Awake!, December 22, 1981

Awake! — December 22, 1981

Source: jw.org

Contents

Page Two

What Are They Fighting for? A Better World?

Ex-Terrorist Tells All

Why Are Some Babies Born Deformed?

Figuring Backwards for the Answers

Birthday Celebrations—How Did They Get Started?

Is It “Just a Job”?

Is Christmas Really Pagan?

Woodburning Stove—Is It for You?

The Case of ‘QWERTY vs. DVORAK’

Is It Worth the Risk?

What’s Wrong with the Economy?

From Our Readers

Watching the World

Index to Volume 62 of Awake!

New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures—$3

Page Two

There has been a great increase in violent acts of terrorism since World War II. Results? Thousands of men, women and children have been killed. Many people are asking: Why? What has been achieved? Will this violence keep on increasing? What do terrorists hope to gain? These two revealing articles give the answers

3 WHAT ARE THEY FIGHTING FOR? A BETTER WORLD?

5 EX-TERRORIST TELLS ALL

What Are They Fighting for? A Better World?

PERHAPS close to 150 groups of people throughout the world are at present resorting to violence in pursuit of what they hope will be a better world. Some may disagree about what to call their members—freedom fighters or simply terrorists—but few will disagree that they are becoming increasingly difficult to overlook.

The Star of Toronto, Canada, reports that terrorist activity is on the rise. In 1979, for example, it states, the world community experienced over 3,000 terrorist incidents, such as political kidnappings and assassinations, hijackings, bombings and armed attacks. “And the men who are trying to do something about it,” the paper continues, “see no end in sight.”

What Is It All About?

One dictionary defines “terrorism” as “unlawful acts of violence committed in an organized attempt to overthrow a government.” But some people argue that “acts of violence” designed to overthrow an oppressive government are justified and therefore not unlawful. They may point out that many nations, including some of today’s most powerful, came into being because people rose up in revolt against a rule they considered restrictive or undesirable.

Thus it is, as journalist Walter Nelson admits, “difficult to define who is a terrorist and who is a member of a national liberation movement.” But regardless of what they are called, and although their goals are varied, all these groups have something in common. British author Christopher Dobson holds that it is a “rejection of the society in which they live and the desire to destroy it,” as well as a belief “that violence is essential to make the world a better place.”

In a world that has bled its way through thousands of wars, including two global ones, it is not difficult for these groups to say: ‘Why should it be wrong for us to resort to violence in pursuit of a better world, when powerful nations, both past and present, have seen no wrong in doing so on a larger scale in pursuit of the same thing?’

Who Gets Involved, and Why?

Young people tend to be idealists. Generally they are quite sensitive to injustice. At the same time they are on the lookout for a “cause,” something to give their life direction or purpose. What, they ask, could be more worthwhile than fighting to wipe out injustice in pursuit of a better world?

“Most terrorists of the left have a remarkably good education and high intelligence,” observed Walter Nelson. A psychiatrist at Rome University investigating the Red Brigades discovered that the majority of those he interviewed were from well-to-do, church-going families, university students or graduates who had majored in social sciences.

Of course, “it would be wrong,” the book The Terrorists points out, “to think that all terrorists are intellectuals fighting for idealistic motives.” Some new converts are drawn by the promise of adventure, the tingling sensation of danger, the hope for easy money or the ready availability of drugs and unrestrained sex.

How Do People Get Involved?

The above-mentioned book by C. Dobson and R. Payne answers this question, saying: “They do not simply march up and apply, but gradually become involved after meeting people who share their anxieties about the state of the modern world, but who already have opted for violent solutions to those problems.”

However, those who “have opted for violent solutions to those problems” did not necessarily start out with violence in mind. American journalist Claire Sterling has done much research on “terrorist groups” and she claims that they “all began as offshoots of relatively nonviolent movements that expressed particular political, economic, religious or ethnic grievances.”

It is not difficult for young people to meet up with individuals who “share their anxieties” and their “political, economic, religious or ethnic grievances.” They can easily be influenced by these individuals, particularly when they are living away from home, possibly under the influence of “mind-expanding” drugs, and are exposed to all the various kinds of protest movements for which many of today’s universities have become noted.

Once a person has been introduced into such a group and has been accepted, it is extremely difficult to backtrack. According to a captured German terrorist, a would-be escapee is faced with the same dilemma as that of the soldier on the battlefront who suddenly discovers he is fighting for the wrong cause. Either he keeps on fighting to prevent his being killed by the enemy or he retreats and risks being killed by his own comrades as a traitor. Page 5

Fighting for a Better World?

To create a world that is really better presupposes being able to set up a government that is really better. It is true that some groups have very definite ideas as to what should replace the system they want to destroy. Others have only the haziest of notions, if any. But at least they hope their terrorism will draw public attention to their cause.

A group’s failure to achieve its idealistic goals or to gain widespread support, however, can lead to resignation. Idealism falters, leaving a vacuum that is quickly filled by anger and frustration. These may seek release in violence. Some feel that this is what happened to the group about which Japanese police and psychologists said: “What seems to be important to Red Army members these days . . . is simply violence itself, for its own ugly sake.”

Sheer brutal violence has also characterized the terrorism that has plagued Italy for many years. Some claim that the instability of its government—a new one on the average every nine months since 1945—has contributed to the sense of drift and uncertainty that fosters “terrorist activity.”

No human government, past or present, has ever been viewed by all its citizens—sometimes not even by a majority—as ideal, totally just, completely satisfactory in every detail. And yet this is exactly the kind of government needed for a world that would be truly better.

Thus, in reality, freedom fighters and terrorists, regardless of what they claim and even sincerely believe, are not really fighting for a better world. The most they can possibly achieve is to replace one imperfect government with another one likewise imperfect and, perhaps, in the long run, just as unsatisfactory as its forerunner.

There are people, however, who really are fighting for a better world and are doing so without resorting to violence. Even former terrorists and freedom fighters are among them. In the following article a young German tells about this switch in fighting methods for a better world.

[Box on page 4]

RECENT SHOCKING INCIDENTS

Casualties from terrorist attacks continued to climb in the past two years. Among them the following:

39 killed in Guatemala’s Spanish embassy during hostage-taking incident

Former Nicaraguan ruler Somoza assassinated in Paraguay

13 killed, 215 injured in Oktoberfest bombing, Munich, Germany

84 killed, 160 injured in Bologna, Italy, railroad-station bombing

4 killed, 9 injured in Paris bombing

18 injured at International Convention Center bombing, Philippines

Italian anti-terrorist chief General Enrico Calvaligi assassinated

American linguist Chester Bitterman kidnapped and killed in Colombia

Former speaker of Northern Ireland’s parliament Sir Norman Stronge and son killed

Pakistani diplomat killed aboard hijacked plane

President Reagan of United States shot

13 killed, 177 wounded by grenades at Philippines cathedral

Economics minister of German state of Hessen, Heinz Karry, assassinated

Pope John Paul II shot in Rome

3 Catholic nuns killed in El Salvador

74 of Iran’s ruling party killed in bombing of party headquarters

French ambassador slain in Lebanon

Bomb at U.S. base in Germany injures 20

20 killed by bomb in Beirut, Lebanon

60 hostages held 15 hours in Turkish embassy in Paris

Another bomb in Beirut, Lebanon, kills at least 50 and injures more than 250

President Rajai and Premier Bahonan killed in Iran by bomb blast

Anwar Sadat of Egypt assassinated

2 killed, 99 injured in Belgium synagogue bomb blast

Ex-Terrorist Tells All

I WAS brought up a Catholic. Even as a youth I had a pronounced sense of justice. This was deepened when I studied history at school and learned about the Nazi concentration camps. And being a student in the early 1960’s meant being encouraged to stand up boldly for your convictions. That is what I wanted to do, in pursuit of a better, more just, world.

It was first while serving my apprenticeship as a chemical technician that I came in contact with groups of young people who were active politically. Our long and sometimes heated discussions convinced me that bearing arms was inconsistent with being a Christian.

Leaning strongly toward pacifism, I became loosely associated with a group that was planning an anti-atomic-weapons protest during the 1966 Easter holidays. When a bishop saw my anti-atomic-weapons button at a Catholic Youth meeting, however, he admonished me “not to get involved.” My reaction was swift. I made a clean break with the Church.

The support people gave the Vietnam War was to me the same as approving of burning women and children alive with napalm. Of course, I was against such a thing! I would protest actively! In 1966 I was introduced to the world of protest marches, participating in several.

Came 1967. U.S. Vice-President Hubert Humphrey was scheduled to visit Berlin on April 6. Several days before his visit, about 40 of us gathered together with a group that was planning a protest action. The group was called “Commune One.” At the outset we were warned that anyone taking part might get into trouble with the police. Most left. But I stayed.

After Humphrey’s visit, the police began an investigation of the demonstrations that had taken place. All the members of “Commune One” were taken into custody, as was I. But these were only the preliminaries. Before my case came up for trial, something else happened that proved to be the real basis for the terrorist scene that later developed in Berlin.

It was a Friday—June 2, 1967—and the shah of Iran was coming. We planned a demonstration against what we considered his cruel regime. Until then all our demonstrations—aside from a few firecrackers and tossed potatoes—had been peaceful. But this time some of the protesters were struck with wooden clubs by the Persian secret service, and one demonstrator was shot to death by the police. Now an element had been added that would have to be reckoned with in future demonstrations—violence!

In July I fled the country to escape trial for the Humphrey affair and did not return until I heard that charges against me had been dropped. But I was back in Berlin in time for the “Vietnam Convention,” held there on February 19, 1968, when almost 10,000 persons marched in protest against the war.

Meanwhile the Berlin press was speaking out strongly against us. As the news media continued its campaign, tension mounted. The climax came on Thursday, April 11. Bullets rang out on West Berlin’s most famous street, the Kurfürstendamm, and a student leader lay seriously injured, the victim of an assassination attempt. This sparked a series of violent demonstrations throughout Germany. Hundreds of persons were injured, and in Munich two lives were lost.

In Berlin a protest march was hastily arranged for that very evening. Seeing a certain publishing house as a symbol of the news media and of all those speaking out against us, we marched to its skyscraper home located alongside the Berlin Wall, just yards within West Berlin. While several hundred policemen frantically tried to preserve order, over 2,000 of us marched toward the building. Among the policemen on duty that night was one named Jürgen. I did not know him at the time, but a few years later I would.

Several of us tried to force our way into the building, but without success. Grabbing a heavy brass rod ripped from the demolished front doors of the building, I lifted it, intent on sending it crashing down upon the head of a policeman standing in my way. At the last minute one of the demonstrators, a lawyer sympathetic to our cause, forcibly prevented me from doing it. Where would I be today had he not done so?

By midnight the crowds began dispersing, leaving behind a battlefield strewn with broken glass and overturned and burned-out autos. And it was a battlefield upon which I had fought. I, the idealist who had started out protesting against the use of force, had now ended up using it myself. What was happening?

At the end of the year, a number of us formed a loosely organized group that we called the “Hashish Rebels.” This was an appropriate name, because many of us caught up in the protest movement had begun taking drugs.

Our tactics were to foster hatred for authority and to force people, almost against their will, to resort to violence. Once, for example, about 2,000 persons were taking part in a protest march sponsored by a group of engineering students. But it took only 20 of us “Hashish Rebels” to change the demonstration’s whole complexion. Scattered among the demonstrators, we began throwing stones at the police. Understandably, they tried to defend themselves and not only the guilty ones but also “peaceful demonstrators” became involved. They, in turn, lashed back at what they considered to be “police brutality.”

In order to activate more people for our cause, we held a teach-in at Berlin’s Technical University the evening of November 29. About 2,500 persons were present. First we heard a lecture on what was called “honorable crime.” We also provided our own musical entertainment. One of our bands, in which I played, was called the Vox Dei, Latin for “God’s voice.” It was obviously a misnomer, for the band’s chief purpose was to get our audience emotionally involved and to make them more receptive to our message.

Later in the evening I played a cassette made by a group called the “West Berlin Tupamaros” that defended the murdering of judges. Several years later the president of Berlin’s highest court, Günter von Drenkmann, and the Federal Republic’s chief prosecutor, Siegfried Buback, were murdered by terrorists.

Inflamed by both the music and what the speakers had said, a large crowd spilled out of the university building into nearby Ernst-Reuter-Platz and started breaking store windows, especially those of a business firm we viewed as being a symbol of American capitalism.

Meanwhile, I was having personal problems. My drug habit had led to a circulatory collapse. I had also developed a severe persecution complex. Afraid to wear sandals, I stomped around in heavy boots, thinking they would be useful in defending myself. And I never ventured out without a knife. My life, nearly destroyed by drugs and poisoned by hatred, was serving no real purpose. I began to realize that a person, unless he starts with himself, can do little to change the world, even with violence.

In March of 1970 two of Jehovah’s Witnesses appeared at my door and showed me their book The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life. One of the men, himself a Witness for only a few months, called back and began a systematic study of the Bible with me. Several of my friends, up to 15 at a time, would frequently attend.

I made rapid progress in learning about God and his purposes. Soon I was attending Christian meetings and making profound changes in my life. Then on May 23, 1971, I was baptized in symbol of my dedication to God, just about a year after having told the two men at my door: “I will be happy to listen to what you have to say, but be sure of one thing: I will never become one of Jehovah’s Witnesses!”

But now I had. And who was this young, newly baptized Witness who had played such a major part in rescuing me from a life of drug addiction and violence? Our paths had crossed once before—on an April night back in 1968. Yes, he was Jürgen! To think that, theoretically at least, the policeman I had been so eager to club three years previously could well have been Jürgen!

During my Bible studies, I learned much—for example, that during the first century there were also “freedom fighters,” or “terrorists,” who thought they could bring about a better world. They were Jews and they wanted to liberate their people from Rome. But they could not. In fact, their acts of violence helped to bring about Jerusalem’s destruction by Roman armies in 70 C.E.

The followers of Jesus, however, did not support these liberation movements. They trusted in God to establish a better world by means of his kingdom. They were aware of the Bible’s words: “Do not put your trust in nobles, nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs. . . . Happy is the one . . . whose hope is in Jehovah his God.”—Ps. 146:3-7.

Where would I be today had not Jürgen stopped at my door and helped me to understand this Bible text? Or the one at 2 Peter 3:13? It states: “But there are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to [God’s] promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell.” A really righteous world—that the Great Creator also wants, and will create!

Many of my former comrades have continued to fight for what they feel will be a better world. Some of the members of “Commune One” and the “Hashish Rebels” went on to form the nucleus of the terrorist group Movement of June 2. Similar groups gave birth to the Red Army Faction and other terrorist groups. Some of the peaceful demonstrators of the 1960’s turned into the bank robbers, kidnappers and murderers of the 1970’s. Examples: Katherine Boudin, etc., who were implicated in the aborted robbery in Nyack, N.Y., Oct. 20, 1981. Is this the better world they had in mind?

I, too, have continued to fight, but not in a violent way. I am fighting hard to live up to God’s righteous requirements for achieving everlasting life in his new system. I am fighting hard to help others, including my wife and two little boys, to do the same. This is a spiritual fight that makes me happy and gives me a worthwhile goal in life. Best of all, it can lead to something that is sure to come—a truly better world.—Contributed.

“Let anger alone and leave rage; do not show yourself heated up only to do evil. For evildoers themselves will be cut off, but those hoping in Jehovah are the ones that will possess the earth.”—Ps. 37:8, 9.

[Blurb on page 6]

Our tactics were to foster hatred for authority and to force people to resort to violence

[Blurb on page 7]

I began to realize that a person can do little to change the world, even with violence

[Blurb on page 8]

Some of the peaceful demonstrators of the 1960’s turned into the bank robbers, kidnappers and murders of the 1970’s

Why Are Some Babies Born Deformed?

AFTER giving birth, the mother was told that her son had a birth defect and would soon be totally blind. The mother reported: ‘The shock caused me to start questioning God’s justice. Why should a helpless little child suffer? I looked after myself healthwise before and after pregnancy. Why did it happen to me?’ Earth wide it is estimated that one out of every 20 babies is born with some deformity. Many anguished parents wonder . . .

Does God Cause It?

Absolutely not! Though many feel that such tragedies are “God’s will” or that he is punishing the parents for some past sin, the Bible, God’s Word, shows that such is not the case.

For instance, Jesus’ disciples asked why a certain man was born blind. They asked Jesus: “Who sinned, this man or his parents, so that he was born blind?” Jesus then made clear that birth defects are not a punishment from God, saying: “Neither this man sinned nor his parents.”—John 9:1-3.

What Is Responsible?

There is a variety of causes of birth defects. At times they occur because of a mix-up in the baby’s microscopic chromosomes or genes. This may or may not have been inherited from the parents. However, the Textbook of Medicine states: “In most malformations no major factor can be identified, and it can be presumed that their existence is due to the complicated interaction of genetic and environmental influences or to special rare genetic combinations.”

Some factors believed to play a role in causing birth defects include: illness or exposure of the mother to certain diseases during pregnancy, radiation injury, chemical pollution, drugs (even some considered safe during pregnancy), excessively large quantities of some vitamins, malnutrition, improper diet, certain living conditions, age of mother, race, and even the season of birth. Frequently, wars and greedy commercialism have caused conditions that led to birth defects.

On the other hand, certain actions by a parent can increase the risk of birth defects. Some lead loose and immoral lives to the detriment of their unborn offspring. The baby can be deformed because the parents contract a venereal disease or are in an incestuous relationship. Also, parents may hurt their developing fetus by indulging in narcotics and tobacco.

However, the basic cause of deformed children is the disobedience of the first couple, Adam and Eve. Their sin against God caused them to lose their perfection of mind and body and produce “defective” children. Each succeeding generation progressively drifted farther away from perfection. Therefore, even if there were no adverse technology, war, malnutrition or immoral behavior, there would still be deformed children by virtue of the fact that we are born of imperfect parents.

What Can Be Done if It Happens?

Depending on the type of deformity, often much can be done. Medical researchers are daily developing new techniques to help cure deformities or to make it easier to bear up with them. Mechanical arms and legs have enabled many born without such to have a more enjoyable life.

There are institutions that are doing much to rehabilitate deformed children. Many child psychologists are proving that when specialized training is started early enough “infants of any intelligence level can develop and learn.” At times a parent may have no alternative but to have the child placed in an institution. Yet parental love is vital. “Love will do more than all the special training,” stated the father of a child born with mongolism.

Many children who were born hopelessly crippled have been assisted and now, as adults, live productive lives. Even some women without arms have raised their own children. Despite their handicaps, they are glad to be alive.

Will such children ever become sound? Yes, they will. Jesus demonstrated the “works of God” by healing a man born blind. This miracle by God’s power shows that God truly cares about the plight of those born deformed. These “works of God” will become even more manifest in the near future. God promises to remove this present selfish system and to bring in “new heavens and a new earth” wherein “righteousness is to dwell.”—2 Pet. 3:13; John 9:3.

Just as Jesus, while on earth, healed blind eyes, deformed legs, a withered hand, so in the “new earth” eyes and ears closed from birth will be opened. Those with useless or missing limbs will joyfully regain their use! Every tear of sadness will pass away under the heavenly rule of Jesus. Even death will disappear!—Mark 3:1-5; Rev. 21:3, 4.

This hope gives incentive to those who have deformed children. The mother of a 15-year-old retarded son who has been a deaf-mute from birth admitted: “There were times when my daughter and I felt like throwing up our hands and quitting, but knowing Jehovah God and realizing that in the future he will rid my son of this condition gave us something to look forward to. This is what kept us going.”

Learn more from the Bible about this inspiring hope and how you and your family can enjoy it. Jehovah’s Witnesses will be glad to help you free of charge.

[Box on page 10]

WHAT SOME PARENTS OF DEFORMED BABIES SAY

“Before he was born I was very short tempered, but by caring for him I learned patience and kindness. This even helped me to be more considerate in dealing with other people.”—Mother of a 15-year-old deaf, speechless and retarded boy with skeletal deformities

‘We have often thought about the doctor who wanted permission to let her die. What a blessing our little girl has been to us! While limited in so many ways, a retarded child seems endowed with a superabundance of love.’—Father of a 10-year-old girl with mongolism

Figuring Backwards for the Answers

“What is 48,241 multiplied by 35,482?”

“1,711,687,162,” answered a young man sitting at one end of the stage, before the woman at the other end had time to enter all the digits in a calculator. When the machine finally gave the same answer, the audience applauded.

“569,733 divided by 832?”

“684.77524 with a remainder of 0.00032.” Again the young man got the answer first, using only his fingers, and the calculator confirmed it.

That was in a competition held at the Chinese University of Science and Technology in May 1978, and the mathematical genius was 24-year-old Shi Fengshou from Shaanxi Province, China. “On question after question put by the audience,” reports “China Reconstructs,” “the man won.”

Shi Fengshou developed his astounding technique strictly through hard work and inventive thinking. While still in the village primary school, he often wondered why people would read a number from left to right but do calculations from right to left. Wouldn’t it be much simpler if everything were done the same way? This started him on the search for a fast way of doing mental calculations.

Working from left to right enabled Shi to give out the answer as soon as each digit was obtained, a definite advantage in mental computations. But the key to his success was in his ingenious way of handling the carry-over. For example, try multiplying 36 by 2 from the left, mentally. The first digit of the answer is not 6 (2 × 3) but 7 because there is a carry-over of 1 from the next operation (2 × 6 = 12). So the answer is 72. From this simple idea, Shi determined that every time a digit is multiplied by 2, the product should be increased by 1 if the next digit is 5 or greater. From there, he worked out the rules for the numbers 3 through 9, and soon such calculations became simple child’s play for him. By the time he graduated from primary school, he had already mastered calculations involving multidigit numbers, such as those he did in the competition.

Later, Shi also developed methods for doing powers and roots and even logarithmic and trigonometric functions mentally. The story had it that he would practice squaring license-plate numbers, that is, multiplying the number by itself. License numbers in China are seven digits long. Can you imagine standing on the street trying to square a seven-digit number? At first, the car would be long gone before he could come up with the answer. But, with practice, he would have it as soon as the car had passed.

It was not long before he attracted professional attention. Eventually his work was published in a book entitled “Quick Calculations,” which became very popular all through China.

Minds like Shi’s are rare, but they demonstrate the immense potential of the human brain. Granted that not all of us are interested in becoming a “human calculator” like Shi Fengshou, but imagine the things that we can learn to do and enjoy when given unlimited time—an eternity—a prospect that the Bible holds out to lovers of the true God.

[Picture on page 11]

Shi Fengshou explains how he does it

Birthday Celebrations—How Did They Get Started?

A PUBLIC figure recently celebrated his 70th birthday—only he didn’t call it that. “It’s the 31st anniversary of my 39th birthday,” he quipped.

Not everybody feels the same about birthdays. Little Johnny may eagerly anticipate the day with its cake, candles and presents. Mommy, on the other hand, may not wish to be reminded of her age.

Some people even decline to celebrate their birthdays for reasons of conscience. Does that seem strange? Actually, if you had been a member of the early Christian church, you would have refused to celebrate your birthday.

“The celebration of the anniversary of an individual’s birth, though customary among the ancients, was originally frowned upon by the Christians,” notes William S. Walsh in his book Curiosities of Popular Customs. Historian Walsh goes on to quote from early Christian writings on the subject, saying: “Thus Origen, in a homily on Leviticus xii 2, assures his hearers that ‘none of the saints can be found who ever held a feast or a banquet upon his birthday, or rejoiced on the day when his son or his daughter was born. But sinners rejoice and make merry on such days.”’

Where did early Christians get their distaste for birthdays? Partly from the Jews. “In the Bible there is no instance of birthday celebrations among the Jews themselves,” points out M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia, adding: “In fact, the later Jews at least regarded birthday celebrations as parts of idolatrous worship.”

Birthdays and Astrology

Of course, early Christians had reasons of their own for not celebrating birthdays. Back then birthdays had strong connections with pagan religion that are less noticeable today. “The custom of commemorating the day of birth is connected . . . in its content, with certain primitive religious principles,” points out the Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics. What principles?

Spiritism, for one. “The Greeks believed that everyone had a protective spirit or daemon who attended his birth and watched over him in life. This spirit had a mystic relation with the god on whose birthday the individual was born. The Romans also subscribed to this idea. They called the spirit the genius. This notion was carried down in human belief and is reflected in the guardian angel, the fairy godmother and the patron saint.”—The Lore of Birthdays, Ralph and Adelin Linton.

Another reason for early Christians to avoid birthdays was the connection with astrology. “The keeping of birthday records was important in ancient times principally because a birth date was essential for the casting of a horoscope,” say the Lintons. To early Christians astrology was associated with Eastern religions, Roman Stoicism and the twisted thinking of the Gnostics. Christians wanted no part of that!

Change in Church Attitude

Eventually the nominal church’s opinion of birthdays changed. Why? Because the overall attitude of the church toward the Roman world changed, not surprisingly, when persecution ceased under Emperor Constantine. Nominal Christianity, much corrupted from the apostolic version, became the state religion. Now what happened to her previous hostility to anything pagan?

As the church “emerged from the storm of persecution into the sunshine of imperial favor,” wrote 19th-century clergyman Henry J. Vandyke, “she passed from the lower conception of a church saved out of the world, to the higher conception of a world to be saved through the ministry of the church.”

What was the result of such unscriptural reasoning? “Then it was that, opening her heart to the humanity of religion, she began to draw near to the humanity of Jesus, and to seek with eager interest for the day of His birth, that she might make it holy.” If Jesus’ birthday could be celebrated, what about other birthdays? William Walsh makes the connection, saying: “With the celebration of Christ’s Nativity returned the celebration of the nativities of ordinary mortals.”

Does It Matter Today?

All of this happened many hundreds of years ago. Why should it affect birthday celebrations today? Well, if first-century Christians celebrated neither their own birthdays nor Jesus’ birthday, why should not sincere Christians today follow their example?

‘But isn’t that an extreme position to take, even fanatical?’ some may ask. ‘After all, what harm is there in a birthday party? No spiritism or astrology is involved today.’

Interestingly, much that is taken for granted in birthday celebrations today retains the flavor of ancient religious rites. “The custom of lighted candles on the cakes started with the Greeks,” say the Lintons. “Philochorus [an ancient Greek historian] records that on the sixth day of each month, the birthday of Artemis, [the fertility] goddess of the moon and the hunt, honey cakes round as the moon and lit with tapers were placed on the temple altars of this goddess.”

What do the candles mean? “Birthday candles, in folk belief, are endowed with special magic for granting wishes . . . Lighted tapers and sacrificial fires have had a special mystic significance ever since man first set up altars to his gods. The birthday candles are thus an honor and tribute to the birthday child and bring good fortune,” notes the same source.

How about the traditional greeting “Happy Birthday”? Says The Lore of Birthdays: “Birthday greetings and wishes for happiness are an intrinsic part of this holiday. . . . originally the idea was rooted in magic. The working of spells for good and evil is the chief usage of witchcraft. One is especially susceptible to such spells on his birthday, as one’s personal spirits are about at the time. . . . Birthday greetings have power for good or ill because one is closer to the spirit world on this day.”—Page 20.

Does that mean that Christians cannot have anything to do with any custom that might have originated in false religious rites? No. A great many common practices may have had such origins. But when features of the custom, as carried over into modern-day practice, go contrary to Bible principles, then true Christians must conscientiously refuse to participate.

Self-Glorification

The Lintons note that birthdays are unlike other holidays, for they are times “when all the presents and good wishes are for oneself. The birthday cake, splendid with colored icing and shining candles is a personal tribute. Other holidays lift the heart, but birthdays warm the ego.”

Is it a good idea for Christians to engage in celebrations that “warm the ego”? Speaking to the proud Pharisees, Jesus warned that “whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.” (Matt. 23:12) Too much ‘ego-warming’ could lead to humiliation at God’s hands. “Let us not become egotistical,” the apostle Paul counseled.—Gal. 5:26.

‘But why pick on a little thing like birthdays?’ some might object. Because Christians believe that the Bible principle “the person faithful in what is least is faithful also in much” applies here.—Luke 16:10.

Besides, while a birthday party might be ‘a little thing,’ a big principle is involved. The fourth-century church began to accept birthdays only after a major change in her thinking. As we noted on page 13, clergyman Vandyke referred to the Scriptural principle that the Christian church is “no part of the world,” as a “lower conception.” But Christians who base their belief on the Bible cannot subscribe to such thinking!

Nowhere do the Scriptures authorize the church to reject Jesus’ statement that “you are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world.” (John 15:19) Where did the church get the authority to reject Jesus’ words as a “lower conception” and to follow a self-proclaimed “higher conception,” that the church should become part of the world in order to save it?

The Bible letter of James puts it strongly, stating: “Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God.” (Jas. 4:4) Does that sound as though the church can save the world by becoming part of it and adopting its rituals?

Something Better

Although childbirth is a joyful occasion, the Bible puts it in perspective with this interesting comment: “A name is better than good oil, and the day of death than the day of one’s being born.” (Eccl. 7:1) How can that be?

At birth all of us have inherited imperfection and sin from our ancestors, Adam and Eve. We are born outside of God’s favor with the prospect of a brief, trouble-filled life and then death.—Job 14:1-4; Rom. 5:12.

Although we are all born under God’s wrath, so to speak, the situation is not hopeless. The Bible writer John put it this way: “He that exercises faith in the Son has everlasting life; he that disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him.”—John 3:36.

So the imperfect life we have at birth is not really life at all from God’s point of view. That is why a good “name” with God is so important! If one’s life has been spent acquiring such a “name,” then, at the end of such a worthwhile life, it can truly be said that ‘the day of death is better than the day of one’s being born.’ Such a person has the sure hope of a resurrection to live again. (Isa. 26:19) Would it not be better to seek and rejoice in a good relationship with God than to celebrate a birth date? After all, we are but a “mist” from his standpoint, “appearing for a little while and then disappearing.”—Jas. 4:14.

“They Don’t Celebrate . . .”

When one of Jehovah’s Witnesses spoke to a family recently, he was informed that other Witnesses lived next door. How did the family know they were Witnesses? A youngster piped up, “They don’t celebrate!”

“It’s true that Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t celebrate birthdays or holidays,” agreed the Witness, “but did you know that we do get together socially at other times and we do have fun?”

The youngster’s eyes got big. “You do?” he asked.

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not wear sanctimonious black robes and hair shirts. Their refusal to celebrate birthdays stems from a sincere desire to please God. They cannot help but note, as Christians have noted since the time of Origen, that the only two birthday celebrations mentioned in the Bible were those of an Egyptian pharaoh and Herod Antipas, a Roman ruler, neither of whom was a servant of God. It is also significant that both celebrations were associated with an execution.—Gen. 40:20-22; Matt. 14:6-11.

Yet Jehovah’s Witnesses enjoy life. They enjoy sharing with one another in healthful periods of relaxation. They look forward together to the hope of everlasting life that comes under God’s kingdom. (Matt. 6:9, 10; Rev. 21:3, 4) They believe that the time is coming when babies will no longer be born into a world filled with heartache and grief. At that time, everyone who is born will be able to look forward confidently to a life so long that counting birthdays will be pointless. In the meantime, the Witnesses’ sincere love of life, as well as their love of God, makes them desirous of pleasing him even in ‘little things’ like their attitude toward celebrations that still carry the fundamentals of false religion.

Is It “Just a Job”?

How do the scientists and specialists who are devoting their time and talents to turning out more and more deadly and devastating weapons feel about it? One such professional who has been in the “business” for over 30 years observes that few leave weapon-related work on account of conscience. “The truth is,” he says, “once they’re in it, very few people think much about it. . . . My colleagues who work on nuclear devices don’t do it for a reason. They do it because they are nuclear physicists.” Another expert feels that his conscience is clear: “The way I see it, since we have a military establishment, the best we can hope for is that no one will go off crazy and start a war.” However, this scientist admits that even this way of thinking is rare. “I’d say only about 10 per cent of my colleagues share my concerns. Maybe another 10 per cent are at the other extreme—they’d do anything that would give us military superiority. And the other 80 per cent, well, I doubt they think much about it. To them, it’s just a job.”

Is Christmas Really Pagan?

PUBLICK NOTICE

The Observation of CHRISTMAS having been deemed a Sacrilege, the exchanging of Gifts and Greetings, dressing in Fine Clothing, Feasting and similar Satanical Practices are hereby FORBIDDEN with the Offender liable to a Fine of FIVE SHILLINGS

Above, at the right, is a facsimile of a statute passed in 1660 in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in New England, prohibiting the observance of Christmas. Similarly, in 17th-century England, Christmas celebrations were banned as “pagan and papish, Saturnalian and Satanic, idolatrous and leading to idleness.”

Though those were laws of a bygone era, they still prompt the question: Is Christmas really pagan? A closer look at the roots of some of the popular customs of Christmas may provide the answer.

The Date

All the standard encyclopedias and reference works agree that the date of Jesus’ birth is unknown and that the churches borrowed the date of December 25 from the Romans, along with their customs and festivities. Here are some typical comments: “The ecclesiastical calendar retains numerous remnants of pre-Christian festivals—notably Christmas, which blends elements including both the feast of the Saturnalia and the birthday of Mithra.” (“Encyclopædia Britannica”) “It is usually held that the day [December 25] was chosen to correspond to pagan festivals that took place around the time of the winter solstice, when the days begin to lengthen, to celebrate the ‘rebirth of the sun.”’ (“Encyclopedia Americana”) “On this day [December 25], as the sun began its return to northern skies, the pagan devotees of Mithra celebrated the birthday of the invincible sun.”—“New Catholic Encyclopedia.”

Saturnalia was a seven-day Roman festival running from December 17 to 24, held in honor of Saturn, the god of agriculture. The festival was marked by boisterous feasting, drinking, merrymaking, dancing, gift-giving and the decorating of homes with evergreens. December 25, the birthday of Mithra the sun-god, originally the Babylonian god of light, became the climax of the week-long celebrations.

In an effort to make converts of the pagans and to win back those fallen away to such worldly practices, the Roman Church, in the middle of the fourth century, ‘Christianized’ Mithra’s birthday and adopted the date and customs, but designated it as a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. Thus was born Christmas.

Christmas Tree

Some authorities attribute the origin of the Christmas tree to Boniface, who convinced the eighth-century Germans to abandon their worship of the sacred oak trees. According to the legend, when he chopped down one of their sacred oaks, a young fir tree grew up in its place. Boniface told the new converts that the fir would be their holy tree—the tree of Christ.

Others believe that the Christmas tree came from the paradise tree, popular in medieval Germany. The tree was the centerpiece in the paradise play honoring “saints” Adam and Eve, whose feast was on December 24. It was decorated with apples and wafers.

Indeed, the first reference to the Christmas tree as we know it came from Strasbourg, Germany, in 1531. German settlers eventually carried the custom to North America, where it was embellished and popularized. The first electrically lighted Christmas tree appeared in 1882 in New York city in the home of Edward Johnson, an associate, appropriately, of Thomas Edison, inventor of the electric lamp.

Santa Claus

Legend has it that when Nicholas, a fourth-century bishop of Myra (now southwest Turkey), heard that a local resident lacked money for dowries for his three daughters, he secretly tossed gold pieces or coins into their home through a window or a smoke hole on the roof. The gold supposedly fell right into some stockings that had been hung by the fire to dry. All the essential elements of the Santa Claus story were there.

The image of the rotund, red-suited gift bearer, however, appeared to be the product of the fertile imagination of a series of famous New Yorkers. First, the Dutch settlers contributed the name—Saint Nicholas in Dutch is Sinterklaas. Then, in the 19th century, writers including Washington Irving and Clement Moore (famous for his poem: “’Twas the Night Before Christmas”) furnished the literary descriptions. Finally, cartoonist Thomas Nast, creator of the Democratic donkey and the Republican elephant, brought the finishing touches to the jolly old fellow seen around Christmas time.

Holly and Mistletoe

According to a New York “Times” report, “evergreens of many sorts were used throughout much of Europe long before the Christian era in midwinter pagan rites intended to insure the return of spring.”

The Teutons and the Celts of medieval Germany and England regarded holly as a symbol of eternal life because it stayed green when other trees faded away in winter. Mistletoe was sacred to the Druids of ancient Britain, who ascribed to it magical power over demons, witchcraft, poisons, diseases and infertility. In Scandinavia, mistletoe was so sacred that enemies meeting under it would lay down their weapons and give each other a kiss of peace.

Fantastic legends developed to link these plants with Jesus. One legend holds that holly was originally leafless in winter. But when Mary put the baby Jesus under a holly bush to hide him from Herod’s soldiers during the flight to Egypt, the plant immediately put out thick green leaves complete with prickly points to hide and protect the infant.

IS IT FOR YOU? Pagan rites and superstitious legends—such are the sources of the Christmas tradition. They were shunned by the early Christians, who, according to “the World Book Encyclopedia,” “did not celebrate His birth because they considered celebration of anyone’s birth to be a pagan custom.”

This package of rituals and superstitions called Christmas is but another by-product of the famous dictum of Pope Gregory I to the missionary Augustine: “Tear down their idols but consecrate their temples.” Only the labels have been changed. The contents are as pagan as ever.

Woodburning Stove—Is It for You?

“WE’LL sit by the fire on nasty, chilly evenings, with a tea kettle simmering on the top, or a pot of soup or chili and it will be wonderful!”

Romantic notions such as this, along with the all-too-familiar price hikes of fuel oil, have sent many homeowners to take a closer look at woodburning stoves as an alternative means for heating their homes. Industrial estimates show that 5,000,000 American homes, or about 7 percent, are already outfitted with some type of wood stove or furnace, and the number is increasing by about one and a half million each year. In Canada, Russia and Scandinavia, woodburning stoves are popular as ever, and even in England, reports show, wood stoves “have sold their way into more than 100,000 British homes in the last few years.”

New Generation of Stoves

Unlike earlier models, modern stoves are airtight and burn wood slowly, requiring fewer refills. Clever designs help to prevent much of the heat from going up the chimney; so they are about 50- to 60-percent efficient. This compares favorably with the 60- to 75-percent efficiency of gas or oil burners. Such a stove, however, is not cheap and installation can also be costly.

The availability and the price of wood are also important factors in figuring the economic advantage of wood stoves. As a comparison, a cord of wood, which is a tightly stacked pile four feet by four feet by eight feet, or 128 cubic feet (3.6 m3), has about the same heating value as 200 gallons (757 L) of home heating oil. In some rural areas and small towns, wood is plentiful and relatively inexpensive. In New England, for example, up to 50 percent of the homes rely, in whole or in part, on wood as fuel. In large cities, however, wood prices and problems with availability and storage can make wood stoves impractical. In addition, there are usually stringent fire laws and safety codes that must be observed.

Dangers and Hazards

No official information is yet available on the relative safety of woodburning stoves and oil, gas or electric heating units. But, according to an insurance trade association report, improper use and maintenance of wood stoves accounted for 15 percent of accidental home fires in New Hampshire and ranked third as the cause of home fires in Oregon. Burns and deaths related to wood stoves also have increased sharply in recent years.

As more and more people turn to wood stoves, air pollution becomes an increasingly serious problem. In some villages in Vermont, it is reported that “you can barely see for all the smoke.” In Portland, Oregon, a test reveals that 36 percent of all inhalable particulate matter in the air is from wood smoke, which is similar in chemical composition to cigarette smoke—a health hazard. Many states already have laws restricting the use of woodburning stoves, and the Clean Air Act in England prohibits the burning of wood in London and other cities.

So, the next time you feel warmed up to wood, whether by the lure of the romantic fireside or because of your oil bill, take careful stock of the pros and cons and see if a woodburning stove is really for you.

The Case of ‘QWERTY vs. DVORAK’

ANYONE who can type in the English language has good reason to know what “QWERTY” is. The name comes from the first six letters from the left on the top row of the standard typewriter keyboard. But what they may not know is that this arrangement of the keys was actually designed for inefficiency.

When Christopher Latham Sholes and his coworkers developed the first commercially successful typewriter in 1873, they originally had all the letters arranged alphabetically in four rows of keys. But the machine would stick or jam when adjacent keys were struck in quick succession. To overcome this problem, Sholes rearranged the keys by putting the most used letters and combinations as far apart as possible to slow down the operator. The result was the “QWERTY” keyboard.

Since then, virtually every part of the typewriter, except the keyboard, has been redesigned for greater efficiency. Throughout the world, 50 million people labor over this 108-year-old design while unaware of or indifferent to a vastly superior system that has been around for nearly 50 years—the Dvorak keyboard.

This system, developed by August Dvorak after 20 years of research, puts nine of the 10 most used letters in the middle or “home” row of the keyboard so that over 3,000 words can be typed without the fingers “reaching,” whereas only about 50 words can be typed on “QWERTY’s” home row. The work load is also redistributed among the fingers so that in an average day of work, the fingers of the typist on the Dvorak keyboard move about one mile (1.6 km), compared with 12 to 20 miles (19 to 32 km) on the standard keyboard.

To demonstrate the superiority of his system, Dvorak retrained 14 Navy typists during World War II. In just one month, they were turning out 74 percent more work and were 68 percent more accurate. According to another enthusiast of the Dvorak system, it “is virtually 100% successful in imparting 60-word-a-minute excellence in about the same training time that would have led to 30 words a minute on old qwerty.”

Still, the public remains largely unimpressed. Not many are willing to be nudged out of their comfortable position. Though typewriters with the new keyboard are being offered by most manufacturers, Royal reports that it sells “fewer than 25 machines a year.” Some are hopeful that the advent of computer word-processing technique, where speed is the hallmark, will hasten the demise of the century-old “QWERTY” system. But this remains to be seen.

The case of ‘QWERTY vs. DVORAK’ appears to have fallen by the wayside as another victim of time and circumstances.

[Pictures on page 19]

QWERTY

OUTPUT

DVORAK

Is It Worth the Risk?

By “Awake!” correspondent in Spain

IT IS July 14, the eighth day of the annual festivities that celebrate Catholic Pamplona’s patron saint, San Fermín. Since before dawn groups of people have been occupying strategic places along the narrow streets of this ancient Spanish city. The early morning vigil passes swiftly with the help of occasional squirts from the wineskins that many carry.

Suddenly tension rises. The city clocks begin to strike seven. There is the startling sound of a rocket fired into the air. The explosion, heard all over the town, is greeted with excited shouts.

Down by the river Arga, corral gates are thrown open and out storm six wild Spanish bulls, led by a few steers as bait. Now there is tumult and commotion from the watching crowd behind the protective barriers and from the nervous participants awaiting their moment of glory down on the Cuesta (Hill) de Santo Domingo.

As the frightened animals gather speed up the hill, a strange sight meets them. Rushing down toward them is a group of excited young men (and some older), dressed mainly in their typical bull-running gear—white shirt and trousers, a red beret and a sash at the waist. Many carry a rolled-up newspaper with which to distract the bull in case of sudden danger. When only a few yards separate the two charging groups, the men suddenly turn on their heels and head back up the hill as fast as their legs will take them.

The horned beasts gain ground on them, and the tailenders snatch a quick glance behind to see which way the bulls are going to veer, if any. The more prudent rush to the nearest wall and flatten themselves against it, not moving a muscle so as not to attract the bulls’ attention.

As the bulls reach the brow of the hill, tragedy strikes. One bull, named Antioquío, gets separated from the bunch. It finds itself alone and under attack, provoked by the mob of men milling around, testing their manhood by their proximity to danger. The animal’s herd instinct is swiftly replaced by its self-defense reflex. It starts striking out viciously with its horns. One of the runners, 26-year-old José Antonio Sánchez, is gored and dragged along for several yards. Others try to help him, but in vain, for he dies three hours later in the hospital.

The bull finally recovers its direction and heads once again toward the disappearing herd and supposed liberty. In fact, it ends up in the bullring. The ring itself is full of men, mainly youths, trying to get in on the act, some taunting the bulls. Antioquío strikes again and 29-year-old Vicente Ladio Risco is gored and falls to his knees, clutching his stomach. A scream of horror rises from the spectators in the stands. They know they have witnessed yet another death in the “holy” festivities of San Fermín.

Was it worth the risk? Two young lives extinguished on a summer’s morning. And for what? What noble cause was furthered? Was it really worth the risk? Was personal pride or glory worth so much to their bereaved families and relatives? These reasonable questions can be applied to many optional human activities that involve a definite risk to life and take their tragic yearly toll.

Mountaineering—How Safe?

For millenniums man has responded to the call of the mountains. For some they present a challenge, while for the majority they provide a magnificent setting for escape from city drudgery. Millions of enthusiasts walk and climb mountains around the world, deriving immense pleasure and satisfaction from this activity while incurring hardly any risk at all.

On the other hand, it has to be admitted that many mountaineers, both budding and experienced, lose their lives each year scaling the earth’s peaks. As an example, in November 1980 three young mountaineers tried to scale the almost vertical face of the San Jeronimo mountain in the Montserrat massif, near Barcelona, Spain. All three fell 260 m (853 feet) to their death. Maybe the reason was lack of experience. But was it worth the risk? How would their parents and families answer today?

Lack of experience is by no means the only reason for disasters in mountaineering. In October 1978 an expedition of veteran women climbers from the United States attempted to reach the summit of Annapurna I (8,078 m; 26,503 feet) in the Himalayas, using two separate teams for the assault. One team made it. The second did not. It is reported that Vera Watson and Alison Chadwick-Onyszkiewicz, experienced climbers, were roped together on their way up the mountain when they fell to their death. Another member of the expedition, Arlene Blum, wrote in her diary of the events: “They must not have been able to stop themselves, and fell 1,500 feet [457 m] down a steep incline of snow and ice. It could happen to any climber, at any time. But why did it have to happen? I feel numb, and my thoughts go to their families. All that grief and pain—what mountain is worth it? . . . Of course, we all decided to take the risk when we came here. But their families and friends made no such decision.” (Italics ours)

A similar tragedy occurred more recently, in June of this year, in the northwestern United States. Sixteen climbers—eleven on Mount Rainier and five on Mount Hood—were killed on the mountain slopes.

Yes, what mountain or transient ambition is worth the risk? This question has to be weighed against the unique asset that is being put in jeopardy—LIFE! Whether one believes in God or not, life is a very precious gift that should not be put at risk at just any price. Life implies a responsibility—not only to oneself but also to one’s family (especially to a husband, wife or children) and, for the Christian, to God, the Giver of “every good gift and every perfect present.”—Jas. 1:17.

Obviously not all mountain deaths are attributable to mountaineers. Occasionally, ill-prepared hikers have died of exposure. As one Spanish authority commented: “Anyone who climbs the mountains on a Sunday will see them crawling with people looking for adventure, the majority without adequate equipment and knowledge of the region. The real miracle is that more do not get killed.” Therefore, if you go to the mountains, the wise course is to be sure that you are in fit physical condition and equipped with suitable clothing and adequate provisions. If you are accompanied by an experienced hiker or mountaineer, that is even better.

The facts speak for themselves. In a recent survey published by El País, a Madrid daily, mountaineering topped the list of sports deaths in Spain for the five-year period 1975-79, with a total of 137. The next most dangerous sports were hunting and underwater activities, both of which claimed 42 lives over the same period. Then came aerial sports, with 39 deaths.

Aerial Sports

Who has not envied the soaring, effortless flight of the eagle or the albatross? From time immemorial man has dreamed of being free to fly and soar like the birds. Thus how appropriate the rhetorical question in the Bible book of Job: “Is it owing to your understanding that the falcon soars up, that it spreads its wings to the south wind?”—Job 39:26.

In recent decades such free-flight aerial sports as gliding, parachuting, ballooning and hang gliding have gained in popularity. With good training and adequate equipment, the danger level in the majority of these sports can be kept to a minimum, especially if the person is not foolhardy. Without a doubt, noiseless flight, with only the wind as a fellow traveler, is a unique and exciting experience for man.

…

Refine Search

Index Downloading...

Awake!, December 22, 1981