Category: Technology

Categories
Culture Experiences History Language Learning Science Technology Theocratic

jídù

jídù ({being jealous [of]}; envying 嫉妒) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[Notes: Tap/click on a Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to reveal its “flashcard”; tap/click on a “flashcard” or its Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to hide the “flashcard”. 📖 📄 📘 icons mean 📖 Reveal All, 📄 Reveal Advanced, and 📘 Reveal None re all the “flashcards” in the heading, paragraph, etc. that they are placed at the beginning of.]

I have long especially liked 1 Corinthians 13. It contains counsel on what really does and doesn’t matter in life, an extensive description and definition of the most important kind of love, and a sublime discussion about the need to become complete, mature, as a person. As these apply to life in general, so too do they apply to our lives as Mandarin field language learners.

As Mandarin field language learners, it can benefit us greatly to consider what we can learn from 1 Corinthians 13, and along the way, we can also consider some of the Mandarin expressions used in that chapter in the current version of the Mandarin New World Translation Bible (nwtsty).

Two Ways About It

This week’s MEotW, “jídù ({being jealous [of]}; envying 嫉妒)”, is used in verse 4 (WOL) of 1 Corinthians 13:

Screenshot of “_jídù_” in 1 Co. 13:4 (nwtsty, CHS+_Pīnyīn_ WOL)

(Dark mode for the Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY (WOL) website, as shown in the above image, can be enabled in the Safari web browser by using the Noir Safari extension. Other web browsers may also have extensions with similar functionality.)

For comparison, here are the current English and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus renderings of 1 Corinthians 13:4:

English:

Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous. It does not brag, does not get puffed up,

Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus:

📖 📄 📘 Ài (love 爱 愛), yǒu (has 有) nàixīn (nài·xīn {being (of/with) enduring} · heart → [patience] 耐心), yòu (also 又) réncí (rén·cí {is kind} 仁慈). Ài (love 爱 愛), bù (not 不) jídù ({is jealous} 嫉妒), bù (not 不) chuīxū (chuī·xū {does puff → [does brag]} · {does sigh → [does praise]} → [does brag] 吹嘘 吹噓), bú (not 不) zìdà (zì·dà {(does consider) self} · {to be big → [to be great]} 自大),

Both of the morphemes in “jídù ({being jealous [of]}; envying 嫉妒)” mean “be jealous of” or “envy”. Interestingly, these morphemes can be reversed to produce “dùjí ({being jealous [of]}; envying 妒嫉)”, which means the same thing as “jídù ({being jealous [of]}; envying 嫉妒)”. In this respect, these expressions are like “fǎlǜ (law 法律)” and “lǜfǎ (law 律法)”. The MEotW post on “fǎlǜ (law 法律)” had this to say about this situation:

But, Why?

If “lǜfǎ (law 律法)” and “fǎlǜ (law 法律)” both mean basically the same thing, why did the world’s Mandarin-speaking population bother to switch the order of “lǜ (law; statute; rule; regulation 律)” and “fǎ (law | method; way; mode | standard; model | {magic arts} | {follow; model after} 法)” in popular usage? Who knows? Appendix A2 of the Mandarin NWT Bible, probably wisely, does not get into the why of it, just mentioning that “fǎlǜ (law 法律)” is now the more common usage. Even if it turns out that there was a reason, it may not be what most would consider a good reason. Sometimes people are just weird, and, speaking as a Chinese person myself, that includes Chinese people—just look at some of the arbitrary ways in which Chinese characters have been designed, that have turned trying to figure out the pronunciations and meanings of unfamiliar Chinese characters into a guessing game.

Speaking of what’s commonplace or popular and why, I am reminded of this quote from William Goldman, who wrote the screenplay for The Princess Bride as well as the screenplays for several other successful, well-known movies:

Nobody knows anything…Not one person in the entire motion picture field knows for a certainty what’s going to work. Every time out it’s a guess

Regarding which Mandarin expression for “be jealous of” is better to use in the Mandarin field, in the Chinese Mandarin (Simplified) version of the Watchtower Online Library (WOL), searching yielded only 6 occurrences of “妒嫉” (“dùjí ({being jealous [of]}; envying 妒嫉)”), occurring between 1960 and 1974 and fitting on a single page, while there were multiple pages of results for “嫉妒” (“jídù ({being jealous [of]}; envying 嫉妒)”), including many occurrences in the current Mandarin New World Translation Study Bible (nwtsty). So, clearly, the organization now uses “jídù ({being jealous [of]}; envying 嫉妒)” regularly, and no longer uses “dùjí ({being jealous [of]}; envying 妒嫉)”.

No Way to Live, or Love

While there may be two ways of saying “being jealous” in Mandarin, being jealous is no way to live, or love. Regarding jealousy, the recent MEotW post on “shíjí (shí·jí ten · {(stair)step [→ [level; rank; grade; class]]} [→ [master/expert level (coll)]] 十级 十級)” said:

Speaking of being an expert, is that a bad thing? Some of those around us, perhaps out of insecurity or jealousy, may seek to “keep us in our place” if we get “uppity”, exhibit “pretensions of grandeur”, and actually try to be good at something, perhaps better at it than they are. (Matthew 13:54–58)…

However, God’s Word…encourages us to actually give Jehovah the best “sacrifice of praise” that we can. (Malachi 1:6–8; Hebrews 11:4; 13:15) So, ignore any insecure or jealous naysayers around you, and as Jesus said, “let your light shine” in the Mandarin field, even at shíjí (shí·jí ten · {(stair)step → [level]} → [expert level (coll)] 十级 十級) if you can, not to glorify yourself, but to glorify our heavenly Father Jehovah.—Matthew 5:16.

Also, the MEotW post on “guīju (guī·ju [([is] following)] {compasses; dividers → [rules; regulations]} · {carpenter’s squares → [rules; regulations]} → [[[is] following] rules; customs; established practices/standards | [[is] following] social etiquette; manners | [is] well-behaved; well-disciplined] 规矩 規矩)” contains the following:

“Strife and Jealousy”

In the New World Translation Bible in the Watchtower Online Library, one of the scriptures linked to 1 Corinthians 13:5 with regard to “indecently” is Romans 13:13:

Let us walk decently as in the daytime, not in wild parties and drunkenness, not in immoral intercourse and brazen conduct, not in strife and jealousy.

Note that among the things that God’s Word lists as being indecent, along with things like drunkenness and sexual immorality, are “strife and jealousy”.

If someone makes an issue of a Mandarin field language learner who, say, uses Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) instead of following tradition and exclusively focusing on characters, is that person not being like those who made an issue of Jesus healing on the Sabbath? Instead of being happy and joyful because of the good that Jesus was doing, those opposers of Jesus were jealous of how “the entire crowd began to rejoice at all the glorious things he did”. (Luke 13:17) Opposers of Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) use today may similarly be jealous of how those who make good use of Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) can accomplish much in Jehovah’s service without having to put the kind of blood, sweat, and tears into learning characters the traditional way that they did. In their tradition-loving eyes, breaking from tradition and using innovative and game-changingly effective new tools like Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) may seem “indecent”, but in God’s eyes, it is the jealousy-motivated strife such ones cause over people doing good in his service that is truly indecent.

In God's organization, our unity is based on God's truth, not on human tradition.

[image or embed]

— tiandi, Links News (@tiandilinksnews.bsky.social) February 2, 2025 at 8:27 AM

Those who are motivated by true Christian love, as described in 1 Corinthians 13, would rejoice over how Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) helps Mandarin field language learners to bear witness to the truth more effectively, instead of considering it “cheating”, since love “rejoices with the truth”. (John 18:37; 1 Corinthians 13:6) Also, those who are motivated by true Christian love would not be jealous of how game-changing tools like Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) help Mandarin field language learners to more easily get more done, since “love is not jealous”. (1 Corinthians 13:4)…

The Needs of the Many, the Needs of the One

Interestingly, the collectivism of worldly Chinese culture may tend to drive people to be jealous, to hold zero-sum beliefs (that one person’s gain must mean another person’s loss), and to “feel bad about themselves when their friends succeed”. In contrast, real Christian love and true empathy move people to “rejoice with those who rejoice”. (Romans 12:15) The MEotW post on “jítǐ zhǔyì ((jí·tǐ gathered; collected · {body [→ [style; form]]} → [collective] 集体 集體) (zhǔ·yì master · meaning → [-ism] 主义 主義) → [collectivism; community spirit])” touched on this:

Self-Identity and Balanced Self-Love

Self-identity is one thing that can particularly be a struggle for those raised in collectivistic societies, since the self is relatatively often neglected in such societies. It’s perhaps not surprising then, that, as mentioned above, in the relatively collectivistic Chinese societies, with their relative paucity, or scarcity, of more healthy ways to build and maintain self-identity, so many have such an unhealthy, obsessive attachment to Chinese characters, as something to desperately hang their neglected self-identities on.

Categories
Culture Experiences Language Learning Technology Theocratic

mángwén

mángwén (máng·wén blind · writing → [braille] 盲文) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

Recently, jw.org featured the video “ ‘Without It, I Would Feel Lost’ ”, which, as its description says, is about “the experience of a blind man who has benefited from having the Bible in braille”. Where the English description of this video uses the word “braille”, the Mandarin description uses this week’s MEotW, “mángwén (máng·wén blind · writing → [braille] 盲文)”. And yes, as the existence of this Mandarin expression suggests, Chinese Braille (Zhōngguó (Zhōng·guó Central · Nation → [Chinese] 中国 中國) Mángwén (Máng·wén Blind · Writing → [Braille] 盲文)) does indeed exist.

Braille in the Land of Characters

But, one may ask, how does braille, with just a limited number of raised dots, work for Mandarin Chinese when thousands and thousands of Chinese characters are usually used to write this language? The post “How Chinese Braille works”, on the blog The Language Closet, discusses this question:

There is one system that intrigues me. one that, [sic] seems a little too big for what braille is able to handle.

You see…, one braille cell contains 6 dots. Including the space, which consists of zero raised dots, there are only 64 possible combinations that can be formed per braille cell. But yet, it is this same system that could represent the entirety of the Mandarin Chinese language to provide accessibility to the blind users. How does it do that? After all, Chinese as we know it is written with thousands upon thousands of characters, each with their own meaning.

To get around this problem of representing thousands of characters in braille, we would have to ditch the concept of the character, and to focus on the structure of the Chinese syllable. Chinese is fairly restricted in its syllable structure, with syllables having a (CG)V(X)T structure, where C is the initial consonant, G is the glide, V is the vowel, X is the coda, and T is one of the four tones, or a neutral tone for weak syllables. So in the hanyu pinyin, the syllable zhuāng can be split into zh + u + a + ng + tone 1. After factoring in tone, there are around 1300 possible syllables, although Mandarin Chinese uses way less than that.

In Mandarin Chinese, there are only 21 possible consonant initials, which are, in hanyu pinyin,

b, p, m, f, d, t, n, l, g, j, k, q, h, x, zh, ch, sh, r, z, c, and s.

Furthermore, with a limited number of final combinations, that is, combining glides, vowels, and codas, every single combination of Chinese initials and finals could be represented in braille.

So, Chinese Braille does NOT work by trying to shoehorn a Chinese characters writing system into braille—even the Simplified one just wouldn’t fit. Instead, the approach taken was to “ditch the concept of the character, and to focus on the structure of the Chinese syllable”, a basic unit of Mandarin speech. Instead of being based on a Chinese characters writing system, with its thousands and thousands of inconsistent, haphazardly designed symbols, Chinese Braille is based on Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), which consistently and elegantly represents any and all Modern Standard Mandarin speech with a reasonable number of symbols.

As the article “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Is a Good, Workable Writing System on Its Own” says:

But, is Pīnyīn even really a writing system? Interestingly, the Chinese national standard Zhōngguó Mángwén (中国盲文/中國盲文, Chinese Braille) is basically a transliteration or conversion of Pīnyīn into braille letters.

From this fact, we can logically draw the following conclusion, as stated in the above-mentioned article:

Braille is obviously a writing system, so Pīnyīn must also be a writing system (see p. 9), not just a pronunciation aid.

But, What About Homophones?!

One of the primary objections raised to the idea of using Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) as a writing system, and not just as a pronunciation aid, is that there are supposedly so many homophones (different words that sound the same) in Mandarin that characters are required to disambiguate them, otherwise there would be mass confusion. However, users of Chinese Braille, which is based on Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), seem to be doing just fine, along with the billion or so people who regularly speak Mandarin without constantly showing each other the Chinese characters that are supposedly required to distinguish homophones from one another.

For more information about Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) and homophones, see the subheading “But There Are So Many Words That Sound the Same!” in the article “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Was Plan A”. For those saying “tl;dr”, here is a bit of material from the conclusion of that section of the article:

The ultimate clarifier in modern Mandarin, even with all its existing homophones, is context, not characters. Characters themselves can have multiple possible meanings and multiple possible pronunciations, so one often has to, yes, check the context of something written in characters before the meaning and/or pronunciation of certain words in it can be determined with certainty.…

…That there are so many different words in modern Mandarin that sound the same is not a good reason not to use Pīnyīn, any more than it is a good reason not to speak Mandarin. Ironically, it is actually a good long-term reason not to use characters!

So, rather than being a real, valid reason not to use Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) as an actual writing system for Mandarin, the objection that characters are required to cope with Mandarin’s homophones is really just copium (“cope”+“opium”) for those who fear that all the blood, sweat, and tears they have invested into trying to learn and remember characters will be made irrelevant. (Such ones shouldn’t really fear, though—the world is and will continue to be awash in Chinese characters, so knowledge of characters will continue to have some value, probably right up until the end of this system of things.) The truth, for those who are willing to face it, is that Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is just as real and workable a writing system for Mandarin as is Chinese Braille, which is based on Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音).

Categories
Culture Science Technology Theocratic

jiéjīng

jiéjīng (jié·jīng {tied (into a knot) → [formed]} · crystal → [crystallized | crystal; crystallization | crystalline] 结晶 結晶) 👈🏼 Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[Notes: Tap/click on a Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to reveal its “flashcard”; tap/click on a “flashcard” or its Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to hide the “flashcard”. 📖 📄 📘 icons mean 📖 Reveal All, 📄 Reveal Advanced, and 📘 Reveal None re all the “flashcards” in the heading, paragraph, etc. that they are placed at the beginning of.]

The Shēngmìng Láizì Chuàngzào Ma? ((Shēngmìng Life 生命) (Lái·zì Came · From 来自 來自) (Chuàng·zào Initiating · {Making, Creating} → [Creating] 创造 創造) (Ma [? ptcl for “yes/no” questions] 吗 嗎)? → [Was Life Created? (lc)]) (Was Life Created? (lc)) brochure and the Shēngmìng de Qǐyuán—Zhíde Sīkǎo de Wǔ Ge Wèntí ((Shēngmìng Life 生命) (de ’s 的) (Qǐ·yuán {Rising → [Starting]} · Source → [Origin] 起源/原)—(Zhí·de Worth · Getting → [Worth] 值得) (Sī·kǎo {Thinking About} · Examining 思考) (de ’s 的) (Wǔ Five 五) (Ge [mw] 个 個/个) (Wèn·tí Asking · Subjects → [Questions] 问题 問題) → [The Origin of Life—Five Questions Worth Asking (lf)]) (The Origin of Life—Five Questions Worth Asking (lf)) brochure were originally published back in 2010, but relatively recently, the English version of the Was Life Created? brochure was updated to the December 2022 Printing, and the Mandarin version of it was updated to the February 2023 Printing. Also, the Was Life Created? brochure and the Origin of Life brochure are now in the Teaching Toolbox section in the JW Library app. So, it would be good to consider some of the expressions used in the Mandarin versions of these publications that can be so helpful when discussing whether life was created.

It’s Crystal Clear

This week’s MEotW, “jiéjīng (jié·jīng {tied (into a knot) → [formed]} · crystal → [crystallized | crystal; crystallization | crystalline] 结晶 結晶)”, occurs in the box at the end of the QUESTION 1 section of the Origin of Life brochure, which section is entitled, in English, “How Did Life Begin?”:

English:

Question: What takes greater faith—to believe that the millions of intricately coordinated parts of a cell arose by chance or to believe that the cell is the product of an intelligent mind?

Mandarin (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus):

📖 📄 📘 Qǐng (please 请 請) xiǎngxiang (xiǎng·xiang {think about} · {think about} 想想): Xìbāo (Xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) de (’s 的) wúshù (wú·shù without · number 无数 無數) bùfen (parts 部分) cuòzōng (cuò·zōng {are interlocked → [are intricate]} · {are combined → [are composite]} → [are intricate] 错综 錯綜)‐fùzá (fù·zá {are turned around → [are compound]} · {are mixed} → [are complex] 复杂 複雜), xiānghù ({with each other} 相互) xiétiáo (xié·tiáo {assisting → [coordinatedly]} · {are regulated → [fit in perfectly]} → [coordinate] 协调 協調), nǐ (you 你) rènwéi (rèn·wéi {do identify} · {(it) to be} (that) 认为 認為) xìbāo (xì·bāo tiny · womb → [cell] 细胞 細胞) shì (is 是) pèngqiǎo (pèng·qiǎo {having bumped into} · {being coincidental} → [by chance] 碰巧) chǎnshēng (chǎn·shēng {given birth to → [produced]} · {given birth to → [caused to exist]} → [brought into being] 产生 產生) de ({’s (thing)} 的), háishi (hái·shi {still more → [or]} · {is (it)} 还是 還是) zhìhuì (zhì·huì wisdom · intelligence → [wisdom] 智慧) de (’s 的) jiéjīng (jié·jīng {tied (into a knot) → [formed]} · crystal → [crystallization] 结晶 結晶) ne ([? ptcl] 呢)? Nǎ (which 哪) yí (one 一) yàng (form → [way] 样 樣) cái ({only then} 才 才/纔) shì (is 是) bùkě (bù·kě (one) not · can → [(one) cannot] 不可) zhìxìn (zhì·xìn place · {believing in} → [believe (usually used in the negative)] 置信) de ({’s (way)} 的) ne ([? ptcl] 呢)?

It’s Really Crystal Clear

The MEotW post on “cuòzōng (cuò·zōng {[is] interlocked and jagged → [[is] intricate]} · {[is] combined → [[is] composite]} → [[is] intricate; complex; tangled] 错综 錯綜)‐fùzá (fù·zá {[is] turned around → [[is] compound; complex]} · {[is] mixed} → [[is] complicated; complex] 复杂 複雜)”, which occurs a bit before this week’s MEotW “jiéjīng (jié·jīng {tied (into a knot) → [formed]} · crystal → [crystallized | crystal; crystallization | crystalline] 结晶 結晶)” in the above-quoted paragraph, contains this sentence:

In “cuòzōng (cuò·zōng {[being] interlocked and jagged → [[being] intricate]} · {[being] combined → [[being] composite]} → [[being] intricate; complex; tangled | (mental) complex (n)] 错综 錯綜)”, “cuò ({[is] alternating; staggered} [→ [[is] wrong; mistaken; incorrect; erroneous | missed | grinding; rubbing | moving to the side | mistake; error; blunder [→ [fault]]]] | {[is] interlocked and jagged} [→ [intricate]] 错 錯)” literally means “interlocked and jagged”, and it effectively means “intricate”.

“Interlocked and jagged” and “intricate” may bring to mind a clockwork mechanism, like this:

Closeup of a clockwork mechanism

To people who see such a clockwork mechanism, it would generally be really crystal clear that such a mechanism is a product of intelligence, and it is interesting to consider how “jiéjīng (jié·jīng {tied (into a knot) → [formed]} · crystal → [crystallized | crystal; crystallization | crystalline] 结晶 結晶)” works as a Mandarin translation for “product”, as it does in the above example from the Origin of Life brochure.

The “jié ({tie [(a knot of)]}; knit; weave [→ [congeal; form; forge; cement | join together; bind; connect; unite | settle; conclude]] | {tying (of a knot)} → [knot | (electrical) junction | node | written guarantee; affidavit; bond] 结 結)” in “jiéjīng (jié·jīng {tied (into a knot) → [formed]} · crystal → [crystallized | crystal; crystallization | crystalline] 结晶 結晶)” literally means “tie (into a knot)”, and in this context it effectively means “form” (used as a verb). (This “jié ({tie [(a knot of)]}; knit; weave [→ [congeal; form; forge; cement | join together; bind; connect; unite | settle; conclude]] | {tying (of a knot)} → [knot | (electrical) junction | node | written guarantee; affidavit; bond] 结 結)” also appears in well-known expressions like “jiéguǒ (jié·guǒ {tied (into a knot) → [formed]} · fruit → [result | as a result] 结果 結果)”, “jiélùn (jié·lùn {tying up → [concluding]} · determining → [conclusion; verdict] 结论 結論)”, and “jiéhūn (jié·hūn {tie (a knot of)} · {marrying → [marriage]} → [marry; get married] 结婚 結婚)”.) The other morpheme “jīng (crystal [→ [clear; brilliant; bright; radiant; glittering; sparkling]] 晶)” means “crystal”. Being put together this way, “jiéjīng (jié·jīng {tied (into a knot) → [formed]} · crystal → [crystallized | crystal; crystallization | crystalline] 结晶 結晶)” on one level of literalness can mean “formed crystal”, and it can effectively mean “crystallization”. This word literally refers to something that has solidified into a crystal, and it can metaphorically refer to “a mental synthesis that becomes fixed or concrete by a process resembling crystal formation”. Similary, a product is something that is produced, that previously was not fixed, concrete, or solid, but that is made to become so, by, for example, intelligence—a crystallization is a product of the process of crystal formation, and a product is a crystallization, a solid result, of the production process.

It’s Really, Really Crystal Clear

If it’s crystal clear that a clockwork mechanism like the one in the image above must have been the product, or crystallization, of intelligence, then what about “the millions of intricately coordinated parts of a cell”? To give us an idea of how some of the parts of a cell function, here is a video I came across that uses computer animation to help us visualize how tiny molecular machines (discussed in the MEotW post on “fēnzǐ jùhé‐tǐ ((fēn·zǐ {divided (off)} · {small and hard thing} → [molecular] 分子) (jù·hé assembled · {closed → [combined]} → [polymerized] 聚合)‐(tǐ body 体 體/体/躰) → [(protein) molecular machine])”) inside our cells copy DNA:

Surely, it’s really, really crystal clear that the tiny molecular machines inside our cells must have been, even more so than any clockwork mechanism, the product, or crystallization, of intelligent design! For example, human-made clockwork mechanisms cannot make copies of themselves, but the molecular machines in our cells can, while being way smaller and more intricate! That is solid evidence that our cells and the molecular machines in them were produced by a higher intelligence than that of humans (a superintelligence, in the terminology of the artificial intelligence field), rather than some subhuman force like mindless blind chance.

The Real Thing Is Even Better

If one came across a wooden doll like Pinocchio that looks like a boy, would that person assume that that wooden doll somehow came into being by chance? Hardly anyone would make that assumption—it would be crystal clear that someone must have made that doll. In the story of Pinocchio, that someone who made Pinocchio was named Geppetto. (By the way, according to the Chinese Wikipedia page for Pinocchio, in Mandarin, “Pinocchio” is “Pǐnuòcáo (Pinocchio 匹诺曹 匹諾曹)”, and “Geppetto” is “Jiépèituō (Geppetto 杰佩托 傑/杰佩/珮托/託)”.)

It would have been dismissively insulting to Geppetto to suggest that all the skill, care, and craftsmanship that he put into making Pinocchio was unnecessary, and that Pinocchio just somehow came into existence from a pile of wood scraps without any help from Geppetto. Similarly, people are dismissively insulting Jehovah God when they suggest that real boys (and girls, and men, and women, and plants, and animals, etc.) just somehow evolved, and did not need any of Jehovah’s skill, care, and craftsmanship to come into existence.

Screenshot of Pinocchio from the trailer for the film Pinocchio (1940).

The real thing is even better!

Let us, then, not hesitate to make good use of the Origin of Life brochure in the Mandarin field, to help ensure that our loving and wise Creator gets the praise and honour he deserves in this field in which many were taught that there is no Creator.—Revelation 4:11.

For convenience:

The direct link for the current-generation Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus resource for the Origin of Life brochure is:

The short link for Chinese field language-learning links for the Origin of Life brochure is:

More Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus web material based on the Mandarin Origin of Life brochure will be made available in the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus web resource as time allows.