Categories
Culture Experiences History Language Learning Science Technology Theocratic

gāo’ào

gāo’ào (gāo’·ào {[is] (considering self to be of) high (status)} · {[is] proud; haughty; arrogant} 高傲) ← 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.]

A few years back, I wrote up a brief web page listing reasons for producing Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), etc. material for the Imitate (ia) book. Some, especially some who grew up in the West, may have felt that this book is made up of “just stories”, and ones that they were already quite familiar with, at that. However, we must remember that Chinese Bible students may often have a different perspective regarding the Bible accounts that are made to come to life in the Imitate book. As that web page said:

  • Many Chinese people in the world have not been exposed to Bible accounts the way many Westerners have.
  • Also, I have heard that some, perhaps many, Chinese Bible students tend to approach their Bible studies like intellectual exercises for accumulating chōuxiàng (abstract) head knowledge as if for a school exam, rather than as training for their hearts for their own real lives.

Later, the web page touches on how some of the real-world benefits of good storytelling like that found in the Imitate book involve empathy:

    • The actress Natalie Portman once said, “I love acting. I think it’s the most amazing thing to be able to do. Your job is practicing empathy. You walk down the street imagining every person’s life.”
  • The Imitate book helps build Bible students’ empathy towards Bible characters, which in turn helps Bible students realize that others would feel empathy towards them as well if they imitated these Bible characters—not everyone will just think they’re crazy, like many worldly friends or family members might think.

While even fictional stories can have the benefits described in the links and the quote above, true stories from the Bible can have even greater benefits, including spiritual ones.

Besides the Imitate book, another book from Jehovah’s organization that relates Bible accounts is the Learn From the Bible (lfb) book. The letter from the Governing Body in this book says that, similarly to the Imitate book, the Learn From the Bible book also “brings the Bible accounts to life and captures the feelings of those depicted”, while, unlike the Imitate book, it “tells the story of the human family from creation onward”. While the Learn From the Bible book is especially suitable for children, the letter from the Governing Body in this book says that “it can also be used to help adults who desire to learn more about the Bible”. So, it would be good to consider on this blog some of the expressions used in the Mandarin Learn From the Bible book.

Proud Pharaoh

This week’s MEotW, “gāo’ào (gāo’·ào {[is] (considering self to be of) high (status)} · {[is] proud; haughty; arrogant} 高傲)”, appears near the beginning of Lesson 19 of the Mandarin Learn From the Bible book (WOL), which is entitled “Tóu (Head → [First]) Sān (Three 三) Chǎng ([mw for recreational, sports, or other activities]場/塲) Zāiyāng (Calamities → [Plagues] 灾殃 災殃) (“The First Three Plagues”):

English:

Jehovah sent Moses and Aaron to Pharaoh with this message: ‘Let my people go so that they can worship me in the wilderness.’ Pharaoh proudly replied: ‘I do not care what Jehovah says, and I will not let the Israelites go.’

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

📖 📄 📘 Yēhéhuá (Jehovah 耶和华 耶和華) pài ({river branched} → [sent] 派) Móxī (Moses 摩西) (and 和) Yàlún (Aaron 亚伦 亞倫) ({to go} 去) jiàn (see) Fǎlǎo (Pharaoh 法老), duì (towards → [to]) (him 他) shuō ({to say}說/説): “ (you 你) yào (must 要) fàng ({let go} 放) wǒ de ((wǒ me 我) (de ’s 的) [my]) zǐmín (zǐ·mín persons · people 子民) zǒu ({to be walking} → [to be leaving] 走), ràng ({to allow}) tāmen (tā·men him/her · [pl] [them] 他们 他們) zài (in 在) kuàngyě (kuàng·yě spacious · {open country} → [wilderness] 旷野 曠野) chóngbài ({to worship} 崇拜) (me 我).” Fǎlǎo (Pharaoh 法老) què (however) gāo’ào (gāo’·ào {(considering self to be of) high (status)} · proud 高傲) de (-ly 地) shuō (said說/説): “Yēhéhuá (Jehovah 耶和华 耶和華) shuō (says說/説) shénme (shén·me what · [suf] 什么 什/甚麼) (I 我) bùguǎn (bù·guǎn not · {am managing → [am bothering about]} 不管), (I 我) jiùshì (jiù·shì exactly · am 就是) (not 不) fàng ({letting go} 放) rén (people 人).”

The Mandarin Learn From the Bible book here uses “gāo’ào (gāo’·ào {[is] (considering self to be of) high (status)} · {[is] proud; haughty; arrogant} 高傲) to correspond with the English word “proud”. A related expression, which also uses the morphemes in “gāo’ào (gāo’·ào {[is] (considering self to be of) high (status)} · {[is] proud; haughty; arrogant} 高傲)”, is “xīngāo (xīn·gāo heart · {[is] high} [→ [[is] proud | [is] having high aspirations/ambitions]] 心高)qì’ào (qì’·ào {air → [spirit | manner; attitude]} · {[is] proud; haughty [→ [[is] unyielding]]} 气傲 氣/气傲)”. This expression occurs in Proverbs 16:18 (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus), which is quoted in Lesson 62 of the Learn From the Bible book (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus).

Pharaoh Was a Bozo

The below quote was recently added to the article “Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Was Plan A”:

This tendency of many to prioritize their own pride and position over what’s really better for everyone is also described in this quote from Guy Kawasaki about something he learned from Steve Jobs:

A players hire A+ players. Actually, Steve believed that A players hire A players—that is people who are as good as they are. I refined this slightly—my theory is that A players hire people even better than themselves. It’s clear, though, that B players hire C players so they can feel superior to them, and C players hire D players. If you start hiring B players, expect what Steve called “the bozo explosion” to happen in your organization.

Yes, Pīnyīn was Plan A, but China unfortunately let the proud, self-serving B players have their way.

Note that what makes someone a B player or worse is not necessarily that person’s level of intelligence, skill, talent, etc. What characterizes B players or worse is their proud, self-serving rejection of others who are better in some way, their need to feel superior to others.

Pharaoh encountered Jehovah God, an A+ player if ever there was one, and rather than humbly recognizing that, working along with Jehovah, and putting himself in a position to learn from him, Pharaoh in his pride stubbornly rejected Jehovah and his request. He didn’t have to be that way—when the king of Nineveh heard the judgement message from Jehovah that Jonah declared (as discussed in Lesson 54 of the Learn From the Bible book), he and his people repented. Unfortunately, the Pharaoh whom Moses and Aaron faced instead proved himself a bozo.

Psalm 2 prophesies that “the kings of the earth” in general would also “take their stand” against Jehovah and his King Jesus, instead of welcoming and honouring them as they deserve. What a bunch of bozos!

Instead of Following Plan A, China Went with the B Players

Again, as quoted above:

Yes, Pīnyīn was Plan A, but China unfortunately let the proud, self-serving B players have their way.

This is a major reason why China continues to mainly use Chinese characters, when Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) was introduced decades ago as a simple, elegant full writing system for Mandarin that was meant to eventually replace characters as the main writing system of China, to provide relief for the masses of people who were struggling with the unnecessarily inhumanly complex characters. As the above-quoted article explains:

In addition to those who feel that phasing out the Hànzì would be a regrettable cultural loss, I have also noticed that there are some for whom knowledge of Hànzì is a matter of pride and self-identity. They are proud of knowing the Hànzì as they do, and they view their knowledge of the Hànzì as part of what makes them who they are, as something that distinguishes them from those who don’t know the Hànzì. Such ones may defend the Hànzì to the point of irrationality in the face of a more accessible alternative that would make them and their hard-earned knowledge of Hànzì less “special”, that would threaten to render worthless all of the blood, sweat, and tears they have invested into grappling with these “Chinese puzzles”. It’s as if they are saying, “That’s not fair! If I had to go through all this bitter hard work to learn characters before I could read and write Chinese, then everyone else has to too!”

This is probably a big reason why, as noted above, “opposition [to Chinese writing reform] ‘comes primarily from intellectuals, especially from high level intellectuals.’ ” Lǔ Xùn (鲁迅/魯迅, Lu Xun), considered by many to be the greatest Chinese writer of the twentieth century (he wrote “The True Story of Ah-Q”, “Diary of a Madman”, and “My Old Hometown”), had this to say about the matter:

In addition to the limitations of social status and economic means, our Chinese characters present another high threshold to the masses: their difficulty. If you don’t spend ten or so years on them, it’s not easy to cross this threshold alone. Those who cross over it are the scholar-officials, and these same scholar-officials do their utmost to make writing as difficult as possible because it makes them especially dignified, surpassing all other ordinary scholar-officials.

Chinese characters and the Chinese literary language are already difficult enough by their own nature. On top of that, the scholar-officials have purposely devised all of these additional difficulties that get added on. Such being the case, how could anyone hope that the masses would have any affinity for the Chinese writing system? But the scholar-officials precisely want it to be this way. If the characters were easy to recognize and everybody could master them, then they would not be dignified, and the scholar-officials would lose their dignity along with them.

Let Us Allow Ourselves to Be Taught by Jehovah

Let us not be proud B players/bozos like those “dignified” scholar-officials, or like Pharaoh. Instead, let us humbly be open to learning from others, especially from Jehovah God himself. Isaiah 54:13 tells us of the good that can result:

And all your sons will be taught by Jehovah,
And the peace of your sons will be abundant.


For convenience:

The direct link for the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus resource for the Learn From the Bible book is:

The short link for Chinese field language-learning links for the Learn From the Bible book 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 Learn From the Bible book will be made available in the Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus web resource as time allows.

Categories
Culture Current Events Language Learning Science Technology Theocratic

yì‐nián‐yí‐dù

yì‐nián‐yí‐dù ((yì one 一)‐(nián year年/秊)‐(yí one 一)‐(dù {spending; passing (of time)} → [mw for occasions/times] 度) [once a year; annual | annually]) ← 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.]

This week’s MEotW, “yì‐nián‐yí‐dù ((yì one 一)‐(nián year年/秊)‐(yí one 一)‐(dù {spending; passing (of time)} → [mw for occasions/times] 度) [once a year; annual | annually])”, occurs in the following sentence, which, at the time of this writing, jw.org is featuring to invite people to attend the Memorial:

English:

We invite you to attend our annual event to remember the death of Jesus Christ.

Mandarin:

📖 📄 📘 Wǒmen (Wǒ·men we · [pl] 我们 我們) yāoqǐng (invite 邀请 邀請) (you 你) cānjiā (cān·jiā {to take part in} · {to add to} → [to attend] 参加 參加) zhèige (zhèi·ge this · [mw] 这个 這個) yì‐nián‐yí‐dù ((yì one 一)‐(nián year年/秊)‐(yí one 一)‐(dù {spending (of time)} → [mw for occasions/times] 度) [annual]) de (’s 的) jìniàn (jì·niàn remembering · {thinking of} → [commemorating] 记/纪念 記/紀念) jùhuì (meeting 聚会 聚會), jìniàn (jì·niàn {to remember} · {to think of} → [to commemorate] 记/纪念 記/紀念) Yēsū (Jesus 耶稣 耶穌) Jīdū (Christ 基督) wèi (for為/爲) rénlèi (rén·lèi human·kind 人类 人類) xīshēng (xī·shēng sacrificed · {(as with a) domestic animal} → [sacrificed] 牺牲 犧牲) shēngmìng (life 生命).

“Yì‐nián‐yí‐dù ((Yì one 一)‐(nián year年/秊)‐(yí one 一)‐(dù {spending; passing (of time)} → [mw for occasions/times] 度) [once a year; annual | annually]) on one level of literalness means “one year one occasion/time”, which effectively means “annual”. Its final morpheme “dù (degree; extent; {degree of intensity} | {spending; passing (of time)} [→ [mw for occasions/times]] 度) in this expression serves as a measure word for occasions or times, which likely derives from its meaning of “spending; passing (of time)”. In other expressions, “dù (degree; extent; {degree of intensity} | {spending; passing (of time)} [→ [mw for occasions/times]] 度) can also mean “degree; extent; degree of intensity”:

  • 📖 📄 📘 dùguò (dù·guò {spend; pass (time)} · pass; cross → [spend; pass (time/etc.) | pull/get through; survive] 度过 度過)
  • 📖 📄 📘 tàidu (tài·du state · degree → [attitude; manner] 态度 態度)
  • 📖 📄 📘 wēndù (wēn·dù {(of) being warm} · {degree of intensity} → [temperature] 温度 溫度)
  • 📖 📄 📘 zhìdù (zhì·dù system · extent → [system] 制度)

Same Character, Different Tones

Note that in “yì‐nián‐yí‐dù ((yì one 一)‐(nián year年/秊)‐(yí one 一)‐(dù {spending; passing (of time)} → [mw for occasions/times] 度) [once a year; annual | annually])”, the morpheme meaning “one” is first pronounced “yì (one 一)”, with a fourth tone, and then it’s pronounced “yí (one 一)”, with a second tone. This is tone sandhi, and as the MEotW post on “diǎnliàng (diǎn·liàng {dot → [light (v); ignite]} · {to be bright} [→ [illuminate; shine light on]] 点亮 點亮) said:

On the other hand, the unofficial Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus resources join the official Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) publications, old and new, in explicitly indicating tone sandhi for “bù (not 不) and “yī (one 一) (e.g., “búzài (bú·zài not · again; further; continuing; anymore 不再) instead of the standard “bùzài (bù·zài not · again; further; continuing; anymore 不再)) to make things easier for readers, even though this practice is not included in the GB/T 16159-2012 [PRC national] standard’s recommendations.

In the end, what matters most re how anything is written is not just what is officially recommended or what happens to be popular among changing, imperfect humans. Rather, what matters most is what really works best to accomplish the goal of writing: To communicate to readers. This is especially true when God-honouring and life-saving Bible truths need to be communicated. So, this blog and the other Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus resources will continue to seek to render Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) in ways that maximize how clearly, easily, effectively, and appropriately it communicates with readers.

Same Characters, Different Word Boundaries

Another interesting thing to note is that the last two morphemes in “yì‐nián‐yí‐dù ((yì one 一)‐(nián year年/秊)‐(yí one 一)‐(dù {spending; passing (of time)} → [mw for occasions/times] 度) [once a year; annual | annually]) can in some contexts form the expression “yídù (yí·dù [(at)] one · {spending; passing (of time) → [mw for occasions/times]} [once; at one time; on one occasion; for a time] 一度)”, which is appropriately written in Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) without a space or other word divider between the two morphemes. Why then, does this blog post render “yì‐nián‐yí‐dù ((yì one 一)‐(nián year年/秊)‐(yí one 一)‐(dù {spending; passing (of time)} → [mw for occasions/times] 度) [once a year; annual | annually]) with a hyphen (that acts as a word divider) between its last two morphemes?

The reason for the different renderings of the same two morphemes in the two different expressions is, well, because we are indeed dealing with two different expressions. Whereas “yì‐nián‐yí‐dù ((yì one 一)‐(nián year年/秊)‐(yí one 一)‐(dù {spending; passing (of time)} → [mw for occasions/times] 度) [once a year; annual | annually]) uses its last two morphemes in a “one-[word divider]-[measure word]” pattern, as does “yí (one 一) ge ([mw]個/个)”, “yídù (yí·dù [(at)] one · {spending; passing (of time) → [mw for occasions/times]} [once; at one time; on one occasion; for a time] 一度), treated as one word without a space in it, is used to effectively mean “once; at one time; on one occasion; for a time”. The ABC Chinese-English Dictionary, edited by John DeFrancis and Victor H. Mair, among others, provides these examples of this expression in use:

📖 📄 📘 Wǒmen (Wǒ·men we · [pl] 我们 我們) yídù (yí·dù (at) one · {passing (of time) → [mw for occasions/times]} [once] 一度) shì (were 是) hǎo (good 好) péngyou (friends 朋友).
We were once good friends.

📖 📄 📘 (she 她) yídù (yí·dù (at) one · {passing (of time) → [mw for occasions/times]} [for a time] 一度) duì (towards) huìhuà (huì·huà painting · paintings 绘画 繪畫) gǎn (felt 感) xìngqù (interest 兴趣 興趣).
She was interested in painting for a time.

Context Is the Key, Not Characters

The above points about how the characters “一” and “度” can have different pronunciations or meanings in different contexts remind us that Chinese characters are NOT the ultimate clarifiers of meaning in Mandarin. This excerpt from the MEotW post on “yǔjìng (yǔ·jìng language · {(set of) boundaries → [(bounded) place; area] → [condition; situation; circumstances]} → [context] 语境 語境) explains further:

Context and Mandarin Writing Systems

Research into the importance of context turned up a couple of interesting sayings from the business world:

Content is king.
—Bill Gates

Content is king, but context is God.
—Gary Vaynerchuk

Mandarin field language-learners may hear the assertion from Chinese culture traditionalists that it is necessary to use Chinese characters to clarify the ambiguity that results from Mandarin having so many homophones, words that sound the same but that have different meanings. The insinuation, or even the outright accusation, is that the upstart Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) system is thus unusable as a writing system for Mandarin, that the Chinese characters writing system is still the rightful king. Besides, there is so much existing content written in Chinese characters, and content is king!

However, a little consideration of the yǔjìng (yǔ·jìng language · {(set of) boundaries → [(bounded) place] → [situation]} → [context] 语境 語境), the language situation or context, shows up the fallacy of this assertion. The Chinese characters writing system exists along with Mandarin speech, and if Chinese characters are truly required to clearly communicate meaning in Mandarin, then that would mean that Mandarin speech on its own, without the help of visible characters, is unusable as a means of communication. That, however, is obviously not true—people who are proficient in spoken Mandarin communicate clearly with each other all the time, undoubtedly pretty much as clearly as proficient English speakers communicate with each other.

The key reason why proficient Mandarin speakers can communicate clearly with each other despite all of the homophones in Mandarin is not that they are constantly referring to Chinese characters, although people do occasionally do that in the current characters-saturated cultural climate. No, the key reason why Mandarin-speakers routinely communicate clearly with each other is because they use sufficient context to clarify any potentially ambiguous homophones. And, since Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) is a simple and direct representation of Mandarin speech, anything that is understandable when spoken in Mandarin is understandable when written in Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)1 Corinthians 14:8–11.

So, while Chinese characters-based content may be so predominant in the Chinese world that it’s king there, context is God, relatively and metaphorically speaking, and Mandarin speech and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) rightly rely on context, not on Chinese characters, just like we rightly rely on God, not on merely human kings.

Categories
Culture Current Events History Technology Theocratic

zhōngzhǐ

zhōngzhǐ (zhōng·zhǐ end; finish · stop; halt 终止 終止) ← 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.]

American president Joe Biden has expressed that the US will back Ukraine in its war for “as long as it takes”. However, looking at the matter of war as a whole, it is evident that human governments will never be able to fully put to rest this destructive phenomenon—while World War I was called “the war to end all wars”, it didn’t actually accomplish this, and down to today, war continues to ravage humankind.

That is why this week’s MEotW, “zhōngzhǐ (zhōng·zhǐ end; finish · stop; halt 终止 終止)”, is so remarkable. It appears in an article that is currently being featured on jw.org in connection with this year’s Memorial campaign, and that has the following title:

English:

Jesus Will End War

Mandarin:

📖 📄 📘 Yēsū (Jesus 耶稣 耶穌) Huì (Will) Zhōngzhǐ (Zhōng·zhǐ End · Halt 终止 終止) Zhànzhēng (Zhàn·zhēng War · Contending → [War] 战争 戰爭)

Besides being used in the title of the article, “zhōngzhǐ (zhōng·zhǐ end; finish · stop; halt 终止 終止) is also used in the current Mandarin New World Translation Bible’s rendition of Psalm 46:9 (WOL, Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus), which the article quotes from:

📖 📄 📘 (he 他) zhōngzhǐ (zhōng·zhǐ {is ending} · {is halting} 终止 終止) zhànzhēng (zhàn·zhēng wars · contendings → [wars] 战争 戰爭), píngdìng (píng·dìng {is making to be flat, level, even → [is making to be peaceful]} · {is making to be settled → [is making to be calm]} 平定) tiānxià (tiān·xià heaven · under → [the whole world] 天下);
(he 他) zhé (breaks折/摺) gōng (bow 弓) duàn (snaps) máo ({(long) spear} 矛), shāohuǐ (shāo·huǐ burns · {to be destroyed} 烧毁 燒毀/燬) zhànchē (zhàn·chē war · vehicles 战车 戰車).

“End War? That’s Crazy!” Or, Is It…

The morphemes in “zhōngzhǐ (zhōng·zhǐ end; finish · stop; halt 终止 終止) mean “end; finish” and “stop; halt”. Is it crazy to think that something as deeply rooted in imperfect human nature as war can actually be ended or halted?

John Lennon and Yoko Ono with a sign saying “WAR IS OVER! IF YOU WANT IT Happy Christmas from John & Yoko”

John Lennon & Yoko Ono with one of their “WAR IS OVER!…” signs [source]
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License logo Wasfi Akab

Decades ago, John Lennon optimistically said, “war is over…if you want it.” Unfortunately, the intervening years have reminded us that while many do want war to be over, some, including world leaders with military forces at their command, don’t want that—they want to be able to use their military forces to try to get their way, which means war. And yet, someone has the audacity, the insanity, to claim to be able to actually end war. Is that truly insanity, though? Many Apple enthusiasts will remember the following quote, which was part of the “Think different” advertising campaign:

[Note: Unlike the televised commercial, which was narrated by actor Richard Dreyfuss, this video is narrated by Steve Jobs.]

Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.

The above was said in an Apple commercial that showed images of well-known humans, including John Lennon, who are widely acknowledged to have changed the world. If even some humans can change the world and accomplish things that people in general would consider “crazy” to even think about, how about the one who Psalm 46:9 says “is bringing an end to wars throughout the earth”, Jehovah God himself?

So “Crazy” That It’s True

Creation and the Bible both testify to the suprahumanly grand and extraordinary things that Jehovah has the power and wisdom to accomplish, and his chosen King Jesus, whose sacrificial death we will remember at the Memorial, is also no ordinary human. (Come to think of it, Jesus fits the above quote’s description of a “crazy one”. Indeed, Mark 3:21 says his relatives thought he had “gone out of his mind”.) As the above-mentioned article on jw.org says:

While on earth, Jesus showed great love for people, even to the point of sacrificing his life for them. (Matthew 20:28; John 15:13) Soon, he will again prove his love for people by using his authority as King of God’s Kingdom to bring “an end to wars throughout the earth.”—Psalm 46:9.

With the power and backing of Jehovah God himself, and with the assistance of “the armies in heaven”, Jesus will indeed end war, regardless of how “crazy” humans of this world may consider that goal to be. (Revelation 19:11–16) Then, people will be able to do more than just “imagine all the people living life in peace”, as John Lennon sang about—they will be able to actually see and live in the reality of a peaceful, global paradise!