The divine law and blood II

Acts15:28,29NASB"For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials:That you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from fornication;"

Of course when this passage was written modern medical uses for blood were not yet invented.But as demonstrated by the first post in this series it would be inconsistent to claim that intravenous feeding on whole blood or its major components are not covered by this passage.

 What though about minor fractions(i.e those not requiring a cross match),I think a comparison between this issue and the same passage's prohibition against the eating of meat sacrificed to idols could be helpful.

 For instance while shopping in the meat market,would a first century Christian be in default of this prohibition if he/she knowingly purchased meat that had been sacrificed at a nearby temple.Or what if his unbelieving neighbour/relative wanted to be hospitable should he accept their invitation to a meal,knowing that some of the meat being served may have been sacrificed to an idol.Please note the apostle Paul's balanced counsel At
1Corinthians8:4NIV"So then about eating foods sacrificed to idols:We know that "An idol is nothing in the world" and that "there is no God but one""
 1Corinthians8:9,10NIV"Be careful,however,that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak.For if someone with a weak conscience sees you,with all your knowledge,eating in an idol's temple,won't that person be emboldened to eat what is sacrificed to idols."
What is the Apostle saying here,first the fact that an animal had previously been sacrificed before a lifeless idol,to some imaginary god represented thereby did not in itself render the meat of this animal unclean.So if while shopping in the market a christian purchased the meat of this animal,or if they were to purchase a meal at a nearby restaurant regularly supplied with meat from a pagan temple,it would not necessarily be a violation of the principle being enunciated at Acts15:28,29.The principle is only violated where eating the meat honors the idol and promotes the demon-inspired falsehood it represents
1Corinithians10:19,20NIV"Do I mean then that food sacrificed to an idol is anything,or that an idol is anything?No,but the sacrifices of the pagans are offered to demons,not to God,and I do not want you to be participants with demons."
 Now it would be obvious to any sensible person that being present during a pagan religious ceremony and partaking of any meat from an animal sacrificed to the deity represented by an idol in that setting,would serve the purposes of the demons and not God.But where do we draw the line.The apostle Paul recognized that beyond the obvious various believers,depending on their background and/or spiritual advancement might reach differing conclusions,some might feel comfortable having a meal in a restaurant adjoining a pagan temple,for others the distinction between such a meal an actual participation in a pagan ritual might not be wide enough.
 Paul's counsel:The truly mature Christian is more concerned with the peace of Jehovah's Congregation than his supposed rights.
 Back to our main topic,the answer hinges on the issue of "what is blood?"We know that blood is biological tissue,that is why a cross-matching of blood-types is necessary prior to a transfusion of whole blood or its primary components,the body's immune system rejects all foreign tissue,by cross-matching the violence of the rejection can be reduced(though not eliminated).The fact that minor fractions don't require cross-matching shows that they are not biological tissue,also to be considered is the fact that many of these fractions naturally occur as an "intrinsic"component of foods not prohibited by the scriptures.What,if anything does any of this mean?Well at the very least, it is impossible to objectively state that minor fractions are in the same class as whole blood and its major components.
 Therefore as is the case with the scriptural prohibition against the eating of meat from animals sacrificed to idols,prayerful meditation on the issues is necessary in order that each christian may make  decisions that would leave them with a healthy conscience.
 Truly mature Christians realize that differing conclusions are bound to be arrived at on this issue and that it is simply not their place to judge the slave of another Romans14:4   

Technology:friend/enemy/frenemy of culture?

I'm O.K,you're O.K?

Whatever would St.Paul(remember him?) say?: 1Corinthians6:9-11NJB"Do you not realise that people who do evil will never inherit the kingdom of God?Make no mistake_the sexually immoral,idolaters,adulterers,the self-indulgent,sodomites,thieves misers,drunkards,slanderers and swindlers,none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.Some of you USED to be of that kind:but you have been washed clean.you have been sanctified and you have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and through the spirit of our God."

  Malachi:2:17NJB"'you have wearied Yahweh with your talk.You ask."how have we wearied him?"When you say,"any evil-doer is good as far as Yahweh is concerned;indeed he is delighted with them";or when you say,"where is the God of fair judgement now?"

A line in the sand? II

Sheol:The end and the beginning II

Think of the happiness you will feel when you see your loved ones again!

Hope for the Dead—The Resurrection

Do you believe in the Bible’s promise of a resurrection?* The prospect of being reunited with our loved ones who have died is appealing, to say the least. But is it realistic to nourish such a hope? To help answer that, we do well to consider the example of the apostles of Jesus Christ.

The apostles firmly believed in the resurrection of the dead. Why? For at least two reasons. First, their hope was primarily based on this fact: Jesus himself had been raised from the dead. The apostles—and “more than 500 brothers at one time”—saw the resurrected Jesus. (1 Corinthians 15:6) Additionally, Jesus’ resurrection was widely attested to and accepted, as the four Gospels show.—Matthew 27:62–28:20; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1–21:25.

Second, the apostles had witnessed Jesus carry out at least three resurrections—first at Nain, then at Capernaum, and finally at Bethany. (Luke 7:11-17; 8:49-56; John 11:1-44) The last of those resurrections, described earlier in this issue, involved a family especially close to Jesus. Let us look further at what happened.

“I AM THE RESURRECTION”

“Your brother will rise.” Jesus spoke those words to Martha, whose brother, Lazarus, had been dead for four days. Martha did not at first understand the meaning of Jesus’ words. “I know he will rise,” she responded, but she thought that it would be at some time in the future. Imagine her surprise when after hearing Jesus say, “I am the resurrection and the life,” she saw Jesus raise her brother from the dead!—John 11:23-25.

Where was Lazarus during the four days after his death? Lazarus said nothing to suggest that he had been alive somewhere else during those four days. No, Lazarus did not have an immortal soul that had gone to heaven. By resurrecting Lazarus, Jesus did not bring him back down to earth, dragging him away from enjoying heavenly bliss in a place near to God. So where was Lazarus during those four days? He was, in fact, asleep in the grave.—Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10.

Remember, Jesus compared death to a sleep from which one is awakened by resurrection. The account reads: “‘Lazarus our friend has fallen asleep, but I am traveling there to awaken him.’ The disciples then said to him: ‘Lord, if he is sleeping, he will get well.’ Jesus, however, had spoken about his death. But they imagined he was speaking about taking rest in sleep. Then Jesus said to them plainly: ‘Lazarus has died.’” (John 11:11-14) By resurrecting Lazarus, Jesus gave him back his life and reunited him with his family. What a marvelous gift Jesus gave to that family!

The resurrections Jesus performed when on earth were a foregleam of what he will do in the future as King of God’s Kingdom.* During his rule over the earth, the heavenly Jesus will bring back to life those humans who are asleep in mankind’s common grave. That is why he said: “I am the resurrection.” Think of the happiness you will feel when you see your loved ones again! Think, too, of the joy that resurrected ones will experience!—Luke 8:56.

FAITH FOR EVERLASTING LIFE

Jesus said to Martha: “The one who exercises faith in me, even though he dies, will come to life; and everyone who is living and exercises faith in me will never die at all.” (John 11:25, 26) Those whom Jesus resurrects during his thousand-year reign will have the prospect of living forever—as long as they truly put faith in him.

After making those remarkable statements about the resurrection, Jesus asked Martha a soul-searching question: “‘Do you believe this?’ She said to him: ‘Yes, Lord, I have believed that you are the Christ, the Son of God.’” (John 11:26, 27) What about you—would you like to develop the kind of faith in the resurrection hope that Martha had? A first step is to take in knowledge of God’s purpose for humankind. (John 17:3; 1 Timothy 2:4) Such knowledge can lead to faith. Why not ask Jehovah’s Witnesses to show you what the Bible teaches about this subject? They will be happy to discuss with you the marvelous hope of the resurrection.

Complimentaries.The Watchtower Society's commentary.

DID YOU KNOW?

In Jesus’ day, how were temple contributions made?

The treasury of the temple was located in the Court of Women. The book The Temple—Its Ministry and Services says: “All around ran a simple colonnade, and within it, against the wall, the thirteen chests, or ‘trumpets,’ [where] contributions were placed.”

The chests were called trumpets because they were narrow at the top and wide at the bottom. Each chest was labeled for a different type of offering, and the funds collected in them were earmarked for specific uses. Jesus was in the Court of Women when he observed many people, including a needy widow, offering contributions.—Luke 21:1, 2.

Two chests were reserved for the temple tax—one for the current year and one for the past year. Chests 3 to 7 were for collecting funds for the appointed value of turtledoves, pigeons, wood, incense, and golden vessels respectively. If the offerer had set aside more than the stipulated price for an offering, then he deposited the leftover amount in one of the remaining chests. Chest 8 was for money left over from sin offerings. Chests 9 through 12 held funds left over from guilt offerings, from the sacrificing of birds, from the offerings of Nazirites, and from the offerings of lepers. Chest 13 was for voluntary contributions.

Was the Bible writer Luke an accurate historian?

Luke wrote the Gospel that bears his name as well as the Acts of Apostles. Luke says that he “traced all things from the start with accuracy,” but some scholars have questioned his account of events. (Luke 1:3) So how accurate was he?

Luke touches on historical facts that can be verified. For example, he uses a number of obscure titles of Roman civic officials, such as praetors, or civil magistrates, in Philippi; politarchs, or local rulers, of Thessalonica; and Asiarchs, or leading men, in Ephesus. (Acts 16:20, Kingdom Interlinear; 17:6; 19:31) Luke calls Herod Antipas a tetrarch, or district ruler, and Sergio Paulus he calls the proconsul of Cyprus.—Acts 13:1, 7.

Luke’s correct use of titles is noteworthy because when the status of a Roman territory changed, so did the title of its administrator. Yet, “time after time such references in Acts prove to be just right for the place and time in question,” says Bible scholar Bruce Metzger. Scholar William Ramsay calls Luke “a historian of the highest order.”

Sheol:The end and the beginning.

Areproduction of the Watchtower Society's article

“Lazarus, come out!”

COVER SUBJECT | DOES DEATH END IT ALL?

Death Does Not End It All!

Bethany was a small village that lay two miles (3 km) from Jerusalem. (John 11:18) A tragedy unfolded there a few weeks before Jesus’ death. Lazarus, one of Jesus’ close friends, unexpectedly became seriously ill and died.

When Jesus first heard the news, he told his disciples that Lazarus was asleep and that he intended to awaken him. (John 11:11) But Jesus’ disciples did not grasp his meaning, so Jesus told them plainly: “Lazarus has died.”—John 11:14.

Four days after the burial, Jesus arrived at Bethany and sought to comfort Martha, a sister of the deceased. “If you had been here, my brother would not have died,” Martha said. (John 11:17, 21) “I am the resurrection and the life,” Jesus replied. “The one who exercises faith in me, even though he dies, will come to life.”—John 11:25.

To demonstrate that those words were not an empty promise, Jesus then approached the tomb and cried out: “Lazarus, come out!” (John 11:43) And to the astonishment of the onlookers, the dead man emerged.

Jesus had performed at least two resurrections previously. On one occasion he raised a young girl from the dead—the daughter of Jairus. Right before Jesus resurrected her, he also described her as being asleep.—Luke 8:52.

Notice that regarding the death of both Lazarus and Jairus’ daughter, Jesus compared death to sleep. That is a fitting comparison. Why? Sleep is an unconscious state and suitably conveys the idea of rest from pain and suffering. (Ecclesiastes 9:5; see the accompanying box, “Death Is Like a Deep Sleep.”) Jesus’ early disciples clearly understood the true condition of the dead. “To the followers of Jesus death was a sleep, and the grave a resting-place . . . for those who had died in the faith,”* states the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics.

It comforts us to know that the dead are asleep in the grave and are not suffering. Death thereby loses its mystery and no longer needs to cause us dread.

“IF A MAN DIES, CAN HE LIVE AGAIN?”

But while we appreciate a good night’s rest, who wants to go to sleep forever? What hope do we have that the dead who lie asleep in the grave will return to life—as Lazarus and Jairus’ daughter did?

The patriarch Job raised that very question when he felt near to death. “If a man dies, can he live again?” he asked.—Job 14:14.

Addressing Almighty God, Job answered his own question, saying: “You will call, and I will answer you. You will long for the work of your hands.” (Job 14:15) Job felt sure that Jehovah longed for the day when He would resurrect His faithful servant. Was that mere wishful thinking on Job’s part? Not at all.

The resurrections performed by Jesus offered clear proof that God gave Jesus power over death. In fact, the Bible says that Jesus now possesses “the keys of death.” (Revelation 1:18) So Jesus will unlock the gates of the grave, just as he ordered that the stone of Lazarus’ tomb be rolled away.

The Bible repeats this resurrection promise time and again. An angel assured the prophet Daniel: “You will rest, but you will stand up for your lot at the end of the days.” (Daniel 12:13) Jesus told the Sadducees, Jewish leaders who denied the resurrection promise: “You are mistaken, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.” (Matthew 22:23, 29) The apostle Paul said: “I have hope toward God . . . that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.”—Acts 24:15.

WHEN WILL THE DEAD ARISE?

When will this resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous occur? The angel told righteous Daniel that he would rise up “at the end of the days.” Martha likewise believed that her brother, Lazarus, would “rise in the resurrection on the last day.”—John 11:24.

The Bible connects this “last day” with Christ’s Kingdom rule. Paul wrote: “For he [Christ] must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing.” (1 Corinthians 15:25, 26) This is a powerful reason why we should pray for God’s Kingdom to come and for God’s will to be done on the earth.*

As Job well knew, God’s will is to resurrect the dead. When that day arrives, death will truly be brought to nothing. And never again will anyone wonder, ‘Does death end it all?’

[Footnotes]

The English word “cemetery” comes from a Greek word meaning “sleeping place.”

To learn more about God’s Kingdom, see chapter 8 of the book What Does the Bible Really Teach? published by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

[Box on page 6]

Death Is Like a Deep Sleep

“Give light to my eyes, so that I may not fall asleep in death.”—Psalm 13:3.

“‘Lazarus our friend has fallen asleep, but I am traveling there to awaken him.’ The disciples then said to him: ‘Lord, if he is sleeping, he will get well.’ Jesus, however, had spoken about his death.”—John 11:11-13.

“David, on the one hand, rendered service to God in his own generation [and] fell asleep in death.”—Acts 13:36.

“Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep in death.”—1 Corinthians 15:20.

“We do not want you to be ignorant about those who are sleeping in death, so that you may not sorrow as the rest do who have no hope.”—1 Thessalonians 4:13.

[Box on page 7]

The Dead Will Rise

“Your dead will live. My corpses will rise up. Awake and shout joyfully!”—Isaiah 26:19.

“Many of those asleep in the dust of the earth will wake up.”—Daniel 12:2.

“The hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out.”—John 5:28, 29.

Our redemption.

Areproduction of the Watchtower Society's article

RANSOM

 

A price paid to buy back or to bring about release from some obligation or undesirable circumstance. The basic idea of “ransom” is a price that covers (as in payment for damages or to satisfy justice), while “redemption” emphasizes the releasing accomplished as a result of the ransom paid. The most significant ransom price is the shed blood of Jesus Christ, which made deliverance from sin and death possible for the offspring of Adam.

In the various Hebrew and Greek terms translated “ransom” and “redeem,” the inherent similarity lies in the idea of a price, or thing of value, given to effect the ransom, or redemption. The thought of exchange, as well as that of correspondency, equivalence, or substitution, is common in all. That is, one thing is given for another, satisfying the demands of justice and resulting in a balancing of matters.—See RECONCILIATION.

A Price That Covers. The Hebrew noun ko′pher comes from the verb ka·phar′, meaning, basically, “cover,” as in Noah’s covering the ark with tar. (Ge 6:14) Ka·phar′, however, is used almost entirely to describe the satisfying of justice through the covering of or atoning for sins. The noun ko′pher refers to the thing given to accomplish this, the ransom price. (Ps 65:3; 78:38; 79:8, 9) A covering corresponds to the thing it covers, either in its form (as in a material lid, such as the “cover [kap·po′reth]” of the ark of the covenant; Ex 25:17-22), or in its value (as in a payment to cover the damages caused by an injury).

As a means for balancing justice and setting matters straight with his people Israel, Jehovah, in the Law covenant, designated various sacrifices and offerings to atone for, or cover, sins, including those of the priests and the Levites (Ex 29:33-37; Le 16:6, 11), of other individuals, or of the nation as a whole (Le 1:4; 4:20, 26, 31, 35), as well as to purify the altar and tabernacle, making atonement because of the sins of the people surrounding these. (Le 16:16-20) In effect, the life of the animal sacrificed went in place of the life of the sinner, its blood making atonement on God’s altar, that is, to the extent that it could. (Le 17:11; compare Heb 9:13, 14; 10:1-4.) The “day of atonement [yohm hak·kip·pu·rim′]” could just as properly be referred to as the “day of the ransoms.” (Le 23:26-28) These sacrifices were required if the nation and its worship were to have and maintain the acceptance and approval of the righteous God.

Well illustrating the sense of a redeeming exchange is the law regarding a bull known to gore. If the owner allowed the bull to go loose so that it killed someone, the owner was to be put to death, paying for the life of the slain person with his own life. However, since he did not deliberately or directly kill another, if the judges viewed it proper to impose upon him a “ransom [ko′pher]” instead, then he must pay that redemption price. The sum assessed and paid was viewed as taking the place of his own life and compensating for the life lost. (Ex 21:28-32; compare De 19:21.) On the other hand, no ransom could be accepted for the deliberate murderer; only his own life could cover the death of the victim. (Nu 35:31-33) Evidently because a census involved lives, at the time such was taken each male over 20 had to have a ransom (ko′pher) of half a shekel ($1.10) given for his soul to Jehovah, the same price applying whether the individual was rich or poor.—Ex 30:11-16.

Since any imbalance of justice is displeasing to God, as well as among humans, the ransom, or covering, could have the additional effect of averting or quelling anger. (Compare Jer 18:23; also Ge 32:20, where “appease” translates ka·phar′.) The husband enraged at the man committing adultery with his wife, however, refuses any “ransom [ko′pher].” (Pr 6:35) The term may also be used with regard to those who should execute justice but who instead accept a bribe or gift as “hush money [ko′pher]” to cover over the wrongdoing in their sight.—1Sa 12:3; Am 5:12.

The Redemption, or Releasing. The Hebrew verb pa·dhah′ means “redeem,” and the related noun pidh·yohn′ means “redemption price.” (Ex 21:30) These terms evidently emphasize the releasing accomplished by the redemption price, while ka·phar′ places stress on the quality or content of the price and its efficacy in balancing the scales of justice. The releasing, or redeeming (pa·dhah′), may be from slavery (Le 19:20; De 7:8), from other distressing or oppressive conditions (2Sa 4:9; Job 6:23; Ps 55:18), or from death and the grave. (Job 33:28; Ps 49:15) Frequent reference is made to Jehovah’s redeeming the nation of Israel from Egypt to be his “private property” (De 9:26; Ps 78:42) and to his redeeming them from Assyrian and Babylonian exile many centuries later. (Isa 35:10; 51:11; Jer 31:11, 12; Zec 10:8-10) Here, too, the redemption involved a price, an exchange. In redeeming Israel from Egypt, Jehovah evidently caused the price to be paid by Egypt. Israel was, in effect, God’s “firstborn,” and Jehovah warned Pharaoh that his stubborn refusal to release Israel would cause the life of Pharaoh’s firstborn and the firstborn of all Egypt, human and animals, to be exacted. (Ex 4:21-23; 11:4-8) Similarly, in return for Cyrus’ overthrow of Babylon and his liberation of the Jews from their exiled state, Jehovah gave “Egypt as a ransom [form of ko′pher] for [his people], Ethiopia and Seba” in their place. The Persian Empire thus later conquered those regions, and so ‘national groups were given in place of the Israelites’ souls.’ (Isa 43:1-4) These exchanges are in harmony with the inspired declaration that the “wicked is [or serves as] a ransom [ko′pher] for the righteous one; and the one dealing treacherously takes the place of the upright ones.”—Pr 21:18.

Another Hebrew term associated with redemption is ga·ʼal′, and this conveys primarily the thought of reclaiming, recovering, or repurchasing. (Jer 32:7, 8) Its similarity to pa·dhah′ is seen by its parallel use with that term at Hosea 13:14: “From the hand of Sheol I shall redeem [form of pa·dhah′] them; from death I shall recover [form of ga·ʼal′] them.” (Compare Ps 69:18.) Ga·ʼal′ gives emphasis to the right of reclaiming or repurchasing, either by a near kinsman of a person whose property or whose very person needed to be repurchased or reclaimed, or by the original owner or seller himself. A near kinsman, called a go·ʼel′, was thus “a repurchaser” (Ru 2:20; 3:9, 13) or, in cases where a murder was involved, a “blood avenger.”—Nu 35:12.

The Law provided that in the case of a poor Israelite whose circumstances forced him to sell his hereditary lands, his city house, or even to sell himself into servitude, “a repurchaser closely related to him,” or go·ʼel′, had the right to “buy back [ga·ʼal′] what his brother sold,” or the seller could do so himself if funds became available to him. (Le 25:23-27, 29-34, 47-49; compare Ru 4:1-15.) If a man should make a vow offering to God of a house or a field and then desire to buy it back, he had to pay the valuation placed on the property plus a fifth in addition to that estimated value. (Le 27:14-19) However, no exchange could be made for anything “devoted to destruction.”—Le 27:28, 29.

In the case of murder, the murderer was not allowed sanctuary in the appointed cities of refuge but, after the judicial hearing, was turned over by the judges to the “avenger [go·ʼel′] of blood,” a near kinsman of the victim, who then put the murderer to death. Since no “ransom [ko′pher]” was allowed for the murderer and since the near kinsman with right of repurchase could not reclaim or recover the life of his dead relative, he rightfully claimed the life of the one who had taken his relative’s life by murder.—Nu 35:9-32; De 19:1-13.

Not Always a Tangible Price. As has been shown, Jehovah “redeemed” (pa·dhah′) or ‘reclaimed’ (ga·ʼal′) Israel from Egypt. (Ex 6:6; Isa 51:10, 11) Later, because the Israelites kept “selling themselves to do what was bad” (2Ki 17:16, 17), Jehovah on several occasions ‘sold them into the hands of their enemies.’ (De 32:30; Jg 2:14; 3:8; 10:7; 1Sa 12:9) Their repentance caused him to buy them back, or reclaim them, out of distress or exile (Ps 107:2, 3; Isa 35:9, 10; Mic 4:10), thereby performing the work of a Go·ʼel′, a Repurchaser related to them inasmuch as he had espoused the nation to himself. (Isa 43:1, 14; 48:20; 49:26; 50:1, 2; 54:5-7) In ‘selling’ them, Jehovah was not paid some material compensation by the pagan nations. His payment was the satisfaction of his justice and the fulfillment of his purpose to have them corrected and disciplined for their rebellion and disrespect.—Compare Isa 48:17, 18.

God’s ‘repurchasing’ likewise need not involve the payment of something tangible. When Jehovah repurchased the Israelites exiled in Babylon, Cyrus willingly liberated them, without tangible compensation. However, when redeeming his people from oppressor nations that had acted with malice against Israel, Jehovah exacted the price from the oppressors themselves, making them pay with their own lives. (Compare Ps 106:10, 11; Isa 41:11-14; 49:26.) When his people were sold to pagan nations, they received “nothing” from their enslavers in the way of true benefit or relief, and Jehovah therefore needed to make no payment to their captors to balance matters out. Instead, he effected the repurchase through the power of “his holy arm.”—Isa 52:3-10; Ps 77:14, 15.

Jehovah’s role of Go·ʼel′ thus embraced the avenging of wrongs done to his servants and resulted in the sanctifying and vindicating of his own name against those who used Israel’s distress as an excuse to reproach him. (Ps 78:35; Isa 59:15-20; 63:3-6, 9) As the Great Kinsman and Redeemer of both the nation and its individuals, he conducted their “legal case” to effect justice.—Ps 119:153, 154; Jer 50:33, 34; La 3:58-60; compare Pr 23:10, 11.

Though living before and outside the nation of Israel, the disease-stricken Job said: “I myself well know that my redeemer is alive, and that, coming after me, he will rise up over the dust.” (Job 19:25; compare Ps 69:18; 103:4.) Following God’s own example, Israel’s king was to act as a redeemer in behalf of the lowly and poor ones of the nation.—Ps 72:1, 2, 14.

Christ Jesus’ Role as Ransomer. The foregoing information lays the basis for understanding the ransom provided for humankind through God’s Son, Christ Jesus. Mankind’s need for a ransom came about through the rebellion in Eden. Adam sold himself to do evil for the selfish pleasure of keeping continued company with his wife, now a sinful transgressor, so he shared the same condemned standing with her before God. He thereby sold himself and his descendants into slavery to sin and to death, the price that God’s justice required. (Ro 5:12-19; compare Ro 7:14-25.) Having possessed human perfection, Adam lost this valuable possession for himself and all his offspring.

The Law, which had “a shadow of the good things to come,” provided for animal sacrifices as a covering for sin. This, however, was only a symbolic or token covering, since such animals were inferior to man; hence, it was “not possible for the blood of bulls and of goats [actually] to take sins away,” as the apostle points out. (Heb 10:1-4) Those pictorial animal sacrifices had to be without blemish, perfect specimens. (Le 22:21) The real ransom sacrifice, a human actually capable of removing sins, must therefore also be perfect, free from blemish. He would have to correspond to the perfect Adam and possess human perfection, if he were to pay the price of redemption that would release Adam’s offspring from the debt, disability, and enslavement into which their first father Adam had sold them. (Compare Ro 7:14; Ps 51:5.) Only thereby could he satisfy God’s perfect justice that requires like for like, a ‘soul for a soul.’—Ex 21:23-25; De 19:21.

The strictness of God’s justice made it impossible for mankind itself to provide its own redeemer. (Ps 49:6-9) However, this results in the magnifying of God’s own love and mercy in that he met his own requirements at tremendous cost to himself, giving the life of his own Son to provide the redemption price. (Ro 5:6-8) This required his Son’s becoming human to correspond to the perfect Adam. God accomplished this by transferring his Son’s life from heaven to the womb of the Jewish virgin Mary. (Lu 1:26-37; Joh 1:14) Since Jesus did not owe his life to any human father descended from the sinner Adam, and since God’s holy spirit ‘overshadowed’ Mary, evidently from the time she conceived until the time of Jesus’ birth, Jesus was born free from any inheritance of sin or imperfection, being, as it were, “an unblemished and spotless lamb,” whose blood could prove to be an acceptable sacrifice. (Lu 1:35; Joh 1:29; 1Pe 1:18, 19) He maintained that sinless state throughout his life and thus did not disqualify himself. (Heb 4:15; 7:26; 1Pe 2:22) As a ‘sharer of blood and flesh,’ he was a near kinsman of mankind and he had the thing of value, his own perfect life maintained pure through tests of integrity, with which to repurchase mankind, emancipate them.—Heb 2:14, 15.

The Christian Greek Scriptures make clear that the release from sin and death is indeed by the paying of a price. Christians are said to be “bought with a price” (1Co 6:20; 7:23), having an “owner that bought them” (2Pe 2:1), and Jesus is presented as the Lamb who ‘was slaughtered and with his blood bought persons for God out of every tribe, tongue, and nation.’ (Re 5:9) In these texts the verb a·go·ra′zo is used, meaning simply “buy at the market [a·go·ra′].” The related e·xa·go·ra′zo (release by purchase) is used by Paul in showing that Christ released “by purchase those under law” through his death on the stake. (Ga 4:5; 3:13) But the thought of redemption or ransoming is more frequently and more fully expressed by the Greek ly′tron and related terms.

Ly′tron (from the verb ly′o, meaning “loose”) was especially used by Greek writers to refer to a price paid to ransom prisoners of war or to release those under bond or in slavery. (Compare Heb 11:35.) In its two Scriptural occurrences it describes Christ’s giving “his soul a ransom in exchange for many.” (Mt 20:28; Mr 10:45) The related word an·ti′ly·tron appears at 1 Timothy 2:6. Parkhurst’s Greek and English Lexicon to the New Testament says it means: “a ransom, price of redemption, or rather a correspondent ransom.” He quotes Hyperius as saying: “It properly signifies a price by which captives are redeemed from the enemy; and that kind of exchange in which the life of one is redeemed by the life of another.” He concludes by saying: “So Aristotle uses the verb [an·ti·ly·tro′o] for redeeming life by life.” (London, 1845, p. 47) Thus Christ “gave himself a corresponding ransom for all.” (1Ti 2:5, 6) Other related words are ly·tro′o·mai, “loose by ransom” (Tit 2:14; 1Pe 1:18, 19), and a·po·ly′tro·sis, “a releasing by ransom.” (Eph 1:7, 14; Col 1:14) The similarity of the usage of these words with that of the Hebrew terms considered is evident. They describe, not an ordinary purchase or releasing, but a redeeming or ransoming, a deliverance effected by payment of a corresponding price.

Though available to all, Christ’s ransom sacrifice is not accepted by all, and “the wrath of God remains” upon those not accepting it, as it also comes upon those who first accept and then turn away from that provision. (Joh 3:36; Heb 10:26-29; contrast Ro 5:9, 10.) They gain no deliverance from the enslavement to Kings Sin and Death. (Ro 5:21) Under the Law the deliberate murderer could not be ransomed. Adam, by his willful course, brought death on all mankind, hence was a murderer. (Ro 5:12) Thus, the sacrificed life of Jesus is not acceptable to God as a ransom for the sinner Adam.

But God is pleased to approve the application of the ransom to redeem those of Adam’s offspring who avail themselves of such a release. As Paul states, “as through the disobedience of the one man many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one person many will be constituted righteous.” (Ro 5:18, 19) At the time of Adam’s sin and his being sentenced to death, his offspring or race were all unborn in his loins and so all died with him. (Compare Heb 7:4-10.) Jesus as a perfect man, “the last Adam” (1Co 15:45), had a race or offspring unborn in his loins, and when he died innocently as a perfect human sacrifice this potential human race died with him. He had willingly abstained from producing a family of his own by natural procreation. Instead, Jesus uses the authority granted by Jehovah on the basis of his ransom to give life to all those who accept this provision.—1Co 15:45; compare Ro 5:15-17.

Thus, Jesus was indeed “a corresponding ransom,” not for the redemption of the one sinner, Adam, but for the redemption of all mankind descended from Adam. He repurchased them so that they could become his family, doing this by presenting the full value of his ransom sacrifice to the God of absolute justice in heaven. (Heb 9:24) He thereby gains a Bride, a heavenly congregation formed of his followers. (Compare Eph 5:23-27; Re 1:5, 6; 5:9, 10; 14:3, 4.) Messianic prophecies also show he will have “offspring” as an “Eternal Father.” (Isa 53:10-12; 9:6, 7) To be such, his ransom must embrace more than those of his “Bride.” In addition to those “bought from among mankind as firstfruits” to form that heavenly congregation, therefore, others are to benefit from his ransom sacrifice and gain everlasting life through the removal of their sins and accompanying imperfection. (Re 14:4; 1Jo 2:1, 2) Since those of the heavenly congregation serve with Christ as priests and “kings over the earth,” such other recipients of the ransom benefits must be earthly subjects of Christ’s Kingdom, and as children of an “Eternal Father” they attain everlasting life. (Re 5:10; 20:6; 21:2-4, 9, 10; 22:17; compare Ps 103:2-5.) The entire arrangement manifests Jehovah’s wisdom and his righteousness in perfectly balancing the scales of justice while showing undeserved kindness and forgiving sins.—Ro 3:21-26.

On a world's end.

A reproduction of the Watchtower Society's article

DELUGE

The catastrophic destruction of men and animals by an overwhelming flood in the days of Noah, 2370 B.C.E. This greatest cataclysm in all human history was sent by Jehovah because wicked men had filled the earth with violence. The survival of righteous Noah and his family, eight souls in all, together with selected animals, was by means of a huge ark, or chest.—Ge 6:9–9:19; 1Pe 3:20; see ARK No. 1; NOAH No. 1.

Extent of the Deluge. This was no local flash flood or cloudburst. In fact, the Greek word used in the Bible to refer to the Flood, or Deluge, is ka·ta·kly·smos′, a cataclysm. (Lu 17:27, ftn) Local floods come and go in a matter of days; this one lasted over a year, the greater portion of which was required for the water to subside. How unreasonable to believe that Noah spent perhaps 50 or 60 years building a huge vessel of approximately 40,000 cu m (1,400,000 cu ft) for the survival of his family and a few animals through a mere local flood! If only a comparatively small area was affected, why the need of bringing into the ark specimens of “every living creature of every sort of flesh” in order to “preserve offspring alive on the surface of the entire earth”? (Ge 6:19; 7:3) Definitely this was a global deluge, the like of which had never occurred before nor has since. “The waters overwhelmed the earth so greatly that all the tall mountains that were under the whole heavens came to be covered. Up to 15 cubits [c. 6.5 m; 22 ft] the waters overwhelmed them and the mountains became covered.” (Ge 7:19, 20) “The end of all flesh has come before me,” Jehovah said, hence “I will wipe every existing thing that I have made off the surface of the ground.” And it was just so. “Everything in which the breath of the force of life was active in its nostrils, namely, all that were on the dry ground, died . . . only Noah and those who were with him in the ark kept on surviving.”—Ge 6:13; 7:4, 22, 23.

Timing of the Deluge. The Deluge did not come suddenly without warning. Years of time were spent building the ark, time that Noah the “preacher of righteousness” also used in warning that wicked generation. (2Pe 2:5) Finally the time limit was up “in the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month.” The “male and female of every sort of flesh” had been brought into the ark with Noah’s family, as well as a sufficient food supply for all, and “after that Jehovah shut the door.” Then “the floodgates of the heavens were opened.” (Ge 7:11, 16) There was an incessant torrential downpour for “forty days and forty nights”; “the waters continued overwhelming the earth” a hundred and fifty days. (Ge 7:4, 12, 24) Five months after the downpour began, the ark “came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.” (Ge 8:4) It was nearly two and a half months later before “the tops of the mountains appeared” (Ge 8:5), another three months before Noah removed the ark’s covering to see that the earth had practically drained (Ge 8:13), and nearly two months later when the door was opened and the survivors set foot on dry ground once again.—Ge 8:14-18.

Noah and his family entered the ark in the 600th year of Noah’s life, the 2nd month (October-November), the 17th day. (Ge 7:11) One year later (a year consisting of 360 days) was the 17th day, 2nd month, 601st year. Ten days after that would be the 27th day of the 2nd month, when they came out; a total of 370 days, or parts of 371 separate days, spent in the ark. (Ge 8:13, 14) In the log that Noah kept, it appears he used months of 30 days each, 12 of them equaling 360 days. In this way he avoided all the complicated fractions involved had he used strictly lunar months consisting of slightly more than 29 1⁄2 days. That such calculations were used in the account is evident from the fact that a five-month period consisted of 150 days.—Ge 7:11, 24; 8:3, 4.

The Floodwaters. It has been said that if all the moisture in the atmosphere were suddenly released as rain it would not amount to even a couple of inches if spread over the earth’s surface. So from what source was this vast deluge of Noah’s day? According to the Genesis account, God said to Noah: “Here I [Jehovah] am bringing the deluge [or, “heavenly ocean”; Heb., mab·bul′] of waters upon the earth.” (Ge 6:17, ftn) Describing what happened, the next chapter says: “All the springs of the vast watery deep were broken open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.” (Ge 7:11) So overwhelming was the Deluge that “all the tall mountains that were under the whole heavens came to be covered.”—Ge 7:19.

Where did this “heavenly ocean” come from? The Genesis account of creation tells how on the second “day” Jehovah made an expanse about the earth, and this expanse (called “Heaven”) formed a division between the waters below it, that is, the oceans, and the waters above it. (Ge 1:6-8) The waters suspended above the expanse evidently remained there from the second “day” of creation until the Flood. This is what the apostle Peter was talking about when he recounted that there “were heavens from of old and an earth standing compactly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God.” Those “heavens” and the waters above and beneath them were the means that God’s word called into operation, and “by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water.” (2Pe 3:5, 6) Various explanations have been offered as to how the water was held aloft until the Flood and as to the processes that resulted in its falling. But these are only speculative. The Bible says simply that God made the expanse with waters above it and that he brought the Deluge. His almighty power could easily accomplish it.

Since, as the Genesis account says, “all the tall mountains” were covered with water, where is all that water now? Evidently it is right here on the earth. It is believed that there was a time when the oceans were smaller and the continents were larger than they are now, as is evidenced by river channels extending far out under the oceans. It should also be noted that scientists have stated that mountains in the past were much lower than at present, and some mountains have even been pushed up from under the seas. As to the present situation, it is said that “there is ten times as much water by volume in the ocean as there is land above sea level. Dump all this land evenly into the sea, and water would cover the entire earth, one and one-half miles deep.” (National Geographic, January 1945, p. 105) So, after the floodwaters fell, but before the raising of mountains and the lowering of seabeds and before the buildup of polar ice caps, there was more than enough water to cover “all the tall mountains,” as the inspired record says.—Ge 7:19.

Effect on the Earth. With the Deluge great changes came, for example, the life span of humans dropped very rapidly. Some have suggested that prior to the Flood the waters above the expanse shielded out some of the harmful radiation and that, with the waters gone, cosmic radiation genetically harmful to man increased. However, the Bible is silent on the matter. Incidentally, any change in radiation would have altered the rate of formation of radioactive carbon-14 to such an extent as to invalidate all radiocarbon dates prior to the Flood.

With the sudden opening of the ‘springs of the watery deep’ and “the floodgates of the heavens,” untold billions of tons of water deluged the earth. (Ge 7:11) This may have caused tremendous changes in earth’s surface. The earth’s crust is relatively thin (estimated at between 30 km [20 mi] and 160 km [100 mi] thick), stretched over a rather plastic mass thousands of kilometers in diameter. Hence, under the added weight of the water, there was likely a great shifting in the crust. In time new mountains evidently were thrust upward, old mountains rose to new heights, shallow sea basins were deepened, and new shorelines were established, with the result that now about 70 percent of the surface is covered with water. This shifting in the earth’s crust may account for many geologic phenomena, such as the raising of old coastlines to new heights. It has been estimated by some that water pressures alone were equal to “2 tons per square inch,” sufficient to fossilize fauna and flora quickly.—See The Biblical Flood and the Ice Epoch, by D. Patten, 1966, p. 62.

What evidence proves that there truly was a global deluge?

Other possible evidence of a drastic change: Remains of mammoths and rhinoceroses have been found in different parts of the earth. Some of these were found in Siberian cliffs; others were preserved in Siberian and Alaskan ice. (PICTURE, Vol. 1, p. 328) In fact, some were found with food undigested in their stomachs or still unchewed in their teeth, indicating that they died suddenly. It is estimated, from the trade in ivory tusks, that bones of tens of thousands of such mammoths have been found. The fossil remains of many other animals, such as lions, tigers, bears, and elk, have been found in common strata, which may indicate that all of these were destroyed simultaneously. Some have pointed to such finds as definite physical proof of a rapid change in climate and sudden destruction caused by a universal flood. Others, however, favor explanations for the death of these animals that do not involve an earth-wide catastrophe. Proof that the Flood occurred is not dependent on such fossils and frozen animal remains.

Flood Legends. Such a cataclysm as the Deluge, which washed the whole world of that time out of existence, would never be forgotten by the survivors. They would talk about it to their children and their children’s children. For 500 years after the Deluge, Shem lived on to relate the event to many generations. He died only ten years before the birth of Jacob. Moses preserved the true account in Genesis. Sometime after the Flood, when God-defying people built the Tower of Babel, Jehovah confused their language and scattered them “over all the surface of the earth.” (Ge 11:9) It was only natural that these people took with them stories of the Flood and passed them on from father to son. The fact that there are not merely a few but perhaps hundreds of different stories about that great Deluge, and that such stories are found among the traditions of many primitive races the world over, is a strong proof that all these people had a common origin and that their early forefathers shared that Flood experience in common.—CHART, Vol. 1, p. 328.

These folklore accounts of the Deluge agree with some major features of the Biblical account: (1) a place of refuge for a few survivors, (2) an otherwise global destruction of life by water, and (3) a seed of mankind preserved. The Egyptians, the Greeks, the Chinese, the Druids of Britain, the Polynesians, the Eskimos and Greenlanders, the Africans, the Hindus, and the American Indians—all of these have their Flood stories. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (Vol. 2, p. 319) states: “Flood stories have been discovered among nearly all nations and tribes. Though most common on the Asian mainland and the islands immediately south of it and on the North American continent, they have been found on all the continents. Totals of the number of stories known run as high as about 270 . . . The universality of the flood accounts is usually taken as evidence for the universal destruction of humanity by a flood and the spread of the human race from one locale and even from one family. Though the traditions may not all refer to the same flood, apparently the vast majority do. The assertion that many of these flood stories came from contacts with missionaries will not stand up because most of them were gathered by anthropologists not interested in vindicating the Bible, and they are filled with fanciful and pagan elements evidently the result of transmission for extended periods of time in a pagan society. Moreover, some of the ancient accounts were written by people very much in opposition to the Hebrew-Christian tradition.”—Edited by G. Bromiley, 1982.

In times past, certain primitive people (in Australia, Egypt, Fiji, Society Islands, Peru, Mexico, and other places) preserved a possible remnant of these traditions about the Flood by observing in November a ‘Feast of Ancestors’ or a ‘Festival of the Dead.’ Such customs reflected a memory of the destruction caused by the Deluge. According to the book Life and Work at the Great Pyramid, the festival in Mexico was held on the 17th of November because they “had a tradition that at that time the world had been previously destroyed; and they dreaded lest a similar catastrophe would, at the end of a cycle, annihilate the human race.” (By Professor C. Piazzi Smyth, Edinburgh, 1867, Vol. II, pp. 390, 391) Notes the book The Worship of the Dead: “This festival [of the dead] is . . . held by all on or about the very day on which, according to the Mosaic account, the Deluge took place, viz., the seventeenth day of the second month—the month nearly corresponding with our November.” (By J. Garnier, London, 1904, p. 4) Interestingly, the Bible reports that the Flood began “in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month.” (Ge 7:11) That “second month” corresponds to the latter part of October and the first part of November on our calendar.

Scriptural Confirmation. Stronger evidence of the historicalness of the Deluge than the pagan traditions of primitive people is the endorsement other Bible writers gave under inspiration. The only other place where the same Hebrew word (mab·bul′, deluge) occurs outside the Genesis account is in David’s melody where he describes Jehovah as seated “upon the deluge.” (Ps 29:10) However, other writers make reference to and confirm the Genesis account, as, for example, Isaiah. (Isa 54:9) Ezekiel also endorses the historicity of Noah. (Eze 14:14, 18, 20) Peter draws heavily upon the Deluge account in his letters. (1Pe 3:20; 2Pe 2:5; 3:5, 6) Paul testifies to the great faith Noah displayed in constructing the ark for the survival of his household. (Heb 11:7) Luke lists Noah in the lineage of Messiah’s forebears.—Lu 3:36.

Even more significant is what Jesus said about the days of the Deluge, as recorded by both Luke and Matthew. Far more than just a simple endorsement of the veracity of the Deluge account, Jesus’ words show the pictorial and prophetic significance of those ancient events. In answer to the disciples’ question, “What will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?” Jesus said, among other things: “For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. For as they were in those days before the flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark; and they took no note until the flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.” (Mt 24:3, 37-39; Lu 17:26, 27) There is, therefore, abundant evidence from the inspired Holy Scriptures themselves to support the authenticity and genuineness of the Deluge account. It does not rest on mere traditions of men, on the folklore of primitive people, or on geologic and archaeological findings.

The walls have ears?

A reproduction of the Economist's article

 

 

 

Who’s afraid of Huawei?

The rise of a Chinese world-beater is stoking fears of cyber-espionage. Techno-nationalism is not the answer

     

CHINESE companies have started to win first place in global markets. Huawei has just overtaken Sweden’s Ericsson to become the world’s largest telecoms-equipment-maker. Even though many foreigners still cannot pronounce its name (some call it “Hawaii”, and the firm has even produced a video teaching people to say hwah-way), Huawei is becoming an increasingly powerful global player, capable of going head-to-head with the best in intensely competitive markets. It follows Haier, which is already the leading white-goods-maker; now Lenovo is challenging Hewlett-Packard as the world’s biggest PC-maker. Plenty more will follow (see article).

Huawei, a private firm, is a standard-bearer in China’s long march into Western markets. Its founder, Ren Zhengfei, who served as an engineer in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), at first struggled to win customers even in China. But his company followed Mao’s strategy of using the countryside to encircle and capture the cities, and it has moved on to win foreign markets too: in Europe it is involved in over half of the superfast 4G telecoms networks that have been announced, and it has become a strong competitor in mobile phones (see article). The company is now a $32-billion business empire with 140,000 employees, and customers in 140 countries. It commands respect by delivering high-quality telecoms equipment at low prices.

In this section

 

They did it Huawei
But Huawei inspires fear too—and not just among its competitors. The company is said to be too close for comfort to the PLA. Westerners fret that the networks the firm is building are used by Chinese spooks to eavesdrop during peacetime and could be shut down suddenly during wartime. They see the firm as a potent weapon in China’s burgeoning cyber-arsenal.
It is a view that some governments are taking seriously. Earlier this year Australia blocked Huawei’s participation in a scheme to build a national broadband network in the country. The company has also faced opposition to its commercial expansion in India. And in America, where Huawei’s attempts to grow have often been stymied, a congressional committee that focuses on intelligence matters is putting the firm under a microscope; suspicions have been aggravated by a recent spate of cyber-attacks attributed to Chinese hackers.
Western governments are also suspicious of the subsidies, low-interest loans and generous export credits lavished on favoured champions, including Huawei. The European Commission is considering opening an investigation. Some people suppose that the Chinese government is helping Huawei win overseas contracts so that spies can exploit its networks to snoop on ever more of the world’s electronic traffic.
Arguments against imports always need to be viewed with caution, since they will be used by protectionists to keep emerging rivals out. Still, it is reasonable to worry about security in telecoms: recent reports have pointed to the efforts of Chinese state-sponsored hackers to vacuum up valuable Western commercial secrets on a massive scale. Western intelligence agencies are also alert to the risks of eavesdropping and cyber-attacks because they themselves are practitioners (a prime example being the Stuxnet virus, aimed at Iran’s nuclear programme). As for Huawei, a firm that controls a network’s creation and management is ideally placed to sneak in malware and sneak out sensitive data. Even though it is a private company with an awful lot to lose if it were caught spying, the power of the state in China’s version of capitalism means the West is right to be vigilant.
But banning Huawei from bidding for commercial contracts is wrongheaded, for two reasons. One is that the economic benefit of competition from China in general and Huawei in particular is huge. It boosts growth and thus wellbeing. Huawei’s cheap but effective equipment helped make Africa’s mobile-telecoms revolution possible.
Distrust and verify
The other reason for not banning Huawei is the dirty little secret that its foreign rivals strangely neglect to mention: just about everybody makes telecoms equipment in China these days. Chinese manufacturers and designers have become an integral part of the global telecoms supply chain. Blocking Huawei (or its rival Chinese telecoms giant, ZTE) while allowing gear from, say, Alcatel-Lucent or Ericsson on a network may make politicians feel good. But it is no guarantee of security. Huawei’s competitors have a vested interest in hyping concerns about it, while disguising their own reliance on Chinese subcontractors and on subsidies.
The answer is to insist on greater scrutiny all round, not just of Chinese firms. Governments should be crystal-clear about what conditions telecoms firms need to meet to win business—something America’s secretive security-review process does not do today. They should also do more to ensure that equipment is secure, no matter who makes it. That means demanding to know where hardware components and software come from, and requiring intrusive random inspections of code and equipment. America has no effective system of supply-chain checks. In Britain, by contrast, where BT is a big customer, Huawei has established a unit (run in close co-operation with GCHQ, Britain’s signals-intelligence agency) with security-cleared personnel, including former employees of GCHQ, who vet gear from China before it is installed. Such scrutiny will drive up costs, but these pale in comparison with those imposed by bans on Chinese firms, which diminish competition and push up prices.
Huawei can also help allay foreigners’ fears. The company’s opaque ownership structure and secretive culture have damaged its reputation. It needs to be far more open. One way to achieve this would be for the closely held firm to seek a listing on a global stockmarket—if not in America, then at least in Hong Kong. Greater openness would also help clarify the real threat that Chinese firms such as Huawei pose to America and other countries: that they are starting to out-innovate the home-grown competition