those of Christendom who reckon to accept the Bible as God’s Word. How do we prove this?

 9, 10. (a) How was fleshly Israel specifically made a “holy nation”? (b) How was Israel otherwise qualified to be called a nation, leading to what question for further discussion?

⁹ Going back again to fleshly Israel, we saw that the first distinguishing feature in their case was that they were, in themselves, a separate nation, especially from the time of the law covenant at Mount Sinai. As Jehovah instructed Moses then to tell the Israelites: “If you will strictly obey my voice and will indeed keep my covenant, . . . you yourselves will become to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” (Ex. 19:5, 6) Of course, apart from that, they would still have been a separate nation. They met the fundamental requirements for the term “nation” to be used in their case. The Israelites were of a common stock, descending from Abraham, through Isaac and Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. (Gen. 32:28) They spoke the same language, Hebrew. Their institutions, customs and traditions were all held in common. They were all subject to the one government, with its set of laws. Even during their forty years’ wandering in the wilderness, they never scattered, like nomads, but kept close together. They finally entered their promised inheritance, dwelling in their own land, with its well-defined boundaries—a nation in every accepted sense of the word.

¹⁰ It is not necessary for a people to comply with all the foregoing characteristics in order to be properly called a nation. Fleshly Israel, however, did indeed fulfill them all. But how does this apply in the case of the Christian church? Is this new instrument a properly constituted nation? We will examine this question in the next issue of The Watchtower.

Modern Bible Translation

A schoolgirl in Ohio tells this experience: “One day in English literature class, we read some parts from the King James Version Bible as an example of English style of writing. Our teacher asked several of us to bring in some modern translations of the Bible and compare them with the King James Version. So I brought the New World Translation and pointed out some of the differences between it and many other translations. I showed them that many times the King James Version uses unfamiliar words that make it hard to understand the Scriptures. I cited the word ‘shambles’ as an example (1 Cor. 10:25, AV), and I also explained about our Creator’s name. My teacher seemed very interested, and the class listened very well. Later in the day a boy approached me saying he enjoyed my report. I showed him the New World Translation, and he asked if I could get one for him at a bookstore. So I placed one with him. I also showed it to a girl whom I had witnessed to before. She too wanted a copy. So I was able to place two Bibles and tell about Jehovah’s name as a result of a classroom assignment.”