ƐYI 23

“Aá Jāhɔ̄ Abɔ̄ Nɛ̄ N Gáā Kɔɔkɔ Kú Um Iyɔ̄bū Aá”

GBƆƆ

Upɔlu kɔɔkɔ ku iyi nu iyɔbu ācɛ nōo yɔ i cɔnu mla otrɛyi ku ɛga ō gbɔɔkɔ a

Ŋma Ɔkpá Ku Úklɔ́ Kú Ācotɛ̄hɔ̄ 21:18–23:10

1, 2. Ɔdiya nɛ Upɔlu nyɔ gā Ujerusalɛm a, aunwalu nyá nɛ ó kē géē má abɔɔ a?

Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

² Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

“É Cɛ̄tra Ɔwɔicō” (Úklɔ́ Kú Ācotɛ̄hɔ̄ 21:18-20a)

3-5. (a) Anyɛ nɛ Upɔlu jila mla uwa ipu Ujerusalɛm a, ɔdi néē kē kɛla lɛyikwu ɔ a? (b) Ɔdi nɛ alɔ lɔfu nwu ŋma ōjila nɛ Upɔlu lɛ mla anyakwɔcɛ nōo yɔ Ujerusalɛm a?

³ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

⁴ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

⁵ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

“Odúúdú Uwā Í Bī Íne Ā Le Hiijā Ŋ́” (Úklɔ́ Kú Ācotɛ̄hɔ̄ 21:20b, 21)

6. Unwalu nyá nɛ Upɔlu gáā jé lɛyikwu ɔ a?

⁶ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

7, 8. (a) Ɛgɛnyá nɛ Ācɛ O Yɛce Ukraist nōo yɔ Ujudiya a i jɛyi ɛlā ɔwɛ okpaakpa ŋ ma? (b) Ohigbu kéē jɛyi ɛlā ɔwɛ okpaakpa ŋ ma, ɔɔma wɛ kéē wɛ Ācɛ O Yɛce Ukraist nōo hayi kpaakpa ŋ nɛɛ, ɔdiya nɛ ó kē lɛ a ŋ ma?

⁷ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

⁸ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

“Ɔdā Nēé Da Uwá Lɛyíkwu Uwɔ Ā, Wɛ Ɛ̄kɛ̄mgbɛ̄” (Úklɔ́ Kú Ācotɛ̄hɔ̄ 21:22-26)

9. Ɔdi nɛ Upɔlu nwu lɛyikwu Íne ku Umosisi a?

⁹ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

10. Ɛgɛnyá nɛ Upɔlu mafu kóō wɛ ɔcɛ ō jeeyi ipu ɔwɛ nɛ ó leyi má ɛlā ku Íne mla api ō hɛ a?

¹⁰ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

11. Ɔdi nɛ anyakwɔcɛ a da Upɔlu kóō ya a, amáŋ ɔdi nɛ ó géē yɛ i ya ŋ ma? (Má ɛlā néē ta ɛhaajɛ a duu.)

¹¹ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

12. Ɛgɛnyá nɛ Upɔlu mafu kóō le tutu ō cɛtɔha mla anyakwɔcɛ nōo yɔ Ujerusalɛm a?

¹² Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

ROMAN LAW AND ROMAN CITIZENS

Roman authorities usually interfered little in local government. Generally speaking, Jewish law governed Jewish affairs. The Romans got involved in Paul’s case only because the riot that erupted upon his appearing in the temple was a threat to public order.

The Roman authorities had considerable power over ordinary provincial subjects. Things were different, however, when the authorities dealt with Roman citizens. a Citizenship afforded a person certain privileges that were recognized and honored throughout the empire. It was illegal, for example, to bind or beat an uncondemned Roman, since such treatment was considered fit for slaves only. Roman citizens also had the right to appeal the decisions of a provincial governor to the emperor, in Rome.

Roman citizenship could be obtained in a number of ways. The first was by inheritance. Emperors occasionally awarded citizenship to individuals or to the free populations of whole cities or districts for services rendered. A slave who bought his freedom from a Roman citizen, a slave who was set free by a Roman, or a veteran of the auxiliary forces who was discharged from the Roman army would himself become a Roman. Apparently, under certain circumstances it was also possible to purchase citizenship. The military commander Claudius Lysias thus told Paul: “I purchased these rights as a citizen for a large sum of money.” Paul responded: “But I have them by birth.” (Acts 22:28) Hence, one of Paul’s male ancestors must somehow have acquired Roman citizenship, although the circumstances remain unknown.

a In the first century C.E., not many Roman citizens would have lived in Judea. Only in the third century were all provincial subjects given Roman citizenship.

When no Scriptural principles were violated, Paul yielded. Do you?

Ó “Cíkā Kóō Yēeyī Ŋ́!” (Úklɔ́ Kú Ācotɛ̄hɔ̄ 21:27–22:30)

13. (a) Ɔdiya nɛ ācɛ Ujiyu ōhī ya unwalu ipu agbliihɔ nɛhi a? (b) Ɛgɛnyá nɛ oyeeyi ku Upɔlu nyata a?

¹³ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

14, 15. (a) Ɔdi nɛ Upɔlu je ta ācɛ Ujiyu eyī peee a? (b) Ɔdi nɛ otrɛyi ku aicɔɔja ku Ācɛ Urom ya o ya ɛɛ kóō jé ɔdā nōo ya nɛ ācɛ Ujiyu a yɔ i cɔnu mla Upɔlu a?

¹⁴ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

¹⁵ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

MODERN-DAY LEGAL BATTLES

Like the apostle Paul, Jehovah’s modern-day Witnesses have sought every legal recourse open to them to combat restrictions imposed on their preaching work. They have been zealous in “the defending and legally establishing of the good news.”—Phil. 1:7.

During the 1920’s and 1930’s, hundreds were arrested for distributing Bible literature. For instance, by 1926, there were 897 cases pending in German courts. So much litigation was involved that it became necessary to establish a Legal Department at the Germany branch. During the 1930’s, arrests for house-to-house preaching in the United States alone ran into the hundreds every year. In 1936, that number rose to 1,149. To provide needed counsel, a Legal Department was also established in the United States. From 1933 to 1939, Witnesses in Romania faced 530 lawsuits. However, appeals to the Romanian High Court won many favorable decisions. Similar situations have developed in many other lands.

Legal challenges have arisen when Christians could not conscientiously agree to take part in activities that would violate their neutrality. (Isa. 2:2-4; John 17:14) Opposers have falsely accused them of sedition, which has sometimes resulted in a complete ban on their activities. Over the years, however, many governments have acknowledged that Jehovah’s Witnesses present no threat to them. b

b For a discussion of the legal victories of Jehovah’s Witnesses in various lands, see chapter 15 of the book God’s Kingdom Rules! and chapter 30 of the book Jehovah’s Witnesses—Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom.

“Ami Abɔ̄yī Um Wɛ Ɔ̄cɛ Ufárisīi” (Úklɔ́ Kú Ācotɛ̄hɔ̄ 23:1-10)

16, 17. (a) Kɛla lɛyikwu ɔdā nōo ya eko nɛ Upɔlu kɛla lɛ aotrɛyi ku ɛgā ō gbɔɔkɔ a. (b) Eko néē gɔ Upɔlu a, ɛgɛnyá nɛ ó lɛ ocabɔ ku ō ta iyi ɔcɛ waajɛ taajɛ a?

¹⁶ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

¹⁷ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

Like Paul, we seek common ground when speaking to those of a different religious background

18. Ɔdiya nɛ Upɔlu hi iyi nu ka ɔcɛ Ufarisii a, ɛgɛnyá nɛ alɔ kē lɔfu bi ɔwɛ ijeeyi ɛgɔɔma le yuklɔ ipu āhɔ̄ ōhī a?

¹⁸ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

19. Ɔdiya nɛ ōjila ku aotrɛyi ku ɛga ō gbɔɔkɔ a i ŋmɛyi ɔwɛ olɔhi ŋ ma?

¹⁹ Jé Ipu Uce Ku Oyibo

THE SADDUCEES AND THE PHARISEES

The Sanhedrin, the national administrative council and high court of the Jews, was dominated by two rival sects—the Sadducees and the Pharisees. According to first-century historian Flavius Josephus, the main difference between these parties was that the Pharisees sought to impose a great number of traditional observances on the people, whereas the Sadducees considered obligatory only what was found in the Law of Moses. Both schools of thought were united in their opposition to Jesus.

It appears that the Sadducees, who were basically conservative, had close ties to the priesthood and that Annas and Caiaphas, both of whom had served as the high priest, belonged to this powerful sect. (Acts 5:17) Josephus says, however, that its teachings could “persuade none but the rich.”

The Pharisees, on the other hand, had great influence over the masses. Yet, their views, which included insistence on extreme ceremonial purity, made observing the Law burdensome for the people. In contrast with the Sadducees, the Pharisees attributed great importance to fate and believed that a soul survived death, after which it received a just reward or punishment for its virtues or its vices.

AƆKPA MLA ƆKPA NƐŊCƐ́