by somebodylovesme 14 Replies latest watchtower bible
My inactive JW hubby said he thought that babies/children too young to choose their beliefs would be brought back after Armageddon in the JW belief system. I have read the opposite on this board. My husband hasn't been to a meeting in quite awhile and I don't think he paid too much attention when he was there ... lol ... so I thought I'd ask.
Thanks.
SLM
Thats not what I remember. The sins of the fathers will be visited upon the sons, or something to that effect. When my son was younger my mom always told me that whether he made it in depended entirely on whether I made it in until he was able to mature enough to choose for himself.
Well guess what, he chose to be an athiest, so I guess we're both going down!
NOT
Gretchen
As the flood story went, all the families (including newborns) drowned because they weren't in the Ark.
(logical bridge....) Jesus said, "as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be when the Son of man comes." And "broad and spacious is the road leading to destruction, and many are going through it, whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading to life, and few are finding it."
So, as the logic goes, any goatlike people who are destroyed at Armageddon will also suffer the loss of the children they irresponsibly brought into this world! It's perfect justice, right? After all don't children usually turn out like their parents anyhow? So down with them too!
The God of Armageddon NEEDS to destroy little children too, so that his sheeplike ones can have their paradise.
My understanding from my Mother and Father, that the babies would not come back or survive. Thier reasoning was there would be too many to take care of. The same seemed to be their beliefs on infant deaths of non-beleivers as well, who's parents died at armegeddon. If that was an opnion or WT doctrine I do not know.
Seedy
Definately WT doctrine...I remember when I got baptised a sister came up and hugged me and said "Now your son is safe as long as you stick with Jehovah" that kind of scared me.
Doesn't make much sense to me...but then again, when the Isrealites went forth committing genocide across the land they did not spare children...so if the god of the old testament is the same as the god in the new testament...why would it be any different for those at armaggedon?
it is sad if you ask me. That not being able to take care of them? People are supposed to be perfect for god's sake! Can you imagine how many couples who chose NOT to have children to pioneer and serve as a faithful witness would just love to take on that responsibilty?
If Russell or Rutherford had any smarts, they would have interpreted the scriptures in around that way, to show that god had a special reward in mind for those that may have died childless or survived throught armaggedon with no kids.
HMMMMMmmmmm maybe I should start working on creating my OWN religion..worked for Ron L Hubbard
I'm a Bloodwashed Born-Again Christian and believe in the RAPTURE. I think Babies and little children etc are all Raptured as well and causes a worldwide panic. Then Anti-Christ shows up to tell the left behinders what happen and they are believe his lie and unites the world because they all believe him. Plus he will have the False Prophets backing him up. So the road has been set just waiting for action! That's my two cent and a dime!
Thanks, all. That is a devastating doctrine and is just one more reason why I could never be a Witness. As if I needed another reason, lol.
SLM
If anybody wonders and has the WT publications, look under "family merit" and Ezekiel chapter 9.
Survival book chap. 12 p. 97 Identified for Destruction or Survival?
Particularly significant is the fact that Jehovah?s executioners were told that age, sex, singleness or marriage relationship was no reason to spare an offender against Jehovah. A married person must individually have his or her mark in order to be spared. If parents resist having their children marked or if they fail to bring them up as servants of Jehovah, they must bear the responsibility for what happens to those children. Although obedient children of godly parents are viewed as "holy" by Jehovah, rebellious ones are not. (1 Corinthians 7:14; Psalm 102:28; Proverbs 20:11; 30:17) If children are old enough to become baptized Christians but do not want to live up to the requirements, whether they are baptized or not, their age will not result in their being spared. How vital, then, for each individual of responsible age to be clearly marked as a person dedicated to God and doing his will!
w87 4/15 pp. 12-13 Gaining Peace With God Through Dedication and Baptism ***Should even youths consider baptism? Well, recall that Jehovah told the six armed men in the vision: "Old man, young man and virgin and little child and women you should kill off?to a ruination. But to any man upon whom there is the mark do not go near." (Ezekiel 9:6) Of course, children too young to make a dedication would be protected by a parent?s "mark" if that parent is striving to bring the children up to love Jehovah and if they are obediently responding. (1 Corinthians 7:14) Yet, if a child is intelligent enough to make a personal decision and has reached the point where he "knows how to do what is right," do not presume that he will continue indefinitely under the merit of his parent?s "mark."?James 4:17.
These quotes are talking about children who have JW parents. If the parents were not JW and subject to destruction, their children would definitely die according to the WTS doctrine.
Blondie
What Jehover will do depends on who you ask.
I just knew that the Org would point to the prophecy in Ezekiel 9, as regards the annihilation of the young generation at the fall of Judea to the Babylonians. In verse 8-10, God is to "destroy the entire remnant of Israel in this outpouring of wrath on Jerusalem." The implication is that those marked for survival, like Noah and his family, Lot and his daughters, and Rahab and her family, are just a tiny number who survive the cataclysm -- and these would survive into the exile in Babylon. But they don't point out this very important detail: it was a failed prophecy. Indeed Nebuchadnezzer did not wipe out the youth of Judea and depopulate the land, and he instead installed local governors to control the population; the land was not depopulated without inhabitant (Jeremiah 40:7-12). Albright estimated the population that remained in Judea after the deportations as around 20,000 (in contrast, around 10,000-16,000 were taken into exile). Ezekiel presents a similar prophecy in ch. 14 where he says that if Danel, Noah, and Job were in the land they could "save neither son nor daughter". This even more exaggerated statement could certainly be used by the Org to claim that baptized parents could not save their children at Armageddon. But again even Ezekiel in a postscript had to admit that his prophecy had been too extreme (v. 22-23). In contrast to the pessimistic attitude of Ezekiel, the Bible and Jewish tradition are full of examples of children being saved by parents -- the least of which were mentioned by Ezekiel himself, Danel saving his son, Noah saving his sons and daughters, and Job having his children brought back from death.
