Questions From Readers
● Both Jeremiah 25:33 and Ezekiel 39:12 refer to those slain at Armageddon, yet one says the dead will not be buried and the other says they will. How are the two texts harmonized?—W. B., Canada.
Jeremiah 25:33 (AS) reads: “And the slain of Jehovah shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth: they shall not be lamented, neither gathered, nor buried; they shall be dung upon the face of the ground.” Those slain by Jehovah will not be gathered up by the survivors of Armageddon and given a formal burial or funeral accompanied by mourning and lamentation. There will be no memorial stones to mark where their remains lie and to symbolize a hope of resurrection for them. Their former existence is not held in the memory of Jehovah so that he will raise them from the dead, nor are these ungodly slain ones remembered with any respectful mourning by Jehovah’s servants that survive the battle of Armageddon. Their bones will be picked clean by the wild birds and beasts so long ill-treated by godless men.—Ezek. 39:4, 17-20; Rev. 19:17-21.
Yet the survivors of Armageddon will not let the earth lie littered with bleached bones, but will bury them to cleanse the land, as Ezekiel 39:12 states: “And seven months shall the house of Israel be burying of them, that they may cleanse the land.” The Mosaic law declared unclean for seven days anyone touching a corpse, and the land would likewise be polluted by such remains. For an executed criminal to remain exposed was a defilement of the land, and the law required his burial to avoid this. (Num. 19:11; Deut. 21:23) Topheth of the Valley of Hinnom was defiled by its becoming a dumping place of garbage and dead bodies. (2 Ki. 23:10) Hence in time there must be a burial of the bones of those slain at Armageddon, but only to cleanse the land, and not to memorialize their existence or imply hope of resurrection.
● The book “New Heavens and a New Earth” says Satan offered to make Jesus the ruler of the seventh world power. Should it not have said sixth world power instead of seventh?—A. W., United States.
The statement in question appears at the bottom of page 109 and the top of page 110, as follows: “Offering to make Jesus Christ the ruler of the seventh world power if he would just forsake Jehovah’s worship and do one act of worship to the Dragon, Satan the Devil showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the inhabited earth and said to him in the mountain of temptation: ‘I will give you all this authority and the glory of them, because it has been delivered to me and to whomever I wish I give it.’ Unlike the beast, Jesus refused.—Luke 4:5-8, NW.”
The statement is correct as it is, seventh being meant, and not sixth. It was not a matter of Satan’s giving Jesus the sixth world power that then existed, and which empire Jesus would perpetuate. It was not to be a continuation of the Roman Empire, the sixth world power, only with Jesus in control; the satanic offer was that rulership would be taken from the sixth world power and given to Jesus, and that Jesus could then set up his own system of rule over the acquired kingdoms of the earth. This new ruling power under Christ would become the new power in the earth, replacing the sixth world power, and hence itself becoming the seventh world power of history. But Jesus rejected the offer, and did not replace the sixth world power of Rome with a rule of his own to make number seven. Centuries later a seventh world power did arise and take the position once held by Rome, the Anglo-American Empire; but this seventh power is not the one referred to in the above-quoted statement of “New Heavens and a New Earth.”
Before the decree bring forth, before the day pass as the chaff, before the fierce anger of Jehovah come upon you, before the day of Jehovah’s anger come upon you. Seek ye Jehovah, all ye meek of the earth, that have kept his ordinances; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye will be hid in the day of Jehovah’s anger.—Zeph. 2:2, 3, AS.