7, 8. How were the men with the weapons for smashing to carry out their mission, and what was the final outcome?

⁷ How, then, were the six men with the weapons for smashing to carry out their mission? Ezekiel overheard Jehovah’s instructions to them: Follow the man with the inkhorn and kill off everyone except any who have been marked on their forehead. “You should start from my sanctuary,” Jehovah directed. (Ezek. 9:6) The executioners were to begin their work at Jerusalem’s heart, the temple, which was no longer sacred to Jehovah. The first to be slain were “the elders who were in front of the house”​—the 70 elders of Israel who were in the temple and were offering incense to false gods.​—Ezek. 8:11, 12; 9:6.

Ezekiel’s prophecy was fulfilled in 607 B.C.E. when the Babylonian army destroyed Jerusalem and its temple. Like a “cup in the hand of Jehovah,” the Babylonians were the instruments Jehovah used to pour out punishment on unfaithful Jerusalem. (Jer. 51:7) Was the destruction indiscriminate? No. Ezekiel’s vision had foretold that some would not be wiped out by the Babylonians.​—Gen. 18:22-33; 2 Pet. 2:9.

¹⁰ A number of faithful individuals survived, including the Rechabites, Ebed-melech the Ethiopian, Jeremiah the prophet, and Baruch, his secretary. (Jer. 35:1-19; 39:15-18; 45:1-5) From Ezekiel’s vision, we may conclude that such ones must have been “sighing and groaning over all the detestable things” being done in Jerusalem. (Ezek. 9:4) Before the destruction, they undoubtedly showed their heartfelt rejection of wickedness and their devotion to pure worship, and they thus put themselves in line to be spared.

The man with the secretary’s inkhorn and the six men with the weapons for smashing were visionary representations of Jehovah’s faithful spirit creatures, who are always ready to carry out his will. (Ps. 103:20, 21) Jehovah no doubt used his angels to direct the execution of judgment on unfaithful Jerusalem. As if putting a mark on the foreheads of those who were to be spared, the angels made sure that the judgment would be selective, not an indiscriminate slaughter.