Well, this is something I found...but I don't think I hit the bullseye. I think it is as you said SixofNine...not much has been said...maybe under family merit or family responsibility.
Imagine that you are in Israel.
*** w99 5/1 3 Everyone Wants to Be Free ***
MILLIONS today still find that “man has dominated man to his injury.” (Ecclesiastes 8:9) In their pursuit of power, ambitious men and women continue to show little or no compunction about crushing the freedoms of others. “Rampaging death squads kill 21 people,” says one typical report. Another speaks of “butchery,” with security forces ‘killing unresisting and defenceless women, children and old people, cutting throats, shooting civilian prisoners in the head, and following a scorched-earth policy of destruction of villages and random shelling.’
No wonder people deeply desire and, indeed, fight for freedom from repression! The sad truth is, though, that fighting for one man’s freedom often involves trampling on the rights and freedoms of another. Innocent men, women, and children are almost inevitably sacrificed in the process, their deaths “legitimized” by declaring the cause worthy and just.
*** w95 10/15 5-6 Fear-Common Now but Not Forever! ***
That 1993 newspaper article reported that selling these mines has become a business that “pays up to $200 million annually.” It involves “some 100 companies and government agencies in 48 countries” that “have been exporting 340 different types” of mines. Diabolically, some mines are designed to look like toys in order to make them attractive to children! Imagine, deliberately targeting innocent children for maiming and destruction! An editorial entitled “100 Million Infernal Machines” claimed that mines have “killed or maimed more people than chemical, biological and nuclear warfare.”
Now that the WTS has expressed their opinion about the wholesale slaughter of children today these are their comments about the past.
*** w52 6/1 350-1 Questions from Readers ***
One child lives because it has consecrated parents. Another dies with its wicked parents. Some persons hear the Kingdom message and live. Others may never hear it and die at Armageddon. Their opportunities are not equal. Would not justice require equal opportunity?—L. S., Ohio.
Justice could demand the death of everyone, since none are righteous of themselves. All are sinners and have earned sin’s wages, which is death. (Rom. 3:10; 6:23) Not justice but love inspired the provision of a ransom price, and its value or merit belongs to God and Christ for them to use as they see fit. Who are we to tell them how to use what is their own? (My comments: Not according to the just principles Jehovah has set down in the Bible? Or as the WTS sees fit to interpret?)… After God has shown in his Word that he sometimes operates on principles of family and communal responsibility, and after we see that some of such instances pictured Armageddon and involve a withholding of the ransom benefits from those destroyed, on what grounds can we thereafter argue that he should act contrary to these principles? Equal opportunity for every individual? What scriptures establish this as a divine principle, and eliminate those of family and community responsibility? (My comment: Fortunately (sic), those killed at Jericho and the Amalekites are eligible for the ransom sacrifice)
Actually, to secure equal opportunity for everyone in the absolute sense would involve far more than merely letting everyone hear the message. There are many influences outside the individual’s control that affect his stand toward the truth. Wicked parents that keep the message from their small children is only one case. Oppressive rulers that keep it from the peoples under their control is only another case. There are more. In one heathen country preaching has been done for many years, with practically no results so far as those steeped in the native religions are concerned. Is it their fault that they were born and raised in an environment that warped their minds beyond the reach of the truth? Some nationalities or races seem to have traits of stubbornness. Others are marked by qualities of humility and teachableness. More of the former reject the truth; more of the latter accept it. Not many wise or powerful or noble get the truth—it is not God’s purpose. He deliberately chooses more of the foolish and weak and ignoble to put the worldly great ones to shame. (1 Cor. 1:26-31) So it is not just wicked parents or dictatorial rulers that influence a person’s destiny. Other things beyond his control, such as the nation or race or station of life in which he was born, are weighty factors.
Aside from these big divisions there are many influencing elements. One person is raised by staunch Catholic parents and now is old. Another is raised by parents who did not indoctrinate him with any false religion and is young. Both hear the truth for the first time. Equal opportunity? Not in the absolute sense, for it is easier for the young, flexible mind free of false doctrine to embrace the truth than for the old, set mind cluttered with creedal errors. A third person may have been raised in the truth. Is not his opportunity for accepting it when he reaches the age of responsibility far better than that of others? Certainly. We cannot ignore the vital role played by home training, as Proverbs 22:6 shows. The varying environments of home and school, factory and office affect the individual’s mental outlook and capacities. “Do not be misled. Bad associations spoil useful habits.” (1 Cor. 15:33, NW) The spoilage can proceed till one becomes like a brute beast fit only to be destroyed. (2 Pet. 2:12) A delinquent world, a dictatorial nation, a degenerate community, wicked parents, bad playmates—all are environmental factors that can corrupt the growing child in its formative years until when old it is beyond recovery and reform. Even inherited personality traits may make it easier for one to grasp the truth than another. So absolutely equal opportunity is not as simply provided as hearing the message.
View another aspect of the matter. Some have their judgment period now (My comment: New light, new light….the judgment period hasn't really started yet, the sheep and goats are not yet being identified, sort of) and hear the message. Others have it in the millennial reign. Undoubtedly acceptance will be easier then, in a righteous new world. (My comment: Is this next statement a “red herring”?) And if we are looking for grounds for complaint, did the faithful men before Christ have equal opportunity? They had no opportunity for heavenly existence as immortal, incorruptible spirit creatures who are privileged to reign with Christ and stand before Jehovah himself. Their earthly reward does not equal that of the higher calling. And the “other sheep” now, should they grumble against God because they do not have an equal opportunity with the anointed to go to heaven? (My comment: Don’t you think the choice between “life” in heaven or “life” on earth is better than the choice between “life in heaven or on earth” or death forever?)
The “equal opportunity” argument is spawned by the human tendency to overrate human importance. We must not commit Adam and Eve’s blunder of trying to decide what is good and what is evil, what is just and what is unjust. (Gen. 3:4-6, 22) We must be willing to dismiss our own thoughts to make room for God’s thoughts, and bend our thinking to conform to the principles of God as shown in his Word, even on this point of family and community responsibility. (Isa. 55:8, 9) …
And have you ever tried to explain this:
Exodus 20:5-6 (Sons die for the fathers’ sins)
5 You must not bow down to them nor be induced to serve them, because I Jehovah your God am a God exacting exclusive devotion, bringing punishment for the error of fathers upon sons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation, in the case of those who hate me; 6 but exercising loving-kindness toward the thousandth generation in the case of those who love me and keep my commandments.
With this statement:
Ezekiel 18:20 (Sons do not die for the fathers’ sins)
The soul that is sinning—it itself will die. A son himself will bear nothing because of the error of the father, and a father himself will bear nothing because of the error of the son. Upon his own self the very righteousness of the righteous one will come to be, and upon his own self the very wickedness of a wicked one will come to be.
*** w53 11/1 670-1 Questions from Readers ***
How can we harmonize Ezekiel 18:20, which says the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, with Exodus 20:5, which says God will visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations?—M. L., Germany.
Ezekiel 18:20 shows that each individual, after reaching an age of responsibility, is judged on the basis of his own attitude and conduct. Early training and family environment can be a big help or hindrance to the offspring, and as a general rule children continue in the behavior patterns established during their formative years. (Prov. 22:6) …The Christian son of an opposing father would not bear the iniquity of his father, but would be favorably judged on the basis of his own Christian works.—Gal. 6:7; Rom. 2:6; Matt. 10:35, NW.
The case of Exodus 20:5 is different. …The covenant was being made with the nation, not individuals....
Faithful ones were not punished for the nation’s sins, but, although they suffered the effects of it, they benefited from God’s loving-kindness. (My comments: Not so for the Gentiles…they bore the national responsibility in spite of their individual actions…and babies…well, we know they aren’t capable of much to be judged by…isn’t that why babies aren't baptized by JWs)…
*** w86 3/15 31 Questions From Readers ***
God’s handling of that case need not be viewed as conflicting with Deuteronomy 24:16 or Ezekiel 18:20.
As part of the Law, God directed: “Fathers should not be put to death on account of children, and children should not be put to death on account of fathers. Each one should be put to death for his own sin.” (Deuteronomy 24:16) Those guidelines were for Israelite judges handling legal cases. The judges could not read hearts. They were to deal with each man on the basis of his own conduct as established by the facts. [b](My comment: Does that mean that the Israelite soldiers could read hearts?)…
