A Voice in the
Re: a Child shall lead them
On the other hand, the same institution over 30 years ago deemed that a tiny child, yet unborn, not having had the option to even choose whether to do right or wrong, can be categorically terminated within the womb at the mother's own discretion base on her own whims and desires, as she "chooses". They have special technology that can be installed in cars for parents to monitor their childrens' every move while driving, but the same daughter can go get an abortion without the parents' knowledge and/or consent. Driving habits are 'important', needing parental supervision; but the life of the unborn (grandchild) is not!!
A parent lays a hand to the bottom of their rebellious child, swatting them a few times in discipline; somebody of the world sees this take place; and with an angry militance the state-sponsored child "protective" services are called, they come swooping in, abduct the child, and imprison the parents for "abuse".
And children are treated as "royalty". In ancient days, in certain societies, the royal heir would never receive a lash upon his back, but whatever would otherwise be due him would instead be applied to a "whipping boy"...a boy whose function it was to receive whatever punishment due the royal heir when the heir misbehaved. According to some documentaries I've seen a few years ago, a royal heir in China had total freedom of behavior and the giving of orders, even as a toddler, keeping the adult guardians in fits of exasperation chasing the little one around, keeping them safe, whilst not interfering with -whatever- the youngster wished to do. And if, in play, the youngster should command one of the servants to kill himself, or mame another...they -must- comply, because the child was the heir...royalty...and in eastern nations like ancient China, -deity-. You don't cross (disobey) the gods...even if they are toddlers.
Indeed, in this country more and more I get this distinct notion of the 'deification' of children, even in something as mundane as school 'crossing' zones. In school crossing zones the speed limit is reduced, and if the crossing guards are stopping traffic to let the children pass, traffic is used to this.
But in recent years, within my -spirit- I have been sensing a new dynamic to traffic...of the 'drivers'. To try to explain this, for you to understand what I'm about to say, if I can make it make sense as I'm thinking it: think about Sunday mornings when traffic is going "to church". It used to be called "Sunday traffic"; the drivers being called "Sunday drivers". There is a certain 'reverence' one can sense, as people's driving habits are suddenly different from the rest of the week. They drive slower, and there is also a sense where 'common sense' also evaporates...if you know what I'm trying to say...where in the interest of -emoting- 'piety' (where all the children in the vehicle have also been exhorted to put their 'smiles' on, where they had been previously arguing and fighting around the breakfast table!) they will abandon certain rules of (for instance) "right-of-way", and instead of -taking- their 'proper' right-of-way in traffic, they will motion somebody else, who is waiting for them to "get going" (and take their 'turn', already!), to go ahead of them. They are emoting undue and inappropriate 'magnanimity', whilst actually in so-doing, holding up people behind them who are wishing they would "get going" and keep traffic "flowing" (according to the rules). Many of you, I'm sure, will understand what I've just said.
Well... I have been sensing this same -spirit- of 'piety' around school crossing zones. And the drivers, instead of gradually, smoothly, slowing down for the zone, -slam- on their brakes in order to -suddenly- be going slower (in some cases you actually see their cars tilt up, almost on their noses, when doing this), and often puttering waaaay -below- the necessary reduced speed, often way before the speed signs require it...kind of with a similar suddenness that easterners, when finding themselves unexpectedly in the presence of royalty, would -suddenly- bow, 'falling' prostrate on the ground, and grovel: I find myself often muttering to myself, when surrounded by this nonsense: "Everybody stop and worship!" i.e. Worship of, uh... "the -children-"
These same 'brats', the objects of this 'worship', being raised to sass adults, disobey parents; and as a business person whose shop is right along the path some of them like to traverse, riding their bikes and skate boards, I have had confrontations on occasion over the years, where they do not respect requests to not loiter, nor ride/jump their skate boards up near the big full-height picture windows (where they can fall and break glass) and such things.
Well, this idea of child 'deity' is not really all that far-fetched, I
recently discovered, for today's mindset. At "News with Views" is an
article by Berit Kjos http://www.newswithviews.com/BeritKjos/kjos40.htm
It is beyond the purpose of this 'trivia' to delve into the Indigo Children concept, something which I read, but must say I don't totally understand, not having studied it in depth; and don't necessarily feel it's necessary to fully understand. (you can go read the link for yourselves) For everything that exists today there are all sorts of fanciful terms, labels and theories. I leave those kinds of discussions to people like the Kjos's. Different minds run down different paths; mine being more 'simplistic' and common-sensical; and in the case of children: either they are being raised Godly, or they are not; for which Scripture uses very simple straight-forward terminology and expressions.
The basic concept, to summarize: Children are 'purposely' being raised to be rebellious. Children are being molded away from "the traditional disciplines and boundaries"; to "self-determination" and "following no authorities but their own inner drive". Children are thought to be the "interconnectedness between human spirits and the universal force". That this process is an "evolution of humanity" toward "world peace" to a "universal oneness under a socialist/spiritual system". What Scripture calls "disobedience", this philosophy calls "non-conformist"; but they claim this 'non-conformity' is necessary to "...raise the vibration of our planet...to bring us the enlightenment to ascend..." It is claimed that this non-conformity is due to a special -spiritual- psychic/gifted quality innate in today's children at birth...that today's children are being born with this special spiritual quality/gift for the betterment of the world. The article states that: "About 85% or higher of children born in '92 or later, 90% born in '94 or after and 95% or more born now are Indigo Children!"
As I read that article, the term that was mulling around in my mind was "demon-possession". If John was filled with God's Holy Spirit "from the womb" (Lk1:15), why should it be so far-fetched to also consider that, as it was in the "days of Noah" (Mt24:37), where the "sons of God (demonic fallen angels)...took wives" (Gen6:2) and created a race of "giants... men of renoun" (vs4) where the pre-diluvian society was "evil all day long" (vs5) and "corrupt" and "filled with violence" (vs11); that today's children, due to society's embrace of New Age 'spirituality', could also be born this way. After all, it is prophesied for the era of the "feet/toes" (today) that: "..they shall become mixed with the seed of men" (Dan2:43)
Ever wonder why so many children are soooo evil? ...and why today's youth pretty much 'all' dress and behave like the 'gangsta' rap stars and brothel stage shows they call "concerts"? They dress and behave like what's in their hearts. Am I suggesting that "95% or more" of today's children are demon-possessed? I don't know. That's the figure given in that article regarding "Indigo children"; and who knows where they got that figure. But notice that Peter, in speaking of what "will be", in describing the "days of Noah" and the "days of Lot"; the days we are in now, about which Jesus prophesied; he also includes in that statement, "will be", the: "ACCURSED CHILDREN". (~2Pet2:14) Often in Scripture, when something/someone is "accursed", it is with the idea that the curse is "everlasting". e.g. when Babylon is cursed, her "smoke rises forever and ever". (Rev19:3) And one of Babylon's key features is her "sorcery". (Rev18:23) There "will be...accursed children". Is that not what we see today!
In 1998 we observed from the Nagano Olympics the theme song, "When Children Rule the World" and today's fulfillment of prophecy...
"And I will give youth to be their rulers, and wanton children shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, man against man, every man by his neighbor. The youth will be insolent against the elder, and the dishonorable against the honorable... As for My people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them." (~Is3:4-5,12)
And all this that we've just observed would certainly seem to be
supported by this trivia's opening hypothesis, would it not.
AND WHAT ARE THE PARENTAL GUIDELINES TOWARD THEIR CHILDREN?
AND IF CHILDREN ARE REBELLIOUS?
What about when the child is a teen-ager, approaching adulthood? The other day Dr.Phil hosted a family where the mid-teens son was an alcoholic, and the father bemoaned, "He's too old to spank, and yelling louder does no good." Is a mid-teen "too old" to spank? What did God command Israel in such cases?
"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and who, when they have chastened him, will not obey them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city, to the gate of his place. And they shall say to the elders of his city, This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard. Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death with stones; thus you shall put away the evil from among you, and all Israel shall hear and fear." (De21:18-21)
Is that not even more drastic than a mere "spanking"! We harken back to how this trivia opened, with the Supreme Court outlawing capital punishment for just such cases.
AND WHAT IF THE PARENT DOESN'T DISCIPLINE THE CHILD?
All these Scriptural exhortations are completely OPPOSITE of how the world functions today, are they not.
SO THEN, WHAT ABOUT THE TRIVIA QUESTION?
Indeed He did. But what was the context? In Mt19:13-15 people were bringing children to have Jesus bless them, and the disciples were turning them away. He rebukes the disciples, inviting the children to be brought to Him, saying what we just quoted; and 'then', in the same context, He "laid His hands on them" (vs15) People wanted their children blessed by Jesus...which He did.
there is often much speculation about that phrase we quoted, what it means. Some use it to justify infant baptism or christening; or that babies of unsaved parents, who die, go to Heaven. There is nothing in Scripture that teaches infant baptism; and Paul is pretty clear that children of unsaved parents are "unclean" (i.e. unsaved)(1Co7:14).
However, there was another incident recorded where Jesus explains salvation, in answer to the disciples' question about "greatness" and getting to Heaven. Many speak of so-called "GREAT men of God". Jesus knocks down that concept ("whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant" Mt20:26) and says, "..unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of Heaven." (Mt18:1-3) It is not 'greatness' (or wealth Mt19:23-26) that gets one into Heaven, but child-like "humility". (vs4, Ja4:10) It is similar to the concept Paul proclaimed, of the "-simplicity- that is in Christ" (2Co11:3) The expression coined by many: "child-like faith".
These presently dangerous poisonous, carnivorous animals "...shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Jehovah, as the waters cover the sea." (Is11:9)
THE BIBLE TEACHES US that, rather than being all-wise, children are bound up with 'foolishness'; out of which they must be trained. As a race we are conceived in sin and born in iniquity. (Ps51:5) It is parents who, having grown up themselves, are to teach/lead their children every step of the way, day-in day-out, posting God's Word and speaking of God's Law at every turn, to raise them up into Godliness. (De6:6-9) Not the other way around.
Obviously, the opening trivia statement is 'false'.