JW Requirements for "Christian" Baptism

by AuldSoul 15 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AuldSoul

  According to the book "What Does the Bible Really Teach?" (chapter 18), Jehovah's Witnesses believe the following steps are Scriptural requirements for Christian baptism:

  (1) Study

  (2) Becoming an unbaptized publisher and regularly preaching

  (3) Repentance and Conversion

  (4) Dedication

  (5) Demonstration of Bible knowledge to congregation elders

  (6) Publicly symbolizing dedication by baptism.

  Point 5 consists of three question and answer sessions covering 104 questions on matters ranging from "Who is the true God?" (Part I, 1) to "Why should one having a communicable disease inform the presiding overseer before getting baptized?" (Part II, 9(e)).

  How then can we reconcile Acts 10:34-48 where Peter speaks less than 200 Greek words to Cornelius (a Gentile who was NOT a Jewish proselyte) whereupon Cornelius and his entire household were baptized with holy spirit immediately, followed immediately by water immersion?

  How can we reconcile Lydia, a Thyatirian seller of purple who, along with her entire household were baptized after one session of listening to the disciples speaking? (Acts 16:11-15) True, whether she had been a Jew or not is not mentioned, but she certainly was not required to preach or prove her knowledge prior to baptism, and there is no mention of a prayer of dedication.

  How can we reconcile the account of the jailer and his family, who were baptized "without delay" after one late night discussion with Paul and Silas? (Acts 16:25-34) Verse 34 specifes that he had not formerly believed in God, and yet he and his household were baptized without first preaching to a single soul.

  If these are actually Scriptural requirements for Christian baptism, which would be expected from a book titled "What Does the Bible Really Teach?", then where is the Scriptural support for requiring these steps prior to baptism? The book does not supply the Scriptures that demonstrate these are requirements.

  If you are studying to become one of Jehovah's Witnesses, please think carefully: If they will misrepresent what God requires prior to baptism, what ELSE will they misrepresent?

  If you are still one of Jehovah's Witnesses, please think carefully: When I go from door to door, to what kind of organization am I encouraging people to attach themselves?

  If they will lie about a little, then they will lie about a lot.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Confession

  Excellent post, AS. The JW baptism is so incredibly different from baptism as reported in the bible. Additionally, JW vows include recognizing the WTS as "God's spirit-directed organization," as if dedicating your life to God should require membership in a legalistic organization. Is this concept anywhere in the bible?
• 

  blondie

  Actually in days gone by in the WTS, people did not have a personal study as we know them; this started in the 1940's with the issue of a booklet called the Model Study. I remember talking to an older sister who was baptized in 1946, that she was the first person in the area to be studied with that way. People were just given books to read and expected to come to all the meetings and participate. There were no questions that the elders asked the "candidate" prior to baptism. People just showed up at assemblies (no conventions then, circuit and district were both called assemblies) with proper attire and towel, sat in the baptism section, listened to the talk and off they went to get baptized. None of this prior approval by the elder body.

  As time went by and people said their baptism wasn't valid because they weren't ready, didn't know what they were doing, they started vetting these people. I think the first book with questions for the "candidates" was the yellow book, Your Word Is A Lamp to My Foot. In my congregation we gather as a group of 7 and the congregation servant (now the PO) asked us the questions and we raised our hand to answer. We didn't have to individually answer each question.

  So perhaps this was a legal CYA measure.

  Blondie
• 

  AuldSoul

  blondie,

  I am certain it was legal CYA. In the first century congregations baptism wasn't a control issue. Among JWs, baptism is THE control issue. If people could claim ignorance or haste as a means of negating their attachment to the bOrg willy-nilly it would be pandemonium! Chaos! AGGGHHHH!

  It remains that there is no way to Scripturally support support any of their pre-baptism requirements except repentance and conversion. I don't mind if they have them. I only mind that they lyingly call them Scriptural.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  blondie

  AuldSoul, I think back on my JW days and am amazed I wasn't run out a rail. I would always ask why there where questions discussed beforehand (no Bible evidence of such), asked at the convention (no Bible evidence), and why nothing was said about the baptism being in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit........when we were dunked. Never got a scriptural answer except the standard---because the FDS says say so and they are the FDS because they say so.

  Blondie
• 

  AuldSoul

  For PMJ, I am giving this a bump.
• 

  Mysterious

  "Why should one having a communicable disease inform the presiding overseer before getting baptized?" (Part II, 9(e)).

  What I don't remember that one at all.
• 

  poppers

  Maybe all of the requirements for baptism is a way for them to keep their perceived identity intact, as a way to distance themselves from everyone else. That way they can say that they know who they are because "we do this, that, and the other thing, unlike all of those satanically deceived others. This proves we are right."
• 

  blondie

  "Why should one having a communicable disease inform the presiding overseer before getting baptized?" (Part II, 9(e)).

  What I don't remember that one at all.

  Mysterious, that's because it was added later by giving the elders a little slip of paper. The rank and file did not get that slip. I found it in my hubbie's Organized book after we faded and asked him about it. Actually, it follows up an obnoxious article in the Awake. *** g94 3/22 p. 14 Helping Those With AIDS ***

  Because of the life-threatening nature of AIDS, it is wise to keep in mind some reasonable precautions when welcoming an AIDS sufferer into our personal association or that of the Christian congregation. First, while no general announcement is to be made, we may want to inform one of the elders in the congregation of the situation so that he would be prepared to give a kind and appropriate response to any who may inquire about the matter. *** Footnote

  What should a person who knows he or she has AIDS do when he or she wants to become one of Jehovah’s Witnesses and get baptized? Out of respect for the feelings of others, it may be wise for them to request a private baptism, although there is no evidence to suggest that AIDS has been transmitted in swimming pools. While many first-century Christians were baptized at large public gatherings, others were baptized in more private settings because of varying circumstances. (Acts 2:38-41; 8:34-38; 9:17, 18) Another alternative would be for the candidate with AIDS to be baptized last.
• 

  Mysterious

  Wow..that's just wow. Thanks for the article blondie.