New light re: baptism?

behemot

I heard rumors that "new light" is coming re: baptism.

It seems that those who got baptised without inner conviction or real dedication and / or cooled off afterwards, could get re-baptised.

Anyone else heard something similar?

Behemot

carla

It would sure make their numbers look good wouldn't it?

behemot

Yep I thought this could be a good reason why they would come up with something like that.

Behemot

I know an elder told me this a wile back so I'm not sure if it's that new, but yes you can do that. What they might have as new light is that if you have been inactive for an x number of years they could consider you DAed, I could see theme twist the bible around to make look okay.

blondie

*** w73 6/1 p. 341 par. 25 Keeping God’s Congregation Clean in the Time of His Judgment ***

25

Would there be need for rebaptism on the part of those abandoning their addiction to tobacco or other harmful product? No, this does not seem necessary. Knowledge brings responsibility and educates the conscience. (1 Tim. 1:13) The congregation gave them to understand that their practice did not ‘prevent them,’ and they were baptized in accord with that understanding. (Acts 8:36) Of course, if an individual feels that he presented himself for baptism with a ‘bad conscience’ due to such practice, he may decide to be rebaptized. That would be his personal decision.

*** w70 5/15 p. 308 Your Conscience Toward Jehovah ***

SOMEREBAPTIZED

18

Now, when the teaching work is being carried on in all lands, among all kinds of people, and when lovers of righteousness respond to the preaching of the message of Jehovah’s established kingdom, new disciples come in line for baptism as outlined by the Bible. Maybe some of such persons have been sprinkled or immersed or had water poured on them in a religious ceremony or possibly have dipped themselves in the Ganges River or otherwise have utilized water in a religious ceremony. Some may have been immersed in association with the theocratic Christian congregation but without having studied the book "YourWordIsaLamptoMyFoot" and without an understanding and appreciation of dedication. Such persons may have wondered if they should now be baptized or perhaps be baptized again. Yes, they should, if they had not truly made a dedication before they were baptized but now are disciples, having come to a knowledge of the truth of God’s Word and having made a dedication to do Jehovah’s will. Yes, if the previous baptism was not the Scripturally ordained ceremony of complete immersion at the hands of a dedicated Christian witness of Jehovah. So if one finds that he has been at variance with the Holy Scriptures in this respect, having undergone no valid baptism of a disciple, then he is now due to perform the symbol of Christian baptism before witnesses in evidence of the dedication he now has made.

*** w64 2/15 pp. 125-126 Did You Make an Acceptable Dedication to God? ***

LIVING UP TO DEDICATIONWhen one dedicates himself to Jehovah God, he solemnly vows, or promises, to do the will of God forever. At baptism, therefore, he symbolizes this vow or promise to continue progressing in the Christian way. The responsibility to continue in that way of life rests upon each one who dedicates his life to God. He must live up to that dedication by doing what God has outlined in his Word. "Offer thanksgiving as your sacrifice to God, and pay to the Most High your vows."—Ps. 50:14.

However, because a person does not live up to his dedication, it does not mean that his dedication was invalid. What it does mean is that he is simply not living up to that dedication! It represents failure to fulfill his vow, his promise, and not a failure to make a correct dedication and baptism in the first place. How serious this is can be seen from God’s Word: "Whenever you vow a vow to God, do not hesitate to pay it, for there is no delight in the stupid ones. What you vow, pay."—Eccl. 5:4.

Thus, if one has slipped away from the faith to a degree, or may have even committed a grievous sin after he was baptized, this cannot be taken as an indication that his baptism must have been invalid and hence he must be rebaptized. In all likelihood it was not his dedication and baptism that were at fault. The trouble is his failure to live up to his promise to do God’s will.

If any today find themselves practicing what is bad, or if they practiced badness some time after their dedication, they should not automatically look to rebaptism to correct the situation. The way to set oneself straight with Jehovah is to confess the wrongdoing to Jehovah in prayer and also to the judicial committee of the congregation, who will prayerfully and Scripturally handle the matter. (1 John 1:9; Jas. 5:16) Whatever correction is administered will work toward the good of the one who has confessed his wrongdoing, as well as toward the good of the entire congregation.

However, it is a different matter when a person was committing serious wrongdoing at the time of his "dedication" and baptism and even thereafter. If one was habitually sinning, practicing a grievous wrong during this time, even though ceasing from it some time after his baptism and making advancement in the service of Jehovah, he was in an unclean state before God at the time of his baptism. Such a baptism, since it did not follow a true dedication, would be invalid. If such a person has now forsaken that practice of sin, repented and made a sincere dedication of himself to Jehovah God, he should be rebaptized.

Therefore, if any individual who wants to be a baptized Christian is living a life that, if he were already dedicated, would result in his being cut off or disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation, he is not ready for baptism. First he must clean up his life in harmony with God’s righteous requirements before presenting himself to the Most High for dedication and baptism.—1 Cor. 6:9-11.

*** w62 6/1 pp. 332-333 Why Be Baptized? ***

REBAPTISM NECESSARY?

11

Due to certain circumstances at the time when they got baptized or due to subsequent developments, some have doubts about the validity of their past dedication and baptism, and they wonder if they should be rebaptized. They may have been baptized at an early age or while they were very immature in the truth, or after baptism they became inactive in the ministry for a time. At the baptism ceremony a talk on baptism is given to make clear what is involved in the matter of dedication and baptism. If one later has some doubts about the validity of his dedication, he should ask himself whether he understood that water baptism symbolized a dedication to do Jehovah’s will and whether he had actually made a dedication to do Jehovah’s will prior to baptism, even though his knowledge of the truth was limited at that time and he may have been gaining accurate knowledge by a Bible study for only a short time. Were the questions at the end of the ceremony answered in the affirmative and with a basic understanding of the significance thereof?

12

Naturally all should have grown in appreciation of their dedication since symbolizing it by water immersion. Certainly we did not appreciate it fully when we made it, or as fully as we do now. But this does not necessarily mean that we should be rebaptized, even though our immaturity might have later caused a temporary lapse in fulfilling our ministerial responsibilities. But if one submitted to baptism mainly because of emotional factors and without proper understanding, or in order to please one’s parents or others, and if this baptism did not symbolize a prior dedication to do Jehovah’s will, it would be proper to be baptized again. Dedication must come before baptism and not afterward.

13

Certain personal circumstances existing at the time of baptism would necessitate rebaptism. The psalmist David, in a song of praise to Jehovah, stated: "Who may ascend into the mountain of Jehovah, and who may rise up in his holy place? Anyone innocent in his hands and clean in heart, who has not carried My soul to sheer worthlessness, nor taken an oath deceitfully. He will carry away blessing from Jehovah and righteousness from his God of salvation." (Ps. 24:3-5) Dedication is a bilateral arrangement. Jehovah is the superior and we are the inferiors. Jehovah makes the terms of dedication; we comply with them. He requires that we first repent, turn from our former unclean practices and present ourselves as clean before him.

14

We could not imagine Jehovah accepting the dedication of anyone living in an immoral situation or doing at the time of baptism things that would result in his being cut off from Jehovah’s favor by disfellowshiping, if he were already in the Christian congregation. In ordinary business a contract is not valid unless it is signed and sealed properly by all parties concerned. On this principle it would be necessary for a formerly unfit person to be baptized again even though after his former baptism he discontinued these wrongs and made advancement in the truth and service of Jehovah. The first baptism could not symbolize a dedication made under proper circumstances that Jehovah could accept. He should now make a firm resolve to do Jehovah’s will and thus dedicate his life to Jehovah’s service and then submit to baptism at the earliest opportunity. If an unclean situation developed sometime after dedication and baptism, this would not make the dedication invalid. The individual, however, would be subject to appropriate discipline by the organization.

15

While the one performing the baptism should be a dedicated brother, the baptizer is not the important thing to consider in determining the validity of the baptism. The main question is, Have we heard the dedication discourse arranged by Jehovah’s theocratic organization and have we submitted ourselves to be baptized by one assigned by the organization? It would not be of concern to us later if it was found that the one who did the baptizing or the one who gave the baptism discourse found it necessary for himself to be baptized again. The important thing is the validity of the organization that he represented at the time and by the authorization and appointment of which he performed the water baptism.

*** w60 3/1 pp. 159-160 Questions From Readers *** What should a congregation committee do in the case of one who has committed acts deserving being put on probation or disfellowshiped and who now claims that in the light of what TheWatchtower, August 1, 1958, had to say about valid and invalid baptisms, his baptism was not a valid one?We well know that Christendom professes to be Jehovah’s organization and in the new covenant with him. It has never renounced that relationship, although it is a false claim and pretense. Yet because of the appearance that Christendom puts on before the world and the demands that it makes according to its boastful claims, Jehovah God will judge Christendom just the same as if she were in actual covenant relationship with him. She will be judged unfaithful and punished accordingly because she has acted hypocritically and brought reproach upon his name.

Likewise, if an individual who has made a profession of dedication to God through Christ and after the baptismal talk submits to water baptism and then continues to associate with the congregation, even though spasmodically, claiming to be a dedicated, baptized member of the congregation and never renouncing that relationship with the congregation, then that individual has to be judged by the congregation according to the appearance of things that is being offered by this person.

The congregation credits the individual with honesty and with having intelligently entered into a full membership in the congregation by virtue of dedication and baptism. The congregation is not God, who is able to read the heart, nor does it have supernatural gifts as did Peter and other apostles so as to know whether the individual is earnest and sincere and is not dishonest and hypocritical. If the individual permits himself to be accepted by the congregation upon the basis of the congregation’s own understanding and view of the matter, then this individual subjects himself to be judged and dealt with according to the standards that the congregation owns up to as found in the Word of God.

If, after the individual commits a wrong that deserves disfellowshiping, the individual first then disclaims having actually been what he has all along pretended to be and what he has let the congregation think he is, then he certainly is trying to take advantage of the congregation and is trying to crawl out from underneath responsibility and due consequences for his acts. He cannot now properly claim that he was not really dedicated and that his baptism was all a mistake and that in reality he never was a member of the congregation and of the New World society and so cannot be chastened by or expelled from it.

This particularly follows in the case of such a one’s making a confession. If inside himself he did not count himself a member of the congregation, then why make a confession to the congregation in the first place? An undedicated, unbaptized person is not obliged to confess all his sins and wickedness that he committed before dedication to the congregation and ask their forgiveness. All that is necessary is that he clean up his life, then make a dedication and act in harmony with that dedication and present himself for baptism.

But whether confessing or not, when a person is found guilty of misconduct he must be dealt with according to the appearance he gave those of the New World society and must therefore be put on probation or disfellowshiped as the situation may call for. If after he has been reinstated he still is convinced that he had not made a dedication before his baptism and it therefore was invalid, he should, if he has not already done so, make an intelligent, binding dedication to God now that he has repented and proved his repentance by works befitting such and then he should be baptized. We cannot trifle with Jehovah God. This is a serious matter and should be treated seriously.

***

w5612/15pp.762-763QuestionsFromReaders***

Because of information presented in the July 1, 1956, Watchtower on baptism, a number of persons have asked about the advisability of being baptized again. They say that their understanding of the matter is better now than when they were immersed. Also, some were told years ago that their immersion in water by one of Christendom’s religious systems was sufficient to symbolize their dedication if they understood at the time that they were dedicating themselves to do Jehovah’s will, but now this article (page 406, paragraph 14) says that baptisms in Christendom’s religious systems today are not valid and that these individuals should be baptized again by Jehovah’s theocratic organization. They ask if they should now be baptized again, and if so, what date for their time of dedication should be shown on their Publisher’s Record card? Should it be this latest baptism date, even though the person has been in the truth and actively witnessing for ten or twenty years or more?On the question of persons who were once baptized by Jehovah’s witnesses and who get to feeling the need of being baptized again in view of the article referred to above, the thought is raised, Did those who heard the baptism talk when they were immersed understand it? Did they understand that water immersion symbolized a dedication they were to have made already in their hearts, a vow or decision already made before God to do his will? Were not the questions specific that were propounded to them at the time of their baptism? Did not the talk and these questions point up with clarity and force the requirements? If the baptism talk stated the case plainly and the questions put to the candidates were plainly and unmistakably worded, why should the one who then said Yes to the questions now say he did not know or understand what he was doing?

All of us have doubtless grown in an appreciation of dedication since we symbolized it by water immersion. Certainly we did not appreciate it fully when we made it, or as fully as we do now. But this does not mean we should be rebaptized. This Watchtower article has not said anything more than or different from what previous articles on the subject have said, except the point of one’s having been baptized in Christendom’s religious denominations not being viewed as sufficient today, since A.D. 1918, when Jehovah God accompanied by his Messenger of the Covenant came to the temple and cast off Christendom.

So it is up to these uncertain persons to ascertain when they knowingly dedicated themselves to God, which dedication they can now distinctly remember with a satisfied conscience, and if it has been since they were baptized years ago, then they should be baptized again in symbol of their real dedication and that date should be the one used on their Publisher’s Record card.

Once a person has been baptized with understanding in token of his dedication there is no need or propriety for him to be rebaptized, even if for a time he falls away or becomes inactive, any more than a member of Christ’s body needs to be re-anointed. His baptism once performed stands forever as a testimony of his dedication to Jehovah and as an irremovable sign of his obligations toward God.

As to the baptism or total immersion of persons while members of Christendom’s religious organization and before becoming associated with Jehovah’s witnesses: In 1918, because of their conduct, the religious denominations of Christendom were definitely cast off by the judgment of Jehovah through His Messenger at His temple. Prior to that many connected with such denominations conscientiously studied their Bibles and came to discern that they must surrender or dedicate or "consecrate" themselves to God through Christ to be God’s and to do his will henceforth, trusting in His help by His holy spirit. They correctly saw that water baptism by complete submersion was the proper thing to have done to represent this surrender of themselves to God through Christ. So they had the clergyman or the authorized official in the religious denomination immerse them, doing so in the formula "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost [or, Spirit]," and they trusted in the operation of God’s spirit as described in the Scriptures, which they had read and were familiar with.

Let it be noted that such individuals made a real dedication of themselves to God through Christ and prayed for His holy spirit and they felt themselves bound by it ever after. They did not make this dedication through the clergyman or other official who baptized them. This is corroborated by the fact that after they came to know the truths as presented by Jehovah’s witnesses they saw their obligation, not to rededicate themselves to God, but to "come out of her" or come out of antitypical Babylon, and so they severed their connections with the religious denominations and became witnesses of Jehovah and continued on doing His will with better knowledge and clearer understanding. They were not rebaptized, but persisted in fulfilling their previous dedication and Jehovah manifested his acceptance of them by using them in his service and by displaying through them the operation of his spirit, while at the same time they brought forth the fruitage of His spirit. This indicates that the essential thing to validate a dedication is, not what the baptizer (be he a clergyman or otherwise) understands or thinks, but what the immersed one thinks, understands and does. The dedication was correct and the water symbol was correct and God indicated his acceptance, putting his spirit upon the immersed one. Why, then, should there be a rebaptism after one has left antitypical Babylon in fulfillment of his dedication and has become one of Jehovah’s witnesses?

Note specifically what the afore-mentioned paragraph 14, page 406, of TheWatchtower says: "Often the question is asked whether one baptized previously in a ceremony performed by some other religious group should again be baptized when coming to an accurate knowledge of the truth and making a dedication to Jehovah." Note those last six words: "And making a dedication to Jehovah." That is, making a dedication after receiving the truths presented by Jehovah’s witnesses and after leaving antitypical Babylon. This means that such person had not symbolized a dedication of himself to God when baptized "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost [or, Spirit]" by an official of the religious denomination but had merely become a member of that denomination. Hence that person saw the need of making a dedication and symbolizing it after associating with Jehovah’s witnesses. Such a person properly gets rebaptized. In agreement with this, the twelve men who were rebaptized in Acts 19:1-7 had been baptized in the name of the Father but not in the name of Jesus nor in the name of the holy spirit, about which they had not heard, so that their previous total immersion was not in the name of all the factors involved, which was why they could not receive the holy spirit before Paul had them rebaptized.

Hence now when the call to come out of Babylon is being clearly sounded out, if anyone has heard of this call and yet remains in a religious part of antitypical Babylon and gets immersed in such a religious part, his immersion would not count. His decision could not have been a dedication to do God’s will, because, to quote paragraph 14, "the individual would have separated himself from such God-dishonoring Babylonish systems even before letting them baptize him." Such an individual could only make an acceptable dedication after he ‘came out of Babylon’ and this dedication he would have to symbolize by a rebaptism in water, being totally submerged. The rebaptism date of such one is the date that should be shown on his Publisher’s Record card in the congregation with which he associates. The date of dedication is never shown, but is understood to have preceded the moment of baptism.

If a person attends a baptism feature but does not sit among the baptismal candidates and does not vocally answer the questions but afterward decides to be baptized in symbol of dedication and so joins in the procession of candidates and actually gets baptized on the same basis as they do, that person obligates himself to Jehovah God through Christ. His symbolized dedication must stand as an everlasting engagement on his part and he must consider himself bound by it in God’s sight. God read his heart and saw what he did and therefore holds him to his public profession of dedication. However, in future, it would be better for a person like this to do the following before submitting to baptism: go to the baptism speaker whose speech this person has heard and then have him ask this person the two questions privately for affirmative answers.

sir82

Have not heard anything about this, seems very unlikely, but...

Given the change to the baptism vows in 1985 (the baptism signifies that you recognize that "you are one of Jehovah's Witnesses", a legal CYA), maybe the idea has some merit?

Maybe they will change the baptism vows again, to word it even more strongly to pledge allegiance & loyalty to the organization?

I still say an extremely low possibility, but an intriguing idea.

shopaholic

This is not new.

I've worked the baptism a number of times at the assemblies and conventions for the women. Before they walk out, I asked their age and if they had been baptized as a JW in the past. I've only come across a few that had been baptized before and they had all been folks that had been disfellowshipped in the past. The final list given to the baptismal overseer is a list containing age and whether or not the person had been baptized before, no names or cong were to be noted.

lesterd

Thanks, you are always so right on.

Dave

oompa

The new light could be that full under water immersion is no longer needed, just sprinkling. That way at the district conventions this summer they will activate the sprinkler systems and be able to count all in attendance as newly baptized........................................oompa

hamsterbait

What struck me as shockingly blasphemous was in one of Blondie's quotes.

the one from 1960.

If a person is not baptized he does not need to seek the forgiveness of the ELDERS.

"We cannot trifle with Jehovah God" (ie the Witchtower Babble and Trick Society)

Excuse me?? I thought only God and Christ can forgive sins.

Who wants a window washer to decide his everlasting fate?

HB

New light re: baptism?

behemot

carla

behemot

Anti-Christ

blondie

sir82

shopaholic

lesterd

oompa

hamsterbait

Share this