Four Hypothetical Questions

by Cold Steel 8 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Cold Steel

  These are purely hypothetical, but here goes.

  1. Two brothers are out going door to door one day and much to their surprise come upon a guy in his 50s who engage them in a religious discussion. The brothers offer to come back and conduct a Bible study and the man agrees. During the next two or three months the man likes what he hears and decides he’d like to be baptized. But he admits that he’s a colonel in the Army...a full bird! What’s more, he has only a year and a half, maybe two, before he’s eligible for retirement, and he doesn’t want to quit for fear of losing his pension and commissary privileges. What happens then?
  2. One JW is visiting his brother at his home out West. The reason? His brother is dying and wants to tie up some loose ends. While there, the Witness notices how drawn and pale his brother looks. And his brother surprises him. Having never received a Christian baptism, he wants his brother to baptize him in his swimming pool outside. He’s not so much interested in being baptized into the WTBTS, but he wants to be baptized unto Christ. He declares that he doesn’t have any views, pro or con, about the Jehovah’s Witnesses, but he does believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the author of his salvation. When asked his views on the Trinity, his brother says it never made much sense to him, but that he believes the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be distinct beings and one in purpose. So, after giving it some thought, the Witness decides to baptize his brother according to his wishes. Several days later he passes away surrounded by his family. Has this JW committed any sins in baptizing his brother? Would he be disciplined for it? And oh yeah, would the JWs recognize the baptism as being legitimate?
  3. Same question as 2) but...the JW considers himself to be of the “Heavenly” class, has partaken of the emblems for a number of years and believes he, by rights, is one of the members of the faithful and discreet slave, and has the authority to distribute spiritual food to those on the earth with a need. Does this make a difference?
  4. Little Jimmy is 14 years old and wants to be baptized. He talks to the elders and satisfies them that he’s a worthy candidate. But he wants his father to baptize him. Can he do it?

  ----------------------------------------------------------------

  I’ve seen videos of mass baptisms and there are a number of brothers in the pools or fonts and people are lined up. Some are baptizing while others are taking a break and waiting to take over when someone else needs a break. Who are these guys? Elders, brothers, a combo of the two? Can a brother baptize others without the permission of the church, because, last I heard, the WBTS didn’t exactly consider itself a “church.”

  

  Sometimes you have large fonts with many people. Other times you take what you get.

  

  This is a much larger affair. The woman (see arrow), seconds later, leaps into the pool, has a quick chat
  with some of the authorities, then exits the font without being baptized. When it rains, it pours!
• 

  Larsinger58

  1. Hypothetically, he should quit the military immediately, since Armageddon is coming soon and all that retirement money wouldn't do him any good anyway. He'd be a wonderful example to the brothers.

  Now I have a personal experience that you might light as a real hypothetical. This brother has been disrfellowshipped for years and had been living with one particular woman whom he loves for several years. Both have background in the truth and so now that he is in a position to repent and resolve his living in sin with this woman, he gets married to her and applies for reinstatement. He's very happy to be getting back to a good standing with the organization, which he interprets as a good standing with Jehovah. But, there's a crinkle! Turns out he got married in Las Vegas to some girlfriend whom he later broke up with, but never got a formal divorce. So technically, he's married to this other woman. No problem, he is now seeking to get an "annulment." BUT now the question is, since his new marriage is not legal until the previous one is annulled or he gets a divorce, should he stop having sex with his new girlfriend until his marriage situation is resolved?
  
  But its a simple answer. Same as above #1. If this person truly was repentant and loved Jehovah and was willing to do anything to get back into Jehovah's favor, he would stop committing fornication, right? Right! If he doesn't stop living with this woman, then what's the point of repenting? Claiming he has changed his life? Maybe this is his true test of repentance. What good is his request for reinstatement if the brothers don't see him as sincere? Clearly, if he continues to live with this woman in sin, then his devotion to the organization/Jehovah is phony. It's a convenience to get back into the truth now that he has settled with one woman and now, after many years, he's probably too old to enjoy the sinful lifestyle he had before.
  
  So we are all tested in many ways. What we must realize, is that test is to the DEATH. That means if you try to cut corners and you try to hold on to this life, your soul and its desires, then you will lose it. But if you give up your soul, that is, you are whole-souled and pleasing Jehovah means everything to you, even more than a wife or a child, then Jehovah will accept that and grant you eternal life. But if you try to skirt the fence, trying to keep a few pleasures of this life and give a blemished sacrifice to Jehovah, then he will reject you. Your sacrifice is not whole-souled.

  There are lots of "hypotheticals" out there, but usually one can tell what one's true priorities are.

  Another very similar situation was that of a woman who had basically decided to be with a man after her husband had died. She would gladly marry him and certainly accepted the truth as presented by JWs, but she was getting a nice pension from her previous husband, which would be cut off if she married someone else. So that is why she hadn't married him formally in the first place. But the money and security was too much to give up, so she never got baptized. Of course, she could have decided to separate from that man and live a single life if she wanted the money that bad. That way, she could have the truth AND the money. So really, it wasn't about giving up her livelihood, but giving up that man. Her choice was to have the money and the truth, or to have the man and the money. She made her choice. It was clear what was more important to her.
• 

  Larsinger58

  HYPOTHETICAL #2: Definitely not, that brother cannot just baptize his brother. He has to go through the baptism book and answer all the questions. That baptism would not be recognized by the WTS, although, it may indeed be recognized by Jehovah, if this was a sincere gesture!

  Further, this addresses the significance of "baptism" itself versus one's relationship with God. If this man was truly turning to God, he wouldn't need to be baptized. God would accept him without that formal condition. Jehovah would recognize the baptism of the heart and spirit. That is more important than the SYMBOL of that life change, the actual baptism.

  But WTS rules and what the Bible says are often in conflict. In this case, though, a truly mature brother would never even think of performing a sentimental baptism. What should be done is to rush him through the baptism book and questions and see if he agrees and then allow one of the elders to baptize him. But within the WTS, the baptism isn't legit unless he qualifies and that means answering all those questions. Of course, ask anyone here and they'll tell you he's much better off not getting baptized in a cult anyway!! The WTS is an apostate, false religion now anyway, particularly after 1996, so as far as Jehovah is concerned, which is the concern, since Jehovah provides life, not the WTS, it wouldn't matter if he was formally baptized or not. Jehovah has the ability to read the heart.

  HYPOTHETICAL #3: ROFL! Is this a real question? You're talking about someone of the anointed who would be considered a renegade anointed if he thought like that. But this scenario doesn't really make sense.

  For one, a true, faithful JW anointed one, would know the rules and it would not likely occur to him that the act of baptism had any significance if the foundation wasn't there. Christendom might think so, but no witness. Baptism is a "symbol" of the dedication. If the dedication and understanding is not there, the baptism has no meaning. Unless, of course, the pool is filled with holy water from the local Catholic Church! (Just kidding!)

  Second, there are renegade anointed ones! They are secretive though. The parable of the "ten virgins" applies to the anointed ones of JWs. Half are wise and use the Bible as authority over the Watchtower; half are "foolish" and are like #1, follow the WTS! But in the case of the true anointed ones, the wise virgins, at one point, they separate from the foolish virgins and don't tell them what is going on. They do not sare any of their extra oil with the foolish virgins. Thus they keep secret that they have left the WTS, spiritually. But these know the WTS is apostate and so would never think of baptising any potential honest Christian into a false religion. In fact, they'd do their best to get them away from the WTS. Plus they'd tell their relative, it is not necessary to get baptized into any religion now, since they are all apostate now, including the WTS! Again, the question is, what is the purpose of an empty baptismal act if there is no meaning behind it?

  HYPOTHETICAL #4: If the boy's father is an elder or ministerial servant, I'm sure the congregation would be happy to allow the father to baptize his son. But if his father is not in good standing, then I'm sure there would be objections.

  Nice hypotheticals. We all need to examine where our feelings are and what the Bible says and some of these twisters help us to sort that all out.

  Again, per the bible, HALF the anointed have spiritually separated themselves with the WTS which is the congregation of the rejected, "foolish virgins" who have lost their seats in the kingdom. They were not paying attention and too focussed on the easy life of following the WTS rather than focussing on bible truth. But some have to still be active witnesses since they can't tell the "foolish virgins" what is going on.

  Even so, at this point, getting baptized as a witness is probably a bad mistake!!
• 

  Amelia Ashton

  I knew a brother who gave up a £25k gratuity by leaving the Navy early.

  This was back in the early 80s so with hindsight he had plenty of time to finish his service and collect and get baptised and 35 years later could have been full time pioneer if he didn't still have to work full time as the gratuity would have paid off his mortgage and given him a little extra!
• 

  darth frosty

  On # 1 I have heard of 'brother' who gave up their military retirements to get baptized. Ironically I thought it dumb even as a lad to give up a pension when you are just a couple of years from retiring/collecting it.

  This was mainly back in the late 70's early 80's.
• 

  Cold Steel

  Wait a minute. If you're already drawing a military pension, you have to give it up? Did I get that right?

  Regarding the brother baptizing his brother, who, exactly, has the authority to baptize in the church? Anciently, these Keys of the Kingdom, binding on Heaven and on Earth, were given to Peter and the apostles. Now are they claimed by the WBTS?

  Jesus said that he who believeth and is baptized shall be saved. He never said a person could be baptized in one's heart. We also know that the Galatian saints were baptizing people vicariously for the dead (1 Cor. 15:29), something Paul never condemned or criticized. If they thought baptism was so necessary that they had to have it for their dead. Epiphanius states: "In this country–I mean Asia and even in Galatia–their school flourished eminently and a traditional fact concerning them has reached us, that when any of them had died without baptism, they used to baptize others in their name, lest in the resurrection they should suffer punishment as unbaptized." (Heresies 8:7) One scholar notes: " St. Chrysostom tells of how the Marcionites, when one of their catechumens died without baptism, would place a living person under the dead man’s bed and ask whether he desired to be baptized. The living person would respond in the affirmative and was then baptized as a proxy for the deceased. (Homily XL on 1 Corinthians 15)"

  So baptism was taken pretty seriously. And though there are many people in the world who have not been baptized, they also have not taken the gospel to heart, so what will become of them?

  What I hear you saying is that one must be first questioned or cleared for baptism, then done under supervision. I didn't know the part about the anointed class not having clout. In a way, aren't they part of the faithful and discreet slave?

  Let's change the hypothetical a bit. Instead of just baptizing his brother, he notifies the local Kingdom Hall and says his brother is dying...can he baptize him? Could they do everything required in a day or two, perhaps a week, if the person is dying?

  If it were you, Larsinger58, what would YOU do? Let's say your brother really wanted to be baptized despite your telling him he didn't need it. Would you baptize him?

  Finally, if Jehovah, as the judge of the quick and the dead, recognized the baptism, wouldn't he be bypassing his own organization on Earth? And what's the worst that could happen if your elders or overseer found out you had participated in an unauthorized baptism? Would they disfellowship, shun or reprimand you?

  Thanks for your replies. Other views are welcomed.
• 

  Ding

  In the WT world, all must be done exactly as prescribed by the GB.

  Remember, they are the FDS now.
• 

  garyneal

  Wait a minute. If you're already drawing a military pension, you have to give it up? Did I get that right?

  I live in a military area and I have not heard of a single brother who was in the military in their 'previous life' giving up his pension. That's right on par with the pioneer sister who does not work and draws a disability check from wicked governments of this current system (my mother-in-law).
• 

  Cold Steel

  Mother-in-laws. Same in every religion. Ha!