Jump to content

Matthew9969

Permission to get baptized

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Matthew9969 -
Andre Plamondon -
28
642

Top Posters


Recommended Posts


9 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Can you really destroy an inability? And if you could, wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Yes, Tom, I should have worded it differently. Choose one:

 

Srecko destroyed your attempt at sarcasm here in this post,

Srecko destroyed your post.

Srecko dismantled your sarcasm here in this post,

 

Point is still, without trying, he made your statement void before you even said it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this mean Jesus needed theological schooling to spread the Good news? Which school did Jesus attend to be considered a “rabbi” by the Jews? Which school did Jesus send his apostles?

Where in the Bible is that written on?

Is anyone aware of what “Catechesis” means?

What good is a theology diploma if that person doesn’t practice or abide by scripture as taught by Jesus?

Is baptism a joke or is it a very serious matter that even Jesus didn’t partake until he was 30 years old. Even as the son of God, baptism is a covenant with God. A promise not to fall into the temptations of this world by obeying God.

Baptism is a literal conviction toward God’s grace. What kind of diploma is needed for that? What an Elder does need to do is observe how serious a person is in dedicating their lives in service of God by baptism just like Jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

Is baptism a joke or is it a very serious matter that even Jesus didn’t partake until he was 30 years old. Even as the son of God, baptism is a covenant with God. A promise not to fall into the temptations of this world by obeying God.

I would have to agree, it is serious and should not be taken lightly. However, the number of children baptized into being jws is pretty high and when Tony Morris is telling folks to keep a drivers license away from a child UNTIL they get baptized, leads me to believe that a jw baptism is done for many reasons other then the individual's seriousness towards God. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shiwiii said:

I would have to agree, it is serious and should not be taken lightly.

 

1 hour ago, Shiwiii said:

Tony Morris is telling folks to keep a drivers license away from a child UNTIL they get baptized

That would be a hypothetical situation. I would imagine a parent would prevent a teenage child from driving if that youth is not ready to take the written and physical test just like it should be done in order to see if an individual is spiritually mature to be baptized.  Spiritual maturity come to individuals by many ages in life. I will agree a “baby” should not be baptized just to satisfy a church tradition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

Yes, Tom, I should have worded it differently. 

Where are we going with this? Are we back to “all roads lead to heaven?” Or “it doesn’t matter what you believe as long a you are sincere?” Maybe people believe this. Witnesses don’t.

9 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Elders have no diploma or prove for credential.

Where would you send them to secure a diploma?

Are we starting to recommend ourselves again? Or do we need, like some men, letters of recommendation to you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, inscribed on our hearts and known and being read by all mankind.” 2 Corinthians 3:2

There you go. The proof is in the doing.

Just like when “Phillip attached himself to the chariot.” What were his credentials? That Phillip attached himself to the chariot. The proof lay in the doing. The eunuch did not even ask to see his diploma.

The man was a Jewish proselyte. What had he been doing to while away the time while traveling? Reading aloud the prophet Isaiah. It’s what he did for fun. Thus, there is every reason to suppose that he was thoroughly familiar with the Jewish framework and needed clarification on just one key point, the one he asked about. Once he had that missing piece supplied and sounded down, he was good to go. That is why his baptism could take place so quickly, in the course of his journey. 

Rarely is this the case today. Far more common is that people have no pre-knowledge whatsoever about the Bible. Often they have been taught some unbiblical doctrines that thoroughly confound understanding of the Word. This all takes time to straighten out. JWs are not a “come down and be saved” faith. An understanding of the Bible does not come instantaneously. Go find a “come down and be saved” faith if you want one. There are enough of them out there.

In the meantime, “attaching oneself to the chariot” is something that very few do other than Jehovah’s Witnesses. That is the proof of their serving God: that they serve him. It has nothing to do with a diploma. If others also claim to be true followers of Christ, let God figure it out. I don’t have to. It is enough for me to follow through on what I have convinced myself is right. As it turns out, there are millions who feel exactly the same why. That is why we clump together. 

Coming back to how elders are appointed, Jehovah’s Witnesses again adhere to the biblical pattern. Elders are appointed by traveling representatives. It was true then. It is true now.

There they strengthened the disciples, encouraging them to remain in the faith and saying: “We must enter into the Kingdom of God through many tribulations. Moreover, they appointed elders for them in each congregation, offering prayer with fasting, and they entrusted them to Jehovah (Acts 14:22-23)

“I left you in Crete so that you would correct the things that were defective and make appointments of elders in city after city, as I instructed you:  (Titus 1:5)

No mention is made of a diploma.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/5/2019 at 11:53 PM, Matthew9969 said:

have heard that witnesses need to pass a 80 question exam by the elders

Questions which determine if the person understands the basics are important....... the person must   understand what we believe and what their obligations are regarding moral obedience to jehovah. It is a loving  to make sure that the person understands.

The reason I was searching for the truth was that I was affirmed in the Dutch Reformed Church at age 16.  We attended class for three months once a week. The day before baptism of the entire group the minister asked a question about the randsom.  A student answered incorrectly.  The answer was: Jesus.  This appalled me that students were allowed to be baptised without understanding this basic teaching. 

Later I retracted my membership of the church. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Where would you send them to secure a diploma?

Are we starting to recommend ourselves again? Or do we need, like some men, letters of recommendation to you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, inscribed on our hearts and known and being read by all mankind.” 2 Corinthians 3:2

There you go. The proof is in the doing.

Do you go to doctor who "know how" to help in your sickness, but have no diploma for that? Do you go on his/their door because of your endless trust to people who proclaim that they can heal people, or you go there because he finished some education? There is people who can help without having certificate. But when he help you in wrong way you have no basis for asking him to "pay" you because he make your life or health to be problematic. You choose him to do job he is not qualified for.

In this matter, JW members have big trust on human who take a lead. Well, you can, of course show trust to both group, with and without diploma. 

If that how it is with elders, only words of other people that this elder can be trusted without question, similar way of logic you can use on people (candidates for baptism) who have to proof how their deeds and intentions are good, too. 

6 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Coming back to how elders are appointed, Jehovah’s Witnesses again adhere to the biblical pattern. Elders are appointed by traveling representatives. It was true then. It is true now.

Yes, this i like to hear. :)) So, this old ferry tails about how, after period of how congregants voting for elders, was also another period and that is, when holy spirit appointing elders, we now have that "biblical pattern" how in fact only legitimate way is when "traveling representatives" doing this.

Well:

1) voting is wrong way

2) spirit is wrong way

What are all those elders in and from period of 1) and 2) ?  What are their "credentials", how much value have their spiritual service if way of appointing them was been administrative error of WT Society? Errors made by voters and by spirit, who have illegally done something for what they have no authorization? 

And CO today have such authorization, :))) Who put them on that position of CO? Spirit, voters, GB, or previous CO? :))) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Matthew9969 The choice of Baptism is up to the individual themselves, and that they feel that they are ready to full serve Jehovah God. Pretty much if they're ready for such a task they go about the steps taken to reach that Spiritual Goal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Forum Statistics

    61,565
    Total Topics
    113,563
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,488
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Robert Cumulus
    Newest Member
    Robert Cumulus
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Uh oh. You are reacting (and I thank you) to my Dawkins post on the wrong thread. Be prepared for an onslaught from @AlanF about how STUPID you are!   He is not the same—JTR is an absolute saint by comparison—but I used to occasionally include off-color words in my posts just to see him, who could launch the nastiest and crudest of tirades, get all bent out of shape that I has said a naughty word.
    • Why I enjoyed your piece : it cclearly identifies the cantankerous way all darwinists act...... the religion seems to affect them this way.   Mr Dawkins has embarrassed himself quite a lot since he became a celebrity for the cause......  I think the best video I saw of him is when he said that aliens seeded the earth. ..... in a discussion on the origins of life. ..
    • Loved your contribution above.  The propaganda regarding the  "religion of peace" hides its extreme and barbaric violence.  True, JWs are the true religion of peace for refusing any political division in our ranks (not taking sides) or going to war to fight any of this system's battles. It is encouraging to be able to identify this nation on earth. I studied the "religion of peace" ...... most people in UK call it by this name now because one can get 2 years in prison for islamaphobia.  One can mock a Christian, burn the bible, call jesus an adulterer and make funny pictures of him but do NOT hint at  anything against the "religion of peace".  Oh-  I am comparing the injustice of the world in its bias treatment of JWs again in OCD way...... that will trigger Mr. JAH2......
    • This is not technically true. Admittedly, there was much opinion, but there was also at least one bit of solid information content: It would be very hard to dispute with that one.
    • I think a lot of people suspected that pretty quickly, especially as their top 3 issues appear to be the same, and as time goes on, even their pet peeves match up. I don't know for sure that JB was "DF'd" from the site, but it's the impression I got because there was some kind of warning, and then he was gone. At this point if they are the same, I don't think it matters in the slightest. But the reason I jump in on this topic is because I don't want anyone to be confused with my use of the term DF.  According to JB, he was treated as if DF'd in his congregation, even though he was not officially DF'd by a committee of elders. Not all of the reasons for this treatment were clear. Now that you have suspected that 4Jah2me was DF'd, I just figured that the JB story ought to be a reminder that it's always possible 4Jah2me was never DF'd either. 
    • Tweeted Richard Dawkins one fine day (11/13/19): “You could easily spot any Religion of Peace. Its extremist members would be extremely peaceful”  Can it be? Is Richard Dawkins referring to Jehovah’s Witnesses—universally known for being “extremely peaceful” yet declared “extremists” in Russia? If so, I will take back the relatively few bad things I have said about him. I have not really said THAT many bad things about him. At times, I have even been complimentary. When he blessed the atheist buses rolling out in London, I said that he raised a good point—his was a reaction to existing “hellfire’ buses, with advertising from the church. He did wuss-out, though, with a: “There probably is no God.” Probably? It wasn’t until I began following him on Twitter, though, that I noticed how breathtakingly contemptuous he was toward anyone who disagreed with him—not merely about God, but also on geopolitical things—and then I did say a few mean things. For example, I said of him that “he does not suffer fools gladly, and a fool is anyone who disagrees with him.” However, he has largely repented over this online meanness. I’ve noticed it over the months. He has not banished it entirely, but it is much less prevalent, so that I regret that I ever said what I did.  The temptation to be disdainful of opponents is well-nigh irresistible, particularly if you think that they are willfully choosing ignorance. I have (more or less) mastered the temptation, of course, but I have a source of effective and unending counsel that he does not. This is no more concisely stated than it was at a recent Watchtower Study. A Bible verse considered how we ought “do nothing out of contentiousness or out of egotism, but with humility consider others superior to you.” (Philippians 2:3) Practically speaking, this advice is not easy to implement. It may even strike one as nonsensical—how can everyone be superior to everyone else? Said that Watchtower: “The humble person acknowledges that everyone is superior to him in some way.—Phil. 2:3, 4.”  Of course. In some way everyone is superior to everyone else. Search for that way, hone in on it like a laser beam, and it will not be so difficult to treat even opponents with respect. “Disagree without being disagreeable” is the catchphrase today. But Professor Dawkins does not have this advantage. Much of his tradition would sway him in just the opposite “survival of the fittest” direction. So he must be given credit for his new, somewhat softer, online personality. Possibly someone who has his best interests at heart—perhaps his wife—said, “Richard, you sure do come across as a cantankerous crank on Twitter,” and he deliberately walked it back. It’s commendable. Now, I don’t think Richard had Jehovah’s Witnesses in mind with his tweet. He probably has formed his views of them through the contributions of their “apostate” contingent, and those views could hardly be blacker. I looked down among his comments to see whether any of those nasties had reared their heads. Perhaps here was an example: “Not entirely true. Extremists usually have their own misinterpretation of scriptures.” I responded to this one: “If “misinterpretation” results in a religion of peace, perhaps it is not a misinterpretation after all. Perhaps the mainline view is a misinterpretation.” Is that not a no-brainer?  Another one, disagreeing with the above tweet: “Actually no. Most extremists do exactly what is written in their book. ‘Misinterpretation’ is used as an argument by believers that cherry pick morals that fit our secular ethics today.” I know this type, too. This is the type that finds slavery in the Bible or war in the Old Testament and rails at the “hypocrisy.” I responded to this fellow as well: “Everything has a historical context and to deliberately ignore such context is to be intellectually dishonest. If our side does it to theirs, we never hear the end of it.” He blew up at this reference to context. Evil is evil, he carried on, across all places and time-frames. These characters are very predictable—you could even write their lines for them and not be too far off. Has “critical thinking” made us all nincompoops? It was once thought the most intelligent thing in the world to consider historical backdrop; one was irresponsible, even deceitful, not to do it. Very well. If he is going to trash, with blinders affixed, the source that I hold dear, I will do the same with his source: “You should turn your critical thinking skills upon Ancient Greece, the definer of it. When time travel is invented, history revisionists will give a friendly wave to American slaveholding forefathers as they race back in time to fetch wicked Greek pedophiles—it was an enshrined value of that world—back in irons.” He was not chastened by this. Hijacking Twitter as his personal courtroom, he cross-examined: “Is the holding and beating of slaves, as described in Exodus, morally acceptable? Yes or no?” I countered: “Is the raping of children as endorsed by Ancient Greek society morally acceptable? Yes or no?” Incredibly, he was not dissuaded. “Last chance!” he shot back. “Is the holding and beating of slaves, as described in Exodus, morally acceptable? Yes or no?” “To the blockheads, I became a blockhead.”—Paul (sort of) —1 Corinthians 9:19-22,” I tweeted back: “Two can play the game of obstinacy. Last chance: Is the rape of children—it was enshrined in Ancient Greek society—morally acceptable? Yes or no?” Then I went away, and when I came back, he had deleted all this tweets so that it was hard for me to reconstruct the thread. However, someone else had pointed out a grave sin I had committed: “Thomas you are guilty of the moral equivalence fallacy.” Am I? I suppose. You can sort of guess by the wording just what that phrase means—I had not heard it before. At least it is in English. I once heard a theologian quip that if there is a Latin phrase and a perfectly clear English phrase that means the same thing, always use the Latin phrase so people will know that you are educated. But my “moral equivalence fallacy” is still is no more than considering historical context, a praiseworthy intellectual technique for all time periods except ours.  Besides, I actually had posted something about slavery long ago. But it is not a topic so simple that it can be hashed out in a few tweets, and so I declined to go there with this fellow, who would debate all the sub-points. If God corrected every human injustice the moment it manifested itself, there would be nothing left. The entire premise of the Bible is that human-rule is unjust in itself and that God allows a period of time for that to be clearly manifested before bringing in his kingdom—the one referred to in the “Lord’s prayer”—to straighten it all out. In the meantime, the very ones who work themselves into a lather at religion “brainwashing” people are livid that God did not brainwash slavery away once humans settled upon it as a fine economic underpinning. If Dawkins’s tweet and my response hangs around long enough before burial in the Twitter feed, I would expect some of our malcontents to observe as they did in Russia, where the only evidence of extremism cited is proclaiming “a religious view of supremacy.” Huge protest will come at how Jehovah’s Witnesses practice shunning and thus “destroy” relationships and even family. But views inevitably translate into consequences and policies. Refusal to “come together” with those who insist on diametrically opposed views is hardly the “extremism” of ISIS—and yet the Russian Supreme Court has declared that it is, with the full backing in principle of those from the ex-JW community—the ones who go crusading, which is perhaps 10%. I’m going to write this up as a post and append it to his thread. Let’s see what happens. Probably nothing, but you never know. Plus, let’s expand on that particular Watchtower some more. The particular article covered was entitled: “Jehovah Values His Humble Servants” (September 2019 issue—study edition) Unlike nearly all religious services, Witness meetings are ones that you can prepare for. You can comment during them. They are studies of the sacred book, not just impromptu rap sessions, acquiescencing to ceremony, or sitting through someone else’s sermon. You can prepare for them, and you are benefited, as in any classroom, when you do. The focus here, as it so often is, is on practical application.  Humility draws persons to us. Haughtiness repels them, and thus makes next to impossible the mantra to “come together.” My own comment, when the time was right, was that haughty people can only accomplish so much—it may be a great deal, for haughty people are often very capable people—but eventually they run up against the fact that nobody else can stand them, and so people are motivated to undercut their ideas, even if they are good ones, out of sheer payback for ugliness. Humble people, on the other hand, may be far less capable individually, but their efforts add up. They know how to cooperate and yield to each other in a way that haughty people do not. Someone else on that Dawkins thread, an amateur wit, played with that them of unlikely extremists: “Jehova's witnesses are peaceful but their extremists are better extremely annoying...” Why fight this? It is a viewpoint. Viewpoints are not wrong, because they are viewpoints—right or wrong doesn’t enter into the equation. Better to roll with it. I was indeed on a roll, and so I tweeted back:  “I will grant that they can be. Still, if you had a choice between a team of JWs approaching your door and a team of ISIS members, you would (hopefully) choose theformer. Those 2 groups, and only those 2 groups are officially declared “extremist” in Russia.” And with that, I included a link to my ebook, “Dear Mr. Putin - Jehovah’s Witnesses Write Russia.” I am shameless in that. No matter how many books I sell, it is not enough. I don’t sell them, anyway. The book is free, a labor of love. It is an application of the theme: “If you have something important to say, don’t hide it behind a paywall.” It is the only, to my knowledge, complete history of events leading up to and beyond the 2017 ban of the Witness organization in Russia. As to the latest developments there, another one was herded off to prison, who, making the best of a sour situation, or perhaps genuinely finding value there, said: "I want to thank … prosecution. I don't just thank you, but thank you very much, because thanks to you my faith has become stronger … I see I'm on the right path." Of course. It is unreasonable to oppose so vehemently a people totally honest, hard-working, and given to peace—and yet the Bible says that such will exactly happen. How can it not serve to strengthen faith?
    • According to scientific knowledge, the entire universe is in two states every day: something becomes and something disappears. Life on Earth is in the same status. I am disappointed with suffer of creatures on Earth, too. And can't connect with "my picture" of God as i accepted through JW Bible interpretations and my own interpretations, then and now. What if we made wrong pictures about Creator? .... based on wrong or failed text? 
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.