About baptism.

[Revvzone]

so then we are at the point where i struggle.. who did the apostles and disciples baptize people in the name of? if we go to the interlinear bible f.ex and look up matthew 28:19? is it a small trifling matter that i would also need to lie to publicly accept and condone the 1914 doctrine and give inappropriate honor publicly to a human organization, even if its merely a tool for a task. for me i find it impossible to be baptized in the name of the watchtower. and do Jehovah really base his judgement on if i manage to get my name written in the database at jworg? Is that the same as the book of life? Thats imo a very human way of looking at it and Gods heart is greater than all of ours.. lucky for us.. even if I am as Roman says 7:24 a miserable man
i put my faith in that.
Jah will provide a way

The apostles followed the example of John the Baptist, up until Christ's sacrifice.. Jesus later blew upon his disciples holy spirit which opened their minds fully, so that the preaching, teaching and baptizing in the name of the father son and holy spirit pattern christ laid down could commence.. ..

 

[SkinnyAndShort]

The apostles followed the example of John the Baptist, up until Christ's sacrifice.. Jesus later blew upon his disciples holy spirit which opened their minds fully, so that the preaching, teaching and baptizing in the name of the father son and holy spirit pattern christ laid down could commence.. ..

If I’m understanding, you say at least two people must be present to do the baptizing? Meaning the one being baptized and one male doing the baptism and one other witness watching? Assuming the one watching can be male or female? Has to be done by active JW’s in with a body of water? If I misunderstood anything correct me on your thoughts.

 

[Revvzone]

I do not disagree, and to be sure, I do not remember the finer details of John‘s work - thanks for the scripture. You’re right. My point really was the value of it, given the qualifications that are applied to it. Surely the meaning is the value of it, as our sins can only be cleansed by the blood of Jesus’ sacrifice? Skinny and short made the point of man-made rules. My thinking was merely to agree that he is absolutely right in my opinion as I understand things to be and yes, that certainly does not come with any degree of guarantee that I am correct in my thinking. I was under the impression, perhaps erroneously then, that baptism is of the heart. I cannot see otherwise, but I see no value in the current vow to watchtower confirming their authority in the process now. It is a blasphemy of the highest order. I am not sure then how sanctification can come from such an error and have believed for some time now, certainly for the last forty odd years that baptism is of the heart. I’m not sure about the necessity of such for the anointed. Perhaps you can straighten me out on that. Was Paul baptised after the intervention of Christ in his life, or was he baptised by the event? Thanks Rev.

It's true, baptism is a very personal and deep thing, a vow of commitment, a promise and a choosing of sides, one not taken lightly by Jehovah.. I don't disagree with you or the others, that watchtower has inserted itself to the same level as God... One must remember, that Jesus dealt with the corrupt temple leaders of his time... No doubt he saw the sacrilegious blasphemy with man made laws of "Command upon Command" as a weighing problem.. However Christ knew his father was using the temple and its sanctimonious men as a tool to bring about his means...just as the watchtower with all it's deplorable blasphemous ways as means to its end..
As for Pual, even though Christ prematurely revealed himself to him, he was not baptized in any sense other than the awakening at that frightening introduction, basically in that fear inspiring moment, one might say, Paul, became a believer!.. and when one believes, they take the steps to baptism...It wasn't till later Paul understood his role..to which he became the most formidable champion of Christ and his brothers..and he himself was also expected to follow the pattern laid down as to preaching, teaching , baptism of disciple making.. which means, he had to be baptized, just as christ and his brothers where..

 

[Revvzone]

If I’m understanding, you say at least two people must be present to do the baptizing? Meaning the one being baptized and one male doing the baptism and one other witness watching? Assuming the one watching can be male or female? Has to be done by active JW’s in with a body of water? If I misunderstood anything correct me on your thoughts.

Yes, at least one male should be baptized, and active in the preaching work just as John was..Basically John was ordained/ commissioned , and yes a woman/women may be present.. you would want individuals who understand and have a basic understanding of Jehovah and his purpose. .

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

It's true, baptism is a very personal and deep thing, a vow of commitment, a promise and a choosing of sides, one not taken lightly by Jehovah.. I don't disagree with you or the others, that watchtower has inserted itself to the same level as God... One must remember, that Jesus dealt with the corrupt temple leaders of his time... No doubt he saw the sacrilegious blasphemy with man made laws of "Command upon Command" as a weighing problem.. However Christ knew his father was using the temple and its sanctimonious men as a tool to bring about his means...just as the watchtower with all it's deplorable blasphemous ways as means to its end..
As for Pual, even though Christ prematurely revealed himself to him, he was not baptized in any sense other than the awakening at that frightening introduction, basically in that fear inspiring moment, one might say, Paul, became a believer!.. and when one believes, they take the steps to baptism...It wasn't till later Paul understood his role..to which he became the most formidable champion of Christ and his brothers..and he himself was also expected to follow the pattern laid down as to preaching, teaching , baptism of disciple making.. which means, he had to be baptized, just as christ and his brothers where..

Thanks rev.

 

[Revvzone]

Thanks rev.

Anytime Barn..

 

[Arctic Cat]

one thing though.. and please correct me if i am mistaken. Trying to get this in perspective. The baptism was not a part of judaism and the first pact? So nobody would have to be baptised in the temple in jerusalem? the baptisement of John was to proclaim a repenting of sins and publicly confess to them. He did so in the wilderness? and the baptisement that Jesus and apostles proclaimed was for the new pact yeah? And they just needed a body of water wherever and a male person "in the know" so to say?(still early here😅sorry if i dont make sense, I am however perfectly able to not make any sense even when im not just woken up so apologies in advance for any confusement😅)

 

[DavidCJ]

one thing though.. and please correct me if i am mistaken. Trying to get this in perspective. The baptism was not a part of judaism and the first pact? So nobody would have to be baptised in the temple in jerusalem? the baptisement of John was to proclaim a repenting of sins and publicly confess to them. He did so in the wilderness? and the baptisement that Jesus and apostles proclaimed was for the new pact yeah? And they just needed a body of water wherever and a male person "in the know" so to say?(still early here😅sorry if i dont make sense, I am however perfectly able to not make any sense even when im not just woken up so apologies in advance for any confusement😅)

Yes, baptism is a Christian thing. And the Law that was in Israel was replaced with Christian teachings. For example Israel practiced polygamy. One husband, many wives. Christian teachings abolished that, back to the way it was meant to be with Adam and Eve in Genesis. And you had to sacrifice animals for certain violations of the Law. Because animals are lower than us, you needed endless sacrifice and couldn't fully atone you. Christ came as a perfect human replacing Adam one-to-one perfectly so animal sacrifices are not needed.

And the thing that starts Christian dedication is water Baptism. Just like water cleansed the earth of Nephilim and the unrighteous in Noah's day, it represents your old self being "dead" and a new Christian self being born.

 

[kenmuldoon55]

I'm 41 and not baptized, I don't belong to a kingdom hall and don't want to be baptized into their man made rules. My question is how can I become baptized outside of a kingdom hall? By whom? Does it have to be a lake or big body of water? Can a women baptize a person or only males? Also, what happens if someone is aware of what it means to be baptized yet never chooses to make that leap? Is being baptized at a kingdom hall by JW's the only way to be baptized?

You could always wait until the tribulation is cut short and the mark of the beast is imposed on the survivors.
There will most likely be a large number of non JWs at that point who will throw their lot in with Christs sealed brothers and if baptism will be an absolute requirement for one to be approved by Jehovah, then some arrangement will be made by these capable “princes” during that 3.5 year time frame.

 

[Watchman]

You could always wait until the tribulation is cut short and the mark of the beast is imposed on the survivors.
There will most likely be a large number of non JWs at that point who will throw their lot in with Christs sealed brothers and if baptism will be an absolute requirement for one to be approved by Jehovah, then some arrangement will be made by these capable “princes” during that 3.5 year time frame.

I like that solution. It would be an act of faith that I am sure Christ would recognize.

 

[Jahrule]

Glad I'm not the only one in this situation. I've considered going to another church. I tried that. Didn't work out. None of the churches I called would baptize me unless I joined them, so that was out. I thought about dropping by home depot in the morning to hire some immigrants to baptize me. But business has been slow, so I couldn't afford to pay anybody. I don't know anybody in Vermont. There are no friends to invite to a baptism. It's one roadblock after another. All I can do is put it in Jehovah's hands. If it's important Jah will provide a way.

 

[The God Pill]

In acts the only witness we have verification of on the eunuch's baptism was Philip baptizing. I'm clocking in at work in a few minutes so can't say much but of course as we know baptism is an outward symbol of a dedication one already made prior.

 

[The God Pill]

While not in the slightest detracting from it's role of displaying dedication priests in some denominations treat baptism as among other things a form of exorcism a view that probably derives from Clementine Homilies/Recognitions where Peter's disciple Clement is beloved but doesn't have all the social privileges of the in group till baptism preceded by fasting so that any evil spirits he might have as a pagan until pretty recently will be removed first.

Attaching some pages of Reversing Hermon on baptism commentary on part of 1 Peter

 

[SkinnyAndShort]

Hmm so it sounds like my best way is to wait til perhaps after the tribulation to find people to baptise me. Unless I can find someone before hand that is inline with the truth.

 

[Nomex]

I'm 41 and not baptized, I don't belong to a kingdom hall and don't want to be baptized into their man made rules. My question is how can I become baptized outside of a kingdom hall? By whom? Does it have to be a lake or big body of water? Can a women baptize a person or only males? Also, what happens if someone is aware of what it means to be baptized yet never chooses to make that leap? Is being baptized at a kingdom hall by JW's the only way to be baptized?

One thing to think about is all the children JW's baptize, especially those who later sin and are disfellowshipped. There are so many things wrong with the baptism of children I argue they are not actually baptized at all. When you cannot legally get a tattoo until you are 18, how can a child really have a true understanding of what dedication really means? They cannot. Also, what about those of us who got baptized as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, with the condition that we accept that WT's interpretation of things like the 1914 doctrine, but now reject that, and would summarily be disfellowshipped if any of our local elders found out we have rejected that and also rejected the idea that the GB are the "faithful slave"?

Clearly I do not have an answer to your question, just more questions to add to it, but I think the only thing we can do is leave it in Jehovah's hands, and have faith he knows these things and he'll work it all out!