Is your Baptism still valid?

This is the place to discuss anything to do with scriptural doctrine. It is the primary purpose of this site, and most discussions will be here.
Forum rules
Matt 18:6; Eccl 7:9; 1 Pet 4:8 (If you're not sure what they say then please hover over them with your mouse or look them up in your own Bible before posting)
Message
Author
Kerry Huish
Posts: 259
Joined: 2 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#31 Post by Kerry Huish » 1 month ago

Get out of her wrote:
1 month ago
Brother Huish wrote:
A person is to be baptized as a disciple of Christ. Not of the one whom did the baptizing, be cautions of those who would quickly make you their slaves.
1 Corinthians 7:23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings.
In just the same manner as your position on the Trinity or "deity of the Christ," the statement or point ITSELF that you are making here Brother Huish is in perfect harmony with God's word. However in this case it can easily be demonstrated with these same scriptures that the way in which you endeavor to understand or APPLY this point in your subsequent comments is dangerously misleading.

For example, if we were to actually follow your reasoning here, wouldn't this mean that it was completely inappropriate for John the Baptist to have disciples? Was it WRONG for the Apostle Paul to issue commands to the ones he was teaching such as "become imitators of ME…" when just AS prophets like John the Baptist he ULTIMATELY was teaching the VERY SAME THINGS as prophets like Jesus? (1 Cor 4:16 11:1) Did JESUS ever give any indication that John the Baptist was out of line or for that matter ANY of Jehovah's faithful prophets who had followers or otherwise ones who would actually LISTEN and PAY HEED to them?
The sheep do not belong to us.
We plant, water and shepherd, that is it.
The sheep belong to the Christ.

Who would it benefit to tell them otherwise, them or you?
You are not a mediator between Christ and his sheep.
Or have you - like many others - made the great mistake of sitting yourself in the seat of Moses?

If the sheep can be shown to whom they belong, if the sheep can recognize to whom they should be obedient to, then it would stop them or at least slow them from being drawn off.

Acts 20:30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.

Matthew 24:23 At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time.

Regards

Kerry

Bobcat
Posts: 3316
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#32 Post by Bobcat » 1 month ago

There is of course a very clear and consistent pattern throughout both the Old and New Testament of religious rituals, often ones to be observed on an annual basis like the memorial of Jesus' death.

The Corinthians did not see the Lord's Evening Meal as an "annual" memorial. (Here)


Bobcat

Stranger
Posts: 1901
Joined: 3 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#33 Post by Stranger » 1 month ago

John S wrote:
1 month ago
to Stranger,

I am more than qualified to baptize you...just due to my having been baptized with water myself since No ember of 1971, and with the Spirit for over 15 years.

i would love to come over to you and meet you some weekend this summer and visit and baptize you in any creek or river or pond and we can cook out and have some friends there to share your joy!

Let me know brother!
I love the confidence John S and I have no doubt you would show up "fully equipped". Your public spirit with the community in mind is well noted and under consideration.
Thank You for the Brotherly offer I will let you know.


Stranger, (Lu 12:50)

Get out of her
Posts: 942
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#34 Post by Get out of her » 1 month ago

Bobcat wrote:

The Corinthians did not see the Lord's Evening Meal as an "annual" memorial. (Here)


I'm not trying to be argumentative here Bobcat. The fact is you make a valid point in your commentary on this topic. However if we were to genuinely follow your line of reasoning on this, wouldn't it be just as presumptuous to dogmatically state your above sentence as it would to insist that the Memorial of Jesus' death WAS instituted as an annual observance? Particularly in view of the fact that it had a kind of predecessor in the form of the annual Passover observance and this was of course part of the "typical representation and shadow of the heavenly things to come" with SPIRITUAL Israel, wouldn't it be a much safer course for us to simply admit that we do not know for certain one way or the other? (He 8:5)

I am reminded of Meleti's recent discussion on the topic of the Holy spirit and the Trinity. I greatly respected and appreciated how he humbly and openly confessed that he simply does not know what exactly comprises Jehovah's Holy Spirit. The fact is that NONE of us currently do. He went on to point out however that the scriptures DO nonetheless give us enough information to determine what it is NOT. In this manner Meleti VERY ACCURATELY and skillfully demonstrated with the scriptures and basic logic how the Trinity doctrine does not even BEGIN to rest on a solid scriptural foundation.

I'm hoping you can soon have a chance to read the post I directed at you (#23 under this topic) and that I can impose upon you to do a quick edit for me on a mistake I made in post #17. Many thanks in advance.

Agape love;
Sol

Bobcat
Posts: 3316
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#35 Post by Bobcat » 1 month ago

That's the thing Sol. I simply pointed out that based on the wording of 1Co 11 they practiced a weekly Lord's Evening Meal. There's no getting around that. And Paul added, "as often as" or "whenever" they did it ...

So Paul was not dogmatic about it with them either. He appears to have allowed them some autonomy in the matter.

I also pointed out in my commentary on the subject that I wasn't condemning someone holding it annually. The wording, both Jesus' and Paul's, does seem to allow for that choice also. So I have no qualms with someone (like you, perhaps) holding it yearly. If that is your desire, then, more power to you.

Imagine a Christian in long years of prison. He might not be able to memorialize it at all. If he correctly sees how it was practised and Paul's somewhat lenient view of the "when" aspect, that might relieve such an imprisoned Christian from what otherwise might have been a heavy burden on his conscience.

The problem I see is when one's, like the WT, try to to make it appear that Jesus directed an annual remembrance. That this is the only acceptable manner of doing it. That just doesn't jive with the scriptural example we are given in Corinthians.

I can see someone thinking that since the Passover was annual, well then, the Memorial must be also. This is the WT's line of reasoning. And on the surface that sounds right. But as I showed with 1Co 5:7, 8, as well as how the Corinthians practiced it, that sort of 'annual' thinking just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. So that, if one is thinking that it must be "annual" due to the OT annual pattern, then I am afraid that my response to that would be that that argument just doesn't hold up to what the NT presents on the subject. (Rom 14:5) It sounds like a good argument at first, but, as they say, the devil is in the details (so to speak).

Just for some related thought, the annual festival of Pentecost was an annual festival and appears to picture the gathering and presentation of firstfruits, a term often used to describe Christians in this age. (Here) The festival of ingathering has been paired with people serving God in the Millenium, the age to come. (Zech 14:16; Rev 7:9, 10, 14)

Pentecost was an annual one day feast. The Festival of Booths/Ingathering was an annual week long feast. But the things they prefigured were not.


Bobcat

Get out of her
Posts: 942
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#36 Post by Get out of her » 1 month ago

I follow your logic here Bobcat, and I'd also like to point out that I am unusually impressed on this occasion on how carefully and deeply you have delved into the scriptures in connection with this topic. Perhaps I can ALSO better explain where I am coming from on this issue.


I'm hoping that particularly since you come from the same Watchtower Corporation background as myself that you can appreciate the dilemma I am dealing with in this case. For at least the majority of the time I spent as an active member, I was meeting together with my congregation not ONE time per week, but rather THREE. Moreover my understanding is that meeting together merely one time per week is not something unique to members of the Watchtower Society. Nevertheless I would have to say it DOES appear to me there is a strong likelihood that the 1st century Corinthians were indeed observing the Lord's Evening Meal on a weekly basis. Also I would like to express my appreciation to you for the work you have done on this topic since not only do I think you are onto something here, but it is also something that I had not even given serious thought to until now. I'm simply pointing out that in my own case at least, I'm not prepared to be quite as dogmatic on the issue as yourself.

Agape love;

Sol

Bobcat
Posts: 3316
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#37 Post by Bobcat » 1 month ago

Hi Sol,
... I'm not prepared to be quite as dogmatic on the issue as yourself.

Perhaps we have a different view of what constitutes 'dogmatism.'

For example, if we are both standing at the bus stop and you say that you believe the bus comes at 5 o'clock, and I say that I believe it comes at 4:45.

It does come at 5 o'clock. And when it does you point at a nearby clock that shows it is 5 o'clock.

Are you being "dogmatic" about your view? Or are you simply pointing out the facts?

Dogmatism, by definition, is an unsupported belief or system of beliefs. The belief could be true. Or not. But it is put forth as a statement of fact with little or no evidence given to support it.

As far as I can see, the post I made on how often the Memorial should be held (here) was anything but dogmatic. (Although, someone who doesn't believe that the Bible is God's Word might point out that my post was dogmatic about that. My linked post doesn't get into the subject of whether the Bible is God's Word. It simply accepts that as a given. I was assuming that the most of our readership here accepts that as a premise. And the post was really aimed at JWs who might visit here, the most of whom do accept that premise.)

But, as I often tell others, "Your mileage may vary."

I can understand that if one has always had the view that the Memorial should be yearly, that it might be difficult to shift away from that view. And my linked post did not have the purpose of making it seem that a yearly view was wrong in itself. But I did hope to widen one's perspective.

The only real congregational example of a Lord's Evening Meal is what we find in 1Co 11:17-34. And there they hold it weekly. So one could wonder, if it is there for our instruction, what purpose does it serve. And you not only have how they practised it, but you also have Paul's (supposedly, in my view) inspired commentary on it. And he says nothing about them going to a yearly practice. (Incidentally, this post, in the same thread as the link above, might be of interest as it reiterates some of the points made in the linked post above. And this post shows the relationship between "observing" it and eating/drinking of the emblems.)


Bobcat

Kerry Huish
Posts: 259
Joined: 2 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#38 Post by Kerry Huish » 1 month ago

Hi Bobcat

Something to consider.

The Corinthians were in the habit of practicing a great many things that were wrong.
By means of his letters Paul addressed some of these things with them.
However, Paul did intend to address many other things with them in person, especially with regards the observance.

1 Corinthians 11:34 Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions.

It is possible that Paul did not want to make an issue out of 'when' and 'how often' they were eating and drinking at this particular time.
First and foremost, it was their attitude to it that needed server correction before they could even begin to be corrected in other matters.

If this is the case, it could be viewed that Paul followed the way of Christ, not being overbearing and working with what he had, growing faith as opposed to snuffing out smoldering wicks.

Matthew 12:20 A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out, till he has brought justice through to victory.
John 16:12 "I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear.

Yes, the Corinthians were observing the meal regularly.
Paul, on this occasion did not say that this was wrong but this does not mean that it was right either.

Babes crawl and bum shuffle and fall down often when learning to walk, but you do not discipline a babe for trying to walk, you encourage them to keep trying.
The Corinthians were babes and Paul treated them as such, they had much to learn, much more than what Paul could just write them in two letters.

1 Corinthians 3:1 Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly--mere infants in Christ.
1 Corinthians 14:20 Brothers and sisters, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults.

Kind Regards

Kerry

Kerry Huish
Posts: 259
Joined: 2 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#39 Post by Kerry Huish » 1 month ago

server = severe

Doh!

Stranger
Posts: 1901
Joined: 3 years ago

Re: Is your Baptism still valid?

#40 Post by Stranger » 1 month ago

Kerry Huish wrote:
1 month ago
Yes, the Corinthians were observing the meal regularly.
Paul, on this occasion did not say that this was wrong but this does not mean that it was right either.

Babes crawl and bum shuffle and fall down often when learning to walk, but you do not discipline a babe for trying to walk, you encourage them to keep trying.
The Corinthians were babes and Paul treated them as such, they had much to learn, much more than what Paul could just write them in two letters.
Nobody's right till somebody's wrong... it's in the WAY that you use it, boy don't you know?

So don't you ever refuse it, it comes and it goes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP1AFDDJoeE


Stranger, (1Cor 11:24)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests