Should Children Be Baptised?

[Earthbound]

TheMdc wrote this in another topic, but I didn't want to sidetrack that topic and thought it best to simply start a new topic:


On the other hand, it is important not to establish a chronological age {for the practice of baptism}, in my opinion.

There are 15 year olds more mature than some 20 year olds. There are some 12 year olds that are more mature than 16 year olds.

The case-by-case basis is the best system possible, IMO. It isn't implemented perfectly because it is run by imperfect men, but I haven't seen a better way proposed, yet.[/b]

How does one determine the appropriate maturity of a child in regards to baptism? Their ability to recite answers to the prerequisite questions posed by the elders (most children can recite/memorize answers by grade school)? Do they, as an example, really have the life experience and wisdom necessary to make the commitment that baptism involves?

Further, if a child is not old enough to marry (certainly a significant commitment and covenant), is it reasonable to say that they are old enough to go through a far more serious commitment?

What is the differentiation between the terms used, "old enough to be baptised" and "mature enough to be baptised"? I noticed that the two terms are used often (sometimes interchangeably), yet are very vague and thus open to interpretation.

Finally, if the Bible is our guide and pattern, and the examples found within early Christianity (New Testament age) are exemplary (the baptisms of the Ethopian eunuch and a Roman centurion being two "singular" and unusual examples), can anyone point to an example within the New Testament where a child underwent baptism? Or are all the examples those of adults (men and or women)? If there are no examples of child baptism which we can point to in the Bible, where is the practice of child baptism derived from? Is it an offshoot of the practice of infant baptism? What is the earliest known child baptism in Christian history and is it associated with Catholicism? Neo-Catholicism?

Thank you for your consideration.

-=:Earthbound:=-

[Jeshurun]

NO!!!!

Jesus was 30!!

'Nuff said!

Love,
Jesh

[uglyandthin]

TheMdc wrote this in another topic, but I didn't want to sidetrack that topic and thought it best to simply start a new topic:


On the other hand, it is important not to establish a chronological age {for the practice of baptism}, in my opinion.

There are 15 year olds more mature than some 20 year olds. There are some 12 year olds that are more mature than 16 year olds.

The case-by-case basis is the best system possible, IMO. It isn't implemented perfectly because it is run by imperfect men, but I haven't seen a better way proposed, yet.[/b]

How does one determine the appropriate maturity of a child in regards to baptism? Their ability to recite answers to the prerequisite questions posed by the elders (most children can recite/memorize answers by grade school)? Do they, as an example, really have the life experience and wisdom necessary to make the commitment that baptism involves?

Further, if a child is not old enough to marry (certainly a significant commitment and covenant), is it reasonable to say that they are old enough to go through a far more serious commitment?

What is the differentiation between the terms used, "old enough to be baptised" and "mature enough to be baptised"? I noticed that the two terms are used often (sometimes interchangeably), yet are very vague and thus open to interpretation.

Finally, if the Bible is our guide and pattern, and the examples found within early Christianity (New Testament age) are exemplary (the baptisms of the Ethopian eunuch and a Roman centurion being two "singular" and unusual examples), can anyone point to an example within the New Testament where a child underwent baptism? Or are all the examples those of adults (men and or women)? If there are no examples of child baptism which we can point to in the Bible, where is the practice of child baptism derived from? Is it an offshoot of the practice of infant baptism? What is the earliest known child baptism in Christian history and is it associated with Catholicism? Neo-Catholicism?

Thank you for your consideration.

-=:Earthbound:=-



[/b]

Hi Earthbound:

This is a very difficult question. There are many children (under age 20 for the purposes of this discussion) who are extremely mature for thier age and have developed a great love for God and Christ at an early age, but they are still children, growing into the role of an adult. Although they may wish to express thier love of God and Christ by undergoing baptism, I am not sure this is correct for them. Even though they can be emotinally mature, they still have not developed a "mature" pre frontal lobe in thier brains. That is where decision making is done. It is where the qualities of right and wrong are weighed, and where we determine in our own minds the "consequences" of our actions, both good and bad, temporary and permanent. For a person in the JW's that is of great concern, because if they make a wrong decision because they have not fully considered the "consequences", they could find themselves outside looking in.

Young ones, no matter how mature find it difficult to fully understand consequences. They have a hard time really placing themselves in the future when they have to deal with the consequences for thier actions.

Do I think an 18 or 19 year old, or 14 year old for that matter should have to be held accountable for thier actions? Yes I do, but it could be something short of DFing. That is like a death penalty. Most countries do not put to death actual child murderers yet we would put to death our children for lesser crimes against God, or God forbid against the Governing Body? Jesus said that his true disciples would be known for their love of one another. Is it really loving to treat our young ones this way.

I think young ones should be allowed to express thier love for God and Christ by baptism, but should not be fully accountable until they are actually adults. 20 sounds like a reasonable enough age. I am totally against shunning as I think it is demonic in nature.

uglyandthin

[TheMdC]

Also copied and pasted from the other thread:


MdC,

What you say is true, but would you then allow the mature 15 year old, say, to get married? Because they are "mature for their age"? This is my point. There are certain things we wait until adulthood for, and with good reason. Teens are an odd mixture of maturity in some areas and immaturity in others.[/b]

I wouldn't allow my child to get married at 15 but I would never even consider imposing my conscience on anyone else in such a way. If 15 is a legal age to marry (which it is in some states, with parental or a judge's consent) then it isn't up to anyone else but the person and his/her parents to decide.

Baptism, like marriage, should be based on individual freedom, I feel.


Consider that when a minor is disfellowshipped, the parents can still have a bible study with him, because they "are still responsible to instruct and discipline him". As the teen matures, they take on more responsibility and the parent takes on less. But it is a process that does not end until adulthood.

Baptism is a contract. I don't suggest waiting until 30, but the "better way" would be to follow Jesus' steps closely as we are instructed to do, and wait until the age commonly considered adulthood.

Besides, baptism is an outward symbol of a private dedication. If a kid makes their private dedication in all seriousness of mind, nothing stops them. But especially since baptism has become a contract with congregation and not just with Jehovah, it should wait until adulthood.[/b]
You make excellent points about why it would be better and wiser to wait until one is older but none about why the wait should be forced on anyone who desires baptism 'now,' whatever their age.

There are enough rules with tenuous basis in scripture. I don't think we need any more.

[imjustaskin]

You make excellent points about why it would be better and wiser to wait until one is older but none about why the wait should be forced on anyone who desires baptism 'now,' whatever their age.

There are enough rules with tenuous basis in scripture. I don't think we need any more.[/b]

That's a good point. I just wonder how many would "desire baptism NOW" if it wasn't being encouraged by the society. IE, if it was the exception rather than the rule. It is implied to those that are waiting that they are somehow not as commited to Jehovah or are weak spiritually, or that the parents are not "directing" their children in the right direction.

Instead of recommending "don't delay!" taking the step of baptism, if the recommendation were to wait until adulthood in most cases, most of these younger baptisms would disappear.

I do believe the trend of younger baptism is harmful, due to those being subject to disfellowshipping for somewhat normal poor judgment and lack of impulse-control found in teens.

[TheMdC]

I think I was probably lucky (can we use the expression "lucky"? :unsure: ). My parents never pushed me. I have probably the most liberal (in the JW sense) parents a guy could have. Coming into the organization in the 1970s, they saw early on that the WTS is imperfect in a big way (1975), and they never tried to hide that fact from me. I was raised as a relatively free thinking JW.

While I'm going down memory lane for a moment, I recall how irate my mom was when the "new understanding" of higher education came out. I was long since grown and married and mom called me to apologize for neither encouraging me nor providing financially for me to go to college. I think she even skipped a few months worth of meetings because of it, IIRC. But she's still with the org and so am I. Dad, too.

But none of us have ever been the automaton type of JW.

[imjustaskin]

I think I was probably lucky (can we use the expression "lucky"? :unsure: ).[/b]

I am SO reporting you...

[Tsaphah]

Further, if a child is not old enough to marry (certainly a significant commitment and covenant), is it reasonable to say that they are old enough to go through a far more serious commitment?

What is the differentiation between the terms used, "old enough to be baptised" and "mature enough to be baptised"? I noticed that the two terms are used often (sometimes interchangeably), yet are very vague and thus open to interpretation.

Finally, if the Bible is our guide and pattern, and the examples found within early Christianity (New Testament age) are exemplary (the baptisms of the Ethopian eunuch and a Roman centurion being two "singular" and unusual examples), can anyone point to an example within the New Testament where a child underwent baptism? Or are all the examples those of adults (men and or women)? If there are no examples of child baptism which we can point to in the Bible, where is the practice of child baptism derived from? Is it an offshoot of the practice of infant baptism? What is the earliest known child baptism in Christian history and is it associated with Catholicism? Neo-Catholicism?

Thank you for your consideration.

-=:Earthbound:=-[/b]

I will keep this short and to the point. There are no examples in the Bible of children or youngsters being baptized. There is no need for a young person to be baptized, as long as they are under the care of their baptized parents. (1 Cor. 7:14)

Agape,
Tsaphah

[Rogue]

Interesting subject, I feel that Tsaphah's answer realy says it as it is, short and powerfull: there is no precedent in the Bible AT ALL for a child being baptised. I also feel like others have mentioned: a child not old enough to get married, should not be baptised either. The emotional part of a brain doesn't mature untill 18-21, so a child cannot realy oversee the consequences of their actions. Also, I feel like a child cannot comprehend what it REALY means to be baptised as a JW. I was 15 when I got baptised, because there is an unwritten policy in the organisation that anyone at age 16 not baptised is considered weak! But at age 15, I didnt understand Society policy, I didn't understand the DF policy, I didn't know I made a comitment to the GB rather than to Jehovah God, I didn't know I had to blindly follow the GB and I certainly didn't understand what it ment to be shunned because you question the GB. How can a child realy get all that? I was able the answer correctly the baptisme questions, but how hard is that, the answer is written below the question!! It is a matter of applying skills you learn at school! It isnt a matter of real understanding... If I had known then what I know now, I would never have baptised myself into the organisation, I would have choosen to have a private baptism, just between me and Jehovah!

[Eyes & Ears]

<div class='quotemain'>Interesting subject, I feel that Tsaphah&#39;s answer realy says it as it is, short and powerfull: there is no precedent in the Bible AT ALL for a child being baptised. I also feel like others have mentioned: a child not old enough to get married, should not be baptised either. The emotional part of a brain doesn&#39;t mature untill 18-21, so a child cannot realy oversee the consequences of their actions. Also, I feel like a child cannot comprehend what it REALY means to be baptised as a JW. I was 15 when I got baptised, because there is an unwritten policy in the organisation that anyone at age 16 not baptised is considered weak! But at age 15, I didnt understand Society policy, I didn&#39;t understand the DF policy, I didn&#39;t know I made a comitment to the GB rather than to Jehovah God, I didn&#39;t know I had to blindly follow the GB and I certainly didn&#39;t understand what it ment to be shunned because you question the GB. How can a child realy get all that? I was able the answer correctly the baptisme questions, but how hard is that, the answer is written below the question!! It is a matter of applying skills you learn at school! It isnt a matter of real understanding... If I had only known the Society Policy a little better, including all the things you mentioned and then some well perhaps things may have been better spiritually for me. (who really knows)

I have also heard other b/s say the same thing about their baptism. It is really sad in some cases. Some young ones leave and never return and get involved in all sorts of things. Very painful.

E & E

[TheMdC]

Lots to discuss here. I&#39;ll try to be concise if I can. These comments are for all, not directed at anyone in particular.

Should children be baptized? No. They lack the maturity to make such a commitment.

Is a 15 year old a child? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. A body of elders needs to use discernment here, as do the teen&#39;s parents.

Is a 12 year old a child? Yes. A body of elders is foolish to allow a 12 year old to get baptized and negligent to actively encourage it.

Is the JW baptism a commitment to the GB? Only if you think it is. It is 1, a dedication to Jehovah, and 2, an acknowledgement that you are henceforth one of Jehovah&#39;s Witnesses.

"But the question I said "yes" to also said, "in association with God&#39;s spirit-directed organization,"" you might say. Yes, it did, if you were baptized post-1985. Are the GB "God&#39;s spirit-directed organization?" As Westley told Buttercup, "If you didn&#39;t say it then you didn&#39;t do it." You can look at it as being dedicated to Jehovah and willing to submit to his "spirit directed organization" wherever it might be operating.

There is no doubt that at times Jehovah&#39;s spirit has been with the JW organization. There are clearly other times when the JW GB has made decisions without Jehovah&#39;s guidance while assuming proudly that they had it. Jehovah&#39;s organization is far greater than a handful of men. Where any are gathered in Jesus&#39; name, praying through Jesus for spirit-direction, and following the spirit-given direction of God&#39;s word, they are therefore both organized and spirit-directed. Your family Bible study can be under the umbrella "Jehovah&#39;s spirit directed organization." (Matthew 18:20)

That many in the JW organization don&#39;t see it that way is really their problem, not ours.

Sure we can get DFd for speaking out against the GB. So don&#39;t speak out. What other people believe and do is truly not our problem. Our relationship with Jehovah is personal, or should be. I don&#39;t want any of the brothers in my business and I&#39;m not going to get into theirs.

You gotta pick your battles wisely.

So much for being concise. Apologies.

[Cephalon]

I...s the JW baptism a commitment to the GB? Only if you think it is. It is 1, a dedication to Jehovah, and 2, an acknowledgement that you are henceforth one of Jehovah&#39;s Witnesses.

"But the question I said "yes" to also said, "in association with God&#39;s spirit-directed organization,"" you might say. Yes, it did, if you were baptized post-1985. Are the GB "God&#39;s spirit-directed organization?" As Westley told Buttercup, "If you didn&#39;t say it then you didn&#39;t do it." You can look at it as being dedicated to Jehovah and willing to submit to his "spirit directed organization" wherever it might be operating.

There is no doubt that at times Jehovah&#39;s spirit has been with the JW organization. There are clearly other times when the JW GB has made decisions without Jehovah&#39;s guidance while assuming proudly that they had it. Jehovah&#39;s organization is far greater than a handful of men. Where any are gathered in Jesus&#39; name, praying through Jesus for spirit-direction, and following the spirit-given direction of God&#39;s word, they are therefore both organized and spirit-directed. Your family Bible study can be under the umbrella "Jehovah&#39;s spirit directed organization." (Matthew 18:20)

That many in the JW organization don&#39;t see it that way is really their problem, not ours.

Sure we can get DFd for speaking out against the GB. So don&#39;t speak out. What other people believe and do is truly not our problem. Our relationship with Jehovah is personal, or should be. I don&#39;t want any of the brothers in my business and I&#39;m not going to get into theirs.

You gotta pick your battles wisely.

So much for being concise. Apologies.[/b]

Well said my brother.
Many ex-JWs used to and still believe that the &#39;Organization&#39; is the GB, when it&#39;s really the worldwide brotherhood (and that&#39;s only the earthly part)
Just like everytime they see FDS, they equal it to the GB.

[shira]

I agree there is definitely a point where an individual is too young and immature to undergo Christian baptism. But the fact is that most people go on and sin after baptism, no matter how old we were, little sins and bigger sins. If the act under discussion were not the type of business contract with the WT organisation as it is, with violations sentenced and enforced by extreme shunning and disfellowship from the society and community, but rather more of an honestly practiced Biblical baptism (and there has been the discussion here before about all the performance required before WT baptism is granted, and so on, which is not Biblical), there would be fewer problems I think.

I think I read someone mention the Amish shunning that is practiced, but in my experience far fewer shunned or former Amish have such a terrible crash and fall into complete aspotasy or atheism as the disfellowshipped JW&#39;s more frequently do. (There are many reasons this could be so, which is a different discussion.) It is possible to separate ourselves from sinners, with LOVE, so that they do not have to go on to lose their minds and hate us and hate truth (though a few bad ones may), but to always remember who we are and the God we stand for, so that they will desire to come back and so that they will know and experience how EASY we make it, with love, for them to return.

It takes sincere humility to treat others&#39; sins and falls, even if ten times in a row, with gentle kindness and untiring, welcoming love and hopeful, optimistic encouragement. Our love and patience in practice is not limited by the weakness and smallness of our natural human state, but is from Jehovah who does not have such limits. There is a degree of faithlessness also in the fear of associating with known sinners, as if Jehovah is not enough to keep us on the right path, and in my eyes this is not the example shown by Jesus nor the example of scripture (occasional shunning, hopefully temporary, of deliberate, unrepentant, persistent sinners aside).

This is one aspect of what I would see of the Amish, but not Jehovah&#39;s Witnesses. I&#39;m sure we all know people whose hearts we can speak to, and inspire to do a little better with love (love in action, not love words combined with hardness of heart) in relation to our struggling brothers and sisters and all humanity.
Love,
Shira

[TheMdC]

The extreme shunning we hear about isn&#39;t practiced everywhere in the organization among family members. I know of a brother in good standing who hired his DF&#39;d son to work for him and they are together all day, every day. To any outsider they&#39;re seen as partners. As I said, he is in good standing in the congregation and he hangs with his adult DF&#39;d son all the time.

I think the extreme shunning of DF&#39;d family is a conscience matter and often misapplied self-righteous zeal.

I have a disassociated relative. Some of my JW family barely will acknowledge her existence. Some of us treat her like a family member who happens to not be a JW any longer.

I&#39;ve never seen any repercussions for anyone speaking with or associating with DF&#39;d or DA&#39;d relatives, though I can imagine it might happen in congs with more militant, less compassionate bodies of elders.

[gertie]

I&#39;ve never seen any repercussions for anyone speaking with or associating with DF&#39;d or DA&#39;d relatives, though I can imagine it might happen in congs with more militant, less compassionate bodies of elders.[/b]

Hi MdC

guess i&#39;m in a militant, less compassionate cong. :sad2:. What are the odds aye!!!!!!!!

gertie xx

[shira]

The extreme shunning we hear about isn&#39;t practiced everywhere in the organization among family members. I know of a brother in good standing who hired his DF&#39;d son to work for him and they are together all day, every day. To any outsider they&#39;re seen as partners. As I said, he is in good standing in the congregation and he hangs with his adult DF&#39;d son all the time.

I think the extreme shunning of DF&#39;d family is a conscience matter and often misapplied self-righteous zeal.

I have a disassociated relative. Some of my JW family barely will acknowledge her existence. Some of us treat her like a family member who happens to not be a JW any longer.

I&#39;ve never seen any repercussions for anyone speaking with or associating with DF&#39;d or DA&#39;d relatives, though I can imagine it might happen in congs with more militant, less compassionate bodies of elders.[/b]

If so, that is good. There are also people who do not have JW family or really anyone at all besides the friends they made (maybe a spouse), and their DF&#39;ing is shattering. Unfortunately I have seen it that when fragile people come in from the world, if they falter or fall away or are removed, they are often seen as next to disposable. It is not the spirit of God that shows such respect of persons. It is very nice for all the JW families that have clout or that stick together. Yet we/they fail many precious ones whom Jehovah loves and desires.
Love,
Shira

[TheMdC]

In your congregations, if you speak with a DF&#39;d relative, what happens to you? I&#39;ve honestly never seen anyone get in trouble for it in the half-dozen or so congregations I&#39;ve been in. Interpretation about how much association is appropriate is viewed as a conscience matter.

Good points about those DF&#39;d without family, shira.

[uglyandthin]

The extreme shunning we hear about isn&#39;t practiced everywhere in the organization among family members. I know of a brother in good standing who hired his DF&#39;d son to work for him and they are together all day, every day. To any outsider they&#39;re seen as partners. As I said, he is in good standing in the congregation and he hangs with his adult DF&#39;d son all the time.

I think the extreme shunning of DF&#39;d family is a conscience matter and often misapplied self-righteous zeal.

I have a disassociated relative. Some of my JW family barely will acknowledge her existence. Some of us treat her like a family member who happens to not be a JW any longer.

I&#39;ve never seen any repercussions for anyone speaking with or associating with DF&#39;d or DA&#39;d relatives, though I can imagine it might happen in congs with more militant, less compassionate bodies of elders.[/b]

Hi The MdC:

I am glad that that is your experience in this matter, that is probably the more correct way to treat disfellowshipped ones (that is for another discussion, I&#39;m sure). I think that Ray Franz was disfellowshipped for this very thing. He ate lunch with an ex-JW (who had disassociated himself from the witnesses before disassociated ones were dealt with the same or worse than DF&#39;d ones) (some have suggested that the change was made for exactly this case). I think the wives of both men were also present at this meal, but to my knowledge, they were not disfellowshipped. The man happened to be his landlord, I think, which technically could have given him "an excuse" to be dealing with him.

I think disfellowshipping is a necessary practice and is scriptural but the way that it is conducted by JW&#39;s as an organization (perhaps not everyone in the org.) is unscriptural and bordering on demonic. Not everyone, I admit is guilty of this, but the expressed understanding as taught by the GB is. Give me one example of a person that Jesus shunned! If we are Christians we should follow his example in all things.

⁷ For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.

⁸ Look out for yourselves, that YOU do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that YOU may obtain a full reward. ⁹ Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son. ¹⁰ If anyone comes to YOU and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into YOUR homes or say a greeting to him. ¹¹ For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.

John clearly gives council about not saying a greeting to a person who denies that Jesus has come in the flesh, an antichrist. Clearly, not all DF&#39;d individuals fall into this category, so to apply this in a blanket way on all unrepentant sinners is a blatant misapplication of scripture.



⁹ In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, ¹⁰ not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, YOU would actually have to get out of the world. ¹¹ But now I am writing YOU to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. ¹² For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do YOU not judge those inside, ¹³ while God judges those outside? “Remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves.”

Paul was giving council to a congregation whose "brothers" have neglected to take action against a known incestual fornicator. He was teaching the congregation members that they were free to exercise thier own consciences in not mixing with this person even though the "elders" in the congregation had neglected to do so. I think it is wise to consider what types of persons that we mix with, bad associations do spoil useful habits, but not even being kind and considerate to persons who find themselves in this state, I think is going overboard and is a bit self-righteous. Would there really be any harm in extending a loving glance and perhaps a heartfelt "how are you doing" to DF&#39;d ones who are attending the hall or whom we come across on the street? I think not. Jesus would, unless they were antichrists!

Also, I think by John&#39;s definition (if you read his admonition closely), he identifies antichrists as those who at one time were a part of the "body of Christ" who no longer teach that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. That would be a rather small group of people that this coucil would apply to, I think!

uglyandthin

[imjustaskin]

Good points, U&T. I spent alot of time researching this subject, and reached somewhat your same conclusions.

The context, history, etc of John&#39;s words show clearly that the extreme avoidance he was talking about applied to antichrists, false teachers - it makes scriptural sense to have zero contact with someone who is intent on forcing his wrong opinions upon the congregation. That person would have a much weighter judgment and indeed pose a much greater risk than a person who needed to be removed because they couldn&#39;t keep their behavior under control.

Using research from the society&#39;s own literature, the scripture is John is missapplied when it is applied to ALL df&#39;d persons, regardless of their attitude or circumstances. It brings shame upon Jehovah&#39;s name.

Also MdC, I find the issue of df&#39;d family members to be a "don&#39;t ask, don&#39;t tell" policy. The official line is indeed "no contact with family members outside the home". But as long as you don&#39;t broadcast it, no one really seems to ask about it. I always understood however, that if it became known in the congregation and you wouldn&#39;t stop the association, you would be df&#39;d yourself. I know people that have been at least counseled over it.

[Eyes & Ears]

I have a couple of examples. Back in the 70&#39;s when I was newly baptized, in my KH a sister was df (her husband an elder) because she talked to her df daughter. Her daughter did something dumb and was df. Her Mother point blank said, she was not going to turn her back on her child, and she did not turn her back on her daughter. I am not sure if the daugther ever returned or not, but the mother did not return to the KH to this day. The husband is still coming to the meetings alone and is still an elder. He is the same loving, gentle man that he was back in the early 70&#39;s. It is always a pleasure to see him at the conventions/assemblies.


Also when I was DF/DA I was not treated harshly by the b/s . Some still smiled, some waved, one cousin sent me cards and encouragement through the mail. I was tapped lovingly by a few when I did make meetings trying to get reinstated (which I did eventually but it was not easy) some would speak to me if we were alone in the KH ladies rest room. (one on one)

Once when I was in a convenient store, a sister saw me, knew I was DA and came up to me and gave me a hug, paid for her items and left. She was young I remember going to her wedding several years before, and her new husband, got discouraged because he was not appointed as a servant, and he no longer attends the meetings. She still does. Also her brother has been DA for years. I remember when it was announced we all went into shock. Like myself he showed no outward signs of being upset about anything.

Also, her sister-in-law (her husband&#39;s sister) was also newly married and shortly after she was df and no longer attends meetings and I have no idea where her husband is. So her hug was special to me.

That particular family has been touched by df/da and the parents talk to the children, take care of the grandchildren and all is well.

I have follks in my family who have df children and they still talk to their children. They are now young adults, but still their children. They made dumb mistakes, as youngsters, they are not apostates.

There were only two elders who were over the top. One on the JC who compared me to Satan, and one who would not look at me at all when I would ask for a publication or said I needed a Bible.

What was ironic about the elder who would not look at me, one of his children (young teen ) was announced as no longer an unbaptized publisher, and he was replaced as the PO, (hmmmmmmmmmm) not long after this took place. Perhaps he was embarrassed because he knew what was about to be announced (who knows) It is not important anyways.

It has been my experience from any KH I attended that you are in no way to speak to any df/and especially DA JW. You are not to go out of your way to have contact. Every 3 -6 months we have this on local needs. So obviously it is an issue to the leadership because the b/s family members are all not going to stop interacting with their relatives or friends, etc.

Personally, I talk to whom I choose to talk to. As long as they are not
practicing nastiness, or are out in the streets screaming demonic apostate stuff if I pass them and they make eye contact I will smile or say hello. It basically is more or less up to how they demonstrate non verbal/verbal communication. I have never run across a disruptive DA/DF witness personally. I have had a one on one discussion with an elder who was df who was a childhood friend.



Just adding to the expressions regarding shunning/df. Not trying to disrupt the
flow of the thread. OKEY DOKEY :icon_razz: Not trying to answer any questions, just sharing information and examples of what happened with me regarding this.

Ok presently, even just several weeks ago, we had a part on how to treat df ones from the congregation book study. (Appendix section)

This is what was discussed for those who don&#39;t have access to the book:

Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
All Rights Reserved


Keep Yourselves in God&#39;s Love Book - Pages 207-209

Why this print is to big I have no idea. Sorry.



E & E


[b]For more information about how to treat disfellowshipped relatives, see the Scriptural counsel discussed in The Watchtower of April 15, 1988, pages 26-31, and September 15, 1981, pages 26-31.</div>
</span></span></span>

[TheMdC]

Methinks that if the rank and file were polled and answered honestly about their behavior, there would be A LOT of DISloyal brothers and sisters, based no those paragraphs. Unless your heart is frozen, you don&#39;t turn your back on family. You just don&#39;t.

On the other hand, I bet nearly 100% gave "by the book" answers at the book study, rather than say what they really do.

[Eyes & Ears]

Methinks that if the rank and file were polled and answered honestly about their behavior, there would be A LOT of DISloyal brothers and sisters, based no those paragraphs. Unless your heart is frozen, you don&#39;t turn your back on family. You just don&#39;t.

On the other hand, I bet nearly 100% gave "by the book" answers at the book study, rather than say what they really do.
[/b]

HA HA, TMDC, YOU KNOW THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED "BY THE BOOK" ANSWERS :icon_razz:

IN FACT IT WAS SO QUIET REGARDING ANSWERS THE ELDERS AND LITTLE

KIDS DID MOST OF THE COMMENTING, AS IS USUALLY DONE AT THIS CONG

BK STUDY ANYWAY.


LATER,

E & E


BY THE WAY EVERYONE HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND. AND DON&#39;T FORGET
KFC NEW GRILLED CHICKEN. :blbl: I&#39;M OUTTA HERE TIL MONDAY.

[uglyandthin]

Methinks that if the rank and file were polled and answered honestly about their behavior, there would be A LOT of DISloyal brothers and sisters, based no those paragraphs. Unless your heart is frozen, you don&#39;t turn your back on family. You just don&#39;t.

On the other hand, I bet nearly 100% gave "by the book" answers at the book study, rather than say what they really do.[/b]


Hi TheMdC:

That is due to the "fear" that has developed among God&#39;s people as opposed to real Love. Fear acts as a restraint, Love never does. I yearn for the time when all will lack a fear of man and what he can do to us. I think that day is near, I hope so!

uglyandthin

[Marque100]

No, it is counterproductive.

As soon as most of them hit teenage years, they rebel and quit the religion. That then causes family issues etc,

Most kids are angels until 12>

Once they start secondary school, they change.

Me, my brother and both sisters quit once we became teenagers - although we were not baptised.

L.

[TheMdC]

Most kids are angels until 12>
[/b]
:boom04:
You mean they get worse?!?
:o

[Rogue]

<div class='quotemain'>Most kids are angels until 12>
[/b]
:boom04:
You mean they get worse?!?
:o


[/b][/quote]

woahahahaha my 1(!) years old kid is not even an angel anymore... the temper and anger in that kid, unbelievable, he&#39;s the kind of kid that rolls on the floor screaming to get his way... he doesn&#39;t get it from us, but keeps trying hahaha! So if it gets worse, I&#39;d better run and hide lol

(for the record: he can also be the sweetest, most cheerfull kid ever, if he feels like it... And one big kiss comming from him makes my week :P)

[FutureMan]

Methinks that if the rank and file were polled and answered honestly about their behavior, there would be A LOT of DISloyal brothers and sisters, based no those paragraphs. Unless your heart is frozen, you don&#39;t turn your back on family. You just don&#39;t.

On the other hand, I bet nearly 100% gave "by the book" answers at the book study, rather than say what they really do.[/b]

Hello all,
Apparently they are tightening up with, who the members in the organization can talk to, when even their family members are disfellowshiped, who do not live in the same house.

I read from another forum, that circuit overseers have received new information on this, to get stricter about those who are disfellowshiped.

This was at one of the recent assemblies.

It reminds me of Rehoboam and the ten tribe kingdom that were torn away from him because of him being harsher and harsher with the people.

From FutureMan.

[TheMdC]

Stricter again? Seems like just a couple years ago they had parts on love and compassion and a new elders&#39; program for helping DF&#39;d ones come back.

Wish they&#39;d make up their mind.

[FutureMan]

Stricter again? Seems like just a couple years ago they had parts on love and compassion and a new elders&#39; program for helping DF&#39;d ones come back.

Wish they&#39;d make up their mind.[/b]

From FutureMan

[kim-bo]

<div class='quotemain'>Stricter again? Seems like just a couple years ago they had parts on love and compassion and a new elders&#39; program for helping DF&#39;d ones come back.

Wish they&#39;d make up their mind.[/b]

From FutureMan
[/b][/quote]

can a 15 year old get baptised, married "85 texas billionair marries them at 25"
jesus rejected satan
only speek to disfellow shipped if nessary
cant leave if not baptised
elders should be checking up on all because we can`t
every situation is different use your own brain
i hope i read this right dyslex

[imjustaskin]

<div class='quotemain'>Methinks that if the rank and file were polled and answered honestly about their behavior, there would be A LOT of DISloyal brothers and sisters, based no those paragraphs. Unless your heart is frozen, you don&#39;t turn your back on family. You just don&#39;t.

On the other hand, I bet nearly 100% gave "by the book" answers at the book study, rather than say what they really do.[/b]

Hello all,
Apparently they are tightening up with, who the members in the organization can talk to, when even their family members are disfellowshiped, who do not live in the same house.

I read from another forum, that circuit overseers have received new information on this, to get stricter about those who are disfellowshiped.

This was at one of the recent assemblies.

It reminds me of Rehoboam and the ten tribe kingdom that were torn away from him because of him being harsher and harsher with the people.

From FutureMan.
[/b][/quote]

What did they mean by stricter? How "stricter" can they get than &#39;TOTAL AVOIDANCE&#39;????

[Juan]

This is a great question.

I was baptized at the age of... (drum roll please).. 9!! And let me tell you right now that at the moment I viewed the org and the bible just like school. You really didn&#39;t care about the subject but you did the homework just to get a good grade amongst your fellow students and to please your parents. That is how i saw things and why i baptized.

I just did it to please my parents and because I felt like it was something I had to do to "get a good grade". Now I feel as though I was cheated of being given the chance to truly feel for myself the desire to dedicate my life to Jehovah, (which I didn&#39;t back then, but profoundly feel today). So I wish i could baptize again at a time like now when I am completely convinced of the need for me to dedicate my life.

BUT!... I have to admit that being baptized from the age of 9 served as a HUGE protection from doing things that are wrong in Jehovah&#39;s eyes. Being baptized gave me a strong conscience and I know that if I was never baptized I would have left the truth long ago.

So although sometimes I feel cheated, I realize that it might have been the best thing my parents ever did for me.

[SWORDOFJAH]

The Bible set the requirements. It is simple.The baptism of a Christian serves as a symbol that one has dedicated his life to God and has vowed, like Jesus: ‘I am come to do your will, O God.So water baptism for Christians is a symbol of having repented of sins and of having accepted Jesus and of having dedicated one’s life to do Jehovah’s will faithfully, as Jesus did. If a young one understand this there is no reason to hold his decision.

[gertie]

So although sometimes I feel cheated, I realize that it might have been the best thing my parents ever did for me.[/b]

I&#39;m sorry if I have misunderstood but surely you mean the best thing you ever did.
Jesus was 30 years old when he got baptised and yeah he did have strong faith when he was a child. Look how he preached in the Temple when he was only 12 but he didn&#39;t get baptised then.
Sorry but I think to let children get baptised is just wrong...IMO they are way to imature.

Gertie xx

Major edit alert ***** Has anyone ever had major finger spasm, cos that just happened to me.
Soooooo sorry :icon_rolleyes:

[Juan]

The question or topic at hand is "should children be baptized?"

My parents saw no problem in me wanting to baptize. They didn&#39;t stop me and say: "Hey hold up! your a kid wait a couple years."

So I stand behind what I said. I&#39;m glad they didn&#39;t stop me from baptizing at an early age.

[TheMdC]

Mine did stop me. I think I started asking to get baptized as soon as I knew it was an option (maybe age 6 or 7?). They kept telling me to wait until I was older.

I ended up being 15 when I was finally baptized. I am glad they made me wait.

[shikinah]

I think it depends on the maturity of the child and how well the parent knows their child. The question the parent needs to find out is why they want to get baptised so young, to please family, be to looked up to etc, it has to be a deep heart felt feeling and desire from the child with all the consequences and seriousness explained. If their still eager allow them that choice. I have never heard of a nine year old getting baptised before, at that age that could become a heavy responsibility if the child wasnt mature.

[FutureMan]

In my opinion if we are to follow the Christ, then if 30 years old was acceptable for him to commit himself to the doing of God&#39;s will then so it would be true of anyone else who are to get baptized.

But of course we must realize that Jesus as the first born in the family, did have to look after his mother and family for a period of time ,as his father had died sometime after he was twelve years old.
So this was his priority at that time until his younger brothers were old enough to take over this responsibility.

But in whatever is our case, a person does have to be of a mature situation, and not an immature child, to come to a dedication (commitment) which is symbolized soon after by water baptism.

Only a wise parent or an insightful elder would be able to determine this.
A child really is not in a position to determine this him or herself.

Just my comment on this from FutureMan