-
Questions From ReadersThe Watchtower—1957 | August 15
-
-
Questions From Readers
● We understand that John’s baptism was for remission of sins committed against the Mosaic law, but that water baptism in Jesus’ name is not for remission of sins. It symbolizes the person’s dedication to do Jehovah’s will. However, those who believe water baptism now washes away sins quote Acts 2:38 as proof. Does this text support their claim?—A. H., United States.
Acts 2:38 (NW) reads: “Peter said to them: ‘Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the holy spirit.’”
John’s baptism was for Jews under the law covenant and indicated their repentance of sins they had committed against that law. Their being baptized by John’s baptism showed their repentance and Jehovah forgave them their sins. But this case at Acts 2:38 was different. Peter was talking to opposers. It is unlikely that they had submitted to John’s baptism in preparation to receive Christ; anyway, they did not receive him but opposed him and must bear responsibility for his impalement, being a part of the house of Israel upon whom the blood of Jesus came. When Peter’s hearers heard of their responsibility for Jesus’ death, either personal responsibility or community responsibility, they were stabbed to the heart, saw their error, and asked what they could do to correct matters. Peter said they should repent and be baptized in Jesus’ name to get their sins forgiven. These were not sins against the law covenant but were sins against Jesus. These were the sins they must repent of. How could they show this repentance and gain forgiveness?
The way for forgiveness was no longer through animal sacrifices offered at the temple in Jerusalem. That law arrangement for forgiveness through temple sacrifices was no longer effective. Now the effective sacrifice was Jesus, his shed blood, and there was no other name given whereby men could be forgiven and saved. Accept him and get forgiveness from God through him, through Jesus, through the merit of his shed blood. This repentance of sins and acceptance of Jesus and his cleansing blood was to be shown by baptism in the name of Jesus. The baptism was only a symbol. This immersion in water did not in itself effect forgiveness of sins, washing them away like a bath does dirt. If that were the case, then one would have to be baptized again and again, repeatedly washing away new sins, just as we bathe to get clean, then later on have to bathe again. The animal sacrifices did not actually and effectively remove sins either, being merely pictorial and having to be repeated over and over again. It is Jesus’ blood that cleanses from sin, not water, and “unless blood is poured out no forgiveness takes place.”—Heb. 9:22, NW.
Acts 22:16 (NW) states: “And now why are you delaying? Rise, get baptized and wash your sins away by your calling upon his name.” Not by mere water immersion, but by calling on his name are sins washed away. Cornelius called on Jehovah’s name and he accepted Christ Jesus and was baptized by holy spirit. For this to happen his sins must have been forgiven, yet it was all before he was baptized in water. If one repents and accepts Christ and trusts in His shed blood one’s sins can be forgiven. Water immersion in Jesus’ name is important, but only as a symbol and public demonstration of repentance of sins and acceptance of Jesus and dedication to do Jehovah’s will faithfully, as Jesus did.
-
-
Teen-Agers Familiar with “The Watchtower”The Watchtower—1957 | August 15
-
-
Teen-Agers Familiar with “The Watchtower”
● A Houston, Texas, teen-age miss writes: “While I was taking senior year civics in high school the subject of communistic propaganda arose and one student said that the Watchtower magazine was an advocate of communism. I decided to remain silent for a while and observe the comments and the reactions of the class, which was, by this time, in a general uproar. Immediately several students explained that their parents subscribed for The Watchtower and that it had nothing to do with communism, while others said that they had read other Watch Tower publications and that these were far removed from communism. The class decided unanimously that The Watchtower was Christian.”
-