Who counts as a 'Believer'?

BluesBrother

This struck me as new departure in the July 1st Watchtower - "Questions from Readers - " At 2 Corinthians 6.14 to whom is Paul referring when he uses the term 'unbelievers'?

alt

Compare this with -

***

w89 11/1 p. 19 Do Not Yoke Yourselves With Unbelievers ***

At 1 Corinthians 14:22, Paul used the term "unbelievers" in contrast with "believers," or baptized persons. The Corinthians, then, would understand the word "unbelievers" to refer to unbaptized persons.?See Acts 8:13; 16:31-34; 18:8.

The context of that quote makes it clear that 'BibleStudents' were not considered beleivers until they had been baptised,and I can recall the elders telling people so - but no more. Of course the rule that they are not ready to be married to still stands

Elsewhere

*** Singing the monkee's song ***

Oh, I'm a believer, I couldn't leave her if I tried...

blondie

Unbelievers = not interested non JWs

Believers = interested unbaptized people studying with JWs and attending meetings progressing towards baptism

Yes they are believers but not "in the Lord." Just a bunch of weasel words!!!!

I think this is a PR move by the WTS who don't want the government officials to think that they are being labeled "unbelievers" and thus screw up their official recognition as a religion.

peacefulpete

I doubt anyone meant this to be a change. I remember spotting many such slips. It just depends upon who wrote the piece.

XQsThaiPoes

THe reason is from 1995 sheep goat. The great crowd means baptized JWs is "old light". So they are trying to make new terminology to butress and fill the gapping hole in the heart of JWdom.

Because now the great crowd is anyone that chooses jesus over satan at the end of the world. The us vs them dichotomy is a falacy under current docterine. So I assume the word "believers" will be the JW catch phrase of the millenium. Because it is very vague you can class and declass many people with out the bother of a JC. For all we know apostates could be re-claissfied as unbelievers. Remember "the jonadab class". Classic case of how JWism has no qualms renaming its patrons to something less bizzar. If they go with believer unbeliever it really opens up their options on how to handle matters. You never know this may never bear fruit or could be the first wave of night vision (minor changes that are never annouced as changes).

JWs problem for the longest time is bigoted terminology. If they ever change that I am sure many opponents that know realtivly little about jws may change them from being dangerous to anonying.

XQsThaiPoes

Anyone notice they assume the other person is a pagan or has no religion such as unbaptised(in any denomination) JW youth. Marry in the lord applies to all christians. It funny because it seems they make it sound like the person in question is a hindu or something that just got studying and falls in love with a sister.

gumby

So nothing has changed as far as marrying ONLY baptised publishers. What did change, was the usage of the word "Believer". Now they are saying one can be termed as a "believer " yet you will never see them use that term in everyday speech concerning a non-baptised publisher because christendom uses the name, and calling someone an unbaptised publisher sounds more heartless and derogatory .....which is what they are famous for.

I guess your not "in the lord" until your head goes under the water......the lords picky like that.

In all honesty they view this the same as ' one is not married until the ceremony is performed.' No pokey pokey until you say I do and the minister says your man and wife. God just luuuuuuuuuvs those ol' formalities ya know?

Gumby

Devils Advocate

I wonder how the WT would classify the sinner who died alongside Christ (who was promised salvation for believing)? He wasn't baptised I recall...

Kenneson

Welcome Devil's Advocate. Catholics would call it baptism by desire. They also have baptism by blood (martyrdom), in addition to baptism by water. I don't recall Jehovah's Witnesses having any such distinctions. Good question.

UnDisfellowshipped

If a non-baptized person is truly a Believer in the true Jesus as Lord and Savior, then according to the Bible, he has been saved.

The Watchtower Society is now claiming that a non-baptized publisher is a "believer", but he is not yet "in the Lord".

He's not an "unbeliever", but he's also not "in the Lord."

The Society teaches that you must be baptized in order to be saved, even if you believe in Jesus and Jehovah and love Them.

The Society teaches that you can associate with unbaptized people, but you are not allowed to marry them.

Where does the Bible say that?

Look what the Bible says though:

Acts 16:30-31: And he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household."

Romans 10:9: That if you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved.

John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that He gave His Only Begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 3:18: He that believes in Him is not condemned: but He that does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the Name of the Only Begotten Son of God.

John 3:36: He that believes in the Son has everlasting life: and he that does not believe the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on him.

John 6:28-29: Then said they to Him, "What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?" Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe on Him whom He has sent."

1st John 3:23-24: And this is His commandment, That we should believe in the Name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as He gave us commandment. And he that keeps His commandments dwells in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

Who counts as a 'Believer'?

Share this