[From ws17/12 p. 18 – February 12-18]
“From infancy you have known the holy writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation.” 2 Timothy 3:15
At least the organization is more upfront with their purpose with this article than with many. It is not primarily to “help your children be wise for salvation“, but rather, as alluded to by the question for paragraphs 1 & 2, to help “children wanting to take the steps of dedication and baptism.” It would be more truthful if they added “because of strong emotional pressure from peers, parents and the Organization”.
This is aside from the issue of whether a formal dedication is required (discussed at length here) since Matthew 28:19b says nothing about vows and dedication but instead speaks only of baptism followed by actions to observe Jesus' commandments.
We then find another tweak in the NWT which changes the meaning of the verse. Matthew 28:19 should read “make disciples of all the nations“, not “make disciples of people of all the nations”. Why is this subtle change wrong? Because it changes the emphasis with which most witnesses read this scripture. The focus goes on “disciples of people” instead of “disciples of all the nations”. The Greek word here translated “nations” is ‘ethnos’ which means “gentiles, people joined by similar customs and culture.” Children are still learning customs and culture; only adults can be said to be truly joined by similar customs and culture.
Did John the Baptist baptise any children? The baptism of children is not mentioned in Scripture. Only the baptism of adults fits the context. (See Luke 3:21; Matthew 3:13; Mark 1:4-8; John 1:29.)
When did Jesus, the Son of God, get baptised? Not as a child, but as a full-grown man of 30. (Luke 3:23) If baptism is so important at such an early age, then why did Jesus Christ not set the example and get baptized when he was a child? Why did he not encourage the baptism of children?
What is the difference between infant and child baptism? Very little. Both have little to no understanding of the gravity of the step they are taking. An infant is not even aware he is being baptized. He has no say in the matter. Does a child make the decision of his or her own free will? Usually, a strong emotional persuasion is exerted by parents, either wittingly or unwittingly, to motivate the child whose natural, inborn desire is to please his mother and/or father. Most children change their outlook on life drastically during their teen years.
The Insight book makes the following comment on Baptism: “That Christian baptism required an understanding of God’s Word and an intelligent decision to present oneself to do the revealed will of God was evident.” -- (it-1 p253 par. 13)
Most countries of the world do not consider a child to be old enough to make important decisions in life until aged 16, 18, or 21, depending on the nature of the decision. Why should becoming a member of a religion with its requirements be any different? We should bear in mind that Jehovah's Witnesses are not baptising their children in the Christ, but rather, in the Organization. JW Baptism means being willing to conform to all the rules, tenets and policies of the Organization, whether these conform to Scripture or not.[i] Few children will realize what they are getting into. (Indeed, few adults do either.) The same things said about infants in the Insight book article on baptism (it-1 p253 para 18) apply to children and most teenagers. How many under the age of say, 16, understand God’s word (let alone organization policy) enough to make an intelligent decision?
Finally Acts 8:12 clearly states that “they proceeded to get baptized, both men and women.” Note the absence of children.
Paragraph 2 attempts to dismiss any concerns on the part of parents. It does this in part by implying that concerns that the children may later leave ‘the way of truth’ should not stop them getting baptized.
However, a vital issue that is missing is the important point made in John 6:44 “No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him; and I will resurrect him in the last day.” And John 6:65 “So he went on to say: “This is why I have said to YOU, No one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” Based on these scriptures, is Jehovah drawing men (adults) or young children? In fact, the Bible indicates that it is the believing adult that sanctifies the children. (1 Cor 7:14)
In paragraph 3, in an attempt to bolster the point being made—i.e. children should get baptized—we read: “though Timothy at that time was likely a teenager”. In court proceedings that would be termed 'inadmissible evidence', since it is pure speculation. The scripture quoted (2 Timothy 3:14,15) gives no indication as to (a) the age at which he learnt about the message of Christ and (b) when he became persuaded it was the true course.
It is commendable to help our children to know the holy writings. Tools can be useful in any task, provided they are the right ones and they are accurate. Sadly almost without exception the tools at the disposal of JW parents teach Organisation values as opposed to Bible values and principles. For instance, the Organization teaches that parents should not take a phone call from their disfellowshipped daughter, or that kids should use their pocket money, not for an ice cream, or even to help out a homeless person, but rather to enrich an already rich Organisation.
Children should be taught to imitate Christians like Apollos who used only the Scriptures to spread the good news. (Acts 18:28)
Paragraph 8 contains an interesting comment by Thomas, a father. “Frankly, I would worry if she accepted something without asking questions”. Our father in heaven is surely equally happy if we ask questions. That is how we gain experience and knowledge on which to reason. Children are noted for their questioning: why, what, where, when, etc. In Acts 17:10, 11, Luke was inspired to write that it was noble-minded to be “carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so”.
What a contrast to the Organisation of today, where asking questions about child sexual abuse issues, or how Jehovah communicates with the Governing Body, or what the Scriptural basis is for the overlapping-generations doctrine, is likely to land one in the back room of the Kingdom hall.
A suggestion given in paragraph 9 is “For example, can your children explain from the Bible what happens at death? Does the Bible’s explanation make sense to them?” There is no indication that before baptism, candidates in the first century were required to understand the Bible teaching about death. They were required, however, to understand that they were getting baptised in the name of Jehovah, Jesus and the holy spirit. Does your child understand what that means? For instance, baptism in the name of Jesus means one is granted the authority to become one of God's children.
“However, to all who did receive him, he gave authority to become God’s children, because they were exercising faith in his name.” (Joh 1:12)
Yet, Jehovah's Witnesses are all baptised as friends of God. Can your child explain that from Scripture?
“Spiritual maturity is not determined primarily by age but by a person’s healthy fear of Jehovah and readiness to obey his commands.“ (Paragraph 12)
So we ask the question: Why, when it comes to selecting spiritually mature ones to be shepherds, is a brother not judged on his Christian qualities? Instead he is judged on his organizational qualities. Primarily on how many hours he spends going from door to door every month. To that is added regularly attending meetings decreed by a body of men, and complete obedience to instructions from a body of men who, by their own admission, are not inspired (unlike the apostles and prophets of old).
Paragraph 15 mentions that a child should be helped to reason. That, in itself, should disbar the child from getting baptised. See how Google dictionary defines child:
- Young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority.
- Synonyms: youngster, young one, little one, boy, girl.
- a son or daughter of any age,
- an immature or irresponsible person
If a child is a minor, which is what is meant in paragraph 15, then they are below the age of majority. This is the age the world sets in an attempt to ensure that someone is mature enough to make decisions that have legal implications and potentially serious effects on their life. Should the step of baptism to serve God and Christ, with its life changing and challenging consequences be taken at any younger age than that of the accepted age of majority? There is a strong argument that the bar of being responsible should be even higher for what is surely the most important personal decision in one’s life. Note definition 4: by definition a child is immature and/or irresponsible. How can an irresponsible or immature person reach a mature, responsible decision? Only on becoming an adult, not a 12-year-old such as was held out in a recent monthly broadcast as a fine example to follow. We are not even talking teenagers here, but prepubescent children.
How long before the Organisation starts encouraging infant baptism like some other churches of Christendom do? Could this new drive be a way to bolster dropping growth figures?
Furthermore would it be right and just for Jehovah to hold someone accountable for a promise made before they were legally mature enough to make that decision or promise? Would Jehovah even consider doing that? It is unthinkable.
The ethical thing to do on the part of any parent or elder or governing body member would be to say ‘It’s wonderful that you have expressed interest in getting baptized, but you cannot do so until you are at least 18 years old and legally an adult, and mature enough to make such an important decision for yourself without any advice from us.’
This would avoid the issues raised in paragraph 16 where the child begins to have doubts as he grows older, and now must face the consequences of being cut off from family and friends.
As discussed in last week's Watchtower article review, Jehovah does not want us to take vows or promises that we may break. Secondly, by taking the baptism vows as they currently stand, the child would be entering a contract with the Watchtower Organization, which if they are a minor, is surely illegal. Anyone encouraging a child to take an illegal action is surely acting in bad faith at the very least.
Finally, consider Paragraph 10 which raises very important questions all of us who are parents need to be able to answer honestly. “Do I talk to my children about why I am convinced of Jehovah’s existence, his love, and the rightness of his ways? Can my children clearly see that I really love Jehovah?’ I can’t expect my children to be persuaded unless I am.” To these questions, we should add, "Can my children clearly see that I really love Jesus?" After all, if we want them to be baptised, not as Jehovists, but as Christians, we should engender in them a love of our Lord, should we not?
_______________________________________________________________
[i] For instance, a baptized child may be required to shun a close friend who has disassociated himself from the Organization as some victims of child abuse have done, even though shunning for disassociation is not scriptural.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by Psalmbee on 2018-02-14 15:20:49
It's really peculiar and also somewhat subliminal how they theme together being wise and being baptized, mind and thought control in action. It's nothing new for them though, for they have been trying to master it for many years now, as well as some generations!!
Comment by Search-truth on 2018-02-11 17:34:39
Great write up Tadua, I initially assumed Meleti was the writer, I assumed wrong...lol. Maybe the org might get desperate & adopt infant baptisms if the numbers dwindle. A year ago I was speaking to a sister about a marriage that was on the ropes & not doing well..She said well, the couple got married way too young, they should of married past the bloom of youth etc etc...I replied that is a good point but can we not apply the same council or advice about baptism? She said what do you mean? When a youth goes astray from the truth, no one ever says, maybe they got baptized too young. Shouldn't baptisms be treated with higher regards than marriage? She agreed..So why are we baptizing children & reckless teens?
Reply by mailman on 2018-02-17 01:28:16
Here's my 2 cents worth take why the Organization likes and encourages children baptism.
To increase the population of its membership and post good statistics that can motivate its readers
To have baptized children that can serve as good role model for other children to emulate
To paint a positive picture of the organization - that children in the organization are very active in doing their religious work compared to those worldly ones.
Comment by Warp Speed on 2018-02-11 17:53:47
Very nice review Tadua! I always enjoy your CLAM reviews immensely. Keep up the good work. I'm sure Meleti enjoys a break once in a while.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2018-02-12 22:01:46
He sure does! :)
Comment by Christian on 2018-02-11 19:22:24
I'm hoping that someone can assist me here. I was baptized as a JW in 1962 as a 17 year old person and what I would like to know is what the wording was back then that I happily agreed to. I know today that candidates must agree to organizational loyalty, but we didn't have those expressed terms then and I think I would have dificulty being baptized to-day because of it. Thank you.
Reply by MarthaMartha on 2018-02-12 04:40:27
The questions changed to the current ones in 1985, Christian.
I was baptised in 1972 and a there was no mention of organisation.
I looked up the article in JWfacts about baptism changes, and at the time you were baptised the questions were:
(1) Have you recognized yourself before Jehovah God as a sinner who needs salvation, and have you acknowledged to him that this salvation proceeds from him the Father through his Son Jesus Christ?
(2) On the basis of this faith in God and in his provision for salvation, have you dedicated yourself unreservedly to God to do his will henceforth as he reveals it to you through Jesus Christ and through the Bible under the enlightenment of the holy spirit?"
I love JWfacts. The GB may try to cover their past but it's there.
I got baptised at 14. I'm now 60. I never felt that my allegiance was with an organisation and if anyone had suggested that to me back then I would have run a mile. Well maybe not when I was 14 because I didn't know what I was doing... I only wanted to serve God and follow Jesus... And please my parents.
I suppose it took me 40 years to realise what I was involved in. Ah well, knowledge is power, and I've got my running shoes on now!Reply by Christian on 2018-02-12 04:56:04
Thank you Martha, that all feels so familiar now. I would be unable to be baptized as a JW now as I could see no place for the mention of a man-made organization in my dedication vows to Jehovah.
Comment by wild olive on 2018-02-11 19:32:07
Thanks for a great critique Tadua.
It's true that the grown ups in the org don't even grasp the implications of the "new" vows, that of course is by design. I wonder how many would take those vows if they realised they have made a verbal contract with an American religious corporation?
Comment by Candace on 2018-02-12 03:41:32
"by taking the baptism vows as they currently stand, the child would be entering a contract with the Watchtower Organization, which if they are a minor, is surely illegal."
Thanks you so much Tadua this review has made my day! If my family could make me get baptised at 8 I am sure it would have happened but I managed to wait until 15. Well I wish I had the patience to wait another 10 years because today my answer would be a very definite 'NO'. I am so glad that the contract I made with the organisation was illegal since I was a minor at 15. The idea of being stuck in a forever contract with an organisation makes me feel like throwing up to be honest. Yep and a quick google search shows research to suggest the brain continues to mature in the 20's and even 30's.
So what kind of weird system is this where we are discourage to ask questions about what we are being taught?! Any questions about the governing body always result in the same awkward/hostile treatment. So sick of these creepy shepherding calls where brothers - random men basically, come to my place my personal space and for an hour ask me all sorts of personal questions. What is the point? My (non witness) friends show more care and empathy which is just ironic don’t you think? Don’t know whether to laugh or cry as this is getting super ridiculous. I already have the strong vibe this Sundays meeting will be like a mental asylum.Reply by Devora on 2018-02-12 09:26:25
Great,clear,irrefutable points!Thank You,Tadua. This A.M.I told my still-in but'awakening'daughter about these very points in your review here,& she agreed...progress!Thanks to all,for this site;with all God's Blessings of deep spiritual insights-plain to see-in your comments.1Cor.2:10-16. Much Love,D.
Comment by wild olive on 2018-02-13 00:50:40
I suppose Brain you have to ask yourself , what exactly is "Jehovah's spirit directed organisation" ? Since such an expression doesn't exist in the bible the only other answer is that it is the Watchtower Bible and Tract society incorporated and all it's attached corporations, which I think is around 30 or so.That would be the clearest definition of what it is . I used to ask myself when I was an elder what is the organisation? It's not the congregation, because it makes no descisions on doctrine , how money is allocated or who gets appointed etc , that's all done by "the organisation " as if it's some kind of entity that's alive, quite creepy really , and the baptism vow requires that be recognised by the candidate ( another non biblical expression).
Reply by Dajo on 2018-02-14 12:13:57
That is a good question. Not in the Bible. The "organization" and its gb are not inspired by their own admission.
Reply by Dajo on 2018-02-14 12:16:52
Good question that. Not inspired by their own admission. Term "..spirit directed org" not in the Bible.
Reply by Zeek on 2018-07-07 14:44:58
Jehovah God has always directed INDIVIDUALS by His Spirit.
But where exactly does the Bible say that an entire organization's 'visible human leadership'★ was all in complete conformity in the specifically directed program/regime/routines of worshiping God?
(★with the exception of Moses as the Mediator of the "code" uniquely prefiguring Jesus Christ as ultimate Mediator who "erased the handwritten document that consisted of decrees and was in opposition to us. He has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the torture stake."—Col2:14
…& Note also how Moses' single mistake cost him his chance to enter the Promised Land!)
~~~~
Before the org's baptismal questions, the speaker tells the baptismal candidates: ‘Your presence in this group of baptismal candidates indicates your desire to be an ORDAINED minister of the Kingdom*.’←(note the lack of specificity)↓
*1 Corinthians 4:8
'You men already have your fill, do you? You are rich already, are you? You have BEGUN→RULING→AS→KINGS* without us, have you? And I wish indeed that you had begun ruling as kings, that we also might rule with you as kings.'
(Compare 2Thes 2:1-2; 3John 9-11; Gal 1:6-12; 3:23-29; 4:9-10,16-21,31; 5:1,4,7-10,12-15,18,20,22-26; 6:2-10,13-15←substitute concept of "circumcision" with 'belonging to the org' to get the point.)
The 1st JW baptismal question is:
"On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?"
↓
So here they treat Jesus Christ as if merely a legalistic perfunctory basis for forgiveness, bypassing Jesus Mediatorship & having a personal relationship with Christ Himself, specifically dedicating (comparable to RCC's "consecration"**, which virtually puts emphasis on 'earning salvation' by prescribed works) directly to Jehovah God as if Jesus' being the Way, the Truth, the Resurrection, the Life, the Judge of the living & dead, & the Sustainer & Restorer of all things, & Gracer of Righteousness… were not for all his disciples/Christians/Witnesses but only for the elite ‘chosen-anointed JW’ so-called 'little flock'.??
** To CON•SECRATE literally means, to DEDICATE WITH-SACREDness:
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/consecrate
“NOT SELF-CONSECRATED”:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1952365#h=15
“NOT A “COVENANT BY {SELF}—SACRIFICE” {NOR by outward human works/service/laws/dictates/conformity/'proving-up-to-code':
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1952365#h=30
Hebrews 1:3
He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact representation of his very being, and he sustains all things by the word of his power. And after he had made a purification for our sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
John 14:6
Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
See also:
http://perimeno.ca/Dedication.htm
The 2nd baptismal question is:
"Do you understand that your dedication and baptism IDENTIFY you as one of “Jehovah’s Witnesses”—{INC.} in ASSOCIATION with→{i.e SUBJUGATION by} God’s spirit-directed organization→{as the 'defacto Head' of each JW}?"
And after the baptismal candidates answer "yes" to both questions, the speaker states:
'Your clear answers indicate that you are qualified for baptism as ORDAINED ministers of Jehovah God{'s visible organization}.'
So they don't even signify the point of baptism INTO Jesus name is to to HEREDITARILY BELONG Christ Himself directly as our immediate Lord & Family Head (1Co11:3) & personal Savior, & as a child of God, lead/directed immediately by Jehovah's Holy Spirit sent through Jesus Christ, not through any imperfect presumptuous 3rd-party who thinks they can get away with acting as if our mediator (or even dictator) between men & Christ & God!
↓
Matthew 23:13
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut up the Kingdom of the heavens before men; for you yourselves do not go in, neither do you permit those on their way in to go in.
Luke 11:52
“Woe to you who are versed in the Law, because you took away the key of knowledge. You yourselves did not go in, and you hinder those going in!”
Just as verbal marriage vows, answered by a verbal affirmation (usually with the words "I do", or even just "yes"), forms a verbal contract, a.k.a. "vow(s)" or oath whereby the person swears before God & men (eg. courts of law also use such verbal contracts to orally "swear in" a witness whenever they testify) to abide by the conditions which the officiant states before all who are present), so also is how the WTBTS/organization insinuates itself (as if it were the Executor & Mediator of God's Will, in-between Christ & the associates/members of their 'worldwide brotherhood') immediately into (& in place of) the sacred Christian baptismal 'ADOPTION' INTO↔('the singular family')→name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, …changing it to rather be a ceremonial ORDINATION (INDUCTION, ENJOINING) into "association" (membership) with, & virtual Spiritual-ownership to, 'God's visible spirit-directed organization'←{note the lack of specificity of "Holy Spirit"} - (under the alleged authority of the org's hierarchy and legalism, as they presume that they alone interpret what the Spirit directs, when in reality their own spirit's will evidently appears preeminent), ⚠SUPPLANTING⚠ Jehovah & Jesus & Holy Spirit (as our owners/parents, where Christ is supposed to be our direct personal Head, not the org), replacing that with baptism →INTO← the organization, in place of "→INTO← the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit".
I have heard elders describe themselves as if they're the spiritual head of their entire natural family even though one such elder was a youngest sibling who was the only elder in his larger extended (all baptized JW) family, even presuming to be his natural father's "spiritual head" just because this conceited youngest son is an "Elder"?!? Laaaadeedaaa—Such a presumptuous ego!!!!!
That's the proud elitist attitude which is nurtured by the org.
The org virtually poses as their "Big Brother" with Christ's total authority on earth to "keep" all sheep 'in line & well disciplined’ & as busy as possible (to make the org more profitable via proselytizing…) with their specifically prescribed/dictated & micromanaged works which alegedly generate "treasures in heaven" & by which 'visible' & reported & accounted-for works, members are judged 'worthy' of being rewarded by their taskmasters (& inmates) with 'approval', association, commendation, & aleged 'friendship' & 'affection'…
2 Corinthians 6:1
Working together with him, we also entreat you not to accept the Grace of God and miss its purpose.
Comment by mailman on 2018-02-17 01:30:42
Baptism should just be anchored on Matthew 28:19, 20 and other scriptural teachings. It should not be a title or something to formalize ones entry to an organization.
Let's just have one pure baptism with no allegiance to JW Organization. See how many will gladly volunteer! :)
Comment by Zeek on 2018-07-06 11:07:33
Here's some more very important points as to the meaning of the specific language of the original Greek text…
Matthew 28:19 BYI
so go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them →»INTO«← THE→{'1 DIVINE-FAMILY'}←NAME of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
↓
{Thus the more correct word "INTO" Grk: εἰς (eis*), {exegetically} implies →ADOPTION←INTO ’The Divine Family Name' which means BELONGING directly to the Father, Son & Spirit→(The Source of Life with the Father, & Son;—Ps36:9; Mt12:31; Lu12:10).
...Oh & naturally, I also find it indeed quite exquisitely & poetically ironic how shamelessly & *EISegetically the WTBTS/GB chose to deliberately oversimplify the highly significant POSSESSIVE depth of the Greek word "eis", by rendering it as only "IN" which (per their deliberate *EISegesis,→INjects their organizational-agenda bias into translation/interpretation & interpolation…, thus deliberately) has a far less intimate (& virtually bureaucratic, formal-legalistic, & distant) NON-possessive implication, which at best insinuates that the (baptismal) subject gains as if only peripheral/organizational/ administrative/legal authorization/permission/approval of/via the objective 'Name of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit', rather than the intimate BELONGING to, & being ADOPTED-AS-A-CHILD INTO, 'The Singular Divine Family ‘Name’', which 'eis' most certainly & absolutely denotes:
↓
“...literally, "motion into which" implying→PENETRATION←("unto," →"UNION"←)”
↓
http://biblehub.com/greek/1519.htm
Galatians 3:26-28
26 You are →ALL←, IN→FACT,→SONS←OF→GOD through→your→Faith← in→Christ Jesus.
27 For →ALL← of you who were →BAPTIZED←INTO←Christ have →PUT→ON→Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female, for you are ALL→ONE→IN→UNION←WITH→ CHRIST JESUS.
1 Corinthians 3:23
in turn YOU/WE→BELONG→to→Christ; Christ, in turn, belongs to God
John 1:12
However, to →ALL← who did receive/accept/look-to him, he GAVE AUTHORITY TO BECOME GOD’S→CHILDREN←, →BECAUSE← they were EXERCISING→FAITH← in his name.
Romans 8:14
For →ALL← who are LED→by→GOD’S→SPIRIT, THESE→are→GOD’S→SONS←.
John 14:20
In that day you will know that I am in union with my Father and YOU→ARE→IN→UNION←WITH→ME and I AM IN→UNION←WITH→YOU.
Hosea 1:10
“And the number of the →SONS←OF→ISRAEL must become like the grains of the sand of the sea that CANNOT BE MEASURED OR NUMBERED. And it must occur that in the place in which it used to be said to them, ‘you men are not my people,’ it will be said to them, ‘The →SONS←OF→THE→LIVING→GOD.’”
…& Why should anyone apparently EISEGETICALLY PRESUME to claim (as does the WTBTS) that any particular of the 9 Happinesses ('Beatitudes') would only apply to certain so-called & alegedly mutually-exclusive "classes" of Christians with supposedly 'different destinies' (like the WTBTS' apparent claim that Mt 5:3,8-12 apply only to tiny minority with 'heavenly hope', whilst 5:5 allegedly only applies to a so-called 'great crowd of other sheep' who stay on earth?
Rather, was not Jesus addressing & applying Mt 5:3-12... to ALL his disciples equally as 1, ALL having the same identical hope & prospects of each of those '9 Happinesses', right up to the end of His future Parousia?
↓
Matthew 5:3,5,8-12
3 “Happy are those conscious of their spiritual need, since the KINGDOM OF THE HEAVENS →BELONGS← to them.
...
5 “Happy are the mild-tempered/meek/gentle, since THEY WILL →INHERIT←THE→EARTH.
... (vs 4,6,7 obviously apply to every disciple also}
8 “Happy are the pure in heart, since THEY→WILL→SEE←GOD.
9 “Happy are the peacemakers, since they will be CALLED→SONS←OF→GOD.
10 “Happy are those who have been persecuted for righteousness’ sake, since the KINGDOM OF THE HEAVENS →BELONGS← TO THEM.
11 “Happy are you when people reproach you and persecute you and lyingly say every sort of wicked thing against you for my sake.
12 Rejoice and be overjoyed, since YOUR REWARD IS GREAT IN→THE→HEAVENS, for in that way they persecuted the prophets prior to you.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2018-07-06 11:25:31
Welcome Zeek, and thank you for sharing this important insight.
Reply by Zeek on 2018-07-07 01:39:19
Thanks, …& my pleasure!
Further related points @
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/galatians/3-27.htm
Galatians 3:27
For all of you who were baptized INTO Christ have put on Christ.
"... Baptized into Christ.
—To be baptised “into Christ” is something more than merely “to be baptised in the name of Christ.” It implies the contracting of a very close and intimate relation, the nature of which is expressed in the phrase which follows.
"Have put on Christ.
—The metaphor has been thought to be taken from the putting on of the white baptismal robes. It is, however, commonly used in the LXX., where it means “to adopt” or “cake to oneself.” The Christian, at his baptism, thus “took to himself” Christ, and sought to grow into full unison and union with Him.
...
"In consequence of your believing in him with your heart unto righteousness, and have thereby testified and professed your faith in him; have put on Christ — Have received him as your righteousness and sanctification; have obtained union with him, and in consequence thereof a conformity to him; have in you the mind which was in him, and walk as he walked.
..."
I hope to see a new article which includes as many of these insights (& the aforementioned) as possible.
:-)