[From ws8/16 p. 13 for October 3-9]
“Each one of you must love his wife as he does himself; . . .
the wife should have deep respect for her husband.”—Eph. 5:33
The theme text of Ephesians 5:33 is one of the hidden gems of wisdom to be found in God’s word. I say hidden, because at first glance it might be viewed as an example of a male-dominated societal mentality that demands respect for the man from the woman, without requiring the same in return.
However, both the man and the woman were made in the image of God, and Jehovah does not put down those who are fashioned after him. He loves them. Even in our flawed, sinful state, He still loves us and wants the best for us. Nevertheless, though each sex is made in God's image, each is different, and it is that difference which is addressed at Ephesians 5:33.
There it counsels the man to love his wife as he does himself. Yet it gives no such counsel to the women, so it would seem. Instead, it requires deep respect from her. While seemingly different, we will see that actually God is giving the same counsel to each sex.
First, why does the man get this counsel?
How often have you heard a man say, “My wife never says she loves me anymore”? This isn’t the type of complaint one expects to hear from a man. On the other hand, women appreciate regular demonstrations of a husband's continuing affection for them. Thus, while we might find the idea of a man giving his wife a bouquet of flowers as romantic, the reverse will seem odd to us. A man may love his wife, but he needs to demonstrate it regularly by words and deeds that let her know he is thinking of her, that he is considering her wants and needs.
I am speaking in generalities, I know, but they are garnered from a lifetime of experience and observation. Generally speaking women are more mindful of the needs of their man than the reverse. Therefore, if asked, most will say that they do already love their husband as they do themselves. Ah, but are they communicating that love to him in a way he understands?
This has much to do with the way men perceive love, not just from a woman, but from anyone. In most societies, there can be no greater insult than for one man to disrespect another. A woman can tell her husband she loves him, but if she shows him respect in some way, that action will speak louder to the male ear than a dozen words of devotion.
For example, say a wife comes home to find her mate working away under the kitchen sink. What she should say is, “I see you’re fixing that leak. You're so handy. Thank you so much.” What she shouldn’t say, with a tremor in her voice, is, “Ah, honey, do you think maybe we should just call a plumber?”
So the counsel of Ephesians 5:33 is even-handed. It is saying the same thing to both sexes, but in a way that addresses the differences and needs of each. This is the wisdom of God.
Paragraph 13 demonstrates a common Watchtower method for converting opinion into doctrine. It states in the paragraph that “some have viewed” such things as “willful non-support, extreme physical abuse, and absolute endangerment of one’s spiritual life” as “exceptional situations” which give reason for separation. Yet, the question asks: “What are valid reasons for separation?” The “some have viewed” is removed from the equation and the audience members are expected to give “valid reasons” for separation. So the publishers appear to be merely expressing an opinion, one that is not necessarily even theirs, while simultaneously laying down the law.
This is also another example of the rampant Pharisaism of the 21st Century Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Bible doesn’t list “valid reasons” for separation. First Corinthians 7:10-17 acknowledges that marital separation may occur, but doesn't give rules to determine who may or may not separate. It leaves it up to the conscience of each one based on the principles expressed elsewhere in Scripture. No need for men to come in and say that a woman can only separate when there is “extreme physical abuse”. What constitutes extreme physical abuse in any case and who determines when the line has been crossed from moderate to severe to extreme in any case? If a husband slaps his wife around once a month, would that be considered “extreme physical abuse”? Are we telling a sister that she cannot leave her husband unless he puts her in the hospital ward?
The moment one starts to make rules, things get silly—and harmful.
A final thought on the message behind paragraph 17.
“Because we are living deep in “the last days,” we are experiencing “critical times hard to deal with.” (2 Tim. 3:1-5) Yet, keeping spiritually strong will do much to offset this world’s negative influences. “The time left is reduced,” wrote Paul. “From now on, let those who have wives be as though they had none, . . . and those making use of the world as those not using it to the full.” (1 Cor. 7:29-31) Paul was not telling married couples to neglect their marital duties. In view of the reduced time, however, they needed to give priority to spiritual matters.—Matt. 6:33.” – par 17
The graphic which accompanies this paragraph indicates what The Watchtower means when it says that married couples should “give priority to spiritual matters”. It means they should get out in the door-to-door work of preaching the good news as taught by the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Nowadays, this means featuring the colorful printed publications and on-line videos of JW.org. Additionally, any work supporting the Organization itself is seen as seeking first the Kingdom.
While preaching the good news—the actual good news as taught in the Bible—is part of our Kingdom work, it is hardly the be-all-and-end-all of it. In fact, over-emphasis on so-called “kingdom activities” has resulted in marriage break-ups when one mate devotes too much time to supporting activities which JW.org promotes as ways to please God and gain his favor. What did Jesus really mean when he gave us the counsel found at Matthew 6:33?
Let’s break down the logic advanced in paragraph 17.
First, we are told we are deep in the last days and have critical times to deal with. (Note, not "difficult", but "critical") For support, 2 Timothy 3:1-5 is cited. However, the magazine fails to include verses 6 thru 9 which show that these features of the last days appear within the Christian congregation. Indeed, they have been appearing since the first century. (Compare Romans 1:28-32.) Witnesses believe 2 Timothy has only been fulfilled since 1914, but that is not the case. Thus we need to modify our thinking. The urgency expressed in the second scripture quoted—1 Co 7:29-31—has to fit into a framework that encompasses 2,000 years of Christian history. Paul’s words to the Corinthians and to Timothy had their fulfillment in the early years of Christianity and continue to be fulfilled down to our day. So the urgency isn’t that the end is upon us, for we cannot know when the end will come. Rather, the urgency has to do with the brevity of our life span and the fact that we have to take advantage of the time we have left individually.
The NWT likes to use the phrase “critical times” rather than the more accurate “difficult times”, because it ramps the stress level up a notch. If a family member is in the hospital and the doctor says that his situation is "critical," you know that is much more serious than simply "difficult." So, if the situation in the last days is no longer just difficult, but critical, one wonders what comes after critical. Fatal?
What was Jesus really saying when he told his disciples to seek the Kingdom of God and His righteousness and not worry about accumulating wealth beyond the day’s needs? He was grooming his disciples to become kings and priests, to rule over, heal, judge and reconcile countless millions who would be resurrected to life on earth under the kingdom of God. To do so, these would have to be declared righteous by God. But that declaration doesn't come automatically. We have to maintain faith in the name of Jesus and follow in his footsteps, carrying a metaphorical cross or stake denoting our willingness to abandon all things and even suffer shame for the sake of his name. (He 12:1-3; Lu 9:23)
Unfortunately, in their desire to present a fine front to the elders by turning in a good field service report, Witnesses often forget the more important things such as caring for the weak and needy in their tribulation. Being there for one who is suffering might mean taking precious time away from the preaching work, thus not making one’s time. So the weak, needy, depressed and suffering ones are overlooked in favor of the preaching work. I have seen this occur far too often for it to be the exception to the rule. Such an attitude may present a form of Godly devotion, but it is not in fact seeking God’s righteousness, nor does it advance the true interests of God’s kingdom. (2Ti 3:5) It may advance the interests of the Organization, which in the eye of many is synonymous with the Kingdom of God, but is Jehovah such a hard taskmaster that he cares little for those who fall by the wayside just so the statistical report looks better at year end?
When Paul gave his excellent counsel to married couples, he started off by saying, “Be in subjection to one another.” (Eph 5:21) That means that we put the interests of our mate as well as our brothers and sisters in the congregation above our own. However, subjecting ourselves to artificial requirements like hourly quotas...not so much? In fact, you'll find nothing in Scripture to support the idea. It is from men.
We all do well to ponder these passages and see how they might apply in our own lives:
“. . .And this is what I continue praying, that YOUR love may abound yet more and more with accurate knowledge and full discernment; 10 that YOU may make sure of the more important things, so that YOU may be flawless and not be stumbling others up to the day of Christ, 11 and may be filled with righteous fruit, which is through Jesus Christ, to God’s glory and praise.” (Php 1:9-11)
“. . .The form of worship that is clean and undefiled from the standpoint of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself without spot from the world.” (Jas 1:27)
“. . .yes, when they came to know the undeserved kindness that was given me, James and Ceʹphas and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars, gave me and Barʹna·bas the right hand of sharing together, that we should go to the nations, but they to those who are circumcised. Only we should keep the poor in mind. This very thing I have also earnestly endeavored to do.” (Ga 2:9, 10)
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by william on 2016-10-04 14:45:29
My comment is just based on your your comment about the “last days” of 2 Timothy 3, Mileti, not the theme of your article. It is interesting to me since I mentioned the scripture in 2 or 3 letters to the WT long ago. The WT conceded that the “last days” of Acts 2:17 referred to the 1st century in the Aid Book and in the Insight Book. Do you know when WT publications first acknowledged that Acts 2:17 had reference to the first century? Ed Dunlap's tape about his expulsion from Bethel (which I think is still on Youtube) reveals that some governing body members suspected that he was guilty of false teaching (they said, “Is this new light?”) for explaining the last days of Acts 2:17 with a 1st century application. His answer was (as I remember) that they should look it up in the Aid book. But do you know if this application preceded with the Aid Book? If not, that might explain the surprise of Suiter and other prominent Witnesses who should have known that Dunlap's exegesis was already in WT literature. Since the WT teaches that we are in the “last days”, WT authors needs “last days” scriptures to make the teaching appear Biblical. The WT can't use Acts 2:17 as if it points to the 21st century, because it already conceded that it points to the first century. That concession leaves them with just 3 scriptures that actually use that expression. I copied this from jw.org:
“This and similar expressions, such as “the final part of the days,” are used in Bible prophecy to refer to the time when historical events would reach a final climax. (Eze 38:16; Da 10:14; Ac 2:17) Most notably, the Bible uses this term regarding “the last days” of the present system of things, during Jesus’ invisible presence.—2Ti 3:1; Jas 5:3; 2 Pe 3:3.”
During the 1980 purge (as reported in the 4th edition Crisis of Conscience which I found on Scribd), there was a list of 8 doctrines used for committee meetings to identify apostasy. Item 6 read:
That the “last days” began in 1914, and that when the apostle Peter (at Acts 2:17) spoke of the last days as applying from Pentecost on, he did not mean the same “last days” that Paul did (at 2 Timothy 3:1).
So the WT was jealously guarding 2 Tim. 3:1 as a proof text. Applying 2 Timothy 3:1 the same way as Acts 2:17 was a serious enough to get you disfellowshipped at that time (although the elders never went that far with me.)
My actual question to you, Mileti, or to anybody else, is did the WT use Acts 2:17 properly before the Aid Book, or was the 1st century application new with the Aid Book?
Of course the real meaning is pretty clear to any reader from context, but so is the meaning of 2 Tim. 3:1.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2016-10-04 17:09:33
Hi William,
To be honest, I don't really know what the application of Acts 2:17 was before the publication of the Aid book. Perhaps someone else could guide us to a reference.Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-10-04 22:42:00
*** w63 3/1 pp. 146-147 par. 16 The General Priesthood Today ***
16 When Peter on the day of Pentecost explained about the first outpouring of the holy spirit, he quoted the prophet Joel, saying: “‘And in the last days,’ God says, ‘I shall pour out some of my spirit upon every sort of flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy and your young men will see visions and your old men will dream dreams; and even upon my men slaves and upon my women slaves I will pour out some of my spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.’” The outpouring of the spirit in Peter’s day was only temporary and a small-scale fulfillment of that prophecy. In these last days of this old system of things, the promised, final, lasting and full-scale outpouring of the spirit has been fulfilled on Jehovah’s witnesses and not on Christendom’s Catholic and Protestant churches. The proof is that Jehovah’s witnesses not only understand and acknowledge the Biblical teaching of the general priesthood, but they are also able to practice it.—Acts 2:17, 18.
*** w52 4/15 p. 252 par. 15 Aids for Understanding Prophecy ***
Malachi 3:1 (AS) foretells that “the Lord, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple”. This had its typical fulfillment on Nisan 11, 12, A.D. 33 when Christ Jesus cleansed the literal temple at Jerusalem and drove out the money changers. (Matt. 21:12, 13; Mark 11:11-17) But Malachi’s prophecy has its complete and final fulfillment in 1918, when the Lord came to the temple for judgment.
Prophecies that have three fulfillments are said to have, first, a typical fulfillment; second, a miniature (the reality on a small scale) or partial fulfillment; and third, a complete (the reality on a full scale) or final fulfillment.
17 There is also the kind of prophecy that has sections of fulfillments in parallel. For example, the prophecy of Joel 2:28 as to the outpouring of the holy spirit has its primary or miniature fulfillment in sort of two installments. The initial part of this first fulfillment occurred at Pentecost A.D. 33, when the Jewish remnant received the gifts of the spirit. (Acts 2:16, 17) But three and one-half years later, in the fall of A.D. 36, the Gentile Cornelius and his household received an outpouring of this same spirit as a further part of this first fulfillment. (Acts 10:44) In the complete fulfillment the first installment occurred in the spring of 1919, when the spirit was poured out to set to work the anointed Christian remnant who survived the temple judgment of 1918. Then three and one-half years later, in the fall of 1922, the Ruth and Esther class of the anointed remnant began to come in and were set to work. These 1919 and 1922 events are in direct parallel to the events of A.D. 33 and 36.
What in the world is the "Ruth and Esther class", you might ask? Read on:
*** w80 2/15 p. 16 pars. 13-14 Festival Illumination ***
When Jesus said, “The harvest is a conclusion of a system of things,” about what was he talking? About the ingathering of “the sons of the kingdom,” that is to say, the spirit-begotten heirs of the heavenly kingdom. That is a spiritual anointed class, symbolized by the wheat, and their ingathering did indeed start in the spring of 1919. In course of time more were gathered in besides those heirs of the Kingdom who were scattered by World War I events. In the period from 1919 onward thousands of others took their stand for God’s established kingdom and dedicated themselves to Jehovah, got baptized, were begotten spiritually and were anointed with God’s spirit, and these were added to the ranks of the original remnant. These newly added ones were, as a class, prefigured by outstanding characters in pre-Christian Bible dramas. These illustrious characters were Ruth the Moabitess, who became the loyal companion of the Jewess Naomi, her mother-in-law, and also Queen Esther, the cousin of the Jew Mordecai, who became the prime minister of the Persian Empire under Emperor Ahasuerus, or Xerxes.
14 Both Ruth and Esther became connected with the royal line of David and with its preservation down to the first coming of Jesus, the “son of David.” (Matt. 1:1, 5; Ruth 4:18-22; Esther 4:13, 14) The gathering in of the Ruth and Esther class, along with the original anointed remnant, marks the opening of the antitypical feast of ingathering, or of booths.Reply by william on 2016-10-04 23:39:19
Thanks, AndereStimme, for your research. I don't have the time or ability to research WT publications. Your research was important to me. The '52 and '63 Watchtowers that you found help explain the surprise Grant Suiter and others expressed at Ed Dunlap when they thought he was teaching new light. They had missed the Aid Book article, which really was a change. The '63 WT you found seems to look at the last days as a 2000-year period. The WT is essentially saying that only a little of the spirit was poured out in the first century, “a temporary and small-scale fulfillment.” And the '63 WT says that the full-scale outpouring was in the “last days” 20th century. The '52 WT article you found gives a similar, 3-installment fulfillment. The WT authors, by letting their imaginations run wild, were able to assert that the “last days' of Acts 2 refers to their own time. So the WT authors used all 4 “last-days” scriptures as proof-texts before the Aid Book (or whatever year the change sneaked in). But even after they got rid of the writers of the Aid Book, the WT kept the Aid Book view of Acts 2 for some reason, and didn't revert to the installment-theory of Acts 2. I got considerably off-topic on this, but as I said before, the issue over 2 Tim. 3 is personal to me because I wrote to the WT about it 2 or 3 times. I appreciate the fact that Mileti went to the trouble to explain the contextual indications that Timothy was going to be alive during those “last days.” I don't remember the WT ever explaining the context of 2 Tim. 3, but only using it as a proof-text for the “last days” in the 20th century. Even though I asked the question for my own benefit, I think other some visitors to this web site will benefit from this.
Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-10-04 23:45:24
Hi William,
With regard to 2 Tim 3, notice the parallel in Rom 1:28-32:
Just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a disapproved mental state, to do the things not fitting. 29 And they were filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, and badness, being full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and malice, being whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, schemers of what is harmful, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, false to agreements, having no natural affection, and merciless. 32 Although these know full well the righteous decree of God—that those practicing such things are deserving of death—they not only keep on doing them but also approve of those practicing them.
Notice that, in language extremely similar to 2 Tim 3, Paul describes things already visible in his time.Reply by william on 2016-10-05 00:55:26
AndereStimme, thanks for your responses. I have believed that 2 Tim. 3 belongs exclusively to the first century since 1976 and perhaps before. My comments on this web page were long, and I was off-topic as I usually am, so I didn't clearly say what I myself thought about 2 Tim. 3. The following is part of a letter dated April 19, 1990, that I addressed to the Writing Committee in Brooklyn:…
“The expression 'last days' occurs something like 2 dozen times in Greek scripture (including the Septuagint.) It's a shame that the writer of the answer to the question on 2 Timothy 3 didn't use the concordances in the Bethel library. He would have reached a different conclusion. 2 Timothy also has a context that could have been used to place the 'last days' in time. Tragically, the context was ignored. The writer viewed 2 Timothy 3 as 'disjointed, unrelated verses, gathered together at random and appropriate for use under any circumstances to prove a point that (he) felt to be correct.' Paul told Timothy to turn away from the wicked people in the last days. So he had in mind a period in which Timothy would be alive (vs. 5.) Timothy would have to deal alone with this problem within the congregation that Paul was experienced with himself, because Paul was about to die (chapter 4.) So whatever precise time period these “last days” involved, these “last days” were not in the twentieth century.”
The passage I copied from my letter within quotation marks above might seem obscure. I was making reference to the April 1, 1973 Watchtower about contextual Bible reading.
The first letter I wrote to them about 2 Tim. 3 was in 1981, complaining about the “Question from Readers” on page 512 of the 1976 Watchtower, which asked, “Did the 'last days' that Paul described at 2 Timothy 3:1-7 have an initial fulfillment on the Jewish system of things in the first century?” I don't have a copy of that original letter, only a copy of their answer. But I probably simply referred to the context which places the fulfillment in Timothy's lifetime (in a similar manner to how Mileti referred to the context in his article).
I believe that all New Testament prophecy was fulfilled in the first century or shortly thereafter. But very few people visiting this web site have such an extreme view. I am EXPLAINING how I understand 2 Tim. 3, not propagandizing. If I had explained what I thought before, you wouldn't have had to go to the trouble of referring to Romans 1:28-32.
Thanks again.Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-10-05 15:57:19
Oh, I got your point all right. Just thought you might want another line of support, if you hadn't seen it already. The Romans correlation is one of those things I noticed decades ago and didn't follow up on it till a few years back.
Your "extreme" view makes a lot of sense, and it's on my list of things to investigate. I get the feeling I have plenty of time...Reply by william on 2016-10-05 18:54:56
Thanks. I had forgotten the passage in Romans.
Reply by william on 2016-10-11 20:05:39
I should never rely on my memory when making comments. I badly confused what I said above about Ed Dunlap's tape, but can't edit the comments. I conflated several incidents in the tape and information from another source. The issue of the “last days” is mentioned at least twice in the tape, but not the way I wrote it. Anybody interested in the facts should listen to the tape on Youtube and ignore what I wrote. Anybody interested in Acts 2:17 as related to the 1980 purge can look it up in Crisis of Conscience or Apocalypse Delayed, by M. James Penton. If you copy and paste “Recent Evidences of Wrong Teachings Being Spread About” into Google, I think you will find the list in Penton's book.
Reply by william on 2016-10-13 18:31:00
I'm pretty sure I was wrong when I thought that the WT explanation of the “last days” in Acts 2 was a new or recent teaching when it appeared in the Aid Book. I missed the point that the WT had a two-last-days theory, and therefore it didn't mind using Acts 2:17 exclusively for the 1st century. I compared the October 1, 1980, WT with the passages from the 1952 and 1963 WT's that AndereStimme gave. The 1980 WT was similar, teaching that Joel 2:28,29 was fulfilled by 2 outpourings of holy spirit, one during the last days of the Jewish system and one during the last days of the corrupt worldwide system of things, notably since 1919 (pp. 29-30). The 1980 article says that Joel 2:28,29 was not completely fulfilled in the 1st century because the heavenly portents were not fulfilled then (page 24). So paragraph 22 says: “there has to be another period of time called the 'last days' for all parts of his prophecy to be realized.” The 1980 WT uses Acts 2:17 as its last-days scripture for the last days of the Jewish system, and uses 2 Timothy 3:1 as its last-days scripture for the last days since 1914. The 1980 WT resembles the 1952 & 1963 quotations AndereStimme provided closely enough that I suspect that the WT back then spoke of 2 last-days periods. This 1980 article clearly states the two last-days periods in bold type at the bottoms of pages 22 and 23:
(1) “Last Days” of 41 years marked conclusion of 1,582 years of Jewish Age
(2) “Last Days” since 1914 climax period of more than 4, 000 years of entire world system
The purpose of this 1980 WT to reject an “apostate” last-days interpretation. Paragraph 17 on page 23 explains that third, but apostate, last-days theory: “However, some students of the Bible may argue that the “last days” embraces the entire “Christian Era,” from the day of Pentecost, when Peter quoted Joel 2:28-32, down to our own date ...”
It was interesting reading the argumentation in the article. Even though 2 Tim. 3 was used as a scripture pointing to the last-days beginning in 1914, the context was ignored, such as 2 Tim. 3:5 (“from such turn away”) and other contextual cues like Romans 1:28-32 (which is similar to 2 Timothy 3). The caption of the article was a quotation of 2 Timothy 3:1. 2 Timothy 3:1-5, 12 are cited but not quoted on page 23. Paragraph 16 on the same page says that “Timothy was not writing about the 'last days' of the Jewish system of things, the time period from 29 to 70 C.E. Paul was writing him about a period of last days future from the time of Jerusalem's destruction ...” 2 Timothy 3:1 is mentioned again in the following article on page 28: “... we see undergoing fulfillment the prophecy that the apostle Paul made about 65 C.E. and set down in 2 Timothy 3:1 ...”
Comment by amoreomeara on 2016-10-05 07:05:25
Hi Meleti,
Another great article, thanks! The comments about the last days are very interesting, I will need to relook at these in greater depth.
One thing that stood out to me was when you say "To do so, these would have to be declared righteous by God. But that declaration doesn’t come automatically."
Personally I believe that, amongst others, Romans 5:9 (Much more, then, since we have NOW been declared righteous by his blood) shows that it absolutely does come automatically, by accepting the ransom sacrifice of Jesus.
Please understand that I'm not saying that we don't need to work at our faith, or that it is impossible to lose our salvation, but I do believe that salvation is instant and applied to our life with immediate effect (ie born again), which as I understand it is the opposite of WT teaching.
:-)Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2016-10-05 09:24:09
Thanks Amoreomeara,
Thanks for bringing this up. I love it when we are forced to go deeper.
I was using "automatic" (acting of itself) to emphasize that our salvation through the declaration of righteousness isn't a fait accompli. But I take your point. We both agree that more is required.
I believe the declaration of righteousness only comes once and it results in immortal life. Thus, being made by God, it cannot be revoked. So I don't believe we are declared righteous until we have completed the test just as Jesus did.
What Paul is speaking of at Romans is a process or arrangement set in motion by Christ's death. He isn't speaking of us individually, but collectively.
“. . .But God recommends his own love to us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more, then, since we have now been declared righteous by his blood, will we be saved through him from wrath. 10 For if when we were enemies we became reconciled to God through the death of his Son, how much more we will be saved by his life, now that we have become reconciled. 11 Not only that, but we are also rejoicing in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.” (Ro 5:8-11)
How can an enemy of God, one who does not yet accept the sacrificial nature of the ransom death of Jesus be considered reconciled with God? Only the righteous can be reconciled with God, yet the enemies of God, by definition, are not righteous. Nevertheless, all making up the body of Christ were at one time enemies of God, yet the kingdom was prepared for such ones and they were chosen from the founding of the world. (Eph 1:4)
The question is, can we apply Romans 5:9 to us individually as well?
The Bible says very little about being "born again". The discussion is confined to John 3:1-8. However, this much we know. We are born of both water and spirit. So the baptism of water and spirit is what accomplishes this birth. I can determine when I am baptized in water, but only Christ can complete the process by pouring out his spirit. I was baptized at 14, but did I receive the spirit then? I cannot say, though I tend to think not.
Am I now declared righteous by God? I have put faith in the name of Jesus, so according to John 1:12, I have the authority to become a child of God. That faith gives me a title deed, as it were, to be declared righteous. (He 11:1) I believe I have a "living hope" which results from being born again ("a new birth") to an inheritance reserved for me in the heavens. (1Pe 1:3, 4) That faith, like a title deed, allows me to claim that inheritance at the time of my death (or transformation, should God will). But I can lose the deed, or I can fail to keep the conditions of that agreement, thus rendering it null and void.
I prefer not to dwell too much on the exact timing of things, partly because of all the problems "timing issues" have caused me when my faith was based in Watchtower dogma. I prefer to dwell on the hope I have and strive not to lose it.