Pudgy

Stockholm syndrome is a psychological response where hostages or victims develop positive feelings, empathy, or even loyalty toward their captors or abusers.
It often occurs in situations of intense fear, isolation, and perceived threat to one's life. The term originated from a 1973 bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, where hostages developed a bond with the perpetrators. Even loyalty.
The syndrome involves a complex interplay of psychological mechanisms, including identification with the aggressor, survival instincts, and a coping strategy to endure the traumatic experience. Victims may rationalize their captor's behavior, empathize with them, and form a sense of dependency.

As usual, Georgie, as always you have missed the point.
I am sure everyone who comes here fully understands the symbolism …
…. but many hate how it has neen consintamtly been misapplied as a tool to manipulate the Brotherhood, to maintain ecclestical power to keep the money waterfall flowing.
Remember it was Aaron that misrepresented Jehovah by making the Golden Calf,  declaring
“This is Jehovah your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt!”.
He convinced the Jews to contribute tons of gold to the project.
Someone should have searched his tent.
There is a reason that above the circuit or district level there is ZERO accountability for contributed funds to the Brotherhood.
I have carefully considered your agenda driven perspective, and what I see is a classic case of Stockholm Syndrome.

I think the point everyone is forgetting, and that we can IGNORE the drivel of who is right and who is wrong about 1914, 1975 and the dozens of other issues that have no credibility whatsoever.  The price is high and the scars are painful and permanent and the casualty rate is high …. but it CAN BE DONE! 
If 85% of what you believe and act on is 85% drivel, the Core Truth is still valid, and that is enough to demonstrate fealty and allegiance to Jehovah God. 
We may even slay or cripple each other, and fall in the battle but  defending or castigating “1914” has NOTHING to do with becoming a close friend of God and Christ.
In the “Big Picture” only the 15% Core Truths are important.
Who pees in their pants in a game of chicken over “1914” or “1975” is only a distraction that subverts the righteous away from concentrating on the mission.
If we fall under a hail of unrelenting stupidity … guess what?
….. we get a “Do Over”!
 

I think the point everyone is forgetting, and that we can IGNORE the drivel of who is right and who is wrong about 1914, 1975 and the dozens of other issues that have no credibility whatsoever.  The price is high and the scars are painful and permanent and the casualty rate is high …. but it CAN BE DONE! 
If 85% of what you believe and act on is 85% drivel, the Core Truth is still valid, and that is enough to demonstrate fealty and allegiance to Jehovah God. 
We may even slay or cripple each other, and fall in the battle but  defending or castigating “1914” has NOTHING to do with becoming a close friend of God and Christ.
In the “Big Picture” only the 15% Core Truths are important.
Who pees in their pants in a game of chicken over “1914” or “1975” is only a distraction that subverts the righteous away from concentrating on the mission.
If we fall under a hail of unrelenting stupidity … guess what?
….. we get a “Do Over”!
 

Says who? 
The veracity of it will not be evident for decades to come. ‘Generation’ can even be stretched further by saying it means ‘era.’
Meantime, those too intent on proving themselves right over this matter tend to miss entirely the greater world’s astonishingly rapid plunge. They effectively join the ranks of ridiculers with their, ‘Where is this promised presence of his?
If the GB simply holds the line on 1914, it becomes a game of chicken with those plotting their downfall. It becomes the movie ending of all movie endings of the Greatest Action Flik of All Time. Let us see who pees their pants first.
   

this is too.

This is very perceptive, very applicable.

The thing is, that one thing I go back to, is not so much that the humans behind the organization have been brilliant, or their ideas were literally from Jehovah's mouth to their ears (or even what was imagined w/regard to those who imagine themselves to be anointed) is this: Jehovah uses organizations to accomplish his will and purposes. With all it's defects this particular organization has highlighted and stuck to many important fundamental points. No Trinity, no hellfire, the kingdom is a government, Jesus is the king of that government, the need to personally get on board with preaching personally. It was the only one annoying enough to get my attention back when I was an unhappy atheist. "1914? Are you kidding me? That's pretty specific. How did you get that?" It little matters to me now that certain things I'd expected didn't take place as I'd expected, or even as I was led to believe. The people I was introduced to were really different and different because THEY believed what they were saying. There was a personal cost to the individual to become one of Jehovah's Witnesses. One can't say that about most nominally Christian organizations. Disfellowshipping, as painful as it is and has been is a critical factor as well, though I disagree with it's use as a tool to silence those drawing attention to perceived or real failings. In the end it is and has served in my view, Jehovah's purposes, though I'll admit to believing that it is not the only one in history or even today to be doing so. I think of the dragnet illustration,and the organizations admission to be part of that dragnet, and I  believe that this is so, and though I couldn't attach myself to any other organization I still feel that it's up to each individual to work out his own salvation with fear and trembling (all the while I can't admit to so much trembling any more at this stage of my life, recognizing that I'm about as good as I can get right now and that's not so great either, so as the saying goes "so sue me" and "you can't get blood out of a turnip" if someone wants any more out of me. I trust Jehovah will deal with me justly (whatever that might be) and I'm OK with that). If a person feels that some other organization would better suit their spiritual growth, then they have the personal responsibility to go with them. I won't curse them if they choose to go even if that wouldn't be my choice.

What comes to mind as I ramble is "Greetings!  Consider it all joy, my brothers, when you meet with various trials, 3 knowing as you do that this tested quality of your faith produces endurance. But let endurance complete its work, so that you may be complete and sound in all respects, not lacking in anything..." James 1:2
People and organizations are like art. There's a proper viewing distance. Sometimes I see trees, sometimes I see the forest. Sometimes I see defects, and sometimes I see these as an opportunity.

In all this I look for Jehovah and to him and the guidance of his Son, and not to the humans who may or may not be moving in harmony with the Holy Spirit.
For some reason that also reminds me of this clip from "Enter the Dragon"
"Don't concentrate on the finger"

Is it possible, Georgie, that you you and your transparent up and down voting sock puppet that AI  is an acronym for “Applied Ignorance”? 
It’s clear your TDS has evolved to include WDS … “… the sword that cuts both ways …”.
I should ask ChatGBT … it’s only wrong 55% of the time.
 
                                                                ↘️
                                                                      ↘️
                                                                           ↘️

I think the current GB realizes it has a compilation of messes on its hands that can only accrue problematically. It's trying to dig itself out. But the fear is the pile is too deep. Ultimately the 1914 thing will implode on itself. Just a matter of time. Ultimately the blood policy will implode on itself. Just a matter of time. I think the society is looking for an exit ramp. Too many problems, too many informational sources. It'll only snowball.

Stockholm syndrome is a psychological response where hostages or victims develop positive feelings, empathy, or even loyalty toward their captors or abusers.
It often occurs in situations of intense fear, isolation, and perceived threat to one's life. The term originated from a 1973 bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, where hostages developed a bond with the perpetrators. Even loyalty.
The syndrome involves a complex interplay of psychological mechanisms, including identification with the aggressor, survival instincts, and a coping strategy to endure the traumatic experience. Victims may rationalize their captor's behavior, empathize with them, and form a sense of dependency.

As usual, Georgie, as always you have missed the point.
I am sure everyone who comes here fully understands the symbolism …
…. but many hate how it has neen consintamtly been misapplied as a tool to manipulate the Brotherhood, to maintain ecclestical power to keep the money waterfall flowing.
Remember it was Aaron that misrepresented Jehovah by making the Golden Calf,  declaring
“This is Jehovah your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt!”.
He convinced the Jews to contribute tons of gold to the project.
Someone should have searched his tent.
There is a reason that above the circuit or district level there is ZERO accountability for contributed funds to the Brotherhood.
I have carefully considered your agenda driven perspective, and what I see is a classic case of Stockholm Syndrome.

You sure you weren't a stand-in for one of Jobs' comforters?

There are several codified “Cowboy Codes” which  I also use for guidance. 
One item states “You should feed your animals before you feed yourself …”.
A really good idea, but to imply it is a command from God is BOGUS.

Lett also stated that we should not judge anyone on any subject about which the Bible is silent.
I fully agree with that, but people have their own standards about every conceivable subject and do judge others accordingly. 
I may judge someone for any reason I want … that is what Adults should do. The Universe will “determine” if that is good or bad, automatically.
If I ride a motorcycle or skydive, or choose to carry weapons, as the Apostles did, is not a theocratic issue.
Tyranny is when you think it is, and have the power to enforce it using Congregational Authority attributed to God, or beat scripture to fit whims of lunacy.
 

Stockholm syndrome is a psychological response where hostages or victims develop positive feelings, empathy, or even loyalty toward their captors or abusers.
It often occurs in situations of intense fear, isolation, and perceived threat to one's life. The term originated from a 1973 bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, where hostages developed a bond with the perpetrators. Even loyalty.
The syndrome involves a complex interplay of psychological mechanisms, including identification with the aggressor, survival instincts, and a coping strategy to endure the traumatic experience. Victims may rationalize their captor's behavior, empathize with them, and form a sense of dependency.

My speculations are optional. They can become effective if you take them seriously. But it is mostly an option of one's free choice.
In contrast, speculations coming from GB are dangerous at the start. To forbid the wearing of beards in Rutherford's time was nothing more than distancing, by those who caused the schism, to break any resemblance to Russell.
Later, the leadership of WTJWorg found excuses for the ban in the appearance of some "worldly" people who participated in various social movements of the society. They claimed that wearing a certain model of hairstyles and external appearance of the face (beard in men in this case) should be avoided because this way JW can be mistakenly identified with, for example, rebels in society.
At the same time, wearing suits and ties and flawless hair and shaved face, GB has never identified with a certain number of corrupt politicians and businessmen who are dishonest. For some reason, they forgot to mention that detail when they were giving advice to their followers about their appearance.
I agree that it is nice to see neat and tidy people (with or without beard). But we don't live in a perfect world, whatever that means.
The Spiritual Slavery that reigns within JW followers requires a "clear and unequivocal answer/instruction" as to what is allowed and what is not allowed with a beard. That demand for "answers" from GB is actually a reflection of the devastating spiritual condition of the flock in so called true Christianity aka JW Church.
If so many people in WTJWorg are unable to have/achieve unity in diversity and freedom of choice over something the Bible has never questioned, then there is no "salvation" for all of you either literally or figuratively. You, JWs, are unfortunately condemned to total dependence on a few men who are not even capable of knowing right from wrong. WTJWorg cannot reform itself for the better.
I agree with @Pudgy, WTJWorg is run by accountants and lawyers.., and by religious leaders who willingly, voluntarily agree to falsehood.

Since neither have any physical bodies, and any beards are just human artist’s concepts, and neither is there any air to support flapping giant wings (… not to mention shoulder blades as big as a hippo’s … and robes with wing holes …), I like to visualize Jesus’ and the Angel’s beards being giant multi- colored light year diameter Brillo pads. 
Of course, this beggers the question, do the wings molt and the pads rust?

I suspect “Leader” back in Jesus time had a nuanced connotation quite different than the common usage of the word today. 
Everything does have to have an exact label to make precision communications possible. Like “stairs” are inside a house and “steps” are outside a house. Like the word “Leader” today is rather innocuous, but the word “Fuhrer” conjures up a mental image quite different.
For a long time Cornell University in Ithaca, NY used a completely different set of mathematical symbols for Quantum Mechanics interactions than Stanford University in California, which affected the flavor and weight of thought processes.
To avoid  being caught in semantic traps, either someone else's of one’s own it’s important to understand labels.
Thats why I have a Brother Labelmaker, and keep at least a dozen cassettes of black-on -yellow label maker tape on hand. (.. which are actually in a box in a desk drawer, not on my hand …).
The labelmaker resembles an early Radio Shack TRS-80 Model 100 tablet computer because of the keyboard and two to eight line only LCD display, so I have even labeled my labelmaker with a label that says Labelmaker and on the label of my Labelmaker I have a small label that says Label.
It’s like when you order dragonfly ice cream for the frog, and honey ice cream for the bear 
…. don’t get ‘em mixed up !

A lot of speculation there.
I think this is about unity.
I always say there is strength in numbers. It's apparent that HQ received many "complaints" (they said so) from people who were arguing the "beard issue" . The organization probably realized that in 2016 they had left the question too ambiguous and this resulted in unnecessary "divisions" in the congregations. It was basically left up to the BOE. So consequently, in the same  building the English congregation had three elders with beards, one of them the COBE, and in the hall literally across the foyer the congregation (not English) wouldn't alow a young brother to operate the microphones unless he shaved his beard off. One elder in another congregation in the same city grew a beard (his wife liked it, it suited him) but the other elders were against it. Obviously no harmony there. So he and his family moved to the English congregation where beards were allowed. In the same city. 
The message was clear: give us a black and white answer, because this policy, that it was up to the elders, was causing divisions. Over what? Over beards! So the logical conclusion was to remove any "supposed" cultural barriers which caused the beard issues and let everyone know that to beard or not to beard is ok world wide for every male and in all responsible positions. 
My only complaint was the use of the chariot and the keeping up with the heavely organization mantra which I personally feel could have been omitted because in my opinion it created the word salad and was a little confusing, and open to interpretation because it suggested what JWI said, and that didn't make much sense. It's almost like sometimes the earthly organization paints itself into a corner. Unnecessarily. 
Jehovah's heavenly organization was obviously never against beards because all the angels had them, including Jesus. 

This is what Jehovah has said: “Cursed is the able-bodied man who puts his trust in earthling man and actually makes flesh his [chariot]. - Jer. 17:5
"Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ." - Mt. 23:10
 

Sorry, it was just a new one for me. I had heard you tell of your troubles in connection with 75. I had never heard of any in connection with beards. My bad.
Score Pudgy 1 and TTH 0.
But maybe tomorrow it will not be that way.

Well, didn't GB tell you a long time ago: Don't think and conclude logically, because our instructions will not look/be logical.

It is quite possible that there are a number of men in JW congregations who wear beards. Because of this, they cannot be excluded, but they are rather "unused" for various functions within the Church. In the chronic shortage of "manpower" for "congregational positions of responsibility", it is possible that this change is aimed at this target group.
It is also possible that some who wear beards have put themselves in that position on purpose, for the reason that they do not want to be burdened with any responsibilities in the Organization.
Also, a certain number of PIMO members (physically inside, mentally outside) chose to wear a beard just to stay connected with the congregation only for free social contacts (because they are not excluded), and on the other hand, so that they cannot be held accountable because they are in the category "spiritually weak individuals".
Changes are made because the Organization is in trouble, not because God has loosened the reins of His Chariot.