BTK59

Since we are posting irrelevant subjects, I guess it means it should be essential for individuals in this community to endorse the teachings of "Pearl Doxsey" and fully embrace the truths that "witness" has long been imparting. People should understand the meaning of the word satire coming from a humor site. lol! Satire: 1.the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issuest·ire Let's revisit the question: Is Bro. Jackson's goatee real or fictional, as depicted in the Babylon Bee illustration? https://babylonbee.com/ What is The Babylon Bee? The Babylon Bee is the world’s best satire site, totally inerrant in all its truth claims. We write satire about Christian stuff, political stuff, and everyday life. The Babylon Bee was created ex nihilo on the eighth day of the creation week, exactly 6,000 years ago. We have been the premier news source through every major world event, from the Tower of Babel and the Exodus to the Reformation and the War of 1812. We focus on just the facts, leaving spin and bias to other news sites like CNN and Fox News. If you would like to complain about something on our site, take it up with God. Unlike other satire sites, everything we post is 100% verified by Snopes.com. babylonbee.com Babylon Bee | Fake News You Can Trust Babylon Bee is a website that publishes humorous and absurd articles about current events, politics, culture, and religion. The articles are often based on real or fictional sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Babylon_Bee Therefore, it is up to individual Jehovah's Witnesses to decide how they interpret and think about their beliefs. While some may believe in the literal truth of the Bible, others may view it as a symbolic or moral guide. Satire and humor can be used to critique and question religious beliefs, but it is ultimately up to each person to determine their own beliefs and principles. The question then becomes, will it be acceptable to God when humor is misplaced?

If I had the time to visit Bro Jackson I would, but I don't. @Pudgy. I couldn't care less about the circulating images, regardless of the fact that your image illustration is obviously manipulated. If you have an issue, address it with Anna, as she's the one making a fuss about it. I simply shared someone else's theory, and you all are making a mountain out of a molehill. Exactly! Tom wouldn't stand a chance with someone like that. Nobody visiting that apostate website does. It's entirely devoted to spreading hatred and malice against Watchtower.

You have quite the challenge ahead, sport. You must demonstrate why the picture being circulated shows an abundance of hair on the side of the brother's head, despite him keeping it extremely short or shaved. That is a feature of AI that can modify photos, as shown by my previous example. Regardless, it's not a big deal. If it's worth arguing about, why not have Tom or JWinsider contact the Watchtower help desk and inquire whether Bro. Jackson is indeed wearing a goatee, not a goatie?

If you are not adept at dealing with an individual who identifies as gay and harbors a deep resentment towards both their own mother and the watchtower organization for excommunicating them due to their sexual orientation, and has subsequently drastically distanced (shunned) themselves from their devoutly religious mother for more than two decades because of her preference for God over her own child, be aware that they possess a fierce capacity to dismantle you emotionally. In addition, the owner, Steve, will ban you without hesitation. Something like it's done here but quicker.

I have no interest in arguing about this. I just shared someone else's opinion that you are strongly reacting to. However, JWtalk, while being supportive of Jehovah's Witnesses, also attracts critics who post content they find on Reddit, similar to what happens here. So, when I see a member of the Governing Body with a beard at an assembly, that's when I know it's truly the truth.

While I indicated it wasn't my call, I will accept Magnum's answer. It cannot be considered a fact until it is witnessed by someone other than apostates. Although I have noticed many people embracing new styles, it is inevitable that someone will eventually go to extreme lengths to prove a point (neanderthal). In such cases, I am confident that God will intervene and ensure that everything falls into place. If you want to challenge Magnum's perspective by proving him wrong, feel free to do so at Jehovah's-Witness.com. Just be prepared for the possibility of him strongly disagreeing with you. Lol!

Indeed, this topic is widely discussed on websites that are critical of the Watchtower organization. Surprisingly, even individuals like Magnum, who strongly oppose Jehovah's Witnesses, consider this particular claim to be fabricated. Nevertheless, it is worth contemplating if this website possesses any unique credibility compared to the others.

I suppose I have acquired that unfortunate habit from you, Pudgy, as you frequently deviate from the topic with your irrelevant rants and incoherent comments. Once you offer evidence to back up your expertise rather than confusion, you will likely have something valuable to add, particularly when accompanied by your friends. Meanwhile, I see you as nothing more than a disillusioned and expelled person who seeks to lay the blame for their own mistakes solely on the Watchtower.

However, my question, "pudgy", why should I pay attention to the relentless complaints of excommunicated former members who have nothing constructive to offer except ignorance and distortions? You desire to remove the intermediary, you are that intermediary. Is it fair to blame Christ or the apostles if someone decides to stop identifying as a Christian or following Christianity because they no longer found it beneficial? Eventually, your dislike towards the organization should be justified.

Your assumption is still based on subjectivity. It may appear irrational to some individuals or to certain members, but it is crucial to acknowledge that many members here have held the belief that the Governing Body (GB) has been incorrect for numerous decades. However, do these opinions hold any validity? Absolutely not. The opinions of individual members do not hold significance in the eyes of God. What truly matters to God is when something is guided by His spirit, it will be implemented regardless of anyone's perception of its correctness or incorrectness. Therefore, the GB's misrepresented words are "so it may seem" not that it is. Are you implying that the Governing Body lives together around the clock? This is a new concept for me. When they come together, they indeed represent one body, just like the rest of the brotherhood. Spiritual Israel is a unified body with Christ, not composed of individuals. Are you suggesting that if a leader neglects their responsibilities, the entire brotherhood is deemed to have failed, including all members of the closed club? And even if any member, regardless of their number, disagrees with something, they will put aside their differences and seek clarity through prayer, regardless of the time it may take. In this context, you are referring to the Governing Body's approach through impulse. The members of the Governing Body believe in patiently waiting for the guidance of God's Holy Spirit to illuminate their hearts. Will it make a difference to those who do not comprehend? Only from a foggy looking glass.

Once again, this is your subjective evaluation and not a rational one at that. If the Governing Body makes a personal mistake, it would be a result of an individual decision. That decision would NOT be influenced by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, you are misunderstanding the perspectives. How can the Watchtower be blamed if a 66-year-old man chooses to distribute child porn? So, if someone defends a predator, while advocating for child sexual abuse prevention, wouldn't that person be a hypocrite? Justifying such actions with the use of callous reasoning about child sexual abuse shifts the blame to the wrong party. When does a church leader intervene in order to expose the 66-year-old man and the defender as hypocrites under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? At times, God employs external means to confront those who have pledged loyalty but have dishonored him through disgraceful behavior in private. You are repeating the actions of the Pharisees who targeted Jesus, searching for flaws until they fabricated one. Their hypocrisy ultimately led to the demise of Jesus. Consequently, those who refuse to comprehend the bible and instead blame others are essentially crucifying Jesus anew. Hebrews 6:6 What was the objective of the previous thread? MATURITY!

Mistakes in life are often a result of personal choices, which are distinct from errors in church policies and completely different from going against God's teachings. As always, former members provide a contradictory illustration to provoke.

Did you manage to accomplish everything on your own without guidance from your parents, teachers, or schools? Furthermore, have you chosen to obey your government's legislation yourself, or were you taught about those laws? How can you personally guarantee someone else's actions? Do you have psychic abilities or supernatural powers to predict the future? Could you have anticipated that a 66-year-old man who was baptized would later commit child abuse? Bear in mind that there are various forms of child abuse.

Does the Watchtower publication suggest that a young person should be compelled to be baptized, using demands, coercion, obligation, or even torture? If a young individual truly feels in their heart that they want to devote their lives to God, then who should intervene if they have the freedom to choose? It's an utterly ridiculous idea, if you ask me about a middle man. It is important to allow individuals to make their own decisions regarding matters of faith, especially when it comes to such personal and significant commitments as baptism. Imposing or coercing such a decision goes against the principles of free will and personal conviction.

I find it truly remarkable that the notion of "spiritual maturity" is not readily grasped as a nourishing aspect, compared to solid food, when using the illustration of "milk". I don't understand why someone would ask such a question, especially if they were a witness. The evidence of Paul's words to Galatia, which has been a subject of debate here, escapes me in regard to this matter. This principle is applicable to the situation where individuals who were once spiritually strong have become influenced by worldly ideals. This is illustrated in Galatians 3:1-3 and 6:8. *** w22 August p. 2 Young Ones—Continue to Make Progress After Baptism*** It warms the hearts of all servants of Jehovah when young ones get baptized. Of course, after baptism, new disciples must continue to make spiritual progress. For the benefit of all in the congregation, this article will focus on ways that recently baptized young Christians can continue to grow toward Christian maturity. Every Witness should be familiar with and grasp the concept of spiritual maturity, especially when it is referenced in the Watchtower publications and is a common theme among theology. Some Christian sects incorporate it into their publicans and bible. Matthew 19:21 Amplified Bible 21 Jesus answered him, “If you wish to be perfect [that is, have the spiritual maturity that accompanies godly character with no moral or ethical deficiencies], go and sell what you have and give [the money] to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me [becoming My disciple, believing and trusting in Me and walking the same path of life that I walk].” He Shamed Them (2 Cor. 12:11-21) He Encouraged Them (2 Co 13:9-14) To begin with, Paul encouraged the Corinthians by his personal prayers on their behalf (2 Co 13:9). The word translated "wish" in the King James Version carries the meaning of "pray." Paul prayed for their Perfection, which does not mean absolute sinless perfection, but "spiritual maturity." The word is part of a word family in the Greek that means "to be fitted out to be equipped." As a medical term, it means "to set a broken bone, to adjust a twisted limb." It also means "to outfit a ship for a voyage" and "to equip an army for battle." In Mt 4:21, it is translated "mending nets." No matter how you choose to present your argument about the concept of "spiritual maturity," ultimately, it all comes down to the process of spiritual growth.

The persistent irrational thoughts still focus on personal failure instead of understanding the true meaning of baptism. This disconnect leads to an immature approach in two different scenarios. Scripture does not provide any evidence as to why a young person with scriptural maturity should not be baptized. On the contrary, it is clear that a young person's ability to comprehend and display maturity in their thinking and actions should be acknowledged. It is the older generation, who should know better, that disregards scripture and exposes themselves to negative influences by complaining and using illogical arguments to discredit the younger generation. This serves as evidence for the older generation to support and comply with the youth, rather than being complicit in hindering their growth. Romans 6:1-4 NIV Dead to Sin, Alive in Christ 6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. Hence, those who are unaware of the teachings of the Bible persist in spreading an erroneous message regarding sin. It is important to note that one's child cannot undo the transgressions committed by their father. It's possible that Jesus could have been baptized at the age of 12, but his true mission on earth did not begin until he commenced his ministry. While people may have listened to Jesus at a younger age, it was as adults that they truly became "followers" of Christ. This offers two distinct perspectives to consider.

It appears that the only one playing games here is pudgy and his group of followers. Instead of evading discussions about your dishonest statements and diverting attention with nonsense, face the questions. The evidence indicates that a 10-year-old displays more spiritual maturity than an uneducated 76-year-old. Who granted these individuals the power to determine who possesses enough spiritual maturity to comprehend their oath before God, especially when someone who took that oath became apostate even before being dismissed for an egregious act against children? Imagine defending someone accused of child sexual abuse while using a sock puppet to do so. It's like playing Whack-A-Mole with the truth, and the consequences are nothing short of insane.

@Pudgy, let's address the straightforward question in paragraph 7. The Watchtower brings up the point that not all children possess the capacity to discern when an adult is deceiving them. Undeniably, this statement holds true. How does that particular point relate to the development of spiritual maturity? 7. (a) Why may a devious abuser find it easy to fool a child, and how might the abuser do so? (b) What may be the results of such lies? How can a young age baptism possibly be linked to a predatory mindset? Is it plausible for a 66-year-old to distribute child pornography while at the same time embracing baptized grandchildren? These two scenarios are not correlated. Are you implying that a baptized 15-year-old should be immune to danger while a baptized 30-year-old woman is not? How would that 15-year-old spiritually mature girl know a 66-year-old male is involved with child porn when a 30-year-old doesn't? If you're going to critique any writing, it should be done universally and not just targeted at a specific organization that you have a dislike for. The sword of criticism should be wielded impartially. First, it needs to make sense. The actions individuals take in private are unrelated to the foresight or spirituality of others. However, they do highlight the potential risks that children may encounter, emphasizing the importance for parents to educate their children about these dangers. This responsibility is no different from that of any spiritual leader who should guide their followers according to Christ's teachings. It is essential to note that baptism does not shield anyone from exposure to such risks, nor does it guarantee anyone's safety. That is the distortion of Srecko's post, refute it if you can.

Since it seems that (Pudgy) is once again starting the year by defending apostate views, just as he has been doing for about a decade now, I wonder what the difference is when statements in quotes are manipulated to misrepresent the facts. What sets "danger" apart from "spiritual maturity"? What is it about ex-witness Srecko post that escapes your understanding? Pudgy, please enlighten us: which path would you suggest Christian children should follow while navigating this harsh world? It is high time you took responsibility for your conduct. Do you believe that parents have no responsibility in ensuring their children are raised properly? Shouldn't parents educate their children about the dangers of the world? Shouldn't spiritual leaders guide Christian children to obey God, instead of leaving it solely to parents? This goes against Jesus's instructions and guidance. What wisdom do you aim to impart?

This seems to be relevant only to people who are spiritually immature and believe they are above God's laws. I don't think former witnesses have the authority to dictate God's commands for this point to be considered by true witnesses. If you can demonstrate that the rule suggested by the GB was truly exclusive to them and not a mere attempt to prioritize appearance on a global scale, then your perspective will become coherent.

Now they understand. Hopefully, witnesses will no longer raise uninformed questions about the discrepancies with other countries. International assemblies host many foreigners who are exposed to diverse cultures and their acceptance. Either way, it's just one person's opinion. Among the mixture of Jews, there were also Romans who kept themselves impeccably groomed, with no trace of facial hair. It is worth noting that not everyone can pull off a beard, especially if it grows unevenly or appears unkempt. Maintaining a polished and presentable appearance is crucial for portraying oneself as a responsible individual; this is the image that should be prioritized. You've contradicted yourself, but I'll acknowledge the importance of appearing respectable throughout the generations. What was once considered unseemly in the past is now acceptable in the present. If you comprehend the concept, that's great. If not, it's our responsibility to make it understandable. Matthew 6:16-18 New International Version Fasting 16 “When you fast, do not look somber as the hypocrites do, for they disfigure their faces to show others they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 17 But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, 18 so that it will not be obvious to others that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who is unseen; and your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

Thank you for once again confirming my point. Is the individual you're attempting to equate me with more offensive than you and your alias Matthew? Perhaps we should refer to you as "pudgy mcnasty"? Interesting!

And yet you're here!

Thank you for proving my point that people here tolerate nastiness from everyone except a selected group.

Do you believe that everyone in Jesus's time, including the apostles, had beards? This idea seems irrational. The power of the Holy Spirit rests solely with God, who grants it. Neither the Elders nor the Governing Body have the power to bestow the Holy Spirit upon anyone. Any belief otherwise is mistaken. Therefore, this cynical view is flawed.