BTK59

Proof, evidence of this is all those "JW kids" who left WTJWorg years or even decades later.

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.

This is the underlying principle of what everyone here knows and remembers …  and the REASON for objections to minor child baptisms …except of course Wally McNasty and his up and down voting clone sock puppets.
But then again, that is what WDS IS.

Regardless of anything else that may or may not be true, the 2001 and 2012 Watchtowers offers much  sound advice. (… entirely from memory, but it made sense at the time…)
The fact that it is CONFLICTING advice is the sticking point!
And … the issue of massive collateral damage for a premature decision made by an 8 year old, etc. is never mentioned in baptism recruiting efforts.
At what age do you think a child is mature enough to give others the legal right to destroy him or her, and their family relationships, perhaps ten years later?
There was a valid reason why Jesus was not baptized at age 12.

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.

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.

…
 

…
Harsh, but fair.
They did say specifically in Governing Body Update 2023-8 that the example they used for guidance was powerful and respected mens’ customs of the world.
( rolls eyes and facepalms forehead )
The only thing I can imagine is that at their weekly meeting on Wednesday sometime in December an Angel with a flaming sword appeared and “read them the riot act” … or their accountants told them they were bankrupt.
Or possibly some Multi-Billionaire with a Beard was recently baptized.
…. merely guesses.
The Warren Commission Report on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was issued on September 24, 1964.
Before I die, I would like to read a non-fiction version.

…. Ol’ Whack-A-Mole George likes to “move the goalposts” and try to get you to run to it.
His favorite tactic, designed to obfuscate and deceive, is to change the parameters of what is being discussed, redefine the terms, and try to get you to answer a dozen almost relevant questions that would each take an Epistle essay to straighten out from his revised false premises.
So transparent it’s laughable … and I do.

I think the issue of underage baptism needs to be evaluated the same way other decisions are made by minors …. and since a Baptism Covenant and dedication between a person and God CANNOT BE UNDONE … except by God … it should be made with that foremost in mind.
This is a Covenant Of Dedication, allegiance and fealty to God and his Christ ….
ONLY!
1.) At what age should a lesser decision be made by a minor about getting married? I say at least 18, and for about 1/4 of the population 24 to 30.
2.) At what age should a lesser decision be made by a minor about getting a driver’s license? I say at least 18, if they can pass the exams.
3.) At what age should a male or female decide that they want to be surgically mutilated, by circumcision or “transgender” reassignment? I say at least 30.
4) At what age should a man or woman be allowed to take up recreational parachuting? I say at least 18.
5. At what age should a person be allowed to join a military organization? I say at least 18, preferably 24.
6.) At what age should a person be allowed to consume alcohol, or other recreational drugs? I say 18 as a minimum.
7.) Since the JW baptism oath of today legally binds you to obey the policys and directives of the “Organization”, under pain of being disfellowshipped, and exiled, and shunned, and the same to every JW that knows you that does not do the same, at what age should a young person be baptized? I say 18, the same as any secular military organization.
In scripture ONLY men and women were baptized. Jesus was Bar-Mitzpah’d at age 12, presumably, but waited to be baptized until he was 30.
Why?
A person, boy or girl, should not make a decision at age 8, 10, 12 or before age 18 that has the potential to later HAVE OTHERS DESTROY THEIR AND THEIR FAMILIES’ LIVES.
These conclusions are only my personal opinions, but they have a rational basis.
Like circumcision, male or female … baptism cannot be undone.
If the Society would allow shunning to be a personal decision of each individual in the Congregation, and release all the hostages from their oath of fealty and obedience to the WTB&TS “Organization”, so they cannot be sued because they are members of a private legal covenant … I would withdraw my objection to an 8 year old being baptized.
For a change …. let God decide.
The Baptism Covenant should be between individual people and God and Christ ONLY.
Earthly accountants, lawyers, and overreaching tyrants who promise to rule well, BUT INTEND TO RULE ANYWAY, should not be involved.
It took them 80+ YEARS to figure out beards!

@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?

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.

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.

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.

Your perspective is simply incorrect. In the past, this might not have been a topic of conversation, but times have changed. The way people perceive a respectable appearance has evolved from being an issue to being a norm. Is it fair to solely blame the worldview for this shift?
Your choice of the word, "tranny," to describe the agreement between fellow believers seems rather inappropriate. However, it is important to note that the Watchtower takes the matter of global trends and styles very seriously. When Jehovah's Witnesses present themselves to the public, they do so as representatives of God. I'm curious, are you suggesting that God is a tyrant?   The decision by the GB most likely stems from the need for a level playing field, as other countries do not have a problem with beards. It may have become an issue when witnesses noticed different cultures sporting beards at international assemblies. Now that the playing field is level, why should anyone care?

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!

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!

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

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

Jehovah created man to have pubic hair, oh what a controversy there should arise if a sect/cult should require it's members to shave all pubic hair, but must grow a full beard, even if genetics won't allow them to do so.
 

Starting a discussion on how Christmas is evil and pagan, how the star was the hit man on Jesus from satan, All the crazy stuff jw's and you dogs of the jws view christmas as a demonic satanic pagan holiday. I predict this discussion going in hundreds of different directions. 
I just go to this while I'm on work break as I have better things to do in my personal time, when I'm not at work. Guess it's a personal satisfaction when jw's try to classify christmas celebrations as reasons why Jehovah is going to kill them.
Maybe I should ask the question......why is Jehovah going to kill everyone who partakes in celebrating the birth of salvation? Or more simply, why is Jehovah going to kill everyone who doesnt celebrate the birth of the governing body?
Jehovah seems to want to kill everyone, isn't there anyone to talk him out of it? Maybe the govering body?

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.