New Light on Beards

[Srecko Sostar]

Whether the picture is fake or not, I don't know.

But be that as it may, religious leaders are expected to set a proper example for their followers by their own actions. Have your beard, which you personally, as a member of GB, banned for decades. And now you still allow it. Have a beard.

lol

[BTK59]

54 minutes ago, Anna said:

I'm afraid you are wrong. This IS real. Well, not this picture. The picture I posted is real.

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!

[Anna]

17 minutes ago, BTK59 said:

It cannot be considered a fact until it is witnessed by someone other than apostates.

The picture was posted on JW.Talk. (not an apostate website) It was taken by a sister attending the SKE, and has been confirmed true.

Why do you find it so hard to believe one of the GB would grow a beard?

[BTK59]

47 minutes ago, Anna said:

The picture was posted on JW.Talk. (not an apostate website) It was taken by a sister attending the SKE, and has been confirmed true.

Why do you find it so hard to believe one of the GB would grow a beard?

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. 

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, BTK59 said:

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!

Oh, yeah. Put me in the lineup. Great use of time, that will be.  

[BTK59]

18 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Oh, yeah. Put me in the lineup. Great use of time, that will be.

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.

[Pudgy]

If your assertions are provably correct, and not based on irrational hatred, malice and neurotic insecurity, it’s IMPOSSIBLE for someone to dismantle you emotionally. 

When they attack, it’s just another “day at the office”, playing Whack-A-Mole during coffee breaks in the lunchroom.

 

BUT, if you cannot PROVE what you are asserting, because objectively it is not in actual fact true …. WITH SPECIFICS …. intellectual Whack-A-Mole will bite you where the sun don’t shine.

[Pudgy]

Combined with GB Update No. 2023-8, and the fact that I have no “fur” in the game, my best guess is that this is 100% TRUE.

[BTK59]

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?

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, BTK59 said:

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?

 

I’m on it.

(please be patient)

[Pudgy]

4 hours ago, BTK59 said:

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?

No, I have no challenge at all. 

I am the one who assumes it’s 100% true. AND I’m not asking anyone else to….

AND it’s only a best guess, anyway ….

You are the one who will disbelieve every photo until you see him in person.

….. forgot about that?

[xero]

9 hours ago, BTK59 said:

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.

Why would anyone have a conversation or even respond to a lane-change request for someone like that?