New Light on Beards

[Pudgy]

2017 was an interesting year … in a  February 2017 issue of the Watchtower the GB ADMITTED, one time only, that they “were not inspired of God, nor infallible” (paraphrased). 

THIS was circulating at that time. 

[Pudgy]

Read carefully the following. Print it out if you have to .

What it is being admitting to is that the GB had been terribly WRONG since the time of Judge Rutherford, and persecuted the Brotherhood and exiled them and chastised them publicly and privately since then.

How many thousands, or tens of thousands of Brothers have been chased away AND had their lives ruined because they could not tolerate this irrational tyranny?

[Pudgy]

I wonder what REALLY prompted this out-of-the-blue with no indication dramatic change?

Not some esoteric contrived fantasy explanation to maintain authority ….

THE REAL REASON?

[xero]

I remember having to tell a young woman that her dreadlocks weren't in keeping with the field ministry, that it was associated with Rastafarians and all that related to the same. She wanted to get baptized and the body left it up to me to explain to her the whole thing. I was annoyed at having to deal with being the congregation fashion coordinator on two counts: 1st that people couldn't read the room and conform to somewhere in the middle and 2nd that I had to enforce something that was a personal choice people were making. I did it thinking to myself that these kinds of people would likely have argued with Moses about circumcision, when there is zero explanation in scripture as to the reasons for it being a requirement other than Jehovah saying "because I told you to". I see both sides of these things. On the one hand, it's nice to have an external sign of people who could be troublemakers, on the other hand "Really? I have to deal with beards, and other fashion concerns? Don't we have bigger fish to fry?" Then I see it all as some kind of useful social exercise. It forces me to think about the benefits and hazards of conformity, and what standards to use, and balancing the differences. When we choose to look different from those we have social bonds with, we are sending messages. There's a whole social science dealing with these "semiotics". Are we Jehovah's Christian Witnesses? Then what does that look like? How does it act? Does it look like seeking it's own personal advantage? Does it look like lording it over the brothers and sisters in telling them what to do with regard to personal matters? Nature identifies juveniles by the way that they look when they are young, vs when they become mature. What do mature people look like? Do they wear themselves out over fashion? 
I remember one elder before my appointment asking me whether I wondered why I wasn't appointed as an elder yet seeing as how I'd been a regular pioneer and servant for almost ten years then and was regularly giving talks outside the congregation. My response was "I imagined it was because Jehovah decided it wasn't the right time". I never asked, because I cared, but I didn't care either if you know what I mean, it's not like I didn't have things to do. The only things I didn't have to do looked more like the annoying things like judicial committees with people who can't take hints from the Bible about how to behave themselves. His reaction was a bit surprised, but then I could see that he needed to give me some counsel so I relented and he went on. It turned out my answers in the meeting suggested I relied on "Worldly Wisdom", my shoes weren't shiny enough and I walked funny when I went up to the podium.  So I thought to myself that I want this elder to feel good about this counseling session so I asked him to watch me at the meetings and let me know if I was slipping in these areas. I told him that when conversing w/the friends I would mention where in the Societies pubs I read whatever it was I was commenting on, so they wouldn't get the idea I was pushing some novel idea unique to me as well. He seemed pleased with my responses. My thoughts were that as an elder you can do some damage, so if I make this elder happy about giving counsel he'll do a better job with the next publisher.
 

Anyway, I'm rambling now....

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, George88 said:

If Jesus had proposed to a Rabbi, he would have likely chosen the first option: for the people to see a well-groomed person promoting respect rather than a scruffy Pharisee demanding it.

If Jesus had proposed to a rabbi?

[Pudgy]

George88; You OBVIOUSLY did not recognize that Stephen Lett gave as the reason  for the  change is that THE WORLD APPROVED.

Watch the Video.

Three times.

[Srecko Sostar]

The GB has allowed what the Bible has never forbidden. Truly unprecedented! GB's personal arbitrariness in forbidding believers to wear beards came because of the alleged alignment with the "heavenly chariot"??

Can anyone in their right mind believe this? As if to say, "The angels have started wearing beards, or have for a while, so it is time to level the playing field for JWs on earth too". 

How a GB member explains the turnaround in doctrine? Yes, you read correctly, this is about doctrine. Like every other instruction and order published in the WTJWorg.

So we have these elements that prompted the GB meeting and its discussion:

1. frequently asked questions about beards (implying that JW men want to be like people in the world who wear beards by choice) Why is this question important to JW men, anyway?

2. doctrinal change is related to the "scene of this world is changing" (i.e. adapting to the "low" standards of this "satanic" world, which is "getting "worse" by the day, is an acceptable price for the coexistence of "believers" and "non-believers") How about firm GB claims, "We shall never change" our doctrine/rule about this and that?

3. responsible people from politics and business wear beards (i.e. the external differences between those who "serve "God" and those who "serve "Satan" are to be eliminated)They compare themselves to the people of the "worldly elements" who, they say, will be destroyed because they are "God's enemies".

The instruction manual for the new doctrine reads:

A JW person should not take a stand for or against a new doctrine. Although some JWs have faithfully followed the former prohibition against wearing beards, no one should regret this today, because it is an indicator of spiritual immaturity. And most importantly, JWs should not have their own opinion on this new issue of beards, nor should they promote anything that contradicts the new GB instructions.

We can conclude that the elders should have prevented any promotion of beards in the past. From now on, they should prevent any attempt to promote the regular shaving of the beard.

We also conclude that this is just a preparation to finally allow the sisters to wear pants whenever they want.

 God bless you all with this new ...something.

 

 

[xero]

Like I said. Semiotics of various sorts. Some are externally worn, some are evident by the things they worry about. I'd rather worry myself about the Bible, Bible history, Biblical archaeology and various apologetics.

On the other hand my wife likes Project Runway and I've seen every episode.

[Pudgy]

That is like saying you would only listen to KKK members if they wore fitted sheets.

[Pudgy]

The total irrelevancy of that comment staggers the human imagination.

…. Add to that the fact that the KKK was invented by and staffed by Democrats, and that Trump has never worn a hood, and doesn’t even wear a hat.

[Srecko Sostar]

11 minutes ago, George88 said:

Could this be a matter of perception rather than a rule? Who can assert that God wore a beard, just like the angels?

The answer to that is simple to give. View all illustrations in WTJWorg publications. Angels have beards. Jesus has a beard. If Jesus and the angels are the image of the invisible God, then YHVH also has a beard.
Another reason for this is that no one from the WTJWorg Art Department has ever seen the angels or Jesus before and after he ascended into heaven, yet they portray them as if they saw them wearing beards.

So, the perception of the "guardian of the doctrine" and the artist set the rule.
WTJWorg publications have Jesus without a beard in the past and Jesus with a beard after doctrine have changed.

 

[Pudgy]