Srecko Sostar

Only if it is their wish and will.

In his latest Update, Gb member "clarified" that JW should emulate, follow the example of "political and business world" when it comes to beards. Well, I guess that also applies to women's fashion. lol

It is to be assumed that members do not need to question their elders for every dispute or ambiguity, because then the elders go to Bethel and Bethel to HQ for answers. On the other hand, people in positions of power, and ultimately GB, should stop with the idea that they are "guardians of doctrine" for banal things like beards. Consequently, everyone in the JW organization bears responsibility for the immaturity that prevails among the believers. I have nothing against neatness. This fact shows the senselessness of striving for rules and religious doctrines and instructions presented by GB.

Fellow Christians in JW have a mutual agreement about beards? Well, well. This is Funny and/or Alarming. In the time of Jesus, there were people in both Greenland and Australia. What do they have to do with beards in the Jewish nation? Jesus is role model ... with his beard? Or not? Since JWs want to be like the first Christians who were mostly Jews, then it is important to remember that the Jews did not follow the world's trends in hairstyles, beards and clothes but stood out as different from their contemporaries. What do JWs want? To be different or the same as people from "nations"?

According to WTJWorg teaching, men who are called (appointed) to positions of responsibility and authority in the congregation are called to that position because they have fulfilled spiritual values/conditions, and therefore HS has appointed them through the existing elders. The practice over the past almost 100 years has not allowed bearded men to be called into such ministry. We can publicly say that they were not appointed by HS and the elders because these individuals had beards. They were not "spiritually mature" because they showed/manifested this with their beards. S. Lett says, in fact, that beards are not a prerequisite for spirituality and not prevent the HS from appointing such bearded persons. He says this has never been the case because there is no Scriptural obstacle for bearded "brothers" to take "responsibility". This, consequently means, that the HS did not appoint bearded men, not because beards, but because the elders and the GB prevented/stopped the HS from acting freely in the church. They (GB) admitted this publicly in their update a few days ago. JWs, are you wondering if, whether at all, the power of HS rests over your congregations or is all power and governance in the hands of GB with their earthly subjects aka elders.

Since WTJWorg and GB should operate within the USA Constitution, we come to a point where we have to ask; 1) What does God guarantee to all people? 2) What does GB guarantee to its people?

Here is the video. https://avoidjw.org/whats-new/higher-education-reason-remove-elder/

You seem to me to be forgetting WHO brought forth the Doctrine of that Trivial Thing. Any attempt, by you or by anyone else, to mitigate the seriousness of the idiocy that has been and continues to be carried out in the name of God YHVH, now after decades of torture on this issue, is shameful. We see at least two ways of tyrannizing. One dragged on for decades in such a way that it was Forbidden to wear a beard. Now they continue with the tyranny through Permitting the wearing of beards. Taking away or giving someone Freedom is a kind of tyranny, because they (GB) have taken a place that does not belong to them. They are not placed by God in a position to take away or give someone freedom of choice.

The laugh is because of the last sentence in the Warning.

Overlapping generations, beards, abolition of hours, daily lawsuits and more will cause an impact that few, if any, are prepared for.

"Flesh, blood, spirit and breath" - 4 components of life. Please, what are the fractions of these 4 main components and what are they called? lol

One of the important features that members of the GB took into account for "clarification about wearing a beard" includes imitating the trends that prevail in the world of politics and business. This is clearly stated in Update by Steven Lett. (starts at minute 10:00) Quote: "Furthermore, as time has passed, we have noted that in many countries it is acceptable for men who hold responsible positions in business and government to wear beards..." That same Governing Body (consisting of elders) wrote this: "If an elder establishes a rule based on culture, he is not acting according to the Scriptures. Younger men must be evaluated, not by personal or cultural viewpoints, but by the measuring stick of God's Word. - 2 Tim. 3:16, 17." - https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-august-2018/do-not-judge-outward-appearance/ Another in a series of contradictions of this "Theocratic Government" in WTJWorg. Double talk. Imitation of "the world". Adapting to "world trends". Disregarding one's own standards. "Lowering" own standards. In the world of WTJWorg, certain patterns of behavior change depending on the current circumstances in the environment (especially in the USA). We have the opportunity to see two ways in which the GB applies the so-called "Biblical Principles". In one model, the GB tries to "force" the government of a country to respect the JW's right to freedom of thought, speech and worship as implemented and practiced by WTJWorg, usually through court cases or mass letters campaigns. In the second model, they find reasons to adapt the so-called "biblical principles" to the social and cultural changes of "worldly people and their institutions".

Maybe, but both are happening at the same time today.

Jesus risked his life for another, like David's soldiers. How would Jesus feel if someone said now; No, I don't want your sacrifice Jesus, that's still too much. Why did you put yourself at risk in the first place? In the example with David, he asked for water. The soldiers considered it a great honor to please their king. Did sinners desire the sacrifice of Jesus? Not. He gave blood to everyone to "drink" because he wants to help them. David refuses "water" aka blood and that makes him a hero in your eyes. Does the one who refuses "blood" aka salvation from Jesus become a hero?

Do you want to say that God doesn't like cookies?

Do all cake ingredients have the same importance (in general and for you)?

A new GB member explained recently that all this is Jehovah's way of working, which is; -the GB promotes a wrong doctrine, -the doctrine is implemented and enforced without exception, -the disobedient are sanctioned, -after a while the doctrine undergoes a change, -it is promoted as a "new light", -obedience is demanded, -no feeling of disappointment is allowed, -it does not allow anyone to manifest their feeling how even in the past he/she knew that the abandoned doctrine was wrong, and now he/she is proud of himself for it. All in all, they shift all responsibility for their stupidity to God, because, well, that's God's way, not man's.

From these and other biblical quotes, it is important to note that the people who wrote something in the Bible, said for themselves that they said something under the influence of God. Or others claimed it for one of them. They believed that what they write or speak is under God's influence. There is an anointed class within JWs who believe they are the anointed. And there is also a class of people in JW who believe such a claim, as well as those who do not believe such a claim. So, the belief/conviction of people in the past in their own role in this process is no more reliable than the belief of people today in their current beliefs in this or that or in themselves. When the GB claims that they are anointed and led by the spirit, it does not have any clear evidence confirmed by God. It actually remains in the vague cloud of their general belief in themselves and the belief of the people around them in their statements and claims. This whole thing is clouded by the fact that the GB separates the meanings of these two words which actually mean one and the same thing. There is no difference between "being inspired" and "being guided" by someone or something.

The same with me. It seems that God has no problem with determining how much blood a person can take into his body. You shouldn't take a lot, but if it's a little it won't be a problem, take it.