carlos

Martin, welcome to JWTalk! Thanks for that detailed post. There are a lot of interesting things to discuss there. The Flood and the canopy are some favorite subjects here and we have discussed them many times. Many members here do not believe there was a water canopy around the earth. This idea hasn't been taught in our publications for several decades, and it poses many problems from a scientific viewpoint. Most recent publications seem to present the idea that the "waters above" are just the clouds. The Bible does say that there will be summer and winter and heat and cold forever, which seems impossible with a water canopy producing a greenhouse effect, so if there was ever such a canopy it doesn't seem it will be back. If you wish, you may have a look at our most recent discussions about the subject to see the reasons some presented in favor or against: https://jwtalk.net/topic/57202-restoration https://jwtalk.net/topic/53731-condition-of-earth-before-flood

I agree. I keep hearing that but I don't think it will make any difference for the authorities whether we use a beard or trousers or a tie. Sometimes we are a bit obsessed with every small detail being a sign that the GT is about to start.

Have a look at this topic: https://jwtalk.net/topic/55712-a-way-to-merge-jw-library-files/ Several such tools are discussed.

That explains everything. You have a huge congregation. In our congregation there are maybe 40 publishers at the meeting for service, which is a lot simpler to arrange.

Jay, I agree with you here. It's quite clear what the brothers meant. Where we were already using jackets and ties, or skirts (which is most of the Western world) that is the standard we will keep using on the platform. However, you know when we wish something we tend to twist words to make them mean what we want. So we have some local sisters who want to wear trousers on the platform and argue that's what the queen of Spain uses even in formal events, so that has to be the standard for this country. Instead of imposing my personal opinion on them, the whole body of elders has decided that the standard of dressing on the platform for sisters in this congregation is a dress or a skirt. Of course we are happy to change that if we receive a different instruction from the CO or the branch --actually we don't have anything against trousers-- but for the time being that is the standard for us in this particular congregation.

That's the way we make the arrangements too in Spain where I live. First you ask if anyone has plans (which are usually the exception), then you manually pair the remaining publishers. It usually works well and doesn't take more than five minutes for a whole congregation. I remember a recent video about two pioneers who used to go together all the time, and one of them realizes she needs to go out with different sisters, and that's the way the brother made the arrangements too, so it must be quite common. Why do you think it's judgmental? Maybe there is some aspect I haven't noticed. I don't understand either why it takes so long in Nnaemeka's congregation.

Burt, maybe I am not expressing myself correctly. If the elders in your congregation decide that the standard of dress on the platform is a jacket and a tie, you will not be allowed to give a talk without a jacket and a tie, no matter what the president wears. Yesterday we had three sisters who had demos at the meeting come with trousers. One was able to change clothes with another sister who had a skirt. The other two had to be replaced by someone else. It's not you or I who decide what the standard is. It's the body of elders. Unless they receive more specific info from the branch, of course.

I don't know of any software to do this, but one possibility is something we learned from our CO: Ask who needs a partner and make plans for those. The rest were already scheduled with someone. Another way is to ask who has plans, then pair the rest with the publisher next to them (within reason, of course). There's also the method of making groups of four. That's half the work than making groups of two.

Well, of course we live in society. The way people dress around us has an influence on us. But if the elders in a congregation decide the standard of dress for the platform is a jacket and a tie, that's the standard for that congregation, not whatever the queen, the president of the pope wears.

Chuck never posted a picture of him on the site. He was quite zealous of his privacy.

Agreed. We wouldn't intentionally hurt our brothers or create issues with them. But that works both ways. Those with a weaker conscience have to respect that others feel differently. Meat at Romans 19, that you mentioned, is a perfect example. Meat was only meat, and idols are nothing, as Paul noted. However, for a Christian who had previously practiced those religious rituals, the idea of eating that meat was disgusting. This is similar to the example I mentioned about entering a church. For me a church is just an old building with interesting history and architecture. But for a sister who used to participate in the rituals of that church, coming into that building would hurt her conscience. It's important to take into account their conscience in this case. On the other hand, having a beard or wearing trousers instead of a skirt is just a personal decision. If someone dislikes it, it's just a personal preference, there is no scriptural reason for it. GB members who have appeared publicly with beards were not afraid that they might stumble some.

It's very important to take into account the conscience of others. But I think there is a difference between people in the territory and our brothers in the congregation. There is also a difference between hurting someone's conscience and doing something they dislike. If certain things offend people in our territory and prevent them from listening to our message, be it makeup, trousers, beards or something else, a mature Christian would sacrifice his right for the good of the territory. "To the weak I became weak, in order to gain the weak" (1 Corinthians 9:22). Now if some in the congregation dislike those things the Slave has said are acceptable, because they are used to the old ways, I don't think we need to please those. They need to adapt. “Stop calling defiled the things God has cleansed” (Acts 10:15). This doesn't mean we don't care about our brothers' consciences. I wouldn't drink alcohol if I am with a brother who is a former alcoholic. I wouldn't enter a church as a tourist if I go with a sister whose conscience doesn't allow her to do that. I don't want to hurt their conscience. But when we speak of details about appearance that really have no scriptural objection and the Slave has said are ok, there is no longer an issue of hurting consciences but rather of personal taste. A brother may dislike brown shoes but I don't need to yield to his likes.

Ubong, I have no idea of what an envoy under the UN ambassador is. Can you explain a bit which kind of work that is? Does he work for a political party? A government? Which kind of tasks he has to do? You won't find any publication that mentions that specific job, but knowing what it implies we can find the Bible principles that apply. Working for the UN is not necessarily wrong in itself. I know Witnesses who work as translators or do administrative work at the UN offices.

We don't allow the friends to freely reserve their shifts. All the shifts are scheduled by a brother. If the publishers who work the carts are more or less the same on the same days, you can use templates to save a lot of time. Just schedule one week (or a whole month), save it as a template, then reuse it for the next weeks (or months).

Leslie, I don't think that comment is fair. You understand that "a part in the program" means only having a part on the platform. But others understand the Governing Body includes in that expression the brothers assigned to scene, audio/video, mics... They don't think they know better than the GB, they think they are applying the instructions from the GB. Maybe you are right, but maybe they are right. Maybe we will get further clarifications, or maybe not. I'm happy to be corrected, John, and everything you say here is right. But those elders are also trying to follow the instructions, even if some understand some details differently than others. As an individual, you report directly to Jesus, so you can dress as you wish. You can go to the KH without a tie, or in jeans, or in pajamas. If the elders consider your attire is not appropriate for certain responsibilities, you won't have those responsibilities, but of course you will be able to attend the meetings anyway.

I don't think it's complicated or distracting. The elders are in charge of the congregation. If they give instructions, follow the instructions. If they don't, do as you feel is better. Things only become complicated when we disagree with the instructions and try to argue with the elders. If someone calls Bethel the brothers won't give any explanation. They will only tell us to watch the update again, apply Bible principles and follow the instructions by the elders. Every body of elders knows what is the feeling of the local congregation.

I had this same conversation with a sister yesterday. She seemed to think the standard of dress is something worldly people set: If the queen of Spain can attend an important event wearing elegant slacks, then that's the standard. That viewpoint is wrong. The standard is whatever the congregation feels it's proper attire for the platform. In other words, as Richard put it, the way you were dressing when you had a part in the meeting before the update. In most of the Western world that is a dress for sisters and tie and jacket for brothers. Then there are places were jackets are not required or ties are not that common. In a handful of countries sisters wear a saree with trousers or brothers use a skirt. In those places, that is the standard of dress. They don't need to start wearing dresses and jackets and ties now. It doesn't look like a terrible thing anyway. The branch has already sent instructions but they don't have anything to do with our clothing. I don't think they will be sending any instructions about this, since the update was perfectly clear.

They are not typically shown to publishers. But if you ask one of the elders probably he will tell you what he remembers from it. Introductory letters are usually very positive. The elders try hard to express all the good things about the publisher. If there is an aspect the publisher needs help with, it's loving to mention it too, so that the need can be covered.

Nancy, it's not automatic although it may feel so. When you move, your old body of elders sends an introductory letter to your new body of elders. They briefly explain your good qualities and why you are appreciated in the congregation, as well as any aspects you may need some help with, if there are any. They also mention different privileges and tasks you have taken care of, together with a recommendation. In most cases you are directly announced as a pioneer in the new congregation when they welcome you. Appointments of ministerial servants and elders usually take a bit longer until the next CO visit, since it's the CO who appoints them. In some occasions the old body of elders may feel the brother or sister no longer qualifies for that privilege and do not recommend them, as happened to sister Linda and her husband.

We don't need to guess why Paul wrote that sisters are not allowed to teach in the congregation, since he explained it clearly: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, but she is to remain silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve." (1 Timothy 2:12,13). So it was not because sisters at that time or in that culture were illiterate, but because Jehovah established a principle of authority from the beginning. Now since most cultures used to have (and many still do) a wrong view of women, many brothers have long misunderstood that scripture to mean that women cannot do any task in the congregation, or that they should never correct a male. Obviously that is wrong, and it's not what Paul meant. What does hosting a meeting or carrying the mics or handling the sound equipment (or taking care of territories, or accounting or literature or cleaning) have to do with teaching the congregation? Nothing at all. The only reason why brothers are preferred for those tasks is that it's a way of training them for further responsibilities. In the last years we have seen our sisters used in a lot more activities by the congregation, and I think they will be used more and more in the future. As long as it's not a teaching role, that's fine.

Where I live, in Madrid, Spain, jackets have always been required on the platform, but they were not required to attend meetings, or for service, or to conduct meetings for service. A tie was required in all those situations.

Rune, I am not sure I am understanding your point. Of course every counsel must always be loving and kind, not judgmental. What did we do until now if a brother forgot to wear a tie, as you say, or if they came to the meeting in work clothes? Usually no advice was necessary if this just happened once. We just assume the brother forgot his tie or had to come directly from work, and would praise them for coming anyway. It would be different if the brother usually came to the meeting dressed that way, then maybe he would need some kind advice. On the other hand, would we allow that brother without a tie or in work clothes to have a part on the platform? We wouldn't before and we won't now. So nothing has changed in that sense.

Also the way to help wrongdoers. Of course elders in general have always tried to help them to repent, but now a lot more stress is put on that. The committee is not just to decide whether there is repentance or not, but rather to help the person to repent. And if more time and more meetings are needed for that, that is not a problem. Jehovah is telling us clearly he wants everybody to repent and come back.

Absolutely agreed. As happy as I am regarding ties, that is just a small detail in comparison with the more merciful approach to those who have sinned or are disfellowshipped. It takes a lot of courage to attend a meeting when you are disfellowshipped. To be received with a kind greeting must make things a lot easier. There is a disfellowshipped woman who has been attending our meetings for some time. I am awaiting with anticipation the next meeting to tell her I am glad to see her.

Please, friends, don't ask for the links here, rather send a PM to the member who offered it. Thank you!