2023 Governing Body Update #8 / BEARDS!!!

[truce]

On 2/21/2025 at 7:08 PM, Piano Man said:

Thank you. 😊 

[truce]

On 2/21/2025 at 8:23 PM, Hope said:

NY Yankees catching up with us JW trendsetters! 😄

 

 

I saw this yesterday and thought the same.

[Piano Man]

45 minutes ago, truce said:

Thank you. 😊 

You're very welcome 

[Sheep]

On 2/21/2025 at 3:05 PM, Cool.As.Ice said:

It looks like now that anyone who is clean-shaven are now the rebels…

Okay. So I'm a rebel. I never grew a beard and I have no intention of following the crowd. Having been told face to face by a householder that she refused to talk to JWs with beards, it made up my mind.

 

Sorry.

[Cool.As.Ice]

(1 Corinthians 9:22) 22 To the weak I became weak, in order to gain the weak. I have become all things to people of all sorts, so that I might by all possible means save some.
https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&pub=nwtsty&srctype=wol&bible=46009022&srcid=share

 

With this in mind, Eric, if I had to shave my beard to gain a Bible student and draw them to Jehovah, I would do it. Beards are a completely personal matter, and what I said earlier was not meant to be taken seriously.

You might want to note the reactions underneath that post; many understood that.

 

If it makes you or certain others feel better without the beard, I say, whatever floats your goat(-ee) 👍.

 

Let me show you another scripture that has somebearing on what we are talking about here. This was a completely different issue, but it was a hot-button topic in early Christianity as beards are now:

(1 Corinthians 7:18-20)

Was any man already circumcised when he was called?+ Let him not undo his circumcision. Has any man been called while uncircumcised? Let him not get circumcised.+ 19 Circumcision means nothing, and uncircumcision means nothing;+ what means something is the observing of God’s commandments.+ 20 In whatever state each one was called, let him remain in it.+
https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&pub=nwtsty&srctype=wol&bible=46007018&srcid=share

 

I know this is talking about a different issue, but the principles still apply here. In the first century, circumcision was a divisive issue among the early Christians, as quite a few of you here on this forum know. 
 

(Acts 15:1,2) 15 Now some men came down from Ju·deʹan and began to teach the brothers: “Unless you get circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 But after quite a bit of dissension and disputing by Paul and Barʹna·bas with them, it was arranged for Paul, Barʹna·bas, and some of the others to go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem regarding this issue.
https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&pub=nwtsty&srctype=wol&bible=44015001&srcid=share

 

As you also know, the Governing Body of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem finally settled the issue in 49 CE by this declaration:

 

(Acts 15:28) 28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things: 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”
https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&pub=nwtsty&srctype=wol&bible=44015028&srcid=share

 

Circumcision was no longer a requirement for God’s people, though quite a few felt so strongly about it because of the Mosaic Law.

Beards are a similarly divisive issue among Christians today. There was a widely-held taboo in various parts of the world that Christians should not have beards, as that used to be a symbol of rebellion and such in some places, or whatever.

 

But very recently, Eric, as you know, Jehovah thru the Slave has made it clear that beards are perfectly acceptable for worshippers of Jehovah to wear. It is not about “following the crowd”, but what is exciting is to see that everyone here has moved forward with the chariot and let go of long-held taboos.

 

If you are still in contact with this householder, and depending on your local culture, if it’s still unacceptable to have beards, then you have to avoid stumbling others, as the important thing is leading people to God’s Kingdom. 
 

But generally, for the most part, around the world, It ain’t important if you have a beard. It ain’t important if you don’t have a beard. At the end of the day, as long as it’s not offensive to your local culture and it doesn’t reflect badly on the truth, what difference does it make? The only thing that matters is being obedient to Jehovah.
 

Whether one got circumcised or not, past Jesus’ death in the first century was a personal choice, the apostles and Governing Body back then, completely put that to bed.

 

In the same manner, whether one grows a beard or not is completely up to them. Do whatever you feel is best, brother. I will still love you whether you look like Esau or Jacob 😆.

 

Edited February 23 by Cool.As.Ice

[Sheep]

Thanks Brother Elijah for your comment.

 

Actually, I met this woman while doing street work back before the pandemic (while I was waiting for two other brothers to finish the last door in the territory). She thanked me for not having a beard, and said it scared her once when she saw two male Witnesses outside her door with beards. She didn't know who they were, or what they wanted. So she didn't answer the door. I just told her they wouldn't 'bite,' and encouraged her to speak her mind if she saw some brothers like that again.

 

I don't know her exact address; she only told me the region of the city she lived in. It wasn't our territory. If a brother with a beard happens to call on her sometime, I'm wondering how he would react to the chastisement and the embarrassment that would follow. I was thankful it wasn't me.

Edited February 23 by Sheep

[Cool.As.Ice]

If Jehovah is drawing her and her attitude had changed since then, I believe something can happen.

Edited February 23 by Cool.As.Ice

[Tortuga]

26 minutes ago, Sheep said:

Thanks Brother Elijah for your comment.

 

Actually, I met this woman while doing street work back before the pandemic (while I was waiting for two other brothers to finish the last door in the territory). She thanked me for not having a beard, and said it scared her once when she saw two male Witnesses outside her door with beards. She didn't know who they were, or what they wanted. So she didn't answer the door. I just told her they wouldn't 'bite,' and encouraged her to speak her mind if she saw some brothers like that again.

 

I don't know her exact address; she only told me the region of the city she lived in. It wasn't our territory. If a brother with a beard happens to call on her sometime, I'm wondering how he would react to the chastisement and the embarrassment that would follow. I was thankful it wasn't me.

Wow. Pogonophobia...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogonophobia

[Sheep]

Just now, Tortuga said:

Wow. Pogonophobia...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogonophobia

 

Not really. She said she didn't believe it appropriate for Christians to wear a beard; I think she implied it had something to do with their being associated with rebellion.

 

I'm inclined to agree with her. Whenever I see a story in the news of some violent group threatening someone, the mug shots of the accused almost always have beards! (...January 6, 2021...)

[Jwanon]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

[Alikay]

7 hours ago, Sheep said:

 

Not really. She said she didn't believe it appropriate for Christians to wear a beard; I think she implied it had something to do with their being associated with rebellion.

 

I'm inclined to agree with her. Whenever I see a story in the news of some violent group threatening someone, the mug shots of the accused almost always have beards! (...January 6, 2021...)

I can’t help but observe that Whenever I see criminals in court they are always dressed in suit and tie and well groomed. 

[trottigy]

56 minutes ago, Alikay said:

I can’t help but observe that Whenever I see criminals in court they are always dressed in suit and tie and well groomed. 

 

Those are the professional criminals.

 

I recall a bike about... Don't worry about the guy who picks your pocket (who looks homeless), worry about the guy trying to steal your life savings (and is wearing a nice suit).

[Sheep]

10 hours ago, Jwanon said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

While there is a certain amount of truth to this 'fallacy' article, it does not apply here. Remember that for many years, the organization didn't encourage beards on brothers. And for what reason? Because a beard was associated with drug addicts, hippies, and student rebels. Whether it was because of the reasons mentioned in the article or not, it doesn't change the fact that people automatically associated beards with something bad. Because of that fact, the organization would say that a brother with a beard does not qualify for privileges in the congregation; he wasn't setting the right example.

[Mike047]

24 minutes ago, Sheep said:

Because of that fact, the organization would say that a brother with a beard does not qualify for privileges in the congregation; he wasn't setting the right example.

In many congregations in the UK, there were brothers serving as MS, as elders or as pioneers with moustaches. These brothers were involved in all aspects of the congregation and all assignments. They would also share in assembly items. Even then, though, the moustache needed to be well shaped and not like the proverbial RAF wartime style handlebars.

 

Some other brothers had full beards, and were able to share at their own hall in assignments, including public talk assignments, but would not usually be sent out to give talks. In many congregations, neither were they appointed as either MS or elders, though some were pioneers.

 

In the first two decades after  WWII a number of brothers kept their military look about them, but gradually they merged into the styles of dress and grooming typical among the Christian brotherhood.

 

 

[Brazilian2024]

Here where I live, in Brazil, no resident reacted strangely to the beard. In fact, those who were most surprised at the beginning were our own brothers. But now the majority have gotten used to it and many even support its use (Some brothers look better with a beard)

[Julsey]

13 hours ago, Alikay said:

I can’t help but observe that Whenever I see criminals in court they are always dressed in suit and tie and well groomed. 

That’s because their lawyers tell them to clean themselves up, or even bring the clothes for them. It’s all about perception, and a courtroom is like a theatre. 

[carlos]

On 2/23/2025 at 6:21 AM, Sheep said:

If a brother with a beard happens to call on her sometime, I'm wondering how he would react to the chastisement and the embarrassment that would follow. I was thankful it wasn't me.

 

You can't please everyone. Some may say Christians should or should not wear certain colors. Some will say it's not proper for Christian women to use makeup or jewels. Others will say women should cover their head. I once met a person in service who believed Christians should greet others with "Peace!".

 

So if the brother happens to greet that person with "Good morning" instead of peace, or if the sister is wearing earrings, how would they react to the "chastisement and the embarrassment that will follow"? Well, it it were me, I wouldn't feel chastised or embarrassed at all. I don't offend people intentionally, but I don't have to please everyone. Jesus was perfect and some complained that he did normal things.

 

Eric, I think what happened in this occasion is that that lady's bias validated your own preferences. Had she complained that some Witnesses came to her using brown shoes instead of black, you wouldn't have given any importance to her idea.

 

[just1-4all]

22 hours ago, Alikay said:

I can’t help but observe that Whenever I see criminals in court they are always dressed in suit and tie and well groomed. 

Perhaps if you're in good with the court's judge you may be allowed to wear a suit? I think it depends on what stage the court case is at and what may be the state or local court rules or what is customary in any given country's judicial system. Notice that defendants in the Russian courts always appear before the judge in a cage.

 

In this country I've seen courts where the defendants are brought before the judge in a prison jumpsuit, sometimes even chained at the feet and handcuffed—(though they usually take the handcuffs before the proceeding starts). Quite a different impression on observers compared to a suit and tie isn't it? Whether caged, in an orange jumpsuit or handcuffed ... just by appearances they already appear guilty don't they? At the least I think it leans most observers to think so. This is not to mention the gender, race, personality/style, or attractiveness factor biases of prosecutor/defendant/defendants attorney, etc. before the judge and jury. On paper, those things are not supposed to matter. In reality, they sometimes do influence opinion.

 

The ones prosecuting and defending (the lawyers) would never be present without proper attire of suit and tie (or for the female attorney's, tasteful modern business dress/apparel). And probably goes without saying, ironically so, it can be just as likely that the judge or attorney's are more criminal and corrupt in their mind and heart than the accused (e.g. concerned more with public opinion than real justice, financially greedy, inept at their job—even grossly negligent, taking cases to advance their careers more than any real interest in their client, etc.) It's just one more reason I pray (joyfully and pleadingly so) for this system to end. No more corrupt judicial processes. 🕊🙏⚖

[just1-4all]

2 hours ago, carlos said:

You can't please everyone. Some may say Christians should or should not wear certain colors. Some will say it's not proper for Christian women to use makeup or jewels. Others will say women should cover their head. I once met a person in service who believed Christians should greet others with "Peace!".

I agree ... Jehovah and his Son are about what is fair and reasonable ... not rigid rules. So true freedom allows for variety within that boundary which is not, again, meant to be so rigid. Intelligent creation can discern what is proper and decent. 

 

I think the 'spirit' of what Jehovah is communicating to the FDS/GB (and to us in turn) is ... make an intelligent choice for yourself and don't be judging other people's conscientious choices. Seems reasonable to me that our Creator, nor those faithful to him, wish to micromanage our lives in areas that do not really matter in the end.

 

And if I'm wrong on anything (not just this topic, but in general) ... I'm open to reasoned counsel and correction (done with affection). 🙂⚖🕊

Edited February 24 by just1-4all
Clarity

[Sheep]

10 hours ago, carlos said:

Eric, I think what happened in this occasion is that that lady's bias validated your own preferences. Had she complained that some Witnesses came to her using brown shoes instead of black, you wouldn't have given any importance to her idea.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "that lady's bias," nor do I know how I should have responded to her. Her comment was not about shoes, but specifically about beards. And I wasn't about to ignore it. Was I supposed to say to her: "Oh, you must have missed the Governing Body Update!"? Or, "You should pay more attention to how other people feel!"? I replied to her with the first thing that came to mind; that she should make her feelings known to someone who is wearing a beard. That's not bias on her part, but likely a product of how she was raised.

 

I don't think it's right to say that I have my own "preferences" in it either. It's not a matter of personal feelings. It's the way I was raised, me and anyone else who is around my age. (Incidentally, this woman didn't look anywhere near my age.) Example: My father had to stay home from work for a few days once. He wasn't feeling well, and he arranged to see our family doctor. When he came home from the doctor's office, he told me people in the waiting room were looking at him as though he didn't belong there. He said he felt like they were looking at the fact he hadn't shaved for a couple of days, among other things. He said: "I was a disgrace!" I was young in those days, although I don't recall what age. But can you imagine the impression that would have left on me? I could recount various other incidents that may have played a role in shaping my so-called "preferences," but I don't think it's necessary. Perhaps it's a question of perception, but it seems that the overall population in general looks at beards negatively. It seems I'm not the only one in my local congregation, nor in other congregations close by, who feel exactly as I do in this matter, and in other issues. I don't think we need to apologize for being who we are.

[Hope]

@Sheep wrote:

Quote

I replied to her with the first thing that came to mind; that she should make her feelings known to someone who is wearing a beard. That's not bias on her part, but likely a product of how she was raised.

 

Feelings based upon how one was raised is pretty much the very definition of "bias". They *are* personal feelings (not facts). Some people's biases are harmless. Other biases devolve into prejudice. In those cases, it really doesn't matter how many feel as we do; it's still judgmental and unkind. Our biases also strongly impact how we think other people see things, too... even though we may be wrong. 

 

Why would that woman's feelings about someone wearing a beard be any more valid than the feelings of the one who was wearing it? What if her feelings are viewed as insulting? They will certainly at least embarrass the man (or brother) with the beard - is that okay? Who is she to "chastise" a stranger? If the woman develops an interest in the Truth, she will learn that her fear of beards will have to be reconciled. Because, what will she do instead about the bearded brothers - in the congregation and on our Governing Body? Whose ways are not adjusted right?

 

Believing that one is a "disgrace" for being unshaven, even when sick, is still merely an opinion... and perhaps an overly harsh one? Perhaps the feelings your father attributed to those in the waiting room actually had nothing to do with the whiskers on his face; did he ask? Or was he imputing wrong motives (subconsciously)?  Even before the restriction was lifted in our congregations, men with beards were not considered disgraceful -- at least, I never heard such sentiments in the 47 years I've been around the Truth. 

 

It's absolutely a matter of perception - on all of our parts. For mine, the congregations around, the general area, and many parts of the earth, beards are NOT looked upon negatively; rather as quite handsome and appropriate for men, as long as they are neat and well-groomed. I know, "different strokes", right? And it's fine to think positively or even neutrally about other folks' dress and grooming. It's okay not to desire a look for oneself. But cultivating a negative attitude about it for others, when we've basically been advised to "quit calling unclean what Jehovah has cleansed", may result in unnecessary discomfort and possibly hard feelings.

 

Quote

Because of that fact, the organization would say that a brother with a beard does not qualify for privileges in the congregation; he wasn't setting the right example.

 

Those days are passed, we move on, and our light continues to get brighter. 

 

Hugs to you, Eric - my friend ❤️ 

[jwhess]

On 2/22/2025 at 11:40 PM, Cool.As.Ice said:

Whether one got circumcised or not, past Jesus’ death in the first century was a personal choice, the apostles and Governing Body back then, completely put that to bed.

 

In the same manner, whether one grows a beard or not is completely up to them. Do whatever you feel is best, brother. I will still love you whether you look like Esau or Jacob 😆.

 

As a side point: 

Circumcision usually occurs when a child is a very small baby (in Hebrew days - 8 days old). So in that case it was NOT a personal choice.  And secondly, it is not a choice you can change.

 

So it is not an 'apples to apples' comparison.  With beards, an adult can choose and if he decides, he can undo it.  With circumcision, babies cannot choose and as an adult later, he cannot undo it.

 

The scripture does show the attentive attitude of the GB and their desire not to impose any unnecessary rules on us...♥️

[Shawnster]

On 2/23/2025 at 12:21 AM, Sheep said:

 

Actually, I met this woman while doing street work back before the pandemic...

 

3 hours ago, Sheep said:

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "that lady's bias," nor do I know how I should have responded to her. Her comment was not about shoes, but specifically about beards. And I wasn't about to ignore it. Was I supposed to say to her: "Oh, you must have missed the Governing Body Update!" 

 

 

I'm confused. 

 

You met this woman before the pandemic. So you met her in 2019 or earlier. Now, after Carlos makes a comment you reply with a remark about the Governing Body Update. 

 

1.  The updates began during the pandemic. There was no such thing as a Governing Body Update before 2020.

 

2. The Governing Body Update about beards was Dec. 2023. This was 3 years after the pandemic began. 

 

Can you understand my confusion? 

[minister159]

14 hours ago, jwhess said:

So it is not an 'apples to apples' comparison.

 

I agree because a beard is quite visible and something everyone can see on a man's face. Circumcision, not so much. 

[undeserved]

5 minutes ago, minister159 said:

 

I agree because a beard is quite visible and something everyone can see on a man's face. Circumcision, not so much. 

You know, that’s something I’ve always wondered about. Did the first thing they did when they greeted one another is lift their skirt up?

Wouldn’t you keep your mouth closed when it wasn’t advantageous!?

How WOULD you know?