2023 Governing Body Update #8 / BEARDS!!!

[Dark King]

25 minutes ago, Dark King said:

Sometimes we have a cultural in our organization to be a Jehovah's witnesses, but not an ordained minister.

For an example, sometime the brothers and sisters. Have a beach day right and the brothers and the sisters are wearing bikinis 👙 and swim wear that don't leave nothing for the imagination.

 

Just ask yourself, will Mary and Joseph the parents of Jesus Chris wear this? Not that it would be wrong to have a beach day. It's okay having a beach day but well. There are bikinis and a swim wear not leaving anything for imagination. 🥺

 

As one circuit overseer said sometimes you look and you said Bow Wow! 😮 

!

Jwhess may not harp on the it any longer, but I'll take up where he left off.

[Andrey]

I appreciate the changes that are happening in our Organization, I like it when there is progress and changes. But, I like a clean-shaven face (there will come a time when I won't have a razor handy), a stylish classic suit, elegance in clothing. I feel solemn when I come to the Kingdom Hall.

 

I also like it when men have a beard, neatly trimmed.

 

This is the choice of each of us, which we must respect, with dignity. This is what Jehovah wants.

 

Good reminder, the book, STUDY 15 Good Personal Appearance, pages 131-134. (I think there will be changes in this lesson soon)

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102001084

[Andrey]

On 4/19/2025 at 4:32 AM, ➕👇 ꓤꓱꓷꓠꓵ🎵Tone said:

Work on the Sabbath? NEVER!

 

Brother Tony, with your permission, may I add: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Sunday?  

 

I like this. 

Edited April 20 by Andrey

[Mike047]

1 hour ago, Dark King said:

Do you understand that your baptism identifies you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with Jehovah’s organization?

 

And, from the brother's big frock coats, of the late 19th century, to the sisters trousers suits of the 21st century, what we are is based on who we are inside. Hopefully, there is enough about our Christian personality that identifies us to others. As Peter, under inspiration, said "Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, consider what sort of people you ought to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion", with the conduct of our personality from within and the deeds of our ministry from without, we should still be visible to those who can tell the difference.

[Dark King]

47 minutes ago, Mike047 said:

And, from the brother's big frock coats, of the late 19th century, to the sisters trousers suits of the 21st century, what we are is based on who we are inside. Hopefully, there is enough about our Christian personality that identifies us to others. As Peter, under inspiration, said "Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, consider what sort of people you ought to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion", with the conduct of our personality from within and the deeds of our ministry from without, we should still be visible to those who can tell the difference.

Thanks brother, I like what you said here. 

 

To illustrated from my way, have you ever been to a Publix grocery store or Chick-fil-A? And on the other hand, have you been to a Piggly Willy and a Burger King where either way you ain't going to have it your way. I prefer when people see Jehovah's organization. They see us as uniform in a way that you will look at Publix or Chick-fil-A. Not the way people review. Piggly wiggly and Burger King. 

 

Back in the early century men and women dress like gentlemen's and Chase women. It still should be that way today. And everybody knew the ordained minister in the community. They was a very prestigious and pillar of the entire community. We as Jehovah's witnesses as ordained Ministers should still be pillars in the ministry in the community.

 

There's is an old saying what's in the heart and what's in the mind eventually filtrates onto the clothes.

Edited April 20 by Dark King

[Dark King]

Sometimes the friends get up and go early morning witnessing on a Saturday morning or a Sunday morning, you know 6:00 7:00 in the morning when the person see you in the way you dress is they thinking to himself? Was they in the club with me till 4:00 AM this morning or is you not distracting from the message? By the way, you dress and people automatically know you are one of those Jehovah's witnesses. And yes you are here to minister them. You're here to help them get forgiveness for their sins. For what they was doing in the club Friday and Saturday last night.

 

I'm just saying 😂😂🤔🤫

Edited April 20 by Dark King

[Tortuga]

On 4/19/2025 at 12:54 AM, jwhess said:

How does it look now?  A bearded guy wearing a polo shirt and chinos walking next to a woman with her blouse tucked into a pair of slacks.  Do you stop your car and say, by the way they dress, "They must be witnesses?. They could be anybody on the street.  How does that add to our identity and how does it indicate unity?

It doesn't add to our identity and unity except through our modesty. As long as we are modest in our dress and grooming, at least we won't detract from our identity and unity.

[computerwiz]

Maybe we needed to change our "uniform" so they'd open the door for us these days!  

 

"Who are y'all??  Oh man....guess I have to listen now, the door's already open".  

[Tortuga]

6 minutes ago, computerwiz said:

Maybe we needed to change our "uniform" so they'd open the door for us these days!  

 

"Who are y'all??  Oh man....guess I have to listen now, the door's already open".  

Unless we look like solar panel salesmen..

[Percy]

18 hours ago, DancesWithWife said:

When I was in a pain management facility with worldly people we would have group discussions.

I wonder if our use of 'worldly' will change sometime soon? It is somewhat of an all inclusive term not unlike 'goy' or 'gentile' used by the Jews. Not all we talk to would really be classified as such.

Is there a better term we could use if we are talking about changes from the 'old days'?

[DancesWithWife]

8 minutes ago, Percy said:

Is there a better term we could use if we are talking about changes from the 'old days'

Good point. It's a term I have been using for 60 years since I was 6 so it comes second nature to me. I guess I could have used non-Jehovah's Witnesses. Not sure how to describe those who are not Jehovah's Witnesses. 

[LeolaRootStew]

 

18 minutes ago, Percy said:

I wonder if our use of 'worldly' will change sometime soon? It is somewhat of an all inclusive term not unlike 'goy' or 'gentile' used by the Jews. Not all we talk to would really be classified as such.

Is there a better term we could use if we are talking about changes from the 'old days'?

 

if they aren't JWs they are worldly...

Edited April 20 by LeolaRootStew

[Dark King]

I think we call 🤙🏾 them unbelieving now.

Unbelieving sounds more lovely 🌹 

[ChrisW]

5 minutes ago, Dark King said:

Unbelieving

That's even the scriptural way they were identified. 2 Cor 6:14, 2 Cor 4:4.

[Julsey]

2 hours ago, DancesWithWife said:

Good point. It's a term I have been using for 60 years since I was 6 so it comes second nature to me. I guess I could have used non-Jehovah's Witnesses. Not sure how to describe those who are not Jehovah's Witnesses. 

I just say that they’re not in the truth.

[LeolaRootStew]

Everyone I know still calls them worldly. It's literally easier to say and it's not an insult.

[Tortuga]

16 hours ago, Percy said:

I wonder if our use of 'worldly' will change sometime soon? It is somewhat of an all inclusive term not unlike 'goy' or 'gentile' used by the Jews. Not all we talk to would really be classified as such.

Is there a better term we could use if we are talking about changes from the 'old days'?

Many use the term "non-witness"

[truce]

3 hours ago, LeolaRootStew said:

Everyone I know still calls them worldly. It's literally easier to say and it's not an insult.

"Worldly" or "Worldlings" comes off to me as derogatory. Also, when I was coming into the truth, a term that was used back then in the early 2000s was "Babylonians"... Very cringeworthy.

Edited April 21 by truce

[minister159]

On 4/19/2025 at 11:20 PM, Eejay said:

Our unity is expressed in our acceptance of those who express these differences within the acceptable parameters

It seems to me that this new-found freedom in dress and grooming has become something of a can of worms. The "acceptable parameters" apparently are very subjective and subject to interpretation, from what I have seen develop in the long term. Is it time for a local needs part or perhaps a Governing Body update on this subject, since it may need to be revisited?

 

When it comes to dress and grooming, we've always had a lot of leeway, especially among the sisters. As they say, variety is the spice of life, and many of us enjoy a variety of styles and colors in harmony with Bible principles. The world on the other hand has always gone to extremes and excesses, including overly casual and slovenly in dress and grooming.

 

We used to have a more specific outline of what qualified as unacceptable, acceptable and exemplary, when it comes to dress and grooming within the organization. When it comes to exemplary, we may not have a specific definition, but I think most of us, at least those of us of a certain age, can say we know it when we see it. However, when it comes to acceptable or unacceptable, it seems the line between the two has been blurred almost beyond recognition, or at least moved to a gray area in what we might call the non-judgmental zone.

 

The churches of Christendom appear to have a no dress-code policy where you're invited to 'come as you are,' which may be necessary in order to get their members to come to church at all and keep the doors open. We make exceptions or allowances for Bible students or visitors in the same way, but hope they will catch on to the decorum and dress appropriately before too long. This is what true worship looks like and I hope we never get to that slippery slope Christendom has gone down in the name of Christian freedom, free will, conscience, personal choice or anything else that could make us visibly indistinguishable from nominal Christians.

 

[Amygdala]

7 hours ago, LeolaRootStew said:

Everyone I know still calls them worldly. It's literally easier to say and it's not an insult.

 

My sister quit studying because a couple of girls in the congregation were told not to play with her because their mother told her she was worldly. She to this day never lets me forget it. She felt completely judged and it left a bad taste in her mouth, even though this happened 30+ years ago. Of course the mother was right, but to have her kids use that term on my sister who was possibly 7 or 8 was very insulting even at that age sadly. Jesus made unbelievers feel not judged, but worthy.

Edited April 21 by Amygdala

[truce]

3 hours ago, minister159 said:

It seems to me that this new-found freedom in dress and grooming has become something of a can of worms. The "acceptable parameters" apparently are very subjective and subject to interpretation, from what I have seen develop in the long term. Is it time for a local needs part or perhaps a Governing Body update on this subject, since it may need to be revisited?

 

When it comes to dress and grooming, we've always had a lot of leeway, especially among the sisters. As they say, variety is the spice of life, and many of us enjoy a variety of styles and colors in harmony with Bible principles. The world on the other hand has always gone to extremes and excesses, including overly casual and slovenly in dress and grooming.

 

We used to have a more specific outline of what qualified as unacceptable, acceptable and exemplary, when it comes to dress and grooming within the organization. When it comes to exemplary, we may not have a specific definition, but I think most of us, at least those of us of a certain age, can say we know it when we see it. However, when it comes to acceptable or unacceptable, it seems the line between the two has been blurred almost beyond recognition, or at least moved to a gray area in what we might call the non-judgmental zone.

 

The churches of Christendom appear to have a no dress-code policy where you're invited to 'come as you are,' which may be necessary in order to get their members to come to church at all and keep the doors open. We make exceptions or allowances for Bible students or visitors in the same way, but hope they will catch on to the decorum and dress appropriately before too long. This is what true worship looks like and I hope we never get to that slippery slope Christendom has gone down in the name of Christian freedom, free will, conscience, personal choice or anything else that could make us visibly indistinguishable from nominal Christians.

 

Nothing (not even dress and grooming choices) can corrupt our pure worship. 

[carlos]

9 hours ago, LeolaRootStew said:

Everyone I know still calls them worldly. It's literally easier to say and it's not an insult.

 

It seems our publications are no longer using that term referring to people for some years. They mention "worldly thinking", "worldly ambitions", "worldly desires" and so on, but not "worldly people".

 

While the term itself is not wrong, many find it derogatory. In recent years we use other more neutral terms instead, such as "non-Witnesses". Of course, it will take time until everybody gets up to date with the new terminology (after all, many still say "the Society" or "the New Order" or "the circuit servant").

[Israel]

I remember using the term worldly people and a 40yo~ sister got mad at me

[TJ]

I asked Grok AI to review Watchtower publications on WOL and tell me the trend in how people who are not Jehovah's Witnesses have been identified in recent years compared to the past. This was its analysis:

 

 

Key Points

• Research suggests Jehovah’s Witnesses are using more neutral terms like “people” or “those we meet” in recent years (2021–2025) for non-members, especially in outreach.
• It seems likely that traditional terms like “worldly” are still used in theological discussions, but less in public-facing materials.
• The evidence leans toward a shift to softer language, possibly due to digital ministry growth, compared to past practices with more judgmental terms.

Recent Trends (2021–2025)

In recent years, Jehovah’s Witnesses’ publications, such as The Watchtower and Awake!, show a trend toward using more neutral and relational language when referring to non-members. Terms like “people,” “those we meet,” or “readers” are increasingly common, especially in evangelistic and digital contexts, aiming to engage a broader audience.

 

Comparison with the Past

Historically, terms like “worldly” or “people of the world” were more frequently used, often with a negative connotation, emphasizing moral and spiritual separation. Recent publications seem to use these terms less in outreach materials, reserving them for theological discussions, indicating a shift toward inclusivity.

 

Supporting Evidence

This trend is supported by reviews of recent issues, such as the February 2025 Watchtower (studied April 14–May 4, 2025), which used “the world’s attitude” instead of “worldly,” and outreach-focused articles avoiding derogatory labels.

 

---

 

Survey Note: Detailed Analysis of Terminology Trends for Non-Jehovah’s Witnesses

This survey note provides a comprehensive analysis of how Jehovah’s Witnesses identify people who are not members of their faith in recent years (2021–2025) compared to historical practices, based on a review of publications available at the Watchtower Online Library. The analysis draws on web searches and direct examination of recent and historical content to identify trends in terminology, tone, and context.

 

Background and Methodology

Jehovah’s Witnesses produce a range of publications, including The Watchtower and Awake! magazines, books, and brochures, accessible through the Watchtower Online Library. These materials are used for internal study, evangelistic outreach, and public education. The focus here is on how non-members (those not part of the faith) are referred to, examining recent trends (2021–2025) against historical usage, particularly from the mid-20th century onward. The analysis relies on available online content, including recent issues and historical references, to identify shifts in language and tone.

 

Historical Terminology for Non-Members

Historically, Jehovah’s Witnesses have used terms like “worldly” or “people of the world” to describe non-members, rooted in biblical references such as John 18:36 (“My Kingdom is no part of this world”). These terms, prevalent in mid-20th-century publications, often carried a negative connotation, emphasizing moral and spiritual separation. For example:

• Articles from the 1960s and 1970s frequently framed non-members as part of “the world,” depicted as morally corrupt and under Satan’s influence.
• The term “Christendom” was used derogatorily to refer to other Christian denominations, reinforcing the belief that Jehovah’s Witnesses are the only true Christians.

Other historical terms included “non-believers” or “those without faith,” particularly in theological discussions about salvation or moral conduct. These terms were common in The Watchtower, which focused on doctrinal clarity and separation from secular influences.

 

Recent Trends (2021–2025)

In recent years, there has been a noticeable shift toward more neutral and relational language, especially in evangelistic and digital contexts. This trend is evident in the following ways:

• Neutral Terms in Outreach: Publications like Awake! and ministry guides increasingly use terms such as “people,” “those we meet,” or “readers” when addressing non-members. For instance, recent issues of Awake! (e.g., “Can Our Planet Survive?—Reasons for Hope,” 2023) discuss universal issues like environmental concerns without labeling non-members, aiming to appeal to a broader audience.
• Softened Tone: Articles in recent The Watchtower issues, such as the February 2025 issue (studied April 14–May 4, 2025), use phrases like “the world’s attitude” to describe non-members, as seen in the article “Reject the Selfish Spirit of Today’s World.” This is a more neutral descriptor compared to “worldly,” suggesting a move toward inclusivity.
• Digital Ministry Influence: The expansion of digital tools, such as the JW Library app and online outreach, has likely contributed to this shift. Publications now often address non-members as “viewers” or “readers,” emphasizing shared human experiences rather than division. For example, the Watchtower Online Library offers content in over 1,000 languages, including sign languages, to reach non-members globally.

However, traditional terms like “worldly” and “non-believers” persist in theological discussions, particularly in The Watchtower. These terms are used to maintain doctrinal distinctions, such as in articles discussing Christian neutrality or loyalty, where non-members are seen as sources of temptation or moral contrast.

 

Comparative Analysis

The following table summarizes the key differences in terminology and tone between recent years and the past:

 

Aspect	Past (Pre-2021)	Recent (2021–2025)
Primary Terms	“Worldly,” “people of the world,” “non-believers”	“People,” “those we meet,” “readers,” “the world’s attitude”
Tone	Often judgmental, emphasizing separation	More neutral and relational, especially in outreach
Context of Use	Frequent in both theological and outreach materials	Neutral terms in outreach, traditional terms in theology
Driver of Change	Emphasis on doctrinal purity and separation	Growth of digital ministry, global accessibility

 

This comparison highlights a dual approach in recent years: maintaining traditional terminology for internal doctrinal discussions while adopting softer language for public-facing materials to engage non-members.

 

Supporting Evidence from Publications

• Recent Issues: Browsing the February 2025 Watchtower (studied April 14–May 4, 2025) revealed articles like “Reject the Selfish Spirit of Today’s World,” which used “the world’s attitude” to describe non-members, indicating a shift toward neutrality. Other articles, such as “How to Be a True Friend,” focused on internal community interactions without derogatory terms for non-members.
• Historical Context: Web searches confirmed that earlier publications, such as those from the 1960s, frequently used “worldly” to denote non-members, often in a pejorative sense. For example, articles emphasized avoiding “worldly influences” during political events, reinforcing separation.
• Outreach Materials: Recent Awake! issues, such as “What Has Happened to Respect?” (No. 1 2024), address universal ethical dilemmas without labeling non-members, using inclusive language to invite dialogue.

Limitations and Observations

The analysis is limited by the inability to access all historical publications directly, relying on web searches and recent issues. However, the trend toward neutral language is consistent with the organization’s focus on digital outreach and global expansion, as seen in the JW Library app’s features for accessing meeting materials and videos. The persistence of “worldly” in theological contexts suggests a balance between outreach and maintaining doctrinal purity.

 

Conclusion

In summary, the trend in recent years (2021–2025) for Jehovah’s Witnesses is toward using more neutral and relational language, such as “people” or “those we meet,” particularly in evangelistic and digital contexts, while traditional terms like “worldly” are reserved for theological discussions. This contrasts with past practices, where “worldly” was more commonly used with a judgmental tone, reflecting a shift driven by the need to engage a broader audience through digital ministry and global accessibility.

[➕👇 ꓤꓱꓷꓠꓵ🎵Tone]

Nothing (not even dress and grooming choices) can corrupt our pure worship.

And we all speak one language -
the language of truth.

Old (Downunder) Tone