2023 Governing Body Update #8 / BEARDS!!!

[Sheep]

15 hours ago, Hope said:

 

 

15 hours ago, Shawnster said:

 

 

Please look in your respective PM inboxes.

[Cool.As.Ice]

17 hours ago, jwhess said:

 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.

 

2 hours 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. 

Here’s my thinking on the matter:

 

The point I was making to Eric earlier is that whether one had a beard or not no longer matters. The slave has made a major adjustment with a situation that had caused major controversy among God’s people before, as circumcision did back in the first century.

 

Circumcision was a requirement under the Mosaic Law. Then, when Jesus died, we Christians were no longer under the Law. So whether one wanted to have their kids circumcised or not no longer mattered to Jehovah, as He no longer required the practice out of his dedicated people.

 

A lot of Jewish brothers still clung on to the practice because it was part of their tradition, and Paul tried his hardest to help them move forward with Jehovah’s organization.

 

Beards used to be a similar divisive issue in our time; back before the GB announcement, there were no formal arrangements per se, other than follow the direction of the local body of elders. I used to have elders on my back when I would forget to shave, and I would not be assigned parts to the meeting.

 

The slave, in one stroke, had removed those taboos and is emphasizing, not only the need not to make rules where the Bible doesn’t say, but about progressing and moving forward as an organization wherever Jehovah is trying to lead us.

 

I didn’t want to so much highlight circumcision as I wanted to make the point that once Jehovah says “this is not necessary anymore” or “this is permissible”, we just go with the flow and simply move forward. Maybe I hadn’t worded it right earlier…

 

Anyway, the Jewish brothers back then needed to be adjusted, and modern-day brothers today, also needed to be adjusted.

Eric is a faithful brother, and he’s been in the truth for a very long time, way longer than me. I’m not telling him anything that he doesn’t already know.  But I wanted to let him know that I respected his free will and freedom of choice, but the fact is is that we have had adjustments, and just like they had to adapt in the first century, we have to adapt to changes today.

 

Hopefully this makes sense.

[jwhess]

1 hour ago, Cool.As.Ice said:

 

Here’s my thinking on the matter:

 

The point I was making to Eric earlier is that whether one had a beard or not no longer matters. The slave has made a major adjustment with a situation that had caused major controversy among God’s people before, as circumcision did back in the first century.

 

Circumcision was a requirement under the Mosaic Law. Then, when Jesus died, we Christians were no longer under the Law. So whether one wanted to have their kids circumcised or not no longer mattered to Jehovah, as He no longer required the practice out of his dedicated people.

 

A lot of Jewish brothers still clung on to the practice because it was part of their tradition, and Paul tried his hardest to help them move forward with Jehovah’s organization.

 

Beards used to be a similar divisive issue in our time; back before the GB announcement, there were no formal arrangements per se, other than follow the direction of the local body of elders. I used to have elders on my back when I would forget to shave, and I would not be assigned parts to the meeting.

 

The slave, in one stroke, had removed those taboos and is emphasizing, not only the need not to make rules where the Bible doesn’t say, but about progressing and moving forward as an organization wherever Jehovah is trying to lead us.

 

I didn’t want to so much highlight circumcision as I wanted to make the point that once Jehovah says “this is not necessary anymore” or “this is permissible”, we just go with the flow and simply move forward. Maybe I hadn’t worded it right earlier…

 

Anyway, the Jewish brothers back then needed to be adjusted, and modern-day brothers today, also needed to be adjusted.

Eric is a faithful brother, and he’s been in the truth for a very long time, way longer than me. I’m not telling him anything that he doesn’t already know.  But I wanted to let him know that I respected his free will and freedom of choice, but the fact is is that we have had adjustments, and just like they had to adapt in the first century, we have to adapt to changes today.

 

Hopefully this makes sense.

Thank you.  The early Jewish Christian gave up the entire Mosaic Law.  So some of the requirements might be closer to the beard discussion.  Such as, the need for a 'blue thread' above their garment hem.  All Jews had it.  I am sure Jewish Christians had it.  But as time went on, they could choose to keep it or stop using it.

 

In this case, the keeping of it might be a fashion choice or maybe a Jewish family member made a garment as a gift. The removing of the thread might be a personal choice to show acceptance of the Law's replacement in their hearts.  But basically it was a mature decision and was reversible.  And in either case, it should not be a matter for congregation division.

[truce]

23 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!"? 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.

Nothing you feel will change what "the holy spirit and we ourselves (the GB)" have decided on this matter. 

[truce]

19 hours ago, Shawnster said:

 

 

 

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? 

Yes, I can.  

[truce]

2 hours ago, Cool.As.Ice said:

 

Here’s my thinking on the matter:

 

The point I was making to Eric earlier is that whether one had a beard or not no longer matters. The slave has made a major adjustment with a situation that had caused major controversy among God’s people before, as circumcision did back in the first century.

 

Circumcision was a requirement under the Mosaic Law. Then, when Jesus died, we Christians were no longer under the Law. So whether one wanted to have their kids circumcised or not no longer mattered to Jehovah, as He no longer required the practice out of his dedicated people.

 

A lot of Jewish brothers still clung on to the practice because it was part of their tradition, and Paul tried his hardest to help them move forward with Jehovah’s organization.

 

Beards used to be a similar divisive issue in our time; back before the GB announcement, there were no formal arrangements per se, other than follow the direction of the local body of elders. I used to have elders on my back when I would forget to shave, and I would not be assigned parts to the meeting.

 

The slave, in one stroke, had removed those taboos and is emphasizing, not only the need not to make rules where the Bible doesn’t say, but about progressing and moving forward as an organization wherever Jehovah is trying to lead us.

 

I didn’t want to so much highlight circumcision as I wanted to make the point that once Jehovah says “this is not necessary anymore” or “this is permissible”, we just go with the flow and simply move forward. Maybe I hadn’t worded it right earlier…

 

Anyway, the Jewish brothers back then needed to be adjusted, and modern-day brothers today, also needed to be adjusted.

Eric is a faithful brother, and he’s been in the truth for a very long time, way longer than me. I’m not telling him anything that he doesn’t already know.  But I wanted to let him know that I respected his free will and freedom of choice, but the fact is is that we have had adjustments, and just like they had to adapt in the first century, we have to adapt to changes today.

 

Hopefully this makes sense.

Yes, it does.

[carlos]

On 2/25/2025 at 12:18 AM, Sheep said:

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.

 

Eric, I was not criticizing your views, I was just acknowledging they exist. You dislike beards. It's ok. That lady disliked beards too, so you thought that was a powerful argument against brothers with beards. Had she had a different bias, you wouldn't have given a second thought to it.

 

My point is that there are all kinds of people out there with their own biases and personal opinions, and we cannot and need not please all of them. We can find someone who will never listen to a bearded person, and we can find someone who had never listened to Witnesses until a bearded one came to his door. All we can do is have a decent and dignified attire, and let Jehovah attract to the truth those he considers deserving.

[Desert Dan]

22 minutes ago, carlos said:

We can find someone who will never listen to a bearded person, and we can find someone who had never listened to Witnesses until a bearded one came to his door. All we can do is have a decent and dignified attire, and let Jehovah attract to the truth those he considers deserving.

 

I believe this is an important thing to reason on as listed above by Carlos.

Edited Tuesday at 11:49 PM by Desert Dan

[Thomas Walker]

61 pages, and 14 months of discussion. Think the GB had any idea what they were turning loose with this one?

Edited Wednesday at 01:29 AM by Thomas Walker

[Tortuga]

You don't know how others truly feel about your beard until they tell you how glad they are that you shaved it off..

[Mike047]

On 2/25/2025 at 2:59 AM, jwhess said:

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.

An interesting point, John. I remember our congregation going to the British Museum and learning about the foreskin restoration practiced by the Greeks. Some Jews during Antiochus' persecution sought to undo their circumcision. Within the 1st century CE, there were still some forms of foreskin restoration being sought after. The text at 1Cor 7:18 might have a side reference to this. During the Bar Kokhba revolt, there is Rabbinic evidence that records, Jews who had removed their circumcision (meaning that foreskin restoration was still being practiced) were recircumcised, voluntarily or by force.

 

[Tortuga]

I decided to cut my beard to look like Herod on the Jesus video. 

[Cool.As.Ice]

34 minutes ago, Tortuga said:

I decided to cut my beard to look like Herod on the Jesus video. 

You fox, you…

Edited Wednesday at 07:17 PM by Cool.As.Ice

[Hope]

4 hours ago, Tortuga said:

I decided to cut my beard to look like Herod on the Jesus video. 

 

[SKnight]

16 minutes ago, Hope said:

 

I will stay on another hour just to see if @Tortuga would do it and to see what he would look like 🤩🤩🤩

[Cool.As.Ice]

This has been the hairiest topic known to man…

[Tortuga]

8 hours ago, Tortuga said:

I decided to cut my beard to look like Herod on the Jesus video. 

 

Well, close enough...

 

 

[SKnight]

3 minutes ago, Tortuga said:

Well, close enough...

It’s giving a “Distinguished-Gentleman” vibe 👍🏽

[Ahuvah]

8 hours ago, Tortuga said:

I decided to cut my beard to look like Herod on the Jesus video. 

Did it work? Did you manage the saliva spit as well?

[Cool.As.Ice]

Too short.