Did anyone find the illustration on Page 26 odd? I surmised for a moment that perhaps the "brother" in the illustration was an elder and he prayed about an employment issue - we all know what he will do. Yet, would that same elder make the same pryerful decision when it came to selling a kingdom hall to say the same church and say no?
I find this wholly riduculous that on one hand a person has to provide for his family, may have limited income, and yet God would be very unhappy if he painted the church but on the other hand he smiles when some BOE rips off a church by selling them an overpriced, shoddily built outhouse?
I also wondered if the whole employment issue was back on the burners again. I recall that there was a distinction between if you were or were not in control of what contracts you took on. if you go out and secure a painting cantract for a church, that is different to being an employee where is is part of your employment contract?