i'm at the water park with my five year old in green bay.
she was so happy to be spared another boring day like she endured at thursday's propaganda feast with her mother.
after breakfast we drove by the convention site.
Good for you wannabe,
the people outside and the people in are on the exact same side of the spectrum. LOL
Ideologies may differ but whatever need is driving their behavoir so that they want to be there, is exactly the same.
You are teaching your daughter to be healthy and free and enjoy the moment.
The best gifts you can give her.
hi guys,.
i stumbled upon this video while snooping around on jw.org.. lol isn't this ironic.. a video about gossip.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfqvywf-1is.
thoughts?
Thoughts?
Well the guy under the tree that the paint can falls on?
He has on tight pants!
There!
I gossiped!~
millie2105 hours agohere is something i just found out this week.former belief - field service is a publishers inalienable right new belief - field service privilege can be taken away if person styles hair or wears clothing in a way that is deemed metrosexual.i was pretty much dumbfounded.. this was posted on another thread, so i decided to start a new topic about this.
i think this is amazing!
i wish this was in place when i was a kid.
oldskoolAn ambiguous concept that nobody ever understood.
The letter reads like guidelines for private reproof. Nothing new
If so, then it means tight pants is a judicial matter. Reproof, private or public is judicial,requiring a committee.
And yes, that would be new.
I am not nit picking your post oldschool. I see you and me as being on the same side here.
I AM picking apart their letter and their policies and will be doing so for as long as they sit themselves up as lords and overseers over other peoples lives.
They need to be consistent within their own policies.
However ridiculous those may be, consistency is a bare minimum standard even they should be able to meet.
millie2105 hours agohere is something i just found out this week.former belief - field service is a publishers inalienable right new belief - field service privilege can be taken away if person styles hair or wears clothing in a way that is deemed metrosexual.i was pretty much dumbfounded.. this was posted on another thread, so i decided to start a new topic about this.
i think this is amazing!
i wish this was in place when i was a kid.
oldskool
Rather than being new wouldn't this simply be defining what was already at the discretion of the local Elders already? Reproof is reproof, they always could do it for any trivial violation found inside WT literature. The mentioned letter may have some defined terms, but it could have been done in the past anyway, correct?
Clothing was always something to be regulated. A good deal of this was informal, members checking each other through gossip, which eventually could lead to reproof action
As far as I know, this stops short of reproof, Reproof can only be for a judicial reason, correct?
Maybe this is more like marking in that one regard (non judicial)
I am guessing. I dont know.
I just see this as a sticky situation, if you tell someone they cant go out in service because of their grooming then who is next?
I mean, wife beaters, drunkards, child molesters, porn addicts, gossips, and disfellowshipped people can ALL go out in service.
But not the kid in the tight pants.
Really?
in an effort to reduce the number of posts, this year i will try to add links to this post.
now, on with the leaks & releases!
first up.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nzvwhflss4.
wifi- you do such a valuable work for all of us. Thank YOU!
millie2105 hours agohere is something i just found out this week.former belief - field service is a publishers inalienable right new belief - field service privilege can be taken away if person styles hair or wears clothing in a way that is deemed metrosexual.i was pretty much dumbfounded.. this was posted on another thread, so i decided to start a new topic about this.
i think this is amazing!
i wish this was in place when i was a kid.
here it is Steve,
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5749122145452032/you-wear-tight-pants-you-will-trouble
in the 10th post by JWFacts, the letter is there to read.
On page 2 of the thread wifibandit has provided a link to the actual letter.
millie2105 hours agohere is something i just found out this week.former belief - field service is a publishers inalienable right new belief - field service privilege can be taken away if person styles hair or wears clothing in a way that is deemed metrosexual.i was pretty much dumbfounded.. this was posted on another thread, so i decided to start a new topic about this.
i think this is amazing!
i wish this was in place when i was a kid.
Hey steve!
Did you read the letter? I would appreciate your take on it.
millie2105 hours agohere is something i just found out this week.former belief - field service is a publishers inalienable right new belief - field service privilege can be taken away if person styles hair or wears clothing in a way that is deemed metrosexual.i was pretty much dumbfounded.. this was posted on another thread, so i decided to start a new topic about this.
i think this is amazing!
i wish this was in place when i was a kid.
steve2
This is NOT - repeat NOT - new. When has it ever been an "inalienable" right - and who ever came up with that overblown adjective to describe Witnesses having rights?
People who are disfellowshipped are not re-baptized upon reinstatement. That baptism supercedes the discipline. A person being a minister was put in that same category.
the issue of whether beards are acceptable or not is addressed in the september 2016 watchtower - well sort of.
it is as clear as mud as to whether they are allowed in places like australia, usa and britain.. 17. what are some factors that may affect whether a brother wears a beard?17 what about the propriety of brothers wearing a beard?
the mosaic law required men to wear a beard.
Like some of you have suggested, it would appear they are taking heavy fire on this issue.
Enough that they had to address it in their usual confusing way.
When you are a group whose sole direction is to REact rather than act...well...you have to be vague until you see which way things are blowing!
hi everyone, a bit of an update here on my continuing disaster of a situation.. (refer to my previous posts for the full story) my mom met with me yesterday for dinner, it was nice.. however, she brought up the fact that because i live with my boyfriend and how everything has gone down, i will be disfellowshipped.. i think the elders basically have enough proof of this.. due to the anonymous tipper (still have no clue who it was, i live in another town 100's of miles away from my old congregation territory), and my mom telling them.
i'm not sure when they will announce it, or if they will contact me prior.. at this point i feel so emotionally dead i don't care- on the other hand, i don't want to be disfellowshipped because i do not want to loose a relationship with my mom.
that is the whole reason i tried fading out.. .
Im sorry such distress is in your life right now raven.
would it help any if you printed out the part of Docs comment from the elders manual so your mom knows exactly that she can contact you rather than some elder just telling her what he thinks?
Also, it has been my experience that older parents are hesitant to break relations with a grown child. Perhaps it is the sense of getting older and more fragile and feeling they need their adult children?
