To demonstrate how the WTS conveniently leaves out crucial information in certain articles depending on the audience or the message, let's compare what the Society says about what Paul wrote at 1 Timothy about "one mediator between God and man".
Ask the average JW and they don't realize that Jesus is not their mediator but is mediator for the anointed only. It's in print, it's an official doctrine but for some reason, the average dub misses out on it.
Here's the official doctrine:
*** Watchtower 1979 April 1 p.31 Questions from Readers ***
Questions from Readers
• Is Jesus the "mediator" only for anointed Christians?
The term "mediator" occurs just six times in the Christian Greek Scriptures and Scripturally is always used regarding a formal covenant.
Moses was the "mediator" of the Law covenant made between God and the nation of Israel. (Gal. 3:19, 20) Christ, though, is the "mediator of a new covenant" between Jehovah and spiritual Israel, the "Israel of God" that will serve as kings and priests in heaven with Jesus. (Heb. 8:6; 9:15; 12:24; Gal. 6:16) At a time when God was selecting those to be taken into that new covenant, the apostle Paul wrote that Christ was the "one mediator between God and men." (1 Tim. 2:5) Reasonably Paul was here using the word "mediator" in the same way he did the other five times, which occurred before the writing of 1 Timothy 2:5, referring to those then being taken into the new covenant for which Christ is "mediator." So in this strict Biblical sense Jesus is the "mediator" only for anointed Christians.
The new covenant will terminate with the glorification of the remnant who are today in that covenant mediated by Christ. The "great crowd" of "other sheep" that is forming today is not in that new covenant. However, by their associating with the "little flock" of those yet in that covenant they come under benefits that flow from that new covenant...
Now, let's notice how the WTS conveniently leaves out these important facts about Jesus not being mediator for the vast majority of mankind in this article on the Trinity:
ONE of the main reasons why Jesus came to earth also has a direct bearing on the Trinity. The Bible states: "There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all."— 1 Timothy 2:5, 6 .
Jesus, no more and no less than a perfect human, became a ransom that compensated exactly for what Adam lost—the right to perfect human life on earth. So Jesus could rightly be called "the last Adam" by the apostle Paul, who said in the same context: "Just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive." ( 1 Corinthians 15:22 , 45 ) The perfect human life of Jesus was the "corresponding ransom" required by divine justice—no more, no less. A basic principle even of human justice is that the price paid should fit the wrong committed.
If Jesus, however, were part of a Godhead, the ransom price would have been infinitely higher than what God's own Law required. ( Exodus 21:23-25 ; Leviticus 24:19-21 ) It was only a perfect human, Adam, who sinned in Eden, not God. So the ransom, to be truly in line with God's justice, had to be strictly an equivalent—a perfect human, "the last Adam." Thus, when God sent Jesus to earth as the ransom, he made Jesus to be what would satisfy justice, not an incarnation, not a god-man, but a perfect man, "lower than angels." ( Hebrews 2:9 ; compare Psalm 8:5, 6 .) How could any part of an almighty Godhead—Father, Son, or holy spirit—ever be lower than angels?
...
WHILE Jesus is often called the Son of God in the Bible, nobody in the first century ever thought of him as being God the Son. Even the demons, who "believe there is one God," knew from their experience in the spirit realm that Jesus was not God. So, correctly, they addressed Jesus as the separate "Son of God." ( James 2:19 ; Matthew 8:29 ) And when Jesus died, the pagan Roman soldiers standing by knew enough to say that what they had heard from his followers must be right, not that Jesus was God, but that "certainly this was God's Son."— Matthew 27:54 .
Hence, the phrase "Son of God" refers to Jesus as a separate created being, not as part of a Trinity. As the Son of God, he could not be God himself, for John 1:18 says: "No one has ever seen God."—RS, Catholic edition.
The disciples viewed Jesus as the "one mediator between God and men," not as God himself. ( 1 Timothy 2:5 ) Since by definition a mediator is someone separate from those who need mediation, it would be a contradiction for Jesus to be one entity with either of the parties he is trying to reconcile. That would be a pretending to be something he is not.
The Bible is clear and consistent about the relationship of God to Jesus. Jehovah God alone is Almighty. He created the prehuman Jesus directly. Thus, Jesus had a beginning and could never be coequal with God in power or eternity.
In this case, the WTS wasn't concerned with who was or wasn't under that mediatorship. They're just trying to argue against the Trinity. But when compared to the official doctrine of the meanings of the words at 1 Timothy, the omission of these crucial facts changes the meanings of the words and how it applies to the reader in this situation.
This is just a small example of how the WTS plays with words and meanings depending on what they want to try to prove.
Similarly, just because the WTS never comes right out and says that the non-anointed are not Christians, doesn't mean that the doctrine doesn't indicate that. When the doctrine is dissected, one has to at least question the definition of who is and who isn't Christian, JW style. It's all smoke and mirrors, bait and switch.
