This is an excerpt from a JW email that was posted in another thread:
I believe it is completely inappropriate for a Christian to go against what the FDS says, because they are the anointed of Jehovah. King Saul here, he was evil, he was a person who was detestable in the eyes of God, yet, as a faithful servant of God, David did not dare thrust his hand against Jehovah's anointed. This is the same attitude I hold today. I love my faithful brothers in the truth, I love the FDS, they do so much for us, and truly are to be commended for their efforts. They are fallible, they are imperfect, they make mistakes. When I see that their teachings go beyond the things that are written in God's inspired Word, I do not agree with it, but I don't go and start preaching against it. I know that Jehovah's spirit will guide us eventually into all truth."
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/161396/1.ashx
I find this JW reasoning confusing. First, David was "annointed" prior to this incident. Remember the story, young David was annointed, then the "evil" spirit from Jehovah entered Saul, and he kept attempting to kill David. That means that there were two, concurrent "annointed" channels, one being King Saul and one being David.
David's failure to kill Saul is not evidence that he supported Saul; David was simply waiting for Jehovah to remove Saul from power. David did, however, collect his own followers, and those followers joined that "channel" in opposition to the other "channel." Those that stuck with Saul eventually lost power, and those that followed the new channel, David, gained power.
This doesn't bode well for JW reasoning. First, it destroys the whole single-channel theory. Additionally, it put the onus upon each person to determine which channel to follow.
...just some ramblings.
Justitia