I don't see much difference between Paul writing a letter to the Corinthian Congregation and the GB writing a letter to the Timbucktoo Congregation.
Is what Paul wrote to the Ephesians just as fallible and subject to 'new light' as the letters the WTS writes to congregations today?
If a letter from the governing body today which says it's immoral to have an organ transplant can be dead wrong and changed later. Can the letter from Paul which says it's wrong to eat blood be dead wrong and subject to change later?
I'm just curious why simple letters would ever become considered the inspired word of god. (I'm also curious why anything written by a human would be considered the inspired word of god, but lets not go there in this topic mmmkay?)
Lastly, in Revelation it says not to add or remove anything from these words.
I'm purdy sure this was just talking about the book of Revelatoin, but witnesses apply that to the ENTIRE bible.
If nothing should have been added to the scriptures after Revelation, and 1st 2nd and 3rd John were written AFTER Revelation, then they can't be scripture can they?