During one of those meetings that took place before my JC, one of the Elders, who was a good friend of mine back then And used to come up with a few outlandish personal views about some teachings, attempted to counter one of my arguments like this:
Eden - "Well, if The truth doesn't change, why is it that what we teach as 'truth' has changed over the years (several examples given)? How can we dogmatically claim at any given moment that we have 'the truth' if our teachings keep changing?"
Elder - " The truth never changes. It's our perspective on The truth that may change, but The truth has always been The same".
Eden - "Well, then, by your own admission, the Organization has been wrong a few times in The past. Doesn't that at least prove that it's possible it may be wrong at present day?"
Elder - "No, The Organization is never wrong"
Eden - "What ?!? But you just said ..."
Elder - "The Organization is only wrong when we look back and see that Jehovah corrected its course. So, it's only wrong in retrospect, never at present time. If Jehovah allows for a teaching or procedure to persist, it's because He wants it that way, therefore it can Never be wrong at any time in present time".
I found it pointless to argue further about this at that point. But I'm curious, because that was an angle I had never heard before, albeit clearly skewed. If you had enough time to prepare a counter-argument, what would it be like?
Eden