Does it seem plausible to you that some of the Society's apparent flip-flops on doctrine are simply errors by the Writing Department?
For instance, take the question of whether the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah will be resurrected. Around 1989, the revised edition of You Can Live Forever in Paradise said no, the Insight book said something else and the Revelation Climax book said something else. (I don't have the page citations in front of me, but in any case, there were two nos and one yes, I think.)
I'd be surprised if the Society actually changed its mind that quickly on the same doctrine in that short of a period of time. Maybe one change would be understandable (like the definition of fornication in the January 1, 1972 and December 15, 1972 Watchtower Questions from Readers), but two seems like a long shot.
Since the Writing Department apparently does a lot of its research just by looking up what past publications have said, might it be that one writer looked up information on Sodom and Gomorrah that wasn't "present truth," thought it sounded right and used it, and then had it rubber-stamped by a member of the Governing Body who was already snowed under by paperwork/late for lunch/sleepy, allowing it to be printed?
The Society prints SO MUCH literature that it's hard for anyone to keep track of it all. Otherwise, I'm sure more Witnesses would become aware of what's said in the older publications and contradictions therein. But instead, they're struggling merely to keep up with what comes out month to month.
Thoughts?
comment