Many churches have readings from holy scriptures or from some respected source. Congregations of conservative churches may go through the entire Bible one chapter at a time, just as Jews may go through the Torah, or Muslims through the Koran, usually with a 'putting of meaning into' the reading - expounding on it. Catholic services include a reading from the gospels without commentary. UU's may read a passage from Emerson, or an ancient pagan blessing, or something from a traditional religious source, letting the passage speak for itself.
In all of these cases, the source is cited and there may be many commentaries that address it. Contrast this with reading from the Watchtower - full of present truth that will presently be passed truth - and ask, are there commentaries available on these words printed only months ago, and is it permissable to seek such commentaries?
It is bad enough that, when readers were first restricted in their comments to an introduction and a conclusion, a clarification had to be made the following year that for non-contiguous readings he may say that he is moving on to another verse. But with all comments verboten - no introductory setting of the stage, no concluding summary of key points, no notes on persons, times, or places - one is left to take in the Bible reading for later consideration and research, but must take the Watchtower as higher than gospel.
Dear friends, is this not the time to cut your ties with false religion that exalts the thoughts of men? The Levites who served before Jehovah made the words of the Law understandable to the people, and thus glorified the word of God, but now those who claim to be mere temple helpers elevate their own words.
The god of the dolphins has flippers.