Sorry, just another thought. But one example of this sort of thing for me is with the WT contention that Matthew was written first. Why? They use the catholic tradition (funny, how these men were so demon possessed but could snap out of it long enough to write something true down).
I look at the arguments for Matthewian priority and funny enough, they are flimsy. Markian priority is way more sensible. Does this change how I view the gospels? Does it change how I view Matthew? Sure it does!
It always bothered me that Matthew got the Jesus riding on two animal thing so very wrong. I always wondered, whats wrong with this guy! But understanding that Matthew wrote later and wasn't very smart and got stuff wrong, helped me to weight that gospel (say compared to Luke, which has much better writing). Just one thought.
There are so many assumptions we make. Tough to challenge them all. But I guess when you come outta the WTBTS, you can't help it. :)
ackack