Hmmm, para. 14 does seem odd:
Q 14. Why should we never yield to apostasy?14. Never should our desire to be yielding, though, lead us to compromise with apostates. Our clear, firm stance in this regard is needed to preserve the purity of the truth and the unity of the congregation. Regarding "false brothers," Paul wrote: "To these we did not yield by way of submission, no, not for an hour, in order that the truth of the good news might continue with you." (Gal. 2:4, 5) In the rare instance that apostasy does appear, devoted Christians will remain firm for what is right.
Does the WTS define apostasy or apostates? Isn't it really anything or anyone that does not agree completely with the WTS?
Would Paul have been considered apostate when he disagreed with other Christians on the resurrection? When he corrected Peter forshunning Gentile Christians, and doing so in front of other Christians?
What if a jw had not agreed with the 1914 generation before 1995 when the WTS officially changed it? Would they have been cast out as apostate?
"devoted Christians"--only jws
Do they support God or the WTS? Is what is right in the WTS publications or the Bible?
"Compromise with apostates"? Previously, they've stated:
***
w061/15p.23par.13DoNotAllowPlacefortheDevil***should we listen to apostates, read their literature, or examine their Web sites on the Internet? If we love God and the truth, we will not do so. We should not allow apostates into our homes or even greet them, for such actions would make us ‘sharers in their wicked works.’
So, if one would never, ever, ever, never have any slight dealings with 'apostates', how could there even be the remote possiblity of "compromise with apostates"?
The topic of this paragraph struck me as somewhat out-of-place, like when they inserted the topic of 'oral sex' in the earlier WT lesson about... Do you recall? Shortly after that lesson I asked the WT conductor. He remembered the 'oral sex' part, but he didn't remember a single thing else about the subject matter.
As boyzone explained, the scripture about "false brothers" is shoehorned to fit. Why would they address unyielding toward 'apostates'? It would seem more logical to just address being unyielding toward 'unbelievers', 'Christendom's teachings', or 'worldly influences'. No, it appears to be aimed specifically at those still inside the congregation.
Also, the wording seems very carefully measured and crafted. Why do they state, "In the rare instance that apostasy does appear..."? Perhaps the instances are not so rare? It would appear that they know it is a serious problem to address, but they also want to minimize the widespread scale of 'apostate' sympathies.
Perhaps this is reactionary. They realize that many in the R&F have leanings toward 'apostasy', that is, 'anything or anyone that does not agree completely with the WTS'. Indeed there is much to motivate one to raise, shall we say, questionable questions about last weeks noolite. So, if Brother Oldtimer says, "I remember decades ago when this new 'this generation' was the official belief. Then they changed it, changed it again, and now changed it back. Who are the screwy WT scholars that come up with this flip-flopping", Brother Oldtimer will be an "apostate" now, eh?
Perhaps this is preparatory, so that no one will make any 'apostate' statements regarding the divine termination of the Congregation Book Study arrangement. Or, maybe they're trying to prepare Sister Tenderheart to not sympathize with the pedophile victims when she hears about the scandals. Stick to the mantra, "the Faithful Slave does nothing wrong", or your an "apostate" Sister Tenderheart. Or perhaps there are more upcoming lessons in the Kool-Aid edition or something bizarre at the district conventions that might cause a possible 'apostate' reaction.
B the X