There's some very intelligent and respectful posts in this thread, so thanks all, for that.
I have only watched a portion of Mr. Jackson's testimony. Time is not on my side at the moment. What I've been able to glean is more of an inside look into the functioning of the governing body and it's role in relation to the rest of the organization. This, to me, is very key from a doctrinal perspective. The portion where I stopped watching is where they were just starting to get into the real issue at hand, but the first 40 minutes or so of the testimony is, in my opinion, quite damaging to the claim of being the "faithful and discreet slave". And it's out of the horse's mouth, so to speak.
Two phrases that jumped out were "Guardians of Doctrine" and calling the Bible our "constitution. "Guardians of Doctrine" never appears in any literature, so that's a new one. However, calling the Bible our "constitution" seemed to be somewhat popular in the 1970s and 1980s, the last reference to it that way in the March 15, 1984 Watchtower (p. 19 par. 18).
As for the phrase, "Guardians of Doctrine", that too is telling. They truly have placed themselves in a position, a self-appointed position, that even the Bible says is not necessary or required. Note Galatians 3:23-25: "However, before the faith arrived, we were being guarded under law, being handed over into custody, looking to the faith that was about to be revealed. So the Law became our guardian leading to Christ, so that we might be declared righteous through faith. But now that the faith has arrived, we are no longer under a guardian."
I do hope some good comes of all of this. At the very least, the light is shining into this critical area. It's on the world stage for all to see. It's on the internet, and it won't be going away any time soon.
