neat blue dog,
These statements are typical of watchtower and Jehovah's witnesses.
They make cleverly worded ambiguous claims that infer a particular idea or clear expression, but ones they can later (with use of semantics) weasel out of.
For example: • they do not rely on strict (rules or authority) of any particular leader------ we have eight men who individually are not leaders but when they come together they form the fds.
• Geoffrey Jackson, in his reply to Angus Stewart at the ARC; "I (think) it would (seem) to be quite presumptuous to say that we are the only spokesperson that God is using". ------but we'll say it anyway because we presume to be the only spokesperson that God is using.
• who is that "prophet" that god is using today?-------Jehovah's witnesses never said we are (Prophets) with a capital "P".
• 1975? Something, but We aren't saying.
Sometimes they get caught out with direct statements, but most times they won't commit and if you look closely at the twisted wording you'll find they have provided themselves with enough ambiguity to be able to wiggle (like the maggots they are) away from the statement and narrative they were responsible for inferring.
RayoFlight2014.