Prof CNJ
Your position is solid and rest assured that most on this forum have contended with the same questions. I don't really remember the first time I was intrigued by the "new light" position, but I would have to say one of the most impressive changes that moved me to question the validity of "light" wasn't even a doctrinal issue.
Way back when an article was written about the American native, I believe it was referring mainly to the eskimos, or Inuit people. The article condemned the "totem pole" as a pagan religious icon or idol. At the time, I was still in school and remembered reading that the totem pole wasn't a religious symbol, but rather, more like a homage to the family tree. I was perplexed, but accepting.
Lo and behold, a couple of months later (I believe), someone wrote a letter to the organization that challenged that position and the organization retracted their comments and stated that the "totem pole" was indeed a family artifact and not pagan in origen.
I knew at that time...I don't know why, but I knew that the idea of light was based on who was in charge and who was writing this stuff.
Just a thought,
SOP