I was curious as to why the WTBTS would publish an article on the ancient city of EBLA.
But, to begin a little research on the internet on EBLA could well be a surprise to any current JW as it could lead to all kinds of fascinating finds as to the origins of the name YHWH when a search is done, and even lead some to the discovery of the God EL, the original lead or head god of the Sumerians. The Jews had Baal as their God of fertility and also YHWH as their storm/desert/ mountain/ supreme God (depending on which article you are reading but not surprising considering how many thousands of years back we need to go for this).
Then, there arises the information on the Cult of YHWH and even more fascinating information that the averge JW will never have come across. Only the most information seeking curious JW will come across the real origins of the God they worship and may well be in for a shock.
The Watchtower tries to put a stop to this with a sub article:
'Ebla and the Bible'
'An article published in 1976 in the Biblical Archeologist magazine aroused the curiosity of Bible scholars. The decipherere of the Ebla tables raised the possibility that, among other things, the tables cited names of people and places mentioned centuries later in the Bible. Perhaps going beyond what the article actually said, soem began to write that Ebla had yielded archeological proof of the trutworthiness of the Genesis account. Jesuit Mitchell Dahood claimed tha the clay tablets from Ebla are illuminating the obscurities of the Bible.' He believed, for example, that they could shed light on the 'problem of the antiquity of the name of the God of Israel.'
Now these texts are being examined with greater objectivity. Given the fact that both Hebrew and Eblaite are Semitic languages, it cannot be ruled out that some names of cities or indicviduals may be similar or identical to those in the Bible. Yet, this does not prove that they refer to the same locations or people. How far discoveries at Eble will influence biblical studies remains to be seen. As to the divine name, the writer of the Biblical Archeologist article has denied that he ever said that 'Yahweh' was mentioned in the Ebla texts. For some, the cuneiform sign interpreted as 'ja' indicates just one of the many deities in the Eblaite pantheon, while a number of other specialist explain it as no more than a grammatical sign. In either cae, it does not refer to the only true God, Jehovah.'
The problem is, for the Watchtower, that should the real early origins of the name Jehovah, Jah, JHWH, Yahweh, be widely discovered, the whole WTBTS may well become a laughing stock as their 'Only True God Jehovah' may not be what they think, or portray him to have been and to be.
Was it wise to publish this article in the Watchtower. Should any curious JW get hunting the internet, they may well stumble into a surprise as to the real origins of their only true god.