This publication has been updated

by road to nowhere 8 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • road to nowhere
    road to nowhere

    I downloaded the clam thing a couple weeks ago. Now got this message, not the first time either

    Can't they even keep doctrine straight for 2 months? No way i can figure to find changes and they don't tell

  • steve2

    Updating a publication does not necessarily mean "doctrine" has also been updated, right? It could be something as straightforward as a change in meeting structure or timing. Besides, the JW org message indicates they have not attempted to hide the update. So I'm not sure what your point is.

  • carla

    To what are you referring?

    Please keep in mind some of will not go to the j w d ot o rg site. If you could explain further it would be appreciated.

  • road to nowhere
    road to nowhere

    The jw library has the meeting parts for the week (month) that can be downloaded into a tablet. When you go to reference them you often get the message about being updated. Some of are still "in" so need to at least look at the material. The point being something that was up to date in may is now needing tweaked

  • steve2

    Sorry road to nowhere, but I don't see why this warrants a post. Your OP asks, "Can't they even keep doctrine straight for 2 months?" If this is updating meeting material, I don't see what the big deal is. It does not relate to "updates" on doctrine. Many publications in this internet age are routinely updated and it doesn't necessarily mean something big is being changed or altered. Besides, as I said in my earlier reply, at least the updates are openly acknowledged.

  • jonahstourguide

    Yes I'm with steve2.

    I religiously read the abc news on line here in Oz. Often I see 'updated 10 minutes ago' when I check the article, that I read six hours ago, I note one sentence relating to the police incident with regard to timing has been updated.


    Its the new Internet age thingy. And yes, their doctrines are a revolving door thingy too.

  • HiddenPimo

    First off - I must say that if we have personal reasons for posting something, who are any of us to judge it as worthy of posting or not.

    While most edits are indeed just grammar corrections or basic edits, the point is that many are updated to changes in Wording to stay current with teachings and β€˜new’ light.

    also some quotes when found to be misquoted have been changed. Also pictures change and so do subtle changes to the song lyrics.

    With the advent of technology and websites to gather news, We have all seen a decline in proofreading from news sources and others.

    But what is significant is that if Jehovah is truly directing or guiding or whatever it is called today, why are these things not caught before publishing.

    just my 2 cents,

    everyone have a great day! πŸ‘πŸΌπŸ˜‰


  • steve2

    HiddenPimo, I go back to my original query which so far hasn't been answered: What is the purpose of pointing out in the OP that a document has been updated? Just as the poster has their personal reasons for posting something, the reader may have their personal reasons for querying it. Are you saying we should just be unquestioning as regards a new topic?

    You have no argument from me over the organization's history of making significant changes in its publications - often without commenting that they have been updated. Okay - so a poster raises that same question over the update in in the CLAM - but produces absolutely no evidence this has involved a doctrine (as hinted at in the OP) in this instance. As I noted and as jonahtourguide reiterated, it is routine practice for publishers to provide updates. And the fact that JW organization's updates are identified by their system as updates shows there has been no attempt to hide the update..

    So again, I ask, What is the point of the OP? If I can be bold let me guess: Even though lacking in any evidence to back up the OP, it is a feeble attempt to suggest even CLAM updates are in some way suspect. And absolutely no evidence to back that up - but the suspision lingers. My view is there is a wealth of information that clearly calls JW organization's practises and policies into question without calling into question some aspects of JW organization that are routine and in line with the practice of publishers providing internet updates.

  • blondie

    I sometimes read my post more carefully after I post it and realize my comment actually says the opposite of what I meant it to say, leaving out just one word, like not. I go back and edit it right away, but sometimes someone has read it already, and I have no way of knowing it. I try to mark it as edited at the end of my post, but sometimes I try to save time.

    I'm not hiding my mistake, just assumed that no one saw the one with the word left out.

Share this