"Stop the Presses!"
Awesome blog article at Bereans.net !
The WT hierarchy just shot themselves in the foot, or rather their oracle mouth, and it could blow the brains off their Other Sheep doctrine. Maybe we'll see further clarification on this "lapsus linguae" as they try to reassemble their revisionist, doctrinal undoing.
One commenter by the username of Eleasar summarizes it this way:
The teaching of the “Great Crowd” is based on 4 fundamental elements.
1. Where do they stand in the temple? (See Revelation 7:15) Naos means the inner sanctuary as based on the 1st May WT 2002 Question from readers. This means that the “Great Crowd” location needs to be revisited. On the understanding of the Spiritual temple (see w72 12/1 pp. 709-716 “The One True Temple at Which to Worship”, w96 7/1 pp. 14-19 Jehovah’s Great Spiritual Temple and w96 7/1 pp. 19-24 The Triumph of True Worship Draws Near) The last article has the point corrected in the 2002 Question from Readers.
2. Jehu and Jonadab teaching of type and antitype based on the 1934 WT 1st August on “His Kindness” no longer applies based on the FDS rule as stated in the bible. This is implicit and not explicitly stated.
3. Cities of Refuge teaching of type and antitype teachings based on the 15th August 1934 “His Kindness Part 2” is no longer valid. This is an explicit statement as we can see in the November 2017 edition and you have covered this in your article.
4. The teaching of John 10:16 is the only one remaining and that is disproved scripturally by Ephesians 2; 11-19.
I make it 3 out of the 4 points have now shown to be in error. The 4th point can be reasoned contextually and will fall.
Since Rutherford based his Other Sheep doctrine on the Cities of Refuge being the prophetic Biblical type for the teaching that the Other Sheep are earth bound subjects of God's Kingdom, by the GB's writing committee admitting that the cities of refuge are not the OT in anti-typical fleece covering, as previously taught, they have left themselves with no published support for the Other Sheep doctrine. They've cut their feet from under themselves on this doctrine. They've shorn the sheep, they've fleeced their doctrine.
The OT doctrine, and the love of pandas and pet lions, may well be firmly ingrained in the minds of current JW publishers, but they've now opened themselves to a doctrinal showdown where a logical disproving of the doctrine could cause a "look who's behind the curtain" shock in a meltdown of cognitive dissonance.
What will happen next?