However, the intellectually honest will admit that while a change in policy may come about to correct an error, it is also the case that the changes in policy could merely be a merciful response to changes in the needs and circumstances of the members.
A powerful illustration of that point is the Savior’s Sermon on the mount where he distinguishes the lesser law of old, with the higher law He is teaching. The law given to the Jews by Jesus as Jehovah, was tailored to their dispositions and needs at the time. It was not a mistake. It was an example of an all wise creator providing policies & commandments best suited to the current circumstances of his people. The new law given by Jehovah as Jesus, was the higher law, suited to the needs of the church he was organizing, the gospel he was teaching. Interestingly, in response to those who accused Jesus of abrogating the lesser law He stated; “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” Matthew 5:17
On a micro level Jehovah who declared through Isaiah that Hezekiah would die of his illness, was not making a mistake. When Isaiah told the king to get his affairs in order because he was going to die, that was a factual and correct statement at that time. Yet, after Hezekiah’s humble pleadings for his Lord to exercise mercy, Jehovah did just that, He changed his prior correct decree, to meet the new circumstance, and to correctly, mercifully, grant Hezekiah 15 more years.
It was an immovable and merciless god that Jonah wanted, when as God’s prophet he declared that the great city Nineveh would be destroyed, Jonah wanted his words to be fulfilled exactly, no changes allowed. Thankfully, God altered his decree based upon the peoples’ humble reaction, and the city was spared. Jonah was then taught how ridiculous and cold hearted his position had been, caring more for a plant than for the lives of all the inhabitants of Nineveh. Jonah wanted to be right, rather than wanting what was right.
These examples and numerous others indicate that in God’s merciful work, (which is to save as many of his children as possible), policies, declarations, and decrees can and will change, depending on the needs and actions of His people.
The change to a 3-hour Sunday block in 1980 did not mean that the many years of split meetings that preceded the change were in error. The earlier format was not a mistake by weak men, who misunderstood God’s will all those years and finally found the strength to correct it. No, the change was an alteration of policy to meet His children’s need at that time.
Just so the recent change to a 2-hour block does not mean the 3-hour policy, nor the split meeting policy that preceded it, were flawed at inception, rather is it a move to meet the needs of God’s people in our day and time, in anticipation of what lies before us.
It is an error to assume that changes in church policy over time must have come about to correct errors. Honesty requires us to accept the fact that another possible reason for each change, was that the change was in response to changes in circumstances, and based upon God’s foreknowledge, love and desires to best meet the needs of his children.