The Jehovah's Witnesses believe that their denomination is a restoration of the original, ancient form of Christianity. They claim to have rediscovered this form through principled biblical study and scholarship.
The Witnesses have even produced their own Bible translation, the New World Translation (NWT), which they claim more accurately reflects the intention of the original writers. While this translation has often been criticized for introducing a bias in favour of the denomination's pre-existing doctrines (and particularly for its use of the word "Jehovah" in the New Testament), it has also attracted praise for its scholarly methods and accuracy.
Let's put aside for now the question of whether the pre-existing doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses unduly influenced this translation. I am interested to learn whether the converse is true: Did the production of the New World Translation influence the doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses? After all, the Witnesses do claim that their beliefs are based on modern, ongoing Biblical scholarship. Did the NWT's translators claim to have gained any new insights on early Christianity, and if so, did these insights lead the denomination's leaders to change any of its previous interpretations and teachings, or to introduce new ones?
EDIT: The comments and answers so far indicate that there may be some confusion about what I am asking. So let me provide an example:
The Jehovah's Witnesses once believed and taught that Jesus was put to death on a cross. However, in the 1930s this doctrine changed due to what they claimed was a re-examination of the original Greek-language texts of the New Testament. They noted that these texts use the word σταυρός (stauros) to refer to the instrument of execution. In consulting the available evidence from historical records and from contemporaneous textual usage of the term, they concluded that the word σταυρός, as used in the Bible, refers to a simple stake without a crossbeam. This interpretation became part of the official teaching: Jehovah's Witnesses now state that Jesus was put to death on a "torture stake". The take-home message here is that in the 1930s they claimed that their scholars discovered a significant translation error which, when corrected, led to a change in their teachings.
The question is thus whether the Jehovah's Witnesses claim to have discovered and corrected any further major errors or omissions in translation or interpretation during the production of their New World Translation in the 1940s and 1950s. Did they ever say something to the effect of, "Until now, we Witnesses have mistakenly believed X. But thanks to the textual and historical evidence that was newly collected and analyzed in the preparation of the NWT, we understand now that we should actually believe Y."?