This code is confused.
First off, while it's called newtonRaphson, it seems to be only for a very specific case of the Newton-Raphson method, that of finding square roots using the Babylonian Method.  So ideally it should have a better name.
It tries to simultaneously solve the problem recursively and with a while-loop.  We need to choose one or the other.  Here we choose a recursive version.
Then we note that these lines make no real sense:
    var previousValue = 0
    if(previousValue === 0){
      previousValue = x/2
    } 
This is a ridiculously round-about way of writing
    var previousValue = x/2
You ask about doing this without passing the previous value to the recursive function.  You could, just by tracking it at a higher scope.  (Please, please, not the global scope!)  It might look like this:
const sqrt = (x, count) => {
  let prev = x / 2
  const _sqrt = (count) => {
    if (count <= 0) return prev
    prev = (prev + (x / prev)) / 2
    return _sqrt (count - 1)
  }
  return _sqrt (count)
}
console .log (sqrt (25, 1)) //=> 7.25
console .log (sqrt (25, 2)) //=> 5.349137931034482
console .log (sqrt (25, 3)) //=> 5.011394106532552
console .log (sqrt (25, 4)) //=> 5.000012953048684
console .log (sqrt (25, 5)) //=> 5.000000000016778
console .log (sqrt (25, 6)) //=> 5
 
 
But I would not recommend this at all.  Recursion is simplest when you pass the necessary variables into the function.  And this is not hard to do, either with a defaulted parameter, like this:
const sqrt = (x, count, prev = x / 2) =>
  count <= 0
    ? prev
    : sqrt (x, count - 1, (prev + (x / prev)) / 2)
or with a public wrapper around an internal recursive helper function, like this:
const _sqrt = (x, count, prev) =>
  count <= 0
    ? prev
    : _sqrt (x, count - 1, (prev + (x / prev)) / 2)
const sqrt = (x, count) => 
  _sqrt (x, count, x / 2)
Of the two, I usually prefer the defaulted parameter, but there are some potential problems with them, especially if you are not in control of how your function is called.  Then the public/internal split makes sense.