JW Insider

There is obviously unity, but the best kinds of unity refer, not to absolute conformity of thought, but to the ability of Witnesses of all ages to respond in their own words with Bible answers to many doctrinal questions. Most active Witnesses are able to do this for dozens of Bible questions, using their own words, even coming up with their own illustrations. Continuous training in Bible topics will create a high level of conformity, but it's also a unity of purpose, unity in moral standards, and unity in the sense of getting along with one another with minimal issues with regard to race, nationality, etc.
Not all Witnesses are even interested in potential variations of doctrine, because it is so easy to just listen and learn. I believe that, as Christians, it's our responsibility to question all things, but doctrines need not be the highest priority to Christians. They can't be ignored, but Christians should be more conscientiously concerned with moral standards, serving the needs of others and showing love for God and neighbor and allowing those priorities to motivate all of their life and conduct. Doctrines will find their place as time permits.
Those Witnesses who do question teachings out of a strong desire for truth are not hard to find if you listen closely in person to their talks and prayers. And of course, online, it's possible to find many more hiding behind avatars and fake names.
Remember, too, that many Witnesses who have done their Christian duty to question all doctrines may currently appear to be in total conformity with the vast majority of other Witnesses because their questions and research have brought them right back into full acceptance of the unique Witness doctrines. Some, of course, will do their Christian duty and find that one or two doctrines seem impossible to accept to that individual's conscience. Because they work among fellow Witnesses where the majority view is different, they are usually careful to avoid hurting the conscience of the other person by talking openly about their belief. This might give an appearance of conformity that appears stricter than the actual conformity.

I know for a fact, and from personal experience, that it is quite possible to hold differing views from many other Witnesses and continue to have privileges and NOT be disfellowshipped. Among certain bodies of elders one can even make a private request not to be given certain subject matter as assignments and, as long as this never interferes with congregation activities as a whole, this need not be a problem. But I also know that there are some elders and circuit overseers who are quick to create an ultimatum that might lead to disciplinary action. It's ironic that some of the most judgmental of these persons themselves also hold views that differ from the Society's view. (I saw this especially when I worked for Brother Schroeder.)
Everyone knows that all of us might hold certain minor variations in our personal beliefs about a verse or an idea here and there, and if we are not dogmatic and if it does not contradict a key teaching then we are "safe."  But it is easy to cause trouble with personal beliefs, and it's easy for people to get caught up in the idea that their personal beliefs make them somehow better or more spiritually mature than others. This was a rather obvious problem for a time at Bethel.
I didn't see it as openly when I was there, but I'm told that there was a practice that probably peaked in the early to mid 1970's and coincided with the hype about 1975 that ran from 1967 to 1974. The practice was for many "Bethel Elders" (especially those in authoritative positions) to talk about ideas they held that differed from the current Watchtower teachings. This was not considered a sign of disrespect, but a way to gain more respect, a way to position themselves as spiritually mature and studious. It was especially the more mature brothers who had responsibilities in the Service Dept, Correspondence, Writing, and similar work. It seemed like every "Table Head" could speak about some nuances of differences in belief that he held, and there was a kind of free-thinking openness that many brothers found refreshing. Younger Bethelites were able to have enlightening conversations among themselves about doctrinal possibilities based on sharing things they heard from table conversations.
The expansion of the Bethel family due to the increased inflow of Witnesses in the pre-1975 era might have had something to do with why this was cracked down upon. With the new Governing Body assignments that expanded beyond the Board of Directors, some of the brothers like Sydlik and Schroeder who were well known for this practice, began to be heard only in more hushed tones. Others followed suit, so that non-conformists seemed to censor themselves (I'm told). Of course, it's quite possible that other factors resulted in the self-censoring. Perhaps there was a fear that it could get out of control; perhaps it came from Knorr or Franz. All I know is that people still talked about the more open freedom that had been the norm in the years just before I got to Bethel, and various Bethelites would still identify who had said what about certain doctrines. The consistency among various Bethelites told me that most of it was probably true, and I was able to verify some of it with Dan Sydlik, Bert Schroeder, Fred Rusk, Sam Friend and others personally.
On the matter of the "overlapping generation" I would think it's simply a matter of attitude and "style." Disagreeing without being disagreeable.

@Eoin Joyce quoted one of the first real hints of the overlapping generation doctrine from the Feb 15, 2008 WT (above).
Above, I also quoted a WT QFR that mentioned overlapping generations from the Sept. 1, 1952 WT, and it showed why overlapping generations do not effect the length of the generation Jesus spoke about.
After the 2008 article, there was also a more recent mention of the some of the same points repeated in the April 15, 2010 WT, and this 2010 article was the first to explicitly create a generation that is defined by the overlap of two specific groups: One group saw the start of an event, and another group could not have seen the start of that event, but would see the start of a different event, not more than two lifespans from the first event:
*** w10 4/15 pp. 10-11 pars. 13-14 Holy Spirit’s Role in the Outworking of Jehovah’s Purpose ***
13 Third, holy spirit is at work in bringing Bible truths to light. (Prov. 4:18) This magazine has long been used by “the faithful and discreet slave” as the primary channel for dispensing increased light. (Matt. 24:45) For example, consider our understanding of those who make up “this generation” mentioned by Jesus. (Read Matthew 24:32-34.) To what generation did Jesus refer? The article “Christ’s Presence—What Does It Mean to You?” explained that Jesus was referring, not to the wicked, but to his disciples, who were soon to be anointed with holy spirit. Jesus’ anointed followers, both in the first century and in our day, would be the ones who would not only see the sign but also discern its meaning—that Jesus “is near at the doors.”
14 What does this explanation mean to us? Although we cannot measure the exact length of “this generation,” we do well to keep in mind several things about the word “generation”: It usually refers to people of varying ages whose lives overlap during a particular time period; it is not excessively long; and it has an end. (Ex. 1:6) How, then, are we to understand Jesus’ words about “this generation”? He evidently meant that the lives of the anointed who were on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation. That generation had a beginning, and it surely will have an end. The fulfillment of the various features of the sign clearly indicates that the tribulation must be near. By maintaining your sense of urgency and keeping on the watch, you show that you are keeping up with advancing light and following the leadings of holy spirit.—Mark 13:37.
I included the paragraph that drops plenty of hints that this new idea is evidence of holy spirit at work, and that it represents the light of Bible truth, and that the source is the "faithful and discreet slave." This introduction stands together with the explanation in paragraph 14 that we don't know the length, that it "usually" refers to a given description, and that Jesus "evidently" refers to a version of what it "usually" refers to. The only points that are given with "sureness" are these:
The generation had a beginning It will have an end The fulfillment of various features of the sign indicates that the tribulation must be near Note that it isn't by believing in a potential 'two-lifespan' generation that we are keeping up with advancing light and the leadings of holy spirit, but only explcitly by maintaining a sense of urgency, and keeping on the watch. As Christians we would do this with or without the two-lifespan generation, based on other scriptures, for example:
(2 Timothy 4:1, 2) . . .: 2 Preach the word; be at it urgently in favorable times and difficult times. . .
(Ephesians 5:15, 16) 15 So keep strict watch that how you walk is not as unwise but as wise persons, 16 making the best use of your time, because the days are wicked.
(2 Peter 3:11, 12) . . .Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought YOU to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion, 12 awaiting and keeping close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah. . .
 

@Eoin Joyce quoted one of the first real hints of the overlapping generation doctrine from the Feb 15, 2008 WT (above).
Above, I also quoted a WT QFR that mentioned overlapping generations from the Sept. 1, 1952 WT, and it showed why overlapping generations do not effect the length of the generation Jesus spoke about.
After the 2008 article, there was also a more recent mention of the some of the same points repeated in the April 15, 2010 WT, and this 2010 article was the first to explicitly create a generation that is defined by the overlap of two specific groups: One group saw the start of an event, and another group could not have seen the start of that event, but would see the start of a different event, not more than two lifespans from the first event:
*** w10 4/15 pp. 10-11 pars. 13-14 Holy Spirit’s Role in the Outworking of Jehovah’s Purpose ***
13 Third, holy spirit is at work in bringing Bible truths to light. (Prov. 4:18) This magazine has long been used by “the faithful and discreet slave” as the primary channel for dispensing increased light. (Matt. 24:45) For example, consider our understanding of those who make up “this generation” mentioned by Jesus. (Read Matthew 24:32-34.) To what generation did Jesus refer? The article “Christ’s Presence—What Does It Mean to You?” explained that Jesus was referring, not to the wicked, but to his disciples, who were soon to be anointed with holy spirit. Jesus’ anointed followers, both in the first century and in our day, would be the ones who would not only see the sign but also discern its meaning—that Jesus “is near at the doors.”
14 What does this explanation mean to us? Although we cannot measure the exact length of “this generation,” we do well to keep in mind several things about the word “generation”: It usually refers to people of varying ages whose lives overlap during a particular time period; it is not excessively long; and it has an end. (Ex. 1:6) How, then, are we to understand Jesus’ words about “this generation”? He evidently meant that the lives of the anointed who were on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation. That generation had a beginning, and it surely will have an end. The fulfillment of the various features of the sign clearly indicates that the tribulation must be near. By maintaining your sense of urgency and keeping on the watch, you show that you are keeping up with advancing light and following the leadings of holy spirit.—Mark 13:37.
I included the paragraph that drops plenty of hints that this new idea is evidence of holy spirit at work, and that it represents the light of Bible truth, and that the source is the "faithful and discreet slave." This introduction stands together with the explanation in paragraph 14 that we don't know the length, that it "usually" refers to a given description, and that Jesus "evidently" refers to a version of what it "usually" refers to. The only points that are given with "sureness" are these:
The generation had a beginning It will have an end The fulfillment of various features of the sign indicates that the tribulation must be near Note that it isn't by believing in a potential 'two-lifespan' generation that we are keeping up with advancing light and the leadings of holy spirit, but only explcitly by maintaining a sense of urgency, and keeping on the watch. As Christians we would do this with or without the two-lifespan generation, based on other scriptures, for example:
(2 Timothy 4:1, 2) . . .: 2 Preach the word; be at it urgently in favorable times and difficult times. . .
(Ephesians 5:15, 16) 15 So keep strict watch that how you walk is not as unwise but as wise persons, 16 making the best use of your time, because the days are wicked.
(2 Peter 3:11, 12) . . .Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought YOU to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion, 12 awaiting and keeping close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah. . .
 

I think a careful reading actually does lead to the idea that the Watchtower is now promoting the entire doctrine as Bible "truth."
Of course there is a lot of "hyperbole" and "hypobole" in this introduction. It was not "some of their expectations about what would happen in 1914 that did not come about; for most of them, it was ALL OF THEIR EXPECTATIONS ABOUT 1914 that did not come about. If they are referring to the entire group of faithful anointed ones (by their own count) who were actively serving God, then no one could say, per the Watch Tower publications that "most of them proved their integrity under trials and persecution" or that "most --if not all--of those anointed" faithfully completed their earthly course. In fact most of them left the Watch Tower organization, and many were pushed out on purpose by Rutherford, either actively or through doctrinal error. (Doctrines that he promoted, but which we now consider to be in error.)
This is also hyperbole, because none of them readily discerned the sign of Christ's presence in that year, because they continued to discern that Christ's presence was in 1874, and this they discerned even into the 1920's and 1930's, when the doctrine was partially changed. Officially, they kept discerning that Christ's presence had begun in 1874, right up until about 1943. Note this from the book, God's Kingdom of a Thousand Years -- Has Approached:
*** ka chap. 11 pp. 209-210 par. 55 “Here Is the Bridegroom!” ***
55In the year 1943 the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society published the book “The Truth Shall Make You Free.” In its chapter 11, entitled “The Count of Time,” it did away with the insertion of 100 years into the period of the Judges and went according to the oldest and most authentic reading of Acts 13:20, and accepted the spelled-out numbers of the Hebrew Scriptures. This moved forward the end of six thousand years of man’s existence into the decade of the 1970’s. Naturally this did away with the year 1874 C.E. as the date of return of the Lord Jesus Christ and the beginning of his invisible presence or parousia.
The Watchtower in the 1940's admits very explicitly that they did NOT discern the sign of Christ's presence in 1914. None of them did.
Therefore, there are conflicting points here about how they did not understand most of what happened in 1914, and then claiming, at the same time, that they readily discerned what happened in 1914. Taken together, it might be highlighting the more important point that, in spite of a wrong understanding, at least some continued to maintain their integrity and continue to be watchful about Christ's presence. This might also color the lens by which some interpret the importance of the urgency and integrity as opposed to the acceptance of the specific current doctrine itself -- then or now.

@Eoin Joyce quoted one of the first real hints of the overlapping generation doctrine from the Feb 15, 2008 WT (above).
Above, I also quoted a WT QFR that mentioned overlapping generations from the Sept. 1, 1952 WT, and it showed why overlapping generations do not effect the length of the generation Jesus spoke about.
After the 2008 article, there was also a more recent mention of the some of the same points repeated in the April 15, 2010 WT, and this 2010 article was the first to explicitly create a generation that is defined by the overlap of two specific groups: One group saw the start of an event, and another group could not have seen the start of that event, but would see the start of a different event, not more than two lifespans from the first event:
*** w10 4/15 pp. 10-11 pars. 13-14 Holy Spirit’s Role in the Outworking of Jehovah’s Purpose ***
13 Third, holy spirit is at work in bringing Bible truths to light. (Prov. 4:18) This magazine has long been used by “the faithful and discreet slave” as the primary channel for dispensing increased light. (Matt. 24:45) For example, consider our understanding of those who make up “this generation” mentioned by Jesus. (Read Matthew 24:32-34.) To what generation did Jesus refer? The article “Christ’s Presence—What Does It Mean to You?” explained that Jesus was referring, not to the wicked, but to his disciples, who were soon to be anointed with holy spirit. Jesus’ anointed followers, both in the first century and in our day, would be the ones who would not only see the sign but also discern its meaning—that Jesus “is near at the doors.”
14 What does this explanation mean to us? Although we cannot measure the exact length of “this generation,” we do well to keep in mind several things about the word “generation”: It usually refers to people of varying ages whose lives overlap during a particular time period; it is not excessively long; and it has an end. (Ex. 1:6) How, then, are we to understand Jesus’ words about “this generation”? He evidently meant that the lives of the anointed who were on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation. That generation had a beginning, and it surely will have an end. The fulfillment of the various features of the sign clearly indicates that the tribulation must be near. By maintaining your sense of urgency and keeping on the watch, you show that you are keeping up with advancing light and following the leadings of holy spirit.—Mark 13:37.
I included the paragraph that drops plenty of hints that this new idea is evidence of holy spirit at work, and that it represents the light of Bible truth, and that the source is the "faithful and discreet slave." This introduction stands together with the explanation in paragraph 14 that we don't know the length, that it "usually" refers to a given description, and that Jesus "evidently" refers to a version of what it "usually" refers to. The only points that are given with "sureness" are these:
The generation had a beginning It will have an end The fulfillment of various features of the sign indicates that the tribulation must be near Note that it isn't by believing in a potential 'two-lifespan' generation that we are keeping up with advancing light and the leadings of holy spirit, but only explcitly by maintaining a sense of urgency, and keeping on the watch. As Christians we would do this with or without the two-lifespan generation, based on other scriptures, for example:
(2 Timothy 4:1, 2) . . .: 2 Preach the word; be at it urgently in favorable times and difficult times. . .
(Ephesians 5:15, 16) 15 So keep strict watch that how you walk is not as unwise but as wise persons, 16 making the best use of your time, because the days are wicked.
(2 Peter 3:11, 12) . . .Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought YOU to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion, 12 awaiting and keeping close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah. . .
 

I'm glad that The Librarian moved the "generation" posts from the unrelated topic over to this topic. It was clear that on this topic, the questions remain unsettled to some and unsettling to others.
In addition to the posts that have already been moved over from that other topic, questions came up about whether belief in the current "overlapping generation" doctrine was optional, or perhaps less important than other doctrines. Perhaps it is not a topic that we promote to new persons but have them consider it when they are better prepared for it. Another question (mine) was whether we should get involved in discussions of chronology at all.

OK.
As was already pointed out, we have always known that a generation can include overlapping contemporaries, but these contemporaries belong to another generation. The Watchtower has said that "three or even four generations" may overlap at the same time. So the overlapping explanation is not about how to define a single "generation that will not pass away." My own issue with the current explanation has more to do with the disrespect it shows to Jesus, in trying to twist up the meaning of language so much that we have inadvertently tried to present him as some kind of trickster.
*** w52 9/1 pp. 542-543 Questions From Readers ***
Your publications point out that the battle of Armageddon will come in this generation, and that this generation began A.D. 1914. Scripturally, how long is a generation?—G. P., Liberia.
Webster’s unabridged dictionary gives, in part, this definition of generation: “The average lifetime of man, or the ordinary period of time at which one rank follows another, or father is succeeded by child; an age. A generation is usually taken to be about 33 years.” But the Bible is not so specific. It gives no number of years for a generation. And in Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30 and Luke 21:32, the texts mentioning the generation the question refers to, we are not to take generation as meaning the average time for one generation to be succeeded by the next, as Webster’s does in its 33-year approximation; but rather more like Webster’s first-quoted definition, “the average lifetime of man.” Three or even four generations may be living at the same time, their lives overlapping. (Ps. 78:4; 145:4) Before the Noachian flood the life span was hundreds of years. Down through the centuries since, it has varied, and even now is different in different countries. The Bible does speak of a man’s days as being threescore and ten or fourscore years; but it assigns no specific number of years to a generation.—Ps. 90:10.
Even if it did, we could not calculate from such a figure the date of Armageddon, for the texts here under discussion do not say God’s battle comes right at the end of this generation, but before its end. To try to say how many years before its end would be speculative. The texts merely set a limit that is sufficiently definite for all present practical purposes. Some persons living A.D. 1914 when the series of foretold events began will also be living when the series ends with Armageddon. All the events will come within the span of a generation. There are hundreds of millions of persons living now that were living in 1914, and many millions of these persons could yet live a score or more years. Just when the lives of the majority of them will be cut short by Armageddon we cannot say.
 
 

Actually, Acts 1:7 says there is something wrong with us banging on about the generation. It says it's none of our concern. It's not in our domain. Knowledge of the times and seasons does not belong to us. It belongs to the Father alone. Anyone who tries is overstepping their authority.
(Acts 1:7) . . .” 7 He said to them: “It does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction [NWT fn: "authority"].
This is why Paul could say that we don't need anything written to us about chronology:
(1 Thessalonians 5:1) Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you.

I'm glad that The Librarian moved the "generation" posts from the unrelated topic over to this topic. It was clear that on this topic, the questions remain unsettled to some and unsettling to others.
In addition to the posts that have already been moved over from that other topic, questions came up about whether belief in the current "overlapping generation" doctrine was optional, or perhaps less important than other doctrines. Perhaps it is not a topic that we promote to new persons but have them consider it when they are better prepared for it. Another question (mine) was whether we should get involved in discussions of chronology at all.

OK.
As was already pointed out, we have always known that a generation can include overlapping contemporaries, but these contemporaries belong to another generation. The Watchtower has said that "three or even four generations" may overlap at the same time. So the overlapping explanation is not about how to define a single "generation that will not pass away." My own issue with the current explanation has more to do with the disrespect it shows to Jesus, in trying to twist up the meaning of language so much that we have inadvertently tried to present him as some kind of trickster.
*** w52 9/1 pp. 542-543 Questions From Readers ***
Your publications point out that the battle of Armageddon will come in this generation, and that this generation began A.D. 1914. Scripturally, how long is a generation?—G. P., Liberia.
Webster’s unabridged dictionary gives, in part, this definition of generation: “The average lifetime of man, or the ordinary period of time at which one rank follows another, or father is succeeded by child; an age. A generation is usually taken to be about 33 years.” But the Bible is not so specific. It gives no number of years for a generation. And in Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30 and Luke 21:32, the texts mentioning the generation the question refers to, we are not to take generation as meaning the average time for one generation to be succeeded by the next, as Webster’s does in its 33-year approximation; but rather more like Webster’s first-quoted definition, “the average lifetime of man.” Three or even four generations may be living at the same time, their lives overlapping. (Ps. 78:4; 145:4) Before the Noachian flood the life span was hundreds of years. Down through the centuries since, it has varied, and even now is different in different countries. The Bible does speak of a man’s days as being threescore and ten or fourscore years; but it assigns no specific number of years to a generation.—Ps. 90:10.
Even if it did, we could not calculate from such a figure the date of Armageddon, for the texts here under discussion do not say God’s battle comes right at the end of this generation, but before its end. To try to say how many years before its end would be speculative. The texts merely set a limit that is sufficiently definite for all present practical purposes. Some persons living A.D. 1914 when the series of foretold events began will also be living when the series ends with Armageddon. All the events will come within the span of a generation. There are hundreds of millions of persons living now that were living in 1914, and many millions of these persons could yet live a score or more years. Just when the lives of the majority of them will be cut short by Armageddon we cannot say.
 
 

I think it was Russell who said that 99% of animals either die by violence or starvation. Of course, I think it was Bertrand Russell, not Charles Taze.

Interesting article and very carefully reasoned through. However, I couldn't commmit to his conclusions any more than agreeing that he raised some interesting possibilities.
The author quotes Ewin Monsma: 'Reformed scholars have generally been of the opinion that the Bible gives no evidence of death among animals before the fall.’ He does not seem to refute this idea, so appears to share it.  I believe there is controversy on this matter amongst those who call themselves (or are called) "creationists", but was surprised recently to find that some Jehovah's Witnesses also adhere to the view that animals only die as a consequence (somehow) of the rebellion in Eden, and that this will not always be the case. (There seemed to be an element of pet bereavement in this).
I haven't met any (yet) who extend the resurrection hope to animals that have died however. Interestingly, this does appear to be a Mormon belief:  "The animals, the fishes of the sea, the fowls of the air, as well as man, are to be recreated, or renewed, through the resurrection, for they too are living souls.” Joseph Fielding Smith. Conference Report, October 1928, p. 100. The mind boggles on the logistics of this!
There is an obvious difference of opinion between Jehovah's Witnesses on animal diet and behaviour, both historic and future as shown in the discussion here. It is pretty clear that a literal interpretation of popularly referenced scriptures such as Isaiah 11:6-9; 65:25, Mic.2:4 is encouraged both in the text and illustrations in Watchtower publications, and there is no denying the appeal of this view. However, the view is open to considerable extrapolation and it is this I think that polarises opinion.
Early on in my theocratic education, it was clearly pointed out to me that paradise promises in the Hebrew Scriptures relating to Israelite restoration should not be interpreted out of their historic context. For example, they should not be used as an authority for concluding that lions will begin roaming the entire earth so that each child can have a lion as a pet. Nor should we think that, regardless of climate conditions, grapes and figs wiIl flourish everywhere. However, they do provide a basis for believing that peaceful and paradisaic conditions will prevail amongst the entire creation here on earth, under Jehovah's Kingdom rule. The relative peace between members of the true Christian congregation as "animalistic" behaviour is replaced by the "fruitage of the spirit" can be seen as a token of what is to come.
This allows for a wide variety in the personal visions individuals may cherish on what conditions will prevail in the paradise earth to come, but in no way allows for an imposition of such views on others where there is no clear Scriptural basis. By the same token, the relatively harmless views of others should be respected, regardless of any perceived naivety on the part of those who feel their more educated perceptions deserve higher credence.
A couple of Scriptural principles that moderate my grip on personal views that can only be termed as benign speculation regarding  the exact detail and logistics of many aspects of life in the coming paradise earth are contained in these texts:
"For the Kingdom of God does not mean eating and drinking, but means righteousness and peace and joy with holy spirit." Rom.14:17
"But just as it is written: “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.” 1Cor.2:9

 

At the convention today there was mention of certain behavioral characteristics that animals have which help them survive. Some of these are instincts which protect them from predators. These behaviours are atributed to Jehovah's creative wisdom. However, this is obviously at odds with the idea that animals were created not to eat each other. How does one reconcile these two opposing ideas?

Jehovah's Witnesses in Orel help clean up city
WHILE LANGUISHING IN SIZO, DENNIS CHRISTENSEN AND HIS FELLOW BELIEVERS RECEIVE THANKS FROM LOCAL AUTHORITIES
Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia, 14 June 2017
 
Authorities of the city of Orel awarded recognition to local Jehovah's Witnesses for their active participation in cleaning up trash from the territory of the city. The believers were scheduled to receive thanks from the city administration and a gift book with the inscription: "In gratitude for good work—cleaning up trash for the benefit of people and nature."  The precious gift was signed by the city administration.
 
Wherever they live, Jehovah's Witnesses strive to provide benefit for neighbors not only by distribution of biblical knowledge but also by participation in various forms of socially useful activity. This is also the civic position of Dennis Christensen, one of the Orel Jehovah's Witnesses who participated actively in the clean up. Standing knee-deep in the cold waters of the river Orlik, he used a net to pull trash from the river. All the work was conducted without pay.
 
In view of this, it seems especially paradoxical that Christensen has languished for almost three weeks now in the city SIZO [pre-trial investigation cell] on the basis of falsified charges of organizing an extremist society. Believers are dumbfounded that it was this society that, in the opinion of city authorities, produced a benefit for the city. Cleaning up trash was the last good deed that Dennis managed to do while at liberty.
 
It is noteworthy that a representative of the Orel administration sympathized with the Jehovah's Witnesses because of the religious persecutions in the country and urged them not to lose heart. (tr. by PDS, posted 17 June 2017)
http://www2.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/170613a.html

Though some carry on about it more than you think they should, nobody can ever say that in a lifetime of service to God, you won’t experience some injustice. It is not business-as-usual routine, but when it does happen, it can be serious. All the more so because you expect trouble from the general world, but not from the brotherhood. When it comes, it throws you for a loop. It is like the verse quoted in the Watchtower study this week, Psalm 55: 12-14:
“For it is not an enemy who taunts me; Otherwise I could put up with it. It is not a foe who has risen up against me; otherwise I could conceal myself from him. But it is you, a man like me, my own companion, whom I know well. We used to enjoy a warm friendship together; into the house of God we used to walk along with the multitude.”
The study article was illustrated with one real-life injustice, and one from the scriptures. A Brother Diehl from 1949 is mentioned. He caught all kinds of heat when he decided to marry. Brothers were all serious back then about single persons in the circuit or Bethel work remaining single, a situation that was not resolved, legend has it, until Brother Knorr himself married. Now THAT’S human! Let nobody say that these guys aren’t. Diehl could certainly be understood if he bellyached about it, but it wouldn’t do him any good. All he could do was get others stirred up. So he waited it out. He was right, but he didn’t make a big deal over it. Eventually, everyone came around. He took it on the chin for a while.
The example from scripture is more serious. Joseph was sold out by his brothers and ended up in slavery. A silver lining eventually materialized and he became a big cheese in Potipher’s house, then he was slammed again and sent to prison for 13 years. Believe me, I would whine plenty about it, but if Joseph did, there is no record of it. What the record shows is that overall he allowed it to mold him:
But now do not be upset and do not reproach one another because you sold me here; because God has sent me ahead of you for the preservation of life … So, then, it was not you who sent me here, but it was the true God, in order to appoint me as chief adviser to Pharoah and lord for all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt. (Genesis 45:5-8)
He didn’t know he would be appointed chief adviser to Pharoah until he was, and had he moaned forever about his kidnapping and later imprisonment, he wouldn’t have been. Everyone could have understood him bitching, but it wouldn’t have done him any good. People screw things up. Usually, their motive is not bad, but sometimes it is, as in Joseph’s case. Often, you don’t have the power to fix things. You do have the power, however, to make them worse.
(‘The Judge of the Earth Always Does What is Right;’ the Watchtower, April 2017 – study edition)

Now that wasn't so difficult actually was it?
I'll overlook the offensive bluster. I know you are capable of an entirely rational response (as in the first quote) when you are in a better frame of mind.
You should try and get a handle on what stresses you out so much 'though. It can't be healthy! Are you holding a grudge or something??
Anyway, take it easy mate!  
 
PS. Could you like my comment please. I've just noticed my reputation figure stands at 666 and I don't like liking my own posts!!

Now, now me old china! You're getting a bit hoighty-toighty yourself here.
For those unable to follow the links to jw.org, what these posts include (my bold) follows:
"The Bible mentions tattoos just once, at Leviticus 19:28, which says: “You must not put tattoo marking upon yourselves.” God gave this command to the nation of Israel, thus setting them apart from the neighboring peoples who marked their skin with the names or symbols of their gods. (Deuteronomy 14:2) While the Law given to Israel is not binding on Christians, the principle underpinning this law is worth serious consideration."
and:
"What questions should I ask?
"What are the health risks? How would it affect your reputation? Will you always like it?  What Bible principles apply?
Colossians 3:20 1 Peter 3:3, 4 1 Timothy 2:9 Romans 12:1 In view of these factors, many people have decided against getting a tattoo."
So, before you start firing off insulting accusations about who is presuming to speak for GOD, please notice that there is no prohibition on tattoos binding on a Christian. However, there are several thought provoking questions and some well chosen scripture texts to enable those who value their Christian freedom to make a well-considered, personal, and conscientious (moral) choice in this matter.
Cheers mate!  
 

I don't remember where it might be, although I'd guess it would have been with the comments regarding the late sister, Audrey [Mock] Knorr.
The story was known by my "table head" at Bethel. (I was the "table foot," for what it's worth.) By 1976, I only heard it "whispered" by this long-time Bethelite, and his younger wife kept trying to get him to keep his voice down about it. But she was also the one feeding him details of the story, as if she was the source. (She worked with Sister Knorr.) But that was while Brother Nathan Knorr was still alive. After Brother Knorr died, 1977, it was talked about more openly. It was talked about again, around 1990, when Brother Richard Wheelock committed suicide by jumping from a window of the Towers Hotel. The person who called me from Bethel to tell me about Brother Wheelock also tied it to the story of his past troubles, although he said he had just learned about those troubles. (BTW: Many people have said that Brother Wheelock jumped from the 8th floor of factory building where he worked. This isn't true.)
So the story goes that Richard Wheelock was engaged to Audrey Mock. In those days Brother Wheelock knew that marriage meant leaving Bethel, probably to become a "circuit servant" in his case. But Brother Knorr really liked her and made it known to her that he was also interested in marriage. Audrey Mock had to tell Brother Wheelock that she was breaking off the engagement in favor of Knorr, and Brother Wheelock was so distraught that he threatened to kill himself if she did. The threat was "jarring" she said, but perhaps should have been taken more seriously. Brother Wheelock had ongoing problems with depression that might have been completely unrelated to what happened with Audrey Mock. Of course, she might have realized that she needed to get away from him as soon as he made the threat. It was not a common thing for a man to say and might have tipped her off that he wasn't a stable man. Richard was the factory overseer for the entire time I was at Bethel, and never seemed "off" or "depressed" to me. He did stay to himself, closed up in his office a lot, but this wasn't an unusual practice.
 

I don't remember where it might be, although I'd guess it would have been with the comments regarding the late sister, Audrey [Mock] Knorr.
The story was known by my "table head" at Bethel. (I was the "table foot," for what it's worth.) By 1976, I only heard it "whispered" by this long-time Bethelite, and his younger wife kept trying to get him to keep his voice down about it. But she was also the one feeding him details of the story, as if she was the source. (She worked with Sister Knorr.) But that was while Brother Nathan Knorr was still alive. After Brother Knorr died, 1977, it was talked about more openly. It was talked about again, around 1990, when Brother Richard Wheelock committed suicide by jumping from a window of the Towers Hotel. The person who called me from Bethel to tell me about Brother Wheelock also tied it to the story of his past troubles, although he said he had just learned about those troubles. (BTW: Many people have said that Brother Wheelock jumped from the 8th floor of factory building where he worked. This isn't true.)
So the story goes that Richard Wheelock was engaged to Audrey Mock. In those days Brother Wheelock knew that marriage meant leaving Bethel, probably to become a "circuit servant" in his case. But Brother Knorr really liked her and made it known to her that he was also interested in marriage. Audrey Mock had to tell Brother Wheelock that she was breaking off the engagement in favor of Knorr, and Brother Wheelock was so distraught that he threatened to kill himself if she did. The threat was "jarring" she said, but perhaps should have been taken more seriously. Brother Wheelock had ongoing problems with depression that might have been completely unrelated to what happened with Audrey Mock. Of course, she might have realized that she needed to get away from him as soon as he made the threat. It was not a common thing for a man to say and might have tipped her off that he wasn't a stable man. Richard was the factory overseer for the entire time I was at Bethel, and never seemed "off" or "depressed" to me. He did stay to himself, closed up in his office a lot, but this wasn't an unusual practice.
 

Looks nice. Based on just the "cover shot" it looked like that they gave little people their own parking lot. They seem to be very appreciative, too!

Quite true. It's almost that those who continually argue for the misidentification and inappropriate worship of Jesus  partly acheive their aim by forcing a diminishing of appreciation in those eager to counter their false claims. We discussed this issue in Kingdom Ministry and Pioneer School.

Yet, we do not know if Jesus would have corrected John, and Hebrews 1:6 indicates that he would not have.
(Hebrews 1:5-2:4) 5 For example, to which one of the angels did God ever say: “You are my son; today I have become your father”? And again: “I will become his father, and he will become my son”? 6 But when he again brings his Firstborn into the inhabited earth, he says: “And let all of God’s angels do obeisance to him.” . . .  8 But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your Kingdom is the scepter of uprightness. 9 You loved righteousness, and you hated lawlessness. That is why God, your God, anointed you with the oil of exultation more than your companions.” 10 And: “At the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands. . . .  13 But about which of the angels has he ever said: “Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet”? . . . [2:3] For it began to be spoken through our Lord and was verified for us by those who heard him, 4 while God joined in bearing witness with signs and wonders and various powerful works and with the holy spirit distributed according to his will.
These have even been used as proof-texts for Trinitarians, since the method of worshiping was "doing obeisance." Same as John was doing when he fell down in front of the angel. But again these are NOT prooftexts, but are here to highlight the unfathomable greatness of Jesus in his position at God's right hand. 
(Revelation 5:8-10) . . .the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb, and each one had a harp and golden bowls that were full of incense. (The incense means the prayers of the holy ones.) 9 And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10 and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, . . .
(Revelation 5:13, 14) 13 And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and underneath the earth and on the sea, and all the things in them, saying: “To the One sitting on the throne and to the Lamb be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever.” 14 The four living creatures were saying: “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshipped.
That was my point. They were written to give an overall picture that fully equips us to understand the position of Christ whether we are from an environment where it was taught that he was no more than a human, or from an environment where it was taught that he was no less than Almighty God. There is no scripture that claims that the Mighty God, Jesus, the Son of God, is equal with the Almighty God, the Father. But John 1 and Hebrews 1, for examples, were written so that we do not think to diminish Christ's position, or consider him unworthy of "obeisance."

.
.
Sometimes TRUTH can only be taught by extrapolating faulty logic to its absurd conclusion, so it is PAINFULLY obvious that a premise is false.
It's called "reducto ad absurdum" in Latin.
.
.
 

I think the closest explanation would be the following from http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/dressed-to-the-nines.html:
I think what he has missed is the fact that poetry of this time period, as with Shakespeare's, often got mangled when quoted. I think that the real source is from the poem, but I'm guessing that it's based on a mangling of the original idea. What the poets and authors wrote, they "addressed to the Nines." [the creative muses] Therefore, anything that is extremely well-said or well-written (or poorly written, if you are being sarcastic) is therefore "addressed to the Nines." Especially "highfalutin" language, often combined with "highfalutin" dress, would become a candidate for saying it was was [ad]dressed to the Nines. The contraction 'dressed for addressed would make the phrase quickly evolve into a reference for highfalutin dress rather than language.