Anna

Most Witnesses still think it is consistent with the Bible. Those who find that it isn't consistent, probably no longer see it as a central doctrine and therefore are able to dismiss it without causing a serious concern. I think it's because there is still so much more to the core teachings, and they might even seem enhanced in value when one critiques the overall set of remaining doctrines.

I think that most people see a collection of eight photos/articles at the bottom of the screen. (I mean the "Powered by Google" grid of articles and/or ads to click on.) We probably don't all see the same selection of 8 items, but in my case it is always heavily slanted to the fake news about JWs, or JW celebrity news, or both (Trump warns Russia over JWs, Jackie Chan is one of Jehovah's Witnesses, and this current one, etc.)
It is the one topic I am least interested in, rarely click on, and it always embarrasses me that these types of articles are readily believed by Witnesses, and sometimes even SOURCED by Witnesses.
I understand that there is a certain use to keep such rumors "up" to drive traffic, but is it only gullible traffic that is desired? I have found some of these fake topics to be easily proven untrue in a matter of seconds, but sometimes these things stay up, even after I have shown the poster the proof. (The last one was to @Bible Speaks and there was not even a response.) I've seen this happen with other people also, just as it happened in this thread.
I prefer to not have such articles demeaning the site, but I know that it's at least possible to change the title of this topic, even slightly, to indicate that we all know better. I'm surprised it wasn't changed months ago, or within a couple hours of the initial post.

Maybe Trump didn't. Maybe Chan isn't. Maybe Inglesias didn't. But they all should have.

Just to be alive!  All other things are a bonus!

I think you have the essence pretty much correct. What sort of persons we ought to be is a much higher priority than our exact doctrinal beliefs. Witnesses believe this even if most of us don't say it out loud because we know that even the Watch Tower Society under Russell and Rutherford and Knorr and Franz had hundreds of doctrines wrong, but we don't judge them as having been judged harshly by Jehovah. We also believe that billions who have lived and died in the past in every religion on earth will be resurrected to an opportunity to live forever. But we know that Jehovah considers only two teachings to be of the highest priority: love of God and love of neighbor. He is not concerned with specific works, or works at all. Jehovah is concerned with our motivation, and if our motivation is love of God and love of neighbor, then proper "works" will follow naturally. 
Here's how good doctrine ("healthful teaching") will follow. Our love of God makes us want to know more about him. We would expect him to have made himself known without excess difficulty. As Paul says in Romans:
(Romans 10:6-8) 6 But the righteousness resulting from faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ that is, to bring Christ down, 7 or, ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ that is, to bring Christ up from the dead.” 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your own mouth and in your own heart”; that is, “the word” of faith, which we are preaching.
So the "word" is near to us. If we listen closely with a desire to know God better, we will hear it being preached, we will find Bibles and books that comment on the Bible. Our desire to know God better will ultimately lead to an attraction to the teachings that make the most sense overall, those that let us know what God's will is, those that let us know the "mind of Christ." Sufficient accuracy of doctrine will follow from our love of God. In trying to imitate our God, we will be motivated to do good for others.
Thus spreads Christianity!

You have probably hit the nail on the head here James. (Not sure who the "we" is for you). Anyway it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what "we" think because the reality will unfold anyway. Until it does, "we" can explain, rationalise, adjust as "we"wish. The way things turn out, however, is not the province of "we", and if "we" want to be there when the whole thing does resolve (or unravel depending on your point of view), then "we" had better be sure "we" are rootin' for the right side.
Ah do declare!...Ah think ah've got it!! 

Usually, it works something along the lines of this:
JTR posts this graphic on his congregation's information board. It is taken down. He posts a similar one, for he has hundreds. In time, he is disfellowshipped for violating one of the many verses discussed here and on other threads against public rabble-rousing in the congregation.
Then he TELLS everyone he was just minding his own business one fine day, when he casually let slip he didn't buy the overlapping generations' explanation, and he was summararily DFed for that reason alone.

I hope I don't get in trouble for this off topic remark but...back in WW 2 fighter pilots use to bring balls of aluminum foil with them. When they went into the enemy territory they would throw them out of the cockpit window. The reason for this was to mask the identity of his plane since the radar at that time could not tell the difference between a plane a flock of birds or aluminum foil. Therefore by illustration Satan has thrown out thousands of religions calling themselves "Christian" and yet only a handful of other sects of other religions. So Satan knows the true religion is one of Christianity's faiths since he is trying to hide it like a needle in a haystack. There are over 2,000 sects of Christianity but how many different Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists are there?   Something to think about.

I don't align myself to a group of men. I seek a valid Christian brotherhood. I can't speak for why others choose the faiths they choose. But I can share my faith. If it is attractive to them, they will seek to learn more. Many people, especially Catholics from your examples, are Catholics because that's how they were raised. But Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses remind them through the process of going out publicly from door to door that there are other options out there, should they seek a change. Some find that attraction through better doctrine, and some through finding a loving Christian brotherhood that excels their current experience.
I personally think that JWs are doing the better job in setting the example of managing a worldwide public ministry. But, as you probably know, I would also welcome an adjustment to three or four non-major doctrines. I don't consider them major, although since one of them is our set of chronology doctrines, some JWs might. Even though I don't think they are critical, Jehovah knows that people will always be curious to see if there is some bit of calculating, in-depth research that might reveal the secrets of the ages. But I also know that Witnesses are not "stuck" on these doctrines. We've made terrible, stupid mistakes, and even promoted some false prophecies over these doctrines in the past, but as soon as they are proved false, they are dismissed. In general our belief in a "revealed" end-times chronology is intended to bolster activity and urgency and watchfulness. Perhaps it works for some people. I think it's the wrong motivation, but I don't know that any other motivation would work better for most of us. 
Also, I'm not one of those Witnesses who judges the members of others religions as deserving of death at Armageddon. I fully expect that it's more likely that all "religion" as organizations will break down during the Great Tribulation. But the ways in which an organization would remain united under such conditions will favor those individuals who came out of organizations that prepared and anticipated the troubles in some way.

Fortunately since we are all imperfect the criteria for identifying true religion is  "Love one another" not a belief in any particular doctrine's substance [such as the meaning of generation] since they can be in many cases subject to change. Jn. 13:35. And since nearly all religions kill each other when a country goes to war that would identify the ones who do not as standing out by that mark. Of course there are other identifying marks but that one [love]  is also involved in all the rest as a DNA of evidence for the true faith. In my opinion Jehovah's Witnesses is that faith.

This is absolutely incorrect. He was ignoring prevailing opinion at the time. His quote specifically states it was not the organization's view at the time. (hence, not in Watchtower print) I didn't drill down any further, seeing no need to challenge every word from trustworthy persons. But frankly, I thought is was their view at the time, with regard to Bethel service.
If you want special privileges anywhere, you may have to conform to some rules. These are not binding for Christians in general, but only for those who wish to officially represent JWs, as elders and MS's do. With Bethel service, I believe it is more a matter of conforming to family headship, Bethel often being called 'the Bethel family.' Among actual families, one family head decrees this or that rule for family members, another does not, or has different ones.
Nobody has to serve in Bethel. Nobody has to pioneer. Nobody has to serve as an elder or MS. But if you do, there may be additional requirements beyond that which apply to Christians generally. It is that way with representing anyone anywhere.
 

Excuse me interjecting here, but I am sure that Catholics not understanding or agreeing with how the doctrine of torment in hell could be real might have been provided with persuasion of a little more physical nature than the application of scriptures.....  

I thought it might be useful to note the differences in the printed version of the Insight article, and the recently updated online version of the Insight article. Words from the original Insight article that are no longer included in the updated version are highlighted in bold/red. Words added only to the updated version are highlighted in bold/blue :
*** it-1 p. 918 Generation ***  [Printed version]
“This Generation” of Christ’s Prophecies.
...
Later that same day, Jesus again used practically the same words, saying: “Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Mt 24:34) In this instance, Jesus was answering a question regarding the desolation of Jerusalem and its temple as well as regarding the sign of his presence and of the conclusion of the system of things. Before his reference to “this generation,” however, he had focused his remarks specifically on his “coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” and the nearness of the Kingdom of God. Immediately afterward, he continued with references to his “presence.” (Mt 24:30, 37, 39; Lu 21:27, 31) Jesus was using the word “generation” with reference to humans whose lives would in some way be associated with the foretold events.—Mt 24.
The people of this 20th-century generation living since 1914 have experienced these many terrifying events concurrently and in concentrated measure—international wars, great earthquakes, terrible pestilences, widespread famine, persecution of Christians, and other conditions that Jesus outlined in Matthew chapter 24, Mark chapter 13, and Luke chapter 21.
*** it-1 p. 918 Generation *** [with online changes]
“This Generation” of Christ’s Prophecies.
...
Later that same day, Jesus again used practically the same words, saying: “Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Mt 24:34) In this instance, Jesus was answering a question regarding the desolation of Jerusalem and its temple as well as regarding the sign of his presence and of the conclusion of the system of things. So his comment about “this generation” logically had an application down to 70 C.E. However, he was also using the word “generation” with reference to humans whose lives would in some way be associated with the foretold events during his presence.—Mt 24.
 
The primary correction being made here is very vague about the definition of "generation" because the Insight book was already being written at a time when the doctrine was in flux.
The actual reason for the correction is that this portion of Matthew 24 was temporarily seen as ONLY applying to a future generation, not the generation that Jesus was speaking to, which was a generation that would see the fulfillment in 37 years. Note that both articles are the same in the beginning portion, quoted below, that was left out at the point where the ellipses were placed in the quotes above:
When Bible prophecy speaks of “this generation,” it is necessary to consider the context to determine what generation is meant. Jesus Christ, when denouncing the Jewish religious leaders, concluded by saying: “Truly I say to you, All these things will come upon this generation.” History recounts that about 37 years later (in 70 C.E.) that contemporary generation personally experienced the destruction of Jerusalem, as foretold.—Mt 23:36.
What the original was saying was that although the context of Matthew 24 speaks of "this generation" twice, once in Matthew 23:36 and once in Matthew 24:34, they mean something different in both cases, so you have to look at the context. The printed version of the Insight book is saying that only Matthew 23:36 refers to the 37-year generation of Jesus' day ending in 70 C.E., but when Jesus says almost the same thing again in Matthew 24:34, then this time he is referring only to the future "1914" generation. Note where the words "however" and "also" are added and omitted in the two versions.
In the updated online version, Insight is now saying that Jesus was simultaneously referring to both historical contexts at the same time: 70 C.E. which saw the end of the Jewish system of things,  and ALSO the generation that sees the end of the entire system of things at the end of his parousia. 
The value of this updated point is that we now have the backing of the Watch Tower publications to show that Jesus used the same word for both contexts. Therefore we would expect that the definition of the word was the same for both historical contexts.
For example, it seemed that Jesus had told that generation that they (or at least many of them) would experience the tribulation upon Jerusalem in their own lifetime because the end would come upon that generation. Now if it had taken 140 years instead of 37, then we might rightly look for an interpretation of "generation" that could be stretched somehow to two lifetimes. But if the end of the Jewish system really had come in 173 C.E. (instead of 70) and we knew that Jesus was referring to a two-lifetime generation, then what right would we have to claim that Jesus could ONLY be referring to a 40 to 70 year generation in the case of the "1914 generation"? If another religion was teaching such an inconsistency, we would obviously deride them for their lack of ability in "handling the word of truth aright." (2 Tim 2:15)

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.

Sigh....tell me about it. It led to my Scarlet A.

Of course, that would be ideal, but as you see, it is kind of difficult to stay on topic, especially if it's not you who changes the topic in the first place....but yes, I understand.

No offense JTR but maybe you should take your bickering with TTH to another thread. We are trying to have a serious and (if possible) fruitful discussion here. I still owe you an answer on the other thread, but unfortunately it doesn't fit the topic either, since you have fractured it into several other topics and keep doing so by bringing up unrelated issues (via cartoons etc.) Still, I will try and return to it later.

@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.
 
 

Interesting article. Thanks.

Not so much, just there's a few sensitive ones round here 

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?

Don't get me wrong, I am not one of those who insist carnivores will only vegetation, as that is clearly physically impossible for some of them. However, my problem is, how would there be peace among animals if some were going to be eaten? And why would a big cat, for example, need claws, if all it was to do is eat carrion? Everything about a big cat spells predatory hunter. Chase and kill, not eat something that has already died...
Perhaps the best solution is as True Tom says "Be there, and you'll find out".

In that case, what with scriptures such as Isaiah 11:6, 7?
Does that mean the wolf will reside with the lamb in peace, until the wolf gets hungry and gobbles up the lamb? Peacefully though of course?
Is that your congregation?