Anna

Whatever they might be trying to covey, one thing is clear, whether someone has been gone for 1 year or 40 years, and they want to come back, they will be welcomed. Varying circumstances call for varying measures, but in the end the welcome will be the same.
 

Ok, so I have finished watching Br. Splane and here is my verdict: Although expressions indicating opinion are not used during the whole of the talk, there would be nothing wrong with anyone saying that it IS an expression of opinion because words indicating fact are not used either. And as you said above, matters are never a fact unless they have already happened! HOWEVER, there is one expression of fact, and that is regarding 1914. Br. Splane  says referring to the signs (paraphrased ) ”now when did all these things begin to appear? (answer:)  In 1914".  Unfortunately , although it has already happened, the invisible part of it (Christ’s enthronement) cannot be proved, because of the fact that it was invisible. The visible part of the sign can be proved depending who you ask.  Br. Splane said (paraphrased) “The boy would understand these things were bad, (regarding 1914) but only those with spiritual discernment  would  see what this meant, that Jesus  was close at the door". Then he asks the crucial question “who were the only ones at that time who drew the right conclusion?” Well of course we know the answer to that. (although they drew that conclusion a little earlier) And then I think we can start getting in to some kind of circular mode of reasoning here....Correct me if I am wrong. Also this brings up the chronology problem again. As regards the explanation of the Generation, one is at liberty to either accept it or reject it without it raising an issue.

Enjoy  the  Talk  with  Brother  Splane !

I am listening to Br. Splane right now so I will give you my opinion later, (tomorrow) for what it's worth

Yes, I can see how that can be the case. I agree that the term generation can be rather ambiguous.
I agree totally, it is a point of view. I may need to go back and listen to Br. Splane's talk again carefully because last time I listened to it it did not leave me with that impression, that it was a point of view.
I understand why you are objecting, and I am sorry if that is how it has come across, that I am attacking because it does not fit in with my interpretation, and I did not mean to be insidious, if that is how it has come across.  I certainly do not want to be casting unwarranted aspersions on anyone not just the anointed. Really I would be fine with all of it if it was delivered in a manner of a proposition, not fact. That is why I need to listen to it again, maybe I am jumping to conclusions too fast. But what I do know is that the passage of time has show us that what we have claimed as an assured fact at one time, has turned out to not be so. So, you know the saying, once bitten twice shy. I have heard the Slave say that they do not want to lose the trust and confidence of the friends. And that is imperative and quite understandable. We should be able to trust Jehovah's representatives on earth. But we also have to remember that they do make mistakes, which they have admitted themselves. And they will keep making mistakes if not for the simple reason that they, just like the rest of us, are not inspired and do not have some kind of direct line of communication with Jehovah. They derive at their understanding through diligent study, and prayer just like the rest of us and I would be so bold as to suggest there is NO difference at all, except for the fact that these anointed men happen to be in that position (of the Slave). It could just as well be anyone of us (within reason of course). So, back to my point, and this is just my impression, if the Slave needs our trust and confidence, then in my logical mind I cannot understand  why the word generation, being so ambiguous (as we have agreed upon)  is not being treated that way, but on the contrary, it seems the overlapping generation is being treated as fact.
There is an noteworthy statement that Br. Jackson made at a hearing in Australia, and I have mentioned this on another post on here, I will copy and paste it again:
"Now, the Governing Body realises that if we were to give some direction that is not in harmony with God's word, all of Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide who have the Bible would notice that and they would see that it was wrong direction.  So we have responsibilities as guardians to make sure that everything is scripturally acceptable". 
On analysis, there are a lot of things one could take away from this. Here are just a few thoughts I had. One is that in order to be able to recognize if something is not in harmony with Gods word we better be well versed in the scriptures ourselves. Two, is that a suggestion that if we see something not in harmony we should not accept it? Or is it merely talking about a hypothetical situation. Three, would for example the "overlapping Generation" be viewed as a "direction" or would that be in the category of doctrine? Is direction to be taken as meaning the same as doctrine?

What I meant was that the "overlapping Generation" shouldn't have a baring on our faith. It is not important.
 
I agree. To be sure, the explanation of the Generation is not a stumbling block for me. It's just that I am a very logical person, and I cannot understand why we are trying to explain it...



I respect that, and agree . And I want to say I am happy we are able to discuss this - what some might regard as controversial and disturbing subjects - in a civilized, calm and respectful way, and more importantly as brothers and sisters . Oh, and also I want you or anyone reading this to be sure that they know that I do not have any intentions to undermine anyone's faith. This is merely a discussion of facts AND personal opinions.
 

To me, the phrase "by no means" means "unless [a] happens then [b ] won't happen". In the Maori Bible, the expression uses "e Kore rawa [never] tenei [this] whakatupuranga [generation] e pahemo [to die], kia puta katoa [all be through] ra ano [until] enei mea [these things] "
So, it might be rendered:
This generation will never die, until all these things are through.
It's interesting...
 
 
 

Hahaha, hilarious discussion going on here
I know the point you were trying to make, and of course you are right because one has to consider every possible aspect so that one does not give a cause for any kind of reproach or stumbling of anyone.  I "love" the artwork where everyone goes swimming fully dressed  so as not to offend others sensibilities regarding modesty. This was solved by dressing everyone in white robes in the latest video shown at the convention. I thought it looked a little creepy and reminded me fof Mormon baptisms . We have become too obsessed with that kind of thing I think. Thankfully we are not all like that in real life. In the 30's our books contained illustrations of full frontal views of Eve, nipples and all. It just shows how innocent society was in comparison to now. The porn industry is flourishing on the one hand, and on the other hand people are uber sensitive to showing any kind of flesh....
Anyway, as an artist myself, I couldn't help thinking that this looked like a patchwork of various poses put together in one. At first I thought the sister in the middle with the hat was modeled on a picture of Catherine Zeta Jones.....Then I recognized the signature and was able to check the brother's Instagram account, and sure enough, he was commissioned by a family to paint them in a paradise setting using several different photographs.... So this painting is not going to get anywhere near Bethel, but hangs in a living room.....

What is wrong with that? All it was, was an illustration, and a good one at that. There was no religious doctrine involved. People like you my dear Theodore give JW's  a bad reputation of being dogmatic and cult like.

Here is the basic assumption upon which your lengthy dissertation appears to be based. (I say lengthy because you have expressed aspects of your view on this matter in a number of responses elsewhere on the forum). 
Before even considering the many facets to your proposition, there remains the fact that Jesus likened his parousia or presence to the days of Noah. Obviously, there is not an exact parallel, as Noah did actually know the time that Jehovah's action would take place, althought there was a rather short notice period given. see Gen.7:4. (Maybe someone would argue that he still did not know the hour.)
However, "apostrophes" aside, Jesus words at Matt.24:37-39 would need to be reconciled with the idea that the parousia is an event taking place at the end of a marked time period or generation. As we are indulging in a bit of a paraphrase, I take Jesus words to be something like this:
  [vs 36] . . . concerning the actual time of Jerusalem's destruction (and by extension the destruction of a complete system of things in the future) I just can't tell you the day or hour because none of us, neither the angels nor myself, actually know it yet. Only the Father has the complete timetable for His executing of judgement. And you know, knowing that day and hour wouldn't really benefit you anyway. [v. 37] However, as you are my friends (John 15:15), I will tell you something that really will benefit you. I will give you a clue about my presence or PAROUSIA which will lead up to that time of judgement. It will be just like the days of Noah.[v. 38] Remember that in those days before the Flood, people were going about their daily lives eating, drinking, getting married  [doing what they had been doing since the days of their forefathers, saying, in effect that there was peace and security] despite the fact that the earth at that time was filled with violence and immorality? Well, Jehovah got involved with Noah and told him what He was going to do. He told Noah to build an ark and also to preach to the people. This went on for years, right up until the very day that Noah entered into the ark. [v 39] Those people heard and saw him, but it meant nothing to them and it was as if they knew nothing until the Flood came by surprise and swept them all away. That's exactly how my PAROUSIA will be. I will get involved with people of faith like Noah, ensure they know what my Father's  requirements for salvation are, and help them to preach the warning message everywhere and to gather in to safety any that respond. Then, once these tasks are completed, judgment will take people by surprise, too. [v.40, 41] That's why you are going to see men and women going about their business in this generation, too, and you will see one person taken by surprise and the person who was right next to them just as surprised to see the other person gone. Their judgement will not be based on outward appearances. [v. 42] So keep on the watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come to execute JUDGEMENT. [v.43] Although it will be as unpredictable as a thief in the night who breaks into your house, (and no thief is going to announce his arrival), here's an illustration to help you keep awake. Although the householder doesn't know the exact time a thief will break in, if he knows during which watch (3 hour period) it will occur, he will be doubly alert and not get robbed.  [v. 44] So once I have alerted you during my PAROUSIA, prove yourself ready at all times, because the JUDGEMENT itself will arrive at a time that you just won't know in advance. 
So, I haven't seen anything yet to dissuade me that Jesus Parousia CULMINATES in an execution of judgement....so far that is.

Thanks . He will do SOMETHING for sure, because he won't let anyone die unjustly. Not only is that a promise, but it is in line with his 4 greatest attributes.

Helpful observations. Thanks!

NO...  bec. Jehovah will use  HIS watching into FUTURE !  Then he will decide, which humans still would love him and they get a chance after Armageddon. So I learned it ! ❤️
PS. Thats my answer for rescue the humans...

Just getting back to the original question:
I'd say that, firstly, 'this Generation' includes the lifetime of, for example, Geoffrey Jackson, who is only 60 at the moment, not even a pensioner, so the generation wouldn't need to be 'longer than we think' to allow for a considerable amount of stuff to happen.
Also, bear in mind that Jehovah said he would 'speed it up in his own time'.  And it's easy to see how things might speed up.  In the past we've heard experiences of missionaries coming across congregations who were already practising the truth, because they'd come across some book from somewhere, and had started sharing it with each other, so that by the time the organisation found them, they were already doing more or less everything Jehovah wanted.  That happened before the internet existed, before people in China or India or anywhere else could look up information in their own language and find out the answers to existential questions everybody has about life, and which people don't stop having just because their country isn't widely Christian.
Consider the changes made in the past ten years. Apps designed to teach us foreign languages. Teaching to use videos as part of our presentations. Cart witnessing. Many ways of witnessing that were previously alien to us are now being embraced. It doesn't seem unlikely that we could be taught to witness online, in different languages, so as to reach these other countries.  That would certainly be one way of speeding it up.
Yes, it is also logical that since Jehovah can read hearts, he can tell the difference between someone who would have accepted the truth had they had the chance, and someone who wouldn't. But I think plenty has been said on that subject already. All I'd add is that given Satan's challenge in Eden, presumably what Jehovah is concerned about when deciding whether a person is suitable to live in the new world is that person's willingness to obey him rather than choosing their own path - not whether they actually got told what he wanted them to do.  That, after all, was the test that Adam and Eve failed.

Interesting question. I'm not sure about @HollyW, but the comment made regarding the choice of option #3 seem to indicate a former association with Jehovah's Witnesses.
Anyway, Byan Wilson wrote a paper suggesting some secular reasons for this kind of activity. This makes for an interesting perspective, whether you agree with everything he suggests or not.
http://www.scientologymyths.info/apostates/docs/bryan-wilson-apostate-study.pdf 

" there is nothing wrong with a personal opinion, it is the advocating or insisting on it". I would never insist on my opinion with the friends. I will mention it once, have a discussion,  but I will not keep on going on about it.
I am talking about it here, as this is a controversial section, and people have the choice to either come here and read it or not. In this regard I am not pushing my opinion on a captive audience. In fact I don't think I am pushing my opinion at all (correct me if I am wrong) I am merely explaining how I feel and why.

Of course. And I think that many of us have used this very reasoning by way of explanation for past (and even current) Watchtower predictions. But Jesus specifically said to "keep on the watch" because we cannot know the chronology in advance. The "contradiction" is summed up in the words from a recent Watchtower indicated by the words: "On the other hand" at the beginning of paragraph 8 below:
*** w15 8/15 pp. 15-16 pars. 7-8 Keep in Expectation! ***
However, Jesus said that most people would take “no note” of his presence, carrying on with life’s normal activities until it is too late. (Read Matthew 24:37-39.) Thus, the Scriptures indicate that world conditions during the last days would not become so extreme that people would be forced to believe that the end is near.—Luke 17:20; 2 Pet. 3:3, 4.
8On the other hand, for the composite sign to serve its purpose, the fulfillment of it would have to be obvious enough to command the attention of those who have been obeying Jesus’ counsel to “keep on the watch.” (Matt. 24:27, 42) And that has been the case since 1914.
Jesus' illustrations at the end of Matthew chapter 24 and into chapter 25 match what 2 Peter says about how we should "keep on the watch." It's about watching the sort of person we ought to be. That's how we prepare and keep it close in mind.
On the other hand Jesus' apostles had asked Jesus what they should watch out for in order to be able to predict the time: When will these things happen to Jerusalem's Temple and buildings?
The very first thing Jesus said was "Do not be misled!" He didn't say it's inevitable that you will be misled out of feverish expectation. He gave them very specific instructions NOT to watch for signs of the time. Yes, the Temple would fall in their own generation, but whether early or late in that generation, he wouldn't say, and said he didn't know himself, anyway! He warned them specifically about watching out for signs that are related to great wars, or great earthquakes or great famines, pestilences, etc.
Yet, every single generation since Jesus said these words tries to find signs of the times in wars, earthquakes, pestilences, famines, etc.
 

Sorry I forgot to comment, well I can't properly yet because I hate numbers (although they are very useful ) so it takes me a while to digest everything, but in essence I can see where you are coming from.
Have you noticed a common thread though, whenever anyone talks about the "end" it always comes in THEIR life time, (regardless of any Generation calculations) Russell 1874, Rutherford 1925, Franz (was it?) 1975 and now, although there is no date as such it is still supposed to happen in the current GB's life time. Isaac Newton was the only one that I know of that "predicted" the end well past his.

I really do not feel like there is any point in arguing with you extensively, merely a few points to make sure other readers do not misunderstand.
1. I never said I wanted to read C. Jonsson's apostate book. I was referring to his treaties he sent to the society in the 70's, he was still a Witness in good standing then.
2. I said I was going to stick with the WTS because they are the best out there. And I said JWInsider said something similar. Where doesn't that make sense?
3. Please get out of the habit of assuming. The best thing to do is ask questions. Such as: "when you said this and that did you mean this?" It is very frustrating when you attribute thoughts to people, when the person didn't even think them. When I said I like real life and experience, why did you think that included reading apostate books? I did not mean that at all. Also I don't believe R. Franz was a good friend of yours. I think you made that up.
4. I have quite a few facts on how "you've been treated here", from the other forum as well. And yes, I am Anna from the other forum, I kept my name just like you and the others did.
5. I don't think you meant to say "I’m here to show the dishonesty, deception and misrepresentation of the WTS"
No need to reply to this. I don't really want to talk to you anymore. It seems like you are suffering from some kind of persecution complex and that hampers normal discussion. Thank you.

I hear you!
I look at it his way though, information IS power. But you are so right when you say they.." had to "research" and write books etc just to prove that THEY were right..."
THAT was their downfall, and pride. It always is. So if we keep information from making us haughty (merely informed/empowered) then we can still be happy 
P.S I like to read both the good and bad reviews when buying something or booking a vacation. I just like to be informed about the positive and the negative, it makes me feel...um...yes, empowered

Believe it or not, that is my opinion, too. It doesn't matter who came up with 2,520 and the chronology stuff doesn't matter in the least. And we shouldn't be concerned about the length of the generation, either. Of course, I am taking it a step further and claiming that we shouldn't care at all about the chronology stuff. At least, that's how I read the warnings against chronology in the Greek Scriptures. Being of service to our fellow brothers and sisters in the congregation motivated by love for Jehovah and love for one another should be our priority.
This is absolutely true. The love, peace, harmony and unity among the brothers is heartwarming and beautiful. I also have absolutely no problem with the vast majority of our doctrines, too. 
Thanks for explaining. I very much expect persons like Allen to defend, and while the abrasive manner is what it is, I can see that it's usually sincere. And of course, we all know that questioning our own doctrines is immediately deemed a form of "treason" by some persons. This is to be expected, of course, but we also have to weigh our obligations to the congregation when we see a brother take a false step that may be stumbling others, or when making a conscientious decision about "how far it depends upon us" to either remain quiet or speak up when we see a danger. In this case, I understand why most would not believe there is any danger here, but in my case I am responding to the danger of upholding a tradition as more important than Biblical truth. Am I obligated to speak up in a certain way, time or place? I don't really know. I do know that I could never speak up in the local congregation this way, but I have been thoroughly surprised when taking up such matters with persons at Bethel for many years. Obviously, I have come to a different conclusion about whether it is right to speak up on a forum such as this one. I have also decided to give permission to anyone who asks to allow them to copy and re-use anything I write here on their own sites or forums. (1 Peter 3:15) And three have asked so far, although I don't know what might have been used.
Naturally, I don't think it's wrong for you to think this way. All of us need to be guided by our own conscience. My motives, since you question them, are merely a love of truth and a love for God's word and a love for the worldwide brotherhood and a desire to do the right thing and keep a clean conscience. I don't expect these motives to be understood except by people who know that I'm telling the truth about what I have seen and heard. This is why the reaction by some is completely expected, and of course I am also very happy with responses like yours and many others here who react in a thoughtful manner. A good part of my motive can be explained by the very verses you referenced:
(Philippians 4:8, 9) . . .Finally, brothers, whatever things are true, whatever things are of serious concern, whatever things are righteous, whatever things are chaste, whatever things are lovable, whatever things are well-spoken-of, whatever things are virtuous, and whatever things are praiseworthy, continue considering these things. 9 The things that you learned as well as accepted and heard and saw in connection with me, practice these, and the God of peace will be with you.
"Whatever things are true" are the most important, especially when truth appears to be overshadowed by a set of clear but "strongly entrenched" falsehoods. I believe that Jesus' words in Matthew 24 and elsewhere should be of "serious concern" especially when we have developed traditions that contradict his words. Eoin, in another thread, made a point about false prophecy and how it does not have to refer to a specific prediction but can be of a type that lulls persons into disbelief. That is the potential danger I see in the use of chronology doctrines during the time period when "a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day." I believe Jesus was speaking about these last days that we live in when he gave us everything we needed to know about them, along with a warning against chronology. The Watchtower has correctly warned against serving Jehovah based on the time period we believe we are in, because this can easily influence whether we are truly appreciating Jehovah's patience and righteousness, or our own desire for an early salvation. We should be serving out of love and our opportunity to help others whether in favorable season or troublesome season. The sort of persons we ought to be is all about our motivation for doing what we do, not our knowledge, nor our personal virtuousness. 
The things we learned, heard and saw in connection with Paul's teaching should not be confused with the chronology traditions we have learned from men, that are so hard to break from. (Recall that Paul said that "as to the times and seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you.") Although, I know that I will suffer the accusation of being haughty for 'kicking against the goads' it has become obvious that it takes a lot more humility to admit that we may have been wrong, and even more humility to accept the ridicule when our conscience moves us to do the right thing for others even if we are repeating truths as we learned and accept them from the words of Jesus and Paul, for example.
I'd love to explain more, but I have a feeling I'm sounding too "preachy."
 

I think that if 587 were ever accepted we would not use it to end 2,520 years in 1934 so that we could reach 2034. If the WTS had wanted to reach 2034 it was still possible by pointing to the fact that there is always the possibility of 120-year-olds still alive in 2034. And of course, 120 could be argued to have a similar meaning in Noah's generation.
(Genesis 6:3) . . . Accordingly, his days will amount to 120 years.”
Because of the thousands of references to 1914 in the history of the Watchtower magazine (over 4,000 of them just since 1950), it's hard to see why 1914 would be tossed out just on account of a potential for a 20 year adjustment. Even if we accepted 587, we could still use 607 as the beginning of the time when Jehovah replaced the Assyrian empire with his "servant" the Babylonian empire in order to punish the nations around them (including the desolation on Judea and Jerusalem). It would not be any different from what has already been said about Babylon:
*** ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 par. 21 Jehovah Profanes the Pride of Tyre ***
He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble.
*** it-2 p. 1136 Tyre ***
Since the nations mentioned in the prophecy of Jeremiah were to “serve the king of Babylon seventy years” (Jer 25:8-11), this suggests that both the prophecy of Isaiah and that of Jeremiah related to Nebuchadnezzar’s campaign against Tyre.
In other words, the Watch Tower writers are already very aware that the "70 years" need not run from the destruction of Jerusalem, but can (and should) run from the beginning of Babylon's hegemony. The original tradition that Barbour utilized to reach 1914 came from chronology by Christopher Bowen, and likely included Even-Tide by John A Brown, but another book that Barbour claims to have studied (Horae Apocalypticae) mentioned 1914 directly by adding 2,520 years to the beginning of the Babylonian conquest -- the 70 years. A Bible Student site shows this at http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/history/05 Horae Third Edition Chronology.htm
Of course if calculated from Nebuchadnezzar's own accession and invasion of Judah, B.C. 606, the end is much later, being A.D. 1914; just one half century, or jubilean period, from our probable date of the opening of the Millennium.
This could also have started at the time of Nebuchadnezzar's time as an army general, or when his father first started their campaigns after the fall of Assyria in 609 BCE. The chronology appear to match within one to two years, depending on how soon after Assyria fell that Babylon would have begun their campaign for empire.
What would be ideal for the GB is to find a good reason to keep 1914 or at least 1919 without any need for chronology to reach the date. I'm sure they are already aware that the Bible only ties a time period of 1,260 days to the Gentile Times, not 2,520 -- so any major change to the chronology would have to address that problem, too. It might seem weak as a stand-alone doctrine, but the WTS has always seen a lot of significance in the reaction of a council of churches to the League of Nations in 1918 and 1919, during the same time period when the WTS underwent persecution nearly to the point of destroying the WTS. This is seen as prophetically significant even though there is no independent Bible chronology that points to 1919. Yet, there are several publications that mention 1919 more than 1914:
In Isaiah's Prophecy I, the score is 27 to 10 (1919 mentioned 27 times, and 1914 only 10 times) In Isaiah's Prophecy II, the score is 67 to 20 In Know Jehovah, the score is 82 to 31 In Paradise Restored, the score is 105 to 67 And several other books are nearly tied or both dates are mentioned dozens of times. In God's Kingdom Rules book the score is 34 to 65. The Revelation Climax book scores 102 to 77, Worldwide Security scores 32 to 31.
1919 is critical because it is the means by which the GB gains authority. A "foundation" document or "foundation" event has always been necessary to the authority of any particular religion, and it is extremely difficult to have such a date (or document) appear in the recent past; too many people remember the chaos of disbelief and doubt. It is always more credible at a distance.
(Matthew 13:57) . . . A prophet is not without honor except in his home territory. . .
 

I do not. I merely mention that Jehovah's Witnesses have been very alert over the years to try to understand the meaning of this prophecy (Mt 24) and have suggested a variety of explanations that are  always intended to highlight the urgency of the times, and the need to be always prepared, as Jesus said. I honestly tell them that this does not mean we should focus on any one specific fulfillment but realize that the first fulfillment was evidently intended to remind us that in these last days we should always be focusing on what sort of persons we ought to be, because we do not know when the end will come. Then we read portions of 1 & 2 Thess and 1 & 2 Peter, 1 Cor, etc. There is plenty of positive correct information in the same publications that contain the "generation" interpretation.

Just another opinion, but I would be careful not to imply that this is the complete picture. Yes, they want the "flock" to have confidence in them, and some have shown themselves to be haughty. But the majority have been very humble, peaceful brothers who have widely varying levels of scriptural knowledge. The key reason they are chosen is for their long record of loyalty to the organization. You would not be chosen if you are full of new ideas to discuss, because that in itself is considered a sign of disloyalty. (That is not meant in a derogatory way, it was just something that was obviously true, especially of the expansion of the Governing Body in 1974 and 1977.)  Naturally, they all truly believe in all the core doctrines, and because they know the Watchtower publications as well as the Bible, they also "generally" believe that the chronology doctrines must be a part of that core set of doctrines. After all, even though the dates themselves have changed, these chronology doctrines have been a key part of the Watchtower tradition since the very first Watch Tower publications.
Therefore it is not merely a matter of protecting the "flock" from losing their confidence in them. They are trying to share their own confidence, and are looking for the most convincing ways to do it.
But they are also very aware that the phrases they still use in the God's Kingdom Rules! book are "stretching" the truth. As was already pointed out they have chosen the phrasing very carefully, which shows they have understood the limitations of what they should claim. I'm sure they are very well aware of the many arguments against the chronology traditions, but until there is a better way to explain them, they are in the same situation that the rest of us are in. They might question some meanings of certain words and ideas around the edges, but they can never question the doctrine "at its core."
I really doubt that any of them are very happy with the "overlapping generation" explanation, but I guess they must already realize that the best solution that comes next would be the solution that Brother Daniel Sydlik (GB) came up with: "just scrap the whole chronology thing, and start over from scratch." That must be the scariest idea ever because it truly would result in a large fall-out! I don't think it's their own reputations they care about here, but the fear of change, and the level of loss.
So, the current GB, just like the rest of us, are all inheritors of a tradition that must be accepted for as long as it has not yet turned into a major stumbling block.  
 

This is just my opinion, trying to be logical about it: Anyone with the right qualifications (long years of faithful service, spirituality,  being of the anointed, and rubbing shoulders with the right people) can become a member of the GB. Besides that, there really is nothing "special" about any members of the GB. I believe any JW who knows their Bible can come to the same conclusions as the GB, and I am sure there are hundreds of brothers and sisters who have already, before it ever becomes an "official" teaching, come to the "right" conclusion about a specific subject themselves. I don't want to brag, but it has happened to me several times. (And I can't even say my Bible knowledge is THAT good). So does that mean I was spirit directed? Of course not. No more than the members of the GB are. But somebody on earth has to take the lead of course. It would also be good however if the "leaders" were able to humbly accept mistakes and not feel the need to have to "appear infallible" because everybody knows they are not anyway.  I am aware that they are concerned with "the sheep in their care not losing their confidence in them". Because I guess if that happened everything would come crumbling down? I don't really think so. You mentioned the "overlapping Generation Theory" that was so "masterfully" explained by Br. Splane. The truth is that IF 587 was the TRUE date of Jerusalem's desolation, that would buy us 20 more years, and if we assumed a generation to be 100 years it might make the  "overlapping" unnecessary. We have "dug" ourselves in so deep with 1914 (now with the Kingdom book) would going back on that date cause the "sheep to lose confidence in the slave"? I don't know how others feel, but I don't think so. After all, is being in the Truth about dates, or is it about our relationship with Jehovah, and our trust in Him? I wonder if the insistence on 1914 is merely to "save face" or is it because the slave REALLY believes 607 is the correct date? On the other hand, no one can deny that 1914 really was a pivotal date in world history. This cannot be said so much about 1934 except that Hitler appointed himself Fuhrer in October of that year.....How about Hitler becoming Fuhrer in 1934 being the direct opposite of Christ who would have been made King in 1934, and Satan who was hurled out of heaven exerting his influence on him (Hitler) to start WW2? Doesn't sound any more unbelievable to me than an overlapping generation ....

This is just my opinion, trying to be logical about it: Anyone with the right qualifications (long years of faithful service, spirituality,  being of the anointed, and rubbing shoulders with the right people) can become a member of the GB. Besides that, there really is nothing "special" about any members of the GB. I believe any JW who knows their Bible can come to the same conclusions as the GB, and I am sure there are hundreds of brothers and sisters who have already, before it ever becomes an "official" teaching, come to the "right" conclusion about a specific subject themselves. I don't want to brag, but it has happened to me several times. (And I can't even say my Bible knowledge is THAT good). So does that mean I was spirit directed? Of course not. No more than the members of the GB are. But somebody on earth has to take the lead of course. It would also be good however if the "leaders" were able to humbly accept mistakes and not feel the need to have to "appear infallible" because everybody knows they are not anyway.  I am aware that they are concerned with "the sheep in their care not losing their confidence in them". Because I guess if that happened everything would come crumbling down? I don't really think so. You mentioned the "overlapping Generation Theory" that was so "masterfully" explained by Br. Splane. The truth is that IF 587 was the TRUE date of Jerusalem's desolation, that would buy us 20 more years, and if we assumed a generation to be 100 years it might make the  "overlapping" unnecessary. We have "dug" ourselves in so deep with 1914 (now with the Kingdom book) would going back on that date cause the "sheep to lose confidence in the slave"? I don't know how others feel, but I don't think so. After all, is being in the Truth about dates, or is it about our relationship with Jehovah, and our trust in Him? I wonder if the insistence on 1914 is merely to "save face" or is it because the slave REALLY believes 607 is the correct date? On the other hand, no one can deny that 1914 really was a pivotal date in world history. This cannot be said so much about 1934 except that Hitler appointed himself Fuhrer in October of that year.....How about Hitler becoming Fuhrer in 1934 being the direct opposite of Christ who would have been made King in 1934, and Satan who was hurled out of heaven exerting his influence on him (Hitler) to start WW2? Doesn't sound any more unbelievable to me than an overlapping generation ....