Anna

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 ....

Yes, of course. The reason was not hidden at all. And while it is controversial, I said it only seems to be foolish, at first. Did you notice how you claimed I said I said it was foolish, when I said "this one might appear silly at first"? Do you see how that is dishonest? Do you see how you would have pointed out the same dishonesty if someone tried that kind of wordplay on you?
I believe it is very serious because it speaks to how well we appreciate truth. I brought those same concerns over from the "Millennium" topic to this topic for the same reason. I'll explain:
It is easy to show that the WTS has repeatedly made the claim that "they" predicted decades in advance that Christ's invisible presence would start in 1914. It's easy to show that the WTS has repeatedly made the claim that "they" predicted decades in advance that Christ would begin his reign as King in 1914. It's easy to show that the WTS has repeatedly claimed that "they" predicted, decades in advance, that the time of trouble seen in 1914 was evidence that what they had predicted (at least since 1904) was correct.
Yet all of those claims are false. "They" didn't predict decades in advance that Jesus would begin his presence, his kingship, or the type of trouble that was seen in WWI. ("They" predicted a vastly different kind of trouble, with a completely different outcome). 
I have put the quote marks around the word "they" to point out that the claim has been worded in different ways so that the following ideas might be believed: "sincere Bible students predicted," "Jehovah's Witnesses predicted," "Bible Students were proclaiming," "Charles Taze Russell and his associates proclaimed" "the pages of this very magazine pointed to the time," "The Watch Tower publications had been predicting,"  etc., etc.  
The claims have sometimes been worded in a way that is clearly false, yet they have been repeated several times. After the Proclaimers book, however, the Watch Tower publications have become more careful about not making these statements in such direct false terms. They have resorted to implying it, instead.
Implying something often enough, however, is just as misleading as stating it in false terms. Any lover of truth should be very concerned about this. We should not just be concerned with the idea that people are being misled, but we should also look at the same point from a higher level and ask why. What is the reason that this same point has been implied dozens of times?
The God's Kingdom Rules book gives us another glimpse into the reason, and it's very consistent with the reason that invariably follows the context of prior claims just like it. It's so that we have more trust in the men who "discerned" these things in advance. If we can be impressed that a "true prediction" as important as this one could have been predicted so many years in advance, then we will be more apt to believe that the persons behind that prediction were "spirit-directed." We will be more apt to believe that the entire "spirit-directed" organization that these men represented must have been blessed with powers of discernment that carries over into all other teachings. In other words, our belief that they were able to make this prediction can lull us into a false sense of security. It may have the effect of motivating us to defend a false teaching because we feel it must be "spirit-directed.
I personally believe that our teachings about hell, Trinity, political neutrality, Jehovah's sovereignty, etc, are the best around, but this shouldn't lull me into thinking that we don't have to test all the teachings. Perhaps the teaching about the "overlapping generation" is a false teaching that we should be questioning, and yet relatively few are questioning the teaching. More persons appear to be defending it as best they can. Also, the misleading idea that the early Bible Students "discerned" Christ's invisible presence in 1914 has been made a key element in the definition of the "overlapping generation" theory. This is not very likely just a coincidence.
Ignoring our responsibility to question every teaching can be dangerous for Christians, because it can make us unwilling to follow the Bible's counsel not just for ourselves, but then we are no longer in a position to help our brothers and sisters if we see that they might be taking a false step.
(1 John 4:1) . . .Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions to see whether they originate with God. . .
(1 Thessalonians 5:20, 21) 20 Do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine.
(2 Corinthians 13:5) Keep testing whether you are in the faith; keep proving what you yourselves are. . . .
(Acts 17:11) . . .carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.
(Proverbs 14:15) Anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word, but the shrewd one considers his steps.
(Philippians 1:9, 10) . . .And this is what I continue praying, that your love may abound still more and more with accurate knowledge and full discernment; 10 that you may make sure of the more important things, so that you may be flawless and not stumbling others up to the day of Christ;
(Romans 12:2) . . .so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
(Ephesians 5:9-10) 9 for the fruitage of the light consists of every sort of goodness and righteousness and truth. 10 Keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord. . .
 

Can I put an end to this argument (discussion)? On page 50, paragraph 5 and 6 of the book says:
"As we saw in Chapter 2 of this book, the Bible Students spent decades pointing out that the year 1914 would be significant in fulfilling Bible prophecy. However, at that time they believed that Christ’s presence had begun in 1874, that he had begun to rule in heaven in 1878, and that the Kingdom would not be fully set up until October 1914. The harvest would extend from 1874 to 1914 and would culminate in the gathering of the anointed to heaven. Do mistaken ideas such as these cast doubt on whether Jesus was guiding those faithful ones by means of holy spirit?
6 Not at all! Think again of our opening illustration. Would the premature ideas and eager questions of the tourists cast doubt on the reliability of their guide? Hardly! Similarly, although God’s people sometimes try to work out details of Jehovah’s purpose before it is time for the holy spirit to guide them to such truths, it is clear that Jesus is leading them. Thus, faithful ones prove willing to be corrected and humbly adjust their views.—Jas. 4:6."
 

Can I put an end to this argument (discussion)? On page 50, paragraph 5 and 6 of the book says:
"As we saw in Chapter 2 of this book, the Bible Students spent decades pointing out that the year 1914 would be significant in fulfilling Bible prophecy. However, at that time they believed that Christ’s presence had begun in 1874, that he had begun to rule in heaven in 1878, and that the Kingdom would not be fully set up until October 1914. The harvest would extend from 1874 to 1914 and would culminate in the gathering of the anointed to heaven. Do mistaken ideas such as these cast doubt on whether Jesus was guiding those faithful ones by means of holy spirit?
6 Not at all! Think again of our opening illustration. Would the premature ideas and eager questions of the tourists cast doubt on the reliability of their guide? Hardly! Similarly, although God’s people sometimes try to work out details of Jehovah’s purpose before it is time for the holy spirit to guide them to such truths, it is clear that Jesus is leading them. Thus, faithful ones prove willing to be corrected and humbly adjust their views.—Jas. 4:6."
 

Can I put an end to this argument (discussion)? On page 50, paragraph 5 and 6 of the book says:
"As we saw in Chapter 2 of this book, the Bible Students spent decades pointing out that the year 1914 would be significant in fulfilling Bible prophecy. However, at that time they believed that Christ’s presence had begun in 1874, that he had begun to rule in heaven in 1878, and that the Kingdom would not be fully set up until October 1914. The harvest would extend from 1874 to 1914 and would culminate in the gathering of the anointed to heaven. Do mistaken ideas such as these cast doubt on whether Jesus was guiding those faithful ones by means of holy spirit?
6 Not at all! Think again of our opening illustration. Would the premature ideas and eager questions of the tourists cast doubt on the reliability of their guide? Hardly! Similarly, although God’s people sometimes try to work out details of Jehovah’s purpose before it is time for the holy spirit to guide them to such truths, it is clear that Jesus is leading them. Thus, faithful ones prove willing to be corrected and humbly adjust their views.—Jas. 4:6."
 

Mostly true. As you know, I find it curious that "we" find it necessary to keep "explaining" the Generation. (Actually, it really gets on my nerves. So much so that I think I will have to go to the bathroom when we are going to go over the chart in the Kingdom Book). The question is, what can we do about it? Nothing really. Well there is something, we just continue doing our part as the Praeceptor rightly reminded me, concentrate on helping other see the fundamental truths in the Bible and the comfort for the future, and let the "haughty" (it that's what they are) worry about what they've said or not said. I have to keep telling myself this.
After all we will all stand before Jehovah individually.

Anna, further to the excellent comment and reference posted by @ThePraeceptor, I do not understand all the fuss about this idea. It is not an inspired expression. And neither can I see a Bible "rule" on what constitutes a "generation" I mean, what was a generation in the time of Noah? Was it the time until his first child?, his lifespan?
It is merely a way of looking at a time period and providing what I see as a very simple suggestion on how a period of time that might exceed the lifetime of an individual in the 20th or 21st Century could still be viewed as a "generation". I didn't actually need a chart to grasp that concept myself.
And anyway, surely the "system of things" comes to an end for the individual either as soon as one accepts the fact that Jehovah's kingdom in the hands of Jesus Christ cast Satan out of the heavens in 1914CE as described at Revelation 12:7-12?. Or at the latest, as soon as one accepts Christ's ransom sacrifice, and disowns oneself  in harmony with his instruction at Matt.8:34?
Let's get real here! I'm not going to worry about the colour of my shoelaces when I am out in the pouring rain!
Thanks for the prophecy .pdf by the way. Most interesting.  

That is something I cannot understand. WHY try to explain the generation? Obviously this "new  (overlapping) understanding" is not something just put out there to see if it sticks. The GB never publicize anything unless it has been studied, and re-studied and re-searched, sometimes even over several years apparently. So it has to have been the same in this case. What I would like to know is what is it that made them arrive at this conclusion?  And also why did they think there was a need to explain the Generation again?  It is obvious in Jesus day it was 40 years. Abraham's 400 years was 4 generations. So a generation is either 40 or 100 years. Why overlap anything??? There is nothing about overlapping in the scriptures is there?
Next week, when we study it in our Cong. Bible study, I am going to ask an elder if someone does not believe in the overlapping generation, would they lose Jehovah's approval. I will let you know what answer I get .

I agree with you there. It seems that "we" just cannot plainly come out and say "we were wrong" instead of beating around the bush or using all the other adjectives you described. I think this may be because "we" feel, as God's ambassadors that, we really cannot, or should not make any mistakes in the eyes of others. I remember when I was a child, I thought my mother was perfect, that she never made any mistakes. She was my protector and someone I looked up to. Of course as I got older I realized she was not perfect. I also realized she was trying to keep me from finding out her imperfections by never actually admitting when she erred. I asked her why. She said it was because she did not want me to lose my trust in her. That she wanted me, as a child, to view her with confidence. This reminded me of something I read about the GB saying something very similar. That they do not want the "other sheep" to lose their confidence in them. I think this may very well be the reason why "we" just cannot plainly and freely admit mistakes, after all, "we have a reputation to live up to"!

1)      How about  John 11:26? Obviously  those people in Jesus’ day died. But they didn’t die in Jehovah’s memory and will have the prospect of living forever. Although obviously Rutherford was being literal, we could look at it in a similar way, so in view of the above, it was not a lie.
2)      In my opinion the GB etc. never prophesied about  anything as such. What they put forward was merely the interpretation of existing Biblical prophecy.
3)      Not sure about that one...
4)      After the disappointment and anticlimax of 1914 I guess they  now felt excited and vindicated when they were exonerated and released from prison, and felt this was a good a time as any to “recognize” themselves as the FDS with now the great task of taking care of the domestics and advertising the King and his Kingdom. They recognized that evidently the job Russell started was not done.
5)      To me personally it does not matter. Fundamental truths are the same and have been almost since the inception of the Bible Students. I don’t view it as a false prophesy, merely an eager and ambitious statement coming from one man and his associates excited about this “new” understanding and  Bible prophesy regarding this subject.  After all, this IS the good news in the Bible, so I don’t think that just because the timing is off, one has to view it with suspicion, or that it should have never been talked about. "Millions now living will never die" WILL eventually happen.
6)      Possible....Plus Jehovah’s organization on earth will never get everything  perfectly right in this system, for obvious reasons.
So that's my two shillings
 

1971 The Nations Shall Know That I Am Jehovah p. 70 par. 33 Commissioned To Speak In The Divine Name 
33. Likewise it was a trying mission upon which the modern Ezekiel class was sent, to religious people the same type as those in Ezekiel's day, But regardless of how Christendom views or regards this group of anointed witnesses of Jehovah, the time must come, and that shortly, when those making up Christendom will know that really a "prophet" of Jehovah was among them.
wt 08 7/15 p. 11 par. 17 Meeting the Challenges of the House-to-House Ministry
Jehovah assured Ezekiel that when the judgments he proclaimed came true, the rebellious house of Israel would “certainly know also that a prophet himself happened to be in the midst of them.” (Ezek. 2:5) Similarly, when God carries out his judgments against the present system of things, people will be forced to recognize that the message Jehovah’s Witnesses preached in public places and from house to house actually originated with the one true God, Jehovah, and that the Witnesses really did serve as his representatives.
I am not sure we have such a rigid interpretation now as in the Nations Shall Know days.
Well don't you feel that the honesty should extend to defining "prophecies" in a way that reflects the non-scriptural understanding of this word?
Mistakes, misjudgements, misapplications, errors etc. are well within the province of imperfect men who are unable to 'bridle the tongue' (compare Ja. 3:2).
But given the scriptural association of the term "false prophecies" I feel this designation is exceeding even James' earlier words at Chap 3:1 regarding the "heavier judgement". And in the context of the divinely commissioned role of an inspired prophet of Jehovah, simply not possible. There, I feel, lies a distinction with distinction.
I agree with this statement entirely and I am looking forward to revisiting this whole area in our consideration of the book God's Kingdom Rules. 

I think this issue has to do with Jehovah's witnesses' understanding of the terms "prophet" and "prophecy" and how they are scripturally applied, whether "true" or "false". And we would have to include our understanding of the role of Jehovah's witnesses in the mix. Much has been said on this matter with vast supporting references and quotations elsewhere in the forum so I will be as brief and simple as I can.
Whilst Merriam-Webster includes a semblance of the comparatively narrow scriptual definition of a "prophet", it also indicates a rather broader application in modern speech. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prophet .
However for Jehovah's Witnesses, the scriptural understanding of the word is summed up in the article "Prophet" in the book Insight on the Scriptures Vol 2 with such statements as:
"One through whom divine will and purpose are made known.." ;
"..true prophets were no ordinary announcers but were spokesmen for God, ‘men of God’ with inspired messages." ;
The messages (prophecies), whilst often connected with future matters, are not limited to this, but share the common factor of being divinely inspired of God, thus without error. (2Tim 3:16). As such, if predictions, they would be fulfilled, and if in the form of statements of fact, divine judgement, intention, direction, or instruction, they would be correct, and binding upon those to whom the message was directed. These prophecies, regardless of form, would be uttered with the overall aim to enable man to bring his ways, desires, and goals into line with the divine will. (Rev.19:10; Eph.1:10)

The role of prophet would thus be greatly privileged, but, by it's nature of divine appointment, highly accountable. This can be seen in the severe biblical condemnations of what are termed "false" prophets. (De.18:20) Self-appointed or corrupted, these false prophets made pronouncements that "lulled the people and their leaders with soothing assurances that, despite their unrighteous course, God was still with them to protect and prosper them." The activity of false prophets  is not limited to ancient times either (Matt. 24:11; 2Pet.2:1). As such, they serve the interests of the Devil, and are termed even as "inspired by demons".(Compare 1Jn 4:1-6; 1Tim.4:1;Rev.13:14)
Jehovah's witnesses do not see themselves as divinely-inspired in the sense the prophets of old were. Therefore, they do not see their teachings in quite the same light as the divine pronouncements of the prophets of old. 
So in view of the scriptural anathema attached to the term "false prophecy" and the specific scriptural understanding of that term as opposed to additional secular definitions, I can understand why we would be reluctant to apply the term "false prophecy" to any mistaken views we may have held in the past or even will hold in the future. These are mistakes, misjudgements, misapplications, errors etc.
But by the same token, I see no contradiction in applying the term "false prophecy" to any teachings or pronouncements from any source that serve to lull the people and their leaders with soothing assurances that, despite their unrighteous course, God is still with them to protect and prosper them, particularly in this "time of the end".  Rev.13:13-16.

It is pretty clear that it is impossible for millions who were living in 1925 and prior to never die as they are likely already ...dead!
But you know, I am loathe to term the famous slogan "Millions Now Living Will Never Die" as a false prophecy similar to something like "infants who die will be safe in the arms of Jesus and will spend eternity with Him in heaven." This is the sort of thing used by some religious groups to comfort those bereaved of infants. Or how about "Put the Church Behind Pershing. To win this war the boys at the front need strength of spirit " used by the American Bible Society to fund-raise for Bible distribution to soldiers during WW1?
Intrinsically,"Millions Now Living Will Never Die" is a true statement. What was wrong about it was the timing and the context of it's application.
To borrow Paul's illustration, Christians are likened to runners in a race. Well, most of us have seen a false start haven't we? The tension and excitement of the moment can carry away even the most seasoned athletes on occasion. And the alertness and eagerness of sincere Christians to the return of Christ has given rise to false alarms in modern times, even as it did amongst the disciples. The good thing about a Christian "jumping the gun" is that they can always get back in the race.
As a rallying cry, the Millions slogan certainly captured the attention of many. Preaching in the 70's, I still met people who had attended one of these lectures by Judge Rutherford. Many may have dropped out with expectation unfulfilled, but any who were alerted to the Bible's message by the Millions campaign, and who are still active Jehovah's witnesses, are unlikely to have regretted that decision although their number would only be a fraction of the "Millions" expected at the time.
Would it have been better to use a slogan like "Billions Now Living Will Die For Ever" ? Attention grabbing maybe, but I think I prefer the original.
Someone said "False starts may be considered illegal, but in life, I’d rather have a false start than no start at all." 

Those are loaded questions! 
I find it quite fascinating reading the scriptures and our attempts to put the pieces of the puzzle together.  However, try as we might, these things can be difficult to figure out as we can see from all the different dates and times.
 
The slogan can't possibly be true.  I don't think it was haughtiness or self serving, whether it's 1914, 1919, 1925 . . . but at best wishful thinking or filling in the blanks and hoping it's right.  (smile)  Many Catholic and Protestant denominations are guilty of the same.  So it makes me wonder why JW's get stuck in the false prophecy pit or why people care to the extent that they do.  The counter argument is that many lost faith, so was their faith in a date? 
 
Every 3 months or so what was written previously, is not admitted as wrong or false prophecy, but a better or more accurate understanding, whether we agree or disagree with past, present interpretations.  Whereas, opponents will most definitely cite any inconsistency as false prophesy.  I remember a case whereby the disciples circulated a rumor John would not die, when something entirely different was meant.  Did that misunderstanding make them false prophets?  I think Jesus and Jehovah understand the imperfections of man.  From the original writings, we have several copies not totally consistent with each other, however not every word or letter has to be exactly perfect in order for us to understand God's will and purpose.  Not every saying, understanding, or interpretation of the faithful and discreet slave will always be exactly perfect or essential in order for us to understand God's will and purpose.  I hope this makes some sense.