I brought this up in my own recent witch trial, the "overlapping generations" thing. "At a certain point," I said, "you have to realize that we're stretching the rules of logic here." It was like talking to the braindead.
This sort of discussion is particularly strange in an article talking about HOLY SPIRIT'S role. Because holy spirit had nothing to do with this doctrinal change. You would really have to just not be paying attention at all to not realize that they're buying time for themselves.
Consider also this logic: if "this generation" could refer to anointed ones whose lives overlap with other anointed ones, then who's to say that we couldn't extend this reasoning BACKWARDS in time, so that we have an [imaginary] unbroken line of anointed ones whose lives overlapped with previous anointed ones? I mean, if we're assuming it refers only to anointed ones, why not?
The other weird thing, I think, was a box that was on the opposite page from the overlapping stuff--it references recent changes, like the elimination of the 1935 as the closing date for the anointed ones to be chosen. My wife and I were going over the daily text sometime ago, and the Watchtower comment was from a 2008 article, printed after the 1935 date had been boxed. But that article specifically mentioned that apparently the calling of the anointed was just about done...in the 1930s!! A 2008 article stating something that had been rendered obsolete in 2007? If I find it, I'll post the quote.
But clearly, "this generation", singular, is apparently now "THESE GENERATIONS". Get three words into your vocabulary, Writing Committee: I DON'T KNOW. Just say them.
The elders told me, at the end of my committee, that I needed to be more humble. I don't consider it arrogance to ask legitimate questions about things that clearly violate common sense, like this. It doesn't require humility to believe this sort of doctrine; it requires mental blindness, a complete lack of individual thought and reason.
To attribute statements like this to holy spirit, I would think, and to put these words in Jesus' mouth, should constitute some form of arrogance, if not blasphemy, in my opinion. "Evidently" is uh, evidently a warning sign that whatever follows that word is probably not true, lacking evidence, and, quite simply, a shot in the dark. I watch for that word now more than most others as a signal that speculation is sure to follow it.
Man plans, God purposes? Why does God need a special term for what is ultimately his plan? The only real difference between God's plans and man's plans is that God's plans work (assuming you believe in that sort of thing). He doesn't need to give everybody every detail, and if something happens to screw with the big plan, he just works around it. The objective is the relevant thing, not the details, so...purpose or plan seems like a nonsense study of semantics. Just another word to throw in when they write the next new song book.
I've wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt, but every article I read has something that just demolishes any reason to give these people credibility as teachers of the scriptures. As for me, holy spirit is definitely leading me away from this kind of stuff and towards the Bible itself, which, evidently, speaks for itself far better than any magazine ever could.
--Christopher