And to think that for over a decade, we were told to believe quite the opposite. The "Generation" teaching is a clear example of a doctrine that shifts back and forth with most people just shrugging their shoulders and accepting whatever crap they're told.
This is from the Watchtower article, "Questions From Our Readers" dated June 1, 1997, pg. 28:
Questions From Our Readers
“The Watchtower" of November 1, 1995, focused on what Jesus said about "this generation" as we read Matthew 24:34. Does this mean that there is some question about whether God's kingdom was set up in heaven in 1914?
[...]
With similar sincere intentions, God’s servants in modern times have tried to derive from what Jesus said about “generation” some clear time element calculated from 1914. For instance, one line of reasoning has been that a generation can be 70 or 80 years, made up of people old enough to grasp the significance of the first world war and other developments; thus we can calculate more or less how near the end is.
However well-meaning such thinking was, did it comply with the advice Jesus went on to give? Jesus said: “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father. . . . Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.”—Matthew 24:36-42.
So the recent information in The Watchtower about “this generation” did not change our understanding of what occurred in 1914. But it did give us a clearer grasp of Jesus’ use of the term “generation,” helping us to see that his usage was no basis for calculating—counting from 1914—how close to the end we are."
Back in the 90's besides this kind of more balanced teaching, we also had the 'higher education' policy softened a little bit. I believe Barbara Anderson has explained something regarding the liberals vs. the hard-liners but I often wonder who the liberals were (and if any remain maybe not as part of the GB but within the "helpers" group).
