slimboyfat.....Very interesting comments and reactions. 
There was a terribly jarring combination in the article as it was argued first that Jesus' presence would be an "extended period", and then the standard reference was trotted out about the devil coming down to the earth with much anger knowing he has a "short period of time". So much emphasis was placed on the idea of it being an "extended period" of time, you really have to wonder how the writer did not get embarrassed then sticking in the usual "short period of time" reference in such close proximity.
I didn't notice that....nice catch! It is also quite striking how in a few paragraphs "presence" became a definite "period" which then became prolonged into an "extended period". The use of the word "extended" in particular seemingly came out of nowhere.
I really wonder how much longer the Society can get away with calling the "last days" from 1914 until a still-future-Armageddon a "short period of time". Surely within the next few years someone will need to say "let's sit down and rethink this whole chronology business". It is getting just a bit ridiculous at this point in my opinion.
It seems like 1914 as the start of the "last days" will be the last thing to go. Have you noticed that in the present article, the generation is defined more by the endpoint of the "extended period" than the start point? It's no longer necessary for the generation to start in 1914.
Does anyone else notice something different? There are a lot more from different racial backgrounds in there than there used to be! Black people and Asians outnumber the white people shown. In the Revelation book and past Watchtower articles there have been pictures of the anointed that supposedly span the generations from the first century to the present, and they show the early apostles, and then Russell and other early Witnesses, then Franz: all white. I suppose what with a potential new upward trend in anointed numbers since the new understanding about 1935 not being a cut off date, then those claiming to be anointed might now be more racially mixed in the past.
Another rather savvy comment. It does subtly play into the new understanding of 1935 no longer being a cut-off date, whether intentional or not. I wonder if others, especially JWs in other countries where there never have been anointed in congregations, might interpret the picture the same way and take it as supporting JWs who want to declare themselves as anointed.
3. How thoroughly weird that when they introduced the new understanding about the generation not the slightest mention was made that for decades the Watchtower taught that "this generation" referred to people alive in 1914, and that Armageddon would come within the lifespan of those people. Instead the article only mentioned the most recent understanding introduced in 1995 about the generation referring to wicked people who reject God living today. How can they get away with this?
It's weird but not surprising. They would have to admit that they've had to change their views more than once on this, which takes away from their claim in the very article that only the anointed have the wisdom to properly understand the prophecy and its fulfillment.
Imagine if they had come out with the "generation" new light before they dropped the 1935 date. What would have happened then? I reckon we would be back in the scenario of working out how long a generation lasts from 1935 - 70 or 80 years - and asking whether that refers to people who can "remember" the year or simply who were born in 1935 and not later; all the nonsense speculation we went through in the Watchtowers of the 1980's in other words.
Wow, another fascinating observation. :) What this suggests to me is that they scheduled out the refinements to prevent such problems from arising -- and who knows what other refinements are still in store that have been planned in committee.
Despite the fact that it was changed in 1995, there were Witnesses present who clearly still had some confused idea that 1914 can still be viewed as a sort of starting date for working out a generation, albeit a longer one than previously envisaged.
Do we know if that article with pre-1995 "old light" is still online on the official Watchtower website?