Matthew 24:34 NEW UNDERSTANDING (January 2018 JW Broadcasting)
It is still a valid definition, nonetheless.
no, it is not Fisherman,
it is invalidated by Jesus' words:
This generation will not pass away until all these things have occurred.
the charts show that the generation of anointed will pass away. short of the beginning of the end.
who is right here, Jesus? , or David Splane, the spokesman? they can not both be valid.
Fisherman, how is their overlapping generation definition a valid one?
Axiom that a generation definition includes overlapping ages. Applying the prophesy to the "anointed," the present "this generation" teaching conforms to such definition.
I know you are just trolling at this point. But come on. Overlapping ages as in not born on the exact same date? Yes. Overlapping decades? No, that is not understood by any definition of a generation except the convoluted WT definition. The key word in the dictionary definition is contemporaneous. How old was Sanderson when Fred died? You would say that they were contemporaries? How? Of course they weren't. My father was 27 when I was born. I was 35 when my son was born. My dad, myself and my son are all alive right now but clearly NO ONE in the world would consider us part of the same generation. Not even in the context of world history. Oh wait, the WT thinks not only we are part of the same generation but my grandfather was also since my son has met him and remembers him.
It would make much more sense if they moved the start of the last days to a more recent date. That's the problem with all their prophetic predictions. Once one part falls, the whole thing falls apart.
I knew my great grandfather!
My great great grandmothers and grandfathers were around until I was around six. My great grandmother's sister lived till mid 1990's.
No, that is not understood by any definition of a generation except the convoluted WT definition
Besides your remarks, you have not invalidated WT teaching of "this generation" as not conforming to the definition of generation.
Of course the watchtowers definition is not in line with any definition of generation that i can find. Perhaps you can find me a definition that would include the generational overlap Fishermen
Somebody ask a dub,
“If somebody you meet in the FS asked you if you believe the generation of 1914 is still around, what would you give them as an answer?”
Yes.... No... I don’t know...
Of course nothing I could say would ever invalidate your precious cult leaders direction. By the way, I'm at the boring midweek meeting so here's a thought. Look at Matt 1:17 and tell me how the Bible defines generations. Here's a clue, the same way as the rest of us. But the GB is more important than the Bible
applying the prophesy to the "anointed," the present "this generation" teaching conforms to such definition. Fisherman:
The "anointed" generation is totally wrong, at least in the second fulfillment of wt's imagination.The first century listeners of Jesus words might have survived the end and lived to see the post-Jerusalem, post temple era. They died only after all these things occurred, but
In the future charted by wt/Splane, the anointed generation is slated to be terminated short of the end. A total disconnect from Jesus' words, and an impossible antitype to the type lived out by the early church.
David blew it, and he must realize that be now. hopefully.
Perhaps, because most GB, F&DS members are so unfamiliar with procreation, motherhood, successions of generations, that they fell in to the anointed generation overlapping since 1914. trap?
Anointed generation is wrong because it contradicts Jesus defining their timeline,
Overlapping generation is wrong because it defies the meaning, the root of the word's usage, in the bible even.
The 2 witness rule is vindicated, Anointed overlapping generation wrong on all 2 minimum counts.
David, back to the drawing board please, to draw different conclusions.