@Drewcoul, yeah, I love that closing comment ... "It makes it more clear, but I need to do more research." Uh, so is it clear or not? Did that discussion of Fred Franz living nearly 100 years actually explain it or not? And where will you do your research? Admit it, mate, it just can't be understood. And why?
2:01 on the audio: "We have to readjust our understanding of what a generation is." And why do they have to readjust? Simple: because the previous "understanding" meant that those who had formed that generation were now at least 107 years old, and so the doctrine was therefore proved WRONG.
The "old understanding" was actually pretty clear, and it made sense in a Watchtower way. "The generation that saw the events of 1914 will not pass away before Armageddon comes." That's clear enough. But when the passing of time makes it clear that the doctrine was WRONG, they need to face facts and say, "Hey, we goofed. If Jesus was talking about a generation alive at the time of Armageddon, then tying it in with the 1914 date was clearly WRONG. If we got that WRONG then we probably got a lot of other stuff WRONG."
But they're too proud to admit they're WRONG. Instead of dismantling their doctrine, they have decided to redefine a fairly basic English word and then force that to fit their doctrine. They can talk all they like at conventions about the lives of old anointed men overlapping the lives of young anointed men. But sorry, that doesn't make them one generation, and anyone with half a brain knows that. I am not the same generation as my grandfather even though were were both alive together for all of the 1960s.
That presentation had excellent actors, but I doubt even they believe it.
