goingthruthemotions, regarding the claim that the JW religion doesn't honor Jesus Christ, I completely disagree with that. They teach that Jesus is the Christ/Messiah, the son of God, the first born (though partly in the sense of being first created) of God, that Jehovah God created all things (other than Jehovah and Jesus) through (by means of) Jesus, and that Jesus is perfect and is perfect in his worship of Jehovah God, etc.
While I was a young child being taught by my JW father in family Bible study, I studied (among other books) the WT book called "Listening to the Great Teacher" - a book (written for children) about Jesus. The WT has also published the book called "The Greatest MAN Who Ever Lived" - another book about Jesus. That latter book was used in congregational book studies. More recently the WT published the book "Learn from the GREAT TEACHER" - another book (written for children and also for adults with limited reading skills) about Jesus.
The Memorial Service of the JW religion honors Jesus Christ - it is a memorial of Jesus Christ. It is done in obedience to the words attributed in the Bible to Jesus, in which the Bible says Jesus said to do such in remembrance of him. Granted, I think/believe the Bible means Jesus wanted all devout Christians to partake of the emblems, not just to pass them around in conjunction to listening to a talk and prayers about them, and not just limiting the partaking to only a literal 144,000 persons over the past some 2000 years.
[Correction: In my prior post where I said "... the WT said Rutherford said Rutherford, prior to joining the WT religion, was told he couldn't marry the .." I should have said "... the WT said that Rutherford said he was told, prior to joining and learning of the WT religion, that he couldn't marry the ..."]
During the time that Rutherford was president of the WT, the WT religion made the odd claim that Jehovah's Witnesses were not a religion, though they did say they practiced pure true worship of Jehovah. [They now say that though false religion exists, true religion also exists and that the JW religion is the modern day true religion.] Interestingly, many Bible Church nondenominational Christians today claim that Christianity is not a religion, but rather a relationship with Jesus. Furthermore some JWs today while witnessing say they have a personal relationship with Jehovah and some of the WT literature uses the expression of 'relationship with Jehovah. In regards to the theme of the latter they even published a book called "Draw Close to Jehovah".
HowTheBibleWasCreated, regarding the KJV Bible currently published (or at least most recently published) by the WT it has the 587 BC (B.C. 587) date because the scripture text pages (including the scripture cross references, page headings, alternate readings and renderings) of that edition are printed from printing plates purchased from Holman. Holman was and still is a major publisher of the KJV Bible. See page 607 (there is that number again) of the Proclaimers' book which says "... plates for the King James Version with marginal references were purchased in 1942 form A. J. Holman Company ..." However, the WT edition did include a concordance and helps prepared by JWs. In the early 1900s an edition of the KJV published by the WT (see page 606 of the Proclaimers' book) included a Bible Students appendix. I once had a copy of that edition. I noticed that in the appendix it had instructions to cross out specific verses and specific parts of verses that are not in critical text editions of the Greek New Testament (and/or Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus) - words that are thought to be spurious. In the pre-NWT era the WT probably made clear that the dates in the KJV edition published by the WT were not calculated by the WT/JWs.
The Proclaimers book (see page 604 and 605) mentions that the WT had distributed an edition of Leeser's translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into English. Some WT literature has also quoted from Leeser's translation. I have a copy of a different edition of Leeser's translation and I notice he makes reference to the 586/587 date and uses the phrasing of before the common era. Leeser was a practicing Jew. The edition I have of his translation is published by "Bloch Publishing company" in 1905 and it has the double triangle six-pointed Jewish star on the title page. In that book the first sentence of the "General Remarks" says "According to Dr. Zunz, the creation of the world dates 3988 before the common era" (in other words 3988 B.C.E). The paragraph says Jerusalem was conquered in the year 3402 after the creation of the world. 3402 years after 3988 "before the common era" equals the year 586 "before the common era". That is just one year off from the year 587 BCE, but one year probably should be added back to 586 BCE because the page said the "the year 3402 after the creation" instead of "3402 years after the year of the creation" and I think it thus includes the first year of the creation.