Anna

I had forgotten what he had said about Jehovah’s Witnesses. But it fits well with this remark from a Russian scholar:
“Nikolai Gordienko, of the Herzen Russian State University in St. Petersburg, has stated ‘When the experts accuse Jehovah’s Witnesses for their teachings, they do not realize that they are actually making accusations against the Bible.’”
 

Every climate scientists realizes this. And everyone should know it. The scientists are looking at what accounts for the excess CO2. It would be like putting half a cup of ice in a glass and getting a full cup of water when it melts. Everyone should understand why you might get nearly half a cup.

Thanks for this part of the history of the restoration of true worship.  However, it also brings out my point that we should retire this kind of talk, since today we certainly believe that Jehovah always had witnesses, and we are not a new religion, but a restoration of true worship.  In my opinion, I certainly think we were in religion in those days but not aware of our rights - or our rights were not quotable in the society of the day. Jesus was not recognized as a true prophet or as the coming Messiah in his time either, although he certainly was.    If we go back to this kind of talk, then we should not talk about the true religion, restoration of true worship or Jehovah's Witnesses is not a new religion, which points we had several tracts and books relaying  over the years in modern times.  For example:
*** rs p. 202-p. 203 Jehovah’s Witnesses ***
How old is the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses?

According to the Bible, the line of witnesses of Jehovah reaches back to faithful Abel. Hebrews 11:4–12:1 says: “By faith Abel offered God a sacrifice of greater worth than Cain . . . By faith Noah, after being given divine warning of things not yet beheld, showed godly fear . . . By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed in going out into a place he was destined to receive as an inheritance . . . By faith Moses, when grown up, refused to be called the son of the daughter of Pharaoh, choosing to be ill-treated with the people of God rather than to have the temporary enjoyment of sin . . . So, then, because we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also put off every weight and the sin that easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us.”
With reference to Jesus Christ, the Bible states: “These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God.” Of whom was he a witness? He himself said that he made his Father’s name manifest. He was the foremost witness of Jehovah.—Rev. 3:14; John 17:6.
Interestingly, some of the Jews asked whether the activity of Jesus Christ represented “a new teaching.” (Mark 1:27) Later, some Greeks thought the apostle Paul was introducing a “new teaching.” (Acts 17:19, 20) It was new to the ears of those who were hearing it, but the important thing was that it was the truth, in full harmony with God’s Word.
The modern-day history of Jehovah’s Witnesses began with the forming of a group for Bible study in Allegheny, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., in the early 1870’s. At first they were known only as Bible Students, but in 1931 they adopted the Scriptural name Jehovah’s Witnesses. (Isa. 43:10-12) Their beliefs and practices are not new but are a restoration of first-century Christianity."  End quote
 
Bold text mine
 

I would certainly never say that it was impossible. I took the word of some what I thought were respectable sources that the laws were not aimed primarily at religion. But sometimes even respectable sources don’t know their knee from their elbow.

That's true, but it would not attract as much attention. Rutherford had been a political marketer before following Russell/WT/Bible Students. This is why he would ADV/ADV/ADV. And why gimmicks like putting David and Abraham on a property deed were important to him. This is why he used the title "Judge."
But I think it was Covington who figured out that he could do much better in the courts if we agreed to be recognized as a religion. Religious rights were easier to fight for than unspecified rights or civil rights of a group who would otherwise be seen only as "peddlers." Tresspassing laws were decidedly against peddlers, but the United States was being recognized in the twentieth century as much more amenable to a variety of religions, and we weren't the only religion asking for (and getting) expanded rights.

I would say it another way: False religion is a snare and a racket.   Not hard to correct. 
Abel had a religion and all of God's servants since.
Definition of religion: Concise Oxford Dictionary: belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny; 2 any formal or institutionalized expression of such belief, e.g. the Christian religion. ...5. something of overwhelming importance to a person.

Give them permanent “W”s

Ah! Now I know where that "NI" came from in your Scrabble game. It was for "Needs Improvement"!

I see you are trying to bring something positive to a negative post 🙂. The truth is though, apostates are an entirely different category to the average person who never was one of Jehovah's Witnesses. The average non Witness would probably side with us, and not Apostates. Nobody likes bullies, and would wonder why all the vitriol. There are a number of people who are for us, even doctors concerning the blood issue for example. (Found on our website).
Just the other day on the ministry I had a lady who thanked us and told us she admired what we do. This wasn't the first time someone said something like this, and I am sure all of us had someone like that at some time. On the other hand we should expect to be hated (by the public) because Jesus said so. And we should also expect opposition from those who were once among us.
A few days ago I was doing some reading on the Yarovaya Law (the law responsible for all the trouble for the Witnesses in Russia), and found that this law was created by a woman named Irina Yarovaya. This got me to wondering whether her "attack" on religion (besides Orthodox) was actually personal, and whether her attack on evangelism specifically, was even more personal.  Then all kinds of ideas came to mind. Did she have a family member who became a Witness and refused blood, or higher education etc. did she blame the Witnesses? Then a plethora of other situations came to mind but I will not post them here because they could be deemed defamatory. (All I will say is pictures speak a thousand words and Russian women are in a league of their own. I can think of a few lady Bible characters though as well).
 

Did he explain what we were before then? I wonder if Rutherford would think the same today, since we are a religion now. He probably would, because religion IS a snare and a racket, except for the true religion 🙂.

I see you are trying to bring something positive to a negative post 🙂. The truth is though, apostates are an entirely different category to the average person who never was one of Jehovah's Witnesses. The average non Witness would probably side with us, and not Apostates. Nobody likes bullies, and would wonder why all the vitriol. There are a number of people who are for us, even doctors concerning the blood issue for example. (Found on our website).
Just the other day on the ministry I had a lady who thanked us and told us she admired what we do. This wasn't the first time someone said something like this, and I am sure all of us had someone like that at some time. On the other hand we should expect to be hated (by the public) because Jesus said so. And we should also expect opposition from those who were once among us.
A few days ago I was doing some reading on the Yarovaya Law (the law responsible for all the trouble for the Witnesses in Russia), and found that this law was created by a woman named Irina Yarovaya. This got me to wondering whether her "attack" on religion (besides Orthodox) was actually personal, and whether her attack on evangelism specifically, was even more personal.  Then all kinds of ideas came to mind. Did she have a family member who became a Witness and refused blood, or higher education etc. did she blame the Witnesses? Then a plethora of other situations came to mind but I will not post them here because they could be deemed defamatory. (All I will say is pictures speak a thousand words and Russian women are in a league of their own. I can think of a few lady Bible characters though as well).
 

I see you are trying to bring something positive to a negative post 🙂. The truth is though, apostates are an entirely different category to the average person who never was one of Jehovah's Witnesses. The average non Witness would probably side with us, and not Apostates. Nobody likes bullies, and would wonder why all the vitriol. There are a number of people who are for us, even doctors concerning the blood issue for example. (Found on our website).
Just the other day on the ministry I had a lady who thanked us and told us she admired what we do. This wasn't the first time someone said something like this, and I am sure all of us had someone like that at some time. On the other hand we should expect to be hated (by the public) because Jesus said so. And we should also expect opposition from those who were once among us.
A few days ago I was doing some reading on the Yarovaya Law (the law responsible for all the trouble for the Witnesses in Russia), and found that this law was created by a woman named Irina Yarovaya. This got me to wondering whether her "attack" on religion (besides Orthodox) was actually personal, and whether her attack on evangelism specifically, was even more personal.  Then all kinds of ideas came to mind. Did she have a family member who became a Witness and refused blood, or higher education etc. did she blame the Witnesses? Then a plethora of other situations came to mind but I will not post them here because they could be deemed defamatory. (All I will say is pictures speak a thousand words and Russian women are in a league of their own. I can think of a few lady Bible characters though as well).
 

Did he explain what we were before then? I wonder if Rutherford would think the same today, since we are a religion now. He probably would, because religion IS a snare and a racket, except for the true religion 🙂.

As vitriolic as the spiteful crticisms of apostate opposers are, there is a remarkable tide of recognition of the integrity of Jehovah's Witnesses, even among those who do not share our beliefs.
Speaking of the voluntary stand of Jehovah's Witnesses against the oppressive demands of the Nazi and Fascist regimes in Germany and Italy this observation was recently made:
"We owe it also to their sacrifice that there was the powerful push in civil society that gave birth to the European project and also the European Court of Human Rights"
Guido Raimondi.  President of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) 1 November 2015 – 5 May 2019
The views of other non-Witness dignitaries can be seen here.

I thought these were all excellent ideas. And I have to agree with them, especially the one where you mentioned me. 😄
I thought an excellent opportunity arose in advance of the Love Never Fails theme for the conventions.
(1 Corinthians 13:8-13) 8 Love never fails. But if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away with; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away with. 9 For we have partial knowledge and we prophesy partially, 10 but when what is complete comes, what is partial will be done away with. 11 When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, to think as a child, to reason as a child; but now that I have become a man, I have done away with the traits of a child. 12 For now we see in hazy outline by means of a metal mirror, but then it will be face-to-face. At present I know partially, but then I will know accurately, just as I am accurately known. 13 Now, however, these three remain: faith, hope, love; but the greatest of these is love.
For me, it seemed like the perfect opportunity to take the exact context of that verse, and develop a theme about ways in which the Governing Body can show that they are now reducing all the emphasis on attempted prophecy. (What will happen next before the end? A more pointed judgment message? Anointed "raptured"? Babylon the Great fallen? "Other Sheep" replacing the Governing Body? Cries of Peace and Security? An attack on Jehovah's Witnesses corresponding to touching Jehovah's eyeball? Gog/Magog? The order of the earthly resurrection? Who will teach whom? What happens at the end of the thousand years?)
1914, 1919, 1922, the 1260 days, the 1290 days, the 1335 days, the 2300 evenings and mornings, the 7 times, etc. These can all be de-emphasized now and replaced with a new message about ways we can show love to one another. This could include caring for aging parents, new counsel about caring for our families materially, caring for the sick and poor among us, even caring for disfellowshipped ones at our own discretion of personal conscience. Becoming known as a group who shows the greatest love among ourselves would be our new "calling card." Preaching could still have a "last days" theme, but it would always be about the sort of persons we ought to be in showing love for one another, knowing that the end could happen at any time, or that our own end could happen at any time. Our hope, and our faith in that hope are still a big part of the good news, but our love right now is the greatest theme of the good news.

As we're approaching to our Annual meeting, here it goes my list of wishes! Perhaps there is a chance some of them could be announced:
KNOW THE REASON FOR UPDATES IN PUBLICATIONS
When a new update is available in JW Library, I download it without knowing the reasons for it: we do not know if it is a small editing error, a significant improvement in translation, a more serious adjustment ... Anyway, I would love be informed of the reasons, especially when sometimes the Bible itself is updated. Perhaps I have used outdated information inadvertently and it would be nice to know that there has been an improvement!
WATCHTOWER WITH APPENDIX
Our study articles are nice, no doubt. However, in order not to make them excessively extensive for their study in the congregation, they lacked extension in some ideas. Perhaps in the form of an appendix that can be read by anyone who wishes delve into some subject
LITERATURE WITH REFERENCES
Years ago it was common to find in our publications references to McClintock, Vine, Barclay and others. Now this has almost completely disappeared. Why? So we don't waste time reading them? Not to be confused by reading different approaches? If it has been useful for decades, I don't see why we don't have those references again.
DISCONTINUE THE PIONERING(AUXILIARY-REGULAR)
I know, it sounds blasphemy. But given the advantages that someone could exhibit, I have seen in others and in myself these "collateral damage", nothing insignificant:
Preach not for love of God or neighbor, but for hours Feeling bad conscience about having to leave the pioner service to attend family, health or the congregation Feelings of superiority  And then, who would attend pioner meetings with C.O.? everybody who wishes! DO NOT REPORT THE PREDICATION
I mean in the current format "so many hours, books, etc." Was it reported that way in the first century? Don't we intend to imitate the primitive congregation to the fullest?
Reporting involves the following:
The elders falsely believe we know the "flock" for knowing the card The actual effort of the low quatitu of hours  is not included in the card, but you have to sacrifice a lot to do it There are brothers who feel ashamed for informing / preaching little and have to report it There are elders who only call publishers to ask for the monthly report The C.O. gets an idea of the state of a congregation by looking at some forms, that can be equivocal REFORM THE PREACHING FROM HOME TO HOME
In many countries (especially Europeans) the challenge of entering residential buildings to preach is enormous. People (myself) do not want strangers to enter buildings, not for religious indifference, but for safety and comfort. When someone manages to "sneak in", whether they sell gas, electricity, insurance ... or religion, the reaction is very negative about the product they intend to sell, for not respecting the privacy and security of the building. Solution? Nothing easy, but go through, in my opinion:
Abandon the idea of preaching entering buildings in many locations That must be determined locally: in the same city or congregation there are buildings where that would not be a problem, but in others yes Stop counting how many times a territory is made as a way to find out the intensity of the preaching of the congregation Stop preaching with a tie and suit (TJ uniform) but sit in the parks, or visit the malls, or a thousand different ways, and then take advantage to make conversations arise REPORT ON THE QUALITY OF THE SPEAKERS
Many are invited on the basis of their friendship with whom they invite, or because they appear on the list of speakers. If each congregation had a simple way to survey the speaker:  did you like Sunday's talk YES / NO? the people in charge of inviting would see that some better not to come much, and vice versa
INFORM ABOUT C.O.'s
Many of these brothers are a gift. Others are simply a test for everyone. I have personally met destructive travelers. It is very difficult to help, change or remove them from that job. Many years ago, in the annual report that each congregation sent to the headquartes, one question was, more or less, "Were the c.o.' visits upbuilding?" Of course, if a congregation says that it is very bad but 19 very good, it is known that they are prejudiced in that congregation. But if in 19 congregations the report is unfavorable and only one speaks well ... something should be done.
MECHANISM OF COMPLAINTS
Do I have a way to express my complaint about something that works badly, as the widows in first century? Yes, I will be told: you tell the elders, then the traveler. Of course, but if they tell me that I have to wait, that nothing else can be done, could I not write to the headquartes, even to NY? Well, I've already done it, and the answers that have come to me have been stereotyped.

It is very difficult for negative situations to escalate. There is a protection mechanism. If I express myself openly, it is interpreted as a lack of appreciation, of faith, of collaborative spirit. I know that is so. However, when you want to know the opinion - POSITIVE - of something mechanisms are established, for example:

On the occasion of the recent presentation of the Bible in Spanish, the c.o. sent us a request for reactions from the brothers to the presentation, yes, all positive: that we say what the brothers thought of the new translation, how they received it at the assembly , and so on.
Well, I would like you to ask me things like:
Do you think it is good that the branch of Spain spends a lot of money in reforming some huge buildings for the real use that will be given to them? Have you felt encouraged by this or that article? Why yes, why not? Etc THE QUALITY OF THE ANSWERS AT THE MEETINGS
In my area it is frowned upon to make a public declaration of faith, to express personal feelings. It breaks the scheme of the meeting, in fact, there is no time. The brothers are used to underline and respond. When the watchtower's question is personal: "What do you think about ...?" nobody raises their hand, or we respond by reading
WATCHTOWER WITH PREAMBLE AND CONCLUSION
99% of the Watchtower overseers I have seen in my life waste their time in introductory paragraphs during meetings. Then you have to go fast in the key paragraphs. Why not place an introduction that is not read, and a conclusion that is not read? 
SOME ROTATING POSITIONS
I understand that if there are 10 elders in a congregation, not everyone is qualified to be a coordinator, for example. But maybe 3 or 4 yes. I would like those 3 or 4 to rotate the position annually, to avoid "love of the chair"
REFORMULATE THE ANNUAL ASSEMBLIES
Many of us remember the assemblies of years ago. They were long, very long. Extensive speeches Many times in full sun, and we were expected to take notes as not to be distracted. Now however there has been an impressive improvement. However, I sincerely believe that many would benefit more if a national assembly was broadcasted by streaming to the entire country, and that most brothers saw it in the Kingdom and assembly halls. What would be achieved?
Savings for siblings who go through hardships to get to the city of assembly and pay for accommodation Central Savings Avoid the sacrifice of early wake ups, fix the children, travel from the hotel to the place of assembly Improvement in concentration. With a few hours of sleep you can't concentrate And the joy of crowded crowds? That is why there would be a few assemblies nationwide, in rotating cities, upon invitation.
EXTERNALIZE BETEL
That they print commercial companies, that the size of Bethel be reduced to the minimum expression. Let the bulk of the work be done by commuters, whenever possible
RESIDENCES OF ELDERLY
Many brothers who have spent their entire lives for the work, as adults, find themselves dependent on the goodwill of friends or a congregation that wants to support them. Bethel is not the place for elderly people. Places could be set up to care for these brothers with dignity and without having to beg for help
SUPERVISION OF THE WORK BY "NORMAL" PEOPLE
Well, I explain myself. What effect does it have on someone who lives, eats, sleeps, works in a secluded place? That he doesn't need to work secularly, or fight to support the family, who are never denied permission to go to meetings, or go to the assembly ... and surrounded by people with the same situation.
What I have seen is that there is a perverse effect. These excellent brothers year after year, decade after decade of living a different life to the rest of humanity and brotherhood have a distorted view of things and brothers. Not always, of course, but many times yes.

I would like that especially the brothers who have to supervise the spiritual activity of others, have secular work, like any other brother. And in the afternoon, instead of the pionering, they could take care of the spiritual needs of others.
By the way, didn't Paul do that, work secularly?
THE BEARD
Yes, wearing a beard. In our publications only men who are not witnesses wear beards. When they are baptized they have always shaved it. Who decides these photos, how do you think they give freedom of choice worldwide? In theory you can wear a beard, but in reality it is badly seen in many places especially for videos and photographs in our publications. Let photos of JW's with beards come out, now!
DOCTRINAL
1914, PARUSIA
@JW Insider has explained it masterfully on so many occasions. Our 1914 doctrine simply does not hold. The parusia of Christ is his return, it is comparable to his coming. It has not yet occurred
PROXIMITY OF THE END
Of course we are near the end! Not since 1914, but since 33 CE. Since Christ left and said he would come unexpectedly, like a thief. That exactly teaches the Bible
DISFELLOWSHIPPING
Others, and myself, have bitterly written that our position is the strictest and most pharisaic interpretation of all possible approaches to expulsion. Especially when it has to do with relatives.
PHARISEISM
With sadness I perceive that, at the organizational level, we're becoming Christian Pharisees. We have been told that we should avoid that attitude, but the importance given to the dress, the beard, the belief that we are better than others, the ambition of the top positions... How I would like these attitudes to be eradicated at the root
SEXUAL RELATIONS
Clearly state that what the marriage decides to do in their room is only for both of them
HUMILITY
How much I would like that instead of exposing new approaches as the last truth, it will be explained that it is the most plausible, but not infallible, explanation. And that with time and study, a different one may look better.
 
There are more, but I better leave it here
 
 
 

This is because I was traumatized when I spotted someone violently attacking a fortune-teller, hitting her repeatedly and hard, and all she did was laugh and laugh.
I intervened. “What do you think you’re doing?” I demanded of the assailant.
”Just trying to strike a happy medium,” he replied.
Still sure you want me on the other forum?

It certainly can. You are right about that.
But it also shows spiritual weakness when we forget to question ourselves and our teaching. So having a place to formulate questions helps us clarify those questions for ourselves, even when no one comes around to provide a scriptural response to those questions. And when someone does come around to provide a scriptural response, we can be happy that we are being corrected, or if it helps us confirm an answer to our questions.
But if it's true that Satan has corrupted persons to think they hold the truth in any subject, then this is the same as accusing the Watchtower organization and its writers of being emboldened by Satan when they present their views as holding the truth in all subjects they speak about. I personally don't believe that the Watchtower writers are being emboldened by Satan. I think it's more of a matter of being excited to believe they have found all the important answers, and they therefore speak as if it must be right, as if they are speaking sacred pronouncement of God. To a point, if we are not going beyond the things written, this is a good thing:
(1 Peter 4:10, 11) . . .To the extent that each one has received a gift, use it in ministering to one another as fine stewards of God’s undeserved kindness that is expressed in various ways. 11 If anyone speaks, let him do so as speaking pronouncements from God;. . .
But there is a danger of being so sure of ourselves, that we forget to question. We forget to ask for questions. We forget to WANT questions. The JW.ORG site does not ask for questions; there is no comments section. We all know that if the teachers are actually humble like little children, they will ask questions, and so will the rest of us.
True. But how often do we also see those in opposition to truth, who know that Brother Russell predicted that other things would happen in 1914 that didn't happen? And then, as a distraction, because they are in opposition to admitting the truth, they point out that some people thought Russell predicted that the world would end in 1914.
True. But how often do we also see those in opposition to truth, who know that Brother Rutherford predicted that other things would happen in 1925, that didn't happen? And then, as a distraction, because they are in opposition to admitting the truth, they point out that some people thought Rutherford predicted that the world would end in 1925.
This can happen. We've seen it happen. But those in opposition to admitting the truth about what was actually predicted for as early as the mid-70's and as late as the end of the twentieth century, are often very anxious to create a distraction by pointing out that some people claim a specific thing was claimed for only 1975.
When a person is really making a specific false claim, then it's good to point it out. But if they are not making that claim then pointing out a different mistake that someone else is making can be a very misleading distraction.

I’ve said it before but not lately. The forum is good for me because with it I can hone my writing. 
If I post a Jumping Jehovah’s Witnesses photo on the JW only forum, someone will give me thunderous applause. If I truthfully say that I think such photos are stupid, someone else will counsel me to turn my frown upside down.
For the most part, I like the atmosphere of unity on what is most important, but there are times when it will not do. Better, from a writing point of view, to be here.
Here I can reference some JW foibles, even missteps, and not suffer rebuke. More importantly, here I can write something favorable about them and know that there are villains that will promptly hurl it back in my teeth. I analyze the response, like a Hadron collider scientist. Sometimes the results tell me that my comment was a logical train wreck. Even friends here will tell me so. When my remark brings mostly taunts, insults, and ridicule, then I know that I have hit bullseye.
A writer needs a muse but he needs more than a muse. He also needs a villain, so I hang here where there are villains galore.

An example of an anti type, and we know what we think of anti types lately:
" Over the years, Jehovah has helped “the faithful and discreet slave” to become more discreet, or cautious. In what way? Now the faithful slave is careful to say that a Bible account represents something greater only when there is a clear Scriptural reason to do so."  ws15 3/15 p. 6
Is there a good scriptural reason to use Nebuchadnezzar's  rulership as applying to Jesus?
I don't know, I haven't researched it enough. And this is the crux of the matter.  I am a perfect example of an average Witness, who really just takes this particular doctrine as matter of fact without thoroughly "making sure whether it is so". Why? Because it is darn time consuming and complicated. And I would say at least 95% of Witnesses feel the same way. Which means 95% of Witnesses believe this doctrine without having convinced themselves whether it is really true or not. Hmmmm.......

An example of an anti type, and we know what we think of anti types lately:
" Over the years, Jehovah has helped “the faithful and discreet slave” to become more discreet, or cautious. In what way? Now the faithful slave is careful to say that a Bible account represents something greater only when there is a clear Scriptural reason to do so."  ws15 3/15 p. 6
Is there a good scriptural reason to use Nebuchadnezzar's  rulership as applying to Jesus?
I don't know, I haven't researched it enough. And this is the crux of the matter.  I am a perfect example of an average Witness, who really just takes this particular doctrine as matter of fact without thoroughly "making sure whether it is so". Why? Because it is darn time consuming and complicated. And I would say at least 95% of Witnesses feel the same way. Which means 95% of Witnesses believe this doctrine without having convinced themselves whether it is really true or not. Hmmmm.......

What I actually said was ....
 

Subtle ... and it probably WILL work to keep you from being "burned at the stake" !
... probably.

I think that one is excellent too. It follows the same general format of showing how the Bible answers the Big Question of how problems on earth will be solved through God's Kingdom. The angle of Truth and Trust in the Bible is the theme. Again, there is nothing stated in this magazine that should produce any unresolved questions. I believe even JTR would have to rate it somewhere near 100 percent useful, rather than his oft-repeated 15/85 rating.
I'm going to try not to get drawn into a 1914 discussion, at least not on this particular thread/topic. But I do understand what you are saying. I'm not sure how far back you are going, because even up to as recently as 2014, there were plenty of references that could have meant what you refer to.
The Isaiah 44/45 (Babylon-Cyrus) prophecy comes across as the most amazing prophecy to outsiders. It's simple, and it's used, of course, in the self-run free study on the JW.ORG website. The only persons for whom it would not work so well are those who believe that "Isaiah II" were chapters tacked onto the original book of Isaiah after the Babylonian exile.
If you listen closely to the Faith In Action -"Out of Darkness" Part 1 video, I think it's clear that Daniel's "prediction" of 1914 is a better example for "insiders." An outsider would have too many unresolved questions:
Most outsiders aren't into this idea that the Bible pinpoints dates for end-times prophecies. They would wonder why wicked Nebuchadnezzar's rulership pictures Jesus' Messianic rulership. They would wonder why we give it an additional application when the scripture itself explicitly says the application is to Nebuchadnezzar, and says nothing about an assumed second application. And they would wonder how we got 1914 from 7 times anyway. It doesn't even say 7 times are 7 years (that takes another scripture from a completely different context). And if it did mean 7 times were 7 years here, it doesn't say that those years were actually 360-day years, which also comes from its use in a different context. And if it did mean that 7 times were 360-day years, it doesn't say that those 7 times 360 have to each be multiplied again by 365.25. That's because the day-for-a-year idea also comes from a different context. And if they looked into it more deeply, they might wonder why we were forced to use a mix of secular dates for some events and pseudo-secular dates for some other events. Some of the dates we accept are the same as the secular dates, and some are 20 years different from the secular dates, but this time in the same context. They might wonder why a Bible prophecy would even rely on secular dates in the first place since the Bible itself never uses a secular date like 539 BCE, 607 BCE, 587 BCE, 33 CE, etc. They might wonder why we inconsistently claim that these "seven times" must be multiplied by 360, then multiplied again by 365.25 days each, when we claim that all uses of the term "three and a half times" in the Bible (Daniel & Revelation) should NEVER be multiplied again by 365.25, but only multiplied by 360. And even then, we allow for round-off in the use of "three and a half times." And if they looked into Babylonian and Jewish calendar systems a bit closer, they might notice that there was no such thing as a period of 7 years that did not contain at least two (sometimes three) intercalary months so that the number of days in ALL 7 year periods would always be closer to 2,568 days, not 2,520. Some of these questions would likely remain unresolved to an outsider, no matter how well we tried to explain them. They work for most those of us on the inside, because we generally trust that all those questions were probably resolved by persons who have a lot more holy spirit available to them than we do. So we just accept that we don't have to ask such questions.
Besides, when I mentioned the "Out of Darkness" video, I am primarily referring to the very fact that this prophecy is used as one that is supposed to prove that Jehovah was using Russell (not Daniel).
At the 44:20 mark in that video, we hear Brother Gerrit Lösch say:
". . . it enhanced their trust that Jehovah was using Brother Russell and his friends to explain truth to others."
At the 44:30 mark in the video, we hear Brother Anthony Morris say:
". . . it's still significant that they could pinpoint that year. That's phenomenal!"
This is hardly about the original prophecy anymore. In effect, this 1914 prophecy is therefore our own "internal" evidence (bragging rights) that there was an element of true inspiration from Jehovah to those who were supposedly "wise" enough to pinpoint that year by jumping through mental hoops that Daniel would have never dreamed of.

I guess the first point I could address is how someone with serious unresolved questions and concerns about a couple of our teachings could still participate in promoting our publications and our meetings to interested persons. Won't those persons be faced with unresolved questions too?
This gets to the claim by some that 85 percent of what we present is not worth it, and 15 percent is worth it, but that 15 percent is valuable enough to ignore the 85 percent.
If those were the real numbers then making a convert would be very hard to justify. And in any case we would always have to spend a lot of time telling our Bible students that there are a lot of things we don't understand ourselves. 
But the numbers aren't that bad, because we really don't spend the amount of time on the areas where more people have unresolved questions. For example, let's just look at the two magazines that were common to many of the carts today. One is the Watchtower No.3 2019, and the other is the Awake! No.2 2019.
The Awake! has the cover is "Six Lessons Children Need to Learn." There are short articles on Self-Control, Humility, Resilience, Responsibility, Adult Guidance, and the Need for Moral Values. I am critical of a lot of things, but I found every single word to be well written and useful. It makes a nicely presented way to discuss such important topics with children. Or it just makes it simple to keep a prioritized list of ideas in a parent's mind to remember as they come up. And all of it leads to the fact that Bible principles are the foundation of these lessons, even if might seem at first like mundane lessons about the amount of time spent on entertainment media.
So on to the Watchtower. The basic questions that religion should answer are the same questions that people ask all over the world. They are the questions that don't really overlap with science, and although they might overlap a bit with "philosophy" it's really the place of true religion to show why the Bible's view gives the best and most satisfying answers. 
These are the questions of "What is the meaning of life?" "Is God to blame for suffering?" "What happens when we die?"
Those are the same questions called "Life's Big Questions" on the back of the Awake!
So the Watchtower starts out with an article on "The Sad Reality of Death." Nothing questionable or inappropriate here. Science is mentioned as a possible source of answers, here, and in the next article "The Search For Long Life." The idea is clear and obvious, that "We are Designed to Live" just as the next article shows. Again, I see nothing that any naysayer, except atheists, might find wrong or questionable. In fact, up to this point, atheists might still be following along, too.  After all, it does not overwhelm with scriptures, but uses them in unobtrusive ways.
Now the question of "Why Do We Grow Old And Die" gets into the Biblical aspects, on page 8 of 15. It's all clearly the correct Biblical answer, however. Granted, some religious and science-oriented religious persons can take Adam & Eve as allegorical in some way, which is common. But even so, the rest of the Bible clearly uses the exact example as the explanation about death on earth.
And therefore page 10 begins discussing the hope, when death is conquered. There is a very clear explanation of the Ransom here. Using Scriptures throughout this article. There is a paragraph or two on "When" but it is not done with the idea that "we know something about the date that no one else knows." Someone might wonder why it only mentions "millions" being resurrected, but this isn't said in such a way that we are telling people that it won't be billions, or thousands; it's just presented as a way of stating a happy hope in the resurrection. It mentions the "last days" but exactly the way the scriptures use the expression.
In detailing "How Can You Have More Than This Life?" on page 12, the appeal is to those who want to see a better earth, and who would like to live forever under much better conditions. It's an invitation to learn more. And the next article shows how the road to that better life will produce side effects of contentment, more satisfying priorities, better marriages, and even better health (overall) in this life.
I find BOTH of these entire magazines to be 100 percent valuable, well written, and they touch on no unresolved or unresolvable questions. And we all know that some of our talks and other publications cover this same material exactly as these articles do, sometimes with more examples, more verses, more detail -- but the same ideas.
We are offering exactly what people should be looking for, satisfactory answers to important questions.
When an interested person gets to all the meetings, they will soon discover that time is spent on the meaning of Ezekiel, for example, the history of the organization, and a lot of emphasis on urgency in preaching on account of the times we're living in, and the overall timing of Jehovah's purpose. Some of this material will likely result in questions that they will find ways to resolve, or else just accept and wait for a resolution in time.
But it's not the gist of our preaching and disciple-making. I think most people who come into the organization will remember the Big Questions, and that those were the primary reasons they joined with us. Those questions are answered in a more appealing and satisfying way than other religions are answering them. And we back up our answers with the Bible. Our teachings regarding war, neutrality, Trinity, hellfire, paradise earth, the challenge to Jehovah's sovereignty, etc., will make even more sense to interested persons when they remember that the first attraction was to the way the Bible answered those big questions. Those were the questions that build a primary foundation around the teaching of God's Purpose, Eternal Life, the Ransom, the Resurrection, etc.
So even if chronology and some of the specific prophetic interpretations can result in unresolved questions, for now, it's not like this needs to be such a big part of Witness thinking. We can participate in every major aspect of our worship with joy and without being overly concerned with these unresolved questions. And when they finally are resolved, I'm sure we'll see them as relatively unimportant compared to the big things.