DespicableME

Arauna wrote:
I either have given or can give proof for what I say.
I didn't say "just". I said this:
<< The Jews and other captives lived in the cities, like Daniel, and were generally business people. They were not farmers. >>
Probably I should have said, "The Jews lived mostly in the cities". This is based on the common understanding among historians that it was mostly the elite Jews who were deported. As this reference states ( http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-babylonian-exile ):
<< The deportations were large, but certainly didn't involve the entire nation. Somewhere around 10,000 people were forced to relocate to the city of Babylon . . . Nebuchadnezzar, the king of the Chaldeans, only deported the most prominent citizens of Judah: professionals, priests, craftsmen, and the wealthy. The "people of the land" (am-hares ) were allowed to stay. . . the deported Jews formed their own community in Babylon and retained their religion, practices, and philosophies. >>
Here is another ( http://www.jpost.com/Not-Just-News/Ancient-tablets-reveal-daily-life-of-exiled-Jews-in-Babylon-2500-years-ago-389864 ):
<< Technically not slaves, Nebuchadnezzar allowed the Judeans in Babylonia to become merchants or assist administering his growing kingdom.
“They were free to go about their lives; they weren’t slaves,” Vukosavovic said. “Nebuchadnezzar wasn’t a brutal ruler in that respect. He knew he needed the Judeans to help revive the struggling Babylonian economy.” >>
And another ( http://www.bible-history.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html ):
<< The Jewish people survived in Babylon because the Babylonian policy allowed the Jews to settle in towns and villages along the Chebar River, which was an irrigation channel. The Jews were allowed to live together in communities, they were allowed to farm and perform other sorts of labor to earn income. Many Jews eventually became wealthy. This was probably because of the influence of certain Jews who ministered in the palace of Babylon, like Daniel and his friends. >>
People who live "in towns and villages" are also known as people who live in cities in the Bible, since in OT usage a "city" can mean what we today call a village of a few dozen people.
My above references prove that it is you who don't understand. The above quotations clearly show that farming by the Jews was a tiny part of farming in Babylonia.
It's also called eisegesis -- something that Watch Tower followers are very good at.
Right, because that is what the appropriate scriptures actually say. Of course, I have repeatedly quoted them to prove this.
Let's look at the rest of the relevant context of Jer. 25:
<< 8 “Therefore this is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘“Because you would not obey my words, 9 I am sending for all the families of the north,” declares Jehovah, “sending for King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these surrounding nations. I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of horror and something to whistle at and a perpetual ruin. 10 I will put an end to the sound of exultation and the sound of rejoicing from them, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the hand mill and the light of the lamp. 11 And all this land will be reduced to ruins and will become an object of horror, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years.”’
12 “‘But when 70 years have been fulfilled, I will call to account the king of Babylon and that nation for their error,’ declares Jehovah, ‘and I will make the land of the Chal·deʹans a desolate wasteland for all time. >>
In context, then, and in view of my above-quoted references, the phrase "the land will become ruined (or desolated)" means that the land will become largely devoid of inhabitants and will contain a mere ruined shadow of its once vibrant community. Furthermore, verse 9 says that this happens to "this land and ... its inhabitants and ... all these surrounding nations." And "these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years." Which nations? The Jews and the nations round about.
Because we know that many of the "nations round about" did not go into captivity at all, much less for 70 years, the phrase "these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years" cannot mean that they would all become captive for 70 years.
And as I have repeatedly shown, Jer. 27  and 29:10 prove that neither the Jews nor any other nation round about were firmly destined to go into captivity, but were firmly destined to serve the Babylonian hegemony for 70 years:
<< 'the nation that brings its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serves him, I will allow to remain on its land,' declares Jehovah, 'to cultivate it and dwell in it.' >> -- Jer. 27:11.
<< For thus says the Lord: When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit you, and I will fulfil to you my promise and bring you back to this place. >> -- Jer. 29:10; ESV
And of course, the fact that all these things happened to the Jews exactly as prophesied, after they failed to submit to Babylon, is shown by the following fulfillments of Jer. 25:12 described in Daniel and 2 Chronicles:
<< 25 And this is the writing that was inscribed: MEʹNE, MEʹNE, TEʹKEL, and PARʹSIN.
26 “This is the interpretation of the words: MEʹNE, God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end.
27 “TEʹKEL, you have been weighed in the balances and found lacking.
28 “PEʹRES, your kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and the Persians.”
29 Then Bel·shazʹzar gave the command, and they clothed Daniel with purple and placed a gold necklace around his neck; and they heralded concerning him that he was to become the third ruler in the kingdom.
30 That very night Bel·shazʹzar the Chal·deʹan king was killed. 31 And Da·riʹus the Mede received the kingdom  >> -- Dan. 5:25-30
<< [Nebuchadnezzar] carried off captive to Babylon those who escaped the sword, and they became servants to him and his sons until the kingdom of Persia began to reign . . . >> -- 2 Chron. 36:20
When was Belshazzar's kingdom divided and given to the Medes and the Persians? In October, 539 BCE. When did Jehovah "call to account the king of Babylon"? In October, 539 BCE. Until when were the Jews servants to Nebuchadnezzar "and his sons"? Until October, 539 BCE. Therefore, when were the 70 years "completed for Babylon"? In October, 539 BCE.
Once again, it is you who are guilty of eisegesis.
Yes, we know all that.
Hmm, Jeremiah clearly states that if the Jews and other nations humbly submitted to Babylon, they would not have been deported, but would have been allowed to stay on their land. But that means Jehovah, through Jeremiah is contradicting himself by means of Isaiah! Wow, you've certainly solved many exegetical problems this way!
Actually there is a very good explanation for the apparent contradiction. You can find it if you look hard. Hint: Jeremiah says nothing about a sabbath rest for the land.
There is ZERO evidence, just speculation. And you've given zero evidence, just speculation that contradicts many clear scriptures.
Continuing to contradict Daniel 5: << God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end. . .
your kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and the Persians. . . That very night Bel·shazʹzar the Chal·deʹan king was killed. 31 And Da·riʹus the Mede received the kingdom . >>
Again contradicting Daniel, Jeremiah and 2 Chronicles -- and even the Watch Tower Society, which agrees that Cyrus began ruling over Babylon in October, 539 BCE.
Again contradicting Mommy Watch Tower on the dates. There is a difference between an inauguration that occurs at the beginning of a king's 1st regnal year and an accession to the throne that occurs when he actually becomes king in his accession year.
[ Mostly irrelevant exposition snipped ]
Again disagreeing with Mommy Watch Tower that Cyrus began his rule in October, 539 BCE, and that his 1st regnal year began in Nisan, 538.
Exactly the same logistics are involved in a 538 scenario and a 537 scenario, to within one month, as I've shown in my post above. Even scholar JW has admitted this.
But we all, including Mommy Watch Tower, agree that the journey must have been about four months.
Here's your problem: since 538 and 537 have pretty much the same logistics, there is no way to decide between them based on those logistics. The ONLY way to decide is by OTHER information -- information such as provided by combining the accounts in Ezra and Josephus, as I have repeatedly explained. That information breaks the tie in favor of 538.
If you disagree with my argument, then by all means show why combining Ezra and Josephus is wrong, or shaky or whatever you like. But you already know you can't, which is why you haven't touched it.
Indeed.
It is a simple fact that the risk of death due to earthquakes in the 18th century was about 2 1/2 times as great as in the 20th century. That's easy enough to prove for yourself, by spending some time on the website of the National Earthquake Information Service and finding its calculator for earthquake statistics.
The other major sorts of disasters -- famine, pestilence and war -- are more difficult to find statistics on, but any careful study will prove what I said. For example, it was fairly common before the 20th century for 10-30% of the population of a fairly large region to be killed by famine, pestilence and war. While the 20th century figures are large in an absolute sense, they are far smaller in percentage. Why do you think the world has a population explosion?
In "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined" Harvard author Steven Pinker marshalls a massive amount of proof that on the whole, violence in the world has declined. Cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Better_Angels_of_Our_Nature .
Where's your evidence? I'll warn you, though: everything the Watch Tower has published on this has been thoroughly debunked.
Actually it's the other way around. The complete failure of every visible thing that C. T. Russell predicted for 1914, and the total failure of the Watch Tower's claims about disasters since 1914, result in the claim that JWs are wrong about 1914.
LOL! Which slave? Russell himself? The one that was comprised of all the anointed since 1919? Or the one that appeared sometime after 2000 (sorry, I don't keep up with the dizzying rate of changes).
Remember that Russell got every prediction of visible events wrong. Some track record for "the slave", eh?
So what? There have been many turning points in history. Some more significant than 1914.
Why don't you write to Mommy Watch Tower and tell them to back off?
It's no ploy. It's a sincere and concerted effort to show in what ways the Watch Tower has lied and lied about its history. This is really a public service. Do you really want to be part of a religion that has lied to you so broadly?
Meaningless generic rationalizations. The fact is that at all times, Watch Tower leaders have claimed to be either inspired or totally guided by God himself, or Jesus, or the angels, for each action they've taken and each thing they've written. They continue in this tradition today by demanding that JWs treat their words and actions as if they came from Jehovah himself, even while admitting that they're fallible and have made many errors. This practice is called "talking out of both sides of your mouth". Of course, they're never in error right now, and God help the JW who disputes them.
Actually there was much archaeology available by 1875 to guide them to conclusions accurate by today's standards. But it appears that God did not see fit to guide them to it. For example, it appears that God failed to guide them to the year 607 BCE for the start of the Gentile Times until 1943, and to 607 BCE for Jerusalem's destruction until 1944. Such a joker God is!
Lots of people claim such love, and look what that has accomplished in the world.
So what? The point is that they always claimed that God guided/inspired them and they treated those with different views as heretics.
To a certain extent, yes. But plenty was available even before 1900 to allow the formation of accurate conclusions. For example, around 1912 one of Russell's closest advisors informed him that Russell's traditional date of 606 BCE was wrong, and gave him appropriate historical information to prove it. But Russell failed to update "Studies in the Scriptures" appropriately. The 1917 book "The Finished Mystery" also used 607 rather than 606. So did a 1931 booklet. So why did it take until 1943 and 1944 to get the date to what it is today? God certainly had nothing to do with guiding any of this nonsense, contrary to what Watch Tower leaders have always claimed.
Again: Nisan 538 BCE was the beginning of Cyrus' 1st regnal year -- not his accession to the throne of Babylon.
Try giving a source reference: "Antiquities of the Jews", Book 11, Chapter 1, Section 1 (a.k.a. "Antiquities", XI,1,1).
Yet again mistaking the 1st regnal year for the accession to the throne.
Nope. Again read my above quotations.
This is similar to what I quoted above, but it does not contradict my basic point: most of the Jewish captives, being of the elite, were businessmen or artisans of some sort, not farmers. They would have been concentrated in and near Babylon, in villages and towns and in Babylon itself.
Except that the many "people of the land" that remained in Judah forgot how to grow food, right?
Nice speculation, but speculation nonetheless. The overall point I made is that the Jews were close enough to Babylon that news of an Edict of Release would have spread extremely rapidly.
 
AlanF

I'm aware of when the Bible says that Darius began ruling -- in October, 539 BCE. After all it is well established that that is when Babylon fell to Cyrus' armies, and Dan. 5:30-31 states: "That very night Bel·shazʹzar the Chal·deʹan king was killed. 31 And Da·riʹus the Mede received the kingdom." And the Bible gives no information about how long Darius the Mede was in power or exactly what his relationship to Cyrus was. We do know that even the Watch Tower agrees with these datings. Why don't you agree?
AlanF

And here I thought you were writing gobble-de-goop before.
AlanF

If Jesus rejected the 2,520, then who am I to say Jesus was wrong? Note, as I said above, that I have no problem with accepting the WTS view of most doctrines, even if they are not based on evidence. The vast majority of doctrines are absolutely correct from a Biblical point of view. I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt as respected teachers.
(1 Timothy 5:17) 17 Let the elders who preside in a fine way be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard in speaking and teaching. It is only where the evidence is contradictory that there would be any real reason to be concerned. In this case, I think we should at least have a good reason why Jesus himself said that the Gentile Times were 1,260, if we still wish to contradict him.
(Revelation 11:2, 3) . . .because it has been given to the nations, and they will trample the holy city [Jerusalem] underfoot for 42 months.” I don't think anyone can doubt that Jesus is referring here to the trampling of Jerusalem by the nations [gentiles] for the appointed times [42 months; 1,260 days; 3 and 1/2 times]. Do you really doubt that this is a reference to the appointed times of the nations? Compare the red-highlighted words if you have any trouble with this question.
(Luke 21:24) . . . and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled. I agree with the significance of Josiah's time and even the possible importance of his death in 609 to the prophecy about Babylon's 70 years of dominating rule over the other nations. Josiah has already been discussed in this context. But I have to say that I found this particular reference you just gave to be about the least valuable and least informed of all the books I have ever seen that reference Josiah and Jeremiah. BTW, do you think that dating Josiah's death to about 609 BCE is correct?

Always a good policy. It results more often in intelligible writing.
AlanF

Nana Fofana wrote:
No one is saying that Jerusalem came under siege in 609. Where are you getting that from?
If you claim that something I stated is a fact when it is not, then let's see if you can argue your point.
In the meantime, note that I use "fact" in a practical way, not necessarily in a theoretical, absolute sense. As Stephen Jay Gould wrote:
<< . . . "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. . . In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." >>
The 70 years refers to a time of Babylonian supremacy, not of desolation of anything (Jer. 25:11-12; 27; 29:10)
Since the 70 years were not a period of desolation, your point is moot.
Besides, secular history is extremely well established on this point: Jerusalem was destroyed in 587/586 BCE, not 607.
AlanF

The only person here who claims superior intelligence is scholar JW.
AlanF

Foreigner wrote:
Correct. That is what we have said.
Wrong. We have clearly argued that that is one possible scenario. We have argued it based on the Watch Tower Society's insistence that Jeremiah's "seventy years" must be an exact number, and most of the time in our simplified arguments that is the position we have assumed. We have also argued that it could be a round number ranging from 66 to 70 years, depending on the event with which it is viewed to have begun. Since the Bible is not specific about this, neither are we. What is certain, however, is that the 70 years ended in 539 BCE.
An important point: You don't seem to know the difference between accession-year and non-accession-year dating of kings, nor that Nisan-Nisan dating was used in Babylon, and that some Bible writers sometimes used Nisan-Nisan dating and sometimes Tishri-Tishri dating. If you don't know what I'm talking about, educate yourself.
To properly state some date for a king, the dating method must be known either by context or explicitly.
A good illustration of variation in the dating methods. Modern historians put the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign in Tishri, 609 BCE, and the death of Josiah a few months earlier. (cf. Jack Finegan, "Handbook of Biblical Chronology", 1998, pp. 253-255) Jehoiakim's accession year, then, would be Tishri, 610 through Elul 609 -- all of this using Tishri-Tishri dating.
However, there is a bit of fuzziness in these dates for complicated reasons I won't go into here. Suffice to say that some historians argue that Jehoiakim's reign should be numbered according to the accession-year or non-accession-year system, and using Nisan-Nisan or Tishri-Tishri dating. So, whether Jehoiakim's accession date in Tishri, 609 should be counted as part of his accession year or his 1st regnal year is not agreed upon by historians.
So far so good.
Here you miss the fact that February, 604 lies in the regnal year that ran Tishri, 605 to Tishri, 604, or in the regnal year that ran Nisan, 605 to Nisan, 604. In either case, February, 604 is part of a regnal year that began in 605 and ended in 604.
Given that you call yourself Foreigner, your ignorance of the English language can be forgiven. English has many styles of writing, not just one formally correct style such as is used in Grammarly. Thus, a military commander might yell, "Fire cannons!" whereas Grammarly would demand "Fire THE cannons!"
So far so good.
Again we see ignorance of English on display.
LOL! Sez he who uses four exclamation points, and says "writings skills". Forgot to use Grammarly on this, eh?
It means that, in your ignorance, you are hopelessly confused.
Since Jehoiakim's 1st year of rule ran from Tishri, 609 through Elul, 608 BCE, his 4th year of rule ran from Tishri, 606 through Elul, 605. Depending on the method of counting regnal years, these can be numbered "accession" (zero) through "3rd", or "1st" through "4th". Various pieces of evidence strongly indicate, but do not prove, that the book of Jeremiah uses Tishri and non-accession-year dating. So it seems a pretty good bet that when Jeremiah refers to the 4th year of Jehoiakim and the 1st year of Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 25:1), he's referring to the period up to but not including Tishri, 605 BCE, since Nebuchadnezzar began reigning the previous month, Elul of 605 BCE. Now count the end year of Jehoiakim's years of reign on your fingers: 608<->1st, 607<->2nd, 606<->3rd, 605<->4th with the latter = Nebuchadnezzar 1st.
To recap, Nebuchadnezzar began his rule Elul 1 = Sept. 7, 605 BCE (cf. Finegan, p. 253). In Babylonian Nisan-Nisan, accession-year dating, therefore, Nebuchadnezzar's accession year ran from Nisan, 605 through Adar 604, and his 1st regnal year began Nisan 1, 604 BCE. Thus, Nebuchadnezzar's accession to the throne of Babylon (by accession-year dating) occurred in Elul, 605 BCE, which was in Jehoiakim's 4th regnal year (by non-accession-year dating). Simple, no?
The word is "prophesied".
It depends on how the historian is counting years of reign. Some place Josiah's accession year in 641/640 and argue that his actual rule began then. Others place his 1st regnal year in 640/639 and argue that his actual rule began then. The Bible is not clear about this. Cf. Edwin R. Thiele, "The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings", 1983, p. 180.
But you're not even counting properly. If 641/640 is Josiah's 1st year, then his 13th year is 629/628 (use your fingers to count). But if 640/639 is his 1st year, then his 13th is 628/627. And 23 years more brings us to 605/604. Wow! That's Jehoiakim's 1st regnal year!
Wrong.
Elul (Sept 7) 605 BCE.
No, because the Bible does not say that the 70 years began with Nebuchadnezzar. It consistently refers to Babylonian supremacy over the Near East. While Nebuchadnezzar was at least partially in command of his father Nabopolassar's armies in 609, Nabopolassar was Babylon's king when the armies deposed Assyria and made Babylon supreme.
Of course. One can be in servitude by being subject to a ruler but not being captive. Read Jeremiah 27 to get the sense of this. It clearly tells the Jews and nations round about: "Serve Babylon and you will remain on your land."
Exactly. The working phrase is "for Babylon".
The word is "muddling" or "muddying".
Hopefully, my above exposition will help you with your confusion. Get hold of the books I reference and read them for more help.

 You're still hopelessly confused. You're confusing 607 BCE in its role as a possible beginning of the 70 years of Jeremiah (as the time of Babylonian supremacy) with its role claimed by the Watch Tower Society as the date of Jerusalem's destruction and the beginning of 70 years of Jewish captivity. Read the above again, and try to understand JW Insider's response to you.
These references are also hopelessly muddled. They also contradict Watch Tower chronology. Note the one you quoted:
 
But the Watch Tower claims that Daniel and company were deported to Babylon in 617 BCE, ten years before Jerusalem's claimed destruction in 607. Again you're hopelessly confused.
 
 
This is largely gobble-de-goop, but I'll do my best to decipher it.
There is no such thing as "Bible chronology" without secular chronology. The Bible gives no absolute calendar dates, only relative dates. Somewhere along the line, these relative dates must be correlated with secular dates in order to get actual calendar dates.
In Elul (Sept 7) 605 BCE.
AlanF

This, of course, would be on how you wish to view history. Technically, Babylon subdued King Jehoiakim in 605BC, as per secular history and 3 years later, 602BC, he rebelled against King Nebuchadnezzar, and in 587BC Jerusalem was destroyed. So, either you're trying to justify 50 years to 70 years, or your calculations fall short within those 70 years. So, what would be the reason to use 609BC if you want to be precise? 608BC, then, you end up in 538BC, 1 year after the fall of Babylon. So, what would be the reason to use another speculative view about Isaiah’s Prophecy, if this claim can’t be added, either? Don’t you think, you are attempting to make things fit, just as the Watchtower is being defamed for?

Just to put things into perspective to those that get confused. AlanF, Ann O'Maly, and JWinsider, claims from 609BC-587BC=22 years. Where does the 19 years in SCRIPTURE, the SAME 3-year difference being argued about for the WT chronology, fall, then? SPECULATION IS ALL YOU HAVE!!!!!

Interesting

Here lies "Alanf'" and JWinsider" argument. That 538BC shouldn't be overlooked. The Jews received the edict in early 538BC and returned and arrived in late 538BC, thus fulfilling the scriptual70 years in 539BC as indicated by ALANF's friend and colleague Jeffro, not 538BC. Normal people should be able to add or subtract. 538BC+70=608BC. 1 year more than what the Watchtower has been claiming for a century. 539BC+70=609BC, NOT 608BC. 2 years more than what the Watchtower has been claiming for a century now. This whole time, COJ proved nothing since the GENTILE TIMES would have started with the death of King Josiah in 609BC. So, 1911 or 1914 when Jesus sat on the throne can still be applied, within a 3-year difference. WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE RAYMOND FRANZ. That he jumped the gun, on sheer speculation.

Then why single out one person, when others like ALANF AND SCHOLAR JW have the same perception of calling themselves within the same level of expertise and portray that same intellectual perception. I believe, the POSTING on the MAIN PAGE of this WEBSITE, shows what you are attempting to single out one person with your statement. So, either you are deliberately being selective, and hate this person, which is against all that Jesus taught? or you are defending those that reject the Watchtower chronology, Which is another view Jesus taught against. Nothing personal, just an honest observation.
You can’t imply, you have no problem with the WT chronology, and then reject the WT chronology and allow your views of rejection be POSTED in AD1914, as though, it is something, factual.
Many scholars agree, those that present an objection, are obligated to show SOLID proof of their objection. Thus far, the objections have been met with speculation, where’s the intellectual mind?
 
 
You are confident that 607BC in NOT the correct year for the destruction of Jerusalem, and have cited with, secular chronology, of 587BC, yet you give a vague response that it COULD VERY WELL BE? When we can be confident with this CLAIM TO BE UTTERLY FALSE. If 607BC is farfetched, then 609BC is FAR WORSE, no, it "could very well be" need to be applied.
 

The thought just occurred to me with
That the "official" designation of a "Generation", in Jehovah God's viewpoint ... IS 70 YEARS.
Hmmmm ...
... comments?

I appreciate Nana, Anna and Scholar quoting the relevant scriptures and thanks Allan Smith for some new ideas on the table. I liked your thoughts on the festivals because the entire history of the nation was centered on the celebration of the festivals (Sabbath Year included). Israel was a nation dedicated to Jehovah - they neglected it and went into exile - but the promise of Jehovah was that they would be repatriated back to the land so they can restart their pure worship to him and rebuild the temple. 
 
AlanF is too quick to "poo" other people’s thoughts but I see he makes a lot of wild hmm… “scholarly” statements for which he has no proof for either!  They just lived in cities??  LOL Get real AlanF...  it was not 2017 AD …..but 537 BCE.  By your comments I can see that you do not have any understanding of how the people lived.... 
Dear AllanF this is for you:
When one reads into the scriptures what you ‘want’ it is called speculation.  I quoted several scriptures referring to ‘70 years’ and you concluded it only refers to ‘hegemony’. 
Please look again at:-  Jeremiah 25:11 refers to the LAND which must be desolate for 70 years. “And this whole LAND shall be a desolation.”   
Most of the inhabitants were removed so there was no large scale planting and the land was not kept clean of wild animals.  When they went back to their land they had to clear it to start planting and get on with everyday life – as prophesied. It does not mean the land was barren of people but that  it was laid waste.
Isaih 1: Look! Jehovah is emptying the land* and making it desolate. He turns it upside down* and scatters its inhabitants.  2  It will be the same for everyone: The people as well as the priest,The servant and his master, The servant and her mistress,The buyer and the seller,The lender and the borrower,The creditor and the debtor.  3  The land will be completely emptied;It will be completely plundered, For Jehovah has spoken this word.  4  The land mourns; it is wasting away. The productive land withers; it is fading away. The prominent people of the land wither.  5  The land has been polluted by its inhabitants, For they have bypassed the laws,
 
Why is your reasoning that these scriptures ONLY refer to ‘hegemony’ faulty?
When in doubt, always go back to :- root cause:  what was the root cause for their exile? Definitely not because Jehovah had a whim to put them under foreign hegemony without a reason…. The reason was because of the law regarding the LAND which must lie fallow every 7th year; together with this, they were not obeying other laws…. and the land on which they were living, was defiled – according to scripture above. 
Jehovah required 70 years by the time of their exile. The number 70 is mentioned too many times to ignore.  If Jehovah uses numbers so many times then he meant to have his 70 years…. Jehovah’s consistency of action based on his word is what gave Daniel trust in this words and he discerned that the end of the 70 years were close. I agree with one of the other contributors on the forum that to give a month to 6 month leeway is acceptable (depending, from where one calculates the year) - it should be very close to 70 years. More discrepancy than this would be unacceptable – not because Jehovah made the error but because we are making an error somewhere.
From whatever angle one looks at this debate: from hegemony side, or the land (Jerusalem) being desolate, there is more than enough evidence for 537BCE.
Cyrus entered from the north when the Tigris river was lower (September) and the battle of Opis took place in October 539 BCE so he could get control of the Median wall. Nabonidus fled to Sippar.  Cyrus followed him to Sippar and so the hegemony was not ‘complete’ while Nabonidus was free. He later gave himself up in Babylon because he had no allies.  Cyrus went ahead and appointed his Satrap, Darius the Mede, and the administrators of the new government.  Then in, 538 BCE, when ALL Babylonia was in his control, Cyrus came back to assume the imperial title “King of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of the four corners of the world"”  ….
All Babylonian kings were inaugurated ONLY in the temple of Marduk since the earliest of ancient times on New Year’s day – some of the Syrian kings were also inaugurated in this temple.  So it was on the following New Year that he took this title 538 BCE.
The Babylonian nation was so superstitious that they would not accept a ruler over the city/state if this festival had not been celebrated. Cyrus knew this; he was related to the Babylonian kings on the Median side. The Median King, Darius, was installed as his regent (Daniel’s vision talks of a two headed beast – the Median and Persian.)
Scholars accept Berossos - who is not really a reliable historian and living 300 years after Daniel but they reject the history of Daniel who was definitely there at the time.  Daniel used some ancient Akkadian words that were only in use in Babylon by highly educated administrators. (Nebuchadnezzar started the practice of rebuilding old temples, did archeology of these temples and kept the Arcadian language as a matter of nationalistic pride and tradition. ) Scholars will not take this into account but Bible students know this empire comprised two empires in one – they believe Daniel and his vision of Persia.
The situation was as follows: the nation of Babylon (very superstitious) hated Nabonidus, who was popular at the beginning of his reign, but popularity turned to hate when he built (and restored several) a temple to the moon god in Tema, oasis in Arabia, and left his son Belshazzar to rule in his place.
Nabonidus was absent so much in a period of ten years that he did not celebrate the NEW YEAR - which was sacrilege! -  It was the most important festival for the king and the nation on the calendar!! On the day of Akitu he had to renew his kingship by humbling himself in front of Marduk in front of all the people! The massive festival was 12 days long. Priests of Marduk taught that Marduk will punish the nation for the king’s deviance.
Cyrus was smart and did what was required – bowed to Marduk on the new year’s day and was loved by the people for taking his crown in this 12 day festival - a happy time for the people. He was seen as a great liberator. This is extremely significant  - if one knows the Babylonian mind and how they operated. This festival was in Nissan for 12 days. 538 BCE
Cyrus thereafter issued his Decree in 538 BCE for the return of the Jews. This date is corroborated all over the internet…..go check it out. 
 
So what “process” did this repatriation involve?
In 538 BCE: In the time of Cyrus and Nabonidus, the logistics were definitely NOT what they are today as Allen Smith pointed out but it fell on deaf ears. Yes, they had technology like the catapult, an excellent canal system (for water) for agriculture, the hanging gardens with its pumps etc. but logistics were time consuming due to transport constraints – not the world we know today...
Rushed communications were usually sent by couriers on horseback via a network of routes – other methods were slower.  Letters were dictated and inscribed and baked in Cuneiform and sealed and sent out to the 120 satraps mentioned by Ezra (evidence of 20 only came somewhat later).  Each Satrap would need a few weeks for the news to be spread to all Jewish enclaves. The territory was large and the 10 tribes were widely scattered during the Assyrian rule. The call went out to ALL of Israel not just the Jews (name Jew comes from Judah at the time).
The Jews then had to organize themselves: where to meet so they could move in a group together (a trek of  3-4 months around the desert – the same way Abraham came into the promised land) so they needed to prepare their logistics…. food, tents, protection, for the move with many animals which needed time to graze every day etc. Preparation is needed to take the most needed things, and extra carts made,  to establish a home on the other side. For the first large group of people to arrive in Jerusalem and start to work the LAND and prune desolate fruit trees, open up wells etc – could easily have taken a year. The LAND must not be fallow and must start to produce to break the desolate cycle.
This is the reason I accepted the date of 537 BCE many years ago.  I am not a scholar but an autodidact. One must account for human processes.  Number punching scholars are not prepared to do this.  Reasonableness about the lifestyle of the time; together with the confirmed historical dates, is the logical way to go.  In modern days – reasonableness and a thinking through of the process is one of the major requirements for logical evaluation when judging a case in court.
The date of 537BCE cannot be disproved because no one knows exactly how quickly the Jews moved to Jerusalem.  Those moved by Jehovah’s spirit could have been so excited that they organized themselves faster than we would expect. Reasonableness and logical thinking of the steps needed to start a new life in a neglected place, helps to make the right conclusion.
But if you are not reasonable then one makes wild statements about 1914, for example:  the scope of disasters in the 100 years before 1914. This has no substance and comes from a deep desire to claim that JWs are wrong about 1914. Whether by accident or not – the evidence on  ground zero proves that Jehovah helped the slave to understand this. Reputable historians that are scholars have said the 1914 was the year the world changed forever.
To watch these fights about 1914 by such early books as written in 1823 to me is silly (archeology was not properly established then).  Archeology started about 1801 when Napoleon went into Egypt…..and people made a connection between the pyramids and the bible (and by the way most bible lovers were fascinated with this for a century – it was part of the social talk of the era. 
So when you argue about these things it is a ploy away from the subject (but related) to discredit JWs early history….. If anyone looks back at the early history of any organization one can discredit it because we look at it with the knowledge we have at present…. which is not a fair and proper judgement because one should understand the ‘era’ they were living in to make this judgment. (I think they did pretty well if one thinks that they made many connections just on the knowledge from the Bible without archeology.) An awakening – but all the puzzle was not yet fitted……they did a good job with what they had….because they had a love for the bible and God.
At the time the early JWs wrote in all sincerity up to 130 years ago – they did not think that some ‘modern’ scholar would come a hundred years later and ‘nitpick’ every word to check out the ‘semantics’.  
The archeology available today has only come through the translation of thousands of tablets – especially the last 40 years…..  
 
Reign of Cyrus (538BCE when he was crowned king of all the earth):
Excerpt from Josephus: In the first year of the reign of Cyrus (1) which was the seventieth from the day that our people were removed out of their own land into Babylon, God commiserated the captivity and calamity of these poor people, according as he had foretold to them by Jeremiah the prophet, before the destruction of the city, that after they had served Nebuchadnezzar and his posterity, and after they had undergone that servitude seventy years, he would restore them again to the land of their fathers, and they should build their temple, and enjoy their ancient prosperity
 
Conditions during the captivity - ALLEN F has it wrong!
The boys from the ruling class were trained at the palace of Nebuchadnezzar.  The largest settlements were villages located along the Chebar River (which was an irrigation channel for agriculture).  The Jews (Juda) were allowed to live together in communities and they were allowed to farm and make all sorts of things to earn a living.  Some became rich…  They needed to keep their farming skills for their return…to work the land again.  They would have planted vegetables and feed for animals.
One can get almost 4 generations in 70 years – if they did not keep up their skills for farming their children will go back to Israel with no skills to sow etc. I see Jehovah’s hand in the circumstance that many of the Judeans were placed at the Chebar River and Ezekiel was there with them - if I remember correctly.
 
Jeremia encouraged the Jews to get on with life in captivity - Jer 29:4-11
4 Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, to all who were carried away captive, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem to Babylon:
5 Build houses and dwell in them; plant gardens and eat their fruit.
6 Take wives and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands, so that they may bear sons and daughters -- that you may be increased there, and not diminished.
7 And seek the peace of the city where I have caused you to be carried away captive, and pray to the LORD for it; for in its peace you will have peace.
8 For thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: Do not let your prophets and your diviners who are in your midst deceive you, nor listen to your dreams which you cause to be dreamed.
9 For they prophesy falsely to you in My name; I have not sent them, says the LORD.
10 For thus says the LORD: After seventy years are completed at Babylon, I will visit you and perform My good word toward you, and cause you to return to this place.
 
I have a peeve with academics:
(Now this is my peeve with many academics:  they just care about ‘dates’ and are totally disconnected to the practicalities of everyday life in the ‘period’ they research.                 
A good example (unrelated to this subject) is Western scholars - when they talk about Islam… claim that Mohammad never existed and the entire religious system was developed over a period of 200 years by other leaders….Why?  Because there are NO secular written references to him and NO secular dates - except the writings attributed to Mohammad by himself and his followers. 
They do not understand tribal and nomadic life. Other kingdoms in Arabia have king lists and histories but these tribes were not capable of writing an accurate historical biography immediately after Mohammad’s death.  In Mohammad’s case – the sword - was the most efficient way of spreading the faith – not writing.  Later, when scholars from Persia etc. was added to the fold – more writings and analytics appeared and many additional teachings from other faiths were added to the writings which already had  been plagiarized from many other religions).
Similar in this case – there are processes at stake we no-one can disprove or prove so we accept the most logical - which also has living evidence on ground zero.

After removing your parenthetical statements, I think this was your question, right? This question appears to be your response to my question about what you would give as a beginning [and ending] of the 70 years of Babylonian domination that would affect nations all around, including Tyre, for different periods of time over that 70 years given to Babylon. You imply that the 70 years could start between 609 and 607, but then you connect this to the time when Jerusalem was under siege and fell, which the Bible ties to the period from about Neb's 17th on up to his 18th/19th year.
You should please correct me if I'm wrong, but I take it that, even though you phrased it as a question, you are accepting the secular dates of 609-607 as the start of the 70 years for TYRE, and other nations, specifically because Jerusalem came under it's greatest domination at that time. But wasn't this supposed to be the 18th/19th year of Nebuchadnezzar? Are you saying that the period of Babylon's domination of the nations all around Babylon could not start prior to the 18th/19th year of Nebuchadnezzar?
I don't think too many would question the idea that the end date must fall very close to 537, at least within a year or two. Of course, then we're back to the problem, that you can't use the date 537 unless you mean a date that would fall a full 20 years after Babylon was destroyed -- if you use 607 as the date of Jerusalem's final fall. This is, of course, because you are using 607 as if it is the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar. You can't mix and match secular dates within the Neo-Babylonian period because they are so tightly intertwined with each other.

I'm fine with that. That's why I have never bragged about intelligence or even claimed intelligence. You will never see me calling myself "scholar" or referencing titles from college degrees in Theological studies, or speaking about two PhD's as Allen Smith has mentioned multiple times. If a person says something that doesn't stand up to evidence, then it should be questioned. It doesn't matter who says it.
The room is actually pretty empty no matter who is playing. Perhaps we can all be thankful for that.
Could very well be. I'm not married to any of these secular dates. I think what favors the beginning in 609 is the idea that 2 Chronicles 36 seems pretty clear about ending it in 539, with the fall of Babylon at the hands of the Persian.
(2 Chronicles 36:17-22)  So he brought against them the king of the Chal·deʹans, who killed their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary; he felt no compassion for young man or virgin, old or infirm. God gave everything into his hand.  All the utensils of the house of the true God, great and small, as well as the treasures of the house of Jehovah and the treasures of the king, and his princes, everything he brought to Babylon. He burned down the house of the true God, tore down the wall of Jerusalem, burned all its fortified towers with fire, and destroyed everything of value.  He carried off captive to Babylon those who escaped the sword, and they became servants to him and his sons until the kingdom of Persia began to reign,  to fulfill Jehovah’s word spoken by Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days it lay desolate it kept sabbath, to fulfill 70 years.  In the first year of King Cyrus of Persia, in order that Jehovah’s word spoken by Jeremiah would be fulfilled, Jehovah stirred the spirit of King Cyrus of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his kingdom. . . It would be difficult to conceive of continued Babylonian domination in a literal sense when Babylon was no longer a world power. They stopped being a world power around October 539. But you could claim, as some have, that it waited until the proclamation, which could have happened within days, or months. The "first year" by some reckoning could have been during those last 3 months of 539. But maybe it was a couple more months, or perhaps it waited a year or so. There's a minimum that can fit the scriptures, but there is also a maximum. A good chronological methodology considers all the possibilities. We can have a preference based on the weight we give various bits of evidence, but there is still a minimum and maximum range at which we might begin and end the period.
How would you answer the question, based on the Isaiah's Prophecy book about the 70 years of Babylon's greatest domination? Would you start it in 607? Do you think that Babylon's domination continued after 539? That's about 68 years, and for me it fulfills the Bible prophecy from Jeremiah. If you believe the 70 years to be a little more literal, I can see why you might choose 609 to 539, or 608 to 538, or 607 to 537. Of course, parts of 72 years can include 70 full years, and parts of 70 years can include 68 full years (in the same sense that Jesus was in the grave for parts of three days to fulfill "three days and three nights").

607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?
By JW Insider, April 12, 2016 in Questions
The implication, of being intelligent has made its way to the forefront. Could there possibly be a reason why I picked you out of a crowd? Or can we agree, suggesting intelligence is a futile endeavor, so, that, everyone can drop the sarcasm about being intelligent, when they show the contrary?




By that logic, then we could agree that 609BC would be worse of a probability than 607BC.

Not so sure why you wanted to pick me out of the crowd. I think it was 605, immediately after his father died. He did manage to get back home probably faster than anyone had ever managed that trip before him.
 Both dates are secular chronology. But again, I have no problem with 607 being the start of the 70 years. I never have. I have always thought that it was close enough, within a year or two, and that even the term "70 years" need not have ever meant an exact number, to the very month, or even the very year. In fact, the expression was already previously in use by Isaiah:
(Isaiah 23:15) . . .seventy years, the same as the days of one king. . . Whether this meant "lifetime" as in "lifespan" of a king, or the span of the Babylonian period of greatest domination, as the "Isaiah's prophecy" book points out, it doesn't have to mean that the prophecy fails if that period of greatest domination was 67 to 69 years, instead of 70 exactly.
*** ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 par. 21 Jehovah Profanes the Pride of Tyre ***
“These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble. What years would you @Foreigner or perhaps @scholar JW or @allensmith28 use to date that 70 years of Babylon's greatest domination as applied to Tyre? Would you start it with the fall of Jerusalem's Temple, or does it make more sense to start it with the earliest years when Babylon was tramping about in the region, beginning to prove its dominance as the next world power in the region?
Besides, you don't know just how long Nebuchadnezzar was the king's representative in Hattu. At what point did Babylon begin controlling Tyre's economy by taking control of key trade routes? (Isaiah 23) At what point did Babylon begin dominating economic and political decisions made in the Hattu region (Syria/Israel/Judah) simply through fear even before the first physical depredations of the land and people were made? I don't think we need to look for a specific event that begins the 70 years of domination, and no specific event that ends the domination. It's pretty easy to get the general time period. (And 2 Chron 36:21 seems to pinpoint the end.)  It certainly makes sense that the prediction of the imminent fall of Nineveh would have been the end of the Assyrian power in the eyes of Jerusalem/Judea. Did it wait until the final and actual fall? And you are right, there appears to be a couple of years when the Egyptian power seemed on par with Babylon's. Egypt was the king of the south at the same time that Babylon was the king of the north. Judeans would continue to choose between them for many years. But even Egypt and Assyria together couldn't stand up against Babylon at Carchemish, as proven in 605. Was Jehovah able to discern the dominance of Babylon even a couple years before 605, while Nebuchadnezzar was still a prince and general?
We could even ask if the devastation and desolation of a city needed to be literal in every respect. Or did prophecy often use poetic language, even poetic hyperbole, in making memorable warnings? Was it even necessary that Nineveh, Jerusalem, Tyre, or Babylon ever be completely desolated? Or was it a warning of what Jehovah was capable of doing as the true sovereign (king) of the world?  For example, In his pronouncement against Assyrian Nineveh, Nahum includes "fear" as part of what devastates and desolates her, yet we know that Nineveh was never totally depopulated:
(Nahum 2:8-11, NWT) 8 And Ninʹe·veh, from the days [that] she [has been], was like a pool of waters; but they are fleeing. “Stand still, YOU men! Stand still!” But there is no one turning back.
9 Plunder silver, YOU men; plunder gold; as there is no limit to the [things in] arrangement. There is a heavy amount of all sorts of desirable articles.
10 The city is empty, desolate, devastated!
Their hearts melt in fear, their knees buckle, their hips tremble; (NWT 2013)
All their faces are flushed. 11 Where is the lair of lions, and the cave that belongs to the maned young lions, where the lion walked and entered, where the lion’s cub was, and no one was making [them] tremble?
Just as we often must do with other prophecies, I sometimes put a softer edge on the chronology in prophecy (unless the prophecy itself tells us otherwise). Dates and numbers can be rounded, just as this has often been explained for other prophecies discussed in our publications.

Jeremiah 25:1-11New International Version (NIV)

Seventy Years of Captivity

25 The word came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the (1)fourth year of Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah, which was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. 2 So Jeremiah the prophet said to all the people of Judah and to all those living in Jerusalem: 3 For twenty-three years—from the thirteenth year of Josiah son of Amon king of Judah until this very day—the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again, but you have not listened.

4 And though the Lord has sent all his servants the prophets to you again and again, you have not listened or paid any attention. 5 They said, “Turn now, each of you, from your evil ways and your evil practices, and you can stay in the land the Lord gave to you and your ancestors for ever and ever. 6 Do not follow other gods to serve and worship them; do not arouse my anger with what your hands have made. Then I will not harm you.”

7 “But you did not listen to me,” declares the Lord, “and you have aroused my anger with what your hands have made, and you have brought harm to yourselves.”

8 Therefore the Lord Almighty says this: “Because you have not listened to my words, 9 I will summon all the peoples of the north and my servant Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon,” declares the Lord, “and I will bring them against this land and its inhabitants and against all the surrounding nations. I will completely destroy[a] them and make them an object of horror and scorn, and an everlasting ruin. 10 I will banish from them the sounds of joy and gladness, the voices of bride and bridegroom, the sound of millstones and the light of the lamp. 11 This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years.




AlanF/Jeffro: ·  609 Babylon becomes world power after conquering Assyria’s final capital, Harran. Seventy years of nations serving Babylon begin.

·  608 King Jehoiakim begins his 11-year rule in Jerusalem.

605 (September) Nebuchadnezzar begins his Babylonian rule

604 (February) Jehoiakim becomes vassal King to Babylon. Daniel and others given as part of tribute along with some temple treasures.* (Grammarly indicates error in given to ARE given)
* The ‘Daniel’ character is presented as a representative of the captives as a literary device.

·  598 (December) Nebuchadnezzar sieges Jerusalem.

·  597 (March) Nebuchadnezzar takes exiles including Ezekiel, temple treasures, and temple utensils. Jehoiachin placed on throne.
(Grammarly indicates error in throne to THE throne)
Those who insult writings skills are ONLY fooling themselves!!!!

1.       608BC-4=604BC Does this mean scripture has it wrong, since King Nebuchadnezzar accession year was in 605BC, or is that just rhetorical to mean 605/4BC with the official regnal year being 604BC, and the figure above is at best confusing.

Jeremiah prophesized 23 years from the 13th year of King Josiah. Secular Chronology places this king at 641/0BC.

Jeremiah started his prophecy from 627/6BC for 23 years. 627-23=604BC

When, was King Nebuchadnezzar made King by secular reckoning JWinsider?

IsnÂ’t it a failure to suggest the 70-year servitude started in 609BC when Nebuchadnezzar wasnÂ’t king yet? How do you reconcile the same argument that faces the WT Chronology? Are we to understand, Captivity and Servitude donÂ’t mean the same thing?

Jeremiah 29:10-14New International Version (NIV)

10 This is what the Lord says: “When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my good promise to bring you back to this place.

IsnÂ’t all this mudding the waters to confuse people into believing something that is obviously NOT TRUE? When was Prince Nebuchadnezzar made KING? Therefore, wouldnÂ’t it be conceivable, those who boast about their intelligence, are simply playing to an empty room? JTR!

 “IF” 607BC is NOT acceptable, and *impossible* because people use SECULAR HISTORY to show Prince Nebuchadnezzar was NOT KING in 607BC? And this is the sole reason why the Watchtower has been criticized and defamed? Then, when, did 609BC become acceptable to all the skeptics?




https://lifehopeandtruth.com/prophecy/understanding-the-book-of-daniel/daniel-9/


 
Dates for the 70 years
The first deportation of Jews to Babylon (which included Daniel and his friends Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-Nego) began the 70 years of captivity. Bible commentaries identify this as occurring between 607 and 605 B.C. Various sources say the date of the return of the Jews to Jerusalem occurred between 539 and 536 B.C


 
Since we are referring to BIBLE CHRONOLOGY, and NOT secular chronology, then what kind of intelligence is being referred to here, when 607BC is flatly “denied” but 609BC is *perfectly* acceptable.  


WHEN DID PRINCE NEBUCHADNEZZAR BECOME KING? BY SECULAR CHRONOLOGY*************

 

scholar JW wrote:
:: The identity of Darius the Mede is immaterial to the question of the date of the return of the Jews to Judah. Sufficient information is given in Ezra and Josephus.
Wrong, as shown in my post above.
What of it?
Except that, all by themselves, those passages provide no information on the date of the Return. One is forced to combine them with other Bible passages to get any date -- just as Carl Jonsson, I and many other JW critics have been doing for decades.
Talk about nonsense! As I have repeatedly explained, the texts of Ezra and Josephus together provide the ONLY clear date for the Return -- Tishri, 538 BCE. Ezra alone provides no clear date. Do remember that speculation is no substitute for two witnesses.
AlanF

scholar JW wrote:
:: The Watch Tower Society would have us believe that the six or seven month interval from Adar or Nisan, 537 BCE month 12 or 1, until Tishri, 537 BCE, month 7 according to its tabulation would be of sufficient time for the Jews to return home with a four-month journey inclusive. Now if ones' imagination cannot accommodate such a hypothesis then it must also be considered that the Jews prior to Adar or Nisan would have been in an anticipatory or preparatory frame of mind with some preparations already in hand. Now, this of course is an interesting scenario but if the Society demands such an indulgence proving 537 BCE for the Return then how is it the case that it refuses to believe or to concede the possibility that the Jews could have easily returned the previous year in 538 BCE?  
Wow! Finally we see a response that isn't a misrepresention, bald assertion or flat out lie, but recognizes the logic of my post.
Yes, and I've repeatedly argued and given evidence, for a dozen years now, why that's perfectly reasonable. You and other JW defenders, on the other hand, have only given excuses that amount to The Argument From Personal Incredulity -- "I can't believe it, so it ain't so!" And of course, "Tain't so cuz Mommy Watch Tower sez different!"
By that "reasoning", every date in 538/537 should be rejected.
But finally we see a bit of rational argument:
That's a valid argument in favor of the Decree being made later in 538 than Nisan, or even as late the early months of 537, in the months immediately before Nisan, 537. But it's not a definitive argument.
Keep in mind that Daniel had been made third ruler in Babylon by Belshazzar, with great fanfare (Dan. 5:29), and continued in a high position under Darius, so Daniel could well have known about Cyrus' coming Decree before it was officially announced. Daniel would then have communicated the news to his fellow captives, and it would have been spread among the Jews in Babylon very quickly.
And of course, you've failed to rationally deal with the fact that, as I have repeatedly argued, all captives in Babylon would have known of Cyrus' habit of releasing captives quite soon after conquering some region, so they would naturally expect also to be released soon. Since they had nearly six lunar months between Cyrus' overthrow of Babylon in October, 539, and the beginning of his 1st regnal year in Nisan (~ late March) 538, they would theoretically have had nearly eight months of preparation time for their journey to Judah.
The Jews would also have been well aware of Jeremiah's prophecy (Jer. 29:10) that when Babylon's 70 years of supremacy were over, Jehovah would bring them back to Judah. And they certainly knew that those 70 years were finished, since Dan. 5:26-28 states:
<< This is the interpretation of the words: ME′NE, God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end. . . “PE′RES, your kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and the Persians. >>
And 2 Chron. 36:20 states that Nebuchadnezzar:
<< carried off captive to Babylon those who escaped the sword, and they became servants to him and his sons until the kingdom of Persia began to reign. >>
What we know for certain from Ezra's account is that the Decree was issued in Cyrus' 1st regnal year, which even the Watch Tower Society admits was Nisan 538 through Adar 537.
You want to argue, without any real justification, that preparations for the journey to Judah could not have begun before Cyrus issued his decree. But that's pure speculation, as I've argued above.
This is no problem at all, for the following reasons: The Watch Tower Society officially admits that Cyrus' accession year was Nisan, 539 through Adar 538, and his first regnal year was Nisan, 538 through Adar, 537 BCE. Do you dispute that? It also admits that identification of Darius the Mede is uncertain, allowing that:
<< some scholars consider it likely that Darius the Mede was in reality a viceroy who ruled over the kingdom of the Chaldeans but as a subordinate of Cyrus, the supreme monarch of the Persian Empire. >> -- Insight, Vol. 1, "Darius", p. 582.
Nonsense. If Darius (whoever he was) ruled concurrently with Cyrus, Cyrus' 1st regnal year still began Nisan 1, 538 BCE. And if you claim that Darius ruled before Cyrus began his 1st regnal year in 538, you're disagreeing with the Society and with virtually all modern scholars.
AlanF

As I recall, there was also something about the composition of the driveway, too. It was not the ordinary blacktop. 
and......the house number.....was........607!
Take it, guys! I'm off this thread!

The usual complete gobble-de-goop. Barely even English.
AlanF

allensmith28
Alan F would have us believe that the six month interval from Nisan, 538 BCE month 1 until Tishri, 538 BCE, month 7 according to his tabulation would be of sufficient time for the Jews to return home with a four-month journey inclusive. Now if ones' imagination cannot accommodate such a hypothesis then it must also be considered that the Jews were prior to Month 1 would have been in an anticipatory or preparatory frame of mind with some preparations already in hand. Now, this of course is an interesting scenario but if Alan F demands such an indulgence proving 538 BCE for the Return then how is it the case that he refuses one to believe or to concede the possibility that the Jews could have more easily returned the following year in 537 BE. 
The 538 BCE scenario perhaps first developed by Jeffro on his colourful website then later copied by Alan F is ridiculous, stupid and impossible unless Cyrus had the Internet, publish, circulate by email to all Jews waiting at the door with their Go- bags  packed  waiting for the air-conditioned coach to take them to the airport where they could travel cattle class by jet travel from Babylon to Jerusalem in a matter of a couple of hours and days.
Frankly, this scenario is garbage. The very fact that COJ remains silent or indifferent on this matter is quite telling for COJ is their hero, their Poppa and these two characters will simply whatever nonsense without any evidence. There is simply no evidence for the many assumptions Alan F and Jeffro make such as:
1. Cyrus issued his Decree in Month 1, 538 BCE
2. That the Jews arrived in Judah in Month 6, 538 BCE
This is just for starters.
scholar JW emeritus

Continuing to entertain us.
AlanF