Srecko Sostar

CC, You keep dragging me (and @Arauna ) into this. Arauna is right. We should be able to explain complex things with simple words and simple sentences. So here goes:
Ann O'maly commented on a paper written by Gerard Gertoux. In her comments, O'maly happened to make mention of a mistake that might have just been a typo. Gertoux's "typo" indicated that 360/12=15, instead of 360/12=30. No big deal. Chavez (CC) sarys Gertoux is right about 15 degrees, and O'maly must be stupid. For evidence CC posts content saying that 360/12=30 and that 360/24=15 and that 30/2=15. CC apparently doesn't realize that all CC has done is prove that O'maly was right. That's the whole story: CC has tried to prove O'maly wrong, but all his evidence directly shows she was right. His evidence blew up in his face. That's the whole story, except that Arauna has sided with the idea that 360/12=15, without even knowing, probably, that this was the entire argument. It's EXACTLY as if:
O'maly said 2+2=4 CC told her she was stupid, because 2+2=5 CC "proves" it by loading up a lot of Googled sites that prove that 2+2=4 CC claims his superiority and O'maly's stupidity, by misreading his evidence that "proved" to him that 2+2=5 Arauna places her bets on the side of 2+2=5 and criticizes O'maly for believing that 2+2=4. But why go to so much trouble to defend a typo in the first place? Why the need to pretend O'maly is stupid and wrong and incompetent just because she caught a simple mistake? That was not even the point of O'maly's comments. 
I think it only goes to prove a more general point we have seen on this thread. Hatred of people interferes with good judgment. And conversely, if people think someone else (like a Furuli, a Gertoux) is on the side of 1914, then it doesn't matter if they are making ludicrous claims. 99.9% of Witnesses apparently aren't really going to test them anyway. It's easier to just say they must be right, and Witnesses should defend them. For people who do not wish to look into the facts, it becomes an 'us versus them' proposition.
But there's another way I can tell that it doesn't matter what the evidence shows, and this is only about assumptions, and not real study or research:
It's because Gerard Gertoux has agreed with  the same date that Carl Olof Jonsson gives for the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. I have even communicated with Gerard Gertoux to find out why.
 

Where does your loyalty stand, with the organization and a GB who are not inspired, or with God and Jesus Christ?  Where is the humility of men who cannot even consider their anointed brothers in Christ, but choose a vast army of unanointed "Gentiles" to do their bidding?  Are you as arrogant as they are? If God truly blessed the organization, he would make it possible for all of "Israel" to come together and lead it in truth.  Yet, instead, for rejecting lies, "Israel" can be condemned to "death" through disfellowshipping.  They are the victors against this Beast/organization.  (Rev 13:15; 15:2) In the end, only those who put their faith in God and Jesus, are saved.  This is why the road is narrow and cramped.  Don't you see?  Your leaders boast of how the organization is growing by leaps and bounds.  Growing!  That road is not narrow, it is broad leading to destruction.  Only those who listen to Christ, his pure teachings, will be on the road leading to life.  Every word proven to be a lie by these men will be their judge.
Matt 12:37 -   For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

Irrelevant scripture. Try Jer. 25:12, 27:7.
You'll never get the point if you can't manage to read the proper scriptures. So I'll help you. Jer. 25:12:
<< 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. >>
According to ScholarJW Pretendus, the beginning of this "desolation" began when the Jews returned to Judah in 537 BCE -- a completely nonsensical idea. My point is that there was no such desolation for another ~1,200 years.
Note that the scripture says nothing about either the city of Babylon or about the Babylonian empire, but about "the land of the Chaldeans". The "land" comprises more than the empire; the empire is a political entity, but the land is a physical entity. The political entity ceased to exist in 539 BCE. In the course of time, the physical entity fell into ruins and became "a desolate wasteland". Capiche?
 

I'm making a catch-all place for the discussions on these topics that were currently under different topics/subjects. As I move old posts into this new topic, the oldest ones will appear to identify the starter/owner of this topic, even though that person didn't create this topic.

Yep, I'm 71 and and at age around 20 (50 year ago) the Org was teaching me about the 7,000 year creative days and about the 6,000 years of human life, then it would be / should have been, Armageddon / Jesus' 1,000 year reign.  That would have then been 49,000 years and then i think the Org was also mentioning a Millenium ??? 
Now, that was a foundation teaching of the Watchtower back then.  A doctrine of importance to all JWs, and those W/t leaders were thought of as having God's Holy Spirit. 
 

Arauna appears stuck in the pre-1980 Watchtower world, when the Society was promoting its version of Young-Earth Creationism (more properly, bits of normal YECism mixed with Russellism) and YEC Flood Geology. About 1980 the Writing Dept. abandoned much of this nonsense and mostly quit trying to justify Noah's Flood, and gradually began referring to the "creative days" as being "millennia long" rather than 7,000 years. Stuck-in-the-mud JWs like Arauna never noticed -- which was exactly why the Society never announced these changes. It would have been a bit too much for the old ones to give up on a century of Russell's nonsense.
These topics are rarely discussed by JWs today, to the extent that ones under about 45 usually know nothing about the 7,000 years nonsense, much less Watchtowerish Flood Geology. Most of the younger JWs have no problem accepting normal geological dating, such as 66 million years ago for the Cretaceous Extinction of the dinosaurs. Only dinosaurs like Arauna have trouble with such dating.

Arauna said:
Rather, be ashamed of it.
Recognizable humans have existed as such for more than 2 million years. Their ancestors have existed for about three times that. A great deal of evidence indicates that a variety of human species have existed just in Europe and Asia during the last 60 thousand years and more -- Neanderthals, Denisovans, probably one other similar to them, and others more distantly related like Homo floriensis and perhaps even Homo erectus. The DNA of the first three is found in all non-Africans today, in percentages ranging from 1% to 5%. All of this is impossible within the Watchtower's 6,000 year timeframe for humanity.
Archaeological remains abound. Gobekli Tepi in Turkey is something like 12,000 years old and is obviously far older than 6,000 years, even to non-archaeologists. Some 74,000 years ago the giant volcano Toba in Sumatra erupted and killed perhaps all but a few thousand humans on earth due to drastic cooling of climate. Above the ash layers in India have been found human artifacts that indicate that another wave of migration out of Africa occurred within some 15,000 years of the eruption. On and on goes the evidence of humans living in Africa, Europe and Asia for tens of thousands of years, and in the Americas for at least 15,000 years.
The Bible and the Watchtower Society are out of sync with reality.

Kind of ???? reasoning.  WTJWorg somehow holds on position how life on Earth begun before 6 Creative Days and that one (JW members) should not really believe that fossils (plant and animal) are millions of years old. 
The word “day” as used in Genesis can refer to long periods of time. In fact, at Genesis 2:4, the word “day” is used to describe all six days of creation.
The Bible’s narrative allows for the possibility that some major events during each day, or creative period, occurred gradually rather than instantly, perhaps some of them even lasting into the following creative days.*** .... How long, then, were the creative days? The Bible does not say; however, the wording of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved. -https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102010234
But, at the same time WTJWorg scholars speaking how God's (Jesus') Kingdom is literally 1000 years long and as such is last part of 6th Creative day, which 6000  years ended in 1975 CE. By that they came to general conclusion how each Creative day last 7000 years. Or, if not every single day, but this final 6th Day have to be 7000 years long. :))) This is WTJWorg Chronology too!  
*** another example of "overlapping" :)))
Insight into/about WTJWorg doctrines leads us to conclusion how, TIMELINE or WTJWorg CHRONOLOGY about 1000 year Kingdom and about Creation Day are not synchronized. 
And as i see, TTH and Arauna don't care nothing about that, but are very proud how their Organization standing in such impossible position.
You making problem about 70 years, but have no problem about thousands or millions of years !!?? Dogmas and chronology about 607 BCE to 1914 CE and 1975 CE, as one part, in connection/relation to 1000 years of (future) Kingdom and Length of Creative Days, as second part, destroys your hopes and theology every single day, and you are not aware of that.
You can't have both. Awake!

Kind of ???? reasoning.  WTJWorg somehow holds on position how life on Earth begun before 6 Creative Days and that one (JW members) should not really believe that fossils (plant and animal) are millions of years old. 
The word “day” as used in Genesis can refer to long periods of time. In fact, at Genesis 2:4, the word “day” is used to describe all six days of creation.
The Bible’s narrative allows for the possibility that some major events during each day, or creative period, occurred gradually rather than instantly, perhaps some of them even lasting into the following creative days.*** .... How long, then, were the creative days? The Bible does not say; however, the wording of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved. -https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102010234
But, at the same time WTJWorg scholars speaking how God's (Jesus') Kingdom is literally 1000 years long and as such is last part of 6th Creative day, which 6000  years ended in 1975 CE. By that they came to general conclusion how each Creative day last 7000 years. Or, if not every single day, but this final 6th Day have to be 7000 years long. :))) This is WTJWorg Chronology too!  
*** another example of "overlapping" :)))
Insight into/about WTJWorg doctrines leads us to conclusion how, TIMELINE or WTJWorg CHRONOLOGY about 1000 year Kingdom and about Creation Day are not synchronized. 
And as i see, TTH and Arauna don't care nothing about that, but are very proud how their Organization standing in such impossible position.
You making problem about 70 years, but have no problem about thousands or millions of years !!?? Dogmas and chronology about 607 BCE to 1914 CE and 1975 CE, as one part, in connection/relation to 1000 years of (future) Kingdom and Length of Creative Days, as second part, destroys your hopes and theology every single day, and you are not aware of that.
You can't have both. Awake!

Jeremiah is the source of the 70-years prophecies, though. Later interpretations and references to them need to harmonize with what Jeremiah actually said. The root of WT's divergence from mainstream understandings of the 70 years is its insistence that the 70-year period relates to the length of time the land would be 'desolate, without an inhabitant.' However, Jeremiah nowhere says this. He talks about a '70 years servitude' to Babylon and a '70 years for Babylon' but not that the land would be uninhabited for 70 years. It is this (mis)understanding that locks Watchtower into its chronological scheme. 
As far as I can see, WT nearly always ignores the problem of Jer. 25:12's sequence of events. One time it attempts to resolve it (w79 9/15 p. 23-24) by claiming the nations continued serving the king of Babylon after the city had been conquered and its king removed by Cyrus because Cyrus then became king of Babylon - the 70-year period was only up two years after the conquest and it was when Cyrus let the Jews go that the Babylonians were punished. Not only is this convoluted tripe not in keeping with the wording in Jer. 25:12, but it goes against Ezra's wording too at 2 Chron. 36:20:
"He [Neb] 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"
As for WT's solution to Jer. 29:10 - it doesn't offer one. It sticks with its translation 'at Babylon' and sidesteps the context by applying it to exiles taken 10 years later.
But we still have the wording of the texts to get past. The 70 years are fulfilled, then the Babylonian king is punished / then God will turn his attention to the exiles. It's not the other way around.

Why all this is so similar to, and remind me on, "overlapping" solution?
WTJWorg made Terminus Post Quem and  Terminus Ante Quem for "this generation will not pass" in "old lights insightful knowledge". Without going into the nuances they created about the interpretations of the term "generation", it was clear to everyone, at that time, and especially today, that "that generation" should have lasted from cca 1914 + 70-80 years according to JW scholars, with "happy conclusion" to the end of 20th century. :)) 

Why all this is so similar to, and remind me on, "overlapping" solution?
WTJWorg made Terminus Post Quem and  Terminus Ante Quem for "this generation will not pass" in "old lights insightful knowledge". Without going into the nuances they created about the interpretations of the term "generation", it was clear to everyone, at that time, and especially today, that "that generation" should have lasted from cca 1914 + 70-80 years according to JW scholars, with "happy conclusion" to the end of 20th century. :)) 

Why all this is so similar to, and remind me on, "overlapping" solution?
WTJWorg made Terminus Post Quem and  Terminus Ante Quem for "this generation will not pass" in "old lights insightful knowledge". Without going into the nuances they created about the interpretations of the term "generation", it was clear to everyone, at that time, and especially today, that "that generation" should have lasted from cca 1914 + 70-80 years according to JW scholars, with "happy conclusion" to the end of 20th century. :)) 

You're asking us to believe that the King of Babylon was called to account two years after he was forcibly deposed and his city conquered. Riiight.
When did Babylon become a desolated wasteland, by the way?
Thank you for also confirming that Young did, in fact, resolve the 587/586 dilemma and that you initially told a whopping fib. 👍

Anna said:
"Admit" is the wrong word. This is what proper scholars have been saying for decades. And of course, JW critics have said it at least a hundred times on this board.
As I, Ann O'Maly and others have shown, the 70 years ended in 539 BCE when the king of Babylon was punished. Go back 70 years and you get 609 BCE. No problem.
Also note that your argument assumes that "70" is an exact figure -- which is open to question.
Nope. I've already explained the details of this many times.
Neither the decree nor the conquest started the Return. The return occurred nearly a year after the conquest of October, 539, not later than about September, 538.
Good!
As Ann and I and others keep pointing out, the Bible and secular history are in excellent agreement about virtually all significant chronology. It is only the Watchtower's distortions that are out of sync. You have only to read the many sources that I and others have pointed you to.
Precisely! Ann and I are in agreement on this.
Nope. The Watchtower Society and its apologists are adamant that the 70 years were a precise period of time that cannot be moved even by one month. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
There was no specific decree to rebuild the temple at a specific time. Cyrus' decree allowed the Jews and other captives to return to their homelands, where they could rebuild temples on their own timetables. Ezra is quite clear that this happened with the Jewish temple in the 2nd month of the 2nd year of the Return from exile, i.e., Iyyar of 537 BCE.
You're going in circles now. It's entirely possible that "the 70 years" was an approximate period. This has been discussed by scholars for centuries.
Perhaps for after-the-fact rationalization, but not as a foundational figure upon which to base the Society's claim that in 1919 Jehovah anointed Watchtower leaders to a special position of spiritual authority "over all Christ's earthly belongings".
The only date one can be dogmatic on is 539 BCE, since a great deal of evidence supports it as the date of Babylon's fall and the end of Nebuchadnezzar's dynasty. And of course, no scriptures pinpoint 539 -- only secular data does that. And Jeremiah 25:12, 27:7 and 29:10 clearly show that the 70 years ended when that dynasty became no more.
Yes, but that is exactly the ass-backwards thinking that has resulted in the Society lying about so much to do with its bogus chronology. What about intellectual honesty?
And remember that the originators of the "606-607 chronology" (Christopher Bowen, E. B. Elliott, Nelson Barbour and C. T. Russell) were adamant that 606 BCE was the starting date for the 70 years. They certainly did no ass-backwards calculations. Rather, they began with secular data (i.e., 536 BCE for the fall of Babylon, (also wrong)) and applied their interpretations of certain Bible passages to arrive (wrongly) at 606 BCE + 2,520 years = 1914 CE. You want to work backwards from 1914. Why?
Yes, but given your JW background, and the fact that you don't lie about these things, in contrast to many other JWs, you can be forgiven.

🤣 at Cesar's Googling and lengthy, but irrelevant, copy-and-pastes in a vain attempt to hide his embarrassing blunder, and that further drive home the point that he had no clue what Gertoux or I were talking about.
 👋👋👋 Well done!

Date is disputed. Other non-WT models are out there that fit the 390 years with the conventional timeline.
As has been shown ad infinitum, Jer. 25:12 falsifies your claim that the 70 year period of the nations' servitude to Babylon ended with the repatriation of the Jews.
... is another subject beyond the scope of this thread and it similarly involves an erroneous WT starting date.
Again, WT interpretation of these periods is upended by sound exegesis and by WT following its own new approach regarding types and antitypes:
Humans cannot know which Bible accounts are shadows of things to come and which are not. The clearest course is this: Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so. - w15 3/15 p. 18
Neil, whatever WT fantasies you have swirling around in that stubborn skull of yours, you know what you've just said above isn't true. You know Young's articles well enough and are familiar with his conclusions. Doesn't your conscience prick you when you lie like that, especially when you can be caught out so easily? Have you no shame? Smh. 😦
"In this paper, the method is applied to all Scriptures in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 2 Kings, and 2 Chronicles relating to the date of Jerusalem's fall to Nebuchadnezzar. It is shown that all texts involved are in harmony with themselves and with each other, and the only year possible for Jerusalem's fall is 587 BC."
- http://www.rcyoung.org/papers.html
"The conclusions from the analysis are as follows.
"(1) Jerusalem fell in the fourth month (Tammuz) of 587 bc. All sources which bear on the question—Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 2 Kings—are consistent in dating the event in that year."
- Young, R.C., 'When Did Jerusalem Fall?', JETS 47/1 (March 2004) 21–3.

Since love doesn't keep account of the injury and covers a multitude of sins, I will not go back and show you what you have actually said. Besides, I've never wanted to make this into a contest of who is smart or not. I've never claimed to be smarter than you or anyone else here. This just happens to be one of my strong interests -- and of course it's an interest that is recommended in the Watchtower itself. It's easy to make mistakes in this area of study. I've made quite a few while learning and might still be making some. I'm hoping to be corrected where I am making mistakes. But it gets easier, and makes more sense every time I read another book and compare it with the evidence and the appropriate Bible passages.
But I'm sure you'll agree that there's nothing wrong with taking an interest in this topic:
*** w11 10/1 p. 26 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part One ***
But why be interested in the actual date when Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II razed the city of Jerusalem? First, because the event marked an important turning point in the history of God’s people. . . .
Second, because knowing the actual year when this “ultimate catastrophe” began and understanding how the restoration of true worship in Jerusalem fulfilled a precise Bible prophecy will build your confidence in the reliability of God’s Word. So why do Jehovah’s Witnesses hold to a date that differs from widely accepted chronology by 20 years? In short, because of evidence within the Bible itself.
The problem, of course, is not just taking an interest, but discovering that the Watchtower's solution produces too many contradictions and cannot be supported without manipulation or rejection of the Biblical and archaeological evidence.
Of course the only right thing to do when one discovers that the evidence leads to a different conclusion is to be quiet and wait on Jehovah. At least that's what I was told even by the persons who first showed me a few pieces of this evidence in 1977 and 1978. If you speak up, you could be disfellowshipped, I was warned. So I stayed pretty quiet about it for more than a third of a century (i.e., 33 years) but I have kept studying about these things off and on.
But my conscience bothered me a bit, because Jehovah is the "God of Truth." (Psalm 31:5) If we see our brother take a false step we shouldn't just ignore it. When I asked about these things with responsible persons in the organization, who I respected, I realized that the only defense was "empty speeches." (Non-answers, avoidance, evasion, misquotes, and very weak or completely unrelated evidence.) Mostly you begin to see that no one really has looked at the evidence. Or, if they are like Furuli, they try to exploit a weakness in one or two tiny pieces of evidence, and won't even admit that their theory is already demolished by 1,000 other bits of independent evidence.
So for me, I must follow my conscience.
(2 Timothy 2:14-18) . . .. 15 Do your utmost to present yourself approved to God, a workman with nothing to be ashamed of, handling the word of the truth aright. 16 But reject empty speeches that violate what is holy, for they will lead to more and more ungodliness, 17 and their word will spread like gangrene. Hy·me·naeʹus and Phi·leʹtus are among them. 18 These men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred, and they are subverting the faith of some.
Hmmmm. Thanks? Well, that should convince her!  I think she trusts your judgment pretty much the way she judges mine.

ScholarJW Pretendus continues making the same mistake that most JW apologists do with chronology as well as many other beliefs: they're ass-backwards in their thinking. Since 1914 is all-important, they must perform all sorts of mental gyrations to justify it. Such as claiming that the 70 years is of fundamental importance to both Bible and secular chronology. But the period ONLY has importance to the 1914 chronology and the huge house-of-cards belief structure that rests on it.
And of course, ScholarJW Mendacicus continues lying about "the 586/7 BCE dilemma" when he knows quite well that Rodger Young put that issue to bed back in 2004. He knows this because he's completely unable to refute Young's paper; all he can manage is his usual limp but loudly proclaimed refrain, "It's wrong cuz the 70 years!!!"

Again confusing Jehovah with the Watchtower Society.
JW Insider, although we disagree about some things, happens to be about most honest JW I've ever come across. Coming from me, that's saying something!
"Clear as daylight." LOL! LIke teaching that organ transplants are the same as eating organs? Like teaching that "the resurrection of the saints" in 1881 was a fact of history for half the Watchtower's history? Like teaching that Christ returned invisibly in 1874? Like teaching "Armageddon is right around the corner" for decades, despite Jesus' warning in Luke 21:8 not to do that?
I could go on with such examples for a long time, but you get the idea: as claimed "speakers for Jehovah", Watchtower leaders speak with forked tongues: they are false prophets.
In the end, assuming your God actually judges people for their actions, who do you think will fare better: Unthinking, willingly gullible drones? Or people who actually think about what they're taught and make decisions according to their consciences?

I already showed you the Scriptural proof that they ended in 539 BCE when Jehovah "called to account" against Nebuchadnezzar's dynasty by conquering Babylon, deposing king Nabonidus and killing king Belshazzar. (Jer. 25:12, etc.)
The Bible does not specify the start of the 70 years, but there are enough hints in the Bible that the period was already running when Jeremiah issued several prophecies. (e.g., Jer. 29:10) Many commentators now tend to view the start as in 609 BCE, when the Babylonians put an end to the last of the Assyrian forces at the battle of Harran. But no one is dogmatic about it, since the Bible is silent.
Because of your JW training, you have it strongly ingrained that the 70 years are of great significance. They are not. The ONLY reason the Watchtower Society views them as significant is that without the 70 years, they cannot get to 1914.

Anna said:
That's a big oversimplification of what Jeremiah said, so let's look at several of the passages of interest.
Jer. 29:10 New American Standard Bible
<< For this is what the Lord says: ‘When seventy years have been completed for Babylon, I will visit you and fulfill My good word to you, to bring you back to this place. >>
That says nothing about 70 years of captivity. It does say 70 years for Babylon. The sense is that when 70 years of Babylonian supremacy over something -- which other passages show is supremacy over the entire Middle East -- when 70 years of supremacy over the Middle East have ended, God would return the Jews to Judah.
The New World Translation in English follows the obsolete King James Version here, and uses "70 years AT Babylon". Many commentators have shown why this is wrong.
The above is entirely consistent with all other relevant passages -- as long as Watchtower spin is not applied. Take a look (this material is borrowed from the essay I pointed you to ( https://ad1914.com/biblical-evidence-against-watchtower-society-chronology/ 😞
Linguistic, contextual and historical biblical facts show that Jeremiah predicted that Judah and the nations around it would, as a group, serve Nebuchadnezzar’s dynasty for 70 years (Jer. 25:8-12; 27:6-7). The key passage is Jer. 25:11: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” The Bible and secular history show that Judah and various nations individually served less than 70 years, depending on when they were first conquered and how one measures “serving.” God, through Jeremiah and other prophets, gave each nation the choice whether to serve on their own land or in exile (Jer. 27:7-11, 17; 40:9-10). To serve in their own land they had to submit to Nebuchadnezzar. The Jews under various kings refused; hence they were taken into exile at various times from 605/4 through 582 BCE (Dan. 1:1-2; Jer. 52:28-30). Thus there was no 70-year exile or captivity or desolation of Judah.
A key point is: Jer.29:10 and Jer.25:11 are consistent: the Jews and surrounding nations would SERVE Babylon 70 years. Whether they would serve while remaining in their own land, or as captives in Babylon, depended upon their peacefully submitting to Babylon.
The 70 years of Babylonian supremacy ended in 539 BCE when Jehovah “called to account” against, or punished, Nebuchadnezzar’s dynasty (Jer. 25:12) by allowing the Medo-Persian empire under Cyrus to conquer Babylon and put an end to Nebuchadnezzar’s dynasty. This is directly stated in Daniel 5, where verses 28-30 say: “Your kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and the Persians… in that very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was killed.” In contrast, the Society claims that Nebuchadnezzar’s dynasty was called to account two years after its demise, when the Persians freed the Jews to return home (w79 9/15 pp. 23-24; g 5/13 p. 13), but this is ridiculous. You cannot punish a dynasty that no longer exists.
2 Chronicles 36:20 states that Nebuchadnezzar’s minions carried off Jews to Babylon, and these Jews remained servants to Nebuchadnezzar’s dynasty until the Persians under Cyrus took over, after which they were servants to Cyrus and his minions until Cyrus let them return to Judah. This confirms again that the 70 years were a time of Babylonian supremacy, not the term of the desolation of Judah. That desolation occurred during the 70 years. This is consistent with Jer. 25:8, 11, 12 which states that the Jews and nations round about would be servants to “Nebuchadnezzar and his sons” until God called them to account.
Because Jews were taken into exile in 605/4, 597, 587 and 582 BCE, and released in 538, there was not just a single period of exile or captivity. Therefore it is wrong to speak of a 70-year exile or captivity. Similarly it is wrong to speak of a 70-year desolation of Judah, because Jerusalem was ruined (Hebrew: chorbah) in a relative sense from the Jewish point of view when Nebuchadnezzar first took a few captives (including Daniel) in 605/4 BCE, and in a complete sense after most of the Jews left the land between 587 and 582 BCE.
Much more could be said about all this, but I'm sure issues will come up during this discussion.

Think about that for a minute. 
Let's use the rNWT for this verse:
10 “For this is what Jehovah says, ‘When 70 years at Babylon are fulfilled, I will turn my attention to you, and I will make good my promise by bringing you back to this place.’
But who was Jeremiah talking to? V. 1, 2:
These are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the prophet sent from Jerusalem to the rest of the elders among the exiled people, the priests, the prophets, and all the people, whom Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar had taken into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon,  after King Jec·o·niʹah, the queen mother, the court officials, the princes of Judah and Jerusalem, and the craftsmen and the metalworkers had gone out of Jerusalem.
The letter was for the exiles taken in 617 (WT time). Checking the figures in 2 Kings 24 and at the end of Jer. 52, the greatest number of captives were taken then. Jehovah told these exiles that he would turn his attention to them once their 70 years 'at Babylon' was fulfilled. But if these exiles were taken in 617, when God turned his attention to them after Babylon fell, they would have actually been 'at Babylon' 80 years - not 70.
Something has gone awry with WT's translation and application here, don't you think? Or do you have a resolution for this anomaly?
 

You have yet to evidence your superior knowledge on the matter, Arauna. From what you wrote, you seemed to know very little.
I explained all that in my post and is the reason I put quote marks around the word 'science.' The Babylonians were committed and (for their time) expert sky-watchers. They recorded what they saw and tried to develop mathematical methods to predict what they would see in the future. This is proto-science, if you like. If you have done any reading or study of their practices, you should know this.
Anyway, astrology was intertwined with astronomy right up until the 17th or 18th century when the scientific method began to be formalized and they became separate disciplines. As I said before: to be a 'competent' astrologer, you had to be a competent astronomer. The Babylonians' superstitions and interpretations of celestial phenomena in no way negates what they observed. The sky doesn't lie. If the Moon or a planet was so many cubits from a certain star on a certain date, it can be checked and verified. What's so hard to understand about that?

GB has a problem with how to incorporate some biblical concepts into the workings of the WT JWorg Organization. The term “holy spirit” occupies one of the three most significant places (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) that can be read about in the Bible.
1) Is the explanation of who or what the holy spirit is properly explained in WTJWorg theology?
2) WTJWorg argues that the workings of the Holy Spirit in the past and today are quite different when it comes to the manner and type of "communication" between “Heaven and Earth”.
3) Why does WTJWorg have trouble with the term/word "inspired"?                                                          4)They say, the WTJWorg Organization and the JW people in the organization are not "inspired by the spirit," but they are "guided by the spirit," "the spirit helps them," the spirit leads them, "the spirit empowered them," "spirit teaches them" and so on. What is the difference?