DespicableME

I think the content of the verse in Micah about having a "waiting attitude" is good, but the context might seem a bit harsh in that the verse applies to waiting on Jehovah when it's an enemy we are up against. I don't think of the Governing Body as an enemy here, and I don't think you do either.
In fact, the only issue I see is that a long-standing tradition made sense for many years, but has turned out to cause more problems than it solved at this point. Still, I don't think it is even that big of a problem when it comes to the day-to-day life of an average Witness.
After all, whether 1914 is a necessary doctrine or not:
We still know that we are living in the time of the end, or the "last days" even if that phrase had the same meaning to Christians in the first century. We still know that Satan has been cast down and walks about like a roaring lion, seeking to devour someone, because his time is short. This is also true even if it had the same meaning in the first century. We also wait for his final abyss and subsequent final demise. We still have a preaching work that is just as important as ever. Jesus is still "King of Kings" and ruler of those who rule the earth. The kingdom is still our focus, and continues to be the theme of our hopes and prayers. We still know that we must overcome critical times, hard to deal with, just as Paul warned Timothy that he would meet up with. We still know that Jesus is present, wherever even two or three are gathered in his name. We know that Jesus will be with us right up until the conclusion of the system of things. We don't live for a date, or serve for a date anyway, so whether or not the end comes in our lifetime or we find out about it after a moment of "sleep" in death, the important thing is still our love for God and neighbor, and "what sort of persons we ought to be." So probably the only thing that we might consider to be different is the idea that the Gentile kings had their day and the times of these nations and their kings ended 103 years ago. This, ironically, is the only prediction that we ever said we got right about 1914 in the first place. So it might end up requiring a bit of humility, but there's nothing wrong with a bit of humility, either.

The general view by the Governing Body is likely that this is exactly what they have been doing for as long as possible, but I'm sure that all or most of them believe they have been doing it for the right reasons. I have no reason to believe that any of the current Governing Body doubt the general idea about 1914, whether or not all of them specifically believe in the Daniel 4 foundation or not. (For many years, Daniel 4 on its own, had nothing to do with the "foundation" for 1914, although it was considered to be a weaker, but still valid, bit of corollary evidence by Russell.)
If it were only true. What this "scholarly type," R.Furuli, had done was take the 10 pieces of independent archaeological and historical evidence and not even address 8 of them except with flippant false claims that shows he doesn't even care to research them. He pins all the importance on only ONE of those pieces of evidence, which is odd because 607 as the year when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem is falsified just as easily by the other pieces of evidence without even needing to rely at all on this one piece of evidence. But then, even at that, he comes up with the most convoluted reasons for rejecting this one item: VAT 4956.
VAT 4956 is one of several astronomical diaries that would ultimately identify Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year as the year 568/567 BCE, based on the astronomy that fits no other possible year. Of course, if the tablet is correct, then it's the same as saying Nebuchadnezzar's 36th year would be 569/8 BCE, his 35th would be 570/569 BCE on back to his 19th (or 18th) year, which would be 587/6 BCE, which is a year that Jeremiah and 2 Chronicles associate with the destruction of Jerusalem. In other words, it's just another of several items of evidence that consistently fits the "secular" chronology -- which also happens to fit the Biblical chronology, even though these particular bits of Biblical evidence are not accepted by the Watch Tower Society.
But even though Furuli grasps at all kinds of straws to invalidate the tablet, most JWs don't even realize that Furuli ADMITS that most of it actually does refer to the date 567 and no other possible date. That is an admission that MOST of this tablet still invalidates the Watch Tower Society's preferred date of 607 BCE for the Temple destruction. He even says that the museum curators might have taken a grinding tool and forged the "37" onto it to look exactly like all the other cuneiform letters that were made when the clay was still wet. Since it's a two-sided piece of clay, he even thinks that one of the two sides might have been faked and didn't originally go together. This is in spite of the fact that he admits that the number 37 on the tablet (in more than one place) is the correct year for most of the readings.
He thought he could find some trouble with the lunar readings, based especially on the fact that there is a known copyist's error on the tablet. He admits that he was an amateur when it came to trying to figure out the astronomical readings, but it does not take a genius to try to duplicate his readings and see that his mistakes were worse than amateurish. They have been discussed elsewhere on the site, and so far, everyone who has tried to duplicate them has seen the errors.
But as you said: "That's all you need." Unfortunately, this is true for many persons. I think that most of us believe that if someone makes a claim that fits a preconceived notion, it must be true. It's a lot like watching CNN and MSNBC fall over themselves to find new ways to use the phrase "Russia hacked our 2016 election." Very few point out that one of the candidates failed to even visit states where she had a preconceived notion of a sure win.

I'm glad you edited out the reference to born again, Baptist clergymen which was far too specific. And I agree. Such prejudicial stereotyping is indefensible. 

I haven't invoked the part of this story that involves the "political" powers that have played no small part in keeping the 1914 doctrine written into our own history. But as you already admit that it applies to everything, I will oblige. Not that this has anything to do with real evidence for anything, but for me, it at least counters the common idea that if something is believed by non-Witnesses or ex-Witnesses it must be wrong. In this case, the same evidence I have already presented was also believed by several members of our own Governing Body, and even more members of our own Writing Department, plus at least one Gilead Instructor and at least two respected members of the Service Department. One is a current Governing Body Helper, and another still works in Writing and both still give convention talks, etc.
As a New Yorker you are not living too far away from some of those who were close friends of many of the people I mention, and you might have an opportunity to validate any part of what I'll mention below:
Daniel Sydlik of the Governing Body once said to me "off the record" that he thought we should just scrap the entire chronology and "start from scratch." I had heard that he had said this to several brothers prior to 1974, and I wanted to know (in 1978) if he still felt that way now that he was on the Governing Body. At the time I was only willing to question the 1918 and 1919 doctrines, and I went to him because I had been told by several people that he dismissed them as fantasy. Ewart Chitty, Ray Franz and Lyman Swingle had also made similar comments even about 1914, not just 1919. I had only heard Lyman Swingle say it personally, but I knew people who said that Chitty and R.Franz had also no longer believed that 1914 was a doctrine we should promote in the way we were doing it. The people who told me this were two of my best friends in Writing and one more very good friend in the Service Department. When Brother Schroeder complained to me about people willing to dismiss 1914, he inadvertently gave me 3 more names in the Writing Department when he said that it included everyone currently in Writing who worked on the Aid Book. The brother who gave my wedding talk, Brother Rusk, was a hard-line loyalist to anything that Fred Franz believed, and he also warned me against my friendship with 3 brothers in Writing, two of whom worked on the Aid Book.
I would never have had the nerve to ask why no member of the Governing Body had not stood up to Fred Franz and questioned the chronology doctrines outright. But several members of the Writing Department explained what they thought was happening. And their ideas were consistent: When serious doctrinal issues were being questioned (like chronology) there was very little that could be done prior to 1977 because it didn't matter what the Governing Body thought anyway, because Nathan Knorr and Fred Franz would override it in favor of "conservative" policies and doctrines. Also, neither Grant Suiter nor Milton Henschel ever cared much for scriptural discussions, which was obvious by the way they handled morning worship only as if it were "business reporting." So any scriptural matters were decided by the Oracle (Fred Franz). The Governing Body from 1971 to 1977 was not really a Governing Body yet anyway in the sense that they could actually bring up major doctrinal issues for questioning. Swingle could grumble about 1914, and R.Franz had already done the research for the Aid Book chronology article, but when R.Franz was added to the Governing Body in 1971, it was with Gangas, Greenlees, and Jackson -- and those three just mentioned were 100% supporters of Fred Franz. In 1974, when Sydlik and Schroeder were added and were known wild-cards, it was still at a time when the Governing Body had no authority to decide anything of any consequence. Also, of course, they were added at the same time as Ted Jaracz, Charles Fekel, Karl Klein, and Ewart Chitty were added. Those four were considered to be 100% Fred Franz supporters, even sycophants was the word used of most of them. Chitty admitted to a very close and respected friend of mine that he had grave reservations about 1914, but I have my doubts he would have pushed against the strength of Fred Franz on a doctrinal issue. (Of the last four, Jaracz, Fekel, Klein, and Chitty, I will not break down all the different rumors about each one, but I will say that it might have seemed obvious, based on their histories, that they would always vote with Fred Franz.) Barber, Barr and Poetzinger were added in 1977 and it was assumed by at least one friend in Writing that they filled out an even wider safety net to keep all votes for change from ever reaching 66.67%. I have to say that I knew almost nothing about any of these last three, and they never said anything during morning worship that gave a hint that they might have had preferred views or teachings that they felt were priorities.
By the time any dangerous questions could have been asked, Schroeder spearheaded a crack-down on such questions, starting in early 1980, and I even watched him try to position himself as the new "Oracle" in the event that "King Saul" died. (The expression, "That won't change until King Saul dies" was heard as a kind of joke many times in the Writing and Service Department, and it actually referred to someone else before Fred Franz.) Some people were very serious about it, however. At any rate, "King Saul" kept his power by minimizing the work Schroeder was doing throughout the 1980's and sometimes pushing for explanations that were exactly the opposite of what Schroeder proposed. (To be fair Schroeder proposed some fairly odd changes, which I won't get into here and now.) But one of the specific items that Schroeder had proposed was the idea that the "generation" should be seen as the generation of the "anointed." He even went to give talks in Europe promoting this new view. In response, Franz pushed for making it the generation of the "wicked" which actually made more sense in light of some scriptures. Schroeder also pushed one last time on trying to prove that the heart was not just a figurative, but a literal seat of emotion, love, hate, envy, etc. Franz responded with a long Gilead Graduation talk in excruciating detail about the meaning of the liver and fat, and why the fat was forbidden just as blood was forbidden. It seemed very serious, but Schroeder told me what he thought of it.

Yes. Partly 607, and partly the inconsistent views and inconsistencies in translation and explanations surrounding the 70 years desolation and captivities, the 70 years of Babylonian hegemony. Each of these bullet points could probably be expanded into 10 more bullet points, and a lot more scriptures than the ones listed. I'll give just a few examples which would all be included in the first bullet point:
The NWT has a fairly obvious mistranslation in Jeremiah 29:10. It has been discussed ad nauseum, but the general view from Hebrew scholars is that we have chosen the word "at" instead of "for" because the more obvious translation would lead people to notice that the verse is directly about Babylon and only indirectly about Judah. Our current doctrine requires the opposite. There was a time when the entire NWT was only translated into a dozen additional languages, and in order to say that these were actual "Bible translations" and not just translations from the English into another language, brothers in a couple countries with Biblical language skills translated directly from Hebrew. Two of these translations came out with the dreaded "for" instead of "at" and had to be changed back to match the NWT English. After many consistent denials of the validity of "for" here, the Isaiah's Prophecy book made use of the exact same point about Babylonian hegemony in the discussion of Tyre. The Insight Book admits that Zechariah 1:12 and 7:4 must have been written almost 90 years after 607 BCE, which would be 90 years after the destruction of Jerusalem, if it had happened in 607. Ten different independent "witnesses" and literally thousands of dated contract documents all combine to provide evidence that it was only 70 years earlier that Jerusalem was destroyed, not 90. Yet, Zechariah 7:4 also indicates that it was only 70 years earlier, showing that Bible history is confirmed by archaeology. This is something that we would normally get excited about, whenever archaeology confirms the Bible record. But in this case we don't say anything because we have a doctrine that has forced us to add 20 years to every date prior to 539, all the way back to the creation of Adam. [edited to add:] Also I had included the reference to Ezra 3 in that initial bullet point because it says that the sound of those who must have been 70-plus-year-olds (per Zechariah) wept with such a loud voice that some people couldn't distinguish the shouts of joy from the weeping. This is far from definitive, but in the Watchtower's theory of events, this would have referred to the sound of the 90-plus-year-olds. If we accept the history from Zechariah 1 & 7, they would have been within the range of the expected life-span, 70-plus. (Psalm 90:10) . . .The span of our life is 70 years, Or 80 if one is especially strong.. . .
(Ezra 3:12,13) Many of the priests, the Levites, and the heads of the paternal houses—the old men who had seen the former house—wept with a loud voice when they saw the foundation of this house being laid, while many others shouted joyfully at the top of their voice. 13 So the people could not distinguish the sound of the joyful shouts from the sound of the weeping, for the people were shouting so loudly that the sound was heard from a great distance.
 
 

If this is a reference to 607 (it is not JWI's fault if I do not do my homework), I think of the expression 'it is the victors that write history.' It is a political statement regarding world powers, but it applies to everything. Certainly, science is fraught with accounts of one view coming into vogue, and then crushing the opposition for as long as possible.
My understanding is that some scholarly type has written a defense of 607. That's all you need. Not one Witness teaching is the majority view today; should we insist this one must be? For all the hype about 'critical thinking' today, the pattern remains what it has always been; in fact, it intensifies: choose your belief (largely based on 'heart') then go find some 'experts' to back you up.
Will 1914 fall? If it does, it does. But I am far from burying it just yet. Nor do I feel I should encourage the GB to have the wisdom and courage to do whatever is right. If I drop dead tomorrow, they will do just fine.
 I have grown used to explaining that 'if the greatest war in history, the ONLY time until then that the entire world went to war at the same time (China & region excepted, as it was isolated at the time), AND if the greatest pestilence in history does not constitute fulfillment of Matt 24:7 and Luke 21:10, 11, what does? Vs 8 of Matt indicates it starts off with a bang, but continues for some time.
Will I have to change my tune on this?
On the vs 8 'you ain't seen nothin' yet' front, terrorist knife or vehicle attacks, unheard of not long ago, are now just 'one of those things.' The gay revolution took decades; whereas the transgendered revolution has taken mere months, and a 9 year old girl can be, on National Geographic, not just transgendered, but a transgendered activist. 'Fake news,' absolutely unheard of just 3 years ago, is now a staple of life, one more of many pitfalls to mess with us.
Perhaps 1914 will suffice to get us through to the end. Maybe that won't be so far off after all.

Even before C.T.Russell was born, commentaries on Bible prophecy included  dozens of potential dates. Nearly 200 years ago, a couple of them even included 1914 as potentially significant time period. The "1914 presence" doctrine, however, is only about 75 years old.
All the ideas behind the Watch Tower's version of the 1914 doctrine have already been discussed for decades now, and all of them, so far, have been shown to be problematic from a Scriptural point of view. Since the time that the doctrine generally took its current shape in 1943, the meanings and applications of various portions of Matthew 24 and 25 have already been changed, and the timing of various prophesied events and illustrations have changed. Most recently, the meaning and identification of the "faithful and discreet slave" has changed. And the definition of "generation" has changed about half-a-dozen times. This doesn't mean that the current understandings are impossible, of course, only that it has become less likely from the point of view of reason and reasonableness.
Besides, for most of the years of teaching this doctrine, we have had the flexibility of extending the "1914 generation" from a possible 40 years, up to 70, then 75, then 80 years. And this has been applied to teenagers who saw 1914, 10-year-olds who saw 1914, then even newborns who saw 1914. With every one of these options already tried and stretched to their limits, we finally were forced to convert the meaning of generation from its most common meanings and give it a new "strained" meaning that has no other Biblical parallel. (See Exodus 1:6; Matthew 1:17; 16:4; 23:36; Luke 11:50)
But that flexibility is still seen as the last reason for hope that the Watch Tower Society might have still been correct in hanging on to 1914. Since the Bible says that a lifespan is 70 or 80 years and 1914 + 80 = 1994, the "generation" doctrine in its original form (1943) could remain stable until about 1994. Of course, a lifespan could technically reach to 120 years or more, and Gen 6:3 even gives vague support to the idea that the "1914 generation" could last 120 years, until 2034.
The current alternative solution is to make the generation out of the length of two lifespans, which technically could be double 120 years, or nearly 240 years from 1914. That would have had the potential to reach to the year 2154 (1914+240) except for the caveat that it can, by its new definition, only refer to anointed persons who discerned the sign in 1914 and whose lives overlapped (technically, by as little as one second) with the lifespan of another anointed person representing the second group. If persons from each group don't really discern their own "anointing" until age 20, for example, this would effectively remove 40 years from the overall maximum. 1914+120-20+120-20 = 2114. We could also assume a possible lifespan of more than 120 years, but otherwise, the new two-lifespan generation could potentially make the generation last 200 years. This "technical maximum" is not promoted currently, because for now we look at examples like Fred Franz who was part of that original generation already anointed and who saw the sign, and the typical example of an anointed brother who was apparently "anointed" prior to Franz' death in 1992 would be someone like Governing Body member, Brother Sanderson, who was born in 1965, baptized in 1975, and was already a "special pioneer" in 1991. His is currently 52.
However, the generation problem is just one more problem now which we can add onto the list of all the other points that make up the 1914 doctrine. Here are several points related to 1914 that appear problematic from a Scriptural point of view:
All evidence shows the 1914 date is wrong when trying to base it on the destruction of Jerusalem. (Daniel 1:1; 2 Chron 36:1-22; Jer 25:8-12; Zech 1:12, 7:4; Ezra 3:10-13) Paul said that Jesus sat at God's right hand in the first century and that he already began ruling as king at that time. (1 Cor 15:25) Jesus said not to be fooled by the idea that wars and rumors of wars would be the start of a "sign" (Matt 24:4,5) Jesus said that the "parousia" would be as visible as lightning (Matt 24:27). He spoke against people who might say he had returned but was currently not visible. (Matt 24:23-26) Jesus said that his "parousia" would come as a surprise to the faithful, not that they would discern the time of the parousia decades in advance. (Matt 24:36-42) Jesus said that the kingdom would not be indicated by "signs" (Luke 17:20, almost any translation except NWT in this case) The "synteleia" (end of all things together) refers to a concluding event, not an extended period of time (Matt 28:20) Jesus was already called ruler, King and even "King of Kings" in the first century. (1 Tim 6:15, Heb 7:2,17; Rev 1:5; 17:14) Wicked, beastly King Nebuchadnezzar's insanity and humiliation does not represent Jesus as the "lowliest one of mankind." (Heb 1:5,6; 2:10,11; Daniel 4:23-25; cf. Heb 2:7; 1 Pet 3:17,18) The demise of a Gentile kingdom cannot rightly represent the time of the rise of the Gentile kingdoms (Daniel 4:26,27) The Gentile kings did not meet their demise in 1914. (Rev 2:25,26) The time assigned to the Gentile Times that Jesus spoke about in Luke 21:24 is already given as 3.5 times, not 7 times (Revelation 11:2,3) The Devil was already brought down from "heaven" in the first century. (1 John 2:14,15; 1 Pet 5:8; Luke 10:18; Heb 2:14) The Bible says that the "last days" began in the first century. (Acts 2:14-20; 2 Tim 3:1-17; 1 Peter 3:3-5; Heb 1:2, almost any translation except NWT in this case.)

A name. A mistery.  Babylon the Great.       QUESTIONS TO TELL IF THE BABYLON THE GREAT IT'S A NATION   In the Bible there are hundreds of references to the destruction of Babylon and Israel unfaithful . They are also parallels between Israel and many hundreds of Babylon (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel ...). Being accustomed to make parallels with Christianity and the world empire of false religion, every time we read "Israel will be destroyed!" we read, in fact, "Christianity will be destroyed!" and every time we read "Babylon will be destroyed!" we read "The world empire of false religion will be destroyed." Now the question is ... "If in a specific step the Bible meant that Israel would be destroyed its meaning Israel ... what we would find it written?" Obviously we would find written "Israel will be destroyed!" In the end it comes to understanding if, whenever we speak of the destruction of Babylon and / or Israel after the day of the Lord , there is at least a chance that you are referring to Israel, that modern Israel is a literal nation. What is the biggest counterfeit of God's people today? Christianity and the modern nation of Israel? Before 1948 this hypothesis, and these questions would have been meaningless. Any assumptions would have ruled out simply because Israel did not exist . Since May 1948, however, Israel exists and we must understand basically three things. 1) See if it is possible that Babylon the Great is a nation 2) If so, see if Israel corresponds to the description that makes the Bible 3) Compare with current understanding, and see which of the two parties, in the light of Scripture and not of desires or personal ideas , is more likely to be.   Question 1 Babylon the Great can be a nation?   Meanwhile, remember that Babylon the Great, throughout history, has been "identified" with many nations and for many different reasons. Imperial Rome, papal Rome, USA, UK, USSR etc. Many people and different religious groups gave different explanations but none of them has ever stood the test of fire , and that is the scrutiny of the Scriptures - I Thessalonians 5:21 What about us? One of the explanations in the publications of the Slave that Babylon the Great can not be a literal nation is the fact that "committing fornication with the kings of the earth". An intensifier of this statement would be the fact that both kings and merchants mourn its destruction. Finally it would be not a nation because they say it misleads the entire inhabited earth through her "spiritistic practice." That's it? Let's see. In Isaiah 23: 15-17 we speak of Tire as a "forgotten prostitute" and therefore, as such, " commits prostitution with all the kingdoms of the earth on the surface of the ground ." Tire was a nation, not a religion or a religious system - Romans 15.4 So a nation can be described in the Bible, in the act of committing prostitution with all the kingdoms of the world and remain a nation. Prostitution may have to do with trade or with acts of injustice and bloodshed , and not necessarily with religion. - Nahum 3: 1-4 In particular, the shooting of prostitution has nothing to do with false religion because if they were, Jehovah would not be considered "holy" his compensation - Isaiah 23:18 The "prostitution" may have to do simply with the alliance and trust in other nations, as reported many times in the Bible when Israel and Judah showed allying with infidels pagan nations. It is clear, therefore, that if this nation is likened to a prostitute loss of this harlot would cause pain to his lovers (the nations with which it has committed prostitution and merchants grew rich from it) just as ancient Israel "tried joy "for the shooting of prostitution gifts and not because shooting was a religion or the religion of Tire. A king can "mourn" the loss of a political ally (and therefore by the fall of a nation) and a large merchant may weep at the drop of a commercial ally (which can be large or small but definitely rich nation). So the reasons that "Babylon the Great" can not be a nation because kings and merchants mourning his passing are not valid. What, though, the strongest affirmation in reference to Babylon The Great namely that "through its practice spiritism have been led astray all the nations"? This statement in particular has led many to think that it was a religious empire (for many sects of Christianity Babylon the Great is Catholicism and even some Catholics is Vatican II). First, we must realize that all the empires of the past have resorted to spiritualist practices, and this is also true for empires modern so-called atheists. Pharaoh opposed to Moses his "practitioners of magic " and Nebuchadnezzar it was virtually surrounded - Exodus 7:11 - Daniel 2: 2 The same thing can be said of Assyria, Syria, Persia, Media etc. So if the Bible, talking about a literal nation, saying that "uses" or "practical magic divination", would not say anything exceptional. We also know, from the study of the Scriptures, that nations are governed by demons who are misleading the entire inhabited earth, and that during the wars are not only human beings involved - Daniel 10:13 We can assume that the demons have no or given special power to a nation, and this has, today, "a kingdom over the kings of the earth"? - Revelation 17:18 also see Luke 4: 5-7 Without forcing any interpretation, logic and Scripture does not allow us to rule "Babylon the Great" among nations.   Question 2 "Babylon the Great can be the literal and modern Israel?"   In Revelation 17: 1, 2 says that Babylon the Great "sits on many waters." We know that the waters mean "peoples and crowds and nations and languages" Israel "sits on many waters" as it is surrounded by many peoples and nations that bear the pain ( "sit on it" can also mean against the will of the neighboring peoples themselves). In Isaiah 8: 5-8 we speak of the powerful Assyrian army as a "devastating waters"; so not always the "waters" are a symbol of protection - Isaiah 8: 5-8 It was put there by force by the UN against the wishes of many neighboring countries. He sits also "on many waters" because his position is due to the nations that make up the United Nations (Babylon the Great sits also on the wild beast scarlet) which, besides having established where still, protect it militarily. The armies of Assyria are likened to "devastating waters," then we can say that also sit on many armies? - Revelation 17: 3, 16 It 'also worth noting that the nation of Israel is actually located in the "crossroads" of three continents: Europe, Africa, Asia. If I wanted to find a literal nation located on the "many waters" (ie peoples and nations and tribes and languages) both geographically and politically, no ' other nation would correspond better to the modern nation of Israel. The harlot riding a beast. In Revelation 17: 3 we read, "And the angel took me in the power of the spirit into a wilderness. And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet-colored wild beast that was full of blasphemous names, having seven heads and ten horns." The nation of Israel is already in a desert and ride the wild beast scarlet color, as we know, the League or the company from the abyss rise Nations under the UN name Israel exists, behind the Anglo-American empire pushed through and by the United Nations since 1948. G them earlier historical events and following the creation of the state of Israel confirms that the Jewish people have ridden the wild beast in scarlet before returning to being a nation. Mother of all harlots. Revelation 17: 4-5: "And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and was adorned with gold and precious stone and pearls and had in her hand a golden cup full of disgusting things and the unclean things of her fornication. And on her forehead was a name written, a mystery: 'Babylon the Great, the mother of harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth' ". If we accept the possibility that a nation is likened to a prostitute (exactly like Tire), then the nation of Israel is the "mother of all harlots" because he committed fornication to a greater extent than any other nation in the world. How can we tell? If the harlot riding the wild beast scarlet, which, as we know, is the League of Nations, is supposed to have committed fornication with all the countries participating in the United Nations. Indeed, its very existence as a nation is due to his political lovers so, to continue to exist , must commit prostitution in excess and continuously. No 'other nation can compare with her as acts of prostitution because no' other nation has a strong need to please the United Nations to continue to exist. It 'also possible that in the Bible is described as a prostitute because it is not a real " queen" but a stretch . It is an empire cut on purpose to a prostitute. The woman is also "arrayed in purple and scarlet, and decked with gold and precious stone ..." then you simply dressed like a queen but the colors purple and scarlet are still the colors of luxury and royal power and this would strengthen the ' idea that you are talking of a kingdom, a literal nation. Likewise the beast that the harlot rides is scarlet and the beast, as we know, the League or the League of Nations (all UN members represent literal nations). The scarlet color is the wild beast that the harlot, is significant. Drunk blood of the saints. Writing goes on to say "And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of saints and witnesses of Jesus." Israel has enormous guilt of blood and Jesus referred to this very nation when he said, "In order to be on you all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye between killing in the sanctuary and the altar "- Matthew 23:35 - Luke 11:50, 51 So Jesus himself identifies Israel, not another nation , as responsible for the payment of "all the righteous blood" (also compared the words of Stephen reported in Acts 7: 51-53). The book "Insight", under the heading "Babylon the Great", correctly points out that not all Christians were persecuted by the Pharisees and the Jews themselves have suffered, in turn, a great persecution. However, even Abel was killed by a Pharisee, and even by some religious minister. Besides the millions of deaths caused by the empire communist, atheist, they could hardly be held up to the false religion. We can assume that Jehovah and Jesus regard as particularly responsible for those who have "know God" and, despite this, they commit unspeakable crimes? In this perfectly fits the nation of Israel. - Hosea 8: 2 - Amos 3: 2 Condolences for the end of Babylon. Revelation 18: 9-14 says, "And the kings of the earth committed fornication with her and lived in unbridled luxury will weep and beat themselves in grief over her when they see the smoke of her burning, 10  and will stand at a distance for fear of her torment and say, 'Woe, doom, the great city, Babylon the strong city, because in one, now is it!' 11  "And the travelers merchants of the earth weep and mourn over her, for no one buys their full load, 12  full load of gold and silver and precious stone and pearls and fine linen and purple and silk and scarlet, and every citron wood and every sort of ivory object and every sort of object of most precious wood, and of brass and iron and marble, 13  and cinnamon and Indian spice and incense and perfumed oil and frankincense and wine and olive oil and fine flour and wheat and cattle and sheep and horses and carriages and slaves and human souls. 14  Yes, the fine fruit that your soul longed has departed from thee, and all things delicious and splendid things have perished from you, and you will find it " As we saw earlier, both kings of the earth and travelers traders suffer from the disappearance of their lover. Unlike any other nation, the destruction of Israel would bring despair and "misfortune" among leaders and among the traders all over the world. Why? Because the Jewish people is the owner of the world's largest banks, almost all the gold, oil, the largest global corporations and everything you can imagine. The major world powers (including the United States, USSR and China) have taken advantage of abundant loans to wage war with other nations and to build imposing and colossal structures (such as the Suez Canal). Simply do some 'research to find out which and how many ways the owners of the world's largest banks have been involved in almost all the wars of the last two centuries and probably much further back in time. The words of Revelation 18: 11-14 that talk about 'full load of gold and silver and precious stone and pearls and fine linen and purple and silk and scarlet, and all citron wood and every sort of ivory object and every sort of most precious wood, and of brass and iron and marble object, and cinnamon and Indian spice and incense and perfumed oil and frankincense and wine and olive oil and fine flour and wheat and cattle and sheep and horses and carriages and slaves and human souls' are significant. Imagining the global economic consequences for the collapse of 80% of all existing banks and thus the immediate and simultaneous failure of thousands of companies all over the world ... one might conclude that a crisis of this magnitude does not correspond at all the history of man - Matthew 24:21 Really the kings of the earth travelers and traders around the world would be right to beat their chests, to mourn and cry, "Woe!" "Come out of her, my people." Revelation 18: 4 says, "And I heard another voice from heaven saying, 'Come out of her, my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and if you do not want to receive part of her plagues.'" If Babylon the Great is the modern nation of Israel, then it is easy to understand who is facing this urgent appeal: our dear brothers present in the nation of Israel who are also "a remnant to be saved." If you remain there, would receive part of her plagues as a result of the attack enraged the United Nations. This possibility is to be evaluated very seriously. This would mean, moreover, that the destruction of Jerusalem in 537 BCE and again in 70 CE would have a further and definitive fulfillment . The third (Revelation 4: 8; 8:13; 16:13, 19 - Ezekiel 21:14). The number two question asked: "The literal people of modern Israel, match the description that the Bible makes Babylon the Great ?" If like it or not what is written above , and it may be a "domino effect" on other interpretations, this is in keeping both with the secular history ch and with Scripture. The answer, then, is yes.   Question 3 Which of the two parties, in the light of Scripture and not of desires or personal ideas , you are more likely to be?   Honestly, all the description that the Bible makes Babylon the Great, corresponds closely to the false religion and so it is very difficult to understand if the Bible wants to tell a literal nation or false religion as a whole. The blatant immorality, extreme violence, the desire for domination, spiritual prostitution, the arrogance and presumption ... are all features world empire of false religion, as well as the current Israel. The clues, however, should be more than enough, when viewed without preconceptions, to understand the subject. Following listing of evidence and comparison subjects.   literal Nation of Israel (NLI)   world empire of false religion (IMFL)   NLI He sits on the scarlet beast (UN) The nation of Israel has been put there by the United Nations. There is thanks to the UN that has established and protects militarily. IMFL He sits on the scarlet beast (UN?) It should not ride the wild beast that ascends from the sea since the false religion has existed since Nimrod times?   NLI He sits on many waters (tribes, peoples, languages). The nations that make up the UN include many nations, tribes, peoples and languages. The waters are also "armies": the UN is a multiple military power. Israel is also at the crossroads of three continents. IMFL Side on many waters (tribes, peoples, languages). False religion has always been part of human history and included every people, tribe, nation and language. These waters have always been a protection for religion.   NLI Mother of all harlots / Fornication Israel commits fornication more than any other nation. To continue to exist should please the UN and all political and existing business partners. No other nation in the world is obliged to do this in his own measure because, other nations, existed before and may continue to exist even without UN backing. IMFL Mother of all harlots / Fornication Christianity claims to be "people of God" but it is adulterous because of his friendship with the world. Its practices are of Babylonian origin. He cheats on "husbandly owner," Jehovah. And 'prostitute. Besides Christianity, however, Babylon the great would include every religion that away from God (this includes all non-Christian religions including tribal). Why, then, it is seen as a prostitute? Jehovah has never considered the husbandly owner of nations like Egypt, Assyria and Persia Media?   NLI Luxury rampant The nation of Israel includes almost all bankers in the world. The largest corporations in the world. Posside gold and oil wells; restaurants, companies etc. It possesses weapons and world organizations of various kinds. The most expensive works of art in the world are owned by Jews. Their commercial power is simply beyond belief. IMFL Luxury rampant False religion, with some exceptions, has always adorned with precious things. Temples, churches, statues, shrines, paintings ... works of art without number and without value. It also reduced in poverty millions of people for a fee every "spiritual service". Even false religion living in the lap of luxury.   NLI Bane of the rulers The fall of Israel would lead the rulers shouting "evil" because they have always done business with them (the sale of weapons to every illicit trafficking). Including the Secret Service. The fall of a partner like that would throw many countries into a deep despair. IMFL Bane of the rulers The global fall of the empire of false religion would lead the rulers shouting doom because of his influence on the crowds but only in some parts of the world (ie Islam). In all Western nations you do not understand why they should shout "misfortune." Religion has always taken from the people and he never shared anything with the host city. The influence that religion had even in Western countries has virtually eliminated after the Second World War. No Western nation has been enriched through religion. On the contrary, scandals such as those of "The bank Ambrosiano" have impoverished nations further. The rulers of the nations "atheistic" hardly would cry at all "doom" to his downfall.   NLI Woe traders Israel is the largest trading partner in the world. Whatever international trader would be in trouble losing a partner like that. The same applies to all the smaller traders who depend, in whole or in part, from the larger ones. The fall of Israel is an economic tsunami unprecedented. IMFL Woe traders Because of its art and its opulent buildings, art dealers would cry "doom." It 'hard to imagine a trader of another kind (electronics, space research, etc.) shout "misfortune." The exponents of false religion, however, play the stock market and have many actions in many different activities for which you can not be categorical.   NLI spiritualistic practices The nation of Israel has its "magic practitioners" and most probably practice more than any other nation magic (think of the Jewish Kabbalah). We know from the scriptures that nations are governed by demons and thus may give the power to a nation or person in particular - 17:18 Revelation; Luke 4: 5-7 The MFL spiritualistic practices The world empire of false religion, by its nature, is "misleading all nations through his spiritualistic practices". All the bloodiest wars were fought because of religious conditioning.   N LI Blood of the saints and of all those slain The Jewish people, as owners of the world's largest banks, has stirred up a lot of wars, even recent ones, for their own economic purposes. Israel is embroiled in the secret services, in international arms trafficking and everything imaginable. It is historically proven that some of the assassinations more "important" have Jewish origins. Jesus identifies Israel as responsible for the payment of "all the righteous blood" - Matthew 23:35 - Luke 11:50, 51 We can assume that Jehovah and Jesus regard as particularly responsible for those who have "know God" and, despite this, they commit unspeakable crimes? - Hosea 8: 2 - Amos 3: 2 IMFL Blood of the saints and of all those slain The violence of false religion as a whole is evident and has no equal in any other country / organization. Having 6,000 years of crimes behind, is not comparable to anything else in known on earth.   NLI Come out of her my people In Israel, as in all the world, our brothers are active. If the UN is going to vent his fury on this nation (because of Jehovah's will) it is obvious and loving from God that He calls His people to come out. This would save a remnant, as reported several times in the Scriptures. This would be the third time that Jehovah destroys "his people" because with their actions show they are no longer his people - Deuteronomy 32: 5 - Revelation 4: 8; 8:13; 16:13, 19 - Ezekiel 21:14 IMFL Come out of her my people Being a symbolic nation can not literally see this spiritual exodus . The two subjects can not be compared. However, it is interesting to note that when Jehovah called his people from Babylon also saying not to be yoked and "do not touch anything unclean," they were already His people dedicated and baptized. His people had come away from a pagan nation (literal). They were not people who were part of another religion and that having good intentions, they would then dedicated baptized and becoming successively His people - II Corinthians 6: 14-18   Reflections   As written at the beginning of this discussion, in the Bible there are hundreds of parallels between Babylon and faithless Israel . Even the cup "full of disgusting things" from which the prostitute is inebriated remembers the utensils of Jehovah's temple. The question is what do we mean when we read these parallel. The table above shows both subjects have strengths and, at least in appearance, weaknesses. A strong point in favor of modern Israel is the fact that it ride the wild beast scarlet, and that is itself dressed in scarlet (which suggests a literal nation). A strong point of world empire of false religion is the shedding of blood; Although the state of Israel has a huge guilt of blood, of course you can not compare to 6000 years of abuse and violence attributable to false religion. However you should not make the mistake of thinking that it is the intensity of a clue to establish the identity of the subject. If anything is the amount of clues, even their totality. If only a small indication not match (and this was proven beyond doubt) apart from all the others, this would compromise the identity.   All of Jehovah's judgments, given in the Scriptures, beat upon peoples and nations literal and also sends plagues upon Egypt, which served to destroy / humiliate their false gods, however, had to fall on a specific country. Moreover, the war of Armageddon, destroying all the nations (which are governed by demons), automatically eliminate all forms of religion; If Babylon the Great was a nation of special interest , but still a nation, this would simply be a sign that the satanic system is about to reach its tragic end - Daniel 2:44   In the book "The prophecies of Isaiah" volume 1, page 202 paragraph 28 (in italian edition) contains Isaiah 19: 3 and it reads ... "Similarly, in the day of judgment, false religion will be unable to save this corrupt system of things." But if Egypt represents the world as a whole, we are already at Armageddon (Isaiah 19: 2 Jehovah puts "Egyptian against Egyptian") and the world empire of false religion (if it is Babylon the Great) was already destroyed . Now, if the world empire of false religion has been previously destroyed , in what sense "the people will resort to the worthless, the charmers and to the spirit mediums"? Only a world still steeped in religion, after the destruction of Babylon the Great, could "resort to the valueless gods."   The above might be in harmony with the writing of Zechariah 13: 4-6 which speaks of "the prophet" who will deny ever be? The Watchtower of July 15, 2015, the subtitle "The beginning of the great tribulation," says ... " Therefore it seems that even some members of the clergy will abandon their religious career and deny that he had ever been a part of false religion." Yet if for the Great adherents of Babylon simply "change his jacket" for their lives (which would make the majority of them, not having a true faith), it seems as if it has been "torn and completely burned with fire." It 'also difficult to imagine this "great mourning" since the majority of the clergy, especially of Christianity, would still be alive after the destruction of Babylon the Great.   The book "Revelation: its peak" in chapter 19 paragraph 29 says ... "Neither the caverns literal mountains nor the political and commercial organizations comparable to the mountains will provide economic security or assistance of another kind." However, even false worship in the Bible is related with the "high places" such as in Ezekiel 6: 1-5 (the high places that did not protect the unfaithful Israelites from the wrath of Jehovah). It 'possible that, in the day of Jehovah del'ira (so after the Great Tribulation) humans will seek protection in political, commercial institutions and religious?   Everything that follows is taken from the book "Babylon" and, to the extent possible, we will see if what he said you can apply it to the modern nation of Israel. Although the book is not updated all'intendimento current (later I will use the book "Revelation: its climax" as reference) reflections and principles on which it was based are still interesting and can provide food for thought.   From the book "Babylon the Great" (bf) Friday, September 8, 1922, an international assembly of non-sectarian Bible students in Cedar Point, Ohio, at a conference on "The Kingdom" at 9:30, they were told that they had to be witnesses of the Lord God, that witnesses Jehovah. The speaker, J. F. Rutherford, then president of the Society Watch Tower Bible and Tract cited the thousands of people gathered in assembly Isaiah 43: 8-12 and then went on to say: Thus we see that those of the temple class are clearly designated as witnesses of God at this time, to bring a message of consolation to the people, who came to the kingdom of heaven and that millions of people now living will never die. Thus we see that God's purpose that his name be magnified, that the people may know that he is Lord. Thus we see that God's purpose to have the earth a people in this time of distress, clearly marked as separate and distinct from all others, that stands like his witnesses, proclaiming boldly the message: "The kingdom of heaven is at hand! " . . . This is confirmed by the Lord in Matthew 24:14. Clearly it is then expressed as proof that the temple class must continue to declare this message of the kingdom until their earthly career is not over. They have to be his faithful witnesses until the walls of Babylon does not collapse to the ground. . . . Be faithful and true witnesses for the Lord. Advanced in the fight until every vestige of Babylon are not desolate. Proclaim the message far and wide. The world must know that Jehovah is God and that Jesus Christ is King of kings and Lord of lords. This is the day of days. Behold, the King reigns! You are his publicity agents. Thus announced, announced, announced the King and his kingdom. - Pages 336, 337 de La Watchtower (English) November 1, 1922.   Note: It was 1922 and did not exist and neither one imagined the birth of modern Israel, which, in fact, takes place May 14, 1948.   (Bf) Recall that the original Babylon was founded as a deviation from adoration of Jehovah's love and loyalty to him as God, as Babylon was established by a rebel who placed himself against. That rebel was stigmatized as "Nimrod mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah." Then the people of the pagan city they called the "Gate of God." However, Jehovah called the city Babel, meaning "Confusion", because it confused the language of the builders of the city and its tower. (Genesis 10: 8-10; 11: 5-9) Babel ( greek,Babylon) was never a Jewish city; It never was Jewish; It was never Messianic or Christian, since it was never the organization of Jehovah God. He was always against his chosen people, and so was against Sion. In the days of the dynasty of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon it had apparently swallowed the chosen nation of Israel "like a big snake" o dragone. (Jeremiah 51:34) The purpose of Babylon was to crack down on Israel.     Note: If Babylon has "swallowed" Israel now bears his name but it is a hoax. It's called "Israel" but Babylon. It makes sure to blend with Israel, the look of it.     (Bf) How Semitic world power for more than seventy years, Babylon was, of course, politics. It was militaristic. It was highly commercial. But it was remarkably religious   If Babylon the Great was a literal nation, the above description which nation would seem to describe today?   (Bf) As soon as the priests could Babylonians converted into money all animal sacrifices and all religious tithes that the people had every day on the altars, especially the things deteriorated quickly. Just like in the hometown of Abraham in Ur of the Chaldeans, the Templars authorities had their deposits required and directed their own shops. They felt good to invest their religious revenue and for this purpose they had, therefore, their own banks.   If it were a literal nation, which nation would seem to describe?   (Bf) What, then, Babylon the Great, whose announced by the fall of God in Revelation 14: 8? It must look like ancient Babylon in remarkable ways, especially in the time of his fall . Otherwise, the name would be inappropriate. First of all, ancient Babylon ruled an empire, the largest empire until that time, so that the line of the World Powers it was the Third World Power. There flourished policy, militarism, commercialism and religion, but religion predominated, especially during the dynasty of Nebuchadnezzar. His religion placed it against Zion or Jerusalem, where the Jewish kings sat on "Jehovah's throne" and where the temple built by King Solomon was the national center of worship of Jehovah.   If it were a literal nation, which nation would seem to describe?   (Bf) Although it is an empire religion, it became in itself commercial and political and formed alliances with the political and commercial elements of this kind worldwide.   These two lines, in some way, belie the claim that Babylon the Great is not also a religious empire (literal), political and trade exactly as it was ancient Babylon.   (Bf) Even Judaism has attached to Babylon the Great. In the first century, Jesus and his twelve apostles applied to traditional Judaism of their day Bible prophecies that refer to Babylon as a place of exile and captivity from which Jehovah's people was asked to leave. Nineteen centuries ago, when the Messiah came to Zion, traditional Judaism practically turned the whole nation against him. He kept his grip on her way Jewish prisoners. Up to this day, traditional Judaism has not changed. It still retains its Jewish prisoners away from the freedom that the promised Messiah.   (Bf) In 1914 CE Babylon the Great, or the world empire of the Babylonian religion, came to its most critical period in world history. Until then it had, as he said the angel of God, "did drink all the wine countries of the passion of her fornication" (Revelation 14: 8) He had made friends with the political rulers of this world and so had committed with their spiritual fornication. (James 4: 4) He had used his religious influence on worldly rulers to stay in power. He swung the support of its religionists in favor of the Gentiles worldly rulers. This had made the nations drink the "wine of the passion", that is, political oppression, trade and economic, religious persecution, the holy wars, religious wars, crusades, and wars of nations for purely political and commercial reasons. Such selfish wars Babylon the Great the sanctified, declaring that they were God's will, so that taking part would do his will.   If talking about a literal nation, that nation would reflect perfectly this description? Friendship with political leaders, religious influence on rulers to retain power, political oppression, the world trade and economic, holy wars for political and commercial reasons etc. There is also a contradiction (at least in appearance). If Babylon the Great falls for the first time in 1919, as can be seen riding the scarlet beast that is the League Of Nations created on June 28, 1919? Babylon the Great can be seen sitting only after the creation of the League and then fall in a period still later but not before.   (Bf) What, then, the image of the wild beast? Between World War I and World War II it was the League of Nations, which once had up to sixty members nations, as the worship of the image and the wild beast was then so great ...   Altr in apparent contr addition . Religion is nothing but "the form of worship." Now if Babylon the Great is the world empire of false religion (and therefore includes all sorts of worship away from Jehovah) this should include the worship of the wild beast. So we should resize the title "world empire of false religion," having ruled out, inevitably, nationalism and militarism? The worship of the wild beast? Nationalism is it not a form of religion?     Other considerations   If we accept the possibility that Babylon the Great is a literal place (and is modern Israel) we have to consider that even the mountains, on which the woman sitteth, are literal mountains. We always speak of the seven world powers of Bible history, but we never hear of the seven mountains. He never speaks of the seven mountains because the political powers, they say, are the seven mountains. Yet the writing of Revelation 17 says that there are seven kings ... and (conjunction, in Italian, meaning "and there are also") seven mountains and this conjunction might suggest that, even though the mountains depict power as well we know , there are actually seven mountains as objects of similarity with the number of kings. It would seem a literal useful clue to identify Babylon the Great. Now the question is ... Who and how many mountains are mentioned in the Scriptures which were part of the Promised Land? 1) Mount Moria 2) Mount Zion 3) Mount of Olives 4) Gilboa 5) Gerizim 6) Ebal 7) Monte Tabor. NB Mount Nebo and others, also mentioned in the Scriptures, were part of the territory of Moab and Edom and are therefore excluded . This parallel is original place, simply impossible to do with the world empire of false religion.   Revelation 3:12 and other scriptures that are fulfilled after the Lord's Day, which mention the New Jerusalem, seem to emphasize a distinction with Old Jerusalem. In chap. 18 of Revelation, Babylon the Great is destroyed. In chapter 19: 7, 8 prepares the marriage of the lamb, so ... Died the prostitute who passed himself off as the bride and the wedding may have finally begun. The marriage takes place with the " New Jerusalem "; the prostitute was perhaps the " Old Jerusalem " that is, the carnal, unclean, disobedient, idolatrous? - I Corinthians 9: 6-8; 10:18 - Galatians 4: 26-29 If I tried a people and a nation that pretends literal and that it was the people of God, to whom I would go nationwide? Only the people who actually were the people of God have what it takes, so to speak, to impersonate legitimate wife.   Babylon is also called "the great city" and the only biblical reference is Nineveh, "the city of bloodshed". This seems in keeping with the fact that Babylon is drunk with the blood of the saints, prophets and all. However in Jeremiah chapter. 22 Jehovah's condemnation of Judah, which is the city of Shallum and Jehoiakim, and people call this city "that great city." So, the city that had once belonged to the Jehovah's "great city" is defined.   Revelation 18: 1, 2 " After this I saw another angel coming down from heaven, with great authority; and the earth was illuminated by his glory. 2  And he cried with a loud voice, saying," Fallen! Babylon the Great has fallen , and it became a dwelling place of demons and a place of refuge for every unclean exhalation and place of refuge for every unclean and hateful bird! " This thundering description of the Angel repeated three times the word "place" (in old traduction bible): 1 ) dwelling place of demons 2 ) place of refuge of every unclean exhalation 3 ) place of refuge of every bird unclean and hateful. We can assume that, by emphasizing three times the word "place" , you are indicating a place / literal nation? This writing may strengthen the hypothesis that Babylon the Great is a literal nation?   Of the two witnesses in sackcloth described in chapter 11 of Revelation says that, once killed, "their corpses will be on the broad way of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was put to pole "- Revelation 11: 8 What "great city" the Lord Jesus was impaled?   Finally, we might ask why, the Revelation writer, after watching scary wild animals, amazing celestial visions is beautiful that terrifying thunderous statements and many other things, only the sight of the woman he "marveled of great marveled " - Revelation 17: 6 , 7 Obviously we can not know why you can only make hypotheses but generally you wonder when you see something that you can never expect to see. It is as if to say ... "But are you? Really? You?" She, who? There may be "marveled with great marveles" for having seen his own people and his own nation (which at the time of writing Revelation no existing more)?     I copy and paste what I was telling the Watchtower of November 1, 2010, pages 27 to 29 ...   The Bible foretold the modern State of Israel? THE WORLD regarded with apprehension to the Middle East. missile attacks, clashes between armed militias, and terrorist bombings are a daily occurrence. In this explosive mixture the very real risk should be added that recourse to nuclear weapons. No wonder that in every place the people are worried. A similar atmosphere is breathed in relation to the Middle East 62 years ago, in May 1948. The British Mandate territory then called Palestine was ending, and war was imminent. The year before, the United Nations had authorized the creation, in a part of the occupied territories, of an independent Jewish state . The neighboring Arab nations had vowed to prevent at all costs. The Arab League warned: "The proposed line for the division will be nothing but a line of fire and blood." It was four in the afternoon of Friday 14 May 1948. It consumed the final hours of the British mandate. In the Tel Aviv Museum of respondents they were in 350, at the invitation secret for the much awaited announcement: the official declaration of the birth of the modern nation of Israel. Security levels were high, lest the numerous enemies of the state newly formed attempted to interrupt the event. David Ben Gurion, leader of the National Council of Israel, read the State Declaration of Independence of Israel, which said in part: "We, members of the People's Council, representatives of the Jewish community in Eretz Israel ... by virtue of our right natural and historical and General Assembly of the United Nations, we declare the founding of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel ". Fulfilled biblical prophecy? Some Evangelical Protestants believe that the birth of the modern state of Israel then go to fulfill a biblical prophecy. For example, in one of his works, Pastor John Hagee states: "This memorable event was recorded by the hand of the prophet Isaiah with the words: 'A nation will be born in a day'. (See Isaiah 66: 8 ). . . . It was the greatest moment in prophetic history of the twentieth century, the clearest proof, under the eyes of all, that the God of Israel was alive and well. " - Jerusalem Countdown. This statement is correct? Isaiah 66: 8 , perhaps foretelling the birth of the modern State of Israel? And May 14, 1948 was indeed "the greatest moment in prophetic history of the twentieth century"? If the modern State of Israel is still God's chosen nation, and if by means of it he fulfills Bible prophecy, the topic is certainly of great interest to those who study the Bible, wherever they are. The prophecy of Isaiah says: "Who has heard of a thing like this? Who has seen things like these? Will a land be brought forth with labor pains in one day? Or a nation be born at once? For Zion he has come into labor pains as she also brought forth her sons. " ( Isaiah 66: 8 ) The verse clearly foretells the birth of a nation that would have occurred suddenly, as in a single day. But who was supposed to give this birth? The next verse helps answer: " 'As for me, I will break and I will not give birth?' says Jehovah. 'Either I give birth and do I actually quit?' says your God. " Jehovah God shows beyond doubt that the extraordinary birth of the nation would work his. Modern Israel is a democracy that has never officially claimed to trust in the God of the Bible. In 1948 the Israelis might recognize Jehovah God as the sole supporter of their national entities? No. In the original draft of the Declaration of God's name was not even mentioned, and besides, even the word "God." About the final draft of the document, a book of Jewish history says: "Until one o'clock in the afternoon, when the National Council gathered, its members were unable to agree on the wording of the Declaration of Independence. . . . Observant Jews wanted it made reference to 'God of Israel'. The laity were opposed. Finding a compromise, Ben Gurion opted for the word 'Rock' instead of the word 'God'. " - Great Moments in Jewish History. The modern State of Israel is proud of its national entity on the basis of a UN resolution and what is called the natural and historic right of the Jewish people. But is it reasonable to assume that the God of the Bible accomplished the greatest miracle aimed to fulfill a prophecy in the twentieth century in favor of a people that refuses to give him honor. False religion has given honor to the birth of the nation of Israel as if it was "God's will." So we can say that the birth of this nation has created some "confusion"? Confusion in all who do not know the Bible. Hence the name, "Babylon", it would be appropriate for the modern nation of Israel.   Here are reflections of some records already seen explained in the book "Revelation its climax" (king).   "Come out of her, my people" (explanation from the book "King") Revelation 18: 4 says, "And I heard another voice from heaven saying, 'Come out of her, my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and if you do not want to receive part of her plagues.'" The book of "Revelation: its climax", page 265 paragraph 24 says that God's servants must separate from false religion if you do not want to receive part of her plagues. However we can reason on the meaning of "my people"? Everyone in the false religion, despite having the best intentions, can not be defined as "people of God." This fact is one of the things that the people of the world reproach us when they say "Only you believe to have the truth!". In fact, it becomes part of God's people only after understanding the basic Bible truths, having repented of the conduct of the past, having converted and then having dedicated, baptized. That's right? How can God call his people from the ranks of false religion? If Babylon the Great is the world empire of false religion we must necessarily assume that God calls those who will become his people. Those people who potentially could become his people but who are not yet. Scripture, however, it seems clear that, when it calls these people "out of Babylon", they are already His people (just as happened in ancient times, they probably had to be cleansed and disciplined but were left, all the time, his people). If Babylon the Great, however, is the modern nation of Israel, then there is not much to interpret. Even in the modern nation of Israel are our dear brothers. And 'it possible that God is saying, to the brothers in Israel, literally to flee away in the imminent destruction seen? This would mean that "the rest", as reported many times in the Scriptures, would literally (physically) a remnant! A remaining to save.   When in 70 CE the first Christians received the command to "flee to the mountains" in view of the destruction that would take place by means of the "disgusting thing" (i.e. at the time of the Roman Empire), they understood it as "separate from Judaism" or this was a natural consequence of the Master's teachings? They do not perhaps understood how to get out literally from the city ?   Writing Romans 9:27, where Paul quotes Isaiah, could have a literal fulfillment?   Jeremiah 25:10, 11 and Revelation 18:22, 23 are very similar to each other yet Jeremiah speaks of Israel and Revelation speaks of Babylon the Great.   In Revelation 18: 5-8 it says, "God has been mindful of his acts of injustice." Because God "has been mindful"? False religion has not always done evil in a 6000 story, without stopping for a moment from the time of Nimrod? It could not be because "Babylon" has not existed for many years, as a nation, but appears again after the "Lord's Day" by another name?   From the book "Insight", in "Babylon the Great," he said ... Features of ancient Babylon. The foundation of Babylon in the plains of Shinar coincided with the attempt to build the tower of Babel. (Ge 11: 2-9) The construction of the city and by the people tower was not motivated by the intention to exalt the name of God, but by the desire to 'make a celebrated name'. The ziggurat discoveries not only in the ruins of ancient Babylon but throughout Mesopotamia seem to confirm the essentially religious nature of the original tower, whatever its form or its style. The resolute action of Jehovah God to overthrow the temple construction is a clear condemnation of his false religious origin. While the Hebrew name of the city, Babel, means "confusion", the Sumerian name ( Ka-ra-dingir ) and Akkadian (Bab-ilu ) both mean "God's door." So the people left in the city they altered the name to avoid the original meaning of condemnation, but the new form also reveals the religious nature of the city.   What was also reported recently in the slave publications, the creation of the modern nation of Israel and the return of the Jews at home was not the work of God and, much more serious, was not made to give glory to God. on the contrary, all this was done to "the desire to become a famous name." The Jewish religion also still believed to be the "Gate of God" but it is a mystification of reality. It is not a lawful wife or queen but, with its political and commercial alliances, has proven to be a sordid prostitute (biblically speaking).   In Revelation 16: 16-21 we are now at Armageddon, the great city is divided into three parts, nations fall and Babylon, "was remembered." So Babylon is related with the fall of other nations as if it were a special nation "," something to remember, but still a nation. Which, among all nations of the earth , it might be considered "special" from Jehovah God?   The golden cup full of "disgusting things" hand-held by the great harlot might remember the utensils of God's temple? - Compare Daniel 5: 1-4   In 2 Kings 17: 24-30 some Babylonians become "Israelites" settling in Samaria but they are Babylonian idolaters and God makes them devoured by lions. This does not seem a parallel with what the Bible says of Babylon the Great? Also in the book "Insight" to "Samaritan - The Samaritan religion," says ...   The Samaritan religion.The development of the Samaritan religion was due to several factors, not least the result of Jeroboam's efforts to expel the ten tribes by the adoration of Jehovah centralized in Jerusalem. In about 250 years after the nation split into two kingdoms, the priests the Levites ordained of God were replaced by a priesthood of human origin which, in turn, led the kingdom of Israel to practice a degrading form of idolatry. (1 Kings 12: 28-33; 2 Kings 17: 7-17; 2Ch 11: 13-15; 13: 8, 9) Then there was the fall of the northern kingdom. The pagan immigrants came from Babylon, Cuthah, Avva, Hamath and Sepharvaim worshiped many gods: Sukkot-Benot, Nergal, Ashima, Nibaz, Tartak, Adrammelech and Anammelec. Although they learned something about Jehovah by teaching a priest of the Jeroboam priesthood, however, as Samaria had done with the golden calves, so they, generation after generation, continued to worship their false gods. (2 Kings 17: 24-41) Nearly a century after the fall of Samaria, all attempts to Josiah to eliminate the idolatrous worship of those northern communities had no more lasting effect of similar reforms he did both in the southern kingdom of Judah. - 2 Kings 23: 4-20; 2Ch 34: 6, 7. In 537 BCE, a remnant of the twelve tribes returned from Babylonian exile prepared to rebuild Jehovah's temple in Jerusalem. (Ezra 1: 3; 2: 1, 70) It was then that the "Samaritans", which were already in the country when they arrived the Israelites and that were described as "adversaries of Judah and Benjamin," they turned to Zerubbabel and to elders, saying, "Let us build with you; because, just like you, we seek your God and we sacrifice since the days of Esar-haddon king of Assyria, who put us here. " (Ezra 4: 1, 2) This alleged devotion to Jehovah, however, showed only formal; In fact, when Zerubbabel declined the offer, the Samaritans did everything they could to prevent the construction of the temple. Failed all their concerted attempts to harass and intimidate the Israelites, Persian emperor did send a letter containing false allegations, and managed to get a government decree that made suspend construction for several years. - Ezra 4: 3-24. In the mid-fifth century BCE, when Nehemiah began repairing Jerusalem's walls, Sanballat (governor of Samaria, according to a papyrus from Elephantine) made several unsuccessful but vigorous attempts to stop the work. (Ne 2:19, 20; 4: 1-12; 6: 1-15) Later, after a prolonged absence, Nehemiah returned to Jerusalem and found the grandson of High Priest Eliashib had married the daughter of Sanballat. Immediately Nehemiah 'chased him away'. - Ne 13: 6, 7, 28.   "The Levitical priests ordained by God were replaced by priests of human origin" : this is not what happened to Israel after God has abandoned the faithless nation in 70 CE? The pagan immigrants came from Babylon become "Israelites" by force (ie, not by God), also learning something about the religion of the Jews, and mingling with them through intermarriage but they basically have Babylonians. It can be assumed that God takes this modern nation for what it really is and that is a modern Babylon? In 537 BCE, the "enemies of Judah and Benjamin," they turned to Zorobabel, and the elders, saying, "Let us build with you; because, just like you, we seek your God and we sacrifice since the days of Esar-haddon king of Assyria, who put us here. " So Babylon in the territory of the true Israel has never disappeared and has never ceased to claim to serve God.   In the book "Revelation" on page 207, paragraph 5, the explanation fits very well to the modern nation of Israel. Even now the Jews believe they are the chosen race, the people of God, and give to God their commercial and military victories. They believe that God has given them authority over all the nations of the world but they, in the words of the Lord, have another father. - Matthew 4: 8-10 - John 8: 43-47 They still say "sit queen, and am no widow, and shall see no mourning."   Question one. According to the explanation of the book "Revelation: its climax" is appropriate that the great whore sit on the wild beast scarlet because, false religion, has always had the power over the kings of the earth reaching even to name them and to oust them. We know that the League or the League of Nations has as its representatives even "old nations" mentioned in the Bible as Roma, Medo-Persia, and others but would not be more logical to see the "great whore" ride the first wild beast, and that is the one that ascends from sea, since false religion has existed since Nimrod times? Instead the great harlot sits on the beast that " was, but is not, and is about to ascend from the abyss, and it will go into destruction " - Revelation 17: 8a What rode the world empire of false religion when the beast not had?   Question two. As has been pointed out, in the Bible Israel is compared to a wife, and Jehovah's husbandly owner. When it seemed to be unfaithful, in alliance with other nations and mixing with false worship, Israel became "infidel" and even "prostitute." Christendom claims to serve God, but in reality, is a prostitute with the nations and in all false doctrine of pagan origin. However if Babylon the Great is the world empire of false religion (and therefore also includes religions such as Buddhism, Shintoism, Hinduism, tribal religions etc), because it is considered as a whole, a prostitute? Jehovah has never been identified as the "husbandly owner" of nations like Ammon, Moab, Egypt or other. So if we apply the concept of prostitution only in a spiritual-religious sense, one would think that this infamous prostitute is only Christianity . Want you know more? Please, visit https://attenzioneallaprofezia.blogspot.it/

I did not follow the conversation from the beginning so I'm not sure of the purpose of this discussion.
From personal experience I know that this date is often mentioned to corroborate or invalidate an alleged calculation of the "seven times" of Nebuchadnezzar's dream. If this is the final purpose of this discussion, then I believe that there are much more important questions.
If the purpose of this discussion is a "historical curiosity", then it is interesting.
If I were a historian, then it would be very important to understand how and where to place the events; study the evidence in favor and the contrary evidence.
As for our beliefs, however, I believe that a Christian should ask himself a more profound and important question.
The Bible book of Daniel, when it spoke of the seven times, refers to the establishment of God's Kingdom?
The question is very simple: what is the use of making a thousand discussions on a historical date if the object of the question is another?
If Daniel chapter 4 is not talking about the establishment of the Kingdom of God but of something else, is it really important to find out an exact date for a wrong event?
Twenty years more or less really do a difference if the interpretation of final event is wrong?
Good reflections to everyone
 

Scholar JW
Correct. 607 BC would be the determined year. After the death of King Josiah. His son took over. Then King Necho ll replaced (Shallum) with Jehoiakim. However. There’s a good indication that happened in the latter part of the year 610 BC. Then Jehoiakim became the puppet king to Babylon in 609 BC. Scripture relates to what happened next. This is why that period ran concurrently without no accession year attached

Max Hatton wrote a treatise in 1965 or book. Most of what is quoted come from there. I donÂ’t doubt thatÂ’s where Raymond Franz and then Carl Olof Jonsson got their ideas from.

I will be honest in a debate whether any other party in a debate is honest or not. That is what I meant when I said it is not a two-way street, at least for me. Debates often end up highlighting the academic dishonesty or false foundations of another person's theory. Academic dishonesty can often be the result of giving too much weight to a certain interpretation and then using logical fallacies to bolster the false claims. So academic dishonesty is not always a "personal" dishonesty, but can come about through sloppiness in research, misuse of evidence, being fooled by someone else's mistakes, etc.
Thanks for admitting that.
This is pretty much true. A lot of people make claims that turn out to be untrue, even if they make perfect sense to a lot of people. I have heard people who believe the chronology of the "Great Week" mentioned below (from http://prophecycorner.theforeverfamily.com/chron.html )
Since it is thought that 6,000 years would go by before the sabbatical millennial Day of the Lord begins, some people have thought that the 6,000th year since Adam's creation would be about 2,000 A.D. I have heard it said that from Adam to Abraham was 2,000 years and from Abraham to Christ was 2,000 years. Like the "Oslo" schema, it's more of a "scheme" than a chronology, but some will fight for it as if it were the only true Bible chronology, and anything different is just a secular falsehood. In the same way, some will also fight to make Cyrus' Edict begin around 460 B.C.E. so that they can make the 70 weeks of years match with their supposedly more "obvious" interpretation of Daniel. There are a lot of claims about Bible chronology, just like several of the old Watchtower claims, that have necessarily been abandoned by now for obvious reasons.
That book contains many claims that are shamefully wrong. Note this one on the page you quoted:
It is because of making the mistake of dating the beginning of the seventy-year period for the desolation of Jerusalem and the land of Judah after King Jehoiakim reigned at Jerusalem but three years that the chronologers in Christendom throw their time schedule of history at least nineteen years out of order, shortening up the stream of time by that many years. They do this because of trying to harmonize the Bible records with the astronomical Canon of Claudius Ptolemy, an Alexandrian or Egyptian astronomer of the second century after Christ, but whose system of astronomy has long since been exploded. In this we do not go along with such chronologers. For a time, the WTS had relied on the king list matching Claudius Ptolemy's to get 539. People noticed the mistake right away. In fact, one letter came in to the Watch Tower the year before the book came out. They should have known better than to print this nonsense.
For example, Max Hatton wrote the Watch Tower Society on June 10, 1962. This letter also contained information about an even earlier letter sent to the Watch Tower Society on July 9, 1959. The 1962 letter says in part:
To date our arguments have been largely concerned with the 70 years mentioned by Jeremiah. I am confident that with the aid of the Societies [sic] publications and some private research I have and will have no real difficulties with this portion of the discussion. It seems that the next item for discussion will inevitably be whether the period of 70 years literal desolation can be accommodated by a Chronological arrangement for the period. As far as I have been able to ascertain the basis for the Chronology, popularly accepted, for the years 747 B.C., to the fall of Babylon in 539 B.C. and further on, is the Canon of Ptolemy. It therefore seems obvious that one cannot accept the record of the 70 year desolation and at the same time accept the Canon as being an accurate record. In rejecting the Canon completely, a problem seems to arise, because, as far as I am aware, the date for the destruction of Babylon in 539 B.C. per medium of the Chronological arrangement for which Ptolemy's Canon is the basis. . . . I would greatly appreciate your advice then, whether 539 B.C. can be accurately calculated by some other means entirely independent of the Canon, such as a continuous list of kings with their Accession years calculated by the length of their reign, based on some other evidence. (Either Bible or Secular.) I fully appreciate the advice in the Watchtower of 1st December, 1946 that an eclipse of the moon is not sufficient data by which to locate the year of a certain event, however the "Secretary of the Australian Institute of Archaeology" has advised me that "Ptolemy's Canon is based on a much wider range of astronomical data, the details of which are recorded in his Almagest. It is necessary to correlate the details he gives in his canon with dates he has calculated in other works. The sum result of this is that his canon appears to be accurate within all reasonable limits."  . . . Could I be advised please in what respects the Society considers the Canon to be in error and also reasonable grounds to substantiate such a claim? That is only a small part of the letter, without the original paragraph breaks from the letter. The Watchtower wrote back to Brother Hatton on June 28, 1962. That letter gave some of the best evidence ever that the Society simply did not understand the claims they were making or that, less likely one hopes, they were willing to be very dishonest. Brother Hatton's next response naturally contained more questions, and even more research, and the Society's next letter, told him that they didn't have time to stop for such a research project with the current preparation for the 1963 "Everlasting Good News" assembly coming out (at which the Babylon book would be released). The following exchange of letters shows that the Society was now on the defensive with nowhere to turn. The Babylon book only made the matters worse because the Society was obviously "digging in its heels" on things they had no right to claim. They asked him to give less attention to chronology. The Society told him that if he didn't agree he could still point persons to the place in the Society's publications where such explanations were given, even if he had mental reservations. By July 1965, the Society had disfellowshipped both Brother Hatton and his wife for apostasy. His wife had possibly never said anything but it was suspected that she supported her husband. 
 

This is correct. King Necho ll originally deposed one King and substituted him with another. Both were under the control of Egypt. 1 King, then Jehoiakim became a puppet King to Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar ll, 1 King. 1 Egyptian, 1 King Babylonian. The crossover was King Jehoiakim. That in effect makes it easier to explain secular chronology with their own timeline.

@Anna -  No. The date 539 BCE is derived from the very same historical sources as 587 BCE.
There is the Babylonian Chronicle that indicates Babylon fell in Nabonidus' 17th year.
How can we pin a BCE date to Nabonidus' 17th year? Babylonian astronomical tablets, that's how - by using the ancient sky clock. The astronomical record on VAT 4956 gives an anchor point for Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year being none other than 568-7 BCE. There are other astronomical anchor points too - one of which is dated to Cambyses' 7th year (522-1 BCE). The method is, once we find out how many years kings ruled (evidenced from other historical data), to count forwards or backwards accordingly.
And so, we arrive at 539 BCE for Babylon's conquest and 587 BCE for the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar when he destroyed Jerusalem (Jer. 52:29).
 

In fact, both dates conform to the exact same set of sources. They are both part of the same NB chronology which is overwhelmingly supported by the evidence from all the archaeological and astronomical sources. You could use 8 sources and come up with both 539 and 587 as correct, and you use only four of those sources and still come up with both dates as correct. You could also dismiss those 4 you just used, and use the other 4 and still see that both dates are correct. You simply cannot accept the data for 539 without also accepting the data for 587.

You're referring to Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim? Jehoahaz was appointed by his own people. Pharaoh Necho hauled off Jehoahaz to Egypt and appointed Jehoiakim in Jehoahaz's stead (2 Kings 23:30-35).
Your chart is confusing. Honestly, the plentiful information supports only one theory, and the data on VAT 4956 belongs only to 568/7 BCE.

Thank you @JW Insider @Ann O'Maly and @scholar JW. I am processing all the information, and made lots of notes. Just haven't had time to put it all together yet.
I have one question in the meantime, why is it that WT has no trouble accepting the 539 date but will not accept the 587 date? Besides the obvious reason, are both dates based on completely different historical sources? Pardon the ignorance, I just haven't got that far in my research yet.
 

Scholar JW
This is an honest assessment for the year 609BC. 2 Kings were appointed within a 3 month period. 1 by Egypt, 1 by Babylon.
In my opinion, certain people are having a hard time grappling with secular chronology, and how the Watchtower is interpreting it. Honestly, there is enough information to support both theories. The easier chronology to explain would be, secular chronology with the date 609BC.

For many years now, the Watchtower has actually been consistent in acknowledging that Ptolemy's canon "may" be accurate, but that we might not be able to rely on it for everything. Almost every reference to Ptolemy, especially in the Insight book, has a somewhat negative side added to it:
*** it-1 p. 456 Chronology ***
Finally, as in the case of Ptolemy, even though the astronomical information (as now interpreted and understood) on the texts discovered is basically accurate, this does not prove . . .
*** it-1 p. 456 Chronology ***
These astronomical diaries contain references to the reigns of certain kings and appear to coincide with the figures given in Ptolemy’s canon. While to some this might seem like incontrovertible evidence, there are factors greatly reducing its strength.
Following up on the point I was making about 539 BCE, 607 BCE, 29 CE, etc, all being secular dates, this is admitted under that same topic heading in the Insight Book:
*** it-1 p. 458 Chronology ***
To make the count in terms of modern calendar dating, we must use some fixed point or pivotal date with which to commence, that is, a date in history that has sound basis for acceptance and that corresponds with a particular event recorded in the Bible. From this date as a pivotal point we can figure backward or forward and assign calendar dates to many of the events referred to in the Bible.
One such date, harmonizing with both Biblical and secular history, is the year 29 C.E., the early months of which were in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar, who was named emperor by the Roman Senate on September 15, 14 C.E. (Gregorian calendar). It was in the year 29 C.E. that John the Baptizer began his preaching and also when, perhaps about six months later, he baptized Jesus.—Lu 3:1-3, 21, 23; 1:36.
Another date that can be used as a pivotal point is the year 539 B.C.E., supported by various historical sources as the year for the overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus the Persian. (Secular sources for Cyrus’ reign include Diodorus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Ptolemy, as well as the Babylonian tablets.)
Of course, someone could read that, especially the last paragraph, and think that 539 BCE for the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus is somehow more supported by various historical sources than is 587 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem.  In fact, 587 BCE for Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year is part of the same Neo-Babylonian chronological system, supported by the same sets (and types) of sources. If the first year of the conquest of Cyrus is a pivotal date, then so is Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year -- for the same reasons.
The quote that Eoin included was:
*** it-1 p. 454 Chronology ***
The date of 539 B.C.E. for the fall of Babylon can be arrived at not only by Ptolemy’s canon but by other sources as well.
This is very accurate, of course, but It would have been exactly as accurate for the Insight book to have said this:
The date of 587 B.C.E. for the fall of Jerusalem can be arrived at not only by Ptolemy’s canon but by other sources as well.
As it turns out, in fact, there are additional sources that add to the evidence for Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year (587 BCE), so that the evidence for 587 BCE could even be said to be a little better than the evidence for 539 BCE, but it doesn't matter because both are equally accurate. Of course, the only reason we focus only on 539 BCE is because we reject 587 BCE.
This argument is equally true in the opposite direction. Both 587 BCE and 539 BCE are also supported by "astronomical diaries" which evidently contain sometimes daily observations of priests or astronomers of the royal court. A specific diary that supports 587 BCE has sometimes been criticized by the WTS for 4 major weaknesses. Without even mentioning the details of those weaknesses, it turns out that all 4 of them are the exact same weaknesses for the diary that supports 539 BCE.
For anyone who might not be aware, these astronomical diaries contain information that can look something like the following:
10th Year of King "So-and-So"
On the night of April 13, Saturn passed within 3 fingers of the moon as it disappeared at the horizon On the night of April 15, the upper star of the head of the Scorpion passed within 2 fingers of the moon. On the morning of April 16, this is the last day this month when the moon set before sunrise. The Euphrates River was at a height of 4 today. On the evening of April 19, there was a lunar eclipse. In 10 degrees of the night it made an eclipse of 4 fingers, 2 fingers remained to totality, it was obscured on the northeast side when it began. It usually turns out that various abbreviations had developed for many of the astronomical phrases. But the main point is that sometimes there was not enough information for a specific day, and sometimes there was plenty of information, but when all of the recorded data was put together, it could often be matched to a certain year where such phenomena would not be repeated again for a thousand years.
What's more important is that all these diaries that contain enough information not only fit the time period that is already known about the various kings identified, they also match the exact year already identified from other sources. Also, they fit each other. There are sometimes two known diaries for the same king, covering separated years. It's as if the example above called: "10th Year of King So-and-So" was identified as 405 BCE and then another diary was found for the same king and it was called "15th Year of King So-and-So" and its astronomical phenomena exactly matched 400 BCE.
Unfortunately there aren't so many of these detailed diaries from the time of Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus, but the ones we do have can still be matched to their year both from the astronomical data and what we already know about their chronology from other sources.
Also, even if we could completely discredit Ptolemy's canon, which we can't, we don't need it anyway for either the 539 BCE date or the 587 BCE date. We get good evidence for both those dates, even without Ptolemy. There is no such evidence from any source that supports 607 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem.
 
 

Yes, that is part of it, although this part directly accepts the evidence Ptolemy presents as inline with "other sources as well" which is being used here as accurate support.  If you go to pages 455-458 and read through from "Ptolemy's Canon" through to "from human creation to the present" to you will see collectively that the WTS supports Ptolemy's Canon in its use of supporting the dates and accuracy. Here is just a sample:
"But even though Ptolemy may have calculated accurately or recorded the dates of certain eclipses in the past (a modern astronomer found three fifths of Ptolemy's dates correct),"
"These astronomical diaries contain references to the reigns of certain kings and appear to coincide with the figures given in Ptolemy's canon."
"Finally, as in the case of Ptolemy, even though the astronomical information ( as now interpreted and understood ) on the texts discovered is basically accurate,"
"Another date that can be used as a pivotal point is the year 539 B.c.E. , supported by various historical sources as the year for the overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus the Persian. ( Secular sources for Cyrus' reign include Diodorus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Ptolemy, as well as the Babylonian tablets.)"

Not only this, but the fact that the WTS only accepts secular chronology when it suits them and their teaching. In one publication they support the use of the Canon of Ptolemy ( Insight vol 1, page 454, under Persian Chronology) in finding the date 539 B.C. as well as being accurate (Insight vol 1, page 455). Now in the Oct 1 Watchtower under the article When was ancient Jerusalem destroyed? - Part one they discredit the Canon with this statement:
"In general, Ptolemy’s canon is regarded as accurate. But in view of its omissions, should it really be used to provide a definite historical chronology?" (http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2011736).
We just saw in the Insight book that it IS used as an accurate source for chronology, according to the WTS. So which is it? You can't have it both ways. This is completely dishonest. 
I look forward to other information that hopefully will come out of this discussion and my learning more about what others feel. This topic is the foundation of the organization itself as it directly relates to 1914/1919, so it should be interesting. 

[Part One - Just a little more background]
The Bible contains no dates, at least not anything like the dates we use today. There is no such thing as a date like 539 BC, or 607 BCE, or 29 CE, or AD 33, or 70 CE, or 1914. The only types of dates that the Bible uses are expressions like:
(Genesis 5:21-27) 21 Eʹnoch lived for 65 years and then became father to Me·thuʹse·lah. 22 After becoming father to Me·thuʹse·lah, Eʹnoch continued to walk with the true God for 300 years. And he became father to sons and daughters. 23 So all the days of Eʹnoch amounted to 365 years. 24 Eʹnoch kept walking with the true God. Then he was no more, for God took him. 25 Me·thuʹse·lah lived for 187 years and then became father to Laʹmech. 26 After becoming father to Laʹmech, Me·thuʹse·lah lived for 782 years. And he became father to sons and daughters. 27 So all the days of Me·thuʹse·lah amounted to 969 years, and then he died.
(1 Kings 15:25-34) 25 Naʹdab the son of Jer·o·boʹam became king over Israel in the second year of King Aʹsa of Judah, and he reigned over Israel for two years. 26 He kept doing what was bad in the eyes of Jehovah . . .  . . . 33  In the third year of King Aʹsa of Judah, Baʹa·sha the son of A·hiʹjah became king in Tirʹzah over all Israel and reigned for 24 years. 34  But he kept doing what was bad in the eyes of Jehovah, and he walked in the way of Jer·o·boʹam and in his sin that he caused Israel to commit.
A portion of the Bible therefore includes a chronology system, that appears to track the number of years from Adam to Noah (and the Flood). Another portion appears to track the number of years from Noah (through Shem) to Abraham. Other sections track the time from Abraham to the Exodus. Then it gets a bit murky. Even so we know we are not too many years off between the Exodus and the Judges and then to King Saul and David. There is a also a lot of information to help track the time from David through the last Judean King Zedekiah. But even these "synchronisms" between the lines of kings leaves several open questions, which can be interpreted in various ways. Of course, not long after Zedekiah and the return of the Jews from Babylon to Judea & Israel, it gets murky again. And we have no chronology to track the time from, say, Zedekiah until Jesus is born.
In other words, you could know that Methuselah was born a certain number of years after Adam was created, or even that Shem or Abraham was born a certain number of years after Adam was created. but you would still have no idea when Adam was created, or what year the Flood arrived. We also have those murky or incomplete portions. That means that we know, for example, that Jereboam's son Nadab became king over Israel in the second year of King Asa of Judah, but we don't know how long that was after Adam or Noah or Abraham.
Still, the main point is that even if we did have a perfectly linked chronology from Adam through Zedekiah, such as the one seen in Genesis 5 or 1 Kings 15, above, we would still have no way to tell how long ago that time period started or ended. We would not be able to identify specific years, only relative years.
The only way we can start attaching specific years, like 4 BCE, or 70 CE, or 539 BCE to any of these "relative dates" is if we decide that we will accept non-Biblical dates, otherwise known as secular dates.
4 BCE is not a Biblical date, it's a secular date. 33 CE is not a Biblical date, it's a secular date. 607 BCE is not a Biblical date, it's a secular date. 587 BCE is not a Biblical date, it's a secular date 539 BCE is not a Biblical date, it's a secular date. The reason that is important is because the question about whether Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE or 587/6 BCE is often framed as if one of those dates is Biblical and the other is secular. They are both secular! Everyone in the world, incluing historians, scientists, archaeologists, Bible scholars, the Watch Tower Society and the Governing Body must rely completely on secular dates to figure out how many years ago a Biblical event might have happened. 
So what do we do?
We need to pick a secular date that we think we can trust and begin trying to link Biblical events to it.  Then we see if we can't create a chain of linked events backwards and forward from there. In fact, we need to pick several secular dates because the Bible's relative chronology does not really link the time around Adam, Noah and Abraham all the way through the time of the Judges and Kings. And after the Temple is rebuilt after the time of Ezra, the timeline stops again, so we'd need to find another secular date to see if we can match the time of Jesus birth, baptism, death, and any other events in the Christian Greek Scriptures.
We need to find some secular dates that we can trust! This is exactly where 539 BCE becomes so interesting. That's the time when Cyrus conquers Babylon, right? Yes, and it seems to be a perfectly good secular date for that event. If we accept it, we also get a pretty good idea when Jerusalem was destroyed. In fact, by accepting 539 BCE we ARE accepting the same secular chronology that pinpoints the destruction of Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year.
(2 Kings 25:8, 9) 8 In the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, that is, in the 19th year of King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar the king of Babylon, Neb·uʹzar·adʹan the chief of the guard, the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. 9 He burned down the house of Jehovah, the king’s house, and all the houses of Jerusalem; he also burned down the house of every prominent man.
This is the whole problem! We like 539 BCE, as the final year of a Babylonian king, but don't want Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year to be 587 BCE. We want his 19th year to be 607 BCE, instead. But we have a lot of trouble taking one without the other. In fact, if we say that Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year must be 607 BCE, then that's the same thing as saying that Cyrus conquered Babylon in 559 BCE instead of 539 BCE.
It makes no sense to say one is Biblical and one is secular. They are both secular and if you say you trust that 539 BCE is correct, then that's also the same as saying you accept that 587/6 BCE, NOT 607 BCE, is the destruction of Jerusalem. Therefore the WTS has always been looking for a way to try to accept one part of the secular chronology without accepting another part of the same chronology.  Those attempts have never worked out, but this is what we'll need to discuss next.
 
 

(Introductory Comments)
Although the Watchtower article says that we should take an interest, some JWs believe that questioning the 607 date is tantamount to apostasy. We shouldn't question the Governing Body or the "faithful and discreet slave." If we question the 607 date we are, perhaps, showing too much pride in our own understanding.
These are legitimate concerns for all of us. And it's one of the reasons that very few of us even understand the reason that such a question might come up in the first place. A discussion was already begun on the subject, but it quickly devolved into a discussion that showed more concern about the questioner(s) rather than the evidence itself. I take my own share of the blame for that problem. That's why, I'm restarting the question again, but this time we'll keep the focus only on evaluating the evidence, both Biblical and archaeological. I hope more people join in, and everyone is welcome, of course, but this time I think we can keep it moderated so that only comments about the evidence remain in the discussion. 

Insider JW
You have posted in three parts so I will respond accordingly:
A debate has two sides with opposing points of view, honesty is required by both parties so I call this a two-way street.
There is no Gap in the NB Period at this stage of our present knowledge but there is a difference of 19 years. when one compares WT Chronology with NB Chronology. The much earlier  Babylon the Great Has Fallen-God's Kingdom Rules , 1963, p. 138. Rol Furuli in recent times has published extensively on the Chronologies of the Ancient World and his thesis is that the Babylonian Empire should be expanded some 20 Years. In view of these viewpoints and because the NB Period and its appended Chronology omits any mention of the Jeremiah's 70 years a Prophett who was contemporaneous with the NB  Period, a eyewitness 'to boot', I have classified the difference between the two systems as the 'Babylonian Gap'. The 'missing 20 years' I propose could properly be inserted at either two points: Neb's 18th year or his 37 th years and that will harmonize the two dating systems and all is well!!
Your claim that the methodology used by WT in connection with 537 BCE for the Return of the Exiles is 'fuzzy' is simply nonsense. Our explanation of all of the relevant data and its sources is well discussed in our publications and 537 BCE is well established. You accuse WT of being fuzzy with dates and cite 537 BCE as an example of this but I must remind you that Historians and Scholars are very fuzzy about this event for you cannot find a specific date for the event in the scholarly literature for this is a fact plain and simple. You quibble over the use of language or terms used in the WT publications which express uncertainty or a lack of finality but history is imperfect and there is no room for dogmatism in either history or chronology. Where matters are uncertain then the reader is advised but this not mean that a Chronology in harmony with certain facts cannot be constructed. The question you should be asking yourself is: 'what then is the precise date for the Return of the Jews?' 
You seem to 'hung up' on the Zero Year problem which is often raised by apostates but not by serious scholars. The WT has simply explained the anomaly and back then some chronologists possible misunderstood the difference between the Astronomical Year and the Years in the Gregorian Calendar and perhaps many reference works at that time made a similar error but once the error was noted then an adjustment was made fortunately or providentially the integrity of the 1914 CE date was preserved as the beginning of the Gentile Times. End of Part One.
scholar JW

You were claiming that our (WTS) theory was impossible when you tried to add another 20 years to the Neo-Babylonian timeline at a point during Nebuchadnezzar's reign. You suggested Zedekiah's 11th year. You create a contradiction for yourself precisely because the Bible synchronizes the reigns of the last kings of Judah in a way that fits Ptolemy's Canon, and the Babylonian Chronicles and the combined evidence from thousands of clay tablets, along with the astronomical diaries.
Actually it is your problem if you are the one interpreting an idea in a way that contradicts all the evidence. Especially since you already admitted that many lines of evidence and thousands of tablets already represent the NB chronology. It's the same as if you wanted to make World War 1 last for parts of 8 years instead of parts of 5 years. If you say that there are three years of history about WW1 missing, then you would have to be the one to figure out where these new years should be inserted.
There is nothing for me to solve here. I see that all the years are already accounted for, and that they already fit the Bible evidence very well. I am happy that the Bible account is corroborated by the historical accounts and evidence from archaeology.
I never mentioned Jehoiakim. I only referred to Jehoiachin. (Also called Jeconiah) It's easy to confuse them.
I looked up several of your past discussions here and elsewhere. I have seen from these past discussions that you typically don't try to solve any of the chronological problems related to this matter. I have noticed a common pattern of trying to imply that it is the other person who has the problem to solve. You even do that in this very post I am responding to. Apparently, you also have made use of a tactic of abandoning a problem when it is clear that you have failed to address it, and then disappearing and coming back at some later point and claiming that you previously solved the problem or "won the argument" that you had abandoned. You seem to give the impression that everything must start all over "from scratch" even after the evidence against your position was already made clear in your last attempt.   
But evidently the most common tactic, and the one I am trying to understand in this current thread, too, is this tendency to offer completely illogical nonsense as if it is relevant to the questions and claims being made. There appears to be a lot of bluster and obfuscation and I can't always tell if it's on purpose. If it is, I don't know who you would be trying to bluster here.
But if you were truly looking for a simple and clear question, in a presentation of facts without references, then I could oblige that, too. But first I'd like to ask if you would address any of the very simple questions that have already been brought up.
One, for example, was:
What is the year you get for the beginning of the 70 years of Babylonian domination assuming you agree with the Watch Tower Society's assessment about these 70 years that ended in 539 B.C.E.? (See the previous post for the references to Jeremiah 25:8-27 in chapter 19 of Isaiah's Prophecy.) If you still insist that this date is "nonsense," as you called it, then please explain why you think the Society's idea here is nonsense, and why it's still on JW.ORG?

Have you written the Watchtower Society to tell them that this claim is "nonsense"?
*** ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 par. 21 Jehovah Profanes the Pride of Tyre ***
True to the prophecy, for the duration of “one king”—the Babylonian Empire—the island-city of Tyre will not be an important financial power. Jehovah, through Jeremiah, includes Tyre among the nations that will be singled out to drink the wine of His rage. He says: “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. If you don't have the Watchtower Library CD/DVD installed just click the link to jw.org here: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102000039 and scroll down to paragraph 21 (page 256) to see the same point.
So, are you saying you do not agree with the assessment of the Watchtower Society that the 70 years of Babylonia's greatest domination ends in 539 B.C.E.?  If Babylon's 70 years of domination ended in 539, then when did it begin? I get 539+70=609.
 Unless you can offer a different answer, I'll have to assume that you get the same thing. So why do you call this claim "nonsense"? Usually, you appear to be defending what's on JW.ORG.
Yes. I see that JW.ORG also does something just like what you say Carl Jonsson did. Do you think that JW.ORG got this idea from Carl Jonsson? Jonsson wrote about 15 years before the "Isaiah's Prophecy" book was written in 2000?
You seem confused about the reason that there is any supposed "conflict" over whether Jerusalem fell in 586 or 587. The reason is explained on JW.ORG and it has absolutely nothing to do with different chronologies for the divided monarchy. The Bible lists both the 18th and 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar for what appears to be the same Jerusalem event. It can simply be a matter of whether the Bible is including Nebuchadnezzar's accession year when referring to the Jerusalem event.
*** it-2 p. 481 Nebuchadnezzar ***
on Tammuz (June-July) 9 in the 11th year of Zedekiah’s reign (Nebuchadnezzar’s 19th year if counting from his accession year or his 18th regnal year), a breach was made in Jerusalem’s wall. The scriptures quoted are as follows:
(Jeremiah 52:29) In the 18th year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, 832 people were taken from Jerusalem. (2 Kings 25:8, 9) In the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, that is, in the 19th year of King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar the king of Babylon, Neb·uʹzar·adʹan the chief of the guard, the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. 9 He burned down the house of Jehovah, the king’s house, and all the houses of Jerusalem; . . .
I know you already knew this from a previous conversation.