The argument that this was written in 605bce does not detract in anyway that the 70 years apply to the Babylonian rule, rather than the Jewish exile.

If the 70 years had already begun, it is still a prophecy that 'these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.".

Sari, I fail to see the reasoning of your argument that this is not a prophecy because the seventy years had already begun.

You then follow by quoting Jeremiah 27:6. Interestingly you fail to mention its chapter 27, yet your argument seems to imply that its a continous line from ch 25. Lets look at the context of this scripture. v1, "In the beginning of the kingdom of Jehoiakim....".

Notice that no actual year is stated. Jeremiah ch 27 does not imply that, in your words,"the 70 years of serving Babylon must begin during the rule of Nebuchadnezzar." Jeremiah 25 clearly states that the nations will "serve the King of Babylon".

If you're going to use these scriptures as a counter argument then at least first have the decency to say where a scripture comes from, rather than linking two together and suggesting it's all one continous passage. Yet another fine example of JW's making one scripture fit into another, to achieve their own result.

Paul