The honest thing to do would have been to move 1914 forward one year to 1915 (is that right?) but that would have spoiled the coincidence of World War One beginning on their favoured date. Does scholar have an answer for that one?
Slim I thought they did do that originally? Was it Russell? Someone had the date as 1915...then it was moved to 1914 because of the war?
If they moved the date to 607 I'm sure they know it's utter rubbish. If they initially believed Jerusalem fell in 606, well...it fell in 606. The logical thing to do when you find out about the zero is to move the prophetic year to 1915. Surely that's the more flexible date?!
Talking of prophetic dates, David Aspinall's video is very interesting here.
https://youtu.be/_jdrBEgTLp4