The discrepancy in Daniel and Josephus, part and parcel of the Society's arguments, is easily explained.
Berossus vs. Josephus: Later writers quote Berossus as saying that after
the battle of Carchemish Nebuchadnezzar extended Babylonian influence into all
Syria-Palestine and, when returning to Babylon (in his accession year, 605 BCE),
he took Jewish captives into exile, confirming that the 70 year period, as a
period of servitude to Babylon, would begin in 605 BCE. That would mean that
the 70-year period would expire in 535 BCE. Berossus also insists that
Nebuchadnezzar took Jewish captives in his accession year. No cuneiform
documents support this. Yet, the book of Daniel (1:1-3) mentions a minor
deportation in the third year of Jehoiakim, which would correspond to the first
year of Nebuchadnezzar (cf. Jer.
25:1; 46:2).
As a minor deportation, it is not surprising that it does not feature on the
list of Jeremiah 52:28-30.
The Jewish historian Josephus respected Berossus. However, he states that in the year of the battle of Carchemish Nebuchadnezzar would conquer all of Syria-Palestine “excepting Judea,” thus contradicting Berossus and conflicting with the claim that 70 years of Jewish servitude began in Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year.—Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews X, vi, 1 [10.86]. Furthermore, Josephus elsewhere describes the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians and then says that “all Judea and Jerusalem, and the temple, continued to be a desert for seventy years” (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews X, ix, 7 [10.184]). He pointedly states that “our city was desolate during the interval of seventy years, until the days of Cyrus” (Josephus, Against Apion I, 19 [1.132]). Here he shares the misconception of a later editor and/or redactor of the book of Daniel, “fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years” (cf. Dan. 9:2).[1] The same goes for the second-century (CE) writer Theophilus of Antioch who believed the 70 years would commence with the destruction of the temple after Zedekiah had reigned 11 years. As seen, Jeremiah applied the seventy years to the Judahites’ Babylonian servitude, and not to the desolation of the land.
[1] Devastations vs. reproach. In the OG we have ὀνειδισμός, meaning “reproach” (singular). See NETS. This is viewed as an error in the transmission: Jer. 25:9 καὶ εἰς ὀνειδισμόν and (I turn them) into a disgrace ולחרפות is read for MT ולחרבת and (I will turn them) into desolations. However, as seen, Dan. 9:2 is not drawn from Jer. 29:10, but Jer. 25:9-12. Here it could mean “reproach, disgrace, insult” (cf. Jer. 18:16; 19:8; Ezek. 5:13, 14). Specifically Jer. 25:9וְלִשְׁרֵקָ֔ה וּלְחָרְב֖וֹת עוֹלָֽם , “and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite.” LXX καὶ εἰς ὀνειδισμόν, ולחֶרְפַּת. See BHS footnote. KBLex, in accordance with the textcritical note suggests an emendation to לְחֶרְפַּת (“as a disgrace”). See J. Lust, E. Eynikel & K. Hauspie (2003). A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint: Revised Edition. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: Stuttgart. According to secular chronology, Jerusalem did not lie desolate for seventy years, but her reproach and humiliation could have started with Jehoiakim’s three year servitude, completing Jeremiah’s seventy year cycle (2 Kings 24:1, 2; cf. Is. 25:9, 11).