Hey Scholar, try this one on for size:
Fact: Your 537-date (correct or not, we will leave that side for a second, although I know also this date is disputable, as Jeffro has showned), which is crucial to your "chronology" is derived from secular chronology in the following way:
1) Nebuchadnezzars 37th year was fixed by an astronomical tablet to have been in 568/567. The Bible (!!!) says that Nebuchadnezzar ruled for 43 years. Correct? This means that Nebuchadnezzar started his reign in 605 BC, whether you like that or not. Now, you can of course try to argue against that, by claiming that the astronomical tablets are wrong/tampered with/incomplete or whatever, but in that case, you won`t get to 539 and 537. This is because it is secular chronology that gets you from Nebuchadnezzars reign (which ended in 562) to 539, as secular chronology sets the reigns of the kings:
Amel-Marduk 562-560 BC
Nergal-Sharezer 560-556 BC
Labashi-Marduk 556 BC
Nabonidus 556-539 BC
...landing us nicely in 539 BC. Now, the question is: Which of the lengths of the kings of these reigns is it you want to change? Changing either one of them takes you away from 539, not closer to it! So no, you can`t change any of the reigns of the kings after Nebuchadnezzar, at least not without also changing Nebuchadnezzars reign (which is what the WTS wants to do, but they don`t realise that they then have to change the entire chronology that got them to 539 and 537 in the first place). You can of course claim that the astronomical tablet that set the date of Nebuchadnezzars 37th year to be in 568/67 to be 20 years off! Move Nebuchadnezzars reign 20 years back in time. By doing that, you have (the infamous) 20 missing years, the 20 years of a hypothetical king noone has heard of, or some terrible errors in the length of reigns of the kings following Nebuchadnezzar. Now, this would be pretty miracolous in the first place: That the entire academic community would both have missed an entire king, or the length of reigns of one or several kings, and misplaced Nebuchadnezzars reign by 20 years. You can of course claim that this is the case (even though it isn`t), but guess what: Then your "pivotal date" of 539 and 537 are just guessing! You will no longer have any secular backing for your theories! You cannot use the same chronology to both establish AND dismiss a date! Or in other words: You can`t use one chronology to establish a date, and then dismiss that entire chronology because you want to establish another date (within the same timespan) that is in conflict with the (first) chronology! WTF!? Are you RETARDED!?!?! Don`t you see that? What the hell is wrong with you? Even a 12-yearold should be able to see that!