See other Religion Articles
Title: God's Signature of Authenticity
Source:
Bible, various authors, and archeological artifacts
URL Source: http://star.wind.mystarband.net/bib/daniel_69_weeks_proof.html
Published: Jul 15, 2005
Author: Starwind
Post Date: 2005-07-15 20:16:26 by Starwind
Ping List: *Bereans* Subscribe to *Bereans*
Keywords: Authenticity, Signature, Gods
Views: 323
Comments: 15
"It is very difficult to prophesy, especially about the future." - Chinese proverb This paper presents a consolidated explanation of how the 69-Weeks prophecy of Daniel 9:25, 26 can be interpreted plainly and consistently with all of scripture and history to show its fulfillment in the baptism and crucifixion of of Jesus Christ. A subsequent paper will address Daniel's prophecy of the 70th week in Dan 9:27. The scripture links default to the NASB at BibleGateway.com, where you may readily click on other translations as you may desire. The explanation here does not pivot or rely upon any one translation. The Blue Letter Bible and the JPS Bible have been referenced when the original Hebrew was a consideration. Historical synopsis: (see timelines at: A Chronology of Scripture; Mesopotamian Babylon; Persian Kings; Postexilic Chronology; Babylonian & Persian King Chronology) "So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah4899 the Prince5057 there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. mâshîyach Brown Driver Briggs Definition: mâshîyach "Prince" is Strong's 5057: Brown Driver Briggs Definition: Anointed (in this context) means divinely selected. It can also mean to pour oil upon in a sacred rite of consecration (a setting apart). Prince is the begotten son of a King. So, "Messiah the Prince" would be the anointed (divinely selected & consecrated) begotten son of God. a) What is the decree? to rebuild and restore Jerusalem not 586 BC (Nebuchadnezzar had just sacked Jerusalem and no decrees were issued this year) not 538 BC (Cyrus 1st year proclaims to rebuild temple, under Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel) Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, 'The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Ezra 1:2 not 444 BC (Artaxerxes 20th full regnal year, decree to Nehemiah to rebuild the wall) And I said to the king, "If it please the king, let letters be given me for the governors of the provinces beyond the River, that they may allow me to pass through until I come to Judah, and a letter to Asaph the keeper of the king's forest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the fortress which is by the temple, for the wall of the city and for the house to which I will go " And the king granted them to me because the good hand of my God was on me. Neh 2:7-8 but 458 BC (Artaxerxes 7th full regnal year, decree to Ezra to return to Jerusalem with money, volunteers, authority over treasurers and to appoint a government) He came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king. For on the first of the first month he began to go up from Babylon; and on the first of the fifth month he came to Jerusalem, because the good hand of his God was upon him. Ezra 7:8-9 Artaxerxes, king of kings, to Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of heaven, And now I have issued a decree that any of the people of Israel and their priests and the Levites in my kingdom who are willing to go to Jerusalem, may go with you. Forasmuch as you are sent by the king and his seven counselors to inquire concerning Judah and Jerusalem according to the law of your God which is in your hand, [...snip...] Whatever seems good to you and to your brothers to do with the rest of the silver and gold, you may do according to the will of your God. [...snip...] "I, even I, King Artaxerxes, issue a decree to all the treasurers who are in the provinces beyond the River, that whatever Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of heaven, may require of you, it shall be done diligently, [...snip...] You, Ezra, according to the wisdom of your God which is in your hand, appoint magistrates and judges that they may judge all the people who are in the province beyond the River, even all those who know the laws of your God; and you may teach anyone who is ignorant of them. Ezra 7:12-25 465 BC is Artaxerxes accession (partial) year and 464 is 1st full regnal year, so; -465 + 7 = -458 BC is 7th full regnal year or visually: c) How long is 69 weeks (sevens)? prophetic weeks are seven's (heptads) of years, so 7 weeks + 62 weeks X 7 years/week = 483 years No adjustments for 'biblical' years to Julian solar years is needed because the Jews already adjusted for them, adding a leap month seven times every 19 years on year 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17 and 19. So essentially every 3 years the Jewish calendar synchronizes with the 365.25 day solar year. Further, the only circumstance in which this has significant impact is intervals of less than 3 years. So over a period of 483 years, the Jews would have added about 177 leap months to stay synchronized with the Solar year and, worst case, at the end of 483 years, a date might be a month off. See The Jewish Calendar. So, computing the year of the "Anointed Prince": -458 BC + 483 years + 1 = 26 AD. Keep in mind we're essentially adding a duration of years that cross BC/AD from a BC date to compute an AD date, and the addition assumes there is a year 0 (but there isn't a year 0; it goes from -1 BC to 1 AD) and so we add a year to the date answer to correct the math for the absence of year 0. Jesus Christ was baptized in water and in the Holy Spirit in 15th year of Tiberius Caesar; 12 AD + 15 -1 = 26 AD (note we subtracted 1 because there is no 0th year of Tiberius reign since it begins with year 1) and when Pontius Pilate was Governor of Judea (AD 26 was Pilate's 1st year); Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene; Luke 3:1 and "when Jesus himself was about thirty years old." Luke 3:23. or visually again: So then, computing Jesus age and year of baptism we have 26 AD - -6 BC - 1 = 31. Because we are subtracting two dates on either side of BC/AD to compute the duration of years between them, we now must subtract 1 year from the duration answer to correct for the absence of year 0. But Jesus would have been 31 on Dec 25th of 26 AD. He was baptized earlier in the year before his 31st birthday, hence when he was 'about 30'. While Tiberius acceded to Ceasar in 14 AD, Augustus had been dying (without heirs) and by 12 AD had made Tiberius co-regent, successor, and Supreme Military Governor over all of Roman provinces (i.e. Tiberius became the Roman military authority in Judea in 12 AD). Tiberius thus had provincial and military authority over Judea since 12 AD, and Luke (and contemporaries) having lived under Tiberius for 15 years by the time of Christ's baptism might reasonably reckon Tiberius reign from when his succession was announced and when they first felt his imposition acting as Ceasar and Supreme Military Governor, rather than when Augustus died or new coins were minted. Commentary on Luke 3, verses 1-2. Jesus' baptism (water & spirit) was His 'anointing', His divine appointment by God the Father in a rite of consecration setting Jesus apart for the task of saving all creation. Instead of oil, Jesus was 'anointed' with the Holy Spirit: Luk 3:21-22 Jesus' anointing was in 26 AD (prior to his 31st birthday on Dec 25th). Assuming Daniel's 69 prophetic weeks are approximate to the month, and that Ezra received the decree from Artaxerxes I just prior to Ezra beginning the journey to Jerusalem in the 1st month of Artaxerxes 7th year (Ezra 7:7-9), and further assuming that for the purposes of recording non-Jewish events that the civil calendar was used (and not the sacred calendar), then the decree would seem to have been issued around August-September of Artaxerxes 7th year. Assuming the anointing (baptism) of Jesus Christ was therefore also in August-September of 26 AD (just prior to the early rains), then a 3 1/2 year ministry (as has been generally recognized) would put Jesus' crucifixion into early AD 30. Further, AD 30 is the only year in which the gospel Passion Week accounts can be harmonized. Jesus is the "`adh-mâshiyach nâghiydh" Dan 9:25 Tanach w/vowels, the anointed Messiah Prince; the baptized begotten son of God, who came into his anointing in AD 26, at about the age of 30, 483 years (69 prophetic weeks) from Artaxerxes I decree to Ezra to 'return and see to Jerusalem' (all as prophesied in Daniel 9:25), and was crucified on a Wednesday Passover in 30 AD at a little more than 34 years old (fulfilling His being "cut off" as prophesied in Daniel 9:26) . e) Was Jerusalem rebuilt with streets and a trench/moat/wall, in times of trouble? Clearly it was (and clearly with a wall, not a moat). In part by Jews who came with Sheshbazzar or Zerubbabel under Cyrus proclamation to rebuild the Temple. They weren't staying in a motel and must have done some rebuilding of some city facilities, but did so without Cyrus' specific proclamation to rebuild Jerusalem. They were even accused of rebuilding the city in violation of Cyrus' proclamation, which accusation was later dismissed by Darius I who reaffirmed Cyrus' proclamation to rebuild the Temple (Ezra 6:1-12) . Ultimately Jerusalem proper was rebuilt by Ezra's return and his volunteers under the decree from Artaxerxes I (Ezra 7:11-14), and then the wall rebuilt by Nehemiah under a subsequent decree from Artaxerxes I to specifically rebuild 'the wall' (Neh 2:7-9), also against opposition (Neh 4). A literal reading of Dan 9:25 is: from the decree to the anointed prince - 7 weeks and 62 weeks - the street (or broad place) shall be built and the wall even in troublous times. The starting event is the decree; the ending event is the anointed prince; in between will be 7 and 62 weeks during which the street and wall are rebuilt in troublous times. Some commentators argue the rebuilding of the street and wall under Ezra and Nehemiah essentially took the initial 7 weeks (49 years). Proven or not, it doesn't change the overall duration of 69 weeks from Artaxerxes I decree in 458 BC (his 7th full regnal year) to Christ's baptism in 26 AD, exactly 483 years (-458 + 483 +1 = 26 AD) Israel may know when the Messiah will come by marking 483 years from when a decree is issued. How would Israel know what decree - when to start counting? Not any decree, but a decree to rebuild Jerusalem. Quite a remarkable and noteworthy decree considering Israel's captivity. So Israel was to watch for a decree to rebuild Jerusalem, add 483 years to the date of that decree, and on that future date the Messiah would come. The prophecy served two purposes. It comforted a captive Israel that Jerusalem would be rebuilt and also that a Messiah would come. Consider the following chapters and verses (NASB where quoted): 2 Chron 36:22-23 Cyrus of Persia decreed in 538 BC that Jews be allowed to return and build the Zerubbabel Temple. That work was completed in 515 BC. Ezra 7 - Artazerxes I (7th year) decreed in 458 BC that Ezra go rebuild Jerusalem. Neh 2 - Artazerxes I (20th year) decrees in 445 BC that Nehemiah return to Jerusalem specifically to rebuild the wall, which was completed in 52 days - 444/3 BC (Neh 6:15) Neh 2:17 Then I said to them, "You see the bad situation we are in, that Jerusalem is desolate [in ruins] and its gates burned by fire. Come, let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem so that we will no longer be a reproach." Neh 3 - The people rebuild the wall - each family working on a section adjacent to the homes in which they were living. Neh 5:14 Moreover, from the day that I was appointed to be their governor in the land of Judah, from the twentieth year to the thirty-second year of King Artaxerxes (445 BC - 433 BC), for twelve years, neither I nor my kinsmen have eaten the governor's food allowance. Neh 4:1-6:14 The rebuilding was in "troublous times" (as per Dan 9:25), confronting: mockery ( Neh 4:1-6), conspiracy (Neh 4:7-23), extortion (Neh 5:1-19), compromise (Neh 6:1-4), slander (Neh 6:5-9), and treachery (Neh 6:10-14). Neh 7:4-6 Now the city was large and spacious, but the people in it were few and the houses were not built. Then my God put it into my heart to assemble the nobles, the officials and the people to be enrolled by genealogies. Then I found the book of the genealogy of those who came up first in which I found the following record: These are the people of the province who came up from the captivity of the exiles whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away, and who returned to Jerusalem and Judah, each to his city, Neh 7:66-69 (and Ezra 2:64-67) The whole assembly together was 42,360, besides their male and their female servants, of whom there were 7,337; and they had 245 male and female singers. Their horses were 736; their mules, 245; their camels, 435; their donkeys, 6,720. Neh 11:1-2 Now the leaders of the people lived in Jerusalem, but the rest of the people cast lots to bring one out of ten to live in Jerusalem, the holy city, while nine-tenths remained in the other cities. And the people blessed all the men who volunteered to live in Jerusalem. Some archeology/history background: VII. Jerusalem: From Town to Metropolis Three thousand years ago the City of David had about 2,000 inhabitants living in an area of 10 to 12 acres. The city's population and area more than doubled during the reign of King Solomon (ca. 961-922 BC), and reached 25,000 and 125 acres, respectively, before the destruction of 586 BC. By the time of the Roman destruction of the city in AD 70, its area had grown to about 425 acres and its population had peaked at about 60,000, a level not exceeded for more than 1,800 years. Lecture: 2 Jerusalem: The City and Memory A little over a century later in 587 BC, Jerusalem was invaded by the neo-Babylonians (this is to differentiate them from Hammurabi who lived 1000 years earlier). The Temple was leveled on this occasion and the entire population, which probably was around 20,000 was deported to Nebuchadnessar's Babylon, the most famous and grand city of the age. This marked the beginning of the Diaspora, or scattering of Jewish people. The area within Nehemiah's wall is maybe 15% (4,000 ft by 1,000 ft at the widest point to 250 ft at the narrowest) of what it was under Solomon, or maybe 20 acres, but still maybe twice what it was under David. At least 1/10th of the 49,942 (42,360 + 7,337 + 245) people who had returned to Jerusalem and Judea moved back into Jerusalem proper to repopulate the city. This is in addition to those who were already living there, released by Cyrus - a prior population sufficient in size to build the Zerubbabel Temple. So summarizing the biblical narrative above and including the historical population perspective: During Daniel's first 7-week prophetic period (Dan 9:25), Jerusalem and the wall had been built again, in troublous times, beginning 458 BC (Artazerxes I decree in his 7th year to Ezra) and repopulated under Nehemiah by 433 BC (in Artazerxes 32nd year) more than under David but less than under Solomon. The Bible does not record how long Nehemiah lived and how much Jerusalem grew from 433 BC to 409 BC (the end of Daniel's first 7-week prophetic period), but the city and population, now reestablished, continued to grow. Jews, with their preoccupation with the Temple and Jerusalem rather than God's salvation and judgement, typically misconstrue God's purpose in Daniel's 70-week prophecy. God's purpose in Daniel's prophecy was to reassure the chosen people that their Messiah-deliver would come and when. God's focus was not predicting how long it would take to rebuild Jerusalem; that was merely a 'marker' to identify and guage the fulfillment of the prophecy of the coming of the Messiah, God's larger purpose. Subsequent then to Daniel's 7-week period to rebuild Jerusalem and the wall, is Daniel's 62 (three score and two) week period upto the appointed time under God's plan to bring forth the Anointed Prince, Messiah, the begotten Son of a King - Jesus Christ - fulfilling the 69-week prophecy of Dan 9:25. "Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. a) Was the Anointed One cutoff, and have nothing? After Jesus Anointing (baptism) in AD 26, some 3 1/2 years later in AD 30 he was crucified (cut off), with no successor lineage, and had nothing upon his death, (save the sins of us all), not even the clothes from his back, which Roman soldiers had taken. Jews for Judaism (J4J below) raises several arguments against Daniel 9:25, 26 being fulfilled by Jesus Christ (not surprisingly) at Jews for Judaism - FAQ - Daniel. Some of their points are factually correct, others are false. Their correct points will be summarized, and then the false ones refuted. Correct are as follows (bold highlighting mine): Jews for Judaism - Daniel - FAQ #043.html The word mashiach is nowhere used in the Jewish Scriptures as a proper name, but as a title of authority of a king or a high priest. Therefore, a correct rendering of the original Hebrew should be: "an anointed one, a prince." The punctuation mark 'atnach functions as the main pause within a sentence. The 'atnach is the appropriate equivalent of the semicolon in the modern system of punctuation. It thus has the effect of separating the seven weeks from the sixty-two weeks: Some Christians claim that there is something called a "prophetic year" of 360 days, thus shortening the interval between the beginning of the 483 years which they claim began in 444 B.C.E., and the date of the crucifixion of Jesus. They do this in order to make the dates coincide, but the claim of a "prophetic year" is without any scriptural foundation. ...the words v'ayn lo (9:26) are incorrectly translated by the King James Version as "but not for himself." They should be translated as "he has nothing" or "he shall have nothing." J4J while correct in their criticisms of the King James Version translation of Dan 9:25-26, ignored the NASB translation employed by most scholars, which reads: "So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah4899 the Prince5057 there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. "Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. In the NASB, Strong's H4899 is translated as Messiah which means "Anointed" and Strong's H5057 is translated as "Prince", so the proof above is in fact based on the meaning of "Anointed Prince". Further, the distinction between the initial 7 weeks and the subsequent 62 weeks has been recognized and reconciled above regarding Jerusalem being rebuilt. The NASB also correctly translates in Dan 9:26 the words v'ayn lo as "and have nothing". And yes, a 360-day prophetic year is not supported anywhere in scripture. Jews for Judaism - Daniel - FAQ #118.html Christian commentators prefer to start the Seventy Weeks countdown with 444 or 445 B.C.E. because it brings their calculations closer to the time period in which Jesus died (30/33 C.E.). Yes, they invariably start with the wrong date and event, having worked backward from the wrong end dates and events, and fudging to make it fit. As shown above when starting with the correct date and event, namely Artaxerxes' decree to Ezra (Ezra 7:12-25) in 458 BC, 69 weeks (not 70) arrives exactly at the baptism (anointing) of Jesus Christ (a Prince, the begotten son of a King/God) in AD 26. Jews for Judaism - Daniel - FAQ #121.html There is no "prophetic year" of 360 days alluded to anywhere in the Bible. Yes, this is one of those ill conceived efforts to get 69 weeks of "prophetic years" to fit the wrong date range. False arguments are as follows (bold highlighting again mine): Jews for Judaism - Daniel - FAQ #043.html By creating a sixty-nine week period, which is not divided into two separate periods of seven weeks and sixty-two weeks respectively, Christians reach an incorrect conclusion, i.e., that the Messiah will come 483 years after the destruction of the First Temple. Hence, two anointed ones are spoken of in this chapter [9:26], one of whom comes after seven weeks (Cyrus), and the other after a further period of sixty-two weeks (Alexander Yannai). This falsehood begins as a straw man argument that the beginning event is the destruction of the First Temple. It is not. The beginning event as previously noted is Artaxerxes' decree to Ezra (Ezra 7:12-25) in 458 BC. It is pure self-serving fiction to argue that two time intervals, 7 weeks and 62 weeks, implies two anointed princes when the text clearly and unambiguously refers in the singular to only one anointed prince who both "comes" and is also "cut off". Further compounding these falsehoods are that: Jews for Judaism - Daniel - FAQ #044.html One needs to understand that both references, when read in the context of Christian theology, refer to Jesus after his death and supposed resurrection: Daniel 9:26 referring to after he is "cut off" and Isaiah 53:12 as a reward for his suffering and death. ... Yet, v'ayn lo, "he has nothing" or "he shall have nothing" cannot refer to Jesus' situation at or after death, if one takes the New Testament seriously. ...V'ayn lo certainly could not refer to a lack of wealth or followers, for this would not distinguish Jesus from the great majority of the world's population. One who "has nothing" or "shall have nothing" (Daniel 9:26) does not receive "a portion with the great" (Isaiah 53:12), does not rise bodily to heaven (Acts 1:9), and does not sit at the "right hand of the throne of the Majesty" (Hebrews 8:1). This again is a false strawman argument on the part of J4J, ignoring that there are both physical and spiritual aspects to Christian theology as well as to Jesus Christ. Jesus died on the cross "having nothing", even his few clothes were taken by the soldiers. But his death was not His reward. His death was punishment for our sin and He took nothing with Him, but all was restored to Him in His resurrection. His reward (amongst other things) is to sit at the right hand of the throne of majesty. Dan 9:26 Isa 53:12 Approximately 3.5 years after his "anointing" in AD 26, after the 7 and 62 weeks elapsed, Jesus Christ was in fact "cut off" having nothing in the material world except the burden of our sins, which clearly distinguishes Him from everyone. Both Dan 9:26a & Isa 53:12 are fulfilled and reconciled with Christ's crucifixion. Isa 53:12a speaks to a post-resurrection reward which will be divided (shared) upon Christ's return (Rev 22:12 ...for my reward is with me... ). Jews for Judaism - Daniel - FAQ #119.html It is Isaiah who proclaims that Cyrus would give the actual command to rebuild Jerusalem. God declares through the prophet, "He [Cyrus] shall build My city" (Isaiah 45:13; see also Ezra 1:1-8, 6:1-5). Indeed, it was Cyrus who issued a proclamation (ca. 537 B.C.E.) for the return, and for the rebuilding to start. This occurred forty-nine years after the destruction of Jerusalem. Isaiah 45:1 describes Cyrus as God's "anointed. His decree to rebuild Jerusalem comes forty-nine years after the destruction of the city and the Temple, which is the time when an "anointed one" (Daniel 9:25) is to come to fulfill the prophecy, ". . . until an anointed one, a prince, shall be seven weeks [forty-nine years]." J4J's argument is a misdirection. Yes, Isaiah prophesys that Cyrus would 'say to Jerusalem and the Temple she/you will be built', but that is a verbalized personification, not a written proclamation or an issued decree. And yes, Cyrus wrote a proclamation (arguably a decree) in 537 BC, but that was to rebuild the Temple (not Jerusalem) and Cryus' proclamation was expressly to fulfill Jeremiah's prophecy, not Daniel's. Certainly Cyrus contributed to the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and arguably under Cyrus' direction the earliest released exiles returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple and in so doing must of necessity have rebuilt part of Jerusalem if for no other purpose than to have places to live and repair areas adjacent to, and ingress/egress for, the Temple. But the issue is not did Cyrus allow exiles to rebuild portions of Jerusalem, but rather the issue is did Cyrus write a proclamation to rebuild Jerusalem in fulfillment of, and does Cyrus himself fulfill the "anointed prince" who would "come" in, Daniel's prophecy. Clearly, Cyrus was neither prophesied to issue decrees, nor did Cyrus in fact issue any decree to rebuild Jerusalem - a key requirement for fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy. So no, Cyrus does not fulfill Daniel's prophecy in whole or in part; Cyrus only fulfills a portion of Jeremiah and Isaiah's prophecy. Jeremiah's prophecy of 70-year exile: This whole land will be a desolation and a horror, and these nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years.. For thus says the LORD, 'When seventy years have been completed for Babylon, I will visit you and fulfill My good word to you, to bring you back to this place. a) Were the Jews 70 years in servitude under the King of Babylon? Nebuchadnezzar (King of Babylon) besieged Jerusalem and began to deport the population (including Daniel) in 605 BC. Then 66 years later in 539 BC Cyrus ended the reign of the last Babylonian king, Belshazzar son of Nabonidus (Dan 5:30-31). A year later in 538 BC Cyrus writes a proclamation to rebuild the Temple and (probably) the next year Sheshbazzar returned to Jerusalem with the Temple artifacts and some exiles (Ezra 1:11) and then (probably) in 535 BC Zerubbabel returned with the remaining exiles to begin restoration of the Temple, 70 years after Nebuchadnezzar first began to take the Jews into exile. b) God used Cyrus specifically to fulfill Jeremiah's prophecy of the exiles return. Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia--in order to fulfill the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah--the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he sent a proclamation throughout his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying, "Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, 'The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and He has appointed me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever there is among you of all His people, may the LORD his God be with him, and let him go up!'" Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he sent a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying: "Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, 'The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. 'Whoever there is among you of all His people, may his God be with him! Let him go up to Jerusalem which is in Judah and rebuild the house of the LORD, the God of Israel; He is the God who is in Jerusalem. The only 'written proclamation' from Cyrus was to rebuild the Temple ("build Him a house in Jerusalem" - in the NASB), but not to rebuild Jerusalem itself whereas in Daniel 9:25 the 'issued decree' prophesied is specifically "to restore and rebuild Jerusalem". Further, the text explicitly states "in order to fulfill the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah", ie fulfillment of Jeremiah's prophecy (not Isaiah's or Daniel's) was God's reason for Cyrus to write the proclamation to rebuild the Temple. Cyrus wrote that proclamation in 538 BC and in 535 BC (70 years after Nebuchadnezzar began to take Jerusalem and Judah into exile in 605 BC) the exiles began to return under Zerubbabel (Ezra 2) to rebuild the Temple (Ezra 3:8-10), fulfilling Jeremiah's prophecy of return after 70 years of servitude in Babylon (Jer 25:11 and 29:10). The Zerubbabel Temple was completed and dedicated under Darius I in 515 BC, fulfilling Cyrus proclamation to rebuild the Temple. So God used Cyrus to specifically fulfill Jeremiah's prophecy of release of the exiles and rebuilding the Temple, and that fulfillment was completed in 515 BC, before any decree had been issued to rebuild Jerusalem itself. Isaiah's prophecy to rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple: But God also fulfilled Isaiah's prophecy, as well as Jeremiah's. Isaiah's prophecy clearly states that Jerusalem and the Temple will both be rebuilt, and that Cyrus is God's Shepherd in such rebuilding. "It is I who says of Cyrus, 'He is My shepherd! And he will perform all My desire.' And he declares of Jerusalem, 'She will be built,' And of the temple, 'Your foundation will be laid.'" Thus says the LORD to Cyrus His anointed, Whom I have taken by the right hand, To subdue nations before him And to loose the loins of kings; To open doors before him so that gates will not be shut: "I have aroused him in righteousness And I will make all his ways smooth; He will build My city and will let My exiles go free, Without any payment or reward," says the LORD of hosts. Note firstly that God refers to Cyrus as "His anointed" and "My shepherd", but not "anointed prince" as in Daniel 9:25. The distinction in context is that Cyrus is "anointed" (set apart) by God to shepherd people, whereas the Messiah is The "Anointed Prince" who will save people, not merely take care of them. Only the Savior can save, whereas Cyrus is merely a set-apart (selected) caretaker. To imply that Isaiah's "anointed shepherd" description of Cyrus is comparable to Daniel's "anointed prince" description of the Messiah (or God's Savior) is false oversimplification. Further, Isa 45:13 does not record the issuance of any decree, declaration or saying nor does 44:28 clearly and unequivocally state that decrees would be issued nor that Cyrus would issue them. Contrast that with Dan 9:25 (and Dan 9:23) in which the context is issuing a command or decree that carries authoritative weight and imperative: Dan 9:23, 25 The point being that the phrase in Isa 44:28 "say (or saying) of (or to) Jerusalem" can not be construed as an "issued decree", and further if it were, then Isaiah would be a false prophet because Cyrus never issued a decree to rebuild Jerusalem. Cyrus only wrote a proclamation to rebuild the Temple, but again that was explicitly to fulfill Jeremiah's prophecy, not Isaiah's or Daniel's. Isaiah's prophecy of 44:28 covered both the Temple and Jerusalem and that Cyrus would further say that both would be rebuilt. Isaiah's prophecy preceded and was broader and more general than: Isaiah's prophecy of 44:28 was a foreshadowing of Jeremiah's and Daniel's regarding the rebuilding of the Temple and then Jerusalem. Throughout chapters 1-39, Isaiah essentially denounces Judah, other nations, Israel and Sennarcherib. Then from chapter 40 onward Isaiah is consoling Israel and Judah, and in 44 Isaiah is foretelling that the Temple and Jerusalem would be restored. God left the revelation of further specifics regarding restoration of the Temple (first) and Jerusalem (subsequent) to Jeremiah and Daniel, respectively. Which is in fact what happened. Cyrus clearly proclaimed the rebuilding of the Temple (2Chron 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-3) but just as clearly did not proclaim or decree to rebuild Jerusalem, though Cyrus allowed Jews to go to Jerusalem to live while rebuilding the Temple, and God's unequivocal words in 2Chron 36 and Ezra 1 state that Cyrus fulfilled Jeremiah's prophecy, not Isaiah's or Daniel's. However, whatever rebuilding of Jerusalem was done by those exiles who returned under Cyrus was minimal as they hadn't even restored the city wall which was left for Nehemiah to direct some 90 years later in 445 BC. But the decree to rebuild Jerusalem came from Artaxerxes I to Ezra (Ezra 7:12-25) beginning fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy of 69 weeks to the Anointed Prince. Lastly now, let's plug J4J's interpretations that Daniel's 7-week period began with Cyrus' proclamation and that Cyrus is the anointed prince who comes into Dan 9:25 (and using the JPS version to give J4J the benefit of any doubts): Dan 9:25 (JPS 1917) Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the So, the problems with that are threefold: Jews for Judaism - Daniel - FAQ #120.html The first seven weeks ends in 537 B.C.E. The second segment of the Seventy Weeks period, sixty-two weeks in length, covered by verse 26, culminates in 103 B.C.E. (586-49-434=103 B.C.E.). Verse 26 indicates that "after sixty-two weeks an anointed one shall be cut off." This "anointed one" is the High Priest Alexander Yannai (103-76 B.C.E.) who came to power just at the end of the sixty-two week period in 103 B.C.E. and was the last of the important Hasmonean leaders. The phrase "after sixty-two weeks" indicates the time frame during which the "anointed one shall be cut off," that is, suffer karet, "excision." The penalty accompanying karet is here aptly described as "to have nothing," or "be no more." This punishment is given to Alexander Yannai infamous for his unjust, tyrannical, and bloody rule. J4J's arguments are inconsistent. In Jews for Judaism - Daniel - FAQ #119.htm they argued that Daniel's initial 7-week (49 year) period began with Cyrus' proclamation in 538 BC to rebuild the Temple: Indeed, it was Cyrus who issued a proclamation (ca. 537 B.C.E.) for the return, and for the rebuilding to start. This occurred forty-nine years after the destruction of Jerusalem. But now in FAQ #120 they argue that Daniel's 7-week period ended (not began) in 537 BC: The first seven weeks ends in 537 B.C.E Let's again plug J4J's interpretations that Daniel's 62 week period ended Yannai as the "anointed one" who is "cut off" into Dan 9:26 (and again using the JPS version to give J4J the benefit of any doubts): Dan 9:26 (JPS 1917) And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one (the High Priest Alexander Yannai) be cut off, and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. So, the addiional problems are: Summing together then the problems with Jews for Judaism's arguments that Daniel's prophecy of 9:25, 26 were fulfilled by Cryus and Alexander Yannai, we have: Perhaps Jews for Judaism will think of something to fix this. But their interpretation is puzzling in that Daniel, heeding Jeremiah's prophecy of Jews in servitude for 70 years would ardently pray and intercede on behalf of his people, and God who esteemed Daniel highly, sent Gabriel (God's No 2 Angel) to answer Daniel's prayer for deliverance of the chosen people and give him God's vision that the Jews would be delivered. But instead of one Anointed Prince, a Jewish Deliverer, Jews for Judaism's representation of Jewish scholarly thought is that God's vision was for a pagan Persian King plus an apostate "unjust, tyrannical, and bloody" High Priest who didn't even make it into scripture. And that, only through tortured reasoning and inconsistent math. This 'answer' just doesn't seem to reconcile with what Daniel was praying for and Gabriel delivered from God. No, God is very much bigger than what Jews for Judaism imagine. But this is not the first. Others have struggled to find an interpretation that points anywhere but at Jesus Christ: Other scholars see two "messiahs" in the prophecy and make Cyrus the Great the first "anointed one." They point out that at the time of Jerusalem's complete desolation (587 BC), God assured Jeremiah that the city would be rebuilt (Jer. 29:10). From this authoritative word until Cyrus in 538 BC was indeed 49 years or 7 "weeks." But to make this interpretation work, they must rearrange the Hebrew word order and translate Daniel 9:25-26 as follows: Know therefore and understand: From the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem [God's word expressed in Jeremiah 29:10 in 587 BC] until the time of an anointed prince, there shall be 7 weeks; and for 62 weeks it shall be built with streets and moat, but in troubled times. And after the 62 weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off, and shall have nothing. But as with J4J's arguments, no decree to restore Jerusalem was issued in 587 BC to begin Daniel's prophecy, and Daniel doesn't even give his 70-week prophecy until 538 BC (Dan 9:1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of Median descent, who was made king over the kingdom of the Chaldeans). Also, most of these 'scholars' view the second "anointed one" as Onias, the legitimate high priest who was murdered in 171 BC without a successor. But the second cluster of 62 weeks from 538 BC to 171 BC is only 367 years, not the 434 years Daniel predicted. Moreover, as noted earlier, the translation given by these scholars is possible only if one alters the word order of the Hebrew text and makes a few changes dictated by opinion, not by the rules of grammar. One should explore all the possibilities of coming up with a workable interpretation of a text as it stands before altering or modifying it. Regardless, Daniel 9 is Messianic Prophecy and the ancient Jewish sages agree: Moses Maimonides in his "Guide of the Perplexed" (translated by Schlomo Pines, Hebrew University) writing in the 12th century says of Daniel 9: "As for what Daniel says: Even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, approached close to me about the time of the evening offering - all this happened in a vision of prophecy. It should by no means occur to your thought that an angel can be seen or that the speech of an angel can be heard except in a vision of prophecy or in a dream of prophecy, according to what is stated as a principle: I do make Myself known unto him in a vision, I do speak with him in a dream. [Num 2:6]" (italics his). Vol II p390. Nachmanides in his "Commentary on the Torah" (translated by Rabbi Dr. Chavel) writing after Maimonides later in the 12th century also says of Daniel 9: "His [Daniel's] book likewise, was not grouped together with the books of the prophets since his affair was with the angel Gabriel, even though he appeared to him and spoke with him when he was awake, as it is said in the vision concerning the second temple: Yea, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, etc. [Dan 9:21]. The vision concerning the ultimate redemption also occurred when Daniel was awake as he walked with his friends beside the Tigris River" [Dan 10:4] (italics his). In the footnotes, Rabbi Chavel reconciles the views of Nachmanides and Maimonides as while angels may deliver prophetic information in a waking vision, it doesn't make the receiver a prophet. (Vol Genesis pp 228, 229) Further, Dr. Mark Eastman, writing for the Messianic Times made the following additional points about Jewish sages: "Daniel57;s Prophecy Came True When Yeshua Entered Jerusalem" One of the most ancient rabbinical commentaries is the Talmudim. In the Babylonian Talmud, compiled between 200-500 CE, ancient rabbis wrote extensively on the time of Messiah57;s coming, as well as Daniel57;s 70-weeks57; prophecy. Rabbi Judah, the main compiler of the Talmud said regarding the times referred to in Daniel57;s prophecy, "These times were over long ago." (Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin.) In the 12th Century AD, Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon (Maimonides), one of the most respected rabbis in history, and a man who rejected the messianic claim of Yeshua, made a remarkable statement that many scholars believe is a reference to Daniel57;s 70-weeks57; prophecy. "Daniel has elucidated to us the knowledge of the end times. However, since they are secret, the wise [rabbis] have barred the calculation of the days of Messiah57;s coming so that the untutored populace will not be led astray when they see that the End Times have already come but there is no sign of the Messiah." (Igeret Teiman, Chapter 3 p 24.) Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi said, "I have examined and searched all the Holy Scriptures and have not found the time for the coming of Messiah clearly fixed, except in the words of Gabriel to the prophet Daniel, which are written in the 9th chapter of the prophecy of Daniel." Various attempts have been made to invalidate the authenticity of the Book of Daniel itself, essentially arguing (incorrectly) that Daniel was written after the fulfillment of the prophecy, and possibly not even written by "Daniel" but someone else. Following then are a summary of the most irrefutable evidences of Daniel's authenticity and links for the more serious reader to pursue the full range of allegations and refutations. Historical Dating of the Book of Daniel gives a very good, very brief overview of the essential arguments. Daniel uses words and grammar known only in Babylonian courts under Babylonian and Persian rulers. Evidences Relating to the Date of the Book of Daniel Copies of Daniel are found in the scrolls at Qumran, but the Aramaic of Daniel is several centuries older than the Aramaic of the Qumran community. For example the spelling of "Darius" in Daniel's Aramaic is Dryw which agrees with the Meissner contract from 515 B.C. and the earliest Aramaic papyri from 494 B.C.; whereas in later times Darius was spelled Dryhw (note the inserted 'h'). In the Akkadian found on the Grotefend Cylinder [Montgomery 243] "the verb normally falls at or near the end of the sentence" whereas in the normal later Aramaic of Palestine it would not. This point "proves that the Aramaic of Daniel (and Ezra) belongs to the early tradition of Imperial Aramaic (seventh-sixth to fourth centuries BC) as opposed to later and local Palestinian derivatives of Imperial Aramaic ..." [Kitchen 76; Soggin, 409] "Shea reports that a clay prism was found in Babylon with 5 columns of text listing various officials of the government. This prism is a record of a loyalty oath taken by these officials about 593 B.C. shortly after Nebuchadnezzar had put down a revolt. What is interesting for us is the fact that it explicitly names the 3 Hebrew worthies who were thrown into the fire. What I found interesting is that Hananiah's name is given in the Babylonian equivalent (Hanunu) and not the recorded change of name in Dan 1:7 (to Shadrach) whereas the other two are. The question for those who propose a 2nd century date for Daniel is how did a 2nd century Jew know of these names in the first place?" Daniel is referenced by his contemporary, Ezekiel: The traditional date of Ezekiel (592-570 BC) is not disputed. Nebuchadnezzar took Daniel captive to Babylon in 605 BC, and from 605 BC to Ezekiel is 13 to 35 years, adequate time for Daniel's exploits to become known to Ezekiel and then for Ezekiel to write about Daniel. Ezekiel 14:14, 20 & 28:3 refers to Daniel as 'righteous and wise and no secret can be kept from him'. This is consistent with the person Daniel of the Book of Daniel, who would not defile himself with the king's food (Dan 1:8); to whom God gave knowledge, intelligence, wisdom, and understanding of visions and dreams (Dan 1:17); and who first reveals the content of Nebuchadnezzar's secret dream (Dan 2:27-35) and then interprets the meaning of the dream (Dan 2:36-45); and the angel Gabriel tells Daniel he is highly esteemed (Dan 9:23). But in the early 1930s the Ras Shamra (Ugaritic) texts were published and referenced someone named "Dnil" described as a Baal-worshipper given to incantations, and some scholars have attempted to equate this Ugaritic Dnil with Ezekiel's Daniel. However, neither Ezekiel nor Daniel (being true prophets of the LORD) would have anything to do with incantations or Baal worship and neither would declare such a person as "righteous" or "wise", nor is there any evidence that the Ugaritic Dnil revealed secrets. Ezekiel refers to the same Daniel of the Book of Daniel, a contemporary of Ezekiel who lived and prophesied during the 6th century BC. Daniel and Jeremiah date Nebuchadnezzar siege of Jerusalem in Jehoiakim's 3rd and 4th years: Daniel 1:1 records Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem in Jehoiakim's third year while Jeremiah 25:1 and 46:2 records Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem in Jehoiakim's fourth year. Both Daniel and Jeremiah reckoned the dates of reigning kings by the accession-year system. But Daniel followed the Jewish civil calendar which reckoned years from Tishri 1 to Elul 29 while Jeremiah followed the Jewish sacred calendar which reckoned years from Nisan 1 to Adar 29. When taking accession-year reckoning and these different calendars into consideration, the accounts of both Daniel and Jeremiah reconcile exactly to available historical records such as the Babylonian Chronicle cuneiform. Daniel and Nabonidus relationship to Belshazzar: Daniel's account in chapter 5 describes Belshazzar as "King" and offering Daniel "authority as the third ruler in the kingdom" (Dan 5:16) but since Cyrus' capture of Babylon (539 BC) until around the 1854 AD (well over two thousand years) secular historians regarded Daniel's account as fabricated because it was supposedly "known" throughout history that not only was Nabonidus the last king of Babylon but the name "Belshazzar" was never even mentioned anywhere. However, in 1854 Sir Henry Rawlinson discovered the Nabonidus Chronicle (cuneiform tablet) and also Nabonidus Stela, and Nabonidus Cylinder (at the British Museum) in which Nabonidus prayed for his son "Belshazzar" and essentially made Belshazzar co-regent of Babylon in Nabonidus' absence (hence Belshazzar's offer to Daniel of 3rd ruler after #1 Nabonidus and #2 Belshazzar). So Daniel's account was validated as accurate almost 2400 years after the fact. But if Daniel had been written between 200 BC to 200 AD as alleged, how would the writer have known Belshazzar's name and role as King when the historical record could not have informed the writer of this fact? The only way Daniel could know such details otherwise missing from the historical and archeological record for over two millennia, is if Daniel lived it. The Book of Daniel is authentic, accurate biblical prophecy. Without ignoring passages, altering punctuation, rearranging scripture, relying on obscure extra-biblical apostates, or imaginary calendar keeping, a plain reading of Dan 9:24, 25 shows that from Artaxerxes I decree to Ezra to take all the volunteers he wanted and return with them to Judah and Jerusalem, and further giving Ezra authority over the region and substantial funds, wasn't just a fact finding trip - it was to restore Jerusalem. From which event, simple addition of 69 weeks of years yields the baptism ("anointing and coming") of Jesus Christ in AD 26, all consistent with history and His age, length of ministry and crucifixion ("cutting off") in AD 30, the only year in which the gospel accounts of Passion Week can be harmonized and reconciled with calendars. Daniel 9:24, 25 is in fact fulfilled Messianic prophecy. But Daniel's exact foretelling, unmistakably fulfilled in a unique confluence of events, could only be foreknown and revealed to Daniel by God. It is in fulfilled biblical prophecy (the foretelling of future events controlled and known only by God, and verified after the fact) that we can recognize God's unforgeable "signature" to the Bible, and the authenticity God demonstrates in fulfilled prophecy can be extended to as yet unfulfilled prophecy and the entire Bible as well. Fulfilled biblical prophecy is God's signature of authenticity, demonstrating to us that the Bible is not merely some fabrication of human imagination, but is indeed The (trustworthy) Word of God. (last updated July 14, 2005)
God's Signature of Authenticity
Note that key anchor dates are highlighted in
Daniel 9:25Isaiah begins Isaiah prophecies Cyrus is God's anointed, that Jerusalem and temple will be rebuilt
Isa 44:28 KJV/Heb; Isa 44:28 YLT; Isa 44:28 JPs Death of Isaiah Jeremiah begins Daniel begins, Nebuchadnezzar Accession, Jeremiah prophecies 70 years of servitude to Nebuchadnezzar Jer 25:11; Jer 29:10 Jerusalem sacked by Nebuchadnezzar Lamentations recorded, Jews exiled AvilMarduk succeeds Nebuchadnezzar Cyrus captures Babylon from Belshazzar son of Nabonidus (Dan 5:30) Daniel's 70-week prophecy made in 1st year of Governor of Babylon - Darius the Mede) Dan 9:1-2; Dan 9:25 Cyrus decrees Jews to rebuild temple Ezra 1:1-3; 2Chron 36:22-23 first return of Temple artifacts and some exiles under Sheshbazzar Ezra 1:11 70-year-exile ends, main return of exiles under Zerubbabel Ezra 2; Temple rebuild begins; Ezra 3:8-10; (Postexilic Chronology) Cyrus killed in battle; Cambyses is king; Temple rebuild stopped Ezra 4:24; (Babylonian Chronicle) Pseudo-Smerdis Darius I (the Great) succeeds Cambyses Temple rebuilding resumes Ezra 4:24 Temple completed Ezra 6:15; (Postexilic Chronology) Xerxes I (Ahasuerus) succeeds Darius I (Hystaspis) Artaxerxes I (Longhand) succeeds Xerxes I Artaxerxes I in 7th year decrees Ezra to return to Jerusalem with volunteers and offerings Ezra 7:8; Ezra 7:11-14 Artaxerxes I in 20th year decrees Nehemiah to rebuild wall of Jerusalem Neh 2:1-9 (completed in 52 days Neh 6:15)
- Registration of families who had returned under Zerubbabel
- Lots cast for new Jerusalem residents Xerxes II succeeds Artaxerxes I (Longhand) Darius II succeeds Xerxes II Augustus Ceasar Ceasars (scroll down to Roman Empire) Dec 25th Estimated birth date of Jesus Christ Story of Jesus (scroll down to 6 BC) and Year of Birth of Jesus Herod the Great dies, succeeded by 3 sons:
- Herod Antipas, Tetrarch of Galilee
- Herod Philip, Tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis
- Lysanias Tetrarch of Abilene Tiberius co-regent with Augustus Ceasar Tiberius I Ceasar (Augustus dies) Pontius Pilate appointed Governor of Judea by Tiberius I Jesus Christ baptized (Tiberius Ceasar 15th year) "at about 30 years old" - Luke 3:1; Luke 3:23 Jesus Christ crucified after 3 1/2 year ministry
maw-shee'-akh
From H4886; anointed; usually a consecrated person (as a king, priest, or saint); specifically the Messiah: - anointed, Messiah.
1) anointed, anointed one 1a) of the Messiah, Messianic prince
1b) of the king of Israel
1c) of the high priest of Israel
1d) of Cyrus
1e) of the patriarchs as anointed kings nâgîyd nâgîd
naw-gheed', naw-gheed'
From H5046; a commander (as occupying the front), civil, military or religious; generally (abstract plural), honorable themes: - captain, chief, excellent thing, (chief) governor, leader, noble, prince, (chief) ruler.
nâgîyd / nâgîd
1) leader, ruler, captain, prince 1a) ruler, prince
1b) prince-overseer
1c) ruler (in other capacities)
1d) princely things
perfect peace.
<= BC AD => Tiberius year Jesus ^
<-ministry->
Now when all the people were baptized, Jesus was also baptized, and while He was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove, and a voice came out of heaven, "You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased."
Zerubbabel Temple was completed and dedicated start of Dan 9:25 first 7-week prophetic period
(the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the wall was decreed by Artazerxes I to Ezra - Ezra 7:8-25). walls of Jerusalem rebuilt encompassing twice the area as under David, though perhaps 1/7th the area under Solomon. approximately 5,000 to 7,000 people had returned to live in Jerusalem proper - a population 2 or 3 times larger than under David but less than half under Solomon. end Dan 9:25 first 7-week prophetic period
begin Dan 9:25 62-week prophetic period end of Dan 9:25 69-weeks Baptism of Jesus Christ
"Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.
Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.
"At the beginning of your supplications the command1697 was issued3318, and I have come to tell you, for you are highly esteemed; so give heed to the message and gain understanding of the vision.
"So you are to know and discern that from the issuing4161 of a decree1697 to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.
word [Cyrus proclamation in 538 BC] to restore and to build Jerusalem [the Temple] unto one anointed, a prince (Cyrus himself), shall be seven weeks; and for threescore and two weeks, it [the Temple] shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times.
Both sages clearly accepted the portrayal of future events regarding a Jewish Deliverer discussed in Dan 9. That they draw a distinction between a 'prophet of God' and a 'writer with a angelic vision from God' doesn't diminish the messianic aspect of Daniel 9 whatsoever.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Barak, Zipporah, Christine, David, Diana, Fatidic, DoctorStrangeLove, lodwick, RickyJ (#0)
I've pinged (this one time) folks who seem to have an interest in Bible exposition, and those of you whom I told I would update and post this apologetic. Added are a harmonization of the gospel accounts of Passion Week (linked) to explain AD 30 as the only year for Christ's crucifixion, and an explanation of Daniel's accuracy with a timeline of the End of Judah (also linked).
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Thanks .. not time to read at the moment but will read later and get back to you..
"...when a society that believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda..."
How long ago were the scriptures written? Everything on this page refers to perfect hindsight. In other words, if it can't be independently verified in a different writing is it really a prophesy? Or just a story written with a timeline to show the alleged fulfillment? Just like when you posted an article by that holyman/scientist who read an Ivy league research paper theorizing the universe was X billion amount of years old, then he divided the number by 6, one for each day in creation and that apparently proved something. You know who else supposedly had a knack for prophesy? Nostradamus. He even wrote about the tyrant Hitler (accurate to within a letter) centuries in advance. Was he inside the whole Jesus/Holy Spirit network or was he an independent agent with a gift for the occult?
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
Thank you for this one.
I agree completely with Starwind's view that the decree which initiates the running of the 483 year period was the decree to Ezra by Artaxerxes Longimanus. And I think his general analysis is fairly sound but I want to offer you some suggestions that you may wish to consider. First place, Ezra 7:8-9 does not say the decree was rendered in the 7th year; it says that on the first day of the first month of the seventh year, Ezra left Babylon to go to Jerusalem. So presumably, the decree was rendered on some date prior to the first day of the first month of the seventh year. In calculating the Julian date to line up the 483 years, that may not affect the calculation. A second problem with the calculation is that the events of commencement of the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus are not all on the clear historical record. And a third problem with the calculation is this. Obviously, Ezra is not talking about a Julian calendar date here. Further, although the Babylonians may have had a calendar which tracked years in more or less the same fashion as the Jews did, they had some different rules about how they treated years in the reign of a king. Longimanus was the son of Xerxes. Xerxes was murdered in 464 BC by Artabanus, a Hyrcanian usurper. The source of the accepted historical date for the 465 BC date for commencement of the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus. However, although Artabanus has been excised from the historical reiginal records which are based on the Persian court records, written by the winners, it is clear from independent records developed from the correspondence between the Levites in the Temple on Elephantine Island and the exiles in Babylon that Artabanus served as King for some period thereafter, almost certainly into August of 461 BC when he was slain by Longimanius. As Starwind's chart recognizes, the Jews counted co-regencies and disputed reigns as separate reigns; and counted regency from the first day of the first full year in which the reign commenced. Thus for purposes of the Jewish book recounting in Ezra, Longimanus would commence his reign on the first day of the year which commenced in the spring (after the vernal equinox in March) of 460 BC. Thus his seventh year was a year beginning in 453 (on the first day of which Ezra departed for Babylon). And certainly, the decree was rendered prior to the first day of that year because, as Ezra recounts in Chapter 7 and 8, there was much preparation for his departure for Jerusalem. We assume, in part because of the precision with which the dates then line up, that the actual decree was rendered in the Julian year 454--perhaps early in the Biblical year. Thus 454 BC to 30 AD = 484 minus 1 year (no year 0) is exactly 483 years to the date of cruxification of Jesus Christ on April 5, 30 AD when He was "cut off but not for himself".
Thankyou for compiling and posting this, there's a wealth of information there!
Hi sweetie, glad you're here. Been real busy with work (summer is our time), try to get back to you 'bout Lake Charles.
It's good to have you back, Diana!
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
Agreed, I need to clean up my explanation on this point. Agreed the decree was issued prior: not earlier than Shevat (Jan/Feb) 458 BC and not later than Ezra's departure Tishri (1st month by civil/fall calendar) 458 BC a range of 8-9 months all within 458 BC and within a reasonable preparation period leading up to Ezra's departure. Consequently, no, my calculations are not affected (aside from the Artabanus issues discussed below). Agreed. Ezra is using the Jewish civil/fall calendar year (Tishri-Elul) as does Nehemiah and Daniel, and reckoning regnal years by accession years on that calendar. So Artaxerxes 7th year began 1 Tishri 458 by Ezra's reckoning according to the Jewish civil/fall calendar. Ezra records his journey departing Babylon 1st day 1st month Artaxerxes 7th year arriving Jerusalem 1st day 5th month Artaxerxes 7th year, or from Tishri 458 BC to Shevat 457 BC. So presumably Artaxerxes would have issued his decree not later than Ezra's departure date Tishri 458 BC and plausibly as early as Shevat 458 BC - a range of 8-9 months all within 458 BC and prior to Ezra's departure. So, on this point, I have not seen any information that Artabanus was credited with any regnal years, certainly not thru 461 BC. I would appreciate a link or cite so I can investigate this more thoroughly. I have looked and only found (again) what I already understood, that being: Artaxerxes' reign began with the murder of his father Xerxes by Artabanus in Kislimnu or Tebetu (Babylonian months for Nov/Dec and Dec/Jan) of 465 BC. Some scholars place Artaxerxes on the throne immediately whereas others have Artabanus ruling for a few months, but regardless Artabanus is not credited with any regnal years for either of two reasons: 4. Egypto-Jewish historical sources. Papyri from the fifth century B.C. written in Aramaic by Jewish military mercenaries in Persian employ on the island of Elephantine in Egypt supply us with additional valuable historical and chronological information. These documents were dated in terms of both of the overlapping Egyptian and Persian-Babylonian calendars. The mathematical junctures at which these two variable calendars intersect with double dates help to fix the dates for the reigns of the kings during which these documents were written. A case of special importance here is Cowley papyrus No. 6 which was dated to both the twenty-first (and last) year of Xerxes and to the accession year of Artaxerxes.[14] The day and month dates utilized in this document fix its writing to January 2, 464 B.C. This text itself indicates that Xerxes' death had been reported in Egypt by that time. Since the Persian "pony express" type of courier system was in effect by that time, the delivery of that news in Egypt may be located late in 465 B.C. This supports the other indications that Xerxes died late in that year, toward its very end of 465 B.C. (In the previous section we reviewed evidence that he died after December 17, 465 B.C.) But I've seen nothing that delays Artaxerxes 1st regnal to 460 BC. That would affect my calculation greatly, and I daresay it wouldn't help yours. My main concern with your approach is you've construed Dan 9:25 69-weeks to end not with the 'anointing' or 'baptism' but rather with the "cutting off" of Dan 9:26. The difficulty I have with that is that it forces the 3.5 year ministry of Jesus to be mathematically accounted for within the 62 (or 69) weeks and I don't see how the text of Dan 9:24 can be so interpretated. It reads "from the decree until Messiah is 7+62 weeks". It doesn't read "from the decree until Messiah is cut off is 7+62 weeks". So while your math looks correct assuming Artabanus had an accession + 4 regnal years such that Artaxerxes ascended in 460 BC, I don't see that it fits the end point of Dan 9:25. I would like to followup on any cites of Artabanus reigning until 461 if you would please. Hyperlinks are great if ya got'm (it's that instant gratification thng), but I'll take pointers to books/periodicals even if they're not on the internet.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
You're very welcome Diana. I'll be making further changes to correct some of the issues David pointed out.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
I have seen the end date as the day on which the Messiah was "cut off but not for himself" on April 5, 30 AD. But I will certainly grant your point that a reading that sees an interval between the end of the 69 weeks and the date on which Messiah was cut off is a fair reading of the passage. There is apparently some fuzz in the translation--the Hebrew may say, as the translator you quote in the original article does, "then, after [at the end of] the sixty-two weeks . . . . " If the end date is defined by the passage translated as a period of time "to Messiah the Prince", then the end date is rendered indefinite. Because although your argument that the end date is the baptism of Jesus by John has some merit, one can equally argue persuasively that "to Messiah the Prince would mean to the birth of Messiah the Prince. Incidentally, your table of dates is very good--but the birth date you use, December of 6 BC is a little off also. It can't be correct because it is not possible to line up a date in December with the end of an Abaijh section of the priesthood 14+ months earlier (Luke 1:24, 36) in October of 7 BC--as I recall the closest end of an Abajh section is September 3, 7 BC which would yield a birth date in the first week of November, 6 BC; and anyway, the sheep would not have been in the fields in December. I agree with your 6 BC year although I believe the month was May which does line up properly with the conception of John; (although June of 7 BC is also a possible--really the only other practical possible, Clement of Alexanderia writing in the second century AD gave a date of May 14, 6 BC which appears to be a precise match with all of the available data). Although Luke 3:1 (15th year of Tiberius) fixes the commencement of John's ministry, it does not necessarily fix the date of Jesus' baptism which "came to pass" later in v. 38. However Clement of Alexandria and other calculations give a date of December of 26 AD for the baptism which accords with your view and which also accords with a correct birthdate in May of 6 BC as "about thirty years of age". To return to the central issue, the timing of the decree which starts the running of the 483 year period. The sixth year of Artaxerxes Longimanus in which the decree must have been rendered lines up with the beginning of the 483 years whether the end date is the cruxification or the baptism--and I assume and believe that if we could prove conclusively all of the exact facts, the dates would line up perfectly to the day which would in turn tell us on which event God founded the prophecy. Fixing the sixth of Artaxerxes requires a fixing of the start date for year one. The Crowley papyrus is not universally accepted as establishing the date of Xerxes' death which may have happened well into 464. As a matter of fact, as I just now recall, I also remember reading an analysis that Xerxes was not killed this early at all, citing purported evidence of a co-regency with Darius that commenced in December of 465 ending when Xerxes in fact died and Darius was promptly killed by Artaxerxes. However also clearly, even from your sources, at least initially, after the death of Xerxes, Artaxerxes and Artabanus were reigning together and when the falling out came with Artabanus' effort to kill Artaxerxes is not a clear certain date either; nor as you suggest is it entirely clear how long after Artabanus attempted to kill Artaxerxes, Artabanus lasted. The official record obviously was committed to minimizing both the period and the role of Artabanus. And the material you cite in the body of the main article is clearly derived from Persian court records directed to that end. But the central point of that discussion is that the Jews would have certainly counted, recorded and reported in their books, timing of the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus as commencing on the first day of the next year following the date on which he became the sole or principal king. Where did I get my dating? Back in the late 70's and early 80's (there was time before the internet, it just seems difficult to remember): "Mr. Eugene William Faulstich . . . founded the Chronology-History Research Institute in 1978. He was a modestly successful industrialist, inventor, and electronic communications engineer . . . [whose] research and writing continued for over ten years." The end product of which work was a series of books, the "History, Chronology . . works" As he was doing the writing, to raise money to support the effort, he published a monthly newsletter for about four or five years in which he gave you among other things, copies of his raw material which I still have and use regularly. A website, operated by his successors is called "Computer Bible Chronology" located: http://www.webspawner.com/users/BibleChron/ I copied my response to you from a paper I prepared stored in Word Perfect so would need to go back and look for the original source data--I did the original Word Perfect document to organize my own thinking for a presentation on Daniel 9:24-27 and did not footnote it. The website is a new version and I have not looked for what original data is there but will probably do so later. I did glance through my ring binder but the issue with the material on the letters did not come readily to hand. (And incidentally, some, perhaps most of these letters are in footnotes and addenda in Graham Hancock's "Sign and the Seal".) And I don't view the August of 461 date as conclusive--I do think it is clear that the end of Xerxes and the first day of Artaxerxes were not the same day and given the substantial events that intervened, the two dates were probably separated by a significant interval in which Artabanus acted as co-regent. Among other things, I have not taken the time to go back and look for the date on which Artaxerxes killed his older brother Darius--I am reasonably sure that event also occurred between the time the reign of Xerxes ended and the first day of the first year of Artaxerxes. Whatever the Persian court records, Artabanus and the events resulting in his permanent termination occupied some significant period of time after the death of Xerxes which the Jews and Ezra would have certainly treated as prior to day one of year one of Artaxerxes. I firmly agree with your principal premises. There is no such thing as a 360 day prophetic year. For the most part, much of the scholarly analysis was written by authors who sought to fit the Roman church's propositions that the initiating decree was the decree of Cyrus and that week 70 had ended with the death of Christ. I have no doubt that the essential decree was the one rendered by Artaxerxes to Ezra.
You go to the website I give you above; click on the home page; then go to the bottom of the page and the link to Chronology-History Research Institute; that link takes you to "Science and God in Balance"--take the link to Table of Contents--at the bottom of the page, under the caption "End Notes" is Appendix B, The Jewish Elephantine Letters For The Persian Period--that link gets you to what appears to be most the letters Falstich had copied for the specified period. That ought to include the letter I referred to which was in the Persian period. But the establishment at Elephantine predated the Persians and the Levites at Elephantine were exchanging letters with the Babylonian captives before the Persians and Falstich (and Hancock) published a number of those letters also which do not appear to be in the collection. Wonder what else he left out. I am in the process of looking through them now but obviously have other things to do. If I find the original letter I referred to or other material of relevance to this topic, I will tell you where I find it--you may well get there first and if you do, please let me know. Incidentally, one of your links above characterizes the Jewish establishment at Elephantine as a Persian Mercenary Military establishment. I know of no facts to support that proposition. On the ground, the artificats clearly show that the Jews had constructed a Temple on a floor plan that duplicated Solomon's Temple which was destroyed by the Babylonians. The principal correspondents were Kohaites and other Levites. What is the establishment party line? What were those guys doing down there anyway?
Well, Falstich himself cites a 465 BC death of Xerxes, a reign of 485-464 BC for Xerxes and a reign of 464-423 BC for Artaxerxes. If you examine The Jewish Elephantine Letters For The Persian Period The headers on letters C5 and C6 are: He doesn't say how he computed the dates, and I know the reign in Julian BC dates are not in the papyri, just dates relative to a kings regnal, so Falstich seems to be using the Elephantine papyri as does everyone else, to confirm what calendar the Jews used when referencing Kings. Further Falstich states (just below C6): I've seen other authors allude to that same point about using the two eclipses to absolutely fix the date of Xerxes death. So, Falstich (in so far as what little material I've found from him) does not seem to support a multi-year reign of Artabanus either, given Falstich shows Artaxerxes reign immediately following Xerxes death in 464 BC. Also, FWIW, examining the Falstich articles: I'm honestly not persuaded Falstich understands the subtleties of biblical calendrics. He makes no mention of different civil/sacred calendars for Jews, or their (and the Babylonian's) use of a 19-year embolismic cycle with intercalated months, nor the Hillel II postponement rules, nor that different chroniclers varied in whether they used the accession or non-accession systems and what calendar they observed. His computer "math" is, frankly, naive. It only works out approximately over very long time periods, but can not be used at all for accurately fixing specific days and dates or converting between different calendrical systems. For my understanding of what is involved, see my own work at: Especially check out http: //www.fourmilab.ch/documents/calendar/ for an example of accurate calendar converter. If you're unpersuaded by the above and still believe Artaxerxes 1st regnal was 460 BC, then I'd still like to pursue whatever information you do find that supports that. Let me know what you think when you have time. lol, possibly false or misrepresented. Considering the very broad scope of their publications/postings, all authors, IMO, have substantial errors in part, but a few (the ones I save and cite) have a great deal of otherwise useful correct factual information from which to learn. That same author whose characterization of the "Jewish establishment at Elephantine as a Persian Mercenary Military establishment" you questioned also said: ... When the correct procedures described above are carried out, it can be seen that the prophecy of the 69 weeks, or the 483 full historical years of Daniel 9, culminates in A.D. 27. The above are my two main disagreement's with Shea. My computations and tables show the entire 483 years ends in AD 26 (not AD 27) and Aratxerxes issued the decree in 458 BC (not 457), but I can't check Shea's math as he didn't show his work as I have done (and I show mine so people can catch and help correct any mistakes I do make). The whole reason for posting my article "God's Signature of Authenticity" is my belief that on the very narrow subject of proving out Dan 9:25, 26, what I put together is the only consolidated treatment that is correct on all aspects. But I do wish to give cites and credits to the work of others when they have aided my understanding in some area. And BTW, thanks very much for your discussion and contributions. (The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
I do need to do some refinement at the "month" level in this area. I'm quite satisfied Christ's birth was in 6 BC or 5 BC and the rest of the various timelines are not impacted (at the year level) by either date, and Daniel's prophecy gives no basis or assurance of fulfillment to any specific month. So minimally God said 483 "years" from a particular decree whose precise month we can't yet establish, and so I'm striving for no greater precision than a "year", at present. Regardless, I will look at your suggestions, learn from them, and see how they fit. I construe Luke 3:1 narrowly to mean not the start of John's ministry, but rather that God directed John (who was already in the "wilderness" at that time - and I construe wilderness to mean either desert areas or the area on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea, near Qumran) who then "came into all the district around the Jordan", and arguably this was God moving John into position to publicly baptise Jesus. It does seem a legitimate 'marker' to be expected considering the commensurate starting 'marker' was Dan 9:25. I don't believe God would give a prophecy and not provide the 'markers' to demonstrate it's fulfillment.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Not 586 BC (Nebuchadnezzar had just sacked Jerusalem and no decrees were issued this year) Not 538 BC (Cyrus 1st year proclaims to rebuild temple, under Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel) Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, 'The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Ezra 1:2 Not 444 BC (Artaxerxes 20th full regnal year, decree to Nehemiah to rebuild the wall) And I said to the king, "If it please the king, let letters be given me for the governors of the provinces beyond the River, that they may allow me to pass through until I come to Judah, and a letter to Asaph the keeper of the king's forest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the fortress which is by the temple, for the wall of the city and for the house to which I will go " And the king granted them to me because the good hand of my God was on me. Neh 2:7-8 But 458 BC (Artaxerxes 7th full regnal year, decree to Ezra to return to Jerusalem with money, volunteers, authority over treasurers and to appoint a government) He came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king. For on the first of the first month he began to go up from Babylon; and on the first of the fifth month he came to Jerusalem, because the good hand of his God was upon him. Ezra 7:8-9 Artaxerxes, king of kings, to Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of heaven, And now I have issued a decree that any of the people of Israel and their priests and the Levites in my kingdom who are willing to go to Jerusalem, may go with you. Forasmuch as you are sent by the king and his seven counselors to inquire concerning Judah and Jerusalem according to the law of your God which is in your hand, [...snip...] Whatever seems good to you and to your brothers to do with the rest of the silver and gold, you may do according to the will of your God. [... snip...] "I, even I, King Artaxerxes, issue a decree to all the treasurers who are in the provinces beyond the River, that whatever Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of heaven, may require of you, it shall be done diligently, [...snip...] You, Ezra, according to the wisdom of your God which is in your hand, appoint magistrates and judges that they may judge all the people who are in the province beyond the River, even all those who know the laws of your God; and you may teach anyone who is ignorant of them. Ezra 7:12-25 So: 464 BC is Artaxerxes 1st regnal year (see Artaxerxes Timeline), so; -464 + 6 = -458 BC (start of his 7th regnal year and coincidentally Ezra's departure) and thus the decree was also issued sometime in 458 BC, prior to Ezra's departure. or visually: Two details are noteworthy in the above table: See Artaxerxes Timeline for detailed development of the dates for accession and regnal years of Artaxerxes, and the decree to Ezra. I've also made several other changes to more concisely organize the material, and I've added an overview at the top. I won't bother to reproduce all of it here. Interested readers may go to: http://star.wind.mystarband.net/bib/daniel_69_weeks_proof.html I will be making further changes: However, none of the foregoing changes the fulfillment of Daniel's 69-week prophecy by Jesus Christ as previously explained. (The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
#2. To: Starwind (#1)
#3. To: Starwind (#0)
#4. To: Starwind (#1)
#5. To: Starwind, Barak, Zipporah, Christine, David, Diana, Fatidic, DoctorStrangeLove, lodwick, RickyJ (#0)
#6. To: Starwind (#1)
#7. To: Diana (#6)
#8. To: Diana (#6)
#9. To: David (#5)
First place, Ezra 7:8-9 does not say the decree was rendered in the 7th year; it says that on the first day of the first month of the seventh year, Ezra left Babylon to go to Jerusalem.
So presumably, the decree was rendered on some date prior to the first day of the first month of the seventh year. In calculating the Julian date to line up the 483 years, that may not affect the calculation.
And a third problem with the calculation is this. Obviously, Ezra is not talking about a Julian calendar date here. Further, although the Babylonians may have had a calendar which tracked years in more or less the same fashion as the Jews did, they had some different rules about how they treated years in the reign of a king.
A second problem with the calculation is that the events of commencement of the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus are not all on the clear historical record.
On this point, it seems the correspondence from Elephantine Island is cited as having been examined and incorporated in some of the reference works I've studied. Here is a synopsis of the impact of the Elephantine material. When Did the Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9:24 Begin?
The research I've seen (and I've not scrutinized it thoroughly) referencing the Elephantine papyri deals mostly with ascertaining what calendar was used and was the embolismic intercalation done correctly.
#10. To: Diana (#6)
#11. To: Starwind (#9)
#12. To: Starwind (#9)
I would like to followup on any cites of Artabanus reigning until 461 if you would please. Hyperlinks are great if ya got'm (it's that instant gratification thng), but I'll take pointers to books/periodicals even if they're not on the internet.
#13. To: David (#12)
You go to the website I give you above; click on the home page; then go to the bottom of the page and the link to Chronology-History Research Institute; that link takes you to "Science and God in Balance"--take the link to Table of Contents--at the bottom of the page, under the caption "End Notes" is Appendix B, The Jewish Elephantine Letters For The Persian Period--that link gets you to what appears to be most the letters Falstich had copied for the specified period.
C5: King Xerxes (485 - 464 B.C.)
C6: King Artaxerxes (464 - 423 B.C.) "The death of Xerxes is often given as 465 BC based on an interpretation of an astronomical text found in Babylon. A notation is made concerning his death at a place between two eclipses in the same year. It is thought that this mandates his death in August of 465. It would be difficult to argue against all these correct double dated texts which were not copied or entered at a late date in history."
http://star.wind.mystarband.net/bib/passion_week.html
http://star.wind.mystarband.net/bib/essene_passover_dates.html
http://star.wind.mystarband.net/bib/end_judah_timeline.html Incidentally, one of your links above characterizes the Jewish establishment at Elephantine as a Persian Mercenary Military establishment. I know of no facts to support that proposition.
Through these two chronological procedures, a search for an absolute date for the regnal years of Artaxerxes and an examination of the question of which kind of calendar Ezra used, we have arrived at 457 B.C. as the date for the decree of Artaxerxes in Ezra 7. ...
#14. To: David (#11)
Incidentally, your table of dates is very good--but the birth date you use, December of 6 BC is a little off also. It can't be correct because it is not possible to line up a date in December with the end of an Abaijh section of the priesthood 14+ months earlier (Luke 1:24, 36) in October of 7 BC--as I recall the closest end of an Abajh section is September 3, 7 BC which would yield a birth date in the first week of November, 6 BC; and anyway, the sheep would not have been in the fields in December.
I agree with your 6 BC year although I believe the month was May which does line up properly with the conception of John; (although June of 7 BC is also a possible--really the only other practical possible, Clement of Alexanderia writing in the second century AD gave a date of May 14, 6 BC which appears to be a precise match with all of the available data).
Although Luke 3:1 (15th year of Tiberius) fixes the commencement of John's ministry, it does not necessarily fix the date of Jesus' baptism which "came to pass" later in v. 38. However Clement of Alexandria and other calculations give a date of December of 26 AD for the baptism which accords with your view and which also accords with a correct birthdate in May of 6 BC as "about thirty years of age".
#15. To: David, *Bereans* (#5)
First place, Ezra 7:8-9 does not say the decree was rendered in the 7th year; it says that on the first day of the first month of the seventh year, Ezra left Babylon to go to Jerusalem.
I have now cleaned up my explanation on this point: c) When was decree issued?
Note I've also added a timeline of Artaxerxes reign to verify the dates that I've relied upon.
perfect peace.
Xerxes
Elul 458->
Shevat 1 457->
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest