The “Seventy Weeks” Prophecy Discovering the Messiah Through Daniel 9 by W. Glenn Moore Please note that this article is formatted for 11” X 17” paper because certain imported calendar graphics require a larger page size. In order to accommodate this, the text size was increased. To print this article on standard 8½” by 11” paper, simply set the print page size to “fit to page”
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
The “Seventy Weeks” Prophecy
Discovering the Messiah Through Daniel 9
by W. Glenn Moore
Please note that this article is formatted for 11” X 17” paper because certain imported calendar graphics require a larger page size. In order to accommodate this, the text size was increased. To print this article on standard 8½” by 11” paper, simply set the print page size to “fit to page”
Table of Contents
Introduction........................................................................0
1. The Prayer of Daniel.....................................................0
2. Consider What Vision?.................................................0
3. Yahweh Is An Exact Timekeeper..................................0
4. The Messiah Fulfills Six Major Points...........................0
5. Dividing the 70 Weeks Prophecy..................................0
6. The Decree to Restore and Rebuild Jerusalem: Which One Was Predicted?....................................................0
7. When Was the Decree to Rebuild Jerusalem Given?...0
8. Was Yahushua Baptized in 27 CE?..............................0
9. Can We find Sabbatical Years that Line Up With the 70 Weeks Prophecy?........................................................0
10. Are There Other Ways to Historically Reveal Jubilee Years?..........................................................................0
11. Can You Establish the Year and Date of the Crucifixion?..................................................................0
12. The Conclusion of the 70 Weeks Prophecy................0
Appendix I: Seventh-Day Adventists and the 1844 Dilemma.......................................................................0
Appendix II: Dispensationalism and the 70th Week of Daniel 9........................................................................0
Appendix III: Dating Events in Ancient Times...................0Note: All Scripture quotes are from the King James Version, unless otherwise noted. Also, the proper name of our Creator (Yahweh, instead of “The LORD”), His title (the
Almighty in the place of “God”—Elohim, in the Hebrew), and the long form of the name of His Son (Yahushua) have been restored within all such Scripture quotes, so
as to give due honor to them.
1
IntroductionIn the book of Daniel there is a prophecy that is of supreme importance for those who are searching for the Messiah, both the Messiah who came 2000 years ago as well as the Messiah who is soon to come (whom I believe represents one and the same person—Yahushua). For this reason, it is my belief that this is the most important prophecy in the TaNaK (commonly called the Old Testament). It is the prophecy of the 70 weeks found in Daniel chapter nine.
Of course, those who follow Judaism would prefer that this prophecy not exist—and therefore they will categorically deny any Messianic connection. However, we have proof that in the ancient past the Jews did understand this prophecy as being Messianic in nature.1 Christians, however, will usually see this prophecy as Messianic—but they differ much concerning how it should be interpreted. Even though this prophecy is known to be of supreme importance and it clearly predicts the coming Messiah, there seems to be a great deal of confusion over how exactly it is fulfilled. Many are teaching a “gap” theory, placing the last week of the 70 weeks into the future—with either seven years of tribulation, or three and a half years of tribulation. And several other views have emerged which attempt to calculate the coming of the Messiah based upon a variable year—such as a 360 day lunar year starting in 445/44 BCE. Then there is the view that it starts in 520 BCE with the decree of Cyrus—however, this view requires even more manipulation of the dating method to make it work. And finally, we have the view which states that the 70 weeks begin in 457 BCE and consist of 490 literal years of 70 “weeks of years” (69 of those weeks leading to the beginning of Messiah’s ministry).2 It is this view which I believe is the most reliable interpretation. However, we will look at all of these more closely to see which one of these views does indeed fit best.
As we study this subject together, it is not enough to consider only our interpretation. There are plenty of people who will do just that. Prophecy is one area which has historically been subject to major abuse. First, it is important to establish the meaning of the text. Next, it is necessary to establish exact dates according to verifiable documentation. Having done all of this we might be able to establish a valid interpretation. I will present an assortment of evidence in this presentation, and will attempt to allow the evidence to speak for itself.
1Please read the online article “THE TIME OF CHRIST’S COMING” for some Jewish insights and ancient documentation on how the Messiah should have come before the temple was destroyed in 70 CE—based on Daniel 9 and the 70-week prophecy. http://www.kolumbus.fi/hjussila/rsla/OT/OT12.html#ind 2For information giving a wide variety of views on this subject, we would recommend going to the Wikepedia online article with links to other studies which suggest various starting points for this prophecy, including the gap theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks, Prophecy of Seventy Weeks.
2
1. The Prayer of Daniel
When we speak of the works of Daniel, we often think of Daniel standing in the civil courts of Babylon, giving the prophetic meaning of dreams and visions. We also think of Daniel standing safely all night and untouched in the lion’s den. How easy it might be to believe that it was all by skill, chance, or heritage that he was able to accomplish so much. However, Scripture bears record of the fact that Daniel accomplished what he did because of his righteousness:
The word of Yahweh came again to me, saying, Son of man, when the land sinneth against me by trespassing grievously, then will I stretch out mine hand upon it, and will break the staff of the bread thereof, and will send famine upon it, and will cut off man and beast from it: Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith Adonai Yahweh. (Ezekiel 14:12-14)
In this passage (as well as verse 20) Daniel is given equal billing with Noah and Job, who were considered among the most righteous of men in ancient history. Daniel was considered a righteous man in the eyes of the prophet Ezekiel, and if we can believe the testimony of Yahweh as given in Ezekiel, then we must accept the fact that he was considered a righteous man in the eyes of Yahweh Himself.
What was it that made Daniel righteous? Of course, he was obedient to Yahweh. For example, in Daniel 2 he decides (with his three friends) to not defile himself with the kings meat—and is rewarded in the end. And in Daniel 6 he is obedient even in the face of certain death at the hands of evil men, as he remains steadfast in his conviction to pray three times a day to Yahweh. But there is more. Please notice that chapter 9 of Daniel will give us the very clue to help us understand why Daniel was considered a truly righteous man.
Here is how that part of his prophecy begins:
In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans; In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of Yahweh came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem. (Daniel 9:1-2)
Daniel was concerned about the 70 years of captivity (which were soon to come to an end) and he here sought Yahweh in a sincere prayer of intercession for himself and his people (Israel). In this record of his prayer, take note of the manner in which Daniel prays:
3
And I set my face unto the Almighty Yahweh*3, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes: (Daniel 9:3)
How many of us pray in this fashion? He was praying with supplications, which means “earnest prayer” and “entreaty.” What this tells us is that his prayer is sincere—from the heart. But there is more. He prays with fasting, and we all should know what that means. Daniel did not eat or drink that day and possibly for many days prior to this. But as if this were not enough, he wore sackcloth. That would be similar to the burlap sacks people wore in the days of the depression. The same rough sacks were used to hold feed for livestock, or potatoes, or other grains. Finally, he prayed with ashes. In ancient times people who were in mourning (or deep sincere prayer) would take ashes from the fireplace or stove and squat down to the ground, covering themselves with those ashes as they prayed or mourned over the loss of a loved one. Now just imagine, here is Daniel (who is considered one of the greatest of the wise men, with a high ranking position in the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar) kneeling in prayer, deprived of food or drink, wearing sackcloth, and covering himself in ashes as he earnestly prays to Yahweh about his people Israel. Do you think maybe this might be an important prayer? Please note the reason Daniel gives for them going into captivity:
And I prayed unto Yahweh my Almighty, and made my confession, and said, O Yahweh*, the great and dreadful Mighty One, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments; We have sinned, and have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from thy precepts and from thy judgments: Neither have we hearkened unto thy servants the prophets, which spake in thy name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land. (Daniel 9:4-6)
Daniel contritely, earnestly, confessed the sins of the people. But why did Daniel accept responsibility for what his people had done? As we learned earlier, Daniel was one of the great men of righteousness. Yet he spoke as if he were responsible. This is a characteristic of his which should remind us of what the Savior has done for us, as He was about to die for a crime which he did not commit—he prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”
And what exactly were the sins which Daniel confessed to Yahweh? They had “rebelled.” They had rebelled by “departing from Thy precepts and from Thy judgments.” And they did not listen to His servants the prophets, which
3Here, in the Masoretic text, the name of Yahweh is substituted with the word “Adonai.” This is one of 134 places in which this was done. Documentation of this is from Appendix 32 of The Companion Bible, http://www.biblestudysite.com/32.htm. See also The Proper Name of the CREATOR, Part 10: The Companion Bible’s Appendix 32 http://www.godsway.org/Proper%20Name%2010.htm However, this was clearly an attempt by them to bring clarity to the text—as it is a custom in Judaism not to speak the name of Yahweh, especially in prayer or public discourse. We will restore the name of Yahweh to its proper place and show with Asterisks all places in which this has been done in the Masoretic text.
4
gave their messages of warning to all of them. They had neither followed nor obeyed Yahweh’s Torah.
O Yahweh*, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against thee. O Yahweh, to us belongeth confusion of face, to our kings, to our princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned against thee. To Yahweh* our Mighty One belong mercies and forgivenesses, though we have rebelled against him; Neither have we obeyed the voice of Yahweh our Mighty One, to walk in his laws, which he set before us by his servants the prophets. Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy Torah, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the Torah of Moses the servant of the Almighty, because we have sinned against him. And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem. As it is written in the Torah of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before Yahweh our Mighty One, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth. Therefore hath Yahweh watched upon the evil, and brought it upon us: for Yahweh our Mighty One is righteous in all his works which he doeth: for we obeyed not his voice. And now, O Yahweh* our Mighty One, that hast brought thy people forth out of the land of Egypt with a mighty hand, and hast gotten thee renown, as at this day; we have sinned, we have done wickedly. O Yahweh*, according to all thy righteousness, I beseech thee, let thine anger and thy fury be turned away from thy city Jerusalem, thy holy mountain: because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and thy people are become a reproach to all that are about us. (Daniel 9:7-16)
Daniel plainly tells us here that the reason for the captivity of Israel and Judah was their rebellion and disobedience to the laws of Yahweh—the “Torah of Moses.” In the next chapter we will put this aspect of Daniel’s prayer in its proper prophetic perspective, as we will explore the issue of the 70-year captivity as predicted by Jeremiah. For now it is enough to realize that the situation was indeed critical, or else Daniel would not have needed to pray about it so fervently. The people of Yahweh were in danger of being assimilated into the rest of the world and Daniel earnestly desired for this situation to be reversed. As with the time when Israel was brought out of Egypt with a mighty hand, Daniel desired for Yahweh to show him how HIs people might “come out of Babylon.” And he desired that the reproach which was heaped upon the city of Jerusalem might be turned away so that they would not longer be a reproach to the people around them.
Now therefore, O our Mighty One, hear the prayer of thy servant, and his supplications, and cause thy face to shine upon thy sanctuary that is desolate, for the Yahweh's* sake. O my Mighty One, incline thine ear, and hear; open thine
5
eyes, and behold our desolations, and the city which is called by thy name: for we do not present our supplications before thee for our righteousnesses, but for thy great mercies. O Yahweh*, hear; O Yahweh*, forgive; O Yahweh*, hearken and do; defer not, for thine own sake, O my Mighty One: for thy city and thy people are called by thy name. (Daniel 9:17-19)
Here is one of the most thrilling prayers of supplication given in Scripture. Daniel clearly desires for Yahweh to restore the sanctuary by asking Him to cause His “face to shine” upon it. He asks Yahweh to see the desolations of the city of Jerusalem and to remember that it is that city which is ”called by thy name.” He then states that it is not because of their own righteousness which he humbly presents his sincere and humble requests, but because of “thy great mercies.” Once again he asks Yahweh to listen, forgive, and to act in their behalf (to provide deliverance, as He had done in Egypt). He says “defer not,” and in doing so it is clear that he is referring to the 70 years captivity which was predicted by Jeremiah. In other words, do not allow their captivity to extend any longer than is necessary. The answer comes quickly, as I will explain in the next chapter.
6
2. Consider What Vision?In Daniel 9:23 the angel Gabriel tells Daniel to “understand the matter, and consider the vision.” Consider what vision? Is it one of the visions Daniel had seen earlier in his life, or was it another vision by another prophet? Could it be that there is a connection between the 70 weeks’ prophecy of Daniel 9 and the visions of another prophet? Jeremiah gave a prophecy concerning a period of 70 years. Since Daniel was focused on that issue in the first part of Daniel 9, could this be what Daniel was referring to? In this chapter I will establish that, although Jeremiah’s prophecy of the 70 years captivity is obviously not the same as the 70 weeks’ prophecy of Daniel 9, there is a direct correlation between the two.
And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before Yahweh my Mighty One for the holy mountain of my Mighty One; Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation. And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision. (Daniel 9:20-23)
The references from Daniel given in the last chapter are only an introduction to the subject of the 70 weeks. The actual prophecy concerning the 70 weeks comes next. Please notice the reason Daniel sought Yahweh in prayer at this time. We know that he was studying the prophecy of Jeremiah chapters 25 and 29 because Daniel plainly mentions this subject of the 70 years’ captivity in Daniel 9:2 where he says “I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of Yahweh came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.” In chapter 25 of Jeremiah he predicts that Judah will go into captivity to Babylon for 70 years, and in chapter 29 he predicts that at the conclusion of this time they will begin to return to Israel. Daniel knew that the 70 years of desolation would soon come to an end.4 What does Jeremiah say about these 70 years of desolation? Consider this now (the vision of Jeremiah concerning the 70 years captivity), for it is very important for us to understand this for the purposes of this discussion!
Therefore thus saith Yahweh of hosts; Because ye have not heard my words, Behold, I will send and take all the families of the north, saith Yahweh, and
4It is not our purpose here to go into any great detail regarding the fulfillment of this 70-year prophecy. Various views have been presented suggesting the dates of the beginning of the fulfillment of this prophecy, ranging from 607 to 587 BCE (the year Jerusalem was finally destroyed). Based upon the best chronological evidence we have, the 70 years of desolation would likely (in my view) have begun in 605 BCE, which is the year the king of Babylon invaded Israel, carried away captives, and laid siege to Jerusalem (the 2nd year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon), and end in 536 BCE (the 2nd year after the fall of Babylon) when Cyrus issued his famous decree to give freedom to the Jewish captives and allow them to return to their homeland. Daniel’s prayer given in Daniel 9 would have come at a time that is very close to the date of Cyrus’s decree (about 536 or 537 BCE).
7
Nebuchadrezzar5 the king of Babylon, my servant, and will bring them against this land, and against the inhabitants thereof, and against all these nations round about, and will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, and an hissing, and perpetual desolations. Moreover I will take from them the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride, the sound of the millstones, and the light of the candle. And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. (Jeremiah 25:8-11)
This is one of the places where the prediction from Jeremiah of the seventy-year captivity is mentioned. The other text is Jeremiah 29:10. However, neither of these texts gives us the details we need to establish why Israel was to be taken away into judgment for 70 years. The Scripture which tells us precisely why this happened is found in 2 Chronicles 36:
And Almighty Yahweh of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, rising up betimes, and sending; because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place: But they mocked the messengers of the Almighty, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of Yahweh arose against his people, till there was no remedy. Therefore he brought upon them the king of the Chaldees, who slew their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no compassion upon young man or maiden, old man, or him that stooped for age: he gave them all into his hand. (2 Chronicles 36:15-17)
Yes, they had rebelled against Yahweh, but the focal point leading to the purpose of our discussion comes later. The rebellious theme continues throughout this chapter, concluding with this statement about the 70 years’ captivity and the reason why Israel had to be sent into captivity at that time:
And they burnt the house of the Almighty, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem, and burnt all the palaces thereof with fire, and destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof. And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia: To fulfil the word of Yahweh by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years. (2 Chronicles 36:19-21)
Notice: “…until the land had enjoyed her Sabbaths.” We know how people can break the Sabbath, but how is it that the land had broken the Sabbath? Well, it is simple: This is referring to the Sabbatical years, not the weekly Sabbath. Notice what it says about these Sabbatical years in the Torah:
And Yahweh spake unto Moses in mount Sinai, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto Yahweh. Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof; But in the
5The Aramaic name, Nebuchadrezzar, has been given various spellings, including the more commonly known spelling of Nebuchadnezzar.
8
seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for Yahweh: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard. (Leviticus 25:1-4)
The following chapter reveals what would happen if they continued to break Yahweh’s Torah, including the Sabbatical years:
And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me; Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat. And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you. And I will make your cities waste, and bring your sanctuaries unto desolation, and I will not smell the savour of your sweet odours. And I will bring the land into desolation: and your enemies which dwell therein shall be astonished at it. And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste. Then shall the land enjoy her sabbaths, as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in your enemies' land; even then shall the land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths. As long as it lieth desolate it shall rest; because it did not rest in your sabbaths, when ye dwelt upon it. (Leviticus 26:27-35)
The reason Daniel receives the vision of the 70 weeks prophecy is because of what happened to cause the 70 years of captivity. The reason Israel was taken into captivity for 70 years is because the children of Israel had violated Yahweh’s Torah, rebelled against His commands, committed evil throughout the land that He had given them, and violated the Sabbatical and Jubilee years. In order for the land to receive its just rest, they were expelled from it for 70 years to fulfill the number of sabbatical years in which it had failed to receive the rest that it was due. What, therefore, is the conclusion of the matter? Here is a big clue: please notice again how and why the 70 weeks prophecy is introduced:
And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before Yahweh my Mighty One for the holy mountain of my Mighty One; Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation. And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision. (Daniel 9:20-23)
Consider what vision? What is this vision that Daniel is to consider? And what is the “matter” that Daniel is to understand? Well, it is obvious—isn’t it? For us to understand this “matter” as Daniel did we need to look at the context. The entire prayer of Daniel 9:1-19 is based upon, and in fact is a response to the 70 years’ captivity. It is the “vision” that Jeremiah had received concerning the desolation and captivity of Israel for 70 years
9
(Jeremiah 25:1; 11-12) that Daniel is concerned about. Moreover, it is the “matter” of how Yahweh allowed the land to keep the Sabbatical years that it had been denied because of Israel’s sins. Therefore, what follows in the account of Daniel must in some way be connected to the Jubilee Calendar as it relates to the 70 years’ captivity. This is exactly what Daniel had been studying and contemplating and praying earnestly about (Daniel 9:2).
Some believe that the “vision” he is referring to is the “vision” of Daniel 8, based upon only two points: Gabriel is the angel mentioned in both prophecies (Daniel 8 and 9), and the word “vision” is used in both prophecies. The word for “vision” is mareh (Strong’s Hebrew 4758) which is often translated “sight,” “appearance,” or “vision.” The word is used in Daniel 8, but it is also used in other parts of Daniel as well. The reason we can be certain this is referring to the 70 years’ prophecy (and not the previous vision of Daniel 8) is simple: Context! Gabriel states that “At the beginning of thy supplication” he began to make his trip to see Daniel and help him understand. At the “beginning” of Daniel’s prayer, he made the distinct reference to the 70 years’ captivity prophesied by Jeremiah, where he states:
In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of Yahweh came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem. (Daniel 9:2)
Let’s review Daniel’s experience from the time he contemplated the seventy-year prophecy until the time he was visited by Gabriel: At the beginning of Daniel’s prayer concerning the 70-year captivity prophesied by Jeremiah, the angel Gabriel was sent to give him “skill and understanding.” Again, we have to go by context. What was Daniel praying about? The 70 years captivity. When was Gabriel sent to Daniel? It was when Daniel began to pray about the 70 years’ captivity. What, therefore, is the “matter” (Daniel 9:2) which Gabriel seeks to help Daniel understand? The 70 years’ captivity. And what was the “vision” that Daniel was instructed to consider? It was the vision of Jeremiah as it relates to the 70 years’ captivity!!
Could the vision of Daniel 9 refer to the vision of Daniel 8? It could not be referring to the vision of Daniel 8, for that vision took place 11 years earlier and was already explained by the angel Gabriel. Furthermore, the subject of Daniel 8 is clearly (based upon the interpretation given in Daniel 8:20-26) both the literal and spiritual conflict between the liberators of Israel and the seducers of Israel (Medo-Persia and Greece). All the evidence that we have at our disposal indicates that the event which would cause such devastation (to “cast down the truth to the ground”) would be fulfilled by Alexander’s Grecian empire, and the 2300 day (literally, 2300 “evenings and mornings”) prophecy would be fulfilled through the actions of Antiochus
10
Epiphanies (as described in 1 and 2 Maccabees) in profaning the temple of Yahweh and casting down the sanctuary, the people of Israel and the truth.
Seventh-Day Adventists believe that the 2300 day prophecy refers to 2300 years, and that it is fulfilled in 1844. For a more detailed explanation of this interpretation, please see Appendix I: Seventh-Day Adventists and the 1844 Dilemma.
Since we have determined that the vision of Daniel 8 is not really connected to the prophecy of Daniel 9, just what is the vision of Daniel 9 really connected with? The whole context of Daniel 9 shows that it is the introduction to the 70-week prophecy and refers to the sins of the children of Israel—the very sins that caused Yahweh to cast them out of the land. Daniel’s extended prayer, as given in the first part of the chapter, is directly concerned with that very issue. And why were they cast out for 70 years? In order to allow the land to keep its Sabbatical years, the years of rest that it was not able to keep while sinful Israelites were still in the land.
What, then, is the connection? Here it is: The 70 years of captivity and the 70 weeks prophecy are both directly connected to the Jubilee / Sabbatical Calendar. In fact, the one is a miniature portrait of the other. Notice how it all neatly fits together as the angel Gabriel begins to set the stage:
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city . . . (Daniel 9:24)
The Hebrew (from Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance) lists the word “determined” as chathak, which means “to cut off,” as well as “decree” or “determine.”
H2852châthakkhaw-thak'A primitive root; properly to cut off, that is, (figuratively) to decree: - determine.
The concept behind this word is based upon the establishing of a “decree” which shows that the 70 weeks would also be based upon a “decree.” And the basic root meaning of the word is simply to “cut off.” Equipped with this understanding, we are now faced with another question, which we will attempt to answer in the next chapter. The question is: If this is not “cut off” from the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14, what exactly is it cut off from?
11
3. Yahweh Is An Exact TimekeeperOur Creator, Almighty Yahweh, is an exact timekeeper. Everything He does is based upon time, and He is neither late nor early in the fulfillment of His appointments. Therefore, it would be natural for us (as we investigate His works throughout history) to seek out and discover not just one or two, but many different occasions in which Yahweh has acted on the stage of history—and according to His perfect timing mechanism. Daniel 9 is the most powerful key that Scripture offers for opening up this timing mechanism.
In this prophecy, the key word for us to focus on is the word “determined.” As we read in chapter two, this word (in the Hebrew) is chathak, which means “to cut off.” What were the 70 weeks “cut off” from? As we ponder the answer to this question, we need to consider the following: We have already learned that the main reason Daniel was given this vision was because of his earnest, heartfelt desire to know what was to become of Yahweh’s people after the 70-year captivity. We also learned that this captivity was thrust upon Judaism because they had not been keeping the Sabbatical and Jubilee years. With this in mind, we can now discern what the 70 weeks were “cut off” from: They were mostly likely “cut off” from the Jubilee Calendar! Remember, 70 Weeks, in equation form, is written as 7 x 70 = 490. That equation reduces down to 7 x 7 x 2 x 5 = 490. Therefore, it can also be given mathematically as 49 x 10 = 490. This just happens to be exactly 10 uninterrupted Jubilee cycles.
In creating this world, Yahweh established the seven-day week as a continual cycle that cannot be broken. Nations have at times sought to alter this cycle, only to find that tampering with an institution established by Yahweh can only lead to chaos. For example, ancient Egypt and ancient China for a certain period of time followed a 10-day week with a 30-day month.6 We don’t know the end result of that experiment, but we do know that it was eventually replaced with the 7-day weekly cycle. France (during 6Calendars through the Ages, http://webexhibits.org/calendars/week.html
27 31 34
BCE CE 408 457 BCE
7 Weeks 49 Years
62 Weeks 434 Years
7 Years 1 Week
490 Years = EXACTLY 10 Jubilee Cycles
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
70 Weeks Are “Cut Off” “Cut Off” from What?
the French Revolution) also attempted to use such a 10 day week, but it had disastrous results and they gave it up to return to the 7 day week.7 The Mayans had a calendar which included weeks of 13 and 20 days used concurrently.8 In spite of these attempts, the 7-day weekly cycle has maintained its dominance throughout most of recorded history.
The reason I’m pointing this out is that in Scripture Yahweh has another cycle of time that He makes use of, especially with regard to prophetic events. The weekly cycle is composed of seven revolutions of the earth on its axis, causing the sun to appear to rise and set upon the earth (a period of 24 hours: one day). As it is with the daily cycle, so it is with the seasons: The earth makes one revolution around the sun every year, which is typically marked off by the spring and the fall equinoxes. Thus, in Scripture a day can be a literal 24-hour day or it can just as easily (depending upon the context) represent a year. The spring and fall equinoxes mark the exact beginning of a solar year, as daylight and night both cover approximately the same amount of time.
In Scripture, we not only have the weekly cycle of days, but also the weekly cycle of years. This is presented as a Sabbatical cycle in Leviticus 25, in which seven of these cycles are used to establish another period which establishes the 50th year9 as a year of Jubilee:
And Yahweh spake unto Moses in mount Sinai, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto Yahweh. Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof; But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for Yahweh: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard. (Leviticus 25:1-4)
And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years. Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubilee to sound on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land. (Leviticus 25:8-9)
We see this Sabbatical cycle in operation when we examine the first two occurrences of the word “week” in Scripture. Note carefully what it says:
7Calendars through the Ages, http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-french.html 8Calendars through the Ages, http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-mayan.html 9There have historically been debates regarding the Jubilee Cycles, whether they are 49 year or 50 year cycles. The evidence from both Scripture (i.e., Ezekiel 4 and Daniel 9) and as shown to have continuously taken place from the year 136/35 BCE to 138/39 CE (as documented from various sources, including primarily the writings of Josephus, and various other documents found near Bethlehem and Qumran) supports continuous seven-year cycles. Such cycles do not show any breaks in the 50 th year. Therefore, the most likely way the Jubilees were calculated (according to both Scripture and history) is that they would have been a 49 year cycle with the next year being both the first year of the next cycle and the year of Jubilee. The evidence of the continuously repeating nature of the Sabbatical/Jubilee cycles will be documented throughout this presentation—especially in chapters 8 and 9.
Fulfill her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years. And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also. (Genesis 29:27-28)
Please notice that this reference offers evidence that the Sabbatical system was in operation, even at this early date. We know this because the author uses the term “week” in connection with a period of 7 years. In the typical Jewish wedding, the “honeymoon” period was to last one week. In this scenario, Jacob was allowed to also marry Rachel after this one week time of “honeymoon” with Leah, and that he also “fulfilled her week” (of literal days) in that regard. Nevertheless, the term “fulfill her week” is obviously being connected and contrasted with the “seven other years” that Jacob was to serve for Rachel. In essence, what this text is saying is, if you fulfill the one week of honeymoon with my daughter Leah, then I will give you Rachel for the service you will give me for another week (of years). The use of the Hebrew word for weeks certainly links the word for “week” with the seven-day period and the seven-year period. We find confirmation of this as we look up the Hebrew word shabua, which lists among its meanings either “weeks of days” or “weeks of years.” The Jewish historian Josephus calls this “sabbatical year by the Greek term heptad (which we will study more in-depth in a later chapter). Notice how shabuwa is listed in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance:
According to this reference, the usage and meaning of the word “week” alone establishes a potential “day-for-year” principle. In addition, it doesn’t have to be in prophecy (as some claim) but can be found anywhere and is determined by the immediate context—not some strict rule that says “a day in prophecy always represents a year.” That particular view is easily shown to be false, for there are several places in both Daniel and Revelation where the rule does not apply in all cases (even in the prophetic sections of those books). At the very least, this indicates that it cannot be used at all times—but is limited to certain situations. Sometimes a day represents a year; sometimes it simply represents a day. The context must reveal what it will be. That is even the case with regard to its use in Daniel and Revelation. Thus, not everything in prophecy that speaks of a day is using the “day for year” principle.
However, we do have examples where the “day-for-year” principle clearly applies, so let’s look at them:
And your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and bear your whoredoms, until your carcases be wasted in the wilderness. After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise. (Numbers 14:33-34)
Lie thou also upon thy left side, and lay the iniquity of the house of Israel upon it: according to the number of the days that thou shalt lie upon it thou shalt bear their iniquity. For I have laid upon thee the years of their iniquity, according to the number of the days, three hundred and ninety days: so shalt thou bear the iniquity of the house of Israel. And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year. (Ezekiel 4:4-6)
Please notice something important here. In each of these cases the “day-for-a-year” principle is clearly identified. Also, we have to come to terms with the foundation of the “day-for-a-year” principle—it appears to be based upon the Jubilee/Sabbatical Calendar. Accordingly, when used in connection with the Hebrew word for “week,” it most emphatically is being used to describe a “week”—a week, that is, of “years.” This involves the day for year principle, but with one additional fact: Not only is it a “day for year,” but it is also a “week” of “years” in exactly the same way in which a week would normally appear, with the 7th day of that prophetic “week” being a Sabbath day (or Sabbatical year). Yahweh has synchronized the weekly cycle by His example (and later command), as given in the 7 days of creation.10
Now regarding the basis for establishing cycles of time, Genesis 1:14 sets the pattern for the rest of the cycles:
And the Almighty said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: (Genesis 1:14)
The monthly cycle is established by the moon, the yearly cycle is established by the equinoxes (both spring and fall), and then on a larger scale Yahweh has established cycles which are only partly based upon the visible heavens. The weekly cycle is one, the cycle of Sabbatical years every 7 years (“weeks of years”) is two, Jubilee Cycles every 49 years (“weeks of weeks of years”) with the year of Jubilee being year 50 is three, and finally, a week of millenniums over a period of 7000 years is four. In this last case, 1000 years are used to represent a day, for a total period of 7000 years from the date of creation to the date of the new heavens and earth.
10The 7-day week is one of four cycles of time that is not determined solely by the movements in the heavenly bodies. The 7-day continuous week (like the sabbatical years) can only be established based upon the creation pattern given in Genesis 1-2, and confirmed by the giving of the manna to the nation of Israel during their 40 years of wandering in the 15 th century BCE.
For the sake of further clarification, let us consider that the word “week” occurs in Scripture 16 times. Ten of those times it is used to describe literal “weeks” composed of seven days (Exodus 34:22; Leviticus 12:5; Numbers 28:26; Deuteronomy 16:9, 10, and 16; 2 Chronicles 8:13; Jeremiah 5:24 and Daniel 10:2, 3). Six times it is used to indicate “weeks of years,” and can be found in Genesis 29:27-28 (where it is used twice) and four more times in Daniel 9:24-27. This word is the Hebrew word shâbûwa, pronounced shaw-boo'-ah, which is word #7620 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. According to Strong’s, shâbûwa literally means “sevened, that is, a week (specifically of years).” These are the only places in which this specific word is found. Shâbûwa can be used to designate “weeks” of literal “days” or “weeks of years.” Because we know that the Jubilee Calendar is in effect, and the context suggests using the “day-for-a-year” principle, it is not a leap of logic to understand that this is also the case in Genesis 29:27-28 (“Fulfill her week”) and Daniel 9:24-27 (“Seventy weeks are determined”). They both refer to “snapshots” of Sabbatical/Jubilee “weeks,” as indicated in the sample calendar that follows:
. . . .
As depicted in this Jubilee calendar,* Jacob worked one full “week of years” for Leah, and a second full “week of years” for Rachel. Again, here is what we read from the record found in Genesis 29:
2185 2186 2187 2188 2189 2190 2191
5Fall 29 Fall 30 Fall 31 Fall 32 Fall 33 Fall 34
Jacob Flees From Esau Fall 35
1801 1800 1799 1798 1797 1796 17952192 2193 2194 2195 2196 2197 2198
6 New Pharoah Comes Fall 36 Fall 37 Fall 38 Fall 39 Fall 40 Fall 41
Jacob Takes
Leah & Rachel
1794 1793 1792 1791 1790 1789 17882199 2200 2201 2202 2203 2204 2205
7 Eber Dies Fall 43 Fall 44 Fall 45 Fall 46 Fall 47 Fall 48 Fall 491787 1786 1785 1784 1783 1782 1781
2206 Top Numbers = Creation Date (CD) Black Numbers = Common Era (CE)
46th Jubilee Red Numbers = Before Common Era (BCE)
1780
Jubilee CalendarCycle 45
Week 1st Day Year 2nd Day Year 3rd Day Year 4th Day Year 5th Day Year 6th Day Year Sabbatical Year
2157 CD 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163
1Fall Year 1 Fall Year 2
Esau Takes 2 Wives Fall 3
Fall 4 Fall 5 Fall 6 Fall 71829 BCE 1828 1827 1826 1825 1824 1823
Jacob Works Seven Years for Rachel
Jacob Works Seven Years for Leah
Fulfill her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years. And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also. (Genesis 29:27-28)
Thus, we can definitively conclude that, Scripturally-speaking, a “week” can refer to a seven-day or a seven-year “week” of time. Many Bible scholars throughout the past 2000 years have seen the link between this “week” (of years), the Sabbatical cycles, and the 70-week prophecy, leading us to identify the exact time of the Messiah’s coming.11 We know that, according to Daniel 9:24, the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem is the starting point of this 70-week prophecy. I believe that decree (as we will examine in much more detail later) was the decree of Artaxerxes, given in the late Spring of 457 BCE and delivered to the Jewish people four months later just before the start of the fall-to-fall civil calendar year in 457 BCE.
We have already established a connection between the 70-year prophecy found in Jeremiah 25 and the 70-week prophecy found in Daniel 9. Do these two prophecies connect with any other prophecies found in Scripture?
Prophetic Links to the Sabbatical/Jubilee Cycle
I will here demonstrate that there is a direct connection between the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel 9, the 70-year prophecy of Jeremiah 25 and the 430-year prophecy of Ezekiel chapter four.
Earlier in this chapter I mentioned a prophecy in Ezekiel 4:4-6. In that prophecy, Ezekiel is commanded to demonstrate to the people how they had sinned against Yahweh, using a day for a year. 390 days are used to illustrate the time of Israel’s rebellion, and 40 days are used to illustrate the period of time during which Judah had sinned against Yahweh (a day for a year). When you add this up, it comes to 430 days (which represent years). It is interesting to note that the 430 years within the Jubilee calendar contain exactly 61 Sabbatical years, including nine Jubilee years, for a total of 70 Sabbatical/Jubilee years. During those 430 years of rebellion, both Israel and Judah had neglected the observance of 61 Sabbatical years and nine jubilee years — a total of 70 Sabbatical/Jubilee years that were snubbed by nations who were supposed to live as Yahweh’s chosen people. Please remember, the 70-year captivity was given to Judah for her rebellion against Yahweh in not keeping the Sabbatical/Jubilee years, and not letting the captives go free in the year of Jubilee. In the following chart, I will demonstrate the full 430-year period, highlighting the 61 Sabbatical years, along with the nine jubilee years:
11B. Z. Wacholder, "Chronomessianism: The Timing of Messianic Movements and the Calendar of Sabbatical Cycles," HUCA 46 (1975). Also see J. A. Goldstein, I Maccabees The Anchor Bible, Vol. 41, New York: Doubleday (1976), 13, n. 13.
The Total Number of Sabbatical and Jubilee Yearsin Ezekiel’s Prophecy (Ezekiel 4:4-6)
JubileeYearsCount
JubileeYears High-
lighted
SabbaticalYears
Highlighted
SabbaticalYearsCount
Weekday Years1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 215 16 17 18 19 20 21 322 23 24 25 26 27 28 429 30 31 32 33 34 35 536 37 38 39 40 41 42 643 44 45 46 47 48 49 7
2 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 857 58 59 60 61 62 63 964 65 66 67 68 69 70 1071 72 73 74 75 76 77 1178 79 80 81 82 83 84 1285 86 87 88 89 90 91 1392 93 94 95 96 97 98 14
3 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 15106 107 108 109 110 111 112 16113 114 115 116 117 118 119 17120 121 122 123 124 125 126 18127 128 129 130 131 132 133 19134 135 136 137 138 139 140 20141 142 143 144 145 146 147 21
4 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 22155 156 157 158 159 160 161 23162 163 164 165 166 167 168 24169 170 171 172 173 174 175 25176 177 178 179 180 181 182 26183 184 185 186 187 188 189 27190 191 192 193 194 195 196 28
5 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 29204 205 206 207 208 209 210 30211 212 213 214 215 216 217 31218 219 220 221 222 223 224 32225 226 227 228 229 230 231 33232 233 234 235 236 237 238 34239 240 241 242 243 244 245 35
6 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 36253 254 255 256 257 258 259 37260 261 262 263 264 265 266 38
267 268 269 270 271 272 273 39274 275 276 277 278 279 280 40281 282 283 284 285 286 287 41288 289 290 291 292 293 294 42
7 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 43302 303 304 305 306 307 308 44309 310 311 312 313 314 315 45316 317 318 319 320 321 322 46323 324 325 326 327 328 329 47330 331 332 333 334 335 336 48337 338 339 340 341 342 343 49
8 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 50351 352 353 354 355 356 357 51358 359 360 361 362 363 364 52365 366 367 368 369 370 371 53372 373 374 375 376 377 378 54379 380 381 382 383 384 385 55386 387 388 389 390 391 392 56
9 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 57400 401 402 403 404 405 406 58407 408 409 410 411 412 413 59414 415 416 417 418 419 420 60421 422 423 424 425 426 427 61428 429 430
9 Number of Sabbaticaland Jubilee Years 61
Combined Total Number of Sabbatical and Jubilee Years
70
Jeremiah predicted that Israel would go into captivity for 70 years because of the sin of not keeping the Sabbatical years, and now we have confirmed mathematically that the 430 years of Israel’s sin (using a day for year) are directly linked to the Jubilee Calendar. We know this because there are exactly 70 Sabbatical/Jubilee Years within a period of 430 years. The 70 years captivity would therefore be directly linked with the 430 years that Israel had rebelled against Yahweh (as Ezekiel tells us in chapter 4 of his prophecy). Does this mean that the prophecy of Daniel 9 is also connected with the Jubilee Calendar? Yes it does!
4. The Messiah Fulfills Six Major PointsLet’s review some of the information we have already learned. Daniel is concerned about the 70 years of captivity prophesied by Jeremiah because he knows this time period is about to end (Daniel 9:2). Of course, as I have shown, the 70 years of captivity were given to Israel because of their rebellion against Yahweh and against His just Laws (Daniel 9:10-12 and Jeremiah 25:8-11). I have also pointed out the connection between the 70 years of captivity and the Sabbatical/Jubilee years, which were clearly violated (compare Leviticus 26:27-35 with 2 Chronicles 36:19-21). They had to go into captivity 70 years to allow the land to receive its Sabbatical rest, which it had not been able to receive while Israel broke those Sabbatical rest laws (390 years by Israel, and 40 years by Judah—for a total of 430 years, according to Ezekiel 4:4-6). Thus, it is only natural that Yahweh would use this same Sabbatical year system to give another prophecy about the future of Israel.
Daniel longed to know what Yahweh was going to do with Israel after this 70 year period ended. Gabriel was dispatched to inform Daniel of Yahweh’s plans, which brings us to the prophecy of the 70 weeks. Let’s carefully review the main part of this prophecy:
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. (Daniel 9:24)
In the simplest terms, Gabriel was sent to inform Daniel that instead of bringing national redemption at the end of the 70 years, the nation of Israel would be given 70 weeks of years to prepare to receive their true redeemer—the Messiah (see “Messiah” in verses 25-26). This prophecy was fulfilled with a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem and ended with the ministry of “Messiah the Prince.”
Many, including myself, believe the Messiah this passage points to is none other than Yahushua. At the same time, I also recognize that there are basically two views among those who believe this concerns Yahushua. One view says it has all been fulfilled at His first coming, and the other (the view of dispensationalists) is that only the first 69 weeks have been fulfilled—and the remaining week is to be fulfilled just before the second coming of the Messiah. This author believes that all of this prophecy has been fulfilled, and that there is no justification in separating the prophecy into separate segments to be fulfilled at different times—frequently referred to as Dispensationalism. It is a prophecy of 70 weeks, not 69 weeks. For a detailed look at this issue of Dispensationalism, please go to Appendix II:
Dispensationalism and the 70th Week of Daniel 9. We will reserve a detailed explanation regarding the exact timing of the events of this prophecy for later chapters. Upon reviewing the prophecy of Daniel 9:24, we find that Gabriel mentioned six objectives that were to be fulfilled. Were those objectives fulfilled through the Messiah in connection with the Jewish people during that 490-year time period? I believe all six objectives were fulfilled as they approached the end of that period. Let’s take a careful look to see how they were fulfilled.
The six objectives given in the prophecy are as follows:
1) To “finish the transgression.” 2) To “make an end of sins.” 3) To “make reconciliation for iniquity.”4) To “bring in everlasting righteousness.”5) To “seal up the vision and prophecy.” 6) To “anoint the most Holy.”
How exactly were these objectives fulfilled?
“To finish the transgression”
There are two key words in this objective, “finish” and “transgression.” Let’s take a look at how these two key words are broken down in the original languages (kâlâ, #3607 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, and peshah, #6588 in Strong’s). First, let’s examine the Hebrew word translated “finish”:
H3607kâlâ΄kaw-law'A primitive root; to restrict, by act (hold back or in) or word (prohibit): - finish, forbid, keep (back), refrain, restrain, retain, shut up, be stayed, withhold.
We often think of the English word “finish” as meaning “bring to an end” or even “destroy.” As Strong’s brings to our attention, however, such is not the case. The inherent meaning of kâlâ is to restrain, shut up, or withhold. It certainly cannot be indicative of something that has been brought to an end or has been destroyed.
Next, let’s look at the Hebrew word translated “transgression”:
H6588pesha‛peh'-shahFrom H6586; a revolt (national, moral or religious): - rebellion, sin, transgression, trespassive
Please notice that the word pesha’ clearly indicates transgression in the sense of rebellion.
Equipped with the understanding of what these two key words mean, let’s return our focus to the Hebrew word kâlâ, and how it is used in Scripture. In several texts, this word is used to mean “finish” or “restrain” in the sense of “shut up.” One example is 1 Samuel 6:10 where it says “And the men did so; and took two milch kine,12 and tied them to the cart, and shut up [kâlâ] their calves at home.” Another example is Jeremiah being “shut up” as a prisoner: “For then the king of Babylon's army besieged Jerusalem: and Jeremiah the prophet was shut up [kâlâ] in the court of the prison, which was in the king of Judah's house.” (Jeremiah 32:2) Please note that the word does not mean something is completely destroyed. It simply means that the object referred to is restricted in their movements. In Daniel 9:24 it could mean that somehow the “rebellion” would be “restrained” through some influence to check its progress.
Another way of looking at this text is to consider the variant meaning of kâlâ (), which is based on the word kâlâh () and means “finish.” There are scholars who believe that kâlâh () is the actual word used in the original text, which would have obviously preceded the Masoretic Text, and until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, was the oldest Hebrew text available.13
Based upon the Masoretic Text and the LXX (Greek Septuagint) readings, some scholars, including C. F. Keil and F. Delitsch, believe either word could have been used here:
In the first and second statements the reading is doubtful. Instead of (Keth.), to seal, the Keri has , to end (R. , to complete). In a double reading is combined, for the vowel-points do not belong to the Keth., which rather has , since is nowhere found in the Piel, but to the Keri, for the Masoretes hold to be of the same meaning as , to be ended. Thus the ancient translators interpreted it: LXX, τάς άδικίας σπανίσαι; Theod., συντελεσθ ναιη , al. συντελέσαι; Aquil., συντελέσαι τήν άθεσίαν; Vulg., ut consummetur praevaricatio.14
12milch kine is an old 17th century term meaning “milk cows.”13The Masoretic Text was compiled between the 7th and 10th centuries CE.14Keil and Delitsch Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. 9, originally published 1866 – 1891 by T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, MA, page 719, commentary on Daniel 9:24 by C. F. Keil.
In layman’s terms, what this is saying is that there is some question as to whether the word in this text should be kâlâ (#3607) or kâlâh (#3615). Both words are pronounced essentially the same, and have nearly the same spelling. The LXX (Septuagint), Theodosian, Aquila, and the Latin Vulgate show the meaning to be “finish,” “complete,” or “to be ended” which confirms the use of the word kâlâh. Thus, this second word [kâlâh] is definitely related to the first, and could be the one intended to be used in this text. It means simply to “end,” “complete,” or to bring to a “finish.” This word is from the Hebrew #3615 in Strong’s Concordance:
H3615kâlâhkaw-law'A primitive root; to end, whether intransitively (to cease, be finished, perish) or transitively (to complete, prepare, consume): - accomplish, cease, consume (away), determine, destroy (utterly), be (when . . . were) done, (be an) end (of), expire, (cause to) fail, faint, finish, fulfil, X fully, X have, leave (off), long, bring to pass, wholly reap, make clean riddance, spend, quite take away, waste.
Other texts which use kâlâh to mean “finish” are Numbers 7:1 and 1 Kings 7:51:
And it came to pass on the day that Moses had fully [kâlâh] set up the tabernacle, and had anointed it, and sanctified it, and all the instruments thereof, both the altar and all the vessels thereof, and had anointed them, and sanctified them; (Numbers 7:1)
But Solomon was building his own house thirteen years, and he finished [kâlâh] all his house. (1 Kings 7:1)
If this is the case in Daniel 9:24, such a usage is perfectly in line with Yahweh’s dealing with sin. In Torah the principle which Yahweh often uses in dealing with sin is that He permits the sin to grow until it reaches a point of saturation—when the sin becomes so great that it can no longer be tolerated. This principle is demonstrated in several key texts:
But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full. (Genesis 15:16)
And Yahweh said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know. (Genesis 18:20-21)
With this principle in mind, what could this word kâlâh be referring to? Based on the evidence we have thus far examined, it could be referring to evil and sin reaching its climax within the Jewish nation. To help us see how an alternate translation views the answer to this question, let’s look at the translation of Daniel 9:24 from the Bible In Basic English (1965). The portion of the text we are examining is translated like this:
Seventy weeks have been fixed for your people and your holy town, to let wrongdoing be complete and sin come to its full limit . . . (Daniel 9:24)15
The point here is that either translation could be valid: “to finish [i.e., complete] the transgression [i.e., rebellion],” or “to restrain the rebellion.” Which translation is the most valid? Since (as we have noted earlier), the Septuagint and other ancient authors saw this word as meaning “finish” or “complete,” I would have to favor this meaning over the other. In what way could this have been fulfilled?
When the Messiah was here, He told the unbelieving Pharisees:
Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. (Matthew 23:31-32)
And in another part of the Messianic Writings it says:
For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of the Almighty which in Judaea are in Messiah Yahushua: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Yahushua, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not the Almighty, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16)
Since the prophecy is clearly speaking of the sins of the Jewish nation, it only stands to reason that it is their transgression which would come to complete fulfillment. Evidently, it means that near the end of this 490 year period the transgression of the Jews would come to a “peak,” and their sins would become so great as to bring them into judgment—not because they are Jews, but because of their “transgression” (or “rebellion”). As we have read in several places in the Messianic Writings, this transgression had indeed been fulfilled when many of the Pharisees and the people rejected Yahushua as the Messiah and permitted Him to be killed as if He were a common criminal.
Ultimately, the origin of this “rebellion” is Satan himself. Since the entire context of the earlier portion of Daniel’s prayer is connected with the
15The Bible in Basic English, 1965.
rebellion and sins of Israel, we can only conclude that the “rebellion” is in reference to that of the Jewish people as they have been led astray by Satan.16 With the advent of a corrupt priesthood, combined with rabbinic “traditions of men” displaying a veneer of righteousness while covertly transgressing Torah, culminating in a lack of new prophetic insight from living prophets of Yahweh, they were (by the time of Messiah) generally destitute of Yahweh’s Spirit.
The famous Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53 clearly indicates that our “rebellion” would cause Yahweh to lay the iniquity of us all (both Jew and Gentile alike) upon “His holy arm” (i.e., the Messiah—Isaiah 52:10). For those who are able to accept it, this prophecy was fulfilled by Yahushua with His death in 31 CE:
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and Yahweh hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:5-6)
The book of Hebrews reveals that Yahushua now sits at the right hand of Yahweh—awaiting the day in which His enemies shall “be made His footstool.” That day is fast approaching.
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Yahushua Messiah once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of the Almighty; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. (Hebrews 10:10-14)
We thus see that the first of these six objectives was fulfilled. It was certainly fulfilled by a corrupt priesthood, which ultimately saw to it that Yahushua was taken out of the way. Their transgression was made complete when they crucified Him. That’s the bad news. The good news is, by His death Yahushua defeated sin, redeeming our lives from destruction if we turn to Him with wholly repentant hearts. Through His death, He has provided a means for salvation to those who were without hope. By His resurrection from the dead, Yahushua broke the power of death, paving the way for those who belong to Him to join in His resurrection at His return. Through Yahushua’s own sacrifice, all who turn to Yahweh are reconciled to Him. Finally, since Yahushua is the fulfillment of all sin offerings, His atoning sacrifice put an end to the need for sin offerings once and for all—which leads us to the second of the six objectives as given in Daniel 9:24.
16In fact, all of these six points are directed toward the Jewish people and the city of Jerusalem.
“To make an end of sins”
The second objective as listed in the prophecy of Daniel 9:24 was to “make an end of sins.” If Yahushua’s sacrifice made an end to sin, this brings us to a most notable problem. Sin is all around us today just as it was back then—like the “rebellion” spoken of earlier. The coming of the Messiah did not exactly bring an end to mankind’s proclivity to sin. However, we need to explore the possibility that this text could have been translated in a slightly different way. The word for “sins” may also be translated as “sin offering.” Notice how this is true as we examine the meaning of this word in Strong’s Hebrew Concordance:
H2403 chaţţâ´âh chaţţâ´th khat-taw-aw', khat-tawth'From H2398; an offence (sometimes habitual sinfulness), and its penalty, occasion, sacrifice, or expiation; also (concretely) an offender: - punishment (of sin), purifying (-fication for sin), sin (-ner, offering).
Yes, the word chattâ’th can mean “sin,” but it can also be a reference to that which is done to purify sin—i.e., a “sin offering.” In Daniel 9:27 this same prophecy establishes that the anointed prince would indeed put an end to “offerings.” It says in Daniel 9:27 that “he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.” While the words are different, they have similar meanings. An “oblation” is indeed a “sin offering.” Please observe how chattâ’th (the word found in this text, which is often translated as “sin”) can also be translated as “sin offering”:
But the flesh of the bullock, and his skin, and his dung, shalt thou burn with fire without the camp: it is a sin offering [chattâ’th]. (Exodus 29:14)
And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering sin offering [chattâ’th] for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it. (Exodus 29:36)
And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering [chattâ’th] with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out his blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering. (Leviticus 4:25)
These are just a few of the places in which chattâ’th is translated “sin offering.” Here is a more complete list:
Exodus 29:36, 30:10, Leviticus 4:8, 20, 21, 24, 25, 29, 32, 33, 34, 5:6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 6:17, 25, 30, 7:7, 37, 8:2, 14, 9:2, 9:3. 9:7, 8, 10, 15, 22, 10:16, 10:17, 19, 12:6, 8, 14:13, 19, 22, 31, 15:15, 30, 16:3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 15, 25, 27,
23:19, Numbers 6:11, 14, 16, 7:16, 22, 28. 34, 40, 46, 52, 58, 64, 70, 76, 82, 87, 8:8, 12, 15:24, 25, 27, 18:9, 28:15, 22, 29:5, 11, 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 38, 2 Chronicles 29:21, 23, 24, Ezra 8:35, Nehemiah 10:33, Ezekiel 40:39, 42:13, 43:19, 21, 22, 25, 44:27, 29, 45:17, 19, 22, 23, 25, 46:20.
It is translated this way 116 times in the KJV, not counting our text in Daniel 9:24. It is also translated “sin,” “sins,” or “sinner” a total of 168 times. These are the two most common translations. Which translation is valid for Daniel 9:24? The context suggests that it should be “sin offering” because the text there is clearly presenting a connection between sin and the sacrificial system. In Daniel 9:27 it plainly says that the Messiah would “cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.” Whenever the sacrificial system is brought into view in a text, and the word chattâ’th is used, in almost every case this word is translated as “sin offering.” Therefore, I believe the best reading for this text would be “he shall make an end of sin offerings.”
Assuming that the King James Version is correct, did the Messiah put an end to sin? Sin is all around us, even today. No, the Messiah did not put an end to sin. It is only by accepting the other translation of this word (i.e., “sin offering”) that it makes all the sense in the world. It cannot be said that the Messiah put a stop to “sin” at that time. But He did put a stop to “sin offering.” This can be established from both the Messianic writings and historical records.17
For Messiah is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of the Almighty for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. (Hebrews 9:24-26)
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Yahushua Messiah once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of the Almighty; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. (Hebrews 10:10-14)
17According to Matthew 27:50-53, the Shekinah glory departed from the temple at the moment of Messiah Yahushua’s death. This would indicate that the sacrificial system had been suspended, and that “sin offerings” maintained there every morning and evening were no longer capable of atoning for sin. Historical evidence also supports this, such as statements from Josephus and several rabbis as presented in the Talmud. Later in the next chapter I give a full presentation on this topic (pages 44-46).
Yahushua thus fulfilled the second objective of this prophecy, bringing an end to “sin offerings.” For those who have accepted His sacrifice for them, He has indeed come “to put away sin” as well.
“To make reconciliation for iniquity”
We need to look more closely at this third objective of Daniel 9:24. Once again referring to Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, we find the following entries for the Hebrew words translated reconciliation and iniquity:
H3722kâpharkaw-far'A primitive root; to cover (specifically with bitumen); figuratively to expiate or condone, to placate or cancel: - appease, make (an) atonement, cleanse, disannul, forgive, be merciful, pacify, pardon, to pitch, purge (away), put off, (make) reconcile (-liation).
H5771 `âvôn `âvônaw-vone', aw-vone'From H5753; perversity, that is, (moral) evil: - fault, iniquity, mischief, punishment (of iniquity), sin.
Upon reviewing the above listings for the Hebrew words kâphar and `âvôn, we can discern that another way the phrase “make reconciliation for iniquity” could have been translated is “to atone for sin.” Whichever way we decide to translate it, the meaning remains the same. Did the Messiah “atone” for our sins? Yes, He did! Please notice that the text which we previously quoted plainly predicted that He would indeed do this:
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and Yahweh hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:5-6)
For Messiah is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of the Almighty for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the
world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. (Hebrews 9:24-26)
The death of Messiah is the atoning sacrifice which does indeed bring reconciliation between us and our heavenly Father Yahweh. In Romans 5 this fact is clearly laid out for all to see:
But the Almighty commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Messiah died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to the Almighty by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in the Almighty through our Lord Yahushua Messiah, by whom we have now received the atonement. (Romans 5:8-11)
The Messiah Yahushua fulfilled the third of these six requirements. He has made atonement for our sins.
“To bring in everlasting righteousness”
Thus far we have seen that the full measure of sins reached its peak when Yahushua was rejected as the Messiah and was slain as a common criminal. I have demonstrated that this is the likely original thought behind the expression “finish the transgression.” We have also seen that Yahushua brought an end to “sin offerings.” We further addressed the fact that another way the phrase “make reconciliation for iniquity” could have been translated is “to atone for sin,” which we know was fulfilled by Yahushua. This brings us to the fourth objective listed in Daniel 9:24: “To bring in everlasting righteousness.”
Did Yahushua fulfill this fourth objective of the prophecy? Notice what is written:
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of the Almighty in him. (2 Corinthians 5:21)
While it is true that everlasting righteousness does not yet exist, someday it will be restored. In the meantime, through the sacrifice of the Messiah, a way has been made in which “we might be made the righteousness of the Almighty in Him.” His first coming has given to those who accept His sacrifice the hope of everlasting righteousness, and at His second coming that same righteousness will be re-established among His people on this earth.
The Apostle Paul, in his letter to the Romans, indicates that everlasting righteousness has been brought to us through the sacrifice of Messiah:
But now the righteousness of the Almighty without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of the Almighty which is by faith of Yahushua Messiah unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of the Almighty; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Messiah Yahushua: Whom the Almighty hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of the Almighty; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Yahushua” (Romans 3:21-26)
For those who are willing to believe it and accept it, Yahushua has brought us righteousness which will endure forever. Yahweh, through the prophet Isaiah, predicted the day of Yahushua when he wrote:
Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law; fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings. For the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall be for ever, and my salvation from generation to generation. (Isaiah 51:7-8)
Yahushua, through His death and subsequent resurrection, proved Himself as the guarantee of eternal life … eternal righteousness (Hebrews 7:22) … to all who believe and follow Him. He thus fulfilled the fourth specific objective of the prophecy given in Daniel 9:24.
“To seal up the vision and prophecy”
We now come to the part where reference is made to sealing up “the vision and prophecy.” Based upon Daniel 12, this statement is most likely a reference to all of Daniel’s prophecies. In the end, Daniel was commanded to seal up his words and the book of his prophecy:
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. (Daniel 12:4)
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. (Daniel 12:9)
To seal the words of a prophecy means to prevent them from being understood. To not seal a prophecy means just the opposite:
And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. (Revelation 22:10)
The book of Revelation, as indicated by the above verse, has never been a sealed book. Indeed, the very name “Revelation” is indicative of something revealed. In contrast, the prophecy of Daniel would be “sealed up” so that no one could fully understand it. Even Daniel himself did not understand it completely, and constantly needed the angel Gabriel to explain some aspect of the prophecy to him. The prophecy was sealed “until the time of the end,” which indicates it was to remain sealed at least throughout the time of the 490 years—if not longer. Many believers during the days of Yahushua were expecting the Messiah to come at that time, which means they believed they were living in the “time of the end,” and they did recognize Daniel 9 as a Messianic prophecy. While this shows they were aware of the general time frame for the fulfillment of the 70 weeks prophecy, they still did not fully understand it, nor do we have any evidence that they were able to determine the precise year in which it should be fulfilled. As proof of this, we have to consider that even in the Messianic Writings we find no direct reference to the 70-week prophecy of Daniel 9. As added proof of their general blindness in this regard, the rabbis who lived during the days of Yahushua routinely discouraged people from attempting to calculate the coming of the Messiah.18
In addition to the sealing of the book of Daniel, it could well be stated that the “sealing” extends to more than just this one prophetic book. It could be referring to the sealing up of all prophecy. It was predicted in both Isaiah and Micah that as part of the punishment of Israel, their prophets would no longer be able to declare truth, nor would they be able to see or hear spiritual things.
And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed. Then said I, Yahweh*, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, And Yahweh have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. (Isaiah 6:9-12)
Thus saith Yahweh concerning the prophets that make my people err, that bite with their teeth, and cry, Peace; and he that putteth not into their mouths, they even prepare war against him. Therefore night shall be unto you, that ye shall not have a vision; and it shall be dark unto you, that ye shall not divine; and the sun shall go down over the prophets, and the day shall be dark over them. Then shall the seers be ashamed, and the diviners confounded: yea, they shall all cover their lips; for there is no answer of the Almighty. (Micah 3:5-7)
18I will give full documentation of this in the next chapter.
These prophecies are a parallel to what Daniel 9:24-27 speaks of—the desolation of Israel and the sealing up of vision and prophecy. Yahushua spoke of this problem when He came, and declared to them the very same thing:
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. (Matthew 13:13-15)
The fifth specific objective of the prophecy, which speaks of sealing vision and prophecy, was indeed fulfilled during the 490 years of Daniel 9. For several centuries prior to the days of Yahushua, there exists no record of living prophets. Likewise, the ability of the people to understand the prophecies that were written for them was “sealed up”—for they had lost their prophetic “vision.”
“To anoint the Most Holy”
Some have expressed the belief that “to anoint the Most Holy” might possibly be a reference to the Most Holy place within the temple in Jerusalem. Notice what the Expositors Bible Commentary says regarding this:
6. The final goal to be achieved at the end of the seventy weeks is the anointing of “the most holy” (qōdeš qādāšîm). This is not likely a reference to the anointing of Christ (as some writers have suggested) because qōdeš qādāšîm nowhere else in Scripture refers to a person. Here the anointing of the “most holy” most likely refers to the consecration of the temple of the Lord, quite conceivably the millennial temple, to which so much attention is given in Ezekiel 40-44.19
While it is true that the term “most holy” is never used in Scripture to refer to a person, it is well known that the “most holy place” was in fact to be found within the temple at Jerusalem. It is interesting that in John 2:18-22, the Messiah compares His body to the temple in Jerusalem:
Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Yahushua answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Yahushua had said. (John 2:18-22)
19Frank E. Gæbelein, General Editor. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 7, p. 113.
Here in the book of John the Messiah clearly identifies Himself with the temple, the innermost part of which Daniel said must be anointed. In addition, we have clear and convincing evidence within the prophecy of Daniel 9 itself that the Messiah is indeed the person to be anointed. In both verses 25 and 26 the term “Messiah” is introduced to us. That term plainly means “anointed one.” On the basis of context alone, then, we are able to determine that the “most holy” that is to be “anointed” is most likely in reference to that same Messiah mentioned in the following verses:
. . . from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince . . . And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off. . . . (Daniel 9:25, 26)
The term “anoint” in verse 24 is clearly linked in the next two verses to the term “Messiah” (which means “anointed one”). For centuries, even during the time of Yahushua, Daniel’s prophecy found here was understood to be messianic in nature. It was so understood by several rabbinic sources, including the Talmud. Here is what Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi says concerning this:
I have examined the Holy Scriptures, and have not found the time for the coming of the Messiah, clearly fixed, except in the words of Gabriel to the prophet Daniel, which are written in the ninth chapter of the prophecy of Daniel.20
Rabbi Azariah affirms his belief in Daniel’s Messiah with this statement:
To seal the vision and prophecy, and to bring in Messiah our righteousness.21
Rabbi Nachmonides believed that it was the Messiah who was to be anointed, and that He represented the “Holy of Holies”:
This Holy of Holies is the Messiah who is sanctified more than the sons of David.22
Jonathan ben Uzziel agrees:
That the ‘vision and prophecy’ may be fulfilled even unto Messiah, the Holy of the Holies.23
The Talmud is one of the best confirmations of the Messianic implications of Daniel’s 70-week prophecy, as shown in this final statement from The Messiahship of Christ:
20Frank Delitzch and Paton Gloag, The Messiahship of Christ / The Messianic Prophecies of Christ, Minneapolis, MN; Klock & Klock, 1983 rpt., pt. 2, p. 226.21Ibid.22Ibid.23Ibid.
In Daniel is delivered to us the end [‘the time of His appearance and death’ - Rabbi Jarchi] of the Messiah. The Talmud also records that about the time of the Roman general Titus’ destruction of the Temple (70 A. D.), the Messiah was believed to have already come, yet His identity was concealed from the Jews until they were rendered more worthy of His appearance!24
Maimonides, a well known Jewish rabbi living and writing in the twelfth century, wrote in the Igeret Teiman that Daniel’s prophecy was clearly Messianic, and that Daniel was certainly not wrong in his calculations leading to the time of the Messiah’s advent:
But Daniel has elucidated to us the profundities of the knowledge of the End Times. However, since they are secret, the Wise, may their memory be blessed, have barred the calculation of the days of the Messiah'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. For this reason the Wise, may their memory be blessed, have decreed: cursed be he who calculates the End Times... But we cannot assert that Daniel was wrong in his reckoning...25
Is this anointed “most holy” really referring to the temple in Jerusalem, or to the long awaited Messiah? By the time of Yahushua’s early ministry, the temple in Jerusalem no longer contained the Ark of the Covenant—and had not contained it for centuries. Without this Ark, it is unlikely that the angel Gabriel would have considered the temple to be “most holy.” Some commentators, including the one quoted earlier (Frank Gæbelein, Expositor’s Bible Commentary), promote the belief that “anointing the Most Holy” is a reference to a time when the Ark of the Covenant will be restored to its place in the temple … when the millennial temple is built. This futuristic approach is a facet of Dispensationalism, which I address in Appendix II: Dispensationalism and the 70th Week of Daniel 9. We have already seen that the other objectives of Daniel’s prophecy were fulfilled during the 490 years leading up to the time of Yahushua’s earthly ministry. It is only consistent that this sixth objective would follow suit, not reach its fulfillment hundreds of years later.
If this is the case, what could this saying “anoint the most holy” mean? We remain open to the possibility that it is referring to the anointing of the Ark of the Covenant, even though it was no longer residing in the temple. However, as I have demonstrated, I believe the anointing of the “Most Holy” is better understood as a reference to the anointing of Messiah. Does this apply to an anointing of the temple in Jerusalem or does it apply to the Messiah Himself?
And Yahushua returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about. And he taught in their synagogues,
24Ibid.25Igeret Teiman, Chapter 3, p. 24.
being glorified of all. And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of Yahweh is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of Yahweh. And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears. (Luke 4:14-21)
Was Yahushua truly “anointed?” Did He come to “preach the acceptable year of Yahweh”? Yes, Yahushua was anointed. Also, if our calculations are correct, then yes, He did preach this acceptable year, for it was in that same year that He began to “confirm the covenant with many” for one week (of years). No one else, evidently, knew the exact year He should have come. However, since He was the promised Messiah, it only stands to reason that He would have known that information (which was hidden from others). The question is, “Who anointed Him?”
The word which the Almighty sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Yahushua Messiah: (he is Lord of all:) That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; How the Almighty anointed Yahushua of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for the Almighty was with him. (Acts 10:36-38)
Luke, the author of the book of Acts, understood that it was Yahweh Himself Who anointed Yahushua.
In the book of Mark the evidence is even more striking—as it plainly demonstrates how the Messiah Yahushua knew that a certain “time” was fulfilled, and that it apparently was connected with the year of His anointing by Yahweh:
Now after that John was put in prison, Yahushua came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of the Almighty, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of the Almighty is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. (Mark 1:14-15)
Yahushua not only came as the Messiah, but He came at a precise time in history, just as the prophecy of Daniel had predicted. While everyone else was blinded to the prophetic significance, Yahushua knew what He was speaking of when He said, “The time is fulfilled.” If the “time” was “fulfilled,” the question we have to ask is, “What time?” There is no other prophecy in Scripture which even comes close to identifying the exact “time” in which the
Messiah was expected to appear—except, of course, the one in Daniel. As a result, we are left with no choice but to conclude that Yahushua’s statement about the time being fulfilled was directly related to the only prophecy in the TaNaK which links a certain “time” with the coming of the Messiah. That prophecy is the prophecy of Daniel 9.
As we read earlier in John 2:19-22, the Messiah plainly demonstrates that the temple in Jerusalem was to be compared to His body. This temple was indeed anointed every single day by the priests, while it stood. According to Acts 4:27, the Messiah was Himself “anointed” by Yahweh:
Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Almighty, and against his Messiah. For of a truth against thy holy child Yahushua, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. (Acts 4:25-28)
The account of Matthew 3 also confirms for us what happened when Yahushua was baptized. Yahushua was anointed by Yahweh’s Spirit, thus fulfilling the sixth objective of Daniel’s prophecy:
And Yahushua, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of the Almighty descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Matthew 3:16-17)
As we examine the prophecy of the 70 weeks more closely, we will begin to see that, indeed, Yahushua is the Son of Yahweh, anointed by Yahweh, and in whom Yahweh is well pleased.
5. Dividing the 70 Weeks ProphecyIn Daniel 9:25 the prophecy begins to unfold in more detail, and we begin to see how the 70 weeks are divided. In that text it also introduces the need for a “decree” or “commandment” to begin the count of the 70 weeks. In our next chapter we will deal more directly with that question of which commandment we should begin this 70 weeks prophecy with, and at what time in history. For now, we will deal with the question of how the 70 weeks are divided and how Yahushua fulfilled this prophecy with his coming.
The command “to restore and to build Jerusalem.”
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks . . . (Daniel 9:25)
One question which often comes up when reading this part of the text is “why does this text separate the seven weeks from the 62 weeks? Why not just say 69 weeks?” Well, that is an interesting question. The prophecy does not tell us what will happen at the end of seven weeks, and people have searched in vain to find an event that would fulfill this part of the prophecy. Instead of the prophecy being divided 69-1, the prophecy is actually divided in the order of 7-62-1 for a total of 70 weeks.
It should also be noted here that the Masoretic scribes did add punctuation between the seven and the 62 weeks in order to divide these numbers into two parts. The purpose of this was apparently to prevent or confuse any Messianic interpretation pointing to the time of Yahushua. However, the original Hebrew really does not contain punctuation marks of any kind, as the source referred to here demonstrates.26 The Septuagint actually reads closely to the Masoretic text here, only without the punctuation mark between these two numbers (“seven ‘sevens’ sixty two ‘sevens’”) as pointed out by the International Bible Commentary.27
Some believe that the 7 weeks is to be figured after the 62 weeks—so as to somehow indicate when the Messiah would be born. However, the order in the prophecy clearly shows that the 7 weeks comes before the 62 weeks—so this view is immediately ruled out. Some believe that the first 7 weeks refers to the restoration and building of Jerusalem. But what they fail to consider is that while the prophecy mentions the rebuilding of Jerusalem, the text does not specifically say that the restoration of the city would be completed exactly at the end of 7 weeks. This whole prophecy is dealing 26Baldwin, J.G., Daniel: An Introduction and Commentary, Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester UK, 1978, p. 170.27Millard A.R., "Daniel," F.F Bruce, editor, The International Bible Commentary, Marshall Pickering/Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, Second Edition, 1986, p. 864.
with the issue of the restoration of the people, their religion, and their power of self-government. There is no evidence (historical or Scriptural) to establish exactly when such a fulfillment would have taken place. In addition, the fact city has been in a state of continual repair over many centuries. While the physical building of Jerusalem would (and did) naturally accompany this “restoration”, once we more fully examine the actual meaning of the Hebrew in this text, it becomes clear that such is not the intent of this decree—nor can the building up of Jerusalem be limited to a period of just seven weeks (49 years).
So why separate the seven weeks from the 62 weeks? There is no known documented historical event to mark the conclusion of these seven weeks. The only plausible reason why this prophetic period should start off with seven weeks, based upon our prior examination of the connection between Daniel’s 70 weeks and the 70 years captivity of Jeremiah, is that these seven weeks represent a complete Jubilee cycle of 49 years. In no other part of Scripture does it speak of a period of seven weeks of years except in Leviticus 25:8-10, where it introduces the Jubilee cycle. Since that is the case, this seven week period is clearly mentioned for the purpose of indicating its alignment with the Jubilee cycles of Leviticus 25:8-10. Any other explanation simply falls short of truly explaining its purpose in this prophecy—since it does not tell us what would happen at the conclusion, and we have no historical event of note to mark the end of that time period.
Now we are struck by the awesome reality of what this text is telling us. People claim that time has been lost (and attempt to use this to prove the Sabbath has also been lost). But no, we have not lost track of the Sabbath. Likewise, many will claim that the Sabbatical /Jubilee years have been lost. While their claim appears to have more merit than those who claim the weekly Sabbath has been lost—we are not without a witness to show how they can be found. In fact we have 2 witnesses, and they are both found in Daniel 9—the seven weeks and the 70 weeks. That whole prophecy is dealing with 10 cycles of 49 years, and is in perfect alignment with the year of Jubilee. The mention of seven weeks establishes a second witness to this fact. The only conclusion we can come to is that the prophecy mentions seven weeks to indicate that it a second witness to indicate the precise timing of the Jubilee Calendar. Therefore, based upon this simple observation alone, the first year of this prophetic period MUST be a year of Jubilee.
. . . the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. (Daniel 9:25)
The city of Jerusalem would be rebuilt, and this literally did happen. But the prophecy here focuses more on the restoration of the people and their
power of self-rule than it did the actual buildings. We know this because of the underlying Hebrew in this text.
For instance, the word “street” as found here should instead be translated “plaza”:
H7339 rechôb rechôbrekh-obe', rekh-obe'From H7337; a width, that is, (concretely) avenue or area: - broad place (way), street. See also H1050.
The New American Standard Bible lists this word rechôb as “plaza” and the New King James Version lists it as “open square.” According to the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, this word really does not mean a “street” but instead means an “open place … always used of a square, market place, or pasture within a village.”28 The “plaza” or “court” was the place in which important decisions were made for the benefit of the citizens of that city. The concept of a “court” of “law” comes directly from this ancient tradition of holding judicial meetings in the “town square.” In ancient times a city would build a “plaza” near the city center that would serve as a “court” where people would gather to participate in and hear the decisions of those who have authority to rule that city. This “court” (or “plaza”—rechôb) was the designated open area in a city which provided not only a social function for the purchase of goods, but also served in an “official administrative and judicial function.”29 Examples of the usage of this word are found in Nehemiah 8:16, as compared to Ezra 10:8-9 and Nehemiah 8:1-3. According to Nehemiah 8:16, the plaza was situated near the city gates. In Ezra 10:8-9, the plaza is the location where legal decisions were to be carried out.
The next Hebrew word used here confirms its judicial connection to the word rechôb (or “plaza”), for the word translated “wall” really doesn’t mean this at all.30 “Moat” is really a better translation, and in the context of this prophecy “decision” or “power of decision” would be even better. This word is listed as chârûts in the Hebrew:
H2742 chârûts chârûtskhaw-roots', khaw-roots'
28Harris R.L., Archer G.L. & Waltke B.K., eds, 1980, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Moody Press: Chicago IL, 1992, Twelfth Printing, Volume 2, p. 840.29Carol and Eric Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, AB, New York, Doubleday, 1987, p. 415.30Pusey E.B. "Daniel the Prophet. Nine Lectures, Delivered in the Divinity School of the University of Oxford. With Copious Notes." Funk & Wagnalls, New York, NY, 1885, p.190.
Passive participle of H2782; properly incised or (active) incisive; hence (as noun masculine or feminine) a trench (as dug), gold (as mined), a threshing sledge (having sharp teeth); (figuratively) determination; also eager: - decision, diligent, (fine) gold, pointed things, sharp, threshing instrument, wall.
While it could be used to mean a “trench” (or as the KJV lists it, a “moat”), the basic root meaning is “incised” or “incisive.” It is connected with the idea of cutting or taking sharp actions (“decisions”), whether literal or figurative. The root word for chârûts is given below and it also indicates that making sharp points is the foundational meaning:
H2782 chârâtskhw-rats'A prim root; properly to point sharply, that is, (literally) to wound; figuratively to be alert, to decide: - bestir self, decide, decree, determine, maim, move.
Making a decision, pointing sharply, and cutting are all closely related in meaning. So it should not surprise us to find that this related root word chârâts is used in 1 Kings to mean “decided.”
And as thy servant was busy here and there, he was gone. And the king of Israel said unto him, So shall thy judgment be; thyself hast decided [chârâts] it. (1 Kings 20:40)
The word found in Daniel 9 [chârûts] is also found twice in Joel 3, so please note the way it is translated:
Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision [chârûts]: for the day of Yahweh is near in the valley of decision [chârûts]. (Joel 3:14)
“The court will be restored again and the power of decision, even in difficult times,” is what the prophecy is really telling us, based upon another viable meaning of chârûts. Is it speaking of rebuilding the city of Jerusalem? Yes, that is included. But the underlying Hebrew reveals that it is more emphatically speaking of rebuilding the authority of the Jewish people to rule over their own lives by the laws of Yahweh, as opposed to the laws of other nations. It is clearly referring to the restoration of their right to rule through courts (i.e., “plaza”) and through their own power of “decision.” That is the meaning of this text in Daniel 9:25.
It is true that the city would also be rebuilt, and this aspect is also included in the prophecy. An important step which must be taken while the city is being rebuilt is to also restore order for those residing there. That is what makes a city a city—more so than just buildings (although obviously they had those
too, buildings in disrepair—nevertheless, they had places to live). Over the course of time they repaired these buildings, built new ones, and even built the wall. According to Nehemiah, they did indeed build up the city (with its walls) and its government “even in troublous times.” During the times of Ezra and Nehemiah, the Samaritans caused great trouble to the Jews as they sought to restore their city and authority to rule. (See Ezra 4:6-24 and Nehemiah 4:1, 6:1, 9:36-37)
But it came to pass, that when Sanballat heard that we builded the wall, he was wroth, and took great indignation, and mocked the Jews. . . . But it came to pass, that when Sanballat, and Tobiah, and the Arabians, and the Ammonites, and the Ashdodites, heard that the walls of Jerusalem were made up, and that the breaches began to be stopped, then they were very wroth, And conspired all of them together to come and to fight against Jerusalem, and to hinder it. (Nehemiah 4:1; 7-8)
The Messiah is “cut off.”
As we continue to examine the prophecy we will begin to see that it is clearly a Messianic prophecy. It speaks of the Messiah being “cut off” and it speaks of the prince who will come (later) and destroy the city of Jerusalem. And then it tells us that someone would confirm the covenant for a period of one week—that someone being the Messiah Himself:
And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:31
and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. (Daniel 9:26-27)
After 7 + 62 weeks the Messiah would be “cut off” (killed) and it is during that final week in which the same Messiah would “confirm the covenant” with many. After all of this, another “prince” (commander) would come and destroy the city. We know that it is “after” the last week because the text plainly says that it will be “the prince that shall come” which will destroy the city (Jerusalem), indicating an event that would come soon after the conclusion of the 70 weeks.31The King James translation is sorely lacking in this verse, as it reads “but not for himself” (an obvious attempt to interpret the text, as many Jewish scholars have rightly noted). However, the corrected translation which gives the sense as “and become naught” does not rule out the Messianic intent of this text. The word in this text is the Hebrew ayin (Strong’s Hebrew #369). It is used many times in Scripture, and is translated in several different ways. “No”, “not,” or “nothing” are just the primary ways it is translated. What is of interest to us is that in one of its first usages in Scripture it is used in reference to Enoch (a great messenger of Yahweh). “And Enoch walked with the Almighty: and he was not [ayin]; for the Almighty took him.” (Genesis 5:24) Might we suggest here that it is entirely probable that Enoch continues to live on, just not here on this earth—for Yahweh took him. Likewise, the prophesied Messiah was also predicted to live on, just not here on this earth—for Yahweh took him also. Indeed, once the Messiah left this earth he did “become naught” in the eyes of those who beheld Him—even while they knew He continued to live on at the “right hand of the Father.”
The reason we know that the “he” that would confirm the covenant is the Messiah and not the prince who would destroy the city is because the prince who destroys the city does so later. This is the “prince that shall come,” not the “Messiah” Himself. It is not the Messiah who brings desolation upon the city, but it is the “people of the prince” (i.e., Rome). This is clarified for us even more when reading from another more accurate translation, such as the New American Standard Version (verse 27):
And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate. (NASV, Daniel 9:27)
Please note that the “one” who brings desolation is not the Messiah, at least not according to this translation. Yes, the Messiah is the one to “confirm” the covenant. Yes, He is the one to “bring an end to sacrifice and offering.” But He is not the one who brings desolation to the city. Note also that the same basic idea holds true when reading this verse from the New King James Version:
Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate. (NKJV, Daniel 9:27)
Now there is one more objective which would be fulfilled by the Messiah himself, and that is the primary objective for which He was sent: to “confirm the covenant.” Just what exactly does that mean, and how was that fulfilled?
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week. . . (Daniel 9:27)
This text simply says that he would “confirm the covenant with many” for one week (which would be seven years in length). There is no question about it—Yahushua is the mediator of a new covenant. But this text plainly says that the time in which the Messiah would “confirm the covenant” would only last one week (a week of years). Notice what He said the night before his death:
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament [meaning “covenant”], which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of
this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom. (Matthew 26:27-29)
The Messiah came to initiate a “new covenant.” So this covenant was indeed ratified at His death (just as Daniel 9:26-27 predicts). And yet, this text in Daniel 9 says nothing about a new covenant. The Messiah only confirms the covenant for one week. How can we explain this?
When reading from the book of Hebrews (especially Hebrews 9) many come to the conclusion that the “old” covenant was done away with when the Messiah came. Even Daniel 9 does not support such a view. Daniel 9 supports the view that the Messiah came to “confirm” the covenant. You don’t come to “confirm” something which is brand new. You “confirm” something which has already existed. He came to “confirm” the so-called “old covenant.” In the process he “ratified” (or was made the guarantee) of a better (or “new”) covenant. The simple fact of the matter is that you don’t establish yourself as a “guarantee” for something which is already here. The purpose of a “guarantee” is something similar to a promissory note: the “note” serves as a “guarantee” that in the future payments will be made. But the “guarantee” is not at the same time the reality, is it? We have been given the “guarantee” of eternal life, through the death and resurrection of Yahushua—but such a “guarantee” does not mean that we actually have it right now, does it? No, and neither do we have the “new covenant”—it is still future. If it were true that we are now in the time of the “new covenant,” then the Messiah would have confirmed the covenant for all time. But no, He only confirms the covenant with “many” for one week—the last week of the 70 week prophecy of Daniel 9.
Now some may ask, why doesn’t this prophecy speak of confirming the covenant for all time, not just the one week period? The reason the prophecy only speaks of confirming this covenant for one week, is because the prophecy itself is focused on the city of Jerusalem and the Jewish people. The Messiah confirms the covenant only with the Jews for one week. After the 70-week prophecy was concluded, and that final week expired, the message went to the rest of the gentile world.According to Genesis 17:1-8, Exodus 2:24 and Leviticus 26:42, Israel had been the recipients of the original covenant. This covenant is still in place, even today. The 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9 indeed points to the time of the Messiah, but does not teach the idea that the Jews are no longer Yahweh’s people. Instead, it teaches just the opposite: that when the 70 weeks are concluded, the “good news” of salvation (which is truly a Jewish phenomenon) would be opened and extended to the entire world. Instead of closing the door on the Jews, it simply opens a door to all the people of the world—and they are included in that. Nevertheless, the gentiles must
also enter into the same covenant given to Israel (both Judah and Ephraim), and this they are now able to do through the Messiah.
Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Messiah, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without the Almighty in the world: But now in Messiah Yahushua ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Messiah. (Ephesians 2:11-13)
The Messiah confirms the covenant with Judah for seven years (3 ½ years before His death and resurrection, and 3 ½ years after as His apostles quickly bring the truth home to the Jewish people. The Messiah is crucified in the midst of the week (of years), most likely the year 31 CE. At the end of this period Stephen is killed (about 34 or 35 CE), and the glory days of Israel have now come to an end. The Messiah came, and while some of the children of Judah received Him as such—many did not. However, that does not mean Yahweh has given up on Israel (either Judah or Ephraim) after 490 years. Instead, the work of Yahweh would enter into a new phase.
So what of the covenant? Are we now under the “new covenant,” as many teach? Hebrews 8:13 states that: “When he speaks of a new covenant, he makes the first obsolete. Now what is growing obsolete and aging is about to disappear.” Please notice that this old covenant is “growing obsolete” and is “about to disappear,” but it says nothing about the old covenant being done away with at that time (which was about 30 years after the crucifixion, according to our best estimates of when Hebrews was written). According to Jeremiah 31:30-34, those who are under the new covenant will not have to teach each and every person to “know Yahweh” for everyone will “know Yahweh.” Has such a time come for us? No, it has not. We are still required to teach others to “know Yahweh.” In fact, we often need teaching ourselves! Therefore, the new covenant is not here yet. Certainly this issue of the covenants is not being used by Yahweh to change His own laws. The covenant is like a marriage contract. Now if the contract is broken, the originator of the contract has the right to make a new contract with someone else—but does he now change the conditions of the contract so as to allow his wife to be unfaithful to Him? No, He doesn’t—and no righteous court would expect Him to do so. Under the “old” covenant, it was Israel who promised to fulfill the conditions of the contract by their own strength. Under the “new” covenant it was Yahweh who promised to write His laws in their hearts. Nevertheless, His “laws” (Torah) remain.
Now it was prophesied in Scripture that Israel would one day be without sacrifice and without a king. Does this mean that they were to be cut off forever? Notice:
For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: . . . (Hosea 3:4)
Many Christians read this and stop right there and declare that the “glory has departed” from Israel forever, and therefore Yahweh has no more plans for Israel. They do this because they believe in what is called “replacement-theology” (the idea that the church has replaced Israel). Scripture, however, does not support such a view. As proof of this, we will continue reading from our text in Hosea 3. Notice the very next verse:
Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek Yahweh their Almighty, and David their king; and shall fear Yahweh and his goodness in the latter days. (Hosea 3:4-5)
Plainly, this text in Hosea is saying that Yahweh does have plans for Israel—but this time it will truly become a righteous nation. It plainly says that the “children of Israel” will return to their land. At this time the prophecy is already beginning to be fulfilled—as many of the children of Israel have already returned to the land of Israel.
In Genesis 49:10 a similar prophecy is given which Jews even from Rabbinic times recognized as Messianic. In this prophecy it is predicted that they will not only loose their king, but also their right to execute judgment. Note what it says:
Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down before thee. Judah is a lion's whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes: His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk. (Genesis 49:8-12)
There is no question about it—this is a Messianic prophecy. Does it apply to Yahushua? I believe it does. Of course, the Rabbis will generally deny it. However, at the time that this “scepter” had been taken, that is, at the time in which their “right over life and death” had been taken away, the Messiah should have come by then. This “right” to execute judgment was taken away from them at sometime prior to about the year 30 CE, for it says in the Jerusalem Talmud that:
A little more than forty years before the destruction of the temple, the power of pronouncing capital sentences was taken from the Jews.32
We know the temple was destroyed (along with Jerusalem) in the year 70 CE. That means sometime before c. 30 CE their right to execute judgment (i.e., the “scepter”) was taken away from them.
What was the reaction of the rabbis? Did they know of the implications of Genesis 49:10? Were they concerned that the prophecy had been fulfilled, yet “Shiloh” (the Messiah) had not come? Well, let us allow them to tell us in their own words:
Rabbi Nachmon says, ‘When the members of the Sanhedrin found themselves deprived of their right over life and death, a general consternation took possession of them; they covered their heads with ashes, and their bodies with sackcloth, exclaiming, ‘Woe unto us, for the scepter has departed from Judah, and the Messiah has not come.’33
Even the Jewish Sanhedrin realized that the prophecy had been fulfilled, yet they generally failed to recognize that the true Messiah was already in their midst. Or is it possible that they actually knew He was the Messiah, and yet because of their evil agenda chose to reject Him?
The prophecy of Genesis 49:8-12 had been fulfilled. Shiloh had come just prior to the scepter being taken away from Judah. Yahushua was born just before that power was taken away. In the end of His ministry, He rode triumphantly into Jerusalem on the “foal of an ass” in that final week of his earthly life. Indeed, in the final week of Daniel’s 70-week prophecy, the Messiah did confirm the covenant with many. But here comes the next part of the prophecy of Daniel 9:
. . . and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. . . (Daniel 9:27)
Previously we read from the book of Hebrews concerning the sacrifice of Messiah. Note what it says:
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Yahushua Messiah once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of the Almighty; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. (Hebrews 10:10-14)
32The Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin, Folio 24, Recto.33The Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, Chapter 4, Folio 37, Recto.
In the midst of the final week of Daniel 7 the Messiah Yahushua died as the ultimate fulfillment of the entire sacrificial system. I believe this took place in the spring of 31 CE. The sacrificial system which had existed all throughout the history of mankind, and was perfected under the Aaronic priesthood, had meaning only as it pointed to the work of Yahushua the Messiah. When He finally fulfilled His commission, the sacrifices no longer had any significant meaning for the Jewish nation. Yes, the sacrifices continued to be performed for about 40 years—until the temple and the city of Jerusalem were finally destroyed. But these sacrifices only had meaning to the believers in Messiah as they now perceived that they are and had always been an object lesson which pointed the people to Yahushua—the ultimate sacrifice. For many of the Jews these sacrifices had by then become only dead works. Therefore, the prophecy which speaks of how “he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease” was indeed fulfilled at that time. The glory was departed from the temple, and the sacrifices were no longer relevant to the people of that time. As a result, the sacrifices had been put aside, in Yahweh’s plan of salvation. But it was not to be a permanent desolation, for Yahweh still has a plan for His people Israel.
Is there any evidence that supports the idea that the glory of Yahweh had departed from the sacrificial system after the death of the Messiah? Yes, both from the Messianic Writings, the Talmud, and Josephus:
Yahushua, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. (Matthew 27:50-53—see also the parallel accounts of Mark 15:38 and Luke 23:45)
It would appear that Matthew validates the prophecy of Daniel 9—the Shekinah glory of Yahweh had left the temple at the death of Yahushua.
Is there any historical evidence for what we have just declared? Please note how the rabbis themselves admitted that this happened 40 years before the temple was destroyed (in 70 CE). In both the Mishna Sanhedrin and the Avoda Zara, it speaks of how the sacrifices lost their effectiveness 40 years before the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed. This is also repeated in the Masekhet Yoma of the Talmud, where it speaks of Rabbi Johanan Ben Zakkai (who died about the year 90 CE):
40 years before the destruction of the sanctuary... its western lamp went out and the doors of the sanctuary opened themselves. Then Rabbi Johanan Ben Zakkai rebuked them, saying, 'Temple, O Temple, why dost thou grieve so? I know this about thee, that thou shalt be destroyed. The prophet Zechariah has, after all, foretold of thee; Open thy doors, O Lebanon, so that fire may devour your cedars'
(11:1). Rabbi Yitshak Ben Tablai said, 'That is why its name was called Lebanon, because it makes white the sins of Israel.'34
Jacob Neusner wrote concerning Johanan Ben Zakkai, that this first incident was a fore warning of the great disaster which was to take place 40 years later. He speaks of how Josephus describes the exact same type of event in The War of the Jews:
Josephus recorded a similar omen concerning the massive brass eastern gate of the temple's inner court. Though securely locked by iron bolts, the gate opened by itself in the middle of the night. The watchman of the temple ran and reported the matter to the captain, he came up and with difficulty succeeded in shutting it.35
And Josephus confirms this as he reports how the Shekinah glory had already departed from the temple less than a year before it was finally destroyed. Here is the account from Josephus himself:
. . . Thus there was a star resembling a sword, which stood over the city, and a comet, that continued a whole year. . . . Moreover, the eastern gate of the inner [court of the] temple, which was of brass, and vastly heavy, and had been with difficulty shut by twenty men, and rested upon a basis armed with iron, and had bolts fastened very deep into the firm floor, which was there made of one entire stone, was seen to be opened of its own accord about the sixth hour of the night. Now those that kept watch in the temple came hereupon running to the captain of the temple, and told him of it; who then came up thither, and not without great difficulty was able to shut the gate again. . . . the men of learning understood it, that the security of their holy house was dissolved of its own accord, and that the gate was opened for the advantage of their enemies. So these publicly declared that the signal foreshowed the desolation that was coming upon them.36
The prophecy of Daniel 9 was fulfilled, as the glory of Yahweh’s presence appears to have left at the exact same moment the Messiah was crucified. The temple partition between the holy place and the most holy was torn in two, revealing the innermost sanctum of the temple. Still, in no account does it speak of anyone being struck dead by this event (they should have died, since they were able to see the contents of the Most Holy place). Then we read from the Talmud how the gate mysteriously opened near that same time in history, and less than 40 years later the same omen took place again just before the temple was finally destroyed. This event is also directly spoken of in Daniel 9:26 and 27:
. . . and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. (Daniel 9:26)
34Yoma, Chapter 39, Section b, from the Babylonian Talmud.35Jacob Neusner, First Century Judaism in Crisis, p. 73-75.36 Josephus, The War of the Jews, Book 6, Chapter 5, Verse 3.
. . . and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. (Daniel 9:27)
Yahushua speaks of the “abomination that makes desolate” on several occasions. Two things are obvious: He is drawing upon the book of Daniel for this description, and He is clearly indicating that Antiochus Epiphanes (as described in Daniel 8) is not the only fulfillment for such a “desolation.” There was another similar fulfillment that was expected. Yahushua knew that the abominable “desolations” of Daniel 9:26-27 were to be fulfilled by the Roman invasion of Titus about 40 years in the future:
And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: (Matthew 24:14-16)
But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains: And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house: (Mark 13:14-15)
The Messiah warns “whoso readeth, let him understand”—understand what? He is implying that the reader should understand that there is more than one fulfillment to this “abomination of desolation,” and that Antiochus Epiphanies was not the only fulfillment. Evidently, the prophecy of Matthew 24 had multiple fulfillments—one for the past (Antiochus), one for the near future (destruction of the temple), and one for the last days (anti-Messiah). The gospel of the kingdom is to go to all the world again, just as it did in the first century. But whatever the case, we can know for a certainty from the context of the earlier part of Mark 13, that the Messiah had in mind the destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem, because He specifically warns the disciples about this very thing:
And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here! And Yahushua answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled? (Mark 13:1-4)
In the writings of Josephus, it is recorded that by the year 66 CE many people had already begun leaving Jerusalem due to the potential of attack
from the Romans.37 Josephus also states that he understood the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus and the desolation of his country by the Romans as the fulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel, as he states:
In the very same manner Daniel also wrote concerning the Roman government, and that our country should be made desolate by them. All these things did this man leave in writing, as God had showed them to him, insomuch that such as read his prophecies, and see how they have been fulfilled, would wonder at the honor wherewith God honored Daniel. . . . So that, by the forementioned predictions of Daniel, those men seem to me very much to err from the truth, who determine that God exercises no providence over human affairs; for if that were the case, that the world went on by mechanical necessity, we should not see that all things would come to pass according to his prophecy. Now as to myself, I have so described these matters as I have found them and read them; but if any one is inclined to another opinion about them, let him enjoy his different sentiments without any blame from me.38
This warning of Yahushua was strictly adhered to by the early believers. As recorded by several authorities from that time (such as Eusebius) the believers in Messiah fled across Jordan and entered into the city of Pella just before the legions of Rome laid siege to the city of Jerusalem.39
From the time that Yahushua was sacrificed there began to spread through the nation the “abomination of desolation.” Rejection of Yahweh’s truth always brings desolation, but to reject the ultimate demonstration of Yahweh’s truth and love (through His Son Yahushua) was the most devastating thing one could do. The result was that Yahweh’s Spirit was withdrawn from the city of Jerusalem and the temple, and it became desolate. This spiritual desolation would last for many years, “even until the consummation” when the city of Jerusalem and the temple were finally destroyed by Titus in 70 CE. That which Yahweh had “determined” as a fitting punishment was to be “poured upon the desolate”—and indeed it was.
The early believers must have known without any doubt that the “abomination of desolation,” described by Daniel (and later the Messiah Himself) would involve the destruction of the temple by a foreign power (Rome). Any other future fulfillment (i.e., dual application) would have to be something which would still fulfill the general requirements of the prophecy (an evil power, an anti-Messiah, seeking to take control of or destroy the “temple of Yahweh” The Messiah says we are—in a spiritual sense, the “temple of Yahweh”—which I would suggest should be the starting point for any further study into the issue of the “abomination of desolation.” For documentation from the Talmud regarding the issue of the Shekinah glory
37Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, Book 2, Chapter 20, Verse 1; Book 4, Chapter 6, Verse 3.38Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book 10, Chapter 11, Section 7.39Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Chapter 5, Section 3.
departing at that time, please visit this website: Talmudic Evidence for the Messiah at 30 C.E. ]
The “7 weeks” of Daniel 9:25 Are Clearly a Reference to a Complete Jubilee Cycle of 49 years, Exactly as
Shown Above.
Now there are several questions which remain. But for now we ask only these two questions: Can we find the evidence to support when this 490 year prophecy begins? How can we prove it was a year of Jubilee?
6. The Decree to Restore and Rebuild Jerusalem: Which One Was Predicted?
The “going forth of the commandment” is in reference to a command (or decree) which would permit the children of Israel to restore and establish Jerusalem. There are four decrees which have been considered for the fulfillment of this prophecy, which were given on these dates40 (in chronological order):
537 BCE
520 BCE
457 BCE
444 BCE
Regarding the basic “content” of these 4 decrees, let us consider if they will fit the criteria of Daniel’s prophecy. In the book of Ezra, the decree of Cyrus (in 537 BCE) was for the purpose of allowing the Israelites to rebuild the temple. It is found in Ezra 1:1-4:
Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of Yahweh by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, Yahweh stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, Yahweh Almighty of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all his people? his Almighty be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of Yahweh Almighty of Israel, (he is the Almighty) which is in Jerusalem. And whosoever remaineth in any place where he sojourneth, let the men of his place help him with silver, and with gold, and with goods, and with beasts, beside the freewill offering for the house of the Almighty that is in Jerusalem. (Ezra 1:1-4)
Please notice that this decree is not concerned with establishing Jerusalem, but in allowing Judah to return home and begin rebuilding the temple at Jerusalem. It says nothing of rebuilding the city of Jerusalem, nor extending
40Sometimes these dates are given in standard reference works with a variance of 1 year. Once we have established which decree is the most likely decree to fulfill the prophecy, we will then proceed to establish the precise date of that decree.
judicial authority to the returning captives. Therefore, it does not qualify as the decree mentioned in Daniel 9:25.
Darius, in 520 BCE, issued a decree that seems to have simply reaffirmed the previous decree, as shown in Ezra 6:1-12:41
Then Darius the king made a decree, and search was made in the house of the rolls, where the treasures were laid up in Babylon. And there was found at Achmetha, in the palace that is in the province of the Medes, a roll, and therein was a record thus written: In the first year of Cyrus the king the same Cyrus the king made a decree concerning the house of Elah at Jerusalem, Let the house be builded, the place where they offered sacrifices, and let the foundations thereof be strongly laid; the height thereof threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof threescore cubits; With three rows of great stones, and a row of new timber: and let the expenses be given out of the king's house: And also let the golden and silver vessels of the house of Elah, which Nebuchadnezzar took forth out of the temple which is at Jerusalem, and brought unto Babylon, be restored, and brought again unto the temple which is at Jerusalem, every one to his place, and place them in the house of Elah. Now therefore, Tatnai, governor beyond the river, Shetharboznai, and your companions the Apharsachites, which are beyond the river, be ye far from thence: Let the work of this house of Elah alone; let the governor of the Jews and the elders of the Jews build this house of Elah in his place. Moreover I make a decree what ye shall do to the elders of these Jews for the building of this house of Elah: that of the king's goods, even of the tribute beyond the river, forthwith expenses be given unto these men, that they be not hindered. And that which they have need of, both young bullocks, and rams, and lambs, for the burnt offerings of the Elah of heaven, wheat, salt, wine, and oil, according to the appointment of the priests which are at Jerusalem, let it be given them day by day without fail: That they may offer sacrifices of sweet savours unto the Elah of heaven, and pray for the life of the king, and of his sons. Also I have made a decree, that whosoever shall alter this word, let timber be pulled down from his house, and being set up, let him be hanged thereon; and let his house be made a dunghill for this. And the Elah that hath caused his name to dwell there destroy all kings and people, that shall put to their hand to alter and to destroy this house of Elah which is at Jerusalem. I Darius have made a decree; let it be done with speed. (Ezra 6:1-12)
The decree of 444 says nothing about the restoration of self-government and even appears to be more of a government sponsored mission than a decree. It is only a reaffirmation of the previous decree (issued in 457 BCE)
41The conservative Jewish view (as expressed in the Jewish Publication Society study Bible) is that the prophecy points to the Maccabean Era and that it commences with the decree of Darius in the year 520. Most Jewish commentators completely reject any Messianic interpretation of this prophecy, stating that it predicts either Zerubabel or the High-priest Joshua (as described in Zechariah 6:9-15) and supposedly ends in 171 BCE, with the death of the High Priest Onias. This is the time of the desolation of the temple and the start of the Maccabean Era. [ http://www.truthnet.org/TheMessiah/10_Messiah_Objections_Daniels70weeks/ ] However, it only takes a quick look at the math to realize that 520 - 490 = 30 BCE for the conclusion of the 490 years, and even allowing for the final week places it in the year 37 BCE. Any other attempt to manipulate the numbers by changing the length of years also fails, as we have already demonstrated that the prophecy is based upon Jubilee and Sabbatical years (which will always average out to literal solar years in length).
for the restoration of Jerusalem. This mission is mentioned in Nehemiah 2:4-8 and it is believed to be issued in the year 444 BCE:
Then the king said unto me, For what dost thou make request? So I prayed to the Almighty of heaven. And I said unto the king, If it please the king, and if thy servant have found favour in thy sight, that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers' sepulchers, that I may build it. And the king said unto me, (the queen also sitting by him,) For how long shall thy journey be? and when wilt thou return? So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time. Moreover I said unto the king, If it please the king, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the river, that they may convey me over till I come into Judah; And a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the king's forest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the palace which appertained to the house, and for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall enter into. And the king granted me, according to the good hand of my Mighty One upon me. (Nehemiah 2:4-8)
Let us look at Artaxerxes’ decree to see if it fulfills the specifics of the prophecy. This decree is given in Ezra chapter 7, as follows. We begin with verse 11:
Now this is the copy of the letter that the king Artaxerxes gave unto Ezra the priest, the scribe, even a scribe of the words of the commandments of Yahweh, and of his statutes to Israel. Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest, a scribe of the law of the Elah of heaven, perfect peace, and at such a time. I make a decree, that all they of the people of Israel, and of his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own freewill to go up to Jerusalem, go with thee. Forasmuch as thou art sent of the king, and of his seven counselors, to inquire concerning Judah and Jerusalem, according to the law of thy Elah which is in thine hand; And to carry the silver and gold, which the king and his counselors have freely offered unto the Elah of Israel, whose habitation is in Jerusalem, And all the silver and gold that thou canst find in all the province of Babylon, with the freewill offering of the people, and of the priests, offering willingly for the house of their Elah which is in Jerusalem: That thou mayest buy speedily with this money bullocks, rams, lambs, with their meat offerings and their drink offerings, and offer them upon the altar of the house of your Elah which is in Jerusalem. And whatsoever shall seem good to thee, and to thy brethren, to do with the rest of the silver and the gold, that do after the will of your Elah. The vessels also that are given thee for the service of the house of thy Elah, those deliver thou before the Elah of Jerusalem. And whatsoever more shall be needful for the house of thy Elah, which thou shalt have occasion to bestow, bestow it out of the king's treasure house. And I, even I Artaxerxes the king, do make a decree to all the treasurers which are beyond the river, that whatsoever Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the Elah of heaven, shall require of you, it be done speedily, Unto an hundred talents of silver, and to an hundred measures of wheat, and to an hundred baths of wine, and to an hundred baths of oil, and salt without prescribing how much. Whatsoever is commanded by the Elah of heaven, let it be diligently done for the house of the Elah of heaven: for why should there be wrath against the realm of the king and his sons? Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers,
porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of Elah, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them. And thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy Elah, that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are beyond the river, all such as know the laws of thy Elah; and teach ye them that know them not. And whosoever will not do the law of thy Elah, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him, whether it be unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment. Blessed be Yahweh Elah of our fathers, which hath put such a thing as this in the king's heart, to beautify the house of Yahweh which is in Jerusalem: And hath extended mercy unto me before the king, and his counsellors, and before all the king's mighty princes. And I was strengthened as the hand of Yahweh my Elah was upon me, and I gathered together out of Israel chief men to go up with me. (Ezra 7:11-28)
When was this decree issued? It was issued in the late Spring of 457 BCE, and 4 months later, in the Fall (Ezra 7:9), Ezra arrived in Jerusalem. About 1 month later came the Day of Atonement in which the Jubilee year would have been announced before the entire congregation, and (if this is the correct decree) the 70-week prophecy would actually begin.
The Jews also at that time began to rebuild the city, the wall, and the foundation (Ezra 4:7-24). The people of the land were not happy about this, and tried to hinder the work. Complaints were made to the Persian government which put a stop to building activities in Jerusalem, both in the days of Xerxes and Artaxerxes:
And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of their companions, unto Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian tongue, and interpreted in the Syrian tongue. Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe wrote a letter against Jerusalem to Artaxerxes the king in this sort: Then wrote Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, and the Elamites, And the rest of the nations whom the great and noble Asnappar brought over, and set in the cities of Samaria, and the rest that are on this side the river, and at such a time. This is the copy of the letter that they sent unto him, even unto Artaxerxes the king; Thy servants the men on this side the river, and at such a time. Be it known unto the king, that the Jews which came up from thee to us are come unto Jerusalem, building the rebellious and the bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and joined the foundations. Be it known now unto the king, that, if this city be builded, and the walls set up again, then will they not pay toll, tribute, and custom, and so thou shalt endamage the revenue of the kings. Now because we have maintenance from the king's palace, and it was not meet for us to see the king's dishonour, therefore have we sent and certified the king; That search may be made in the book of the records of thy fathers: so shalt thou find in the book of the records, and know that this city is a rebellious city, and hurtful unto kings and provinces, and that they have moved sedition within the same of old time: for which cause was this city destroyed. We certify the king that, if this city be builded again,
and the walls thereof set up, by this means thou shalt have no portion on this side the river. Then sent the king an answer unto Rehum the chancellor, and to Shimshai the scribe, and to the rest of their companions that dwell in Samaria, and unto the rest beyond the river, Peace, and at such a time. The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me. And I commanded, and search hath been made, and it is found that this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that rebellion and sedition have been made therein. There have been mighty kings also over Jerusalem, which have ruled over all countries beyond the river; and toll, tribute, and custom, was paid unto them. Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me. Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage grow to the hurt of the kings? Now when the copy of king Artaxerxes' letter was read before Rehum, and Shimshai the scribe, and their companions, they went up in haste to Jerusalem unto the Jews, and made them to cease by force and power. Then ceased the work of the house of God which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia. (Ezra 4:7-24)
We should add that there seems to be a chronological problem here since Ezra 4 comes before Ezra 7, and therefore would appear to be listed chronologically before the decree of Ezra 7. However, there is evidence which clearly shows that parts of Ezra 4 really do belong to the time of the decree of Artaxerxes (as given in Ezra 7).
First of all, while it may seem logical that there could be more than one “Artaxerxes,” just as there could be more than one Ahasuerus (also commonly believed to be Xerxes42), this supposition cannot be supported by the well known listing of the kings of Persia! There is only one Xerxes and one Artaxerxes reigning in the time frame indicated by Ezra 4. Who was the king that put a stop to the building activities of the city of Jerusalem? The text of Ezra 4 says it was Artaxerxes.
This supplemental information reveals that they were engaged in building during the reign of Xerxes (not only the temple, but also the city of Jerusalem. The name of those kings are listed as Ahasuerus (also called Xerxes) and Artaxerxes. Many believe that this is referring to a time well before the kings of Xerxes and Artaxerxes, because it plainly states in Ezra 4:5 that the construction was delayed “all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia.” The reign of Cyrus the Great began about the year 559 (his reign over the whole Babylonian Empire began in 538) and ended in 530 BCE. Since the reign of Darius is known to have begun in 521, it appears to be saying that the Ahasuerus (Xerxes) and the Artaxerxes of Ezra 4:6-7 must be describing different kings than the ones that came over 50 years later. But the historical data that we have
42“Xerxes (Persian)- ("ruler of heroes") Also known by his actual name, Ahasuerus (Hebrew), King of Persia from 486-464 B.C.E.”— King Xerxes Invades Greece, by By: Paul Chrastina. http://adam2.org/eastons/ebd/xerxes.html also see Wikipedia, Xerxes I of Persia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerxes_I_of_Persia
available to us (which is abundant in regard to the Persian Empire) completely contradicts this view. There is no king listed between the reigns of Cyrus and Darius by the names of Xerxes (Ahasuerus) and Artaxerxes! As confirmation of this, we submit to you the complete list of Persian kings from the Achaemenid Dynasty—from Achaemenes to Artaxerxes V, as listed in Wikipedia43:
List of Persian Kings and Dates of Reign from the Achaemenid Dynasty
Achaemenes (Legendary Founder of Persian Empire)
Uncertain Date
Teispes, king of Anshan (Son of Achaemenes)
Uncertain Date
Cyrus I of Anshan 640–580Cambyses I of Anshan 580–559Cyrus II the Great 559-529Cambyses II 530-522 BCESmerdis (his alleged brother)
522 BCE
Darius I the Great 521-486 BCEXerxes I 486-465 BCEArtaxerxes I Longimanus 464-424 BCEXerxes II 424Sogdianus 424-423Darius II Nothus 423-404 BCEArtaxerxes III Ochus 358-338 BCEArtaxerxes IV Arses 338-336 BCEDarius III Codomannus 336-330 BCEArtaxerxes V Bessus 330-329 BCE
Evidently, the list of Persian kings as given to us in Persian history match closely the order as given in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. However,
43Wikipedia, List of Kings of Persia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Kings
there are those two places in which there is a question regarding which kings put a stop to the building activities in Jerusalem (as mentioned in Ezra 4). It plainly states in Ezra 4:5 that the construction of the temple was delayed “all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia.” In the preceding table, those kings are highlighted in purple. Notice that Xerxes and Artaxerxes are listed after those kings. Now notice what it says following this:
And in the reign of Ahusurerus [footnote: Xerxes], in the beginning of his reign, wrote they unto him an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem. And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of their companions, unto Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian tongue, and interpreted in the Syrian tongue. (Ezra 4:6-7)
Ahasuerus is simply another name for Xerxes. Artaxerxes could possibly be referring to another king by that name, other than Artaxerxes I and II—since this name could simply be a title. However, the historical evidence shows that this is not the case. The kings between the reigns of Cyrus and Darius were Cambyses and Pseudo Smerdis, as we have already determined. This is solidly established from various historical sources. Therefore, the statements found in Ezra 4:7-23 are clearly listed out of chronological order. In Ezra 4:6 it speaks of stopping the work on the building of the temple. In Ezra 4:7-23 it continuously speaks of stopping the work on the building of the city of Jerusalem (the temple is not mentioned here). Finally, in Ezra 4:24, it brings us back again to the issue of the building of the temple and clearly states that the building of the temple was stopped until the second year of Darius. Therefore, the Artaxerxes who stopped the building of the city of Jerusalem (according to Ezra 4:7) is the same Artaxerxes who permitted Ezra to return to Jerusalem and do that very thing—to restore Jerusalem. It is clear that Artaxerxes did indeed permit Ezra to return to Jerusalem for that work, but because of the evil reports from the people of the land he attempted to renege on his promises from time to time.
Having established the chronology of Ezra and the events surrounding the giving of the first two decrees, we need to know if these qualify as the decree to restore and build Jerusalem. For certain, the first two decrees (Cyrus in 536 and Darius in 520 BCE) were important as they sought to reestablish the Jewish people in their homeland and restore the temple for purposes of worship. However, they do not meet the specifications of the prophecy in Daniel 9:25 because they do not say anything about restoring self-government to the Jews, nor about restoring the city, only restoring the temple. The prophecy specifically requires the restoration of self-government, as mentioned in Daniel 9:25.
The only decree that appears to meet the specifications and requirements of the prophecy of Daniel 9 is the decree of Artaxerxes given in 457 BCE.
That decree involved the restoration of the temple (Ezra 7:11-28) and its worship, as well as the restoration of self-government to the Jews in Jerusalem (Ezra 7:25-26). The restoration of full civil authority to Jerusalem was restored by this decree. Unlike the other 3 decrees, that decree also permitted the Jews (through Ezra himself) to “appoint magistrates and judges to administer justice to all the people” according to the laws of Yahweh (Ezra 7:25-26). In Ezra 6:14 all three decrees are spoken of as if one (the decree of Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes) showing that it is the final decree of Artaxerxes (in 457 BCE) which was the capstone and the most crucial decree of them all. Without question, it is the only decree of the four possible ones listed here which gives the Jews self-ruling authority. [Please see Patmos Papers website for a more complete explanation of why the decree of 457 BCE is the right one, as opposed to the other 3 decrees.]
King Scripture Date Details of the DecreeCyrus Ezra 1 537 BCE This decree allowed the
Jews to return to Israel and begin to rebuild the temple. However, this project was stopped because of rumors. (see Ezra 4:1-13).
Darius Ezra 6 520 BCE This decree allowed the Jews to finish the rebuilding of the temple, which they did 5 years later.
Artaxerxes Ezra 7 457 BCE This decree gave the Jewish people (through Ezra) the power of self-government as they began to enforce the Laws of Yahweh.
Artaxerxes Nehemiah 1-2
444 BCE This decree gave Nehemiah the authority to finish rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem.
Regarding the issue of the “timing” of these decrees, only one of these dates could possibly work. The prophecy of Daniel 9 clearly indicates that it is to reach all the way to the time of the Messiah. There are 3 possible dates when the Messiah would most likely have been crucified: 30 CE, 31 CE, and 33 CE. While some scholars believe that the year 33 CE is the correct date of the crucifixion, there is abundant evidence which favors one of the earlier dates.44 For our purposes at this time, it is not important for us to be settled regarding the exact date—only to know the general time in which Messiah came to offer Himself as a sacrifice. Subtracting 490 years from any of these dates (30, 31, or 33 CE), we come up with 461, 460, and 44Archer, G.L., Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI., 1982, p.291.
458 BCE (all of which are close to the time of 457 BCE). Therefore, the only decree that could possibly fit the approximate “timing” aspect of the prophecy is the decree of Artaxerxes of 457 BCE. As we continue with this discussion in later chapters, we will more precisely fix the date in relation to the prophecy.
There are those who seek to use the decree of 444 to establish the time of Yahushua’s crucifixion. Sir Robert Anderson taught that the 70 weeks were to be established based upon “prophetic years” of 360 days—12 months, each composed of 30 days. By calculating time in this way, he took the prophecy from 444 BCE to 33 CE. One problem with this method is that it does not leave time for the Messiah to do anything, since the Messiah was to cause the “offering and oblation to cease” in the midst of the final week. We have determined that the Messiah most likely began his ministry in 27 CE—too late to align with 444. Another problem with this method is that it is too complex—and when something is too complex, it gives all the appearance of being artificial. We should be able to calculate this time prophecy using the typical solar year. Although there is evidence that in ancient times (prior to 2000 BCE) some people (for example, the Egyptians) used 30-day months and therefore a 360-day yearly calendar, such a system no longer existed by the time of the post-temple era. Even with that system, the Egyptians still added 5 days to the calendar to adjust for the solar year.
The Jews used various calendars at this time, a 364-day calendar based upon the seven-day week (see the Book of Jubilees and the Book of Enoch), and a 354-day calendar based upon the phases of the moon, with the addition of an “intercalary month” every few years to correct the calendar. Nevertheless, they were well aware of the fact that a solar year was 365.24 days in length, and knew how to adjust their calendars accordingly. We are certain that they knew what the solar year was because they and the Babylonians had worked out a system whereby 235 lunar months very accurately lined up with 19 solar years of 365.24 days (accurate to within about two hours and four minutes). The Greeks also developed the same exact system, what they called the Metonic cycle.45
While some today will still attempt to use this less than accurate cycle of 360-day pseudo-lunar years (or some other variation) to attempt to make one of the other decrees extend to the time of Messiah—the evidence simply does not support this line of reasoning.
Another major problem with these other views (which use some other dating scheme other than a literal solar year, such as a 360-day calendar) is that they completely ignore the connection between the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, the Sabbatical/Jubilee year (solar year) cycles, and the 70 years (solar
45Wikipedia, Metonic cycle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonic_cycle
years) of Jeremiah’s prophecies. As we have established in a previous chapter, these cycles are all indeed connected. We would, therefore, expect that the same yearly cycles would be used in all of them. Lest we forget what has already been established, the prophecy of the 70 weeks is the answer to Daniel’s questions concerning the 70 “years” of captivity (solar years—see Daniel 9:1-2). Add to this the fact that the 70 “years” of captivity (solar years) were the result of breaking the Sabbatical years (which also used solar years), and we can understand that this 70-week prophecy must be based upon the Sabbatical year system. What this means is that the cycle of “weeks” cannot refer to any other cycle than a 7-day week as amplified by the solar year (e.g., “weeks of years”), which is based upon the sabbatical years in which the years were (and still are) marked by the equinoxes (either fall or spring) and begun at the new moon on or after this line of demarcation. The equinox marks one complete revolution of the earth around the sun, and is approximately 365.24 days in length.
When taking all of these factors into consideration, the only decree that even comes close to fulfilling the prophecy (the “content,” the “timing,” and the yearly “cycle”) is the one issued in 457 BCE.
Does Scripture support the understanding that the decree of Artaxerxes is the correct decree upon which to start the 70-week prophecy? Yes it does! Were they engaged in building the city as well as the civil government? Yes they were!
But now we need to establish how certain we are that the date of 457 BCE is the actual date of this decree.
7. When Was the Decree to Rebuild Jerusalem Given?As we all know, the seventy years of desolation that Yahweh imposed upon Jerusalem eventually came to an end with Cyrus’ decree in 537 BCE (Ezra 1:1; 5:13 and 6:3), which allowed the Jews to return to their homeland and begin to rebuild their temple (Ezra 1:1-4). Imagine the excitement this must have brought to Yahweh’s chosen people! Having been raised in a land not their own, Jerusalem could only have been a dream to most of the Jews. To put this in perspective, I am told that my ancestors came to America from Scotland. I have often wondered what life was like in Scotland for my forebearers, so I naturally long to visit that country. However, visiting Scotland is only a dream for me, so unless circumstances change, I do not expect to ever make it there. I can only imagine what it would be like if I had been told of what a magnificent country Scotland is, but that my ancestors had been forcibly removed in the distant past. What if I were told that I could now return and start a new life in the very place once inhabited by my great-great-great grandparents? In the same way, imagine the stories that Jewish children, growing up in Babylon, were told of what had once been their homeland, and especially the stories about the temple and the feasts that were celebrated there! Finally, their dreams were about to become reality!
Once they arrived, however, life was not so easy. We have read of how the Samaritans stirred up trouble (Ezra 4:1-24), causing work on the beloved temple to cease. It wasn’t until some sixteen years later, in Persian King Darius’ second year (Ezra 4:24), that construction of the temple was allowed to resume (520 BCE). We can only imagine the excitement that flooded the hearts of Judaism, when, in Darius’ sixth year of reigning (Ezra 6:15), the temple was finally completed!
We now fast-forward to the reign of King Artaxerxes, the Persian king who reigned from 464 to 424 BCE. It was during his reign that the decree of his seventh year was issued (Ezra 7), the decree that reestablished Jewish law as the basis of local government, making possible the restoration of Jerusalem as the capital city of Israel.
Now some Bible scholars prefer to place the decree of Artaxerxes in the spring of the year 458, instead of 457 BCE, as we here maintain. How do we know when to place this decree in our timeline? Before we answer this question, it might be beneficial to get some background information on how major events were typically dated in ancient times—and cross-checked for accuracy in modern times. For a detailed explanation of that, please go to Appendix III: Dating Events in Ancient Times.
Now that we have a better understanding of how to determine dates in ancient history, should we place the decree of Artaxerxes in the spring of the year 458, or in the spring of 457 BCE? The main reason for the difference in dating this event is based upon whether Ezra was using the Persian/Babylonian calendar or the Jewish calendar. The Persians and Babylonians followed a spring-to-spring civil calendar, whereas the Jews are known to have followed a fall-to-fall civil calendar. The question is, “Did Ezra use the Persian calendar or the Jewish calendar to date that event?” The answer will decide for us the year in which the decree was actually issued and put into force.
Thankfully, we have a direct answer from Scripture on this issue. Ezra and Nehemiah were contemporaries, and at some point in time they began to work closely together. If Nehemiah used a certain dating system, then we can safely assume Ezra did the same.
We can determine which calendar Ezra used based upon the dates found in Nehemiah 1:1 and 2:1. The first chapter of Nehemiah gives us a specific month and year—“Chisleu, in the twentieth year.” In the second chapter (which describes events only a few months later) it gives the month of “Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes.” It is impossible for Nisan to still be in the 20th year of Artaxerxes if he is using spring-to-spring calculations—for Nisan is in the spring, and therefore it should have been the 21st year (in a spring-to-spring calendar). Using a fall-to-fall calendar, however, we can solve the problem completely—since Chisleu46 and Nisan47 could both be represented (in that order) as part of the same year. So, it is clear that Ezra (who was a contemporary of Nehemiah) was using the Jewish civil fall-to-fall calendar to determine dates.48 Thus, at least during the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, the first day of Tishri49 (the 7th month) was the time to start
46Chisleu is also called Kislimu and Kislev, and represents the 9th month of the Babylonian civil calendar, and the 3 rd month of the Jewish civil calendar. It corresponds roughly to December-January. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_calendar#Modern_calendar 47Nisan is the Babylonian equivalent of the Hebrew month of “Abib,” declared the first month of the year by Moses himself (Exodus 12:1-2). It corresponds roughly to March-April. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nisan 48It is true that ancient Israel was also given a spring-to-spring calendar at the time of the Exodus (Exodus 12:1-2), but this calendar was given to them for religious purposes. It does not say in Exodus 12 that it would be wrong to also use a fall-to-fall calendar in conjunction with the other one, and two texts in Exodus clearly state that the year can also end in the fall (see Exodus 23:16 and Exodus 34:22). The fact that they were given this spring-to-spring calendar does not prove that they could not have also made use of a fall-to-fall calendar, and several texts in Scripture clearly point to the fact that they used the fall-to-fall calendar for civil matters (as related to the conclusion of the harvest) and for the purpose of introducing the year of Jubilee. The Egyptians began their year at an odd season—in the summer. Since Moses directed them to use a spring-to-spring calendar immediately after leaving Egypt, this strongly implies that the purpose of this new calendar was to replace the Egyptian summer-to-summer calendar—not the fall-to-fall calendar. Therefore, since the fall-to-fall calendar appears to be more universally used in Jewish history (as we know it was after the Babylonian captivity, cf. Nehemiah 1:2), and because the year of Jubilee was always announced on the Day of Atonement in the fall (see Leviticus 25:9-10) we believe that the fall-to-fall calendar is the true basis for establishing the Jubilee cycles. Since the prophecy of Daniel 9 is connected with the Jubilee cycles, then its fulfillment also would be linked with a fall-to-fall calendar.49Tishri is the seventh month of the Jewish religious calendar, and the first month of their civil calendar. It roughly corresponds to the months of September-October. “Tishrei . . . the first month of the civil year and the seventh month of the ecclesiastical year in the Hebrew calendar.” . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tishri
counting the years for “foreign kings.” We also have confirmation of this from the Talmud, as explained by Ziegfried Horn:
That the fifth century Jews actually counted the regnal year of the Persian kings according to their own fall-to-fall calendar is attested not only by Nehemiah.... later on (it is) traditionally by the Talmud. ‘According to the explanation of Rosh Hashanah ... the first of Tishri (the seventh month) is the new year for foreign kings.50
More directly, the Talmud, in commenting on Rosh Hashannah in the Gemara, states the same thing.51 Not only does this commentary indicate a fall-to-fall calendar for foreign kings, not only does it indicate a spring-to-spring calendar for the kings of Judah, but it also shows accession year reckoning for the same:
The rabbis taught: If a king die in Adar, and his successor ascend the throne in Adar, (documents may be dated either) the (last) year of the (dead) king or the (first) year of the new king. If a king die in Nissan52, and his successor ascend the throne in Nissan, the same is the case. But if a king die in Adar, and his successor does not ascend the throne until Nisan, then the year ending with Adar should be referred to as the year of the dead king, and from Nissan it should be referred to as that of his successor. Is this not self-evident? The case here mentioned refers to an instance where the new king was a son of the deceased, and, while ascending the throne in Nissan, had been elected in the month of Adar, and being the king's son, it might be assumed that he was king immediately after his election, and thus the following first of Nissan would inaugurate the second year of his reign. He comes to teach us that such is not the case. . . . .
R. Hisda says: The rule of the Mishna—that the year of the kings begins with Nissan—refers to the kings of Israel only, but for the kings of other nations it commences from Tishri.53
To add to this evidence, the Mishnah plainly reveals that there were historically four ways of counting years. One of those ways of determining a year was based upon a spring-to-spring calendar. Other events (such as Sabbatical years) were established by a fall-to-fall calendar. Since the Mishnah deals almost exclusively with regulations which affect the nation of Israel, Nisan (the first month) would have naturally been considered the time to begin counting the years for kings of Israel and the feasts, while Tishri (the seventh month) would be the time to begin counting Sabbatical and Jubilee years (and foreign kings, according to the Talmud):
50The Chronology of Ezra 7, by Siegfried H. Horn and Lynn H. Wood, p. 73.51In presenting occasional quotes from the Talmud and Mishnah, let it be understood that these are not presented as inspired texts, but instead as valuable historical references revealing the well accepted beliefs of ancient Jews (extending from the first century CE to the fourth century CE, when these writings were finally compiled).52“Nissan” is a variant spelling of “Nisan,” the seventh month of the Jewish fall-to-fall calendar. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_%28disambiguation%29 53The Jewish Vertual Library, Talmud, tractate Rosh Hashana, Chapter 1 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Talmud/rh1.html
1:1 A. There are four new years:B. (1) the first day of Nisan is the new year for kings and festivals;C. (2) the first day of Elul54 is the new year for tithing cattle.D. R. Eleasar and R. Simeon say, “It is on the first day of Tishre.”E. (3) The first day of Tishre55 is the new year for the reckoning of years,
for Sabbatical years, and for Jubilees,F. for planting [trees] and for vegetables.G. (4) The first day of Shebat is the New Year for trees, . . .56
Having established that the years of foreign kings began in the fall, we need to address other issues. One issue is that fact that some Bible scholars believe Ezra and Nehemiah were not contemporaries. In connection with that, therefore, they believe that the 7th year of Artaxerxes was in reference to Artaxerxes II who reigned over 50 years after 457 BCE. Here is an example of that teaching, as shown in the Interpreters Bible Commentary:
One of the most perplexing and controversial problems of Ezra-Nehemiah is that of the date of Ezra's arrival in Jerusalem. Traditionally Artaxerxes is identified with Artaxerxes 1 (464-424 B.C.) whose seventh year was 458 B.C. Since Ezra followed Nehemiah into Palestine and was not his contemporary, the Artaxerxes must have been Artaxerxes II (404-359 B.C.), whose seventh year was 398 B.C.57
Is this true? Amazingly, many believe that Ezra and Nehemiah were not living at the same time (as plainly revealed in Nehemiah 8:1-9), and that they can therefore question the relevance of Scripture. Please note the profound statement of another in this regard:
The chronological problems connected with the era of Ezra-Nehemiah remain unsolved, though there is a growing scholarly consensus in favour of reversing the traditional order (which place Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I, i.e. 458, and Nehemiah in the 20th year, or 445). Van Hoonacker was the chief exponent of the view that Ezra followed Nehemiah and was therefore to be dated in the reign of Artaxerxes II (seventh year-398).58
Do the chronological issues regarding the era of Ezra and Nehemiah “remain unsolved,” as the author above states? A common assumption from some is that Nehemiah and Ezra were not contemporaries, which therefore (supposedly) proves that the Artaxerxes mentioned in Ezra 7 could not have been Artzxerxes I but instead Artaxerxes II of a later generation. However, there is ample historical evidence that proves this to be in error. In the Chronology of Ezra 7, Siegfried Horn demonstrates from
54Elul is the 6th month of the Jewish Calendar, approximately August-September.55“Tishre” is a variant spelling for “Tishri,” the seventh month of the Jewish Calendar. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tishri 56The Mishnah, A New Translation. Edited by Jacob Neusner. Yale University Press: New Haven and London, 1988. ROSH HASHSHANAH 1.1, p. 299.57Interpreters Bible Commentary, Commentary on Ezra, Volume 3, p. 624.58The Bible and the Ancient Near East; G. Ernest Wright, editor, p. 213.
reliable historical documents how this idea of Artaxerxes II being the one referred to in Ezra 7 is simply wrong. He states the following:
In the Elephantine papyri AP 30 and 31 we learn that Johanan was high priest in Jerusalem in 407 B.C. This was during the reign of Artaxerxes the second. He [Johanan] is mentioned in Nehemiah 12-22:23 [also in Ezra 10:6) as a son of a high priest Eliashib. Eliashib held this office under Nehemiah!! (Neh. 3:1)59
Basically, what these Elephantine documents prove is that Eliashib lived in the generation prior to the reign of Artaxerxes II, and was a contemporary of both Ezra and Nehemiah. In addition to this, we have the testimony of Nehemiah 8:1-9, which plainly states that Ezra and Nehemiah were both alive, functioning, and working together at the same time. This means Ezra and Nehemiah were definitely contemporaries, that they lived during the reign of Artaxerxes I, and therefore the decree of Artaxerxes really did take place in the 7th year of the reign of Artaxerxes I (what I will soon demonstrate can be more precisely established as 457 BCE).
Now we need to establish more exactly when the reign of Artaxerxes I began and when this decree was issued. According to a papyrus document found at Elephantine Island and the cuneiform tablets of Ur, in late December of 465 BCE it was still considered the 21st year of Xerxes and the beginning of the reign of Artaxerxes. Xerxes himself was assassinated sometime in the fall or winter of 465 BCE. Evidently, based upon that evidence, there was a delay of a few months before he was replaced by his son Artaxerxes as the new king of the Chaldeans. We know this because chronologists have already determined that the 21st year of Xerxes is still ongoing by December of 465 BCE and the first year of Artaxerxes is not declared until sometime in 464 BCE. How did they know all of this?
First, they know from historical accounts that the full length of Xerxes reign was 21 years. This can be determined by the simple fact that the 21st year of Xerxes (and therefore 465 BCE) is plainly declared in historical documents to be his last year of life! The historical documents I am referring to are called saros tablets. One of those tablets is named BM 32234 and it is dated by astronomical events to the 21st year of Xerxes, part of which says:
Month V, 14 [?], Xerxes was murdered by his son.60
Xerxes was clearly assassinated in his 21st year (sometime between the fall and winter of 465 BCE), as attested to by this and several other cuneiform
59The Chronology of Ezra 7, by Siegfried H. and Lynn H. Wood, p. 90.60The Saros tablets are studied in detail in these publications: Zur Chronologie der Seleuciden, ZA 8 (1893): 106-113 and J. N. Strassmaier, Einige chronologische Daten aus astronomischen Rechnungen, ZA 7 (1892): 197-204.
tablets. But what was the first year of Artaxerxes? Did his reign begin immediately?
Evidently, his reign did not begin in the fall of 465 BCE. For example, we have historical confirmation of the exact timing of the 11 th year of Artaxerxes. One document which confirms this is a diary of astronomical information (called VAT 5047) which lists the 11th year of Artzxerxes as the year of two peculiar lunar alignments with Mercury, Jupiter, Venus and Saturn. Based upon astronomical data from that general time, that particular year could only have been the year 454 BCE.61 Since 454 BCE would be part of Artaxerxes’ 11th year, ten years prior to this would give us the first year of Artaxerxes—464 BCE.
Backtracking From the 11th year of Artaxerxes (Based upon VAT 5047)
11th year 454/45362
10th year 455/4549th year 456/4558th year 457/4567th year 458/4576th year 459/4585th year 460/4594th year 461/4603rd year 462/4612nd year 463/4621st year 464/463
Please notice that this also establishes the 7th year of Artaxerxes as 458/457 BCE. There are other ways we can determine the first year of Artaxerxes. For example, we know that Xerxes died in his 21st year. In addition to this, we know that even as late as December of 465 BCE it was still considered the 21st year of Xerxes! There are several papyri which give us evidence of this. Before I present these documents I wish to remind the reader that the month of Kisleu and the month of Kislimu are actually variant names of the same month (Kislev, in the Hebrew calendar—December-January). The first document precisely establishes the exact date of the ascension of Artaxerxes to the throne. Here is what this Aramaic papyrus (AP 6) says:
61A. J. Sachs and H. Hunger, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, Vol. I: Diaries from 652 to 262 B.C. (Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1988), pp. 56-59.62Today our calendars start from January 1. However, in ancient times historical dates are given in connection with calendars which either start in the spring, the summer, or the fall. In the interest of accuracy, we will often give two dates in this presentation.
On the 18th of Kisleu which is the (17th) day of Thoth63, in year 21, the beginning of the reign when King Artaxerxes sat on his throne64
The “day of Thoth” is in reference to an Egyptian month which (at that time) begins almost the same time as the Hebrew month Kisleu, and it is the Egyptian New Year. The 18th day of Kisleu would be the 17th day of Thoth in the Hebrew calendar, at that time in history. Based upon other chronological data, we can more specifically identify the beginning of this month Thoth as December 17, 465 BCE.65 Kisleu 18 would therefore be January 3rd or 4th in the year 464 BCE.
How do we know this? We know this because of the great Egyptian Sothic Cycle. Using this great cycle, we are able to coordinate exactly the 18th day of Kisleu (from a calendar which is based on lunar cycles) with the 17 th day of Thoth (from a calendar which is based upon the Egyptian Sothic Cycle). In ancient times, the Egyptian calendar was composed of 360 days (30 days to each month) with 5 added days to allow it to approximate the actual solar year.66 However, the Egyptian calendar was out of sync with the actual solar year by about one-fourth of a day for every year. We know that the Sothic cycle began at a certain date in history at the rising of Sirius in Egypt, and the date of this grand cycle is confirmed by Censorinus, a Roman grammarian and writer on a great variety of subjects:
According to Roman writer Censorinus, the Egyptian New Year’s Day fell on July 20 in the Julian Calendar in 139 CE, which was a heliacal rising of Sirius in Egypt. From this it is possible to calculate that the previous occasion on which this occurred was 1322 BCE, and the one before that was 2782 BCE.67
Based upon this, let’s do some mathematical calculations to determine what day the Egyptian New Year began in 466, 465, and 464 BCE (the three possible dates for Xerxes final year and the start of Artaxerxes regnal year).
Calculating the Last Year of Xerxes Using the 63Thoth is the name of one of the chief Egyptian deities. It is here equated with the Hebrew month of Kisleu, the ninth month (Kislev) of the Hebrew calendar (December-January). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_calendar#Modern_calendar 64The Chronology of Ezra 7, by Siegfried H. Horn and Lynn H. Wood, p. 101-103. See also A. E. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford: Oxford University, 1923). AP 6 papyrus is on page 15-18.65This date can be accurately determined because these months were based upon a repeatable and predictable astronomical event (the phases of the moon), which can be calculated backward thousands of years into the past (with an accuracy of within a few hours time). Please search the Nasa Eclipse Home Page for specific lunar dates for certain centuries, found at: http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/phase/phasecat.html 66Wikipedia, the Egyptian Calendar, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_calendar67Ibid.
Egyptian Sothic CyclePossible Dates
for Xerxes Final Year
466 BCE 465 BCE 464 BCE
Subtract the date in question from the year the Egyptians are known to have been in perfect alignment with the true solar calendar.
1322-466856
1322-465857
1322-464858
Divide the number of years elapsed by four to determine the approximate number of days the Egyptian calendar is out of sync with the true solar calendar.
856/ 4
214
857/ 4
214.25
858/ 4
214.5
Subtract the total number of days from July 20 (round up one day for partial days) to establish the exact date of the first day of Thoth.
July 20 Minus 214 = December 18
July 20 Minus 215 = December 17
July 20 Minus 215 = December 17
Days and Months to
Subtract from July 20:
July = 20 daysJune = 30 daysMay = 31 daysApril = 30 daysMarch = 31 daysFeb. = 28 daysJan. = 31 daysDec. = 13 days
July = 20 daysJune = 30 daysMay = 31 daysApril = 30 daysMarch = 31 daysFeb. = 28 daysJan. = 31 daysDec. = 14 days
July = 20 daysJune = 30 daysMay = 31 daysApril = 30 daysMarch = 31 daysFeb. = 28 daysJan. = 31 daysDec. = 14 days
Worksheet:
214 Days Out of Sync with Solar Year
20+30+31+30+31+28+31+13=
214
13 days before the end of December equals
December 18
215 Days Out of Sync with Solar Year
20+30+31+30+31+28+31+14=
215
14 days before the end of December equals
December 17
215 Days Out of Sync with Solar Year
20+30+31+30+31+28+31+14=
215
14 days before the end of December equals
December 17
We now know that the first day of Thoth of the Egyptian calendar was December 18 in 466, December 17 in 465, and December 17 in 464 BCE. How does this establish the exact date? Well, it is actually simple. We have another date which is linked to the 17th day of Thoth, and that date is Kislimu 18. Kislimu is a variant spelling of Kislev, the 9 th month of the Hebrew calendar. At that time, the Hebrew calendar was based upon the repeatedly observable first sighting of the crescent moon over Israel. By using simple calculations, we can accurately calculate (to within only a couple of hours margin of error) the exact date upon which Kislev 1 fell for the years 466, 465, and 464 BCE. Here is what the evidence will show:
Using Moon Calculation programs, lunar cycles and their corresponding Julian dates can be determined even going back several thousand years. Generally, such dates are accurate to within a few hours. There is an online Moon Calculation program which proves useful to those who do not have such programs available to them. The lunar calendar dates given here are based upon an online Moon Calendar which is able to calculate lunar cycles from 3999 BCE to 3999 CE, and align them with the Julian calendar.68
Based upon the evidence shown for the dates in question, the new visible crescent moon for 465 BCE is in nearly exact alignment with the Egyptian Sothic cycle (which explains why AP 6 mentions them as being in almost perfect synchrony). Here is what we will find:
Dates Based Upon Lunar Cycles (Visual Sighting)466 BCE 465 BCE 464 BCE
Kislev 1 December 28 December 17 December 7Kislev 18 January 14 January 4 December 24
The 1460 year Sothic Cycles have also be determined (as shown earlier), and the dates for those years are also given here:
68Moon Calendar, by Paul Carlisle, http://www.paulcarlisle.net/old/MoonCalendar.html
Dates Based Upon Egyptian 1460 year Sothic Cycles466 BCE 465 BCE 464 BCE
Thoth 1 December 18 December 17 December 17Thoth 17 January 4 January 3 January 3
The only year which is in close alignment between the Hebrew month Kislev (which follows a lunar cycle) and the Egyptian month of Thoth (which follows the Sothic cycle) is the year 465 BCE. The year 466 shows Kislev 18 being 10 days late, and the year 464 BCE shows Kislev 18 being 10 days early. 465 BCE shows Kislev 18 in near perfect alignment with the Egyptian Sothic cycle, with a possible variance of + / - one day.69 The Sothic cycle dates are based upon the previously mentioned reference from Censorinus giving us 139 BCE as the last historically known alignment of the Sothic cycle with the true solar year. We therefore use the prior Sothic alignment of 1322 BCE as our starting point, subtract the number of years from that date, and divide by four to discover how many days out of sync the Sothic cycle is from the true solar year. The near perfect alignment of these dates is astounding, especially when we consider that we are going back in time nearly 2500 years! Since these are the only three possible years which Xerxes reign could have ended, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the winter of 465 BCE still being Xerxes 21st year and the beginning of the accession year of Artaxerxes.
Now there are those who would question this particular papyri (AP 6), mainly because it appears to establish (above all other forms of evidence) that the 21st year of Xerxes was also the year in which Artaxerxes began to reign. I believe it would be a mistake to simply assume that the author of this papyri made an error. Another cuneiform tablet found in the early part of the 20th century confirms what this papyri says regarding the date Artaxerxes—that he ascended to the throne in the 21st year of Xerxes:
A cuneiform tablet found in the excavation campaign of 1930-31 in Ur, [regarding] an agreement dated in the thirteenth year of Artaxerxes the first, but states that the original arrangement was signed in the month Kislimu in the twenty-first year of Xerxes.70
Along with showing the year of Artaxerxes ascent to the throne, it also appears to demonstrate that Xerxes was still alive as late as the month of Kislimu (which is the same as “Kislue” or “Kislev,” i.e., sometime around
69A very likely reason for the one-day discrepancy could be due to one of two factors: First, the Julian year of 365.25 days is also slightly out of sync with a true solar year and could explain the one-day discrepancy. Another factor that could explain this discrepancy is the fact that in ancient times Egyptians and others could have been using a conjunction moon to determine dates, as apposed to the visual sighting of the crescent. The difference between a conjunction moon and a first sighted crescent is usually about one day. If either one of these factors comes into play, Kislev 1 would be December 16, Thoth 1 would be December 17, and the 18th of Kislev would therefore have been in perfect alignment with the 17 th of Thoth. That date would correspond exactly with the evening of January 2 to the evening of January 3, 464 BCE.70Ibid., p. 101.
December of 465 or January of 464 BCE. The year 21, based upon this cuneiform tablet, is clearly the last year of the reign of Xerxes. That year 21 is still in progress as late as December of 465 BCE. It is at this time (based upon AP 6) that Artaxerxes begins his accession year. If the Jewish chroniclers are using a fall-to-fall calendar, then that would mean Artaxerxes first full year would begin in the fall of 464 BCE.
The evidences presented here also demonstrate for us that they were dating this based upon accession year reckoning. Using the non-accession year reckoning Artaxerxes first year would have been from late December of 465 to the fall of 464 BCE. As previously noted in one of the cuneiform tablets of the time, King Xerxes was still alive at this time, and that year was considered the 21st year of Xerxes. Since it is dated according to Xerxes 21st year, it certainly cannot also be considered the first full year of Artaxerxes. Artaxerxes first year had to have been calculated as the following year. This is just another confirmation of the use of accession years to date historical events, at least in this case.
In the Talmud, the Jews were generally using accession year dating methods. Accession year reckoning does not include the year in which the king ascends to the throne in calculating his length of reign.71 Instead, the remaining portion of the year is reckoned as belonging to the previous ruler.72 Since we have already determined that the Jews at this time calculated the reigns of foreign kings according to a fall-to-fall calendar (which Nehemiah, a contemporary of Ezra, confirms for us in Nehemiah 1-2), then we are left with no other option but to calculate the first year of Artaxerxes reign starting from the fall of 464 BCE. The seventh year, therefore, would have been from the fall of 458 to the fall of 457.
The Reign of ArtaxerxesBased on Accession Years for Kings
Accession Year of Artaxerxes and Last Year of Xerxes December, 465 BCE to Fall of 464 BCE
Year 1 Fall of 464 to Fall of 463 CEYear 2 Fall of 463 to Fall of 462 CEYear 3 Fall of 462 to Fall of 461 CEYear 4 Fall of 461 to Fall of 460 CEYear 5 Fall of 460 to Fall of 459 CEYear 6 Fall of 459 to Fall of 458 CEYear 7 Fall of 458 to Fall of 457 CE
Let’s look again at the decree of Artaxerxes. This decree is listed in Ezra 7:
71http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regnal_year 72The Chronology of Ancient Western Asia and Egypt, by Van Der Meer, 2nd Revised Edition, Leiden, EJ Brill, 1955, p. 7. See also Handbook of Biblical Chronology, by Jack Finegan, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1964, pp. 85.
Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Ezra the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah, The son of Shallum, the son of Zadok, the son of Ahitub, The son of Amariah, the son of Azariah, the son of Meraioth, The son of Zerahiah, the son of Uzzi, the son of Bukki, The son of Abishua, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the chief priest: This Ezra went up from Babylon; and he was a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which Yahweh Almighty of Israel had given: and the king granted him all his request, according to the hand of Yahweh his Almighty upon him. And there went up some of the children of Israel, and of the priests, and the Levites, and the singers, and the porters, and the Nethinims, unto Jerusalem, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes the king. And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king. For upon the first day of the first month began he to go up from Babylon, and on the first day of the fifth month came he to Jerusalem, according to the good hand of his Almighty upon him. For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of Yahweh, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments. Now this is the copy of the letter that the king Artaxerxes gave unto Ezra the priest, the scribe, even a scribe of the words of the commandments of Yahweh, and of his statutes to Israel. Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest, a scribe of the law of the Almighty of heaven, perfect peace, and at such a time. I make a decree, that all they of the people of Israel, and of his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own freewill to go up to Jerusalem, go with thee. Forasmuch as thou art sent of the king, and of his seven counsellors, to enquire concerning Judah and Jerusalem, according to the law of thy Mighty One which is in thine hand; And to carry the silver and gold, which the king and his counsellors have freely offered unto the Almighty of Israel, whose habitation is in Jerusalem, And all the silver and gold that thou canst find in all the province of Babylon, with the freewill offering of the people, and of the priests, offering willingly for the house of their Almighty which is in Jerusalem: That thou mayest buy speedily with this money bullocks, rams, lambs, with their meat offerings and their drink offerings, and offer them upon the altar of the house of your Almighty which is in Jerusalem. And whatsoever shall seem good to thee, and to thy brethren, to do with the rest of the silver and the gold, that do after the will of your Almighty. The vessels also that are given thee for the service of the house of thy Mighty One, those deliver thou before the Almighty of Jerusalem. And whatsoever more shall be needful for the house of thy Almighty, which thou shalt have occasion to bestow, bestow it out of the king's treasure house. And I, even I Artaxerxes the king, do make a decree to all the treasurers which are beyond the river, that whatsoever Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the Almighty of heaven, shall require of you, it be done speedily, Unto an hundred talents of silver, and to an hundred measures of wheat, and to an hundred baths of wine, and to an hundred baths of oil, and salt without prescribing how much. Whatsoever is commanded by the Almighty of heaven, let it be diligently done for the house of the Almighty of heaven: for why should there be wrath against the realm of the king and his sons? Also we certify
you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of the Almighty, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them. And thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy Mighty One, that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are beyond the river, all such as know the laws of thy Mighty One; and teach ye them that know them not. And whosoever will not do the law of thy Mighty One, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him, whether it be unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment. Blessed be Yahweh Almighty of our fathers, which hath put such a thing as this in the king's heart, to beautify the house of Yahweh which is in Jerusalem: And hath extended mercy unto me before the king, and his counsellors, and before all the king's mighty princes. And I was strengthened as the hand of Yahweh my Almighty was upon me, and I gathered together out of Israel chief men to go up with me. (Ezra 7:1-28)
All of the evidence presented here shows conclusively that the 7 th year of Artaxerxes would extend from the fall of 458 to the fall of 457 BCE. The language of the decree also shows that Ezra was given authority to establish Jewish courts of law, so that the people could be ruled according to the Torah of Yahweh—not the laws of other nations. Therefore, this decree (above all other decrees) is the one which best fulfills the language and intent of the prophecy of Daniel 9—and it clearly came in the late spring of 457 BCE.
69 Weeks would transpire until the final week of the 70 weeks prophecy. That is equal to 483 years which (counting from 457 BCE) extends to the year 27 CE. Did the Messiah come in 27 CE?
8. Was Yahushua Baptized in 27 CE?The dating of the beginning of Yahushua’s ministry is not as easily and as firmly established as the dating of the decree of Artaxerxes. However, we can make a very strong case in support of 27 CE being the time in which He was baptized by John in the Jordan river. Notice what it says in the book of Luke:
Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene, Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of the Almighty came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness. And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; (Luke 3:1-3)
Of course, the ministry of the Messiah was also very soon to begin, as recorded later in that same chapter:
Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Yahushua also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. (Luke 3:21-22)
Of all the gospel accounts, this reference to the 15th year of Tiberius is probably one of the best references we could have to determine the time in which Yahushua’s ministry began. It is even much clearer than the supposed date of his birth, which is by no means certain. Historians have given dates for his birth ranging from 6 to 1 BCE—which shows just how difficult it is to arrive at the exact date of his birth. The date of the beginning of his ministry is much more definite.
Although we cannot ascertain with certainty the exact date of the Messiah’s birth, we do have evidence which gives us an approximate time range.
One date that can be fixed with certainty is the death of Herod the Great. Josephus records the events accompanying Herod's end in such a way that the time is unmistakable. The week of the Passover was approaching, a lunar eclipse had just occurred, and the length of his reign is specified. The year 4 BC is definite, and the day, April 4, is highly probable (cf. Matt. 2:19).73
Since this date is firmly established, there is reason to conclude that the Messiah’s birth took place close to this date, with a possible variance of 2 years in either direction (6 to 2 BCE). When we add to this the estimated
73Lewis Foster, The Expositors Bible Commentary, with NIV, Vol. 1., Pg. 595.
age of Yahushua at the beginning of his ministry (30 years) it brings us to a range of 25 to 29 CE (-6 + 30 = 24 + 1 [there is no zero year] = 25 + 4 = 29)
And Yahushua himself began to be about thirty years of age . . . (Luke 3:23)
Luke confirms the approximate age of Yahushua at the time he began his public ministry, which clearly fits with our proposed time of 27 CE. Let us go back, now, to the issue regarding the reign of Tiberius. The text says:
Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar . . . (Luke 3:1)
According to Wikipedia, Augustus died on August 19, 14 CE.74 Tiberius stalled the senate and would not allow them to name him emperor for about a month. On September 18, 14 CE, Tiberius became the emperor of Rome:
The Senate convened on 18 September, ostensibly to validate Tiberius's position as Princeps and, as it had done with Augustus before, extend the powers of the position to him.75
Now one may be tempted to think that you need only add 15 years to the year 14 to arrive at the year of the Messiah’s baptism. However, there are 3 points which we need to make:
First, the Jewish year (which for civil matters was a fall-to-fall calendar) begins on the first day of the 7th month. While September 18 is only a few weeks prior to the beginning of the 7th month on the Jewish calendar, the author of Luke (who many believe was a Jew) would most likely have used inclusive reckoning to determine this date.76 The next Jewish year would have begun on November 13, 14 CE. Therefore those few weeks of the reign of Tiberius would have counted as if they were a full year. The following year the Jews would have accepted as being the second year of Tiberius reign (November 13, 14 CE to November 1, 15 CE).
Second, we know based upon the writings of Josephus that this method of inclusive reckoning (or, as chronologists call it—non-accession year reckoning) was commonly used by this time when dating the reign of kings (such as king Herod) as apposed to the accession year method. It was toward the end of the post-temple era that the kings of Judah typically used this non-accession year method (starting in the month of Tishri). I believe
74http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus 75http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius#Early_reign 76It is assumed by many that Luke was a “gentile” and therefore would have used the “accession year” method of calculating this date. However, there really is no solid evidence that Luke was a gentile. The typical method of determining dates by Jews for foreign rulers was the “non-accession” year method. While I cannot be dogmatic regarding this issue, the non-accession year method is the preferred method for this time and place in history. Nevertheless, to have access to a more complete dialogue concerning the ways that the fifteenth year of Tiberius could have been determined, please review these publications: Jack Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology, First Edition, pp.259–273, and Harold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, pp.29–37.
that examples given to us by Josephus appear to confirm the use of the “non-accession year” method in Judea just prior to the coming of the Messiah, although it is true that both methods were at various times used:
2. At this time it was that the fight happened at Actium, between Octavius Caesar and Antony, in the seventh year of the reign of Herod*. . .
[*The reader is here to take notice, that this seventh year of the reign of Herod, and all other years of his reign, in Josephus, are dated from the death of Antigonus, or at the soonest from the conquest of Antigonus, and the taking of Jerusalem, a few months before, and never from his first obtaining the kingdom at Rome, above three years before, as some have very weakly and injudiciously done.]77
CONCERNING HEROD’S DEATH, AND TESTAMENT, AND BURIAL
1. And now Herod altered his testament upon the alteration of his mind; for he appointed Antipas, to whom he had before left the kingdom, to be tetrarch of Galilee and Berea, and granted the kingdom to Archelaus. . . When he had done those things, he died, the fifth day after he had caused Antipater to be slain; having reigned, since he had procured Antigonus† to be slain, thirty-four years; but since he had been declared king by the Romans, thirty-seven.
[†These numbers of years for Herod's reign, 34 and 37, are the very same with those, Of the War, B. I. ch. 33. sect. 8, and are among the principal chronological characters belonging to the reign or death of Herod. See Harm. p. 150--155.]78
These examples from Josephus show that the Romans used what is called the “Roman Tribunal” method of calculating the reign of their own rulers (since this method gives them more years).79 But Josephus, being a Jew, did not use this method of dating. Based upon this example, the Jews would show fewer years than this to determine the reign of foreign rulers, and yet, by that same example of Josephus, they began the calculation from the year that person actually took office. Based upon these statements, it would appear that Josephus here uses the non-accession year method of determining the years for Herod. Proof of this comes from the clue in the statement by Josephus which says “having reigned, since he had procured Antigonus to be slain, thirty-four years;”—which shows that the dating of his reign starts from the very year he actually begins his rule and starts executing his authority. It is not started from the beginning of the next new year (whether spring or fall), and not from the Roman Tribunal method of starting from their confirmation as tribune. From this we can ascertain that the 15th year of Tiberius would most likely have begun in the fall of 27 CE, which is by the “non-accession year” method. If the source reference of Luke is not using this method and instead using “accession” years to 77Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book XV., Chapter 5, Section 2. [The note in brackets is the commentary of the translator.]78Ibid., Book XVII., Chapter 8, Section 1. [The note in brackets is the commentary of the translator.]79The Roman Tribunal method of calculating reigns of kings is simply starting the length of a kings reign from the time of their confirmation of one as tribune, not the actual length of reign (which is regnal dating).
establish the 15th year of Tiberius, then Tiberius would begin his reign in the fall of 14 CE and his 15th year would begin in the fall of 28 CE. Please note how this chronology can fit into place in the chart below:
The Reign of TiberiusBased on Accession or Non-Accession Years
Accession Year 0
Non-Accession
Year 1September 18 to October 14 November
12, 14 CE
Year 1 Year 2 November 13, 14 CE to November 1, 15 CE
Year 2 Year 3 Fall of 15 to Fall of 16 CEYear 3 Year 4 Fall of 16 to Fall of 17 CEYear 4 Year 5 Fall of 17 to Fall of 18 CEYear 5 Year 6 Fall of 18 to Fall of 19 CEYear 6 Year 7 Fall of 19 to Fall of 20 CEYear 7 Year 8 Fall of 20 to Fall of 21 CEYear 8 Year 9 Fall of 21 to Fall of 22 CEYear 9 Year 10 Fall of 22 to Fall of 23 CE
Year 10 Year 11 Fall of 23 to Fall of 24 CEYear 11 Year 12 Fall of 24 to Fall of 25 CEYear 12 Year 13 Fall of 25 to Fall of 26 CEYear 13 Year 14 Fall of 26 to Fall of 27 CEYear 14 Year 15 October 20, 27 CE to November 7, 28 CEYear 15 November 8, 28 CE to October 28, 29 CE
What Else Can We Use to Verify that 27 CE is the Start of Yahushua’s Ministry?
According to the evidence we have found so far, we have established that the ministry of Yahushua began either in the fall of 27 or 28 CE. As we have pointed out, based upon the way that Josephus handles the years of king Herod, it would indicate that this 15th year of Tiberius should really begin in the fall of 27 CE. Earlier, according to Luke 3:23, we established that the Messiah was about 30 years old at the time He began His ministry. That ministry began in the 15th year of Tiberius, which could have been either the fall of 27 or 28 CE (depending on whether the dating method used was accession or non-accession year reckoning). Since we cannot be absolutely 100% certain which method was used in this case, is there another way to narrow this down more specifically? I believe there is.
In John 2:18-21 it tells us that the Jews made a statement involving the temple and its restoration 46 years prior to that date. Note what it says:
“Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Yahushua answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body.” (John 2:18-21)
The second temple was built (according to our best chronological information) in the year 515 BCE. That was about 540 years prior to this time. So, what were these people referring to? Certainly, they were not referring to the temple built in 515 BCE. Instead, they were referring to the extensive restoration of that same temple during the days of king Herod. It is because of this restoration that it has historically been known as “Herod’s temple.” Since the statement in John 2 indicates 46 years extend from the time that this restoration began, the question is—when did this restoration begin to take place?
According to Josephus, in his book Antiquities of the Jews, he says this:
HOW HEROD REBUILT THE TEMPLE AND RAISED IT HIGHER AND MADE IT MORE MAGNIFICENT THAN IT WAS BEFORE; AS ALSO CONCERNING THAT TOWER WHICH HE CALLED ANTONIA.
1. AND now Herod, in the eighteenth year of his reign, and after the acts already mentioned, undertook a very great work, that is, to build of himself the temple of God,(22) and make it larger in compass, and to raise it to a most magnificent altitude, as esteeming it to be the most glorious of all his actions, as it really was, to bring it to perfection; and that this would be sufficient for an everlasting memorial of him . . .80
In the next chapter, I will present evidence showing that the siege of Herod against Jerusalem definitely took place in the year 37 BCE and soon after this he began to reign. We know this based upon more evidence presented by Josephus, in which the year Herod began to reign was also linked to the 27th year after the attack of Pompey against Jerusalem. It is also linked to the “hundred eighty and fifth Olympiad,” which would have covered between July 1 of 40 to July 1, 36 BCE. Gallus and Agrippa both were consuls by the year 63 BCE, which would be the year Pompey attacked Jerusalem. 27 years after Gallus and Agrippa were both consuls would give us the year 37 BCE (using inclusive reckoning). Therefore, Herod most likely became ruler in Jerusalem in the year 37 BCE.81
The text of Josephus tells us that the restoration of the temple began in the 18th year of Herod’s reign, which would have been in the year 19 BCE (37-18=19). Following the text of John 2, 46 years after this extensive restoration of the temple began would bring us to the year 28 CE (19+28-182
=46). According to John (as mentioned only a few verses earlier regarding
80Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book XV, Chapter 11, Section 1.81Ibid., Book 15, Chapter 1, Section 2.82We subtract a year to compensate for the lack of a zero year between BCE and BC dates.
the restoration of the temple) this event took place in close proximity to the time of Passover:
And the Judean passover83 was at hand, and Yahushua went up to Jerusalem, . . . (John 2:13)
Based upon the order of events as mentioned in the book of John, this would have to have been the first Passover the Messiah celebrated after the start of his ministry. Yahushua was baptized in the fall just prior to this date, and that first Passover would have been six months later. Having accurately established this year-date as the spring of 28 CE (in close proximity to the time of Passover), then the baptism of Yahushua would have taken place six months earlier, in the fall of 27 CE.
83The KJV says “passover of the Jews.” However, such terminology is obviously prejudicial—since the Messiah and his disciples were all “Jewish.” A better way to translate this (based upon the actual Greek text) is to say simply “Judean Passover,” and this is the way I will translate this and other similar terms throughout this presentation.
What is the 15th Year of Tiberius?
Accession Year of Tiberius
Sep. 18 to Nov. 12, 14 CE
20th and 21st
Year of Tiberius Based on
Roman Tribunal Reckoning
3rd Year Based on
Jewish Non-Accession
Year Reckoning
Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
13 CE 14 14 15 16 17 18 19Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring
29 30 31 32 33 34 3568th Week of Daniel 9
Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13
14h Year According to Jewish Reckoning
20 21 22 23 24 25 26Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring
36 37 38 39 40 41 4269th Week of Daniel 9
15th Year of Tiberius
End of Jubilee Cycle in
Spring of 34 CE
Beginning of Yahushua’s
Ministry in Fall of 27 CE
Statement Regarding 46th
year given near
Passover, 28 CE
27 28 29 30 31 32 33Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring
43 44 45 46 47 48 4970th Week of Daniel 9
How certain can we be that this chronology above is correct, and that the 15th year of Tiberius can be established beyond question? Well, I believe I have made a very strong case for 27 CE being the 15 th year of Tiberius. To say it is “beyond question” might be going too far. The study of Chronology is not always such an exact science. However, based upon all of the information that we have we can safely say that the evidence appears to have narrowed our search down to the fall of 27 CE. We have shown that the 15th year of Tiberius had to have been somewhere between 27 and 29 CE and that the fall of these years fell in 27 and 28 CE. Since the 46 th year after Herod refurbished the temple would have extended from 19 BCE to the spring of the year 28 CE (six months after Yahushua was baptized), this appears to narrow the date of Yahushua’s baptism to the fall of 27 CE. If
the Jews were using non-accession year reckoning, as Josephus plainly indicates applied to king Herod, then the fall of the 15th year of Tiberius would indeed be the year 27 CE. We can state with confidence that the fall of 27 CE was almost certainly the 15th year of Tiberius. Remarkably, it also just happens to be the beginning of the 70th week of Daniel 9 and the final ‘week’ (of years) leading up to the year of Jubilee!
Let us now look at how this last “week” of Daniel 9:27 would appear in the Jubilee Calendar, the 70th week of the 490-year prophecy:
Now some other questions remain. Since I have stated with utmost confidence that the prophecy of Daniel 9 is based totally upon the Jubilee/Sabbatical year cycles it will likely lead to other questions: Can we find Sabbatical and Jubilee years that will indeed line up with the 70 weeks prophecy? Are you really sure that 457 BCE is a year of Jubilee? Were all of the 6 objectives of this prophecy fulfilled?
9. Can We find Sabbatical Years that Line Up With the 70 Weeks Prophecy?
In ancient times, the Jews kept track of Sabbatical years and Jubilee years. However, for whatever reason, they were no longer completely free to observe all the laws of Torah in the second temple period. As a result, even if they still kept track with them, they began to discontinue the observance of Jubilee years. Yet, we know that they still kept track of Sabbatical years (since they were able to obtain concessions from their captors in order to continue its observance). It is not easy to find Sabbatical years—for Jubilee years, it is almost impossible. Records which might indicate when a Jubilee year is are hard to find. However, Sabbatical years can be identified and I believe that Jubilee years, while difficult to find, might also be found. One way we can find a Jubilee year is to look closely at a clue which Daniel left to us in the prophecy of the 70 weeks.
The prophecy in Daniel 9, as we have shared earlier, there appears to be clues pointing us to where and how to find the Jubilee years. You see, the prophecy of Daniel 9 gives us several indicators to let us know that the timing of that prophecy will be in exact alignment with the Jubilee cycles. First, as we have already shown, it is a prophecy which is based upon and a parallel to the 70 years prophecy of Jeremiah (a prophecy which is itself based upon the Jubilees). Second, the prophecy is about 70 weeks of years, which happen to equal 490 years. 490 years happen to be exactly 10 Jubilee Cycles. Finally, the prophecy mentions a smaller period of seven weeks. The only conceivable purpose of mentioning seven weeks of years (or 49 years) is to indicate a second witness to the fact that the prophecy is based upon and in exact alignment with the Jubilee Cycles.
If Daniel 9 provides the significant clue, then it is interesting that one of the most important Jewish historians during the time of the Messiah may have provided many of the key answers to reveal to us the historical timing of Sabbatical cycles. The name of that historian is Josephus. Quite frequently, Josephus mentions Sabbatical years (called hebdomos in Greek) and some of those we may be able to track and even provide an accurate estimate of the year date in question. In 3 places Josephus refers to a special Sabbatical year, as he uses the term hebdomatidou once84 and hebdomatikon twice85, indicating that these had special significance.
While this first reference appears by the context to refer to a “seventh year” in general, the statement is made in the year in which Alexander began his invasion of the Persian empire. The significant point here is that Alexander
84Antiquities of the Jews, translated by William Whiston, Book 11, Chapter 8, Section 6.85Ibid., Book 14, Chapter 16, Section 2 and Book 15, Chapter 1, Section 2.
is told of the prophecy regarding him found in the book of Daniel, in the section just prior to this one:
And when the Book of Daniel was showed him wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended. . . .86
It is interesting to note that the very year Alexander came into Judea on his journey for the conquest of Persia was the year 332/31 BCE. That year, according to our examination of the historical record (as pointed out also in the Zuckermann Table) was indeed a Sabbatical year—and can be proven as much. The Zuckermann Table is a list of Sabbatical years published by Benedict Zuckerman in 1856 CE, in which he offers substantial evidence of the Sabbatical years. In 1901, Emil Shurer reinforced the accuracy of the Zuckerman findings with his own research, and so we find their conclusions to be very reliable.87
In the Zuckermann Table, one of the first mentioned Sabbatical year dates is 332/31 BCE. It is in this year that Alexander gives an exemption to the Jews from taxation because it is a Sabbatical.88
The record of this event is found in Antiquities of the Jews, by the Jewish historian Josephus. In this account Josephus clearly suggests that this took place right after Alexandar took Gaza:
when the seven months of the siege of Tyre were over, and the two months of the siege of Gaza, Sanballat died. Now Alexander, when he had taken Gaza, made haste to go up to Jerusalem89
And later he states (concerning Alexander’s generosity):
but the next day he called them to him, and bid them ask what favors they pleased of him; whereupon the high priest desired that they might enjoy the laws of their forefathers, and might pay no tribute on the seventh year. He granted all they desired.
If indeed Alexander “granted all they desired” immediately, then both conditions were met. By implication, then, it was a Sabbatical year already86Ibid., Book 11, Chapter 8, Section 5.87In 1856 Benedict Zuckermann published his proposed table of sabbatical years throughout the second-temple period. While we do not use popular opinion to determine whether something is true or not, it should be noted that Zuckermann’s views are considered the “orthodox” position. In the year 1973 Ben Zion Wacholder published his own table of sabbatical years ["The Calendar of Sabbatical Cycles During the Second temple and the Early Rabbinic Period," Hebrew Union College Annual 44 (1973)]. Wacholder’s dates are listed as six months later than the proposed dates of Zuckerman. While some chronologists (such as Wacholder and others) have attempted to contradict the findings of Zuckermann, a careful examination of Zuckermann’s findings strongly suggest that his original conclusions are the correct ones all along. And while the purpose of this article is not to present any lengthy discussion of Biblical chronology, we will present some of the evidence which just happens to support the Zuckermann Table and helps us understand the precise timing of the 70 week prophecy.88The Zuckermann Table, by Benedict Zuckermann, 1856.89 Antiquities of the Jews, by Josephus, Book 11, Chapter 8, Section 4-5.
—or else one was very soon to come. Alexander took Gaza in 332 BCE, during the month of November. Since the Jews were very concerned about being granted an exemption for sabbatical years at this time, it strongly suggests that such an event was either already in progress or was soon about to take place. This makes it very likely that 332/331 would be a sabbatical year.
Another sabbatical year which we feel we can most confidently identify is the year Judas Maccabees was defeated at the siege of Beth-Sura. A sabbatical year is mentioned in Maccabees 6:49 which took place at the same time as the battle we just mentioned (Maccabees 6:20). Also, Antiochus himself died that very same year (Maccabees 6:16). The siege is dated to the 149th year of the Seleucid Era according to 2 Maccabees 13:1. As if that were not confusing enough, in 1 Maccabees 6:20 the same battle is declared to have taken place in the 150th year of the Seleucid Era, and that year is declared to have been a Sabbatical year.
In the hundred forty and ninth year it was told Judas, that Antiochus Eupator was coming with a great power into Judea, (2 Maccabees 13:1)
Now when the king had taken a taste of the manliness of the Jews, he went about to take the holds by policy, And marched toward Bethsura, which was a strong hold of the Jews: but he was put to flight, failed, and lost of his men: (2 Maccabees 13:18-19)
The context suggests that the events between verse 1 and verses 18-19 took place in close proximity to each other, that is, in the 149th year of the Seleucid Era.
So king Antiochus died there in the hundred forty and ninth year. (1 Maccabees 6:16)
Evidently, it is the death of Antiochus in this same year which becomes the trigger that ignites the flame that brings on the siege at Bethsura and Jerusalem.
So they came together, and besieged them in the hundred and fiftieth year, and he made mounts for shot against them, and other engines. (1 Maccabees 6:20)
But with them that were in Bethsura he made peace: for they came out of the city, because they had no victuals there to endure the siege, it being a year of rest to the land. (1 Maccabees 6:49)
This last text identifies that the “year of rest” was in progress at the same time as the siege of Bethsura, which took place (according to 1 Maccabees) in the 150th year of the Seleucid era. The Seleucid Era is given in
commemoration of the entry into Babylon by Seleucus (one of Alexander’s four generals) in August of 312 BCE. We know that the author of Maccabees is using that dating system for all of his dates, because he plainly says so in the beginning of his writings:
And there came out of them a wicked root Antiochus surnamed Epiphanes, son of Antiochus the king, who had been an hostage at Rome, and he reigned in the hundred and thirty and seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks. (1 Maccabees 1:10)
So we now have a problem, for both dates are being used to describe the same series of events. Either the author is using two different dating methods, or the events described are happening at the conclusion of one date and the start of another.
One solution is to consider that the events transpiring here may be beginning near the conclusion of the 149th year and the start of the 150th
year. If the beginning of the Seleucid era is counted from the typical method of August of 212 BCE, and assuming the Jewish year is from Fall-to-Fall (September/October), then that 149th year ends about 1 month later, in the 7th month. This would make the year in question cover from the Fall of 164 to the Fall of 163 BCE. This solution actually makes sense, because in the texts of Maccabbees as well as the parallel text of Josephus’ Antiquities, the people of Beth-Sura surrendered quickly when they were besieged by Antiochus Eupator. They surrendered quickly because all of their stores of food had been used up by then, since that year which was passing was a Sabbatical year. Clearly, from the context of the statement by Josephus, that Sabbatical year was coming to an end since they had already run out of food. The implication is that the siege of Bethsura (and Jerusalem) came toward the end of that Sabbatical year:
But Judas, seeing the strength of the enemy, retired to Jerusalem, and prepared to endure a siege. As for Antiochus, he sent part of his army to Bethsura, to besiege it, and with the rest of his army he came against Jerusalem; but the inhabitants of Bethsura were terrified at his strength; and seeing that their provisions grew scarce, they delivered themselves up on the security of oaths that they should suffer no hard treatment from the king. And when Antiochus had thus taken the city, he did them no other harm than sending them out naked. He also placed a garrison of his own in the city. But as for the temple of Jerusalem, he lay at its siege a long time, while they within bravely defended it; for what engines soever the king set against them, they set other engines again to oppose them. But then their provisions failed them; what fruits of the ground they had laid up were spent and the land being not ploughed that year, continued unsowed, because it was the seventh year, on which, by our laws, we are obliged to let it lay uncultivated. And withal, so many of the besieged ran away for want of necessaries, that but a few only were left in the temple.90
90Antiquities of the Jews, translated by William Whiston, Book 12, Chapter 9, Section 5.
This text plainly states that the stores were already almost used up when the siege began—which would not likely be true if the Sabbatical year was just starting. The land was not plowed in the Sabbatical year, and “continued unsowed” into the next year as well—as Josephus plainly states. They were at the end of the Sabbatical year and since the Seleucid year does not align with the Jewish years that means simply that part of both the 149th and the 150th Seleucid year covered the Sabbatical year mentioned by 1 Maccabees and Josephus. By our dating the Seleucid year from August of 212 BCE, that would make the 149th and early part of the 150th years come to 164/163 BCE.
Another solution is to consider that 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees may be dating events according to two different methods. While these two dates (149th and 150th year) may seem to be in conflict, it must be remembered that the Seleucid Era has been dated by different cities and countries using different methods. Some give dates based upon a spring-to-spring calendar, some use a fall-to-fall calendar. Some systems use the actual year as year one, while others wait till the start of the next year to begin the count. If the two dates are actually referring to the same year, it is difficult to figure out which system is being used in 1 Maccabbees as compared with 2 Maccabbees. Nevertheless, it would appear that both accounts are speaking of the same series of events taking place in about the same time frame.
According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, the problem with the dating of events between these two books (1st and 2nd Maccabbees) is that in one book they are using a spring-to-spring calendar (starting from the month of Nisan), and in the other book they are using a fall-to-fall calendar (starting from the month of Tishri). Please note what is said in this regard:
The Jews of post-Biblical times adopted the Greek era of the Seleucids. The Greek era . . . dates from the battle of Gaza in the autumn of the year 312 B.C. This was used by the Jews as early as the Book of Maccabees (I Macc. i. 11), though the author of the first Book of Maccabees deals with the year as beginning with Nisan, while in the second book the beginning of the year is placed in Tishri (see the elaborate discussion in Schürer, ‘Geschichte,’ i. 36-46; and the literature mentioned on p. 46).91
So, taking into consideration that several possible dates could be used based upon various factors, the other solution to this problem is to merely chart it in a graph to see how this could have been dated based upon each of these dating methods. Here is what such a graph should look like:
Harmonizing the 149th and 150th Year of the Seleucid Era91The Jewish Encyclopedia, under section entitled “Era”. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=438&letter=E
If the Seleucid Era Begins in:
The Fall of 313 BCE
The Spring of 312 BCE
The Fall of 312 BCE
The Spring of 311 BCE
Then the 150th year would be:
Fall 164 toFall 163
Spring 163 toSpring 162
Fall 163 toFall 162
Spring 162 toSpring 161
The 150th Year Siege would be: 164/163 BCE 163 BCE 163/162 BCE 162 BCE
Or the 149th Year would be:
Fall 165 toFall 164
Spring 164 toSpring 163
Fall 164 toFall 163
Spring 163 toSpring 162
So the 149th Year Siege would be:
165/164 BCE 164 BCE 164/163 BCE 163 BCE
Please notice that the best way to harmonize these 2 conflicting dates is to accept the year 163 as the year of the siege of Beth-Sura (and the Sabbatical year as well). The year 165/164 does not harmonize, nor does the year 162—for neither one will allow the alternative dates to be the same. Only the year 164/163 BCE will fit with any and all methods of dating the Seleucid Era, as it aligns perfectly with either the 149th or 150th years (depending on which system is used). Therefore, while at first glance the dating of this event may appear to be without any resolution—we have confirmed that the conflicting report concerning the dating of this event is not such a difficult problem after all. Whichever method we use (harmonizing the two dates, or placing the Sabbatical at the end of one and the start of the other) we have established a very strong case for dating a Sabbatical in the year 163 BCE.92
Now if 332/31 is a verifiable Sabbatical year and 164/63 is a verifiable Sabbatical year, then this is good news. But let’s look at another piece of evidence which will help us find another Sabbatical year:
Now the Jews that were enclosed within the walls of the city fought against Herod with great alacrity and zeal (for the whole nation was gathered together); they also gave out many prophecies about the temple, and many things agreeable to the people, as if God would deliver them out of the dangers they were in ... for this happened to be a Sabbatic year93
Now this translation says it was a “Sabbatic” year, but the actual word used by Josephus is literally hebdomatikon. In various other places (over 25 times), Josephus makes references to the “Sabbatical” years, using the usual Greek term hebdomos (meaning “seventh”). The word for “seventh” is indeed “ebdomos,” which would be written as Hebdomos in English (exactly as given to us in the writings of Josephus).94 However, in this particular 92Please notice also that according to the chart given on pages 88-90 of this document, 163/162 BCE is a year of Jubilee. If some Judeans were still keeping Jubilee years, then they would not have been sowing or reaping their crops on both the Sabbatical year and the next year either. This would be another valid explanation as to why the land had “continued unsowed” in the following year.93Antiquities of the Jews, translated by William Whiston, Book 14, Chapter 16, Section 2.94Greek numerals: cardinal numbers followed by ordinal numbers. http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/2355/?letter=a&page=1&spage=1&s=seventy
place he uses the term hebdomatikon. Why does he use this term? We cannot be certain, accept that it seems to imply it is special event which is a “weekly” occurrence (weeks of years).
While it may be difficult for us to find an answer to this question regarding the words Josephus uses, it is not impossible. In Greek the word Hebdoma means simply “seven.”95 Hebdomos (as given by Josephus) appears to be a variant spelling for the Classical Greek word Hebdomazo (εβδομαζω) which means simply to “celebrate the Sabbath” or “celebrate the seventh day.” The important point here is that these terms found in the writings of Josephus (Hedbdomos and Hebdomatikon) are likely referring to periods of time based upon “seven.” When used in connection with “years” it becomes obvious that such terms are being used to describe special periods of “seven years” (Hebdomos) and in two rare instances they are called Hebdomatikon years, indicating special Sabbatical years
In the next book by Josephus, he uses this same exact term again (Hebdomatikon) a second time when referring to that same “Sabbatic” year he mentioned earlier:
. . . nor was there any end of the miseries he brought upon them; and this distress was in part occasioned by the covetousness of the prince regent, who was still in want of more, and in part by the Sabbatic year, which was still going on, and forced the country to lie still uncultivated, since we are forbidden to sow our land in that year.96
Again, he is using the word Hebdomatikon to describe a sabbatical year. Now one may ask, “How do we know that this year-date was 37 BCE? Well, let’s look more closely at this.
Based upon this last statement from Josephus, Herod attacked Jerusalem throughout the spring and summer of what he clearly calls a sabbatical year. Now let’s look at some other information from Josephus which identifies that year more precisely.
This destruction befell the city of Jerusalem when Marcus Agrippa and Caninius Gallus were consuls of Rome on the hundred eighty and fifth olympiad, on the third month, on the solemnity of the fast, as if a periodical revolution of calamities had returned since that which befell the Jews under Pompey; for the Jews were taken by him on the same day, and this was after twenty-seven years' time97
Olympiads were periods of four-year lengths which marked the Greek games. This particular Olympiad is well known to have taken place from 95Words For Our Age: Especially English Words from Latin and Greek Sources. See under “Hebdoma” http://www.wordsources.info/refs-ga-iz.html 96Ibid., Book 15, Chapter 1, Section 2.97 Ibid., Book 14, Chapter 16, Section 4.
July of 40 to the end of June in 36 BCE. The “fast” is in reference to the “fast of Tammuz” which took place in the third month of the year. It is clearly not a reference to the fast of the Day of Atonement, which took place in the 7th month of the Jewish year. Since the attack and eventual destruction of Jerusalem took place over a period of several months, including the summer months, this 185th Olympiad could not have taken place during the summer of 36, for halfway through the siege they would have entered into the 186 th
Olympiad. We know what year Gallus and Agrippa first became consuls of Rome—that would be the year 63 BCE. Therefore, the ending of the 27 years, by using inclusive (or accession year) reckoning brings us to the year 37 BCE, a year in which Agrippa and Gallus were still consuls of Rome.
The year that King Herod laid siege to Jerusalem had to have been 27 years after Pompey attacked the same city, 27 years since Gallus and Agrippa first became consuls (which we know to have happened in 63 BCE), and during the 185th Olympiad (7/40 to 6/36 BCE). Therefore that year was 37 BCE (according to the best chronological calculations) and was a sabbatical year. We know that the Sabbatical year when Herod attacked Jerusalem was 38/37 BCE because of the numerous chronological evidences pointing to that year date (some of which we have mentioned here). Finally, The Zuckermann Table is in complete agreement with this date.98
The fact that Josephus refers to “hebdomatikon” two times, and in reference to this particular date in history (38/37 BCE—the siege of Jerusalem by king Herod) shows that it cannot just be a regular Sabbatical year (which is mentioned often with the term hebdemos). So why does he do this? He does this because it is a special Sabbatical year. Why is it special? We simply cannot be certain.
If 332/331, 164/163, and 38/37 BCE are sabbatical years, then it is easy to line them all up to find every other sabbatical year. If, as I here maintain, Daniel 9 is a prophecy which indicates 457 should be a Jubilee year, then one can calculate from that date to find all Sabbatical and Jubilee years throughout history. In the following chart, I did exactly that and ended up showing that 457/456 BCE was a Jubilee year, and the year the Messiah began his ministry (27/26 CE) was also a Jubilee year. Please look over this chart carefully to see how the dates line up.
The following chronology is based upon a fall-to-fall calendar, and all dates represent part of two Julian/Gregorian year dates. For the sake of simplicity, the first year is usually the only year shown. On the Sabbatical year dates, however, I will show both year dates as part of
98The Zuckermann Table, by Benedict Zuckermann, 1856.
the same Sabbatical year. Example: 38/37 means that the year begins in the fall of 38 BCE, extends through the spring of 37 BCE and finally ends where it began, just before the fall of 37 BCE. If only the number 37 is shown (as BCE dates, for example) it indicates the years 37/36 BCE—from fall to fall.
Please note that in the following chart I also use certain colors to help distinguish certain important points:
*Number-Dates in Brown represent uneventful BCE dates.*Number-Dates in Black represent uneventful CE dates.*Numbers in Bold Blue are our proposed Sabbatical years.*Numbers in Bold Green are our proposed Jubilee years.*Numbers in Bold Red represent documented Sabbatical and Jubilee years.
27 CE (in Purple)Year that Messiah Yahushua began his ministry, a date which has been documented in a previous chapter.
Full documentation for these Jubilee and Sabbatical years will be given in the next chapter. 132/133 was the year the Bar Kochba revolt began, and 138/39 is the year designated by a land contract.
Chart of Sabbatical and Jubilee Years from 457 BCE to 174 CE
First Day Years 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th7 Cycle
Count BCE Dates Sabbatical Years
457Doc.
Jubilee Year
456 455 454 453 452 451/450
450 6 449 448 447 446 445 444/443443 5 442 441 440 439 438 437/436436 4 435 434 433 432 431 430/429429 3 428 427 426 425 424 423/422422 2 421 420 419 418 417 416/415415 1 414 413 412 411 410 409/408408 Jubilee
Year 407 406 405 404 403 402/401
401 6 400 399 398 397 396 395/394394 5 393 392 391 390 389 388/387387 4 386 385 384 383 382 381/380380 3 379 378 377 376 375 374/373373 2 372 371 370 369 368 367/366366 1 365 364 363 362 361 360/359
359 Jubilee Year 358 357 356 355 354 353/352
352 6 351 350 349 348 347 346/345345 5 344 343 342 341 340 339/338
338 4 337 336 335 334 333Documented Sabbatical
Year332/331
331 3 330 329 328 327 326 325/324324 2 323 322 321 320 319 318/317317 1 316 315 314 313 312 311/310310 Jubilee
Year 309 308 307 306 305 304/303
303 6 302 301 300 299 298 297/296296 5 295 294 293 292 291 290/289289 4 288 287 286 285 284 283/282282 3 281 280 279 278 277 276/275275 2 274 273 272 271 270 269/268268 1 267 266 265 264 263 262/261
261 Jubilee Year 260 259 258 257 256 255/254
254 6 253 252 251 250 249 248/247
247 5 246 245 244 243 242 241/240240 4 239 238 237 236 235 234/233233 3 232 231 230 229 228 227/226226 2 225 224 223 222 221 220/219219 1 218 217 216 215 214 213/212
212 Jubilee Year 211 210 209 208 207 206/205
205 6 204 203 202 201 200 199/198198 5 197 196 195 194 193 192/191191 4 190 189 188 187 186 185/184184 3 183 182 181 180 179 178/177177 2 176 175 174 173 172 171/170
170 1 169 168 167 166 165Documented Sabbatical
Year164/163
163 Jubilee Year 162 161 160 159 158 157/156
156 6 155 154 153 152 151 150/149149 5 148 147 146 145 144 143/142142 4 141 140 139 138 137 136/135135 3 134 133 132 131 130 129/128128 2 127 126 125 124 123 122/121121 1 120 119 118 117 116 115/114
114 Jubilee Year 113 112 111 110 109 108/107
107 6 106 105 104 103 102 101/100100 5 99 98 97 96 95 94/9393 4 92 91 90 89 88 87/8686 3 85 84 83 82 81 80/7979 2 78 77 76 75 74 73/7272 1 71 70 69 68 67 66/6565 Jubilee
Year 64 63 62 61 60 59/58
58 6 57 56 55 54 53 52/5151 5 50 49 48 47 46 45/44
44 4 43 42 41 40 39Documented Sabbatical
Year38/37
37 3 36 35 34 33 32 31/3030 2 29 28 27 26 25 24/2323 1 22 21 20 19 18 17/16
16 Jubilee Year 15 14 13 12 11 10/9
9 6 8 7 6 5 4 3/2
2 5 1 BCE
1CE 2 3 4 5/6
6 4 7 8 9 10 11 12/1313 3 14 15 16 17 18 19/2020 2 21 22 23 24 25 26/27
27 AnnointMessiah 28 29 30 31 32 33/34
34 Jubilee Year 35 36 37 38 39 40/41
41 6 42 43 44 45 46 47/4848 5 49 50 51 52 53 54/5555 4 56 57 58 59 60 61/6262 3 63 64 65 66 67 68/6969 2 70 71 72 73 74 75/7676 1 77 78 79 80 81 82/8383 Jubilee
Year 84 85 86 87 88 89/90
90 6 91 92 93 94 95 96/9797 5 98 99 100 101 102 103/104
104 4 105 106 107 108 109 110/111111 3 112 113 114 115 116 117/118118 2 119 120 121 122 123 124/125125 1 126 127 128 129 130 131/132
132Doc.
Jubilee Year
133 134 135 136 137Documented Sabbatical
Year138/139
139 6 140 141 142 143 144 145/146146 5 147 148 149 150 151 152/153153 4 154 155 156 157 158 159/160160 3 161 162 163 164 165 166/167167 2 168 169 170 171 172 173/174
*Numbers in Bold Blue are our proposed Sabbatical years.*Numbers in Bold Green are our proposed Jubilee years.*Numbers in Bold Red represent documented Sabbatical and Jubilee years.
27 CE (in Purple)Year that Messiah Yahushua began his ministry, a date which has been documented.Full documentation for these Jubilee and Sabbatical years will be given in the next chapter. 132/133 was the year the Bar Kochba revolt began, and 138/39 is the year designated by a land contract.
10. Are There Other Ways to Historically Reveal Jubilee Years?
Even if in the previous chapter we have been successful in finding Sabbatical years and showing how Daniel 9 identifies for us a Jubilee year, it is possible that doubts may continue to linger. Certainly, no one can claim to have the absolute answers to every problem. All any of us can be expected to do is compile the best evidence and weigh that evidence to determine the truth. It is for this reason that it is important to consider other sources of chronological information, in the hopes that whatever doubts may remain might be cleared up.
There are other references to Sabbatical years which also line up with the previously sited chart. But this time we have a document which seems to support both Jubilee and Sabbatical years. One of the most important of these references is the one which is in regard to a Sabbatical year during the time of the Bar Kochba revolt. Wacholder speaks of this event in his study of Chronomessianism. It would appear that the Jews who lived before and during the time of the Bar Kochba revolt believed that the Messiah would come to them at or during a Jubilee year. For this reason, they felt that Daniel 9 (as I also believe) offered the solution to their problem of how to find the Messiah. There are (according to Wacholder) ancient texts which declare that the prophecy of Daniel’s 70 weeks is Messianic and it is in reference to 70 sabbatical year cycles.99
The only major problem with this belief that Bar Kochba was the promised Messiah was that they had already rejected Yahushua as the Messiah about a hundred years prior to this time, at a time in which another Jubilee year was fast approaching. In order to make the chronology of Daniel 9 fit their own time they appear to have deleted about 165-170 years of known history and then extended the chronology based upon their faulty understanding of the time in which the temple was built. In order to accomplish this, they had to reduce the period of the Persian rule to 34 years (when in reality it lasted over 200 years). Evidently, by doing this they were able to create a chronology which caused the prophecy of Daniel 9 to line up with a certain date which they hoped would be the year of their deliverance. The result is that Bar Kochba began his rebellion in the year 132/133 CE100, quite possibly based upon a faulty understanding of the 70-week prophecy of Daniel 9.
99"Chronomessianism, The Timing of Messianic Movements and the Calendar of Sabbatical Cycles," Hebrew Union College Annual 46 (1975), pp. 202-204.100We will present evidence later showing why this is the correct year.
Based upon Chronomessianism, the Jews expected the Messiah to come in connection with (or on) a year of Jubilee. In declaring Bar Kochba as the true Messiah, and in that particular year, they also indirectly declared this to be the year of Jubilee. Is it possible that Bar Kochba began his revolt in the year of Jubilee? Based upon our previous chart, the answer would have to be yes!! Our calculations (which can be seen in the chart on page 102) show that it is indeed a Jubilee year!
The modern Jewish calendar places the creation of this earth in the year 3760 BCE, which many chronologists agree contains a glaringly obvious error of about 240 years. The reason for this discrepancy is that it is based upon the the Seder Olam. Soon after the Bar Kochba revolt, the Seder Olam Rabbah was compiled as an attempt to represent chronological history from the creation to their own day. This chronology retained the dating system related to the Bar Kochba revolt, only they no longer used that information to identify Bar Kochba as the Messiah (for obvious reasons—his revolt failed!). The Seder Olam chronology is, because of it’s original purpose, very inaccurate.101
Evidently, the original purpose of altering the chronological history was to make 132/133 CE and the Bar Kochba revolt fit in with their own Messianic understanding of Daniel 9. What is so interesting about all of this is that modern Jews no longer see any messianic message in Daniel 9, whereas many Jews living in the first few centuries of the common era did indeed see Daniel 9 as a Messianic prophecy. If it were not true, then they would not have even considered that Yahushua might be the Messiah (that is, if he had not come exactly on time)—according to Daniel 9. Likewise, for this same reason, they would not have considered Bar Kochba to be a reliable candidate for the Messiah.
After the Bar Kochba revolt, many statements were made in the Talmud which condemn any attempts to date the coming of the Messiah. It is understandable why they did this, but the obvious question is: Why did they miss it when Yahushua came at the right time, about 100 years before Bar Kochba? Why did they have to convince people not to use Daniel 9 to date the Messiah’s arrival (the only prophecy in the TaNaK which could conceivably do so) if there were not many doing that very thing?
Rabbi Shmuel bar Nahmani said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: May those who calculate the end and offer a date for the Messiah’s arrival be cursed, for they say: Since the time that we thought had been designated for the Messiah’s arrival has already passed, and still he has not come, he will not come at all.102
101The most glaring omission from the Seder Olam chronology, is the compression of known Persian history from about 200 years to a mere 34 years.102Sanhedrin 97B, Babylonian Talmud.
Maimonides himself says something along the same lines:
May those who calculate the end swell up. ‘One should not try to calculate the end, for the Rabbis already cursed those who tried to offer a date for the Messiah’s arrival’103
The only reason for the rabbis to say something like this, is because they realize that either they missed the true coming of Messiah (Yahushua), or their understanding of prophecy was wrong. It is for this reason that today Judaism does not view Daniel 9 as a Messianic prophecy, even though in the past they did view it as Messianic.
Now having said all of this, it would be easy for us to conclude that the entire system upon which the Seder Olam was based was flawed from start to finish. I believe that this would be an error. Sabbatical years were known to have been kept right up until the Bar Kochba revolt and the Seder Olam was written about 3 decades later. This means that the author of Seder Olam would have been quite capable of tracking Sabbatical years and could do a much better job of it than we could almost 2000 years later. Lest we forget, it was not just Bar Kochba who revolted—it was the majority of the Jewish nation living at that time. They generally had more access to accurate information regarding Sabbatical years than we do today, and many of them likely knew when the Sabbatical years were. It was only later (after this second revolt of Bar Kochba) that they generally began to lose that knowledge. What this means is that the Seder Olam probably retains the basic pattern of the true Sabbatical year count, while it is chronologically inaccurate in its rendering of the historical timeline (especially during the Persian period). The fact that the whole Jewish nation believed Bar Kochba came at the right time in history to deliver them from Roman oppression is a startling testimony to the accuracy of the Sabbatical cycles as they were documented for us three decades later in the Seder Olam. In a sense, the Jews at that time knew the day of the week—but had started to forget what season it was. In other words, the rabbinical chronology which second century Jews had depended upon was wrong—but the basic cycle of Sabbatical years might very well have been correct all along. Our previous investigation shows that several Sabbatical years could be tracked as far back as 332/31 BCE. There are more Sabbatical years we could have tracked, but chose not to here. These cycles appear to be in exact synchrony with the Seder Olam.
In a recent issue of Prophecy in the News, J. R. Church states that the Seder Olam compressed chronological history in order to “make Daniel’s seventy weeks point to Bar Kochba as the Jewish Messiah”104 Is he correct in this assessment? Let’s find out.103Rambam (Maimonides), Sefer Shofetim, Hilkhot Melakhim 12:2.104J. R. Church, “Found at Last: The Jewish Calendar’s 240 Missing Years,” Prophecy in the News, August 2005.
We have knowledge of a document which establishes another Sabbatical year at the time of the Bar Kochba revolt. A rental contract dated to the era of the Bar Kochba revolt (labeled as “Mur 24E”), show that in the second year of the revolt five more years of harvest would be collected before the next Sabbatical year. This contract was found among several contracts in the caves of Wadi Murabba’ near Bethlehem. This property was seized by the Jews during the revolt, which began sometime between the Fall of 132 and the Spring of 133 CE and lasted at least two and a half years (possibly three and a half years, according to other records). They are dated on Shevat 20, year two of the Kochba revolt (which is about the month of January or February of that year). Here is a translation of part of that document [brackets indicating missing and/or ambiguous text]:
[On the twentieth of Shev]at of the year tw[o] of the Redemption of[I]srael by Shimeon ben K[os]ba, the prince of[Is]rael. In the camp which is located in Herodium,[Ye]hudah ben Raba’ said to Hillel ben Grys:‘I of my free will have [re]nted from you today theland which is my re[n]tal in’ IrNabash which I hold as a tenant from Shimeon, the Prince of Israel, This land I have rented from you todayUntil the end of the eve of Shemitah,* which are yearsFull [f]iscal years, five, of tenancy;[that I wi]ll deliver to you in [Her]jodium: wheat,[of good and pure quality.] th[ree kor]s and a lethekh,[of which a tenth part of the tithe] of these[you will deliver to the silo of the treasury.] And [I am obli]gated[in regard of this matter thusly ][Yehudah ben Raba’, in person][Shim on ben Kosba’, by dictation.]105
This document clearly indicates five complete “fiscal” years of tenancy to be concluded at the end of the eve of the “Shemitah” (or the Sabbatical year). While some might interpret this to be exactly five years of exactly 12 months each, the term “fiscal years” tells us that at some fixed point in time these years would end. The text plainly says that it will last “until the end of the eve of Shemitah” (meaning, the end of the year before the Sabbatical year). While it is true that the religious year is from Spring to Spring, (and Bar Kochba himself re-introduced this way of counting the years106), for Sabbatical years and “civil” (or “fiscal”) years, such years would extend from Fall-to-Fall (Tishri-to-Tishri), as noted in The Mishnah.107 Please note that even today this tradition has continued, as a “fiscal year” often ends in the 105Translated in "The Calendar of Sabbatical Cycles During the Second temple and the Early Rabbinic Period," by Ben Zion Wacholder, 1973, Hebrew Union College Annual 44, p. 177.106Israel Exploration Journal, Kanael B., “Notes on the Dates Used During the Bar Kokhba Revolt,” 1971, pp. 39-46.107“The first day of Tishre is the new year for the reckoning of years, for Sabbatical years, and for Jubilees. . .” The Mishnah, A New Translation. Edited by Jacob Neusner. Yale University Press: New Haven and London, 1988. ROSH HASHSHANAH 1.1, p. 299.
fall. The fact that payment is to be made every year in the form of wheat shows that there must be five harvest seasons—or five “fiscal years.” If you do as Wachover suggests (and extend this to five years and six months) then what you will end up doing is collecting six years of harvest, instead of five years. So the way you calculate this so as to collect only five years of harvest is as follows:
The year that they are still in (the second year of the revolt) has spring and summer yet to be completed. Presuming that the land is already (or is soon to be) under cultivation, that means there must be a harvest in that same year. The conclusion of that second year is the conclusion of year one of the harvest. Four more harvests will take place in years 3, 4, 5, and finally with the contract being completed at the end of year 6 of the revolt. Therefore, the Sabbatical year would be year 7 after the revolt. Here is how this can be visualized in a simple chart, and please note this also reveals tor us a year of Jubilee:
Chronology of Kochba Revolt and the Rental ContractBar Kochba
Revolt Begins Officially in
Spring 133 CE
Second Year of Revolt: Rental Contract Given Feb. 134 CE
Bar Kochba Revolt Ends
About this Year
Year of Jubilee
(See Chart p. 48)
First Harvest at End of Same
Year
Second Harvest Third Harvest Fourth
Harvest
Fifth and Final
Harvest
This Year Declared
Sabbatical Year
Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring132/133 133/134 134/135 135/136 136/137 137/138 138/139
According to Jerome’s compilation of the Chronican of Eusebius, the Bar Kochba revolt began in the 16th year of Emperor Hadrian.108 While dating the 16th year of Hadrian has its share of problems (because of the various methods used in different places) the most likely way this event was dated is by the Roman method of counting the years which begins in August. Using this method, the 16th year of Hadrian would have begun in August of 132. We know for certain that the revolt was in full bloom by the spring of 133 CE. We know this because of a document from that period which identified the first year of the revolt. It says: “On the first of Iyyar, Year 1 of the redemption of Israel by Simeon Bar Kosiba, prince of Israel.”109 Iyyar is the month which corresponds to April/May. The phrase “Year 1 of the redemption” means for certain the first year of the revolt. But it also strongly suggests another special year—a Jubilee Year. Based upon our previously cited reference to the phenomena of Chronomessianism, the dating of events from “Year 1 of the redemption” clearly places that year in a year of Jubilee. While the revolt of Bar Kochba did not officially begin until the
108Die Chronik des Hieronymous. In Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte , Eusebius VII, by Rudolf Helm, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 1984.109Israel Exploration Journal, Kanael B., “Notes on the Dates Used During the Bar Kokhba Revolt,” 1971, p. 41.
Spring of 133 CE, unofficially it probably had already begun at some time during the year 132 CE. Therefore, it clearly began within the year 132/33 of the Fall-to-Fall Jewish civil calendar. As added confirmation, the revolt is often dated from 132-135 CE by modern dictionary/encyclopedia sources (lasting two and a half years).110 The revolt began sometime between the Fall of 132 and the Spring of 133 CE.
Does the Bar Kochba revolt reveal to us both a Sabbatical and Jubilee year? Well, indirectly, yes it does. Bar Kochba was a messianic figure, and messianic figures were expected to come at exactly the right time. The fact that he came and began his revolt in the year 132/33 CE (which is, I believe, a Jubilee year) strongly supports this contention. The fact that a land rental contract begins in the second year of this revolt and ends at the end of 5 years (on the “eve of the shemita”) also directs us to a Sabbatical year in the year 138/139 CE. Bar Kochba is dating future events based on the first year of the revolt and calling it the “year of redemption.” He shows great concern so as to identify when the next Sabbatical year is. This is another indication that his designation of the first year is a special count of years from “year one”, since he calls it the “year of redemption.” This brings to mind the redemption that Israel was supposed to receive every 50th year in the year of Jubilee. Based upon all of this, the year 132/133 would almost certainly be a Jubilee year.
Now there is another year of Jubilee which we would like to demonstrate, and this time it is the most crucial year-date of all the dates given so far. That year is the year 457 BCE—the year Ezra came into the land of Israel to fulfill the terms of the decree of Artexerxes. There is another famous chronologist who gives us a “clue” concerning that Jubilee year, which was established in the days of Ezra—in 457 BCE). His name is Maimonides.
In the twelfth century, Maimonides would make use of the chronology of Seder Olam in order to declare the first temple destroyed around 421 BCE, and the second temple built about the year 351 BCE. Of course, we should know that such a chronology of events is here out of step by about 170 years.
Maimonides said that Ezra went up to the land of Israel and that such an event was called “the second entrance into the Promised Land.” Historically, the Jews have tended to believe that the entrance into the promised land came in a year of Jubilee. The alignment of the chronology of Sefer Olam supports that view as well. While we do not necessarily find proof in Scripture that Israel’s entrance into the promised land actually took place in a year of Jubilee, the point is that this is what they believed (including Maimonides). Therefore, his statement is very interesting for us—
110See Wikepedia article on Simon Bar Kokhba, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_bar_Kokhba
as it becomes another testimony to the accuracy of 457 being a year of Jubilee and a fulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel 9.
The Second Temple was then built and stood for 420 years. In the seventh year after its erection Ezra went up to the Land, and this is called the second entrance into the Promised Land. From that year the Israelites began a new count and declared the thirteenth year after the building of the Second Temple a Sabbatical year.111
Maimonides was wrong in regards to his understanding of the chronology of Israel. But an important point is that he essentially declared that Ezra went into the land at the start of a Jubilee year. Ezra came into the land of Israel in the seventh year of Artaxerxes. It was (based upon our investigation) a year of Jubilee. The 70 weeks prophecy was clearly a reference to 70 Sabbatical cycles, which would end in the 70th week with the coming of the Messiah.
Does Maimonides Count Work?
Second temple
Finished?
Year 1Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
464 BCE 463 462 461 460 459 458Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring
43 44 45 46 47 48 49Ezra Enters “Promised
Land”“Year 7”
Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12Sabbatical
Year“Year 13”
457 456 455 454 453 452 451Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring
1 2 3 4 5 6 7Start of
Jubilee Cycle
1st Week of Daniel 9
Evidently, Maimonides count to the next Sabbatical year (from the 7 th year after the temple being finished to the 13th year) is a perfect fit! Remember, he also states that the count had been renewed. Obviously, he could only be referring to the count to the next Jubilee year!! Since we know that the spring of 457 was the time the decree was given, and the fall of 457 is when Ezra came into the land of Israel to carry out the dictates of that decree, we know that this is also (according to Maimonides) the first year of the count (which would also be a year of Jubilee).
111Sabbatical and Jubilee Years, chapter 10, paragraph 3.Obviously, this part of Maimonides exposition is incorrect. We know that the temple was complete 58 years before this time, in about the year 515 BCE.
Now someone might argue that this decree was given five months too early, therefore it could not have accurately fulfilled the prophecy since it should start exactly from the time the decree was given. But Maimonides starts the count from the time Ezra comes into the land. Also, the prophecy specifically states that 70 “weeks” are “cut off” and that from the time that the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem is given unto the Messiah would be seven weeks and 62 weeks (7+62=69 weeks). That means full weeks (and full years), not partial weeks of years. The civil years (for the Jews throughout their history) began in the Fall and ended just before the next fall.112 Even if one started the years with a Spring-to-Spring calendar, the decree came about a month after the start of spring.
The Messiah would confirm the covenant for one week (the 70th week). Notice, this is exactly what happened. Once the decree was given the very next Jubilee Calendar year that would commence was five months later. Ezra arrived in Jerusalem to carry out the dictates of that decree about four months later, just one month prior to the beginning of the next Jubilee cycle (which just happens to be a Jubilee year). According to Maimonides, this is also the year that Ezra renews the count of years leading to the next year of Jubilee. 69 weeks of years later (483 years) brings us to the fall of 27 CE, the year in which the Messiah came and was “anointed” for his 3½ year ministry. That was the fall of 27 CE in which John the Baptizer baptized Yahushua Messiah.
112Please see footnote on page 71 where the fall-to-fall civil calendar is explained in more detail.
11. Can You Establish the Year and Date of the Crucifixion?If you wish to establish the date of the crucifixion based upon solid dates of an Emperor or King, the answer would have to be “no, you cannot with any certainty establish that date.” But if you know the approximate years in which the Messiah was crucified and if you can determine for certain which day of the week he was crucified, then “yes, you can establish not only the year but even the exact date of the crucifixion.” The reason you could even establish an exact date is because the Messiah was crucified on a Jewish holiday which is fixed by an astronomical event that can be precisely calculated 2000 years after the fact.
Our calculations show that by using the historical Jewish means of determining the months (that is, by the visual sighting of the crescent moon113) we know that a crucifixion in 30 CE would have been on a Thursday.114 In 31 CE it would have been on a Wednesday. In 33 CE it would have been on a Sunday. In addition, there is a website where one can go to obtain moon calculations (using the conjunction moon) which can bring you at least to within 1 day of the actual date. Computer programs are even more precise, and we can use both of these sources in parallel with each other to determine ancient dates in light of the Jewish calendar.115 So, if you can determine exactly which day of the week the crucifixion took place (i.e., on a Wednesday, Thursday, or a Friday) it is a simple matter to determine the exact date of the crucifixion using the moon phase calculations of various lunar calculating programs (in each of these three most likely years).
At one time I was of the opinion (along with most Christians) that the crucifixion took place on a Friday and the resurrection took place on a Sunday. However, after reviewing more evidence it would appear that a Wednesday crucifixion is probably the most likely way it happened. If this is true, then the only viable year in which this would have taken place would have been 31 CE. Passover in the year 31 CE would have taken place on a late Wednesday afternoon. That would put the crucifixion (if it happened that year) on a Wednesday and the resurrection on a late Saturday afternoon. Of course, His empty tomb would have been discovered early on a Sunday morning.
113Philo, a contemporary Jew of Yahushua’s day, writes that the new moon was determined (in his day) by sighting the visible crescent. Here is what he says: “For at the time of the new moon, the sun begins to illuminate the moon with a light which is visible to the outward senses, and then she displays her own beauty to the beholders.” The Works of Philo, translated by C. D. Yonge, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, MA, Foreward (by David M. Scholer), “The Special Laws, II” p. 581.114A crucifixion in the year 30 CE would give us (based upon the sighting of the visible crescent moon) a Passover on April 6, Abib 14, and therefore if the crucifixion took place in that year, it would have been a Thursday crucifixion. The Jews did not use a calculated calendar until Hillel instituted such use in 358 CE.115There are computer programs which can be used to determined the exact phases of the moon going back over 2000 years (for example Sky Globe, by Mark Haney). They confirm that the first new moon (visible crescent) after the equinox of 31 CE would have been sighted on April 11. That would make the following day (April 12) the first day of Abib and Wednesday, April 25, the 14 th day of Abib, or Passover.
We cannot devote much space to a discussion of the crucifixion date, but we will take a quick look at the subject and give further resources to check out for a more in-depth study. We know that there are many who believe that Messiah was crucified on a Friday, and while Friday’s are also called a “preparation day”, the statement from John 19:31 makes it clear that this was a “high sabbath” and “Passover” which they were preparing for. It was the 14th of Abib, Passover day, and the “preparation” for the sacrifice of the Passover lamb that evening and the “preparation” for the entire “Feast of Unleavened Bread.”
In Matthew 12 Yahushua tells the people that the only sign they will have is the sign of Jonah, and that like Jonah the “son of man” will be in the grave for three days and three nights. The only way to fully fulfill this prediction would be for Yahushua to die and be put in the grave from Wednesday, April 25, to Saturday afternoon, April 28 (31 CE). A Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection does not allow for three days and three nights in the grave, and neither does a Thursday crucifixion.
Of the 2 best options for the year of crucifixion (30 and 31 CE), the year 31 CE is the most likely year that this took place. (The year 33 CE is too late in the historical timeline, and while the year 30 CE is a better option than 33 CE—a crucifixion that year would have been on a Thursday.) Passover is always on the 14th day of the first month of the Jewish religious calendar. By going to this website you can input the dates 31 CE and April 25 to find out which day of the week it was: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/ We know that this was the correct date because the next conjunction of the moon for 31 CE (after the spring equinox) was on April 10. (Please see this link for the equinox and new moon listings under 31 CE: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/SpringPhenom.html) For those who do not have the necessary computer programs to accurately calculate this, all that is necessary is that you add 1 day to April 10, 31 (which is the conjunction new moon) to take you to the estimated first sighting of the crescent moon (since the new moon was determined by visual sighting). The new moon would have been sighted on April 11—both according to the US Naval Observatory (plus 1 day) and the computer program called Sky Globe (which is accurate to within a variance of only a few minutes over 2000 years). That makes it a certainty that Wednesday, April 12, 31 CE was the first day of the new moon. Add 14 days to April 11 and you have April 25, Wednesday, the date of the crucifixion and the date of Passover.
Because of this and other evidence, we are fairly certain Yahushua was crucified on the 14th of Abib, a Wednesday. That was Wednesday, April 25, 31 CE. It was three days later (on the evening of the 17th, a “Saturday night”) that Yahushua was resurrected. We know it was a “Saturday night” because it was on the next morning (“first day of the week”) that Mary found the empty tomb. When we compare Scripture with the testimony of the US
Naval Observatory’s calculations concerning the new moons of antiquity, we have no choice but to go with a Wednesday as opposed to a Friday crucifixion.
Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:38-40)
If it were not for the Messiah’s plain declaration that He would be three days and nights in “the heart of the earth” (the grave) it would be tempting to accept the typical view that three days is meant to be understood as “inclusive” reckoning. However, a Friday crucifixion does not allow for the Messiah being “three days and three night” in the grave. Messiah plainly says he should die and be “in the heart of the earth” for “three days and three nights.” Only a Wednesday crucifixion allows for that. A Thursday crucifixion also does not allow for three days and three nights, since the full three days and nights would end on Sunday evening (not morning).
And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Yahushua, and led him away. (John 19:14-16)
The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. (John 19:31)
Because it was dawning toward the first day of unleavened bread (the “high sabbath”) they did not have time to prepare the spices for his burial. That “high day” was a Thursday (in 31 CE). It could not have been a reference to Friday as the preparation for the Sabbath, because John 19:14 plainly says it was the “preparation of the Passover” and that the next day (according to John 19:31) would be a “sabbath…high day”. Anyway, preparing spices and ointments for burial is a work that requires a large part of the day to accomplish. They evidently were not allowed to do this the next day because it was a sabbaton (or Festival Sabbath—the first day of unleavened bread). Therefore, the preparing of spices was done on the following day, a Friday (Abib 16), and they waited for the Sabbath to be completed before they came to the tomb. While that may appear like a long delay, they had no choice in the matter because of the Sabbath. A Friday crucifixion does not allow for them to prepare the burial spices, since the Sabbath “drew on” very soon after Yahushua died and was taken to the tomb.
And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on. And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid. And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment. (Luke 23:54-56)
Note what it appears to be saying: It was the preparation day, “the preparation of the passover” as John 19 states. The first “sabbath” they were speaking of here was simply the “high day” or the first day of unleavened bread. Then they came to the tomb on Thursday evening (or possibly Friday morning) to see how his body was laid out. The next day (Friday) they prepared spices and ointments (which is considerable work that would not and really could not be done on a Sabbath—not in Jerusalem). They would have rested on the feast day Sabbath (first day of unleavened bread), viewed the body on Thursday evening, prepared spices on Friday (which was not a Sabbath of any kind), and then waited till after the weekly Sabbath to go and anoint his body. Otherwise, how does a Friday crucifixion allow for the preparation of spices? How does a Friday crucifixion explain that these women apparently prepared spices (which is work, certainly according to the sect of the Pharisees) and yet were able at the same time to keep the Sabbath? The only explanation that fits is a Wednesday crucifixion, the celebration of the high sabbath for the first day of unleavened bread (Thursday), the viewing of the tomb that Thursday evening or Friday morning, the preparation of spices on Friday, and finally abstaining from work on Sabbath on the following day. Please note how this fits perfectly with the other crucifixion narrative:
In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Yahushua, which was crucified. He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. (Matthew 28:1-6)
This text plainly says that when the stone was rolled back it was merely to reveal that Yahushua was already gone, for he tells her plainly “He is not here.” They came to the tomb “at the end of the Sabbath.” He was resurrected at the end of the third day, and it is now the fourth day since the crucifixion, Abib 18.
There are many who will hold onto belief in a Friday crucifixion. This is understandable. There is evidence in the Messianic writings which at least appears to support a Friday crucifixion. Let’s look over some of that evidence:
Luke 9:22, 18:33 and 24:7 and 46 say that the Messiah was killed and then raised to life “on the third day.” If the gospel writers were using inclusive reckoning (which is certainly within the realm of possibility) then it could be possible to have a Friday crucifixion and a Sunday resurrection. But we already know that the Messiah plainly tells us that the sign of Jonah was the sign pointing to Himself—and this would be repeated by the Messiah stating he would be in the heart of the earth “three days and three nights.” There are other texts which tell us that the Messiah was resurrected after the third day. For instance, Mark 9:31 says it was “after three days.” Matthew 26:63 says “after three days” and in the next verse guards are instructed to watch the tomb “until the third day” (which seems contradictory until you realize they only need to guard the tomb for the full three days and nights, and not a moment more).
While there is some evidence which supports a Friday crucifixion, there are several pieces of evidence which I believe completely contradicts a Friday crucifixion, leaving only a Thursday or Wednesday crucifixion as viable options. The sign of Jonah (“three days and three nights”) appears to rule out a Thursday crucifixion as well as a Friday crucifixion. Since we know that the year dates of 30 and 31 are the only ones which allow for a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion, the additional evidence below is extremely important for us to consider.
In John 12:1 we find that 6 days before His final Passover, Yahushua traveled a long journey to Bethany. In chapter 11 we find that he had been staying in Ephraim. That is a 14-mile journey through rough terrain. Please take note of the fact that this is not a trip which an observant Jewish rabbi would take on the Sabbath.
Then Yahushua six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. (John 12:1)
Since it is a Scriptural certainty that Abib 14 is Passover (read Leviticus 23:4 and Numbers 28:16) and since 6 days prior to this would be Abib 8, that day could not be a Sabbath—for extensive travel on the Sabbath was not permitted in Torah. Matthew 5:17-19 clearly states that Yahushua did not come to destroy the law, and therefore He certainly would not have violated the law of Yahweh by a lengthy journey on the Sabbath. If one chooses to accept a Friday crucifixion (on Passover) then 6 days prior to that would have been a Sabbath. Therefore, without any doubt a Friday crucifixion on this or any other year is completely ruled out. Since Yahushua truly fulfilled the types found in Scripture, He surely would have been crucified on Passover day—in fact, at the exact time the Passover lamb was commanded to be slain!! I repeat it here for emphasis—subtract six days from Friday and you arrive at the Sabbath, and Yahushua would not have broken the Sabbath to travel 14 miles! Based upon this simple fact, Yahushua could not have been crucified on a Friday!!
Calculations of Passovers from the 3 ½ years of Yahushua’s ministry indicate that Passover took place on April 28, 28 CE (a Wednesday), April 17, 29 CE (a Sunday), and April 6, 30 CE (a Thursday). Six days prior to these dates would be April 22, 28 CE (a Thursday), April 11, 29 CE (a Monday) and March 31, 30 CE (a Friday). Since we believe Yahushua’s last Passover was in 31 CE, that would make Passover that year fall on a Wednesday, April 25, and 6 days prior to that would have been April 19, a Thursday. None of those dates (if he traveled on them) would have been a Sabbath.
Yahushua therefore walked no more openly among the [Judeans]; but went thence unto a country near to the wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there continued with his disciples. And the [Judean] Passover was nigh at hand: and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the Passover, to purify themselves. (John 11:54-55)
Then Yahushua six days before the Passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. (John 12:1)
This is strong proof that a Friday crucifixion is ruled out.
One more significant evidence for a Wednesday crucifixion in 31 CE is the length of Yahushua’s ministry. We know from a previous chapter that His ministry can be known from the evidence of when the 15 th year of Tiberius began. Since this has been determined to have most likely been the year 27 CE, we know that His ministry began in the fall of 27 CE. Knowing this, it is simply a matter of reading from the book of John to find out how many Passover seasons passed from this time to His crucifixion. The answer is surprisingly simple and amazing.
In the writings of John, it speaks of Passovers that came during the ministry of Yahushua. While this does not prove conclusively how long the length of his ministry was, it does show that it was probably 3 ½ years in length. We have no way of knowing for certain if there were more Passovers during his ministry. However, since all of this evidence comes from the book of John (and it is John who portrays Yahushua as the “lamb of the Almighty that taketh away the sins of the world”) we can only observe that for John the feast of Passover would hold great importance to him. If this is so, then it is unlikely that he would have left out any of the Passover feasts during Yahushua’s ministry. Here are the Passovers which seem to show the length of Yahushua’s ministry:
First Passover: Based on John 2:13 and 23.
“And the Judean passover was at hand, and Yahushua went up to Jerusalem. . . . Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.” (John 2:13, 23)
We know this is referring to the first Passover of His ministry, not only because of the order of arrangement within the book of John but also because of the statement made three verses earlier, where it speaks concerning his apparent first miracle (of turning the water into wine):
This beginning of miracles did Yahushua in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him. (John 2:11)
Second Passover: John 4:35 in connection with John 5:1
Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest. (John 4:35)
This text proves that it was four months before another Passover, since Passover always comes at the time of the yearly harvest. Then, only a few verses later a feast is identified. It doesn’t say which feast it was, but we know it could not have been the feast of Tabernacles because that feast took place about six months prior to the time of the spring harvest (not four months). The context shows the events of John 4:35 and John 5:1 were closely connected in time. So, based upon John 4:35 we know that this feast would almost certainly have to be Passover—even though it does not say it was the feast of Passover:
After this there was a Judean feast; and Yahushua went up to Jerusalem. (John 5:1)
Third Passover: Based on John 6:3-4.
And Yahushua went up into a mountain, and there he sat with his disciples. And the passover, a feast of Judea, was nigh. (John 6:3-4)
Fourth Passover: Based on John 13:1.
Now before the feast of the passover, when Yahushua knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. (John 13:1)
Since the Messiah was baptized in the fall, then that means about six months expired before the first Passover season (as described in John 2:13). We know that this was most likely the first Passover because it mentions only a few verses before the miracle of turning water into wine (which happened near the start of His ministry). Another year expired to the next Passover, another to the third Passover and the same happens again to the fourth (and final) Passover. So we calculate 6 months to the first Passover, 1 year to the next, 1 year to the next and 1 year to the last for a total of 3 ½ years from His anointing to the crucifixion. By using the starting date of the fall of 27 CE this would take us to 31 CE for the year of the crucifixion. 32 CE has been ruled out because of historical conflicts. 33 CE is unlikely because of the time constraints within the gospel accounts, which
appear to cover only about three years. Six or more years would appear to be an inordinate amount of time allowed for his ministry.
Unlike the first year of Yahushua’s ministry, we do not have the date of an emperor or some other dating method to establish the timing of His death. However, we do have several key points which (when added up) appear to narrow the crucifixion date to the spring of 31 CE.
Point #1: Yahushua was about 30 years of age when he was baptized and began His ministry.
Point #2: Yahushua had to have been born at sometime prior to 2 BCE (which could be anywhere from 6 to 2 BCE). The most likely time of His birth is 4 BCE.
Point #3: When you add 30 years to 4 BCE, you come to the approximate date of 28 CE.
Point #4: Our examination of all data related to the 15 th year of Tiberius (the year Yahushua begins His ministry) is that it is mostly likely the same as the year 27 BC. Please note our detailed explanation of this in chapter seven on page 70.
Point #5: In the writings of John, it speaks of Passovers that came during the ministry of Yahushua. While this does not prove conclusively exactly how long the length of his ministry was, it does show that it had to have been at least 3 ½ years in length. We have no way of knowing if there were more Passovers during his ministry. However, since John saw Yahushua as the sinless lamb it only seems reasonable that he would not have failed to mention the passing of a Passover feast. Three and one half years from the fall of 27 CE brings us to the spring of 31 CE as the most likely year of the crucifixion.
While this is significant, I should point out that I am not the only one who has seen this connection. Eusebius, a Christian writing in the fourth century CE, has not only seen the four Passovers of John (and therefore acknowledges a 3 ½ year ministry for the Messiah), but he even uses the language of Daniel 9 as he states that this 3 ½ year period is “half a week”:
Now the whole period of our Saviour’s teaching and working of miracles is said to have been three-and-a-half years, which is half a week. John the evangelist, in his Gospel makes this clear to the attentive.116
Point #6:
John 11:54-55 and 12:1 clearly show that six days prior to Passover, the Messiah made a 14-mile journey. If Passover took place on a Friday, then six days prior would have been a Sabbath—and the Messiah would never
116Eusebius, The Proof of the Gospel, Book 8, Chapter 2.
undertake such a long journey on the Sabbath. This effectively rules out a Friday crucifixion and leaves us only the options of a Wednesday or a Thursday crucifixion.
Point #7:
A Friday and a Thursday crucifixion is effectively ruled out because neither one of these options will allow for the accurate fulfillment of the sign of Jonah, the “three days and three nights” in the grave and an empty tomb on Sunday morning. Now we are left with what appears to be the only viable alternative—a Wednesday crucifixion.
Point #8:
Moon phase calculations will only give us a Wednesday crucifixion for the year 31 CE, which we can arrive at based upon the 70th week of Daniel 9 (the midst of the week) and upon the four recorded Passovers in the gospel of John.
Regarding the prophecy of Daniel 9, it says that “in the midst of the week” the “anointed one” (Messiah) would cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease. He did this through His death. But the prophecy does not say it had to be exactly in the middle of the week. While this author believes that the crucifixion very likely took place in 31 CE (which, based upon lunar-solar calculations, would make it a Wednesday crucifixion and exactly in the middle of Daniel’s 70th week) it could possibly have taken place in the year 30 CE and still fulfilled the prophecy of Daniel 9.
The three most probable dates for the crucifixion include the spring of 30, 31, and 33 CE. Of course, even with all of this evidence, we still cannot be absolutely 100% certain of the exact year of the crucifixion. While I wish to remain open to other possibilities, I feel that 31 CE is a much better date that seems to fit—not only with the accounts given in the four gospels, but also the astronomical observations of historical moon cycles and the exact synchronizations of the Jubilee calendar (i.e., 70 Weeks of Daniel 9).
12. The Conclusion of the 70 Weeks Prophecy
According to our study, the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9 was definitely fulfilled by the decree of Artaxerxes in 457 BCE to rebuild Jerusalem. The 70th week clearly began in 27 CE and was marked by the appearance of Yahushua and the beginning of His ministry. The evidence we have presented also strongly suggests that His ministry lasted three and a half years, and culminated in the death and resurrection of Yahushua the Messiah in the spring of 31 CE. Three and a half years later (in the fall of 34 CE) the 70-week prophecy came to an end. What happened at that time? Is there some event which marks the end of that prophecy?
A few years after the Messiah was crucified and resurrected, Stephen was stoned to death for his faith in Yahushua. The text which speaks of this event is found in Acts chapter 6-7:
And the word of the Almighty increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people. Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake. (Acts 6:7-10)
We cannot be completely certain of the exact dating of this series of events. However, it states that “the number of the disciples multiplied.” Such multiplication does not usually happen within only one year, but may require three or four years. Now let us continue:
Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it. When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth. But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of the Almighty, and Yahushua standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of the Almighty. Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul. And they stoned Stephen, calling upon the Almighty, and saying, Lord Yahushua, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep. (Acts 7:51-60)
Soon after this event, Saul (Shaul) had an experience on the road to Damascus which quickly led to the gospel going to the gentiles (Acts 9:1-15). Shaul was given a commission to bring the good news to the gentiles, and not limit it strictly to the Jews. Do we have an exact date by which to identify all of these events? No, we do not. We can say that it was probably 34 CE when Stephen was stoned and soon after Saul took up his mission to spread the gospel into all the world. But we have no proof that this is exactly when it happened. However, we can be reasonably sure that these events took place at approximately this time.
Regardless of the uncertainty of the date, we do know that within only a few years after the Messiah was crucified, the gospel did go to all the world because of Stephen and because of Saul who came on the scene very soon after the stoning of Stephen. The prophecy of the 70 weeks had come to a conclusion in the end of the Sabbatical year just prior to another year of Jubilee which began in the fall of 34 CE. There is no requirement in the prophecy of Daniel 9 for any special event to take place at the end of the 70 weeks. It is only that the Messiah was to be crucified in the last week and that in the midst of the final week the sacrifice and oblation would cease. At some undetermined time after all of this, the prophecy says that “he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.” Indeed, this happened about 40 years later in the year 70 CE, when the temple and Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans (along with about a million Jews).
We have seen the evidence of the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. In fact, we have seen the evidence that clearly shows that Daniel 9 is probably one of the most important prophecies in all of Scripture. It is (in my view) the most important prophecy because it identifies by an exact series of dates and events the most important man to ever walk on the face of this earth—the man Yahushua Messiah. The Jews would like to forget about this prophecy, and the Christians would like to misinterpret and confuse this prophecy (in several different ways, including the introducing of the “gap theory” to supposedly support Dispensationalism and a “secret rapture”, or calculations based upon a contrived 360 day/year count). But the evidence (as I have presented it here today) has shown what the real truth is. The Messiah came on time, to visit his own people and give them the gift of eternal life, and yet many of His own people refused to accept him. We today are in danger of making the same mistake, to assume that Yahweh is “putting off” His great day of wrath and judgment. Those who are familiar with the “timing” aspect of this and other prophecies know that it is more true now than ever when it says: “the time is at hand.”
Appendix I: Seventh-Day Adventists and the 1844 Dilemma
While I believe that this side note is not necessary for most, I also believe that there will be some who read this study who may be familiar with or even belong to the Seventh-day Adventist faith. The SDA’s believe that the prophecy of Daniel 8 and 9 are directly connected, and that the 2300 days represent 2300 years, which extend from 457 BCE to 1844 CE. In fact, this teaching is without a doubt the single most important doctrine within the SDA church. It is so fundamental to Adventism that you could not in good faith remain an Adventist and at the same time reject this teaching. I do not share their beliefs in regard to the importance of 1844 as it is linked to the prophecy of Daniel 8:14. Therefore, for those who might be interested to learn more, I would like to take this opportunity to briefly explain why I believe this view to be an error.
At one time I did indeed believe in this teaching, since I was also an SDA for about 20 years. Even after leaving this denomination, I continued to hold onto what I considered the core teachings of Adventism, including this belief regarding Daniel 8:14. However, once I studied these prophecies out carefully on my own I came to see that there were some serious errors being perpetuated by them, including their beliefs regarding 1844. While the starting date of 457 BCE is (as I believe) still valid for the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9, the idea that the 2300 days is connected with it and also starts at the same time is really impossible to prove. Here is why this cannot be valid:
In the prophecy of Daniel 8, SDA’s rightly recognize that “determined” also means “cut off,” and they rightly acknowledge that the prophecy of the 70 weeks extends to the time of Yahushua’s ministry. However, they erroneously connect the 70 weeks of Daniel 9:24-27 with the prophecy of Daniel 8:14 (the 2300 “evenings and mornings”) and they believe that the 70 weeks are “cut off” from that prophecy. The major problem with this idea is that there really is no way of making a direct contextual connection between the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9 and the 2300 evening and morning prophecy of Daniel 8. Who is the one to determine just exactly what the 70 weeks are “cut off” from? And based upon what evidence?
According to Daniel 8, Yahweh gave a commandment to Gabriel: “Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision” (Daniel 8:16). Did Gabriel fail in his mission to explain the vision? No, he did not. Gabriel had already explained the vision of Daniel 8, and it is universally agreed that several years had elapsed between the end of chapter 8 and the beginning of chapter 9. Thus, any attempt to connect the 2300 “evenings and mornings”
prophecy of Daniel 8 with the 70 weeks’ prophecy of Daniel 9 is to take those prophecies out of context.
The context clearly shows that the issue Daniel was concerned with in chapter 9 was the 70 years of desolation that were soon to come to an end. Is there anywhere in Daniel 9 where one can find evidence which links directly to the vision of Daniel 8? Nowhere is there any evidence to link the prophecies. Daniel was not thinking and praying about the vision of chapter 8, but instead he was praying about the 70 years of desolation. In fact, prior to this chapter, Daniel is commanded by the angel Gabriel to “seal up the vision,” so why would he again have to unseal it so as to connect it with another prophecy?:
And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days. (Daniel 8:26)
Nowhere in Daniel 9 is Daniel commanded to “unseal” the vision of Daniel 8 so as to introduce another prophecy. Instead of being concerned about the vision of chapter 8, Daniel was now clearly concerned with the 70 years of desolation mentioned by the prophet Jeremiah. His entire prayer is focused on that issue. He must surely have been thinking, “Will Yahweh restore the people of Israel to their land after the 70 years have expired and restore them to their former glory?” The answer came later: Yes, He would restore them to their land but afterwards they would be allotted 70 weeks of years (490 years) to prepare their hearts to receive the Messiah.117 The fact that Gabriel assigns 70 weeks to this prophecy in contrast to the 70 years of captivity is the final proof that the “matter” and the “vision” Gabriel refers to are clearly not connected to the prophecies of Daniel 8—but instead to the 70 years captivity.
Another major obstacle for the Adventist position involves the fact that the prophecy of Daniel 8 clearly identifies the power that would cause the “desolation” of the “sanctuary” and the general timeframe that it would be fulfilled in. This power is really a subsidiary (i.e., “little horn”) of Alexander’s Grecian empire, therefore placing the fulfillment of that prophecy in the ancient past—not a secret fulfillment in the distant future. It certainly cannot apply to a hidden “sanctuary” that is not of this earth. Notice how clearly this is proven by the following text:
And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be. The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the
117“Messiah” is from the Hebrew word for “anointed” (Moshiach). In the Greek it is typically translated as “Christ” but we will consistently translate it here as Messiah.
nation, but not in his power. And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. . . (Daniel 8:19-23)
This text plainly interprets for us the meaning of the vision of Daniel 8:1-14. The kingdom of Greece would be that power which causes the “desolation,” “cast down the truth to the ground,” and bring desolation to the “sanctuary”—“in the latter time of their kingdom” (as explained in Daniel 8:23). The “latter time” is not a reference to the mid 1800’s, but instead to the “latter time” of the empire of Greece. The prophecy of Daniel 8:14 was indeed fulfilled in the “latter time” of the Grecian empire. This period of 2300 “evenings and mornings” is a reference to the “morning” and “evening” sacrificial offerings made in the temple at Jerusalem. In 171 BCE Antiochus Epiphanes desolated that temple by sacrificing a pig on the alter and he put a stop to the temple sacrifices. This explains Daniel’s reference to the “evenings and mornings” since sacrifices are commanded in Scripture to be carried out twice in each day. While the purpose of this side note is not to give a detailed explanation of this prophecy of the 2300 days, we can say with confidence that this was certainly fulfilled by Antiochus Epiphanes and the 2300 days most likely took place sometime between 171 and 164 BCE. It is, therefore, a prophecy in reference to the desolation of the temple by Antiochus—not a 2300-year prophecy which Adventists claim was secretly fulfilled in 1844.118
118While I do not agree with every teaching proposed by this website, I would like to suggest this excellent online article for further study, located at: http://www.ellenwhite.org/2300.htm The 2300-day Dilemma—The TRUTH about 1844 Made Simple (Ellen White Research Project).
Appendix II: Dispensationalism and the 70th Week of Daniel 9
For those who may or may not have heard of or believe in dispensationalism, it is necessary for us to take a closer look at this teaching—as it has been widely taught by many evangelicals, and therefore needs to be examined more closely. Our study of this has an important bearing on the prophecy of Daniel 9.
Dispensationalism is the teaching that Yahweh deals with men in different ways in different ages of history. In the most simplistic terms, a dispensationalist believes that there is an age of Law (which is fulfilled by Israel) and an age of Grace (which is fulfilled by the Christian Church). It teaches that people are saved by obedience to the Law before the Messiah came, and they are saved by the Grace of Yahweh after the Messiah came.
Dispensationalism originated through the teachings of John N. Darby (1800-1882) who was a prominent leader of the Plymouth Brethren Movement and a prolific writer.119 It was popularized by the key notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, through the work of Cyrus Scofield in 1909.120 Today, dispensationalism has changed somewhat from its original teachings. It not only includes futurism as its mode of prophetic fulfillment, but also includes the secret rapture theory. These teachings have been championed by Hal Lindsey in his book The Late Great Planet Earth, which has sold millions of copies and is very popular among evangelical Christians.
It is the belief of this author that dispensational-futurism tends to deny the historical accuracy of the prophetic word, including the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9. In teaching various “gaps” in the prophetic timeline, as well as “gaps” in the ages and manner of salvation, it leads one to view our heavenly Father as one like unto ourselves—inconsistent! The real truth is that people are saved now in the same way they were in ancient times. For example, the sacrificial system used by Israel pointed forward to the work of the Messiah—and those who partook of that system by faith did so looking forward to His sacrifice. Those who are saved now (through faith in Messiah) do so upon the same terms—by faith. The Law was never a means to salvation, nevertheless, Yahweh’s requirements do not change—we are still required to keep the Law. Those who truly kept the law in ancient times did so by faith in a future Messiah, just as those who do so today. There is no dispensation when it comes to the basic requirements of salvation—we are all saved or lost based upon the same criteria, our faith in
119For more detailed information on Dispensationalism as introduced by John Darby, please see Walvoord, The Nations, Israel and the Church in Prophecy, pp. 103-20, and Hal Lindsey, The Rapture: Truth or Consequences (New York, 1983).120B. Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1960), pp. 48-99.
Yahweh (through the Messiah, the true sacrificial lamb) and our actions which follow according to our faith.
In connection with Daniel 9, dispensationalism teaches that the Messiah did not completely fulfill that prophecy. Dispensationalists believe that many things are left unfulfilled, and that the final 7 years (or 3 ½ years, depending upon which view is presented) are yet future. They believe that there is a “gap” between the 69th week and the 70th week of Daniel 9. They believe this based upon the principles from another “gap theory,” which is a similar theory regarding the creation of this world which teaches that creation was originally built upon the destruction of a previous “creation.” As a result, the dispensationalist believes there is a “gap” between the original creation of this earth as recorded in Genesis 1:1 (possibly millions of years) and the seven days of creation described after this (which literally happened only a few thousand years ago). In regard to the 70th week of Daniel 9, dispensationalism teaches that it has also been postponed until the coming of an anti-christ, as Christians await the longed for “secret rapture,” which is another related doctrine which has neither Scriptural nor historical support.
One dispensationalist teacher, H. A. Ironside, teaches that the prophets looked into the future and saw everything as if it were a great mountain range, some closer and easier to see and some further away and more difficult to see. The prophet would (according to this view) see only the “peaks,” not the valleys below.121 This reasoning is used to explain why the prophet Daniel did not (supposedly) know of a delay between the 69th and the 70th week of his prophecy. He says, concerning some of the predictions made by Daniel in chapter 9, that “they were not fulfilled.”122 But what does Scripture say about the work of a true prophet? And what does the Messiah say about the prophecies concerning Himself:
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. (Luke 24:44)
The Messiah Yahushua says that “all things must be fulfilled” in regards to the coming Messiah. Does this allow room for partial fulfillments? Not really. Yet the typical teaching of dispensationalism is that part of Daniel 9 was not fulfilled—including the timing aspect (which appears to place Daniel among the false prophets). Already, the dispensationalist teaching regarding Daniel 9 is on shaky ground. Ironside continues:121H. A. Ironside, The Great Parentheses, p. 12.122Ibid., p. 23.*Although we have not yet established the basis of the Jubilee Calendar as given on page 18, we here show this calendar as an example. In a future article we will explain in greater detail how the Jubilee Calendar works, and provide evidence to support the dates suggested—with the understanding that many chronological statements (no matter how well documented) are not to be understood as being completely “infallible.” We can only say that we have confidence that these dates represent my best estimate of chronological history—which tends to be increasingly accurate in many cases after the year 853/852 BCE (the year of king Ahab’s death). Prior to this date, establishing an exact date in history is very difficult—often impossible.
The fact is they were not fulfilled. Israel did not recognize their Messiah. They did not know Him yet as their Sin-bearer. Their transgression has not been finished. An end of sins for them has not been made. They do not know anything yet of atonement for iniquity. . . . The seventieth week has been postponed by God Himself. The moment Messiah died on the cross the prophetic clock stopped. There has not been one tick on that clock for nineteen centuries. It will not begin to go again until the entire present age has come to an end, and Israel will once more be taken up by God.123
There are several problems with this view. First, does Scripture allow a prophecy from a true prophet to be only partially fulfilled—especially when it includes a time factor? Notice that when a prophet makes a prediction that does not come to pass exactly as given, he is to be considered a false prophet:
When a prophet speaketh in the name of Yahweh, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which Yahweh hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:22)
Does the gap theory concerning Daniel 9 place Daniel among the false prophets? If Daniel is indeed a true prophet, yet dispensationalists teach that part of what he predicted did not really happen (because it has been delayed), where does that put the dispensationalists?
Here are some other questions we could ask: Where in Scripture does it say that the “prophetic clock stopped,” as dispensationalists’ teach? Assuming this teaching is true, how are we supposed to know (from Scripture) when that “prophetic clock” is to restart? Where does it say that the 70th week has been postponed by Yahweh? Where does it say in Daniel 9 that in order for the prophecy to be fulfilled every single descendant of Abraham must recognize their Messiah? Must they all put an end to all of their sins? Must they all learn of and accept His atonement, and finish the transgression? There simply is nothing in Scripture which states everyone must accept salvation from Yahweh before this or any other prophecy can be fulfilled. In fact, the concept is so contrary to the examples and teachings of Scripture that it appears to qualify as heresy. Scripture does not teach universal salvation, and there is not even a “hint” of a “secret rapture.” Scripture teaches that the majority are often wrong, and that “every eye will see him” (the Messiah at His coming—Revelation 1:7). It would be practically impossible for a “secret rapture” to take place under conditions that would permit “every eye” to see Him! Also, John the Baptist spoke of salvation as an individual decision, as he plainly rebuked the Pharisees:
123Ibid.
And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that the Almighty is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. (Matthew 3:9-10)
You will notice that he does not say all sons of Abraham would be cut down and cast away (which is “replacement theology”), nor that they would all be saved (which is a form of “universalism”). Instead he clearly stated that salvation would be (as it has always been) based upon individual decisions. The text below plainly teaches that all now have access to salvation, not just the Jews:
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. (Acts 10:43)
Being a son of Abraham cannot help them, nor can it hinder them. Salvation has now been extended to all (all, that is, who accept it). But salvation also requires “good fruit” as proof of our faith, as John the Baptist told the Pharisees:
And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. (Matthew 3:10)
Yahushua informs the Pharisees that because they have not brought forth “good fruit” they give testimony that they are descendants of those who killed the prophets, and that it is now time for them to “fill ye up” the measure of the sins of their fathers:
Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. (Matthew 23:31-32)
The prophecy of Daniel 9:24 said that the first thing to happen was to “finish the transgression.” Is it possible that this truly was fulfilled when the sons of Abraham rejected their Messiah and crucified Him? He said it—“Fill ye up the measure of your Fathers!” This statement sounds incredibly similar to the statement of Daniel 9:24—“to finish the transgression. . .”
Dispensationalism teaches that there is a “postponement” of Yahweh’s Word. It teaches that, while the prophecy of Daniel 9 leads to the coming Messiah, it is a prophecy which is incomplete, and is in need of an extension of time to bring it to complete fulfillment. Such a teaching as this really calls into question Yahweh’s Word, suggesting that it is fallible and requires new “theories” to explain it—like the “dispensationalist theory,” the “gap theory,” and the “secret rapture theory.” I would strongly recommend
that we not allow a “theory” to have foremost authority in our minds—especially as it tends to discredit and override the Word of Yahweh.
Appendix III: Dating Events in Ancient Times
In ancient times the nations did not have a standardized universal method of tracking the years as we do today. Instead, they had their own way of establishing timelines unique to their particular culture and nation. I believe it is important for us to acquaint ourselves with those dating methods before we proceed with the rest of this study—since we may be referring to them from time to time.
One method of tracking events in time is what is called Eponym years. The word “Eponym” simply means “name” and signifies that a certain year is named after the name of someone important. One example is the year of “Solon” (594 BCE).124 Various cultures have made use of such a system to identify certain years.125 In establishing ancient chronologies, the use of the Eponym is very important.126
One system of eponym years, which is very important for chronologists, is that created by the ancient Assyrians. The Assyrians developed a custom in which every year would be named after the name of one of the leading statesmen. A consecutive list of these “eponym” are available to us from the years 853 to 703 BCE. We know that these are the years in question because of the fact that the Assyrians also kept track of solar eclipses (which modern science is able to pinpoint to the very day and hour). Eclipses were noted in Assyria for the years 832, 763 and 585 BCE, and along with the record of the eclipses we have the eponym years to firmly fix certain events to certain historical dates.127 As a result, we are able to establish generally reliable dates for certain events during that time frame—often accurate to within a year or even hours in some cases.
A second method of dating events is what is called the Seleucid Era. The Seleucid Era was established just prior to the great expansion and conquest of the Grecian empire. It is a time frame which is known to have extended from August of 312 to July of 311 BCE, according to the fall-to-fall calendar of the Macedonian court. According to the Babylonian system (which used a spring-to-spring calendar) the first year of the Seleucid Era extended from April of 311 BCE to March of 310 BCE. It is often used to date historical events, especially in the books of 1st and 2nd Maccabees, and is not always as precisely accurate as the Assyrian and Babylonian dates—which can often be confirmed through astronomical events, such as eclipses.128
124Answers.com “Eponym.” http://www.answers.com/topic/eponym 125Wikipedia, article under “Eponym.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eponym 126Wikipedia, article under “Chronology of the Ancient Near East.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_Ancient_Near_East 127Wikipedia, article under “Eponym list.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eponym_list 128Wikipedia, article under “Seleucid era.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seleucid_Era#_note-0
A third method of dating historical events is called the Olympiad. In the year 776 BCE the Olympic games were started in Greece, such that every four years the new Olympic date is given and the fifth year is then established as the first year of the new Olympiad.129 From that time going forward, Olympiads were declared as late as the fifth century CE. However, there were some slight changes to the system at a later date and it does provide only a four-year variable date (not a precise year). Therefore, while this dating method is important and can provide useful information, it should not be relied on exclusively to determine accurate dates.130
A fourth and very important method of dating events in history is to link the event with the year of a certain king, which is called “regnal year” dating. This method of dating is almost exclusively used in Scripture, especially in the books of Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah. Very simply, when a certain king began his reign, events would be dated in accordance with the number of years that particular king remained in his position.131 This method of dating is divided into two parts, called “accession years” and “non-accession years.” In regnal dating, an “accession year” of a king is considered to be the last year of the previous monarch. Therefore, using this method, they count the reign of this king according to his first full year. Using a “non-accession year” method, the year that the king comes to the throne is considered the first year. Both of these methods of dating events appear to have been used throughout Scripture.132
Regnal year dating increases in accuracy as we come into the post-temple era, and especially as it is linked with astronomical events and other dating methods. Here is a simple chart to illustrate the differences between these two methods:
The Ancient Regnal (Kingly) Dating MethodAccession Year Method
Accession Year 0 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year
Non-Accession Year Method 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year
In his book Mapping Time, E. G. Richards states that this method of dating came “. . . naturally from the practice of regnal dating. Instead of
129Wikipedia, article under “Olympiad.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympiad “By our modern calendar system (Gregorian), the first Olympiad is reckoned to the year 776 BC, which year is arrived at deductively. The first year of the common era (1 CE/AD) is equivalent to the seven-hundred and fifty-fourth year from the founding of Rome (AUC 754) according to the Varronian epoch. The founding of Rome, in turn, is testified as being April 21, in the third year of the sixth Olympiad (OL 6) (Plutarch, Romulus 23-24; Eutropius, History 1.1). So deductively speaking, the first year of the games and the start of the first Olympiad was the summer of 776 BC.”130Ibid.131Wikipedia, article under “Regnal year.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regnal_year 132For a more complete discussion of Regnal years as it relates to Bible Chronology, please read the book The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, by Edwin Thiele.
starting the count anew with each successive king, the counting continued through reign after reign. . .”133 Later he clarifies his point with this statement: ". . . this gave way to a system of regnal dating: the first year of a king would start with the next 'first of Nisanu' after his accession . . ."134
In an earlier chapter we learned that while many of the kings of Israel and Judah started the year in the spring (on the first day of Nisan) this was not always the case. Sometimes they would change their method and start in the fall, and this is especially true in regards to the dating of foreign kings. For now, it is important that we understand that the year is typically known to have started either in the spring (at the new moon on or after the equinox) or in the fall—depending upon whether it is referring to Israel or Judah or foreign kings. These are the two times most often noted by Bible chronologists as the beginning of the year. Therefore, whatever dating system historians attempt to use, they must also decide whether the people for whom the ancient document was written were generally using a fall-to-fall calendar or a spring-to-spring calendar. When attempting to establish exact dates, such a question as this is of paramount importance. The answers are not always easy find, since evidence appears to be so sporadic.
In addition to all of these methods of dating events, we must hasten to add that variations exist with regard to what was considered the start of the year. Unlike our current Gregorian calendar, the year did not always start on January 1. Instead, depending on which country is dating the event, the year would start at various key points in the seasons. For instance, in ancient Egypt the year began in the summer at the time of the rising of Sirius in a certain year (2782 BCE) and because of its cycle being out of sync with the true solar year by ¼ th of a day we are able to use this grand “Sothic Cycle” to establish many accurate dates in history.135
133Mapping Time: The Calendar and Its History, by E. G. Richards, p. 106.134Ibid., p. 148.135Wikipedia, Sothic Cycle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sothic_cycle
The prophecy of Malachi states that Yahweh would send His messenger to prepare the way before Him, and that the Messiah would suddenly come to the temple:
Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and Yahweh, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith Yahweh of hosts. (Malachi 3:1)
Although the KJV says it is “to finish the transgression,” it could also be translated “restrain” or “hold back” the “revolt.” It cannot be said of the Messiah Yahushua (or anyone else in history) that they were able to completely “finish” or bring to an end all “rebellion” on this earth. But it could be said of the Messiah that His influence in this earth has been such that it has indeed “restrained” the revolt so that it cannot exceed a certain boundary. One has to wonder what the world today would be like if the Messiah had not come when He did? His work is that of a restraining influence that prevents Satan from exercising full and complete authority in this world. Prior to His day (for example) there were world empires which held sway over large portions of the earth. Within only a few centuries of His resurrection, the Roman Empire began to crumble, and the nations of the world continue to remain divided to this day. The Jewish nation also fell (along with the city of Jerusalem) only 40 years after the crucifixion—another example of how the “rebellion” was “restrained.” We also see that various attempts to unify the world into a single “New World Order,” such attempts have failed miserably. The “rebellion” has clearly been held in check.
The Messiah has restrained the rebellion by the simple and direct presentation of truth as given to us in the gospel accounts. And it is also by His revelation of Yahweh’s true character to the Jewish people (and later to the rest of the world). His subsequent death and resurrection placed a seal upon the Jewish nation (because of their rebellion, and for no other reason) that eventually led to the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 CE. Since the completion of the 490 years the Jewish people have been scattered, and the rebellion has been effectively “restrained”—although, not completely stopped. When the Messiah finally sets up His kingdom, re-gathers the lost tribes, and restores the nation of Israel to her former glory (both Jews and the lost tribes called
Ephraim), there will be no more rebellion. The people of Yahweh will present a united front to all nations, to illustrate what men can create when led by Yahweh’s Spirit.
For those of us who have accepted the Messiah, we can see how the message of salvation has influenced many people since that time to turn away from their rebellious tendencies. The Messiah has not only “restrained” the rebellion of the Jewish nation as a whole, but He has done the same on a personal level for all of those who turn to Him. We who have recognized Him as the Son of Yahweh, the one Who has borne our sins, believe that He has removed our sins from us as far as the east is from the west. While none of us is perfect, we understand that before we turned to Yahushua, we were steeped in sin, and the only thing we had to look forward to was eternal separation from Yahweh. Until that time, sin reigned in our mortal bodies, and we obeyed the lusts thereof.
However, when we turned to Yahushua, we came to the realization of the course we were on, and the hope that He offers to us … the free gift of salvation. We had been married to the “man of sin,” but we symbolically put that man to death, burying it in the watery grave of baptism, and we rose again a new creation that we might be married to another … our bridegroom Yahushua the Messiah. Henceforth, we live for Him, as servants of righteousness. It is when we received the gift of the Spirit that we became that new creature, and it is for those who thus turn to Him that everlasting righteousness has been brought in. For us, He has indeed “restrained the rebellion” as He Himself took our sins upon Himself and has wiped our slate clean. Thus reconciled to Him, those who have turned to Him live new lives guided by the Spirit and dedicated to pleasing the Father and His Son.
Related Documents
