Sir Robert Anderson's Dates ???

[precepts]

If we use Anderson's method we have to assume the descendants of Jacob were the worst calendar makers during that period of civilization. You were correct about the error. Within a period of only 35 years the calendar would be out-of-sync with the seasons by a period of 1/2 year. This would reverse the seasons and throw off the planting and harvest time.

We have to remember that these people were in communication with the creator of the universe. Instead of being the worst calendar makers, they should have been the best. They made corrections every few years to solve the calendar synchronization problem. This is something Anderson did not consider in his calculations.



If you want to really understand the ancient Jewish calendar, go to the link below and get a copy of "The Atonement Clock", by Christian Gedge. Another poster (Gideon) recommended the book to me. After I read it, I ordered 10 more copies for Christmas presents.

It is also available from Amazon.com.

THE ATONEMENT CLOCK - Christian Gedge | 5 Loaves & 2 Fishes




.

.

You didn't address anything I said.

- The hebrew year was/is 360 days a year, 12 months a year. Haven't read thru the thread, so I don't know if these issues have been addressed yet, but there's no calendar that can equally divided the year into days without it eventually drifting out of sync.


- The only other thing is the decree to rebuild Shalem wasn't given by Artaxerxes, but by Cyrus. And the 70 weeks were 70 literal yrs, evident by the 7 weeks/yrs to the commandment prophesied in the 1st yr of Darius the Mede who reigned in Babylon 7yrs prior to Cyrus' conquest of the same Babylon.


- Artaxerxes decree was for the rebuilding of the wall by Nehem-h after the sixty and two weeks.

- This is the Artaxerxes that reigned in 445 bc when the wall was rebuilt. Cyrus gave the decree in 539 bc. The temple was completed in the reign of Darius the grandfather of this Artaxerxes.

 

[BABerean2]

Reading your words above, I am sitting here shaking my head. You continue to take your reading what you do into my words as my intent.

I never asserted that you were not my brother as I already explained in another post to Ol Jack that I check on that; I do not right off assume one is or is not my brother.

The reason I do is simple - I sat in an assembly many years ago for about a year never aware I was lost the entire time I was there. For, while they would mention "the gospel" I did not know "the gospel of the grace of God" and no one ever brought it up - this happens in assemblies - people just assume one knows the Lord. As a result I ask others about their assurance.

Any mature believer would understand this concern as well as appreciate it. If that is somehow an offense to you and Interplanner; who also seems to have taken offence that I voiced my concern then perhaps you each ought to question your level of maturity on this important matter.

My concern was and remains valid from my heart; but read it as you will. It was and is concern out of not knowing one way or the other, after you posted that hellfire passage aimed at me, as the only thing I took personal about your having aimed the passage at me was the concern I felt over what that might or might not be saying about your belief about salvation - concern for your soul, not for mine.

What an odd response to another's concern for you - another who has at the bottom of their signature Eph. 4:16.

No need to get back to me on this, its been put on the table, met with what it did, and I am satisfied that I at least stepped forward to voice my concern at the risk of being reported and or banned for having perhaps offended someone over the very issue that cost the Savior His Blood, and that we are each called to be ambassadors of. I mean, how much more sensitive about this does one need to be to get through that theirs was actually concern.

I've said my piece, have the last word, if that is what you need. The best to you regardless.

If you call another poster on this forum a "fool" and they send the following verse back to you and you are offended, then the problem does not lie in the other person.


Mat_5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.


Not only is calling another poster a "fool" a violation of forum rules and common decency, it goes above and beyond the spirit of debate on a Christian website.


Then when you do something like this, there never seems to be any spirit of repentance.

Biblewriter and I have had our heated comments, however there is a line we do not cross without remorse and repentance afterward.

You, on the other-hand only make excuses for your name-calling.

.

 

[BABerean2]

You didn't address anything I said.

I will attempt to do a little better this time.

The following dates come from pages 42 and 43 of The Atonement Clock, by Christian Gedge.

Empire of Babylon Ends: 538 BC Cyrus decree

Desolation of Jerusalem ends after 70 years: 520 BC Darius decree

Old 70-week era ends. New 70-weeks begin: 457 BC Artaxerxes decree

There shall be seven weeks and sixty two weeks= 483 years: AD 27
Until Messiah the Prince. (Daniel 9:25) Christ begins His public ministry.

In the middle of the 70th week, Jesus is crucified. AD 30
He shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifices and offering (Daniel 9:27)


Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament(covenant), which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
(I added this verse for the sake of our discussion here.)


AD 34: Weeks end
(section below was added by me for our discussion here)
We know the disciples continue to carry the Gospel to the Jews after Christ went to be with the Father. Stephen was stoned around the end of the 70th week.


Stephen is accused of saying that Christ would fulfill Daniel 9:27.

Act 6:14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.


.

 

[precepts]

I will attempt to do a little better this time.

The following dates come from pages 42 and 43 of The Atonement Clock, by Christian Gedge.

Empire of Babylon Ends: 538 BC Cyrus decree

Babylon was conquered by Darius the Mede 7yrs prior to Cyrus' conquest of Babylon, and Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was given in the 1st yr of this Darius of the Medes, historical facts. It was then "7 weeks/yrs to the commandment to go forth and rebuild Shalem" when Cyrus would conquer Darius and make the decree. It was prophecied 7yrs before it happened, all historical and scriptural facts.

Desolation of Jerusalem ends after 70 years: 520 BC Darius decree

I don't know where you're getting your information from, but you are wrong. What you're referring to in this Darius' reign is the completion of the temple, which was 70 yrs from it's destruction to it's reconstruction. It was 70 yrs from Judah's first carrying off into Babylon to Cyrus' decree freeing them. The temple was destroyed 40 yrs after this first carrying off and rebuilt 70 yrs after in Darius' reign. I'm not sure which yr of his reign it was, but it was in his reign. Darius was the grandson of the original Darius the Mede who defeated Babylon 7 yrs prior to Cyrus.

Old 70-week era ends. New 70-weeks begin: 457 BC Artaxerxes decree

The prophesy says sixty and two weeks the walls would be rebuilt, and I provided the verses proving the walls were rebuilt in Artaxerxes time, by Nehem-h.

If you read Nehem-h, the temple was already rebuilt by Artaxerxes' grandfather Darius. The walls were destroyed by the prince that came in the troublous times, which was part of the 70 weeks prophecy.

There shall be seven weeks and sixty two weeks= 483 years: AD 27
Until Messiah the Prince. (Daniel 9:25) Christ begins His public ministry.

The reason you ignore the historical and scriptural facts is because you want to interpret the 70 weeks as being fulfilled by Christ, but the decree from 539 bc being 490 yrs drops short; plus, the 70 weeks, as I said before, is literally 70 yrs, not 490 yrs.This is proven by the 7 weeks which was a literal 7yrs to Cyrus' decree.

In the middle of the 70th week, Jesus is crucified. AD 30
He shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifices and offering (Daniel 9:27)


Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament(covenant), which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
(I added this verse for the sake of our discussion here.)


AD 34: Weeks end
(section below was added by me for our discussion here)
We know the disciples continue to carry the Gospel to the Jews after Christ went to be with the Father. Stephen was stoned around the end of the 70th week.


Stephen is accused of saying that Christ would fulfill Daniel 9:27.

Act 6:14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.


.

The decree was given in 539 bc by Cyrus. The decree was given for the rebuilding of Shalem which was already rebuilt in Artaxerxes time. Your and Christianity's stumbling block is the anointing of the son of Josedech, Joshua, as King and high priest. The vision sealed in the 70 weeks prophecy, the anointing of the most high, and the desolation until the "consummation."

 

[Danoh]

AD 34: Weeks end
(section below was added by me for our discussion here)
We know the disciples continue to carry the Gospel to the Jews after Christ went to be with the Father. Stephen was stoned around the end of the 70th week.


Stephen is accused of saying that Christ would fulfill Daniel 9:27.

Act 6:14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.


.

Meaning what; that their understanding was that Jesus was the Jewish anti-Messiah that Daniel 9:27 points to in light of other passages in Daniel like Daniel 7:

25. And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

And, say, Daniel 11 among others:

36. And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
37. Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.
38. But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.

Each of those details is in the sense of Israelite understanding of same - example - "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women..."

What is this desire of women among the Israelites? Any Jew who knows her culture will tell you it is the desire for the honor of the following blessing among women - Luke 1:

28. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
29. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
30. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33. And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

This honor among women, to have bestowed on her the honor of bring the Lord's Christ into the world, though obviously desired by her as an Israelite, nevertheless threw Mary off:

34. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
35. And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

41. And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her
womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
42. And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is
the fruit of thy womb.
43. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
44. For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my
womb for joy.
45. And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.
46. And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
47. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
48. For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
49. For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.
50. And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation.
51. He hath shewed strength with his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
52. He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree.
53. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.
54. He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy;
55. As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.

And that is just the tip of the iceberg of all the gems the Scripture contains on these issues...

 

[BABerean2]

Meaning what; that their understanding was that Jesus was the Jewish anti-Messiah that Daniel 9:27 points to in light of other passages in Daniel like Daniel 7:

25. And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

And, say, Daniel 11 among others:

36. And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
37. Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.
38. But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.

Each of those details is in the sense of Israelite understanding of same - example - "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women..."

What is this desire of women among the Israelites? Any Jew who knows her culture will tell you it is the desire for the honor of the following blessing among women - Luke 1:

28. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
29. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
30. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33. And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

This honor among women, to have bestowed on her the honor of bring the Lord's Christ into the world, though obviously desired by her as an Israelite, nevertheless threw Mary off:

34. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
35. And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

41. And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her
womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
42. And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is
the fruit of thy womb.
43. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
44. For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my
womb for joy.
45. And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.
46. And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
47. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
48. For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
49. For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.
50. And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation.
51. He hath shewed strength with his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
52. He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree.
53. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.
54. He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy;
55. As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.

And that is just the tip of the iceberg of all the gems the Scripture contains on these issues...

You must have been a lawyer at some point in life.

The master of Double-talking confusion has done it again.
Jump back and forth between chapters in Daniel to get Daniel 9:27 to say what you want it to say.

There is no antecedent of the "he" in Daniel chapter 9 for the antichrist.
That is no problem for Danoh, who will jump to chapters 7 and then 11 to make it work for his doctrine.

And then he claims he takes a "literal" interpretation to scripture.

The word "Messiah" means the anointed one.


Dan 9:24 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.

Dan 9:25 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: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

You may want to look up the word "after" in the dictionary.
If I am still talking to you after this week, it will be into the next week.

Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: 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.

Don't pay any attention to what Jesus said in His own words, because Christ might destroy your doctrine.


Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament(covenant) , which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

In the verses below Christ was talking to four of His disciples, but instead of reading the "ye" as "you" you and yours must somehow ignore that He was actually talking to His disciples.
Instead, you say He was talking to the Jews 2,000 years into the future.
If that were the case, He would have used the word "they" instead of "ye".


Mat 24:15 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
Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:




Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
Luk 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Luk 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
(Even most Dispensationalists admit that this verse was fulfilled in 70 AD. How about Danoh? )


Dan 9:27 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.


You change a covenant confirmed by Christ during the 490 years proclaimed by the Angel Gabriel, into a treaty broken by the antichrist over 2,000 years after the 490 years began.

You and yours then act like the rest of us have lost our mind for not accepting your "literal" interpretation.

You might want to look up the word "literal" while you have your dictionary in front of you.


.

 

[Gideon]

You change a covenant confirmed by Christ during the 490 years proclaimed by the Angel Gabriel, into a treaty broken by the antichrist over 2,000 years after the 490 years began.

Yes. And this raises an interesting side-point that is not often noticed. It was the angel Gabriel who gave Daniel the vision of the 70 weeks. It was the same angel, Gabriel, involved in the opening of the New Testament.

Clearly, the 'weeks' are all about Messiah, not 'anti-Messiah!' If only people would realize this!

 

[Danoh]

"Ye" it is plural; and consistently refers to "all of you," and in Israel's case, to that entire nation., as Daniel's "we" prayer in Daniel 9 attests - that God's dealing with Israel is corporate; as a nation, not as individual's unlike the case where the Body of Christ is concerned, in which the issue is sometimes the one individual, other times the Body.

The issue in "the whole family of God" is, in Israel's case, that of a nation as an agency, not of an ethnicity, when that agency is the issue, in contrast to when the Body as an agency is the issue.

When He related to Nicodemas in John 3 as a "ruler of Israel" of that nation, that "ye must be born again" He was referring to that entire nation.

Note their corporate guilt in their nation's sins, that both, as in Daniel's case, suffer His judgments corporately. Such is not the case with the Body.

Thus, I doubt He was later merely addressing four disciples.

Gainsay it if that is what you feel you must do, but that is not the record of Scripture as to these Things That Differ within the household of faith we of the Body have been blessed to have been made fellow citizens with this side of their corporate fall until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in

 

[Interplanner]

Stop recommending books you book-hater.

What on earth does made fellow citizens with this side of their fall possibly mean? Is that what you think is in Eph 2B-3A? Good grief.

 

[riverrat]

Stop recommending books you book-hater.

What on earth does made fellow citizens with this side of their fall possibly mean? Is that what you think is in Eph 2B-3A? Good grief.

Good grief. Learn to compose a proper sentence.

 

[BABerean2]

"Ye" it is plural; and consistently refers to "all of you," and in Israel's case, to that entire nation., as Daniel's "we" prayer in Daniel 9 attests - that God's dealing with Israel is corporate; as a nation, not as individual's unlike the case where the Body of Christ is concerned, in which the issue is sometimes the one individual, other times the Body.

The issue in "the whole family of God" is, in Israel's case, that of a nation as an agency, not of an ethnicity, when that agency is the issue, in contrast to when the Body as an agency is the issue.

When He related to Nicodemas in John 3 as a "ruler of Israel" of that nation, that "ye must be born again" He was referring to that entire nation.

Note their corporate guilt in their nation's sins, that both, as in Daniel's case, suffer His judgments corporately. Such is not the case with the Body.

Thus, I doubt He was later merely addressing four disciples.
Gainsay it if that is what you feel you must do, but that is not the record of Scripture as to these Things That Differ within the household of faith we of the Body have been blessed to have been made fellow citizens with this side of their corporate fall until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in

Are you going to be a literalist or not?

Or, do you avoid it when it proves your doctrine wrong?



13:2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
Mar 13:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,
Mar 13:4 Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?


.

 

[Danoh]

Are you going to be a literalist or not?

Or, do you avoid it when it proves your doctrine wrong?



13:2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
Mar 13:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,
Mar 13:4 Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?


.

We are both being literal, but what we are being literal about differs due to where we are each looking at that from.

Not only are you perhaps looking at it from that passage alone, but perhaps also assuming that because the narrative relates that those four asked him in private. And that not only were those two questions asked by four men, but that He was only addressing those four.

Matthew 10 relates that all Twelve were there.

Further, Acts 1 relates that Mathias, the disciple who replaced Judas Iscariot, was possibly there as well, as the requirement for be made an Apostle was that they had to have companied Christ throughout ministry.

Acts 1 further relates that there were possibly other disciples there as well.

As for where I am literal or not, the way I see that is that, at times the literal is, well, literal, as in "ye shall yet die in your sins."

While other times the literal is represented by the figurative, where the literal the figurative normally represents is the same as the literal it is being applied to, as in "Behold the lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."

 

[BABerean2]

We are both being literal, but what we are being literal about differs due to where we are each looking at that from.

Not only are you perhaps looking at it from that passage alone, but perhaps also assuming that because the narrative relates that those four asked him in private. And that not only were those two questions asked by four men, but that He was only addressing those four.

Matthew 10 relates that all Twelve were there.

Further, Acts 1 relates that Mathias, the disciple who replaced Judas Iscariot, was possibly there as well, as the requirement for be made an Apostle was that they had to have companied Christ throughout ministry.

Acts 1 further relates that there were possibly other disciples there as well.

As for where I am literal or not, the way I see that is that, at times the literal is, well, literal, as in "ye shall yet die in your sins."

While other times the literal is represented by the figurative, where the literal the figurative normally represents is the same as the literal it is being applied to, as in "Behold the lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."

In Matthew chapter 10 Christ gives the disciples some similar instructions, however unless I am missing something they were not in the same place and the same time as Matthew chapter 24.

In Matthew chapter 24 the other disciples were near, however He was asked the questions by the four privately. We could debate the interpretation of the word "privately". However, the four would most certainly have relayed the information to the others if they were not within hearing distance.


Mar 13:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,
Mar 13:4 Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?




.

 

[precepts]

I will attempt to do a little better this time.

The following dates come from pages 42 and 43 of The Atonement Clock, by Christian Gedge.

Empire of Babylon Ends: 538 BC Cyrus decree

Babylon was conquered by Darius the Mede 7yrs prior to Cyrus' conquest of Babylon, and Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was given in the 1st yr of this Darius of the Medes, historical facts. It was then "7 weeks/yrs to the commandment to go forth and rebuild Shalem," when Cyrus would conquer Darius and make the decree. It was prophecied 7yrs before it happened, all historical and scriptural facts.

Desolation of Jerusalem ends after 70 years: 520 BC Darius decree

I don't know where you're getting your information from, but you are wrong. What you're referring to in this Darius' reign is the completion of the temple, which was 70 yrs from it's destruction to it's reconstruction.

It was 70 yrs from Judah's first carrying off into Babylon to Cyrus' decree freeing them. The temple was destroyed 40 yrs after this first carrying off, and rebuilt 70 yrs after in Darius' reign.

Not sure which yr of his reign it was, but it was in his reign. Darius is the grandson of the original Darius the Mede who defeated Babylon 7 yrs prior to Cyrus.

Old 70-week era ends. New 70-weeks begin: 457 BC Artaxerxes decree

The prophesy says sixty and two weeks the walls would be rebuilt and I provided the verses proving the walls were rebuilt in Artaxerxes time, by Nehem-h.

If you read Nehem-h, the temple was already rebuilt by Artaxerxes' grandfather, Darius. The walls were destroyed by the prince that came in the troublous times, which is part of the 70 weeks prophecy.

There shall be seven weeks and sixty two weeks= 483 years: AD 27
Until Messiah the Prince. (Daniel 9:25) Christ begins His public ministry.

The reason you ignore the historical and scriptural facts is because you want to interpret the 70 weeks as being fulfilled by Christ, but the decree from 539 bc being 490 yrs drops short; plus, the 70 weeks, as I said before, is literally 70 yrs, not 490 yrs.This is proven by the 7 weeks which was a literal 7yrs to Cyrus' decree.

In the middle of the 70th week, Jesus is crucified. AD 30
He shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifices and offering (Daniel 9:27)


Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament(covenant), which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
(I added this verse for the sake of our discussion here.)


AD 34: Weeks end
(section below was added by me for our discussion here)
We know the disciples continue to carry the Gospel to the Jews after Christ went to be with the Father. Stephen was stoned around the end of the 70th week.


Stephen is accused of saying that Christ would fulfill Daniel 9:27.

Act 6:14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.


.

The decree was given in 539 bc by Cyrus. The decree was given for the rebuilding of Shalem, which was already finished in Artaxerxes time. Your and Christianity's stumbling block is the anointing of the son of Josedech, Joshua, as King and high priest. The vision sealed in the 70 weeks prophecy, the anointing of the most high, and the desolation until the "consummation."

 

[BABerean2]

Babylon was conquered by Darius the Mede 7yrs prior to Cyrus' conquest of Babylon, and Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was given in the 1st yr of this Darius of the Medes, historical facts. It was then "7 weeks/yrs to the commandment to go forth and rebuild Shalem," when Cyrus would conquer Darius and make the decree. It was prophecied 7yrs before it happened, all historical and scriptural facts.



I don't know where you're getting your information from, but you are wrong. What you're referring to in this Darius' reign is the completion of the temple, which was 70 yrs from it's destruction to it's reconstruction.

It was 70 yrs from Judah's first carrying off into Babylon to Cyrus' decree freeing them. The temple was destroyed 40 yrs after this first carrying off, and rebuilt 70 yrs after in Darius' reign.

Not sure which yr of his reign it was, but it was in his reign. Darius is the grandson of the original Darius the Mede who defeated Babylon 7 yrs prior to Cyrus.



The prophesy says sixty and two weeks the walls would be rebuilt and I provided the verses proving the walls were rebuilt in Artaxerxes time, by Nehem-h.

If you read Nehem-h, the temple was already rebuilt by Artaxerxes' grandfather, Darius. The walls were destroyed by the prince that came in the troublous times, which is part of the 70 weeks prophecy.



The reason you ignore the historical and scriptural facts is because you want to interpret the 70 weeks as being fulfilled by Christ, but the decree from 539 bc being 490 yrs drops short; plus, the 70 weeks, as I said before, is literally 70 yrs, not 490 yrs.This is proven by the 7 weeks which was a literal 7yrs to Cyrus' decree.



The decree was given in 539 bc by Cyrus. The decree was given for the rebuilding of Shalem, which was already finished in Artaxerxes time. Your and Christianity's stumbling block is the anointing of the son of Josedech, Joshua, as King and high priest. The vision sealed in the 70 weeks prophecy, the anointing of the most high, and the desolation until the "consummation."

So are you are saying that the most common understanding of the "70 weeks" as 70 weeks of years is a mistranslation from the Hebrew ?


A second question would be... Do you think any of Daniel chapter 9 is about Christ?

 

[Interplanner]

Never heard your view in 4 decades. The letter to Hebrews is saturated in the accomplishments of Messiah, in the actual vocab. The alternates for the sevens is 'weeks.' Pretty hard to be "literal" when "weeks" would mean the thing took place a year and a half later, not 70 years.

It is far more likely that some events of the Maccabean era pre-figured what would happen in the 1st century, than anything else.

You also have to deal with the only place the event of the desolation is mentioned is Mt24A and //s which means 1st century Judea. That is an interp by Christ with thousands of lives at stake; a major chunk of his church in fact.

 

[riverrat]

Never heard your view in 4 decades. The letter to Hebrews is saturated in the accomplishments of Messiah, in the actual vocab. The alternates for the sevens is 'weeks.' Pretty hard to be "literal" when "weeks" would mean the thing took place a year and a half later, not 70 years.

It is far more likely that some events of the Maccabean era pre-figured what would happen in the 1st century, than anything else.

You also have to deal with the only place the event of the desolation is mentioned is Mt24A and //s which means 1st century Judea. That is an interp by Christ with thousands of lives at stake; a major chunk of his church in fact.

Preterism continues to raise its ugly head!

 

[precepts]

So are you are saying that the most common understanding of the "70 weeks" as 70 weeks of years is a mistranslation from the Hebrew ?

How could not understanding the 7wks being 7 literal yrs based on the historical fact be a mistranslation from the Hebrew? Scripture never said the 70 wks were 490 yrs. The false preachers/teachers did.

A second question would be... Do you think any of Daniel chapter 9 is about Christ?

Why would you ask that? Maybe if you took the time out to address my questions, we wouldn't be having this conversation. I addressed these points in the last post.

 

[precepts]

Never heard your view in 4 decades. The letter to Hebrews is saturated in the accomplishments of Messiah, in the actual vocab. The alternates for the sevens is 'weeks.' Pretty hard to be "literal" when "weeks" would mean the thing took place a year and a half later, not 70 years.

It is far more likely that some events of the Maccabean era pre-figured what would happen in the 1st century, than anything else.

You also have to deal with the only place the event of the desolation is mentioned is Mt24A and //s which means 1st century Judea. That is an interp by Christ with thousands of lives at stake; a major chunk of his church in fact.

Address the proof I provided. As for the only place the desolation is mentioned being Mt24, shows your lack of knowledge of scripture and thus your illogical behavior. Whether Mt24 is the only place the desolation is mentioned has nothing to do with the fact the 7wks to the commandment was 7 literal yrs, thus 70 wks = 70 literal yrs!

 

[precepts]

Preterism continues to raise its ugly head!

Ignorance is bliss, riverrat. Address the facts.