7 year peace treaty, what 7 year peace treaty?

precepts said:

That's what I thought. You can't find any links because the list that follows a colon do not include clauses. Clauses that follow a colon are appositive clauses, even the so-called "list" is appositive to the clause before the colon.

And I won't even get into the context or the right interpretation of vs 24 to 27 with you because I've explain the facts before, but you're not listening. It's not about A.D. events!

Click to expand...

Exactly how many sentences have you seen with 4 independent clauses? It is a an uncommon sentence structure. I showed you that the And's are intended for continuity over an expressed time as in Genesis, and I also provided you with feedback from the Jews, from one of their experts in Hebrew, with a Phd, that the Hebrew in Genesis is written the same way regarding the And's.

And in the Jews (Judaism) English translation of the Tanach, Daniel 9;26, it is written in the same manner, but without the colon and the semicolon - but uses commas instead - like is more commonly used in preceding the and's in a compound sentence. From the Chabad.org site.

26And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more, and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation.

It's not that the KJV translators were wrong how they chose to punctuate the verse; its just that it is a uncommon sentence structure.

So, I don't know where you get the Kutzpah to think that you are right either grammatically or eschatology- wise. You are not explaining facts. You are explaining your own made up (and in error) grammar rules regarding an appositive for the messiah. As there are no dependent clauses in that verse, other than the "that shall come", which is an adjective clause.

The verse is actually structured as a list of things that take place over the course of the seventy weeks and is a continuation of the previous verse, because the verse itself begins with the conjunction "and".

You haven't taken the sentence and highlighted the parts that you are claiming is an appositive. You have said that the verse is not a compound sentence. But when asked by me, what kind of sentence you claim it is, your response is an implied - duh? So I don't see why you continue to make your posts with the tone you do, which is not in a Christ-like manner, even if you were right on all accounts - which you are not right on any account. You put down the majority of Christians in your opening savoy, saying that they don't know grammar rules - like you seem to think that you have some special gift in that area - such that according to you the majority of Christians are inept in grammar in understanding how that verse is supposed to be understood. Precepts, you could stand to take a few pills in humility. You are acting like a jerk.



.

BABerean2 said:

Dallas Theological Seminary was established in 1924, and taught the new doctrine to future pastors. Lewis Sperry Chafer the first president of Dallas Theological had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church.


“The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.”

Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107.

He is claiming above there are two separate Kingdoms, one for the Jews and another for the Church.
However, the New Testament says we are grafted together with the believing Israelites and we share the same inheritance. Galatians 3:16, 29


Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.”

Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323.


Here he is saying the same thing and relating it to the land promise.
He does not say anything about the New Heavens and the New Earth.



John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated…

"...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.”

John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25

Walvoord is claiming that the Church is a "parenthesis" in God's plan of dealing with Israel.
He is placing the focus on Israel, instead of the Church of Jesus Christ.
Paul stated in Romans 11 that salvation comes by being grafted into the Olive Tree, which is a symbol of the Church.

At one time I did not understand the reason the Dispensationalists needed a pretrib rapture.
The reason was so that God could give the modern Jews a do-over during a future 70th week of Daniel.
They claim that people will come to faith in Christ during this time, but will not be a part of the Church.

They have clearly violated Paul's warning in Galatians 1:6-9.

If more evangelical Christians truly understood the reason for the pretrib rapture of modern Dispensational Theology, they would reject the doctrine and they would see Dispensational Theology for what it really is...
.

Click to expand...

That's all disturbing, but their doctrinal error (of those who actually hold to this alternate plan of salvation for Jewish Tribulation believers) doesn't negate all the many clear passages about the 1,000 year reign of Jesus after physical return of Christ.

miamited said:

Hi precepts,

Look, it doesn't matter if Nehemiah rebuilt the city. The prophecy doesn't say anything about 'who' would rebuild the city. I have, however, shown you a fairly convincing verse, I think, that should tell you that however God meant for Cyrus to rebuild the city and 'when' he meant for Cyrus to do that, Nehemiah, in the time of Artaxerxes says that the city and the gates lay in ruins.

Now, you can do with that what you like.

Yes, Isaiah wrote that God said that Cyrus would build His city. I'm sure that Cyrus did because God said so, but...

Most of the information that I have says that Cyrus rebuilt the temple. All well and good, but that isn't what the prophecy is about. It doesn't even mention the temple. I imagine that Cyrus, in God's estimation, rebuilt the 'city' by freeing the captives and allowing them to return to the city. After all, a city doesn't have to refer to just buildings, but can also be a large group of people living in one place. I don't know exactly what God meant or intended us to understand when He caused Isaiah to write that Cyrus was going to rebuild the city.

What I do know, is that in the time of Artaxerxes, Nehemiah declared that the city and the gates were in ruins and Artaxerxes, at Nehemiah's pleading, issued a decree or some sort of official documents giving Nehemiah the chance to go home and rebuild the city and to get help from some of the people in the area as far as supplies and such.

What I do know, is that Artaxerxes decree is believed to have been issued in 444 B.C. which fits perfectly with the prophecy that God gave unto Daniel foretelling the time of Jesus' arrival and death.

You are free to teach whatever you believe to be the truth, but you really should have someone redact the account of Nehemiah in your Scriptures if you're going to insist that the city was rebuilt before his day.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Click to expand...

There's no logical way to conclude Nehem rebuilt the city in 52 days when scripture specifically states they began rebuilding from the 7th month of the first year of their exodus to a 2yr interruption to 71 yrs to Nehem. That's a total of 92 years of unhindered building before Nehem's time. What is your excuse for them not finishing in 92 yrs what Cyrus decreed for them to do?

Also, the ruins Nehem was concerned about could not have been the ruins done by Nebuchadnezzar because that was 164 years before his time. Why would he be saddened by "recent" news from the returned Israel nation being in ruins if it was done 164 years earlier? It makes no sense. You are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

My KJV says the "walls" were broken down and the "gates" burnt with fire. Consider changing your version. That's the context of the 70wks prophecy - the "troublous times" when the "wall" was to be rebuilt.

I can only lead an horse to water, or maybe my words are falling on deaf ears.

miamited said:

Hi again precepts,

Ok, I'm irritating you because you believe that I haven't researched the subject. I'm ok with that, but I am sorry that you are bothered by my posts.

Let's get down to brass tacks. Daniel 9 as regards the 70 sevens is obviously a prophecy. I think we can both agree on that. The prophecy gives an account of time. Gabriel says there will be this span and then the 'Anointed' would be here. How do you understand the prophecy?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Click to expand...

Your stumbling block is not reading and understanding for yourself. You are a victim of tradition.

My take on Dan 9 has no bearing on the grammatical fact and message given in the history that's given by scripture concerning the events that happen according to the prophecy. If you can't accept the facts as given instead of second guessing them because it doesn't align with what you've been told, then you will never understand prophecy and the truth of scripture.

The book is unread. Think for yourself.

What amount of time are you talking about?

precepts said:

There's no logical way to conclude Nehem rebuilt the city in 52 days when scripture specifically states they began rebuilding from the second year of their exodus to an interruption that lasted less than a year to 71 yrs to Nehem. That's a total of 104 years of unhindered building before Nehem's time. What is your excuse for them not finishing in 104 yrs what Cyrus decreed for them to do?

Click to expand...

Wait a minute! Would you stop with the 'who rebuilt Jerusalem'. It doesn't have anything to do with the prophecy in question. I don't care if Nehemiah only went to the city for 3 hours, it doesn't matter as regards the prophecy. The prophecy says, "When the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem..." I don't care if Charlie Brown rebuilt Jerusalem and it took him 50,000 years, the prophecy is only about a decree. You keep arguing that there's no way that Nehemiah rebuilt the city. I don't know if he personally did or he didn't. What I know, based on the Scriptures is that Nehemiah, in the days of Artaxerxes said that the city and its gates lay in ruins. He asked Artaxerxes to let him go and rebuild the city and Artaxerxes issued some sort of decree that allowed him to go and gave him documents whereby he could get materials and supplies from other people in the area. That's what I know.

Who rebuilt Jerusalem, according to Isaiah, at some point Cyrus did. According to Nehemiah he at least oversaw some rebuilding effort, but none of that is any concern of the prophecy. All the prophecy says is that there is going to be a decree to rebuild the city and that from the time of that decree it would be 69 sevens until Jesus came.

Maybe Cyrus did rebuild some or much of Jerusalem but never through some official decree. We do know that Cyrus did issue a decree to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. I just don't understand why you spin your wheels and fluster yourself trying to argue points that have absolutely nothing to do with the prophecy.

precepts said:

Also, the ruins Nehem was concerned about could not have been the ruins done by Nebuchadnezzar because that was 175 years before his time. Why would he be saddened by "recent" news from the returned Israel nation being in ruins if it was done 175 years earlier? It makes no sense. You are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

My KJV says the "walls" were broken down and the "gates" burnt with fire. Consider changing your version. That's the context of the 70wks prophecy - the "troublous times" when the "wall" was to be rebuilt.

I can only lead an horse to water, or maybe my words are falling on deaf ears.

Click to expand...

Ok, you're right.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

precepts said:

Your stumbling block is not reading and understanding for yourself. You are a victim of tradition.

My take on Dan 9 has no bearing on the grammatical fact and message given in the history that's given by scripture concerning the events that happen according to the prophecy. If you can't accept the facts as given instead of second guessing them because it doesn't align with what you've been told, then you will never understand prophecy and the truth of scripture.

The book is unread. Think for yourself.

What amount of time are you talking about?

Click to expand...

Hi precepts,

Could you please rewrite that in basic english. I honestly have no idea what it means to say, 'no bearing on the grammatical fact and message given in the history that's given by scripture concerning the events that happen according to the prophecy.'

You did say 'according to the prophecy', so, we do both agree that it is a prophecy. My question to you was, ok fine, what is the prophecy prophesying?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Hi again precepts,

Here's the online KJV of Nehemiah 2:3:

Nehemiah 2:3 (KJV) And said unto the king, Let the king live for ever: why should not my countenance be sad , when the city, the place of my fathers' sepulchres, lieth waste, and the gates thereof are consumed with fire?

As a matter of fact, every translation in my 'compare translations' says city or town. However, I'm to understand that Jerusalem was destroyed again 90 years after the end of the 70 year captivity. Do you have some evidence of that? Seems odd to me that God's word wouldn't have made note of something so important in the life of His people.

I'm confident that it wasn't 'recent' news to Nehemiah that Jerusalem had been left in ruins after the armies of Nebuchadnezzar had taken Israel captive. Nehemiah, however, was not living in Israel and what was news to him was that the city was apparently still in ruins 175 years after the fact and 90 years after the Jews had been allowed to return to their country. Nehemiah may have, just like you, assumed that Cyrus had rebuilt the city and all was well and good back home. However, some of his relatives came to him and told him that it wasn't the case. That Jerusalem still lay in ruins with no gates to protect the city and its people.

That news saddened Nehemiah and he went before Artaxerxes and appealed to him for help.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Douggg said:

Exactly how many sentences have you seen with 4 independent clauses? It is a an uncommon sentence structure. I showed you that the And's are intended for continuity over an expressed time as in Genesis, and I also provided you with feedback from the Jews, from one of their experts in Hebrew, with a Phd, that the Hebrew in Genesis is written the same way regarding the And's.

Click to expand...

Listen, I don't care about what anybody has to say other than a link that proves your point. The reason why it's an uncommon sentence is because the 3 independent clauses are appositives.

I don't need anyone to explain to me the Hebrew because I know the context and the right interpretation of the 70wks prophecy, vs 24-27. The subject/topic is the Mess--h.

Douggg said:

And in the Jews (Judaism) English translation of the Tanach, Daniel 9;26, it is written in the same manner, but without the colon and the semicolon - but uses commas instead - like is more commonly used in preceding the and's in a compound sentence. From the Chabad.org site.

26And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more, and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation.

Click to expand...

And you are telling me these statements aren't appositives? These statements aren't explaining what happens at the "cutting off"? And "he" shall confirm the covenant is not speaking about the Mess--h? Please! It's your Ma sugar!

Douggg said:

It's not that the KJV translators were wrong how they chose to punctuate the verse; its just that it is a uncommon sentence structure.

Click to expand...

Not if they are appositives.

Douggg said:

So, I don't know where you get the Kutzpah to think that you are right either grammatically or eschatology- wise. You are not explaining facts. You are explaining your own made up (and in error) grammar rules regarding an appositive for the messiah. As there are no dependent clauses in that verse, other than the "that shall come", which is an adjective clause.

Click to expand...

Wow! Are you sure it's not your "Kutzpah" that's standing in the way of your understanding? The entire context from vs 24-27 is about the "Mess--h."

Douggg said:

The verse is actually structured as a list of things that take place over the course of the seventy weeks and is a continuation of the previous verse, because the verse itself begins with the conjunction "and".

Click to expand...

"And" doesn't strike me like a word that means "after" what was said, but more like "in addition" to what was said, like an appositive.

Douggg said:

You haven't taken the sentence and highlighted the parts that you are claiming is an appositive. You have said that the verse is not a compound sentence. But when asked by me, what kind of sentence you claim it is, your response is an implied - duh? So I don't see why you continue to make your posts with the tone you do, which is not in a Christ-like manner, even if you were right on all accounts - which you are not right on any account. You put down the majority of Christians in your opening savoy, saying that they don't know grammar rules - like you seem to think that you have some special gift in that area - such that according to you the majority of Christians are inept in grammar in understanding how that verse is supposed to be understood. Precepts, you could stand to take a few pills in humility. You are acting like a jerk.



.

Click to expand...

Wow! LOL!

I told you I'm not a grammar expert and might have been wrong on the compound sentence, wrong on the subordinate conjunction, and as well as on other things; but I do know that what follows a colon are appositive clauses, something you didn't know, which could be why you interpret the verse the way you do. Take it into consideration.

miamited said:

Wait a minute! Would you stop with the 'who rebuilt Jerusalem'. It doesn't have anything to do with the prophecy in question. I don't care if Nehemiah only went to the city for 3 hours, it doesn't matter as regards the prophecy. The prophecy says, "When the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem..." I don't care if Charlie Brown rebuilt Jerusalem and it took him 50,000 years, the prophecy is only about a decree. You keep arguing that there's no way that Nehemiah rebuilt the city. I don't know if he personally did or he didn't. What I know, based on the Scriptures is that Nehemiah, in the days of Artaxerxes said that the city and its gates lay in ruins. He asked Artaxerxes to let him go and rebuild the city and Artaxerxes issued some sort of decree that allowed him to go and gave him documents whereby he could get materials and supplies from other people in the area. That's what I know.

Who rebuilt Jerusalem, according to Isaiah, at some point Cyrus did. According to Nehemiah he at least oversaw some rebuilding effort, but none of that is any concern of the prophecy. All the prophecy says is that there is going to be a decree to rebuild the city and that from the time of that decree it would be 69 sevens until Jesus came.

Maybe Cyrus did rebuild some or much of Jerusalem but never through some official decree. We do know that Cyrus did issue a decree to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. I just don't understand why you spin your wheels and fluster yourself trying to argue points that have absolutely nothing to do with the prophecy.



Ok, you're right.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Click to expand...

Thank you! And I made some changes to my previous posts. The numbers were off. It was 94yrs to Nehem from the Babylonian exodus and a 2 years interruption from the imposter to Darius' 2nd year of reign.

miamited said:

Hi precepts,

Could you please rewrite that in basic english. I honestly have no idea what it means to say, 'no bearing on the grammatical fact and message given in the history that's given by scripture concerning the events that happen according to the prophecy.'

Click to expand...

I was basically saying how I interpret the 70wks doesn't change the historical facts discussed in the book of Nehem and Ezra.

miamited said:

You did say 'according to the prophecy', so, we do both agree that it is a prophecy. My question to you was, ok fine, what is the prophecy prophesying?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Click to expand...

Believe it or not, I have come to discover the 70wks prophecy is referring to Jerem--h's "70 yrs in Babylon" prophecy, the 70wks that is/was determined on Israel, based on the fact the prophecy goes on to say "7wks" to the commandment to rebuild the city, and sixty and two weeks the streets and walls to be rebuilt in troublous times. They are not prophesies about the 70wks determined on Israel.

Some calculate the 7wks, semicolon, and sixty and two weeks to be 69wks, but they are speaking of two different events. One is the 7yrs to Cyrus' decree, and the other is the walls being rebuilt in 445 bc, which would be [after] the sixty and two weeks, equating it with vs 26 and it's "'after' sixty and two weeks" the Mess--h being cut off, causing the resealing of the covenant that was confirmed after Babylon by Nehem and company in Neh 9:38 and 10:1.

Chris-tianity's stumbling block in understanding this prophecy is refusing the stone the Jews refused, the crowning of "Joshua/Jesus" as king and high priest post-Babylon (Zech 6:9-15). It is he who is anointed and confirms the covenant, sealing up the vision of Revelation's Lamb on the throne of King David with the 144,000 singers and players of instruments, sealed by King David on his death bed (1 Chr 25).

I know this is a lot to take in at one time, but bear with me.

miamited said:

Hi again precepts,

Here's the online KJV of Nehemiah 2:3:

Nehemiah 2:3 (KJV) And said unto the king, Let the king live for ever: why should not my countenance be sad , when the city, the place of my fathers' sepulchres, lieth waste, and the gates thereof are consumed with fire?

As a matter of fact, every translation in my 'compare translations' says city or town. However, I'm to understand that Jerusalem was destroyed again 90 years after the end of the 70 year captivity. Do you have some evidence of that? Seems odd to me that God's word wouldn't have made note of something so important in the life of His people.

Click to expand...

That must be the new KJV. Try the 1611 edition.

And I never said the city was destroyed again after the 70yrs captivity. I told you it was damaged by a historically documented Egyptian-Greek revolt. The revolt was "stirred up" by Artaxerxes father, Xerxes I, who was the 4th king that Daniel prophesied to Darius the Mede about in Dan 11:1-2, that would "stir up" the Greeks to come against Persia Media.

miamited said:

I'm confident that it wasn't 'recent' news to Nehemiah that Jerusalem had been left in ruins after the armies of Nebuchadnezzar had taken Israel captive. Nehemiah, however, was not living in Israel and what was news to him was that the city was apparently still in ruins 175 years after the fact and 90 years after the Jews had been allowed to return to their country.

Click to expand...

Please! Why would he react that way after 164yrs? <staff edit>

miamited said:

Nehemiah may have, just like you, assumed that Cyrus had rebuilt the city and all was well and good back home. However, some of his relatives came to him and told him that it wasn't the case. That Jerusalem still lay in ruins with no gates to protect the city and its people.

That news saddened Nehemiah and he went before Artaxerxes and appealed to him for help.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Click to expand...

Sounds like a good read.

precepts said:

Listen, I don't care about what anybody has to say other than a link that proves your point. The reason why it's an uncommon sentence is because the 3 independent clauses are appositives.

I don't need anyone to explain to me the Hebrew because I know the context and the right interpretation of the 70wks prophecy, vs 24-27. The subject/topic is the Mess--h.

Click to expand...

Read it again. Messiah is within the 70 weeks. Not the 70 weeks within the Messiah. Verse 24, 25, 26, 27 are about the 70 weeks.

In verse 9:26, the messiah is the subject of one of the independent clauses - that fits in with the 70 weeks explanation of events.

The other three independent clauses in verse 9:26, are things that take place unitl the completion of the seventy weeks - signified in the text by "the end thereof (the seventy weeks) shall be with a flood," The last independent clause goes all the way to be battle of armageddon, and the end of that war.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Hi precepts,

Well, at this point you and I will have to agree to disagree.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

miamited said:

Hi precepts,

Well, at this point you and I will have to agree to disagree.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Click to expand...

Ted, the whole problem with precepts and Bab2 is that they don't see that verses 9:24, 25, 26, 27 is about the 70 weeks determined on Daniel's people Israel and Jerusalem.

miamited said:

Wait a minute! Would you stop with the 'who rebuilt Jerusalem'. It doesn't have anything to do with the prophecy in question. I don't care if Nehemiah only went to the city for 3 hours, it doesn't matter as regards the prophecy. The prophecy says, "When the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem..." I don't care if Charlie Brown rebuilt Jerusalem and it took him 50,000 years, the prophecy is only about a decree. You keep arguing that there's no way that Nehemiah rebuilt the city. I don't know if he personally did or he didn't. What I know, based on the Scriptures is that Nehemiah, in the days of Artaxerxes said that the city and its gates lay in ruins. He asked Artaxerxes to let him go and rebuild the city and Artaxerxes issued some sort of decree that allowed him to go and gave him documents whereby he could get materials and supplies from other people in the area. That's what I know.

Who rebuilt Jerusalem, according to Isaiah, at some point Cyrus did. According to Nehemiah he at least oversaw some rebuilding effort, but none of that is any concern of the prophecy. All the prophecy says is that there is going to be a decree to rebuild the city and that from the time of that decree it would be 69 sevens until Jesus came.

Maybe Cyrus did rebuild some or much of Jerusalem but never through some official decree. We do know that Cyrus did issue a decree to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. I just don't understand why you spin your wheels and fluster yourself trying to argue points that have absolutely nothing to do with the prophecy.



Ok, you're right.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Click to expand...

I was considering what That captivity of Nehemiah 1:2-3 was speaking of.

2that Hanani, one of my brothers, and some men from Judah came; and I asked them concerning the Jews who had escaped and had survived the captivity, and about Jerusalem. 3They said to me, “The remnant there in the province who survived the captivity are in great distress and reproach, and the wall of Jerusalem is broken down and its gates are burned with fire.”

Obviously we're not speaking of the Babylonian captivity by Nebucadnezzar 170+ years prior.
I have found the answer likely to be in Ezra 4:23

23Then as soon as the copy of King Artaxerxes’ document was read before Rehum and Shimshai the scribe and their colleagues, they went in haste to Jerusalem to the Jews and stopped them by force of arms.

Notice here the Jews were stopped by force of arms. This is possibly where the captivity (in Nehemiah 1:2-3) began to occur. Right at the time when Artexerxes was king. This because the Jews were stopped "by force of arms".

Ezra 4 is a little tricky. I think the most logical explanation is that Ezra 4:6-23 is like a parenthetical. Which jumps ahead to the future to explain a little of what occurred in Ahasuerus (Xerxes) reign, but mostly what occurred in Artexerxes reign. Namely the letter written by the enemies of the Jews. Then ultimately, them behing stopped by force of arms. As a result of the order of Artexerxes. So, really Ezra 4:6-23 is a description of what occurred several years after the completion of the second temple structure. So Ezra 4:6-23 covers 485-440? BC. Whereas Ezra 4:1-5 covers 538-520 BC. And Ezra 4:24 picks right back up at 520 BC where the work on the second temple (structure) resumed.

Also we are told that Cyrus fulfilled the words of the prophet Jeremiah. Not specifically the words of the prophet Isaiah Ezra 1:1

1Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, the LORDstirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he sent a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and also put itin writing, saying:

What I'm saying is, it is a possibility the Cyrus in Isaiah is a future prophecy. I noticed in Isaiah how it is the Lord who named (or at least calls him) Cyrus. Isaiah 45:3-4 speaking of Cyrus.

3I will give you the treasures of darkness
and the hoards in secret places,
that you may know that it is I, the LORD,
the God of Israel, who call you by your name.
4For the sake of my servant Jacob,
and Israel my chosen,
I call you by your name,
I name you, though you do not know me.

The impression I get, it that it is the Lord who calls him Cyrus. Sort of a spiritual name of sorts? I don't see the city having been rebuilt during Cyrus's reign. Ezra 4:4

4Then the people of the land discouraged the people of Judah and made them afraid to build 5and bribed counselors against them to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia.

This seems to indicate that shortly after the foundation was laid. About 536 BC the people were discouraged until 520 BC. Therefore, the city could not have been rebuilt during Cyrus's reign.

I definitely see it as you do though.
That's the way I see it and Ive always heard, as you are stating, that the decree was given by Artexerxes to rebuild the city and that's when the "count" starts.

Ezra 1:2

2“Thus says Cyrus king of Persia: The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah.

Notice here Cyrus talks about building the house of the Lord, not the city of Jerusalem.