Prove me wrong: Every possible starting point to the 70 Weeks Prophecy faces insurmountable problems

[Christian Gedge]

I guess my biggest concern is that this decree doesn't relate to the building of the city … How do you link the first decree of Artaxerxes with the rebuilding of Jerusalem? Thanks!

@BobRyan had a go at this and I basically agree with his explanation post #5. Let’s see if we can add something. The original decree came from Cyrus.

“I am the Lord … who says of Cyrus, ‘He is my shepherd and will accomplish all that I please; he will say of Jerusalem, “Let it be rebuilt,” and of the temple, “Let its foundations be laid.” (Isaiah 44:28)​

Here – in the original decree (538 BC) – we have both city and temple being rebuilt. Next, we see the decree being re-decreed by Darius in 520 BC and again by Artaxerxes in 457 BC. (Ezra 6:14) As you know, the perpetuation of former decrees was an immutable law of the Medes and Persians. (Daniel 6:12) So, the decision we are making is not “which decree” but at which point God’s decree was re-stated by which Emperor.

Nevertheless, like you, I would have preferred that Ezra said more about rebuilding the city. Here is one clue that is worth considering.

“Now I, King Artaxerxes, decree … you, Ezra, in accordance with the wisdom of your God, which you possess, appoint magistrates and judges to administer justice to all the people of Trans-Euphrates.” (Ezra 7:25)​

As we can see, Ezra’s work went well beyond just the temple. The emperor delegated full governmental authority to administer justice. No, not explicitly saying “build”, but that would be implied, IMO. What do you think?

 

[3 Resurrections]

Here – in the original decree (538 BC) – we have both city and temple being rebuilt. Next, we see the decree being re-decreed by Darius in 520 BC and again by Artaxerxes in 457 BC. (Ezra 6:14) As you know, the perpetuation of former decrees was an immutable law of the Medes and Persians. (Daniel 6:12) So, the decision we are making is not “which decree” but at which point God’s decree was re-stated by which Emperor.

Yes, this point about the immutable law of the Medes and Persians bears repeating. In actuality , all the decrees more or less repeated Cyrus's original decree, with the addition of a few matters in each case.

However, to me, the highlighted mention in Daniel 9:25 of the street and the wall being built again, "even in troublous times" (when every man worked with a sword girded on his side for defense), points directly to the 20th year decree by Artaxerxes. Nehemiah went to great lengths to describe the rebuilding of Jerusalem's wall, even under the threat of enemies coming to attack their efforts. Jerusalem was not considered to be truly rebuilt until it was surrounded by a defensible, intact wall with gates, and the decree in Artaxerxes's 20th regnal year in 454 BC authorized that supplies be given to accomplish this (Nehemiah 2:8-9).

 

[DavidPT]

Here – in the original decree (538 BC) – we have both city and temple being rebuilt. Next, we see the decree being re-decreed by Darius in 520 BC and again by Artaxerxes in 457 BC.

Doesn't that cause a contradiction in Ezra 4, though?

Ezra 4:23 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.
24 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.

Verse 24 would be meaning 519 BC if his reign began in 520 BC, and seems to be because of the copy of the letter in verse 23, except that copy of the letter couldn't even remotely exist yet if Artaxerxes doesn't even begin reigning until 464 BC. Obviously, 519 BC comes before 464 BC, and 7 years after that would be 457 BC. And still, 519 BC comes before 457 BC as well. What I bring up is not new to anyone, though. Most are aware of this alleged contradiction. Verse 23 has to square with verse 24 somehow, not contradict it. Verse 24 begins with a 'Then'. How can that 'Then' not be pertaining to what is recorded in verse 23?

 

[BobRyan]

I also fully acknowledge that the book of Ezra is not chronological. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I assume you are saying that the events of Ezra 4 (under Artaxerxes) happen as a result of the decree in Ezra 7? Is your chronology widely accepted? Or is it one of many scholarly opinions on Ezra?

I don't think that any one view is accepted by all.

The way I see it - there are two options in Ezra. (Where either way the 457 B.C. start date still works and ends with the Messiah beginning his ministry in 27 A.D.)

1. The version I posted #5 where Ezra 1:1 - to - 4:23 is simple chronology spanning the entire time, and then follows two blocks of a focused look at a 5 year period in Darius' reign and a 1 year period in Artaxerxes reign --

-- OR --

2. It is all essentially chronological from 1:1 to the end of the book -- and that means that the Artaxerxes in chapter 4 is really "false Smerdis"

Ezra 4:7 - George Haydock's Catholic Commentary

Adam Clarke Bible Commentary
Verse Ezra 4:7. _IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES_] After the death of Cambyses, one of the _Magi_ named _Oropaestus_ by Trogus Pompeius, _Smerdis_ by Herodotus, _Mardus_ by AEschylus, and _Sphendatates_ by...

Albert Barnes' Bible Commentary
ARTAXERXES - Gomates, the Pseudo-Smerdis. He succeeded Cambyses (521 B.C.), and reigned for seven months, when he was deposed and executed by Darius Hystaspis. WRITTEN IN THE SYRIAN TONGUE ... - Or, “...


Ellicott's Commentary On The Whole Bible
IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES. — This must be Gomates, the Magian priest who personated Smerdis, the dead son of Cyrus, and reigned only seven months: note that the expression used is “days,” and not “rei...


John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
AND IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES,.... The same with Ahasuerus, in the preceding verse; and who also is Cambyses, which is his name in Heathen authors, Artaxerxes being a common name to the kings of Persi...


Matthew Henry Commentary on the Whole Bible
6-24 It is an old slander, that the prosperity of the church would be hurtful to kings and princes. Nothing can be more false, for true godliness teaches us to honour and obey our sovereign. But wher...

Matthew Poole's Concise Commentary On The Bible
IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES; either, 1. Artaxerxes the son of Xerxes. Or, 2. Smerdis the magician. Or rather, 3. The same Cambyses, called by his Chaldee name Ahasuems, EZRA 4:6, and here by his Persi...


The Pulpit Commentaries
EXPOSITION EZRA 4:7 AND IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES. See the comment on Ezra 4:6. If Artaxerxes be the Pseudo-Smerdis, we can readily understand why an application was not made to him at once, and how...

 

[DavidPT]

I don't think that any one view is accepted by all.

The way I see it - there are two options in Ezra. (Where either way the 457 start date still works and ends with the Messiah beginning his ministry in 27 A.D.)

1. The version I posted #5 where Ezra 1:1 - to - 4:23 is simple chronology spanning the entire time, and then follows two blocks of a focused look at a 5 year period in Darius' reign and a 1 year period in Artaxerxes reign --

-- OR --

2. It is all essentially chronological from 1:1 to the end of the book -- and that means that the Artaxerxes in chapter 4 is really "false Smerdis"

Ezra 4:7 - George Haydock's Catholic Commentary

Adam Clarke Bible Commentary
Verse Ezra 4:7. _IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES_] After the death of Cambyses, one of the _Magi_ named _Oropaestus_ by Trogus Pompeius, _Smerdis_ by Herodotus, _Mardus_ by AEschylus, and _Sphendatates_ by...

Albert Barnes' Bible Commentary
ARTAXERXES - Gomates, the Pseudo-Smerdis. He succeeded Cambyses (521 B.C.), and reigned for seven months, when he was deposed and executed by Darius Hystaspis. WRITTEN IN THE SYRIAN TONGUE ... - Or, “...


Ellicott's Commentary On The Whole Bible
IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES. — This must be Gomates, the Magian priest who personated Smerdis, the dead son of Cyrus, and reigned only seven months: note that the expression used is “days,” and not “rei...


John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
AND IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES,.... The same with Ahasuerus, in the preceding verse; and who also is Cambyses, which is his name in Heathen authors, Artaxerxes being a common name to the kings of Persi...


Matthew Henry Commentary on the Whole Bible
6-24 It is an old slander, that the prosperity of the church would be hurtful to kings and princes. Nothing can be more false, for true godliness teaches us to honour and obey our sovereign. But wher...

Matthew Poole's Concise Commentary On The Bible
IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES; either, 1. Artaxerxes the son of Xerxes. Or, 2. Smerdis the magician. Or rather, 3. The same Cambyses, called by his Chaldee name Ahasuems, EZRA 4:6, and here by his Persi...


The Pulpit Commentaries
EXPOSITION EZRA 4:7 AND IN THE DAYS OF ARTAXERXES. See the comment on Ezra 4:6. If Artaxerxes be the Pseudo-Smerdis, we can readily understand why an application was not made to him at once, and how...

But no matter how you look at it, Ezra 4:24 is meaning around 516 BC or so so, if Darius 1 is meant. It makes no sense to bring up a future letter that doesn't even exist at the time, then somehow connect it with something that had already been fulfilled decades earlier than when this letter is presumed to have been written.

 

[BobRyan]

But no matter how you look at it, Ezra 4:24 is meaning around 516 BC or so so, if Darius 1 is meant. It makes no sense to bring up a future letter that doesn't even exist at the time, then somehow connect it with something that had already been fulfilled decades earlier than when this letter is presumed to have been written.

Darius I (Darius the great) lived -  550 BC – 486 BC The start date for the final decree being 457 B.C. is still after Darius 1 (Darius the Great).

In post 24 -- #24 -- I point out the scenario where Artaxerxes in chapter 4 is really "false Smerdis", so an imposter who is not the real Smerdis and is also not the real Artaxerxes.

(The Persian Empire had 3 Darius, and 3 Artaxerxes. )

This allows the whole book to be in chronological order and there is no 'future letter" in that case in chapter 4 since it is actually sent to what some call "false Smerdis" not Artaxerxes.

Ezra 4 does not claim that Darius received any letter of complaint.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Here's a proposal which no one has realized before (that I can determine). It takes the text literally, it's historically accurate and no 360 day years required.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5hXmAa69113D6OdZk-0TpA9_n3pYpZkm

That is a link to 7 videos where everything is laid out in detail. But I'll give you the very condensed version. Know that everything can be proven with evidence.

1. Gabriel outlined to Daniel a period of 70 weeks of years which are split into 3 time periods (each a group of 7 years). There are unstated gaps between the groups and each gap is itself a group of 7 years.
2. How can we prove that there are gaps? Gabriel specifically says "after the 62 weeks of years". If the events in the final 1 week happened immediately after the 62 weeks, then he wouldn't have to specifically state "after" and then list events which do not occur in the final 1 week. Also, the Hebrew grammar of the text omits the connector "and" in a significant part of the text. This shows that there are gaps implied.
3. The most accepted interpretation based on the work of Sir Robert Anderson is not at all correct.
a. First, the King James translators inserted their particular bias into the text by capitalizing the words "Messiah" and "Prince". Hebrew does not have capitals or punctuation. They combined the first 7 weeks along with the next 62 weeks - the Hebrew text does not do this. It is meant to be understood as separate groups of years.
b. Anderson assumes that the decree witnessed by Nehemiah was the start of the first 7 weeks and this happened on Nisan 1. No where in the text is the specific day of the month given. He claims this was in March. The Babylonian calendar never has Nisan start early in March - it was impossible. Even Hoehner who modified Anderson's dates has Nisan start early in March. Nisan always started after the spring equinox. Their system is totally flawed.
4. People do not take into account one of the purposes of the 70 Weeks prophecy. It was God's answer to Daniel's impassioned prayer for his people. It was an answer to prayer. If, as is the assumption, the start of the 70 weeks began with Artaxerxes' decree, that was over 100 years after the prophecy was given. Daniel would have been long dead. He would not have seen the specific answer to his prayer. God would have been a liar. So the first 7 weeks MUST start within Daniel's own lifetime
5. Most people the KJV and see the word "decree" and then look for 1 of 3 decrees by earthly kings. However, Ezra specifically states there were actually 4 decrees. 3 by kings and 1 by God. When did God make this decree? Gabriel tells Daniel to go back to Jeremiah's writings. There Daniel could find that God specifically stated that Jerusalem would be rebuilt and the Jews would return. Jeremiah uses the exact same Hebrew words which occur in Daniel 9. That is the start of the 7 weeks of years. 537 BC. 49 years later and the messiah, a prince shows up - Cyrus. Cyrus is specifically called God's messiah in Isaiah.
6. The 62 weeks of years occurs after a gap of 14 groups of 7 years later. Artaxerxes given the decree to return and rebuild. But the text does not say it is at the decree. It is when the work actually takes place - and that is 4 years later when Nehemiah returns to Jerusalem. The entire period of 62 weeks is a troubled time when Jerusalem and the temple constantly were torn down and rebuilt. Most people say it took 49 years to rebuild. Actually Josephus lists all the wars and battles where the walls and the temple were torn down multiple times.
7. The 62 weeks ends in 6BC with the coming of the Messiah. Jesus was born during this year.
8. We are currently living in the 2nd gap. It can be easily shown that starting from 6 BC, we are in the 290th group of 7 years. We are coming up to its completion in 2025.
9. These various dates are also confirmed by Eclipse Event Signs. This is recent research which shows that groups of eclipses which occur on Jewish Feast days are used by God to mark very special events in the history of the Jews. It is the first year of the group of eclipses which is significant. 6 BC, 31 AD, 1948 AD, 2025 AD, 2032 AD are all such significant years (there are many others). Actually, the group that starts in 2032 has the most full lunar and solar eclipses in centuries.
There is too much to write about. The series of 7 videos goes through everything in a lot of detail. However, this is finally the proper interpretation of this very difficult and intricate prophecy which has been revealed in our modern times.

 

[Timtofly]

Hello everyone, I have been researching the 70 weeks prophecy for eschatological and apologetics purposes. However, I find every possible starting point to be extremely unsatisfying. I used to take the "prophetic year" view, wherein each year is reckoned as 360 days each. But after abandoning that, I'm basically pulling my hair out to try to get a starting point which fits the text without forcing anything.

I know what I believe (for the most part) about Daniel 9:24, 9:26, and 9:27. It seems that a literal reading of the prophecy would be fairly straightforward, if it wasn't for historical difficulties associated with Daniel 9:25

So you are to know and understand that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, until Messiah the Prince, there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with streets and moat, even in times of distress. (Daniel 9:25 NASB2020)
​

A straightforward literal reading of this would say that the Messiah will come 483 years after "a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem." There are several theories, each of which has some kind of (potentially) insurmountable difficulty.

1) Cyrus decree to rebuild the temple (538/537 BC)

Pro: Fits well with Isaiah 44:28; and Isaiah 45:13.​

Cons: Cyrus decree + 483 years does not lead to the time of Christ.​

2) Darius I decree (520 BC)

Pros: (None)​

Cons: Darius I decree reiterates Cyrus's decree, still does not reach time of Christ.​

3) Artaxerxes I Decree (7th year) (458/457 BC)

Pros: Lines up almost exactly with time of Christ's baptism (26 AD). Decree also "restores" Jewish control of Jerusalem, which is consistent with how the word for "restore" is used of other cities in the Old Testament (i.e. 2 Kings 14:22). Also consistent with usage in Jeremiah 30:18 and Isaiah 1:26​

Cons: Decree has nothing to do with building Jerusalem whatsoever. This theory must resort to convoluted inferences from Ezra 4 and Nehemiah to prove that this decree in Ezra 7, somehow, authorized city building when it says nothing of the sort.​

4) Artaxerxes I Authorization to Rebuild Jerusalem (20th Year) (445/444 BC)

Pros: Relates directly to building the city of Jerusalem.​

Cons: Must use 360 day calendar, which was not used by Jews at that time. For example, Daniel 9 talks about "70 years" for the completion of the desolations of Jerusalem. Are these likewise 360 day years? This seems unlikely, due to 2 Chronicles 36:20-22 and its relation to Leviticus 25:8. Years seem to be based on an agricultural cycle. Where a lunar calendar is used, adjustments are made to make them actual solar years. This view also leads to 33 A.D. crucifixion, which is slightly less popular than 30 A.D. view among scholars. Finally, Nehemiah's building project took place 140ish years or so after Babylon's attack on Jerusalem. It would be really weird for Nehemiah to mourn and weep for days over the destruction of the city that happened over 100 years ago (Nehemiah 1:1-4).​

5) Seventy weeks are symbolic

Pros: Relieves us from calculating exact dates.​

Cons: Jews before Christ did not regard this passage as symbolic. Furthermore, 70 years of Babylonian rule would also have to be symbolic, when a good case can be made that this was intended literally (see 2 Chronicles 36:20-22; Jeremiah 29:10-14). A good case can also be made that the 70 years for Babylon were fulfilled literally. This view also ignores the fact that some of these decrees come extremely close to the life of Christ when you add approximately 483 years to them.
​

6) The first three decrees start the 70 weeks.

Pros: Ezra 6:14 apparently speaks of Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes' decrees as one decree.​

Cons: The book of Ezra does not explicitly relate these decrees to the building of the city, but the temple. Furthermore, it seems like special pleading if the 70 weeks prophecy is meant to have apologetic value as fulfilled prophecy. It looks nice on paper....after the fact. How could a Jew know when to start counting when really decree after decree was really just one decree? Others mention how God issued a command, which resulted in these three decrees. How do we know there were going to be three, and not four, five or six?!​

7) The seventy weeks are sabbath year land cycles.

Pros: There is good historical reason to believe that Jews before Christ interpreted the "weeks" in this way.​

Cons: Still does not get around the difficulties associated with the starting points.​

I welcome all views as to the possible start of the 70 weeks (preterist, futurist, dispensational, etc.) If someone can convince me of the correct decree (and tolerate me playing devil's advocate), I would greatly appreciate it. Though I myself am a futurist with dispensational leanings, I am interested in what ANYONE has to say regarding the starting point!

Thanks in advance.

It won't fit people's opinions which is about all posters have to offer.

The 69 weeks were over at least 50 years if not more before Jesus was even born. Only 2 people were alive who even thought about it. Anna and Simon.

It is the same as the OD where Jesus said a certain generation would not totally pass away after Israel became a nation. There were only 2 people still alive who were the generation that would see the birth of Jesus, after the 69 week was over. Luke 2:25-38

Daniel 9:26 is not a specific date setting prophecy.

"And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:"

The point was nothing would happen before the 69 weeks ended. Nor would it be immediately upon the 69 weeks ending. Jesus would come sometime in the generation that saw the end of the 69th week. Two people were left.

Jesus is the 70th week:

3.5 years as Messiah.
3.5 years as Prince.

When the 7th Trumpet stops, the 70th week will be fulfilled. Revelation 10:5-7

 

[Yahudim]

EES, thank you for this. It will obviously take some time to get through the videos alone. This seems a fascinating line of inquiry and it will receive my full attention.

Here's a proposal which no one has realized before (that I can determine). It takes the text literally, it's historically accurate and no 360 day years required.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5hXmAa69113D6OdZk-0TpA9_n3pYpZkm

That is a link to 7 videos where everything is laid out in detail. But I'll give you the very condensed version. Know that everything can be proven with evidence.

1. Gabriel outlined to Daniel a period of 70 weeks of years which are split into 3 time periods (each a group of 7 years). There are unstated gaps between the groups and each gap is itself a group of 7 years.
2. How can we prove that there are gaps? Gabriel specifically says "after the 62 weeks of years". If the events in the final 1 week happened immediately after the 62 weeks, then he wouldn't have to specifically state "after" and then list events which do not occur in the final 1 week. Also, the Hebrew grammar of the text omits the connector "and" in a significant part of the text. This shows that there are gaps implied.
3. The most accepted interpretation based on the work of Sir Robert Anderson is not at all correct.
a. First, the King James translators inserted their particular bias into the text by capitalizing the words "Messiah" and "Prince". Hebrew does not have capitals or punctuation. They combined the first 7 weeks along with the next 62 weeks - the Hebrew text does not do this. It is meant to be understood as separate groups of years.
b. Anderson assumes that the decree witnessed by Nehemiah was the start of the first 7 weeks and this happened on Nisan 1. No where in the text is the specific day of the month given. He claims this was in March. The Babylonian calendar never has Nisan start early in March - it was impossible. Even Hoehner who modified Anderson's dates has Nisan start early in March. Nisan always started after the spring equinox. Their system is totally flawed.
4. People do not take into account one of the purposes of the 70 Weeks prophecy. It was God's answer to Daniel's impassioned prayer for his people. It was an answer to prayer. If, as is the assumption, the start of the 70 weeks began with Artaxerxes' decree, that was over 100 years after the prophecy was given. Daniel would have been long dead. He would not have seen the specific answer to his prayer. God would have been a liar. So the first 7 weeks MUST start within Daniel's own lifetime
5. Most people the KJV and see the word "decree" and then look for 1 of 3 decrees by earthly kings. However, Ezra specifically states there were actually 4 decrees. 3 by kings and 1 by God. When did God make this decree? Gabriel tells Daniel to go back to Jeremiah's writings. There Daniel could find that God specifically stated that Jerusalem would be rebuilt and the Jews would return. Jeremiah uses the exact same Hebrew words which occur in Daniel 9. That is the start of the 7 weeks of years. 537 BC. 49 years later and the messiah, a prince shows up - Cyrus. Cyrus is specifically called God's messiah in Isaiah.
6. The 62 weeks of years occurs after a gap of 14 groups of 7 years later. Artaxerxes given the decree to return and rebuild. But the text does not say it is at the decree. It is when the work actually takes place - and that is 4 years later when Nehemiah returns to Jerusalem. The entire period of 62 weeks is a troubled time when Jerusalem and the temple constantly were torn down and rebuilt. Most people say it took 49 years to rebuild. Actually Josephus lists all the wars and battles where the walls and the temple were torn down multiple times.
7. The 62 weeks ends in 6BC with the coming of the Messiah. Jesus was born during this year.
8. We are currently living in the 2nd gap. It can be easily shown that starting from 6 BC, we are in the 290th group of 7 years. We are coming up to its completion in 2025.
9. These various dates are also confirmed by Eclipse Event Signs. This is recent research which shows that groups of eclipses which occur on Jewish Feast days are used by God to mark very special events in the history of the Jews. It is the first year of the group of eclipses which is significant. 6 BC, 31 AD, 1948 AD, 2025 AD, 2032 AD are all such significant years (there are many others). Actually, the group that starts in 2032 has the most full lunar and solar eclipses in centuries.
There is too much to write about. The series of 7 videos goes through everything in a lot of detail. However, this is finally the proper interpretation of this very difficult and intricate prophecy which has been revealed in our modern times.

 

[vk_61]

I heard it was somewhere between 6-4 BC. Is that the number you go with?

Try this date: July 27, 7 BCE.

 

[SuperCow]

3) Artaxerxes I Decree (7th year) (458/457 BC)

Pros: Lines up almost exactly with time of Christ's baptism (26 AD). Decree also "restores" Jewish control of Jerusalem, which is consistent with how the word for "restore" is used of other cities in the Old Testament (i.e. 2 Kings 14:22). Also consistent with usage in Jeremiah 30:18 and Isaiah 1:26​

Cons: Decree has nothing to do with building Jerusalem whatsoever. This theory must resort to convoluted inferences from Ezra 4 and Nehemiah to prove that this decree in Ezra 7, somehow, authorized city building when it says nothing of the sort.​

You can also count backwards in time from the New Testament. John the Baptists' ministry began in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar. Augustus Caesar died in 14 AD and Tiberius had a 2 year co-regency, so his 15th year is between 26-28 AD depending on how you count that. Jesus ministry began less than a year after that.

Counting backwards 483 years gets you between 456 BC and 458 BC. (Note that there is no zero year.) Therefore #3 is the only timeline that fits. The decrees from Cyrus and Darius (#1 & #2) were to rebuild the temple, which was completed in 516 or 517 BC. Daniel refers to rebuilding the wall, which only happened during Artaxerxes reign and was not mentioned in the previous decrees. It is not specifically mentioned in the king's letter to Ezra in chapter 7, but it is mentioned in Ezra 9:9.

It's readily available even on wikipedia that Artaxerxes I reigned from 465 - 424 BC. Ezra says the command happened in the 7th year of his reign. 7 years after 465 BC is 458 BC or 457 BC. So everything lines up chronologically.

 

[SuperCow]

Thanks for your reply. I have heard some different theories that the dates used by historians are actually incorrect, due to apparent difficulties with Ptolemy's Canon. For example, I heard it proposed in one journal article (by a Jehovah's Witness) that implied the 20th year of Artaxerxes is 455 B.C. not 444 B.C. However, this would seem to be a situation where a certain interpretation of the 70 weeks prophecy is causing us to doubt secular history. As difficult as the 70 Weeks prophecy is, I don't think that it's tenable, especially from an apologetics standpoint, to abandon secular dates when they have no interest in the 70 weeks prophecy one way or another.

Thanks again. What are your thoughts?

The Jehovah's Witnesses are backed into a chronological corner, because of their adherence to the 7 times being equal to 2520 years, starting backwards from 1914 AD. They also misread Jeremiah and think that prophecies of 70 years in Jeremiah refers to Judah instead of Babylon. 539 BC is difficult to refute, so they mark the return of Israel to be 537 BC and the destruction of Jerusalem's temple to be 607 BC. This pushes all their dates 20 years further back from conventional Christian dates.

Going forward they have distortions as well, which is related to the date you mentioned here, since they also have worked out that Jesus ministry starts in 30 AD and his death is in 33 AD., so their 483 years has to go back to 454 BC and since the Bible is the final authority (along with their current interpretation of it) they just assume that other historical sources are wrong.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

You can also count backwards in time from the New Testament. John the Baptists' ministry began in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar. Augustus Caesar died in 14 AD and Tiberius had a 2 year co-regency, so his 15th year is between 26-28 AD depending on how you count that. Jesus ministry began less than a year after that.

Counting backwards 483 years gets you between 456 BC and 458 BC. (Note that there is no zero year.) Therefore #3 is the only timeline that fits. The decrees from Cyrus and Darius (#1 & #2) were to rebuild the temple, which was completed in 516 or 517 BC. Daniel refers to rebuilding the wall, which only happened during Artaxerxes reign and was not mentioned in the previous decrees. It is not specifically mentioned in the king's letter to Ezra in chapter 7, but it is mentioned in Ezra 9:9.

It's readily available even on wikipedia that Artaxerxes I reigned from 465 - 424 BC. Ezra says the command happened in the 7th year of his reign. 7 years after 465 BC is 458 BC or 457 BC. So everything lines up chronologically.

Several facts which are not accurate about what was posted.
1. Artaxerxes' decree in his 7th year was specifically to do with beautification of the temple and to resettle more exiles (Ezra 7:27-28). Absolutely nothing to do with rebuilding the wall.
2. Ezra 9:9 does refer to a "wall". The Hebrew used there is NOT used for the wall of the city. A completely different word is used throughout Nehemiah to refer to the city wall. But the same word is used elsewhere to refer to the wall of the temple complex (Ezekiel 42:7). Like other things in the 70 Weeks, one can NOT use the English translations to come to an accurate understanding of the prophecy. You MUST study the text in Hebrew.
3. The translations which use the word "decree" in the 70 weeks text are inaccurate. Daniel never uses the Hebrew word "dabar" to refer to decrees of earthly kings. A totally different word is used for that. Daniel uses "dabar" when talking about the command of God. It's used this way in Daniel 9:2. Daniel gives us this major clue right at the start of the chapter of exactly who gave this command and when the 70 Weeks started.

 

[joeLightening]

I do not think the Lord will return until there is peace on Earth. Peace meaning simply the absence of war and rumors of war. This will not happen until there is a one world leader person. Trying to align the 70 weeks is not my goal right now. We can be content to face one day at a time and follow our Lord Jesus. However, the prophetic signs one day will all be fulfilled and the Lord will appear. After the abomination of desolation happens, the end is at the door. Then the end will happen quickly and suddenly.

 

[BobRyan]

3) Artaxerxes I Decree (7th year) (458/457 BC)

Pros: Lines up almost exactly with time of Christ's baptism (26 AD). Decree also "restores" Jewish control of Jerusalem, which is consistent with how the word for "restore" is used of other cities in the Old Testament (i.e. 2 Kings 14:22). Also consistent with usage in Jeremiah 30:18 and Isaiah 1:26​

Cons: Decree has nothing to do with building Jerusalem whatsoever. This theory must resort to convoluted inferences from Ezra 4 and Nehemiah to prove that this decree in Ezra 7, somehow, authorized city building when it says nothing of the sort.​

...

I welcome all views as to the possible start of the 70 weeks (preterist, futurist, dispensational, etc.) If someone can convince me of the correct decree (and tolerate me playing devil's advocate), I would greatly appreciate it. Though I myself am a futurist with dispensational leanings, I am interested in what ANYONE has to say regarding the starting point!

Thanks in advance.

457 is correct.

Mark 1:14-15 has Christ confirming at the start of His ministry in 27 AD that the "Time is fulfilled" - the timeline of Dan 9 and its 69th week completed -- 483 years from 457 point exactly to 27 AD. So it is "confirmation" of the timeline alignment by Christ Himself.

Ezra 6 informs us that this was a 3 part decree of Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes. We know that some minor damage was done to the city and then in Nehemiah's day it was repaired in full in just 53 days. Ezra 4:12 makes it clear that the city and the walls were being rebuilt.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

457 is correct.

Mark 1:14-15 has Christ confirming at the start of His ministry in 27 AD that the "Time is fulfilled" - the timeline of Dan 9 and its 69th week completed -- 483 years from 457 point exactly to 27 AD. So it is "confirmation" of the timeline alignment by Christ Himself.

Ezra 6 informs us that this was a 3 part decree of Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes. We know that some minor damage was done to the city and then in Nehemiah's day it was repaired in full in just 53 days. Ezra 4:12 makes it clear that the city and the walls were being rebuilt.

No, Ezra 6:14 says there were 4 commands. Not 3. EVERYONE misses this. This is the key to the 70 Weeks prophecy. It's the Ezra 6:14 Challenge.

 

[David Kent]

OK. Then tell me the exact date Jesus Christ of Nazareth was born. IF you know that date then we can do the math.

Well, his ministry started when he was about 30yo.
Herod, we read died 4bc. Herod killed the children up to 2 years old. and the family fled to Egypt. They were stil in Betlehem when Jesus was 40 days old as Mary had to go to the temple for ritual cleansing.
So Jesus could not have been born later than5 6BC and possibly earlier. my g uess is 6BC which will make the baptism autumn AD23 and the crucifixion passover AD 27

 

[David Kent]

Well, his ministry started when he was about 30yo.
Herod, we read died 4bc. Herod killed the children up to 2 years old. and the family fled to Egypt. They were stil in Betlehem when Jesus was 40 days old as Mary had to go to the temple for ritual cleansing.
So Jesus could not have been born later than5 6BC and possibly earlier. my g uess is 6BC which will make the baptism autumn AD23 and the crucifixion passover AD 27. we don't know how long the family were in Egypt.

 

[Douggg]

I will attempt a process to determine the questions and let you suggest the answers. By making developing a chart.

The starting point of the process is when Jesus was crucified, The 62 wks is the first segment to deal with.


Jesus was crucified at the conclusion of the 62 weeks being over. So 62x7 = 434 years earlier or prior to a command was given.

Next step to put a BC year on it. If Jesus was crucified at 33 years, then 434- 33 years = a command was given 401 BC or prior to.


Here's the chart of the first segment - the 434 years.

The questions are... what takes place during the 434 year segment? Is the beginning of those activities begin on 401 BC ? Or was the command given on 401 BC? Or perhaps earlier, and the 434 years is the length of the activities ? Or something else, I haven't thought of ?

 

[Douggg]

For the second segment chart... it looks like only one commandment is involved.

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.