Beginning of the 70 weeks?

[Guest]

I've just come across some more evidence of the Persian "screw-up" of history, right in the biblical account itself. I mentioned in the post above that, according to the Jews, the Persian rule lasted for 52 years and spanned four kings, but the Greek chronology lasted for over 200 years and spanned ten kings. (I didn't include Gaumata in either count, though.) Right?

Here is the Greek chronology:

Cyrus - 539-529 BC
Cambyses - 530-522 BC
Gaumata - 522 BC
Darius I - 522-486 BC
Xerxes I - 486-465 BC
Artaxerxes I - 465-424 BC
Darius II - 424-405 BC
Artaxerxes II - 405-359 BC
Artaxerxes III - 359-338 BC
Arses - 338-336 BC
Darius III - 336-331 BC
Alexander the Great - 331-323 BC
Etc.

Here is the Jewish chronology:

Darius the Mede - 369 BC
Cyrus - 369-366 BC
Ahasuerus - 366-352 BC
Gaumata (a short-lived usurper that technically isn't mentioned in the Jewish chronology) - 352 BC
Darius the Persian 352-317 BC
Alexander the Great - 317 BC-311 BC
Etc.

Let's read Daniel 11:1-4:

"Also I [the angel speaking to Daniel] in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him. And now will I show you [Daniel] the truth. Behold, three more Persian kings will will yet stand up [Cyrus, Ahasuerus, and Gaumata], and the fourth shall be far richer than all of them [Darius the Persian]. By his strength, through his riches, he will stir up all [Persia] against the realm of Grecia. And a mighty king shall stand up [Alexander the Great] that will rule with great dominion and do according to his will. And when he stands up, his kingdom will be broken, and will be divided toward the four winds of heaven..."

There's no way around it. The Greek chronology has to be wrong. As to whether there were only a mere 52 years between the destruction of the Temple and the re-entrance into the Holy Land I don't know, but the traditional, Christian interpretation of the 70 weeks' prophecy cannot be right.

Hmmm....

Damon

[Guest]

an e-mail i sent about this very topic.

an internet article about this:
http://www.starways.net/lisa/essays/heifetzfix.html

if persian empire lasted only 52 years, this would not affect jeremiah's prophecy of 70 years of exile, because this would include 28 years at the end of the babylonian empire.

my own comments on this:

DANIEL CHAPTER NINE

The Seventy "Sevens"

20 While I was speaking and praying, confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel and making my request to the LORD my God for his holy hill- 21 while I was still in prayer, Gabriel, the man I had seen in the earlier vision, came to me in swift flight about the time of the evening sacrifice. 22 He instructed me and said to me, "Daniel, I have now come to give you insight and understanding. 23 As soon as you began to pray, an answer was given, which I have come to tell you, for you are highly esteemed. Therefore, consider the message and understand the vision:

24 "Seventy 'sevens' [c] are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish [d] transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy. [e]

25 "Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree [f] to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, [g] the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. [h] The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' [j] he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him. [k] " [l]

Yochanan,

the main thing i get from the Heifetz article (attached below) are the following two important points:

1. the strong evidence that there were only 4 Persian kings. this all but eliminates the secular and conventional Christian date of 586 BC, which relies on a string of some ten Persian kings that are chronicled by some Greek historians. this position also is supported by the following verses in Daniel Chapter 11:

Kings of the South and North

1 2"Now then, I will reveal the truth to you. Three more Persian kings will reign, to be succeeded by a fourth, far richer than the others. Using his wealth for political advantage, he will stir up everyone to war against the kingdom of Greece.[a]

3"Then a mighty king will rise to power who will rule a vast kingdom and accomplish everything he sets out to do. 4But at the height of his power, his kingdom will be broken apart and divided into four parts. It will not be ruled by the king's descendants, nor will the kingdom hold the authority it once had. For his empire will be uprooted and given to others.

these verses clearly state that there will be a total of 4 Persian kings. also that the last, who will be the greatest, will be defeated by a Greek king. all commentators agree that this alludes to Alexander the great, whose empire was divided amongst his 4 generals, exactly as verse 4 indicates.

from this we are forced to conclude that the fourth Persian king lived close to the time of Alexander the great, who was around 320 BC.

this evidence is strongly supportive of the chronology in the seder olam and other rabbinical works that puts the destruction of the first temple in 420 BC.

let's review the dates, taking them in round numbers for simplicity:

420 destruction of first Jerusalem temple by Babylonians

370 Cyrus the great who is called Messiah in Isaiah 44:28-45:3

44:28When I say of Cyrus, `He is my shepherd,' he will certainly do as I say. He will command that Jerusalem be rebuilt and that the Temple be restored."45:1This is what the LORD says to Cyrus, his anointed one, whose right hand he will empower. Before him, mighty kings will be paralyzed with fear. Their fortress gates will be opened, never again to shut against him. 2This is what the LORD says: "I will go before you, Cyrus, and level the mountains.[a] I will smash down gates of bronze and cut through bars of iron. 3And I will give you treasures hidden in the darkness--secret riches. I will do this so you may know that I am the LORD, the God of Israel, the one who calls you by name.

356-350 Darius allows rebuilding of temple, completed in 350

340 Ezra Nehemiah

320 Alexander the great

this chronology then forces the dates in Daniel 9:25-27 to be explained as follows:

7 weeks of years from going forth of word to restore Jerusalem: 420-370BC

62 weeks of years additional: 370BC-63AD

1 final week from 63-70 AD, when second Jerusalem temple was destroyed.

in addition, we must say that the messiah prince in Daniel 9:25 refers to Cyrus, while messiah cut off in verse 26 refers to king Aggrippas, who was deposed by Rome in 63 AD. and this is the standard rabbinic explanation of these verses in Daniel, as explained for example by Rashi.

the only problem with this approach, which is mathematically sound, is Daniel 9:24 which seems to make no sense:

24"A period of seventy sets of seven[c] has been decreed for your people and your holy city to put down rebellion, to bring an end to sin, to atone for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to confirm the prophetic vision, and to anoint the Most Holy Place.[d]

according to Rashi, Daniel's Vision of the 70 weeks encompasses the Jews'' return to Israel from Persian captivity, the rebuilding of the second temple in Jerusalem, difficult times, culminating in the banishment of the Jewish ruler, the destruction of the city and the temple, and the exile of the nation.

this is actually a very terrible prophecy, as explained by Rashi. Both mentions of Messiah in these verses refer to secular rulers. And Aggrippas was an invalid non-Davidic King, an Edomite, who was totally unfit to rule the nation. so how do we see the wonderful promises of Daniel 9:24 fulfilled in this scheme of interpretation?

therefore i would like to suggest that, based on verse 24, a special kind of Messiah, a true spiritual redeemer, is alluded to in these verses. in fact, He is hidden within the verses. Jesus as the God-Man King and Redeemer of both the Jews and the Gentiles is virtually demanded in order to understand the words in verse 24. and obviously the Christian understanding of Jesus' death on the cross as the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of all of humanity fits these words perfectly.

the problem is how to find Jesus alluded to in verses 25-27. to solve this i would like to propose an alternative reading of verse 25:

Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks; and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times.

i wonder if we can see an alternative reading hidden in this verse: that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks but also 62 weeks. in other words there are two sets of calculations here:

1. 420-370BC 7 weeks until Cyrus.

2. 420-14AD 62 weeks until the year Jesus was Bar Mitzvah, or considered an adult in Jewish tradition.

thus hidden in this verse are two different types of Messiah, one Cyrus a secular ruler, another Jesus a Divine Redeemer.

to follow into verse 26, sometime after these 62 weeks Messiah Jesus would be cut off (interestingly the word for cut off in Hebrew, kareth, sounds like cross in the Ashkenazi pronunciation), but not for himself, meaning He was guiltless.

then verse 27 describes the covenant that "he" makes with the many. this could refer either to the beginning of verse 26, meaning the Messiah cut off, or the end of the verse, referring to the Prince of the People who destroy Jerusalem. in other words, Christ or anti-Christ. many Christian commentators say that Jesus' ministry was 3.5 years, at which time He was crucified causing the sacrificial system in the temple to become obsolete. His disciples first went to Gentiles another 3.5 years after His crucifixion, at which time His unique covenant period for one week (7 years) with the Jewish nation came to an end.

another possible approach is to say that the 7 weeks are counted from Cyrus' decree allowing the Jews to return and rebuild the Temple in 370BC. 50 years later is the middle of the period of Ezra-Nehemiah. Ezra was a kind of anointed leader of the Jews. in fact the Talmud says he was as great as Moses.

the 62 weeks are counted from the destruction of the first temple in 420BC, again arriving at 14AD, the time when Jesus became an adult under the Jewish law. in this system the word Messiah in verse 25 refers to two special Jewish leaders, anointed to a great task, namely Ezra and Jesus.

i admit this counting system is a bit convoluted, but it seems to me the only way to understand the exalted promises of verse 24. this verse is left totally unexplained by Rashi and the other rabbis, unless you say that Jerusalem's destruction and the ensuing Jewish world wide exile is some kind of positive development for that nation. of course in a sense it is, but it also is clearly a terrible disaster and tragedy that does not easily conform to the meaning of verse 24:

24"A period of seventy sets of seven[c] has been decreed for your people and your holy city to put down rebellion, to bring an end to sin, to atone for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to confirm the prophetic vision, and to anoint the Most Holy Place.[d]

thus i want to argue that Daniel 9:24-27 overtly alludes to two secular rulers, Cyrus and Aggrippas, as the rabbis claim, but also alludes to two anointed Jewish spiritual leaders, Ezra and Jesus. Thus the Divine Messiah is hidden within the more overt secular meaning of these verses. but verse 24 virtually demands that we seek some kind of deeper and more subtle spiritual fulfillment in these verses.

i would be most grateful for your feedback.

sincerely,

menachem korn

[Guest]

if persian empire lasted only 52 years, this would not affect jeremiah's prophecy of 70 years of exile, because this would include 28 years at the end of the babylonian empire.

Technically the length of the Persian empire wouldn't affect the length of the exile, that's true, but the exile itself wasn't a full 70 years. The 70 years began with the destruction of the Temple and ended in the second year of Darius. See 2 Chronicles 36:15-21 and Zechariah 1:7 and 12. The reason that the 70 years ended then is because that's when the political circumstances changed, such that rebuilding the Temple was possible. (Zech. 1:13-16; God having "mercy" on Jerusalem after a 70-year period of "indignation" is directly connected with allowing the Temple to be rebuilt, in verse 16.)

this chronology then forces the dates in Daniel 9:25-27 to be explained as follows:

7 weeks of years from going forth of word to restore Jerusalem: 420-370BC

The only hitch is that Cyrus' decree was apparently in 369 BC. 421 BC was what I reckoned to be the destruction of the Temple, and the difference is 52 years. "Seven sevens" plus three more years. From 369 BC to 70 AD, when the Temple was again destroyed, was 438 years. That's "sixty-two sevens" plus four more years, making a total of "seventy sevens" altogether.

62 weeks of years additional: 370BC-63AD

That's not quite 62 sevens, though. 62 sevens - 434 years - would bring the count to 65 AD (since there is no year zero).

in addition, we must say that the messiah prince in Daniel 9:25 refers to Cyrus, while messiah cut off in verse 26 refers to king Aggrippas, who was deposed by Rome in 63 AD. and this is the standard rabbinic explanation of these verses in Daniel, as explained for example by Rashi.

If King Agrippa was "cut off" in 63 AD, that doesn't quite fit. Whatever "anointed one" was "cut off" has to be in 66 AD or afterwards (or 65 AD, after correcting your calculation).

the only problem with this approach, which is mathematically sound, is Daniel 9:24 which seems to make no sense:

24"A period of seventy sets of seven[c] has been decreed for your people and your holy city to put down rebellion, to bring an end to sin, to atone for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to confirm the prophetic vision, and to anoint the Most Holy Place.[d]

This isn't that difficult. The "atonement" spoken of relates directly to the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, the rituals pertaining to which were carried out at the Temple, and the two goats, one of which was killed and the other exiled on that day. These two goats were killed and exiled in place of the nation of Israel. When the Temple was destroyed, there was nothing left to prevent Israel from suffering these twin fates.

Israel's sins in the First Temple period got so bad that they were no longer considered as being atoned for by this ceremony. See Isaiah 29:1: "Add year to year [the sins of Israel], let them kill sacrifices [in vain]." The sins were added "year to year" because the Day of Atonement was supposed to remove those sins annually, and the ceremony was, by this point in time, no longer spiritually efficacious.

The "rebellion", "sin" and "guilt" were those of Israel against God. This period of "seventy sevens" was to atone for this. Part of this atonement, historically speaking, was allowing the land of Israel to "rest" and not be polluted with the sins of Israel for a time. (2 Chron. 36:21) The other part of it was to put Israel at the effect of others' sins against them, through captivity and through being ruled by foreign rulers for all "seventy sevens." In other words, if Israel hadn't been sensitive to how their sins had grieved God, maybe they'd be more sensitive if they were on the receiving end of others' sins.

The "prophetic vision" related to all of the visions and revelations that Daniel had had. Daniel's various visions of the "four kingdoms" all culminated in 70 AD. Then, the visions transitioned immediately to the Messianic Kingdom, skipping over the past two thousand years of history. (Ex. Dan. 7:9-14; 12:1-3, 13) Other biblical prophecies are written in the same style. (Ex. Isa. 10:20-22 and all of Isa. 11)

However, anointing the "Most Holy Place" and bringing in "everlasting righteousness" present more problems, as both are inextricably Messianic. (The Holy Anointing Oil, which would have been used to anoint the "Most Holy Place," was hidden after the first Temple was destroyed and remained undiscovered until quite recently.) It's as if 70 AD were to be the beginning of the Messianic Age. The question is, why? How does 70 AD connect with the Messianic Age? It obviously does, just as every other biblical prophecy which conflates events in history with the Messianic Age does. So what's the connection?

See below.

therefore i would like to suggest that, based on verse 24, a special kind of Messiah, a true spiritual redeemer, is alluded to in these verses. in fact, He is hidden within the verses. Jesus as the God-Man King and Redeemer of both the Jews and the Gentiles is virtually demanded in order to understand the words in verse 24. and obviously the Christian understanding of Jesus' death on the cross as the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of all of humanity fits these words perfectly.

Yes and no. On the one hand, Jesus came at a time when Messianic expectations were high - but in regards to the literal building of a Kingdom of Israel on earth! See Acts 1:6. This, Jesus did not do.

However, put this in context with Genesis 3:15. The Messianic descendant of the woman who crushes the head of the serpent must do so inwardly as well as outwardly. Before Satan, as the Serpent, can be defeated in battle, he must first be defeated in the form of the "Evil Inclination" as the Jews put it. This is the reason Jesus came. (Heb. 2:14-18 ) That's how the "redemption" is meant to happen, as it's both physical and spiritual.

the problem is how to find Jesus alluded to in verses 25-27. to solve this i would like to propose an alternative reading of verse 25:

Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks; and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times.

i wonder if we can see an alternative reading hidden in this verse: that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks but also 62 weeks. in other words there are two sets of calculations here:

1. 420-370BC 7 weeks until Cyrus.

2. 420-14AD 62 weeks until the year Jesus was Bar Mitzvah, or considered an adult in Jewish tradition.

It would technically be 421 BC to 14 AD. However, Jesus was born in 3 BC. (See this web site.) He would be 15 or 16 years old in 14 AD, not 12.

then verse 27 describes the covenant that "he" makes with the many. this could refer either to the beginning of verse 26, meaning the Messiah cut off, or the end of the verse, referring to the Prince of the People who destroy Jerusalem. in other words, Christ or anti-Christ. many Christian commentators say that Jesus' ministry was 3.5 years, at which time He was crucified causing the sacrificial system in the temple to become obsolete. His disciples first went to Gentiles another 3.5 years after His crucifixion, at which time His unique covenant period for one week (7 years) with the Jewish nation came to an end.

Jesus' ministry was apparently only 2 1/2 years. (See the same web site, above.)

i would be most grateful for your feedback.

sincerely,

menachem korn

Sure.

I honestly don't see Jesus' birth, Bar Mitzvah, ministry or death pointed to in these calculations. However, I do see Him coming at a time when "bringing in everlasting righteousness" and "anointing the Most Holy Place" could be fulfilled in type. Nevertheless, the Messianic expectations of Daniel's prophecies were not fulfilled when they culminated in 70 AD.

This is a forum with a "preterist" bent, meaning that they see many of the Messianic prophecies as only pertaining to events that occurred pre-70 AD. Although I see some merit in this view, I myself consider it to be too restrictive to how God works. Not only do I recognize the spiritual fulfillments in history, but also the ultimate physical fulfillment at the end of this present age.

The question remains, however, how do we identify the end of the age? The biblical Messianic prophecies which talked of the Kingdom being established on this earth forever don't easily lend themselves to calculating exactly when this will occur. Nevertheless, they are like "signposts" which point the way.

For instance, the preterists on this forum would look at passages like Matthew 24-25 as relating to events which are entirely pre-70 AD. In one sense they're right! However, because Daniel's prophetic vision transitioned immediately from 70 AD to the Messianic Age, I believe that passages like Matthew 24-25 represent an overlay with the events which will immediately precede the true Messianic Age. Those are the "signposts" that we should look for.

To conclude, consider the book of Zechariah. It begins with God having mercy on Jerusalem so that the Temple could be rebuilt (Zech. 1:12-16), and culminates with the Messianic Age (Zech. 14). Zech. 14:1-2 parallel events which happened when Jerusalem and its Temple was destroyed in 70 AD, but verses 3 onward are entirely Messianic in character.

Thus, it's my belief that a Temple will be built again in Jerusalem, prior to the beginning of the Messianic Age. A decree will go forth for the rebuilding of this Temple at the proper time. However, for the Temple to be rebuilt, the Levitical priests who would serve in it (both spiritually and apparently physically as well) must be purified. This will be done by "the messenger of the covenant" (Mal. 3:1-4).

The "covenant" is the original marital covenant between God and Israel. (See. Mal. 4:4) The "messenger of the covenant" will be one who preaches repentance, and who restores not only broken family relationships, but also the broken relationship between God, as a loving Parent, with his children, the nation of Israel. In other words, the "messenger of the covenant" will be Elijah the Prophet. (See. Mal. 4:5-6)

When you see the end-time Elijah the Prophet decreeing that now is the time for the Temple to be rebuilt in Jerusalem, sit up and take notice. That's when we should look for the final fulfillment of prophecy and the beginning of the Messianic Age.

Damon
PS. Elijah would also have to answer the question of how the physical promises to Israel, including the building of the Third Temple and the apparent reinstitution of animal sacrifices as Malachi 3 describes, can be reconciled with the New Covenant. I'm not dismissing that difficulty, but neither do I claim to understand it.

[Guest]

It seems to me that Daniel refers to the decree to "restore and rebuild Jerusalem." According to Ezra 1:2 the decree of Cyrus only refers to building a temple in Jerusalem not the city itself. It is not until the first decree of Artaxerxes that there is a decree to rebuild the city (Nehemiah Chapter 2). Therefore, the first decree of Artaxerxes seems to be the beginning of Daniel's 70 weeks.

Todd

[Guest]

Hi Todd. According to the prophecy in Isaiah 44:28, Cyrus' decree concerned both the rebuilding of the Temple and the restoration of Jerusalem. The passage makes no differentiation between the two. Whether Cyrus' historical decree actually mentioned the restoration of Jerusalem makes no difference because we should be comparing prophecy with prophecy (Isa. 44:28 with Dan. 9:25) and not prophecy with history (Dan. 9:25 with Ezra 1:2). When we do compare prophecy with prophecy, the "anointed prince" can be none other than Cyrus. (See Isa. 45:1.)

Make sense?

Damon