Daniel's 70 weeks - Need Input

  • Thread starter Thread starter JohnPaul0
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JohnPaul0

Guest
I’m looking for critique of Daniel 9:24-27 as it is portrayed in the attached Dispensaltionalist “timeline.” Specifically, I’d like to hear comments about the accuracy of the dates and anything else that can be said about the passage from a Catholic standpoint.

In Dispensationalist teaching, 69 “weeks of years” have been completed. The final “week” of seven years begins in the future when the Jewish temple is rebuilt

Thanks!

-JohnPaul0
 
I used to research this… but I gave up. Everything I read was like the ugly sister tryinig to twist her foot into the glass slipper.
 
I’m looking for critique of Daniel 9:24-27 as it is portrayed in the attached Dispensaltionalist “timeline.” Specifically, I’d like to hear comments about the accuracy of the dates and anything else that can be said about the passage from a Catholic standpoint.

In Dispensationalist teaching, 69 “weeks of years” have been completed. The final “week” of seven years begins in the future when the Jewish temple is rebuilt

Thanks!

-JohnPaul0
This from a CAF member…sites.google.com/site/aquinasstudybible/home/daniel
 
It makes a lot of sense, since Jesus did fulfill the coming of the Messiah 482 years after the declaration to rebuild the temple to Nehemiah, that the prophesy for the last 7 would be true, as well.
 
What I can say is that one traditional Christian interpretation of the last of the seventy weeks when the sacrifices would stop (Daniel 9:27 “and he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease”) is, ever since Origen and Eusebius, as a prophecy about Christ; in fact, this is where the oft-repeated idea of Jesus being out in public for three and a half years (something the Gospels are very vague about: some interpret the Synoptics as presenting a one-year ministry, while a literal reading of John, who speaks of three Passovers, produces a two-year period) comes from, i.e. “midst of the week” = half a week = three days and a half = three years and a half.

Therefore it is written, “and in the midst of the week shall be taken away sacrifice and libation;” (Daniel 9:27) and it is clear that with the Passion was forcibly taken from them * sacrifice and libation, when according to the Evangelical Scripture “the veil of the Temple was rent from the top to the bottom” (Matthew 27:41).
  • Eusebius, Prophetic Eclogues 3.46
This was also the opinion that John Calvin and Martin Luther held:

The Prophet now subjoins, He will make to cease the sacrifice and offering for half a week. We ought to refer this to the time of the resurrection. For while Christ passed through the period of his life on earth, he did not put an end to the sacrifices; but after he had offered himself up as a victim, then all the rites of the law came to a close. By the words “sacrifice and offering” the Prophet implies all ceremonies, a part being put for the whole; as if he had said, after Christ had offered up one eternal sacrifice, all the customary ceremonies of the Law were abolished; for otherwise Christ’s death would have been superfluous, had he not put an end to all the old shadows of the Law. Although the sacrifices were continued for many years after Christ’s death, yet we can no longer call them “legitimate,” for no reason can be offered why the sacrifices of the Law should be pleasing to God, except their reference to that heavenly pattern which Moses saw on the mount. (Exodus 25:40) Hence, after Christ had appeared and expiated all the sins of the world, it became necessary for all sacrifices to cease. (Hebrews 8:5)
  • John Calvin, Commentary on Daniel Volume 2, Lecture 52
The Prophet Daniel desired to know the definite time when this should come to pass, but he could not learn it, and although the angel pointed out a definite time, it was nevertheless too dark for the prophet to understand, hence he said before: But at last, at the last time, you shall see everything, that is, your prophecy, that is to be revealed to you, shall transpire at the end of time. For when Christ sent out the Gospel through the ministry of himself and of the Apostles, it lasted three or three and a half years, that it almost amounts to the calculation of Daniel, namely the 490 years. Hence he also says, Christ shall take a half a week, in which the daily offerings shall cease; that is, the priesthood and reign of the Jews shall have an end; which all took place in the three and a half years in which Christ preached, and was almost completed in four years after Christ, in which the Gospel prospered the most, especially in Palestine through the Apostles (that when they opened their mouth, the Holy Ghost fell as it were, from heaven, as we see in the Acts of the Apostles), so that a whole week, or seven years, established the covenant, as Daniel says; that is, the Gospel was preached to the Jews, of which we spoke before. Now, when the time came that a new message or sermon began, there must also begin a new kingdom, that is, where Christ rules spiritually in our hearts through the Word and faith. If this is now to continue, then the other must be set aside and has no more authority and must cease. This is the part of the prophecy of the prophets, which Christ is explaining.
  • Martin Luther, Sermon for the Twenty-Fifth Sunday after Trinity; Matthew 24:15-28 6
In fact, while some of the Church Fathers seem to have understood the prophecy as (partly) referring to the end times - especially the latter parts of the prophecy - others also thought that they were already fulfilled.

Another interpretation more familiar (at least, if you hang around the right circles…) nowadays is that the "he" who would make the sacrifices cease actually refers to the Antichrist. St. Hippolytus of Rome and Apollinarius of Laodicea held this opinion:

For when the threescore and two weeks are fulfilled, and Christ is come, and the Gospel is preached in every place, the times being then accomplished, there will remain only one week, the last, in which Elias will appear, and Enoch, and in the midst of it the abomination of desolation will be manifested, viz., Antichrist, announcing desolation to the world. And when he comes, the sacrifice and oblation will be removed, which now are offered to God in every place by the nations. These things being thus recounted, the prophet again describes another vision to us. For he had no other care save to be accurately instructed in all things that are to be, and to prove himself an instructor in such.
  • Hippolytus, On Daniel 2.22*
 
David Currie’s book on the rapture has a whole chapter about Daniel’s weeks. Check it out.
 
I’d like to go with this one, except the dates do not appear to line up with Scripture. Neh 2:1 says that the command to rebuild Jerusalem was given in the month of Nisan in the 20th year of Ataxerxes reign, which puts it in March, 444 BC. Catholic historian Warren Carroll says Nehemiah arrived in Jersusalem to rebuild it in 445 BC, so the date is close to the timeline I posted.

The link above puts the start of the 70 weeks “somewhere around 465 BC”, so it does not appear to start in the correct year.

Any thoughts?
 
Patrick457, your information is helpful. Also, the quotes from Calvin and Luther might get some attention from my protestant co-workers, with whom I am discussing this. Actually, the guy who made the chart is from my co-worker’s church, and he actually is coming into our work this Thursday to discuss this with me, so my “prophetic time” to come up with a response is short! 😃

After staring at this, I see a few flaws in the information in the diagram I posted:
  1. To get the correct number of years, you have to use “Bible prophecy” 360-day years (see 360calendar.com/ ). Otherwise, 33 AD is only week 68 counting from 444 BC using ordinary 7-day weeks which is what I believe the Jews always used. So, we have hints of Gnosticism where you have to know the “correct” number of days in a year.
  2. At the start of the 70th week, he typed in “temple rebuilt,” which is an event that I don’t see in Scripture. Neither do I see “Prince Appears.” I’ll have to ask him where he got that.
    The rebuilding of the temple is straight from dispensationalist thought. What I’m going to concentrate on is trying to show him that the Church has replaced Israel as the people of God. So, there will be no need of Jewish sacrifices, as Luther and Calvin realized.
Thus, even if the 70th week does relate to the end of the world, then the quote from Hippolytus can apply, and I can mention the sacrifice of the Mass to them. I never thought before, but we know that the Church will endure until Christ returns, but could it be the case during the final tribulation that Mass no longer would be said?
Another interpretation more familiar (at least, if you hang around the right circles…) nowadays is that the "he" who would make the sacrifices cease actually refers to the Antichrist. St. Hippolytus of Rome and Apollinarius of Laodicea held this opinion:
For when the threescore and two weeks are fulfilled, and Christ is come, and the Gospel is preached in every place, the times being then accomplished, there will remain only one week, the last, in which Elias will appear, and Enoch, and in the midst of it the abomination of desolation will be manifested, viz., Antichrist, announcing desolation to the world. And when he comes, the sacrifice and oblation will be removed, which now are offered to God in every place by the nations. These things being thus recounted, the prophet again describes another vision to us. For he had no other care save to be accurately instructed in all things that are to be, and to prove himself an instructor in such.
  • Hippolytus, On Daniel 2.22
 
If you look at the Hebrew in Daniel 9:27, the plural words for abominations is used, not singular. So it is not talking about THE abomination of desolation. Rather, KJV is about the only translation that gets it right – “for the overspreading of abomination he shall make desolate.” And in Matthew 23, for the overspreading of Pharisaic abominations, Jesus did just that – “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.”

The 70 weeks are ALL about Christ. Christ fulfilled them.
 
Patrick457, your information is helpful. Also, the quotes from Calvin and Luther might get some attention from my protestant co-workers, with whom I am discussing this. Actually, the guy who made the chart is from my co-worker’s church, and he actually is coming into our work this Thursday to discuss this with me, so my “prophetic time” to come up with a response is short! 😃

After staring at this, I see a few flaws in the information in the diagram I posted:
  1. To get the correct number of years, you have to use “Bible prophecy” 360-day years (see 360calendar.com/ ). Otherwise, 33 AD is only week 68 counting from 444 BC using ordinary 7-day weeks which is what I believe the Jews always used. So, we have hints of Gnosticism where you have to know the “correct” number of days in a year.
This is complicated of course by the fact that we don’t know exactly when Jesus died. AD 30 and 33 are popular candidates, but it could very well be any other year within Pontius Pilate’s ten-year (AD 26-36) tenure as prefect of Judaea.
The rebuilding of the temple is straight from dispensationalist thought. What I’m going to concentrate on is trying to show him that the Church has replaced Israel as the people of God. So, there will be no need of Jewish sacrifices, as Luther and Calvin realized.

Thus, even if the 70th week does relate to the end of the world, then the quote from Hippolytus can apply, and I can mention the sacrifice of the Mass to them. I never thought before, but we know that the Church will endure until Christ returns, but could it be the case during the final tribulation that Mass no longer would be said?
Dispensationalism is an idea which sees a series of chronologically successive “dispensations” or periods in history in which God relates to human beings in different ways under different Biblical covenants. There is also a clear distinction between Israel the ethnic nation and the Church (the two do have some overlaps, but are totally different entities): a classic way of putting it is that Christianity was a ‘parenthesis’ or temporary interlude in the progress of Israel’s prophesied history, so that God has yet to fulfill His promises to national Israel.
 
This is complicated of course by the fact that we don’t know exactly when Jesus died. AD 30 and 33 are popular candidates, but it could very well be any other year within Pontius Pilate’s ten-year (AD 26-36) tenure as prefect of Judaea.
30AD aligns perfectly with the prophecy of the 70 weeks. 👍
 
30AD aligns perfectly with the prophecy of the 70 weeks. 👍
No, not if you start counting from 444 BC, which is the accepted date when Ataxerxes gave the decree to rebuild Jerusalem (c.f Dan 9:25 and Neh 2:6).

If you count 444 BC as year “zero”, then you have 443 years through 1 BC, then 47 years AD. So, 443 + 47 = 490 years (70*7 weeks of years).
 
No, not if you start counting from 444 BC, which is the accepted date when Ataxerxes gave the decree to rebuild Jerusalem (c.f Dan 9:25 and Neh 2:6).

If you count 444 BC as year “zero”, then you have 443 years through 1 BC, then 47 years AD. So, 443 + 47 = 490 years (70*7 weeks of years).
Nehemiah 2 is when Artaxerxes in his twentieth year permits Nehemiah to join in the rebuilding.

Ezra 7 documents when the decree ‘went forth’:

8And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king.
9For upon the first day of the first month began he to go up from Babylon…

That was in 457BC, the seventh year of Artaxerxes, putting Jesus saying ‘the time is fulfilled’ at 1 Nisan (first day of the first month) in 27AD. That would kick off the ‘last seven’, and the fourth year (the very middle) of that last seven began 1 Nisan 30 AD, when Jesus would be crucified around that Passover.

I had documented it more thoroughly here: christianforums.com/t7505232-2/#post55869114

There I expose the clues within the first couple chapters of John which support my findings, that John said “This is the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world” on 1 Nisan 27AD.
 
Nehemiah 2 is when Artaxerxes in his twentieth year permits Nehemiah to join in the rebuilding.

Ezra 7 documents when the decree ‘went forth’:

8And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king.
9For upon the first day of the first month began he to go up from Babylon…

That was in 457BC, the seventh year of Artaxerxes, putting Jesus saying ‘the time is fulfilled’ at 1 Nisan (first day of the first month) in 27AD. That would kick off the ‘last seven’, and the fourth year (the very middle) of that last seven began 1 Nisan 30 AD, when Jesus would be crucified around that Passover.

I had documented it more thoroughly here: christianforums.com/t7505232-2/#post55869114

There I expose the clues within the first couple chapters of John which support my findings, that John said “This is the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world” on 1 Nisan 27AD.
I like this interpretation, and your insights from the Gospel of John speak well of it. By placing the start of the 70 weeks in 457 BC, it allows the middle of the 70th week to fall during the time of Christ’s crucifixation. That way, the timing of the 70th week puts it in accord with patrick457’s “traditional” interpretation:
"Therefore it is written, “and in the midst of the week shall be taken away sacrifice and libation;” (Daniel 9:27) and it is clear that with the Passion was forcibly taken from them * sacrifice and libation, when according to the Evangelical Scripture “the veil of the Temple was rent from the top to the bottom” (Matthew 27:41).
  • Eusebius, Prophetic Eclogues 3.46"
    The weakness is that the 457 BC decree in Ezra 7 allows people to go to Jerusalem, specifically to supply the temple, it does not specifically say to go and build Jerusalem like the 444 BC instructions to Nehemiah in Nehemiah chapter 2 to build the city of Jerusalem.
How would you respond to that?

-JohnPaul0*
 
Thank you for your support, this is a very technical but amazing (and fulfilled) prophecy of Christ that I wish more folks grasped.
The weakness is that the 457 BC decree in Ezra 7 allows people to go to Jerusalem, specifically to supply the temple, it does not specifically say to go and build Jerusalem like the 444 BC instructions to Nehemiah in Nehemiah chapter 2 to build the city of Jerusalem.

How would you respond to that?

-JohnPaul0
In Ezra 4, Artaxerxes declares:

21Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me.

But in Ezra 7, Artaxerxes does send out that ‘another commandment’ with Ezra, saying:

23Whatsoever is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be diligently done for the house of the God of heaven: for why should there be wrath against the realm of the king and his sons?

By the time Artaxerxes permits Nehemiah to be relieved of his servitude as a ‘drink-tester’ (to make sure his drinks aren’t poisoned) and authorized provisions of timber for rebuilding the gate and wall, Ezra and everyone had already been in Jerusalem 13 years, rebuilding the city (houses and et cetera) according to Artaxerxes’ declaration seen in Ezra 7:23.

I agree, it’s not ‘specific’ like in Nehemiah 2, but the context lends some pretty strong implications IMO.
 
Thank you for your support, this is a very technical but amazing (and fulfilled) prophecy of Christ that I wish more folks grasped.

In Ezra 4, Artaxerxes declares:

21Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me.

But in Ezra 7, Artaxerxes does send out that ‘another commandment’ with Ezra, saying:

23Whatsoever is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be diligently done for the house of the God of heaven: for why should there be wrath against the realm of the king and his sons?

By the time Artaxerxes permits Nehemiah to be relieved of his servitude as a ‘drink-tester’ (to make sure his drinks aren’t poisoned) and authorized provisions of timber for rebuilding the gate and wall, Ezra and everyone had already been in Jerusalem 13 years, rebuilding the city (houses and et cetera) according to Artaxerxes’ declaration seen in Ezra 7:23.

I agree, it’s not ‘specific’ like in Nehemiah 2, but the context lends some pretty strong implications IMO.
Yes, I think I follow your implications that Ataxerxes first stopped the building of the city until he should issue a new decree, and then he does issue a new decree, at least for the temple.

I checked historian Warren Carroll’s The Founding of Christendom about this timeframe. You may be surprised to read that, In his footnotes (p. 190) Carroll lists three reference sources that reject Ataxerxes I as the unnumbered Ataxerxes of Exra 7:11. These historians favor either earlier or later dates that don’t fit well with Daniel’s 70 weeks. On the other hand, Carroll lists a contrarian source that favors 458 BC as the date. This is Paul Heinisch, History of the Old Testament.(Collegeville, MN, 1952), pp. 330-338.

The text in Ezra does not appear to be written in time sequence, so that makes the task difficult.
 
You are correct, it is not entirely in chronological order.

But this we know: while not directly succeeding each other, Cyrus the Great came before Darius the Great, who came before Artaxerxes I.

Ezra 4
5And hired counsellors against them, to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia.

Ezra 5
7They sent a letter unto him, wherein was written thus; Unto Darius the king, all peace.
8Be it known unto the king, that we went into the province of Judea, to the house of the great God, which is builded with great stones, and timber is laid in the walls, and this work goeth fast on, and prospereth in their hands.

Ezra 6
8Moreover I make a decree what ye shall do to the elders of these Jews for the building of this house of God: that of the king’s goods, even of the tribute beyond the river, forthwith expenses be given unto these men, that they be not hindered.
15And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king.

So during the reign of Darius, the temple was finished…

Ezra 4
21Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me.

Then during the reign of Artxerxes, he declared to cause them to cease building the city until further command…

Ezra 7
18And whatsoever shall seem good to thee, and to thy brethren, to do with the rest of the silver and the gold, that do after the will of your God.

And when he finally issues a further decree, it says nothing about building the temple, but it does say to do whatever they wished with all that gold and silver.
 
You are correct, it is not entirely in chronological order.

But this we know: while not directly succeeding each other, Cyrus the Great came before Darius the Great, who came before Artaxerxes I.

Ezra 4
5And hired counsellors against them, to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia.

Ezra 5
7They sent a letter unto him, wherein was written thus; Unto Darius the king, all peace.
8Be it known unto the king, that we went into the province of Judea, to the house of the great God, which is builded with great stones, and timber is laid in the walls, and this work goeth fast on, and prospereth in their hands.

Ezra 6
8Moreover I make a decree what ye shall do to the elders of these Jews for the building of this house of God: that of the king’s goods, even of the tribute beyond the river, forthwith expenses be given unto these men, that they be not hindered.
15And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king.

So during the reign of Darius, the temple was finished…

Ezra 4
21Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me.

Then during the reign of Artxerxes, he declared to cause them to cease building the city until further command…

Ezra 7
18And whatsoever shall seem good to thee, and to thy brethren, to do with the rest of the silver and the gold, that do after the will of your God.

And when he finally issues a further decree, it says nothing about building the temple, but it does say to do whatever they wished with all that gold and silver.
Good job, sir:clapping:

Gong back to my original post, when we met last Thursday, I was not able to bring up anything about the 70 weeks. He said that we could continue the discussion, though. If so, I’ll package your information and send it to him, and I’ll let you know how it goes.

Peace,
JohnPaul
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top