Thanks for all the replies everyone. I will do my best to answer all the questions brought up by you, but to be honest I don't have all the answers (which is something to be admitted by everyone).
Daniel 9:24-27
"70 weeks have been decreed for your people and you holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to annoint the most holy place. So you are to know and discern 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 plaza and moat, even in the times of distress. Then after the 62 weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flodd; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. And then he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate."
Q. Why can it be assumed that shebua is refering to weeks of years?
A. Shebua was used to refer to weeks of days or weeks of years (it wasn't used to refer to months, centuries, etc.)
The background for the prediction in verse 24 refers to the disobedience of Israel for 70 weeks (weeks was referred to as weeks of years- Daniel wrote this 63 "weeks" into the disobedience of Isreal and was warning them of their 10 "weeks" exile (70 years) that was to come after the remaining 7 weeks of disobedience (the fulfillment of this can be found in 2 Chronicles 36:20,21).
Another reason we can say that Daniel was referring to weeks of years is that by using common sense we know (as well as Daniel knew) that 1.3 years was not enough time to rebuild the temple.
In chapter 10 verse 2 and 3 Daniel refers to himself as having fasted for "3 entire weeks of days". Daniel made sure to put "weeks of days" even though common sense tells us he couldn't have fasted for 21 years. What is assumed by Daniel as a week is a unit of 7 years which is why he emphasized days in this passage.

There was a question about the decree to rebuild Jerusalem.
Cyrus gave a decree in 539BC to authorize the rebuilding of the temple.
Darius gave a decree in 519BC that confirmed Cyrus.
Artaxerxes decreed in 457BC that authorized the temples enhancement.
In 444BC Artexerxes decreed COMPLETE REBUILDING OF JERUSALEM (Nehemia, Neh. 2:1,5,9). This decree was in March (Nisan) of 444BC.

Hopefully the following will answer your questions concerning the lunar years and calculations:
(7+62weeks)x7=483 Lunar years (the years used at the time made up of 360 days)
483x360=173,880 days 173,880/365.25=476.06 Solar years.
From this point after factoring in the "zero" year we come to March of 33AD.
(Historians say that Jesus could have died in either 30AD or 33AD because Friday was the beginning of passover which only occured in those 2 possible years around the time of his death) We can look at the evidence for 33BC more extensively but for now I will stick to the question at hand. There was a reference to Jesus being born in 4AD. There is no evidence for this in Matthew chapter 2. Historians will agree that Jesus was born before this time. If you disagree with this we can debate this one further too.

Q: Couldn't Jesus have just tried to fit the prophecy on his own?
A: No. On top of the Daniel 9 prophecy, several other prophecies were made regarding the Messiah. The chance of any one man fulfilling these prophecies is beyond that man's controll. Prophecies were made regarding the liniage of the Messiah, how he would be executed by crucifixion (prophecy made before crucifixions were even invented), how he would be betrayed for 30 peices of silver, where he would be born, that people would cast lots for his clothing, etc.- all of which couldn't have been done by Jesus as a trick to make people think he was the Messiah.
I think a lot of people miss the point when they look for the Old Testament to say "Jesus Christ of Nazareth is the Messiah". That argument doesn't seem to have any point to me. No person was ever mentioned by name in the Old Testament as the one who will be the Messiah. This doesn't mean that the Messiah wouldn't exist, it means recognize the one who fulfills the prophecies. The chance of a random person fulfilling just 8 out of (I think) fifty-something (if you want to raise an argument on the number of prophecies I will look it up) has been described as the same chance a person would have if the entire state of Texas was filled a foot deep with silver dollars and one of them was marked. Then the person would be blindfolded and asked to pick one silver dollar. The chance that the one he chose was the marked one is the same as a random person fulfilling just 8 of the prophecies. I realize that last couple sentences may seem retarded to you but that is just a way of describing the impossiblity of a random person fulfilling just 8 out of the fifty-something prophecies. Jesus fulfilled all of them and that is why we can say that when the OT refers to the Messiah, it is referring to Jesus. I'm sure I haven't done this argument justice at all. If you are really interested in any of this I encourage you to buy a little book by Josh McDowell called "More Than a Carpenter". If you really want, I will send you a copy for free. All I ask is that you read it and then give me your opinion/explanation on what is said.
Somebody asked if the speaker was a historian or an apologetic I think. The speaker at the seminar was a historian who became a Christian after extensive study. I'm sure I have left out many questions but these are the ones I remember reading. Thank you all so much for your input.

I think I just did. If you mean find the word "Jesus" in the above passage, then stop wasting everyone's time.

70 weeks have been decreed for your people and you holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to annoint the most holy place. So you are to know and discern 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 plaza and moat, even in the times of distress…..

Rodahi has already pointed out that Jesus is nowhere in this passage. This is a second - century text and the events referenced within it refer to Antiochus Epiphanies, who lived at the time, and not a later figure.

Let's look at the specifics…

Then after the 62 weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing,

"Cut off?" Jesus was not cut off, and he did not disappear, but came back, at least according to his followers.

The rest of it is equally vague and open to any interpretation whatsoever. There was no flood associated with Jesus death or the fall of Jerusalem, and the "one who made desolate" was not made desolate himself, but rose to become the most powerful and admired men in his world.

The background for the prediction in verse 24 refers to the disobedience of Israel for 70 weeks (weeks was referred to as weeks of years- Daniel wrote this 63 "weeks" into the disobedience of Isreal and was warning them of their 10 "weeks" exile (70 years) that was to come after the remaining 7 weeks of disobedience (the fulfillment of this can be found in 2 Chronicles 6:20,21). Another reason we can say that Daniel was referring to weeks of years is that by using common
sense we know (as well as Daniel knew) that 1.3 years was not enough time to rebuild the temple.

"Daniel" is a fictional construction based on other Near Eastern myths. Writing in the second century, of course Daniel had some idea of how long the exile lasted and what would happen afterwards. None of this prophecy, but some of it is bungled history.

Hopefully the following will answer your questions concerning the lunar years and calculations: (7+62weeks)x7=483 Lunar years (the years used at the time made up of 360 days)…

Unfortunately the text does not specify what length of year we should use (a tropical year? a sidereal year? an anomalistic year?). A lunar year does not have 360 days. This varies, sometimes by several days. A Hebrew year can have 354, 355, 383, or 384 days (avg: 369, which gives us 487 years or so. Bye-bye prophecy). All in all, such blithe calculations as you have done are not justified by the text. The 360 day year is Roman and has nothing to do with Hebrew calendars, AFAIK.

how he would be executed by crucifixion (prophecy made before crucifixions were even invented), how he would be betrayed for 30 peices of silver, where he would be born, that people would cast lots for his clothing, etc.- all of which couldn't have been done by Jesus as a trick to make people think he was the Messiah.

TSG, the prophecy-fulfillment argument is so ridiculous that no apologist here argues it. The Gospels are constructions by their authors made up of verses from the OT, traditions, sayings floating around, legends, stories and texts about a Founder figure, and their own creativity. The lot

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../prophecy.html and
http://www.angelfire.com/ky/agnostic...lresponse.html talk about some of the prophecy fulfillment issues. Actually, Jesus fulfilled none of the OT prophecies and there are no prophecies of Jesus in the OT. For example, find me the OT chapter and verse that spells out that the Messiah is to die by crucifixion and rise again on the third day. For one thing, there isn't one, for another, Jesus was buried on Friday night and rose on Sunday morn, so we have at most two nights (two days, if you count like the Jews) in the grave -- sorry, but no fulfillment there either way. And of course, the thirty pieces of silver isn't found in Jeremiah where Matthew said it was; thirty pieces of silver is known only in Zechariah, where it has nothing to do with prophecy, and indeed is translated somewhat differently in different versions of the Bible, as Till's discussion shows.

I wish you luck in your quest for truth, but you'll have to look elsewhere for it that Bible prophecies.

Michael

Oh please, Tercel. Jesus was not cut off, he came right back, at least according to his followers, and still goes on today. Show me the flood associated with Jesus' death or the sack of Jerusalem by the Romans. What is the "strong covenant"? This passage could mean anything, and there is certainly no Jesus here. The text dates from the second century and refers to events of that time.

The language of the book—part of which is Aramaic(2:4–7:28)—probably indicates a date of composition later than the Babylonian Exile (6th century BC). Numerous inaccuracies connected with the exilic period (no deportation occurred in 605 BC; Darius was a successor of Cyrus, not a predecessor; etc.) tend to confirm this judgment. Because its religious ideas do not belong to the 6th century BC, numerous scholars date Daniel in the first half of the 2nd century BC and relate the visions to the persecution of the Jews under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164/163 BC).

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=29171&tocid=0

Michael

Just to clarify something for you. In the Hebrew writing of Daniel the term for "cut-off" is to kill violently. Jesus was killed violently. The years used by Daniel were the same years he used in explaining the transgressions of Israel, so yes in fact we can know what kinds of years Daniel was referring to. The same years he used to describe time periods earlier. If you choose to ignore the prophecy that is your choice, but it is pointless to make arguments with no backing.

TSG. Of the many problems with Daniel, the one that doesn't require you to learn any bible scholarship is this one. Doesn't it strike you as a bit disingenuous to convert the prophesy into lunar weeks, then back to solar years? Where is that in Daniel? Transparently, the prophesy is being manipulated to produce the desired answer. Anyway, if you're really interested, this article explains why the prophecy doesn't fit.

Rodahi, Michael and anyone else who cares to comment. I've always been fascinated by one particular question about Daniel. Taking as given that it was written second century BCE, what did the 70 Weeks prophesy originally mean? The only serious attempt to answer that question I've found is a rather exotic numerological one by Bernard Muller ("Daniel Part 2 'Seventy Sevens'"; starts about halfway down the page). If you can point me to links with less speculative theories, I'd appreciate it.

[This message has been edited by JubalH (edited June 09, 2001).]

I said that Jesus was born in 4 BC, not AD. There is evidence that this is the case if you accept the quote I gave in my last post, because Matthew 2:1 shows that Jesus must have been born no later than 4 BC (see my last post). This means that if he did ride into Jerusalem in 33 AD, he must have been over 37 years old, which would conflict with the tradition of Jesus having died in his early thirties.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tallskinnyguy:
Just to clarify something for you. In the Hebrew writing of Daniel the term for "cut-off" is to kill violently.

No, tall, according to the Tanakh, the correct reading is as follows: "And after those sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will disappear and vanish. The army of a leader who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary, but its end will come through a flood." (9:26) Any impartial reader can plainly see that the text DOES NOT allude to Jesus or his execution.

tall: Jesus was killed violently.

It is debatable whether slow suffocation is a "violent" death, but, anyway, the Daniel passage clearly says nothing about Jesus.

tall: If you choose to ignore the prophecy that is your choice, but it is pointless to make arguments with no backing

You just made an "argument with no backing." In order to force a "prophecy" out of the passage, you have to ignore the 90% of the text which contradicts the details reported about Jesus and his execution.

rodahi

rodahi: The following is what Gabriel ACTUALLY says to Daniel in the Hebrew Scriptures:

"Seventy weeks of years are decreed concerning your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place.
Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the world to restore and build Jerusalem to the the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. And after the sixty-two weeks, and anointed one shall be cut-off [disappear and vanish], and shall have nothing; and the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war; desolations are decreed. And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week; and for half of the week he shall cause sacrifice and offering to cease; and upon the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator."

I challenge anyone to find Jesus anywhere in the above passage.

Tercel: I think I just did.

I think you just didn't. At what point in his career did Jesus become an anointed King of Israel? At what point in his career did Jesus disappear and vanish?

Tercel: If you mean find the word "Jesus" in the above passage, then stop wasting everyone's time.

Since you didn't find either Jesus or the name "Jesus" in the above passage, it is you who seems to be wasting everyone's time.

rodahi



[This message has been edited by rodahi (edited June 09, 2001).]

On the subject of Daniel and the Seventy Weeks myth:

I had a conversation with a short-lived poster about this a while back. It's been arcived, but you can read it here. A significant (IMO) point in it all:

Anyway, just thought I'd point tallskinnyguy towards it. The conversation Nathan and I were having petered out (we both got caught up with life, I suppose) but it's interesting reading nonetheless.

--W@L