Jim Larmore

Gregg,
There are many things that happened during ancient times thats in the Bible but is not in the Jewish historical record. For instance recently they have just authenticated the existence of the Hittite nation thru archeological digs, the Bible told us they existed and were defeated by the nation of Isreal but there was no record of them in historical records so the skeptics refused to believe they existed until proof was found.

I'm sure that even though only priest were alowed into the temple that the tearing of the veil in the temple would have been something the whole of Jerusalem would have known about.Information like that leaks out every time. Why didn't they record it? I don't know, I have an opinion, I think that based on what the Bible tells us about the Passion we can assume they wouldn't record anything that would give credence or validity to the life or acitons of Jesus. They hated Him and killed Him because He exposed their hypocracy. Jesus called them vipers and hypocrites and so they were but they were the ruling class of clergy for the day. They could have stopped any mention of the tearing of the veil from being on record. They were the "Scribes" and Pharisees, the scribes wrote everthing down that they were told to by the priests who were also Pharisees.

Dr.X,
I don't know why you can't find the info about the 360 year on that web site , its the one I went to immediately after I started researching this issue with you , however it really doesn't change the prophecy any. The 70 week prophecy is one of years. I don't think the fact that their year was 354 or 383 matters here. The day in Biblical prophecy was symbolic of a year in prophecy however they counted it , it was still a year to them and it brought them down to the time of Christ birth when it was supposed to.

Jim Larmore

I'm sorry Dr.X I meant to address that last post to Steven Carr. I must be having a senior moment.

Steven Carr

So if the information 'leaked out over time', how did the Gospel writers know that the tearing of the veil happened at the moment Jesus died?


Perhaps if you had given a link that worked....

However they counted it....? Make up the numbers and start claiming prophecy fulfillment. People do the same with the Pyramids in Egypt....

Don't you know a day is a thousand years , not one year?

You had originally written 'Since the 69 prophectic weeks contain 483 years, this reaches down to the baptism of Jesus in 27 A.D. or the beginning of His ministry.'

Now you claim it brought them down to the time of Christ's birth.

Don't you even know what you are meant to be defending?

Jim Larmore

Steve,
The prophecy did come down to the start of Jesus ministry which was His baptism. The magi or wise men knew of the general time of His birth ans was looking for a sign. The star of Bethlehem was the sign they were looking for. these were men from the far east yet they knew from the prophetic writings that the messiah was to be borne around this time period. They traveled over a great distance to bring their gifts , The fallacy of the "three wise men" is not valid, we don't know how many wise men there were. The assumption is there were three because of the three different types of gifts, gold , francinsense ( spelling ) and myrr. The Lord lead these men to Bethlehem for a special purpose.

Bernard Muller

Jim wrote:
Actually there were three decrees to re-build Jerusalem, the first was in the first year of the reign of Cyrus Ezra 1:1-4 this was about 537 B.C. , the second was in the reign of Darius l soon after 520 B.C. Ezra 6:1-12, the third was in the 7th year of the reign of Artaxerxes Ezra 7:1-26.
In the previous two decrees neither Cyrus or Darius made any genuine "provision" for the reparation to begin. The decree made by Artaxerxes not only gave them the money to do it with but it also gave the jewish state full autonomy. ( subject of course by the overlordship of the persian empire). According to S.H. Horn and L.H. Wood authors of" the Chronicles of Ezra 7" the decree which would have started the 70 week prophecy began in the autumn of 457 B.C.

Does that letter to Ezra only can be considered as THE decree?
Absolutely not!

From one of my pages:

>> c) Artaxerxes I (458) (Ezra 7:11-28): This "letter" to Ezra only does not decree any reconstruction, but freedom for Israelites to go to Jerusalem, Jewish animal sacrifices, gifts for the temple & its people and special rights for Ezra. This temple had been already rebuilt and consecrated in 516 (Ezra 6:15 "The temple was completed ... in the sixth year of the reign of King Darius."). Also, in the book of Ezra, there is no mention of any rebuilding (or repairs) in Jerusalem while Ezra (a priest & teacher of the law only -- 7:21) was there. As a matter of fact, Isaiah 44:28, Ezra 2:1, 7:8,9,13, 8:31,32 imply Jerusalem is existing then as a town. <<

Furthermore:

>> b) In Da9:25 ("From the issuing of the decree [also translated as "going forth of the word"] to restore and rebuild Jerusalem"), the word usually translated as "decree" (Hebrew 'dabar') normally means "speech", "utterance", "word(s)" or "saying", that is a verbal command. And among the aforementioned "decrees", from 'Ezra' & 'Nehemiah', only one is spoken first (as a proclamation):
Ezra 1:1-2 "... the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying,
Thus says Cyrus king of Persia:"
Isaiah 44:28 "... he [Cyrus] will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt,""
The others do not relate to any proclamation; they are just letters given/addressed to one or several individual(s). <<

Best regards, Bernard

Steven Carr

This is all baffling to me. Jesus's baptism was long after he was born..........

How did they know the Messiah was to be bon around 4 BC?

Jim Larmore

Bernard,
What is your contention here? Are you saying the decree Artaxerxes made was not to rebuild Jerusalem but only to free the Jews who were captive in Jerusalem? I don't think that will hold H2O because Ezra was the high priest who was to "oversee" the rebuilding of the temple and to report back to the king of the progress. The decree is dated around the 7th year of Artaxerxes reign which was 458/457 ish. A fairly recently published cuneiform tablet from Ur of the Chaldees mentioning a date in the year of the death of Xerxes, together with one of the papyri discovered at Elephantine, places the accession of Artaxerxes in Dec. of 465 B.C. , Thus according to Jewish reckoning his beginning reign or assession year would run from Dec 565 to the next Jewish New Year in the fall of 464. That makes his first year to reign ( full calendar year) from the fall of 464 to the fall of 463. The 7th year of Xerxes would then extend from the fall of 458 to the fall of 457. The specifications of the decree were not to be carried out until after Ezra returned from Babylon, which was the late summer of 457 B.C. ,you can look all this up in the 3rd vol. pp. 100-104 S.H Horn and L.H Wood The Chronciles of Ezra 7. This make 457 the starting date for the prophecy of Dan9 and ends at the baptism of Jesus in A.D 27 when His ministry started.

If you begin with the autumn of 457 B.C. when the decree went into effect , and add 69 prophetic weeks which is 483 years you come to A.D 27, , the natural way of calculating these weeks in Daniel is to consider them consecutively, that is the 62 weeks begin where the 7 weeks end. These divisions are components of the 70 weeks mentioned in verse 24 so 7+62+1=70,

Its important to note that if you begin earlier in the year of 457 instead of the fall you would wind up extending to A.D. 26 not 27. this is partially because historians never count the zero year. The B.C. A.D. thing can get confusing when you read that Jesus started His ministry when He was about 30 years old. This is due to the fact that when the christian era started, an error of about 4 years occurred. Jesus couldn't have been born in A.D. 1 from the fact that when He was born Herod the Great was still alive, Herod died in 4 B.C. a matter of public record.

Bernard Muller

Jim wrote:
What is your contention here? Are you saying the decree Artaxerxes made was not to rebuild Jerusalem but only to free the Jews who were captive in Jerusalem? I don't think that will hold H2O because Ezra was the high priest who was to "oversee" the rebuilding of the temple and to report back to the king of the progress.

There is no evidence for all (as above) you claim whatsoever.
The one we have is as follows:
When Ezra goes to Jerusalem, the temple has already been rebuilt and consecrated, under the rule of Darius in 516BC. See:
Ezra6:15 "This temple was completed on the third day of the (1) month Adar; it was the sixth year of the reign of King Darius."
Then:
Ezra7:1 "Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, there went up Ezra ...'
Then:
Ezra7:8 "He [Ezra] came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king."
That's in 458BC
It is clear the temple was rebuilt and in operation (see Ezra7:19-22) before Ezra goes to Jerusalem, forty-two years later.

And Ezra is never said to be the high priest, only a priest: see Ezra 7:21, 10:10 & 10:16

And from what did you conclude Ezra goes "to free the Jews who were captive in Jerusalem." Show me the evidence.

Best regards, Bernard

Steven Carr

Luke says this baptism happened in the 15th year of Tiberius.
When was that?

Mullibok

But according to Luke he was born around the time of a big ol' census, which was in the AD's.