spin

You might have to, but when is the question.

Why did they received them?

1. Where in Daniel is there talk of money?
2. Why do you think Cyrus didn't finance them if he did all the rest?
3. Have you ever read Ezra 3:7?

I guess you don't believe what Ezra 1-3 says.

Perhaps you might explain then the coronation of Jeshua in Zech 6:9-14.

As I hadn't taken the notion of your Artaxerxes claim seriously before, I thought I might just look into the indications.
It is definitely not Artaxerxes I who was responsible for the decree you are so fond of talking about, for Artaxerxes I we are told in Ezr 4:17-22 specifically suppressed the building in Jerusalem. The decree came from Artaxerxes II, a good 50 years after the time that you want it to be.

Now I suggest you find a way to redate Artaxerxes II (or Jesus's ministry) and then you can be happy again.


spin

unknown4

Ok, it's "pure speculation" on my part that I list various dates, but it's not speculation on your part that you KNOW "from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem" was the 7th year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, and that it wasn't 467BCE because he supposedly co-reigned with his father for 10 years, or that Ussher said 464BCE, or that a Zoroastrian website showed a date different than yours?


Also, as far as the "Jubilee year" theory, I've read that 457 BCE is in a middle of a Jubilee year. Why should I accept part of a Jubilee year as a whole one? Why not instead use the full whole one as the start of a Jubilee year?

If you assume it's talking about Jesus, then I guess so. If the Masoretic text is correct, you may need to combine the first 7 weeks into "the 62 weeks", use Artaxerxes Mnemon and the decree in his 7th year to get it to around 37CE. Then again, one could use a "Jubilee year" on that too I guess. Whatever it takes, as long as it references Jesus, even though the NT never quotes Daniel 9:24-27 as a time line fulfilled by Jesus' coming/crucifixion.

Doesn't line up with WHOSE "history", Jim? Yours? Your scholars? Some fellow Christians disagree with you. Want me to list some websites? I think I will.

You SAY this is the "decree that actually made it". Some other Christians disagree with you.

What I see is you getting a date you want, to fit it in with Jesus being the final week of Daniel 9:24-27. Other Christians get a date they want, in particular 445/444 BCE, supposedly the 20th year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, and use "prophetic years", or "jubilee years" to get to a crucifixion at 33CE/32CE.

Here are some websites, some of them having CHRISTIAN interpretations of Daniel 9:24-27, for your information/entertainment/whatever:

http://members.aol.com/gparrishjr/chron.html
claims Artaxerxes' 20th year is 455BCE, so 7th year would be like 468BCE.
http://www.key2persia.com/iran.htm
claims Artaxerxes I reigned from 486-465BCE.
http://www.therain.org/appendixes/app91.html
claims 20th year of Artaxerxes 454/455BCE as start date.
http://members.datafast.net.au/sggram/f979.htm
claims 7th year of Artaxerxes is 458BCE, and it is favoured by premillennialists because its timing seems to be right when they work out their sums.
http://www.heavendwellers.com/hd_sev..._of_daniel.htm
It says "As to this it is common knowledge that the received date for the 20th year of Artaxerxes is 454 B.C"
http://www.vohuman.org/Article/The%2...Transition.htm
Gives last year of Artaxexes' reign as 435BCE
http://www.ccg.org/english/s/p013.html
Refers to 7th year of Artaxerxes as Mnemon and in 398BCE, 20th year in 385BCE.
http://www.truelightministries.org/a...icles%2025.htm
Says 7th year of Artaxerxes is 460BCE, 20th year 447BCE.
http://www.kingdombaptist.org/article596.cfm
Various Christian views of the 70 weeks. One of them including using Mnenom, I assume the decree in the 7th year, and combining the first 7 weeks into the 62 weeks, since after all, Daniel did write "after the 62 weeks", not "after the 69 weeks".
http://www.geocities.com/biblicalsec...daniel11_2.htm
Says 20th year of Artaxerxes was 433BCE
http://lostsheep.faithweb.com/part3.htm
Says Josephus claimed "Artaxerxes" was a general name for a few kings. Says Darius Hystaspes = Artaxerxes of Ezra 7 and Nehemiah
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Book...y_romance.html
Also identifies Darius Hystaspes with Artaxerxes, concerning Ezra 6 - Neh 13.
http://www.angelfire.com/bc2/Bereans...rtaxerxes.html
The German Historian Dr. Arno Peters, (the summary of whose work can be found at http://www.hyperhistory.com/online_n2/History_n2/a.html) sets the birth of Artaxerxes at 484 BC. In 464 BC, he would have been in the 20th year of the King, though only starting his second year of power.
http://users.cwnet.com/dalede/SeventySevens.htm
Presents various views of Daniel's 70 weeks from a Christian viewpoint, one being that a Cyrus date is correct, and claiming that Ptolemy's history wasn't totally accurate concerning some dates. I seem to recall another website which also said a Cyrus date is correct and also made the claim that Ptolemy's history wasn't totally accurate concerning some dates, but I can't find it now.

So, rather than simply telling me that all of my references are unhistorical, while your sources are historical, why should I believe your date over theirs? Cause yours fits what you want it to fit concerning Jesus? I'm not asking you to change your beliefs. What I'm saying is that it sounds like you have a theory, and you're sticking to it.

Jim Larmore

They wouldn't, but they could have easily understood from the decree that actually made the restoration of Jerusalem happen until Messiah the prince shall be 7 weeks three score and and two weeks adding up to 69 prophetic weeks or 483 years.
I'm not saying they didnt know it, they were probably fully aware of it they just chose not to accept it maybe in the same way you are right now. Another possibility is like I said before they were looking for a king like Messiah not a suffering lowly servant like Isa 53 portrays.

History says He died in 4 B.C. not too long after Jesus was born.

spin

Did Ezra even exist?

Good question, but wrong thread (although it is related through the evidence extracted from the book).

Perhaps the moderators could move it to a new thread.


spin

Diogenes the Cynic

Done

Wallener

I don't see how. They would be reading the Hebrew text, which clearly states the first annointed one arrives in seven weeks.

Jim Larmore

These prophecies can and often do have dual meanings. Yes I admitt that the star is referring to the Christ but it also alludes to the celestial object that appeared at His birth.

Jim Larmore

Thats the way you read and understand it. It may not have been understood that way back then and with the proper syntax interpreted.

Wallener

I have the hebrew text in front of me. I'm not interpreting a translation, nor am I interpreting in order to translate. A period is a period, a colon is a colon, a disjunctive is a disjunctive. Are you suggesting the hebrew text is incorrect? If so, on what evidence do you base this? Are you also suggesting the numerous English translations that *do* agree with the Hebrew text are also incorrect?

Jim Larmore

I'm not aware of Xerxes stopping the restoration of Jerusalem. I know a delegation was sent to him from neighboring nations to complain of the restoration but from what I have read in the refereces I have the building went forward under Xerxes 1.

Maybe our learned Spin can provide us with some solid evidence that Artaxeres stopped the restoration and it didn't resume until 50 years later.

I'm waiting Spin.