G
GRA
Guest
Actually, they are not --- read Daniel 9:25-26 very carefully...So why are the 69 weeeks divided into two groups one of seven weeks and the other 62.
Actually, they are not --- read Daniel 9:25-26 very carefully...So why are the 69 weeeks divided into two groups one of seven weeks and the other 62.
I did a study on this some time ago -- best I remember, the numbers ended up something like this:
"It seems like we are in the same ballpark..."
457 B.C. - The decree went forth to rebuild the city.
445 B.C. - The wall of the city is built in 52 days.
405 B.C. - The rebuilding of the city ends 52 years after the decree went forth.
- 3 B.C. - Christ is born in Bethlehem.
- - - - -- ( Remember that there is no year 0. )
-30 A.D. - Christ is crucified 62 x 7 = 434 years after the rebuilding of the city ends.
- - - - -- ( NOT 434 years after the end of the 7th week - look carefully at Daniel 9:25-26 )
-34 A.D. - Daniel's 70 weeks end 70 x 7 = 490 years after the decree went forth.
![]()
Actually, they are not --- read Daniel 9:25-26 very carefully...
![]()
I did not say that it did...Can you show us where Cyrus' decree issued in 457 included rebuilding the wall?
"I don't have an issue with anyone - not even you, should we not happen to agree..."Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
The text clearly show 7 weeks and 62 weeks, two groups added together to make 69. Your issue is not with me but with the Scriptures.
Thank You, chootchooot - I appreciate that!GRA! God bless you brother good to see you back
The point of departure is that the book of Daniel was written during the conflict under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (somewhere between 168 and 163 BCE) in the form of a prophecy, but after the events described had taken place. All prophecies of Daniel point to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes and no further. The seventy weeks has been applied to the period between the Babylonian exile and the death of Antiochus in 164 BCE. The “prince who is to come” (9:26) was Antiochus Epiphanes, whose armies partially destroyed Jerusalem and massacred many of its inhabitants. There are a number of variations of the critical school of thought, but all of them start the third division (one week) with the death of the high priest Onias III in 171/0 BCE. Onias was the “anointed one” who was “cut off’ after 62 weeks (9:26). It was Antiochus IV Epiphanes who stopped sacrifice and grain offering in the middle of the week (9:27) when he erected the "desolating sacrilege" on December 4, 167 BCE (15 Kislev, 145; 1 Mace 1:54). The “anointing of a most holy place” (9:24) is the rededication of the altar of sacrifice by the victorious Judas Maccabeus, six or seven years after Onias was killed (December 14, 164 BCE - 25 Kislev, 148; 1 Mace 4:52). The standard historical-critical interpretation is that the 70x7 weeks is an interpretation of Jeremiah’s 70 years (9:2; cf. Jer. 25:1, 12). Consequently the first 7 weeks begin with the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/6 BCE. The critical interpretation follows the Masoretic punctuation of 9:25, which put the Messiah at the end of the first 7 weeks. This messiah is Cyrus—the Persian king that set the Jews free in 539.8 BCE. The second division (62 weeks) extends from 539/8 BCE to the murder of the high priest Onias III in either 171/0 BCE.
I did not say that it did...
Daniel 9:
[SUP]25[/SUP] Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. [SUP]26[/SUP] And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
The important and significant decree is the one that commanded the city to be rebuilt. It is true that the wall was built first --- but, it has no bearing on the decree to rebuild the city --- which is what matters as far as verse 25 is concerned...
![]()
Verse 26 does not negate the fact that verse 25 says 7 and 62 weeks. Why not just say 69 weeks if nothing significant were to happen at the end of the first 7 weeks?"I don't have an issue with anyone - not even you, should we not happen to agree..."
Did you forget to read verse 26 ???
![]()
"I know that Wikipedia is not to be trusted as a source of truth..."According to Wikipedia, here's the historical-critical school of interpretation for Daniel 9:24-27: Is there any evidence refuting this understanding of the text?
According to Wikipedia, here's the historical-critical school of interpretation for Daniel 9:24-27:
Is there any evidence refuting this understanding of the text?
No need to toss out anything --- just read what is actually written...So we just toss out the fact that the decree Daniel referred to would include rebuilding the wall so we can forcefit Scripture to our doctrine, instead of adjusting our doctrine to fit Scripture? Have you considered that maybe the reason Daniel said that the decree would include rebuilding the wall was so that we would know which of the 4 decrees ordering Jerusalem's restoration he was referring to? If not how would we know which of those 4 decrees we should use as a starting point for the 7 and 62 weeks? The only one of those 4 decrees that included rebuilding the wall was the one issued by Artaxerxes in 444BC.
May God bless your studies!
This made me laugh. Sorry, its probably some mind-control programming kicking in. Sadly, I can't even think where I last heard that - you're probably right, I reckon either TV somewhere (I don't watch anymore), or I've just read/seen it so many times from others I use it in autopilot.UGH!!! Right off the bat you used a saying that has driven me crazy for yrs. I even hear advertisers say it or a variant of it and it gets me ill!
"you might find you LEARN something you DIDN"T KNOW"
Even typing it gave me a bit of nausea! How can you learn something that you ALREADY know?!!!!!
"He has..."May God bless your studies!
I believe I know the answer to that question; however, I do not think you would believe me if I told you...Verse 26 does not negate the fact that verse 25 says 7 and 62 weeks. Why not just say 69 weeks if nothing significant were to happen at the end of the first 7 weeks?
No need to toss out anything --- just read what is actually written...
Daniel does not say that the decree would include rebuilding the wall.
![]()
"He has..."
I believe I know the answer to that question; however, I do not think you would believe me if I told you...
![]()
This made me laugh. Sorry, its probably some mind-control programming kicking in. Sadly, I can't even think where I last heard that - you're probably right, I reckon either TV somewhere (I don't watch anymore), or I've just read/seen it so many times from others I use it in autopilot.What I should have said, is that you might learn you were wrong about something you thought you knew. But psychologically, to phrase thus can be a little off-putting, as perhaps you don't want to be wrong about your cherished beliefs? Personally, I hate that!
With regards to hateful comments, these say more about you than they do Zone. A father spanks the naughty child he loves. You think we should just let heretics and other religions go to hell because we don't want to offend their sensibilities? I say we spank them! Perhaps they will repent.![]()