IS PROPHECY POSSIBLE?
The following is derivatively based from a comment I made on a Bible Forum in March, 2012. In the intervening time my understanding of the 360-day year has grown. I now realize that within 200 years before the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC, the world still had a 360-day year, and that oral tradition should have preserved that fact down to the 6th century BC. And so it should have been common knowledge in Daniel’s time that the centuries in which the Jews had failed 70 times to rest the land every 7th year occurred entirely, or at least mostly, when the world had a 360-day year. Therefore because the Jews knew of this purpose of the exile, it should have been evident to them that when Daniel spoke of yet another 70 ‘weeks’ [of years] pertaining to the Jews, it was to be understood according to the former pattern. In effect God was giving the Jews a ‘do-over.’ I mention this to explain why in March, 2012, I was still under the impression that the 360-day year ended with the Great Flood, instead of with what is commonly called the “Assyrian Eclipse,” which occurred on (Julian) June 15, 763 BC. Consequently, this is reflected in some of the thoughts below. The context of the comment was to defend Daniel’s 6th century BC prophecy that Messiah would be cut off after 69 weeks (lit. sevens [of years]). Daniel is given this prophecy by the angel, Gabriel, who tells him this period of sevens would begin with a decree to rebuild Jerusalem. History shows the decree was issued in 444 BC, about 90 years after the prophecy in 536/5 BC, and that the end of the 69 sevens-of-years came on Christ’s Day of Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, in 33 AD.
It was, then, around October of 2010 when I entered a period of spiritual doubt. Oddly enough, I realized I had no reason for it. Looking back, I think it stemmed from my lack of persevering repentance over my obesity, until I came to question how I could be a Christian at all. (I’m doing somewhat better on this issue now.) I began feeling offended at Christ. This took the odd form of my reaction to looking at pictures of Israel taken by my father or uncle, around the time they took me there when I was 13. I’m not Jewish, but my father and uncle were ordained ministers with a keen interest in biblical history. I now looked at boring pictures of what looked like God-forsaken half-desert, and asked myself, “Really? The Son of God walked here in this barren place? Really? Miracles actually happened here?”
The doubts gnawed and grew, until I became alarmed at my thoughts. It was then that I decided to see if Daniel’s prophecy about the time of Christ’s death could really be proven by historical records. After all, my parents had named me for the prophet. And so I ought to at least see whether or not Daniel’s prophecy in the 6th century BC could stand up to rigorous testing.
I began by thinking about a particular statement by Christ on his way into Jerusalem on the donkey, on the so-called Day of Triumphal Entry (it wasn’t very triumphant, really). He wept over Jerusalem and said the Jews should have known “in this your day” the things pertaining to their peace. Another gospel refers to this day as the Jews’ time of “visitation.” Now, I had once heard it claimed that Christ, by the phrase “this thy day,” literally meant that exact calendar day when he rode into Jerusalem. But I more or less dismissed that idea as some sort of over-zealous, extreme Dispensationalist claim. But over the years I began to hear that it might really be the case—that the 69 weeks of years actually did end on that day.
But being skeptical by nature, I considered a question I had never before seen in any of the many books that talked about the 70 weeks, whether Dispensational or not. It was this: If the Dispensationalist view was correct that the 69 ‘weeks’ were really 483 years of 360 days, not of 365+ days, and if, in fact, Christ did appear exactly 173,880 days since the time the command went forth to rebuild Jerusalem, didn’t that imply that Christ had the expectation that the Jews should have been counting down 360-day years since the command to rebuild the City? But why ever should Christ have expected the Jews to do such an unorthodox thing?
I thought that nothing in the Old Testament prophets, etc., had ever instructed the Jews to count off 360-day years in anticipation of their Messiah. And so I reasoned that if the Dispensationalists were correct, then something must have occurred in Jewish history that alerted the Jews to the idea that they should count off years in this manner. It then occurred to me that perhaps the exile of 70 years was not really 70 ‘normal’ years of 365+ days. Perhaps it was only 70 years of 360 days. Out of curiosity I calculated the amount of days this would mean. I found to my surprise that it equaled almost exactly 69 years. In fact it came to 69 years less 2 days. At this point I formed a hypothesis. If the Jews noticed that their exile had lasted almost exactly one year short of what they had expected, they could have asked themselves why this was so. And after further reflection, they could have divided the amount of days of their exile into 70 and arrived at the fact that they had been exiled 70 years of 360 days. And upon that fact, they could have further surmised the significance of a 360-day year from Genesis 7 and 8, in which 5 months of Noah’s life is stated to have been 150 days at the time of the Great Flood. And since even the five longest lunar months do not equal in length 150 days, the Jews could have then concluded that 30-day lunar months represented the lunar orbit at the time of the Flood, and therefore presumably also at the time of Creation, a time when God set the earth, moon, sun, and stars to more simply “tell the seasons.”
Putting all this information together could have led the Jews to conclude that the Messiah intended a restoration in the widest sense. It would go beyond the idea of restoring hearts to him, to include even the repositioning of the sun/earth/moon system to how it was at the time of creation. Of course, the returning Jewish exiles would continue observing their lunar-solar year in the centuries leading up to Christ, in order to keep their festivals in their proper seasons of the year. But for the sole purpose of counting down the time to Messiah the Prince, they would begin counting down 69 weeks of 360-days each.
Well, it was an interesting hypothesis, but where was the evidence?
This led to the vexing problem of trying to determine when exactly the exile had occurred. I tentatively began by accepting the standard date given for Nebuchadnezzar’s capture of Jerusalem. This is when Jehoiachin, king of Judah, came out and surrendered after a three month and 10-day reign. According to the Babylonian record of Nebuchadnezzar’s early years, it was on the 2nd of Addaru (Addaru is essentially equivalent to Heb. Adar, the 12th month), 597 BC. Specifically, scholars believe it was on March 16, 597 BC. I decided to accept this as an anchor date from which I would try to work backward and forward to determine the years of the exile, stated by Daniel in 1:1 to have begun in the 3rd year of Jehoiakim (Jehoiachin’s father). One or two other statements from the Kings and/or Chronicles confirms this as the year the children of Judah went into captivity.
Another perplexing problem was trying to reconcile Jeremiah and the Babylonian record with II Kings 24. This is because Jeremiah puts the deportation in the 7th year of Nebuchadnezzar (as does the Babylonian record), but II Kings puts the surrender (of Jehoiachin) in Nebuchadnezzar’s 8th year. Note that it wouldn’t be much of a problem if the 7th year spoke of the surrender and the 8th year spoke of the deportation, since one could then argue that a turn of the year took place between the surrender and the deportation. But to say that the surrender was in the 8th year but the deportation in the 7th year was very problematic. Eventually the solution began to appear. Professor Harold Hoehner from Dallas Theological Seminary had shown that by the 5th century BC the Jews were no longer reckoning the anniversary of a king’s reigning years from Nisan to Nisan (the 1st month), but from Tishri to Tishri (the 7th month). He proves this from statements in Nehemiah, where Nehemiah speaks of an event in the 9th month of Artaxerxes’ 20th year, and then speaks of a later event in the 1st month [also] in Artaxerxes’ 20th year. And so, I hypothesized that although Jeremiah reckoned events from Nisan to Nisan, perhaps the author(s) of the books of Kings and Chronicles reckoned years according to Tishri to Tishri. (We know these books were contemporaneously written works because both reference Cyrus’ 1st year and repeatedly reference each other). Moreover, Kings and Chronicles appear to have been written by expatriate Jews, for the Jews who returned to the land reverted back to Nisan reckoning, as statements in Haggai show. Long story short, I found that this resolved all the apparent discrepancies, not only between the internal, biblical ones, but also between the Bible and the Babylonian record of Nebuchadnezzar’s early years.
The Boy Jesus in the Temple, by Heinrich Hoffman. Jesus was 12 when he astounded the teachers in the temple.
Probably by this age he knew he would die at Passover in 33 AD, just four days after Daniel’s 69 ‘weeks’ would come to an end.
To calculate all this, one must also know when Nebuchadnezzar began his ascension (Sept. 7, 605), how that affects the entire chronology of Judean kings in relation to Nebuchadnezzar, how these events were reckoned by Jeremiah compared to that of Kings and Chronicles, and what it means in terms of when the exile began (as it turns out, in the 3rd year of Jehoiakim, who reigned 11 years by the Tishri to Tishri system of reckoning).
By comparing statements in Jeremiah to those in Kings and Chronicles, it can be deduced that Jehoiakim had to have ascended between Nisan and Tishri, as had Nebuchadnezzar, and that Nebuchadnezzar’s 1st year was Jehoiakim’s 4th. And so, the earliest I found the exile could have commenced was Tishri, 606 BC. The last day of the exile I dated to the 9th day of Cyrus’ 2nd year of reign (Tishri 9), 537 BC. This was shortly after the Jews had returned from exile in such numbers as to offer sacrifice in Jerusalem, on Tishri 1 (the Feast of Trumpets), which came shortly before Tishri 10, the beginning of their agricultural year. As Cyrus’ ascension was on October 29, 539 BC, i.e. after Tishri 1 of that year, his 1st regnal year by Ezra’s reckoning would have been Tishri to Tishri 538/537. Therefore the last day of the exile was on the 9th of Tishri, 537 BC, one day before the 50-year Jubilee cycle began anew, on Tishri 10, 537 BC. If it can be assumed that the returning exiles used the new moon to reckon the beginning of a month, we can know the exact dates of the beginning and ending of the exile. As for the Jews using the new moon instead of the new crescent to mark the beginning of months, the pre-exilic prophet Amos states that dishonest merchants chafed while waiting for a sabbath or new moon to be past, so they could begin cheating again (Amos 8:3). Also, Ezra states that the returning Jews made various offerings, including ones on the new moon (Ezra 3:5). It is hard to imagine why the Jews would celebrate a feast on the new moon if they did not also use the new moon to mark the beginning of the month. As a matter of general interest, then, if we assume the Jews used the new moon, the exact dates of the exile run from (Julian) Tuesday, October 13, 606 BC to Tuesday, October 10, 537 BC (during the same time of day).
Examining dates of moon phases shows when Nisan could have begun in both 606 and 537 BC. From there it can be calculated when Tishri occurred in each of these years. Thus the exile could have begun as early as September 16, 606 BC. This allows a window of about 69 years and 4 weeks to accommodate an exile of 69 years less 2 days. This assumes a March 23, not April 21, beginning of Nisan in 606 BC. Egyptologists S.H. Horn and L.H. Wood in “The Fifth-Century Jewish Calendar at Elephantine”1 have estimated that the beginning of Nisan ranged from about March 26 to April 24. This is based on legal contracts among Elephantine Jews, which were double dated according to Egyptian and Babylonian months. However, these contracts are from the 5th century BC. There is no historical record of what criteria were used by the Jews of the late 7th century prior to their exile, to determine when Nisan began. Therefore what influence Babylonian calendrics exerted on the pre-exilic Jews, if any, is not known and therefore cannot be insisted upon. And so a March 23 new moon, 1st of Nisan, is certainly possible for 606 BC. But the main point here is that the historical records, both biblical and extra-biblical, do not support an exile of 70 ‘normal’ years. In fact atheists frequently point out the failure of Christian commentaries to justify a 70-year exile (e.g. Chris Sandoval, who, though he is right insofar as the exile not being 70 years, is mistaken to think the exile was either 67 or 72 years).
In short, an exile of 69 ‘normal’ years plus 2 days fits the historical records. Therefore any assertion by a biblical scholar or student of a 70 ‘normal’ year exile must account for why biblical and extra-biblical records support an exile not longer than about 69 years and 4 weeks. Furthermore, as far as I know, although the Hebrews sometimes counted any part of a day as a full day, this was not done with years. In other words, if a biblicist insists that the exile lasted long enough to barely enter its 70th ‘normal’ year, so that a few days or weeks into the 70th year could be understood to be a 70-year exile, they must also explain how such a length of exile would have served as a quid pro quo for the 70 full years the Jews failed to rest the land in its Sabbath years. The only plausible answer is that the earth’s orbital year from Creation until the 8th century BC was of 360 days. This includes that era of history when the Jews failed 70 times to Sabbath the land during the 7th year in a seven-year sabbatical cycle. This is why a period of 69 ‘normal’ years of 365.2422 days could serve as a quid pro quo for land denied its rest. For after the Assyrian Eclipse of 763 BC, 69 years was essentially equal to what 70 years had been prior to the Eclipse.
A Jewish legal contract dated Sep. 14, 437 BC. Double-dated contracts from the Jewish colony
at Elephantine establishes the range of dates when the 5th cent. Babylonians reckoned their new year.
Moving on, the only year of a command or decree to rebuild Jerusalem that fits 483 years of 360 days, i.e., the beginning of Daniel’s 69 weeks, is 444 BC. There is a lot of disagreement among Dispensationalists about whether the 69 weeks should begin in 445 or 444 BC. But the proposal of 445 BC is an impossible view. This is because it would terminate in 32 AD, a problematic year, since Nisan had to have begun no earlier than March 29. Assuming new moon reckoning, this makes the Triumphal Entry of Christ (the end of the 69 weeks) fall on April 7, 32 AD. But an April 7 date in 32 AD forces the beginning of the 69 weeks to fall on March 18, 445 BC, in a month which therefore must begin on or after the new moon which precedes that date, which is March 13. But according to Horn and Wood, March 13 is far too early to meet the parameters of when Nisan began in the 5th century BC, according to Elephantine documents (which place Nisan 1 from about March 26 to April 24). Further, if to solve this problem Nisan in 445 BC is moved one month later, this would have to assume the new moon of Nisan in 32 AD fell on April 28 at about 9:30 AM Jerusalem time, and so either the evening of April 28 or 29, either of which is too late in the year for a beginning of Nisan. And even if these latter dates were granted, it means a Nisan 14th/crucifixion of Christ on a Sunday or Monday (May 11 or 12), meaning a Nisan 16/resurrection on a Tuesday or Wednesday (May 13 or 14). Such dates are plainly too late in the year for when Nisan was reckoned in the 1st century, and would also contradict the statement in Matthew 28:1 that Christ rose on the first of the week. The 445 to 32 AD scenario is therefore not plausible.
However, a 444 BC to 33 AD proposal fits the necessary parameters. In 33 AD the new moon of Nisan occurred a little before 5 PM (Jerusalem time) on April 17. This means the night of April 17/18, or April 18 by Jewish reckoning which began about ½ hour after sunset, was the first evening of the new moon. This means the 10th of Nisan (Day of Triumphal Entry) would have been Monday, April 27th. If we subtract 173,880 days (70 years of 360 days each) from April 27th, 33 AD, we come to April 6, 444 BC, the beginning of Daniel’s 69 weeks. The beginning of Nisan, 444 BC must therefore be the new moon on or preceding this date, which is April 1. (See the 6,000 year catalog of moon phases at astropixels.com. Keep in mind that his chart assigns “0” for 1 BC, “-1” for 2 BC, and so on.) Thus the dates for the beginning of Nisan fall correctly in the scenario of 444 BC to 33 AD and thus fulfill the requirements for Daniel’s prophecy of the 69 weeks.
This leads to a further deduction. The dates of April 27, May 1, and May 3 in 33 AD are when Christ fulfilled three symbolic dates in the Old Testament. The sacrificial lamb was set apart from the flock on the 10th of Nisan, was sacrificed on the 14th of Nisan, and the 16th of Nisan marked the [Barley] Offering of First Fruits, signifying spring, or resurrection.
Moving on, time fails to explain all the details supporting (1) the year 1 AD for Herod the Great’s death (based on W.E. Filmer’s article in the Journal of Theological Studies [Oxford]), (2) how a literal reading of Christ’s simile of his burial to Jonah’s 3-day and 3-night stay in the whale actually allows for an interpretation of a 36-hour burial (based on how Gr. kai can act as “yet” in passages expressing irony, a fact the standard lexicons miss), (3) how the normal understanding of Tiberius’ ascension year and subsequent 15th year of rule results in a spring to fall 29 AD baptism of Christ, making Christ “about 30 years old” (as Luke says), (4) the non-contiguous nature of the 490 years of disobedience (490 being implied in 70 seven-year sabbatical cycles in which the Jews failed to Sabbath the land, thus necessitating a 70 year exile) over a sporadic, 650-year period of time, and what it suggests for whether God is obligated to a contiguous and unbroken timeline for the last 490 years, i.e., the “70 weeks” of Daniel’s prophecy that pertains to the Jews.
For all those who claim Herod’s death was in 4 BC, and that Tiberius’ reign should be reckoned from 13 AD instead of 15 AD because of his being co-princeps with Augustus, I remain unconvinced, because none give evidence of the breadth of material they ought, especially about the exile being a year short of what they have assumed, along with what might be the reason for it.
And so that’s how I see Daniel’s prophecy played out—the command to rebuild Jerusalem so that it would be ready for its Messiah when he came, so that he might rule from there. But then in my mind’s eye I see the Messiah moved with emotion over his people’s lost opportunity on the very day that ended the 69 weeks, as he rode into Jerusalem on (Julian) April 27, 33 AD. One of the saddest statements in the Bible is overlooked, when one of the gospels tells us that Christ, after he rode into Jerusalem, “looked about” the temple and then departed (Mk. 11:11). The leaders of the Jews should have been spiritually ready. They should have been anticipating Jesus’ sacrifice of himself (to take place later in the week) with no more malice toward him than what Abraham felt as he raised his knife against Isaac upon the altar. But it didn’t happen that way. And so Christ departed. And with him went the possibility of his rule over the nations during that era, and of his restoration of the earth and the heavens to what they had been like at Creation, and of a general improvement to the human condition that would have allowed lifespans to reach into the many hundreds of years.
Do I think these findings will persuade anyone here? Not necessarily. If I had to guess, I would say that perhaps just one person who is contributing to this thread might eventually agree to it. It is for his or her sake, if there is such a one, that I have told my story, and for any third-party readers listening in. I have never told it online to this extent before, and I appreciate your patience.
What obviously upsets me, then, as I check out this or that site on the internet, is to see deliberate attempts by skeptics or preterists et al to abrogate Daniel’s prophecy until God’s people are bereft of a great and comforting evidence for their faith. Some persons here might accuse me of needing to justify Daniel’s prophecy because of a crisis in my own faith, and that I have read into the historical record evidence that is not there. I gladly admit my dependency on the veracity of the prophecy. But I also think the evidence speaks for itself.
Endnote
1 Elephantine is a small island in the Nile.