180
T H E K I N G ' S B U S I N E S S
May, 1^39
significantly the Hebrew here reads literally "three sevens of days." Now if in chapter 9 the writer intended us to .understand that the "Seventy Sevens” are composed of days, why did he not use the .same form of expression adopted in chapter 10? The quite obvious answer is that Daniel- used the Hebrew "shabua” alone when referring to the well-known “week” of years, a cus tomary usage which every Jew would un derstand; but in chapter 10, when he speaks of the ‘.‘three weeks” of fasting, he definitely specifies them as “weeks of days " in order to distinguish them from the “weeks” of years in chapter 9. And if the “weeks” of chapter 9 were composed of days, there would have been no possible reason for changing the Hebrew form of expression in chapter 10. Therefore, by every fair and sensible rule of interpretation, the “Seventy Sevens” must be understood as years, not days which we must surreptitiously change into years to make the prophecy come out right; If These "Weeks" Are Composed of Years, What is the Length of the Year? It is quite well known that the various calendars of the nations have used years of different lengths, correcting the errors by the addition of days from time to time. Even our own year of 365 days is not exact, the shortage being a little less than one day in four years. If, therefore, the time of the Seventy Weeks is to be calculated exactly, we must know the length of the year in volved. And unless this information is sup plied by the inspired Word, the case is hopeless. But there is conclusive evidence to show that the prophetic year of Scrip ture is composed of 360 days, or twelve months of 30 days. The first argument is historical. Accord ing to the Genesis record, the Flood came on the seventeenth day of the second month (7:11), and came to an end on the seven teenth day of the seventh month (8 :4 ). This is a period of exactly five months, and fortunately the length of this period is also given in terms of days—“an hundred and fifty days” (7:24; 8 :3 ). Thus the earliest known month used in Biblical history was thirty days in length, and twelve such months would give us a 360-day year. The second argument is prophetical, and is absolutely conclusive because it is based on a measure included within the great prophecy of the Seventy Weeks under dis cussion. Daniel 9:27 mentions a period of Jewish persecution at the hands of the Coming Prince who will make a covenant with that people. Since this persecution be gins in the “midst” of the Seventieth Week, and continues to the “end” of the Week, the period is obviously three and one-half years. Daniel 7:24, 25 speaks of the same Roman Prince and the same persecution, fixing the duration as “a time and times and the dividing of time”—in the Hebrew, three and a half times. Revelation 13:4-7 speaks of the same great political ruler and his persecution of the Jewish “saints,” lasting “forty and two months.” Revelation 12: 13, 14 refers to the same persecution, stat ing the duration in the exact language of Daniel 7:25 as “a time, and times, and half
a time”; and this period is further defined in Revelation 12:6 as “a thousand two hun dred and threescore days.” Thus we have the same period of time variously stated as 3J^ years, 42 months, and 1260 days. Therefore, the length of the year in the Sev enty Weeks prophecy is fixed by Scripture itself as exactly 360 days. When Did the Whole Period of the Seventy Weeks Begin? Having found that the Seventy Weeks are “weeks” of years, and that these years are each 360 days in length, our next prob lem is to find the historical date when the whole period begins. And here we are not left in any doubt, for verse 25 of the proph ecy names a definite historical event: “Know therefore and understand, that from the g o ing forth o f the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah the Prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks." If now we can lo cate this “commandment” or decree, and fix its date accurately, we shall have the exact point from which the prophecy takes its start. This “commandment," by a large number of interpreters, has been identified with the decrees issued by Cyrus, Darius, and Arta- xerxes, recorded in the Book of Ezra. But these decrees without any exception have to do with the rebuilding of the temple, not the city. Let the student read carefully Ezra 1:1, 2; 4:1-5, 11-24; 6:1-5, 14, 15; 7:11, 20, 27, and notice that in every case the decree concerns the “house of the Lord.” But there is no authorization for the re building of the city. And it is an interesting fact that the rebuilding of the temple was stopped for a time because of accusations from Jewish enemies that the Jews were attempting without authority also to re build the city (Ezra 4:1-24). The very evident motive on the part of some inter preters to find the decree in Ezra was to get the prophecy of the Weeks started early enough to make the first “Sixty-nine” Weeks end near the birth of Christ. Other wise it is very doubtful Whether any one would ever have turned to the decrees in Ezra. But the early date is not only un necessary, but plunges the entire chronology into endless confusion and disagreement. There is only one decree in Old Testa ment history which, apart from all expedi ents of interpretation, can by any possibil ity be identified as the "commandment" re ferred to in Daniel’s prophecy. That de cree is found in the Book of Nehemiah. Let the student read carefully 1:1-4 and 2:1-8, noting several facts: First, it was a report of the ruined condition of the “wall” and “gates” of the city that aroused the deep concern of Nehemiah, Jewish “cup bearer" to King Artaxerxes. Second, after earnest prayer he dared petition the king “that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers’ sepulchres, that 1 may build it" (2:5). Third, the bold request by the grace of God succeeded, as he tells us: "And the king granted me, ac cording to the good hand of my God upon me” (2 :8 ). But most important of all, we should notice how carefully Nehemiah, writing by divine inspiration, records the 'exact date o f this decree "in the month Ni-.:
san, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king” (2 :1 ). For those who believe in Biblical inspira tion and the genuineness of predictive prophecy, it will be no surprise to learn that the date fixed by Nehemiah happens to be one of the best-known dates in an cient history. Even the latest edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, certainly not biased in favor of prophecy, sets the date of Artaxerxes’ accession as 465; and therefore his twentieth year would be 445 B.C. The month was Nisan, and since no day is given, according to Jewish custom the date would be understood as the first. Now the first of Nisan would be March 14, 445 B.C. Here we have the beginning of the Seventy Weeks. When Did the First Sixty-Nine Weeks End, and What Happened on That Pate? Having found that the Weeks are com posed of years, that the length of the pro phetic year is 360 days, and that these years begin on March 14, 445 B.C., we find that the ground is now cleared for the chrono logical computation. And for this I am in debted to the painstaking research of the late Sir Robert Anderson, the results of which are set forth in his great book The Coming Prince — a work o c c a s io n a lly sneered at by critics but never answered. In order to find the end of the Sixty- Nine Weeks, we must first reduce them to days. Since we have 69 weeks of 7 years each, and each year has 360 days, the equation is as follows: 69X 7X 360=173,- 880 days. Beginning with March 14, 445 B.C., this number of days brings us to A. D. April 6, 32. April 6, 32 A.D., therefore, is fixed as the end of the era of the first Sixty-Nine Weeks; and according to Daniel’s prophecy it should mark the very day' of Messiah’s manifestation as the "Prince" of Israel. Without attempting to enter into the clear but intricate chronological calculations set forth by Anderson in his - book, I shall simply state his conclusion that April 6, 32 A.D., was the 10th of Nisan, that momen tous day on which our Lord in fulfillment of Messianic prophecy rode upto Jerusalem on the “foal of an ass” and offered Himself 4s the “ Prince” and "Kin$" cji tsraeL t That our Lord understood perfectly the crucial nature of'His action on that day is unmistakably clear from the record in Luke f 9:28-44, a passage which should be studied carefully noting the following details: First, realizing that the day had arrived for Him to ride up to Jerusalem in fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9, He sends His disciples to procure the "colt” upon which as the "King” He must appear (vs. 30-34). Second, the whole multitude of the disciples, clearly un derstanding the meaning of His act, begin to shout a well-known quotation from a M e ssia n ic P salm (118:22-26), saying, “Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord” (vs. 37, 38). Third, whereas previously He had forbidden the disciples to make Him known as the Mes siah, now he rebukes the Pharisees’ pro test and commends the disciples’ shout, say- x......... ..„.{Continued on page 205].It
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker