Tag Archives: Daniel’s 70 Weeks

Ezra: Priest & Scribe – Part I

EzraDuring the 2nd temple period, few Old Testament characters hold a more prominent position than Ezra. The Bible identifies him as a Priest and Scribe. It is believed that he was the author of both the book of Ezra as well as Chronicles. Both of these accounts provide a vivid record of the triumphs and tragedies of the Judean captives’ efforts in rebuilding the 2nd temple and Jerusalem. After the completion of the temple in the 6th year of Darius, Ezra, who still resided in Persia, saw the need to return to Jerusalem and teach the people the law of YHWH.

Today, the chronology of Ezra is an important cornerstone for most of today’s teachings on Daniel 9, the greatest Messianic prophecy in the Bible.  Daniel 9, also known as the prophecy of “seventy weeks,” is the only prophecy in the Bible that specifically links a dateable secular event with the coming of the Messiah. Daniel 9:25 states the following:

Daniel 9:25  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,

Without the chronology of Ezra, there would be no way to determine the starting point for “the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.”  (For more on the subject see my articles The Fifth Command and The “Artaxerxes Assumption”.) Considering the importance of Ezra’s writings to our understanding of the Seventy Weeks prophecy you might assume this Old Testament chronology would be well established upon a reasonable Biblical basis. For those who have taken the time to look, you will find instead it is one of the best kept secrets of Old Testament chronology.

Do you find that hard to believe?  I encourage you to see for yourself. Choose any of today’s most respected teachers on the prophecy of Seventy Weeks and see what reasonable Biblical evidence they provide to show Ezra was a contemporary of “Artaxerxes” Longimanus. To be sure you will find their “Artaxerxes Assumption” but what you will not find is any reasonable Biblical evidence to support it.
So what does the Bible say about Ezra?

It may surprise you to learn there is substantial Biblical evidence to determine Ezra’s place in 2nd temple era chronology. Probably the best place to start is in the beginning.

Ezra 7:1 Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Ezra the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah,

Lineage of Ezra

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the verse above, it says that Ezra was the son of Seraiah. What’s fascinating about this statement is Seraiah, son of Azariah, was the last high priest of Solomon’s temple. 2 Kings 25:8-21 tells us that Seraiah was taken by Nebuzaradan to Riblah in the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar and there he was killed.


2 Kings 25:1-21 8 And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem:  9 And he burnt the house of YHWH, and the king’s house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man’s house burnt he with fire.  10 And all the army of the Chaldees, that were with the captain of the guard, brake down the walls of Jerusalem round about.  11 Now the rest of the people that were left in the city, and the fugitives that fell away to the king of Babylon, with the remnant of the multitude, did Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carry away………..18 And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the door………….  20 And Nebuzaradan captain of the guard took these, and brought them to the king of Babylon to Riblah:  21 And the king of Babylon smote them, and slew them at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So Judah was carried away out of their land.

I think most everyone would agree, it is  reasonable to assume that Ezra could not have been conceived after the death of his father, Seraiah. Let’s further assume, for the sake of argument, that Ezra was born the year his father was killed. (Not really a reasonable assumption considering the events that took place in Jerusalem but it’s the earliest he could have been born so let’s go with it) The 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar by many accounts was 584 BC.

Ezra 7:1-8  Now after these things……… This Ezra went up from Babylon;……. unto Jerusalem, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes the king.  8 And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king.

In order to establish Ezra’s place in the chronology of the 2nd Temple era all we now need to do is determine the date for the 7th year of “Artaxerxes”. If you’ve read my articles The Fifth Command and The “Artaxerxes Assumption you know that the term “Artaxerxes” is simply a title which was applied to several Persian kings. For the sake of brevity, I will not list all the possible Persian Artaxerxes, only those whose reign lasted at least 32 years as required by Nehemiah 5:14. Those Persian kings are Darius “the Great” Artaxerxes, Artaxerxes Longimanus, and Artaxerxes Memnon. With the above information, it is a simple matter to calculate Ezra’s minimum age during the reign of “Artaxerxes”. In the table below you will see the youngest Ezra could have been in the 7th year of each “Artaxerxes”. Please keep in mind that Ezra was also alive 14 year later at the dedication of the wall in Jerusalem and took an active part in those ceremonies.

Ezra 7th Year Artaxerxes

The question is simple: Which of the above Persian Kings most reasonably qualifies as a contemporary of Ezra? Keep in mind the words of king David:

 Psalm 90:9-10   9 For all our days are passed away in thy wrath: we spend our years as a tale that is told.  10 The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.

 

In my next article, Ezra the Priest and Scribe – Part II we will look at the chronology of Ezra 6 &7. What does the Bible say about the 7th year of “Artaxerxes” and who does it identify as this “Artaxerxes”? Why is this relevant to the prophecy of Seventy Weeks?

 

Book 1
Book I - Description

The 13th Enumeration
"A book that will change how you look at the Bible's Messianic Symbolism."

Book 2
Book 2 - Description

Daniel's 70 Weeks -
"A book that will forever change how you understand the Bible's greatest Messianic prophecy."

Book 3
Book 3 - Description

The Jubilee Code -
"A book that will show you real Biblical evidence for Yahweh's guiding in hand history bringing about His redemptive plan for mankind."

 

More Articles related to the prophecy of 70 Weeks and 2nd temple era chronology:
The “Artaxerxes” Assumption – The best kept secret of Old Testament chronology.
The Fifth Command – Why do prophecy teachers ignore it?
Ezra: Priest & Scribe – Part I – Defining “Artaxerxes” in the context of Ezra.
Ezra: Priest & Scribe – Part II – Ezra, Darius even “Artaxerxes”.
Nehemiah: The Governor– Nehemiah’s place in the 2nd temple chronology
Queen of Persia – Part I – Defining Esther is the context of the 2nd Temple era.
Queen of Persia – Part II – Defining Esther is the context of the 2nd Temple era.
A New Testament Cipher – The key to unlocking the prophecy of Daniel’s 70 Weeks.
Ezekiel’s 13th Month– Key to understanding Biblical “time” in the 2nd Temple era
6 milestones – Seventy Weeks – Defining the purpose of the Messiah within Daniel’s 70 “weeks”.
The Messiah Factors (Part I): Decoding 13 & 14 – Symbolism of the Messiah
The Messiah Factors (Part II): The Countdown – Proving Yeshua/Jesus is the Messiah promised in Daniel 9.

The “Artaxerxes” Assumption

220px-GodfreyKneller-IsaacNewton-1689

” Those Jews who took Herod for the Messiah, and were thence called Herodians, seem to have grounded their opinion upon the seventy weeks of years, which they found between the Reign of Cyrus and that of Herod: but afterwards, in applying the Prophesy to Theudas, and Judas of Galilee, and at length to Barchochab, they seem to have shortened the Reign of the Kingdom of Persia.”   
Anyone care to guess who made the quote above? Would you believe that one of the most famous scientists of all time penned this in the early 1700’s?  It may come as a surprise to some that Sir Isaac Newton had a great interest in the Bible and Biblical prophecy. It was in his Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, as quoted above, where he noticed the Jewish chronology was missing a couple of centuries. What’s fascinating is he traced the root of that missing chronology to an assumption made by early Jewish messianic expectants concerning the most important prophecy in the Bible.

It is worth considering the importance of that for a moment. Over two thousand years ago Jewish messianic believers made an assumption about the prophecy of 70 Weeks (found in the book of Daniel chapter 9) which led them to erase over two hundred years of history.  Ironically, Christian scholars today have made a similar mistake only instead of erasing two hundred years of chronology they have added seventy years. What is most amazing about these chronological errors is that they are both based in what could be called an “Artaxerxes Assumption.”

For over two millennia, the holy grail of messianic prophecies has been the prophecy of “70 Weeks” found in chapter 9 of the book of Daniel.  This is the only prophecy in the entire Biblical record which gives a specific datable event as a marker for the future appearance of the Messiah.  As quoted above, Isaac Newton believed the prophecy was in part responsible for over two hundred years of missing Persian chronology.  Though he was correct in tracing the missing chronology to an erroneous assumption concerning the prophecy of 70 weeks, Newton was incorrect in attributing that error to a starting point in the reign of Cyrus.

To get to the real root of the problem it is imperative to understand the prophecy within the context of the 2nd temple era of Jewish history. The starting point for the prophecy of Daniel 9 (which was the basis for each of the failed messianic claims noted by Newton) began with a “commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem”.

Daniel 9:25  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,

As explained in my article The Fifth Command there was only one “commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem” the Jewish people would have recognized.  That command was the Divine command given by YHWH, proclaimed by Haggai and Zechariah and witnessed by Ezra 6:14 (see my article The Fifth Command for further explanation).

Here is how the “Artaxerxes Assumption” enters the picture.  The Divine command “to restore and to build Jerusalem” was given in the 2nd year of Darius who was also known historically as “Artaxerxes”.  When the Asmonaeans calculated the 70 weeks of Daniel from the 2nd year of Darius it allowed them to claim that Judas Maccabaeus was the promised messiah. When he failed to usher in the Messianic kingdom, the prophecy was recycled for the next Jewish messianic figure. Since the Divine command was given in the 2nd year of Darius “Artaxerxes” the next generation of Jewish messianic expectants just shifted the prophecy to the 2nd year of another Persian Artaxerxes.   With the end of the Bar Cochab rebellion in the first part of the 2nd century the use of Daniel 9 to claim the start of the Messianic kingdom had run its course.  The Rabbinic Biblical calendar was reset and 241 years of Persian history were lost.

To this day the Rabbinic Biblical calendar still reflects this mistake.  Unfortunately, the “Artaxerxes Assumption” of the 1st centuries set in motion the chronological confusion which is still alive today. As a result of these errors, the only legitimate and contextually accurate fulfillment of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks was obscured and eventually all but forgotten.

 

Around the turn of the twentieth century, a Scotland Yard investigator named Sir Robert Anderson (of Jack the Ripper fame) wrote a book on the prophecy of Daniel 9 called The Coming Prince. In his work on this great prophecy, Anderson made his own “Artaxerxes Assumption.” This time instead of erasing the Persian chronology, Anderson stretched the Biblical chronology of Ezra and Nehemiah by 58 years in order to fulfill his interpretation of the prophecy of 70 weeks.  Today, Anderson’s interpretation is the basis for most scholars’ writings on the subject of Daniel 9. Regrettably, his good intentions were a little short on reasonable chronological evidence from the Bible.

First, Anderson ignored the contextual relevance of YHWH’s command “to restore and to build Jerusalem.”  Unlike his 1st century messianic predecessors, Anderson saw no reason to begin the prophecy with the words of YHWH.  Next, Anderson assumed the “Artaxerxes” of Nehemiah and Ezra was Artaxerxes Longimanus. Unfortunately, he did not base this assumption upon any Biblical evidence but instead upon a single unsubstantiated opinion of the Christian historian, Rawlinson, in his translation of Herodotus, vol. 4, p.217 . That quote as taken from Anderson’s The Coming Prince is as follows:

Artaxerxes I. reigned forty years, from 465 to 425. He is mentioned by Herodotus once (6. 98), by Thucydides frequently. Both writers were his contemporaries. There is every reason to believe that he was the king who sent Ezra and Nehemiah to Jerusalem, and sanctioned the restoration of the fortifications.” – RAWLINSON, Herodotus, vol. 4., p. 217.

Anderson, by all accounts, was an exceptional Biblical scholar. To be fair to Anderson, his assumption was understandable considering Ussher, Newton, Rawlinson, and Josephus were of the same general opinion concerning “Artaxerxes.”  I mean, what kind of person argues with the opinion of some of the greatest Biblical chronologists of all time? Okay, I must admit I am raising my hand timidly from the back of the room. But with all due respect to these great men, it seemed to have been a case of each thinking the other had done his homework. In this case, their messianic zeal caused them to make an assumption which is unsupported by Biblical chronology.  I appreciate the fact that they believed Ezra and Nehemiah were contemporaries of Artaxerxes Longimanus, but is that sufficient proof upon which to establish the most important prophecy in the Scripture?  Kind of hard to believe, isn’t it? I encourage you to check it out for yourself. The Coming Prince can be read at Rapture Ready, one of the most respected Bible prophecy web sites on the internet. Here is what they say about Sir Robert Anderson and The Coming Prince:

“He helped establish the fact that 69 of Daniel’s 70 weeks have now transpired, and that the tribulation will be the 70th week. Sir Robert Anderson’s book, The Coming Prince, has become a foundational resource for all dispensationalists.”

With all due respect to the good folks over at Rapture Ready how can a belief about Daniel’s 70 weeks be an established “fact” when the “foundational resource” is based upon an assumption with no reasonable basis in Biblical chronology?

In closing, I would like to encourage those of you interested in Bible prophecy to check out the Biblical chronological evidence, before you make your own unfounded “Artaxerxes Assumption.”

Book 1
Book I - Description

The 13th Enumeration
"A book that will change how you look at the Bible's Messianic Symbolism."

Book 2
Book 2 - Description

Daniel's 70 Weeks -
"A book that will forever change how you understand the Bible's greatest Messianic prophecy."

Book 3
Book 3 - Description

The Jubilee Code -
"A book that will show you real Biblical evidence for Yahweh's guiding in hand history bringing about His redemptive plan for mankind."

 

More Articles related to the prophecy of 70 Weeks and 2nd temple era chronology:
The “Artaxerxes” Assumption – The best kept secret of Old Testament chronology.
The Fifth Command – Why do prophecy teachers ignore it?
Ezra: Priest & Scribe – Part I – Defining “Artaxerxes” in the context of Ezra.
Ezra: Priest & Scribe – Part II – Ezra, Darius even “Artaxerxes”.
Nehemiah: The Governor– Nehemiah’s place in the 2nd temple chronology
Queen of Persia – Part I – Defining Esther is the context of the 2nd Temple era.
Queen of Persia – Part II – Defining Esther is the context of the 2nd Temple era.
A New Testament Cipher – The key to unlocking the prophecy of Daniel’s 70 Weeks.
Ezekiel’s 13th Month– Key to understanding Biblical “time” in the 2nd Temple era
6 milestones – Seventy Weeks – Defining the purpose of the Messiah within Daniel’s 70 “weeks”.
The Messiah Factors (Part I): Decoding 13 & 14 – Symbolism of the Messiah
The Messiah Factors (Part II): The Countdown – Proving Yeshua/Jesus is the Messiah promised in Daniel 9.