Tag Archives: LXX

The Anti-Semitic Roots of a Christian Conspiracy Theory

Did the Jewish Rabbis Alter the Bible to Hurt Christianity?

In my last article, we learned there was no smoking gun of Rabbinic manipulation of the Hebrew Old Testament texts. The best “evidence” that those who hold this Christian conspiracy theory could come up with were second hand accounts and the belief that the Jewish rabbis of the 2nd century had “motive, means, and opportunity” to change the Hebrew Masoretic (MT) text of the Old Testament in order to undermine the Christian belief that the Yeshua of Nazareth was the Old Testament’s promised Messiah.

We also learned in the last article that the Septuagint text of the Old Testament was in fact purposely changed in thousands of places. This manipulation was likely a well-meaning attempt to make it more appealing to the Greek speaking audience of its day. Kind of like a “living translation” scholars compile today in order to make the Bible more understandable to their modern readers. I don’t agree with this mentality, nevertheless, I understand the reasons one might attempt such an effort.

Since there is no hard evidence the Jewish rabbis of the 2nd century manipulated the text of the Old Testament to undermine early Christian beliefs that Yeshua (Jesus) was the Old Testament’s promised Messiah, shouldn’t we as Christian’s give them the benefit of the doubt? I believe we should

In the interest of thoroughness though, let’s look at some of the Christian conspiratorialist’s circumstantial evidence to see if there is any validity to their claims.

Let’s start with the claim that the Old Testament chronology was shortened so that Yeshua of Nazareth did not arrive at the time expected of the Messiah. Here are a couple of quotes from Mr. Woodward’s – Rebooting the Bible pp. 199-200 that explain his arguments:

 

Voices Confirming MT Corruption of the Timeline
Debating the nature of the differences between the LXX and the MT isn’t just a recent pastime of interested academics. It has been a hot topic for seventeen centuries! And scholars in the early Church arrived at the same conclusion that our study deduces: The rabbis of the first and second centuries changed the MT text in Messianic passages, but also “deflated” the Genesis 5 and 11 chronologies; Henry B. Smith Jr. informs us:

Ephraem of Syria [306-373 A. D.] is the first known ancient source to explicitly argue that the Jewish rabbis of the second century AD deflated the primeval chronology by ca. 1300 years in their Hebrew MSS for the purpose of discrediting Jesus as the Christ: “The Jews have subtracted 600 years [in Genesis 5] from the generations of Adam, Seth, etc., in order that their own books might not convict them concerning the coming of CHRIST: he having been predicted to appear for the deliverance of mankind after 5500 years.” Ephraem was one of many ancient authors who claimed that the rabbis deliberately reduced the primeval chronology for messianic reasons.224

Prophecy students are familiar with the notion that there would be a “Sabbath week” of millennia, meaning that biblical history would extend 7,000 years with the final 1,000 years being the reign of Christ –aka the Kingdom of David, or more appropriately, the Kingdom of God. Few know that this belief was widespread in Second Temple Judaism – meaning that the Messiah would appear before six thousand years had transpired. Says Smith, “Messianic chronologies were usually associated with the Days of Creation, with each day representing 1,000 years of history. In some schemes, the Messiah would arrive in the 6th millennium (5000-5999 AM), and usher in the kingdom in the 7th millennium (6000 AM).”225 Smith comments that this was done by the rabbis because “reducing the primeval chronology as presently found in the MT places Jesus’ life outside the time of the coming of the Messiah [This is, Jesus’s coming in 1 B.C., would have been too early for Jesus to qualify as Messiah].226 But Akiba had altered the dates so that Jesus of Nazareth didn’t come as the Messiah after 5,000 years!

Rebooting Early Christian Anti-Semitism
There are several problems with Mr. Woodward’s and Mr. Smith’s reasoning above.  To start with let’s address  the origins of the Christian Conspiracy Theory regarding the unproven chronological manipulations of the Hebrew Bible by Jewish Rabbis.

In the quote above it is admitted that the first known ancient source who “explicitly“ argued that Jewish rabbis purposely manipulated the Hebrew text of the Bible was the early church father Ephraem of Syria. (306-373 AD) What Mr. Woodward and Mr. Smith fail to mention is that Ephraem was a rabid anti-Semite who wrote vitriolic rants against the Jewish people in an attempt to convince his Christian followers that the customs of the Jewish people were evil.

You see, the context of Ephraem’s words take place in the fourth century when it was still popular for many Christian believers to keep the Biblical holy day of Passover. Ephraem and other church fathers believed these “Jewish” traditions were evil and the Eucharist was the proper method to remember Yeshua sacrificial atonement on our behalf.  Even though the Passover supper was in fact the symbol by which Yeshua taught his own disciples and those disciples taught their early followers to remember  Yahweh’s  redemptive plan for mankind and Yeshua’s  part in that plan, many of the church fathers reject the Passover symbolism because of it’s “Jewishness”.

So you clearly understand the mentality of Ephraem and his unsupported claims that the Jewish rabbis manipulated the Old Testament chronology of the Bible; here are a few quotes reflecting his view of the Jewish people. These quotes come from several of Ephraem’s anti-semitic hymns which can be found here: Ephraem the Syrian

“Blessed is he who rejected the People [the Jewish people] and their matza
Since their hands were defiled with precious blood!

For when the People went forth they bore
leaven of idolatry along with matza.

See how the People refresh their outward appearance
While in their heart dwells deadly poison.

For [the People] resembles the first serpent
Who deceived us by giving us deadly fruit.

Don’t take that matza, brethren,
from the People with blood-spattered hands

How much more unclean is matza,
kneaded by hands that killed the Son!

The People that did not eat pork
is a blood-stained pig.

‘I hate the Jewish dead!
I loathe their bones in Sheol.

‘If only there was a way I could get rid of their bones
from Sheol, for they make the place stink!

‘By the Holy Spirit, I’m astonished at how long I’ve dwelt
among a People who smell as rank as their way of life!

‘Onions and garlic are the heralds of their deeds —  (Numeri 11.5)
The mind of that filthy People resembles their food.’

Ephraem’s claims of Jewish manipulation of the text must be seen through his depraved  and unscriptural view of the Jewish people as reflected above. Ephraem clearly hated the Jewish people. His anti-semitic conspiracy theory about their manipulations of the Scriptures was likely rooted in this same evil.

Alison Salvesen of Jewish/Non-Jewish Relations explains the context of Ephraem’s Anti-Jewish Hymns this way:

Discussion of the sources
The first three examples of Ephraem’s anti-Jewish works are taken from a series of hymns on the Unleavened Bread, for use in the days before the festival of Easter. It is clear from Ephrem, and from other writers of the period such as St John Chrysostom in Antioch in Syria, that Christians found participation in Jewish festivals attractive, with Pesach being a great favourite. Ephrem uses the strongest possible language to deter his congregants from eating matza with their Jewish neighbours. He also uses Old Testament Scripture very selectively and out of context, to support his argument that God has rejected the Jewish Chosen People, in favour of the ‘People from the Peoples’ (i.e., Gentile Christians). Ephrem’s goal is to get local Christians to accept the superior spiritual significance of Easter over Passover, and of Eucharistic bread (as symbol of the Body of Christ) over Jewish unleavened bread. https://jnjr.div.ed.ac.uk/primary-sources/rabbinic/st-ephrem-ephrem-the-syrian-c-306-373-ce-anti-jewish-hymns/

While not all early church fathers shared the vitriolic hatred expressed by Ephraem of Syria, many did consider the Jewish people (as a race) to be hopelessly flawed, and because of this supposed deficiency  God cursed them with Torah observance and suffering. Justin Martyr, one of the earliest proponents of the Christian Conspiracy theory concerning the Rabbinic manipulations of the Hebrew text, had this to say about the Jewish people in his work: Dialogue with Trypho (a Jew). (Circa 155-170 AD)

We too, would observe your circumcision of the flesh, your Sabbath days, and in a word, all you festivals, if we were not aware of the reason why they were imposed upon you, namely, because of your sins and the hardness of heart.

 The custom of circumcising the flesh, handed down from Abraham, was given to you as a distinguishing mark, to set you off from other nations and from us Christians. The purpose of this was that you and only you might suffer the afflictions that are now justly yours; that only your land be desolated, and you cities ruined by fire, that the fruits of you land be eaten by strangers before your very eyes; that not one of you be permitted to enter your city of Jerusalem. Your circumcision of the flesh is the only mark by which you can certainly be distinguished from other men…as I stated before it was by reason of your sins and the sins of your fathers that, among other precepts, God imposed upon you the observence of the sabbath as a mark.

What is so disconcerting about the sentiments expressed above is, first of all, their lack of love as exemplified by Yeshua’s death and resurrection for the sins of ALL mankind, not just the Jewish people. We are all flawed sinners in the eyes of Yahweh. Second, the Jewish people were and are special in the eyes of Yahweh because he chose them to fulfill his covenant with Abraham, that promise that through Abraham’s seed ALL nations of the earth would be blessed. Thirdly, the apostle Paul explained that it was Yahweh’s graciousness that used the rejection of Yeshua by some of the Jewish people and their leaders, to bring the good news of the gospel to the Gentiles – in order that BOTH Jews and Gentiles might be added to the family of God.

Romans 11:7-21   7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded  8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.  9

And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:  10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. 

11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. 

12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?  13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:  14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.  15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? 

16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.  17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;  18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.  19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.  20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 

21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

Grafted into the Olive Tree
As Gentiles grafted into the same source as the Jewish people, we should not get caught up in the reckless accusations of some of the early church fathers who saw the Jewish people as a hopelessly cursed race. Quite the contrary, the Jewish people as a race are indeed special in the eyes of Yahweh and they are and will continue to be a central fixture in Yahweh’s redemptive plan for mankind.

In fact, those of you who like me earnestly look for the return of Yeshua, it would behoove us to remember that Yeshua will not return again until the Jewish People as a nation say, “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord [Yahweh].”

I ask you then, what part are you playing in Yahweh’s plan to restore the Jewish people to favor in His sight? Are your words and actions helping or hindering the Jewish people in their understanding of the good news of Yeshua, the Jewish Messiah?  Making unfounded and slanderous accusations against the Jewish people, certainly does not further their understanding of Yahweh’s redemptive plan for mankind through Yeshua – their JEWISH Messiah.

Luke 13:34-35   34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!  35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

For those who would like to better understand the anti-Semitism of the early church fathers I encourage you to read Dr. David Reagan’s excellent article entitled:  Anti-Semitism: Its Roots and Perseverance.

A Chronological Conspiracy
Okay, so we’ve explored the antisemitic roots of the Christian Conspiracy Theory concerning the supposed Rabbinic manipulations of the Hebrew Bible. While the early church father’s anti-Semitic bias clearly contributed to their view of their unreliability of the Hebrew text of the Scripture, what about the facts of the case? Is their validity to the claims made above by Mr. Woodward and Mr. Smith that the MT Hebrew text of the Scripture was maliciously modified in order to hide the fact that Yeshua was the Bible’s promised Messiah?

Let’s do some chronological forensics to see if this Christian chronological conspiracy theory has any truth to it even though it was originally built upon an evil foundation of anti-Semitism. Might there be some truth to it, nevertheless?

Let’s look once more at Mr. Woodward’s and Mr. Smith’s claims regarding the chronological conspiracy of the Jewish Rabbis:

Prophecy students are familiar with the notion that there would be a “Sabbath week” of millennia, meaning that biblical history would extend 7,000 years with the final 1,000 years being the reign of Christ –aka the Kingdom of David, or more appropriately, the Kingdom of God. Few know that this belief was widespread in Second Temple Judaism – meaning that the Messiah would appear before six thousand years had transpired. Says Smith, “Messianic chronologies were usually associated with the Days of Creation, with each day representing 1,000 years of history. In some schemes, the Messiah would arrive in the 6th millennium (5000-5999 AM), and usher in the kingdom in the 7th millennium (6000 AM).”225 Smith comments that this was done by the rabbis because “reducing the primeval chronology as presently found in the MT places Jesus’ life outside the time of the coming of the Messiah [This is, Jesus’s coming in 1 B.C., would have been too early for Jesus to qualify as Messiah].226 But Akiba had altered the dates so that Jesus of Nazareth didn’t come as the Messiah after 5,000 years! (Woodward – Rebooting the Bible pp. 199-200)

Misunderstandings and Misrepresentations
There are a couple of problems with Mr. Woodward’s & Mr. Smith’s representation of the early church’s belief in the 6 days (6000 years labor) – 1 day (1000 year rest) symbolism. First of all what we agree upon: Many of the early church fathers did indeed see Biblical history in terms of a 7000 year plan of God. Like Yahweh’s pattern at creation they saw the six days of Yahweh’s labor as 6000 years of mankind’s labor under the curse of sin, followed by a Sabbath rest of 1000 years where Yeshua literally ruled from the throne of David during the millennium. While there is clearly Biblical support for a 1000 year reign of Christ, Yeshua’s coming – during – the 6th millennium is nowhere clearly stated in the Bible.

Pre-Millenniallism and the Church Fathers
For more information on the Pre-Millennialism of the early church I’d encourage you to read Bob DeWaay’s  article Pre-Millennialism and the Early Church Fathers. The article shows that Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Papias, Tertullian, Commodianus, Lactantius and Hippolytus of Rome all held some version of (7th day) millennialism (not 6th day).

As many before me have said, in many ways, Yeshua’s first coming could be seen as a secret mission. He came at His 1st coming to restore Israel’s and mankind’s spiritual fortunes and it is at His 2nd coming that the more physical manifestations of that redemptive plan will be revealed – to include Yeshua physical rule over the nations, a rule in which the nation of Israel will have an honored place.

But let’s get back to the conspiracy theory. To be clear, the invented accusation that because the Jewish Hebrew text of the Scripture placed Yeshua’s first coming in the 4th millennium instead of the LLX’s version of the chronology which places the first coming of Yeshua in the middle of the 6th millennium somehow constitutes proof of a Rabbinic manipulation is exaggerating the evidence to say the least.

Here take a look at the chronology of the Septuagint organized within the early church’s view of the 7000 year plan of Yahweh.

Click on image to enlarge

Good and Bad News
First of all the bad news: According to the early church fathers’ view of Biblical history based upon the Septuagint (chart above), you and I have officially missed the millennial reign of Christ. The Good news is that we are now living in the age of the new heaven and earth and the New Jerusalem. Of course you must spiritualize much of what the Bible says about the coming messianic age to claim this age is in any way a fulfillment of what the Bible promises.

Missing the Millennium
The above chart gives one an insight into understanding  why from the 4th century onwards the literalist or chiliast (millennial) view of Biblical history of the early church was rejected in favor of a spiritualized (kingdom now) version of history.

The church based in part upon their rejection of everything Jewish, and their acceptance of the Septuagint’s chronology of Biblical history, saw that the Yeshua had not literally returned to reign from Jerusalem.  Those who held to the Septuagint version of chronology and the 6000/1000 view of Biblical history sought an alternative version of history to explain their failed eschatology.

Definition: Chiliasm
The belief that Christ will return to earth in visible form and establish a kingdom to last 1000 years. Also called millenarianism. — chiliast, n. — chiliastic, adj.

In the above chart note especially Ephraem of Syria’s chronological place in all of this. He, the first church father to specifically claim (according to Smith) that the Jewish Rabbis had manipulated the chronology of the Hebrew Bible to hide the messianic nature of Yeshua of Nazareth, himself made these claims when he stood at what his generation considered the very threshold of the millennium. Prejudiced by his hatred of the Jewish people, he might well have assumed that the Jewish version (MT) of the Scriptures was purposely concealing the soon return and reign of Christ.

Spiritualizing the Bible
Looking back  we might explain the failed eschatological (chiliast) expectations of the early church fathers and their subsequent shift away from a literalist eschatological interpretation of Scripture to a more spiritualized view in a couple of different ways.

  1. The early church fathers’ chiliast expectations (6000/1000) view of history was flawed since the Messiah didn’t come.
  2. The Septuagint chronology of the Bible was inflated and it was not yet the end of the 6th millennium from Adam. In other words the early church fathers trust in the LXX was flawed and because of their anti-Semitic bias they were blinded to this possibility that the MT text of the Bible might have been correct.

 The Rabbi’s Predicted the Coming of Yeshua
Here is the real irony of this whole convoluted conspiracy theory. If the early church fathers hadn’t summarily rejected everything “Jewish” they might have realized that their conspiracy about the early Jewish manipulations of the Old Testament chronology were simply not accurate.

The fact of the matter is that Yeshua came precisely when the Rabbis believed the messianic age would begin. You see, like the early church fathers, many of the Jewish people believed in a 6 day (6000 yrs.) 1 day (millennial reign) view of Biblical history. The Jewish rabbis divided the 6000 years into three periods of time. The first 2000 years they called the Age of Chaos, the 2nd 2000 years the Age of Law/Instructions, and the 3rd 2000 years the Age of / Days of the Messiah.

Compiled in roughly 500 AD the Babylonian Talmud explained the Rabbinic Jewish view of Biblical history in the following way:

There is a Boraitha in accordance with R. Ktina: As in the Sabbatic period, the seventh year is a release, so will it be with the whole world that one thousand years after six will be a release, as above cited verse [Isa. xii. i] and [Ps. xcii. 11]: “A Psalm or song for the Sabbath day,” which means the day which will be all Sabbath. And as [ibid. xc. 4]: “For a thousand years are in thy eyes but as the yesterday when it is passed.”

The disciples of Elijah taught: The world will continue for six thousand years, the first two thousand of which were a chaos (Tahu), the second two thousand were of wisdom, and the third two thousand are the days of the Messiah, and because of our sins many, many years of these have elapsed, and still he has not come.

Elijah said to R. Jehudah, the brother of R. Sala the Pious: The world will continue for no less than eighty-five jubilaic periods, and in the last jubilaic period ben David will come. (anonymous. The Babylonian Talmud (Annotated) (p. 317). Unknown. Kindle Edition.)

Take a look at the following chart. According to the Hebrew MT text of the Bible Yeshua’s first coming took place at precisely the beginning of what the Jewish rabbis believed to be the start of the Messianic age. From a Jewish rabbinic point of view any time during those 2000 years would have been time to expect the Messiah. That Yeshua came at the very beginning of this messianic period and many signs point to Yeshua soon return, the significance of this view should not be ignored.

Click on Image to Enlarge

You might be wondering, by what kind of logic could the early church fathers have claimed this was a manipulation meant to hide the messianic identity of Yeshua?

The only thing that makes sense to me is that Christian Conspiracy Theory of the early church fathers was so firmly rooted in their anti-Semitic view of the Jewish People that they were blinded to the truth and simply believed what seemed (at the time) to confirm their chronological (and eschatological) world view as given in the LXX version of the Bible.

While it is clear that the early church fathers were wrong about their unfounded claims that the Jewish rabbis manipulated the Hebrew MT chronology of the Bible to undermine Yeshua of Nazareth’s credibility as the promise Messiah. What is not so clear is whether the Septuagint version of chronology was inaccurate or the early church fathers’ view of a 7000 year plan of God was in error.

In my final article in this series (Yahweh willing), I will make a case for why I believe the chronology of the MT text of the Scripture is accurate in its projection of Biblical hisotry. I will also provide evidence to show that this version of the Old Testament chronology was known to the early New Testament church. Specifically, I will show that Matthew’s arrangement of Yeshua’s generations only makes sense if seen within the context of the chronology as given in the MT text of the Bible.

The “Dirty” Reason for Believing the Septuagint
Please forgive my pun, but in exploring the modern resurrection of this Christian Conspiracy Theory regarding the Jewish manipulations of the Old Testament chronology, it became apparent to me that unlike the anti-Semitic roots of the past, the modern necessity for believing the LXX chronology had a more “scientific” albeit dirty reason.

I’ll let Mr. Woodward explain:

“Since the chronology also contributes to the case for Jesus Christ (as we will demonstrate later), the timeline was altered too – and dramatically so. The unintended consequences for Jews and Christians were not that significant. But over the last 200 years, during our modern era, this corrupted chronology has become a big problem. It became so since the science of Archeology started unearthing artifacts contradicting the dates supplied by the Masoretic Text.” (Woodward, S. Douglas, Rebooting the Bible – Introduction p. 14)

In our quest to know how God spoke through the Biblical authors, the LXX demands our highest respect and a good portion of our study. To discover the truth about the creation, the birth of humanity, the Great Flood, the Exodus, and so on, we must “reboot the Bible.” Many of the findings of Archeology can now much better be squared with God’s truth.” (Woodward, S. Douglas, Rebooting the Bible – The Creation of the Alexandrian Septuagint p. 63)

If you read the above closely you see the real driving reason behind Rebooting an ancient Christian Conspiracy Theory is to better align Biblical history with the consensus of modern archeology and the resulting history derived from it study.

Based upon the evidence that Mr. Woodward and other well meaning scholars like Mr. Smith have provided, I find little reason to believe in their conspiracy theory regarding the Jewish manipulations of the MT text of the Bible. Even if the facts and evidence are given an equal weighing against assumptions about motive, means, and opportunity, I beleive the scale tips decidedly in favor of the MT and the “Jewish” version of Old Testament history.

Maranatha!

This is a multi part article exploring the Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis
Part I: Rebooting a Christian Conspiracy Theory
Part II: The Anti-Semitic Roots of a Christian Conspiracy Theory

For an expanded version of this subject please see my articles:
Part I: The Septuagint, the Masoretic Text, & Matthew 1
Part II: Matthew 1, the Masoretic Text, & the Bible’s Messianic Symbolism
Part III: The Masoretic Text, Matthew 1, & the Jubilee
Part IV: Sir Isaac Newton, Daniel 9, & the Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis

 

Sir Isaac Newton, Daniel 9, & the Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis

Did you know that Sir Isaac Newton wrote more about Biblical history and Bible prophecy then he did science? While he contributed greatly to science, I would argue that one of his greatest contributions to the field of Biblical history and Bible prophecy was his following observation:

” 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.” (page 357, Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended)

In this article I hope to also show you why this often ignored statement is a key to understanding the chronology of the Persian era as it relates to the Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis. But more importantly this statement provides us a rare insight into the incredible influence Daniel 9 and the Seventy Weeks prophecy has had on Messianic expectancy and Bible chronology of the past and why its unique influence has continued to this very day.

Adding further intrigue to Newton’s statement above is the little known fact that it exposes the root of a chronological error that many of the Jewish messianic expectants of the 1st centuries BC/AD embedded into their interpretation of Daniel 9. Surprisingly, this error has been borrowed by most of today’s Christian eschatological scholars in a well-meaning effort to prove that Yeshua (Jesus) is the Messiah prophesied by the 70 Sevens prophecy of Daniel 9. As you’ll see this error has profound implications for the vast majority of today’s eschatological world views.

Authors Note:
This article is Part III in my exploration of Rabbinic forgery hypothesis. The following links will take you to the previous articles in this series.
Part I: The Septuagint, the Masoretic Text, & Matthew 1
Part II: Matthew 1, the Masoretic Text, & the Bible’s Messianic Symbolism
Part III: The Masoretic Text, Matthew 1, & the Jubilee
Part IV: Sir Isaac Newton, Daniel 9, & the Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis

Eclipsing the Persian Era
So what did Newton mean when he stated that Messianic expectancy based in the Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9 “seem” to have shortened the “Reign of the Kingdom of Persia”?

Unfortunately, Newton didn’t provide any direct evidence to explain why it “seems” to him that the Persian era had been shortened by the Jewish Messianic expectants. What’s implied by Newton’s statement, however, is that he believed the Jewish Messianic expectants used the decree of Cyrus (which allowed the Jewish people to rebuild the temple and Jerusalem) as a basis to claim that Herod was a fulfillment of the 70 Weeks of Daniel 9. When the Messianic kingdom (under Herod) failed to materialize, the Jewish Messianic expectants applied the prophecy to Theudas, then Judas of Galilee, and finally Barchochab. Thus by some unexplained means Newton surmised the Jewish rabbis had shortened the chronology of Persia.

Click on Image to Enlarge or for a high resolution PDF click here: PDF

Though Newton’s intuition was amazingly prescient, he provided no mechanism by which he could show how the Jewish people might have used Cyrus’ decree as a means to shorten the Persian period. It wasn’t until the early 1900s that Davidson and Aldersmith1 further illuminated Newton’s insights into a workable theory that could be proven with some clever chronological forensics.

What Davidson and Aldersmith found was that no matter what type of year used; lunar, solar, or prophetic (360 day), there was no reasonable way the Herodians could have used the decree of Cyrus to claim that Herod was the messiah of Daniel 9. To confirm Davidson and Aldersmith’s position, in the chart below, I’ve calculated each of the possible “years” the first century’s Jewish Messianic expectants might have used to claim Herod as the messiah. As you can see none of them provide a means to claim Herod as their messiah.

The following chart includes a “prophetic” (360 day) “year”, a solar (365.24 day) year and varying lunar cycle “years”. Keep in mind here that the Biblical year the Jewish people were familiar with was lunar/solar and varied between 12 & 13 lunar cycles. Please note that since there is some disagreement as to the BC date of Cyrus’ reign (some claim 538 BC and others 536 BC) I’ve provided calculations using both.

Click on Image to Enlarge or for a high resolution PDF click here: PDF

As you can see from the above chart, while Newton was on the right trail regarding the shortened Persian period attributed to the messianic expectations of the Jewish people, it was not the decree of Cyrus that was the basis for their messianic expectancy, but rather a decree given in 2nd year of Darius.

Davidson and Aldersmith explained Newton’s error this way:

“Thus Sir Isaac Newton (‘ Chronology of Ancient. Kingdoms Amended,” p. 357) states correctly, regarding the manipulations of the Jews, but incorrectly regarding the 1st year of Cyrus as the basis of these manipulations” (Davidson & Aldersmith, The Great Pyramid: It’s Divine Messiah – Table XXVIII)

What Davidson & Aldersmith discovered was that a decree in the 2nd year of Darius (Hystaspes) also known as Darius ‘the great’ Artaxerxes, did indeed provided a basis for the Herodians to claim that Herod was the expect messiah. Not only did this decree in the 2nd year of Darius provide the Herodians a basis to claim that Herod was the Messiah, but when Herod failed to usher in the messianic kingdom, the Jewish Messianic expectants found in this decree, the means to apply it to the 2nd year of the next Persian king and thus claim a new messianic hero as the expected Messiah. In fact, as the chart above demonstrates the 2nd year of Darius provided a basis for all the Jewish messianic claims of the 1st centuries BC/AD. That basis found its origins in the following statement from the book of Ezra:

And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it, according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the commandment of Cyrus, and Darius, and [even] Artaxerxes king of Persia. (Ezra 6:14)

If you read the entire context of Ezra chapter 6 you’ll find that verse 14 is a statement which provided the Jewish people with a rock solid starting point from which to build their messianic claims. That starting point originated from Yahweh Himself when He gave a divine decree to restore and build Jerusalem. This decree had further weight because it was given through and confirmed by the – two – prophetic proclamations of Haggai and Zechariah.

Click on Image to Enlarge or for a high resolution PDF click here: PDF
This divine “commandment” (Hebrew dabar) was given by Yahweh through Haggai and Zechariah in the 2nd year of Darius(See Ezra 6, Hag. 1 & Zech. 1). Because this divine command was given in the 2nd year of a Persian king named Darius, the Jewish Messianic expectants of the 1st centuries BC/AD, found in this 2nd year a basis for their calculations to prove their heroes were the expected messiah. As we’ll see this 2nd year of Darius became the origin of all the 2nd temple chronological confusion which has plagued Bible chronologists and eschatologists (both Jewish & Christian) to this very day.

A Divine Word to Restore and Build
Before expanding upon the chronological errors resulting from the Jewish application of the 2nd year of Darius as a basis for their messianic fulfillment attempts, we really need to understand the context of Ezra 6:14 and the “commandment” Ezra describes as given by the “God of Israel”.

Did you know that in Daniel 9:25 the word translated “commandment” is the Hebrew word dabar? Interestingly, dabar simply means – “word”. According to my concordance, dabar is used 1439 times in the Bible. Of those occurrences, the vast majority refer to the “word of Yahweh”. That bears repeating, the vast majority of the time dabar (word) is used in the Bible refers to something spoken by Yahweh, the living God of the Bible.

Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment [commandment = dabar = word] to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks,… (Daniel 9:25a)

It is only reasonable to consider that to the 1st century Jewish Messianic expectants, it is likely that their first and natural choice would have been to assume that the “word” (dabar) of Daniel 9:25 was the word of Yahweh. What baffles me is that today most Christian scholars go to such great lengths to “prove” a decree of Cyrus, Darius, or Artaxerxes, but you hardly ever hear about the commandment or “word” of Yahweh.

This blindness is even more unexplainable when you consider that in Daniel 9 dabar is used not just once (in Daniel 9:25) but three other times in the preceding verses. Each of those other occurrences refers clearly to the dabar or word of Yahweh. Here take a look for yourself:

Daniel 9:2 – In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word [dabar] of YHWH came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.

Daniel 9:12 – And he [YHWH] hath confirmed his words [dabar], which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem.

Daniel 9:23 – At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment [word / dabar] came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.

Daniel 9:25 – Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment [word / dabar] to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks,

Can you explain to me why nearly all Christian scholars today completely ignore this context when ascertaining who gave the “word” to restore and build Jerusalem? Why is it not even mentioned?

This blindness aside, as you can see from the above verses, there is in fact real hard contextual evidence, to consider that Daniel 9:25 might have been a divine “word” to restore and build Jerusalem. Here are the two contextual examples of Yahweh’s divine word to restore and build Jerusalem as described in Ezra 6:14. Both were given in the 2nd year of Darius:

In the second year of Darius the king, in the sixth month, in the first day of the month, came the word [dabar] of YHWH by Haggai the prophet …

This people say, The time is not come, the time that YHWH’s house should be built. Then came the word [dabar] of YHWH by Haggai the prophet, saying, Is it time for you, O ye, to dwell in your cieled houses, and this house lie waste?…

Thus saith YHWH of hosts; Consider your ways. Go up to the mountain, and bring wood, and build the house; and I will take pleasure in it, and I will be glorified, saith YHWH. (Haggai 1:1-8 exerpted)

Upon the four and twentieth day of the eleventh month, which is the month Sebat, in the second year of Darius, came the word [dabar] of YHWH unto Zechariah….

Then the angel of YHWH answered and said, O YHWH of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?…[70 years from the departure of the shekinah from the 1st temple, i.e. 589 – 520 BC ]

And YHWH answered the angel that talked with me with good words and comfortable words. So the angel that communed with me said unto me, Cry thou, saying, Thus saith YHWH of hosts; I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy. And I am very sore displeased with the heathen that are at ease: for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction.

Therefore thus saith YHWH; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: my house shall be built in it, saith YHWH of hosts, and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem. (Zechariah 1:7-16 exerpted)

And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it, according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the commandment of Cyrus, and Darius, and [even] Artaxerxes king of Persia. (Ezra 6:14)

So with this in mind, we now have a better understanding of why the Jewish Messianic expectants of the first centuries BC/AD would have seen in Daniel 9:25 a divine decree to restore and build Jerusalem. Further, since both Haggai and Zechariah witnessed this decree as originating in the 2nd year of Darius (‘the great’ Artaxerxes) then naturally the Jewish Messianic expectants would have used this 2nd year of Darius (520 BC) as their basis to calculate the fulfillment of 70 “Weeks” in their messianic heroes. Keep in mind here that this date (520 BC) also marked the end of 70 years of divine anger mentioned in Zechariah 1 as well as the 71st jubilee cycle from Adam as we explored in my last article: The Masoretic Text, Matthew 1, & the Jubilee

Building Jerusalem
I’m sure some of you are thinking, okay I get that, but this still doesn’t really explain the mechanics of how or why the Jewish Messianic expectants justified applying this 2nd year basis to other Persian kings and thus “eclipsing” the Persian period nor does it really explain the resulting chronological confusion which resulted in this shortening of the Persian era. That explanation is found in a further examination of Ezra 6:14 and a related bit of intriguing Hebrew grammar.

You see at the center of the Jewish people’s efforts to “restore” Jerusalem was their effort to rebuild Yahweh’s desolate sanctuary. Building the temple in the eyes of the Jewish people was restoring Jerusalem. Try to put yourself in 2nd temple era context. What made Jerusalem different from any other city in the history of mankind? It was different, because it is the one place where Yahweh choose to meet with mankind.

You know, I find our obtuseness about this mind boggling. When we look for the “commandment to restore and build Jerusalem” of Daniel 9:25 most scholars will tell you it was the walls, the plaza, or even the houses of Jerusalem that signified the building of Jerusalem.

Why?

We don’t get that assumption from Daniel 9:25. So why the insistence upon the walls or plaza of Jerusalem as the starting point of the Jewish people’s efforts to rebuilt Jerusalem. Is Jerusalem as special city because of its impressive walls? Its dwellings?

No, Jerusalem was unique because it was the temporary dwelling place of Yahweh. Even the enemies of the Jewish people understood this.

I encourage you to read Ezra 4 carefully. You’ll find that when the enemies of the Jewish people approached the king of Persia about the Jewish building efforts they claimed it was the walls and fortifications they were concerned about. But notice when they received their cease and desist from the king it was the temple construction which they halted.

Be it known unto the king, that the Jews which came up from thee to us are come unto Jerusalem, building the rebellious and the bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and joined the foundations. Be it known now unto the king, that, if this city be builded, and the walls set up again, then will they not pay toll, tribute, and custom, and so thou shalt endamage the revenue of the kings…

Then sent the king an answer unto Rehum the chancellor, and to Shimshai the scribe, and to the rest of their companions that dwell in Samaria,..

Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me…

Now when the copy of king Artaxerxes’ letter was read before Rehum, and Shimshai the scribe, and their companions, they went up in haste to Jerusalem unto the Jews, and made them to cease by force and power.

Then ceased the work of the house of God which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia. (Ezra 4:12-24 exerpted)

As you can see from the above account building the temple was in fact building Jerusalem.
Another example comes from the context of Daniel 9. When Daniel poured out his heart to Yahweh in prayer and supplication regarding his people and the city of Jerusalem (Dan. 9:1-22), what was the focus of his pleadings? From Daniel’s point of view what was restoring Jerusalem?

In Daniel’s mind was restoring Jerusalem about the wall? We can’t separate Daniel 9:25 from the context of Daniel’s prayer. And yet, that is what nearly every scholar today must do in order to find a secular decree to restore and build Jerusalem and its walls.

Here are Daniel’s pleadings to Yahweh, notice his focus:

O Lord, according to all thy righteousness, I beseech thee, let thine anger and thy fury be turned away from thy city Jerusalem, thy holy mountain: because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and thy people are become a reproach to all that are about us.

Now therefore, O our God, hear the prayer of thy servant, and his supplications, and cause thy face to shine upon thy sanctuary that is desolate, for the Lord’s sake. (Daniel 9:16-17)

Darius  and even Artaxerxes
This brings us back to Ezra 6:14-15 and the restoration of the temple. It was this “building” effort that was considered by all parties, (the enemies of the Jews, Daniel, Ezra, and Yahweh) the de facto event in restoring or building Jerusalem. As Ezra 6:14-15 summarizes, it was, an order of importance, the “commandment” of Yahweh, Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes that brought to completion the restoration of the temple by the 6th year of Darius. Just as the destruction of Solomon’s temple marked the desolation of Jerusalem so too the rebuilding of the 2nd temple marked Jerusalem’s restoration. The temple of Yahweh was the beating heart of Jerusalem.

I can’t stress enough how important this context is, because this is where most of today’s reasonably minded scholars break nearly all well established rules of exegesis. The most reasonable reading of Ezra chapters 1-6 clearly delineates the chronology of the temple construction as being completed by the 6th year of Darius (‘the great’ Artaxerxes). Here take a look once more:

And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it, according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the commandment of Cyrus, and Darius, and [even] Artaxerxes king of Persia.

And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king. (Ezra 6:14-15)

Because of the way this verse has been translated, when you and I read the above account in English we assume that there were four individuals who gave a “commandment” to restore and build the temple. But in Hebrew this is just one of two different ways to understand the verse.

A Jewish person, who understood the context of Ezra chapters 1-6 and understood Hebrew grammar would have more than likely (as their historical messianic attempts demonstrate) understood that “Artaxerxes” did not refer to another Persian ruler but rather referred to Darius as an “Artaxerxes”.

Again the context:

A careful reading of Ezra chapters 1-6 makes it clear, that only Yahweh, Cyrus, and Darius gave “commandments” which resulted in the completion of the temple by the 6th year of Darius. The Bible simply does not tell of another “Artaxerxes” responsible for the completion of the temple by the 6th year of Darius. No such person exits!

This is where Hebrew grammar explains the confusion. In Hebrew, the letter “waw’ is normally used as a conjunction. But sometimes, as any Hebrew lexicon will tell you, “waw” is also used as a hendiadys or in other words, instead of connecting two words with two different meanings, it is used to connect two words with the same meaning. The TWOT Hebrew lexicon explains it this way:

519.0 – w (wa) . . . and, so, then, when, now, or, but, that and many others.
(ASV and RSV similar.) The vocalization varies.

This is an inseparable prefix which is used as a conjunction or introductory particle which can usually be translated “and.”

The fundamental use of the prefix is that of a simple conjunction “and,” connecting words (“days and years,” Gen. 1:14), phrases (“and to divide” Gen. 1:18) and complete sentences (connecting Gen. 2:11 with verse 12). However it is used more often and for a greater variety of construction than is the English connector “and.”

It is often used at the beginning of sentences, for which reason the KJV begins many sentences with an unexplained “and.” This use may be explained as a mild introductory particle and is often translated “now” as in Exo 1:1 where it begins the book (KJV, ASV; the RSV ignores it completely; cf. Gen 3:1; Gen 4:1).

The item following the prefix is not always an additional item, different from that which preceded: “Judah and Jerusalem” (Isa. 1:1), pointing out Jerusalem especially as an important and representative part of Judah; “in Ramah, and his own city” (1 Sam 28:3), the two being the same place, hence the translation “even” as explanatory.

When the second word specifies the first the construction is called a “hendiadys,” i.e., two words with one meaning. For example, “a tent and dwelling” in 2 Sam 7:6 means “a dwelling tent.” (TWOT 519.0, emphasis mine)

So in Ezra 6:14 when the passage refers to Darius and Artaxerxes, the only reasonable contextual explanation demands that we translate the passage as “Darius and even Artaxerxes.” In other words Ezra 6:14 was not telling of a fourth Persian king who gave a “commandment” to restore and build Jerusalem, it was simply informing us of the fact that the Persian king named “Darius” was also known by the title “Artaxerxes”. As I explained in my article Context, Chronology, and Daniel 9, this additional title can be explained with reasonable historical facts related to Darius’ rise to power in Persia. This straight forward contextual chronology also explains why Ezra 6 ends in the 6th year of Darius “even” Artaxerxes and Ezra 7 picks the story back up in the 7th year of Artaxerxes (a.k.a Darius)

Necessity – the Mother of Invention
This then brings new light to the chronological confusion of the Persian era and has direct bearing on the Jewish forgeries hypothesis. As stated before, the Jewish Messianic expectants of the first centuries BC/AD were certainly justified in believing that there was a divine “commandment” (word) to restore and build Jerusalem given in the 2nd year of Darius ‘the great’ Artaxerxes. This divine command was further strengthened by the fact that it was given through two different prophets in the same year. (the 2nd year of Darius – see Hag. 1 & Zech. 1)
The statement of Ezra 6:14 that equated Darius with Artaxerxes then became the chronological basis to “eclipse” the Persian era.

As Davidson and Aldersmith showed, (and my chart calculations above reflect) using the 2nd year of Darius as a basis, Jewish Messianic expectants had a mathematical means to claimed the Maccabaes fulfilled the 70 “weeks” of Daniel 9. When Maccabaen fulfillment didn’t usher in the messianic age then the prophecy was recycled and applied to Asmonaeans, then the Herodeans, and on down the line. Each time the prophecy was recycled it still had as its basis the implied “divine commandment” to restore and build Jerusalem in the 2nd year of Darius. (The only real “commandment” choice in the eyes of the Jewish people) But since Ezra 6:14 equated Darius with Artaxerxes this allowed the Messianic expectants to shift the prophecy to successive Darius and Artaxerxes of the Persian era, each time clipping a bit of history from the Persian era. Thus the original divine decree in 520 BC became a divine decree given in 463 BC, then 422 BC, then 403 BC, etc, etc.  Messianic necessity became the mother of chronological invention.

Click on image to enlarge or to view a high resolution PDF click here: PDF

Thus the divine “command” in the 2nd year of Darius, and the Biblical statement that Darius was also kwon as Artaxerxes became the vehicle by which the Jewish people gradually erased much of the Persian era. To give you a better sense of this chronology, below is a chart based upon Aldersmith and Davidson’s original. I’ve modified the first chart to include the BC dating and added color for clarification. Davidson and Aldersmith’s dating is based upon what they termed A.K. (anno Kalendri) which began with first year of Adam as described in the Masoretic text.

The second chart I’ve provided shows the same basic chronology only expanded and from a slightly different perspective. The charts are quite large so I recommend you click on the image to get a larger resolution chart or download the PDF. I’ve also provided my Excel workbook with notes and calculations (at the end of this article) for those of you who are really serious about digging into this subject and verifying my work.

As you explore these charts take note of a few things.

• First, notice how profoundly influential Daniel 9 and the 70 “Weeks” have been to the    Messianic identity of the Jewish people.
• Second, notice (I will expand on this later) how Daniel 9 and the failed messianic applications of this prophecy provide unique evidence for the existence of the shorter Hebrew chronology based in the Masoretic text.
• Third, notice how each successive Persian Darius or “Artaxerxes” became the catalyst to shorten the Persian period.

Click on image to enlarge or for higher resolution PDF click here: PDF

Click on image to enlarge or for higher resolution PDF click here: PDF

Unproven Accusations
For those of you who have taken a bit of time to study the charts, you can see in the chronological forensics described above a reasonable explanation of why the Jewish people eclipsed the Persian period. To be sure Rabbinic scholars have had no great motivation to correct their errors, especially in light of the adversarial relationship Jews and Christians have showed towards each other over the centuries, but no longer can we claim with certainty that the rabbis forged Persian history to obfuscate the identity of Yeshua as the promised Messiah. Frankly, it’s much more complicated and likely less nefarious than that.

Further, those well-meaning scholars like Jeremy Sexton and Henry Smith who use evidence of this erroneous Rabbinic chronology of the Persian era as a means to give credence to their Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis of the OT Masoretic text, I’d encourage to take a step back and reevaluate any related assumptions.

An Artaxerxes Assumption
More importantly though, I call out my Christian peers who in self-righteous indignation point to the chronological errors of the Jewish rabbis, claiming they were intentionally used to discredit Yeshua (Jesus) as the promised Messiah, but themselves borrow the very same chronological errors to prove their own Messianic expectations about Yeshua.

Think about the irony of the situation. Most of today’s respected eschatological teachers, historians, and scholars claim that “commandment to restore and build Jerusalem” of Daniel 9:25 was given by Artaxerxes Longimanus in his 7th or 21st year (i.e.. 458 or 445 BC respectively) Yet, as you’ve seen described in this article the very basis for those claims come from the evolution of the Jewish chronology, (which said chronology erroneously manipulated the Biblical statement of Ezra 6:14 that Darius “even” Artaxerxes was the Persian ruler during whose reign when the divine decree was given) so that they (the Jewish people) could claim their own Messianic heroes were the promised Messiah.

Not only do most Christian scholars today follow in the erroneous footsteps of their Jewish predecessors (by claiming that the “Artaxerxes” of Ezra 6 & 7 is Longimanus) but they compound this error by jettisoning the original kernel of truth that provided the basis for the entire complicated mess in the first place. That original kernel of truth being the certain knowledge that Daniel 9 and 70 “weeks” prophecy began with a divine command to restore and build Jerusalem by Yahweh the living God of the Bible.

Why This is Important
If you’ve read this far I hope you don’t think this subject is some trivial exercise irrelevant chronological minutia. If you believe as I do, that many Biblical vectors are pointing towards the soon return of Yeshua then we need to ensure that our eschatological world view is based upon a rock solid foundation. Whether you realize it or not, Daniel 9 and the 70 “Weeks” prophecy is the core of most of your future eschatological framework. This prophecy influences our view of the Anti-Christ and his kingdom, a “seven year” tribulation, the rapture, the restoration of Israel, the end of this age, and many other important eschatological truths.

If you doubt my statement, here is an exercise for you: Try explaining a “seven year” tribulation without the prophetic context of Daniel 9. Try to find a single clear statement in the Bible which mentions a 7 year period of tribulation. Other periods of time are mentioned, 42 months, 1260 days, 1335 days, etc, but not seven years. Without an Artaxerxes Assumption, the seven year tribulation theory loses its chronological anchor point and its credibility.

How many books have you read that lay out their case for the rapture, (pre trib, post trib, mid trib, pre-wrath) using a 7 year tribulation as the framework? Nearly all of them, don’t they? Do you see how deep this root of error has grown into our view of eschatology?

If your view of Daniel 9 and the 70 “Weeks” includes some form of the original Jewish Artaxerxes Assumption then it most likely rests upon a unstable foundation of sand. Any understanding of Bible prophecy that relies in part or whole upon an interpretation Daniel 9 needs to be reconsidered carefully to ascertain how they have been influenced by Daniel 9. We may be soon entering into one of the most challenging and wonderful periods in human history and your view of how the Bible says those events are supposed to play out may be flawed. If you are a pastor or a Bible teacher, you may be giving erroneous information to your followers. Today I plead with you to ensure your interpretations of Bible prophecy are based upon rock solid, contextual Biblical truth. If you sincerely care about truth, then I encourage you to do your Berean duty and carefully consider the chronology of the 2nd temple era. Challenge yourself to apply the golden rule of Biblical interpretation to your assumptions about Artaxerxes and “word” to restore and build Jerusalem.

The Purpose of Prophecy and Chronology
As a final thought, I believe it is important to always remember why Bible chronology and Bible prophecy are important. Revelation 19:10 informs us that the “spirit” of prophecy is the testimony of Yeshua. In other words, the underlying theme of the Bible’s prophetic revelation is the testimony of Yahweh’s salvation for mankind. (Yeshua (Jesus) means Yahweh saves or Yahweh’s salvation).

 

Prophecy is a prediction of future events. Those events, in order to have relevance to you and I, are related within a framework of time. In my opinion, this is the reason the Bible’s chronological details are so important. They are the context that brings relevance to Yahweh’s redemptive plan for mankind. The main purpose of Bible chronology is not about aligning Biblical history with what modern scholarship says about the geological or archeological record, any more than the main purpose of Bible prophecy is about predicting future events.

The real purpose of prophecy and chronology in the Bible (in my opinion) is to work hand in hand to provide mankind with evidence and assurance that Yahweh is in control, that He has ordered the past, is working in the present, and is in complete control of the future to accomplish His redemptive purpose for mankind through His Yeshua. That is the real importance of the Bible’s chronological and prophetic record. As you explore these issues in the coming days I hope you’ll keep that focus in mind.

Maranatha!

My Excel workbook with calculations and notes: Excel Workbook

1Author’s Note on the Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis:
For those of you really interested in a further detailed analysis of Josephus’ chronology as it relates to the original Hebrew chronology and the Masoretic text I’ve provided Davidson and Aldersmith’s charts and notes on the subject. The charts and notes come from their book The Great Pyramid: It’s Divine Message (1924). Though I don’t agree with all of Davidson’s and Aldersmith’s theories about the Great Pyramid, in my 30 plus years of interest in Biblical history and Bible prophecy I’ve not found a more comprehensive organization and elucidation of Ancient and Biblical history as found in their 570 page tome.

Those of you interested in the Rabbinic forgeries hypotheses will also find in Davidson’s and Aldersmith’s unique work, evidence to show that 1st and 2nd BC century messianic expectants did indeed use a version of Old Testament chronology which is congruent with the Masoretic text today. Their work disproves the theory that the chronology of the Masoretic text was a 1st or 2nd century AD invention of Jewish rabbis. There Elucidation of the subject can be found here:
Chronological Forensics of the Original Hebrew Chronology

Authors Note:
This article is Part III in my exploration of Rabbinic forgery hypothesis. The following links will take you to the previous articles in this series.
Part I: The Septuagint, the Masoretic Text, & Matthew 1
Part II: Matthew 1, the Masoretic Text, & the Bible’s Messianic Symbolism
Part III: The Masoretic Text, Matthew 1, & the Jubilee
Part IV: Sir Isaac Newton, Daniel 9, & the Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis

* * *

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."

The Septuagint, the Masoretic Text, & Matthew 1

Exploring Jeremy Sexton’s and Henry Smith’s Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis

How many of you are familiar with the claim that  Jewish Rabbinic scholars forged Biblical history to obfuscate the identity of Yeshua (Jesus) as the Bible’s Messiah?

Regular readers of this blog will appreciate that these accusations are intriguingly intertwined with Old Testament chronology, the 70 Weeks prophecy, and the Biblical Jubilee – three subjects that I’m passionate about and that we’ve explored extensively here.

This week I’d like to look at the Rabbinic Forgeries Hypothesis from a perspective, that as far as I am aware, has not been explored before. I want to look at this subject in light of Yeshua’s (Jesus’) lineage as found in Matthew 1 because I believe this enigmatic list of names offers an important perspective of this ongoing controversy. But most importantly, as I hope to show, this controversy resolves itself in an amazing display of the congruency of Yahweh’s redemptive plan for mankind through Yeshua as described in His word. I hope you’ll stick with me here because I believe you’ll be thrilled at the implications of what we’ll discover. Continue reading