Daniels 70-Weeks Timeline

[covenantee]

I don’t believe that Rome was the fourth kingdom I believe it was Greece but that’s a different topic.

King Nebuchadnezzar was told that he was one of the kings and kingdoms and the rock cut out from the mountain did smash Babylon. How does the rock cut from the mountain destroy each kingdom (Daniel 2:34-35 & 45) if it didn’t come until Jesus? Those kingdoms were long gone by the time Jesus came.

The kingdom started in Daniels days with the faithful before the cross remaining faithful to God and then Jesus came and called it to Himself and sent it worldwide.

That's a reasonable question. However, it then begs a responding question: How could the rock smite the feet of the image (Daniel 2:34) during Daniel's time, when the kingdom which the feet represented (Grecian or Roman) would not appear until at least two centuries after Daniel's time?

Jesus announced that the Kingdom of God was at hand, and would be established through the preaching and reception of the Gospel, rather than having already been established during Daniel's time.

 

[Christian Gedge]

Good chart. Did you draw this?

Sure. I like to use a picture when starting a thread. Just right-click and save if you want to use any of my graphics.

 

[Christian Gedge]

There are six things Daniel said had to be confirmed. The seventy weeks had to:

1. finish the transgression,
2. make an end of sins,
3. make reconciliation for iniquity,
4. bring in everlasting righteousness,
5. seal up vision and prophecy,
6. anoint the Most Holy.​

The first four clauses were achieved in the middle of the 70th week when the curtain of the temple was torn down.

The final two objectives were achieved following the Cross and up to the conclusion of the 70th week. To ‘seal up vision and prophecy’ is speaking of the authentication and completion of Messiah’s ministry.

To 'anoint the most holy,' (the Church) began at Pentecost, and completed when the Gentiles were grafted in. (AD 33-34) Thus, the ‘most holy’ is indeed a temple, though not a physical building. It is the anointed manifestation of Christ together with His Church.

 

[Marty fox]

That's a reasonable question. However, it then begs a responding question: How could the rock smite the feet of the image (Daniel 2:34) during Daniel's time, when the kingdom which the feet represented (Grecian or Roman) would not appear until at least two centuries after Daniel's time?

Jesus announced that the Kingdom of God was at hand, and would be established through the preaching and reception of the Gospel, rather than having already been established during Daniel's time.

But it said in the time of those kings and King Nebuchadnezzar was the head of gold and Babylon was judged. That can’t be disputed.

Daniel only lived through some of them but it started in his days. The whole statue was destroyed by the rock starting with Babylon then each kingdom was judged and consumed with the kingdom after them.

 

[Marty fox]

Why do you begin the 70 weeks at 605 BC rather than 457 BC?

Because that’s when the Jews were taken into captivity. The key to understanding the 70 weeks was the decree by king Cyrus to the Jews to go back and rebuild Jerusalem.

The command by the angel Gabriel is to know and understand the prophecy. The decree (the word to go and rebuild Jerusalem) would trigger the understanding of the time line of the vision. Thus the decree of king Cyrus is the key to know and understand the 70 weeks. The decree of king Cyrus gives us a concrete date and point in time of the 70 weeks.

Below are the time lines of each set of weeks

605 B.C. The start of the 70 weeks Daniel and the Jews are taken into captivity. (time goes backwards from the time of Daniel vision)

587 B.C. Jerusalem is destroyed by Babylon the start of the 7 weeks (runs parallel to some of the 62 weeks)

538 B.C. King Cyrus issues a decree to go and rebuild Jerusalem and Joshua (the first anointed one who was to come) goes back to rebuild Jerusalem. This is the end of the 7 weeks which was 49 years after 587 B.C. when Jerusalem was destroyed.

170/1 B.C. Onias 3rd is murdered (cut off and has nothing) the second anointed one the last of the Zadokite priesthood which was the start of the 70th week.

167 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanies 4th desecrates the temple ½ way through the 70th week. The abomination that caused desolation.

164/3 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanies 4th dies and the temple sacrifice is reestablished the end of the 70th week. (the end is poured out on him)

In summary

605 B.C.-171 B.C. 62 weeks or 434 years

587 B.C.-538 B.C. 7 weeks or 49 years

170/1 B.C.-164/3 B.C. 70th week or 7 years

 

[Marty fox]

The answer to Daniels prayer was a revelation of Israel's probationary period of grace afforded to them to prepare for the coming of their Messiah. To claim the prophecy is about the Antichrist is blatant Jesuit thinking born in the counter reformation. Nor is it about Antiochus, and for several reasons which I will reveal later. But I have a question. The prayer of Daniel was motivated by his ignorance of the meaning of a vision. There was no vision in Daniel 9, only the explanation. Therefore that explanation was for the vision given in Daniel 8. Not the vision about the sheep and the goat, that was understood. But rather the vision(Marah) of the 2300 days. That astonished Daniel and he fainted. Why? Why faint when his prayer previously included the prayer for his people motivated by the desire to see them return home? Why was he horrified of the angel was literally saying 2300 days? That's only a little over 6 years away. Daniel would have been delighted with that would be not? No. Because Daniel knew that the 2300 days actually meant 2300 years. The explanation of that time line, the 70 weeks, was also prophetic time...70x7=490 years. The beginning of both periods began at the same time...457bc.
Now, to Antiochus.
Through preterism, Satan has laid hold of the liberal wing of Protestantism. Through futurism he has laid hold of the conservative wing. Although these two systems appear to be opposites, they really have several striking similarities and they both meet in the abyss of satanic deception.
In both systems, Antichrist is understood as a literal blasphemous individual. Both see this individual as a desecrator of the literal Jewish Temple for three and a half literal years. The only difference is that, in the case of preterism this person was Antiochus Epiphanes, while in the case of futurism it will be an individual who has not yet appeared.
But the most notable similarity is that both systems derived their
hermeneutical methodology from Papal Jesuit theologians and both
systems shield the Papacy from being detected as the great Antichrist of Scripture!! By shifting the fulfillment of prophecy backwards or forwards, these prophetic systems have attempted to change God’s prophetic times.
The Protestant reformers held the almost unanimous view that the Papacy was the predicted Antichrist of Bible prophecy. They shared several theological concepts: 1) The fourth beast of Daniel 7 is imperial Rome. 2) The “restrainer” of II Thessalonians 2 is the Roman Empire. 3) The Antichrist is not an individual, but rather a succession of popes who, taken together, constitute an apostate religious system. 4) The time periods in symbolic prophecy are to be understood figuratively, not literally. 5) The “temple” in which the Antichrist sits is not the literal Jerusalem temple, but rather, the Christian Church. 6) The word “Antichrist” does not denote a blasphemous
individual who openly denies and defies God, but rather, one who opposes Christ by posing as the vicar of Christ. 7) Though not unanimous, most Protestant reformers believed that the little horn of Daniel 7 represents the Roman Catholic Papal system.
When we think of the Protestant Reformation, expressions such as sola scriptura (Scripture alone), sola fide (faith alone), sola gratia (grace alone) come to mind. However, all these “solas” grew out of a realization that the Roman Catholic system was the predicted Antichrist of Bible prophecy.
You see, the Protestant reformers knew for certain that in the prophetic flow, the lion (Babylon), the bear (Medo-Persia), the leopard (Greece), and the dragon (Rome) had already ruled the world. They also knew that Rome had been divided into ten kingdoms when the Barbarians carved up the Empire. They also knew that the predicted Antichrist was to arise among these ten kingdoms of Western Europe. They saw clearly and distinctly that they were living in the time of the little horn.
The historicist hermeneutical method made it quite simple. A correct understanding of Bible prophecy gave them the unmistakable mandate to unmask this system which had usurped the prerogatives of Christ and adulterated the truth of God.

I can give quotes from history confirming the above of you want

I will now detail my reasons why I believe Antiochus cannot be the little horn of Daniel 7.
a. Antiochus does not rise after 10 kings. He was the 8th king in the Syrian line of Seleucid kings. Besides, the prophecy calls for 10 kingdoms to exist contemporaneously, not successively.
b. Antiochus belonged to the 3rd empire (Greece) in actual historical sequence from Daniel’s time.
c. He was not ‘diverse’ from any other king.
d. He did not ‘pluck up’ 3 other kings.
e. He was not ‘stouter’ than his fellows. His father was known as Antiochus the Great, not Epiphanes.
f. He did not prevail until the end of time, the judgment.
g. The kingdom following was Rome, not the kingdom of the saints.

Reasons why Antiochus cannot be the little horn of Daniel 8.
a. Antiochus was not a horn in his own right. He was of the Seleucid line therefore was a part of one of the four.
b. He did not wax exceeding great. In fact his father was greater, but neither was as great as even Babylon or Media Persia, certainly no greater than Alexander. Yet the prophecy demands that the little horn be greater than any empire before it.
c. He does not fit the time periods. According to Maccabees 1:54,59, and 4:52 Antiochus suppressed the sacrifices exactly 3 years. This fits neither the 1260 days , (times time and half a time,) nor the 2300 days (evenings and mornings of Daniel 8:14). These figures do not compliment one another NOR do they meet the reign of Antiochus.
d. The 2300 days is prophetic. Using the day/year principle established elsewhere as being the standard and norm for interpreting prophetic time periods, it is a literal 2300 years.

Were you make a mistake is that it’s 2300 mornings and evenings which is actually 1150 days. Each day has a morning and evening.

Three kings who were next inline were uprooted before him thus he was the 11th who became the 8th.

The bible actually describes the antichrist as a deceiving spirit within many who had already came and was still coming in Johns day. The biblical antichrist is the perfect description of apostate Israel. Thus the antichrist is completely different from the two beast of Daniel and revelation

 

[covenantee]

But it said in the time of those kings and King Nebuchadnezzar was the head of gold and Babylon was judged. That can’t be disputed.

Daniel only lived through some of them but it started in his days. The whole statue was destroyed by the rock starting with Babylon then each kingdom was judged and consumed with the kingdom after them.

Neither can it be disputed that Jesus heralded the Kingdom of God at the beginning of His ministry.

Jesus was intimately familiar with what Daniel had written.

So if there's an apparent interpretive impasse, I'll always defer to the Master Interpreter.

 

[Marty fox]

Neither can it be disputed that Jesus heralded the Kingdom of God at the beginning of His ministry.

Jesus was intimately familiar with what Daniel had written.

So if there's an apparent interpretive impasse, I'll always defer to the Master Interpreter.

So can the bible contradict itself? Of course not so what is the proper interpretation?

Jesus Himself said that the kingdom of God was before His ministry

Matthew 11:12
12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it.

The faithful before the cross are saved in the same way as the faithful after the cross thus they are a part of the same kingdom.

Revelation 7:9-14
9 After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. 10 And they cried out in a loud voice:

“Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb.”

 

[covenantee]

So can the bible contradict itself? Of course not so what is the proper interpretation?

Jesus Himself said that the kingdom of God was before His ministry

Matthew 11:12
12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it.

The faithful before the cross are saved in the same way as the faithful after the cross thus they are a part of the same kingdom.

Revelation 7:9-14
9 After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. 10 And they cried out in a loud voice:

“Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb.”

If the kingdom was already present and active, why would Jesus describe it as "at hand" rather than "is come" or "has come" or "is here"?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Sure. I like to use a picture when starting a thread. Just right-click and save if you want to use any of my graphics.

Thank you.

 

[RedFan]

To 'anoint the most holy,' (the Church) began at Pentecost, and completed when the Gentiles were grafted in. (AD 33-34) Thus, the ‘most holy’ is indeed a temple, though not a physical building. It is the anointed manifestation of Christ together with His Church.

While I agree that "the ‘most holy’ is indeed a temple," I do think it is indeed a physical building -- and so I think it's quite a stretch to equate Dan. 9:24's "most holy" (qödeš qodäšîm) with a "grafting in" of Gentiles into "the Church." Rendering qödeš qodäšîm as "anoint the most holy" -- as the KJV, NIV and ASV do -- downplays Daniel's connotation that the "most holy" is a place and the anointing a definitive event. I favor "anoint the Most Holy Place" as in the ESV, NIV, NASB and RSV, because I think the LXX got Dan. 9:24 right in rendering qödeš qodäšîm as χρῖσαι ἅγιον ἁγιων, i.e., anointing the Holy of Holies. Wherever qödeš qodäšîm is found in the OT it is always associated with the Temple. Why would we presume Daniel to be altering that understanding entrenched in his readers?

So I think the sixth thing to be accomplished at the end of Daniel's 490 years was some sort of sanctification or rededication of the Temple in Jerusalem. It is just the more natural reading.

While I think yours is a stretch, I don't have a proposed event for fulfillment of Daniel's sixth prophecy -- but nor am I wedded to A.D. 33-34 as the time frame for it. (I tend toward Artaxerxes' 20th year rather than 7th year as the starting point, based on Nehemiah 2 -- but that's a guess.)

 

[Marty fox]

If the kingdom was already present and active, why would Jesus describe it as "at hand" rather than "is come" or "has come" or "is here"?

Because the king was here. He was making a declaration because it was there and people didn’t realize it thus Jesus was the one to spread it to the world.

Jesus did state that it was on the earth before Him.

 

[ScottA]

Here is my timeline and dates for Daniels 70-weeks prophecy.

"Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city… Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince, there shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks …
And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; … he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.” (Daniel 9:24-27 NKJV abbrev.)​

As you can see, I have it starting 457 BC date being Artaxerxes' 7th year. However, there have been no small number of differences when it comes to the terminus a quo of Daniels weeks. Some say the first year of Cyrus in 538 BC. Others say Darius (520 BC) Still others, Artaxerxes' 20th year (444 BC)

As if that wasn’t as all over the place enough, the crucifixion of Jesus – the high point of the prophecy – has ranged from AD 29 to AD 33!

We could do without the muddle and, as you can see, the diagram shows exactly 7 + 62 + ½ weeks from the emperor’s decree until the cross. Let’s discuss.

What--no 2,000 year gap?!!

Just kidding!​

This is as good as any I have seen, and represents the times according to the perspective of Daniel, which is appropriate because that is who received the prophecy. Good job!

However, looking at things from Daniel's perspective is somewhat limited. Within the "Daniel's people" context, is also the greater context of all peoples and nations, as "a time, times, and half a time." By broadening the scope from weeks to times, the emphasis is more accurately less of a timeline, and more of an event line. The point being, that, yes, most do look at the events from the perspective of the world...but in reality--it is God's reality that we ought to be looking at rather than the would-be reality of men. As events of God in whom there is "no shadow of turning"--no time, and no timeline--time is irrelevant.

In other words, when and if we can loose the time component enough to generalize in the way that "a time, times, and half a time" does...then we can begin to actually see things from God perspective--which is the "all truth" perspective that we are to be lead into by the Spirit, as arranged for our times by Jesus. After all, He should increase and we should decrease.

The "time, times, and half a time" understanding of events also places Christ and the cross in the middle of events putting an end to the daily sacrifice. The "time" then, is all time; the "times" then, are the times before and after Christ; and the "half" or the "dividing" of "time", is "God divided the light from the darkness" (past tense).

"Then comes the End", who by name is Christ. And it is by this truth that Jesus foretold these times to be "as the days of Noah", rather than what most believe are to be times of great tribulation and the events of Revelation. For which it is written, no, but, "Look behind you, O Benjamin!" Hosea 5:8

 

[ScottA]

The fact that EVERLASTING RIGHTEOUSNESS (Dan 9:24) does not exist on earth right now proves how mistaken you people are. When that prophecy is fulfilled there will indeed be everlasting righteousness on earth.

However, the reign and rule of Christ does exist on the earth right now...which ought to be a paradigm shift for most.

But you are drawing the wrong conclusion for the wrong reasons. Seeing the times as sinful, is simply seeing the times of the gentiles fulfilled. Which takes nothing away from what is already in Christ in God, but adds the gentiles who come "each one in his own order." Don't be blinded by that. That would be like not attributing salvation to Christ before the foundation of the world...because Israel had not all come in all their generations yet. Both mean nothing to the righteousness of God and and Christ.

 

[covenantee]

Because the king was here. He was making a declaration because it was there and people didn’t realize it thus Jesus was the one to spread it to the world.

Jesus did state that it was on the earth before Him.

Not conclusive.

Matthew 11:12
12 From the days of John the Baptist until now...

"From the days of John the Baptist" does not refer the days before John the Baptist.
"Until now" could imply that something new could be happening "now".

It was the dawn of the New Testament/Covenant era.
The Testament/Covenant was new. (Matthew 26-28;Hebrews 8:8;Hebrews 8:13;Hebrews 9:15)
The cloth, wine, and bottles were new. (Matthew 9:16-17)
The commandment was new. (John 13:34)
The creature, man, and all things are become new. (2 Corinthians 5:17;Galatians 6:15;Ephesians 2:15;Ephesians 4:24;Colossians 3:10)
The way was new. (Hebrews 10:20)
All things are made new. (Revelation 21:5)

The Kingdom of God/Heaven is inextricably bound to the New Testament/Covenant, and to all that is new.
Why would the New Testament/Covenant Kingdom of God/Heaven not also be new?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

This is completely false. If the 70th week was already fulfilled, then the entire prophecy of the 70 weeks would also have been fulfilled.

But none of the necessary conditions have been fulfilled, therefore there is no everlasting righteousness (Dan 9:24) on earth right now. If anything there is presently more evil on earth than has been seen in the last 100 years!

The 70th week of Daniel has absolutely nothing to do with the ministry of Christ. It has everything to do with the reign of the Antichrist, and one only has to look at verse 27 to see that, since it refers to the Abomination of Desolation: And he [the Antichrist] shall confirm the [bogus] covenant with many for one week [seven years]: and in the midst of the week [at the end of 3 1/2 years] he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease [in the temple at Jerusalem], and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate [the Great Tribulation].

You are obviously equating the fulfillment of "everlasting righteousness" to there being literal everlasting righteousness on earth. Well, that won't happen until the new (renewed) earth is ushered in. It is only at that point that there will be everlasting righteousness on the earth in the context of what you're talking about because Peter says in 2 Peter 3:13 that "we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells". Yet, I'm sure you don't think that the 70th week will lead up to the ushering in of the new heaven and new earth. So, how do you reconcile this with your understanding of the fulfillment of bringing in everlasting righteousness?

This is childish nonsense. If you are unable to see the Antichrist in the books of Daniel and Revelation, then you have a serious problem in comprehending Bible prophecy. But to assign the period designated for the Antichrist (the Beast, the Man of Sin) to Christ is actually blasphemous!

Assigning the period designated for Jesus Christ to a supposed Antichrist, as you do, is blasphemous. Of course, you're just doing it out of ignorance due to your own "childish nonsense", so I'm sure you can be forgiven for this grievous error in judgment.

 

[Enoch111]

You are obviously equating the fulfillment of "everlasting righteousness" to there being literal everlasting righteousness on earth. Well, that won't happen until the new (renewed) earth is ushered in.

Exactly. And that is why Daniel's 70th week is in the future.

Here is what will need to happen according to Daniel 9:24:
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city:
1. to finish the transgression, and
2. to make an end of sins, and
3. to make reconciliation for iniquity, and
4. to bring in everlasting righteousness, and
5. to seal up the vision and prophecy, and
6. to anoint the most Holy.

None of this can happen BEFORE the Second Coming of Christ. Therefore to apply the 70th week of this prophecy to Christ (rather than the Antichrist) is to fail to see what the prophecy is really all about.

1, Has there been an "end of sins" on earth? Of course not.
2. Is sin and evil actually increasing by leaps and bounds until the coming of the Antichrist? Absolutely.
3. Is the World Economic Forum, the UN, the Great Reset, and "Build Back Better" preparation for the rule of the Antichrist? Absolutely.

 

[Enoch111]

However, the reign and rule of Christ does exist on the earth right now...which ought to be a paradigm shift for most.

If that were true, then sin and evil could not co-exist on earth. Neither could the enemies of God and Christ thrive on earth. Neither would it be possible to have the future reign of the Antichrist on earth for 3 1/2 years.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Consider, Daniel 9:24 was not fulfilled at all in any way and the 70 weeks of years has ended.

 

[ScottA]

If that were true, then sin and evil could not co-exist on earth. Neither could the enemies of God and Christ thrive on earth. Neither would it be possible to have the future reign of the Antichrist on earth for 3 1/2 years.

No...God is always in control, and Christ always King, the same yesterday, today, and forever--even in and over the whole earth.

Satan's being loosed for a time does not make him ruler over all the earth, but rather the ruler of this world. Indeed, not that it shall forever be, but for a time they do co-exist...since the Father gave all authority to Christ Jesus:

Matthew 28:18
And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
​

Then comes the end.