The 70 Weeks Prophecy - The Ezra 6:14 Challenge

[Ronald Nolette]

This is one of the most precise English translations of the 70 Weeks Prophecy you will come across. No English translation reads this way. No English translation has translated the Hebrew text properly.

[Daniel 9:24-27 based on ESV text but translates much more accurately the Hebrew text]
Removed capitals. Removed punctuation. Each "and" starts a new thought. Combined "and" where they are similar items. Some words replaced with more precise words.

Most precise according to whom?

YOu seem to forget that "and" is a conjunction and is more commonly used tp join two phrases into one or two descriptions to one person/place/thing.

Would you show me those "more precise words" you just claimed?

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Well you are wrong again ! You wrote about your deeds, so I simply showed you mine.

You people are absolutely nut cases. You are the one who originally asked

And your expertise to accuse them of error is??????

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You people are absolutely nut cases. You are the one who originally asked

I asked, you told. so when I tell you, IU am now guilty of being a "super douper louper"? All because I showed you where I come from as well as seeking to know where you come from?

Maybe I am a nut case. but so weren't Jesus and legions of others down through th eages who dared stand for th efaith and questioned when someone brought a new or different concept along.

If you wish to make claims here that run contrary to orthodoxy, you better be prepared to defend your positions or you won't be taken seriously. and just calling people nut cases makes it even worse for you.

But I would still like to know what is your expertise in calling many godly men who have gone on before us in error.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

I asked, you told. so when I tell you, IU am now guilty of being a "super douper louper"? All because I showed you where I come from as well as seeking to know where you come from?

Maybe I am a nut case. but so weren't Jesus and legions of others down through th eages who dared stand for th efaith and questioned when someone brought a new or different concept along.

If you wish to make claims here that run contrary to orthodoxy, you better be prepared to defend your positions or you won't be taken seriously. and just calling people nut cases makes it even worse for you.

But I would still like to know what is your expertise in calling many godly men who have gone on before us in error.

I point out error where ever it is. With you. With others. With supposed experts. All using the Word of God. If you can't read the words, there is no hope.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I point out error where ever it is. With you. With others. With supposed experts. All using the Word of God. If you can't read the words, there is no hope.

And others using the word of God point out errors. Why are you more correct than them? All you are doing is giving generic comments without providing any reason why your opinions of what Scripture says is correct and all others are wrong.

I already showed you a grave error in your challenge. by showing you that Darius/Cyrus/ Artaxerxes are all the same person. You refuse to acknowledge your error, so why should I place trust in anything else you say is biblically correct when you are so wrong here?

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

And others using the word of God point out errors. Why are you more correct than them? All you are doing is giving generic comments without providing any reason why your opinions of what Scripture says is correct and all others are wrong

"Generic comments"? I've included multiple posts outlining the Ezra 6:14 Challenge. I explain in GREAT DETAIL. But you have to sift through the childish mocking and ridicule posts of ignorant people on this thread.

My research includes many sources and references. I wrote an entire book. I've done hours of presentations. I can't possibly include it all in a post. Those who have open minds can look and VERIFY it all. Instead of mocking, ridiculing and responding childishly to ideas that don't match your own preconceived notions, anyone can do read it for themselves. But no. No one has time for it. They all want to watch the Witcher or Marvel TV shows or Joel Osteen or whatever.

Why am I more correct? Because it is the true interpretation of the Prophecy. That's just the facts. Examine the research for yourselves and see. It's just childish to keep bashing out of ignorance and falsehoods.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

"Generic comments"? I've included multiple posts outlining the Ezra 6:14 Challenge. I explain in GREAT DETAIL. But you have to sift through the childish mocking and ridicule posts of ignorant people on this thread.

My research includes many sources and references. I wrote an entire book. I've done hours of presentations. I can't possibly include it all in a post. Those who have open minds can look and VERIFY it all. Instead of mocking, ridiculing and responding childishly to ideas that don't match your own preconceived notions, anyone can do read it for themselves. But no. No one has time for it. They all want to watch the Witcher or Marvel TV shows or Joel Osteen or whatever.

Why am I more correct? Because it is the true interpretation of the Prophecy. That's just the facts. Examine the research for yourselves and see. It's just childish to keep bashing out of ignorance and falsehoods.

So you want me to accept it just because you sayi it is true?

I already proved you a liar about the three kings. That took less than a minute. What is the name of your book and where can I purchase it?

I have no idea what the witcher is, or Marvel tv shows and Joel Osteen is a false prophet .

I have written an 80 page manuscript on Eschatology. I have many references and resources, I have done years of teaching and reverifying information on eschatology.

YOu have written many true things. Even th ewildest erroneous so called teachers of eschatology write many truthful things.

But you cannot even humble yourself enough to admit on this thread where you declared Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes to be three separate kings that you are wrong.

Why should i invest more time when you cannot even admit this one error I exposed.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

So you want me to accept it just because you sayi it is true?

I already proved you a liar about the three kings. That took less than a minute. What is the name of your book and where can I purchase it?

I have no idea what the witcher is, or Marvel tv shows and Joel Osteen is a false prophet .

I have written an 80 page manuscript on Eschatology. I have many references and resources, I have done years of teaching and reverifying information on eschatology.

YOu have written many true things. Even th ewildest erroneous so called teachers of eschatology write many truthful things.

But you cannot even humble yourself enough to admit on this thread where you declared Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes to be three separate kings that you are wrong.

Why should i invest more time when you cannot even admit this one error I exposed.

You keep showing yourself to have a closed mind. All this is wasted on people like you. No one can even get off their high horses to spend even a bit of time to investigate and VERIFY. Don't believe me. I hope you don't. But at least have the decency to admit you choose to stay in ignorance and STOP POSTING in this thread. It's really for people who want to know the truth and investigate and want to discuss it. Please, just go away already.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

My research includes many sources and references. I wrote an entire book. I've done hours of presentations. I can't possibly include it all in a post.

As I have done the same. but that means nothing. It doesn't make either one of us right. It just means we have spent many many hours laboring to reach a conclusion.

I have learned and grown over the years as I have learned to handle Scripture better and better and honed my language skills better. I have had to alter many conclusions when better understanding of Scripture came or I had not included other passages of Scripture. You have done los of work. but you are putting way too much stock on your Ezra verse challenge.

For as long as you refuse to recognize the three names are for one king only, you will have your data skewed by that wrong conclusion. there are many more eschatological passages that show the erros of your Ezra challenge.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

As I have done the same. but that means nothing. It doesn't make either one of us right. It just means we have spent many many hours laboring to reach a conclusion.

I have learned and grown over the years as I have learned to handle Scripture better and better and honed my language skills better. I have had to alter many conclusions when better understanding of Scripture came or I had not included other passages of Scripture. You have done los of work. but you are putting way too much stock on your Ezra verse challenge.

For as long as you refuse to recognize the three names are for one king only, you will have your data skewed by that wrong conclusion. there are many more eschatological passages that show the erros of your Ezra challenge.

Not going to fall for your goading about the "three names". I can disprove that concept so easily. But not with someone with a closed mind like yours. It's an absolute waste of time engaging people like you. I don't really care. Get it? I don't care.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Here's another clue about the Ezra 6:14 Test.
People just do not fully address the real reason for the 70 Weeks Prophecy. They focus on the climax - Daniel 9:24-27. But in order to truly understand the prophecy, the entire Chapter 9 must be correctly understood. The key is in verse 2
[Dan 9:2 ESV] 2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, perceived in the books the number of years that, according to the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the prophet, must pass before the end of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years.

Here is another error of your Ezra challenge.

Daniel knew the 70 years of exile were up. It was one year for every sabbath year Israel did not let the land rest! That has othing to do with teh 70 sevens found in Daniel 9

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The proper interpretation is all tied to the original Hebrew text. No one will understand the prophecy correctly by reading an English translation. That is part of the Ezra 6:14 Challenge.

Do you claim you have rendered the dcorrect Hebrew translation? Have you studied biblical Hebrew/Aramaic? Or are you just making your own interpretation by adding your own punctuations and caps and verse numbers?

YOu also suggest that because YOU are closer to teh end than so many others sin ce Anderson, you must be the one to whom God opened up the sealed portions of Daniel to.

You also did not give us a conclusion to teh Ezra 6:14 challenge. YOu just gave claims and showed where all others are wrong but did not give the answer to teh challenge.

Do you even possess this answere?

Are you purposely keeping it from everyone on this thread you posed this challenge to?

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Do you claim you have rendered the dcorrect Hebrew translation? Have you studied biblical Hebrew/Aramaic? Or are you just making your own interpretation by adding your own punctuations and caps and verse numbers?

YOu also suggest that because YOU are closer to teh end than so many others sin ce Anderson, you must be the one to whom God opened up the sealed portions of Daniel to.

You also did not give us a conclusion to teh Ezra 6:14 challenge. YOu just gave claims and showed where all others are wrong but did not give the answer to teh challenge.

Do you even possess this answere?

Are you purposely keeping it from everyone on this thread you posed this challenge to?

Just do some reading. All your answers are in this thread. Yes, you and the others have polluted this thread with so much doo-doo that it's hard to read now. But it's all here.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Just do some reading. All your answers are in this thread. Yes, you and the others have polluted this thread with so much doo-doo that it's hard to read now. But it's all here.

Well I have read your challenge. I already showed you two errors which you refuse to acknowledge or even mention or attempt to show how I could be wrong.

As I stated previously it's all tied to Jeremiah's writings, which Daniel had been studying intensely and finally understood. "Restore" and "rebuild". "Sub" and "bana". The keys that Gabriel told to Daniel and what he understood. But also the phrase "the going out of the word". The "word" is the Hebrew "dabar". It means speech, utterance, words. Daniel never uses this word to refer to an official decree by an earthly king.

Daniel used the word Dabar 22 times in his book. And you are correct in saying it never means command. But that is the word (or decree) because it is the word of the king which makes it a decree.

As I stated previously it's all tied to Jeremiah's writings, which Daniel had been studying intensely and finally understood. "Restore" and "rebuild". "Sub" and "bana". The keys that Gabriel told to Daniel and what he understood. But also the phrase "the going out of the word". The "word" is the Hebrew "dabar". It means speech, utterance, words. Daniel never uses this word to refer to an official decree by an earthly king. Never. He uses entirely different words for that. But he does use "dabar" when talking about the word of God. God's word through the prophets. He actually uses it at the beginning of the chapter.

Yes Daniel does use it for the king earlier in his letter. In some places it is called matter, thing or word.

Also yu never list in your lengthy writing on "sub" and "bana" where they appear as the Lords decree to return and rebuild So you leave out where to validate this theory of yours.

But as for "sub" which depending on the verb stem can mean a return. However as this in the Hiphil it means either return or rebuild. And given that the first major return of Jews from Babylon was under Zerubbabel, which was before Nehemiah. it cannot mean return. but for a rebuild (restore back) it can be tied to teh decree of Darius?artaxerxes/ Cyrus in Nehemiah for Nehemiah to go back and rebuild Jerusalem which He did!

Nehemiah Chapter 2.

Teh Ezra 6:14 challenge has crumbled in light of seeking the whole counsel of Scripture.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Just do some reading. All your answers are in this thread. Yes, you and the others have polluted this thread with so much doo-doo that it's hard to read now. But it's all here.

So to disagree with the great and powerful Oz (eclipseEventSigns) is to mean your words are doo-doo. OKay then, someone needs to get a pin and pop your ego.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Well I have read your challenge. I already showed you two errors which you refuse to acknowledge or even mention or attempt to show how I could be wrong.

Daniel used the word Dabar 22 times in his book. And you are correct in saying it never means command. But that is the word (or decree) because it is the word of the king which makes it a decree.


Yes Daniel does use it for the king earlier in his letter. In some places it is called matter, thing or word.

Also yu never list in your lengthy writing on "sub" and "bana" where they appear as the Lords decree to return and rebuild So you leave out where to validate this theory of yours.

But as for "sub" which depending on the verb stem can mean a return. However as this in the Hiphil it means either return or rebuild. And given that the first major return of Jews from Babylon was under Zerubbabel, which was before Nehemiah. it cannot mean return. but for a rebuild (restore back) it can be tied to teh decree of Darius?artaxerxes/ Cyrus in Nehemiah for Nehemiah to go back and rebuild Jerusalem which He did!

Nehemiah Chapter 2.

Teh Ezra 6:14 challenge has crumbled in light of seeking the whole counsel of Scripture.

No. Not true. But it would be a exercise in futility to show you where. Whatever. I just do not care anymore. Just do not care. Pearls before swine.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

No. Not true. But it would be a exercise in futility to show you where. Whatever. I just do not care anymore. Just do not care. Pearls before swine.

In other words you either cannot or will not be willing to prove me wrong! That is not the mark of a teacher.

But seeing as you think me a swine- this is my last post to you. Have the last word if you wish.

I have exposed the errors in your calculations and the best you can do is say, no its not true. Sad.

 

[Phoneman777]

Which decree by Artaxerxes? Ezra talks about the one in 457 BC. Nehemiah about the one in 445 BC. Both have been very clearly refuted.

445 BC

Why do Dispies count Daniels 'weeks' from Artaxerxes 20th year?

Admittedly, the twentieth-year start point for Daniel’s 70 weeks has had its supporters. Their problem though, is that a count of 483 years (69 x 7) from 444 BC comes to AD 40, a date which arrives well after Jesus died. So, proponents of the 444 BC terminus a quo resort to various 'short-year'...

www.christianityboard.com

457 BC
This decree had nothing to do with rebuilding Jerusalem.
[Ezr 7:27 LSB] 27 Blessed be Yahweh, the God of our fathers, who has put [such a thing] as this in the king's heart, to beautify the house of Yahweh which is in Jerusalem,

On the contrary...according to Biblical scholars, 457 B.C. is established by extra-Biblical archaeology, which is why that date was inserted in the margins of older Bibles before the change-agents got busy. Also, you misread my post where I denied 445-444 B.C. as the legit date.


As for "beautify the house of the Lord...", read Ezra 9:8-9 KJV:

[8] And now for a little space grace hath been shewed from the Lord our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage.
[9] For we were bondmen; yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage, but hath extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to give us a reviving, to set up the house of our God, and to repair the desolations thereof, and to give us a wall in Judah and in Jerusalem.

See that? Ezra is thanking God for Artaxerxes' decree in chapter 7 which authorized walls, temples, judicial systems, constabularies, education systems, etc. In other words, the ONLY decree that is comprehensive enough to qualify for fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy: "...from the going forth of the commandment to RESTORE AND BUILD JERUSALEM (which goes far beyond the mere rebuilding of a temple) unto Messiah the Prince..."

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

On the contrary...according to Biblical scholars, 457 B.C. is established by extra-Biblical archaeology, which is why that date was inserted in the margins of older Bibles before the change-agents got busy. Also, you misread my post where I denied 445-444 B.C. as the legit date.


As for "beautify the house of the Lord...", read Ezra 9:8-9 KJV:

[8] And now for a little space grace hath been shewed from the Lord our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage.
[9] For we were bondmen; yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage, but hath extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to give us a reviving, to set up the house of our God, and to repair the desolations thereof, and to give us a wall in Judah and in Jerusalem.

See that? Ezra is thanking God for Artaxerxes' decree in chapter 7 which authorized walls, temples, judicial systems, constabularies, education systems, etc. In other words, the ONLY decree that is comprehensive enough to qualify for fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy: "...from the going forth of the commandment to RESTORE AND BUILD JERUSALEM (which goes far beyond the mere rebuilding of a temple) unto Messiah the Prince..."

No. No. No. So much no. I know this will be a pointless exercise to refute this. But it must be done.

"Change agents"? Seriously?

The 457 decree by Artaxerxes is listed there in the text. It does not give permission for a wall. It just doesn't. It was adding to the already COMPLETED temple. No stones for a wall. No wooden beams for gates. The other decrees include these things. This one does not.

" judicial systems, constabularies, education systems,"? What does that have to do with anything? Ezra set up the Sanhedrin Council at this point (if it was called that already). It met IN THE TEMPLE.

 

[Phoneman777]

No. No. No. So much no. I know this will be a pointless exercise to refute this. But it must be done.

Gabriel said "restore and build Jerusalem" - which means the decree in question must include details concerning the reestablishment of the entire city - not just talk about a temple.

Does Cyrus' decree provide for this? Does Darius' decree provide for the this? Does Artaxerxes' decree FAIL to provide for this? NO, NO, and NO.

"Change agents"? Seriously?

Revisionist historians, since time immemorial.

The 457 decree by Artaxerxes is listed there in the text. It does not give permission for a wall. It just doesn't.

So, we're to believe the author of the only decree to fit all or Gabriel's criteria would expect that all that gold, silver, timber, livestock, etc., would be secure in an unwalled city?

Did Ezra give thanks for "a wall" after the decree of Cyrus? Did Ezra give thanks for "a wall" after the decree of Darius? Did Ezra FAIL to give thanks for "a wall" after the decree of Artaxerxes? NO, NO, and NO.

It was adding to the already COMPLETED temple.

Wrong. Artaxerxes' decree said "beautify" the temple, right? No contractor would list a house as "complete" without decorative moulding, lighting fixtures, and several coats of paint to beautify it.

Also, the temple priests and company were still in the North with the sacred vessels - Artaxerxes' decree provided for the return of both.

The other decrees include these things. This one does not.

" judicial systems, constabularies, education systems,"? What does that have to do with anything? Ezra set up the Sanhedrin Council at this point (if it was called that already). It met IN THE TEMPLE.

We aren't discussing Ezra's actions, but which decree fits the criteria of Gabriel. Judicial system, constabulary, education system, temple services, along with provision for temple construction and "a wall" in Jerusalem, says Ezra, is what comprised the decree of Artaxerxes alone.

Look, if you're the top salesman to whom is due the $500 bonus, and the last place guy demands your money, what would you tell him? Right - he didn't meet the criteria for it. Friend, you haven't cornered any little truth on this issue, you've just contracted a serious case of tunnel vision - I'd get some of that Laodicean salve "that thou mayest see".