The 70 Weeks Prophecy - The Ezra 6:14 Challenge

[Timtofly]

There are 69 weeks after which Messiah is cut off, so it is not a part of the 69 weeks. Afterward comes a war and destruction, after which a covenant is confirmed for 1 week, making the 70 Weeks determined.

I think it states that Messiah is cut off after 69 weeks, no?

Then destruction. But the Covenant was the Atonement of the Cross. It was established by Messiah and Confirmed by the Prince and both are the same person.

"from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be"

Jesus is both Messiah and Prince. So the Gap is twofold. Jesus was born after the 69 weeks, after many years the first gap, because Simeon was almost 100, and Anna was over 100, when Jesus was born. Indicating a gap of at least 50 years. Then the second part is a gap between Messiah and Prince.

Then we see:

"the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

This comes after the Messiah is cut off and after the city is destroyed, closer to the time the Prince part happens.

So Jesus comes once as Messiah to establish the Covenant and once as Prince to confirm the Covenant. Jesus is the 70th week.

The 7th Trumpet is the declaration of accomplishment per Revelation 10.

The last gap is in the days of the 7th Trumpet. That is not 7 years but 7 days.

This gap is the 42 months given to Satan. These 42 months stop 3.5 days before Armageddon. When the 7th Trumpet starts is when Satan and his angels approach the throne of God itself, but are cast down to earth which is the third woe. Then God determines if that is the end or if time will be extended 42 months, 3.5 days after the 7th Trumpet starts to sound.

From how Daniel ends. Daniel was given peace and died the year the first decree was given. There were 49 years until the work came to an abrupt stop by Artaxerxes, himself. Then later he acknowledged the original decree, and decreed for the work to be finished. Then there were 434 uninterrupted years and Anna and Simeon were born and were told by the Holy Spirit that time was up and Messiah would be born. We are not told how old they were when told, but they were about the only 2 alive who represented the generation when those first 69 weeks ended. Then Jesus grew up and even Anna and Simeon were no longer alive. Obviously even Herod was dead when Jesus was baptized. So there was even 30 years between when Anna and Simeon saw the Messiah and when Jesus was baptized part of that 50 year gap. At least 20 years prior to His birth and 30 years after, before Jesus even started the first 3.5 year ministry. Then Jesus was cut off and the rest has been history leading up to the Second Coming so Jesus can finish the last 3.5 years of being Messiah the Prince. The 7th Trumpet declares Jesus as King of every nation on earth. Job completed. Then the chance for that last gap has to be reconciled.

Revelation gives us two endings: Revelation 14 and then Revelation 19.

That is why there cannot be 7 years left. Messiah already accomplished 3.5 of those years. Those 42 months in Revelation 13 are not the Second half. The second half is declared over when the 7th Trumpet sounds and Jesus is declared King.

So we are in the gap between Messiah and Prince. After the 7th Trumpet starts is when the gap mentioned in Daniel 9:27 may happen.

 

[Timtofly]

I specifically said the text doesn't say 70 1/2

So if the text does not say 70 1/2, why would you bring up this fabricated point, that only you see, because you fabricated the point?

The phrase is "7 and 62".

The phrase is "in the midst of".

You add 7 and 62

You divide in the midst off.

The Hebrew could read "and" or "but", however the sense is dividing, not adding. Most translations say in the midst of, even the Hebrew would read that way. Some translations get it wrong by making that Hebrew noun into an ongoing action. "Half of" this time is "the middle" of this time. There is not even a reason in the Hebrew to call this either a set of years or a set of days. That is why some versions do not specify either.

Jesus used the whole week of years to be both Messiah and Prince. But the week in verse 27 is addressing the 7th Trumpet. That is the week of days that declares the week of years over, per Revelation 10:6-7 and then again in Revelation 11:15.

The Messiah part ended in a week of days with the Cross in the midst of that week.

The King part ended in a week of days with the confirmation in the midst of that week.

Unless there is no need to extend the week. The week in the first century was extended for the fulness of the Gentiles. The week after the Second Coming is for those who will be beheaded. If neither extensions had happened there would have been the Day of the Lord, and we would have been in the NHNE for the last 993 years.

We did get the first extension, but the last extension will be determined at that time, in the midst of the 7th Trumpet sounding.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

So if the text does not say 70 1/2, why would you bring up this fabricated point, that only you see, because you fabricated the point?

The phrase is "7 and 62".

The phrase is "in the midst of".

You add 7 and 62

You divide in the midst off.

The Hebrew could read "and" or "but", however the sense is dividing, not adding. Most translations say in the midst of, even the Hebrew would read that way. Some translations get it wrong by making that Hebrew noun into an ongoing action. "Half of" this time is "the middle" of this time. There is not even a reason in the Hebrew to call this either a set of years or a set of days. That is why some versions do not specify either.

Jesus used the whole week of years to be both Messiah and Prince. But the week in verse 27 is addressing the 7th Trumpet. That is the week of days that declares the week of years over, per Revelation 10:6-7 and then again in Revelation 11:15.

The Messiah part ended in a week of days with the Cross in the midst of that week.

The King part ended in a week of days with the confirmation in the midst of that week.

Unless there is no need to extend the week. The week in the first century was extended for the fulness of the Gentiles. The week after the Second Coming is for those who will be beheaded. If neither extensions had happened there would have been the Day of the Lord, and we would have been in the NHNE for the last 993 years.

We did get the first extension, but the last extension will be determined at that time, in the midst of the 7th Trumpet sounding.

Obviously, you wouldn't see any problems in your view of the text. Obviously. But there is if you treat the text in Hebrew consistently and honestly. If you just base it on English translated phrases like you list, your interpretation is forced on you from the start. You have to follow the path that the English translators set...to a preconceived conclusion. A conclusion that can not be supported.

 

[Timtofly]

Obviously, you wouldn't see any problems in your view of the text. Obviously. But there is if you treat the text in Hebrew consistently and honestly. If you just base it on English translated phrases like you list, your interpretation is forced on your from the start. You have to follow the path that the English translators set...to a preconceived conclusion. A conclusion that can not be supported.

Actually I don't "have to" be led by humans at all. Do you think God never used humans, or just let them guess in preserving His Word?

You make it sound like God stopped preserving His Word, when the scribes stopped caring.

The Hebrew is only 2 words "half" and "a period of seven".

There is no implication of two seperate periods as indicated in either verse 25 or 26, which gives two distinct time periods. 60 and 2 are still the way Hebrew is parsed. Then 7 and 60 and 2. We understand the implication is to add. Now you claim, with the words "half" and "a period of seven", we are adding what? What number does half represent? The Hebrew is not .5 or 3.5 or "half of any random number", it is just the word "half". This is simply translated as "in the midst of" it is not a number, but a half way point.

In fact verse 26 does not even combine the previous verse's three periods of time. So by your logic, there would be 490 years + 49 years + 434 years + 434 years + 7 years + 3.5 years with a grand total of 1148.5 years. That would be the logical path your point is implying about the English translations. So if you want to misrepresent some people's views telling them they need to be consistent, are you claiming you are consistent as your point is, or just hypocritical?

So far this preconceived notion is only in your head, as your head introduced this, and then called it someone else's preconceived notion.

I would agree there are some horrendous translations out there that are leading humans astray. I don't see the KJV purposely doing that.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Actually I don't "have to" be led by humans at all. Do you think God never used humans, or just let them guess in preserving His Word?

You make it sound like God stopped preserving His Word, when the scribes stopped caring.

The Hebrew is only 2 words "half" and "a period of seven".

There is no implication of two seperate periods as indicated in either verse 25 or 26, which gives two distinct time periods. 60 and 2 are still the way Hebrew is parsed. Then 7 and 60 and 2. We understand the implication is to add. Now you claim, with the words "half" and "a period of seven", we are adding what? What number does half represent? The Hebrew is not .5 or 3.5 or "half of any random number", it is just the word "half". This is simply translated as "in the midst of" it is not a number, but a half way point.

In fact verse 26 does not even combine the previous verse's three periods of time. So by your logic, there would be 490 years + 49 years + 434 years + 434 years + 7 years + 3.5 years with a grand total of 1148.5 years. That would be the logical path your point is implying about the English translations. So if you want to misrepresent some people's views telling them they need to be consistent, are you claiming you are consistent as your point is, or just hypocritical?

So far this preconceived notion is only in your head, as your head introduced this, and then called it someone else's preconceived notion.

I would agree there are some horrendous translations out there that are leading humans astray. I don't see the KJV purposely doing that.

Again, everything seen from English. Your mental block is hopelessly hard set.
Have you even examined the Hebrew text? It literally reads "...week one and half the week..." The question remains if you are going to add up the previous Weeks why don't you do it in this case too? Understanding the real reason why is part of cracking the true interpretation.

 

[marks]

I think it states that Messiah is cut off after 69 weeks, no?

Then destruction. But the Covenant was the Atonement of the Cross. It was established by Messiah and Confirmed by the Prince and both are the same person.

"from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be"

Jesus is both Messiah and Prince. So the Gap is twofold. Jesus was born after the 69 weeks, after many years the first gap, because Simeon was almost 100, and Anna was over 100, when Jesus was born. Indicating a gap of at least 50 years. Then the second part is a gap between Messiah and Prince.

Then we see:

"the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

This comes after the Messiah is cut off and after the city is destroyed, closer to the time the Prince part happens.

So Jesus comes once as Messiah to establish the Covenant and once as Prince to confirm the Covenant. Jesus is the 70th week.

The 7th Trumpet is the declaration of accomplishment per Revelation 10.

The last gap is in the days of the 7th Trumpet. That is not 7 years but 7 days.

This gap is the 42 months given to Satan. These 42 months stop 3.5 days before Armageddon. When the 7th Trumpet starts is when Satan and his angels approach the throne of God itself, but are cast down to earth which is the third woe. Then God determines if that is the end or if time will be extended 42 months, 3.5 days after the 7th Trumpet starts to sound.

From how Daniel ends. Daniel was given peace and died the year the first decree was given. There were 49 years until the work came to an abrupt stop by Artaxerxes, himself. Then later he acknowledged the original decree, and decreed for the work to be finished. Then there were 434 uninterrupted years and Anna and Simeon were born and were told by the Holy Spirit that time was up and Messiah would be born. We are not told how old they were when told, but they were about the only 2 alive who represented the generation when those first 69 weeks ended. Then Jesus grew up and even Anna and Simeon were no longer alive. Obviously even Herod was dead when Jesus was baptized. So there was even 30 years between when Anna and Simeon saw the Messiah and when Jesus was baptized part of that 50 year gap. At least 20 years prior to His birth and 30 years after, before Jesus even started the first 3.5 year ministry. Then Jesus was cut off and the rest has been history leading up to the Second Coming so Jesus can finish the last 3.5 years of being Messiah the Prince. The 7th Trumpet declares Jesus as King of every nation on earth. Job completed. Then the chance for that last gap has to be reconciled.

Revelation gives us two endings: Revelation 14 and then Revelation 19.

That is why there cannot be 7 years left. Messiah already accomplished 3.5 of those years. Those 42 months in Revelation 13 are not the Second half. The second half is declared over when the 7th Trumpet sounds and Jesus is declared King.

So we are in the gap between Messiah and Prince. After the 7th Trumpet starts is when the gap mentioned in Daniel 9:27 may happen.

I've known people who see it this way, to a certain degree, and you give a very interesting presentation.


Could you elaborate more on this:

"Jesus was born after the 69 weeks, after many years the first gap, because Simeon was almost 100, and Anna was over 100, when Jesus was born. Indicating a gap of at least 50 years."

Can you tell me the reasoning for Jesus being born after the 69 weeks? I've heard some say the 69 weeks ended when Jesus was baptized.

Much love!

 

[ScottA]

There can only be one correct interpretation of the 70 Weeks prophecy. That means most views are wrong. I wanted to identify a single issue as the test to judge all interpretations by. I think I have found it.

Everyone argues endlessly about which king made the decree to start the whole period of the 70 Weeks. Was it Cyrus? Was it Darius? Was it Artaxerxes? Was it something else people come up with? Well, Ezra gives us the major clue.

When talking about the second temple, he says: [Ezr 6:14 LSB] 14b So they built and completed [it] according to the decree of the God of Israel and the decree of Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes king of Persia.

Ezra 6:14 states that there were more than just 3 decrees from earthly kings that allowed for the completion of the temple (and by extension, returning to the land and rebuilding Jerusalem). There was a fourth. In addition Ezra seems to list the earthly decrees in chronological order. That would suggest that the decree by God, which no one recognizes, happened BEFORE the one from Cyrus. Where is this decree? Why does no one recognize or address this? Can your particular system even survive taking this decree into account? Either your interpretation can't pass the test or your interpretation does not consider the Word of God as accurate.

My claim is that ALL interpretations of the 70 Weeks Prophecy can not pass this test. Except for the one correct one.

Here is the decree:

Genesis 3:22​

Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—​

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

I've known people who see it this way, to a certain degree, and you give a very interesting presentation.


Could you elaborate more on this:

"Jesus was born after the 69 weeks, after many years the first gap, because Simeon was almost 100, and Anna was over 100, when Jesus was born. Indicating a gap of at least 50 years."

Can you tell me the reasoning for Jesus being born after the 69 weeks? I've heard some say the 69 weeks ended when Jesus was baptized.

Much love!

The Scripture does not support either supposed age of Simeon or Anna. Luke does not state how old Simeon was. Luke states Anna was 84 years old (Luke 2:37)
The reason they knew when to expect the birth of the Messiah is because they had rightly interpreted the 70 Weeks prophecy.
Anyone who wants to know how this could be possible, it's all in my presentations (see the links at the bottom) for anyone to watch and verify for themselves.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

From how Daniel ends. Daniel was given peace and died the year the first decree was given. There were 49 years until the work came to an abrupt stop by Artaxerxes, himself.

Where do you get these wildly unsupported ideas from?
First, " There were 49 years until the work came to an abrupt stop by Artaxerxes, himself." can't be supported.
Second, it's not clear what decree you are referring to so I'll assume the one in the 7th year of Artaxerxes which people assign to 457 BC. If so, as the Bible makes very clear, that decree had nothing whatsoever to do with returning to and restoring Jerusalem. And that would make Daniel about 163 years old? Also, no where in Scripture does it specify when Daniel died.
he's roughly 15 years old when he's taken to exile in 605 BC - 457 BC = 163 years

 

[Jay Ross]

The reason they knew when to expect the birth of the Messiah is because they had rightly interpreted the 70 Weeks prophecy.

Please provide biblical proof to support this claim.

 

[Timtofly]

I've known people who see it this way, to a certain degree, and you give a very interesting presentation.


Could you elaborate more on this:

"Jesus was born after the 69 weeks, after many years the first gap, because Simeon was almost 100, and Anna was over 100, when Jesus was born. Indicating a gap of at least 50 years."

Can you tell me the reasoning for Jesus being born after the 69 weeks? I've heard some say the 69 weeks ended when Jesus was baptized.

Much love!

Because the 434 years is from Artaxerxes decree to return to work after the first gap. If people claim that date is 457, then subtract 434 from that. That would be around 24BC.

We don't know when the work stopped. But if the first decree was from Darius, the year Daniel died, then we have to figure out when that was.

Jerusalem was destroyed around 586. 70 years later would be 516. But some claim the temple was built and finished by 516. The decree from Darius. Darius' reign was from 522 to 486.

"Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him."

"In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans; In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem."

So if you subtract 49 from either 522 or 516 you get between 473 to 467. Which still leaves 16 to 10 years until 457.

If the first 49 years started in 522, then the temple could have been finished in 516, 6 years later, but 516 was the end of the 70 years that Jeremiah prophesied. Many argue over which decree built what.

"Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks."

But what about the end of the 70 years and being able to return? The same year Gabriel gave the message could have been the year the decree went out. As God never claimed the 70 weeks would finish in the first century.

Yet even if the Temple was not part of the decree, it was finished in 516. If you subtracted 490 years from that you are still at 26BC. They had to have someplace to live if the Temple itself was built.

The whole reason the work was stopped after the 49th year, was because the surrounding foreign interest groups thought they were becoming too strong and fortified, which was the whole point of a city and walls. I just acknowledged that the decree to start back up was the last 62 weeks, and that was given by Artaxerxes. Many want to remove all gaps and put the 490 years into one point of time to fit some sort of spiritual meaning to the whole process.

Then they miss that only 2 people Simeon and Anna were probably the only ones left of a generation who expected those 69 weeks to be up. And yet it would be 30 more years after Jesus was born for Jesus to be baptized as the anointed one. So that is why I think there was still another gap between the end of the 69 week and the baptism of Jesus. Then the next gap is when Jesus was cut off.

The final gap is Daniel 9:27. The midst of the week of the sounding of the 7th Trumpet. That gap is after Jesus is declared King by the 7th Trumpet sounding. So Jesus as King completes the 70th week because Jesus is Christ the King. The Second Coming brings Jesus to earth to finish the 70th week after leaving so the kingdom would receive the fulness of the Gentiles.

I would agree that all the physical work was done for the promises in Daniel 9:24 via the Cross.

Yet the 70th week was put on hold for the same reason those promises were not fully implemented. That being the fulness of the Gentiles. It is not that the Gentiles replaced Israel. It was the fact the whole world was now covered by those promises, not just Daniel's people. But only Jesus as King of the earth can finish those 70 weeks and implement the promises.

Sorry got carried away. While people try to narrow the field to make some point. I think there is plenty of room in the historical record to allow for gaps.

 

[Timtofly]

Where do you get these wildly unsupported ideas from?
First, " There were 49 years until the work came to an abrupt stop by Artaxerxes, himself." can't be supported.
Second, it's not clear what decree you are referring to so I'll assume the one in the 7th year of Artaxerxes which people assign to 457 BC. If so, as the Bible makes very clear, that decree had nothing whatsoever to do with returning to and restoring Jerusalem. And that would make Daniel about 163 years old? Also, no where in Scripture does it specify when Daniel died.
he's roughly 15 years old when he's taken to exile in 605 BC - 457 BC = 163 years

You did not understand my point. Never made most of those claims, you think you read.

How do you even know the years without going outside of Scripture?

You just use the same old argument as every one that only you know which decree solves the puzzle you yourself keeps locked up in your head.

Scripture claims Artaxerxes stopped the work and then made a decree to finish the work. The work did not take the full 490 years. If you are not using Artaxerxes, then you are not using 457BC evidently.

 

[Timtofly]

Again, everything seen from English. Your mental block is hopelessly hard set.
Have you even examined the Hebrew text? It literally reads "...week one and half the week..." The question remains if you are going to add up the previous Weeks why don't you do it in this case too? Understanding the real reason why is part of cracking the true interpretation.

I don't add up the other weeks. Why would I add half to the same week it is referring to?

Still all in your head as a pointless argument. And you present yourself that way. So don't blame those reading your post.

Gabriel is referring to 70 weeks, then divides that same 70 weeks into 7 and 62. That is still missing a set of 7. Gabriel never defines the last week as a period of time. Daniel 9:27 is not the 70th week.

The 70th week is defined as the person called the Messiah the Prince.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

You did not understand my point. Never made most of those claims, you think you read.

How do you even know the years without going outside of Scripture?

You just use the same old argument as every one that only you know which decree solves the puzzle you yourself keeps locked up in your head.

Scripture claims Artaxerxes stopped the work and then made a decree to finish the work. The work did not take the full 490 years. If you are not using Artaxerxes, then you are not using 457BC evidently.

Already proved from HISTORICAL information that your statements are wrong. Jerusalem and the temple were built AND destroyed multiple times over the period of 62 weeks. In times of distress. JUST AS the prophecy said it would. There is no evidence anywhere that rebuilding took 49. NONE. Can't be shown or proven in any way. And the 457 BC decree had NOTHING to do with "sub" and "bana" or "rebuilding" and "restoring" Jerusalem or the temple. As was PROVEN by actual scripture.

So if you can not even prove your statements with actual scripture and FACTS, you have got nothing in this discussion. I've identified 8 FACTS. Not opinions. Not interpretations. FACTS. Unless you address these facts, your system is not according to FACTS found in scripture.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Another day goes by and still NO ONE wants to address the Ezra 6:14 Challenge. At least 8 FACTS identified about the 70 Weeks Prophecy. Not based on interpretation. Not based on any prophetic system. Actual FACTS. If these are not addressed by all interpretations, they are not according to Scripture.

That's what we constantly have to do. Hold all claims to the standard of Scripture. None of this loosey-goosey "it means this to me" stuff. Or stuff tied to a particular church tradition. Or to a particular Bible translation (usually in English).

No one has the courage to address these FACTS head on.
8 Points of the Ezra 6:14 Challenge

[update: please pay attention to the childish one who adds laughing emojis to the bottom of posts that he wants to mock and ridicule. Troll behaviour]

 

[marks]

Sorry got carried away.

Not at all!! I really appreciate all the effort you put into this!

I've had to read through it a few times, but I think I'm getting what you are saying. I'm going to need to let this sit in the mind for a bit. There really are a lot of different ways to look at this! Thank you again!

Much love!

 

[marks]

No one has the courage to address these FACTS head on.

That's not it. I'm not interested in your conversational style. Even this here, I have my own reasons, but you broadbrush everyone as cowards.

No, I'm just not interested in that kind of conversation.

Much love!

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

That's not it. I'm not interested in your conversational style. Even this here, I have my own reasons, but you broadbrush everyone as cowards.

No, I'm just not interested in that kind of conversation.

Much love!

Truth hurts. That's what happens when your views can't stand up to the truth found in Scripture.

 

[marks]

Truth hurts. That's what happens when your views can't stand up to the truth found in Scripture.

That has nothing to do with this. It's your personal manner. And again this is another example.

Much love!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

That's not it. I'm not interested in your conversational style. Even this here, I have my own reasons, but you broadbrush everyone as cowards.

No, I'm just not interested in that kind of conversation.

Much love!

Everyone here has addressed his so called "facts"

They just do not agree with his interpretation so he says no one is able to.