I had a mistake in the maths at one point not doing things in the right order.
In Dan 9 the messiah was going to be cut off (the crucifixion) at the end of 483 years (69 times 7) starting from when a decree went out to rebuild. One of the decrees is in Nehemiah 2 the 20th year of Artaxerxes of Persia which based on archeology was 445 BC. The author of Genesis (150 days, 5 months) Jubilees (150 days, 5 months) , and Revelation (times, time, half a time, 1260 days) are using 360 day a year calendars. So 445 BC minus 483 = -39 AD then minus another 1 year when going from BC to AD or vice versa 40 AD in Gregorian years. To convert to 360 day years then 483 times 5.24 days (the difference between Gregorian years of 365.24 and 360 day years)= 2530/ 360 = 7 year difference. Subtract 7 from 40 AD puts the crucifixion at 33 AD. Please explain if there is a problem with that math.
If the decree was 7th year of Artaxerxes 457 BC in Ezra then 457-483= -26, - another 1= 27 AD - 7 = 20 AD so that makes no sense unless someone has Jesus being born around 10 BC (the NT says something about Jesus 30th year)
Dear Brother, thank you for all three replies your effort, calculations, and desire for accuracy are genuinely appreciated.
You clearly care deeply about chronology and the integrity of the text, and I respect that.
Let me address your points carefully and biblically.
1. About the 360-day year
You have argued strongly that the Bible uses a
360-day year, based on:
- Genesis 7–8
- Jubilees
- Revelation 11–12
These examples do show the
prophetic calendar using round 30-day months, especially in apocalyptic literature.
However, the question is:
Does Daniel 9 require a 360-day year?
The answer is
no, because Daniel 9 never assigns any days, only:
שָׁבֻעִים – “weeks / units of seven”
The Hebrew term means
“sevens” not days, not lunar months, not solar years.
There is
zero linguistic requirement for 360-day years in Daniel 9.
Most Jewish interpreters from antiquity (including Josephus, Philo, early rabbis) treated the 70 weeks figuratively or symbolically not as exact-day mathematical calculations.
So:
✔️ 360-day prophetic calendar
exists
❌ but Daniel 9
doesn’t mandate it.
This means the conversion math may be interesting, but
the text doesn’t require it.
2. About the decree date: 445/444 BC vs. 457 BC
You argued strongly for a
Nehemiah 2 (445–444 BC) decree.
That is a valid view many dispensational scholars hold it.
But the Hebrew wording in Daniel 9:25 says:
מִן־מֹצָא דָבָר לְהָשִׁיב וְלִבְנוֹת יְרוּשָׁלִַם
“From the
issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem”
The key word is:
לְהָשִׁיב – “to restore” (not just rebuild walls)
Ezra 7 (457 BC) is the only decree that:
- restores Jewish law
- restores autonomy
- restores worship
- restores judicial authority
- restores the temple economy
Nehemiah’s decree (444 BC)
does not restore it only repairs the walls.
So historically and textually:
✔️ 445 BC is possible
✔️ 457 BC is linguistically stronger
This is why most classical and Jewish scholars use
457 BC, not
444 BC.
3. About the math leading to 20 AD or 18 AD crucifixion
Dear Brother, you are honest enough to admit your calculations were changing.
That alone shows your sincerity.
Let me lovingly say this:
If the math produces an impossible crucifixion year, that means the system not the Bible is flawed.
The Bible is consistent.
- Jesus’ ministry begins in “the 15th year of Tiberius” (Luke 3:1) → 27/28 AD
- Jesus is “about 30” at that time (Luke 3:23)
- Passover crucifixion fits 30–33 AD astronomically
Anything earlier (18–25 AD) simply does
not match the New Testament.
So any chronological system that pushes the crucifixion earlier than 30 AD is mathematically elegant, but
biblically impossible.
This is the problem with forcing 360-day conversions on a text that never requires them.
4. “2 Thessalonians 2 happened in 70 AD”
Paul says the man of lawlessness:
- exalts himself as God (2 Thess 2:4)
- sits in the temple of God
- performs false signs and wonders (2 Thess 2:9)
Josephus records:
❌ No individual claiming to be God
❌ No supernatural signs
❌ No global deception
❌ No covenant with many (Dan 9:27)
❌ No stopping of sacrifices by a false messiah
❌ No “breath of the Lord destroying him” (2 Thess 2:8)
So respectfully,
70 AD simply does not match Paul’s description.
Paul also wrote 2 Thess before 70 AD and said:
“Do not think the Day of the Lord has come.”
(2 Thess 2:2)
So Paul contradicts the idea that 70 AD fulfills the passage.
5. “All of Matthew 24 happened in 70 AD”
Jesus says:
- the gospel will be preached to all nations (Matt 24:14) not completed in 70 AD
- the sun and moon will be darkened (24:29) did not happen
- tribulation such as never was or never will be (24:21) WWII exceeded 70 AD
- they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds (24:30) did not occur
- angels gathering the elect (24:31) no record of this event
This cannot be compressed into 70 AD.
Jesus clearly divides:
- Local signs (70 AD) Luke 21
- Global final signs (end times) Matthew 24
6. “Revelation was written in 41 AD”
There is
zero historical evidence for a 41 AD date.
All early Church fathers agree:
- Irenaeus (AD 180)
- Clement of Alexandria
- Origen
- Victorinus
- Eusebius
all testify Revelation was written
during the reign of Domitian (81–96 AD).
There is
no manuscript
no commentary
no Greek tradition
no early writer
no historian
that places Revelation in 41 AD.
So that part of your system is historically unsupported.
7. “The final 7 years were 63–70 AD”
Daniel 9:27 says the one who makes the covenant:
- strengthens a covenant with many
- stops sacrifices
- sets up an abomination
- is destroyed at the consummation
Nothing in 63–70 AD fits that complete sequence.
The Zealots stopping sacrifices was:
- not covenant-related
- not done by a single ruler
- not accompanied by abomination signs
- not followed by the ruler’s destruction
- not followed by everlasting righteousness (9:24)
Back to the Topic: Does Daniel 9 support a dual 70-week structure?
Yes! because:
1. The Hebrew word נֶחְתַּךְ (“divided out, cut off”)
allows sequential “divisions” of time.
2. The structure of the prophecy is chiastic
A–B–C–D–C’–B’–A’
3. There is a clear gap after the 69th week (Dan 9:26)
4. Jesus places part of Daniel 9 in the future (Matt 24:15)
5. Paul places elements of Daniel 9 in the future (2 Thess 2)
6. John places elements of Daniel 9 in the future (Rev 11–13)
Thus:
✔️ A dual-layer fulfillment fits both the
textual grammar and the
biblical canon.
Blessings Dear Brother