HI Doug:
JCanon,
Thank you for your contribution. Am I therefore correct in understanding that you assume the 70 years are measured from a "depopulation" of the land until the Fall of Babylon??
You know, people often complain about my long posts, but inevitably short statements often leave more questions, such as this. But at least open discussions clarify these details. Your above assumption is incorrect, it turns out. I do not end the 70 years with the classic "fall of Babylon" but six years later. The prophecy of the 70 years of servitude was under "Nebuchadnezzar and his sons" and Darius the Mede who ruled for six years after the fall of Babylon is included in that category since he was the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar. As well, it appears that when Darius the Mede began to rule Babylon, the primary king of Babylon, Nabonidus, was still at large in Borsippa and was not removed from the throne until Cyrus began to rule at which time he was placed under house arrest. Thus technically the NB empire kings and the sons of Nebuchadnezzar ruled 6 years past the takeover of Darius the Mede. The 70 years ends with the end of the NB empire not the death of Belshazzer, per my interpretation. I could add more detail here, but I'll await your specific questions, if any (smile).
In my understanding, the destruction of Jerusalem was an unnecessary event, despite the completion of 70 years of desolations.
I would not directly disagree with that, but only state that the 70 years of "desolation" was directly related to paying back missed sabbaths. Technically Jerusalem didn't need to be destroyed for that to happen, but of course, it facilitated it.
I do not find Josephus account, as you provide it, to be in any way contrary to my understanding.
Wow. I find that rather humorous, but then, I'm not sure which reference in Josephus you would be referring to. My two key references are in Antiquities X and XI, regarding the seventy years being connected with year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar and "when the people went off their land."
10.9.7 " [In the] the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar... he took those Jews that were there captives [in Egypt], and led them away to Babylon. And such was the end of the nation of the Hebrews...., but the king of Babylon, who brought out the two tribes, placed no other nation in their country, by which means all Judea and Jerusalem, and the temple, continued to be a desert for seventy years."
11.1.1 1. IN the first year of the reign of Cyrus (1) which was the seventieth from the day that our people were removed out of their own land into Babylon, God commiserated the captivity and calamity of these poor people, according as he had foretold to them by Jeremiah the prophet, before the destruction of the city, that after they had served Nebuchadnezzar and his posterity, and after they had undergone that servitude seventy years, he would restore them again to the land of their fathers, and they should build their temple, and enjoy their ancient prosperity.
The above establish that Josephus assigns the 70 years of servitude specifically to the last deportees out of the land in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar. His reference to "these poor people" is the reference to those who had been left behind in the land after the destruction of Jerusalem to continue harvesting the crops, but who went down into Egypt. Note Josephus counts the seventy years as the "seventieth from the day that our people were removed out of their own land into Babylon." The people as a composite nation were not completely removed out of their land, leaving it desolate, until the last deportation. Finally, as noted, "Nebuchadnezzar and his posteriory" meant Nebuchadnezzar and his sons. Darius the Mede took over Babylon after it was conquered, essentially without much of a fuss. That's because Darius the Mede was a Babylonian prince and had been a general in the Babylonian army. So it was just one son of Nebuchadnezzar killing his cousin. Thus the remainder of the 70 years of servitude included six years under Darius the Mede and Nabonidus. It would not be until the 1st of Cyrus, when Darius the Mede abdicated to Cyrus that the Jews were released. The Jews were still in exile under the 6-year rule of Darius, the Mede.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to provide me with a scan of the context of the page(s) from Josephus.
See above. Josephus' works are available online at several places, fortunately: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/josephus/ant-11.htm
I don't know any Martin Anstey. Does he say that the 70 years ran as I have described your position above?
Doug
Again, Martin Anstey is known for his famous "Romance of Bible Chronology" which is also available online, and basically opting to believe the Bible's reference that there were only 483 years from the 1st of Cyrus to the baptism of Christ, which when dated to 29 CE means the 1st of Cyrus falls in 455 BCE. This is my conclusion as well. That means the Bible reduced the popular Persian Period by 82 years, which is quite easy to do actually. Generally, the Bible vs secular records shows the NB Period is 26 years longer per Josephus and the Bible, and the Persian Period is 82 years shorter.
The belief that the "seventy weeks" must begin in 455 BCE is expounded now by others such as Philip Mauro. This differs from many others who try to link the beginning of the 70 weeks to other events, such as JWs who try to link 455 BCE to the 20th of Artaxerxes.
By the way, here is a great quote that some of us were talking about in regard to the messiah, and your reference about the Jewish historians in agreement with the secular historians. It also shows it was commonly thought that Herod was the messiah based upon the 70 weeks prophecy! The Jewish history only assigns 52 years to the entire Persian Period per this quote by Mauro:
In order to show how great is the uncertainty as to the length of the Persian empire, we have only to mention the fact that, according to Jewish traditions in the days of Christ (which surely are as much to be trusted as heathen traditions of a later date), the period of the Persian kings was only 52 years. Here is a difference of 153 years, and that in regard to a matter which is essential to an understanding of this prophecy. Sir Isaac Newton says that "some of the Jews took Herod for the Messiah, and were called 'Herodians.' They seem to have grounded their opinion on the 70 weeks." Inasmuch as the accession of Herod was 34 years before Christ, it is evident that the opinion of the Herodians required a comparatively short Persian period. On the other hand, the opinions of certain modern expositors are based upon a Persian era of supposedly long duration.
The basis for dating the "seventy weeks" to the 1st of Cyrus is discussed by him in detail where he notes:
Upon the plain and simple facts stated above it is evident that every expositor who sets aside this decree of Cyrus as the starting point of the 70 weeks, and substitutes some other event, must either be unaware of the testimony of Isaiah 44 and 45 (and of other Bible-testimony to which we will refer presently) or else he prefers the guesses of a heathen astronomer (who had no means of knowing the facts which occurred over five hundred years before his time) to the evidence of Scripture.
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/images/1921_mauro_seventy-weeks/ms-02.html
Basically, because the prophecy of Isaiah says that Cyrus was to rebuild both the temple and the "city", there is little alternative than to assign the beginning of the 70 weeks to the 1st of Cyrus. In that case, there is an 82-year discrepancy with popular secular chronology, which Mauro and Anstey, of course, challenge academically to correct. Except my research specifically identifies where the extra years are and corrects the timeline.
However, be aware that the 52-year reference to the entire length of the Persian Period by the Jews is likely "cryptic". That is, they don't likely believe that the Persian Period was only 52 years. The actual length was 122 years when you count from 455 BCE to 333 BCE. Interestingly enough, if you add 70 years to 52 years you get 122 years. Coincidental interval? Well here's another "coincidence." The Jews date the 6th of Darius which is the year the temple was completed to 352 BCE. The actual date is 434 BCE. The revised secular date is 516 BCE. Of course, the 516 BCE date represents the 82-year discrepancy (516-82=434). Interestingly enough, is you subtract 82 years from 434 BCE you get 352 BCE (434-82=352). Thus the Jewish dates are not considered for their face value as simply being in error, but cryptic references to what they knew to be the original chronology. Relevant intervals relating to the major temple events can be used to covert all the Jewish rabbinical dates. This doesn't necessarily prove anything, but it establishes reasonable suspicion that the Jews never lost track of the original timeline.
But, again, for your reference, Doug, the primary reference for the 70 years of desolation and for the land to pay back its sabbaths for 70 years is based upon the 390 years of error assigned to the 10 tribes and 40 years to Judah, totalling 430 years. Divide that by the two types of agricultural sabbaths of 7 and 50 years and it results in 70 years:
430/7 = 61.4
430/50 = 8.6
61.4 + 8.6 = 70
So the 70 years of the desolate land to pay back its sabbaths is totally non-negotiable . I'm more than happy to agree to disagree with you on this point, therefore.
JCanon
