The two eclipses that are highlighted in bold lettering are the main
ones that we will study. The eclipse of March 13, 4 B.C., is the wrong one, as
we saw earlier. We can prove conclusively that the eclipse that coincided with
the deposition of the high priest, Matthias, occurred on January 9, 1 B.C.
Herod then died the end of January. This means that Jesus was born the
previous autumn at the Feast of Trumpets, September 29, 2 B.C.
Herod, Age 70, Died in 1 B.C.
Josephus tells us that Herod
was about 70 years of age when he died, for Josephus tells us in
Antiquities of the Jews, XVII, vi, 1,
And as he
despaired of recovering (for he was about the seventieth year of his
age), he grew fierce and indulged the bitterest anger upon all occasions.
Again, Josephus confirms this in another
book, Wars of the Jews, I, xxxiii, 1, where he writes about this same
topic,
Now Herod’s
distemper became more and more severe; and this because his disorders fell
upon him in his old age, and when he was in a melancholy condition. For he was
almost seventy years of age.
Josephus also
tells us that Herod was 25 years old in 47 B.C. when his father appointed him
governor of Galilee. (See Antiquities of the Jews, XIV, ix, 2, with
footnote.) If king Herod was 25 years old in the year 47-46 B.C., then he was
70 during the year 2-1 B.C. So we must find an eclipse that occurred in 2 or 1
B.C. to determine the time of his death. In our listing, we find there are
only two possibilities: one on July 17, 2 B.C., and another on January 9, 1
B.C.
Of these, we can immediately
eliminate the one that occurred on July 17, 2 B.C., because it came at the
wrong time of the year. Herod died two or three months before a Passover,
according to Josephus’ account. So this positively eliminates the eclipse in
July of 2 B.C. Josephus carefully and completely recorded the events from
Herod’s death to the Passover. So we have to look for a lunar eclipse that
occurred sometime during the winter, but certainly not as late as March.
THE ONLY POSSIBILITY is the
lunar eclipse that occurred on January 9, 1 B.C. No other eclipse occurred
near the time when Herod was 70 years old in 1 B.C. If Herod had died shortly
after the lunar eclipse of March 13, 4 B.C., he would have died at about the
age of 67, or at most 68. If Herod had died shortly after the lunar eclipse of
Nov. 8, 2 A.D., he would have been about 72.
We conclude, then, that Herod killed Matthias January 9, 1 B.C. Herod
himself died in late January, allowing Joseph and Mary to return from Egypt in
time for Passover in 1 B.C.
None of the ancient
historians or Church fathers placed his birth before 3 B.C. Most reckon His
birth in what we would today call 2 B.C. Tertullian was born around 160 A.D.
He was a Roman lawyer, one of the more educated and outstanding early Church
leaders. Tertullian’s knowledge of Roman history was as fresh as our knowledge
of the American Revolutionary War. He had easy access to all the records of
the Roman Empire by which he could date Jesus’ birth. In 198 A.D., Tertullian
wrote An Answer to the Jews, where he commented on the year of Jesus’
birth:
Let us see,
moreover, how in the forty-first year of the empire of Augustus, when he had
been reigning for twenty and eight years after the death of Cleopatra, the
Christ is born. (And the same Augustus survived, after Christ is born, fifteen
years; and the remaining times of years to the day of the birth of Christ will
bring us to the forty-first year, which is the twenty and eighth of Augustus
after the death of Cleopatra.)
Remember, Tertullian lived
some centuries before Dionysius, so he did not date events according to B.C.
or A.D. Instead, he dated these events according to Roman history, with which
he was so familiar.
Tertullian dated the birth of Jesus in three ways. First, he said that Jesus
was born in the 41st year of Augustus. We know that Augustus (Octavian) began
to rule in 43 B.C., so Octavian—later known as Augustus—was first appointed
Consul of Rome on August 19, 43 B.C. This is when Roman history dates the
beginning of the reign of Octavian. his 41st year went from 3 B.C. to 2 B.C.
Tertullian also
tells us that Augustus lived 15 years after the birth of Jesus. Roman
historians tell us that Augustus died on August 19, 14 A.D. He died precisely
56 years to the day after he had first become Consul of Rome, and so all the
historians record this unusual coincidence.
So according to
Tertullian, Jesus would have been born about 15 years prior to 14 A.D. or 2
B.C. (As you calculate, remember that there is no year zero.) This was 15
years before Augustus died, and it was the 41st year of his reign.
Finally,
Tertullian also says that the 41st year of Augustus (when Jesus was born) was
the 28th year after the death of Cleopatra. One of the key dates in Roman
history is the Battle of Actium, when Octavian’s naval forces defeated those
of Antony and Cleopatra. This battle is dated September 2, 31 B.C. A year
later, rather than face captivity and possible execution, she and Mark Antony
committed suicide in August of 30 B.C. This ended the power struggle and put
Octavian in full charge of Rome. Three years later, the Roman Senate
proclaimed him “Augustus.” The Roman Republic was dead; the Empire was fully
born.
Another early
Church leader, Irenaeus, states in his book, Against Heresies, III, xxi,
3, that “Our Lord was born about the 41st year of the reign of Augustus.”
Thus, he agrees with Tertullian that Jesus was born in 2 B.C.
Eusebius, the bishop of
Caesarea (264-340 A.D.), is known as “The Father of Church History.” He wrote
the first true history of the Christian Church. Of Jesus’ birth, he says in
Ecclesiastical History, Book 1, Sec. 5,
It was the forty-second year of Augustus’ reign
and the twenty-eighth after the subjection of Egypt and the deaths of Antony
and Cleopatra. . . .
Eusebius equates the 28th year after the death of Cleopatra with the 42nd year
of Augustus. In doing so, he corrects the possible misunderstanding in the
writings of Irenaeus and Tertullian, who say it was his 41st year. The 41st
year, strictly speaking, would have ended in August of 2 B.C., which was
close, but fell about a month short of the birth of Jesus. Jesus was born
September 29 of 2 B.C. So Bishop Eusebius pinpoints the time of Jesus’ birth a
little bit better than did Tertullian a century earlier.
The 42nd year of
Augustus extended from August of 2 B.C. to August of 1 B.C. The 42nd
year of Augustus went from August of 2 B.C. to August of 1 B.C. If Bishop
Eusebius was correct, then Jesus was born in September of 2 B.C. I believe
that He was born on the evening of the Feast of Trumpets, which in that year
fell on September 29.
Clement of
Alexandria (born about 150 A.D.) also says Jesus was born in the 15th year
before the death of Augustus Caesar—that is, in 2 B.C.
According to the eminent W.E.
Filmer, who wrote an article proving that Jesus was born in 2 B.C., “there
were, before the year 500, no less than ten Christian witnesses who agreed on
the year in which Christ was born.” He suggests that the reason so many
agreed on the year of His birth, even though they widely disagreed on other
dates, was that the Romans had official proof of the year of His birth. They
had, after all, conducted a census in the year of Jesus’ birth, which had
brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem for the registration. The results of this
census were apparently open for inspection, for Justin Martyr wrote in the
mid-second century in his First Apology, 34,
Now there is a
village in the land of the Jews, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which
Jesus was born, as you can ascertain also from the registers of the
taxing made under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judea.
And so we conclude that many
early Church leaders agreed upon the date of Jesus’ birth, because the Roman
records were open for all to see. It is unfortunate that most of those records
are now locked in the archives of the Vatican, where they remain hidden from
public view.
When Was Jesus’ Thirtieth
Birthday?
If Jesus was born in
September of 2 B.C., then He would have been baptized to begin His ministry at
the age of 30 in September of 29 A.D. The New Testament does not date the
beginning of Jesus’ ministry, but it does say that He was 30 when He began to
minister. Luke 3:23 says Jesus was “ABOUT thirty years of age” when He
began His ministry. In the Greek language, the word “about” does NOT mean
approximately, as we think in English today. It means precisely, or
in very close proximity to 30 years old.
We must date
Jesus’ ministry from the beginning of the ministry of John the Baptist, who
was about six months older than Jesus, and who likewise must have begun his
ministry at the age of 30, as the law prescribed for priests. Numbers 4:2 and
3 says,
2
Take the sum of the sons of Kohath
from among the sons of Levi, after their families, by the house of their
fathers, 3
From thirty years old and upward
even until fifty years old, all
that enter into the host, to do the work in the tabernacle of the
congregation.
We know from
Luke 1:36 that John’s mother was five or six months pregnant with him when
Mary conceived by the Holy Ghost. So this makes John five or six months older
than Jesus. John was of a priestly family (Luke 1:5), and so, like Jesus, he
would have begun his independent, full-fledged ministry at the age of 30. He
turned 30 years old in the spring of some year, and we know Jesus began His
ministry in the fall of that same year, also at the age of 30.
Both John and
Jesus began their ministries in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar. Luke
3:1-3 says,
1 Now in the fifteenth
year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar. . . 2 the Word of God
came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness. 3 And he
came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance
for the remission of sins.
Since the Bible dates his
ministry according to Roman history, we must look at Roman history to fix the
date of the start of John’s ministry. Once we determine this, we can simply
add another five or six months to establish the beginning of Jesus’ ministry
and His baptism.
Augustus (i.e., Octavian)
began his career on August 19, 43 B.C., when he was first appointed consul of
Rome. He died precisely 56 years later, on August 19, 14 A.D. Because of this
unusual coincidence, many Roman historians mention it in their writings,
making it one of the most well established dates in Roman history.
Tiberius, his adopted son,
began his reign when Augustus died, on August 19, 14 A.D. Tiberius, of course,
had been exercising power some time before Augustus actually died, and this
has led some to believe that the first year of Tiberius began a few years
earlier at the beginning of a co-regency. However, evidence tells us that
Tiberius never officially claimed that his first year began before the death
of Augustus.
Adam Rutherford tells us in
his Bible Chronology (p. 450) that shortly after Tiberius began to
reign, coins were minted in his honor in Antioch. These were double-dated as
the first year of Tiberius and the 45th year after the battle of Actium (Sept.
2, 31 B.C.). Roman historians often dated their history according to the
“Actium Era,” which began in September of 31 B.C. Keeping in mind that there
was no year zero, the 45th year of the Actium Era would extend from
September of 14 A.D. to September of 15 A.D.
These coins prove that the first year of Tiberius extended from 14 to 15 A.D.,
no matter what some may say about Tiberius ruling as a co-regent with Augustus
in the last few years of his life. As Rutherford asserts, “No instance is
known where the years of Tiberius’ reign were reckoned from his previous
partial association with Augustus” (Ibid., p. 451).
A couple of years later, more
coins were minted, and dated as the third year of Tiberius and the 47th year
of the Actium Era. Again, these prove that the reign of Tiberius was
officially recognized in his own time as beginning in 14 A.D. Tiberius never
attempted to extend the length of his reign by claiming the last few years of
Augustus’ reign on the basis of a co-regency.
So the 15th year
of Tiberius extended from August of 28 A.D. to August of 29 A.D. In His
Sovereignty, God saw to it that we would know precisely when John began his
ministry. Otherwise, it would have been useless information to know that he
began to preach in the 15th year of Tiberius. But God did not leave
us hanging. We know that John began to preach in the spring of 29 A.D. This
was the only spring season in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar.
Jesus Was Born on the Feast
of Tumpets
There are some who believe
Jesus was born on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles (Tishri 15), and
that He was circumcised on the eighth day of Tabernacles (Tishri 22). That
theory is plausible, only because it is the time when Christ will be birthed
in us at the appointed time in the future. But Jesus Himself was born
on the evening of Trumpets (Tishri 1).
In the law, God established
three very significant Holy Days in the autumn of the year. They all occur in
the seventh month of the Hebrew calendar, which is called the month of Tishri.
This correlates roughly with September or October of our modern calendar.
These Holy Days are as follows:
(1) Trumpets (Tishri 1)
(2) Day of Atonement (Tishri
10)
(3) Feast of Tabernacles (Tishri
15-22)
In order to fulfill the whole
law, neither John nor Jesus was eligible for initiation into the ministry
until they were fully 30 years old (Num. 4:3, 23, 30, 35, 39). We will see
that Jesus was baptized on the Day of Atonement (Tishri 10), five days before
the beginning of the Feast of Tabernacles. If He had been born on the first
day of Tabernacles, then He would not have come to John for baptism on the Day
of Atonement, because He would have lacked a few days yet to his 30th
birthday.
So the question is, how do we
know Jesus was baptized on the Day of Atonement? On that day the priests in
the temple were supposed to choose two goats. They were to cast lots over the
goats to see which one would be killed and which one would be sent into the
wilderness. (The full instructions are found in Leviticus 16.) When Jesus came
to John for baptism, all of his actions were meant to fulfill the requirements
of the Day of Atonement.
While the priests were
carrying out these rituals in the temple in Jerusalem, Jesus came to John for
baptism. John was the true High Priest in the eyes of God. Caiaphas was the
High Priest in the Temple, chosen by men. Jesus was, in effect, presenting
Himself as the first goat, which was to be “killed” for the cleansing of the
sanctuary. His baptism was the moment of His legal death. Baptism represents
death (Romans 6:4). After His baptism, Matthew 4:1 says, “Then was Jesus
led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.”
In other words, He
immediately fulfilled the pattern of the second goat, which at that time was
being led “by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness” (Leviticus
16:21). The Hebrew word translated “fit” here means seasonal, timely, or
ready. In this case, we see that the “fit man” was the Holy Spirit,
who always comes at the appointed time and season to do the work. And so we
see that Jesus’ baptism and the Spirit’s leading Him into the wilderness ran
directly parallel to the temple activities on the Day of Atonement. This can
only indicate that He was baptized on that feast day, nine days after His 30th
birthday on the Feast of Trumpets.
Jesus’ Crucifixion in 33 A.D.
Jesus’ ministry
lasted about three and a half years. Then, to fulfill the Feast of Passover,
He was crucified at the time all the people killed the Passover lambs. The
method God used to ensure the precise fulfillment of this type is amazing. The
law of Passover stated that the people were to kill the Passover lambs “in the
evening” (Exodus 12:6). The literal Hebrew text reads “between the two
evenings.” The first evening was at noon, when the sun began descending.
The second evening was when the sun actually set. Thus, the law said they were
to kill the lambs sometime in the afternoon.
Josephus tells us that it was
common practice to kill the Passover lambs at mid-afternoon. In his Wars of
the Jews, VI, ix, 3 we read,
So these
high-priests did so upon the coming of that feast which is called the
Passover, when they slay their sacrifices from the ninth hour till the
eleventh… [i.e., from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m.]
It was lawful to slay the
lambs any time after noon, so long as it was done before sunset. The people
all had to be indoors by sunset, and they were not allowed to leave the house
until the first light (Exodus 12:22).
Jesus was put on the cross at
the third hour of the day (roughly 9:00 a.m.), and he died at the ninth hour
of the day (roughly 3:00 p.m.). There was a ruling of the Sanhedrin that the
Passover lambs should not be killed until a half hour past noon, lest any
should mistakenly kill the lamb too early. But at noon, God suddenly imposed
darkness upon the whole land. Luke 23:44 tells us,
44
And it was about the sixth hour [noon], and there was a
darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.
Thus, darkness covered the
land for three hours, from noon until about 3:00 p.m. The people were no doubt
very worried about this, since they could not kill the Passover lambs in the
darkness. That would have been unlawful. One can only imagine the relief they
must have felt when the sun finally came out at the ninth hour. Immediately,
thousands of lambs were hastily slain by a city full of worried people—and at
that moment Jesus died as the true Passover Lamb who had come to take away the
sin of the world.
According to Kudlek and
Mickler’s book on eclipses mentioned earlier, there was a lunar eclipse late
that same afternoon. Remember, Passover was always held on a full moon,
because it was the 14th day of the lunar month. Thus, every so often there
would be a lunar eclipse on that day, though very seldom would it have been
visible in Jerusalem. But on April 3, 33 A.D. (Passover that year) there was
just such a lunar eclipse visible in Jerusalem. It was visible in the western
Roman Empire about 3:00 p.m. and in Jerusalem at 5:10 p.m. When the moon rose
over Jerusalem that fateful day, it was already in eclipse, as even as Joseph
of Arimathea was hurrying to bury the body of Jesus in his own tomb.
We know from Luke’s account
that a supernatural darkness covered the land from the sixth hour to the
ninth, or from noon to 3:00 p.m. But two hours after the sun reappeared, there
was a natural eclipse of the moon. These two heavenly signs marked the date of
the crucifixion on April 3, 33 A.D.
We have now established the historic evidence that Jesus was born in
September of 2 B.C. Rome was celebrating its 750th year of history,
and Augustus Caesar was celebrating his Silver Jubilee. Peace reigned
throughout the Empire, and the signs in the heavens led astrologers everywhere
to believe that the world was entering into a new Golden Age. We have seen
that the Roman Senate passed a decree making Augustus Caesar the Father of the
Country in February of 2 B.C., which everyone in the Empire had to ratify in
the following year. Joseph and Mary had to go to Bethlehem for this
registration. There Jesus was born in September of that year.
Three months
later, while still in Bethlehem, the Magi arrived in Jerusalem asking about
the newborn king. King Herod was not pleased and ordered all babies up to two
years old near Bethlehem to be killed. Joseph and Mary escaped and took Jesus
to Egypt, the “house of Pharaoh,” for safekeeping. Jesus was three months old
at the time, which was precisely the age that Moses was brought into Pharaoh’s
house for safekeeping many years earlier.
Within two
weeks, King Herod pronounced judgment upon the conspirators who had torn down
Rome’s golden eagle from the temple, and that evening there was an eclipse of
the moon, January 9, 1 B.C. Herod died about two weeks later, allowing Jesus’
family to return to their home in Nazareth.
When Jesus was
grown, He came to John for baptism on the Day of Atonement in September of 29
A.D. This was the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, the
adopted son of Augustus Caesar, who had died August 19, 14 A.D. Jesus’
ministry lasted three and a half years, and He was crucified at Passover,
April 3, 33 A.D.
Jesus’ 2000th
birthday fell on the Feast of Trumpets, September 11, 1999. This date may yet
prove to have great significance, because of Hosea 6:1-3, which says,
1
Come, and let us return unto the
LORD: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind
us up. 2
After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we
shall live in his sight. 3
Then shall we know, if we
follow on to know the LORD: his going forth is prepared as the morning; and he
shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the
earth.
Psalm 90:4 and 2
Peter 3:8 seem to define a prophetic “day” as a thousand years. Bible scholars
and teachers have suggested for many years that Hosea’s prophecy might be
fulfilled after Jesus’ 2000th birthday. Of course, even if this is
so, it must be kept in mind that Hosea says these things could be fulfilled
anytime in the THIRD DAY, or the third millennium.
We ourselves are
simply marking the beginning of the third millennium from the birth of Jesus
in order to give notice that the world has reached another important date that
will have long-term effects upon history. We believe that the Kingdom of God
will now be preached with greater effectiveness throughout the earth. We
believe that the nations will come to realize that man’s governments and all
human wisdom will fail to bring peace to the earth. We believe that the
angelic message given to the simple shepherds of Bethlehem on the night of
Jesus’ birth is about to be fulfilled: “On earth peace, good will toward
men.”
Daniel’s 70 Weeks Ended in 33
A.D.
I was brought up a good
dispensationalist, as many others were. I read many theories attempting to
explain the timing of Daniel’s 70 weeks. When I finally read Adam Rutherford’s
book, Bible Chronology, as part of my study of timing, I began to see
how my beliefs were not based on viable historical data. I began to see that
key dates had been manipulated to make it turn out according to biased
understanding. It began to dawn on me that we needed to adjust our
understanding to fit the facts, not adjust the facts to fit our understanding
of the Bible.
In other words, prophecies
should be understood in light of how they were actually fulfilled in history.
History is fulfilled prophecy.
The plain fact of history is
that Daniel’s 70 weeks (490 years) began in 458 B.C. with the decree of
Artaxerxes I, and it ended 490 years later in 33 A.D. with the crucifixion of
Jesus. In other words, the crucifixion occurred at the end of the 70
weeks, not in the middle of the final “week," as I had been taught. So let us
take a closer look at Daniel 9:24-27 now in the light of the history already
presented.
24 Seventy weeks
[i.e., 70 rest year cycles, or 490 years] are determined upon thy people
and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of
sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting
righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most
holy. 25 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 [i.e., 7 rest year cycles, or 49 years] and
threescore and two weeks [62 x 7 = 434 years]… 26 And after
threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off… 27 And He shall
confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the midst of the week He
shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. . .
It is not our intention to do
a complete study on this subject, as that would take an entire book in itself.
The question we must resolve here is the meaning of verses 26 and 27. The
Messiah was to be “cut off” sometime after the 62-week period. Daniel’s three
time periods are as follows:
(1) Seven Weeks 458 B.C. - 409 B.C.
(2) Sixty-Two Weeks 409 B.C.
- 26 A.D.
(3) One Week
26 A.D. - 33 A.D.
Daniel’s prophecy tells us
that “the sacrifice and the oblation” would cease in the midst of the final
week of years (26-33 A.D.). This turns out to be the fall of 29 A.D.,
specifically, the Day of Atonement of that year, when Jesus presented
Himself to John for baptism.
We usually assume that the
crucifixion ended the Old Testament sacrificial system, and most certainly, it
did mark the full end of sacrifice insofar as the Christian is concerned. The
priests continued sacrificing in the Temple for another 40 years, until the
Temple was destroyed by the Romans. Thus, it is obvious that Daniel’s prophecy
spoke only from God’s perspective about the efficacy of those sacrifices and
oblations. No sacrifice after Jesus’ presentations had any relevance to the
sin question. The midst of Daniel’s 70th week marks the time of Jesus’
baptism, when He presented Himself as the true Goat. Jesus later presented
Himself as the true Lamb at Passover of 33 A.D., marking the end of Daniel’s
70 weeks.
These are the two great days
in which Jesus presented Himself to the Father as the Sacrifice for sin. The
first was a legal death, when He “died” by means of baptism. The second
was His actual death on the Cross.
There are two great works of
Christ to be considered here, not just one. Those who understand the law of
the two goats (Lev. 16) and compare it with the law of the two doves needed to
cleanse the lepers (Lev. 14) will understand how this works. Both the first
goat and the first dove were killed; while the second goat and the second dove
were released alive. The first was a death work; the second a living work.
These form the basic foundation of the two works of Christ in His two
“comings."
Jesus came the first time to
die, and we are expected to “die with Him” daily. He comes the second time
alive, that we who have died with Him might also live with Him.
But while these things are
all very important for our overall understanding, we must limit ourselves to a
discussion of Daniel’s 70 weeks. Jesus was “cut off” after the 62-week period,
as Daniel 9:26 indicates. This cutting off actually worked out in two stages:
His baptism, and His crucifixion. I believe that this is why Daniel’s prophecy
is worded the way it is. Daniel does not say that He would be cut off
in the midst of the 70th week. It merely says He would be “cut off” after
the 62-week period, i.e., after 26 A.D. Thus, He must be “cut off” during the
final week of years, 26 - 33 A.D.
So the Messiah was indeed cut
off, but it took place in two stages: the first at the beginning of His
ministry in the fall of 29 A.D.; the second at Passover of 33 A.D.
Nonetheless, Daniel 9:27
talks about this final week and pinpoints the midst of this week as the time
when the sacrifice and oblation cease. History shows that God was talking
about His baptism, not the crucifixion. In the eyes of God, the sacrifices and
oblations (at least those performed on the Day of Atonement) became irrelevant
at that point, for now the True Goat had been presented to God.
The fact that the Temple
priests continued to offer sacrifices and oblations long after this date is of
no consequence to us. It is not what men do, but what God accepts that is
important. Sacrifices would not actually cease for many years, but in the eyes
of God, that era had ended in 29 A.D. Hebrews 9:12-14 says,
12 Neither by the blood
of goats and calves, but by His own blood He entered in once into the holy
place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 13 For if the
blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the
unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; 14 How much
more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself
without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living
God?
The usual theory is that “the
clock stopped," either at the beginning of the 70th week or in the middle of
it, and will be resumed at some point in the future. These views become
irrelevant, once we see that Jesus was indeed crucified at the full end of the
490-year period. Jesus’ baptism in the midst of the week did not stop any time
clocks. Furthermore, Daniel 9:27 is not talking about an “antichrist” who will
put a stop to modern Temple sacrifices in Jerusalem at some future point. It
is talking about what happened at Jesus’ baptism. Jesus is the One who put an
end to the sacrificial system. And Jesus is the One who confirmed the New
Covenant with many during that week from 26-33 A.D.
Nearly the entire concept of
modern Dispensationalism is based upon a faulty knowledge of history. The
beginning points of Daniel’s 70 weeks are manipulated without regard to actual
Persian history that is conclusively established by astronomy. The dates are
manipulated in order to make Jesus’ crucifixion date fit their view of
prophecy. They have Him crucified in the middle of the 70th week, in order to
“stop the clock” and push the final week or half-week into the future. To make
matters worse, the view then mandates the re-establishment of animal
sacrifices on the old Temple site, as if God would have any regard for them.
This view tramples on the blood of Christ and makes void His Sacrifice.
Christians have no business dabbling in such a view. My tolerance for other
viewpoints is greater than average, but not when they begin to undermine the
blood of Jesus and its effectiveness for sin. This is basic to Christianity
itself.
Modern Dispensationalism also
does not understand the concept of Blessed Time. They seldom relate it to
Jesus’ statement to Peter in Matthew 18:21-22 about forgiving “seventy times
seven” times. We can hardly blame them for not knowing how the principle of
Blessed Time works, because this appears to be a new understanding not
revealed in the past. Yet it is clear now that Blessed Time, as well as Judged
Time and Cursed Time, are all cycles of forgiveness—grace periods, during
which time God “forgives," withholding judgment for sin. Once we understand
this, we can see that the purpose of the 70 weeks of Daniel was to bring us to
the Cross, when God called the world into the Divine Courtroom and reckoned
the account for the whole world. The whole world was found carrying an
insurmountable debt to sin; but that entire debt was placed upon Jesus Christ,
who paid it in full by His death on the Cross. If He had done this before the
end of the seventy weeks (such as in the middle of the final week), He would
have violated His own principle of Blessed Time, when judgment is deferred by
grace 490 times. Thus, Jesus’ statement to Peter lays down an important
principle that is not only a moral command to us, but also a prophetic law
that God Himself reveals to us by personal example.
