Dr. Peter Ruest wrote: Hi Mike, do you know Bob Newman's report about this?
You probably do. But just in case... This is from the current IBRI catalog
(www.ibri.org ... Mail your order to: IBRI, P.O. Box 423, Hatfield, PA
19440-0423): "RR9 (F). Robert C. Newman, The Time of the Messiah. 1981, 1988.
12 pp, $2.00. ISBN 0-944788-09-2. The historical sources from the first two
centuries AD indicate that the period was a time when the Messiah was
expected to appear in fulfillment of some OT prophecy, probably Daniel
9:24-27. The classic calculation of Sir Robert Anderson faces some serious
difficulties, but these may be resolved by taking the "weeks" of this
prophecy to be the OT seven- year land use cycle. The result points to Jesus
as the fulfillment of this prophecy."
Yes, I was aware of Newman's article on the "70 weeks." By the way, those who
care to read it do not need to pay $2.00. It is fully published at IBRI's web
site. The $2.00 charge is for those requesting a printed copy by snail mail.
Which I would not recommend doing, since I cannot recommend the article. For
it is, in my opinion, deficient in explaining Daniel's "70 weeks" prophecy in
several respects.
For one thing, Newman fails altogether to deal with this prophecy's "70th
week." He ends his discussion with its 69th week, during which time his
interpretation says that Christ was crucified. However, the prophecy itself
tells us that the Messiah would "put an end to sacrifice and offering" "in
the middle of" its 70th week. He also entirely fails to address a major
problem with understanding this prophecy. That is, understanding when the "70
weeks" began to run, in light of the fact that Josephus twice clearly
indicates that Nehemiah returned to Jerusalem to begin his rebuilding work in
the "25th year of Artaxerxes," which historians tell us was 440 BC, while
Nehemiah indicates that Artaxerxes gave him permission to do so in his "20th
year" as king of Persia.
This is a real problem for Newman and others like him who begin their count
of the "70 weeks" in 445 BC. For the best current scholarship highly regards
Josephus' dating of Nehemiah's return to Jerusalem. There are two ways of
reconciling this apparent contradiction, both of which point to 440 BC as the
year Daniel's "70 weeks" began to run, not 445 BC as Newman's article would
have us believe. One of these ways is discussed at some length in John
Bright's third edition of A History of Israel. It offers us what I believe is
a reasonable solution to this problem. However, I believe the real solution
lies elsewhere.
In any case, thanks, Peter, for your response.
Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 22 2002 - 15:49:00 EDT