THERE is nothing more striking than the definiteness of the dates recorded in Scripture, both historically and prophetically. Rationalistic criticism, which is ever hostile, has not hesitated to impugn the correctness of some of these dates, so far as the history of the Bible is concerned, but in result has been forced to bow and acknowledge their accuracy.
We are now considering dates which are by no means vague, and it is well to remember, whatever the “higher critics” may endeavor to prove to the contrary, that Daniel was uttering a prophecy and not recording history. The communication given to Daniel by the angel Gabriel was made in the first year of Darius the Mede (chap. 9:1), about B.C. 538, whereas the point of departure for the seventy weeks was, as we have seen, the twentieth year of Artaxerxes (Neh. 2:11And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that wine was before him: and I took up the wine, and gave it unto the king. Now I had not been beforetime sad in his presence. (Nehemiah 2:1)), or B.C. 445. The very month even is stated, “And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king.”
A most interesting reckoning of dates, showing the accuracy of this prophetic period, will be found in Sir Robert Anderson’s recent work, “Daniel in the Critic’s Den.” The author writes: “The edict for the rebuilding of Jerusalem is to be assigned to the 1St Nisan, B.C. 445. From that epoch, ‘unto the Messiah, the Prince,’ was to be sixty-nine sevens of prophetic years. But 483 years of 360 days contain 173,880 days; and 173,880 days, computed from the 1St day of Nisan in the 20th year of Artaxerxes, ended on the loth day of Nisan in the 18th year of Tiberias Cesar — the day when, in the fulfillment of this, and of Zechariah’s prophecy, our Lord made His first and only public entry into Jerusalem.”
Whether we adopt the exact conclusions of the writer or no, there can be no doubt that the period of the advent of the Messiah is here intentionally most accurately specified. And, moreover, it is certain that godly souls in Israel were led at this very time to expect the coming of Christ. Wise men had come to Jerusalem from the east to worship Him, and all Jerusalem was troubled by their visit.
Simeon, in the same city, was “waiting for the consolation of Israel” (Luke 2:2525And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. (Luke 2:25)); nor was he alone in this, for Anna, the prophetess, “spake of Him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem” (vs. 38). Besides this, the testimony of John the Baptist rang forth in the wilderness of Judea, and in all the country about Jordan, calling upon the nation to repent. His voice was as of one crying in the wilderness, “Prepare ye the way of the Lord.”
The land of Judea, and especially the city of Jerusalem, was greatly stirred; minds were in suspense, “the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ or not” (Luke 4:1515And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all. (Luke 4:15)).
Priests and Levites came from Jerusalem, and sought out the Baptist in the wilderness, in their anxiety to know who the man could be that drew such crowds to the river Jordan, and John “confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ” (John 1:2020And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. (John 1:20)).
The Christ, then, was expected, and about this very time, in fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy that “unto the Messiah, the Prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks.”
But not only did Daniel foretell His advent, His rejection was as clearly predicted. “And after the three score and two weeks” — for the definite article should here be inserted — “shall Messiah be cut off.” The marginal reading of the next clause is doubtless correct — “and shall have nothing.” He was “born King of the Jews,” “but they received Him not.” Though the clearest prophecies were fulfilled at His birth and all through His life of public service, yet was the Jewish nation blind as to His Messianic glory. The gospel narrative bears ample testimony to this. Scribes and Pharisees, chief priests and rulers, yes, all the religious teachers of the people, were first and foremost in His rejection, and at length fulfilled the very voices of the prophets, read every Sabbath-day in their synagogues, in condemning Him (Acts 13:2727For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him. (Acts 13:27)). “After the three score and two weeks,” that is, after sixty-nine of the weeks were ended (for seven weeks had preceded the sixty-two), Messiah was cut off, and, instead of the crown of David, was given the cross; He received nothing of His earthly glory in connection with Israel. Other purposes God had in view, purposes not revealed in the prophetic writings of Old Testament times, purposes hidden until the fitting time for their revelation had come, and until that which formed the basis of their development had been accomplished in the death, resurrection, and ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the consequent descent of the Holy Ghost — yes, God’s eternal purpose in the calling of the Church, out of this world of Jew and Gentile, to share the heavenly glory of Christ.
Daniel was inspired to predict the cutting off and rejection of the Messiah. Thus far the prophecy has been fulfilled; sixty-nine out of the seventy have been accounted for, but the blessings of verse 24 have not yet been realized by Daniel’s people. So far from that, another prince is spoken of, a prince yet to come, whose people in the past destroyed the city and the sanctuary. If the cross of Christ has brought to the Christian infinite and eternal spiritual blessings, it has left the nation of Israel in a worse, far worse, condition than that in which they were when Daniel was a captive at Babylon.
The destruction of Jerusalem, and not its final blessing, followed the cutting off of Messiah. A people came, the Romans, under Titus, who destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple, and ever since the people have been dispersed and trodden down. An evident break occurs here in the prophecy. The seventieth week is separated from the sixty-nine. The time of the cutting off of Messiah is clearly and accurately reckoned, then follows an undefined and lengthened period during which the city and sanctuary are destroyed, desolations are determined, and unrest, confusion, and war are prominent, How truly this has been the history of the Jewish nation since, yea, because of their rejection and crucifixion of Messiah, is manifest to all.