When Is a Wall Not a Wall?

According to Pre-Millennial (Rapture) theologians, when its a city!

Daniel 9:25 is a vital verse for the popularized predictions of pre-Millennialist teachers. Many use highly impressive mathematical calculations to show that Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, on what we call Palm Sunday, is exactly Daniel’s predicted 483 years. Their math depends on four major assumptions: 1) special prophetic years of 360 days length, not standard solar years, 2) a preferred, but historically uncertain date for one of two major decrees about Jerusalem, 3) that the preferred decree actually authorizes restoring a city, and 4) that Jesus was crucified in 33 AD. These assumptions may be true or they may be false. Let’s take an honest look.

The Bible does not state anywhere that special prophetic years exist or should be used to interpret prophecies. As this is the least of the four assumptions, I’ll just say that honest differences exist on this subject. A closer look at the other three assumptions seems to remove the need for special prophetic years entirely, so even if they were a valid concept, they wouldn’t matter.

The common Premillennialist 483-year formula depends on a decree given Nehemiah sometime in 444 or 445 BC. Not a very solid starting point for a precise proof mathematical formula, is it? Regardless, a closer look at Daniel’s inspired and inerrant words do not support this second of two decrees as a starting point anyway. From the English Standard (ESV) translation, and it is essentially the same in any sound translation, here are the verses that premillennialists say were fulfilled by Jesus on that first Palm Sunday as “the coming of an anointed one”.

²⁵Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. ²⁶ And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing.

The bible doesn’t say if it is a human decree, a divine decree, one issued by Jews, or one issued by Gentiles. But a human decree may be correct. We might note that we do not have the full text of any decree available to verify its content. Regardless what kind of decree, verses in Ezra, Nehemiah, and Haggai show that well before Nehemiah, Jerusalem already had significant rebuilding, a form of government, and civil courts in addition to the Temple restoration which is properly the main subject of the book of Ezra. Simply put, Jerusalem as the city and the center of the Jewish religion was already reestablished prior to Nehemiah’s role.

Here’s a few highlights. First of all, besides non-exile Jews who may have inhabited the city for a long time, the first wave of returning exiles came in 515 BC, that is, some 50ish years before Nehemiah. So, Jerusalem had inhabitants (Ezra 4:6). This implies houses they lived in. Long before Nehemiah, the enemies of the Jews stated that “they are rebuilding their city” (Ezra 4:12ff), which included some work on the walls. And of course, can you imagine the huge workforce and priesthood involved in rebuilding the massive (It was HUGE!) Jewish Temple with its primary architecture and furnishings without significant restoration of other parts of Jerusalem? This is all long before Nehemiah.

In Nehemiah we find other indications that the city was well restored before he began work on the wall and gates. We might note that Nehemiah’s pre-work inspection (2:17) was only for the walls and gates with no attention whatsoever to anything in the city proper. Curious for a decree supposedly to rebuild a city. In chapter 3, we find multiple statements about men who ruled “districts” of Jerusalem. Without people resident, there could be no districts to rule. Also in chapter 3 of Nehemiah, we find verses with multiple, existing houses (not clan or family relationships sometimes called “house of” ) belonging to specific men used to identify key points along the wall being rebuilt. In order to be useful as construction markers, these houses had to precede repair to the wall portions in question. There is no mention of houses being built. In Nehemiah 5:12 we find mention of “every man from his own house.” So it seems inescapable that the city itself had been substantially restored before the decree was given to Nehemiah to rebuild the wall. The book of Nehemiah affirms that he did indeed rebuild the walls and gates and says nothing of any other part of the city being improved by his activity.

And just for fun, a prophet named Haggai wrote about the Temple Ezra would rebuild well over a half-century before Nehemiah got his decree, returned to Jerusalem, and started to repair the wall and gates. (Haggai 1:2-4) Thus says the Lord of hosts: “These people say the time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the Lord.” Then the word of the Lord came by the hand of Haggai the prophet, “Is it a time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, while this house lies in ruins?” Clearly, not only had houses been rebuilt, they were nicely decorated. The Hebrew word for panels describes a decorative woodwork or wainscotting type addition. And the people in these houses had already delayed restoration of the Temple for some time before this Word from God.

So, when is a wall not a wall? According to premillennialist teachers, “When its a city!”

Of course, while ignoring what I wrote above some might say, “Can’t you read the clear words of the bible? Look at Nehemiah 7:4!”. Using sound versions popular in premillenialist circles we read:

• KJV Now the city was large and great: but the people were few therein, and the houses were not builded.
• NIV Now the city was large and spacious, but there were few people in it, and the houses had not yet been rebuilt.
• NKJV Now the city was large and spacious, but the people in it were few, and the houses were not rebuilt.
• NASB Now the city was large and spacious, but the people in it were few and the houses were not built.

Gosh. I guess I’m wrong after all. Or not. After all, whatever the verses above say, their correct understanding and translation cannot contradict the many verses I mentioned earlier that say houses were already rebuilt in Jerusalem, and more than just houses.

The most likely explanation is that at the time of Nehemiah 7:4, the number of rebuilt houses was small compared to the number of homes before the war and those that would be there when the city was fully re-populated. We might also call this statement a hyperbole. We need only look to the previous verse to find further support for the comparative or hyperbolic interpretation. (7:3) “And I said to them, ‘Let not the gates of Jerusalem be opened until the sun is hot. And while they are still standing guard, let them shut and bar the doors. Appoint guards from among the inhabitants of Jerusalem, some at their guard posts and some in front of their own homes.’” Without their own homes, they couldn’t stand guard in front of them. And a pile of rubble wouldn’t be a home, nor would it need a guard. In Nehemiah 11:1-2, a larger population is added, not an original one.

A wall is a wall is a wall. Not a city. So, the decree of 445/444 BC doesn’t mark the beginning of the 483 years to Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem. But the 458/457 BC decree to Ezra does establish the things required by Daniel 9:25. And the elapsed years point directly to Jesus’ anointing at his baptism in 26 AD, a time when he was openly revealed to Israel as the Son of God, the Lamb of God, and the promised Messiah/Christ. BTW, the title “Christ” literally means “the anointed one.” His baptism was his anointing and revelation to Israel, per John the Baptist and the Father’s own audible voice.

One final part. The premillennial position, unless somewhat arbitrarily adapted, requires Jesus to have been crucified in 33AD. This remains a widely believed date by Christians of all persuasions. Yet, it is not certain and quite possibly wrong.

In brief, since the 33AD date was developed, it has been found that our BC/AD dating system was originally incorrectly computed and the year 1 is more accurately about the year 3 or 4 BC. So, continued use of a 33AD crucifixion date would make Jesus about 37 years old when the Bible said he was about 30. It would also contradict John’s affirmation (John 2:20) that the Temple complex had been in construction for 46 years as the dates of its construction period are solidly established by evidence. While 33 AD does agree with a lunar determined Passover on a Saturday during the possible rule of Pontius Pilate, so also does 30 AD. This earlier year also agrees with the Bible’s statements about the time lapse of temple complex construction and the age of Jesus as he began his public ministry in 26 AD. As you might realize, changing to 30 AD for the crucifixion doesn’t change anything in sound bible theology. The original reasons 33 AD was chosen included matching the other bible statements now mismatched to that date. But those who wish the prophecy of Daniel to point from the 445/444 BC decree to Jesus’ entry to Jerusalem miss the target even further if they update to a 30 AD event.

And this 30 AD crucifixion date fits the timeline established by using the 458/457 BC Ezra decree and makes the entire prophecy about Jesus, his mission, his crucifixion, his death, and the beginning of the Gospel kingdom which is the major focus of Daniel’s dreams, visions, and events as well as the focus of the entire Old Testament. So, it seems that the prophecy doesn’t add up to the triumphal entry and crucifixion in 33 AD.

All this when we realize that a city is a city, not a wall.