The Command to Restore and Build
The last Persian king who issued a command related to Jerusalem was Artaxerxes I. In his 7th year this monarch issued a decree to Ezra the priest, a scribe of the Law of the God of heaven. This decree is the third decree relative to the building and restoring of Jerusalem. In analyzing this decree one observes that it went further than the previous decrees, in that it provided full religious and political liberty to the Jews.
First, it restored religious freedom to the priests and those involved in the religious services, granting their ancient privileges by removing all obstacles to their work. The decree said, “We inform you that it shall not be lawful to impose tax, tribute, or custom on any of the priests, Levites, singers, gatekeepers, Nethinim, of servant of this house of God” (Ezra 7:24).
The decree also restored to the Jews full political and judicial freedom by giving Ezra full liberty to appoint civil officers to rule the people beyond the river with the Jewish law code. The decree stated, “And you, Ezra, according to your God-given wisdom, set magistrates and judges who may judge all the people who are in the region beyond the River, all such as know the laws of our God and teach those who do not know them” (Ezra 7:25).
In addition, the decree specified Artaxerxes’ continued commitment to improve the appearance of the temple. Ezra wrote that God had put it in the king’s heart “to beautify the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem” (Ezra 7:27).
The result of this decree was that with the restoration of full religious and political freedom, both the building of the temple and the city would be fully finished. Thus Ezra could state about the king, “He extended mercy to us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to revive us, to repair the house of our God, to rebuild its ruins, and to give us a wall in Judah and Jerusalem” (Ezra 9:9).
These events in the history of Artaxerxes I we find also recorded in 1 Esdras 8. Josephus also recounted a similar history. However, he puts these events under King Xerxes I, the son of Darius I (Antiquities, XI, v, 1, 2). It is clear that Josephus confused Artaxerxes I with Xerxes I. If he would have placed these events under the next king, Artaxerxes I, the history would have been identical.
The Opposition
Ezra’s rebuilding efforts were not without problems. After 13 years of labor, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes I, the Jews’ adversaries had again succeeded in interrupting the work of rebuilding the city. At that time Nehemiah, the king’s cupbearer, met some Jews who had just arrived from Jerusalem in Shushan, one of the Persian palace cities. When Nehemiah inquired about the condition of the Jewish exiles in Judah, he received a bad report: The Jews are “in great distress and reproach. The wall of Jerusalem is also broken down, and its gates are burned with fire” (Neh. 1:3).
This news so deeply affected Nehemiah that the king took notice of it. When the king asked Nehemiah what was troubling him, he responded, “Why should my face not be sad, when the city, the place of my fathers’ tombs, lies waste, and its gates are burned with fire?” (Neh. 2:3).
Then King Artaxerxes I asked Nehemiah if he had any request. Nehemiah then petitioned that the king would send him “to Judah, to the city of my fathers’ tombs, that I may rebuild it” (Neh. 2:5). He requested also that the king would give him letters for safe passage “for the governors of the regions beyond the River, that they must permit me to pass through till I come to Judah” (Neh. 2:7). In addition, he requested a letter to the keeper of the king’s forest “that he must give me timber to make beams for the gates of the citadel which pertains to the temple for the city wall, and for the house that I will occupy (Neh. 2:8). The king granted his requests and he traveled to Jerusalem without any difficulty.
As soon as Nehemiah arrived in Judah he “viewed the walls of Jerusalem which were broken down and its gates which were burned with fire” (Neh. 2:13). Then he quickly designed plans to finish the rebuilding of the walls of the city. In spite of strong opposition, he was able with concerted efforts of the loyal Jews to complete the rebuilding of the walls in only 52 days (Neh. 6:15).
As Josephus confused Artaxerxes I with Xerxes, the above events Josephus put during the reign of Xerxes I instead of Artaxerxes I (Antiquities, XI, v, 6-8). It is clear that Josephus should have put this history under Artaxerxes I. If he had done that, there would have been agreement between Josephus’ history and the book of Ezra.
Some have interpreted the permission the king granted to Nehemiah as another decree of Artaxerxes I, but that is difficult to establish from the available documents. There were no written documents issued stating this permission. This is natural because the pervious decree the king had issued 13 years earlier contained all that was necessary to complete the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem. The letters the king wrote were letters Nehemiah requested for safe passage and for financial support to fund the building the gates of the citadel associated with the temple, and the building of his own house.
Conclusion
From our research it has become clear that each of the Persian kings Cyrus the Great, Darius I, and Artaxerxes I contributed to the decree to restore and build Jerusalem as predicted in Daniel 9:25. It was with the third and final decree under Artaxerxes I issued in 457 BC that the restoring and building of the city was accomplished. When we look at the accomplishments of each of these kings, we found that under the decree of Cyrus the rebuilding of Jerusalem began. Opposition under Cyrus’ son Cambyses, called Ahasuerus in Ezra 4:6, and the False Smerdis, named Artaxerxes in Ezra 4:7, stopped the rebuilding of the city until the second year of the reign of Darius I.
This period of opposition has been recorded by the Jewish historian Josephus and in 1 Esdras, and harmonizes precisely with the account in Ezra 4:6-24. These extra-Biblical sources support the linear chronological reading of Ezra 4. This means that in Ezra 4, King Ahasuerus is the Persian king Cambyses and King Artaxerxes is the False Smerdis. The accounts of Josephus and 1 Esdras harmonize with the chronological reading of Ezra 4. The linear chronology of Ezra 4 provides biblical evidence that the Jews were already rebuilding Jerusalem during the period between Cyrus the Great and Darius I.
Ellen G. White also supports the chronological reading of Ezra 4 and the fact that the rebuilding of Jerusalem had started between Cyrus and Darius I. Such a position points to the fact that in Ezra there were two kings named Artaxerxes—the False Smerdis in Ezra 4 and Artaxerxes I in Ezra 7, not one Artaxerxes as is suggested by the thematic interpretation of Ezra. For evidence of for the two different Persian kings named Artaxerxes in Ezra, see the first article of this series.
The second decree authorizing the rebuilding of Jerusalem was issued by King Darius I. Again there was an attempt by the opposition to stop the building process. An investigation into the ancient royal records by King Darius ascertained that the Jewish rebuilding efforts were legitimate, which is why he ordered the resumption of the rebuilding of the temple and city under the decree of Cyrus.
The third decree was issued in 457 BC by King Artaxerxes I, which led to the completion of the restoring and building of Jerusalem. As no precise dates are available for the previous decrees, and as Cyrus and Darius were actively involved in the rebuilding of the city, this last decree by Artaxerxes can be considered as the result of the combined effort of three kings, 457 BC can thus be considered as the date from which to count the prophetic period of seventy weeks predicted in Daniel 9:24-27.
Taking this date as a starting point brings us to the year 27 AD as the year of Christ’s baptism, the year 31 AD as the year of Christ’s death, and the year 34 AD as the termination of Jewish probation (the stoning of Stephen) at the end of the seventy prophetic weeks. The acceptance of the fulfillment of the specifics of this prophecy prevents people from getting involved in futurism with its speculative dispensationalism.
The acceptance by scholars of the date of 457 BC as the date for the beginning of the seventy prophetic weeks is key to opening the door for the acceptance of the 2300 prophetic days of Daniel 8:14 as the commencement of the antitypical day of Atonement of Jesus Christ’s High Priestly ministry during the hour of God’s judgment (Rev 14:7). Therefore, the acceptance of 457 BC is a crucial prerequisite for understanding Adventist eschatology.
Dr. P. Gerard Damsteegt is a retired professor of church history at the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary at Andrews University.