We have seen that Anderson's calculation is in error on practically every level. Some of these problems are known to dispensational scholars. Dr. Harold Hoehner, in his book Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, presents a different version of Anderson's calculation that gives alternative dates.
This alternative solved some of the difficulties of Anderson's work and it has now become widely accepted in dispensational circles. Hoehner's work is based on the same principles as Anderson's, but starts and finishes the 70 Weeks one year later. However we shall see that his calculation does not work either.
The most obvious pointer that Anderson was in error was his year for the crucifixion. Hoehner realised that an AD 32 crucifixion was impossible, for Christ would then have had to die on a Sunday or Monday. Anderson himself realised this dilemma and had to use mental gymnastics to try and get a Friday crucifixion (his attempts to do this are clearly invalid). Hoehner establishes from the scriptural requirement that the Crucifixion was on a Friday 14th Nisan that the only possibilities are AD 30 and AD 33. Therefore Hoehner realised the only way to save Anderson's calculation was to bring it forward a year.
So, instead of having it run from 445 BC - 32 AD, Hoehner's 69 Weeks run from 444 BC - 33 AD. His 69 Weeks began on Nisan 1 in 444 BC, which fell on 5th March (Julian). The 69 Weeks then ended on Nisan 10 33 AD, which fell on 30th March that year. So Christ died on Friday 3rd April (Julian) in 33 AD. In so far as Hoehner now has the correct date for the Cross, he has improved upon Anderson. However in every other respect his calculation has all the same problems as Anderson's and cannot be correct.
Hoehner's Four Changes
He identified 444 BC as the 20th year of Artaxerxes.
33 AD is a much better choice for the year of the crucifixion since it is possible to have Christ die on Friday that year.
His starting date, 5th March 444 BC, was the first day of a Jewish month since the new moon could have first been seen the previous evening. In this respect this is better than Anderson's first day.
His end-date for the first 69 Weeks, 30th March 33 AD, was indeed the tenth day of a Jewish month, since the new crescent moon could have first been seen the evening of 20th March. In this respect this is better than Anderson's last day of the 69 Weeks which as we have seen could not have been the 10th of Nisan despite Anderson's claims.
Hoehner's Corrections Don't Work!
Wrong Year to Start From
As with Anderson, he starts from the 20th year of the reign of Artaxerxes (rather than the 7th), but he dates it to 444 BC rather than 445 BC as Anderson did. However in this respect Anderson was probably right and Hoehner wrong. Both Jewish and Persian practice at that time was to number their years and the years of their kings from Nisan. This gives 445 AD for the 20th year of Artaxerxes which is the generally accepted year. In order to get 444 BC instead so that the first 69 Weeks ended in 33 AD, he has to argue that the regnal years of Artaxerxes were measured from Tishri in Nehemiah, but this is unlikely.
Wrong kind of year
Like Anderson Hoehner uses the 360-day year which we have previously shown to be in error.
Wrong Intervening Period
Hoehner is guilty of the same basic calculating error as Anderson through mixing together Julian and Gregorian years in his calculation. Hoehner used the same basic premise as Anderson...
483 'prophetic' years x 360 days = 173,880 days
He then tries to show that 5th March 444 BC and 30th March 33 AD are 173,880 days apart, which would be exactly 69 Weeks of 360-day years. If this was correct it might be impressive. But it is wrong! Instead of there being 173,880 days between the dates in question, there are really 173,885 days!
Hoehner was off by 5 days in his calculation! This is an issue of fact not interpretation or opinion. The main strength of this interpretation - its apparent accuracy to the very day - is an illusion. In the next section we will show it is not only inaccurate but impossible.
How was this error made? In order to determine how many days there were between his start date of 5th March 444 BC (Julian), and his end-date of 30th March 33 AD (Julian), he said this is 476 (solar) years plus 25 days. So he multiplied 476 by 365.24219879, the number of days in a solar year to get 173,855 days and then added 25 days to get the 173,880 days. This would slip under the radar of anyone unfamiliar with calendars. The problem is that he is using Julian dates, but true solar years to measure the gap between them. A Julian year is only approximately solar, but the difference builds up over centuries. If he used Julian dates he should have used 365.25, the number of days in a Julian year. Then he would have got the correct answer of 173,885 days between the 2 dates (reckoning inclusively). Or he could have used the Gregorian year with Gregorian dates, but by using the solar year of 365.24219879 days he introduced confusion resulting in an error of 5 days in his calculation. It is much safer and less confusing to do these calculations with Julian Day (JD) numbers.
Wrong Month to Start From
The wrong number of days between 5th March 444 BC and 30th March 33 AD is not quite fatal to Hoehner's position since he correctly states that Artaxerxes could have sent Nehemiah off to Jerusalem later than Nisan 1. If the correct starting date is Nisan 6 instead of Nisan 1, then the number of days between the dates could be 173,880 after all. But the difficulty we will consider in this section disqualifies Hoehner's view from further consideration.
He postulates a Nisan 1 date occurring on 5th March 444 BC. This corresponds to a Gregorian date of 28th February. The Gregorian calendar stays aligned the seasons perpetually, and the Jewish calendar never starts Nisan 1 on February 28 as this is much too early in the year! The Passover would then be on 13th March (Gregorian). However, there is absolutely no way that Jews in 444 BC celebrated the Passover 8 days before the Spring Equinox. This is way too early. It contradicts the Jewish practice that the Passover (14th Nisan) must be after the Spring Equinox (21st March). This means that 1st Nisan (Abib) could not possibly be before 8th March (Gregorian). Moreover if Nisan 1 was on 28th February, then the barley could not possibly be ready for the Firstfruits Offering on Nisan 16th. Thus it is impossible that this could be the starting month for the 70 Weeks and the whole calculation fails to work. It is not just out by a few days, but also by a whole month.
Start a Month Later?
We have shown that it is impossible that the New Moon of 5th March (Julian) 444 BC could be Nisan 1 marking the start of the New Year. Therefore Nisan 1 could come no earlier than the next New Moon in 444 BC which was 3rd April (Julian). This agrees with today's rabbinical calendar projected back to the 5th century BC. But this is a whole month later than the date postulated by Hoehner.
This means the 69 Weeks finish a month later in 33 AD.
That would make Nisan 14 (Passover) fall on Saturday 2nd May, or perhaps a day later (Sunday). But if Nisan 14 fell on a Saturday or Sunday in 33 AD, how could Christ have died on a Friday if He died in that year? So when we try to start the 483 years a month later in 444 BC (whatever day in Nisan we start with), we end up with the impossibility that Christ died on a Saturday or a Sunday in 33 AD. Whichever way you try to do it, the Anderson style of calculation does not work.
So, neither Anderson's nor Hoehner's reckoning of the 70 Weeks is correct, and this interpretation is proven false.
