Modified 08/25/10

The 390 and Forty Day Time Periods

of Ezek 4:5, 6, and 9
Copyright (c) 2010 by Frank W. Hardy, Ph.D.

Introduction
The traditional use of Ezek 4 among Seventh-day Adventists has been to show that the
forty days/years of vs. 6, together with the forty years/days of Lev 14:34, demonstrate the
validity of the year-day principle by which a prophetic day stands for a literal year. Here our
attention is focused primarily, though not exclusively, on the other time period in the
chapter--the 390 days/years of vss. 5 and 9.

Ezekiel is a difficult book. The problems in this case are such that some have
abandoned all hope of making historical or chronological sense out of the details of the present
narrative. C. F. Keil, for example, states,

These numbers, however, cannot be satisfactorily explained from a chronological point of view,
whether they be referred to the time during which Israel and Judah sinned, and heaped upon
themselves guilt which was to be punished, or to the time during which they were to atone, or
suffer punishment for their sins.1

It is correct, as Keil says, that so long as we insist on applying the periods in question
either to Israel's sin alone or to its punishment alone no chronological solution is forthcoming.
When the two are combined there is a chronological solution but we are left asking why Ezekiel
should deal with the history of the northern kingdom so long after the fall of Samaria. In all of
this there is a missing dimension. Both the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom
of Judah had in common a covenant relationship with one God. The prophecy is not given
exclusively from Israel's point of view, or from Judah's point of view, or Ezekiel's point of view.
That is not its orientation. It is given in part from the above but in part from God's own point of
view. God's role in what happens must be taken into account. When the implications of this fact
are acknowledged a cohesive set of historical reminiscences does indeed emerge from the
prophet's vivid enactment.

The benefit that follows from taking the numbers in Ezek 4 seriously is not confined to
Ezek 4 or to the rest of Ezekiel. It extends to other books. For example, the problems
associated with dating Jeroboam's apostasy after the death of Solomon are clarified by
reference to Ezek 4. Apart from this there is a good deal of theological insight to be gained from
our study. And a basis is provided for evaluating some well known principles of prophetic
interpretation. The prophecy before us is not one that we can afford to ignore or take lightly.

The Year-Day Principle

We begin with the principle of year-day time symbolism on which the present prophecy
is based. In light of the fact that God clearly says, "'I have assigned you the same number of

Historicism (Corrected) Page 1 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

days as the years of their sin'" (Ezek 4:5), it would be hard to deny that a day is being used here
to represent a year. Anyone who comments on Ezek 4 must take this obvious equation into
account. John B. Taylor, Episcopal bishop of St. Albans in England, meets the issue simply and
directly.

The number of years represented by the 390 days for Israel and the 40 days for Judah
presents problems both of the text and of its interpretation. That it is reckoned on the basis of a day
for each year is straightforward and needs little comment. The same symbolism is found in Num-
bers 14:34; Daniel 9:24ff.2

Because of the importance that the year-day principle has had for Seventh-day
Adventists I will spend more time on it than Taylor does, keeping in mind all the while that this is
an introduction to the paper's topic and not the topic itself.

The broad scope of year-day

symbolism

William H. Shea, in his book, Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation,3 points out
that, far from being confined to such passages as Ezek 4:5, 6, and 9; Num 14:34; and Dan
9:24-27, the year-day symbolism they contain reflects a broad undercurrent of Hebrew thought.
Days stand for years, and years also stand for days, in a variety of Hebrew literary
genres--including historical narratives, poetry, legal documents, and prophecy. It is a recurring
and pervasive motif.

Historical narratives. As regards historical narratives, "days" can refer to events repeated
annually (Exod 13:10; Judg 11:40; 1 Sam 1:21; 2:19; 20:6), to the period of a single year (Num
9:22; 1 Sam 27:7), or to an individual's life span (Gen 6:3; 47:9; 1 Kgs 1:1).

The formula that is repeated ten times over for the antediluvian patriarchs listed there [in
Gen 5] is: "X lived so many years and begat Y. And X lived so many years after he begat Y and
begat sons and daughters. And all the days of X were so many years, and he died.4

Poetry. As regards Old Testament poetry, in which one idea is commonly stated twice
with different but equivalent words, consider Deut 32:7; Job 10:5; 15:20; 32:7; 36:11; Ps 77:5;
90:9-10. Two examples are quoted below.

"Are your days like those of a mortal

or your years like those of a man, . . ."
(Job 10:5)

All our days pass away under your wrath;

we finish our years with a moan. (Ps 90:9-10)

Legal documents. Two of the most prominent and widely known laws in the Mosaic corpus
rely crucially on year-day symbolism and cannot have avoided influencing the thought of later
Jewish historians, poets, and prophets. One of these was the law of the sabbatical year (Lev
25:1-7). In this case one day represents one year.

Historicism (Corrected) Page 2 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

"'For six years sow your fields, and for six years prune your vineyards and gather their crops.
(4) But in the seventh year the land is to have a sabbath of rest, a sabbath to the Lord. Do not sow
your fields or prune your vineyards. (5) Do not reap what grows of itself or harvest the grapes of
your untended vines. The land is to have a year of rest.'" (Lev 25:3-5)

The other was the law of the jubilee (Lev 25:8-17). In this case one day represents
seven years.

"'Count off seven sabbaths of years--seven times seven years--so that the seven sabbaths of years
amount to a period of forty-nine years. (9) Then have the trumpet sounded everywhere on the tenth
day of the seventh month; on the Day of Atonement sound the trumpet throughout your land. (10)
Consecrate the fiftieth year and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.'" (Lev
25:8-10)

The cycles of seven days, seven years, and seven weeks of years did not escape the
notice of foreigners. Josephus quotes Julius Caesar as follows:

"Gaius Caesar, Imperator for the second time, has ruled that they shall pay a tax for
the city of Jerusalem, Joppa excluded, every year except in the seventh year, which they call the
sabbatical year, because in this time they neither take fruit from the trees nor do they sow."5

Prophecy. I now return to a fact, mentioned above, but which needs more emphasis. That
fact is that the above cycles did not escape the notice of Jews either. Legislators, historians,
poets, prophets, biblical writers of every description, all grew up in an intellectual environment
steeped in year-day symbolism. It was something that no Jew could help taking entirely for
granted.

In prophecy this use of the year-day principle is paralleled most directly by Dan 9:24-27. A
different word (’¿bÈÆ>) is used in that prophecy, but it means the same thing that the "sabbaths"
mean in Lev 25:8, that is, "weeks." The applicability of the year-day principle to the time periods
of Dan 9:24-27 is especially evident, therefore, from the parallel construction of the Levitical
instruction on the jubilee year. One could almost say that the time period involved in Dan 9:24-27
was modeled after the jubilee legislation.6

The appropriateness of using

year-day symbolism

Another prophecy besides that of Dan 9 which incorporates year-day symbolism is Ezek
4, discussed here. The linguistic connection between Ezek 4:6 and Num 14:34 in turn is too
broad to miss.7 The latter passage reads as follows:

"'For forty years--one year for each of the forty days you explored the land--you will suffer for your
sins and know what it is like to have me against you.' (35) I, the Lord, have spoken, and I will
surely do these things to this whole wicked community, which has banded together against me.
They will meet their end in this desert; here they will die" (Num 14:34-35).

Historicism (Corrected) Page 3 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

Seventh-day Adventists should not be criticized for seeing how well Ezek 4:6 and Num
14:34 support their position that year-day symbolism is a legitimate exegetical tool available for
use in interpreting prophecy. The criticism we deserve is not that we have used these texts but
that we have confined our attention to them. Beyond lies a vast fund of other passages that
should be included in the discussion as well. One of these is in the verse preceding Ezek 4:6,
i.e., vs. 5.

The 390 Day Time Period of

Vss. 5 and 9
If the 390 days of Ezek 4:5 and 9 refer to a period of 390 years, as God tells Ezekiel they
do in the first part of vs. 5, there is a question exactly which 390 year period they refer to. This
might be considered a round number. If it is, we can stop here. But how round is 390? And why
should both periods together (390 days and forty days) add up to 430? The connection here
between Ezek 4:5 and Exod 12:40-41 should be noted.

Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. (41) At the end of
the 430 years, to the very day, all the Lord's divisions left Egypt. (Exod 12:40-41)

God is trying to convey a lesson through his prophet in Ezek 4 and if we dismiss the
numbers he uses to illustrate His point, we will surely miss the point He is illustrating by means
of them.8

The text of the passage

Ezekiel plays a dual role in the enacted prophecy or prophetic parable of chap. 4. On the
one hand he represents God's point of view by showing hostility toward a clay map or model of
Jerusalem (vss. 1-3). On the other hand he represents his people's point of view by lying first in
Israel's sin on his left side for 390 days (vss. 4-5) and then in Judah's sin on his right side for an
additional forty days (vss. 6-8).9 The part of the illustration having to do with food (vss. 9-17)
continues the second line of thought. "'The people will eat rationed food in anxiety and drink
rationed water in despair, . . .'" (vs. 16). Here also Ezekiel stands in his oppressed people's
place by undergoing tokens of discipline.

The siege of Jerusalem provides the setting for the illustration here, but more is being
represented by it than the siege of Jerusalem. No siege lasts 390 years, much less 430 years.
There is a question therefore when the period begins, when it ends, and what it refers to in
between those two points. Answering the first two questions is not the same as answering the
third.

The historical application

Below I suggest that the 390 years begin in 929/28 B.C. with Israel's apostasy under
Jeroboam,1 that they represent a period of mutual estrangement between God and His people,

1
Jeroboam counted his years from 931/30, but reigned from 929/28.

Historicism (Corrected) Page 4 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

and that they end in 539 B.C. when any Jews wishing to do so are allowed by Cyrus to return
home from exile.

The period begins with an apostasy. Ezekiel is commanded to bear sin for the 390 plus forty
day period during which he must enact the above drama. From this I draw that the period has
something to do with sin. God's response, which would follow as a natural consequence of
Israel's sin, is included within the scope of the illustration (vs. 3). Thus, the time period includes
both the sin of God's people and the response of their God. It is not confined to either set of
factors in isolation.

A number of facts support the conclusion that Ezekiel's 390 days look back symbolically
to the apostasy of Jeroboam. First, since all the people were caught up in the results of
apostasy, all the people must have been involved in the actions leading to those results.
However bad it might have been, we are not talking about the sin of a single individual but with
a national apostasy--a corporate act of falling into and remaining in sin--that involves a
substantial cross-section of the population. Second, because a definite time is used to describe
the onset of apostasy it would be reasonable to assume that it did in fact occur at a set time
rather than developing imperceptibly over decades or centuries. The nature of the prophecy
does not lead us to speak in generalities about time. And third, a majority of the total period of
430 days (88%) has to do with Israel rather than Judah.

If we examine Jewish history prior to Ezekiel for (1) an apostasy that was (2) nationwide,
(3) occurred at an identifiable time, and (4) involved the northern kingdom of Israel, the search
need not detain us for long. After Solomon died, leaving Rehoboam as his successor, Jeroboam
son of Nebat rebelled and ruled the northern tribes. After the kingdom divided in 931/30 BC, the
Jeroboam's first order of business was to fortify "Shechem in the hill country of Ephraim," so he
could live there (1 Kgs 12:25). The next order of business was to keep the northern tribes from
worshiping in Jerusalem (vs. 28). If 930 was taken up with fortifying Shechem, 929 would be a
reasonable time for him to deal with the religious needs of his subjects.

Jeroboam thought to himself, "The kingdom will now likely revert to the house of David. (27) If
these people go up to offer sacrifices at the temple of the Lord in Jerusalem, they will again give
their allegiance to their lord, Rehoboam king of Judah. They will kill me and return to King
Rehoboam."
(28) After seeking advice, the king made two golden calves. He said to the people, "It is too
much for you to go up to Jerusalem. Here are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of
Egypt." (29) One he set up in Bethel, and the other in Dan. (30) And this thing became a sin; the
people went even as far as Dan to worship the one there. (1 Kgs 12:25-30)

Jeroboam became the prototype of every apostate king that followed him on the throne
of Israel. He is known, not merely as a king who sinned, but as one who caused all Israel to sin.
Thus, of Baasha it is said that "He did evil in the eyes of the Lord, walking in the ways of
Jeroboam and in his sin, which he had caused Israel to commit" (1 Kgs 15:34). Nor is the
reference here to some philosophical or moral state of sinfulness. The issue God is dealing with
is open and avowed apostasy. Similar statements are found in later chapters concerning Zimri
(16:19), Omri (16:26), Ahab (21:22), and Ahaziah (22:52). Each in turn is compared to
Jeroboam, who caused Israel to sin.

Historicism (Corrected) Page 5 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

Some Israelite kings were not so wicked as others. But even reformers such as Jehu
"did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, which he had caused Israel to
commit--the worship of the golden calves at Bethel and Dan" (2 Kgs 10:29, 31).10 In the end
Israel is given over to Assyria and ceases to exist as a political entity. The compiler of the
narrative concludes this part of his history by reminding us one last time that,

When he [God] tore Israel away from the house of David, they made Jeroboam son of Nebat their
king. Jeroboam enticed Israel away from following the Lord and caused them to commit a great
sin. (2 Kgs 17:21)

If there is any single motif that runs through the entire history of Israel, as an entity
separate from Judah, this is it. That is one point. Another point is that it is entirely appropriate for
God to remind His people of these things through Ezekiel's enacted parable as he lies on his left
side for 390 days beseiging a clay representation of the other city so soon to fall for precisely
the same reasons that had led to Samaria's ruin. Apostasy had destroyed Samaria and now
apostasy was destroying Jerusalem. It was a connection that needed to be made. The cases of
the two cities were virtually identical.

In what Ezekiel says and does God is explaining His actions toward Jerusalem. The
people need to understand why God is doing what He does. There are reasons. Jerusalem is
not being handed over to the Babylonians because God dislikes Jerusalem or is unable to
protect its residents any longer. On the contrary, God leaves His people to their own devices
because they insist on turning away from Him. The results are not arbitrary but follow naturally
from the nature of the sin they have committed. What was soon to happen to Jerusalem during
Ezekiel's lifetime had all happened to Samaria before. History was repeating itself. There were
not two sets of reasons for these events but one set of reasons set in place on two different
occasions. Jerusalem would have itself to thank for what was happening to it.11

The period is one of estrangement. The first part of vs. 5 says, "'I have assigned you the
same number of days as the years of their sin.'" But the sin referred to is not confined to that of
the northern or southern kingdom in isolation and, whoever commits it, sin is not the only factor
included in the time period. If it were, we would be left with periods of approximately 206 years
from Israel's apostasy (928 B.C.) to the fall of Samaria (723/22 B.C.), 342 years from Israel's
apostasy to the fall of Judah (586 B.C.), or an indefinite number of years from Judah's apostasy,
which was more gradual, to the fall of Jerusalem. The 390 years do not make historical sense
until the two kingdoms are combined for purposes of discussion and until their period of
punishment is included along with their sin.

The two factors of sin and punishment brought together here are widely different when
taken in isolation. But there is a point at which they meet that goes beyond the matter of cause
and effect. Both man's sin and God's inevitable response to it reflect a state of estrangement. In
either case there is separation. Sin cannot be understood meaningfully without reference to the
aggrieved party. "We all, like sheep, have gone astray" (Isa 53:6)--from the good Shepherd. We
have all been the prodigal son. We have left our Father and wasted His substance living as we
pleased. He stands looking "'a long way off'" (Luke 15:20), scanning the horizon for some
indication that we will come back. And whenever one of us does come back, we must say,
"'Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you.'" (Luke 15:21). The father in the story
allowed his son to say this much. We have not just sinned; we have sinned against God.

Historicism (Corrected) Page 6 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

It is not enough to appeal to the necessity for clean academic distinctions if we wish to
eliminate the second part of this formula. It does not make good academic sense to mistake the
half for the whole any more than it makes good practical or spiritual sense to do so. Sin is a
willingness to go our own way and wound the Father's heart. It results in separation and God
longs to bring it to an end. He is willing to receive us back but we must respond to His love and
return. This matter of separateness is fundamental to the concept of sin and, more than any
other one factor, is what makes sin so thoroughly offensive and unacceptable to God.

We do not see things as God does (Isa 55:8). It is true that God "'does not live in
temples built by hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything,
because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else'" (Acts 17:25-26). But He
does have needs. He needs us.

"I have no need of a bull from your stall

or of goats from your pens,
(10) for every animal of the forest is mine,
and the cattle on a thousand hills." (Ps 50:9-10)

Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams,

with ten thousand rivers of oil?
Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
(8) He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God. (Mic 6:7-8)

We read the above passage from Micah and grasp the part about acting justly and loving
mercy. These are things we either do, or must do, or cannot do, or whatever. But that is not
where the passage ends. God goes on and asks us to walk humbly with Him. In this way He
invites us to walk with Him, to be with Him, to enjoy being with Him as He enjoys being with us.
There is a personal component here that must be appreciated. Sin does not take place in some
abstract manner and salvation from sin is not limited to an act of self control. The sinner is not
the only one involved even if no one ever learns what he has done. There is estrangement in
sin. If we leave God alone, it is true that He will eventually leave us alone, but the point is that
the Father longs for and values our companionship.

Making the application now to the passage under discussion, the 390 days/years of
Ezek 4:5, and the forty days/years of Ezek 4:6, are a period, not of sin only or of punishment
only, but of separation. They represent a time of mutual estrangement between God and His
people.

The period ends with a restoration of favor. If I have correctly identified the nature of the
above events, a reconciliation would provide the natural ending point for Ezekiel's 390 day time
period. Again it would not be a reconciliation of individuals only but an event affecting a
substantial cross-section of the entire nation by which God's blessings are renewed and His
people accept the terms of those blessings once more. Understood from this point of view the
historical application made here to the end of the period is just as prominent and obvious as the
apostasy that marked its beginning. The corporate reconciliation between God and His wayward

Historicism (Corrected) Page 7 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

people occurred when they were allowed to come home once more from all the places where
they had been sent into exile.

"This is what the Lord says--

your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb:
I am the Lord,
who has made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who spread out the earth by myself, . . .
(27) who says to the watery deep, 'Be dry,
and I will dry up your streams,'
(28) who says of Cyrus, 'He is my shepherd
and will accomplish all that I please;
he will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt,"
and of the temple, "Let its foundations be
laid."'"
(Isa 44:24, 27-28)12

The northern ten tribes with their capital in Samaria had been defeated and exiled by
Shalmaneser. "In the ninth year of Hoshea, the king of Assyria captured Samaria and deported
the Israelites to Assyria. He settled them in Halah, in Gozan on the Habor River and in the
towns of the Medes" (2 Kgs 17:6). Halah (Assyrian Halahhu) was northeast of Ninevah and
gave its name to one of the gates of that city.13 The Habor River drained an area between the
Tigris and Euphrates rivers and flowed into the middle Euphrates. The city of Gozan (ancient
Guzana), built on the Habor river, was west of Ninevah roughly midway between Ninevah to the
east and Charchemish to the west. Its ruins (modern Tell Halaf) are in northern Syria.14 The
"towns of the Medes" would include an area in the western part of modern Iran.

Babylon ruled these same places after Assyria and when Cyrus conquered Babylon on
October 12, 539 B.C. both sets of Jewish exiles came under his power in turn. In the following
decree he speaks of Jerusalem rather than Samaria, but the survivors of both sieges lived side
by side within his domain and would both be included without distinction when he invites them to
return.

"This is what Cyrus king of Persia says:

"'The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has
appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah. (3) Anyone of his people among
you--may his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem in Judah and build the temple of the
Lord, the God of Israel, the God who is in Jerusalem. (4) And the people of any place where
survivors may now be living are to provide him with silver and gold, with goods and livestock, and
with freewill offerings for the temple of God in Jerusalem.'" (Ezra 1:2-4)

The apostasy of Jeroboam son of Nebat marks the beginning of the 390 years of Ezek
4:5 and the return of the exiles--from both Judah and Israel--after the former's Babylonian
captivity marks the end of that period. If these are the events in question, it only remains to
relate them chronologically. We would expect them to be 390 years apart. And in fact they are.

Historicism (Corrected) Page 8 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

Some Chronological Matters

Below I review the available evidence for the date of Jeroboam's apostasy and for the
Jews' return under Cyrus after their time in Babylonian exile.

When did Jeroboam apostatize?

There is a question exactly when the apostasy of Jeroboam occurred. The event is well
known but presents a fascinating chronological puzzle. The end of Solomon's reign and
therefore the beginning of his son Rehoboam's reign can be very confidently dated to 931/30
B.C., i.e., sometime between the months of Tishri in the fall of 931 B.C. and Nisan in the spring
of 930 B.C.15

The armies of Cyrus, under Ugbaru, conquered Babylon on October 12, 53916 and
according to Ezra 1:1 the decree allowing all Jewish captives to return home was written in
Cyrus' first regnal year (538/37 B.C.) (see below). Now 931/30 to 538/37 B.C. is not 390 years
but 393. On the other hand, however, it is so close to 390 that the possibility of a solution along
these lines cannot be merely set aside. There is something here worth looking for. So far we
have approached the passage from Ezek 4 in the context of Jeroboam's apostasy. It will now be
useful to approach Jeroboam's apostasy in the context of Ezek 4. Examining this relationship
closely will have value for both passages.

According to 2 Chr 11:17 Jeroboam and the northern ten tribes of Israel did not rebel
against Rehoboam immediately after Solomon's death. There was a short time during which the
whole nation remained loyal to Rehoboam.

They strengthened the kingdom of Judah and supported Rehoboam son of Solomon three years,
walking in the ways of David and Solomon during this time. (2 Chr 11:17)

The "three years" mentioned in this verse are subject to more than one interpretation
and so require comment. Jeroboam might have chosen to date his reign from the break
between himself and Rehoboam when he actually started to rule, thus conceding the legitimacy
of Rehoboam's rule over the northern kingdom up to that time. If the "three years" ended in
931/30 B.C., the death of Solomon would have to be moved back three years earlier to 934/33
B.C. This is impossible.

If, on the other hand, Jeroboam dated his reign retroactively from the time of Solomon's
death and not from his break with Rehoboam, then the three years of 2 Chr 11:17 begin in
931/30 B.C. and end later.17 I here assume that 931/30 B.C. was when Rehoboam started to
rule, not when Jeroboam rebelled. The people of Israel "strengthened the kingdom of Judah and
supported Rehoboam son of Solomon three years" starting in 931/30 B.C. and it was during this
same three years that they walked "in the ways of David and Solomon." The significance of this
last clause is that for three years the northern and southern tribes all worshiped Yahweh
together in Jerusalem as David and Solomon had.

The above facts create a paradox that only a careful student of ancient chronology will
appreciate, i.e., that Jeroboam actually began the process of ruling during what he would come
to count as his third regnal year. The beginning point for the series of regnal years that he

Historicism (Corrected) Page 9 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

eventually claimed was established after the fact and this is why it extends back to Solomon's
death--not because he started ruling then.

Once Jeroboam rebelled against Rehoboam he lost no time in encouraging his subjects
to make the break with Jerusalem complete in every way--religiously as well as politically. Thus,
the period of united worship after Solomon's death is roughly coterminous with the period of
united rule. The time during which the people walked "in the ways of David and Solomon" was
three years and the time during which they "strengthened the kingdom of Judah and supported
Rehoboam son of Solomon" was the same three years. The date we select for Jeroboam's
apostasy depends crucially on that for his rebellion. All available evidence indicates that the two
are very nearly the same.

It should be noted that different systems were used in Judah and Israel respectively for
counting the years of a king's reign. Rehoboam used the accession year method of dating and
his regnal years began in the fall. Jeroboam did not use the accession year method and his
regnal years began in the spring. But in either case when years are counted the count must be
performed inclusively. Thus, three years means any part of three years or within the third year.
The third year of Jeroboam, as Jeroboam would eventually count it, was 929/28 B.C. spring to
spring. The same regnal year as counted by a Judean scribe would be 928/27 B.C. fall-to-fall.
The two do not overlap at any point.18 If we assume that the year referred to in 2 Chr 11:17 was
counted in the northern manner, then the 390 years we expect to find on the basis of Ezek 4:5
would be closer to 391 years. If we assume that it was counted in the southern manner, with
Jeroboam's rebellion and apostasy coming late in 928 B.C., the period is exactly correct.

Let me summarize the argument so far. Ezekiel was caused to enact a parable in which
God and His people would be estranged in various ways for 390 years. The apostasy of
Jeroboam occurred in 928/27 B.C. God brought His captive people from Babylonian captivity in
538/37 B.C. The difference between 928 and 538 is 390. These are the raw materials for a
conclusion. The conclusion I draw from those materials is that Ezekiel's prophetic parable
incorporates both Israel's historic apostasy and Judah's ongoing captivity.19 The period
symbolized did not end when the enactment of it ended, but several years later when Cyrus
captured Babylon and permitted all the Jews within his realm who wished to do so to return to
their ancestral homeland under God's renewed blessing.

When did Cyrus allow the Jewish

exiles to return home?

I have stated above that the city of Babylon fell to Cyrus' general Ugbaru (Gubaru) on
October 12, 539 B.C. Thus, Cyrus' accession year, if counted from Nisan in the spring, would
extend from October 12, 539 to March 23, 538 B.C. and "the first year of Cyrus king of Persia"
(Ezra 1:1) would begin on March 24, 538 B.C. If counted from Tishri in the fall, his accession
year would extend from October 12, 539 beyond March to September 16, 538 B.C. and his year
1 would begin on September 17, 538 B.C.20

The question is, which method did Ezra use for counting "the first year of Cyrus"? I have
discussed the background for this question elsewhere.21 The evidence from Ezra is subject to
more than one interpretation. Fortunately the evidence from Nehemiah is not; Nehemiah clearly
uses a fall-to-fall calendar.22 On the strength of the similarity between these closely related
books it is reasonable to conclude that Ezra also used a fall-to-fall calendar. For the above

Historicism (Corrected) Page 10 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

reasons I suggest that "the first year of Cyrus" (Ezra 1:1) refers to some point during the thirteen
months starting with September 17, 538 and ending October 5, 537 B.C.23

Earlier it was pointed out that our choices for the third year of Jeroboam (1 Chr 11:17)
are between 929/28 spring-to-spring on the one hand and 928/27 B.C. fall-to-fall on the other.
The Chronicler clearly did not have a northern origin. He was from Judah. Thus, the third year of
Jeroboam (1 Chr 11:17) is 928/27 B.C. fall-to-fall. And whether Ezra is or is not himself the
Chronicler, he also uses the ancient fall-to-fall calendar of Judah, if we accept the parallel
evidence from Nehemiah. (What would require an explanation is not accepting such evidence.)
Thus, the first year of Cyrus (Ezra 1:1) is 538/37 B.C. fall-to-fall. The interval between 928/27
and 538/37 B.C. is 390 years.

We have already indicated the appropriateness of these two events (the apostasy of
Israel and the return of Judah) as the starting and ending points respectively for the 390 year
period that Ezekiel represents to his fellow exiles. We have established historically defensible
beginning and ending points for this period (928/27 B.C. and 538/37 B.C.). We have seen that
the difference between the proposed beginning and end is 390 years. I conclude that God was
conveying something of historical as well spiritual worth through His prophet in Ezek 4:5 and 9.
The prophecy is natural in its significance and factually accurate.

The Forty Day Time Period

of Vs. 6
So far our attention has been confined to the 390 days of Ezek 4:5. This is the most
significant number in the chapter. Verse 6 must be taken in this context and yet there are some
differences. According to Keil,

the number forty already possessed the symbolical significance of a measured period of divine
visitation. This significance it had already received, not through the 40 years of the desert
wandering, but through the 40 days of rain at the time of the deluge (Gen. vii.17), so that, in
conformity with this, the punishment of dying in the wilderness, suspended over the rebellious race
of Israel at Kadesh, is already stated at 40 years, although it included in reality only 38 years; see
on Num. xiv.32 sqq. If now, however, it should be supposed that this penal sentence had
contributed to the fixing of the number 40 as a symbolical number to denote a longer period of
punishment, the 40 years of punishment for Judah could not yet have been viewed apart from this
event.24

Counting forty years from the reforms of Josiah, begun in the eighteenth year of his reign
(2 Kgs 22:3) (623/22 B.C.), takes us nine years beyond the time of Ezekiel's prophetic enact-
ment, which began sometime between Jul 21, 592 (1:1, 2) and Sep 7, 591 B.C. (8:1).25 Nothing
of any significance that I know of happened in 583/82 B.C. And there is a question why we
would want to count the forty years starting with an attempted reform. This is not a useful
direction for further inquiry.

If we count forty years from the first attack of Nebuchadnezzar in 605 B.C., we come to
565 B.C., twenty-six years before Cyrus captured Babylon. If we count from the exile of
Jehoiachin in 597 B.C., we come to 557 B.C., twenty-nine years after the fall of Jerusalem and

Historicism (Corrected) Page 11 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

eighteen years before the fall of Babylon. Nothing was happening then. Considerations such as
these prompt Taylor to suggest that, "The 40 years assigned to Judah's punishment is a round
number and need not be taken too literally."26

All of this assumes, however, that the 390 years of vs. 5 and the forty years of vs. 6 are
the main data and that they coincidentally total 430 years. In my view the total is crucial to
understanding the remaining forty years. There are 390 years of estrangement between God
and His people from Jeroboam to Cyrus. The total of 430 years corresponds to the earlier
period of affliction in Egypt. And the forty years are reminiscent of the wilderness wanderings
that immediately followed the period of Egyptian enslavement. None of these associations or
national memories would be lost on the Jewish exiles who heard and saw Ezekiel do what is
described in chap. 4. With them he was communicating very well. It is we who have to study
these things out before we know what they mean.

Conclusion
The 390 days of Ezek 4:5 and 9 are the main historical element in the prophecy. In
introducing this first time period God links it to a specific set of events: "'I have assigned you the
same number of days as the years of their sin. So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the
house of Israel'" (vs. 5). As regards the house of Judah, on the other hand, God says merely, "'I
have assigned you 40 days, a day for each year'" (vs. 6). We are left to wonder, a day for each
year of what? In his prophetic enactment Ezekiel lies on his left side (facing north) during the
first period and on his right side (facing south) during the second. We should not take this to
mean, however, that Israel sinned for 390 years and that Judah sinned for only forty. If that were
the case, which forty was it? The longer period is not confined to Israel, nor is it confined to sin.
It includes Judah as well as Israel and God's response to what both groups insisted on doing as
well as the actions themselves.

God is accomplishing a number of things at once in Ezek 4 and for us what He does
there might not be obvious at the outset. By having the prophet lie on both sides for specified
periods both kingdoms are brought within the scope of the prophecy. Both had sinned to an
equal degree and in an equivalent manner. What happened to the one would happen to the
other and for the same reasons. Without justifying Samaria's actions no one who grasped this
point could justify those of Jerusalem. If God was fair in dealing as He did with Samaria, He was
fair in dealing as He would soon have to with Jerusalem.

In addition, by allowing the time during which Ezekiel lies on both sides to total 430 days
God calls to mind the earlier period of Egyptian captivity, which lasted 430 years (Exod
12:40-41).27 The Egyptian captivity was followed by a time of release and renewed blessing. In
the same way the Babylonian captivity was not the end for God's people but would in turn be
followed by a time of release and renewed blessing.

By causing the remainder over and above 390 days to equal forty days God brings
together the themes of hardship and deliverance. The exodus was a dramatic experience for
those who lived through it, but beyond it was a blessing conceived on an equally large scale.
Through Ezekiel God was appealing to His people's minds. He wanted them to understand His
benevolent motives--the reasons for what He was about to do.

Historicism (Corrected) Page 12 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

This one simple enactment, therefore, served to recall a wide variety of national
memories and was rich in associations for the Jewish exiles to whom it was presented. I
suggest that they understood Ezekiel's intent quite well--as well as they could while not wishing
to do so.

There was nothing in the experience of the exiles who heard and saw Ezekiel's
presentations that would correspond to the 390 days/years of vs. 5 alone. They would invoke no
memories at present. That would come later after all the events predicted had taken place. Then
the instruction given on this one occasion would be renewed to each succeeding generation
who learned of it. In fact the 390 year period indicated would not come to an end for at least
another fifty-three years. But the instruction it contained would remain as long as time would
last. It has remained until now. In the short term, however, it was the other numbers (the forty
day remainder and 430 day total) that were most instructive.

There is instruction for us in Ezek 4 as well as for later generations of Jews. The topics
of sin and punishment, brought together by the nature of the time periods, are both clarified in
the present context. The one indicates a willingness and the other an equally strong
unwillingness to accept mutual separation. Sin involves separation and separation must always
involve two parties. The 390 day period includes both, as it should. Sin does not occur in the
abstract. When we sin we sin against God and both parties are hurt in the process.

Approaching Jeroboam's apostasy in the books of Kings and Chronicles in terms of

Ezekiel's prophecy enables us to resolve some fascinating chronological problems associated
with that earlier historical event. Jeroboam's final break with Jerusalem occurred in what he
would later count as his third regnal year--three years after Solomon's death (1 Chr 11:17). And
the chronology of the exiles' return under Cyrus is clarified by approaching it in the context of
Jeroboam's apostasy, as portrayed in the present chapter. The "first year of Cyrus" (Ezra 1:1) is
not that king's first calendar year but his first regnal year, which did not begin for Ezra's
purposes until almost a year after the fall of Babylon. As an aside it should also be pointed out
that Ezek 4 has a unique contribution to make in the area of Qumran studies.28 There is a lot of
depth in this particular prophecy--perhaps more than has been commonly realized.

NOTE: All Scripture quotations in this paper, except when noted otherwise, are from the
Holy Bible, New International Version. Copyright (c) 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible
Society.
1
C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, 10 vols. (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, n.d.), vol. 9: Ezekiel, Daniel, pp. 72-73.
2
Taylor, Ezekiel: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale Old Testament
Commentaries (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity, 1969), p. 78.
3
Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 1 (Washington, DC: General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists, 1982), pp. 56-93.
4
Ibid., p. 67.
5
R. Marcus, transl., Antiquities, vol. 7, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1943), 14.202; see Hardy, "Historical Overview of Dan 11:23-28," Historicism
6
No. 15/ Jul 88, pp. 15-16, 46-48. Ibid., p. 72.
7
See Shea, Selected Studies, pp. 72-74.
8
In vs. 4, where NIV has, "'You are to bear their sin for the number of days you lie on
your side,'" the Septuagint specifies the number and gives it as 150. That is for the right side.
Then in vs. 5 it states that the total number (not the number for the right side) would be 190
days. Both the Hebrew and the Greek subsequently agree in vs. 6 that Ezekiel would have to lie

Historicism (Corrected) Page 13 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

on his left side for forty days. So in the Greek the numbers are 150 + 40 = 190. In the Hebrew,
which I follow here, they are 390 + 40 = 430. Note that in the Greek the number given in vs. 5
(190 days) includes the forty days of vs. 6, while in the Hebrew the number given in vs. 5 (390
days) does not include the forty days of vs. 6. So there is a question whether the two periods
run concurrently (see Taylor, Ezekiel, pp. 79-80). Here I assume that they do not: "'After you
have finished this [the first 390 days], lie down again, this time on your right side, and bear the
sin of the house of Judah'" (Ezek 4:6).
9
"The symbolism of upon your left side was probably helped out by the prophet's lying on
the ground in an east-west direction, with his head towards Jerusalem, and facing northwards
as if towards Israel while on his left side and southwards towards Judah while on his right"
(Taylor, Ezekiel, p. 78). Thus, Ezekiel faced north as he prophesied about the northern kingdom
of Israel and south as he prophesied about the southern kingdom of Judah.
10
See also the remarks made concerning Jehoahaz (2 Kgs 13:2, 6), Jehoash (13:11),
Jeroboam II (14:24), Zechariah (15:9), Menahem (15:18), Pekahiah (15:24), and Pekah (15:28).
11
When we say that God's punishment of sin is not arbitrary that is different from saying
it is not punishment or that it is not something God does. God punishes sin, but He does not do
so in an arbitrary manner.
12
The reference to Jerusalem in vs. 28 is problematic. Seventh-day Adventists have
consistently distinguished decrees to restore and rebuild the temple in Jerusalem from decrees
to restore and rebuild Jerusalem itself. One reason for maintaining this careful distinction is that
the latter marks the beginning of the seventy weeks prophecy of Dan 9, and with it the 2300 day
prophecy of Dan 8. So the question for any Seventh-day Adventist expositor of Isa 44:28 is
whether Cyrus also issued a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem or if Artaxerxes was the
only one to do so (Ezra 7:12-26; see Hardy, "The Chronology of Ezra 4," Historicism
No. 10/Apr 87, pp. 18-41, esp. p. 25). Our answer must take into account the fact that the two
clauses, "'"he will say of Jerusalem, 'Let it be rebuilt,' and of the temple, 'Let its foundations be
laid'"'" (Isa 44:28), represent a poetic parallel. Thus, unless we say they have opposite
meanings we must conclude that their meanings were seen as being substantially identical. The
two clauses must be allowed to interpret each other. Restoring the temple within Jerusalem
does truly constitute an act of restoration, but does not imply that the whole city could be
rebuilt--walls included. What part of "Jerusalem" would Cyrus permit the Jews to restore? The
temple. Where was "the temple" whose foundations Cyrus would lay? In Jerusalem. Cyrus did
not allow the Jews to rebuild the walls around the city, but only the temple, and the above
passage from Isaiah does not say or imply anything more than this.
13
New Bible Dictionary, 2nd ed. (Wheaton: Tyndale, 1982), s.v. "Halah."
14
Ibid., s.v. "Gozan."
15
See Edwin R. Thiele, A Chronology of the Hebrew Kings (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1977), pp. 23-32.
16
Shea, "An Unrecognized Vassal King of Babylon in the Early Achaemenid Period," part
3, Andrews University Seminary Studies 10 (1972): 112.
17
In a similar manner Pekah would later date his reign retroactively from the time of
Zechariah's death (son of Jeroboam II), thus ignoring the reigns of Shallum, Menachem, and
Pekahiah (2 Kgs 15:8, 27) and producing an unusually difficult set of problems for later students
of these events (see Edwin R. Thiele, A Chronology of the Hebrew Kings (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1977), pp. 46-51; Siegfried H. Horn, "The Chronology of King Hezekiah's Reign,"
Andrews University Seminary Studies 2 (1964): 40-52.
18
See Hardy, "A Timeline for the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah," Historicism
Supplement/Nov 86, p. 18.
19
The two datelines of Ezek 1:1 and 2 both point to Jul 21, 592 B.C. fall-to-fall (Jul 21,
592 and Jul 31, 593 B.C. spring-to-spring). See Hardy, "The Context for Ezra's Use of a
Fall-to-Fall Calendar," Historicism No. 8/Oct 86, table 7, p. 28.

Historicism (Corrected) Page 14 No. 16/Oct 88

Hardy Ezek 4

20
Richard A. Parker and Waldo H. Dubberstein, Babylonian Chronology 626
B.C.-A.D. 75, Brown University Studies, vol. 19 (Providence, RI: Brown University Press, 1956),
p. 29.
21
See Hardy, "Fall-to-Fall Calendar," pp. 39-44, 51.
22
Ibid., pp. 44-46.
23
There was a second Elul that year, at least in the Babylonian records available for
comparison. It occupied September 6 to October 4, 537 B.C.
24
Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary 9:75-76.
25
It could be that the chapters are not presented in chronological order, but there is no
textual evidence to support such an alternative hypothesis. The datelines that occur in Ezek 1:1,
2; 8:1; 20:1; 24:1-2; 26:1; 29:1, 17-18; 30:20-21; 31:1; 32:1, 17; 33:21; 40:1a, 1b are all in
proper sequence and, assuming a fall-to-fall calendar, range over a nineteen year period from
July 21, 592 (1:1) to October 22, 573 B.C. (40:1a) (see Hardy, "Fall-to-Fall Calendar," p. 28,
table 7).
26
Ezekiel, p. 78.
27
The Septuagint in Exod 12:40 reads, "But the dwelling of the sons of Israel, which they
dwelt in Egypt and in Canaan [kai en t· chanaan], [was] 430 years." There is a question whether
all of the 430 years were spent inside Egypt.
28
A period of 390 years is referred to in the extrabiblical Damascus Document found at
Qumran. Approaching that and other similar statements in the present biblical context
completely solves the problem of how to apply the 390 years in that document and offers a
useful historical framework for examining other similar problems of historical background
involving Qumran documents. See Isaac Rabinowitz, "A Reconsideration of 'Damascus' and
'390 Years' in the 'Damascus' ('Zadokite') Fragments," Journal of Biblical Literature 73 (1954):
11-35; Norman Walker, "Concerning the 390 Years and the 20 Years of the Damascus
Document," Journal of Biblical Literature 76 (1957): 57-58. Walker applies the Damascus
Document's 390 years as I have suggested doing here (928 to 538 B.C.), based on Ezek 4, and
the twenty years as the remaining time (538 to 518 B.C.) before the temple was rebuilt by
Zerubbabel.
These facts in turn clarify what the phrase "beyond Damascus" means at Qumran. It is a
reference to the historic Babylonian exile and not to anything in the immediate experience of the
authors. In this regard consider Amos 5:27 ("'Therefore I will send you into exile beyond
Damascus,' says the Lord, whose name is God Almighty"). See also Acts 7:43, which is based
on the passage from Amos ("'"Therefore I will send you into exile" beyond Babylon'").
Interpreting the Qumran references in a biblical rather than entirely local context helps to
recover the meaning of more than one of the scrolls.

Historicism (Corrected) Page 15 No. 16/Oct 88