Which decree is the correct interpretation of Daniel 9:25?

There are quite a number of statements in the OPs question which I think are not correct. It gives the date of the decree of Cyrus to 600 BC. This is one of the supposed dates of Cyrus the First, whereas the decree of Ezra 1:1 was that of Cyrus II better known as Cyrus the Great. Cyrus II ruled Persia from 559 BC. He conquered the Babylonian Empire, which included Judea, when his armies entered the city of Babylon on the night of Oct 12th 539 BC. 539 BC is when he began to be king as far as the Jews were concerned and it is the year from which the decree is derived. (In fact 13th October 539 to (the end of the day before) New Year's Day in the spring of 538 was "the year of his becoming King" and New Year's Day 538 BC was the beginning his "first year".)

The decree starting the 70 weeks is that of Artaxerxes I which began to be obeyed 1st Nisan 458 BC (Ezra 7:9).

Here is an interesting take from Stephen E. Jones which I took from this website. The timing is based upon the "sacrifice and oblation" ceasing (from God's perspective) when Jesus presented Himself for baptism in the middle of the 70th week and then being cut off on the cross at the end of that week.

This view necessitates that the "he" of Daniel 9:27 refers to Messiah and not the prince who is to come. See this BH question: https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27992/what-is-the-antecedent-of-he-in-daniel-927

The plain fact of history is that Daniel’s 70 weeks (490 years) began in 458 B.C. with the decree of Artaxerxes I, and it ended 490 years later in 33 A.D. with the crucifixion of Jesus. In other words, the crucifixion occurred at the end of the 70 weeks, not in the middle of the final “week,” as I had been taught. So let us take a closer look at Daniel 9:24-27 now in the light of the history already presented.

24 Seventy weeks [i.e., 70 rest year cycles, or 490 years] are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy. 25 Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks [i.e., 7 rest year cycles, or 49 years] and threescore and two weeks [62 x 7 = 434 years]… 26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off. . . 27 And He shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the midst of the week He shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. . .

It is not our intention to do a complete study on this subject, as that would take an entire book in itself. The question we must resolve here is the meaning of verses 26 and 27. The Messiah was to be “cut off” sometime after the 62-week period. Daniel’s three time periods are as follows:

(1) Seven Weeks 458 B.C. - 409 B.C.

(2) Sixty-Two Weeks 409 B.C. - 26 A.D.

(3) One Week 26 A.D. - 33 A.D.

Daniel’s prophecy tells us that “the sacrifice and the oblation” would cease in the midst of the final week of years (26-33 A.D.). This turns out to be the fall of 29 A.D., specifically, the Day of Atonement of that year, when Jesus presented Himself to John for baptism.

We usually assume that the crucifixion ended the Old Testament sacrificial system, and most certainly, it did mark the full end of sacrifice insofar as the Christian is concerned. The priests continued sacrificing in the Temple for another 40 years, until the Temple was destroyed by the Romans. Thus, it is obvious that Daniel’s prophecy spoke only from God’s perspective about the efficacy of those sacrifices and oblations. No sacrifice after Jesus’ presentations had any relevance to the sin question. The midst of Daniel’s 70th week marks the time of Jesus’ baptism, when He presented Himself as the true Goat. Jesus later presented Himself as the true Lamb at Passover of 33 A.D., marking the end of Daniel’s 70 weeks.

In order to count 69 weeks (483 years) from which ever decree you choose as the correct one, you have to consider there is no year 0 when crossing from BCE to CE (BC to AD).

". . . you still have to adjust for the absence of year 0. You do this by removing 1 from your answer" https://sciencing.com/calculate-years-across-bc-ad-8433373.html

When counting 483 years from the decree given in the 7th year of King Artaxerxes in 457 BC until the coming of the Messiah comes to AD 27. But you also see those who point to that decree as coming in 458 BC which comes to the year AD 26.

Luke 3:1 informs us that Jesus began his ministry as the Messiah in the 15th year of Tiberius after the baptism of John. (See Acts 10:36-38 when Jesus was anointed at his baptism; Messiah means "anointed one"). But we find competing dates for the 15th year of Tiberius:

"On page 194 of his New Testament Commentary volume on Luke, Hendriksen labels as the “traditional view” that which dates the 15th year of Tiberius to AD 26" https://biblearchaeology.org/research/the-daniel-9-24-27-project/4363-what-was-the-fifteenth-year-of-tiberius

Another date:

Thus the reign of Tiberius is dated (not from his sole reign at the death of Augustus) but from the beginning of his joint reign (two years prior to his death in A.D. 12) when Tiberius was given legal equality with Augustus. The 15th year if Tiberius would then correspond to A.D. 27. http://www.onegodonelord.com/27ad

So, whether or not the prophecy given in Daniel 9:25 should be counted from 457 or 458 BC, or culminate in AD 26 or 27, its a remarkable prophecy that points to Jesus being crucified in AD 30 after a roughly 3 year ministry. His ministry beginning somewhere in mid AD 26 would work for a 3 1/2 year ministry.

The Talmud helps confirm Jesus was crucified in AD 30. Recorded in both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds were curious events that occurred for 40 straight years until the temple's destruction in AD 70.

Beginning in AD 30 the temple doors would not remain shut for 40 straight years.

the Temple doors swung open every night of their own accord. This too occurred for forty years, beginning in 30 CE The leading Jewish authority of that time, Yohanan ben Zakkai, declared that this was a sign of impending doom, that the Temple itself would be destroyed.

There was a seven candle-stick Menorah in the Temple that was supposed to remain lit.

"Every night for 40 years (over 12,500 nights in a row) the main lamp of the Temple lampstand (menorah) went out of its own accord no matter what attempts and precautions the priests took to safeguard against this event!"

The crimson red cloth put on the azazel goat (scape goat) and also put on the temple door once a year did not change color.

Each year the red cloth on the Temple door turned white as if to signify the atonement of another Yom Kippur was acceptable to the Lord. This annual event happened until 30 CE when the cloth then remained crimson each year to the time of the Temple's destruction.

Each year at Yom Kipur a lot was chosen to determined which of two goats would be "for the Lord" and which goat would be the "Azazel" or "scapegoat" to be released in to the wilderness.

"During the two hundred years before 30 CE, when the High Priest picked one of two stones, again this selection was governed by chance, and each year the priest would select a black stone as often as a white stone. But for forty years in a row, beginning in 30 CE, the High Priest always picked the black stone! The odds against this happening are astronomical (2 to the 40th power). In other words, the chances of this occurring are 1 in approximately 5,479,548,800 or about 5.5 billion to one! By comparison, your chances of winning your local state or municipal-run cash Lottery is would be much more favorable."

http://www.3dbibleproject.com/en/temple/details/evidence.htm

So, what event happened in AD 30 to effect temple observance. We read in Matthew 27 that immediately after Christ died on the cross the great veil that separated the Holly of Hollies was rent in two from top to bottom. Jesus is the final sacrifice. The temple sacrifices that were only a shadow of Jesus' perfect sacrifice were now supplanted by Jesus' sacrifice. In Col. 2:14 Paul informs us Jesus nailed those Mosaic ordinances to his cross, taking them out of the way.

So, I believe the Jewish Talmud points to the crucifixion of Christ in AD 30, and no other decree works for that date except the one given in the 7th year or King Artaxerxes (Ezra 7).

The 490 years begin with “a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem” (Dan 9:25). A number of historical decrees with different dates have been suggested by scholars.

RESTORE

The right decree will both “restore” and “rebuild” Jerusalem. The word translated as “restore” (shûb) does not mean the same as "rebuild." To rebuild means to physically reconstruct. Shûb means to return ownership of a city to the previous owner (e.g., I Kings 20:34).

In Daniel 9:25, it means more than merely allowing the Jews to live in the city. Since Jerusalem was the judicial capital of the nation, to restore the city means to return it to the Jews to serve as their capital from where they would govern themselves according to their own laws.

JEREMIAH'S PROPHECY

Critical scholars believe that Daniel 9 describes the persecution of the Jews by the Greek king Antiochus IV; around 165 BC. To fit 490 years between the decree and the time of Antiochus, they select the earliest possible decree. They propose that the decree was a prophecy by Jeremiah that God would bring Israel back from exile. But even if we take the earliest possible such ‘decree’, we still only have 440 years between the ‘decree’ and Antiochus; not the 490 years required by the prophecy.

CYRUS

In 538/7 BC, Cyrus issued a decree in which he announced: “The God of heaven ... has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah” (Ezra 1:2-4). This decree allowed the Jews to return to Judea and rebuild the temple. By implication, it also allowed them to rebuild Jerusalem. But that decree did not "restore" Jerusalem, for it did not allow the Jews to govern themselves. They were still ruled directly by Persian laws.

DARIUS I

In response to Cyrus' edict, the Jews slowly began to return to their homeland but they did not rebuild the temple. When Zerubbabel and Joshua began to rebuild the temple 17 years after Cyrus’ decree, they experienced resistance (Ezra 5) from Israel's old enemies—the Samaritans, who complained to the authorities. (This confirms that the city was still under Persian jurisdiction and has not yet been ”restored” to the Jews.) In response, Darius affirmed Cyrus’ decree by means of an additional edict (ca. 520 BC) (Ezra 6:3-12). Darius’ decree mentions only the restoration of the temple and simply confirmed and expedited Cyrus' order. Therefore, it still did not “restore” Jerusalem.

ARTAXERXES I

Artaxerxes issued two decrees:

• The first is recorded in Ezra 7:12-26. This was in the seventh year of his reign (Ezra 7:7), namely in 458/7 BC.
• In 445/4 BC (Neh 2:1), Nehemiah, cupbearer to Artaxerxes I, received a report that “the wall of Jerusalem is broken down, and its gates are destroyed by fire” (Neh 1:3; cf. 2:3). He then requested and obtained permission from Artaxerxes to go to Jerusalem and rebuild the city (Neh 2:5).

One of these must be the decree identified in Daniel 9:24. Dispensationalism prefers the second decree but, for the following reasons, Artaxerxes' first decree in 458/7 should be accepted as the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem:

RESTORE

Artaxerxes’ first decree (458/7) for the first time “restored” the city to the Israelites for it made the Mosaic law part of the Persian law and granted authority to the Jews to govern themselves on the basis of the law of God (Ezra 7:26). Artaxerxes’ second decree did not “restore” the city because (1) his first decree already did that, (2) the decree said nothing about the right of Jews to rule themselves, and (3) it only dealt with the physical construction of the walls of the city.

FITS THE TIME OF CHRIST

Daniel 9:25 states:

“from the issuing of a decree … until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks.“

In other words, the Messiah (Jesus Christ) will appear 483 years (7x7+62x7=483) after the decree.

Artaxerxes’ first decree fits the time of Christ. Jesus’ public ministry began when He was anointed by the Holy Spirit at His baptism (John 1:31; Acts 10:37, 38). This was in the fifteenth year of the Roman emperor Tiberius (Luke 3:1, 5, 21), which was the year AD 26/27; exactly 483 years after the decree in 458/7 (457 + 27 - 1 = 483). (One year is deducted because there was no year nil. From 1 BC to 1 AD was one year, not two.)

The decree of 445/4 BC does not fit the time of Christ. If we add 483 years to 445/4 BC, we come to about seven years after Jesus died. To make the 445/4 decree fit the time of Christ, Dispensationalism interprets the 483 years as ‘prophetic years’ of 360 literal days each. This reduces the 483 years by about 7 years. However, as discussed, the "seventy weeks" (Dan 9:24) are based on Israel’s seven-year cycle in which every seventh is a Sabbath year. This means that the 70 weeks are 490 literal years; not 'prophetic years'.

Furthermore, interpreting the 483 years as “prophetic years” brings us to Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, but that was only a few days before His death. In other words, that was the END of His ministry. In contrast, the implication of Daniel 9:25 is that the Messiah’s ministry will BEGIN at the end of the first 483 years. Jesus’ ministry began about three years earlier when He was "anointed" at His baptism.

REBUILT JERUSALEM

Dispensationalism argues that the decree of Artaxerxes I in 457 BC was not the right decree because it did not specifically authorize the rebuilding of Jerusalem. Dispensationalism claims that Artaxerxes' second decree was the first to authorize the rebuilding of Jerusalem. But that is not true:

(a) The previous decrees by Cyrus, Darius I, and Artaxerxes I, by allowing the Jews to return to Judah, to rebuild the temple, and to govern themselves, implicitly allowed the Jews to rebuild their cities.

(b) As shown in the detailed article, much evidence exists that the construction of the walls began before Nehemiah arrived.

In summary, Artaxerxes' first decree fits the description in Daniel 9:25 better than his second because it:

(a) Fits the time of Christ; (b) "Restored" Jerusalem as judicial capital to the Jews, and: (c) Implicitly authorized the Jews to "rebuild" the city.

This is a summary. For the full article, see here.