My thanks to Jim for clearing up at http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/feb2015/jim222-3.htm where the 49 year theory came from.  Perhaps the way it was presented on TV did indeed create some confusion between what Newton said and what those quoting him said.

There was another statement that is worth addresing.  Jim said,

"Newton says there is no linguistic basis for adding those two numbers (49 and 434), and to do so is “doing violence to the language of Daniel.” Newton says the two numbers separately speak of both the First Coming and the Second Coming, both being counted from the “going forth of the commandment to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem.” Some commentators agree."

He did say something along these lines.  Here's what Newton said;

"We avoid also the doing violence to the language of Daniel, by taking the seven weeks and sixty two weeks for one number. Had that been Daniel's meaning, he would have said sixty and nine weeks, and not seven weeks and sixty two weeks, a way of numbring used by no nation. In our way the years are Jewish Luni-solar years, [11] as they ought to be; and the seventy weeks of years are Jewish weeks ending with sabbatical years, which is very remarkable. For they end either with the year of the birth of Christ, two years before the vulgar account, or with the year of his death, or with the seventh year after it: all which are sabbatical years." (chapter X)

HOWEVER, he also applied the ENTIRE 70x7 years to the first coming!!!!

"by putting a week for seven years, are reckoned 490 years from the time that the dispersed Jews should be re-incorporated into [7] a people and a holy city, until the death and resurrection of Christ;...For by joining the accomplishment of the vision with the expiation of sins, the 490 years are ended with the death of Christ" (Chapter X, paragraph 7)

Perhaps he wrote his commentary over a period of time and his opinion morphed and two competing opinions got recorded in the same body of work, since it is hard to harmonize these two statements, even though they are close to each other in the same chapter.

But enough of Newton's opinion.  What matters is whether it makes sense.  Personally, I have always wondered why this time period was split in two.  Indeed, just by counting history, one can see that 483 years passed from the issueing of the decree to the death of the Messiah.  So they were added together, one after the other for the first coming.  Were they split because the second coming will be different?  I don't know and have wondered about this myself numerous times without coming to a conclusion.  If anyone has got an explanation, I'd love to hear it.

Shalom,

Joe