Daniel and the "7 year Tribulation"

I was recently perusing through some of my old folders when I came across some notes that I had written years earlier (probably 20 years ago; they were after all handwritten). There on the page I had 'calculated' the 483 years of Dan 9 so that it 'fits' with the life of Christ--actually the thought is that Dan 9 leads us exactly to the time of Christ's Triumphal entry, or the cross, depending on whom you ask. (As I have noted before, this was my upbringing. I was rasied to read the Scriptures in such a literalistic fashion--meaning that we are to take everything literally instead of letting the genre determine how we read the text). So, how might I respond to such a reading (that is, how do I respond to myself!): 1) Taking numbers in an apocalyptic text like Daniel literally are problematic; the first ‘time frame’ given in Dan is found in 7:25 which reads ‘a time, times, and half a time’—this is clearly an undefinable time frame (the plural use of 'times' cannot be defined); which is an apocalyptic way of saying that the time frame is symbolic and not to be taken literally. Numbers is apocalypses do not have as their primary referent a literally meaning (secondary or tertiary perhaps). To say that Daniel goes on to affirm that the time frame is 3 1/2 years (half of the 7 years) does not work either since Daniel gives us two numbers in ch 12 that don't work together (1290; 1335). 2) The 69 X 7 (or 483) years of Dan 9 must be manipulated to ‘fit’ with the Christ events (my notes have all the details as to how the numbers 'work out'; but my efforts are clearly an effort to make things work); hardly any scholar will date the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus in AD 32 (it was either in 30 or 33); also to make this date work one must assume it was the decree of 445 BC, when the context of Daniel favors the decree of Cyrus in 539 BC; even so, there were several other decrees; so one must arbitrarily take the decree of 445; furthermore, 445 BC to AD 32 does not equal 483 years (of course, such proposals come with many adjustments to make it fit, but such manipulations themselves should tell you that the proposal is highly suspect) The beauty of the Bible is found in its intricacies. The beauty of the text often transcends some literalistic surface reading. We must learn to be content with allowing the mystery and complexity of the Scriptures be what they are: namely, they point to realities of God's sovereignty; they are not riddles to be solved by our clever calculations Now let me be clear on what I am saying: Certainly, I absolutely affirm that Dan 9 leads us to Jesus. But I don't think that we have to decipher the 'exact time frame' that is supposedly hidden in the text. Instead, the text informs us of God's sovereign control of events and that He will bring them to fruition in accordance with His faithfulness (and not a time clock)!