Daniel 9: 62 weeks or 69 weeks?

[DavidPT]

There is no difference. Only one individual in the passage is identified as a prince, and that is Messiah in verse 25. He is the prince in verse 26, and the desolator in verse 27, and the Romans and Jews/Israelites were His people functioning as His instruments of judgment and desolation in the destruction of the city and sanctuary.

Grammatically, all references to "he" in the passage resolve back to Messiah.

We have likely been over this before, and I realize this doesn't prove anything, but apparently the KJV translators didn't take the Prince in verse 25 to be meaning the prince in verse 26 either, otherwise they would have capitalized prince in verse 26 like they did in verse 25. Or at least you would think so in this particular case. Or maybe it's just the KJV I'm using that they didn't do that in, but in other KJVs they did?

 

[jgr]

We have likely been over this before, and I realize this doesn't prove anything, but apparently the KJV translators didn't take the Prince in verse 25 to be meaning the prince in verse 26 either, otherwise they would have capitalized prince in verse 26 like they did in verse 25. Or at least you would think so in this particular case. Or maybe it's just the KJV I'm using that they didn't do that in, but in other KJVs they did?

They capitalized it in the original.

 

[DavidPT]

Not the entire verse. There is a difference between Messiah and the one to come in v26....,and there is difference between the one who confirms and the one who makes desolate in v 27.

Dan 9
26 Then after the sixty-two weeks, the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

27 And he will confirm a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come the one who makes desolate, until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, gushes forth on the one who makes desolate.”

They are 40 years apart.

Daniel 9:25 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, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.


What does this verse involve? It involves 69 of the 70 weeks, right? Prove that it involves anything outside of these 69 weeks, IOW, apply the same logic that you are applying to verse 27, that even though verse 27 pertains to the 70th week, you insist some of it isn't. That's not the pattern seen in verse 25, though.

 

[jeffweedaman]

Daniel 9:25 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, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.


What does this verse involve? It involves 69 of the 70 weeks, right?

Right.

[ Prove that it involves anything outside of these 69 weeks, IOW, apply the same logic that you are applying to verse 27, that even though verse 27 pertains to the 70th week, you insist some of it isn't. That's not the pattern seen in verse 25, though.]

I only apply that logic because v27 demands it by saying the prince to come would destroy the city and the sanctuary. This occured 40 years after Messiah was declared after the 69 weeks to confirm the NC in the Final week.
The destruction and desolation has nothing to do with the accomplishments of Jesus atonement victory in the 70th week.

24 “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city,
to finish the transgression,
to make an end of sin,
to make atonement for iniquity,
to bring in everlasting righteousness,
to seal up vision and prophecy
and to anoint the most holy place.


Heb 9
11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.


but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, 28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

 

[Timtofly]

Knowing specific ancient history dates involving certain events is not something I have kept up with all that much since it's not a main interest of mine, yet I do realize it is relevant when coming to topics such as this. It's just that some of these dates aren't embedded in my memory like they might be in others.

I'm certain I could probably consult Google in order to determine what the date of that would have been, but since I'm discussing this with you, and that you are proposing that there is a gap between the 49 years and the 434 years, which I personally see as a possibility since I have been thinking along the same lines myself because I too have noticed what you brought up about Ezra, what was the date of that in your view, what I quoted from your post above, and where does it end up 434 years later? It has to end up at a period of time before He is cutoff if it is after the 62 weeks that He is cutoff.

From the NT, there were 2 people Anna and Simon who represent any one still alive after the 483 weeks came to an end in the middle of the first century BC. No Scripture states the end was specific at a birth, the baptism, nor even the Cross when the Messiah was "cut off".

All the tries to pinpoint that end, is just like the date setters of today. The reasoning comes from one's eschatological bias.

 

[DavidPT]

From the NT, there were 2 people Anna and Simon who represent any one still alive after the 483 weeks came to an end in the middle of the first century BC. No Scripture states the end was specific at a birth, the baptism, nor even the Cross when the Messiah was "cut off".

All the tries to pinpoint that end, is just like the date setters of today. The reasoning comes from one's eschatological bias.

Is it possible that when He is cutoff that it's meaning His ascension? That has crossed my mind before, but nothing I really ever gave any serious thought to.

 

[Timtofly]

Is it possible that when He is cutoff that it's meaning His ascension? That has crossed my mind before, but nothing I really ever gave any serious thought to.

The point about being cut off, is that He only came as Messiah and not Prince.

We refer to Him constantly as Christ, not King. Christ being the same as Messiah, that is the anointed one.

Also it is not because He is not currently reigning. It is that He was Messiah on earth. When He is Prince on earth, then the 70 weeks will be finished. Jesus was always the anointed one, always ruling, but the physical appearance on earth is what brought about the 70th week.

Jesus will not be Prince for a future 7 years. He was Messiah for 3.5 years, then on earth for 3.5 years as Prince. Thus Jesus physically on earth is the 70th week.

 

[jeffweedaman]

The point about being cut off, is that He only came as Messiah and not Prince.

We refer to Him constantly as Christ, not King. Christ being the same as Messiah, that is the anointed one.

Also it is not because He is not currently reigning. It is that He was Messiah on earth. When He is Prince on earth, then the 70 weeks will be finished. Jesus was always the anointed one, always ruling, but the physical appearance on earth is what brought about the 70th week.

Jesus will not be Prince for a future 7 years. He was Messiah for 3.5 years, then on earth for 3.5 years as Prince. Thus Jesus physically on earth is the 70th week.

1. Acts 3:15
   but put to death the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, a fact to which we are witnesses.
   
   
2. Acts 5:31
   He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

We have likely been over this before, and I realize this doesn't prove anything, but apparently the KJV translators didn't take the Prince in verse 25 to be meaning the prince in verse 26 either, otherwise they would have capitalized prince in verse 26 like they did in verse 25. Or at least you would think so in this particular case. Or maybe it's just the KJV I'm using that they didn't do that in, but in other KJVs they did?

Here it is from the NIV:

25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.

So, it calls Him "the Anointed One" and "the ruler" in verse 25. And then it refers to "the ruler" in verse 26 as well. I've gone back and forth on who I think "the prince" or "the ruler" is referring to in verse 26 (either Christ or the Roman prince or ruler such as Titus), but I lean now towards believing that jgr is right and it's referring to the Messiah or "Anointed One".

Jesus, of course, was a Jew and the Jews were His people in that sense. And there is a sense in which the Jews destroyed the city and the sanctuary even though they are not the ones who literally, physically destroyed them. Jesus blamed the Jews (just the unbelievers, of course) for the eventual physical destruction of the city and the sanctuary, so in that sense they are the ones who destroyed the city and the sanctuary even though the Romans are the ones who actually physically destroyed the city and the sanctuary.

Luke 19:41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”

As Jesus made clear, they brought the destruction of their city upon themselves because they "did not recognize the time of God's coming to you" (The KJV says "because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.").

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Is it possible that when He is cutoff that it's meaning His ascension? That has crossed my mind before, but nothing I really ever gave any serious thought to.

No, it's not possible. You shouldn't give any more thought to that.

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

I guess you are following the 360-day year theory of Sir Robert Anderson? I would recommend that you count normal years from Artaxerxes 7th year. When you do that, the 69th week ends on the commencement of Jesus’ ministry. His death comes 3 years after that. (In the midst of the 70th week)

You are absolutely right Sir.

"... I have appointed thee each day for a year." Ezekiel 4:6

 

[Jerryhuerta]

Here it is from the NIV:

25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.

So, it calls Him "the Anointed One" and "the ruler" in verse 25. And then it refers to "the ruler" in verse 26 as well. I've gone back and forth on who I think "the prince" or "the ruler" is referring to in verse 26 (either Christ or the Roman prince or ruler such as Titus), but I lean now towards believing that jgr is right and it's referring to the Messiah or "Anointed One".

Jesus, of course, was a Jew and the Jews were His people in that sense. And there is a sense in which the Jews destroyed the city and the sanctuary even though they are not the ones who literally, physically destroyed them. Jesus blamed the Jews (just the unbelievers, of course) for the eventual physical destruction of the city and the sanctuary, so in that sense they are the ones who destroyed the city and the sanctuary even though the Romans are the ones who actually physically destroyed the city and the sanctuary.

Luke 19:41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”

As Jesus made clear, they brought the destruction of their city upon themselves because they "did not recognize the time of God's coming to you" (The KJV says "because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.").

The Parable of the Wedding Feast clinches it with those who have eyes that see and ears that listen.

Matthew 22:7 But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.

 

[DavidPT]

No, it's not possible. You shouldn't give any more thought to that.

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

I haven't given it anymore thought, just something that crossed my mind in the past for some reason, and that I was curious if had ever crossed Timtofly's mind as well.

 

[Hank77]

They capitalized it in the original.

Thank you for posting this.