What is the significance of the separation of the 7 weeks and 62 weeks in Daniel 9:25?

Jake Arsenal

Active Member
Mar 2, 2021
306
193
Celestial City
✟40,016.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I request that this discussion be focused on the significance of the separation between the two groups of weeks.

Every teaching I have read regarding this subject ignores the separation and refers to the two groups of weeks as 69 weeks. However the prophesy clearly stipulates in verse 26 that the 62 weeks has a separate significance.

What is the significance of the separation of the 7 weeks and 62 weeks in Daniel 9:25?

I request that this discussion be focused on the significance of the separation between the two groups of weeks.
 

disciple Clint

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2018
15,258
5,990
Pacific Northwest
✟200,679.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I request that this discussion be focused on the significance of the separation between the two groups of weeks.

Every teaching I have read regarding this subject ignores the separation and refers to the two groups of weeks as 69 weeks. However the prophesy clearly stipulates in verse 26 that the 62 weeks has a separate significance.

What is the significance of the separation of the 7 weeks and 62 weeks in Daniel 9:25?

I request that this discussion be focused on the significance of the separation between the two groups of weeks.
Why 7 Weeks plus 62 Weeks? – Grace thru faith
The first 49 years (7 weeks) are the time during which the city was being rebuilt. These were the “times of trouble” mentioned in Daniel 9:25 and recorded in Nehemiah 2-7 as consisting of constant efforts by Israel’s enemies to prevent them from completing the project. Nehemiah tells of workmen building with one hand while holding a sword in the other, and sleeping on site in their clothes, for fear of a surprise attack. The remaining 434 years (62 weeks) began when the city and its walls were complete and ran to the time of the first Palm Sunday when Jesus presented Himself to Israel as their Messiah.
 
Upvote 0

Christian Gedge

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,214
1,361
Waikato
Visit site
✟227,010.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What is the significance of the separation of the 7 weeks and 62 weeks in Daniel 9:25?

Some say of the first ‘seven weeks’ that it meant it would take 49 years for the
city to be rebuilt. It is known that rebuilding was delayed by ‘troubled times’, so much so that the Emperor had to dispatch Nehemiah to Jerusalem to kick-start the stalled project thirteen years after he made the decree. However, the rest of Nehemiah’s account suggests that the cities and towns were established quickly after that.

A better explanation of the seven weeks is that they end with the final prophet Malachi,
whose ministry came slightly after Nehemiah, and after which the Old Testament prophets fell silent. He was the last; there were no more; the canon was complete! So, I believe the first stage of Daniel’s 70 weeks predicted the closing of the remaining prophets, closing, as best as we can judge, after the Sabbath of 409 BC.

Then came the 62 weeks.

danielsweekdivisions.png
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Abraxos

Nemo vir est qui mundum non reddat meliorem.
Jan 12, 2016
1,116
599
123
New Zealand
✟69,315.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I request that this discussion be focused on the significance of the separation between the two groups of weeks.

Every teaching I have read regarding this subject ignores the separation and refers to the two groups of weeks as 69 weeks. However the prophesy clearly stipulates in verse 26 that the 62 weeks has a separate significance.

What is the significance of the separation of the 7 weeks and 62 weeks in Daniel 9:25?

I request that this discussion be focused on the significance of the separation between the two groups of weeks.
After the issuing of the decree to restore Jerusalem — the anointed ruler will come after 'seven weeks', and then will reign for a further 'sixty-two weeks' to lead in the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem. He cannot be called an anointed ruler if he doesn't rule for a period of time. v.26, After the anointed one's reign for exactly 'sixty-two weeks', he will be 'cut off' which would un-restrain the people of the lawless one to destroy Jerusalem.

The significance of the separation of the seven weeks and sixty-two weeks is that the anointed ruler comes after seven weeks and rules for sixty-two weeks. This would entail that this vision has not yet been fulfilled, and by extension, cannot be referring to Jesus' first advent.
 
Upvote 0

Jake Arsenal

Active Member
Mar 2, 2021
306
193
Celestial City
✟40,016.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why 7 Weeks plus 62 Weeks? – Grace thru faith
The first 49 years (7 weeks) are the time during which the city was being rebuilt. These were the “times of trouble” mentioned in Daniel 9:25 and recorded in Nehemiah 2-7 as consisting of constant efforts by Israel’s enemies to prevent them from completing the project. Nehemiah tells of workmen building with one hand while holding a sword in the other, and sleeping on site in their clothes, for fear of a surprise attack. The remaining 434 years (62 weeks) began when the city and its walls were complete and ran to the time of the first Palm Sunday when Jesus presented Himself to Israel as their Messiah.


Some say of the first ‘seven weeks’ that it meant it would take 49 years for the
city to be rebuilt. It is known that rebuilding was delayed by ‘troubled times’, so much so that the Emperor had to dispatch Nehemiah to Jerusalem to kick-start the stalled project thirteen years after he made the decree. However, the rest of Nehemiah’s account suggests that the cities and towns were established quickly after that.
View attachment 299186

This popular interpretation is problematic as @Christian Gedge explained.

A better explanation of the seven weeks is that they end with the final prophet Malachi,
whose ministry came slightly after Nehemiah, and after which the Old Testament prophets fell silent. He was the last; there were no more; the canon was complete! So, I believe the first stage of Daniel’s 70 weeks predicted the closing of the remaining prophets, closing, as best as we can judge, after the Sabbath of 409 BC.

Then came the 62 weeks.

View attachment 299186

I think this explanation has more merit than the previous explanation, but it still leaves me with some questions. As I study the prophets and their common interpretations, I often find that the history(and its interpretation) has been distorted by the consensus of scholars.


After the issuing of the decree to restore Jerusalem — the anointed ruler will come after 'seven weeks', and then will reign for a further 'sixty-two weeks' to lead in the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem. He cannot be called an anointed ruler if he doesn't rule for a period of time. v.26, After the anointed one's reign for exactly 'sixty-two weeks', he will be 'cut off' which would un-restrain the people of the lawless one to destroy Jerusalem.

The significance of the separation of the seven weeks and sixty-two weeks is that the anointed ruler comes after seven weeks and rules for sixty-two weeks. This would entail that this vision has not yet been fulfilled, and by extension, cannot be referring to Jesus' first advent.

Your interpretation raises contextual questions. Daniel has just understood from the book of Jeremiah that the end of the 70 years of captivity is imminent, so he prayed until he received an answer. This prophesy is that answer. Can you explain how your interpretation fits into that context?
 
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,297.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
This popular interpretation is problematic as @Christian Gedge explained.

I see no Biblical basis to push the final 70th week of the Daniel 9 prophecy into the time of Christ's Ministry. That idea is simply a leaven doctrine added by men.

The Scripture is very clear that after 62 weeks Messiah would be "cut off", which means Christ's Ministry ended at 69 weeks (the previous 7 of verse 25 plus the 62 of the following verse):

Dan 9:26
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
KJV
 
Upvote 0

Christian Gedge

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,214
1,361
Waikato
Visit site
✟227,010.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
A better explanation of the seven weeks is that they end with the final prophet Malachi, whose ministry came slightly after Nehemiah, and after which the Old Testament prophets fell silent. He was the last; there were no more; the canon was complete! So, I believe the first stage of Daniel’s 70 weeks predicted the closing of the remaining prophets, closing, as best as we can judge, after the Sabbath of 409 BC.

Then came the 62 weeks.

I think this explanation has more merit than the previous explanation, but it still leaves me with some questions. As I study the prophets and their common interpretations, I often find that the history (and its interpretation) has been distorted by the consensus of scholars.

I would just like to add that the Old Testament prophets ended their words with a promise:

"Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes. And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers." (Malachi 4:5-6)

Then, as suddenly as the old prophets had ceased, the prophetic voice resumed with the same message from which it had ended:

The angel said to him, “... your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John ... He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb. And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God. He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” (Luke 1:5-17)

So, the ‘62 weeks’ were the link between Old and New Testaments.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Jake Arsenal
Upvote 0

Abraxos

Nemo vir est qui mundum non reddat meliorem.
Jan 12, 2016
1,116
599
123
New Zealand
✟69,315.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Your interpretation raises contextual questions. Daniel has just understood from the book of Jeremiah that the end of the 70 years of captivity is imminent, so he prayed until he received an answer. This prophesy is that answer. Can you explain how your interpretation fits into that context?
The context is that this chapter takes place during the reign of Darius the Mede. By studying the book of Jeremiah, Daniel realized that the seventy years of captivity were almost at an end. However, the eschatological implications that followed in Christian doctrine show that the answer he received from Gabriel wasn't the answer in regards to his imminent freedom, but is a prophecy that transcended both Jeremiah and Daniel's understanding of it as it didn't come to pass in his time.

Part of the reason why numerous scholars do not believe it was in regards to Daniel's own imminent freedom from captivity is because of how vague the events that took place soon after, and the years that followed didn't line up with his vision; this underwhelming feeling is further expressed in Haggai 1:2 and Zechariah 1:12 that contradict Daniel's vision. So, exegetically it should be considered that the 'answer' he was given by Gabriel wasn't intended for him and his people or his time. This opened up interpretations that attempt to explain it is regarding a future messiah.

So the context is that Daniel believed it was about his generation when it wasn't.
 
Upvote 0