Another modern Preterist on Daniel's 70 weeks......gotta bring them out of hiding.......
M.F. Blume: What Do Preterists Believe About “The Prince” in the 70 Weeks of Daniel? (2001)
What Do Preterists Believe About “The Prince” in the 70 Weeks of Daniel?
By Michael F. Blume August, 2001
I recently read an article in the Summer 2001 edition of
CONNECT magazine written by an Apostolic who proposed that Preterism incorrectly teaches that there was only one prince mentioned in
Daniel 9:24-27, regarding the 70 weeks of Daniel.
The argument was based upon an attempt to prove there must be a gap between the 69th and the 70th weeks of Daniel’s 70 weeks noted in Daniel 9:24. However, the information said to be promoted by Preterists in this article was absolutely incorrect.
Let me try to set the record straight regarding what Preterists and Partial Preterists actually believe regarding the issue of the “prince” in
Daniel 9, and also address some other concerns raised by the particular author who misrepresented Preterism.............
THE REAL QUESTION CONCERNS THE IDENTITY OF “HE” IN VERSE 27
The entire issue circles around the identity of the “he” in verse 27.
Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: …
Who is the “he” who confirms a covenant with many for one week?
Futurists, who believe that the entire 70 weeks is not yet fulfilled, contend that the “he” is the antichrist.
Preterists and Partial Preterists contend that the “he” is not the antichrist but is the Messiah the Prince, Jesus Christ. Let us prove that the “he” most certainly is Jesus Christ.
It has been argued by some Futurists that Preterists teach the prince in verse 26 is Jesus, and that Preterists therefore teach that Jesus destroyed the temple accord to the statement, “the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.”
This is simply a straw man argument (an argument that attacks a belief supposedly held by another group while in reality the other group holds no such belief at all!).
Jesus is certainly the Messiah the Prince of verse 25. Nobody in Christianity argues that. The second prince noted in verse 26, “the prince that shall come,” is not Jesus Christ. That is not the problem between Futurists and Preterists. The real issue is the identity of the “he” noted in the first phrase of verse 27.
THERE ARE TWO PRINCES MENTIONED IN THE DISCOURSE
In the straw man argument proposed by some futurists, the aspect of the lower case letter “p” in the word “prince” from the phrase, “prince that shall come,” is a matter of supposed proof that Preterists are incorrect. Once again, Preterists do not believe the prince in verse 26 is Jesus. So the argument about who this prince is, is not an issue anyway!
But simply for the sake of noting proper study manners, I do wish to point out that it is unwise to prove a doctrine based upon the translators’ preference of capitalization in a word! In the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, every word was comprised of capital letters! This shows some very weak study manners used by those Futurists who argue their point using such methods as pointing to what words are capitalized or not..
GRAMMAR PROVES CHRIST IS THE “HE”
Analyzing the grammar of verses 25 through 27 shows us that the “he” who confirms a covenant for seven years is Jesus Christ. The subject of the discussion is found in verse 25, and is the Messiah the Prince. Verse 25 mentions a span of time of “seven weeks” and “threescore and two weeks.” Seven plus sixty-two is sixty-nine. The Messiah the Prince is on the scene after the first 69 weeks. And we read that after the “threescore and two weeks”, Messiah shall be cut off.
What is “after” the threescore and two weeks? It is the 70th WEEK!
During the time after the 69th week, which is during the 70th week, Messiah is cut off. And this fits perfectly with the sequence of events that occurred in the Biblical texts of the New Testament. Jesus came, and 3.5 years later was crucified, or cut off.
The “week” is a week of seven years. All agree with that. And in the midst of the “week”, the sacrifice and oblation ceased. God would never again accept sacrifice of blood, since Christ was the final sacrifice God would ever recognize.
This refers to the crucifixion where Christ was “cut off” due to an untimely death, as opposed to death by natural old age. He was “cut off” since He was killed. And he was not cut off for Himself! He died for the salvation of humanity! Praise God!
Not only would Christ be cut off after the 69 weeks, but the people of the prince that shall come would destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple).
This was fulfilled by the year 70 AD. Desolations were “determined.” Jesus Christ referred to the destruction of the Temple, Himself, in
Matthew 23.
Matthew 23:37-38 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
“Your house is left unto you desolate.”
IS THE LAST WEEK NOT A LITERAL PERIOD OF SEVEN YEARS?
The 70th week of Daniel is not a spiritualized week of untold number of actual days. It is a seven-year period. In the midst of the period, Christ was crucified, and 3.5 years elapsed after that to fulfill the time for Israel alone being privy to God’s workings. Note that the gentiles did not come into the picture of experiencing salvation until after 3.5 years.
Only Jews were filled with the Spirit in
Acts 2:4. People have estimated that Stephen’s death, when Saul of Tarsus first began to be pricked in his heart concerning the Christians whom he persecuted, who later preached and turned to the Gentiles alone in ministry, occurred 3.5 years after Jesus died and rose again. However, the precise dating of when the final 3.5 years were fulfilled is not necessary. The whole point of Daniel was “after” the 69th week, Christ would be cut off and make an end of sacrifices.
