Question about Daniel 9

[edwin]

Just caught sight of this thread. Not meaning to offend anyone, but Daniel 9 has nothing to do with Jesus. Sir Robert Anderson's "The Coming Prince" is based on faulty translation from the KJB.

 

[edwin]

why do you say that this is in reference to Jesus?

 

[Vic C.]

Just caught sight of this thread. Not meaning to offend anyone, but Daniel 9 has nothing to do with Jesus. Sir Robert Anderson's "The Coming Prince" is based on faulty translation from the KJB.

I don't know much about this Robert Anderson. But I do know that Daniel 9:24-27 is at the very center of all Messianic prophecy. It outlines Jesus' 3 1/2 years of ministry, the 3 1/2 years following, up to the time Stephen was stoned and the time the Gospel was brought to the first Gentile (Cornelius).

It also points to the eventual end of all Temple ceremonies and rituals (sacrifice and oblation), which occurred some 40 years after His death on the Cross (70AD).

Verse 24 starts off like this:

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city,

"Thy people", meaning Daniel's people. Iy was given to Daniel so that he may point his people to the coming of their Messiah. These people would know nothing about any antichrist. That would have meant noting to them.

The rest of the verse says:

... to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

All this was accomplishes by Jesus. He paid the price for their (and our) transgressions. His death nullified the penalty for our sins.

Colossians 2:14 - Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Through His sacrifice, we are reconciled and are imputed with everlasting righteousness.

He was anointed at His baptism. Even His followers knew He was anointed when they cried out:

Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest

(Matthew 21:9).

Verse 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

This sets up the time-line for the 70 weeks. Jesus is Messiah the Prince.

Verse 26

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:

3 1/2 years after His anointing, He was crucified, but not for anything He did. He was crucified for us.

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.

This part of the verse is parenthetical. It explains events that would eventually lead to the destruction of Jerusalem, the Temple and their ways of worship. Their rejection and denial of their Messiah was the reason for God's wrath upon them.

Verse 27

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:

One week, seven years. From the time of His anointing to the time of His death was 3 1/2 years. From His death to the time the Gospel was brought to the Gentiles was 3 1/2 years. Added together is how we come up with the 70th. week, which we now see is consecutive with the first 69 weeks.

and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,

The midst, or middle, of the week, He was crucified. In His own words:

"It is finished"

(John 19:30).

Old Covenant out and the New Covenant in and wrath for those who continued in the old ways.

and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

This overspreading, or wings, of abominations, represents an army or armies. In this case, it represents the Roman armies who destroyed Jerusalem.

Isaac Newton explained it this way:

And upon a wing of abominations he shall cause desolation, even until the consummation, and that which is determined be poured upon the desolate. The Prophets, in representing kingdoms by Beasts and Birds, put their wings stretcht out over any country for their armies sent out to invade and rule over that country.

Hence a wing of abominations is an army of false Gods: for an abomination is often put in scripture for a false God; as where Chemosh is called the abomination of Moab {1 Kings 11.}, and Molech the abomination of Ammon. The meaning therefore is, that the people of a Prince to come shall destroy the sanctuary, and abolish the daily worship of the true God, and overspread the land with an army of false gods; and by setting up their dominion and worship, cause desolation to the Jews, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. For Christ tells us, that the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel was to be set up in the times of the Roman Empire, Matth. 24:15.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/comm...=3159&commInfo=10&topic=Daniel and Revelation

 

[edwin]

I am aware of the standard interpretation offered by Christianity. My point is the conclusions you have reached are based on mistranslations found in the KJB from the original Hebrew and a failure to consider the context of the whole chapter. I will continue, if I may, when I have more time.

 

[edwin]

First, linguistic problems in the KJB. Here is a more accurate translation from the Hebrew text of Daniel:

24. Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies. כד. 25. And you shall know and understand that from the emergence of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed ruler [shall be] seven weeks; and [in] sixty-two weeks it will return and be built street and moat, but in troubled times. כה. 26. And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more; and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation. כו. 27. And he will strengthen a covenant for the princes for one week, and half the week he will abolish sacrifice and meal- offering, and on high, among abominations, will be the dumb one, and until destruction and extermination befall the dumb one.

Problems from the KJB.

1. The Hebrew says "ad mashiach nagid" ie until an anointed ruler (prince). KJB has "unto the Messiah the Prince". First, there are no capitalizations in Hebrew. Second, there is no definitive article "the" in the Hebrew before the words for either "messiah" or "prince". The KJB translates the word "mashiach" multiple times as "anointed". There is only ONE place where it improperly translates it as "the Messiah"- in Daniel. Why?

2.The Hebrew text is clearly talking about 2 time periods and 2 anointed individuals. The modern KJB combines the seven week and sixty-two week period together to make sixty-nine. Hebrew, like any other language uses a base ten and would state sixty-nine as sixty and nine, not seven and sixty-two. The Hebrew punctuation has an etnach which functions as a semi-colon after the seven week period. It is interesting that if you look at the original 1611 KJB, it too recognizes the etnach and uses a semi-colon to indicate that after the word to restore Jerusalem there comes an anointed prince STOP.

25Know therefore and vnderstand, that from the going foorth of the commandement to restore and to build Ierusalem, vnto the Messiah the Prince, shall be seuen weekes; and threescore and two weekes, the street shall be built againe, and the wall, euen in troublous times. KJB 1611

Now the Hebrew text proves to us further that there are 2 time periods. v26 says "v'acharai HAshavuim shesheem ushnaim" ie "And after THE sixty-two weeks..". Interestlingly enough-the KJB conveniently leaves out the definite article here where it belongs!

The second anointed one is a different person. He is not a prince and the Hebrew says he is "y'kareit" which is a term always used in the Hebrew bible in the context of being spriritually cut off from the people of Israel for significant sins or transgressions. In other words the second mashiach may be an individual or collective entity but if it is "kareit" it is sinful and evil. Is this a description that Christianity wants to bestow on its saviour? More to come.

 

[Vic C.]

I am aware of the standard interpretation offered by Christianity. My point is the conclusions you have reached are based on mistranslations found in the KJB from the original Hebrew and a failure to consider the context of the whole chapter. I will continue, if I may, when I have more time.

The current standard interpretation of this passage has nothing to do with the KJV. The current pretrib or premil teachings teach the passage is about antichrist in some distant future.

Actually, Newton, where I got some of my beliefs about this passage, read directly from the Hebrew and Greek. He was well versed in both languages. Therefore, no mistranslations from the KJV have crept into his observations.

I'm not trying to sway you simply for the sake of being correct in my understanding; we are all here (hopefully) to come to the truth.

No matter how inconvenient and uncomfortable it may be to look at this in a more scriptural light, truth must not be forsaken because one doesn't want to change his/her views.

Several years ago, I was premil. I made fun of this view and even openly laughed at it. Now, here I am supporting that which I once thought was wrong and off the wall.

I am led by the Spirit, not by any current or popular interpretation. As we grow in faith, we also increase in our knowledge of the Word. Some 1700 years of eschatology just can't be erased by those who teach something different (and make $$$ off their books) that could possibly contradict scripture.

Though I may disagree with the belief that this passage is about antichrist and some future seven year "tribulation period", I do respect your beliefs, only because I was once where you were.

It's much easier to understand when you've once walked in the same shoes.

 

[Vic C.]

The second anointed one is a different person. He is not a prince and the Hebrew says he is "y'kareit" which is a term always used in the Hebrew bible in the context of being spriritually cut off from the people of Israel for significant sins or transgressions. In other words the second mashiach may be an individual or collective entity but if it is "kareit" it is sinful and evil. Is this a description that Christianity wants to bestow on its saviour? More to come.

I see what you have done here and I covered this.

Of course the second 'prince' mentioned in vs.26 could not be a reference to Jesus. Most or all of us who hold my view know that. We would also agree that the "he" in vs. 27 is Jesus. It was His judgement against the adulterous Jews which was the cause of the destruction of the City and Temple. the Romans were just His tool.

Above, I mentioned there is a parenthetical prophecy in that passage (meaning it is outside of the main prophecy). This is in reference to some leader, most likely a leader within the Roman Empire. The people of this coming prince (their leader), the Roman citizens or at the very least, the Roman warriors, do destroy the city and the Temple (sanctuary) in 70 AD.

Jesus clearly pointed to this in Matthew 24 (specifically vs.15)

Some here would say it is Nero; some would name another Roman leader. Either way, it doesn't matter to me. It was God's will and judgement on those who have rejected their Messiah. This in no way makes Christianity or Christ look bad.

How could we ever label God's judgement(s) as bad?

One more thing; using grammar like you did and neglecting context and the fact that this Daniel passage is a part of the overall Messianic prophecies might be an attempt to build a straw-man argument.

I'm out.

 

[edwin]

With all due respect, you have completely ignored everything I posted. I have not even begun do discuss context. BTW the Hebrew bible uses the word davar which means "word", not "commandment". In other words, the first anointed comes seven septets or 49 years after the WORD concerning the restoration of Jerusalem. Christianity talks about their saviour coming sixty-nine septets after the "commandment" but there is controversy about which commandment or decree. I recognize most talk about Artaxerxes around 444 BC but this begs another question.
If Gavriel came to Daniel to provide him with understanding about what was to transpire and he is told that a mashiach will come 49 years after some commandment or decree- how does that provide Daniel with any understanding? In this case Daniel has no starting point from which to start the countdown since the decree Christianity talks about is in the future and the angel does not tell Daniel which decree or commandment is the starting point. Only if Daniel's starting point is in the past- a point he recognizes can he then make the calculations of what is to transpire in the future. After all, what was Daniel concerned about in this chapter? Look at v2. he was calculating the number of years that the WORD (there's that word again) of the Lord had come to Jeremiah concerning the 70 years prophecy regarding Jerusalem.The book of Jeremiah has 2 major prophecies of 70 years. In chapter 25 it refers to 70 years for the destruction of Babylon- this had already taken place. In chapter 29 it refers to the restoration and return from exile. This is why Daniel was concerned. Babylon was already destroyed but in the first year of Darius the mede there was still no sign of the restoration and return to Israel. Daniel thought this was because of the sins of Israel which is why he started praying in earnest. Daniel made the mistake of thinking that both prophecies of Jeremiah started at the same time- they didn't- the second prophecy came about 18 years after the first- at the time of the destruction of the Temple. The going forth of the WORD is God's word through the prophet Jeremiah.see Jeremiah 29:10-
10 For thus saith the LORD: After seventy years are accomplished for Babylon, I will remember you, and perform My good WORD toward you, in causing you to return to this place.

I would be happy to answer any questions.

 

[Elijah674]

I don't know much about this Robert Anderson. But I do know that Daniel 9:24-27 is at the very center of all Messianic prophecy. It outlines Jesus' 3 1/2 years of ministry, the 3 1/2 years following, up to the time Stephen was stoned and the time the Gospel was brought to the first Gentile (Cornelius).

It also points to the eventual end of all Temple ceremonies and rituals (sacrifice and oblation), which occurred some 40 years after His death on the Cross (70AD).

Verse 24 starts off like this:



"Thy people", meaning Daniel's people. Iy was given to Daniel so that he may point his people to the coming of their Messiah. These people would know nothing about any antichrist. That would have meant noting to them.

The rest of the verse says:



All this was accomplishes by Jesus. He paid the price for their (and our) transgressions. His death nullified the penalty for our sins.



Through His sacrifice, we are reconciled and are imputed with everlasting righteousness.

He was anointed at His baptism. Even His followers knew He was anointed when they cried out:

(Matthew 21:9).

Verse 25

This sets up the time-line for the 70 weeks. Jesus is Messiah the Prince.

Verse 26

3 1/2 years after His anointing, He was crucified, but not for anything He did. He was crucified for us.


This part of the verse is parenthetical. It explains events that would eventually lead to the destruction of Jerusalem, the Temple and their ways of worship. Their rejection and denial of their Messiah was the reason for God's wrath upon them.

Verse 27

One week, seven years. From the time of His anointing to the time of His death was 3 1/2 years. From His death to the time the Gospel was brought to the Gentiles was 3 1/2 years. Added together is how we come up with the 70th. week, which we now see is consecutive with the first 69 weeks.


The midst, or middle, of the week, He was crucified. In His own words:

(John 19:30).

Old Covenant out and the New Covenant in and wrath for those who continued in the old ways.


This overspreading, or wings, of abominations, represents an army or armies. In this case, it represents the Roman armies who destroyed Jerusalem.

Isaac Newton explained it this way:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/comm...=3159&commInfo=10&topic=Daniel and Revelation

Hey, not a bad SDA (partly) post, huh?;)
Now if you would just do your homework on the 27-34 AD span of seven as you have arrived correctly at, then see Ecc' 1:9-10 + Eccl. 3:15 requirement along with the way God has said that He documents the 'thing established' by Him. Gen. 41:32

And then comes Matt. 7's Broadway ones + the Rev. 17:1-5 ones that are seen as a repeated bunch, right? And mom?? She is world/wide also.

--Elijah

 

[rainbows]

Very interesting thread so far.

What say ye to the following;

Daniel 12

10 Many will be purged, purified and refined, but the wicked will
act wickedly; and none of the wicked will understand, but those
who have insight will understand.

11 From the time that the regular sacrifice is abolished and the
abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.

 

[Cyberseeker]

dontcha just hate advertising?

 

[Cyberseeker]

Please address the historical Christian view

The second anointed one is a different person. He is not a prince and the Hebrew says he is "y'kareit" which is a term always used in the Hebrew bible in the context of being spriritually cut off from the people of Israel for significant sins or transgressions. In other words the second mashiach may be an individual or collective entity but if it is "kareit" it is sinful and evil. Is this a description that Christianity wants to bestow on its saviour? More to come.

So you are presenting us with the Jewish debunk of (ONE) Christian explanation of the 'weeks.' OK, but please remember that the most vocal Christian interpretation (the one Sir Robert Anderson popularized) is actually not the historical Christian view at all. Vic explained the historical view.

Also, most of us don't read the KJV anymore. The following Bible version gives a more reliable translation of the verses and I’ve included my notes in red to show the historic Christian way of interpreting it.

"After the sixty-two weeks an anointed one (Jesus Christ) shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince who is to come (troops of Titus) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (AD 70) The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.

He (Christ) shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week (3½ yrs after baptism) shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. (veil of temple torn) And on the wing of abominations (continuing sacrifices were an abomination) shall be one who makes desolate, (Titus) even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate." (God's judgement on Jerusalem from AD 70)​

 

[Stormcrow]

And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint the city to desolations. Daniel 9:26 LXX

The Septuagint, translated from Hebrew into Greek in Alexandria in the 3rd century BC, is the best translation of this passage, IMHO.

What's more, when you read the Septuagint version of Daniel 9, you get the distinct impression - as some have suggested - that the chapters in the book are out of order. Chapter 10 should come after chapter 11, and chapter 12 should come after chapter 9.

Here's a link to the online version of the Septuagint:

http://ecmarsh.com/lxx/index.htm

Now I'll insert my red letter commentary into just this verse:

And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one [Yeshua Ha'Mashaich] shall be destroyed [crucified, killed], and there is no judgment in him [for no legal reason; unjustly]: and he [Christ] shall destroy the city and the sanctuary [Jerusalem and its Temple] with the prince [Titus] that is coming: they [Jerusalem's people] shall be cut off with a flood [overrun; destroyed by invading armies], and to the end of the war [with Rome] which is rapidly completed [Titus took less than a year to finish the war over Jerusalem that began with Nero in 66 AD] he [Christ] shall appoint the city [Jerusalem] to desolations ["Behold, your house is left to you desolate." Matt. 23:38]. Daniel 9:26 LXX

 

[edwin]

And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint the city to desolations. Daniel 9:26 LXX

The Septuagint, translated from Hebrew into Greek in Alexandria in the 3rd century BC, is the best translation of this passage, IMHO.

What's more, when you read the Septuagint version of Daniel 9, you get the distinct impression - as some have suggested - that the chapters in the book are out of order. Chapter 10 should come after chapter 11, and chapter 12 should come after chapter 9.

Here's a link to the online version of the Septuagint:

http://ecmarsh.com/lxx/index.htm

Now I'll insert my red letter commentary into just this verse:

And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one [Yeshua Ha'Mashaich] shall be destroyed [crucified, killed], and there is no judgment in him [for no legal reason; unjustly]: and he [Christ] shall destroy the city and the sanctuary [Jerusalem and its Temple] with the prince [Titus] that is coming: they [Jerusalem's people] shall be cut off with a flood [overrun; destroyed by invading armies], and to the end of the war [with Rome] which is rapidly completed [Titus took less than a year to finish the war over Jerusalem that began with Nero in 66 AD] he [Christ] shall appoint the city [Jerusalem] to desolations ["Behold, your house is left to you desolate." Matt. 23:38]. Daniel 9:26 LXX

Not to get off topic, but the Septuagint to which you refer is a Church rendered document. The original Septuagint translation from Hebrew to Greek only consisted of the Torah, ie the 5 Books of Moses. The Prophets and Writings were never part of the official translations by learned Jews. Furthermore, an early Church father, Origen, found the later writings to be unreliable.

My arguments do not rely on the KJB. There are a number of Christian Bibles which translate the verses more accurately from the Hebrew. Here is the RSV:

25] Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks.
Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time.
[26] And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off, and shall have nothing; and the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war; desolations are decreed.

I put it to you and anyone following this thread. It is clear from the Christian Bible that there are 2 anointed ones and 2 separate time periods. The first is an anointed prince or ruler who comes after 7 weeks. The second anointed comes much later, after the sixty-two weeks. They cannot be the same entity. Furthermore, as I have explained further the Hebrew term y'kareit refers to the spiritual cutting off of the individual from Israel because of the commission of sins. Anyone that is kareit in the Hebrew Bible has committed a serious transgression
An example, Ex12:15-

15 Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; howbeit the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses; for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.

My questions to you are 1) Who is the first anointed? 2) Do you think that Jesus is both anointeds? 3) If you really understand the Hebrew word y'kareit (it does not just mean to be killed) and realize it applies only to sinners- why are you applying this to the one Chrisitianity considers to be sinless, and in most cases, the one Christianity considers to be God? 4) Who is the anointed who comes after 7 weeks?

 

[Vic C.]

Hey, not a bad SDA (partly) post, huh?;) ...
--Elijah

LOL We both know the SDA stole that from Newton. ;)

 

[Elijah674]

LOL We both know the SDA stole that from Newton. ;)

Still it seems quite easy to follow if one will!

 

[edwin]

Just waiting to see if anyone on the forum has some answers to post 34,:dunno

 

[Elijah674]

Just waiting to see if anyone on the forum has some answers to post 34,:dunno

What would it accomplish?? Some here are just way to smart for me & I am told several different things from them about me. Personal things. So Titus 3:9-11 applies as I see it to me.

--Elijah

 

[Sinthesis]

Just waiting to see if anyone on the forum has some answers to post 34,:dunno

Just waiting to see what your angle is. Clearly you have a presupposition about what it means to be 'cut off' that is going to get in the way of a correct interpretation of the passage.

 

[edwin]

Just waiting to see what your angle is. Clearly you have a presupposition about what it means to be 'cut off' that is going to get in the way of a correct interpretation of the passage.

I have no "angle". I am just presenting a more honest translation of the passages from the original Hebrew. I am fluent in the language, but if I have any questions I have colleagues who teach the language at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

Go through the Hebrew Bible and find for me ONE example where the term "kareit" or its derivatives is NOT used to describe a sinner or transgressor who is spiritually cut off from Israel- and I am not referring to the use of same word when it is used to describe the making of a covenant- in which case the context it totally different. I could give you dozens of examples- I have already given one but here is another:

Lev7:20 but the person who eats the flesh of the sacrifice of Hashem's peace offerings while an uncleanness is on him, that person shall be cut off from his people.

The term is always used for those who have committed serious sins against God. The term implies spiritual rather than physical death but even if there is an implication of actual physical death it is not relevant to the discussion. The second entity that is y'kareit (future tense use of the term) is simply another "anointed". The Hebrew does not say "hamashiach" ie THE MESSIAH- just an anointed one who by definition of the term is evil and deserves to be cut off from the people of Israel for his transgression. If you wish to apply this to Jesus- that is your choice. In the meantime- still waiting for someone to answer my previous questions.