0 votes
by (2.3k points)
Daniel 9:24-27

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, 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.
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.
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.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Most people agree that the first 69 weeks started with the decree to re-build Jerusalem and ended on Palm Sunday.  For the 70th week, assuming you don't take a dispensational view, it seems pretty clear that this passage is referring to judgment on Jerusalem and that "he [the Messiah the prince] shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease" refers to the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, when the sacrifices stopped.  So was the Romans' 3 1/2 year seige of Jerusalem the first half or the second half of the week?  And what period of time is the other half of the week, and what significance does that period have?

P.S.  What is the significance of splitting the first 69 weeks into 7 weeks and 62 weeks?

3 Answers

0 votes
Best answer

Here is a link to go to for an intelligent article-->http://planetpreterist.com/news-5393.html

by (2.3k points)
Hey, that's a really great article.  Personally, I think I'm leaning more towards a historicist view of Revelation, but I see no conflict between that and the discussion of Dan. 9 in the article.
So, to summarize, Christ caused the sacrifice to cease in terms of its spiritual efficacy when He was crucified at the end of His 3.5-year ministry, and the Roman Titus caused the sacrifice to physically cease at the end of his 3.5-year "ministry" (seige).  These two combined are the 70th week.
(I suppose the gap between them is just God's mercy in delaying judgment to allow time for the gospel to reach people who would believe.)

But one more question:  I had always heard that the 69 weeks was exactly the number of days from the proclamation to build Jerusalem to Palm Sunday, which is almost the end of the first half of the 70th week, using this interpretation.  Therefore there's a discrepancy of nearly 3.5 years.  Can someone address this?
by (2.3k points)
Regarding the 7 weeks and 62 weeks:  Perhaps the 7 weeks ends when the Old Testament canon ends.  Depending on who you ask, Malachi may have been written as late as 396 B.C., 49 years after the decree to rebuild Jerusalem in 445 B.C.  That's the only significant event I can think of that may have happened around that year.  What think ye?
0 votes
by (4k points)

Dr. F.N. Lee gives the historicist interpretation of the 70 weeks in his book Daniel's Eschatology. See pg. 47 http://www.dr-fnlee.org/docs5/daniel/daniel_47.html

Historicists and preterists generally agree on this particular issue against the dispensationalist gap theory.

According to Lee:

End of the 69th week: 30.3' A.D. is the approximate time of Christ's Baptism
("to 'anoint' the Most Holy One...unto Messiah the Prince," Dan. 9:24f).
Middle of the 70th week: 33.9' A.D. is the approximate time of Christ's death
("cut off, but not for Himself," Dan. 9:26).
End of the 70th week: 37 A.D. is the approximate time of the end of Dan. 9's "70th
0 votes
by (3.4k points)
edited by
Available on the Web in PDF form is a 305-page document, detailed and scholarly, which documents the fulfillment of the Prophecy of Daniel, the tail end of which fulfillment now is in progress.

The Prophecy of Daniel has to do with the regathering of Israel under Christ Jesus in the Church.  The teaching of the Protestant Pulpit and Scofield regarding the breaking of a covenant and a yet-future reversion to the "Dispensation of Israel" is complete rubbish.

One of the first steps to understanding the Prophecy of Daniel is to give heed to the exhortation of I Thessalonians 5:21 and investigate the canonicity of the Book of Revelation.  As scholars pointed out centuries ago, linguistic style alone proves that the book of Revelation could not possibly have been written by the fisherman who wrote the earthy Greek of the Gospel Account of John and the Epistle of John.  The Book of Revelation is written in a literary style of Greek which is not seen in the Scripture, but IS seen in the Talmudic Primer attributed to the non-Apostle James of Jerusalem.  Respected commentator and linguistic scholar Adam Clarke, a contemporary of Isaac Newton, points out that, though the Book of Revelation generally was recognized to be a forgery, no one could bear to relegate to the rubbish bin so majestic a piece of literature.  As so often is the case, men love Tradition more than they love Truth.

A primary purpose of the great detail of the Prophecy was to provide for the Remnant of Israel a precise specification of the historical epoch of the Incarnation; this is a primary reason for the obvious expectation of the Remnant that the Christ soon would appear.  Thus, Peter was not surprised when Andrew announced that he had found the Christ, John 1:41.

Caveat:  The document is of an academic calibre which has all but perished; the authors are true scholars.  Download and print the document, and expect to spend a week or two or longer digesting it; because of its depth, it can not be studied seriously on-line study from a computer screen.

The title page reads:


The Past History
Future Destiny of Israel,

As unfolded in the eighth and succeeding chapters
of the Book of Daniel.

by the late Robert Wodrow, Esq.

With a Preliminary Essay,
by the Rev. John G. Lorimer,
of St. David's Free Church, Glasgow.

Blackie and Son:
Glasgow, Edinburgh, and London.


by (4k points)
In regards to the Apostle John not writing the book of Revelation because the style is different from the fourth gospel, the internal witness of the fourth gospel indicates that it was written by Lazarus and not the Apostle John. Lazarus is the "beloved disciple."
by (3.4k points)
edited by
Having read the references you provided,  I agree.  I thank you for the enlightenment.

However, despite this truth, the fact remains that the Book of Revelation is a forgery which has no rightful place in the Canon of Scripture.  At every turn, the Book of Revelation contradicts the teaching of the Scripture as a whole.  Inasmuch as the Scripture is a coherent whole, one or two passages in Revelation cannot set aside numerous other passages which are in agreement one with the other.
Welcome to Study Bible Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of the community.