by
Damien F. Mackey
“And
after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have
nothing.
Its
end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are
decreed”.
Daniel 9:26
Part One:
A Jewish scholar
clarifies the main terms
Introduction
Daniel’s
famous prophecy of the Seventy Weeks “has been”, according to J. Paul Tanner, “one
of the most notorious interpretive problem passages in Old Testament studies”
(“IS DANIEL’S SEVENTY-WEEKS PROPHECY MESSIANIC?”).
Many see this
prophecy as referring to Jesus Christ the Messiah, his Death and Resurrection,
and thereby regard it as a most important piece of chronology for dating the
era of Jesus Christ, based on Daniel 9:25: “ … from the issuing of
a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince will be
seven weeks and sixty-two weeks …”.
That is,
434 years (for the “sixty-two weeks”).
And this
is precisely how I have long regarded, and have calculated, this prophecy.
In more
recent times though, however, I have come to reject the notion that the prophet
Daniel’s periods of “Weeks” are meant to be taken as chronological projections
well into the future. And, with this, has inevitably come about the new
conclusion of mine that the “cut off” Messiah can by no means be a reference to
Jesus Christ himself.
On the
contrary, the person to whom I believe Daniel’s prophecy is here pointing was
actually a most wicked biblical character who was, in the end - and as
according to this prophecy - left with “nothing” (with no descendants).
Not least
of my reasons for rejecting that there could have been approximately 500 years
(Daniel’s “Seventy Weeks”) between the era of Daniel and that of Jesus Christ
is the fact that:
Medo-Persian History [is] Archaeologically
Light. Part One: Introductory
https://www.academia.edu/31090097/Medo-Persian_History_Archaeologically_Light._Part_One_Introductory
For more, read this multi-part series.
In my related article:
Persian History has no adequate Archaeology
I began with the following quotation: “The
very existence of a Median empire, with the emphasis
on empire, is thus questionable” (H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, "Was there ever
a Median Empire?"). Although there was a Medo-Persian empire, it was
far briefer, with far fewer kings, than according to the textbook estimates.
Scholars
down through the centuries have not been unanimous in their interpretations of
the meaning of the Daniel 9 text.
Whilst
many have regarded it as being Messianic (with reference to Jesus Christ),
others have not. And even the Church Fathers, who generally tended to relate it
to Jesus Christ, were by no means unanimous in their explanations of the
various details of the prophecy.
This is
apparent from J. Paul Tanner’s introduction to the subject:
THE
SEVENTY-WEEKS PROPHECY IN DANIEL 9:24–27 has been one of the most notorious
interpretive problem passages in Old Testament studies. As Montgomery put it,
“The history of the exegesis of the 70 Weeks is the Dismal Swamp of O.T.
criticism.” 1 Early
church fathers commonly embraced a messianic interpretation of the passage and
sought to prove a chronological computation for the time of Messiah’s coming
based on this prophecy. This approach has been favored by many
conservatives—both premillennial and amillennial—down through the centuries.
Advocates of the messianic view differ over the details of interpretation (e.g.,
the number of times Messiah is referred to in the passage, the termini of the
calculations, or how the final seventieth week relates to the first
sixty-nine), but they agree that this passage is one of the most astounding
references to the Lord Jesus Christ and the time of His first advent.
On
the other hand some writers see no reference to Messiah in this passage. This
includes most critical scholars, who typically favor a Maccabean fulfillment
(i.e., in the second century B.C.), and Jewish exegetes, who—although differing
about various details—tend to see the fulfillment of this passage with the
destruction of the temple in A.D. 70 and/or its aftermath. ….
[End of quote]
in which article I find
some important lessons pertaining to the Hebrew words – though I would not
accept the Rabbi’s conventionally-based chronology and dates.
The book of Daniel is filled with Messianic illusions and calculations
that even left Daniel pondering their meanings. …. Is there something about the
Jewish Messiah?
Daniel
Chapter 9
The ninth chapter has been of particular interest
to both Jews and Christians. The message of a merciful God communicated in
verse 18, “for not because of our righteousness do we pour out supplications
before You, but because of Your great compassion.” has been a foundation of
a Jews personal and spiritual relationship with God. Christians, on the
other hand, tend to focus on verses 24 -26. The following is the Christian
translation of those verses:
24) Seventy weeks are determined upon your people
and upon your 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 discern that from the issuing
of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince will be
seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again with plaza and moat but
in troubled times.
26) Then after sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off but not for himself and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.”
26) Then after sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off but not for himself and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.”
Many Christians assert that these passages are a
prophecy that predicts the exact dates that the Messiah will come and also die.
They believe that Jesus fulfilled these predictions. Before examining
these verses it is important to point out that: 1) Based on the Hebrew original
and context, Jews have very valid reasons for rejecting the Christian
interpretation and 2) the New Testament authors never quote these passages and
calculations as a proof-text.
To understand this chapter, we must begin with an
explanation of the term “weeks.”
Daniel chapter 9 uses the Hebrew word (שבעים ~
Shavuim) to represents a period of time multiplied by seven. For various
reasons this word is translated as “weeks” and means a multiple of seven years
rather than a multiple of seven days.
a) We see a similar use in the verse, “You shall
count~ שבע שבתת השנים) seven Shabbaths of years), seven years seven times…
forty-nine years.” Leviticus 25:8
b) A Shabbath is a period of seven days and shares the same Hebrew root for the word (שבועה~Shavuah) that means “week”.
b) A Shabbath is a period of seven days and shares the same Hebrew root for the word (שבועה~Shavuah) that means “week”.
c) Normally the plural of week would be (שבעות ~
Shavuot) in Daniel it uses the masculine “ים” ending for ( שבעים~
Shavuim) similar to (years ~ שנים) This indicates that (שבעים~ Shavuim) is
referring to a multiple of seven years
d) Both Jews and Christian agree that this is referring to a multiple of years.
d) Both Jews and Christian agree that this is referring to a multiple of years.
Therefore in Daniel chapter 9, each week is a
period of seven years.
Christian polemicists interpret these passages in
the following way. These passages are being spoken by Daniel after the
destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the evil Babylonian empire. At some
point after the destruction, there will be a “decree” issued to restore
and rebuild Jerusalem. Starting from the issuing of that decree, 7 and 62 weeks
totaling 69 weeks of years (483 years), will pass and then the Messiah will
come and in that same seven year period “week” he will be cut off, but
not for himself, but for the sins of mankind. Then the city and sanctuary will
be destroyed. Christian assert that their calculation proves that Jesus
fulfilled this prophecy to the exact day.
After the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem, any Jews
that survived the Babylonian slaughter were exiled from their land. Daniel, for
example, lived in Babylon. Eventually, the Babylonians were conquered by the
Persian Empire. Christians claim that the decree mentioned in Daniel 9:25
was issued by the Persian King Artaxerxes in the year 444 BCE, based on
Nehemiah 2:1-8. These passages speak about the king giving Nehemiah “letters”
(אגרות ~ Iggrot) for safe passage and permission to rebuild the Temple.
Mackey’s comment: But see my identification
of this King “Artaxerxes” with the Chaldean king Nebuchednezzar II in my
multi-part series:
Governor Nehemiah's master
"Artaxerxes king of Babylon".
especially Part Two: “‘Artaxerxes’
as king Nebuchednezzar”
The Rabbi continues:
The building of Jerusalem was started and halted
several times, and there are three additional decrees mentioned earlier in the
Bible.
1) In Ezra 1:1-4, King Cyrus issues a proclamation (קול ~ Kol) and writings (מכתב ~ Michtav) granting the Jews permission to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple.
2) Ezra 6:12-13, King Darius issues a decree (טעם ~Taam) granting permission to rebuilt the Temple.
3) Ezra 7:11-16, Artaxerxex, issues a decree (טעם
~Taam) granting permission to rebuilt the Temple. (Artaxerxex is a Persian
title of royalty and can refer to different leaders. This is similar to the way
Pharaoh is the title of rulers of Egypt)
We will see latter that it is significant that in
these verses there are four different words used to describe these
proclamations, and none of them match the Hebrew word used in Daniel 9 which is
(דבר ~ Devar) that means “word.”
With four different proclamations, there is no
historical justification to choose the one mentioned in Nehemiah 2 and there is
no reliable source stating that it occurred exactly in 444 BCE. It seems that
Christians picked this passage out of convenience and assigned it this specific
date, because if you start at 444 BCE and count 69 weeks of years (483 years)
you reach 39 CE. Whatever their reason for choosing Nehemiah’s reference and
attributing it as having occurred in 444 BCE it is still seven years off from
the year 32 CE when Jesus supposedly died.
This seven-year discrepancy is resolved by Christian
theologians who redefined the definition of a “year.” They claim that
prophecies like Daniel’s are to be understood in “Prophetic years” that have
360 days rather than 365 ¼ days. The argument that Daniel might be speaking to
Babylonians who may have had a 360 year is unsubstantiated and refuted by the
fact that this particular passage is spoken in Hebrew to Jews who had a
different calendar then and Babylonians who spoke Aramaic.
Prophetic
Year vs Solar Year
One Christian attempt to prove this concept of
Prophetic years is from the New Testament: “They will tread underfoot
the holy city for 42 months, and they will prophesy for 1260 days.” Revelations
11:2-3
By dividing 1260 (days) by 42 (months) you get 30
days per month, they claim that each month is 30 days and a Prophetic Biblical
year would therefore be being 360 days (30×12=360). An additional
proof-text utilizes the events surrounding the flood. The following verses are
quoted to show how biblical months were periods of 30 days,
“the water prevailed upon the earth 150 days”
Gen 7:24 and
the flood started on,
“the 17th day of the second month” Gen
7:11, and ended on,
“the 17th day of the seventh month.” Gen
8:4.
They argue that by taking this exact five month
period and dividing it into the 150 days, you will see that there must be five
months of 30 days each and therefore a year would be 360 days. The
Christian argument continues that the difference between a solar year of 365 ¼
days and the so-called prophetic year of 360 days is what caused the seven-year
discrepancy in their interpretation of Daniel 9, and the resolution of the
problem is accomplished by converting the time period from “biblical”
years to solar years.
They argue that that by multiplying 360 days by 483
years (69 weeks of years) you get 173,880 prophetic days. To convert this to
solar years, you divide the 173,880 days by 365 1/4 (days), and you will get
476 years. 444 BCE plus 476 years will give you the year 32 CE, which they
claim is the year that Jesus not only made his triumphant entry into Jerusalem
(Messiah’s arrival) but was also crucified (cut off ).
Before explaining why this line of reasoning is
absolutely false and a simply an act of desperation to resolve their 7 year
miscalculation, we must explore the correct meaning of Daniel 9 and the concept
of a Jewish calendar year.
Translating
Daniel Correctly
It is essential to a correct understanding of
Daniel 9, to point out that it is incorrect to read this passage as if it were
speaking about the Messiah. This may appear obvious to Christians since
their translations has the word “Messiah” mentioned twice in this
chapter; however this is the result of a blatant and intentional mistranslation
of the Hebrew word (משיח ~ Moshiach”).
This word literally means “anointed” and is
an adjective as in the 1 Samuel 10:1-2 where the word clearly means an act of
consecration. It is not a personal pronoun that refers to a particular individual
called “The Messiah.” The word (משיח ~ Moshiach”) is used
throughout Jewish Scriptures no less than 100 times and refers to a variety of
individuals and objects. For example:
Priests: Leviticus 4:3
Kings: 1 Kings 1:39
Prophets: Isaiah 61:1
Temple Alter: Exodus 40:9-11
Matzot ~ Unleavened Bread: Numbers 6:15
Cyrus ~ a non-Jewish Persian King: Isaiah 45:1
Even in Christian translations, the word Moshiach
is translated 99% of the time as “anointed.” The only exception is twice
in Daniel 9 verses 25 and 26. This inconsistency is even more blatant since
Christian translators translate the word (משיח ~ Moshiach) as “anointed”
one verse earlier when it is used in Daniel 9:24. In this instance, it is
referring to anointing the innermost chamber of the Holy Temple known as the “Holy
of Holies,” (קדשים קדש ~ Kodesh Kedoshim). It is incorrect to translate
this, as some missionaries do, to mean the “most holy one” in an attempt
to have this refer to the Messiah rather than a place.
Therefore, in Daniel, the passages should be
correctly translated as:
Daniel 9:24 “Until an anointed prince” and not as “Until Messiah he
prince.”
Daniel 9:25 “an anointed one will be cut off” and not as “the
Messiah will be cut off.”
Additionally, in verse 25 there is no definite
article (Hey ~ ה) before the word (משיח ~ Moshiach), and it is incorrect to
translate this as “the Messiah” or “the anointed one” as if it were speaking
about one exclusive individual. When translating correctly as an “anointed
individual,7” the passages could be referring any one of a number of
different individuals or objects that were anointed and not necessarily “the
Messiah.”
A careful examination of Daniel 9 will lead to a
clear understand of exactly to whom and what this chapter is referring. An
additional mistake made by Christians is the translation of 7 and 62 weeks as
one undivided unity of 69 weeks. The Christian version makes it sound as if the
arrival and “cutting off” of the “Messiah” will take place
sixty-nine weeks (483 years) after a decree to restore Jerusalem. They add the
7 and 62 weeks together and have one person (the Messiah) and two events
occurring towards the end of the 69th week.
Actually, according to the Hebrew the 7 and 62
weeks are two separate and distinct periods. One event happens after seven
weeks and another event after an additional 62 weeks. Simply put, if you
wanted to say 69 in Hebrew you would say “sixty and nine.” You would not
say “seven and sixty two.”
Furthermore, in Daniel it is written “7 weeks
and 62 weeks rather than “7 and 62 weeks.” The use of the word “weeks”
after each number also shows that they are separate events. The use of the
definite article (ה ~ Hey) that means “the” in verse 26, “and after
the 62 weeks shall an anointed one be cut off,” is sometimes deleted in
Christian translations, but it’s presence in the Hebrew original clearly
indicates that the 62 weeks is to be treated as separate period of time from
the original 7 weeks.
The correct translation should be: “until
an anointed prince shall be 7 weeks (49 years),” “then for 62 weeks (434 years)
it (Jerusalem) will be built again but in troubled times.” Then after (those)
the 62 weeks shall an anointed one will be cut off.” Daniel 9:24-25
Two separate events and anointed ones, 62 weeks
(434 years) apart.
Christians also incorrectly translated the Hebrew
(V’ayn Lo ~ לו ואין), at the end of Daniel 9:26. They translate it that he will
be cut off “but not for himself,” as if it refers to someone being cut
off not for himself but cut off for us and indicating a form of vicarious
attainment. However the Hebrew original means “and he will be no more”
literally “and no more of him” and indicates the finality of his demise.
Interestingly the Hebrew word (kares ~ כרת) translated as “cut off” biblically
refers to someone who has sinned so grievously that they are put to death by
heavenly decree as a divine punishment for their own transgressions.
Mackey’s
comment: As I wrote above, “… the person to
whom I believe Daniel’s prophecy is here pointing was actually a most wicked
biblical character who was, in the end - and as according to this prophecy -
left with “nothing” (with no descendants)”.
The Rabbi continues:
An awareness of these eight mistranslations is
essential to understanding the ninth chapter of Daniel. To recap:
1. (קדשים קדש) mean “holy of holies” not the
“most holy one”
2. (דבר ~ Devar) that means “word” not
decree.
3. (משיח ~ Moshiach”) means “anointed” not “Messiah”
verse 23
4. (משיח ~ Moshiach”) means “anointed” not “Messiah”
verse 24
5. “seven weeks and sixty-two ” means two
events one at 7 weeks and the other
62 weeks later not one event after a cumulative 69
weeks
6. (Hey ~ ה) mean “the”
7. (V’ayn Lo ~ לו ואין) mean “will be no more”
not “not for himself”
8. (kares ~ כרת) means death to a transgressor the
cuts off their relationship to God.
Jewish
Calendar Years
In addition to … these eight mistranslations
Christians, as mentioned above, manipulate their calculation of the 69 weeks in
Daniel 9 in an attempt to have them coincide with the arrival and death of
Jesus in Jerusalem.
Christians based their understand with a belief
that the starting point of the prophesy begins in 444 BCE with the decree
issued by King Artaxerxex (Ezra 7:ll-16). Sixty–nine weeks (483 years)
would bring you to 39 CE. This is 7 years off the commonly accepted date of 32
CE being the year Jesus was put to death. As mentioned above they attempt to
resolve this issue by transforming “prophetic years” into solar years.
The problem is that according to Jewish tradition and scriptures there is no
such thing as a prophetic year of 360 days.
Jewish scripture clearly teaches that the Jewish
calendar is both Solar and Lunar. As early as Genesis 1:14, that deals with the
creation of the sun and the moon, we are told that “Let there be lights in the
firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night, and let them be for
signs, and for seasons, and for days and years” Both luminaries are used to
determine our calendar.
A solar year is 365 1/4 days and a lunar year is 11
days shorter, 354 days long. Unlike the Gentile’s year where the length of the
months is set by convention rather than a relationship to the lunar calendar, a
Biblical Jewish calendar must coincide with both the sun (for seasons) and the
moon. When God, commanded the people of Israel to sanctify the months he
established the month that the Exodus took place as the first of the months.
Exodus 12:1. God also commanded to observe Passover in the springtime as is
says, “Observe the month of springtime and perform the Passover for
God, for in the month on springtime God took you out of Egypt.” Deut
16:1.
In other words, a biblical calendar must coincide
the months with the seasons creating a Solar-Lunar calendar.
There is an eleven day difference between a solar
and lunar year. If Jewish holidays were established solely by a lunar year the
holidays would move further and further away from their original seasons. This
happens all the time with the Muslim Lunar calendar with Ramadan falling in a
variety of seasons. A biblical Solar/Lunar calendar corrects this by adding a
13 month leap year approximately every 4 years. Some years have 12 months and
the leap year has 13. The fabricated “prophetic year” of 360 days could
not exist because it would not allow Jewish holidays to coincide with both
months and seasons.
Understanding
Daniel
Now we can return to the beginning of Daniel 9 and
establish the correct starting point for Daniel’s prophesy. The Christian
major error in establishing the starting point of Daniel prophesy is caused by
their mistranslation of the verse, “know therefore and discern that from the
going forth of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem.” Daniel 9:25
Since their translation asserts that the starting
point of this prophesy is from the issuing of a certain decree to rebuild Jerusalem,
they incorrectly assume that it is the decree of King Artaxerxex. However, as
mentioned above, there were a number of different decrees made concerning
returning and rebuilding Jerusalem.
In Daniel 9:25, the original Hebrew used the word
(דבר ~ Devar) which is significantly different from a human decree. The word
(דבר ~ Devar) refers to a prophetic word. In the beginning of Daniel 9 verse 2,
this word is used when Daniel says that he wants to understand “the word of
the Lord to the Prophet Jeremiah.”
As mentioned above, in all of the passages that
mention some form of decree or proclamation concerning Jerusalem, none of them
use the Hebrew word (דבר ~ Devar).
The correct translation of Daniel should be: “Know
therefore and discern that from the going forth of the word to restore and
rebuild Jerusalem” Daniel 9:25
Therefore the correct starting point of Daniel’s
prophesy must be associated with the issuing of a prophetic word and not a
human decree. The word (דבר ~ Devar) is used in the beginning of Daniel
chapter 9. A careful reading of the beginning of this chapter clarifies the
correct meaning of the reference to the “word to restore and to build
Jerusalem” mentioned in Daniel 9:25.
Chapter 9 begins as follows: “I Daniel
considered (or contemplated) in the books the number of the years which the
word (דבר ~ Devar) of G-d came to Jeremiah the Prophet that would accomplish to
the destruction of Jerusalem” Daniel 9:2
Here Daniel uses the word (דבר ~ Devar) when
pondering the numbers of years that Jeremiah had spoken about. Jeremiah had
twice prophesied concerning a 70 year period.
Once Jeremiah said: “and these nation shall
serve the King of Babylon 70 years and it shall come to pass when seventy years
are accomplished that I will punish the King of Babylon and that nation … and
make it everlasting desolation” Jeremiah 25: 11-12
This prophesy states that Babylon would dominate
Israel for a total of 70 years.
Jeremiah also says: “After 70 years are
accomplished to Babylon I will take heed of you and perform My good word
towards you in causing you to return to this place.” Jeremiah 29:l0
This prophesy states, that after the 70 years, in
addition to the end of Babylonian domination, the Jews would also return to
Jerusalem from the Babylonian exile. There are two Jeremiah prophesies
concerning: 1) subjugation, and 2) return to Jerusalem.
Jeremiah’s 70 years start from the initial
subjugation of Jerusalem by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. This took place 18
years before the destruction of Jerusalem, as demonstrated by the following
passages, We know that the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem in the 19th
year of King Nebuchadnezzar. As it says:
“In the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuzaradan
the chief executioner was in service of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem…
and destroyed the Temple of God” Jeremiah 52:12-13
The 19th year means that 18 full years had already
been completed. Nebuchadnezzar started to subjugate Jerusalem in his first year
of his rule; this can be derived from the following verses;
“in King Yehoyakim’s third year (three completed
years) Nebuchadnezzar came to besiege Jerusalem” Daniel 1:1
“in the fourth year (three completed years) of
Yehoyakim which was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar” Jeremiah 25:1
These verses demonstrate that Nebuchadnezzar
started to besiege Jerusalem in his first year and the destruction of Jerusalem
took place in his “19th” year. Therefore, 18 complete years had passed from the
beginning of the siege until the destruction of Jerusalem. During these 18
years Jerusalem was laid siege and completely surrounded. Scriptures also
indicate that the 70 years of Jeremiah were completed with the advent of Cyrus
the King of the Persian Empire. As it says:
“Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia,
that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled.” Ezra
1:1-3
“Those who survived the sword he exiled to Babylon,
where they became slaves to him and his sons until the kingdom of Persia began
to reign. This was the fulfillment of the word of God to Jeremiah, until the
land would be appeased of its Sabbatical years, all the years of its desolation
it rested, to the completion of 70 years. In the first year of Cyrus king of
Persia, upon the expiration of God’s prophesy spoken by Jeremiah. God aroused
the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia and he issues a proclamation… to build God a
Temple in Jerusalem.” 2
Chronicles 36:20-23
In addition to the Babylonian rule ended in
fulfillment of Jeremiah 25:11-12, Cyrus also gave permission, in fulfillment of
Jeremiah 29:l0, to the Jews to return to Jerusalem, as it says;
“Whoever is among you all his people, let his
God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build
the house of the Lord G-d of Israel.” Ezra 1:4
It is important to remember that from the beginning
of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, 18 years before the fall of Jerusalem, until the
fall of the Babylonian Empire, when Cyrus came into power, 70 years had
elapsed. By subtracting the 18 years subjugation before the destruction of the
first Temple from the total of 70 years we are left with 52 years. This proves
that King Cyrus arose to power and fulfilled Jeremiah’s prophesy 52 years after
the destruction of Jerusalem.
Mackey’s comment: This “52 years” is, I
believe, too large a figure for the period in question.
I think that Jeremiah’s “70
years” ought instead to be dated from the 13th year of king Josiah,
which was 23 years from the 1st year of Nebuchednezzar, as according
to this most important of OT chronological entries (Jeremiah 25:1-3):
The
word came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of
Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah, which was the first year of
Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. So Jeremiah the
prophet said to all the people of Judah and to all those living in Jerusalem:
‘For twenty-three years—from the thirteenth year of Josiah son
of Amon king of Judah until this very day—the word of the Lord has come to me and I have spoken to you again and again, but you
have not listened’.
And at this point we can leave the Rabbi’s excellent and most helpful discourse
as, from now on, his identification of Medo-Persian kings begins greatly to
confuse matters – at least according to my own arrangement and identification of
these monarchs.
Part Two:
The “cut off”
one was an evil king of Judah
This is what the Lord says:
‘Record this man as if childless,
a man who will not prosper in his lifetime,
for none of his offspring will prosper,
none will sit on the throne of David
or rule anymore in Judah’.
a man who will not prosper in his lifetime,
for none of his offspring will prosper,
none will sit on the throne of David
or rule anymore in Judah’.
Jeremiah 22:30
We
learned from PART ONE about Daniel 9, following Rabbi helpful account of the proper meanings of the key Hebrew
words therein, that commentators have long been foisting their artificial translations
upon the ancient text, usually for the purpose of ‘making’ it culminate with
Jesus Christ the Messiah.
I also
suggested that a flaw in the Rabbi’s own interpretation of Daniel’s text,
chronology wise, pertained to the inevitable difficulties associated with
accepting the standard Babylonian to Medo-Persian succession of kings.
According to the Rabbi:
It is
important to remember that from the beginning of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, 18
years before the fall of Jerusalem, until the fall of the Babylonian Empire,
when Cyrus came into power, 70 years had elapsed. By subtracting the 18 years
subjugation before the destruction of the first Temple from the total of 70
years we are left with 52 years. This proves that King Cyrus arose to power and
fulfilled Jeremiah’s prophesy 52 years after the destruction of Jerusalem.
That
would be according to the conventional arrangement of neo-Babylonian kings
Ruler
|
Reigned
|
Comments
|
626 –
605 BC
|
Took
control of Babylonia from Sinsharishkun of Assyria, ejected Assyrian
armies from Babylonia in 616 BC. Entered into alliance with Cyaxares and destroyed Assyrian empire.
| |
605 –
562 BC
|
Chaldean king. Defeated the Egyptians and Assyrians at Carchemish. Is associated with Daniel in the Bible.
| |
Amel-Marduk
(Evil-Merodach)
|
562 –
560 BC
| |
Nergal-shar-usur (Nergal-sharezer/Neriglissar)
|
560 –
556 BC
|
Son-in-law
of Nebuchadnezzar II. Murdered Amel-Marduk.
|
556 BC
|
Son of
Neriglissar. Murdered after being deemed unfit to rule.
| |
556 –
539 BC
|
Last
Mesopotamian king of Babylon, originated in Harran in Assyria. Was not a
Chaldean, often left rule to his son Belshazzar in a co-regency arrangement.
|
which,
unfortunately, has several too many kings, Nebuchednezzar II being in fact the
same as Nabonidus; Evil-Merodach being the same as the biblical “Belshazzar”
(Bel-shar-usur), who is most likely the same, again, as Nergalsharezer
(Nergal-shar-usur).
Given
that 23 years of the prophet Jeremiah’s count of 70 years of captivity had
already expired by the 1st year of Nebuchednezzar (refer back to Part
One), then about (23+18 =) 40/41 years must have expired when the Temple was
destroyed by the Chaldeans. That means that there could have been only about 30
years, rather than the Rabbi’s “52 years”, until the 1st year of
Cyrus. Those 30 years would now be made up of a remaining 25 years for
Nebuchednezzar, plus 3-4 of his son-successor Belshazzar, plus the first year
for Cyrus (25 + 4 + 1 = 30).
{This is
only an approximate calculation on my non-mathematically inclined part}.
There is
no room here as well for the approximately 4 years of Nergalsharezer, the 1
year of Labashi-Marduk (whoever he was), or the 17 years of Nabonidus (4 + 1 +
17 = 22), from which conventional estimate Rabbi would have obtained his (30 + 22 =) “52 years”.
My
choice for the “cut off” anointed one of Daniel 9 has to be king Jehoiachin of
Judah.
He is
“cut off” even in name in the Book of Jeremiah, which reduces his name, sans theophoric, to “Coniah” (Jeremiah
22:24-28):
‘As
surely as I live’, declares the Lord, ‘even if
you, Coniah son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, were a signet ring on my right
hand, I would still pull you off. I will deliver you
into the hands of those who want to kill you, those you fear—Nebuchadnezzar
king of Babylon and the Babylonians. I will hurl you and the
mother who gave you birth into another country, where neither of you was born,
and there you both will die. You will never come back
to the land you long to return to’.
Is this man Jehoiachin a despised, broken
pot,
an object no one wants?
Why will he and his children be hurled out,
cast into a land they do not know?
an object no one wants?
Why will he and his children be hurled out,
cast into a land they do not know?
King
Jehoiachin I have previously identified with the wicked Haman of the Book of
Esther, and, more recently, with king Amon of Judah, from whom, indeed, we must
get the name “Aman” (or Haman). See my article:
King Amon's descent into Aman (Haman)
As
Haman, he was childless alright, all ten of his sons having been killed by order
of king “Ahasuerus” (i.e., Cyrus) soon after his own violent death (Esther
7:10): “So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for
Mordecai. Then the wrath of the king abated”.
Such was
the ugly demise of the very evil and extremely long-reigning (but only in
captivity) former king of Judah, Jehoiachin (Jeconiah-Coniah)/Amon/Aman (Haman).
The aged
king of Judah had even been revered by the Persians as “father” (Esther
16:11-12):
[Haman]
… found our humanity so great towards him, that he was called our father, and
was worshipped by all as the next man after the king: But he was so far puffed
up with arrogancy, as to go about to deprive us of our kingdom and life.
Part Three:
The ‘terminus ad
quem’ of Daniel 9
“… he will put an end to sacrifice
and offering.
And at the Temple he will set
up an abomination that causes desolation,
until the end that is decreed
is poured out on him”.
Daniel 9:27
For
those who interpret Daniel 9 as being a Messianic prophecy pertaining to Jesus
Christ, then its culminating two verses (vv. 26-27):
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. He will confirm a covenant with many for one
‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and
offering. And at the Temple he will set up an abomination that causes
desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him [,]
can only
be a description of the complete destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70
AD (conventional dating).
Though
who the “he” might be in this case could be problematical.
Not so,
however, according to my revision, in which the “he” can be one, and only one,
person, following on from my identification of the “cut off’ anointed one of
the previous verse (v. 25) with Haman of the Medo-Persian period. The “he” can
then only be that terrible persecuting king Antiochus IV ‘Epiphanes’ of “the
[Macedonian] people of the ruler who will come will
destroy the city and the sanctuary”.
For, as we read in 1 Maccabees 1:20-24:
In the year
143, after the conquest of Egypt, Antiochus marched with a great army against
the land of Israel and the city of Jerusalem. In his
arrogance, he entered the Temple and took away the gold altar, the lampstand
with all its equipment, the table for the bread offered
to the Lord, the cups and bowls, the gold fire pans, the curtain, and the
crowns. He also stripped all the gold from the front of the Temple and carried off the silver and gold and everything else of value,
including all the treasures that he could find stored there. Then he took it all to his own country. He had also murdered many
people and boasted arrogantly about it.
Then,
just two years later (vv. 30-32): “… he suddenly
launched a fierce attack on the city, dealing it a major blow and killing many
of the people. He plundered the city, set it on fire,
and tore down its buildings and walls. He and his army
took the women and children as prisoners and seized the cattle”.
Next, came the Abomination (vv. 54-57):
King Antiochus
set up The Awful Horror [Abomination] on the altar of the Temple, and pagan
altars were built in the towns throughout Judea. Pagan sacrifices were offered in front of houses and in the streets. Any books of the Law which were found
were torn up and burned, and
anyone who was caught with a copy of the sacred books or who obeyed the Law was
put to death by order of the king.
My
identification of the “cut off’ one also necessitates now that the long count
of the approximately 434 years of Daniel 9:26 must be retrospective – and not
looking forwards – in relation to the era of Daniel, for as we read there: “After the sixty-two
‘sevens,’ an Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing”.
The author of the following blog article has likewise rejected the “anointed”
one of Daniel as being Jesus Christ, whilst correctly also (I believe)
connecting the Abominator with Antiochus. His/her identification of the
“anointed” one with the Maccabean high priest, Onias - which I personally
cannot accept - is a view that does have some supporters as well. His/her
conventional chronology of the Maccabean period is, I believe, wildly off the
mark: https://dustinmartyr.wordpress.com/2016/06/17/responsibly-interpreting-the-visions-in-daniel-9-part-3/
Responsibly Interpreting the
Visions in Daniel 9 (part 3)
This
will be the final post on the Seventy Weeks prophecy in Daniel 9. For a recap
of my thoughts on the passage’s introduction and verse 9:24, click here. Yesterday’s post regarded the exegesis
of Dan 9:25 (here). Today’s post will deal with the final
two verses (9:26-27) and some concluding matters of interpretation.
9:26 “And after the sixty-two weeks an anointed one will be cut off
and no one will come to his aid. Then the people of the coming prince will
spoil the city and the sanctuary. But his end will come with a flood unto an
end; a war is being decided; desolating things.”
9:27 “He will confirm a covenant with the great ones for one week.
But in the middle of the week he will remove the sacrifice and the grain
offering; and upon a wing of abominations he will be desolating, up to the
point of a complete destruction being decided which will be poured out upon the
one desolating.”
Quite
a few remarks need to be stated in regard to this passage. I will number them
for the sake of making organized conversation points:
1.
As I
noted in the previous post, these two verses focus entirely upon the events
after the initial two periods of history (‘seven’ weeks and ‘sixty-two’ weeks).
In other words, the final week of the Seventy Weeks prophecy gets the most
attention, making its events the crux of the passage’s emphasis.
2.
The
beginning of this passage moves the listener over a long period of time up to
this decisive moment where an anointed figure will be killed. Since there is a
massive sixty-two week period separating these events from those described in
9:25, it seems obvious that the anointed figure in 9:26 is not the same
individual as the one back in 9:25. It has been common ground for Christians to
regard this anointed figure again as the Anointed One
(i.e., Jesus Christ). Again, this argument fails to hold up to scholarly
scrutiny. For one, we again have the Hebrew noun mashiach without the definite
article, requiring the translation “an anointed one” rather than “the anointed
one.” Sadly, many modern English translations have not been entirely honest on
this point. Secondly, if this were a predictive prophecy about the death of
Jesus Christ, why does the passage qualify this death with “no one will come to
his aid”? Shouldn’t the passage (if it were referring to the death of Jesus)
say that he will be supernaturally vindicated in glorious resurrection by God
the Father? Why then does the passage actually say that no one will come to his
aid? This is hardly a reference to Jesus.
Furthermore, the New Testament Christians (who searched the Hebrew Bible
diligently for any hint of messianic predictions) never once quote Daniel
9:26 to refer to Jesus’ death. Instead, they focus primarily upon Isaiah 53
and other verses, but never once is Dan 9:26 quoted in the New Testament to
refer to Jesus. This suggests that its interpretation had an accepted reading
which excluded Jesus from being its object of focus.
3.
In
fact, we possess a perfect candidate for this anointed figure 
mentioned in 9:26. In the year 171 BCE a high
priest named Onias III was in fact murdered. Unfortunately for him, none of the
Jews came to help him or avenge his death. Instead his brother, the Hellenistic
sympathizer Jason, took control of the temple. The actions of Jason were
instrumental in the events leading up to the Maccabean Revolt.
mentioned in 9:26. In the year 171 BCE a high
priest named Onias III was in fact murdered. Unfortunately for him, none of the
Jews came to help him or avenge his death. Instead his brother, the Hellenistic
sympathizer Jason, took control of the temple. The actions of Jason were
instrumental in the events leading up to the Maccabean Revolt.
4.
Around
this time, the Seleucid Empire ruled by Antiochus IV made an agreement with
some of the leading officials in Jerusalem in order to hellenize the city and
its people. This agreement is the “covenant” mentioned in Dan 9:27. This is
recorded in detail in 1 Maccabees:
In
those days certain renegades came out from Israel and misled many, saying, “Let
us go and make a covenant with the Gentiles around us, for
since we separated from them many disasters have come upon us.” This proposal
pleased them, and some of the people eagerly went to the king, who authorized
them to observe the ordinances of the Gentiles. So they built a gymnasium in
Jerusalem, according to Gentile custom, and they removed the marks of circumcision,
and abandoned the holy covenant. They joined with the Gentiles and sold
themselves to do evil. (1 Macc 1:11-15)
5.
After
the murder of the anointed high priest Onias III the Seleucid armies, commanded
by Antiochus Epiphanes, came into Jerusalem. The act of circumcision was
restricted and the Sabbath was profaned. But the most detestable act was the 
placement of a statue of Zeus upon the
temple’s sacrificial altar. Jews were forced to offer sacrifices to this image.These offensive acts are what Dan 9:26
refers to as the “spoiling of the city and the sanctuary” and what 9:27
describes as the plural “abominations.” These events were too much for the
conservative Jews who were resistant to Hellenization (thus provoking the
Maccabean Revolt).
placement of a statue of Zeus upon the
temple’s sacrificial altar. Jews were forced to offer sacrifices to this image.These offensive acts are what Dan 9:26
refers to as the “spoiling of the city and the sanctuary” and what 9:27
describes as the plural “abominations.” These events were too much for the
conservative Jews who were resistant to Hellenization (thus provoking the
Maccabean Revolt).
6.
As I
just noted in #5, the Syrian forces led by Antiochus brought about desolating
abominations upon Jerusalem and its people. Note carefully that these
abominations of desolation are plural, not
singular. Furthermore, they are plural objects, not
persons. This is something different from what Jesus stated in Mark 13:14
(i.e., a single, personal abomination of desolation). This point should not be
taken lightly; Daniel 9:24-27 refers to plural abominations as things/objects
and Mark 13:14 refers to a single person who is an abomination of desolation.
We should let Daniel 9 say what it wants to say and let Mark say something else
(without harmonizing the two accounts). Jesus is likely reusing the terrible
events of the past as a rubric to convey the future abomination of desolation.
7.
Daniel
9:26 promises that there will indeed be divine retribution upon the coming
prince Antiochus. His end will come with a “flood” – a common prophetic 
hyperbole for a swift death (cf. Isa 8:8; 10:22;
30:28; Ezek 13:13; Nah 1:8). Furthermore, 9:27 says that a destruction has been
decreed by God (divine passive). This reassures the original readers that this
national catastrophe will not go unpunished by Israel’s God, encouraging them
to resist the hellenizing influences in covenantal faithfulness. Antiochus IV
did indeed die in the year 164 BCE.
hyperbole for a swift death (cf. Isa 8:8; 10:22;
30:28; Ezek 13:13; Nah 1:8). Furthermore, 9:27 says that a destruction has been
decreed by God (divine passive). This reassures the original readers that this
national catastrophe will not go unpunished by Israel’s God, encouraging them
to resist the hellenizing influences in covenantal faithfulness. Antiochus IV
did indeed die in the year 164 BCE.
8.
To
connect some loose ends, it is important to remember that some of the
significant dates need to be kept in the forefront of these discussions:
o
Onias
III, the Jewish high priest, was murdered in 171
BCE. This began the agreement/covenant (1 Macc 1:11-15)
between the Seleucids and the leading Jews to hellenize Jerusalem and its
people,
o
The
Syrian forces led by Antiochus halted sacrifices and offerings by placing an
idol of Zeus upon the altar. This occurred in 167
BCE,
o
The
Maccabean Revolt ended in 164 with the
cleansing of the holy temple, thus removing all of the abominations from it,
o
171
minus 164 equals 7. How many years are in a single week? Seven. When did the sacrifice
and offerings cease? In the middle of this period
(167 BCE).
9.
If
the seventieth week deals with the events from 171-164 BCE, then prophetic
schemes expecting a future seven year tribulation prior to the end of the age have
absolutely no biblical basis for their theology.
