But, in order to make use of these emerging treasure houses of data, we need to have an open mind. If we hold onto those interpretations which we are used to by tradition, we would miss more apt interpretations. Infact, it has to be noted that the deluge of historical information in these days itself is a fulfilment of the ‘knowledge shall increase’ in the end times prophecy of Daniel 12:4. Hence, this knowledge explosion is the will of God and so we should not ignore it. In a previous issue of Grace, we saw an example of how new historical and scientific knowledge embellish Biblical truths (See Grace – Blossom 30:June 10, paras 09,10). Hence, if we ignore new, certified historical data and stick to century old dates which have been proven wrong time and again, we cannot grow in our prophetic understanding. Hence, let us approach prophecies with an open mind. Moreover, items like Parables, Types and Prophecies have not been directly interpreted in the Bible. We have to interpret them. Hence, one should not be dogmatic about one’s interpretation on such items. Each person has the God given free will to adhere to what they believe to be the right interpretation. Only, any interpretation should not be contradictory to the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. We saw in an earlier issue of Grace what the fundamental doctrines of Christianity are, according to Apostle Paul (Hebrews 6:1,2, See Grace – Blossom 27:Passover 10, para 04). Hence, when we present our interpretation, we should be humble enough to say that is just an interpretation that seems right to us. We should also eagerly lend our ears to different interpretations and accept one, if it makes better sense than ours. Only then we can grow in the truth. But, sometimes we may feel our interpretation is right and someone may hold a different interpretation to be the right one. And both the interpretations may not contradict fundamental Christian doctrines. In that case, it is ok for two brethren to hold two different interpretations. Since the fundamental Christian faith is same for both of them, there should not be any rift in the brotherly love between those two for the sake of differences in prophetic understanding. In this issue, we will study the prophecy that pre-announced the first coming of Jesus Christ – popularly called the ‘70 Weeks’. We will humbly present an interpretation which we feel is Biblically accurate. Do a thorough research of the Biblical and Historical arguments presented in this issue and make your own mind. Even if you do not accept this interpretation, it is still healthy to have had an exchange of ideas with regard to prophecies. 70 Weeks prophecy was given in the first year of the rule of Persian King Darius the Mede (another name for Cyrus), which was historically 538 B.C. (Dan 9:1). Daniel was worried about his people, the Jews and prays for them (Dan 9:4-20). God sent Gabriel in response to Daniel’s prayer (Dan 9:22,23). We will look into the verses 24 to 27 of the 9th chapter of Daniel which constitute this prophecy in detail. Do note that verses 25, 26 and 27 of the chapter will be studied in two parts to enable a deeper study.
(2) Dan 9:24 – ‘Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy’ : Ironically, the study has to start by discrediting the very title of this issue. Many do not know that in the Hebrew language, there is no separate word denoting ‘week’. ‘Shabuwa’ is the word, usually translated as ‘week’ but its meaning is just ‘seven’ (Strong’s No: 7620). Based on the context wherein it appears, it can denote either a seven day week or a seven-year period. Many Biblical scholars believe that in the context of this prophecy, ‘shabuwa’ refers to seven-year periods rather than seven day weeks. That is the reason that new biblical translations like the NIV have rendered ‘shabuwa’ as ‘sevens’ instead of ‘weeks’. Hence, it is not actually a prophecy of ‘70 Weeks’ but of ‘70 seven-year periods’. 70 seven-year periods will be equal to 490 years (70 x 7). It is also important to note that Gabriel mentions categorically here that this period is decreed for only Daniel’s people i.e. the Jews and their holy city i.e. Jerusalem. So, this prophecy is not about the Gentiles or the Church. Hence, attempts by some interpreters to extend this prophecy’s reach beyond the Jewish period are misguided. Within this 70 seven-year period, Gabriel says that the Jewish people need to end their transgression and sinfulness by atoning for it and get everlasting righteousness, thus sealing up the vision and prophecy by anointing the most holy, the promised Messiah. It was a deadline for the Jews. Then what will happen to the Jews after these 490 years? It can be inferred that since a deadline is given, after the deadline they would face consequences. Do remember this as this observation is critical to understand the later parts of this prophecy. The righteousness that was given to the Jews by the Mosaic Law was not an everlasting one as it had to be kept up with the offering of many sacrifices every year and even every day. Only the atonement sacrifice of Jesus brought in the possibility of everlasting righteousness. Hence, Gabriel is hinting that within this period of 490 years, the promised Messiah would come and provide the atonement sacrifice. But the question to ask is, 490 years from when? Put otherwise, what event marks the starting of this 490 year period? Let us study further.
(3) Dan 9:25 (1st part) – ‘Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two sevens’: We will study this verse in two parts. When this prophecy was given (538 B.C), Jerusalem lied in ruins, destroyed by Babylon in 587 B.C. Gabriel says that a period of 69 ‘sevens’ i.e. 69 x 7 = 483 years (‘seven sevens + sixty two sevens = 69 sevens’) will pass from the year the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem is given till the coming of the Anointed one, the Messiah. So, the key to unlocking this prophecy is to identify the year in which a decree to rebuild Jerusalem was given. That year is the beginning of the 490 year deadline for the Jews. In the very same year (538 B.C.), Persian King Cyrus decreed the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 36:22-23). However, the prophesied decree of Daniel 9:25 concerns itself with the rebuilding of the city of Jerusalem rather than the temple. The decree of Cyrus as recorded in the Bible makes no mention of the rebuilding of the city and hence does not fulfil the requirements needed to be identified as the decree of Daniel 9:25. And henceforth, it is safe to conclude that the decree to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem given by Cyrus in 538 B.C is not the decree we are looking for. The next decree which we have to examine is the decree given by another Persian King called Darius in 520 B.C. (Ezra 6). Again, this decree was also limited in scope with regards to the temple and in effect reaffirmed the decree of Cyrus, as the rebuilding of the temple had been interrupted because of opposition (See Grace – Blossom 07:September 2008, paras 2,5,10). Henceforth, this decree can also be counted out. The next decree regarding Jerusalem was issued by another Persian King called Artaxerxes to Ezra in the seventh year of his reign, which was historically 458 B.C. This decree is recorded formally and in detail in the book of Ezra (Ezra 7:11-26). Some consider this decree also to be concerned only with the temple in Jerusalem. But, the decree specifically allows the Jews to ‘inquire about Judah and Jerusalem with regard to the Law of your God’ and hence was not limited in scope to the temple alone. Moreover, Biblical evidence shows without doubt that the Jews were rebuilding the city and its walls after this decree (Ezra 4:12; 9:9). Why would not they because this decree amongst other things granted the Jews to live freely as per the Law Covenant. Hence, this decree qualifies fully to be deemed as the prophesied decree of Daniel 9:25. However, some argue that the letters given by Artaxerxes, thirteen years later, in his 20th year of reign, i.e. 445 B.C to Nehemiah as the decree of Daniel 9:25. This is wrong because Nehemiah did not get a decree, only a few letters. A decree is a formal order. In ancient times, an order or decree is something that is publicly issued by the King. Nehemiah was issued only personal letters by Artaxerxes and that too after Nehemiah’s request. If you read and compare the formal decree recorded in Ezra 7:11-26 or even the Darius decree recorded in Ezra 6:1-11 with Nehemiah 2:7,8, you will understand this difference. Hence, these personal letters should not be confused with the issuance of a formal decree which is a fundamental requisite as per Daniel 9:25. What happened was, after the Ezra decree the Jews started the rebuilding of both the city and its walls (Ezra 4:12). But the people of Trans-Euphrates protested and sent the King a letter saying that it was dangerous for the King to allow the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Ezra 4:13-15). Artaxerxes was convinced with their arguments and fearing the rise of a fortified, independent Jerusalem, he halted the rebuilding of the city and its walls (Ezra 4:17-22). The personal letter he sent to the governor of Trans-Euphrates with Nehemiah, provided protection for Nehemiah in his rebuilding efforts. In essence, he gave a decree in 458 B.C allowing the rebuilding of Jerusalem. But as prophesied in the second part of Daniel 9:25 which we will be discussing shortly, troubled times stopped the work with Artaxerxes halting his own decree temporarily. And with his letter sent through Nehemiah, he allowed the rebuilding again in 445 B.C. Hence, the letters sent through Nehemiah were only to allow what was already decreed in 458 B.C. by Artaxerxes. So, the only decree which conforms to the requisites of Daniel 9:25 is the decree issued by Artaxerxes in the year 458 B.C. It is the first and only decree regarding the rebuilding of Jerusalem. That is the Biblical and historical fact. Gabriel had said that from the issuance of this decree there would be 69 seven-year periods before the coming of the Messiah. At this juncture, it has to be noted that this prophecy is based on the unit of seven-year periods and hence when it says after 69 seven-year periods, it means that the Messiah would come in the 70th seven-year period. Not necessarily in the first year of the 70th seven-year period, but within the seven years constituting the 70th seven-year period. For example, if I say to a friend that I will meet him after 4 days, it means that I will meet him on the 5th day. But it can be in the morning or in the evening of the 5th day as I have not specified that. Similarly, if I say to that friend that I will meet him after 4 weeks, its means that I will meet him in the 5th week but I have not specified which day of the 5th week it will be. It could be any day in that week. Likewise, in this prophecy too, it is specified that the Messiah would come after 69 seven-year periods and that only means that he would come in any year of the 70th seven-year period. Now, 69 seven-year periods from 458 B.C (69 X 7 = 483; 483-458 = 25; +1year to compensate for BC-AD transition = 26 A.D) leads us to 26 A.D. Thus, Messiah was due in the 70th seven-year period that ran from 26 A.D to 33 A.D. Fulfilling this prophecy; Jesus arrived as the promised Messiah with his baptism in the hands of John, which took place in 29/30 A.D.
(4) Daniel 9:25 (2nd part) – ‘It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble’: Herein, Gabriel is still talking about what will happen during the 69 seven-year periods preceding the coming of the Messiah i.e. between 458 B.C. and 26 A.D. Within this time, Jerusalem will be rebuilt completely, yet in times of trouble. Likewise, we saw in the last para how Artaxerxes, the man who decreed the rebuilding of Jerusalem, himself shut it down for sometime. Such obstacles and difficulties kept on coming. Truly, Jews managed to rebuild Jerusalem only under severe opposition and troubles.
(5) Daniel 9:26 (1st part) – ‘After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing’: This verse will also be discussed in two parts. Notice that if one interprets from the previous verse that Messiah has to come at the exact year after the ending of the 69 seven-year periods, then that method of interpretation has to lead to the conclusion that Messiah will be cut off in the very same year as this verse says that he will be cut off after the very same 69 seven-year periods (62 + the 7 before). But, New Testament records clearly indicate that Jesus did live and preach for atleast three years. Hence, that interpretation is evidently wrong. As we pointed out, after 69 seven-year periods means in the 70th year seven-year period ( 26 A.D – 33 A.D). And so it happened. Messiah was cut off in 33 A.D, the last year of that 70th seven-year period (See Grace – Blossom 30:June 10).
(6) Daniel 9:26 (2nd part) – ‘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’: ‘The ruler who will come’ of this verse is not Messiah. Messiah was cut off already, wasn’t he? Moreover, unlike this ruler’s people, Messiah’s people i.e. the Christians did not destroy the city or the temple. Gabriel says that after Messiah’s cutting off, that is after 33 A.D; people of a ruler will come and destroy Jerusalem and the temple. War will continue till the end of the city and desolations will result like a flood, referring to the flood of Noah’s time. Just as not all were destroyed in that catastrophic flood that ended the first world as Noah’s family was spared so would be this time as well as a remnant of Jews would remain after this destruction. Even Jesus had forewarned about this destruction (Matthews 24:1,2). How was this fulfilled? In the first century, Judah was a Roman Province. But in 66 A.D the Jews revolted against the Romans. To suppress that revolt, Rome appointed a General called Vespasian. In 68 A.D, the then Roman Emperor Nero died and Vespasian became the Roman Emperor. After that it was Vespasian’s son Titus who led the war against the revolting Jews. Hence, it was by the ‘people of the ruler’ Vespasian, i.e. by the Romans that Judah, Jerusalem and temple were destroyed between the years 66 A.D – 73 A.D. This is the history. Hence, the ‘ruler’ of this verse is undoubtedly Roman Emperor Vespasian.
(7) Daniel 9:27 (1st part) – ‘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’: Again, this verse will also be broken down and discussed in two parts. That Messiah should be cut off in the middle of the week is a widely held view. But, if one carefully reads this verse, there is no Biblical basis for that view. Infact, this verse is not even talking about the Messiah. This verse is a continuation of the previous verse and hence the ‘He’ of this verse is not Messiah but the ‘ruler who will come’ i.e. Vespasian. Read these verses slowly and carefully. The obvious ‘He’ here based on the context is the ‘ruler’ from the previous verse and not Messiah. Identifying this ‘He’ as Messiah would be a grave injustice to the context, which is crystal clear. For example, let us consider the following saying – ‘Ashok got married. After that Karthik left the town. He was unemployed for two years’. The ‘He’ of the third sentence here definitely refers to Karthik and can never refer to Ashok. Isn’t it? In the same way, the ‘He’ of Daniel 9:27 refers only to the ‘ruler who will come’ of the previous verse, i.e. Vespasian and not to Messiah. When the context is such unambiguous, the reason most interpreters skip the logic of context and believe that the ‘He’ mentioned here is Messiah is because of the tasks to be performed by this ‘He’. When looked casually, confirming a covenant with many and putting an end to sacrifice & offering does appear like Messianic tasks. We will explain later how Roman Emperor Vespasian performed these tasks but for now let us choose to respect the normal flow of context as our rudder and decide this ‘He’ to be Vespasian. Another related common mistake is to treat the seven-year period (‘seven)’ mentioned here as part of the original 70 seven-year periods. Nothing in the verse warrants such an interpretation. 70 Weeks ends with the cutting off of the Messiah. As said in Daniel 9:24, the 70 seven-year periods are only up till the coming of ‘eternal righteousness’. We saw from the previous verse that it is only after the cutting off of Messiah that the destruction of the City and Temple by the Romans happen. Since this verse follows that verse, the ‘one seven’ that is seven years mentioned in this verse is a period that comes after the completion of the 70 seven-year periods. The reason this separate seven-year period is thought to be part of the 70 seven-year periods is because since by many ‘He’ of this verse is thought to be Messiah, this seven-year period is assumed to be part of the 70 seven-year periods and particularly as the 70th seven-year period. It is a matter of one error leading to another. But now, since we have identified Vespasian as the ‘He’ of this verse, there is no necessity for this seven-year period to be part of the 70 seven-year periods. In fact, it cannot be a part of the 70 seven-year periods because Vespasian’s people come to destroy the city and the temple, something which cannot happen in the 70 seven-year periods because that was the deadline given for the Jews to repent. So, their destruction cannot come before the end of that period. Henceforth, the seven-year period in which the covenant is confirmed to many and sacrifices & offerings are put to an end is a separate seven-year period that comes after the end of the 70 seven-year periods. These conclusions do raise a lot of questions. How did Roman Emperor Vespasian confirm a covenant with many and also put an end to sacrifice & offering? If this seven-year period is not part of the 70 seven-year periods, which period is this?
(8) Amazingly, the Roman war against the rebelling Jews also lasted for a period of seven years. It began in 66 A.D and lasted till 73 A.D when the last Jewish stronghold of Masada fell. Indeed, this seven year period of 66 A.D – 73 A.D is the seven-year period of Daniel 9:27. The destruction prophesied in the previous verse (Daniel 9:26) was fulfilled in this period. As we inferred in para 2, giving deadline meant sanctioning punishment if the deadline was not met. Thereby, this prophecy not only mentions the punishment but also pre-announces the duration of this coming judgement to be of seven years. But, how did Vespasian put an end to sacrifice and offering in the middle of these seven years? While writing about covenants, Old and New, Paul says that ‘By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear’ (Heb 8:13). His reference is to ‘first one’ is to the Law Covenant. We know that the Law Covenant had become useless after the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ. But why does Paul say here that it had not ‘disappeared’ yet? Because, when Paul wrote this, the Jerusalem temple was still standing. Sacrifices and offerings were still being carried out there and that is the reason Paul says that the Law covenant had not disappeared yet. When did it disappear then? In 70 A.D, Vespasian’s Roman armies destroyed the Jewish temple and with that the system of sacrifices and offering were put to an end and they disappeared forever. Don’t forget to notice that this, i.e. 70 A.D is right in the middle of the seven-year period of 66 A.D to 73 A.D. Pause and reflect on the neatness of this fulfilment. But how did Vespasian confirm a covenant with many in this seven-year period? Even though the covenant of Christ had started in 33 A.D itself, the continuance of the Jewish temple and the old system would have prevented many Jewish sympathisers of Jesus from fully accepting him. Doubts would have lingered. But, this historically unprecedented seven-year period of judgement on them as promised by Jesus would have made many realise the truth in the words of Christ and embrace Christianity fully (Mat 24:1,2, Mark 13:1,2, Luke 21:5,6). The covenant of Christ was indeed confirmed to many hesitating Jews during this seven-year period by the destruction and suffering unleashed by the Romans. Infact, Jesus redeemed all and not a few many. Hence, the ‘He’ of this verse cannot be Jesus.
(9) Daniel 9:27 (2nd part) – ‘And for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate’: KJV translation is preferred even though the alternative translation provided in NIV is also helpful. What is being desolated? Jerusalem and the Jewish people are being desolated. Gabriel says that all predetermined judgements will be poured upon the Jewish people. The ones making desolate and is abominable are the Roman armies. Even the ‘abomination that causes desolation’ reference of Jesus in which he specifically mentions the name of Daniel is a reference to the Roman Armies. Truly, if you compare Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20, you will understand this clearly. It is to be noted that Gentile armies were considered as an abomination by the Jews. Hence, it is this prophecy of Daniel that Jesus is making a reference to in Matthew 24:15. In fact, it is clearer now why Jesus specifically mentioned about this prophecy of Daniel by mentioning his name. Because, this prophecy speaks in detail about the coming destruction on the Jews, including the exact time span of the destruction. Those who had listened to Jesus’ words then would have studied this prophecy of Daniel and would have known in 66 A.D that the Roman Armies will eventually destroy the temple and city and that the war would last for seven long years. Armed with this information, these followers of Christ would have been thus better placed to escape the judgement that was unfolding. Just as promised by Jesus, this war was ‘shortened’ for the sake of the elect i.e. historically the Roman armies took a break for a couple of times in the middle of war, allowing atleast these alert followers of Christ to flee from Judea because they would have realised from Daniel’s this prophecy that it was a temporary break in the war as the judgement was scheduled to last for seven years (Mat 24:22). So, they would have run away and returned well after the end of seven years. The rest of the Jews would have foolishly thought that they had repelled the Romans and stayed back. They would have been destroyed later. Now, is this all mere speculation by us? No, Historical Details support this view. Amazingly, historical evidences show that many Christians ran away from Jerusalem to a city called ‘Pella’ and that they returned after 73 A.D. Truly, new historical details refine and deepen our prophetic understandings! Now, if the ‘He’ of the first part of Daniel 9:27 is interpreted as Messiah, as done by many, then it would mean that Jesus was the one making desolate of Jerusalem which is both historically and biblically wrong. Biblically, Jesus was the one who was warning the Jews about the coming destruction (Luke 23:28-30).
(10) When the Roman Armies were destroying Jerusalem, little did they know that they were fulfilling a prophecy written about them long long ago! God is indeed masterful! We humbly place this interpretation before you for your review. All the historical dates used in this issue i.e. 538 B.C/520 B.C/458 B.C/445 B.C/33 A.D/66 A.D/70 A.D/73 A.D are well established ones. Doubters are encouraged to verify on their own. We pray that this issue kindles you to undertake prophetic researches. Amen.