Jemoh66 wrote:I tend to agree with Steve on the division of the 70 weeks. I think the text supports this. The NET Bible has what I think a very decent rendering of this passage.
I see major problems with this NET translation
24 “Seventy weeks have been determined
concerning your people and your holy city
Basically, what you are saying is that Daniel’s prophesy is wrong, that it wasn’t just seventy sevens of years, rather seventy sevens of years + a large, indeterminate number of years that aren’t counted. You are forced into that interpretation because your other option is to say that Daniel’s prophesy is false because the destruction of Jerusalem didn’t happen in a period right after Jesus’ resurrection. I see seventy sevens as seventy sevens, a unit, now let’s see how that lines up with history.
to put an end to rebellion,
to bring sin to completion,
to atone for iniquity,
to bring in perpetual righteousness,
to seal up the prophetic vision,
and to anoint a most holy place.
According to New Testament theology, this is what Jesus did in his life, death and resurrection.
25 So know and understand:
From the issuing of the command to restore and rebuild
Jerusalem until an anointed one, a prince arrives,
there will be a period of seven weeks and sixty-two weeks.
I don’t know of a single place in Tanakh where two dissimilar numbers like this are added together to make a third unit. Now it’s possible that I didn’t make note of it because I wasn’t looking for it, but unless other examples can be shown from within Tanakh, this addition is wrong.
… 26 Now after the sixty-two weeks,
an anointed one will be cut off and have nothing.
That the 62 sevens are listed here separately indicates that it was never intended to be part of the 7 + 62 sevens.
As for the city and the sanctuary,
the people of the coming prince will destroy them.
But his end will come speedily like a flood.
“His” grammatically can refer to the city and sanctuary. “Speedily” is not in the verse.
Until the end of the war that has been decreed
there will be destruction.
This is an awkward translation. “Until the end, destructive war has been decreed.”
27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one week.
This translation is wrong. הגביר is the hiphil, causative form of גבר that has the idea of mastering, overcoming. This is not confirming, rather it’s imposing.
“With” is not in the verse.
We could say “seven years he (the people) will impose a covenant to many”
But in the middle of that week
he will bring sacrifices and offerings to a halt.
On the wing of abominations will come one who destroys,
One interpretation I’ve heard is that the Roman standards had wings on them. They were an abomination because they represented a false god.
until the decreed end is poured out on the one who destroys.”
This last line is admittedly difficult to understand and translate.
The many problems in this translation makes me reject it and I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone.
I suspect that some of the problems in this passage are the result of a theology that insists on certain results. I don’t share that theology. That theology also has problems with history.
Ezra came to Jerusalem 13 years before Nehemiah was ordered to rebuild Jerusalem. Before Nehemiah came, there was the temple and a scattering of houses among the ruins. After he finished, Jerusalem was a fortified city with a decent population. Before Ezra came to Jerusalem, he already had a reputation as a scholar and leader, he was no spring chicken. According to Jewish history, this same Ezra presided over the Great Assembly that was held about 400 BC. If Ezra arrived in Jerusalem about 440 BC, there’s no problem with seeing him at about 70 years old with enough energy to lead the Great Assembly in about 400 BC.
If we accept that Nehemiah was ordered to rebuild Jerusalem about 415 BC ± a few years, then Jesus’ death is within the margin of error for 62 sevens of years + later. Then there’s no problem in recognizing that the ending of the 70 sevens of years concluded with the Romans taking seven years to impose Pax Romana on the land and people. Then there’s a clue to who was the anointed leader who came 49 years later.
In short, if we take Daniel’s prophesy at face value, then it fits history within history’s margin of error.
Karl W. Randolph.