70 x 7 YEARS !??
Almost all literature written concerning the Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy views
the prophecy as a period of 70 groups of 7 years, ie 490 years.
Have the scholars seen what they wanted to see ??
Looking at the Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy, what is it highlighting?
- A span of 70 time periods allowed for repentance
- A span of 69 time periods (included within the
70 time periods) for the development of a city
identified as Jerusalem
- The arrival of an 'anointed' representative of God
sent to warn the city of impending destruction
- A prince sent to destroy the city
- The destruction of the city for non-repentance,
thereby ceasing its sacrifice and offering.
What is the Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy really about?
Well it is NOT really about Jesus Christ!
It is actually about, 'the building and destruction of a city'!
A city to be destroyed upon the expiry of the 70 weeks!
Will the city be destroyed in the future? Many scholars say 'Yes!'.
To stretch to the future a 2,000 year time gap between the 69th and
70th periods is added. Is this 2,000 year time extension implied in
the prophecy? NO! The 2,000 theory is merely an attempt to strengthen
a weak theory!
Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD, did this fulfil the prophecy?
Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, but scholars do not end the 490
years at 70 AD. Why? 490 years is not enough time to reach to 70 AD!
Did prior destructions fulfil this Daniel chapter nine prophecy?
Scripture implies a prior destruction. In the time of Jesus Christ,
when the Pharisees mentioned the temple, they said it was 46 years old.
Refer John 2:20.
Although Jewish theologians may prefer such a solution, it does not
appeal to Christian commentators.
What about the starting point of the 70 time periods?
Few scholars opt for when Cyrus issued the decree to release the Jews,
when the Jews returned to Judah and began to rebuild Jerusalem. (Refer
Ezra 1:2-4.) At this time 42,360 (Ezra 2:64) of the congregation left
Babylon. Although by far the most obvious starting point, few scholars
choose it. Why? Because they accept commonly used archeological dating
and as a result they can not bridge the gap between Cyrus and the arrival
Are scholars playing the game of picking a biblical event which would
agree with man's 'accepted' dating regime?
What about the division of the 69 time periods into two portions, a span of
7 periods followed by 62 periods. Surely this must be important!
No exhaustive discussion is encountered detailing what happened upon the
expiry of the 7 time periods. Virtually nothing is ever said! No biblical
proof is presented. Another major indication of a weak Daniel 9:24-27
What about the appearance of Jesus Christ?
NB: Many translations incorrectly render the Hebrew word for 'anointed'
In verse 26 there is 'an anointed one' sent to warn the city and in this
verse there is also a 'ruler' mentioned which destroys this city. Two
different functions, two different entities!
In verse 25 there is 'an anointed one, a ruler', which one of these two
is this person?
Verse 26, 'Anointed shall be cut off, but not for Himself'. Sounds like
Jesus Christ, but is it?
- For those who favour a future destruction of a rebuilt Jerusalem
this 'person' would be referring to the end time witness (the one
announcing the final warning). Not Jesus Christ!
- For those who consider the 70 weeks ended in the early New Testament
era, who make Jesus Christ the anointed, find themselves out of step
with the timing of the fall of Jerusalem.
The prophecy does NOT fit 490 years!
Is there a better answer?