in response to – https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2010/12/21/letter-to-sy-about-messiah/#comment-18283
Let me begin by thanking you for taking the time for this interaction – when we interact and listen to each other there is a chance that we can come closer to the truth.
Let me explain my position in light of your questions.
I believe that the 70 weeks of Daniel are contiguous – it seems that we are in agreement on this. I believe that the secular or conventional understand of history is incorrect and unbiblical. According to Daniel 11:2 there are only four Persian kings between Darius the Mede and Alexander’s victory over Darius II. Conventional history has about 10 kings between these two events. According to Zechariah 1:12 it was only 70 years since the destruction of the Temple in the second year of Darius II – again conventional chronology would have many more years between these two points in time. This article http://www.starways.net/lisa/essays/heifetzfix.html and this book http://www.amazon.com/The-Challenge-Jewish-History-Missing/dp/1937887316 will help you understand the Jewish point of view.
The Hebrew grammar of Daniel 9:25 does not allow the 7 weeks and 62 weeks to be joined. This is not a matter of punctuation – the Hebrew of the sentence does not allow the latter phrase (“return and be built…”) to stand by itself. The grammar dictates that the 7 weeks end with Mashiach Nagid who would be Cyrus and the 62 weeks end with the cutting off of Moshiach who would be the Sadducee high-priesthood that was terminated with the destruction of the Second Temple. The idea that one Messiah coming after 69 weeks is not viable on the basis of the Hebrew grammar of the verse.
Furthermore, both Cyrus and the high priest were called Moshiach in Scripture before this phrase in Daniel (Isaiah 45:1; Leviticus 4:3). The Davidic King that is to reign at the end of time is not. Therefore it would be logical to assume that Daniel is referring to people who we have already identified with this term and it is illogical to assume that he is talking of someone who has never been called by this title.
The “ending of sin” is the process of exile – as per Ezekiel 22:15 (the same verb is used there as in Daniel 9:24). This has two ramifications as it relates to this passage in Daniel – one is that the process of ending sin (of verse 24) is a process of exile that begins with the destruction of the Second Temple. And another ramification is that the word (Hebrew “davar” not decree which would be the Hebrew “gezerah”) to restore Jerusalem of verse 25 is the beginning of the exile process which is the destruction of the First Temple.
The concept of “ending sacrifices” spoken of in Daniel 9:27 is not a positive prediction and it has nothing to do with abolishing the efficacy of sacrifices – if that is what Daniel said he would be contradicting Moses who said that sacrifices do atone. He would also be contradicting all the prophets who predicted a return of the animal sacrifices with the advent of the Messianic era. Your understanding of this passage is also refuted by the fact that Jesus’ disciples were still bringing animal offerings for the expiation of sin in the Jerusalem Temple (Acts 21:26) see also https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/response-to-answering-judaism-acts-21-part-2/
You missed the point of the article (Letter to SY about Messiah). The point of the article is that Scripture gives us quite a bit of information on the subject of Messiah. You need to see the whole book in context. You cannot read Daniel apart from the rest of the Bible.
Let me finish by pointing out something about your writing style. I copied your comment onto a word document and it took up 23 pages. My humble request to you is – try to be brief. You do not add clarity by adding words. I don’t expect your writing style to change overnight – but please make it easier for people to follow this exchange.
If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.
Judaism Resources is a recognized 501(c) 3 public charity and your donation is tax exempt.
Yisroel C. Blumenthal
BRU’S ANSWER TO = Daniel 9 – an Open Letter to Bru Ram May 3, 2015 by yourphariseefriend
You wrote>>>Let me begin by thanking you for taking the time for this interaction – when we interact and listen to each other there is a chance that we can come closer to the truth.
I think you are right!
I also want to thank for your kindness and for putting up with my writings…
>>>Let me explain my position in light of your questions. I believe that the 70 weeks of Daniel are contiguous – it seems that we are in agreement on this.
Agreed!! Those 70 weeks are certainly contiguous!
In top of that, according to the vision, this timeline is subdivided into 3 consecutive periods of time which when placed together one after the other they add to the total number of weeks, which is 70 weeks=
7weeks.+62week.+1week = 70weeks
NONETHELESS….The issue in question are the starting and ending points of those 70 weeks of Daniel 9, of which many do not agree.
>>>I believe that the secular or conventional understand of history is incorrect and unbiblical.
One thing, biblical understanding does not looses its logic…that is God’s gift.
And we need to remember that “time” has one direction and it is forwards…
does not goes back and forth in an illogical way…
History does not changes ….it was what it was and it is what it is…
when correlated with the prophetic record they never contradict each other…
although certainly they might not emphasized the same…
The problem is that many want to understand biblical prophetic history within the context of secular values and this is not possible. What I am saying is that an event might not have meaning in history as such overlooked, while it might be of immense value within the context of spiritual realities or the real issues address in the particular prophecy (that is what we think it says might not be …a misunderstanding error)
For example I just learn that the 70 years prophecy of Jeremiah is told to speak of the period of the Babylonian oppression of Israel, among other nations, as such those 70 years starts from 609bc to the times of the decree of Cyrus in 539bc… it does not just address the status of the city and temple (destroyed later in 597bc), but also includes its initial oppression of God’s people in 609bc by the Babylonians (since its actual destruction came later about in 597bc)
Another difference is that the Bible is not just a history treatise, and sometimes that is not its purpose altogether… You see history sometimes goes into details that prophecy considers superfluous. Therefore it is also an error to look at the prophetic message, within that sole context. The Bible nonetheless keeps the prophetic historical relationships by the simple fact of the unidirectional characteristics of TIME!
>>>According to Daniel 11:2 there are only four Persian kings between Darius the Mede and Alexander’s victory over Darius II. Conventional history has about 10 kings between these two events.
The problem is that you are saying something it is not told in the prophecy…
notice when speaking of Alexander…the verse says “shall come”…that is an indefinitive time period
and as such it is specifically tied to those previous 4 MedoPersian kings..The Bible is only showing a real relationship…those 4 came…and some time later the other king (Alexander) shall stand up…
Dan 11:2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
Dan 11:3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
BIBLICAL HISTORY DOES NOT CONTRADICTS HISTORY…
ALTHOUGH TRUTH BE TOLD, BIBLICAL HISTORY IS USUALLY NOT AS DETAILED…
I really think that although biblical history is not as detailed, the basic relationships are maintained. Also we need not add words that are not in the prophetic message, for example it is an error to say that the verse in Daniel 11:2 says “there are only” ….because the fact is that that verse does not say that. What does says is that it mentions 4 of those kings about MedoPersia, perhaps because of their importance as kings.. but it does not say that there will be none other…
the truth is that the prophecy then jumps forwards in time… and says “….”AN A MIGHTY KING SHALL STAND UP”, this limited information IS NONSPECIFIC and does not negate other realities.
The fact that Greece is mentioned previously as antecedent, suggest that this king is standing in Greece, the fact is that it is the prophetic details when correlated with the historical record that identifies this person as Alexander the Great…and the weight of the identification therefore falls heavily in the historical record…as a comparative study…as such prophecy and history help each other…complements each other…
Dan 11:3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
this statement does not contradict the previous ones …and the fact that it gives an indefinite date “shall stand” this does not say when this is to happen in either way or how it is related to the previous statement, except that it will come after them…but when it is not told…
One cannot judge in the absence of information….
Another point in prophetic history, is that sometimes a particular “king” becomes a symbol of the whole time of the empire as such a “king of such and such” representing “the Kingdom of Such and Such”, as such this is a pleural term, and is inclusive of all other kings within that empire and inclusive of all the people that formed that empire during the times that it lasted…
For example Daniel 11:20 could very well be referring to Augustus Caesar the Taxer described in Luke, who is the father of the empire, and him then as representing all the period of the empire of the Rome of the Caesars in that particular prophecy, (which I believe it could very well be so if one understands the next person in line called the Vile Person as representing the next phase of the Roman Empire, its religious phase as Papal Rome).
But even if this “vile person” were to symbolized the actual follower to the throne of Augustus, which was Tiberius Caesar, he then will be representing all the remaining kings of the Roman Empire (Ceasars and Papal) since this king is seen remaining and extending his kingdom from the early roman times all the way to the end of time, even into our future… a long life for a single person…therefore the empire instead is the one represented by this “king”….(mind you Daniel 11-12, goes in both directions speaking of particular kings and yet also having a particular king representing the whole empire….the context is the one to keep in mind)…
(This then let us see the symbolism involved in the prophetic message where one or a few rulers symbolized all the time period that empire is in power… something which is not used much in secular history, yet it is used much as such in the prophetic history, especially in actual symbolic visions and even in its angelic explanation and complementary information, which is what Daniel 11 -12 is all about…)
>>>According to Zechariah 1:12 it was only 70 years since the destruction of the Temple in the second year of Darius II – again conventional chronology would have many more years between these two points in time.
Ok…let me have something clear…
IT IS THE BABYLONIANS WHO DESTROYS THE CITY AND TEMPLE IN 597BC… Not Darius II….
when does the 70 years told by Jeremiah were to start?…
does it speak of the Babylon as oppressor….or of the people oppressed…or both….?
apparently they are intimately related, but the prophecy says that it has to start with the rise to power by the Nebuchadnezzar(Babylonian empire) 609bc, at which time started its oppression of Israel and other nations…. which eventually gave way to the desolation of Israel, the city and temple(597bc)… and the ending point of the timeline as being the fall of the Babylonian empire and also as a result their return from M.Persia starts, induced by Cyrus’ decree/539bc…which started their return…
= 609bc to 539bc = 70 years OF JEREMIAH…THE BABYLONIAN OPPRESSION=
THE BABYLONIAN EMPIRE, AND ITS RESULTANT OPPRESSION, DEPORTATION, AND ABOMINATION OF THE CITY AND TEMPLE…
My observation about your statement above, is that as far as I know the Temple was not destroyed in the times of Darius II (MedoPersian king), but by the Babylonians…around 600bc…
The Medopersian kings were involved in the following restoration of the Jewish city and temple for the most part (perhaps during this time it might have slow down, but the truth is that the temple was already destroyed by Babylon by the time of this king Darius II that you mentioned)
YOU said…=>>>According to Zechariah 1:12 it was only 70 years since the destruction of the Temple in the second year of Darius II – again conventional chronology would have many more years between these two points in time.
I was checking your history….and it is not what Wikipedia says about Darius II….he had nothing to do with the destruction of the Jewish temple but with its restoration……THIS IS WHAT IT SAYS=
Darius II (Persian: داريوش دوم) (Dārayavahuš), was king of the Persian Empire from 423 BC to 405 BC. Historians know little about Darius II’s reign. … It is likely that Ezra and Nehemiah were alive during this monarch’s reign, as it was approximately at this time that the new walls of Jerusalem, demolished ***during the Babylonian period***, WERE REBUILT.
(according to the prophecy of Daniel 9, the rebuilding of the temple was from the decree of Artaxerxes 457 BC until 49 years later(7weeks)–>408bc….as such this correlates with the historical record that says that it was during the times of the Darius II(423bc to 40bbc) that the walls of Jerusalem were finally rebuilt…)
THE BABYLONIAN OPPRESSION/DEPORTATION= 70 YEARS =
609BC/BABYLON=DESTROYS UNTO 539BC/CYRUS=STARTS RESTORATION
STARTING POINT= THE BABYLONIAN DESOLATION(609BC)
PERIOD IN BETWEEN= 70 YRS
Zec 1:12 Then the angel of the LORD answered and said, O LORD of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on “”Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah””, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?
ENDING POINT= THE MEDOPERSIAN CONQUEST OF BABYLON, AND ASSOCIATED FOLLOW UP RESTORATION= 539BC/CYRUS
Zec 1:16 Therefore thus saith the LORD; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: my house shall be built in it, saith the LORD of hosts, and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem.
The 70 years of Jeremiah/Zacariah spoke of the oppression by the Babylonian empire, it is Babylon the one prophecize to last 70 years of oppression of Israel and other nations…after which they were to return back to Jerusalem as induced by the Medopersian restoration..=
Jeremiah 29:10 (NIV) THE 70 YEARS OF BABYLON AS OPPRESSOR, THAT IS THE MEASURING STICK, CERTAINLY IT IS CLOSELY RELATED TO THE JEWISH OPPRESSION AND DEPORTATION (609BC LEAVING 539BC AS STARTING TO RETURN)
This is what the Lord says: “When seventy years are ^^completed for Babylon^^, I will come to you and fulfil my gracious promise to bring you back to this place.”
THE 70 YEARS OF THE BABYLONIAN EMPIRE, THE OPPRESSOR, DESOLATOR…AS TOLD ABOVE…STARTS FROM 609BC AND ENDS WITH CYRUS 539BC, AS THE CONQUERING MEDOPERSIAN EMPIRE, WHO STARTS THE RESTORATION OF ISRAEL…
It seems clear from the context in these two segments that the seventy years applies to Babylon itself, not to the period of time that the people of Judah are to spend in Babylon. In chapter 25 it says that the nations would serve Babylon for 70 years. Again in chapter 29, Jeremiah makes the connection to Babylon by saying that 70 years are “for Babylon”.
So the 70 years refers to the period of Babylonian Empire. When did this start and finish? As alluded to earlier, Babylon was conquered by Cyrus in 539 BC. So this is the finish. When was the start? For our purposes, the start would have to be when the other “nations will serve the king of Babylon” (see excerpt from Jeremiah 25 above). The major world power prior to Babylon was Assyria. …… Here it describes how the Assyrian empire, after becoming weakened through civil war, fell to the combined forces of the Medes and the Babylonians, finally being extinguished in 609 BC. In this final battle, the Assyrians and the Egyptians fought side-by-side. Prior to being conquered by the Medes and Babylonians, the Egyptians fought against Judah – and Judah lost. This is the battle where Josiah was killed. The chronology of Judah places this event in 608 BC – but that is close enough to 609 BC when a 1 year margin of error is assumed.
70 YEARS OF JEREMIAHS PROPHECY
609/initial Jerusalem invasion(–70 YEARS–)>539bc/Cyrus
It becomes apparent, that the problem is not with the Biblical history, but with our understanding of what the Bible is saying…(which I being learning further details as I being reading) and those 70 years (NOT TO BE CONFUSE WITH THE 70 WEEKS/483 YEARS OF DANIEL 9 PROPHECY), apparently addresses the times from the initial oppression of Jerusalem by the Babylonians until the fall of the Babylonian Empire, by Cyrus which also gave the order to the return of the Jews back to their homeland.
>>This article http://www.starways.net/lisa/essays/heifetzfix.html and this book http://www.amazon.com/The-Challenge-Jewish-History-Missing/dp/1937887316 will help you understand the Jewish point of view.
(this will hav”e to be next….right now I got to read this one you wrote)
>>>The Hebrew grammar of Daniel 9:25 does not allow the 7 weeks and 62 weeks to be joined. This is not a matter of punctuation – the Hebrew of the sentence does not allow the latter phrase (“return and be built…”) to stand by itself.
I do not know…but this translation shows it standing by itself=
Dan. 9:25….”the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
Could we be assuming grammatical rules which were not binding at the time the book of Daniel was written…~2500 years ago..
Yet..this understanding (7weeks 62weeks, as meaning 69weeks) as far as I know is key for the proper understanding of the prophetic message of Daniel 9, and as a result for the proper understanding of who is the Messiah( which when understood as 69weeks(483 years) from the decree of 457bc unto the Messiah…it points squarely at the feet of Jesus as the Messiah..in 27ad….)
I will not go further except to say, that unfortunately I do not know Hebrew, as such I have to rely on translations by other scholars which see that relationship(7wks62weeks= 69wks/483yrs) as actually used in your language(which you do not accept), these have translated the 7weeks 62weeks as meaning 7week and 62weeks= 69wks=483 years….
(by the way I have seen other time periods in the Bible given in similar format…as for example
10yrs4score…as 50 for example…., I do not quite remember where…but I am looking for it)
as such from the decree/457bc… unto the Messiah Prince…. shall be 69 weeks(483 years) =
Dan 9:25 ….
STARTING POINT= (D)= DECREE=
that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem
ENDING POINT= ARRIVAL OF THE MESSIAH
UNTO the Messiah the Prince
TIME PERIOD IN BETWEEN= TIMELINE
shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: (69wks/483yrs)
Decree/457bc +TIMELINE/69wks/483yrs-> 27ad/(A)Jesus the Messiah arrives…
KEY POINT THAT SUPPORTS JESUS AS THE MESSIAH OF THE PROPHECY OF DAN.9=
1) THE ABOMINATION.DESOLATION DID HAPPENED IN 70AD
Suffix for me to say, that the foretold re- abomination desolation/destruction of the Jerusalem and its 2nd temple after the end of the 70 weeks of probation/mercy, did take place in 70ad as prophetically scheduled and historically confirmed…as such this point of 70ad is a historically fix point.
2) ACCORDING THE PROPHECY OF DAN. 9, THE MESSIAH WAS TO ARRIVE SHORTLY BEFORE THE RE-ABOMINATION DESOLATION OF THE REBUILT JERUSALEM AND THE TEMPLE( WHICH TOOK PLACE IN 70 AD)…THIS THEN SUPPORTS THE CLAIMS OF JESUS AS THE MESSIAH, WHICH DIED SHORTLY BEFORE IN 31AD..
Since the Messiah’s life and death was foretold to take place shortly before this abomination desolation(that took place in 70ad)= it is important to note, that it so happens that the death of Jesus as the Messiah in 31ad, happening just 40 years before this abomination desolation, certainly meets that requirement of that prophecy in Dan. 9.
Starting Point= decree
457bc=decree described in Ezra 7
7weeks.62weeks.1week = 70 weeks= 490 years
ending point= end of probation Israel = 34ad
e.o.p= end of probation…
70ad = is the physical abomination-desolation/destruction of the Jerusalem and the temple, by the Romans in 70ad., happening close to 40 years after the close of probation in 34ad (AFTER END OF PROBATION/end of mercy/E.O.P.). By necesity, the abomination desolation as judgment has to follow and be outside the time of mercy (time of probation/70weeks)
>>>The grammar dictates that the 7 weeks end with Mashiach Nagid who would be Cyrus
This is not possible…
lets review what you are saying above, concerning DANIELS-POST BABYLONIAN restoration=
According to you=
1) the decree marks the start of the 7 weeks(49 years)
2) the decree/starting point was induced by Cyrus(539bc), as such Cyrus is associated with the the starting point of this period of time which is 7weeks(49 years)
3)the Messiah Nagid to come was associated with the ending point of this timeline, according to you coming at the end of the 7 weeks(49 years),instead of 69 weeks as we believe. Therefore according to you the Messiah Prince was to arrive at the end of the 49 years/7 weeks). (While we believe the Messiah Prince was to arrive at the end of the 69 weeks.)…
Yet the prophetic timeline is actually saying the opposite of what you say…which is …
in fact saying that since Cyrus associated with the starting point(~539bc/decree), he cannot be the Messiah Prince which comes 49 years later in 490bc (same as 7weeks later according to you).
You cannot have….
Cyrus/decree/539bc — +7wks/49yrs—>Cyrus(as the Messiah Prince)/490bc
Those 3 points above tells us that Cyrus(associated with the starting point of ~539bc)…is not the Messiah Prince which was to arrive 49 years later(7 weeks/49yrs later, according to you)…
He cannot be both, he cannot be related to the starting point and be also be the ending point of the timeline…simply because he was not alive by its end in 490bc…and it does not make sense,
if he was at the start of the timeline, then this timeline cannot be “arriving” to him at the end…
ACCORDING TO YOU=
Cyrus/decrees(starting.point) + 7weeks->back to Cyrus(as ending point)
Cyrus/539bc/S.P — +7weeks(49 years)–> 490bc (Cyrus as Messiah Prince??)
evaluation= not possible….
Please pardon me if I have misrepresented what you said….but that is what I understand you said..
you have Cyrus being the ending point of the initial 7 weeks(49 years), and the decree I understood is the one of the restoration to take place…which Cyrus induced…539 initiciating decree for the restoration of Jerusalem and temple after the Babylonian desolation….
note= this proposition of yours does not work, you cannot have the Cyrus of the decrees(539bc) to restore Jerusalem as the starting point and then call him 49 years later as being the ending point of that timeline…one cannot be both…and by 490bc Cyrus was not even in power, not even alive….
Again pardon me …if that is not what you said…
ACCORDING TO WHAT WE SAY=
457bc 27ad/Jesus the Messiah Prince arrives
457bc 27AD/Jesus the Messiah Prince arrives
457bc 27AD/Jesus the Messiah Prince arrives
(Cyrus, Darius,Arta) give the starting decrees(457bc as the finalizing decree) and from that point forwards one counts 7weeks.62weeks (=69weeks/483 years) to arrive to the year of arrival of the Messiah Prince…in 27ad(which was the date of the arrival of Jesus as the Messiah Prince)…
Cyrus cannot be “the Messiah Prince that was to come” as told in the prophecy of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9. = because Cyrus starts the timeline and therefore he cannot also be the ending point which is the Messiah Prince that was to come, …
the Messiah Prince is at the ending point of the 69 weeks, and lives during the 70th week/ending
while Cyrus is at the starting point of those 7wks.62weeks period….
Now in the prophecy of Jeremiah, referring to the time of the Babylonian deportation period, certainly Cyrus was the one that was to ended. Cyrus is the anointed that was to end the timeline of the Babylonian deportation…and also he was to induce a series of decrees which had to do with what follows, the restoration and actual functioning of the city and temple until the arrival of the Messiah 69 weeks (483 years) later…
I have seen a confusion with these two prophecies of Jeremiah and Daniel as if they were the same…but although related they are not…
-since during the 70 yrs of the Jeremiah the city.temple is not functioning= Babylonian desolation
-while during the 70weeks(490 yrs)Daniel 9 the city.temple in function=Post.Babylonian restoration
1) JEREMIAH’S 70 years…”BABYLONIAN DESOLATION”= ”NO” city or temple functioning during this time period/Jeremiah’s70years= **Babylonian-desolation** its oppression ending with Cyrus decree…(609bc to 539bc/Cyrus)…is not the same as….
2) DANIEL’S 70weeks(490years)… “POST BABILONIAN RESTORATION/FUNCTIONING…UNTIL THE END OF PROBATION AT THE END OF THE 70WKS, WHICH GAVE WAY TO THE RESULTANT FOLLOW UP DESTRUCTION OF THE CITY AND TEMPLE ONCE AGAIN A FEW YEARS LATER.. “YES” city and temple restored and functioning during this time period, BUT destroyed soon after the end of this probationary time period, time of mercy)=
Daniel’s 70weeks(490 years)= post Babylonian restoration/functioning, starts from (Cyrus, Darius, and Artarxerxes)/457bc= the city and temple restored, and in function thereafter until the foretold 2nd destruction once again, (70ad).
>>>and the 62 weeks end with the cutting off of Moshiach who would be the Sadducee high-priesthood that was terminated with the destruction of the Second Temple. The idea that one Messiah coming after 69 weeks is not viable on the basis of the Hebrew grammar of the verse.
So since you say that the timelines are continuous, and so you agree, and trying to analize your timeline…it becomes evident, that the 62 weeks, have to start when the 7 weeks ended according to you which was 490bc…
according to you=
490bc– + 62weeks(434 years)–> 56bc/Saducee High Priesthood/destruction 2ndtemple/70ad???
Wait a minute….which date you use for the starting decree?
you have 56bc…as the saducee High Priesthood
you have 59bc …as the destruction 2nd temple/70ad…
Something is wrong here…did I get your decree wrong…?
Is it Cyrus= 539bc
Is it Darius= 519bc
Is it Artax= 457bc
other=???? this cannot be only those 3 decrees were given, by the times of the letter of Nehemiah in 444bc, already the finalizing decree had being given in 457bc…
According you the 62 weeks should end in 56bc…
this does not bring us to any individual in particular..and certainly does not bring us to Jesus, nor to the abomination.desolation of 70ad, which if I remember right you mentioned it did….
>>>Furthermore, both Cyrus and the high priest were called Moshiach in Scripture before this phrase in Daniel (Isaiah 45:1; Leviticus 4:3).
One thing is Cyrus, the anointed, (just like Saul and David were)…and another thing is the atoning Messiah…aka The Messiah, which was to atone for our sins, and bring everlasting righteousness …that is a tall order for Cyrus…. Yet it was Jesus the Atoning Messiah which fulfilled the prophetic message and vision…..
>>>The Davidic King that is to reign at the end of time is not. Therefore it would be logical to assume that Daniel is referring to people who we have already identified with this term and it is illogical to assume that he is talking of someone who has never been called by this title.
That Jesus while here on earth was not called by those titles…does not means that He does not have them, or that He was not called as such in heaven… He said His kingdom is not of this world….yet He being of the root of David, He is the Davidic King that is to reign at the end of time in the heaven, in the Earth Made New…
Actually in Daniel Jesus is called as your Prince…Michael your Prince,
the prince of the covenant…see some of these=
JESUS THE MESSIAH PRINCE IN DANIEL ALSO CALLED=
Dan 8:11 …the prince of the host,
Dan 8:25 the Prince of princes
Dan 9:25 the Messiah the Prince
Dan 10:13 Michael, one of the chief princes,
Dan 10:21 Michael your prince.
Dan 11:22 the prince of the covenant
Dan 12:1 Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people:
This Prince Jesus, when finishing His mediatory and intercessory, and judgment work…is going to be crowned as King of kings and Lord of lords, and will return as such at His second coming….
this is Jesus…….
>>>The “ending of sin” is the process of exile – as per Ezekiel 22:15 (the same verb is used there as in Daniel 9:24).
Wow…that will be nice if we could stop sinning just by going into exile…nor us or the ones that send us can accomplish that by just going to exile…
You know, seems to me, and it is hard to understand, how many see the sin problem as something requiring a lot of work in order to fix it…
let me with that purpose remind you, that we went really down with the sin of Adam and Eve, and to restore us to a sinless perfection is going to take much more than a simple exile. In fact it took the death of the Messiah to atone for our sins, finding pardon and therefore reconciliation back to God..as such bringing us everlasting righteousness (his righteousness becomes ours)…
there is much more to sin..that just a simple exile can fix…
>>This has two ramifications as it relates to this passage in Daniel – one is that the process of ending sin (of verse 24) is a process of exile that begins with the destruction of the Second Temple.
First only by the righteousness of the Messiah (suffering servant) one can be justified..and end of sin..… solely by dying as a lamb…
Isa 53:11 by his knowledge shall my righteous servant
justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
for he was cut off out of the land of the living:
for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
And the desolation of the Jerusalem and temple, and diaspora, exile…this is is not a reward…but a judgment…as such does not saves anybody… Certainly the experience for some makes them come to ask for pardon… but even still the pardon comes from the Messiah…from Christ…
>>And another ramification is that the word (Hebrew “davar” not decree which would be the Hebrew “gezerah”) to restore Jerusalem of verse 25 is the beginning of the exile process which is the destruction of the First Temple.
Lets get real here….
if a King gives a word, in which he says so and so…that is a command…that is a decree….to think otherwise is splitting hairs… In top of that Strong’s Concordance, has the word davar also meaning decree…either way the order came from the MedoPersian’s Kings, nobody else had the power to order the restoration of the Jerusalem and its temple…and nobody else in the empire could give the order(decree if you please) to restore the religious political powers back to Israel…that was done by the King of MedoPersia(3 consecutive complementary decrees) finalized by the final decree of 457bc…
The fact remains….that the Kings gave “words”, which were command, which were decrees, which resulted in the restoration of Jerusalem and the city….and as such happened in 457bc…the decree that gave that desolated place of Jerusalem, once again the power to be a city, a capital, and by default Israel once again a nation under God….the only “word” that did that was the decree of 457bc.
Yes Dabar is a word, but also is used in many others ways=
H1697 = word, commandment, decree,
From H1696; A WORD; by implication a matter (as spoken of) of thing; adverbially a cause: – act, advice, affair, answer, X any such (thing), + because of, book, business, care, case, cause, certain rate, + chronicles, COMMANDMENT, X commune (-ication), + concern [-ing], + confer, counsel, + dearth, DECREE, deed, X disease, due, duty, effect, + eloquent, errand, [evil favoured-] ness, + glory, + harm, hurt, + iniquity, + judgment, language, + lying, manner, matter, message, [no] thing, oracle, X ought, X parts, + pertaining, + please, portion, + power, promise, provision, purpose, question, rate, reason, report, REQUEST, X (as hast) said, sake, saying, sentence, + sign, + so, some [uncleanness], somewhat to say, + song, speech, X spoken, talk, task, + that, X there done, thing (concerning), thought, + thus, tidings, what [-soever], + wherewith, which, word, work.
>>>>The concept of “ending sacrifices” spoken of in Daniel 9:27 is not a positive prediction and it has nothing to do with abolishing the efficacy of sacrifices – if that is what Daniel said he would be contradicting Moses who said that sacrifices do atone.
Certainly they did, but even them found their meaning in the promise and oath of the Messiah that was to come, to take away our iniquities..finding an end to our sins…in his blood…!~~ Once he came…as He was to come…then no need of animal sacrifices as simple as that…His blood is sufficient..
WELL….seems to me that when something ends…it is Xionara…abolish…
Think of this…since the Messiah came to confirm(give in force) the Covenat (the new covenant Jeremiah spoke about) which the prophecy itself foretold…you have to know that when a New covenant is ratified, the old one is no longer valid.
The fact is that the death of the Messiah ratifying the New Covenant ended the Old Covenant of sacrifices and oblations….after all the sacrifices of animals was set up simply to point to the promise one, the “seed” that was to destroy the destroyer, a promise given to Adam and Eve and then promised to Abraham…. New Covenant that Jeremiah says the following about,..since the Messiah found the remedy for sin…this means that his people having no sins…therefore no need for sacrifices for sins…
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a NEW COVENANT with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, “I will put my law in their inward parts”(SANCTIFICATION), and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 …..for “I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more”(JUSTIFICATION)
>>He would also be contradicting all the prophets who predicted a return of the animal sacrifices with the advent of the Messianic era.
Will be nice if you paste those verses, let alone where they are found…
Let me just say something…one needs to remember the change in paradigm for Israel…because if they did not accepted the New Covenant that the Messiah Prince confirmed to them, as the prophecy itself foretold…
then…the Jews need to realize that something has changed…
The prophets do not have to be ashamed of anything…
because they were part of the Old Paradigm and as such it was purposed….
But it was not God nor the prophets the ones that cause the change in paradigm…therefore they need not be ashame… The truth is that it was the Nation of Israel apparently rejected the New Covenant the Messiah offered them…(otherwise their city and temple would not have being destroyed, and it did in 70 ad)…
Therefore, within the New Paradigm, the prophetic message has to be understood, because where Israel failed, the Messiah triumph and open for them what He offered …salvation to all of them, certainly at the personal level solely, because as a nation Israel did not accepted the New Covenant and the Old Covenant found its end…which means….
Let’s suppose those prophecies and that covenant spoken by Jeremiah and also foretold by Daniel, was first offered to the Jews in the 70th week as the prophecy itself says, and we both know that that 70th week came and went (whomever might have been the Messiah who offered that New covenant)….…and we know that the Jews rejected that new covenant…are you really going to tell me that things are the same as before…and that the Jews should return to the Old Covenant…but for what reason?…if the New Covenant is in effect, and by virtue of this New Covenant being in effect it annuls the Old Covenant of sacrifices and oblation…. Why then go back to make sacrifices???
Do you think that the death of the Messiah(whomever He might be according to you), whom is foretold in the same prophecy as offering the New Covenant and is seeing dying in the midst of that 70th week, and the end of sacrifices and oblations taking place at the same time, in the midst of the 70th week..….Do you think that is just a coincidence??…
it cannot be….!!! It is cause and effect!!!!
The truth is that the Messiah in ratifying the New Covenant(atonement) was in so doing to cause the sacrifices and oblation (Old Covenant) to cease…
that is a determinant action…that is an end…
it does not speaks of a return back to the way
things were before He came…
TO CEASE….this has only one meaning….its end…
Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the (NEW/EVERLASTING) covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation TO CEASE,
Your understanding of this passage is also refuted by the fact that Jesus’ disciples were still bringing animal offerings for the expiation of sin in the Jerusalem Temple (Acts 21:26) see also
Whatever the disciples might have done…
the truth is that the New Covenant clearly says that one is not return to making animal sacrifices..that was prohibited within the New Covenant….
Now….this is the text you quoted in which you are saying they did sacrifices ….and nowhere I see that they did.
That they might have shave their head, and have purifying baths …that is not prohibited in the New Covenant… What the new Covenant does say is that those rituals no longer have spiritual meaning… but participating in them as long as this fact is kept in mind…it was not negated….
Act 21:24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
>>>You missed the point of the article (Letter to SY about Messiah). The point of the article is that Scripture gives us quite a bit of information on the subject of Messiah. You need to see the whole book in context. You cannot read Daniel apart from the rest of the Bible.
Certainly what you say it is right…there is a lot information about what the Messiah was to accomplished…
we need to remember that Daniel the only prophet to which it was given the place of the Messiah in the prophetic timeline to come…a place in history…
No other prophecy tells the exact date for the arrival of this atoning Messiah, this sole information was given solely to Daniel. Which means Daniel is not competing with any of the other prophets but simply localizing the Messiah in an exact date in history…therefore all other prophecies are complementary…
>>>Let me finish by pointing out something about your writing style. I copied your comment onto a word document and it took up 23 pages. My humble request to you is – try to be brief. You do not add clarity by adding words. I don’t expect your writing style to change overnight – but please make it easier for people to follow this exchange.
I really appreciate your advice…
You are right I got a lot to learn still concerning my writing, and this language of yours…
Perhaps, I overdue it…to complement for my deficiencies, hoping that what is misunderstood in one place might be clarified in the next….
But improve…I must!!!
Sorry….the NO…got erased…here it is the proper meaning…
the verse says “shall come”…that is an indefinitive time period
and as such it is NOT specifically tied to those previous 4 MedoPersian kings..The Bible is only showing a real relationship…those 4 came…and some time later the other king (Alexander) shall stand up…
You must be spending a lot of time writing these lengthy replies and I sincerely appreciate your investment of time – but this investment would be more wisely spent attempting to understand what I wrote and studying Scripture. You have misunderstood many of my points and you have missed some key teachings of Scripture.
My first point was that the chronology that you are using is incorrect from a Biblical standpoint – there is conflict between the Bible and the way conventional history dates certain events – I believe that the Bible has it right and the conventional understanding of history is flawed – the links I provided explain the Jewish position.
You also misunderstood my point in quoting Zechariah 1:12. I do not for a second believe that Darius destroyed the Temple – what I am showing you is that the prophet understood that from the time of the destruction of the Temple (through Nebuchadnezzar) until the second year of Darius II only 70 years had passed – this does not fit with the conventional way of dating history.
You also misunderstood my point about the Hebrew grammar of verse 25 – it is not a book of rules that I am talking about – it is simply jarring to read it the way you are suggesting
The word for “ending sacrifice” is “yashbis” which means put to rest – generally on a temporary basis. That word does not mean abolish or cease.
The prophets who spoke about the restoration of sacrifices in the Messianic era are Ezekiel, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Malachi – here are some of the references – Isaiah 56:7, 60:7; Ezekiel 20:40,41; 45:22; Malachi 3:3,4. The fact that you developed your world-view without accounting for these passages tells me as it should tell you that you are putting more emphasis on the SDA writings then you do on the word of God.
You also missed Acts 21:26 where it explicitly speaks of the OFFERING that is to be offered upon the shaving of the head which includes a sacrifice for the expiation of sin as per Numbers 6:14
You also misunderstood my point about the term Messiah – the Jewish Scripture NEVER refer to the Davidic King that is to rule at the end of time with the word “Messiah” – so it is illogical to believe that Daniel was referring to this king without explaining himself – but if he was referring to Cyrus and the high-priest – it makes a lot of sense because that is what his readers would have immediately understood.
I have more comments to make on your comment – but I want to keep it brief
yourphariseefriend says: >>>You must be spending a lot of time writing these lengthy replies and I sincerely appreciate your investment of time – but this investment would be more wisely spent attempting to understand what I wrote and studying Scripture. You have misunderstood many of my points and you have missed some key teachings of Scripture.
Sorry, I did not answer your post before…as you know I was in another site sharing and learning.
I do take time to answer, and I do try to understand what you and others say and the implications of what you and others say. Feel free to let me know where I have failed to understand you, so that I make the appropiate corrections. Would be nice if you include in this format an editing form, so that some corrections can be made.
>>>My first point was that the chronology that you are using is incorrect from a Biblical standpoint – there is conflict between the Bible and the way conventional history dates certain events – I believe that the Bible has it right and the conventional understanding of history is flawed – the links I provided explain the Jewish position.
>>>You also misunderstood my point in quoting Zechariah 1:12. I do not for a second believe that Darius destroyed the Temple – what I am showing you is that the prophet understood that from the time of the destruction of the Temple (through Nebuchadnezzar) until the second year of Darius II only 70 years had passed – this does not fit with the conventional way of dating history.
I did misunderstood what you said. My apologies!!!
<<>>The word for “ending sacrifice” is “yashbis” which means put to rest – generally on a temporary basis. That word does not mean abolish or cease.
You are referring to the statement….=
Dan 9:27 ….and in the midstH2677 of the weekH7620 he shall cause the sacrificeH2077 and the oblationH4503 to cease,H7673
According what I have read…the word is “shabath” (I guess you write it yashbis) (SEE BELOW)..The Old Covenant of sacrifice and oblation was to be put to rest, to end. And think of this, since the Messiah was to confirm and ratify a New Covenant, logically is that the Old Covenant of sacrifices and oblations will end at that time. You see a New Covenant, makes the previous Old Covenant obsolete. Then the issue remains did the Messiah ratified the New Covenant? and apparently He did since the prophecy tell us that He already came ( SEE BELOW POINT X)
You know the Shabath points to an eternal rest… so within this context, the “shabath” of the Old Covenant needs to be understood as eternal.. Because once the New Covenant is in place (as confirmed and ratified with the blood of the Messiah that came before the abom.des. of 70 ad, as the prophecy of Daniel 9 tells us) this means that the Old Covenant has become obsolete…
Dan 9:27 he shall cause the sacrificeH2077 and the oblationH4503 to cease,H7673
A primitive root; to repose, that is, desist from exertion; used in many implied relations (causatively, figuratively or specifically): – (cause to, let, make to) cease, celebrate, cause (make) to fail, keep (sabbath), suffer to be lacking, leave, put away (down), (make to) rest, rid, still, take away.
SO…..DID THE MESSIAH ALREADY COME?
According to Daniel 9 He already came and did what He was to do, since the prophecy says that He was to come first, at the end of the 69weeks counting from the decree
(same as end of 62 weeks when counting from the end of the 7 weeks), as such before the abomination desolation/destruction of the city and temple in 70ad which was foretold to follow. Which means the Messiah came, since later on (AFTER) took place the abom.des/Roman/70ad as foretold in the prophecy of Daniel 9.
A= MESSIAH ARRIVES (at the end of the 69 weeks, same as end of 62weeks, depends from where one is counting)
ABOM.DES= 70 AD ABOMINATION DESOLATION=
TIMELINE = 7wks 62wks (A) 1wk– > end 70 weeks ….then AFTER abom.des/70ad
AS SEEN BY MANY=
According to the prophecy…. first came the Messiah AT THE END OF THE 62weeks(A) He then dies AFTER 62 WEEKS (within the 1week/70th week, see above timeline), and thereafter the city and temple is destroyed AFTER THE 62 WEEKS(70ad). Which means the Messiah already came, before 70ad.
AS SEEN BY OTHERS=
Even as seen by you and others, even if two Messiahs were to come,
(the first coming at the end of the 7 weeks, the other coming after the 62 weeks (A) above (told to be in action during the 1 week/70th week)….even these if understood as two Messiahs, as you and others say…all have already come by the time the abom.des. took place in 70ad
TIMELINE ACCORDING TO YOU AND OTHERS=
7wks.(1st.M). 62wks(2ndM). 1w –> end of 70weeks …then AFTER abom.des/70ad
<<>>You also missed Acts 21:26 where it explicitly speaks of the OFFERING that is to be offered upon the shaving of the head which includes a sacrifice for the expiation of sin as per Numbers 6:14
They could very well take partial participation in that activity…neither you or me knows..
But the disciples, are not the ones that establish the rules…(actually many christians have done opposite of what the doctrines say, that does not change them..that is their individual doing, has nothing to do with what God expects)
and what you are forgetting is that all over the New Testament, it is plainly told the sacrifices and oblation have ended within the context of that New Covenant..=
But now hath he(CHRIST) obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
***In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.****
>>You also misunderstood my point about the term Messiah – the Jewish Scripture NEVER refer to the Davidic King that is to rule at the end of time with the word “Messiah”
Sorry, but every king is anointed at some point or another…otherwise no ruling…whether it is told or not…The Davidic King is by its own definition as king, and anointed one…
>>– so it is illogical to believe that Daniel was referring to this king without explaining himself –
We need to understand that the prophetic message is actually many times given as c complementary. One prophet here gives some information (eg. where the Messiah was to be born), and another says who was to be His mother and other says what was to happen to him…and another says when in history He was to come(Daniel), and so forth…
therefore…we need not expect Daniel give all details concerning this Messiah and what He was to accomplish, certainly not in just one vision/Daniel 9. Why demand that from Daniel,when all other prophets have the same …look at the suffering servant of Isaiah…did Isaiah gave details as how it is that this servant is to glory of his work at his death…and yet see it after wards?
The fact is that despite taking into account the fragmentary given of the prophetic message, as meaning to put all the pieces of the puzzle together, with each prophet given a piece…despite taking that in consideration…Daniel says much more that what many want to admit…how…well by placing all His visions and studying them as complementary themselves, which is the way that should be done, when you come to realize that you hava symbolic vision of animals and horns, and the following visions are in fact Angelic Explanations of this symbolic vision of Daniel 8, (not to mention they symbolic visions Dan. 2 and DAn. 7 and their angelic explanations, which also sheds further light).
In fact all the visions of Daniel are complementary, but specifically Daniel 8 is being explained in Daniel 9 and Daniel 11-12….being Daniel 9 our present concerned…
The problem is that many fail to do a comparative study of all these visions, which as pieces of a puzzle when all are place together …it is only then that the whole image is seen.
You cannot expect Daniel to show you all the details and life of this Messiah (especially just in Daniel 9), but believe it or not…once a concept becomes real…then…the truth shines through… which is that Daniel’s “Your Prince”, the Prince that stand for your people, is the Messiah Prince, is the Prince of the Covenant(that confirms the covenant), is the Son of Man, it is Michael your Prince…once that beautiful relationship is understood…then you will see your King, your Davidic king, in the writings of Daniel 12:1-3, and in DAniel 7…as the heavenly Son of Man, there getting His crown, and then sharing with HIs people…your people…the Israel of Faith…originating from the OT and continuing in the NT…the good Olive tree-
Dan 12:1-3 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
Dan 7:13-14 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
The Son of God..receiving the whole kingdom from God…?…He is more than a man…
He is God that became man….He was part of the “US” that were together at creation=
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let US make man in our image,
It is… because of His sacrifice He was able to redeem us(the bethrothal) and soon to take us with Him to the mansions He went to build for us at his father’s house in heaven(the second coming, the wedding of the lamb, of the Messiah and His bride the church, finally together for eternity)…
>>>but if he was referring to Cyrus and the high-priest – it makes a lot of sense because that is what his readers would have immediately understood.
Daniel..did not understand…the book was sealed… only centuries after the book of Revelation sheds further light and “reveals” Daniel’s prophecies…. and vice versa…
but truth be told… a great deal of the message of Daniel was for you and me, the generations of the time of the end…(giving us the identity of the Christ and who is the Antichrist…when properly understood within the context of time)…
Cyrus position in the prophetic history is as =
1) Cyrus…as the ending point for the Babylonian Empire ‘s 70 years (told by Jeremiah’s prophecy) during which exiled its people, abominated and desolated its city and temple
2) Cyrus as the start of the 70 weeks timeline of Daniel 9 for the Post-Babylonian Restoration…, Cyrus associated with spearheading the decrees as the starting point of the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel. Decrees = Cyrus 539bc, Darius 519bc and finally Artaxerxes of 457bc, which deal with the post-babiylonian restoration of the city and temple…and its Messiah to come..
But the prophecy of Daniel 9, deals with the post-Babylonian restoration=
STARTING POINT= from the times of the completed decree/457bc
TIMELINE = + 70weeks(490years)
ENDING POINT= to the end of the Messiah Prince mission/end of his confirmation of NC.
7wks. 62weeks . 1 week/Messiah = end of 70 weeks
1 week = 70th week
(of which the ” 7 . 62 weeks” (sixty nine WEEKS) = 483 years was to bring us to the the start of the Messiah’s ministry of confirmation of the New Covenant, at the beginning of the last week or 70th week)
Decrees(Cyrus/539bc–Arta/457bc) + 7weeks.62weeks > 27ad/Messiah prince/Jesus
Decree 457bc + 7wks.62wks ( 483 years) — > 27ad= (A) Messiah/Jesus arrives
Decree/457bc + 483years -> 27ad= Messia/Jesus arrives
7weeks.62weeks = 69 weeks … the Messiah arrives, starts confirming New Covenant
7weeks. 62weeks. 1 week= end 70 weeks/Messiah ends confirmation of New Covenant
ending confirmation of New Covenant= means the close of probation, as to ending offering the New Covenant to the nation of Israel… 70 weeks are for the people and city, of these the last week/70th week is the time of the Messiah’s ministry of confirming the New Covenant for the Jews, at the end of the 70th week, same as the end of the 70 weeks, the times of the Jews to confirmation of the new Covenant ended…
since then it is offered to believers, both original Jews and grafted Gentiles..
Considering what you said… you said that Cyrus is the Messiah…but he cannot be, he is associated with the starting decrees (finalized in 457bc),
as such associated with the start of the restoration of the city and temple,
from which years later the Messiah was to come, by the ending point of the timeline.
If Cyrus is associated with starting point of the timeline, as spearheading those decrees of which the final of 457bc wrap all the details for the restoration of the city,
as such associated with the start of the 70 weeks timeline..from which 69 weeks was to take us to the Messiah, he cannot be its ending point as the Messiah to come……
Cyrus — + timeline(7wks or 7wks.62 weeks) – > Cyrus…
Cyrus at the start and also at the ending pont it is not possible…
Now…Daniel 8 is the original symbolic vision there also partially explained by an Angel, but which is also further explained by an Angel in Daniel 9 and Daniel 11-12 ….
ALLL these SYMBOLIC VISION AND ANGELIC EXPLANATIONS shows these timelines as also starting with the MedoPersia, as the ram of Daniel 8, and in Daniel 9 as the “decrees giver” ….
As such Daniel 9 timeline of the 70 weeks(490 years) starts with MedoPersia as the starting point by giving the decree of 457 bc,
and from there the initial 69 weeks(483 years) of this 70 weeks timeline bring us to the later arrival of the Messiah in 27ad/Jesus Christ..
Then the end of the 70th of this timeline, point to the end of the times of the Messiah, as such the end of His confirmation/offering in force of the New Covenant to the Jews…
Therefore.. the end of the 70 weeks…is the end of probation for the Jews during which they were to accept or reject the New Covenant…and we all know what happened…
(the 70 weeks does not includes the times of the Babylonian Desolation)
ALL…HAVING MEDOPERSIAN…as the starting point for the timeline
having to do with the restoration, function of the city and temple and pointing to later r associated events, such as the arrival of the Messiah at the ending point of the 69 weeks timeline, (which is His first coming)…and the also marking the end of the Messiah ministry of confirming the New Covenant as the end of the 70th week…the end of the 70 weeks, then marking the end of probation that was given to the nation of Israel to accept the New Covenant… which they did not do…yet it is still open at the personal level to all !!!
(certainly Dan. 11-12 given further details up to the end of time still in our future…)
Bru Again – you write a lengthy response without taking the time to understand what I wrote or the implications of what I wrote. The word “yashbit” is a construct of the word “shavat” – and throughout Scripture it is much more commonly used for temporary cessation and not for permanent cessation. Furthermore the prophets (Isaiah, jeremiah, Ezekiel, Malachi) all prophesied a restoration of the sacrifices in the Messianic age – thus demonstrating that your theology violates God’s word. My point about Acts 21 is that the people who lived with Jesus obviously never heard about a cessation of sacrifices – so why do you believe the author of the book of Hebrews when he preaches something that flies in the face of all the evidence? The problem you have Bru is that you have never read Scripture to see what God says – read my article entitled “The Totality of Scripture” and you will see how you are being misled
[<>The word for “ending sacrifice” is “yashbis” which means put to rest – generally on a temporary basis. That word does not mean abolish or cease.
You are referring to the statement….=
Dan 9:27 ….and in the midstH2677 of the weekH7620 he shall cause the sacrificeH2077 and the oblationH4503 to cease,H7673
According what I have read…the word is “shabath” (I guess you write it yashbis) (SEE BELOW)..The Old Covenant of sacrifice and oblation was to be put to rest, to end. And think of this, since the Messiah was to confirm and ratify a New Covenant, logically is that the Old Covenant of sacrifices and oblations will end at that time. You see a New Covenant, makes the previous Old Covenant obsolete. Then the issue remains did the Messiah ratified the New Covenant? and apparently He did since the prophecy tell us that He already came ( SEE BELOW POINT X) ]
Now, this is just HILARIOUS!!
Bru, you are trying to correct a rabbi on Hebrew Grammar is that right?
It’s hard enough reading a computer screen (might be why I don’t have kindle etc). and something as long as this is impossible for me.
(I do not know…but this translation shows it standing by itself=
Dan. 9:25….”the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
Could we be assuming grammatical rules which were not binding at the time the book of Daniel was written…~2500 years ago..)
I would just say; Without grammar there can be no language. It is the essence of language.
In all that you have said it can be concluded that Cyrus really has no place in this timeline. As you say it is essentially Artaxerxes. If this is the case then looking at what is written, the question that simply MUST be answered is WHY is Cryus mentioned in the various places if they have no essential meaning. We cannot ignore that it IS written. We have to ask WHY did Ezra write what he did. Why did Chronicles give those details of Cryus. Why did Isaiah refer to him as it is written. We can safely say there is nothing superfluous written in scripture. It has a reason.
It makes little sense to attempt a debate with someone who does not know Hebrew and yet is so arrogant , they feel they can correct someone as knowledgeable as the rabbi in this website.
Just a few salient points-
From the going forth of the WORD to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the coming of an anointed ruler will be seven weeks.
This is the word of Jeremiah. It is G-ds word through his prophet.
For thus saith HaShem: After seventy years are accomplished for Babylon, I will remember you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place.
The word of Jeremiah is given just before the destruction of the Temple. This is also apparent from the next verse.
In the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, contemplated the calculations, the number of years about which the word of HaShem had come to the prophet Jeremiah, to complete the seventy years SINCE THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM.
The word of Hashem in the mouth of Jeremiah does not come, nor is it calculated from the subjugation of Jerusalem, but rather from the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple.
Know and comprehend: From the emergence of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem until an anointed prince will be seven septets; and for sixty two septets it will be rebuilt, street and moat, but in troubled times. The Hebrew says “an anointed prince” NOT “The Messiah the Prince (KJB)
It is Cyrus who fulfills the word of God through Jeremiah. The Torah tells us this-
2nd Chronicles 36:21-23 To fulfill the word of HaShem by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her Sabbaths; for as long as she lay desolate she kept Sabbath, to fulfill seventy years. And in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, so that the word of HaShem spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, HaShem stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, and he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying: Thus said Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth has the HaShem G-d of heaven given me; and he has charged me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever is among you of all his people, HaShem his G-d be with him, and let him go up!
Interesting to note that the original 1611 KJB recognizes the etnach in the masoretic text and places a semicolon after the seven weeks. However in typical fashion it then ignores the “ha” in v. 26 which translates as “and after THE sixty-two weeks” thus clearly demonstrating the 2 time periods
Just sharing this study, which will help understand the ANGELIC EXPLANATORY VISION OF DANIEL 9 within the context of ITS PARENT SYMBOLIC VISION OF DANIEL 8 (that is Daniel 9 is an explanatory vision of Daniel 8, concentrating in the firs part of Daniel 8’s timeline of the 2300 years which are the Old Testament times from the times of MedoPersia Post Babylonian Reconstruction to the times of the Messiah, certainly Daniel 9 does makes allusion to later abomination.desolations, especially the one of the Pleasant land( also mentioned in Dan. 8:9), which is the destruction of the Jewish temple and City=
Connecting Links Between Daniel 8 & 9
February 19, 2013 at 11:32am
There are many today who, to use the words of the servant of the Lord, “rashly cut the knot” (GC pg 409) between Daniel 8 and Daniel 9. Thus they deny the fulfillment of prophecy in 1844 and the emergence of the remnant movement from out of the disappointment. We, on the other hand, do not wish to be so rash. Is there Bible evidence connecting the time prophecy of Daniel 9 (70 weeks or 490 prophetic years) with the time prophecy of Daniel 8 (2,300 evening/mornings or 2,300 prophetic years)? Let us prayerfully explore this subject together. Now I am not going to get into the explanation of these prophecies here (that’s another study) but deal solely with the connecting links between the two. It is the conclusion of this author that the time prophecy of Daniel 8:13, 14 is clearly connected to the time prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27. Many try to deny the connecting links but their efforts falls short because God has given numerous evidences that link the two and what God has joined together no man can put asunder.
1) Connecting link # 1: The literary parallel in structure between chapter 7 and chapters 8 & 9 when viewed together:
Dream/Vision [vs 2-14]
Appeals for explanation [vs 15,16]
Initial explanation [vs 17,18]
Appeal for supplementary explanation [vs 19,20]
Supplement to vision [vs 21,22]
Supplementary explanation [vs 23-27]
Dream/Vision [vs 2-14]
Appeals for explanation [vs 15]
Initial explanation [vs 16-26]
Appeal (prayer about sanctuary) [vs 1-19]
Supplement (sees Gabriel again) [vs 20-23]
Explanation [vs 24-27]
Together chapters 8 and 9 are paralleled in structure to chapter 7. God’s Word is marvelous in its structure (study the book of Revelation closely if you disbelieve). This parallel between chapter 7 and chapter 8 & 9 together is an evidence that the latter two chapters are an unit
2) Connecting Link # 2: There is also a thematic link.
In Daniel 9, Daniel is praying about the desolated sanctuary in Jerusalem. In Daniel 8, the only thing not explained is the starting point of the time period of the desolated sanctuary. If you read the end of Daniel 8 you will see that no one (including Daniel himself) understood that vision (Dan 8:21) but he had learned that there would be a transgression of desolation and the sanctuary would be trampled. This would be a matter of confusion to Daniel because at that point in time there was no temple in Jerusalem becasue Babylon had destroyed it. So imagine Daniel’s thought process! Would there be a new temple built? Would it get destroyed again? Was the prophecy he had received in regard to the old temple? Was Jerusalem going to remain desolate longer than previously anticipated? When would his vision of the 2,300 evening/mornings begin? While we cannot know exactly what his thoughts were we know that his mind was exercised on these things because in Daniel 9 we see him studying a time prophecy from Jeremiah about the desolation of Jerusalem (Dan 9:2) and he asked God to shine His face upon the sanctuary that is desolate (Dan 9:17). Now what makes this connection even more poignant is that Daniel starts this prayer in the 1st year when the Medo-Persian power takes over Babylon (Dan 9:1). This was the 1st event he saw in his vision back in chapter 8! In other words the Ram (Dan 8:3,4) that he saw, which was explained by Gabriel as the Medo-Persian kingdom (Dan 8:20), had just arrived on the scene. Therefore Daniel would see this as a possible starting point for the timeline in his vision. This is why he turns to the Scripture to search for clues about the time according to the former prophets.
3) Connecting Link # 3 The mentioning of Gabriel The angel Gabriel, is first mentioned by name in connection with the vision of Daniel 8.
And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision. (Daniel 8:16)
Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision. (Daniel 9:21-23)
4) Connecting Link # 4: Gabriel’s mission for Daniel
And besides that there is another connecting link in terms of Gabriel’s commission. If you notice the underlined portions above, he was told in Daniel 8 to make Daniel understand the vision. As previously mentioned at the end of Daniel 8 this commission was not fulfilled for no one understood the vision. Now here in Daniel 9 Gabriel shows up again and the first thing out of his mouth is that he has come to give Daniel skill and understanding and he tells him to consider the vision. Daniel had seen no new vision so this must be an explanation of the previous one!
5) Connecting Link # 5: The Hebrew words for vision
In Daniel 8 and 9 the words translated as “vision” are ‘chazon’ and ‘mar’eh.’ There is evidence in Daniel 8 that the word ‘chazon’ refers to the vision as a whole, while the word ‘mar’eh’ refers to either an angelic appearance or a particular aspect of something seen in the overall vision.
When Daniel writes about the whole vision he uses the word “chazon” (See Dan 8:1, 2, 13, 15, 17, 26- we will look at vs. 26 more closely because both “chazon” and “mar’eh” are used in this one).Let’s illustrate this:
“In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar a vision [Heb: Chazon] appeared unto me, even unto me Daniel, after that which appeared unto me at the first. And I saw in a vision [Heb: Chazon] ; and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in a vision [Heb: Chazon], and I was by the river of Ulai.” (Dan 8:1, 2)
As you can see Daniel uses “chazon” to refer to the whole vision but then, when he writes about Gabriel’s appearance and the 2,300 days he uses the word, the “mar’eh” (See Dan 8:15, 16, 26).
And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision [Heb: Chazon], and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance [Heb: Mar’eh] of a man. And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai which called, and said , Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision [Heb: Mar’eh] (Dan 8:15, 16)
Note: Notice that the word “mar’eh” is now being used. First it is used for Gabriel’s “appearance.” And this Gabriel is told to make Daniel “to understand the vision [Mar’eh].” Now let’s keep reading. We are quoting from Daniel’s record of what Gabriel said now:
So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision [Heb: Chazon]…And the vision [Heb: Mar’eh] of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision [Heb: Chazon] ; for it shall be for many days. And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king’s business; and I was astonished at the vision [Heb: Mar’eh], but none understood it. (Dan 8:17, 26)
Note: Notice here that Gabriel explains that “at the time of the end shall be the vision [Heb: Chazon] but then later on he mentions the “vision” [Heb: Mar’eh] of the evening and the morning (this is the 2,300 evenings and mornings part) as true. Next Gabriel says to shut the vision [Heb: Chazon] because it shall be for many days and then Daniel explains that he was astonished at the vision [Heb: Mar’eh] but none understood it. The point here, and do not miss this, is that the word “mar’eh” is connected specifically to Gabriel’s appearance and the 2,300 evening/mornings. Everywhere else the word “chazon” is used. Now let’s turn to Daniel 9 and see what we read there about “chazon” and “mar’eh.” And remember that the “vision” of the evening and the morning (that is the 2,300 days) was called the “mar’eh.” Now let’s turn to Daniel 9:
Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision [Heb: Chazon] at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation. And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision [Heb: Mar’eh]. (Dan 9:21-23)
Thus, in Dan 8 a certain portion of the total vision [Heb: Chazon] was left unexplained, specifically the “mar’eh” of the 2,300 evenings and mornings. Then in Daniel 9, Gabriel, the man from the vision [Heb: Chazon] shows us to explain the “mar’eh.” And remember the ‘mar’eh’ was clearly used in attachment to the 2,300 days. This is another linguistic evidence that the two visions are inseparably connected.
Connecting Link # 6: The time aspect
Moving along there is link in terms of time. The last thing that Daniel heard as a part of his vision had to do with a time prophecy. The only thing that Gabriel does not explain in Daniel 8 is about the time. There is no starting point given for this period in Daniel 8. The first thing that Gabriel mentions in Daniel 9 is about time and he gives a starting point. So the connecting links here with the 2 chapters is obviously in the area of time.
Connecting Link # 7: The Hebrew word for decreed
Now there is also another connecting link. It has to do with the word in Dan 9:24. The Hebrew word for “decreed” here is “nihtak” It properly means “to cut” or “to divide.” This word is only used once in the Scripture. In the Theodotian version, which was so widely copied in by the early Christian church that it virtually superseded the Septugiant, this word is rendered as “sunetmethaesan.” The root word is “suntemna” which means “they were cut off.” Later on this word was used to mean “to amputate.” So a viable translation here is “cut off.” Thus the time period of Daniel 9 (70 weeks) would be cut off from the larger period of 2,300 evenings/mornings. And bear in mind reader, without Daniel 9, there is no specified starting point for the 2,300 evening/mornings of Daniel 8.
Hence we see seven connecting links between the two visions. They are:
1) Structure of Daniel 8 & 9 combined parallels Daniel 7 thus indicating that the two together are an unit
2) Thematic link of the desolate sanctuary
3) Gabriel mentioned by name only in chapter 8 and 9
4) Gabriel’s commission is the same in chapter 8 and 9. He is completing what was unfinished from chapter 8.
5) Linguistic link via chazon and mar’eh- the usage of chazon and mar’eh match in both chapters.
6) The Time link connecting both chapters
7) Linguistic link via nihtak which shows that the shorter time of Daniel 9 is cut off from the larger time of Daniel 8. This gives us the starting point for the time prophecy of Daniel 8.
As I stated, near the start of this paper, it is the conclusion of this author that the time prophecy of Daniel 8:13, 14 is clearly connected to the time prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27. Many try to deny the connecting links but their efforts falls short because God has given numerous evidences that link the two and what God has joined together no man can put asunder.
Yours in Christ,
(my note, Daniel 11-12, is also an explanatory vision of the same symbolic vision of Daniel 8 and also shares further light in the angelic explanatory vision in question which is Daniel 9)
who’s writing are we cutting and pasting today? who is GC? What does the date and time have to do with it?
Bru Please do not “cut and paste” from other sites – if you think an SDA article is important for us to read – provide the link don’t fill this comment section with articles of other people. If you want to write something out that is something else – but I will ask you not to simply keep on repeating yourself but rather interact with the questions posed to you.
Everything you have concluded is based upon the year 457 and NOW the date of 1844.
You have ignored the repeated question regarding Cyrus. I cited many references and the one of G-d Himself calling Cyrus His Mashiach and that he would perform His pleasure in building the Temple. In Isaiah it doesn’t just say the above, being Mashiach, but that G-d Himself would PAVE THE WAY for Cyrus to do G-d’s will. G-d says that He called Cyrus BY NAME for the sake of Jacob, My Servant and Israel My Chosen. Surely Cyrus warrants much more than that footnote.
Given the emphasis placed upon Cyrus by Hashem why do Xtians only place him as a footnote in history. Certainly G-d wanted him to be more than a footnote. Instead, you and your fellow Xtians have elevated Artaxerxes as preeminent and the entire purpose of all the visions of Daniel. If G-d’s purpose in all this was as you say WHY did G-d NOT give this Artaxerxes the stature that He DID give to Cyrus. A person would have to have the heart of Pharaoh not to see this as obvious.
Because Sharbano, many (though by no means all) Christians read the Tanakh, (and their own Christian history too) as a mere footnote. In fact, Christians who knew the roots of their faith, (and their teacher’s faith,) or their history shouldn’t even be here bothering you about G-d, or chiding you for keeping observances that Jesus himself followed for his entire life.
It is a historical fact, that the only mention of Hannukah outside of the Talmud and texts like 1 Macabees exists in John’s gospel. Interesting Coincidence? Is it also a coincidence that all early manuals of Christoan discipline and ethical practices concern themselves with practices and questions about practice that would only have mattered to religious Jews?
Christianity is the only fruit I know of to systematically abuse its own vine. Jesus lived and died as a religious second temple Jew, but haven forbid that Jews today would have any insight.,,..sigh….frustrating.
Sacrifices allow us to draw near. Teshuva happens prior to this. Without the kevannah of teshuva, sacrifice would not have meaning.