Daniel 9:24-27

Context
Daniel 9:24-27
Daniel 9:24a: Weeks of Years
Daniel 9:24b: The Six Purposes to Be Accomplished
Daniel 9:25 – The Structure of the 69 Heptads
Non-Possible Starting Point: The Decree of Cyrus
2 Possible Answers
7.1 Artaxerxes to Nehemiah
7.2 Artaxerxes to Ezra
After the 69th Week, before the 70th Week
8.1 Daniel 9:26a
8.2 Daniel 9:26b
Jesus quoted Daniel 9 about Rome
Daniel 9:27: The 70th Week and the Fall of Jerusalem
Verse 27 expands on Verse 26
Jesus Fulfilled All 6 Requirements
Rabbi Rashi
Talmud
Should the 7 and 62 Weeks Be Separated?

Context

Before diving into the prophetic vision of Daniel 9:24–27, it’s essential to understand the historical and textual context that sets the stage. This context helps ground the interpretation and avoid common misunderstandings about timing, characters, and the significance of the events described.

Daniel 9:1

“In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the lineage of the Medes, who was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans…”
— Daniel 9:1 (NKJV)

This verse anchors Daniel’s vision at a pivotal moment in Israel’s history. The first year of Darius the Mede is critical because it marks the end of the Babylonian empire and the transition to Medo-Persian rule. This change in global power dynamics signaled the beginning of hope for the exiled Jewish people — the long-awaited end of their captivity in Babylon. Darius the Mede is widely associated with Cyaxares II, the son of Astyages, and uncle to Cyrus the Great. He is portrayed as a co-ruler or vassal king under the authority of Cyrus during the initial years of the Medo-Persian Empire.

Daniel 9:2

“In the first year of his reign I, Daniel, understood by the books the number of the years specified by the word of the Lord through Jeremiah the prophet, that He would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.”

While Daniel was reading and studying Scripture—specifically the writings of Jeremiah, his contemporary—he understood that the exile was limited to 70 years. He knew this because of two key prophecies:

Jeremiah 25:11–12 (NKJV)

“And this whole land shall be a desolation and an astonishment, and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. Then it will come to pass, when seventy years are completed, that I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the land of the Chaldeans, for their iniquity,” says the Lord.”

Jeremiah 29:10 (NKJV)

“For thus says the Lord: After seventy years are completed at Babylon, I will visit you and perform My good word toward you, and cause you to return to this place.”

Daniel understood that God had appointed seventy years of exile for Judah. By his time—the first year of Darius the Mede—those years were almost complete.

However, watch how Daniel reacts to this fulfillment:

¹¹Yes, all Israel has transgressed Your law, and has departed so as not to obey Your voice; therefore the curse and the oath written in the Law of Moses the servant of God have been poured out on us, because we have sinned against Him. ¹²And He has confirmed His words, which He spoke against us and against our judges who judged us, by bringing upon us a great disaster; for under the whole heaven such has never been done as what has been done to Jerusalem.

¹³“As it is written in the Law of Moses, all this disaster has come upon us; yet we have not made our prayer before the Lord our God, that we might turn from our iniquities and understand Your truth.

In Daniel 9:11–13, the prophet explicitly refers to the “Law of Moses” as the foundation for understanding Israel’s exile, pointing to the covenantal curses foretold in Leviticus 26, Deuteronomy 28, 31, and 32. These passages warned that disobedience would result in national calamity, dispersion, and foreign domination — precisely the reality Daniel was living. His reliance on these texts is remarkable, as it completely undermines both liberal critical claims that the Torah was written centuries later by unknown editors and Islamic claims that the Torah has been corrupted. Instead, Daniel, a prophet revered in both Judaism and Islam, fully trusts and quotes an uncorrupted Torah during the Babylonian exile in the 6th century BC, showing it was already known, preserved, and authoritative in his day.

Daniel is concerned because even though the 70 years from Jeremiah are almost up, the Jews haven’t truly repented as a nation, and they haven’t yet returned to rebuild Jerusalem. Daniel has just read Jeremiah’s prophecy, and he understands that the return depends on repentance, not just the calendar (Daniel 9:2–3). This is why Daniel doesn’t celebrate — he falls to his knees in confession, supplicating for Israel.

He recognizes that the curses of Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 have been fulfilled (the Israelites in exile) — and now he fears, rightly, that if they still don’t repent, then Leviticus 26:18 will kick in:

“If after all this you will not listen to Me, I will punish you seven times more for your sins.” – Lev 26:18

Which, when multiplied (7 × 70 years of desolation), gives 490 years. Daniel is afraid that this Israel’s unrepentant attitude is going to add on another 420 years to the exile. However, let’s see how God comforts Daniel:

²⁰Now while I was speaking, praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the Lord my God for the holy mountain of my God, ²¹yes, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, reached me about the time of the evening offering. ²²And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, “O Daniel, I have now come forth to give you skill to understand. ²³At the beginning of your supplications the command went out, and I have come to tell you, for you are greatly beloved; therefore consider the matter, and understand the vision: – Daniel 9:20-23

Even though the temple in Jerusalem had been destroyed and no sacrifices were being offered at the time, Daniel still marks time by the evening sacrifice — which was typically offered at the 9th hour, which is 3:00 PM (cf. Exodus 29:39–41). This shows:

His heart remained tethered to God’s covenant and worship.
He viewed prayer as a spiritual continuation of the sacrificial system, even in exile.
God responds immediately during this sacred time — emphasizing that prayer and repentance are acceptable substitutes for sacrifice when offered in sincerity.

Throughout Scripture, prayer is closely associated with sacrifice and incense:

Psalm 141:2 (NKJV)

“Let my prayer be set before You as incense, the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice.”

Daniel’s prayer was like a spiritual offering, ascending to God just like incense and sacrifice did in the temple — and God responded instantly.

Revelation 5:8 (NKJV)

“…golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.”

Revelation 8:3–4 (NKJV)

“Then another angel, having a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints… and the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, ascended before God…”

These verses show that in both Old and New Covenants, prayers are viewed as a holy offering, received by God like incense on His altar.

Notice the continuity between the Old and New Testaments:

Acts 10:3–4 (NKJV)

“About the ninth hour of the day, he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in and saying to him, ‘Cornelius!’ And… [the angel said], ‘Your prayers and your alms have come up for a memorial before God.'”

Cornelius, a Gentile God-fearer, was praying at the ninth hour, which is 3PM evening sacrifice, when an angel (a “man in bright clothing”) appears — just as Gabriel did to Daniel — and tells him that his prayers have ascended to God like a memorial offering.

Why is this important? While Daniel feared additional wrath due to the people’s unrepentance, God instead reveals a plan centered on the coming Messiah — one who would deal with sin at its root. Daniel’s confession and supplication reflect the requirements of Leviticus 26:40–42, where God promises to remember His covenant if the people confess their iniquity. Though the nation at large had not turned, Daniel’s intercession on their behalf parallels Moses’ role in Exodus 32, where one righteous man stands in the gap for many. Daniel’s prayers and repentance are offerings of “sweet smelling aroma” and his intercession accepted as atonement for Israel.

God’s response through the angel Gabriel is unexpected. Rather than announcing an extension of judgment of a total 490 years, Gabriel reveals a prophetic vision of “seventy weeks” (literally 490 years), which outlines God’s redemptive plan. These 490 years are not a sevenfold curse, but rather a structured period leading to ultimate redemption. In other words, Daniel’s intercession turned what was meant to be a seven fold punishment of 70 years (Leviticus 26:18) totaling 490 years, into a redemptive timeline pointing to the Messiah who will bring in true redemption and freedom. In Daniel 9:24, Gabriel lists six goals to be accomplished during this time: to finish transgression, put an end to sin, atone for iniquity, bring in everlasting righteousness, seal up vision and prophecy, and anoint the Most Holy. This shows that God, while just, is moving toward restoration rather than additional judgment. The 70 weeks are about undoing sin, not extending punishment.

Now let’s get into the meat of the matter:

“Seventy weeks are determined
For your people and for your holy city,
To finish the transgression,
To make an end of sins,
To make reconciliation for iniquity,
To bring in everlasting righteousness,
To seal up vision and prophecy,
And to anoint the Most Holy.

²⁵“Know therefore and understand,
That from the going forth of the command
To restore and build Jerusalem
Until Messiah the Prince,
There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks;
The street shall be built again, and the wall,
Even in troublesome times.

²⁶“And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.
²⁷And he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”

Daniel 9:24a: Weeks of Years

The verse begins:

“Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city…”
(Daniel 9:24a)

This prophecy was delivered to Daniel by the angel Gabriel and refers specifically to Daniel’s people (the Jewish nation) and Daniel’s holy city (Jerusalem). The phrase “seventy weeks” in English can be somewhat misleading without an understanding of the original Hebrew.

**1. The Hebrew Word Used: Shavuim (שָׁבֻעִים)**

The word translated “weeks” in Daniel 9 is the Hebrew “shavuim”, which literally means “sevens” or “heptads.” It does not inherently mean “seven days”—it simply means “a unit of seven.”

In most contexts in the Old Testament, “seven” (shavua) refers to a week of days, but in Daniel 9, the plural masculine form (shavuim) is used. This form is unusual and appears only in prophetic contexts. That opens the door to a symbolic or non-standard application—specifically, weeks of years.

2. The Context of Daniel’s Prayer in Daniel 9

Daniel is praying about the 70 years of exile foretold by Jeremiah (Jer. 25:11–12, 29:10). He is thinking in years, not days.

God’s response, through the angel Gabriel, uses a parallel numerical structure: “seventy sevens are decreed for your people.” This directly responds to Daniel’s concern about the 70 years — not in days, but years.

So the logical answer is: seventy “sevens” of years (i.e., 490 years).

3. The “Sevens” Are Divided into Long Periods That Don’t Fit Days

Daniel 9:25–26 divides the 70 “weeks” into:

7 sevens (49 units)
62 sevens (434 units)
Final 1 seven (7 units)

This structure would make no sense if these were literal weeks of days:

7 weeks = 49 days (just over 1½ months)
62 weeks = 434 days (a little over a year)
Total = 483 days (a little over 1 year and 4 months)

But Daniel 9:25 speaks of the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and verse 26 includes the coming of the Messiah and the destruction of the city and sanctuary. These events span centuries, not months.

4. The “Week” of Years Is a Known Concept in the Torah

In the Law of Moses, especially in Leviticus 25, God instituted the idea of “weeks” or units of seven years:

Every 7th year was a Sabbath year (Lev. 25:2–4).
Seven Sabbath years (7 × 7 = 49 years) led to a Jubilee year in the 50th year (Lev. 25:8–10).
See also Numbers 14:34 & Ezekiel 4:6: The “day-for-a-year principle” in prophetic symbolism.

This pattern of heptads of years was already part of Israel’s national calendar and religious life. So when Gabriel uses “sevens” to describe prophetic time in Daniel 9, the idea of weeks of years would not be foreign to Daniel.

Daniel 9:24b: The Six Purposes to Be Accomplished

The second half of the verse lists six major objectives that are to be fulfilled within this prophetic 490-year period:

“…to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy.”
(Daniel 9:24b)

Let’s break each down:

To Finish the Transgression
This implies putting a complete and final end to rebellion against God.
To Make an End of Sins
This phrase carries the idea of removing sin altogether or putting a permanent stop to it. It suggests that sin will no longer have dominion, pointing to a future time of spiritual restoration and cleansing.
To Make Reconciliation (Atonement) for Iniquity
The Hebrew word here is often associated with sacrificial atonement (similar to the Day of Atonement). This is a clear reference to a divine act of reconciliation, where iniquity is not only covered but forgiven—fulfilled ultimately in the Messiah’s redemptive work.
To Bring in Everlasting Righteousness
This refers to the establishment of a new, enduring order of righteousness. It hints at the arrival of the Messianic kingdom where God’s justice and holiness will reign without end.
To Seal Up Vision and Prophecy
“Seal up” in biblical terms often means to complete, fulfill, or authenticate. This means that the prophetic revelation in Daniel will reach its culmination and be fully realized.
To Anoint the Most Holy
This phrase has been understood in two primary ways:
- The Anointing of the Messiah who is the Most Holy
- The Anointing of the Most Holy Place

Either interpretation fits within a messianic expectation and ultimate sanctification of God’s redemptive plan.

Daniel 9:25 – The Structure of the 69 Heptads

“And you are to know and understand, from the going forth of the command [or ‘decree’; literally, the Hebrew word dābār, meaning ‘word’] to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, until Messiah the Prince [Hebrew: nāgîd], there will be seven heptads and sixty-two heptads.”
(Daniel 9:25)

This verse outlines one continuous prophetic timeline broken into two key installments:

Seven heptads (7 × 7 = 49 years): This period refers to the initial rebuilding of Jerusalem—its streets, walls, and infrastructure. From the command to rebuild Jerusalem until its completion, it will take 49 years.
Sixty-two heptads (62 × 7 = 434 years): This period extends from the completion of the rebuilding to the coming of “Messiah the Prince.” it will be 434 years.

Together, these two segments total:

7 heptads + 62 heptads = 69 heptads, or 49+434 = 483 years.

Significantly, the 70th heptad (the last 7 years) is not included in this count—it is held in abeyance, meaning it is temporarily suspended or inactive. It does not come into focus until verse 27, which describes a final seven-year period yet to be fulfilled.

Please pay very careful attention to the Terminus a quo (the starting point) and the Terminus ad quem (the finishing point) of Daniel’s prophecy. Daniel 9:25 outlines a total of 483 years from (Terminus a quo) the issuing of the decree to rebuild Jerusalem to (Terminus ad quem) the appearance of the Messiah, leaving the 70th heptad as a distinct, future period.

Dabar ≠ Decree?

In Daniel 9:25 the phrase often translated “from the going forth of the commandment” is in Hebrew מֹצָא דָבָר (môtsâ’ dâbâr), literally “from the going out of the word.” Critics sometimes object that rendering dâbâr as “decree” is a distortion, but the charge doesn’t really hold up when you consider how the word functions. Dâbâr is indeed the common Hebrew term for “word”, yet in certain contexts it takes on the force of an authoritative order—as in Daniel 9:23 where yâtsâ’ dâbâr means “the word/command went forth.” The companion term môtsâ’ intensifies this sense of something issuing forth with effect, used elsewhere for the rising sun (Psalm 19:6) or a spring bursting from the ground (Isaiah 41:18). In other words, the phrase is not simply about abstract speech but about a word that has real, binding consequence. Translating it as “decree” is therefore not a Christian imposition but a legitimate reflection of the Hebrew’s semantic range. The real interpretive question is not whether “decree” is the right word, but whose decree is intended—God’s proclamation of restoration or the royal edicts of Persian kings like Cyrus, Darius, or Artaxerxes. The text doesn’t exactly say. It could be either. The ambiguity lies in the source, not in the translation.

Non-Possible Starting Point: The Decree of Cyrus

When considering which royal decree marks the beginning of the prophetic countdown in Daniel 9:25, it is essential to examine the decrees historically issued concerning Jerusalem. Daniel received this vision around 538/539 B.C. (cf. Daniel 9:1), and the first significant decree following that time came from Cyrus the Great.

The Decree of Cyrus: What It Actually Authorized

Cyrus’s decree is recorded in 2 Chronicles 36:23, Ezra 1:1–4 and Ezra 6:3

“This is what Cyrus king of Persia says: “‘The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah. Any of his people among you may go up, and may the Lord their God be with them.’” – 2 Chr 36:23

In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah, the Lord moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm and also to put it in writing:

²“This is what Cyrus king of Persia says:

“‘The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah. ³Any of his people among you may go up to Jerusalem in Judah and build the temple of the Lord, the God of Israel, the God who is in Jerusalem, and may their God be with them. ⁴And in any locality where survivors may now be living, the people are to provide them with silver and gold, with goods and livestock, and with freewill offerings for the temple of God in Jerusalem.’” – Ezra 1:1-4

³In the first year of King Cyrus, the king issued a decree concerning the temple of God in Jerusalem:

Let the temple be rebuilt as a place to present sacrifices, and let its foundations be laid. It is to be sixty cubits^[a] high and sixty cubits wide, – Ezra 6:3

This decree, issued in 538 or 537 B.C., was clear in its purpose: it authorized the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem—not the restoration of the city itself. This distinction is crucial. Daniel 9:25 requires a decree to “restore and rebuild Jerusalem”—not just its temple.

Archaeological Confirmation: The Cyrus Cylinder

Further support comes from archaeology. The Cyrus Cylinder, discovered in 1879 and dated to 539 B.C., documents Cyrus’s broader policy of releasing conquered peoples and allowing them to return to their homelands to rebuild their temples—not their cities. Cyrus hoped that, in doing so, the gods of these nations would bless him. This cylinder confirms that Cyrus’s decree had religious—not civic—intent.

Thus, Cyrus’s decree does not fulfill the requirement of Daniel 9:25, which clearly speaks of the rebuilding of the city of Jerusalem, including its streets and walls (see Daniel 9:25b).

What About Isaiah 44:28

²⁶Who confirms the word of His servant,
And performs the counsel of His messengers;
Who says to Jerusalem, ‘You shall be inhabited,’
To the cities of Judah, ‘You shall be built,’
And I will raise up her waste places;
²⁷Who says to the deep, ‘Be dry!
And I will dry up your rivers’;
²⁸Who says of Cyrus, ‘He is My shepherd,
And he shall perform all My pleasure,
Saying to Jerusalem, “You shall be built,”
And to the temple, “Your foundation shall be laid.” ’ – Isaiah 44:26-28

This is what the Septuagint has to say in regards to Isaiah 44:26-28:

and confirming the word of his servant, and verifying the counsel of his messengers: who says to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be inhabited; and to the cities of Idumea, Ye shall be built, and her desert places shall spring forth.

27Who says to the deep, Thou shalt be dried up, and I will dry up the rivers.

28Who bids Cyrus be wise, and he shall perform all my will: who says to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built, and I will lay the foundation of my holy house

And the Latin Vulgate Isaiah 44:26-28:

²⁶That raise up the word of my servant and perform the counsel of my messengers, who say to Jerusalem: Thou shalt be inhabited: and to the cities of Juda: You shall be built, and I will raise up the wastes thereof.

²⁷Who say to the deep: Be thou desolate, and I will dry up thy rivers.

²⁸Who say to Cyrus: Thou art my shepherd, and thou shalt perform all my pleasure. Who say to Jerusalem: Thou shalt be built: and to the temple: Thy foundations shall be laid.

The Hebrew, the Septuagint (LXX), and the Vulgate all agree unequivocally that it is God Himself who is speaking in Isaiah 44:28—not Cyrus. The verse does not record what Cyrus will decree, but rather what God will accomplish through him. The emphasis is not on Cyrus’s personal command, but on the divine initiative being carried out through his actions. By appointing Cyrus to set the Jews free and authorize the rebuilding of the Temple, God is initiating a process that will ultimately lead to the full restoration of Jerusalem. Cyrus is thus the instrument, not the source, and the rebuilding of the city unfolds as a consequence of the Temple’s reconstruction. Cyrus is the initiator of the temple’s restoration, which starts the broader redemptive process that would eventually include the rebuilding of Jerusalem — a process continued under Darius and Artaxerxes. That’s why Isaiah refers to Cyrus idiomatically — crediting him with the whole movement, even if he didn’t fulfill every phase personally.

What about 45:13?

“He will build My city and let My exiles go free…” – Isaiah 45:13

This verse must be understood idiomatically rather than literally. It does not mean Cyrus literally rebuilt Jerusalem. In fact, Cyrus never went to Jerusalem, nor did he oversee any rebuilding of the city itself. Instead, Isaiah is using a Hebraic expression where a person is credited with initiating an action, even if they did not carry it out personally.

This principle appears elsewhere in Scripture. For example:

1 Thessalonians 2:14–16 says the Jews “killed the Lord Jesus”, even though the Romans carried out the execution. The Jews are held responsible because they caused or initiated the events leading to His death.
2 Samuel 12:9 – Nathan to David: “You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword.” But David did not kill Uriah directly. He orchestrated Uriah’s death by ordering Joab to place him in the front lines of battle. Yet, God (through Nathan) holds David responsible as though he personally committed the act.
1 Samuel 6:6 – “Why then do you harden your hearts as the Egyptians and Pharaoh hardened their hearts? When He did mighty things among them, did they not let the people go?” This refers to the stubbornness of Pharaoh, which is described in several Exodus passages where Scripture states that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exodus 9:12; 10:1, 20), while other verses say Pharaoh hardened his own heart (Exodus 8:15). This shows the biblical principle that God did not force Pharaoh to sin but allowed or judicially confirmed Pharaoh’s stubborn choices, using them to accomplish His divine purposes, even as Pharaoh remained responsible for his decisions. So God is attributed with the “hardening” when in reality it was Pharaoh our of his own free will.

In the same way, Cyrus is credited with “building the city” because he began a process that would eventually lead there, but he did not issue a decree to rebuild Jerusalem itself. His role was limited to restoring worship via the temple.

Another reason why it could not have been Cyrus is because in Persian law, a king could not undo or outright contradict a previously given decree/law:

Daniel 6:8
“Now, O king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not.”

Daniel 6:12
“…The king answered and said, The thing is true, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not.”

Daniel 6:15
“Know, O king, that the law of the Medes and Persians is, That no decree nor statute which the king establisheth may be changed.”

Esther 1:19
“If it please the king, let there go a royal commandment from him, and let it be written among the laws of the Persians and the Medes, that it be not altered…”

Esther 8:8
“…for the writing which is written in the king’s name, and sealed with the king’s ring, may no man reverse.”

However, when complaints reach Artaxerxes that the city of Jerusalem is being rebuilt, which would not have happened if Cyrus had ordered a decree, but if it did, he contradicts the decree of Cyrus by ordering to stop the Jews from working on the city until he gives out a royal decree himself:

Ezra 4:21 – Now give the command to make these men cease, that this city may not be built until the command is given by me.

In contrast, when king Darius I found the previous king Cyrus’ decree to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem, he gave a decree warning anyone who would interfere with Cyrus’ decree:

Ezra 6:7, 11-12 – Let the work of this house of God alone; let the governor of the Jews and the elders of the Jews build this house of God on its site…Also I issue a decree that whoever alters this edict, let a timber be pulled from his house and erected, and let him be hanged on it; and let his house be made a refuse heap because of this. And may the God who causes His name to dwell there destroy any king or people who put their hand to alter it, or to destroy this house of God which is in Jerusalem. I Darius issue a decree; let it be done diligently.

If Cyrus had also ordered the rebuilding of the city and its walls, Artaxerxes had no legal right to alter that decision and he would not have decreed a law that explicitly contradicted Cyrus’ law. Eventually Artaxerxes did issue a decree to continue building the temple as well as start rebuild the city. Let’s go on to see what these decrees are:

2 Possible Answers

1. Artaxerxes to Nehemiah (Nehemiah 2:5-8)

⁵And I said to the king, “If it pleases the king, and if your servant has found favor in your sight, I ask that you send me to Judah, to the city of my fathers’ tombs, that I may rebuild it.”

⁶Then the king said to me (the queen also sitting beside him), “How long will your journey be? And when will you return?” So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time.

⁷Furthermore I said to the king, “If it pleases the king, let letters be given to me for the governors of the region beyond ^[c]the River, that they must permit me to pass through till I come to Judah, ⁸and a letter to Asaph the keeper of the king’s forest, that he must give me timber to make beams for the gates of the ^[d]citadel which pertains to the ^[e]temple, for the city wall, and for the house that I will occupy.” And the king granted them to me according to the good hand of my God upon me.

Nehemiah 2:1 tells us exactly when this decree was given:

“… In the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes” (Nehemiah 2:1)

The Bible says the event happened in the month of Nisan during his 20th year. Artaxerxes became king in 465 BC. That means his 20th year reign would be the year 444 BC. So in 444BC, Artaxerxes I, the king of Persia, granted Nehemiah’s request to rebuild Jerusalem. Nehemiah was a Jewish official who asked for permission to travel to Judah and restore the city of Jerusalem. The king not only allowed it but also provided him with timber for the gates and walls of the city.

Length of Prophetic Year (360 Days)

The Bible often refers to a 360-day year for prophetic events. This is different from our modern calendar of 365 days in a year. Here’s how it works:

Genesis 7:11 and Genesis 8:4 mention 5 months = 150 days, which equals 30 days per month.
Revelation 12:6 (as well as Daniel 9:27) talk about 3.5 years which in verse 14 is 1,260 days, fitting the 360-day year. Revelation 13:5 equates this to 42 months.
So Time, times, half a time = 3 and a half years = 42 months = 1,260 days.

So, the Bible uses 360 days for a prophetic year, unlike our solar calendar which has 365 days a year.

The Calculation

So, from the decree of Artaxerxes in 444 BC, until the Messiah, there will be 69 weeks (or 483 years). Let’s see where this gets us:

Calculation:

69 × 7 (69 seven’s) × 360 days = 173,880 days

The total number of prophetic days from the decree to the Messiah’s arrival would be 173, 880 days.

If we take these 173,880 prophetic days and calculate this historically using the normal 365 days a year calender (solar calendar) including an extra day every 4 years (leap years), the 173,880 prophetic days becomes 476 years and 25 days (Gregorian). This is done by dividing 173,880 prophetic days by 365.24219879. Adding 476 years to 444 BC gets up A.D. 33.

To make this even more stronger, according to Jewish tradition, if no day is mentioned, it usually means the first day of the month. So if we go with this tradition, Nisan 1 in 444 BC in on our modern calendar (Gregorian Calender) would be March 5, 444 BC. As we saw, adding 476 years gets us to 33AD. However, 476 years equals only 173,855 days. This leaves us with 25 days to account for.

When you add those 25 days to March 5, 444 BC, you arrive at March 30, A.D. 33, which is the exact day of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Nisan 10, A.D. 33), the very same year and day Jesus came in Jerusalem riding on Donkey, publicly proclaiming Himself as the Messiah of Zechariah 9:9.

2. Artaxerxes to Ezra (Nehemiah 1)

A more likely explanation, and the explanation I prefer, is that there was an earlier decree before Nehemiah’s time, which already authorized the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls. When Nehemiah heard from his brother Hanani that:

“the wall of Jerusalem is also broken down, and its gates are burned with fire” (Nehemiah 1:3, NKJV)

he was deeply distressed. Nehemiah 1:4 says,

“So it was, when I heard these words, that I sat down and wept, and mourned for many days; I was fasting and praying before the God of heaven.”

This emotional response suggests Nehemiah had expected the walls to have already been rebuilt, indicating that a previous royal decree may have permitted that very thing.

King Artexerxes began to reign in the year 465BC. This earlier decree came in 457 B.C., during the seventh year of King Artaxerxes I, when Ezra led a return to Jerusalem as Ezra 7:6-8 (NKJV) states:

“This Ezra came up from Babylon; and he was a skilled scribe in the Law of Moses, which the LORD God of Israel had given. The king granted him all his request, according to the hand of the LORD his God upon him. Some of the children of Israel, the priests, the Levites, the singers, the gatekeepers, and the Nethinim came up to Jerusalem in the seventh year of King Artaxerxes. And Ezra came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king.

Notice the similarity to Nehemiah 2:8, where the king also grants Nehemiah’s request “according to the good hand of my God upon me.”

Ezra didn’t come alone. Ezra 7:7 indicates he was joined by Levites, singers, gatekeepers, Nethinim (temple servants), and some of the children of Israel. After arriving in Jerusalem, Ezra first devoted himself to spiritual and moral reform. Ezra 7:10 (NKJV) says, “For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the Law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach statutes and ordinances in Israel.”

Ezra was also given broad authority. Ezra 7:18 says the king allowed him to use the leftover silver and gold “as it seems good to you and your brethren to do with the rest of the silver and the gold, do it according to the will of your God.” Furthermore, Ezra 7:25-26 (NKJV) declares:

“And you, Ezra, according to your God-given wisdom, set magistrates and judges who may judge all the people… and teach those who do not know them. Whoever will not observe the law of your God and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily on him—whether it be death, or banishment, or confiscation of goods, or imprisonment.”

Such authority implies Ezra was fully empowered to oversee not just religious matters, but also civil protections—presupposing the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls to safeguard the temple and Jewish law.

Ezra himself refers to this authority in his public prayer:
Ezra 9:9 (NKJV) says,

“For we were slaves. Yet our God did not forsake us in our bondage; but He extended mercy to us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to revive us, to repair the house of our God, to rebuild its ruins, and to give us a wall in Judah and Jerusalem.”

It couldn’t be any more clear. They were there to rebuild the city walls as Daniel 9 pinpoints. Although the word “wall” may refer to a metaphorical wall meaning “protection” as some commentators point out, the verse itself surrounds this word with other words which are clearly not metaphorical, such as “repair the house of our God” and “rebuild its ruins”. So contextually, this refers to a literal wall in Jerusalem.

Unfortunately, the Bible doesn’t give specific historical details between 457 and 446 B.C. But seeing the chronology, Ezra attempted to rebuild the walls during this period and was either thwarted by opposition or discouraged by the apathy of the returned exiles. This would explain Nehemiah’s shock and sorrow in Nehemiah 1:3, upon learning that Jerusalem’s walls and gates were still destroyed despite the earlier decree. As a matter of fact, this is perfectly in line with Daniel 9 since it says:

“…The street shall be built again, and the wall,
Even in troublesome times.” – Daniel 9:25

Ezra’s attempt to rebuild Jerusalem and restore temple life was met with significant discouragement and opposition, aligning perfectly with Daniel 9:25, which prophesied that “the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublesome times.” Although Ezra had royal permission and authority (Ezra 7:6, 18, 25–26), his efforts to restore Jerusalem faced resistance from surrounding enemies (Ezra 4:1–5) and apathy among the returnees (Ezra 9:4). This opposition likely hindered or delayed the full rebuilding of the city’s defenses, as reflected in Ezra’s prayer acknowledging God had granted “a wall in Judah and Jerusalem” (Ezra 9:9)—implying intent or partial progress, but not yet fulfillment. This troubled period of rebuilding, with political tension, spiritual decline, and external threats, precisely mirrors Daniel’s vision that Jerusalem would be restored in the midst of adversity.

As we just saw, Daniel 9:25 states that “It will again be built with street and moat [walls], even in troublesome times,” indicating that the rebuilding of Jerusalem—its infrastructure, streets, and fortifications—would occur under pressure and hardship. From this, it is reasonable to deduce that the initial phase of restoration, covering the city’s structural and civic completeness, would span the first “seven sevens” or 49 years. Historical context supports this: beginning with the decree in 457 B.C. (Artaxerxes’ commission to Ezra), the city’s walls and public structures faced interruptions, opposition, and slow progress. However, by around 408–400 B.C., the physical reconstruction of Jerusalem—its moat, streets, and defenses—was completed. This fulfills the prophecy’s timeline and reinforces that God’s purposes for Jerusalem unfolded exactly as foretold, despite adversity.

Thus, if we take 457 B.C.—the year of Ezra’s commission—as the starting point (terminus a quo) for the 69 “weeks” (i.e., 483 years) mentioned in Daniel 9:25, the calculation (457-483) leads us to -26, or A.D. 26. However, since there is no such thing as 0AD, between 1 B.C. and 1 A.D, the total lands on A.D. 27, which is the year of Jesus’ baptism and the beginning of His public ministry, where He is anointed with the Holy Spirit.

This remarkably accurate prophetic fulfilment underscores the divine origin of Daniel’s vision—no human calculation alone could have predicted the coming of the Messiah with such precision.

After the 69th Week, before the 70th Week

Daniel 9:26a

In Daniel 9:26a, the prophetic vision continues with a deeply significant statement:

“And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself…”

This moment marks a pivotal point in redemptive history. The phrase “after the sixty-two weeks” refers to a time following the initial 7 weeks and the subsequent 62 weeks—69 weeks in total—leading to the arrival of the Messiah. This is not an immediate transition into the 70th week, which will begin later as Daniel mentions, but a prophetic pause in which major events unfold.

The prophecy declares that the “Messiah shall be cut off,” using the Hebrew word yikaret, which signifies a violent and untimely death. This term, although different, is similar to that of Isaiah 53:8:

“For He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of My people He was stricken.” (NKJV)

This is what Barnes Notes on the Bible Commentary says concerning “cut off”:

Be cut off – The word used here (כרת kârath) means, properly, to cut, to cut off, as a part of a garment, 1 Samuel 24:5 (6), 11 (12); a branch of a tree, Numbers 13:23; the prepuce, Exodus 4:25; the head, 1 Samuel 17:51; 1 Samuel 5:4; to cut down trees, Deuteronomy 19:5; Isaiah 14:8; Isaiah 44:14; Jeremiah 10:3; Jeremiah 22:7. Then it means to cut off persons, to destroy, Deuteronomy 20:20; Jeremiah 11:19; Genesis 9:11; Psalm 37:9; Proverbs 2:22; Proverbs 10:31, et al. scepe. The phrase, “that soul shall be cut off from his people,” “from the midst of the people,” “from Israel,” “from the congregation,” etc., occurs frequently in the Scriptures (compare Genesis 17:14; Leviticus 7:20-21; Numbers 15:30; Numbers 19:13, Numbers 19:20; Exodus 12:19, et al.), and denotes the punishment of death in general, without defining the manner. “It is never the punishment of exile.” – Gesenius, Lexicon The proper notion or meaning here is, undoubtedly, that of being cut off by death, and would suggest the idea of a “violent” death, or a death by the agency of others.It would apply to one who was assassinated, or murdered by a mob, or who was appointed to death by a judicial decree; or it might be applied to one who was cut down in battle, or by the pestilence, or by lightning, or by shipwreck, but it would not naturally or properly be applied to one who had lived out his days, and died a peaceful death. We always now connect with the word the idea of some unusual interposition, as when we speak of one who is cut down in middle life. The ancient translators understood it of a violent death. So the Latin “Vulgate, occidetur Christus;” Syriac, “the Messiah shall be slain,” or put to death. It need not be here said that this phrase would find a complete fulfillment in the manner in which the Lord Jesus was put to death, nor that this is the very language in which it is proper now to describe the manner in which he was removed. He was cut off by violence; by a judicial decree: by a mob; in the midst of his way, etc. If it should be admitted that the angel meant to describe the manner of his death, he could not have found a single word that would have better expressed it.

This is clearly a reference to the crucifixion of Christ at Golgotha, around A.D. 30. The Messiah would be executed not for His own wrongdoing—“not for Himself”—but as a substitutionary sacrifice for the sins of others. The Septuagint reads “shall have nothing,” which underscores His rejection and the absence of worldly recognition. The NASB and NRSV render it as “shall have no one,” emphasizing His isolation in death, a fulfillment of Isaiah 53:3 and Mark 14:50, where He was “despised and forsaken of men” and abandoned by His disciples.

Daniel 9:26 introduces a significant chronological distinction that many overlook: the prophecy says that after the 62 weeks (which follow the initial 7), the Messiah will be “cut off.” This phrasing alone implies that the Messiah’s death occurs after the 69 weeks, not within them—opening the door to a necessary and deliberate interval.

What follows is the last and final week in verse 27, a reference to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, an event that occurred in A.D. 70—decades after Jesus’s crucifixion.

Daniel 9:26b

…And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Following the Messiah’s rejection and death, Daniel 9:26 shifts to describe the consequences that would fall upon the very city that had turned Him away.

Here, the Romans are described as the prople of the Prince who is already identified as the Messiah.

The idea that the “people of the prince” in Daniel 9:26 could refer to the Romans—while the “prince” refers to the Messiah—is valid when viewed through the broader biblical pattern in which God uses pagan nations and leaders to fulfill His purposes. In Scripture, being called God’s “people” or “anointed” doesn’t always mean spiritual allegiance, but rather being instruments of His will. For instance, Babylon, a pagan empire, is described as God’s servant (Jeremiah 25:9) because God used it to bring judgment on Judah. Similarly, Egypt is called “My people” in Isaiah 19:25, not because they were covenantally faithful, but because they would one day be included in God’s redemptive plan. Cyrus, a Persian king and idol worshiper, is explicitly called God’s “anointed” (Isaiah 45:1), because he was chosen to release the Jews from exile. These examples show that God can and does work through ungodly nations or rulers to accomplish His purposes of judgment or blessing. Therefore, the Romans being described as the people of the Messiah’s coming judgment aligns with this biblical pattern: God using even hostile nations to execute His sovereign plans.

Jesus quoted Daniel 9 about Rome

A clear reference to Daniel 9 as being fulfilled in Jesus as the Messiah is in Matthew 24:15–17 (NKJV), Jesus gives a sobering warning:

“Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes.”

Here, Jesus directly references Daniel’s prophecies, particularly Daniel 9:27 and 11:31–35, which originally referred to the Greek tyrant Antiochus Epiphanes—a brutal oppressor of the Jewish people in the 2nd century B.C. Antiochus desecrated the Temple by outlawing Jewish worship and sacrificing a pig on the altar, an act Daniel foresaw with uncanny precision. Yet Jesus sees Antiochus as a type or foreshadow of a far greater and more devastating “abomination”—fulfilled when Roman armies under General Titus surrounded and destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70, razing the Temple and ending the sacrificial system. In Daniel 9:27, it is prophesied that in the middle of the 70th week, the Messiah would bring an end to sacrifice and offering—not merely through Temple destruction, but by fulfilling the sacrificial system through His atoning death. Thus, the historical abomination under Antiochus serves as a prophetic template, magnified in the Roman destruction—showing how Daniel’s visions echo through multiple layers of fulfillment. (for more information, see my Article – “Daniel 2, 7 & 8”)

The 70th Week and the Fall of Jerusalem

Daniel 9:27 reads:

“And he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering…”

“He” refers to the nearest antecedent who is the Messiah. He confirms (makes true) God’s covenant—specifically the covenantal curses outlined in the Torah (especially in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28). “And he shall confirm the covenant” literally means “he shall make strong” (Hebrew: vehigbîr). The phrase conveys the idea of strengthening, securing, or firmly establishing something—specifically, the covenant—making it stable and reliable. This is certainly the case as a few verses prior, in Daniel 9:11-13, the covenant God made with Israelites was confirmed by the reality of its stipulations. Here it carries the idea of making true or testifying to somethig as true or bringing about the stipulations of an already etablished covenant, that of the Torah and that of the Gospel in Matthew 24, where Jesus made a covenant with His followers, “the many”(cf. Isaiah 53:8), that the City will be destroyed.

This final “week” in Daniel’s prophecy—a seven-year period—is clearly fulfilled in the events surrounding the Jewish-Roman War (66–73 AD) and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

The revolt erupted in 66 AD, sparked by decades of Roman oppression, particularly high taxation and increasing interference in Jewish religious life. Tensions reached a breaking point under the Roman procurator Gessius Florus, whose brutality provoked open rebellion. What began as isolated unrest quickly escalated into full-scale war. Groups like the Zealots and Sicarii rejected all compromise, determined to fight to the death. This internal strife fractured any unified approach.

So, when Messiah destroys Jerusalem through “His people”, He confirms God’s covenant promises regarding judgment for disobedience (Dan 9:11-13).

Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 lay out both blessings for obedience and curses for rebellion. Consider this:

Deuteronomy 28:49–52 (NKJV):

“The Lord will bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flies…
They shall besiege you at all your gates until your high and fortified walls, in which you trust, come down…
They shall besiege you at all your gates throughout all your land…”

This language perfectly parallels the Roman siege of Jerusalem in AD 70.

When Daniel says “he shall confirm a covenant”, and that desolation is poured out, this echoes God’s words centuries earlier about what would happen if Israel broke the covenant. Rome—though unaware—is fulfilling God’s declared judgment for 7 years, from 66-73AD.

Verse 27 expands on Verse 26

In Daniel 9:27, it starts with he word “And” in Hebrew is a conjunctive waw, literally “And”. This doesn’t automatically imply the events described in verse 27 follow chronological after 26. Rather its continuing to describe the second half of verse 26 in greater depth. Daniel 9:26 simply mentions the “aftermath summary” of the what happens after the 69th week: the Messiah would be “cut off,” and the city and sanctuary would face destruction. Verse 26 doesn’t exactly say these events instantly fall into the final 7 week of years, it just situates them broadly in the post-69th landscape. Only when the prophecy moves into verse 27 does it zoom in and describe what actually happens within the final “week.” This structure allows the prophecy to mention both the crucifixion (AD 30) and Jerusalem’s destruction (AD 70) as outgrowths of the 69th week without forcing them into the precise boundaries of the 70th, leaving room for a gap before the last week begins.

So the layout goes:

Verse 25: 69 weeks

Verse 26: no weeks stated

Verse 27: 1 week (the 70th)

The Holy Spirit intentionally arranged the prophecy so that verse 26 sits between week 69 and week 70. From 27AD until 65AD, God gave the Jews 38 years to repent before He enacted the final “week”. The patience of our God. So the “weeks” are only counted in so far as the events described in them are happening. For example, 10 working days (assuming the standard Mon-Fri) is actually 14 calender days. You’re working 10 days in 2 weeks. Working days count only during the period when the activity is actually happening. When the activity pauses (weekend), you don’t count them as “working days”. The next working day (Monday) really is the next one in the series (after last Friday), even though there was a gap (weekend) in the calendar. Likewise, the 70 weeks are only counted when the events described within them are actually occuring. Hence:

7 weeks = Rebuilding of Temple

62 weeks = Coming of the Messiah

1 week = Destruction of the Temple

At first glance, some might assume these are entirely separate events, sequentially happening after verse 26. But when we focus on cause and effect, the relationship between verses 26 and 27 becomes clearer and deeper.

Reading the text too literally and chronologically its going to have some problems:

Daniel 9:25 “Know therefore and understand,
That from the going forth of the command
To restore and build Jerusalem
Until Messiah the Prince,
There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks;
The street shall be built again, and the wall,
Even in troublesome times.

Reading this too literally will imply that after the Decree was given, Messiah came first BEFORE the building of the City and then the city was built, which is not the case. Instead, its written in terms of cause and effects where because the City is built, the Messiah will arrive.

Likewise verse 26 states:

Daniel 9:26 “And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Now its because Messiah is cut off, the City is destroyed.

This proves that Daniel 9:26-27 isn’t to be read chronologically since it implies that the 2nd Temple was destroyed in verse 26 and a 3rd Temple destroyed in the future which goes against Jesus’ applicatiom of this text to the 2nd Temple (Matthew 24:1-2).

To strengthen our case, look at the comparisons:

and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. – Daniel 9:26

and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.” – Daniel 9:27

Notice the similarities:

Its end = complete destruction
A flood = poured out
Desolations = makes desolate
Determined = decreed

The destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in verse 26 is not a different event from the desolation mentioned in verse 27; rather, verse 27 expounds or elaborates on it.

Thus, verse 27 reiterates and deepens the picture of what was introduced in verse 26, especially the temple’s downfall, but with covenantal and sacrificial implications added in.

Jesus Himself interprets the destruction of the temple as a direct consequence of Jerusalem rejecting Him:

“…they will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”
(Luke 19:44)

This confirms the pattern in Daniel 9:

God sends the Messiah → He is rejected → Temple and city are destroyed.

So, Daniel 9:26–27 must be understood not as a straightforward timeline, but as a prophetic message showing cause and effect.

Messiah – Jerusalem Pattern

Notice that pattern that emerges between the Messiah and Jerusalem:

“Seventy ^[e]weeks are determined
For your people and for your holy city [CITY],
To finish the transgression,
^[f]To make an end of sins,
To make reconciliation for iniquity,
To bring in everlasting righteousness,
To seal up vision and prophecy,
And to anoint ^[g]the Most Holy. [MESSIAH]

²⁵“Know therefore and understand,
That from the going forth of the command
To restore and build Jerusalem [CITY]
Until Messiah the Prince, [MESSIAH]
There shall be seven weeks [CITY] and sixty-two weeks [MESSIAH];
The ^[h]street shall be built again, and the ^[i]wall,
Even in troublesome times. [CITY]

²⁶“And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall ^[j]be cut off, but not for Himself; [MESSIAH]
And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. [CITY]
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

²⁷And he shall confirm a ^[k]covenant with many for one week; [MESSIAH]
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the ^[l]desolate.” [CITY]

Here we that Daniel switches between the Messiah and the City, showing their relationship and cgonnection. The passage in Daniel 9:24–27 is often misunderstood as purely chronological, but it follows more of a cause-and-effect structure. Here’s the theological logic:

Jerusalem is rebuilt (first 7 weeks) — this is God’s gracious provision for Israel. – The Messiah arrives (after the next 62 weeks) — Jesus comes at the end of the 69th week.
The Messiah is rejected and “cut off” — Israel does not accept Him (Daniel 9:26a). – As a consequence, Jerusalem and the Temple are destroyed again (Daniel 9:26b–27) — just as Jesus predicted (Luke 19:41–44).

So, the restoration of Jerusalem served a redemptive purpose: to prepare for the arrival of the Messiah. But since Israel, as a nation, rejected Him, the city and Temple were again made desolate — not as a random historical event, but as a divine judgment (cf. Matthew 23:37–38).

He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. – Daniel 9:27

Although, at His crucifixion, Jesus spiritually and theologically ended the need for temple sacrifices, His once-for-all atonement made the entire Levitical system obsolete (Rom 10:4; Heb 10:14), this is referring to the Jewish sacrifices, the visible Jewish sacrificial system. Though the temple rituals continued physically, their power and necessity ended in God’s eyes. The veil torn in the temple (Matt. 27:51) was a clear sign that the old covenant access to God through sacrifices was now fulfilled in Christ.

The final, visible, and irreversible end of the sacrificial system came with the destruction of the Second Temple by the Romans under Titus. After this, there was literally no more place to perform sacrifices. This was God’s way of closing the system that Jesus had already fulfilled.

Luke 21:6 – Jesus prophesied: “Not one stone will be left on another.”
Matthew 24:15 – Jesus referenced the “abomination of desolation” from Daniel, pointing to the Roman destruction.
Hebrews 8:13 (written before 70 AD) – “What is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”

In conclusion, verse 27 Does need to repeat Messiah’s death in verse 26 because verse 27 is a reiteration or a “zoom in” on the destruction of the Temple.

Jesus fulfilled all 6 requirements

1. To Terminate Transgression

Meaning:
“Terminate transgression” means to bring an end to rebellion or sin against God. It implies a decisive breaking of humanity’s ongoing sinful condition and rebellion against God’s law.

Jesus’ Fulfillment:
Jesus came to put an end to the power of sin by offering Himself as the perfect sacrifice. Through His death and resurrection, the power of sin was decisively defeated, terminating transgression for those who believe in Him.

Supporting NT Verses:

Romans 6:10-11: “The death He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life He lives, He lives to God.”
Colossians 2:13-14: “He has forgiven you all trespasses, having canceled the record of debt that stood against us…”
Hebrews 9:26: Jesus “appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.”

2. To End Sin

Meaning:
Ending sin means stopping sin’s dominion over humanity and its consequences. It refers to the removal of sin’s guilt and its power.

Jesus’ Fulfillment:
Jesus’ sacrifice takes away the guilt of sin, enabling a new life free from sin’s ultimate condemnation.

Supporting NT Verses:

1 John 3:5: “You know that He appeared to take away sins, and in Him there is no sin.”
Romans 8:3-4: God sent His Son “to condemn sin in the flesh.”
2 Corinthians 5:21: “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us.”

3. To Expiate Iniquity

Meaning:
To expiate iniquity means to atone or make full satisfaction for sin and wrongdoing, thus cleansing guilt.

Jesus’ Fulfillment:
Jesus’ blood is the perfect atonement, cleansing believers from sin and restoring their relationship with God.

Supporting NT Verses:

1 John 2:2: “He is the propitiation for our sins.”
Hebrews 10:12: “He offered one sacrifice for sins forever.”
Ephesians 1:7: “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.”

4. To Bring in Everlasting Righteousness

Meaning:
This means establishing a permanent state of righteousness for God’s people, a right standing before God that lasts forever.

Jesus’ Fulfillment:
Jesus imparts His perfect righteousness to believers, giving them an eternal right standing with God, not by their works but by faith.

Supporting NT Verses:

2 Corinthians 5:21: “…that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”
Romans 3:22: “The righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe.”
Philippians 3:9: “…not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ.”

5. To Seal Up Vision and Prophecy

Daniel 9:24 is not about all prophecy ever given [it doesnt say “all prophecy and vision”] — it’s about the events and prophecies concerning this 490-year (70-week) period decreed for Daniel’s people and holy city (Israel and Jerusalem).

“Seventy ‘weeks’ are determined for your people and your holy city… to seal up vision and prophecy.” (Daniel 9:24)

So to “seal up vision and prophecy” means:

Bring to completion the specific visions and prophecies related to the redemption of Israel, the coming of the Messiah, and the fate of the Temple and city within this 490-year window.
This includes prophetic words about:
- The rebuilding of Jerusalem (e.g., in Nehemiah and Ezra)
- The coming and death of Messiah (e.g., Isaiah 53, Psalm 22)
- The destruction of Jerusalem (e.g., Daniel 9:26, Matthew 24:2)
- The establishment of a New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31–34)

By the end of the 70th week (around 70 AD), these specific prophecies would be “sealed up” — i.e., brought to fulfillment, validated, and concluded.

Athanasius of Alexandria gives another interpretation, one equally valid:

So the Jews are indulging in fiction, and transferring present time to future. When did
prophet and vision cease from Israel? Was it not when Christ came, the Holy One of holies? It is,
in fact, a sign and notable proof of the coming of the Word that Jerusalem no longer stands,
neither is prophet raised up nor vision revealed among them. And it is natural that it should be
so, for when He that was signified had come, what need was there any longer of any to signify
Him? And when the Truth had come, what further need was there of the shadow? On His
account only they prophesied continually, until such time as Essential Righteousness has come,
Who was made the Ransom for the sins of all. For the same reason Jerusalem stood until the
same time, in order that there men might premeditate the types before the Truth was known. So,
of course, once the Holy One of holies had come, both vision and prophecy were sealed. And the
kingdom of Jerusalem ceased at the same time, because kings were to be anointed among them
only until the Holy of holies had been anointed. Moses also prophesies that the kingdom of the
Jews shall stand until His time, saying, “A ruler shall not fail from Judah nor a prince from his
loins, until the things laid up for him shall come and the Expectation of the nations Himself.” (Genesis 49:10)
And that is why the Savior Himself was always proclaiming “The law and the prophets
prophesied until John.” (Matthew 11:13) So if there is still king or prophet or vision among the Jews, they do well to deny that Christ has come; but if there is neither king nor vision, and since that time all prophecy has been sealed and city and temple taken, how can they be so irreligious, how can
they so flaunt the facts, as to deny Christ Who has brought it all about?

On the Incarnation, section 40, Against the Jews

In simple terms, no more prophecies to be added to the Old Testament, hence sealed.

When Athanasius quotes Matthew 11:13 — “The law and the prophets prophesied until John” — he is using it to prove that the Old Testament’s forward-looking prophecy about the coming and revelation of the Messiah had reached its goal in Jesus Christ. In other words, all the prophetic voices and symbols that anticipated who the Redeemer would be, when He would come, and what He would accomplish in His first coming are now complete. The “seal” is God’s sign that these prophecies have been fulfilled and no longer need to be repeated or continued. The “shadow” has given way to the “Truth.” This is why Athanasius also ties the end of prophecy and kingship in Israel to Christ’s arrival: the preparatory system — the prophets, the temple, the kings — had finished its purpose once the true Anointed One appeared.

However, Athanasius’s claim does not mean that every prophecy of the Old Testament has already been fulfilled, or that there is no longer any revelation in the New Testament. He is not denying eschatological or second-coming prophecies — those still await their fulfillment. Nor is he saying that divine revelation stopped entirely; rather, the kind of revelation changed. The old prophetic office that looked forward to the coming of the Messiah has ceased, but revelation continues in a new form through the apostles, who bear witness to what Christ has accomplished and what He will yet bring to completion. So, Athanasius’s point is specific and bounded: the prophetic anticipation of Christ’s first coming (or rather more properly Christ unveiled) is sealed — fulfilled and closed — but the ongoing revelation of His work through the New Testament, and the hope of His second coming, remain open realities grounded in that fulfillment.

6. To Anoint the Most Holy Place

Meaning:
Since the passage is about a number of determined years for the 2nd temple to be destroyed, this cannot be in reference to the Temple, which even if it is its still fulfilled in Messiah, but this refers to Messiah the Prince, who is the Most Holy.

Jesus’ Fulfillment:
Rather than referring to a physical temple or heavenly sanctuary, the phrase “to anoint the Most Holy” finds its ultimate fulfillment in the person of Jesus Himself. He is the “Most Holy One” — the true Messiah — anointed not with oil, but with the Holy Spirit at His baptism (Acts 10:38). In Him, God’s presence dwelled bodily (Colossians 2:9), and He became the focal point of God’s redemptive work.

Supporting NT Verses:

Luke 4:18 – “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me…”
Acts 10:38 – “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power…”
John 1:32-34 – John the Baptist testifies that he saw the Spirit descend and remain on Jesus, identifying Him as the chosen One of God.
John 2:19-21 – Jesus refers to His body as the temple, showing that He is the true dwelling place of God on earth.

Conclusion

When the atonement happens, everything else in Daniel’s list finally has a place to stand. Atonement isn’t just one item among the six; it’s the foundation that carries the weight of the others.

In the logic of covenant repair, the deepest problem is the unresolved breach between God and His people. Once that breach is healed—once sin is dealt with at its root—then the whole sequence can unfold.

Here is what atonement (requirement 3) accomplishes: Finishing the transgression (1) makes sense only if the covenant-breaking guilt has been answered. Ending sin’s power (2) follows naturally once its debt is paid. Everlasting righteousness (4) can begin because the obstacle that blocked it has been removed. Prophecies (5) can reach their intended goal because the core event they anticipated has happened. The Most Holy can be anointed (6) because the restored relationship now allows God’s reign to be established.

All 6 depends on that one act. Atonement is the bedrock, and the other five phrases are the structure built on top of it.

Rabbi Rashi

Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki—better known as Rashi—comments on Daniel 9:24–27. Notably, Rashi, a staunch critic of Christianity, made striking admissions that support key Christian interpretations. He acknowledged that the Messianic age was expected to begin during the period in which Jesus lived, and he recognized that the figure whose death is foretold in Daniel 9:26 appeared around the same time as Jesus’ ministry. In doing so, Rashi’s explanation aligns—perhaps unintentionally—with the Christian view that Daniel foresaw the events leading up to the crucifixion of Christ and the destruction of the Second Temple.

24 Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.

Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed: on Jerusalem from the day of the first destruction in the days of Zedekiah until it will be [destroyed] the second time.

to terminate the transgression and to end sin: so that Israel should receive their complete retribution IN THE EXILE OF TITUS AND HIS SUBJUGATION, in order that their transgressions should terminate, their sins should end, and their iniquities should be expiated, in order to bring upon them eternal righteousness and to anoint upon them (sic) the Holy of Holies: the Ark, the altars, and the holy vessels, which they will bring to them THROUGH THE KING MESSIAH. The number of seventy weeks is four hundred and ninety years. The Babylonian exile was seventy [years] and the Second Temple stood four hundred and twenty [years]. (The Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary)

26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more, and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation.

And after: those weeks.

the anointed one will be cut off: Agrippa, the king of Judea, who was ruling at the time of the destruction, will be slain.

and he will be no more: Heb. וְאֵין לוֹ, and he will not have. The meaning is that he will not be.

the anointed one: Heb. מָשִׁיחַ. This is purely an expression of a prince and a dignitary.

and the city and the Sanctuary: lit. and the city and the Holy.

and the people of the coming monarch will destroy: [The monarch who will come] upon them. THAT IS TITUS AND HIS ARMIES.

and his end will come about by inundation: And his end will be damnation and destruction, for He will inundate the power of his kingdom THROUGH THE MESSIAH.

and until the end of the wars: of Gog the city will exist.

cut off into desolation: a destruction of desolation. (Ibid.)

27 And he will strengthen a covenant for the princes for one week, and half the week he will abolish sacrifice and meal- offering, and on high, among abominations, will be the dumb one, and until destruction and extermination befall the dumb one.

And he will strengthen a covenant for the princes for one week: לָרַבִּים, for the princes, like “and all the officers of (רַבֵּי) the king,” in the Book of Jeremiah (39:13).

will strengthen: TITUS [will strengthen] a covenant with the princes of Israel.

for one week: He will promise them the strengthening of a covenant and peace for seven years, but within the seven years, he will abrogate his covenant.

he will abolish sacrifice and meal-offering: This is what he says in the first vision (8:26): “and in tranquility he will destroy many.” Through a covenant of tranquility, he will destroy them.

and on high, among abominations will be the dumb one: This is a pejorative for pagan deities. i.e., on a high place, among abominations and disgusting things, he will place the dumb one, the pagan deity, which is dumb like a silent stone.

high: Heb. כְּנַף, lit. wing, an expression of height, like the wing of a flying bird.

and until destruction and extermination befall the dumb one: and the ruling of the abomination will endure until the day that the destruction and extermination decreed upon it [will] befall it, IN THE DAYS OF THE KING MESSIAH.

befall the dumb one: Heb…reach; and total destruction will descend upon the image of the pagan deity and upon its worshippers.

Rashi explicitly acknowledges that Daniel’s prophecy regarding the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple was fulfilled when the Roman general Titus laid siege to the city and demolished the sanctuary. He also connects this catastrophic period with the activity of the King Messiah, who he says would anoint the holy artifacts of the sanctuary and subdue the Roman empire.

Remarkably, this suggests that even by Rashi’s own calculations, the Messiah was expected to arrive before the destruction of the Second Temple—placing His appearance firmly in the first century, during the lifetime of Jesus of Nazareth.

However, Rashi’s identification of the “Anointed One” who is “cut off” in Daniel 9:26 as Herod Agrippa raises serious questions. Agrippa’s death by poisoning in 44 AD holds little, if any, theological or redemptive significance. Rashi does not explain how Agrippa’s death could possibly fulfill the prophecy’s promises—to end transgression, atone for iniquity, usher in everlasting righteousness, and anoint the Holy of Holies.

Strikingly, Rashi fails to mention a far more historically and theologically relevant figure: Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified just a few years before Agrippa’s death. Jesus claimed to be the divine Son of God and Messianic King of the Jews, and He explicitly stated that His death would serve as a ransom for many, to bring forgiveness of sins (cf. Matthew 20:28). These claims align far more closely with Daniel’s prophetic themes than anything found in Agrippa’s short and politically fragile reign.

Thus, while Rashi’s effort to sidestep Christian messianism is understandable given his historical context, his interpretation ends up corroborating key elements of the Christian understanding—even as it attempts to deny them.

Talmud

The Gemara responds: Although they might have known that the Second Temple would be destroyed, as the verse speaks of three Temples, did they know when it would be destroyed? Would they have considered that it might occur in their lifetimes, preventing them from sacrificing their offerings? Abaye said: And did they not know when? But isn’t it written: “Seventy sevens are decreed upon your people and upon your sacred city” (Daniel 9:24), which indicates that the Second Temple would be destroyed seventy Sabbatical cycles of seven years after the destruction of the First Temple, which is 490 years. The Gemara answers: And still, did we know on which day it would be destroyed? It was therefore impossible to use this factor as a means to broach the dissolution of their vows. (Nazir, 32b https://www.sefaria.org/Nazir.32b.5-6?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)

The school of Eliyahu taught: Six thousand years is the duration of the world. Two thousand of the six thousand years are characterized by chaos; two thousand years are characterized by Torah, from the era of the Patriarchs until the end of the mishnaic period; and two thousand years are the period of the coming of the Messiah.

(Sanhedrin 97a https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.97a.14?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)

That is the course that history was to take, but due to our sins that time frame increased. The Messiah did not come after four thousand years passed, and furthermore, the years that elapsed since then, which were to have been the messianic era, have elapsed. (Sanhedrin 97b https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.97b.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase “And it declares [veyafe’aḥ] of the end, and does not lie”? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says that Rabbi Yonatan says: May those who calculate the end of days be cursed [tippaḥ], as they would say once the end of days that they calculated arrived and the Messiah did not come, that he will no longer come at all. Rather, the proper behavior is to continue to wait for his coming, as it is stated: “Though it tarry, wait for it.” Lest you say we are expectantly awaiting the end of days and the Holy One, Blessed be He, is not awaiting the end of days and does not want to redeem His people, the verse states: “And therefore will the Lord wait, to be gracious to you; and therefore will He be exalted, to have mercy upon you; for the Lord is a God of judgment; happy are all they who wait for Him” (Isaiah 30:18). (Ibid., https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.97b.9?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)

And seemingly, since we are awaiting the end of days and the Holy One, Blessed be He, is also awaiting the end of days, who is preventing the coming of the Messiah? It is the divine attribute of judgment that prevents his coming, as it is written: “For the Lord is a God of judgment,” and we are not worthy. And since the attribute of judgment prevents the coming of the Messiah and we are not worthy of redemption, why do we await his coming daily? We do so in order to receive a reward for awaiting his coming, as it is stated: “Happy are all they who wait for Him.” (Ibid. https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.97b.9?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)

Here’s a different English rendering of the foregoing references:
The Tanna debe Eliyyahu teaches: The world is to exist six thousand years. In the first two thousand there was desolation;37 two thousand years the Torah flourished;38 and the next two thousand years is the Messianic era,39 but through our many iniquities all these years have been lost.1 (Sanhedrin 97a http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_97.html#PARTb)

37. I.e., no Torah. It is a tradition that Abraham was fifty-two years old when he began to convert men to the worship of the true God; from Adam until then, two thousand years elapsed.

38. I.e., from Abraham’s fifty-second year until one hundred and seventy-two years after the destruction of the second Temple. This does not mean that the Torah should cease thereafter, but is mentioned merely to distinguish it from the next era.

39. I.e., Messiah will come within that period. (Ibid. http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_97.html#97a_37)

1. He should have come at the beginning of the last two thousand years; the delay is due to our sins. (Ibid. http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_97.html#97b_1)

It’s important to note that the Messiah was prophesied to appear precisely at the time Jesus came onto the scene. Unfortunately, because many in the Jewish community rejected Him, rabbinic tradition concluded that the Messiah had not yet come, attributing this to the people’s sins. What they didn’t realize, however, is that Jesus was the promised Messiah who arrived exactly as foretold—right on schedule—even though He was not accepted by all.

There’s more:

R. Hanan b. Tahlifa sent [word] to R. Joseph: I once met a man who possessed a scroll written in Hebrew in Assyrian characters.7 I said to him: ‘Whence has this come to thee?’ He replied, ‘I hired myself as a mercenary in the Roman army, and found it amongst the Roman archives. In it is stated that four thousand, two hundred and thirty8-one years after the creation the world will be orphaned.9 [As to the years following,] some of them will be spent in the war of the great sea monsters,10 and some in the war of Gog and Magog, and the remaining [period] will be the Messianic era, whilst the Holy One, blessed be He, will renew his world only after seven thousand years.’ R. Abba the son of Raba said: The statement was after five thousand years.

It has been taught; R. Nathan said: This verse pierces and descends to the very abyss:11 For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though he tarry, wait for him; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.12 Not as our Masters, who interpreted the verse, until a time and times and the dividing of time;13 nor as R. Simlai who expounded, Thou feedest them with the bread of tears; and givest them tears to drink a third time;14 nor as R. Akiba who expounded, Yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth:15 but the first dynasty [sc. the Hasmonean] shall last seventy years, the second [the Herodian], fifty two, and the reign of Bar Koziba16 two and a half years.17

What is meant by ‘but at the end it shall speak [we-yafeah] and not lie?’ — R. Samuel b. Nahmani said in the name of R. Jonathan: Blasted be18 the bones of those who calculate the end.19 For they would say, since the predetermined time HAS ARRIVED, and yet he has not come, he will never come. But [even so], wait for him, as it is written, Though he tarry, wait for him. Should you say, We look forward [to his coming] but He does not: therefore Scripture saith, And therefore will the Lord wait, that he may be gracious unto you, and therefore will he be exalted, that he may have mercy upon you.20 But since we look forward to it, and He does likewise, what delays [his coming]? — The Attribute of Justice delays it.21 But since the Attribute of Justice delays it, why do we await it? — To be rewarded [for hoping], as it is written, blessed are all they that wait for him.22 (Sanhedrin 97b http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_97.html#PARTb)

17. The verses cited from Daniel, the Psalms, and Haggai were interpreted so as to give a definite date for the advent of the Messiah. R. Nathan however, on the authority of Hab. II, 3, asserts that all such calculations are false. The three verses refer to the Hasmonean, Herodian, and Bar Koziba’s reign, but the advent of Messiah is unknowable, Rashi. (Ibid. http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_97.html#97b_17)

19. I.e., Messiah’s advent. (Ibid. http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_97.html#97b_19)

Article, Capital Letter & Translation

The phrase “the Messiah the Prince” in Daniel 9:25 is best understood as a specific title, not just any generic reference to an “anointed one” or “a prince.” Some modern translations render it as “an anointed one, a prince” because the original Hebrew lacks the definite article (like “the” in English). However, Hebrew grammar doesn’t work the same way as English. Hebrew only has one article, not separate definite (“the”) and indefinite (“a/an”) articles. So, if the article is missing, it doesn’t automatically mean the noun is indefinite (i.e., generic or non-specific).

In fact, in Hebrew, certain titles or well-known terms are understood to be definite even without the article, especially if the noun is used like a proper name or recognized title. The word “mashiach” (Messiah or Anointed One) in this passage is functioning as a title, and the same applies to “nagid” (Prince) — together, they point to a specific person.

Just like in 1 Kings 16:16, where “captain of the host” appears without articles, it’s still clearly a specific role or title [cf. Jewish Translations such as JPS Tanakh and CJB Translation]. Similarly, “the world” in 1 Samuel 2:8 lacks the article in Hebrew but is still treated as definite in meaning.

So, the King James Version rendering — “the Messiah the Prince” — is grammatically valid and likely more accurate than the indefinite “an anointed one, a prince.” Saying the KJV is wrong here either misunderstands Hebrew grammar or intentionally downplays the text’s clear Messianic focus, which early Christians and many traditional interpreters rightly saw as pointing to Jesus of Nazareth.

Daniel 9:25 refers to “Mashiach” (מָשִׁיחַ), which literally means “anointed one.” used 39x in the Old Testament. Translating it as “Messiah” with a capital M is valid because in the context of Daniel’s prophecy, this figure is more than just any anointed person (like a priest or king); he is the special, divinely appointed deliverer expected to fulfil a unique redemptive role. The passage highlights 6 specific actions and timing—such as the coming to “finish transgression” and “bring in everlasting righteousness”—which point to a singular, prophetic figure with a significant mission, fitting the theological and messianic expectations that justify capitalizing “Messiah” rather than using a generic term.

Should the 7 and 62 Weeks Be Separated?

The issue revolves around how to translate Daniel 9:25

“… from the going forth of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again …”

or

“… from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again …”

The Hebrew text does not support any indication of a pause or new clause between the two segments or adding the word “for” to separating the two segments. The conjunction “and” (Hebrew: ו־ / wa) links the two, making the period continuous rather than divided.

The Accent Mark (Athnach) Is Not a Divider

About 500 years after Christ, during the Masoretic period, Jewish scholars added punctuation to the Hebrew text of Daniel 9. In their version, they placed an athnach—a major pause marker—right after the phrase “seven weeks.” Some claim that a Hebrew accent mark (called the athnach), which was added by Jewish scribes after Christianity, under the word for “seven” proves there should be the word “for” [ “And for 62 weeks”], in their Jewish translations, is implied and the weeks should be separated. It is a disjunctive accent mark intended to separate clauses, much like how we use commas or semi colons in English. This punctuation led to translations like the RSV, which interpret the Messiah’s appearance as happening at the end of the first seven weeks, not at the end of the entire 69 weeks.

However, there’s little reason to accept this Jewish punctuation here, especially since the timing aligns with a motive to distance Jesus from this prophecy. As Edward notes (p. 173, n. 4), Rashi explained that this division was introduced “because of heretics,” meaning Christians, to alter the original meaning and break the connection to Jesus:

4 The Jews put the main stop of the verse under [seven]?’, meaning to separate the two numbers, 7 and 62. This they must have done dishonestly…(as Rashi says in rejecting- literal expositions which favoured the Christians) ” on account of the heretics,” i. e. Christians – Daniel the prophet, Pusey, E. B. (Edward Bouverie), 1800-1882

Wow, how shocking that anti-christian Jesus-hating Jews 500 years after Christ would rob the passage of its Christological meaning? Obviously this is to be expected, especially that this was even happening during the time of the Early Church Fathers like Justin Martyr who explicitly mentions Jews who were already accustomed to changing and corrupting their Hebrew scriptures to refute Christians using it to prove Jesus as the Messiah.

Ancient Translations: This clear corruption is seen by the fact that before Christ’s time, when the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek by the Jews, translators added punctuation to clarify the text. In all the ancient Greek versions—like the Septuagint (LXX), Theodotion, Symmachus, and Aquila—as well as the Peshitta, the 7 weeks and 62 weeks mentioned in Daniel 9:25 are understood as one continuous time period, ending with the arrival of the Messiah. Later translations, such as the Latin Vulgate and Syriac versions, along with modern translations like the NASB, have followed this same punctuation approach, viewing the entire span as a single, connected timeline culminating in the Messiah’s coming.

For example, here is the Septuagint translation:

And thou shalt know and understand, that from the going forth of the command for the answer and for the building of Jerusalem until Christ the prince there shall be seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks [ἑβδομάδες ἑπτὰ καὶ ἑβδομάδες ἑξήκοντα δύο]; and then the time shall return, and the street shall be built, and the wall, and the times shall be exhausted. – Daniel 9:25 LXX

Structure: Going further, as we have already seen, the structure of Daniel is to go back forth between the Messiah and the City. This structure shows a clear separation: the seven weeks (the first period) focus on the rebuilding of Jerusalem, while the sixty-two weeks lead up to the Messiah’s arrival and subsequent “cutting off” (typically understood as Jesus’ death).

Not Conclusive: The athnach is a pause mark in the Hebrew accent system, but it does not always indicate a clear or logical break in the sentence. As William Wickes—whose work on the Hebrew accents is still a standard reference, points out:

In cases of specification, we often find the proper logical or syntactical division—particularly the latter—neglected, and the main musical pause introduced between the details or particulars given. Distinctness of enunciation, and emphasis (where necessary), were thus secured. The pause was introduced where it seemed likely to be most effective. Thus the logical division is disregarded[.] . . . Syntactical clauses are treated in the same way, and subject, object, &c. are cut in two—or members that belong together, separated—by the dichotomy. (A logical pause may occur in the verse or not). Two Treatises on the Accentuation of the Old Testament, pp.40-41

The scribes often placed an athnach for reasons of rhythm, chanting, or emphasis rather than strict grammar. Sometimes it even cuts straight through phrases that obviously belong together, such as subject and object. Wickes shows examples where the athnach divides lists in unnatural places, like Numbers 28:19, which reads: “two young bullocks and one ram (athnach), and seven he-lambs,” even though the offerings clearly belong to a single unit. Note that if we use the Jewish tactic, we ought to translate this as “two young bullocks and one ram (athnach), and for seven he-lambs of the first year; they shall be unto you without blemish;” which makes no sense because its one united sacrifice, not 2. Other verses such as Genesis 7:13, Exodus 35:23, and Isaiah 49:21 show the same phenomenon. This means that leaning too heavily on the athnach in Daniel 9:25 to argue for a break between the seven weeks and the sixty-two weeks is not justified. In fact, Hebrew grammars caution that the athnach varies in strength: in some verses it marks a major division, while in others it is almost invisible. For example, in Genesis 1:1 the athnach falls under “Elohim” (“God”), but in English translations it doesn’t even warrant a comma. Not also what another Hebrew Grammarian has to say:

At the same time it must not be forgotten that the value of the accent as a mark of punctuation is always relative; thus, e. g., athnach as regards the logical structure of the sentence may at one time indicate a very important break (as in Gen 1:4) at another, one which is almost imperceptible (as in Gen 1:1) Wilhelm Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, p.58

The point is simple: the athnach is not a consistent punctuation mark, so it cannot settle the debate over how to read Daniel 9:25.

Makes no sense: Finally, the “seven weeks” and the “sixty-two weeks” in Daniel 9:25 are best understood as parts of one continuous timeline rather than two unrelated periods. Detaching them creates major problems. One Jewish website suggested a better reading of Daniel as:

25) Know therefore and discern that from the issuing of a word to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (starting from its destruction) until an anointed Prince (Cyrus) will be seven weeks (49 years) and then for sixty-two weeks (434 years) it will be built again with plaza and moat but in troubled times. (Persian, Greek, and Roman domination) https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/daniel-9-a-true-biblical-interpretation/

But this would mean that the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s “street and wall” took 434 years—the length of the sixty-two weeks—which is completely out of step with history. The restoration under Ezra and Nehemiah was finished in a matter of decades, not centuries. Instead, the prophecy makes more sense when read as a single flow: the first “seven weeks” (49 years) cover the initial rebuilding of Jerusalem, and the following “sixty-two weeks” (434 years) stretch through the long Persian, Greek, and Roman periods. Together, they total sixty-nine weeks (483 years), leading directly to the appearance of the “anointed one.” This reading not only fits the historical timeline but also matches the ancient Greek translation of the Scriptures (the Septuagint), which shows that Jews before the time of Christ already understood the passage as a single continuous period rather than two separate events.

Antiochus and Onias III?

The interpretation that Daniel 9’s prophecy could be fulfilled in the events surrounding the Maccabean Revolt (171–164 BCE) and the desecration of the Temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes (which occurred in 167 BCE) does have a historical basis in certain prophetic schemes. However, there are significant challenges with using this interpretation, particularly regarding the destruction of the Second Temple and other details in Daniel’s prophecy that seem to point beyond the Maccabean period.

The Second Temple’s Destruction:
Daniel 9:26 clearly speaks about the destruction of the Temple and the city (Jerusalem) after the appearance of the Messiah. It states, “The people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.” This clearly refers to a major event following the arrival of the “Messiah the Prince” (v. 25), a timeline that many interpret as pointing to the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD by the Romans. Antiochus IV’s desecration of the Temple in 167 BC and the subsequent Maccabean Revolt in 164 BC did not lead to the destruction of the Second Temple; rather, it was cleansed and rededicated. Therefore, the prophecy about the destruction of the Temple doesn’t align with these earlier events.
Did Onias accomplish the 6 requirements:
Onias III’s death in 171 BC, while a pivotal event in Jewish history that led to the Maccabean Revolt, does not fulfill the six key requirements outlined in Daniel 9:24-27. The prophecy speaks of finishing transgression, ending sin, making reconciliation for iniquity, bringing everlasting righteousness, sealing up the vision, and anointing the Most Holy, none of which were accomplished by the events surrounding Onias’ death. While the Maccabees did cleanse the Temple and restore Jewish independence, these actions were temporary and did not lead to the ultimate reconciliation or eternal righteousness the prophecy foretells. The Maccabean Revolt did not fulfill the vision of a Messianic figure, nor did it bring about the anointing of the true “Most Holy,” which Christians interpret as Jesus Christ. In essence, the death of Onias and the subsequent events did not bring the prophetic fulfillment seen in Daniel 9, as they lacked the final, eschatological resolution expected in the prophecy.

It does not refer to the building of walls?

The claim is that the Daniel 9:25 refers to the rebuilding of “streets and conduits,” which are more likely associated with residential areas and urban infrastructure, not the city walls. This claim is partially true, but requires clarification. The term “restore and rebuild” in the Hebrew text can refer to both rebuilding walls and the reestablishment of Jerusalem, including residential and infrastructural aspects. So the word “moat” can legitimately be translated as “walls” as that is one of its meanings. But regardless of that, the “streets and moat” includes the rebuilding of walls under the broader “restoration” of the city, since city walls were a critical part of a city’s restoration in ancient times.

Nehemiah took 52 days, not 49 years

¹⁵So the wall was finished on the twenty-fifth day of Elul, in fifty-two days. – Nehemiah 6:15

Nehemiah’s Decree (444BC): The connection between Nehemiah’s decree and the 7-week (49 years) period of Daniel 9 is easily reconcilable seeing that Nehemiah’s 6:15 refers to the completion of of the walls alone, not the entire city. Daniel 9’s reference to the rebuilding of Jerusalem refers to a more comprehensive restoration, including the rebuilding of the city’s infrastructure, residential areas, and overall urban resettlement. The 49 years are the time it took for the full resettlement of Jerusalem, which would include not only the physical rebuilding of walls but also the restoration of civic life, which Nehemiah’s efforts were part of. The short duration of the wall repairs in comparison to the larger rebuilding process suggests that the 7-week period represents a symbolic or general timeframe rather than a precise match to Nehemiah’s work.

Ezra’s Decree (457BC): The decree to Ezra issued in 457 BC by Artaxerxes is often seen as a more suitable starting point for the 70 weeks in my opinion. This decree allowed for the return of the Jews to Jerusalem and the reinstatement of proper worship, aligning more closely with the comprehensive rebuilding of the city outlined in Daniel. The 7-week period could thus be seen as covering the 49 years necessary for this holistic restoration of both the city’s physical infrastructure and its spiritual life. Starting from 457 BC, the timeline fits more naturally with the prophetic scheme, providing a clearer connection between the decree and the subsequent fulfillment of the prophecy in the coming of the Anointed One (Jesus).

Conclusion: Jesus is the Messiah.

Table of Contents

Context

Daniel 9:24-27

Daniel 9:24a: Weeks of Years

1. The Hebrew Word Used: Shavuim (שָׁבֻעִים)

2. The Context of Daniel’s Prayer in Daniel 9

3. The “Sevens” Are Divided into Long Periods That Don’t Fit Days

4. The “Week” of Years Is a Known Concept in the Torah

Daniel 9:24b: The Six Purposes to Be Accomplished

Daniel 9:25 – The Structure of the 69 Heptads

Dabar ≠ Decree?

Non-Possible Starting Point: The Decree of Cyrus

The Decree of Cyrus: What It Actually Authorized

Archaeological Confirmation: The Cyrus Cylinder

What About Isaiah 44:28

What about 45:13?

2 Possible Answers

1. Artaxerxes to Nehemiah (Nehemiah 2:5-8)

Length of Prophetic Year (360 Days)

The Calculation

2. Artaxerxes to Ezra (Nehemiah 1)

After the 69th Week, before the 70th Week

Jesus quoted Daniel 9 about Rome

The 70th Week and the Fall of Jerusalem

Verse 27 expands on Verse 26

Messiah – Jerusalem Pattern

Jesus fulfilled all 6 requirements

1. To Terminate Transgression

2. To End Sin

3. To Expiate Iniquity

4. To Bring in Everlasting Righteousness

5. To Seal Up Vision and Prophecy

6. To Anoint the Most Holy Place

Conclusion

Rabbi Rashi

Talmud

Article, Capital Letter & Translation

Should the 7 and 62 Weeks Be Separated?

The Accent Mark (Athnach) Is Not a Divider

Antiochus and Onias III?

It does not refer to the building of walls?

Nehemiah took 52 days, not 49 years

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Published by ezekielmamaia

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

Discover more from Proving Christ

**1. The Hebrew Word Used: Shavuim (שָׁבֻעִים)**