Finally, The Correct Interpretation of the 70 Weeks Prophecy in Daniel

EclipseEventSigns

Active Member
Finally, The Correct Interpretation of the 70 Weeks in Daniel

In our cynical age, the kneejerk reaction will be to reject this claim or even laugh this off as ridiculous. Can the barriers be broken just to get to an open mind that would even consider this evidence?

What this is NOT.
  • It is not based on a vision or personal revelation
  • It is not tied to a particular denomination or church tradition
  • It is not based on a particular type of year (ie. 360 day "prophetic" year)
  • It is not tied to a particular translation of the Bible

What this IS and why it's the correct interpretation.
  • It does treat the original text, written in Hebrew, as accurate historically, culturally and linguistically
  • It is consistent with the entire message of Scripture
  • It is consistent with all other prophetic passages of Scripture
  • It uses the restored Jewish calendar which was in use during the Biblical era

But why has this interpretation NEVER before been seen until now?

This proper interpretation has only been rediscovered now in our modern age. It was never meant to be properly understood until the time of the end. This is due to various phases of how this passage has been interpreted since it was originally spoken by Gabriel.

Daniel properly understood the 70 Weeks from the start. [Dan 9:22 LSB] Then he made [me] understand and spoke with me and said, "O Daniel, I have now come forth to give you insight with understanding."

The proper interpretation was hidden from and not fully understood by the majority after the book began to be circulated. However, the original Hebrew text and the Aramaic translation in the Targums was understood generally and led to a general expectation of the coming Messiah. However, the original Greek Septuagint had a totally corrupt text for Daniel 9. (What is now in the current Septuagint is Theodotian's translation of Daniel from centuries later.)

Some did have a more accurate understanding. Most likely the Magi figured out the prophecy. Very likely Simeon and Anna (in the temple) also knew exactly when the Messiah would arrive.

After 70 AD and continuing through the early Roman Church period, the dominant view was to treat the prophecy as allegory. Less and less access to the written text for the common folk allowed this view to remain for centuries.

The prophecy as understood by the jewish scholars never had a hope of being understood correctly. Their system of historical dates omitted several centuries as compared with historical fact.

With the invention of the printing press and the availability of readable translations, study of the prophecy increased. However, the particular interpretation bias found in the King James Version did not allow for the proper understanding of the prophecy to develop. The eastern churches who used the Greek translation mirrored that same interpretation bias so they also were similarly in the dark.

Increasing scholarship of ancient history allowed for the restoration of accurate literal-based alternatives to the allegorical interpretation. Some of these included those by Bishop Ussher, Magellan, and Isaac Newton. But they all came to very similar conclusions due to the influence of church tradition, use of the Jewish calendar and common assumptions. In the late 1800s Sir Robert Anderson introduced a completely novel interpretation which seemed to solve the various issues that many had struggled with.

This became the dominant interpretation of conservative Bible scholars for almost one hundred years. There have, of course, been many fringe interpretations which can be very easily dismissed upon examination. During the early 1970's Harold Hoehner recognized that there were several flaws in Anderson's method and attempted to correct them. This then became the accepted interpretation which has been accepted since.

However, this interpretation accepted by the majority is flawed because
  • it still makes use of the corruptions in the modern Jewish calendar,
  • it is still forced into a certain interpretation because it is based on the assumptions of the translators of the King James Version,
  • it does not recognize that the presumed historical anchor dates are just not historically possible and
  • it does not fully appreciate the purpose of why the 70 Weeks prophecy was given in the first place.

But since 2005 the proper and accurate interpretation of the 70 Weeks of Daniel has been understood again. The first time in two millennia.


I hope this has piqued your interest to investigate further. Here is a link to the 7 video series which explains the proper understanding of the 70 Weeks Prophecy in great detail. I invite you to examine all the included references and sources for yourself.
70 Weeks Prophecy Series

Or if you prefer the published book which contains even greater detail and all the calculations, see here:
Hidden Rhythms in Prophecy
 
It takes investment of time to follow the evidence and logic for a complete understanding. I can guarantee that those who do will be rewarded.

Strikes me as lazy that someone would not be willing to invest the time to summarize it.

Makes me think it's more sparkle than substance.

Sorry.
 
Strikes me as lazy that someone would not be willing to invest the time to summarize it.

Makes me think it's more sparkle than substance.

Sorry.
It's your loss. Sorry. It's more lazy for those that do not want to spend the time and want a summary. I put in hundreds of hours of research and hundreds of hours of thought into the best way to present it. That's how I want it presented. Not summarized.
 
None of the views put forward by that video reflects the research that I put forward as the scripturally correct one in the first post of this thread.

Yes, I understand, it's just two more views to consider.
 
Yes, but you advised to consider "both sides". There are many more than just two side put forward as "correct" ones. Once I review that video I will write a critique of "both" of those interpretations.

It's an IDIOM. Not to be taking over-literally.
 
both 2 of 3
conjunction
—used as a function word to indicate and stress the inclusion of each of two or more things specified by coordinated words, phrases, or clauses
prized both for its beauty and for its utility
he … who loveth well both man and bird and beast— S. T. Coleridge
 
Always listen to both sides.
I gave this a listen and here is my critique. I don't want this to devolve into a discussion about this video. That is not the point of this thread. But my critique is in response to the 2 viewpoints in general that were presented. What must be stated is that the video debate was not really about a complete presentation of the futurist and historicist methods of interpretation. They really only focused on whether or not the 70 Weeks have been completely fulfilled. While the historicist position was understandable, the person representing the futurist position was very poor and was not coherent whatsoever. I wouldn't consider this video to be useful in understanding the 70 Weeks topic.

I listened to the opening 20 minutes of each view. Both made statements contrary to the text of Scripture and disqualified themselves right there. I did not continue to listen to the complete 4 hours.

Presenter of the historicist position:
-said that the interpretation of the 69 weeks is the same in all the views of the 70 Weeks. That is incorrect.
-said that Jeremiah contains the prophecy that the Jewish exile in Babylon would be 70 years long. That is incorrect. Jer 25:11,12 specifically states that "these nations" will serve Babylon, not just Judah. Jer 29:10 states that 70 years is tied to Babylon itself, not Judah. No where does Jeremiah state there will be an exile for 70 years. That's not even historically accurate.
-asked "How could a 2nd century BC Jew have known anything about an anti-christ?" Is he implying that he considers the book of Daniel to be written in the 2nd century BC? It was actually written during a period roughly between 550-525 BC.
-stated that "sacrifice and oblation" ceased at the point of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. He considers everything else in the prophecy as literal but then not this? Obviously the temple sacrifices and oblation offering continued long after - until 70 AD. Not a consistent method of interpretation.

Presenter of the futurist position:
-was all over the place and very hard to follow his main argument
-began with Daniel 7 and stated this was the start of the prophecy. Actually Daniel 9 is a vision that is complete and self contained within a single chapter.
-presented a unique interpretation of the 4 beasts in Daniel 7. While that is alright if there is Scriptural support, there is none in this case. He stated that the 4 beasts are actually eras in history (ie. Industrial age, Space age, etc.). Daniel 7:17 specifically states that the beasts are 4 earthly kings who will arise.
-it just devolved from there and I couldn't understand what he was trying to get across

So, ya, listen to what others present. But listen and compare with what Scripture says and how it interprets itself. That has been the big problem with Daniel 9. Very few have investigated what Daniel was actually referring to in the beginning of the chapter - during his long prayer. That is where the key is to understanding the 70 Weeks prophecy because that is what Gabriel was sent by God to answer. And that is what my research reflects. And you can find my research in the first post of this thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's a lot of work, yet you are unwilling to summarize your own position, lol.

Not a good look, honestly.
 
There can only be one correct interpretation of the 70 Weeks prophecy. That means most views are wrong. When considering the interpretation that I have researched, I wanted to identify a single issue as the test to judge all other interpretations by. I think I have found it.

Everyone argues endlessly about which king made the decree to start the whole period of the 70 Weeks. Was is Cyrus? Was it Darius? Was it Artaxerxes? Was it something else people come up with? Well, Ezra gives us the major clue.

When talking about the second temple, he says: [Ezr 6:14 LSB] 14b So they built and completed [it] according to the decree of the God of Israel and the decree of Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes king of Persia.

Ezra 6:14 states that there were more than just 3 decrees from earthly kings that allowed for the rebuilding of the temple (and by extension, rebuilding Jerusalem). There was a fourth. In addition Ezra seems to list the earthly decrees in chronological order. That would suggest that the decree by God, which no one recognizes, happened BEFORE the one from Cyrus. Where is this decree? Why does no one recognize or address this? Can your particular system even survive taking this decree into account? Either your interpretation can't pass the test or your interpretation does not consider the Word of God as accurate.

My claim is that ALL interpretations of the 70 Weeks Prophecy can not pass this test. Except for the one correct one.
 
Here's another clue about the Ezra 6:14 Test.
People just do not fully address the real reason for the 70 Weeks Prophecy. They focus on the climax - Daniel 9:24-27. But in order to truly understand the prophecy, the entire Chapter 9 must be correctly understood. The key is in verse 2
[Dan 9:2 ESV] 2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, perceived in the books the number of years that, according to the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the prophet, must pass before the end of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years.

Daniel studied and understood what was in Jeremiah's writings. It caused such a stir in him that he launched into an impassioned prayer. He realized the very reputation of God was on the line.
[Dan 9:19 ESV] 5 ... O Lord, pay attention and act. Delay not, for your own sake...

The entire chapter revolves around Jeremiah. Daniel correctly understands Jeremiah. He prays. God hears and immediately sends Gabriel with an answer for Daniel. God's answer as the 70 Weeks Prophecy directly addresses what Jeremiah said. This is what everyone has missed - for centuries.

Gabriel ties the 70 Weeks right back to the very place where Daniel had been intensely studying. He gives him an answer within his own lifetime. Not with some future decree by an earthly king when he is long dead. Gabriel tells Daniel to "understand" and Daniel would have immediately understood exactly what Gabriel was saying. The utterance or going forth of the word (command) to restore and build Jerusalem is the key anchor point. But it's a play on words. It's not just the subject matter but the actual words themselves. The words to restore and build - Hebrew "sub" and "bana" - that's the key. Where were those actual words used in Jeremiah and what exactly did they signify?
 
Here's another clue for the Ezra 6:14 Challenge.
Ezra specifically lists 4 commands. These allowed the temple to be finished by reason of, as a result of, because of these 4 commands. This is not the same as stating they all only dealt with the temple. Some were limited in scope to the temple. But some included reentry into the land so that Jerusalem would be rebuilt along with the temple. Three were by earthly kings. The first in the list was by God Himself. Where is this command and when was it done?

An in depth analysis of Daniel 9:25 very clearly shows that none of the eventual 3 decrees by earthly kings is being referred to. The very first part of the phrase that Gabriel speaks makes this evident. "So you are to know and have insight that from the going out of...."[Dan 9:25a] Gabriel tells Daniel to listen to this information and fully understand it. Daniel is not going to have to wait around for some earthly king like Artaxerxes to make a decree a hundred years after he is dead. He was to understand what Gabriel was saying immediately. God gave Daniel an answer to his prayer right then and there.

As I stated previously it's all tied to Jeremiah's writings, which Daniel had been studying intensely and finally understood. "Restore" and "rebuild". "Sub" and "bana". The keys that Gabriel told to Daniel and what he understood. But also the phrase "the going out of the word". The "word" is the Hebrew "dabar". It means speech, utterance, words. Daniel never uses this word to refer to an official decree by an earthly king. Never. He uses entirely different words for that. But he does use "dabar" when talking about the word of God. God's word through the prophets. He actually uses it at the beginning of the chapter.

[Dan 9:2 LSB] 2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, discerned in the books the number of the years [concerning] which the word of Yahweh came to Jeremiah the prophet ...

Gabriel specifically ties the "sub" and "bana" to the word of the Lord through Jeremiah which Daniel was well acquainted with. It would have made immediate and perfect sense to Daniel. Just as Gabriel told him it would.

So where is this word of the Lord using the specific words "sub" and "bana"? This is the Ezra 6:14 Challenge. If an interpretation of the 70 Weeks prophecy doesn't address this issue, it is not correct.
 
Here's another clue for the Ezra 6:14 Challenge.

Ezra 6:14 shows that Ezra understood the 70 Weeks Prophecy correctly. He recognized the existence and importance of God's command to be listed as one of the four decrees which allowed for the return to the land and the completion of the second temple. Return and restore. "Sub" and "bana".

But the proper interpretation was being lost to time. Very few truly understood the 70 Weeks. And this makes complete sense. Gabriel said the prophecy would be sealed during the period of 70 weeks. One of the 6 purposes for the 70 Weeks is:
[Dan 9:24 LSB] 24 "Seventy weeks have been determined for your people and for your holy city,... to seal up vision and prophecy"

Later, in Gabriel's last recorded visit to Daniel, he says:
[Dan 12:4 LSB] 4 "But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the time of the end; ..."
The entire contents of Daniel's prophecies would be hidden from proper interpretation until the time of the end.

So those who try to find the interpretation within the writings of the early Church Fathers are on a fool's errand. They did not properly understand prophecy. God said it wouldn't be possible then. Or some look to Bishop Ussher. Nope. He was wrong too. Or Isaac Newton. Nope. Or Magellan. Nope.

Well, surely Sir Robert Anderson. He came up with a fantastic ingenious method that is highly popular to this day. Well, he definitely lived closer to the time of the end. But that's been already 140 years. So nope. How about the prophecy craze starting in the mid 20th century? Getting closer. But still not the time of the end. What about the explosion of prophecy "ministries" with everyone interpreting news headlines and trying to find the "7 year peace treaty"? Closer still to the time of the end. But still not as almost everyone still is tied to the misunderstandings from Church tradition.

Only with a fresh and accurate approach to the original text in Hebrew and the willingness to go where the Scriptural evidence leads will the proper interpretation be found. It won't be found in any English translation as none of the various Bible translators fully understood the 70 Weeks prophecy so no one has translated the Hebrew text in a manner that allows for the interpretation to become obvious.

The time of the end continues to get ever closer. The Ezra 6:14 Challenge exists to separate all the old misunderstandings of the past from the one correct interpretation that results when things are understood correctly. Does your particular interpretation of the 70 Weeks meet the Challenge?
 
Here's another clue for the Ezra 6:14 Challenge.

Ezra 6:14 lists 4 commands that were given in order for the temple to be completed - and by way of returning to the land and restoring it. The Hebrew words "sub" and "bana". "Return" and "restore". These are the words found in Daniel 9:25. The words which signaled the start of the entire period of the 70 Weeks.

Arguments have raged back and forth as to when did this period start. What king's decree started the whole thing? Look on any forum thread about this topic and every tom, dick and harry has their pet interpretation. Very few base theirs on an accurate understanding of the text. Some tie it to their particular denomination. Or some "personal vision from God". Or some supposed expert scholar. But no one realizes that Ezra 6:14 invalidates all of their interpretations. They don't acknowledge or realize that God's command to "sub" and "bana" came before any of the 3 kings' decrees.

This makes complete sense, unfortunately. Out of all the many English translations, they all interpret Daniel 9:25 differently. It's a complete mess. This shows that no translator has ever truly correctly understood the 70 Weeks prophecy.

The vast majority of proposed interpretations are based on the King James Version.
King James Bible
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Some are very close in wording.
New American Standard Bible
So you are to know and understand that 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, with streets and moat, even in times of distress.

New International Version
"Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.

But their biases are very evident. Anyone who knows the Hebrew language knows that there are no capital letters in Hebrew. Or punctuation. Any translation that puts in capitals and adds punctuation is making an INTERPRETATION of the original Hebrew text. It's very safe to say that anyone who bases their own view on the KJV, NASB, NIV or similar with added capitals will NEVER come to the correct view of the prophecy.

Obviously, the English language needs punctuation. But what about those translations who don't add capitals for "messiah" and "prince"?
NET Bible
So know and understand: From the issuing of the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed one, a prince arrives, there will be a period of seven weeks and sixty-two weeks. It will again be built, with plaza and moat, but in distressful times.

JPS Tanakh 1917
Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks; and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times.

Coverdale Bible of 1535
Vnderstode this then, and marcke it well: that from the tyme it shalbe concluded, to go and repayre Ierusalem agayne, vnto Christ (or the anoynted) prynce: there shalbe seuen wekes. Then shall the stretes & walles be buylded agayne [sixty-two] wekes, but with harde troublous tyme.

Even though the Coverdale still capitalizes "Christ", they include the alternate "anoynted". But notice where the periods of weeks occur. Totally different. And what are you going to do with this translation?
English Standard Version
Know therefore and understand that from the going out 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 with squares and moat, but in a troubled time.

The proper interpretation is all tied to the original Hebrew text. No one will understand the prophecy correctly by reading an English translation. That is part of the Ezra 6:14 Challenge.
 
Back
Top Bottom