shmelke, you are mixing translations. Your opening quote verses 24-27 in yellow is not the kjv.

Here is the kjv:

9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
9:25 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.
9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


What tipped me off was your statement - "Missionaries maintain crucified Jesus is that cut off Messiah, and he terminated sin and did bring everlasting righteousness."

If you read verse 24 above from the kjv, it says bring "in"everlasting righteousness. Everlasting righteous will not be brought "in" until the kingdom of God is established here on earth in the days of the ten kings of the toes of the feet of clay and iron of Nebuchadnezzars statue dream. So the 70 weeks in our view will not be complete until then.

Missionaries present the verse as if there is only one anointed coming at the end of sixty-nine weeks (483 years). This view is without merit. Were this true, there would be no reason to break a period of 69 weeks into 62 and 7, and no reason to write anointed two times.

We believe that there is only one anointed because the two sentences containing "anointed one" are adjoining and there is no indication that there is two separate anointed ones.

The anointed one talked about arrives in Jerusalem at the end of the 69th week - who we believe to be Jesus - 4 days later after arriving Jerusalem for Passover, he was crucified.


This alone is sufficient to undercut Browns position, but that is not all. Daniel tells us that 490 years are given to terminate sin and bring everlasting righteousness.


Again, shmelke, the kjv reads "bring in everlasting righteousness" which will not occure until the kingdom of God is established here on earth to complete the 70 weeks.

There is a more basic problem with the missionary interpretation: JESUS WAS NOT ANOINTED! See Uri Yosef's article 'Anointed or Smeared.'

Jesus was never anointed in the manner as a man-king and never will be.

btw, was Cyrus - who Judaism claims is the anointed one in verse 9:25 - "annointed because God says he is "annointed", or because he underwent the special oil anointing cerimony?

How can Cyrus be the anointed one in 9:25 who was NOT annointed using the special oil - while at the same time Judaism says Jesus can't be that anointed one because the special annointing oil was not applied to him? Sheesh!
Talk about a double standard.