Daniel 9, missionaries claim, predicts the death of the Messiah near the end of Second Temple era.
24. Seventy weeks [490 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. 25. And you shall know and understand that from the emergence of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed prince shall be seven weeks [49 years]; and in sixty-two weeks [434 years ] it will return and be built street and trench, but in troubled times. 26. And after the sixty-two weeks, an 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. 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.
Missionaries maintain crucified Jesus is that cut off Messiah, and he terminated sin and did bring everlasting righteousness.
This view is fraught with problems. It relies on mistranslation, unlikely punctuation, unlikely dating, and ignoring the repetition of the word anointed.
A number of Christian translations of Daniel 9 write the Messiah. Their aim is to show that this anointed one is the same person called in the post-Biblical age the Messiah i.e. the Davidic Messiah. This is incorrect. The Hebrew text contains no definite article, and there are no capital letters in Hebrew. It says a messiah, not the Messiah. messiah (anointed one) refers to any king or priest.
The next question is, of which anointed one does Daniel speak? In fact there are two anointed persons in Daniel 9! The first is associated with the end of seven weeks (49 years) and the second is cut off at the end of sixty-two seeks (434 years).
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.
The 1611 edition of King James Version correctly puts a semicolon between the two clauses (shall be seven weeke; and threescore and two weekes, the street shall be built againe, and the wall euen in troublous times). This is in agreement with the Masoretic accents in Hebrew Bibles. Unfortunately, the modern KJV (and other Christian translations) removes the semicolon:
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 (KJV).
The false impression created is that Daniel 9:25-26 speaks of only one anointed i.e. Jesus, who comes after 69 weeks (7+62=69).
In Dr. Michael Browns own words, why not simply state shall be sixty-nine weeks rather than seven weeks and threescore and two [62] weeks (p. Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, vol. 3 p.103). Yes, this is our question. Browns answer: There was a prophetic significance to these two specific sets of weeks, the first set covering 49 years, being the time during which Jerusalem was restored and rebuilt, and the second set covering 434 years
Brown attempts to resolve the issue as follows: (1) if there are two anointed ones, the second anointed one is the Messiah (p. 109). Brown continues to say if there is only one anointed, it is Jesus.
This is hardly convincing. We have explained that the one anointed theory lacks a good explanation for why anointed is said twice with reference to 7 and 62 weeks respectively. The suggestion that perhaps only the second anointed is Jesus prompts the question, who is the first anointed?
Brown admits he has no credible answer. He claims the word to rebuild Jerusalem and the start of the weeks begins at a time period very close to the decree of Artaxerxes, [which Brown dates] in 457 B.C.E., since that is when the actual rebuilding of the citys walls began (p. 107). From there he counts 69 weeks (483 years) to 27 CE, when Brown claims Jesus ministry began. Never mind that Jesus was not cut off at the beginning of his ministry. Even if we assume the 69 weeks begins close to the decree of Artaxerxes (questionable), which anointed prince of note came on the scene 7 weeks after this?
After mentioning Cyrus, Joshua the high priest and Zerubabel, Brown notes, None of these figures, however, can be decisively identified as the anointed leader of whom the text speaks, nor is there a rock-solid interpretation that explains how the forty-nine year period beginning with Daniel 9:25 ends with any of them. Some of them have chronological problems (as in the case of Cyrus) or problems in determining exactly why the text singled them out or how someone would identify them as the anointed one in question. Why them? (p. 110).
In other words, Brown has not a clue. In fact he understates the problem. Not only Cyrus but Joshua and Zerubabel also appear on the scene long prior to the end of 49 years after the decree of Artaxerxes.
Brown then proceeds to revisit the belief that there is only one anointed. For this he needs to explain what 7 and 62 weeks represent: that interpretation puts the emphasis on the proper division of the years (49 years for the rebuilding of Jerusalem, followed by 434 years until the Messiahs death) and explains why such emphasis was placed on this mashiach (p. 110).
Say what? If the word to rebuild Jerusalem starts in 457 BCE, what is the 49 years to rebuild Jerusalem? Where does Scripture indicate Jerusalem was rebuilt 49 years after the decree of Artaxerxes? In fact, Browns interpretation does not even fit the KJV translation he favors. Lets see it again:
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 (KJV).
KJV says nothing here about a building process of 49 years. It says the time span between the commandment to build Jerusalem and Messiah is 7+62 weeks. From the commandment until the Messiah is 69 weeks. The actual building is never mentioned; we are not told how many years it took.
Finally, 9:26 does not fit the KJV rendering of 9:25. 9:26 tells us that a cut off messiah comes after 62 weeks. 62 weeks after what? The true answer is, after the 7 weeks. However, KJV in 9:25 joined 7 and 62 into one time frame, saying that Messiah comes after 69 weeks. It is clear from 9:26 that the cut off messiah is unrelated to the 7 weeks. Those 7 weeks belong exclusively to messiah prince, a different individual.
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. Did Jesus do this during that time? We see with our eyes this is false. If missionaries mean spiritual salvation, that is in the invisible realm of the soul. It represents circular reasoning: we believe Jesus invisibly terminated sin, therefore he terminated sin. If they are referring to an actual fulfillment anticipated for the Second Coming, they are speaking of an unfulfilled prophecy and cannot now point to its fulfillment within Daniels 70 weeks .
There is a more basic problem with the missionary interpretation: JESUS WAS NOT ANOINTED! See Uri Yosef's article 'Anointed or Smeared.'
The missionary explanation of Daniel 9 is a mess.
