The End of the Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9:24- #1
The End of the Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9 – #1
Seventy Weeks Are Determined… To Seal Vision and Prophecy
Did the Seventy Weeks End in AD 34-35?
Daniel 9:24-27 continues to be one of the most fascinating and important of OT prophecies. Dispensationalists appeal to the text to support their idea of a two millennia gap between the sixty ninth week of Daniel’s 70 week program. As a general rule, both Amillennialists and Postmillennialists ascribe no genuine eschatological significance to these verses, positing the end of the end of the Weeks in either AD 34-35 or, some even in AD 70. Yet, again, they do not ascribe any genuine eschatological significance to the text. This is unfortunate and misguided for several reasons.
First, Daniel 9:24 foretold the time when all prophecy would be fulfilled. That is, as I demonstrate in my book, Seal Up Vision and Prophecy, the meaning of the text that says, “Seventy Weeks are determined to seal vision and prophecy.” In my book I give a wealth of documentation, from across the entire spectrum of theological thought, to prove this. While futurists seek to dismiss– or even simply ignore– the meaning of these words, the meaning is clear. Daniel 9 was predicting the time for the fulfillment of all prophecy. Nothing is more eschatological than that!
Second, Daniel 9:24 foretold the bringing in of “everlasting righteousness.” This is nothing but the prediction of the coming of the New Heaven and Earth anticipated by Isaiah as well as the NT writers. Peter said that he and his audience was eagerly awaiting the New Creation “according to his promise” (2 Peter 3:13). John likewise looked for the imminent coming of the New Creation as promised by the OT prophets (Revelation 22:6).
So, when commentators all but summarily dismiss Daniel 9:24f as a critical eschatological text they are doing themselves and their readers a great disservice.
As noted above, Dispensationalism considers Daniel 9 to be of critical importance. According to the late John Walvoord, called “the dean of Dispensationalism,” Daniel 9:24-27 was the climactic center of Daniel: “In many respects, this is the high point of the book of Daniel.” (John Walvoord, Daniel: Key to Prophetic Revelation, (Chicago; Moody, 1971), 201).
Daniel 9 is particularly important for the Dispensational view of the postponed kingdom idea. In fact, Thomas Ice, with whom I have engaged in formal debate, says this of the importance of Daniel 9 to the “Delayed kingdom” idea: Thomas Ice:
Without a futurized (i.e. postponed, DKP), seventieth week, the dispensational system falls apart. There can be no pre-tribulational rapture, great tribulation, or rebuilt temple without the gap. (Thomas Ice, Internet Article: www.according2prophecy.org/seventy-weeks-pt2.html .)
Even in Post-Tribulational Millennial circles, Daniel 9 is appealed to in support of a 2000 year gap between the 69th and 70th Week. In a thesis on Daniel 9, Nicholas Berry (2015) wrote:
Through the utilization of a theological- This paper will show that there is an intently important gap of immeasurable time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel’s vision, thus supporting that the appropriate interpretive view is a post-tribulational and futurist interpretation. (https://www.academia.edu/33817831/The_Gap_in_Daniels_Seventy_Weeks_A_Post_Tribulational_Futurist_Perspective?auto=download&email_work_card=download-paper).
While Daniel 9 firmly refutes the Dispensational claims, when properly understood, it likewise refutes the futurism of the Amillennial and Postmillennial views.
The focus of this series of articles is to demonstrate several things:
First, Daniel 9 cannot be used to justify a 2000 year postponement of the kingdom.
Second, as already suggested, to verify that Daniel 9 is a critically important eschatological text.
Third, to show that the Weeks did not and could not have ended in AD 34-35.
Fourth, to prove conclusively that the Weeks ended at the time of the Jewish War of AD 66-70.
My approach is to begin with point #3. The establishment of this point will go a long way in refuting Postmillennial and Amillennial views. If the Weeks did not end in AD 34-35 both of those schools of thought are left with few options.
Did the Weeks of Daniel 9 End in AD 34-35?
It is common among Amillennialists and Postmillennialists, and even among some preterists, to suggest that Daniel’s Weeks ended in AD 34-35. I believe this is untenable and will list only two major reasons why.
#1 – The Seventy Weeks were determined by God to “seal vision and prophecy” which, according to widespread scholarly consensus meant to bring the prophetic office to a close through the fulfillment of all prophecy. In my aforementioned book, I document this very thoroughly and comprehensively.
Among those scholars who expressed this was Jerome, who said that the Jews believed that “seal up vision and prophecy” meant: “And so shall the vision and the prophecy be sealed, with the result that there shall be no more any prophet to be found in Israel, and the saint of Saints shall be anointed.” (Jerome’s Commentary, Daniel, (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1958), 108). Many, many scholars -both ancient and modern – could be cited in full support of this position, but for brevity just take note of what the proper definition of “seal vision and prophecy” means for the claim that the Weeks ended in AD 34-35.
Seventy Weeks were determined to seal vision and prophecy, i.e. to bring the prophetic office to an end through the fulfillment of all prophecy.
The Seventy Weeks ended in AD 34-35 per some scholars.
Therefore, the prophetic office came to an end through the fulfillment of all prophecy in
AD 34-35.
Commentators often try to counter this implication by claiming that “seal vision and prophecy referred to the specific prophecy of the Seventy Weeks itself or to the prophecy of Jeremiah 29. In other words, Seventy Weeks were determined to fulfill the vision of the Weeks. But the noted Hebraists, Keil and Delitzsch effectively refuted that claim:
Against this view stands the fact of the absence of the article; for if by חָזֹון that (singular, DKP) prophecy is intended, an intimation of this would have been expected at least by the definite article, and here particularly would have been altogether indispensable. It is also condemned by the word נָבִיא added, which shows that both words are used in comprehensive generality for all existing prophecies and prophets. Not only the prophecy, but the prophet who gives it, i.e., not merely the prophecy, but also the calling of the prophet, must be sealed (Keil, C. F., & Delitzsch, F. (1996). Commentary on the Old Testament (Vol. 9, pp. 721–722). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson- Keil and Delitzsch clearly understood that the prophetic office would only cease at the “end of time” but while that construct is false, their linguistic analysis is sound).
Even Kenneth Gentry seemed to “catch the power” of what “seal vision and prophecy” truly meant, although he was reluctant to follow the evidence. Commenting on Daniel 9 he said:
It has been pointed out by several evangelical scholars that also contained in Daniel is an important prophecy which seems to tie the close of the canon and all prophetic revelation to the AD 70 destruction of the temple. Daniel 9:24 reads, ‘Seventy Weeks are determined… to make an end of sin, to make the atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy place… after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince that is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood.’ This seventy weeks of years period is widely held among conservative scholars to read to the First Advent of Christ. The usefulness of this passage is enhanced by the fact that Christ draws from it in His Olivet Discourse which is clearly related to the AD 70 destruction of the Temple (Mat. 24:1-2) This argument deserves greater explication, but may lead us afield from our primary concern (Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, Tyler, Tx, 1989),135).
So the bottom line is that seal vision and prophecy spoke of the coming time when the prophetic office would come to an end because no further prophecy would be needed. What is important to see is that the NT agrees with the posit that the prophetic office, along with the charismatic gifts, would come to an end in the first century.
☛ In 1 Corinthians 1:4-8 Paul wrote to the Corinthians church to remind them of how they had been confirmed in the Word by the gifts of the Spirit. He also assured them that they would continue to be confirmed “to the end” that they might be found blameless at the Day of the Lord. When we realize that Jesus posited his coming at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matthew 24:29-34) this confirms this assessment.
So, Paul envisioned the cessation of the gifts, which included the prophetic office, at the Day of the Lord which Jesus placed at the judgment of Jerusalem. This agrees perfectly with Daniel 9 that foresaw the end of the prophetic office at the end of the Weeks, terminating in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. It is clear from the language that he expected that “end”, that Day, within the first century generation, not millennia in the future.
☛ Likewise, in Luke 21:22 we find direct confirmation of this view. In describing the impending judgment on the beloved city, the Lord said, “these be the days in which all things written must be fulfilled.”
Commentators often try to “qualify” the “all things written” by claiming, as Kenneth Gentry does:
The grammar of the passage (Luke 21, DKP) limits the declaration. Jesus speaks of ‘all things which are written’ by employing a perfect passive participle: ‘gegrammena’ (‘having been written’). This refers to prophecies already written – when he speaks in AD 30. Yet we know that more prophecies arise later in the New Testament revelation.
Once again we see a limitation on Jesus’ statement. Furthermore, technically it does not even refer to any prophecy which Christ speaks. For these are not prophecies that have already been written. That being the case, the final resurrection (for instance) is outside of this declaration (Jn 5:28-29). Thus, Jesus is referring to all things written in the Old Testament. At this stage of redemptive history those are the only prophecies that had already been written. (He Shall Have Dominion, (2009, 542f).
As I pointed out in a response to Gentry, he actually destroys his own futurist eschatology by his claims. The reason is simple:
“All things written” referred to by Jesus in Luke 21;22 referred to all things (all prophecy) written in the Old Testament – Gentry.
But the Old Testament foretold the end of the age Day of the Lord, the judgment, the resurrection and the New Creation (Isaiah 2-4 / Isaiah 65-66 / Daniel 12:2).
Therefore, since all things written (prophesied) in the Old Testament were to be fulfilled in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem (per Gentry) this means that the end of the age Day of the Lord, the judgment, the resurrection and the New Creation were all fulfilled in the events of the judgment of Jerusalem in AD 70.
Others, such as the vitriolic Jason Bradfield, try to mitigate the power of Luke 21:22 by claiming that what Jesus meant was that only all things written concerning the judgment of Jerusalem would be fulfilled in AD 70. Bradfield as typical of his articles, like Gentry, had clearly not thought through what he was asserting. Here is why.
In my book, These Are the Days When All Things Must Be Fulfilled, I demonstrate, with a wealth of Scriptural proof, that in the Tanakh, every single constituent element of the end times eschatological narrative is inseparably linked to the judgment of Jerusalem! That includes the coming of the Lord, the judgment, the kingdom, the time of salvation, the resurrection. Everyone of those elements is tied to the judgment on the Old Covenant world of Israel and the destruction of Jerusalem. You simply MUST catch the power of this fact!
I pointed all of this out also in a series of articles responding to Bradfield. I wrote those articles in 2019, and to my knowledge, Bradfield (nor Gentry in articles in which I answered his claims), has hit a key to respond to my articles). In fact, Gentry has been challenged numerous times to engage me in a formal debate, but totally refuses to do so.
So, in Luke 21:22 we have perfect agreement with Daniel 9. The Seventy Weeks were determined to bring the prophetic office to a close by the fulfillment of all prophecy. The end of the Weeks was to be at the destruction of the city and sanctuary. And Jesus, who cites Daniel 9 in the Olivet Discourse, posited the fulfillment of “all things written” at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem.
Unless one can prove- definitively- that seal vision and prophecy did not refer to the fulfillment of all prophecy, then since Jesus alluded to Daniel in his prediction of the coming destruction and affirmed that in those days, “all things written” would be fulfilled, this means that the Weeks were not fulfilled and did not end in AD 34-35. You cannot place the fulfillment of all things written beyond – or before – the time at which Jesus said “all things written” would be fulfilled.
☛ Another corroboration for the idea that all prophecy was fulfilled- vision and prophecy were sealed– in AD 70, is found in Revelation 10:5-7 and Revelation 11:15f
The angel whom I saw standing on the sea and on the land raised up his hand to heaven and swore by Him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and the things that are in it, the earth and the things that are in it, and the sea and the things that are in it, that there should be delay no longer, but in the days of the sounding of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound, the mystery of God would be finished, as He declared to His servants the prophets (Revelation 10:5-7).
Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!” And the twenty-four elders who sat before God on their thrones fell on their faces and worshiped God, saying: We give You thanks, O Lord God Almighty, The One who is and who was and who is to come, Because You have taken Your great power and reigned. The nations were angry, and Your wrath has come, And the time of the dead, that they should be judged, And that You should reward Your servants the prophets and the saints, And those who fear Your name, small and great, And should destroy those who destroy the earth (Revelation 11:15-19).
While an in-depth discussion of the importance of Revelation 11 would be fruitful and interesting, not to mention tremendously important, for brevity, I just want to focus on the issue of the fulfillment of all prophecy as foretold by Daniel 9.
Take careful note that this vision in Revelation 10:6-7, as many scholars agree, is highly reminiscent of Daniel 12:6-7, which in turn is directly parallel to Daniel 9. Both Daniel 9 and Daniel 12 foretold the resurrection. Daniel 9 foretold the coming of the world of everlasting righteousness. This is the New Creation of 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21-22, that follows the resurrection. Daniel 12 predicted the resurrection “out of the dust” (12:2). It would be when the prophets would be rewarded with their eternal inheritance (Daniel 12:13). And here in Revelation 11, at the sounding of the last, the seventh trumpet, we find the resurrection. It is, “the time of the dead that they should be judged and that you should reward your servants the prophets and the saints.”
Focus now on the fact that in Daniel 9, all vision and prophecy would be fulfilled within or by the time of the end of the Seventy Weeks that were to end no later than the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. (More on this later). Well, in Revelation 10-11, we find the final fulfillment of all that the prophets had foretold taking place at the sounding of the last trumpet – the time of the resurrection. But keep in mind that this takes place at the destruction of the city, “Where the Lord was crucified” (Revelation 11:8). So, both Daniel 9 and Revelation 10-11, posit the fulfillment of all that the prophets had foretold at the same identical time: the time of the destruction of Jerusalem.
Now, since the Weeks could not end until the fulfillment of the prophets, the sealing of vision and prophecy, and since Revelation undeniably posits the fulfillment of that “mystery of God foretold by the prophets” at the judgment of Jerusalem, it is anachronistic, to say the least, to have the Weeks ending decades before all prophecy was actually fulfilled.
What all of this means is that you cannot, logically, affirm that the Seventy Weeks ended in AD 34-35 without being able to prove – definitively – that “seal vision and prophecy” did not mean the cessation of the prophetic office through the fulfillment of all prophecy. OR, you must be willing to say that all prophecy was fulfilled in AD 34-35. To say that this would be a totally indefensible position is a huge understatement.
Daniel 9 foretold the fulfillment of all prophecy within the confines of the seventy weeks.
All prophecy was NOT fulfilled in AD 34-35 – and no one believes it was.
Therefore, the end of the seventy weeks was not in AD 34-35.
More to come.