ESV Study Bible Notes on the "Seventy Weeks" of Daniel 9

We have found the notes included in the ESV Study Bible to be consistently helpful as we collaborate in sermon preparation.  They provide basic context, historical background and, in passages like Daniel 9, a fair summary of different understandings of difficult texts.  It successfully shines outside light on the text, without distracting from or imposing outside views of the text itself.  We offer the notes that follow as a helpful summary - with a chart no less! - of four common views of the "Seventy Weeks" in Daniel 9, including how it would have been understood by the Jews two centuries before Christ in what we call the Maccabean Period. - Pastor Aaron & Pastor Bill

CLICK HERE for Amazon.com connection to the ESV Study Bible

From the ESV Study Bible

There are many suggested interpretations of the seventy weeks (or “seventy sevens,” see ESV footnote), but there are three main views: (1) the passage refers to events surrounding Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 b.c.); (2) the 70 sevens are to be understood figuratively; and (3) the passage refers to events around the time of Christ. Most scholars understand the 70 “sevens” to be made up of 70 times seven years, or 490 years, but they apply these years to different periods of time. (See chart below.) In any case, the important point is that God has appointed the amount of time, and thus his people should not lose heart.

(1) Those who hold the first view often understand the word to restore and build Jerusalem (v. 25) to allude to Jeremiah’s prophecy of the “seventy years of captivity” (Jer. 25:1, 11), which began in 605 b.c. (or some start at 586, when the Babylonians destroyed the temple) and extended to the cleansing of the temple by Judas Maccabeus (164) or the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (164). These solutions give only an approximate fulfillment for the “seventy weeks” (since 490 years after 605 is 115 b.c., and 490 years after 586 is 96 b.c.). An objection to this view is that it is hard to see how the events around Antiochus IV could fulfill the purpose for the “seventy weeks” (such as, “to finish the transgression,” to make “an end to sin,” “to bring in everlasting righteousness”).

(2) Scholars who hold the second view believe the 490 years (7 + 62 + 1, each multiplied by seven years) to be symbolic periods of time ending in the first century a.d. Support for finding symbolism here comes from the mention of “seventy” in Dan. 9:2, and the connection of “seven” to the weekly Sabbath (Lev. 23:3), to the Feast of Weeks (Lev. 23:11–16, “seven weeks”), to the sabbatical year (Lev. 25:3–4, connected to discipline of the people in Lev. 26:34–35; 2 Chron. 36:21), and to the Jubilee year (Lev. 25:8, “seven weeks/Sabbaths of years”). These numbers can therefore imply God’s perfect appointment of time. One approach for this second view is simply to say that 70 × 7 symbolizes the ultimate in completeness, and no further specificity is implied. Another approach is to see three broad periods, with the first period of seven sevens extending from Cyrus’s decree allowing the Jews to return and build the temple (538 b.c.) to about the time of Ezra and Nehemiah in the fifth century (c. 458–433). Then the 62 weeks extends from about 400 b.c. to the advent of Christ. The last “seven” goes from the first advent of Christ to sometime after his death, but before the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70. An argument against this view is that the enumeration of 7 + 62 + 1 weeks seems to be intended to give a much more precise chronology rather than just a sequence of three periods of history. In addition, the purposes for the 70 weeks do not appear to be fulfilled in a.d. 70 (“to finish transgression,” “to put an end to sin,” and “to bring in everlasting righteousness”). Some interpreters who hold a symbolic view have suggested it refers to periods of time ending with Christ’s second coming, which would answer this last objection.

(3) The third view sees the “seventy sevens” as a literal period of 490 years, culminating around the time of Christ. But what starting date can be used for this? (a) The starting date for this period of time is not likely to be 538 b.c., when Cyrus gave permission for the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple (2 Chron. 36:23; Ezra 1:2–4), for that was not a decree to build the city, and 490 years from 538 yields 48 b.c., a date of no great significance. (b) One reasonable possibility is the decree of Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:12–26, which occurred in 458 b.c. (see note on Ezra 7:6–7). Though this decree still has much to do with provisions for the temple, it makes provision for “magistrates and judges” (Ezra 7:25) and thus assumes rebuilding of a city would take place. And 490 years after 458 b.c. is exactly a.d. 33, the most likely date of the crucifixion of Christ. (See article on The Date of Jesus’ Crucifixion.) (458 + 33 = 491, but one year must be subtracted since there was no year 0, so from 458 b.c. to a.d. 33 is exactly 490 years, or “seventy sevens.”) This calculation also fits Dan. 9:24, for Christ’s death accomplished the things mentioned there as what would be done in the 70 weeks: “to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness.” Possibly a better understanding of this interpretation is that the 7 + 62 = 69 weeks in v. 25 brings us to a.d. 26, and some NT scholars think that Jesus began his ministry in a.d. 26 and died in 30. But v. 26 simply says, “After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing,” and in this interpretation Jesus’ death did occur shortly after the 62 weeks. (This understanding of the verse allows for Jesus’ death in either a.d. 30 or 33.) (c) A third possibility for the start of the 490 years is 445 b.c., when Artaxerxes gave letters to Nehemiah authorizing him to rebuild the wall and to build a home in Jerusalem (Neh. 2:5–8; cf. Neh. 2:1 for the date, 13 years after Ezra 7:7). But 490 years after 445 b.c. gives a.d. 46, a date well beyond the crucifixion of Christ. An alternative to this view is to see Christ’s death occurring in the sixty-ninth week, which would be a.d. 39, but that is still too late. However, some interpreters argue that a “year” in this prophecy should be calculated at 12 months × 30 days = 360 days (cf. Dan. 12:7, 11; Rev. 11:2; 12:6). On that basis, 69 “weeks” of such years equals 483 years of 360 days, and that comes out to a.d. 32 or 33, depending on whether Artaxerxes’ letter in Neh. 2:5–8 is dated 445 or 444 b.c. It is difficult to decide among these alternatives.

An additional question is whether Daniel’s prophecy allows for a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. Dispensational interpreters understand Dan. 9:26 to allow for the entire church age, and v. 27 to describe the seventieth week, which includes the seven-year great tribulation and the appearance of the Antichrist. Dispensationalists argue that Daniel’s vision appears to be dealing primarily with the events regarding the nation of Israel, not the Gentiles. Other interpreters have thought that no such gap is implied by Daniel’s words.

There are many difficulties in deciding between these interpretations, which also involve questions of the proper approach to interpreting biblical prophecy. In all of this it is crucial not to miss Daniel’s message for his audience, namely, that God has allotted the amount of time for these events, and therefore his people should trust and endure.

9:24 Gabriel’s message was that Daniel’s requests for a transformation in the state of his people and city would be answered. The very year of Daniel’s request (cf. v. 1 with 2 Chron. 36:23; Ezra 1:2–4) would be the initial end of the desolations of Jerusalem, for Cyrus fulfilled this when he allowed God’s people to return home. But Gabriel surpasses that event and explains when the ultimate desolations of Jerusalem would be over. The transgression, sin, and iniquity of Israel that had led to their abandonment by God (Dan. 9:7) would ultimately be atoned for. God would bring everlasting righteousness, making his people into a holy nation. Because of the past neglect of the words of the prophets by his people (v. 6), the Lord would seal their words as an ancient document writer might seal a letter. God would stamp the words of the prophets as authentic expressions of his mind through their fulfillment. To anoint a most holy place might refer to the sanctuary in Jerusalem and its reconsecration by Judas Maccabeus in 164 b.c., or to the “anointing” of the heavenly “most holy place” by Christ when he died (cf. Heb. 9:11–14, 23–24); some even take it as the anointing of a future temple, according to their reading of Ezekiel 40–48. The Lord was committed to bring in the promised new covenant of Jer. 31:31–33. However, this promised new covenant would not arrive at the end of the 70 years of the exile. That period of judgment was a small part of a larger plan of God, which would take seventy weeks (or “sevens,” ESV footnote) rather than 70 years to work itself out.

9:24 Atonement comes in Christ (Heb. 7:23–8:6; 10:1–14). Everlasting righteousness comes both with Christ the perfectly Righteous Savior (Acts 3:14) and with the righteousness that he gives to his people in justification (Rom. 3:23–26; 2 Cor. 5:21).

9:25–26 The promised restoration of God’s people and sanctuary would come in three stages. (See note on vv. 24–27 for various views of the actual dates.) The first seven sevens would run from the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem to the time when that rebuilding was complete (perhaps 458–409 b.c., or 445–396). This period of restoration, along with the subsequent sixty-two sevens after the city had been rebuilt, would be a time of trouble. The messianic ruler would make his appearance at the end of these 69 sevens. Even the appearing of this anointed one, a prince, would not immediately usher in the peace and righteousness that Jeremiah anticipated. Instead, the anointed one (Hb. mashiakh, from which “Messiah” is derived) would himself be cut off (v. 26), leaving him with nothing, surely a reference to the crucifixion of Christ. After the cutting off of the anointed one, the people of the prince (Hb. nagid) who is to come would destroy Jerusalem and its sanctuary. Many commentators understand this “coming prince” as a reference to the Roman general Titus, whose army destroyed Jerusalem in a.d. 70, or as a reference to a future antichrist. Other interpreters understand this prince to be the same “anointed prince” (Hb. mashiakh nagid) anticipated in v. 25. This person is addressed as “anointed one,” where the focus is on his priestly work of offering himself as a sacrifice, and as a “ruler” whose people fail to submit to his rule. The principal cause of the destruction of the city and temple of Jerusalem in a.d. 70 was the transgression of God’s people in rejecting the Messiah that God had sent to them (Luke 19:41–44).

The 70 Weeks of Daniel 9

9:27 he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. On one interpretation, this refers to Christ’s atonement. With the death of Jesus on the cross, the atoning sacrifices of the OT were abolished (Heb. 10:1–9). His death brought those whom God had chosen into the new covenant relationship with the Lord. On another interpretation, if “the prince who is to come” (Dan. 9:26) is not the Messiah but an opponent of God’s people, then “he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering” means he will destroy the temple, and the prediction refers to the destruction of Jerusalem. The final part of v. 27 is extremely difficult to translate. Literally, it reads, “In the middle of that seven, he will put an end to sacrifice and offering, and on account of the extremity [or “wing”] of abominations that cause desolation, until the end that has been decreed, it will be poured out unto desolation.” On the connection of “abominations” and “makes desolate,” see note on 11:31–32. Yet a third interpretation comes from dispensational scholars, who have argued that 9:27 will be fulfilled at the end of the church age, during the great tribulation. The argument in support of this position is as follows: If the first 69 weeks end with the death of Jesus, and if he comes back after the “seventieth week” to punish the one who makes desolate, then there must be a gap or period of time between these weeks (namely, the entire church age). Often this gap is explained as the time when God is dealing with the church and not specifically Israel, and thus it is not part of the “seventy sevens.” In the climactic seventieth week, the ruler (taken to be the “Antichrist”) makes a strong covenant (“treaty or alliance”) with many (i.e., the Jewish people) for three and a half years and then puts “an end to sacrifice and offering” that he had allowed to be offered in a rebuilt temple (cf. Isa. 66:6; Ezekiel 40–44; 47; Rev. 3:12; 11:1–2). The cutting off of the sacrifices will then usher in the second half of the “great tribulation” (by this reading of Rev. 7:14; cf. Matt. 24:21) because it will be an intense time of persecution. The final part of Dan. 9:27 envisages a climactic abomination that causes the devastating final judgment decreed for the Antichrist (the one who makes desolate). Other interpreters do not see such a specific prediction in v. 27.