After the sixty-two weeks the Anointed One will be cut off, and will have nothing. The people of the prince who come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end will be with a flood, and war will be even to the end. Desolations are determined.
Parallel Translations
-
After the sixty-two weeks the Anointed One will be cut off, and will have nothing. The people of the prince who come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end will be with a flood, and war will be even to the end. Desolations are determined.
-
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.
-
And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Messianic Prophecies (1)
Passages read as foretelling the Messiah, with the fulfillment reading and the counter-reading set side by side.
Cross-references (33)
Passages linked to Daniel 9:26 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Isaiah 53:8 He was taken away by oppression and judgment. As for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living and stricken for the disobedience of my people?
- Nahum 1:8 But with an overflowing flood, he will make a full end of her place, and will pursue his enemies into darkness.
- Mark 13:2 Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone on another, which will not be thrown down.”
- Luke 24:26 Didn’t the Christ have to suffer these things and to enter into his glory?”
- Matthew 24:2 But he answered them, “You see all of these things, don’t you? Most certainly I tell you, there will not be left here one stone on another, that will not be thrown down.”
- Mark 9:12 He said to them, “Elijah indeed comes first, and restores all things. How is it written about the Son of Man, that he should suffer many things and be despised?
- Luke 19:43-44 For the days will come on you, when your enemies will throw up a barricade against you, surround you, hem you in on every side, and will dash you and your children within you to the ground. They will not leave in you one stone on another, because you didn’t know the time of your visitation.”
- John 11:51-52 Now he didn’t say this of himself, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but that he might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.
- 1 Peter 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live to righteousness. You were healed by his wounds.
- Isaiah 8:7 now therefore, behold, the Lord brings upon them the mighty flood waters of the River: the king of Assyria and all his glory. It will come up over all its channels, and go over all its banks.
- Daniel 9:27 He will make a firm covenant with many for one week. In the middle of the week he will cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease. On the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate; and even to the full end, and that determined, wrath will be poured out on the desolate.”
- Daniel 11:10 His sons will wage war, and will assemble a multitude of great forces, which will come on, and overflow, and pass through. They will return and wage war, even to his fortress.
- 2 Corinthians 5:21 For him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
- Galatians 3:13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us. For it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree,”
- 1 Peter 3:18 Because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring you to God, being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit,
- Psalms 22:15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd. My tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth. You have brought me into the dust of death.
- Jeremiah 46:7 “Who is this who rises up like the Nile, whose waters toss themselves like the rivers?
- Hosea 1:9 He said, “Call his name Lo-Ammi; for you are not my people, and I will not be yours.
- Amos 8:8 Won’t the land tremble for this, and everyone mourn who dwells in it? Yes, it will rise up wholly like the River; and it will be stirred up and sink again, like the River of Egypt.
- Amos 9:5 For the Lord, Yahweh of Armies, is he who touches the land and it melts, and all who dwell in it will mourn; and it will rise up wholly like the River, and will sink again, like the River of Egypt.
- Matthew 22:2 “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a certain king, who made a wedding feast for his son,
- Matthew 22:7 When the king heard that, he was angry, and sent his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city.
- Matthew 24:6-14 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you aren’t troubled, for all this must happen, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there will be famines, plagues, and earthquakes in various places. But all these things are the beginning of birth pains. Then they will deliver you up to oppression, and will kill you. You will be hated by all of the nations for my name’s sake. Then many will stumble, and will deliver up one another, and will hate one another. Many false prophets will arise, and will lead many astray. Because iniquity will be multiplied, the love of many will grow cold. But he who endures to the end will be saved. This Good News of the Kingdom will be preached in the whole world for a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.
- Mark 13:7 “When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, don’t be troubled. For those must happen, but the end is not yet.
- Luke 21:24 They will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
- Luke 24:46 He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day,
- John 14:30 I will no more speak much with you, for the prince of the world comes, and he has nothing in me.
- Acts 6:13-14 and set up false witnesses who said, “This man never stops speaking blasphemous words against this holy place and the law. For we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place, and will change the customs which Moses delivered to us.”
- 1 Peter 2:21 For you were called to this, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving you an example, that you should follow his steps,
- Daniel 11:17 He will set his face to come with the strength of his whole kingdom, and with him equitable conditions. He will perform them. He will give him the daughter of women, to corrupt her; but she will not stand, and won’t be for him.
- Matthew 23:38 Behold, your house is left to you desolate.
- Luke 21:6 “As for these things which you see, the days will come, in which there will not be left here one stone on another that will not be thrown down.”
- John 12:32-34 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” But he said this, signifying by what kind of death he should die. The multitude answered him, “We have heard out of the law that the Christ remains forever. How do you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up?’ Who is this Son of Man?”
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (18 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain Here Daniel treats of the sixty-two weeks which elapsed…
Here Daniel treats of the sixty-two weeks which elapsed between the sixth year of Darius and the baptism of Christ, when the Gospel began to be promulgated, but at the same time he does not neglect the seven weeks of which he had been speaking. For they comprehend the space of time which intervened between the Persian monarchy and the second edict which again granted liberty to the people after the death of Cambyses. After the sixty-two weeks which should succeed the seven former ones, Messiah shall be cut off, says he. Here the angel predicts the death of Christ. The Jews refer this to Agrippa, but this, as we have already observed, is utterly nugatory and foolish. Eusebius and others refer it to Aristobulus, but this is equally destitute of reason. Therefore the angel speaks of the only Mediator, as in the former verse he had said, until Christ the Leader The extension of this to all the priesthood is both forced and absurd. The angel rather means this — Christ should then be manifest to undertake the government of his people; or, in other words, until Messiah shall appear and commence his reign. We have already remarked upon those who erroneously and childishly explain the name “Leader,” as if it were inferior in dignity to that of king. As the angel had used the name “Christ” in the sense of Mediator, so he repeats it in this passage in the same sense. And surely, as he had formerly treated of those singular marks of God’s favor, by which the new Church was to surpass the old, we cannot understand the passage otherwise than of Christ alone, of whom the priests and kings under the Law were equally a type. The angel, then, here asserts, Christ should die, and at the same time he specifies the kind of death by saying, nothing shall remain to him. This short clause may be taken in various senses, yet I do not hesitate to represent the angel’s meaning to be this — Christ should so die as to be entirely reduced to nothing. Some expound it thus, — -the city or the people shall be as nothing to him; meaning, he shall be divorced from the people, and their adoption shall cease, since we know the Jews to have so fallen away from true piety by their perfidy as to be entirely alienated from God, and to have lost the name of a Church. But that is forced. Others think it means, it shall be neither hostile nor favorable; and others, nothing shall remain to him in the sense of being destitute of all help; but all these comments appear to me too frigid. The genuine sense, I have no doubt, is as follows, — the death of Christ should be without any attractiveness or loveliness, as Isaiah says. (Isaiah 53:2.) In truth, the angel informs us of the ignominious character of Christ’s death, as if he should vanish from the sight of men through want of comeliness. Nothing, therefore, shall remain to him, says he; and the obvious reason is, because men would think him utterly abolished.
He now adds, The leader of the coming people shall destroy the city and the sanctuary Here the angel inserts what rather concerns the end of the chapter, as he will afterwards return to Christ. He here mentions what should happen at Christ’s death, and purposely interrupts the order of the narrative to shew that their impiety would not escape punishment, as they not only rejected the Christ of God, but slew him and endeavored to blot out his remembrance from the world. And although the angel had special reference to the faithful alone, still unbelievers required to be admonished with the view of rendering them without excuse. We are well aware of the supineness and brutality of this people, as displayed in their putting Christ to death; for this event occasioned a triumph for the priests and the whole people. Hence these points ought to be joined together. But; the angel consulted the interests of the faithful, as they would be greatly shocked at the death of Christ, which we have alluded to, and also at his ignominy and rejection. As this was a method of perishing so very horrible in the opinion of mankind, the minds of all the pious might utterly despond unless the angel had come to their relief. Hence he proposes a suitable remedy, The leader of the coming people shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; as if he had said, There is no encouragement for the unbelievers to please and flatter themselves, because Christ was reduced to nothing after a carnal sense; vengeance shall instantly overtake them; the leader of the coming people shall destroy both the city and the sanctuary He names a coming leader, to prevent the unbelievers from resting secure through self-flattery, as if God would not instantly stretch forth his hand to avenge himself upon them. Although the Roman army which should destroy the city and sanctuary did not immediately appear, yet the Prophet assures them of the arrival of a leader with an army which should occasion the destruction of both the city and the sanctuary. Without the slightest doubt, he here signifies that God would inflict dreadful vengeance upon the Jews for their murder of his Christ. That trifler, Barbinel, when desirous of refuting the Christians, says — more than two hundred years elapsed between the destruction of the Temple and the death of Christ. How ignorant he was! Even if we were to withhold all confidence from the evangelists and apostles, yet profane writers would soon convict him of folly. But such is the barbarity of his nation, and so great their obstinacy, that they are ashamed of nothing. As far as we are concerned, we gather with sufficient clearness from the passage how the angel touched briefly upon the future slaughter of the city and the destruction of the Temple, lest the faithful should be overwhelmed with trials in consequence of Christ’s death, and lest the unbelievers should be hardened through this occurrence. The interpretation of some writers respecting the people of the coming leader, as if Titus wished to spare the most beautiful city and preserve it untouched, seems to me too refined. I take it simply as a leader about to come with his army to destroy the city, and utterly to overthrow the Temple.
Read full note →
He afterwards adds, Its end shall be in a deluge Here the angel removes all hope from the Jews, whose obstinacy might lead them to expect some advantage in their favor, for we are already aware of their great stupidity when in a state of desperation. Lest the faithful should indulge in the same feelings with the apostates and rebellious, he says, The end of the leader, Titus, should be in a deluge; meaning, he should overthrow the city and national polity, and utterly put an end to the priesthood and the race, while all God’s favors would at the same time be withdrawn. In this sense his end should be in a deluge Lastly, at the end of the war a most decisive desolation The word נחרצת, nech-retzeth, “a completion,” can scarcely be taken otherwise than as a noun substantive. A plural noun follows, שממות, shem-moth, “of desolation’s” or “devastation’s;” and taken verbally it means “definite or terminated laying waste.” The most skillful grammarians allow that the former of these words may be taken substantively for “termination,” as if the angel had said: Even if the Jews experience a variety of fortune in battle, and have hopes of being superior to their enemies, and of sallying out and prohibiting their foes from entering the city; nay, even if they repel them, still the end of the war shall result in utter devastation, and their destruction is clearly defined. Two points, then, are to be noticed here; first, all hope is to be taken from the Jews, as they must be taught the necessity for their perishing; and secondly, a reason is ascribed for this, namely, the determination of the Almighty and his inviolable decree. It afterwards follows: —
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain He shall seem to have no beauty, nor to…
He shall seem to have no beauty, nor to be of any estimation, as Isa. 53:2.
In this least week of the seventy, shall Christ come and preach and suffer death.
Read full note →
Meaning Titus, Vespasian’s son, who should come and destroy both the Temple and the people without all hope of recovery.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall…
Dan 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.
Ver. 26. And after threescore and two weeks.] See on Dan 9:25. Within these threescore and two weeks befell the Jews many memorable things, as may be seen in Dan 8:1-27 Dan 11:1-45.
Read full note →
Shall Messiah be cut off.] Excindetur, not abscindetur, cut off - that is, by wicked hands crucified and slain; {Act 2:23} not only cast out of the synagogue, and excommunicated, as that malicious Rabbi read and sensed this text. Others of the Jewish doctors, by the evidence of these words, have been compelled to confess that Messiah is already come, and that he was that Jesus whom their forefathers crucified. See for this R. Samuel’s Epistle to R. Isaak, set down at large by Dionys. Carthus. in his commentary on this text. See also R. Osea’s lamentation for this inexpiable guilt of the Jewish nation, recorded by Galatinus, lib. iv. cap. 18. Polanus reporteth that he, living some time in Moravia, where he used the help of some Rabbis for the understanding of the Hebrew tongue, heard them say, that for this ninth chapter’s sake, they acknowledged not Daniel to be authentic, and therefore read it not among the people, lest hereby they should be turned to Christ, finding out how they had been by them deceived.
But not for himself,] i.e., Not for any fault of his, nor yet for any good to himself, but to mankind; whence some render these words, Et non sibi vel nihil ei, There being nothing therein for him: others, When he shall have nothing, i.e., nothing more to do at Jerusalem, but shall utterly relinquish it, and call his people out of it to Pella, &c.
And the people of the prince that shall come,] i.e., Titus’s soldiers, whose rage he himself could not repress, but they would needs burn down the temple, which he would fain have preserved, as one of the world’s wonders. {a} Messiah the prince had a hand in it doubtless, whence also those Roman forces are called his armies. {Mat 22:7}
Shall destroy the city.] That slaughter house of the saints.
And the sanctuary.] That den of thieves.
And the end thereof shall be with a flood,] i.e., Their extirpation shall be sudden, universal, irresistible, as was Noah’s flood. How this was fulfilled, see Josephus, Hegesippus, Eusebius, &c.
And unto the end of the war, &c.] The Romans shall have somewhat to do; but after tedious wars, they shall effect it.
{a} Joseph.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain After the threescore and two weeks. i.e. after the…
After the threescore and two weeks. i.e. after the seven before, and after the sixty-two that followed them, which all make up sixty-nine, referring the angel’s seventy weeks, which is nothing though no week more be described, because it makes up the number a round number, after the Jewish manner of calculation, and there might be some fragments in the particular reckoning to make up the sum, or it might be finished in the seventieth week, and that was enough to call it seventy weeks, Dan 9:24.
Shall Messiah be cut off; which word כרת signifies cutting off, or cutting down, as a tree, Isa 44:14; Jer 10:3. Secondly, it is used for cutting off by capital punishment, Exo 12:15; 30:33,38; whether this be by the signal hand of God, or by the magistrate, for some heinous offence, Lev 18:29; 20:17; Psa 37:34. This foreshows that the death of Christ should be as of a condemned malefactor sentenced to death, and that justly. So did the Jews, Christ’s executioners, proclaim that he died for blasphemy, and that he was a devilish impostor, &c. Yea, God himself charged sin upon him and the curse, Isa 53:4; 2Co 5:21; Gal 3:13.
Read full note →
But not for himself; wl Nyaw which being abrupt, is variously rendered and read; some referring it to Christ, and some to the people: and others to both, and all with very probable conjectures, Psa 22:6,7; Isa 53:3; i.e. not to him: There was none to succour him; or that they would none of him for their Messiah; they set him at nought, and would not have him live, and therefore he would not own them for his people, but cast them off, for thus dying is expressed in short, not to be. Thus Enoch, Gen 5:24, Joseph, Gen 42:36, and Rachel’s children, Jer 31:15; Mat 2:17,18. But our English translation seems to hit the truest sense, i.e. not
for himself. He was innocent and guiltless, he died for others, not for himself, but for our sakes and for our salvation.
The people of the prince that shall come; the Romans under the conduct of Titus Vespantianus. Some will include Christ’s people here, whom he should chiefly gather out of the Roman empire, should ruin that church, and polity, and worship. Desolations are determined; God hath decreed to destroy that place and people by the miseries and desolations of war, i.e. sword, famine, sickness, scattering. All this is signified by
shomemoth: also the profaning of the temple by idols, which are called abominations that make desolate; this was done by the Greeks and Jews before, and the Romans at their siege, and after.
Quest. But some will query, why the angel who was sent to comfort Daniel should insert here this tragical business of destruction and desolation, being beyond the space of seventy weeks?
Answ.
1. That Daniel might be informed of the judgments of God upon that place and people, and the reasons of it, viz. their rejecting and killing Christ.
2. That the spirit of God’s people should not fail when these tragedies were acted; being foretold, thereby they were prepared and fortified against it, and to expect it, and not to be surprised by it when it came.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain And after threescore and two weeks,.... To be reckoned…
And after threescore and two weeks,.... To be reckoned from the end of the seven weeks, or forty nine years, which, added to them, make four hundred and eighty three years:
shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself; by whom is designed the same with Messiah the Prince in Dan 9:25, not Onias the high priest, as a late writer (g) would have it, an upright person, and of great holiness, taken off by an unjust death; since he was dead many years before the expiration of these weeks; nor Hyrcanus the high priest, slain by Herod, as Eusebius (h) thinks; in whom the succession of the ancient priests terminated, and with whom the priestly unction perished; which indeed bids fairer than the former; but he was not a person of so much note as to be pointed at in such a prophecy; besides, the priesthood continued much longer: nor is King Agrippa intended, as Jarchi and Abarbinel, who, they say, was the last king of the Jews, and was slain by Vespasian at the destruction of Jerusalem; which is not true; he was not properly king of the Jews, having only Galilee for his jurisdiction; was not slain by Vespasian; was a confederate of the Romans, lived some years after the destruction of the city, and at last died in peace; but Jesus the true Messiah is intended, with whom the character, dates, and death, and the manner of it, entirely agree: now to his death were to be four hundred and eighty three years; which years ended, as we have observed, in the thirty third year of the vulgar era of Christ, and the nineteenth of Tiberius; when Jesus the true Messiah was cut off in a judicial way; not for any sins of his own, but for the sins of his people, to make satisfaction for them, and to obtain their redemption and salvation; see Isa 53:8, or "he is not", as Jarchi, no more in the land of the living, is dead; see Jer 31:15, or "there is", or "will be, none for him", or "with him" (i), to help and assist him in his great work, Isa 63:5. The Vulgate Latin version is, "they shall not be his people"; the Jews rejecting him shall have a "loammi" upon them, and be no more the people of God. Gussetius (k) better renders it, "he hath not"; or he has nothing, so Cocceius; all things were wanted by him, that is, by Christ; he had neither riches, nor clothes, nor any to stand by him, or to accompany him:
Read full note →
and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; that is, the people of the Romans, under Vespasian their prince, emperor, and general, should, in a little time after the cutting off of the Messiah, enter into the land of Judea, and destroy the city of Jerusalem, and the temple that stood in it; though some understand this of Messiah the Prince that should come in his power, and in a way of judgment upon the Jewish nation, and destroy them for their rejection of him; whose people the Romans would be, and under whose direction, and by whose orders, all these judgments should be brought upon the Jews; but many of the Jewish writers themselves interpret it of Vespasian, as Aben Ezra, Jarchi, Abarbinel, and Jacchiades:
and the end thereof shall be with a flood: the end of the city and temple, and of the whole nation, should be by the Roman army, which, like a flood, would overspread the land, and carry all before it. It denotes the number, power, and irresistible force of the enemy, and the sad devastation made by them:
and unto the end of the war desolations are determined; from the beginning of the war by the Romans with the Jews, to the end of it, there would be nothing but continual desolations; a dreadful havoc and ruin everywhere; and all this appointed and determined by the Lord, as a just punishment for their sins.
(g) Scheme of literal Prophecy, &c. p. 183. (h) Demonstrat. Evangel. l. 8. p. 396, 397. (i) "et non erit ei", Pagninus; "et nullus erit pro co", Vatablus. (k) Comment. Ebr. p. 33.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain And after - After the seven and the sixty…
And after - After the seven and the sixty two that followed them. Not for himself - But for our sakes, and for our salvation. And the people - The Roman under the conduct of Titus. Determined - God hath decreed to destroy that place and people, by the miseries and desolations of war.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 26. And the people of the prince that…
Verse 26. And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary] By the "prince" Titus, the son of Vespasian, is plainly intended; and "the people of that prince" are no other than the Romans, who, according to the prophecy, destroyed the sanctuary, הקדש hakkodesh, the holy place or temple, and, as a flood, swept away all, till the total destruction of that obstinate people finished the war.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Dan 9:26. After threescore and two weeks (counting from…
Dan 9:26. After threescore and two weeks (counting from the expiration of the first interval) shall Messiah be cut off — “This long interval extends from the 93d Olympiad to the 202d Olympiad, or four hundred and thirty- four years; ending with the sixty-ninth [prophetic] week, and with the commencing of our Lord’s ministry. No prophetic characters are here given of the long interval; but they are supplied from other predictions of this great prophet, which respect the Roman people and empire, the Persian monarchy, Alexander and his successors; particularly by that circumstantial prophecy in the eleventh chapter, respecting the Lagidæ and Seleucidæ, and extending to the antichristian persecutions and idolatries typified by those of Antiochus Epiphanes. These four centuries include the most interesting periods of profane history, and their chronology is so well ascertained as to make the computation of Daniel’s weeks mathematically exact. For sixty-two weeks, or four hundred and thirty-four years, added to seven weeks, or forty-nine years, are equal to four hundred and eighty- three years. After which period, or in the last one week, containing seven years, the Messiah should be cut off. The title of MESSIAH is, by way of eminence, peculiar to Christ. It was first used in this prophecy in that appropriate sense. No other application of this title ever obtained among the ancient Jews. Nor can it, without absurdity, be applied to any civil or ecclesiastical prince, much less to a succession in the high-priesthood. It is here used personally, proper to some one anointed; and to whom it is proper is decided by that emphatic circumstance, Messiah shall be CUT OFF, an expression used in Scripture to denote a judicial sentence and a violent death; BUT NOT FOR HIMSELF — Isaiah gives an exact comment on both these expressions, Isa 53:8. HE WAS CUT OFF out of the land of the living; FOR THE TRANSGRESSION OF MY PEOPLE was he stricken.” — Dr. Apthorp.
And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city, &c. — Thus to the death of Christ the angel immediately subjoins the excision of Jerusalem. The people here spoken of are the Romans, and the prince that should come, may mean, as some think, the Messiah; the Romans being called his people, both on account of their present subserviency to his will, and their future conversion to his faith; HE sent forth HIS armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city, Mat 22:7. Or, the prince that should come may be understood of Titus Vespasian, of whom the Roman writers speak as if his military glory chiefly resulted from the taking of Jerusalem. “The actions of this prince, in the conduct of this memorable siege, are related in the fifth and sixth books of Josephus; the most tragical event in history was effected by a prince whose clemency made him ‘the delight of human-kind,’ and who saw, with generous reluctance, the horrors of his own victory. — Jos., 7:5. 2. It is thus Divine Providence distinguishes its counsels and instruments; and the victor himself acknowledged that ‘God was his assistant, that none but God could have ejected the Jews from so strong fortifications,’ Josephus Dan 6:9. 1. They shall destroy the CITY and the SANCTUARY — The specification is remarkable; as Jerusalem, in effect, sustained two separate sieges; one, of the lower city; the other, of the temple, or sanctuary of strength, as our prophet elsewhere styles it, chap. Josephus Dan 11:31, as being not only a magnificent temple newly rebuilt, but a strong fortress, which was consumed by their own fires, against the intention and efforts of their conqueror. — Josephus Dan 6:4, 7.” The end thereof shall be with a flood — The symbol of invading armies:
Read full note →
— — Aggeribus ruptis cum spumeus amnis Exiit, oppositasque evicit gurgite moles, Fertur in arva furens cumulo, camposque per omnes, Cum stabulis armenta trahit. VIRG. ÆN. 2:496.
Not with so fierce a rage the foaming flood Roars, when he finds his rapid course withstood; Bears down the dams with unresisted sway, And sweeps the cattle and the cots away. DRYDEN.
And unto the end of the war desolations are determined — “Which marks the irrevocable decree of Heaven, and the completeness of the devastation, after a continued war of more than seven years.” — Dr. Apthorp.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain And after threescore and two weeks - After the…
And after threescore and two weeks - After the completion of the last period of four hundred and thirty-four years. The angel had shown in the previous verse what would be the characteristic of the first period of “seven weeks” - that during that time the wall and the street would be built in circumstances of general distress and anxiety, and he now proceeds to state what would occur in relation to the remaining sixty-two weeks. The particular thing which would characterize that period would be, that the Messiah would be cut off, and that the series of events would commence which would terminate in the destruction of the city and the temple. He does not say that this would be immediately on the termination of the sixty-two weeks, but he says that it would be “after” אחרי 'achărēy - “subsequent” to the close of that period. The word does not mean necessarily immediately, but it denotes what is to succeed - to follow - and would be well expressed by the word “afterward:” Gen 15:14; Gen 23:19; Gen 25:26, et al. See Gesenius, Lexicon The natural meaning here would be, that this would be the “next event” in the order of events to be reckoned; it would be that on which the prophetic eye would rest subsequent to the close of the period of sixty-two weeks. There are two circumstances in the prophecy itself which go to show that it is not meant that this would immediately follow:
(a) One is, that in the previous verse it is said that the “sixty-two weeks” would extend “unto the Messiah;” that is, either to his birth or to his manifestation as such; and it is not implied anywhere that he would be “cut off” at once on his appearing, nor is such a supposition reasonable, or one that would have been embraced by an ancient student of the prophecies;
Read full note →
(b) the other is, that, in the subsequent verse, it is expressly said that what he would accomplish in causing the oblation to cease would occur “in the midst of the week;” that is, of the remaining one week that would complete the seventy. This could not occur if he were to be “cut off” immediately at the close of the sixty-two weeks.
The careful student of this prophecy, therefore, would anticipate that the Messiah would appear at the close of the sixty-two weeks, and that he would continue during a part, at least, of the remaining one week before he would be cut off. This point could have been clearly made out from the prophecy before the Messiah came.
Shall Messiah - Notes, Dan 9:25.
Be cut off - The word used here (כרת kârath) means, properly, to cut, to cut off, as a part of a garment, 1Sa 24:5 (6), 11 (12); a branch of a tree, Num 13:23; the prepuce, Exo 4:25; the head, 1Sa 17:51; 1Sa 5:4; to cut down trees, Deu 19:5; Isa 14:8; Isa 44:14; Jer 10:3; Jer 22:7. Then it means to cut off persons, to destroy, Deu 20:20; Jer 11:19; Gen 9:11; Psa 37:9; Pro 2:22; Pro 10:31, et al. scepe. The phrase, “that soul shall be cut off from his people,” “from the midst of the people,” “from Israel,” “from the congregation,” etc., occurs frequently in the Scriptures (compare Gen 17:14; Lev 7:20-21; Num 15:30; Num 19:13, Num 19:20; Exo 12:19, et al.), and denotes the punishment of death in general, without defining the manner. “It is never the punishment of exile.” - Gesenius, Lexicon The proper notion or meaning here is, undoubtedly, that of being cut off by death, and would suggest the idea of a “violent” death, or a death by the agency of others.
It would apply to one who was assassinated, or murdered by a mob, or who was appointed to death by a judicial decree; or it might be applied to one who was cut down in battle, or by the pestilence, or by lightning, or by shipwreck, but it would not naturally or properly be applied to one who had lived out his days, and died a peaceful death. We always now connect with the word the idea of some unusual interposition, as when we speak of one who is cut down in middle life. The ancient translators understood it of a violent death. So the Latin “Vulgate, occidetur Christus;” Syriac, “the Messiah shall be slain,” or put to death. It need not be here said that this phrase would find a complete fulfillment in the manner in which the Lord Jesus was put to death, nor that this is the very language in which it is proper now to describe the manner in which he was removed. He was cut off by violence; by a judicial decree: by a mob; in the midst of his way, etc. If it should be admitted that the angel meant to describe the manner of his death, he could not have found a single word that would have better expressed it.
But not for himself - Margin, “and shall have nothing.” This phrase has given rise to not a little discussion, and not a little diversity of opinion. The Latin Vulgate is, “et non erit ejus populus, qui eum negaturus est” - “and they shall not be his people who shall deny him.” Theodotion (in the Septuagint), καὶ κρίμα οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν ἀυτῷ kai krima ouk estin en autō - “and there is no crime in him.” Syriac, “And it is not with him.” The Hebrew is לו ואין ve'ēyn lô - and the interpretation turns on the meaning of the word אין 'ēyn. Hengstenberg maintains that it is never used in the sense of לא lo' (not), but that it always conveys the idea of “nothing,” or “non-existence,” and that the meaning here is, that, then, “there was nothing to him;” that is, that he ceased to have authority and power, as in the cutting off of a prince or ruler whose power comes to an end.
Accordingly he renders it, “and is not to him;” that is, his dominion, authority, or power over the covenant people as an anointed prince, would cease when he was cut off, and another one would come and desolate the sanctuary, and take possession. Bertholdt renders it, Ohne Nachfolger von den Seinigen zu haben - “without any successors of his own “ - meaning that his family, or that the dynasty would be cut off, or would end with him. He maintains that the whole phrase denotes “a sudden and an unexpected death,” and that it here means that he would have no successor of his own family. He applies it to Alexander the Great. Lengerke renders it, Und nicht ist vorhanden, der ihm, angehoret - and explains the whole to mean, “The anointed one (as the lawful king) shall be cut off, but it shall not then be one who belongs to his family (to wit, upon the throne), but a Prince shall come to whom the crown did not belong, to whom the name anointed could not properly belong.”
Maurer explains it, “There shall be to him no successor or lawful heir.” Prof. Stuart renders it, “One shall be cut off, and there shall be none for it” (the people). C. B. Michaelis, “and not to be will be his lot.” Jacch. and Hitzig, “and no one remained to him.” Rosch, “and no one was present for him.” Our translation - “but not for himself” - was undoubtedly adopted from the common view of the atonement - that the Messiah did not die for himself, but that his life was given as a ransom for others. There can be no doubt of that fact to those who hold the common doctrine of the atonement, and yet it maybe doubted whether the translators did not undesignedly allow their views of the atonement to shape the interpretation of this passage, and whether it can be fairly made out from the Hebrew. The ordinary meaning of the Hebrew word אין 'ēyn is, undoubtedly, “nothing, emptiness” - in the sense of there being nothing (see Gesenius, Lexicon); and, thus applied, the sense here would be, that after he was cut off, or in consequence of his being cut off, what he before possessed would cease, or there would be “nothing” to him; that is, either his life would cease, or his dominion would cease, or he would be cut off as the Prince - the Messiah. This interpretation appears to be confirmed by what is immediately said, that another would come and would destroy the city and the sanctuary, or that the possession would pass into his bands.
It seems probable to me that this is the fair interpretation. The Messiah would come as a “Prince.” It might be expected that he would come to rule - to set up a kingdom. But he would be suddenly cut off by a violent death. The anticipated dominion over the people as a prince would not be set up. It would not pertain to him. Thus suddenly cut off, the expectations of such a rule would be disappointed and blasted. He would in fact set up no such dominion as might naturally be expected of an anointed prince; he would have no successor; the dynasty would not remain in his hands or his family, and soon the people of a foreign prince would come and would sweep all away. This interpretation does not suppose that the real object of his coming would be thwarted, or that he would not set up a kingdom in accordance with the prediction properly explained, but that such a kingdom as would be expected by the people would not be set up.
He would be cut off soon after he came, and the anticipated dominion would not pertain to him, or there would be “nothing” of it found in him, and soon after a foreign prince would come and destroy the city and the sanctuary. This interpretation, indeed, will take this passage away as a proof-text of the doctrine of the atonement, or as affirming the design of the death of the Messiah, but it furnishes a meaning as much in accordance with the general strain of the prophecy, and with the facts in the work of the Messiah. For it was a natural expectation that when he came he would set up a kingdom - a temporal reign - and this expectation was extensively cherished among the people. He was, however, soon cut off, and all such hopes at once perished in the minds of his true followers (compare Luk 24:21), and in the minds of the multitudes who, though not his true followers, began to inquire whether he might not be the predicted Messiah - the Prince to sit on the throne of David. But of such an anticipated dominion or rule, there was “nothing” to him.
All these expectations were blighted by his sudden death, and soon, instead of his delivering the nation from bondage and setting up a visible kingdom, a foreign prince would come with his forces and would sweep away everything. Whether this would be the interpretation affixed to these words before the advent of the Messiah cannot now be determined. We have few remains of the methods in which the Hebrews interpreted the ancient prophecies, and we may readily suppose that they would not be disposed to embrace an exposition which would show them that the reign of the Messiah, as they anticipated it, would not occur, but that almost as soon as he appeared, he would be put to death, and the dominion pass away, and the nation be subjected to the ravages of a foreign power. “And the people of the prince that shall come.” Margin, “And they (the Jews) shall be no more his people; or, the Prince’s (Messiah’s) future people.” This seems to be rather an explanation of the meaning, than a translation of the Hebrew. The literal rendering would be, “and the city, and the sanctuary, the people of a prince that comes, shall lay waste.” On the general supposition that this whole passage refers to the Messiah and his time, the language used here is not difficult of interpretation, and denotes with undoubted accuracy the events that soon followed the “cutting off” of the Messiah. The word “people” (עם ‛am) is a word that may well be applied to subjects or armies - such a people as an invading prince or warrior would lead with him for purposes of conquest. It denotes properly
(a) a people, or tribe, or race in general; and then
(b) the people as opposed to kings, princes, rulers (compare λαός laos, the people as opposed to chiefs in Homer, Iliad ii. 365, xiii. 108, xxiv. 28): and then as soldiers, Jdg 5:2. Hence, it may be applied, as it would be understood to be here, to the soldiers of the prince that should come.
Of the prince that shall come - The word “prince” here (נגיד nāgı̂yd) is the same which occurs in Dan 9:25, “Messiah the prince.” It is clear, however, that another prince is meant here, for
(a) it is just said that that prince - the Messiah - would be “cut off,” and this clearly refers to one that was to follow;
(b) the phrase “that is to come” (הבא habbâ') would also imply this.
It would naturally suggest the idea that he would come from abroad, or that he would be a foreign prince - for he would “come” for the purposes of destruction. No one can fail to see the applicability of this to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman power, after the Lord Jesus was put to death. If that was the design of the prophecy, or if it be admitted that the prophecy contemplated that, the language could not have been better chosen, or the prediction more exact. No one can reasonably doubt that, if the ancient Hebrews had understood the former part of the prophecy, as meaning that the true Messiah would be put to death soon after his appearing, they could not fail to anticipate that a foreign prince would soon come and lay waste their city and sanctuary.
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary - The “holy place” - the temple. This is the termination of the prophecy. It begins with the command to “rebuild and restore” the city, and ends with its destruction. The time is not fixed, nor is there in the prophecy any direct intimation when it would occur, unless it be found in the general declaration in Dan 9:24, that “seventy weeks were determined upon the people and the city.” The whole scope of the prophecy, however, would lead to the supposition that this was soon to occur after the Messiah should be “cut off.” The series of events under the Romans which led to the destruction of the city and temple, in fact, began very soon after the death of the Lord Jesus, and ceased only when the temple was wholly demolished, and the city was rased to its foundations.
And the end thereof - Hebrew, “its end,” or “his end” - קצו qı̂tsô. It is not certain as to what the word “it” (ו ô) here refers. It may be either the end of the city, or of the prince, or of the prophecy, so far as the grammatical construction is concerned. As the principal and immediate subject of the prophecy, however, is the city, it is more natural to refer it to that. Hengstenberg renders it, “it will end,” supposing, with Vitringa, that it refers to the subject of the discourse: “the thing - the whole affair - all that is here predicted in this series of events - will end with a flood.” This accords well with the whole design of the prophecy.
With a flood - בשׁטף basheṭeph. That is, it shall be like an overflowing flood. The word used here means a “gushing, outpouring,” as of rain, Job 38:25; of a torrent, Pro 27:4; an overflowing, inundation, flood, Psa 32:6; Nah 1:8. Hence, it would appropriately denote the ravages of an army, sweeping everything away. It would be like a sudden inundation, carrying everything before it. No one can doubt that this language is applicable in every respect to the desolations brought upon Jerusalem by the Roman armies.
And unto the end of the war desolations are determined - Margin, “it shall be cut off by desolations.” Hengstenberg renders this, “and unto the end is war, a decree of ruins.” So Lengerke - and his aufs Ende Krieg und Beschluss der Wusten. Bertholdt renders it, “and the great desolations shall continue unto the end of the war.” The Latin Vulgate renders it, et post finem belli statuta desolatio - “and after the end of the war desolation is determined.” Prof. Stuart translates it, “and unto the end shall be war, a decreed measure of desolations.” The literal meaning of the passage is, “and unto the end of the war desolations are decreed,” or determined. The word rendered “determined” (חרץ chârats) means, properly, to cut, cut in, engrave; then to decide, to determine, to decree, to pass sentence. See the notes at Dan 9:24. Here the meaning naturally is, that such desolations were settled or determined as by a decree or purpose. There was something which made them certain; that is, it was a part of the great plan here referred to in the vision of the seventy weeks, that there should be such desolations extending through the war. The things which would, therefore, be anticipated from this passage would be,
(a) that there would be war. This is implied also in the assurance that the people of a foreign prince would come and take the city.
(b) That this war would be of a “desolating” character, or that it would in a remarkable manner extend and spread ruin over the land. All wars are thus characterized; but it would seem that this would do it in a remarkable manner.
(c) That these desolations would extend through the war, or to its close. There would be no intermission; no cessation. It is hardly necessary to say that this was, in fact, precisely the character of the war which the Romans waged with the Jews after the death of the Saviour, and which ended in the destruction of the city and temple; the overthrow of the whole Hebrew polity; and the removal of great numbers of the people to a distant and perpetual captivity. No war, perhaps, has been in its progress more marked by desolation; in none has the purpose of destruction been more perseveringly manifested to its very close. The “language” here, indeed, might apply to many wars - in a certain sense to all wars; to none, however, would it be more appropriate than to the wars of the Romans with the Jews.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Weeks, or four hundred and thirty-eight years, which elapsed…
Weeks, or four hundred and thirty-eight years, which elapsed from the twentieth of Artaxerxes to the death of Christ, according to the most exact chronologists. (Calmet) --- Slain. Protestant: "cut off, but not for himself, and the people of the prince that," &c. (Haydock) --- St. Jerome and some manuscripts read, Christus, et non erit ejus. The sense is thus suspended. The Jews lose their prerogative of being God’s people. (Calmet) --- Christ will not receive them again. (St. Jerome) -- Greek: "the unction shall be destroyed, and there shall not be judgment in him." The priesthood and royal dignity is taken from the Jews. (Theod.) --- The order of succession among the high priests was quite deranged, while the country was ruled by the Romans, and by Herod, a foreigner. (Calmet) --- Leader. The Romans under Titus. (Challoner; Calmet)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain after threescore and two weeks--rather, the threescore and two…
after threescore and two weeks--rather, the threescore and two weeks. In this verse, and in Dan 9:27, Messiah is made the prominent subject, while the fate of the city and sanctuary are secondary, being mentioned only in the second halves of the verses. Messiah appears in a twofold aspect, salvation to believers, judgment on unbelievers (Luk 2:34; compare Mal 3:1-6; Mal 4:1-3). He repeatedly, in Passion week, connects His being "cut off" with the destruction of the city, as cause and effect (Mat 21:37-41; Mat 23:37-38; Luk 21:20-24; Luk 23:28-31). Israel might naturally expect Messiah's kingdom of glory, if not after the seventy years' captivity, at least at the end of the sixty-two weeks; but, instead of that, shall be His death, and the consequent destruction of Jerusalem.
not for himself--rather, "there shall be nothing to Him" [HENGSTENBERG]; not that the real object of His first coming (His spiritual kingdom) should be frustrated; but the earthly kingdom anticipated by the Jews should, for the present, come to naught, and not then be realized. TREGELLES refers the title, "the Prince" (Dan 9:25), to the time of His entering Jerusalem on an ass's colt, His only appearance as a king, and six days afterwards put to death as "King of the Jews."
Read full note →
the people of the prince--the Romans, led by Titus, the representative of the world power, ultimately to be transferred to Messiah, and so called by Messiah's title, "the Prince"; as also because sent by Him, as His instrument of judgment (Mat 22:7).
end thereof--of the sanctuary. TREGELLES takes it, "the end of the Prince," the last head of the Roman power, Antichrist.
with a flood--namely, of war (Psa 90:5; Isa 8:7-8; Isa 28:18). Implying the completeness of the catastrophe, "not one stone left on another."
unto the end of the war--rather, "unto the end there is war."
determined--by God's decree (Isa 10:23; Isa 28:22).
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 26. R.V. reads, “And after the threescore and two…
26. R.V. reads, “And after the threescore and two weeks shall the [an] anointed one be cut off.” Delitzsch and Zockler, as recent evangelical scholars generally, accept Onias III as the “anointed one” referred to here. Onias was the last Jewish high priest who ruled in the regular succession. He was deposed by Antiochus about 175 B.C. and murdered 171 B.C. This awful event must have made a tremendous impression upon the Jewish world. (Compare Dan_11:22; 2Ma_4:35.) Others of the newer critics explain this as referring to the murder of Seleucus Philopator by Heliodorus; but this seems less probable than the above. It is a significant fact that “Jewish exposition in pre-Christian times is united in referring this section [Dan_9:25-27] to the Maccabean era of tribulation under Antiochus Epiphanes” (Zockler). The older exegetes follow here the punctuation of the A.V. and, uniting the seven with the sixty-two weeks, see a direct reference to Jesus the Messiah, who was cut off at the end of the sixty-nine prophetic weeks. (See note Dan_9:25 and our remarks on “The Seventy Weeks,” Introduction to Daniel, II, 10.) The argument of Dr. Terry that an (or, “the”) anointed one in Dan_9:26 should be the same as the anointed one in Dan_9:25, while valid in ordinary historic narration, does not apply so forcibly in apocalyptic writings, which were made purposely obscure and of a double meaning.
But not for himself — This translation of the Hebrew cannot be defended. The R.V. is better, “and shall have nothing,” or, as the margin, “there shall be none belonging to him” (or, “for him”). Kautzsch renders freely, “without his having any (fault).” There are grammatical objections to every translation and the meaning is very obscure. Behrmann and many others render “and no one follows [succeeds] him.” Most critics who hold the newer interpretation of the passage explain it as meaning that Onias had no legitimate successor. Those who hold to the direct Messianic interpretation, and yet accept the critical Hebrew text generally, take it to mean that the Messiah had no one to stand for him as protector or helper when threatened with death.
Read full note →
The people of the prince that shall come — According to the most common form of the newer critical interpretation this refers to the army of Antiochus (compare Jdg_5:2), who came from Rome after the death of Onias and devastated Jerusalem, destroyed the sanctuary, and massacred forty thousand of its inhabitants. For the objection that Antiochus did not literally destroy Jerusalem compare notes Eze_29:8-12. According to the older view this phrase refers to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.
And the end thereof shall be with a flood — In-stead of “the” end R.V. renders “his” end, as also the A.V., in the margin. The difficulty is to know whether the flood sweeps away the sanctuary or the people or the prince. It seems most natural to refer it to the city and sanctuary, over which the invading army sweeps like a deluge (Dan_11:22; compare Nah_1:8).
And unto the end of the war — Rather, with R.V., “and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined.” Instead of the perfect security, victory, and peace which Daniel at the close of the seventy years’ captivity would probably have expected from the prophecy of Jeremiah which he was reading (Dan_9:2; compare Jer_29:11; Jer_29:14; Jer_30:8; Jer_30:10; Jer_30:19-20; Jer_33:10-16), the “perpetual desolations” which Jeremiah had prophesied against the heathen (Jer_25:12) are now prophesied against Jerusalem clear down to the end of the seventy weeks. Only after these seventy weeks of calamity can the real fulfillment of all Jeremiah’s prophecies of restoration and joy take place.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 26. And after the threescore and two weeks shall…
26. And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and shall have no …] The ‘anointed one’ cannot be the same as the ‘anointed one’ of Dan_9:25; for he lives 62 ‘weeks’ (i.e. 434 years) after him. The language is intentionally allusive and ambiguous. The term ‘anointed’ (see on Dan_9:25) is used sometimes of the high-priest; and the reference, it seems, is here to Onias III. Onias III. was high-priest till b.c. 175, when he was superseded by his brother Jason, who by the offer of 440 talents of silver purchased the office from Antiochus for himself (2Ma_4:7-9). Jason held office for three years, at the end of which time a certain Menelaus, whom he had employed as his agent to carry the 440 talents to the king, took advantage of the occasion to secure the high-priesthood for himself by offering Antiochus 300 talents more. The money promised by Menelaus not being paid, he was summoned before the king. When he arrived he found Antiochus absent in Cilicia and a courtier named Andronicus representing him at Antioch. Menelaus, anxious to secure Andronicus’s favour, presented him with some golden vessels which he had stolen from the Temple. Onias, who was in the neighbourhood, hearing of what he had done, rebuked him sharply for his sacrilege; and Menelaus, resenting the rebuke, prevailed upon Andronicus to assassinate Onias. Antiochus, upon his return home, was vexed with what had occurred, and (according to 2 Macc.) had Andronicus put to death at the very spot at which he had murdered Onias (2Ma_4:7-9; 2Ma_4:23-38). The assassination of one who was the lawful high-priest was an occurrence which might well be singled out for mention in the prophecy; and how the godly character of Onias, and his unjust end, impressed the Jews, appears from what is said of him in 2Ma_3:1-2; 2Ma_4:2; 2Ma_4:35-37; 2Ma_15:12[339]. On the chronological difficulty involved in the verse, see below, p. 146 f.
[339] This account of the end of Onias III. is accepted generally by historians (e.g. Ewald, v. 295; Schürer2, i. 152; Grätz ii. 2, 303): but 2 Macc. (which alone records it) is known to contain much that is not historical; and Josephus not only does not mention the assassination of Onias, but, while he sometimes (Ant. xii. ix. 7, xiii. iii. 1–3, xx. x.) speaks of Onias’ son as fleeing to Egypt, and founding there the temple at Leontopolis, elsewhere (B. J. i. i. 1, vii. x. 2–3) says that Onias himself, after Antiochus attack upon Jerusalem in 170 (Introduction, p. xliii.), fled to Egypt, and founded the temple at Leontopolis (cf. Bäthgen, ZATW., 1886, pp. 278–282). On, these and some other grounds, Wellhausen (Gött. Gel. Anz. 1895, pp. 950–6; Isr. u. Jüd. Gesch.3, 1897, pp. 244–7), partly following Willrich (Juden u. Griechen vorder Makkab. Erhebung, 1895, pp. 77–90), regards the account of Onias’ murder in 2 Macc. as apocryphal: see, however, on the other side, Büchler, Die Tobiaden u. die Oniaden (1899), pp. 106–124, 240 f., 275 f., 353–6, whose conclusion on this subject has the weighty support of the historian Niese, Kritik der beiden Makkabäerbücher (1900), p. 96 f. If Wellhausen’s view is correct, the reference in this verse of Dan. will be to the cessation of the legitimate high-priesthood, when Jason was superseded by the Benjaminite (2Ma_4:23; cf. 2Ma_3:4; Büchler, p. 14) Menelaus.
Read full note →
and shall have no.…] The clause is difficult; though the same text (ואין לו) was perhaps already read (but rendered incorrectly) by the LXX. (καὶ οὐκ ἔσται), and is distinctly implied by Aq., Symm., and the Pesh. The rendering ‘and shall have nothing’ may be defended by Exo_22:3 [Hebrews 2], though, it is true, the ‘thing’ lacking is there more easily supplied from the context than is the case here; but the sense obtained is not very satisfactory, and the sentence (in the Heb.) reads also incompletely; we should have expected, ‘and shall have no [helper].’—as Grätz would actually read, comparing Dan_11:45,—or ‘[successor],’ or ‘[seed],’ or something of the kind. Still, if the text be sound, this, it seems, must be the meaning: the ‘anointed one,’ when he is ‘cut off,’ will have nought, i.e. he will be left with nothing,—no name, no house, no legitimate successor. (LXX. and be no more, would be the correct rendering of ואיננו; but this reading is suspiciously easy.) The rendering of A.V., ‘but not for himself,’ is an impossible one: אין is not a synonym of לא, but always includes the substantive verb, ‘there is not,’ ‘was not,’ ‘shall not be’ (the tense being supplied according to the context).
the people of a prince that shall come] viz. against the land, the verb being used in the same hostile sense which it has in Dan_1:1, Dan_11:13; Dan_11:16; Dan_11:21; Dan_11:40-41. The allusion is to the soldiery of Antiochus Epiphanes, who set Jerusalem on fire, and pulled down many of the houses and fortifications, so that the inhabitants took flight, and the city could be described as being ‘without inhabitant, like a wilderness’ (1Ma_1:31-32; 1Ma_1:38; 1Ma_3:45)—‘people’ being used as in 2Sa_10:13, Eze_30:11, &c., of a body of troops. On the treatment which the Temple received at the same time, see above on Dan_8:11.
but his end (shall be) with a flood] he will be swept away in the flood of a Divine judgement. The word (cf. Dan_11:22) may be suggested by Nah_1:8; cf. the cognate verb (also of an overwhelming Divine judgement) in Isa_10:22 (‘overflowing with righteousness,’ i.e. judicial righteousness, judgement), Isa_28:2; Isa_28:15; Isa_28:17-18, Isa_30:28.
and until the end (shall be) war, (even) that which is determined of desolations] until the end (i.e. until the close of the seventieth week,—the period pictured by the writer (see on Dan_8:17) as the ‘end’ of the present dispensation), the war waged by Antiochus against the saints (Dan_7:21) will continue, together with the accompanying ‘desolations,’ determined upon in the Divine counsels. The word rendered ‘that which is determined,’ which recurs in Dan_9:27, and Dan_11:36, is a rare one; and is manifestly a reminiscence of Isa_10:23; Isa_28:22. For ‘desolations,’ comp. 1Ma_1:39; 1Ma_3:45; 1Ma_4:38 (quoted in the notes on Dan_8:11).
26, 27. The 70th week (b.c. 171 to 164).
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (26) After threescore and two weeks.—These words can only…
(26) After threescore and two weeks.—These words can only mean that in the seventieth week the Anointed one shall be cut off. Observe the care with which the seventy weeks are arranged in a series of the form 7 + 62 + 1. During the period of seven weeks Jerusalem is to be rebuilt. The “troublous times” are not to be restricted to this period, but may apply to the sixty-two weeks which follow. After the end of the sixty-nine weeks Messiah is to be cut off. By “Messiah” we must understand the same person who is spoken of in Dan_9:25. It should also be observed that the word “prince,” which is applied to Messiah in Dan_9:25, is here used of another person—some secular prince, who stands in opposition to the Messiah. The Greek versions render “unction” instead of “anointed,” whence Jacob of Edessa explains “the cutting off” to mean “the cessation of the unction by which judgment and sovereignty were established.” The word “to cut off,” however, applies to a person more appropriately than to a thing. It is frequently used of excommunication, e.g., Exo_30:33; Exo_30:38, Psa_37:9, and must not be mistaken for the word “to cut off” (Isa_53:8).
But not for himself.—On the marginal rendering comp. Joh_14:30. Literally the words mean, and He has not, but what it is that He loses is left indefinite. Taking the sense according to the context, the meaning is either that He has no more a people, or that His office of Messiah amongst His people ceases.
Read full note →
That shall come.—These words imply coming with hostile intent, as Dan_1:1; Dan_11:10. Two such princes have been already mentioned (Dan_7:23, &c., Dan_8:23, &c.), the one being Antiochus, the other his great antitype, namely, Antichrist. Are we to identify this “prince” with either of these? Apparently not. Another typical prince is here introduced to our notice, who shall destroy the city and the sanctuary after the “cutting off” or rejection of the Messiah. But it must be noticed that the work of destruction is here attributed to the “people,” and not to the “prince.”
The end thereof.—It is not clear what end or whose end is signified. According to grammatical rules, the possessive pronoun may either refer to “sanctuary, the last substantive, or to “prince,” the chief nominative in the sentence. The use of the word “flood” (Dan_11:22) (comp. “overflow,” Dan_11:26) makes it, at first sight, more plausible to think of the end of a person than of a thing. (Comp. also Nah_1:8.) But upon comparing this clause with the following, it appears that by “the end” is meant the whole issue of the invasion. This is stated to be desolation, such as is caused by a deluge.
Unto the end.—That is, until the end of the seventy weeks, desolations are decreed. The words recall Isa_10:22-23.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain And after three score and two weeks shall Messiah…
And after three score 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. The version of the LXX is nearly unintelligible as it stands, though the genesis of each separate clause from a text akin to the Massoretic can be easily understood, "And after seven and seventy and sixty-two, the anointing shall be taken away, and shall not be, and the kingdom of the heathen shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the Messiah, and his end shall come with wrath, and it shall be warred with war till the time of the end." The first clause has strayed from the end of the preceding verse, and (shibeeem), "seventy," is confused with (shibooeem), "weeks." It is a possible thing that the Kabbalistic use of numbers had something to do with this number, for if these numbers are expressed in letters, and the letters taken as initials, we have the initials of this sentence d mz lbb Tymls, "The time until the overthrow of Babylon." They must have read hj instead of jy It is difficult to understand how "the people of the prince that shall come" could be read, "the kingdom of the Gentiles." save by supposing a somewhat arbitrary paraphrase. The last clause has probably assumed the present shape through the insertion of some part of the verb and the omission of the end of the verse. Theodotion"s rendering is in closer agreement with the Massoretic text, yet is wide from it too, "After the sixty-two weeks anointing shall be utterly destroyed, and judgment is not in it (or "him," aujtw), and he (it) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the leader that cometh; they shall be cut off with a flood, even until the end of the war, having been arranged by disappearances in order." The introduction of krima is difficult to explain, except as an explanatory addition from Isa_53:8. Still more difficultis it to understand the genesis of the last clause. The Peshitta, though considerably closer to the Massoretic in the beginning of the verse, is as far apart in the last clause, "And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed shall he killed, and there was not to him, and the city of the holy shall be destroyed with the king that cometh and his end is with a flood, even until the end of the war of the fragments of destruction." The Vetus, as represented by the quotation in Tertullian, is not so close to the LXX as it usually is, "And after the sixty-two weeks, even the anointing shall be destroyed, and shall not be, and with the coming leader he shall destroy the holy city, and thus shall be destroyed in the end of the war, because he shall be destroyed even to death." This version agrees neither with the LXX nor with Theodotion. Jerome translates into an eminently Christian sense, "And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain, and his people who will deny him will not be. And his people with a leader about to come, will destroy the city and sanctuary, its end wasting, and after the end of the war desolation determined." And after three score and two weeks shall the Messiah be cut off. The period of sixty-two weeks must begin after the seven weeks have ended, as the completed period to Messiah the prince is seven weeks and sixty-two weeks. The Messiah: the word has no article, and, therefore, it is argued, it ought to be rendered "an anointed one;" but the use of the article is not so rigid. It is omitted in poetic and semi-poetic passages: eg. the first word in the Hebrew Bible is anarthreus, although we are obliged to translate it with the article. Further, the Messiah the Prince has already been mentioned, and, therefore, comes somewhat into the region of proper names, as Amo_7:12, "the sanctuary of king," instead of "the king;" so 1Ki_21:13, "curse God and king." We take "Messiah" here as equivalent to "the Messiah" above mentioned. Who is it that is here referred to? The common critical position assuming, without reason assigned, that "anointed" without any subject may refer to a priest, asserts that the reference here is to Onias III The account of his murder is given in RAPC 2Ma 4:39. He had succeeded his father, Simon If., as high priest, B.C. 198. In connection with his high-priesthood is the legendary story told (RAPC 2Ma 3) of the attempt of Heliodorus to spoil the temple. On the accession of Epiphanes, Jason, the brother of Onias, endeavoured to undermine him with the king, and succeeded: Onias, displaced, in favour of Jason, retired to Antioch. Three years after Jason, in turn, was superseded by Menelaus, who, according to 2 Maccabees, was a Benjamite. Onias rebuked Menelaus for selling some of the sacred vessels; Menelaus bribed Andronieus to put Onias to death, which he did, alluring him from the sanctuary of Daphne, in which he had taken refuge. Josephus gives a different account of matters (Ant. ," 12:5), "About this time, Onias having died, he (Epiphanes) gives the high-priesthood to his brother Jesus, for the son whom Onias left was only a child. This Jesus, who was brother of Onias, was deprived of the high-priesthood. The king, being angry with him, gave it to his youngest brother Onias." Josephus adds, "These two brothers changed their names Jesus became Jason, and Onias Menelaus. After a little, Onias (Menelaus) was expelled from Jerusalem, and retired to Antiochus and abjured his religion." In 1 Macccabees there is no reference to the death of Onias at all. Certainly the First Book of Maccabees does not take up this part of the history, but if this Onias was murdered, and his murder so affected Jewish feeling, that it became a date of superlative interest in Jewish history the writer would at least have referred to it. The whole story, as told in 2 Maccabees, has a doubtful look. Even if we disregard the Heliodorus legend altogether, and the suspicion of the whole history which it engenders, we have Menelaus, a man who, according to 2 Maccabees, is a Benjamite, intruded into an office for which only Aaronites were eligible, without a hint that the writer thought it an additional element in the guilt of the usurper. Josephus mentions it as a point against Alcimus, that he was not of the high-priestly family (Ant. ," 11:9. 5), yet Alcimus was a descendant of Aaron. (RAPC 1Ma 7:13) We have, further, a zealous Jew retiring to Antioch, and, when in danger, betaking himself for safety to the heathen sanctuary of Daphne. We know the orgies that consecrated the groves of Daphne. These would make Daphne the last place in which a Jewish high priest would seek refuge; if his very presence in the sanctuary would not be held by the Greeks as polluting it. Titus, even though we had not the express evidence of Josephus against it, the narrative is self-condemned. The whole story is baseless, and, whether true or false, did not affect Jewish imagination in the way assumed by critics. Had the story been that, while high priest, he was allured from the sacred precincts of the temple at Jerusalem and been murdered, then the legend, even if untrue, might well have affected the Jews deeply. But a high priest who had surrendered his office and retired into a heathen city was a less sacred person, and his allurement from a heathen sanctuary and his murder was a less heinous crime. The whole notion that Onias III can be thought of here is an absurdity that would have been scouted at once by these critics, had any necessity of argument required it. The origin of this legend of the murder of Onias IIl. is to be sought in the murder or execution of Onias Menelaus by order of Antiochus Eupator (Jos., Ant. ," 12:9. 5; RAPC 2Ma 13:5). Is the anointed one Seleucus Philopator? Bleek, von Lengerke, Maurer, and Ewald hold this view. Seleucus is alleged to have been murdered by Helio-dorus: this rests on the sole authority of Appian, in a narrative in which there is evidence of confusion. Even if it be granted, it is difficult to imagine a heathen prince called "Messiah." Certainly Cyrus is called so in the Second Isaiah, but this is because of the work he is to do for Israel. There seems a necessity to maintain that it was some one who was to be the anointed prince of the Jewish people, who should thus be cut off. But not for himself. Great difference of opinion exists as to the precise meaning of this phrase. The meaning expressed by the Authorized Version would have required at least in normal Hebrew, not wOl yaw (v"ayin lo), but wOl aOlw (velo"lo). The Revised Version is preferable, "and shall have nothing." It may mean "he shall not be," but that is not so natural. The Revised, however, is vague, and one is inclined to seek for an explanation in a parallel passage in Dan_11:45, wOl riziwP yaew) "And there was no helper to him." It is no sufficient answer to say, as does Professor Bevan, that Dan_11:45 applies to Epiphanes, and this does not. The same statement might be made of two different persons. It seems to be a more condensed expression of what we find in Isa_63:3, "Of the people there was none with me." Behrmann"s translation is indefensible, "No one remains to him, i.e. follows him;" he gives no particular reference. This view assumes Onias III to be the Messiah. He was, according to Josephus, on his death succeeded by first one and then the other of his two brothers, because his son was too young for the office. The further assumption has to be made that, in the opinion of the pious, they were not successors of Onias. The pious of that time have left no record of their opinions. And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The word translated "prince" is rarely to be rendered" king." The only cases are these of Solomon (1Ch_29:22) and Hezekiah. (2Ki_20:5) The former was anointed, dygn, while his father was still living; the latter occurs in a poetical passage. Priests are sometimes called" princes," or "rulers," but that is simply in regard to the house of God and the sacerdotal arrangements. If the verse stood by itself, there would seem little possible difficulty in regard to accepting the old Jewish interpretation which made "the prince" Titus, who was left to carry on the siege of Jerusalem while his father was in Rome, busied with the duties incumbent on the occupant of the imperial throne. Certainly the Romans, the people of the prince, did destroy the city and the sanctuary in a more thorough way than any one since Nebuchadnezzar. And the end thereof shall be with a flood. It is difficult to decide the reference of "thereof" here. The reference grammatically seems to be restricted to "the people," as that is the nominative of the preceding verb. It may, however, without much grammatical strain, refer to the prince. In regard to prophecy, especially apocalyptic prophecy, grammar cannot be regarded as affording a final canon for interpretation. The main subject of the verse is the Messiah who shall be cut off. There might, therefore, be a reference to him, "his end" being the vengeance that came upon the people for deserting him. This is the interpretation of the Septuagint, "The kingdom of the heathen shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the Messiah," identifying "prince" with "Messiah," and his end shall come with wrath." Theodotion refers to the city and the sanctuary, for he has, "They shall be cut off with a flood." The Peshitta refers to the king that cometh. The Vetus has finem belli. Jerome has finis eius vastas, his reference being to the city. The idea of Hitzig, that the prenominal suffix refers to the campaign, seems the most natural one. Of course, Hitzig refers it to the campaign of Antiochus, but the interpretation does not necessitate that. With a flood; not a literal flood. This word does not elsewhere refer to a number of men, save in the eleventh chapter of this book; that chapter, however, is of doubtful authenticity. All that we draw from the use of shateph, "a flood," for "a multitude of men," and of shataph, to overflow," "to overrun," is that, in the opinion of the author of the eleventh chapter, the phrase here means "a multitude of men." "Wrath," or "devastation," seems to be the best meaning of the word. The latter seems, on the whole, the more natural rendering here. If so, no one can fail to see how apt a description it gives of the state of Judaea, and especially of Jerusalem, after the war which was concluded by the capture of the city by Titus. And unto the end of the war desolations are determined. Rather it should be rendered, "until the end was the decree of desolations," viz. the end of this campaign above referred to, and until that end is reached, war, which is itself a decree of desolations, is determined. Taken thus, this clause explains that which has gone before. The text here, however, is evidently in such a corrupt state that no decision can be made with any feeling of confidence. The Septuagint appears to have read yillahaym instead of nehresheth, and has omitted the last word altogether. Theodotion has, "by order in disappearances," but one cannot tell what Hebrew words these represent. The Vetus, which usually stands closely related to the Septuagint, omits a number of words. The uncertainty of the text renders one chary of suggesting meanings.
Vers. 26, 27.
Read full note →
The close of the Jewish economy.
after three score and two weeks," etc. (vers. 26, 27). The angel passed from the restoration of the city to the coming of Messiah and the close of the Judaic dispensation. This is the manner of prophecy to seize on the great epochs in the history el the Divine dealings with man.
I THE DEATH OF THE CHRIST.
1. It was to be violent. "Messiah was to be cut off." An ominous and portentous phrase to every Jewish mind. Ever used of the close of the career of the wicked (Exo_31:14; Psa_37:9; Pro_2:21, Pro_2:22) The phrase implies a supernatural agent too; so in this case. (Act_2:23)
2. Without cause. In Hebrew, literally, "There is nothing to him." The Septuagint gives the meaning doubtless: Kaima oujk estin ejn aujtw. "In him was no sin;" he "did no sin;" he "knew no sin." Pilate"s verdict: "I find in him no fault at all.
II THE DESTRUCTION OF THE JEWISH POLITY.
1. The instruments. "And the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary." That the prince is not the Christ is evident:
(1) Because of his designation simply "a prince.
(2) He is to "come" clearly from without the Jewish state.
(3) His invasion was to be after the death of Messiah. So the context indicates. History shows that the prince was Titus.
1. The mode. "And its end with inundation, and to the end, war; decree of desolations." The foreign army should sweep everything before it. The war was to be exterminating. No intermission of calamity until no city was left on which calamity could fall.
2. The reason. Note the inner connection of the passage between the cutting off of Messiah and the fall of the city and polity between Calvary and the coming of Titus. (Luk_19:41-44) When Christ wept over the city, the nation in heart had rejected him. Formally, and in so many words, in the course of a few days they discarded their only Saviour. For that rejection, city and nation descended into the abyss. As it was at the end of the Jewish economy, so shall it be at the close of the Christian. The condemnation will not be sin, but rejection, or neglect of the sinner"s Saviour. (Joh_3:18)
III THE CONFIRMATION OF THE COVENANT.
1. The Confirmer. The Lord Jesus. His august Personality has been prominent throughout. The actions described in ver. 24 are his. in Isa_42:1-7, specially in ver. 6, Christ is described as Divine Covenant incarnate.
2. The covenant. Neither the old nor the new, but that one comprehensive covenant of salvation, of which they were transcripts.
3. Its confirmation was by the Redeemer"s words of grace, miracles, and death; by the Pentecostal effusion; by the first preaching of the gospel, especially to the Jews.
4. The time. From the commencement of the Lord"s ministry to about the time of the death of Stephen and the scattering of the Jewish Church about seven years. By that time the nation rejected both the Messiah and that Spirit who came with Pentecostal power and grace. Then was the nation dead, waiting for the fire of the Divine judgments. The "hebdomads seventy" were ended. Henceforth the history in the Acts of the Apostles turns to the Gentiles.
5. With whom. "With many." But all showed the nation"s sin.
IV THE CESSATION OF SACRIFICE. He shall cause the sacrifice," etc., that is, Christ the Lord.
1. In mercy. The sacrifices might cease:
(1) either literally;
(2) or, their object accomplished, they might become useless, and in time disappear. In the latter sense they were made to cease. No need of the finger of the type, when the glory of the Antitype filled the world. Herein mercy. He offered up sacrifice for the people"s sins "once, when he offered up himself." "Once in the end of the world" he "put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
1. In judgment. Not long was it ere in judgment they ceased literally.
2. In permanence. Ceasing, they cease for ever, and no power of man can ever restore what has been doomed by God. (See description of the signal attempts of Julian the Apostate to restore the sacrifices, and its remarkable failure, in Dr. Smith"s Dict. of the Bible, art. Jerusalem, by James Fergusson, vol. 1:1015, b.) "The Word of our God stands for ever.
V THE CONSUMMATION We read, "And upon the wing of abominations, a desolator; even until destruction, and that determined, shall be poured upon the desolate." The passage would be difficult before the events, intentionally so, but not so difficult after. The design was, perhaps, to throw out fragments of thought rather than give a continuous idea; to light up with lightning rather than with sunshine. After speaking of the cessation of sacrifice, attention is fixed on the temple, some high point of it, soaring portion, "wing." A "wing of abominations," the temple hateful on account of its corruptions. The temple must become detestable
(1) by corruption;
(2) from within, ere any desolator is allowed to touch it. Note the lesson well. But having become abominable, look! watch! behold the desolator, i.e. the Roman! But how long shall the Roman eagle look down upon the temple threateningly? "Until destruction, and that which is decreed, shall be passed upon the desolate." Daniel"s prayer was offered in sight of a desolate Jerusalem; the vision opened by the angel ends with a desolation more appalling. "How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! R.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain Shall Messiah be cut off, but not for Himself.
Dan_9:26
Shall Messiah be cut off, but not for Himself.
Read full note →
Cut off, but not for Himself
The Messiah here mentioned is the great and only God, who, in reference to His office as the anointed Saviour, was called Messiah, and also Christ. He is said to be cut off, but not for Himself. His being cut off denotes His being made a sacrifice. His being cut off, but not for Himself, implies His being made a sacrifice for us--that is, as our substitute. In no other way can justice be appeased; in noother way can sins be forgiven. The expression implies that He died as a sacrifice for the general good, and as a vicarious sacrifice. Christ died to make an atonement for our sins; and without that atonement we could never have been saved. (W. Durham.)
For the Sake of Others
On the side of some mighty tower you may see often a fragile rod. The rod saves the tower. It directs the vague, all-destroying electric flame of which the stormy air is full harmlessly into the earth. Such a lightning-rod is every righteous man to the city or class in which he lives. His one desire is to win some wondrous good for his fellow-men. That is what Christ did for all the world, and we are true Christians in as far as we are consciously trying to do for others the work of Christ. We cannot at the best do much we have only one life, one second that is in Gods eternity to do it in, but that becomes majestic when it is regarded as part of one mighty whole. (Dean Farrar.)
.
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 sixty-two sevens
sixty-two sevens
This is not the normal way the Israelites counted. If possible, try to translate in a way that preserves this use of the number seven. See how you translated this number in Daniel 9:25. AT: "sixty-two times seven"
Read full note →
the anointed one will be destroyed and will have nothing
This can be stated in active form. AT: "people will destroy the anointed one and he will have nothing" (See: Active or Passive)
the anointed one
Anointing is a symbolic act to show that someone is chosen. See how you translated this title in Daniel 9:25. AT: "the person that God anoints" or "the person that God chooses"
a coming ruler
This is a foreign ruler, not "the anointed one." AT: "a foreign ruler who will come" or "a powerful ruler who will come"
Its end will come with a flood
The army will destroy the city and the holy place just as a flood destroys things. (See: Metaphor)
Desolations have been decreed
This can be stated in active form. AT: "God has decreed ruin for the city and sanctuary" or "God has declared that the enemy army will destroy everything" (See: Active or Passive)
translationWords
anoint
rule
holy place
flood
desolate
decree
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 9:26 the Anointed One (literally an anointed): Those who…
9:26 the Anointed One (literally an anointed): Those who see the fulfillment of this passage in the time of Antiochus IV point to the murder of the high priest Onias III in 171 BC as the fulfillment of this prophecy (see study note on 11:22). Those who see the fulfillment of this passage in the time of Christ will refer this prophecy to the crucifixion of the Messiah in AD 30 or 33. • The ruler who will arise could refer to Antiochus IV, who attempted to destroy the Jewish people and their worship in the Temple between 171 and 164 BC (see 1 Maccabees 1:20-40). Many believe, however, that the destruction of the city and the Temple refers to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 66–70. • The end refers to the completion of the seventy sets of seven. The text implies that the very end is a later time, and that the war would continue into the future (cp. Matt 24:4-8; Mark 13:5-8). • The image of a flood often represents an invading army (cp. Dan 11:10, 22, 40; Nah 1:8) or devastating destruction.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.