“Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city”
Daniel 9:24
So begins one of the most pivotal ‘end times’ passages in the old testament. From this verse up until the end of the chapter we are given a 490 year (70 times 7) timeline which leads right up to “the end” (v26), Is this the end of the world or the end of something else? And who is the anointed prince spoken of throughout the passage: Christ or the antichrist?
The End of the World?
To understand the “end” that the passage is leading us towards, we have to begin with a list of six blessings which are due to be realized through this time period (v24). They are grouped into two sets of three, the first three concerning the end of “transgression”, “sin” and “iniquity” and the second three concerning the entrance of “everlasting righteousness”, the confirmation of prophecy and the anointing of a “most holy”.
One common view is to see this as the end of the world. When God makes all things new, sin will be done away with forever in place of perfect righteousness, all prophecies will be completely fulfilled and the whole world will be holy to God. This position has a huge problem to deal with though – how does 490 years take you from the time of Daniel (around 500 BC) right up to the end of the world more than 2500 years later (and still counting)?
Two solutions have been proposed to address this issue. The first solution I’ll describe as the “gap view”. Essentially, this view holds that the first “69 sevens” (483 years) takes place as predicted, but then there is a gap of several thousand years until one day the final seven year period (known as “the great tribulation” by proponents of this view) will begin, triggering the final countdown to the end of the world.
A second solution is what I’ll describe as the “symbolic view”. Essentially, on this view the “seventy sevens” are not literal years but a symbolic time period which take us from the time of Daniel to the end of the world. Usually proponents of this view split the final “seven” into two sections, one of which corresponds to the ministry of Christ and the second of which runs from the death of Christ right up until the end of the world.
Christ or Antichrist?
A related question which needs tackling is the identity of the anointed prince mentioned throughout the passage. The first of these views (the gap view) takes the “anointed prince” as a final antichrist figure of sorts who will persecute the righteous. The second view (the symbolic view) sees a sort of dual fulfilment in both Christ and a future antichrist figure just before the end of the world.
I’m just going to cut to the chase. I don’t think this passage is about the end of the world at all. I also don’t think it has anything to do with a final antichrist. I think this passage is all about Jesus – about his fulfilment of the old covenant, his perfect offering for sin. And I think this is instructive for how we should understand biblical prophecy in general.
Consider again those six blessings mentioned in verse 24. Does Jesus in a real and meaningful sense deal with the problem of “transgression”, “sin” and “iniquity”? Absolutely! By his death on the cross he does away with the penalty of sin. Does Jesus bring in an “everlasting righteousness”? Does he confirm and fulfil old testament prophecy? Yes and Amen.
In fact, the last item mentioned “anoint a most holy” is particularly noteworthy. Usually the “most holy” would refer to the “most holy place” in the temple. However, there’s only one thing referred to as “anointed” throughout the passage – the anointed prince. This tells us that the prince corresponds to the temple in some way. Just as God dwelt in the temple, so too will God dwell in this great prince as a sort of new temple. So this cannot be an antichrist figure – it must be none other than the true Messiah, the one indwelt and anointed by God beyond measure.
The End of Jerusalem
What, then, is the “end” the passage has in view? It’s the end of the city and temple. The passage takes us from the rebuilding of the city and temple after the exile right up to their destruction hundreds of years later. Beginning with the decree to rebuild the city under Cyrus or Artaxerxes (commentators disagree about the starting point), the passage takes us right up to the time of Jesus and his baptismal anointing with the Holy Spirit, which begins the final period of seven years, the final “week”.
In this final period of seven years, a “strong covenant” is established by Jesus (the new covenant). About halfway through this period, Jesus would be “cut off and have nothing” (v26) and in doing so would “put an end to sacrifice and offering” (v27). This is referring to his death on the cross, which fulfils the temple and its worship system, making the need for sacrifice null and void by doing away with the penalty of sin once and for all.
Who are “the people of the prince” who “destroy the city and the sanctuary”? I would argue that they are none other than the Jewish people, the “people” spoken of throughout the chapter (eg. v24). Jesus was after all the king of the Jews, the Messiah of Israel. By putting their Messiah to death, the people of Israel brought judgement and destruction upon their city and temple. This would all come to its ultimate fruition 40 years after the resurrection of Christ, when the Roman general Titus Vespasian (“one who makes desolate”) would bring final destruction and desolation upon Jerusalem and its temple.
The New Jerusalem
It’s noteworthy that the end of the seventy sevens culminates around the time of the stoning of Stephen described in the book of Acts. It was at this time that many Christians had to flee from Jerusalem and were scattered across the empire. The passage takes us then from the gathering of Israel to rebuild the city of Jerusalem and its temple right up to the scattering of the people of God and their departure from those old realities. They had no need for the earthly city and temple any more, having found their home in the new and greater “most holy” of God (Christ) and in the “new Jerusalem” (the Church).
And this is what Daniel could take comfort in hundreds of years earlier. Even though he had been promised that Jerusalem and its temple would be rebuilt after the exile, God gave him a far greater hope than that for the future. He could look beyond the restored temple to a “most holy” person who would fulfil all of the realities of the Law and bring God’s presence to humanity in a way never experienced before. He could look beyond the restored city of Jerusalem to a new Jerusalem whose everlasting righteousness would extend to the far corners of the earth.
Heavenly Gathering 