Jesus' Words Only

 Daniel Chapter 9 Says God Will Send A Messiah to Atone

 

Why Do We Not Ever Hear About this Passage?

 

Daniel's prophecy of Messiah in Daniel 9:24-27 is only one of 2 prophecies in all of Holy Scrpture that uses the term "Messiah" for a future figure. The other is Psalm 2. (On that passage, see this link.)

 

Daniel's prophecy of Messiah represents God's response to Daniel's prayer for mercy. In that prayer, Daniel acknowledged that God's mercy— favor and looking away from past sin— depended upon the people satisfying repentance on God's terms stated in the Ten Commandments. In Daniel 9:4, Daniel verbatim quotes from Exodus 20:6 from within the Ten Commandments. So let's read that Exodus passage first:  

[I] show[] mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

In the next quote, Daniel is quoting this passage from within the Ten Commandments -- Exodus 20:6 -- wherein God gives His principle of mercy and grace if you obey them. Daniel introduces the quote as follows: 

And I prayed unto the Lord my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments; (Daniel 9:4 KJV)

Daniel was acknowledging thereby the two conditions of mercy stated right within the Ten Commandments. Is it faith in God?  No. Rather it is both love of God, and obedience to His commandments. 

 

Jesus twice teaches the same, paraphrasing Exodus 20:6, in Matthew 19 and Luke 18. See Was Jesus Ever Point Blank Asked How to Have Eternal Life?

 

What commandments does Exodus 20:6 reference? In the context in which Exodus 20:6 appears, it meant these Ten Commandments.

 

Then only after this plea for mercy in Daniel 9:4 quoting Exodus 20:6, did God send Gabriel to explain a Messiah who would provide the atonement to cover the nation's sins over which Daniel repented as a representative. 

 

Gabriel begins by explaining that God heard his "pleas for mercy" (Dan. 9:23 ESV), and then God commanded Gabriel to tell Daniel he was "highly esteemed" and that God would send a "Messiah" who would "make atonement for iniquity." (Daniel 9: 24.)  It further says in verse 26 that Messiah will be "cut off but not for himself." (Daniel 9:26.) The meaning is subtle but also self-evident in hindsight. Messiah himself will provide the blood of the atonement -- the blood of an innocent living being whom is atoning not for his own sin, but for the sins of others.

 

So a plea by Daniel for mercy on the conditions stated in the Ten Commandments -- quoting Exodus 20:6 in fact -- was responded to by God with a promise to send a Messiah to atone for sin of which Daniel repented for himself and for Israel. In that prayer, Daniel made clear he knew the conditions for mercy: love of God, and obedience to God. Daniel was impliedly promising he and the nation of Israel would satisfy those conditions of repentance in return for God's mercy and forgiveness. This is what triggered God's response to send a Messiah figure "to make an atonement." (Daniel 9: 24.)

 

Again, it is key to remember Daniel is quoting those mercy requirements from Exodus 20:6. A provision appearing right between the first and second of the Ten Commandments.

But if God were going to use Paul's message in the future, should not have God said the following?

'Daniel, you and your people don't need to change or obey or love me; you only need to believe that I am sending a messiah who will die for your sins, be buried, and whom I will resurrect. Whoever believes those facts truly happened after they happen, they will be saved.'

That's what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:1-6 saves you. 

This passage by Paul represents an Atonement-based creedal Christianity. Salvation is determined solely by what facts you believe about atonement. If you believe Christ's atonement applies to you, his atonement supposedly saves you

But that's not the offer of conditions of love and obedience by Daniel that led to God promising a Messiah to Israel in the first place. God was promising to have a Messiah to make the necessary atonement -- apparently for all time -- to match the promise of repentance that Daniel was offering God on behalf of God's people. 

 

Amazing Prophecy of Date Messiah Killed.

 

What explains why we virtually never hear about the most amazing proof of Jesus' validity as Messiah in the book of Daniel, as we will prove below? Is it because it is couched in a gospel of grace -- mercy -- that offends the ears of many? That cheap grace gospel barrier is dominant. But for its interference, who would doubt we should have all been taught many times about the following amazingly time-specific prophecy:

 

Daniel is writing in approximately 604 BC. In the passage quoted next, it says that the Messiah will be "cut off" by at least 69 periods of 7s (years)  after the order goes out to rebuild Jerusalem. (The city laid in ruins due to the Babylonians taking away the Jews to Babylon for 70 years, destroying the city as they left.) See Daniel 9:25-26 (7 sevens and 62 sevens).

 

To be clear, technically, it says Messiah will come to make atonement at the 69 periods of 7 years after the order to rebuild Jerusalem  -- including its streets and walls. (9:25). It separately says sometime after an earlier date of 62 periods of sevens Messiah will be "cut off." (9:26.) So that means Messiah is said to "come" (arrive) by the 69th period of 7 years, and will be "cut off" sometime after the earlier date of 62 periods of 7s. So for all intents and purposes, Messiah is to be "cut off" (killed) by the same point in time He "comes" to Jerusalem to atone: 69 periods of sevens, and no later. We know from hindsight his atonement when he came was to let himself be "cut off" not for his own sin (as Daniel said) but for the sin of others, as we can now see. Hence, when you connect the dots, Messiah will be cut off when he comes to Jerusalem to atone at the 69 sevens point.

 

So here is Daniel 9:25-26 from the KJV:

 

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going

forth of the commandment to restore and to build

Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven

weeks, and threescore [3x20] and two weeks:

the street shall be built again, and the wall, even

in troublous times.

 

26 And after threescore (3x20) 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.

 

Before we continue, let's pause to undestand the word which the KJV translated as "weeks" can mean week but in fact the word has a meaning of simply seven of anything, whether days, weeks, years, etc., which is derived from context:

 

The word 'week' also means seven (Hebrew shevua), and can mean seven of anything - days, months or years. (Tim LaHaye, Edward Hinson, The Popular Bible Commentary (Harvest House, 2007) at 246.)

 

With that said, let's continue. 

 

We already extracted two different time-lines from these verses above. Now let's find out when the order went out to rebuild Jerusalem. This way we can calculate when is the 69 x 7 years by which Messiah arrives at Jerusalem to atone which means it coincides with when he must be cut off. That's the first time line in these two verses -- verse 25 -- seven "weeks" (years) plus three score (3x20) plus two more sevens -- for a total of 69 x 7, or 483. That means the prophecy is 483 years on the Bible's measure of 360 days per year, as will be explained in a moment.

 

But one more digression is important. To know how 483 lunar years are translated into our Western Julian calendars -- we need to know that in 46 BC the "first  calendar" was imposed by Rome - a year of 365 days. (Time & Date Website.) Thus we need to first realize a necessity to measure the "year" interpretation of 69x7 by a lunar calendar of 360 days. Thus date differences between an annual lunar measurement and solar date must be adjusted to account for the different amount of days. 

Why?

 

First, a lunar calendar of 360 days operated in Babylon where Daniel lived when the prophecy was given. Also, it is evident in multiple places that the Bible's strict understanding of a year is it is equal to 12 months of 30 days or 360 days, irrespective of the necessity that came about to make additions every few years of extra days to keep the seasons in sync with astronomical activity. But this does not change the Biblical meaning of a 'Year" as 360 days.  

 

Thus, a Bible prophecy of years does not equate automatically into a year measured in our 365 day solar based calendar. Any date we come across using BC, BCE or AD, CE as an identifier is what is called a Julian date. It is on a 365 day per year solar calendar as we still use in the West today.

 

Thus, if the prophecy for the order to rebuild Jerusalem is given to us using a Julian date, and we want to measure the years on the same Julian dating system,  we need to translate the number of days in 483 lunar years into what how many years that represents in a 365 day year. Only by doing so can we then determine when and if Daniel's prophecy was fulfilled. This will become more clear when we take that step below.

 

More on that in a moment.

 

The Jewish Encyclopedia gives details that this order to rebuild Jerusalem took place in 444 B.C.E. --a Julian date:

 

Nehemiah "arrived in Jerusalem in 444 BCE with an appointment as governor of Judah... [and his] first action was to rebuild... Jerusalem." ("Nehemiah," The Jewish Encyclopedia of Judaism (1989) at 520.)

 

A modern non-Christian work similarly says:

Nehemiah gains permission to rebuild Jerusalem in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes (Neh. 1:1; 2:1); ca. 445/ 444 BCE." (T&T Encyclopedia of Second Temple Judaism (Bloomsbury 2019) Vol. 1 at this ebook page.

 

Hence, the Jewish Encylopedia says in 444 BC that Nehemiah was appointed as governor of Judah. Then his "first action" was to "rebuild" Jerusalem. He had to first ask permission, says The Encyclopedia of Second Temple Judaism, to rebuild Jerusalem. This "first action" to rebuild thus is estimated as late as 445 BC in the same treatise.

 

So Daniel says in 605 BC to measure the 69 x 7 for Messiah to come (to do atonement at Jerusalem) from the date the orders goes out to "rebuild and restore Jerusalem." Jewish history independently uses the same words to describe an event in 444 or 445 BC. There is no conscious effort by Judaism to prove when this prophecy would take place but these words do just that.

 

Now this is a clear date in Jewish history. These references can be compared with other references within Judaism that this 444 BCE time stamp is well-documented. This is because that year was the famous Great Synagogue Synod involving Nehemiah and Ezra.  Ironically, these sources tell us that the book of Daniel was accepted into the Biblical canon at that synod. Here are two other sources to reflect upon:

 

Cf. "Ezra the Scribe," The Jewish Encyclopedia (1916) at 316 ("[I]t was only after the arrival of Nehemiah (444 BC; cf. Nehemia 8:1 et seq. that [Ezra] published the book of the "Law of Moses.")

 

Cf. "The Great Synagogue Synod," The Jewish Encyclopedia (1905) Vol. 11 at 642 ("In addition to fixing the ritual observance for the first two quarters of the day (Neh. 9:8), the Great Synagogue engaged in legislative proceedings...[T]he memorable gathering was held on 24th of Tishri, 444 B.C. [for] a single day....The following rulings were ascribed to the men of the Great Synagogue (1) They included Ezekiel, Daniel ... in the Biblical canon.")

 

These multiple sources prove an order went out to "rebuild Jerusalem" by Judah's  "governor" Nehemiah -- words echoing Daniel's prophecy -- close in time to Nehemiah's arrival in 444 BCE. This date is known because it is an event transfixed in Jewish history as the time of the Great Synagogue Synod.  It appears that rebuilding Jerusalem was a top priority. Once permission was given that he as governor of Judah could do so, Nehemiah's next step as governor necessarily was to order the rebuilding of Jerusalem. This could be in either 444 BC or 445 BC.

 

Hence, there could be a short time after Nehemiah's arrival in 444 BC, or even a 445 date attached to this order to rebuild Jerusalem. Yet, we have a very firm approximation for the order: 444 to 445 BC.

 

So how can we calculate the Messiah's date of Atoning death on our calendar using this prophecy?

 

As mentioned before, the Jewish calendar year of Daniel is a lunar-based year. There are only 360 days in the "year" of which Daniel is prophesying. Daniel's prophecy of 483 lunar years thus represents 173,880 days (483 x 360). (See Google calculation.) This equates to 476 solar years in our calendar. (See Google calculation.)

 

If you subtract 476 years from 444 B.C., you hit square on 32 A.D. (See Google calculation.) If you use 445 BC, you hit square on 31 A.D. (See Google calculation.)

 

I include these google calculations because without any clear explanation, Dr. Thomas Constable -- a famous expounder who taught at Dallas Theological Seminary  -- provides in 2020 a calculation using a lunar-based Bible year. He starts from 444 BC, as we provide here too. Constable calculates 483 lunar years later out to be 33 AD, as I will quote in a moment. Thus, mathemtically speaking, he is off  1 year from what is the mathematically correct number from 444 BC. I suspect a typographical error. We cannot be sure, however, because he does not extrapolate the number of days in 483 years, nor does he extrapolate whether the divisor is 365. His quote below implies, however, that he is doing the same math we presented above, and thus it should be 32 AD, not 33 AD. This is why I suspect a typographical error. Yet, on the other hand, there could also be an important factor which he considered that I cannot deduce. Regardless, whether error or correct, his number of 33 AD is still within the recognized parameters of the date for Jesus' crucifixion. Here is Dr. Constable's statement on page 176 of his mostly excellent Notes on Daniel (2020) available in PDF at this link: 

Seven sevens plus sixty-two sevens equals 483 sevens or

years. Gabriel predicted that after 483 years, Messiah would

be cut off. Detailed chronological studies have been done that

show that Jesus Christ's death occurred then. If one calculates

483 years from 444 B.C., one might conclude [i.e., based upon

solar dating] that the date for Messiah being cut off is A.D. 39.

However, both the Jews and the Babylonians observed years of

360, rather than 365 days per year. If one calculates the number

of days involved in the Jewish and Babylonian calendar year,

the year  Messiah would be cut off comes out to A.D. 33.

 

 

Again, I do not know for sure what explains the discrepancy. But the numbers do not lie.

  

Finally, we can now apply this prophecy to Jesus' life. Is there a match?

 

Wikipedia says Jesus' crucifixion took place "most likely between 30 and 33 AD."  ("Jesus' Crucifixion," Wikipedia.) 

 

Both 31 and 32 AD -- the correct calculations -- fall directly between 30 and 33 AD.

 

How amazing!   

No Prophetic Fulfillment Possible in Current State.

 

Please also note that this prophecy about an order to rebuild Jerusalem cannot be fulfilled presently by a future order to simply rebuild the Temple. It requires as a predicate that an order go out to "rebuild" the city of Jerusalem -- walls and streets -- not rebuild only the Temple. That means that this prophecy's fulfillment can not be triggered in the future unless Jerusalem itself, streets and walls, have been destroyed. Babylon did this shortly before Daniel's prophecy. Unless something like that happens again, there is no future prospect that Daniel 9's prophecy would be fulfilled merely by rebuilding the Temple at Jerusalem as long as the city itself is not in ruins. 

 

 

The Second Amazing Prophecy: The Temple's Destruction.

 

While Daniel says Messiah is cut off after 62 weeks but comes (to atone) at 69 weeks, Daniel starts similarly prophesying of the Temple's destruction, but has no verse saying it happens by the 69th week. The 62 weeks thus constitutes a separate time prophecy about the Temple. Thus, here is Daniel saying the Temple destruction is after 62 weeks but he does not say it will happen by the 69th week. The 69 weeks is a separate time-line for Messiah to "come" to Jerusalem in verse 25. So unlike the Messiah prophecy of 62 and 69 weeks, the Temple prophecy is only described as happening after 62 weeks. That said, here is the Temple Destruction prophecy -- an event that fits unquestionably when Rome destroyed the Temple in 70 AD. It happens to follow the mention of the cutting off of Messiah after that same post-62 week period. Now we read:

And after threescore [i.e., 3x20 = 60] and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come ["to come" - Israel Bible] 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. (Dan. 9:26)   

 

Please note the Israel Bible of Judaism says too the Messiah / Annointed One "after" 62 weeks (434 years) is cut off -- but in more unflattering terms -- translating the term so Messiah "will disappear and vanish." See this link.  However, the key take-away from the Israel Bible is it confirms the Messiah is cut-off and the Temple destruction is sometime "after" 62 periods of 7. But there is no delimeter in this verse on exactly how much later than 434 -- understood as years.  This means there is no delimeter of how much after 434 years the army comes to destroy Jerusalem and the sanctuary. But in verse 25 there is a delimeter on when the Messiah "comes" to Jerusalem -- 69 weeks, 483 lunar years, which is about 31-32 AD. Hence, when verse 25 and 26 are read together, the Messiah comes to Jerusalem by 31-32 AD -- 69 weeks, but the destruction of the temple is any time after 62 weeks which means it can be after 31-32 AD, including 70 AD when the Temple was destroyed.

 

What an amazing prophecy with distinct time-lines that overlap and criss-cross so only after the events you can see how utterly precise they were.

 

Moreover, the Israel Bible (a truly Jewish mainstream Bible) more aptly has in verse 26 after the "annointed" (messiah) is cut off  that "an army of a leader who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary...." Hence, this "army of a leader" is not only distinct from the messiah's time of being "cut off," but is also "to come" after the messiah is "cut off." That fits Jesus precisely again: Jesus is cut off after 62 x 7 -- sometime "after" 434 years, and then "an army of a leader" yet "to come" at sometime after that event arrives to form a covenant with many, put an end to the sacrifices, and destroy the Temple and Jerusalem. 

 

Digression: Jesus Does Not Destroy the Temple And Sacrifices.

 

Incidentally, due to the absence of this "army of a leader who is to come" in our English Bibles -- replaced by "people of the prince" in the KJV of 9:26 to apparently make us think the "he" refers to "prince" Messiah rather than a "leader," the Seventh-Day Adventists believe it is Jesus who "confirms a covenant with many" (9:27). See Daniel 9: The Coming of Messiah hosted currently on the official Seventh-Day Adventists Bible Study & Discussion Website. 

 

But this actually refers to "the leader" of the "army" who makes the covenant. The SDA then apparently ignores that the same leader is mentioned next as responsible for destroying the city, and temple. This SDA article just cited -- Daniel 9: The Comming of Messiah -- omits mention of any actor causing the end of sacrifices, and simply notes the sacrificial system will come to an end in this period, citing verse 27. But more important is that if the "he" as "Prince" (KJV translation) truly is the same as Messiah for making of a covenant, then "he" who destroys the city and temple is likewise Prince Messiah. A terrible implication. This proves the SDA claim Jesus is the leader who made the "covenant" cannot possibly be correct.

 

This also proves one cannot apply the actions in verse 27 to Jesus only when we like to do so, and ignore the actor is the same as the destroyer of Jerusalem. For the "he" in verse 27 is clearly referring to the last subject-actor -- the leader of the army that is the destroyer of Jerusalem and the Temple. One cannot skip past that, and prefer to read the prior subject actor -- the "annointed" -- is the actor making the covenant and putting an end to the daily sacrifices, etc.

 

In fact, some Seventh-Day Adventists take it one step closer to the notion Jesus is the leader who not only makes the covenant but also is the destroyer of the city and sanctuary.  

 

David Lawson likewise expounds the SDA postition, and he takes it further in Why I Am A Seventh Day Adventist Christian (2008). At page 142, Lawson explains it is Jesus who not only confirms "a covenant" but also is the one who "puts an end to sacrifices." (Incidentally, verse 27 says also this person puts an end to the daily "meal offering" -- not something effectuated by Jesus' atonement but true of the Romans in 70 AD.) Therefore Lawson like the SDA ignores the absurd implication of such a view if one reads the entire sentence together. For the passage reads that the same prince or "commander of the army" (as the Israel Bible translates) who makes the covenant with many, and who "causes" the sacrifices and the daily meal offerings to cease, is also responsible for destroying Jerusalem and the sanctuary. Specifically, Daniel says the leader of an army will come

 

"to destroy the city and sanctuary...and he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week, and in the midst of the week, shall cause the sacrifice and oblation [i.e., daily meal offering] to cease, and for the overspreading of abomination he shall make it desolate." (Daniel 9:26-27 KJV.)  

 

Neither Lawson nor the SDA expressly spell out the terrible implications. However, that means they either hold to their views despite its mismatch to the context, or they do hold Jesus is somehow responsible for Rome destroying Jerusalem and the Sanctuary. In either case, we cannot credit either position as correct.

 

Titus of Rome in 70 AD Fulfills The Leader of An Army's Actions.

 

The only correct reading about who is the leader of the army is Titus of Rome. He fits this entire prophecy as a result of his successful siege that not only destroyed Jerusalem but also let Rome tear down the Temple for the gold on its ceilings. But like Pompey in 63 BC, Titus did not find the gold-laden Ark of the Covenant (including the Ten Commandments inside). The priests apparently each time were able to hide the Ark containing the Ten Commandments - a great prize which the Romans no doubt sought to find each time. See "Whatever Happened to the Ark," Ministry Magazine (1984). 

 

How did Titus fulfill the "covenant with many" aspect during his famous "siege of Jerusalem" in 70 AD? 

 

The whole point of siege tactics -- starving one's enemy held up in a stronghold -- is greatly advantaged if you can pre-plan defections from within who would cooperate and do Rome's bidding once the siege begins. For obvious practical reasons, this has to be planned in advance of the siege to ensure success.

 

Now the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD begins quite normally. Three legions converged on April 23, 70 AD on the hills outside Jerusalem. The city had a natural barrier from ravines on one side. Elsewhere, Jerusalem had a "massive wall" known as the "first wall." ("Siege of Jerusalem, Documentary Part 1, Invicta," YouTube at 5:48.) Then protecting a city expansion was the "second wall" and in 41 AD the "third wall" for another city expansion. (Id. at 5:59 et seq.) It was a "formidable three-layer defensive network." (Id. at 6:54.) 

 

Then Titus put three legions totaling 60,000 men to surround the city of Jerusalem. This was three days after Passover in 70 AD -- a tactically chosen date. Josephus saw through Rome's strategy, as this meant the assault was timed so almost all able men of Israel were now trapped inside with everyone else. As a result, the Jewish men who otherwise could have fought with weapons stored at their own homes, were all thereby disarmed. See "Siege of Jerusalem," Wikipedia.

 

However, something extraordinary happened during the siege. There is a well-known episode of a "self-destructive" act of a group inside Jerusalem working at odds with the defense of the city, which, but for that, the Romans would have to engage in this siege for many years. Using common sense, ask yourself whether Rome's agents were in the city ahead of time -- since the siege was pre-planned to coincide with the end of Passover -- and these agents were obviously bribed to engage in a self-destructive act which otherwise is completely inexplicable. Indeed, undisputed history is that there were seemingly "crazy" acts by a small group inside the city who destroyed all their food stocks that would otherwise have lasted for years for everyone present!  

Unaware of the prophetic implication of describing this 'crazy self-destructive' group, Joseph Telushkin in Jewish Literacy (N.Y.: William Morrow, 1991) explains:

 

While the Romans would have won the war in any case, the Jewish civil war both hastened their victory and immensely increased the casualties. One horrendous example: In expectation of a Roman siege, Jerusalem's Jews had stockpiled a supply of dry food that could have fed the city for many years. But one of the warring Zealot factions burned the entire supply, apparently hoping that destroying this "security blanket" would compel everyone to participate in the revolt. The starvation resulting from this mad act caused suffering as great as any the Romans inflicted.

 

Josephus deduced likewise about a related earlier event that bribes were the only explanation why Rome did not take Jerusalem earlier. Josephus pointed to the otherwise inexplicable behavior of the Roman commander Cestius. For when Cestius was a hair's length from taking Jerusalem years earlier, Josephus says what else than bribes explains why Cestius "without having suffered any reverse and contrary to all calculation retired from the City" and let victory escape Rome. (See link.) Josephus said what was so incongruous was that  people inside the city walls were just at this point "offering to open the city to" Cestius, and were in panic. 

Bribed agreements are a common "covenant" in war when sieges or assaults are conducted. When the same or a similar event by an invading army is prophesied in Daniel 11:30-31, it says an invading army will seek out "intelligence on those who forsake the holy covenant" to ensure success in taking the city.  Hence, this prophesies of a common tactic of conquest: bribery covenants of safe passage for traitors out of a city under assault in return for protection later.

 

Thus, looking at the events of 70 AD, it involved an otherwise inexplicable defection from self-defense which enormously aided Rome. It only makes sense if these destroyers-from-within were precisely what they appear to be: defectors who are in covenant with Rome -- hired and recruited prior to the siege. Because Rome timed perfectly the events to coincide with the end of the Passover holiday gathering of all at Jerusalem, the Romans obviously pre-planned this with bribed allies who agreed to stay inside and do Rome's bidding to end the siege quickly.

 

Alternatively, we also know that 33% of the Roman troops were from the "region's client rulers" when the troops were first assembled near Alexandria, Egypt. See "Siege of Jerusalem, part 1, Documenary by Invicta," YouTube at 3:12. The entire force was estimated as 60,000 men. Hence, about 20,000 came from the region's client rulers. The documentary states that it may speculated that "local rulers were eager to donate men to the war effort in a political bid to secure Rome's good-will." (Id., at 3:49.) Hence, this represents another "covenant with many."

 

Collectively, in fact, the conspirators inside and the co-ooperative region client rulers outside represent Titus' "covenant with many" as Daniel prophesied to achieve success over Jerusalem and the Temple.

How the End of the Attack Resulted in Abominations.

 

Next, how did Titus and his army's invasion end in abominations? 

 

When the troops entered the Temple, they would have all been uncircumcised. They obviously were all standing inside the Temple's most holy sections.

What does this imply about whether the temple was abominated? Ezekiel already told us --  any uncircumcised Gentile in the Temple represents an "abomination." (Ezekiel 44:9.)  (Incidentally, circumicised Gentiles were welcome in the Temple.) 

 

Of course, Titus fulfills exactly the other two remaining prophecies in 9:26-27: destruction of Jerusalem and putting an end to sacrifices. 

 

How Some Ignore Daniel's Prayer Has Mercy on Exodus 20:6 Basis.

 

Another interesting point about the SDA: unlike almost all other Protestant sects which ignore this prophecy at sermon time for the most part, the SDA have taught it frequently and with detailed efforts at exposition. As one would expect by their doctrine on faith alone (see link), they do have to explain away the prayer of Daniel as what led to the promise of Messiah. To that end, the SDA official website's exposition omits completely any quotation of Daniel quoting Exodus 20:6. (It says God grants "mercy" to those who "love me and obey my commandments.") So instead they then make Daniel's Prayer as supposedly all about "grace" that we have neither any obligation to do anything, nor can do anything (such as love God or obey His commandments), to receive mercy aka grace through Messiah. Their webpage says instead this about Daniel's Prayer:

 

"It is clear Daniel's hope lies not in himself or anything his people he or his people could do but only in God's love and grace for fallen beings." ("Daniel's Prayer," Daniel 9: The Coming of Messiah hosted at the official website Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Study and Discussion.) 

 

This proves my first point: mainstream Protestantism cannot show you this amazing prophecy because they would have to discuss Daniel's Prayer, but to do so and keep their faith-alone doctrine, they would have to employ suppression of a key aspect of the actual prayer of Daniel about mercy, and then miscategorize his prayer. Thus to avoid that obvious incorrect course, mainstream Protestantism prefers just supressing our knowledge of this prophecy altogether unless of course the explanation is that the leaders simply never closely studied the passage themselves. While that may appear unlikely, we pray for their leaders that will be their honest explanation when examined on judgment day why we generally never hear at sermon time about the most convincing proof that Jesus is the Messiah. 

 

Returning to the Temple Prophecy.

 

So the Temple is prophesied to be destroyed after 62 x 7 years by a "leader of an army to come" after the Messiah is "cut off." The Temple's destruction by this army is not subject to the 69 week time-limit for Messiah to come because it is not mentioned in the 69 x 7 prophecy unlike the Messiah appearing also on the 69 x 7 timeline.

So was the Temple destroyed sometime "after" the 62 weeks of Daniel?

Yes.

If we take our previous calculation that 69 x 7 years is 31-32 AD, then that means 62 x 7 is seven years less, that is 24-25 AD -- one 7 year period less.

 

So Daniel's 62 week prophecy about the Temple with no 69 week delimiter means the Temple would be destroyed sometime after 25 AD. It does not say how much later. But if you put two and two together, if Messiah will "come" to do Atonement by 69 sevens (31-32 AD), which for the nation means at Jerusalem, then this event of the Temple destruction would have to be sometime after the 69th week when Messiah "comes" to Jerusalem. Hence, the Temple's fall in 70 AD fits not only a post-62nd week but also an implied  post-69th week of Daniel that is implied if Messiah came by the 69th week to Jerusalem to make atonement. And this also fits the Israel Bible translation which says the "leader of an army to come" to destroy the temple is after the Messiah is cut off. See Daniel 9:26 Israel Bible.

 

Pretty amazing prophecy, don't you think?

 

Why is Daniel 9 Never Preached? A Third Prophecy Fulfilled?

 

Ever wonder why these passages are never quoted on Sunday despite it is an amazing prophecy which can only be about Jesus? Oh, yeah, it has a different gospel than Paul's!!!  You cannot ignore how it begins with Daniel's prayer about "mercy" on a promise of "loving" God and "obeying" God's commandments.

 

So apparently our pastors believe we must ignore this passage each week. ''God forbid people should listen to the best prophecy of Jesus being the Messiah!" Why? "For that would undo our Pauline gospel, and we cannot have that!""

 

Or am I wrong? Can any of you remember a single exposition on that text at sermon time ever to validate Jesus as Messiah with this precision? To evangelize and prove to newcomers that Jesus is Messiah?

 

I have attended sermons for four decades in evangelical, baptist and presybeterian churches. Yet not once was there a sermon or class ever devoted to this text. I cannot remember a single time it was reviewed, studied, or even just shared by a few quotes momentarily so we would know this is a very powerful text to evangelize with.

 

Then please also reflect upon whether the fact you are hearing this now, and the news is spreading, actually fulfills one further prophecy of Daniel which is about the knowledge of these very same prophecies. These prophecies would be suppressed to the point they are kept secret from the public until the time of the end: 

 

Go your way Daniel, for what I have said will remain secret until the time of the end. (Dan 12:9 NLT.)

The Jewish commentary in the Israel Bible says about this verse:

 

Only in retrospect will it be possible to match up the visions with their actualization. (Israel Bible Commentary.)

 

But it is that, and more. The prophecy will not be well-known until the time of the end. We see it is suppressed by our teachers and pastors who abhor the principle of mercy conjoined to the promise of Messiah. They would choke if they had to explain the promise of Messiah was spawned by Daniel affirming grace on the grounds of Exodus 20:6 -- a passage we all have ignored even though it is right there between the first and second of the Ten Commandments. I did not see that Exodus passage until about over a year ago. It led me to Daniel's quote, and that led me to seeing how the 'kept secret' prophecy also has been fulfilled. 

 

 

Why A Messiah Who Atones?

 

Now why can a prince-Messiah's atonement be better than the cost of animals and money for atonement for us? 

Precisely because once the Messiah came to make atonement for you, and this Messiah made it 100% clear that you only may bring such an atonement offering to God's mercy seat if works worthy of repentance are done first, then there is no justifiable error any longer to misunderstand that there is any such thing as a works-free, repentance-free access to atonement. God put you and I both on notice.

 

For you, me and everyone else cannot miss the Sermon on the Mount begins with the same Messiah uttering the condition that you cannot use the atonement gift -- DONOR which is poorly translated as only "gift" -- at the altar unless first you go back home and you do whatever it properly takes to have "reconciliation" with the one you offended, e.g., works worthy of repentance (Matt 5:21-26). See full discussion in Chapter One of Jesus' Words on Salvation free at this link.

 

God used a human messiah to personally deliver that message to us in simple terms. The purpose was to overcome all the nonsensical claims that atonement by itself is effective without works of repentance. The Messiah's teaching would overcome a common misconception which  God had sent multiple prophets to excoriate and correct prior to Jesus doing likewise.  (Jer. 7:20-25; Mic. 6:6-8, Joel 2:13; Hos.14:1-2; and Mal. 1:10; 3:3-4. Cf. Isaiah 27:9.)

 

Sadly, the entire point of Jesus' atonement appears lost on several hundreds of years of Protestant-misinformed generations due to Luther's mistake in emphasis on faith alone found in Romans 4:3-5 and 1 Cor. 15:1-5. In turn, this wrong teaching of faith-alone influenced preachers to use translations which obscure Jesus' meaning in Matthew 5:21-26 on the works-condition to employ atonement -- the donor -- to bring your atonement gift / offering to the altar.

Finally, it appears the best prophecy about Jesus anywhere in Holy Scripture is to be ignored because we don't like the gospel that comes with Daniel's prayer  to God. Otherwise, Daniel 9 would be quoted every week to re-confirm the unequivocal proof of Jesus' Messiahship. 

 

END 

 

Bonus Material:

The 70th 7 Of Daniel,  Plus the 3 1/2 Days of Daniel 7  

 

What about the 70th so-called "week" of Daniel?

 

Here is where it gets really interesting to unlock.

 

First, as already mentioned, remember that "week" was never the only correct translation throughout the entire passage. The word rendered in KJV as "weeks" can mean week but in fact the word has a meaning of simply seven of anything, whether days, weeks, years, etc., which is derived from context:

 

The word 'week' also means seven (Hebrew shevua), and can mean seven of anything - days, months or years. (Tim LaHaye, Edward Hinson, The Popular Bible Commentary (Harvest House, 2007) at 246.)

 

In fact, the common reading by those attempting to unravel Daniel usually ignore it says "weeks" in the KJV and most translations. Instead, most realize instead that the prophecy in Daniel 9 must mean years. Why? Because when we replace weeks with years, others have sensed looking backwards that it then approximately appears the prophecies of Daniel 9 match historical fact, especially the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD.

 

But we need to do one more thing with the period of 70 times 7.

 

What do we know about the number 70 x 7?

 

It is a hyper large number. That is what the expression means. When Peter is told to forgive in a day up to 7 times, Peter asks "Up to 7 times?" -- taking Jesus literally. And Jesus -- to send the message it is not a definite or literal 7 -- says up to "70 times 7" -- a hyper large number. Matt 18:21-22.  Jesus meant, 'let's not get technical on a fixed number; instead it is as much as is necessary.'

 

So now listen to the prophecy of the events by the 70th "week," and you will see it now means a hyper large period of time, and not a literaly definite 70 x 7 years until the final end of sin and to bring in everlasting righteousness:  

 

Seventy weeks [70 x 7 in Hebrew] are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. (Daniel 9:24.) 

 

These events match when all the earth is transformed into a New Jerusalem. Daniel first refers to this episode in Daniel 7:18 KJV  which in context comes after a terrible tribulation: "But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom, and possess it for ever, even for ever and ever." This revelation was given as the happy ending first before the prophecy of what amounts to world tribulations.

 

This good news ending was repeated again in the middle of some terrible events at Daniel 7:22. The evil ones "prevailed" for a time over the saints, "until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High, and the time came the saints possessed the kingdom." So ultimate good news is mixed with some bad news.

 

We see from Daniel 7 a reflection that everyone prefers to know the happy ending of a story is coming when really bad news is being related.

 

Hence, the 70 7s in Daniel 9 matches these other prophetic passage of the end times in the book of Daniel chapter seven.

 

When will all that happen?

 

At 70 x 7 - meaning for as much time as necessary for it all to play out.

 

The Last 3 1/2 Days of the 70th Week of Daniel.

 

One more important part of Daniel needs explanation.

 

First, please note one thing: the predicate to that happy end is that a certain horn must "war against the saints and prevail against them." (Daniel 7:21 KJV.) That means any time period where true Christianity has nearly died out will be the predicate of fulfillment of the great news ending.

Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount that the way to destruction is broad, but to the way of life is narrow and "few" find it. (Matt 7:14.) If Christ is coming soon, we would not expect many people to be truly following Jesus. The true Christianity will be almost worn out to nothing.

 

Even if people thought they were following Jesus, we would expect at that point they are largely following the impostor version Jesus warned about in Matthew 24:4-5, 24-27. They would accept his atonement to save them but dismiss his teachings such as His Sermon on the Mount, insisting it is intended for a prior dispensation or not to be taken seriously. See Modern Teaching that Sermon on the Mount is Irrelevant. 

 

Then consider when we read in Daniel 7 about a "time, times and a dividing of a time" which means 3 1/2 (1 + 2 and 1/2). As this 3 1/2 numbers precedes the end of the 70th week of Daniel -- an indefinite plenitude of days -- it represents half that indefinite time. These 3 1/2 days of the 70th 7  kicks off after the horn first defeats "three kings (rulers) " for a time (v. 24), and then this follows:  

 

25 And he shall speak great words against the

most High, and shall wear out the saints of the

most High, and think to change times and laws:

and they shall be given into his hand until a time

and times and the dividing of time.

26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take

away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it

unto the end.

27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the

greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven,

shall be given to the people of the saints of the

most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting

kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey

him.

28 Hitherto is the end of the matter. As for me

Daniel, my cogitations much troubled me, and my

countenance changed in me: but I kept the matter

in my heart.

 

Who Is the Horn That Puts Down 3 Rulers & Changes Times & Law?

 

Are three rulers -- "pillars" -- of our true church founded

by Jesus put down, and not allowed to "impart" anything

as a result to someone?

 

2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain. (Gal. 2:2.)****

6 But from those who were reputed to be somewhat (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth not man’s person)—they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me:

9 and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas [i.e., Peter] and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision; (Gal. 2:2,6,9.)

 

Is the meaning of Deuteronomy 25:4 "changed" -- even

obliterated -- to serve a self-serving purpose of applying

it to the sole economic benefit of the speaker? 

For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” Is it oxen God is concerned about? 10 Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope [i.e., hope is euphemism for money in context]. (1 Cor. 9:9-10 NKJV.)

 

God does not care for oxen? Is that a sound basis to overrule the passage's intended beneficiary? Had the three pillars been able to impart to this speaker Jesus' lesson that God "cares" for a sparrow when it falls to the ground, and thus so much more He "cares" for us (Matt 10:29-31)? Apparently not, for otherwise one would not expect such an audacious contradiction of Jesus against God's care for animal life, besides the underlying contradiction of Yahweh's meaning. 

 

Does anyone we know also "speak words against the Most High" in the same line of authorship?

 

We read in Romans 7:7-11 NKJV:

I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”[a] 8 But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all manner of evil desire. For apart from the law sin was dead. 9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me.

 

Does the attribution of God saying something to mislead and destroy us -- words against the Most High -- appear elsewhere in the same line of authorship?  

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie,12 that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thess. 2:10-13 2 Thess. 2:10-13 KJV-21st)

What can one think about this passage implies about the character of the Most High?

The Christian Intelligencer article "Things Hard to be Understood Illustrated" (1821) says that  2 Thess 2:10-13 reads that God the Father is the "sender of strong and damning delusions," and one "cannot become an accessor to deception" by "sliding off by equivocations, and say God permitted the delusions." (Christian Intelligencer (1821) at 59.)

Indeed, the text says God "sends" the delusion that men should believe a damning lie. So Christian Intelligencer correctly asks:

If they are damned for believing a lie, and believe the lie, because God sent the delusion, and sufficiently strong to produce its effects, in what character does it present the God of truth and love?" Id., at 59.

The author asks: "who loves the character of the deluder?" Id., at 60. The author correctly answers: "deceivers love him whom they say deceives or deludes men to their eternal damnation." Id. Then properly the author asks:

"Because, if the God we adore, send strong delusions, where, beneath these heavens, shall we look for safety?" Id., at 60.

 

 

Does someone in the same line of authorship seek to change the "times" appointed by God in the sixth commandment on the Sabbath? We read in Col. 2:16-17:

¹⁶ Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in

drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new

moon, or of the sabbath days:

¹⁷Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body

is of Christ.

The same line of authorship say something similar in Romans 14:5-6: 

 

"One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind."

 

Does this negatively impact salvation for Gentiles? 

 

The promise in Isaiah 56 of salvation to Gentiles ("my

salvation is about to come", 56:1) through God's

suffering servant in Isaiah 53 (whom was obviously

Jesus) was predicated on two things: "keep the Sabbath

from profaning it and keep his hand from doing evil."

(Isaiah 56:2) or "who keep My Sabbaths, and choose

things that please Me, and take hold of my covenant."

(Isaiah 56:4,6).

 

The word covenant means the ten commandments,

such as in the Ark of the Covenant, i.e., the box holding

the tablets of the Ten Commandments. Yahweh clearly

adds in Isaiah

56:7 -- the very next verse --  His aim:

 

"For my House, a House of Prayer, is called for all

peoples." (Isaiah 56:7.)

 

This passage of Isaiah 56:6-7 identically appears in the Dead Sea Scrolls

of 125 BC. See link to PDF of page 363 of Abegg's DSS Bible. 

 

Jesus highlighted Isaiah 56 where Gentiles' salvation turns on obeying Sabbath and holding to the "covenant" (the ten commandments). For Jesus quotes from this Isaiah 56-Gentile-conditions-for-salvation passage in Matthew 21:13: "It is written," he said to them, "'My house will be called a house of prayer,' but you are making it 'a den of robbers.'"  This is no accident for Jesus knew the entire context.

 

Have spiritual robbers who are stealing God's Word from us been long in motion? If so, we were already told that the horn would prevail against us for a time, but good news is coming. It won't last forever. 

 

So we have solved who is the horn of Daniel 7. But who is the Anti-Christ? It is not the horn. It is someone else. See Hebrew Matthew Identifies Anti-Christ.

 

End of Bonus Material

 

Typical Efforts to Apply Daniel 9

 

Any one can see separating out the three time-lines -- 62, 69 and 70 -- and how Messiah fits on two -- makes all the difference. Without that, one can end up conflating (mixing up) the prophecy of the temple destruction as having to fit the identical time when Messiah is cut-off. Also, if one does not translate Daniel's years from lunar to solar Julian dating, then you miss the significance, and  thus do not mention the 444 BC order to rebuild Jerusalem. Also, if one does not see the 70 x 7 is not a specific year prophecy, you appear to be stretching things in the 70th period to fit what truly comes at the end of time if you say this all happened with Jesus' coming.

 

For an example of a common approach to Daniel 9, see this 119 Ministries YouTube at this link. As is typical of  many independent presentations which do better than the mainstream, it still falls a small distance short. For example, it stretches implausibly that all the events of 70 x 7 happened with Jesus. I don't think so. Neither does Constable in his Notes on Daniel (2020) think one can plausibly hold that view. Hence, the 70 7s explanation presented here -- to mean 'as many years as necessary' -- explains it well, and fits Jesus' own words. It is plausible, or more so, than saying Jesus fulfilled all of the events prophesied in 70 x 7.

 

 

 

Email Comments

 

Wow, these articles were very helpful to me. I see that salvation comes

from Yahshua's words only. I really appreciate it Doug, keep encouraging

me and sharing the word.  (Lone B...July 1, 2020.)  

 

Study notes

 

Doug Hamp in his study of the 70th week of Daniel likewise says it simply really says 70 7s. See his 6/20/2020 video at 6 minute mark at this link.

Interestingly the list of orders to rebuild Jerusalem afterward that Hamp mentions includes lastly the one of Nehemiah from 444 BC, and the commentator he cites  -- Thomas Constable -- says the latter is "likely" in view in Daniel's prophecy. See Hamp video at 7:30.  Hamp was evidently referring to Constable's 2020 ebook Notes on Daniel ay 175-76 available free at this link.

 

At 7:00 he says there are 49 years (7x7) followed by 62 x 7s. Doug -- a good student of the Bible -- did not see that 70x 7 needs to be spelled out, and when done so, it is obvious it means whatever time is necessary.

 

Constable Makes No Big Deal of this Prophecy Nor Relates Correctly the Gospel of Mercy Invoked in Daniel's Prayer   

 

Constable's 237 pages referenced above pays little attention to this amazing fulfillment of prophecy which he says was Christ's crucifixion in 33 AD. Its ony mention is the brief paragraph I quoted above. As already mentioned, it is not broken down, to allow a reader to replicate the proof for use in evangelism. It is not mentioned anywhere else in the 237 pages. There is almost an eery silence, letting this passage pass by the reader's attention as no more important than any other page among 236 other pages. It is lost in a sea of words.

 

And as I predicted, his discussion of the prayer of Daniel -- which takes up several pages, never mentions that Daniel quotes in Daniel 9:4 the gospel of mercy / grace -- in Hebrew HESED -- from the Ten Commandments -- Exodus 20:6, and instead borrows the misleading pattern of translations like the NIV. 

 

Constable follows an old pattern of faith-alone translators like the NIV who obscure the Hebrew word Hesed's meaning in passages like Exodus 20:6. While the KJV correctly rendered it as "mercy" in Exodus 20:6 and in Daniel 9:4 and 9:19,  the presence of the conditions of "loving God and obeying His commandments" just is too much to stomach for more "enlightened" translators of today. So the NIV changes Hesed to "love" -- a more abstract meaning  whenever Hesed has those two conditions (Daniel 9:4), but when Daniel confesses sin, and admits as things now stand the people are unworthy (not because of any "merit of ours"), and he still asks for "mercy," this time the NIV will translate Hesed as "mercy." (Daniel 9:18-19 viz. 19.)

 

Tricky, are they not? Do you see the game that is being played? Constable whom I assume follows the NIV program unwittingly, plays the cards he is given by the NIV to the letter. So card tricks invented by mistranslators continue even if the commentator is unaware. 

 

At page 168, Daniel 9:4 is never quoted; we don't know Daniel invokes God's covenant of mercy by "loving God and obeying his commandments." Instead we are told, HESED means simply  "love" ...not mercy.

Daniel stressed God's transcendence and his loyal love (Heb. hesed) to Israel in his salutation. (v. 4) 

That's what the NIV said it was. But Daniel truly said, and the KJV has it right:  

 

And I prayed unto the Lord my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments; (Daniel 9:4 KJV)

 

So if you do not know that, and then in Daniel 9:19, Daniel confesses as things now stand, the people are unworthy, and now Daniel uses HESED again, and still asks forgiveness, and if you don't know HESED was in 9:4 on more conditions, then 9:19 sounds like faith alone, right? So the NIV switches, and translates HESED as Mercy in 9:19, as cited above.

Constable too switches on 9:19 his vocubulary in lockstep with the NIV, and he too mentions "mercy" is the meaning of the word (which perhaps he did not know was hesed which previously he said meant "love"). I trust this switch by Constable is not deliberate but simply due to trusting the NIV.

 

So what does Constable say? For Daniel 9:19,  Constable on page 168 when summarizing "Daniel's Prayer of Confession:9: 4-14," tells us that Daniel begins by confessing "sin and guilt," but ends with a "plea for mercy" and restoration (vv. 15-19.) There is the word "mercy" -- which we know is HESED, in reference to vv. 15-19. But when it was spoken in verse 4, please remember Constable (hopefully unwittingly) employed the NIV's neutering tactic by telling us HESED means "love." Constable finishes by saying Daniel "stressed...Israel's unworthiness." (Constable, Notes on Daniel (2002) at 170.) So all these card tricks are the fruit of a cunning strategy by some unknow NIV translator, which apparently fooled Constable.  The answer is God heard both pleas for mercy -- the one invoking the covenant of mercy in return for love and obeying the commandments, and the one praying for mercy despite the people being at present not having yet merited such mercy. This is a common situation, incidentally, such as in the case of Zaccheus. This tax collector promises to return what he stole fourfold to the poor. Jesus says "this day salvation has come to this house." (Luke 19:1-10 NIV.) So the last prayer for mercy by Daniel does not stand alone apart from the necessity to follow through with our side of the covenant of the ten commandments. And this is clear because Gabriel responds to both pleas, saying  God heard Daniel's "pleas for mercy" (Dan. 9:23 ESV). Both prayers were heard, and in response, God commanded Gabriel to tell Daniel he was "highly esteemed" and that God would send a "Messiah" who would "make atonement for iniquity." (Daniel 9: 24.)