End of Days: Stepping Into The Controversy

• Goal: Understanding the placement of the 70th Week in Daniel 9
• Focal Books & Chapters of the Bible: Daniel 9
• Other Verses/Helpful Books: Deuteronomy 12:32, Revelation 22:18-19, Deuteronomy 4:2

In my post End of Days: Understanding the Timeline, I started examining the prophetic timeline of the End of Days (foretold in the Bible), focusing on Daniel 9 which details the 70 weeks prophecy. Most Christians agree on the first 69 weeks of that prophecy, but it is from that point on that Preterists, Historicists, and Futurists, begin to diverge.

Futurists believe that we are suspended between the 69th and 70th week. This is where the idea of a 7 year tribulation, such as the narrative from the Left Behind series by Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye come from. According to this school of thought, the final week in Daniel 9 is going to occur at some unknown point in the future. Historicists and Preterists hold that the entire 70 weeks occurred in the past (as described in my last End of Days post).

When Is the 70th Week?

It is the answer to the question of whether the 70th week is to come, or already past that will guide your interpretation and views of the End of Days. Based on my previous post, it's obvious that I disagree with the Futurists, but before we continue, lets consider the possibilities. Daniel 9 first mentions the 70 weeks in the verse 24:

Seventy weeks 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 KJV)

Nothing in this passage suggests separation between the weeks. Daniel 9:24 is basically allotting a time period for "thy people" and "thy holy city" to finish acting out against God's law, make an end of sins, reconcile for immoral behavior, bring in everlasting righteousness, and to close up the sight (of God?) and prophecy. Since the angel is speaking to Daniel, thy people means Daniel's people and thy holy city means Daniel's holy city—the Jews and Jerusalem. If there is a break in the time frame there is one major ramification with stemming from this verse: more than 70 weeks are given to the people. If you tell me I have 2 weeks to do something, there are only two possibilities, I have 14 consecutive days to do something, or I can spend 14 days to do something. In the first case, there is a clear beginning and end. In the second case, I can only be permitted to do this something on a chosen set of days, otherwise I am exceeding my time limit. When applying this logic to the 70 weeks prophecy, you must conclude that there is either 70 consecutive weeks or these tasks are to be completed in no more (or less) than 70 weeks. Why would we be given a beginning, followed by a chronological ordering of events only to be told the final week is completely unpredictable and disjoint from the rest of the prophecy? Also, if the 70th week has not happened yet, then we can't accomplish any of the tasks in Daniel 9:24 because that would be allowing more than 70 weeks. This means that we are unable to reconcile for iniquity (sin) which directly contradicts Jesus' death and resurrection, which occurred after the 69th week.

Let's look at the prophecy concerning the last week, again, shall we?

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. (Daniel 9:27 KJV)

One point of contention here is who "he" refers to. Futurists believe "he" refers to the antichrist. If you read all of Daniel 9 KJV, you will see that the only "he" mentioned leading up to Daniel 9:27 is Messiah the Prince. He is the prince of the people who come to destroy the city (after all He did come to save all people). Many think that because it says "the prince that shall come," it refers to the antichrist, but the antichrist is not a prince—he will rule, he will become a king, but he is never referred to as a prince in the Bible. By definition, a prince is someone who inherits the right to rule through his bloodline (in this case his father). Jesus is a prince as He is the Son of God (the Father). The antichrist is not a prince because he is not the son of God and he won't inherit kingdom, he will try to steal it. 

Shenanigans with Biblical Wording

Note that the NIV translation does not mention the Messiah specifically but uses the wording "Anointed One," further changing "prince" to  "ruler." This is probably part of the cause of confusion. "Prince" must refer to Jesus, while ruler is more ambiguous.  You should read up on all the changes and omissions in NIV (and other English translations), keeping in mind that in Revelation 22:18-19, Deuteronomy 4:2, and Deuteronomy 12:32 we are warned not to tamper with God's word.  You should also watch this video on why the KJV is the most accurate English Bible we have.

What Next?

In terms of the timeline, this post was more of an aside. Next time, I'll jump back into the timeline. Following that post I'll do a "pros" and "cons" of the different schools of thought on the end of days.