antecedent of 'he' in Dan 9:27

Question

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.
Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

the prince that shall come

CJ

Ozzourti · Answer

From a logical point of view, the "he" in verse 27 refers to the Messiah (Christ). The "prince" is someone else -- most likely Titus, a Roman Emperor under whose command the Romans besieged the city of Jerusalem and destroyed the temple in 70 CE.

CalifJim · Answer

ozzourtiThe "prince" is someone else -- most likely Titus, a Roman Emperor

Hmm. I thought 'the prince' was 'the Messiah'. I must have read it wrong. (It doesn't help that I'm not familiar with the history that this passage is about.)

CJ

Ozzourti · Answer

Well, I really don't think that the Messiah was supposed to destroy the city or the sanctuary/temple, or anything else for that matter. Here's the full verse from the KJV:

Daniel 9:27: 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.

In the New Testament, the promised Messiah "confirmed the covenant" on the day he was baptized by John the Baptist. That was the beginning of the "one week", which actually wasn't a week as we know it -- but rather seven years. After three and a half years (in the middle of the "week"), Jesus Christ was crucified and "the sacrifice and oblation" ceased.

I don't know why the translators of the KJV put another "he" in the second part of that verse -- it's very confusing. In my opinion, the English Standard Version offers a better rendering:

[...] And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.

CalifJim · Answer

ozzourtiI don't know why the translators of the KJV put another "he" in the second part of that verse -- it's very confusing.

Agreed.

ozzourtiWell, I really don't think that the Messiah was supposed to destroy anything.

I can see that I should not have tried to answer this question at all because the little that I've learned about all this sort of thing includes the idea that the Messiah was supposed to destroy all sorts of things (like "the temple", maybe, and "evil people") and throw people in **** to be tortured and all that, but only after they're dead, I guess, or whatever it's all about. I imagine I have it all twisted around in one way or another.

CJ

Ozzourti · Answer

Actually the Messiah is supposed to do away with all sorts of evil, but to my mind it has more to do with cleansing the "spiritual realm" than with destroying cities or buildings. Still, many seem to envision the battle of Armageddon literally the way it was described in the Bible.

Fivejedjon · Answer

Even scholars do not agree on the meaning of the passage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks

CalifJim · Answer

fivejedjonEven scholars do not agree

Oh, wow. Now I'm a scholar!

CJ

Ozzourti · Answer

I think we can all agree that the "he" stands for the Messiah. Whether or not the "prince" is the same person as the Messiah is probably open to debate, but I suppose that he isn't (for the reasons I gave earlier).

antecedent of 'he' in Dan 9:27

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions