For Steve: making a covenant for one week?

[Guest]

Steve:

I was wondering if you can comment on an issue that comes up periodically in Dan. 9:24-27. It says that He (obviously Messiah, at least to me) makes a covenant with the many for one week. This is seemingly fulfilled in Mt.26:28, though more accurately when Jesus dies on the cross. What about the objection that says if this is referring to Jesus, he obviously made a covenant for more than one week (7 years), in fact, His covenant was an everlasting covenant. How do you handle this objection?
Thanks for your time and God Bless. Hope you are having a Happy Holiday!

In His Love,

Tim

[Guest]

Steve:

I was wondering if you can comment on an issue that comes up periodically in Dan. 9:24-27. It says that He (obviously Messiah, at least to me) makes a covenant with the many for one week. This is seemingly fulfilled in Mt.26:28, though more accurately when Jesus dies on the cross. What about the objection that says if this is referring to Jesus, he obviously made a covenant for more than one week (7 years), in fact, His covenant was an everlasting covenant. How do you handle this objection?
Thanks for your time and God Bless. Hope you are having a Happy Holiday!

In His Love,

Tim

I'll give my thougths and hopefully Steve will too,

The covenant was for one "seven" because after the final "seven" was complete (3.5 years after Jesus death) the covenant was no longer exclusive to the Jews only, but at this point (the end of the final week) the covenant extends to the Gentiles as well. We see this happen in Acts when Saul is converted to preach to the Gentiles and Peter goes to Cornelius.

It's not that the covenant ended at the end of the seven, "Seventy weeks are determined For your people and for your holy city... " (Dan 9:24) But it stopped being exclusive toward Jews only.

[Guest]

I agree with Sean's comments here but would like to add a little. I believe that a better translation for v.27 is found in the New King James Version as well as some others.

Daniel 9:27
27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;....

The key word here is "confirm". During that seven year period, that began with Jesus' ministry and ended with Peter and Paul's bringing the gospel to the Gentiles, many "signs and wonders" were done by Jesus (as recorded in the four Gospels) and the Apostles (as recorded in Acts). These "signs and wonders" were done to prove that God approved and "confirmed" the Gospel message and the bringing in of a New Covenant (Heb 9).

Acts 2:22
22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.

Heb 2:3-4
3How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
4God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

Acts 5:12
12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch.

The miracles didn't stop when the Gentiles were brought in as we see in this verse.

Acts 14:3
3 So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders.

Todd

[Guest]

I agree and would also add this quote:

Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.

I would also agree that the signs and wonders did not end with the Gentiles coming in, nor were they suppose to.

[Guest]

I can see that we're going in lots of different directions with this passage...

While I believe this to be an overlay with multiple fulfillments, let's look at it in the context of Christ's ministry. And, just for kicks, let's try taking it literally - as a literal week - instead of symbolically as a seven year period, and see where that gets us.

What we have is a one-week period that Christ is in Jerusalem. In the middle of the week, He is crucified. At the end of the week, He is resurrected from the dead. THAT is the covenant that He confirms.

We have the following:

* In John 12:1, we read that "Jesus came to Bethany six days before the Passover." Now, according to Exodus 12, this is the fourteenth day of the first lunar month of the biblical year. However, in the time of the first century, the Passover observance had been changed and many people kept a national Passover observance (instead of a family-based observance) on the fifteenth instead of the fourteenth. This was based on the national Passover observances in the time of King Hezekiah (2 Chron. 30) and also in the time of Josiah (2 Kings 23:21-23; 2 Chron. 35:1-19). Although there were many Jews in the first century who kept the 14th Passover, we can know that John was speaking of the 15th Passover here because in John 18:28, we find mention of "the Passover" on the day after Jesus ate an apparently 14th Passover meal according to John 13:1-2. Therefore, Jesus came to Bethany on the ninth day of the first lunar month, six days before the 15th Passover.

* The day that Jesus entered Jerusalem was the day after He arrived at Bethany. See John 12:1 and 12. So Jesus entered Jerusalem on the 10th day. This was the day when the people cried "Hosanna!" to Him and put down palm branches in the streets.

* Jesus entered into Jerusalem riding on a donkey on one day, and although He entered into the Temple on that day, He didn't overturn the moneychangers' tables until the next day. See Mark 11:1-19. So Jesus overturned the moneychangers' tables on the 11th day.

* The fig tree withered on the day after Jesus' overturned the moneychangers' tables. See Mark 11:20. This was also the day that the Pharisees asked Him by what authority He did these things, continuing on through His private discourse with the disciples concerning the sign of His coming. See Mark 11:27 through the end of chapter 13. This was the 12th day.

* Two days later was the 14th Passover. See Matthew 26:1-2 and Mark 14:1. Remember that in the bible, a day begins at sunset. Jesus ate the Passover with His disciples on the evening beginning the 14th, and was crucified the following afternoon, which was still the 14th. He was buried immediately prior to evening beginning the 15th.

* Jesus was in the tomb three days and three nights. So He was resurrected just before the evening beginning the 18th.

* The following morning, which was Sunday morning, the women discovered the empty tomb.

Backtracking to figure out the days of the week for all of the above events, we have Jesus entering Bethany on Friday the 9th. He entered Jerusalem on Saturday the 10th - sorry, it wasn't "Palm Sunday", although since Jesus entered the Temple twice, I can see how the confusion originally occurred. He cast out the moneychangers on Sunday the 11th. He ate the Passover meal on Tuesday evening and was crucified on the afternoon of Wednesday the 14th - in the very middle of the week. He rose on Saturday evening and was seen on Sunday morning.

I already know that there will be quite a few people who will object to this chronology, as they are inclined towards a Friday crucifixion. Please understand that I've already seen all of the chronological arguments in favor of a Friday crucifixion and have already dealt with them in my own studies, so there's really nothing you can point out that I haven't come across before. Plus, this neatly explains Daniel's "one week" and so should be seriously considered without rejecting it out of hand.

By the way, there was an earthquake when Jesus died (Mat. 27:51) "in the midst of the week" which tore the veil covering the Holy of Holies in the Temple. Until this was repaired, the Jews couldn't offer sacrifices at the Temple, so sacrifices literally ceased for a period of time. Compare Daniel 9:27. Of course, the Temple sacrifices ceased entirely when the Temple was destroyed forty years later, but that doesn't fit the time context of Daniel's prophecy.

FYI, the Exodus from Egypt occurred right about the time that Jesus was buried in the tomb - right towards sunset, the beginning of the 15th day of the month - and they crossed the Red Sea during the day portion of the 17th, reaching the other side right about the time that Jesus was resurrected, on the evening beginning the 18th.

But that's another story...

Damon

[Guest]

* Two days later was the 14th Passover. See Matthew 26:1-2 and Mark 14:1. Remember that in the bible, a day begins at sunset. Jesus ate the Passover with His disciples on the evening beginning the 14th, and was crucified the following afternoon, which was still the 14th. He was buried immediately prior to evening beginning the 15th.

Doesn't Mark 15 + John 19 say Jesus died the day before the Sabbath? If Jesus was crucified on the day of the Jewish Passover, the 14th of Nisan. Then how is it that Jesus celebrated the Passover at the Last Supper, the day before his crucifixion?

Plus, this neatly explains Daniel's "one week" and so should be seriously considered without rejecting it out of hand.

Daniel's one "week" is not a week. It's a seven. Up to this point, the 69 sevens were 483 years with one "seven" remaining, one literal seven years. If the first 69 were literally 483 years, why would the last "seven"
be seven days?

By the way, there was an earthquake when Jesus died (Mat. 27:51) "in the midst of the week" which tore the veil covering the Holy of Holies in the Temple.

Damon

I can't find were you get "in the midst of the week" to refer to Matt 27?

[Guest]

Hi Sean.

First of all, I'd posted in another thread that the original, historical fulfillment of Daniel 9 occurred in Daniel's time. It was a prophecy of 70 literal weeks at the end of the 70 year period of Babylonian captivity. So, why should it be at all surprising if there's a prophetic overlay with Christ's ministry and that we're once again dealing with a literal week?

By the way, I think a fulfillment as a seven year period is also valid, to a degree.

And secondly, like I said, I've seen all of the chronological arguments, including this one. To this day, the Jews refer to the annual Holy Days (see Leviticus 23) as "High Holy Days." Jesus died the day before the Sabbath, all right - but it was an annual Sabbath, not the weekly Sabbath! Look at John 19:31. It was a "high day." It was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Furthermore, the women bought spices both before the Sabbath (Luke 23:56) and after the Sabbath (Mark 16:1). They only bought spices once, but there were two Sabbaths that week. One was on Thursday and the other was the weekly Sabbath on Saturday.

Also, you didn't understand what I said. I said that in the bible, a day begins at sunset. So you have:

Monday, sunset + Tuesday = Nisan 13
Tuesday sunset + Wednesday = Nisan 14
Wednesday sunset + Thursday = Nisan 15
etc.

Jesus ate a Passover meal on the evening portion of Nisan 14, and was crucified the following day, which was still on Nisan 14. The national observance was kept on Nisan 15th, and that's what the Jews were still waiting for in John 18:28.

To answer your last question:

"And He [the Messiah] will confirm the covenant with many for one week, and in the middle of the week He [again, the Messiah] will cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease [by His death and by the earthquake], and for the overspreading of abominations He [once again, the Messiah] will make it [the Temple and Jerusalem] desolate until the consummation, and what has been determined [destruction, referring to AD 70] will be poured upon the desolate [Temple and city]."

Jesus was the one who said that the Temple was left to the Jews desolate because of their wickedness and their abominations in Matthew 23, specifically in verse 38. Therefore, He fulfilled even this part of the prophecy.

I'm not asking you to agree with me, but understand that my view on this passage is as rock-solid and internally consistent as it can possibly be, because I've put lots of study into examining it and testing it. To you, I'm sure your own view is rock-solid and internally consistent because you've studied your view closely as well! All I'm saying is that I've already looked at all of the arguments - chronological and otherwise - concerning this subject, and this is my conclusion. But nevertheless, I consider Daniel 9:27 to have multiple historical fulfillments. I also believe that there will be an end-time fulfillment, for instance.

Damon

[Guest]

What we have is a one-week period that Christ is in Jerusalem. In the middle of the week, He is crucified. At the end of the week, He is resurrected from the dead. THAT is the covenant that He confirms.

Damon,

I certainly agree that the resurrection of Christ is the most significant sign wrought by God in confirming the covenant; however, the verses already listed in previous posts also point out that there were other signs that were also done to confirm God's acceptance of the message and teaching (the new convenant) of Jesus and the Apostles.

By the way, there was an earthquake when Jesus died (Mat. 27:51) "in the midst of the week" which tore the veil covering the Holy of Holies in the Temple. Until this was repaired, the Jews couldn't offer sacrifices at the Temple, so sacrifices literally ceased for a period of time. Compare Daniel 9:27. Of course, the Temple sacrifices ceased entirely when the Temple was destroyed forty years later, but that doesn't fit the time context of Daniel's prophecy.

The end of the sacrifice and offering that Daniel refers to in Dan 9:27 happened when Jesus was crucified NOT when the Temple was destroyed forty years later. This is fully explained in Hebrews Chapter 9.

Heb 9:11-17
11But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come,[a] with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. 12Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, 14how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
16For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. 17For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives.

This passage explains that the Old Covenant was replaced by the New Covenant at Jesus' death making the sacrifices and offerings under the Old Covenant completed, fulfilled, and no longer acknowledged by God as a continuing practice.

Todd

[Guest]

I certainly agree that the resurrection of Christ is the most significant sign wrought by God in confirming the covenant; however, the verses already listed in previous posts also point out that there were other signs that were also done to confirm God's acceptance of the message and teaching (the new convenant) of Jesus and the Apostles.

I don't disagree. Like I said, I see multiple fulfillments going on here. The most primary fulfillment involves a literal week, and a secondary fulfillment involves a period of seven years. I also see an end-time literal week as well as a seven year period connected with this as well.

I see what you see, Todd. But I also see a bigger picture than just that one fulfillment.

Take a look at this post (which is a response to one of your own posts, I see) where I discuss why I believe the 70 weeks' prophecy in Daniel to have a historical fulfillment during the 70 years of Babylonian captivity. Hopefully that will shed a little more light for you on why I see multiple historical fulfillments here.

Damon

[Guest]

I see multiple fulfillments going on here. The most primary fulfillment involves a literal week, and a secondary fulfillment involves a period of seven years. I also see an end-time literal week as well as a seven year period connected with this as well.

Damon,

As I consider your "multiple fulfillments" it seems that there are problems. First, Daniel says that the seventy weeks begin with the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Dan 9:25). How can that relate to seventy literal weeks during the time of Christ - unless, of course, you are only using the last week and ignoring the other sixty-nine. Also, with regard to the time of the captivity in Babylon, Daniel says that the Messiah would come at the end of the sixty-ninth week. How could that be fulfilled then (Cyrus??)?

Todd