Adversary Teardown: Aish.com and Other Traditions

The clarity of Daniel 9:24-27 regarding the timing of the Messiah's advent and "cutting off" is a direct challenge to traditions that deny Yeshua's Messianic claim. We will expose the systematic distortions employed by some modern Jewish counter-missionary movements and other traditions to obscure this profound prophecy.

Aish.com and the Rabbinic Counter-Missionary Narrative

Adversary Position: Aish.com, a prominent Orthodox Jewish website, often presents interpretations that reinterpret Daniel's 70 Weeks. For example, in articles discussing Messianic prophecies, they might argue that the "anointed one" (מָשִׁיחַ, mashiach) in Daniel 9:25 refers to Cyrus the Great or a High Priest, and the "cutting off" (יִכָּרֵת, yikaret) in Daniel 9:26 refers to the removal of a leader or even the death of King Agrippa I, rather than a sacrificial death of the Messiah. They often align the destruction of the city and sanctuary with 70 CE, but disconnect the "cutting off" of the Messiah from Yeshua, or claim the prophecy refers to the destruction of the First Temple period.

Denominational Lineage & Deviation: This interpretive shift gained significant traction in later rabbinic tradition, particularly following the rise of Christianity. While earlier rabbinic sources, such as the Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 53 and Sanhedrin 98b, show a strong Messianic expectation and understanding of a suffering Messiah, figures like Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki, 1040-1105 CE) began to systematically reinterpret Messianic prophecies to deflect Christian claims. Rashi, in his commentary on Daniel 9, interprets the "anointed one" of verse 25 as Cyrus, and the "anointed one" of verse 26 as Agrippa. This marks a clear departure from the earlier, more direct Messianic understanding that permeated the Second Temple period and is evident in the Dead Sea Scrolls (e.g., 11Q13, which links the 70 Weeks to a Messianic figure). The motivation was explicitly apologetic, to create a firewall against the growing influence of Christian claims.

Corrected Reading: The Hebrew term מָשִׁיחַ (mashiach) specifically refers to "Messiah the Prince" (מָשִׁיחַ נָגִיד, mashiach nagid) in Daniel 9:25, a title consistently applied to the ultimate redeemer. To apply it to Cyrus, who is called "My anointed" (מְשִׁיחִי, m'shichi) in Isaiah 45:1 but never "Messiah the Prince," is a forced reading. Furthermore, the "cutting off" (יִכָּרֵת, yikaret) in Daniel 9:26, especially when followed by "but not for Himself," carries a profound sacrificial connotation, distinct from the "removal" or death of a king like Agrippa, who certainly died "for himself" and his own sins. The prophecy's explicit sequence – Messiah cut off, then the city and sanctuary destroyed – places the Messiah's death before 70 CE, a timeline that Yeshua fulfills.

Chabad.org and the Emphasis on a Living, Reigning Messiah

Adversary Position: Chabad.org, representing the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic movement, while acknowledging the Messianic era, typically focuses on the coming of a future, living Messiah who will rebuild the Temple and usher in an era of peace. They tend to interpret the "70 Weeks" in Daniel 9:24-27 either as already fulfilled in the Second Temple period with various high priests or leaders, or as a more general prophecy about the redemption process, rather than a precise timeline for a suffering Messiah's first advent. Their emphasis is often on the "anointed one" as a king or spiritual leader, not one who is "cut off" in sacrifice.

Denominational Lineage & Deviation: Chabad, like other Orthodox movements, inherits the post-Rashi interpretive tradition. Their focus on a reigning, living Messiah is deeply rooted in the Maimonidean criteria for Messiah (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 11:4), which emphasizes rebuilding the Temple and gathering exiles. This emphasis, while valid for the Second Coming, can sometimes overshadow the Tanakh's prophecies of a suffering Messiah (Isaiah 53, Zechariah 12:10) and the timing of Daniel 9. The deviation here is less about direct reinterpretation of specific words and more about an overarching theological framework that prioritizes the triumphant aspect of the Messiah over the atoning, suffering aspect, thereby potentially overlooking the fulfillment of the "cutting off" prophecy.

Corrected Reading: The prophecy of Daniel 9:26 explicitly states the Messiah will be "cut off" before the "prince who is to come" destroys the city and sanctuary. This suffering and death is presented as a prerequisite for the "everlasting righteousness" mentioned in Daniel 9:24. While the Messiah will indeed reign, His atoning death is a foundational element of His first advent, specifically indicated by Daniel. To ignore or downplay the "cutting off" aspect of the prophecy is to miss a crucial component of the Messianic work outlined in the Tanakh.

Bart Ehrman and Secular-Critical Redating of Daniel

Adversary Position: Bart Ehrman, a prominent New Testament scholar known for his textual criticism and agnosticism, often aligns with secular-critical scholarship that dates the book of Daniel to the Maccabean period (circa 167-164 BCE). From this perspective, the "prophecies" in Daniel, including the 70 Weeks, are seen as vaticinium ex eventu – prophecies written after the events they describe. Thus, Daniel 9 would be interpreted as reflecting the historical events of the Maccabean revolt, the desecration of the Temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, or possibly the death of Onias III, rather than a genuine prediction of a future Messiah.

Denominational Lineage & Deviation: This critical approach originated in the Enlightenment and gained significant traction in 19th and 20th-century German higher criticism. Figures like Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918) were instrumental in popularizing source criticism and redating biblical books. The motivation is often a naturalistic worldview that rejects supernatural prophecy. The "break point" from traditional Jewish and Christian understanding is the rejection of divine inspiration and the prophetic nature of the text itself. By redating Daniel, the predictive power of the 70 Weeks prophecy is largely nullified, potentially making any Messianic fulfillment impossible by definition.

Corrected Reading: The internal evidence of Daniel, including its theological themes and linguistic features, supports an earlier dating. Furthermore, the Dead Sea Scrolls, containing copies of Daniel that predate the Maccabean period, provide strong evidence against a late dating. Even if one were to accept a Maccabean dating, the prophecy of Daniel 9:26-27 still describes events (the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE) that occurred centuries after the Maccabean period. Therefore, even under a critical lens, the prophecy of the "cutting off" of the Messiah and the subsequent destruction of the Temple can be seen as a genuine prediction, not merely a historical recount. The alignment of 69 weeks with Yeshua's advent and death is viewed as a powerful testimony to its prophetic accuracy, regardless of scholarly debates on dating.

Counter-Arguments Anticipated

Objection 1: The "anointed one" in Daniel 9:25-26 refers to someone other than the Messiah, such as Cyrus or a High Priest.

Rebuttal: This objection, often raised by counter-missionary movements, fails to account for the specific terminology and context. Daniel 9:25 uses the phrase "Messiah the Prince" (מָשִׁיחַ נָגִיד, mashiach nagid), a unique and exalted title not applied to Cyrus, who is merely called "My anointed" (מְשִׁיחִי, m'shichi) in Isaiah 45:1. Nor is it typically applied to High Priests in this prophetic context. The immediate context of Daniel 9:24 speaks of objectives like "to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to make atonement for iniquity," which are clearly Messianic in scope and far exceed the role of any king or priest mentioned in the Second Temple era. The Dead Sea Scroll 11Q13 (Melchizedek) is interpreted by some scholars as connecting the "anointed one" of Daniel 9 with a transcendent Messianic figure, suggesting a first-century Jewish understanding that aligns with Yeshua.

Objection 2: The "cutting off" (יִכָּרֵת, yikaret) in Daniel 9:26 simply means removal or exile, not a sacrificial death.

Rebuttal: While yikaret can mean to be cut off from the community or exiled, its usage in Daniel 9:26, coupled with "but not for Himself," points towards a violent, vicarious death. In the Tanakh, karet (the root of yikaret) often denotes divine judgment leading to death (e.g., Leviticus 7:20-21). Furthermore, the phrase "but not for Himself" (וְאֵין לוֹ, v'ein lo) suggests a selfless, atoning purpose, a concept deeply embedded in the sacrificial system of the Torah. A mere "removal" or death of a king for his own sins might not fully fit this profound theological nuance. The subsequent destruction of the city and sanctuary after the Messiah is "cut off" further emphasizes the consequence of this event, linking it to divine judgment and atonement.

Objection 3: The 70 weeks are not literal years or do not start from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem, making the calculation invalid.

Rebuttal: The interpretation of "weeks" (שָׁבֻעִים, shavu'im) as "weeks of years" (i.e., seven-year periods) is a well-established hermeneutical principle in Jewish prophecy, exemplified by Daniel's own understanding of Jeremiah's 70 years (Daniel 9:2). This interpretation is supported by the magnitude of the events described (rebuilding Jerusalem, advent of Messiah, destruction of Temple) which cannot fit into 490 literal days. The starting point, "the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem" (Daniel 9:25), is often linked to the decree of Artaxerxes in Nehemiah 2:1-8, which historical records place in 445 BCE. This decree was for the rebuilding of the city with its walls and infrastructure, not just the Temple, a distinction sometimes overlooked by those attempting to shift the starting date. The precision of the calculation, leading towards the time of Yeshua's ministry and crucifixion, provides significant evidence for this interpretation.

Position Lock

Position Lock: The prophecy of Daniel's 70 Weeks (Daniel 9:24-27) provides a divinely ordained timeline that many scholars interpret as pointing to the first advent of the Messiah, which they believe is fulfilled in Yeshua HaMashiach, who was "cut off" (crucified) after 69 weeks (483 prophetic years) and before the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, thereby accomplishing atonement for sin and inaugurating everlasting righteousness, consistent with Torah-observant Hebraic faith.

Related Sources & Prophecies

• Dead Sea Scrolls: Unveiling Messianic Expectation
• Messianic Prophecy: Fulfillment in Yeshua
• Messianic prophecy fulfillment timeline
• Messianic worldview overview
• Ask Enoch about was the prophecy "Daniel's 70 Weeks