Tanakh Prophecy
"After the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself."
Fulfillment
"Jesus cried out and breathed His last… 'Not one stone upon another.'"
Rabbinic Sources
"The rabbis recognized the deadline but declared 'the times have passed.'"
Deep Dive: Daniel's 70 Weeks — Messiah cut off before 70 CE
Historical Context
The prophecy of Daniel's 70 Weeks is situated within a tumultuous era in Jewish history, penned during the Babylonian exile around the 6th century BCE. The author, traditionally identified as the prophet Daniel, lived through significant political upheaval, witnessing the fall of the Babylonian Empire and the rise of the Medo-Persian Empire. Daniel's visions and prophecies were directed towards the Jewish exiles in Babylon, providing them with hope and a timeline for the anticipated restoration of Jerusalem and the coming Messiah.
Archaeological evidence, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, has confirmed the existence of the Book of Daniel in the Second Temple period, underscoring its importance to the Jewish people. The historical backdrop of this prophecy is critical, as it reflects the yearning for divine intervention in a time of oppression and the longing for the restoration of Israel. The prophecy in Daniel 9:26, "After the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself," introduces the concept of a suffering Messiah, which contrasts starkly with the prevailing expectations of a triumphant political leader.
Textual Analysis
The key Hebrew phrase in Daniel 9:26, "וְנִכְרַת מָשִׁיחַ" (ve-nichrat mashiach), translates to "and Messiah shall be cut off." The term "נִכְרַת" (nichrat) carries connotations of being cut off or removed, suggesting a violent or abrupt end. This nuance is crucial for understanding the nature of the Messiah's death, which is not for Himself but for the sake of others.
The phrase "not for Himself" (לֹא לוֹ) emphasizes the selfless nature of this Messiah's sacrifice, pointing towards a redemptive purpose as opposed to personal gain. Various translations, such as the New International Version (NIV) and the Jewish Publication Society (JPS), maintain fidelity to this meaning, highlighting the unique character of the Messiah in contrast to contemporary expectations of a conquering king.
In Jewish tradition, the interpretation of "weeks" (שָׁבוּעַ, shavua) as periods of seven years has been widely accepted. Thus, the 70 weeks amount to a total of 490 years, which further frames the prophecy within a specific historical timeline leading to the Messiah's arrival and subsequent death.
Fulfillment Evidence
The New Testament presents compelling evidence that Yeshua fulfilled the prophecy of the "cut-off" Messiah. In Mark 15:37, it is recorded that Yeshua cried out and then breathed His last, signifying His death at a pivotal moment in history. Furthermore, Luke 19:41–44 recounts Yeshua's lament over Jerusalem, where He foretells its destruction: "Not one stone upon another will be left." This aligns with Daniel's prophecy, suggesting that the Messiah's death preceded the catastrophic events that befell Jerusalem in 70 CE.
Historical records from Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, corroborate the timing of these events. He documents the siege and subsequent destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, occurring shortly after Yeshua's crucifixion. This sequence of events reinforces the prophetic timeline outlined in Daniel.
Despite the clear connections, some objections arise regarding the interpretation of "cut off." Critics may argue that the concept of a suffering Messiah is inconsistent with traditional Jewish beliefs. However, the Talmudic text in Sanhedrin 97b acknowledges the timeline for the Messiah's arrival, albeit with a note of skepticism, stating, "the times have passed." This admission indicates an awareness of the prophecy's significance and the expectation of fulfillment, which aligns with the New Testament accounts.
Rabbinic Perspectives
Traditional rabbinic literature offers insights into the interpretation of Daniel 9:26. The Talmud, particularly in Sanhedrin 97b, discusses the Messiah's arrival and supports the notion of a messianic figure who would face adversity. The Midrash, too, contains interpretations that recognize the suffering aspect of the Messiah, which resonates with the New Testament portrayal of Yeshua's mission.
The Targumim, Aramaic translations of the Hebrew scriptures, often reflect a messianic understanding of key texts. In their interpretations of Daniel, they highlight the expectation of a redeemer who would endure suffering, suggesting that this concept was not foreign to early Jewish thought.
Significance for Today
The prophecy of Daniel's 70 Weeks remains profoundly relevant for contemporary believers and seekers. It encapsulates the core message of redemption and hope amid suffering, emphasizing that the Messiah’s mission was divinely orchestrated for humanity's benefit. For Messianic Jews, this prophecy serves as a pivotal link between the Tanakh and the New Testament, affirming the belief that Yeshua is indeed the awaited Messiah who fulfilled the prophecies of old.
Moreover, understanding this prophecy encourages deeper reflection on the character of the Messiah, who, rather than conforming to human expectations of power, chose a path of sacrifice and love. This resonates with modern believers seeking a transformative relationship with God through Yeshua, reinforcing the belief that the fulfillment of prophecies is not merely historical but also applicable to personal faith journeys today. The acknowledgment of a Messiah who suffers for His people invites a broader understanding of redemption, calling individuals to embrace the hope that transcends temporal circumstances.
Two Millennia of Adversary Positions
5 eras of objections to this prophecy, with primary sources and Messianic corrections.
Talmudic Sages
Prophecy Failed, Deadline Passed
"let the breath of those who calculate the ends burst, for they would say, since the end has arrived and he has not come, he will not come anymore."
The sages in the Talmud calculated the timeframe of Daniel's 70 weeks and concluded that the deadline for the Messiah's arrival had already passed. Seeing no fulfillment they recognized, they declared the calculations void and pronounced a curse on future date-setters to discourage eschatological speculation.
Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki)
'Anointed One' is King Agrippa, Not Messiah
"an anointed one shall be cut off: Agrippa, the king of Judea, who was ruling at the time of the destruction, will be killed."
Rashi interprets the 'anointed one' who is 'cut off' not as the Messiah, but as a political figure, King Agrippa II. He argues Agrippa was killed at the time of the Second Temple's destruction, thus fulfilling this part of the prophecy without reference to Jesus.
Abraham Ibn Ezra
'Cut Off' Refers to the Office of Priesthood, Not a Person
"The meaning of an anointed one shall be cut off is that there will be no anointed one in Israel, neither a king nor a high priest who is anointed with the anointing oil."
Ibn Ezra offers an alternative reading where the 'cutting off' does not refer to the death of a single person. He suggests it signifies the cessation of the anointed office itself—that after the destruction, Israel would no longer have a High Priest anointed with oil or a king.
Bart Ehrman
Prophecy Written After-the-Fact about Maccabean Events
"The 'anointed one' who is 'cut off' is the Jewish high priest Onias III, who was deposed from office and then murdered in 170 B.C.E."
Bart Ehrman represents the critical scholarly view that Daniel is an example of 'vaticinium ex eventu' (prophecy after the event). He argues the book was written in the 2nd century BCE and 'predicts' the murder of the High Priest Onias III (c. 170 BCE), not a future Messiah. The prophecy is thus seen as history written in a prophetic style.
Tovia Singer
Timeline Broken by Hebrew Grammar; Two 'Anointed Ones'
Tovia Singer argues that Christian interpretations misread the Hebrew. He points to the Masoretic accent mark (atnach) placed after 'seven weeks' in Daniel 9:25 to argue for a hard stop, breaking the 69-week continuous timeline that points to Jesus. He claims the first 'anointed one' in verse 25 is Cyrus the Great, while the 'anointed one' cut off in verse 26 refers to the High Priesthood being destroyed in 70 CE, not a person.