Is Daniel's 70th Week Referring to Jesus or the Antichrist?

Hello Youtubers,

Daniel’s 70th Week is perhaps the most difficult passage to interpret in the Bible. In general, different views of Daniel’s 70th week can be broken into two categories; namely that Daniel’s 70th week happened in the past or that Daniel’s 70th week is a future event. When I personally read the passages, even though I’m premillennial, I admit that these verses seem to be talking about Jesus’s first coming. So, I’ll first go over that view first. However, the premillennialists of Early Christianity, even though they were not dispensational, saw a future interpretation of Daniel’s 70th week. I will also briefly present that argument, though a future video will go into much greater detail.

I’ll assume that everyone is on agreement on the first 69 weeks. The biggest issue is “Who is the person in the 70th week talking about”? Well, if the first 69 weeks are talking about the time until the coming of the messiah, it’s likely that the 70th week is talking about the messiah isn’t it? The only reason we would think it’s talking about the antichrist is because in verse 26, it’s said that during the 70th week, that is, after the 62 and 7 weeks, it mentions the people of the prince who will come desolates the temple, right after mentioning that the anointed one is cut off.

So is the “he” that confirms a covenant referring to the anointed one, or the people of the prince who come? Because both are mentioned during the 70th week, in verse 26. This is important because if verse 27 is referring to Jesus, it happened in the past, during his ministry. If talking about the antichrist, it’s a prophecy about the future.

When reading the verse, I think there’s a good argument to be made that Jesus fulfilled everything stated in verse 27. At the same time, I recognize the premillennial arguments of the early church. I don’t agree, but it’s possible that my disagreement comes from poor translation of the verse into English.

When reading the King James Version, I come to the conclusion that Daniel’s 70th Week is talking about Jesus. After all, didn’t Jesus confirm the new covenant of grace with many? And that covenant of grace is still in effect isn’t it? The passage doesn’t say that the covenant lasts a week, only that it takes a week to confirm the covenant. And, approximately 3.5 years into his ministry, didn’t Jesus cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, through his sacrifice and atonement for sin? Wasn’t it his resurrection that led to the destruction of the temple and the flourishment of evil, just as the verse said? It says “for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate”. In other words, “In order for evil to spread, the temple shall be desolate even until the end of time, when the sinners are punished”. I ask, didn’t Jesus in every way fulfill what was spoken in this verse?

But perhaps the error isn’t in my reading comprehension. Perhaps the error is in the translation. I was quoting from the King James version, but the English Standard version says something a bit different. It states,

“And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.”

That’s a bit different. In this translation, it says he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering FOR half the week, not that the time in which sacrifice and offering ends is at the halfway point of the week. And the English Standard version states that there “shall come one who makes desolate” rather than “he shall make desolate”, as the King James version renders. When comparing the English Standard Version against the King James Version, it seems that the English Standard Version makes a much stronger case that verse 27 is referring to a future antichrist.

Perhaps more importantly, it seems that the earliest Christian premillennialists interpreted the passages as applying to a future antichrist. In the earliest Christian commentary on Daniel, Hippolytus had this to say.

Then he says, “after sixty-two weeks, times shall be spun out and he shall set forth a covenant with many for one week. And in half of the week sacrifice and the drink offering shall be taken away and upon the Temple shall be an abomination of desolation. For after sixty-two weeks was fulfilled and after Christ has come and the Gospel has been preached in every place, times having been spun out, the end remains one week away, in which Elijah and Enoch shall be present and in its half the abomination of desolation, the Antichrist, shall appear who threatens desolation of the world. After he comes, sacrifice and drink offering, which now in every way is offered by the nations to God, shall be taken away.”

So Hippolytus clearly believed in a future fulfillment of Daniel’s 70th Week. I’ll explore his views on Daniel in greater detail in a future video.

That’s all the time I have for now. If you like this video please show your support by subscribing!