THE SCOFIELD BIBLE PUBLISHED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 20TH CENTURY, GAVE A WILD, CRAZY, SILLY, PLANET PLUTO TEACHING ON DANIEL 9.
MANY FUNNY-MENTAL PROTESTANT TEACHERS CONTINUE TO PROCLAIM SCOFIELD'S FAR OUT THEOLOGY ON THIS PROPHECY.
THEY ARE VERY WRONG, AND TOGETHER WITH THEIR "SECRET RAPTURE" TEACHING LEAD MANY INTO A FALSE UNDERSTANDING OF END TIME PROPHECY---Keith Hunt
Albert Barnes on Daniel 9 #5
The 70 week Prophecy
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary
The "holy place" - the temple. This is the termination
of the prophecy. It begins with the command to "rebuild and
restore" the city, and ends with its destruction. The thing is
not fixed, nor is there in the prophecy any direct intimation
when it would occur, unless it be found in the general
declaration in verse 24, that " seventy weeks were determined upon
the people and the city." The whole scope of the prophecy,
however, would lead to the supposition that this was soon to
occur after the Messiah should be "cut off." The series of,
events under the Romans which led to the destruction of the city
and temple, in fact, began very soon after the death of the Lord
Jesus, and ceased only when the temple was wholly demolished,
and the city was rased to its foundations.
And the end thereof
Heb "its end," or "his end"--(Heb. given) It is not certain as to what
the word it (Heb. given) here refers. It may be either the end of the
city, or of the prince, or of the prophecy, so as the grammatical
construction is concerned. As the principal and immediate subject
of the prophecy, however, is the city, it is more natural to
refer it to that. Hengstenberg renders it, "it will end,"
supposing, with Vitrina, that it refers to the subject of the
discourse: "the thing--the whole affair--all that is here
predicted in this series of events will end with a flood." This
accords well with the whole design of the prophecy.
With a flood
That is, it shall be like an overflowing flood. The word here
used means a gushing, outpouring, as of rain, Job xxxviii. 25;
of a torrent, Prov. xxvii. 4; an overflowing, inundation, flood,
Psa. xxvii. 6; Nah. i. 8. Hence it would appropriately denote the
ravages of an army, sweeping everything away. It would be like a
sudden inundation, carrying everything before it. No one can
doubt that this language is applicable in every respect to the
desolations brought upon Jerusalem by the Roman armies. And
unto the end of the war desolations are determined. Marg., "it shall
be cut off by desolations." Hengstenberg renders this, "and unto
the end is war, a decree of ruins." So Lengerke - "und bis aufs
Ende Krieg und Beschluss der Wusten." Bertholdt renders it, "and
the great desolations shall continue unto the end of the war."
The Latin Vulgate renders it, "et post finem belli statuta
desolatio"--"and after the end of the war desolation is
determined." Prof. Stuart translates it, "and unto the end shall
be war, a decreed measure of desolations." The literal meaning of
the passage is, "and unto the end of the war desolations are
decreed," or determined. The word rendered "determined"
(Heb. given) means, properly, to cut, cut in, engrave; then to decide,
to determine, to decree, to pass sentence. See Notes on ver.24. Here
the meaning naturally is, that such desolations were settled or
determined as by a decree or purpose. There was so meshing which
made them certain; that is, it was a part of the great plan here
referred to in the vision of the seventy weeks, that there should
be such desolations extending through the war. The things which
would, therefore, be anticipated from this passage would be:
(a) That there would be war. This is implied also in the
assurance that the people of a foreign prince would come
and take the city.
(b) That this war would be of a desolating character, or that it
would in a remarkable manner extend and spread ruin over the
land. All wars are thus characterized; but it would seem that
this would do it in a remarkable manner.
(c) That these desolations would extend through the war, or to
its close. There would be no intermission; no cessation. It is
hardly necessary to say that this was, in fact, precisely the
character of the war which the Romans waged with the Jews after
the death of the Saviour, and which ended in the destruction of
the city and temple; the overthrow of the whole Hebrew polity;
and the removal of great numbers of the people to a distant and
perpetual captivity. No war, perhaps, has been in its progress
more marked by desolation; in none has the purpose of destruction
been more perseveringly manifested to its very close. The
language here, indeed, might apply to many wars in a certain
sense to all wars; to none, however, would it be more appropriate
than to the wars of the Romans with the Jews.
And he shall confirm the covenant
Literally, "he shall make strong" (Heb. given) The idea is that of
giving strength, or stability; of making firm and sure. The
Hebrew word here evidently refers to the "covenant" which God is
said to establish with his people - so often referred to in the
Scriptures as expressing the relation between Him and them, and
hence used, in general, to denote the laws and institutions of
the true religion, the laws which God has made for his church;
his promises to be their protector, &c., and the institutions
which grow out of that relation. The margin reads it, more in
accordance with the Hebrew, "a" meaning that he would confirm or
establish "a covenant" with the many. According to this, it is
not necessary to suppose that it was any existing covenant that
it referred to, but that he would ratify what was understood by
the word "covenant;" that is, that he would lead many to enter
into a true and real covenant with God. This would be fulfilled
if he should perform such a work as would bring the "many" into a
relation to God corresponding to that which was sustained to him
by his ancient people; that is, bring them to be his true friends
and worshippers. The meaning of the expression here cannot be
mistaken, that during the time specified, "he" (whoever may be
referred to) would, for "one week" - pursue such a course as
would tend to establish the true religion; to render it more
stable and firm; to give it higher sanctions in the approbation
of the "many," and to bring it to bear more decidedly and
powerfully on the heart. Whether this would be by some law
enacted in its favour; or by protection extended over the nation;
or by present example; or by instruction; or by some work of a
new kind, and new influences which he would set forth, is not
mentioned, and beforehand perhaps it could not have been well
anticipated in what way this would be. There has been a
difference of opinion, however, as to the proper nominative to
the verb "confirm"--(Heb. given) -- whether it is the Messiah, or the
foreign prince, or the "one week." Hengstenberg prefers the
latter, and renders it, "And one week shall confirm the covenant
with many." So also Lengerke renders it. Bertholdt renders it
"he," that is, "he shall unite himself firmly with many for one
week" - or, a period of seven years, "ein Jahrsiebend lang."
It seems to me that it is an unnatural construction to make the
word "week" the nominative to the verb, and that the more obvious
interpretation is to refer it to some person to whom the whole
subject relates. It is not usual to represent time as an agent in
accomplishing a work. In poetic and metaphorical language,
indeed, we personate time as cutting down men, as a destroyer,
&c., but this usage would not justify the expression that "time
would confirm a covenant with many." That is, evidently, the work
of a conscious, intelligent agent; and it is most natural,
therefore, to understand this as of one of the two agents who are
spoken of in the passage. These two agents are the "Messiah," and
the "prince that should come." But it is not reasonable to
suppose that the latter is referred to, because it is said (verse
26) that the effect and the purpose of his coming would be to
"destroy the city and the sanctuary." He was to come "with a
flood," and the effect of his coming would be only desolation.
The more correct interpretation, therefore, is to refer it to the
Messiah, who is the principal subject of the prophecy; and the
work which, according to this, he was to perform was, during that
"one week," to exert such an influence as would tend to establish
a covenant between the people and God. The effect of his work
during that one week would be to secure their adhesion to the
true religion; to confirm to them the Divine promises, and to
establish the principles of that religion which would lead them
to God. Nothing is said of the mode by which that would be done;
and anything, therefore, which would secure this would be a
fulfilment of the prophecy. As a matter of fact, if it refers to
the Lord Jesus, this was done by his personal instructions, his
example, his sufferings and death, and the arrangements which he
made to secure the proper effect of his work on the minds of the
people - all designed to procure for them the friendship and
favour of God, and to unite them to him in the bonds of an
enduring covenant.
With man
Or, for many; or, unto many. He would perform a work which would
pertain to many, or which would bear on many, leading them to
God. There is nothing in the word here which I would indicate who
they were, whether his own immediate followers, or those who
already were in the covenant. The simple idea is, that this would
pertain to many persons, and it would be fulfilled if the effect
of his work were to confirm many who were already in the
covenant, or if he should bring many others into a covenant
relation with God. Nothing could be determined from the meaning
of the word used here as to which of these things was designed,
and consequently a fair fulfilment would be found if either of
them occurred. If it refers to the Messiah, it would be fulfilled
if in fact the effect of his coming should be either by statute
or by instructions to confirm and establish those who already
sustained this relation to God, or if he gathered other
followers, and confirmed them in their allegiance to God.
For one week
The fair interpretation of this, according to the principles
adopted throughout this exposition, is, that this includes the
space of seven years. See Notes on verse 24. This is the one week
that makes up the seventy--seven of them, or forty-nine years,
embracing the period from the command to rebuild the city and
temple to its completion under Nehemiah; sixty-two, or four
hundred and thirty-four years, to the public appearing of the
Messiah, and this one week to complete the whole seventy, or four
hundred and ninety years "to finish transgression, and to make an
end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to
bring in everlasting righteousness," &c., ver.24.
It is essential, therefore, to find something done, occupying
these seven years, that would go to "confirm the covenant " in
the sense above explained. In the consideration of this, the
attention is arrested by the announcement of an important event
which was to occur "in the midst of the week," to wit, in causing
the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, showing that there was
to be an important change occurring during the "week," or that
while he would be, in fact, confirming the covenant through the
week in some proper sense, the sacrifice and oblation would
cease, and therefore the confirming of the many in the covenant
must depend on something else than the continuation of the
sacrifice and oblation.
In regard to this language, as in respect to all the rest of the
prophecy, there are, in fact, just two questions: one, what is
fairly to be understood by the words, or what is the proper
interpretation, independent of anything in the result; the other
is, whether anything occurred in that which is regarded
the fulfilment which corresponds with the language so
interpreted.
(1.) The first inquiry then, is: What is the fair meaning of the
language? Or what would one who had a correct knowledge of the
proper principles of interpretation understand by thus? Now,
in regard to this, while it may be admitted, perhaps, that there
would be some liability to a difference of view in interpreting
it with no reference to the event, or no shaping of its meaning
by the event, the following things seem to be clear:
(a) That the "one week," would comprise seven years, immediately
succeeding the appearance of the Messiah, or the sixty-two weeks,
and that there was something which he would do in "confirming the
covenant," or in establishing the principles of religion, which
would extend through that period of seven years, or that that
would be, in some proper sense, a period of time, having a
beginning--to wit, his appearing, and some proper close or
termination at the end of the seven years: that is, that there
would be some reason why that should be a marked period, or
why the whole should terminate there, and not at some other time.
(b) That in the middle of that period of seven years, another
important event would occur, serving to divide that time into two
portions, and especially to be known as causing the sacrifice and
oblation to cease; in some way affecting the public offering of
sacrifice, so that from that time there would be in fact a
cessation.
(c) And that this would be succeeded by the consummation of the
whole matter expressed in the words, "and for the overspreading
of abomination he shall make it desolate," &c. It is not said,
however, that this latter would immediately occur, but this would
be one of the events that would appertain to the fulfilment of
the prophecy. There is nothing, indeed, in the prediction to
forbid the expectation that this would occur at once, nor is
there anything in the words which makes it imperative that we
should so understand it. It may be admitted that this would be
the most natural interpretation, but it cannot be shown that that
is required. It may be added, also, that this may not have
appertained to the direct design, of the prophecy - which was to
foretell the coming of the Messiah, but that this was appended to
show the end of the whole thing.
When the Messiah should have come, and should have made an
atonement for sin, the great design of rebuilding Jerusalem and
the temple would have been accomplished, and both might pass
away. Whether that would occur immediately or not might be in
itself a matter of indifference; but it was important to state
here that it would occur, for that was properly a completion of
the design of rebuilding the city, and of the purpose for which
it had ever been set apart as a holy city.
(2.) The other inquiry is, whether there was that in what is
regarded as the fulfilment of this, which fairly corresponds with
the prediction. I have attempted above (on verse 25) to show that
this refers to the Messiah properly so called - the Lord Jesus
Christ. The inquiry now is, therefore, whether we can find in his
life and death what is a fair fulfilment of these reasonable
expectations. In order to see this, it is proper to review these
points in their order:
(a) The period, then, which is embraced in the prophecy, is seven
years, and it is necessary to find in his life and work something
which would be accomplished during these seven years which could
be properly referred to as "confirming the covenant with many."
The main difficulty in the case is on this point, and I
acknowledge that this seems to me to be the most embarrassing
portion of the prophecy, and that the solutions which can be
given of this are less satisfactory than those that pertain to
any other part. Were it not that the remarkable clause "in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to
cease." were added, I admit that the natural interpretation would
be, that he would do this personally, and that we might look for
something which he would himself accomplish during the whole
period of seven years. That clause, however, looks as if some
remarkable event were to occur in the middle of that period; for
the fact that he would cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease
--that is, would bring the rites of the temple to a close - shows
that what is meant by "confirming the covenant" is different from
the ordinary worship under the ancient economy. No Jew would
think of expressing himself thus, or would see how it was
practicable to "confirm the covenant" at the same time that all
his sacrifices were to cease. The confirming of the covenant,
therefore, during that "one week," must be consistent with some
work or event that would cause the sacrifice and oblation to
cease in the middle of that period.
(b) The true fulfilment, it seems to me, is to be found in the
bearing of the work of the Saviour on the Hebrew people - the
ancient covenant people of God - for about the period of seven
years after he entered on his work. Then the particular relation
of his work to the Jewish people ceased. It may not be
practicable to make out the exact time of "seven years" in
reference to this, and it may be admitted that this would not be
understood from the prophecy before the things occurred; but
still there are a number of circumstances which will show that
this interpretation is not only plausible, but that it has in its
very nature strong probability in its favour. They are such as
these:
(1.) The ministry of the Saviour himself was wholly among the
Jews, and his work was what would, in their common language,
be spoken of as "confirming the covenant;" that is, it would be
strengthening the principles of religion, bringing the Divine
promises to bear on the mind, and leading men to God, &c.
(2.) This same work was continued by the apostles as they
laboured among the Jews. They endeavoured to do the same thing
that their Lord and Master had done, with all the additional
sanctions, now derived from his life and death. The whole
tendency of their ministry would have been properly expressed in
this language: that they endeavoured to "connfirm the covenant"
with the Hebrew people; that is, to bring them to just views of
the character of their natural covenant with God; to show them
how it was confirmed in the Messiah; to establish the ancient
promises; and to bring to bear upon them the sanctions of their
law as it was now fulfilled, and ratified, and enlarged through
the Messiah. Had the Saviour himself succeeded in this, or had
his apostles, it would have been, in fact, only "confirming the
ancient covenant" - the covenant made with Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob; the covenant established under Moses, and ratified by so
many laws and customs among the people. The whole bearing of the
Saviour's instructions, and of his followers, was to carry out
and fulfil the real design of that ancient institution - to show
its true nature and meaning, and to impress it on the hearts of
men:
(3.) This was continued for about the period here referred to; at
least for a period so long that it could properly be represented
in round numbers as "one week," or seven years. The Saviour's own
ministry continued about half that time; and then the apostles
prosecuted the same work, labouring with the Jews for about the
other portion, before they turned their attention to the
Gentiles, and before the purpose to endeavour to bring in the
Jewish people was abandoned. They remained in Jerusalem; they
preached in the synagogues; they observed the rites of the temple
service; they directed their first attention everywhere to the
Hebrew people; they had not yet learned that they were to turn
away from the "covenant people," and to go to the Gentiles. It
was a slow process by which they were led to this. It required a
miracle to convince Peter of it, and to show him that it was
right to go to Cornelius (Acts x.), as a representative of the
Gentile people, and it required another miracle to convert Saul
of Tarsus, "the apostle of the Gentiles," and to prepare him for
the work of carrying the gospel to the heathen world, and a
succession of severe persecutions was demanded to induce the
apostles to leave Jerusalem, and to go abroad upon the face of
the earth to convey the message of salvation. Their first work
was among the Jewish people, and they would have remained among
them if they had not been driven away by these persecutions, and
been thus constrained to go to other lands.......
......................
To be continued
Barnes on Daniel 9 #6
The 70 week Prophecy
It is true that it cannot be shown that this was a period of
exactly "half a week," or three years and a half after the
ascension of the Saviour, but, in a prophecy of this nature, it
was a period that might, in round numbers, be well expressed by
that; or the whole might be properly described by "seventy
weeks," or four hundred and ninety years, and the last portion
after the appearing of the Messiah as one of these weeks. There
has been much needless anxiety to make out the exact time to a
month or a day in regard to this prophecy - not remembering its
general design, and not reflecting how uncertain are all the
questions in ancient chronology. Compare the sensible remarks of
Calvin on verse 25. When this occurred; when the apostles turned
away from the Hebrew people, and gave themselves to their labours
among the Gentiles, the work of "confirming the covenant" with
those to whom the promises had been made, and to whom the law was
given, ceased. They were regarded as "broken off" and left, and
the hope of success was in the Gentile world. See the reasoning
of the apostle Paul in Rom. xi. Jerusalem was given up soon after
to destruction, and the whole work, as contemplated in this
prophecy, ceased. The object for which the city and temple were
rebuilt was accomplished, and here was a proper termination of
the prophecy. It was not necessary, indeed, that these should be
at once destroyed, but they were henceforth regarded as having
fulfilled the work designed, and as being now left to ruin. The
ruin did not at once occur, but the sacrifices thenceforward
offered were without meaning, and the train of events was
constantly preparing that would sweep away city and temple
together. I suppose, therefore, that this last "one week"
embraced the period from the beginning of the ministry of the
Saviour to that when the direct and exclusive efforts to bring
the principles of his religion to bear on the Hebrew people, as
carrying out the design of the covenant made by God with their
fathers, and confirmed with so many promises, ceased, and the
great effort was commenced to evangelize the heathen world.
Then was the proper close of the seventy weeks; what is added is
merely a statement of the winding up of the whole affair, in the
destruction of the city and temple. That occurred, indeed, some
years after; but at this period all that was material in regard
to that city had taken place, and consequently that was all that
was necessary to specify as to the proper termination of the
design of rebuilding the city and the temple.
And in the midst of the week
The word here rendered "in the midst" - (Heb. given)—means, properly,
half, the half part, Exod. xxiv. 6; Numb. xii. 12; then the
middle, or the midst, Judg. xvi. 3. The Vulgate renders it, "in
dimidio;" the Greek...Hengstenberg, "the half." Lengerke, "die
Halfte;" Luther, "mit-ten." The natural and obvious
interpretation is that which is expressed in our translation, and
that will convey the essential idea in the original. It refers to
something which was to occur at about the middle portion of this
time, or when about half of this period was elapsed, or to
something which it would require half of the "one week," or seven
years, to accomplish. The meaning of the passage is fully met by
the supposition that it refers to the Lord Jesus and his work,
and that the exact thing that was intended by the prophecy was
his death, or his being "cut off," and thus causing, the
sacrifice and oblation to cease. Whatever difficulties there may
be about the precise time of our Lord's ministry, and whether he
celebrated three passovers or four after he entered on his public
work, it is agreed on all hands that it lasted about three years
and a half - the time referred to here. Though a few have
supposed that a longer period was occupied, yet the general
belief of the church has coincided in that, and there are few
points in history better settled. On the supposition that this
pertains to the death of the Lord Jesus, and that it was the
design of the prophecy here to refer to the effects of that
death, this is the very language which would have been used.
If the period of "a week" were for any purpose mentioned,
then it would be indispensable to suppose that there would be an
allusion to the important event - in fact, the great event which
was to occur in the middle of that period, when the ends of the
types and ceremonies of the Hebrew people would be accomplished,
and a sacrifice made for the sins of the whole world.
He shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease
The word "he," in this place, refers to the Messiah, if the
interpretation of the former part of the verse is correct, for
there can be no doubt that it is the same person who is mentioned
in the phrase "he shall confirm the covenant with many." The
words "sacrifice" and "oblation" refer to the offerings made in
the temple. The former word more properly denotes bloody
offerings; the latter offerings of any kind - whether of flour,
fruits, grain, &c. See these words explained in the Notes on Isa.
i. 11,13. The word rendered "cease" means, properly, to rest
(whence the word Sabbath), and then in Hiphil, to cause to rest,
or to cause to cease. It conveys the idea of putting an end to -
as, for example, war, Psa. xlvi. 9; contention, Prov. xviii. 18;
exultation, Isa. xvi. 10. Gesenius. The literal signification
here would be met by the supposition that an end would be made of
these sacrifices, and this would occur either by their being made
wholly to cease to be offered at that time, or by the fact that
the object of their appointment was accomplished, and that
henceforward they would be useless and would die away. As a
matter of fact, so far as the Divine intention in the appointment
of these sacrifices and offerings was concerned, they ceased at
the death of Christ - in the middle of the "week." Then the great
sacrifice which they had [pointed to - Keith Hunt] was offered.
Then they ceased to have any significancy, no reason existing for their
longer continuance. Then, as they never had had any efficacy in
themselves, they ceased also to have any propriety as types--for
the thing which they had prefigured had been accomplished. Then,
too, began a series of events and influence which led to their
abolition, for soon they were interrupted by the Romans, and the
temple and the altars were swept away to be rebuilt no more. The
death of Christ was, in fact, the thing which made them to cease,
and the fact that the great atonement has been made, and that
there is now no further need of those offerings, is the only
philosophical reason which can be given why the Jews have never
been able to rebuild the temple, and why for eighteen hundred
years they have found no place where they could again offer a
bloody sacrifice. The sacrifice and the oblation were made, as
the result of the coming of the Messiah, to "cease" ..... and
no power of man will be able to restore them again in Jerusalem.
Comp. Gibbon's account of the attempt of Julian to rebuild the
temple at Jerusalem: "Decline and Fall," ii. 35-37.
[NO POWER IN THIS AGE CAN BRING IT ALL BACK INTO
FUNCTION - Keith Hunt]
And for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it
desolate
The marginal reading here is very different, showing clearly the
perplexity of the translators: "Upon the battlements shall be the
idols of the desolator." There is great variety, also, in the
ancient versions in rendering this passage. The Latin Vulgate is,
"And there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation."
The Greek, "And upon the temple shall be an abomination of
desolations." The Syriac, "And upon the extremities of the
abomination shall rest desolation." The Arabic, "And over the
sanctuary shall there be the abomination of ruin." Luther renders
it, "And upon the wings shall stand the abomination of
desolation." Lengerke and Hengstenberg render it, "And upon the
summit of abomination comes the destroyer." Prof.Stuart, "And the
water shall be over a winged fowl of abominations." These
different translations show that there is great obscurity in the
original, and perhaps exclude the hope of being able entirely to
free the passage from all difficulties. An examination of the
words, however, may perhaps enable us to form a judgment of its
meaning. The literal and obvious sense of the original, as I
understand it, is, "And upon the wing of the abominations one
causing desolation" - (Heb. given) - the word rendered "overspreading"
means, properly, a wing; so called as covering, or because it
covers - from (Heb. given) to cover, to hide. Then it denotes
anything having a resemblance to a wing, as an extremity, a
corner, as (a) of a garment, the skirt, or flap, 1 Sam. xxiv. 4
(5), 11 (12); Numb. xv. 38, and hence, as the outer garment was
used by the Orientals to wrap themselves in at night, the word is
used for the extremity or border of a bed-covering, Deut. xxii.
30 (xxiii. 1); Ruth iii. 9. (b) It is applied to land, or to the
earth - as the earth is compared with a garment spread out, Isa.
xxiv. 16; Job xxxvii. 3; xxxviii. 13. (c) It is used to denote
the highest point, or a battlement, a pinnacle as having a
resemblance to a wing spread out. So the word (Greek given)
is used in Matt. iv. 5. See Notes on that passage.
It would seem most probable that the allusion by the word as
applied to a building would not be, as supposed by Gesenius
(Lex.), and by Hengstenberg and Lengerke, to the pinnacle or
summit, but to some roof, porch, or piazza that had a resemblance
to the wings of a bird as spread out - a use of the word that
would be very natural and obvious. The extended porch that
Solomon built on the easten side of the temple would, not
improbably, have, to one standing on the opposite Mount of
Olives, much of the appearance of the wings of a bird spread out.
Nothing certain can be determined about the allusion here from
the use of this word, but the connection would lead us to suppose
that the reference was to something pertaining to the city or
temple, for the whole prophecy has a reference to the city and
temple, and it is natural to suppose that in its close there
would be an allusion to it. The use of the word "wing" here would
lead to the supposition that what is said would pertain to
something in connection with the temple having a resemblance to
the wins of a bird, and the word "upon" (Heb. given) would lead us to
suppose that what was to occur would be somehow upon that. The
word rendered "abominations" (Heb. given) means abominable things,
things to be held in detestation, as things unclean, filthy
garments, &c., and then idols, as things that are to be held in
abhorrence. The word (Heb.) shik-kootz, is rendered abomination
in Deut. xxix. 17; 1 Kings xi. 5, 7; 2 Kings xxiii. 13, 24; Isa.
lxvi. 3; Jer. iv. 1; vii. 30; xiii. 27; xxxii. 34; Ezek. v. 11;
vii. 20; xx. 7, 8, 30; Dan. ix. 27; xi. 31; xii. 11; Hos. ix. 10;
Zech. ix. 7; abominable idols in 2 Chron. xv. 3 (in the margin
abominations); detestable in Jer. xvi. 18; Ezek. xi. 18, 21;
xxxvii. 23; and abominable filth in Nah. iii. 6. It does not
occur elsewhere. In most of these places it is applied to idols,
and the current usage would lead us so to apply it, if there were
nothing in the connection to demand a different interpretation.
It might refer to anything that was held in abomination, or that
was detestable and offensive. The word is one that might be used
of an idol god, or of anything that would pollute or defile, or
that was from any cause offensive. It is not used in the Old
Testament with reference to a banner or military standard, but
there can be no doubt that it might be so applied as denoting the
standard of a foe - of a heathen - planted on any part of the
temple - a thing which would be particularly detestable and
abominable in the sight of the Jews. The word rendered "he shall
make it desolate"--(Heb. given)—is "he making desolate;" that is, a
desolator. It is a Poel participle from (Heb. given)—to be astonished,
to be laid waste; and then, in an active sense, to lay waste, to
make desolate.- Gesenius. The same word, and the same phrase,
occur in ch. xi. 31: "And they shall place the abomination that
maketh desolate," or, as it is in the margin, "astonisheth."
There, also, the expression is used in connection with "taking
away the daily sacrifices." The word would be more properly
rendered in this place desolator, referring to some one who would
produce desolation. There is great abruptness in the entire
expression, and it is evident that it was not the intention to
give so clear a prediction in this that it could be fully
understood beforehand.
The other portions of the prophecy respecting the building of the
city, and the coming of the Messiah, and the work that he would
accomplish, are much more clear, and their meaning could have
been made out with much more certainty. But, in reference to
this, it would seem, perhaps, that all that was designed was to
throw out suggestions - fragments of thought, that would rather
hint at the subject than give any continuous idea. Perhaps a much
more abrupt method of translation than that which attempts to
express it in a continuous grammatical construction capable of
being parsed easily, would better express the state of the mind
of the speaker, and the language which he uses, than the ordinary
versions.
The Masoretic pointing, also, may be disregarded, and
then the real idea would be better expressed by some such
translation as the following: - "He shall cause the sacrifice and
the offering to cease. And-upon-the-wing-the porch of the
temple--abominations! And a desolator!" That is, after the
ceasing of the sacrifice and the oblation, the mind is fixed upon
the temple where they had been offered. The first thing that
arrests the eye is some portion of the temple, here denoted by
the word wing. The next is something abominable or detestable -
an object to be hated and loathed in the very temple itself.
The next is a desolator--one who had come to carry desolation to
that very temple. Whether the "abomination" is connected with the
"desolator" or not is not intimated by the language. It might or
might not be. The angel uses language as these objects strike the
eye, and he expresses himself in this abrupt manner as the eye
rests on one or the other. The question then arises, What does
this mean? Or what is to be regarded as the proper fulfilment?
It seems to me that there can be no doubt that there is a
reference to the Roman standard or banners planted on some part
of the temple, or to the Roman army, or to some idols set up by
the Romans--objects of abomination to the Jews--as attracting
the eye of the angel in the distant future, and as indicating the
close of the series of events here referred to in the prophecy.
The reasons for this opinion are, summarily, the following:
(a) The place or order in which the passage stands in the
prophecy. It is after the coming of the Messsiah; after the
proper cessation of the sacrifice and oblation, and at the close
of the whole series of events the termination of the whole design
about rebuilding the city and the temple.
(b) The language is such as would properly represent that.
Nothing could be more appropriate, in the common estimation of
the Jews, than to speak of such an object as a Roman military
standard planted in any part of the temple, as an abomination;
and no word would better denote the character of the Roman
conqueror than the word desolator--for the effect of his coming
was to lay the whole city and temple in ruins.
(c) The language of the Saviour in his reference to this would
seem to demand such an interpretation, Matt. xxiv.15: "When ye,
therefore, shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by
Daniel the prophet stand in the holy place," &c. There can be no
reasonable doubt that the Saviour refers to this passage in
Daniel (see Notes on Matt. xxiv. 15), or that events occurred in
the attack on Jerusalem and the temple that would fully
correspond with the language used here. Josephus, for instance,
says, that when the city was taken, the Romans brought their
ensigns into the temple, and placed them over the eastern gate,
and sacrificed to them there. "And now the Romans," says he,
"upon the flight of the seditious into the city, and upon the
burning of the holy house itself, and all the buildings round
about it, brought their ensigns into the temple, and set them
over against its eastern gate; and there they did offer
sacrifices to them, and there did they make Titus Imperator with
the greatest acclamations of joy." -- Jewish Wars, b. vi. ch.
vi.1. This fact fully accords with the meaning of the language as
above explained, and the reference to it was demanded in order
that the purpose of the prophecy should be complete. Its proper
termination is the destruction of the city and temple - as its
beginning is the order to rebuild them.
Even until the consummation
Until the completion--(Heb. given) That is, the series of events in
the prophecy shall in fact reach to the completion of everything
pertaining to the city and temple. The whole purpose in regard to
that shall be completed. The design for which it is to be rebuilt
shall be consummated; the sacrifices to be offered there shall be
finished, and they shall be no longer efficacious or proper; the
whole civil and religious polity connected with the city and
temple shall pass away.
And that determined
See this word explained in the Notes on verses. 24, 26. See also
Notes on Isa. x. 23. There seems to be an allusion in the word
here to its former use, as denoting that this is the fulfilment
of the determination in regard to the city and temple. The idea
is, that that which was determined, or decided on, to wit, with
reference to the closing scenes of the city and temple, would be
accomplished.
Shall be poured
The word here used means to pour, to pour out, to overflow - as
rain, water, curses, anger, &c. It may be properly applied to
calamity or desolation, as these things may be represented as
poured down upon a people, in the manner of a storm. Compare 2
Sam. xxi. 10; Exod. ix. 33; Psa. xi. 6; Ezek. xxxviii. 22; 2
Chron. xxxiv. 21; xii. 7; Jer. vii. 20; xlii. 18; xliv. 6.
Upon the desolate
Marg., desolator. The Hebrew word (Heb. given) is the same,
though in another form (Kal instead of Poel) which is used in the
previous part of the verse, and rendered "he shall make it desolate,"
but which is proposed above to be rendered desolator. The verb
(Heb. given) is an intransitive verb, and means, in Kal, the form
used here, to be astonished or amazed; then "to be laid waste, to be
made desolate" (Gesenius); and the meaning in this place, therefore,
is that which is desolate or laid waste--the wasted, the perishing,
the solitary. The reference is to Jerusalem viewed as desolate or
reduced to ruins. The angel perhaps contemplates it, as he is speaking,
in ruins or as desolate, and he sees this also as the termination of the
entire series of predictions, and, in view of the whole, speaks of Jerusalem
appropriately as the desolate. Though it would be rebuilt, yet it would
be again reduced to desolation, for the purpose of the rebuilding--the
coming of the Messiah--would be accomplished. As the prophecy
finds Jerusalem a scene of ruins, so it leaves it, and the last
word in the prophecy, therefore, is appropriately the word desolate.
The intermediate state indeed between the condition of the city
as seen at first and at the close is glorious - for it embraces
the whole work of the Messiah; but the beginning is a scene of
ruins, and so is the close. The sum of the whole in the latter
part of the verse may be expressed in a free paraphrase. "He, the
Messiah, shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease," by
having fulfilled in his own death the design of the ancient
offerings, thus rendering them now useless, and upon the
outspreading - upon the temple regarded as spread out, or some
wing or portico, there are seen abominable things - idolatrous
ensigns, and the worship of foreigners. A desolator is there,
also, come to spread destruction--a foreign army or leader. And
this shall continue even to the end of the whole matter - the end
of the events contemplated by the prophecy--the end of the city
and the temple. And that which is determined on - the destruction
decreed--shall be poured out like a tempest on the city doomed to
desolation--desolate as surveyed at the beginning of the
prophecy--desolate at the close, and therefore appropriately
called "the desolate."
After this protracted examination of the meaning of this
prophecy, all the remark which it seems proper to make is, that
this prediction could have been the result only of inspiration.
There is the clearest evidence that the prophecy was recorded
long before the time of the Messiah, and it is manifest that it
could not have been the result of any natural sagacity. There is
not the slightest proof that it was uttered as late as the coming
of Christ, and there is nothing better determined in relation to
any ancient matter than that it was recorded long before the
birth of the Lord Jesus. But it is equally clear that it could
have been the result of no mere natural sagacity. How could such
events have been foreseen except by Him who knows all things?
How could the order have been determined? How could the time have
been fixed? How could it have been anticipated that the Messiah,
the Prince, would be cut off? How could it have been known that
he would cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease? How could it
have been ascertained that the period during which he would be
engaged in this would be one week - or about seven years? How
could it be predicted that a remarkable event would occur in the
middle of that period that would in fact cause the sacrifice and
oblation ultimately to cease? And how could it be conjectured
that a foreign prince would come, and plant the standard of
abomination in the holy city, and sweep all away -- laying the
city and the temple in ruins, and bringing the whole polity to an
end? These things are beyond the range of natural sagacity, and
if they are fairly implied in this prophecy, they demonstrate
that this portion of the book is from God.
......................
So Albert Barnes ends his lengthy discourse on Daniel's 70 week
prophecy.
Quite a remarkable understanding for the most part. As Barnes
shows, it is one continuous prophecy, no "gaps" of thousands of
years in any part of it as some/even many, modern "fundamental"
teachers want you to believe with their end time prophecies,
which I have called "fundamental folly" - and which are truly
science fiction dreams including a two-phased return of Christ,
the first unknown, can happen any second they say, which is an
invisible coming, to catch away the saints (driving buses, flying
airplanes, driving taxis, holiday coaches, flying helicopters,
fighting fires, doing life and death surgery, driving school
buses packed with children, etc.), leaving passengers behind to
try and fend for themselves, while the saints are supposed to be
up in the sky with Jesus, then off to heaven for 7 or 3 and a 1/2
years, while all hell breaks loose on earth under the Beast power
and Nations of the East and North of the Euphrates river. Then
Jesus comes in visible form to establish the Kingdom of God on
earth.
The first part of this teaching is way off the wall, from planet
Pluto (which they say is not a planet now). And I could wish this
fundamental folly in prophecy was not real either, but the funny-
mentals keep pushing it. Such are they who are ever learning, but
never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
For those who have eyes to seek with, a mind to read with, some
common logic, you have read the truth of this matter from Matthew
Henry, Adam Clarke, and now Albert Barnes.
Yep, those old fundamental guys had it correct. Will you be
willing to admit they were correct and the modern teachers are
out in left field, way off the track?
When you see the modern fellows are WRONG! Then you will be ready
to search many other "theology" areas and find they are very
wrong about other important Bible topics also. As you search the
Scriptures daily, you will come to find who the faithful teachers
of the Lord are, and who are the blind leaders of the blind, who
both fall into the ditch.
He that has an ear to hear with should hear!
Keith Hunt, June 24 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment