Daniel’s 70 Weeks Prophecy – The Coming of Israel’s Chosen King Part 4

Daniel 9:26 – Gabriel Reveals Events in the Gap between Weeks Sixty-Nine and Seventy

By GF Herrin

Verse 26 describes some of the events that were to take place after the first sixty-nine weeks had been completed. It is commonly believed that the prophecy regarding the Messiah being cut off refers to the Lord Jesus’ sacrifice for sins on the cross at Calvary (Anderson, 125). So, “cut off” could be understood to mean “killed”. It is obvious from the wording of the text, “after the sixty-two weeks”, that the cutting off would take place after the second set of weeks had been complete. The phrase “cut off” is similar to the wording used by Isaiah: “He was taken from prison and from judgment, and who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of my people He was stricken” (Isa. 53:8). The interpretation of the verse in Daniel could also be that the Messiah would be cut off both from life and from having children. Jesus did not have any natural descendants so He was left with nothing and no one to survive Him. Also, the text states “but not for Himself.” This implies that the Messiah would die sacrificially, or for someone else. We know now that this refers to Christ who died as a ransom for our sins so that men could be reconciled to God through His Son’s shed blood on the cross. “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21).

The second part of this verse introduces “the prince who is to come” as someone who is distinctly different from the Messiah. The passage states that it will be the people “of the prince who is to come” who will destroy the city (Jerusalem) and the sanctuary (temple). The text states that the end would come like a flood. And until the war ended in Jerusalem and in Israel, desolations were determined that would occur. The understanding here is that a sudden attack or influx of a large army would cause the desolations to occur. We know from history that Jerusalem and the second temple were destroyed in A.D. 70 when the Romans laid siege to it.

Josephus describes the desolation of Israel after the war:

And truly, the very view itself was a melancholy thing, for those places which were adorned with trees and pleasant gardens, were now become desolate country every way, and its trees were all cut down. Nor could any foreigner that had formerly seen Judaea and the most beautiful suburbs of the city, and now saw it as a desert, but lament and mourn sadly at so great a change. For the war had laid all signs of beauty quite waste. Nor had anyone who had known the place before, had come on a sudden to it now, would he have known it again. But though he {a foreigner} were at the city itself, yet would he have inquired for it (Flavius Josephus, The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, 1901, Chapter 1.1, 666).

Futurists, those who believe in a future fulfillment for certain prophetic Scripture, interpret “the prince who is to come” to be the same person who is the subject of verse 27 – “he”. This is the one who “shall confirm a covenant” and “bring an end to sacrifice and offering.” So, there is the understanding from verse 26 that the people who are of the same nationality as a future prince to come will be the ones who destroy Jerusalem and the temple. Since the destruction was in fact carried out by the people of Rome, or the Roman soldiers, we discern that future prince from verse 27 who confirms a covenant and stop the sacrifices and offerings made at the temple will in fact be a Roman or one of the people of the Roman Empire.

Preterists, those who believe that most of the prophetic Scripture of the Bible has been fulfilled, contend that this reference to the “prince who is to come” refers to Titus (Mauro, 26), who along with his soldiers besieged Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Mauro interprets this passage to say that the people under a contemporaneous ruler will destroy the city and temple rather than interpreting that the destruction will be accomplished by the people who are the same nationality as the ruler whose coming is yet future. Mauro seems to make this assertion because of his presupposition that “he” in verse 27 (see next section) refers to Christ, instead of the future ruler from the Roman Empire who many scholars believe is also referred to in Daniel 7:25 (Mauro, 29). Mauro, in essence, holds to the opinion that all of the prophecies of the seventy weeks were fulfilled by A.D. 70. Mauro writes, “Thus the entire prophecy of the Seventy Weeks encompasses in its scope the rebuilding of the city and the temple, and the final destruction of both. It covers the stretch of time from the restoration of the people to their land and the city in the first year of Cyrus, down to their dispersion by the Romans into all the nations of the world” (Mauro, 26).

But how is that possible? There is nothing in the text in verse 26 to cause someone to conclude that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, along with the dispersion of God’s people, Israel, takes place within the seventy weeks. All that can be concluded is that the events in verse 26 take place after the first sixty-nine weeks. Since the Messiah’s death, the destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem all occurred between the years of A.D. 2 and 70, well after the completion of the sixty-ninth week, this by necessity creates a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. Yet, Mauro insists that to suggest a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks is to “destroy the prophecy as a whole” (Mauro, 37).

But Alva McClain suggests that Old Testament prophecy is not always given in a continuous chronology:

Although certain areas of the future are definitely clocked as to time sequence and extent, we shall find in Old Testament prophecy no absolutely continuous and unbroken chronology of the future. The prophets often saw together on the screen of revelation certain events which in their fulfillment would be greatly separated by centuries of time. This characteristic, so strange to western minds, was in perfect harmony with the oriental mind which was not greatly concerned with continuous chronology. And the Bible, humanly speaking, is an oriental book (Alva J. McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom, 1974, 137).

Historical References for the Resurrection and the Events of the New Testament

By GF Herrin

    It is part of human nature to want to possess concrete evidence in order to confirm historical events that have taken place in the past. Archaeology, in its own way, is like a picture in time of an event that occurred in the past. It is evidence that points to the validity of actual historical events that took place long ago.

Biblical archaeology provides evidence for facts that previously may have been believed to be unverifiable. Archaeological documents composed by non-Christians provide even more confirmation of the death and resurrection of Jesus. Christian apologist Josh McDowell states: “Archaeology does not prove the Bible is the word of God. All it can do is confirm the basic historicity or authenticity of a narrative. It can show that a certain incident fits into the time it purports to be from” (Josh McDowell, The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, 370). While Archaeology does not prove that the Bible is the word of God, it does provide a picture of Jesus as a historical figure. And as the saying goes, “a picture is worth a thousand words.”

With this picture concept in mind, below are several ancient historical references that give us a clear confirmation of the Resurrection and the Events of the New Testament. It can be ascertained from these references that Jesus existed, He worked miracles, and He was believed to have been resurrected after being put to death by Pontius Pilate (Gary Habermas, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, 1996, 189 – 90; 195 – 96.). In addition, this documentation presents solid evidence that Jesus was already worshipped as God by the time of the first century. These unbiased historical references are important because they validate the New Testament as a reliable chronology of the life and mission of Jesus Christ and His early followers.

One of the earliest known references to Christ comes from the Jewish Pharisee historian, Flavius Josephus, who became a court historian for Emperor Vespasian in Rome after Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman Army in AD 70. Josephus wrote several books detailing the history of the Jews. One of his works, Antiquities, describes events in Jerusalem during Pilate’s time as governor. This historical reference pre-dates other known Roman extra-biblical references to Jesus. In this passage written between AD 90 – 95, Josephus writes:

“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, – a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was (the) Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named for him, are not extinct at this day” (Flavius Josephus, Antiquities 18.3. The Works of Flavius Josephus. trans. William Whiston).

We can discern the following important facts from the passage:

1) Jesus performed good works/miracles and was recognized as a virtuous man.

2) He had many followers comprised of both Jews and Gentiles.

3) He claimed to be and was recognized as the Messiah by some.

4) He was sentenced to die and was crucified by Pilate.

5) His disciples claimed that He was resurrected from the dead and that they had seen Him.

6) He was founder of the “tribe” of Believers who took His name.

Another Josephus passage from Antiquities refers to the event of the death of James, the brother of Jesus: “So he (Ananus) assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others [or some of his companions]; and, when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned” (Josephus, 20:9). Clearly, in this passage there is the connection of James as a brother of Jesus. Also, there is a clear reference to Jesus being recognized as the Messiah.

The earliest known extra-biblical Gentile reference to Christ comes from the Roman historian, Cornelius Tacitus, (ca. AD 55 – 120), who lived through the reign of six emperors. Tacitus’ book, The Annals, which was written around AD 115, covers the period of Roman history from AD 14 to AD 68. Tacitus’ account describes the period during which Emperor Nero attempted to blame the great fire in Rome of AD 64 on the Christians (F. F. Bruce, Are the New Testament Documents Reliable?,1946,114).

Tacitus writes:
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures…on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular” (Cornelius Tacitus, The Annals of Imperial Rome, trans. Michael Grant, 1973, 365).

This passage from Tacitus is important for a couple of reasons:

1) It provides early confirmation of the biblical reference that Jesus was put to death by Pontius Pilate (Matt. 27:26; Mark 15:15; Luke 23:24 – 25; John 19:16). Tacitus’ reference to “the extreme penalty” is a confirmation that Jesus paid for His “crime” by dying. That it is referred to as “the extreme penalty” could also confirm that Tacitus viewed crucifixion to be the most horrible form of capital punishment carried out by the Roman Empire (Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus,2004, 49).

2) The passage provides early evidence (from a Gentile government official no less) in the belief in Jesus as Deity. The phrase “mischievous superstition” likely refers to the belief in Jesus as the Messiah/God– man.

A parallel account to the Tacitus reference is given by the Roman historian Gaius Seutonius Tranquillas, the general secretary for Emperor Hadrian (AD 117 – 138). Seutonius also refers to the great fire in Rome and the punishment inflicted on Christians by Nero. An earlier account by Seutonius during the time of the Emperor Claudius (AD 41 – 54) refers to the early Jewish Christians who were expelled from the city in AD 49. This ancient reference provides further evidence for an early belief in Christ. The account also serves as verification of the passage in Acts 18:2, which describes Aquila and Priscilla’s departure from Rome because of Claudius’ demand that all Jews leave the city.

Another early reference to Christians and the crucifixion of Jesus is from the second century Greek satirist, Lucian, who writes:

“The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day – the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account…You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all times, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property” (Lucian, The Works of Lucian, trans. A.M. Harmon, 2001, 11-13).

In this passage, we see historical confirmation that by the second century Jesus was commonly worshipped as God. Also, we see a reference to Jesus as a teacher who was crucified for the “rites” that He espoused. In addition, this passage provides confirmation in the early belief in life after death for believers who have put their trust in Christ. The passage also speaks of the early Christians’ identification as a unique family within itself and their collective denial of false gods.

Other secular passages that refer to the crucifixion, activities of early Christians or decrees or ordinances concerning them include references by Africanus, Pliny the Younger, and Emperors Trajan and Hadian. Altogether, these passages provide us with unbiased and reasonable historical proof that Jesus was who the Bible said He was. These passages also provide us information that is completely consistent with the teachings found in the New Testament.

The Ossuary of James

The Ossuary of James


Archaeological Evidence for Jesus’ Life, Death, and Resurrection

By GF Herrin

     In the Spring of 2002, Andre Lemaire, an expert on ancient Semitic scripts, was shown photographs of several ossuaries acquired by a collector who was an acquaintance. The collector had acquired one particular ossuary from a dealer in East Jerusalem. The collector had been told that the ossuary came from Silwan, an Arab village just east of the City of David (the old city of Jerusalem). There was an inscription on the side of the ossuary that says: “Ya’akov bar Yosef achui d’Yeshua”. In English: “James son of Joseph, brother of Jesus” (Hershel Shanks and BenWitherington III, The Brother of Jesus, 2003,11 – 12).

Many believe that this ossuary is the actual bone box of James, the brother of the Lord Jesus. Subsequent tests have proven it to be consistent with a box which has an ancient origin. Laboratory tests have analyzed the patina (the film formed from chemicals seeping onto it while being stored for hundreds of years in a cave) covering the ossuary and concluded that the inscription did not display any inconsistencies with material found on the rest of the ossuary. Paleographers who have analyzed the inscription first hand have found no sign of forgery, either. “The inscription is written in the Jewish script, it was done with a sharp instrument and I think it was done by the same hand. It is an authentic inscription,” Prof Gabriel Barkay of Bar-Ilan University explained.. Owner Oded Golan cites expert evidence from the trial showing the patina – a biological crust formed on ancient objects – inside the grooves of the inscription.”There is no doubt that it’s ancient, and the probability is that it belonged to the brother of Jesus Christ,” said Golan (from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/25/burial-box-earliest-reference-jesus, December 2013).

It seems reasonable to date the ossuary as having originated in the first century. Biblical archaeologist and commentator Merrill Unger writes: “Not a single one of the numerous Jewish tombs in the region of Jerusalem can be dated to the period after AD 70. All inscribed ossuaries hitherto found in the vicinity of Jerusalem belong to the period 30 BC to AD 70” (Merrill F. Unger, Archaeology and the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1962), 25). It is widely believed that James died in AD 62 (Shanks, 166 – 68). The first century historian, Josephus’ account in Antiquities provides historical evidence of the circumstance of his stoning which was overseen by Ananus (Flavius Josephus, Antiquities 20.9. The Works of Flavius Josephus. trans. William Whiston, 1901).

In addition, the fact that the discovered ossuary is inscribed with the name of deceased’s brother is in itself unusual. Most Jewish ossuaries in the area near Jerusalem from the first century mention only the deceased person’s name and his father’s name. However, in some cases there were exceptions if the deceased was associated with some good work for which he was well known. For example, one ossuary inscription referred to “Simon (Shimon) as the builder of the sanctuary temple” (Shanks, 77). It seems to be the case that James’ family wanted to honor him by associating him with his well-known brother, Jesus.

Biblical Archaeology Review editor Hershel Shanks provides a thoughtful analysis of the likelihood of all three names (James, Joseph, and Jesus) appearing on any ossuary from the first century period near Jerusalem. His analysis concludes that the odds of this occurring is amazingly only ¼ of 1%.[1] Given the fact that the odds are so low for all three names appearing together, and given that the ossuary has been verified as being an ancient inscripted first century antiquity found in the area where James had lived and died, it seems likely that this ossuary belonged to James, brother of our Lord. This discovery provides further verification of the historical reliability of the facts of the New Testament and ultimately of the resurrection of Christ.