THE IDENTITY OF “HE” IN DANIEL 9:27

THE IDENTITY OF “HE” IN DANIEL 9:27


By

Jens Randolff

December 11, 2008




And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray.

Matthew 24:4-5, ESV



CONTENTS


ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

I.Why “he” is the antichrist

A.Basic Premise

i.Argument #1

ii.Argument #2

II.Why “he” is not the Christ

A.Basic Premise

B.Weakness

i.Issue #1

i.Issue #2

III.Why “he” is not Antiochus Epiphanes

A.Basic Premise

B.Weakness

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY




ABSTRACT

My Thesis Statement: In this paper I intend to offer an answer to the question: “Who is the “he” of Daniel 9:27 and on what basis do you build your argument?”



INTRODUCTION

The identity of the individual of Daniel 9:27 referred to only as “he” has been the subject of great debate. As is the case with most prophesies concerning the issue of eschatology, there exist a number of varying interpretations. Some see the “he” to be Christ himself, others see here a reference to the antichrist, while still others identify the ”he” to be a conquering, dictatorial government.

This final seven-year period in Daniel’s seventy weeks is commonly known among futurist interpreters as the “Great Tribulation” because of the suffering and severe testing which is to be endured by those living on the earth at that time. Classical interpreters, however, see the initial fulfillment of Daniel’s prophetic sections in past historical events, with the ultimate fulfillment for many prophecies to be experienced in the end times.

This final period of the “times of the Gentiles” is projected by futurists to begin when “he” makes a covenant to protect Israel for a seven-year period (Is. 28:14–17). The first three and a half years (42 months; Rev. 13:1–5) will be known to the Jews as “the beginning of sorrows” (Matt. 24:8), as “he” gathers a coalition of nations under his might and persuasion (Rev. 13:3–5).

At mid-point of Daniel’s Seventieth Week (after 31 ½ years), “he” will change his stance toward the Jews and demand that they worship him. This is the “abomination of desolation”, which Daniel and Paul refer to (Dan. 9:27; 2 Thess. 2:2–4). It will include the desecration of the temple and great persecution of Israel.[1]

It is the author’s intend to demonstrate that the “he” can only refer to one person – the antichrist. The author shall attempt to introduce sufficient evidence for his position while discounting two of the most common alternative views as to the issue in question.



I. Why “he” is the antichrist

A. Basic Premise

The entire Christian dispensation, beginning with the crucifixion of Christ, is left out of Daniel 9:24-27 as it incidentally occurs between the sixty-ninth and the seventieth week. Verses

9:26-27 address the events following the end of the Christian dispensation.

The judgment of God upon His people is to allow the destruction of their “city and sanctuary” (9:26). This destruction is to be brought about by the people of a Prince, who will appear and subsequently be destroyed at the end of the seventieth week.

This “Prince” is the “he” of Dan. 9:27 – the antichrist, connected with and at the head of the revived Roman Empire. The “Prince” (v. 26) should not be confused with the one who headed the Roman armies that destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in a.d. 70 as this was but an illustration of a future invasion and destruction to be led by the antichrist.[2] This is evident from the fact that Dan. 9:27 infers that this Prince is to play his part in the yet future seventieth week.

Additional evidence further makes it clear that the subject of v. 27 is none other than the antichrist, “the Prince that shall come” (v. 26). By the time “he” appears on the scene, large numbers of Jews will have returned to their land (cf. Isa. 18), and it is with them the “he” makes a covenant. This will be regarded by God with indignation, as a covenant with Death,and an agreement with Sheol. But while this covenant is accepted by the majority of the Jews, God will again reserve to Himself a remnant that will refuse to bow to “Baal”. That there

will be a remnant is clear from the text, which states that the covenant will be with “many” not all.

The fact that Daniel states that “he”, after three and a half years, will issue a decree ordering the sacrifices to cease, and the worship of Jehovah to be directed to him, further underscores the identity of “he” as being the antichrist (2 Thess. 2:4).[3]


i. Argument #1

Daniel. 9:27 should be viewed in light of Revelation 13:11–15. By linking these scriptures together, the following facts come to the forefront. (a)The false Prophet will perform great wonders, and will command men to shape a likeness of the beast. The erecting of this “image” will most likely be accompanied by supernatural phenomena and the “image” itself will possess supernatural power, for it shall be able to “speak” (Rev.13:15). (b) The “image” will stand in the holy place (Matt. 24:15) - the rebuilt Temple at Jerusalem. (c) This “image” will be set up during the middle of Daniel’s seventieth week (Da 9:27; 12:11) while “he” poses as the Christ. (d) The “daily sacrifice” will cease when “he” drops his religious pretensions and defies heaven as well as earth. The image will be the object of worship, and those who refuse to worship it will be killed (Rev. 13:14, 15). (e) This “image” is termed by Christ the abomination of desolation.” The term “abomination” is an Old Testament expression connected with idolatry, and signifies some special idol or false god (see Deut. 7:26; 1 Kings 11:5-7).[4]

ii. Argument #2
Daniel 11:21-37 leads to same conclusion as it treats the analogous period in the same manner as does 9:17; From Daniel 11:21-24; 30b-37 to the end of the chapter the text provides a continuous history of the antichrist. Henceforth, it serves to solidify the claim that “he” of 9:27 is indeed one and the same – the antichrist. Beginning with 11:21, Daniel speaks of a vile person who will not be given the kingdom but who will come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries the details surrounding said person are divided into three parts This “Vile Person” is the “Prince of the Covenant,” therefore, identifying him as the “Prince” of 9:26, 27.
Verse 23 states that after he has made a covenant he will work deceitfully. This “covenant” is undoubtedly the seven-year treaty confirmed with Israel, made early on in antichrist’s reign. It is also the period during which the pollution of the sanctuary and the ceasing of the daily sacrifice culminate into the abomination of desolation. There can be little doubt that these verses are relating what will take place during the seventieth week. The mention of polluting the Sanctuary is an unmistakable reference to “the abomination of desolation,” i.e. the setting up of an idol to the antichrist in the Temple. It should be pointed out that the repeated use of the plural pronoun in this verse, the “they”, refers to the Antichrist and the False Prophet (cf. Rev 13).
Verses 23-31 address the interval from the time when “he” makes a covenant with Israel, to the taking away of the daily sacrifice and subsequently the setting up of the abomination of desolation.Following these events there will exist a brief season when “he” shows his true colors and openly defies God, while causing death and mayhem on earth (32–37 - [45]). A significant detail found in verse 32 is the allusion made to the faithful remnant—those who do know their God.[5]
The King in v. 36 and the “Vile Person” are one and the same. This is not only apparent by the absence of any break in the prophecy, but also by the connecting “and” with which the verse opens. Removing any lasting doubt is definitely established by the fact that in v. 27 (note context) the “Vile Person” is expressly termed a “king!” The contents of this thirty-sixth verse clearly connects “the king” with the Man of Sin of 2 Thess. 2:3, 4, identifies him with the “little horn” (cf. 7:23; 8:25) and refers to the “he” in 9:27.[6]

II. Why “he” is not the Christ

A. Basic Premise
Matthew Henry and others, contents that Christ is the “Prince that shall come” and that He employs either the Roman armies in His service, which are his armies (Mt. 22:7), belonging to a monarchy yet to come, or perhaps the Gentiles who, although still strangers, will become the people of the Messiah, yet later will destroy the Jews. The destruction by war and the subsequent end of that war is to be the decreed desolation (26).[7]
Preterist, Dr. Kenneth Gentry contents that the indefinite pronoun ‘he’ does not refer back to ‘the prince who is to come’ of verse 26." Fellow preterist, Gary DeMar, insists that it is Jesus who ‘will make a firm covenant with the many,’ not the antichrist. Yet, such an interpretation is not only erroneous but also violates the grammar and syntax of the Hebrew text.

B. Weakness
i. Issue #1
The above interpretations are fundamentally flawed for several reasons. The text mentions a time period, and then announces what God will achieve in this period (v.24). God’s ultimate objective is of primary importance and the schedule only of secondary importance, a fact often reversed by scholars who seem to focus on the time period rather than on God’s objective. The text deals with time in relation to the Messiah in vv.25–26a and focuses on a man whom Jesus Christ would later call ‘the abomination of desolation’ (vv.26b–27; Matt 24:15, etc.).[8]
Another important fact is that in Hebrew grammar, as with most languages, a pronoun would refer to the nearest antecedent, unless there was a contextual reason to think otherwise. In this instance, the nearest antecedent in agreement with "he" is "the prince who is to come" in verse 26. Only a priori theological bias could lead a scholar of ancient Hebrew to reach any other conclusion.

ii. Issue #2
Leon Wood makes some interesting observations. The unusual manner of mention regarding that “prince” in verse 26, calls for further reference such as that of verse 27. There would be no plausible reason for the earlier mention unless something further were to be said regarding him, for he does nothing nor plays any part in activities there described. In addition, the event of vv. 26-27 cannot refer to Christ for several reasons. “He” makes a covenant with “many,” however, Christ made no such covenant. God made a Covenant of Grace with man, and Christ fulfilled the requirements under it.
Amillennials suggest that Christ confirmed or fulfilled the Abrahamic Covenant; however, the Gospels give no indication that Christ did with His first coming. Had Christ made a covenant with people during His lifetime, the idea of mentioning it only here in the overall thought of the passage is simply not reasonable. The idea of the seventieth week, here closely associated with “he”, does not correlate with the life and ministry of Christ, as His ministry did not last seven years. Furthermore, the fact that “he” orders "sacrifice and offering” to cease is unlikely in reference to Christ in this context, since Christ’s death did not stop sacrifices and offerings.Amillennials argue that “sacrifice and offering” ceased subsequent to Christ's atoning death. Yet, although, sacrifices and offerings are indeed of no further use, and thus cease in principle, the manner in which the alleged reference is stated here seems improbable, as it is difficult to rationalize why such a fundamental truth would be expressed in such uncertain language.[9] Henceforth, it is safe to conclude that the immediate context of this passage and the book as a whole supports the author’s view that “he” refers to none other than the antichrist.



III. Why “he” is not Antiochus Epiphanes

A. Basic Premise

Interpretations of this message vary enormously, and depend on the interpreter’s wider view of the fulfillment of prophecy. Liberal scholars, who view the writing of Daniel in the context of the second century B.C., see the period in question to stretch from the sixth century to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. On that premise, the four hundred and ninety years are being either understood in round terms, or literally and, perhaps, mistakenly.

Those who hold to the view that “he” indeed refers to Antiochus Epiphanes, point out that a grave “abomination of desolation” was committed in 168 B.C. Under the reign of Antiochus, an altar was constructed on top of the great altar of burnt offerings, and a pig, considered an unclean animal by Jews, was sacrificed there; not to mention that a statue of the Greek deity “Zeus” was erected in the “Holy of Holies.” This act precipitated the Maccabean revolt, which Antiochus attempted unsuccessfully to put down with great cruelty (167-164 B.C.).


B. Weakness

The fact that this abomination does not occur until the consummation, suggests that verse 27 describes the “abomination of desolation” of the antichrist who is yet to come against the living God (cf. Matt. 24:15) and not that of Antiochus.[10] From the perspective of the NT, one can hardly arrive at any conclusion other than that the Anointed One (Da 9:25) is fulfilled in Jesus Christ whose death on the cross brings atonement and the end of guilt (9:24). As some conservative interpreters have demonstrated by means of various calculations, the figure of four hundred and ninety is a chronologically exact prediction of the death of Christ.[11]



CONCLUSION

In summary, Daniel 9:27 succinctly captures the horror of the path that humanity is currently following. It must have pained Daniel tremendously to learn that “he” - the antichrist, will be so convincing that he will persuade even some of the angels in Heaven to follow Satan’s earlier example and rebel against their Creator.

Verse 9:27 links the times of Daniel to the future and thus, to “he” - the antichrist, who will act on Satan’s behalf on earth. The ruler of this world, through his representative, will be granted the power to destroy life to such an extraordinary degree (v.24) that the human race will come to the brink of extinction. It will only be by divine intervention that a remnant of humanity will be saved (Mark 13:20).

This vision therefore maps the course of history to the arrival of the ultimate apostate man whose time, during the course of transgressing against God, will finally end. God will terminate his reign, put an end to the desolator and to desolation, and usher in His reign of righteousness under the Messiah.[12]



END NOTES

1. Jack W. Hayford, and Gary Curtis, Until The End of Time: Revealing The Future of Humankind: a Study of Daniel and Revelations, Spirit-Filled Life Bible Discovery Guides (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1994).

2. Warren W. Wiersbe, Wiersbe's Expository Outlines On The Old Testament (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1993), Da 9:1.

3. Arthur Walkington Pink, The Antichrist, Reprint (Originally Published: Swengel, Pa.: Bible Truth Depot, 1923. With New Foreword. Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2005), 154.

4. Ibid, 169.

5. Ibid, 159.

6. Pink, The Antichrist, 160.

7. Matthew Henry's Commentary On The Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996, c1991), Da. 9:20

8. M.S. Mills, Daniel: A Study Guide to The Book of Daniel (Dallas, TX: 3E Ministries, 1999), Da 9:24.

9. Leon Wood, A Commentary On Daniel (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973), 257.

10. The NKJV Study Bible (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2007), Da 9:27.

11. D. A. Carson, New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, Rev. Ed. Of: The New Bible Commentary. 3rd Ed. / Edited By D. Guthrie, J.A. Motyer. 1970., 4th Ed. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL, USA: InterVarsity Press, 1994), Da 9:20.

12. M.S. Mills, Daniel: A Study Guide to The Book of Daniel (Dallas, TX: 3E Ministries, 1999), Da 9:1.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

Carson, D. A. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, Rev. Ed. Of: The New Bible Commentary. 3rd Ed. / Edited By D. Guthrie, J.A. Motyer. 1970., 4th Ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL, USA: InterVarsity Press, 1994.

Darby, J. N. Synopsis of The Books of The Bible: Ezra to Malachi. Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2008.

Hayford, Jack W., and Gary Curtis. Until The End of Time: Revealing The Future of Humankind: a Study of Daniel and Revelations. Spirit-Filled Life Bible Discovery Guides. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1994.

Henry, Matthew. Matthew Henry's Commentary On The Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996, c1991.

Mills, M.S. Daniel: A Study Guide to The Book of Daniel. Dallas, TX: 3E Ministries, 1999.

Pink, Arthur Walkington. The Antichrist. Reprint. Originally Published: Swengel, Pa. : Bible Truth Depot, 1923. With New Foreword. Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2005.

The NKJV Study Bible. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2007.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Wiersbe's Expository Outlines On The Old Testament. Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1993.

Wood, Leon. A Commentary On Daniel. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973.