Greg Wilson (22 Aug 2021)

Re: Steve Coerper “The end of sacrifice in Daniel 9:27”

 

Steve:  You asked for comments on your letter dated August 15, 2021.  My comments are as follows.  Daniel 9:26 and 9:27 state:

 

²⁶ And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

 

²⁷And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

 

Daniel’s prophecy is the most complex and important prophecy in the Scriptures. For forecasts the first and second advents of Christ.  It was sealed until the time of the end. (Daniel 12:9)   Today, the majority view on verse 27 uses a simplistic grammatical argument to determine who “he” is in verse 27.  The majority view finds that “he” of verse 27 is the “prince who shall come” of verse 26 holding that “he” is the antichrist in verse 27.   This is wrong for so many reasons.   Your grammatical view is correct.  “He” cannot be the “prince”.  It is an accepted rule of grammar that a pronoun should not refer to noun within a prepositional phrase.   The word “of” is a preposition and the word “prince” is in the prepositional phrase.  Prince simply informs us about the “peoples” relationship with him.  The prince is not the subject to the sentence.  The word “prince” is an improper antecedent for the pronoun “he” in verse 27.  To your point that Rome did not destroy the Temple I think is somewhat incorrect.  History tells us that most of the Roman soldier conscripts in Judea were comprised of the local indigenous peoples, likely opposed to the Jews generally.  The “people of the prince” [Titus] were likely made up of Samarians, Assyrians and Persian type peoples.  The pronoun “he” cannot find its antecedent in the noun “people” because it is a plural neuter noun and “he” is a masculine singular pronoun.

 

Great scholars like E.W. Bullinger say that if you cannot find the antecedent noun to a pronoun, you should divert your attention to the subject of the verse.  So, following Bullinger’s wise advice, we would necessarily focus on “the covenant” and not who “he” is.    If we focus on “the covenant” our first question might be about the nature of the covenant.  Are there any pre-existing covenants which might need to be fulfilled before the Second Advent?   What is the nature of the verb which acts on the covenant?  What is the theme of Daniel 9 and might that theme guide our inquiry to truth?  I have written extensively on these subjects over the years on Fivedoves.   I am going to cut to the chase since your letter was focused on the sacrifices of verse 27.   The Abrahamic promises have not been fulfilled to national Israel.  They will be fulfilled at the Second Advent when the Lord calls out the remnant of Israel who will have the faith and testimony of Yeshua/Jesus.  The Abrahamic covenant had been suspended with the crucifixion of Jesus and they must be confirmed once again. (Genesis 22:16, 1 Chronicles 16:16-17, Psalm 105: 9-10.  In fact, the Abrahamic covenant should be known as the “confirmed covenant” to Israel’s fathers.  The verb “to confirm” in Hebrew is “gabar”.  This verb is only used once in the Bible next to the word “covenant”.   One of our Lord’s names is “mighty God”, El Gibbor.  Gibbor finds its root in “gabar”.  This is a clue to who “He” is.  The theme of Daniel 9 is that the Lord God keeps His promises.  He is the covenant keeping God.  Daniel wrote 12 chapters.  In all twelve chapters he never used God’s covenant name “Jehovah” with the exception of Chapter 9.  In Chapter 9 he used God’s covenant name 7 times.  That my friends is critically important.  The covenant is confirmed by a verb which is used to described God as the Mighty God appearing once in the bible next to the word covenant.   Following the resurrection/rapture event, God will “confirm” his promises to “remnant Israel”, those Jews who shall acknowledge Yeshua/Jesus as Lord. (Revelation 12:17, 14:12, 20:4-5)  Remnant Israel shall be saved. (Romans 9:27; 11:26-27)

 

The verse 27 sacrifices have nothing to do with the atonement for sin.  Anyone who thinks that these two sacrifices refer back to Jesus’ sin atoning sacrifice have failed to understand the Scriptures and err grievously.   

 

Does the Sacrifice and the Oblation Offend the Cross ?

 

Commentators have objected to the notion that the "he" in the first phrase of verse 27 is Jesus based on the statement that "he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease". The basis of the objection seems to be that when Jesus died on the cross, the Temple veil was ripped and the sacrificial system ended.   On its face, this objection appears valid.  Jesus' death certainly ended the blood sacrifice for the atonement of sins.  He died once for all.

 

If God permits Israel to build the Third Temple [and He will Matthew 24:15], does God not expect that the Jews will re-establish the sacrificial system ?  

 

Do this verse 27 sacrifice and oblation diminish Jesus' blood sacrifice ?  Are the sacrifices and oblation of Daniel 9:27 blood sacrifices for the atonement of sin ?  Are they sin offerings ?  Let's look at the Hebrew words used in verse 27 and see if we can learn anything which specifically addresses whether this sacrifice and oblation constitute sin offerings. 

 

Verse 27: “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice (zebach) and the oblation (minchah) to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured out desolate.

 

Zebach Offering: A Peace Offering

 

The Zebach is a peace offering.  The Hebrew term for the peace offerings is Zebach Sh'lamim.  Sh'lamim is related to shalom meaning peace or wholeness.  A peace offering is an offering thanking God for restoring the worshiper to a state of wholeness with Him, for being at peace with God and having fellowship with Him.   A portion of this offering is burned on the altar, a portion given to the priests and the balance eaten by the offeror and family. This may include an animal flesh offering.  This category of offerings includes Thanksgiving Offerings, Free Will Offerings and offerings after the fulfillment of a vow.    A peace or thanksgiving offering is an appropriate form of worship of Him who alone is worthy of praise and thanksgiving.

 

Minchah Offering:  A Food Offering

 

The Minchah offering is a grain offering.  Minchah refers to an offering from the fruits of the soil.  This offering was usually comprised of fine flour made from wheat grain.  This offering represented the fruits of the farmer's labor from tilling the soil, tending the plants, harvesting, threshing and grinding.  A portion of the offering was burned in the fire of the altar and the balance given to the priests.  The Minchah offering acknowledged that God is responsible for our jobs, skill, labor and strength.

 

The Zebach and Minchah class of offerings have no relationship to sin offerings.

 

Chatah Offering:  A Sin Offering

 

The Hebrew term for the sin offering is "chatah" which means to "sin" or to "miss the mark".   The first use of this term is found in Genesis 4:7.  In this verse the word "chatta'ah is used for sin and sin offering.  The second time we find it is in Genesis 18:20 where it is used to describe the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah.  Neither, the Hebrew word "chatah" nor "chatt'ah" is used in Daniel 9:27.  The verse 27 sacrifice and oblation offerings are not sin offerings.  Therefore, they do not impose on Jesus' atoning work on the cross.