יִכָּרֵת מָשִיַח
Dân•i•eil′  9.26

Commentators have all assumed that Dân•i•eil′  was prophesying the future when describing (9.25) "the going-forth of the word to return and build Y^әru•shâ•la′ yim until the Mâ•shi′ akh Prince will be 7 and 62 [=69 of the 70] weeks"—each "week" equating to seven actual years according to virtually all commentators. The fact of the matter, however, is that, while all historians (and almost all commentators) agree that the edict to rebuild Y^әru•shâ•la′ yim was issued by Artaxerxes in B.C.E. 453, Dân•i•eil′  lived and wrote almost 1¾ centuries later, ca. B.C.E. 275. As Dân•i•eil′  was writing, the edict had been issued about 178 years earlier (Chronology of the Tan"kh from the 'Big Stretch-Apart'). Dân•i•eil′  saw himself in the middle of the period he described and looked forward to the coming of the Mâ•shi′ akh (9.25), whom he prophesied would be יִכָּרֵת ‭ ‬ (9.26).

We agree with virtually all commentators that the first 69 of these 70 "weeks" in Dân•i•eil′  are 7-year periods like those that Ya•a•qov′  worked for his wives. 62 + 7 = 69 of these 7-year periods = 483 years. These are distinct from the last, or "70th week of Dân•i•eil′ ," the final period treated as a separate entity.

The am of the coming nâ•gid′ , of course, was a future event to Dân•i•eil′ . There is a difference in connotation between "the nâ•gid′  of the coming am," which is not the wording here, and "the am of the coming nâ•gid′ ." The former would refer to the leader of the "coming am," Titus, whereas the latter, as found in this verse, suggests a "coming nâ•gid′ " of the am who would corrupt Y^әru•shâ•la′ yim and the Qo′ dësh, i.e., a nâ•gid′  who would come to the idolatrous Roman Hellenists—bishops & popes.

Half of the last 7-year prophetic period is a 3½ year prophetic period. This is variously equated to an eon, eons and a half-eon; an עִדָן, ‭ ‬ עִדָנִין and half an עִדָן; and a מוֹעֵד, ‭ ‬ מוֹעֵדים and half a מוֹעֵד. Each of these are also described in other ways as 3½ years: 42 months, and 1260 yâm•im′ .

Ja•v^әr•i•eil also designates other portions of this separate 70th week: 2300 prophetic yâm•im′  and 1290 prophetic yâm•im′ —roughly 6.3 prophetic years and 3½ prophetic years plus a prophetic month, respectively. This last 7 prophetic-year period is not necessarily 7 literal years, but rather an indefinite period of 7 prophetic time units (PTUs).

According to Khagai 2.7-9: "I will fill this house with kavod says י--ה of armies179 … The kavod 217 of this latter house shall be greater than that of the former, says י--ה of armies." 179 The term kavod,217 when referring to the Beit ha-Miqdash2 and the "anointing" of the Holy of Holies, designates the Shekhinah.501 The physical anointing was merely the ritual symbolzing the presence of the Shekhinah.501

Neither is there any doubt that the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Sheini183 of Zeru-Bavel, is meant, specifically naming Zeru-Bavel (Khagai 2.4): "Yet now be strong O Zeru-Bavel, says י--ה." Yet, apparently inferior to the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Rishon, the Shekhinah501 never entered the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Sheini.183 Despite the physical superiority of the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Sheini,183 Khagai noted in the previous verse (2.3): "Who is left among you who saw this Bayit218 in its first kavod 217 and how do you see it now? Isn't it nothing [compared to the first] in your eyes?"

The entrance of the Shekhinah501 is well documented in the Mishkan and Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Rishon,2 as well as its departure from the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Rishon.2 Yet, upon the destruction of the Beit ha-Miqdash2 of Zeru-Bavel, the Shekhinah501 had never entered it to fulfill this prophecy of Khagai. Either the prophecy of Khagai, and the words of י--ה, went down with the destruction of the Beit ha-Miqdash2 of Zeru-Bavel in 70 C.E., or there was another manifestation of the kavod 217 of י--ה empowering the function of the Holy of Holies. Only the absence of the kavod,217 i.e. the absence of the Shekhinah,501 can account for Khagai describing the far grander building of the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Sheini183 as "nothing" compared to the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Rishon.218 If the words of the prophet Khagai are true, what kavod 217 greater than the Shekhinah501 came after Khagai and entered the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Sheini183 before it was destroyed in 70 C.E.? 2

The word ve-limshoakh211 in Dân•i•eil′  9.24 should turn on lights all over, alerting the reader that this passage may allude to the mashiakh.220 The Mashiakh is the only possibility that the kavod 217—the Shekhinah501—entered the Beit ha-Miqdash ha-Sheini183 satisfying the prophecy of Khagai and allowing the words of 'ת, to be true.

"Anoint211 the Holy of Holies" (9.24, above) cannot refer to the mere anointing by men, which merely symbolized Shekhinah.501 Mosheh was commanded to anoint the Mishkan,219 and the utensils in it, as well as the Mizbeiakh and the laver. But anointing of the Holy of Holies by men was nothing more than a ritual symbolizing the true anointing of the Holy of Holies with the kavod 217 of the Shekhinah.501

In the very next verse (Dân•i•eil′  9.25) we find the phrase "until the noble Mashiakh … and (9.26) after the 62 weeks212 עֵת the Mashiakh will be cut off and he will have no one." Would the Mashiakh come, be cut off and his closest followers desert him at the time designated here to fulfill this prophecy and transfer the Holy of Holies from the symbolic rituals of the physical world to the spiritual realm? Dân•i•eil′  9.25 declares: "From the going forth of the word to return and build Yerushalayim until the Noble Mashiakh will be (7 seven-year periods = 49 years) + (62 seven-year periods = 434 years) [totals 483 years], and it will again be rebuilt, street and gutters, but in stressful times."