Daniel 9:24-27 – Past Present Future? Symbolic vs. Literal Views, cont’d

Bob Hunt has been examining Daniel 9:24-27 verse by verse. This detailed study focuses on two main viewpoints. The first is whether these verses have already occurred in our past or does any of it have a future fulfillment. The second point is whether these verses are to be taken literally or symbolically with a theological meaning. The literalist understands the years and events described by Daniel in a natural sense with common understanding. Specifically, "a year is a year". Therefore Daniel’s 70 weeks are 490 literal years. The symbolist finds it necessary to view these verses in a symbolic manner, and understands a theological meaning behind Daniel’s words. Thus segments of time are presenting theological events and are not to be seen as literal years. Bob has challenged the listener to gather the evidence of both viewpoints and then make a determination as to which one is most reasonable. In this exposition of Daniel 9:27 Bob will present again both the symbolists understanding and the literalists viewpoint. The symbolist understands this verse to be a description of the events occurring in verse 26. Jesus Christ is the maker of the new covenant. The destroyer of the city and temple in 70AD is the Roman general Titus who brings an end to sacrifice and offering. The 70th week of Daniel includes the temple destruction in the middle. The last part of the 70th week is a time when believers are continually added and will continue until the return of Jesus Christ. There is no 7 year period of time coming in the future. The literalist argues that the chronological aspect of Daniel's teaching continues. The one week is a literal 7-year segment of time yet to come. This week will bring about the end of the age. In the middle of this week, 3-½ years, sacrifice and offering will end. This necessitates the building of a new temple, but likely much less ornate than in the past. Finally the one who rises in the middle of this week and destroys, will himself be destroyed. This “one” is the biblical Antichrist. Since a period of time like this and a person this evil has yet to appear in history, a futurist perspective must be held. The interpretation of this verse broadens the gap between the literalist and the symbolist. The impact of choosing one or the other will affect so many other eschatological passages. So choose carefully by deciding which one is most reasonable.