A Reader's Guidebook To Daniel 9

A Readers Guidebook to Daniel 9
Loren Lineberry, 2016

Introduction to the Guidebook
The Readers Guidebook is offered in the hope that it will help both the specialist and the
non-specialist in reading Daniel 9. For the specialist, that is those who have some level of
mastery of the Hebrew text, the guidebook offers grammatical, lexical, and syntactical data. It is
hoped that this information will encourage further use of the Hebrew and Aramaic text of Daniel.
For the non-specialist, the guidebook is intended to facilitate a more informed reading of the text
of Daniel 9. By making grammatical, lexical, and syntactical information available to the nonspecialist, it is hoped that a more nuanced reading of Daniel is made possible. That is, used in
conjunction with the non-specialist readers personal Bible, the Guidebook offers information on
troublesome words, phrases, and sentences.
The grammatical analysis deals with the major grammatical issues in each line of the
Biblical text. Where appropriate, the Guidebook offers analysis of prepositional phrases, genitive
constructions, and verbal parsing, among other matters as they arise. While the Guidebook does
not discuss every word of the text, it is hoped that those constructions that are explained will be
of help to the specialist as well as the non-specialist. Moreover, the Guidebook offers insight into
the punctuation of clauses. It is important that the reader appreciate units of expression and
thought in order to pay due diligence to the context of words and phrases. While we admit that
the Masoretic punctuation is not inspired, it is a place to start in reading with an eye on context.
The syntactical analysis will specify how the text fits together. Special attention is given
to the relationship between clauses in the Hebrew Daniel 9. It is hoped that attention to syntax
will be of some help to the pulpit exposition of the text of Daniel. To this end, a syntactical
outline will be given for each paragraph in Daniel 9. Other matters that will be covered in
questions of syntax will include attention to tense/aspect, where such interest would be helpful.
Finally, issues concerning the use of participles, genitives, infinitives and prepositions will be
discussed. Again, not every construction is analyzed syntactically, rather only those that are
crucial for intelligent reading of the text are covered.
The lexical analysis presents glosses for the more important terms in the text. In this
regard, the standard lexicon of Koehler and Baumgartner is consulted. Moreover, the lexicons of
Brown, Driver, and Briggs, William Holladay, and David J.A. Clines are consulted. Finally, the
Guidebook will make available the lexical work in the New International Dictionary of Old
Testament Theology and Exegesis, The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, The
Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, and the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament.
The lexical section of the Guidebook attempts to make the most up to date information available
to the specialist as well as the non-specialist reader of Daniel.
Attention will also be given to the genre of each section of Daniel 9. Attending to genre
helps readers know what to expect and what not to expect from the reading of the text. Genre
also helps the expository preacher know how to handle the text from the pulpit. In addition to
genre, the theme of each paragraph will be offered. It is crucial for the reader of Daniel 9 to keep
context firmly in mind as each verse or section of verse is read. It is imperative that the reader
not over-read word studies, but rather focus on sentence meaning and paragraph theme. Many
miscues in interpretation can be avoided by keeping the forest and the trees in perspective!
The Hebrew text used is Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia; all translations are the authors.

Table of Contents
Introduction to the Guidebook
Table of Contents
General Introduction to Daniel 9
3-4
I.
A narrative introduction to the prayer [9:1-2]
5-9
II.
Daniels prayer [9:3-19]
9-106
A.
Daniels preparation for prayer [9:3-4a]
9-15
B.
Invocation [9:4b]
15-24
C.
Confession [9:5-14]
24-80
Confession of Sin [9:5-6]

Confession of Shame [9:7-8]
Confession of Yahwehs compassion [9:9-11]
Confession that Yahweh is just [9:12-14]
D.
Petition [9:15-19]
Remembrance of past deliverance [9:15a]
Confession of sin [9:15b]
Request for Yahweh to relent [9:16-19]
III.
24-39
39-50
50-64
64-80
81-106
81-85
85
85-106
A response from Gabriel [9:20-27]
106-
A.
Daniels circumstances [9:20-21]
106-09
B.
Revelation from Gabriel [9:22-27]
109-62
Why Gabriel responds [9:22-23]

The revelation to Daniel [9:24-27]
A time-frame [9:24a]
The purpose [9:24b]
The events [9:25-27]
109-12
113-62
113-17
117-31
131-62
General Introduction to Daniel 9

Genre
Daniel 9 is composed of multiple genres. The first is prayer that runs from Daniel 9:319. Within this macrogenre, we find communal confession [9:5-14] and petition [9:15-19]. The
second major genre is an angelic discourse [9:20-27].
The communal confession [9:5-14] is a prayer of repentance and petition for mercy. 1
This particular communal confession focuses on sin, shame, Yahwehs compassion, and Yahwehs
justness. There is no special justification for Daniel undertaking this communal confession, since
he was not a priest or from a priestly line. It is well to take note of Baldwins observation, it is
one of the glories of Scripture that no special permission is required for intercession on behalf of
others.2
The petition [9:15-19] is a plea from Daniel on behalf of what remains of his people for Yahweh
to relent in His warranted punishment of Israel. The petition opens with a remembrance of past
deliverance; it continues with another confession of sin, and closes with a plea for Yahweh to
relent [9:16-19].
Finally, the centerpiece of Daniel 9 is the angelic discourse, for it is here in Dan 9:24-27
that Gabriel assures Daniel that Yahweh fully intends to relent, in His own time. An angelic
discourse may be read as a revelation from heaven to Daniel. Collins notes that the angelic
discourse is a revelation delivered as a speech by an angel. 3 In this case, Dan 9:25-27 is the
climax of the angelic discourse, hinting at the Messiah.
Themes
Among the key themes in Daniel 9 is the humility of Daniel as he approaches God for grace and
mercy [Dan 9:1-2]. Daniel devotes himself to prayer with fasting in sackcloth and ashes.
Another theme in Daniel 9 is covenant betrayal. When Daniel commences his communal
confession, he specifically notes Yahwehs faithfulness to the covenant [] in Dan 9:4
only to turn immediately to the communal confession of sin and betrayal in Dan 9:5.
An additional theme in Daniel 9 is communal responsibility for the covenant betrayal and
consequent exile [Dan 9:7-8]. Daniel goes out of his way to spread the responsibility for the
communitys collapse squarely on every major class of citizenry [Dan 9:8].
A further theme in Daniel 9 is the willful disobedience of Gods people in spite of His
consistent mercy and forgiveness [Dan 9:9-11]. Rebellion, disobedience, violations, going astray;
all of these bring on the curse which is the exile.
1 Rolf Knierim and Gene Tucker, ed., The Forms of Old Testament Literature, vol. XX, Daniel by
John J. Collins (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 106 [hereafter abbreviated FOTL/Daniel].
2 D.J. Wiseman, ed., Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, Daniel by Joyce Baldwin (Downers
Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1978).
3 FOTL/Daniel, 105.
3
Yet another theme in Daniel 9 is Yahwehs warrant in imposing the exile [Dan 9:12-14].
The nation of Israel managed to ignore Yahweh to their loss; but, with all that Yahweh has done to
them, He is in the right [Dan 9:14].
When Daniel petitions Yahweh in Dan 9:15-19, Daniel is clear and certain: that all hope
depends on Yahweh is the obvious theme in Dan 9:15-19. Appealing to Yahwehs benevolence in
Dan 9:16, Daniel stakes everything on Yahwehs good favor in relenting His wrath and fury.
The final theme in Daniel 9 is the most important: the Messianic era [Dan 9:24-27]. In
Dan 9:24 a series of six infinitive clauses unveil Yahwehs ultimate purposes for His people: [1]
end covenant betrayal, [2] seal up sin, [3] wipe away guilt, [4] bring everlasting righteousness, [5]
seal up the vision, and [6] anoint a Most Holy.
A Narrative Introduction to the Prayer [Dan 9:1-2]

Text and translation

9:1a
In the first year, of
Darius son of Ahasuerus,

of Median descent;

9:1b who was made king,

over the realm of the Chaldeans.

9:2a
In the first year of his governance,

I Daniel, discerned in
the scrolls;

9:2b the number of years,

seeing that the
word of Yahweh had come to
Jeremiah the prophet,

concerning the completion of
the desolation of
Jerusalem,

seventy years.
Syntactical outline
(Main clause)
I, Daniel discerned in the scrolls the number of years
(Temporal marker: when)
In the first year, of Darius son of Ahasuerus,
(Clarification of Darius)
(who was) of Median descent;
(Clarification of Darius)
Who was made king
(Clarification of realm)
Over the realm of the Chaldeans.
(Temporal marker: when)
In the first year of his governance
(The basis of discernment)
Seeing that the word of Yahweh had come to Jeremiah the

prophet
(Clarification of the prophetic word)

(Specification of desolation)
Concerning the completion of the desolation of

Jerusalem
Seventy years
The syntactical outline helps set the context for this narrative introduction. That is, the
main truth claim is that Daniel discerned in the scrolls the number of years. The support for
this truth claim emerges in Dan 9:2b: seeing that the word of Yahweh had come to Jeremiah the
prophet. At this point, the gist of the prophetic word takes center stage: concerning the
completion of the desolation of Jerusalem, which is further specified with seventy years.
Theme of the paragraph
5
It would seem that the theme of this narrative introduction to the prayer [Dan 9:3-19] and
the angelic response [Dan 9:20-27] is completion [Dan 9:2b] of the desolation of Jerusalem. In
other words, this brief paragraph sets the tone for all that is to follow: there is light at the end of
the tunnel!
Genre
We read this paragraph as a simple, straightforward narrative unit; in other words the
reader may read Dan 9:1-2 as an account of events or actions in sequential form. 4 The
paragraph may be taken as history, altogether worthy of trust.
Dan 9:1-2 In the first year, of Darius son of Ahasuerus, of Median descent; who was made
king, over the realm of the Chaldeans. In the first year of his governance, I, Daniel, discerned in
the scrolls; the number of years, seeing that the word of Yahweh had come to Jeremiah the
prophet, concerning the completion of the desolation of Jerusalem, seventy years.
The main clause in the paragraph: I, Daniel discerned in the scrolls the number of years
[ ].
I, Daniel discerned [(Qal, perfect, 1st, cs) ] is an
emphatic opening. The main verb, discerned [] is already inflected for the first
person; the writer did not have to insert I, Daniel. The fact that he did probably indicates
psychological focus, that is, focused attention or deep self-consciousness of Daniels part in this
drama.5
Discerned [] is a verb from a semantic field of terms for discernment. 6 The verb has the
following ranges of meaning in the Qal stem: [1] with an accusative to understand or to see;
and [2] also with an accusative to pay attention to, to consider, to perceive, or to discern. 7
When used with an accusative, the number of years in this case, the sense of becomes
to understand or to comprehend.8 The point is that Daniels prayer was triggered, in part,
from the insight that comes from knowing.9 Ignorance and doubt are not the only reasons for
prayer; understanding may become a motive for prayer, for confession, and for petition.
In the scrolls [] is a prepositional phrase that is written with a definite article. The
syntax of the prepositional phrase is straightforward. The phrase in the scrolls is probably
4 FOTL/Daniel, 114.
5 For this use of the personal pronoun, see Bruce Waltke and Michael OConnor, An Introduction
to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 296 [hereafter abbreviated IBHS].
6 See Discernment in Willem VanGemeren, ed., The New International Dictionary of Old
Testament Theology and Exegesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan; C-D Rom), Discernment;
[hereafter abbreviated NIDOTTE].
7 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old
Testament, 2 vols., revised by Walter Baumgartner and Jakob Stamm, translated and edited by M.
E. J. Richardson (Leiden: Brill, 2001); vol. 1, 122 [hereafter abbreviated KB 1 (-) and KB2
(-)].
8 David J.A. Clines, ed., The Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, with David Stec and
Jacqueline C.R. de Roo (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2009), 45 [hereafter abbreviated
CDCH].
9 Terence Fretheim, , in NIDOTTE [H1067].
6
locational.10 The function of the definite article is probably cataphoric, that is, restricted to what
follows,11 Jeremiah in this case. Thus, the scrolls are the scrolls of the prophecy of Jeremiah.
The reader should note this very carefully; that is, if we may date the first year of the reign of
Darius in 539 BC, then we may infer that, for Daniel at least, there were scrolls in existence
which were authoritative. While this does not necessarily imply a fully formed canon, it does
suggest that there was an identifiable collection of religious writings. 12
The number of years [ ] is the drift of what Daniel comprehended from the
scrolls of Jeremiah. The noun translated number [] basically points to a quantity.13
The noun can also imply final number, limit.14 The reference to the number of years is the
completion of the destruction of Jerusalem [Dan 9:2b].
The basis of Daniels discernment: seeing that the word of Yahweh had come to the prophet
Jeremiah [ ], is followed by
two points of clarification: [1] a clarification of the prophetic word: concerning the completion
of the desolation of Jerusalem [ ], and [2] a
specification of the time for the desolation: seventy years [ ].
The basis behind Daniels discernment of the number of years is the prophetic word of
Jeremiah. The term in the Hebrew that signals basis is /seeing that. The upshot is that,
in this line, signals causation.15 We translate seeing that, but one could also translate
owing to the fact that.
The author clarifies the subject of this particular prophetic word: concerning the completion of
the desolation of Jerusalem [ ]. This clarification
is comprised of [1] an infinitive (): concerning the completion of, followed by
[2] a prepositional phrase ( ): the desolation of Jerusalem.
Concerning the completion of [] is written as a Piel infinitive construct.
The syntax of the infinitive clause serves to qualify the idea in the principle verb in the preceding
sentence the word of the Lord had come. The nature of this qualification is referential; that is,
the word of the Lord had come in respect of or regarding an end to the destruction of Jerusalem.16
10 Ronald Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967)
240.
11 IBHS, 243.
12 John D. W. Watts and James W. Watts, ed., The Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 30, Daniel, by
John Goldingay (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1989), 240.
13 William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), 204.
14 CDCH, 231.
15 See J. C. L. Gibson, Davidsons Introductory Hebrew Grammar~Syntax (Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark, 1994), 158; see also Paul Joon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 2 vols., translated by T.
Muraoka (Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1966), 638 [hereafter abbreviated J-M];
Christo H.J. van der Merwe, Jackie A. Naud and Jan H. Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference
Grammar (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), 297 [hereafter abbreviated Van der
Merwe].
16 For the referential use of the infinitive clause, see J-M, 437; and Thomas O. Lambdin,
Introduction to Biblical Hebrew (New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1971), 129.
7
Completion [] is from a semantic field of terms for full or fulfillment. 17 The ranges of
meaning for in the Piel stem are: [1] to fill or saturate something with something, [2] of
a period of time to come to an end, [3] to endow someone with something, [4] to consecrate,
devote, [5] to fulfill or carry out.18 The best option for in Dan 9:2 is a period of time
to come to an end.
Significantly, the Piel, infinitive construct of this verb is used in Jeremiah 25:12,
concerning the seventy years When the seventy years are completed [], I will punish
the king of Babylon and that nation, says the Lord, for their iniquity, and the land of the
Chaldeans; I will make it an eternal desolation. In this passage, the completion of the seventy
years serves as a warning for the Chaldeans. In Jeremiah 29:10, the prophet again uses the Piel,
infinitive construct of this verb, this time issuing a promise to Israel Thus says the Lord,
When Babylons seventy years have come to an end [], I will take note of you; I will
carry out for you My promise of favor, to bring you back to this place. In this passage, the
completion of the seventy years results in a promise for Gods suffering people. We may infer
that this is also what Daniel comprehended from the prophetic word delivered to Jeremiah.
The desolation of Jerusalem [ ] highlights the term desolation
[]. The noun is from a semantic field of terms for desolation. 19 Basically,
means a site of ruins.20 BDB opts for waste, ruin.21 O. Kaiser renders in Dan 9:2
with desolate place, ruins.22 As passages such as Jeremiah 7:34 and 25:18 make clear, the
waste [] which befalls Jerusalem is the result of Yahwehs punishment of disobedient
Israel. Indeed, Jeremiah 44:2-3, 6 underline covenant betrayal via Israels succumbing to idolatry
as the cause of Yahwehs wrath. The reader may readily infer that that the connection between
and divine wrath helped motivate the confession in Dan 9:5-14.
Seventy years [ ] is the time frame for the completion of the desolation of
Jerusalem. Seventy years [ ] is mentioned in two senses in Jeremiah 25.
First, Jeremiah 25:11 affirms that the land will be a desolation [] for seventy years
[ ]; this is obviously due to Israels covenant betrayal. But second, Jeremiah
25:12 promises that when the seventy years [ ] are completed [] the
oppressive Babylonian regime will themselves be made a waste []. Both of these verses
from Jeremiah must have been in Daniels mind.
Crunching the numbers yields considerable puzzlement. That is, if we take the first year
of Darius to be 539 BC and backtrack seventy years, we have 609 BC; the puzzle is that nothing
of note happened with Israel and exile in 609 BC. It may be the case that seventy years in
Jeremiah and Daniel should be read as not exactly seventy but close enough. However, it may be
17 See Full, fulfillment in NIDOTTE.
18 KB1, 584.
19 See Desolation in NIDOTTE.
20 KB1, 350.
21 Francis Brown, S.R. Driver, Charles A. Briggs, The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius
Hebrew and English Lexicon (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1979; reprint), 352 [hereafter
abbreviated BDB].
22 G.J. Botterweck and H. Ringgren, ed., Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, translated
by David Green, vol. V, O. Kaiser, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 153 [hereafter
Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament will be abbreviated TDOT with the appropriate
volume number].
8
the case that seventy years is more symbolic in nature and that a passage in 2 Chronicles 36:21
may be of some help.
In 2 Chronicles 36:5-21, the Chronicler recalls the gory details of the Babylonian exile.
Then, in 2 Chronicles 36:20, the Chronicler references the return under Cyrus; and then in 36:21
he mentions the seventy years as a period during which the land satisfied/made good []
the Sabbaths. Dillard writes, From the vantage point of the restoration, the seventy years of
sabbatical rests prepared the land for the returnees [emphasis mine]; it allowed time for
recuperation.23 The upshot is this: the number, seventy years, may symbolically signal a
homeland that is prepared and waiting for the returnees in Jeremiah 29:10 and 2 Chronicles
36:20-21.
Sentence summary
Dan 9:1-2 sets the tone for the remainder of the prayer and angelic discourse. Overall, these
verses depict Daniels sensitivity to the completion [] of the seventy year desolation. Dan
9:2 specifically underlines what Daniel comprehends [] from reading the scrolls of
Jeremiah, more than likely Jeremiah 25:11-12; 29:10. Historically located in the first year of
Darius, 539 BC, Daniel can certainly do the math; it is with a scripturally inspired sense that the
Exile is coming to a close that Daniel turns to the Lord in prayer. 24
Daniels Preparation for Prayer [9:3-4a]

supplication for favor;

Yahweh my God,
9:3a
So, I directed my face,

toward the Lord God,
to seek by prayer and
9:3b
with fasting and sackcloth and ashes.

9:4a
Then I prayed to
and so I confessed;
Syntactical outline
First main clause:
So I directed my face, (9:3a)
Directional marker:
Toward the Lord God, (9:3a)
Purpose indicator:
To seek (9:3a)
Manner:
By prayer and supplication for favor (9:3b)
Manner:
With fasting and sackcloth and ashes (9:3b)
23 John D.W. Watts, ed., The Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 15, 2 Chronicles by Raymond
Dillard (Waco: Word Incorporated, 1987), 301.
24 Tremper Longman III, The NIV Application Commentary: Daniel (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1999), 223.
9
Explanatory clause:
Then I acted as intercessor to Yahweh my God (9:4a)
Explanatory clause:
And so I confessed (9:4a)
Theme of paragraph
Overall, this paragraph underscores Daniels preparation to approach his Lord with
unlimited trust and unconstrained humility. Trust is evident in the various terms for God that
Daniel uses, almost as if he were struggling for just the right words with which to plead with his
God. Moreover, his humility is apparent in his manner of preparation supplication for favor,
fasting, sackcloth, and ashes.
Genre
We may read this brief paragraph as narrative, Daniel rehearsing the events that lead up
to his prayer. In other words, this paragraph may be read as history, the history of a humbled yet
trusting man approaching his God in hope.
Dan 9:3 So, I directed my face toward the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplication for
favor; with fasting and sackcloth and ashes.
The primary act in Dan 9:3 is this: So, I directed my face toward the Lord God. This is
the only place in the Hebrew Bible where this precise collocation of verb [] + direct
object [] within a range of three words is used of a human being; in its other four
appearances in the Hebrew Bible, the subject is Yahweh. 25 If nothing else, this fact may suggest
the resoluteness with which Daniel approached his God in prayer.
Direct my face [ ], when followed by an infinitive, as it is here [to seek
()], carries with it the ideas of to intend and determine. 26 Determination, strength of
mind, and resolve all seem to coalesce in this phrase. As Russell notes, Daniel adjusts his mind
God-wards.27
Toward the Lord God [ ] appears only here in this precise collocation
[note the definite article () on ] in the Hebrew Bible. Otherwise, Lord God
[ ] appears five times in the Hebrew Bible.28 Literally, we should read my
Lord the God.
Lord God [ ], without the definite article on God [],
appears in the Psalms and in Daniel in the Hebrew Bible. In the Psalms [38:15; 86:12; 90:17],
the collocation is used in genres that deal with the crisis of sin.. In Psalm 38,
appears in a psalm of lament over sin; having confessed his sin [Psalm 38:3-9 (MT)]
and expressed his confidence in Yahweh [Psalm 38:10 (MT)], the poet eventually expresses his
hope and confidence in [Lord, my God]. Psalm 86 is an individual
plea for divine aid for one who is afflicted and needy owing to his enemies; the poet ultimately
25 Leviticus 20:3, 6; Ezekiel 3:8; 15:7.
26 Michael Grisanti, , in NIDOTTE.
27 J.C.L. Gibson, ed., The Daily Study Bible Series, Daniel by D.S. Russell (Louisville:
Westminster John Knox Press, 1981), 171.
28 Psalm 38:15; 86:12; 90:17; Daniel 9:9, 15.
10
has unconquerable trust for deliverance by [Lord, my God]. Psalm

90 is a meditation on God with attention to the fragility of human life and the power of sin in the
poets experience; accordingly, the poet appeals to [Lord, our God]
for His favor upon them.
What the use of is these three psalms demonstrates is that this
identification of Yahweh is invoked at times of moral crisis, specifically, crises of sin. The same
moral setting the crisis of sin is plainly evident in the two uses of in
Daniel [Dan 9:9 (we have rebelled, ), 15 (we have sinned, ). While the
sampling is very small, only five appearances of this collocation [() ] in
the Old Testament, it is nevertheless the case that when the collocation is used it appears in
contexts that seek deliverance from the crisis of sin. Thus we read the thrust of
in Dan 9:3.
Thus far, Daniel prepares for his prayers with resolve, strength of mind and determination
to adjust his concentration God-ward; what is more, Daniel reaches out to the Lord God to whom
others like him have appealed for deliverance from sin. One gets the sense that at this moment
Daniel is utterly consumed by the moral crisis, the crisis of sin, in his life and that of his fellow
countrymen; this is no ritual prayer, no mere going through the form and motion of prayer; quite
the contrary, this moment of prayer is serious business, a matter of life and death.
To seek [ (preposition, , Piel, infinitive construct)] is syntactically a signal of
purpose.29 Seek [] is from a semantic field of terms for seeking. 30 The verb appears
predominately in the Piel stem in the Hebrew Bible. Accordingly, the ranges of meaning for
in the Piel are: [1] to discover, find, [2] to attempt to do something, [3] to try to
possess, to demand, to require, to request, to endeavor, to strive for, [4] to search for, to call on,
consult, and [5] to seek in prayer.31 G. Gerleman affirms that the basic meaning of in
the Piel is the search for something lost or missed. 32 In terms of what is missed, if our
conjecture concerning the use of as signaling He who delivers from the
crisis of sin, then that which is missed is forgiveness of sin. Accordingly, we may translate the
sense of the verse thus far as: So, I directed my face toward the Lord God to seek (forgiveness of
sin). Finally, if forgiveness of sin is the implied object of seeking [], then the verb
acquires an emotional nuance: to strive after something, be busy, be concerned. 33 In this
regard, S. Wagner notes that has in view the finding of an object which really exists or
which is thought to exist, which is not close at hand to the subject at the time of seeking, but is
desired most earnestly.34
To this point, Daniel has reported to the reader that he directed his face, that is focuses his
concentration, toward the Lord God to seek (forgiveness of sin). Now, Daniel proceeds to
report the manner in which he labored after Gods forgiveness: [1] by prayer and supplication
for favor, and [2] with fasting and sackcloth and ashes.
29 For this use of the infinitive construct with the prefixed to signal purpose, see Williams, 36;
IBHS 606-07.
30 See Seeking in NIDOTTE.
31 KB1, 152.
32 Ernst Jenni and Claus Westermann, Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, translated by
Mark Biddle; vol. I, , G. Gerleman (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1997), 251 [hereafter
abbreviated TLOT I, II, III for the respective volume].
33 Ibid., 252.
34 S. Wagner, , in TDOT, vol. II, 229.
11
By prayer and supplication for favor [ ] are grammatically

the twin direct objects of seeking []. Syntactically, this kind of construction is an internal
accusative. This means that prayer and supplication tease out the details associated with
seeking []; the sense is: to seek in/with/by means of prayer and supplication for favor.35
This precise collocation [ ] occurs only here in the Hebrew Bible.
Perhaps this fact attests to the intensity with which Daniel prepares himself to seek forgiveness
from Yahweh.
Prayer [] is a general word for a prayer, especially for a prayer of
supplication, including a prayer of repentance and supplication, at the same time, the noun
has its place in intercessions.36 More to the point, , the noun, is linked to , a
verb, which has the following ranges of meaning: [1] in the Piel stem: (a) to pronounce judgment,
(b) to be the arbitrator, intercessor, to act as advocate, (c) to speak up for someone as arbitrator or
intercessor, and (d) to assume in the sense of take into consideration, assess; and [2] in the
Hithpael stem: (a) to act as an advocate, (b) to make intercession for, act as an intercessor. 37 It is
significant that in the next verse, Dan 9:4, the verb is used: I acted as intercessor to
Yahweh, my God. H.P. Sthli concurs, noting that in Dan 9:3 has a sense of
intercession.38 The net effect is that takes on the sense of intercessory prayer.
The upshot thus far is that Daniel prepares to direct his face toward the Lord God, seeking
forgiveness of sin by means of intercessory prayer.
Supplication for favor [] is from a semantic field of terms for grace. 39
Even without delving more deeply into the sense of this term [], we can see what
Daniel is up to: seeking forgiveness of sin by means of intercessory prayer [Daniels part] and by
means of supplication for grace [Gods part].
Supplication for favor [] is a noun that appears eighteen times in the Hebrew Bible; it
appears eight times in the Psalms and four times in Daniel. Indeed, appears in each
of the major units of Daniel 9. That is, the noun is in Dan 9:3, the preparation for prayer; it
appears twice in the petitionary section in Dan 9:17-18; and the noun is found in the final
revelation from Gabriel in Dan 9:23. Thus, /supplication for grace has a binding
effect on the prayer as a whole.
Supplication for favor [] is in essence a plea for [grace].40 Like its
counterpart in the line, is also a nominal derivative from a verb, . This verb
is one of the major grace terms in the Hebrew Bible, appearing seventy eight times with the
following ranges of meaning for the verb: [1] in the Qal stem: (a) used of Yahweh: be gracious to,
show favor to, spare, (b) to graciously give to, (c) be generous; [2] in the Niphal stem: to be
pitied; [3] in the Piel stem: to make gracious; [4] in the Poel stem: to have pity on; [5] in the
Hophal stem: to be shown favor to; and [6] in the Hithpael stem: to make supplication to, to
35 For this use of the internal accusative, see IBHS 10.2.1g, 10.2.2; J-M 125 q; Williams 60.
36 KB2, 1778.
37 Ibid., 934.
38 H.P. Sthli, , in TLOT, II, 993.
39 See Grace, favor in NIDOTTE.
40 KB2, 1719.
12
implore the favor of.41 This brief survey of the ranges of meaning of the verb from which the
noun is derivative sheds considerable light on the meaning of the noun: a plea for grace from
Yahweh. Later, Daniel will admit that his /supplication for favor to Yahweh is
based completely on Yahwehs great compassion, not any merit on Daniels part [Dan 9:18].
Thus far, Daniels preparation involves directing his face, with all of the focus and determination
implied in the phrase, to the Lord God for the express purpose of seeking that which is missing to
this point in his life and that of his fellow countrymen, that is, forgiveness of sin, sought by
means of intercessory prayer and heartfelt appeal for divine grace. There is one more means by
which Daniel seeks this forgiveness through grace: with fast and sackcloth and ashes; this, as
we shall see, involves public confession of sin.
With fasting and sackcloth and ashes [ ] is a phrase that
appears only here in the Hebrew Bible. In the Old Testament, fasting is a preparatory rite for
confession of sin, among other objectives. See Nehemiah 9 for the use of fasting, sackcloth, and
dirt in preparation for communal confession of sin. In addition to self-abnegation, fasting, with
these accoutrements, also publically displays confession and contriteness for sin. For similar
links between fasting and confession of sin, see 1 Samuel 7:6; Ezra 8:23.
At this point, Daniel proceeds to explain precisely what he will be up to in his prayer
[Dan 9:5-14]: Daniel acts as intercessor and he acts as public confessor.
Then, I acted as intercessor to Yahweh my God [
] is a clause that is linked to the preceding by more closely describing what
directing the face toward the Lord God implied for Daniel. 42 What is more, the phrase
Yahweh my God uses my God in apposition to Yahweh.43
I acted as intercessor [ (Hithpael, waw consecutive, imperfect, 1st, cs)] features the
main verb written in the Hithpael stem. This means, in this case at least, that the meaning of the
verb includes a causative/indirect-reflexive nuance; in a nutshell, this implies that Daniel is
interceding with himself included.44 The use of the plural in the body of the prayer confirms this:
for example, we have sinned [Dan 9:5a]; we have acted wickedly [Dan 9:5a]; we have
rebelled [Dan 9:5a]; and finally, Daniel notes that he was specifically confessing [] his
sin as well as the sin of the people [Dan 9:20].
We have noted above [page 12] the ranges of meaning for the verb in this clause, . As
noted, the meaning of in the Hithpael in Dan 9:4 is (a) to act as an advocate, (b) to make
intercession for, act as an intercessor. The Old Testament is replete with examples of men who
interceded on behalf of the people who had fallen into sin: Moses [Numbers 21:7], Samuel [1
Samuel 7:5; 12:19, 23], an unnamed man of God [1 Kings 13:6], Job [Job 42:8, 10], Jeremiah
[Jeremiah 42:2, 20], and Nehemiah [Nehemiah 1:6].
Yahweh my God [ ] is the addressee in Daniels intercession. There is
a significant fact to note here: /Yahweh appears in the book of Daniel only in Daniel
41 CDCH, 125.
42 For the explanatory use of the waw consecutive imperfect, see Gibson 78; IBHS 33.2.2a;
Van der Merwe 21.2.3 (closer definition).
43 On this point, see IBHS 12.3e.
44 See Lambdin, 177; see also IBHS 26.1.2c, 2e.
13
9. The significance is this: in Daniel 9, /Yahweh is the covenant God

[/covenant] in Dan 9:4; betrayal of /Yahwehs covenant on Israels part is
the frank admission in Dan 9:10; the people have stoutly refused to repent and return to
/Yahweh in Dan 9:13; therefore, all of the calamity associated with defiance of the
Mosaic covenant has come upon Israel compliments of /Yahweh in Dan 9:14. In a
nutshell, this is the covenant God whom Israel has betrayed with its sin. There is still another
noteworthy matter regarding the divine name.
Yahweh my God [ ] opens the prayer; but Yahweh our God
[ ] appears in the body of the prayer. The appeal to our God is based
upon a personal relationship, on Daniels part, with my God. Goldingay observes, Daniel
prays as one who has a close relationship with God, one to whom God may be expected to
listen.45 Naturally, Daniels expectation of getting a sympathetic hearing from
/Yahweh is the trust factor implicit in his intercession to begin with.
And confessed [ (Hithpael, waw consecutive imperfect, 1st, cs)] is another waw
consecutive imperfect syntactically functioning to explain I directed my face in Dan 9:3a.46
Confess [] is from a semantic field of terms for acknowledgement or recognition. 47 The
verb is used only in the Hiphil and Hithpael stems in the Hebrew Bible. Six times in the Hiphil,
the meaning is confess transgression [ (Psalm 32:5)], or he who confesses
[] and forsakes [] transgression [ (Proverbs 28:13)]; otherwise, the meaning
is confess Your name [ (1 Kings 8:33, 35; 2 Chronicles 6:24, 26)]. In the Hithpael,
the meaning is confess sin [ (Leviticus 5:5; Numbers 5:7; Nehemiah 1:6; Daniel
9:20)], confess iniquity [ (Leviticus 16:21; 26:40)], or confess sin and iniquity
[ (Nehemiah 9:2)]. The upshot is that essentially conveys the
idea of acknowledgment,48 or what we might understand as admission and acceptance of that
which is morally accurate, for which one is morally accountable.
Sentence summary
In Dan 9:3-4a, the prophet directs his face, with all of the focus and determination implied in the
phrase, to the Lord God for the express purpose of seeking that which is missing to this point in
his life and that of his fellow countrymen, that is, forgiveness of sin. This Daniel seeks by means
of intercessory prayer and heartfelt appeal for divine grace and by means of fasting with
sackcloth and ashes; this involves self-reproach and public confession of sin.
Then, Daniel more fully explains what he intends to do in terms of interceding and
confessing. Daniels intercession is predicated upon his intimate and faithful relationship to
Yahweh; indeed, Daniels fidelity to the spirit of Yahwehs covenant has been ably demonstrated
in Daniel 1-6. At the end of the day, Daniel will pour out his heart in admitting and accepting his
role, as well as the role of his fellow countrymen, in the covenant betrayal that fomented the
exile; Daniel will confess that the charge is morally accurate and that he, and his fellows, are
morally culpable. All of this exhibits Daniels humility.
45 Goldingay, 241.
46 See Gibson 78; IBHS 33.2.2a.
47 See Acknowledgement, care, recognition in NIDOTTE.
48 C. Westermann, , in TLOT II, 503.
14

Invocation [Dan 9:4b]
9:4b
so I said:

I beseech you, Lord,
the God great and
fearsome,

the One who keeps the gracious
covenant,
with those who love Him,

and with those who keep His
commandments.
Syntactical outline
The reader should appreciate that the divisions in Daniels invocation are based on the
punctuation marks in the Masoretic text. While I fully admit that these are not divinely inspired,
they do represent an early tradition concerning the way Daniel 9:4b is segmented. We may set
out the invocation with punctuation marks49 thus:
9:4b - I beseech You, Lord, the God great and fearsome (pashta)
9:4b - the One who keeps the gracious covenant (zaqep)
9:4b - with those who love him (tipha)
9:4b - and with those who keep His commandments (silluq)
Now, having identified the individual lines in the invocation, we may set out the
syntactical outline thus:
(Main clause)
(Apposition)
(Another apposition)
(Relational marker)
(Relational marker)
I beseech You, Lord,

The God great and fearsome
The One who keeps the gracious covenant
With those who love Him
With those who keep His commandments
Theme
The theme of this invocation is naturally God: who He is [Lord]; what He is like [the
God great and fearsome]; what He does [the One who keeps the gracious covenant]; and the
relationship He demands [those who love Him and those who keep His commandments].
Indeed, as I have laid out the individual lines in the invocation, the reader will note a reference to
Yahweh in each of them [underlined].
49 Each of these four accents is a disjunctive accent, signaling a slight pause at the end of each
line; I have indicated the pause with the comma.
15
Genre
I have identified these lines as an invocation that opens the prayer; the invocation is the
address to the deity to whom the supplicant is appealing.
Dan 9:4b And I said: I beseech You Lord, the God great and fearsome, the One who keeps
the gracious covenant, with those who love Him and with those who keep His commandments.
The invocation opens with: I beseech You, Lord [ ]. The opening term
in the line is an interjection [I beseech]. As the reader will observe, is
variously translated by the English versions; one suspects that such translations as prayed are
not quite emphatic enough. J-M identifies as a reinforced entreating particle,
translating, For pitys sake!50 Van der Merwe simply notes that denotes an urgent
request.
Daniel addresses his prayer to the Lord []. The noun appears over 550 times in the
Hebrew Bible, eleven times in Daniel, ten of them in Daniel 9. The noun is from a semantic field
of terms for master,51 and it has two ranges of meaning: [1] in reference to humans: (a) a lord, a
human master, a superior, (b) a husband, (c) an employer, (d) an owner; and [2] in reference to
deity: (a) the Lord.52 Johnston avers that the semantic domain of describes the
sovereign authority of lordship (lord as master).53 E. Jenni concurs, noting that when used as a
vocative, as it is in Dan 9:4b, the sense is Lord par excellence, Lord of all. 54 Ludwig Kohler
noted that the usage of shows without any shadow of doubt that with its
forms means the Lord as the ruler; this means, for Kohler at least, that God is the ruling
Lord: that is the one fundamental statement in the theology of the Old Testament [italics his].55
From Daniels point of view, God as ruling Lord is the authority, the sovereign, the superior to
whom the confession and the petition is uttered. In Dan 9:4b, is further disambiguated
with the God, great and fearsome.
The God great and fearsome [ ] is in apposition to Lord
[].56 The appositional line the God great and fearsome teases out the shared
qualities between Lord and God.
Daniel may be recalling the language of Deuteronomy here, for Deuteronomy 7:21 has virtually
the same phrase with the exception of the definite articles. We may compare them:
Daniel 9:4

Deuteronomy 7:21
In the Deuteronomy 7 passage, the context concerns life in the Promised Land
[Deuteronomy 7:12-11:25]. Battles within the Promised Land are well within the province of
50 J-M 105 e.
51 See Master in NIDOTTE.
52 CDCH, 4.
53 G. Johnston, , in NIDOTTE [H123].
54 E. Jenni, , in TLOT I, 26.
55 Ludwig Kohler, Old Testament Theology, translated by A.S. Todd (Philadelphia: The
Westminster Press, 1957), 30 [hereafter abbreviated OTT].
56 For apposition, see Gibson 39.
16
Yahweh [Deuteronomy 7:12-26]. To this latter point, Deuteronomy 7:21-22 affirms that Yahweh
will fight for His people, and bring them ultimate victory with His will prevailing. The strength
of the enemy is largely irrelevant, Yahweh will overcome. In the Daniel 9:4 passage, the memory
of these words from Deuteronomy must come into play: Daniel is basing his own personal trust in
a positive divine response to his upcoming confession [Dan 9:5-14] and petition [Dan 9:15-19] on
the overriding fact of Yahwehs prevailing and overcoming will for His people.
The adjective, great [], is from a semantic field of terms for great. 57
/great is used to describe the following: [1] that which is great in size, [2] that which
is great in height, [3] that which is great in extent, [4] that which is great in number, [5] that
which is great in weight: power, vengeance, fear, [6] that which is great in significance, [7] that
which is great in volume, [8] that which is great in age, and [9] that which is great in influence. 58
This last nuance great in significance seems to fit Dan 9:4. Martin Abegg notes that
/great in Dan 9:4 depicts the prominence or importance of God. 59
The participle, fearsome [], is written in the Niphal stem and comes from a semantic
field of terms for awe.60 The ranges of meaning for in the Niphal are: [1] to be feared, to
be honored, [2] the Niphal participle: dreaded, to be feared, be terrible, awesome, terrible. 61
Kohler-Baumgartner read in Dan 9:4 in the sense of to be feared, terrible. 62 H.-P.
Sthli affirms that the Niphal participle in Dan 9:4 belongs to the realm of numinous fear and
means frightful, frightening.63 BDB opts for inspire reverence, godly fear, and awe in Dan
9:4.64 Slotki notes that means awe-inspiring or revered.65
The God great and fearsome [ ] probably draws upon
Deuteronomy 7:21 in memory of Yahwehs defense and protection of His people. This security
emboldens Daniels trust and establishes his prayer on Yahwehs proven shelter for His people.
Taken together, both the adjective and the Niphal participle denote Yahwehs unrivalled mastery
over all idols and over all rulers; Daniel has confronted, and will continue to encounter, both in
his work as prophet in the court of Babylonian and Persian power-players. Daniel acknowledges
that Yahweh, great and fearsome, may be trusted to lead in a time of crisis, such as the covenant
crisis faced by Daniel and his people. As we shall see, this God can be counted upon to remain
faithful to His side of the covenant promises.
57 See Great in NIDOTTE.

58 KB1, 177.
59 Martin Abegg, Jr., , in NIDOTTE [H1540].
60 See Awe in NIDOTTE.
61 KB1, 433; the Niphal of is used of Yahweh in the following ways: [1] it denotes
Yahwehs supremacy over all gods (Exodus 15:11; Deuteronomy 10:17; 1 Chronicles 16:25;
Psalm 96:4); [2] it denotes Yahweh as a defender/protector of His people (Deuteronomy 7:21;
Nehemiah 1:5; 4:14; 9:32; Psalm 66:5; 68:35; 111:9; Dan 9:4; [3] it denotes the honor or awe
associated with Yahwehs name (Deuteronomy 28:58); [4] it denotes Yahwehs kingship over all
the earth (Psalm 47:2; 76:12; 99:3; Zephaniah 2:11; Malachi 1:14); and [5] it denotes Yahwehs
honored status in heaven (Psalm 89:17).
62 Ibid.
63 H.-P. Sthli, , in TLOT II, 571.
64 BDB, 431.
65 Slotki, 72.
17
The One who keeps the gracious covenant [ ] is a line

that is in apposition to the God great and fearsome. The One who keeps the gracious
covenant gives additional information germane to the context concerning the God great and
fearsome.66
Gracious covenant [ ] is literally the covenant and the lovingkindness;
indeed, most English Bibles translate the phrase like this or something close. However, this
phrase may be an example of hendiadys, a construction whereby two nouns with a similar
meaning are combined into a single concept.67
The One who keeps the gracious covenant [ ] is a clause that
appears in precisely this form five times in the Hebrew Bible [Deuteronomy 7:9; 1 Kings 8:23; 2
Chronicles 6:14; Nehemiah 9:32; Daniel 9:4]. We may set out Daniel and Deuteronomy thus:
Daniel 9:4

Deuteronomy 7:9

It would appear that Daniel is once more citing a reference from Deuteronomy; this time,
the context immediately preceding the former citation [Deuteronomy 7:21], that is Deuteronomy
7:1-11. The overall context is still entry into the Promised Land; Yahweh promises to go before
Israel and Israel is directed to utterly destroy all of the inhabitants of the land into which they are
being led [Deuteronomy 7:2-3]. The basis for this drastic step is the relationship of the Israelites
as a people holy to Yahweh [Deuteronomy 7:6]. The foundation of this relationship is Yahwehs
choice of Israel [Deuteronomy 7:7-8]. Ultimately, the basis of Israels election is Yahwehs
faithfulness to His covenant commitment [Deuteronomy 7:9]. In the Deuteronomy passage, the
One who keeps the gracious covenant is the glue that holds the covenant together. One may
imagine that once more Daniel remembers this aspect of the covenant: the heart and soul of the
Divine-human covenant is the steadfast loyalty of Yahweh to His covenant promises. The reader
understands immediately why this remembrance finds its way into the foundation of Daniels
confession and petition.
The One who keeps [] is written as a Qal participle; when the participle functions
as a substantive [as a noun in the sentence], the participle may indicate an action which
characterizes the referent.68 We may infer that keeping the covenant is routine with Yahweh;
He never defaults on His covenant. This characteristic loyalty of Yahweh also supports Daniels
trust in his confession and petition.
Keeps [] is from a semantic field of terms for keeping or guarding. 69 This participle
[] written in the Qal is used with Yahweh as its subject followed by a direct object eleven
times in the Hebrew Bible.70 Of these collocations, two usages appear: [1] Yahweh as subject of
with an abstract direct object, and [2] Yahweh as subject of with a human object.
In the first case, Yahweh is the subject of with covenant [(this combination
appears six times out of the eleven)] as the direct object, and with faith [] as the direct
66 On this use of a circumstantial clause, see Gibson 135.
67 See Van der Merwe 40.8 (v); for this way of translating hendiadys, see Williams 72.
68 IBHS 37.2b.
69 See Keeping, guarding in NIDOTTE.
70 Deuteronomy 7:9; 1 Kings 8:23; 2 Chronicles 6:14; Nehemiah 1:5; 9:32; Psalm 97:10; 116:6;
145:20; 146:6, 9; Daniel 9:4.
18
object. In the second case, Yahweh as subject of appears with four human direct objects:
[1] Yahweh /preserves the soul [Psalm 97:10]; [2] Yahweh /preserves the
simple [Psalm 116:6]; [3] Yahweh /preserves all who love Him [Psalm 145:20]; and [4]
Yahweh /protects the stranger [Psalm 146:9]. The striking feature of this data is that
Yahweh /keeping the covenant [] dominates the field.
The sense of keeping the covenant [ ] must fall somewhere within the
following ranges of meaning for in the Qal: [1] keep, have charge of, mind, tend, [2]
keep, retain, hold on to, [3] keep watch over, keep guard over, guard, [4] keep, guard, preserve,
protect, take care of, [5] observe, watch, [6] keep, observe, perform, [7] be careful, act carefully,
[8] give heed to, pay regard to, take note of, [9] keep loyal to, devote oneself to, and [10] keep
oneself from (with ).71 The best option for Dan 9:4 is [9]: to keep loyal to. This sense also
works for Deuteronomy 7:9; 1 Kings 8:23; 2 Chronicles 6:14; Nehemiah 1:5; 9:23.
So, we may conclude that Daniel prays to Yahweh, the God who remains loyal to or wholly
devotes Himself to the covenant. With all of this, the reader must note that Yahweh remains loyal
to the gracious covenant. The hendiadys serves to highlight that in which Daniel places his trust
as he confesses and petitions.
Gracious covenant [ ] is literally, taking into account the definite
articles, the gracious covenant. As noted previously, we read this construction as a hendiadys,
which means that gracious/ defines covenant/. Dan 9:4 is the only use of
in the sense of a divine covenant in Daniel 9. Frankly, it is difficult to be dogmatic
about the function of the definite articles in this construction. The best bet may be to read them
as indicating a unique, one of a kind referent.72
Covenant [], in this case, is an agreement or contract of sorts between God and
mankind.73 From Gods side, includes promises and expectations and from mans side,
includes responses.
Definitions of vary some; these are representative and useful: A covenant, in
its normal sense, is an elected, as opposed to natural, relationship of obligation under oath. 74 A
covenant is an enduring agreement which defines a relationship between two parties involving a
solemn, binding obligation(s) specified on the part of at least one of the parties toward the other,
made by an oath under threat of divine curse, and ratified by a visual ritual. 75 Gordon
McConville defines covenant as a mutual commitment, which paradoxically recognized both the
initiative of God in the arrangement and insisted on the reality and necessity of human choice as
well.76
The covenants in the Old Testament are: [1] the covenant with creation 77, [2] the covenant
with Noah, [3] the covenant with Abraham, [4] the covenant with Moses, [5] the covenant with
71 CDCH, 470.
72 See Van der Merwe, 24.4.4 (ii).
73 KB1, 158.
74 Gordon Hugenberger, Marriage as a Covenant (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 11.
75 Daniel Lane, The Meaning and Use of the Old Testament Term for Covenant (PhD diss.,
Trinity International University, 2000).
76 Gordon J. McConville, , in NIDOTTE [H1382].
77 There is some debate over a covenant with creation; see Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum,
Gods Kingdom Through Gods Covenants (Wheaton: Crossway, 2015), 69-92.
19
David, and [6] the new covenant. One may easily see that the concept of covenant binds together
the Old and New Testaments. Moreover, the binding function of these covenants takes the form
of providing the framework for the biblical storyline from Genesis to Revelation; they are the
backbone of the biblical narrative.78
The covenant in mind in Dan 9:4 is surely the Mosaic covenant; twice in the confession,
Daniel explicitly mentions /Torah of Moses [Dan 9:11, 13]. The form of the
Sinai Covenant in Exodus-Leviticus, Deuteronomy, and Joshua is virtually identical: 79
Title/Preamble
Historical prologue
Stipulations
Depositing text
Reading out
Witness
Stipulations
Blessings for obedience
Curses for disobedience
The Mosaic covenant may be understood as a national covenant, providing a kind of
constitution for the theocratic nation that has grown out of the Abrahamic family. As McConville
puts it, the distinctive characteristic of the Mosaic covenant is its setting of God's laws
regulating Israel's life in the framework of a theology of the election of Israel by grace.80
Naturally, in the body of his confession, Daniel will rehearse the ways in which Israel violated the
stipulations of the Sinai Covenant, thus incurring its curses.
Gracious [] is the term that describes, for Daniel, the covenant []. The
statement that prefaces the Sinai covenant is: I [alone] Yahweh your God, who brought you
from the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery [Exodus 20:2; Deuteronomy 5:6]. This
places the Sinai Covenant precisely within the orbit of grace.
Gracious [] is from a sematic field of terms for loyalty.81 The ranges of meaning
for are: [1] joint obligation between relatives, friends, host and guest, master and servant;
closeness, solidarity, loyalty, [2] in Gods relationship with the people or an individual:
faithfulness, goodness, graciousness, and [3] when used in the plural (): the
individual actions resulting from solidarity: (of humans) godly action, (of God) proofs of mercy.82
BDB opts for lovingkindness for Dan 9:4.83 D.A. Baer and R.P. Gordon write that is
commonly used of the attitudes and behavior of humans toward one another, but more frequently
(ratio 3:1) describes the disposition and beneficent actions of God toward the faithful, Israel his
people, and humanity in general.84 H.-J. Zobel writes that when appears in the
semantic field of , it takes second place after and is used to express the
permanence and constancy of Yahwehs kindness, its inviolability and trustworthiness. 85
78 Ibid., 51.
79 K.A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 284.
80 McConville, , in NIDOTTE.
81 See Loyalty in NIDOTTE.
82 KB1, 337.
83 BDB, 338.
84 D.A. Baer and R.P. Gordon, , in NIDOTTE [H2874].
85 H.-J. Zobel, , in TDOT, vol. V, 63.
20
Summary. We may summarize our reflections: the gracious covenant is first and
foremost a relationship between unequal partners; all of the six covenants share this trait; they
are all covenants between disparate participants and this disparity underlines the grace, the
. Second, all of the covenants in the Bible are the consequence of an initiative of Yahweh;
thus, to the extent that all of the covenants owe their coming to be to Yahweh, they are acts of
grace, of . Third, the Sinai Covenant is specifically identified as a covenant of grace in
Exodus 20:2 and Deuteronomy 5:6. This means that divine promises and expectations as well as
the human responses are all part and parcel of the package called grace, called . In Dan
9:4, the prophet is staking his life and that of his people on Yahwehs gracious covenant, for the
simple fact is that, from the human side, all one sees is sin and failure; if the gracious covenant is
to continue in force for these all too fleshly people, loyalty will have to come from Yahweh, from
grace, from ; no man, no woman neither merits nor earns Gods grace, rather, He simply
and unerringly offers it.
With those who love Him and with those who keep His commandments [
] are both prepositional phrases, marking relationship. The
preposition may denote a set of relations that are based on the following connection: with
regard to.86 Yahweh remains loyal to the gracious covenant with regard to those who love and
obey.
With those who love Him and with those who keep His commandments [
] appears in precisely this form three times in the Hebrew Bible:
Deuteronomy 7:9; Nehemiah 1:5; Daniel 9:4.87 The Deuteronomy 7:9 passage has an add-on:
with those who love Him and with those who keep His commandments to the thousandth
generation [ ]. This addendum, attesting as it does to Yahwehs enduring
graciousness, is what makes confession and petition worthwhile for Daniel: there is always room
for repentance with Yahweh. This too is part of His gracious relationship with Israel, and with the
rest of us for that matter.
Love Him [] appears in terms of loving God [in one way or another] forty times in
the Hebrew Bible. Of these forty occurrences, 12 are in Deuteronomy and 31 are in the Psalms.
Since Daniel is drawing from Deuteronomy 7:9, we may focus on in Deuteronomy for
insight into its meaning.
To begin with, is a deeply personal and interior reaction to Yahweh.
Deuteronomy 6:5 tells us that we are to love [] God with [] all of your heart []
and all your soul [] and all your strength []. To love [] God with [] all
of these human psychic and physical attributes means that these attributes are instrumental in
loving God.88 What is more, heart/ and soul/ are obviously interior to mankind.
Indeed, BDB reads in Deuteronomy 6:5 in the sense of the inner man, indefinitely,
comprehending mind, affections, and will.89 Clines, however, understands in
86 IBHS 11.2.10d.
87 Exodus 20:6 has: with those who love Me and keep My commandments; similarly
Deuteronomy 5:10; altogether on twelve occasions in the OT the combination of love and
keep emerge in the OT [Exodus 20:6; Deuteronomy 5:10; 7:9; 11:1, 22; 19:9; 30:16; Joshua
22:5; 23:11; Nehemiah 1:5; Isaiah 56:6; Dan 9:4.
88 For the instrumental use of the preposition [], see Van der Merwe 39.6.3 (i) b.
89 BDB, 523.
21
Deuteronomy 6:5 in the sense of inclination, a characterized as loyal, devoted.90

Clines reading is probably to be preferred, especially as an instrument of human love for God.
Furthermore, to love [] God with all ones soul [] means to love God at ones
center; that is, as Kohler-Baumgartner point out, soul/ may be used in the sense of
the center and transmitter of feelings and perceptions probably ones longing or desire. 91
Clines also follows suit for Deuteronomy 6:5, locating ones love [] for God in the
soul/, which is the soul, heart, mind, as the seat [emphasis mine] of desire, will, feelings,
emotions.92 Finally, the interiority of is underlined through the instrumentality of
/strength. When all is said and done, strength comes down to a superlative degree of
total commitment to Yahweh.93 The upshot is this: he who loves God does so from deeply
within, from the depths of ones loyalty and ones devotion, from the very seat of ones desires,
will, feelings, and emotion, yielding total commitment to Yahweh. To God is a deeply
personal, deeply interior human endeavor.
Beyond that, is publically active in Deuteronomy. Indeed, throughout the OT
one of the more frequent circumstances attendant upon loving [] Yahweh is keeping
[] His commandments [].94 To the extent that this public obedience is tethered
to internal devotion [/love], then the public and the private side of life merge. No one
simply loves God any more than one simply obeys God; rather both are part and parcel of the
same package. With all of that, means that ones devotion shows up in keeping the
commandments. By keeping [], the author of Deuteronomy means to keep, observe,
perform.95 The net effect is that /love for God shows its public face in keeping and
performing the commandments of Yahweh.
The sum of the matter is this: love Him [] begins within the inner depths of Gods
people; love/ derives from the depths of a follower, involving loyalty and devotion,
encompassing the very seat of ones desires, feelings, intentions, and emotions, and comprising
unswerving commitment to Yahweh alone. Naturally, such powerful inner drives emerge
publically, especially in terms of living ones public life according to the commandments of
Yahweh. The reader should appreciate that from Deuteronomy to Daniel, love for God motivates
obedience to God; we should be finished once and for all with the shibboleth that the life before
Yahweh in the Old Testament is merely a matter of blind obedience. Not a bit of that; obedience
to the commandments flows out of a heart and soul in love with God!
Keep His commandments [ ] is written as a Qal participle
with a single noun functioning as direct object of the participle. The verbal aspect of the
participle is durative;96 the keeping is an ongoing, typical proposition.
Keep [], as noted, is written as a Qal participle with a human subject and a single
noun [His commandments, ] as direct object. This precise collocation appears
90 CDCH, 190.
91 KB1, 713.
92 CDCH, 279.
93 R.L. Harris, G.L. Archer, B.K. Waltke, ed., Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament
(Chicago: Moody Press, 1981; second printing), 1134 [hereafter abbreviated TWOT].
94 See Exodus 20:6; Deuteronomy 5:10; 7:9; 11:1; Nehemiah 1:5; Psalm 119:167; Isaiah 56:6;
Daniel 9:4.
95 CDCH, 470.
96 Van der Merwe 20.3.1.
22
15 times in the Hebrew Bible. The upshot is that the meaning of is shaped by the noun as
direct object. In this case, to a commandment/ is in effect to keep, observe,
perform the dictates of the commandments. In other words, or keeping is obedience.
Keith Schoville notes that the basic idea of is to pay careful attention to.97 F. Garca
Lpez writes, concerning that the mutual obligations of the covenant find expression in
various formulas in which the verb plays an important role, with the basic meaning
observe, obey.98
Summary. So, what can be said concerning the One who keeps [] His gracious
covenant with those who love [] Him and keep [] His commandments? The
reader will note the two uses of keep/; there is a world of difference between the two.
Basically, only Yahweh actually keeps [] His end of the covenant relationship; the
human partners utterly fail to keep the commandments, and by implication, fall short in loving
Yahweh. So, where does this leave us? In Dan 9:4, the prophet is staking everything on Yahwehs
gracious covenant, for the simple fact is that, from the human side, all one sees is sin and failure;
if the gracious covenant is to continue in force for these all too fleshly people, loyalty will have
to come from Yahweh; none neither merits nor earns Gods grace, rather, He faithfully and
unerringly offers it. Accordingly, loving God and following through with consistent obedience is
still part and parcel of the covenant relationship. But, as Daniel knows all too well, the human
side is the weak link; thus, all depends on the grace of Yahweh, on His unwavering loyalty to His
side of the covenant relationship with His people. In the final analysis, when Daniel said with
those who love Him and keep His commandments, the words must have grieved the man deeply,
for they indict, they impeach, they accuse all Israel, and Daniel will soon confess as much.
Sentence summary
Dan 9:4b is an extraordinary invocation, an appeal that seeks to reach out to God in all of His
majesty, that seeks to throw the supplicant onto the sheer grace of God, and that tacitly admits
that all of the covenant failure rests on the human side. Indeed, when Daniel beseeches
Yahweh, Daniel is, in effect, begging in what must be akin to the New Testament idea of poverty
of spirit [Matthew 5:3].
Daniel begins where he must: beseeching the God, great and fearsome. Calling on
memory of Deuteronomy 7:21, Daniels appeal reaches out to the God whose will prevails in
every circumstance. As far as Daniels appeal is concerned, this means that Daniel is casting
himself and his people onto the sovereign and masterful will of God. To be sure, in Israels past,
tis God has been their faithful defense and protection; Daniel is placing his bets with Yahweh as
Israels security yet again.
Great and fearsome are the attributes that seep into Daniels invocation to Yahweh.
The former term implies Yahwehs influence and significance; Daniels appeal summons
Yahwehs authority to forgive and the authority to relent in His anger and wrath [Dan 9:16]. The
second term recalls Yahwehs honor, kingship, and the majesty associated with His name; in terms
of Daniels appeal, Yahweh is the only being, the only power, the only king who can rescue Israel
from its part in the covenant betrayal.
97 Keith Schoville, , in NIDOTTE [H9068].

98 F. Garca Lpez, , in TDOT, vol. XV, 289.
23
The One who keeps the gracious covenant is Daniels tacit appeal to grace, to the
covenant relationship initiated by Yahweh; this is nothing less than a covenant of grace between
two very unequal partners. The genius of the covenant is that Yahweh may always be counted
upon to keep His side of the covenant; this divine loyalty, this divine reliability, this divine
steadfastness is of the essence of grace, and upon this constancy Daniel throws himself and his
people. As we noted above [see page 21], when covenant/ appears in the semantic field
of gracious/, covenant takes second place after grace/ and is used to express the
permanence and constancy of Yahwehs kindness, its inviolability and trustworthiness. For those
who draw hard and fast lines between the Old testament and the New in terms of grace being
solely located in the New testament, Dan 9:4 must come as something of a shock.
With those who love Him and keep His commandments is the line that must have stuck
in Daniels throat; for here we have the failure of the human participants in the aforementioned
covenant relationship. To be sure, loving Yahweh and obedience to the commandments
constituted the human response in the covenant relationship; but, this response, or better the lack
of it, was Israels downfall. This part of Daniels invocation anticipates the confession of sin
[Dan 9:5-6] and the confession of shame [Dan 9:7-8].
All told, the flow of the invocation begins with the unrivaled majesty of Yahweh, the
unmatched constancy of His grace, and the incomparable inviolability of His covenant demands.
Daniels invocation strains to reach out to God, summoning the best language Daniel has at hand
to implore Yahweh. To be sure, the invocation continues with its unwavering trust in Gods
grace; Daniels appeal to Yahweh who keeps the gracious covenant is nothing less than the beggar
throwing himself upon merciful clemency of the God of this universe. Only then does Daniel
even begin to broach the human need; the human need comes last in the invocation; pride of
place goes to God!
The Confession of Sin [Dan 9:5-6]

done wrong,

have rebelled;

Your
9:5a
We have sinned and we have

we have become guilty and we
9:5b
that is, we have turned from
commandments and Your judgments.

9:6a
We have not
obeyed Your servants the prophets,

who spoke in Your name,

to our kings, our
leaders, and our fathers;

9:6b and to all the people of the land.
Syntactical outline
The confession of sin may be read with the punctuation of the text in mind:
24
9:5a We have sinned and we have done wrong

9:5a We have become guilty and we have rebelled
9:5b For, we have we have turned from Your commandments and Your
judgments
9:6a We have not obeyed Your servants the prophets
9:6a Who spoke in Your name
9:6a To our kings, our leaders, and our fathers
9:6b And to all the people of the land
Thus, the punctuation of the confession of sin yields the following syntactical outline:
(Main clause one)
[1] We have sinned and we have done wrong
(Main clause two)
[2] We have become guilty and we have rebelled
(Causal clause)
For, we have turned from Your commandments and Your judgments
(Main clause three)
[3] We have not obeyed Your servants the prophets
(Clarification of prophets)
Who spoke in Your name
(Addressees)
To our kings, our leaders, and our fathers
(Addressee)
And to all the people of the land
Theme
Obviously, the theme of Dan 9:5-6 is communal sin. The first four verbs sinned,
done wrong, acted wickedly, and rebelled are all 1st, common, plural verbs: we, thus
underlining the communal side of the theme. To be sure, the communal aspect of the
paragraphs theme is underlined by social class in Dan 9:6a-b kings, leaders, fathers, and all
the people. Moreover, the first five verbs are terms for sin: sinned, done wrong, acted
wickedly, rebelled, and turned; thus underling the sin element in the theme. The upshot is that
societies as a whole, from top to bottom, can be communally sinful.
Genre
Dan 9:5-6 is a direct confession of sin; the genre depicts Daniel as representing himself
and his fellows in confessing to their covenant betrayal.
Dan 9:5 We have sinned, we have done wrong, we have become guilty and we have rebelled;
for, we have turned from Your commandments and Your judgments.
We have sinned, we have done wrong [ (simple waw, Qal, perfect, 1st, c, pl)
(Qal, perfect, 1st, c, pl)] are both written in the 1st, person plural and in the perfect
aspect. The syntactical function of the plural is obvious: to draw the entire covenant community
into the orbit of sin. The perfect aspect verbs sinned and done wrong are probably of the
persistent perfective variety, what Comrie refers to as the experiential perfect: a given situation
has held at least once during some time in the past leading up to the present. 99 The reader may
nuance the sense of the verbs as: we have been and remain in a state of sin; we have been and
remain those who have done wrong.
99 Bernard Comrie, Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 58; see also IBHS 30.5.1c..
25
We have sinned, we have done wrong [ ] is identical with 1 Kings

8:47, and very close to 2 Chronicles 6:37, where King Solomon envisages a time when Israel will
sin [] against Yahweh and do wrong [] and so He sends them into captivity
[ (1 Kings 8:46)]; but, should they make supplication during their captivity, saying we
have sinned [] and we have done wrong [], then Yahweh will listen to
them when they call [1 Kings 8:52].
We have no way of knowing whether Daniel is citing this passage; indeed, if Kings and
Chronicles and Daniel were written sometime during the exile, and since the date for all of these
writings is speculative at best, then we simply have no way of knowing in which direction the
dependence, if any, goes. So, where does this leave us? Allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture,
we might conclude that the Kings-Chronicles passages place confession within a larger context of
hope. Indeed, as we pointed out in the sentence summary for Dan 9:4, hope in the God of the
gracious covenant has already been appealed to. Accordingly, Daniel may also be trusting in
hope in his confession of sin.
Sin [], as noted above, is written in the 1st, person, plural, perfect aspect; this
grammatical form of appears 24 times in the Hebrew Bible,100 and in all but one of them
[Jeremiah 16:10], the form is used in a confession of sin.
Sin [], as a verb, has the following ranges of meaning in the Qal stem (which we have here
in Dan 9:5): [1] to miss (a mark), to fail to reach, [2] to wrong (morally), to offend, [3] to be
culpable before () a person, [4] to do wrong, to sin, [5] to commit a sin. 101 BDB reads
in Dan 9:5 in the sense of to miss the path of right and duty. 102
The canard that basically means to miss the mark may be wide of the mark.
K. Koch notes that this view is based upon four texts in the OT [Judges 20:16; Proverbs 8:35;
19:2; Job 5:24] and observes this is scanty evidence in view of the religious usage attested
centuries earlier among the Semites.103 Among the Semitic languages, designates
negative conditions and conduct especially with reference to human agents in a religious
context.104 Furthermore, and this is crucial as regards the use of , the term denotes an
offense against someone with whom one stands in an institutionalized community relationship
[emphasis mine].105 Now, the someone may be either a human or God; but, the key idea is that
is disobedience, witting or unwitting, of a communally recognized norm committed
against another within the community. In the case of Dan 9:5, the sin/ is clearly against
Yahweh, since Daniel we immediately confess that he and his people have turned from Your
commandments [Dan 9:5b]. Rolf Knierim puts the matter this way, the criterion for error is
not particular commandments but injury to a communal relationship [emphasis mine]: a person
sins against a person or against God. Nevertheless, to the extent that a particular communal
relationship implies norms of relation [emphasis mine], violation of the norms results in injury to
the relationship.106
100 Numbers 12:11; 14:40; 21:7; Deuteronomy 1:41; Judges 10:10, 15; 1 Samuel 7:6; 12:10; 1
Kings 8:47; 2 Chronicles 6:37; Nehemiah 1:6; Psalm 106:6; Isaiah 42:24; Jeremiah 3:25; 8:14;
14:7, 20; 16:10; Lamentations 5:16; Daniel 9:5, 8, 11, 15.
101 KB1, 305.
102 BDB, 307.
103 K. Koch, , in TDOT, vol. IV, 311.
104 Ibid., 310.
105 Ibid., 311.
106 R. Knierim, , in TLOT I, 409.
26
The upshot is this: sin/ is [1] a violation of the norms of the covenant relationship
with Yahweh, which [2] damages the covenant relationship.
Done wrong [ (Qal, perf, 1st, c, pl)] is also written in the perfect aspect of the
verb, similarly read as an experiential perfect: a situation [doing wrong] has held at least once
during some time in the past leading up to and continuing into the present. Again, the communal
notion of this violation is underlined by the plural verb: we, the covenant community, should not
have done wrong but we have and still do.
Done wrong [] is from a semantic field of terms for transgression. 107 The verb
appears only 17 times in the Hebrew Bible.108 The verb appears in the Qal stem, which we have
in Dan 9:5, only twice [Esther 1:16; Dan 9:5]. As noted with , the 1st person plural of
appears in 1 Kings 8:47; 2 Chronicles 6:37; Psalm 106:6, all communal confession
contexts as in Dan 9:5.
Done wrong [] has some interesting ancient Near Eastern cognates: the Jewish
Aramaic cognate means to deviate, to do wrong; the Akkadian cognate means to burden with;
and the Arabic cognate means to err (in actions). 109 The ranges of meaning for the various
stems are the following: [1] Qal to do wrong, [2] Niphal to be bent, irritated, confused,
disturbed, [3] Piel to twist something, [4] Hiphil to twist (the law) or to go astray.110
Rolf Knierim notes that the basic meaning of the verb is to bend, curve, turn aside,
twist.111 Then, in a more figurative sense, means to twist the course of life, or to
pervert the right, or even to be of perverse intention. 112 Ultimately, in Dan 9:5, has the
meaning a conscious divergence from the right way. 113
The Septuagint tradition translates /do wrong with the Greek verb
, a verb that means to do wrong, of any violation of human or divine law or
simply to be in the wrong.114
Summary. The upshot is this: do wrong/ points to [1] a conscious act on the
part of the covenant community as a whole that [2] diverges from the right path as stipulated in
the covenant relationship. Moreover, the first main clause [We have sinned and we have done
wrong] affirms the following: to begin with, sin/ has shattered the covenant relationship
between the human participants in the covenant and Yahweh; moreover, done wrong/
points to consciousness, on the part of the covenant community, of intentionally diverging from
the stipulations of the covenant between Yahweh and mankind. To put the same thing another
107 See Transgression in NIDOTTE.
108 1 Samuel 20:30; 2 Samuel 7:14; 19:20; 24:17; 1 Kings 8:47; 2 Chronicles 6:37; Esther 1:16;
Job 33:27; Psalms 38:6; 106:6; Proverbs 12:8; Isaiah 21:3; 24:1; Jeremiah 3:21; 9:4;
Lamentations 3:9; Daniel 9:5.
109 KB1, 796.
110 Ibid., 796-97.
111 R. Knierim, , in TLOT II, 863.
112 Ibid.
113 Ibid., 864.
114 Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature, ed., W.F. Arndt, F.W. Gingrich; revised F.W. Gingrich, F.W. Danker (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1979), 17 [hereafter abbreviated BAGD].
27
way, in the case of sin/, the relationship with Yahweh was severed; and, beyond that, in the
case of do wrong/, the members of the covenant community actually perverted or twisted
the path laid out in the covenant stipulations.
We now turn to the second main clause: We have become guilty and we have rebelled.
We have become guilty [ (Hiphil, perf, 1st, c, pl)] is written in the perfect aspect and
in the plural; accordingly, the previous observations apply here too: [1] the contour of the action
is experiential: the members of the covenant community have become guilty in the past and
remain so in the present; and [2] the plurality in the verbal stem as written once more points to the
communal aspect of becoming guilty.
Become guilty [] is from a sematic field of terms for wickedness. 115 The verb
occurs 34 times in the Hebrew Bible, with Job [11] presenting the most incidences. The verb
occurs in the Qal and Hiphil stems in the Hebrew Bible, and both stems are represented in Daniel
[Qal in Dan 9:15; Hiphil in Dan 9:5; 11:32; 12:10].
Kohler-Baumgartner affirm that identifying a basic meaning of this root cannot be determined
with certainty; the lexicon does eventually opt for a forensic sense of the root, a general sense of
being or becoming guilty of some divine infraction.116 Ludwig Kohler also affirms this forensic
sense of : proved guilty of charges;117 indeed the word has a more general sense
describing character rather than individual action. 118 We conclude that focuses more on
the moral standing of one who as a result of committing sinful deeds stands in a state of guilt
before Yahweh; culpability characterizes the status of the before God. The ranges of
meaning for will confirm this forensic nuance in the root.
The ranges of meaning for are: [1] in the Qal: to be (become) guilty, and [2] in the Hiphil:
(a) to make oneself guilty and (b) to pronounce or declare one guilty.119 As far as Dan 9:5 is
concerned, means to make oneself guilty; indeed the Hiphil stem, in this case, is an
example of the internal Hiphil, which means that the subject the covenant community in this
case causes itself to be regarded as /guilty.120
The upshot is this: become guilty/ denotes [1] the communitys moral standing before
Yahweh, which [2] is a matter of proven guilt for betraying the covenant with Yahweh.
We have rebelled [ (Qal, perf, 1st, c, pl)] shares the aspectual and plurality
nuances that we have noted in the three previous verbs: these people have rebelled (and continue
to do so) and the rebellion is a communal affair.
115 See Wickedness in NIDOTTE.

116 KB2, 1294.
117 Kohler, OTT, 167.
118 Ibid., 171.
119 KB2, 1294-95.
120 IBHS 27.2f.
28
Rebel [] is from a semantic field of terms for rebellion, conspiracy, stubbornness,

and obstinacy.121 The verb appears 25 times in the Hebrew Bible.122 The verb occurs only in the
Qal stem in the Hebrew Bible; its ranges of meaning are: [1] to rise in revolt or rebel in political
revolt and [2] to rise in revolt against Yahweh. 123
Rebel [], when used in political terms, almost always refers to men revolting against some
heavy-handed political power [Genesis 14:4; 2 Kings 18:7, 20; 2 Kings 24:1, 20; 2 Chronicles
13:6; 36:13; Nehemiah 2:19; 6:6; Isaiah 36:5; Jeremiah 52:3; Ezekiel 17:15]. The main point to
note here is that the rebels revolt against nations in covenant with them.
Thus, if /rebel, then in an international political context refers to disloyalty and
disunity among nations in covenant then it is only natural to assume that it is in this context, i.e.,
the context of a broken covenant, that the term refers to man's rebellion against God.124 And so it
is; when /rebel is used in the Hebrew Bible in reference to revolt against Yahweh, the
root tends to denote revolt against the covenant program of Yahweh [Joshua 22:16, 18-19, 29;
Nehemiah 9:26; Ezekiel 2:3; 20:37-38 (explicit mention of /covenant); Daniel 9:4-5
(explicit mention of /covenant), 9]. Indeed, Carpenter and Grisanti write that
/rebel most frequently functions against the background of covenantal relationships. 125
Summary. So, in this second pair of perfect aspect verbs we have the following: [1] we have
become guilty [] means that the covenant community stands in moral guilt before
Yahweh for having betrayed the covenant, and [2] we have rebelled teases out the covenant
betrayal theme vis--vis Israels open revolt against Yahweh and His covenant.
For, we have turned [] is written with a disjunctive waw [] prefixed to an
infinitive absolute []. The syntactical function of the clause is signaled by the disjunctive
waw, which in this case, is probably causal [for].126 The reason behind the covenant betrayal
[sinned, done wrong, become guilty, rebelled] is the nations turning from Torah, for Gods
Word.
We have turned [] is an infinitive absolute; the infinitive absolute may be used as a
substitute for finite verbs, in this case for four of them, when it is sufficient to highlight the verbal
idea[/ turning].127 The number and perfect aspect of the previous four verbs are carried
over to the infinitive: we have turned (and remain so to this day). The function of this
construction is probably to underline the behavior of the covenant community.
Turn [] is from a semantic field of terms for apostasy.128 In Dan 9:5, we have the verb
[] + a prepositional phrase [/from]. This collocation [ /turn from]
121 See Rebellion, conspiracy, stubbornness, obstinacy in NIDOTTE.
122 Genesis 14:4: Numbers 14:9; Joshua 22:16, 18-19, 29; 2 Kings 18:7, 20; 24:1, 20; 2
Chronicles 13:6; 36:13; Nehemiah 2:19; 6:6; 9:26; Job 24:13; Isaiah 36:5; Jeremiah 52:3; Ezekiel
2:3; 20:38; Daniel 9:5, 9.
123 KB1, 632.
124 Victor Hamilton, , in TWOT 1240.
125 Eugene Carpenter and Michael Grisanti, , in NIDOTTE [H5277].
126 For the causal use of the disjunctive waw, see IBHS 39.2.3b.
127 E. Kautzsch, ed., Gesenius Hebrew Grammar; revised by A.E. Cowley (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1972; reprint), 113 y, z [hereafter abbreviated GKC]; see also J-M 123 x.
128 See Turning, apostasy, faithlessness in NIDOTTE.
29
occurs 31 times in the Hebrew Bible.129 Turning from [ ] is tantamount to

forgetting [ (Deut 4:9)], to doing evil in the sight of Yahweh [
(2 Kings 13:11)], to turning from the way [ (Isa
30:11)], and turning from the statutes [ (Mal 3:7)]; it may be accompanied by
following after other gods [Deut 28:14]; and it is contrasted with doing what is right in the
sight of Yahweh [ (1 Kings 15:5)]. All of these
references spell out apostasy in one form or another.
Turn [ (Qal, infinitive absolute)] has the following ranges of meaning in the Qal stem: [1]
to turn aside, [2] to go off, to retreat, [3] to fall down, to desert, to backslide, [4] to abandon, to
desist, [5] to stand aloof from, [6] to leave off, to stop. 130 S. Schwertner ascribes the following
basic meaning to : to turn aside from the direction one has set out on. 131 L.A. Snijders
concurs, noting that means turn aside, deviate (from the path).132 The net effect is this:
/turning is deviation from, abandoning, deserting the commandments and judgments of
Yahweh; in a nutshell, is apostasy.
From Your commandments and Your judgments [ ] is a
prepositional phrase, stipulating the point of the deviation/apostasy. This preposition []
points to separation, alienation, remoteness from. 133 This combination [Your commandments
and Your judgments] occurs only here in the Hebrew Bible. Otherwise, commandments
[] and judgments [] appears four times in the Hebrew Bible [Deut 8:11;
26:17; 1 Kings 2:3; 1 Chronicles 28:11].
Commandment [] is from a semantic field of terms for law, command, order, statute. 134
The term is linked with keeping the covenant [] in Dan 9:4, thus reaffirming our
contention that Daniels confession in Dan 9:5-6 is an admission of covenant betrayal. 135
Commandment [] appears 180 times in the Hebrew Bible, 43 of them in Deuteronomy;
the noun appears in Daniel only in Dan 9:4-5. The range of meaning for is as follows:
a commission, an individual commandment or a set of all the commandments; a claim or a
right.136 In essence, the commandments [] are the divine stipulations for keeping the
covenant in effect from the human side. Accordingly, when Daniel confesses that he and his
people have abandoned [] the commandments [], the principles of the law, he is
acknowledging that he and his people have shattered their part of the covenant arrangement.
Judgment [] is also from a semantic field of terms for law, command, order, statute. 137
The noun appears about 420 times in the Hebrew Bible. 138 In a nutshell, it would seem that
129 Deuteronomy 4:9; 28:14; Joshua 1:7; 23:6; 1 Kings 15:5, 13; 2 Kings 13:6, 11; 14:24; 15:9,
24, 28; 2 Chronicles 14:4; 15:16-17; Job 15:30; Psalm 6:8; 81:6; Proverbs 4:24; 5:7; 13:14;
14:27; 15:24; Isaiah 3:1; 17:1; 30:11; 58:9; Daniel 9:5; Zephaniah 3:11; Malachi 3:7.
130 KB1, 748.
131 S. Schwertner, , in TLOT II, 796.
132 L.A. Snijders, , in TDOT, vol. X, 201.
133 On this sense of the preposition [], see Williams 315; Van der Merwe 39.14.3; and
GKC 119 v.
134 See Law, command, order, statute in NIDOTTE.
135 For the connection between covenant and commandment, see Lev 26:15; Deut 7:9; 2 Kings
23:3; 2 Chron 34:31; Ezra 10:3; Neh 1:5; Dan 9:4-5; Mal 2:4.
136 KB1, 622.
138 66 times in the Psalms; 43 times in Ezekiel; 42 times in Isaiah; and 35 times in Deuteronomy.
30
/judgment is the application of /commandment. That is, KohlerBaumgartner schematize this way: ruling>legal decision, judgment>case>law, right,
claim>what is due to someone in a case.139 The ranges of meaning of are: [1]
decision, judgment, [2] dispute, case, [3] legal claim, [4] measure, [5] law.140
Judgment [] is often, but by no means always, associated with judicial concerns. In this
regard, Peter Enns writes, What is most often the topic of concern is the process governing
the settling of some dispute, whether between human parties or between God and the
Israelites, or the actual verdict itself.141 In a similar way, Ludwig Kohler affirms that
means properly the proposal which is made for the settlement of a dispute or suit at
law.142 Accordingly, when the Hebrew Bible refers to the judgments [] of God, the net
effect is to denote the just claims of God.143 The upshot is this: as an application of
/commandment, a /judgment is the just claim of this application. As
Joyce Baldwin notes, the is the application of those principles to particular
circumstances.144
In Deuteronomy, is to be executed with an even hand, without showing partiality [Deut
1:17]. In Deuteronomy 24:17, is not to be perverted [ (steered sideways)]. In
terms of Daniels confession, we may infer that even-handedness and impartiality were not the
norm among his people.
Deuteronomy is especially concerned that is exercised on behalf of those who
are defenseless: the widow, the orphan, the alien [Deut 10:18; 24:17; 27:19]. Again, we may
reasonably infer that Daniel is tacitly confessing that this was not always the case.
Deuteronomy requires that should be administered with righteousness; indeed,
Deuteronomy 16:18 calls for righteous judgment, where equity or what is right must guide the
application of in individual cases. This kind of equity embraces the whole of the Torah
[Deut 4:8]. In the case of Daniels confession, we may presume that equity did not always guide
the pursuit of .
Finally, Deuteronomy insists that wisdom [] in the sense of shrewdness or skill
be applied in the administration of [Deut 4:5-6]. We may conclude that wisdom did
not always guide the pursuit of .
Summary. 9:5b [For, we have we have turned from Your commandments and Your
judgments] is a causal clause, assigning the reason why the covenant community, for whom
Daniel is confessing, have sinned, have done wrong, have become guilty, and have rebelled.
They have betrayed the covenant; they have consciously deviated from the path stipulated by the
covenant; they have incurred a moral standing of proven guilt in the sight of Yahweh; and they
have broken out in open revolt against the covenant program of Yahweh. The key to
understanding the spiritual source of this covenant betrayal is apostasy: they have turned, have
deviated, have abandoned, have deserted; they have alienated themselves from the divine
stipulations of the covenant and have separated themselves from the just claims of divine law
139 KB1, 651.
140 Ibid., 651-52.
141 Peter Enns, , in NIDOTTE [H5477].
143 Ibid.
144 Baldwin, 165.
31
applied. All told, Daniel is confessing the covenant betrayal of his community in the form of
their apostasy.
Dan 9:6 Seeing that we have not obeyed Your servants the prophets who spoke as Your
representatives to our kings, our leaders, and our fathers; and to all the people of the nation.

9:6a
Seeing that we
have not obeyed Your servants
the prophets,

who spoke as Your representatives,

to our kings, our
leaders, and our fathers;

9:6b and to all the people of the nation.
Syntactical outline
(Main clause: clarification of 9:5)
(Apposition to servants)
(Clarification of prophets)
(Addressees of prophets)
(Addressees of prophets)
9:6a Seeing that we have not obeyed Your servants

the prophets,
9:6a who spoke as Your representatives,
9:6a to our kings, our leaders, and our fathers;
9:6b and to all the people of the nation.
The reader observes that the theme of disobedience continues, but to the theme is added
the extent of culpability: four strata of society are specifically mentioned as responsible for the
betrayal of the covenant. This is a point that the modern reader might want to keep in mind:
modern-day social critics are adept at pinning the blame for national decline solely on leaders; the
fact of the matter is that sustaining various levels of official leadership is the community or the
nation [all the people of the nation].
Seeing that we have not obeyed [ ] is written as a disjunctive waw
prefixed to a negative adverb followed by a Qal, perfect, 1 st, common, plural. The perfect aspect
and the plural number in the verb are continued with the same import as the previous instances of
this construction: we, the covenant community as a whole, have disobeyed consistently
throughout the past and continue to do so up to this moment is the drift of Dan 9:6.
The entire verse functions syntactically to offer clarification of Dan 9:5. Indeed, there is
more than likely an element of causation implied in the clarifying statement. The sense is: all of
the ranges of moral collapse in Dan 9:5 occurred seeing that/because of disobedience to the
revealed word of the God-sent prophets.145
Obey [] is from a semantic field of terms for obedience. 146 Since our term in Dan 9:6 is
written in the Qal stem, we note the following ranges of meaning for the Qal of : [1] to
hear with the ears, [2] to listen to, with the accusative of the thing listened to or the person; to
attend to someones words carefully, [3] to hear and accept a request, [4] to hear > to listen to, to
hearken > to obey, with the accusative of the thing to be obeyed or the person to be obeyed, and
145 On this use of the disjunctive waw [], see IBHS 39.2.3b; GKC 158 a; Gibson 137.
146 See Obedience in NIDOTTE.
32
[5] to hear in the sense of to understand.147 It would seem that more than mere hearing what the
prophets said is implied here; translations should clarify what the issue actually is for the
covenant community: refusal to obey the prophetic voices that called them to covenant fidelity.
Such translations as listen or words to that effect really fail to drive home with sufficient clarity
the failure to yield to what is heard.
Obey [] obviously involves using ones mental faculties in hearing or listening. For, one
uses ones intellect to attend to someones words carefully and also therefore to obey.
Obedience assumes attentiveness, understanding, and discernment. 148 One does not merely hear
and obey; rather, obedience includes focus and concentration on what is being said, awareness
and perception of the gist of what is being said, and discriminating judgment concerning the
applicability of the message which is being presented.
Obey [] is also part and parcel of the covenant relationship with Yahweh, since hearing
[] occurs within the sovereign relationship of the covenant [Exodus 19:5; 24:7;
Deuteronomy 7:12; Judges 2:20; 2 Kings 18:12; Jeremiah 11:3, 6, 8, 10; 34:10]. Once more, the
failure to , to obey, is tantamount to covenant betrayal.
Your servants the prophets [ ] is a phrase that
appears elsewhere in the form of My servants, the prophets [ ],
especially in the prophet Jeremiah. In Jeremiah, the phrase occurs five times [out of the eight
total times in the Hebrew Bible], where Jeremiah underlines the repetitiveness [] with
which Yahweh sent His servants the prophets to Israel to no avail whatsoever [Jeremiah 7:25;
26:5; 29:19; 35:15; 44:4].
That the prophets, especially Jeremiah, reminded the covenant community of its failure to
obey their end of the covenant is evident when we note how often the prophets use the phrase not
obeyed [ ].149 Since Daniel admits that the covenant community did not/does not
obey [ ] Yahwehs prophets, we may gain valuable historical and spiritual
background concerning Yahwehs extensive efforts to reach His people through His servant, the
prophet Jeremiah. Indeed, the time frames for Daniel and Jeremiah are instructive. That is, we
may date Daniels confession to about 539 BC; Jeremiahs prophetic activity ranged from roughly
626 586 BC, about 87 years before Daniels confession. The upshot is that Daniels confession
appeals to a long and more or less recent history of prophetic proclamation imploring the
covenant community to reverse its disobedient covenant betrayal. Indeed, Jeremiah uses
to tease out the gory details of the communitys covenant betrayal: idolatry, self-sufficiency,
discarding truth, pride, and spiritual obstinacy.
Jeremiah uses the phrase /do not obey in reference to a variety of moral lapses, the
first of which is idolatry [Jeremiah 3:13; 44:5, 23]. Moreover, Jeremiah identifies self-sufficiency
as ; Jeremiah 7:24 notes that the covenant community walked in its own
counsel/plans, not those of Yahweh; they self-sufficiently charted their own course. Beyond that,
the covenant community has permitted truth to perish; that is, they no longer cared much for the
corrective words that came from Yahweh [Jeremiah 7:28]. Furthermore, disobedience [
147 KB2,1571-72.
148 See the lexical entry for in CDCH, 469.
149 Altogether, not obeyed [ ] appears 181 times in the Hebrew Bible; Exodus has
the phrase 15 times, Deuteronomy 16 times, Isaiah 14 times and Jeremiah 50 times [about 28% of
the total appearances of the phrase in the Hebrew Bible].
33
/ not obey] took the form of pride/arrogance [ in Jeremiah 13:17]. Finally,

insubordination was enfleshed in spiritual obstinacy [they did nothing] in Jeremiah 32:23.
Who spoke as Your representatives [ ] is literally spoke in Your name.
A study of the prepositional phrase [literally in Your name] shows some of the depth
implied in this phrase.
To begin with, is used in association with the present and effective power of
Yahweh in moments of virtually insurmountable threat. In 2 Chronicles 14:10, King Asa is
outnumbered by the Cushites by two-to-one. Accordingly, he notes that there is none beside
Yahweh who can help, where help takes the form of divine power overcoming Asas military
weakness. Hence, Asa trusts /in Your name to engage the overpowering Cushites.150
Moreover, the psalmist links with Yahwehs power to vindicate the innocent. In Psalm
54, David is being attacked by ruthless enemies [Psalm 54:3]. Accordingly, David appeals
/by Yahwehs name to vindicate him by His strength [Psalm 54:1]. Here also, the
power is present, that is, at hand for the situation; but the effect of the power is vindication.
Furthermore, the psalmist almost seems to equate Yahweh Himself with /in
Your name. In Psalm 79:6, the poet laments those nations that /do not
know You as those who /do not call upon Your name; the
parallelism is obvious: /in Your name amounts to an interchangeable expression for
Yahweh Himself.
Additionally, Psalm 89:16 places /in Your name in parallel with
/in Your righteousness. This implies that Yahwehs name is a witness of His
character, His righteous character in this case.
Finally, the usage in Dan 9:6 seems to point to meaning something like
to speak by Your authority or as Your representative. Indeed, this precise collocation of verb
[/speak] plus the prepositional phrase [/in Your name] is used twice in the
Hebrew Bible, Dan 9:6 and Exodus 5:23. In both passages, the collocation implies representing
the interests of Yahweh before a hearer(s).151 The upshot is that the prophets, whom the covenant
community ignored, were speaking on behalf of Yahweh, representing His interests before them,
bearing Yahwehs personal authority in their prophetic words.
Those who were addressed by these prophets subsequently ignored them. We may read kings,
leaders, fathers, and all the people as a unit, stratified though they are. While it may be
cumbersome, it will nevertheless be instructive to consider briefly the extent to which Yahweh,
through His prophets, reached out to the kings over the covenant people.
Among the more important kings of the kings of Judah were: Rehoboam, Asa,
Jehoshaphat, Joash, Uzziah, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Ammon, Josiah, and Jehoiakim. Investigation
of interactions these men had with prophets will provide useful background for the dilemma
Daniels prayer addressed.
Rehoboam [931-13 B.C.] was the first king in Judah of the period of the divided
monarchy. In the summary statement of his kingship, his legacy included: he abandoned the
150 For a similar use of , see Psalm 44:5.
151 For a similar emphasis using /speak in the name, see Deuteronomy 18:1920; 1 Chronicles 21:19; Zechariah 13:3.
34
Torah of the Lord and all Israel with him [2 Chronicles 12:1]. The specific nature of this
abandonment included idolatry [1 Kings 14:23] and male prostitution [1 Kings 14:24]. Under
Rehoboam, Judah imitated all of the abhorrent practices of the nations that Yahweh had
dispossessed before them [1 Kings 14:24]. In the fifth year of his reign, Shishak of Egypt
marched against him. During this conflict, the prophet Shemaiah came to Rehoboam and said,
Thus says Yahweh, because you have abandoned Me, I am abandoning you to Shishak. After
the officers of Rehoboam humbled themselves, Yahweh relented to a degree and did not destroy
Judah.
Asa [910-869 B.C.] was another king of Judah during the divided monarchy. In the
summary statement of his reign, the Chronicler notes: Asa did what was good and pleasing to the
Lord his God [2 Chronicles 14:1]. Even with such a tradition, Asa did manage to incur the wrath
of Yahweh. Late in Asas regime, King Baasha of Israel marched against Asa of Judah. In order
to protect the silver and gold articles of the sanctuary and the royal palace, Asa placed them in the
safe-keeping of the king of Aram. Asa also convinced Ben-hadad to break his alliance with the
king of Israel. Ben-hadad did both. At that time, a seer, Hanani, came to Asa and chided him for
trusting in the king of Aram rather than Yahweh [2 Chronicles 16:7-9]. The essence of the charge
against Asa was: Asa was not wholeheartedly with Yahweh [2 Chronicles 16:9]. The outcome was
that Judah would be beset with wars [2 Chronicles 16:9].
Jehoshaphat [872-848 B.C] exhibited a similar pattern of good mixed with bad. The
summary statement in 2 Chronicles 20:32-33 is telling: He followed the course of his father, Asa,
and did not deviate from it, doing what was pleasing to the Lord (20:32). However, the shrines
did not cease; the people still did not direct their hearts toward the God of their fathers (20:33).
At one point of his governance, Jehoshaphat entered into a military alliance with the king of
Israel to build ships. Immediately, a prophet, Eliezer, delivered an oracle of judgment to the
effect that Jehoshaphat had acted wickedly [2 Chronicles 20:35]. Interestingly, the term glossed
acted wickedly is the same term Daniel uses in 9:5a.
Another king of Judah, Joash [835-796 B.C.] displayed the same pattern of good and evil.
The summary statement says: All the days of the priest Jehoida, Joash did what was pleasing to
the Lord [2 Chronicles 24:2]. As the reader might imagine, when the priest, Jehoida, was gone,
the morality of the monarchy deteriorated. The Chronicler tells us that after the death of Jehoida,
Joash and his leaders abandoned Yahweh and turned to serve idols [2 Chronicles 24:17-18]. The
Chronicler tells us that Yahweh sent prophets to them to admonish them [2 Chronicles 24:19], but
none of them paid the prophets any mind [24:19].
King Uzziah [790-739 B.C] reigned over Judah, also with mixed results. The summary
statement affirms that Uzziah did what was pleasing to the Lord [2 Chronicles 26:4]. Fair
enough; but the pattern noted in previous administrations emerges once more. The Chronicler
picks up the narrative depicting the degeneration of Uzziah: When he was strong, he became
arrogant to the point of acting corruptly; that is, he acted treacherously toward Yahweh by
entering the Temple of the Lord to offer incense on the incense altar [2 Chronicles 26:16]. Only
Aaronite priests, who were consecrated for this task, were permitted to offer incense on the
incense altar. The Chronicler then tells us that Uzziah was confronted by some priests, not
prophets in this case [2 Chronicles 26:17-18]. Uzziah became angry with the priests and was
stricken with leprosy for his trouble [26:19-21].
Hezekiah [728-697 B.C.] is portrayed by the Chronicler as one of the eminent kings of
Judah. The summary statement at the beginning of the Hezekiah narrative is familiar: He did
what was pleasing to the Lord [2 Chronicles 29:2]. To give Hezekiah his due, the Chronicler
35
narrates the exceptional works of Hezekiah relative to the house of Yahweh in Jerusalem [2
Chronicles 29-30]; he also smashed the idolatrous shrines throughout the land [2 Chronicles 31:1]
and refocused attention on worship [2 Chronicles 32].
At the same time, in the wake of the healing of his illness [2 Chronicles 32:24], Hezekiah
grew arrogant and so wrath was decreed for him and for Judah and Jerusalem [2 Chronicles
32:25]. The sequel to this decree is found in Isaiah 38-39, especially chapter 39. In Isaiah 39,
after the healing, Hezekiah is approached by Merodach-baladan, the king of Babylon. Isaiah 39
displays Hezekiahs pride over the wealth of Judah and his apparent willingness to forge an
alliance with Babylon. Accordingly, the prophet Isaiah steps in and informs Hezekiah that Judah
will indeed find itself allied with Babylon, in the Exile [Isaiah 38:5-7]. Hezekiahs response to
this prophecy is dumbfounding: Good is the word of the Lord, which you have spoken, for, there
will be peace and stability in my days.
Manasseh [697-642 B.C.] is presented as a king who blunders badly and then rights
himself [2 Chronicles 33]. He rebuilt the idolatrous shrines that Hezekiah had demolished [2
Chronicles 33:2-5]; he engaged in human sacrifice of his sons [2 Chronicles 33:6], and seems to
have practiced divination [2 Chronicles 33:6]. Yahweh speaks to Manasseh through His servants,
the prophets, but neither Manasseh nor the people listened [2 Chronicles 33:10-11; 2 Kings
21:10]. Accordingly, Manasseh is carried off, in fetters, to Babylon [2 Chronicles 33:11]. Seeing
error of his ways, Manasseh humbled himself and entreated the favor of Yahweh [2 Chronicles
33:12], which Yahweh answered [2 Chronicles 33:13]. The upshot is that Manasseh withdrew
much of what he had done earlier in his reign [2 Chronicles 33:14-17].
Josiah [640-609 B.C.], like Hezekiah before him, was one of Judahs finest kings, but one
who had his moment of transgression. For the most part, the reign of Josiah was exemplary, the
Chronicler noting that Josiah did what was pleasing to the Lord, following the ways of his father,
David, without deviating to the right or the left [2 Chronicles 34:2]. He purged the land of its
idolatrous shrines [2 Chronicles 34:3-7]; he repaired the House of Yahweh [2 Chronicles 34:813]; he leads the nation in covenant renewal [2 Chronicles 34:29-32].
With all of this, there emerges a moment of transgression, even for Josiah. The king of
Egypt, King Necho, was intending to wage war with Babylon, and evidently sought passage
through Judah for his army. Indeed, Necho has been informed that his intentions are the will of
God [2 Chronicles 35:21-22]. Josiah ignores this and is eventually killed in the battle [2
Chronicles 35:23-24].
Finally, Jehoiakim [608-597 B.C.] is the king under whom Daniel suffers deportation.
The summary statement is ominous: he did what was displeasing to the Lord his God [2
Chronicles 36:5]. As we know, under the governance of Jehoiakim, Judah is led into exile.
We now turn to some of the more important kings of Israel: Jeroboam I, Ahab, Jehu, and
Jeroboam II.
Jeroboam I [930-910 B.C.] is noteworthy for establishing the worship of golden calves in
Israel at the outset of his administration [1 Kings 12:25-29], and he also appointed priests from
outside the ranks of the Levites [1 Kings 12:31]. The net effect is that this proved to be a cause
of guilt [1 Kings 12:30]. This situation generates two prophetic utterances against these practices
of Jeroboam I. The first is delivered by a man of God against the calf worship Jeroboam had
initiated [1 Kings 13:1-34]. Jeroboam is unmoved by the events surrounding this prophecy and
continues his evil ways [1 Kings 13:33]. The second prophecy is delivered by the prophet Ahijah
36
[1 Kings 14:6-18]. The gist of the prophecy is an oracle of judgment against the house of
Jeroboam I.
Ahab [874-853] is also conspicuous for the spiritual decadence of his regime. The
summary statement in 1 Kings is telling: Ahab did what was displeasing to Yahweh, more than all
who preceded him [1 Kings 16:29]. The depravity pursued by Ahab concentrated on idolatry,
serving Baal and worshiping him [1 Kings 16:31]. This Baal worship leads to confrontations of
Ahab by the prophet Elijah [1 Kings 17:1-24; 18:15-19, 20-46; 21:17-29]. Owing to this last
prophetic encounter with Elijah, Ahab does humble himself before Yahweh [1 Kings 21:27-29]
and Yahweh relents, somewhat. That is, Yahweh postpones the disaster upon Israel until the reign
of his son, Ahaziah [1 Kings 21:29].
Jehu [841-814] ruled Israel with mixed results. On the one hand, the summary statement
of his regime reads: Because you have acted well and done what was pleasing to Me [Yahweh],
having carried out all that I desired on the house of Ahab, four generations of your descendants
shall occupy the throne of Israel [2 Kings 10:30]. At the same time, it is written of Jehu that he
was not careful to follow Torah with all his heart, failing to turn from the sins of Jeroboam.
Finally, Jeroboam II [793-53] ruled Israel for over forty years, four decades of doing
what was displeasing to the Lord [2 Kings 14:24], refusing to depart from all the sins of
Jeroboam I. At the same time, there does seem to be a bright spot in this regime for Israel;
Jeroboam II restored the territory of Israel according to a promise made by Yahweh [2 Kings
14:25].
So, what does all of this demonstrate? Daniel has confessed that Yahwehs servants, the
prophets, had spoken, repeatedly as it turns out, to the kings of Judah and Israel. The laundry list
of sins makes most contemporary governments look monastic by comparison; they [1] abandoned
Torah, [2] practiced idolatry, [3] engaged in male prostitution, [4] were not wholehearted in
following Yahweh, [5] were arrogant, [6] were corrupt, [7] practiced divination, [8] engaged in
human sacrifice, and [9] worshiped Baal [and we think weve got it bad!]. Against these sins,
these wrongs, these guilt-incurring deeds, these rebellious acts, the prophets confronted, exposed,
and railed in no uncertain terms to no avail whatsoever. In Dan 9:6, Daniel knows this, admits
this, and confesses this to Yahweh.
Now, not only did Yahweh seek to reach out to the highest levels of government, He also
nudged some of those in bureaucracy: the leaders, to which we now turn.
Leaders [] is from a semantic field of terms for leadership. 152 The noun appears
about 420 times in the Hebrew Bible; fortunately, the term is used [1] in foreign lands, which we
shall ignore, and [2] within Israel. Now, within Israel, has the following ranges of meaning:
[1] a person of note, a head, one who is first in a series, [2] denoting individual kings, [3] more
specifically: (a) a military leader, (b) administrators, (c) civil overseer, chief administrator of
royal goods or of the royal estate, (d) commandant of a city, (e) a quartermaster, (f) leaders within
the religious cult, (g) within family units, head of the family.153 BDB identifies the as
officials as a class under the king.154 Similarly, Baker and Nel identify the as the advisers
of the king, namely, city officials, military officials, and royal officials and functionaries in
152 See Leadership in NIDOTTE.

153 KB2, 1351-52.
154 BDB, 978; see 2 Chronicles 8:10; 12:6; 17:7; 21:4 for examples.
37
general.155 Indeed, is used in the sense of high-level Babylonian bureaucrats in Dan 1:711, 18. We may conclude that the /leader would have been a close administrative associate
of the king, leaders who were exposed also to prophetic ministries [Isaiah 1:23; 3:14; 49:7;
Jeremiah 1:18; 2:26; 44:21].
Fathers [] is written as a plural noun and is from a semantic field of terms for
family, relative, citizen.156 The noun has the following ranges of meaning: [1] a human father, [2]
a progenitor/ancestor of a tribe, [3] progenitor, first of a class or profession, [4] fatherly protector
of orphans, [5] honorary title, [6] used of God.157
According to Deuteronomy, the fathers [] were the original recipients of the
covenant promises regarding the Promised Land [Deut 1:18; 4:31]; the father was responsible for
the moral upbringing of children [Deut 21:18-19; Prov 4:1]; and, the prophets spoke to the sins of
the fathers [Isa 65:7; Jer 2:5; 3:25; 6:21; Zech 1:4]. The net effect is that the fathers would have
been, from Daniels point of view, the generations before the exile. 158
All the people of the nation [ ] is the final strata of society for
whom Daniel confesses. Obviously, this stratum is the most comprehensive of the four, denoting
the mass of ordinary members of the people.159 It is noteworthy that Daniel confesses the
societal responsibility for the nation of Israel in exile; unlike many modern commentators, the
ruling elite are not solely or uniquely responsible for the moral state of affairs in the land, or for
the steps Yahweh may take to punish moral infidelity; we the people are also intimately involved
in the moral state of affairs in a nation.
Summary of sentences
Dan 9:5-6 is a confession of national sin, a confession of covenant betrayal. Four terms for sin
dominate Dan 9:5; communal culpability for these sins is also confessed. Then, in Dan 9:6,
Daniel confesses what he sees as the basic cause: disobedience to the prophetic voices of the
covenant with Yahweh.
The sin of the people is laid out in stark terms: sin means violation of the norms of the
covenant with Yahweh; sin means covenant betrayal; sin means fracturing the relationship with
Yahweh that is the covenant; doing wrong means conscious divergence from the path stipulated in
the covenant; become guilty means the moral standing of the covenant community before
Yahweh; become guilty means proven to be guilty before God; and rebel means an intentional
revolt against Yahwehs covenant program. All told, the sin of the people is covenant betrayal.
The cause of the covenant betrayal is turning, where turning is an apostasy term. The net
effect is that the reason behind the covenant betrayal is apostasy, taking the form of forgetting
what Yahweh has directed, doing evil in the sight of Yahweh, turning from the way and the
statutes and turning to serving other gods; all of this amounts to apostasy as the source of
covenant betrayal.
155 David Baker and Philip Nel, , in NIDOTTE [H8606].

156 See Family, relative, citizen in NIDOTTE.
157 KB1, 1-2.
158 Goldingay, 246.
159 Ibid.
38
Furthermore, the cause of the apostasy is traced to disobedience in Dan 9:6. Daniel
confesses that virtually every strata of the covenant community, from the most elite to the most
pedestrian, have not obeyed. The covenant community was not sufficiently attentive to the voices
of the prophets, was not determined to understand what the prophets were saying to them, was
not adequately discerning of what was preached to them, and ultimately failed to apply the
messages of the prophets to their circumstances as members of the covenant community.
Finally, Daniels confession underlines the fact that none in the covenant community can
evade responsibility for the divine punishment that is the exile. Dan 9:6 makes the culpability of
the entire societal structure crystal clear.
Confession of shame [9:7-8]

9:7a With You, Lord deliverance,

9:7a but with us public shame,

9:7a as to this day;

9:7b with the men of Judah,

9:7b and with those who dwell in Jerusalem,
9:7b and with all Israel,

9:7b the near and the far,
9:7b in all the countries,

9:7b where You have banished them,
9:7b because of their disloyalty,

9:7b with which they have been untrue to
You.
9:8a Yahweh,

9:8a with us public shame,
9:8a with our kings our leaders and
our fathers;

9:8b for we have sinned against You.
Syntactical outline
To begin with, lets set out the confession of shame with respect to punctuation:
9:7a
9:7a
9:7a
9:7b
9:7b
9:7b
9:7b
9:7b
9:7b
9:7b
9:7b
9:8a
9:8a
With You, Lord deliverance [zaqef]

but with us public shame [tipha]
as to this day [atnach]
with the men of Judah [pashta]
and with those who dwell in Jerusalem [zaqef]
and with all Israel [gereshayim]
the near and the far [rebia]
in all the countries [pashta]
where You have banished them [zaqef]
because of their disloyalty [tipha]
with which they have been untrue to You [silluq]
Yahweh [rebia]
with us public shame [zaqef]
39
9:8a with our kings our leaders and our fathers [atnach]
9:8b for we have sinned against You [silluq]
Before we delve into the syntactical outline, note the two key repetitions in the
confession of shame. To begin with, the very first words in the confession with You []
are the very same words with which the confession closes against You []. Thus, Yahweh
frames the confession, opening it and closing it. This, it would seem, helps us to appreciate what
was uppermost on Daniels mind as he prayed: Yahweh. Moreover, Daniel repeats himself with
what must be seen as the key phrase, at the beginning and the end, of the confession with us
public shame [ ]. Now, lets turn to the syntactical outline.
I
(Main clause: Yahweh) (9:7a) With You, Lord deliverance,

(Main clause/contrast: us) (9:7a) but with us public shame,
(Temporal marker) (9:7a) as to this day;
(Relational marker) (9:7b) with the men of Judah,
(Relational marker) (9:7b)
and with those who dwell in Jerusalem,
(Relational marker) (9:7b)
and with all Israel,
(Clarification) (9:7b) the near and the far,
(Locational marker) (9:7b) in all the countries,
(Clarification) (9:7b)
where You have banished them,
(Causal marker) (9:7b) because of their disloyalty,
(Clarification) (9:7b) with which they have been untrue to You.
II
(Main clause: Yahweh) (9:8a) Yahweh,

(Main clause: us) (9:8a) with us public shame,
(Relational marker) (9:8a)
with our kings our leaders and our fathers;
(Causal marker) (9:8b) for we have sinned against You.
The syntactical outline shows parallel structure in the two units of the confession:
Yahweh/us in 9:7 a-a and Yahweh/us in 9:8 a-a. This Yahweh/us parallelism segues
into the theme of the confession, repeated word-for-word in both verses: with us public
shame [ ]. What is more, two causal statements are repeated in each
verse, statements that are more or less parallel: because of their disloyalty = we have sinned
against You. If anything, the second is a summary of the first.
Theme
The theme of the paragraph is public shame. While more will be said about public
shame later, the reader is alerted to the fact that, for Daniel, there actually was such a thing as
public shame, a characteristic that seems to be in short supply these days.
Genre
The genre of this paragraph is confession pure and simple; Daniel is conceding that
everything he says is true about the covenant community, especially their shame.
Dan 9:7 With You (and no one else), Lord deliverance, but with us (and no one else) public
shame, as to this day; with the men of Judah, and with those who dwell in Jerusalem, and with all
Israel, the near and the far, in all the countries, where You have banished them, because of their
disloyalty, with which they have been untrue to You.
40
The reader will note that Dan 9:7 opens with a reference to Yahweh [
(with You)] and closes with a reference to Yahweh [ (against You]. Indeed, Dan 9:8 also
opens with a reference to Yahweh, using the divine name [] and closes with a reference
to Yahweh [ (against You)]. What this tells us is that the nuts and bolts of the confession
are acknowledged only within a context of the living God of the covenant. Literally and
structurally, Yahweh frames everything.
The first main clause with You (and no one else) Lord deliverance is a verbless
clause; the subject is (with You,) Lord and the predicate is deliverance.
Dan 9:7 opens with a verbless clause of identification, declaring that there is total
overlap between Lord [] and deliverance [].160 If one were asking
What is the Lord? the answer would come back the deliverer. On this reading, deliverance
becomes the focus of the verbless clause; the topic is Lord []; or to put the same thing
another way, Lord [] is the given in the line; deliverance [] is the key
information.
With You (and no one else) is a prepositional phrase [] that is front-loaded in the sentence. In
this case, we are probably justified in reading some level of emphasis here; the best guess is that
the phrase confirms the personal and exclusive role of Yahweh in the affirmation in the verbless
clause. Hence, we may translate: With You (and no one else). 161
The prepositional phrase [] is a bit difficult to pin down. The phrase uses the preposition
in one of two senses: [1] possessively in the sense of belonging to You,162 or [2] specifying in
the sense of with regard to.163 At the end of the day, this may be a distinction without a
difference, but possession seems the best option.
Deliverance [] does have a definite article that should not be over read; the article
functions to identify the kind of verbless clause we have. Hence, the reader should resist the
temptation to read the deliverance (as opposed to all the pretenders to deliverance in the
world) or readings to that effect. Indeed, the definite article in this case functions as a generic
marker, signifying an abstract term.164 The verbless clause simply accentuates the complete
overlap between the abstract concept, deliverance, and the Lord []. We could just as
easily render the line: With You (and You alone) Lord (the gift of) deliverance. As an aside,
the reader should appreciate what the author was up to by not putting a finite verb in the sentence.
At least, the overlap is visually immediate [assuming one is reading the Hebrew], rendering the
clause more striking and its affirmation more arresting. We have attempted to show the striking
nature of the verbless clause in the translation provided above.
If we read the definite construction [] as drawing attention to an abstract idea, then
we must read /deliverance as an abstract notion, underscoring the concept, the idea of
/deliverance. Interestingly, appears in only two passages in the Hebrew
Bible, here and Isaiah 32:17. In the Isaiah passage, is social in orientation: peace,
quietness, and security.
160 IBHS 8.4.1a-b.
161 Van der Merwe 47.2 b.
162 IBHS 11.2.10d.
163 Ibid.
164 On this use of the definite article, see IBHS 13.5.1g; GKC 126 n.
41
The lexicons attempt to differentiate between and ; the former []

may refer either to [1] righteousness in general (collective idea) or [2] to right order; and the latter
[] may denote either [1] a single act of righteousness or justice or [2] right behavior
(that aims at order).165 But, I am not sure these distinctions are of much help; the meaning of
must be evaluated context by context.
The ranges of meaning for may be broken down into two categories, that referring to
humans and that referring to Yahweh. Beginning with vis--vis humans, we have: [1]
righteousness, moral uprightness, right conduct, godliness, i.e. what is right in Yahwehs eyes; [2]
in reference to an earthly ruler who dispenses justice, especially social justice toward the poor;
[3] personal merit; [4] a legal right, an entitlement, a claim; [5] truthfulness in speech, honesty in
behavior; [6] justness done according to the law; [7] in the plural, good deeds, virtues.
Then, as applied to Yahweh means: [1] divine benevolence, divine justice, of
Yahweh as judge, lawgiver, king, divine retribution; [2] the righteous will of Yahweh; [3] saving
righteousness, vindication, victory, deliverance, often accomplished by Yahweh for His people;
[4] in the plural, of Yahwehs righteous acts, often specifically His saving deeds and victorious
deeds.166
Deliverance [] in Dan 9:7 is disambiguated in Dan 9:16, where has the sense
of saving righteousness, vindication, victory, deliverance. Accordingly, in Dan 9:7,
boils down to [1] an attribute of Yahweh, [2] considered conceptually, and meaning [3]
Yahwehs positive and beneficent intervention,167 in the form of His saving righteousness,
vindication, deliverance.
Finally, Kohler-Baumgartners take on should be mentioned. To make a long story
short, they read against a background of communal loyalty, whether on the part of
Yahweh or the covenant community.168 When applied to Yahweh, in Dan 9:7 would
amount to justness in the sense of Yahwehs loyalty to the covenant community, a loyalty that is
His prerogative.169 In light of what has been pointed out by Daniel in 9:5-6, especially in terms of
covenant betrayal, this nuance Yahwehs covenant loyalty is a very attractive support for the
deliverance nuance noted in the previous paragraph. In sum, as Yahwehs covenant
loyalty buttresses as Yahwehs saving righteousness/deliverance. The sense then
becomes: With You (and no one else) Lord deliverance (reflecting Your covenant loyalty).
But with us (and no one else) public shame [ ] opens with a
disjunctive waw [] prefixed to the prepositional phrase. The disjunctive waw [] indicates a
contrast with the preceding verbless clause.170 The contrast signifies that, from the human side,
the side of the covenant community, there is neither alibi nor exit; all rests with Yahweh (and
none other) who delivers (based on covenant loyalty).
165 CDCH, 375; KB2, 1004.

166 CDCH, 375.
167 B. Johnson, , in TDOT, vol. XII, 253.
168 KB2, 1006.
169 Ibid.
170 For this use of the disjunctive waw [], see IBHS 39.2.3b.
42
But with us (and no one else) [] front loads another prepositional phrase; the semanticsyntactical import of the construction is antithetically parallel to with You [] in the previous
verbless clause: with You but with us. What is more, the import of this phrase parallels the
emphasis in the preceding example [with You (and no one else) ()]; that is, with us (and
no one else).171 Once more, there is total overlap between us and public shame.172 And, just
as deliverance was the key information in the former verbless clause, so public shame is the
stressed information in this verbless clause. Indeed, one may speculate that the antithesis
between deliverance and public shame stands in a relationship of crisis [public shame] and
cure [deliverance].
Public shame [ ] is literally the shame of the face. Dan 9:7-8 are the only
two places where this precise phrase appears in the Hebrew Bible; otherwise the phrase in slightly
different Hebrew form appears in 2 Chronicles 32:21; Ezra 9:7; Psalm 44:16; Jeremiah 7:19.
Shame of the face [ ] is a genitive construction, probably an epexegetical
genitive, which suggests that shame is characteristic of the face;173 the sense is: shamefaced. Indeed, the four texts cited above use in the sense of public shame
or public humiliation. Interestingly, the psalmist mentions that his foes, who have overcome him
for the moment, taunt and revile him so much that he goes about shamefacedly [
]. As Joyce Baldwin puts it, They have been humiliated for all the wrong they have
done.174
Shame [] may be used in the OT in two ways: [1] a subjective sense: feelings of shame,
and [2] an objective sense: shamefulness, deeds done that are shameful. 175 The Hebrew Bible has
some enlightening synonyms that elaborate on /shame.
The term that is most often used in tandem with /shame is 176, a noun that
means insult, reproach, disgrace,177 indeed a sense of disgrace that attends public
humiliation.178 S. Wagner goes a bit further, unpacking the basic idea of thus: the
meaning of klm appears to stay within the realm of disaster and disgrace, both active and
passive. The root conveys the notion of disintegration.179 Jeremiah uses and
[shame] together in a context similar to that of Dan 9:5-8: the sin of the covenant community,
including the fathers, against Yahwehs covenant.
Another noun used with /shame is .180 Overall, the noun means [1] reviling,
taunting, or [2] disgrace, shame.181 John Hartley notes that means scorn, insult,
slander, contempt.182 In terms of Dan 9:7, the covenant community must have suffered public
taunting and insult over the apparent failure of their God to protect them from the exile; Daniel is
silent as to whether there were those within the covenant community that believed the same thing.
171 Van der Merwe 47.2 b.
172 IBHS 8.4.1a-b.
173 Ibid., 9.5.3c.
174 Baldwin, 166.
175 KB1, 165.
176 See Psalm 35:26; 44:15; 69:19; 109:29; Isaiah 30:13; 61:7; Jeremiah 3:25.
177 CDCH, 178.
178 John Oswalt, , in TWOT [987].
179 S. Wagner, , in TDOT, vol. VII, 186.
180 See Psalm 69:19; Isaiah 30:5; 54:4.
181 KB1, 356.
182 John Hartley, , in NIDOTTE [H3070].
43
Summary. The two main clauses dominate the confession of shame in Dan 9:7. Structurally and
thematically, the clauses are antithetical; Daniel places Yahweh on one side of a divide and the
covenant community on the other. With Yahweh, and Yahweh alone, is covenant loyalty and,
therefore, the hope of deliverance; from the side of the covenant community, and from them
alone, is public shame. Grace and loyalty, mercy and constancy versus shamefacedness and
reproach, contumely and reviling; all of this is honestly and openly confessed. There are no
evasions, no alibis, no extenuating circumstances, no hedging nor hiding behind fleshliness; no,
none of that, just sheer and simple confession of Yahwehs irreproachable holiness and loyalty
and the human shame.
As it is to this day [ (preposition, definite article, noun, ms, sg)] is a
prepositional phrase, obviously with temporal implications. Indeed, the preposition, in this
case, may signal an exact point in time:183 the sense is now, today, this very day and time.184
The reader will observe that the passage of time has not dimmed Daniels sense of shame and
guilt for himself and his fellow covenanters; rather, the curses and sworn judgments written long
ago in the law of Moses and consistently disobeyed over time still sting Daniels conscience.
Finally, at the time of this prayer [539 BC (see Dan 9:1)], it had been about 65 years since
Daniels exile from Jerusalem; time had not mellowed that wound one little bit.
Where You have banished them [ (Hiphil, perfect, 2nd, ms, 3rd, ms, pl, suffix)
] is a relative clause that clarifies, if not indicts, the people in the preceding lines: the
men of Judah those who dwell in Jerusalem, and with all Israel, the near and the far. The
reader will note that both Israel and Judah, the north and the south, are drawn into this web of
banishment; the chosen people of the covenant community are simply banished.
Banish [] is one of six terms used in reference to the exile. 185 Taken together,
these six terms unpack [1] the reasons for the exile, [2] the circumstances associated with the
exile, [3] restoration from the exile, and [4] the fact of sin after the exile.
[1] The reasons for banishment in exile are many and varied. In the book of the 8 th century
prophet Amos, four general reasons for the exile of Israel are lifted out. First, there is the matter
of idolatry [Amos 5:4-6]; second, there is the matter of injustice, a key theme in the book of
Amos [Amos 5:7-12; 6:12-14]; third, the topic of pseudo-piety, the kind of religion that tacitly
supports injustice, is driven home as a reason for the exile [Amos 5:21-25]; finally, fourth, there
is the issue of the prideful and self-indulgent leadership of the nation [Amos 6:1-7].
Israel is also the target of the 8th century prophet Hosea. According to Hosea, the exile is
brought on by idolatry, or spiritual prostitution [Hosea 3:1-5; 13:1-3]. Second, there is the issue
of degeneracy of the nation as a whole [Hosea 4:1-3 (widespread instances of lying, murder, theft,
and idolatry)]. Subsequently, the criminal degeneracy in the nation is again brought up [Hosea
7:1-2 (widespread deceit and theft)]. Later, Hosea will take to task both the religious and the
political leaders of the people for allowing this state of affairs to occur [Hosea 5:1-7]. Moreover,
Hosea hones in on the widespread corruption in domestic political governance [Hosea 7:3-7] and
in international political endeavors [Hosea 7:8-12]. Third, there is the debasement of religious
183 On this use of , see IBHS 11.2.9e; Van der Merwe 39.10.3; and Williams 262.
184 KB1, 401.
185 and derivatives are used in the sense of to remove; and derivatives point to
taking captive; has no derivatives and is used in 9:7e in the sense of to banish; is
used in the sense of to drive; in the Hiphil communicates to bring; and implies to
pursue.
44
leadership in the country [Hosea 4:4-10]. Fourth, as we have seen in Amos, religious worship is
hypocritical [Hosea 4:11-14; 9:1-4 (you have prostituted yourselves)].
8th century B. C. Judah also had ample warning regarding the reasons behind the exile;
pride of place among the 8th century prophets to Judah is Isaiah. Isaiah initially points to the
extensive moral depravity that characterizes Judahs national profile [Isaiah 1:2-9].
Subsequently, Isaiah teases out the unchecked moral degeneracy of the society [Isaiah 3:1-4:1
(oppression, 3:5; partiality in justice, 3:9; robbing the poor, 3:14; pride and arrogance, 3:16);
5:8-23 (greed for ever more acquisitions, 5:8-10; self-indulgence, 5:11-12; unbridled self-conceit,
5:21; avarice, 5:22-23)]. Second, Isaiah lifts out the idolatry that marks religious worship [Isaiah
1:10-20]. As with the prophet Amos, the worship services are elaborate, but only secure
Yahwehs loathing [Isaiah 1:14]. Third, Isaiah also singles out the social injustice that is
pervasive [Isaiah 1:21-26], including corrupt leaders [Isaiah 1:23 (rogues who are cronies of
thieves, greedy for bribes)].
Among the 7th century prophets, Jeremiah casts a large shadow. Jeremiah wastes little
time in pinpointing one of the major reasons for the exile of Judah; for, pride of place goes to the
apostasy of Judah [Jeremiah 2:1-3:5]. Indeed, Jeremiah affirms that Judah abandoned Yahweh
and chased after delusions [Jeremiah 2:5]. Second, the religious leadership leads the apostasy by
ignoring Torah [Jeremiah 2:8], leaders including the shepherds and the prophets [Jeremiah 2:8].
The net effect is that the people of Yahweh have forsaken Him [Jeremiah 2:13, 17, 19] and turned
to the spiritual prostitution of idolatry [Jeremiah 2:20-24, 27-29; 3:1-5]. Third, the moral and
ethical depravity of the nation is pervasive [Jeremiah 5:1-31]. The social degeneracy of Judah
includes injustice [Jeremiah 5:1], a complete absence of integrity among the populace [Jeremiah
5:1, 3], lying [Jeremiah 5:2], sexual sins [Jeremiah 5:8], betrayal of Yahweh [Jeremiah 5:11],
messages from prophets geared to mollify the sins of the people [Jeremiah 5:12-13], vicious and
predatory business practices among the wealthier classes [Jeremiah 5:26-28], and a thorough lack
of care for those who are needy and poor [Jeremiah 5:28]. Fourth, Jeremiah clearly tells Judah
that they have broken the covenant [Jeremiah 11:1-10].
[2] The circumstances associated with banishment in exile are stark. Jeremiah predicts
that the priest, Pashhur, will endure terror and the death of his friends and associates [Jeremiah
20:4]. Moreover, Jeremiah continues by promising what else the priest will suffer by observing
that all of Judah will either be exiled or fall victim to mass extermination [Jeremiah 20:4].
Moreover, there will be the complete confiscation of wealth [Jeremiah 20:5]. Ultimately, this
priest will die in a foreign country [Jeremiah 20:6].
2 Kings 25:15-16 recounts the circumstances associated with the exile during the reign of
Jehoiachin [598-597 B.C.] in Judah and Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon exiled all of
Jerusalem [2 Kings 25:14], plundered the treasures of the royal palace and the temple [2 Kings
25:13], deported all of the military men [2 Kings 25:14] and even expatriated the craftsmen in
Jerusalem [2 Kings 25:14] to Babylon.
Finally, Deuteronomy depicts the humiliation associated with the exile of Israel. In
Deuteronomy 28:36-37, Moses predicts that the exile will be the occasion of Israels becoming a
horror, a proverb, and an object of taunt [Deuteronomy 28:37]. In the first case, the object of
horror, the implication is that the plight of these exiles strikes onlookers with revulsion. The
implication of Israel becoming a proverb probably points to them becoming an object of mockery
and jest.186 The notion of disgrace is further teased out with the promise that in exile Israel will
be an object of taunt. The noun used here is often used in tandem with proverb [Deuteronomy
186 For this sense of the noun see KB1, 648.
45
28:37; 1 Kings 9:7; 2 Chronicles 7:20; Jeremiah 24:9] to signal one who is an object of
derision.187 Overall, these terms merge to signal loathing, degradation, humiliation, ignominy and
public disgrace.
[3] With all of this, the prophets are equally certain that somehow by Gods grace the people of
God will be restored from banishment. Amos, who was scathing of Israels religious hypocrisy
and injustice, was clear that Israel would be restored from exile. Indeed, Amos closes his
prophetic book with the Divine promise that Yahweh would restore His people Israel back to
their cities and their land [Amos 9:14].
Isaiah was equally certain that Israel would be restored from exile. Isaiah affirms that
Yahweh will assemble the banished of Israel [Isaiah 11:2]. Isaiah subsequently tells us, through a
Divine speech, that using Cyrus to effect the release of His people is the right thing to do [Isaiah
45:13].
Jeremiah is equally positive that Israel will be restored from exile [Jeremiah 27:20-21].
At the same time, Jeremiah shows us that Yahwehs actions in effecting the restoration display a
variety of motives.
Jeremiah informs us that the restoration of Israel from the exile was an act of Divine
grace [Jeremiah 29:10-14]. Yahweh pledges: I will keep My promise to bring you back to this
place [Jeremiah 29:10]. The Lord then elaborates on the details of the promise in terms of the
grace involved: purposes which bring peace, a hopeful future [Jeremiah 29:11]. The gist of the
grace is Yahwehs intention to restore peace with Him, leading to a hopeful future. J. Gordon
McConville describes the grace thus188:
The Exile has a limit; God will finally save his people. And in
the meantime he has not forgotten them. Jeremiah's letter to the
exiles (Jer 29:4-28) shows that his purposes for them continue
right in and through their banishment to a foreign land (vv. 1014).
Jeremiah also tells us that the restoration of Israel from exile looks forward to the Messianic era
[Jeremiah 30:8-11]. Yahweh promises that He will liberate His people [Jeremiah 30:8], so that,
they shall serve the Lord their God and David their king, whom Yahweh shall raise up for them
[Jeremiah 30:9]. The restoration from exile is prompted by Yahwehs intention to usher in the
Messianic era. This promise of a Messianic occupant of the Davidic throne is in marked contrast
to one of Jeremiahs previous statements. That is, Jeremiah promises that no human king will
ever again occupy the throne of David [Jeremiah 22:30]. The reasons that have led to the exile
are well beyond the powers of any human politician to remedy. True restoration demands the
Messiah.
Jeremiah further tells us that the restoration from exile is inspired by Yahwehs plan to
unveil the New Covenant [Jeremiah 31:23-34; 32:36-41]. After reaffirming His promise to
restore the fortunes of the houses of Israel and Judah [Jeremiah 31:23-30], Yahweh discloses a
further dimension of the restoration [Jeremiah 31:31-34]. That is, Yahweh promises to make a
new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah [Jeremiah 31:31]. This new
covenant will not be like the previous covenant [Jeremiah 31:32]. Rather, the substance of the
187 KB2, 1606.
188 J. Gordon McConville, The Theology of Jeremiah, in NIDOTTE.
46
new covenant is thus: I will place My Law in their very depths, that is, upon their hearts, I will
write it [Jeremiah 31:33b]; as a result, Yahweh says, I will be their God and they will be My
people [Jeremiah 31:33c]. Furthermore, the basis of this new covenant is the grace of
forgiveness: I will forgive their iniquities and their sins I shall no longer remember [Jeremiah
31:34b]. The net effect is that the various reasons for the exile, cited above, are overcome in the
restoration period through the aegis of the New Covenant. Of course, in the Gospels, the New
Covenant will become the New Covenant in My blood, when the Messiah is crucified on the
Cross to banish the presence and the power of sin. As we noted above, the reasons for the
discipline that was the exile will only be overcome through the Messiah.
[4] The power of sin rears its head after the covenant people return from the banishment
of exile. The exile also demonstrated the power of sin over those who returned from Exile [Ezra
9:3-15; 10:5-11]. Even after the gracious restoration with its attendant promises for a hopeful
future, the exiles who returned lapsed back into idolatry and immorality, taking their moral cues
from the surrounding cultures [Ezra 9:1]. Furthermore, the returning exiles inter-married with the
heathen population around them [Ezra 9:2]. The net effect is that, though the exiles returned to
the land, they also returned to their sinful ways. Once more, the necessity for the coming of the
Messiah and the New Covenant in His blood is all the more evident.
This overview of the reasons for the exile, the circumstances of life in the exile, the
restoration from the exile, and the lapse into sin after the exile brings us back to Daniel 9:7b,
which is part of Daniels synopsis of the reasons for the exile.
Because of their disloyalty [] is a prepositional phrase, assigning a reason for
the banishment mentioned in the previous line. The preposition, , indicates that the banishment
is on account of covenant betrayal.189
Disloyalty [] is a noun that appears 30 times in the Hebrew Bible, from a semantic field of
terms for faithless.190 To complicate matters a bit more, as a noun is also used in tandem
with as a verb: noun verb in Daniel 9:7, albeit with the relative particle
sandwiched between the noun verb combination. The fact is that the clause in Dan 9:7
is virtually identical to a clause in Leviticus 26:40. We may display them thus:
Lev 26:40 - prep phrasefinite verb relative prep phrase
Dan 9:7- prep phrasefinite verb relative prep phrase
The Leviticus passage uses the clause [ ] to modify
a nominal construction, [iniquity of their fathers]; the modification is
probably instrumental : iniquity of their fathers by means of their disloyalty with which they
have been untrue to Me. The import of this line is that their disloyalty to Me with which they
have been untrue to Me [ ] provides the motive behind the
iniquities of their fathers; in other words, describes the
spiritual state of mind for those who committed iniquities.
What the Leviticus and Daniel passages have in common is the spirit of disloyalty that
animates both actors in each passage so as to court an iniquitous life. With Daniels knowledge of
the Hebrew Bible, it may be the case that the Leviticus passage was on his mind at the time. Be
189 For this use of the preposition, , see IBHS 11.2.5e; Williams 247; Gibson 118 R2;
BDB, 90.
190 See Faithless in NIDOTTE.
47
that as it may, the instrumentality of disloyalty to Yahweh [

] that prompts iniquity is key. In the case of Dan 9:7, disloyalty to Yahweh
[ ], as part of the covenant communitys spiritual attitude, is
instrumental in the banishment of the covenant community.
Disloyalty [] is associated with other formidable spiritual forces in the OT. For
example, disloyalty/infidelity [] is associated with hostility to Yahweh [Leviticus 26:40],
with refusing to treat Yahweh as holy [; Deuteronomy 32:15]; with turning [] from
following [] Yahweh [Joshua 22:16], with acting corruptly [; 2 Chronicles
26:16], with allowing depravity to spread [; 2 Chronicles 28:16], with following the
abominations [] of the nations [2 Chronicles 36:14], and acting with
disloyalty/infidelity is the means by which the covenant community reviles/blasphemes [;
Ezekiel 20:27] Yahweh. I am not suggesting that every one of these associations is connected
with Dan 9:7; what I am saying is that, from the perspective of the Hebrew Bible,
disloyalty/infidelity [] is a very serious matter.191 We are in the world of spiritual
treachery here.
Summary. Dan 9:7 is painful to read; it must have been excruciating to confess. The theme of
verse is public shame; everywhere the prophet looks, whenever he sees or thinks about the
covenant community, all he can envision is public shame.
Fortunately for Daniel, the covenant community is not the only player in the game; where
there is Yahweh, there is hope. Accordingly, using a phrase very striking to the eye and to the ear,
Daniel simply begins: with You (and no one else), Lord (covenant loyalty and therefore the
hope of) deliverance.
We have pointed out that the Hebrew term Daniel uses for deliverance, ,
should not be read in the sense of right or righteousness. As we have pointed out, when used
of Yahweh, is divine benevolence, divine justice, saving righteousness, vindication,
victory, deliverance, often accomplished by Yahweh for His people. In this context, a public
confession of shame, the context most certainly demands, not an appeal to Yahwehs
righteousness, but rather an appeal to His benevolence, saving righteousness, deliverance or the
like. The only hope, the only appeal that Daniel can make is to the gracious covenant loyalty of
Yahweh, a loyalty that Daniel trusts will yield deliverance from the sin, the wrong doing, the state
of merited guilt, and rebellion [Dan 9:5].
The encapsulation of Dan 9:5 is summarized as public shame in Dan 9:7. This would
have been the painful admission for Daniel; he and his fellow covenanters are swathed in the
garments of public shame. For, Yahwehs judgment took the form of the exile; everything that
had propped up the people the temple, the king, the law, the prophets, the wealth, the power,
even the state itself all is destabilized in the exile. The net effect? The people were
shamefaced, probably the victims of insults, of taunting, of reviling; they would have been, as a
community, utterly disgraced.
191 As an aside, since disloyalty/infidelity [] is such a serious matter, the reader should be
careful of reducing the weightiness of disloyalty/infidelity [] by reading or translating with
such flat words as trespass, unfaithful deeds or unfaithfulness. It is not that these are not
serious, but they do not capture the crisis of covenant treachery that disloyalty/infidelity
[]depicts.
48
Indeed, they had been banished []; they had been driven away from Yahweh and
scattered from one another; they had been pushed away and ousted; there were no remaining
options, for, they were on their own; expelled, evicted, exiled.
Finally, the reason behind this comprehensive suspension, for all intents and purposes, of
the covenant relationship is declared in simple and straightforward language: the covenant
community has been disloyal. As we noted above, the covenant is suspended for reasons far
more compelling than unfaithful deeds or trespasses; no, the real reason behind the
suspension goes far deeper: disloyalty.
Disloyalty is an attitude of faithlessness; indeed so intent is Daniel on underling the
gravity of this infidelity that he communicates disloyalty with a cognate accusative [noun
verb] thus intensifying the attitude of fickleness. What is more, as we noted from the
parallel passage in Leviticus 26:40, disloyalty is a motive behind iniquitous behaviors. Thus,
disloyalty is an attitude, an outlook, a posture toward Yahweh and covenant life.
Moreover, disloyalty has some appalling associates in the Hebrew Bible; connections that
help underline the dangerousness of covenant betrayal: disloyalty is an attitude that permits
hostility to Yahweh [Leviticus 26:40], that de facto denies Yahwehs holiness [Deuteronomy
32:15], that allows depravity to spread [2 Chronicles 28:16], that is infatuated with the
abominations of heathen nations [2 Chronicles 36:14], and is the means by which one blasphemes
Yahweh [Ezekiel 20:27]. Now, all of these associations are illustrative of the seriousness of
disloyalty; for as noted above, disloyalty is more than a matter of bad choices or spiritually
hostile environmental factors. Rather, disloyalty goes to the heart of the covenant relationship,
severing, if only for a moment, the covenant bond with Yahweh. If the covenant community is
being held up to public shame, the fault lies with the covenant community.
Dan 9:8 Yahweh, with us (and no one else) public shame, with our kings, our leaders, and
our fathers; for we have sinned against You.
It is noteworthy that the opening line in Dan 9:8 is repeated almost verbatim from Daniel
9:7: with us public shame. If nothing else, this repetition helps communicate the essential
theme in Dan 9:7-8, which is public shame on the part of the covenant community. It is almost
as if Daniel is intent on getting this point across to Yahweh: we really deserve what You have
done!
What is more, Daniel also repeats a causal clause; that is, here in Dan 9:8 we have: for
we have sinned against You. While, earlier in Dan 9:7, Daniel admitted: because of their
disloyalty with which they have been untrue to You. The upshot is that these two causal clauses
are part and parcel of the same package: disloyalty is sin; sin is disloyalty.
We have sinned [] is mentioned earlier in Dan 9:5 [see the notes on the verb
there]. All that needs to be mentioned at this point is that Daniel repeats this part of the
confession /we have sinned four times [Dan 9:5, 8, 11, 16]. Again, the
repetition is for emphasis and for truthfulness.
Confession that Yahweh is compassionate, the people rebellious [Dan 9:9-11]

9:9a With the Lord our God

9:9a compassionate forgiveness;
49

9:9b but we have risen in revolt against Him.

9:10aThat is we have not obeyed

9:10athe voice of Yahweh our God;

9:10b
by behaving by means
of His instructions,

9:10b
which He placed before
us,

9:10b
by means of His
servants the prophets.
9:11aIndeed, all Israel

9:11ahas contravened Your instructions,
9:11a
turning aside,

9:11aso as not to obey Your voice;

9:11bthus, the sworn curse
has come upon us,

9:11b
which was written in
the Torah of Moses

9:11bthe servant of God,

9:11bfor we have sinned against Him.
Syntactical outline
Lets give some attention to the way the Masoretes punctuated this passage:
9:9a With the Lord our God [zaqef]
9:9a compassionate forgiveness; [atnach]
9:9b but we have risen in revolt against Him [silluq]
9:10aThat is we have not obeyed [zaqef]
9:10athe voice of Yahweh our God; [atnach]
9:10b
by behaving by means of His instructions [pashta]
9:10b
which He placed before us [zaqef]
9:10b
by means of His servants the prophets [silluq]
9:11aIndeed, all Israel [rebia]
9:11ahas contravened Your instructions [zaqef]
9:11a
turning aside [zaqef gadol]
9:11aso as not to obey Your voice [atnach]
9:11bthus, the sworn curse has come upon us [rebia]
9:11b
which was written in the Torah of Moses [pashta]
9:11bthe servant of God [zaqef]
9:11bfor we have sinned against Him [silluq]
We may syntactically outline Dan 9:9-11 thus:

I.
The dynamics of disobedience
(Main clause: verbless clause): With the Lord our God compassionate forgiveness [9:9a-]
(Contrast/antithesis): but we have risen in revolt against Him [9:9b]
(Clarification of 9: 9b): That is we have not obeyed the voice of Yahweh our God [9:10a]
50
(Means of not obeying): by behaving by means of His instructions [9:10b]

(Specification of instruction): which He placed before us [9:10b]
(Agency of placing): by means of His servants the prophets [9:10b]
II.
The outcome of disobedience
(Main clause: summary of 9:9-10): Indeed all Israel has contravened Your instruction [9:11a]
(Explication of 9:11a-): turning aside [9:11a]
(Result of turning): so as not to obey Your voice [9:11a]
(Consequence of disobedience): thus, the sworn curse has come upon us [9:11b]
(Specification of curse): which was written in the Torah of Moses the servant of God
[9:11b-]
(Cause of the curse): for we have sinned against Him [9:11b]
The outline shows us that Daniel is holding on to Yahwehs grace to which the covenant
community responds with revolt. This antithesis between the gracious faithfulness of Yahweh
and the open defiance of His chosen people fits in nicely with the confession thus far.
The reader will note the bold words; disobedience is the theme that links the two
sections of Dan 9:9-11. In the first section [Dan 9:9-10], disobedience is clarified by various
clauses pinpointing the means by which the disobedience occurred. In the second section [Dan
9:11], however, disobedience is followed up with the consequence: curse.
Finally, while disobedience dominates the paragraph, it would seem that the paragraph
builds up to the emergence of the curse discussion.
Theme
The basic theme of Dan 9:9-11 is disobedience, viewed from two points of view: [1] the
dynamics of disobedience [Dan 9:9-10] and [2] the outcome of disobedience [Dan 9:11].
Genre
The genre of Dan 9:9-11 continues to be communal confession; Daniel continues to lay
his cards on the table, face-up. In this paragraph also, there are no evasions, no alibis, no
excuses; just simple straightforward confession.
Dan 9:9 With the Lord our God compassionate forgiveness; but, we have risen in revolt
against Him.
Dan 9:9 opens with a verbless clause: With the Lord our God compassionate
forgiveness. We take the function of this verbless clause to be descriptive; the predicate
51
[compassionate forgiveness] describes the subject [With the Lord our God]. 192 We might
reasonably conclude that compassionate forgiveness is the key information in the verbless
clause.
With the Lord our God [ ] may be translated and read in the same
sense as the previous prepositional phrase with in Dan 9:7a [ (With You and
no one else Lord); (but with us and no one else)] and in Dan 9:8a [ (With us
and no one else). Accordingly, the front-loading of [With the Lord
our God] serves to focus on the exclusive role of Yahweh in the matter of compassionate
forgiveness.193 The sense becomes: With the Lord our God (and no other deity).
Compassionate forgiveness [ ] is literally compassion and
forgiveness, which most English versions dutifully render; and rightly so. At the same time, the
sequence of two nouns with a shared meaning may be combined into a single referent:
compassionate forgiveness [hendiadys]. 194 This has the net effect of intensifying and
concentrating compassion/forgiveness into a single concept. This is the only place in the Hebrew
Bible where this precise collocation of nouns is found.
Forgiveness [] is from a semantic field of terms for forgiveness and pardon. 195 The
noun appears only three times in the Hebrew Bible [Nehemiah 9:17; Psalm 130:4; Daniel 9:9].
The noun, forgiveness [], means pardon from God.196 The verbal form of
the root [] appears in Dan 9:19 in the sense of being indulgent toward/forgive. 197
Commenting on the use of the verb [] J.P.J. Olivier affirms that it denotes an act of
pardon by God alone.198 Interestingly, forgiveness [], the noun, appears some 33
times in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Among the more interesting associations with
/forgiveness, pardon are these:
[1] /forgiveness, pardon is part of the divine mind-set that provides atonement:
Damascus Document [4Q266]
2:4

2:2
rebellion
discernment and knowledge serve Him

slowness of anger with Him
and abundance of pardon
to atone for those who repent of
[2] /forgiveness, pardon is tantamount to lovingkindness:

1QHa 4:30
4:30
and abounding in lovingkindness

and the deeds of Your mighty right hand
192 J-M 154 ea.
193 Van der Merwe 47.2.b.
194 IBHS 4.4.1b.
195 See Forgiveness, pardon in NIDOTTE.
196 KB1, 757.
197 Ibid.
198 J.P.J. Olivier, , in NIDOTTE [H6142]. 222222w
52

transgressions of the ancestors
and pardon for the
[3] /forgiveness, pardon is crucial since there is no deliverance without it:

1QHa15:20-21
15:20
[]
15:21 []

]
[
there is no (human) righteousness

capable of delivering from transgression
without pardon
so I rely
on the abundance of Your compassion
and on the greatness of Your lovingkindness
[4] /forgiveness, pardon is absolutely necessary in order to be able to stand in

Gods presence:
1QHa 15:32-33
15:32
all the sons of Your truth

You bring to pardon in Your presence

by purifying them from their transgressions

by the abundance of Your goodness

and by the greatness of Your compassion
Among other things, these references to /forgiveness, pardon in the scrolls
indicate that amounts to Yahwehs willing disposition to pardon those who recognize
the necessity of pardon and earnestly seek it. Indeed, is the divine mind-set that
provides atonement for those whose transgressions separate them from God [4Q266].
Compassionate [] is from a semantic field of terms for compassion. 199 The
noun appears 40 times in the Hebrew Bible. There are six Hebrew terms altogether in the
semantic field of words for compassion [, , , , ,
]. The first of the terms for compassion, , means pity, to look with compassion
upon, to spare.200 The second term, , means to spare or to refrain from. 201 The next
term, , means to regret, be sorry, relent; to be moved to pity. 202 The fourth term, ,
means to have pity on, to be afflicted, distressed, grieved. 203 The fifth term, the one we have in
Dan 9:9, , belongs to the realm of grace and hope, expressing someones willingness to
show favor.204 The final word, , means delight, pleasure.205
What all of this tells us is that, of the options available to Daniel, options that include sparing,
refraining, relenting, pitying, and delighting, Daniel chooses a term that highlights
willing to show favor, a term that, as we shall see, involves the very depths of Yahwehs inner
being.
Regarding this root [], Kohler-Baumgartner point out that when the root is used
199 See Compassion, comfort, consolation in NIDOTTE.
200 CDCH, 110.
201 Mike Butterworth, , in NIDOTTE [H2798].
202 CDCH, 269.
203 G.M. Butterworth, , in NIDOTTE [H6327].
204 Mike Butterworth, , in NIDOTTE [H8163].
205 CDCH, 492.
53
as a verb in the Piel stem, the verb carries the sense of a relationship affecting the object; thus
to greet someone with love, take pity on someone.206 Similarly, the noun [], which
we have in Dan 9:9, means a feeling of love, loving sensation, mercy (originally designating the
seat of this feeling, meaning bowels, inner parts of the body, the inner person). 207
So, what does this mean for the collocation compassionate forgiveness? To begin with,
forgiveness is pardon, pure and simple; a state of mind that is willing to go the second mile in
pardoning those who offend, repeatedly as it turns out, the covenant relationship. Fair enough;
but, compassionate tells us that this willingness to pardon, to be indulgent toward His wayward
children, is a loving sensation that comes from Yahwehs very depths; it is as if the relationship is
something that He simply cannot let go of. Hence, Daniel bases his confession, stakes everything,
on Yahwehs compassionate forgiveness; there is simply nowhere else to turn!
Summary. The sense of the sentence With the Lord, our God (and none other)
compassionate forgiveness is to clear the decks of all conceivable sources of hope for ending
the curse that is the exile; all depends on the grace of God. Daniel uses exceptionally lofty
language to reach out to the God of all grace: compassionate forgiveness. In one sense, there is
the hope of forbearance, the prospect of sympathetic understanding, the likelihood of leniency,
clemency, and pardon. At the same time, Daniel intentionally reaches out to Yahwehs
compassion, indeed the confessor appeals to the very seat of that feeling, extending his
confession, to the extent that human language permits, to the very inner person of Yahweh. Only
if Daniel can penetrate to Yahwehs depths, to the compassionate forgiveness of Yahweh, will
there be any hope for restoring the covenant alliance.
Now, Daniel confesses the flip side of the equation: but, we have risen in revolt against
Him [Dan 9:9b]. There are two ways of reading this sentence: [1] as a contrast with the
preceding208: with the Lord, our God (and none other) compassionate forgiveness or [2] as a
reason for saying209 with the Lord, our God (and none other) compassionate forgiveness. In
the final analysis, either makes perfectly good sense; I prefer contrast since the antithesis between
Yahweh and His people have been center stage in the immediate context [Dan 9:7-8].
We have risen in revolt against Him [ (Qal, perfect, 1st, pl)] is another perfect
aspect verb written in the plural. Again, the plural number enfolds the entire covenant
community into the revolt; and, the perfect aspect verb signals a state of revolt into which the
people have fallen and where they remain at the moment of Daniels confession.210
Revolt [] is from a sematic field of terms for rebellion. 211 In Dan 9:9, we have the
combination: [preposition] + [verb], which is usually translated revolt/rebel against.
All told, the verb [] appears 25 times in the Hebrew Bible; appears only in the Qal
stem in the Hebrew Bible.
206 KB2, 1217.

207 Ibid., 1218.
208 For the conjunction used to signal contrast, see Gibson 142 d; GKC 163.
209 A. Aejmelaeus, Function and Interpretation of in Biblical Hebrew, in The Journal of
Biblical Literature, 105 (1968), 203; see also Van der Merwe 40.9.II.2(ii).
210 On this point, see Gibson 57 d; GKC 106 g; IBHS 30.5.1c.
54
Revolt [] means to rise in revolt, rebel.212 When Yahweh is the direct object of revolt, in
all but two cases the collocation is [preposition] + [verb]. Carpenter and Grisanti
affirm that the collocation in Dan 9:9 must be understood against a background of covenant
treachery.213 Indeed, Schwienhorst notes that denotes the attempt of a subordinate to
escape from a dependent relationship.214 Covenant betrayal is contained within some of the
others uses of + [revolt/rebel against] in the Hebrew Bible.
Numbers 14:19 [ (Qal, ip, 2nd, ms, pl, jussive) ]: do not rebel
against the Lord finds rebelling taking the form of fearing the people in the land of Canaan.
This in spite of the fact that Num 14:19 also points out that protection had been withdrawn
from these Canaanites and the Lord was with Israel. In this case, + [revolt/rebel
against] amounts to failure to take a divine promise at face value; an act tantamount to covenant
betrayal.
Joshua 22:16 [ (Qal, inf, con)]: so as to rebel this
day against Yahweh. In this passage, we have another infinitive clause parallel to this infinitive
clause:
so as to rebel this day against Yahweh
so as to turn this day from following after
Yahweh
It is obvious that rebellion is tantamount to turning from following Yahweh. Among other
things, following Yahweh has covenant fidelity overtones [2 Chronicles 34:31-33]. This means
that rebelling this day takes the form of turning this day which encompasses covenant
betrayal.
Nehemiah 9:26 [ (Qal, waw/cons/ip, 3rd, ms, pl)]: they rebelled
against You. Nehemiah 9:26 contains four waw consecutive imperfect, 3 rd, plural verbs that
more or less interpret each other; to see these four is to watch covenant betrayal in progress:
[1] (Hiph) they behaved obstinately [fact]
[2] (Qal) they rebelled against You [evaluation]
[3] (Hiph) they tossed Your Torah
behind their back [fact]
[4] (Qal) they demonstrated monstrous contempt
[evaluation]
Summary. The sentence sense of Dan 9:9 revolves around the antithesis between what
God is and what His covenant people have become. There is a gulf here, an abyss that cannot be
traversed from the human side; if the chasm is to be bridged, the connection must come from
Gods side.
Compassionate forgiveness can span the breach created by the covenant betrayal of Gods
people; compassionate forgiveness: the hope of mercy, the prospect of sympathetic indulgence,
the likelihood of leniency, clemency, and pardon. In view of that, Daniel intentionally reaches
out to Yahwehs compassion, appealing to the very seat of divine kindheartedness, tendering his
confession, to the extent that human language permits, to the very inner person of Yahweh.
Daniel knows as certainly as he knows anything at all that he and his people are in no position to
212 KB1, 632.
214 L. Schwienhorst, , in TDOT, vol. IX, 5.
55
mend the relationship and their only possible plea is the character of God. 215
Compassionate forgiveness is the hope, the paramount and overriding prospect for a people in
revolt. And their mutiny is far more than cumulative moral missteps; rather, theirs is revolt to the
fullest: covenant betrayal. For, the covenant people have effectively severed the covenant
relationship and fallen into a cursed status [Dan 9:11]. They failed to take covenant promises at
face value [Numbers 14:19]; they turned from following Yahweh and the ways of His covenant
[Joshua 22:16; 2 Chronicles 34:31-33]; they became and pretty much remained obstinate, filled
with monstrous contempt for covenant standards [Nehemiah 9:26]. With all of this and much
more, the prophet throws himself and his people before the compassionate forgiveness of
Yahweh.
Dan 9:10 That is, we have not obeyed the voice of Yahweh our God; by behaving by means of
His instructions, which He placed before us, by means of His servants the prophets.
Syntactically, Dan 9:10 spells out the specifics of the revolt in Dan 9:9b.216 The
sentence sense is: we have risen in revolt against Him [Dan 9:9b], specifically we have not
obeyed.
We have not obeyed [ ] is written in the perfect aspect and in plural number.
Once more, Daniel is encapsulating the entire covenant community into this admission. What is
more, the perfect aspect verb signals the state of disobedience into which the covenant has fallen
and where they remain.217
Obey the voice [ ] is a collocation that appears over 80 times in the Hebrew
Bible, about 57 times referring to obeying Yahweh. In some instances, obey the voice
[ ] is associated with the covenant: that is, obey the voice [ ]
is correlated with the creation of the covenant with Abraham [Genesis 22:18], while obey the
voice [ ] is often cited as a covenant stipulation [2 Kings 18:12; Jeremiah 11:45; 18:10]. At the other end of the spectrum, refusal to obey the voice [ ] is
grounds for suffering the covenant curse [Deuteronomy 28:15, 45, 62; 30:1-2; Daniel 9:11, 14].
In Deuteronomy 9:23, to refuse to obey the voice [ ] is tantamount to
disbelief [ (Hiphil)]. In this case, in the Hiphil means that the covenant
community refused to rely on Yahweh,218 or to trust in Yahweh.219 On the flipside, to obey the
voice [ ] is to put into practice what Yahweh says in His instruction
[Deuteronomy 5:27; Daniel 9:10], which is tantamount to serving [] Him and to clinging
to [] Him [Deuteronomy 13:5].
By behaving by means of His instructions [ (preposition, noun, fm, pl)

(preposition, Qal, infinitive construct)] is an infinitive clause that spells out the means by which
the disobedience in the previous line was carried out. 220 The sense is: we have not obeyed the
voice of Yahweh by means of behaving by means of His instructions. Furthermore as the reader
215 Baldwin, 166.
216 For this use of the disjunctive waw, see Gibson 137; IBHS 39.2.3b.
217 See Gibson 57; GKC 106 g; IBHS 30.5.1.
218 Holladay, 20.
219 KB1, 64.
56
can see, the second prepositional phrase is also instrumental: behaving by means of His
instructions.221
Behaving by means of His instructions [ ] is a collocation comprised
of the noun [instructions/] + the preposition [by means of/] + the verb
[behaving/]. This collocation appears eight times in the Hebrew Bible. 222 The meaning
of the collocation is uniformly: to behave in accord with the instructions (in the Mosaic law).
In the case of Daniels confession, he is admitting that we have not obeyed the voice of Yahweh
by means of behaving in accord with the instructions (in the Mosaic Law). There are two items
of interest here: [1] the insistence on behavior and [2] behavior shaped by instructions.
Behavior [behaving/] matters; it always has. /behaving appears more than
1500 times in the Hebrew Bible; it comes from a semantic field of terms for journey.223
Obviously, is used in Dan 9:10 figuratively, meaning: behave. 224 At the same time, as
BDB points out, may take on a more refined figurative use: of moral and religious life,
particularly walk in () ways (counsels, statutes, etc). In other words, Daniel may have in
mind not merely living or even behavior, but rather moral behavior. The eight uses of the
noun [instructions/] + the preposition [by means of/] + the verb
[behaving/] noted in the previous paragraph support the notion that the behavior in
view is moral behavior.
Instruction [ (tr)] is a noun that is found about 220 times in the Hebrew Bible; it is
from a semantic field of terms for law, command, order, and statute. 225 The origin of the term is
up in the air. Two options are prominent: [1] tr is derived from that means throw,
hurl. The semantic development is from throw to stretch out a finger or hand, to point in a
direction, and finally to show the way;226 and [2] tr derives from an Akkadian root,
trtu, yielding bring, lead, lead away, and then send, transmit (especially the knowledge and
practice of something), instruct.227 Kohler-Baumgartner opt for option [1] as the most
probable.228 However, when all is said and done, the evidence is less than conclusive.
Instruction [ (tr)] has the following ranges of meaning: [1] direction, instruction
(as for example the instruction from the wise or a family member), [2] instruction, decision from
some authority figure (prophet, judicial or priestly figure), [3] an established, particular
instruction (as the rule for the temple-precincts), and [4] instruction (as a synoptic term
representing the embodiment of instruction).229 Peter Enns notes that generally speaking
designates some divine standard of conduct for Gods people. 230 Of the four options
listed above, option [2] best fits: instruction/decision from an authority figure, i.e. prophets
220 For this use of the infinitive clause, see Van der Merwe 20.2(v); Williams 195; IBHS
36.2.3e.
221 For the instrumental use of , see Van der Merwe 39.6.2; IBHS 11.2.5d; BDB, 89.
222 Exodus 16:4; 2 Kings 10:31; 2 Chronicles 6:16; Nehemiah 10:30; Psalm 119:1; Jeremiah
26:4; 44:10; Daniel 9:10.
223 See Journey, going, marching, walking, wandering in NIDOTTE.
224 KB1, 247.
226 F. Garca Lpez and H.-J. Fabry, , in TDOT, vol. XV, 611.
227 Ibid.
228 KB2, 1710.
229 Ibid., 1710-11.
230 Peter Enns, , in NIDOTTE [Law of God: Theology].
57
[Dan 9:10] and Torah of Moses [Dan 9:11]. If this reading is taken into account, then
instruction [] is authoritative instruction, from the prophets and Moses in this case.
Summary. The sense of Dan 9:10 is that the covenant people have not obeyed Yahweh by means
of behaving morally in accord with the authoritative instructions (contained in the Mosaic Law);
the covenant community [1] has not obeyed, [2] has not behaved morally, and [3] has ignored
authoritative instruction.
Daniel confesses to the communitys disobedience; this waywardness is tantamount to
covenant betrayal; it expresses a failure to rely on Yahweh as well as a failure to trust in Yahweh.
Daniel also acknowledges that the people of God have not behaved morally; there is such
a thing as a moral component in life, yet the people of God, in possession of the Mosaic Law,
have stumbled irretrievably in their moral and spiritual lives.
Finally, Daniel concedes that the covenant community has resolutely ignored
authoritative instruction from the prophets as well as Moses. The divine standards of conduct,
conduct as befits men and women in a covenant relationship with the Creator God, standards as
communicated throughout the lifetime of the covenant by respected and trustworthy voices, these
instructions have been discounted.
Dan 9:11 Indeed, all Israel has contravened Your instruction, turning aside, so as not to obey
Your voice; thus, the sworn curse has come upon us, which was written in the Torah of Moses the
servant of God, for we have sinned against Him.
This verse functions to summarize the confession thus far.231 Indeed, pride of place in the
summary goes to the front-loaded element - /all Israel. This front-loading
is a casus pendens; in this construction, the prominent terminology is isolated at the beginning of
the sentence all Israel and then resumed later in the sentence by a pronoun the sworn
curse has come upon us. The function of this construction is to place all Israel front and
center in the covenant betrayal.232 Finally, the Masoretes placed a punctuation mark [rebia]
indicating a pause after all Israel; it is as if they chose to pause and think for a moment.
All Israel [] is a genitive construction; literally all of Israel. In all
likelihood, this genitive is a genitive of measure, more or less quantifying the level of Israels
participation in the covenant betrayal; 233 Israel is united in its defection.
All Israel has covenant overtones. Indeed, the Mosaic covenant in Deuteronomy opens with a
reference to all Israel in the first verse [Deuteronomy 1:1] and closes with a reference to all
Israel in the last verse [Deuteronomy 34:12]. This framing via all Israel has the net effect of
wrapping the covenant in and with the community, all Israel. The two are part and parcel of the
same package.234
Has contravened Your instruction [ ] is the principle charge in the
sentence; all else is supportive of this charge in one way or another. This is the only place in the
Hebrew Bible where this charge appears.
231 For the disjunctive waw [], see IBHS 39.2.3b; GKC 154 a; Gibson 135.
232 See Gibson 149; Van der Merwe 46.1.2(3); J-M 156.
233 See IBHS 9.5.3f; Van der Merwe 25.4.3; J-M 139 e; GKC 127 b.
234 For the covenant associations with all Israel, see Deuteronomy 5:1-3; 11:6-9; 29:1-2; 31:7.
58
Has contravened [] is written in the perfect aspect, in the plural number. As we

have noted repeatedly in the confession, the plural/perfect helps bind the confession together.
Indeed, the plural number encompasses the entirety of the covenant community. The perfect
aspect verb, again, communicates a state of affairs [contravening in this case] to which all
Israel has capitulated and where they remain bound.235
Contravene [] is a verb that normally communicates movement from one place to another.
Indeed, NIDOTTE places in a semantic field of terms for journey.236 Obviously, a
figurative meaning has developed out of the more literal nuance. The ranges of meaning for
make this clear: [1] to pull along, to go on ones way, to move through, [2] to pass over
someone, [3] to pass over, pass by, [4] to go over, to pass over, [5] to overstep, contravene. 237
H.F. Fuhs notes that refers in a very general sense to a change of location or position.
The only connotation seems to be that movement in question is purposeful or goal oriented. This
indefinite quality attaching to the root enables it to pick up various contextual specifications and
thus to represent a great many semantic aspects. 238 With this in mind, Harris comment on the
figurative use of is apropos: means to move outside or beyond the requirements
of the covenant or law.239 Indeed, moving [] so as to be in breach of the covenant
[] is fairly common in the OT [Joshua 7:11, 15; 23:16; 2 Kings 18:12; Jeremiah 34:18];
along with moving [] so as to flout the law [Numbers 14:41; 22:18; 24:13; 1 Samuel
15:24; 2 Chronicles 24:20; Daniel 9:11].
Contravene [] does signal a change in ones spiritual or theological position in life; there
is movement, albeit in the wrong direction. For, when all is said and done, one contravenes
intentionally; ones change in position is both calculated internally and fixed on a new and
different direction externally. In this case, the change in position is away from the covenant and
away from Yahwehs revealed moral standards in Torah to whatever is more appealing in the
environment (often idolatry). In a nutshell, Daniel confesses that the spiritual shift of his fellow
covenanters was premeditated, not accidental; deliberate and thought-out, not merely
spontaneous or unintended. The covenant community did not lethargically drift into covenant
treachery; rather, they made every effort to free themselves from the constraints of the covenant,
and this Daniel freely admits.
Turning aside [ (conjunction, Qal, infinitive absolute)] is punctuated with a

zaqep gadol, suggesting a slight pause in the reading of the line. While one certainly doesnt
want to over read these accents, given the gravity of the confession and the somberness of the
confessional language, the Masoretes may be suggesting that we linger, thoughtfully, over this
clarifying term also.
235 For this sense of the perfect, see Gibson 57 d; GKC 106 g; IBHS 30.5.1c.
236 See Passing, fording in NIDOTTE.
237 KB1, 779.
238 H.F. Fuhs, , in TDOT, vol. X, 413.
239 R.L. Harris, , in TWOT [1556].
59
Turning aside [ (conjunction, Qal, infinitive absolute)] is syntactically linked to

the preceding sentence by explicating or clarifying it; the sense is: all Israel has contravened
Your instruction, that is turning aside (pause).240
Turning aside [] is from a semantic field of terms for apostasy.241 Almost immediately we
can sense the reason behind the pause in the Masoretic text: the implication of this word needs to
sink in; the reader needs to stop and think about it! That said, /turn aside has a basic
meaning: to change direction.242 S. Schwertner notes that basically means to turn
aside from the direction one has set out on.243 L.A. Snijders says the same thing this way:
means turn aside, deviate (from the path). 244 The ranges of meaning for the root in the
Qal stem [the stem used in Dan 9:11] are: [1] to turn aside, [2] to go off, retreat, to shun someone,
to yield [3] to fall down, to turn aside from God, [4] to abandon, desist from, [5] to stand aloof
from, [6] to leave off, to stop.245 In a nutshell, /turn aside is, as we shall see presently,
tantamount to apostasy.
Turning aside [] in the sense of apostasy from Yahweh is fleshed out in other passages in
the Hebrew Bible; the way OT authors use /turn aside varies some.246 All told, these
collocations stress turning from Yahweh personally, hence apostasy; the following list of
behaviors are associated with /turning aside/apostasy. [1] Apostasy may bring on
idolatry in one form or another [Deuteronomy 7:4]; [2] it certainly includes disregarding
Yahwehs ways as a guide to life [Job 34:27]; [3] apostasy means being uninterested in
knowledge of Yahwehs ways [Job 21:14]; [4] apostasy shows up in out and out scorn and
derision of Yahweh [Job 22:17]; [5] apostasy is known by not wanting to bother with Yahweh
(simple indifference) [Isaiah 30:10]; [6] apostasy prefers to place trust in humanity [Jeremiah
17:5]; [7] apostasy is apathy toward how Yahweh reacts to our turning aside [Ezekiel 6:9]; [8]
apostasy prefers independence so as to pursue ones own subjective ends [Hosea 7:14]; [9]
clearly, apostasy means pivoting to another lifestyle [Jeremiah 5:23]; and [10] apostasy takes the
form of refusing to listen to the voice of God [Daniel 9:11].
The upshot is this: Daniel confesses in Dan 9:11 that all Israel, the sum total of the covenant
community, has become apostate; they have effectively changed direction; they have abandoned
their original path in pursuit of another; in a nutshell, they have turned aside from God on a
personal level. Indeed, Daniel elaborates noting their refusal to listen to/obey Yahwehs voice
when it speaks to them; thus emphasizing the communitys personal disinterest in what Yahweh
wants or thinks. At the same time, the reader may reasonably infer that Daniel summarizes their
apostasy in Dan 9:11, assuming the various behaviors noted above; so, we may take for granted
that all are included.
240 For this use of the disjunctive waw, see IBHS 39.2.3b; Gibson 135, 137.
241 See Apostasy in NIDOTTE.
242 KB1, 748.
243 S. Schwertner, , in TLOT II, 796.
244 L.A. Snijders, , in TDOT, vol. X, 201.
245 Ibid.
246 Some authors use turn aside from following after ( ) [Deuteronomy
7:4; 1 Samuel 12:20; 2 Kings 18:6; 2 Chronicles 25:27; Job 34:27]; some authors use turn from
( ) [Job 21:14; 22:17; Isaiah 30:11]; some authors use turn away from (
) [Jeremiah 32:40; Ezekiel 6:9]; one author uses turn from Me ( ) [Hosea
7:14]; one author goes with turn and depart ( ) [Jeremiah 5:23]; and one
author opts for turn and not listen to the voice [Daniel 9:11].
60
Finally, the Hebrew Bible is equally clear that apostasy is not a terminal condition. The
prophet Jeremiah envisions a day when apostasy [turn away from Me ( )] will no
longer be the case; Yahweh intends to take certain unilateral steps so as to alleviate apostasy.
Jeremiah 32:40 regales us with these divinely initiated activities: [1] an everlasting covenant
[ ], [2] Yahweh will never turn from them ( ),
[3] do them good ( ), and [4] put the fear of God in their hearts
( ).
Later in Dan 9:24, Daniel himself will offer the divine antidote for covenant betrayal and
apostasy. We shall take this matter up in detail later, but for now it is enough to note that Daniel
shares Jeremiahs optimism that apostasy is not necessarily terminal. In Dan 9:24, we have this:
Gods six goals for all of human history [9:24] in two sets of three:
Concerning sin
To bring an end to the covenant betrayal [9:24b]
To seal up sins [9:24c]
To wipe away [the guilt of] iniquity [9:24d]
Concerning righteousness
To bring near everlasting righteousness [9:24e]
To confirm the vision and the prophecy [9:24f]
To anoint a most holy [9:24g]].
As we shall see when we get to Dan 9:24, these six goals for human history must relate to
the Messiah; at one level, the arrival of Jesus on this earth set in motion what both Jeremiah and
Daniel envisioned; and, at another level, what Jesus, the Messiah set in motion in the first century
is yet to reach its consummation; but it will [Ephesians 1:10].
So as not to obey Your voice [ ] is a negative clause
[ + ], where negates the content of a subordinate clause, 247 the infinitive in
this case. The function of the infinitive is probably to introduce a result clause;248 the sense is:
turning aside so as (so that you do) not to obey. For the meaning of this clause, see Dan 9:10
[page 56 above].
Thus, the sworn curse has come upon us [ (Qal,
waw consecutive imperfect, 3rd, fm, sg)] connects with the main verb in Dan 9:11a-
[contravened]. The connection is to tease out the consequence of contravening.249 The sense
is: all Israel has contravened with the result that the sworn curse has come upon us.
Typically, when an imperfect aspect verb [/has come upon] is syntactically
subordinate to a perfect aspect verb [/has contravened], the net effect is that the
imperfect retains the perfective value of the perfect aspect verb. What this boils down to is this:
like contravened, the imperfect aspect verb [/has come upon] means that the
covenant community is in a state of affairs that remains; i.e. they are in a cursed state that is not
going anywhere for the time being.
Sworn curse [ ] is literally, the curse [] and the oath
[]. Once more, we have hendiadys here: two words with more or less the same
247 Van der Merwe 41.4.(ii).6; J-M 124 e; 160 l-m.
248 IBHS 36.2.3d.
249 On this use of waw consecutive imperfect, see IBHS 33.2.1b; GKC 111 i-l.
61
meaning connected by a conjunction translated as a single concept: 250 sworn curse. This is the
only time when this precise phrase [ ] occurs in the Hebrew Bible.
Curse [] is from a semantic field of terms for curse. 251 The terms in the field are these: [1]
: to utter a curse, swear an oath,252 [2] : to curse, to be accursed,253 [3] :
normally to bless, used euphemistically in Piel stem for to curse, 254 [4] : to blaspheme, to
revile,255 [5] : to curse, to scold, to hurl imprecations at,256 [6] : to slander,257 [7]
: to curse, to chant (presumably accompanied by acts of magic) 258 and [8] : in Piel:
to declare cursed, accursed.259
The nuance in curse/ that jumps out is the covenantal association connected with the
curse/; as used in the OT, the association is either with a human contract260 or a divine
covenant.261 Indeed, Daniel has been at pains to underline the covenant betrayal that is endemic
in Israel; as a result of defecting from Yahweh, even becoming apostates, Daniel now confesses
that the price to be paid for violating the covenant is the curse associated with the covenant of
Yahweh.262 In real terms for Daniel, the exile and all that went with it were the tangible
manifestations of the curse.
Sworn [] is from a semantic field of terms for pledge, security. One senses that the
idea of assurance is to the fore here: Daniel acknowledges that Yahweh has pledged to deal
definitely with those who betray the covenant; and so He has!
Sworn [] is a noun that has the following ranges of meaning: [1] an oath,
swearing, often of humans, [2] oath, promise of Yahweh, and [3] a curse. 263 KohlerBaumgartner translate in Dan 9:11 with an oath sealed with a curse or simply a
sworn curse.264 Keller reads in Dan 9:11 in the sense of a solemn obligation
accompanied under some circumstances by a conditional curse. 265 This reading underlines that
of Kohler-Baumgartner: an oath sealed with a curse. Kottsieper notes that the hendiadys
in Dan 9:11 refers to the curses that according to Deuteronomy
accompanied the covenant at Horeb.266
250 IBHS 4.4.1b; Williams 72.
251 See Curse in NIDOTTE.
252 CDCH, 19.
253 Ibid., 34.
254 KB1, 160.
255 Ibid., 180.
256 Ibid., 276-77.
257 Ibid., 719.
258 KB2, 1060.
259 Ibid., 1104.
260 Genesis 24:41; 26:28 (referred to as a /covenant); 1 Kings 8:31; Proverbs 29:24;
Ezekiel 17:13, 16, 18.
261 Deuteronomy 29:11, 13 ( and are equated), 19-20; Nehemiah 10:29; Isaiah
24:5-6; Jeremiah 23:10; 29:18; 42:18; 44:12; Ezekiel 16:59; 17:19; Daniel 9:11; Zechariah 5:3.
262 For the gory details of the curses contained in the Law of Moses, see Leviticus 26:14-45;
Deuteronomy 28:15-68.
263 CDCH, 445.
264 KB2, 1385.
265 C.A. Keller, , in TLOT III, 1294.
266 I. Kottsieper, , in TDOT, vol. XIV, 344.
62
The sworn curse is thus the guarantee of divine reprisal for covenant betrayal. Indeed, the exiles
cannot say that they had not be forewarned, for the consequences of disobedience had been
made plain beforehand in the law of Moses, meaning instruction in all its aspects.267
Which was written in the Torah of Moses the servant of God [
] is a line that further specifies the basis for Israels
suffering the exile. As we noted above, the fact that the sworn curse had been inscripturated prior
to the exile leaves the covenant community without excuse. Indeed, the experience of judgment
had confirmed the authority of the Mosaic writings because their words had come to pass. 268
For, we have sinned against Him [ ] is a causal sentence, stating
the reason why the sworn curse has broken forth in the fury that was the exile, a fury that, as
Daniel confesses, remains in effect for him and his people. 269 For Israel, this national crisis in
governance had come about as a result of sin; is there a lesson here?
Summary
This paragraph, Dan 9:9-11, is summarized in the first two lines: with the Lord our God
compassionate forgiveness, but we have risen in revolt against Him. On the one hand, the
paragraph begins, using a verbless clause to underline the fixedness of Yahwehs grace, by stating
the stability, the steadiness of Yahwehs compassionate forgiveness. On the other hand, the
covenant community has repaid His compassion with revolt. This all-too-human response to
Yahwehs mercy is all-too-common for the covenant community.
Compassionate forgiveness is one of many phrases in the OT that should put an end to
the notion that the Hebrew Bible is graceless; indeed, compassionate forgiveness flows out of
Gods willing disposition to show pardon and extend indulgence toward sinners. The reader may
assume that Daniel is counting on Yahwehs gracious disposition in Israels great hour of need.
When all is said and done about compassionate forgiveness, it shows Yahwehs willingness to go
the second mile, a willingness that is not forced upon Him by circumstances, but rather an
inclination that springs out of His depths. Daniel has grown neither bitter nor cynical owing to
his personal exile; he has not engaged in self-pity, nor does he cling to a sense of entitlement;
rather, fully aware of the just verdict from God on the sin of Israel taking the form of the exile,
Daniel is drawn ever closer to his solitary hope, reduced as it were to his lone prospect
compassionate forgiveness.
The midsection of the paragraph is dominated by the language of rebellion: revolt, not
obeyed [twice], contravene, and turn aside. Each word in its own way makes its own contribution
to the depiction of rebellion: revolt is snubbing dependency on Yahweh; disobedience is covenant
betrayal; contravening is a change in position in the form of a moral and spiritual about-face; and
turning aside is apostasy. All told, the center of the paragraph smacks of intentional mutiny, of
calculated abandonment, of deliberate infidelity on the part of all Israel toward Yahweh.
The conclusion of the paragraph unpacks the existing results: the sworn curse has come
to life in full force. Yahweh has acted. A major part of the threats and curses inscripturated in
267 Baldwin, 166.
268 Ibid.
269 For the details on , see the notes on Dan 9:5, 8, 11.
63
Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 have swept over hapless Israel. It is not as if fair warning had
not been given; from Moses to the prophets, the covenant community was warned about the price
to be paid for covenant betrayal. She did not heed the repeated and powerful warnings; so her
ruin has come.
Confession that Yahweh is Just [Dan 9:12-14]

9:12aThus, He has fulfilled His word,

9:12awhich He spoke against us,

9:12aand against our rulers,

9:12awho governed us,

9:12aby bringing upon us a
great disaster;

9:12b
so that there has never been
done,

9:12b
under the whole of the heavens,

9:12b
such as that
which happened in Jerusalem.

9:13aAs it has been written,

9:13ain the Law of Moses,

9:13aall of this disaster,

9:13ahas befallen us;
9:13b
nevertheless we have not
entreated,
9:13b
the favor of,

9:13b
Yahweh our God,

9:13b
and thus turn from our
iniquities,

9:13b
and instead closely attend to
Your faithfulness.

9:14aSo then Yahweh has watched over,
9:14athe disaster,

9:14aand has brought it upon us;

9:14b
for just
Yahweh our God,
9:14b
in the matter of all His
works,

9:14b
which He has done,

9:14b
still we have not listened to His
voice.
64
Syntactical outline
I. (Summary: sworn curse has come, 9:11b): Thus, He has fulfilled His word, 9:12a
(Further information: His word): which He spoke against us, 9:12a
(Further information on addressees): and against our rulers, 9:12a
(Clarification of leaders): who governed us, 9:12a
(Explanation of has kept His word): by bringing upon us a great disaster, 9:12a
(Consequence of bringing great disaster): so that there has never been done, 9:12b
(Scope of what has never been done): under the whole of the heavens, 9:12b
(Comparative): such as that which happened in Jerusalem, 9:12b
II. (Comparative [shock]): As it has been written, 9:13a
(Where written): in the Law of Moses, 9:13a
(Consequence of what has been written): all of this disaster has befallen us; 9:13a-
(Antithesis to disaster has befallen): nevertheless we have not entreated the favor of
Yahweh, our God, 9:13b-
(First result of not entreating): and thus turn from our iniquities, 9:13b
(Second result of not entreating): and instead closely attend to Your faithfulness, 9:13b
III. (Summary of disaster befallen): So then Yahweh has watched over the disaster, 9:14a-
(Elaboration of summary): and has brought it upon us, 9:14a
(Moral justification): for just Yahweh our God, 9:14b
(Specification of just): in the matter of all His works, 9:14b
(Clarification of works): which He has done, 9:14b
(Antithesis to moral justification): still we have not listened to His voice, 9:14b
Theme of paragraph
The repeated words highlighted in bold expose the theme of the paragraph: Yahweh is
warranted in instigating this disaster. The exile, and all that goes with it, is thoroughly justified.
Yahwehs justification is signaled by an inclusion of sorts that frames the paragraph: He has kept
His word which He spoke opens the paragraph; still we have not listened to His voice closes
the paragraph. The covenant communitys culpability, and thus Yahwehs justification, could not
be more forthrightly stated.
Genre
This paragraph continues the communal confession of sin, underlining Yahwehs
justification for commencing this disaster. This paragraph concedes that what Yahweh has done
is justly merited; there is no persuasion, no evasion, certainly no manipulation, rather an honest
admission of Yahwehs vindication in the decision He has made to exile His people.
65
Dan 9:12 Thus, He has fulfilled His word, which He spoke against us, and against our rulers,
who governed us, by bringing upon us a great disaster, so that there has never been done, under
the whole of the heavens, such as that which has happened in Jerusalem.
This verse underlines the cause-effect connection between Yahwehs fidelity to His word
[cause] and the emergence of a great disaster upon Jerusalem [effect]. The remainder of the verse
highlights the exceptional (and merited) devastation for Jerusalem that was the exile. The major
theme of the paragraph jumps out at once: Yahweh is warranted in activating the exile: He has
kept His word by bringing upon us a great disaster.
He has fulfilled His word [ (Hiphil, waw consecutive
imperfect, 3rd, ms, sg)] is a summary statement;270 the earlier incident the sworn curse has come
upon us is now summarized from a different point of view, that of Yahwehs fidelity to His
word.
The collocation fulfill the word [ ] appears ten times in the Hebrew
Bible, three times in reference to Yahweh [1 Kings 6:12 (Hiphil); Nehemiah 9:8 (Hiphil); Daniel
9:12 (Hiphil)] and seven in reference to a human [Deuteronomy 27:26; 1 Samuel 15:13; 1 Kings
12:15; 2 Kings 23:3, 24; Jeremiah 34:18; 35:14]. The ranges of meaning for in the Hiphil
stem, the stem used for all of the uses of /fulfill when employed in reference to Yahweh
are: [1] to erect, to put up, [2] to take out, keep, [3] to fulfill in the sense of to cause to happen
what has been promised or threatened, [4] to tell to get up, to make someone rise, [5] to raise, to
help up, [6] to raise someone, to nominate, entrust with a task, appoint, [7] to raise, erect, obtain.
The sense becomes: Yahweh has carried out or given effect to, upheld, or fulfilled His word;271 in
a nutshell, Yahweh has followed through on His word.
Yahweh informs King Solomon that, if he adheres to the covenant, then Yahweh will follow
through on [] the promises He made to David [1 Kings 6:12]; similarly, Yahweh followed
through on [] His promises to Abraham [Nehemiah 9:8]. The fact that the sworn curse
has come upon us is tantamount to Yahweh has followed through on His word.
Which He spoke against us and against our rulers who governed us is a relative clause
that essentially underscores what Yahweh did with His word and with whom He did it.
He spoke against us [ ] is a collocation that features a verb
plus a preposition [ + ]; this collocation appears 46 times in the Hebrew Bible. The
collocation, + , is used in four ways when Yahweh is the speaker: [1] to speak
concerning someone or something,272 [2] to promise something to someone;273 [3] to proclaim
against (in all but two of these, some form of calamity/ is mentioned in the immediate
context);274 and [4] to simply speak to someone.275 Owing to the presence of /disaster
270 For this use of the waw consecutive imperfect, see IBHS 33.2.1d; Van der Merwe 21.1.3
(i).
271 CDCH, 391.
272 Genesis 18:19; 2 Samuel 7:25; 1 Kings 2:4, 27; 1 Chronicles 17: 17, 23; 22:11; Jeremiah
18:7.
273 1 Kings 9:5; 1 Chronicles 17:26; Jeremiah 32:42.
274 1 Kings 22:23; Jeremiah 11:17; 18:8; 19:15; 25:13; 26:13, 19; 35:17; Ezekiel 36:5; Daniel
9:12.
275 Isaiah 40:2; Jeremiah 26:2; Hosea 12:10.
66
later in Dan 9:12, the sense in this line communicates threat with the nuance of speaks against;
there is something of a determination to bring catastrophe upon a recipient present in the context.
The net effect is that Daniel concedes that Yahwehs word contained a menacing component that
promised peril for those, like his fellow covenanters, who turned their backs on Yahweh and His
word.
Our rulers who governed us [ ] is a line that widens
the scope of Yahwehs threat: the nations political and religious leadership. In Daniel 9:12a, it
is the people who bear their share of responsibility for the implementation of the judgment, the
Exile; in Daniel 9:12a-, it is the ruling class that comes in for its cut of accountability for the
national disaster that has befallen the nation. It is never merely the ruling classes that are
answerable for the decline of a nation; degeneration is a communal affair.
Rulers who governed utilizes the same Hebrew root, , for both rulers and those
who governed.
Rulers [ (Qal, part, ms, pl)] is a participle in written form. The Qal
participle may be used as a noun and also represent a professional class, based upon the semantic
content of the participle in question.276 Accordingly, we may infer that Daniel has in mind the
professional ruling class among his people.
Ruler [] is from a semantic field of terms for justice or judgment. 277 There are four terms
found in this semantic field: [1] , [2] , [3] , and [4] . The first term,
, means to vindicate, plead a cause, execute justice; 278 this implies that leads to
the maintenance of justice. The second term, , means to act as an advocate, to act as an
intercessor for someone;279 this means that offers arbitration from the ruling classes for
the populace. The third term, , means to be in the right, to be right;280 this means that
has a dual sense, a forensic sense that signals to be in the right, and a more pragmatic
sense to do what is right. Finally, the fourth term, , means the action that restores
(peace) to a community after it has been disturbed; 281 this means that restores
or preserves order in society. Accordingly, Daniel confesses that it was not to the vindicators, nor
the advocates, nor the custodians of right that Yahweh spoke against, but rather to those
responsible for preserving order in the community.
Ruler [] has the following ranges of meaning in the Qal stem: [1] to decide between, to
settle a dispute, [2] to administer justice, [3] to decide, [4] to pass judgment, [5] to make a
judgment about, to announce a verdict, [6] to rule, to be in authority.282 Kohler-Baumgartner
identify the meaning of in Dan 9:12 as the responsible men among us, those who govern
us.283 BDB places under the general heading of those who are tasked with giving law,
deciding controversies and executing law, civil, religious, political, and social. 284 Richard Shultz
more or less follows suit, reading here to describe the authority or activities of a
276 IBHS 37.2c.
277 See Justice, judgment in NIDOTTE.
278 CDCH, 78.
279 KB2, 934.
280 Ibid., 1003.
281 Ibid., 1623.
282 Ibid.
283 Ibid., 1624.
284 BDB, 1047.
67
ruler/governor.285 G. Liedke places the activities of a ruler or governor in Dan 9:12 squarely
within the frame of preserving peace/: the restoration of community order should be
understood not only as a one-time act but also as a continuous activity, as a constant preservation
of the lm; thus the meaning to govern, rule results.286 The upshot is that the task of the
was to restore and preserve order, /lm within the covenant
community; obviously they failed.
The nature of this failure is varied. The prophet Amos, however, gives us a nice snapshot of the
failure of the rulers/ to restore and preserve /lm. In Amos 2, the
prophet excoriates the rulers/ for their failure to maintain /lm. First,
the rulers/ took the form of selling the just and needy for profit [Amos 2:6]; second,
the rulers/ made ample use of oppression when it benefitted them [Amos 2:7]; third,
the rulers/ managed to sanction sexual abuse [Amos 2:7]; and fourth, the
rulers/ took full advantage of financial exploitation where their profits were
concerned [Amos 2:8]. Later in the book, the prophet denounces those who cannot wait for the
Sabbath to come to an end so that they could weigh deceitfully with false balances [Amos 8:5].
Rabbi Heschel captures this unjust spirit neatly: Man is waiting for the day of sanctity to come
to an end so that cheating and exploitation can be resumed. 287 We may confidently infer that the
people as a whole were silently complicit in the failure of the rulers/.
By bringing upon us a great disaster [ ] is an
infinitive clause, which amounts to an infinitive clause of explanation.288 The repetition of
against us [] here and in Dan 9:12a suggests a back reference to that sentence.
The upshot is that by bringing upon us a great disaster is an explanation of or fills out the
circumstances of Dan 9:12a. The sense of the two lines is He spoke against us by bringing
upon us a great disaster.
By bringing [ (preposition, Hiphil, infinitive, construct)] is written in the Hiphil stem,
which is causative. The Hiphil of this verb of motion to bring [] implies the causation
of an event, in which the causation is indirect and mediated. 289 The context, Dan 9:12a,
stipulates that the mediator is Yahweh. The meaning of the verb in the Hiphil is to bring to pass
something promised.290
A great disaster [ ] is a feminine noun [] modified by a feminine
adjective []. The noun, /disaster is from a semantic field of terms for what is
bad, vicious, or wicked.291 There are six terms in this field: [1] , an evil plan, [2] ,
godlessness, [3] , perversity, [4] , intentional malice, [5] , harm or misery,
and [6] , wickedness or evil. The word that Daniel uses rules out understanding the exile
as an evil plan come to fruition, as a state or act of godlessness, as perversity, as intentional
malice directed toward the covenant community, and as something that is pure wickedness or
evil; rather, Daniel concedes that what has befallen the covenant community does qualify as
misery; the exile is in a real sense harmful.
285 Richard Schultz, , in NIDOTTE [H9149].
286 G. Liedke, , in TLOT III, 1394.
287 Abraham J. Heschel, The Prophets, Two Volumes in One (Peabody: The Prince Press, 2003),
vol. I, 31.
288 For the infinitive clause of explanation, see IBHS 36.2.3e; GKC 114 n; Gibson 108.
289 See IBHS 27.2b; Lambdin 157a.
290 KB1, 114.
291 See Bad, vicious, wicked in NIDOTTE.
68
Furthermore, the noun /disaster is an abstract noun,292 which functions to

underscore the state of misery into which the nation had fallen as a result of Yahwehs real time
judgment on their sins. From the perspective of Daniel, the state of misery that the Exile brought
the end of the state of Israel as an autonomous nation, the removal of kingship, the end of
worship with the destruction of the Temple and the end of the priesthood, the deportation of most
of the survivors out of Israel and the destruction of Jerusalem goads their agony. God has
confirmed the written word of Scripture by bringing upon them this great calamity that has
befallen Jerusalem.293
Finally, Daniel concedes the enormity of the disaster in Jerusalem: so that there has
never been done, under the whole of the heavens, such as that which has happened in Jerusalem.
Daniel mentions Jerusalem seven times in his book [Dan 1:1; 9:2, 7, 12, 16 2, 25]. Overall, the
prophet reveals a variety of viewpoints on Jerusalem.
In Dan 1:1, the prophet does the work of an historian, depicting Jerusalem destroyed; in
Dan 9:2, the student of Jeremiah realizes that there is hope for Jerusalem; in Dan 9:7, Daniel the
confessor frankly admits the contemptibility of Jerusalem for her sins; in Dan 9:12, the penitent
laments the misery of Jerusalem; in Dan 9:16, the contrite prophet appeals to Yahweh to relent in
His anger and fury directed toward Jerusalem and he laments the scorn heaped upon Jerusalem
by all who see her; finally, in Dan 9:25, the visionary is told that Jerusalem is to be restored.
The reader will observe that Daniel depicts the legacy of Jerusalem as running the gamut
from destruction [Dan 1:1] to restoration [Dan 9:25]. In the interim, the history of Jerusalem is
blighted with contempt [Dan 9:7], misery [Dan 9:12], divine fury and rage [Dan 9:16], and scorn
[Dan 9:16]. In the final analysis, the misery and disaster that befell Jerusalem did not just happen
as an accident of international politics; rather Yahweh had a hand in it for some very compelling
reasons.
To be sure, it is the prophet Jeremiah who lifts the veil on the depravity of Jerusalem
during the reign of Jehoiakim. Early in Jehoiakims reign (609-598), Jeremiah preached the
now-famous temple sermon (Jer 7; 26).294 The text of the sermon in Jeremiah 7 gives the reader
of Daniel chapter and verse on the depraved spiritual conditions in Jerusalem and Judah during
the reign of Jehoiakim. Two matters jump out.
First, the Jerusalem for which Daniel now confesses placed trust in temple worship to the
exclusion of moral reformation [Jeremiah 7:3-5]. On the one hand was the moral depravity of the
people in Jerusalem who came to the temple to worship [Jeremiah 7:5-9], a moral depravity that
went unchanged [Jeremiah 7:3-4]; while, on the other hand, the worshipers felt justified by going
to temple and saying we are delivered [7:10]. Jeremiah refers to this juxtaposition of
immorality and worship as deception.
292 For this noun as an abstract, see IBHS 6.4.2b; J-M 134 e; Gibson 18.
293 Russell, Daniel, 177.
294 Elmer Martens, Jeremiah: Theology, in NIDOTTE.
69
Second, the Jerusalem for which Daniel now pleads was morally corrupt. Jeremiah lifts out:
injustice [7:5], oppression of the widow and orphan [7:6], shedding innocent blood; [7:6],
idolatry [7:6]; theft, murder, adultery, false swearing, and sacrificing to Baal [7:9].
The net effect is that the enormity of the disaster in Jerusalem [there has never been
done, under the whole of the heavens, such as that which has happened in Jerusalem (Dan
9:12b-)] is matched by the flagrancy of Jerusalems moral depravity. Perhaps this causeeffect bond is on Daniels mind as he laments the enormity of the disaster in Jerusalem.
Summary
Dan 9:12 may be summarized succinctly as promise-fulfillment. The sworn curse has
come upon us is the execution of what Yahweh promised: He has fulfilled His word. Yahweh
has carried out and given effect to His word; in a nutshell, Yahweh has followed through on what
He promised.
The promissory note stipulates that Yahweh will cause to happen what had been
threatened in Torah [Leviticus 26:14-45; Deuteronomy 28:15-68]. None of these curses is
pleasant to think about; there is menace that pledges peril for those who betray the covenant.
Still, Daniel seems to consent to the fittingness of Yahwehs justification [Dan 9:7] in imposing
the sworn curses. We take the rough with the smooth!
The promissory note is redeemed by the ruling class in Israel. In the previous line, the
people were the redeemers [Dan 9:12a]; the net effect is that both the rulers and the ruled are
culpable before God for the moral and spiritual state of the nation. For, the ruling professionals,
authorities and bureaucrats at every level in Israel, or any nation for that matter, have a sacred
duty to preserve order, /lm in this case; and when necessary, these professionals
restore /lm. In any event, the chief task of the ruling class in Israel was to
maintain an orderly society. However, as we noted above, their failure was unambiguous: selfjustifying worship rationalized moral depravity; corruption was flourishing: injustice, oppression
of societys defenseless, devaluing human life, idolatry, theft, adultery, false swearing. The ruling
class reaped the whirlwind when they redeemed their promissory note.
Redemption of the promissory meant disaster for Jerusalem. Daniel unpacks the depth
and range of the citys disaster elsewhere in Daniel 9: she is contemptible [Dan 9:7], miserable
[Dan 9:12], thrashed by divine rage [Dan 9:16], and mocked [Dan 9:16]. This was in marked
contrast to what Jerusalem was intended to become.
That Jerusalem was intended to become a religious center was verified by Yahwehs
declared intention to make Jerusalem the place where He puts His name [1 Kings 8:1; 11:32, 36;
14:21; 2 Kings 23:27]. To be sure, Jerusalem was the place where Yahweh chose to dwell [Psalm
135:21]. Jerusalem was equated with the authority of Yahweh, since His Word would go forth
from there [Isaiah 2:3]. Indeed, Jerusalem would become the place from which Yahweh reigned
[Isaiah 24:23]. But, all of this was thwarted owing to the covenant betrayal of Yahwehs partners
in the covenant enterprise. In Dan 9:12, the promissory noted meant disaster for Jerusalem, not
glory.
70
Dan 9:13 As it has been written in the Law of Moses, all of this disaster has befallen us;
nevertheless we have not entreated the favor of Yahweh, our God, and thus turn from our
iniquities and instead closely attend to Your faithfulness.
Dan 9:13 is a comparative clause, signaling shock at national moral disinterest. The
situation compared [as it has been written in the Law of Moses, all of this disaster has befallen
us] is followed by the present situation [nevertheless we have not entreated the favor of
Yahweh, our God and thus turned from our iniquities and closely attended to Your
faithfulness].295 Daniel seems to be concentrating on the present situation, conveying
astonishment; the sense of the sentence is: as it has been written in the Law of Moses, all of this
disaster has befallen us; yet even with all of that we have not entreated the favor of Yahweh our
God, and thus turned from our iniquities and closely attended Your faithfulness. There is shock
and disbelief at his nations present-day moral indifference; as Baldwin notes there has been no
decisive move on His peoples part to seek His forgiveness. Such apathy was in itself
blameworthy.296
As it has been written in the Law of Moses [ ] is written
with a Qal, passive participle as the main verb. In general, the participle tends to describe a state
of affairs as opposed to simply presenting a bare event. 297 More specifically, the function of the
participle in Dan 9:13a is as a predicate. In this case, the participle describes an ongoing state
of affairs;298 the authority of the Mosaic Law remains intact. Indeed, in a general way, Daniel
may have had in mind Deuteronomy 28:15-69, the laundry list of curses that would befall the
people of God were they to prove disloyal to the Mosaic covenant. More particularly,
considering the Exile, Moses words in 28:36-37 might have come to Daniels remembrance. Be
that as it may, what Moses had written centuries before was still in force.
All of this disaster has befallen us [ ] is a
sentence with a peculiar introduction. The reader will note the word that begins the line.
Normally, this particle is a direct object marker after a verb. But, in this case, introduces a
nominal subject with emphasis.299 The net effect is to rhetorically underline all of this disaster
for prominence. The sense of the sentence then becomes: given all of this disaster, we still have
not entreated Yahweh. For the meaning of disaster, see the notes on Dan 9:12a, pages 6869.
Nevertheless, we have not entreated the favor of Yahweh, our God [
] is an example of antithesis by negation after a positive
statement.300 Given the shocking disaster that has befallen the covenant community [Dan
9:13a-], it is equally astounding that nothing has happened with them to redress the situation.
The sentence depicts a course of action that is the opposite of what Daniel expects should have
been done. The covenant community should have entreated the favor of Yahweh.
295 On the comparative, see IBHS 38.5a; J-M 174e.

296 Baldwin, 166.
297 IBHS 37.1f.
298 Ibid., 37.6d.
299 GKC 117 m.
300 Gibson 142 b.
71
Entreat the favor [ ] is an idiom that appears sixteen times in the Hebrew Bible. 301
To this point, there is no clear account of its derivation. In thirteen of these appearances, it is
Yahweh who is being entreated for favor.302 Of these thirteen, seven appear in a context of
judgment.303 Of these seven, four have language that is parallel to or otherwise disambiguates
[entreat the favor].304
In the 1 Kings 13 passage, the setting is a judgment on Jeroboam for burning incense on the altar
[1 Kings 13:1]. Yahweh executes judgment on Jeroboam in the form of withering the kings hand
[1 Kings 13:4]. At this point, Jeroboam asked the man of God in the story:
[entreat the favor of Yahweh] as well as
[act as an intercessor on my behalf]. The net effect is that entreating the favor of Yahweh
leads to or results in the man of God acting as intercessor on behalf of Jeroboam. It is the case
that when one entreats the favor of Yahweh, one is acting as intercessor on ones own behalf, or,
in the case of Daniel 9:13, on behalf of the covenant community.
In the 2 Chronicles 33 passage, the setting is the evil kingship of Manasseh. After a
rehearsal of the abominable practices of his kingship [2 Chron 33:1-9]; Yahweh spoke to the king
and the people, to no avail [2 Chron 33:10]. Then, in an act of judgment, the king of Assyria
overpowers Manasseh and takes him to Babylon [2 Chron 33:11]. At this point, Manasseh:
[entreated the favor of Yahweh] as well as
[humbled himself greatly in the presence of God]. The net
effect is that Manasseh entreats the favor of Yahweh and at the same time humbles himself
greatly before God. Similarly, Daniels humility is obvious in his confession to Yahweh [Dan
9:3].
In the Jeremiah 26 passage, the setting is a warning of impending judgment delivered by
Jeremiah against the leaders of Judah. At the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, Yahweh
commands Jeremiah to speak to Judah without leaving out a word [Jer 26:1-2]. The gist of the
message is that if Judah does not listen to Jeremiah, Yahweh will turn Judah into a curse [Jer
26:3-6]. The response from the population in Judah was swift: Jeremiah must die [Jer 26:8-11].
Jeremiah responds to the death sentence by repeating his message [Jer 26:12-15]. This time,
some among the population get the message and decide to follow the lead of Hezekiah [Jer
26:19], who (a) [feared Yahweh], (b)
[entreated the favor of Yahweh], and (c)
[Yahweh relented concerning the disaster]. The net effect is that, first, fearing Yahweh is a
prerequisite for entreating His favor; and, second, entreating the favor results in Yahweh relenting
concerning the threatened disaster. Daniel also identifies Yahweh as fearsome [] in Dan
9:4. More to the point of the confession, Daniel certainly petitions Yahweh to relent [Dan 9:1619].
And, in the Malachi 1:9 passage, the setting is a judgment on the deficient priestly
practices, offering defiled offerings [Mal 1:6-8]. Yahweh is engaging in irony when He asks: (a)
301 Exodus 32:11; 1 Samuel 13:12; 1 Kings 13:62; 2 Kings 13:4; 2 Chronicles 33:12; Job 11:19;
Psalm 45:12; 119:58; Proverbs 19:6; Jeremiah 26:19; Daniel 9:13; Zechariah 7:2; 8:21-22;
Malachi 1:9.
302 Exodus 32:11; 1 Samuel 13:12; 1 Kings 13:62; 2 Kings 13:4; 2 Chronicles 33:12; 119:58;
Jeremiah 26:19; Daniel 9:13; Zechariah 7:2; 8:21-22; Malachi 1:9.
303 Exodus 32:11; 1 Kings 13:6; 2 Kings 13:4; 2 Chronicles 33:12; Jeremiah 26:19; Daniel 9:13;
Malachi 1:9.
304 1 Kings 13:6; 2 Chronicles 33:12; Jeremiah 26:19; Malachi 1:9.
72
[entreat the favor of Yahweh] so that (b) [He may be

gracious to us]. The net effect is that entreating the favor of Yahweh results in Yahweh being
gracious to those who entreat Him. Again, Daniel has commended Yahweh for His compassion
[Dan 9:9].
The sum of the matter is this: when Daniel confesses that the covenant community did
not entreat the favor of Yahweh, he concedes that they did not intercede on their own behalf in
prayer, did not humble themselves before Yahweh, did not fear Yahweh, did not ask Him to
relent, and did not place themselves at the feet of His grace.
And thus turn from our iniquities and instead closely attend to Your faithfulness
[ ] is a pair of infinitive clauses. There
are two syntactical questions here: first, what is the function of each clause, and second, how is
each related to the other?
The syntactical function of the two infinitive clauses may be either purpose or result.305
In the first case, the sense would be: we did not entreat the favor of Yahweh our God in order to
turn from our iniquities and closely attend Your faithfulness. In the second case, the sense
becomes: we did not entreat the favor of Yahweh our God so as to turn from our iniquities and
closely attend Your faithfulness.
The distinction, if there is one, is microscopic. However, when we apply the larger
depiction of entreating the favor to this line, the logic of result fits: we did not intercede on our
own behalf; we did not humble ourselves before Yahweh; we did not fear Yahweh; we did not ask
Him to relent; and we did not place ourselves at the feet of His grace thereby resulting in turning
from our iniquities and closely attending to Your faithfulness.
The relationship between the two infinitive clauses is a second matter. The disjunctive
waw [] that is prefixed to the first word in the second infinitive clause [ (and
closely attended)] probably indicates a contrast that describes a situation that differs from the
preceding clause [turn from our iniquities]. 306 It is possible, for semantic reasons as much as
anything else, to tease out this contrast this way: and thus turned from our iniquities and instead
closely attend Your faithfulness.
Putting all of this together, we read: the covenant community did not intercede in prayer,
did not humble themselves, did not fear, did not ask Yahweh to relent, did not plead for His grace,
so as to turn from their iniquities and instead closely attend Yahwehs faithfulness.
Turn from our iniquities [ ] should have been, indeed could have
been, the net effect of entreating the favor of Yahweh. This clause features a verb [] + a
preposition [] + a noun []; this collocation is found in this precise form only here and
in Malachi 2:6. The Malachi passage differentiates turning from iniquity from true
instruction [ ], peace [], and uprightness [], all of
which guides life [].
305 For the use of the infinitive construct to signal purpose, see Van der Merwe 20.1.3; IBHS
36.2.3d; Williams 197, 277. For the use of the infinitive construct to depict result, see Van der
Merwe 20.1.3; IBHS 36.2.3d; Williams 198, 279.
306 Lambdin 132.
73
To turn from [ + ] has many objects from which one turns. Overall however,
to turn from [ (from) + (turn)] means to turn away from, abandon, desist, not to
proceed.307 The sense of the collocation [to turn from] is to discontinue whatever one is doing,
to call a halt to it, to make a clean break from. 308 The net effect is that the covenant community
did not intercede in prayer, did not humble themselves, did not fear Yahweh, did not ask Yahweh
to relent, did not plead for His grace, so as to make a clean break with their iniquities and instead
closely attend to Yahwehs faithfulness.
Our iniquities [] uses a noun for iniquity that appears over 230 times in
the Hebrew Bible, and for the first time here in Daniel [Dan 9:13, 16, 24]. The noun is from a
sematic field of terms for iniquity.309 There are three terms in this field: [1] , [2] ,
and [3] . The first, , refers to sin, injustice, deception,310 perhaps the abuse of
power that brings harm and destruction;311 the second, , means to do wrong,312 or
pervert;313 and the third, , means misdeed or guilt caused by sin.314 The third term,
, used here in Dan 9:13, often points to an act, or mistake, which is not right, unjust; in
essence points to the reality of the act and its consequences. 315
This last point may be the reason behind Daniels use of : he intends to confess
the unjust misdeeds of his fellow covenanters and, at the same time, highlight the consequences
of their transgressions. It is not necessarily the abuse of power aspect of sin or the perverted
element in sin that Daniel intends to underline; rather, he is intent on confessing the
consequences of unjust behavior on the part of the covenant community.
And instead to closely attend to Your faithfulness [ ] is the
counterpoint to turning from iniquities. It is one thing to sweep the demons out of ones life; it
is quite another to fill the vacuum with the quality replacements: Yahwehs faithfulness, closely
attended to.
Closely attend [] should have been what the covenant community stressed. They
should have interceded in prayer, humbled themselves, feared Yahweh, asked Yahweh to relent,
and appealed for grace, resulting in making a complete break with their iniquitous ways and
substituting close attention to Yahwehs faithfulness; but, they didnt!
Closely attend [] is from a semantic field of terms for wisdom, knowledge, and
skill.316 This tells us something: to closely attend is to strive for penetration into the truth of
Gods will; to master skillful astuteness in handling His faithfulness. Among the key terms in this
semantic field are: [1] , [2] , [3] , and [4] . The first, , points
307 KB2, 1430.
308 Ezekiel makes generous use of turn from [ + ], providing nice commentary on
how the prophet understands turning from [Ezekiel 3:19; 13:22; 14:6 (make a clean break with all
abominations); 18:21 (turning is a matter of life or death), 23, 28, 30; 33:9, 11-12, 14-15; Jonah
3:10.
309 See Iniquity in NIDOTTE.
310 KB1, 22.
311 Eugene Carpenter/Michael Grisanti, , in NIDOTTE [H224].
312 Ibid., 796.
313 H.F. van Rooy, , in NIDOTTE [H6390].
314 Ibid., 800.
315 Ibid.
316 See Wisdom, knowledge, skill in NIDOTTE.
74
to discernment, the faculty of discernment and interpretation; 317 the second, , suggests
wisdom or expertise, a high degree of knowledge and skill in any domain; 318 the third, ,
points to understanding, any cognition, from minimal awareness to elevated sagacity; 319 and
finally, the fourth term, , suggesting insight, the ability to grasp the meanings or
implications of a situation or message, Yahwehs faithfulness [] in this case.320
It is the fourth term, [closely attend], that Daniel uses to confess what the
covenant community failed to do. Daniel skips over discernment [], omits expertise
[], avoids cognition [] and underlines the ability to understand the meanings and
implications of Yahwehs covenantal faithfulness.
Your faithfulness [] is from a semantic field of terms for faithfulness. 321 The
ranges of meaning for are: [1] reliability, dependability, trustworthiness, faithfulness,
constancy, [2] stability (of political conditions), [3] truth and correctness (of words and
statements) [4] sincerity, honesty (of motives); [5] genuineness, reality.322 Kohler-Baumgartner
translates with truth in Dan 9:13.323 BDB opts for truth, as a body of ethical or
religious knowledge.324 Kohler-Baumgartner and BDB seem to prefer meaning [3], truth and
correctness (of words and statements); however, the reader might want to weigh and consider
meaning [1] for in Dan 9:13.
When we consider the use of in the Hebrew Bible in passages that connect
with Yahweh in some sense, a case emerges for relating with reliability,
dependability, trustworthiness, faithfulness or constancy in Dan 9:13. Key to making this case is
the use of in Exodus 34:6, a pivotal self-revelation from Yahweh concerning His
character.
The set-up for this self-revelation is important. Moses had just finished receiving the
word of Yahweh on Mount Sinai [Exodus 31:18]. Unbeknownst to Moses, the people, wearying
of waiting for Moses, proceeded to consult Aaron about making gods for themselves [Exodus
32:1-6]. Yahweh informs Moses of the peoples apostasy [Exodus 32:7-8] and also informs
Moses of His intention to annihilate the apostates [Exodus 32:9-10]. However, Moses entreats
Yahweh to relent [Exodus 32:11-13] and Yahweh relented [Exodus 32:14].
Moses then proceeds down the mountain to confront the people [Exodus 32:15-20].
Moses sizes things up and then asks for all who are for the Lord to come to him and the all the
Levites responded [Exodus 32:25-26]. Moses then commands the Levites to go through the
camp, killing the apostates, which they did [Exodus 32:27-29].
After this, Moses proceeds to go back up Mount Sinai to entreat Yahweh to forgive this
great sin [Exodus 32:30-32]. Yahweh relents in a fashion: He intends to blot out of His book all
who sinned against Him, but Moses is permitted to lead the people to the place Yahweh had
317 W.F Albright and David N. Freedman, The Anchor Bible, vol. 18A, Proverbs 1-9 by Michael
V. Fox (New York: Doubleday, 2000), 30.
318 Ibid., 32.
319 Ibid., 31.
320 Ibid., 36.
321 See Faithfulness in NIDOTTE.
322 CDCH, 26.
323 KB1, 69.
324 BDB, 54.
75
spoken of [Exodus 32:34]; eventually Yahweh strikes the people with a plague owing to the
episode with the golden calf [Exodus 32:35].
Moses is now prepared to lead the people to the place Yahweh had chosen, but he asks
who will accompany him on the journey [Exodus 33:12]; Yahweh Himself promises to lead them
[Exodus 33:14]. Then, Moses asked to see Yahwehs glory [Exodus 33:18]. Yahweh promises to
display His glory to Moses, without showing His face, which Moses would not have survived
[Exodus 33:19-23].
When the day comes, Moses chisels out two stones in preparation for receiving the word
of Yahweh once again [Exodus 34:4]. Then the moment arrives for Moses: Yahweh passes in
front of Moses, saying in Exodus 34:6, Yahweh, Yahweh, a gracious and compassionate God;
slow to anger but rich in lovingkindness [] and faithfulness [].
Exodus 34:6 contains Yahwehs self-revelation, a personal testimony that underlines His
lovingkindness and His faithfulness []. In this case, both lovingkindness and faithfulness
[]surface in terms of Yahwehs willingness to renew the covenant with Moses and the
people [Exodus 34:10]. Yahwehs willingness to renew the covenant with these sinful people
attests to His , His reliability, dependability, trustworthiness, faithfulness, constancy, His
covenantal faithfulness.
The sum of the matter is this: the situation in Exodus 32-34 is similar to that in Dan 9:13:
both describe in covenant betrayal; both describe situations in which the covenant people must
trust in Yahwehs willingness to renew the betrayed covenant. Accordingly, in Dan 9:13 Daniel
confesses that the people should have remembered Yahwehs undeviating , His abiding
reliability, dependability, trustworthiness, faithfulness, constancy, as exemplified in this seminal
moment in Israels history [Exodus 32-34]. At least, Daniel remembers the kind of faithfulness
[] that Yahweh displayed in Exodus 34:6. The similarity in situational setting favors
reading as faithfulness rather than truth in the sense of a body of religious knowledge.
The net effect is that the covenant community should have interceded in prayer, humbled
themselves, feared Yahweh, asked Yahweh to relent, and appealed for grace, resulting in making a
complete break with their iniquitous ways and substituting a grasp of the meaning and
implications [] of Yahwehs covenant faithfulness []; but, they didnt!
Dan 9:14 So then, Yahweh has watched over the disaster, and has brought it upon us; for, just
Yahweh our God, in the matter of all His works, which He has done, still we have not listened
to His voice.
Dan 9:14 underlines judgment and justice; this sentence affirms that the curse that has befallen
the covenant community is fully warranted. With all of that, Yahwehs actions are beyond
reproach, and the covenant community remains indifferent to His voice.
So then, Yahweh has watched over the disaster [
] is a sentence that is governed by the waw consecutive imperfect that signals a
consequence of the perfect aspect verb in 9:13.325 The sense of the two lines is: we have not
entreated the favor of Yahweh [9:13], so, then [the net effect has been] Yahweh has watched over
325 The syntactical function of the waw consecutive imperfect is to follow the preceding
perfect with a temporal and logical consequence [IBHS 33.2.2.3c; GKC 111 l].
76
the disaster. The implication is that favor sought would have been favor granted; but it wasnt,
attesting to the spiritual apathy of the covenant community.
Has watched over [] is from a semantic field of terms for guarding or watching. 326
There are five roots in this field: [1] , to watch over, guard;327 [2] , to watch over,
protect;328 [3] , keep watch, be a lookout;329 [4] , watch over, take care of,
preserve;330 and , be wakeful, concerned about, lie in wait.331 Taken at face value, the term
Daniel uses in his confession does not underline guarding, protecting, being a lookout or
preserving, as much as being wakeful and watchful.
Watch over is comprised of the verb [] followed by a preposition []; this
collocation appears five times in the Hebrew Bible. 332 The collocation is used with Yahweh as
subject of watching three times [Jeremiah 5:6; 44:27; Daniel 9:14]. The Jeremiah 5 passage is
a judgment context and the collocation has the meaning of to lie in wait for. 333 In the other
Jeremiah passage [Jeremiah 44:27], Yahweh is watching over [ ] Judah for harm
rather than good. It may well be the case that Daniel, a student of Jeremiah, had this passage in
mind in Dan 9:14; Yahweh will be wakeful and punctual in carrying out the disaster. Young notes
that the Lord was vigilant to bring the evil upon his people at the proper time. 334 As noted
above, favor sought would have been favor granted, but it wasnt; therefore Yahweh was vigilant
and punctual in releasing His wrath upon the covenant community.
For just Yahweh our God [ ] is a verbless
clause. We have refrained from inserting a verb [is or the like] in order to preserve the striking
manner in which the sentence reads as it is written. That which is prominent in the verbless
clause just is front-loaded so as to make Yahwehs justness prominent; moral justification
for what Yahweh has done, Daniel confessed, is His , His justness.
Just Yahweh our God [ ] appears only here in the
Hebrew Bible; however, remove our God and just Yahweh [ ] is found
in the OT five times.335 All but one appearance of the collocation [Psalm 5:12] refer to Yahweh.
2 Chronicles 12:6 concerns King Rehoboams covenant betrayal [2 Chronicles 12:1-2].
As a result, the prophet Shemaiah announces to the king that Jerusalem is about to be overrun by
Egypt [2 Chronicles 12:5]. In the wake of this impending judgment, Rehoboam and his princes
acknowledge: Just Yahweh; and Yahweh relents. What this suggests is that
means that Yahweh is just in the sense of relenting and showing grace when the
recalcitrant humble themselves.
326 See Guarding, watching in NIDOTTE.

327 KB1, 695.
328 Ibid., 718.
329 KB2, 1044.
330 Ibid., 1582.
331 Ibid., 1638.
332 I configured the search with two lexemes between the preposition and its following noun and
with four lexemes between the verb and the preposition.
333 KB2, 1639.
334 Young, 189; see also Driver, 131.
335 2 Chronicles 12:6; Psalms 5:12; 11:7; 145:17; Daniel 9:14.
77
Psalm 11:7 is significant in that it offers a depiction of the clause

[Just Yahweh]. The disambiguation of is: Yahweh loves []
righteousness []. This implies that Yahweh is just [] in the sense of loving
mans deeds of loyalty to the community.336 What this suggests is that
means that Yahweh is just in the sense of honoring human loyalty to the covenant in the form of
concrete actions.
Psalm 145:17 has an interesting parallel line to : Righteous
[] Yahweh in all His ways // faithful [] in all His acts. Righteous
[] and faithful [] seem to be part and parcel with the same package. What this
suggests is that means that Yahweh is just in the sense of remaining faithful
to the bond between Himself and His covenant partners.
The upshot is that means that Yahweh is just in the sense of
relenting and showing grace toward the repentant; just in the sense of honoring human loyalty in
deeds consistent with the covenant; and just in the sense of remaining faithful to His end of the
bond between Himself and His covenant partners. But all of this does not seem to shed much
light on the use of in Dan 9:14. When we investigate the appearance of and
in the same verse, we widen the scope of our study and gain insight into the use of
and in contexts of judgment.
Exodus 9:27 finds Pharaoh admitting to Moses that Yahweh the righteous One
[ ]; this tells us that, in a context of judgment, means that
Yahweh is in the right or is warranted in sending punishment upon those who stubbornly defy
Him. Similarly, 2 Chronicles 12:6 observes Rehoboam candidly confessing as much before he
humbles himself before Yahweh.337 Psalm 129:4 links Yahwehs to His just execution
of judgment upon the wicked. Jerusalem laments her pain and grief as she experiences Yahwehs
just and warranted punishments [Lamentations 1:18].
Psalm 119:137 ties Yahwehs to His upright judgments, where upright
[] has the sense of predictable and consistent administration of His world on the basis on
publically known norms through the Mosaic covenant. Moreover, Jeremiah trusts in this same
feature of Yahwehs in Jeremiah 12:1. In a similar manner, Zephaniah extols Yahwehs
, saying that Yahweh does no wrong [Zephaniah 3:5].
The sum of the matter is this: in Dan 9:14, the confessor draws upon a rich tradition of
thought that has depicted Yahweh as /righteous in the sense of being in the right or
fully warranted in executing severe punishments on the wicked. Since Yahweh can do no wrong,
He is fully justified in sending the curse of exile upon the community that betrayed the covenant.
Yahweh has been upright in the sense of making fully known the standards of behavior that were
incumbent upon His human covenant partners; but they consistently resisted Him; so now,
Yahweh is beyond reproach, /righteous, in sending them into exile.
Still, we have not listened to His voice [ ] is the antithesis
to Yahwehs moral justification; even Pharaoh in Exodus 9:27 admits, for a brief moment, that he
is in the wrong and that Yahweh is in the right, and that he must make supplication to Yahweh
336 KB2, 1006.

337 See also Ezra 9:15.
78
through Moses [Exodus 9:28]. But not the covenant community; still we have not listened to his
voice.338
Summary
Dan 9:12-14 hammers away at the truth that Yahweh is fully justified in sending the covenant
community into exile. Indeed, that the exile, and all that goes with it, is wholly supportable, is
signaled by an inclusion that frames the entire paragraph: He has kept His word which He
spoke opens the paragraph; still we have not listened to His voice closes the paragraph. The
covenant communitys apathy and culpability, and thus Yahwehs justification, could not be more
forthrightly portrayed.
Dan 9:12 underlines the cause-effect connection between Yahwehs fidelity to His word
[cause] and the emergence of a great disaster upon Jerusalem [effect]. The remainder of the verse
highlights the exceptional (and merited) devastation for Jerusalem that was the exile. The major
theme of the paragraph jumps out at once: Yahweh is warranted in activating the exile: He has
kept His word by bringing upon us a great disaster.
Of particular moment in Dan 9:12 is Yahwehs consistent fidelity to His word. We are
reminded that Yahweh carries out or gives effect to, or upholds, or fulfills His word; in a nutshell,
Yahweh follows through on what He promises. At the very least, when Daniel confesses, the
covenant community should have by that time grasped the full and terrible authority of the word
of God.
There is another matter of import in Dan 9:12: the unqualified failure of the nations
political leadership to preserve order [shalom/] in society. The prophet concedes in Dan
9:12 that this staggering judgment came upon those who governed. By singling out rulers, Daniel
is confessing, for them as it were, their complicity in the nations crisis in governance. And,
judging by some of the other prophets, the failure was of unspeakable proportions.
In Amos 2, the prophet censures the leadership class for their failure to maintain
/lm, in other words, their inability to preserve order in society. They dealt in
human trafficking, selling the just and needy for profit [Amos 2:6]; they profited from oppression
[Amos 2:7]; they sanctioned sexual abuse [Amos 2:7]; and they took full advantage of financial
exploitation where their profits were concerned [Amos 2:8]. Later in the book, the prophet
denounces those who cannot wait for the Sabbath to come to an end so that they could weigh
deceitfully with false balances [Amos 8:5].
Before we leave the matter of the political leadership in the nation, we repeat what was
said earlier: this disaster, the exile, came upon the both the people and the political classes [Dan
9:12]. Both amoral and immoral leadership often emerges from citizens cut out of the same piece
of cloth; however, it is most assuredly the case that a moral citizenry is going to respond to
amoral or immoral leadership. The nature of this response differs based upon the nature of the
commonwealth, whether a democracy or dictatorship. In either case, Yahweh can and does
partner with the moral sector of a nation [Daniel is a case in point] to turn around amoral or
immoral trends.
338 See the notes on Dan 9:10, page 56, for the sense of hear the voice.
79
Dan 9:13 confesses Daniels shock at the spiritual apathy and moral indifference to the
word of God on the part of the covenant community. The sense of Dan 9:13 boils down to this:
as it has been written in the Law of Moses, all of this disaster has befallen us; yet even with all
of that we have not entreated the favor of Yahweh our God, and thus turned from our iniquities
and closely attended Your faithfulness. Implied within Dan 9:13 is the promise that had favor
been entreated it would have been granted; stated in Dan 9:13 is the covenant communitys
failure to do so.
Dan 9:13 upholds Yahwehs faithfulness; in a very real sense, the entire verse is about
this divine faithfulness. In one way or another, everything in this verse hinges on Yahwehs
reliability, dependability, trustworthiness, faithfulness or constancy. If it is a matter of all this
disaster befalling the covenant people, then insofar as this was foretold in the Law of Moses,
Yahwehs faithfulness is in play. Or, if it is a matter of entreating the favor of Yahweh, then the
covenant community could have relied upon Yahwehs faithfulness. In either circumstance, the
covenant community should have interceded in prayer, humbled themselves, feared Yahweh,
asked Yahweh to relent, and appealed for grace, resulting in making a complete break with their
iniquitous ways and substituting a grasp of the meaning and implications of Yahwehs covenant
faithfulness; but, they didnt!
Dan 9:13 is also about the human failure; the failure to look beyond the political crisis
that was the exile to the spiritual foundations that underpinned the exile. The spiritual collapse
takes on three forms: [1] a reluctance on the part of the covenant community to cast themselves
upon the mercy of God; [2] a refusal to make a clean break with behaviors that were contrary to
the Law of Moses, especially those involving unjust behavior and its consequences; and [3] a
dismissive attitude towards thinking through the meaning and implications of Yahwehs
faithfulness. When the spiritual disciplines of mercy, manners, and meditation are jettisoned,
political crisis will jump in to fill the vacuum created by deserting the things of God. In the final
analysis, God is fully justified in holding to account His recalcitrant human partners.
Dan 9:14 underscores the stalemate between Yahweh and His covenant partners; on the
one hand, Yahweh is just; on the other hand, still we have not listened. Daniels confession in Dan
9:14 concedes the deadlock; the people and their God are at an impasse.
Yahweh is fully warranted in bringing on the exile; since Yahweh can do no wrong, He is
fully justified in sending the curse of exile upon the community that betrayed the covenant.
Furthermore, Yahweh has been upright in the sense of making fully known the standards of
behavior that were incumbent upon His human covenant partners; they are without excuse.
Still, they have not listened to His voice; from the human side the standoff takes the form
of refusal to obey what Yahweh demands. This is tantamount to disbelief; to a refusal to rely on
Yahweh, or to trust in Yahweh, to a rejection of observing what Yahweh says in His instruction, a
repudiation of serving Him and of clinging to Him. The net effect is that things are at a standstill;
accordingly, Daniel must petition Yahweh that He relent [Dan 9:15-19].
80
Petition [Dan 9:15-19]


9:15aSo now, O Lord our God,

9:15awho brought Your
people from the land of
Egypt,

9:15awith a mighty hand,

9:15athus You established for Yourself a
reputation,

9:15aas at this day;
9:15b
we are sinners,
9:15b
we act wickedly.

9:16aLord, in accord with all of Your
demonstrations
of loyalty,

9:16aturn away please Your
raging anger,

9:16afrom Your city Jerusalem,
9:16aYour holy mountain;

9:16b
due to our sins,

9:16b
and the
iniquities of our fathers,

9:16b
Jerusalem and Your
people an object of scorn,
9:16b
to everyone around us.

9:17aSo now, listen our God,

9:17ato the prayer of Your servant,
9:17aand to his supplication (for

favor),

9:17aand let Your face shine,

9:17aupon Your desolate sanctuary;

9:17b
for Your sake, O Lord.

9:18aIncline, my God, Your ear,
9:18aso as to hear,

9:18aopen Your eyes,

9:18aso as to see our desolations,

9:18aeven the city which
bears Your name;

9:18b
indeed, not on the basis
of our moral conduct,
81

9:18b
are we
presenting our supplications before You,

9:18b
but rather on the basis
of Your great
compassion.

9:19aO Lord, listen,

9:19aO Lord, forgive,

9:19a
O Lord, listen carefully
and act,
9:19ado not delay;

9:19b for Your sake my God,

9:19b because Your name is called,

9:19b over Your city and over Your
people.
Syntactical analysis
I.
(Invocation): So now, O Lord our God, 9:15a

(Clarifying statement): who brought Your people from Egypt, 9:15a
(Manner): with a mighty hand, 9:15a
(Result of 9:15a): thus You established for Yourself a reputation, 9:15a
(Temporal statement): as at this day; 9:15a
II.
(Confession): we are sinners, 9:15b

(Confession): we act wickedly. 9:15b
III.
(Petition)
(Motive/appeal): Lord, in accord with all of Your demonstrations of loyalty, 9:16a
(Appeal): (1) turn away please Your raging anger, 9:16a
(Object): from Your city Jerusalem, 9:16a
(Apposition to 9:16a): Your holy mountain; 9:16a
(Reason one for 9:16b): due to our sins, 9:16b
(Reason two for 9:16b): and the iniquities of our fathers, 9:16b
(Motive for 9:16a): Jerusalem and Your people an object of scorn, 9:16b
(Spatial statement): to everyone around us. 9:16b
(Plea): So now, listen our God, 9:17a
(Object one): to the prayer of Your servant, 9:17a
(Object two): and to his supplication (for favor), 9:17a
(Appeal): (2) and let Your face shine, 9:17a
(Object): upon Your desolate sanctuary; 9:17a
(Motive for 9:17a): for Your sake, O Lord. 9:17b
(Plea): Incline, my God, Your ear, so as to hear, 9:18a-
82
(Appeal): (3) open Your eyes, so as to see our desolations, 9:18a-

(Apposition to desolations): even the city which bears Your name; 9:18a
(Motives for appeal): (a) indeed, not on the basis of our moral conduct, 9:18b
are we presenting our supplications before You, 9:18b
(b) but rather on the basis of Your great compassion. 9:18b
(Plea): O Lord, listen, 9:19a
(Appeal): (4) O Lord, forgive, 9:19a
(Plea): O Lord, listen carefully and act, 9:19a
(Appeal): (5) do not delay; 9:19a
(Motive for 9:19a-) for Your sake my God, 9:19b
(Explanation of motive) because Your name is called, over Your city and over Your
people 9:19b-
The syntactical outline shows that Daniels petition moves from invocation to confession
and then to a series of appeals. The outline demonstrates that Daniel is emphasizing the appeal
portion of his prayer.
The invocation recalls the seminal event in the history of Israel, the covenant community:
the exodus from Egypt. Daniel appeals to Yahweh to act in accordance with the deliverance He
achieved from Israel from Egypt, which had gained Him renown. 339
The confession is brief and to the point; Daniel has covered this ground, the sin of the covenant
community, in Dan 9:5-14.
Obviously, the appeal is the crux. There are nine appeals, twelve imperatival forms
altogether between Dan 9:16-19. The appeals are basically threefold: [1] attend: (a) incline Your
ear, Dan 9:19a, (b) hear, Dan 9:18a, (c) open Your eyes, Dan 9:18a, and (d) see the
desolations, Dan 9:18a; [2] relent: (a) turn away Your wrath, Dan 9:16a, and (b) forgive, Dan
9:19a; and [3] act: (a) let Your face shine, Dan 9:17a, and (b) do not delay, Dan 9:19a.
At the same time, the reader must not ignore the spiritual depth of the motives for the
various appeals. Daniel certainly finds abundant reasons for his appeals outside of his own need.
That is, Daniel appeals for Yahweh to relent on the basis of the scorn heaped upon Jerusalem
[Dan 9:16b]. Daniel also finds cause for appeal in Yahweh; twice Daniel appeals for Your
sake [Dan 9:17b; 9:19b]. The high water mark, as far as motives are concerned, comes in
Dan 9:18; in a grand statement of personal, human moral bankruptcy, Daniel bases everything on
Yahwehs compassion.
Overall, we would have to say that the theme of Dan 9:15-19 is an appeal to relent; in
one way or another, Daniel petitions Yahweh to turn from His wrath and forgive the covenant
339 Baldwin, 166.
83
betrayal of the community. The appeal falls squarely upon the compassionate grace of God;
Daniel and the covenant community offer nothing beyond sin and iniquity.
Genre
Dan 9:15-19 is essentially a prayer of petition; that is, a prayer which makes a specific
request of God.340 With this in mind, the reader of Dan 9:15-19 should remain aware of the
specific request Daniel is making: relent.
Dan 9:15 So now, O Lord our God, who brought Your people from the land of Egypt, with a
mighty hand, thus You established for Yourself a reputation, as at this day; we are sinners, we act
wickedly.
Dan 9:15 juxtaposes the glory of God and the vulgarity of man. The Lord our God redeems His
covenant promises and frees the captive community from Egyptian bondage; man, on the other
hand, clenches the redemption and then betrays the covenant that provided them.
O Lord [] is one of the many words for God in the OT. Yahweh is .341
To be sure, identifies Yahweh as sovereign power, as ruler, and as master. To address
Yahweh as is to address Him as the one who rules as Lord over all He has
acquired.342 Terence Fretheim affirms that denotes the universal authority of God.343
Indeed, Yahweh as showed His sovereign power by delivering His people from
bondage in Egypt [Dan 9:15 a]. The net effect is that by identifying Yahweh as ,
Daniel is addressing the supreme, dominant, absolute, and ascendant authority in the universe.
Everything else in the cosmos subordinates itself to the fact that Yahweh is .344
Who brought Your people from the land of Egypt [
] is a clause that appears 54 times in the Hebrew Bible, attesting the breadth
and force of the Exodus event in the history, if not always in the recollection of the covenant
community. Russell notes that for the covenant community the memory of that great event,
commemorated regularly in public and private prayers and in the reading of the Scriptures, was
an ever-recurring source of encouragement to them. 345 Such is the case in Dan 9:15, at least for
Daniel.
340 Collins, FOTL, 117.
341 is a lord or a master [KB1, 13]; see also BDB, 11; Holladay, 4. In general,
denotes Yahwehs sovereign power.
342 Kohler, OTT, 240n15.
343 Terence Fretheim, , in NIDOTTE [H151].
344 Ibid., 30.
345 Russell, Daniel, 178.
84
You established for Yourself a reputation [ ] is a chronological and logical

outcome of the preceding perfect who brought.346 The sense is: who brought Your people from
the land of Egypt and as a result You established for Yourself a reputation.
The phrase [You established for a reputation ( )], in this basic
configuration, appears 21 times in the Hebrew Bible. Establishing a name or reputation is used
of both humans and Yahweh; we are concerned with those uses that pertain to God. There are
three writers who use the phrase in a manner similar to that of Dan 9:15 [Nehemiah 9:10; Isaiah
63:12, 14; Jeremiah 32:20]. Kohler-Baumgartner affirm that all three of these writers use the
phrase to signal standing, reputation, fame.347 BDB follows suit, noting that the clause denotes
fashioning a reputation.348 F.V. Reiterer notices a coalescence of the spoken name and the
presence of God in the collocation of /establish and /reputation, fame, honor.349
This is surely the case; reputation, fame, or even honor is exhibited by the presence of Yahweh in
world history. As the exodus demonstrates, Yahwehs fame is not stagnant, but rather rests on His
direct intervention in history. Accordingly, Daniel invokes the merger of Yahwehs renowned use
of His power to deliver in human history with the covenant communitys sin and wickedness as a
basis for the petition. Daniel is staking everything on a divine prestige that is permanent [Isaiah
63:12] and glorious [Isaiah 63:14]. Yahwehs eminence is His reputation for doing the
impossible [Jeremiah 32:17], for unwavering fidelity to the covenant [Jeremiah 32:18], for
executing the greatest of purposes [Jeremiah 32:19], for awareness of all that mankind does
[Jeremiah 32:19], and for miraculous events leading to deliverance [Jeremiah 32:20-21].
We are sinners, we act wickedly [ ] are terms that have dealt with
in Dan 9:5.350 The key matter here is the nuance of these two perfect aspect verbs. The normal
way of translating these perfects is to render we have sinned, we have acted wickedly. This
translation, though certainly possible, leaves the English reader with the impression that these
verbs refer to some moral behavior in the vague and undefined past. Not so, for the perfect
aspect of these verbs indicates the perfect of persistent situation, where sin and wickedness
extend into the past and continue into the present, right up to the moment of speaking. 351
Accordingly, some such reading as we are sinners, we act wickedly or we have been sinners
(and still are), we have acted wickedly (and still do) captures the perfect aspect of these verbs.
For purposes of summary, to admit that the people of God are sinners is to concede that
they stand before Yahweh as morally deviant, as premeditated in their depravity, as morally
responsible, and judged as sinners; wantonness is here-and-now! Moreover, to admit that the
people of God act wickedly is to grant that all stand guilty before Yahweh; culpability
characterizes their standing before God; guilt is here-and-now! Such is Daniels brief confession.
Dan 9:16 Lord, in accord with all of Your demonstrations of loyalty, turn away please
Your raging anger, from Your city Jerusalem, Your holy mountain; due to our sins, and the
iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and Your people an object of scorn, to everyone around us.
346 See IBHS 33.2.1a; GKC 111 i.

347 KB2, 1549.
348 BDB, 1027.
349 F.V. Reiterer, , in TDOT, vol. XV, 173.
350 See pages 25-30.
351 Comrie, 60.
85
(1) The syntactical shape of this first petition is the most complex of all the appeals in Dan 9:1619. It is advisable to review the syntax of this first appeal, which features the petition bracketed
by two motive statements:
Motive statement: Lord, in accord with all of Your demonstrations of loyalty
The appeal: turn away please Your raging anger, from Your city Jerusalem
Basis (for the next motive): due to our sins and the iniquities of our fathers
Motive statement: Jerusalem an object of scorn
It should be noted well that the motive statements involve Yahweh and the interests of
Jerusalem and its people as an object of scorn; Daniel does not base his appeal on strictly
personal suffering; there is not even a hint of self-interest in this plea. Indeed, the reference to
scorn is a roundabout acknowledgement of Jerusalem and its people as the possession of
Yahweh.
In accord with all of Your demonstrations of loyalty [] front-loads
the master motive, in Daniels mind, to seek cessation of Yahwehs furious rage leveled at the
covenant community.
In accord with is a prepositional phrase, using the preposition . The author front loads
the prepositional phrase, highlighting the norm or standard that Daniel asks Yahweh to apply to
his first appeal; thus, the translation in accordance with.352 The criterion that Daniel asks be
applied to the case of the people of God is the Covenant loyalty of Yahweh.
Your demonstrations of loyalty [] is normally translated with righteousness or
righteous acts or words to that effect. This translation, while certainly permissible, is a bit
wooden, and misses the weightier point of . The use of the noun
[righteousness/demonstrations of loyalty] with the second, masculine, singular, suffix [Your]
occurs 21 times in the Hebrew Bible; obviously, they all refer to Yahwehs .
A working assumption when dealing with the /righteousness root is to draw a
distinction between the form and the form . Kohler-Baumgartner tease out
the distinction this way: has a collective meaning; it refers to correct order, whether
accuracy or equity, what is right, or communal loyalty or salvation; on the other
hand denotes a single proof of uprightness.353 In other words, is a particular
demonstration of . This is especially clear when is written in the plural, as it is
in Dan 9:16 [the only plural form of of the 21 appearances of ], accentuating
the demonstration of concrete acts of accuracy or equity or communal loyalty or salvation.
The upshot is this: in Dan 9:16, [demonstrations of loyalty] means the tangible proof
of Yahwehs communal loyalty; this proof has come previously in the form of His leading His
people out of Egypt [Dan 9:15a]. Accordingly, Daniel is drawing upon Yahwehs
demonstrations of covenant loyalty scattered throughout the earthly history of the covenant
community. Yahwehs proven history of beneficent intervention on behalf of His covenant
352 The use of the preposition indicates the manner or the norm of an action [Van der
Merwe 39.10.3]; see also J-M 133 g; GKC 118 s; IBHS 11.2.9b.
353 KB2, 1004.
86
partners is the basis for Daniels appeal. The demonstration of Yahwehs covenant loyalty that
Daniel seeks this time is for Yahweh to turn from His raging anger.
Turn away please Your raging anger [ ] is the first of twelve
directive or command forms in Dan 9:16-19. If nothing else, Daniel is pulling out all the stops in
order to plead with Yahweh for a softer line.
There may be a structure in these twelve imperatives. The reader will note that the call
for Yahweh to listen is repeated four times [Dan 9:17a, 18a, 19a, 19a]. We may postulate
that each of these four appearances of listen follows an imperative as a sort of final plea to act
on the appeal above it. We might set out the internal structure of petition this way:
(1) Turn away please Your raging anger
Listen [to this appeal to turn away Your anger]
(2) Let Your face shine;
Incline Your ear so as to hear [this appeal to let Your face shine]
(3) Open Your eyes so as to see our desolations
Listen [to this appeal to open Your eyes and see our desolations]
(4) Forgive
(10) Listen carefully [to this appeal for forgiveness and (11) act]
(5) Do not delay
If this suggested structure holds water, then there are in effect five primary appeals,
supported by a plea to listen. The seven primary petitions are: [1] turn away please Your
raging anger; [2] let Your face shine; [3] open Your eyes to see our utter desolation; [4]
forgive; and [5] do not delay. So, having postulated all of this, lets turn our attention to the
first primary appeal.
Turn away please Your raging anger [ ] is written in the jussive
form, a form of the imperative mode that avoids command in favor of polite request. The jussive
use of the imperfect is a restrained entreaty whereby Daniel longs to motivate the Lord to turn
away from his wrath. The thrust of the jussive, therefore, is an indirect plea in the sense of a
polite request.354 The nuance of the verb expresses Daniels desire that Yahweh would relent.355
Sadly, most of the English versions leave a word untranslated: please []. To be sure, there
is more going on here than mere civility on Daniels part. Rather, Daniel uses the particle []
to back reference Yahwehs demonstrations of covenant loyalty [Dan 9:16a]. Lambdin writes
concerning the function of this particle that it denotes that the command in question is a logical
consequence, either of an immediately preceding statement or of the general situation in which it
is uttered.356 The sense becomes this: turn away please (I am appealing to Your covenant
loyalty) turn away Your raging anger.
The use of the jussive of polite request, the reminder that Daniel is staking everything on
Yahwehs covenant loyalty reveals much about Daniel as an individual before God. That is,
Daniel approaches Yahweh as a beggar; there is deference in Daniels attitude toward the God to
whom he prays; there is humility and meekness. Daniels style is unassuming and submissive.
Placing himself at a polite distance from Yahweh, Daniel shows respect and reverence for the
graciousness and the sovereign power of his Lord; blessed are the poor in spirit. This self354 Van der Merwe 19.4.4.
355 GKC 109.
356 Lambdin 136.
87
effacing attitude, this unpretentiousness is quite at odds with some modern attitudes toward
petition. That is, Daniel knows nothing of coming to God and making virtual demands of Him.
A popular, modern, attitude toward petition is that in making requests we are, in effect, making
claims. We foolishly presume that we can present God with an ultimatum, arrogantly demanding
of Him the outcome that we seek. Of this conceit, Daniel 9:16 knows nothing.
Turn away [] is from a sematic field of terms for turning. 357 KohlerBaumgartner note that the basic meaning of is to depict someone who has shifted
direction in a particular way and then shifted back from it in the opposite way. 358 Taking this at
face value, we may infer that depicts a turnaround of one sort or another.
For the ranges of meaning for , see CDCH [450-51]. Of the 32 ranges of meaning CDCH
offers, the best for our context is turn away, subside, abate. 359 If this is the case, then Daniel is
politely begging Yahweh to terminate His raging anger. The upshot is that Daniel humbly asks
Yahweh to change His inclination toward His people, withdrawing this annihilating, consuming,
and utterly engulfing Divine rage.
Raging anger [ ] is literally Your anger and Your rage, and so most of the
English versions translate it. Again, there is nothing wrong with this translation; at the same time,
when the language permits a more concentrated translation, we should use it. Such a translation
is permitted through hendiadys; the function of hendiadys is to permit two component nouns to be
read as a single unit in combination.360 Thus, raging anger seems to be a way of rhetorically
underling the intensity, the unremitting passion, of the wrath of God as experienced by the exiles.
Yet, as we shall note, His anger is not as intense as it could have been.
Anger [] is from a semantic field of terms for anger, rage, and wrath. 361 Among the terms
within this semantic field are: [1] , [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6]
, [7] , [8] , and [9] .
is from the first root, , which points to an intense emotional state; a state that is
usually visibly forceful; this is the term used in Dan 9:16.362 The second term, , is one that
typically signals a wider variety of affects: cursing, scolding, indignation. 363 The third term,
, is a somewhat more restrained term for anger.364 The fourth term, , is one of the
357 See Turning, apostasy, returning, faithlessness, repentance in NIDOTTE.
358 KB2, 1429.
359 CDCH, 451.
360 W.G.E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995;
reprint), 325.
361 See Anger, rage, wrath in NIDOTTE.
362 appears about 120 times in the Hebrew Bible. The ranges of meaning are as follows:
[1] nose, breath; in anger, there is heavy breathing through the nose and fire burns inside (Deut
32:22), which is why the nose becomes the organ symbolic of anger; [2] the region of the nose,
face; [3] anger, used about 80 times of Yahweh; [4] nostrils; and [5] face (KB 1, 76-77).
363 [verb] appears 12 times in the Hebrew Bible; 11 times in the Qal; once in the Niphal.
The ranges of meaning in the Qal are: to curse, scold; to hurl and imprecation at; show
indignation; in the Niphal: be inflicted by a curse (KB 1, 276-77); [noun] appears 22 times
in the HB. The ranges of meaning are: [1] cursed by an indignant God; [2] curse against God or
His prophets (KB1, 277).
364 [verb] appears 6 times in the HB, only in the Qal. The ranges of meaning are: to rage
against (KB1, 277); be angry, enraged against (CDCH, 103); to be out of humor, vexed, enraged
88
more passionate terms for anger in the Hebrew Bible; it is pretty much anger that has reached the
end of its tether.365 The fifth term, , is one that tends to point to legitimate rage leveled
against an inferior.366 The sixth term, , is one of the terms for anger in the field that has a
more muted nuance.367 The seventh term, , is very intense term, pointing to the kind of
rage that, when vented, nothing remains standing.368 The eighth term, , is another of the
more muted terms for anger in field.369 The ninth, and final, term in the field is , a term
that signals fierce emotion, when applied to hums, accompanied by visible shaking. 370
What all of this tells us is this: Yahweh is passionately enraged, but He shows this rage in a
marginally moderated fashion; His rage is not as all-out as it could have been. Certainly, the rage
manifested in Dan 9:16 is not the kind of rage that is completely destructive, with no one left
(BDB, 277). [noun] appears 5 times in the HB. The ranges of meaning are: rage, furious
rage [KB1, 277]; anger, raging (CDCH, 102); storming, raging, rage (BDB, 277).
365 [noun] appears 131 times in the HB. The ranges of meaning are: [1] heat; [2] poison,
venom of either animals or humans; [3] rage, wrath (about 26 times); [4] Gods wrath (about 80
times, especially Jeremiah/Ezekiel; KB 1, 326).
366 [verb] appears 94 times in the HB, mostly in the Qal with usages in the Niphal,
Hiphil and Hithpael. The ranges of meaning in the Qal are; [1] to become hot, to be hot, become
angry; in the Niphal, to be angry with; in the Hiphil, to kindle; and in the Hithpael, to get excited
(KB1, 351). CDCH offers for the Qal: to burn, be kindled, be angry with, kindle; for the Niphal:
to be angry/incensed with; for the Hiphil: to burn with zeal, to kindle anger against; and for the
Hithpael: to show oneself angry (CDCH, 132). [noun] appears 41 times in the HB; the
ranges of meaning are: burning anger, only of God (KB1, 351-52).
367 [verb] appears 55 times in the HB, in the Qal, Piel, and mostly in Hiphil. The ranges
of meaning for the Qal are: to be vexed, angry; Piel, to irritate, and the Hiphil: to grieve, to
offend, to provoke to anger (KB1, 491). [noun] appears 21 times in the HB. The ranges of
meaning are: [1] vexation, [2] grief, [3] plural offenses (KB 1, 491).
368 [verb] appears 8 times in the HB, all in the Hithpael: to show oneself angry, become
excited, flare up (KB1, 781). CDCH offers: to be angry, become enraged; to pretend to be angry
with; to incite to anger, to infuriate; to be arrogant, headstrong (CDCH, 308). [noun]
appears 34 times in the HB. The ranges of meaning are: crossing leading to outburst; anger, rage
(KB1, 782). CDCH offers rancor, indignation, usually of Yahweh (CDCH, 309).
369 [verb] appears 34 times in the HB in the Qal, Hiphil, and Hithpael. The ranges of
meaning are: Qal: to be angry, to be furious; Hiphil: to rouse to anger, to incense; and Hithpael:
fallen into a rage (KB2, 1124). [noun] appears 29 times in the HB; the ranges of meaning
are: [1] of people: ill-humor, frustration; of Yahweh: anger, judgment of anger (KB 2, 1125).
CDCH offers: [1] anger, wrath, judgment, punishment; [2] anger, frustration (of people; CDCH,
399).
370 [verb] appears 41 times in the HB in the Qal, Hiphil, and Hithpael. The ranges of
meaning in the Qal: [1] to tremble, be caught in restless motion, to tremble with emotion; [2] to
come out quaking with fear; [3] to get excited, to rave; for the Hiphil: [1] to agitate, to arouse, to
disturb; [2] to cause unrest to someone; and for the Hithpael: to get worked up, to be enraged
(KB2, 1183). CDCH offers for the Qal: [1] to tremble, shake, quake (of the earth); [2] to come
trembling (through fear); [3] to be shaken, moved (through grief); [4] to be stirred up, to be astir;
[5] to quarrel; [6] to rage (of Yahweh in Isa 28:21); for the Hiphil: [1] to cause to tremble, shake;
[2] to cause disquiet or unrest for someone; [3] to disturb (a dead person); [4] to enrage, provoke
Yahweh (Job 12:6; CDCH 413). [noun] appears 7 times in the HB; the ranges of
meaning are: [1] going wild; [2] nervousness, agitation; [3] anger (Hab 3:2 of Yahweh; KB 2,
1183).
89
standing []. On the other hand, Yahweh is far more than vexed and out of humor
[]. Rather, Yahwehs anger burns with remarkable yet not quite annihilationist passion
against His erstwhile covenant partners; basically, Yahweh has come to the end of the line with
His people.
Raging [] is fourth of the terms from the semantic field for anger that we have
noted. The term is very forceful, signaling anger that has reached the end of its tether. To put the
same thing another way, , and anger [] for that matter, tells us that the patience of
Yahweh had come to an end.371 Daniel senses that he and his people are backed into a corner with
no real way out, save Yahwehs willingness to relent.372
From Your city, Jerusalem, Your holy mountain [ ]
suggests the following: The fact that Jerusalem is referred to as Your city underscores the fact that
Jerusalem is the place where Yahweh chose to reveal His name [1 Kings 11:36; 14:21; 2 Kings
23:27]. Jerusalem is also the place where the Temple represents His presence [2 Kings 23:27;
Zechariah 8:3]. Moreover, when Jerusalem is associated with the Holy Mountain, the city
becomes the place where Yahweh dwells and reigns [Isaiah 24:23].
The reader can easily note that much more is at stake with Jerusalem than merely a
geographical location in Israel; rather, Yahwehs name, Yahwehs presence, and Yahwehs rule
and reign are at stake for the covenant people, and ultimately, for mankind. The last time Daniel
mentions Jerusalem in his book, he is being told that it will be rebuilt [Dan 9:25].
Due to our sins and the iniquities of our fathers [
] is, as we have pointed out above [page 85], is reason behind the second
motive statement. Overall, the appeal and its twin motives look like this:
Appeal = turn away please Your raging anger, from Your city Jerusalem
1st motive = Lord, in accord with all of Your demonstrations of loyalty
2nd motive = Jerusalem and Your people an object of scorn to everyone around us
Reason for the second motive: Due to our sins and the iniquities of our fathers
For the data on our sins and our iniquities, see the notes on Dan 9:5 [pages 26-28].
Daniel confesses that the actions of the covenant people have brought scorn on the nation; one
would more or less expect this from pagan people, but not the people of God. However, as
pointed out repeatedly in this study of Daniel, God is sovereign over the national and
international political fortunes of the nations of this earth, rumors to the contrary.
Jerusalem and Your people an object of scorn, to everyone around us
[ ] is a verbless clause; we
have refrained from inserting a copula in order to retain the abruptness, the striking quality, of the
clause as written. The focal point of the verbless clause is the predicate: an object of scorn, to
everyone around us.
371 On this point, see Gale Struthers, , in NIDOTTE.
372 The reader should note and respect that fact of Yahwehs anger. As we have noted, Yahwehs
anger is fully warranted; He has gone the second mile more than once with His covenant partners;
still with all of His grace, Dan 9:16 implies that there are limits to Yahwehs patience with
recalcitrant people. We have no reason to doubt that this expression of anger comes at a personal
price for God; ultimately the cost is visible on Calvary; still, justice demands that He holds His
people accountable for their end of the covenant relationship.
90
Object of scorn [] is from a semantic field of terms for shame, disgrace,

humiliation, and scorn.373 There are ten terms in this field: [1] , [2] , [3] ,
[4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , and [10]
. The first of these terms [] means to show contempt for someone; to despise
another;374 the second term [] is more oriented toward shame: either to be ashamed or to
be put to shame;375 the third term [] connotes insult: either shame or abuse;376 the fourth
term denotes dismay: to be confounded;377 the fifth term [] has more to do with mockery:
to reproach, taunt or revile;378 the sixth term [] denotes humiliation: to be humiliated or to
be put to shame;379 the seventh term [] is a word that indicates scorn: to deride or mock;380
the eighth term is a bit more forceful, indicating rejection: to have contempt for, despise, spurn,
disdain;381 the ninth term [] signals virtual worthlessness: dung-heap, disgrace,
worth nothing;382 and the final term [] suggests that which is dishonored: to become or
make contemptible, or to treat someone contemptibly.383
To be sure, the ancient Near Eastern cognates cast light on mockery []. The Syriac
cognate [chref] means to be sharp (people); the Arabic cognate [chrf] means to be sharp, to treat
badly;384 and the Jewish Aramaic cognate [] means abuse, slander, insult.385
What all of this leads to is this: of all the shades of ignominy that Daniel could have chosen to
depict how Jerusalem was viewed in the eyes of those around her, he chose one [] that
underlines mockery; there is insult and slander hurled at Jerusalems collapse in the region; she
has become the victim of insolence. By extension, based upon what has been noted concerning
Yahwehs stake in Jerusalem, His name, His presence, and His rule and reign, mockery heaped
upon Jerusalem is simultaneously mockery heaped upon Yahweh. Joyce Baldwin writes, the
captivity of Judah and the non-existence of the Jerusalem sanctuary were interpreted by the
nations to mean that Judahs God was either powerless or a delusion. 386
Dan 9:17 So now, listen our God, to the prayer of Your servant, and to his supplication (for
favor), and let Your face shine, upon Your desolate sanctuary; for Your sake O Lord.
Dan 9:17 is the first of four requests to Yahweh to hear/listen [Dan 9:17a, 18a, 19a, 19a].
We have postulated that the repetition of this request serves the purpose of following a major
appeal with a plea for Yahweh to hear/listen to that major appeal. The sense is: Turn away
please Your raging anger [Dan 9:16]; so now, listen our God (to this appeal to turn away Your
anger), to the prayer of Your servant, and to his supplication (for favor) [Dan 9:17].
373 See Shame, disgrace, humiliation, scorn in NIDOTTE.
374 KB1, 115.
375 Ibid., 116.
376 Ibid., 336.
377 CDCH, 128.
378 Ibid., 133.
379 Ibid., 178.
380 Ibid., 196.
381 Ibid., 255.
382 KB2, 1099.
383 Ibid., 1101.
384 KB1, 355.
385 E. Kutsch, , in TDOT, vol. V, 210.
386 Baldwin, 167.
91
This relationship between Dan 9:17 and Dan 9:16 is supported by Daniels use of a
subordinating conjunction [ (so now)]. This conjunction signals that Dan 9:17 has a
logical force to it, teasing out an implication of the appeal in Dan 9:16. 387 The sense becomes:
Turn away please- Your raging anger; (as a result I urge You) now (that You) listen our God (to
this appeal to turn away Your anger).
Listen [ (Qal, imperative)] is a request, not a demand. Daniel knows that Yahweh has
poured out His raging anger and that Jerusalem and the people of God have become a mockery as
a result. Daniel is in no position to be giving ultimatums to God. Rather, Daniel implores
Yahweh to hear his prayer and act favorably upon it. The imperative is the imperative of
supplication and entreaty, pure and simple. D.S. Russell captures the plea in Daniels request: 388
No attempt is made here to protest Israels innocence or to plead
extenuating circumstances. The peoples sin and that of their
forefathers is readily acknowledged. They can but throw
themselves on the mercy of God and beseech Him to turn aside
His wrath.
Listen [], in this context, means listen (and please accept). 389 The implication is that
Daniel hopes that Yahweh will not only hear his appeal but respond to it favorably.
Our God [] should be observed by the reader. Daniel places his appeal before our
God; the force of the 1st person plural suffix should be noted. Daniel prays as a member of the
covenant community; he implores the favorable attention of our God. Elsewhere in Daniel 9, the
prophet has referred to our God in covenantal contexts [9:10 (author of Torah), 13 (curses in
Moses Torah), 14, 15(Exodus from Egypt)]. Daniel confesses and petitions as a participant in
the covenant with Yahweh and, as a member of that covenant community, pleads for rescue from
Yahwehs wrath.
An implication of supplicating our God is that the individual does not rise above the
level of the community. The principle that seems to inform Daniels prayer is that Daniel, as an
individual, can live before God only as a member of the community; 390 individualism in the
sense of an unwavering and obsessive self-interest has no place in the Old Testament notion of
covenant community. Daniel does not single himself out, does not parade himself in a show of
dogged individualism as he appeals. The request is not about Daniel; rather it is about our plight
and our sin and our iniquity. Hence, the appeal is an entreaty to our God.391
387 For the logical force of , see IBHS 39.3.4f; Van der Merwe 44.6 notes that
is a discourse marker indicating a logical conclusion; see also Gibson 72 Rem.4.
388 Russell, 178.
389 For the gloss, hear and accept, see KB2, 1572; BDB, 1034 [hear and answer]; Holladay, 376,
heed a request. For similar uses of the imperative of , see Psalm 4:2; 27:7; 30:10; Daniel
9:18-19.
391 Modern Christendom, especially in the United States, has fallen victim to the narcissism
characteristic of our culture. Far too many of us live and breathe an environment of Its all about
me! Sadly, much modern Christian television feeds off this narcissistic self-interest. The church
needs to begin to conceive of itself as a community of believers who mutually support one another
in accomplishing the tasks set before the church by the Messiah. We stand as individuals in our
own right but only as members of the larger covenant community. One of the clearest statements
92
The prayer of Your servant [ ] is that to which Daniel invites Yahwehs

attention and response. The noun translated prayer [] is the general word for a
prayer, especially for a prayer of supplication; what is more also has a place in
intercessions.392 The uses of are these: [1] communal lamentation, [2] supplication of
a human king, [3] a prayer of repentance and supplication, [4] intercession, and [5] the prayer of a
priest in blessing the community.393 As used in Dan 9:17, points to an intercession on
Daniels part for Yahweh to relent.
Supplication (for favor) [] is from a semantic field of terms for favor.394 Terms
in the field include: [1] , [2] , [3] , and [4] . The first term, ,
appears 54 times in the OT and means either (a) to be willing, or (b) to consent or accept. 395
The second term, , is the most extensive term in the field, having a number of
derivatives, our word [] among them. The verbal form in the field [] is used
78 times in the OT and means: (a) in the Qal: to be gracious to, to show favor to, to spare, and to
be generous to; (b) in the Niphal: to be pitied; (c) in the Piel: to make gracious; (d) in the Poel: to
have pity of; and (e) in the Hithpael: to make supplication, to implore the favor of. 396 Our term,
, means either a supplication or a plea for favor.397 Kohler-Baumgartner more or
less follow suit, translating with pleading for compassionate attention; indeed,
is sought by a mind beset with terror.398 This latter point extends Daniels prayer
[] by underling the desperation he feels, implicit in , a supplication (for
favor).
The third term, , is a verb that has the following ranges of meaning: [1] in the Qal:
(a) to be good, pleasing, appropriate, all right, (b) to be good, happy, merry, in good spirits,
healthy, (c) to be worthwhile, and (d) to be better than; and in the Hiphil: (a) to be right, do well,
act benevolently, and (b) to please someone.399
Finally, the fourth term, , is a verb that appears over 55 times in the OT. The
ranges of meaning are: [1] in the Qal: (a) to be pleased with, accept favorably, (b) to show ones
favor, (c) enjoy, take pleasure in, (d) to be pleased or happy to do something, (e) to be pleased or
content, (f) to accept humbly, (g) become friends, (h) be a favorite, (i) to be desirous; [2] in the
Niphal: (a) to be regarded as pleasing, and (b) to find favor or be accepted; [3] in the Piel: (a) to
seek the favor of, and (b) to make acceptable; [4] in the Hiphil: to enjoy; and [5] in the Hithpael:
to make oneself acceptable.400
What all of this implies is that, first, Daniel is appealing for more than being accepted
[]. What is more, Daniel seems to covet something beyond benevolence [
of the status of the individual within the community is found in Philippians 2:1-12. The reader
should take it to heart.
392 KB2, 1777.
393 Ibid.
394 See Favor in NIDOTTE.
395 CDCH, 1.
396 Ibid., 125.
397 Ibid., 486.
398 KB2, 1719.
399 CDCH, 139.
400 Ibid., 429.
93
(Hiphil)] or purely finding favor []. Rather, Daniels supplication (for favor) has a tone of
desperation in it; he is pleading for Yahwehs compassionate attention []. Indeed,
this noun, , appears 18 times in OT, quite often in situations that are dire as well as
beyond human control for resolving [Psalm 28:2, 6; 31:22; 86:6-7; 116:1-3; 130:2-3].
We have suggested that Dan 9:17 is in reality a plea for Yahweh to attend to the major
appeal in the previous verse [Dan 9:16]; the sense is: Turn away please Your raging anger
[Dan 9:16]; indeed now, listen our God (to this appeal to turn away Your anger), to the prayer of
Your servant, and to his supplication (for favor) [Dan 9:17]. Having uttered his first, major,
appeal for Yahweh to relent in His anger toward the covenant community in Dan 9:16, Daniel
reinforces that appeal with another in Dan 9:17 designed to underline intercession []
that is in effect a desperate plea for compassion [ ].
(2) And let Your face shine upon Your desolate sanctuary [
] is the second major appeal. The first had been an appeal for Yahweh to
relent in His wrath, followed by a supportive plea for Yahweh to listen. The same pattern is
followed here; after making an appeal for Yahwehs face to shine upon the sanctuary [Dan
9:17a-b], Daniel will once more reinforce this major appeal with a plea for Yahweh to [1]
Incline, my God, Your ear, and [2] hear, (9:18a-). If the first appeal was a plea for Yahweh
to cease doing something, then this second appeal is a plea for Yahweh to begin doing something.
Obviously, the gist of this appeal is to be uncovered in the figure of Yahwehs shining face
upon the sanctuary.
Let Your face shine [ ] may be understood in light of similar language in
the Psalms [Psalm 31:17; 67:1; 80:3, 7, 19]. Indeed, these poems utilize parallel expressions that
help give substance to let Your face shine. We may organize them thus:
Psalm 31:17

//

Save me through Your lovingkindness // Cause Your face to shine upon Your servant
Psalm 67:1

//

God, be gracious to us and bless us //
May He shine His face upon us
Psalm 80:3

//

God, restore us
//
Shine Your face and we shall be saved
Psalm 80:7, 19 substantially repeat the language of Psalm 80:3. Psalm 80 is especially
important insofar as it links Yahwehs causing His face to shine with restoration and rescue,
repeating the linkage three times [Psalm 80:3, 7, 19]. Psalm 31:17 also underlines the rescue
motif [ in both (save)]. Now, to restoration [] and rescue [], Psalm 67
adds grace [] and blessedness []. Overall, then, let Your face shine [
] has both abstract and concrete implications: abstractly, when Yahwehs face shines, His
attitude is marked by grace [] and a willingness to bless []; concretely, when
Yahwehs face shines, His behavior is characterized by restoration [] and rescue [].
94
Interestingly, Psalm 80 may reflect exilic conditions, possibly those in the Northern
Kingdom. We waffle a bit on the exilic reference in the poem, since scholars are uncertain as to
the setting of Psalm 80. Yet, the language within the psalm certainly mirrors exilic conditions. 401
If this psalm is exilic, then we may postulate some overlap in conditions on the ground with
Daniel 9. While I doubt that Daniel has Psalm 80 in mind, to the extent that Scripture interprets
Scripture, we may infer common ground between Yahwehs face shining and restoration and
rescue in both Psalm 80 and Daniel.
The upshot is this: let Your face shine is a metaphor, an image of grace with blessedness taking
the form of restoration and rescue in real life. Moreover, there would seem to be an element of
personal attention implied in the metaphor of causing the face to shine upon the people. Personal
attention means that the grace and loving kindness of Yahweh is granted to His people in their
humanly unresolvable need. In addition, personal attention also seems to entail Yahwehs active
intervention with restoration or salvation.
Upon Your desolate sanctuary [ ] is the intended object of
Yahwehs active intervention, Yahwehs personal attention, Yahwehs grace and blessedness,
Yahwehs restoration and rescue: Let Your face shine upon Your desolate sanctuary.
Sanctuary [] references the Temple in Jerusalem. Since the place of the Temple
in the faith of Israel is very complex, the reader should at least appreciate the essential reasons
behind the centrality if the sanctuary. Richard Averbeck presents these reasons under four heads:
[1] the Temple was the focal point of Israels world; [2] the Temple was the place of contact
between Yahweh and His people; [3] the Temple mirrored the heavenly realm on earth; and [4]
the Temple was the place where Yahweh was present.402
The net effect is that Daniel pleads with Yahweh to restore the focal point of his peoples world;
restore the point of contact between his people and Yahweh; restore the heavenly exemplification
on earth; and restore Yahwehs presence among them. Obviously, the sanctuary, or Temple if
you will, entails much more than a physical building with latitudinal and longitudinal
coordinates; the reader must grasp the centrality of the sanctuary, the centeredness of life around
who was to be encountered in the Temple. However, at the time of Daniels confession and
petition, the Temple lay desolate.
Desolate [] is an adjective that describes the condition of the sanctuary at the time
of Daniels prayer. The term is from a semantic field of terms for desolation. 403 There are three
lexemes in this field: [1] means to be dry, and then extends into devastation resulting
from dryness;404 [2] means to lay waste, a state of disorder and confusion; 405 and finally
[3] the term in Dan 9:17, which means destruction accompanied by desertion and
401 Scholars who are open to an exilic setting include: C.A. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Book of Psalms, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark; 1986), 203; A. Cohen, The
Psalms (New York: Soncino, 1985), 263; M. Dahood, Psalms II: 51-100 (New York: Doubleday,
1968), 255; J. Goldingay, Psalms, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 534; D. Kidner,
Psalms 73-150 (London: InterVarsity Press, 1975), 288; and A. Weiser, The Psalms (Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1962), 547.
402 See Dr. Averbecks excellent article: , in NIDOTTE [H5216].
404 R. Hayden, , in NIDOTTE [H2990].
405 A.H. Konkel, , in NIDOTTE [H8615].
95
abandonment leading to a resulting state of ruin.406 Kohler-Baumgartner renders in

Dan 9:17 with desolated, deserted, uninhabited. 407 BDB goes with devastated.408 PterContesse and Ellington go with which has been devastated or more simply which is in
ruins.409
It is obvious that Daniels petition at this point centers on the restoration of the now ruined,
desolated, deserted sanctuary. The motives behind this part of the appeal have already been
mentioned above.
For Your sake, O Lord [ ] is the motive Daniel offers in his appeal for
Yahweh to cause His face to shine upon His desolate sanctuary. The motive should read, more
literally, on account of the Lord. There is no Your [2 nd, person, masculine, singular suffix]
written in the prepositional phrase. BHS offers an emendation with the suffix, and we read Your
sake accordingly. Slotki notes, Not for any merit that Israel might claim, but to vindicate the
honor of the Divine name.410 After all, it was Yahweh who appointed the sanctuary as the
centerpiece of the covenant communitys world; it was Yahweh who made the sanctuary a place
of contact; it was Yahweh who fashioned the sanctuary as an instantiation of heaven on this earth;
and it was Yahweh who designated the sanctuary as the locus of His presence. Therefore, in
every sense of the word, Yahwehs honor is at stake; restoration of the desolate and deserted
sanctuary is for Yahwehs sake.
Joyce Baldwin observes that this prayer is totally devoid of anything like self-interest. 411 And so it
is; Daniel does not pray for the sake of his fellow covenanters; he does not pray for the sake of
his nation; and he most assuredly does not pray for his own sake. Rather, this forsaken and
isolated man, sixty six years after he had been deported, is, in the autumn of his life,
predominately concerned for the honor of Yahweh. When men and nations face ruin, perhaps it is
wise to pray for Your sake, O Lord.
Dan 5:18 Incline, my God, Your ear so as to hear, open Your eyes and see our desolations,
even the city which bears Your name; indeed, not on the basis of our own moral conduct, are we
presenting our supplications before You, but rather on the basis of Your great compassion.
We have suggested that the repetition of the plea to hear/listen is strategically placed to
reinforce the immediately preceding appeal. Accordingly, the second appeal was: Let Your face
shine, upon Your desolate sanctuary; for Your sake O Lord [Dan 9:17a- b]; this, in turn, is
reinforced by a plea in the opening lines of Dan 5:18 to attend to the aforementioned appeal; the
sense is: Incline, my God, Your ear so as to hear (my appeal to let Your face shine).
Incline so as to hear [ (Qal, imperative) (Hiphil, imperative)] is
an imperative + imperative construction. In such cases, the second imperative may be a result of
the first.412 Thus, we translate incline Your ear so as to hear. Inclining the ear is a metaphor
406 T.F. Williams, , in NIDOTTE [H9037].
407 KB2, 1566.
408 BDB, 1031.
409 Ren Pter-Contesse and John Ellington, The Book of Daniel (New York: United Bible
Societies, 1993), 246.
410 Judah Slotki, Daniel-Ezra-Nehemiah (New York: Soncino Press, 1993), 76.
411 Baldwin, 167.
412 See Gibson 86; GKC 110 f; Lambdin 107.
96
that is used in the psalms to signal urgency [Psalm 31:2; 102:2] and to signal immediate rescue
[Psalms 71:2; 86:1].
The appeal to let Your face shine was an entreaty for grace with blessedness taking the form of
restoration and rescue; the plea incline so as to hear makes application to Yahweh to
respond as a matter of urgency; immediate rescue is sought by Daniel in his appeal in Dan 5:1718.
The third appeal is: open Your eyes, so as to see our desolations [Dan 9:18a-].
The third appeal is supported by an appositional statement and two motives statements:
[Appeal 3]: open Your eyes, so as to see our desolations, [Dan 9:18a-]
(Apposition to desolations): even the city which bears Your name; [Dan 9:18a]
(Motives for appeal):
(a) indeed, not on the basis of our moral conduct, [Dan 9:18b]
are we presenting our supplications before You, [Dan 9:18b
]
(b) but rather on the basis of Your great compassion. [Dan9:18b].
Open so as to see [ (Qal, imperative) (Qal, imperative)] mirrors
the imperative + imperative construction noted above. The second imperative so as to see
is the result of the first open. Obviously, Daniel is imploring Yahwehs scrutiny of His citys
desolations.413
Open [] is given a very interesting rendering by Kohler-Baumgartner of in Dan
9:18: to open the eyes to something which exceeds normal human powers of observation; 414
evidently this nuance applies to humans as opposed to God. Open [] appears 17 times in
the Qal stem and 3 times in the Niphal stem in the Hebrew Bible. In the Qal, is used of
Yahwehs eyes in 2 Kings 19:16 [=Isaiah 37:17]; Job 14:3; Jeremiah 32:19; Zechariah 12:4.
2 Kings 19:16 is similar in form to Dan 9:18. In the Kings passage, Hezekiah appeals to Yahweh
for deliverance from Sennacherib. The gist of his appeal is for Yahweh to incline His ear and
hear, open [] His eyes and see Sennacheribs blasphemous words. Victor Hamilton
suggests that this phraseology is an anthropomorphism, the drift of which is for Yahwehs
attentiveness and awareness as opposed to His passivity and lack of involvement.415 One senses
that Hezekiah also anticipates Yahwehs intervention after opening His eyes.
In the Job 14 passage, the net effect of Yahwehs opening [] His eyes is to bring
mankind into judgment []. Thus, Jobs reply to Zophar, like Hezekiahs prayer,
correlates Yahwehs open eyes with divine intervention, this time in the form of judgment.
The Jeremiah 32 passage carries on the open eyes intervention theme already noted,
but this time with an additional component. In Jeremiah 32:17, the prophet is praying to Yahweh,
extolling His powers and virtues. In Jeremiah 32:19, the prophet praises Yahweh that His eyes
are open [] to all the ways of mankind, requiting each in accord with his/her actions in
life. This extends the intervention motif to include scrutiny in Yahwehs open [] eyes
upon mankind.
413 One may conjecture that Daniel ponders whether Yahweh noticed or even cared any more.
414 KB2, 959.
415 Victor Hamilton, , in TWOT [1803].
97
Finally, the Zechariah passage adds yet another component to Yahwehs open []
eyes. Zechariah sees a day when Judah, beset and surrounded by threats, will remain secure since
Yahweh watches over [ ] Judah. In this instance, open eyes [] as intervention
takes on the form of open eyes [] as protection/security.
Open so as to see [ ] in Dan 9:18 is another
anthropomorphism that beseeches Yahweh to attend to the city and intervene on its behalf. In this
context, intervention equals restoration.
Our desolations [ (Qal, fm, pl, ptc)] is a plural participle. The participle
may be used as a noun; in this case, the active participle probably underlines the exhibition of the
condition of desolations.416 The plural number may intensify the desolation idea or it may
represent desolation collectively;417 it is difficult to know which is intended by Daniel, but given
the emotional thrust of this confession and petition, the former fits. The sense becomes: our
utter and complete desolation.
Desolation [] is from a semantic field of terms for desolation. 418 There are two primary
terms in this field: and . The former means either to dry up or to be in ruins, in
the final stage of destruction.419 This root means basically to be dry and then, by extension,
becomes a term that describes what is a ruin or waste. The latter term, , which we have in
Dan 9:18, is distinguished from the former root by being often associated with disaster that comes
as a result of judgment. Indeed, the association with judgment is certainly the case with the
adjective [] we have in Dan 9:18 as well as its other use in Jeremiah 12:11. We may
conclude that our desolations, complete and utter as they are, are the effect of judgment in
Daniels mind.
Even the city which bears Your name [ ] is in apposition to
our desolations. The net effect of this clause is to make more specific what Daniel has in mind
with our desolations.420 The sense is: open Your eyes and see our utter and complete
desolation, even the city which bears Your name.
Bears Your name [ ] is a clause that is used three times in the Hebrew Bible
[Isaiah 63:19; Jeremiah 15:16; Daniel 9:18]. The Isaiah text explains bear Your name in the
sense of rulership []; that is, to bear the name of Yahweh is be ruled over by Yahweh. The
Jeremiah passage seems to underscore ownership; in this case, Yahwehs ownership over [
] Jeremiah.
Elsewhere, an infinitive clause, to (infinitive) His name there, is used to signal the
place where Yahweh dwells [Deuteronomy 12:5 ()], the place where Yahweh is worshiped
[Deuteronomy 12:11; 14:23; 16:2].
All told the city which bears Your name in Dan 9:18 implies the place where Yahweh
dwells, the place where Yahweh rules, the place that Yahweh owns, and the place where Yahweh
is worshiped. The sense then becomes: open Your eyes and see our utter and complete
desolation, even the city where You dwell, the city where You rule, the city that You own, and the
city where You are worshiped. The reader can easily see why for Daniel this is such a crucial
416 On this point, see Gibson 110.
417 Ibid., 20.
419 KB1, 348-49.
420 For this use of clausal apposition, see Gibson 146.
98
matter for the prophet: Yahwehs reputation among the covenant people and the surrounding
nations is at stake: if He chooses not to defend his own territory, then what kind of God is He?
Goldingay writes, Their being desolate brings discredit on Him; for His own sake, He should
act.421 In Dan 9:18, Daniel is deeply concerned for Yahweh.
Finally in Dan 9:18, the confessor-petitioner bares his motives behind imploring Yahwehs
scrutiny of the desolation of Yahwehs home; the motive statement affirms [1] what does not drive
Daniel to petition his Lord [Dan 9:18b] and then what his motivation, the wellspring of his
hope, actually is [Dan9:18b].
Not on the basis of our moral conduct [ ] is front loaded;
the confessor-petitioners poverty of spirit is stated up front; his conduct, and that of the covenant
community as a whole, can base no appeal on the quality of their lives before Yahweh; they have
nothing to bargain with; they have shown themselves to be, for the most part, morally bankrupt
(as we all are!).
On the basis of [] is a prepositional phrase, stipulating from the get-go what the basis
for Daniels appeal is not, nor can be. The syntax of the preposition [] tells us all: the
preposition on the basis of underlines the norm or the basis for some action.422 The basis
upon which the casting of the nations plea rests is not their moral virtue. In the next sentence,
9:18b, the same preposition is used to signal what the basis of their plea is on the basis of
Your great compassion.
Our moral conduct [] is a corporate stipulation; the entire body of believers
known as the covenant community is culpable for the desolation of Yahwehs city and the
trashing of His reputation into the bargain. Earlier, Daniel named those in the moral indictment:
our kings, our leaders, our fathers, and all the people of the land [Dan 9:6]; no single
individual can bear all the blame; rather it takes a nation to defile itself and its God.
Moral conduct [] is a noun that may be broken down into two categories,
referring to humans and to Yahweh. vis--vis humans means: [1]
righteousness, moral uprightness, right conduct, godliness, i.e. what is right in Yahwehs eyes; [2]
in reference to an earthly ruler who dispenses justice, especially social justice toward the poor;
[3] personal merit; [4] a legal right, an entitlement, a claim; [5] truthfulness in speech, honesty in
behavior; [6] justness done according to the law; [7] in the plural, good deeds, virtues. Among
these options, two seem best in this context: [1] moral uprightness in the sense of doing what is
right in Yahwehs eyes and [2] personal merit. We have opted for the former, but honestly, the
latter is not far removed from the idea of moral conduct.
Moral conduct, or rather the lack of it, is a primary theme of Isaiah; the pre-exilic prophet
gives us chapter and verse on the moral failures of the covenant community, the kind of moral
ruin that must have been agonizingly familiar to Daniel. Isaiah mentions, several times,
deficiencies in social justice [Isaiah 5:7, 23; 28:17; 32:16; 56:1; 59:9, 14]; Isaiah cites telling the
truth [Isaiah 33:15] as well as avoiding a life of greed [Isaiah 33:15] as part and parcel of the
moral life, qualities in short supply within the covenant community. The poet mentions peace
and well-being owing to obedience to the ordinances of Yahweh [Isaiah 32:17; 48:18], again
421 Goldingay, 255.
422 IBHS 11.2.3e; Van der Merwe 39.19.4.(ii); Gibson 118 Rem.1.
99
wanting within Judah. Finally, Isaiah notes that the worship of Gods people did not measure up
to righteousness [Isaiah 58:2]. The net effect is that there is nothing about the moral conduct of
the people of God that would obligate Yahweh to respond to their plea for His mercy. Similarly,
there simply is nothing about the quality of moral conduct in Daniel 9:18b that could move
Yahweh to respond with His mercy. One is reminded of Psalm 130:3 If iniquities You should
keep in account, O God, Lord, who could stand? The question answers itself.
It is common to what many call religion to insist that by doing certain things as well as
by not doing other things, we can earn sufficient merit in this life to obligate God to save us in the
next. Daniel 9:18b utterly demolishes this shibboleth. Not on the basis of our own moral
conduct means that Daniel admits that he brings nothing to Yahweh in this life or the next for
that matter apart from moral failure, so this leaves Daniel pleading for Yahwehs mercy. Not on
the basis of our own moral conduct anticipates the apostle Paul by about 650 years!
But rather on the basis of Your great compassion [
] is an antithetical line;423 the sense is: not on the basis of our moral conduct but rather on
the basis of Your great compassion. The reader of Dan 9:18b- must take this antithesis
seriously; to deny the former [not on the basis of our moral conduct] is to affirm the latter [but
rather on the basis of Your great compassion]; Daniel does not have one foot in each camp;
rather, this time it is all or nothing. Daniel is not aware of partial moral merit that at the same
time appeals to Yahwehs great compassion. Quite the contrary! Daniel has no moral standing in
the eyes of God that would compel God to even listen to him, let alone respond to him; be
merciful to me a sinner is the sum and substance of Daniels plea.
Compassion [] is a term we considered in some depth in Dan 9:7 [see pages 53-54].
We determined that when Daniel chose this term for compassion from a semantic field of terms
for compassion, he was entreating the divine willingness to show favor, an attitude that derives
from the very depths of Yahwehs inner being. Accordingly, the noun [] means a
feeling of love, loving sensation, mercy (originally designating the seat of this feeling, meaning
bowels, inner parts of the body, the inner person). 424 Daniel appeals to Gods depths.
The reader can easily see that involves Yahwehs emotional response to His
people, a response that is prepared to go the second mile. Indeed, it is this second mile kind of
compassion that prompted Yahweh to refuse to abandon His people in the wilderness [Nehemiah
9:19 ()]; without a doubt, Yahwehs second mile compassion moves Him to
respond to the wilderness generations pleas for relief from their oppressors [Nehemiah 9:27
()]. Yet, even after Yahwehs gracious response, the people once more fall into sin,
are abandoned into the hands of the enemy, cry out one more time, and Yahwehs second mile
compassion yields with rescue [Nehemiah 9:28 ()]; this is Yahwehs ,
His compassion in action.
Daniel began this series of appeals in Dan 9:16; there, he asked Yahweh to relent [turn
away please Your raging anger (9:16a)]. At this point [Dan 9:18], it comes down to this:
Yahweh, please go the second mile one more time and turn away please Your raging anger.
That is the sum total of Daniels supplication to this point.
Dan 9:19 O Lord, listen, O Lord, forgive, O Lord, listen carefully and act, do not delay; for
Your sake my God, because Your name is called, over Your city and over Your people.
423 The particle when following a negative sentence introduces an antithetical sentence;
Gibson 142d.
424 Ibid., 1218.
100
As noted above, Daniel supports his third appeal open Your eyes and see our desolations
not on the basis of our moral conduct, but rather on the basis of Your great compassion with
the opening plea in Dan 9:19 a to listen to that third appeal.
Daniel now voices his fourth appeal; this appeal is simplicity itself: O Lord, forgive
[].
O, Lord [] is repeated three times in Dan 9:19. While there are several places
where /O, Lord is repeated twice in the same verse [Exodus 34:9; 2 Samuel 7:19;
Jeremiah 46:10; Lamentations 1:15; Ezekiel 6:3; 12:28; 13:8; 20:3; 25:3; 36:4; 45:9; Amos 7:14;
Micah 1:2], Dan 9:19 is the only place in the Hebrew Bible where the term is repeated thrice.
Strictly speaking, functions as a vocative, designating the addressee of the appeal for
forgiveness.425 The repetition of surely intensifies the appeal, what Collins calls
urgent insistence.426
Forgive [ (Qal, imperative, paragogic heh)] is written as an imperative with a so-called
paragogic heh attached to the imperative []. It is probably the case that, with this
imperative addressed to God, the paragogic heh is honorific;427 the sense would be: (with
respect) forgive. Again, the imperative is not a directive given to Yahweh; rather, the imperative
is a request from a beggar offered with honor and respect.
Forgive [] is from a semantic field of terms for forgiveness or pardon. 428 There are two
terms in this field: [1] and [2] . The first, , has a fairly wide range of uses,
including to carry, to lift [an object], to lift up, to receive someone in a friendly manner, to
hold.429 In a more figurative manner, can mean to take away and when used with sin
terminology, means to forgive. This nuance may be used of human-on-human situations
and of divine-human situations. When used in reference to a divine-human encounter, is
tantamount to forgiveness [Exodus 32:32; Numbers 14:19; Psalm 25:18; 85:3; 99:8; Isaiah 33:24;
Hosea 14:3; Micah 7:18].
The second term, , which we have here in Dan 9:19 is significantly different from
in at least two respects: [1] is used only of Yahweh in every one of its appearances in the
Hebrew Bible and [2] it denotes only divine forgiveness. We may infer that Daniel chose the one
term available to him that is earmarked for divine forgiveness in the OT. If nothing else, Daniel
is unambiguously asking Yahweh to do the one thing that only Yahweh, as far as the Hebrew
Scriptures are concerned, can do: forgive the sin saturated covenant community.
Listen carefully and act [ (Qal, imperative) (Hiphil, imperative)]
is the plea that supports the appeal for divine forgiveness. This plea is more intense than the
previous three [listen (Dan 9:17a); incline Your ear and hear (Dan 9:18a); and listen (Dan
9:19a)]. The reason for this intensified passion is not far to seek: the appeal for Yahwehs
second mile compassion in the form of divine forgiveness; this is Daniels only hope: listen
carefully and act.
425 Van der Merwe 34.4.
426 Collins, Daniel, 351.
427 J-M 48 d.
428 See Forgiveness, pardon in NIDOTTE.
429 KB1, 724-25.
101
Listen carefully [] and act [] are two imperatives linked by a simple waw.
There are two points to note at this juncture. First, the punctuation in the Masoretic text should
be taken into account. That is, O Lord, listen carefully and act is a self-contained utterance;
there is a disjunctive accent [a pause] after act. Second, the simple waw [and ()] that
unites the two imperatives share the same syntactical function as we have noted previously with
back-to-back imperatives; that is, the second imperative [and act] is a consequence of the first
[listen carefully]. The sense becomes: listen carefully (to the appeal for forgiveness) and then
act.
Listen carefully [] is in the semantic field of terms for attentiveness. 430 According
to NIDOTTE, is the sole occupant of the field. The verb is used once in the Qal [Isaiah
32:3] and 45 times in the Hiphil stem. The ranges of meaning are these: [1] in the Qal: to be fully
alert; [2] in the Hiphil: to listen attentively.431 The verb is used in the Hiphil with Yahweh as the
addressee 11 times in the Hebrew Bible, eight of them in the Psalms. 432
Listen carefully [] in the Psalms is often an appeal sought with passion and intensity born
of dire circumstances. For example, in Psalm 5:2, the poet asks Yahweh to listen carefully
[] to his cry for help []. In Psalm 17:1, David entreats Yahweh to listen carefully
to his cry of moaning []. Finally, in Psalm 55:2, David beseeches Yahweh to listen
carefully owing to his restlessness [] and distraction []. These are not pedestrian
pleas for attention; rather, these are the pleadings of a supplicant at the end of his rope.
The upshot is that Daniel appeals to Yahweh for His merciful and supportive attention
and his responsive and favorable consideration.433 Daniel pleads with God to listen intently,
attend with assiduousness, single-mindedly alert to the covenant communitys need for
forgiveness; things have come to a desperate pass; there are no other exits.
And act [] is a bit restrained. That is, the sense of the line is: listen carefully (to my
appeal for forgiveness) and then act. One might expect Daniel to have said: listen carefully (to
my appeal for forgiveness) and then forgive us; but Daniel, submitting to Yahwehs sovereignty,
seems to yield to whatever act Yahweh deems best. Daniel does not lecture God concerning
what God ought to do; rather Daniel is willing to accept the course of action Yahweh chooses.
With the words and act, we see humility merged with hope.
Do not delay [ (Piel, 2nd, sg, imperfect, jussive)] is Daniels fifth and
final appeal. The jussive, while a directive of sorts, does not carry the force of an out-and-out
imperative form; rather, the jussive is used when the petitioner acknowledges candidly his status
as an inferior appealing to a loftier personage, Yahweh in this case.
Do not delay [] is an appeal that appears five times in the Hebrew Bible,
three of which are at the end of a prayerful (and frantic) petition [Psalms 40:17; 70:15; Daniel
9:19]. I doubt that this is merely formulaic praying; rather, there is desperation and no small
degree of anguish implied here. As Derek Kidner put it, commenting on Psalm 70:15, the psalm
430 See Attentive in NIDOTTE.
431 KB2, 1151.
432 Psalm 5:2; 10:17; 17:1; 55:2; 61:1; 66:19; 86:6; 142:6; Jeremiah 18:19; Daniel 9:19; Malachi
3:16.
433 R. Mosis, , in TDOT, vol. XIII, 187.
102
emphasizes the urgency of the matter. There is not a moment to lose; or so at least it appears at
ground-level.434
Delay [] has the following ranges of meaning: [1] in the Qal stem: to linger; [2] in the Piel
stem: (a) to detain someone, (b) to hold back, to do something with hesitation, (c) to linger, and
(d) to delay or to hesitate; [3] in the Hiphil: to be delayed. 435 The sense here is do not delay or
do not hesitate.
For Your sake, my God, because Your name is called over Your city and over Your people
[ ] is a
motive statement, which has been dealt with in Dan 9:18 [pages 98-99]. For now, it is
noteworthy that Daniel repeats four times: Your sake Your name Your city and Your
people; that remains his motivation behind this long petition [Dan 9:15-19]. With this, Daniels
confession-petition ends.
Summary
Dan 9:15-19 is a petition from Daniel addressed to Yahweh, seeking, in essence, that He
relent in His punishing wrath aimed at the covenant community. Daniel opens the petition with
two preliminary matters: [a] past deliverance and [b] yet another confession of sin. After these
preliminaries, Daniel begins in earnest his appeal for Yahweh to relent [Daniel 9:16-19],
submitting five entreaties: [1] cease Your raging anger (Dan 9:16a); [2] let Your face shine
upon us (Dan 9:17a); [3] open Your eyes to our utter desolation (Dan 9:18a-); [4] forgive
(Dan 9:19a); and [5] do not delay (Dan 9:19a).
Dan 9:16a depicts Daniel entreating God to bring to a halt His raging anger. There are
two matters of import in Dan 9:16a: the fact of Yahwehs raging anger and the hope that He
changes direction.
The reader of Dan 9:16a should appreciate the fact that anger is a reality with God; we
may not like to think of that so much, but the Old Testament is not ashamed to display Yahweh in
His angry moments. To be sure, Yahweh is a God who goes the second mile with His people; still
there are limits. There comes the time when those who repeatedly defy God and then presume
upon His grace must face the fact of Gods anger. Finally, the reader should not make the mistake
of thinking that the New Testament upends divine wrath; it doesnt. Both Jesus and Paul were
quick to warn the people of their day of the danger of Gods wrath [Matthew 3:7; John 3:36;
Romans 1:18; 2:25].
The fact of the matter is that in Dan 9:16a Yahweh is furious with His covenant people.
Yahweh is passionately enraged, but He shows this rage in a somewhat moderated fashion; His
rage is not as all-out as it could have been. Certainly, the rage manifested in Dan 9:16 is not the
kind of rage that is completely destructive, with no one left standing. On the other hand, Yahweh
is far more than vexed and out of humor. Rather, Yahwehs anger burns with formidable yet not
quite annihilationist passion against His erstwhile covenant partners; basically, Yahweh has come
perilously close to the end of the line with His people.
434 D.J. Wiseman, ed., Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, vol. 15, Psalms 1-72 by Derek
Kidner (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 2008; reprint), 269.
435 KB1, 34-35.
103
We have noted earlier in this study [Dan 9:12-14] that Yahweh is thoroughly warranted in
venting His anger against His people. This is why Daniel has gone out of his way to confess the
sin of the covenant people; it is not that God is simply a petulant, frustrated, thin-skinned deity;
rather, He is a God of justice and righteousness and, as Daniel and his comrades have painfully
learned, there are consequences for willfully defying the right [ (righteousness) and
(justice)] that Yahweh has carved into the stonework of the Universe and
communicated directly to His people.
Finally, the fact that Daniel is alive and able to offer this confession-petition declares that
there is hope on the other side of Yahwehs anger. Daniel seems to sense this in his appeal for
Yahwehs name, Yahwehs city, Yahwehs sanctuary, and most of all Yahwehs people. Gods
anger does not neutralize His overwhelming compassionate forgiveness, or so Daniel seems to
assume.
Facing such wrath, Daniel asks Yahweh to turn away from His raging anger. As we
noted at the time, the language of turning is expresses an about-face, a shift toward the opposite
direction. Daniel is entreating Yahweh for abatement, pleading that His raging anger subsides.
The reader of Dan 9:16 should also meditate upon the way in which Daniel presents his
petition to God. That is, Daniel approaches Yahweh as a beggar; there is deference in Daniels
attitude toward the God to whom he prays; there is humility and meekness. Daniels style is
unassuming and submissive. Placing himself at a polite distance from Yahweh, Daniel shows
respect and reverence for the graciousness and the sovereign power of his Lord. Daniel makes no
excuses; there are no extenuating circumstances, just vile covenant betrayal; blessed are the poor
in spirit.
Dan 9:16 entreats Yahweh to cease doing something venting His raging anger; Dan
9:17, on the other hand, implores Yahweh to begin to do something: bless His people anew.
Dan 9:17a presses Yahweh to cause His face to shine upon them. Based upon the use of
this clause in the Psalms, the prophet-petitioner is asking for the grace and blessedness that
resides in Yahwehs heart to issue forth in rescue and restoration. Obviously, Daniel is painfully
and immediately aware of the engulfing force of Yahwehs wrath; at the same time, this wrath is
but for a moment (figuratively speaking); in reality, grace, that instinct of Yahwehs to show
favor when none is deserved,436 and an eagerness to bless are never far from Yahwehs dealings
with his people. Daniel has no real options here; he may wallow in the gloom of Yahwehs raging
anger or turn in faith to His majestic and loving grace; he opts for the latter and stakes everything
on the grace of God.
As if to answer an unspoken question from Yahweh What exactly do you want of Me?
Daniel answers with open Your eyes to our utter desolation [Dan 9:18a-].
Dan 9:18a urges Yahweh to open His eyes to the utter desolation, utterly deserved at
the human level, brought on by Yahwehs raging anger. At the time, we noted that opening the
eyes was a figure of speech that signaled looking at things that were, for all intents and purposes,
beyond the range of normal human observation. What does Daniel have in mind here? What is it
that he begs Yahweh to weigh and consider? We suggest that the answer is in the next line: Your
name. The city which bore Yahwehs name, Jerusalem, was in complete ruin; Daniel is
concerned for Yahwehs name in the wake of this total devastation. The place where Yahweh
436 Goldingay, 266.
104
chose to dwell is in ruins; the place from which Yahweh rules is a shambles; the place which
Yahweh Himself owns lies in wreckage; and the place where Yahweh is worshiped is a heap of
debris. Daniel must wonder: Is this not a scandal of the highest order? Is this not a humiliating
disgrace? Does this not degrade and discredit Yahweh?
While Daniel does beseech Yahweh to weigh and consider our utter desolation, it
seems obvious that our is tilted in the direction of Yahwehs honor among His people and the
people around Judah. Daniel is well aware of the fact that this desolation, from the human side,
was justly deserved; be that as it may, Daniel is spiritual enough, realistic enough, to know and
regret the impact the human failure had on the divine covenant partner, Yahweh. 437
The reason behind the appeal for Yahweh to open His eyes and consider closely and spiritually
the desolation of Jerusalem is one of the high-water marks in the book of Daniel: not on the basis
of any human merit, but rather solely on the basis of divine grace.
Human merit? Lets review a fraction of the legacy of human merit from Dan 9:13: 438 [1]
human merit fails to yield peace, shalom, order in society; [2] human merit is not too proud to
engage in human trafficking for profit (Amos 2:6); [3] human merit is highly skilled in the
oppression of others for the sake of monetary profit (Amos 2:7); [4] human merit does not blush
at sanctioning sexual abuse [Amos 2:7]; [5] human merit bullies its way through financial
exploitation (Amos 2:8); and [6] the human merit of the religious community cannot wait for
the end of Sabbath services and then go out and make a fast, and dodgy, buck (Amos 8:5). This
was the tip of the iceberg of what passed for human merit among the covenant community; little
wonder that Daniel rejects human merit as a basis for his appeal to God. One is reminded of
Psalm 130:3 If iniquities You should keep in account, O God, Lord, who could stand? The
question answers itself.
Solely on the basis of divine grace! That is all any of us has, Daniel included. Indeed, Daniel
chose a term for compassion from a semantic field of terms for compassion that underlined the
divine eagerness to show favor, an attitude that derives from the very depths of Yahwehs inner
being; a feeling of love, loving sensation, mercy (originally designating the seat of this feeling,
meaning bowels, inner parts of the body, the inner person). Daniel appealed to Gods depths,
Yahwehs emotional response to His people, a response that is prepared to go the second mile. As
with the wilderness generation and since, it is Yahwehs willingness to go the second mile that
holds out hope for sinners like the covenant community for whom Daniel petitioned. Solely on
the basis of a second mile kind of grace!
In Dan 9:19a, is it any wonder that the next appeal out of Daniels mouth is the single,
simple word: Forgive? Daniel doesnt embellish; he doesnt decorate the appeal with
reminiscences of his and his peoples wretchedness; he doesnt wager, he doesnt bargain, he
doesnt arm twist; he simply says Forgive. This word has the power to stop Gods ire dead in
its tracks, the capacity to abate Yahwehs fierce and raging anger; this word has the power to turn
everything around for Daniel and his fellow covenanters; this word is the key that opens the door
to renewed horizons, renewed possibilities, to renewed opportunities for service to Yahweh.
When all is said and done, Daniel chose the one term available to him that is earmarked for divine
437 We often hear the appeal from evangelicals to pray for America. Indeed, we should; I am
not denying that. But, there is another victim in the blight that has become the moral landscape
of the United States, and the western democracies for that matter: God. Should we not, like
Daniel, be just as concerned for our trashing of Yahwehs honor?
438 See page 79 above.
105
forgiveness in the OT. If nothing else, Daniel unambiguously asked Yahweh to do the one thing
that only Yahweh, as far as the Hebrew Scriptures are concerned, could (and would!) do: forgive
the sin saturated covenant community.
Having asked the one thing needful to be asked, Daniel ends his appeals with a plea: Do
not delay. Daniel had petitioned Yahweh to turn from His raging anger; so, do not delay;
Daniel begged Yahweh to cause His face to shine upon them, with all that that meant; Therefore,
do not delay; Daniel implored Yahweh to weigh and consider the depth and breadth of the utter
desolation that had befallen the covenant community; hence, do not delay; and finally, Daniel
supplicated Yahweh to forgive; thus, do not delay!
III. A Response from Gabriel [Dan 9:20-27]
A. Daniels circumstances after the prayer [Dan 9:20-21]

9:20aWhile I was speaking and
interceding,

9:20athat is confessing my sin,

9:20a
and the sin of my people Israel;

9:20b
and presenting my supplication,

9:20b
before Yahweh my God,

9:20b
on behalf of the Holy Mountain of my
God.

9:21aSo, while I was speaking in
prayer;

9:21b
the man Gabriel,
9:21b
whom I had seen in the previous
vision,

9:21b
who was sent forth in flight,

9:21b
reached me,

9:21b
at the time of the evening
offering.
Syntactical outline
[Temporal marker; simultaneous with main clause]: While I was speaking and interceding
[Clarification of speak/intercede]: that is confessing my sin
[Further clarification]: and the sin of my people Israel
[Further clarification]: and presenting my supplication
[Object of supplication]: before Yahweh my God
[Beneficiary of supplication]: on behalf of the Holy Mountain of my God
[Restatement of temporal marker]: So, while I was speaking in prayer
[Main clause]: the man Gabriel reached me
[Clarification of Gabriel]: whom I had seen in the previous vision
[Further clarification]: who was sent forth in flight
[Temporal marker]: at the time of the evening offering
106
Overall, Dan 9:20-21 may be divided into two segments: [1] some preliminaries in Dan
9:20 and [2] the emergence of Gabriel in Dan 9:21. This brief paragraph serves as the setting for
the revelation the angel is going to deliver to Daniel in Dan 9:22-23 and 9:24-27.
Theme of paragraph
The theme of Dan 9:20-21 is the emergence of the angel Gabriel; all else is more or less
supportive of this key event.
Genre
The genre of Dan 9:20-21 is narrative, an account of events or actions in sequential
form.439 There is no reason to read this paragraph as anything other than an historical event in
the life of Daniel.
Dan 9:20 While I was speaking and interceding, that is confessing my sin, and the sin of my
people Israel; and presenting my supplication before Yahweh my God, on behalf of the Holy
Mountain of my God.
Daniel recounts the setting of the eventual revelation to him in Dan 9:22-27; the revelation more
or less interrupted Daniels prayer begun in Dan 9:4b. As we shall see presently [Dan 9:23],
Daniel was already earmarked for deeper insight into the exile and beyond. This puts the power
of prayer in an interesting perspective: even before we finish our supplications, we may be
singled out for a response.
While I was speaking and interceding [ ] not
only provides a temporal marker for Gabriels emergence, it also neatly summarizes what Daniel
has been doing since Dan 9:4.
While [] is an adverb that expresses simultaneity.440 The upshot is that while
Daniel was praying, the man Gabriel reached him [9:21b]. This may be Daniels way of saying
that the intervention of Gabriel was completely unforeseen. Daniel did not set out to have an upclose and personal encounter with an angel.
Speaking and interceding [ ] summarizes, in a general way, what Daniel
had been doing. We have already commented on interceding in Dan 9:4. 441 The meaning of
in the Hithpael in Dan 9:4 is (a) to act as an advocate, (b) to make intercession for, act as
an intercessor. The Old Testament is replete with examples of men who interceded on behalf of
the people who had fallen into sin: Moses [Numbers 21:7], Samuel [1 Samuel 7:5; 12:19, 23], an
unnamed man of God [1 Kings 13:6], Job [Job 42:8, 10], Jeremiah [Jeremiah 42:2, 20], and
Nehemiah [Nehemiah 1:6]. We may be assured that means the same here.
Confessing my sin [ ] is language similar to that in Dan 9:4.442 As far
as confession is concerned, the upshot is that it essentially conveys the idea of
439 FOTL, 114.
440 For this adverb used with participles to express simultaneity, see IBHS 37.6d.
441 See pages 12-13.
442 For the notes on confess, see page 14.
107
acknowledgment,443 or what we might understand as admission and acceptance of that which is

morally accurate, that for which one is morally accountable.
Presenting my supplication [ ] uses /supplication only here in
the Hebrew text of Daniel. The noun [/supplication] is from a semantic field of terms
for favor.444 The ranges of meaning for the noun are: [1] mercy, pardon, compassion, and [2]
pleading, pleading for compassionate attention. 445 It is surely significant, spiritually at least, that
Daniels entire prayer, begun in Dan 9:4, amounts to a plea for compassionate attention. This is
surely the attitude of one who fully understands the distance between himself, a sinner, and
Yahweh who is most holy. There is no spiritual presumptuousness, not even a hint of
overconfidence or pushiness on Daniels part; he simply pleads for compassionate attention;
please just listen to me!
The Holy Mountain [] has already been mentioned in Dan 9:16.446 In Dan 9:20,
Daniel reprises his concern for Yahwehs presence among His people. The Holy Mountain
amounts to the place where Yahweh has revealed His name [1 Kings 11:36; 14:21; 2 Kings
23:27]; has staked out His presence [2 Kings 23:27; Zechariah 8:3]. Moreover, when Jerusalem
is associated with the Holy Mountain, the city becomes the place where Yahweh dwells and
reigns [Isaiah 24:23].
Dan 9:21 So, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the
previous vision, who was sent forth in flight, reached me, at the time of the evening offering.
The man Gabriel [ ] is the second mention of Gabriel [see Dan 8:16].
Gabriel appears only in Dan 8:16; 9:21 in the Hebrew Bible. The name probably means
something like man [] of God [].447 The name is also used in the Dead Sea
Scrolls and the New Testament [Luke 1:19, 26]. We ought not to over read the man
[]; it is probably Daniels way of back referencing the previous vision in Dan 8:15ff. 448
Who was set forth in flight [ (Hophal, ptc, ms, sg)] is variously translated in the
English versions. There are two general trends: [1] set forth in flight or words to that effect,
and [2] when I was utterly exhausted or words to that effect; BDB opts for this translation. 449
The construction has a Hophal participle of the root followed by a prepositional phrase,
using the preposition prefixed to the nominal root [the same root as the verbal root].
The reason for the discrepancy is that Hebrew has two roots I and II. One of
them means to grow weary [we shall call this I] and the other means to fly [a variant
of the root (to fly); we shall call this one II].450 We take up a discussion of
I grow weary.
443 C. Westermann, , in TLOT II, 503.

444 See Favor in NIDOTTE.
445 KB2, 1718.
446 See the notes on pages 89-90.
447 KB1, 176.
448 On this point, see James Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Book
of Daniel (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1989; reprint), 370.
449 BDB, 419: wearied from weariness, of the flight of Gabriel.
450 See KB1, 421.
108
The translation grow weary is applied in two directions in the verse: [1] either Daniel, who was
weary after his prayer ordeal451, or [2] Gabriel, presumably after his flight. 452 The problem with
the former is that the syntax of the line seems to deny it. That is, the participial clause seems to
refer to Gabriel: Gabriel who was weary. This leaves us with the problem with the second
option: a wearied angel seems absurd.453
The Septuagint tradition goes with II, the flight nuance. The Old Greek has
[quickly moving] and Theodotion simply has
[flying]. Thus, we prefer to read : who set forth in
flight.
The man Gabriel reached me [ ] is the main clause in Dan 9:21. The
verb in the clause is translated in one of two ways: [1] reached or [2] touched. There is good
reason to adopt the translation touch for ; its ranges of meaning are [1] to touch
(physically), [2] to touch (aggressively), to strike, and [3] to reach as far as, to arrive. 454 On the
other hand, in this context is preceded by a motion term sent forth in flight and is
followed by a temporal phrase at the time of the evening offering. The upshot is that,
contextually, the best sense is: Gabriel who was sent forth in flight arrived (at me) at the time
of the evening offering.
At the evening offering [ ] is a prepositional phrase, signaling a
temporal marker in the line. The temporal marker translates to about 3:00-4:00 PM. We ought
not to over read here; it is not that regular sacrifices were again being offered, only that the
regular times were remembered in exile.455
B.
A revelation from Gabriel [Dan 9:22-27]

1.
Why Gabriel responds to Daniel [Dan 9:22-23]

9:22a And so, he explained and spoke with
me;
9:22b
and he said:

9:22b
Daniel, now I have come forth,

9:22b
to teach you understanding.
9:23aWith the beginning of your supplication,
a decree
came forth,

9:23anow, I have come to explain,

9:23afor, highly esteemed you;

9:23b
so, pay attention to the decree,

9:23b
understand the vision.
451 C.F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament in Ten Volumes, vol. IX, by
C.F. Keil, Ezekiel, Daniel (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1991; reprint), 335 [hereafter
abbreviated Keil, Daniel.
452 Montgomery, 370-71; Collins, Daniel, 345.
453 Ibid., 371.
454 KB1, 668.
455 Baldwin, 167.
109
I.
Main clause: and so, he explained [] and spoke with me

Main clause: and he said
II.
Addressee: Daniel
Main clause: now I have come forth
Purpose: to teach you understanding []
III.
Motive: a decree came forth
Temporal marker: with the beginning of your supplication
IV.
Main clause: now, I have come forth
Motive: for, highly esteemed you
V.
Command: so, pay attention [] to the decree
Command: and understand [] the vision
Theme of paragraph
As the words in bold indicate, this paragraph is about understanding. Basically, the
paragraph begins with an understanding term [ (Dan 9:22a)] and ends with the same
verb [ (9:23b)]. This framing technique visually encloses the paragraph with its theme:
understanding; Gabriel announces a teaching moment.
Genre
Dan 9:22-23 is an angelic discourse, which is a revelation delivered as a speech by an
angel.456 Clearly, the revelation amounts to delivering understanding to Daniel concerning the
exile.
Dan 9:22 And so, he explained and spoke with me, and he said: Daniel, now I have come
forth to teach you understanding.
He explained and spoke with me [ (Piel, waw/consecutive/imperfect, 3rd, ms)
(Hiphil, waw/consecutive/imperfect, 3rd, ms)] is the opening main clause. The
syntactical relationship between the two verbs may point to a logical consequence of sorts;457 the
sense may be: He explained for he spoke with me. The upshot is that Dan 9:22 represents an
angelic teaching moment. The operative term is explain [].
Explain [] is written in the Hiphil stem of the verb, a causative stem. The ranges of
meaning for in the Hiphil are: [1] to be able to discern, to have/get understanding, to
understand, to consider; [2] to make understand, to enlighten, to give understanding to, to explain,
to teach.458 BDB renders in Dan 9:22 with to give understanding to, to teach.459 The
reader might weigh and consider in the sense of explain for contextual reasons. That is,
in Dan 9:21Gabriel suddenly appears while Daniel is still in prayer; accordingly, Gabriel hastens
to , to explain, why he has shown up so unexpectedly. The centerpiece of the explanation
comes in the next line.
To teach you understanding [ ] is the essential reason for Gabriels
visit. The term translated teach [] is also written in the Hiphil stem. It is from the same
457 For the waw consecutive imperfect used to signal a consequence, see Van der Merwe
21.2.1.(ii).
458 KB1, 122.
459 BDB, 106.
110
semantic field as , explain and understanding for that matter. The teaching moment
motif continues.
To teach [] is written in the Hiphil stem, which makes the action of the verb
causative; Gabriel is there to bring about insight into the unfolding of the exile. The ranges of
meaning for in the Hiphil are: [1] to understand, comprehend; [2] to have insight; [3] to
make wise, insightful, to instruct/teach, to make clear; [4] to achieve success. 460 It is obvious that
with this direct object understanding the verb must reflect those options in [3].
Understanding [] is the objective. Generally speaking, refers to intellectual
discernment; the ability to comprehend meanings and perceive relations and causes. 461 The
question is: discernment of what? Preceding his prayer, Daniel had consulted Jeremiah and
determined that the desolation of Jerusalem was to last seventy years, a time period that Daniel
must have reckoned was near its end. Accordingly, Daniel confesses and petitions [Dan 9:5-19].
At this point, Gabriel emerges and proceeds to fill in the blanks regarding the holy city; it is to
this message from Gabriel concerning the holy city going forward that the angel offers Daniel
discernment, discernment of Jeremiahs prophecy that goes well beyond surface readings of that
text.
Dan 9:23 With the beginning of your supplication, a decree came forth, now, I have come to
explain, for, highly esteemed you; so, pay attention to the decree, and understand the vision.
With the beginning of your supplication [ ] is exceptional testimony
to the power of prayer; with the inception of the prayer, the culmination is in the works.
A decree [] is from a semantic field of terms for speech. 462 The noun appears
more than 1400 times in the Hebrew Bible. The ranges of meaning for the noun are these: [1]
word or speech: (a) request, (b) promise, (c) command, (d) commission, (e) thought, (f) theme,
(g) sentence, verdict, (h) accusation; [2] thing: (a) matter, (b) affair, (c) cause, (d) case, (e) deed;
[3] way, manner; [4] reason, cause.463 BDB renders a word of command.464 Elsewhere
in the OT, when /word is used with /came forth, the meaning of is
something like decree/edict [Esther 1:19]; this seems to be the meaning of the collocation here.
The sense is: with the beginning of your supplication, a decree/edict came forth. The nuts and
bolts of the /decree are unpacked in Dan 9:24-27.
For a highly esteemed you [ ] is a verbless clause; the given
element in the line is you; the new information is treasure. A similar statement is made,
using similar language, regarding Daniel in Dan 10:11, 19.
Highly esteemed [] is used nine times in the OT, six of them in Daniel [Dan
9:23; 10:3, 11, 19; 11:38, 43] and three of them referring to Daniel [Dan 9:23; 10:11, 19]. These
three uses of in Daniel are the only times the adjective is used to describe a human
being.
460 KB2, 1328.

461 Fox, Proverbs 1-9, 30.
462 See Speech in NIDOTTE.
463 CDCH, 74.
464 BDB, 182.
111
Highly esteemed [] is from a semantic field of terms for worth or value. 465
The ranges of meaning for are: [1] preciousness, [2] a precious thing, [3]
desirableness.466 Kohler-Baumgartner seems to suggest attractive for in Dan
9:23.467 G. Wallis reads in Dan 9:23 in the sense of a beloved person. 468 The
Septuagint tradition is very interesting. The Old Greek tradition uses , and
Theodotion goes with . The former term [] means
miserable, pitiable;469 the latter term [], which is a bit closer to the sense of
the Hebrew text, means desire, longing, craving. 470 In the final analysis, we read
as a term that depicts heavens declaration of Daniels worth and value. Goldingay comments in
this regard, that Daniel is one who is held in high regard. 471 The net effect is that the motive
behind Daniel being favored with angelic explanations is the high esteem that Daniel enjoys in
heaven.
Gabriel wraps up his explanation of what and why he is about to expound by giving Daniel two
commands: [1] pay attention and [2] understand.
Pay attention to the decree [ ] is a directive [Qal, imperative]. The force
of the imperative is probably that of an admonition472; Gabriel is urging Daniel to pay close
attention. The nuance of here is pay attention to, consider, perceive.473 BDB opts for
consider with attention, a nuance that nicely fits the context. 474 In other words, Gabriel
admonishes Daniel to be exceptionally attentive to what the angel is about to say. Now, to the
extent that Daniel is studiously attentive, Daniel may expect to understand. For, as we have noted
previously, when two imperatives are written in sequence [pay attention and understand],
then the second is the result of the first.475 The sense is: pay attention and as a result you will
understand.
Decree vision [ ] seems to be an odd combination. Decree has been
dealt with above [see page 111]; as noted, the nuts and bolts of the decree are unpacked in Dan
9:24-27, the vision.
Vision [] is from a semantic field of terms for vision. 476 There are two nouns,
one masculine [ (Dan 9:23)] and one feminine [], which differ only in terms
of a vowel under the . Be that as it may, Vetter notes that the feminine [ (Dan 9:23)]
may be used like the masculine [], a term which points to a revelation of some sort.477
Indeed, this masculine noun means a vision in the sense of a revelation of a divine word [Dan
10:7, 16].478 The upshot is that the decree in Dan 9:24-27 is actually a divine revelation to
465 See Worth, value in NIDOTTE.
466 CDCH, 122.
467 KB1, 326.
468 G. Wallis, , in TDOT, vol. IV, 454.
469 BAGD, 248.
470 Ibid., 293.
471 Goldingay, 256.
472 GKC 110 a.
473 KB1, 122.
474 BDB, 106.
475 GKC 110 f.
476 See Vision in NIDOTTE.
477 D. Vetter, in TLOT III, 1182.
478 KB1, 630-31.
112
Daniel concerning post-exilic events; the vision, as we shall soon see, looks much further down
the road than the mere reconstruction of Jerusalem and the temple.
The Revelation to Daniel [Dan 9:24-27]


9:24a1 Seventy sevens,

9:24a2 have been decreed for
your people and your
holy city,

9:24a3 to bring an end to covenant betrayal,

9:24a4 to make an end of sin,

9:24a5 to wipe away the guilt of iniquity,

9:24a6 to bring about everlasting
righteousness;

9:24b1 to confirm the vision and the
prophecy,

9:24b2 and to anoint a most holy.
1

9:25a Therefore, know and comprehend:

9:25a2 from (the) issuance of (the) decree,

9:25a3 to rebuild Jerusalem,

9:25a4 until an anointed one a
prince, seven sevens;

9:25b1 and sixty two sevens,

9:25b2 it will be rebuilt, plaza
and trench,

9:25b3 even in the oppression of the
times.

9:26a1 Then after sixty two
sevens,

9:26a2 an anointed one will be eliminated,

9:26a3 and he has nothing;

9:26b1 then the city and the sanctuary,

9:26b2 the people of a coming prince
will wipe out,

9:26b3 but his end in a flood,

9:26b4 yet to the end war,

9:26b5 determined desolations.

9:27a1 He will enforce a covenant for
many,
113

9:27a2 one seven;

9:27b and (in the)
middle of the seven, he will remove
sacrifice and gift offering,

9:27b and upon the wing of detestable
things one
who makes desolate,

9:27b and until a destruction
determined

9:27b is poured out upon the one who makes
desolate.
The syntactical outline will be reserved for each verse, owing to the complexity of Dan
9:24-27.
The theme of this paragraph is announcement of the seventy sevens. After that, the
heavenly speaker treats Daniel, and the reader, to a breakdown of the seventy sevens: seven
sevens, sixty two sevens, and one seven.
The genre of Daniel 9:24-27 is a continuation of the angelic discourse, which amounts
to a divine revelation.
Dan 9:24 Seventy sevens have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to bring an
end to covenant betrayal, to make an end of sin, to wipe away the guilt of iniquity, to bring about
everlasting righteousness, to confirm the vision and the prophecy, and to anoint a most holy.
Syntactical outline
(Main clause): Seventy sevens have been decreed for your people and your holy city
(Six-fold purpose of the decree): (a) to bring an end to covenant betrayal, (b) to make an end of
sin, (c) to wipe away the guilt of iniquity, (d) to bring about everlasting righteousness, (e) to
confirm the vision and the prophecy, and (f) to anoint a most holy.
Exposition
Dan 9:24 front loads seventy sevens; whatever this phrase turns out to mean, it is clear
that the six infinitive clauses that follow constitute the key events associated with seventy
sevens. The Guidebook affirms that seventy sevens is a figure of speech, probably alluding to
the number seven as a figure for comprehensive completeness, that should be read openendedly: an unspecified but thoroughly complete period of time for finalizing historys six key
purposes.
Seventy sevens [ (cardinal numeral) (noun, ms, pl)] is literally
sevens seventy. The masculine noun [ (sevens)] is formed from a primary noun
[] that describes a group of seven or a seven part unit. 479 Holladay follows suit,
describing the primary noun [(sevens)] with a unit (period) of seven. 480 BDB offers
479 KB2, 1384.
480 Holladay, 358.
114
a period of seven that may be disambiguated in terms of either days or years, based on the
context.481 Young affirms that (sevens) is actually a participial form that means,
literally, besevened, i.e., computed by sevens.482 The upshot is that
= seventy sevens = a seven part unit [of undetermined length] multiplied seventy times. Thus far,
the language that Gabriel uses indicates that a fixed period of time [seventy sevens] is allotted
by heaven to accomplish the six purposes that will deal with sin and establish righteousness. We
should keep the forest and the trees in some perspective here; the key to Dan 9:24 is not the time
frame, whatever it is, rather the centerpiece of Dan 9:24 is the series of six infinitive clauses of
purpose.
At this point in the exposition, we must wade into the weeds of various readings of the
chronology offered by Gabriel. We shall note two things: [1] it is by no means certain how to
figure the angels chronology; and [2] the ambiguities that color all of the chronological attempts
leave us to conclude that Gabriel was speaking figuratively with seventy sevens [Dan 9:24],
seven sevens [Dan 9:25], sixty sevens [Dan 9:26], and one seven [Dan 9:27].
Most English translations have seventy weeks for . And, a
fair number of commentators read or seventy weeks in the sense of
seventy weeks of years since the original mention of seventy years from Jeremiahs prophecy
has been referenced by Daniel in Dan 9:2. The implication is that the seventy years of
punishment alluded to by Jeremiah [in Jeremiah 25; about 586 BC] is being inflated by a factor of
seventy.
Moreover, in the angelic speech, Gabriel references a kind of itemization of the seventy
sevens [or seventy weeks if you will]. First, in Dan 9:25, Gabriel announces: from (the)
proclamation of (the) decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed one, a prince
seven sevens [or seven weeks = 49 years (most of the English versions ignore the punctuation
mark in the Masoretic text after seven sevens; there is an atnach punctuating the line which
roughly corresponds to our semicolon; the atnach divides a verse at its midpoint)]. Second, in
Dan 9:25, Gabriel affirms and sixty two sevens [or sixty two weeks = 434 years] it will be
restored and rebuilt, plaza and moat. Third, in Dan 9:26, Gabriel claims that after sixty two
sevens [or sixty two weeks = after 434 years] an anointed one will be eliminated. And fourth,
in Dan 9:27, Gabriel refers to someone who will enforce a covenant for many one seven [or one
week = 7 years], and (in the) middle of the seven [or in the middle of the seven year period =
32 years], he will put an end to sacrifice and grain offering. Lets look at one key piece of
chronology, if we take seven to amount to seven years.
Essentially, we must consider the alleged chronology of Dan 9:25. If we apply the
formula that one week = one calendar year (an assumption not without problems!), then Dan 9:25
affirms that from the issuance of a proclamation to restore Jerusalem to the emergence of an
anointed one is 49 years483. The fact of the matter is that the OT reveals numerous options that fit
Dan 9:25 at this point.
Jeremiah 29:10 was a piece of correspondence from Jeremiah to the exiles in Babylon; the date
was probably about 597 BC. In this letter, Jeremiah tells the exiles that when the seventy years
481 BDB, 988-89.
482 Young, 195.
483 As I point out in the previous paragraph, I am aware that most English translations read:
seven weeks and sixty two weeks. Sadly, this translation ignores the Masoretic punctuation
that puts a stop after seven weeks. I punctuate with a semicolon [see my translation, above].
115
are at an end, Yahweh pledges to fulfill His promises to the exiles and bring them back to
Jerusalem. While restoration is not explicitly mentioned, it is implied. So, applying the seven
weeks or 49 years to the 597 BC date, this brings us to 548 BC. Where is the anointed one
that is supposed to have appeared in 548 BC``?
Or, consider Dan 9:23 that refers to a decree that came forth. Why not read the
issuance of a proclamation to restore Jerusalem in terms of Gabriels words to Daniel in 539
BC? If we apply the seven weeks to this date, we arrive at 490 BC; again, what anointed one
appeared in 490 BC?
Ezra 6:1-12 recalls the decree of Darius in 521 BC to rebuild Jerusalem and the temple
complex. If we apply the seven weeks to this date, we arrive at 472 BC; again, where is the
anointed one in 472 BC?
Ezra 7:12-26 mentions the decree of Artaxerxes probably in 458 BC. Once more, doing
the math, we come down to a date of 409 BC; once more, what anointed one emerged in 409
BC?
Nehemiah 2 recounts the permission of Artaxerxes again to rebuild Jerusalem; the date of
this permission would have been about 445 BC. When we apply the formula we have been using,
we end up in 396 BC. At this date also, an anointed one is hard to come by.
We began by considering the chronology of the seven sevens or seven weeks [49
years] in Dan 9:25. As far as the return to and restoration of Jerusalem goes, we have too many
dates to choose from based upon OT evidence. To lift out any one of them to the exclusion of the
others is arbitrariness. The fact is that we simply cannot fill out the chronology in Dan 9:25
beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, when Gabriel said to Daniel, from (the) pronouncement of
(the) decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed one seven sevens, he left us
with a chronology that cannot be settled definitively at its beginning or its end.
Now, if we cannot definitively settle a clear chronology of Dan 9:25, then every so-called
chronological statement after Dan 9:25 is also beyond settling; this applies to Dan 9:25 [and
sixty two sevens it will be restored and rebuilt, plaza and moat], to Dan 9:26 [after sixty sevens
an anointed one will be eliminated], and Dan 9:27 [He will enforce a covenant for many one
seven, and (in the) middle of the seven, he will put an end to sacrifice and grain offering].
The information supplied on the previous page supports the thesis that chronology is not
Gabriels point with his numerous references to seven. Rather, as we noted previously, the
angel seems to be referring to more or less fixed but indeterminate phases of time. Clarity, of a
sort, emerges when we consider seventy sevens [ ] vis--vis the six
infinitives that dominate Dan 9:24. Lets set out the main clause in Dan 9:24 with the six
infinities:
Main clause: Seventy sevens have been decreed for your people and your holy city
[1] to bring an end to covenant betrayal
[2] to make an end of sin
[3] to wipe away the guilt of iniquity
[4] to bring about everlasting righteousness
[5] to confirm the vision and the prophecy
[6] to anoint a most holy
116
Now, we may also weigh and consider the above in a slightly different way:
Seventy sevens are decreed to accomplish six goals:
Goals relating to sin:
[1] bring an end to covenant betrayal
[2] make an end of sin
[3] wipe away the guilt of iniquity
Goals relating to righteousness:
[4] bring about everlasting righteousness
[5] confirm the vision and the prophecy
[6] anoint a most holy
All Messianic!
The sum of the matter is this: the seventy sevens are not merely 490 years; rather, the
[seventy sevens] are a figure of comprehensive completeness; an
indeterminate time during which Yahweh, through His Messiah, accomplishes His six most key
objectives for the salvation of mankind. The termination [emphasis mine] of the 70 sevens
coincides then, not with the times of Antiochus, nor with the end of the present age, the second
Advent of our Lord, but with His first [emphasis mine] Advent.484 As we exegete these six
infinitives clauses, we shall see how they could only be fulfilled by the Messiah.
Have been decreed [ (Niphal, perfect, 3rd, ms, sg)] presents us with another problem:
the verb is written as a singular verb, but the subject of this passive verb,
, is plural. Now, under normal circumstances, there should be concord in number
between the verb and its subject. When this concord is not present, there must be a reason.
Essentially, when a plural noun is to be understood collectively, as a totality, complete and
unified, it may take a singular verb and thus rhetorically underline the single unit comprising the
plurals.485
There is a key point as a consequence here: since /seventy sevens is to
be read collectively, then /seventy sevens encompasses the unitary
nature of this open-ended time period. As Gerhard Hasel writes, it is syntactically inappropriate
to divide the sum total of /seventy sevens into sixty nine weeks that
are continuous and a last week that is separated from them by a gap, parenthesis, or some other
time element which places the seventieth week in the future. 486 Moreover,
/seventy sevens is to be regarded as a totality, and, as we have pointed out above,
the /seventy sevens basically frame the Messiahs sojourn on earth;
accordingly, /seventy sevens does not reference the entire church
age.
Decreed [] is written as a Niphal perfect. The perfect aspect of this verb [], for
lexical reasons as much as anything else, probably points to the existing results of the act of
decreeing.487 The decree is completed and is still in effect. The Niphal stem of the verb
484 Young, 201.
485 On this point of number agreement, see GKC 145 h.
486 Gerhard Hasel, The Hebrew Masculine Plural for Weeks in the Expression Seventy
Weeks in Daniel 9:24 (Andrews University Studies, number 2: 1993, 118).
487 Comrie, 56.
117
carries a passive sense. The seventy sevens are in a state of being acted upon decreed by an
unidentified agent.488 We probably have here a kind of theological passive where Yahweh is the
unidentified agent. The sense of the line is: Yahweh decrees seventy sevens for your people and
for your holy city.
Decree [] is from a semantic field of terms for decree or decision. 489 It appears only here
in the Hebrew Bible; it appears once in the Dead Sea Scrolls [4Q252]. Kohler-Baumgartner
render in Dan 9:24 as determine, impose.490 Holladay goes with decreed, ordained.491
The appearance in the Dead Sea Scrolls is in a commentary on Genesis, a retelling of the flood
story in Genesis 6.492 The meaning of in this line is determined, fixed, or settled. The
sense of in Dan 9:24 is similar. The sense is: Yahweh fixes seventy sevens for your
people and for your holy city.
As we noted above, seventy sevens are fixed or finalized to accomplish six objectives; three
concerning sin and three concerning righteousness; it is to these that we now turn.
Bring an end to covenant betrayal.
Bring an end to the covenant betrayal [ ] is less wooden and less
confusing; that is, just what does it mean to bring an end to the transgression?
Bring an end to [] is a Piel infinitive construct with a prepositional prefix []
to signal purpose.493 The same purposive notion holds for all six of the infinitives. The infinitive,
as a hybrid verbal form, merely denotes the bare verbal action or state in the abstract.494 Since
the infinitive, in and of itself, does not possess tense, there is no reference to ongoing actions
or any other aspectual nuance; the kind of action may be inferred from the context. The point is
that the infinitive simply records the fact of the action in the abstract.
Bring an end to [] is variously translated. Some translators go with finish, or fill, or
put an end to or even restraining. The problem is the direct object: . If we translate
with the transgression, then a variety of options leap out: [1] finishing the
transgression, [2] putting an end to the transgression, [3] filling (the measure of) the
transgression [4] or restraining the transgression. 495 Restraining the transgression seems a
bit compromising; the other translations, those that put an end to transgression [or the like],
would seem to make the next infinitive clause [seal up sins] superfluous. Obviously, then, the
real issue is the meaning of ; it is the transgression or something else?
488 IBHS 23.2.2a.
489 See Decree, decision in NIDOTTE.
490 KB1, 364.
491 Holladay, 120.
492 The text reads as follows:
[And God said:
My spirit will not dwell with man forever; their days will be determined at one hundred twenty
years].
493 IBHS 36.2.3c.
494 Ibid., 35.2.2a.
495 The translation restraining is based upon reading the lexeme , which is in Dan 9:24,
with another verb, , which means to restrain.
118
Bring an end to [] is from a semantic field of terms for complete or destruction. 496 The
ranges of meaning for are: [1] in the Qal stem: (a) to stop, to come to an end, (b) to be
finished or completed, (c) to vanish or fade away, (d) to perish, (e) to be determined, and (f) to
fail; [2] in the Piel stem (which we have in Dan 9:24): (a) to complete or bring to an end, (b) to
finish or to cease to, (c) to use up, to consume, to destroy; and [3] in the Pual: to be finished. 497
Kohler-Baumgartner opt for (c), to destroy. 498 BDB goes with to make an end of.499 The
upshot is that Yahweh intends, during the seventy sevens, to bring an end to the process of
. The now is: just what does denote?
The covenant betrayal [] is almost universally translated transgression in the English
versions. Strictly speaking, there is absolutely nothing improper in this reading. However, it
does raise a question concerning the next infinitive clause, which more or less says the same
thing. Why would Gabriel repeat himself this way? And, there is one more grammatical matter:
the transgression or the covenant betrayal is the only direct object of any of the six infinitives
with a definite article. One suspects that Gabriel is emphasizing in some sense.
The covenant betrayal [], as noted, has the definite article prefixed. What, if
anything, does this tell us? More than likely, Gabriel prefixes the article to designate the whole
class of ideas associated with ; specifically, to denote the whole class of attributes or states
connected with ,500 including covenant betrayal. This consideration brings us to the
meaning of in Dan 9:24.
Covenant betrayal [] is from a semantic field of terms for rebellion. 501 Statistically, the
verbal form of occurs 41 times in the Hebrew Bible. Of these 41, at least 22 of these
depict /rebellion as an instance of covenant betrayal. 502 Especially clear in connecting
with covenant betrayal is Hosea 8:1 they have transgressed My covenant; they have
revolted () against My Torah. Carpenter and Grisanti put the matter into perspective: 503
signifies a willful, knowledgeable violation of a norm or
standard. Beyond that, it represents a willful breach of trust. It
occurs most frequently to designate the disruption of an alliance
through violation of a covenant. In all of this, in a fundamental
sense, represents covenant treachery [emphasis mine].
496 See Complete, destruction in NIDOTTE.

497 KB1, 476-77.
498 Ibid., 477.
499 BDB, 477.
500 GKC 126 n.
502 1 Kings 8:50; Psalm 37:38; 51:15; Isaiah 1:2 [they have revolted () against Me], 28
[those who forsake Yahweh]; 43:27 [your intermediaries have revolted () against Me];
46:8; 53:12; 59:13 [turning away from our God]; 66:24; Jeremiah 2:8, 29 [you have all
transgressed () against Me]; 3:13; 33:8; Lamentations 3:42 [we have revolted ()
and rebelled and You do not forgive]; Ezekiel 2:3; 18:31; 20:38; Hosea 7:13 [they have
wandered away from Me]; 8:1 [they have transgressed My covenant; they have revolted
() against My Torah]; 14:10; Zephaniah 3:11.
119
The Septuagint tradition, in both the Old Greek and Theodotion, translate bring an end to
[] with the Greek verb . Now, this Greek verb in Dan 9:24 has an
interesting connection with the same verb [] in Hebrews 8:8 I will bring
into existence [] a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. It may
well be the case that the end to covenant betrayal takes the form of inaugurating the new
covenant in the New Testament. And the new covenant is a Messianic enterprise.
Bring an end to sin.
Make an end of sin [ (noun, feminine, singular) (Hiphil, infinitive
construct)] reads the verb [] as emended by BHS and the direct object [] as
emended by the BHS504. With this reading, the reader should note that the direct object,
, is a feminine singular. Obviously, the meaning of in the Hiphil stem is
crucial.
Make an end of [] is from a semantic field of terms for completion or destruction. 505 It is
from the same semantic field as bring to an end [] in the first infinitive clause [bring to
an end covenant betrayal]. The other terms in the field are and .
was discussed in relation to Dan 9:24a3 [bring an end to covenant betrayal]. As noted
at the time, the ranges of meaning for are: [1] in the Qal stem: (a) to stop, to come to an
end, (b) to be finished or completed, (c) to vanish or fade away, (d) to perish, (e) to be
determined, and (f) to fail; [2] in the Piel stem (which we have in Dan 9:24): (a) to complete or
bring to an end, (b) to finish or to cease to, (c) to use up, to consume, to destroy; and [3] in the
Pual: to be finished. These ranges of meaning suggest that refers to the end of a process.
In the case of covenant betrayal, Gabriel sees a time when the process that makes up covenant
betrayal is brought to an end.
appears eight times in the Aramaic section of Ezra 506 and twice in the Hebrew
text in Ezekiel 27:4, 11. The two uses in Ezekiel 27 come in a context of judgment; Ezekiel
advises Tyre, whose beauty [] has been perfected [], that soon all will fall into the
depths of the sea [Ezekiel 27:27]. Obviously, this use of has the sense of to make
something perfect or to bring something to a state of completion.
appears 64 times in the Hebrew Bible, 54 in the Qal stem, 8 in the Hiphil stem [which we
have in Dan 9:24], and 2 in the Hithpael stem. The ranges of meaning are as follows: [1] in the
Qal: (a) to be completed, finished, (b) to be complete, to come to an end, (c) to come to an end, be
gone, to cease, to be spent, (d) to be consumed, to be destroyed, to perish, to die out, (e) to do
(something) completely, to finish (doing), (f) to be blameless, to be perfect; [2] in the Hiphil: (a)
to complete or to accomplish some event, (b) to complete (the cooking of) flesh, (c) to cause to
cease, to make an end of, (d) to consume, to destroy, (e) to make blameless, to make perfect, (f) to
reckon the sum of money, (g) to finish, to cease doing, (h) to be complete (in number), and (i) to
settle a matter; [3] in the Hithpael: (a) to show oneself blameless, and (b) to deal in integrity. 507
The Hiphil of especially seems to have the sense of to bring to a state of termination.508
504 BHS is Biblical Hebraica Stuttgartensia, the standard Hebrew text used by Old Testament
students and scholars.
505 See Completion, destruction in NIDOTTE.
506 Ezra 4:122, 13, 16; 5:3, 9, 11; 6:14.
507 CDCH, 490.
120
The sum of the matter is this: Gabriel chose not to use a term that depicted the ending of a
process []; rather, Gabriel chose a term [] that, in the Hiphil at least, means to
bring to a state of termination. The question now becomes: in what sense can this be applied to
sin? In what sense can one speak of bringing an end to or bringing into a state of termination
sin?
Sin [] is a noun, common, feminine, singular. It appears well over 200 times in
the Hebrew Bible. The noun [] has the following ranges of meaning: can
refer to: [1] the presence and power of sin (Genesis 4:7); [2] the guilt associated with sin (Gen
18:20); [3] sin committed against another human being (about 11 references); [4] sin committed
against Yahweh (over 70 references); [5] sin in the sense of a sin offering (over 100 references);
[6] sin used to depict purification from sin (Numbers 8:7; 19:9, 17); [7] and sin used to represent
punishment for sin (Proverbs 10:16; Zechariah 14:19). Now, with this overview in hand, just
what is entailed in the angelic promise that during the seventy sevens sin will be brought into a
state of termination? Two options come to mind.
First, we might conclude that Gabriel foresees a time when sin as a power is brought into
a state of termination. The Genesis 4 passage presents sin [] as a lurker [], a
lurker, presumably lying in wait with a craving [] for Abel. Von Rad writes that
this statement shows sin as an objective power which, as it were, is outside the man and over
him, waiting eagerly to take possession of him.509 In the light of Dan 9:24, Gabriel may be
affirming that a time is coming when sin as a power in life will be in a state of termination.
The New Testament certainly views sin [ (the Greek translation for our term
)] as a power. Paul tells us that sin entered the world [Romans 5:12]; having entered,
sin lives [Romans 7:9]; living, sin indwells [Romans 7:17, 20], indwelling, sin enslaves [John
8:34; Romans 6:6, 14]; enslaving, sin reigns [Romans 5:21; 6:12]; and reigning, sin produces
coveting [Romans 7:8] and sin deceives [Romans 7:11]. All of this attests to the fact that the New
Testament understands sin as a power.
Thus, based on the overlap between //sin as a power, we may
reasonably conclude that canonically Gabriel is affirming that a day will come during the seventy
sevens when sin as a power will be in a state of termination. Indeed, the New Testament makes
the same point; for we have died to sin [Romans 6:2, 11]; we are no longer slaves to sin [Romans
6:6]; we are free from sin [Romans 6:7, 18]; we need not let sin reign [Romans 6:12]; sin is not
master over us [Romans 6:14]; we were slaves of sin but became obedient [Romans 6:17]; and
we are free from the power of sin and enslaved to God [Romans 6:22]. All of this attests to the
fact that Gabriel was right: sin as a power is in a state of termination.
Second, we might conclude that Gabriel foresees a times when sin as sin offerings might
be brought into a state of termination. We noted above that sin in the sense of a sin offering
508 The Hiphil of appears eight times; it is used of bringing a dispute to a state of
termination [2 Samuel 20:18]; it is used of bringing a count of funds to a state of termination [2
Kings 22:4]; it is used of morality, bringing one to a state of moral blamelessness [Job 22:3]; it is
used of bringing destruction to a state of termination [Isaiah 33:1]; it is used of bringing
uncleanness to a state of termination [Ezekiel 22:5]; it is used of bringing the cooking of flesh to
a state of termination [Ezekiel 24:10]; it is used of transgressors who bring their transgressions to
a state of termination [Dan 8:23]; and it is used of bringing sin to a state of termination [Dan
9:24].
509 Gerhard Von Rad, Genesis: A Commentary (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972), 105.
121
appears in over 100 references in the Hebrew Bible. 510 The fact of the matter is that these sin
offerings were offered to accomplish a variety of purposes. One of the purposes for the sin
offering was forgiveness of sin for the worshiper. This is stated explicitly in passages such as Lev
4:20, 34; 5:6-10; 10:17. These passages link: (a) the /sin offering with (b)
/atonement and (c) /forgiveness. Averbeck summarizes this way:
According to Lev 4-5, by means of the sin offering the worshipers could receive forgiveness for
their sin (e.g., 4:20, 26, 31, 35, etc.) and, at the same time, deal with the degree to which their sin
might have contaminated the tabernacle.511
Other passages in Leviticus make the same point concerning the as a means of
forgiveness of sin by linking the /sin offering simply with /atonement [Lev
5:6; 6:28; 7:7; 9:7; 16:6, 11, 27]. Finally, one passage links (a) /sin offering with (b)
/carrying away guilt of iniquity and (c) /atonement [Lev 10:17].
These passages from Leviticus go a long way to show that /sin offering was a means
by which individuals or the community could be forgiven of their sin. Therefore, in light of Dan
9:24, Gabriel may be affirming that a time would come, during the seventy sevens, when the
connection between sin offerings and forgiveness of sins would come to a state of termination.
The New Testament certainly views sin [ (the Greek translation for our
term )] as that which must be forgiven through a sin offering. This point is made
abundantly clear by the Messiah Himself at the Last Supper, when Jesus refers His blood as the
blood of the covenant, poured out for the forgiveness of sins [Matthew 26:28]. Earlier in His life,
John the Baptist had referred to Jesus as the (sacrificial) Lamb of God that removes the sin of the
world [John 1:29].
The Apostle Paul picks up on this self-offering-forgiveness motif in at least two
prominent passages. In Romans 8:3, the Apostle identifies Jesus as an offering for sin that had
the net effect of condemning sin in the flesh [Romans 8:3]. Then, in 2 Corinthians 5:21, the
Apostle characterizes Jesus as the One who knew no sin but yet became sin on our behalf.
However, when it comes to the correlation between self-offering and forgiveness in the
New Testament, pride of place must go to Hebrews. The author wastes no time in connecting selfoffering with forgiveness when he notes that Jesus provided purification for sin and then sat at the
right hand of majesty [Hebrews 1:3]. Later, extolling the superiority of Jesus Highpriesthood,
the author notes that Jesus does not need to offer sacrifices, first for His sins and then the sins of
others, since He, once and for all, offered Himself [Hebrew 7:27]. In no uncertain terms, the
author declares that Jesus has removed sin by the sacrifice of Himself [Hebrews 9:26]. Indeed,
we are told that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sin for all time [Hebrews 10:12]. Finally, the
author informs us that where there is forgiveness, sacrifice is not necessary any longer [Hebrews
10:18]. All of this attests to the fact that Gabriel was right: sin as a sin-offering is in a state of
termination since the Messiah offered Himself as a sacrifice for sins once and for all.
510 Exodus 29:14, 36; 30:10; Leviticus 4:3, 8, 14, 20, 21, 24, 25, 29, 32, 33, 34; 5:6, 7, 8,
9, 11, 12; 6:10, 18, 23; 7:7, 37; 8:2, 14; 9:2, 3, 7, 8, 10, 15, 22; 10:16, 17, 19; 12:6, 8; 14:13, 19,
22, 31; 15:15, 30; 16:3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 15, 25, 27; 23:19; Numbers 6:11, 14, 16; 7:16, 22, 28, 34, 40,
46, 52, 58, 64, 70, 76, 82, 87; 8:8, 12; 15:24, 25, 27; 18:9; 28:15, 22; 29:5, 11, 16, 19, 22, 25, 28,
31, 34, 38; 2 Chronicles 29:21, 23, 24; Ezra 8:35; Ezekiel 40:39; 42:13; 43:19, 21, 22, 25; 44:27,
29; 45:17, 19, 22, 23, 25; 46:20.
511 Richard Averbeck, in NIDOTTE [H2366].
122
Earlier we asked: just what is entailed in the angelic promise that during the seventy
sevens sin will be brought into a state of termination? It turns out that sin is brought into a state
of termination in at least two ways. First, sin as a power in ones life will be brought into a state
of termination during the seventy sevens. Indeed, the crucifixion is the key event, during the
seventy sevens, whereby mankind is offered the opportunity to be set free from the power of sin
[Romans 6:6]. Second, sin as a sin offering for ones sin, per the traditional Mosaic cult, is also
brought into a state of termination during the seventy sevens. Indeed, as noted above, where
there is forgiveness of sin, sin offerings are no longer necessary [Hebrews 10:18]. Finally, both
of these are benefits of the life and work of the Messiah.
Wipe away the guilt of iniquity.
Wipe away the guilt of iniquity [ ] is the third objective, signaled by
the infinitive construct, during the seventy sevens. Again, as with the two previous infinitives,
this one is also purposive; an objective during the seventy sevens is wiping away the guilt of
iniquity.
Wiping away [] is written in the Piel stem of the verb, ; indeed the majority
of the appearances of this verb is in the Piel stem [92 times in the Piel]. is from a sematic
field of terms for atonement;512 the only other term in the field is , to pay for, to make
good.
There is debate over the basic idea in the verb, . The debate is deliberated in three
respects: first, there are those who affirm that essentially means to cover, then to
ransom, and then to wipe away. 513 The first option does have some problems with it, but the
second, based upon Leviticus 17:11, does seem to associate the sacrificial blood of an animal as a
ransom for human life.514 The third option is also well supported, especially in terms of Jeremiah
18:23.515 The question is: does either of the two options that are plausible rise above the other?
The use of this verb, , followed by the direct object we have, , appears seven times
in the Hebrew Bible.516 Three of these passages provide interesting parallels to
[wipe away the guilt of iniquity]. The parallels may be set out thus:
Psalm 78:38
Did not wipe out
Isaiah 27:29
Remove sin
Jeremiah 18:23
Let not sin be blotted out
//

// Wipe away the guilt of iniquity
//

// Iniquity will be wiped away
//

// Do not wipe away the guilt of iniquity
The reader can easily note that the respective parallels support the notion that, essentially,
, when used with , means to wipe away, the third of the options mentioned
above. Indeed, based upon the parallels sited above, = wipe away = wipe out = remove =
blot out. Thus, we may conclude that the accomplishment involved in wiping away is
elimination, deletion, eradication, even abolition of the guilt of iniquity.
512 See Atonement in NIDOTTE.
513 Richard Averbeck, , in NIDOTTE [H4106].
514 Ibid.
515 Ibid.
516 1 Samuel 3:14; Psalm 78:38; Proverbs 16:6; Isaiah 22:14; 27:9; Jeremiah 18:23; Daniel 9:24.
123
Guilt of iniquity [] is from a semantic field of terms for transgression. 517 The
ranges of meaning for are: [1] a misdeed or a sin, [2] guilt caused by sin (and the
consequences thereof), [3] punishment (for guilt). 518 Used as the direct object of /wipe
away, the best option for is to wipe away the guilt caused by sin (and the consequences
thereof). There is ample evidence of this sense of in the Hebrew Bible.
For those who break Yahwehs commandments, these will be blotted out so that his guilt caused
by sin and its consequences will be on him [Numbers 15:31]. When Abigail fell at the feet of
David, she confessed, on me (alone) the guilt caused by sin and its consequences [1 Samuel
25:24]. In what must be an imprecation, David prays concerning his enemies: may the guilt
caused by sin and its consequences of his fathers be remembered by Yahweh [Psalm 109:14].
Jeremiah confesses his peoples wickedness the guilt caused by sin and its consequences of
our fathers [Jeremiah 14:20]. In one of the most gracious statements of reprieve in the Hebrew
Bible, Jeremiah sees a time when they will seek for the guilt [of Gods people] caused by sin and
its consequences, but there is none [Jeremiah 50:20]. Therefore, in light of Dan 9:24, Gabriel
may be affirming that a time would come, during the seventy sevens, when the guilt caused by sin
and its consequences would come to a state of termination.
Tracing the overlap between the Hebrew action word used here /wipe out
and the Greek term used in the Septuagint and thus into the New Testament is a bit tricky. To
begin with, the Old Greek tradition uses , a verb that does not appear in the
New Testament. However, the translation for used by Theodotion is
, which is not used in the New Testament either, but, if we remove the
prefix [] from the verb, then we have and this term, with
derivatives519, figures in the New Testament in a major way.
The verb [] is used of Jesus, the great High priest, whose death expiates
the sins of the people [Hebrews 2:17].520 In other words, the outcome of Jesus atonement is the
wiping out of the guilt of sins [emphasis mine] and the offer of forgiveness to the new people of
God.521 The upshot is that God, through His Messiahs self-sacrifice, nullifies the guilt caused
by sin along with the consequences thereof.
The noun [] appears twice in the New Testament, 1 John 2:2 and 4:10. In the
former passage, the Apostle affirms that Jesus Himself is the for our sins, as
well as the sins of the world. Robert Law tends to read in the sense of
expiation, that which in some way expiates the guilt of sin, which restores sinful offenders to
God by rendering their sin null and inoperative as a barrier to fellowship with Him. 522 The net
517 See Transgression in NIDOTTE.
518 KB1, 800.
519 There are two derivatives: [expiation] and [a
means of expiation].
520 There is a debate among biblical scholars concerning propitiation and expiation. To
make a long story short, propitiation appeases the offended person, whereas expiation is
concerned with nullifying the offensive act [Moiss Silva, ed., The New International
Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis, vol. 2, - (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
2014), 534 [hereafter abbreviated NIDNTTE with the volume number only].
521 Ibid., 538.
522 Robert Law, The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of John (Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1968; reprint), 163.
124
effect is that God, through His Messiah, expiates the sins of the whole world; that is, He nullifies
offensive acts, the guilt caused by sin and the consequences thereof.
The noun [] is used in Romans 3:25 in the sense of a means of
expiation, a gift to procure expiation.523 Thus, Paul describes the Messiah as One whom God
brought forth as a means of expiation in His blood through faith [Romans 3:25]. The upshot is
that God willed to forgive sinful men and, being truly merciful, willed to forgive them
righteously, that is, without in any way condoning their sin, purposed to direct against His own
very Self in the person of His Son the full weight of that righteous wrath which they deserved. 524
To put the same thing another way, in the Messiahs self-sacrifice, God nullified mankinds full
repertoire of sinful acts, effectively wiping out the guilt caused by sin and the consequences
thereof.
The sum of the matter is this: in Dan 9:24, Gabriel advises Daniel that, during the seventy sevens,
God would wipe away, bring to a state of termination, the guilt of iniquity. Indeed, Gabriel is not
referring to covering over, rather the angelic messenger is foreseeing a time when the guilt of
sin and the consequences thereof are wiped away, wiped out, removed, blotted out, eliminated
and deleted. The New Testament picks up this theme through the vocabulary,
proclaiming that on His Cross, Jesus, the Messiah, expiated, that is nullified the consequences of
wicked deeds committed by humankind.
Summary
Lets summarize the first three objectives, the divine goals relating to humanitys problem
with sin. It seems to me that we do have a progression in these first three infinitive clauses, a
progression that descends from the more across-the-board problem to more focused concerns.
The sweeping problem is covenant betrayal; all else, as far as sin is concerned, begins
with covenant betrayal. To be sure, those who violated the covenant were Gods chosen people,
Israel. As Hosea puts it, they have transgressed My covenant []; they have revolted
() against My Torah [Hosea 8:1]. Here, covenant betrayal focuses on betraying the
Mosaic covenant; but, we may presume that the betrayal is even more sweeping that that. From
the outset, from the covenant with creation in Genesis 1-2, there was covenant betrayal. Indeed,
throughout salvation history as this history unfolds through successive covenants Noah,
Abraham, Moses, and David there had been moments of covenant betrayal; indeed, betrayal of
the covenant arrangements had brought the people of God into exile in Babylon. To be sure, one
of the very first overtures of God, acting strictly on His own and motivated by grace, was to enact
a covenant relationship between Himself and mankind [Genesis 6:18]. From that time to this,
covenant has been the vehicle, the structure, of the relationship between God and man. From
Gods side, there are promises; from mans side there are responses; taken together, covenant is
the word that defines and describes mans relationship with God. Sadly, at every point along the
covenantal continuum, there had been sin, covenant betrayal; this is the across-the-board
problem, and Gabriel promises Daniel that a time would come, during the seventy sevens, when
covenant betrayal would be brought to an end. The New Testament declares that the end to
covenant betrayal came with new covenant in Jesus blood [Luke 22:20].
Beyond the basic difficulty, Gabriel focuses on a more concentrated obstacle: the problem
of sin. As anyone can see, sin is the agent of covenant betrayal. Responding to the problem of
523 BAGD, 375.
524 C.E.B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, vol.
1, Romans I-VIII (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1977), 217.
125
sin, Gabriel affirms that a time would come when sin would be brought into a state of termination
in at least two ways. First, sin as a power in ones life would be brought into a state of
termination during the seventy sevens. At this point, the crucifixion is the key event, during the
seventy sevens, whereby mankind is offered the opportunity to be set free from the power of sin
[Romans 6:6]. Second, sin as a sin offering for ones sin, per the traditional Mosaic cult, would
also brought into a state of termination during the seventy sevens. Once more, the Messiahs
Cross is crucial: where there is forgiveness of sin, sin offerings are no longer necessary [Hebrews
10:18].
Finally, there is the problem of guilt, of culpability for the aforementioned sin and
covenant betrayal. Gabriel affirms that a time would come, during the seventy sevens, when guilt
caused by sin (and the consequences thereof) would be wiped away; and Gabriel is unambiguous
on this point: for the guilt caused by sin is not merely to be covered over in some fashion, rather it
is to be wiped out, deleted, blotted out, cast into the depths of the sea, removed as far as east is
from the west. Once more, in the New Testament, the Messiah is the instrument of expiating the
guilt caused by sin and all of the consequences of this sin-guilt nexus; on His Cross, Jesus, the
Messiah, expiated, that is nullified the consequences of wicked deeds committed by humankind.
Having dealt with the three goals relating to sin, Gabriel now moves toward the positive
agenda of heaven: the three objectives concerning righteousness. They may be set out this way:
Goals relating to righteousness:

[4] bring about everlasting righteousness
[5] confirm the vision and the prophecy
[6] anoint a most holy
Bring about everlasting righteousness.
Bring about [ (Hiphil, infinitive construct)] is from a semantic field of terms
for entering.525 The verb appears over 2500 times in the Hebrew Bible. In the Hiphil stem, the
verb has the following ranges of meaning: [1] to bring near (someone or something); [2] to bring
in (someone or something); [3] to cause to set; and [4] to bring about a state of affairs. 526 This
fourth option is very attractive: to bring about everlasting righteousness (a state of affairs).
Similar to option [4] is to bring to pass (something promised). 527
Moreover, this verb [] plays a role in Messianic prophecy in the Hebrew Bible. 528 In one
way or another, various prophets use [bring about] to signal that the Messiah is coming
[]. For example, Isaiah 60:1 promises the people of God that your light has come
[]; the glory of Yahweh shines among you. John Oswalt notes, This material is
addressed to the faithful in Israel, both at the time of the first coming of the Messiah and at the
time of His second coming.529 Jeremiah adds his voice with Behold: the days are coming
[], says Yahweh, when I shall appoint for David a righteous [] branch; thus, he
525 See Coming, approaching, entering in NIDOTTE.
526 CDCH, 42.
527 KB1, 114.
528 For the use of in reference to the coming Messiah, see Isaiah 60:1; 62:11; Jeremiah
23:5; 31:31; Zechariah 3:8; 9:9; Malachi 3:1.
529 John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 537.
126
will reign as king, act with insight, and effect justice and righteousness [] on the earth
[Jeremiah 23:5]. Note that this Messianic reference includes bringing about righteousness!
Finally, there is the familiar text in Zechariah, which speaks for itself: Daughter of Jerusalem,
behold: your King comes [] to you, righteous [] and victorious He [Zechariah
9:9]. Note once more that the coming [] One brings with Him righteousness []!
It is inescapable that the coming King is the purveyor of righteousness in both Jeremiah and
Zechariah; this fits nicely with Gabriels prediction for Daniel in Dan 9:24.
Everlasting righteousness [ ] appears only in Dan 9:24 in the Hebrew Bible.
However, with the addition of a preposition onto everlasting, we do have another reference to
everlasting righteousness in Psalm 119:142 a-b. We may set out the texts thus, demonstrating
the parallelism:
Psalm 119:142a
righteousness]
Psalm 119:142b
[everlasting righteousness] [Your

[truth]
[Your Torah]
The interesting fact about the parallelism is that everlasting righteousness in the A-line
is concretized in terms of Torah which is truth in the B-line. To the extent that everlasting
righteousness in Psalm 119:142 is any comment on the notion of everlasting righteousness in
Dan 9:24, then it may be the case that everlasting righteousness takes the form of the rule and
reign of Yahwehs Torah beginning with the Messianic advent during the seventy sevens.
Jeremiah 31:31 tells us that days are coming [] when Yahweh will establish a new
covenant with His people, the gist of which is that Yahweh will place His Torah []
within them, writing Torah [] upon their hearts. The upshot is this: if these connections
hold firm, connections between righteousness [], coming [], and Torah
[], then the everlasting righteousness that Gabriel foresees amounts to the rule and
reign of Yahwehs Torah ultimately operating from within the hearts of His people; this is the
everlasting righteousness that emerges during the seventy sevens.
In the New Testament, especially in Paul, the connection between righteousness that
which operates from within the believer is especially prominent. In Romans 10:8, the Apostle,
citing Deuteronomy 30:14, affirms that the the word is near you, in your mouth and in your
heart. Cranfield claims that Paul cites the Deuteronomy passage in order to underscore the fact
that originally God had drawn near to them in His word which could be taken on their lips and
received in their hearts. But all along, His nearness to Israel by means of His law pointed
forward to His gift of Himself to men in Christ.530 The Apostle John also draws a connection
between a life of righteousness and the indwelling of Christ when he affirms that everyone that
practices righteousness is born of Him [1 John 2:29].
Overall, then, Gabriel looks down the long corridor of history and foresees a time when
everlasting righteousness [], the rule and reign of Yahwehs Torah [Psalms 119:142], will
emerge spontaneously from within the believer; the word is near you in your heart. This
spontaneous emergence is the fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:31 and comes [] during the
seventy sevens, the Messianic era.
Confirm the vision and the prophecy
530 Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans, vol. 2, 526.

127
To confirm the vision and the prophecy [ ] is usually

translated to seal up or words to that effect. To an English reader, this would naturally imply
closing off the vision and the prophecy to view. Sadly, this is not quite what Gabriel has in mind.
To confirm [] is a verb that is used 27 times in the Hebrew Bible; it has the
following ranges of meaning: [1] to seal up, and [2] more metaphorically, to confirm. 531 Holladay
opts for confirm.532 The sense is: to confirm [by being fulfilled] the vision and the prophecy.
Driver writes, The close of the 70 weeks will bring with it the confirmation of the prophetic
utterances (such as those just quoted) respecting a blissful future. 533 Similarly, Russell notes that
the messages of the prophets and the visions they have received will at last be confirmed and
shown to be true.534
Vision and the prophecy [ ] appear in this precise form only here in the
Hebrew Bible; we may read vision and prophecy as more or less interchangeable terms. The
ranges of meaning for are: [1] a vision, associated with (a) a prophecy, revelation, or
(b) dreaming; [2] a revelatory word, inspired saying.535 In a nutshell, the is a revelatory
word from God to a recipient basically in visual form; in content, it is prophetic.
There are more references to vision [] in the book of Daniel than in any other
book in the Old Testament. As noted, the is a revelation from God in visual form [Dan
8:1-2] with prophetic content. These visions do have specific content visually represented, for
example, the vision [] concerning the Tamid, the regular sacrifice [Dan 8:13]. In
Daniel, the vision [] must be understood intellectually [Dan 8:15], but intellectual
perception requires divine help [Dan 8:17; 9:21-22]. Once understood, the recipient, Daniel in
this case, comes to a fuller understanding of the vision, which in this instance pertains to a distant
future [Dan 10:14].
This last point concerning the in Daniel should be given due consideration, for
Daniel received visions that pertained to [days in the future (Dan
10:14)]. In the context of Daniel, these events are essentially unpacked in Daniel 11-12.
Accordingly, it may be the case that it is these events (among others in the OT), the days in the
future specified in Daniel 11-12, that Gabriel promises will be confirmed in the fullness of time.
Collins writes that the allusion probably includes all prophecy [emphasis mine] that is construed
as eschatological.536 Collins point is taken up in the New Testament.
We have affirmed that vision [] and prophecy [
( in Greek)] are words that, in this context are interchangeable. Now, in the
Gospel of Matthew, prophecy [] is announced as being confirmed. In the
birth of the Messiah, prophecy is fulfilled [Matthew 1:22]; the flight into Egypt with the Child
and His mother is accomplished in order that prophecy might be fulfilled [Matthew 2:15]; the
Messianic ministry in Galilee was embarked upon so that prophecy might be fulfilled [Matthew
4:14]; Messianic healings were carried out in order that prophecy might be fulfilled [Matthew
8:17]; the Messiah insisted that His identity not be made known at a certain point in the ministry
531 KB1, 364.
532 Holladay, 120.
533 S.R. Driver, The Book of Daniel with introduction and Notes (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1901), 136.
534 Russell, Daniel, 185; similarly, Slotki, 78.
535 CDCH, 111.
128
so that prophecy might be fulfilled [Matthew 12:17]; the Messiah spoke in parables to the end
that prophecy might be fulfilled [Matthew 13:35]; and the triumphal entry of the Messiah, an
entry that would end in death and resurrection, was played out in answer to the fulfillment of
prophecy [Matthew 21:4]. Taken as a whole, we may conclude that Gabriel is announcing the
confirmation in human history of the visions and prophecies that concern days in the future
[Dan 10:14], the prophecies in Daniel and those in other prophetic pronouncements.
Anoint a most holy
Anoint a most holy [ ] is variously translated; the differences
basically come down to translating the most holy place or words to that effect. There are
syntactical reasons for the translation anoint a most holy.
A most holy [ ] is a genitive construction, literally holy of holies.
Now, the reader will note that both terms in the construction are from the same root
[ ]. When this happens in Hebrew, the author intends to signal an absolute
superlative. Van der Merwe writes, the absolute superlative, which manifests the outstanding
feature, condition or state of something or someone can be expressed by a singular noun in the
construct state preceding the indefinite plural form of the same word.537 This is precisely what
we have here; thus we translate: a most holy. There is no definite article in the Hebrew text,
nor is there any compelling reason to insert one. Moreover, since this is a superlative
construction, insertion of the word place is not called for. The net effect is that whatever the
referent of this most holy is, the genitive construction communicates a most holy (par
excellence).
Most holy [ ] appears twenty two times in the Hebrew Bible, most of them in
the Pentateuch, and most of these in Exodus and Leviticus. In every case in the Hebrew Bible,
except one Dan 9:24 a referent to most holy is specified in the context. 538 In the case of Dan
9:24, the most that we can say is that the referent is ambiguous; whatever or whoever it is, it is
holiness [] par excellence. So, where does this leave us? Perhaps a closer look at the verb
in the clause anoint [] may be useful.
Anoint [] is a verb that appears 70 times in the Hebrew Bible, 65 of them in the Qal stem.
It is from a sematic field of terms for to anoint. 539 The objects of anointing fall into two
categories: inanimate and human.
Among the inanimate objects of anointing are: pillars [Genesis 31:13], unleavened wafers
[Exodus 29:2; Leviticus 2:4; 7:12; Numbers 6:15], the altar [Exodus 29:36; 40:10; Leviticus 8:11;
Numbers 7:10, 84, 88], the Tent of meeting [Exodus 30:26], the tabernacle [Exodus 40:9;
Leviticus 7:12; 8:10; Numbers 7:11], the laver [Exodus 40:11] and shields [Isaiah 21:5].
537 Van der Merwe 30.2.(i)a.
538 Among the referents to most holy [ ], the following are specified in the
context: the altar [Exodus 29:37; 30:29; 40:10]; the sin offering [Exodus 30:10; Leviticus 6:29;
10:17]; incense [Exodus 30:36]; the grain offering [Leviticus 2:3, 10; 6:17; 10:12]; the guilt
offering [Leviticus 7:1, 6; 14:13]; bread [Leviticus 24:9]; things set apart to the Lord [Leviticus
27:28]; Aaron [1 Chronicles 23:13]; an area of the house [Ezekiel 43:12]; the sanctuary [Ezekiel
45:3]; and an allotment [Ezekiel 48:12]. While some of these referents are obscure, the point is
that they are all specified in the context; only in Dan 9:24 is no referent identified.
539 See Anoint in NIDOTTE.
129
Among the human objects of anointing, we find three general groups [priest, king,
prophet]: (1) priests [Exodus 28:41; Leviticus 7:36; 16:32] including Aaron [Exodus 29:7; 30:30;
40:13; Leviticus 6:10; 8:12] and his sons [Exodus 40:15; Numbers 3:3]; (2) several kings,
including Saul [1 Samuel 9:16; 10:1; 15:1, 17], David [1 Samuel 16:3, 12, 13; 2 Samuel 2:4, 7;
3:39; 5:3, 17; 12:7; 1 Chronicles 11:3; 14:18; Psalm 89:20], and Solomon [1 Kings 1:34, 39, 45;
5:15; 1 Chronicles 29:22]; (3) a prophet, Elisha [1 Kings 19:16]; and (4) what can best be
described as a Messianic figure [Psalm 45:7; Isaiah 61:1].
At this juncture, we are faced with three options for the object of anointing in Dan 9:24
[anoint a most holy]: [1] a most holy may refer to an inanimate object; [2] a most holy may
refer to a human object; or [3] a most holy could refer to both. Context, thus far, suggests a
human-Messianic referent, since the five previous references seem to have been Messianic.
Some corroboration for a Messianic reading of anoint a most holy may be found in Isaiah 61:1.
A point of confirmation is the similarity of syntactical structure between Daniel 9:24 and
Isaiah 61:1-3. That is, Daniel 9:24 is comprised of six infinitives construct: [1] to bring an end
to covenant betrayal ( ), [2] to make an end of sin (
), [3] to wipe away the guilt of iniquity ( ), [4] to bring about
everlasting righteousness ( ), [5] to confirm the vision and the
prophecy ( ), and [6] to anoint a most holy (
).
Similarly, in Isaiah 61:1-3, the Spirit of the Lord God [ ]
anoints [] the recipient [a Messianic figure] to accomplish six objectives, as in Daniel
9:24, all of them presented to the reader as six infinitives construct: [1] to bring good news to the
afflicted ( ), [2] to bind up the broken hearted (
), [3] to proclaim liberty to the captives and freedom to prisoners (
), [4] to proclaim the favorable year of
Yahweh and the day of vengeance of our God (
), [5] to comfort all who mourn ( ),
and [6] to grant to those who mourn a turban in place of ashes (
).
The similarities in syntactical structure between Daniel 9:24 and Isaiah 61:1 are obvious:
six infinitives construct in both. It would seem, moreover, that both are mutually interpretive,
both referring to the Messianic era. Provisionally, we might weigh and consider the following
proposition: the most holy in Daniel 9:24 is a Messianic figure, who is described in Isaiah 61:13, also a Messianic figure.540
Summary
First, the final three infinitives construct bring to a close the six objectives to be fulfilled during
the seventy sevens. At the outset, these six goals, which are presented as an aggregate [the
grammatical parallelism of the six infinitives construct verifies this], bear out that the seventy
sevens are a unified whole. The reader ought not to make too much of the division of the seventy
sevens into seven-sixty two-one; these are the phases over which the six are accomplished.
540 I admit that much more research should be done to trace out the overlap between Dan 9:24
and Isa 61:1-3. For example, it might be useful to plot the overlap between some of the referents
in Isa 61:1-3, such as afflicted, broken-hearted, captives-prisoners, mourners, and
ashes, and the experience of the exilic community as presented elsewhere in the OT.
130
Rather, the seventy sevens are collective, and are thus to be regarded as a unit.541 Now, since
the seventy sevens are all of one piece, there are no gaps in the seventy sevens. There is a
theory, and a theory is all it is, to the effect that between the 69 th seven and the 70th seven there is
a gap. Young cites Ironside, one of the proponents of this theory, to this effect: 542
Between the sixty-ninth and the seventieth week we have a Great
Parenthesis which has now lasted over nineteen hundred years.
The seventieth week has been postponed by God Himself, who
changes the times and the seasons because of the transgression of
the people. As I have put it elsewhere, though some have
objected to the expression, the moment the Messiah died on the
Cross, the prophetic clock stopped. There has not been a click
upon that clock for nineteen centuries.
The refutation of this theory is simple enough: Daniel nowhere in Dan 9:24-27 says that there is
a gap between the 69th and the 70th week; if we are to read the text in a more or less literal
fashion, then the reader can easily determine for herself or himself that Daniel never makes such
a claim clear-cut. The reader may read Dan 9:24-27 until his/her eyes fall out of their sockets,
and nowhere will she/he read that Daniel refers to, mentions, declares, or writes about a Great
Parenthesis. The entire scheme is fantasy!
Second, the seventy sevens are the time frame within which the six objectives are
accomplished. Now, these six objectives are obviously Messianic; this means that the seventy
sevens look forward to the first century. Furthermore, it would seem that these six Messianic
goals are inaugurated in the first century yet with ongoing consequences. The open-endedness of
these objectives is clear: Gabriel refers to bringing an end to covenant betrayal, to making an end
of sin [its presence and the sin-offering], to wiping away the guilt of iniquity, to bringing about
everlasting righteousness, to confirming the vision and the prophecy, and to anointing a most
holy. Each of these objectives has an open-ended and ongoing quality about them; in the final
analysis, with these six operations, the first century changed everything for the rest of human
history.
Third, bring about everlasting righteousness should be taken at face value. Indeed, we
noted above [see page 126] that means to bring about
everlasting righteousness as a state of affairs in society. This righteousness, drawing upon the
commentary provided by Psalm 119:142, amounts to the rule and reign of Yahwehs Torah in the
heart of mankind. In other words, everlasting righteousness is the evidence of the new
covenant [Jeremiah 31:31], which is ultimately sealed in the blood of the Messiah on the Cross
[Hebrews 12:24]. Furthermore, everlasting righteousness is ongoing.
Fourth, confirm the vision and the prophecy needs little comment. The sense is: to
confirm [by fulfilling] the vision and the prophecy. The vision and the prophecy include the
six Messianic objectives stipulated in Dan 9:24 as well as the sum total of Messianic visions and
prophecies elsewhere in the OT. Naturally, these prophecies are enduring.
Finally, anoint a most holy is a superlative construction a most holy (par
excellence) and is clearly Messianic. Indeed, the anointed most holy is more fully
explicated in Isaiah 61:1-3; that is, He (as the anointed most holy) [1] brings good news to the
541 Young, 197.
542 H.A. Ironside, The Great Parenthesis (1943); quoted in Young, 194.
131
afflicted, [2] binds up the broken hearted, [3] proclaims liberty to the captives and freedom to
prisoners, [4] proclaims the favorable year of Yahweh and the day of vengeance of our God, [5]
comforts all who mourn, and [6] grants to those who mourn a turban in place of ashes. The
impact of the Messiah in history is continuing to this hour.
We now take up the remainder of Dan 9:25-27, the breakdown of the seventy sevens
that find their unveiling in the first century. We begin with the syntactical outline.
Syntactical outline
I. Directive [result]
Therefore, know and comprehend: [9:25a1]
Temporal
from [the] issuance of a decree, [9:25a2]
Purpose [of decree]
to rebuild Jerusalem, [9:25a3] 543
Temporal
until an anointed one, a prince, [9:25a4]
Predicate
seven sevens; [9:25a5 (atnach: pause)] 544
Seven sevens
II. Temporal And [in a space of] sixty two sevens, [9:25b1]
Main clause
it will be rebuilt, [9:25b2]
Apposition
plaza and trench, [9:25b2]
Attendant
while in the oppression of the times [9:25b3 (end)].
Circumstance
Sixty two sevens
III. Temporalsequential
Main clause
Elaboration
Then, after sixty two sevens [9:26a1],

an anointed one will be eliminated [9:26a2],
and he has nothing [9:26a3 (atnach: pause)];
IV. Circumstantial
then, the city and the sanctuary [9:26b1]545,
Main clause the people of a coming prince will wipe out [9:26b2],
Antithesis
but his end in a flood [9:26b3],
Elaboration
yet to the end war [9:26b4],
Further elaboration determined desolations [9:26b5 (end)].
543 with a following verb in the sense of to do again.
544 See Youngs footnote on page 204.
132
V. Main clause
Apposition
Then, He will enforce a covenant for many [9:27a1],

one seven [9:27a2 (atnach: pause];
VI. Temporal
Main clause
Circumstantial
Predicate
and (in the) middle of the seven [9:27b1 (pause)],

he will remove sacrifice and gift offering [9:27b2],
and upon the wing of detestable things [9:27b3 (pause)],
one who makes desolate [9:27b4 (pause)],
VII. Temporal
Parenthetical
Main clause
and until a destruction [9:27b5 (pause)]

determined [9:27b6 (pause)],
is poured out upon the one who makes desolate [9:27b7].
One seven

The theme of this paragraph seems to be the breakdown of the seventy sevens in Dan
9:24. As I have pointed out above, the breakdown falls into three phases. What is more, the
theme of this paragraph seems to assume the divine hand back of all of this. That is, certain
events occur in each phase, suggesting the sovereignty of Yahweh in human history.
Genre of the paragraph

Collins identifies Dan 9:25-27 as prophecy in time periods. 546 The net effect is to chart
a forward looking history of the seventy sevens.547 Finally, we must keep firmly in mind the
fact that in Dan 9:24, the six key events are an elaboration of the seventy sevens, taking us into
the Messianic era beginning in the first century and covering the whole of future time.
Seven sevens Dan 9:25a1-5 Therefore, know and comprehend: from the issuance of a decree,
to rebuild Jerusalem, until an anointed one, a prince seven sevens.
This series of five cola [Dan 9:251-5] is punctuated at the end [after seven sevens] with an
atnach.548 I take it as a given of the Masoretic text that a pause [an English semicolon] should
occur in reading the text between seven sevens and sixty two sevens in the next cola. For
what it is worth, the JPS Hebrew-English TANAKH, from the Jewish Publication Society, also
places a semicolon after ;549 Jewish scholar Judah Slotki follows suit.550
545 The direct object of the verb the city and the sanctuary is front loaded for emphasis.
547 Longman, 227.
548 Not every scholar pays attention to the accentuation in the Hebrew Bible; indeed, Joyce
Baldwin remarks that punctuation is not part of the original text [Baldwin, 170]. This is very true
and also applies to vowel system in the Masoretic text, a system that, for the most part, scholars
seem to rely upon. I admit that the punctuation marks are not inspired; at the same time, we may
consult the punctuation marks as a reliable guide to the exegesis of the text [William Wickes, A
Treatise on the Accentuation of the Twenty-One So-Called Prose Books of the Old Testament
(Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1887; reprint: University of Toronto Libraries, nd), 4.
549 JPS Hebrew-English TANAKH (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1999), 1828.
550 Slotki, 78.
133
Collins notes that the Masoretic text is undoubtedly correct. 551 What this means is that English
versions that translate seven weeks and sixty two weeks, or words to that effect, are
misleading; they simply do not read everything the Masoretic text gives us.
Syntactically, Dan 9:251-5 may be set out this way:
Directive
Content of directive
Purpose of decree
Know and understand

from the issuance of a decree to an anointed one seven sevens
to rebuild Jerusalem
Know and understand [ (Hiphil, imperfect, 2nd, ms, jussive) (Qal,

imperfect, 2nd, ms)] should be read as a directive communication from Gabriel to Daniel. Both
verbs should be read as volitional; indeed, the second verb understand is jussive [a
directive] in form. We see no reason not to read both volitionally. Indeed, the imperfect form of
the first verb know may be read as a non-perfective of injunction, expressing Gabriels
positive request to Daniel.552 The sense of the first verb may be you must know. The jussive
form on the second verb understand is likewise an expression of a positive request from
Gabriel to Daniel.553 This is the only place in the Hebrew Bible where these two verbs, separated
by a conjunction, are used.
Know and understand [ ] are two verbs from the same semantic field, a field for
knowledge or discernment.554 As they stand in the context, both verbs are a consequence of what
Gabriel has said in Dan 9:24. The simple waw on the verbs may point to a consequence for either
lexical or contextual reasons.555 Slotki glosses the consequential notion with: Know therefore.556
The upshot is that, as a consequence of what Gabriel said in 9:24 regarding the seventy sevens
and the six Messianic objectives, now Daniel must understand some details. Gabriel expects
Daniel to apply thought to what the angelic messenger has just said.
From [] until [] is the subject of a verbless clause; the predicate is seven sevens
[ ]. Embedded within the verbless clause is an infinitive clause that teases
out the purpose behind the issuance of the decree: to rebuild Jerusalem. [From]
[until] are two prepositions paired up to signal an interval of time; 557 the interval is
characterized by two events [1] the issuance of a decree on the front end, and [2] an anointed
one, a prince on the back end; the interval is further characterized by seven sevens in the
predicate of the verbless clause. As in Dan 9:24, the interval was depicted by the vague seventy
sevens, yet the interlude was characterized by six fairly clear-cut events; so it is here: while
seven sevens is a bit ambiguous, both phrases the issuance of a decree and an anointed
one, a prince are somewhat more unambiguous. The vagaries of the time frames and the
events within the intervals bespeak the sovereignty of God at work; we may not understand all,
but He does.

552 IBHS 31.5a-b; GKC 107 n.
553 For the jussive form, see GKC 109; Van der Merwe 19.4.4.
554 See Knowledge, discernment, shrewd, wisdom in NIDOTTE.
555 See IBHS 33.4b; J-M 177 a, c.
556 Slotki, 78.
557 For this use of this pair of prepositions, see BDB, 582.
134
The upshot is this: the seven sevens begin with a decree to rebuild Jerusalem and end with the
appearance of an anointed one. We shall argue that the two events are not only [1] the decree to
rebuild Jerusalem but also [2] the appearance of the Messiah in the first century.
From the issuance of a decree [ ] is a prepositional phrase, used
temporally to lift out the beginning of the interval called seven sevens.
Issuance [] is a noun that appears 32 times in the Hebrew Bible; it is from a
semantic field of terms for going.558 Obviously, we have a figurative use of the term in Dan 9:25.
Kohler-Baumgartner translate with pronouncement.559 E. Jenni in TLOT II takes a
similar position: a pronouncement or statement.560
Decree [] is from a semantic field of terms for speech. 561 The ranges of meaning for
are: [1] a word, speech, in some contexts with more specific meanings: (a) report, (b)
request, (c) promise, (d) command, (e) commission, (f) thought, (g) theme, (h) sentence, verdict,
(i) accusation; [2] thing: (a) matter, affair, cause, case, (b) deed, (c) event, (d) something,
anything; [3] way, manner; and [4] reason, cause. 562 BDB goes with a word of command 563
[presumably from God]. There are several sources proposed for this decree.
God is proposed as the author of the decree, looking back to Dan 9:2 and the Jeremiah 30:18
reference.564 Others propose a kingly decree, either from Cyrus [Ezra 1], from Darius [Ezra 6] or
Artaxerxes [Ezra 7]. Baldwin claims that the best option in this context is a kingly decree, but
there is a caveat: The starting-point of the interpretation is the command to rebuild the Temple,
given by Cyrus in 539 BC (Ezra 1:1-4), unless a distinction is made between the Temple and the
city, in which case the time of Nehemiah would be the starting-point (Nehemiah 2:5, 445 BC).
No other alternative seems possible.565
Just to give some perspective on the problem of dating, note the following: [1] if we allow that
the decree refers to the Jeremiah 30 prophecy, then the date would be somewhere around 587
BC; [2] if we go with the decree of Cyrus, then the date becomes 539 BC; [3] or, if we prefer
the decree of Darius, then the date falls to near 521 BC; [4] if our decision is to opt for
Artaxerxes, then the date comes down to 458 BC; and [5], as noted above, if we finally land on
Nehemiahs era, then the date is 445 BC.566 Is it any wonder that Collins remarks that the
starting-point is uncertain?567
It may well be the case that dating is not as crucial to Gabriel and Daniel as it is to the modern
reader; for, if dating is part of this angelic word in Dan 9:25, then the wealth of options makes
an exact date virtually impossible. We might be better off to think in more general terms. That is,
someone [we cant determine exactly who, and who probably doesnt matter anyway] will issue a
decree so that Jerusalem and the Temple will be rebuilt; and, as Baldwin points out, the
558 See Journey, going, marching, walking, wandering in NIDOTTE.
559 KB1, 559.
560 E. Jenni, , in TLOT II, 563.
561 See Speech in NIDOTTE.
562 CDCH, 74.
563 BDB, 182.
564 Driver, Daniel, 137-38; Young, 201; Slotki, 78; Montgomery, 378.
565 Baldwin, 170.
566 See Goldingay, 260.
135
assurance that rebuilding was about to be ordered (before the edict of Cyrus had been made)
would have been most important to Daniel.568
The net effect is this: from the issuance of a decree opens the seven sevens; while God is
surely behind this issuance, it is reasonable to propose that the divine impulse took on human
form; a decree was issued by someone with the authority to do so, and the prediction of the
decree predated its issuance. The substance of the decree follows.
To rebuild Jerusalem [ ] is literally to restore
and to rebuild Jerusalem. There are two ways of translating these words. First, one may simply
translate the two infinitives as they are written: to restore and the rebuild. Or, second, one may
read the first infinitive [] in connection with the second infinitive [] in the sense of
to do again [that which is contained in the second infinitive], or simply to rebuild. 569
Until an anointed one, a prince [ ] is the event at the back end of the
seven sevens. The line is a prepositional phrase that indicates a point in time up to which
events occur.570 Finally, the noun prince [] is in apposition to anointed one
[]. Two nouns in apposition signal that the two nouns overlap in reference; in this case,
the second noun [prince] probably designates the class to which the anointed one belongs.571
Anointed one [] is written as a noun here in Dan 9:25; in Dan 9:24, is written as
a verb, specifically an infinitive construct. As noted above, this anointed one []
belongs to the class of those identified as a prince [].
Anointed one [] appears 38 times in the Hebrew Bible; it is used in reference to
priests, patriarchs who were prophets, and kings. For the most part, references to anointed
Israelite kings dominate.572 The contextual setting comes into play here; that is, we have argued
that Dan 9:24 [the summary seventy sevens] is Messianic from top to bottom; accordingly, to
the extent that the parts equal the sum of the whole, the anointed one [] of the seven
sevens must come within the Messianic time frame of Dan 9:24. Therefore, it seem fairly
certain that , an anointed one, in this context must refer to the King, the Messiah. 573
John Oswalts excellent note should be pondered:574
This existence of the concept of The Anointed One
() in its own right, over and above the more narrowly
prescribed historical functions of prophet, priest, and king,
568 Baldwin, 170.
569 Young, 203, has a good explanation of and defense of the more literal interpretation.
570 Van der Merwe 39.18.
571 Gibson 39 d.
572 Of the 38 appearances of in the Hebrew Bible, 31 of them refer to a king [1 Sam
2:10, 35; 12:3, 5; 16:6; 24:7, 11; 26:9, 11, 16, 23; 2 Sam 1:14, 16; 19:22; 22:51; 23:1; 2 Chron
6:42; Ps 2:2; 18:50; 20:6; 28:8; 84:10; 89:38, 51; 132:10, 17; Isa 45:1 (Cyrus); Lam 4:20; Dan
9:25-26 (?); Hab 3:13].
573 Similarly, Keil [354-55], Young [204].
574 John Oswalt, , in NIDOTTE [H5417].
136
undoubtedly contributed to the rise of the concept of the

eschatological Anointed One, the Messiah. Within the canon of
the OT there are only two unambiguous references to this figure,
both in Dan 9 (25, 26). Here Daniel predicts a time in the future
when the Anointed One, who may well be The Most Holy who is
anointed in 9:24, will appear and then be cut off with nothing.
For the record, it is the position of the Guidebook that an anointed one [] in Dan 9:25
is the Most Holy [ ] who is anointed [] in Dan 9:24.
A prince [] is from a semantic field of terms for leaders. As noted previously,
this term more fully qualifies the anointed one. The noun appears 43 times in the Hebrew Bible;
its ranges of meaning are: [1] prince, (a) parallel with kings of the earth and (b) king of Tyre;
[2] a leader within a small domain, (a) an officer in an army, (b) a governor of a town, (c) a court
official, (d) the head of a family, and (e) an eminent person; [3] a cult official; [4] the leader of
Israel, appointed by Yahweh, including Saul, David, Solomon, Jeroboam, Hezekiah, and Jehu. 575
G. Hasel speculates that is a participial form of the verb [to be high,
exalted]; this leads to the following basic meaning of : high or exalted;
appears to have denoted a function; the diversity of OT usage indicates that it became an
honorific and specifically a title of nobility for people appointed to various positions. 576
Commenting on the use of in Dan 9:25, Hasel affirms that the primary emphasis is on
the , a figure exalted by God, in whom the exaltation inherent in the term finds
expression in leadership and rule.577
Owing to the conclusions we arrived at regarding an anointed one, the Messianic King, we
might revise Professor Hasels statement to read: the is a figure exalted by God in
whom the exaltation inherent in finds expression in His kingly Messianic role.
Summary
Dan 9:25a1-5 encompasses the time frame seven sevens. The first point that is crucial in
Dan 9:25a1-5 is that a full stop comes after seven sevens. The atnach under the last word in the
line [ (seven)] signals that the Masoretic text places a pause at that point. We have
acknowledged that these accent marks are not inspired in the sense that the text is, but, at the
same time, they are part of the Masoretic text, along with the vowel pointing and the words of the
text themselves for that matter. In any event, the burden is upon those who would ignore the
pause to show why such disregard is warranted. The fact of the matter is that the text has a stop
after seven sevens and should be read; those who give priority to the primacy of the text as
written should avoid doing otherwise.
Furthermore, this time frame, seven sevens, is characterized by two key events, one
coming at the front end and the other at the back end of the time frame. At the front end, we have
a decree to rebuild Jerusalem; at the back end, we have the appearance of an anointed one.
575 KB1, 668.

576 G. Hasel, , in TDOT, vol. IX, 196.
577 Ibid., 201.
137
The opening event of note during the seven sevens is the decree to rebuild Jerusalem.
The issue at this point is the source of the decree; two options were cited: [1] God or [2] some
royal official. The issue is muddied quite a bit when we note that the several choices we have for
the source of the decree, both divine and human, leave us with dates beginning around 587 BC
[or possibly as early as 605 BC] and ending around 445 BC. The upshot is that making a
conclusive choice from among the options really is not possible.
We concluded that dating is not as crucial to Gabriel and Daniel as it is to the modern
reader; for, if dating is part of this angelic word in Dan 9:25, then the wealth of options makes
an exact date virtually impossible. We might be better off to think in more general terms. That is,
someone [we cant determine exactly who, and who probably doesnt matter anyway] will issue a
decree so that Jerusalem and the Temple will be rebuilt; and, the angelic promise that rebuilding
was about to be ordered (before the edict of whomever had been made) should be read as the key
affirmation at the front end of the seven sevens.
Finally, at the back end of the seven sevens is the appearance of an anointed one. While
many commentators prefer to see an allusion to a human leader, we prefer to understand the
anointed one as a reference to the Messiah. There are two reasons for this conclusion: first, the
usages of in the OT are overwhelmingly used to refer to kings of Israel; second, and
most importantly, the context, specifically Dan 9:24, is Messianic from start to finish. We have
demonstrated that the six objectives during the seventy sevens are Messianic objectives.
Accordingly, on the principle that the whole [Dan 9:24 (Messianic)] equals the sum of the parts
[Dan 9:25-27], we may reasonably infer that the anointed one in Dan 9:25a is Messianic.
We now turn to the time frame identified as sixty two sevens. Here too, we have an
event at the front end Jerusalem is rebuilt and then, after sixty two sevens, at the back end of
the time frame, the key event is the elimination of an anointed one. The reader should appreciate
what Gabriel is pledging thus far by charting his promises, first during the seven sevens and then
during the sixty two sevens:
Seven sevens
Sixty two sevens
Front end
decree to rebuild Jerusalem
rebuild Jerusalem
Back end
an anointed one
eliminate an anointed one
Is it not obvious what Gabriel is saying here? The events during the sixty two sevens
overlap with those of the seven sevens [note the underlined terms]; in other words, the events in
the seven sevens are filled out by the events in the sixty two sevens. C.F. Keil puts the matter this
way, The sixty two weeks [sevens] which follow these seven weeks [sevens], ending with
the coming of the Messiah, have the same contents [emphasis mine], only with more special
definition [emphasis mine].578
Sixty-two sevens-Dan 9:25b1-26a3 And (in a space of) sixty two sevens, it will be rebuilt,
plaza and trench, while in the opposition of the times. Then after sixty two sevens, an anointed
one will be eliminated, and he has nothing;
It is obvious that the sixty two sevens also have a key event on the front end and on the back end;
rebuild Jerusalem is the front end event and eliminate an anointed one is the back end event.
578 Keil, 373-74.

138
And (in a space of) sixty two sevens [ ] is a translation

that demands some explanation. Basically, functions as an
accusative of duration, specifying the interval during which it will be rebuilt. 579 J-M notes that
the accusative of duration answers the questions when? or how long?580 The sense is: during
a span of sixty two sevens [however long that may be], it [Jerusalem] will be rebuilt.
If the reader wonders why it takes sixty two sevens to rebuild the city, the answer is that, as we
have pointed out, sixty two sevens is figurative language, not literal, calendric numbers.
Indeed, many of the hair-raising anomalies in Daniel 9 would vanish if the reader would simply
accept the fact that, as apocalyptic, the numbers are figurative!
It will be rebuilt [ ] contains the same verbal roots [ +
] as the earlier statement in Dan 9:25a3 [ (to
rebuild Jerusalem); thus our assertion above that Dan 9:25b 1-26a3 overlaps with Dan 9:25a3 is
verified by the repetition of key language.
Plaza and trench [ ] is a bit tricky. The first term,
[plaza], is an open plaza in the city set against the inner wall of the gate. 581 Ezra 10:9 refers to
an open square [] near the house of God. The was also a place large
enough and prominent enough to hold city gatherings in Jerusalem [2 Chronicles 29:4; Nehemiah
8:1, 3].
Trench [] is a different story, the term appearing only here in the Hebrew Bible.
Kohler-Baumgartner render with town-moat.582 CDCH follows suit with
channel, moat.583 BDB concurs with trench, moat.584 There may be a reference to the
defenses of the city, since a trench cut into the rock along the exterior walls would make scaling
the walls more difficult, hence enhancing the defenses of the city.585
When we ask why these two details should be mentioned, there is simply no good answer at hand.
Young surmises that, taken together, they depict the complete restoration of the city and its
environs.586 This is as good a guess as any.
While in the opposition of the times [ ] brings Dan 9:25 to a close. The
sense of the prepositional phrase is clear enough: oppression and opposition characterize the
rebuilding efforts in Jerusalem; Nehemiah is particularly clear on this point. Indeed, the era of
rebuilding will be during a time of distress.587 On balance, this term describes the condition of
579 For the accusative of duration with examples, see IBHS 10.2.2c; see also GKC 118 k
580 J-M 126 i.
581 KB2, 1212.
582 KB1, 352.
583 CDCH, 132.
584 BDB, 358.
585 See Pter-Contesse and Ellington, 255, on this point.
586 Young, 206; similarly Driver, Daniel, 139.
587 has Ancient Near Eastern cognates that add flavor to the sense of the noun.
The form is used in the Dead Sea Scrolls to signal affliction; a Jewish Aramaic form,
, means hardship; a Syriac cognate signals pain, sadness; an Arabic cognate means
straitened circumstances, trepidation, and an Ethiopic cognate marks narrowness, affliction,
distress [KB2, 1014-15]. The use in Daniel 9:25 is distress [Ibid.]. BDB, 848, glosses constraint,
139
oppression, suffered as experienced pressures. The term indicates restricted circumstances,

constraints, harassment and afflictions. These difficulties are discussed in the books of Ezra and
Nehemiah, which deal with the post-exilic period and the internal and external pressures
associated with rebuilding the temple and the city [Ezra 4:1-24; 9:1-15; Nehemiah 4:1-23; 5:1-19;
6:1-19]. These passages in Ezra and Nehemiah describe the internal and spiritual challenges as
well as the external political trials associated with rebuilding the temple and the city.
So, on the front end of the sixty two sevens, the good news is that Jerusalem is more or less
restored as a city along with its defenses; at the same time, this work was completed amidst
duress, politically and spiritually. Now, we move on to the back end event of the sixty two
sevens.
Then, after sixty two sevens [ ] places
us at the tail end of the sixty two sevens; we read after in the sense of toward the end of.
After [] is a preposition with a prefixed coordinating conjunction [
(then)]. The preposition is used temporally, meaning either after or afterward. 588 It is not
at all clear that after means that the sixty two sevens have come to a complete end. The
preposition [] properly points to the hinder parts of something,589 as in 2 Samuel 2:23,
[with the butt end of the spear]. J-M claims that was
originally a substantive [meaning the back], used eventually as a preposition with the sense, at
the back of something.590 The sense then becomes: toward the end of [or at the back of] sixty
two sevens, an anointed one will be eliminated. All of this prompts Keil to write, From the
(after) it does not with certainty follow that the cutting off of the Messiah falls
wholly within the beginning of [emphasis mine] the seventieth week, but only that the cutting
off shall constitute the first great event of this week. 591 The sense is: somewhere at the end of
sixty two sevens, an anointed one will be eliminated.
Will be eliminated [ (Niphal, imperfect, 3rd, ms)] is from a semantic field of terms for
destruction or annihilation.592 The syntactical-semantic thrust of the Niphal stem of this verb
seems to underline a passive sense. That is, the subject of the verb an anointed one is in the
state of suffering the effects of the action of the verb [being] eliminated by an implicit,
unspecified, agent.593 The imperfect aspect of the verb does seem to suggest a specific future.594
[eliminate] has the following ranges of meaning: [1] in the Qal stem: (a) to cut something
off, (b) to cut something down, (c) to fell, (d) to cut out or exterminate, (e) to cut a covenant; [2]
distress; Holladay, 305, goes with oppression.The verbal form of the root, , also has
interesting ANE cognates. Jewish Aramaic uses in the sense of to be narrow, to put
pressure on, to harass; Ugaritic has a cognate that may be glossed to trouble or to pressure;
Akkadian uses squ in the sense of to be/become narrow; the Syriac cognate means worried; and
the Arabic cognate means to be/become narrow, to be weary, to be depressed, to vex or to harass;
the Ethiopic cognate means to be narrow, to restrict, to harass [KB2, 1014].
588 IBHS 11.2.1a.
589 GKC 103 o; see also BDB, 29 [the hinder or following part].
590 J-M 103 a; similarly, E. Jenni, in TLOT I, 83.
591 Keil, 359.
592 See Destruction, annihilation, devastation, disfigurement, ruin in NIDOTTE.
593 For this sense of the Niphal, see IBHS 23.2.2a; Williams 139.
594 IBHS 31.6.2b; Williams 167 [simple future].
140
in the Niphal (which we have in Dan 9:26): (a) to be felled, to be cut off, to disappear, (b) to be
exterminated, (c) to be wiped out, to be eliminated, (d) to be cut off or excluded from; [3] in the
Pual stem: (a) to be cut down, (b) to be cut off; [4] in the Hiphil stem: (a) to exterminate; and [5]
in the Hophal stem: (a) to be exterminated, to fail, to be lost. 595 Kohler-Baumgartner renders
in Dan 9:26 with to be exterminated.596 BDB simply opts for to be cut off.597 Gerhard
Hasel reads in Dan 9:26 in the sense of the destruction of mach.598 The
Septuagint tradition more or less follows suit with the destruction theme. Theodotion renders
with , a verb that means to destroy utterly or to root out. 599
The Old Greek goes with in the future passive, which means depart,
withdraw.600 The sense is: an anointed one [the Messiah] will suffer the effects of being cut off
by death [or elimination]. The destruction of a person, the Messiah, is in view here!
And he has nothing [ ] is a very troublesome clause. To begin with, the
Masoretes placed an atnach under nothing, indicating a full stop at that point in the reading of
the text. Moreover, and he has nothing is connected to the preceding line [an anointed one
will be eliminated] with a conjunctive waw [ (and)]. The syntactical function of this
connective is to provide additional background circumstantial information vis--vis an anointed
one will be eliminated. The syntactical sense is something like: an anointed one will be
eliminated and what is more he has nothing.
He has nothing [ ] is a verbless clause. The subject element is a
prepositional phrase [He (literally to him)] and the predicate element is a particle of
negation [has nothing]. The predicate lexicalizes non-existence and may
function like a front loaded, contextualized predicate. 601 Thus, we may infer that he has nothing
is another way to emphatically depict non-existence as it relates to the anointed one. If this
reading is accepted, then the clause he has nothing functions to clarify the elimination
motif in the preceding line by underling the anointed ones non-existence/destructiondeath/abandonment. Youngs observation is apropos, This is a very forceful way of setting forth
His utter rejection, both by God and man.602
Summary
Dan 9:25b1-26a3 makes several key points. The first is this: Dan 9:25b1-26a3 overlaps with and
essentially elaborates upon Dan 9:251-5 [seven sevens]. We may graphically represent the
overlap this way, noting the reiterations:
Front end
Back end
Seven sevens
decree to rebuild Jerusalem
an anointed one [full stop]
Sixty two sevens
rebuild Jerusalem
eliminate an anointed one
595 KB1, 500-01.

596 Ibid., 501.
597 BDB, 503.
598 G. Hasel, , in TDOT, vol. VII, 345.
599 BAGD, 276.
600 Ibid., 127.
601 On this point see Randall Bluth, Word Order in the Verbless Clause, in The Verbless
Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches, ed., Cynthia Miller (Winona Lake:
Eisenbrauns, 1999), 107.
602 Young, 207.
141
In this regard, the overlap is also supported by the full stop [an atnach] after an anointed
one in Dan 9:251-5. The atnach under the last word in the line [ (seven)] signals that
the Masoretic text places a pause at that point. We have acknowledged that these accent marks
are not inspired in the sense that the text is, but, at the same time, they are part of the Masoretic
text, along with the vowel pointing and the words of the text themselves for that matter. In any
event, the burden is upon those who would ignore the pause to show why such disregard is
warranted. The fact of the matter is that the text has a stop after seven sevens and should be
read; those who give priority to the primacy of the text as written should avoid doing otherwise.
With this in mind, Gabriel proceeds in Dan 9:26a1-3 to begin his elaboration of the preceding
lines.
Second, Dan 9:25b1-26a3 is durative; that is to say, And (in a space of) sixty two sevens
functions as an accusative of duration, specifying the interval during which it will be rebuilt and
an anointed one is eliminated.603 The sense is: during a span of sixty two sevens [however long
that may be], it [Jerusalem] will be rebuilt and an anointed one [the Messiah] will be eliminated.
Dan 9:25b1-26a3 is a comprehensive statement of the two seminal events of this open-ended
period of sixty two sevens. Dan 9:25b1-26a3 should not be read as providing discreet points on a
time line; rather, Dan 9:25b1-26a3 underlines an across-the-board perspective on an era.
Third, Dan 9:25b1-26a3 promises that Jerusalem will be rebuilt plaza and trench. To make a
long story short, it seems that this aspect of the promise underscores completeness. The upshot is
that on the front end of the sixty two sevens, the good news is that Jerusalem is more or less
restored as a city along with its defenses; at the same time, this work was completed amidst
duress, politically and spiritually. Now, we move on to the back end event of the sixty two
sevens, where, we assume, the key event is unpacked.
Fourth, Dan 9:26a1-3 affirms that toward the end of the sixty two sevens, an anointed one
will be eliminated. Readers of the English versions jump to a conclusion when they read after
sixty two sevens; that is, they read after in the sense of the period of time following some
event or time period. The Hebrew preposition [/after] indicates some period of time
toward the end of the sixty two sevens. The sense is: somewhere at the end of sixty two sevens,
an anointed one will be eliminated.
Fifth, Dan 9:26a1-3 claims that an anointed one will be eliminated. We have posited that
this anointed one is the Messiah, and this conclusion is based on the programmatic Messianic
nature of Dan 9:24. Again, the logic of Dan 9:24 and Dan 9:25-27 is this: the whole [Dan 9:24] is
equal to the sum of the parts [Dan 9:25-27].
Sixth, Dan 9:26a1-3 maintains that the Messiah will be eliminated. The nature of the
language here is eliminationist, whether we translate with eliminate or exterminate or
wipe out; the text makes the same point: the elimination is the death of Jesus Christ, the
Messiah, on the Cross at Calvary.
One seven-Dan 9:26b1-27b7 Then, the city and the sanctuary, the people of a coming prince
will wipe out, but his end in a flood, yet to the end war, determined desolations. Thus, he
will enforce a covenant for many, one seven; and (in the) middle of the seven, he will put an end
to sacrifice and gift offering, and upon the wing of detestable things, one who makes desolate,
and until a destruction, determined, is poured out upon the one who makes desolate.
603 For the accusative of duration with examples, see IBHS 10.2.2c; see also GKC 118 k
142
The sixty two sevens end with the elimination [] of an anointed one; significantly,
the one seven opens with the city and sanctuary being wiped out []. The suggestive point
is that both of these verbs /eliminate and /wipe out share the same
semantic field.604 The noteworthiness of this fact is that Gabriel uses a linguistic link on the motif
of destruction to transition from the sixty two sevens to the one seven, with destruction more or
less dominating the paragraph [Dan 9:26b1-27b7].
We affirm that this section, Dan 9:26b1-27b7 depicts the events of the final seven; having
transitioned to a destruction motif, Gabriel teases out more fully the opposition to and the
suffering of God and His people. Moreover, there is another reason for reading Dan 9:26b 1-27b7
as constituting the final seven: the shift to a new key player.
Primarily, a new actor emerges on the scene: a coming prince [ ] in
Dan 9:26b1. This is the prince that will enforce a covenant for many; will put an end to
sacrifice and grain offering; and is one who makes desolate. Indeed, during [and possibly
after] his reign, to the end war; and determined desolations.
Moreover, this prince is surely doomed to destruction, since his end in a flood.
Ultimately, this prince will run afoul of a destruction, determined, which is poured out upon the
one who makes desolate.
The sum of the matter is this: Gabriel signals a new topic in his revelation to Daniel by
bringing front and center this prince who will concentrate on challenging the interests of God
and His people, ultimately to no avail!
We may set out the key affirmations in this final seven thus:
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
The people of a coming prince will wipe out the city and the sanctuary (Dan 9:26b 1-2)
But his end in the flood (Dan 9:26b3)
Yet, to the end war (Dan 9:26b4)
parenthetical remarks (all verbless clauses)
Determined desolations (Dan 9:26b5)
Then, he will enforce a covenant for many, one seven (Dan 9:27a 1-2)
And (in the) middle of the seven he will remove sacrifice and gift offering (Dan 9:27b 1-2)
And upon the wing of detestable things, one who makes desolate (Dan 9:27b 3-4)
Until destruction, determined, is poured out on the one who makes desolate (Dan 9:27b 57
)
Sifting out the three parenthetical remarks, we are left with four major events during this
final seven: [a] the people of a coming prince wipe out the city and the sanctuary; [b] he (the
prince) will enforce a covenant for many, one seven; [c] in the middle of the seven, he (the
prince) will remove sacrifice and grain offering; and [d] destruction is determined for the one
who makes desolate (the prince). It is clear that this final seven is characterized by all-out
opposition to God and to Gods people.
The people of a coming prince will wipe out the city and the sanctuary [
] is the first of the key events during this
final seven. As the reader will note, the translation provided by the Guidebook front loads the
direct object of the main verb; literally, we have in the Masoretic text: the city and the sanctuary,
the people of a coming prince will wipe out. This front loading helps signal the shift to the new
604 See Destruction, annihilation, devastation, disfigurement, ruin in NIDOTTE.
143
topic unpacked during the final, single, period of seven. As noted previously, the pattern during
the seven sevens is: rebuild Jerusalem followed by an anointed one; the pattern during the sixty
two sevens is also to rebuild Jerusalem followed by an anointed one; but, the pattern for the
single seven contrasts with these two: destroy Jerusalem followed by the destruction of the one
who makes desolate.
The people of a coming prince [ ] is a genitive construction;
literally we have: the people of a prince [ (genitive)] who is coming [
(articular participle)].
The syntax of the genitive yields people associated with the prince functioning as a genitive
of relation, where people are associated with this ruler.605 This prince/leader has his loyal
followers.
The coming prince [ ] has an articular participle [coming ()] that
functions as a dependent relative clause. Normally, the articular participle would agree for
definiteness with the noun it modifies; but, there are exceptions, as we have here. 606 The question
now becomes: who or what is this prince []?
In a very general way, Dan 9: 9:26b1-27b7 is clear that this /prince is thoroughly
hostile to the interests of God and to the people of God. This /prince wipes out
Jerusalem and the sanctuary [Dan 9:26b1-2]; he brings an end to sacrifice and the grain offering
[Dan 9:27b1-2]. As far as the people of God are concerned, the /prince will enforce a
covenant for many [Dan 9:27a1-2]. As Joyce Baldwin remarks, this /prince is the
enemy of Gods cause.607 However, can we be more specific?
Prince [] is used in the following ways: [1] a human political leader in Israel appointed
by Yahweh;608 [2] a prince in the general sense of a king of the land; 609 [3] a military officer;610 [4]
a commander of a fortified garrison;611 [5] a court official of some sort;612 [6] the head of a
family/tribe;613 [7] in a general sense: an prominent person; 614 [8] a leader of some sort in the
cultic arena;615 and [9] the Messiah.616
605 IBHS 9.5.1i.

606 Ibid., 37.5b.
607 Baldwin, 171.
608 1 Samuel 9:16 (Saul); 10:1 (Saul); 13:14 (David); 25:30 (David); 2 Samuel 5:2 (David); 6:21
(David); 7:8 (David); 1 Kings 1:35 (Solomon); 14:7 (Jeroboam); 16:2 (Jehu); 2 Kings 20:5
(Hezekiah); 1 Chronicles 5:2 (David); 11:2 (David); 17:7 (David); 28:4 (David); 29:22
(Solomon); 2 Chronicles 6:5-6 (David); Isaiah 55:3-4 (David).
609 Psalm 76:12 (general reference); Proverbs 28:16; Ezekiel 28:2 (leader of Tyre).
610 1 Chronicles 13:1 (military leader in the army of King David); 2 Chronicles 32:21 (military
commander in the army of Sennacherib).
611 2 Chronicles 11:11.
612 1 Chronicles 26:24; 2 Chronicles 19:11; 28:7.
613 1 Chronicles 27:16 (head of the Reubenites); 2 Chronicles 11:22.
614 Job 29:10; 31:37.
615 1 Chronicles 9:20; 2 Chronicles 31:12 (Levite); Nehemiah 11:11 (priest); Jeremiah 20:1
(priest); Daniel 11:22.
616 Daniel 9:25.
144
Of the options listed above, the Messiah [9] may be ruled out at once, as well as cultic leaders [8]
and the head of a tribe [7], since none of these would be inclined to destroy Jerusalem or the
sanctuary. The political/kingly leaders appointed by Yahweh [1] in are also ruled out for the
simple reason that, after the exile, they were either dead or otherwise indisposed. This leaves us
with: [a] a political leader in a general sense [2], [b] a military leader [3/4], or [c] an eminent
person [7].
This narrows the field some; leaving us to weigh and consider the following: the
reference later in Dan 9:26 to war does suggest that the /prince is somehow
connected with military operations. Moreover, in Dan 9:27, this same /prince more
or less forces political alliances with many, indicating that this /prince also has
political powers. Thus this /prince is a human sovereign, a person of politicalmilitary rank and authority. Naturally, this usage of /prince places this leader in
opposition to the purposes [Dan 9:24] of the Anointed leader [] of Dan 9:25, the
Messiah.617
Who comes [] is a Qal participle, modifying /prince; thus, the
/prince is the one who comes. It is routinely asserted that who comes implies
coming with hostile intent.618 However, when who comes [] implies hostile intent, the
participle is normally followed by a prepositional phrase signaling coming against [ (Dan
11:16)]. It may be best to simply read the participle as introducing a breed of player to emerge
during the one seven. At the same time, it is clear from the context that this /prince is
indeed hostile; the point is that this hostility is not part of the inherent meaning of the one who
comes [].
Will wipe out [ (Hiphil, imperfect, 3rd, ms, sg)] is the action taken against the city and
the sanctuary by the people associated with the coming prince. This verb is from a semantic field
of terms for destruction or annihilation; the verb appears over 140 times in the Hebrew Bible.
Wipe out [] has the following ranges of meaning: [1] in the Niphal: (a) to be
(become) ruined or spoiled; [2] in the Piel: (a) to ruin, destroy, annihilate, to be stifled, to behave
corruptly, cause trouble; [3] Hiphil (which we have in Dan 9:26): (a) to ruin deliberately, to wish
to destroy, (b) to annihilate, to exterminate, (c) to behave corruptly; [4] in the Hophal: (a) to be
ruined.619
The reader will note that has two basic meanings in the Hiphil stem: [1] either to
physically destroy something or someone, or [2] to morally corrupt someone. J. Conrad writes
that signifies an act of ruthless destruction subjecting the object to complete annihilation
or decimating and corrupting it so thoroughly that its demise is certain. 620 Conrad further notes
that in the Hiphil is used in the context of war and power politics: the figure of the
[prince] in 9:26 whose (military) people will destroy, i.e., proceed with military
force against Jerusalem and its sanctuary. 621
617 Among the commentators, the referents vary some: [1] the Antichrist (Keil, 362); Keil
references Dan 7:8, a passage that deals with the small horn that arises from the fourth beast;
there is no linguistic connection between in Dan 9:26 and Dan 7:8; [2] Antiochus
Epiphanes (Driver, Daniel, 140; Russell, Daniel, 189; Collins, Daniel, 357); the problem here is
that Antiochus destroyed neither the Temple nor the city of Jerusalem.
618 Young, 207.
619 KB2, 1469-72.
620 J. Conrad, , in TDOT, vol. XIV, 584.
621 Ibid., 587.
145
The sum of the matter is this: the context, Dan 9:26-27, alludes to physical destruction [wipe out
the city and the sanctuary (Dan 9:26b1-2)] as well as moral degeneration [an end to sacrifice and
grain offering (Dan 9:27b2)]. We see no compelling reason against affirming that this kind of
leader will either destroy utterly or corrupt thoroughly, or both.
Now, the fact that Dan 9:24 compels us to read Dan 9:25-27 during the Messianic era, it
seems reasonable to point out that the Roman general Titus destroyed the city and the sanctuary
for a second time in 70 AD.622 However, as we argued above regarding Dan 9:24, the seventy
sevens is not merely calendric time; rather, the [seventy sevens] is a
figure of comprehensive completeness; an indeterminate time during which Yahweh, through His
Messiah, accomplishes His six key objectives for the salvation of mankind [see page 116]. To
make a long story short, the seventy sevens is shorthand for the remainder of human history
right up to the end of human history as we know it. Indeed, when one weighs and considers the
three objectives for sin [(a) end covenant betrayal, (b) end the presence and power of sin, (c) wipe
away the guilt of iniquity] and the three objectives for righteousness [(a) bring about everlasting
righteousness, (b) confirm the vision and the prophecy, (c) anoint a most holy one], it is clear that
all of these have an ongoing quality to them, beginning with the work of the Messiah and ending
at His final return.
Next, Gabriel, using three verbless clauses, adds a series of parenthetical remarks: [1] but his
end in the flood (Dan 9:26b3), [2] yet to the end war (Dan 9:26b4), and [3] determined
desolations (Dan 9:26b5). The first parenthetical remark appears to apply to the fate of the
coming prince; while the final two seem to be of a more open-ended nature: human history,
even during the Messianic era, will be dominated by war and desolations. Finally, each of these
three verbless clauses is punctuated with a disjunctive accent, signaling a pause in reading. Thus,
we have: but his end in the flood (pause); yet to the end war (pause); and determined
desolations (end of sentence).623
But his end in the flood [ ] has as the subject element [but his
end] and the predicate element is [in the flood]. The syntax of the utterance is
shaped by the function of the disjunctive waw that signals contrast to Dan 9:26b2.624 The people
associated with this coming prince, as well as the prince personally, will deliberately ruin,
morally and/or physically, the city and the sanctuary, but, their end will come.
The antecedent of the pronoun, his end, is surely the coming prince [ ]. The
antecedent of the 3rd, masculine, singular pronominal suffix his end is the coming
prince/leader [noun, masculine, singular] in the preceding line. 625 While it is undeniably the case
that a masculine pronoun can have a feminine antecedent, the fact that the topic under discussion
is the coming prince [masculine], we opt for the prince/leader as the antecedent. Significantly,
there is in this utterance a clear contrast between this leaders coming [] with his end
[].
622 Baldwin, 171; Young, 207; Collins, 357 (refers to a Roman conqueror as an option).
623 Given the punctuation, there is no warrant for reading the last two verbless clauses as one
continual sentence; they have a pause between them.
624 IBHS 39.2.3b; Van der Merwe 40.8.1(iv).
625 There are other views. Young [207] affirms that the end refers to the destruction itself.
Goldingay [230] sees the reference in terms of the end that the prince brings, or the peoples end.
Slotki [79] and Montgomery [383] see the antecedent in terms of the prince.
146
Given the above, the reader is advised to be wary of some of the English versions. For example,
one translation, following an emendation recommended by BHS, reads the end will come. But,
the Masoretic text does have the pronominal suffix [his end] and should be read; otherwise the
passage could be misread as referring to the end of human history. Moreover, there are
translations that muddy the waters some with the end of it; what exactly does it refer to?
End [] is from a semantic field of terms for end or cessation; 626 the noun is used 15
times in Daniel, the most for any book in the OT. The ranges of meaning for the noun are these:
[1] the end of a person, or collectively of a people, in the sense of death [Genesis 6:13; Jeremiah
51:13; Daniel 11:45 (these suggest judgment)], in the sense of the transience of life [Psalm 39:4];
in the sense of the end/cessation of something: (a) words [Job 16:3] or (b) finitude [Psalm
119:96]; [2] a border that circumscribes something: (a) darkness [Job 28:3], (b) resting place [2
Kings 19:23]; [3] a destination or destiny [Job 6:11]; [4] and an end as such. 627 In Dan 9:26, the
sense becomes: his end (the end/death of this person as an act of divine judgment).
In the flood [] is a prepositional phrase with a definite article: in the flood. The noun
appears six times in the OT.628 As the reader can see, there is no connection between and
the Noachian flood. The term is used in the following ways: [1] more or less literally, of
floodwaters [Job 38:25]; and [2] in a variety of metaphorical uses, all of which underline some
catastrophe that is overflowing and thus overpowering: (a) as a figure of some devastating
catastrophe from which only Yahweh can deliver, Psalm 32:6; (b) as a figure of overflowing
human rage, Proverbs 27:4; (c) as a figure of overpowering military force that sweeps away
everything and everyone in its path, Daniel 11:22; and (d) as a figure of Yahwehs consuming
judgment, Nahum 1:8. There are two options for Dan 9:26, and it is difficult to decide which is
better: [1] the flood could be overpowering military force that overwhelms the coming prince;
in this case, the idea is that he who lives by the sword dies by it; [2] the flood could be a
metaphor of Yahwehs overriding and uncontrollable judgment. The former does have contextual
support, since this coming prince presumably uses his own military force to wipe out the city and
the sanctuary [Dan 9:26b1-2]; but, when all is said and done, the choice between the two is
problematic, since it is difficult not to see the divine wrath at work here. Perhaps the reader could
hedge his/her bets and opt for a bit of both.
Yet to the end war [ ] is another verbless clause; as we noted above,
taking the Masoretic punctuation at face value, there is a pause after this clause; thus, there is no
textual warrant for reading this clause and the next as if they were one single sentence.
The subject of the verbless clause is a prepositional phrase to the end [ ].
The preposition in this instance indicates temporal positioning, a point in time up to which events
[war in this instance] occur.629 In this case, the preposition marks up to (a limit) and places in
the foreground the thought of the period thus demarcated.630 Therefore, to the extent that the
preposition signals a limit to a period of time, we are justified in translating with a definite article:
to (the) end.
End [] is the same noun we dealt with on the previous page. In the current line [Dan 9:26b 4],
we have to nuance option [4], end as such. Accordingly, the end is more than likely the
626 See End, cessation, outcome in NIDOTTE.
627 KB2, 1118-19.
628 Job 38:25; Psalm 32:6; Proverbs 27:4; Daniel 9:26; 11:22; Nahum 1:8.
629 Van der Merwe 39.18.2.
630 For this thought, see IBHS 11.2.12bn102.
147
end of the seventy weeks, or the whole of future time from Daniels and Gabriels point of
view.631 S. Talmon understands Dan 9:26 as referring to a historical period of devastating wars
that mark the culmination of divine judgment.632 The upshot is this: to the end of the historical
period denoted by seventy sevens, which is the Messianic era, there will wars; to put the same
thing another way, from the Incarnation of Jesus the Messiah to His final return, war will be a
commonplace.
War [] is a noun that comes from a semantic field of terms for war or battle. 633 The
basic meaning of the verb [] from which this noun is derived means to be pressed
together and then to come to blows. Our nominal form means hand-to-hand fighting, struggle,
war.634 H.D. Preuss notes that the semantic scope of the root and its derivatives extends from
crowding and shoving to conflict and antagonism, to skirmish, battle, and war. 635 There is little
semantic warrant for reading war in the sense of spiritual warfare; although I do not doubt the
existence of spiritual warfare, the fact is that, as this term is used in the OT, we are in the world of
military conflict.
The Septuagint tradition uses the noun , which appears in Matthew 24:6; Mark
13:2; and Luke 21:9 of wars and rumors of wars. The Messiah further notes that these wars do
not portend the end of human history. Our Lord nuances Dan 9:26 in such a way as to affirm the
truth of up to the end war, while declaring that these wars do not signal anything at all about
the end of human history.
If one wonders why Gabriel lifts out warfare of all things as a characteristic of the
seventy sevens, we may conclude that the angelic voice is giving expression to one of the cardinal
tenets of fallen man: We measure manhood by the sword and are convinced that history is
ultimately determined on the fields of battle.636 Truly, the wicked are wholly unacquainted with
the concept of peace [Isaiah 57:21].
Determined desolations [ (Qal, participle, fm, pl) (Niphal, participle,
fm, sg)] is the final clause, another verbless clause, in Dan 9:26. The subject of the verbless
clause is desolations and the new information in the line is that they are determined.
The syntax of the number used in each participle is interesting. The first participle is
singular and the second is plural. The singular used with determined probably points to a
class of circumstance with a broad referent within the class of circumstances defined by the
lexeme.637 The plural used with desolations suggests a repeated series of actions.638 The
upshot is that a variety of circumstances that qualify as desolation is fixed, as a condition.
Desolations [] is from a semantic field of terms for desolation. 639 Other terms in the
field are and . The first term, , means in the Qal stem: (a) to dry up
(water), and (b) to be in ruins (as the final stage of destruction); in the Niphal: (a) to be laid
631 See Driver, Daniel, 141
632 S. Talmon, , in TDOT, vol. XIII, 82; see also Keil, Daniel, 364.
633 See War, army, battle, fight in NIDOTTE.
634 KB1, 589.
635 H.D. Preuss, , in TDOT, vol. VIII, 335.
636 Heschel, Prophets, vol. I, 160.
637 IBHS, 7.2.2a.
638 Ibid., 7.4.2b.
148
waste; in the Pual: (a) to be dried; in the Hiphil: (a) to cause to dry up, run dry, and (b) to reduce
to ruins, to lay waste; and in the Hophal: (a) to be destroyed or laid waste. 640 Obviously, the basic
meaning here is to be dry, with an extension to include the concept of heat that causes dryness
and then devastation resulting from drought, punishment or war. 641 The net effect is that
implies both dryness and then by extension devastation; the devastation nuance is
oriented around that which has been laid waste in a stative sense describing a condition.
The second term, , means in the Qal stem: (a) to lie desolate (of a town); in the Niphal: (a)
to be devastated; and in the Hiphil: to let something go to ruin and turn into a heap of rubble. 642
In the case of , the sense of devastation is also a stative circumstance, describing a state
of affairs or a more or less terminal condition. As K.-M. Beyse remarks concerning the basic
meaning of , as a result of downfall and disaster, refers to devastation and
desolation.643
The term that Gabriel uses [] has a wider range of meanings than the other two; in the Qal
stem: (a) to be uninhabited, to be deserted (of settlements), (b) to be removed from contact with
other people because of deprivation or affliction, (c) to shudder or to be appalled in the face of
persecution or conviction of a crime, (d) destructions; in the Niphal: (a) to be made uninhabited
as a result of violence, to become deserted, (b) of people, to be made to tremble; in the Poel stem:
(a) to be put to shame, to be inwardly shattered, to be numbed; in the Hiphil stem: (a) to cause to
be deserted, to cause to be desolated, (b) to cause people to be dumbfounded, disconcerted,
awestruck; in the Hophal: (a) desolation; in the Hithpolel: (a) to show oneself overcome with
amazement, (b) to bring oneself to a state of ruin. As the reader will note, this verb has both a
subjective and objective nuance to it; that is, at times depicts appalment [subjective] and
at other times it depicts that which or one who lies devastated [objective]. F. Stolz writes The
basic meaning of the root may be rendered by the expressions to be desolate, cut off from life. 644
In Dan 9:26, is used more objectively in the sense of to lie devastated. 645 At the same
time, Hebrew blends [emphasis mine] the two aspects in a way that translations are usually
unable to render.646 I. Meyer, commenting on the basic idea of the root, writes that is
close to desolation, which can suggest the psychological states as well as the geographical and
physical conditions denoted by the forms of .647 The upshot is that Gabriel uses a term
for devastation or desolation as an objective reality that is still shaded with the subjective impact.
This blending explains the angels choice of as opposed to the other two terms.
Desolations [], therefore, should be read in an intransitive sense: (our) desolations, i.e.,
that which stands desolate in our midst.648 Destructions, with all of their subjective,
psychological impacts, all of the appalment, the numbness, the shame, will be part of the divine
plan going forward throughout the seventy sevens, the Messianic era. The net effect is that
suffering, losses, devastations are inevitable. The reader is advised not to over-interpret
desolations; the term casts a fairly wide net, encompassing sufferings and destructions of
640 KB1, 349.
641 Roy Hayden, , in NIDOTTE.
642 KB2, 1368.
643 K.-M. Beyse, , in TDOT, vol. XIV, 237.
644 F. Stolz, , in TLOT III, 1372.
645 Ibid., 1373.
646 Ibid., 1372.
647 I. Meyer, , in TDOT, vol. XV, 239.
648 Ibid., 244.
149
various kinds. The point is that during the seventy sevens humanity will be plagued with
destruction upon destruction.
Many commentators read the events from Dan 9:26b1-2 to Dan 9:26b5 as fulfilled in the
Antiochene crisis. But, as we have insisted, the time frame of the seventy sevens should be
determinative for Dan 9:26b1-2 to Dan 9:26b5 and that time frame is both Messianic and openended. This means that the data from Dan 9:26b1-2 to Dan 9:26b5 also applies to the Messianic
era, however long that may turn out to be. The fact of the matter is that Dan 9:26b 1-2 to Dan
9:26b5 promises that Gods enemies will continue their conflict right up to the end, only to face
defeat!
Determined [ (Niphal, participle, singular)] is from a semantic field of terms
for decree or decision.649 This Niphal participle appears five times in the Hebrew Bible. 650 In
three of these appearances [Isaiah 10:23; 28:22; Daniel 11:36] the agent who determines is
explicitly Yahweh; Daniel 9:26-27 do not explicitly identify Yahweh as the agent.
Determine [] has the following ranges of meaning: [1] in the Qal stem: (a) to point, or to
threaten, (b) to fix or determine (judgment, destruction, days of life); [2] in the Niphal stem
(which we have in Dan 9:26): (a) what is determined, a determined end. 651 CDCH translates the
Niphal of with to be determined.652 BDB offers an interesting note on the meaning of
here: a strict decision; that which is strictly determined. 653
D.N. Freedman and J.R. Lundbom affirm that the root has the basic meaning of to
cut.654 Eventually, in a more figurative sense, certain things are pre-cut by Yahweh, i.e., they
are determined well in advance of the time when they are to take place. 655 So it is in Dan 9:26.
The net effect is that the aforementioned desolations, the sufferings, losses, destructions that
blight humanity during the seventy sevens, are not autonomous; human history at its worst is not
self-directed, rather in some mysterious way even all of historys losses and all its griefs are
tethered to the sovereign will of Yahweh. In one sense, then, during the seventy sevens, the
Messianic age, suffering and destruction and loss are inevitable; in another sense though, these
thrashings are governed by the sovereign will of God, but this story does not end here.
Determined [] appears in the final line of Dan 9:27, where we are told that the one who
desolates is determined for destruction. This final determination puts the lid on the worst that
the worst in history have done and can do; eventually, they meet their match in the sovereign will
of Yahweh; their demise is pre-cut!
The reader should note well determined. Now, this determined is not the
determinism of natural philosophy. That philosophy affirms, abetted by the popularity of
Darwinism in our day, that human behavior, like everything else in the natural world, obeys
natural laws. To put the same thing another way, it is inconceivable that any human act, any
human decision, does not have an antecedent cause of some sort in the natural world. The reader
649 See Decree, decision in NIDOTTE.
650 Isaiah 10:23; 28:22; Daniel 9:26, 27; 11:36.
651 KB1, 356.
652 CDCH, 133.
653 BDB, 358.
654 D.N. Freedman and J.R. Lundbom, , in TDOT, vol. V, 216.
655 Ibid., 220.
150
must appreciate that there is no break in nature [emphasis mine] no place where its laws cease
to operate,656 and that this is a first principle of determinism.
Now, the first principle in Gabriels world is the sovereignty of God. This God originally created
human beings and fashioned them with a free will when He breathed into mans nostrils the
breath of life and man thereby became a living being [Genesis 2:7]. Furthermore, God permitted
man to exercise his free moral agency in mastery and rule [Genesis 1:28]. But, when man was
placed in Eden and permitted to exercise his free moral agency in eating from every tree in Eden
[Genesis 2:16], there was a caveat, a qualification: one tree the tree of the knowledge of good
and evil was off limits [Genesis 2:17]; God does have His unique sphere of influence. The
upshot is this: Gods will is sovereign and in the context of the divine-human relationship, Gods
will is determinative where He makes His will determinative. Man may choose, in his free will,
either heed God or ignore Him, but, when all is said and done, it is Gods will that is
determinative. To be sure, there is mystery here: in some way, Gods sovereignty leaves ample
room for mans free will [how this happens, happens to be beyond me!]. But, having said that,
God has the final say, and in this case, desolations are more or less pre-cut by God in order to
unfold His will in human history to His ends and to His glory.
Dan 9:27 Then, he will enforce a covenant for many, one seven; and (in the) middle of the
seven, he will remove sacrifice and gift offering, and upon the wing of detestable things, one who
makes desolate, and until a destruction, determined, is poured out upon the one who makes
desolate.
We now come to the final three major events during this final seven: [a] he (the prince)
will enforce a covenant for many, one seven (Dan 9:27a 1-2); [b] in the middle of the seven, he (the
prince) will put an end to sacrifice and grain offering (Dan 9:27b 1-2); and [c] destruction is
determined for the one who makes desolate (the prince; Dan 9:27b 3-7). It is advisable to keep in
the mind that these verses are filled with symbolic language; this means that the mania to connect
the major player [the prince] and the major events with people and events in history may leave
one missing the point.
We have already concluded [see page 144] that the prince is a person of militarypolitical rank and authority who is in opposition to the purposes of God. This definition fits
many players throughout history, including Antiochus Epiphanes, Herod the Great, Nero, Trajan,
Hitler, Stalin, and any number of current totalitarian despots. Furthermore, as the argument
concerning Dan 9:24 makes clear, Gabriel is scoping out the Messianic era, an era that covers the
whole of future time; what is more, the parenthetical statements in Dan 9:26b 3-5 make clear that
the Messianic era will be a time of judgment, war, and desolations. To make a long story short,
what all of this tells us is this: the State, specifically, the totalitarian state guided by persons with
military-political authority and opposed to the interests of God, in many guises over the span of
the seventy sevens will oppose the purposes of God; but, in the final analysis, as Dan 9:27b 5-7
makes abundantly clear, God has the final say. Indeed, as we have argued elsewhere in these
studies in Daniel657 the sovereignty of God over those regimes that would oppose His interests is
the basic theme of Daniel. Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; whatever men sow, that they
will reap!
656 G.T.W. Patrick, Introduction to Philosophy (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1935), 306.
657 See L Lineberry at www.scribd.com for studies in Daniel 1-8, where this point is made
repeatedly; indeed, we affirm that the basic thesis of the book of Daniel as a whole is that God is
sovereign over the national and international political and military adventures of mankind,
appearances to the contrary.
151
Going forward in the Messianic era as depicted in Dan 9:27, this kind of leader [a] will force
his/her bidding on the populace (Dan 9:27a1-2), [b] will directly oppose the interests of God (Dan
9:27b3-7), [c] but will finally be destroyed (Dan 9:27b5-7). To repeat, the symbolic language here
suggests that Gabriel is alerting Daniel and those who would read his book to the kinds of events
that will crop up, the patterns in history during the Messianic era right up to the end of human
history.
He will enforce a covenant for many, one seven [

] is the first pattern in history that will plague the Messianic era. This
line is punctuated with an atnach under the final terms, one seven. This accent signals the
major break in the reading of Dan 9:27.
Syntactically, the line opens with the verb, [Hiphil, waw consecutive
perfect]. We read this waw consecutive perfect as temporally succeeding the Hiphil imperfect
[ (Hiphil, imperfect, will wipe out)] in Dan 9:26658. The connection between these
two patterns is this: will wipe out and then will enforce a covenant. In terms of verbal
aspect, the contour of the conjugation over time, he will enforce and will wipe out are both
future oriented.659 The upshot is that an enforced covenant [Dan 9:27] comes after destruction
[Dan 9:26] and both are events that will occur at some unspecified point in future history. Indeed,
these kinds of events are parts of the patterns in history that will afflict the Messianic era.
Enforce a covenant [ ] is a collocation that occurs only here in the
Hebrew Bible; it does not occur in the Qumran literature.
Enforce [] is from a semantic field of terms for power or strength. 660 The ranges
of meaning for are: [1] in the Qal stem: (a) to be superior, (b) to achieve something, (c) to
increase; [2] in the Piel stem: (a) to make superior, (b) to exert oneself; [3] in the Hiphil stem
(which we have in Dan 9:27): (a) to be strong; and [4] in the Hithpael stem: (a) to prevail, (b) to
act violently.661
The sense of the Hiphil of in Dan 9:27 is problematic. Kohler-Baumgartner offer: [1]
to make a strong covenant, [2] to break the covenant, and [3] for the covenant to become difficult
or pressing.662 CDCH opts for enforce covenant.663 BDB more or less follows suit with
confirm a covenant.664 Holladay follows Kohler-Baumgartner, adding let become faithless
(in covenant) or become heavy or oppressive (in covenant). 665
658 On this point, see IBHS 32.2.1c.

659 Ibid., 32.2.1d.
660 See Power, strength in NIDOTTE.
661 KB1, 175.
662 Ibid.
663 CDCH, 61.
664 BDB, 149.
665 Holladay, 55.
152
Generally speaking, the root [] emphasizes power and strength and often on excellence
and superiority as well.666 From this base, the Hiphil of in Dan 9:27 may mean forcing
an agreement by means of superior strength.667 Kosmala reads the Hiphil of in Dan 9:27
in the sense of make a firm agreement.668 Either way, both options seem to denote a display of
might and power through covenant or alliance making.
Most commentators read enforce a covenant in reference to the alliances with Jews forged by
Antiochus Epiphanes.669 This view is untenable on the grounds of the context, the Messianic era,
as set in Dan 9:24. As seems obvious, the six events in Dan 9:24 are Messianic in nature and
clearly go forward in history from the inauguration of the Messianic era. Moreover, to the extent
that Dan 9:24 represents the whole, then, the parts in the breakdown [seven sevens sixty two
sevens one seven] must also refer in some sense to the Messianic era. So, where does this
leave us?
We may reasonably follow the translation of the Hiphil of offered by CDCH: enforce a
covenant or alliance. This kind of leader [prince] is the sort of tyrant who uses power and
strength, political, military, or both, to enforce his will over the many; he forces agreements by
means of his superior strength, whether political or military, and this is a pattern that will torment
the Messianic era.
is the basic OT word for covenant. For the moment, it is important to note that
/covenant is used in two basic ways in the OT: [1] as an agreement between persons
and [2] as an agreement between God and man.670 In the case of Dan 9:27, we are in the realm of
the former an agreement between humans not the latter. The reason for this is the new player
[the prince] introduced in Dan 9:26b1-2; indeed, this prince, a person of political and military
authority who is also opposed to the interests of God, dominates Dan 9:26b 1-27b7. Clearly, this
political-military power-player is the one who enters into alliances with other persons in 9:27a 1-2.
Accordingly, we may read /covenant in the sense of a covenant, agreement, obligation
between a ruler and subjects.671 To recall what Joyce Baldwin writes in this regard, enforcing a
covenant has the implication of forcing an agreement by means of superior strength. 672 The net
effect is that the Messianic era will be hounded by political-military leaders who all but force
their wills on the many for the simple reason that they have the power to do so. 673 As Keil notes,
666 Robin Wakely, , in NIDOTTE; for a similar point, see H. Kosmala, , in
TDOT, vol. II, 367.
667 Wakely, , in NIDOTTE; similarly Baldwin, 171.
668 Kosmala, , in TDOT, 368.
669 So, Driver, 141; Hartman and Di Lella, The Book of Daniel (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 2005; paperback edition), 252; Russell, Daniel, 190; Montgomery, 385; Goldingay, 262;
Collins, 357; for that matter, many footnotes in English Bibles have the same data.
670 KB1, 157-58.
671 CDCH, 56.
672 Baldwin, 171.
673 As I write these words, the western democracies have thoroughly jettisoned any pragmatic
attachment to transcendent moral values; indeed, every man does what is right in his own eyes.
The net effect of this state of affairs, in order to avoid total chaos, is the extension of the power of
federal, state, and local law over the lives of citizens. As these laws extend their reach over everexpanding areas of private life, we in the western democracies are finding ourselves in the grip of
an ever-increasing democratic totalitarianism. In other words, modern leaders in the western
democracies are thoroughly adept at enforcing agreements upon its citizenry. This is just one
way in which the vision and the prophecy concerning the Messianic era are confirmed.
153
That ungodly prince shall impose on the mass of the people a strong covenant that they should
follow him and give themselves to him as their God.674 A clearer statement of modern political
idolatry could hardly be given.
The many [] is a prepositional phrase with a definite article. The point worthy of
note here is that many but not all follow in lockstep with this political-military power-player.
(In the) middle of the seven [ ] is literally half of the seven. The
sense is halfway through the period denoted by the seven. There are no real surprises
concerning the meaning of : half, middle, midst.675 Baldwin notes Gods people will
not have to experience such intense suffering throughout the whole of the last period of time. 676
The seven [] is obviously the final period in the breakdown [seven sevens sixty
two sevens one seven] of the Messianic era depicted in Dan 9:24 [seventy sevens]. Indeed,
as we have argued, the seventy sevens may be read as a figure of comprehensive completeness;
an indeterminate time during which Yahweh, through His Messiah, accomplishes His six most
key objectives for the salvation of mankind, followed by the end of human history.677 This final
seven is marked by severe but limited challenges to the interests of and the people of God.
Here again, references to the abominations of Antiochus Epiphanes 678 as the key player in the
half of the seven are wide of the contextual mark. As we have already noted, Dan 9:24 is the
contextual framework for Dan 9:25-27, on the principle that the sum of the parts [Dan 9:25-27]
equal the whole [Dan 9:24]; and Dan 9:24 is Messianic.
He will remove sacrifice and gift offering [ ] is obviously an
example of this political-military authoritys opposition to the interests of God and Gods people.
Remove [ (Hiphil, imperfect, 3rd, ms)] is written in the Hiphil stem, which
signals causation on the part of the prince/political-military power-player. The sense of the
construction with these two objects is causing a stative event. 679 In other words, it is the case that
this power politician will make these religious worship functions disappear.
Remove [] has the following ranges of meaning in the Hiphil: [1] to put an end to, to bring
to a conclusion, [2] to remove or put away, [3] to allow to be missing, and [4] to cause to
disappear.680 Kohler-Baumgartner translate in Dan 9:27 with to cause to disappear.681
BDB opts for to cause to cease, to put an end to.682 F. Stolz notes that the Hiphil of has
two basic senses: [1] to cause to cease and [2] to cause to disappear or remove. 683 E. Haag
affirms that the basic meaning of is to cease, to come to an end.684 In the Hiphil, the
reference is consistently to the cessation of a previous activity or to the end of a process that has
674 Keil, Daniel, 367.
675 CDCH, 129.
676 Baldwin, 171.
677 See the notes on pages 116ff.
678 Russell, Daniel, 190; Hartman and Di Lella, 252-53; Driver, 141; Collins, Daniel, 357.
679 IBHS 27.3c.
680 KB2, 1408.
681 Ibid.
682 BDB, 991.
684 E. Haag, , in TDOT, vol. XIV, 382.
154
come to a conclusion and that is not merely interrupted temporarily. 685 The notion of ceasing a
previous activity dovetails with removal. To read this action as a permanent removal is to overread the language; Gabriel simply tells us that during the end of the Messianic era there will be
fairly intense opposition to the worship of God.
Sacrifice and gift offering [ ] pinpoint two aspects of worship as the target of
opposition: [1] communion and [2] dependence; during the final period of the Messianic era, the
prince, a man who represents politically and militarily powerful leaders during the final seven,
will seek to sever relatedness to Yahweh and dependence upon Him.
Sacrifice [] as an act of worship signals communion; Kohler-Baumgartner write
concerning the idea of /sacrifice, is the sacrifice of slaughtered sheep, goats, or
cattle to create communion [emphasis mine] between the god to whom the sacrifice is made and
the partners of the sacrifice, and communion [emphasis mine] between the partners
themselves.686 Indeed, Leviticus uses /sacrifice in conjunction with /peace.
Jacob Milgrom notes that the amounts to a sacrifice of well-being.687 If
we may assume that this sacrifice of well-being was a communal sacrifice of well-being, then
communion between the partakers of the /sacrifice is clear.
Gift offering [] is problematic. That is, in some contexts, there is uncertainty on
whether means [a] a gift offering or [b] a more specific grain offering. 688 Dan 9:27 is
such a context. We opt for the more general meaning of the term. This general meaning is a
gift, present, as an expression of respect, thanksgiving, homage, friendship, dependence. 689
When the is presented to Yahweh, the offering depicts dependence upon Yahweh
[Psalm 96:8; 1 Chronicles 16:29].
To put the whole thing in a nutshell, during the Messianic era, politically-militarily powerful
leaders will attempt to severe the relationship between God and man, and thereby, the
relationship between people, as well as the sense of dependence upon God.690
Once again, the reader may note in commentaries or in footnotes in the English Bible that
Antiochus Epiphanes [175-64 BC] is mentioned, and with good reason. During his second
century BC reign he did attempt to remove sacrifice and gift offering; about this, there is no doubt
[see 1Maccabees 1:41-50]. However, there are patterns in history. The varieties of opposition
inflicted upon Gods people by Antiochus have had many successors in the Messianic era. There
are those leaders and nations that see the only legitimate sense of sacrifice as that applied to the
state; any thought of sacrifice as communion with God is thereby downplayed or obliterated [1
Maccabees 1:45]. Beyond that, dependence is the sole province of government [1 Maccabees
1:41-42]. The net effect is that Daniels angelic messenger is telling Daniel that Antiochus
685 Ibid., 385.

686 KB1, 262.
687 Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 204.
688 Richard Averbeck, , in NIDOTTE.
689 KB1, 601.
690 The means by which this is teased out in the western democracies varies. In the United
States, the relationship between God and man is made problematic by means of the various
prohibitions against even mentioning the name of God in public. As far as dependence is
concerned, it is self-evident that, per the vision in Daniel 4, the State has become the object of
human dependence that God once was.
155
Epiphanes shall have many impersonators during the final period of seven. There are patterns in
history.691
Dan 9:27 is rounded off with three clauses: [1] upon the wing of detestable things, one who
makes desolate (), [2] until a destruction, determined, and [3] is poured out on the one
who makes desolate (). The repetition of one who makes desolate in the first and final
clauses indicates that all three should be considered as some sort of unit. Beyond that, these lines
are exceedingly difficult to untangle.
Upon the wing of detestable things [ ] is punctuated with a
pashta, suggesting a slight pause in the reading before the next term, one who makes desolate
[], which has its own disjunctive accent.
Wing [] is used in the OT in both a more or less literal fashion as well as a
figurative sense. W. Dommershausen notes that wing [] is a symbol of the speed and
violence of an onrushing storm.692 Therefore, we may read /wing as a symbol of
swiftness [Proverbs 23:5 (the swiftness with which wealth may disappear); Isaiah 8:8 (the
swiftness with which the Assyrian army approaches); Jeremiah 48:40; 49:22; Zechariah 5:9]. We
may conclude, then, that wing is a figure of speech, depicting the swift and speedy onset of
what is identified as detestable things wielded by one who makes desolate. To put the same
thing another way, the desolator [] is quick [] to employ detestable things
[].
Detestable things [] is plural in form, probably indicating the various forms of
/detestable things; accordingly, it might be unwise to reduce this to one
particular manifestation of detestable things [say, Antiochus Epiphanes shenanigans in the
Temple in Jerusalem in December of 167 BC].
Detestable [] is a noun from a semantic field of terms for abomination. 693 The
noun occurs 28 times in the OT with most of the occurrences in the prophets [20 out of the 28].
The noun is used in two contexts: [1] cultic and [2] secular; our use in Dan 9:27 is clearly cultic.
Basically, in a cultic context means abhorrence, an object of horror, horror,
monster.694 In cultic contexts, usually refers to images and symbols of pagan
deities,695 often specific idols worshiped in Israel [1 Kings 11:5, 7; 2 Kings 23:13]. The noun
focuses exclusively on certain aspects of idolatrous worship, whether the idol itself or part of an
idolatrous worship.696 The upshot is that the /detestable thing is something filthy and
loathsome of which people should feel ashamed;697 it is idolatrous worship.
691 To follow up on Antiochus Epiphanes as a pattern for opposition to God, see L Lineberry
www.scribd.com on Daniel 7.
692 W. Dommershausen, , in TDOT vol. VII, 230. This usage is often associated with
the phrase wings of the wind [], which is found in the Psalms [18:11;
104:3].
693 See Abomination in NIDOTTE.
694 KB2, 1640.
695 Ibid.
696 Michael Grisanti, , in NIDOTTE.
697 Baldwin, 172.
156
We have noted previously that the Messianic era will be plagued with leaders military-political
authority figures who will oppose the interests of God. We have determined that upon the
wings of desolation means that these desolators will be quick to engage in detestable practices,
practices which now turn out to be various forms of idolatry, which are by definition detestable.
One who makes desolate [ (Poel, participle)] is a bit tricky; the problem is the
syntactical relationship between one who makes desolate and upon the wing of detestable
things. The punctuation may help some; there is pashta separating the two phrases, thus: upon
the wing of detestable things (pause), one who makes desolate. In terms of the form, we have a
prepositional phrase [upon the wings of detestable things] plus a participle [one who makes
desolate]. This formation has the look of a verbless clause, where the subject is one who makes
desolate and the predicate element is upon the wings of detestable things. The sense of the
verbless clause may be: the desolator rapidly advocates idolatry.
The subject and predicate of this clause is important; we argue that the subject one
who makes desolate is the actor in the line and the predicate upon the wing of detestable
things is the action in the line. This subject-predicate arrangement argues against those
translations that read an abomination that causes desolation, or words to that effect. The
desolator is the performer; upon the wings of detestable things [or rapidly advocates
idolatry] is what he does. What is more, this subject-predicate arrangement forbids reading
abomination of desolations here.
One who makes desolate [ (Poel, participle)] is written in the Poel stem, a stem
which is a morphemic variant of the Piel.698 Now, the Piel is associated with causation and
specifically with causation of a state [of desolation in this case].699 The sense is: one who
brings about a state of desolation.
One who makes desolate [] is from a semantic field of terms for desolation. 700 For the full
notes on this verb, see above 148-49. For now, it is enough to recall that has both a
subjective/psychological impact [appalment at the desolations] as well as the objective reality of
the state of desolation. In the Poel stem, has the following ranges of meaning: [1] make
desolate, devastate, [2] as a noun in the participial form [as we have here]: desolator, devastator;
[3] be appalled; and [4] cause appalment.701 BDB opts for causing horror.702 F. Stolz considers
here to mean ravaging, desecrating,703 and cites the sacrilege of Antiochus Epiphanes.
During the Messianic era, there will emerge onto the scene those military-political power-players
who thoroughly oppose the interests of God and, by extension, resist His people. This
circumstance is the state of desolation; perhaps one who causes horror [per BDB] is an apt
translation of . Finally, the reader ought not to forget that Dan 9:27 falls within the
purview of Dan 9:24, the Messianic era; this means that during the final seven, those who oppose
the cause of God will more or less dominate the scene. The upshot is this: the one who makes
desolate is an Antiochene-like figure whose all-out opposition to Yahweh brings moral
698 IBHS 21.2.3a.
699 Ibid., 24.1i.
701 CDCH, 468.
702 BDB, 1030.
157
dreadfulness, ethical disgust, spiritual revulsion, and holy dismay to the people of God. The
reader can only assume that during the final period of seven, there will be any number of those
who inherit this distressing mantle. At the same time, the sovereignty of Yahweh extends over
even those most egregious forms of disgusting and malevolent persecution, as the final lines in
Daniel 9 attest.
Until destruction, determined, is poured out upon the one who makes desolate
[ ] is the equalizing factor that trumps the
preceding line. God has the last word.
The grammar of the line features a prepositional phrase until destruction followed by
a participle determined and then the finite verb is poured out and concludes with another
prepositional phrase upon the one who makes desolate. The punctuation in the line may be set
out thus:
Until destruction [pause], determined [pause], is poured out upon the one who makes
desolate [end of sentence].
The syntax of the preposition until is temporal, implying a point in time up to which
events occur,704 but not beyond. On one hand, all the worst that mankind does to oppose the
interests of God is restrained by His will; at the same time, the reader should focus attention on
the time frame, the ongoing horror and desolation, which leads up to this point of complete
destruction of the desolator.
Destruction [] is from a semantic field of terms for annihilation, destruction, end. 705 The
noun occurs 22 times in the OT, twice in Daniel [9:27; 11:16]. Basically, the noun is a fairly
powerful term, depicting complete destruction, annihilation. 706 Significantly, Domeris and Van
Dam write that finality [emphasis mine] is an important feature of the semantic domain of
; and necessitates such harsh expressions as annihilation, decimation, or total
destruction.707 The upshot is that, for the one who desolates, the one who challenges the cause of
God and His people during the final seven, there is but one end and that end is inevitable and
irrevocable: destruction.
Determined [ (Niphal, participle)] is written as a Niphal participle; this stem in this
instance means that the subject of the sentence one who makes desolate is in the state of
suffering the effects of the action in the line destruction is poured out by some unnamed
agent708, surely Yahweh. Determined alerts the reader to the fact that Yahweh is still master of
His Universe, appearances to the contrary.
Determined [] is the same term in the same form that we have in Dan 9:26
desolations are determined. At that point, we noted that the sufferings, losses, destructions that
blight humanity during the seventy sevens, are not autonomous; human history at its worst is not
self-directed, rather in some mysterious way even all of historys losses and all its griefs are
tethered to the sovereign will of Yahweh; certain things are pre-cut by Yahweh. 709 Now we
704 Van der Merwe 39.18; IBHS 11.2.12b.
705 See Annihilation, destruction, end in NIDOTTE.
706 KB1, 477.
707 W.R. Domeris and C. Van Dam, , in NIDOTTE.
708 IBHS, 23.2.2a.
709 On this point, see above page 150.
158
have come full circle: not only does Yahweh pre-cut the worst which militarily-politically
powerful leaders may do [Dan 9:26], He also pre-cuts their demise [Dan 9:27]. All of this is in
concert with what I regard as the theme of the book of Daniel as stated in Dan 2:20 He
[Yahweh] removes kings and He appoints kings. Yahweh is sovereign over the national and
international political undertakings of humanity, appearances to the contrary.
Is poured out upon [ (Qal, imperfect, 3rd, sg)] is written with a verb [] that
appears 21 times in the OT; of these, 12 explicitly mention Yahweh pouring out His anger or
wrath.710 We may reasonably assume that in Dan 9:27, Yahweh is also the source of pouring out
(final) destruction on the one who makes desolate.
Kohler-Baumgartner demonstrates that conveys intensity: [1] in the Qal: to gush forth;
[2] in the Niphal: to gush forth, to be brought to the melting point; [3] in the Hiphil: to pour out
(like milk), to melt down, or throw away; to bring to the melting point; and [4] in the Hophal: to
be melted.711 Obviously, there is dynamism and forceful power implied in most of these
meanings. Indeed, Nahum 1:6 asks who can stand in the presence of Yahwehs burning anger
when it is poured out? Ezekiel 22:21 affirms that when Yahweh unleashes His burning wrath,
those who experience this wrath are melted in the midst of it. Altogether, , in contexts
that are concerned with Gods wrath, points to catastrophic and final divine intervention.
One who makes desolate [ (Qal, participle)] is written as a substantive participle, or a
participle functioning as a noun. The syntactical-semantic thrust of the nominal participle may be
to underline the deportment and action which characterize [emphasis mine] a person, perhaps
temporarily.712 This is perilously close to Gesenius observation on the participle used as a noun,
which indicates repeated, enduring, or commonly occurring acts, occupations and thoughts. 713
Finally, the reader will note that there is no definite article used here; accordingly, translations
with the desolator or words to that effect are wide of the grammatical mark. There may be a
reason for one who makes desolate to be indefinite: the indefinite noun focuses on the class to
which the referent belongs, its quality and character. 714 In other words, leaders of this class,
whenever they emerge during the final seven, will find destruction poured out upon them.
We must remember that the final seven is a part of the seventy sevens, which is the Messianic era,
covering the whole of future time.715 This broader context must be kept in mind as we read and
evaluate the parts; accordingly, it would seem that reducing one who makes desolate to some
single individual ignores the two syntactical points made in the previous paragraph: [1] that one
who makes desolate describes deportment and actions which characterize and [2] one who
makes desolate focuses on the class to which the referent belongs. It would be plausible to infer
that over the course of the seventy sevens, there would be more than one leader who would fill
this desolating function.
Desolation [] has been thoroughly discussed above;716 it is enough to recall at this point
that , as used here, has a dual focus: [1] psychological horror and [2] physical destruction.
710 2 Chronicles 12:7; 34:21, 25; Job 10:10; Jeremiah 7:20; 48:18; 44:6; Ezekiel 22:20, 21, 22;
Daniel 9:11; Nahum 1:6.
711 KB1, 732-33.
712 IBHS 37.2b.
713 GKC 116 f.
714 IBHS 13.2b.
715 Baldwin, 177.
716 See pages 148-50.
159
During the final seven of the Messianic era, the concluding era of human history, many will
emerge upon the plane of human history to inflict in both of these ways.
Summary
At this point, we intend to summarize Dan 9:26b1-27b7. Here are the key points as presented in
the translation:
[1] The people of a coming prince will wipe out city and sanctuary [Dan 9:26b 1-2]
[2] But his end in a flood [Dan 9:26b3]
[3] Yet to the end war [Dan 9:26b4]
parenthetical remarks
[4] Determined desolations [Dan 9:26b5]
[5] He will enforce a covenant for many, one seven [Dan 9:27a 1-2]
[6] (In the) middle of the seven [Dan 9:27b1], he [prince/leader/military-political power
player] will remove sacrifice and grain offering [Dan 9:27b 2];
[7] And upon the wing of detestable things [Dan 9:27b3] one who makes desolate
[Dan 9:27b4];
[8] Until a destruction [Dan 9:27b5], determined [Dan 9:27b6], is poured out upon the
one who makes desolate [Dan 9:27b7]
We affirm that this section, Dan 9:26b1-27b7 depicts the events of the final seven; having
transitioned to a destruction motif, Gabriel teases out more fully the opposition to and the
suffering of God and His people.
In a very general way, Dan 9: 9:26b1-27b7 is clear that this /prince is
thoroughly hostile to the interests of God and to the people of God. This /prince
wipes out Jerusalem and the sanctuary [Dan 9:26b1-2]; he brings an end to sacrifice and the grain
offering [Dan 9:27b1-2]. As far as the people of God are concerned, the /prince will
enforce a covenant for many [Dan 9:27a1-2]. As Joyce Baldwin remarks, this /prince
is the enemy of Gods cause.717
As argued above, the parenthetical remarks in Dan 9:26b 3-5 suggest that this prince is a
prototype who through the medium of numerous successors will cause havoc throughout the final
seven.
Now, the fact that Dan 9:24 compels us to read Dan 9:25-27 during the Messianic era, it
seems reasonable to point out that the Roman general Titus destroyed the city and the sanctuary
for a second time in 70 AD.718 This seems to be an obvious outworking of the people of a
coming prince will wipe out city and sanctuary. To be sure, the kind of eliminationist opposition
that opens the Messianic era will be a staple throughout the final seven. The opposition to the
interests of God did not come to an end in 70 AD with Titus.
Events 2-4 are all verbless clauses that function to provide parenthetical information. The first
parenthetical remark appears to apply to the fate of the coming prince; while the final two seem
to be of a more open-ended nature: human history, even during the Messianic era, will be
dominated by war and desolations.
717 Baldwin, 171.

718 Baldwin, 171; Young, 207; Collins, 357 (refers to a Roman conqueror as an option).
160
Event 5 describes an imposed political arrangement among men: He will enforce a

covenant for many, one seven. It is well not to over-read these words, especially the reference to
he. Admittedly, he would seem to refer to a coming prince; but, as we have remarked, the
events during the final seven are open-ended and seem to occupy the sum total of the Messianic
era. Furthermore, it is advisable to keep in the mind that these verses are filled with symbolic
language; this means that the mania to connect the major player [the prince] and the major events
with people and events in history may leave one missing the point. Finally, weigh and consider
this: we have already concluded [see page 144] that the prince is a person of military-political
rank and authority who is in opposition to the purposes of God. This definition fits many players
throughout history, including Antiochus Epiphanes, Herod the Great, Nero, Trajan, Hitler, Stalin,
and any number of current totalitarian despots. Furthermore, as the content of Dan 9:24 makes
clear, Gabriel is scoping out the Messianic era, an era that covers the whole of future time; what
is more, the parenthetical statements in Dan 9:26b3-5 make clear that the Messianic era will be a
time of judgment, war, and desolations. To make a long story short, what all of this tells us is
this: the State, specifically, the totalitarian state guided by persons with military-political
authority and opposed to the interests of God, in many guises over the span of the seventy sevens
will oppose the purposes of God; but, in the final analysis, as Dan 9:27b 5-7 makes abundantly
clear, God has the final say.
As far as he will enforce a covenant is concerned, it comes down to this: this kind of
leader, the kind mentioned in the paragraph above, is the sort of tyrant who uses power and
strength, political, military, or both, to enforce his will over the many; he forces agreements by
means of his superior strength, whether political or military, and this is a political pattern that will
torment the Messianic era. The net effect is that the Messianic era will be hounded by politicalmilitary leaders who all but force their wills on the many for the simple reason that they have the
power to do so. As Keil notes, That ungodly prince shall impose on the mass of the people a
strong covenant that they should follow him and give themselves to him as their God. 719 A
clearer statement of modern political idolatry could hardly be given.
Event 6 is a direct attack on the worship of God: he [military-political power-player] will
remove sacrifice and grain offering [Dan 9:27b2]. To begin with, references to the abominations
of Antiochus Epiphanes as the key player in the half of the seven are wide of the contextual
mark. As we have already noted, Dan 9:24 is the contextual framework for Dan 9:25-27, on the
principle that the sum of the parts [Dan 9:25-27] equals the whole [Dan 9:24]; and Dan 9:24 is
Messianic. At the same time, Antiochus will loom large in Daniel 10-11, especially Daniel 11.
However, as we shall point out, Antiochus Epiphanes is a prototype of many military-political
power-players who come after him, especially during the final seven, the Messianic era.
The removal of sacrifice and grain offering has two objectives: first, interrupt the
communion between God and His people; and, second, short-circuit the dependence Gods people
have on Yahweh. It should not be forgotten that these twin goals are the objectives of the State in
many cases. To put the whole thing in a nutshell, during the Messianic era, politically-militarily
powerful leaders will attempt to dissolve the relationship between God and man, and thereby, the
relationship between people, as well as the sense of dependence upon God. How this is done
varies considerably; in some of the democracies, such as the United States, there are legal
prohibitions on mentioning God in certain settings; in some of the totalitarian settings, God is
simply denied outright and the State substituted in His place. As far as dependence is concerned,
one would be hard pressed to name any nation that does not view itself as the entity upon which
the people must depend for just about everything.
719 Keil, Daniel, 367.
161
The seventh and eighth events center upon one who makes desolate [Dan 9:27b 3-7].
Generally speaking, there are two events that involve one who makes desolate: first, he is swift
in employing detestable practices in his opposition to God and His interests; second, God has the
final say: he is doomed to destruction.
The seventh key event that occurs during the final seven involves the speed with which
those who oppose God go about their work: upon the wing of detestable things one who makes
desolate is a clause that we concluded (a) depicted the swift and speedy onset (b) of what is
identified as detestable things (c) wielded by one who makes desolate. To put the same thing
another way, the desolator [] is quick [] to employ detestable things/practices
[] in his/her God-defying work. What are these detestable practices? A good
guess takes into account the fact that detestable thing is something filthy and loathsome of
which people should feel ashamed;720 it is in a nutshell idolatrous worship.
We have noted previously that the Messianic era will be plagued with leaders military-political
authority figures who will oppose the interests of God. We have determined that upon the
wings of desolation means that these desolators will be quick to engage in detestable practices,
practices which now turn out to be promoting various forms of idolatry, which are by definition
detestable. To this end, the western democracies tout the idolatry of power, the idolatry of Self,
and the idolatry of wealth, among others.
The eighth key event is reasonably clear: until destruction, determined, is poured out on
the one who makes desolate [Dan 9:27b5-7]. In a nutshell, these words tell us in no uncertain
terms that God has the final say; political-military power-players may strut across the stage of
human history, conquering and being conquered, in an almost unending orgy of acquiring and
losing power. In the meantime, people, especially Gods people, suffer under these despotic
regimes, often to the point of martyrdom. But, do not be deceived; God is not mocked; rather
God has the final say.
720 Baldwin, 172.

162

A Reader's Guidebook To Daniel 9

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

A Reader's Guidebook To Daniel 9

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

A Readers Guidebook to Daniel 9

Loren Lineberry, 2016