Here we go…
What is the 70th week about? Here’s the text:
And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed. And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator. (Daniel 9.26, 27, ESV)
Most believe that “after 62 weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off…” refers to the crucifixion. Then we have “the people of the prince who is to come…” So future to the crucifixion.
Let’s pause… I was raised in what is called “dispensationalism.” Some of my readers fall into that camp. If you’ve read Late, Great Planet Earth by Hal Lindsey (1970), you’re familiar with it. More recently, the Left Behind Series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins novelizes dispensationalist “eschatology,” the study of last things.
To oversimplify and relate Daniel’s 70th week to dispensationalism, we have to believe in a “2-body” approach to the people of God. Specifically, Old Testament Israel and the New Testament Church, which began with Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2, are two separate entities. The Church is considered, essentially, a parenthesis, in God’s dealings with Israel. Therefore, between the end of the 69th week and the beginning of the 70th week, we have the church age, which will end with the Rapture as described in 1 Thessalonians 4.13 – 18. Then the 70th week kicks in.
The full detail of how dispensationalist eschatology relates to the 70 weeks of Daniel is contained in a classic book, The Coming Prince by Sir Robert Anderson, first published in 1881. I used to have this book in my library, and I’ve read it. Moreover, I started my ChatGPT discussions on the 70 weeks with this book. Here’s the conclusion of Anderson’s timeline according to ChatGPT (points labeled 1, 2 and 3 are really labeled 7, 8, and 9):
- The prophecy then jumps forward to a future ruler. This is one of Anderson’s most important ideas. Daniel says that the people of the prince that shall come will destroy Jerusalem and the Temple. Anderson argues that this “prince that shall come” is not Christ, but a future ruler associated with the Roman world.
- The final, seventieth week is still future. Anderson therefore sees a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. The church age occupies this interval. The final seven years concern Israel’s future and culminate in the events associated with Antichrist and the Second Coming.
- The Coming Prince is Antichrist.The final ruler makes a covenant with “the many” for one week—seven years—but breaks it after three and a half years. He stops sacrifice and worship and commits the “abomination of desolation.” Anderson connects this with the New Testament’s teaching concerning the Antichrist and the final tribulation.
So there it is. Clear (to Anderson), tied up neatly. The problem is that dispensationalism is a relatively new teaching, starting in the early to mid 1800s. What was the church teaching before that? And what do non-dispensationalist theologians believe now? I asked ChatGPT.
| Tradition | General understanding of the 70 weeks |
|---|---|
| Early Church Fathers | Primarily fulfilled in Christ, with considerable variation concerning the final week |
| Roman Catholic | Traditionally Christological/Messianic; generally sees the prophecy culminating in Christ and/or Jerusalem’s destruction |
| Eastern Orthodox | Essentially Christological, but often with an additional eschatological dimension |
| Reformation/Reformed | Generally Christ-centered, with Calvin seeing the prophecy as reaching Christ’s first advent rather than a future seven-year tribulation |
| Historicist Protestants | 490 years, usually extending from the Persian period to Christ, sometimes using the day-for-a-year principle |
| Dispensationalism | 69 weeks → Christ; gap; future 70th week → Antichrist/Israel/tribulation |
| Anderson | A particularly precise dispensational calculation: 483 prophetic years = 173,880 days, ending at Christ’s presentation as Messiah |
I asked specifically about what John Piper teaches:
Piper does not take the classic dispensational view that Daniel’s 70th week is a still-future, seven-year period separated from the first 69 weeks.
In a 1987 position paper, he says that the idea of a seven-year tribulation comes from interpreting Daniel 9:24–27 as having the 70th week separated from the first 69. But he explicitly says, “That the tribulation will last seven years is not a New Testament teaching.” (Desiring God)
So, briefly: Piper is cautious about making Daniel 9:27 the basis for a future seven-year tribulation. He does believe in a future great tribulation and Christ’s return, but he does not build the dispensational end-times timetable around a postponed 70th week.
I also asked about Tim Keller who didn’t write specifically about the 70 weeks. What ChatGPT concluded is:
Where his broader eschatology is clear, he treats Christ’s first coming, death, resurrection, and the destruction of Jerusalem as central fulfillments of Old Testament prophecy—not as events that require a postponed Danielic timetable.
I should clarify that non-dispensationalists are generally “1-body” people. That is, Israel is the Old Testament people of God, and the Church is the New Testament people of God. A discussion of this distinction is way beyond the scope of today’s blog and the Ewellogy in general.
I concluded my ChatGPT conversation this way:
Thank you. Very helpful since the only interpretation I “know” is Anderson’s and Dispensationalism. As I read the other alternatives, I think we’re left with the one conclusion that makes sense with respect to eschatology:
We don’t know.
ChatGPT’s response to my conclusion is worth another blog as we close out our study of the 70 weeks. Stay tuned.