Devin
Puritan Board Sophomore
I hope this is the correct forum for this post. Feel free to move it if it's not.
The ESV rendering seems to present a timetable such as this:
The call to rebuild--->Seven Weeks ---> The coming of the anointed one--->62 weeks of rebuilding
Most other translations have the two sets of weeks linked together, such that:
The call to rebuild--->Seven weeks + 62 weeks -->The coming of the anointed one
Some examples:
Thus, I have a few questions:
1. Which rendering is correct?
2. Why is the ESV different?
3. If the two sets of weeks should be added together grammatically, why are they separated at all? Why not say 69 weeks?
Daniel 9:25 (ESV) said:Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time.
The ESV rendering seems to present a timetable such as this:
The call to rebuild--->Seven Weeks ---> The coming of the anointed one--->62 weeks of rebuilding
Most other translations have the two sets of weeks linked together, such that:
The call to rebuild--->Seven weeks + 62 weeks -->The coming of the anointed one
Some examples:
Daniel 9:25 (NASB) said:So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.
Daniel 9:25 (NKJV) said:Know therefore and understand,
That from the going forth of the command
To restore and build Jerusalem
Until Messiah the Prince,
There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks;
The street shall be built again, and the wall,
Even in troublesome times.
Thus, I have a few questions:
1. Which rendering is correct?
2. Why is the ESV different?
3. If the two sets of weeks should be added together grammatically, why are they separated at all? Why not say 69 weeks?