Daniel 9:27 | Who confirms the 70th week covenant and how?

Only God can make a covenant and the covenant spoken of here in verse 27 is (of course) the same one spoken of a few verses earlier! And this is what most people seem to miss! So, why is it widely taught that in the last days an anti-Christ makes a covenant for seven years with Israel? Can the devil or his underlings even make covenants? Of course not.

May 18, 2014 (edited 2026)

What is the covenant of Daniel 9:27?

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Who is "he" and what "covenant" is he to confirm? Let's refer back to a previous verse!

Dan 9:4 And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;

Many people do not know that the "covenant" spoken of in verse 27 is referencing a "covenant" that God has made with Israel mentioned just earlier in verse 4. And this covenant is representing the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants concerning a coming King and Saviour for Israel and the Earth. But, instead, from out of nowhere they draw an anti-Christ into the verse! How, why? Is there any indication in the Bible that would lead them to think this? Answer - no there isn't. It's just something we've been taught our whole lives.

How many times have we heard it said that the anti-Christ would arrive and would make a covenant with Israel for seven years (i.e. a week of years). And that in the middle of those seven years he would break that covenant? Often the same people who say that also will say that part of the breaking of that covenant will be that the anti-Christ will cause the sacrifices and oblations to cease.

The same who teach this have probably failed to realize that the covenant is already previously mentioned and that the maker and confirmer (i.e. 'keeper') of the covenant is God Himself. Often, rather than swallow our pride and admit to ourselves that we haven't actually studied the chapter closely, we are tempted to double down in obstinance. If you're unable to find any scripture that would back this teaching then why give it credibility that it doesn't deserve?

Who is 'He' who is sent to confirm this covenant?

Daniel 9:27 seems to indicate that a 'confirmer' of the covenant in verse 4 will arrive and confirm that covenant for one week (i.e. one seven) of years and that in the midst of those seven years He will bring an end to blood sacrifices and oblations. Can you think of anyone who made blood sacrifices obsolete?

Matt 26.28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins

notice the similarity with Dan 9.27:

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...

Notice how closely matching the words of Jesus at the last supper fit Daniel 9.27 and that His sacrifice on the cross eliminates the need for future blood sacrifices! This is really pretty obvious to understand once you see it see and hear it coming to pass in the gospels (Matthew 26.28,Mark 14.24,Luke 22.20). Considering the covenant that God made with Abraham concerning a coming King and Saviour should automatically be assumed what the covenant is and who it is with.

Jesus is surely the 'confirmer' of the covenant. Being the Word of God manifest in the flesh, His self sacrifice is sufficient to cover all sin. To continue to promote sacrificial offerings is to misunderstand or undervalue His sacrifice (remember, He IS the Word of God come in the flesh!). He is that which was spoken by God in Genesis 1.3 to offer light for those who seek it, the light that delivers from the darkness and confusion of a fallen world (Genesis 1:2-3).

Understanding Messiah's arrival at the 70th week.

Now, I'm not one who considers historians to be very reliable but for now we will accept their general dates from the times of the Babylonian captivity of Jerusalem to be accurate. So, let's look at Daniel 9:25 to find the start of our 70 week time line.

Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, [that] from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince [shall be] seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

"Weeks" here literally means sevens. So if each 'seven' is 7 years long then 69 weeks would be 483 years.

By many sources, the first decree by Artaxerxes to rebuild the temple occurs about 454BC. This would put the arrival of Jesus at about 29AD. This would be at the time of Jesus baptism at the age of 30 and the start of His ministry in the Holy Land.

Luke 3:21...23 Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened,... And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being ( as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was [the son] of Heli,

Strickly as an interesting side note, notice that it states Jesus was being ( as was supposed) the son of Joseph. Obviously, Joseph is not the father of Jesus and therefore is simply being 'reckoned' as such here. The verses following this one are actually giving Mary's (Jesus' mother) bloodline. Joseph's actual bloodline is given in the book of Matthew.

According to our verse in question (Daniel 9:27), His ministry up to 'causing the sacrifices and oblations to cease' will last until sometime into the 'midst of the 70th week' (i.e some amount of time less than 490 years but 'after' 483 years). This causes many to question whether the 70th week is divided into two (or more?) portions. Since the two witnesses of Revelation 11 are thought to appear for 1260 days (3 1/2 years) before Jesus' return at the end of days, we could infer that Jesus' ministry at His first advent would have taken place at some point up to the first 3 1/2 years of the 70th week.

Dan 9:25-27 25Know therefore and understand, [that] from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince [shall be] seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. 26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. 27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

In so far as a timeline goes, it simply says "...and in the midst of the week...". Another matter of note is in verse 25 in reference to "Messiah the Prince". A "Prince" is a future king, whether you accept Him as such or not. This is an accurate description of Jesus at the first advent. The "daughter of Sion" recognizes Him as their King and Saviour when He rides humbly into town "upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass". However, the "daughter of Jerusalem" is not mentioned in the fulfillment of this prophecy and does not accept Him. They will in fact kill Him. (see Zechariah 9:9-10, Matthew 21:5, and Luke 19:41-44)

It's fair to say, from what we know that His ministry at the first advent lasted up to 3 1/2 years including His time in the Holy Land. It doesn't pinpoint here when exactly He arrives nor how far into the 70th week that it lasts, only that at some point in the midst of the 70th week He is "cut off but not from His own" (OR makes covenant but not unto/with His own).

Here can be found a fair analysis of the timeline of Jesus' ministry for those who may be interested - Oracles of God - Jesus' ministry chronology (Thanks to the author!).

Other Issues Related to Understanding Daniel Chapter 9

Daniel 9 is a prayer for the forgiveness of Israel and a reminder of the covenant that God keeps with them. That prayer is answered by sending the angel Gabriel to deliver to Daniel (to us actually!) a semi detailed timeline of the arrival of the Messiah, our Lord and Savior, being the very Word of God in the flesh. He is that covenant!

The daughter of Zion recognized Him as He arrived with salvation, humble and riding upon ass with a colt and rejoiced greatly in acceptance of Him (see Matthew 21:4-5). This partially fulfills the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9-10. Sadly, the daughter of Jerusalem did not recognize nor accept Him (at that time). Even in His own Words He bitterly weeps over them because "they knewest not the time of their visitation". (see Luke 19:44)

Zechariah9:9-10 9Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he [is] just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. 10And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion [shall be] from sea [even] to sea, and from the river [even] to the ends of the earth

Take particular notice how 'Ephraim' of verse 10 correlates to 'the daughter of Zion of verse 9. Also notice that 'Jerusalem' is 'daughter of Jerusalem' in both verses.

Christ is the Word of God made manifest in the flesh! Why should Christians seek to receive answers about their God and His Word (our Savior) from people who do not even believe in Christ? Why should they kowtow to the Israelis (not Israelites!) knowing that they reject Jesus and generally despise Him? Even to this day Christians wait with anticipation for the day when the 'Jews' will roast the red hefer for the Lord in yet another man made temple. Have we not here shown that Jesus Himself put away animal sacrifices and man made temples?

Me, I’m not going to be expecting or watching for a 7 year 'peace deal' with Israel. And Israel isn’t who modern tradition says that they are any way, but that’s another topic for another time… God willing. So many churches today teach that God’s 'chosen people' will rebuild the temple and resume animal sacrifices. To think that the chosen people of Israel, after Christ redeemed us would then re-institute animal blood sacrifices and burnt offerings in a man made temple in covenant with the antichrist… WOW!!! What a CIRCUS tent!!!, what a rats nest to try to untangle! What a sack of confusion! It would be laughable if it weren’t so widely accepted. People (fellow covenant brothers and sisters) if you’re listening to that in your church you should consider starting a new Bible study group!


In Summary

The 'He' of Verse 27 is the Messiah who is a key part of the covenant mentioned in verse 4! He is born in Bethlahem and raised in Galilee in His younger years. After some absence, He re-appears in the Holy Land at the beginning of the 70th week (483 years after the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem). He is baptized by John the Baptist and begins a ministry that will last possibly 3 1/2 years. At the end of those years, He will be crucified, becoming the 'acceptable offering' know as the "blood of the new testamant, which is shed for 'many'" (see Matthew 26:28 and note the similarity with the wording in Daniel 9:27).

Fellow seekers, satan can’t make covenants and valid scriptures don’t spend time expounding on them. It’s actually a little bit nauseating to think that the prayer and answer contained in Daniel 9 concerning the covenanted Saviour and King of the Israelites (and all creation) has been marketed as a future satanic peace deal with the Israelites in deep covenant with a devil. Now does that sound like something that God's true Holy covenant people will aspire to do?

It's long past time to retire that regrettable doctrine and to acknowledge it as rediculous and unfounded. It presupposes that the 'Israelis' are modern day house of Israel. That simply isn't True. God willing, we will get into that misunderstanding with postings on that subject which will help clarify the distinction between the house of Israel, the house of Judah, and the Jews of the Babylonian captivity.