Daniel 9:24, Part 2. “To Make an End of Sins”

Daniel 9:24, Part 2.  “To Make an End of Sins”

Introduction

In Daniel 9:24, Gabriel proclaims that within 70 weeks (490 years), six events will be accomplished for Israel and Jerusalem, including “to make an end of sins” (וּלְחָתֵם חַטָּאוֹת, ul’chatem chata’ot). This second event, integral to a prophecy culminating in the death of the Anointed One (Daniel 9:26, AD 30), refers to the termination of sins’ legal condemnation through the end of the Mosaic law’s authority and the nullification of sin-sacrifices. This essay argues that “to make an end” means permanently resolving the penalty and power of sins, achieved solely by Jesus’ sacrificial death (AD 30) within the 70th Week (AD 27-34) of the unified 490-year timeline (458 BC to AD 34). Rooted in Paul’s teachings (Romans 4:15; 6:6-11; Hebrews 10:1-18) and the covenantal framework of Leviticus 26, this interpretation fulfills the Mosaic covenant’s redemptive purpose, rendering any alternative fulfillment—whether future Messianic, eschatological, or behavioral—indefensible. Any explanation that extends this event beyond the 70 weeks or diminishes Jesus’ sacrifice risks undermining its infinite value.

The Resolution of Sins’ Condemnation

The Hebrew phrase “ul’chatem chata’ot” denotes the final closure of moral sins, with “chatem” (to seal) implying completion or finalization, as in sealing a document (Jeremiah 32:10) or tomb (Matthew 27:66), and “chata’ot” (sins, plural of חַטָּאת, chattat) referring to covenantal offenses (Leviticus 4:3). The Septuagint (LXX) renders it “to seal up sins” (σφραγίσαι ἁμαρτίας, sphragisai hamartias), emphasizing resolution. Paul’s teachings clarify this as the termination of sins’ legal condemnation: “Where there is no law there is no transgression” (Romans 4:15) and “sin is not counted where there is no law” (Romans 5:13). Jesus’ death (AD 30) ends the Mosaic law’s authority for forgiveness (Romans 10:4, “Christ is the end of the law for righteousness”), removing the legal framework that defines sins’ guilt (Romans 8:1, “no condemnation”). While “chata’ot” means “sins,” not “sin-offerings,” the nullification of sin-sacrifices (Hebrews 10:18) is related, as the law’s sacrificial system (Leviticus 16) addressed sins’ penalty. Jesus’ once-for-all sacrifice (Hebrews 10:14) ends this system, resolving sins’ judicial power. This judicial end, not a behavioral cessation of sinning (1 John 1:8, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves”), fulfills Gabriel’s prophecy within the 70th Week, ensuring no alternative interpretations are viable.

Historical and Covenantal Fulfillment

The event’s fulfillment is anchored exclusively in Jesus’ death (April AD 30), within the 70th Week (AD 27-34) of the 490-year timeline from Artaxerxes’ decree (458 BC, Ezra 7). The Talmud notes that Yom Kippur offerings ceased being accepted in AD 30 (Yoma 39b), signaling a covenantal shift, as Jesus’ sacrifice supplanted the Mosaic system. Leviticus 26:14-45 outlines covenantal curses for sins (exile, desolation, 587 BC; AD 70) and restoration through repentance and atonement (26:40-45), fulfilled by Jesus’ sacrifice (Romans 5:11; 2 Corinthians 5:19). Deuteronomy 30:1-5 promises spiritual regathering, realized through the New Covenant (Hebrews 8:6-13) initiated by Jesus’ death. Paul’s teachings in Romans 6:6-11 (“the body of sin might be done away with”) and Hebrews 10:1-18 (“no longer any offering for sin”) confirm that Jesus’ death ends sins’ condemning power and the sacrificial system, fulfilling Leviticus 26:40-45. No other event can fulfill this prophecy, as alternatives—such as a future Messianic Kingdom where Jesus rules with a “rod of iron” (Revelation 19:15), implying ongoing sin, or an eschatological New Heavens and New Earth (Revelation 21:1) with glorified beings—extend the prophecy beyond the 70 weeks and undermine the infinite value of Jesus’ sacrifice. Suggesting His death left sins unresolved is an attack on its sufficiency, as Hebrews 10:14 declares believers “perfected for all time.” The unified 490-year timeline ensures this event’s completion in AD 30, with no future extension.

Strengths of This Interpretation

  1. Textual Precision: “Chatem” as “final closure” and “chata’ot” as “sins” fit the Hebrew, with Paul’s teachings (Romans 4:15; 6:6-11) clarifying the judicial end of sins’ penalty, aligning with the 70 weeks’ timeline.
  2. Pauline Support: Romans 4:15, 5:13, 6:6-11, 10:4, and Hebrews 10:1-18 tie the end of sins to the law’s termination and sacrifice nullification, validating your interpretation.
  3. Historical Fit: Jesus’ death (AD 30) in the 70th Week (AD 27-34) aligns with the 70 weeks (458 BC to AD 34), supported by Yoma 39b and crucifixion dating (John 19:31).
  4. Covenantal Coherence: Leviticus 26:40-45 and Deuteronomy 30:1-5 frame the event as covenantal restoration, fulfilled by Jesus’ atonement, ending sins’ penalty.
  5. Sequential Order: As the second event, it follows finishing transgression (#1) and precedes atonement for iniquity (#3), culminating in the 70th Week, aligning with your sequential process.

Weaknesses

  1. Behavioral Misinterpretation: The phrase “make an end of sins” might suggest stopping sinning, but 1 John 1:8 and Romans 7:15-20 clarify it’s judicial, not behavioral, mitigated by emphasizing Paul’s focus.
  2. Sin-Offerings Distinction: While “chata’ot” means “sins,” the related nullification of sin-offerings (Hebrews 10:18) might blur the focus, addressed by prioritizing sins’ penalty.
  3. Overlap with Event #3: The similarity between “end of sins” (#2) and “atone for iniquity” (#3) is resolved by distinguishing penalty (#2) from reconciliation (#3), per Romans 5:11.
  4. Eschatological Confusion: References to death’s future defeat (1 Corinthians 15:26) are separated from AD 30’s judicial end, ensuring no future extension, per your view.

Argument Against Incomplete or Alternative Fulfillment

Any alternative to Jesus’ death fulfilling “to make an end of sins” is indefensible, as Gabriel’s prophecy is completed within the 70 weeks, and no other event matches the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice. Dispensationalists (e.g., Precept Austin) claim a future Messianic Kingdom ends sin globally, citing a gap after the 69th week, but Daniel 9:24-27’s unified timeline (458 BC to AD 34) rejects gaps. The Messianic Kingdom’s “rod of iron” (Revelation 19:15) implies ongoing sin, incompatible with ending sins’ penalty in AD 30. Michael Brown’s partial view (realmessiah.com), delaying full resolution to the Second Coming, introduces an unwarranted extension, as Romans 8:1 and Hebrews 10:18 confirm completion in AD 30. Jewish non-messianic views (e.g., Rashi) tie the event to 515 BC or a future Messiah, but these miss the Anointed One’s death (9:26) and Paul’s resolution of sins (Romans 5:13). Behavioral interpretations (stopping sinning) are refuted by 1 John 1:8, as believers still sin (Romans 7:15-20). Leviticus 26:40-45 requires atonement within the 70 weeks, fulfilled solely by Jesus, ensuring no alternative is viable.

Conclusion

The fulfillment of “to make an end of sins” in Daniel 9:24 is the permanent resolution of sins’ legal condemnation through Jesus’ death (AD 30), which ends the Mosaic law’s authority (Romans 10:4) and nullifies sin-sacrifices (Hebrews 10:18), within the 70th Week (AD 27-34) of the 490-year timeline (458 BC to AD 34). Paul’s teachings (Romans 4:15; 6:6-11; Hebrews 10:1-18) confirm this judicial end, fulfilling the covenantal promises of Leviticus 26:40-45 and Deuteronomy 30:1-5. As the second event in a sequential process, it follows finishing transgression and precedes atonement for iniquity, marking a pivotal step in God’s redemptive plan. The unified timeline and historical fulfillment reject incomplete or behavioral interpretations, ensuring the event’s completion within the 70 weeks. Any interpretation that delays this resolution or misrepresents it as stopping sinning risks misrepresenting the singular, transformative impact of Jesus’ death, which ends sins’ penalty and establishes the New Covenant.