Sermon Tone Analysis

Wenstrom Bible Ministries

Pastor-Teacher Bill Wenstrom

Wednesday December 4, 2013

www.wenstrom.org

Daniel: The Literal, Grammatical, Historical Interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27

Lesson # 279

Please turn in your Bibles to Daniel 9:24.

Daniel 9:24 “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place.

25 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.

26 Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.

And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

27 And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

(NASB95)

One must adhere to sound hermeneutical principles when interpreting the prophecy, which appears in Daniel 9:24-27.

The rules and principles involved in interpreting the Bible is called hermeneutics.

The English word “hermeneutics” comes from the Greek verb hermeneuo and the noun hermeneia.

These words point back to the wing-footed messenger god Hermes in Grecian mythology who was responsible for transmuting what is beyond human understanding into a form that human intelligence can grasp.

He is said to have discovered language and writing and was the god of literature and eloquence, among other things.

He was the messenger or interpreter of the gods, and particularly of his father Zeus.

Thus, the verb hermeneuo came to refer to bringing someone to an understanding of something in his language (thus explanation) or in another language (thus translation).

Thus interpretation involves making clear and intelligible something that was unclear or unknown.

A compound form of this verb appears in Luke 24:27 with regards to the Lord Jesus Christ interpreting or explaining the Scriptures concerning Himself to His disciples.

Adhering to sound hermeneutical principles will result in sound exegesis, which refers to the process of determining the meaning of a text of Scripture, the Word of God whereas exposition refers to the explaining, declaring, telling, or relating of objective truth.

When interpreting the prophecy of the seventy weeks in Daniel 9:24-27 as is the case with the rest of Scripture, one must not allegorize but let the Biblical text speak for itself.

Those who allegorize are not letting the text speak for itself but are putting words into God’s mouth.

Daniel 9:24-27 like the rest of the Scriptures must be interpreted in its historical setting.

One must compare Scripture with Scripture.

Also, one must interpret literally and grammatically and not allegorize.

Proper interpretation involves paying attention to the context of a particular verse.

One must interpret a passage by taking into account the immediate context as well as the context of the book it appears in and the rest of Scripture.

This leads to a pretribulational and premillennial view.

The basic differences between the premillennial and amillennial and between pretribulation and posttribulation views are hermeneutical.

In other words, they are the direct result of the method one chooses to interpret Scripture.

The basic difference between an amillennialist and a premillennialist is the direct result of the method one chooses to interpret Scripture.

Those who allegorize and do not interpret the Scripture literally and specifically prophetic portions of Scripture will not be pretribulational or premillennial but will be posttribulationalists and amillennialists.

Therefore, the method one chooses to interpret the book of Daniel as is the case with the rest of Scripture, must be based upon sound hermeneutical principles.

Unsound method of interpreting Scripture leads to error in interpretation and practice and false doctrine.

The allegorical method involves interpreting a literary text which regards the literal sense as the instrument for a secondary and more spiritual profound sense.

This method either ignores or denies the historical context.

The emphasis with this method is entirely upon the secondary sense with the result that the original words of the text have little or no significance at all.

Thus, this method does not interpret Scripture but ignores the meaning of the original sense with the justification that one is seeking a deeper, spiritual meaning.

It is in error because it doesn’t interpret Scripture but puts words into God’s mouth.

It denies the authority of the Scripture.

Furthermore, this method does not provide any means at all to test the interpretation.

Thus, the allegorical method of interpreting Daniel or any portion of Scripture takes away the authority of Scripture.

It does not leave any basis upon which interpretations may be tested.

The direct antithesis of the allegorical method is the literal method of interpreting the Scripture.

The literal method gives each word the same exact basic meaning it would have in normal and customary usage whether in writing, speaking or thinking.

It is also called by some the grammatical-historical method, which emphasizes the fact that the meaning of a text is to be determined by carefully considering its grammar and syntax as well as its historical setting.

The literal method is the normal approach in all languages.

Also, parables, allegories, types and symbols depend upon the literal meaning of the terms.

The Bible makes sense when interpreted literally.

Furthermore, many erroneously contend that the literal method does not take into consideration figures of speech, symbols, allegories and types but this in fact is not the case.

This method removes the subjective and emphasizes the objective meaning that it keeps man’s imaginations from imposing itself on the text and lets the text speak for itself.

Further in support of the literal method is that when the Old Testament is used by the New Testament authors under the inspiration of the Spirit it is only used in a literal sense.

For example, the prophecies concerning the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ were literally fulfilled two thousand years ago with the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

This tells us that the prophecies concerning His Second Advent will also be fulfilled literally.

The literal method bases itself in fact, which means that it seeks to establish itself in objective data such as grammar, logic, etymology, history, geography, archaeology, theology, etc.

All sound exegesis of a passage of Scripture must begin with the words of the text itself.

Secondly, the interpreter must pay attention to the context in which any passage appears.

Thirdly, one must interpret a passage of Scripture in its historical setting.

Now, the interpreter of the book Daniel must be very careful since it contains prophetic material.

First and foremost, the interpreter must interpret prophecy literally.

He must take into consideration and analyze a passage in relation to the words it contains as well as its context, grammar, syntax and historical setting.

When interpreting prophecy such as that which appears in the book of Daniel, the interpreter must determine the historical background of the prophet and the prophecy.

He must determine the full meaning and significance of all the names, events, geographical references, references to customs and culture.

He is to determine if the passage is prophecy or didactic.

If the former, then is the verse presenting a prophecy that is fulfilled, unfulfilled or conditional.

The interpreter also must determine if the same theme or concept is addressed in another passage of Scripture.

Simultaneously, the interpreter must pay attention to the context.

He is to be aware of whether the prophecy is local or temporal.

Furthermore, prophecy must be interpreted in harmony with the rest of God’s prophetic program, which is a principle presented by Peter in 2 Peter 1:20-21.

Another important aspect of interpreting prophecy is understanding and being aware that a passage might have a double reference.

This means that in prophecy, events often bear some relationship to one another and are in fact parts of one program.

In other words, certain events of the future are seen grouped together in one defined area of vision even though they are at different distances.

For example, many times the major prophets issued prophecies concerning the Babylonian captivity, the events of the day of the Lord, the return from Babylon, the world-wide dispersion of Israel and their future return to the land and grouped them all together seemingly indiscriminately.

Connected to this when interpreting prophecy, the interpreter must observe the time relationships meaning that some events that are widely separated as to the time of their fulfillment are sometimes treated within one prophecy.

For example, the prophecies concerning the First and Second Advents of Christ are spoken of together in one pericope as though they were going to take place at the same time.

This phenomena is also seen with the second and third dispersions of the Jews, which are viewed as taking place without interruption.

So the prophet may view widely separated events as continuous or future things as either past or present.

Another important aspect of interpreting prophecy is that of understanding and being aware of the central theme of all prophecy, namely, the Lord Jesus Christ, His person and work.

To summarize, one must interpret prophecy historically, which means that the interpreter must know and understand the historical background of the prophet and the prophecy.

This will include understanding the full meaning and significance of all proper names, events, geographical references, references to customs and culture.

Connected to this is that the interpreter must interpret grammatically meaning that must strictly observe the rules that govern grammatical interpretation.

He also must interpret according to the principle of double reference, which we noted earlier.

Finally, interpreting prophecy demands consistency applying the literal-grammatical method.

Failure to consistently apply sound hermeneutical principles results in error in one’s conclusions and interpretations, which results in false doctrine and ungodly conduct.

Consistent observance of these sound hermeneutical principles results in correct interpretation, sound doctrine and godly conduct.

One of the results of applying these sound hermeneutical principles is that one will see that the Scriptures make a distinction between Israel and the church.

The book of Daniel concerns itself with Israel and not the church.

The essence of dispensationalism is that it recognizes distinctions between the church and Israel, which is the result of applying the literal-grammatical-historical method of interpretation.

Dispensationalism recognizes distinctions in God’s program in history.

The dispensationalist follows the principle of interpreting the Bible literally, and does not allegorize away the Bible, thus he is consistent in his interpretation.

It recognizes that God’s message to man was not given in one single act but was unfolded in a long series of successive acts and through the minds and hands of many men of varying backgrounds.