SEVENTY WEEKS - Chapter Seven

I am encouraged when I am able to see that the men who have prepared a Bible version have broken with tradition and have made a literal translation of a particular word, even though it doesn't read as well in that initially we don't know what they mean to say. In Daniel 9:24a, the NIV has done that, and you can see that we're not exactly comfortable with the different wording. That version has the wording of this passage as:

"He will confirm a covenant with many for one seven." (Daniel 9:24a)

To speak about a 'seven' doesn't work for us, does it? At least not until we investigate to find out what it is talking about, but 'seven' is a literal translation of the Hebrew word shabuwa in that verse. The men who provide that version decided we need to know that.

In the King James version, the translators claimed to have identified words that they had added to the original text in order to help our understanding, and they marked those added words by printing them in italics. Some other versions have done the same, but many version have not done so. In the Darby version, the translators show us the added words with italics. Here is how they render verse 27a.

"And he shall confirm a covenant with the many for one week" (Daniel 9:27a; Darby)

How many other versions have done that? None that I could find at the internet site I use: http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Dan&c=9&v=27&t=KJV#27 Not even the King James version shows that the word for has been added, but Young's Literal Version even goes it one better. Young's just doesn't add the word for in the first place. Young's version presents the line WITHOUT added words:

"And he hath strengthened a covenant with many -- one week," (Daniel 9:27a; Young's)

Leaving OUT a word that was never intended to be IN this statement in the first place makes a big difference. Let's read it again:

"And he hath strengthened a covenant with many, one week,"

Can we see what it means without the added word for? And one week he hath strengthened a covenant with many.

With the added word for we have been led to believe in a covenant that will only last for one week. Without the added word we can see that the covenant gets strengthened DURING A WEEK. Beloved, THIS IS A BIG DEAL! But, is the word for actually part of the original text or not? Who is telling the truth?

You can see here: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Tpdf/dan9.pdf that there is no Hebrew word in there that would translate as for. And, here: http://septuagint-interlinear-greek-bible.comOldTestament.pdf you can see that, in the Greek Septuagint, there is nothing to justify the added word.

The word for is NOT supposed to be there. The covenant gets confirmed during one week. Anyone who studies this passage knows that verse 27 is talking about the final shabuwa of the seventy shabuwa, and that is the time period when we should look to see if there was a covenant was confirmed.

Summary: In the first line of Daniel 9:27, the word for has been added by those who have translated and produced most of our English versions. It is not supposed to be there, and its addition to the text has perverted the meaning of the original Hebrew texts.