The pronoun "**he**" is traditionally associated with the "_the prince of the people who is to come_" and often interpreted as referring to the antichrist. There is alternate camps that view the Antecedent as the Anointed One presented back in verse 25 and with this comes theology about the **cessation of sacrifices and offerings** in relation to the New covenant of Jesus Christ. Both of these theology's rely on the interpretation of the "**he**" and who it refers to. This article wants to take a closer examination of the passage and learn what the "he" must refer to in the structure and context of the Hebrew text. Before we begin with the Antecedent, we must know how nouns work. In Hebrew, nouns are categorized based on **gender**, **number**, **person**, **case**, and **state**. > [!quote]- [Grammatical Overview: Noun Properties](https://hebrew4christians.com/~hebrewfo/Grammar/Unit_Four/Noun_Properties/noun_properties.html) > In Hebrew a noun is called "shem etzem" (OSY OV), meaing the "essence or substance of a name." Like English a noun is a name (nomen) given to a person, place, or thing. Nouns have the following properties: 1) gender, 2) number, 3) person, 4) case, and 5) state: > 1. Gender: > Gender is a property that indicates the sex of the referrent (masculine or feminine). In Hebrew, however, the correlation between the gender of a noun and its referrent is > generally accidental. For example, the word Torah in Hebrew is feminine, but that does not imply anything about the nature of the Torah itself. Unlike Greek, there is no "neuter" gender in Hebrew. > > 2. Number: Number is the property that indicates whether one or more than one object is referenced when using the word. Hebrew has singular nouns (one object), plural nouns (more than one object), and dual nouns (a pair of objects). For plural nouns, there are regular plurals, irregular plurals, dual plurals, and plurals functioning as singular nouns. > 3. Person: Person refers to the relationship between the noun and the speaker. A noun can be in the first person (I, John, am here), second person (Oh, John!), or third person (John is here). Normally these distinctions apply to the study of pronouns, but they are implicit in the grammar of the noun as well. > 4. Case: Case indicates the grammatical function of the noun in a sentence. The noun can be a subject of a sentence (Hebrew is fun), an object in a sentence (John loves Hebrew), or in a possessive relationship with an object (John's Hebrew book). For possessives, Hebrew uses a "construct state" where one of two (or more) Hebrew nouns appear as a chain in a sentence (more later). > 5. State: In Hebrew, the state of a noun may be either "absolute" or "construct." The absolute form of a noun is simply its standard lexical form, that is, the normal form of the noun (whether it is masculine, feminine, plural, dual, and so on), whereas the "construct state" concerns the spelling of the noun when it is used in a construct chain, that is, when it expresses a grammatically possessive relationship to one or more other nouns to which it is joined. Typically I will abbreviate the absolute state of a noun using "abs," and the construct state using "constr. " > > Also, nouns can definite Therefore, the "**he**" in Daniel 9:27 must refer to a **singular, masculine, third person, nominative, and absolute** noun that has already been introduced in the passage. This is because: - **Singular** and **masculine**: The pronoun "**he**" is singular and masculine, so it must refer to a singular and masculine noun. - **Third person**: The pronoun "**he**" refers to someone or something that is not the speaker (first person) or the listener (second person), so it must be third person. - **Nominative**: The pronoun "**he**" is functioning as the subject of the sentence, performing the actions (confirming, breaking, and desolating), so the noun must be in the nominative case. - **Absolute**: In Hebrew, nouns are categorized as **definite nouns** (such as proper nouns like "Messiah"), **possessive nouns**, and **indefinite nouns** (like "a prophet" or "a prince"). The pronoun "**he**" in verse 27 should refer to the **nearest definite noun** because pronouns in Hebrew point back to their antecedents, the nouns they replace. The noun must be in the **absolute** state because it's functioning as the subject of the sentence, not part of a construct chain. Additionally, the noun cannot be in the **construct** state, as the construct state typically indicates a possessive or partitive relationship between two nouns. In this context, the pronoun "**he**" refers to the subject of the actions (confirming a covenant, breaking it, and bringing desolation), not a noun that is part of a possessive relationship. In verses 25 and 26, there are two possible and debated antecedents for "**he**", we need to determine which of these two figures—Messiah or the prince who is to come—fits this role. Thus, the noun must be in the **absolute** state to align with its subject role in the sentence. #### **(4) The prince who is to come is a supernatural being.** The prince in verse 26 is described as “the prince who is to come.” A few verses later we read of another prince who is “to come:” “I shall now return to fight against the prince of Persia; … the prince of Greece is about **to come**. … Yet there is no one who stands firmly with me against these **forces** except Michael your prince.” ([Dan 10:20](https://ref.ly/Dan%2010.20;esv?t=biblia), [21](https://ref.ly/Dan%2010.21;esv?t=biblia); see also [Dan 12:1](https://ref.ly/Dan%2012.1;esv?t=biblia)) Since this is a supernatural being that is speaking here ([Dan 10:16](https://ref.ly/Dan%2010.16;esv?t=biblia), [18](https://ref.ly/Dan%2010.18;esv?t=biblia)), the princes against whom he fights, and the prince Michael who stands with him, are also supernatural beings. The NASB, quoted above, refers to them as “forces.” They are not human beings.  Since both the “prince of Greece” and the prince of Rome are “to come” ([Dan 10:20](https://ref.ly/Dan%2010.20;esv?t=biblia); [9:26](https://ref.ly/Dan%209.26;esv?t=biblia)), it is implied that the prince of Rome in 9:26 is also a supernatural being. The Messiah is also called a prince ([Dan 9:25](https://ref.ly/Dan%209.25;esv?t=biblia)). Since He could say, “before Abraham was born, I am” ([John 8:58](https://ref.ly/John%208.58;esv?t=biblia)) and, since the Baptist could say, “He existed before me” ([John 1:30](https://ref.ly/John%201.30;esv?t=biblia)), the Messiah is a human being but also a supernatural being. Each of the princes (of Persia, of Greece, and “Michael your prince”) represents a nation: Michael is the prince of the nation of Israel ([Dan 12:1](https://ref.ly/Dan%2012.1;esv?t=biblia)). Both the princes of Rome and “of Greece” are “to come” ([Dan 9:26](https://ref.ly/Dan%209.26;esv?t=biblia); [10:20](https://ref.ly/Dan%2010.20;esv?t=biblia)). But the “prince of Greece” was to come sooner, for he was “**about** to come,” just like the empire of Greece came before the Roman Empire. In conclusion, the prince in 9:26 is not a human being but a supernatural “force” ([Dan 10:21](https://ref.ly/Dan%2010.21;esv?t=biblia)) or being representing the Roman nation. Since the “he” of verse 27 is a human being, he cannot refer back to the prince in verse 26, for the latter is a supernatural being. In Hebrew, nouns are categorized based on **gender**, **number**, **person**, **case**, and **state**. Therefore, the "**he**" in Daniel 9:27 must refer to a noun that has already been introduced in the passage and fits each parameter. In verses 25 and 26, there are two possible and debated antecedents for "**he**": Since **"he"** in verse 27 is performing the action of confirming a covenant, breaking it, and bringing desolation, we need to determine which of these two figures—Messiah or the prince who is to come—fits this role. 1. _mā·šî·aḥ_ – **Messiah** ([Strong's #4899](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/4899.htm)) - A singular, masculine, third person, nominative and **absolute** noun in verse 25 - Introduced in verse 25 _"Until Messiah the Prince, there shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks."_. In verse 26, the verb _"yik·kā·rêṯ"_ ("shall be cut off") refers to the Messiah. The phrase _"wə·’ên lōw"_ ("but not for Himself") makes it clear that the Messiah is cut off for others, not for Himself. - the phrase is **definite** because the key nouns are preceded by the definite article **הַ** ("the") and are used in a context that refers to specific entities, which makes them definite. 2. *‘Am nā·ḡîḏ hab·bā* – **"the people of the prince who is to come"** ([Strong's #5971](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5971.htm), [#5057](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5057.htm), [#935](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/935.htm)) - A **plural** (referring to "the people"), masculine, third person, nominative, and **construct** noun. The phrase is construct because "people" (_‘am_) is in possession of "prince" (_nā·ḡîḏ_), with "who is to come" (_hab·bā_) modifying _nā·ḡîḏ_ and describing the prince as an object of the noun "people." ([[@Brown1991-px]]) - Introduced in verse 26 within the phrase: _"The people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary."_ Can also be rendered as “the coming Prince,” or “the prince, the coming one.” This is the exact phrase John used while in prison when he sent his disciples to ask Jesus if He was “the coming one” or should they expect a different kind of messiah [Matt. 11:3]. A key grammatical factor to consider is the construct relationship in verse 26. The adjective **הַבָּא֙** (_hab·bā_), meaning "**the one to come**," which modifies **נָגִיד** (_nā·ḡîḏ_), meaning "**prince**." Since Hebrew adjectives must match the definiteness of the noun they modify, the definite article **הַ** (_ha_, meaning "the") on _hab·bā_ also applies to _nā·ḡîḏ_, making it "**the prince who is to come**" rather than just "**a prince.**" Because **עַם** (_‘am_, "people") is in a construct relationship with _nā·ḡîḏ_, it takes on the definiteness of _nā·ḡîḏ_. This means that the phrase should be translated as "**the people of the prince who is to come**" rather than "**a people of a prince who is to come.**" By these interrelationships of the three linked Hebrew words—two nouns (_‘am_ and _nā·ḡîḏ_) affected by a single adjective (_hab·bā_) with a definite article attached to it—we get "**the people of the prince, the one who is to come.**" it is important to note that the subject of the destruction in verse 26 is "**the people**" (_‘am_), not "**the prince**" (_nā·ḡî·ḏ_). The verb **_yaš·ḥîṯ_** ("shall destroy") refers to **the people**, not the prince, which means the one directly responsible for the destruction of the city and sanctuary is the people, not the coming ruler himself. Normally to refer to "**The people of the prince that shall come**" would require the pronoun "they" since it is a compound subject. To have the antecedent of 9:27 apply to this one would have to isolate "the prince" from the compound subject. Syntactically, the nearest antecedent usually is the subject. However, the Prince of v. 26b cannot be the antecedent because it is neither the subject nor the object of the preceding clause, “and the people of the prince who shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” The “Prince” is subordinated to the subject of the clause “the people.” Nevertheless, “the people” is plural in sense, though grammatically singular in Hebrew, and thus cannot be the antecedent of the “he” in v. 27. >[!Tip] Verses in the Bible where the Antecedent does not follow the closest subject. > [Genesis 4:9-10](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/GEN.4.9-10) ("He" Switches Subjects), [9:24](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/GEN.9.24) (Ham's son Canaan, not Ham), [10:11-12](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/GEN.10.11-12) (Refers to Nineveh, not Resen), [14:9-11](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/GEN.14.9-11) ("they" doesn't apply to the Kings), [29:3](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/GEN.29.3) (Flocks did not roll stone), [30:28-29](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/GEN.30.28-29), [32:26-27](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/GEN.32.26-27), [30:34-36](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/GEN.30.34-36) ("He" Switches Subjects); [Exodus 4:24-25](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/EXO.4.24-25) (Moses’ son, not Moses), [4:26](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/EXO.4.26) (God let Moses’ son go);[Job 20:6-28](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/JOB.20.6-28) (Antecedent in verse 5), [31:15](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/JOB.31.15) (Antecedent in verse 13); [2 Samuel 10:18](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/2SAM.10.18) (Antecedent in verse 16), [21:14](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/2SAM.21.14) (Not Benjamin and Jonathan), [23:10](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/2SAM.23.10) (David, not God); [1 Kings 19:1-2](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/1KI.19.1-2) (Prophets, not Gods); [2 Kings 1:17](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/2KI.1.17) (Ahaziah, not Jehoram), [6:32-33](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/2KI.6.32-33) (The King Speaks "This evil"), [8:11](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/2KI.8.11) (Hazael’s was ashamed); [Jeremiah 36:23](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/JER.36.23) (Jehoiakim burned the roll); [Ezekiel 39:28](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/EZK.39.28) (Israel Not Nations); [Daniel 9:25](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/DAN.9.25g) (No immediate antecedent), [11:36](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/DAN.11.36) (Antecedent in verse 21). English, being a syntactic language, relies heavily on word order to convey meaning, particularly when it comes to pronouns, which must directly refer to the last person or group mentioned. In contrast, Hebrew is an inflective language, where word order is less important because meanings are conveyed through prefixes, suffixes, and verb forms. This allows for more flexibility in sentence structure, and pronouns in Hebrew may refer to individuals that are not immediately adjacent in the sentence. When translating Hebrew into English, it's important to understand these differences, as Hebrew’s looser word order and pronoun usage often require adjustments to fit English grammar, which can lead to confusion for those unfamiliar with the language's structure. In the Hebrew text, antecedents are sometimes further backward than some misleading referents. E.g. “Ahab told Jezebel all that Elijah had done, …how he killed all the prophets …. Jezebel sent a messenger to Elijah with this warning, “May the gods judge me severely if … I do not take your life as you did theirs!”). Which is the closest and which is the logical referent (both masculine): the gods, or the prophets? Ezk 39:28 “They will know that I am YH their God, when I will bring them captives to the nations. Then I will gather them to their country, I will leave none of them there anymore.”). Could the pronouns “them” and “their”, refer to nations, the “closest referent”? They have the same referent as the pronouns emphasized in the first sentence, that point back to verse 22 (where the explicit referent is identified as “the house of Israel”). The true logical referent are the Israelites, the future of Israel is the issue. Given the structure of the passage, the Messiah is cut off before verse 27, and the closest singular, masculine noun is **"the prince who is to come."** However, there is an additional grammatical rule we must follow. In **verse 26**, the terms "the people of" ([_‘am_](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5971.htm)) and "the prince" ([_nā·ḡî·d_](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5057.htm)) are **indefinite nouns**, meaning they do not specifically identify a person or entity. These indefinite nouns are not the correct antecedents for the pronoun "**he**." Since "Messiah" in verse 25 is a **definite noun** and is closer to the pronoun "**he**" in verse 27, it is the most logical antecedent, meaning that "**he**" refers to the **Messiah**. On the other hand, in the earlier part of verse 26, the verb _"yaš·ḥîṯ"_ ("shall destroy") refers to _“the people”_ (_‘am_), not the prince. The subject of the one doing the destroying of the city and the sanctuary, is people, not prince. Since "a people of a prince" is plural, we would expect a plural pronoun, like _“they”_, to refer to them and then the Hebrew would properly read, “*Then **they** shall confirm a covenant with many.*”. But in verse 27, the pronoun used is _“he”_, which is singular. Translations such as the Jewish Study Bible ([[@Fishbane2004-uc]]) translate it as "*The army of a leader who is to come*", support that this phrase is not focused on the leader, but rather the armies. >[!danger]- The Translations Of The Septuagint Also Support This! > ![[Daniel 70 Weeks In The Septuagint]]