The identity of the pronoun "**he**" in Daniel 9:27 is a critical point of debate for understanding this pivotal prophetic passage. Traditionally today, "**he**" has been associated with "*the prince of the people who is to come*," often interpreted as the Antichrist (Tanner, Daniel p.590-591, Hoehner, Harold W.. Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ . Zondervan. Kindle Edition, Feinberg, Tradition and Testament: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Daniel 9:24-27, p. 213). . However, another significant interpretation views the antecedent as the "Anointed One" (Messiah) mentioned in Daniel 9:25. The theological implications regarding the **cessation of sacrifices and offerings** in relation to the New Covenant of Jesus Christ hinge on which figure "he" refers to. To determine the most grammatically and contextually sound antecedent, it is essential to examine the properties of Hebrew nouns and pronouns. > [!quote]- [Grammatical Overview: Noun Properties](https://hebrew4christians.com/~hebrewfo/Grammar/Unit_Four/Noun_Properties/noun_properties.html) > > In Hebrew, nouns have five key properties: **gender**, **number**, **person**, **case**, and **state**. These properties must align with the pronoun they refer to. The masculine singular pronoun “he” (הוּא) in Daniel 9:27 therefore requires an antecedent that matches in the following ways: > 1. **Singular & Masculine** – The antecedent must be a singular, masculine noun to match the pronoun “he.” > > 2. **Third Person** – Since “he” refers to someone other than the speaker or audience, the antecedent must be in the third person. > > 3. **Nominative Case** – The pronoun “he” is the subject of the verbs in verse 27 (confirming, breaking, and desolating). Its antecedent must likewise function as the subject of a sentence. > > 4. **Absolute State** – The antecedent must be in its standard lexical (absolute) form, not the construct state. The construct state indicates a possessive chain (e.g., “people of the prince”), which cannot serve as the subject for “he” in this context. > > 5. **Definiteness** – Hebrew pronouns point back to definite nouns. A definite noun is one that is specific, often marked with the definite article **הַ** (“the”) or functioning as a proper name. Indefinite nouns (e.g., “a prince”) are not natural antecedents for “he.” ## Examining the Possible Antecedents Based on these grammatical requirements, Daniel 9:25-26 presents two primary candidates for the antecedent of "he" in verse 27: 1. The Messiah (Mā·šî·aḥ): The term "**Messiah**" (_mā·šî·aḥ_) [Strong's #4899] is introduced in Daniel 9:25. • **Properties**: It is a **singular, masculine, third person, nominative, and absolute noun** in verse 25. The phrase referring to the Messiah is considered **definite** because key nouns are preceded by the definite article _הַ_ ("the") and refer to specific entities. • **Context**: In verse 26, the Messiah is described as being "_cut off_," See[[The 70 Weeks of Daniel#Why Is The Anointed One Cut Off?| why here]]. 2. "The people of the prince who is to come" (‘Am nā·ḡîḏ hab·bā): This phrase, "_‘Am nā·ḡîḏ hab·bā_" [Strong's #5971, #5057, #935], is introduced in Daniel 9:26. • **Properties**: Grammatically, "the people" (_‘am_) is a **plural** noun (referring to a group), though grammatically singular in Hebrew, while "prince" (_nā·ḡîḏ_) is singular and masculine. The entire phrase forms a **construct noun** because "people" is in possession of "prince". The adjective _הַבָּא֙_ ("the one to come") modifies "prince," making it "the prince who is to come." Since _‘am_ is in a construct relationship with _nā·ḡîḏ_, the whole phrase should be translated as "**the people of the prince who is to come**". • **Action in Verse 26**: It is crucial to note that in verse 26, the verb "_yaš·ḥîṯ_" ("shall destroy") refers to "**the people**" (_‘am_) as the subject of the destruction of the city and the sanctuary, not the prince himself. • **Pronoun Mismatch**: If "he" in verse 27 were to refer to "the people of the prince," a **plural pronoun** like "_they_" would typically be expected, not the singular "he". To have the antecedent apply to "the prince" would require isolating him from the compound subject. ## The Rule of "Nearest Antecedent" and Hebrew Grammar Syntactically, the nearest antecedent usually is the subject. If the rule of nearest antecedent is applied to this passage in the same manner as scholars insist [Daniel 9:26-27](https://www.bible.com/bible/100/DAN.9.26-27) should be read, then the nearest antecedent would be the “Prince”. (https://www.academia.edu/128225345/Daniel_9_The_Antichrist_Antecedent).The concept of a "nearest antecedent" is often simpler in English, a syntactic language where word order heavily dictates pronoun reference. However, Hebrew is an **inflective language**, meaning its grammar relies more on prefixes, suffixes, and verb forms, allowing for greater flexibility in sentence structure and pronoun reference. This means a pronoun in Hebrew may refer to an antecedent that is not immediately adjacent in the sentence >[!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). While "the prince who is to come" appears closer in the text, grammatical analysis, particularly concerning **number (singular "he" vs. plural "people")**, **definite vs. indefinite nouns**, and the **state of the noun (absolute)**, strongly favors the **Messiah** as the antecedent. Although the "prince" is the syntactically nearest single masculine noun, it is subordinated to "the people" in the preceding clause, which makes "the people" the actual subject of destruction. Considering "Messiah" in verse 25 is a **definite noun** and fits the required properties, it is considered the most logical antecedent for "he" in verse 27. 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. ### Support from Greek Translations (Septuagint) The **Old Greek (OG)** and **Theodotion (TH)** versions of Daniel **both suggest** that it is the "**anointed one**", not the "*leader of the people*" or a future ruler, who **makes the covenant** in Daniel 9:27. >[!danger]- The Translations Of The Septuagint Also Support This! > ### Daniel 9:26–27 (TH): > >[!Bible] [[Rick Brannan et al., eds., The Lexham English Septuagint: Alternate Texts (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2012), Da 9:24–27.|Lexham English Septuagint Alternate Texts]] > >^**26** Now, after the sixty two weeks an anointing will be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him. And he will destroy the city and the sacred place together with the coming leader. They will be cut off by a deluge and destruction in battle array until the end of the war that has been cut off. ^**27** He will fortify a covenant with many weeks, for one and at the half of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering will be removed. And at the temple there will be an abomination of desolations also until the completion of time. A completion will be given upon the desolation.’ ” > > In this rendering, the destruction is carried out **by the one associated with the anointing**, not by a kingdom. This figure acts _together with the coming leader_, implying that the leader is an ally or instrument in the act of destroying the city and sanctuary. The same “he” then appears in v. 27, actively **fortifying a covenant**. The grammar is presented in the **active voice**, explicitly naming a _He_ who _fortifies a covenant_. > ### Daniel 9:26–27 (OG): > > >[!Bible] [[Brannan, Rick, Ken M. Penner, Israel Loken, Michael Aubrey, and Isaiah Hoogendyk, eds. 2012. _The Lexham English Septuagint_. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.|Lexham English Septuagint]] > >^**26**And after seven periods of seven and sixty-two periods of seven, an anointed place will be removed, and it will not be. And a kingdom from among the nations will despoil the city and the holy place along with the anointed one, and his end will come with destructive anger until the set time of the consummation. There will be war upon war. ^**27**And the covenant will be made strong for many, and it will recover again, and it will be built up in breadth and length. And at the end of the appointed times, and after seven periods of seventy appointed times and sixty-two years during the set time of the consummation of war, then the desolation will be taken away when the covenant prevails for many weeks. And at the completion of the period of seven, offering and drink-offering will be taken away, and upon the holy place there will be an abomination of desolation until the end. And a determined final destruction will be rendered upon the one making desolate. > > The Old Greek (OG) version of Daniel 9:27 does not support the identification of a _He_ as the _prince of the people_ because the OG text **does not feature an active agent** making the covenant in that verse. Unlike the Masoretic Text (MT), which states *'he will make a firm covenant'*, the OG presents the action in the **passive voice**: *'the covenant will be made strong for many.'* This means that in the OG, the covenant is **strengthened for many without explicitly naming** the one performing this action. The OG also appears to **separate the desolator**—the one bringing destruction—**from the covenant itself**. This **restorative framing** suggests the covenant could be understood **positively rather than deceitfully**. > > ## Read More at [[Daniel's 70 Weeks In The Greek Septuagint (LXX)]] >