Know also and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to cause to return and to build Jerusalem, unto the Anointed the Prince, shall be seven weeks. The former part of the Prophecy related to the first coming of Christ, being dated to his coming as a Prophet; this being dated to his coming to be Prince or King, seems to relate to his second coming.

There, the prophet was consummate, and the most holy anointed: here, he that was anointed comes to be Prince and to reign. For Daniel’s Prophecies reach to the end of the world; and there is scarce a prophecy in the Old Testament concerning Christ, which doth not in something or other relate to his second coming. If divers of the ancients, as Irenaeus, Julius Africanus, Hippolytus the martyr, and Apollinaris Bishop of Laodicea, applied the half week to the times of Antichrist; why may not we, by the same liberty of interpretation, apply the seven weeks to the time when Antichrist shall be destroyed by the brightness of Christ’s coming? The Israelites in the days of the ancient Prophets, when the ten Tribes were led into captivity, expected a double return; and that at the first the Jews should build a new Temple inferior to Solomon’s, until the time of that age should be fulfilled; and afterwards they should return from all places of their captivity, and build Jerusalem and the Temple gloriously, Tobit 14: 4, 5, 6: and to express the glory and excellence of this city, it is figuratively said to be built of precious stones, Tobit 13:16, 17, 18. Isaiah 54:11, 12.

Revelation 11:and called the New Jerusalem, the Heavenly Jerusalem, the Holy City, the Lamb’s Wife, the City of the Great King, the City into which the Kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour. Now, while such a return from captivity was the expectation of Israel, even before the times of Daniel, I know not why Daniel should omit it in his Prophecy.