Daniel 9:26

9:26 Now after the sixty-two weeks,

an anointed one will be cut off and have nothing. ¹ 

As for the city and the sanctuary,

the people of the coming prince will destroy ²  them.

But his end will come speedily ³  like a flood. ⁴ 

Until the end of the war that has been decreed

there will be destruction.

John 11:49-52

11:49 Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, ⁵  “You know nothing at all! 11:50 You do not realize ⁶  that it is more to your advantage to have one man ⁷  die for the people than for the whole nation to perish.” ⁸  11:51 (Now he did not say this on his own, ⁹  but because he was high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish nation, ¹⁰  11:52 and not for the Jewish nation ¹¹  only, ¹²  but to gather together ¹³  into one the children of God who are scattered.) ¹⁴ 

[9:26]  ¹ sn The expression have nothing is difficult. Presumably it refers to an absence of support or assistance for the anointed one at the time of his “cutting off.” The KJV rendering “but not for himself,” apparently suggesting a vicarious death, cannot be defended.

[9:26]  ² tc Some witnesses (e.g., the Syriac) understand a passive verb and the preposition עִם (’im, “with) rather than the noun עַם (’am, “people”), thus reading “the city and the sanctuary will be destroyed with the coming prince.”

[9:26]  ³ tn The words “will come speedily” are not in the Hebrew text but have been added in the translation for clarity.

[9:26]  ⁴ sn Flood here is a metaphor for sudden destruction.

[11:49]  ⁵ tn Grk “said to them.” The indirect object αὐτοῖς (autois) has not been translated for stylistic reasons.

[11:50]  ⁶ tn Or “you are not considering.”

[11:50]  ⁷ tn Although it is possible to argue that ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo") should be translated “person” here since it is not necessarily masculinity that is in view in Caiaphas’ statement, “man” was retained in the translation because in 11:47 “this man” (οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος, outo" Jo anqrwpo") has as its referent a specific individual, Jesus, and it was felt this connection should be maintained.

[11:50]  ⁸ sn In his own mind Caiaphas was no doubt giving voice to a common-sense statement of political expediency. Yet he was unconsciously echoing a saying of Jesus himself (cf. Mark 10:45). Caiaphas was right; the death of Jesus would save the nation from destruction. Yet Caiaphas could not suspect that Jesus would die, not in place of the political nation Israel, but on behalf of the true people of God; and he would save them, not from physical destruction, but from eternal destruction (cf. 3:16-17). The understanding of Caiaphas’ words in a sense that Caiaphas could not possibly have imagined at the time he uttered them serves as a clear example of the way in which the author understood that words and actions could be invested retrospectively with a meaning not consciously intended or understood by those present at the time.

[11:51]  ⁹ tn Grk “say this from himself.”

[11:51]  ¹⁰ tn The word “Jewish” is not in the Greek text, but is clearly implied by the context (so also NIV; TEV “the Jewish people”).

[11:52]  ¹¹ tn See the note on the word “nation” in the previous verse.

[11:52]  ¹² sn The author in his comment expands the prophecy to include the Gentiles (not for the Jewish nation only), a confirmation that the Fourth Gospel was directed, at least partly, to a Gentile audience. There are echoes of Pauline concepts here (particularly Eph 2:11-22) in the stress on the unity of Jew and Gentile.

[11:52]  ¹³ tn Grk “that he might gather together.”

[11:52]  ¹⁴ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.