his commentary presents an intertextual reading of Daniel that places the Temple and eschatological Atonement at the centre of the book’s theology. A failure of exilic prophetic interpretation inspired a failed attempt to restore the First Temple under Cyrus. The unsuccessful mission under Cyrus was corrected 21 years later during the ministries of Zechariah-Haggai under Darius Hystaspis; precisely 62 years after the deportation of the last Judean captives by Nebuchadnezzar with the Second Temple rebuilt exactly 70 years after it had been destroyed. For this reason Daniel ignores the reign of Cyrus and proceeds directly to the conquest of Babylon by Darius Hystaspis (Darius the Mede). Daniel’s history is subordinated to his theology. The initial setting of Babylonian First Temple destruction and Persian era restoration is supplemented by Antiochene desecration and Maccabean rededication of the Second Temple resulting in an already/not yet realization (apocalyptic moment). However, Daniel’s enigmatic numerical time periods are not Maccabean era inventions or ex eventu prophecy as they represent supra-historical realities based on intervals between the destruction of the Temple on the ninth of Ab and prominent Jewish Feasts in the lunar Jewish Festal Calendar. The influence of Temple-Atonement theology is traced from Daniel through the New Testament where it shaped the annunciation narrative in Luke, the Synoptic trial narratives, the resurrection event (an apocalyptic moment) and the Olivet prophecy. The destruction of the Second Temple by Rome predicted in the Olivet prophecy closes this period and confirms Christ as the replacement of the Second Temple. The measuring and revelation of the eschatological Temple in the Apocalypse completes the New Testaments treatment of Daniel’s Temple-Atonement oriented theology.