The interpretation of Dan. 9: 25-26 has challenged biblical scholars for centuries. Because of this prophecy's significance for identifying Messiah Prince, it continues to be a source of debate between Christians and Jews. Within Christendom, most contemporary commentators have followed the common belief that the terminus a quo, or beginning point, of the 70 weeks, occurred in either 445 BC or 444 BC, which points to Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem as the end point or terminus ad quem of the first 69 weeks. But is this biblically supportable? Many Jewish scholars have rightly criticized the traditional Christian interpretation of these passages as being both inconsistent with ancient Hebrew language and the testimony of scripture itself, while Christians have clung to this interpretation, believing t to be the only way to find literal fulfillment of this prophecy in person of Jesus. Building on the arguments of 19th century scholar Nathaniel West, the author of Kw Therefore and Understand argues that there are key scriptures outside of the book of Daniel that have a great bearing on Dan. 9: 25-26, but which are commonly either dismissed or overlooked, but resolve the dispute with extraordinary simplicity and precision. These scriptures provide a solid case for a much earlier terminus a quo that places the terminus ad quem, t at Jesus' triumphal entry, but at his birth. The author's argument is testified both by the ancient prophets and by secular history, proving both to the Jewish and Christian communities that Jesus must be the Messiah Prince in a way that is both historically and biblically defensible.