The idea is still there about "the prince" though, because he represents general Titus, his people would thus be represented by his Roman army.
And no, that is not about Jesus, because "Messiah the prince" is used to point to Jesus (Daniel 9:25). After we are told Messiah is 'cut off' in verse 26, He has nothing more to do with the next phrases that follow. So you should have posted that, but you chose to chop it off...
Dan 9:26
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
KJV
Only the blue part is about Jesus. The rest in green is about the Roman general Titus and his army destroying Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D. And the last phrase in brown is about the very end involving the final Antichrist. God is using "the prince" in green also to point to the final Antichrist.
Hi Davy,
I fully agree with your
blue and
green parts, but I don't agree with the
brown part, and here is why:
1. In the
Textus Receptus Greek text (TRG), the origin of the KJV Bible, one will
never find the words "the" and "antichrist" put together anywhere.
However in the many
newer translations, they all do manage to
say or
imply, that there is to come a singular man, they call "THE Antichrist". The reason for that is, the newer translations (including the JW-NWT), are from the
Westcott & Hort Greek text (WHG). Both Greek texts, side by side, are worlds apart from each other for interpretations.
Now, referencing 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, the TRG is very clear on the KJV words "
that Wicked". It is written in the TR Greek as "
the wicked", which clearly allows the interpretation to be in the PLURAL, and not necessarily in the singular.
Now, since the context is in the plural, we are justified in reading it in the plural.
Also, to add insult to injury, the words: "
that man of sin" also has the same problem. In the TRG, it is written: "
the man of sin", which also allows it to be read in the plural, just as we do for the scripture: "
the natural man".
Unfortunately, there really are those errors of translation in the KJV, but that doesn't justify full blown error by the newer translations of today, from a different Greek text. It most assuredly is NOT helping the misunderstanding, and is therefore is only compounding it.
So then, by making the necessary adjustments and justified corrections in the KJV, I firmly believe that there will never be a one man band, miracle man to come, called "The Antichrist".
Many of the churches are under misguidance, and it is primarily due to a complete misunderstanding of who the "little horn" was in Daniel, of whom shall never appear again.