If you really want to understand Dan. 9:24-27 then one must drop all their metaphorical thinking, mystical whimsies and thoughts like “well, in a manner of speaking…” and just deal with the cold, hard facts. Dan. 9:24-27: (words in parenthesis mine)
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people (Israel) and upon thy holy city (Jerusalem), to finish the transgression, (by implication, the national apostasy. Has this been done? No!) and to make an end of sins, (are sins finished? No!) and to make reconciliation for iniquity, (did He make reconciliation for sins? Yes!) and to bring in everlasting righteousness, (Yes, but only in the person of Himself, not to Israel or Jerusalem yet!) and to seal up the vision and prophecy, (vision and prophecy has not been sealed up) and to anoint the most Holy. (This can be taken two ways. Christ was not anointed as King of the Jews by their leadership as Samuel anointed David, nor did He anoint any part of the temple, so this aspect has also not been fulfilled.)
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem (this was already accomplished before Messiah came) unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself
: (for some reason this is where everyone gets confused. The word “Prince” here is “nagid” and one of the defs. is “captain” and Christ is referred to as the “captain” of our salvation”) (what needs to be understood here is that Christ’s coming as Messiah and His getting “cut off” was just a matter of a few days, not 3 ½ yrs. He didn’t “come” until He fulfilled Zech. 9:9, His triumphal entry, so no part of the 70[sup]th[/sup] week has occurred yet) and the people of the prince ( this word “prince“ isn‘t capitalized so there is no justification to believe it is still talking about Messiah,) ,that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; (if one was to take this as written and believe that it’s still speaking of Christ, who destroyed the city and sanctuary, Christians?? No! ) and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war (what war?) desolations are determined.
27 And he (small prince, not Messiah) shall confirm (to prevail over and act insolently towards) the covenant (which covenant?) with many for one week: (seven years) and in the midst of the week (sometime within the seven, it doesn’t have to be the exact middle) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, (again, not Christ because they continued until 70 AD) and for (because of) the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, (complete and total destruction) and that determined (previously decided) shall be poured upon the desolate.”(desolater)
I kind of like the way the NLT translates the latter half of vs. 27: “... And as a climax to all his terrible deeds, he will set up a sacrilegious object (the abomination of desolation) that causes desecration, until the fate decreed for this defiler (a/c) is finally poured out on him.”
Just about every other translation out there seems to acknowledge that in no way is vs. 27 speaking of Christ, but the “desolater” (a/c) and more about him can be found in Dan. 11:21-45. Everyone is correct in that there are two ways to define the word “confirm”. One is the positive affirmation and the other, the negative connotation. We need to ask ourselves a couple of questions. What covenant and what war?
Almost everyone assumes that the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is depicted in this passage but I’m going to declare it is not! I used to believe it did but as God has led me to reconsider my timeline, He has also started to show me other truths as well, because I asked Him to. No man can “figure” out prophecy on their own. We all need to trust in the HS who will “lead us in all understanding” as Christ promised. We all need to come to these realizations in our own time, however, in no way am I saying, “Aha! God has shown me everything, this is the way it will go down.” God has an (forgive me, Lord) annoying way of just offering trickles of info, when what we want is the whole flood of info, but He probably knows we would be overwhelmed and He knows best, but the waiting is hard! lol!
We can find our answers to both of those questions in Dan. 11. Some believe that all of Dan. 11 is history but I disagree. Dan. 11 is divided into three eras. It begins with tales of Alexander the Great, goes to Antiochus Eppiphanes and ends in vss. 21-45 with events that will occur in the 70[sup]th[/sup] week. In this passage the a/c is the king of the north.
I also used to believe the a/c would make a seven year “treaty/covenant” with Israel based on 9:27. Retro thinks this is the Davidic covenant, others think this is the new covenant but most seem to believe, as I did, that it was a new and different covenant. God has led me to believe differently based on Dan. 11:28-31 - “Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart shall be against (the peoples of ?) the holy covenant; and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land. 29 At the time appointed he shall return, and come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter. 30 For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against (the peoples of?) the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence (show favor) with them that forsake the holy covenant. 31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.”
Vs. 31 aligns itself with Dan. 9:27 pretty smoothly so based on this I stand behind the negative connotation that I gave in the parenthesized meaning of the word “confirm”. The “covenant” is not the new nor the Davidic but it is Sinaitic covenant from Ex. 19:5-8 that he is against. I believe this is the same covenant that Daniel is referencing in 9:4 - “And I prayed unto the Lord my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments…”
A lot of people also believe the “many” of vs. 27 is the same “many” as found in Dan. 12:2 but obviously this isn’t the case. The “many” here in vs. 27 are simply those who are allied with the a/c. There are just too many factors against Christ being the “he” of vs. 27.
This also has nothing to do with Matt. 23:38 as Retro has suggested, however, their national rejection of Christ is the direct cause for the time gap between the end of the 69[sup]th[/sup] week and the beginning of the 70[sup]th[/sup] week. Christ had to be crucified per God’s plan, however, if immediately afterward Israel would have repented then the 70[sup]th[/sup] week would have continued as prophesied. As a result of their rejection, the 70[sup]th[/sup] week has been delayed and Christ will point out that fact to the righteous remnant and show them that it was because of that rejection and lack of repentance that they have had to suffer for millennia. I’m sure Christ will also point out the words of that generation as recorded in Matt. 27:25 - “Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.” But Retro was right when he said, when Israel is ready to say on a national level Matt. 23:39 - “For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” That the end would come. The end of Dan. 9:26 has this phrase, “and unto the end of the war”. I believe this war is speaking of Armageddon.