The Great Tribulation Began in 70AD and Continues to This Very Day

[David in NJ]

However, on this particular issue of where to place the 70th week in time, I do vehemently inform you

"vehemently"

You gave me a gut-buster with that = thank you

 

[David in NJ]

You and I see many things in scripture alike.

However, on this particular issue of where to place the 70th week in time, I do vehemently inform you that it most definitely was during Jesus ministry on earth, 3.5 years in his mortal flesh, and then immediately after his resurrection, as Holy Spirit for the remaining 3.5 years. In both instances, he was confirming the New covenant to his disciples, and then by His Spirit, He was confirming the New covenant to the Early churches.
Please see my post #192 for additional precise info about Dan. 9:24-27.

You are determined to confound the plain issues of KJV prophetic scripture FULFILLED, so that you may continue foisting your own personal argument through numerous other biblical sources that support your view.
The latter part of KJV Dan. 9:27 clearly reveals the Day of Pentecost and onward.

i ALWAYS said that JESUS was crucified in the 70th week

The 70th week has not ended

The remaining 3.5 years will be completed/fulfilled when:
1.) the Gospel is preached to all nations
2.) the Antichrist is revealed
3.) Mark of the Beast = Abomination of Desolations
4.) Saints are persecuted worldwide
5.) Two prophets fulfill their ministry in Jerusalem and are killed by the Beast
6.) Israel again surrounded by the nations who want Her destroyed
7 = 2nd Coming of Christ = 2 Thessalonians chapter 2

 

[CTK]

@CTK, I agree to all of your 7 points, but as to your last point, the 8th, I do not agree.

Since Daniel 9:24-27 is directly involved with the 3.5+3.5 = 7 years, aka in the midst of the week, Messiah is cut off, I would have you to understand that the 1st 3.5 years of Jesus' ministry was in the flesh, confirming the New covenant with his Disciples.

Now, since Jesus was cut off in the midst of the 70th week, and NEVER DIED, except in his mortal flesh, we are TO KNOW that his Life in the Holy Spirit was immediate and functional. Therefore, Jesus FULFILLED the remaining 3.5 years (totaling 7) by confirming the New covenant with the early churches, of which Paul the Apostle was a direct and personal witness of Jesus doing so!!

Unfortunately, most of "church-ianity" has gone BLIND on this issue about the 70th week, and as a result many Protestant churches have "gone off the rails" and have "lost the plot" altogether about the book of Revelation.

Thank you for your thoughs and I appreciate your comment that you agree - it is so difficult to most people to entertain different / new interpretations.....

Anyway, regarding your comment on #8.. I certainly agree with your statement, but there are two things I would ask you to consider:

1) One of the reasosns God separated the 70 weeks into 3 separate periods was to identify those elements He would assign to the Jews to restore the physical elements that were destroyed or taken away by the Babylonians. This was their God given restorative responsibility. The only element they were incapable of restoring was the restoration of the Ark of the Covenant. Thus, God would give this restorative responsibnility to the Messiah - He would restore the Presence of God back into the Sanctuary. Thus both parties completeldy fulfilled their restorative assignments. And you will also notice they were each restored in the exact revese order they were destroyed or taken away by the Babylonians. This is also support that all the physical elements, including the sacrifices, the ceremonies, the sabbatical cyles. etc., had to be fully restored BEFORE the Messiah could arrive on the first day of the 70th weekd (no gap theory whatsoever). So when Jesus did begin His ministry, everything was ready for Him to complete His God given missions - 9:24.


2) So the times prior to the 70th week were separated to denote those things the Jews would restore and the 70th week was purposefully set aside for the Messiah to restore the Presence of God and fulfill His mission -even though He would be cutoff exactly 3.5 years into His final week. This had NO affect on Him completing or fulfilling 9:24. There was absolutely nothing He was given to complete during the last week that was supposed to be completed.


3) This means the 70 week of year prophecy was completed and fulfilled. The vPROPHECY was complete. And as mentioned above, both parties fulfilled their restorative mission prior to the cross.

4) The ONLY unfulfilled element one could find in Daniel is related to the 490 year period - but it is NOT related to the prophecy or what would be completed within and during the prophecy. And this is where so much of Daniel is fully intergrated with other books within the Tanakh as well as with the book of Revelation (especially the book of Revelation).

5) If you notice the 70 weeks of years prophecy began in 457 BC and would continue for 490 years (no gaps). But what is also interesting is that the 4th and final Great Jubilees also started in 457 BC and each of the 4 Great Jubilee's are also 490 years long. However, as a direct result of the Jews rejection and crucifixion of their Messiah, the clock stopped counting exactly at the time of the cross - 486.5 years into the 490 years. These years MUST be completed BEFORE the end of the 4th Great Jubilee can be fulfilled. And you might note that ONLY the Jews - His chosen people are able to start that clock again., but they cannot begin the clock until they have been restored in their relationship with their God (after the times of the Gentiles). And this will only take place when God removes the blindness from their eyes and they recognize the One they have pierced. In Revelation, this is represented when the 144,000 will have their Damascus like experience from God - no different that Paul. They will now be in unity with their God and will preach the Good News for the remaining 3.5 years and then the Messiah willl return. So, the 70 weeks of years prophecy stands by itself - it was fulfilled and completed in ALL respects. But the 4th and final Great Jubilee, which ran right along side it was not completed. Same starting point, same ending date, same number of years, but the 4th GJ is the ONLY time element not yet completed. We should not be conflating the prophecy with the tribulation - apples and oranges.

 

[David in NJ]

Part 2


In 9:26, Jesus is described as being “cut off, but not for Himself”—a clear reference to His substitutionary death. At this point, God no longer addresses Him as “Messiah the Prince” but simply as “Messiah.” The title of royalty is withheld. Why? Because Jesus is no longer appearing in His role as the reigning Prince, but as the sacrificial Lamb, bearing the sins of the world. This mirrors what we see in the Gospels: Jesus, who once referred to the Temple as “My house” (Matthew 21:12–13), later declares in heartbreak: “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate” (Matthew 23:38). The shift from “My house” to “your house” is not semantic—it is judicial. It marks the removal of divine presence due to national rejection of the Messiah.

The phrase “the people of the prince who is to come” introduces another layer of complexity. In this verse, the word “prince” is again the Hebrew nagiyd, just as it was in 9:25. However, this time it is not paired with the word “Messiah.” This deliberate separation introduces a level of ambiguity. The identity of this “prince” is not as clearly defined as in 9:25 (“Messiah the Prince”), nor is it as generic as the rulers referenced earlier in verses 6 and 8 (which use a different Hebrew term).

If God had wanted to clearly differentiate this prince from the Messiah, He could have used the more common Hebrew word for ruler (as seen in 9:6 and 9:8). That would have left the door open for multiple interpretations—perhaps a foreign king, a military commander, or a generic figure of authority. On the other hand, if He wanted to reaffirm this prince as the Messiah, He could have once again included the title “Messiah” with nagiyd, as in 9:25. But instead, He does neither.

The use of nagiyd without “Messiah” appears intentional and meaningful. It distinguishes this prince from both the true Anointed One and from ordinary rulers. He is not a generic prince, nor is he identified as the Messiah. So who is he? Many scholars point to Titus, the Roman general who led the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, as a likely candidate. The following phrase in 9:26 states, “the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” Historically, this aligns with what happened under Titus’ command. His legions ravaged the city, razed the Temple, and slaughtered over a million Jews. In this view, Titus is the “prince,” and the Roman army is “his people.”

There is a strong precedent in Daniel for God using foreign rulers as instruments of judgment. Nebuchadnezzar was used to discipline Judah. Cyrus was used to overthrow Babylon. Alexander was used to dismantle corrupt empires. Titus, like these others, fits this divine pattern. From a physical and historical perspective, this interpretation is compelling. But prophecy often has layers—and verse 26 points to something deeper than military conquest.

The text does not say that the prince destroys the city—it says his people do. The destruction comes first, and the prince comes afterward to rule over those people. This suggests a delayed arrival, not someone who leads the destruction, but one who emerges from the aftermath of it. This opens the door to a more profound, spiritual fulfillment. This “prince who is to come” is not merely Titus. He is the same figure described in Daniel 8:10–12 and 8:23–25. He is the little horn—a powerful, blasphemous, deceptive force who rises out of the Roman world system and takes on a religious-political identity. He comes after the fall of Jerusalem and after the fall of pagan Rome (7:11).

From this perspective, the "people" (of Rome led by Titus) who destroyed the city become the foundation for the next great power—a spiritual counterfeit that claims the authority of Christ but works in opposition to Him. This aligns with Daniel’s three-phase prophetic structure after the cross:

• The people destroy the city and the sanctuary (70 AD).​

​

• The prince who is to come rises later, emerging from among them – the little horn.​

​

• He rules over their legacy—not by military conquest, but by spiritual authority.​

This “prince” is not just a figure of history or speculation. He becomes the central antagonist in Daniel’s later visions: the little horn, the deceiver, the blasphemer, the one who opposes the true Prince of princes (Daniel 8:25). He represents the long arc of counterfeit religion and corrupted power that dominates until the return of Christ.


If anyone has an interest in my commentary on Daniel ... you can enter the following ISBN # (9798218637231) into Amazon. If you would like a free author's copy, please PM me with your mailing information and it will be sent directly from Amazon to you.

Let's tweak your opening unto perfection (your opening is GOOD Brother)

A.) The REASON/TRUTH that the Scripture states Messiah the Prince is to denote His Origin = Heaven/Heavenlies/ABOVE

B.) the REASON/TRUTH as to why the title of 'Prince' is not repeated is because(as you stated) he set aside His Glory to be a sinless Man who gave Himself for the sins of Mankind = SEE First Adam and Last Adam from 1 Corinthians chapter 15

IMPORTANT = Messiah never lost His title as 'Prince' even when HE went to the Cross = Acts 3:15

But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you;
and killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

SHALOM

 

[CTK]

All GOOD until you combined Messiah with the other prince.

There is a Prophetic REASON why the word "nagiyd" is applied to the Messiah and the "prince who is to come"

Your Mission, should you accept it, is to SEE why.

You will find a clue as to "why" in Daniel chapter 10

Let me know if you SEE

SHALOM

Thank you David and please remember that the narrative above represents only part of the chapter 9 narrative in the commentary - there simply is too much to speak to.... but I do agree with your comment above but here is a PARTIAL cut out from the chapter 9 narrative that addresses your point.

What began as a liberating gospel movement would, over time, become entangled with worldly power—fulfilling the prophetic arc set forth in Daniel 2 and further developed in chapters 7 and 8. Thus, the “prince who is to come” arises after the destruction—to rule over the people who destroyed it in 70 AD. He does not come as a general but as a priest-king, seated in a place of authority, exalting himself even within God’s temple. Just as Satan rebelled in heaven, aspiring to the throne of God, so this prince rises from within the earthly kingdom that once served God. He emerges from the fourth beast and wages war against everything holy. Like the fallen angels who followed Satan, those aligned with this prince mix truth with error, Scripture with tradition, light with darkness. The apostle Paul echoes this warning in 2 Thessalonians 2:3–4:

“Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed... who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God... so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.”​

This passage perfectly aligns with the mission and posture of the prince who is to come—a figure of religious deception, apostate power, and global influence. His reign does not end with military conquest, but with spiritual domination—subduing not by sword, but by false doctrine and usurped authority. The “prince who is to come” in Daniel 9:26 is not Christ. He is not merely Titus. He is a figure of dual fulfillment:

Historically tied to the people of Rome who destroyed the city.

Prophetically fulfilled in the little horn who rises from their legacy.

This prince is granted the prophetic title nagiyd, not because he is righteous, but because he imitates the true Prince. His deception lies in his resemblance. His power lies in his pretense. And his ultimate downfall will come when the true Messiah, the real Prince of princes, returns to destroy him with the brightness of His coming.

It is the "little horn" who attempts to claim divinity, be God on earth, forgive sin where only God can, etc.,, So God has given this deceiver (purposefully) - this one who will claim to be a "prince" of earth the term "nagiy," but He will NOT give him the title "Messiah"along with it.

Now, I do not know what your are referring to in chapter 10 that speaks of the "prince" but, if you do not accept / like this interpretation, please let me know your thoughts.. thanks so much.

 

[David in NJ]

Thank you David and please remember that the narrative above represents only part of the chapter 9 narrative in the commentary - there simply is too much to speak to.... but I do agree with your comment above but here is a PARTIAL cut out from the chapter 9 narrative that addresses your point.

What began as a liberating gospel movement would, over time, become entangled with worldly power—fulfilling the prophetic arc set forth in Daniel 2 and further developed in chapters 7 and 8. Thus, the “prince who is to come” arises after the destruction—to rule over the people who destroyed it in 70 AD. He does not come as a general but as a priest-king, seated in a place of authority, exalting himself even within God’s temple. Just as Satan rebelled in heaven, aspiring to the throne of God, so this prince rises from within the earthly kingdom that once served God. He emerges from the fourth beast and wages war against everything holy. Like the fallen angels who followed Satan, those aligned with this prince mix truth with error, Scripture with tradition, light with darkness. The apostle Paul echoes this warning in 2 Thessalonians 2:3–4:

“Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed... who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God... so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.”​

This passage perfectly aligns with the mission and posture of the prince who is to come—a figure of religious deception, apostate power, and global influence. His reign does not end with military conquest, but with spiritual domination—subduing not by sword, but by false doctrine and usurped authority. The “prince who is to come” in Daniel 9:26 is not Christ. He is not merely Titus. He is a figure of dual fulfillment:

Historically tied to the people of Rome who destroyed the city.

Prophetically fulfilled in the little horn who rises from their legacy.

This prince is granted the prophetic title nagiyd, not because he is righteous, but because he imitates the true Prince. His deception lies in his resemblance. His power lies in his pretense. And his ultimate downfall will come when the true Messiah, the real Prince of princes, returns to destroy him with the brightness of His coming.

It is the "little horn" who attempts to claim divinity, be God on earth, forgive sin where only God can, etc.,, So God has given this deceiver (purposefully) - this one who will claim to be a "prince" of earth the term "nagiy," but He will NOT give him the title "Messiah"along with it.

Now, I do not know what your are referring to in chapter 10 that speaks of the "prince" but, if you do not accept / like this interpretation, please let me know your thoughts.. thanks so much.

It is very rare to speak with another Brother on these forums who can SEE the Big Picture by embracing all Scripture.

If everyone submitted to "It is written" , there would be far less bickering and confusion.

Thank You for sharing the Joy that the Holy Spirit has given you with us.

 

[David in NJ]

This prince is granted the prophetic title nagiyd, not because he is righteous, but because he imitates the true Prince.

YES my Brother = This is exactly what i was going to share with you

but there is more, for "the prince who is to come" is in fact a true prince = fallen angel

Thus Daniel chapter 10 and the heavenly princes that do battle with each other

 

[CTK]

Let's tweak your opening unto perfection (your opening is GOOD Brother)

A.) The REASON/TRUTH that the Scripture states Messiah the Prince is to denote His Origin = Heaven/Heavenlies/ABOVE

B.) the REASON/TRUTH as to why the title of 'Prince' is not repeated is because(as you stated) he set aside His Glory to be a sinless Man who gave Himself for the sins of Mankind = SEE First Adam and Last Adam from 1 Corinthians chapter 15

IMPORTANT = Messiah never lost His title as 'Prince' even when HE went to the Cross = Acts 3:15

But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you;
and killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

SHALOM

I understand and thanks for your thoughts!!!! When Jesus went to the cross (before He died), He had to take on the sin of the world. That was His mission from God. But before He could complete that He had to "give up His Spirit" to God. Just like in Adam when he sinned, the Spirit that God gave him - which was God's Holy Spirit (not the Holy Spirit but God's holiness, His righteousness because there is no other place anywhere where there exists His holiness or righteousness, thus He had to give Adam part of His holiness). When Adam sinned, that holiness from God had to return back to God since sin and His holiness cannot be in the same place). Thus, before Jesus took on the sin of the world, He first had to return God's holiness, God's righteousnes that was bestowed on Him when He was baptized in the Jordan. Thus, God would no longer see His Prince, but the Messiah who took on the sin of the world. Of course, God woud restore that holiness, that righteouness back into the Messiah on the 3rd day which reflects exactly what He will do for us for those that have accepted Jesus as our Lord and Savior - full circle.

 

[CTK]

It is very rare to speak with another Brother on these forums who can SEE the Big Picture by embracing all Scripture.

If everyone submitted to "It is written" , there would be far less bickering and confusion.

Thank You for sharing the Joy that the Holy Spirit has given you with us.

That is more than kind of you to say that here.... I hope you might be interested in receiving or getting a copy of the commentary - there is so much in there that cannot be shared in these few posts. Daniel is THE most complicated book in the Scriptures - in my opinion, it is 10 times more difficult to unpack than Revelation - but that is because so much of relies on Daniel to be interpreted properly. God bless always and even if you disagree with my interpertations, I welcome your thoughts and opinions -there simply is too much for anyone to see and find in Daniel... it truly is bottomless. Thanks again for your kind words, Charlie

 

[David in NJ]

I understand and thanks for your thoughts!!!! When Jesus went to the cross (before He died), He had to take on the sin of the world. That was His mission from God. But before He could complete that He had to "give up His Spirit" to God. Just like in Adam when he sinned, the Spirit that God gave him - which was God's Holy Spirit (not the Holy Spirit but God's holiness, His righteousness because there is no other place anywhere where there exists His holiness or righteousness, thus He had to give Adam part of His holiness). When Adam sinned, that holiness from God had to return back to God since sin and His holiness cannot be in the same place). Thus, before Jesus took on the sin of the world, He first had to return God's holiness, God's righteousnes that was bestowed on Him when He was baptized in the Jordan. Thus, God would no longer see His Prince, but the Messiah who took on the sin of the world. Of course, God woud restore that holiness, that righteouness back into the Messiah on the 3rd day which reflects exactly what He will do for us for those that have accepted Jesus as our Lord and Savior - full circle.

Thus, before Jesus took on the sin of the world, He first had to return God's holiness, God's righteousnes that was bestowed on Him when He was baptized in the Jordan.

i would disagree with this statement since the LORD also disagrees

THREE reasons why:

#1 - And when Jesus had cried out with a loud voice, He said, “Father, ‘into Your hands I commit My spirit.’ ” Having said this, He breathed His last.

#2 - Elohim from Genesis = But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit(H.S.), if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you.
Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His - Romans 8:9

#3 - On the 3rd day Christ Rose from the dead

 

[CTK]

YES my Brother = This is exactly what i was going to share with you

but there is more, for "the prince who is to come" is in fact a true prince = fallen angel

Thus Daniel chapter 10 and the heavenly princes that do battle with each other

Oh, I see what you are saying... I have not thought of that or related the two .... In my interpretation, the "prince who is to come" is the little horn (papacy / papal Rome) who comes after 70 AD ... while you are connecting him to the prince of the kingdom of Persia....

 

[David in NJ]

That is more than kind of you to say that here.... I hope you might be interested in receiving or getting a copy of the commentary - there is so much in there that cannot be shared in these few posts. Daniel is THE most complicated book in the Scriptures - in my opinion, it is 10 times more difficult to unpack than Revelation - but that is because so much of relies on Daniel to be interpreted properly. God bless always and even if you disagree with my interpertations, I welcome your thoughts and opinions -there simply is too much for anyone to see and find in Daniel... it truly is bottomless. Thanks again for your kind words, Charlie

We can disagree on some things and it does not in any way mean that we should disavow one another.

Only when a person denies CLEAR scripture such as the divinity of Christ = John 1:1 and more

 

[CTK]

i would disagree with this statement since the LORD also disagrees

THREE reasons why:

#1 - And when Jesus had cried out with a loud voice, He said, “Father, ‘into Your hands I commit My spirit.’ ” Having said this, He breathed His last.

#2 - Elohim from Genesis = But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit(H.S.), if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you.
Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His - Romans 8:9

#3 - On the 3rd day Christ Rose from the dead

If you do not mind, can you share with me alttle more about this?

 

[David in NJ]

Oh, I see what you are saying... I have not thought of that or related the two .... In my interpretation, the "prince who is to come" is the little horn (papacy / papal Rome) who comes after 70 AD ... while you are connecting him to the prince of the kingdom of Persia....

i mentioned Daniel ch10 because it shows us that there are certain High Ranking fallen angels that are denoted by "prince"

The "prince who is to come" is either satan or another very HIGH Ranking fallen angel that indwells a man.

Ezekiel chapter 28 shows us how this occurs with the "prince of Tyre"

 

[David in NJ]

If you do not mind, can you share with me alttle more about this?

In the beginning
בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית (bə·rê·šîṯ)
Preposition-b | Noun - feminine singular
Strong's Hebrew 7225: 1) first, beginning, best, chief 1a) beginning 1b) first 1c) chief 1d) choice part

God
אֱלֹהִ֑ים (’ĕ·lō·hîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's Hebrew 430: 1) (plural) 1a) rulers, judges 1b) divine ones 1c) angels 1d) gods 2) (plural intensive-singular meaning) 2a) god, goddess 2b) godlike one 2c) works or special possessions of God 2d) the (true) God 2e) God

Then Elohim(Plural) said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; = 3 times Spoken in Plural

 

[CTK]

i mentioned Daniel ch10 because it shows us that there are certain High Ranking fallen angels that are denoted by "prince"

The "prince who is to come" is either satan or another very HIGH Ranking fallen angel that indwells a man.

Ezekiel chapter 28 shows us how this occurs with the "prince of Tyre"

Got it and thanks! Well, I think it might be safe to say that you do not believe the little horn or this prince or the evil one in chapter 11 represent the papacy / papal Rome who will replace pagan Rome after their demise in 476AD (Daniel 7:11)?

 

[CTK]

In the beginning
בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית (bə·rê·šîṯ)
Preposition-b | Noun - feminine singular
Strong's Hebrew 7225: 1) first, beginning, best, chief 1a) beginning 1b) first 1c) chief 1d) choice part

God
אֱלֹהִ֑ים (’ĕ·lō·hîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's Hebrew 430: 1) (plural) 1a) rulers, judges 1b) divine ones 1c) angels 1d) gods 2) (plural intensive-singular meaning) 2a) god, goddess 2b) godlike one 2c) works or special possessions of God 2d) the (true) God 2e) God

Then Elohim(Plural) said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; = 3 times Spoken in Plural

Certainly no problem with this but I am having trouble connecting the dots to our discussion on the cross. I will have to go back and see why I brought this into the conversation... but it was in response to something you disagreed with... we will hammer this out! Thanks.

 

[David in NJ]

Got it and thanks! Well, I think it might be safe to say that you do not believe the little horn or this prince or the evil one in chapter 11 represent the papacy / papal Rome who will replace pagan Rome after their demise in 476AD (Daniel 7:11)?

i KNOW how EVIL the Papacy of Rome is

The papacy remains as pagan Rome = they just changed names around and call the Roman gods as 'saints'

Vatican is pure EVIL

 

[David in NJ]

Certainly no problem with this but I am having trouble connecting the dots to our discussion on the cross. I will have to go back and see why I brought this into the conversation... but it was in response to something you disagreed with... we will hammer this out! Thanks.

Dwell on this as well = Christ was 3 days in the grave/tomb

3 is the Signature of Elohim = Elohim FATHER Elohim WORD/SON/LORD Elohim HOLY SPIRIT

Thus why the holy angels sing: HOLY HOLY HOLY is the LORD GOD ALMIGHTY

 

[CTK]

i KNOW how EVIL the Papacy of Rome is

The papacy remains as pagan Rome = they just changed names around and call the Roman gods as 'saints'

Vatican is pure EVIL

Well, I agree with you but I would ask that you might just consider the papacy as the "divided" kingdom mentioned in Daniel 7, 8, and the prophecies in 9 and 11.- as well as in Revelation. This is also a wonderful subject to discuss... there is no shortage of identifiers in Daniel as to the identity of the little horn.