This is the context of how Dan. 9:24-27 should be considered!

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
7,773
3,438
113
75
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Titus wasn't the "prince to come"
True. Messiah the Prince was the prince to come. He came between five and six centuries after Daniel wrote.
the "people of the prince" weren't Romans. They were conscripted soldiers from the nations surrounding Israel.
Hogwash. :laughing:

Here is a description of 70 AD from the Jewish Virtual Library itself. Ancient Jewish History: The Great Revolt

No conscripts to be seen. Only Roman troops and Jewish Zealots.

Both the people of Messiah the Prince for His purposes of accomplishing judgment and destruction upon the city and the nation which had rejected Him.


You're peddling nothing but dispensational revisionist futurized fantasy and fallacy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Spiritual Israelite

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2020
5,244
1,863
113
Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
At least your argument about me supposedly ignoring or misunderstanding the word "therefore" in Matthew 24:15 is stronger than your argument that Jesus did not answer the disciples' question about when the temple buildings would be destroyed. There is no reason whatsoever that He would not be willing to answer that question after having just told them shortly before that the temple buildings would be destroyed. Imagine me telling you that your house is going to be destroyed, but then refusing to answer any questions you have about that. It makes no sense.

Jesus had already answered them on the Temple Mount - just outside the temple - when they pointed out the architectural magnificence of the buildings and structure - after hearing Him tell the scribes and Pharisees in the temple that it was going to be left to them desolate.

He merely repeated what He told the scribes and Pharisees - this time making it abundantly clear, saying that not one stone would be left upon another.

At the time the apostles asked a second time about the temple - this time on the Mount of Olives, they

- still did not know about Jesus's words which He was still to utter at the last supper about His blood and the new covenant,

- nor about what was to transpire immediately after the last supper,

- nor about the veil of the temple between the holy of holies and the holy place being torn in two when Jesus died,

- nor about Jesus's resurrection from the dead,

- nor about His ascension into heaven,

- nor about the Holy Spirit coming down and filling the church on the day of Pentecost.

- They did not know about the New Testament Temple when they asked the question.


All three of the synoptic gospels record Jesus replying by immediately embarking on a long discourse about the tribulation and persecution that His disciples (the living stones of the New Testament Temple) were going to experience for His name's sake

- but the Old Covenant temple system was the only "Temple of God" they knew the day they asked the question. They still had the destruction of the temple, the end of the age and Christ appearing in His glory mixed up (as can be seen by their questions).

No one could have blamed them - but by the time Hebrews 9:11 was written, they no longer needed an answer to that question about that temple that they had asked about on the Mount of Olives, and Jesus would have known that.

Jesus did not answer their question - either by telling them when the temple would be destroyed, or by giving them a sign about when that temple was about to be destroyed

- He only mentioned armies gathering around Jerusalem so that His disciples would know that THEY need to flee Judea

- but long before 70 AD - and from the Day of Pentecost onward - they already knew that they really did not need to pay any attention to the fate of a religious temple that had ceased being the Temple of God when Jesus died on the cross and the veil was torn in two.

But I'm not at all surprised by your lack of understanding, because your verbal displays of ostentation - frequently mixed with insults - always only betrays your own fleshly mind and exposes the reason why you often don't understand the things you think you understand and claim to understand.

So you will not understand this either.​
 
Last edited:

CTK

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2024
1,515
315
83
72
Albuquerque
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Are you claiming that the prince to come mentioned in Daniel 9:26 was not actually the prince/ruler of the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary in 70 AD, but was some future prince to

Are you claiming that the prince to come mentioned in Daniel 9:26 was not actually the prince/ruler of the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary in 70 AD, but was some future prince to that time?
Are you claiming that the prince to come mentioned in Daniel 9:26 was not actually the prince/ruler of the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary in 70 AD, but was some future prince to that time?
Yes, the PEOPLE of the prince who is to come destroyed the city. It was Titus, the head of the Roman army who desegregated city in 70 AD.

The “prince WHO IS TO COME “ of those people (Roman’s while identified within pagan Roman rule) is the little horn that comes out of early church that was established by God through the cross.

He is here given the title of “prince” (small p) purposely to identify him as the coming little horn who would think to represent the true Prince (Jesus) and claim divinity, forgiveness of sins, etc. He attempts to take the place of God on earth.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
16,902
6,853
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Yes, the PEOPLE of the prince who is to come destroyed the city. It was Titus, the head of the Roman army who desegregated city in 70 AD.

The “prince WHO IS TO COME “ of those people (Roman’s while identified within pagan Roman rule) is the little horn that comes out of early church that was established by God through the cross.
What "prince who is to come" are you referring to exactly? You are referring to some other scripture than Daniel 9:26?

He is here
Where is here?

given the title of “prince” (small p) purposely to identify him as the coming little horn who would think to represent the true Prince (Jesus) and claim divinity, forgiveness of sins, etc. He attempts to take the place of God on earth.
I can't follow you. Please clarify who you believe "the prince who is to come" is in Daniel 9:26.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
16,902
6,853
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Jesus had already answered them on the Temple Mount - just outside the temple - when they pointed out the architectural magnificence of the buildings and structure - after hearing Him tell the scribes and Pharisees in the temple that it was going to be left to them desolate.

He merely repeated what He told the scribes and Pharisees - this time making it abundantly clear, saying that not one stone would be left upon another.

At the time the apostles asked a second time about the temple - this time on the Mount of Olives, they

- still did not know about Jesus's words which He was still to utter at the last supper about His blood and the new covenant,

- nor about what was to transpire immediately after the last supper,

- nor about the veil of the temple between the holy of holies and the holy place being torn in two when Jesus died,

- nor about Jesus's resurrection from the dead,

- nor about His ascension into heaven,

- nor about the Holy Spirit coming down and filling the church on the day of Pentecost.

- They did not know about the New Testament Temple when they asked the question.


All three of the synoptic gospels record Jesus replying by immediately embarking on a long discourse about the tribulation and persecution that His disciples (the living stones of the New Testament Temple) were going to experience for His name's sake

- but the Old Covenant temple system was the only "Temple of God" they knew the day they asked the question. They still had the destruction of the temple, the end of the age and Christ appearing in His glory mixed up (as can be seen by their questions).

No one could have blamed them - but by the time Hebrews 9:11 was written, they no longer needed an answer to that question about that temple that they had asked about on the Mount of Olives, and Jesus would have known that.

Jesus did not answer their question - either by telling them when the temple would be destroyed, or by giving them a sign about when that temple was about to be destroyed

- He only mentioned armies gathering around Jerusalem so that His disciples would know that THEY need to flee Judea

- but long before 70 AD - and from the Day of Pentecost onward - they already knew that they really did not need to pay any attention to the fate of a religious temple that had ceased being the Temple of God when Jesus died on the cross and the veil was torn in two.

But I'm not at all surprised by your lack of understanding, because your verbal displays of ostentation - frequently mixed with insults - always only betrays your own fleshly mind and exposes the reason why you often don't understand the things you think you understand and claim to understand.

So you will not understand this either.​
You make simple things complicated sometimes. I feel sorry for you when you do that. Nothing you're saying changes the fact that the context of what spawned the Olivet Discourse is Jesus saying that the physical temple buildings standing at that time would be destroyed. He didn't just say that for nothing and there's no reason to think that He would not answer a question about that by giving an answer that related specifically to those temple buildings. He said that people in Judea would need to flee to the mountains when they saw something to indicate that Jesus's prophecy about the temple buildings being destroyed was about to happen. He was not concerned about the temple itself, He was concerned about His people not being caught up in the wrath and destruction going on in that area, so that's why He said they needed to flee from there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

CTK

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2024
1,515
315
83
72
Albuquerque
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What "prince who is to come" are you referring to exactly? You are referring to some other scripture than Daniel 9:26?


Where is here?


I can't follow you. Please clarify who you believe "the prince who is to come" is in Daniel 9:26.
The “prince” (small p) who is to come (after the cross) represents the same actor in Daniel 7
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
16,902
6,853
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
The “prince” (small p) who is to come (after the cross) represents the same actor in Daniel 7
And who do you think that is/was? It has to be someone who was the prince of the people who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD.
 

CTK

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2024
1,515
315
83
72
Albuquerque
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What "prince who is to come" are you referring to exactly? You are referring to some other scripture than Daniel 9:26?


Where is here?


I can't follow you. Please clarify who you believe "the prince who is to come" is in Daniel 9:26.
The “prince” (small p) who is to come out AFTER the destruction of the city in 70 AD is the one identified in 7:24 and 25, as well as the one identified in 8:23-25.

He is the little horn that has been revealed / discussed at length in Daniel 7,8 and 11. Here in chapter 9 he is again identified as a “prince” that will come after the cross, after 70 AD, and also right after pagan Rome is slain (7:11). When pagan Rome is slain in 476 AD this little horn will rise to power and will come to rule both over civil and religious matters.
 

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2020
5,244
1,863
113
Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
So much error is here.

I agree. The errors you mention in your posts are many.

"THE" AoD spoken of by Christ and he wasn't referencing 9: 27 he was referencing Dan. 11:31 and 12:11.

That's what I said. When the daily sacrifices were taken away and the AoD was placed in the temple (Daniel 8:11-12; 11:31 & 12:11) it did not result in the destruction of either the city or the temple - and the daily sacrifices for sins mentioned in Daniel 8:11-12; 11:31 & 12:11 were only temporarily suspended.

- but Daniel 9:26-27 associates abominations with the destruction of both the city and the temple, and the complete cessation of sacrifices for sin.

Whatever it is that constituted the abominations mentioned in Daniel 9:27 is not specified in the text. However, in their rejection of Christ's once-for-all sacrifice for sins, daily animal sacrifices for sins continued to be made by the people upon the altar in the Jerusalem temple - and this continued for forty years until the temple was destroyed.

Like lost sheep, the people wandered in unbelief. The author to the Hebrews wrote,

"Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, 'Oh, that today you would listen as he speaks! Do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, in the day of testing in the wilderness. There your fathers tested me and tried me, and they saw my works for forty years. Therefore, I became provoked at that generation and said, Their hearts are always wandering and they have not known my ways. As I swore in my anger, They will never enter my rest!" (Hebrews 3:7-11).

"For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.

But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness? And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief." (Hebrews 3:16-19).​

I know those other ones aren't speaking of the messiah. and neither is 9:27. Neither Matt. 24:15 or 2 Thess. 2:4 have been fulfilled yet and yes they are speaking of the same guy from Dan. 9:27.

So much error is here in what you say. Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4 have not been fulfilled yet, and are both talking about a fulfillment that will take place in the one and only holy place ("let the reader understand") - a.k.a the New Testament temple - the one and only [naos] / sanctuary of God - of which the historical AoD of Daniel 8:11-12; 11:31 & 12:11 is the type that Jesus referred to in Matthew 24:15

- but Daniel 9:27 has been fulfilled by and in the Messiah.​

You can see what that future fulfillment will look like in Rev. 13:14-15. I know those other ones aren't speaking of the messiah.

You can see what the kind of delusion you are under which leads you to falsely assume that IF Rev.13:14-16 is referring to a temple in Jerusalem made with human hands, this also refers to the temple Jesus spoke about in Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4.

It's the same delusion Preterists and @Spiritual Israelite and others are under - except they place that "AoD" in a Jerusalem "temple" in a different millennium to you.
 
Last edited:

claninja

Active Member
Dec 11, 2022
601
117
43
the south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
You imply they knew how soon the return of Christ would be -

Jesus said they “would know” when it was near in Matthew 24:31-33. Not could, not maybe, not possibly, but would know.

So again, did the apostles ever say the coming was near, soon, in a little while without delay? Or that it was the last hour? Or that the end of all things had drawn near?
 

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2020
5,244
1,863
113
Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
The “prince” (small p) who is to come out AFTER the destruction of the city in 70 AD is the one identified in 7:24 and 25, as well as the one identified in 8:23-25.

That's absolute nonsense. The prophecy in verses 24-25 is not about the coming of the "antichrist" who you are talking about. It's about the coming of the Messiah. The prince of the people who would come and destroy the city is only mentioned in verse 26.

You have just turned the prophecy on its head and have completely corrupted the revelation of God given to Daniel.

You are implying that Christ is an antichrist or the one you call "the" antichrist.

He is the little horn that has been revealed / discussed at length in Daniel 7,8 and 11.

Absolute nonsense. That's not what Daniel 9:24-25 says about the coming of the Messiah.

Daniel 9:26: After threescore and two weeks (AFTER THE 69TH WEEK) shall

(a) Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and

(b) 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.

Daniel 9:27: And (a) he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(a) Messiah: Shall confirm the covenant with many for (during) the one (final) week.
(b) For for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

It's not clear whether it's the Messiah making it desolate (by handing it over to Rome in 70 AD), or the people of the prince who were to come making it desolate because of the overspreading of abominations - but it makes no difference, because the prophecy is about only one person and the coming of that one person - the Messiah.
 

claninja

Active Member
Dec 11, 2022
601
117
43
the south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
If the prophecies are not about Christ's 1st advent, they are most likely all future except Lk. 21:20-24 which is a stand alone prophecy among the gospels.
Ok, so how do we determine when God determines a prophecy as fulfilled, especially its when not mentioned in the NT?
 
Last edited:

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2020
5,244
1,863
113
Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
You make simple things complicated sometimes. I feel sorry for you when you do that. Nothing you're saying changes the fact that the context of what spawned the Olivet Discourse is Jesus saying that the physical temple buildings standing at that time would be destroyed. He didn't just say that for nothing and there's no reason to think that He would not answer a question about that by giving an answer that related specifically to those temple buildings. He said that people in Judea would need to flee to the mountains when they saw something to indicate that Jesus's prophecy about the temple buildings being destroyed was about to happen. He was not concerned about the temple itself, He was concerned about His people not being caught up in the wrath and destruction going on in that area, so that's why He said they needed to flee from there.

OK have it your simple way then.

Your simple way: Jesus answered them about the temple that they asked about:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​
Luke 21:
.. But before all these, they shall lay their hands on those who worship at the temple in Jerusalem, and persecute the Jews, delivering them up to the Romans, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for the sake of the temple in Jerusalem.

And it shall turn to the Jews for a testimony.
Tell the Jews therefore to settle it in their hearts, not to meditate before what they shall answer: For from the temple in Jerusalem will they be given a mouth and wisdom, which all their adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.

And they that worship at the temple in Jerusalem shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of them shall they cause to be put to death.

And they shall be hated of all men for the sake of the temple in Jerusalem. But there shall not an hair of their head perish, because in their patience possess those who worship at the temple in Jerusalem their souls.

And tell those who worship at the temple in Jerusalem that when THEY shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then THEY are to know that the desolation thereof is nigh, so then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

For these be the days of vengeance upon those who do not worship at the temple in Jerusalem, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon the people because of those who do not worship at the temple in Jerusalem. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

Have it your simple way: Jesus was not answering them by telling them about the tribulation and persecution that the living stones of the New Testament Temple were to endure. He was answering their question about the temple in Jerusalem; and in Matthew 24:15-21 and Luke 21:20-24 Jesus was not answering them by telling them about the tribulation and persecution that the living stones of the New Testament Temple were to endure. He was answering their question about the temple in Jerusalem:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

Matthew 24
All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall they deliver those who worship at the temple in Jerusalem up to be afflicted, and shall kill them: and THEY shall be hated of all nations for the sake of the temple in Jerusalem. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

And this gospel of the eternal endurance of the temple in Jerusalem and news of its coming destruction shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let the Jews which be in Judea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But the Jews who worship at the temple in Jerusalem should pray that THEIR flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: For then shall be great tribulation for the Jews who worship at the temple in Jerusalem, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the sake of the Jews who worship at the temple in Jerusalem, those days shall be shortened.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​
Have it your simple way: In Matthew 24:15-21 and Luke 21:20-24 Jesus was not answering them by telling them about the tribulation and persecution that the living stones of the New Testament Temple were to endure. He was answering their question about the temple in Jerusalem.
 
Last edited:

CTK

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2024
1,515
315
83
72
Albuquerque
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That's absolute nonsense. The prophecy in verses 24-25 is not about the coming of the "antichrist" who you are talking about. It's about the coming of the Messiah. The prince of the people who would come and destroy the city is only mentioned in verse 26.

You have just turned the prophecy on its head and have completely corrupted the revelation of God given to Daniel.

You are implying that Christ is an antichrist or the one you call "the" antichrist.



Absolute nonsense. That's not what Daniel 9:24-25 says about the coming of the Messiah.

Daniel 9:26: After threescore and two weeks (AFTER THE 69TH WEEK) shall

(a) Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and

(b) 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.

Daniel 9:27: And (a) he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(a) Messiah: Shall confirm the covenant with many for (during) the one (final) week.
(b) For for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

It's not clear whether it's the Messiah making it desolate (by handing it over to Rome in 70 AD), or the people of the prince who were to come making it desolate because of the overspreading of abominations - but it makes no difference, because the prophecy is about only one person and the coming of that one person - the Messiah.
You are absolutely correct! But I think you might take a second look at the verses I was speaking to - not chapter 9 but chapters 7 and 8.
 

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2020
5,244
1,863
113
Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
You are absolutely correct! But I think you might take a second look at the verses I was speaking to - not chapter 9 but chapters 7 and 8.

I don't believe you know what you are talking about. Daniel 8:11-12; 11:31 & 12:11 are talking about an abomination of desolation in a temple that according to the prophecy would not be destroyed when the daily sacrifices were restored. Nor would the city be destroyed - and it has already taken place in history, becoming the type of the abomination of desolation that is still to come.

Chapter 9:26-27 is associated with the destruction of both the city and the temple.

You need to believe the prophets instead of in what you take away from and put into the prophets.
 

Trekson

Well-Known Member
Jul 24, 2012
2,679
311
83
70
Kentucky
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
True. Messiah the Prince was the prince to come. He came between five and six centuries after Daniel wrote.

Hogwash. :laughing:

Here is a description of 70 AD from the Jewish Virtual Library itself. Ancient Jewish History: The Great Revolt

No conscripts to be seen. Only Roman troops and Jewish Zealots.

Both the people of Messiah the Prince for His purposes of accomplishing judgment and destruction upon the city and the nation which had rejected Him.


You're peddling nothing but dispensational revisionist futurized fantasy and fallacy.
So, you're going to believe something from an organization whose purpose is to denounce anything that could possibly lead to Christ? Perhaps to those at the time because they were in Rome's army, they were understood to be Romans. Their army was large because of their use and they used the plunder of other nations to help pay for them.
 

CTK

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2024
1,515
315
83
72
Albuquerque
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I don't believe you know what you are talking about. Daniel 8:11-12; 11:31 & 12:11 are talking about an abomination of desolation in a temple that according to the prophecy would not be destroyed when the daily sacrifices were restored. Nor would the city be destroyed - and it has already taken place in history, becoming the type of the abomination of desolation that is still to come.

Chapter 9:26-27 is associated with the destruction of both the city and the temple.

You need to believe the prophets instead of in what you take away from and put into the prophets.
Thanks for your thoughts. Please read or re-read the earlier posts -#'s 122, 123 and 134. Just for nothing tell me your understanding of what 12:11 is talking about and how you intepret the 1290 days....
 

CTK

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2024
1,515
315
83
72
Albuquerque
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So, you're going to believe something from an organization whose purpose is to denounce anything that could possibly lead to Christ? Perhaps to those at the time because they were in Rome's army, they were understood to be Romans. Their army was large because of their use and they used the plunder of other nations to help pay for them.
Is is possible that the term "army" used here does not mean a military army?