70th Week and Day of the Lord are separate events.

[covenantee]

I agree with part of what you are saying, but I think you are blending two different levels of destruction that Daniel keeps distinct.
Yes, there was a spiritual condition before the physical destruction. Daniel’s prayer in chapter 9 shows that Jerusalem’s earlier fall came after covenant disobedience. In the same way, by the time of Christ, the nation’s leadership had become spiritually desolate before the physical destruction of AD 70. I do not disagree with that principle.

But Daniel 9:26 is still speaking of a real physical destruction of the city and sanctuary: “the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” The Jews did not physically destroy the city and temple in AD 70. Rome did.

So while the Jews were covenantally responsible for rejecting Messiah, the actual destroying “people” in verse 26 were the Roman people/armies. That is why the phrase points us to a prince connected to the Roman power, not simply back to Messiah the Prince in verse 25.

Also, the text does not say “His people,” as though it means Messiah’s people. It says “the people of the prince who is to come.” The people are identified by their connection to that coming prince, and historically the people who destroyed the city and sanctuary were Roman.

And when Jesus refers to Daniel’s abomination of desolation, He is not merely warning about old Babylonian history. He is pointing forward to the consequence of rejecting Him. The same pattern repeats: spiritual desolation first, physical destruction afterward. But that still does not make the Roman destroyers into the Jews, nor does it require the coming prince of verse 26 to be Messiah the Prince of verse 25.

History records that the Jews themselves, e.g. the Zealots, were highly complicit in the destruction of Jerusalem.

Why do you not believe that Messiah could use unbelieving Romans and Jews as His people, i.e. agents and instruments, to accomplish His purposes of judgment and destruction upon the apostate nation? He certainly did at least twice in the OT.

 

[CTK]

The Bible does not tell us that Daniel was speaking of a real physical destruction of the city and sanctuary, you assume this through extrabiblical sources. Yes, the Jews did SPIRITUALLY destroy the city and temple by committing spiritual abominations against God. Why do you argue for the physical destruction in 70 AD? What comes next if this is what the prophet Daniel is speaking of? What are your expectations when Christ, the promised Messiah Prince shall come again?



No, the text does not point us to a prince connected to the Roman power. What the text does not say is that the prince that shall come is a lesser Prince than Messiah the Prince that has been the focus. Again, you only read Rome into the text through extrabiblical sources. Yes, the people coming who destroy the city and temple are indeed connected to the Prince that would come. They are of the same biological seeds of Abraham; Jews. Just as the Prince that would come the Messiah was born of the Jews.

Yes, Daniel is pointing forward to what shall befall his people in the future when they too reject God.

Thanks for the coversation but I have provided you with answers with scripture references to your interpretations at least twice. You are certainly entitiled to your own interpretations.

9:26.....And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.

In the above verse, who are the people that will come to destroy the city in 70 AD? (Rome)
Is the destruction of the city found within these verses or, as you claim, from extrabiblical sources? (here with chapter 9)
Is the prince mentioned in the verse above coming AFTER the destruction of the city and the sanctuary? (Yes)
After the city and the sanctuary are destoyed in 70 AD, are there ANY more Jews left (very few but you know what I mean)? (No)
After the cross, Jesus returned to His Father in heaven. Can He be this "prince of the Roman people to come?" (No)
Does the little horn arise to power AFTER the city and the sanctuary are destroyed in 70 AD? (Yes)

I hope you will take another / another / another look at all of the information that has been put in front of you during the past week or so. But again, you are entitiled to your own interpretations... I have to move on. Best wishes.

 

[CTK]

History records that the Jews themselves, e.g. the Zealots, were highly complicit in the destruction of Jerusalem.

Why do you not believe that Messiah could use unbelieving Romans and Jews as His people, i.e. agents and instruments, to accomplish His purposes of judgment and destruction upon the apostate nation? He certainly did at least twice in the OT.

There is no question there was terrible in-fighting within the nation - at least 3 different factions all clawing at themselve. The nation was disintegrating. But, the one common denominator for the 3 groups was their hatred for Rome. And when the northern Jews fought, embarrassed and killed many Romans, they made a decision to send Titus and a very large army to get rid of them once and for all.

God certainly DID use the Romans for His purposes, no different than when He used Babylon to destroy the Assyrians, or the Persians to destroy the Babylonians, or the Greeks to destroy the Persians. Nothing new there..... Not sure why you brought that up - did not come from my writings.

 

[covenantee]

There is no question there was terrible in-fighting within the nation - at least 3 different factions all clawing at themselve. The nation was disintegrating. But, the one common denominator for the 3 groups was their hatred for Rome. And when the northern Jews fought, embarrassed and killed many Romans, they made a decision to send Titus and a very large army to get rid of them once and for all.

God certainly DID use the Romans for His purposes, no different than when He used Babylon to destroy the Assyrians, or the Persians to destroy the Babylonians, or the Greeks to destroy the Persians. Nothing new there..... Not sure why you brought that up - did not come from my writings.

Don't you believe that the prince in verse 26 is not Messiah?