Daniel 9:24-27

[Trekson]

[SIZE=12pt]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)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]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.)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]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. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]: (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 70th 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.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]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)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]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.”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]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?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Many assume that the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is depicted in this passage but in my opinion, it is not! 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 70th week. In this passage, the a/c is the king of the north.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]I used to believe the a/c would make a seven year “treaty/covenant” with Israel based on 9:27. 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.”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]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…”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]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.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]The Jews national rejection of Christ is the direct cause for the time gap between the end of the 69th week and the beginning of the 70th week. Christ had to be crucified per God’s plan, however, if immediately afterward Israel would have repented then the 70th week would have continued as prophesied. As a result of their rejection, the 70th 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.” 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,” then 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.[/SIZE]

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

That's a very good, short exegesis for these very important verses. Every valid eschatology has to incorporate Daniel 9:24-27 in order to be serious. How this is done can make a fundamental pivot in your take on the end-times.

I agree wholeheartedly that the actor, he, in verse 27 (understood by the singular, masculine verb conjugation of gabar) reverts back to a prince who comes from the people who destroy the Temple. I maintain that the future anti-Christ will be Roman in nature and head of the "North."

By the way, against critics of Daniel who state it was written in the second century as historical (to counter the accuracy in prophecy for the conflict between the Greeks' divided kingdoms) - Daniel 9:26 is still future oriented and stands as prophecy proved true.

I have a slightly different take on the verbs used in verse 24 and I'll have to re-consider that some like putting an end to sin is still future-oriented. I counted the first four as accomplished and the last two still to be fulfilled. Again, I'll have to go back and look at this anew - thank-you for stirring up the old thought process.

Based on Hosea 6:2 though, I have to question if Israel's disobedience was not foreseen and these past two "days" (2000 years) are not the growing season for the Church. In that vein, the Church must come in first before natural Israel becomes jealous for the Servant Messiah she rejected but sees anew in their Millennial Messiah King. Thus, they live with the Lord for the third "day," - the Millennium.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

In the prevailing view of Bible prophecy, the well known passage in Daniel chapter 9 concerning the 70 weeks of Daniel is commonly interpreted to put forth the proposition that the Antichrist will make a 7-year treaty with the Jewish people. But is this proposition actually accurate, and if it is not, what are the implications for the rather large cluster of prophetic interpretations that rest upon this idea of a treaty that will be broken "in the midst of the week"? (Daniel 9:27)

Daniel's 70th week is one of the premier prophetic passages in the entire Bible - but it has been distorted to the point where the interpretation that is popularly offered is so far off from what the text actually says that most believers simply take the interpretation for granted. This traditional interpretation has become so deeply ingrained that study Bibles routinely offer it in their margin notes. Indeed, few people are aware that it is this very text that is the primary passage used to teach the faulty idea of a 7-year tribulation, and the fictional 7-year treaty. The truth is, there is not one verse in the entire Bible that teaches either concept.

The key to Daniel's 70-Week passage is found in the summary of what is to occur during a period described as "70 weeks." That summary occurs in Daniel 9:24:

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to
[a] finish the transgression
[b ] and to make an end of sins,
[c] and to make reconciliation for iniquity,
[d] and to bring in everlasting righteousness,
[e] and to seal up the vision and prophecy,
[f] and to anoint the most holy."

Various sequential aspects of the prophecy are then detailed, including how long it will be until the coming of "Messiah the prince," and how long His ministry will last. These details are found in verses 25 and 26. Then the prophecy bluntly informs us that after the Messiah has come and gone, an unnamed "people" will come and destroy "the city and the sanctuary." (verse 26)

The last aspect of the prophecy elaborates on the destruction of the sanctuary and the abominations that are to occur. It even describes the reason for the devastation as the text tells us it is "...for the overspreading of abominations [that] he shall make it desolate." (Daniel 9:27)

Once again, it's crucial that we see that Jesus the Messiah is the fulfillment of these prophecies - and the totality of what he accomplishes is in verse 24. One may simply read through the points of verse 24 and ask WHO fulfills each and every aspect of the prophecy? The answer is JESUS CHRIST.

Another way to approach this is to reverse the perspective. Does the Antichrist "finish the transgression?" Of course not. Can it be said that the Beast is the one who will "make an end of sins?" Obviously not. Does the Son of Perdition "make reconciliation for iniquity?" The answer is self-evident. Does the wicked one "seal up the vision and prophecy?" He does not. And does the Antichrist "anoint the most holy?" Of course not.

The focal point of the entire prophecy is JESUS CHRIST. It may also be instructive to recognize that because we are reading this prophecy so many years after its fulfillment we don't fully appreciate the incredible accuracy in it. We need to point out that Daniel's incredible work was written about 550 years before JESUS was born!

It's worth noting that the coming of the Messiah was always the central hope implied in virtually every prophecy. The belief that God would send a Messiah is the great historic longing that existed in almost every historic time period of Israel and Judah. One of the great wonders of this prophecy is that it not only provided precious details about the arrival of the Messiah, it even included a countdown to the events that would lead to his arrival!

Conversely, the Antichrist is never mentioned. There is no mention of a 7-year treaty, nor a 7-year tribulation. All of those understandings have been artificially attached to the prophecy. The central message in this entire prophecy is the arrival of the Messiah, and what will happen once he arrives. Having said that, let's take it chronologically.

The first part of the prophecy, after the summary in verse 24, breaks down the period into separate components. Verse 25 says that "from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks." Most prophecy teachers have recognized the 'year for a day' principle in this prophetic language. Under this perspective, each "week" is seen as a seven-year period. Thus, the first period of "seven weeks" may accurately be depicted as seven seven-year periods - or 49 years. The second period of "threescore and two weeks" (which is 62 weeks) may be seen as 62 seven-year periods, or 434 years. That totals 69 "weeks" or 483 years - leaving only the third period of one "week" (7 years) for the total of 70 weeks.

What the text is saying is that the commandment to build Jerusalem will trigger three time periods. To offer a rough paraphrase, it's telling us the commandment will be given, then 49 years later something related to the prophecy will happen. Then a period of 434 years will elapse, and then the Messiah will arrive. The last period of 7 years will then elapse. A characterization of the first portion of the prophecy is added when the text tells us the time when the sanctuary is to be rebuilt will be "troublous."

Textual evidence in the historical books of Nehemiah and Ezra suggest that it took about 49 years to rebuild the wall and the temple after the command to construct them was given by the Persian king Cyrus: "Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah." (Ezra 1:2).

After the initial building period of 49 years elapsed, the second period of 434 years went by with almost nothing occurring that was related to the messianic expectation. This second period is the period between the last book of the Old Testament (Malachi) and the coming of Jesus Christ - and it turns out to be 434 years!

It is at this point that the gigantic error is made in the prophetic interpretation - and it changes the meaning of almost everything. Because the prophecy is broken up into 3 periods (49 years, 434 years, and 7 years), prophecy interpreters claim that the prophecy was "suspended" after the Messiah arrived, and the last 7-year period, which they identify as the tribulation, was pushed far into the future. They then say the Antichrist will emerge and inaugurate that last 7-year period. The problem is, the text never actually says any of that, nor does it even infer a gap between the 69th and 70th week.

The Messiah arrives after the 2nd period of 434 years (62 weeks in the text). There is no reason to believe the unfolding of the timeline stops at that point. Thus, the Messiah arrives at the beginning of the 70th week and it commenced when he arrived. Remember, the focus of the prophecy is on the Messiah who must accomplish everything specified within the 70-week period.

After the Messiah arrives, the text simply continues with the chronological description: "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off...." (Daniel 9:26) This verse is simply saying that after the second period of 434 years (the 62 weeks) has gone by, the Messiah is to be "cut off." It then continues the chronological statement from the point of the 'cutting off' and says that at some unspecified time after the Messiah is cut off, "the city and the sanctuary" will be destroyed.

In the next verse, the prophecy provides us with the details of the cutting off of the Saviour. Again, the focal point of the entire prophecy is the Messiah, so after he arrives, "he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week...." (Daniel 9:27) This is precisely what would be expected as when he arrived, there would be "one week" left to the 70 weeks. The obvious question should be how can the Antichrist suddenly get inserted into this prophecy and "confirm" a covenant that has never been mentioned? Indeed, the Antichrist himself has never been mentioned in the entire text!

Furthermore, it's useful to recognize that the term covenant is not the same term as the word treaty. We separate the Bible into the Old Testament and the New Testament, and the word "testament" is interchangeable with the term covenant (see Hebrews 9:15). On the other hand, a treaty is a political instrument that is used between nations - not a sacred agreement between God and man.

In the Old Testament, God made an agreement with man that if the people will adhere to his "covenant," he will protect and keep them and be their God. This is articulated in Exodus with the children of Israel where God says "Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people...." (Exodus 19:5). In the very passage in question in Daniel, which is prophetic on its face, God further promises that he will bring the Messiah who will confirm the covenant that he has already made.

Although it is a new covenant in that it brings out certain characteristics that were somewhat veiled in the Old Testament, because it is a covenant with Israel, it is actually a renewal of the covenant that God made through Moses. Thus in Jeremiah, God says "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel...." (Jeremiah 31:31)

Therefore, about 50 years after God promised to Jeremiah that he would remember Israel with another covenant that will build upon the existing covenant, he tells Daniel that "the Messiah the Prince...shall confirm the covenant with many...." (Daniel 9:25, 27).

The New Testament writers recognized this as the Apostle Paul explicitly wrote on the subject when he stated "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after...." (Galatians 3:17) Through this confirmation, we learn that Christ is the heir of all the promises. He is the Seed of Abraham upon whom the blessings are bestowed, and he is the only one who "brings in everlasting righteousness." (Daniel 9:2).

The twist on the truth that has come to dominate the prophetic expectations of so many millions will reap a bitter harvest. As vast numbers of Christians are deceived on this subject, their lives and actions are predicated on a false understanding of the immediate future - and the fruit of it will be dreadful. Very few understand the enormous spiritual ramifications of embracing significant error in our prophetic perspective. Indeed, it was the fact that Israel did not recognize the time of their visitation from God that brought the nation of Israel to "the overspreading of abominations" that were the natural outgrowth of their refusal to recognize Jesus as their promised Messiah.

Literally millions upon millions of believers are now similarly deceived in that the person explicitly described in the scriptures as the MESSIAH is actually seen as the Antichrist. Our Saviour told the Pharisees that attributing the works of God to the Devil was the unpardonable sin (Matthew 12:31). The blind religious leaders of yesteryear claimed the person doing the miracles in their presence was actually a vessel of the Devil. The truth was, that person was Jesus Christ and the Jewish leaders committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit in their refusal to recognize Jesus was the individual prophesied of in Daniel 9:27.

How is it any different when the modern day Pharisees, the denominational Christians of our time, are now claiming these magnificent prophecies apply to the Antichrist, when the exact opposite is true as these words testify of the awesome truth of "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ?" (Titus 2:13) As the import of this great truth sinks in, it affects practically everything - including the actual identity of the chosen people, our individual standing in Christ, and the immediate future of America in a prophetic context.

The very fact that most "believers" will simply discard this pointed exegesis testifies that it is the organized churches that have perpetrated the great fraud that Christendom finds herself entangled in. And because of their lazy refusal to study the truth of the scriptures on a personal level - instead relying upon the false doctrines of their hireling shepherds - we will shortly see the big surprise in which so many that thought they were saved will be turned away. The scriptures will not be broken, and they tell us it is "for which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience." (Colossians 3:6)

-- Brother James

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Sorry, but it is not by the overspreading of abomination, but "on wing," abominations, desolation - as written in the Hebrew.

"On wing:" describing the fastest animal of ancient time. Kind of like how the anti-Christ comes like a flood in Daniel 11: quickly and overwhelmingly.

Wings, being the strongest muscle of a bird, can denote strength. They are used in the Psalms to also show shielding. But another attribute of a wing is its speed, like how Mercury is depicted with winged feet.

Saying, "on wing," is like saying a person "flew" into a room.

Secondly, Jesus never made a limited time covenant.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

Not knowing who/what "Israel" is, then lumping the ill-named "Israel" in with the "Church" (another invention), and mixing the dough with the leaven of "rapture" theory (another invention), results in a half-baked theology that blinds one to the truth of the wonderful 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Which really means that you can't tell me where Jesus ever forced through by (military) strength a limited, seven-year covenant; so instead you resort to the lowest form of debate: ridicule and insult.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

Sorry, but it is...as written in the Hebrew.

Please show all of us the scriptural passage directing us to learn Hebrew.

"On wing:" describing the fastest animal of ancient time. Kind of like how the anti-Christ comes like a flood in Daniel 11: quickly and overwhelmingly.

There's no "antichrist" in that passage.

Wings, being the strongest muscle of a bird, can denote strength.

It can also denote the name of Paul McCartney's band. Rather, context.

They are used in the Psalms to also show shielding. But another attribute of a wing is its speed, like how Mercury is depicted with winged feet.

Mercury is a demon, a devil.

Quantum leaps of worldly logic, without scriptural or linguistic support

Which really means that you can't tell me where Jesus ever forced through by (military) strength a limited, seven-year covenant

No one said he did. In the meantime, your "covenant" comment is a non sequitur to the issue I raised, "which really means you can't tell me" who or what is "Israel."

The central issue confronting the last generation is related to the identity of Jesus Christ, and the identity of the believers, in relationship to him. Those who teach that “Israel” is a flesh and blood construct, existing side by side with the so called “Church” under the New Covenant, are in a lethal error. The Scriptures plainly state there is one body (Ephesians 4:4) of saved individuals based upon Spiritual regeneration in Christ (“ye must be born again”), and that body was chosen by the LORD, and consistently identified with Israel.
.
.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

If you don't try to learn what the original language meant, with its nuances, culture, and idioms, you are not a serious student of the Bible.

Daniel uses many names for the anti-Christ, and anti-Christ isn't one of them. In this passage he is the prince who is to come: "and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. HE will prevail a covenant, not the Messiah prince who was, previous to this factual statement of prophecy; cut off. The order is correct: 1. Jesus is slain, 2. people destroy the Temple, and 3. war continues to the end. Referring back to the last person mentioned, verse 27's implicit pronoun refers to the prince (the anti-Christ is the King of the North) who comes from the people who destroyed the Temple.

Daniel writes in his culture, not yours. The King James translators had the right concept for the figurative use of "wing," but missed the correct characteristic, which is multiple.

Mercury is mythic man-made creation; he is not real like demons. You err again. You also knew exactly to whom I was referring. The example demonstrates the principle that birds' wings are associated with swiftness.

"No one said he [sic] did."? YOU said Jesus was at the heart of every part of this passage in Daniel. Therefore, while you may not have had actually said Jesus forced - prevailed a limited-time covenant: your entire tenet shouts it out. My challenge to those who say Jesus is the actor of verse 27 is to show the world WHERE, HOW, and WHEN Jesus EVER made a limited, seven-year covenant.

To use the reference to one body to blur the stark distinction between Christians and non-believing-in-Jesus-Jews is to totally miss the mark of why we are to endure patiently, and only those in Judea are to flee, and shows such a proponent is again not a worthy student of the Bible so as to dictate theology to those to whom he or she disagrees.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

If you don't try to learn what the original language meant, with its nuances, culture, and idioms, you are not a serious student of the Bible.

You don't even know the definition of the hackneyed term, "original language."

If you don't believe the word of God, i.e. that God has preserved his pure inspired word for ever (Psalm 12:6, 7), and magnified it above his name ( Psalm 138:2), then you are just another in a long line of wanna-be 'scholars' posing as an arbiter of God's word who, as Malachi chapter 2 says, has 'corrupted the covenant' and 'led many astray.'

Daniel writes in his culture, not yours.

God gave ALL cultures his pure inspired preserved for ever word, and in ALL languages (Acts 2, Psalms 12).

Your blindness to the truth of prophectic parallels is due in part to a refusal to lay down your theology on the altar before the King.

The King James translators had the right concept for the figurative use of "wing," but missed the correct characteristic, which is multiple.

How magnanimous of you to correct the translators.

Mercury is mythic man-made creation; he is not real like demons. You err again.

Rather, you err as you again mix what is holy with what is profane and think nothing of it.

Mercury was, and still is, a major Roman god, with his own major festival.

...while you may not have had actually said Jesus forced - prevailed a limited-time covenant: your entire tenet shouts it out.

The spirit behind your fabrication demands that you perceive my words in a manner "expeditious" to your theology.

My challenge to those who say Jesus is the actor of verse 27 is to show the world WHERE, HOW, and WHEN Jesus EVER made a limited, seven-year covenant.

Now Jesus is an "actor" lol... Because you do not know who or what a Jew is, who or what the remnant is, who or what Israel is, who or what God's chosen people are, you've placed yourself into the position of having to re-define, indeed, pigeonhole, the word of God to suit your implacable theology. Your "limited seven-year covenant" is a red herring, worse, a strawman, to the truth of the 70 weeks prophecy (and, I add, a disgrace to the word of God). The next new version, the next dead language, the next Roman god, the next, the next -- none of it will bring you any closer to the truth. Again, you must lay your intellect down on the altar before the King -- not before textual critics.

To use the reference to one body...

We, the born again, are the BODY OF CHRIST. There is no Jew or Gentile in Christ. Read your Bible and not the National Enquirer.

To use the reference to one body to blur the stark distinction between Christians and non-believing-in-Jesus-Jews is to totally miss the mark of why we are to endure patiently, and only those in Judea are to flee, and shows such a proponent is again not a worthy student of the Bible so as to dictate theology to those to whom he or she disagrees.

Do you think Judea is necesarily referring to geography? Again, are you not aware of prophetic parallels, indeed, throughout scripture?

Judea = collectively the Jews; Jewry.

I haven't "dictated" anything other than scripture. My post is filled with it, whereas your post is filled with secular speculation. Consider yourself corrected, with Scripture.

 

[Trekson]

Hi S4C, Your words: "In the prevailing view of Bible prophecy, the well known passage in Daniel chapter 9 concerning the 70 weeks of Daniel is commonly interpreted to put forth the proposition that the Antichrist will make a 7-year treaty with the Jewish people. But is this proposition actually accurate, and if it is not, what are the implications for the rather large cluster of prophetic interpretations that rest upon this idea of a treaty that will be broken "in the midst of the week"?"

This time, try actually reading my post and try again.

Hi S4C, Your words: "We, the born again, are the BODY OF CHRIST. There is no Jew or Gentile in Christ."

I will address this one issue. I agree 100% with your statement, AT THIS TIME. However, when the "times of the Gentiles" are fulfilled, THINGS CHANGE! If you read the prophetic books in the OT, just about everyone of them, in its final chapters, speak about the restoration of Israel. This is national Israel, not codewords for "the body of Christ"! There will come a time, in fulfillment of prophecy, when the remnant of national Israel, will be given the spirit of grace to know the truth, Zech. 12:10, when that happens, they will say, again in fulfillment of prophecy, Matt.23:39, "Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord". They can only come to God in the same way as all believers do, by accepting His atoning sacrifice for their sins, acknowledging that He is the Son of God and receiving His salvation, in their hearts. There is no other way. All of Israel that is left alive by the end of the 70th week, will do this if they want to enter into the millennium, so that again as prophesied, "All Israel will be saved"!

 

[Retrobyter]

Shabbat shalom, sojourner4Christ.

(Marcus said, “If you don't try to learn what the original language meant, with its nuances, culture, and idioms, you are not a serious student of the Bible.” )

You don't even know the definition of the hackneyed term, "original language."

If you don't believe the word of God, i.e. that God has preserved his pure inspired word for ever (Psalm 12:6, 7), and magnified it above his name ( Psalm 138:2), then you are just another in a long line of wanna-be 'scholars' posing as an arbiter of God's word who, as Malachi chapter 2 says, has 'corrupted the covenant' and 'led many astray.'

(Marcus said, “Daniel writes in his culture, not yours.”)

God gave ALL cultures his pure inspired preserved-for-ever word, and in ALL languages (Acts 2, Psalms 12).

Your blindness to the truth of prophectic parallels is due in part to a refusal to lay down your theology on the altar before the King.

(Marcus said, “The King James translators had the right concept for the figurative use of "wing," but missed the correct characteristic, which is multiple.”)

How magnanimous of you to correct the translators.

(Marcus said, “Mercury is mythic man-made creation; he is not real like demons. You err again.”)

Rather, you err as you again mix what is holy with what is profane and think nothing of it.

Mercury was, and still is, a major Roman god, with his own major festival.

(Marcus said, “'No one said he [sic] did.'? YOU said Jesus was at the heart of every part of this passage in Daniel. Therefore, while you may not have had actually said Jesus forced - prevailed a limited-time covenant: your entire tenet shouts it out. My challenge to those who say Jesus is the actor of verse 27 is to show the world WHERE, HOW, and WHEN Jesus EVER made a limited, seven-year covenant.", and you truncated it to “...while you may not have had actually said Jesus forced - prevailed a limited-time covenant: your entire tenet shouts it out.")

The spirit behind your fabrication demands that you perceive my words in a manner "expeditious" to your theology.

(Marcus said, “My challenge to those who say Jesus is the actor of verse 27 is to show the world WHERE, HOW, and WHEN Jesus EVER made a limited, seven-year covenant.”)

Now Jesus is an "actor" lol... Because you do not know who or what a Jew is, who or what the remnant is, who or what Israel is, who or what God's chosen people are, you've placed yourself into the position of having to re-define, indeed, pigeonhole, the word of God to suit your implacable theology. Your "limited seven-year covenant" is a red herring, worse, a strawman, to the truth of the 70 weeks prophecy (and, I add, a disgrace to the word of God). The next new version, the next dead language, the next Roman god, the next, the next -- none of it will bring you any closer to the truth. Again, you must lay your intellect down on the altar before the King -- not before textual critics.

(Marcus said, “To use the reference to one body to blur the stark distinction between Christians and non-believing-in-Jesus-Jews is to totally miss the mark of why we are to endure patiently, and only those in Judea are to flee, and shows such a proponent is again not a worthy student of the Bible so as to dictate theology to those to whom he or she disagrees.”)

We, the born again, are the BODY OF CHRIST. There is no Jew or Gentile in Christ. Read your Bible and not the National Enquirer.

(and add...)

Do you think Judea is necesarily referring to geography? Again, are you not aware of prophetic parallels, indeed, throughout scripture?

Judea = collectively the Jews; Jewry.

I haven't "dictated" anything other than scripture. My post is filled with it, whereas your post is filled with secular speculation. Consider yourself corrected, with Scripture.

A couple of things you should think about: First, remember that NO language is sufficient to tell all of Yeshua`s (Jesus’) works. (John 21:25)

Second, no language translates into another language perfectly one-to-one. One word in Hebrew, for example, might translate to English as many different words, depending on its context, and many different words in Hebrew might translate to the same English word. The same can be said for ANY language, not just Hebrew. That’s just a fact related to the fact that languages are communication tools of fallible human beings.

A case in point: “word.” In English, this ONE word, “word,” is translated from 561 eemer, 565 imraah, 1697 daaVar, 2790 maarash, 4405 milaah, or 6310 peh. And, that’s just the HEBREW! I’m not even talking about Aramaic or Greek, yet! Now, here are those six words listed in the Greek Dictionary of Strong’s Concordance:

OT:565 imraah (im-raw'); or emraah (em-raw'); feminine of OT:561, and meaning the same:
KJV - commandment, speech, word.

OT:561 eemer (ay'-mer; from OT:559; something said:
KJV - answer, appointed unto him, saying, speech, word.

OT:559 aamar (aw-mar'); a primitive root; to say (used with great latitude):
KJV - answer, appoint, avouch, bid, boastself, call, certify, challenge, charge, (at the, give) command (-ment), commune, consider, declare, demand, desire, determine, expressly, indeed, intend, name, plainly, promise, publish, report, require, say, speak (against, of), still, suppose, talk, tell, term, that is, think, use [speech], utter, verily, yet.

OT:1697 daaVaar (daw-bawr'); from OT:1696; a word; by implication, a matter (as spoken of) or thing; adverbially, a cause:
KJV - act, advice, affair, answer, any such (thing), because of, book, business, care, case, cause, certain rate, chronicles, commandment, commune (-ication), concern [-ing], confer, counsel, dearth, decree, deed, disease, due, duty, effect, eloquent, errand, [evil favouredness-], glory, harm, hurt, iniquity, judgment, language, lying, manner, matter, message, [no] thing, oracle, ought, parts, pertaining, please, portion, power, promise, provision, purpose, question, rate, reason, report, request, (as hast) said, sake, saying, sentence, sign, so, some [uncleanness], somewhat to say, song, speech, spoken, talk, task, that, there done, thing (concerning), thought, thus, tidings, what [-soever], wherewith, which, word, work.

OT:2790 chaarash (khaw-rash'); a primitive root; to scratch, i.e. (by implication) to engrave, plough (plow); hence (from the use of tools) to fabricate (of any material); figuratively, to devise (in a bad sense); hence (from the idea of secrecy) to be silent, to let alone; hence (by implication) to be deaf (as an accompaniment of dumbness):
KJV - altogether, cease, conceal, be deaf, devise, ear, graven, imagine, leave off speaking, hold peace, plow (-er, man), be quiet, rest, practise secretly, keep silence, be silent, speak not a word, be still, hold tongue, worker.

OT:4405 millaah (mil-law'); from OT:4448 (plural masculine as if from milleh (mil-leh'); a word; collectively, a discourse; figuratively, a topic:
KJV - answer, by-word, matter, any thing (what) to say, to speak (-ing), speak, talking, word.

OT:6310 peh (peh); from OT:6284; the mouth (as the means of blowing), whether literal or figurative (particularly speech); specifically edge, portion or side; adverbially (with preposition) according to:
KJV - accord (-ing as, -ing to), after, appointment, assent, collar, command (-ment), eat, edge, end, entry, file, hole, in, mind, mouth, part, portion, (should) say (-ing), sentence, skirt, sound, speech, spoken, talk, tenor, to, two-edged, wish, word.

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

Look at all the English words (following the “KJV -“ tag) to which each one of these words was translated! If one were to look up each one of these English words in Strong’s Concordance, one would find that particular Hebrew number listed beside that verse entry!

You should not ignore these many-to-one and one-to-many relationships between languages!

Third, one really DOES need to understand the culture and history of a particular people if the author of a book of the Bible hails from that people, culture, and time period! It makes a GREAT difference in how one should understand a particular word or phrase. For instance, if we were to say “he filed it away” back in the early 1800s, one would need to understand that the speaker was referring to a person using a file or rasp and was filing a burr of some sort off of a piece of metal, for instance. Say that same phrase today, and one would normally and naturally understand that the speaker was referring to a person putting information in a file cabinet, whether a literal file cabinet or a file folder on a computer!

Now, let’s look at one passage of the verses you chose to use for your life principle: Psalm 12:6, 7:

Psalm 12:6-7
6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
KJV

All this is on the ONE WORD “word!”

And, NOTICE: Psalm 12 is NOT on the words WRITTEN; it’s about the words SAID! And, again, look at all the English words (following "KJV - “) to which it was translated! However, one would not get that nuance from the (KJV) English wording of Psalm 12!

You shouldn’t hide your head in the sand about the original languages. While we don’t have the original documents - the original manuscripts, we DO have a preserved copy of those manuscripts.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

You shouldn’t hide your head in the sand about the original languages. While we don’t have the original documents - the original manuscripts, we DO have a preserved copy of those manuscripts

There's the problem. You don't know which is which, i.e. what is the inspired word of God and what is not the inspired word of God (witness the plethora of modern copyrighted inventions you've quoted from throughout the forums). You're adrift in your own vulgar library -- and the tragic point of the matter is that such does not matter to you! So naturally you do the culturally correct thing and mix the whole lot together.

While we don’t have the original documents - the original manuscripts, we DO have a preserved copy of those manuscripts

We don't need and don't want anything that the Lord has determined we do not need. We do have the Lord's pure, inspired, preserved for ever word in today's common Bible.

Conversely, your entire argument is derived from the secular mind. And it only continues downhill from there.

 

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, sojourner4Christ.

Oh, so that’s why we’ve been given all this information about Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek? God saw fit to give us this information because “the Lord has determined we do not need” it? Are you CRAZY?! As the saying used to go, “Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth!"

What is the version YOU think we’ve been given? The KJV? Did you know that it is called the "Authorized Version" because it is the ONLY version authorized and allowed by the Anglican Supreme Governor, King James I, to be used in the pulpits of the Church of England?

Did you know that the word “baptize” was basically INVENTED at that time because, although the Greek word “baptizo” means “I immerse,” such a translation would never have been accepted by the Anglican Church, which at most believed in pouring and believed in infant baptism? So, John was called the “Baptist” instead of the “Immerser!"

If you think you’re using the 1611 version, you’ve got another “think" coming! You couldn’t even READ the 1611 version, if you had one in your hands! The “1611 KJV" has undergone several revisions since 1611!

Did you know that there are multiple locations in the KJV that are just plain WRONG?! Here’s a sampling from bible-researcher.com/Defects of the King James Version:

The Rev. Dr. Green, of the Old Testament Revision Committee, gives the following paragraph, illustrative of error of this nature:

"Thus, 'the house of God,' Judges xx., 26, should be 'Bethel;' 'an hollow place that was in the jaw,' Judges xv., 19, should be 'the hollow place that is in Lehi;' 'populous No,' Nah. iii., 8, should be 'No-Ammon;' 'an heifer of three years old,' Isa. xv., 5, should have been left untranslated; so should 'what he did,' Num. xxi., 14. On the contrary, 'the book of Jasher,' 2 Sam. i., 18, is not by an author of that name, but is simply the book of the upright. 'Rub-saris' and 'Rub-mag,' Jer. xxxiv., 3, are not names of men but titles of office. 'Belial' is not the name of an evil spirit, but 'men of Belial' ought to be rendered 'worthless' or 'base men.' 'Huz-zab,' Nah. ii., 7, is not a personification of Nineveh, or a name of its queen, but a declaration that the fate of the city 'is decided.' 'Sheth,' Num. xxiv., 17, should be, 'tumult;' 'Bajith,' Isa. xv., 2, should be the 'house' or 'idol temple;' 'Gammadims,' Ezek. xxvii., 11, should be 'warriors ;' 'Pannag,' ver, 17, is not a region of country, but a species of confection; and there was no such place as 'Metheg-ammah,' 2 Sam. viii., 1."

Furthermore, the same source says:

The word translated "avenging," Judges v., 2, means "leaders ;" "the plain of Moreh," Gen. xii., 6, ought to be "the oak of Moreh;" "the groves," frequently spoken of in connection with idolatrous services, as Ex. xxxiv., 13, were not groves, but upright pillars. Job. xxvi, 13, does not speak of the "crooked," nor Isaiah xxvii., 1, of the "piercing" serpent; the epithet, which is the same in both cases, is 'fleet.' The psalmist does not say, Ps. lxxi., 22, "I will sing with the harp," but "I will play with the harp." Huldah did not dwell in the "college" 2 Kings xxii., 14, but in the "second ward" of the city. "Flagons of wine," Hos. iii., should be "cakes of pressed grapes;" "galleries," Cant. vii., 5, should be "curls" or "locks of hair." "All that made sluices and ponds for fish," Isa. xix., 10, is a mere guess from the connection, and should be rendered, "all that work for hire are sad at heart." Samson did not go down to "the top of the rock," Judges xv., 8, but to the "cleft of the rock." The children of Israel did not by divine direction "borrow," Ex. xi., 2, of the Egyptians what they never intended to return; they "asked" for and received gifts. "Chariots with flaming torches," Nah. ii., 3, are "chariots with flashing steel;" and "the fir trees" of the same verse are "lances made of cypress." "Hunt souls to make them fly," Ezek. xiii., 20, should be rendered, "hunt souls as birds;" and the "untempered mortar," ver. 10, should be "whitewash."

And, these are but a FEW of the mistakes that the translators of the KJV made!

Now, to qualify these, let’s admit that they are mistakes made unintentionally and without malice. On the other hand, they are STILL mistakes!

I don’t “prefer” the KJV, but I will use it most often because of the plethora of study helps keyed to its pages. However, there is NO version that has no mistakes! They are ALL fallible works of men! This is important for you to understand! The minute that human hands get involved in either the copying or the translation of the text, that copy or translation is susceptible to error! That’s called “informational thermodynamics.” It’s the NATURAL result of fallible human beings getting involved! And, no matter how careful and honest a person is, and no matter how thoroughly his work is checked and rechecked, the work will no longer be perfect! It may be 99.99995% pure, but it will no longer be 100%!

Haven’t you ever played “telephone?” As a child in grade school, I still remember sitting in a huge circle of kids in the gymnasium at our school, and seeing the whispering and the confusion on the faces of each child as a single message begun at the head of the circle worked its way around the circle until it got back to the last person next to the first. Then, the teacher asked the last student to recite what he had been told by the previous person to say. It often came out gibberish, but with some semblance of understanding. Then, the teacher would read from a paper exactly what the first person was told to say to the next. They didn’t sound ANYTHING like each other! The message had become garbled and lost much in the telling and retelling of that message! The more people there were in the circle, the worse the message was garbled!

We’ve had almost 2,000 years in the telling and retelling of the Scriptures - copying existing versions and writing new versions for other languages - and the message of the Bible has become garbled. No matter how careful the copying of the text, no matter how well the new text was checked against the old, mistakes were inevitable, all because of HUMAN ERROR!

Another source, DeanBurgonSociety.org/Non-Ruckmanite Answers to Anti-KJV, gives this analogy:

(6) Is any translation "inspired"? Is the KJV an "inspired translation"?
God "inspired" or "breathed out" (Qeopneusto", 2 Tim 3:16) His words in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Strictly speaking, the divinely inspired words were the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek words God gave to His Prophets and Apostles to pen the Holy Scriptures.
What is the relation between the inspired text and its derived translation? By way of illustration, the original language Scripture underlying the KJV is like the perfect platinum yardstick of the Smithsonian Institute, infallible, inerrant, authoritative. The KJV and other accurate and reliable translations are like the common yardstick, though not 100% are good and safe enough for use. Although there may be a need to consult the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts especially when interpreting difficult verses, we do not believe that the King James translators were in any way careless in translating their Bible. The same however cannot be said of the modern versions-they are definitely shorter by many inches and far too unreliable.

This source continued...

(7) Is the KJV "scripture?" Is it "given by inspiration of God" (2 Tim 3:16)?
The KJV as a translation was not "given by inspiration of God." "All Scripture" (pasa grafh) of 2 Timothy 3:16 refers to the original Hebrew, Aramaic OT and Greek NT words that God had "breathed out" without any error or mistake. These divinely inspired words in the original languages are infallible and inerrant and cannot be corrected, improved upon or changed in any way.
The English words of the KJV are translated words. But since the English words in the KJV are so accurately and faithfully translated from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek words, we can confidently declare the KJV to be "the Word of God," and "Holy Scripture," and thus "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" (2 Tim 3:16-17).

I believe both of these points are true! (Although the "platinum yardstick" has long been replaced by the definition of the standard meter as “the distance traveled by light in a vacuum in 1,299,792,500 seconds.” (Chemistry & Chemical Reactivity, John C. Kotz and Keith F. Purcell, Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia, PA, 1987, p. 12.)

 

[sojourner4Christ]

Did you know that there are multiple locations in the KJV that are just plain WRONG?! Here’s a sampling from bible-researcher.com/Defects of the King James Version:...

Furthermore, the same source says:...

Your quoted “source,” taken from here, indicates the author as one Isaac H. Hall. Who is Prof. Isaac H. Hall? He was a curator of sculpture. His domain included all works of art except paintings. He was a biblical scholar, a specialist in Syriac languages. He was an editor of the Oriental Department of the Sunday-School Times (Philadelphia). This scholar lists a bunch of bogus "errors" according to his lofty opinion.

Why does this KJB critic, the good professor Hall Ph. D., allege errors and defects in the King James Bible? Simply because this man does not believe that ANY Bible in ANY language IS or ever was the complete, inspired and 100% historically true words of God.

He has no infallible Bible in any language and he knows it. Just ask any ‘biblical scholar’ to tell you where you can get a copy of God's 100% true words so you can compare it to whatever translation you are using now so you can see the similarities and differences. They WILL NEVER TELL YOU! Why? Because they themselves are Bible Agnostics who do not know where to find God's infallible words and they couldn't give you a copy of them if their lives depended on it.

My family and I will be interceding for you tonight in Jesus Christ's name.

For the OP's sake, I am finished here.
.
.

 

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, Trekson.

Regarding Daniel 9:26-27:

The first thing one must understand is simple grammar, preferably from the Hebrew, since the passage was originally written in Hebrew, but in English as well.

Here’s the Hebrew transliterated:

Dani’el 9:26-27
26 V’achareey hashaaVu`iym shishiym uwshnayim yikaareet Maashiyach v’eeyn low vhaa`iyr vhaqodesh yashchiyt `am naagiyd habaa’ vqitsow basheTef v`ad qeets milchaamaah necheretset shomeemowt:
27 Vhigbiyr briyt laarabiym shaaVuwa` echaad vachatsiy hashaaVuwa` yashbiyt zeVach uwminchaah v`al knaf shiquwtsiym mshomeem v`ad kaalaah vnecheraatsaah titakh `al shomeem:
JPS Hebrew-English TANAKH

In verse 26, notice that the highlighted phrase consists of two nouns put back-to-back. The Hebrew word “`am” means “people.” The Hebrew word “naagiyd” means “prince.” When we translate into English, this pair of nouns, called a “noun construct state” in Hebrew, has the word “of” added between them: “people of prince.” For clarity, we might also add the definite article (although it is not present in the original): “[the] people of [the] prince.” In such a phrase, both in Hebrew and in the English translation, the first word “people” is the noun that may be part of the sentence grammar directly, participating in the activity of the verb as the subject, direct object, or the indirect object. The second noun is subordinate to the first in Hebrew and an object of the preposition “of” in English. In BOTH languages, the second noun cannot participate in the sentence grammar directly. In English, as a prepositional phrase, “of [the] prince,” the whole phrase is treated as an adjective or an adverb, describing a noun or the verb that does participate in the grammar. In this particular sentence, the phrase answers “WHICH people?” Thus, it is an adjective phrase that describes “people."

The ONLY active singular noun that has participated in the sentence grammar directly and refers to a single person has been “Maashiyach” or “[the] Messiah.” Thus, the verbs (which imply the pronoun “he”) that follow must refer back to “Maashiyach,” NOT to “naagiyd!” This is particularly true for subsequent “sentences” which give no subject noun, as those in verse 27! Therefore, the “he” found in verse 27 (all locations) MUST refer back to “Maashiyach!"

So, when we read (in translation),

Daniel 9:26-27
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.
27 And 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.
KJV

the instances of “he” in verse 27 refer to “Messiah” in verse 26.

Now, the word “confirm” in verse 27 is the Hebrew word “Vhigbiyr,” translated fully to “And-he-shall-confirm,” the leading vav, “V-,” being the connective “And.” The rest comes from the Hebrew word “gaaVar”:

OT:1396 gaaVar (gaw-bar'); a primitive root; to be strong; by implication, to prevail, act insolently:
KJV - exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more [strength], strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

[As is typical with Strong’s, the “bet” (Hebrew letter equivalent to our “b”), missing the dagesh (the middle dot), is really the Hebrew letter “vet” (the Hebrew letter equivalent to our “v”), and is pronounced as a “v” in “victory.” Hence, I transliterate it as a “V.”]

In Hebrew, this is the verb that is applied to the direct object noun, “briyt,” meaning “a covenant." In English, the active verb form of “strong” (an adjective) is “to strengthen.” Therefore, the word could also be translated “And-he-shall-strengthen.” However, using a Roget’s Thesaurus, one can find that “strengthening” an agreement, such as a “covenant,” can be the English word to "ratify” a covenant, meaning to “substantiate” the agreement.

It does NOT mean to “MAKE” a covenant! It means to “STRENGTHEN” an already existing covenant!

So, the conclusion is that verse 27 says:

1. MESSIAH shall strengthen a covenant with many for one Seven;
2. In the midst (middle) of the Seven MESSIAH shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and
3. For the overspreading of abominations MESSIAH shall make it (the city or the sanctuary) desolate, even until the consummation (conclusion).

And, those “abominations” are not HIS “abominations," obviously!

Furthermore, we are also given the additional information...

3a. That determined (decided; decreed) shall be poured upon the desolate (NOT the “desolator!”).

The “desolate” are those upon whom the “desolation” comes or those who are made “desolate."

These points are CONFIRMED in Scripture!

1. This is the longest to describe for sheer volume of Scripture passages: 1 Samuel 13:14; 16:12-13; 2 Samuel 2:4, 11; 5:1-5; 7:5-16 (although it could be the WHOLE chapter 7); 1 Chronicles 11:1-3; 17:7-14; Psalm 89:3-4, 20-37 (although, again, it is the WHOLE psalm - the WHOLE song). David (pronounced “Dah-VEED,” btw), Yeshua`s ancestor and the original king of his dynasty, was the first “King of the Jews.” He reigned in Hevrown (Hebron) for a little more than 7 years before he conquered Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) from haYvuwciym (the Jebusites) and was anointed king over Isra’el by the rest of the tribes’ leaders. The leaders of his own tribe came to HIM and anointed HIM to be their king before the rest of Isra’el “got over” Sha`uwl’s (Saul’s) dynasty. Being anointed, he was an "anointed one” - a “maashiyach” - a “messiah” - a “christos” - a “christ" - the same as his greater grandson, Yeshua`, whom people today call “Jesus [the] Christ.” It was THIS Davidic covenant which God made with David which the Messiah Yeshua` CONFIRMED and RATIFIED simply by “fulfilling all righteousness” and humbling Himself to be immersed by Yochanan (Matthew 3:13-17). Thus, Yeshua` was called “the Son of God” in the ears of others, and was anointed by the Ruach haQodesh, the Holy Spirit, of God, in fulfillment of the Davidic covenant, namely that David’s descendant would “call God his Father, and God would call Him His Son!” (See also Psalm 2:1-12.)
1 Chronicles 17:7-14
7 Now therefore thus shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote, even from following the sheep, that thou shouldest be ruler over my people Israel:
8 And I have been with thee whithersoever thou hast walked, and have cut off all thine enemies from before thee, and have made thee a name like the name of the great men that are in the earth.
9 Also I will ordain a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, and they shall dwell in their place, and shall be moved no more; neither shall the children of wickedness waste them any more, as at the beginning,
10 And since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel. Moreover I will subdue all thine enemies. Furthermore I tell thee that the LORD will build thee an house.
11 And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom.
12 He shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever.
13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee:
14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore.
KJV

1 Chronicles 22:8-10
8 But the word of the LORD came to me, saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made great wars: thou shalt not build an house unto my name, because thou hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight.
9 Behold, a son shall be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies round about: for his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quietness unto Israel in his days.
10 He shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.
KJV

1 Chronicles 28:2-7
2 Then David the king stood up upon his feet, and said, Hear me, my brethren, and my people: As for me, I had in mine heart to build an house of rest for the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and for the footstool of our God, and had made ready for the building:
3 But God said unto me, Thou shalt not build an house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and hast shed blood.
4 Howbeit the LORD God of Israel chose me before all the house of my father to be king over Israel for ever: for he hath chosen Judah to be the ruler; and of the house of Judah, the house of my father; and among the sons of my father he liked me to make me king over all Israel:
5 And of all my sons, (for the LORD hath given me many sons,) he hath chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the LORD over Israel.
6 And he said unto me, Solomon thy son, he shall build my house and my courts: for I have chosen him to be my son, and I will be his father.
7 Moreover I will establish his kingdom for ever, if he be constant to do my commandments and my judgments, as at this day.
KJV

Isaiah 55:1-4
1 Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
2 Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness.
3 Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David.
4 Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people.
KJV

Jeremiah 33:19-22
19 And the word of the LORD came unto Jeremiah, saying,
20 Thus saith the LORD; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season;
21 Then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests, my ministers.
22 As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.
KJV

David is one of the few names that are mentioned in both lineages of the Messiah (Matt. 1 and Luke 3), and Yeshua` is the ONE Person argued by Mattityahu (Matthew) to be the rightful Heir to David’s throne! So, when the Scriptures tell us that David passed on His covenant to His children and grandchildren through Shlomoh (Solomon), that it took David seven and a half years to be anointed king over Isra’el, and that God would call David’s “seed” His Son, it should take Yeshua` LESS time - seven years - the one Seven - to be anointed king over Isra’el, that is, with a FAITHFULgeneration, not the faithless ones who rejected Him and crucified Him at His first coming. Notice one of the six reasons for the final 70 Sevens:

Daniel 9:24
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
KJV

To anoint, not the PLACE, but the PERSON, the “most Holy!"

2. The Messiah caused the sacrifice and the oblation (the gift) to cease:

Hebrews 10:1-22
1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting (anticipating) till his enemies be made his footstool.
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, THERE IS NO MORE OFFERING FOR SIN.
19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water (baptism).
KJV

Matthew 27:50-53
50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
KJV

Mark 15:37-38
37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.
KJV

Luke 23:44-46
44 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.
45 And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.
46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
KJV

Oh, sure. While there was still a Temple for the next 40 years of testing, they still made animal sacrifices, but GOD was no longer accepting those slaughters as true sacrifices! Yeshua` was the ONE AND ONLY SACRIFICE from that moment on! There’s even the report that, following Yeshua`s death, no longer would the scarlet thread tied about the scape goat sacrifice on the Day of Atonement turn from red to white, signifying God’s acceptance of the sacrifice!

3. For the overspreading of abominations THE MESSIAH made it desolate, even until the consummation (conclusion):

Matthew 23:1-39
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate!
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.
KJV

And so, they’ve been left desolate ever since until this day! Yeshua` gave a sampling of all their abominations against God and Himself; then, He pronounced them “DESOLATE” until the end - until they can say, “Baruwkh haha’ b-shem YHWH.” (See Psalm 118:26.) That’s Hebrew for “Welcome, Comer in the Name of - in the authority of - YHWH,” finally recognizing Yeshua` as GOD’S Anointed One - GOD'S Messiah! For almost 2,000 years now, that decided against them has been poured out on them, and it will continue to be poured on them until the conclusion - the consummation - when they finally knuckle under and say, “UNCLE! We give up! We want what the Christians have! We want our Messiah back, and we will welcome Him when He comes!” THEN Yeshua` will return and pick up where He left off with a new generation!

See, HE put the gap in the middle of the Seven! When He left them desolate and ended the sacrifice, HE postponed the second half of the Seven until His people knuckled under! He offered them His Kingdom BEFORE He was crucified, and He will offer them His Kingdom AFTER He returns! We’ve been LIVING in the “Great Tribulation,” THEIR “horrific pressure," sandwiched between for the last two millennia!

Christians have put FAR too much emphasis on a “seven-year period” and an “antichrist!” That is NOT who is seen in Daniel 9:26-27! That “prince” was Titus who DID come ... in the first century! The people of that “prince,” the Romans, particularly the Roman soldiers, burned and tore the Temple apart, stone by stone, until there was nothing left standing! Thus, ANY and EVERY theory based on seeing an “antichrist” in Daniel 9:24-27 should be DISCARDED!

What Yeshua` was talking about in His "Olivet Discourse” (Matthew 24, 25; Mark 13; and Luke 21) was the ultimate result of those “abominations that led to desolation” - the “abomination OF the desolation,” namely the desecration of the Temple, the most terrifying and horrible abomination of all to a Jew!

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

OT:1396 gaaVar (gaw-bar'); a primitive root; to be strong; by implication, to prevail, act insolently:
KJV - exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more [strength], strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.

It does NOT mean to “MAKE” a covenant! It means to “STRENGTHEN” an already existing covenant!

These points are CONFIRMED in Scripture!

Those points are not "prevailed" in Scripture. To highlight 'confirm' in such a way and have the reader refer it to gabar is a misuse of the word itself.

You have the definition for gabar stated correctly in blue, but then you take it far beyond the meaning of gabar as a verb such that you then take 'to prevail,' or 'to force,' especially in the sense of 'military might or strength,' into the positive connotation for "confirm," like what young Catholic girls do, or even in the political sense: ratify - is to stretch definition past the pale of just what words mean.

Onto this you interject wholly out of a cloth of your own making that to prevail also means an existing covenant. The verse says nothing of the sort.

310נכד (gābar) prevail, be mighty, have strength, be great. (ASV and RSV similar.)

Derivatives
310a (geber) man.
310b (gibbôr) mighty man.
310c (ge bûrâ) might.
310d (ge bîrâ) lady, queen (masc. lord, Gen 27:29, 37).
310e (ge beret) lady, queen.

This root and its derivatives occur 328 times in the OT, of which the verb account for but 26. The cognate is well attested in the semitic languages, appearing in Akkadian, Arabic, Aramaic, Phoenician, and Moabite. At present, it is only known in a proper noun in Ugaritic. In general the same meaning is shared throughout. In Arabic, the basic meaning of the root is “to rise, raise, restore,” with the idea of being strong, or prevailing over coming only in the only in the derived stems. That the Hebrew may share a similar range of meaning is seen in the Hithpael where the idea is not so much to make oneself prevail over God, as it is to raise oneself up in arrogance and stand in his face (Job 15:25; 36:9; Isa 42:13). The Hebrew root is commonly associated with warfare and has to do with the strength and vitality of the successful warrior.

In the first analysis, might and mighty men were causes for celebration in the OT. During much of the bibilical period Israel was in a heroic age. Thus the feats and exploits of her champions we causes for delight and storytelling. Such an exploit was that of David’s three mighty men as they broke through the Philistine lines to bring him water from Bethlehem (I Chr 11:15-19). I Samuel 1 is a lament for the fallen heroes, Saul and Jonathan, extolling their valiant deeds. Similarly II Sam 23 records the glories of various mighty men. I and II Chronicles contain many references to the mighty men of Israel, commonly employing the phrase gibbôr hayil “mighty men of valor” to describe them. Although Chr generally uses the term to express “warrior” or “soldier,” there are indications that originally this was a technical term for men of a certain social class, “nobles” who had the privilege of bearing arms for the king (cf. Ruth 2:1; I Sam 9:1; II Kgs 15:20, etc. where “warrior” is too narrow a translation.

It is not surprising that in such a society God was often depicted as a warrior. God is the true prototype of the mighty man, and if an earthly warrior’s deeds are recounted, how much more should God’s be. Thus the psalmists recount God’s mighty acts (106:8; 145:4, 11, 12; etc.) and in various places those attributes which a warrior-king might be expected to possess ―wisdom, might, counsel and understanding― are attributed par excellence to God (Job 12:13; Prov 8:14). Isaiah (9:6; cf. 10:21) indicates that these will be the attributes of the Coming King, whose name is the Mighty God as well as the Prince of Peace, but he also makes it plain that justice and righteousness will accompany his might (cf. Ps 89: 13-14 [H 14-15]).

God’s might draws the limits to man’s might, for man’s prowess is to be gloried in just so long as it does not overstep itself. When man sees his might as all he needs for successful living, he is deluded (Ps 33:16; 90:10; Eccl 9:11). When he, in the arrogance of his strength, pits himself against the Warrior-God, he will be destroyed (Ps 52; Jer 9:22; 46:5; etc.). Rather might must be tempered with wisdom (I Sam 2:9; Prov 16:32; 21:22) and the greatest wisdom of all is to trust God. Thus it is said that he is geber (a male at the height of his powers) who trust God (Ps 40:4 [H 5]). The man possessed of might who yet distrusts his own powers and instead trusts those of God is most truly entitled to the appellation “man” (Job 38:3; jer 17:7; Mic 3:8). This is the “new man” of Paul, for he will have discovered that although transgressions have prevailed over him (Ps 65:3 [H 4]), the Lord’s mercy will prevail over them (Ps 103:11) and that the Lord is indeed “might to save” (Ps 80:3).

Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament edited by R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke; © 1980, Moody Press, p 148, author: John N. Oswalt, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Biblical Languages and Literature, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky.

 

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, Marcus.

Those points are not "prevailed" in Scripture. To highlight 'confirm' in such a way and have the reader refer it to gabar is a misuse of the word itself.

You have the definition for gabar stated correctly in blue, but then you take it far beyond the meaning of gabar as a verb such that you then take 'to prevail,' or 'to force,' especially in the sense of 'military might or strength,' into the positive connotation for "confirm," like what young Catholic girls do, or even in the political sense: ratify - is to stretch definition past the pale of just what words mean.

Onto this you interject wholly out of a cloth of your own making that to prevail also means an existing covenant. The verse says nothing of the sort.

310נכד (gābar) prevail, be mighty, have strength, be great. (ASV and RSV similar.)

Derivatives
310a (geber) man.
310b (gibbôr) mighty man.
310c (ge bûrâ) might.
310d (ge bîrâ) lady, queen (masc. lord, Gen 27:29, 37).
310e (ge beret) lady, queen.

This root and its derivatives occur 328 times in the OT, of which the verb account for but 26. The cognate is well attested in the semitic languages, appearing in Akkadian, Arabic, Aramaic, Phoenician, and Moabite. At present, it is only known in a proper noun in Ugaritic. In general the same meaning is shared throughout. In Arabic, the basic meaning of the root is “to rise, raise, restore,” with the idea of being strong, or prevailing over coming only in the only in the derived stems. That the Hebrew may share a similar range of meaning is seen in the Hithpael where the idea is not so much to make oneself prevail over God, as it is to raise oneself up in arrogance and stand in his face (Job 15:25; 36:9; Isa 42:13). The Hebrew root is commonly associated with warfare and has to do with the strength and vitality of the successful warrior.

In the first analysis, might and mighty men were causes for celebration in the OT. During much of the bibilical period Israel was in a heroic age. Thus the feats and exploits of her champions we causes for delight and storytelling. Such an exploit was that of David’s three mighty men as they broke through the Philistine lines to bring him water from Bethlehem (I Chr 11:15-19). I Samuel 1 is a lament for the fallen heroes, Saul and Jonathan, extolling their valiant deeds. Similarly II Sam 23 records the glories of various mighty men. I and II Chronicles contain many references to the mighty men of Israel, commonly employing the phrase gibbôr hayil “mighty men of valor” to describe them. Although Chr generally uses the term to express “warrior” or “soldier,” there are indications that originally this was a technical term for men of a certain social class, “nobles” who had the privilege of bearing arms for the king (cf. Ruth 2:1; I Sam 9:1; II Kgs 15:20, etc. where “warrior” is too narrow a translation.

It is not surprising that in such a society God was often depicted as a warrior. God is the true prototype of the mighty man, and if an earthly warrior’s deeds are recounted, how much more should God’s be. Thus the psalmists recount God’s mighty acts (106:8; 145:4, 11, 12; etc.) and in various places those attributes which a warrior-king might be expected to possess ―wisdom, might, counsel and understanding― are attributed par excellence to God (Job 12:13; Prov 8:14). Isaiah (9:6; cf. 10:21) indicates that these will be the attributes of the Coming King, whose name is the Mighty God as well as the Prince of Peace, but he also makes it plain that justice and righteousness will accompany his might (cf. Ps 89: 13-14 [H 14-15]).

God’s might draws the limits to man’s might, for man’s prowess is to be gloried in just so long as it does not overstep itself. When man sees his might as all he needs for successful living, he is deluded (Ps 33:16; 90:10; Eccl 9:11). When he, in the arrogance of his strength, pits himself against the Warrior-God, he will be destroyed (Ps 52; Jer 9:22; 46:5; etc.). Rather might must be tempered with wisdom (I Sam 2:9; Prov 16:32; 21:22) and the greatest wisdom of all is to trust God. Thus it is said that he is geber (a male at the height of his powers) who trust God (Ps 40:4 [H 5]). The man possessed of might who yet distrusts his own powers and instead trusts those of God is most truly entitled to the appellation “man” (Job 38:3; jer 17:7; Mic 3:8). This is the “new man” of Paul, for he will have discovered that although transgressions have prevailed over him (Ps 65:3 [H 4]), the Lord’s mercy will prevail over them (Ps 103:11) and that the Lord is indeed “might to save” (Ps 80:3).

Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament edited by R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke; © 1980, Moody Press, p 148, author: John N. Oswalt, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Biblical Languages and Literature, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky.

Have you even BOTHERED to learn Hebrew?! It is my second language! What do I care what some “professor of Bible languages and literature” says?! Try LIVING with the language, for a change! I KNOW that this word means “to be STRONG!” (I use it quite frequently!) The author(s) of Strong’s Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary admit(s) that the other definitions of that word are “by IMPLICATION!” That is, the word is IMPLIED in certain contexts to mean “to prevail” OR to "act insolently!” “To prevail” simply means “to win” or “to conquer!” We might use the comparative phrase: “He was the STRONGER!” “To act insolently” simply means “to be smug about winning, showing a rude and arrogant lack of respect!” HOWEVER, that is NOT this word’s PRIMARY meaning! It’s PRIMARY meaning is simply “to be STRONG!” PERIOD!

Why do you think one of God’s titles is “Eel Gibowr,” the “Almighty God?!” (Isaiah 9:6; 10:17; etc.) It’s the same word with different vowel pointing! Listen: The primary form of the word, the root of the word family, IS a verb. As the form of the word is altered, even by the "vowel pointing” or the vowel sounds added to the consonant-letters of the word, the word takes on other parts of speech, such as that of an adjective or a noun.

As one who “prevails” in a battle or a competition, he is the “WINNER (a noun) - the “STRONGEST!” And, that is what “gibowr” means. Why is that such a hurdle for you?! “GaaVar” (“Gabar" with the first “long a” to show the qamets as opposed to the patach represented by the second, "short a”; I use an “aa” instead of the “long a”) is a verb and it is the primary word in the family of G-B-R words. It means “to be strong!”

Now, within this verse, Daniel 9:27, the word is “v-higbiyr.” Taking off the “v-“ (the vav connective meaning “and”), the rest is the third-person, masculine, singular form that is in the perfect tense of the hif`iyl pattern. That means it has a causative meaning. It translates to “he-shall-make-strong” or “he-shall-strengthen.” Can I help it that it is immediately followed by “briyt” without a definite article? That would translate to “a-covenant.” So, those two words would translate to “And he shall make strong a covenant...” or “And he shall strengthen a covenant...."

All the wishing in the world won’t change that!

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Retro: I live across the street from some Greeks. The Greeks are all Greek around here. They marry Greek. The eat Greek. They run Greek restaurants. They name their kids Greek. They only speak Greek among themselves. They constantly have Greek family over. They have Greek parties. They eat Greek food.

They are not authorities on Kione Greek though. They don't know everything and they stumble over words they don't know, like euthuno.

As far as you: you're the only one in all my books that uses the funny spelling you use. You fail to communicate when you use your own little special way of spelling things because they don't line up with what real authorities in the language use.

Now you gave a pretty good definition of gabar, and then you conveniently change it to mean what you think the passage says.

In a nutshell:

1. As a verb: gabar means to prevail, to rise up - and this sense is expressed in the Bible in Job 15;25, 36:9, and Isa 42:13.
2. As an adjective, gabar means to be strong, and is usually associated with might, especially as a warrior.

_________________________________________________________

In the short passage in question:

1. There will be seven 'sevens' for rebuilding in times of distress (Israel is occupied, and this is not the Great Distress).
2. There will be sixty-two 'sevens' until Messiah the Prince (#1) comes - mashiyach nagiyd.
3. After the sixty-two 'sevens' the Messiah - mashiyach - will be cut off (karat).

• This ends the involvement of the Messiah Prince.
• The cutting off denotes no following lineage - unlike the whole Holy Grail obsession.
• The cutting off also connotes a covenant - as in cutting a deal - Biblical covenants require shed blood.

4. Then the people of the prince who will come (#2) destroy the city and the sanctuary.

• The Jews did not do this, Titus did.
• To destroy is in the Hebrew hiphil stem, as a verb, imperfect, 3rd person, masculine, and singular with 'people' as one unit.
• Daniel uses this verb in the Hiphil stem in 8:24 - and it is used as ruin (destroy) not morally corrupt.
• You know, and I know Hebrew words can have more than one meaning.
• When we have solid historical evidence of physical destruction in history foretold by Christ, then we need not twist the word around to a moral corruption for which there is no evidence despite the some of the objectionable actions of the zealots - who - as zealots, probably took a very strict, literal interpretation of the Torah and would insist on the least letter of the Law being fulfilled. There has been corruption in the Temple by Priests in the past, but there is no evidence the zealots exceeded their sins. Hence, your insistence on making all things Jewish and ignoring the elephant in the room (the Romans) forces you to interpret this word as a moral corruption.

5. War continues until the end - which sets up a very long period of time between the sixty-two and the one 'seven.'

• War has been a continual fact of man's history for the last 2000 years.
• The first Jewish Revolt was not the worst time ever - it happened during the Romana Pax - the Roman peace!
• War will only end when the one 'seven' is concluded.
• Ergo: the one 'seven' has not ended, nor begun - it is one unit of time.

6. The prince who will come prevails a covenant for one 'seven.'

• Prince (#2) is the last person named for labeling the 3rd person singular conjugation of gabar.
• There is no rule in Hebrew that an object of a preposition cannot be the reference for the next pronoun (unlike what you say).
• Jesus' only covenant was the New one, and He made that just before His being cut off.
• Jesus' role ended when He was cut off, which supplied the blood of the Covenant.
• Jesus did not prevail on the cross by might. (Nor did He die of crucifixion though.)
• Jesus never instituted a limited, seven-year covenant; His New Covenant goes on until the Last Trumpet.
• Jesus said the Day of the Lord will not come until after the midpoint (Mt 24:15-31) of the one 'seven.'

7. In the middle of the one 'seven,' quickly (on wing - like a flood) there is an abomination of great magnitude (plural) and desolation.

• In Rev 13:14-15 Jesus gives us the explanation for why this abomination (idol in the Bible) is so great - it speaks!
• Following the abomination comes God's Wrath - which are a series of desolations upon the earth.

8. At the end of the one 'seven' the desolations are poured out on the desolator.

• The last desolations are the Bowls.
• God's Wrath is not directed toward conditions; God's Wrath is directed toward entities, persons/demons.

1. MESSIAH shall strengthen a covenant with many for one Seven;

Please provide the Biblical reference, chapter and verse - where Jesus specifically makes, remakes, or strengthens the Davidic Covenant.

Also - you will have to provide start and end dates for said limited-time offer. (This will be hard because we don't have any firm dates in the Bible - including the exact date of Jesus' birth which we are soon to celebrate).

You will also have to explain why this strengthening by the Commander of God's Army is so weak it only lasts seven years.

In the midst (middle) of the Seven MESSIAH shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease;

This is after you have already acknowledged that sacrifice and offering went on for another four decades or about.

Your timeline is not in accordance with what Gabriel told Daniel.

We do have evidence in Revelation chapter 13 that the false prophet, who controls the Temple, erects a talking image (an idol = abomination in the Bible) and unlike the many idols God hates in the past which are dumb and cannot speak - this one does!

We can surmise that with the willing subjugation of the Priestly class in the one 'seven' - still to come - that Priestly functions would cease with such an abomination - as both Jesus and Paul said would happen and as John writes - in place in the Temple in front of the curtain (Holy Place).

For the overspreading of abominations MESSIAH shall make it (the city or the sanctuary) desolate, even until the consummation (conclusion).

This really limits what the Lord will do with His Wrath not only on the Day of the Lord, but afterward.

What you do with the language of Daniel 9:26-7 not only violates it, but it goes against what Jesus said in the Olivet Discourse, what Paul wrote in 2nd Thessalonians chapter 2, and what John wrote revealed by God through Jesus to him in Revelation chapter 13.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Retro, I thought I made my point pretty clear in the OP, but I guess not. Let's take a second look:

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. 25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem 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: (imo, there should have been a period here (with no "and") to close the topic of the Messiah and to start a new one, ie. "the people of the prince") 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.
27 And 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."

The first thing one must come to grips with is, it's all or nothing regarding the 70th week. There is no such thing as a 3 1/2 yr. split except in the eyes of those that want to devise one out of nothing.

Your words: “See, HE put the gap in the middle of the Seven! When He left them desolate and ended the sacrifice, HE postponed the second half of the Seven until His people knuckled under! He offered them His Kingdom BEFORE He was crucified, and He will offer them His Kingdom AFTER He returns!

There is no “gap” at all. His “coming” did not begin with his ministry but with his fulfillment of Zech. 9:9 – “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”

So there is no gap! At the end of the 69th week Messiah was “cut off” (crucified). The 70th week never began! Also there can be no partial fulfillment. All six aspects of vs. 24 must be fulfilled within or at the end of the 70th week.

Your words: “Christians have put FAR too much emphasis on a “seven-year period” and an “antichrist!” That is NOT who is seen in Daniel 9:26-27! That “prince” was Titus who DID come ... in the first century! The people of that “prince,” the Romans, particularly the Roman soldiers, burned and tore the Temple apart, stone by stone, until there was nothing left standing! Thus, ANY and EVERY theory based on seeing an “antichrist” in Daniel 9:24-27 should be DISCARDED!”

Antiochus Eppiphanes was closer to a complete fulfillment of the prophecy than Titus ever could be. The only reason he is not is because all six aspects weren’t fulfilled, thus he became a ‘type” of what we and the Jews are to look for in the future. I agree that “some” aspects seemed to be fulfilled around 70 AD but again not ALL, thus it should be eliminated from the list of possible fulfillments.

Your words: “What Yeshua` was talking about in His "Olivet Discourse” (Matthew 24, 25; Mark 13; and Luke 21) was the ultimate result of those “abominations that led to desolation” - the “abomination OF the desolation,” namely the desecration of the Temple, the most terrifying and horrible abomination of all to a Jew.”

Respectfully, I think you’re wrong on your take of the gospel account.

Matt. 24:15 – “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”

I believe this can come from only two places.

Dan. 11:31 – “ 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.” (and the same thing being spoken of in…)

Dan. 12:11 – “And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.”

Well, here are some things we know for sure. It wasn’t the destruction of the temple that was the a of d as that had happened before. There is only one foreseeable point in scripture when “there will be an end to sins” and that is in the millennial era. That and that alone should be enough to inform one that the end of the 70th week will be the beginning of the millennial era and that hasn’t happened yet. I know you disagree with this but, imo, from Dan. 11:21 unto the end of the chapter is detailing the time of the a/c. So we must ask ourselves did Christ give us any more clues describing the a of d and in my opinion, he did in Rev. 13. I think it quite clear that the only thing that would qualify as THE a of d, would be a fulfillment of the “type” that occurred with Antiochus Eppiphanes. Remember, what was the #1 law as shown in the OT? “Thou shalt have no other Gods before me”! As far as I know, Titus never erected a statue to be worshipped, thus again eliminating 70 AD as a possible fulfillment.

Your words: “We’ve been LIVING in the “Great Tribulation,” THEIR “horrific pressure," sandwiched between for the last two millennia!”

Sorry, but I believe the great trib is on the church and Israel will have the “time of Jacob’s trouble”. Two similar but separate events, imo. And yes, I think it’s going to get much worse for Israel as a whole, in the near future, and no disrespect intended but it will make the holocaust seem like small potatoes, in comparison. It will be about Jews and Christians world-wide not just around Israel.

 

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, sojourner4Christ.

Your quoted “source,” taken from here, indicates the author as one Isaac H. Hall. Who is Prof. Isaac H. Hall? He was a curator of sculpture. His domain included all works of art except paintings. He was a biblical scholar, a specialist in Syriac languages. He was an editor of the Oriental Department of the Sunday-School Times (Philadelphia). This scholar lists a bunch of bogus "errors" according to his lofty opinion.

Why does this KJB critic, the good professor Hall Ph. D., allege errors and defects in the King James Bible? Simply because this man does not believe that ANY Bible in ANY language IS or ever was the complete, inspired and 100% historically true words of God.

He has no infallible Bible in any language and he knows it. Just ask any ‘biblical scholar’ to tell you where you can get a copy of God's 100% true words so you can compare it to whatever translation you are using now so you can see the similarities and differences. They WILL NEVER TELL YOU! Why? Because they themselves are Bible Agnostics who do not know where to find God's infallible words and they couldn't give you a copy of them if their lives depended on it.

My family and I will be interceding for you tonight in Jesus Christ's name.

For the OP's sake, I am finished here.
.
.

First, you don’t know Isaac H. Hall any more than I do. There IS another possibility! (Shhhh...! He found historical evidence of such origins and errors in the KJAV.) You just can’t handle such an explanation. And, that’s too bad.

Second, you are assuming much about biblical scholars that, again, you don’t know any better than Prof. Hall. SHAME on you for assuming the worst about others who name the name of Christ! “Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.” (And, that’s a two-way street, btw!)

Finally, your intercession would go better if you address Him with His TRUE name, Yeshua` haMashiach, Yeshua` the Messiah!

“100% true”? Rose-colored glasses?