Please notice that all desolations, that are less than 2 Peter ch. 3, are NOT "the consummation" in Dan. 9:27.
How it is that you cannot understand the words I just quoted, but instead sense the need to fabricate fiction about it, tells me that you are failing to let go of a pet doctrine.
Please read it again:
"even until the consummation"
Therefore the temple building that once was in Jerusalem shall never be rebuilt again.
For how long?? "Even until [upto] the consummation, aka the complete end of all things in this world, as well as the earth itself.
Try reading what the text actually says. Then use Scripture in the book of Daniel to interpret Scripture.
First of all here is what the text actually says---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate. Let's stop here for now. What needs to be asked and have an answer for, shall make what desolate? Obviously, this---and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. What else could it be referring to in that verse if not that? Obviously, this--and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate.--has to have a nearest antecedent. There has to be context nearby that explains it, and clearly 2 Peter 3:10 is not that context that explains it. What I have quoted from verse 27 thus far has zero to do with 2 Peter 3:10. Then look what else the text actually says---even until the consummation
Which seems to be telling us that he makes it desolate throughout the entire 2nd half of the 70th week even up to the consummation, the end of the 70th week, the end of the 70 weeks. That's where 2 Peter 3:10 fits in, not during this instead--and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate.
The next question is, in what way does he make it desolate? The keyword is desolate and that it is the Hebrew word shamem and is used in the following passages in the book of Daniel.
Daniel 9:26 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(shamem) 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(shamem), even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate(shamem).
Daniel 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation(shamem), to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
Daniel 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(shamem).
Daniel 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate(shamem) 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.
set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
One would have to be blind or have doctrinal bias' so severe to not see the connections here. Anyone who insists the desolation recorded in Daniel 9:27 is not the same desolation recorded in these other passages have reading comprehension issues in that case. And/or don't have a clue how Scripture interpreting Scripture actually works, regardless that they might insist they interpret Scripture with Scripture. OK then, so why isn't that same one interpreting Scripture with Scripture in this case, assuming they insist there is zero connection with the desolation recorded in Daniel 9:27 with that of these other passages I submitted?
On a side note. Most in here can write and formulate their thoughts better than I can, but even so, I feel I surpass them in reading comprehension a lot of the time, so maybe not every time, yet a lot of the time, regardless. I would rather have better reading comprehension than better writing skills, if in my case I can't have both. I'm not saying others can't have both. I'm only meaning in my case. The point being, good reading comprehension trumps good writing skills. One doesn't have to have good writing skills in order to have good reading comprehension, being another point.