The Last and Final Evil Kingdom of Daniel

[Trekson]

First the temple in heaven is just as real as the temple on earth will be but here ya go...of course you will refute these as your mind is closed but 2 Thess. 2:4 and Rev. 11:1, 2 and since this is speaking prophetically about the same event Dan. 11:31 and 12:11.

I never claimed it had anything to do w/ 70ad and neither does Dan. 9:27, Prophetically 70ad closes w/ Dan. 9:26b, Dan. 9:26c-27 are speaking of a time after 70 ad. The time of the future kingdoms that my article is based on.

 

[covenantee]

I disagree. It's not 'antecedent'. It's just the same word. It basically means ruler or commander but can be used for different ranks. It's not referring to the same person in each case just because it's the same word, IMO.

It's the same word, with the additional qualification of "Messiah" in verse 25 to confirm the identity when comparing Scripture with Scripture.

Who is the "prince" in verse 26, and who is "he" in verse 27?

 

[covenantee]

It's not a moot point as the prophecy specifies that is "the people of" who destroy the city. Titus isn't important in this as it's not talking about him but about the prince yet to come that in the linear text is sometime "after" Rome. This lets us know that the a/c will be the head of nations from the eastern part of the Roman empire, not the western part as many mistakenly believe.

They were the people of Messiah the Prince, His people/servants to accomplish His purposes of judgment and destruction upon the nation which had rejected Him.

There is no antichrist in Daniel 9 or anywhere else in the OT. The word does not exist in OT Hebrew or Aramaic.

 

[covenantee]

That's the crux of the whole thing. It was never for Christ to do but the task was for Israel to do. Nothing in vs. 24 implies it was something Messiah was to do for them. For a proper understanding of vs. 24 it should be read like this. Dan. 9:24 - "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the (national) transgression, and to make an end of (national) sins, and to make reconciliation for (national) iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy." The prophecy knows how Israel will accept the Messiah and this deals w/ their rejection of him. The three latter parts of this prophecy will be fulfilled after Armageddon when Matt. 23:39 is fulfilled. They will bring in Christ (everlasting righteousness) to Jerusalem (the real triumphal entry) which will finish the visions and prophecy concerning this present age and anoint Christ as King and Messiah over Israel. Jesus laid the foundation for their national repentance and their failure to accomplish these at his first advent is why the 70th week was suspended until in the fullness of time, when Israel will be ready to repent as a nation. Zech. 12:10 prophecies about this and 13:8-9 tells us that 1/3 will be saved and these are who the millennium will begin with. In the prophecy of vs. 26, it's not the prince that is important, it's "the people of" as this leads us to know historically who the a/c of vs. 27 will be leading.

You're on the wrong side of Scripture, history, and historical Christian orthodoxy.

Only Christ could accomplish what Daniel 9:24 describes.

Which He did in the 70th contiguous week.

As the historical true Christian Church for more than 17 centuries unanimously believed and proclaimed.

 

[Earburner]

First the temple in heaven is just as real as the temple on earth will be but here ya go...of course you will refute these as your mind is closed but 2 Thess. 2:4 and Rev. 11:1, 2 and since this is speaking prophetically about the same event Dan. 11:31 and 12:11.

Which temple on earth??

 

[Earburner]

It's the same word, with the additional qualification of "Messiah" in verse 25 to confirm the identity when comparing Scripture with Scripture.

Who is the "prince" in verse 26, and who is "he" in verse 27?

They really do not know!! That is the confusion of "church-ianity", by "the wisdom of men". 1 Cor. 2:5.

They ignore the six works of Christ in Dan. 9:24, and then lose themselves counting "weeks", looking for the 70th week in the far future, to be performed by their fictitious one man band, magic man, that they love to call "THE" Antichrist, who will never show.

 

[ewq1938]

They really do not know!! That is the confusion of "church-ianity", by "the wisdom of men". 1 Cor. 2:5.

They ignore the six works of Christ in Dan. 9:24, and then lose themselves counting "weeks", looking for the 70th week in the far future, to be performed by their fictitious one man band, magic man, that they love to call "THE" Antichrist, who will never show.

And such an unscriptural belief is EXACTLY what the antichrist needs to be successful and create the Apostasy....that is how "church-ianity" of all flavors will fall away. This is as bad, maybe worse than Pretrib's version where they escape away so they don't face the AC or Preterism's version where the AC is also real, but came long ago in the past.

Falsehoods:

1. The AC isn't a real end times figure.
2. We won't be here to have to deal with the AC.
3. The AC came in the past so cannot be a future figure.

All are antichrist denial.

Steer FAR away from all of those doctrines.

 

[covenantee]

And such an unscriptural belief is EXACTLY what the antichrist needs to be successful and create the Apostasy....that is how "church-ianity" of all flavors will fall away. This is as bad, maybe worse than Pretrib's version where they escape away so they don't face the AC or Preterism's version where the AC is also real, but came long ago in the past.

Falsehoods:

1. The AC isn't a real end times figure.
2. We won't be here to have to deal with the AC.
3. The AC came in the past so cannot be a future figure.

All are antichrist denial.

Steer FAR away from all of those doctrines.

Steer in the opposite direction from modernist cultic dispensationalism, which denies Christ's accomplishments at Calvary, and attempts to contort Him into antichrist.

 

[Trekson]

They were the people of Messiah the Prince, His people/servants to accomplish His purposes of judgment and destruction upon the nation which had rejected Him.

There is no antichrist in Daniel 9 or anywhere else in the OT. The word does not exist in OT Hebrew or Aramaic.

He is known by many names and of course the word "antichrist" wouldn't be in the OT. In Daniel, he is the prince to come, the prince of the covenant, the little horn and the willful king. He is described in Dan. 7:24-25, 8:11, 9:27, 11:22-45.

 

[Trekson]

Which temple on earth??

The temple that will be set up in the near future although to fulfill the prophecies a portable tabernacle would suffice.

 

[Trekson]

You're on the wrong side of Scripture, history, and historical Christian orthodoxy.

Only Christ could accomplish what Daniel 9:24 describes.

Which He did in the 70th contiguous week.

As the historical true Christian Church for more than 17 centuries unanimously believed and proclaimed.

Sorry but this sounds like the typical historical/preterist eschatology (or lack thereof) run amok!

 

[covenantee]

He is known by many names and of course the word "antichrist" wouldn't be in the OT. In Daniel, he is the prince to come, the prince of the covenant, the little horn and the willful king. He is described in Dan. 7:24-25, 8:11, 9:27, 11:22-45.

Those are all modernist cultic dispensational fantasies and fallacies "run amok".

 

[covenantee]

Sorry but this sounds like the typical historical/preterist eschatology (or lack thereof) run amok!

I'll take historical Christian orthodoxy over modernist cultic dispensationalism.

Every time.

 

[Zao is life]

It's not a moot point as the prophecy specifies that is "the people of" who destroy the city. Titus isn't important in this as it's not talking about him but about the prince yet to come that in the linear text is sometime "after" Rome. This lets us know that the a/c will be the head of nations from the eastern part of the Roman empire, not the western part as many mistakenly believe.

The beast of Revelation is not even the Eastern part of the Roman Empire. It's the former kingdoms of Babylon, Medo-Persia and the Macedonian/Greek empires. Islamic. The Eastern part of the Roman Empire at its height soon after the time of Christ did not stretch much further East than current-day Lebanon, Israel and Gaza. The lion, the leopard and the bear of Revelation 13 is neither the Western nor the furthest extent of the Eastern part of the Roman Empire​

 

[Zao is life]

2 Thess. 2:4 and Rev. 11:1, 2 and since this is speaking prophetically about the same event Dan. 11:31 and 12:11.

Daniel 8:11; 11:31 and 12:11 has nothing to do with any destruction of the temple. The city and temple are not destroyed in those verses, and the temple is only defiled by an idol in it.

Those prophecies were fulfilled in the 2nd century BC, but that history did not completely fulfill everything. That's why they also point to 2 Thess 2:4 (and Matthew 24:15 - which also has nothing to do with the destruction of God's temple, but with its defilement, and corresponds with 2 Thess 2:4).

The error many make is to conflate the defilement of the temple (Dan 8:11; 11:31 and 12:11) with its destruction prophesied in Daniel 9:26-27, which prophesies the destruction of both the city and the temple.

QUOTE
"Abomination of Desolation" is a phrase from the Book of Daniel describing the pagan sacrifices with which the 2nd century BC Greek king Antiochus IV Epiphanes replaced the twice-daily offering in the Jewish temple, or alternatively the altar on which such offerings were made."
(Abomination of desolation - Wikipedia)
UNQUOTE

That temple was not destroyed. And the verses which talk about the defilement by Antiochus IV are Daniel 8:11, 11:31 and 12:11 - but because the prophecy is about the end time, Antiochus IV is only the type of the Antichrist. He did not completely fulfill the prophecy.

You really do need to separate the above defilement of God's temple from the destruction of the 2nd temple prophesied in Daniel 9:26-27.

 

[Zao is life]

It's the same word, with the additional qualification of "Messiah" in verse 25 to confirm the identity when comparing Scripture with Scripture.

Who is the "prince" in verse 26, and who is "he" in verse 27?

"He" confirming the (new) covenant and (through His own blood) causing the system of sacrifices and offerings for sins to cease to be necessary, is the Messiah.

One Prince is mentioned in Daniel 9:24-25.
A second prince of the people who were to come is mentioned in Daniel 9:26.

The Messiah:
26 And after sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself.
27 And he (Messiah) shall confirm a covenant with many for one week. And in the midst of the week he (Messiah) shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease.

The city & sanctuary:
26 And the people of the prince who shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. And the end of it shall be with the flood, and ruins are determined, until the end shall be war.
27 and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

There are various ways of translating verse 27, because the meaning is not 100% clear in the Hebrew. There are almost as many widely different translations of verse 27 as there are versions of the Bible.

Netfree
He will confirm a covenant with many for one week. But in the middle of that week he will bring sacrifices and offerings to a halt.
On the wing of abominations will come one who destroys, until the decreed end is poured out on the one who destroys."

The first mention of "one who destroys" is not pointing to the Messiah, IMO. It refers to the prince of the people who were to come, destroying the city and the temple.

Compare it with Jesus' words when standing in the temple, 40 years before the city and the temple in it were destroyed by Roman armies.

 

[covenantee]

"He" confirming the (new) covenant and (through His own blood) causing the system of sacrifices and offerings for sins to cease to be necessary, is the Messiah.

True.

One Prince is mentioned in Daniel 9:24-25.
A second prince of the people who were to come is mentioned in Daniel 9:26.

There is only individual identified as a Prince/prince in the passage.

He is Messiah.

He who confirmed His New Covenant is also He whose people, the Roman armies who were His servants of judgment and destruction, destroyed the city and sanctuary.

 

[Zao is life]

True.


There is only individual identified as a Prince/prince in the passage.

He is Messiah.

He who confirmed His New Covenant is also He whose people, the Roman armies who were His servants of judgment and destruction, destroyed the city and sanctuary.

who are the people he is the prince of? Because they are said to destroy the city and temple in verse 26

 

[covenantee]

who are the people he is the prince of? Because they are said to destroy the city and temple in verse 26

The Romans who served as His servants to accomplish those purposes.

 

[Zao is life]

The Romans who served as His servants to accomplish those purposes.

So how can their prince be the Messiah when Caesar was their god and king?