Dake Bible Discussion BoardThe "HE" of Daniel 9:27

General Discussion Forum devoted to the study of God's Word in Honor of Finis J. Dake.
Ray

The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by Ray »

The "HE" of Daniel 9:27


Daniel 9:27

King James Version (KJV)




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.




{Where, one must ask is any covenant mentioned in all of Scripture between antichrist and many of mankind ? I say No where (in Scripture) only in the commentary

of man is such a covenant mentioned. Yet Daniel's People Israel Knew and were awaiting another Covenant a "New Covenant" different from the Old Covenant

as was made known to them by the Prophecy given by Jeremiah, As This New Covenant was the Covenant that is again mentioned in this Daniel 9:27 Verse}




Jeremiah 31:31

King James Version (KJV)

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:





{The word "confirm" as used in the passage Dan 9:27 is in the Hebrew language "gabar" and defines to strengthen or to be made strong.

It was Our LORD JESUS Who was to "strengthen" or "confirm" This mentioned Covenant with "many" of Daniel's People Israel for "one Week" (7 yrs) by

HIS Sacrificial Death and HIS Ministry to ONLY Daniel's People Israel, and the early Ministry of HIS Apostles (Being with THE HOLY SPIRIT) went

to at the first ONLY to Daniel's People up until the time of Acts 9 Paul's Conversion and Acts 10 Peter's vision which led to the Apostles to go at that time

to the Gentiles which was at the completion of the 70th week and the 70 week Prophecy given to Daniel by the Angel Gabriel. }





Hebrews 9:16-17

King James Version (KJV)

16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.





{Our LORD JESUS speaks of the Confirmation of this "New Covenant" at the Passover Supper before HIS Sacrificial Death, Speaking of the Blood

of Which this "New Covenant" would be Confirmed (gabar:made strong) with, and using the word "many" as the Dan 9:27 verse uses of who This

Covenant would be confirmed with for "one week"}




Matthew 26:28

King James Version (KJV)

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.





{Our LORD JESUS was THE "HE" Who caused the "Sacrifice and the Oblation to cease " in the midst (middle) of This spoken of "week" By The Perfect

and Complete Sacrifice of HIMSELF after HIS 3 1/2 year Ministry among Daniel's People.}




Matthew 27:50-51

King James Version (KJV)

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;




{As Our LORD JESUS had made The Perfect Sacrifice the Temple Veil which seperated The Holy Place from The Most Holy Place (HOLY OF HOLIES) being

rent (torn asunder) was Clear proof that The Temple Sacrificial system which was Ordained By Our HEAVENLY FATHER had come to a completion

by The Perfect Sacrifice that was ordained By HIM.}




Hebrews 10:11-14

King James Version (KJV)

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 till his enemies be made his footstool.

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.



brodave

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by brodave »

The covenant in Dan. 9:27 is made with the nation of Isreal a the beginning of the tribulation.It has nothing to do with the NEW COVENANT.The nation of Israel rejected the NEW COVENANT we have now.At the end of the tribulation Jesus will gather the remnant of Israel to Jerusalem to fulfill the NEW COVENANT and make a great nation of them.The NEW COVENANT is the B LOOD of Jesus and those who are cleansed bty the blood.



Ray

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by Ray »

brodave wrote:The covenant in Dan. 9:27 is made with the nation of Isreal a the beginning of the tribulation.It has nothing to do with the NEW COVENANT.The nation of Israel rejected the NEW COVENANT we have now.At the end of the tribulation Jesus will gather the remnant of Israel to Jerusalem to fulfill the NEW COVENANT and make a great nation of them.The NEW COVENANT is the B LOOD of Jesus and those who are cleansed bty the blood.
Brother Dave,
The covenant of Daniel 9:27 is Confirmed (made strong) with Daniel's People, Israel for one week (7 years).

As "Messiah the Prince" (JESUS CHRIST) and the people of the prince to come, who would destroy Jerusalem (as occured in 70 A.D. under prince
Titus Vespasion)
Who of these ONLY two mentioned (JESUS or Titus) confirms this Covenant with Israel ???



titus213
Do Good to Them that Hate You
Posts: 470
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 1:45 pm

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by titus213 »

The subject of the verb "will confirm" is indefinite in the Hebrew; in other words, the subject is not expressed but needs to be supplied. But the rules of grammar require that the last personal subject mentioned would be carried over as the subject in verse 27. The last personal subject mentioned in v.26 is "the prince who shall come", not the Messiah who is already "cut off", but a ruler whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple. It is this ruler who will establish a covenant or treaty with the Jewish community.



Ray

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by Ray »

fatherfisher wrote:The subject of the verb "will confirm" is indefinite in the Hebrew; in other words, the subject is not expressed but needs to be supplied. But the rules of grammar require that the last personal subject mentioned would be carried over as the subject in verse 27. The last personal subject mentioned in v.26 is "the prince who shall come", not the Messiah who is already "cut off", but a ruler whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple. It is this ruler who will establish a covenant or treaty with the Jewish community.
Hello fatherfisher,
You state that this Prophecy speaks of "a ruler whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple. It is this ruler who will establish a covenant or treaty with the Jewish community."

When This prophecy was given The City of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple had been destroyed, and as Gabriel speaks of the command to go forth to restore and to build Jerusalem (at which time the Temple was also to be rebuilt) which again was destroyed in 70 A.D.By the Roman army under prince Titus. You yet seem to look past the City and Temple that was rebuilt and destroyed in 70 A.D.to a city and Temple in the still future. How can this be? Why must we look past The City (and Temple)
that this prophecy speaks of a command to rebuild which was then in the future to this one you speak of still in the future.
There is no true Bible hermeneutics or exegesis that can allow this to be the True understanding of this text.
Please reply,as maybe I have misunderstood your comments.



titus213
Do Good to Them that Hate You
Posts: 470
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 1:45 pm

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by titus213 »

You are correct, I do indeed look past the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD because it is clear from the events surrounding that destruction that it cannot be the one Daniel 9:26-27 speaks of. For one thing, Titus did not destroy the Temple -- he found it already destroyed by fire when he and his forces entered the city of Jerusalem. He never set up an "abomination of desolation" in the Temple (or anywhere else) because it was already gone when he entered the city. Titus never entered into any kind of covenant or treaty with the Jewish community. There was no defense of the people by Michael, no resurrection of the dead, etc. as spoken of in Daniel 12.

In short, it can be shown that none of the events of 70 AD relate to Daniel's prophecy in chapter 9.



Ray

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by Ray »

fatherfisher wrote:You are correct, I do indeed look past the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD because it is clear from the events surrounding that destruction that it cannot be the one Daniel 9:26-27 speaks of. For one thing, Titus did not destroy the Temple -- he found it already destroyed by fire when he and his forces entered the city of Jerusalem. He never set up an "abomination of desolation" in the Temple (or anywhere else) because it was already gone when he entered the city. Titus never entered into any kind of covenant or treaty with the Jewish community. There was no defense of the people by Michael, no resurrection of the dead, etc. as spoken of in Daniel 12.

In short, it can be shown that none of the events of 70 AD relate to Daniel's prophecy in chapter 9.
fatherfisher,

So, you interpret these verses as Gabriel speaks of a command that
would go forth to rebuild Jerusalem (and Temple) in verse 25, then in verse 26 skips over that rebuilt City of Jerusalem with it's Temple
and speaks of one that would be 2500+ years in the future ?



Ray

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by Ray »

fatherfisher,
What destruction of Jerusalem was JESUS speaking of in these verses ?

Luke 21:20-24
20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Matthew 24:15-21
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:)
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.


Mark 13:14-19
14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
15 And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house:
16 And let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment.
17 But woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
18 And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter.
19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.



titus213
Do Good to Them that Hate You
Posts: 470
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 1:45 pm

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by titus213 »

In Luke 21 he is referring to the destruction in AD 70 (Jerusalem surrounded by armies, the Jews scattered, etc) but in Matthew and Mark he is referring to the future destruction by the Antichrist (as spoken by the prophet Daniel). Although Luke's description uses some similar language it is actually quite different in details, than Matthew and Mark.

For example:

Jerusalem surrounded by armies is the sign given in Luke
a specific object of sacrilege is the sign given in Matthew-Mark

no note of urgent evacuation in Luke 21 (because in 70 AD the city was under siege for years and people were allowed to leave)
an immediate and urgent flight from the city is suggested in Matthew-Mark

the outcome of the destruction in Luke is that the Jews are scattered to the nations until the times of the Gentiles comes to an end.
the outcome of the destruction in Matthew-Mark is the tribulation and Second Coming of Christ

no connection to the Book of Daniel for the events described by Luke
direct connection to the Book of Daniel in Matthew-Mark (because the sign is different)

Luke 17 had already dealt with the destruction which Matthew and Mark discuss; so Luke 21 addresses the destruction in 70 AD. Separate events with separate signs and separate details.



Ray

Re: The "HE" of Daniel 9:27

Post by Ray »

fatherfisher wrote:In Luke 21 he is referring to the destruction in AD 70 (Jerusalem surrounded by armies, the Jews scattered, etc) but in Matthew and Mark he is referring to the future destruction by the Antichrist (as spoken by the prophet Daniel). Although Luke's description uses some similar language it is actually quite different in details, than Matthew and Mark.

For example:

Jerusalem surrounded by armies is the sign given in Luke
a specific object of sacrilege is the sign given in Matthew-Mark

no note of urgent evacuation in Luke 21 (because in 70 AD the city was under siege for years and people were allowed to leave)
an immediate and urgent flight from the city is suggested in Matthew-Mark

the outcome of the destruction in Luke is that the Jews are scattered to the nations until the times of the Gentiles comes to an end.
the outcome of the destruction in Matthew-Mark is the tribulation and Second Coming of Christ

no connection to the Book of Daniel for the events described by Luke
direct connection to the Book of Daniel in Matthew-Mark (because the sign is different)

Luke 17 had already dealt with the destruction which Matthew and Mark discuss; so Luke 21 addresses the destruction in 70 AD. Separate events with separate signs and separate details.
fatherfisher,

As JESUS left the Temple that was then in Jerusalem and spoke of it's
destruction, HIS Apostles (Peter, Andrew, James & John) ask Him when
shall these things be concerning the Temple destruction, And Seems like
you are saying JESUS avoids their Question about the Temple HE spoke of not having a stone left upon another and goes on and speaks of
another Temple which was not yet built. Do you really Believe this to
be the case?

Matthew 24
King James Version (KJV)

1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?



Post Reply