Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More on Daniel 9:27

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Discussion More on Daniel 9:27

    NIV
    He will confirm a covenant with many for one seven. In the middle of the seven he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

    NIV Footnote
    He will confirm a covenant with many for one seven. In the middle of the seven he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And one who causes desolation will come on the wing of the abominable, until the end that is decreed is poured out on the desolated.

    Amplified
    And he shall enter into a strong and firm covenant with the many for one week [seven years]. And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and offering to cease [for the remaining three and one-half years]; and upon the wing or pinnacle of abominations [shall come] one who makes desolate, until the full determined end is poured out on the desolator

    KJV
    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.

    NASB
    And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and upon the wing of abominations `shall come' one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall `wrath' be poured out upon the desolate

    Darby
    And he shall confirm a covenant with the many [for] one week; and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and because of the protection of abominations [there shall be] a desolator, even until that the consumption and what is determined shall be poured out upon the desolate.

    Webster
    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

    World English
    He shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease; and on the wing of abominations [shall come] one who makes desolate; and even to the full end, and that determined, shall [wrath] be poured out on the desolate.

    Youngs
    And he hath strengthened a covenant with many -- one week, and `in' the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease, and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate, even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one.'

    It is interesting to note that the two most common views on Daniel 9:27 would not fit into more than half of the translations listed.

    A)The view that Jesus fulfils both "halves" of the verse (preterist) cannot fit into all the bible interpretations above colored blue.

    B)The view that a future antichrist will fulfil both "halves" (futurist) of Daniel 9:27 also cannot fit into all the bible interpretations above colored blue.

    I say that we have to look into a further interpretation that can encompass the best parts of both views and fits into the blue interpretations , two separate people that are involved, one confirms a covenant and one that sets up the abomination.

    If we don't explore this option then we are just keeping our heads in the sand hoping our particular translation is the correct one. Unfortunately I haven't got the time now to explain it , will add a post later.
    Last edited by DurbanDude; Nov 17th 2008, 03:06 PM. Reason: clarifying

  • #2
    I didn't want to derail vinsight's thread with a whole new discussion topic, so started this thread.

    What if the preterists are right and Jesus did confirm the covenant?

    Remember if you have no preconceived ideas, all you would be looking for is a man who confirms a covenant 483 years (69x7) after a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. One seven before the completion of the 490 year period.

    This would happen at the same time as the coming of the Messiah , because the coming of the Messiah also happens at 483 years according to Daniel 9:25. So the Messiah comes and Jesus himself confirms right at the beginning of his ministry that he is the fulfilment of Isaiah , God's covenant to send a saviour to free the Jews. So the greatest ever covenant is confirmed at the right timing of the 70 sevens. If one had no pre-conceived ideas , the first part of the verse would be fulfilled with ease.

    Referring to the phrase "and HE will confirm the covenant ,the only problem with this is that some say that the last mentioned male figure is not Jesus , but is another ruler associated with the people who destroy the temple and the sanctuary.

    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 are determined.
    9:27 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.

    So some people say that because of a rule of English grammar, the "he" that confirms the covenant has to refer to the last male , the prince, and can't refer to the Messiah,therefore it is this prince that will confirm the covenant. I am saying that this rule of English grammar does not apply to the bible at all, because it was not written in English.

    eg: If this was a strict rule of biblical grammar read this:

    Micah 5:5 And this man shall be the peace, when the Assyrian shall come into our land: and when he shall tread in our palaces, then shall we raise against him seven shepherds, and eight principal men.
    5:6 And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.

    The blue "he" does not keep that rule of grammar.

    And read this;

    2 Thess 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
    2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders

    In other words, the wording shows us that the main character of the chapter or paragraph can just as easily be referred to as he or him , not only the last male person.

    Jesus did confirm a great covenant at year 483, but the biblical "he" also puts an end to sacrifice and offering halfway through the seven years. Did Jesus do this? YES , the crucifixion. I don't even need to explain the significance of Jesus crucifixion and how sacrifices are no longer needed , this is a Christian site. This happened 3.5 years after Jesus began His ministry.

    At this point I differ from the preterists and agree with the futurists, I do not see all the promises of Daniel 9:24 as having been fulfilled, and see no significant event 3.5 years after the crucifixion that would end the 490 year timeline.

    The setting up of the abomination will be the starting point of the last 3.5 years of covenant relationship of Jesus with the Jews as their Messiah, during the 3.5 year tribulation period. Isn't it interesting to note that there is no mention of a peace treaty in the New Testament and all periods mentioned are 3.5 years long and not 7 years.

    There is so much biblical evidence to support various aspects of this that this post could go on forever, but will end it here.

    Conclusion: I believe 486.5 years of the 490 year period have been fulfilled and the tribulation will be only 3.5 years long.

    Comment


    • #3
      I mean... it really takes some work to put the ability to justify saying these things through scripture. This Daniel 9 verse is a new one to me. Wow people... WOW! I mean really DurbanDude? People even use scriptures like these to justify Christian lawlessness? Not saying that it's you, it's just that the one you're pointing out here is a new one to me.

      I just can't believe how much work it takes for those to justify the putting away of Gods law and decrees in their walk, all so they can feel comfortable to be able to say things like:

      "I fall short and it doesn't matter anymore because Jesus saved us.'

      "The law doesn't apply to us."

      "We are under a new covenant which means the law was thrown into the garbage by Jesus."

      "The law is only for Jews." (which is actually kinda right)

      "We are not Jewish." (which is actually kinda right)

      "We have Grace so the law is completely irrelevant."

      So if your not Jewish, never were Jewish, and the Law only applied to the Jews, what is it that you fall short of and fail in? and don't say "THE GRACE OF GOD" either because that grace has a measuring pole. That pole is how Christ lived the law, setting the example for us, and commanding us to follow it the same way. Grace is not some mysterious or hypothetical thing. Christ is not saying "Well... pfft... you're not God so don't even bother trying to follow the law the way I have. I'll live the law for you and die so you don't have to even try anymore." Of course there are many scriptures that PAUL wrote that people will say, "yeah man... that is exactly what Christ meant when he said to follow his example, you don't have to follow his example or the law! See Paul says it right here..."

      Why is it these days that every sermon or even post you might see and hear either is about how we are no longer under the law, or has a very strong subtext saying the same?

      Even stranger, the need that some feel to constantly be trying to convince themselves and others of the same. As if there is some big Judahizing conspiracy that is always surrounding them and trying to put them under the law. Like there is a roving gang of guys in funny hats trying to impose the LAW of God on people, that so much effort has to be put into this counter doctrine to protect us from these Judahizing meanies. Which we know is not true. What is actually true is the massive need to twist as much scripture as possible to deaden a convicted conscience through the law. Because hey if we throw away the law, no more conviction right???

      SO REALLY? They're going after Daniel and those scriptures too??? Lets just start the lawless anarchy right now. WE have Christ and his mysterious saving grace to cover us in our anarchy so why not?

      The end to sacrifice and offering? HA! As if the Abomination even has to tell some big lie to make this covenant. The abomination will just take a seat and Christian doctrines like these will applaud him for doing it. The lie is already being told, and the Christian anti-law doctrines are how the world is being taught to buy it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DurbanDude View Post
        NIV
        And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and upon the wing of abominations `shall come' one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall `wrath' be poured out upon the desolate
        It is interesting to note that the two most common views on Daniel 9:27 would not fit into more than half of the translations listed.

        A)The view that Jesus fulfils both "halves" of the verse (preterist) cannot fit into all the bible interpretations above colored blue.

        B)The view that a future antichrist will fulfil both "halves" (futurist) of Daniel 9:27 also cannot fit into all the bible interpretations above colored blue.

        I say that we have to look into a further interpretation that can encompass the best parts of both views and fits into the blue interpretations , two separate people that are involved, one confirms a covenant and one that sets up the abomination.

        If we don't explore this option then we are just keeping our heads in the sand hoping our particular translation is the correct one. Unfortunately I haven't got the time now to explain it , will add a post later.
        In context with the verse before, it makes sense that the "HE" is the Prince of the the people that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary(Daniel 9:26)

        Comment


        • #5
          Here is the Septuagint into english version:

          Daniel 9

          9:26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint [the city] to desolations.

          9:27 And one week shall establish the covenant with many: and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away: and on the temple [shall be] the abomination of desolations; and at the end of time an end shall be put to the desolation.

          The original Septuagint never limited the Covenant to 7 years. It stated that the Covenant would be established within 7 years. Notice the addition of "my sacrifice and drink-offering". Grammatically the addition of the "my" reinforces that the prophecy concerns Jesus, not antichrist. Also, notice that in verse 26 that it states clearly "And after the sixty-two weeks. After the sixty weeks is clear that we are NOW in the seventieth week. What is after the 62 weeks but the last week? If we do not acknowledge this we must now insert a gap of an undetermined amount of time. Christ's crucifixion was within the last 7 years(Seventieth Week.) If every group of 7 years was consecutive, there is nothing to warrent removing the last week 2000+ years into the future.

          If we do not see fulfillment in 490 years and add any amount of time until it is fulfilled whether 1 year or 2000 years destroys the prophecy. We cannot in good conscience call it the prophecy of the seventy sevens. Also, the angel was messing around with peoples heads by saying it would be fulfilled in "seventy sevens" or 490 years but an undetermined period of time.

          We must have fulfillment in 490 years.

          God Bless!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Romulus View Post
            Here is the Septuagint into english version:

            Daniel 9

            9:26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint [the city] to desolations.

            9:27 And one week shall establish the covenant with many: and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away: and on the temple [shall be] the abomination of desolations; and at the end of time an end shall be put to the desolation.

            The original Septuagint never limited the Covenant to 7 years. It stated that the Covenant would be established within 7 years. Notice the addition of "my sacrifice and drink-offering". Grammatically the addition of the "my" reinforces that the prophecy concerns Jesus, not antichrist. Also, notice that in verse 26 that it states clearly "And after the sixty-two weeks. After the sixty weeks is clear that we are NOW in the seventieth week. What is after the 62 weeks but the last week? If we do not acknowledge this we must now insert a gap of an undetermined amount of time. Christ's crucifixion was within the last 7 years(Seventieth Week.) If every group of 7 years was consecutive, there is nothing to warrent removing the last week 2000+ years into the future.

            If we do not see fulfillment in 490 years and add any amount of time until it is fulfilled whether 1 year or 2000 years destroys the prophecy. We cannot in good conscience call it the prophecy of the seventy sevens. Also, the angel was messing around with peoples heads by saying it would be fulfilled in "seventy sevens" or 490 years but an undetermined period of time.

            We must have fulfillment in 490 years.

            God Bless!
            So God sent Gabriel to mess with Daniel's head? To confuse him? That does not sound like God to me.

            Also, this "my" you are talking about; what version is that from? I've checked the NIV, The Message, NASB, NJKV, and the Amplified Bible.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mfowler12 View Post
              So God sent Gabriel to mess with Daniel's head? To confuse him? That does not sound like God to me.

              Also, this "my" you are talking about; what version is that from? I've checked the NIV, The Message, NASB, NJKV, and the Amplified Bible.
              We agree that the angel was not sent to fool with Daniel's head. I believe that the angel meant what he said: that the prophecy would be fulfilled in seventy sevens or 70 7's=490 years. If he did not mean 490 years then what conclusion must we come up with is that the angel did not mean what he said.

              The Septuagint into English version by Brenton was exactly that, the translation of the original Septuagint into English. This included the books of the old testament only. The LXX or the Septuagint was the Greek translation of the original Hebrew texts. The Septuagint was translated anywhere from the 3rd to 1st century B.C. and existed from that time forward and would have been used by Jews and Christians alike in Christ's time.

              It gives a different version then current translations that state the "he" would confirm a covenant with many "for" seven years. The Septuagint never stated this. The Septuagint stated that within 7 years the Covenant with many would be established. It was at the Last Supper:

              This is my blood of the New Covenant, shed for many for the forgiveness of sins

              Some later translations have "confirm" a covenant but even that is an argument that must point to Christ and not the Beast. What Covenant would the Beast confirm? Making a peace treaty with Israel is not "confirming" a covenant with many. Scripturaly what Covenant was in effect in the time that Daniel was given the prophecy? It was the Old Covenant which was confirmed in Christ within the 70th week.

              There were only 2 Covenants in scripture. Neither was a peace treaty of any kind. There was only the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.

              Comment


              • #8
                The futurist says: "There's a gap in the 70 weeks, between week 69 and week 70."

                Okay... in that case, if God was just going to hit the "pause" button, what was the point of setting a 70 'week' time limit on the prophecy if it wouldn't be fulfilled within a consecutive 70 'week' timeframe?

                To try and interpret the 70 weeks as having an arbitrary multi-thousand-year gap in it completely contradicts the whole point of having a time-limit for the prophecies to begin with. Meaning, if God knew ahead of time that the prophecies would not be fulfilled in a consecutive 70-week timeframe, what was the point of setting a timeframe that wouldn't be kept?
                To This Day

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by markedward View Post
                  The futurist says: "There's a gap in the 70 weeks, between week 69 and week 70."

                  Okay... in that case, if God was just going to hit the "pause" button, what was the point of setting a 70 'week' time limit on the prophecy if it wouldn't be fulfilled within a consecutive 70 'week' timeframe?

                  To try and interpret the 70 weeks as having an arbitrary multi-thousand-year gap in it completely contradicts the whole point of having a time-limit for the prophecies to begin with. Meaning, if God knew ahead of time that the prophecies would not be fulfilled in a consecutive 70-week timeframe, what was the point of setting a timeframe that wouldn't be kept?
                  I am a one who sees a "paus button" being pressed.
                  Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
                  :26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
                  When did the "fullness of the Gentiles come in"?
                  Was the "ungodliness of Jacob" turned away?
                  Is "all Israel saved?
                  When was the "time of Jacob's trouble"
                  When was Dan. 9:27 fullfied?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Diolectic View Post

                    When did the "fullness of the Gentiles come in"?
                    It is now presently, in the process of coming in. Another phrase for it is the N.T. Harvest; the fruit of the great commission; first in Jerusalem, then Judaea, then all of the world. (to quote Peter).


                    Originally posted by Diolectic View Post
                    Was the "ungodliness of Jacob" turned away?
                    When Christ took the sins of Jacob upon Himself on the cross of Calvary would be a good start.

                    That is 'the Deliverer' that the O.T. prophets were looking forward to.

                    Originally posted by Diolectic View Post
                    Is "all Israel saved?
                    Again, it is in the process of being saved...Peter wrote of it in Acts chapter two already at that point being underway to 'all the house of israel and her children, from that generation ontward'.

                    Originally posted by Diolectic View Post
                    When was the "time of Jacob's trouble"
                    The context of Jeremiah 29-31 was the Babylonian Captivity circa 522 B.C.

                    Originally posted by Diolectic View Post
                    When was Dan. 9:27 fullfied?
                    At the cross; when Messiah the Prince was put to death; as the final sacfrice; and that sacrifice caused an end forever of sacrifice and offerings.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come (troops of Titus) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; (ad70) and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he (Messiah) shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week (3 yrs after baptism) He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. (veil of temple torn) And on the wing of abominations (atonement sacrifices after the cross was an abomination) shall be one who makes desolate, (Titus) even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate." (Gods judgement on Jerusalem from ad70 until the times of the gentiles finish)

                      (Dan 9: 26,27 NKJV with my notes added)

                      "Your name and renown
                      is the desire of our hearts."
                      (Isaiah 26:8)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Diolectic View Post
                        I am a one who sees a "paus button" being pressed.
                        Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.
                        :26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
                        When did the "fullness of the Gentiles come in"?
                        Was the "ungodliness of Jacob" turned away?
                        Is "all Israel saved?
                        When was the "time of Jacob's trouble"
                        When was Dan. 9:27 fullfied?
                        The Deliverer already came to turn ungodliness away from Jacob and take away their sins.

                        Acts 3
                        25Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
                        26Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

                        Matthew 26
                        26And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
                        27And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
                        28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                          Here is the Septuagint into english version:

                          Daniel 9

                          9:26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint [the city] to desolations.

                          9:27 And one week shall establish the covenant with many: and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away: and on the temple [shall be] the abomination of desolations; and at the end of time an end shall be put to the desolation.

                          God Bless!
                          This statement itself has shown me one thing. I do not know as muich as I thought I did concerning the 70 weeks in Daniel. If what Romulus said is true, then it is very possible that the seventy weeks are fulfilled, and thus we should move on with the NT signs, adn leave at least Daniel 9 behind. (Although I say that Daniel 7 is still in effect).

                          However, I am not that willing to just say, yup, Batman is right. No, I must study this a lot more, and I shall. Until I find compelling evidence, (or in this case, colaborating evidence from the Septuagine), I wil continue to believe that there is a pause button that has been pressed when Jerusalem and the Temple was destroyed.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by David Taylor View Post
                            When did the "fullness of the Gentiles come in"?
                            It is now presently, in the process of coming in. Another phrase for it is the N.T. Harvest; the fruit of the great commission; first in Jerusalem, then Judaea, then all of the world. (to quote Peter).
                            Then the true nation of Israel is still blind & Isreal is not saved.
                            Because the gentiles who will be saved beclme part of Israel.
                            Was the "ungodliness of Jacob" turned away?
                            When Christ took the sins of Jacob upon Himself on the cross of Calvary would be a good start.
                            That is 'the Deliverer' that the O.T. prophets were looking forward to.
                            Is "all Israel saved?
                            Again, it is in the process of being saved...Peter wrote of it in Acts chapter two already at that point being underway to 'all the house of israel and her children, from that generation ontward'.
                            How do you say that ungodlyness of Jacob has been taken away?

                            When was Dan. 9:27 fullfied?
                            At the cross; when Messiah the Prince was put to death; as the final sacfrice; and that sacrifice caused an end forever of sacrifice and offerings.
                            That would be Dan 9:26:
                            And after the sixty-two weeks which is 434 years (note: the 434 years, plus the 49 years, equals a total of 483 years total),
                            shall Messiah which is Jesus Christ or the Anointed One will
                            be cut off or killed or Isa 53:8for he was cut off out of the land of the living. Jesus Christ was crucified
                            but not for himself He did not die for Himself, Jesus never sinned. He died for those who should trust on Him as their Lord and Savior.

                            When will the "he" confirm the covenant with many for one week or seven years?

                            Furthermore, Jesus never did cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease even after 3& 1/2 years after His resurrection.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Diolectic
                              Furthermore, Jesus never did cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease even after 3& 1/2 years after His resurrection.
                              Are you aware of how much damage was done to the inner sanctuary by the earthquake in AD30? Sacrifice ceased alright. However historical records do not tell us for how long.

                              And when the Jewish leaders resumed sacrifice they did so in defiance of God. Hence the term 'overspreading of abominations.' (KJV) The overspreading of abominations was the resumption of the Day of atonement sacrifice after God had caused it to cease.

                              Hence the destruction of the temple, not simply by the Romans, but by God's will. At which point it ceased forever!
                              "Your name and renown
                              is the desire of our hearts."
                              (Isaiah 26:8)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X