Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

Futurists please

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$1,048.00
Goal
$1,038.00

Cyberseeker

Member
Have I read you right?

Forgive me for tacking bracketed notes into the text, but I want to represent your viewpoint exactly as the futurist sees it.

After this period of sixty-two sets of seven, the Anointed One will be killed, (Christ) appearing to have accomplished nothing, and a ruler will arise whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple. (future Antichrist event)
The end will come with a flood, and war and its miseries are decreed from that time to the very end. (from AoD until 2nd coming)

(Daniel 9:26 New Living Translation, bracketed notes added)

My question is only verse 26 and Im sure we all agree that the first part of the verse speaks of the cross. But who is the ruler "whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple?" Do you see it as a future conflict or do you see it as the Romans in AD 70?

Thanks
 
Have I read you right?

Forgive me for tacking bracketed notes into the text, but I want to represent your viewpoint exactly as the futurist sees it.



My question is only verse 26 and Im sure we all agree that the first part of the verse speaks of the cross. But who is the ruler "whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple?" Do you see it as a future conflict or do you see it as the Romans in AD 70?

Thanks


26 "And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined. Daniel 9 :26



  • after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off... - 33 AD

  • the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. - 70 AD
The people [Romans] destroyed the city and sanctuary in 70 AD.


The prince who is to come, clearly comes sometime after 70 AD.


Next question.




JLB
 
How were the people of this 'prince who has yet to come' identified with 'him' back in 70AD?

Scripturally, where is the promise of his coming?
 
Since "prince" in this verse is not capitalized I have difficulty seeing how this is referring to Christ.
 
JLB said:
The people [Romans] destroyed the city and sanctuary in 70 AD.


The prince who is to come, clearly comes sometime after 70 AD.


Next question.

So, are you treating this part of verse 26 as a 'double fulfillment?' ie. definitely is Ad70 and definitely is future as well?
 
Since "prince" in this verse is not capitalized I have difficulty seeing how this is referring to Christ.

Just so we don't put too much emphasis on captialization and punctuation, remember that...

"The basic Hebrew text is called the Masoretic Text (MT), which is named after a group of scribes in the ninth century that preserved the text and added vowels and punctuation marks. The original Hebrew just had consonants, but a few consonants functioned as vowels. No one would know how to pronounce the Hebrew words unless vowel marks were added. This is a great help in understanding the text. (Hebrew Bible)"

Dan 9:24 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.

Since the decree we count from (there were actually four decrees) was in 457BC...

Ezr 7:8 And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king.
Ezr 7:9 For upon the first day of the first month began he to go up from Babylon, and on the first day of the fifth month came he to Jerusalem, according to the good hand of his God upon him.
Ezr 7:10 For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments.
Ezr 7:11 Now this is the copy of the letter that the king Artaxerxes gave unto Ezra the priest, the scribe, even a scribe of the words of the commandments of the LORD, and of his statutes to Israel.
Ezr 7:12 Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest, a scribe of the law of the God of heaven, perfect peace, and at such a time.
Ezr 7:13 I make a decree, that all they of the people of Israel, and of his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own freewill to go up to Jerusalem, go with thee.

Now 483 years later we come to 27 AD when Christ began His ministry. So one more seven (seven years, Num 14:34 Ezek 4:6) brings us to 34 AD. What happened in 34 AD? Not much and the temple and the city were not destroyed until 70 AD. So there must be a gap in the last week (the last seven). If not the destruction of 70 AD does not fit this prophecy. If there is a gap then who can tell me when the last 3-1/2 years is actually finished?

Dan 11:40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.
Dan 11:41 He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.
Dan 11:42 He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape.
Dan 11:43 But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.
Dan 11:44 But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.
Dan 11:45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.
Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
Dan 12:3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Dan 12:5 Then I Daniel looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on that side of the bank of the river.
Dan 12:6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?
Dan 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.
Dan 12:8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
Dan 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.
Dan 12:10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.
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.
Dan 12:12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.
Dan 12:13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

This was not completed in 70 AD. 70 AD was just a type of the coming abomination and the real tribulation...

Mat 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
Mat 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Now there can only be one time that is worse than any other before it or after it. It is unique. The Simon bar Kochba revolt was worse than 70 AD. Hitler and Stalin were far worse than 70 AD. Yet these did not result in the return of Christ. The Coming tribulation will.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How were the people of this 'prince who has yet to come' identified with 'him' back in 70AD?

Scripturally, where is the promise of his coming?

In the next verse -

Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate."

Can you tell us what key event must take place for us to identify who "he" is?


JLB
 

Well, that was short and sweet. :angel

J, Ive been checking and futurist leaders seem to be saying it as Ive described.

After this period of sixty-two sets of seven, the Anointed One will be killed, (Christ) appearing to have accomplished nothing, and a ruler will arise whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple. (future Antichrist event) The end will come with a flood, and war and its miseries are decreed from that time to the very end. (from AoD until 2nd coming)

Thomas Ice seems to be saying the same,
The subject of this sentence is "the people," not "the prince who is to come." Thus, it is the people of the prince who is to come that destroys the city and the sanctuary. We have already identified the people as the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in a.d. 70 under the leadership of Titus. Yet, I believe that the prince who is to come is a reference to the yet to come Antichrist.

Dwight Pentecost says it too,
The ruler who will come is that final head of the Roman Empire, the little horn of 7:8. It is significant that the people of the ruler, not the ruler himself, will destroy Jerusalem. Since he will be the final Roman ruler, the people of that ruler must be the Romans themselves.​

Am I missing something?
 
Daniel 9:26 ". . the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary . ." This occurred in 70 AD. The prince spoken of here certainly was not and is not Jesus.
 
Well, that was short and sweet. :angel

J, Ive been checking and futurist leaders seem to be saying it as Ive described.
After this period of sixty-two sets of seven, the Anointed One will be killed, (Christ) appearing to have accomplished nothing, and a ruler will arise whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple. (future Antichrist event) The end will come with a flood, and war and its miseries are decreed from that time to the very end. (from AoD until 2nd coming)
Thomas Ice seems to be saying the same,
The subject of this sentence is "the people," not "the prince who is to come." Thus, it is the people of the prince who is to come that destroys the city and the sanctuary. We have already identified the people as the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in a.d. 70 under the leadership of Titus. Yet, I believe that the prince who is to come is a reference to the yet to come Antichrist.
Dwight Pentecost says it too,
The ruler who will come is that final head of the Roman Empire, the little horn of 7:8. It is significant that the people of the ruler, not the ruler himself, will destroy Jerusalem. Since he will be the final Roman ruler, the people of that ruler must be the Romans themselves.​
Am I missing something?


Thomas Ice seems to be saying the same,
The subject of this sentence is "the people," not "the prince who is to come." Thus, it is the people of the prince who is to come that destroys the city and the sanctuary. We have already identified the people as the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in a.d. 70 under the leadership of Titus. Yet, I believe that the prince who is to come is a reference to the yet to come Antichrist.
I agree with this statement.


JLB
 
Okay, Ive been trying to hear what everyone is saying and decided to open up my question to Futurist as well as non-Futurist. Also, the NKJV translation seems better than 'New Living'.

So, what do you think now? :oops Does this brief comparison summary correctly represent our major viewpoints?

Futurist Interpretation
After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince who is to come (future descendants of Titus' race) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (a future event) The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Non-Futurist Interpretation
After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince who is to come (troops of Titus) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (AD 70) The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.​
 
Okay, Ive been trying to hear what everyone is saying and decided to open up my question to Futurist as well as non-Futurist. Also, the NKJV translation seems better than 'New Living'.

So, what do you think now? :oops Does this brief comparison summary correctly represent our major viewpoints?
Futurist Interpretation
After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince who is to come (future descendants of Titus' race) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (a future event) The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Non-Futurist Interpretation
After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince who is to come (troops of Titus) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (AD 70) The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.​


I can't speak for anyone else, much less a "group" of people that may or may not label themselves as "Futurist" or "Non-Futurist".

For me personally, The events of vs. 26 happened in the past.

The events of verse 27 happen in the future.

The "he" in verse 27 refers to "the prince who is to come".

JLB
 
Okay, Ive been trying to hear what everyone is saying and decided to open up my question to Futurist as well as non-Futurist. Also, the NKJV translation seems better than 'New Living'.

So, what do you think now? :oops Does this brief comparison summary correctly represent our major viewpoints?

Futurist Interpretation

After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince who is to come (future descendants of Titus' race) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (a future event) The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Non-Futurist Interpretation
After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince who is to come (troops of Titus) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (AD 70) The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.​
Restricting the OP to Daniel 9:26 here, and as a futurist I also believe the events described involving the people of the prince who is to come concluded with the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
 
26 "And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Looking back we see the "city and sanctuary" was destroyed in 70 AD.

The question is: Is the term "the prince who is to come" a reference that is future in relation to the event of "the city and sanctuary" being destroyed?

Some people read verse 26 as -

The prince who is to come, comes in 70 AD and the people with him destroy the city and sanctuary.

One must refer to the next verse to see that "the prince who is to come" is future to the events of 70 AD.

Jesus said -

15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand).

Our full understanding will not come from verse 26 alone.

Let the reader understand, is a reference to lead us to what Daniel said.

However Daniel did not mention this word; abomination or desolation, in verse 26.

It is clear that the term "prince who is to come" is continued in verse 27 by the reference to "he", which is associated with "temple activities".


JLB
 
Bear with me please. Here is verse 26 (revised). Does it properly represent the futurist view?

After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people (Roman troops in ad 70) of the prince who is to come (Antichrist, from revived roman empire) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.

And here is verse 27 (with a time gap after 26a).

He (future Antichrist) shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week (3½ yrs after his treaty) shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. (temple desecrated) And on the wing of abominations (situated in a wing of the temple) shall be one who makes desolate, (Antichrists abomination) even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate. (judgement on Antichrist)

Any suggested improvements welcomed.
 
Bear with me please. Here is verse 26 (revised). Does it properly represent the futurist view?
After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people (Roman troops in ad 70) of the prince who is to come (Antichrist, from revived roman empire) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.
And here is verse 27 (with a time gap after 26a).
He (future Antichrist) shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week (3½ yrs after his treaty) shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. (temple desecrated) And on the wing of abominations (situated in a wing of the temple) shall be one who makes desolate, (Antichrists abomination) even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate. (judgement on Antichrist)
Any suggested improvements welcomed.

You seem to have changed versions again.
Also, the NKJV translation seems better than 'New Living'.
Here is how it reads in the NKJV -

26 "And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined. 27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate."

"he" is the last person mentioned in verse 26, which is "the prince who is to come".

This person is associated with "sacrifice and offerings" ie; Temple activities!

The events of verse 27 coming after the events of verse 26.


JLB
 
Bear with me please. Here is verse 26 (revised). Does it properly represent the futurist view?

After the sixty-two weeks Messiah (Jesus) shall be cut off, but not for himself; and the people (Roman troops in ad 70) of the prince who is to come (Antichrist, from revived roman empire) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.



And here is verse 27 (with a time gap after 26a).

He (future Antichrist) shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week (3½ yrs after his treaty) shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. (temple desecrated) And on the wing of abominations (situated in a wing of the temple) shall be one who makes desolate, (Antichrists abomination) even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate. (judgement on Antichrist)

Any suggested improvements welcomed.

Any temple built to offer blood sacrifice is desecrated to start with
 
There is no reason for me to think that some of the NT prophecies could have been talking about 70AD where more were for the future.
 
Back
Top