He Shall Confirm The Covenant...

[S.T. Ranger]

Daniel 9:26-27 King James Version (KJV)

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.

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.

The focus is the "he" in v.27. Two primary views are held which significantly change our understanding of this passage. I will present my own view, which is that the "he" in v.27 (emphasized) is a reference to Antichrist, not Messiah, and I will include a list of reasons why I believe that, which is open for criticism:

1. Note that Messiah is cut off before the covenant is said to be confirmed, which will not allow for His "confirming of the covenant" within the Seventieth Week.

2. The word "confirmed" is better understood in the sense of "strengthening," or "supporting in character," rather than a modern understanding in which a covenant might be thought to be brought into existence and established (as in, if the "He" were Christ, this might be thought to speak of Christ confirming the New Covenant).

3. Christ did not "confirm" the New Covenant in His Ministry, this remained a mystery until Pentecost.

4.Christ did confirm the Covenant of Law, but again this would only be relevant if "confirm" is viewed as a strengthening or support of the Covenant of Law. However, we would have to bounce around in who is in view, shifting from Messiah to Antichrist: Messiah is not the "prince that shall come," for example.

5. It is reasonable to conclude "the prince that shall come" is a reference to Antichrist because it is his people that destroy the city and the sanctuary.

6. Christ is not the One that "makes desolate," thus keeping the "he" a consistent subject.

7. If Christ is the One effecting the Abomination which makes desolate, then in Matthew 24 we have Christ warning people to flee when they see this. Again we get outside of a 3 1/2 year timeframe.

8. Christ does cause sacrifice and oblation to cease by establishing the New Covenant, but, it is roughly 35 years before the Temple is physically destroyed.

9. If we did give a spiritual application to Christ being the One to "confirm" the New Covenant (and it would have to be the New Covenant), again we do not see the New Covenant "confirmed by Christ" for 3 1/2 years, and...we are left with trying to figure out how we can justify a view that has the New Covenant "confirmed for only one week, or, seven years.

10. If we say that the "covenant" in view here is the New Covenant, and that it is confirmed by Christ, then we have to throw out any 3 1/2 year period ascribed to Christ because it would be at His death, not at the beginning of His ministry...that the Seventieth Week begins. Thus nullifying the view that His Ministry could be considered the "confirming," and that the cessation of sacrifice and oblation takes place at the mid-point of the week. Messiah is cut off before the events in vv.26-27 take place.

This list is given with an open invitation to critique.

God bless.

[Guest]

I agree that the "he" is the Anti-Christ.

[Salty]

The "he" is the coming Antichrist, and the confirming is... the Old Covenant, which is HOW sacrifices and Old Covenant worship by orthodox Jews in Jerusalem will return again with a rebuilt temple in order for the "abomination of desolation" prophecy Jesus mentioned from the Book of Daniel can come to pass at the very end of the tribulation.

[Guest]

 

The "He" In Verse 27 I Believe Is Indeed The Anti-Christ With His Covenant Of Men

 

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: Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Matthew 24:15-16

 

And The Confirming Of The "Real" Covenant I Believe Will Be Jesus And His Salvation Of All Israel

 

And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Romans 11:26-27

 

As I See It

[Enoch2021]

This is yet another (in a long list) of Fallacies propagated here by S.T. Ranger:

 

It's a veiled Argument To Popularity (Ad Populum) Fallacy-----  Appeals to popularity suggest that an idea must be true simply because it is widely held. http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-popularity/

 

Consensus/Vote doesn't = TRUTH

 

Of which, this "POLL" is designed to Facilitate then Elucidate.

 

What if 99% Vote that the 'he" is the Messiah?   What then?

 

Is the Interpretation of The WORD of GOD up for a Vote?

 

 

We see where "Consensus" (veiled as "Peer Review") has gotten us with "So-Called" science....Has gotten most of the World believing in Fairytales: evolution, big, bangs, black holes, multi-verses, abiogenesis   , something from nothing, et al ad nauseam.

[S.T. Ranger]

This is yet another (in a long list) of Fallacies propagated here by S.T. Ranger:

When you can deal with the fallacies addressed in your responses in the other thread perhaps your rant here might mean something.

But here again, we see you present false arguments. Let me show you those, my friend:

 

It's a veiled Argument To Popularity (Ad Populum) Fallacy-----  Appeals to popularity suggest that an idea must be true simply because it is widely held. http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-popularity/

On the contrary, nothing veiled about the list of objections posted in the OP.

False argument #1.

Consensus/Vote doesn't = TRUTH

No-one, particularly the OP (yours truly)...suggested the poll would determine truth.

False argument #2.

Of which, this "POLL" is designed to Facilitate then Elucidate.

False argument #3: the poll was added for my own benefit to see the community's views. Some that will partake in the poll will not bother to address the OP.

You know...kind of like what you are doing.

 

What if 99% Vote that the 'he" is the Messiah?   What then?

False argument #4: trying to justify previous false arguments with rationalization.

You created the premise that the poll is designed to determine truth and then run with it.

Is the Interpretation of The WORD of GOD up for a Vote?

Sometimes it is. Church History will show that. That is why so much false doctrine continues to be prevalent in a number of groups today.

That is why we deal with the doctrine by measuring it according to the Word of God itself.

False argument #5: there is no precedent for a collective body embracing doctrine based on the fact that many others, or even a majority embrace that doctrine.

 

We see where "Consensus" (veiled as "Peer Review") has gotten us with "So-Called" science....Has gotten most of the World believing in Fairytales: evolution, big, bangs, black holes, multi-verses, abiogenesis   , something from nothing, et al ad nauseam.

Again the basic premise of the false argument is presented.

If you would like to address the OP rather than what you read into the thread you are welcome to participate.

God bless.

[Guest]

This is yet another (in a long list) of Fallacies propagated here by S.T. Ranger:

 

It's a veiled Argument To Popularity (Ad Populum) Fallacy-----  Appeals to popularity suggest that an idea must be true simply because it is widely held. http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-popularity/

 

Consensus/Vote doesn't = TRUTH

 

Of which, this "POLL" is designed to Facilitate then Elucidate.

 

What if 99% Vote that the 'he" is the Messiah?   What then?

 

Is the Interpretation of The WORD of GOD up for a Vote?

 

 

We see where "Consensus" (veiled as "Peer Review") has gotten us with "So-Called" science....Has gotten most of the World believing in Fairytales: evolution, big, bangs, black holes, multi-verses, abiogenesis   , something from nothing, et al ad nauseam.

So......you don't believe that the "He" is the Anti-Christ? Whom, pray tell, do you believe that "he" is?

[Enoch2021]

 

This is yet another (in a long list) of Fallacies propagated here by S.T. Ranger:

 

It's a veiled Argument To Popularity (Ad Populum) Fallacy-----  Appeals to popularity suggest that an idea must be true simply because it is widely held. http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-popularity/

 

Consensus/Vote doesn't = TRUTH

 

Of which, this "POLL" is designed to Facilitate then Elucidate.

 

What if 99% Vote that the 'he" is the Messiah?   What then?

 

Is the Interpretation of The WORD of GOD up for a Vote?

 

 

We see where "Consensus" (veiled as "Peer Review") has gotten us with "So-Called" science....Has gotten most of the World believing in Fairytales: evolution, big, bangs, black holes, multi-verses, abiogenesis   , something from nothing, et al ad nauseam.

So......you don't believe that the "He" is the Anti-Christ? Whom, pray tell, do you believe that "he" is?

 

 

 

==========================================================================================================

 

 

So......you don't believe that the "He" is the Anti-Christ? Whom, pray tell, do you believe that "he" is?

 

 

I didn't say either way.  How did you arrive @ that conclusion?  I only commented on the veiled "meaning" of the "Poll"

 

I personally KNOW the "he" is the ac by simple exegesis of the passages...

 

(Daniel 9:26-27) "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. 

 

{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."

 

The "he" is speaking to the Antecedent.....The Prince.  Verse 26 (The Prince) is speaking to who destroyed the City and the Sanctuary after Jesus was Executed.  This turns out to be Titus Vespasian with his people....the 5th, 10th, 12th, and 15th Roman Legions in 70 AD.

 

Knowing that Verse 27 is speaking to a yet future time (Daniel's 70th Week), the "he" directly can't be Titus Vespasian unless he personally is Resurrected (and we know that's not happening) ERGO....the "he" is a "TYPE".  In this specific case, "he" is a "Type" of anti-christ......and he's comes from the ROMAN Empire.  Most likely from the Eastern Leg (Byzantine) since that empire covered a large portion of Assyria.  Which then is cross-confirmed via Isaiah (10:5, 10:24, 14:25, 31:8), and Micah (5:5, 5:6) of an Assyrian. <--- the AC, a Nimrod II motif.

 

All of this is THEN Driven HOME in Daniel Chapter 2 (Ten Toes/Ten Kings) and Daniel Chapter 7 (Ten Horns/Ten Kings)....and the "Little Horn" that "is the Eighth" that comes up from....ROME.

[Last Daze]

How about the "he" being the "prince of Rome", a fallen angel who has the false prophet (antichrist) as a mouthpiece?  The Romans were "of" this prince and this prince "was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss". 

[Salty]

If all Satan's followers of men are "antichrists", then who would be the ULTIMATE ANTICHRIST? Wouldn't just another flesh man antichrist be another one of those "many antichrists"? Even the antichrists MUST have an ultimate antichrist figure that they follow.