He Shall Confirm The Covenant...

[Kan]

In Matthew 23:38 Jesus declared that the house of Israel is left desolate. Why? because of its abominations as mentioned in verse 37. Killing the prophets, was the reason God allowed them to be captured by Babylon many years ago.

 

Around the time of the end of their Babylon captivity, Daniel was given the vision concerning the state of the Sanctuary, and he was told that Israel had a certain time frame to get it together and honor the coming of the Messiah.

 

When the Messiah came He was cut off even before the probation for Israel as God's chosen nation was over.

Jesus in His prophetic knowledge warned the disciples that Jerusalem, the spiritually desolate, would be destroyed, and so gave them an opportunity to escape.

The Messiah was not "the prince that shall come" to destroy "the city and the sanctuary"

but it was the Roman army under Titus in 70 AD.

But after 69 weeks "in the middle of the (last) week" of the "seventy weeks" of probation for Israel, the "Messiah was cut off," causing the sacrificial system of the Jewish temple to end. And because of the widespread abominations done in Israel to the prophets, the innocent, as well as the Son of God, they were totally desolate.

 

However, God in His mercy did not end it there, but gave the nation another chance through the mission of the disciples to find salvation, and the "consummation" of the desolate did not happen till about 36 years later. 

This action was illustrated by the parable of the gardener with the fruitless tree, who trimmed, dug around and fertilized it for another season.

 

"The covenant" was none other than what God had given Israel through the sanctuary on earth, Ch 8:13, it was a way of being with them as a nation, but because of their lack of faith and backsliding, their time was running out. Verse 24, - "70 weeks are determined upon thy people... to make an end" of the nonsense.

[Salty]

Jesus was officially "cut off" at His death on the cross. That's when the 69th week of Dan.9 ended, not many years later when sacrifices in Jerusalem ended with the destruction of the temple. The final "one week" is still yet to be fulfilled today.

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, 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.

 

Sorry, bro’,  but you have an error in your poll. There is no third option to the question about the covenant. Hence, when I tried to vote with neither selected, it gave me an error message.

 

There IS a third option, and in my opinion, it is the correct option. The covenant is the DAVIDIC Covenant! Also, who taught you how to make a poll, anyway? There should always be an option that says, “None of the above” or “Other,” with a chance to explain one’s choice. (Which I guess is in the posts below, for this poll.)

 

It IS the Messiah who strengthens the Davidic Covenant, but that covenant is neither a “covenant of law” nor is it a “covenant established by some ‘Antichrist' character!” It is God’s UNCONDITIONAL covenant to David, a ONE-SIDED covenant! To the lesser sires of Yeshua` in David’s line, it was conditional for THEM, but to the line of David itself (which culminated in the ULTIMATE Messiah), it is UNCONDITIONAL and ETERNAL!

 

Now, the wording of verse 26 above is EXTREMELY important as is the Jewish thought process.

 

Regarding the Jewish thought process first, we who speak English in the “Western” world (which includes much of Europe, btw), we use an almost strict system of CHRONOLOGICAL development in our “telling of a story.” We seldom use the idea of stating the main points in an outline first and then go into the sub-points - the details - of those main points. That’s REVERSED in Jewish thought. They will often state their main points FIRST and THEN go into a detailed, more-chronological tale of their sub-points.

 

Contemplate that for a few moments. Consider Genesis 1:1-13:

 

Genesis 1:1-13

1 In the beginning God created the Heaven and the earth (Hebrew: eet hashaamaayim v’eet haa’aarets).

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven (Hebrew: shaamaayim, the same word in verse 1 except without the definite article). And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth (Hebrew: erets, the same word in verse 1 except without the definite article); and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

KJV

 

The point of the narrative is to describe the origin OF OUR PLANET, and in particular, OF OUR BIOSPHERE! The word for “the Heaven” or literally “the heavens” is “hashaamaayim,” and it is the SAME WORD used in verse 8. This is also true for the word translated as “the earth,” which is “haa’aarets.” It’s the SAME WORD used in verse 10.

 

The same is true for verse 26 above. The Hebrew word for “and-after” is “v’achareey” and comes from ...

 

 

OT:310 'achar (akh-ar'); from OT:309; properly, the hind part; generally used as an adverb or conjunction, after (in various senses):

KJV - after (that, -ward), again, at, away from, back (from, -side), behind, beside, by, follow (after, -ing), forasmuch, from, hereafter, hinder end,  out (over) live,  persecute, posterity, pursuing, remnant, seeing, since, thence [-forth], when, with.

 

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

 

 

 

as Strong’s Dictionary of the Hebrew and Chaldee Languages lists it.

 

It’s the same word that is used for “latter days” or “end times,” which in Hebrew is “achariyt hayamim.” It literally can mean "ANYTIME after!” Verse 26 gives us the general, more inclusive points, and then verse 27 goes into the details of those main points.

 

HOWEVER, the verbs of verse 27 have no subject ownership within that “sentence.” That’s why in English translation the pronoun “he” must be added. Therefore, these verbs must go back to the prior masculine, singular subject in the previous verse. That CANNOT be “prince” (Hebrew: naagiyd meaning “commander”) in verse 26 because it is the subordinate noun in the noun construct state, “am naagiyd." In English translation, that is equivalent to being the OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION “OF” in the phrase “the people OF the prince.” And, the next masculine, singular SUBJECT is “Messiah” (Hebrew: “maashiach”) of verse 26a!

 

Thus, your point number 1 above is wrong, and that changes everything below it!

[S.T. Ranger]

Shalom, 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.

Sorry, bro’, but you have an error in your poll. There is no third option to the question about the covenant. Hence, when I tried to vote with neither selected, it gave me an error message.

Only the two primary thoughts are given in the poll, and we can see that there is a majority who feel that Antichrist makes a covenant that may be thought to be distinct to Antichrist.

There is good reason why the Davidic Covenant is not given, which is because it simply will not fit the context of either Daniel or Other relevant passages.

There IS a third option, and in my opinion, it is the correct option. The covenant is the DAVIDIC Covenant! Also, who taught you how to make a poll, anyway? There should always be an option that says, “None of the above” or “Other,” with a chance to explain one’s choice. (Which I guess is in the posts below, for this poll.)

And why we would reject the Davidic Covenant as an option is quite simple: neither Christ not Antichrist will confirm the Davidic Covenant for one Week.

It is not the Davidic Covenant that would allow for sacrifice and oblation, because we would have to see one or the other claiming to fulfill that role. Christ certainly did, but it had not impact on Levitical Service, which was already established and being carried out.

It IS the Messiah who strengthens the Davidic Covenant,

Christ did confirm the Law, as well as the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants. He also confirmed the covenant of the Levitical Priesthood.

But none of these are confirmed by God for one Week.

Only Antichrist fits in a confirmation of any covenant which is then broken, thus we do not see God breaking any Covenant. Not even the Law is despised by Christ, but fulfilled. The writer of Hebrews says to leave the Law, not despise it, which is also confirmed by Paul, who says we establish the Law (and this may cause some confusion).

but that covenant is neither a “covenant of law” nor is it a “covenant established by some ‘Antichrist' character!” It is God’s UNCONDITIONAL covenant to David, a ONE-SIDED covenant! To the lesser sires of Yeshua` in David’s line, it was conditional for THEM, but to the line of David itself (which culminated in the ULTIMATE Messiah), it is UNCONDITIONAL and ETERNAL!

Now, the wording of verse 26 above is EXTREMELY important as is the Jewish thought process.

Regarding the Jewish thought process first, we who speak English in the “Western” world (which includes much of Europe, btw), we use an almost strict system of CHRONOLOGICAL development in our “telling of a story.” We seldom use the idea of stating the main points in an outline first and then go into the sub-points - the details - of those main points. That’s REVERSED in Jewish thought. They will often state their main points FIRST and THEN go into a detailed, more-chronological tale of their sub-points.

Contemplate that for a few moments. Consider Genesis 1:1-13:

I agree completely. Often it is by addressing points in Scripture backwards that they are best understood.

But the one thing you need to consider is that the New Covenant, which is how the Davidic Covenant is fulfilled, cannot be broken, particularly by God Himself.

Genesis 1:1-13

1 In the beginning God created the Heaven and the earth (Hebrew: eet hashaamaayim v’eet haa’aarets).

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven (Hebrew: shaamaayim, the same word in verse 1 except without the definite article). And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth (Hebrew: erets, the same word in verse 1 except without the definite article); and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

KJV

The point of the narrative is to describe the origin OF OUR PLANET, and in particular, OF OUR BIOSPHERE! The word for “the Heaven” or literally “the heavens” is “hashaamaayim,” and it is the SAME WORD used in verse 8. This is also true for the word translated as “the earth,” which is “haa’aarets.” It’s the SAME WORD used in verse 10.

The same is true for verse 26 above. The Hebrew word for “and-after” is “v’achareey” and comes from ...

OT:310 'achar (akh-ar'); from OT:309; properly, the hind part; generally used as an adverb or conjunction, after (in various senses):

KJV - after (that, -ward), again, at, away from, back (from, -side), behind, beside, by, follow (after, -ing), forasmuch, from, hereafter, hinder end, out (over) live, persecute, posterity, pursuing, remnant, seeing, since, thence [-forth], when, with.

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

as Strong’s Dictionary of the Hebrew and Chaldee Languages lists it.

It’s the same word that is used for “latter days” or “end times,” which in Hebrew is “achariyt hayamim.” It literally can mean "ANYTIME after!” Verse 26 gives us the general, more inclusive points, and then verse 27 goes into the details of those main points.

Again, Christ is cut off after the 69 Weeks, which makes it doubtful He is in view. I will go back and emamine this later, as I am in a hurry at the moment, but I see nothing here to make point one in error.

HOWEVER, the verbs of verse 27 have no subject ownership within that “sentence.” That’s why in English translation the pronoun “he” must be added. Therefore, these verbs must go back to the prior masculine, singular subject in the previous verse. That CANNOT be “prince” (Hebrew: naagiyd meaning “commander”) in verse 26 because it is the subordinate noun in the noun construct state, “am naagiyd." In English translation, that is equivalent to being the OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION “OF” in the phrase “the people OF the prince.” And, the next masculine, singular SUBJECT is “Messiah” (Hebrew: “maashiach”) of verse 26a!

So Christians destroy the city and the sanctuary?

Thus, your point number 1 above is wrong, and that changes everything below it!

Take a look at "that shall come," and see how that is significant to who it is that the covenant pertains to.

I would ask if you see the Seventieth Week as being a seven year tribulation period to come. When you answer this, then we can discuss how Christ can confirm the Davidic Covenant within that period.

God bless.

[Retrobyter]

Shabbat shalom, S.T. Ranger.

 

 

Shalom, 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.

Sorry, bro’, but you have an error in your poll. There is no third option to the question about the covenant. Hence, when I tried to vote with neither selected, it gave me an error message.

 

Only the two primary thoughts are given in the poll, and we can see that there is a majority who feel that Antichrist makes a covenant that may be thought to be distinct to Antichrist.

There is good reason why the Davidic Covenant is not given, which is because it simply will not fit the context of either Daniel or Other relevant passages.

 

...

 

Nonsense. One still must provide in a poll for a consideration that he may not have anticipated. And, it is only your OPINION that the Davidic Covenant doesn’t “fit the context of either Daniel or other relevant passages.” I find that it fits their contexts quite well!

 

 

...

There IS a third option, and in my opinion, it is the correct option. The covenant is the DAVIDIC Covenant! Also, who taught you how to make a poll, anyway? There should always be an option that says, “None of the above” or “Other,” with a chance to explain one’s choice. (Which I guess is in the posts below, for this poll.)

And why we would reject the Davidic Covenant as an option is quite simple: neither Christ not Antichrist will confirm the Davidic Covenant for one Week.

It is not the Davidic Covenant that would allow for sacrifice and oblation, because we would have to see one or the other claiming to fulfill that role. Christ certainly did, but it had not impact on Levitical Service, which was already established and being carried out.
...

 

 

It is the Davidic Covenant that PURPOSELY does NOT allow for sacrifice and oblation, which is PRECISELY why they CEASE! It is through the MESSIAH’S sacrifice and OUR UNION with the Messiah that gives God the freedom to associate with believers and set aside the need for further sacrifice! It was not necessary to have an “impact on Levitical Service”; Yeshua` fulfilled the sacrifice as a “priest forever after the order of Malkhiy-Tsedeq!” “My King of Righteousness!” In fact, the author of Hebrews tells us that the Levitical priests could NOT have fulfilled that role! Look at the WHOLE song:

 

Psalm 110:1-7

1 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.

3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.

4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

5 The LORD at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath.

6 He shall judge among the heathen (Goyim; Gentiles), he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries.

7 He shall drink of the brook in the way: therefore shall he lift up the head.

KJV

 

Psalm 110:1-7 (0-7)

110:1(0) A psalm of David:

 

(1) Adonai says to my Lord,

“Sit at my right hand,

until I make your enemiesyour footstool.” 

 

2 Adonai will send your powerful scepter

out from Tziyon,

so that you will rule over

your enemies around you.

3 On the day your forces mobilize,

your people willingly offer themselves

in holy splendors from the womb of the dawn;

the dew of your youth is yours. 

 

4 Adonai has sworn it,

and he will never retract —

“You are a cohen forever,

to be compared with Malki-Tzedek.”

 

5 Adonai at your right hand

will shatter kings on the day of his anger.

6 He will pass judgment among the nations,

filling it with dead bodies;

he will shatter heads

throughout an extensive territory.

7 He will drink from a stream as he goes on his way;

therefore he will hold his head high. 

CJB

 

This is a psalm of DAVID the king, one who was so selected by anointing to be king, a MESSIAH! It was written by the one to whom God made the covenant! And, this is a Messianic Psalm; that is, it prophesies about the future ULTIMATE Messiah, Yeshua`, as I’m sure of which you’re aware! Now, refresh your memory about what was written by the author of Hebrews:

 

Hebrews 9:1-10:14

9:1 Now the first covenant had both regulations for worship and a Holy Place here on earth. 2 A tent was set up, the outer one, which was called the Holy Place; in it were the menorah, the table and the Bread of the Presence. 3 Behind the second parokhet was a tent called the Holiest Place, 4 which had the golden altar for burning incense and the Ark of the Covenant, entirely covered with gold. In the Ark were the gold jar containing the man, Aharon’s rod that sprouted and the stone Tablets of the Covenant; 5 and above it were the k’ruvim representing the Sh’khinah, casting their shadow on the lid of the Ark — but now is not the time to discuss these things in detail. 

6 With things so arranged, the cohanim go into the outer tent all the time to discharge their duties; 7 but only the cohen hagadol enters the inner one; and he goes in only once a year, and he must always bring blood, which he offers both for himself and for the sins committed in ignorance by the people. 8 By this arrangement, the Ruach HaKodesh showed that so long as the first Tent had standing, the way into the Holiest Place was still closed. 9 This symbolizes the present age and indicates that the conscience of the person performing the service cannot be brought to the goal by the gifts and sacrifices he offers. 10 For they involve only food and drink and various ceremonial washings — regulations concerning the outward life, imposed until the time for God to reshape the whole structure. 

11 But when the Messiah appeared as cohen gadol of the good things that are happening already, then, through the greater and more perfect Tent which is not man-made (that is, it is not of this created world), 12 he entered the Holiest Place once and for all.

And he entered not by means of the blood of goats and calves, but by means of his own blood, thus setting people free forever. 13 For if sprinkling ceremonially unclean persons with the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer restores their outward purity; 14 then how much more the blood of the Messiah, who, through the eternal Spirit, offered himself to God as a sacrifice without blemish, will purify our conscience from works that lead to death, so that we can serve the living God! 

15 It is because of this death that he is mediator of a new covenant [or will].  Because a death has occurred which sets people free from the transgressions committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promised eternal inheritance. 16 For where there is a will, there must necessarily be produced evidence of its maker’s death, 17 since a will goes into effect only upon death; it never has force while its maker is still alive. 

18 This is why the first covenant too was inaugurated with blood. 19 After Moshe had proclaimed every command of the Torah to all the people, he took the blood of the calves with some water and used scarlet wool and hyssop to sprinkle both the scroll itself and all the people; 20 and he said, “This is the blood of the covenant which God has ordained for you.”  21 Likewise, he sprinkled with the blood both the Tent and all the things used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, according to the Torah, almost everything is purified with blood; indeed, without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. 

23 Now this is how the copies of the heavenly things had to be purified, but the heavenly things themselves require better sacrifices than these. 24 For the Messiah has entered a Holiest Place which is not man-made and merely a copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, in order to appear now on our behalf in the very presence of God. 

25 Further, he did not enter heaven to offer himself over and over again, like the cohen hagadol who enters the Holiest Place year after year with blood that is not his own; 26 for then he would have had to suffer death many times — from the founding of the universe on. But as it is, he has appeared once at the end of the ages in order to do away with sin through the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as human beings have to die once, but after this comes judgment, 28 so also the Messiah, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to deliver those who are eagerly waiting for him. 

10 1 For the Torah has in it a shadow of the good things to come, but not the actual manifestation of the originals. Therefore, it can never, by means of the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, bring to the goal those who approach the Holy Place to offer them. 2 Otherwise, wouldn’t the offering of those sacrifices have ceased? For if the people performing the service had been cleansed once and for all, they would no longer have sins on their conscience. 3 No, it is quite the contrary — in these sacrifices is a reminder of sins, year after year. 4 For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins. 

5 This is why, on coming into the world, he says,

 

“It has not been your will

to have an animal sacrifice and a meal offering;

rather, you have prepared for me a body.

6 No, you have not been pleased

with burnt offerings and sin offerings.

7 Then I said, ‘Look!

In the scroll of the book

it is written about me.

I have come to do your will.’” 

 

8 In saying first, “You neither willed nor were pleased with animal sacrifices, meal offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings,” things which are offered in accordance with the Torah; 9 and then, “Look, I have come to do your will”; he takes away the first system in order to set up the second. 10 It is in connection with this will that we have been separated for God and made holy, once and for all, through the offering of Yeshua the Messiah’s body. 

11 Now every cohen stands every day doing his service, offering over and over the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this one, after he had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from then on to wait until his enemies be made a footstool for his feet.  14 For by a single offering he has brought to the goal for all time those who are being set apart for God and made holy. 

CJB

 

The Messiah Yeshua` DID strengthen the covenant for a Seven! A “Seven” in Hebrew Scripture is a “PERFECTION” or a “COMPLETION” or an “OATH!"

 

Genesis 21:25-34

25 Now Avraham had complained to Avimelekh about a well which Avimelekh’s servants had seized. 26 Avimelekh answered, “I don’t know who has done this. You didn’t tell me, and I heard about it only today.” 27 Avraham took sheep and cattle and gave them to Avimelekh, and the two of them made a covenant. 28 Avraham put seven female lambs from the flock by themselves. 29 Avimelekh asked Avraham, “What is the meaning of these seven female lambs you have put by themselves?” 30 He answered, “You are to accept these seven female lambs from me as witness that I dug this well.” 31 This is why that place was called Be’er-Sheva [well of seven, well of an oath] — because they both swore an oath there. 32 When they made the covenant at Be’er-Sheva, Avimelekh departed with Pikhol the commander of his army and returned to the land of the P’lishtim. 33 Avraham planted a tamarisk tree in Be’er-Sheva, and there he called on the name of Adonai, the everlasting God. 34 Avraham lived for a long time as a foreigner in the land of the P’lishtim. 

CJB

 

So, the very word “Seven” refers to God’s oath! His rejection and the result of His leaving them “desolate,” ENDED the sacrifices and the oblation (gift)! When He was crucified, He became the final “keves Elohiym” for the Pesach, the final “lamb of God” for the Passover! And, offering His own blood to the throne of God as our cohen gadol, our high priest, “nailed that door shut” forever!

 

For 3.5 years, He offered them the Kingdom of God from the sky, since HE was the One anointed to be the King and HE came from the sky through the Ruach haQodesh. Ultimately, that generation rejected Him (as God knew they would), and it became our invitation into His Kingdom prematurely. However, for them, He took His Kingdom away when He ascended back to His Father. In the future, when He returns, He will offer them the Kingdom once again. This time, He will come as the Aryeeh `Am Yhudah! The Lion of the Tribe of Judah, coming in vengeance and rescue for His people! This will be when the second 3.5 years will occur.

 

Finally, you asked “So Christians destroy the city and the sanctuary?” You’re not following along. First, I NEVER said that Messiah Yeshua` was the “prince that shall come.” To the contrary, it WAS Titus in the first century A.D. and "the PEOPLE of the prince that shall come” were the Roman soldiers. Don’t confuse the two: Yeshua` haMashiach (Jesus the Christ) is the “Messiah,” and Titus is the “prince that shall come.” Again, the verbs point back as actions of the “Messiah”; the “prince that shall come” is only an object of the preposition, so to speak. The verbs are NOT connected with the “prince!"

[ENOCH2010]

Very well explained Roy.  

[S.T. Ranger]

Hello retrobyter, I will address a few things in your post, which I did yesterday but due to the length and not having ability to copy and paste was not able to post it. So I will answer in order to your comments and apologize for such a response.

This will be my last post in this thread so you are welcome to the last word, lol.

First, the options in the poll represent the two primary views that fit Daniel, and if you want a poll that gives the Davidic Covenant as an option...create it. You have given your view and I explained already why it was not given.

That you ''feel'' that the Davidic covenant fits the context of relevant passages does not negate the singular point that it is the Covenant of Law which is the covenant broken by Israel that brought about the judgment, as well as the fact that it is the Covenant of Law and the New Covenant the writer of Hebrews contrasts, nullifying your quotation of a chapter and a half of Hebrews...moot. Furthermore, Paul writes ''...we have been made able ministers of...the New Covenant.''

Not the Davidic, which like the Abrahamic Covenant, finds its fulfillment in the New, by which we do not exclude that covenant, but rather see it as inseparable from the establishing of the New through Christ.

I did not put the New Covenant as an option either, which reason should be evident in the points themselves.

Your second point also overlooks some obvious issues, primarily the fact that, again, cessation of sacrifice for sins is through relationship with God through...the New covenant.

Not the Davidic.

We also see a conflict with trying to see this covenant ''confirmed'' for one Week, and the, the opposite of what you insist, this confirming thwarted, which is not what took place. While it still remains for Israel to come into relationship on a national basis, that actually reinforces that your view suggests they were. You will deny that, but I would remind you that this last Week will see Israel brought under the New Covenant. So since this did not take place, coupled with the fact that it is roughly 35 years later the Temple is destroyed, we cannot, apart from fanciful applications, apply the establishment of any covenant concerning National Israel.

You speak of ''our union'' when it is Israel's restoration through the New Covenant in view in Daniel. And that hasn't happened yet.

Then, because you see that the confirming of a covenant in Daniel refers to the Davidic, you argue the Levitical priests can't fulfill this. This forgets that Christ did not cause Levitical Service to cease when He died. In order for this to be given a spiritual meaning only, we would also have to see these services stop in the middle of the Week. That didn't happen. The Priesthood is not compared to Christ's Priesthood except in a context of the Covenant of Law. In the chapter and a half you quoted...did that escape your attention?

So the comparisons do not fit the context. Christ did not confirm the Davidic covenant for 3 1/2 years, make service of the Law obsolete, thus fulfilling the prophecy. Christ is cut off prior to the 70th Week, which places Christ's death before the covenant in view is ''confirmed.''

Again, I apologize for such a limited response, and will pause there and finish this in another post so as not to risk it not posting.

Continued...

[S.T. Ranger]

Continuing...

You argue that the Davidic covenant is confirmed and fuflfilled through Christ, yet again, most would agree that Christ is not cut off in the middle of the 70th Week' which makes it untenable for Christ to confirm the Davidic covenant after His death, then we see cessation of Levitical Service. So the portion of your post where you quote the Psalms is the beginning of a false argument, which becomes more apparent in your quotation of Hebrews.

You then say ''refresh your memory,'' lol, and it is the Covenant of Law...in the very first verse you quote. Not sure this could have been intentionally more humorous than it is.

The single point I would raise would be that Hebrews consistently teaches the Law was abrogated by Christ's death, which in the timeline falls prior to the Seventieth Week, which precludes the views that try to spiritualize Daniel to make the cessation spoken of in the middle of the Seventieth Week apply to Christ.

While it is reasonable to make the correlation, we still have to maintain the Biblical timeline which does not place the cutting off of Messiah in the middle of the Week.

Continued...

[S.T. Ranger]

The point you try to make from Hebrews (following the quotation) is to impose a ''seven'' within the text, which is, in my view, an incredible abuse of the passage.

The completion in view is not a seven, or a veiled reference, but is specifically speaking of completion through the New Covenant in contrast with the very incomplete nature of the Covenant of Law.

In view is...salvation in Christ. The spiritualization of the text to support a view is shameful. You rob those who embrace your teaching of the intent of the writer and thus...the Holy Spirit.

Again, the completion in view contrasts the Covenant of Law and the New Covenant established by Christ and His blood/death. The promise of eternal redemption is bestowed upon those set apart to God through His offering which is clearly contrasted with the offerings of the Law. The Law could not take always sins, the Offering of the New Covenant can and does. 10:14 sums up that completion and the contrast of the sacrifices of both Covenants by stating that in regards to remission of sins, for those sanctified by His blood/death/offering...it is forever settled.

It is finished, complete, believers are forever forgiven.

We put that back into the context of the Whole Counsel of the Word of God and see the writer, thus the Holy Spirit...confirm the promises of God to Man (for the promise of God is fulfilled in that all families of the earth will be blessed through the Seed).

Now we put this back into the context of our discussion, and again, trying to impose the Davidic Covenant into Daniel becomes, not only impossible, but absurd. That covenant will not be fulfilled until Israel conforms to

God's will, which did not occur in the first century, and as of yet still has not occurred.

Continued...

[S.T. Ranger]

Continuing...

You're correlation to creation is also faulty because the seventh day rest will be the Millennial Kingdom. Hebrews can also help you're understanding in regards to Rest in Christ, which the writer exhorts his Hebrew brethren there were still those in need of entering. Again, the writer contrasts Hebrews under the First Covenant contrasted with being under the New.

The culmination of rest for Israel will be first coming into covenant relationship with

God under the New Covenant (as all believers now do, thus we have entered into that rest), then the Kingdom, then the Eternal State in the new creation. Israel has not yet entered into any of those rests as a nation, that day is yet future.

The rest in view in the timeline is the fulfilling of all of the Covenants, which necessitates prophecy concerning the King establishing His Kingdom yet future. A spiritual Kingdom is not denied on my part, it is you're negating of the physical kingdom, which is the very kingdom primarily in view in the Lord's earthly ministry.

As far as your final statements dealing with Who and who is in view, the points raised in the OP, which you have ignored based on the premise given, deals with that point.

As I said, this is my final post, so the last word is yours. Have at it, lol, all I ask is that you deal with the points raised rather than ignore them and proceed with your own teaching, which is what you did from your first response.

The false premise that ''all the points are in error because there is no option for the Davidic Covenant'' is no excuse to ignore all the points raised. You will have to also ignore everything spoken of in the New Testament concerning the New Covenant. Again we are to be ministers of the New Covenant, not the Davidic, which will be ministered by the King Himself when Israel is, on a national basis, as prophesied, brought into relationship with God through the New Covenant.

And just as we are told in Daniel, this will be through judgment, and at that point will it be fulfilled...''all Israel will be saved,'' because the unbelieving will be destroyed.

God bless