He Shall Confirm The Covenant...

[rollinTHUNDER]

First, I believe that a 'week' here is 7 years.  (If one does not accept this then a different thread is required to bring that out.)  The midpoint of the week is the cross.  Realistically you do not need an 'event' on either side if you have the midpoint... but we do have them.

• 3.5 before the cross is Jesus baptism - the beginning of His ministry to the Jews.  
• 3.5 after the cross is the conversion of Paul who ultimately is known as the Apostle to the Gentiles - this marks the beginning of the end of the exclusivity of the message to the Jews.  This of course is followed by Peter's dream... Paul's missionary journey's... and the rest is history.

bj

So where does the abomination of desolation come into play? And what about the Temple?

Cheers

[BJ66]

Last Daze -

 

I am sorry I misunderstood your question. 

 

As most issues related to dating... this is a deduction. 

 

Below are the two time frames given per Logos Bible Software related to Paul's Conversion.  Other dates are available from other sources... all are in this general timeframe.

• AD 33 Paul Converts to Christianity (Early)
• AD 35 Paul Convert to Christianity (Late)

 

Ultimately If the Jews received more than a 'seven'... then they did receive a 'seven'.  I do not think a measure of grace would be precluded - nor do I think our dating methods are perfect.

 

But you are correct in asking about the degree of certainty.  There is not specific scripture.

 

I should not state this with such specificity! It is a deduction!

 

bj

[Last Daze]

Last Daze -

 

I am sorry I misunderstood your question. 

 

As most issues related to dating... this is a deduction. 

 

Below are the two time frames given per Logos Bible Software related to Paul's Conversion.  Other dates are available from other sources... all are in this general timeframe.

• AD 33 Paul Converts to Christianity (Early)
• AD 35 Paul Convert to Christianity (Late)

 

Ultimately If the Jews received more than a 'seven'... then they did receive a 'seven'.  I do not think a measure of grace would be precluded - nor do I think our dating methods are perfect.

 

But you are correct in asking about the degree of certainty.  There is not specific scripture.

 

I should not state this with such specificity! It is a deduction!

 

bj

 

Thanks for the clarification.  I did a cursory search myself to see what I could find and it does fall within the realm of possibility.

 

It's still a compelling interpretation.  If there were something specifying the time as 3.5 years then I would consider it very compelling.  That's why I was curious.

[BJ66]

 

So where does the abomination of desolation come into play? And what about the Temple?

Cheers

 

 

rollinTHUNDER

 

Answer to follow tomorrow - Sorry no discretionary time right now.... kids (who knew??)  Just wanted to let you know I will reply shortly.

 

Thanks for the opportunity to answer the question.

 

bj

[BJ66]

rollinTHUNDER asked about the abomination of desolation and the Temple.  Interestingly the correlation of these two is integral to the answer. 

 

My apologies in advance for the length of this answer.  But the short question pulls right from the middle of 9:26 and from the middle of 9:27.  I could not explain my understanding without dealing with the whole of both verses and their integrated relationship.

 

While this is convoluted at one level… it is quite simple at another.

 

Verses 26 and 27 is a short parallelism or is in a ‘chiastic’ type of form.

 

Take a look:

 

The 1’s go together, the 2’s go together, and the 3’s go together.

 

Daniel 9:26–27 (NKJV)

26

1. “And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
2. 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,
3. And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

 

27

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

 

The 1’s really need little explanation.  Seeing the ‘covenant’ as the New Covenant:

• 26(1) depicts the Messiah being ‘cut off’ – this is the cross, and
• 27(1) the corresponding end of the sacrificial system

 

The 2’s are very interesting… can we equate…:

• 26(2) the ‘…the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary’… with…
• 27(2) ‘on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate’. 

 

On the face of it these could go together… but more evidence would be nice – see below!

 

Let’s look at two sets of verses in two synoptic gospels.  These lend significant credibility to the idea that these concepts are, if not identical, certainly parallel.   

 

Let’s look at how a passage in Matthew correlates to a passage in Luke that deal with these same two issues – the abomination of desolation and the destruction of the Temple.

 

Remember Luke is a Gentile writing from that perspective and Matthew is a Jew writing from that perspective and heritage.

 

Matthew 24:15–16 (NKJV)

15 “Therefore when you see    (…BLANK…)

16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

 

Luke 21:20–21a (NKJV)

20 “But when you see    (…BLANK…)  

21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains,…

 

The (…BLANK…) of Matthew 24:15

• “the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand),”

 

The (…BLANK…) of Luke 21:20

• “Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near”

 

These are synoptic Gospels saying, if not the same thing, certainly parallel thoughts. 

 

This is the same construct in terms of how we understand the ‘cross’ and ‘the end of the sacrificial system’ as parallel concepts.  They do not need to be identical just related. 

 

 So, the ‘abomination of desolation’ and ‘Jerusalem surrounded by armies’ are at least parallel concepts if not identical concepts expressed differently. 
 

Matthew’s version is even followed by ‘whoever reads, let him understand’ as if to say this is a culturally constrained reference.  Matthew would employ this reference to speak specifically to Jews who would be familiar with this historical reference from Daniel. 

 

It would seem most appropriate to say that Luke interprets Matthew’s reference for us Gentiles.

 

This then, at the same time, verifies the parallel nature of Daniel 26(2) and 27(2).

 

The 3’s are about the ‘determination’ or declaration of:

• Daniel 26(3) And till the end of the war desolations are determined.
• Daniel 27(3) Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.”

 

Even though this is somewhat cryptic language it is easy to see that these verses, on their face, are likely parallel.  But a deeper look helps to confirm and enlighten.

 

Jesus ’determines’ – declares – both:

• The desolation and
• The end, the consummation

 

•  Daniel 26(3) Jesus determines/declares THE DESOLATION
  • Matthew 23:37–38 (NKJV)

37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!

38 See! Your house is left to you desolate;

• Matthew 24:2 (NKJV)

2 And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

 

• Daniel 27(3) Jesus determines/declares the time of the end, THE CONSUMMATION
  • Luke 21:22 (NKJV)

22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

• Luke 21:24 (NKJV)

24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

• Luke 21:32 (NKJV)

32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.

 

 

This prophecy of Daniel 9 is about the end of the Old Covenant – Daniel’s people (National Israel) as he had known them – constituted on the foundation of the Old Covenant. 

 

Going forward there would be a re-constitution of Israel in the form of a New Covenant with Israel.  There is no vaulting of 9:27 into our future. 

 

One last note… all of the events of Daniel 9:26 &27 are “after the sixty-two weeks” (after 7+62... which is anytime in the 70th week or after).  Only the components of 9:24 are constrained to the seventy weeks.  Daniel’s 70 weeks of 9:24 are literal and chronological as was the 70 year captivity that the 490 years were based on. 9:25 is constrained within the first 69 weeks. (7+62)

 

My apologies again rollinTHUNDER for this excessive explanation.  Your question however was perfectly in the middle of 9:26 and 9:27… The 2’s; so I felt it important to explain the 1’s and the 3’s as well.

 

By the way a chiasm or parallelism is not a foreign literary device in scripture.  (In chiastic terms 9:26-27 would be in the form of an ABA ABA Chiasm.  For ease in 'word processing' I have stated this above in terms of 1, 2, 3; 1, 2, 3. - probably more than you wanted to know!)

 

bj

Edited February 5, 2015 by BJ66

[rollinTHUNDER]

Hi BJ66,

Thanks for explaining your view, but it just doesn't work for me. You said that Christ' death on the cross occurs in the middle of the week. There's quite a few that have come to believe this, but I don't. First, you must assume that Christ' ministry lasted exactly 3 1/2 years, but there's no way to prove this. I don't even think we can look to His baptism as confirming the covenant with many. He introduced the new covenant the same night they captured and arrested Him after the last supper, so I don't think His ministry has anything to do with it.

And Christ did not put a stop to sacrifice and offering when He was crucified either. These continued another 40 years until AD 70. And He most certainly was not the abomination that causes desolation. So when exactly do you suppose the man of sin/son of perdition will go into the Temple and claim he is God, or do you believe this was already fulfilled as well???

I believe this theory is dead in the water.

Cheers

[ARGOSY]

Hi BJ66,

Thanks for explaining your view, but it just doesn't work for me. You said that Christ' death on the cross occurs in the middle of the week. There's quite a few that have come to believe this, but I don't. First, you must assume that Christ' ministry lasted exactly 3 1/2 years, but there's no way to prove this. I don't even think we can look to His baptism as confirming the covenant with many. He introduced the new covenant the same night they captured and arrested Him after the last supper, so I don't think His ministry has anything to do with it.

And Christ did not put a stop to sacrifice and offering when He was crucified either. These continued another 40 years until AD 70. And He most certainly was not the abomination that causes desolation. So when exactly do you suppose the man of sin/son of perdition will go into the Temple and claim he is God, or do you believe this was already fulfilled as well???

I believe this theory is dead in the water.

Cheers

 

For a number of reasons Jesus' ministry has been widely accepted as 3.5 years long. The main reason is that 4 Passover feasts, including the final crucifixion moment,  are clearly recorded in the gospel during Jesus' ministry which makes his ministry definitely 3 years and some months, yet not quite 4 years. 

 

But adding strength to this, we can date the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan to sometime between the beginning of 26AD and the spring of 27AD.  John the Baptist started his ministry during the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1) , which can be dated to the earliest 26AD.  Jesus first Passover feast of his ministry was during the 46th year of the rebuilding of Herod's temple (John 2:20) which is the spring of 27AD. 

 

This frankly does not leave much time for all the preaching and baptising of John to the whole of Israel, plus all the ministry of Jesus until the first Passover of his ministry. It would be fair to split this ~1 yr  period in approximately  half, giving John the Baptist a little time to preach before he baptised Jesus. We therefore need to place Jesus baptism around autumn of 26AD , his first Passover in spring 27AD, which then places the crucifixion in the spring of 30AD. This date of 30AD has been widely accepted for a number of reasons, which is possibly a subject for another thread. 

 

So its not conclusive, but definitely Jesus' ministry was 3 years and some months. It would then be naive to ignore the possibility of Jesus fitting those first 3.5 years when Jesus did give strength to God's promise to send a Messiah. It could be argued that this was the greatest hope and expectation of the people of God for over 1000 years. To then over-emphasize a possible antichrist covenant could be biblically naive in the face of this really great Jewish covenant which was actually fulfilled within the special 490 year Jewish period. 

 

this brings to question how Jesus could be the "he".  This is possible if one studies history surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem, then one can see that those that corrupted and ruined the city before the Romans even entered the city were actually Galilean Jews. So the Galilean Jews, Jesus own countrymen, were the people to ruin the city before the Romans came in like a flood to complete its destruction.  So the people of the prince who ruined the city were Jesus' own people, Galilean Jews. This improves the grammar of verse 25 and verse 26, which both refer to a coming prince without any indication of a change of character from one verse to the other.

 

This view then highlights a further fault of the standard "antichrist" view. MOST English translation actually identify TWO characters in Daniel 9:27, not just one. These translations describe HE as confirming the covenant, and ONE/DESOLATER as setting up the abomination. Most translations therefore contradict the standard view of the antichrist doing both those deeds.

 

Regarding your point about Christ putting a stop to sacrifices, Jesus was the last and final acceptable sacrifice for sins. Hebrews describes this clearly. After Christ there was no further need for the priests to continually sacrifice, The fact that they did continue is irrelevant to the fact that Jesus fulfilled the law and they were continuing to sacrifice needlessly.

[rollinTHUNDER]

Hi BJ66,

Thanks for explaining your view, but it just doesn't work for me. You said that Christ' death on the cross occurs in the middle of the week. There's quite a few that have come to believe this, but I don't. First, you must assume that Christ' ministry lasted exactly 3 1/2 years, but there's no way to prove this. I don't even think we can look to His baptism as confirming the covenant with many. He introduced the new covenant the same night they captured and arrested Him after the last supper, so I don't think His ministry has anything to do with it.

And Christ did not put a stop to sacrifice and offering when He was crucified either. These continued another 40 years until AD 70. And He most certainly was not the abomination that causes desolation. So when exactly do you suppose the man of sin/son of perdition will go into the Temple and claim he is God, or do you believe this was already fulfilled as well???

I believe this theory is dead in the water.

Cheers

 

For a number of reasons Jesus' ministry has been widely accepted as 3.5 years long. The main reason is that 4 Passover feasts, including the final crucifixion moment,  are clearly recorded in the gospel during Jesus' ministry which makes his ministry definitely 3 years and some months, yet not quite 4 years. 

 

But adding strength to this, we can date the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan to sometime between the beginning of 26AD and the spring of 27AD.  John the Baptist started his ministry during the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1) , which can be dated to the earliest 26AD.  Jesus first Passover feast of his ministry was during the 46th year of the rebuilding of Herod's temple (John 2:20) which is the spring of 27AD. 

 

This frankly does not leave much time for all the preaching and baptising of John to the whole of Israel, plus all the ministry of Jesus until the first Passover of his ministry. It would be fair to split this ~1 yr  period in approximately  half, giving John the Baptist a little time to preach before he baptised Jesus. We therefore need to place Jesus baptism around autumn of 26AD , his first Passover in spring 27AD, which then places the crucifixion in the spring of 30AD. This date of 30AD has been widely accepted for a number of reasons, which is possibly a subject for another thread. 

 

So its not conclusive, but definitely Jesus' ministry was 3 years and some months. It would then be naive to ignore the possibility of Jesus fitting those first 3.5 years when Jesus did give strength to God's promise to send a Messiah. It could be argued that this was the greatest hope and expectation of the people of God for over 1000 years. To then over-emphasize a possible antichrist covenant could be biblically naive in the face of this really great Jewish covenant which was actually fulfilled within the special 490 year Jewish period. 

 

this brings to question how Jesus could be the "he".  This is possible if one studies history surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem, then one can see that those that corrupted and ruined the city before the Romans even entered the city were actually Galilean Jews. So the Galilean Jews, Jesus own countrymen, were the people to ruin the city before the Romans came in like a flood to complete its destruction.  So the people of the prince who ruined the city were Jesus' own people, Galilean Jews. This improves the grammar of verse 25 and verse 26, which both refer to a coming prince without any indication of a change of character from one verse to the other.

 

This view then highlights a further fault of the standard "antichrist" view. MOST English translation actually identify TWO characters in Daniel 9:27, not just one. These translations describe HE as confirming the covenant, and ONE/DESOLATER as setting up the abomination. Most translations therefore contradict the standard view of the antichrist doing both those deeds.

 

Regarding your point about Christ putting a stop to sacrifices, Jesus was the last and final acceptable sacrifice for sins. Hebrews describes this clearly. After Christ there was no further need for the priests to continually sacrifice, The fact that they did continue is irrelevant to the fact that Jesus fulfilled the law and they were continuing to sacrifice needlessly.

You've done a nice job putting this together, but as I said, this is not for me.

It really doesn't matter so much to me whether or not Christ' ministry was 3 1/2 years. Scripture says that He was cut off after 69 weeks, not 69 1/2 or in the middle of the 70th week. I take it as cutting Him off completed 69 weeks. Also, the new covenant is a covenant in blood and is an eternal covenant, not a seven year covenant. If we say this covenant began when He was baptized, then it was missing the blood. He came to die for our sins, and that required His blood. So since you are placing His blood in the middle of the week, any ministry before that had no power.

What can wash away my sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

What can make me whole again? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

Cheers

[ARGOSY]

 

 

Hi BJ66,

Thanks for explaining your view, but it just doesn't work for me. You said that Christ' death on the cross occurs in the middle of the week. There's quite a few that have come to believe this, but I don't. First, you must assume that Christ' ministry lasted exactly 3 1/2 years, but there's no way to prove this. I don't even think we can look to His baptism as confirming the covenant with many. He introduced the new covenant the same night they captured and arrested Him after the last supper, so I don't think His ministry has anything to do with it.

And Christ did not put a stop to sacrifice and offering when He was crucified either. These continued another 40 years until AD 70. And He most certainly was not the abomination that causes desolation. So when exactly do you suppose the man of sin/son of perdition will go into the Temple and claim he is God, or do you believe this was already fulfilled as well???

I believe this theory is dead in the water.

Cheers

 

For a number of reasons Jesus' ministry has been widely accepted as 3.5 years long. The main reason is that 4 Passover feasts, including the final crucifixion moment,  are clearly recorded in the gospel during Jesus' ministry which makes his ministry definitely 3 years and some months, yet not quite 4 years. 

 

But adding strength to this, we can date the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan to sometime between the beginning of 26AD and the spring of 27AD.  John the Baptist started his ministry during the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1) , which can be dated to the earliest 26AD.  Jesus first Passover feast of his ministry was during the 46th year of the rebuilding of Herod's temple (John 2:20) which is the spring of 27AD. 

 

This frankly does not leave much time for all the preaching and baptising of John to the whole of Israel, plus all the ministry of Jesus until the first Passover of his ministry. It would be fair to split this ~1 yr  period in approximately  half, giving John the Baptist a little time to preach before he baptised Jesus. We therefore need to place Jesus baptism around autumn of 26AD , his first Passover in spring 27AD, which then places the crucifixion in the spring of 30AD. This date of 30AD has been widely accepted for a number of reasons, which is possibly a subject for another thread. 

 

So its not conclusive, but definitely Jesus' ministry was 3 years and some months. It would then be naive to ignore the possibility of Jesus fitting those first 3.5 years when Jesus did give strength to God's promise to send a Messiah. It could be argued that this was the greatest hope and expectation of the people of God for over 1000 years. To then over-emphasize a possible antichrist covenant could be biblically naive in the face of this really great Jewish covenant which was actually fulfilled within the special 490 year Jewish period. 

 

this brings to question how Jesus could be the "he".  This is possible if one studies history surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem, then one can see that those that corrupted and ruined the city before the Romans even entered the city were actually Galilean Jews. So the Galilean Jews, Jesus own countrymen, were the people to ruin the city before the Romans came in like a flood to complete its destruction.  So the people of the prince who ruined the city were Jesus' own people, Galilean Jews. This improves the grammar of verse 25 and verse 26, which both refer to a coming prince without any indication of a change of character from one verse to the other.

 

This view then highlights a further fault of the standard "antichrist" view. MOST English translation actually identify TWO characters in Daniel 9:27, not just one. These translations describe HE as confirming the covenant, and ONE/DESOLATER as setting up the abomination. Most translations therefore contradict the standard view of the antichrist doing both those deeds.

 

Regarding your point about Christ putting a stop to sacrifices, Jesus was the last and final acceptable sacrifice for sins. Hebrews describes this clearly. After Christ there was no further need for the priests to continually sacrifice, The fact that they did continue is irrelevant to the fact that Jesus fulfilled the law and they were continuing to sacrifice needlessly.

 

You've done a nice job putting this together, but as I said, this is not for me.

It really doesn't matter so much to me whether or not Christ' ministry was 3 1/2 years. Scripture says that He was cut off after 69 weeks, not 69 1/2 or in the middle of the 70th week. I take it as cutting Him off completed 69 weeks. Also, the new covenant is a covenant in blood and is an eternal covenant, not a seven year covenant. If we say this covenant began when He was baptized, then it was missing the blood. He came to die for our sins, and that required His blood. So since you are placing His blood in the middle of the week, any ministry before that had no power.

What can wash away my sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

What can make me whole again? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

Cheers

 

 

 

You bring up some more good points. The key word though is "after".  I'm not sure why some people like to place the "cutting off" at the end of 69th week, or immediately after it. the word "after" does not indicate how long after. 3.5 years after still fits in with context. The way I see it, there is a special 7 year Messianic timeframe, the Jews had the first 3.5 years of Jesus' ministry/salvation  mainly to them only, and will have the last 3.5 years of Jesus' salvation mainly to them only.  And so the first will be last. Some verses indicate a special time of Jewish salvation during the great tribulation.

 

romans 11:25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in

 

This successful salvation of the Gentiles reminds me of Rev 12 where we have a huge success of the gospel that actually causes Satan to fall. This is followed by 3.5 years of tribulation for believers yet protection for Israel (the woman with the 12 stars). 

 

So believe it or not, there are TWO special 3.5 year periods for the Jewish people, and during both they get closer to Jesus. This is simple maths, 3.5 plus 3.5 =  7

 

You refer to the blood covenant, but what about the simple covenant/promise by God that he would send the Jews a saviour to set them free? So for 7 years before the second coming, Jesus is their saviour. 

[Retrobyter]

Shabbat shalom, S.T. Ranger.

 

Sorry for being away so long.

 

Y’know, when making a poll, PLEASE make sure that you cover every angle. I really felt uncomfortable having to vote for EITHER choice in the “The covenant is...” portion. I don’t believe that it is EITHER ONE! The “he” is UNDOUBTABLY haMashiach (the Messiah), according to Hebrew grammar. When making a poll, ALWAYS have a “third choice.” Call it “Other” or “Else” or “Neither one,” but ALWAYS include a way for someone to opt out of the narrow list of choices you provide, ESPECIALLY when you are making it a dichotomous “either ... or” choice!

 

 

...

Well, actually you’re not following along the wording of the prophecy, either. The New Covenant was not established UNTIL the death of the Messiah; however, the prophecy of Daniel 9 has already said, “He (the Messiah) would strengthen a covenant with many for one Seven.” That doesn’t necessarily push the Seven back to beginning at the time of Yeshua`s death, but rather confirms that this is a DIFFERENT covenant than the New Covenant!

Again, the cutting off of Messiah is at His death, and as has been pointed out the New Covenant is an eternal Covenant, which, as you say, is different than the Covenant in view in Daniel. We cannot impose the Lord's ministry into the 70th Week.

 

No, see, you’re still stuck in the dichotomy of the covenant being either the “Covenant of Law” or a “covenant established by AC.” It’s neither one! It’s the DAVIDIC Covenant!

 

1 Chronicles 17:11-14

11 And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom.

12 He shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever.

13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee:

14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore.

KJV

 

Psalm 89:3-4

3 I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant,

4 Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations. Selah.

KJV

 

The “cutting off” of the Messiah is not the DEATH of the Messiah; it was the REJECTION of the Messiah! It fostered the MUTUAL rejection, because it was at that moment that Yeshua` gave up on THEM and left them “desolate” for the overspreading of THEIR abominations in rejecting Him as their King and rejecting His Kingdom!

 

Daniel 9:26

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off (Hebrew: yikaareet = “he shall be cut off [FROM THEM]”), 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.

KJV

 

On a positive note, however, we must also include this fact: Although He left that generation “desolate,” it was that He left them “desolate UNTIL ...”:

 

Matthew 23:37-39

37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

KJV

 

Thus, He is not finished with the children of Israel, and He shall “offer" the Kingdom to them again in the near future! THIS TIME, they will be MORE than willing to accept Him as their King and Deliverer, as all of their neighbors, acting ANYTHING BUT “neighborly,” shall come against them!