the ruler to come in Dan 7

[RandyPNW]

A different view of Dan 9.
I'm seeing the 70 Weeks of Dan 9 a little differently than I have been. And I think it may make reading it a little more cohesive and readable, which should be what an account is all about.

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."

In vss. 26-27 there is a central character, the "ruler who will come," which I believe refers to the Roman leader--not a specific leader, but basically a position. He will do several things, it appears.
1) He will have his people destroy Jerusalem and the temple.
2) He will confirm a covenant with many for a Week, presumably of years.
3) He will put an end to sacrifice and offering in the middle of the Week.
4) He will set up an abomination that causes desolation.

What's different in my position now is that I used to think Christ was the one who confirms a covenant with many for a Week, and put an end to sacrifice and offering in the middle of the Week. But that seems to confuse the cohesiveness of the discourse, and muddy who is doing what. If we see all of the elements being orchestrated by a single entity, the Roman leadership, then it makes cohesive sense, and the prophecy seems to flow more evenly.

So how did the Roman leader(s) make this happen? He brought about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple from 70-135 AD. Leading up to this, Rome initially allowed the Jews to continue under their temple covenant during the ministry of Christ, which lasted 3.5 years. This was the 70th Week of the 70 Weeks Prophecy.

Then a Roman leader, Pontius Pilate, put Christ to death in the middle of this 70th Week, since Jesus died apparently after only 3.5 years of ministry--half of a Week. This put an end to divine acceptance of sacrifices and offerings made at the temple. The veil was rent at Jesus' death.

Finally, a Roman general set up an Army around Jerusalem and the temple, presenting an "abomination of desolation." It was a display of raw pagan power, set to destroy God's temple. There were actually 2 Roman generals involved in this, Cestius Gallus in 66 AD and Titus in 70 AD.

This seems to allow the passage to flow more smoothly in the vein of its context. The context, largely, has to do with the future of the temple and with the coming of Messiah.

Daniel is praying about the restoration of the temple, and God sends an angel to explain that over a 70 Weeks period the temple will be restored and remain as such until the coming of Messiah.

The rise of Rome, the 4th Kingdom Daniel mentioned earlier in chs. 2 and 7, will cooperate with this covenant in the time of Messiah, who comes in the 70th Week. During the time of Jesus, the Romans will allow the Gospel of Messiah to be disseminated until he is judged and crucified.

The "end that is decreed" is either one of two options. Either this "end" is something decreed to end the temple by the "ruler who will come." Or, this end is something that will come to Rome itself, taking place in 476 AD. It depends on how the words apply.

Roman leadership did not immediately come to an end, but in 476 AD it did come to an end. The Roman imperial tradition continued in the East, and was later restored in the West. But the Western branch of the ancient Roman Empire did come to an end.

But the context seems rather to have to do with the cessation of Jewish worship, and perhaps the reference was to this, which happened at the destruction of the temple in 70 AD? After all, no immediate vengeance was poured out upon the Roman perpetrator of this judgment.

"And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."

The word "him" here may also be translated at "it," apparently. As such, it may be rendered, more properly, as...

"And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on IT."

[journeyman]

A different view of Dan 9.
I'm seeing the 70 Weeks of Dan 9 a little differently than I have been. And I think it may make reading it a little more cohesive and readable, which should be what an account is all about.

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

I believe the holy city being spoken of is the new Jerusalem. The one seven divided in two are, first the ministry of the Messiah and then, the ministry of the Messiahs followers, the second 3.5 years as mirroring our Lord's ministry, really a continuation of his ministry, which finished transgression, put an end to sin, atoned for wickedness, brought in everlasting righteousness.

[RandyPNW]

A different view of Dan 9.
I'm seeing the 70 Weeks of Dan 9 a little differently than I have been. And I think it may make reading it a little more cohesive and readable, which should be what an account is all about.

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

I believe the holy city being spoken of is the new Jerusalem. The one seven divided in two are, first the ministry of the Messiah and then, the ministry of the Messiahs followers, the second 3.5 years as mirroring our Lord's ministry, really a continuation of his ministry, which finished transgression, put an end to sin, atoned for wickedness, brought in everlasting righteousness.

I would be uncomfortable adopting such an unusual reading. The 2 periods of 3.5 years is commonly expressed, but the reference to New Jerusalem here isn't something I've heard before. Where did you get this idea from?

But thanks for weighing in. I don't have a working knowledge of the Hebrew language, and I'm just sort of throwing it out there to see if there are any complaints about this interpretation, based on the Hebrew language.

I'm talking to my brother about it right now, who does have a working knowledge of Hebrew. He did have some suggestions for determining whether the pronouns can be used in this way.

[journeyman]

I would be uncomfortable adopting such an unusual reading. The 2 periods of 3.5 years is commonly expressed, but the reference to New Jerusalem here isn't something I've heard before. Where did you get this idea from?

From Dan.9:24,

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city....

And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem Rev.21:2

And what the angel tells Daniel (ending trangression, bringing in everlasting righteousness, etc.) is through Jesus.

Things like trampling underfoot the holy city for 3 1/2 years could easily represent how Christ was spiken against, persecuted, executed, during his ministry. The saints (the holy city), appear to be overcome by the beast, but because our Lord is in us (which is the reason for the hatred), the beast cannot truly destroy God's city.

[RandyPNW]

I would be uncomfortable adopting such an unusual reading. The 2 periods of 3.5 years is commonly expressed, but the reference to New Jerusalem here isn't something I've heard before. Where did you get this idea from?

From Dan.9:24,

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city....

And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem Rev.21:2

And what the angel tells Daniel (ending trangression, bringing in everlasting righteousness, etc.) is through Jesus.

Things like trampling underfoot the holy city for 3 1/2 years could easily represent how Christ was spiken against, persecuted, executed, during his ministry. The saints (the holy city), appear to be overcome by the beast, but because our Lord is in us (which is the reason for the hatred), the beast cannot truly destroy God's city.

I'm trying to get a grasp of how far you go in interpreting "Jerusalem" as the "New Jerusalem." Are you interpreting the New Jerusalem as being in Dan 9, in Luke 21, and in Rev 11, as well as in Rev 21? If so, I don't understand how you distinguish between the city of Jerusalem on a map from the New Jerusalem as a city that arrives *after* Christ's return?

[RabbiKnife]

The new Jerusalem arrived almost 2000 years ago.

[journeyman]

I'm trying to get a grasp of how far you go in interpreting "Jerusalem" as the "New Jerusalem." Are you interpreting the New Jerusalem as being in Dan 9, in Luke 21, and in Rev 11, as well as in Rev 21? If so, I don't understand how you distinguish between the city of Jerusalem on a map from the New Jerusalem as a city that arrives *after* Christ's return?

The holy city doesn't arrive after our Lord's return. It's completed in him before he returns. It's where we as believers are brought to and become part of by faith in Jesus,

But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, Heb.12:22

Jesus said,
In your patience possess ye your souls. Lk.21:19

He said this because believers would be under temptation from intense persecution to fall away (see also Rev.13:10, 14:12.

In Lk.21:20, we don't need to run from persecution because of Lk.21:18. Lk.21:21 is is comparable to Lot leaving Sodom, separating himself from the destruction coming on the ungodly. Or Zech.14:5, which speaks of a run to Christ for protection.

Rev.11 is the same type of symbology, where the church is persecuted as Christ was during his ministry (3 1/2 years). The 2 witnesses being symbolic of the truth (Jn.8:17), as the Father and Son are in believers. The fire proceeding from the witnesses mouths being the gospels effect on the unrepentant (Jn.12:48).

It's all there. He's just saying it in different ways.

[RandyPNW]

I'm trying to get a grasp of how far you go in interpreting "Jerusalem" as the "New Jerusalem." Are you interpreting the New Jerusalem as being in Dan 9, in Luke 21, and in Rev 11, as well as in Rev 21? If so, I don't understand how you distinguish between the city of Jerusalem on a map from the New Jerusalem as a city that arrives *after* Christ's return?

The holy city doesn't arrive after our Lord's return. It's completed in him before he returns. It's where we as believers are brought to and become part of by faith in Jesus,

But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, Heb.12:22

Jesus said,
In your patience possess ye your souls. Lk.21:19

He said this because believers would be under temptation from intense persecution to fall away (see also Rev.13:10, 14:12.

In Lk.21:20, we don't need to run from persecution because of Lk.21:18. Lk.21:21 is is comparable to Lot leaving Sodom, separating himself from the destruction coming on the ungodly. Or Zech.14:5, which speaks of a run to Christ for protection.

Rev.11 is the same type of symbology, where the church is persecuted as Christ was during his ministry (3 1/2 years). The 2 witnesses being symbolic of the truth (Jn.8:17), as the Father and Son are in believers. The fire proceeding from the witnesses mouths being the gospels effect on the unrepentant (Jn.12:48).

It's all there. He's just saying it in different ways.

You should realize it's not that simple. Certain truths of the Gospel are simple, but learning runs smack into human pride, and we only learn through a process. These passages speak of things Christians have to think about, because we're constantly growing, if we're walking in Christ.

I'm not suggesting that Jesus asked his Disciples to "run from persecution." But he did tell them to hightail it to the mountains or hills, to avoid judgment that was not intended, by God, for the righteous.

We do come to the heavenly Jerusalem, but it has not yet come to earth. We go to it, in a manner of speaking, by registering our names with it, by making our "reservations," so to speak.

We've become saved, and our place is assured and locked in in heaven. But we aren't there yet, and it surely hasn't yet come to us! It hasn't yet arrived on earth. The book of Revelation seems to indicate it only comes after the return of Christ, perhaps after the Millennial age.

In the meantime, the Kingdom is mysteriously present in a spiritual way, though not yet physically present. The powers of the Kingdom are partly with us, enabling us to complete our testimony of Christ's salvation to this earth.

In the end, the Kingdom will come with judgment. It will be established on the earth. But the New Jerusalem may not yet come until after a thousand years of Kingdom reign upon the earth. That's just how I look at it.

[RabbiKnife]

Just wondering....

What do you think the 1st century churches thought that The Apocalypse meant when they read it?

[journeyman]

You should realize it's not that simple. Certain truths of the Gospel are simple, but learning runs smack into human pride, and we only learn through a process. These passages speak of things Christians have to think about, because we're constantly growing, if we're walking in Christ.

But it's walking with our Lord that destroys pride in ourselves. And the process through which we learn is also by walking with him.

I'm not suggesting that Jesus asked his Disciples to "run from persecution." But he did tell them to hightail it to the mountains or hills, to avoid judgment that was not intended, by God, for the righteous.

But judgement is avoided by faith in our Savior, not by running to a cave or some other location. Look at Exo.10:21-23, 8:21-23, 9:3-4 and so on. Leaving Babylon, or Egypt, etc. is to leave the sinful ways of those cultures,

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 2Cor.6:17

We do come to the heavenly Jerusalem, but it has not yet come to earth. We go to it, in a manner of speaking, by registering our names with it, by making our "reservations," so to speak.

We've become saved, and our place is assured and locked in in heaven. But we aren't there yet, and it surely hasn't yet come to us! It hasn't yet arrived on earth. The book of Revelation seems to indicate it only comes after the return of Christ, perhaps after the Millennial age.

In the meantime, the Kingdom is mysteriously present in a spiritual way, though not yet physically present. The powers of the Kingdom are partly with us, enabling us to complete our testimony of Christ's salvation to this earth.

In the end, the Kingdom will come with judgment. It will be established on the earth. But the New Jerusalem may not yet come until after a thousand years of Kingdom reign upon the earth. That's just how I look at it.

We don't see as clearly as we should, but it's here now. It just hasn't been transformed yet, but it's here. It's like when Jesus took the three and showed them how he really is.

[RandyPNW]

I won't go on about this. But if I were you, I wouldn't contradict Jesus when he told his disciples to "flee." If he told them to flee, they should do so, whether or not it "sounds spiritual."

[journeyman]

And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. Lk.12:4

I, even I, am he that comforteth you: who art thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die, and of the son of man which shall be made as grass; Isa. 51:12

[RandyPNW]

James 2.11 For he who said, “You shall not commit adultery,” also said, “You shall not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker.

You should not fear eternal judgment if you have cast your lot with Jesus. Neither should you ignore Jesus if he tells you to run when you need to run.

[journeyman]

some of you shall they cause to be put to death.....But there shall not an hair of your head perish. Lk.21:16,18

flee from idolatry. 1Cor.10.14

[ross3421]

I would be uncomfortable adopting such an unusual reading. The 2 periods of 3.5 years is commonly expressed, but the reference to New Jerusalem here isn't something I've heard before. Where did you get this idea from?

From Dan.9:24,

Dan 9.24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city....

And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem Rev.21:2

And what the angel tells Daniel (ending trangression, bringing in everlasting righteousness, etc.) is through Jesus.

Things like trampling underfoot the holy city for 3 1/2 years could easily represent how Christ was spiken against, persecuted, executed, during his ministry. The saints (the holy city), appear to be overcome by the beast, but because our Lord is in us (which is the reason for the hatred), the beast cannot truly destroy God's city.

I'm trying to get a grasp of how far you go in interpreting "Jerusalem" as the "New Jerusalem." Are you interpreting the New Jerusalem as being in Dan 9, in Luke 21, and in Rev 11, as well as in Rev 21? If so, I don't understand how you distinguish between the city of Jerusalem on a map from the New Jerusalem as a city that arrives *after* Christ's return?

heavenly jerusalem currettly in the heavens is not new jereusalem as all things are made new upon his return even this city.  ez 40-48 we see this transition.  so the holy city is the current heavenly jerusalem which comes down prior to nj