Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Anderson
Now switching to serious mode...
Take a look at Young's Literal Translation and then I have a few questions.
Daniel 9:27 And he hath strengthened a covenant with many—one week, and in the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease, and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate, even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one.’
Young, R. (1997). Young’s Literal Translation (Da 9:27)
1. Question #1 - most translations say "make a covenant", but the literal text is "strengthened a covenant". It could be a pre-existing agreement that is "strengthened", not made. Do you think it is "make a covenant" or "strengthened a covenant"?
2. Question #2 - Is it an interpretive jump to go from "a covenant with many" to a covenant with Israel? I think it is. Who are "the many"? I can't find evidence that it is solely Israel.
3. Question #3 - How do you reconcile "by the wing of abominations" to a physical aspect of a physical temple of God? What feature of the Temple of God can be thought of as a "wing of abominations". If you cannot resolve the "wing of abominations" to a physical aspect of the Temple of God then you have a interpretive problem here. There are many physical pictures in the Old Testament that resolve to spiritual realities in the New Testament Age. We know that Jesus made a temple not made with human hands when he resurrected. So, there is a new Temple of God in the New Testament age. Could Daniel's references here be to the new Temple of God in the New Testament age?
|
YLT can help at times, but language idioms get lost. Let me paraphrase Proverbs, "
In a multitude of translations, there is wisdom." E.g. "
causes present to cease," makes no sense. Sounds like the Grinch who stole Christmas. The "present" here are offerings in the Temple.
Q1. "Make a covenant, strengthen a covenant, confirm a covenant" all are the same, though I put less credibility on YLT than the other translations for the above reasoning. The impact of this covenant will be to enable Israel to safely rebuilt their Temple. Obviously no temple exists in Jerusalem presently, so one must be built. The "covenant" maker here must be one who has great power, i.e. the "Beast" of Revelation, the "Man of Sin" of 2 Thessalonians, the "He" of Daniel 9, or the un-named in Matthew 24.
Q2. The "many" is Israel, perhaps over the objections of some in Israel. Daniel chapters 8-12 are written in Hebrew to Israel, in contrast to Daniel 2.4 thru chap 7 which are written in Aramaic to the Babylonians. Daniel 9.27 describes the final 70th week "
decreed for your people and your holy city." (9.24) The context here makes all the difference in understanding this verse. Verse 9.27 cannot be taken out of context.
The "middle of the seven" is crucial when compared with Revelation. Half a week of 7 years is 3 1/2 years, "42 months, a time and times and half a time, 1260 days" all of which are mentioned there. That something monumental happens in the "middle of this week" is mentioned often.
Jesus warned us that false Christs will come. Most in Israel will consider the Antichrist Beast to be their long-awaited Messiah, and will be completely deceived by him. In his first few years of ruling, he will appear as god on earth, and all will marvel. Some, however, will voice their objections and probably be banished as conspiracy theorists propagating foreign intelligence, or some such.
Q3. I interpret Daniel 9.27 "abomination and desolation" by Jesus in Matt 24.15 and Paul in 2 Ths 2.4. Jesus said you will "see" this event, and I suspect this will be well-publicized on all the 24 hr cable news stations. This spectacular event will follow the Beast's miraculous recovery from what is probably an assassination attempt. Perhaps he will die, and be brought back to life. Paul says, "
he seats himself in the Temple, proclaiming himself as god."
Your reference to the church age "Temple" of God is interesting, and not without consideration based on 2 Ths 2. The Thessalonians asked Paul concerning the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, and he spoke of two distinct events which
must precede His coming. The "apostasy" must come first, and the man of lawlessness must be revealed. This evil man will be revealed when he enters the Temple and "
opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or an object of worship."
The "apostasy" must also include the many in the church of God. In the only other NT mention of this word, it is used to condemn Paul he departed from his Jewish religion. (Acts 21.21) Ralph Earle
Word Meanings says this means "
to forsake, a defection or a revolt. The word implies that the opposition contemplated by Paul springs up from within and not from without." Reminds me of Paul's word "
all in Asia have deserted me."
Trying times indeed. What sayeth you?