In Daniel 9:27, “the covenant” is spoken of prophetically.

Daniel 9:27 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.

 

Then the remainder of the times in Daniel, when he speaks prophetically of “the covenant”, is it not the same old covenant, spoken of throughout the old testament?

It is the same word used overwhelmingly in the scriptures, easily seen using a concordance.

Now some try to imply that “in the Hebrew”, it is different.

That is a common tactic used, telling people, “In the Hebrew”, or “In the Greek”, and most people will accept that & trust their different rendering.

Well, even someone who had not had 1 or 2 years of Hebrew and 3 or 4 years of Greek, can still use a Strong’s Concordance.

Then they will quickly see that they had the wool pulled over their eyes.

Is it not also overwhelmingly the same usage in the Hebrew old testament, for covenant, also? Like the following:

Exodus 19:5; 24:7, 8; 31:16; 34: 27, 28

Leviticus 2:13; 24:8, 9; 26:15, 25

Numbers 10:33; 14:44; 25:12, 13

Deuteronomy 4:13, 23; 5:2, 3; 9:9, 11, 15; 10:8; 17:2; 29:1, 9, 12, 14, 21, 25; 31:9, 16, 20, 25, 26; 33:9

Joshua 3:3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17; 4:7, 9, 18,; 6:6, 8; 7:11, 15; 8:33; 23:16

Judges 2:20; 20:27

I Samuel 4:3, 4

II Samuel 15:24

I Kings 3:15; 6:19; 8:1, 6, 9, 21; 11:11; 19:10, 14

II Kings 17:15, 35, 38; 18;12; 23:2, 3, 21

I Chronicles 11:3; 15:26, 26, 28, 29; 16: 6, 37; 17:1; 22:19, 28:2, 18

II Chronicles 5:2, 7, 10; 6:11; 34:30, 31, 32

Psalm 25:10; 44:17; 50:16; 78:10, 37; 103:18

Isaiah 56:4, 6

Jeremiah 3:16; 11:2, 3, 6, 8, 10; 14:21; 22:9; 31:32; 34:13, 15, 18

Ezekiel 16:59; 16:60; 44:7

Hosea 6:7; 8:1

Malachi 2:4, 5, 10; 3:1

I know that many of the prophecy teachers all want “the covenant” in Daniel 9:27, to suddenly & uncharacteristically be interpreted as “a strong covenant”.

And then go on to explain that it’s use in Daniel 9:27 is more like a military pact.

They don’t get that from the use of the words “covenant” or “the covenant”, as “the covenant” is overwhelmingly used for the Mosaic covenant.

They also don’t get that from the ways that the Hebrew was used elsewhere, also.

Because they would still have to admit that it, also, was overwhelmingly used for the Mosaic covenant.

I think that they inject their eschatology into their hypothetical rendering of the verse.

Do they not try to make it say what they already believed it to mean, rather than to believe based on what it actually clearly says?

Covenant is used 5 more times in Daniel, and they are prophetic, as well.

In fact 3 of those times it says “the holy covenant”, which is clearly not a military agreement.

 

Daniel 11:22 And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.

28 Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart shall be against the holy covenant; and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land.

30 ¶ For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant.

32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.

 

No, I think that in Daniel 9:27, as well as the 5 times in chapter 11, that it is speaking of the Mosaic covenant.

I think that the Antichrist, confirms the Mosaic covenant with Israel, even allowing them to go back and have temple sacrifices.

So it looks like Israel is allowed to rebuild their temple, empowered by his confirming the Mosaic covenant.

That is a very antichrist thing for the Antichrist to do, since there is no more need of the Mosaic covenant.

The very confirming of the Mosaic covenant with Israel, is only hardening their stand against their real Messiah, Jesus, and his sacrifice.

By doing so, they completely go against everything taught in the book of Hebrews, and fulfill:

 

Hebrews 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

 

Then he shows his true colors and turns against the covenant, stops the sacrifices, and enters, himself, into that very temple.

He blasphemes and shows himself to be God.

He is neither a high priest after the order of Aaron, nor after the order of Melchisedec.

He is not the LORD, so he has no business entering into there, beyond the veil.

It is all blasphemy, false doctrine, and idolatry.

Then people are expected to worship him or die.

 

So, it all seems to involve worship, not Vera-chips, visa cards, or military or Oslo accords.

That is also another reason that I think that Daniel 9:27 is talking about the Mosaic covenant.

                        What do you think?

                                    Gino