All Doves:

Most of the readers and posters at this site have missed the obvious and overlooked the point about who the mysterious "HE" of Daniel 9:27 that resolved this issue 400 years ago, and has not been mentioned by anyone.  I have been waiting for several months now for someone to come along and remind us of this oversight.  In my various posts, especially my series on the "Standing In The Gap" series, where I brought up the point about the confusion that came about because of ignoring the correct and proper use of grammar in regards to the pronoun "He" which is found three times in Daniel 9:27. 

In one post, where a reader specifically asked the question, Who is the "He" in Daniel 9:27?, I replied that the
the mysterious "He" is the adversary or the Antichrist.  I stated that grammar dictates, the personal pronoun "He" must refer back to its antecedent, which is usually found in the previous sentence where the antecedent is actually named.  In the case of Daniel 9:27 there are not just one, but actually three occurrences of the personal pronoun "He" in the passage.  I believe two others validated my statement, but a series of disingenuous posts poo-pooed what I said as if I did not know what I was talking about.

Then, others over at that web site, which shall go nameless here, applauded individuals that took pot shots at my postings here at Five Doves.  They daily post their errant bovine excrement that the "He" of Daniel 9:27 refers to the Messiah Jesus Christ and that there is no so-called "Gap" between Daniel's 69th and 70th Week.  As their main proof being they quote from the 1599 Geneva Bible.  I did three posts on exposing the 1599 Geneva Bible, showing its inferior translation quality, dethroning its study notes, and identifying why it was reissued, under the guise that this was the Pilgrim's Bible, and if it was good enough for the Pilgrims it must be good enough for you.  I pointed out this re-publishing of the Calvinist 1599 Geneva Bible was all about the "profits" to be made and suggested that the real goal may have been to undermine sales of the KJV Bible.  I also noted that the Pilgrims did not have a choice of what Bible to bring with them to Plymouth, Mass; It was the 1599 Geneva Bible or nothing at all.

The wags disingenuously mocked my education, years of experience, and went about their normal activity by patting themselves on the back for putting this old preacher in his place.  Absolutely no where did they present a credible defense for their premise that the "He" of Daniel 9:27 was the Messiah Christ Jesus.  Not surprising in the least, people like them are not capable of intelligent debate, even at a high school level.  They are prime examples of how the church today has been dumbed-down but doesn't even know it.  They offer a "smorgasbord" Christianity, but they are certainly not about Biblical truth, but more about entertainment and sensationalism. 

Yes, the church today has been dumbed-down by men more interested in serving mega-churches than to be spiritual shepherds of small flocks.  These church hirelings have traded or exchanged truth for tolerance,  sanctification for self-esteem, and holiness for happiness.  But let's us get back to the mysterious "He" of Daniel 9:27. 

In my series on "Standing In The Gap", I showed that at least 24 such "Gaps" exist in the Bible besides the one in Daniel 9:24-27.  I opted not go into the reason for those "Gaps", but rather my concern was simply to show their existence.  I was saving the explanation as to why these gaps appear for a future lesson which I thought readers would appreciate learning.

I argued from a position of correct proper grammar; English, or Hebrew, or Greek, that all three occurrences of "He" in Daniel 9:27 refers to the adversary or the Antichrist.  THEY DO NOT REFER TO JESUS CHRIST.  There are two definitive points to answering this question, once and for all;  one which I did identify in the original posts, and a second which I chose not to share immediately but saved for a later time, such as now, after I had a chance to see what the reaction would be by readers.

At this point, I encourage the reader to pay very close attention as I prove to the reader how we know with absolute conviction that the mysterious "He" is the Antichrist. 

In Daniel 9:27, the identity of all three occurrences of the pronoun "He" is determined by the antecedent, which is generally referred to be found in the previous sentence or verse in this case.  This is a given by proper grammar rules, principles and practices. 

In Daniel 9:26, there is a break in the passage that establishes the identity of the three "He's" in verse 27.

Verse 26 of Daniel 9 directly from the King James Bible, reads as follows:

"And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:"     (End of clause).

The rest of that verse 26 is a new clause, a self supporting statement.  It reads or continues as following:

"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."   

Again, what are we looking for now?  The identity of "He" from the next verse, verse 27 of Daniel 9.  At this point there is no need for me to include the text of that verse 27. 

All three pronouns "He" in verse 27 refer back to the antecedent of "He" which occurs in the previous verse, or verse 26.  In this case the mysterious "He" is identified as "the people of the prince". 

My opponents will argue the antecedent is "the Messiah".  Are they right?  NO!  Not a snow ball's chance!

Here is the reason, and this is where I was surprised that not one noted this in reply to any of my posts.  Not one person noted the point that I am about to unveil here for you.

The whole entire issue in this running debate is the result of, not necessarily Biblical illiteracy, but of simple grammatical incompetence.  This is the crux of the debate. 

The KJV Bible translators were well-trained in correct and proper grammar.  They all were fluent in Hebrew and Greek.  Of that fact there is no question or debate.  In fact, no translation since the1611 KJV Bible has had the depth and breadth of scholarship, in the number of people involved in the translating work, the number of books each translated, and then read of by each other's translation work.  The KJV Bible is so vastly superior to any modern translation in existence today, but there are men afoot doing everything they can do to undermine the KJV Bible.  Even the vast majority of clergy today are themselves deceived by their mentoring professors, who were also deceived themself.

Now to the obvious! 

It is that little colon ( : ) that appears at the end of the first clause above in bold italic type.   Don't cry foul but this little bit of punctuation decides just who "He" really is!

A Colon ( : ) is used to separate two independent clauses that can stand alone and independent of each other and still make proper sense.  Here is another simple example:

                There is only one thing left to do now: confess while you still have time.

A new clause following a colon ( : ) does not have to be capitalized.  This fact is confirmed and validated simply by examining the KJV Bible.  The translators of the KJV Bible consistently followed that principle found from Genesis to Revelation, which is found here in Daniel 9:26.  I note that specifically because the critics that will cry foul will want to argue this doesn't mean what it says.

All three occurrences of the pronoun "He" in Daniel 9:27, refer back to the antecedent, "the people of the prince" and because of that little colon ( : ), which tells the reader that verse 27 is, in reality, actually TWO sentences, each capable of standing alone and independent of each other and still making sense. 

Did you grasp the previous statement?  Yes, Daniel 9:26 is TWO DIFFERENT SENTENCES! that are separated by an insertion of a simple colon ( : ). 

The Daniel 9:26 passage is really self-evident.  Ask yourself, did Jesus Christ destroy the city or the sanctuary?  Definitely not.  It was the Roman legion, the occupiers of the land of Israel in that day.  This is both confirmed, from the Bible, and as a fact of recorded history, by both Jewish historians and secular historians.  It was destroyed by "the people of the prince".  The people of the prince were Roman soldiers.
 
Anyone, doubting Thomas' included, can verify the truth of this little ( : ) punctuation symbol by proof-checking any literary style book on writing papers, documents, theses, dissertations.  This means that any reference to the Messiah in the passage of Daniel 9:24-27, ends at the close of the first clause preceding the ( : ). 

Just what are the implications of this revelation?  I have listed just a few without getting too theological here:

1.  It destroys the Pre-Wrath position argument that Daniel's Seventy Weeks are contiguous or continuous without any break between weeks 69 and 70.  This inference by the use of the colon ( : ) corroborates a "Gap" between week 69 and week 70.  That "Gap" is our Church Age or the Age of Grace.

2.  It corroborates the Pre-Tribulational Rapture before the 70th week, or "Seven"-year Tribulation by numerous means, both explicit and many implicit themes, such as the "The Biblical Theme of The Bride" and "The Feast of Trumpets".

3.  It specifically confirms that it will be the Antichrist that will usher in the Tribulation period by his covenant.  I'm not sure at the moment of the fact that last week's report that members of the Jewish Knesset leaked that they had signed a "secret" agreement with Pope Francis giving the Vatican control over the city of Jerusalem, when the pope was in Israel back in June.  Without knowing the details of this "secret" agreement, we can't be sure if this is or isn't the Biblical covenant between the Jews and the Antichrist. 

4.  It refutes the Seventh-day Adventist position that the Church will go through much of the Tribulation period.  It refutes a Pre-Wrath, or Mid-Trib, or even a Post-Trib position.  The Church, made up of true believers, not carnal Christians, but those truly Born-Again believers, ONLY, will go in the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.  As the pentacostal preacher and author, Hilton Sutton said some twenty-years ago, "When the bombs are descending, the saints will be ascending." 

5.  It confirms with total certainty that the Antichrist is the mysterious "He" of Daniel 9:27, noted in three occurrences therewith.

6.  All of the Scripture-twisting and contortions, done by the Pre-Wrath position are likewise, damaged from their flawed interpretation of the Daniel 9:24-27.  Dr. Renald Showers' book 'A critique of the Pre-Wrath Rapture' view deals with at least twenty of those areas of confusion.  It is by far the most exhaustive work on unraveling the confusion of Marvin Rosenthal and Robert Van Kampen's books.  Dr. Renald Showers was a colleague of Marvin Rosenthal at 'The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry' before Marvin Rosenthal was summarily fired from his position.

7.  This truth refutes the Preterist [partial or full Preterist] position [those who believe all prophecy on this was fulfilled by 70 AD].  This include people such as the radio 'Bible Answer Man', Hank Hanegraff, R.C. Sproul, Gary DeMar, Ken Gentry, the late David Chilton, Gary North, N.T. Wright, to name but a few.

8.  It refutes the idea that Jesus returned "spiritually" before 70 AD, something that is alluded to, directly and indirectly, by many holding the Pre-Wrath position.  There is no evidence to substantiate that claim whatsoever.

I doubt seriously that very few of those holding to the Pre-Wrath position, or what Dr. Tommy Ice refers to it as the 3/4-Rapture position, will change their minds (repent) of their error.  Pride, being man's downfall, precludes their ability to recognize, or man-up, to the fact that the basics of proper grammar today sides with the proper grammar of the KJV Bible translators. 

Interestingly so, in my past research, I found that most Pre-Wrath sites prefer to use the NIV translation.  In the case of Daniel 9:26, the NIV actually does properly separate and break the verse into two independent sentences.  But again, their interpretation of the Daniel passage of (9:26-27) still violates the grammatical rules of proper grammar.  Clearly, they are either incompetent or choose to ignore or torture the text to give them what they want to believe. 

While this is not part of my analysis here, the NIV was translated from the corrupted Westcott and Hort Greek text.  The NIV Perversion is discussed in great detail at the web site at www.Jesus-is-Savior.com in an article entitled "NIV Exposed".  My reference here is to the original NIV, and not the updated sodomite/lesbian friendly 2011 TNIV edition. 

In concluding this post, it should be evident that the mysterious "He" of Daniel 9:27, all three of them, refers to no one but the adversary, the Antichrist.  Keep looking up and your ears clear because we are going home very soon and we need to be alert, awake, and at work.  My confident hope is on Rosh HaShanah this September 25/26th.

God bless, and may He have all the glory,   (Hope you catch the antecedent of "He" in my closing.

Pastor Bob