Hi David:

My response to your questions will be a bit long so bear with me.  A correct interpretation of Daniel clarifies the Scriptural revelations that God has a future for God's people.  Critical thinking about the prophetic message of Daniel creates a makeshift argument for the book.  Such mishandling of the book removes the meaning of the prophecies and makes the writing of Daniel a travesty and a sham.

Daniel is the key to ALL Biblical prophecy.  Without Daniel, the far-distant prophetic revelation and the prophetic scope are unexplainable.  The Lord's great prophecies in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13; and Luke 21; as well as 2nd Thesalonians 2, and the book of Revelation (which both speak of the Antichrist of Daniel 11), can only be understood with the help of Daniel's prophecies.

Daniel 9:24-27 are just one piece of a much larger puzzle.  This lynchpin passage becomes a stumbling block for the Preterist (those who want you to believe all or most of Bible prophecy was fulfilled by the end of the first century).  This includes all the "travelers" (SDA's, JW's, Mormons, and a slew of people like "Kingdom-now" and its sister group "Dominionism".  There are others but these are the most common.

While I have been focusing on exposing the teachings of SDA cult evangelist Steven Wohlberg, it is a given that my focus has been a specific or micro-view analysis.  This passage (Daniel 9:24-27) has been a micro-view analysis.  The passage, however, is enriched in its meaning, when looked at in the macro-view.  By that, I mean it has to be understood in the larger context of the other prophecies of the book.  Such includes:

            * Nebuchadnezzar's dream of a statute
            * The writing on the wall
            * The four beasts
            * The Son of Man
            * Other world rulers
            * The Antichrist
            * The Resurrection

The Gabriel vision of the "70 weeks" when isolated from the rest of the story, as Paul Harvey would say,become problematic.  When isolated or taken out of context it becomes incomplete in its full understanding and to simply focus on that particular passage.  This is exactly what so many students and teachers try to do, however, this is simply a strategy to proof-text or support a pre-conceived agenda.  I often refer to this practice as "cherry-picking" the text.

As an example, think of photography.  I use this because I was an avid photographer since I have been eleven years old, and up to a point where my legs would not support my hobby.  A serious photographer is never limited to a single lense for his camera.  He moves up to include a close-up macro lense, a wide-angle lense, and even a telephoto lense.  The demanding photographer moves up to where he may have as many as 8 to 12 lenses.  I once had two Canon F1's with motor drives, and twelve assorted lenses.  Why so many?  Each offers a plethora of photo image option choices or specs in getting that desired shot.  Each lense offers different views of the object, its foreground, background, depth of field, sharpness, etc.

In studying a particular passage, like Daniel 9:24-27, most students and even teachers attempt to split hairs in their analysis.  It becomes necessary to pull back in our view finder in order to get a better depth of field rather than to obscure the clarity and obsess in minutia.  Look at the overall systemic picture.

Daniel's prophecies contain much imagery, but what is envisioned and prophesied is to be taken in a full historical, normal and literal sense.  Behind Daniel's imagery is a literal fulfillment; its about real people, and nations that either existed in the days of Daniel or would come on the world stage in the future.

In his prophecies, Daniel portrays the course of Gentile world power, i.e., "The Times of the Gentiles" -(Luke 21:24).  Through the passage of history, we have seen many of these prophecies fulfilled.  Still to come is the event in which great nations are destroyed by a fifth kingdom (the Messiah's), which is depicted as a stone cut out without hands -(Daniel 2:34-45).

Your framework of history in your remarks is almost identical to another Dove's question I recently answered.  I frequently encounter this myopic understanding and it is common with Preterists (church folk, pastors, teachers, students, etc.).  The Preterist movement has grown quickly in the last thirty years.  I believe I understand why they come to this view.  They can't see the trees for the forest.  The world around them does not give them assurance that God is in control, or doing anything to retard the entropy taking place in the world.  There Biblical world-view is turned on its head.  They are looking for things that they can personally do to bring about positive change.  They have a sense of helplessness in a world going to hell when they believe we the church are not doing enough to bring the world to Christ.  I see it in Christian resources everywhere.  The CBD catalog is a mirror of product offered with the idea of changing things everywhere for good, down to the point of individual finances.  All of that comes down to what can I do as a person, a church, etc. to change the world for Christ.  The modern day "church growth" movement is the perfect example of where the focus is backwards.  Churches will grow when people are given the "whole" Biblical message.  I could run off a list of methods being used to so-called build the church movement.  The church has tried to bring people into the church, by becoming like the world, i.e., dress, music, worship styles, and after twenty-five years the original host of this "seeker-sensitive" movement, Bill Hybels, has admitted it has failed.  All of the churches efforts have not worked. I argue that the modern day church has lost its moral imperative for existence.  But that is another issue altogether.

I recall Gary DeMar using this defense that the "70 weeks" of Daniel were fulfilled in the first century.  Ken Gentry , David Chilton, R.C. Sproul, the "Bible Answer Man Hank Hanegraff, and many others teach that all or nearly all of prophecies were fulfilled in the 70 AD period.  Preterists "proof-text" three major passages in Matthew as a basis for this view of a first century fulfillment.  These are: Matthew 10:23; 16:27-28; and 24:34.

There are dozens of passages in the New Testament that confound the Preterist beliefs.  They simply resort to dismissing them as irrelevant or blatantly reject.  The one that always comes to mind is Revelation 20, where we are told that the Millennial Kingdom will take place on Earth, Jesus Christ will rule and reign for 1,000 years, and it was made explicitly clear, 1,000 years, repeated six times to make sure it was clear.  The Preterist turns around and says it does not mean what it says.  They casually reply by saying it only means a long time.  I bought that crap long before I took my Greek in seminary.

If we are currently living in the new heaven and new earth, then there is so Satan (Rev. 20:10); no death, no crying, or pain (Rev. 21:4); no unclean persons, nor those practicing abominations and lying (Rev. 21:27); and especially no curse on the creation (Rev. 22:3).  I could go on and on here but there is no need to.  Because of the spread of Preterism, those who believe that Christ came in 70 AD, will not be found looking for the Lord's return when He does rapture the church without any signs or warning.  They disregard a command the Lord gave to keep watching until He comes.

Your reference to the Palestine Facts info and your question as to whether the events between 1948 and 1967 could be the fulfillment of Daniel 9:24-27.  My answer is a definitive NO.  It definitely points to the prince to come.  That is understood in the context of Daniel 2.  Daniel 2 addresses the point of a revived Roman Empire that will come on the scene in the future.  I believe we are seeing that unfolding in our time.  Nebuchadnezzar's dream revealed the full scope of all of history.  No other prophet was given such a full and concise view of future history.

Your next to last paragraph is self-answerable.  Israel has not controlled the Temple Mount throughout its formal Statehood since 1948 but for a few hours at its capture by the IDF in the 1972 war.  General Rabin (he was the general recognized by his black patch over his one eye) relinquished control to the Jordanians to administer the Temple Mount almost immediately after his troops captured the Holy sites. 

The word "sanctuary" and "temple" and "holy place" are all the same.  The word for all of them in the Greek text is "Qoph".  Of its many uses, there are approximately ten variations in Greek which are determined by the five principles of "Gender, Case, Voice, Mood, and Tense" which is determine in its spelling in Greek or in Hebrew.

I can affirm with a high degree of statistical confidence or tell you that Rome/Vatican will take over the Temple Mount as its new capital.  The orchestration of that has been and in process for some time and is currently as I am typing this.  Pope Francis this past weekend scored points with all the important parties except Bibi.  The Vatican, the Jesuits, the Jews (not all), and Freemasons, all want to build a Third Temple, each for different reasons, ASAP.  They work individually, and collectively to divide and conquer their opposition.  They are the Cabal we commonly refer to as the Illuminati elite.  The House of Rothschild is the Vatican's private financial arm.  They have been the Vatican's financial fiduciary since the 1800's.  They are a major player in the Antichrist economic system.  The Rothschild's bought and paid for the physical Knesset building, the Israeli Supreme Court building, and these two are just for starters.

The people of the prince that destroyed Jerusalem and Herod's Temple, will do a repeat gig.  90% of present day Jews are secular, no faith, and they want peace so bad they will fall for the deception of the Antichrist, mainly because they do not know their national Biblical history, or outright dismiss it completely.

In closing, critics of Dispensationalism make disparaging remarks and statements such as, "They (meaning people who listen to Hal Lindsey, or Tim LaHay, or Chuck Missler, Tommy Ice, Gary Stearman, do not study the Bible, they just listen to the teachings of illiterate men, and they include me and others that recognize Dispensationalism as a valid method of interpreting the Bible."   When I first came around to the idea that the Bible becomes clear and understandable through the lense of Dispensationalism, I ceased to be intimidated by those folks that hold to a "Covenantal/Reformed" understanding of the Bible.  The critics do not offer solid scholarship evidence, proof, to attack Dispensationalism.  When they find a nice "cherry-picked" verse, it becomes their mantle of proof-texting we are wrong, "we" being people like myself.  They attack our knowledge, education, our integrity, our years of formal training, even our faith, as to whether we are a "true Christian" all to defend a "Covenant/Reformed" theology that in my opinion is like booking a trip on the RMS Titantic, or the real ship that was passed off to be the Titanic by the Whitestar Lines in order to collect the insurance. 

Every Dispensationalist that I know or know of, has in addition to a bachelor's degree, and no less than four, and as many as eight or ten years of advanced, and demanding, grueling years of graduate education in the Bible.  Most are fluent in at least one foreign language besides the Biblical languages.  In fact, Hal Lindsey, majored in Greek language studies when he went to Dallas Theological Seminary.   I resent the attacks on Scofield, and Darby.  They only reveal their ignorance of the truth!

Unfortunately, for me, when I went to seminary, I didn't have enough foresight to know the two seminaries I graduated from were of the "Covenant/Reformed" theological camp:  One a Presbyterian and one a Methodist. 
Had I the foresight and bothered to discover their institutional statement of faith, I could have saved myself many thousands of dollars.  I could have come to the Dispensational method of understanding and interpretation 25 years sooner.  My series on hermeneutics on Bible understanding, hopefully will lift the fog of subterfuge that is causing so much confusion on the part of readers at Five Doves.  It wasn't a total loss when I consider that I understand their rationale and way of thinking, and despite its errors, I can know my adversary in a way that is only learned by walking and following in their footsteps.

Hope this has been a help on determining just who "he" is.

God bless,

Pastor Bob