70th Week - It Is Still Pending

[DavidPT]

I don't think we have seen the fat lady sing yet.

Just wait, only a real Temple will do. Paul was teaching the Thessalonians based on the Olivette Discourse of Jesus. Also, the Temple was standing then so they would of understood this as a literal Temple. Jesus was quoting Daniel:


Mat 24:15　 "When, therefore, you see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),　

Notice it is our responsibility to understand what this means. So the Book of Daniel will be key in understanding the End Times, just as it is to understand the book of Revelation.

The whole ball of wax is, there will be very few Christians that hold to the truth, before Jesus returns. We see this on these Forums where almost daily, most deny there is little or any prophecy left to be fulfilled, or we will be conveniently taken to heaven before we have to put our faith on the line for Jesus. According to the parable of the wheat and tares we are looking at 2/3 are not truly saved in Christendom. The ten virgins teach us that 1/2 will fall away in the season of His return. These are sobering and staggering facts taught by Jesus Himself!

It comes down to a choice that is simple and yet very profound: Do we believe what Jesus says in the Olivette Discourse or not? What did Jesus Himself teach about the End Times? Can we trust what He said? Does our understanding of the End Times come from Jesus, or our Denomination? Who will we follow?

As for me, I don't have to have every detail figured out. I just trust what He said is the truth about the end times. It don't matter that I can fit every little piece into the puzzle of the end times. If we don't start here-with the Olivette Discourse, with the teaching of Jesus on this important subject, we will never come to knowledge of the truth. He was teaching the 12 Apostles, the very foundation of the Church itself as we know it. Who's names are in the foundation of the Heavenly city, for crying out loud! And the city has 12 gates, that have the names of the 12 tribes of Israel. Which shows the importance of both the Church and Israel in the redemptive and prophetic program of God.

Rev 21:12　 having a great and high wall; having twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels; and names written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel.　

Rev 21:13　 On the east were three gates; and on the north three gates; and on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.　

Rev 21:14　 The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them twelve names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb.　

He said there will be signs before His coming/Parousia, but we don't believe this it seems. We relegate the Olivette Discourse to Jews only, or fulfilled in 70 AD. But this IS Jesus we are talking about here! Right? We don't need to be a PHD in Biblical languages, or be really that bright at all, to understand what He is saying plainly in this one little chapter of the Bible. But what we believe about this chapter, has everything to do about what will happen before He returns- and if we are in truth or error. He gave us Revelation too- but that is just icing on the cake and gives us more to fight about it seems.

But we don't really believe it do we, these words of Jesus? It's been too long, and it looks too messy for us to be in that time period, we are too advanced as a modern people to believe this... so we disregard it. A little slip here, a little there, until we are thoroughly asleep and totally deceived by the world system and the false prophets within the Church, and we can't understand the signs of the times. We become like the Pharisees who couldn't or didn't want to understand, and chose a moment of power and position, for an eternity in Hell.

It seems only two of the Elders of Israel were open to the teachings of Jesus, men that knew the Bible and prophesies. Let that sink in...Only two. What do you think our chances are to be able to understand the End Times if we don't believe what Jesus Himself taught about His second coming in the Olivette Discourse? He is the only one we can trust about this whole matter. And if it don't come to pass exactly how He says, He is a false prophet-according to the test of Scriptures, and this is impossible!

This is really what is at stake here, and why it is so important our teaching lines up with what Jesus taught. Does it?

Deu 18:18　 I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him.　

Deu 18:19　 And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him.　

Deu 18:20　 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.'　

Deu 18:21　 And if you say in your heart, 'How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?'—　

Deu 18:22　 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.　
　
Luk 18:8　 I tell you, he will give justice to them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?"

2Pe 3:3　 knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires.　

2Pe 3:4　 They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation."　

2Pe 3:14　 Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless;　

2Pe 3:15　 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you,　

2Pe 3:16　 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.　

2Pe 3:17　 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;　

You and I are on the same page more than you might realize, yet we are not on the same page in regards to all of these things though. A brick and mortar temple in Jerusalem, where animal sacrifices resume, and in the midst of the 70th week, the one proclaiming to be God, per 2 Thessalonians 2:4, he puts an end to these sacrifices, there is no logic to that if taken in a literal sense. But if not taken in a literal sense, then yes, there is logic to the 70th week being fulfilled at the end of this age.

 

[Dave L]

There really should not be any confusion about the Daniel 9 70 weeks prophecy events. They were clearly given, and even an orthodox Jew who started 'Jews For Jesus' converted to Jesus because of rightly understanding the Daniel prophecy which revealed the timing of Messiah's 1st coming and death.

For those interested, here is the actual Scripture evidence that the final 70th week is still yet to come to pass.

Dan 9:25
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
KJV

1. The first period is the 'seven sevens' (as "seven weeks" in the KJV). With each week equaling a period of seven years, that totals out to 49 years. So the first period is 49 years, from the command to restore and build unto 404 B.C. that marked the completion and dedication of the 2nd temple. The command to restore and rebuild was given in the 20th year of Artaxerxes in 454 B.C. (means 'the great king', an appeliative like Pharaoh, Czar, etc.). Thus the first period was from 454 B.C. to 404 B.C., or 49 years.

Dan 9:26
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: 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.
KJV


2. The second period given is the "threescore and two weeks" (62 weeks or 434 years). This period followed on the first period that ended on 404 B.C. So from the completion and dedication of the 2nd temple to the time of Messiah at the cross was to be 62 weeks, or 434 years, and from the command to restore in 454 B.C. to 404 B.C. added is 483 years. So from 454 B.C. plus 483 years comes to 29 A.D. when Jesus was on the cross, and thus "cut off" per Dan.9:26. That ended 69 weeks at 29 A.D., the year of the cross.

The people of the prince that shall come was the Roman general Titus who's army destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D.

The end that thereof shall be with a flood, etc., is about the very end of this world, still in our near future. That prince as Titus only served as a blueprint for the coming final Antichrist.

Dan 9:27
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.
KJV

Per English grammar, we are required to go back to the 26th verse and pick up the subject about that "he". It is about that "prince" idea in verse 26, but not in the same role this next time, i.e., the coming Antichrist for the end is not going to destroy Jerusalem and the sanctuary, he instead is going to support building of a new temple, and starting up the old covenant sacrifices again.

3. The third and last period is "one week", the final 70th week, and is about the very end of this world. That "one week" is divided by that false one coming to end sacrifices in the middle of the "one week" (7 years). More info on what he will do is given as the "vile person" in Daniel 11.

Dan 11:21-24
21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.
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.
23 And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.
KJV

That "league" is the covenant of Dan.9:27. It will involve the re-institution of sacrifices in Jerusalem at the end, with a new temple, requirements under the old covenant, called the "holy covenant" in Daniel 11.

Dan 11:30-31
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.

31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
KJV

The time will come when that "vile person" (Antichrist) will conspire with those who forsake the "holy covenant", and arms on his part will end the sacrifices and instead place the abomination idol that makes the sanctuary spiritually desolate. That is the "abomination of desolation" our Lord Jesus warned us about in Matthew 24 and Mark 13. It is the idol image of the beast of Revelation 13.

In 170 B.C., Antiochus IV took Jerusalem, went into the temple and sacrificed swine upon the altar, and spread its broth around inside the temple. Then he setup an idol to Zeus in false worship for all to bow to. But that was in 170 B.C., so Antiochus IV only served as an example of the final Antichrist at the end of this world. Yet there's the example for the end, the 70th week which is still pending.

They crucified Jesus in the middle of the 70th week just as foretold. If you deny this you make God a liar.

 

[Dave L]

I agree with the majority of the OP. What I have quoted above is not anything I can also agree with. The temple that gets desecrated by the AC is meaning the temple in 2 Thessalonians 2, and that that is not meaning a brick and mortar temple standing in Jerusalem. In 2 Thessalonians 2, nowhere can Jerusalem even be found in the contexts, yet it would have to involve Jerusalem in order for your interpretation to be correct.

Those who reject a future fulfillment of the 70th week, I don't blame them for doing so if it means they have to agree that what you quoted above will indeed be fact. There are other ways to understand some of these things then. Though some of these things in the OT may appear to involve literal things, such as literal brick and mortar temples, that doesn't mean they necessarily really do though. But in the event they really do, it would make far better sense to place these events during ancient times, such as in the first century, rather than in the future instead, such as the days we are now living in.

Where does scripture say a gap exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th week?

 

[claninja]

Per English grammar, we are required to go back to the 26th verse and pick up the subject about that "he". It is about that "prince" idea in verse 26, but not in the same role this next time, i.e., the coming Antichrist for the end is not going to destroy Jerusalem and the sanctuary, he instead is going to support building of a new temple, and starting up the old covenant sacrifices again.

It's interesting the angel specifically talks about Jerusalem being rebuilt after the Babylonian exile
Dan 9:25
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Where does the prophecy specifically mention it being rebuilt a 2nd time after it's prophecied destruction in 70 ad?

Dan 9:26
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: 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.
KJV


2. The second period given is the "threescore and two weeks" (62 weeks or 434 years). This period followed on the first period that ended on 404 B.C. So from the completion and dedication of the 2nd temple to the time of Messiah at the cross was to be 62 weeks, or 434 years, and from the command to restore in 454 B.C. to 404 B.C. added is 483 years. So from 454 B.C. plus 483 years comes to 29 A.D. when Jesus was on the cross, and thus "cut off" per Dan.9:26. That ended 69 weeks at 29 A.D., the year of the cross.

Notice its 69 weeks until the coming of the messiah, not the messiah's cutting off.

Daniel 9:25 from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem till Messiah the Leader [is] seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks

The messiah is cut off AFTER the 62 weeks +7 weeks, not at the end or in any part of the 62 weeks + 7 weeks

Daniel 9:26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing.


Thus your theory puts Christ's death in a gap, and not in a prophetic week.

 

[DavidPT]

Where does scripture say a gap exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th week?

Where does Scripture say a gap DOESN'T exist between the 69th and 70th week?

 

[oldrunner]

You and I are on the same page more than you might realize, yet we are not on the same page in regards to all of these things though. A brick and mortar temple in Jerusalem, where animal sacrifices resume, and in the midst of the 70th week, the one proclaiming to be God, per 2 Thessalonians 2:4, he puts an end to these sacrifices, there is no logic to that if taken in a literal sense. But if not taken in a literal sense, then yes, there is logic to the 70th week being fulfilled at the end of this age.

Premill is good! At least you are watching. Not sure why you don't think a literal makes sense?

 

[Dave L]

Where does Scripture say a gap DOESN'T exist between the 69th and 70th week?

Jesus fulfilled Daniel 9:27 in the middle of the 70th week on the cross. If there is a gap, it is man made.

 

[A71]

Where does Scripture say a gap DOESN'T exist between the 69th and 70th week?

Clearly the gap notion exists by virtue of the division of the 70 weeks.

So logically, if you accept that there is a gap between weeks 69 and 70, you will also have to accept one, or the possibility of one, it makes no odds, between the 7 and the 62 weeks.

So now when we posit a gap there, lets say 1000 years, since there seems no logic behind the length of your gap, this then means that the 62nd week ends around 1000AD. Ok, now how do you relate Daniel's prophecy to Christ? You can't. Period. You have just tarred, feathered and emasculated the greatest Messianic prophecy in Scripture. I hope you feel good about that.

 

[DavidPT]

Clearly the gap notion exists by virtue of the division of the 70 weeks.

So logically, if you accept that there is a gap between weeks 69 and 70, you will also have to accept one, or the possibility of one, it makes no odds, between the 7 and the 62 weeks.

So now when we posit a gap there, lets say 1000 years, since there seems no logic behind the length of your gap, this then means that the 62nd week ends around 1000AD. Ok, now how do you relate Daniel's prophecy to Christ? You can't. Period. You have just tarred, feathered and emasculated the greatest Messianic prophecy in Scripture. I hope you feel good about that.

Just because there might be a gap between the 69th and 70th week, that doesn't mean there also has to be a gap between the first 7 weeks and 62 weeks. If 69 weeks have to lead to Messiah being cut off, and that Messiah is meaning Jesus, it's pretty silly to suggest a gap of an undetermined amount of time between the the first two block of weeks. If Jesus isn't meant in verse 27, a gap is the only logical conclusion to come to. But if instead, Jesus is meant in verse 27, only then would a gap between the 69 and 70 weeks be illogical. What then proves Jesus is not meant in verse 27?

The following does, since this, too, must occur during the 70th week---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

[BABerean2]

Where does Scripture say a gap DOESN'T exist between the 69th and 70th week?

Mat 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
Mat 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mat 10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.


Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.


Gal 1:14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.
Gal 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,
Gal 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
Gal 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
Gal 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

.

 

[A71]

In ordinary conversation I would say something very colloquial and pithy, along the lines of you being full of
Nonsense.
Unfortunately the moderators here frown on such uninhibited truth talking. So,

Goodnight, goodbye, sayonara, many happy ignores

Just because there might be a gap between the 69th and 70th week, that doesn't mean there also has to be a gap between the first 7 weeks and 62 weeks. If 69 weeks have to lead to Messiah being cut off, and that Messiah is meaning Jesus, it's pretty silly to suggest a gap of an undetermined amount of time between the the first two block of weeks. If Jesus isn't meant in verse 27, a gap is the only logical conclusion to come to. But if instead, Jesus is meant in verse 27, only then would a gap between the 69 and 70 weeks be illogical. What then proves Jesus is not meant in verse 27?

The following does, since this, too, must occur during the 70th week---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

[Dave L]

Clarence Larkin (Gap Heavyweight) says the Jesuits came up with the Gap to divert attention away from the Papacy as being the Antichrist in Reformed writings.

“The “Futurist School” interprets the language of the Apocalypse “literally,” except such symbols as are named as such, and holds that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet “future” and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of “Daniel's Seventy Weeks.” This view, while it dates in modern times only from the close of the Sixteenth Century, is really the most ancient of the three. It was held in many of its prominent features by the primitive Fathers of the Church, and is one of the early interpretations of scripture truth that sunk into oblivion with the growth of Papacy, and that has been restored to the Church in these last times. In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century, with the Jesuit Ribera, who, actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the “Antichrist,” and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and that among Protestants. It is the most largely accepted of the three views. It has been charged with ignoring the Papal and Mohammedan systems, but this is far from the truth, for it looks upon them as fore shadowed in the scriptures, and sees in them the “Type” of those great “Anti-Types” yet future, the “Beast” and the “False Prophet.” The “Futurist” interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book.” Dispensational Truth; pg. 5 Clarence Larkin

 

[A71]

Many eschatologies try and reverse engineer prophecy. They start with various assumptions and conclusions about Christ's return, and then fit everything in around them.

This approach has perhaps some merit, because there is every reason to believe, according to the law (of thumb) of types and examples, that the conclusion of this age mirrors in some ways the conclusion of the last ( big discussion in itself). But this approach can only work in a big picture kind of way, and then very often people assume everything pertains to the end of this age, at which point the law of examples is rendered devoid of force anyway.

When it comes to particulars, then Christ was very meticulous, and the only way to truly grasp prophecy
In all its glory is to understand it correctly.

Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, Daniel is the both the most cryptic and complex of prophets, but also the most essential.

Ezekiel 28:2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord God; Because thine heart (literally:mind) is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:3 Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:4 With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures:5 By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:

 

[claninja]

If 69 weeks have to lead to Messiah being cut off,

69 weeks leads to the messiah, not the messiah being cut off
Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks
The messiah is cut off AFTER 69 weeks
Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off

The following does, since this, too, must occur during the 70th week---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

What proves Jesus is one of mentioned in 70th week of Daniel 9:27? What number comes AFTER 69?
Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off

 

[DavidPT]

In ordinary conversation I would say something very colloquial and pithy, along the lines of you being full of
Nonsense.
Unfortunately the moderators here frown on such uninhibited truth talking. So,

Goodnight, goodbye, sayonara, many happy ignores

lol---Ignore me all you want then, I couldn't care less. You are nobody special to me.

 

[DavidPT]

What proves Jesus is one of mentioned in 70th week of Daniel 9:27? What number comes AFTER 69?
Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off

The prince that shall come, per verse 26, this is whom the pronouns in verse 27 are referring to. The prince that shall come is not meaning Jesus the Messiah though. Some take him to be meaning Titus, others take him to be meaning the AC. The translators of the KJV centuries ago obviously didn't take this prince to be meaning the same prince in verse 25 either. Because if they had, they would have undoubtedly capitalized the 'prince' in that verse as well.

 

[DavidPT]

Clarence Larkin (Gap Heavyweight) says the Jesuits came up with the Gap to divert attention away from the Papacy as being the Antichrist in Reformed writings.

“The “Futurist School” interprets the language of the Apocalypse “literally,” except such symbols as are named as such, and holds that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet “future” and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of “Daniel's Seventy Weeks.” This view, while it dates in modern times only from the close of the Sixteenth Century, is really the most ancient of the three. It was held in many of its prominent features by the primitive Fathers of the Church, and is one of the early interpretations of scripture truth that sunk into oblivion with the growth of Papacy, and that has been restored to the Church in these last times. In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century, with the Jesuit Ribera, who, actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the “Antichrist,” and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and that among Protestants. It is the most largely accepted of the three views. It has been charged with ignoring the Papal and Mohammedan systems, but this is far from the truth, for it looks upon them as fore shadowed in the scriptures, and sees in them the “Type” of those great “Anti-Types” yet future, the “Beast” and the “False Prophet.” The “Futurist” interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book.” Dispensational Truth; pg. 5 Clarence Larkin

None of these things apply to someone such as me though. Yet I, too, conclude there is a gap between the 69th and 70th week. BTW, and not meaning you so much since you are usually respectable about things for the most part, even when you disagree with others, but there are some, or least one anyway, in this thread, who apparently can't win the debate on arguments alone, but instead has to try and intimidate others to try and force them to agree with their view instead. Maybe intimidation works on some people, on me it doesn't though.

 

[jgr]

The prince that shall come, per verse 26, this is whom the pronouns in verse 27 are referring to. The prince that shall come is not meaning Jesus the Messiah though. Some take him to be meaning Titus, others take him to be meaning the AC. The translators of the KJV centuries ago obviously didn't take this prince to be meaning the same prince in verse 25 either. Because if they had, they would have undoubtedly capitalized the 'prince' in that verse as well.

There is only one individual identified as a prince in the passage. It is Messiah.

Capitalization in the KJV is inconsistent and therefore unreliable:
Revelation 1
5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Capitalization is consistent in the YLT:
Daniel 9
25 And thou dost know, and dost consider wisely, from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem till Messiah the Leader [is] seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks: the broad place hath been built again, and the rampart, even in the distress of the times.
26 And after the sixty and two weeks, cut off is Messiah, and the city and the holy place are not his, the Leader who hath come doth destroy the people; and its end [is] with a flood, and till the end [is] war, determined [are] desolations.

 

[claninja]

The prince that shall come, per verse 26, this is whom the pronouns in verse 27 are referring to. The prince that shall come is not meaning Jesus the Messiah though. Some take him to be meaning Titus, others take him to be meaning the AC. The translators of the KJV centuries ago obviously didn't take this prince to be meaning the same prince in verse 25 either. Because if they had, they would have undoubtedly capitalized the 'prince' in that verse as well.

Daniel 9:26 (a) = Daniel 9:27 (a)

The messiah was cut off AFTER 69 weeks:
Daniel 9:26 (a) And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself
Christ's ministry confirmed the covenant with Israel (national not spiritual) for 1 week. half way into the week, he was crucified, effectively ending the temple sacrifices and offerings for Israel (however, unbelieving Israel continued to 'worship' God via sacrifices and offerings):
Daniel 9:27 (a) 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,

If Christ's sacrifice did not end the offering, then there is no forgiveness of sins
Hebrews 10:18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.

Daniel 9:26 (b) = Daniel 9:27 (b)

Outside of the 70 weeks (70 ad)
Daniel 9:26 (b) 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
Outside of the 70 weeks (70 ad)
Daniel 9:27 (b) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

The prince that shall come is not meaning Jesus the Messiah though

Here is where you could be right. Let's look at the Greek Septuagint. Notice the "he" destroys the city and the sanctuary WITH "the prince that is coming"

Daniel 9:26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary WITH the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint [the city] to desolations.

So ultimately, it's still God who destroys the city and the sanctuary:
Matthew 21:40-41
Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
“He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and he will rent the vineyard to other tenants, who will give him his share of the crop at harvest time.”

Using Rome as his war hammer:
Matthew 22:7 The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.

 

[DavidPT]

There is only one individual identified as a prince in the passage. It is Messiah.

Capitalization in the KJV is inconsistent and therefore unreliable:
Revelation 1
5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Capitalization is consistent in the YLT:
Daniel 9
25 And thou dost know, and dost consider wisely, from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem till Messiah the Leader [is] seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks: the broad place hath been built again, and the rampart, even in the distress of the times.
26 And after the sixty and two weeks, cut off is Messiah, and the city and the holy place are not his, the Leader who hath come doth destroy the people; and its end [is] with a flood, and till the end [is] war, determined [are] desolations.

I agree to a degree, as your examples showed. But in two verses next to each other though, they would capitalize prince in one of them, but not in the very next one, assuming they took that prince to be meaning this same prince as well?

Daniel 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.


They capitalized prince in this verse as well, apparently indicating they took this prince to be meaning Jesus, the same way they did in Daniel 9:25. If they thought the prince in verse 26 of Daniel 9 is this same prince, Jesus in this case, they would have at least bothered to capitalize it in verse 26 since they bothered to do that in verse 25.