According to popular eschatology, this passage of Bible Prophecy describes the "Seven Year Tribulation Period", which corresponds to Daniel's Seventieth Week, and which begins with some agreement (covenant), whereby confirmation of the Abrhamic Covenant reestablishes the system of Levitical Temple worship in Israel, (which may or may not include the restoration of the Second Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, depending on what theologian you ask).
During the Middle of the week, (The Beginning of the Second Three and a Half Years of the Tribulation Period, or Great Tribulation), the Antichrist breaks the agreement with Israel and then..(well apparantly nobody is really clear on exactly what happens after that). The whole theory becomes a little bit "murky" after that.
Do I agree with this "popular" interpretation of Daniel 9:27 ?.. No I don't. I think it's patently absurd. First, the idea of a restoration of Levitical Temple Worship makes absolutely no sense from the standpoint of Christian Theology. It's even more rediculous to suggest any Middle East Peace Agreement would have as a precondition the restoration or rebuilding of the ancient Second Temple, (that would naturally necessitate the removal, or at least the desecration of the Dome of the Rock-Al asqa Mosque, the Third Holiest site in all of Islam). That isn't the basis for a Middle East Peace Agreement, It's a recipe for a Declaration of War against Israel.
Second, there's no reason to assume Daniel 9:27 can ONLY refer to the "Abrahamic Covenant", as though no OTHER covenant agreement exists in the Biblical record. Why couldn't Daniel 9:27 be a reference to the "Noahic Covenant" instead, (Genesis 9:9-17) "And God set a rainbow in the cloud as a token of His covenant" ?!
Proponents of the Abrahamic Covenant theory point out the "sacrifice and oblation" are cut off by the Antichrist in the Midst of Daniel's Seventieth Week (which corresponds to the beginning of thr Great Tribulation), and the use of the terminology "sacrifice and oblation" are concrete evidence their interpretation is absolutely correct and irrefutable.
Hold on a second there, not so fast. The terms "sacrifice and oblation" are NOT EXCLUSIVE TO JUDAISM !. In Christian doctrine the term "sacrifice" refers to "living according to God's Will" as a believer in Christ", (Romans 12:1-2). To make a living "sacrifice" is to forsake all else in order to do the Will of God, just as Jesus Christ did (Matthew 10:37-39, 19:29).
The "oblation" is a jewish tradition and represents a twice daily (morning and evening) prayer thanking the Creator for creating the earth and all the creations therein. However this tradition was adopted by Early Christians as well, and is still reverently observed by some Christians even today.
So the "sacrifice and oblation" which is cut off in the midst of the Tribulation Period could well be a reference to the destruction of Christianity, which if I remember my eschatology correctly, is actually mentioned in the Revelation (Revelation 6:11, 7:14) and the Gospel of Christ, (Matthew 24:49).
Poof ! There goes the irrefutable concrete proof Daniel 9:27 can ONLY refer to the "Abrahamic Covenant". At best that theory is totally arbitrary, and at worst it violates Christian theology which maintains the ritualistic temple "sacrifice" of animals as an offering to God is no longer valid, the sacrifice of Christ now being sufficient to cover all sin.
"And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off anymore by the waters of a flood; neither shall there anymore be a flood to destroy the earth" (Genesis 9:11, KJV).
In December 2015 the United Nations met in Paris France to "confirm" the "Noahic Covenant" by reaching an international agreement that addresses the Threat of Climate Change and the threat of rising sea levels, caused by increased greenhouse gas e missions resulting from heavy industry. Thus, "Saving The Earth" from catastrophic environmental damage for future generations. The Climate Change Agreement was signed and became international law on Dec.12, 2015.
Actually, there are Scriptural hints elsewhere in the Bible which seem to indicate the "Noahic Covenant" is related to End Time events. The story of the flood and Noah are specifically referenced in the Olivet Discourse, which deals with the events of the Tribulation Period, (Matthew 24:37).
Also, in the story of Noah and the ark, it says from the time God instructed Noah to enter the ark until the rain came was SEVEN DAYS, (Genesis 7:3-4). Why was there a seven day delay before the flood began ?.. Is this because it took seven days to complete the loading of the Ark ? The story doesn't say why. Was this some cryptic, hidden allusion to Daniel's Seventieth Week, (The Seven Year Tribulation Period) ?!..
Where would I put my money on the correct interpretation of Daniel 9:27 ? On some arbitrary and convoluted MYTH about the "Abrahamic Covenant" ?.. Or instead, on an actual recent historic event that probably represents the fulfillment of Daniel's Prophecy !.. Uuum. I'll go with what's behind door number two.
Of course this "Noahic" interpretation as it relates to Daniel 9:27 has a very serious and profound implication for End Time Bible Prophecy. If correct, this means the Tribulation Period began on December 12, 2015.
During the Middle of the week, (The Beginning of the Second Three and a Half Years of the Tribulation Period, or Great Tribulation), the Antichrist breaks the agreement with Israel and then..(well apparantly nobody is really clear on exactly what happens after that). The whole theory becomes a little bit "murky" after that.
Do I agree with this "popular" interpretation of Daniel 9:27 ?.. No I don't. I think it's patently absurd. First, the idea of a restoration of Levitical Temple Worship makes absolutely no sense from the standpoint of Christian Theology. It's even more rediculous to suggest any Middle East Peace Agreement would have as a precondition the restoration or rebuilding of the ancient Second Temple, (that would naturally necessitate the removal, or at least the desecration of the Dome of the Rock-Al asqa Mosque, the Third Holiest site in all of Islam). That isn't the basis for a Middle East Peace Agreement, It's a recipe for a Declaration of War against Israel.
Second, there's no reason to assume Daniel 9:27 can ONLY refer to the "Abrahamic Covenant", as though no OTHER covenant agreement exists in the Biblical record. Why couldn't Daniel 9:27 be a reference to the "Noahic Covenant" instead, (Genesis 9:9-17) "And God set a rainbow in the cloud as a token of His covenant" ?!
Proponents of the Abrahamic Covenant theory point out the "sacrifice and oblation" are cut off by the Antichrist in the Midst of Daniel's Seventieth Week (which corresponds to the beginning of thr Great Tribulation), and the use of the terminology "sacrifice and oblation" are concrete evidence their interpretation is absolutely correct and irrefutable.
Hold on a second there, not so fast. The terms "sacrifice and oblation" are NOT EXCLUSIVE TO JUDAISM !. In Christian doctrine the term "sacrifice" refers to "living according to God's Will" as a believer in Christ", (Romans 12:1-2). To make a living "sacrifice" is to forsake all else in order to do the Will of God, just as Jesus Christ did (Matthew 10:37-39, 19:29).
The "oblation" is a jewish tradition and represents a twice daily (morning and evening) prayer thanking the Creator for creating the earth and all the creations therein. However this tradition was adopted by Early Christians as well, and is still reverently observed by some Christians even today.
So the "sacrifice and oblation" which is cut off in the midst of the Tribulation Period could well be a reference to the destruction of Christianity, which if I remember my eschatology correctly, is actually mentioned in the Revelation (Revelation 6:11, 7:14) and the Gospel of Christ, (Matthew 24:49).
Poof ! There goes the irrefutable concrete proof Daniel 9:27 can ONLY refer to the "Abrahamic Covenant". At best that theory is totally arbitrary, and at worst it violates Christian theology which maintains the ritualistic temple "sacrifice" of animals as an offering to God is no longer valid, the sacrifice of Christ now being sufficient to cover all sin.
"And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off anymore by the waters of a flood; neither shall there anymore be a flood to destroy the earth" (Genesis 9:11, KJV).
In December 2015 the United Nations met in Paris France to "confirm" the "Noahic Covenant" by reaching an international agreement that addresses the Threat of Climate Change and the threat of rising sea levels, caused by increased greenhouse gas e missions resulting from heavy industry. Thus, "Saving The Earth" from catastrophic environmental damage for future generations. The Climate Change Agreement was signed and became international law on Dec.12, 2015.
Actually, there are Scriptural hints elsewhere in the Bible which seem to indicate the "Noahic Covenant" is related to End Time events. The story of the flood and Noah are specifically referenced in the Olivet Discourse, which deals with the events of the Tribulation Period, (Matthew 24:37).
Also, in the story of Noah and the ark, it says from the time God instructed Noah to enter the ark until the rain came was SEVEN DAYS, (Genesis 7:3-4). Why was there a seven day delay before the flood began ?.. Is this because it took seven days to complete the loading of the Ark ? The story doesn't say why. Was this some cryptic, hidden allusion to Daniel's Seventieth Week, (The Seven Year Tribulation Period) ?!..
Where would I put my money on the correct interpretation of Daniel 9:27 ? On some arbitrary and convoluted MYTH about the "Abrahamic Covenant" ?.. Or instead, on an actual recent historic event that probably represents the fulfillment of Daniel's Prophecy !.. Uuum. I'll go with what's behind door number two.
Of course this "Noahic" interpretation as it relates to Daniel 9:27 has a very serious and profound implication for End Time Bible Prophecy. If correct, this means the Tribulation Period began on December 12, 2015.
Last edited: