It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Anointed Prince of Daniel 9:26

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 03:29 AM
Dan 9:25-27

25 "Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.
26 After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.
27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

Daniel 9:25-27 is a response to the pleas of Daniel over the future of Judah and Israel. The angel Gabriel is sent by G-d to Daniel to deliver what some call Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks.

Some believe the prophecy foretells the coming of Christ and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 A.D. Others think it deals with Antiochus IV Epiphanes who instigated the Maccabean Revolt.

The timeline presented is ambiguous and confusing. It is supposed to begin with a decree to rebuild Jerusalem. Some believe the decree to rebuild took place in 538 BC coming from the Persian King Cyrus the Great. Cyrus at that time invited the Jews to return to Judah to rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple.

Personally, I'm not sure if his invitation equals an actual decree. Regardless, the Temple was completed by 516 BC. So the decree may of came between 538 and 516 BC.

But there is a problem with the timing. Gabriel mentions Seven Sevens and Sixty Two Sevens implying some kind of break between them. Why the break? Were also not exactly sure how long each Seven is. Some say Seven years, but is that Lunar, Solar, or something else? Some calculations are made to try throw in a timeline involving Jesus and/or the destruction of the Temple in 70AD by the Romans.

There is no guarantee with any timeline though due to the ambiguous and mysterious nature of the weeks.

There are two important figures in the text. One is the Anointed Prince who is cut off and the other is the Coming Prince. Some interpret the Anointed Prince as Jesus and while the Coming Prince is sometimes identified as Roman or even as the Antichrist.

The coming prince apparently confirms a covenant with many at the beginning of a Seven. Somehow this is interpreted to be Israel, yet the text only concerns many people. In the middle of the Seven he puts an end to sacrifice and offering. Some think this means the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. The truth is that sacrifices did not totally stop until over 60 years later. On the wing of the Temple the coming prince sets up an abomination. This abomination will sit on the wing until the prince is punished.

Now what sits up on the wing of the Temple? The ruins of the Second Temple remained until the time of Shimon Bar Kochba who lead the Jews on their final rebellion against Rome. During his time in power Shimon was declared Prince of Israel, and sacrifices continued on the Temple Mount. The Altar had survived the Roman destruction in 70 AD. Nothing would be set upon the Temple mount until after the final Jewish rebellion.

In light of these discrepancies what if the Anointed Prince that is cut off is someone no one has ever thought of before? Are there events and persons who correlate closely to the text? Was there a Roman leader who ultimately destroyed the Temple's altar and truly stopped all sacrifices? Did this Roman leader set up an abomination upon the Temple Mount? One man whose actions would set up conflict in even modern Israel to this very day?

I present you Emperor Hadrian, the Coming Prince.

Hadrian attempted to root out Judaism, which he saw as the cause of continuous rebellions. He prohibited the Torah law, the Hebrew calendar and executed Judaic scholars. The sacred scroll was ceremoniously burned on the Temple Mount. At the former Temple sanctuary, he installed two statues, one of Jupiter, another of himself. In an attempt to erase any memory of Judea, he wiped the name off the map and replaced it with Syria Palaestina, after the Philistines, the ancient enemies of the Jews; previously similar terms had been used to describe only the (smaller) former Philistine homeland to the west of Judaea. Since then, the land has been referred to as "Palestine," which supplanted earlier terms such as "Iudaea" (Judaea) and the antiquated "Canaan." Similarly, he re-established Jerusalem as the Roman pagan polis of Aelia Capitolina, and Jews were forbidden from entering it.

This is the man who gave us the name Palestine. This is the man who gave us the Jewish Diaspora. This is the man who is the origin of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

It is said He would establish a covenant with many. Hadrian in his time expanded the Roman Empire to its greatest extent and at the same time his rule was defined by peace, except for the Second Jewish Rebellion. He established what is known as the Panhellion that was centered in Athens and was based in Greek ideal and unity. This Panhellion League was aimed uniting the Greek city states, spreading Greek culture, and established the Panhellenic games(The Olympics) in Athens.

So what could be the abomination of desolation laid upon the Temple Mount by Hadrian?

After Jerusalem was laid waste and the Temple laid bare, Hadrian had the Temple of Venus built upon part of the Temple Mount, on a wing as the scripture says. That Temple was later chosen by Queen Helena, the mother of the Roman Emperor Constantine to be the foundation the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

That Church historically was the spark of one of the greatest conflicts in human history. A conflict that to this day has not been resolved.

On October 18, 1009, under the so-called "mad" Fatimid caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, orders for the complete destruction of the Church were carried out. It is believed that Al-Hakim "was aggrieved by the scale of the Easter pilgrimage to Jerusalem, which was caused specially by the annual miracle of the Holy Fire within the Sepulchre.

The destruction of this Church, resulted in one of the most important speeches ever given in human history. The proclamation by Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont, the call that launched the Crusades. Even though Hakim's son had the Church rebuilt, the damage was already done.

So far we have Hadrian having a hand in the Arab-Israeli conflict and the conflict between the West and Islam, but he also does things that fulfill prophecies involving the "Little Horn" of Daniel who changes the Law and the times. He outlawed the Torah and the Hebrew Calendar.

In addition to that he committed a lesser known crime, but one of the gravest crimes against the Jewish people. The hunting down and murder of the members of the Line of David. He believed that if the House of David was wiped out then no one could be called Anointed Prince or Messiah and thus no Jewish Rebellion.

If Hadrian was the Coming Prince, who was the Anointed Prince who was cut off?

Before Hadrian laid waste to Judea, the Jews had begun an open rebellion against Rome in 132 AD. A rebellion that in the beginning was victorious. Jewish armies had defeated Roman armies on the field of battle. They were lead by a seemingly miraculous leader.

The Jewish victory was so thorough, that for a couple of years the Jews had virtual autonomy in the Roman Empire. They minted their own coins, formed their own government, and over all of it was one man, proclaimed Nasi Israel, "Prince of Israel" this man was Shimon Bar Kochba.

The Romans pulled legions, half of their entire army, from all over their empire to Judea. The war was catastrophic on a scale the Romans had rarely faced. According to historians almost 600,000 Jews were killed in the fighting. The Roman casualties were so high that Hadrian when addressing the Roman Senate did not use the normal phrase, "If you and your children are in health, it is well; I and the army are in health." The entire 22nd Legion had been annihilated in battle.

On the 9th of Av, the same date as the destruction of the first and second Temples, the last Jewish stronghold, Betar fell. With it's destruction on 135 AD, Shimon Bar Kochba also fell. He was said to of been captured by the Romans where the last Prince of Israel was sentenced to death by Crucifixion.

When I first made this realization after I had analyzed the text and correlated historical events, I had a "Whoa" moment like Keanu Reaves in The Matrix.

The implications of it change everything. It would essentially create a whole new paradigm of thought on the subject.

I invite people to discuss, debate, and dispute. I'm in a bit of denial myself over it and would like to hear other people's thoughts and ideas. Try to keep an objective perspective on it and analyze the events, persons, and the text.

Note I am not trying to offend or upset anyone. I'm trying to initiate open discussion only.

posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 05:35 AM
I enjoyed the read .... You have caught my interest. I do think You have made a real good point in what You have read. I do believe though that things that have happened in the past will come again. Antiochus was a type of the anti christ also that did defile the temple. Antiochus sacrificed a pig upon the alter to zeus or apollo which caused the macabee revolt. So Your arguement makes good points but then again someone could say the same about Antiochus.

posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 10:07 AM
i have heard a list of 3 or more men-messiahas throughout history....

heres a little on the topic by a Rabbi:

i snip a part from it:

The most popular explanation of the origin of this holiday concerns two men considered great in Jewish history. Both these men lived in Yisrael under extreme Roman oppression just prior to the complete destruction of the Temple in 135 A.D. One, Rabbi Akiva was a second century Jewish scholar and the other was Shimon Bar Kosiva, a self-styled leader of a small guerrilla group that harassed the Roman occupying troops.

Rabbi Akiva was thoroughly impressed with Bar Kosiva. Legend has it he was strong enough to uproot a tree with his bare hands while riding on a horse. Bar Kosiva also won impressive victories over the Romans. Because of his prowess and victories Rabbi Akiva changed Bar Kosiva's name, which means, son of the deceiver, to Bar Kochba, which means, son of the shinning star.

Rabbi Akiva made this change because he truly believed that Bar Kosiva was the long awaited Mashiach (Messiah) of Yisrael. Rabbi Akiva took Bar Kosiva's new name from this Messianic Scripture:

Bamidbar (Numbers) [24:17] I shall see Him, but not now: I shall behold Him, but not near: there shall come a Star out of Yaacov (Jacob), and a Scepter shall rise out of Yisrael, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.

The Roman army eventually defeated Bar Kosiva and along with him they killed Rabbi Akiva and all His disciples. One thousand devout Jews died defending a false messiah. Needless to say and in view of the origins of this holiday it would be inappropriate for Messianic believers to celebrate it.


if you go to the link, he continues with identifying other (not up to the task) messiahas over the ages; Shabbatai Ziv in 17th century, Lubavithcher Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneersohn most recently...

but! of major import is the following... stated above,
Rabbi Akiva, impressed with bar Kosiva, had to change his name, because bar kosiva meant = son of the deceiver

the Rabbi Akiva changed the admired & charismatic leaders name to Bar Kochba = son of the shining star
... so as to fufill scriptual prophecy.

ergo, i do not agree that Daniel was refering to that personnification
as 'the' person, known as the prophetic 'prince'...


posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 05:30 PM
reply to post by St Udio

The parallels between the historical events and figures are too much for me to ignore it based on Shimon's name. Historically his last name was written in many forms, Koziva, Kozevah, Koseva. Most likely this name comes from either the place where he was born or his father's name. Try googling the surname Koseva, its allover the place.

Israel's former name Jacob has the meaning to supplant. Supplant is as negative if not more so than deceit or disappointment. To supplant involves deceit.

The thing that interests me more than the name is his lineage. Messianic lineage involves the Davidic line. Shimon was said to of have come from the line of David, but I have yet to find a family tree or something showing his lineage.

I doubt that the Sanhedrin and Rabbi Akiva would have conferred the title of Prince upon him had he not been of the Davidic line though. He had the entire Sanhedrin behind him.

new topics

top topics

log in