Being the nice pastoral type that I am I also am a little fogged by the biblical concept (mainly cause it’s barely taught these days in our humanistic modern church).

It reminds me of a statement from Paul the bondslave - “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema [excommunicated, accursed] Maranatha [an exclamation of the approaching divine judgment].” (1 Cor 16:22)

Interesting hey!

Ta 4 the reminder of the fig and the mount. I’m yet 2 understand more…the whole “bless and do not curse” principle fogs it up for me (Rom 12:14, Jas 3:9). Seems unnatural that we should curse anything, but i see the symbolism.

: ) dm

Thanks for your thoughts.

I understand that you and probably others struggle with that part. The armies of the Empire who desolate Jerusalem is a good clear answer to who the people of Messiah the Prince are that destroy the city and sanctuary. However, I don’t think that that is a full enough answer in itself. Coming back to the saints also being the people of the Prince who destroyed the city… - as we saw in Matt 21:18-22 - Jesus cursed the fig tree (national Israel) and then encouraged His servants to prayerfully remove the mountain before them- Olivet/kingdom of Israel/Sinai/touchable religion, in order for Mt Sion to be established. It was nothing short of a war between the whore and the bride. The whore fought with politics and swords and the bride fought in the Spirit with the Word, humility, prayer and the like.

Also remember that the world is cursed and if you remove all the redeemed from an area then that area is nothing but cursed. When all but a handfull of the righteous were evacuated from Jerusalem it was very un-blessed and prepared for judgement. Consider Soddom and Gommorah when the few righteous were evacuated the fire fell. So to with apostate Israel n Jerusalem- when the righteous were moved on the judgement was sealed and in God’s realm it was as good as destroyed then, afterwards, when the saints heeded Jesus’ prophecy (olivet discourse) and again left, the fire fell in a complete and tangable manner. Again according to Heb 2:8-9. with God it is done even before we see it carnally accomplished.

I don’t mind if most people don’t roll with this side of it. The armies of the Empire are a worthy biblical answer to the verse. I do however stoke in what I feel the Lord has shown me on this. (I am always open to correction and new info).

Peace bro

Just on Daniel 9:26 - “and the people of the prince that comes shall destroy the city”…I have no probs with the Roman troops being the ‘people of the prince’, since this, in my view, lines up with Christ’s parable of the nobles who rejected the marriage feast [Mt 22]…

Mat 22:7 But when the king [i.e. God] heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.

So God seems to call the invading troops of vengeance His Own armies. And the Hebrew word ‘people’ [of the prince] can mean “troops or attendants”.

To be honest, I struggle with the whole ‘Christians destroyed the city by leaving it’ angle. : )

For a different spin entirely, Young’s Literal Version words Dan 9:26 in a way that implies that the ‘people’ are the ones being killed, not doing the killing…(?)

It just occurred to me how important it is that we make known God’s first century judgment of the Jews and the biblical reasons behind it. I suspect that our failure to do so is why certain trendy Jewish doctrines, like sabbaths and feasts, still fester today. The louder we proclaim God’s historic rejection of outward shallow religion, the less people will fall into bondage of such child play.