Daniel#9-27:[Better skip for now] Click to expand.

🛑First of all: THERE IS GUARANTEED NOTHING THAT AGAINST IT COULD SPEAK!

"The abomination of desolation" was set up at least once, actually twice (the second time is questionable for some).

I choose this example because I consider the understanding of it to be the most questionable.

If so, both times Israel was taken over by military force, and an abomination of desolation was set up in the temple of God.

NEVER, BUT, through an inside job, i.e., by someone who came to power in Israel and then revealed that he was actually an enemy, by setting up "an abomination of desolation," or shortly before. SO THIS WOULD ACTUALLY BE A BREAK WITH COMMON PRACTICE IN THE BIBLE, WHICH MUCH IS REPEATED.

WHO NOW SAYS THERE'S NO OTHER WAY, BECAUSE OF DANIEL #9-27: YES IT IS! BUT GUARANTEED!

1. MANY TRANSLATE "HE will cause drink and offering to cease, "AND" upon the "WING" HE will set up the "ABHORROR" of desolation."
BUT THAT IS A BIG INTERPRETATION OF THE HEBREW, WHICH ALSO PROVIDES ANOTHER SIMPLE POSSIBILITY, BUT THE VERSE IS CONTROVERSIAL ANYWAY! THEREFORE THE VERSE IS TRANSLATED, AMONG OTHERS. ALSO TRANSLATED DIFFERENTLY (TAKE A LOOK AT THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS)!
The first part is almost clear, except for 2 possibilities that are hardly worth discussing, as there are better ones:



1.) 1396 [e] ⬜ וְהִגְבִּ֥יר ⬜ wə-hiḡ-bîr ⬜ And he shall confirm ⬜ Conj-w | V-Hifil-ConjPerf-3ms
ONE CAN ALSO TRANSLATE: "HE WILL MAKE STRENGTH" INSTEAD OF "And he shall confirm" (see comments on the verse ON BIBLEHUB.COM)

2.) 1285 [e] 🛑H1285 DESCRIBES, CONTRARY TO Ellicott's COMMENTARY, NOT ONLY THE COVENANT BETWEEN GOD AND HUMAN BEINGS, BUT ALSO THE COVENANT BETWEEN HUMAN BEINGS (cf. Josh#9-6)!

3.) 7227 [e] ⬜ לָרַבִּ֖ים ⬜ lā-rab-bîm ⬜ with many ⬜ Prep-l, Art | Adj-mp
YOU CAN ALSO TRANSLATE: "FOR THE MANY" INSTEAD OF "with many" (see also Daniel #11-33 where the prep-l is omitted in the translation).
👉The prep-l can mean related to: a) "with" (association or complicity) or b) "for" (indication of beneficiary or purpose) c) "to" (indication of direction or destination) or d) "from" (indication of possession (partially) like "FROM DAVID" in songs)



But the 2nd part is something special: 🛑THE ONLY TIME THAT A PLURAL OF ABOMINATIONS IS MENTIONED IN THE OT & NT - LIKE EVERYTHING, OF COURSE I LOOKED THROUGH IT EXPLICITLY!!!



1.) 5921 [e] ⬜ וְעַ֨ל ⬜ wə-‘al ⬜ and on ⬜ Conj-w | Prep
HERE IS THE "וְ" Vav, WHICH MEANS "and" AND YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE MORPHOLOGY "Conj-w".
THIS IS ALWAYS "POSSIBLE" AN INDETERMINATED TIME INDICATION OF UP TO THOUSANDS OF YEARS, AS CAN BE SEEN IN THE GAZA PROPHECY, OR IN DANIEL#11 (SINCE THIS OCCURRED MORE OFTEN) (SEE ROGER LIEBI DANIEL#11 VIDEO IN THE BROCHURE FOR EVIDENCE). HERE THERE WOULD BE POSSIBLE. WEEKS TO MONTHS.

2.) 8251 [e] ⬜ שִׁקּוּצִים֙ ⬜ šiq-qū-ṣîm ⬜ of abominations ⬜ N-mp
THIS IS IN THE PLURAL HERE, SO "ABHORRENCE! OF DESOLATION" WHICH YOU CAN SEE IN THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE "mp". MP MEANS: Masculine Plural
WHY DOES EVERYONE TRANSLATE "HE WILL SET UP THE(SINGULAR) ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION"? AS ALREADY SAID, A NOT TOO UNCOMMON GREAT INTERPRETATION OF THE HEBREW BY THE TRANSLATOR, WHICH WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE ABSOLUTELY WRONG (if one doesn't consider the deletion of information to be wrong), BUT IS THEREFORE GUARANTEED NOT CORRECT!

LITTERALLY:
5921 [e] AND OVER
3671 [e] THE WING (OR even garment, the word means both)
8251 [e] ABOMINATION (THE GERMAN PLURAL OF "ABRUEL" IS ACTUALLY "ABRUEL" ALSO, FOR CLARIFICATION I SAY "GREULE")
8074 [e] SHALL BE ONE WHO DEVASTATES (HERE WE HAVE THE POSSIBLE REFERENCE TO AN "ABRUCTION") THAT STANDS OUT FROM THE ADDITIONAL "ABRUCES" THAT WILL ALSO BE. THAT MEANS THAT IF YOU DON'T TRANSLATE THAT, SOME MAY THINK THEY RECOGNIZE THE "STANDING ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION" TOO EARLY AND ACT ACCORDINGLY! FATAL, I THINK.)

NOW THE LEIHE COULD SAY:
3.)8074 [e] ⬜ מְשֹׁמֵ֔ם ⬜ mə-šō-mêm ⬜ shall be one who makes desolate ⬜ V-Piel-Prtcpl-ms
THAT'S WRITTEN HERE IN THE MASCULINE SINGULAR, WHICH YOU CAN RECOGNIZE IN MORPHOLOGY BY THE "ms" SEES.

QUESTION: IS IT NOT CLEAR, THEREFORE, THAT "HE" ERECTED THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION, THE "HE" WHO EVEN CAUSED THE DRINK AND THE MEAL OFFERING TO STOP?
ANSWER: NO, NOT THAT! IT IS POSSIBLE, BUT NOT BECAUSE OF THAT & THAT WOULD JUST BE A POSSIBILITY!

CONTEXT CLARIFICATION: [CHECKED WITH THE COPILOT AI, & THE EXPLANATIONS EXTRACTED]
A) Grammatical Marking Through Additional Endings: A central feature of Hebrew grammar is how grammatical genders are morphologically marked. Frequently, the feminine form is marked by additional endings—for example, by adding "ת" (Tav) or occasionally "ה" (He). The masculine singular ALWAYS appears as the base form. This means that instead of an additional ending, as is used to indicate the feminine (e.g., "ת" or "ה"), the masculine is indicated by its vocalization and the presence of a final consonant. This form is called a "zero ending" because no explicit letter is added to mark the masculine gender.

However, this does not mean that there are no masculine endings at all. In other morphological areas, particularly in plural formation, specific endings occur that are clearly masculine. For example, the ending ים is often used for masculine nouns in the plural to indicate the masculine plural. In verb and adjective inflection, masculine forms can also be marked by certain endings or vowel changes, whereby these changes often emphasize the contrast with the feminine form.

In short:
Masculine singular: ALWAYS unmarked (zero ending) – the masculinity is implied by the form and vocalization.

Masculine plural: Marked by endings, such as "ים" IN #9-27 AT THE WORD BEFORE, ABOMINATION, שִׁקּוּצִים֙ šiq-qū-ṣîm of abominations. 👉This is NOT the case here!
The form מְשׁוֹמֵם (SHOULD BE SOMEONE WHO DEVASTATES) ends – through its vocalization and the final consonant – as is typical for the masculine singular form. Thus, no feminine ending appears, which is why it is clearly recognizable as masculine.

B) Standard usage: As already mentioned, in the biblical context, no explicit reference is made to grammatical gender, or if the adjective is in conjunction with a masculine noun, the standard form, which is usually masculine, is used. 👉This is (as already said in [A)] ) the case here!

RESULT=> Therefore, "3.)8074 [e] מְשֹׁמֵ֔ם mə-šō-mêm" is in the masculine form in this context, which reflects the usual rules of Hebrew adjective inflection, AS EXPLAINED IN B).

1.)Grammatical function of the adjective: In Hebrew, adjectives are often used without an additional, explicit personal pronoun[AS EXPLAINED IN B], because the grammatical form (here masculine singular)[AS EXPLAINED IN B)] is sufficient to mark the noun to be modified. In this verse, "מְשׁוֹמֵם mə-šō-mêm" appears in the masculine singular form, which suggests that it is referring to a specific term that should be understood as singular—namely, a single "abomination of desolation." BUT IT SAYS "ABRUME" IN THE PLURAL? (YES, THAT'S IMMEDIATELY CLEAR)

2.) Translation tradition and interpretation question: Sometimes translators in German add an "er" to make the sentence seem more fluid or active. However, this leads to a misunderstanding, as it could sound as if it is a person who is carrying out the deed. The original Hebrew grammar does not require this: Here, an object or entity is described, not necessarily an acting subject.

3.) Meaning and Context: The adjective "מְשֹׁמֵ֔ם mə-šō-mêm" serves to emphasize the "abomination of desolation" as a single, specific phenomenon. It does NOT automatically indicate that an agent (such as "he") is actively "erecting" this abomination. Therefore, inserting an additional personal pronoun could distort the meaning.

Detailed Explanation:

1.) Grammar vs. Symbolism: Grammatically, "מְשֹׁמֵ֔ם mə-šō-mêm" corresponds to the masculine singular form, which initially suggests a single, specific "abomination of desolation." At the same time, "שִׁקּוּצִים֙ šiq-qū-ṣîm" is in the plural, which basically indicates several instances or elements.

2.]Special cases in biblical expression: It is not unusual in biblical Hebrew for an adjective – although it should normally agree with the noun in number and gender – to be used in exceptional cases as a fixed designation or as a typological element. In such cases, a single, singular adjective can symbolize a particularly prominent or characteristic manifestation within a group.

3.]Concrete interpretation: In your case, one could read that "שִׁקּוּצִים֙ šiq-qū-ṣîm" denotes several abominations (or various atrocious elements/events), while "מְשֹׁמֵ֔ם mə-šō-mêm" – in its singular form – highlights a specific form of abomination or a particularly striking abomination among them. This means that the text aims to present this one type as particularly devastating, or characteristic, even if there are several gruesome manifestations.

In summary: Yes, it is possible that the plural "שִׁקּוּצִים֙ šiq-qū-ṣîm" refers to multiple gruesome elements, while "מְשֹׁמֵ֔ם mə-šō-mêm" as a singular expression designates a specific, particularly prominent abomination of desolation. This reading corresponds to a typological or symbolic interpretation, which in some biblical passages is expressed precisely through such deviations from the usual congruence.

👉SO DANIEL#9-27 CAN ALSO MEAN THIS:
AND HE WILL MAKE/STRENGTHEN A MIGHTY COVENANT WITH MANY (OR FOR MANY) FOR ONE WEEK, AND IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WEEK HE WILL CAUSE DRINK AND MEAT OFFERING TO CANCEL. AND OVER THE WING WILL BE ABOMINATIONS, ONE OF WHICH WILL DEVASTATE. AND UNTIL THE COMPLETE END, WHAT IS DECIDED WILL BE POURED OUT ON THE ONE WHO MAKES DESOLATION.


🛑THAT'S WHY I SAID THAT IT WOULDN'T BE COMPLETELY MISTRANSLATED, BUT GUARANTEED NOT CORRECTLY EITHER!
SO YOU CAN INTERPRET A "HE" INTO IT, THAT THE 2ND PRINCE FROM DANIEL #9-25 & 27, THIS PRESENT "HE", SET UP THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION, BUT THAT IS BY NO MEANS A MUST, COMPLETELY THE OPPOSITE! THIS "HE" COULD SIMPLY BE THE PRIEST-LORD FROM EZEKIEL, WHO WILL EXIST, AND HE ENDS THE DRINK AND THE MEAL OFFERING (as it is guaranteed to say) BECAUSE OF THE WAR, BECAUSE THE ENEMY IS AT THE DOOR (logically)! AND FROM THEN BEGINS A SEQUENCE OF WHAT HAPPENS AFTERWARDS, STARTING WITH THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION. BUT WEEKS OR MONTHS CAN PASS UNTIL THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION COMES TO HAPPEN, MARKED BY THE "AND" ABOVE THE wing, SINCE THE "AND" CAN MEAN AN INDEFINITE PERIOD OF TIME IN PROPHECY.

🕎This raises the question, is the Antichrist also the "null and void shepherd" at the same time, or are they two different people? Which would also explain who "the evil one" is, who must be removed from "the middle" before "the Antichrist" reveals himself (or before he publicly appears as the ANTICHRIST with real MAGIC, as explained, among other things, in Exodus).
The "identity" of the biblical "evil in the middle" is unknown (not to me, but to others in every known theory) (even other teachers do not draw the conclusion here that the "null and void shepherd" is possibly only the "null and void shepherd" (i.e., not the Antichrist), & that this "null and void shepherd" is thus also referred to as the "EVIL IN THE MIDDLE" (at least, I have never heard that anywhere else).



🌈SHORT ADMONITION:
✝JESUS WAS CRUCIFIED BECAUSE THE JEWS HAD A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING OF THE OT, NOT BECAUSE HE DID NOT SHOW THEM EVERYTHING THAT WAS WRITTEN ABOUT HIM!
THUS THEY PLACED THEMSELVES ABOVE GOD. BUT GOD SAW IT OKAY THAT THEY HAD A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING. SINCE THERE ARE LAWS THAT ARE GREATER THAN HUMAN KNOWLEDGE, NOTHING NEW.
GOD REVEALS EVERYTHING AS HE WILLS.
WHO HAS LEARNED THIS FROM THE CRUCIFIXION AND SAYS THERE ARE SEVERAL POSSIBILITIES FOR HOW IT CAN HAPPEN, AND DOESN'T HAVE A FALSE, HARD FOREHEAD FOR HIS VIEW, LIKE THE JEWS BACK THEN?
& WHO IGNORES THIS AND DOESN'T TEACH THIS IMPORTANT FACT OF THE CRUCIFIXION, INCLUDING ITS TEACHING ABOUT ONE OF THE GREATEST Wrong decisions that resulted in one of the greatest punishments in the Bible?🕊

🕎Building the temple... which is stated as follows:
Zechariah 6:12...13:
"...Thus says the Lord of hosts: Behold, there is a man whose name is the Branch; and under him shall it sprout, and he shall build the temple of the Lord. And he shall build the temple of the Lord, and he shall be glorious; and he shall sit and rule upon his throne. And there shall be a priest at his right hand, and there shall be peace between them both. OR He shall be king and priest, and the council of one accord shall be between them both."

🕎Many Christians relate these verses👆(Zechariah 6:12...13) to Jesus (ZECHARIAH IS FULL OF SYMBOLISM & SIGNS FOR THE END TIMES)! CHRISTIANS NATURALLY RELATE THIS TO THE SPIRITUAL TEMPLE, BUT ANOTHER ONE MUST ALSO BE BUILT IN STONE.
One could also say that this was only for the 2nd Temple building (whether that is ignorant and not wise is another question), but one cannot rule it out as a possibility for the 3rd Temple building, and Zechariah is very strongly linked to the end times. EITHER WAY (wise or not), I FIND THAT AN EXTREME THOUGHT THAT THE ANTICHRIST IS BUILDING GOD'S TEMPLE, EVEN IF ONE LOGICALLY DOES NOT INCLUDE THESE VERSES IN THE THOUGHT THAT THE ANTICHRIST IS BUILDING THE TEMPLE.

SO AGAIN: Yes, he will build the temple of the Lord [MENTALLY REFERRING TO THE THIRD TEMPLE IN THE END TIMES (which no one does because it doesn't fit the most commonly taught possibility) - THROUGH THE ANTICHRIST, MUCH FROM ZECHARIAH IS FOR THESE END TIMES!] and will be glorious, and will sit and rule on his throne.
IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THE ANTICHRIST IS BUILDING THE TEMPLE, THAT IS NOT A SIGN. ALTHOUGH THERE ARE POSSIBLE SIGNS IN ZECHARIAH REGARDING THE 3RD TEMPLE BUILDING, IN THE ADDITIONAL POSSIBILITY DESCRIBED, WHICH HAS NO BIBLICAL COUNTERARGUMENT, THAT FITS VERSE VERSE VERSE VERSE VERSE VERSE VERSE. SO FAR IT IS AS FOLLOWS: "I BELIEVE (or rather, I don't know any better) THAT THE ANTICHRIST IS BUILDING THE TEMPLE. THEN THESE VERSES DO NOT FIT AS SIGNS, SO I'LL IGNORE THEM. ALL OTHERS, THE VERY MANY IN ZECHARIAH, I ACCEPT AS SIGNS."

(more on this in BT6 under [➡Only Here] Suffice it to say, there are at least 2 other possibilities that are Biblically IMPOSSIBLE to rule out!)