The Word That Wasn't There - Revisiting Daniel
In our last study, we asked a single question about Daniel chapter nine, verse twenty-seven: where does the text say that the one who confirms the covenant is the Antichrist? The answer was that it doesn't. The identification is supplied.
But an alert reader has a comeback ready, and it's a good one. It's three chapters later. Daniel twelve, verse eleven — the daily sacrifice taken away, the abomination set up, twelve hundred and ninety days counted from that moment. That's the end. That's future. Jesus himself pointed forward to it. And if a sacrifice gets taken away at the end, sacrifices must be running at the end. Which means a temple. Which puts the whole structure back on its feet.
That's the strongest argument against everything we said last time. So we went and looked at it.
The Hebrew of that clause contains one word where the English gives us two. Hattamid — "the continual." Not the lamb. Not the altar. The continual. And the translators of 1611 were honest enough to show us exactly where they'd filled the gap, printing their addition in italics so no one would be misled.
Today we're going to ask what Daniel actually wrote, why he used different words in chapter nine than he used in chapters eight, eleven, and twelve, and whether the end of the age requires a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem at all.
Bring your Bible. Check the italics.
Article: The Word That Wasn't There
Episode Link:
