I think these two have to be looked at as one thought...
verse 27 speaking of the prince that shall come (which I believe was Titus son of Vespasian)
Daniel 9:26-27
King James Version (KJV)
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
I believe "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off" is a direct reference to Isaiah 53:8, which I think Daniel must have been familiar with....
All else picks up with this other prince...agree or not...
brother Paul
Have you ever studied WHO the "people of the prince" is? Arabs. I want to bring to you attention the importance of the second part: “…and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary…” Because Titus was the one in charge when the temple was destroyed, many equate this with him being the “prince” and thereby the “people” being Romans. The truth of the matter is the “prince” is the antichrist, not Titus. Therefore, where will the antichrist come from? First, Josephus states that Titus had no desire of destroying neither the city nor the temple. Hearing that the temple was on fire, he ran to the site with his commanders running behind him, and after them legions of Roman soldiers. It almost reads comical! Titus gesturing and yelling for the men to put out the flames, the soldiers completely ignored him and “neither any persuasions nor any threatenings could restrain their violence, but each one's own passion” Roman soldiers were renowned for their stiff obedience, yet these were blatantly disobedience. Why?
Tacitus states that Titus went to Judea and found three legions there, left by Vespasian. “To these he added the 12th from Syria, and some men belonging to the 18th and 3rd, whom he had withdrawn from Alexandria. This force was accompanied by … a strong contingent of Arabs, who hated the Jews...”
As you can see, the real soldiers, who were uncontrollable, even to the point of beatings, were Arabs. Every word in the Scriptures is important. In these verses, we see the Holy Spirit use the word “prince” and the historian Tacitus uses the word “Prince”. They do not mean the same person and I believe that is why today, so many pastors and authors use Rome as the seat of power for the antichrist. I remember when the European Union grew to ten nations and everyone started with “this is it, Jesus is coming!” The word “prince” used by the Holy Spirit was referring to the antichrist; Tacitus used it to refer to Titus. Scripture says that “he”, the “prince”, will confirm a covenant for one week. From this, we understand that the antichrist will sign a treaty with Israel for seven years.
This is important because in order to understand the prophecies about the antichrist and the end times, you must know from where the antichrist comes from. Scriptures speak of “the Assyrian”:
Micah 5:5-6 “And this man shall be the peace, when the Assyrian shall come into our land: and when he shall tread in our palaces, then shall we raise against him seven shepherds, and eight principal men. And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.”
Isaiah 10:24-25 “Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD of hosts, O my people that dwellest in Zion, be not afraid of the Assyrian: he shall smite thee with a rod, and shall lift up his staff against thee, after the manner of Egypt. For yet a very little while, and the indignation shall cease, and mine anger in their destruction.”
Verse 27 is about the Antichrist and not Titus. Titus wanted the temple for himself and despite his desire his disobedient soldiers set it on fire. Also Titus didn't sign any covenant with the Jews. I believe this 70th week is yet future. As even Jesus quoted this verse (Mat 24:15; Mar 13:14) about the abomination of desolation, which Titus did not do, and because Jesus said it was yet future it wasn't Antiochus IV Epiphanes since that occurred over 150 years before Christ's birth.
Just my thoughts.