The reason I made reference to Dan. 9:26 is because it parallels Rev. 13:7. I will place them side by side for you to see:

• Dan. 9:26
  And after the sixty-two weeks, Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
  And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.
   
• Rev. 13:5-7
  And HE was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. It was granted to him to make war with the saints AND to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.

It's the same character and period of "time, times and the dividing of times" (OR 1,260 days, OR 42 months); then the utter overthrow of Jerusalem.

///

Daniel 9 is addressing the 490 years -- the seventy sevens of prophetic time that spanned time from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity, until Messiah the Prince, who would die, (be cut off) not for Himself but to provide salvation for the human race.

Because Israel (as a nation) rejected the Messiah the Prince and declared they "have no king but Caesar, they chose ANOTHER PRINCE, who came and destroyed their city in 70 A.D.

REVELATION
on the other hand, was written AFTER the 490 years were already fulfilled. It was written AFTER Rome had already destroyed Jerusalem and the temple there in 70 A.D..

Revelation joins with Daniel's much longer prophecies (1260 and 2300 day/years) that reach beyond His (John's) time and show the future of the church from John's day forward to the end.

John and the other apostles define the "saints", not as the Jews, but as the followers of Christ. This definitely includes the Gentiles and is based on a connection with Christ, not a physical descent from Abraham, as we see Paul calling the Gentile believers "saints" in his letters.

I do not at this time recognize the suggested parallel between Dan. 9 and Rev. 13, for the following reasons:

1. Daniel is addressing the time period between him and the coming and crucifixion of Christ, while Revelation addresses some future time prior to the end.

2. There is no correlation in time periods.

3. The "saints" are not the Jews, as previously mentioned.

So I must reject the relationship between the passages, and the related assertion that the "land" or "sand" refers to Jerusalem.

************

This is going to be a VERY interesting discussion.


************

///
 

I've heard that said before without any evidence. Perhaps you might like to share your reason why you see the book as post-70AD?

///

Really?
I'm not sure why.
It will likely deteriorate into mis-quotes and half-truths and shifting positions and finally fade away.

1. "... the crucifixion of Christ"; yes, and further to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Dan. 9:26-27
    
2. OK
    
3. You are imposing the Catholic idea of "saints" on the Bible: people who walk around in long white robes, having a halo on their heads, who did at least two miracles to make themselves worthy of petitions by mere mortals on this side; exceptionally holy people, even nice people with hardly a fault.
   
   Saints, according to the Bible are simply those who know God, by association at least:
    
   • Deut. 33:3, "Yes, He loves the people; All His saints are in Your hand; They sit down at Your feet; Everyone receives Your words."
      
   • John 10:34-35, "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, You are 'gods'? If He called them 'gods', to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken) ..."

///
 

1. Let me rephrase that: The word "saints" when used in Revelation, never refers to the Jews or Jewish people.
2. "You are imposing the Catholic idea of "saints" on the Bible: etc., etc." I DID NOT have this idea in mind when understanding the word "saints." If you continue to tell me what I'm thinking this will be a very SHORT discussion.

Then we end it now; for a thin skin is not for warriors: Eph. 6:10-18. Thank you for your time.

///

As you wish. Such arrogance rarely leads to meaningful discussion.