I have been considering Daniel 9:26 and have tried to look at it from different perspectives when dealing with the destruction of the city and the sanctuary. When approaching this verse I came to the word sanctuary and pondered if indeed this actually speaks of the third temple to be built by the Hebrews as the followers of pre-tribulation attach to this verse. The one thing I realized is that this word denotes a sacred place or thing rarely abstract. Now I am no Bible scholar but, the word abstract is defined as something that is separate or distinct from something else. If by definition then the word sanctuary means a holy place, how can the third temple that supposedly is to be built by the Hebrews to be considered a holy place? I mean if the church has been raptured up to heaven and the Holy Spirit is removed from the Earth, how does one consider this building that is built by men to be a holy place? It is my understanding that the third temple has already been built. It was built on the day of Pentecost in Acts. Correct me if I am wrong, but God is the one who declares one to be holy, no one else has that right. Additionally, it is my understanding that if the temple is to be destroyed then it goes to reason that the entire city will be destroyed as well for the verse says that the city will be destroyed as well. I believe, but am not certain, that the majority of pre-tribulation subscribers promote the theory that God will not allow the city of Jerusalem to be destroyed prior to His second coming.