This passage has not been adequately recognized by previous commentators. Here a qeitz occurred during the time of Antiochus III the Great (ca. B.C.E. 242-197), father of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who was the villain of the Kha•nukh•âh′ story. A qeitz occurred in this season, and those with the proper eyes (see â•dâm′ ) must discern what qeitz this was. In B.C.E. 198, Antiochus III took control of the entire land of Israel.
Yet another qeitz is prophesied future to that. Thus, there are (at least) two instances of qeitz. One instance has already occurred and we must discern its significance.
Dân•i•eil′ 11.16 identifies Antiochus III as "having the ëìä in his hand." Without equivocation, this marks the beginning of the close-out of that era.
The Beit ha-Mi•qәdâsh′ ha-Shein•i′ (cf. note 2) was abominated by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Then the Ma•kab•im′ re-sanctified and re-dedicated it. Thereafter, Herod extensively refurbished it and, at the close of this era, the Roman Hellenists finally destroyed it. All of this occurred without fulfilling the prophesy of Khaj•ai′ 2.7 that "I will fill this House with kâ•vod′ ."
The term kâ•vod′ is a metonym of the Shәkhin•âh′ , present in the Mi•shәkân′ and in the Beit ha-Mi•qәdâsh′ ha-Rish•on′ . The Shәkhin•âh′ never returned to this Beit ha-Mi•qәdâsh′ !!!
Aside from the Shәkhin•âh′ , there is only one possible entity who, as agent and representative of é--ä, could represent the kâ•vod′ —"glory"—of é--ä in the Beit ha-Mi•qәdâsh′ ha-Shein•i′ and be the milestone closing out the era—the prophesied Mâ•shi′ akh of é--ä!!!
Moreover, just as we find two instance of qeitz prophesied here, so too the prophecies describe two distinct and different comings of the Mâ•shi′ akh (which led to the distinction between the Mâ•shi′ akh Bën-Yo•seiph′ and Mâ•shi′ akh Bën-Dâ•wid′ ):