The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

[Secret Alias]

What does Tertullian say about 9:26? I remember it was vague and elusive.

[Secret Alias]

These are all the passages Biblindex connects Tertullian to 9:26

8:1 Accordingly the times must be inquired into of the predicted and future nativity of the Christ, and of His passion, and of the extermination of the city of Jerusalem, that is, its devastation. For Daniel says, that "both the holy city and the holy place are exterminated together with the coming Leader, and that the pinnacle is destroyed unto ruin."
8.8 But God, foreseeing what was to be--that they will not merely not receive Him, but will both persecute and deliver Him to death--both recapitulated, and said, that in lx and ii and an half of an hebdomad He is born, and an holy one of holy ones is anointed; but that when vii hebdomads108 and an half were fulfilling, He had to suffer, and the holy city had to be exterminated after one and an half hebdomad--whereby namely, the seven and an half hebdomads have been completed. For he says thus: "And the city and the holy place to be exterminated together with the leader who is to come; and they shall be cut short as in a deluge; and he shall destroy the pinnacle unto ruin."
8:17 Therefore, when these times also were completed, and the Jews subdued, there afterwards ceased in that place "libations and sacrifices," which thenceforward have not been able to be in that place celebrated; for "the unction," too,118 was "exterminated" in that place after the passion of Christ. For it had been predicted that the unction should be exterminated in that place; as in the Psalms it is prophesied, "They exterminated my hands and feet."
13:6 For the Law enjoined that, in captivity, it was not lawful for the unction of the royal chrism to be compounded.265 But, if there is no longer "unction" there266 as Daniel prophesied (for he says, "Unction shall be exterminated"), it follows that they267 no longer have it, because neither have they a temple where was the "horn"268 from which kings were wont to be anointed.
13:9 For, after His advent, we read, according to Daniel, that the city itself had to be exterminated; and we recognise that so it has befallen. For the Scripture says thus, that "the city and the holy place are simultaneously exterminated together with the leader,"269 --undoubtedly (that Leader) who was to proceed "from Bethlehem," and from the tribe of "Judah."

[Ben C. Smith]

What does Tertullian say about 9:26? I remember it was vague and elusive.

Tertullian, Against the Jews 8.1-2: 1 Accordingly the times must be inquired into of the predicted and future nativity of the Christ, and of His passion, and of the extermination of the city of Jerusalem, that is, its devastation. For Daniel says, that "both the holy city and the holy place are exterminated together with the coming Leader, and that the pinnacle is destroyed unto ruin." 2 And so the times of the coming Christ, the Leader, must be inquired into, which we shall trace in Daniel; and, after computing them, shall prove Him to be come, even on the ground of the times prescribed, and of competent signs and operations of His. Which matters we prove, again, on the ground of the consequences which were ever announced as to follow His advent; in order that we may believe all to have been as well fulfilled as foreseen.

I am honestly not sure how he is reading the verse overall, but he seems clear on Daniel 9.26 predicting the Christ's death. He seems to lump the "prince" (= "leader", I suppose) in with the figure who perishes.

[Secret Alias]

Right it seems that he initially connects the death of Christ with 9:26 but then Aquila's translation (or maybe others too) takes over and the discussion seems to be about 'unction' as a way of avoiding that connection.

[Secret Alias]

I think there is a strange avoidance of what to me is the most obvious prediction of a death of the messiah in the prophetic writings. It has always struck me as strange and forced. If I were a Christian I would certainly assume that 9:26 is an uncanny prediction of the Passion. Odd that every Church Father doesn't pound the drum on 9:26. But they don't. Was it heresy to do so? Does this equation lead to a known heresy?

[Ben C. Smith]

Right it seems that he initially connects the death of Christ with 9:26 but then Aquila's translation (or maybe others too) takes over and the discussion seems to be about 'unction' as a way of avoiding that connection.

The ancient translations of Daniel 9.24-27 were confused and confusing. I think that a lot of Christians probably just split the difference and decided to find the Christ in Daniel 7.13-14 but the timing in Daniel 9.24-27.

[Secret Alias]

But not the crucifixion of the 'messiah' (the only place the word appears in the OT) as predicted in 9:26. Which again is the strangest thing in earliest Christianity.

[Ben C. Smith]

But not the death as predicted in 9:26.

That is where Tertullian seems to get the death. But right: it is hard to find explicit references earlier than that along those lines.

[Ben C. Smith]

It may have been tricky to separate the Messiah being "cut off" and having "nothing" from the temple being destroyed.

[Secret Alias]

Clement (implicit) and Origen can identify Agrippa's death as being predicted by 9:26. But not Jesus. Even though this is the only place the word 'messiah' is actually used in the whole OT. But how can early Christians blab on about 'the Christ' and 'Christ was crucified' and 'the prophets predicted this' but somehow ignore that 9:26 mentions 'Christ,' he was killed and was no more and its relation to the destruction of Jerusalem but fail to make a connection. As I said, it leaves me dumbfounded. Something's not right.