When the debate dust settles regarding Daniel 9:26 the following is most likely the interpretative reality thereof.
As such, I hereby suggest a realistic call for the Emendation of the Hebrew word עם.
Going forward then, the next words of concern in the Daniel 9:26 transliterations is the Hebrew words am (om) עם which is KJV transliterated as people and 'im (om) which denotes with. Regarding 'am' vs. 'im', these two words do look pretty much identical in Hebrew. In fact, they both have the same two consonants (ayin and mem) Strong's Hebrew # s 5971-5974.
The only difference is their vocalization, with the word for people having a patach (a short a), and the word for with having a hireq (an i). However, these vowels, neither of which would have been represented historically in either of these words with a mater lectionis (i.e., the use of a yodh or a waw to indicate which vowel was present), date to the era of the Masoretes (circa A.D. 800, give or take), so they are in a sense Interpretations and Derivations generated from the original word. Moreover, Strong s numbers were NOT even mentioned nor applied to Scriptural texts until the mid 1800 s.
Thus, in Dan. 9:26 we have the MT vs. the LXX regarding the use of the Hebrew word עם (Strong's 5971 am - people) vs. עם (Strong's 5973 im - with).
Dan 9:26 Original Hebrew Tanakh (Masoretic Text)
ואחרי 310 and after השׁבעים7620 weeks שׁשׁים8346 sixty ושׁנים8147and two יכרת3772 He shall be cut off משׁיח4899 Messiah ואין369 and there is none לוו to Him והעיר5892 and the city והקדשׁ6944 and the sanctuary ישׁחית7843 He shall destroy עם5971/5973 people of (am) with (im) נגיד 5057Prince הבא935 coming
As can be seen below the interpretative manipulation of the above MT becomes unnecessary with the emended application of the Hebrew im (with) rather than that of am (people) and is then in COMPLETE agreement with the LXX.
Dan. 9:26 - Greek Septuagint - LXX
And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one shall be destroyed, and there is no judgment in him: and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the prince that is coming: they shall be cut off with a flood, and to the end of the war which is rapidly completed he shall appoint the city to desolations.
Daniel 9:26 KJV:
and the city and the sanctuary (He) shall destroy with the coming Prince...
To this end, the "HE" of the LXX Dan. 9:26 above and the "HE" of the MT of Dan. 9:27 reveals that God gave the Spiritual Authorization for the 70 A.D. destruction while as history records the prince Titus Caesar was the Literal instrument by means of which the 70 A.D. destruction was carried out. Moreover, in the Spirit world Titus Caesar most certainly could NOT have undertaken such a task without the Spiritual permission and authority of God Himself. See http://www.shalach.org/YeshuaMessiah/Dan:9.26.html
To this end, if you will be so kind as to read Lk. 20:9-17 and tell me just who the HE is that will destroy the city and the sanctuary PEOPLE Jews (especially vs. 20:16) it will be most appreciated.
Likewise, if you will be so kind as to read Gal. 3:15-17 and once again tell me just who the HE is that confirms the covenant with the Jews (especially vs. 3:17) it will be most appreciated.
This will invariably answer the question of who the HE is in both Dan. 9:26 & 27 in either the MT or the LXX.
Meanwhile, is the MT always correct?
The MT below begs the question of how could Ahaziah assume the Kingdom from his father Jehoram at his father s death and be older than his father was? According to the MT Jehoram, was 38 years old when he died and his son was 42 (or 22) years old when he was appointed to take his place as King.
2 Chron. 21:20
Thirty (shelowshiym - 7970) and two years old was he [Jehoram] when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years, and departed without being desired. Howbeit they buried him in the city of David, but not in the sepulchres of the kings.
2 Chron. 22:1
And the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah his youngest son king in his stead: for the band of men that came with the Arabians to the camp had slain all the eldest. So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned.
2 Chron. 22:2
Forty ('arba`iym - 705) and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.
2 Kings 8:25-26
In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign. [26] Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.
In summary, while NOT personally advocating the LXX over the MT in any way, the LXX however, does get the above Passages right.