וְעַל כְּנַף שִׁקּוּצִים מְשֹׁמֵם
and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate (YLT)
The meaning of the “wing” in 9:27 is in any case problematic, being variously explained by scholars, e.g. as referring to the “pinnacle” of the Jerusalem temple, to the “horns” of the altar in the temple, and/or to the “wings” of Baal portrayed as an eagle or winged sun.-Wenham, D. (1992). Abomination of Desolation. In D. N. Freedman (Ed.), The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (Vol. 1, p. 28). New York: Doubleday.
The “wing of abominations” is none of those things, rather its a “flying fortress” “wing of fallen angel technology and energy” over which the Desolator Son of Destruction presides to rain destruction down from the heavens upon his enemies on earth.
on the wings of abomination he comes desolating…
“Thus in this passage wings are attributed to the שִׁקּוּצִים, idol-objects, and to idolatry with its abominations, because that shall be the power which lifts upwards the destroyer and desolater, carries him, and moves with him over the earth to lay waste”” (Kliefoth, T.). -Keil, C. F., & Delitzsch, F. (2002). Commentary on the Old Testament [1866 first edition]. (Da 9:27). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
An idol is abominable because of the demonic reality behind it inspiring lawlessness and abominations (1 Ki. 11:5; 2 Ki. 23:24; Ez. 20:7-8; 1 Cor. 10:19-20; Dt. 32:17; Lev. 17:7).
The wing is “of abominations”, therefore built and powered by demons, the god of forces (fortresses) which allow him to act against the strongest fortifications of his enemies:
38 But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.
39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain. (Dan. 11:38-39 KJV)
And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? (Rev. 13:4 KJV)
The scholarly arguments against this interpretion are many and diverse, but conviently dispensed with by Keil & Delitzsch in their Commentary Of The Old Testament. As this approximately 150 year old commentary is public domain, I will reproduce the relevant portion below adding helpful explanatory material in [brackets] that are not part of the original text:
The third clause of this verse,וְעַל כְּנַף שִׁקּוּצִים מְשֹׁמֵם [and on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate], is difficult, and its interpretation has been disputed. The LXX have rendered it: καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἱερὸν βδέλυγμα τῶν ἐρημώσεων ἔσται [and upon the temple abomination the making desolate be]. Theodotion has given the same rendering, only omitting ἔσται [be]. The Vulgate has: et erit in templo abominatio desolationis [there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation]. The church interpreters have explained the words in accordance with these translations, understanding by כְּנַף שִׁקּוּצִים [wing of abominations] the abomination of idols in the temple, or the temple desecrated by the abomination of idols. Hävernick explains the words of the extreme height of abomination, i.e., of the highest place that can be reached where the abominations would be committed, i.e., the temple as the highest point in Jerusalem; Hengstenberg, on the contrary, regards the “wing of the abominations” as the pinnacle of the temple so desecrated by the abomination that it no longer deserved the name of a temple of the Lord, but the name of an idol-temple. Auberlen translates it “on account of the desolating summit of abominations,” and understands by it the summit of the abominations committed by Israel, which draws down the desolation, because it is the desolation itself, and which reached its acme in the desecration of the temple by the Zealots shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem. But no one of these interpretations is justified by the language here used, because כָּנָף [wing] does not signify summit, highest point. This word, it is true, is often used figuratively of the extremity or skirt of the upper garment or cloak (1 Sam. 15:27; 24:5; Hag. 2:12), of the uttermost part, end, of the earth, Isa. 24:16, and frequently in the plur. of the borders of the earth, in the rabbin. also of the lobes of the lungs, but demonstrably never of the summit as the highest point or peak of an object; and thus can mean neither the temple as the highest point in Jerusalem, nor the pinnacle of the temple desecrated by the abomination, nor the summit of the abomination committed by Israel. “It is used indeed,” as Bleek (Jahrbb. v. p. 93) also remarks, “of the extreme point of an object, but only of that which is extended horizontally (for end, or extremity), but never of that which is extended perpendicularly (for peak).” The use of it in the latter sense cannot also be proved from the πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ [pinnacle of the temple], Matt. 4:5, Luke 4:9. Here the genitive τοῦ ἱεροῦ [of the temple], not τοῦ ναοῦ [of the sanctuary], shows that not the pinnacle, i.e., the summit of the temple itself, is meant, but a wing or adjoining building of the sanctuary; and if Suidas and Hesychius explain πτερύγιον [pinnacle] by ἀκρωτήριον [mountain peak LXX 1 Sam. 14:4 2x], this explanation is constructed only from the passages of the N.T. referred to, and is not confirmed by the Greek classics.
But though πτερύγιον [pinnacle]may have the meaning of summit, yet this can by no means be proved to be the meaning of כָּנָף [wing]. Accordingly כְּנַף שִׁקּוּצִים [wing of abominations] cannot on verbal grounds be referred to the temple. This argument from the words used is not set aside by other arguments which Hengstenberg brings forward, neither by the remark that this explanation harmonizes well with the other parts of the prophecy, especially the removal of the sacrifice and the destruction of the temple, nor by the reference to the testimony of tradition and to the authority of the Lord. For, with reference to that remark, we have already shown in the explanation of the preceding verses that they do not refer to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, and thus are not reconcilable with this interpretation of כְּנַף שִׁקּוּצִים [wing of abominations]. But the testimony of tradition for this interpretation in Josephus, De bello Jud. iv. 6. 3, that by the desecration of the temple on the part of the Zealots an old prophecy regarding the destruction of the temple was fulfilled, itself demonstrates (under the supposition that no other passage occur in the book of Daniel in which Josephus would be able to find the announcement of bloody abomination in the temple which proceeded even from the members of the covenant people) nothing further than that Josephus, with many of his contemporaries, found such a prophecy in this verse in the Alexandrine translation, but it does not warrant the correctness of this interpretation of the passage. This warrant would certainly be afforded by the words of our Lord regarding “the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet standing in the holy place” (Matt. 24:15f.; Mark 13:14), if it were decided that the Lord had this passage (Dan. 9:27) alone before His mind, and that He regarded the “abomination of desolation” as a sign announcing the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. But neither of these conditions is established. The expression βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως [abomination the causing desolation] is found not only in Dan. 9:27 (where the LXX and Theod. have the plur. ἐρημώσεων [desolations]), but also in Dan. 11:31 (βδ. ἐρημώσεως) [abomination making desolate] and Dan. 12:11 (τὸ βδ. τῆς ἐρημώσεως) [the abomination the making desolate], and thus may refer to one of these passages. [Only Dan. 12:11 precisely matches Mat. 24:15; Mk. 13:14 and this is why the writer cautions readers to understand it alone is the reference].The possibility of this reference is not weakened by the objection, “that the prophecy Dan. 11 and 12 was generally regarded as fulfilled in the Maccabean times, and that the fulfilling of Dan. 9 was placed forward into the future in the time of Christ” (Hgstb.), because the Lord can have a deeper and more correct apprehension of the prophecies of Daniel than the Jewish writers of His time; because, moreover, the first historical fulfilling of Dan. 11 in the Maccabean times does not exclude a further and a fuller accomplishment in the future, and the rage of Antiochus Epiphanes against the Jewish temple and the worship of God can be a type of the assault of Antichrist against the sanctuary and the church of God in the time of the end. Still less from the words, “whoso readeth, let him understand” (Matt. 24:15), can it be proved that Christ had only Dan. 9:27, and not also 11:31 or 12:11, before His view. The remark that these words refer to בִּין בַּדָּבָר (understand the matter), Dan. 9:23, and to וְתֵדַע וְתַשְׂכֵּל (know, and understand), does not avail for this purpose, because this reference is not certain, and בִּין אֶת־הַדָּבָר (and he understood the thing) is used (Dan. 10:1) also of the prophecy in Dan. 10 and 11. But though it were beyond a doubt that Christ had, in the words quoted, only Dan. 9:27 before His view, yet would the reference of this prophecy to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans not be thereby proved, because in His discourse Christ spake not only of this destruction of the ancient Jerusalem, but generally of His παρουσία [coming] and the συντέλεια τοῦ αἰῶνος [end of the age] (Matt. 24:3), and referred the words of Daniel of the βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως [abomination of desolation] to the παρουσία τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου [coming of the son of man].
On these grounds we must affirm that the reference of the words under consideration to the desecration of the temple before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans is untenable.
But also the reference of these words, as maintained by other interpreters, to the desecration of the temple by the βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως [abomination of desolation] (1 Macc. 1:54), built on the altar of burnt-offering by Antiochus Epiphanes, is disproved on the verbal ground that כָּנָף [wing] cannot designate the surface of the altar. In favour of this view the הַשִּׁקּוּץ מְשֹׁמֵם, Dan. 11:31 (the abomination that maketh desolate), is principally relied on, in order to establish the connection of מְשֹׁמֵם [one who makes desolate] with שִׁקּוּצִים [abominations]; but that passage is of a different character, and the difference of number between them opposes the connecting together of these two words. The singular מְשֹׁמֵם [desolator] cannot be connected as an adjective with שִׁקּוּצִים [abominations]. But the uniting of מְשֹׁמֵם [desolator] with the noun כְּנַף [wing] gives no meaning [unless we interpret the flying wing that desolates is of abominations-demons], and besides has the parallels Dan. 11:31 and Dan 12:11 against it. In this passage before us מְשֹׁמֵם [one who makes desolate] can only be the subject; and the clause is neither to be connected with the preceding nor with the following, but is to be interpreted as containing an independent statement. Since in the preceding context mention is made of a Nagid [Leader, “prince”] who shall make desolate the city and the sanctuary, and shall take away the bloody and the unbloody sacrifice, it is natural to regard the מְשֹׁמֵם, desolater, as the Nagid [prince], and to identify the two [via telescope prophetic dual fulfillment]. The circumstance that it does not refer to it by the article (הַמְּשֹׁמֵם) [the desolator] is no valid objection, because the article is in no way necessary, as מְשֹׁמֵם [one who makes desolate] is a participle, and can be rendered as such: “on the wings of abomination he comes desolating.”
עַל כָּנָף [on wing] can, without ingenuity, be rendered in no other way than on wings. שִׁקּוּצִים [abominations] signifies not acts of abomination, but objects of abomination, things causing abomination, and is constantly used of the heathen gods, idol-images, sacrifices to the gods, and other heathen abominations. The connection of שִׁקּוּצִים [abominations] permits us, however, with Reichel, Ebrard, Kliefoth, and Kranichfeld, to think on nothing else than that wings (כָּנָף) are attributed to the שִׁקּוּצִים [abominations]. The sing. כְּנַף [wing] does not oppose this, since it is often used collectively in a peculiar and figurative meaning; cf. e.g., בַּעַל כָּנָף [winged bird], Prov. 1:17, with בַּעַל כְּנָפַיִם, Eccles. 10:20, the winged, the bird; and כְּנַף הָאָרֶץ (from the uttermost part of the earth), Isa. 24:16, is not different from כַּנְפֹות הָאָרֶץ [ends of the earth], Job 37:3; 38:13, just as אֶבְרָה, wing, plumage, Ps. 91:4, Deut. 32:11, is found for אֶבְרֹות (wings), Ps. 68:14. But from such passages as Deut. 32:11, Ex. 19:4, and Ps. 18:11, we perceive the sense in which wings are attributed to the שִׁקּוּצִים [abominations] the idolatrous objects.82 In the first of these passages (Deut. 32:11), wings, the wings of an eagle, are attributed to God, because He is the power which raises up Israel, and lifting it up, and carrying it throughout its history, guides it over the earth. In Ps. 18:11 wings are attributed to the wind, because the wind is contemplated as the power which carries out the will of God throughout the kingdom of nature. “Thus in this passage wings are attributed to the שִׁקּוּצִים [abominations], idol-objects, and to idolatry with its abominations, because that shall be the power which lifts upwards the destroyer and desolater, carries him, and moves with him over the earth to lay waste” (Klief.).83
82 The interpretation of J. D. Michaelis, which has been revived by Hofmann, needs no serious refutation. They hold that כְּנַף שִׁקּוּצִים [wing of abominations] signifies an idol-bird, and denotes the eagle of Jupiter of Zeus. Hofm. repeats this interpretation in his Schriftbew. ii. 2, p. 592, after he had abandoned it.
83 Similarly, and independently of Kliefoth, Kranichfeld also explains the words: “The powerful heathen enemy of God is here conceived of as carried on (עַל) [upon] these wings of the idol-abomination, like as the God of the theocracy is borne on the wings of the clouds, and on cherubim, who are His servants; cf. Ps. 18:11; 104:3.”
Keil, C. F., & Delitzsch, F. (1996). Commentary on the Old Testament (Vol. 9, pp. 737–740). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.