That's not a bad thing to be! Hey, didn't Jesus say something about that?
And you miss the point yet again. I'm not talking about the gospel here that even little kids can understand. I'm talking about spiritual maturity in relation to understanding the deeper things in scripture here. Please read 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 and then maybe you can see what I'm talking about. I meant little kids in a spiritual sense. Like the "babes in Christ" that Paul rebuked in 1 Corinthians 3 who were only able to sip on the milk of God's word and weren't ready for the solid food. They could only understand the most simple things that were spelled out to them and couldn't understand deeper things that require the help of the Holy Spirit to understand.
Even Peter said that Paul taught some things that were difficult to understand, but he did not give anyone an excuse for not understanding what Paul wrote, as you can see here:
2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Clearly, scripture isn't always just explicitly spelled out to us, yet we are still expected to understand it. Why? Because we have the Holy Spirit in us showing us what it means even when it isn't explicitly spelled out.
The text simply says, "after the 62 weeks". (I was incorrect earlier when I said "after the 69 weeks", it actually separates the 62 weeks from the first 7 weeks.
It's obviously implied that it's after the 69th week since we know that the 7 weeks comes before the 62 weeks.
Then it speaks of a week of a confirmed covenant, which it speaks of AFTER Messiah is cut off, at least, that's the sequence it appears in the text. Mind you, I've heard myriad timelines people have applied to this handful of verses.
62 weeks . . . then Messiah cut off . . . then a covenant confirmed for 1 week . . . in the middle of the week the sacrifice is stopped.
Yes. So, are you saying you don't think the one week of Daniel 9:27 is the 70th week? Not really sure what your point is here.
To me it's clear that the Messiah being cut off after the end of the 69th week places His death within the 70th week and His death must occur within the 70 weeks somewhere since it is crucial to fulfilling at least some of Daniel 9:24, as you acknowledged yourself (I believe it's crucial to fulfilling all of it).