I perceive that you are accruing time through the theory of 7 day week ×1000 equals 7000 years. Though that concept sounds "logical" to our "natural mind", God is doing no such thing with literal time in that manner.
I have not pointed to the length of an age being 1,000 years long. In fact a season is 1,000 years long as we know that Satan, the other heavenly hosts, i.e., the four beasts and the Little Horn, and the judged kings of the earth, and the length of their imprisonment in the Pit/Bottomless Pit, as told in Rev 20, is for a 1,000 years year period. In Daniel 7:12b we are told this: - ", yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time." What I have consistently posted on this forum is that the seventh age will be 1,000 years plus a little while/time period long.
Using only the Old Testament, it is possible to establish a chronology of time from the creation of Adam up to the time when the final judgement of mankind will take place. From my chronology calculations I believe that this time period is over 7,000 years in duration with each age being 1,000 years plus a little while/time long.
As such your perception of what I understand is your creation and not mine.
Whether its solar, lunar or prophetic time, there is no need to analyze which concept of time is being used in Daniel 9:24-27 about the 70 weeks. All one has to do is agree with scripture, that Daniel 9:26 is directly pointing to the fact that in the midst of one of the weeks, Messiah is cut off [crucified], but not for himself, which of course is the 70th last week of that prophecy.
Again, you have created a very different understanding of when Christ died on the cross. Daniel 9:26a tells us this: -
"26 "And after the sixty-two weeks,;
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;"
It provides not time indication as to when Christ died. It only tells us that after the "sixty-two weeks of years" that the Messiah would be cut off, but not for himself.
Now what you have shown in this quote above is that you do not agree with scripture and have created your own understanding which is not supported by scripture.
Now in reading Daniel 9:24-27, all of the prophetic words given are sequential and naturally they follow each other.
It is my belief that Daniel 9:26b has a duration of around 2,000 years and the end point of this prophecy is when the wars is over.
[b}Daniel 9:26b: -[/b]
"26b: - And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined."
As such there is a long gap that is to happen between Daniel 9:25 and 27.
From Isaiah 24:21-22 we know that the heavenly hosts, i.e., Satan, the four beasts of Daniel 7:1-12 and the Little Horn, along with the kings of the earth will be judged and together they will be imprisoned for many days to await the time of their punishment. Putting a number of scriptures together we can determine that this judgement recorded in Isaiah 24:21-22 occurs at the very beginning of the seventh age.
As such, Satan or the other heavenly hosts cannot enter into a Solemn covenant with many until they are released from the bottomless pit.
As such, it is not Christ that enters into a solemn covenant with many in Daniel 9:27.
You then justified your belief with this statement: -
God is not requiring anyone to jump through "math hoops", to figure out when the 70th week will be. He put the factual answer right out there in plain sight. The 70th week prophecy was for to reveal the crucifixion of Christ.
As a result there is no need whatsoever to take that 70th week and push it out into the far future.
In fact, it has derailed most of Christianity into a quagmire of literal lies of fantasy.
You claimed in this quote that it has "In fact, . .
derailed most of Christianity into a quagmire of literal lies of fantasy." but the reality is that it is your understanding, like many like minded people's who have entered into "a quagmire of literal lies of fantasy."
Please, before you continue to try and prove that my understanding is wrong, check whether or not your understanding can stand up to scrutiny, as in my humble opinion it fails all scrutiny when reviewed.
Goodbye