It seems to be coming more to my attention that many Christians believe Christ is the one referred to who puts an end to the sacrifices in the middle of the 70th week of Daniel. In other words, putting Christ's crucifixion at week 69.5. To arrive at this conclusion is to make the "he" in Daniel 9:27 refer to the Messiah, where others have understood it as refering to the prince to come of the people (Romans) who destroyed the Temple and Jerusalem. In other words the future Antichrist. My reading puts the crucifixion and destruction of Jerusalem after the fulfillment of 69 total weeks, but before the 70th week, which I believe is still yet to be fulfilled after the desolations are determined.I do not see how Christ can be "cut off" after 69 weeks and also fulfill the end of sacrifice at 69.5 weeks since they would have to be the same event. When Christ refers to the future Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel in Matthew 24, how can that refer to his own Crucifixion in a matter of days? Or yet, how can we then apply the 1260, 1290, or 1335 days, if the middle of the week was 2,000 years ago? The idea that Christ put an end to sacrifice may seem to make sense, but it would seem to twist the progression outlined in Daniel 9 as well as the nature of the ending of the sacrifices therein mentioned. The ending of sacrifice is associated with abomination and desolation. And also, how can Christ's atonement put an end to sacrifice (pertaining to this passage) when the Destruction of Jerusalem is said to occur first in the flow of Daniel 9? I believe the destruction of Jerusalem separates the 69th and 70th week and mandates that the 70th week will not occur until the prince of the people who destroyed Jerusalem is revealed after the removal of the Church body.How does anyone else view this passage?By His Grace,Daniel Matson