Dear Jane A.
 
Referring your post on Daniel 9:27 - you are correct.  The answer to this is a bit lengthy but confusion arises due to a variety of errors.  I will explain why you are correct.
 
Daniel 9:27 refers to "He" as being the "Antichrist" not the "Messiah Yeshuah" or "Jesus" - your preference.
 
The antecedent of the "He" who would confirm a covenant is the future prince who was yet to come. Some commentators assume "that the prince to come"  and who makes the covenant "for one seven" is the same as "the Messiah the Prince" in verse 25.  But Jesus was put to death before the seventieth week.  The new covenant that was put into effect by his death and the shedding of His blood was God-given and not limited to one "seven" of years.  It will never be broken.
 
That prince who is to come destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 AD, confirmed in Luke 21:20).  His people were the Romans, not the people of the Messiah.  The Romans made no covenant with the Jews after the death of Jesus.  The signs Jesus prophesied were not all fulfilled in the destruction carried out by the armies of Titus.  All of this shows us that Daniel's seventieth week of years is to come.  This gives us grounds for taking the coming Tribulation to be "seven" years long.  I would say that most "Pre-Millennialists" agree on this point.
 
Some people claim the seventieth seven of years followed immediately after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.  But the fact that the Roman destruction of the city and Temple came forty years after the death of Jesus and the fact that the Roman construction came before the seventieth week of years shows there is a gap between the sixty-ninth and the seventieth week.  Since God does not look at time the way we do (2 Peter 38), it is not contrary to the way the Bible reveals things for the gap to extend into the time of the Great Tribulation at the end of this age.  The ruler or prince to come fits the little horn already prophesied in Daniel 7:8, and confirmed in verse 24.  He would be an "antichrist", a counterfeit Christ.  Note that "anti" in the Greek primarily "instead of" or "in place of".  He will not call himself the antichrist.  He may say that he is Christ or that he is the final manifestation of a long line of prophets, gods, and goddesses.
 
In the middle of the seventieth "seven", or week of years, the ruler to come will break the covenant with the Jews (possibly mad with respect to a land dispute; (confirmed in 11:39) by stopping their sacrifices and offerings in what will be a restored temple.  This will be a time of trouble and distress (Jeremiah 30:7; Daniel `11:1).  On a "wing" of that temple He will set up "an abomination that causes desolation."  This does not refer to the pagan alter and the statute of Zeus and Antiochus IV Epiphanes set up in the Temple in 167 BC.  Jesus prophesied that this abomination that causes desolation that Daniel saw was still to come (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14.).  Thus the Antichrist will set up that abomination in a Temple yet to be built in Jerusalem (see 2 Thessalonians 2:3 and verses following; Revelation 13:14 and verses following).  But the Antichrist would not last forever.  A decree  end would be poured out upon him.  Revelation 19 gives us the details of how that will be accomplished.
 
What most readers do not seem to understand, and confusion that arises from the text of (Daniel 9:24-27) is what I have just covered is this issue of a "gap" in our time.  Many want to reject the "Gap" idea of God's working in time.
 
As I stated in a previous post a few weeks back, God clearly differentiates between His People the Jews, the Church.  They want to co-mingle the two, which logically cannot be.  Those of you that have a "Thompson" Chain Reference Bible will easily note that the author changed the text.  Wherever "Israel" appeared in the Bible, the author changed it to read "the church".  Need I remind you of what God said about changing, adding to or taking away, from His Word?
 
I would recommend to anyone reading prophecy sites to understand where they are coming from.  Many, and I mean many, come from backgrounds heavily influenced by SDA theology.  While Seventh Day Adventists have some interesting and even seemingly plausible ideas at times, you should not be deceived by their theology.  SDA's JW's, LDS people are being set-up for a fall.  All three of these cults were founded by Freemasons.  Freemasons are just one of many secret societies controlled at the top by the Vatican.  On the hierarchy pyramid they are just below the Knights of Malta and the Society of Jesus (Jesuits).  The SDA, JW, and LDS all (ALL) were founded by individuals that were affiliated with Masonry.  The grave sites of the founders all have the "obelisk" on their grave sites.  I have personally visited the grave sites of Ellen White and her husband (SDA's), and Charles Taze Russell (JW) and saw for myself.  I have never been to the LDS founder's grave but the Mormon Tabernacle in Salt Lake City wreaks of Masonic symbolism.  I have been to the Temple in Salt Lake City and you have no doubts of their Masonic symbolism inside and outside of the Temple.
 
The three "cults" are crafty at deception.  I had a JW invitation on my door Friday inviting me to a service and inside the little leaflet it said "We believe in Jesus" like others.  Remember words mean something, and what often is not said is far more important than what is said.  They do not believe that Jesus Christ, is the Son of God, the Messiah.  When I was a United Methodist pastor many Districts welcomed the SDA pastors into local ministerial associations.  I recommend John Ankerberg's booklets on different denominations and just what it is they believe and do not believe.
 
The first characteristic of a cult is that it rejects Jesus of Nazareth as God incarnate.  The second characteristic of a cult is that you have to do something extra other than to "believe" - Ephesians 2:8-9.  "For by grace are ye saved  through faith; and that not of  yourselves: It is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man boast."
 
The site you referred to in your post on the passage of Daniel 9:27 leans to SDA teachings.  They carry a lot of Mark Wohlberg teachings and other SDA video. I know that Marvin Rosenthal holds to a Pre-Wrath position.  I have read his books but I have to say he is wrong.  His best work is his book on the 'Feasts of God'.
 
When JW's came up the street I always made sure to talk with them.  Most Christians run and hide because they don't know their Bible as they should.  Paul said to be prepared to give an answer for your faith in and out of season.  Where I lived a few years ago the JW's always were out in force on Friday's.  They came to our street quite regularly and after several months I noticed they stopped coming to my door and went on by.  I even watched them to see if I was correct.  They stopped coming because at least one of the two coming to the door are probies.  Same for the Mormons.
 
In a previous post a few weeks ago I identified a list of scholars, with earned Ph.D and Th.D degrees that earned their credibility.  I note their academic credentials because they had to study Greek and Hebrew in order to earn their doctorates in order to fully understand the English text of our Bible.  Not all doctorates require proficiency in Biblical languages, such as a D.D.  I can tell you that "words" and their meanings have changed over centuries.  Hebrew "idioms" and "idiomatic expressions" recorded in the ancient text are void and meaningless to modern culture, but that has not diminished their importance, so we have to be careful in reading into the English something that is not there.  For example, the expression "he had an evil eye" has nothing to do with the eye - it means the person was a tight wad or stingy.
 
I noted my point of the critics using "straw man" arguments to shoot down the teaching of those having a belief in a "Pre-Tribulation Rapture".  Its so disingenuous and a common tactic in debate circles.  Intelligent discourse and honest debate is the only way to come to an understanding of Truth.  All Bible translations are subject to error in the English language.  Unless you are reading the original Masoretic Text and Textus Receptus or the Septuagint you cannot know for sure that your favorite English translations are accurately rendering the word's meaning..  Even when the original Hebrew/Greek word is quoted, it may still be wrong.  Unless you have a working familiarity with:  Gender, Case, Voice, Mood, and Tense you will be working with your hands tied behind your back.
Only a handful of theological seminaries even still require their students to take Greek and Hebrew for graduation.  Most dropped the Biblical languages fifty years ago in order to include other courses in their curriculum, like psychology, management, and church growth.  Bible colleges may require Greek and Hebrew but it Is pretty much watered down to handle the dumbed down students that come out of the public school system.  Bone-head math and bone-head English is given at the best colleges and universities of America.  It has been that way since the 1960's, I know as I worked for two of the major college text book publishers in the country.
 
Jane, I apologize for being wordy but in a world that wants everything to be short and sweet, and to the point, the Bible is not one of those that can be treated in a blasé fashion.  YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF DANIEL 9:27 is correct!
 
Pastor Bob