Why do you say blindly, and perfectly?

Blindly, because if rocket propulsion is used to land, then the pilot needs to see through the rocket's thruster exhaust (assuming there's a window) to see where to land.
It's extremely unlikely that the exhaust is transparent during the final moments of descent, so it would be essentially landing blindly through smoke.

Perfectly, because landing a rocket on it's thrusters requires functional perfection. Top of the line 2018 tech is still crashing in double-digit figures.

Belief is the issue at hand. There are too many successively improbable (impossible) challenges to overcome for a single successful landing.

We haven't even addressed the fuel required to leaves the moon to connect to the orbiter, or how all of the alignment/rotational challenges also exist for recoupling the lander and orbiter (again this is close to impossible).
Consider the challenges of aircraft in-flight refueling, and then add in theall of the subtle rotational challenges as difficulty multipliers.

Realistically consider how many second chance they would have to realign and reconnect in orbit??? If the approach is to fast, then reverse thrusters are engaged, but that created a rotational moment, and now the craft is rotating in a combination of i-j-k directions.

You have seen the inside of the lander module, right?
Primitive CRT screens, lights, dials, switches, buttons, etc.
How do they determine the precise rotational speeds, and precise rotational directions (yaw, pitch, roll) with any degree of precision? How do they precisely correct the movements???

Success at any of these extremely challenging situations is a miracle.

Performing each of these challenges.
Flawlessly.
6/6 times to the"moon".
In 3 short years???
That is... impossible. :-/