But your case is quite different, I see.
I have heard arguments about if most of the prophecies have come to pass or still to come but I do not belong to any side on these because it is much easier for me to read the Bible than it is to read all of the gobble goop( big words) the big educated people put in their writings that I can not understand, in most cases I have no idea what they are talking about
Here is an example
Millennial series part 11
The oft-repeated charge that premillennialism is only a dispute over the interpretation of Revelation 20 is both understatement and a serious misrepresentation of the facts. Opponents of premillennialism delight to point out that the reference to the thousand years is found only in Revelation 20. Warfield observes in a footnote, “‘Once, and only once,’ says the ‘Ency. Bibl.,’ 3095, ‘in the New Testament we hear of a millennium.’“1 The issues of premillennialism cannot be so simplified. The issues are neither trivial nor simple. Premillennialism is rather a system of theology based on many Scriptures and with a distinctive theological context. The reckless charge of Landis that European premillennialism is based only on Ezekiel 40-48 and that American premillennialism is based only on Revelation 20:1-7 is as unfair as his more serious charge that “actually their bases are both contra-Biblical,” and that premillennialism “is a fungus growth of first-century Pharisaic rabbinism.”2 Most opponents of premillennialism have enough perspective to see that premillennialism has its own Biblical and theological context and that its origin in the early church as well as its restoration in modern times is based on Biblical and theological studies. It is the purpose of this phase of the study of premillennialism to examine the general features of premillennial theology in contrast to opposing views. Premillennialism involves a distinctive principle of interpretation of Scripture, a different concept of the present age, a distinct doctrine of Israel, and its own teaching concerning the second advent and millennial kingdom. Origen, the father of amillenarianism, most certainly did. Conservative amillenarians would, however, feel perfectly justified in proceeding to spiritualize passages speaking of a future righteous government on earth, of Israel’s restoration as a national and political entity, of Israel’s regathering to Palestine, and of Christ reigning literally upon the earth for a thousand years. Their justification is that these doctrines are absurd and impossible and that therefore they must be spiritualized. The wish is father of the interpretation, therefore, and amillennial interpretattion of Scripture abundantly illustrates this.
They use a lot of words to say something that is probably simple if I just knew what they were saying.
I have also heard arguments about a rapture before the tribulation, plus mid and post, and believe none of it.
I have also heard about who the great harlot of rev 17 is from the seventh day Adventists and I tend to agree but I have not studied with them and I disagree with them on many points.
But if I am an amillennialist it is just a coincidence.
One more thing I can honestly say is that I know absolutely nothing, I can only say I believe this way or that way, just what ever makes the most sense to me alone..
Thanks for the response. I fail to see how Rev. 20 can be all that difficult for you. Verse four makes an absolute case for a future millennial kingdom. How so? I’ll try to break this down as simplistic as I can. Here goes:
1. Martyrs of the tribulaion, who refused to worship the beast nor his image, nor take the mark of the beast, are described taking part in the event that BEGINS the thousand years, the first resurrection.
2. The first resurrection, then, is the defining event on the millennial kingdom issue. Put simply, according to this verse, the tribulation has to occur BEFORE the thousand years.
3. The martyrs are martyrs of the tribulation that begins the thousand years, are they not? And we know from chapters 6-19 preceding chapter 20, that this is when the worship of the beast, his image, and his mark, takes place.
4. Since the worship of the besst, his image, and mark of the beast haven’t happened yet, nor has the first resurrection which resurrects those who did not worship the beast, his image, nor take his mark,
5. Unless you are a preterist amill or a historicist amill, I’m sure you must agree the worship of the beast, his image, nor mark of the beast have obviously NOT happened yet. And neither has the first resurrection that resurrects these martyrs. And since the first resurrection begins the thousand years, NEITHER HAS THE THOUSAND YEARS.
6. Which means the events of chapters 6-19 have to PRECEDE the events described in 20:1-6. Which makes 20:4 the key verse proving chapters 6-20 to be chronological. If is proven to be chronological, then it is virtually impossible for us to have been in the millennial kingdom for the last two thousand years.
7. These things being so, this also means the binding of the devil for a thousand years is not the extremely strained interpretation amills have made of it.