So far I’ve quoted on this thread and on another similar one, the following reputable scholars to you, Robert Gundry, George Ladd, Michael J. Vlatch, and Philip Schaff’s History of the Christian Church, 2:614, are you saying they are liars?
That’s a cop out, and you know it. It has nothing to do with my views of these men.
You claim that somehow your view on the millennium matches with the views of the early church fathers, yet you are unable (or unwilling) to provide direct quotes from those ECF that supports your claim.
The critical idea, in my opinion, if the modern premil idea that Jesus will be reigning literally on the earth during the future thousand years. Without this key piece of data, it can hardly be thought that the ECF were chiliasts in any modern sense. In fact this was the conclusion of premil Alan Patrick Boyd, that the best we can say of the ECF is they were “seminal amillennialists.”
Given your oft-repeated claim (e.g., “The ECF writings abound with statements …”), it should be fairly simple process to find numerous ECF quotes with that idea clearly spelled out. You should not have to rely on the (hearsay) analysis of others. (Unless, perhaps, you have not actually read the ECF to verify your claim.)
So far all you have managed to do is avoid the real issue. It’s time to man up.