Critical thinking is crucial for understanding scripture. Personally I was a pre-millenialist for years as that is what I was taught. Nobody taught me amillenialism, and even to this day I don't have a single personal relationship with another amil. I didn't even know there was a name for it until after I started believing it. My friends and family all think I'm crazy but I came to believe it after carefully studying the Bible.
But what convinced you? Why do you believe it's wrong?
This is good, and a good way to go, as I have gone the same way, though I was very fortunate that my adopted family did not push religion on me, though my birth family did. Hahaha.
(I did have influence, before I read the Bible all the way through, in my early twenties, the early 90s, and my adopted family is Christian. The first book I wrote, in fact, was called 'Heaven Touches Hell On Earth', which I finished when I was 18. And it borrowed heavily from the Bible, but I had merely page turned to get that inspiration.)
(I mention that book, by title, because it does show I had some manner of belief that Heaven touching Hell, on earth, is some manner of possibility, even back then, in the late 80s.)
Really, I studied pretty exhaustively, histories of the Church, through Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox eyes, way back in the 90s, but have continued that viewpoint ever since. [Trust fund enabled me to do so, and since then, easy jobs and grace of God.] The Protestant way, I found, by far, the most impressive. I did not find much error in the Orthodox viewpoints, however, as expressed in the Philokalia, or in later, Russian and Eastern European books.
I had saved the Bible for last, before that having studied just about everything else to try and figure out what was going on. [I still do so, in fact, just a few years ago, read every book Dawkins ever wrote, and Sagan's book on atheism.]
...
Really, I have only become entirely convinced that 'the Millennium has not happened yet', just in the past few weeks, and that from largely talking to amillenialists. Partly, the influence of pre-Millenialists here, as well.
I leaned pre-millienalism since the mid-90s, but continued to entertain the possibility or amillenialism or post-millenialism, until now. These past few weeks.
I think, the biggest problem, is there simply is no reason to believe the Millennium has already begun. So, the flimsy arguments of the amillenialists have persuaded me, as they did not have anything more solid.
Certainly, my studies of the Catholic Church and "Holy" Roman Empire led to that. Historically speaking, but also in terms of of doctrine. That is why I leaned away. If you must include the Catholic Church and 'Holy Roman Empire' to justify the Millennium has already begun, then you really are basing it on the legitimacy of those empires and that particular church.
The arguments that the 'harlot of Babylon' is 'the Catholic Church' is strong, that also has contributed to my leaning. For instance, Isaiah 47 , and this
wiki summation, which, currently, I find to be fair and encapsulates some of the main arguments.
But, ultimately, there is no reason for the Millennium having already happened. If they have no reason, then why profess it? Especially, as the Beast figures prominently in the two mere paragraphs arguing it? Worse, the binding of Satan, so 'he deceives the nations no longer' is stated, as well.
While these two paragraphs do not state the Beast is any longer with them, this certainly can be said to be implied. As the very paragraph before this chapter shows the beast as being destroyed. And, why, on earth, mention the beast at all, when you are only going to spend two paragraphs on the 1000 years, if the beast has not even come yet?
Is God a god of order, or disorder? Is this some manner of disinformation, which was required to trick Satan? Why would God have a need to do that? God is certainly vague in much of Revelation, not even detailing the identity of Jesus directly in many places, but being vague and giving outright disinformation are two very, very different things.
I suppose, further, the rest of Revelation, I do not feel is as much as a mystery to me, as I did in years past. My birth family helped persuade me of that. When it is all a mystery, then it appears as chaotic, and as if anything could be true.
But, it is not chaotic, there are the opening of the seven seals, the seven trumpets, the three woes, the seven censers: one event precedes another, and a lot of care and concern was put into making that clear. While some may overlap with others, they are not taken out of order in their own.
This clear ordering may be broken, once all the trumpets have sounded, and all the seals have been broken, and all the censers have been dropped, and all the three woes have been finished. So, I could see, before, how someone could argue that the Millennium began before all of those things have been finished. But, then, the Devil is locked up to not deceive the nations any longer, and at least some - if not all - of those who are resurrected, 'were beheaded by the Beast'.
So, that continuity continues.
There is no reason to break it.
What reasons to break it might remain? I believe, the most difficult reason for people, is that the Seventh Trumpet has sounded, and so true believers have been 'caught up in the air' with Christ. A spiritual rapture.
So, they do have some sense of reigning with Christ and God already.
I think, for me, that was my main stumbling block, as well. And why I have felt that we are reigning, spiritually.
Why we feel an ownership on earth.
I believe, however, this has happened relatively lately, and not in the far past, and it had nothing to do with the Catholic Church.
