The Bible teaches a literal 1,000-yr future earthly reign by Jesus in Jerusalem

This time around I will actually begin with answering questions and rebuttal.Your first question and I would be glad to educate you (:A.1According to the Oxford English dictionary, a generation is all of the people born and living at about the same time, regarded collectively.The dictionary then goes on in this manner<SPECIAL USAGE>-the average period, generally considered to be about thirty years, during which children are born and grow up, become adults, and begin to have children of their own. So you are right about the word "generation" it is in "special" circumstances used as a measure of time but that does not mean it is always used as a measure of time. "Be ye mindful always of the covenant; the word which He commanded to a thousand generations." (I Chron 16: 15)These are the two verses that follow16 The covenant which He made with Abraham,And His oath to Isaac,17 And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,To Israel for an everlasting covenant,In context we can understand that a thousand generations does not have to be 20-30 years in fact it can just be a next generation in the family. Abraham, Issac, and Jacob all lived at one time together but they each can be another generation. If God is truely creator of earth and all of mankind then we all are apart of the thousand generations the commandments apply forever, they will even apply in the New Earth. Sin might be removed but that wouldn't make it ok to break a commandment. Not to mention these verses don't actually conflict with with Christ reining for a 1000 years.A.2 You have carried the idea it seems that the kingdom of God can exist only on earth, even though we both full well know that their is a heaven, I hope you have gathered that from scripture if not then I just don't know what kind of Christian you are. The kingdom of God has always existed but our time to choose Him or reject Him hasn't ended yet and the real 1000 year rein of Christ will signal our last chance to choose.A.3It won't matter if the Jews rejected Christ this time, in fact the only number I am certain of accepting Christ are the 144,000 described Rev 14:4 after that I figure it becomes a matter between the and Christ. However if you want to try to theorize that someone could actually stand against the armies of heaven and make a difference I'm not going to touch you there, you try. I refuse to bow down to any man as an American I believe all men are created equal, and I am a soldier in the U.S army but their is no way I would try to fight the armies of heaven, God and Christ are a force I will bow down to.Ok your first part of your rebuttal I'm just going to quote it:"*First of all, your position is that everything in Rev 20 is literal. Thus, you have the devil being a literal serpent and a literal snake at the same time and, as such, cast into a literal pit with literally no bottom as well as a literal prison. Not only that, but you have Jesus being a literal lion (Rev 5: 5), a literal root (Rev 5: 5), a literal lamb (John 1: 36) - while Herod was a literal fox (Luke 13: 32). Don't you see that such descriptions are figurative? You have a question on the "literalness" of "a thousand generations", and I'd like to see the response"Starting from the top and working my way down I realize I didn't stop you in my first rebuttal but when I say I interpret scripture literally what I mean is I do this. I Observe, Interpret, Apply and then Principalize that is my method of bible study but the most important step is observation. I do want to point out I never gave my Christian view a specific title because it doesn't have one I get what I believe from that process and the ministers as well as friends and family. Observation is the most important step to understand whats going on and anyone can realize that a serpant is a metaphor there for Satan. I'm sorry you assumed I was a total idiot who doesn't understand devices of poetry. Those metaphors do have literal meaning however Christ was really sacrificed like a lamb "literally" and Herod was cunning and sneaky like a fox "literaly".Is it really hard to comprehend that I can respect poetry and take something literaly?I just want to touch on your rebuttal to my second contention, my view of revelations does not allow me to be certain of every prophecy in revelations except for a few such as the rapture and Christ's reing. The rapture is however the 7th trumpet and I do have reason to believe that, the next trumpet could very well be the 7th. But saying the next one is the 7th doesn't mean it will happen tomorrow or in 50 years. If I can however show that what revelation points out isn't describing something that has happened, or won't necessarily start inside a specific time frame we have reason to believe that those prophecy's will take place if we believe that Christ really is God. That he will fulfill His prophecy's.The faith of a preterist sadly sounds really weak it's a view that sounds like it doubts the ability of God to fulfill of His prophecy's. Which is something I'm sorry about.The last rebuttal of yours I will refute is this*Your response to the phrase "shortly come to pass" is "shortly and nearly are not nearly the same, ..."I actually said "Shortly and Nearly are not nearly the same, as specifically saying take a 5 minute(break), 30minute(lunch) or an 8 hour sleep. I'm sure you would agree."Maybe a made a grammatical error and the comma doesn't belong there if thats the case then I am sorry. But I said that shortly and nearly as in nethier one of them are the same as taking a 5 minute(break), 30minute(lunch) or an 8 hour sleep. I'm sure you would agree.Then you totally ignored my explanation of God's view of time, I suppose the Title "Star Trek" may of bored you but it is a relevant example because it gives a look at what a race without a linear existence is like. Which is the case with an infinite God, I think an even athiest would agree if God was truely infinite He wouldn't have to adhere to a linear existence. I'm going to just point out something you missed in my case.You talked a lot about my literal view of revelaiton 20 but I want to point out you never actually attacked my first full contention which was my first contention what I said in round one was not a conention I just wanted to make it clear I understood what pro was. I didn't make an actualy contention because you said "First round is acceptance" so I figured I probably should do nothing more than accept the debate. I did ask a question but you didn't "have" to answer if you didn't want to count that first round.The fact that you dropped my actual first contention.The most important part of my first conention is this "in the court of law you never assume fraud or inaccuracy from a testimony unless the one testifying contradicts him or her self or other evidence that is more reliable shows a clear contradiction. You do claim contradictions but my re-butal will show how they fall short of their objective." Nothing you offer truely contradicts the passages of the book Revelation the only thing you have is your interpretations of prophecy. In your own words you said to me "No, you need to give examples that, by logic and reason and study, force one to "conclude", not merely "allow." You said this in response to my second contention where I offered alternatives to your prophecy's. Even you have not "force[d] one to 'conclude'," that your interpretations are the sole accurate ones of the prophecy's dealing with time. But what "I" have been able to do is shoot holes in your interpretations of those time elements and leave you unable to respond back to the part in my first contention which breaks down how revelation tells us that what is prophesied is yet to come and that, that is the only actual certain time constraint if it's even a constraint of Revelation. I will admit though Revelation won't create converts but it isn't supposed to, Christ is fulfilled prophecy is only a helper. Please see my first contention.