Revelation is prophetic riddle, not spoken clearly (Nu 12:8) and subject to more than one interpretation, the only rule being that interpretation must be in agreement with authoritative NT apostolic teaching.
You keep saying that personal interpretation is bad, but your personal interpretation is bad. You even have your own version of what you call authoritative NT apostolic teaching, and that there is some unspoken rule that this comes before God Himself. You sound like a supporter of the Catholic Church, which claims to be the holder and supporter of all truth pertaining to scripture. Just replace that NT apostolic teaching with "Catholic Church". A weapon to wield against anyone who doesn't agree with you.
The context of the verse you wrote is Aaron and Miriam vs. God and Moses. God tells Aaron and Miriam that if they have a prophet in their midst, God will speak to them... in dreams. However, God speaks to Moses directly, that is the relationship God has with Moses alone. He does not have that relationship with anyone else in the nation of Israel, just Moses. And when God speaks to Moses, it is clear and direct. In those dreams however, the prophet would have to deal with riddles. God is expressing His intense anger with Aaron and Miriam which was such that when God left, Miriam had full-blown leprosy. It wasn't just developing, it was in full swing and she was snow white. (That is a major change of skin tone for a Jewish person.)
So please, don't use your own personal agenda to reinterpret scripture. If you want to say that this covers all time, then consider that this verse would only matter if you were to say, attack your pastor's teachings. However, even your pastor does not have the relationship with God that Moses had. Elijah, Elisha, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Habbakuk, etc. all had a special relationship with God. God spoke directly and clearly with Elijah. And in fact, unlike Moses, Elijah never died.
I interpret that differently, that 1,000 years is figurative of the church age, and the first resurrection is from spiritual death to eternal life in the new birth. All those who do not take part in the first resurrection (new birth) rise to eternal judgment.
Likewise, the apostles teach that the church (of both OT and NT saints, Ro 11:16-23) is
the last times and the end of the ages (1 Pe 1:20, Heb 1:2, 9:26),
the fulfillment of the ages (1 Co 10:11) and
God's new creation (2 Co 5:17, Gal 6:15) for eternity.
Papias, who was a student of Polycarp who was the disciple of John taught that it was a 1000 year kingdom over the Jews. Eusebius, historian of the Catholic Church, and an amillennialist (not preterist at all) ridiculed Papias for believing such things, saying it was due to his age and that he probably forgot things. Eusebius gave no reason not to believe what Papias was saying, other than to question his intellectual abilities. Why? He had to. Again, this was someone who was the student of John's disciple, and had heard John speak. He also wrote about John.
God has no other plan on earth than his church, the body of Christ (Eph 5:30-32) and bride of the Lamb (Rev 21:9-14), the New Jerusalem.
And God has revealed no other plan for his church than his new creation, exceeding his original creation.
So why does God, through Paul, say He has a different plan than you say? Why do you hate the Jewish people so much that you want to shut them out of the Kingdom. The reason why Paul speaks about those who were added to the olive tree, but that God would gladly rip out again if they are non-producers, if they don't continue in Christ, is because they were bragging about the exclusion of the Jews. That is why Paul reminds them that they were only removed for unbelief. If they believe again, the natural branch of the olive tree will be added back. God has no issue simply removing the foreign branch. Remember again, Jesus said that there is another flock not a part of His fold that He needs to bring in. He was speaking of the Gentiles.
