but not necessary.
Using the mathematical sense of necessary and sufficient, I wish to argue that for biblical prophecy to be consistent with human free will, the prophecies in Revelation must cover all possible human choices and their resulting world conditions from the first century to the last century.
God or whatever cannot undermine human free will by making a specific prophecies, for the enumerous human choices [that intervene the prophecy and the event] cannot be prophesized, or else there is no human free will.
So god in making a prophecy is faced with a number of possible scenarios in the end of days and he or she must therefore do the only scientifically valid thing and enumerate all possible events within the prophecy.
So what Revelations reveals is two basic possibilities. Either we get through the nuclear crisis and reach the 1000 years of peace, or we have WWIII wherein anyone who wants to survive must survive in undergroud bunkers, just as Revelations says.
But because of human free will, we earthlings as a whole have the choice to be peaceful or warlike. Right now it seems that god is going to give us a small taste of war, so that we decide finally to be peaceful.
Back to the original point, because of human free will, prophecy even in the hands of a god cannot be exact. If so the next best thing is to prophesize everything possible.
At least then humans will know what to look out for.\!!!
And this proves that even a god can be fallible