amor Posted August 6, 2007 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,194 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 34 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/18/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted August 6, 2007 It is fringe though the above do not as Nebula states constitute a majority of scholars. There is Christianity beyond middle America and its peculiar paranoias and even more peculiar televangelists. Indeed it is strange trange that most of the "scholars" you cite above (all the ones I checked out at least) are buck chasing televangelists. If this is so, would you please, then, explain to us what your research has shown the majority of scholars to interpret Magog to be? Thanks! Most don't indulge in trying to turn the Bible into a glorified fortune telling almanac. Anyway since we are told explicitly in the Jesus that we are not in a postion to make predictions about the end: If this is so, why did Jesus rebuke His disciples for being unable to discern and recognize the fulfillment of prophecy? (He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!, Luke 24:25) Why did He rebuke the Pharisees and Sadducees: "When evening comes, you say, 'It will be fair weather, for the sky is red,' and in the morning, 'Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times." (Matt. 16:2,3)? Please, amor, I am not asking for your interpretation of the entire chapter. However, you had stated that most scholars do not interpret Magog to be Russia. Therefore, I asked you what you know most scholars to mean it to be? Please do not tell me I am incorrect in my statement and then not inform me of what the correction is. People on the fringes, and all to often in postions of power at all time have soght to see Magog as symbolising some group that they don't like, and them to treat them as evil incarnate, making them of course much easier to dismiss, attackand oppress. This is what you with your simplistic reading trying to force scripture to fit your political prejudices are doing now. I' don't play tthat game, and neither do most Christians and reputable theologians Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari21 Posted August 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 140 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,846 Content Per Day: 0.29 Reputation: 10 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/04/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/05/1987 Share Posted August 6, 2007 No biggie....just more stuff for Israel to burn when they finally are attacked... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted August 6, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted August 6, 2007 People on the fringes, and all to often in postions of power at all time have soght to see Magog as symbolising some group that they don't like, and them to treat them as evil incarnate, making them of course much easier to dismiss, attackand oppress. This is what you with your simplistic reading trying to force scripture to fit your political prejudices are doing now. I' don't play tthat game, and neither do most Christians and reputable theologians Really amor. Firstly, Wikipedia is hardly a credible source for information. Secondly, trying to understand what the Scriptures meant by Magog is not trying to impose my dislikes on another nation. If one sees that ancient Persia has "evolved" into what is now Iran, why is it imposing a view if one's research determines that there was a land called Magog in the area that is now the Moscow region? Your argument comes off sounding like you are the one trying to avoid what you don't like in Scripture. Besides, you are avoiding answering the question. You have claimed the interpretation of "most theologians", yet you cannot answer what "most theologians" say. Please stop spouting wind and answer with the facts, OK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinM Posted August 6, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 144 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 4,512 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 625 Days Won: 10 Joined: 04/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/07/1979 Share Posted August 6, 2007 It is fringe though the above do not as Nebula states constitute a majority of scholars. There is Christianity beyond middle America and its peculiar paranoias and even more peculiar televangelists. Indeed it is strange trange that most of the "scholars" you cite above (all the ones I checked out at least) are buck chasing televangelists. If this is so, would you please, then, explain to us what your research has shown the majority of scholars to interpret Magog to be? Thanks! Most don't indulge in trying to turn the Bible into a glorified fortune telling almanac. Anyway since we are told explicitly in the Jesus that we are not in a postion to make predictions about the end: If this is so, why did Jesus rebuke His disciples for being unable to discern and recognize the fulfillment of prophecy? (He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!, Luke 24:25) Why did He rebuke the Pharisees and Sadducees: "When evening comes, you say, 'It will be fair weather, for the sky is red,' and in the morning, 'Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times." (Matt. 16:2,3)? Please, amor, I am not asking for your interpretation of the entire chapter. However, you had stated that most scholars do not interpret Magog to be Russia. Therefore, I asked you what you know most scholars to mean it to be? Please do not tell me I am incorrect in my statement and then not inform me of what the correction is. People on the fringes, and all to often in postions of power at all time have soght to see Magog as symbolising some group that they don't like, and them to treat them as evil incarnate, making them of course much easier to dismiss, attackand oppress. This is what you with your simplistic reading trying to force scripture to fit your political prejudices are doing now. I' don't play tthat game, and neither do most Christians and reputable theologians You are just echoeing what Jullius Wellhausen wrote in 1886 called the "Documentary Hypothesis" I would say many break throughs in language, archaelogy and theology have made his hypothesis obsolete. I have an idea, grab a string and globe and start in Jerusalem and pull the string North to the North Pole and see what capital runs along that line. Moscow, plus with their new claim to the North Pole, they believe they are the most North a nation can become. It seems they are desperate to be Gog from Magog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amor Posted August 8, 2007 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,194 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 34 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/18/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted August 8, 2007 People on the fringes, and all to often in postions of power at all time have soght to see Magog as symbolising some group that they don't like, and them to treat them as evil incarnate, making them of course much easier to dismiss, attackand oppress. This is what you with your simplistic reading trying to force scripture to fit your political prejudices are doing now. I' don't play tthat game, and neither do most Christians and reputable theologians Really amor. Firstly, Wikipedia is hardly a credible source for information. Unlike Hal Lindsey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amor Posted August 8, 2007 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,194 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 34 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/18/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted August 8, 2007 Secondly, trying to understand what the Scriptures meant by Magog is not trying to impose my dislikes on another nation. If one sees that ancient Persia has "evolved" into what is now Iran, why is it imposing a view if one's research determines that there was a land called Magog in the area that is now the Moscow region? Your argument comes off sounding like you are the one trying to avoid what you don't like in Scripture. Besides, you are avoiding answering the question. You have claimed the interpretation of "most theologians", yet you cannot answer what "most theologians" say. Please stop spouting wind and answer with the facts, OK? There's is a difference berween trying to understand scripture, and trying to twist it to suit your own political outlook. I can't because there are no monolithic interpretations out there, the point is that they don't agree with you. Since you came up with the claim that a " majority of scholars" share your interpretation, it is for you to show who they are, and in what way they constitute a majority. It's you who made the grand statement back it up and explain your statistics. It is your wind that has been spouted and your facts that are not backed up. Show me your "majority"!! I do by thate way accept that if you interpret "scholar" as meaning televangelist from the American mid-West then in yor terms you might be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted August 8, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted August 8, 2007 Firstly, Wikipedia is hardly a credible source for information. Unlike Hal Lindsey? Amor - 1. Why do you believe I used Hal Lindsey as my source of reference? I never made this claim. But yet you keep making this assumption. 2. Your response is an avoidance attack. You still haven't answered the question. Why? I said that most Biblical scholars believe Magog to be what is now Russia. You said most scholars do not believe this. So, I asked you a simple question: Who or what do you believe most scholars to believe Magog to be? I'm not trying to get into a long, drawn-out debate with you over your interpretation or non-interpretation. I would just like to know what you know "most scholars" to say about Magog. I don't want a throw-out to a summation of the argument. Since you believe most scholars to interpret Magog as something else, I just plain and simple want to know your understanding of Magog. Why is this so difficult? Secondly, trying to understand what the Scriptures meant by Magog is not trying to impose my dislikes on another nation. If one sees that ancient Persia has "evolved" into what is now Iran, why is it imposing a view if one's research determines that there was a land called Magog in the area that is now the Moscow region? Your argument comes off sounding like you are the one trying to avoid what you don't like in Scripture. Besides, you are avoiding answering the question. You have claimed the interpretation of "most theologians", yet you cannot answer what "most theologians" say. Please stop spouting wind and answer with the facts, OK? There's is a difference berween trying to understand scripture, and trying to twist it to suit your own political outlook. Amor - I am growing weary of your assumptions. This is a false accusation you have made against me. You don't me, nor my spiritual walk, nor my research. Yet because I view prophecy and the Mid-East you again assume I twist Scripture to fit my agenda. One thing I have learned of human nature, people who love to point the finger do not realize they have three fingers pointing back at them. Let me ask you, are you twisting your interpretation of Scripture to suit your own political outlook? I can't because there are no monolithic interpretations out there, the point is that they don't agree with you. Well then, why didn't you just say from the beginning, "My research has found too much disagreement to say for sure who the Lord through Ezekiel meant by Magog," or something to that effect? I would have accepted that. (Doesn't mean I'd agree, but at least I would know your position on the matter - which is all I wanted to know.) Since you came up with the claim that a " majority of scholars" share your interpretation, it is for you to show who they are, and in what way they constitute a majority. It's you who made the grand statement back it up and explain your statistics. Again, I wasn't looking to prove a point. The post I made, if you look again at it, is a speculative statement. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Prophecy is elusive - I am not ignorant of this. So, I keep my interpretations and understandings to speculations. All I wanted to know was if you had an understanding of this prophecy or not. The way you answered tells me you haven't actually paid attention to this prophecy before. If not, why be so elusive? It is your wind that has been spouted and your facts that are not backed up. Show me your "majority"!! I do by thate way accept that if you interpret "scholar" as meaning televangelist from the American mid-West then in yor terms you might be right. Amor, this is not the way to debate a subject. All you have done is avoid the question and defend with attacks. I wish you actually had some substance to bring to this discussion. As for my research - it's kind of hard to bring up sources I no longer have access to. That's why I just said "research." If my intent was to prove a point you are correct that I should find these things and post them. But this was not my intention. All I wanted was your understanding, and who you deem "most scholars to be" - preferrably from a Christian source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOVE SONGS Posted August 9, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 131 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,188 Content Per Day: 0.50 Reputation: 135 Days Won: 8 Joined: 04/10/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted August 9, 2007 Israel is looking into reports that Russia plans to sell 250 advanced long-range Sukhoi-30 fighter jets to Iran in an unprecedented billion-dollar deal. http://www.worthynews.com/news/jpost-com-s...rticle-Printer/ oh....geeeezzzzz...whats next ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amor Posted August 9, 2007 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,194 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 34 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/18/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted August 9, 2007 Firstly, Wikipedia is hardly a credible source for information. Unlike Hal Lindsey? Amor - 1. Why do you believe I used Hal Lindsey as my source of reference? I never made this claim. But yet you keep making this assumption. You haven't I don't think quoted any of the majority of scholars who share your opinion. Howevwer JR2 whose posts have now seems to have vanished, but iare preserved in quotations in my and other people's posts did cite him along with the following The list of scholars who believe that either Gog or Magog is Russia. Jack Van Impe, Hal Lindsey, Perry Stone, Grant Jeffrey, P.J. Dake, Charles Capps, Jerry Falwell, And Adrian Rodgers just to name a few Lindsey and Falwell I've heard of before and are like the others, withe the exception of Dake who doesn't seem to make it onto google are all mid-west televangelists All keen to predict the imminent end, but paradoxically, given that immenence have time to hoover up donations for the gullible, and in the case at least of Jeffery offer financial advice on the side, just in case he and other cathode tube beamed locusts have left them with any seeds in their silo. Follow God's rules for financial freedom. In today's uncertain times, how can you achieve the goal of financial independence? Success depends on a balanced strategy that is based on timeless biblical wisdom and up-to-date financial guidance. Finding Financial Freedom is your guide to prosperity that lasts. Written by Bible scholar and professional financial planner Grant R. Jeffrey, this book shows how you can: The only financial advice we need is not, of course to be found in one ofGrant's pricey little books Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted August 9, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted August 9, 2007 OK, so the bottom line is that you do not have a position on the identity of Magog, but you don't believe it is Russia because . . . ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts