Revisit The Book of Daniel with a Heretical Baptist

[BobRyan]

How say you?

For all the hundreds of millions, even billions of Ahmeds, Mohammeds, Brown Eyed Deer who lived without a chance to hear of Christ, what do you believe about their ultimate fate?

Not a sticky problem for me. I know God to be infinite in love, patience, wisdom, power, and presence.

Agape (Ug ahp py)

George

Many have died since the days of Christ and the days of Adam.

Rom 2:13-16 solves the problem for those who live without any access at all to the Word of God and yet SHOW the law of God written on the heart by the work of the Holy Spirit under the New Covenant - doing "instinctively" the things written in God's Law.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

John, I quite disagree with your discourse. Again, look at Paul's letter to the Romans:

Rom 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Rom 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

[JawgeFromJawja]

None of those examples are a problem, except as we attempt to try and reason out how God is going to deal with them.

We need to allow God to do what He knows is best. But those problems don't contradict what the Bible teaches about salvation. It's like the issue of babies. The Bible says nothing about the question of the salvation of babies, but we know that God loves them and will do what is best.

So we leave those decisions in the hands of God.

Having said that, we know that the Bible teaches that people will be lost because they didn't hear the gospel preached. That is why it's imperative that Christians take the gospel to the ends of the world and teach the people about Christ.

See Romans 10: 13-17; Matt. 28: 19-20; John 3: 16-18.

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

[color:#000099]Verse 13 is quite clear.

Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

In these two verses, 14 and 15, Paul asks questions, but provides no answer.

Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

It is obvious that people who never heard the gospel could not believe the Gospel.

Further, v 17 points out that faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Rom 10:18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth,

Verse 18 is Paul's opinion. Paul opined much that none of us accepts, such as proscribing women speaking in Church. V. 18 is not spiritual doctrine, and obviously the whole world has never yet heard the Gospel.

Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

This is the Great Commission, a command of Jesus, but the command to go in no way implies that those who do not hear die hopelessly lost. This command was given to begin establishing God's Kingdom, in accordance with prophecy.

Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Once more, there is no implication here that those who are not ever privileged to hear the Gospel die hopelessly lost. See verse 19: there are uncounted billions who never saw the light, and who died not hearing the Gospel.

So let me see if I understand your position:

1. You do agree, I hope, that God is a Being of love and mercy.

2. You probably also agree that God is omniscient, and knows the future.

You seem to believe that God, a Being of love and mercy, created people whom He knew in advance would never hear the Gospel. Therefore Merciful and Loving God created people He knew, by your doctrine, would be doomed.

John, this is not in God's character. I know Him better than that. God did not create a privileged few to be saved. Such would not in any way manifest love and mercy. Such would be arbitrary, weak, not compassionate, and even lazy. Weak and lazy in that for an omniscient, omnipotent Being, there would be many solutions that would ultimately lead to salvation for those who never hear the Gospel.

My prayer is that you come to realize the unconditional love of God, "charity" in Elizabethan English, or Agape as derived from the Greek.

God bless you in every way, especially knowledge and wisdom.

George

[JawgeFromJawja]

Originally Posted By: JawgeFromJawja

Other verses in Revelation reveal or suggest that the prophecy of Revelation is to take place soon in relationship to the date of the writing of Revelation.

Originally Posted By: John317

What it's saying is that the prophecies would begin to be fulfilled soon. It is obvious that the whole prophecy of Revelation was not fulfilled in John's day.

That is true. The Rev 19 second comming, and Rev 20 millennium, And Rev 20 Lake of Fire and Rev 21 New earth and Rev 21-21 City of God landing on Earth... and Rev 20 Devil destroyed in the lake of fire along with all the wicked... so many things that have not yet happened.

Pretty hard to ignore it.

Peter said that the Church "fixes its hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ". The Second coming was and still is the entire focus of the NT church age.

in Christ,

Bob

Bob, to take the bulk of Revelation as anything but allegory, metaphor, and symbolism is to grossly misunderstand Judeo-Christian apocalyptic literature.

Many examples abound:

In Daniel, disturbing dreams and very unlikely beasts, some with multiple horns.

In Revelation, this passage is highly symbolic and metaphorical:

Rev 1:13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.

Rev 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;

Rev 1:15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.

Rev 1:16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

Then there are dragons, visits to a highly symbolic Heaven in which are strange beasts with wings covered with eyes, prayers symbolized by incense ascending to God, stinging locusts like horses, but with faces of men, and on and on.

And yes, I do believe that the prophesies of Revelation have all been actualized.

God's blessings,

[Stan]

What if....... someone took us through, in another thread.. the book of Daniel verse by verse..?

[John317]

OK, here's what I'll do if George is OK with it. We can post a verse or several verses of Daniel, starting with Daniel 1: 1, and then anyone can just post any comments he wants, but it has to be only on those verses and it can't go off the topic of those particular verses. And more verses won't be posted until everyone participating is done with the verses already posted.

This wouldn't prevent people from bringing in parallel, or related, verses in the book of Revelation, and people could also quote, or talk about the obvservations of, Bible commentaries on those particular verses. Various translations would also be welcome.

All comments would be acceptable.

What do you think, George? Would it be OK to do here, or would you rather have it moved to a separate discussion?

If you're OK with it, we could start with Daniel 1: 1-2:

KJV--

Daniel 1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.

1:2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god.

I won't continue this until George has given us his answer.

[BobRyan]

Please read, read with comprehension, Colossians 2: 16:

Col 2:16 Let no man therefore condemne you in meate and drinke, or in respect of an holy day, or of the newe moone, or of the Sabbath dayes,

Paul made it clear that he was writing of, including all Jewish holy days AND the Sabbath.

But those were different from the weekly Sabbath that God Himself made holy and commands that humans remember to keep holy.

There you go again. Where in Scripture does God command that "humans" other than Israel keep the Sabbath?

[BobRyan]

And Paul makes it abundantly clear that Christians are to obey the Ten Commandments, just as Christ Himself taught also:

Romans 13:8-10-- Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if [there be] any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love [is] the fulfilling of the law.

Nor does it include not taking the Lord's name in vain... nor does it include having no other Gods, or does it include not bowing down to idols.

Those who try to invent the doctrine that "any part of God's word not repeated must be deleted" are continually running into a brick wall in that regard.

Surely you cannot expect us to leap off that cliff.

The essence of The Law is love. Love for God and love for your fellow man.

Originally Posted By: JawgeFromJawja

Now for the bottom line. This question is directed not only to John317, but to all Adventists. I, along with hundreds of millions, probably even tens of billions, of non-SDA Christians, cannot honestly accept Sabbath

[/quote']

100's of millions of Catholics say they cannot honestly reject praying to the dead.

100's of millions of hindus say they cannot honestly reject praying to a great many gods.

millions of atheists say they cannot honestly accept Christ as their savior.

None of those groups "change the Bible" just because they find a way to differ with it.

The Ten commandments "remain" as Paul points out in Eph 6:1-5 as a solid unit applicable to all mankind such that the 5th commandment is the first one in that still-applicable unit with a promise.

The TEN commandments are the LAW of God - and Paul says in 1Cor 7:18 "what matters is KEEPING the Law of God" you say "oh no it does not matter" --

We simply say "let each reader decide for themselves".

the Bible says "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to Worship" and you say "oh no - not so" ...

We say - "let each reader decide between God's Word and your man made tradition.

in Christ's day millions of Jews followed the "traditions of man" and "set aside the commandments of God". - in Mark 7 Christ said "in vain do they worship Me teaching for doctrines the COMMANDMENTS OF MEN...NEGLETING the COMMANDMENTS of God you hold to the TRADITIONS of man"

You have chosen a path of "high risk" in going directly against the Word of God - and teaching others to do likewise. That we can say with ceratainty.

But we have never been called by the Bible or by God in any other form to declare that this or that person is not saved as if on an individual case-by-case basis we are sitting in the judgment seat of Christ.

We don't need to go to such an extreme. All we are called to do is to state clearly what God's Word actually says - and to contrast it as in your case with the traditions of man.

That we are happy to do -- all day long.

in Christ,

Bob

[Guest]

You do have a way with words Bob. And it's true what you said.

[BobRyan]

Other verses in Revelation reveal or suggest that the prophecy of Revelation is to take place soon in relationship to the date of the writing of Revelation.

[BobRyan]

You do have a way with words Bob. And it's true what you said.

I live to serve - my friend.

[BobRyan]

OK, here's what I'll do if George is OK with it. We can post a verse or several verses of Daniel, starting with Daniel 1: 1, and then anyone can just post any comments he wants, but it has to be only on those verses and it can't go off the topic of those particular verses. And more verses won't be posted until everyone participating is done with the verses already posted.

This wouldn't prevent people from bringing in parallel, or related, verses in the book of Revelation, and people could also quote, or talk about the obvservations of, Bible commentaries on those particular verses. Various translations would also be welcome.

All comments would be acceptable.

What do you think, George? Would it be OK to do here, or would you rather have it moved to a separate discussion?

If you're OK with it, we could start with Daniel 1: 1-2:

How about starting a new thread. Let George pick the section of Daniel that he wants to focus on - because otherwise you will have a long and drawn out thread - waiting to get to the part that is actually of interest to George.

My suggestion is that once he picks a chapter - you title the thread "Daniel chapter x" whatever the number is.

But notice that in this dicussion so far George has shown little interest in the book of Daniel - even when I questioned him about Daniel 9 extensively. In his recent statement on REvelation and Daniel - he almost appears to discard them entirely as nothing but symbolism. It is unclear to me that he wants to discuss the text in detail - so I would be surprised if he is interested in a text-by-text walk through starting with verse 1.

I could be wrong. We will see.

in Christ,

Bob

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: RLH

You do have a way with words Bob. And it's true what you said.

I live to serve - my friend.

Good! A voice of reason.

[teresaq]

For some reason I got the impression that Jawge wanted to be in control of his own thread but that hasn't been respected so far. I'm not so sure starting another thread would give better results.

'Course that's just my impression. Jawge can confirm or deny or make no comment, however he deems best.

[BobRyan]

Ever the cheerful optimist.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

OK, here's what I'll do if George is OK with it. We can post a verse or several verses of Daniel, starting with Daniel 1: 1, and then anyone can just post any comments he wants, but it has to be only on those verses and it can't go off the topic of those particular verses. And more verses won't be posted until everyone participating is done with the verses already posted.

This wouldn't prevent people from bringing in parallel, or related, verses in the book of Revelation, and people could also quote, or talk about the obvservations of, Bible commentaries on those particular verses. Various translations would also be welcome.

All comments would be acceptable.

What do you think, George? Would it be OK to do here, or would you rather have it moved to a separate discussion?

If you're OK with it, we could start with Daniel 1: 1-2:

How about starting a new thread. Let George pick the section of Daniel that he wants to focus on - because otherwise you will have a long and drawn out thread - waiting to get to the part that is actually of interest to George.

Good idea. I'll wait for George to answer before I decide to open up a new thread about Daniel. I think it would make a great discussion.

[JawgeFromJawja]

What if....... someone took us through, in another thread.. the book of Daniel verse by verse..?

Great, Stan. That would probably accomplish what I had in mind with this topic. If no one objects, let me fall back, regroup, and counter attack in that vein.

God's blessings and love,

[JawgeFromJawja]

So let us begin over, verse by verse, as suggested by Stan.

Dan 1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.

Dan 1:2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god.

Dan 1:3 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes;

Dan 1:4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.

Dan 1:5 And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king.

Dan 1:6 Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah:

Dan 1:7 Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego.

Dan 1:8 But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king's meat, nor with the wine which he drank: therefore he requested of the prince of the eunuchs that he might not defile himself.

Dan 1:9 Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs.

Dan 1:10 And the prince of the eunuchs said unto Daniel, I fear my lord the king, who hath appointed your meat and your drink: for why should he see your faces worse liking than the children which are of your sort? then shall ye make me endanger my head to the king.

On first glance, the young men, Daniel (Belteshazzar)); Hananiah, (Shadrach); Mishael (Meshach); and Azariah(Abednego)might seem to be in a heap of trouble. But they have the favor and protection of God and of the Babylonians, from the king to the eunuch assigned to their nurture.

Dan 1:11 Then said Daniel to Melzar, whom the prince of the eunuchs had set over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah,

Dan 1:12 Prove thy servants, I beseech thee, ten days; and let them give us pulse to eat, and water to drink.

Dan 1:13 Then let our countenances be looked upon before thee, and the countenance of the children that eat of the portion of the king's meat: and as thou seest, deal with thy servants.

Dan 1:14 So he consented to them in this matter, and proved them ten days.

Dan 1:15 And at the end of ten days their countenances appeared fairer and fatter in flesh than all the children which did eat the portion of the king's meat.

Dan 1:16 Thus Melzar took away the portion of their meat, and the wine that they should drink; and gave them pulse.

Dan 1:17 As for these four children, God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom: and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams.

Dan 1:18 Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in, then the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar.

Dan 1:19 And the king communed with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore stood they before the king.

Dan 1:20 And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm.

Dan 1:21 And Daniel continued even unto the first year of king Cyrus.

The first Chapter sets the stage for the miracles and prophecies of The Book of Daniel, and reinforces the truth that God does indeed work in the affairs of mankind, both collectively and individually.

God's Blessings,

[JawgeFromJawja]

Originally Posted By: JawgeFromJawja

There are innumerable preterists who believe that most, if not all of prophecy has been fulfilled. For several years, I have agreed with most doctrines of preterism.

Are you aware of the origin of preterism and of who came up with that theory?

It basically denies that the Bible contains any genuine predictive prophecy.

Here's what the Wikipedia has to say about Preterism:

Quote:

There has historically been general agreement that the first systematic Preterist exposition of prophecy was written by the Jesuit Luis De Alcasar during the Counter Reformation.[8][9] Moses Stuart noted that Alcasar's Preterist interpretation was of considerable benefit to the Roman Catholic Church during its arguments with Protestants,[10] and Preterism has been described in modern eschatological commentary as a Catholic defense against the Protestant Historicist view which identified the Roman Catholic Church as a persecuting apostasy.[11]

Due to resistance by Protestant Historicists, the Preterist view was slow to gain acceptance outside the Roman Catholic Church.[12] Among Protestants it was first accepted by Hugo Grotius,[13][14] a Dutch Protestant eager to establish common ground between Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church.[15] His first attempt to do this was entitled ‘Commentary on Certain Texts Which Deal with Antichrist’ (1640), in which he attempted to argue that the texts relating to Antichrist had their fulfillment in the 1st century AD. This was not well received by Protestants,[16] but Grotius was undeterred and in his next work ‘Commentaries On The New Testament' (1641-1650), he expanded his Preterist views to include the Olivet prophecy and Revelation.

Preterism is a false theory and interpretation of the prophecies.

Nay, not so, in all accounts. It is not false in any sense. First of all, preterism was the position of the early Church: the whole New Testament verifies that.

As for the Jesuit origin of preterism, such a statement is bound to cast preterism in a pejorative sense among folks who adhere to Jesuit conspiracy theories and other such nonsense. I cannot defend the Catholic Church in any way, but that institution is now obviously in a state of decline: no need to worry. At least I shan't worry. Should the extremely highly unlikely situation of a specific Antichrist with Catholic connections arise, then I have most Protestant denominations to worry about that, and to sound the alarm.

Preterism as a Protestant doctrine had a rebirth during the reformation. Those of the historicist persuasion fought the doctrine tooth and nail, which is one factor holding back acceptance of Preterism. After your ripostes to this post, let's table discussion on preterism. George Collier King intends a dedicated topic on preterism later. Or perhaps even simultaneously with this on on Daniel.

Best regards,

[JawgeFromJawja]

Originally Posted By: JawgeFromJawja

How say you?

For all the hundreds of millions, even billions of Ahmeds, Mohammeds, Brown Eyed Deer who lived without a chance to hear of Christ, what do you believe about their ultimate fate?

Not a sticky problem for me. I know God to be infinite in love, patience, wisdom, power, and presence.

Agape (Ug ahp py)

George

Many have died since the days of Christ and the days of Adam.

Rom 2:13-16 solves the problem for those who live without any access at all to the Word of God and yet SHOW the law of God written on the heart by the work of the Holy Spirit under the New Covenant - doing "instinctively" the things written in God's Law.

in Christ,

Bob

Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

Thank you very much, Bob. Very helpful in reiterating the power of Agape, God's love.

Not only scripture, but song and verse verify God's over arcing

mercy and love:

Hymn – The Love of God

The love of God is greater far

Than tongue or pen can ever tell;

It goes beyond the highest star,

And reaches to the lowest hell;

The guilty pair, bowed down with care,

God gave His Son to win;

His erring child He reconciled,

And pardoned from his sin.

O love of God, how rich and pure!

How measureless and strong!

It shall forevermore endure

The saints’ and angels’ song.

When years of time shall pass away,

And earthly thrones and kingdoms fall,

When men, who here refuse to pray,

On rocks and hills and mountains call,

God’s love so sure, shall still endure,

All measureless and strong;

Redeeming grace to Adam’s race—

The saints’ and angels’ song.

Could we with ink the ocean fill,

And were the skies of parchment made,

Were every stalk on earth a quill,

And every man a scribe by trade,

To write the love of God above,

Would drain the ocean dry.

Nor could the scroll contain the whole,

Though stretched from sky to sky.

God's love

[JawgeFromJawja]

Originally Posted By: John317

OK, here's what I'll do if George is OK with it. We can post a verse or several verses of Daniel, starting with Daniel 1: 1, and then anyone can just post any comments he wants, but it has to be only on those verses and it can't go off the topic of those particular verses. And more verses won't be posted until everyone participating is done with the verses already posted.

This wouldn't prevent people from bringing in parallel, or related, verses in the book of Revelation, and people could also quote, or talk about the obvservations of, Bible commentaries on those particular verses. Various translations would also be welcome.

All comments would be acceptable.

What do you think, George? Would it be OK to do here, or would you rather have it moved to a separate discussion?

If you're OK with it, we could start with Daniel 1: 1-2:

How about starting a new thread. Let George pick the section of Daniel that he wants to focus on - because otherwise you will have a long and drawn out thread - waiting to get to the part that is actually of interest to George.

My suggestion is that once he picks a chapter - you title the thread "Daniel chapter x" whatever the number is.

But notice that in this dicussion so far George has shown little interest in the book of Daniel - even when I questioned him about Daniel 9 extensively. In his recent statement on REvelation and Daniel - he almost appears to discard them entirely as nothing but symbolism. It is unclear to me that he wants to discuss the text in detail - so I would be surprised if he is interested in a text-by-text walk through starting with verse 1.

I could be wrong. We will see.

in Christ,

Bob

Come on, Bob! Be fair! How could I effectively express my interest in Daniel with a zillion other subjects being interjected?

So, I have already started my verse by verse comment within this topic. Not every subsequent post will encompass a whole chapter. Daniel Chapter 1 largely sets the stage for Daniel.

Best regards to a fellow Georgian, even though he is 100 percent right only 72 percent of the time.

[teresaq]

I don't, my brother. Lead on... I would like to see what we do agree on...before starting in with what I disagree. So lead on, I will fall in line.

Originally Posted By: Stan Jensen

What if....... someone took us through, in another thread.. the book of Daniel verse by verse..?

Great, Stan. That would probably accomplish what I had in mind with this topic. If no one objects, let me fall back, regroup, and counter attack in that vein.

God's blessings and love,

[teresaq]

OH! I am so sorry about that! Truly I am. It is another thing we do, tho I'm sure it is not unique with us. I do believe we might be in the lead. It is bad enough when we misrepresent each other, but to do it to someone else...well I'm not sure how we expect to make a "convert" that way.

Jer 31:3 The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.

Come on, Bob! Be fair! How could I effectively express my interest in Daniel with a zillion other subjects being interjected?

[JawgeFromJawja]

For some reason I got the impression that Jawge wanted to be in control of his own thread but that hasn't been respected so far. I'm not so sure starting another thread would give better results.

'Course that's just my impression. Jawge can confirm or deny or make no comment, however he deems best.

Okay, after sleeping on this'un, it has become obvious that this first of my topics on Daniel has become too unwieldy,largely because of off topic posting of other subjects related to Adventist theology.

Unless there are objections, some of my style will be in Appalachian, Southeastern USA, Cajun, and the idiom of other regions. Ah jis' love language and its tendency to evolve into local variations.

Thank you, Stan, Bob, John, Teresaq, Overaged, Pkrause, and others for the suggestions and posts. Daniel Chapters 1 - 6 will be the first division of that new set of A Heretical Baptist's Views on The Book of Daniel. I will post a short topic just for listing listing other intended topics. For clarity, continuity,and order, please post on topic for each subject. The subjects will largely cover doctrines dear to Adventists' hearts.

God bless us, everyone.

(Quote from one of my favorite authors)

[BobRyan]

You do have a way with words Bob. And it's true what you said.