Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I publicly repent of my superman comments. Sorry p4t.
Totally accepted and forgiven brother.
I just see all this about God, and am floored and stand in awe of Him.
I just can't help that. I see Him ulitimately and Sovereignly reigning in control of all things and take great comfort in these things. And that He saved me? Are you kidding me? Him, save me?
No one needs Gods mercy more that me, and no one deserves it less than I.
That is the truth and I do not lie.
Winman, do you think for a moment God did not allow nor permit that withstanding in Persia, to accomplish in perfect timing His will? Answer whether this was a surprise and a flank upon His goal, or if He foreknew this.
Come on Winman, see Gods Glory in it. This wasn't some "oh no, we have a delay here" in Gods economy.
Since your reasoning is lacking the above understanding, your question remains off track and untenable friend.
Your logic demands God have a "plan b" which denies his Omniscience and other attributes.
I see God way above these things.
If you call believeing God's word for what it says "lacking in reasoning", then I plead guilty to the charge.
Look, the scriptures say this man, whether the Lord or one of his angels "withstood" him for 21 days until Michael "helped" him. I didn't write the scriptures, God did. I simply believe what it says. It also says this man attempted to come to Daniel from the moment he first prayed, why would God prevent his own messenger from coming to Daniel? Why would he send this messenger the first day if he really wanted to wait 21 days? So, I don't follow your reasoning at all. Satan is not following God's orders like a servant, he is actively opposed to God, and in this case prevented God's messenger from coming to Daniel for 21 days.
I was going to edit the personal attack out of here P4T, unit I realized I couldn't. The entire post is a condescending personal attack that doesn't address Winman's post one iota. Stop your ranting and raving, and accusations about what you think he believes and address the post. This is the type of post that gets this thread shut down. It is not Winman that has the problem here.The problem lies within your inability and unwillingness to dump your proof-text theology. The other side of the coin is your seeming unwillingness to give God the Glory, and to recognize His full control of all things. I also feel you may harbor some ill feelings about it since He is in full control of all things. Also, I had a grandfather who embraced this limitted God theology, shared with me commentary (can't remember the autor, but from Coc) that showed the authors unwillingness to give God glory. It was ugly really, a very oppressive and anti-biblical representation of God. After all his arguing, on his death bed, he asked how to make sure he was saved, having believed in baptismal regeneration.
You're not believing and accepting God has all authority. It takes an eye of faith also Winman, and this based upon the entire counsel of God. This withstanding fell all into Gods plan and worked exactly accordingly. Tell me whats wrong with that and why you have a problem with it. Tell me you think God was surprised and was delayed by this unknowingly and had to go to plan B? I actually believe you would believe this, and in it I see a weak, limitted God, not Almighty God of the Scriptures. Not picking, it just looks pretty apparent to me.
I was going to edit the personal attack out of here P4T, unit I realized I couldn't. The entire post is a condescending personal attack that doesn't address Winman's post one iota. Stop your ranting and raving, and accusations about what you think he believes and address the post. This is the type of post that gets this thread shut down. It is not Winman that has the problem here.
His post was about: warfare, Daniel, Michael, God and Satan being in a battle, etc. You addressed none of that. Instead of addressing that you, in so many words called him ignorant of Bible knowledge. That is unacceptable. It demands an apology. It is not civil debate.Explaining the facts of where his viewpoint leads me, in my mind is not a personal attack in any manner. He in fact says God is limited in knowledge. I believe it to be unscriptural, and using a text to prove it fails to see the entire Word of God. A la proof-texting.
Nothing was condescending when explaining facts, of how he sees things, and of how I see truth, and applying there logical end against one another isn't either.
I've never said what I think he believes. I've addressed what he has stated and defended to be his personal belief system, and asked what is wrong with seeing it from this side.
I won't allow you to drag me into a fight as it is unecessary as I am walking with God.
- Blessings and Peace to you
His post was about: warfare, the prince of Persia, God and Satan being in a battle, etc. You addressed none of that. Instead of addressing that you, in so many words called him ignorant of Bible knowledge. That is unacceptable. It demands an apology. It is not civil debate.
Winman, do you think for a moment God did not allow nor permit that withstanding in Persia, to accomplish in perfect timing His will? Answer whether this was a surprise and a flank upon His goal, or if He foreknew this.
This withstanding fell all into Gods plan and worked exactly accordingly...Tell me you think God was surprised and was delayed by this unknowingly and had to go to plan B?
Go back and read his post. Within the post two questions were directly asked. Both of them started with "why" which demands an explanation, not a yes or no answer. But even then you hardly gave that. You rudely answered with another question. It shows your inability to intelligently carry on a conversation. As I warned before this type of behavior will get this thread closed quickly.I most certainly did address that:
Two times:
- Blessings and Peace to you
Go back and read his post. Within the post two questions were directly asked. Both of them started with "why" which demands an explanation, not a yes or no answer. But even then you hardly gave that. You rudely answered with another question. It shows your inability to intelligently carry on a conversation. As I warned before this type of behavior will get this thread closed quickly.
Go back and read his post. Within the post two questions were directly asked. Both of them started with "why" which demands an explanation, not a yes or no answer. But even then you hardly gave that. You rudely answered with another question. It shows your inability to intelligently carry on a conversation. As I warned before this type of behavior will get this thread closed quickly.
Look, here is your first paragraph, sentence by sentence to Winman. Show me any hint of an answer to his post. There is nothing but insult.No, I've already read it once. Actually several times.
As I've shown you, I did address it. Even gave you proof.
I answer with questions because, well, frankly, it is allowed. It's called leading one another in thought. Jesus did it Himself. I employ this methodology myself.
I know, I am unintelligent and have no abilities, you tell me this quite often.
- Blessings and Grace
Continue on.1. The problem lies within your inability and unwillingness to dump your proof-text theology.
2. The other side of the coin is your seeming unwillingness to give God the Glory, and to recognize His full control of all things.
3. Also, I had a grandfather who embraced this limitted God theology, shared with me commentary (can't remember the autor, but from Coc) that showed the authors unwillingness to give God glory.
4. It was ugly really, a very oppressive and anti-biblical representation of God. After all his arguing, on his death bed, he asked how to make sure he was saved, having believed in baptismal regeneration.
Look, here is your first paragraph, sentence by sentence to Winman. Show me any hint of an answer to his post. There is nothing but insult.
Continue on.
Perhaps I will post it so other moderators can see it.
This is not permitted on this board, but you do it over and over again, and then have the gall to deny it.
There doesn't have to be a "rest". Personal attacks are not permitted. Period.Obviously you've left out the parts that show I did, in fact, address it. Didn't you, my friend? Where's the rest of it?
Look, here is your first paragraph, sentence by sentence to Winman. Show me any hint of an answer to his post