Daniel; Let them eat bean-cake

Reply to post by DISRAELI

Great post OP, didn't know what I was getting myself into at first when I started reading, but your commentary was enjoyable, and pertinent to the times at hand where many are forced to choose between God, government, and country.
In reality though, the idea of everyone being able to believe what they want without any overlap of ideas or conflict, I believe, isn't true. There is no government, secular or otherwise, that can allow complete autonomy for all, and I am glad the scriptures teach us how to walk that fine line.
Daniel interestingly never protests his bondage or the bondage of the children of Israel, but he rather used this time to be an influence in the kings life, but he never bowed to the religious dictates of Babylon. As a side note, we can also see here, as Paul explained, that Israel is not of nationality or geography, but true Israel is a spiritual one (Romans 2:29).


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Reply to post by dondrews

I can't say that something needing explanation implies that it is irrelevant, even if it needs much explanation. The Bible deals with, among other things, the human condition, and all the intricacies of it. There is no simple answer to many of these questions, and to add to it we are also dealing with man's interaction with an infinite, incomprehensible God.

The Bible remains relevant because it deals with questions we all ask at one time or another: is there a God? If so, who is he/she/it/they? What is expected of me? How should I live? What's with all the suffering in the world? What happens when you die? Can I get to know this God, better yet, does God want to know me?
We must also add that we are dealing with a time period and a culture many of us in the west are unfamiliar with, so we have to first understand the historical context before we can get a grasp of certain situations, like what OP explained about the eating of meat sacrificed to idols; without that bit of information Daniels behavior would appear confusing.

So why is it so hard to understand? Well they actually ask Jesus the same question, since he always answered questions with parables in Matthew 13:10-17. He basically says that the hard of heart, the cynical ones will never understand, but to those who seek the true meaning, it will be revealed to them. OP shows us this in action, digging past a story that on the surface seems irrelevant, but if you are willing to dig, the usefulness of the passage becomes clear, thousands of years later.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by GBP/JPY
like woodsmom posted......time for more, how cool
Daniel stood up for His belief, the real life nuts and bolts of how that works......God wants us to be aware of His presence at all times....that will guide your speech and emotions and minute to minute trials. ( sometimes we face a hundred trials in a day). He will guide your minute to minute ....and that doubting voice we hear deep down inside is our old flesh.....which God doesn't see( He sees our new spirit self only, I have proof) so without explaing to God why we sinned or failed just an hour ago.....He knows we will.....just meditate on His presence and His message He gives everytime, silently. DO NOT TRY TO BE PERFECT...that will screw-up the kids minds.

Daniel sinned everyday.....but that sin was at the bottom of the ocean....so God doesn't know about it...that's how far away it is from God(I have proof). I guess that's when they say don't take your eyes off Him.....(the sea of Galilee)

I am in the trenches as of late, and I desperately needed to read this. Thank you for this Word in due season.

Originally posted by balanc3
I appreciate this OP.... thx. In my readings of the Bible I try to do exactly as has been accomplished in this thread. Find out how these people from ancient times dealt effectively with conflict and apply those lessons to my life.

Slavery is indeed a sensitive topic not to be taken lightly, but the title of the thread feels "skillful" to me in its combination of ideas and wording.....

And in referring to the palatial treatment of Daniel, as a slave, perhaps his living conditions were"humane"...I didn't see the OP say slavery was good...

Point taken, and yes, I was a little harsh, but wanted to point out the seriousness of these lines of thinking, if you will. I have read many of OP's threads, and OP is always informative and thoughtful about the subject matter of this book.

I want to thank the OP for this informative thread. I personally benefited from his thoughtful explanation. While I am not a Christian, I still value the bible as an important book for spiritual study and insight.

Wonderful thread S&F for sure. Such a good example of how seemingly never ceases to to expound knowledge. Layer upon layer with a message that is at once comprehensible to the uninitiated and astounding to the elder.

On another note it appears the asylum has skipped its meds today.

I think the title of your thread is funny and most importantly it's intriguing.

reply to post by tetra50



I don't know why your harping on the 'slave' thing so much. If Daniel could have ever been described as a slave it would have been only for a short time. His first three years of the Babylonian captivity were spent as a student and upon his interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's statue dream was made Governor of the entire province of Babylon.

Clearly he was still revered during the reign of Belshazzar The man stood before a King and told him that he would be killed and his kingdom divided. When he comes before Belshazzar he is addressed as an exile not a slave. Under the Persians he was promoted to a three member administration which oversaw 120 Provincial Governors, and it is written:

So Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian. Daniel 6:28

reply to post by Josephus


Again, your point taken, as well, and I did try a makeshift apology in reply to another post. However,

On another note it appears the asylum has skipped its meds today.

perhaps, you, as well, are being a little harsh. Especially for one who seems to be "Christian?"

reply to post by DISRAELI


“What happens when an Irresistible Force meets an Immovable Object?”

“What happens when the will of God meets the will of a ruler who thinks he’s God?”

Okay. Let's all understand here that the above two quotes are NOT the same thing. The will of "God" is based on an assumption. It has yet to be proven, and therefore cannot be measured. As such, it is inapplicable in congruency with the "unstoppable force" hypothesis.

That's really all I have to say here. My head hurts from facepalming so hard.

Originally posted by wjones837

Daniel interestingly never protests his bondage or the bondage of the children of Israel,

Yes, this is a very important point.
Daniel does not fight government as such, but only goverment's opposition to the commands of God.
I'm sure this is relevant to the attitude we might expect to take to the kind of "Beast" described in Revelation.
There is no suggestion that believers are expected to contest the power of the Beast as such- only to resist such commands of the Beast as conflict with the first commandment.
One important conclusion, for me, is that this reduces the necessity to identify the Beast.
If we make a point of resisting "anti-God" commands, wherever they come from, then the "anti-God" commands of the Beast will automatically be included, whether we've identified him or not.
The quest to identify THE enemy of God loses its urgency.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
That's really all I have to say here. My head hurts from facepalming so hard.

You know, I'm cheerfully indifferent to your disapproval
I was contemplating using exactly the same opening paragraph on threads dealing with the next five chapters of Daniel, so you're going to be in danger of bruising your cheeks.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Okay. Let's all understand here that the above two quotes are NOT the same thing. The will of "God" is based on an assumption. It has yet to be proven, and therefore cannot be measured. As such, it is inapplicable in congruency with the "unstoppable force" hypothesis.
.

P.S. In any case, it doesn't actually matter whether the comparison is philosophically valid or not.
It is a reasonable description of what Daniel is trying to tell us, and Daniel's meaning is what I'm pursuing..

reply to post by Josephus

Thank you for those comments.
I appreciate your encouragement.

On meat sacrificed to idols; Daniel or Paul?

One issue which I meant to address, when I got around to it, was that Daniel and Paul seem to offer different practical solutions to the problem of "meat sacrifced to idols".
Daniel's conclusion is that it must be avoided.
Paul's advice, as I observed, is that it does not matter if the meat has been offered in sacrifice in the past.

On consideration, though, it seems to me that the two viewpoints can be harmonised.
Paul's "it does not matter" had an important exception. If you positively KNOW that the meat has been sacrificed, and particularly if other people KNOW that you know, then the meat should be avoided.
This is mainly "out of consideration" for the other person, to prevent them falling into any misunderstanding about the Christian standpoint.- 1 Corinthians ch10 v28

But that exception covers Daniel's case precisely. It would have been well-known to everybody that the meat from the king's table was offered to the gods of Babylon. Therefore Paul himself would have had to advise Daniel to behave exactly as he did. There is no contradiction at all.

The motive that Paul supplies, the motive of "witness", would also have been very relevant to the circumstances of these new arrivals in Babylon

reply to post by DISRAELI


Not a problem! Sometimes it's good to know what you spend your energy on is appreciated! I really enjoyed reading through your Revelations info too!

I for one do not object to you titling of this thread. It served it's purpose. It gets one's attention to something familiar in our knowledge base. Getting one's attention to then come into the thread and discover the crux of the information being said is the point of a title in the first place. Not judging a book by its cover so to speak, most are open minded enough not to make percieved judgement and come in a look around and in this case see what the meat of the story is about. Sorry about that, my bit of humor just came out, like that of the title, not making light but brains do make connections. I have read many of your threads and learned and absorbed and pondered what you have written about for some time now. So keep up the good work. The title is meant to get our attention, job well done.
Now, in reference to your content....this is connecting. As living beings today, living under our powers that be, we are to follow the laws of the land in which we live up to but not to be in our selves let that over ride our adherence to the utmost important commandment. Disraeli, please interpret where my mind is going with this cause in my simple cognitive processes, critical thinking may not always be my forte. More of a compassionate empathetic soul so to speak.
Sorry just reread your OP and then my post, going off on tangent, sorry do not mean to derail.

Originally posted by SunflowerStar
As living beings today, living under our powers that be, we are to follow the laws of the land in which we live up to but not to be in our selves let that over ride our adherence to the utmost important commandment.

Thank you fpr your comments.
That looks likea fair summary. Not especially going off on a tangent, but maybe that was in the part you edited out.

reply to post by DISRAELI


Opps, that was a broken filament there, but you got the gist.

For information;

This is gradually turning into a series (I wasn't sure at first), and the next thread will be on the king's dream in the second chapter. "The stone and the statue" is the title.