Book Of Daniel Dating
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-08-2013, 01:39 PM
Book Of Daniel Dating
Besides it's obvious reference to events that took place after it's supposed date of writing, is their any good reason to date it to the 2nd century BCE rather than the 6th?

I Will have My revenge on AlternateHistory.com, in this life or the next Evil_monster

~WrappedInShadows (AKA Me)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-08-2013, 02:47 PM
RE: Book Of Daniel Dating
(11-08-2013 01:39 PM)TheLastEnemy Wrote:  Besides it's obvious reference to events that took place after it's supposed date of writing, is their any good reason to date it to the 2nd century BCE rather than the 6th?

Let me sum up all the reasons found on Wikipedia:

1. The history of the kings of that time period is severely messed up. Daniel mistook what kingdom took over what kingdom in what order, and made up "Darius the Mede". It also messes up what year the story starts (the Siege of Jerusalem) by 8 years, which is inexcusable as another part of the bible, 2 Kings, actually places it at the correct time. None of this places Daniel's authorship in a specific time period, but does cast doubt on it being written by a witness to any of the events.

2. Nebuchadnezzer was not known by that name until hundreds of years later. At the time he was known mainly as Nebuchadrezzar II.

3. Besides Nebuchadnezzer's name, there are several words and phrases used in the Aramaic portion of Daniel (chapters 2-7) that are "loanwords" from other cultures. Language changes over time, and these are examples of changes that would have occurred after the alleged earlier writing date (600 BCE).

4. The Dead Sea Scrolls make it definitively clear how old Daniel is. Because the "bible version" differs from other "books of Daniel" found, along with the sheer amount of the book recovered from this collection of books written between 200 - 60 BCE, it only makes sense that it was from that time period.

Not that you have to rely on Wikipedia as a source. Everything one needs to know can be found on this page.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-08-2013, 03:53 PM
RE: Book Of Daniel Dating
A separate thread for this? Really?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2013, 01:27 PM
RE: Book Of Daniel Dating
Oops! I'm late to the party here. But I stand behind what I wrote there in another thread. Some of the Wikipedia arguments I found a little specious.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: