I could use a hand.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-05-2013, 01:40 AM
I could use a hand.
I've been talking to ChuckTesta on his Jesus and the Olivet thread ( his spelling not mine) and he brought up that some person that he is talking to brought up Daniel 9. Unfortunately all I have from my books on Daniel is a small statement about Daniel being made around the 160's BCE. This is from the Oxford History of the Biblical World.
(pg 341)

That and a website by infidels.org

Since this isn't done by a scholar though and I can't check there sources, most of which are books, I can't rule out potential bias. If anyone has better information please feel free to share. Thanks.

Just an outsider looking inn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2013, 04:33 AM
RE: I could use a hand.
[Image: gallery_45765_5904_61770.jpg]

Sorry, I couldn't resist the urge. Tongue

I'm afraid I won't be much help on this.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Tartarus Sauce's post
01-05-2013, 05:48 AM
RE: I could use a hand.
(01-05-2013 01:40 AM)Foxcanine1 Wrote:  I've been talking to ChuckTesta on his Jesus and the Olivet thread ( his spelling not mine) and he brought up that some person that he is talking to brought up Daniel 9. Unfortunately all I have from my books on Daniel is a small statement about Daniel being made around the 160's BCE. This is from the Oxford History of the Biblical World.
(pg 341)

That and a website by infidels.org

Since this isn't done by a scholar though and I can't check there sources, most of which are books, I can't rule out potential bias. If anyone has better information please feel free to share. Thanks.
Check out the Atheist/Agnostic research Library thread. Maybe one of those links would be helpful.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2013, 09:07 AM
RE: I could use a hand.
Another question then, There was a Youtuber who's name was itsthesuperfly I believe. Does anyone know or possibly have access to his page?

Just an outsider looking inn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2013, 04:23 PM
RE: I could use a hand.
Fly has deleted his account, unfortunately.

Bury me with my guns on, so when I reach the other side - I can show him what it feels like to die.
Bury me with my guns on, so when I'm cast out of the sky, I can shoot the devil right between the eyes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2013, 08:15 PM
RE: I could use a hand.
(01-05-2013 04:23 PM)Red Tornado Wrote:  Fly has deleted his account, unfortunately.

Damn, there was a book that that guy used alot. Some commentary bible. Meaning to get it for some time now ( this whole recent shabacle go me thinking how I really want another book, I'm a sucker for the things). Anyway, any idea of what it was called. Jewish commentary bible? Something like that I think. It's to bad the guy deleted his account. Had some awesome video's.Confused

Just an outsider looking inn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2013, 07:43 AM
RE: I could use a hand.
Assuming Daniel 9 wsan't written by Daniel and was written circa 160 BCW, it shows an amazing ability to predict the Messiah's death on Passover exactly when Jesus Christ died on the cross before His resurrection. Likely why it was brought to your attention...?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2013, 02:54 PM
RE: I could use a hand.
(02-05-2013 07:43 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Assuming Daniel 9 wsan't written by Daniel and was written circa 160 BCW, it shows an amazing ability to predict the Messiah's death on Passover exactly when Jesus Christ died on the cross before His resurrection. Likely why it was brought to your attention...?

Or, you know, the author of the gospel could simply have had Jesus's death on the cross conform to Daniel 9

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
02-05-2013, 04:00 PM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2013 08:40 PM by docskeptic.)
RE: I could use a hand.
Foxcanine1, sorry for the delay. I wanted to make sure I had all my facts straight.

The allegation that Daniel was a late composition dating to 160's BCE as opposed to the 6th century BCE is based on the following observations:

1. Discrepancies in Daniel that would be inexplicable if the author was a 6th century BCE Jew, eg.
a. Daniel 1:1 says that Jerusalem was captured in 605 BCE, while multiple portions in Jeremiah suggest 604 or 603 BCE
b. Daniel 5:1 calls Belshazzar the king, while contemporary Babylonian cuneiform tablets say that the throne was occupied by Nabonidus in that time frame
c. Daniel 5:29 calls Daniel the third highest man in the kingdom but no extra-Biblical source refers to him
d. Daniel 4:33 says that King Nebuchadnezzar became insane and "ate grass like cattle. ...his hair grew like the feathers of an eagle and his nails like the claws of a bird." No extra-Biblical source refers to this episode in Nebuchadnezzar's life. However, a Qumran document called the "Prayer of Nabonidus" says that King Nabonidus became seriously ill and sought help from a priest of YHWH. Could the later "Daniel" have mistaken Nabonidus for the more famous Nebuchadnezzar?
e. Daniel 4:34-37 has King Nebuchadnezzar acknowledging his insanity and admitting that YHWH was the "Most High", a most unlikely confession.
f. Daniel 1:21 says that Daniel lived till the first year of Cyrus the king, but Daniel 10:1 says that he saw a vision in the third year of the same king!

2. Anachronisms, eg.
a. The use of the word "Chaldean" to describe an ethnic group and as a descriptor for "wise men".
b. The use of Greek words to describe instruments such as the harp, sakbut and psaltery (arguing that the work was composed during the Seleucid period).

3. Language. The book is composed in two languages. The prologue (roughly, ch. 1 and early ch. 2) and epilogue (ch 8-12) are in Aramaic, while the body is in Hebrew.

4. Referral to persons such as Darius the Mede, who apparently succeeded Belshazzar. Darius the Mede has not been identified in extra-Biblical sources.

5. The name of Daniel is omitted in Ecclesiasticus by Ben Sira in his "list of ancestor heroes". An unusual omission for one who achieved so great a position in Babylon.

6. The book of Daniel has attracted clearly apocryphal additions such as "Song of the Three Children", "Susanna" and "Bel and the Dragon". Why could not the rest of the book be apocryphal as well?

However, Christians have clever arguments to counter all these objections. Hope this helps.

Doc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2013, 10:55 PM
RE: I could use a hand.
(02-05-2013 04:00 PM)docskeptic Wrote:  Foxcanine1, sorry for the delay. I wanted to make sure I had all my facts straight.

The allegation that Daniel was a late composition dating to 160's BCE as opposed to the 6th century BCE is based on the following observations:

1. Discrepancies in Daniel that would be inexplicable if the author was a 6th century BCE Jew, eg.
a. Daniel 1:1 says that Jerusalem was captured in 605 BCE, while multiple portions in Jeremiah suggest 604 or 603 BCE
b. Daniel 5:1 calls Belshazzar the king, while contemporary Babylonian cuneiform tablets say that the throne was occupied by Nabonidus in that time frame
c. Daniel 5:29 calls Daniel the third highest man in the kingdom but no extra-Biblical source refers to him
d. Daniel 4:33 says that King Nebuchadnezzar became insane and "ate grass like cattle. ...his hair grew like the feathers of an eagle and his nails like the claws of a bird." No extra-Biblical source refers to this episode in Nebuchadnezzar's life. However, a Qumran document called the "Prayer of Nabonidus" says that King Nabonidus became seriously ill and sought help from a priest of YHWH. Could the later "Daniel" have mistaken Nabonidus for the more famous Nebuchadnezzar?
e. Daniel 4:34-37 has King Nebuchadnezzar acknowledging his insanity and admitting that YHWH was the "Most High", a most unlikely confession.
f. Daniel 1:21 says that Daniel lived till the first year of Cyrus the king, but Daniel 10:1 says that he saw a vision in the third year of the same king!

2. Anachronisms, eg.
a. The use of the word "Chaldean" to describe an ethnic group and as a descriptor for "wise men".
b. The use of Greek words to describe instruments such as the harp, sakbut and psaltery (arguing that the work was composed during the Seleucid period).

3. Language. The book is composed in two languages. The prologue (roughly, ch. 1 and early ch. 2) and epilogue (ch 8-12) are in Aramaic, while the body is in Hebrew.

4. Referral to persons such as Darius the Mede, who apparently succeeded Belshazzar. Darius the Mede has not been identified in extra-Biblical sources.

5. The name of Daniel is omitted in Ecclesiasticus by Ben Sira in his "list of ancestor heroes". An unusual omission for one who achieved so great a position in Babylon.

6. The book of Daniel has attracted clearly apocryphal additions such as "Song of the Three Children", "Susanna" and "Bel and the Dragon". Why could not the rest of the book be apocryphal as well?

However, Christians have clever arguments to counter all these objections. Hope this helps.

Doc

Thanks for the info, By chance could you list some of your sources. If there was a lot of them then just a few would be ok. ( website's, books, textbooks, etc...) Smile

Just an outsider looking inn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: