I could use a hand.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-05-2013, 12:20 AM
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...?

When we assume, we make an ass out of "u" and "me".

Besides, isn't it obvious that the "Daniel math" being used is just a reverse-engineering of the date, starting with the supposed date of Jesus' death and working backwards? Even if we granted that the prediction was true and real, and even if we granted that the history in Daniel was accurate, we'd still only have a rough estimate of when it happened given when that king reigned... there's no way to know to the day when it was. The date is assumed by counting backward from an alleged date (which isn't accurate, either).

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
03-05-2013, 07:31 AM
RE: I could use a hand.
(02-05-2013 10:55 PM)Foxcanine1 Wrote:  
(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

Foxcanine1,
I did use a lot of resources. I have several commentaries, but the most useful for this topic might be the entries for Daniel in:
1. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
2. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible.
Both articles are detailed, scholarly discussions of the problems with the Daniel chronology and Christian attempts to rebutt them.

The ISBE (old version) is available for free download at Olive Tree Software or your local library might carry copies of these and other commentaries. Let me know if you need more info.

Doc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes docskeptic's post
03-05-2013, 01:37 PM
RE: I could use a hand.
Quote: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!
You are right Christians have answers for all the "discrepancies" like this one above!

Daniel 1:21 - "And Daniel remained there until the first year [serving in the Babylonian court] of King Cyrus."

Not ALIVE but in the Babylonian service until Cyrus, who was a PERSIAN ruler. Can you guess why? Wink
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2013, 01:40 PM
RE: I could use a hand.
Quote:When we assume, we make an ass out of "u" and "me".

Besides, isn't it obvious that the "Daniel math" being used is just a reverse-engineering of the date, starting with the supposed date of Jesus' death and working backwards? Even if we granted that the prediction was true and real, and even if we granted that the history in Daniel was accurate, we'd still only have a rough estimate of when it happened given when that king reigned... there's no way to know to the day when it was. The date is assumed by counting backward from an alleged date (which isn't accurate, either).

It is obvious if Daniel was written in 40 CE, but I think Daniel wrote it and liberal scholars date it not later than the Maccabean period or so.

Since the historicity and crucifixon of Jesus is accepted by most scholars NOT ON THIS FORUM, it follows that Jesus fulfilled Daniel's PROPHECY:

If scholars dated Daniel to after Jesus, you are 100% right!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2013, 02:03 PM (This post was last modified: 03-05-2013 02:19 PM by docskeptic.)
RE: I could use a hand.
(03-05-2013 01:37 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote: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!
You are right Christians have answers for all the "discrepancies" like this one above!

Daniel 1:21 - "And Daniel remained there until the first year [serving in the Babylonian court] of King Cyrus."

Not ALIVE but in the Babylonian service until Cyrus, who was a PERSIAN ruler. Can you guess why? Wink

PleaseJesus,

You are correct. That was a weak argument. I only included it because the root Hebrew word "way·hî" is ambiguous and could be translated in one of many ways. For example, while the NET Bible translates the passage as "Now Daniel lived on until the first year of Cyrus the king", the NIV says, "And Daniel remained there until the first year of King Cyrus." I assume the "(serving in the Babylonian court)" is your interpolation. A reader of the NET Bible would be confused when they got to Daniel 10:1.

A little more concerningly, the word "there" in the NIV is NOT in the original Hebrew and was added by the NIV translators to give the word "remained" a function of position rather than time. The literal Hebrew says, "continued, and Daniel, until year, the first, of Cyrus, the king", making the interpretation that this verse was talking about Daniel's lifespan a reasonable one.

Please comment on the rest of the discrepancies I listed.

Doc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2013, 02:18 PM
RE: I could use a hand.
(03-05-2013 01:40 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:When we assume, we make an ass out of "u" and "me".

Besides, isn't it obvious that the "Daniel math" being used is just a reverse-engineering of the date, starting with the supposed date of Jesus' death and working backwards? Even if we granted that the prediction was true and real, and even if we granted that the history in Daniel was accurate, we'd still only have a rough estimate of when it happened given when that king reigned... there's no way to know to the day when it was. The date is assumed by counting backward from an alleged date (which isn't accurate, either).

It is obvious if Daniel was written in 40 CE, but I think Daniel wrote it and liberal scholars date it not later than the Maccabean period or so.

Since the historicity and crucifixon of Jesus is accepted by most scholars NOT ON THIS FORUM, it follows that Jesus fulfilled Daniel's PROPHECY:

If scholars dated Daniel to after Jesus, you are 100% right!

Give me THREE Reputable historians that say that the crucifixion happened exactly as was stated in the Bible? The best you guys have found is Taticus and he wasn't even fucking contemporary to the actual event.

[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
04-05-2013, 08:36 PM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2013 08:43 PM by Starcrash.)
RE: I could use a hand.
(03-05-2013 01:40 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:When we assume, we make an ass out of "u" and "me".

Besides, isn't it obvious that the "Daniel math" being used is just a reverse-engineering of the date, starting with the supposed date of Jesus' death and working backwards? Even if we granted that the prediction was true and real, and even if we granted that the history in Daniel was accurate, we'd still only have a rough estimate of when it happened given when that king reigned... there's no way to know to the day when it was. The date is assumed by counting backward from an alleged date (which isn't accurate, either).

It is obvious if Daniel was written in 40 CE, but I think Daniel wrote it and liberal scholars date it not later than the Maccabean period or so.

Since the historicity and crucifixon of Jesus is accepted by most scholars NOT ON THIS FORUM, it follows that Jesus fulfilled Daniel's PROPHECY:

If scholars dated Daniel to after Jesus, you are 100% right!

Yes, "liberal scholars date it not later than the Maccabean period or so", which is around 165 BCE rather than near the time it is talking about (around 500 BCE). That makes it a less-than-eyewitness account (removed over 300 years) and thus subject to well-placed skepticism.

Looking back through my quote, I see that you're attacking a straw man when you argue about whether scholars believe that Jesus was crucified -- I didn't say that he wasn't; I said that they couldn't agree on a date. I even said why. To cite Wikipedia again (our unbiased source), scholars put the crucifixion at 30-36 AD, certainly not allowing for a prediction "to the day" as believers in Daniel's math would assume.

But that's just one end... perhaps you didn't understand the argument I was making. Those who think that Daniel worked out how long after Daniel the crucifixion happened not only assume a specific date of the crucifixion but a specific date for Daniel's prophecy. At the other end of the prophecy is a date that can only be estimated to a range of years for when Nebuchadnezzer was king. Even the bible (the only source for this prophecy) doesn't give us a specific date for when the prophecy was made, which is why it's "obvious" (as I said) that the alleged date that Daniel made the prediction is assumed by working backward from the date of Jesus' crucifixion.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: