Manuscript Evidence: Manuscripts discovered at Qumran (e.g., a Florilegium found in cave 4Q), which date from the Maccabean period make it very unlikely that the book was written during the time of the Maccabees (e.g., 168 B. This is also substantiated in Daniel 9 with the vision of the ram and the he-goat (with one horn and then four horns--divided Greece). Late: Someone living during the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (these go with the arguments above) B. 7:1; the rest of the references are in terms of pronouns either third person or first person singular) A. On the contrary, if it is a spurious, fraudulent, although well-intentioned piece of literature, then the reliability of other books in the canon of Scripture may legitimately be questioned.
C.) since it would have taken some time for it to have been accepted and included in the canon 2. Aramaic: Daniel’s Aramaic demonstrates grammatical evidences for an early date more closely associated with the seventh and sixth centuries B. Early: Daniel the self-proclaimed author of the book living during the sixth century B. “To establish hope in future restoration by reflecting in vision God’s dealing with Israel’s national sin through the times of the Gentiles” The two-fold division is argued upon (1) the way in which Moses' Law is referred to as a unit throughout the Scriptures, (2) the way in which the historical books are linked together as a unit, (3) the reference in Daniel to the Law and the books [9:2], and (4) the recognition of the Former prophetic books by the Latter (See Geisler and Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, pp. The Writings include: (1) Poetical Books--Psalms, Proverbs, Job, (2) Five Rolls (Megilloth)--Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Esther, Ecclesiastes, (3) Historical Books--Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, Chronicles Sometimes Ruth was attached to Judges, and Lamentations was attached to Jeremiah thereby making the Hebrew canon comprised of 22 books rather than the more usual 24 books (see Geisler and Nix, General, pp. Critical scholars assume that the three-fold division reflects dates of canonization in accordance with their dates of compositions--Law (400 B. Third, one's understanding of the nature of Jesus Christ depends on the answer to the date of the book. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 388; Brevard S. Bibliotheca Sacra 133 (1976): 322-23; Franz Rosenthal, Die Aramaistisch Forschung (Leiden: E.
In addition Archer writes, the statement in Josephus (Contra Apionem 1:8) ... D., Daniel was included among the prophets in the second division of the Old Testament canon; hence it could not have been assigned to the Kethubim until a later period (Gleason L. The reason is that most scholars embrace a liberal, naturalistic, and rationalistic philiosphy. Archer writes, Despite the numerous objections whihc have been advanced by scholars who regard this as a prophecy written after the event, there is no good reason for denying to the sixth-century Daniel the composition of the entire work.
Naturalism and rationalism are ultimately based on faith rather than on evidence; therefore, this faith will not allow them to accept the supernatural predictions (Bruce K. This represents a collection of his memoirs made at the end of a long and eventful career which included government service from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar in the 590s [605? The appearance of Persian technical terms indicates a final recension of these memoirs at a time when Persian teminology had already infiltrated into the vocabulary of Aramaic.
Much of Daniel’s writing does not bear the character of prophecy, but rather of history B. The Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (The Septuagint or LXX c. C.) divided the Old Testament according to subject matter which is the basis of the modern four-fold classification of the: five books of Law, twelve books of History, five books of Poetry, and seventeen books of Prophecy 2. Most who hold to a late date for Daneil emphasize it as being apocalyptic literature: a. First, the sovereignty of the revealed God in this book is at stake. This makes best sense out of the synchronisms given between the two kingdoms.Also note that all the details of synchronisms, accession years, etc, are not explicitly marked here.The most likely date of the final ediition of the book, therefore, would be about 530 B. Often in reading one of the Old Testament books, one will run across the mention of a specific date, such as in Jeremiah 39.2: "In the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, on the ninth day of the month, a breach was made in the city." The information below translates such dates into those we more easily recognize.The sensational events (3; 5; 6) are necessarily writing conventions like those which were employed by noncanonical literature of the intertestamental period 6. Persian: 1) Persian loan words in Daniel do not necessarily argue against an early date for the book since Daniel, who lived under the Persians, could have placed the material in its final form at the latter part of his life 2) Four of the nineteen Persian words are not translated well by the Greek renderings of about 100 B. implying that their meaning was lost or drastically changed meaning that it is very unlikely that Daniel was written in 165 B. C.) where these words could have been used, and since they are the names of musical instruments which often are circulated beyond national boundaries, and since Greek words are found in the Aramaic documents of Elephantine dated to the fifth-century B. Literary Evidence: The reason the development of history seems to stop with Antiochus IV Epiphanes is not necessarily because that was when the writer lived; it is probably for literary/theological reasons, he best foreshadows the Antichrist to come 5. The Jewish Talmud attributes the writing of “Daniel” to the Great Synagogue but it is questionable whether such a synagogue ever really existed. The writer shows an accurate knowledge of sixth-century events: 1) The city of Shushan is described as being in the province of Elam back in the time of the Chaldeans (8:2) 2. Second, the divine inspiration of the Bible hangs in the balance. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 395-97 where he also shows how the Greek (or lack thereof) is a strong support for an early date for Daniel. Often there is a hermeneutical presupposition against predictive writing 1. Predictive Evidence: The fourth empire in Daniel 2 is not that of the Greeks as those who hold to a late date affirm; this is substantiated by the vision in chapter 7 were the second empire is not Media and the third empire is not Perisa, but is Greece which divides into four (the Persian empire never divided into four parts). Jesus identifies Daniel as the prophet who spoke of the “abomination of desolation” (cf. Internal Evidence: The author refers to himself as Daniel throughout the book (cf. If the book contains true predictions, then there is firm reason to believe that this book ultimately owes its origin to One who can predict the future. al., The Aramaic of Daniel, in Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel, 31-79. In the Hebrew canon Daniel is not included among the prophets 4. Now a prophetic year (also a lunar year) is 360 days (cf.In the Hebrew canon Daniel is included among the writings with the “historical” books. 33) is 173,880 days (476 x 365 = 173,740 days; March 4 [1 Nisan] to March 29 [the date of the Passover in A. Rev 11) and 483 years multiplied by that figure also equal 173,880. Although Childs does not hold to a sixth century date for Daniel and comes about this statement in a 'round-a-bout manner, his analysis of its design is true (Brevard S.Jesus Christ regarded the Book of Daniel as a prophetic preview of future history and indeed of the divine program for a future that still lies ahead (Matt. If he is wrong in His interpretation of the book, then He must be less than the omniscient, inerrant God incarnate. For a concise overview of this position and the imaginative working with the evidence to support their presuppositions see Brevard S. Childs writes, The visions called the community of faith to obedience and challenged it to hold on because the end of time which Daniel foresaw would shortly come. On the other hand, if His appraisal is right, then His claim to deity cannot be questioned in this regard (Bruce K. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, 611ff. Because it was written in the form of vaticinium ex eventu, the effect of this message would be electrifying. Daniel's Aramaic is closer to Eastern Aramaic (rather than Western Aramaic) much like that which is found in the Elephantine papyri (fifth-century B. C.) than it is with the Genesis Apocryphon found in Qumran Cave One from the first century B.