Ok, first off:
I do not want to get into the whole 607 vs 587 debate here.
Not my intent.
As of right now I am wondering about the Book of Daniel.
As most of us, if not all of us know, there is the claim that Daniel prophesied the fall of Babylon and that it was not written after the fact.
Has anyone researched this?
Would you be willing to share your research and your thoughts here?
Black Swan of Memphis
(don't ask :) )
Book of Daniel
Ok, first off:
I’m just starting to re-read the book of Daniel, against my own will power because I just can’t stand this sh##t anymore lol, and came across this interesting link below:
It was written by Daniel from a prophecy the angel Gabriel gave him while he and the Jews were undergoing their exile in Babylon. It tells the Jews that God had given them a second chance to return to Israel and rebuild their Temple to get ready to ultimately receive their Messiah (Jesus Christ). It is an actual blueprint to the day Jesus would ride into Jerusalem on a donkey, and the first day (Psalm Sunday) Jesus (a son of David) would allow them to proclaim Him King -- the actual day He would die on the cross - to the actual day (end of 70th week-3.5 years after His crucifixion) that the door would slam shut on the Jews.
I want to take as much into consideration as possible while researching it for myself.
I just printed it out and am carting it upstairs to read it while I eat my breakfast.
isn't there anyone else who can comment?
ok going to put kids down for night
was hoping some of you researchers out there might have some comments.
This is old, but it gives you an idea:
I've done a lot of research since then and yeah, the book dates itself very securely to the second century BC. I have a long thread I've been working on about the composition history of Daniel, and I hope to post that sometime this year.
Leolaia, looks like you are not in the desert yet. That is a great summary of the date for Daniel.
Do you know what the earliest version of Daniel in the Septuagint is? I have heard that it too dates to the second century. Are there older Septuagint versions in existence that do not contain Daniel?
Thank You Leolaia for your post. I'm printing this out to read and am looking forward to it.
I really appreciate your post.
I look forward to your post on the comp history of Daniel.
I've been lurking around here for a while as I generally don't write much on forums, but when it comes to the book of Daniel I can't resist the temptation to join in on the discussion. I really find that book fascinating.
I think the most compelling evidence that this book - or at least major parts of it - is not prophecy is chapter 11 regarding the king of the North and the king of the South. Basically this description of events fits extremely well with actual history as we know it, right until the events described in verse 40 and thereafter. The events described in these verses don't fit at all with history. The fact that the verses before fit perfectly well with recorded history, and the verses after don't, is in my opinion very strong evidence that the book of Daniel was written (or at least compiled) in the year 163 b.c.
I know some christians argue that the events of verses 40-45 did actually happen, just not right at that time, and they're of course free to believe this.
What I find quite interesting also, is the completely ridiculous attempt by the Watchtower to 'stretch' the events of the verses to make them fit far, far beyond the year 163 b.c. I once tried to compare chapter 11 and actual history with the timeline proposed in the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy" by the Watchtower, and I was astounded by the way the Watchtower goes completely off the deep end in their interpretation of verses 40 and beyond.
Whereas the events described in Daniel take place within a relatively short timeline - the events of one verse and the next are sometimes only 1 year apart, if that - the Watchtower has one verse span hundreds of years, actually more than a thousand years. The roman empire became the bysantine, which became anglo-america (where did the Ottoman empire go?), which brings us to the present day.
They could have tried to reconcile the events of Daniel with actual history, and used that to claim Daniel was a reliable and accurate book, but instead they try and make the timeline of the kings of the North and South about the present day - even though they can't really say who is the Northen king today.
Anyway, I know your post wasn't really about how the JWs interpret the book of Daniel, but I couldn't resist writing about it. Sorry :-)
on a similar line, it strikes me that Daniel names the beast as being Medo Persian, and Greece, but does not name the last beast. This too indicates it was written in the time of Greece, but the writer was unable to prophetically name who would come next.
I remember reading something about the original texts being dated or referenced to the desecration of the Jerusalem Temple 160's BC.
I would be very interested if someone knows more information of this.
Good topic blackswan, and welcome to JWD.