The Bible Book of Daniel Dating/Late Dating ? Elaboration by Gerd Imhoff Copyright 2021PART 1 Daniel Late dating ‘The Neoplatonist “Porphyrios” clalmed that the Bible book of Daniel was written by an “unknown Jew” during the Maccabean period in the 2% century BCE, that is “after” all the prophecies about the world empires had already been fuffiled, and there would be no prophecy in the sense of predictions of the future. Therefore, he interpreted this book of Daniel into the time of the Maccabees ca. 167 8.C.E. in connection with Antiochus ete... Some historical parallels fit into this time. But ‘Jesus referred to Daniel at Matthew 24:15 (Oanie! 7:13 as se-designation = Mat. 26:64) as a prophet (foretelling the future). To Jesus, Daniel was not an “unknown Jew" from the time of the Maccabees. Was Jesus wrong? Whoever is attacking, Daniel (see quote of Isaac Newton ~ see below). Daniel was also seen asa prophet (Nebiim) und not just a scribe (Ketubim). This s also clear from the ‘Midrash (oral form of tradition), from Jesus himself and Josephus Flavius. Likewise, from Qumran 4 quarter 174 (The book of the prophets) and the Essenes. List of Ben Sirach: Now and then the list of the “famous personalities ofthe Bible” of “Ben Sirach” is Biven asa counter-argument. He wouldn't have listed “Daniel”. ‘But why is also Job missing from his lst, all the judges except Samuel (), King Asa, Jehoshaphat, Mordechai and Ezra? “Finds from Cairo, known as Cairo Genizah indicate that Ben Sirach’s work originally contained portions that referred to the Hebrew portion of the book of, Daniel. To imply Ben Sirach (180 B.C.E) did not know Daniel difficult.” (Mario Tafferner) “Even inthe writings of Philo (about 20 B.C.) there are no quotations from Ezekiel, Songs of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes and Esther. Yet allof these books were well known in his time” (6. Maier). "in Qumran there are no quotations from Joshua, Joel, Jonah, Haggai, Ruth, or Lamentations. Yet these books were available atthe time ofthe Qumran community." (G. Maier). Ezekiok: Incidentally, Daniel is mentioned in Ezekiel (6 century B.CE.|: Eze. 14:24-20; 28:3, ‘Aso, Noah and Job ete. “historical” Daniel. Fact: Ezekiel, a contemporary of Daniel, accepted the “Even those who reject the Inspiration of the Bible believe that most ofthe book of Ezekiel was written in the 6 century.” (Manweiler) 1“Gleason Archer and Richard Carrier (strong critic) accept that Ezekiel lived in the 6 century.” Result: The isting or omission of biblical persons has no significance. Rather the suspicion of a manipulative speculation of a matter. ‘What is the problem? ‘An Oxford University professor wrote: “Nothing is gained by repeating objections, as long as the original "prejudice" remains that there can be no prophecy from a supernatural source.” So here, too, one’s “world view’ plays a weighty role. Hence Isaac Newton once wrote: “He who would reject Daniel’s prophecies, would do as much as ithe would ‘undermine the Christian religion, which were founded, as it were, on prophecies ‘of Daniel by Christ” (C. A. Auberlein). ‘The authenticity of the book of Daniel in the 6* centu Porphyria lived ca. 300 C.. and was the only known eritic having this point of View until the time of the so-called higher criticism in the 17th century, that, more than two thousand years after the event. Porphyrios was later refuted by Jerome Ukewise, from Metodid, Eusebios of Caesarea and Appollinarius.(Walvoord i971). ‘Also refuted by Origen, isaac Newton, Josephus Flavius, Calvin etc... and in particular by contemporary Historians. Especially the linguistic Aramaie/Hebrew aspect is refuted (efeoat etc) Even “Driver (historian) has withdrawn argument ofthe Aramaic und Hebrew dating at the time of the 2% century. “The authenticity ofthe book of Daniel was not questioned by anyone until the tise ofthe “delstie" movement liberal theclogians) inthe 17 century” (Wilson). “1udeism and the Christian Church have always believed thet the book of Daniel was written by the historical Danie” (EJ. Young -Daniel- Brockhaus Kommentar zur Bibel, The writers ofthe NT also recognized Daniel asa prophet. This is evident from the Daniel quotations and the large numberof allusions that relate to his book (Compare Neste Aland: Novum Testament Grace, Stuttgart 1979 p. 765) Prophecy Daniel 3: Another problem liberal Christians have is Daniel 9:25,26 This prophecy goes beyond Antiochus IV Epiphanes! ‘These 65 weeks of years were fulfilled at he baptism of Jesus (29 CE). Even ifthe so-called late dating (Daniel was written only in 167 BCE, thats, after the politial events and enumerations ofthe empires) was correct, the 2\wrter of the book of Daniel would have known the future some “200 years in advance’. Was the "unknown Jew of Maccabean time" a prophet aftr all? “That would be an own goal by the liberal theologian. {always wonder: four historical Daniel had written his book during the Maccabean period, why did he never mention Antiochus? On the Septuagint: There are two versions. 1. DANLXX und die Theodotian Translation (THEOD). “The beginning of the translation “The general translation of biblical writings into Greek hastits beginnings in the 3° century BCE” (S. Pace Jeansonne) "Daniel 4-6 already in the frst half ofthe third century 8.C.E." (R.Albertz) “The Septuagint and the Roman Emaite “By no means had the Roman empire already grown into a world empire atthe time ofthe (xx translators. Nor had the Romans visibly yet taken over the rule of Egypt” (Birte Braasch, Dissertation for obtaining the degree of Doctor of Theology, 2003) Conon: ‘According to "Josephus Flavus", the canon was completed in the S* century B.C, which ineuded the book of Daniel See more in the literature “That itwas acknowledged as canonical, is supported by the writer ofthe apocryphal but historical Book of 1. Maccabees 2:58, 60. (Insight, Vol. 1 p. 577- 78) ‘Qumran and the book of Daniel: “The number of Daniel finds in Qumran exceeds that of most other books ofthe Hebrew Bible.” (P. W. Flint, Mertens, JJ. Collins, Hermeneia) “the eight Daniel fragments, among others also Daniel 9 range from the 2° century B.C. to the frst century CE." (lint, Collins) “This is the evidence for an early dating ofthe historical Daniel” (Wegner) ‘the presence and popularity of the Daniel manuscripts at Qumran contradicted the modern view, which advocates the late dating of the composition of Daniel.” {Contain} Here again we see the conflicts withthe late dating ofthe book of Daniel and the manuscripts from Qumran, Even these manuscripts are only “copies ofthe original’. Moreover, the emergence of the Qumran Essenes fli into this very {ole ofthe Maccabees. These “Maccabees” made themselves “priestly princes” from 152 although they were not Levites.Jesus knew this too and would never have quoted such "gentile high priests". "A Maccabean date for Daniel is ruled out by the Qumran fragments." ( Harrison “Daniel finds were written between 167 to 165 BCE” (Baldwin).” “The oldest 40 Daniel fragment late 2nd Century 8.C.E." (Collins, Cross) “The Compllation of the Book of Daniel in alibrary of the Maccabees would be impossible at this time." (The Zonieren Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible) For the Essenes, moreover, Daniel is 2 historical figure. The Essenes in particular lived in the expectation of the end times based on their knowledge of the book of Daniel. Even more, we find references to Daniel in the “Jewish literature”: Maccabees 1, Maccabees 2, Maccabees 3, Sibyline Oracles, Wisdom of Solomon 3:4.8 (1st century) Enoch 14, Baruch, etc. ‘The findings from Qumran and the Aramaic from the 2% century and 6* century “It must be admitted that the Aramaic of Daniel is from the 6th century and does not coincide with that of the 2° century” (Collin) “The Aramaic of Daniel does not fit 167 B.CE. (Jeffcoad, Yamduchie) “The imperial Aramaic (of Daniel) was common in the S* century BCE, not later.” (Archer)" Danial i similar (paleographically) to the Habakkuk and Isaiah texts from Qumran, Ezekiel, Haggai, Ezra, and Chronicles" (R.K. Harrison) ‘This Is also consistent with an early dating of Daniel.” “The Aramaic of the Daniel fragments at Qumran is not the Aramaic ofthe Maccabean period, but of the 6* century Eastern Aramaic.” (Bock Expository ‘Sermons Criswell) “The studies of F. Rosenthal have shown that the Aramaic in the book of Daniel corresponds to the Aramaic (Imperial Aramaic, K.A. Kitchen) which has spread increasingly as an official language in the Middle East since the 7 century B.CE.” (R.K. Harrison) Repetition: According to Josephus (lewish Antiquities), Daniel was written in Its completion (canon) before our common era ‘itis clear that the judgment stories in chapters 1-6 were not written in ‘Maccabean times. It is not even possible to isolate a single verse that reveals an editorial insertion from this period.” (Collins) Aramaic: Don't forget: The Book of Daniel was written in Aramaic (language of the Gentiles) and Hebrew (language of the Jews).“This language (Aramaic) became more and more widespread in the 7 century.” (Dr. J. Vernon McGee) Daniel 2-7 in Aramaic, rather for pagan world powers that ware the focus of prophecy. Chapters 8-12 rather for the people of the Jews - Isl. “The Hebrew of Daniels similar to that found in Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles”. (Montgomery 1954) 90% of the text is from the 5* century.” (Townsley) “The Aramaic Part in Daniel” (6, Bromiley 1979) (Insight Vol. 1. p. 77-78) ‘itis the language of courts and pulpits.” (Waltke) Daniel was the third most influential man inthe state. “This Aramaic is almost the same as that in parts of Ezra. It is identical in speling, ‘etymology, syntax, to the Aramaic ofthe North Semitic inscriptions of the 7, 8, ‘and 9® centuries 8.C.E. Egyptian papyri (Elephantine) confirm these.” (Wilson) Bible texts from the New Testament point to both the Aramaic and Hebrew portions of the bock of Daniel, e.g, Hebr. 11:32-34; Matt. 24:18; Mark 13:14. What does that show? Jesus treated Daniel asa historical person. In addition, “Nestle Aland Novum Testament” lists 200 references about Daniel The Vereinigte Bibelgesellschaft a" e Daniel. Belshazzar and historical accuracy. xcept for Daniel himself, no one knew ofa "Belshazzar" at the time of the Maccabees and until 1854 C.E. jon uses 150 references from the book of Neither Herodotus S* century 8.C-., nor Xenophon (2* century B.C.E.) nor Berossos 3° century B.C.E, knew of @ Belshazzar. Only in 1854 CE. and later, cunetform writings were found ~ prayer of Nabonidus (have this as a replica) of ‘the king of Babylon. Name of the son = Belshazzar “Nabonidus gave the regency to his son Belshazzar.” (Alan Millard) “Co-ruler” (New Bible Dictionary Lexikon zur Bibel) Question: How could an "unknown Jew" know anything about a Belshazzar that other historians ke Herodotus ca. 490 BC Xenophon, ca. 430 BC or Berossos, ca. 330, B.CE. passed over and was not described until hundreds of years into the Maccabean period? Was this Jew, unknown to Porphyrius, inspired afterall? In addition to this, Raymond Dougherty, a decade-long sharp critic: "Two famous Greek historians of the 4 century and 5 century B.C.E do not mention Belshazzar by name. Annals in Greek, written from the beginning of the 5‘3 century, ate utterly silent on Belshazzar and his importance in the Neo- Babylonian Empice. The total information found in the cuneiforms of the 6 century B.C. and before the time of Josephus Flavius of the 1* century CE. cannot provide the historical framework of the S* chapter of Daniel” (Nabonidus and Belshazzar p. 199-200) ‘The fact that Daniel knows it nevertheless testifies to its composition during the 6 century. Greek loan words in the book of Daniel: All three/four Greek words are used for musical instruments. The intention is to ‘show that this "unknown Jew’ wrate the book of Daniel in the time of the Maccabees. So around the time of 167-165 of Greece. “The presence of the Greek language in Semitic milieu was common long before the 6 century BC" (Vashol2) ‘The word “symphony.” “Pythagoras uses the term to refer to an instrument in the 6 century B.CE. “(Hymni Homerica, ad Mercurium 51) ete. .... The word of Daniel 3:5 qatros (either) or sabcha (sambuke or pesanterin (lute) are Greek ‘words; but this is too little to make the book of Daniel a book of the Hellenistic period.” Aristotle 304-322 B.C. and Plato 428-347 likewise used these words.” (Montgomery) “Hellenistic influence had already reached Babylon by the reign of Nebuchadnezzar Il, These instruments are also seen on Assyrian reliefs.” (Wilson, Kell) Also found are 19 Persian loan words on an early date of the book of Daniel None of them were used after 300 8.C.E. Moreover, in Babylon there were Greek mercenaries, merchants, etc ‘The “Elephantine Papyei” also contain Aramaic documents from the 5* century ‘which already contain Greek loan words. So this shows us how flimsy and from which desperate comer one tries to do injustice to the historical Daniel here. aniel 3:5, 7, 10, 15 Instruments are also used by “Homer” from the 8* century B.CE" (Kitchen) “old Persian gave way to Middle Persian in 300 B.C. These terms (Book of Daniel) must date from before Persia fll to the Greeks." (Miller) “Danie''s special ancient Persian words are words that were in use before 300 CE." (Harrison) ‘These words just speak clearly against a Maccabean dating of Daniel (165).” (K. A. Kitchen) “That Persian loan words occur there in the book of Daniel shows that he partly wrltes down some things at the beginning ofthe Persian rule” (W. Mller)Summary: The one Daniel, whom | know from the 6* century, has a comprehensive understanding and knowledge of Babylonian and Persian customs and history. For ‘example, Daniel describes Nebuchadnezzar as the bullder of Babylon. Greek historians attributed the building to Semiramis (Assyrian Queen). Belshazzar is rightfully given the third place in Babylon ete. Like no other, heis also experienced In the power relations of the Babylonian rulers (Belshazzar), Spel Jeremiah and the Bible book of Ezra also use Aramaic and Hebrew as spelling. The latest shack wave against alate date for the book of Daniel was generated by the ‘publication of Job Targum (110 Qlob) from Cave 11 of Qumran. Itfls the gap of several centuries between the Aramaic of the books of Daniel and Ezra, External evidence: 41) The testimony of Jesus, who would never quote @ high priest (Maccabean] who \was not ofthe tribe of the Levites. (Mat. 24:15; 25:33; 26:64) Jesus quoted Daniel 28 "a prophet” 2) The apostles also bear witness to this Daniel. (1 Kor. 6:2; 2. Thess. 2:3) 3) Ezekiel 14:14, 20; 28:3 describes Daniel, Job etc. . 4) The character and the recordings are entirely consistent with the times and circumstances in which the author lives. 5) Certain parts (Dan. 2:4, 7) are written in Aramaic. Hebrew is related to Ezra. An Aramaic that doesn’t fit the time of the Maccabees. 66) Qumran and the Daniel fragments and the Essenes assume a very early Daniel. 7) Historical: Belshazzar (see above). Daniel didn't make a historical mistake. 8) Loan words are historically not a problem. Daniel was apolitical figure and was able to make use of the linguistic diversity in the country, 9) Prophecies? Some prophecies go far beyond just the Maccabees. (Dan. 9:25 — Luke 21:24) Moreover, the Messiah appeared at the right time (29 C.E,), over 200 years after the time of Maccabees. 10] The Jews did not include the Book of Maccabees in the Bible canon. Why not? 11) Ancient Jewish and Christian authorities accepted the authenticity ofthe book. 12) According to Jesus, the “disgusting thing” spoken about by Daniel at Matt 24:15 was in "the future” not in the past with the Maccabees (Porphyrios).(Other arguments by liberal theologians would include the resurrection accounts, in Daniel from the 5" century. These would be far too early for 6* century B.CE. dating. Is that right? No. ‘Such topics are already discussed in Genesis or in Job 14:13, 15; Ps. 16:10; 1 Kings 47-21, 22; 2 Kings 4:22-37, 13:20, 21... (Insight Vol. 1, p. 577-78) ‘Therefore, to me, thera is only one result: ‘The Bible book of Daniel with al its prophecies was written in the 6" century B.CE. All other counter-arguments are refuted after careful consideration by historians or linguists. Any previous arguments against this Daniel, as | know him, are irrelevant as they make no sense archaeologically either (Belshazzar, Quran etc. ). Would a Porphyrius stil write against a Daniel of the 6* century 8.C.E. after all the archaeological, linguistic and theological arguments? Probably, Why? itis. because of his world view. It can’t be what can’t be. That's the way liberal theologians are. Yes, itis true that “no man” nor an “unknown Jew” can make such prophetic statements about world empires. Butif| am right in believing in the existence of 2 God through “rational thought”, then that is possible. And how. ‘Much reminds me of the theme: creation or evolution and of Ps. 10-4 and 14-1. Paul Davies (Sheffield University) therefore rightly wrote: “its a deplorable fraud ‘that the book of Daniel is essentially a deliberate deception perpetrated on the (allegedly) gullible readers by dishonest means and intended to serve, asit were, 2 noble purpose." ...| find ithard to accuse the original readers of the book of such gullblty. If one can speak of credulity in this case, itis rather on the part of rationalist ites." (Journal forthe Study of the Olé Testament) Little hint: The 8 fragments about Daniel can be viewed on the internet. This ‘morning | did some more research. One is almost overwhelmed by good ‘arguments for the origin of the book of Daniel from the time around S30 B.C.E, Here are some other recommendable Internet pag 41) The Book of Daniel and Matters of Language (Hasel) 2) The linguistic argument for the date of Daniel - Apologetics Press (Jeffcoat) 3) The Book of Daniel (3/20) Bible Apologetics 4) Insight Vol. 1 p. 577-78 5) David Conklin- tektonicsPART 2: For generations we have been trapped in a “rationalism for which the company of areal God is simply no longer acceptable, Everything “religious", supposedly Lnprovable, is pushed into the realm of fables, even when facts contradict ‘everything. The main thing is not to have to answer to any god anymore, ‘Therefore, there is no place in thelr thought pattern for thinking in terms of 9 book of “Daniel” and for example its predictions of coming world empires. ‘fatal mistake, in my opinion. Why? Let's get to the bottom of some points on extending/adding to the so-called Late Date Theory. 1: Historical accuracy in the book of Daniel: In 1850, a German Bible commentary clsimed that the name of king “Belshazzar” could not be found outside the Bible. However, in 1854 2 four inches long clay cylinder engraved with cuneiform writing (Nabonidus Chronicle) was found with the name: BELSHAZZAR. Nabonicusis referred to as “crown prince” and Belshazzar as second In rank. (Alan Mille) Interestingly enough, Daniel is termed the third highest i Bible. (Dan. 5:1, 10-31) Likewise, through the *Nabonidus Chronicle” and the “East Indian Tablet" in the sh Museum, scholars have recognized the first chapters of Daniel. the order of rank in the 2. The book of Daniel was not written until 167 8.C.E: Antiochus Epiphanes (Seleucid tried to introduce idolatry and pagan sacrifices in ‘the temple of Jerusalem. Can these circumstances be applied to the prophecies of Daniel 11:31-32 (disgusting thing) auf Antiochus Epiphanes? In fact, the Maccabees were Jewish freedom fighters und refused to accept the Syrian religion One of the Maccabees, Mattathias, gave a speech In 166 B.C. to unify” the Jews In the spirit of the Maccabees. In this speech he described “historical personalities “from Abraham to Daniel” (1 ‘Maccabees 2:51-60). if Daniel was a contemporary of Mattathias (166 B.C, orf the book of Daniel was written only in the “previous year", would Daniel then be described as one of the ancestors such as Abraham? Weak speech. It does not fit. 9 I: Tha seein Garman adi Nebo wd as "krrprin”bezeehet ind Besser alain in dr Regering, (lan iter) ooe ‘He WNa6 2/1. 27 Basharrr—Crown rine or King? Paring is ln rd cores that white cal ‘nitions fed to Besar ak come roe ‘nay hve bean conser ute odefr such hoc cre the oo of Oui cal Besa tng acted ing i thar ape Shoshana een Tei the soryasreteain Cait” onan MER npranhaMoreover, the temple was not destroyed back then, (Hanukkah Liberation Festival... Later yes. ‘3. Another Daniel? Ezekiel 14:13, 14 connects this Daniel as well as Mattathias ‘above, with ancestors (Abraham) singled out because of thei ‘Who is this Daniel from the book of Daniel? Ezekiel 28:3 gives another clue by describing the prince of Tyre: "Look! You are wiser than Daniel.” “Unger Bible Dictionary calls the theory of two different Daniels of lite validity” 4. Was the book of Danial part of the completed canon? Yes. Early in the fist century, Matthew wrote about this Daniel in Matthew 24:15 as part of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. Atthe “Council of Jamnia” in 70 CE. after the fall of Jerusalem (Daniel 9), it was discussed whether certain books should remain recognized as part ofthe Holy Scriptures. (That s, there was already a completed canon). Daniel was never in question. It was never a point of discussion. “The Qumran finds confirm its firm existence as part of the OT. Even more, the coming of the Messiah was an important element of the Essenes. Daniel 9 helped them. According to the book: “Calendar and Chronology Jewish and Christian (1996)" Roger T. Beckwith has stated that “the Essenic interpretation of the 70 ‘weeks was drawn up ca. 146 B.C.E. This is evident from various writings of the time.” Further, he (Beckwirth) said, “Since the discovery at Qumran, the common, Maceabean dating of the bool must be re-examined.” ‘The “Jewish Talmud" also teaches that the book of Daniel was written in300 B.CE. and included In the canon of the OT. The result? ‘What if we didn't have all these very good arguments for @ Daniel from the 6th century B.CE? If we had just the statements of Jesus and the apostles? Its a good thing, is it not?PART3 (Qumran: “But with the wealth of facts provided by the Dead Sea Seralls, we are in 8 position to settle this question once and forall" (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties 1882. page 282) Daniel spoke of himself in the third person, as if he were writing about another: “which is a perfectly common practice among ancient writers of historical memoirs.” (Gleason Archer Bible Lexicon The Expositors Bible Commentary) He also used the frst person: Daniel 7:15; 8:15;9:2; 10:2... n