Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jack the Bodiless · 08-27-2004, 09:25 AM

Posted by Jim Larmore in this thread:

Quote:

There are about 300 plus messianic prophecies alone in the old testiment that can only fit one being and that is Jesus Christ. If you look in the Book of Daniel you'll find a bunch of prophecies that delineate the 4 major kingdoms of the world and the 2300 year prophecy for the end times. Daniel is a highly disputed book because of these prophecies. I have done a lot of research on Daniel and its genuine. It was canonized before the maccabean wars and is a part of the dead sea scrolls which puts it way before the critics say it was written...

...Do a google on the authenticity of the book of Daniel and you'll see the book was canonized many years before critics say it was written. They can't admitt its genuine because it has too many prophecies in it. They say it is a history book but the evidence and facts say otherwise.

This is a more appropriate forum for this discussion.

I can see a problem with Jim's claim immediately. From here:

Quote:

The scrolls and scroll fragments recovered in the Qumran environs represent a voluminous body of Jewish documents, a veritable "library", dating from the third century B.C.E. to 68 C.E.

Why is it "impossible" for references to a book written in 168 BC (or thereabouts) to be present in a collection of documents ranging up to 68 CE?

Jim Larmore · 08-27-2004, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Posted by Jim Larmore in this thread:

This is a more appropriate forum for this discussion.

I {agree.}

(I'm just guessing that what was supposed to have been here, Jim, since you continue to respond below. Let me know if this needs to be changed. -Amaleq13)

Quote:

Why is it "impossible" for references to a book written in 168 BC (or thereabouts) to be present in a collection of documents ranging up to 68 CE?

Daniel is part of the dead sea scrolls that means it was canonized before the maccabean wars. Canonization takes many years, Daniel is authentic.

Gooch's dad · 08-27-2004, 11:01 AM

Jim, you completely ignored his question. The fact that the DSS included Daniel doesn't mean it was canonized, for one thing.

But his question was about the date range for the DSS, which ranges up to 68 CE. If the DSS's include documents with dates as late as 68 CE, why are you claiming that the book of Daniel has an early date?

The dating of the book of Daniel is well established by biblical scholars. It is one of the few books where we have a good idea, within a year or two, as to when it was written. It was written during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, but not before he died. It has the details of much of the Maccabean revolt correct, but is completely vague on how Antiochus would die.

This places it between 167 BCE and 164 BCE.

08-27-2004, 11:56 AM

Could someone list for me the books inlcuded in the DSS, that were written between 160-68 BCE?

funinspace · 08-27-2004, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Larmore

Daniel is part of the dead sea scrolls that means it was canonized before the maccabean wars. Canonization takes many years, Daniel is authentic.

It seams that Biblical Scholars disagree with your assumption...
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/daniel/intro.htm

Quote:

This Book takes its name, not from the author, who is actually unknown, but from its hero, a young Jew taken early to Babylon, where he lived at least until 538 B.C. Strictly speaking, the book does not belong to the prophetic writings but rather to a distinctive type of literature known as "apocalyptic," of which it is an early specimen. Apocalyptic writing enjoyed its greatest popularity from 200 B.C. to 100 A.D., a time of distress and persecution for Jews, and later, for Christians. Though subsequent in time to the prophetic, apocalyptic literature has its roots in the teaching of the prophets, who often pointed ahead to the day of the Lord, the consummation of history. For both prophet and apocalyptist Yahweh was the Lord of history, and he would ultimately vindicate his people.

This work was composed during the bitter persecution carried on by Antiochus IV Epiphanes (167-164) and was written to strengthen and comfort the Jewish people in their ordeal.

spin · 08-28-2004, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gooch's dad

Jim, you completely ignored his question. The fact that the DSS included Daniel doesn't mean it was canonized, for one thing.

But his question was about the date range for the DSS, which ranges up to 68 CE. If the DSS's include documents with dates as late as 68 CE, why are you claiming that the book of Daniel has an early date?

The dating of the book of Daniel is well established by biblical scholars. It is one of the few books where we have a good idea, within a year or two, as to when it was written. It was written during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, but not before he died. It has the details of much of the Maccabean revolt correct, but is completely vague on how Antiochus would die.

This places it between 167 BCE and 164 BCE.

The book of Daniel is actually two collections of works (ch.1-6, ch.7-12), which should be apparent due to the differences between the approaches of the two parts, the first being mainly a collection of tales with a small visionary content, while the second part is a collection of visions, and it is this second part which can be dated to the period leading to the death of Antiochus IV in 164 BCE.

The first half was written somewhat earlier. The vision of the giant figure composed of different materials, which has the legs being the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms, was written earlier than the victory of Antiochus III over Scopas, the Ptolemaic general.

(The visions in the second part are all different perspectives of the same situation, Antiochus IV's pollution of the temple.)

That there is evidence for Daniel in the DSS is no indication of the book's "canonisation", unless of course one wants to claim canonisation for the numerous other (previously unknown) works cited within the DSS corpus.

spin

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-27-2004, 11:01 AM	#3
Gooch's dad Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Madison WI USA Posts: 3,508	Jim, you completely ignored his question. The fact that the DSS included Daniel doesn't mean it was canonized, for one thing. But his question was about the date range for the DSS, which ranges up to 68 CE. If the DSS's include documents with dates as late as 68 CE, why are you claiming that the book of Daniel has an early date? The dating of the book of Daniel is well established by biblical scholars. It is one of the few books where we have a good idea, within a year or two, as to when it was written. It was written during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, but not before he died. It has the details of much of the Maccabean revolt correct, but is completely vague on how Antiochus would die. This places it between 167 BCE and 164 BCE.

08-27-2004, 11:56 AM	#4
doubtingthomas Guest Posts: n/a	Could someone list for me the books inlcuded in the DSS, that were written between 160-68 BCE?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.