Related pages
Date and authorship
Modern critical scholarship has been virtually unanimous in its rejection of the book as a sixth century BC document written by Daniel, containing predictions of the future written centuries before their fulfilment in the Greek and Roman empires.
Instead, it is claimed that Daniel was a book written by an unknown author during the period of the Maccabees, with the aim of encouraging faithful Jews in their resistance to the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes. In this case, the prophecies were written after the events were fulfilled. If this was so, then it would have been written about 165 BC.
This view was first put forward in the third century AD by Porphyry. His pre-supposition was that there could be no predictive element as such in prophecy, therefore Daniel must have been written as history. This view has been reflected one way or other ever since, in rationalistic attacks by those who cannot accept the supernatural, and therefore explain away the miracles and do not believe in predictive prophecy. The result of his claim is that the book of Daniel is basically a forgery, and therefore not the Word of God, and therefore of no value.
Evidence used to claim that Daniel was not written in the sixth century BC
Daniel 1:1 is said to be in conflict with Jer 25:1 and 46:2.
Did Nebuchadnezzar conquer Jerusalem in the third year of Jehoiakim's reign (Dan 1:1) or the fourth year (Jer 25:1)? The difference is due to the different ways of counting the years of the reigning kings between Egypt and Babylon. The Babylonian scribes used a system of counting which reckoned the year in which the king ascended the throne as the 'year of accession to the kingdom', or 'the beginning of his reign', lasting from his accession until the next New Year's Day. This was followed by the first and second years etc.. The scribes in Palestine used the method of the Egyptians which reckoned the year the king started reigning as the first year. Therefore the fourth year of Jer 25:1 is the third year of Dan 1:1 (605 BC).
| Jeremiah (Jerusalem / Egypt) |
|
Daniel (Babylonian method) |
| First year |
608 BC |
Accession year |
| Second year |
607 BC |
First year |
| Third year |
606 BC |
Second year |
| Fourth year |
605 BC |
Third year |
This historical accuracy actually is a mark of the genuineness of Daniel, and increases its authenticity as a 6th cent. BC. document.
'Chaldeans' is used in a restricted sense to denote a group of wise men.
This usage is not seen anywhere else in the OT, therefore points to a late date of composition. Normally 'Chaldeans' is used to describe all Babylonians (as in Habakkuk). Daniel uses the word both to refer to the astrologers or wise men (eg. 2:2, 4:7, 5:7,11), and in the ethnic sense to describe Babylonians in general (1:4, 3:8, 5:30). The historian Herodotus also used the word in both ways.
Who was king? Belshazzar or Nabonidus?
In Daniel chapter five, Belshazzar is king but contemporary cuneiform writings state that Nabonidus occupied the throne. There was great political unrest when Nabonidus began to reign (four kings in six years). Neriglissar killed Evil-Merodach and Nabonidus killed Labashi-Marduk. There were high taxes for military and public expenditures. There was pressure from the Medes and the Lydians. Nabonidus wanted to bring reforms that were rejected by the Babylonian priesthood, so he made Belshazzar his son, co-regent in his place, and left for northern Arabia for a decade while the feud between them simmered down.
The Chronicle of Nabonidus, a clay tablet in the British Museum, explains that Nabonidus was absent in Arabia for much of his reign, and that his son Belshazzar ruled in his place. Therefore when Daniel successfully interpreted the writing on the wall during Belshazzar's feast, he was offered third place in the kingdom, rather than the second (Dan 5:7). Heroditus the historian writing in 450 BC, 100 years after the fall of Babylon, makes no mention of Belshazzar, which suggests that Belshazzar was soon forgotten.
Was Belshazzar the son of Nebuchadnezzar?
Dan 5:18 refers to Nebuchadnezzar being Belshazzar's father, but history shows that Nabonidus was his father. However, in Semitic usage 'son' often was used for a grandson or another descendant, or even an unrelated king.
The insanity of Nebuchadnezzar (ch 4)
Critics often claim the insanity of Nebuchadnezzar as evidence of the non-historical nature of the book, because they say that there is no historical record of this event. Insanity was treated with fear and dread in the time of Daniel, and considered to be the result of demon possession. Madmen were deprived of normal social contacts lest the others should be infected. It is unthinkable that this should happen to the great king Nebuchadnezzar, therefore we should not be surprised by the silence in Babylonian history.
Actually the silence is not so silent. A third century BC Babylonian priest and historian named Berossus preserved a tradition that Nebuchadnezzar became suddenly ill towards the end of his reign. From 582 to 575 BC, there is no record of any political activity by Nebuchadnezzar in any secular historical sources. A damaged inscription, known as 'The Standard Inscription of Nebuchadnezzar' was found in the ruins of Babylon by Sir Henry Rawlinson, may allude to this period. "For four years...in all my dominions I did not build a high place of honour; the precious treasures of my kingdom I did not lay out. In the worship of Merodach...I did not sing his praise...Nor did I clean out the canals".
The 'seven times' (4:16) does not necessarily mean seven years, as the word 'times' means 'seasons' (4:32). In the Babylonian calendar, there were only two seasons, summer and winter. Therefore seven seasons equals 3½ years.
This kind of insanity is known today. It is a rare but genuine psychotic condition called boanthropy, in which the sufferer imagines himself to be an ox and acts like one, eating grass and drinking rain water.
Greek names used for musical instruments
In chapter three, Greek names are used for musical instruments. These are: lyre/zither, harp/trigon and pipe/bagpipes (3:5,10,15). This however no longer presents a problem since archaeological discoveries have revealed something of the extent to which Greek culture had infiltrated the near east long before the Persian period. There were Greek traders in Babylon from the 8th century BC, and mercenaries from the 7th century BC. It is known that the instruments in question are undoubtedly Mesopotamian in origin.
The descriptions of the relations between Syria and Egypt in Chapter eleven are so detailed, they must have been written after the events.
Liberal theologians, approaching this book from a rationalistic viewpoint claim that this chapter must have been written at the time of the Maccabees, looking back on history from the perspective of the second century BC. 11:40 onwards does not seem to fit any known history of that period, so must contain the author's inaccurate guess of his future.
Evidence supporting a 6th century date for Daniel
The style of writing
The Hebrew sections (1:1-2:4a, 8-12) have affinity to Ezekiel, Haggai, Ezra, and Chronicles, rather than the later linguistic characteristics of the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus. The Aramaic sections are very similar to the Aramaic used in the fifth century BC in the Elephantine papyri and in the Aramaic sections in Ezra (4:7 -6:18, 7:12-26). Recent studies have shown that the Aramaic used in Daniel was the kind which developed in government circles from the seventh century BC and subsequently became widespread in the near east.
The writer was familiar with the details of different customs of the two different empires
Various types of punishment: Babylon used fire (ch. 3), Persia used lions (ch. 6), because fire was sacred to the Zoroastrians.
The law-making of the different peoples: Nebuchadnezzar could make and change laws with absolute sovereignty (2:12, 13-46). Darius was limited as the law of Medes and Persians could not be changed (6:8-9).
The author also knew why the image in chapter three had been set up in the plain of Dura
Archaeological excavations have shown that Nebuchadnezzar instigated a great reformation of religious calendars and rituals. Before, many religious practices had been undertaken by the priesthood in secret. Nebuchadnezzar brought them into the open and established general congregational worship by the public, with the king rather than the priests representing god, thus bringing religion within reach of the lowliest citizen in the empire.
Daniel and his three friends were given Babylonian names (1:7)
These names include the names of Babylonian or Sumerian deities. An author writing in the second century BC would be unlikely to know, or to include this information, especially if they were concerned with preserving the purity of the Jewish faith.
Evidence from the Apocrypha
The apocryphal book of 1 Maccabees, written around the time of the Maccabees in the second century BC, includes Daniel and his friends in a list of the great exploits of their ancestors, including Abraham, Joseph, Joshua, Caleb, David and Elijah (1 Macc 2:51-60). He did not consider Daniel to be a contemporary character, but rather an historical figure in Israel's past. "Hannaniah, Azariah, and Mishael believed and were saved from the flame. Daniel, because of his innocence, was delivered from the mouth of the lions."
The fact that Daniel is included in the OT
Another strong indication that Daniel was written before 165 B.C. is the very fact that it is in the canon. The canon was closed before this period by common consent (at the time of Ezra - 450 BC), and the book of 1 Maccabees along with others were not accepted.
Daniel writes in the first person and the phrase "I, Daniel" (8:1, 9:2, 10:2, 12:5-8)
The Book of Daniel claims to be contemporary with the historical kings Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar and Cyrus in the sixth century BC, with Daniel present in the royal court in Babylon from 605 BC to 535 BC.
If Daniel's authorship is denied, then serious questions are made about the inerrancy and accuracy of God's Word. If the book was written in the second century BC, then it was a forgery. Jesus quoted from Daniel 9:27, using the phrase "spoken by the prophet Daniel" (Mt 24:15), showing that he accepted Daniel to be the author.
Related pages