When Was the Book of Daniel Written? And Who Wrote Daniel?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ธ.ค. 2024
- When was Daniel Written? And who was the Author? Well despite what Bible Minimalist, Textual Critics and Atheists might want you to believe, The Book of Daniel was Written when it says it was written, by whom it says wrote it!
Visit my web site at www.myhebrewroots.org
Credits:
Executive Producers: Me, Myself and AJ
Co-writers: Abraham, Joseph and AJ
Editor in Chief: Joe
Recommended Books, articles and publications on this teaching:
Dead Sea Scroll Deception by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh
John C. Whitcomb, "Daniel" .Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1985
Great site on Biblical Archaeology: apxaioc.com/
Bibliography and scripture list
Muddiman, John. The Oxford Bible Commentary."Daniel", Oxford University Press.2001 pg 658
May, James, Harper Collins Bible Commentary. "Daniel". HarperOne, 2001
The Expositor’s Bible Commentary "Daniel", Zondervan 1976
Haughwout, Mark S."Dating the Book of Daniel", 2007
HASEL, GERHARD F."THE BOOK OF DANIEL AND MATTERS OF LANGUAGE: EVIDENCES RELATING TO NAMES, WORDS, AND THE ARAMAIC LANGUAGE". Andrews University 1981
HASEL, GERHARD F."The Book of Daniel Confirmed by the Dead sea Scrolls". Andrews University 1990
Wiki-paedia "Book of Daniel"
Daniel 9:25
Deseret News "Delay in Publishing Dead Sea Scrolls is Disgracefull, Historians Charge". Deseret News June 28, 1989
Wade, Nicholas. "The Vanity of Scholars" The New York Times, July 9, 1989
Ercolano, Patrick. "Bible Expert Criticizes Delay in Scrolls' Release". Los Angeles Times. October 28, 1989
Rourke, Mary. "Official on Dead Sea Scrolls project lost his position after making anti-Semetic remarks" Los Angeles Times
Shanks, Hershel. "Leading Dead Sea Scroll Scholar Denounces Delay". Biblical Archaeology Review. April 1990
Jewish Telegraphic Agency."Editor of Dead Sea Scrolls Fired After Attacking Judaism and Israel" December 13,1990
Daniel 1:3
Wilson, Robert,D."Daniel".International Bible Encyclopedia, Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1995
John C. Whitcomb, "Daniel" .Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1985
apxaioc.com/?p=25
Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible
Strong's complete Concordance of the Bible
The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon
Thank you for this. I’m sick of skeptics shaking my faith with lies.
Yeah, the biblical scholars are out to get you. lol. Umm, the word skeptic is another issue. Whether one is a skeptic or not isn't relevant. This guy and this video is just apologetics garbage.
Buy a good commentary like John J Collins and his Hermeneia commentary or Carol Newsom's and get back to me in a few years,
This guy calling all these scholars who disagree with him 'god-haters' and other stupid juvenile names as he throws a hissy fit is not a reliable person to believe. He is dishonest, slanders and is just totally outside of his grade. He is a first grader dealing with giants of a field (which includes all types of scholars including believers) scared of really studying the issue.
You can do better. Buy those two commentaries.
The apologist like this dude is the LIAR
just research Darius of Mede and you will find why Harvard & Yale scholars don't agree with this guy.
If the book of Daniel had true prophecies it wouldn't be shaking yourfaith. Second of all biblical scholars aren't lying when they say it was written much later. There are plenty of Christians who know that it was written late and it doesn't affect their faith. Just like people who realize that the book of Jonah isn't real and a person really wasn't swallowed by a big fish. Once you face reality you won't be going around saying you're sick of skeptics because you will become one. Your problem is you're not a skeptic
@@OrthodoxJoker you are afraid of reality and that is what is shaking your faith. Why don't you just deal with it? If your faith relies on BS what good is it? What drove me to study was I wanted to get to know the God of the Bible better! When you do that you find out a lot of BS goes on with apologists and pretzel twisting in order to make harmony out of something that can't be made into a rational belief. Grow up! Spend some money and buy some books and read your Bible critically. When I was a believer I knew my God could handle it. If he can't then maybe it doesn't exist. Grow up!
@@OrthodoxJoker skeptics lie? All of them? You're living a lie. You want to listen to this dude on this video who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about? You will sink that low in order to keep your faith? Think about that! This dude doesn't know Jack Sh33t! You want to follow this and find out years later you should've listened to people like me and a couple other people who have taken time out to comment on why this dude is wrong? Do you want to have regrets later in life like that? Buy the commentary I mentioned. This guy doesn't even respond to points made. Get yourself out of that hole and burn your security blanket and buy that commentary. It doesn't mean you're going to turn into an unbeliever but it will mean that at least you're studying the issue and you know that this guy is full of crap
Just discovered your channel and glad i did.. Great video..looking forward to binge watching your other videos.. Thanks!
@15:44 "There are no incomplete or partial mss; there's no quotes, commentaries or proof that the book was compiled over time."
Well, that is just patently false.
4QDan-c and 4QDan-e are definitely copies of only small parts of what became the entire book. 4QDan-b and 4QDan-d are also probably copies of only the Aramaic tales. Moreover, there is other evidence from Qumran in 4Q246 and 4Q248 and 4Q530 all look like they are earlier source material for Daniel. Significantly, there also seems to be within the Dead Sea Scrolls a wide range of Aramaic literature which featured "Daniel" as a protagonist, but was also unknown prior to the discovery of the Scrolls.
Quotes from Qumran aren’t proof that Daniel didn’t exist in its complete form. That’s ridiculous. Quotes are quotes because they aren’t full copies of a book.
Also, Bel and the Dragon existing doesn’t mean Daniel didn’t exist in its complete form before Qumran.
@j7489 That is NOT what I am saying.
I am telling you that there are at least two-and probably more-of the Daniel Scrolls from Qumran that contained ONLY small sections. These are NOT scrolls which cited texts from Daniel. These are copies of "Daniel," but only portions of the final book. 4QDan-c (4Q114) undisputedly contained ONLY Daniel 11-12 when it was written. 4QDan-e (4Q116) undisputedly contained ONLY Daniel 9. But, moreover, this ms. also may have been a copy of only the prayer, minus any mention of Daniel. This is almost after factoring in reconstruction of the fragmentary remains in order to calculate what was originally there.
And, this all fails to factor in the significance of several texts, which appear as earlier versions of later Daniel stories. The most notable is 4Q246, which CLEARLY was an earlier version of Daniel 4, but with Nabonidas instead of Nebuchadnezzar, and an anonymous Jew instead of Daniel.
If I take a copy of Daniel and leave it in my driveway for a week, due to the abuse and deterioration, it now becomes an incomplete manuscript. - That's not what I was referring to. All of the dead sea scrolls suffered some deterioration and missing portions. That's not what I was referring to either. What I was saying was, that there were no incomplete, partial manuscripts or quotes of prior DRAFTS that show that Daniel evolved over a period of time. All of the Dead Sea Scrolls are available on dssenglishbible.com where any deviation from the Texus Receptus is noted. These deviations are extremely minor and can be attributed to scribal errors.
I am fully aware that apocryphal additions to Daniel like Bel and the Dragon exist- and that is fine. There is a reason that Ezra didn't enter it in to cannon. Their existence does not detract from the authenticity of Daniel.
However the position that Daniel was written during a singular time period is not one I take alone. Most all minimalist scholars believe this as well. -Anathea Portier-Young, Michael P. Theophilos, Leland Ryken, ; Tremper Longman, ect.ect.ect......
What I am confused about is why there are so many Universities like Trinity Western University, that hire atheist to teach Christian classes. That's the bizarre part.
@@myhebrewroots4478 well, I wasn't always an atheist.
My problem is with this: "there were no incomplete, partial manuscripts or quotes of prior DRAFTS that show that Daniel evolved over a period of time."
That is flatly incorrect. As I noted earlier, while all the Daniel mss are fragmentary the ONLY one that can be reconstructed to contain a complete copy of the entire book is 4Q112. 4Q113 also probably was a complete ms., since this one was copied directly from 4Q112. ALL OF THE REST of the fragments are at best conjectural:
· The Cave 1Q Daniel mss are too fragmentary to know much of anything about their original shape, but their last deposition-rolled together along with another, seemingly unrelated text-suggests that these were not at first individual complete copies of the entire later book.
· 4Q114 and 4Q116 were DEFINITELY originally copies of only small parts of Daniel: 4Q113 was a scroll containing ONLY the final vision, and 4Q115 contained ONLY the prayer from Daniel 9-and there is good reason that this scroll did not even contain any mention of Daniel in connection to the prayer.
· 4Q115 possibly contained the entire book, but it is more likely that it comprised ONLY the Aramaic tales.
· 6Q7 was almost certainly a (papyrus!) copy of ONLY the visions.
We know this because we have been working on carefully attempting to reconstruct these mss for decades.
Moreover, if you know anything at all about Daniel and the Scrolls then you would also know that 4Q242 is clearly a source text for Daniel 4. Numerous scholars have demonstrated this, and have offered convincing evidence that there were other DSS fragments which likewise preserve earlier source material.
But, what do I know? I have only spent my entire adult life working on the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Dr. Kipp Davis,
Years ago I was listening to a Yale University Lecture by professor and Atheist Christine Hayes where she was discussing the Noachian flood. She admitted that almost every ancient civilization in the Mesopotamian region had a flood story that was very similar to Genesis. But then she quickly informed the class that this only proves that Moses didn’t receive this information from God, he simply “modified” a story from all the people around him. But what she didn't do is offer another explanation: That if all the societies of the Near East have witnessed the same flood event, then maybe it actually happened! Bible Minimalists only recite minimalist theories.
This also applies directly to the prayer of Nabonius(4Q242). Just because Nabonius also refers to similar information to Daniel does not prove it was a source material. Maybe they both witnessed the same event? Maybe Nabonius used Daniel as a source. Bible Minimalists only recite minimalist theories.
The conclusions that you have drawn from fragments of the 8 scrolls of Daniel are conjecture at best. There are multiple other theories that can be drawn from the same information however you only cherry pick the theories that minimize the authority of the bible. There is a big difference between scribal errors and content evolution. As you know untrained, unofficial scribes (like Essene scribes) always make mistakes and those mistake get passed from document to document. The passing of scribal errors does not prove in any way that the content of Daniel "evolved". Private libraries (like Essene's) were known to own discount scrolls that probably suffered damage before they purchased them. They would "fill in the blanks" when they couldn't copy the damaged or missing text. The Sopheriem destroyed their old damaged copies to prevent this. Once again, minimalist never consider or repeat alternative theories that don't minimize the bible.
I refer back only to my original question of: Why are there so many Universities, like Trinity Western University, that hire atheist to teach Christian classes? I have listened to multiple lectures by minimalists and you guys are all the same. You ignore any traditional explanations as though they don't exist. You only repeat theories that minimize the bible. And you spin information that you can't ignore. The real idiots are the parents that send their children to your Universities.
One of the reasons I left the Religion of Atheism was because of Daniel. One of the reasons why I promote Daniel so much now is because it doesn't matter exactly when Daniel was written because even if it was written in 50BC, it still predicts the coming of the Messiah, the fall of Rome from within, the 10 generals of Rome, little horn power from the 10 generals, and more.
This is amazing to know and amazing to preach. ❤❤❤
Right you are. God bless.
Atheisn is not a religion, it's a relationship - with reality!
@@TobyQuan When we look at definitions and we see things like Religion of consumerism etc, we have to look deeper at the "Why" an "How" could something like consumerism is used as a definition for Religion.
What other things could far into the definition/category of Religion?
It does matter when it was written, because if it's late He did not predict anything regarding the roman empire and was just recording something that happened in his time, most importantly, the end of the age did not come either after the fall of the Greeks nor the fall of the roman empire. No one really knows when and by who the book of Daniel was written.
@@iguanapoolservice1461 Everyone agrees that Daniel was written long before Jesus. Whether you believe in time of Babylon or time of Greece doesn't matter cause Daniel still predicted the fall of each kingdom including the 4 generals of Greece and 10 generals of Rome after they fell, and predicted the Messiah and the ending of the daily sacrifices.
Just this much information is mind blowing. And then it also talks about the Little Horn power that came from the 10 generals of Rome, this Little Horn power is the Roman Catholic Church as this Little Horn speaks and blasphemes (The title of Pope is claim to be God on Earth, etc etc).
It also continues. The rise of Papacy and the fall of Papacy in the 1260 year prophecy which ended in 1798 when the Pope was taken captive and died in jail.
There is so much more that Daniel talks about 💝💝💝.
Excellent analysis, much more thorough than the naysayers. Thank you for recording this.
There was NO analysis. Just bloviating and name calling
@@gmac6503should see the garbage the naysayers put out.
Amazing video! I would love to see more!
This was a great video, but the "dark times" and "last days" and "end times" comments are baseless opinions. There has been far (far!) darker times for Christians in the past 2000 years, and there have been very few times in history even remotely close to as good of a time to be alive as today. Just think about what century you would rather be living in, and I bet this one is in your top 3. People who think these are "dark times" have no sense of history. Every generation of Christians for the past 2000 years (including the original disciples) thought they were living in the "last days". Just a silly way to think and there is no basis for it theologically. It could be another 2000 years until those times.
Seventy weeks are determined [cut off] upon *thy people and upon thy holy city*
...to finish the transgression, and
(Jn 19:30; Col 2:13-14; Is 53:12)
...to make an end of sins, and
(Jn 1:29; 1Jn 3:5; Jn 5:14; Jn 8:11; Rom 6:6-7; 1 Cor 15:3; Heb 9:26-28; Heb 10:14)
...to make reconciliation for iniquity, and
(Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:18-19; Col 1:20-22; Eph 2:14-16)
...to bring in everlasting righteousness, and
(Matt 3:15; Rom 3:21-22; Rom 8:4; 2 Cor 5:21)
...to seal up the vision and prophecy, and
(Matt 3:13-17)
...to anoint the most Holy.
(Jn 1:32-34; Mark 1:15; Acts 10:38; Luke 4:18; Is 61:1)
{Daniel 9:24} < The context
And he [the Messiah] shall confirm the covenant with many for ONE WEEK: and IN THE MIDST OF THE WEEK (the seventieth) he [Christ] SHALL CAUSE THE SACRIFICE AND THE OBLATION TO CEASE, and for the overspreading of abominations (the continued temple sacrifices, after Christ one perfect sacrifice.) he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. ("Behold your house has been left unto you desolate.")
{Daniel 9:27}
7 weeks + 62 weeks + *one week* = 70 weeks, to anoint the most Holy, and to seal up the vision and the prophecy.
Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, *It was necessary* that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: (for there were three and a half years remaining grace for "thy people" of the final week.) but seeing ye put it from you, and *judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life* lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
{Acts 13:46-48}
To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until *the land had enjoyed her sabbaths* for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years.
{2 Chronicles 36:21}
For 490 years, equal to 70 sabbath rest for the land every seventh year, that Israel and Judah transgressed the law of God.
This is why they received seventy years exiled in bondage in the land of Babylon.
There was no gap in their seventy years in exil, and there is no gap in the 490 years of transgressing the law of God, and there most certainly was no gap unto the coming of the Messiah who did not come in a vacuum, but rather confirmed his covenant with many for there and a half years, and in the land of Israel's inheritance.
The stoning of Steven is when probation closed on the covenant that God made with the their fathers, exactly three and a half years after Jesus Christ, our passover was sacrificed for us, and the gospel of the kingdom of heaven went out unto the Gentiles also.
The destruction of the temple is supposed to happen at the 69th week, close to the cutting off of the anointed one, not 37 years after the end of the 70th
There is always at least one wrong thing in the Daniel 9 math that people try to lay out
@@Greyz174
That is incorrect. 69 weeks till the *coming* of the Messiah, and after confirming His new covenant for three and a half year, in the middle of the seventieth week he was cutt off, but not for Himself.
The destruction of the remple was prophecy, but not part of the time prophecy of 70 weeks. 70 A.D. was 39 years after the cross.
@@larrybedouin2921 the destruction of the temple is the second half of the sentence that starts with the anointed one getting cut off, after 62 weeks
You shouldnt need to pluck a verse out of the timeline and put it decades later if this is a real prophecy
@@Greyz174
Do the math and get back with me.
God bless you, sir!! ❤
There's one thing I don't understand. You can literally count the year to the birth of the Messiah and his death according to Daniel.
So why didn't the Jewish rulers anticipate the year of the birth of the Messiah if they were well studied in all of the OT? How come no Pharisee or Sadducee could deduct that Jesus was born according to the timeline in Daniel that have given more credence to the claims that Jesus made? Even in the gospels it states that the Jewish rules examined the scriptures and that no prophet came from Nazareth. But no mention of the timeline of Daniel.
Surely when the year zero rolled around, (year zero to us but not at the time), all the Jewish rulers would have anticipated the birth of the Messiah if they were well studied in all the scriptures including Daniel.
Because it isn't real.
Yep there is no evidence that this prophecy was given and kept track of by the Jews for 500 years
Daniel is not about Jesus. The Messiah that is "cut off" in Daniel 9:26 is Anointed High Priest Onias III who was killed in 171 BCE. Chapters 9-12 deals with the event around Antiochus IV Epiphanes in the 2nd century BCE.
One of the reasons critical bible scholars, minimalists and atheists have a hard time post dating Daniel anymore than 400 years is because of the abundance of Jewish 1st century BC manuscripts discussing the coming of the Messiah according to Daniels 70 weeks prophecy (Dan9:24-27) . One of the debates was centered around WHEN the "going forth of the commandment" happened and which command is the correct one. There were in fact 3 commands by Artaxerxes to build the Temple but only the last one was done by an Official decree and included instructions and money to rebuild the city walls as the prophecy required. This command took place in 457 B.C. If you count 69 weeks using the day for a year principle (found everywhere throughout scripture) it gives you 483 years. 483 years from 457 BC brings you to 27 AD which is when Jesus began his ministry. The gospel of Luke confirms this because shows the Jews were aware of this timing and were in anticipation of the coming of the Messiah. Luke 3:15
The book of Daniel doesn't mention Rome at all. All 4 kingdoms are mentioned specifically in the book. Later interpreters read Rome into the book.
"If you can prove that Daniel is a fraud, you can basically prove the entire Bible is a fraud". Glad to see there are some Christians who understand that
And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days. (2,300 prophetic days = years)
And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and I was astonished at the vision,
👉but none *understood* it.
{Daniel 8:26-27}
In the first year (years later in the 68th year of the exile) of his [Darius] reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of YHWH came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.
{Daniel 9:2}
...
Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.
And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and *understanding*
At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision (of the 2,300 years in Daniel 8).
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, [49 years] and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
{Daniel 9:21-23,25}
The Jews do not deny the first part of this prophecy, (and that the day for a year principle applies to it) it's only after threescore and two weeks, do they deny the coming of their Messiah.
Jesus Christ did not come in a vacuum.
He confirmed his new covenant promised in (Jer 31:31-34) for three and a half years, after his anointing by the Holy Spirt at the beginning of his ministry. Like king David before, Jesus would be anointed 'again' at his death, when he became our passover Lamb in the middle of the seventieth week, with three and a half years remaining (grace) of the final seventieth week under the covenant God made with their fathers "Thy people".
This is why the gospel was preach exclusively within the boards of the promise land, before Christ chose Paul to bring his gospel unto the Gentile nation to bring them into the common wealth of Israel (Jeshurun his people).
And *after* threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off,
👉but not for himself:...
...and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
{Daniel 9:26}
^
This is not part of the seventy weeks.
It's the consequences of the abominations made in the temple, after Christ had put an end to the sacrifices and the oblations of the daily. It was a prince (lower-case) of Rome (the fourth beast of Daniel 7) who stood in the holy place in 70 A.D.
☆The seventy weeks are determined from the terminus que [457 B.C.] of the 2,300 evenings and mornings, and the cleansing of the sanctuary (judgment 'yom kippur')
👉in heaven.
And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; *for the hour of his judgment is come* and worship him *that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters*
{Revelation 14 6-7}
"wikipedia, which only allows atheists to contribute to its website" 🤣🤣
thanks dude it was fun watching your head explode. 😉
can't wait till you try to disprove Ezekiel's clear false prophecy about the city of Tyre in Ezekiel chapter 26, one of the oldest continually inhabited on Earth that was supposed to be wiped off the map never to be seen again.
The creator of this video is not being honest. Scholars clearly lay out the reasons why they think Daniel was actually completed in the 2nd century BCE rather than just appealing to other scholars like the creator claims.
The reasons why scholars believe that the book of Daniel was later in the 2nd century BCE include...
1. The form of language in the Hebrew portions are identical to that found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, suggesting a second century BCE date for the Hebrew chapters 1 and 8-12.
2. In the Hebrew Bible, Daniel is not included among the prophets. This exclusion indicates that both the book and its author were unknown as recently as second century when the prophetic canon was fixed.
3. No reference to Daniel before the 2nd Century BCE.
4. Theology is too advanced: Chapter 12 discusses the dead being judged and taken to either heaven and hell. The concept of heaven and hell was introduced later by the Greeks.
5. No mention of Daniel the person nor his Babylonian name Belteshazzar in any Babylonian records.
6. Daniel 11:31 refers to "the abominable thing that causes desolation." This appears to refer to the erection of a statue of Zeus in the Jerusalem temple in 167 BCE, and would indicate that the book was written later than that date.
7. About 180 BCE, Jeshua ben Sira listed the heroes of the Jewish faith, including "Enoch, Noah and Abraham through to Nehemiah;" Daniel is not mentioned.
8. Contains Greek loan words (Dan. 3:5,7,10, 15); yet the Greek occupation of the area did not occur until the 4th century BCE.
9. The earliest indisputable reference to the book of Daniel occurs in the book of 1 Maccabees 2:60, dated to approximately 100 BCE.
10. The earliest known manuscript copy of a fragment of Daniel is 4QDan from Qumran, also dated to approximately 125-100 BCE.
11. Historical accuracy is poor when the book describes events starting in the 6th century BCE when the author supposedly lived and would have known intimately as a high ranking official of the kingdom, strongest around the events of 164 BCE during the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and then becomes inaccurate.
how could it have been written so late if it was accepted as scriptural Hebrew canon, if it was so late it would have been apocrypha and not so heavily quoted in the new testament as obvious scripture to new testament writers and even Jesus himself, I don't know how one can be a christian and doubt the authenticity of Daniel
@@ronester1 In the Hebrew Bible, Daniel is not included among the prophets. This exclusion indicates that both the book and its author were unknown as recently as second century when the prophetic canon was fixed. It was accepted because the book's apocalyptic theme had a great appeal to both the Jews and the Christians that were dealing with persecution. Not only did it appeal to the Jews suffering during the persecution of Antiochus IV Epiphanes in the 2nd century BCE but also under the Roman oppressions and war in the 1st and 2nd century CE. Since this was the time when the Hebrew canon was being canonized, it makes sense that it would be included because of it's popular appeal.
Nailed it! Excellent explanation.
I believe in the Lord and I say Daniel was written at Alexandria with the rest of the Bible. That does not make it a fraud, it is obviously the greatest book ever written.
Nailed it.
Whatever this guy is, to fake the book of Daniel without Internet, without a dictionary and chatGPT, and convince everyone to be canonized and written in months by every single scribe… well, this guy could be only a genius or devil itself, what a faith atheists! I wish I had a faith like you!
@@wixalm lol. Atheists have faith L O L what about the biblical scholars who disagree with this dude? This guy is all shaken up so he refuses to read scholarship. So he rejects it by faith because he doesn't want to believe it. How grown up!
The devil making false prophecies about Christ in order to create the schismatic Christian cult that idolized a human man and worshiped him as god would be exactly what Satan would do actually.
I'll tell you something to eliminate the skeptics why would Jesus quote Daniel? That's what did it for me
Hehe😂😂😂 very funny defens of the forgery of Daniel. However it is not a matter of minimalist scholars, fear of accomplished prophecies, or even atheism. It is a matter of truth, honestly and do science.
The Hebrew Scriptures harbor the Hallmarks of Holiness. The Materialists masquerade as sensible scientists, but they are completely devoid of any rigor or reasoning. The truth seams unbelievably distant from those who deal in lies.
Yeah, and you are so far off that about 40% Daniel is written in ARAMAIC - DUH! Hey, ya think maybe that was taken into view by SCHOLARS when they do their commentaries? Ya know, like Collins or Newsom and others.
Weird projection bro. This guy lies multiple times with nothing to back up his claims. Only accusations of atheism.
That sort of dogmatic clinging to a conclusion when presented with evidence is a hallmark of being brainwashed. This guy is in a cult.
Nice
always dismissing the gospels; the bible is criticized like no other book....what about the prophecies of Christ or revelation?
Well... I haven't watched the video yet. But I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that it was Daniel. 🤷♂️
Hi!
The Masoretic Text hides the actual meaning of the Hebrew Script in Daniel 9:24-27.
With the vowel pointing of the Hebrew Script we have 'Seventy Weeks or 490 years', then 'Seven Weeks or 49 years' plus 'Sixty Two Weeks or 434 years' giving a Total=483 years, with no beginning year, and a Seven Year discrepancy leaving it open for interpretation.
Without the Masoretic vowel pointing changing the meaning of words, we have v24, Seventy Seventy, indicating two calculations each beginning with Seventy, found in v25. When calculated, Daniel gives us the following information:
V25, SEVENTY SEVEN - NOT - SEVEN WEEKS
539 BCE the year of the Cyrus Decree - Seventy x7=490 plus Seven x7=49 Total=539
SEVENTY SIXTY AND TWO - NOT - SIXTY TWO WEEKS
56 BCE the year of the Birth of Messiah the Prince - Seventy x7=490 minus Sixty Two x7=434 Total=56
V26, AND AFTER - 70 60 AND TWO OR 56 YEARS
A repeat of the last calculation of 56 years, brings us to the end of 1 BCE and begins 1 CE the Death of Messiah the Prince.
V27, ONE SEVEN AND HALF THE SEVEN
He shall Confirm a Covenant with many (His Disciples). Fifty days after his death Holy Spirit is poured out upon His Disciples at Pentecost empowering them with signs and wonders following, leading up to the Destruction of Jerusalem and Temple ending the Daily Sacrifice.
NOT - IN THE MIDDLE OF THE 'WEEK'
One Seven and Half the Seven 7x7=49 3x7=21 Total=70 years (only six is halved because there is no Sabbath, being an incomplete Seven). Hope you find this interesting?
מאוד משכנע
THIS GUY IS AN ISLAMIC
Who me?