The Book of Daniel (dating)
The Book of Daniel was one of the last written in the OT, and in many ways one of the most important. Many Christians say it prophesises Jesus, and according to the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus himself referenced it (also Mark 14:15, but without explicitly saying Daniel):
The other school of thought is that the so-called prophesy was written when it was already history, and this dates the book to the point at which the prophesy goes awry. This would have it written around 165-163 BC, as it gets everything right up to time, but then gets it all wrong. Note, however, it seems likely it did draw on already established stories of a hero called Daniel, so the earlier chapters do have roots that are considerably older.
This was the conclusion of a Neoplatonic philospher called Porphyry (234-305 AD). His books were all burned by Christians keen to suppress his arguments, but we have this text, quoted by Jerome.
Daniel did not predict so much future events as he narrated past ones. Finally what he had told up to Antiochus contained true history; if anything was guessed beyond that point it was false, for he had not known the future.
The Book of Daniel has Belshazzar, king of Babylon, slain by Darius the Mede, when Darius conquered Babylonia. In fact Cyrus conquered Babylonia, which was ruled by Nabonidus, in 539 BC. Cyrus was succeeded by Cambyses, who was in turn succeeded by Darius. Daniel has Cyrus come after Darius. There is no way someone alive at the time would get these things wrong.
The Babylonians are portrayed as persecuting the Jews, but in reality they were very tolerant of them, allowing them to go about their religion as they pleased. Indeed, Judaism could be said to have flourished during the Babylonia Captivity, very much becoming the religion that it is today.
Note also that apocalyptic literature of this type is very much of the later period. Apocalypse actually means unveiling, as in a truth that has been revealed, but is used more specifically here to indicate a revelation about the end times. The book of Revelation is, of course, the other famous example. Zechariah 9-14 give an early example (dated to fifth century BC).
That said, Daniel does have the appearance of an older text. Perhaps it was written in 165 BC, but was included in the LXX because it was presented as dating from the Babylonian Captivity, and so seemed to be centuries old.
It is worth noting that there are important variations in the translations. Bits that may or may not be present are: the prayer of Azariah and the song of the three; the story of Susanna; and the story of Bel and the dragon. This does suggest the text had not been "set in stone" by being a full part of the canon.
More likely, however, this is about someone else altogether, a man called Danel, and some Bibles even note this possibility (eg footnote a here)
The name is seen in earlier verses, in connection to Noah and Job:
However, the Jews would have had a huge incentive to believe the book was older, which may well have led to it getting quickly adopted into the canon or to become popular in a religious community.
The break from Hebrew to Aramaic is part way through a sentence. In this verse, Aramaic begins with the quotation, then continues for several chapters:
An alternative view (consistent with an earlier dating) is that the Aramaic parts were written for a wider audience, a message to gentiles as well as Jews that God is great, whilst the Hebrew is for Jews alone, reassuring them that God will triumph (indeed this may have been dangerous to say in Babylon, so was kept hidden).
Others suggest the text was originally in one language, and later translated into the other, and what we have is all that survives of that. However, the change is apparent in the fragments from the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QDana), which argues against such a scenario.
There seems a fair amount of disagreement on whether the Aramaic of Daniel is that of the sixth century (the Captivity) or of the second century BC. This article makes the case that Daniel's Aramaic is very like that used at the Qumran community (thought to have been set up not long after the later dating for Daniel).
http://markhaughwout.com/Bible/Dating_Daniel.html
Matthew 24:15 “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’[a] spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.There are two schools of thought on the dating of the Book of Daniel. It is written from the perspective of a man living through the Babylonia Captivity, seeing a vision of the future. This then is the earlier dating.
The other school of thought is that the so-called prophesy was written when it was already history, and this dates the book to the point at which the prophesy goes awry. This would have it written around 165-163 BC, as it gets everything right up to time, but then gets it all wrong. Note, however, it seems likely it did draw on already established stories of a hero called Daniel, so the earlier chapters do have roots that are considerably older.
This was the conclusion of a Neoplatonic philospher called Porphyry (234-305 AD). His books were all burned by Christians keen to suppress his arguments, but we have this text, quoted by Jerome.
Daniel did not predict so much future events as he narrated past ones. Finally what he had told up to Antiochus contained true history; if anything was guessed beyond that point it was false, for he had not known the future.
Scholarly position
This is a statement by the chairman of a Seventh-day Adventist department of theology. Their beliefs depend on Daniel, and the article therefore sets out to prove an early date for Daniel, but the author is forced to admit that Biblical scholars nearly all agree on the later date:Adventists in general take for granted the authenticity of this book that means so much to us. In this respect we differ from the vast majority of modern scholars. It is doubtful that a single secular university engaging in Biblical studies would accept our position, and it is quite certain that the majority of theological seminaries affirm the Maccabean dating of this Old Testament apocalypse.
Historical errors
A major reason for supposing the later date is a number of historical errors about the time of the Babylonia Captivity. This is to be expected in the authors was writing centuries later, but cannot be explained for an author alive at that time.The Book of Daniel has Belshazzar, king of Babylon, slain by Darius the Mede, when Darius conquered Babylonia. In fact Cyrus conquered Babylonia, which was ruled by Nabonidus, in 539 BC. Cyrus was succeeded by Cambyses, who was in turn succeeded by Darius. Daniel has Cyrus come after Darius. There is no way someone alive at the time would get these things wrong.
The Babylonians are portrayed as persecuting the Jews, but in reality they were very tolerant of them, allowing them to go about their religion as they pleased. Indeed, Judaism could be said to have flourished during the Babylonia Captivity, very much becoming the religion that it is today.
Place in the Old Testament
The Book of Daniel is considered to be part of the Writings, not the Prophets. Why is that? If the earlier dating is correct, then Daniel would pre-date Ezra and Nehemiah, both of which are included in the Prophets.Note also that apocalyptic literature of this type is very much of the later period. Apocalypse actually means unveiling, as in a truth that has been revealed, but is used more specifically here to indicate a revelation about the end times. The book of Revelation is, of course, the other famous example. Zechariah 9-14 give an early example (dated to fifth century BC).
Numerology
This is interesting:Second, the name Nebuchadnezzar contains a disguised reference to Antiochus to those acquainted with Hebrew numbering. The Babylonian king of 605 - 562 BCE was in fact called nabu-kuddurri-usur which should be transliterated into Hebrew script as NeuchadRezzar (as it is in eg. Jeremiah 46:2, 39:11). The change of that one letter gives this name the same numerical value in Hebrew (which had no separate numbers and so used letters to represent numbers) as the name Antiochus Epiphanes. This is too coincidental to be accidental and too contrived to be miraculous.
The Septuagint
An argument for the earlier date is that Daniel appears in the LXX, indicating it was part of the Jewish canon at that time (compared to the Books of the Maccabees, which were written very close to the later dating, but are absent from some versions of the Septuagint). This is not as clear cut as it might be, as it is uncertain when the translation was done. The Torah was probably translated in the third century BC, but other books were translated later, over the next two centuries. There is certainly time for Daniel to get written at the later date and then subsequently translated in the LXX, but whether there is time for it to become part of the canon too is debatable.That said, Daniel does have the appearance of an older text. Perhaps it was written in 165 BC, but was included in the LXX because it was presented as dating from the Babylonian Captivity, and so seemed to be centuries old.
It is worth noting that there are important variations in the translations. Bits that may or may not be present are: the prayer of Azariah and the song of the three; the story of Susanna; and the story of Bel and the dragon. This does suggest the text had not been "set in stone" by being a full part of the canon.
Ezekiel
There is an apparent mention of Daniel in Ezekiel:Ezekiel 28:3 Are you wiser than Daniel[a]?Ezekiel was written during the Babylonia Captivity, and if this is a reference to the Book of Daniel at that time, then the earlier dating is assured. However it is not that simple. Ezekiel shows signs of later editing, so it could have been added later. The Book of Daniel perhaps draws on older stories, and it could be this that Ezekiel cites.
Is no secret hidden from you?
More likely, however, this is about someone else altogether, a man called Danel, and some Bibles even note this possibility (eg footnote a here)
The name is seen in earlier verses, in connection to Noah and Job:
12 The word of the Lord came to me: 13 “Son of man, if a country sins against me by being unfaithful and I stretch out my hand against it to cut off its food supply and send famine upon it and kill its people and their animals, 14 even if these three men—Noah, Daniel[a] and Job—were in it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign Lord.Neither Noah or Job were Israelites, and both were names from antiquity even for Ezekiel, suggesting that the Daniel/Danel that Exzekiel is talking about is similar, rather than a contemporary of his.
...
19 “Or if I send a plague into that land and pour out my wrath on it through bloodshed, killing its people and their animals, 20 as surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, even if Noah, Daniel and Job were in it, they could save neither son nor daughter. They would save only themselves by their righteousness.
Dead Sea Scrolls
The Book of Daniel is the most represented of all the OT books at Qumran. The community was established shortly after the Maccabean victory over Antiochus, so this does give time for Daniel to be written in 167 BC, and then be present, but it is not long at all for it to get canonised.However, the Jews would have had a huge incentive to believe the book was older, which may well have led to it getting quickly adopted into the canon or to become popular in a religious community.
Josephus and Alexander
Josephus in Jewish antiquities 11.317-345 relates the story of how Alexander the Great, when approached Jerusalem, was shown the Book of Daniel, with the prophecy that he recognised as himself. The story goes that the Jews gave him free entry to the city, he was so impressed that he allowed them to continue their religious acts without constraint. However, this seems to be a myth, and not a real event.Language
The earliest versions of Daniel are written in a mix of Aramaic (chapters 2 to 7) and Hebrew (chapters 1 and 8 to 12). Besides the odd word or phrase, the only other place where Aramaic is used in the OT is Ezra 4:8–6:18 and 7:12–26, and that may be because it is taken directly from documents of the time (letters relating to rebuilding the temple). Daniel is, therefore, very usual in its use of Aramaic.The break from Hebrew to Aramaic is part way through a sentence. In this verse, Aramaic begins with the quotation, then continues for several chapters:
Daniel 2:4 Then the astrologers answered the king,[c] “May the king live forever! Tell your servants the dream, and we will interpret it.”The split of languages almost, but not quite, matches the split in the narrative; the court stories (chapters 1 to 8) and the prophesy (chapters 9-12). It is possible that chapters 2 to 7 were the original stories from the Babylonia Captivity, with the Hebrew added to frame it, plus the prophesy.
An alternative view (consistent with an earlier dating) is that the Aramaic parts were written for a wider audience, a message to gentiles as well as Jews that God is great, whilst the Hebrew is for Jews alone, reassuring them that God will triumph (indeed this may have been dangerous to say in Babylon, so was kept hidden).
Others suggest the text was originally in one language, and later translated into the other, and what we have is all that survives of that. However, the change is apparent in the fragments from the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QDana), which argues against such a scenario.
There seems a fair amount of disagreement on whether the Aramaic of Daniel is that of the sixth century (the Captivity) or of the second century BC. This article makes the case that Daniel's Aramaic is very like that used at the Qumran community (thought to have been set up not long after the later dating for Daniel).
See also
http://www.textexcavation.com/daniel.htmlhttp://markhaughwout.com/Bible/Dating_Daniel.html
Comments
Post a Comment