> ‎Chapter 1‎ > ‎Chapter 2‎ > ‎Chapter 3‎ > ‎Chapter 4‎ > ‎Chapter 5‎ > ‎Chapter 6‎ > ‎Chapter 7‎ > ‎Chapter 8‎ > ‎Chapter 9‎ > ‎Chapter 10‎ > ‎Chapter 11‎ > ‎Chapter 12‎ > ‎Chapter 13 Susanna‎ > ‎Chapter 14 Bel and the Dragon‎ > 

 

 

Date of composition: Many today think Daniel was written rather
late, in the second century B.C., after the time of Antiochus IV
and his persecution. They think many things that seem to be
prophecies are really made after the things happened (prophecies
<ex eventu>).We will defend the position that Daniel was written
in 6th century B.C. Step by step we will take up the difficulties
against that position for all but the last two chapters 13-14,
which are a later work it seems.

<One line of argument for a late date claims there are late
words>, not in use before the time of Antiochus. However fine
studies by Gleason Archer (<Expositor's Bible Commentary>, ed. F.
Gaebelein, VII, pp.20-24) and Kenneth Kitchen, <Problems in
Daniel>, Chicago, 1966.36-44 have shown that most of the Persian
type words in Daniel are attested in early Aramaic documents from
5th and 6th centuries B.C.) Kitchen also (<Ancient Orient and Old
Testament>, Chicago, 1966) has shown other instances of words once
thought to be late which are now known to have been early. Kitchen
has likewise shown how empty are common arguments for the
documentary theory and for other things often held.

Another frequent line of argument to support the late view is on
the dating of events within Daniel. We will consider these one at
a time below, especially in relation to literary genre.

<Genre>: It is clear that there are two genres in Daniel.

<One is apocalyptic>, which presents highly colored images and
often secret things. We still will need to ask whether the writer
means to <assert> that he saws the visions described, or are they
only a literary device to convey certain truths. In any case, the
original readers knew they must reduce the imagery very much.

Within apocalyptic it is permitted to give prophecies of things,
as if they were still to come, whereas they are past. The genre
lets us know that such retrojected prophecies are apt to be
present. In most other genres it is not permitted to retroject a
prophecy, though it is possible to retroject things. other than
prophecies.

Many exegetes today think the prophecies in Daniel are mostly
retrojected, and the event had happened before the writing was
done. Specifically, they think what appears to be prophecy is
merely a record of what happened in the time of Antiochus IV of
Syria. It is also quite possible to see cases of multiple
fulfillment, i.e., some things really did already happen under
Antiochus, but not all: Some look ahead to the future of Christ.
We will need to consider the specific cases separately. An example
of multiple fulfillment appears in Isaiah 7.14 about the young
woman/virgin who is to conceive and bear a son.

<It is less easy to be certain of what genre the second one is.>
We will try to show step by step, that there is an answer to all
difficulties against considering it basically historical.

The problem becomes acute right away in the opening verse, in
regard to the date of the third year of Jehoiakim, which seems at
least a first sight to contradict the Babylonian records.

One possible solution is to say that the stories of that part of
Daniel and some others too, are in the edifying narrative genre.
It is clear that such a genre was running during that period,
e.g., in the story of Ahiqar. In this genre we read stories that
are quite interesting, but the relation of the things in them to
real history or biography is about he same as the relation of
science fiction to science. For example, there are some early
medieval lives of Irish Saints. These Saints did everything by
miracles. A normal process would be more striking. Now: would an
ancient Irishman even with six good shots of whiskey really take
these stories as real history? Of course not. Yet he got a sort of
lift out of reading them. It is evident that in such a genre there
is no need for precision on dates and some other things.

There is little else in Daniel that presents problems such that we
really need to suppose the edifying narrative genre. <As we shall
see, there is really nothing that cannot be understood as straight
history or apocalyptic.>

But here is another solution to the problem of Daniel 1.1. The
text says the siege came in the third year of King Jehoiakim. Now
Jeremiah 46.2 puts the first year of Nabuchodonosor as the fourth
year of Jehoiakim. And the Babylonian cuneiform records agree with
the date in Jeremiah.

However there were two ways at that time of dating the first year
of a king. In the <non-acession year system> the year in which a
king actually began to reign was counted as his first year, even
if he began to reign later in that year. In that system the first
year of Jehoiakim would be 608. This system was in use in Judah at
the time (the northern kingdom had used the accession year system,
but that kingdom came to an end with the fall of Samaria in 722.).

<In the accession year system, the year in which the king actually
began to reign was called his first year. In Babylon the acession
year method was in use at this time. Thus in Babylonian reckoning
the first year of Jehoiakim would be 607 and his third year would
have been 605, the year of the siege of Jerusalem. So the problem
vanishes if we suppose that Daniel, who was writing from Babylon
used the Babylonian system.>

Pius XII in his Scripture Encyclical <Divino afflante Spiritu>, of
1943 (EB 559-60) pointed out well that Semites are prone to
approximations and hyperbole. Examples are common and large. In
the book of Jonah in the Hebrew we hear that God will destroy the
city in 40 days. But the LXX for the same passage has 3 days.
Still another special use of the third days is explained in a
scholarly article by Bertrand de Margerie, S.J. "Le troisième
jour, selon les Ecritures, Il est ressucité" in <Recherches des
Sciences Religieuses> (Strasbourg, 66, 1986, pp.158-88) shows that
the third day was widely used in Scripture for the day of rescue.
It was the day of the rescue of Isaac from being sacrificed (Gen
22.4ff) and of the deliverance given by Joseph to his brothers
(Gen 42.17ff). The Hebrews were to go three days into the desert
to sacrifice (Ex 5.3-4). It was the day of the revelation of the
law at Sinai (Ex 19.16). It was the day the spies saved by Rahab
were delivered (Jos 2.22). David had sinned by ordering a census,
but chose a punishment of pestilence to end on the third day (2
Sam 24.13ff). It was the day on which Hezekiah would go up to he
temple again, after being delivered from death (Is 38.1-5). It was
the day on which Esther found favor with the king and saved her
people (Esther 5.1). It was the day of return from the exile at
the time of Ezra (Esdr 8.32) It was the day of deliverance of
Jonah from the whale (Jon 2.1). Jesus Himself predicted His
resurrection on the third day (Mt.16.21; 20.19; 27.63).
Interestingly, in Babylonia, in the <Descent of Ishtar>, the third
day was the day of the reawakening of the fertility gods: ANET
55.(Cf. Is 53:10; Paul in Gal 1, 18 -2.1 says at after his
conversion he went for a time into Arabia and then returned to
Damascus.

Numbers 25.9 tells of 25,000 slain in a plague. But St. Paul in 1
Cor 10.8 puts the number at 23,000.

So it is true, very true, that ancient Semites did not handle
numbers the way we Americans do. So perhaps there is no need to
labor over a difference of 1 year.

<Languages>: Hebrew is used in Daniel 1.1- to 2.4. Then, when the
Chaldeans speak to the King, it changes to Aramaic which is used
to the end of chapter 7. Aramaic was the <lingua franca> in the
Babylonian and Persian Empires in 6th- 5th centuries. Many guesses
have been made on why the shift in languages, but none are
satisfactory.

The pattern of the book is clear: chapters 1-6 could be the
edifying narrative type, of which we spoke above. Chapters 7-12
are apocalyptic; chapters 13-14 are narrative additions. We recall
that Apocalyptic is a genre or pattern of writing in which the
author describes visions and revelations. It is not usually clear
if he meant to assert they were real, and not merely a vehicle for
his message. They contain bizarre, highly colored images. Often
there are figures of animals, to represent pagan empires, a horn
to stand for a king or a power, and they often include an angel
who interprets images. Apocalyptic is commonly a work to give
consolation in time of severe trial. God is presented as Lord of
history. There may be prediction of the future. Now if such
predictions were made in a rather factual genre, we would need to
maintain that they really were made before the events .However
because of the highly colored imagery and fanciful nature of
apocalyptic, the predictions may be made after the events
pictured, without any dishonesty. It is understood such things may
happen in this genre.

Most of Daniel is in Hebrew, yet chapters 2-7 are Aramaic. The
reason for this is not fully clear. The suggestion has been made
that the Hebrew chapters were for the special concerns of the
Jewish people, while the Aramaic portions were intended especially
for the gentiles - for Aramaic was the international language of
diplomacy at the time.

<Most important>: When Alexander the Great came through the Jewish
land, the High Priest and other priests with their robes came out
to meet him, Alexander prostrated himself before the name of God.
He explained that before leaving for Asia, he saws the High Priest
in a dream, telling him to come over to Asia---something like
Cyrus being appointed by God to capture Persia.(Isaiah cap 45).
Then they showed Alexander the book of Daniel and on reading part
of it he concluded it referred to his conquest of Persia:
Josephus, <Antiquities> 1.5-6, 329-40.