The Prophecy of the 70 weeks of Daniel

Who says Darius was a name? I already gave a link that suggested it was a title. Need more?? Prove your claims, or lose them. Our recoreds are better than what secular history has, they do not even know some of these things. So??"The message of the book claims to have originated during the Babylonian exile, from the first deportation of the Jews into captivity (606 B.C.; Daniel 1:1-2) to the ascension of the Persian Empire to world dominance (c. 536 B.C.; Daniel 10:1). This date, however, has been questioned and generally dismissed by critical scholars who date the final composition of the book to the second century B.C. Specifically, it is argued that the tales in chapters 1-6 as they appear in their present form can be no earlier than the Hellenistic age (c. 332 B.C.). Also, the four-kingdom outline, explicitly stated in chapter 2, allegedly requires a date after the rise of the Grecian Empire. Further, these scholars argue that since there is no explicit reference to Antiochus Epiphanes IV (175-164 B.C.), a Seleucid king clearly under prophetic consideration in chapter 11, a date in the late third or early second century B.C. is most likely (see Collins, 1992a, 2:31; Whitehorne, 1992, 1:270).The apparent reason for this conclusion among critical scholars is the predictive nature of the book of Daniel. It speaks precisely of events that transpired several hundred years removed from the period in which it claims to have been composed. Since the guiding principles of the historical-critical method preclude a transcendent God’s intervening in human affairs (see Brantley, 1994), the idea of inspired predictive prophecy is dismissed a priori from the realm of possibility. Accordingly, Daniel could not have spoken with such precision about events so remote from his day. Therefore, critical scholars conclude that the book was written actually as a historical record of events during the Maccabean period, but couched in apocalyptic or prophetic language. Such conclusions clearly deny that this book was the authentic composition of a Daniel who lived in the sixth century B.C., that the Bible affirms.The Dead Sea Scrolls have lifted their voice in this controversy. Due to the amount of Daniel fragments found in various caves near Qumran, it appears that this prophetic book was one of the most treasured by that community. Perhaps the popularity of Daniel was due to the fact that the people of Qumran lived during the anxious period in which many of these prophecies actually were being fulfilled. For whatever reason, Daniel was peculiarly safeguarded to the extent that we have at our disposal parts of all chapters of Daniel, except chapters 9 and 12. However, one manuscript (4QDanc; 4 = Cave 4; Q = Qumran; Danc = one of the Daniel fragments arbitrarily designated “c” for clarification), published in November 1989, has been dated to the late second century B.C. (see Hasel, 1992, 5[2]:47). Two other major documents (4QDanb, 4QDana) have been published since 1987, and contribute to scholarly analysis of Daniel. These recently released fragments have direct bearing on the integrity and authenticity of the book of Daniel. "http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/266Do you, or do you not have any reason to claim that I should dismiss the writing of the scriptures as being when the book of Daniel says??? I do not recall reading 'the copy was written in such and such BC'!!?? I do not much care when the latest COPY might date to. Why would I, I am looking at the writing itself.

Well, I don't know. It seems you rely on a lot of mistranslations (psalm 22, isaiah 7:14 for example), Retrofitting stuff (all the rest of the garbage), vague references, twisting of words, and taking phrases out of context (you have not used one phrase from the 'Old Testament' in context to make your case at all, and a lot of it was mistranslated).Your link does not make an honest case for any of it's claims.I noticed you are unable to counter the problems using psalm 22, nor Isaiah 7:14, but you repeat that like a parrot, who does not understand what it is saying.

I see you are totally avoiding the issue. At least you acknowledge the fact that so far, the copy from Qumran is probably the oldest extant copy of the Book of Daniel.How do the archeologist's date it, and to what date to they put that copy.
We will acknowledge that is not when ti was writtenOh, you have not made a case that the Book of Daniel was 'the most treasured' of this community.I would say, answer the question, and Paul will get to the next issue at hand.I am sure he will address your points.

There are no problems in places like Psalms. Those that choose to strain at a rendering of a word as 'pierced' better focus on the elephant here, and not the nat. What is it you claim happened to the Messiah's hands and feet!!!!!!??? Do tell! What, someone tickled them?? Then there is the matter of no bones broken, parting garments among them, and etc. Your pathetic lack of a case can only be called denial. Religious denial.

Your moot question is a joke. Not some crucial litmus test. You have nothing. Admit it."There are, of course, critical scholars who, despite the evidence, continue to argue against the authenticity of Daniel and other biblical books. Yet, the Qumran texts have provided compelling evidence that buttresses our faith in the integrity of the manuscripts on which our translations are based. It is now up to Bible believers to allow these texts to direct our attention to divine concerns and become the people God intends us to be."http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/266

For the 8th time,What is the date of the earliest extant texts of the Book of Daniel?

Please, using your vast knowledge of Hebrew, make the case. Show how 'K'ari' has been translated as 'pierced' anyplace else. It wasn't even translated as 'pierced' by the KJV translators in other places it was used.

quote:

---

Who cares if not all the bible deals just in the Messiah? There is enough there to cover it just fine, so some poor soul doesn't start thinking some king was Him.

​

I am not sure what your idea of understanding the bible is supposed to be. Apparently it needs rejecting Jesus, and accepting Cyrus!! Not a good start, really.

---

You know that isn't true. The proposition you object to so strenuously is that Isaiah 45:1 says what it says. Your continued misrepresentation - which at this stage can only be intentional - only proves my point. Understanding the Bible is against your religion.

quote:

---

If you were interested in it, you might start without the preconceptions, and do more than cherry picking.

---

As is quite obvious it is your interpretation that is controlled by preconceptions. The idea that Daniel refers to Jesus at all is a preconception.. The invention of a massive gap between the 69th and 70th "week" is based solely on your preconceptions. Your refusal to accept the clear words of Daniel 8 is based on preconceptions.And it would be an understatement to accuse you of cherry-picking. Even ripped out of context Daniel 8:28 did not support your presumed gap in the 490 year. And the context clearly contradicts your reading by placing the End Times in the Hellenistic period.

You have something to offer on that, cough it up. Otherwise, Who cares?

I take it you are agreeing that the DSS texts of Daniel are the earliest existing texts of Daniel?

Tell us how it matters what they did to His hands and feet? What would you prefer? Sprinkled goat milk on them??? Someone parted His garments, and did something to His hands and feet. Tell us your edumacated preference of words to better use as a translation there!!!Remember, it has to have something to do with wounds being received in the house of His friends!!! Boy are you hooped.

You apparently like to pretend you have an ace up your sleeve, yet you were called out. Where is it?? You got nothin. Ha ha ha.

1. I go with the science on that one. Though I'd rather have a good Christian black daughter-in-law than an atheist or even a secularist one, the science seems to be that the majority tendency is to prefer one's own color and race. All one need do is go in the churches and neighborhoods, of the world to come to that conclusion. History attests to it.2. I would advise a single son to marry into his own race since God created the races but if my son came home with a black bride I and wifie would go out of our way to make the new bride feel welcome and treat her as we would a white one.3. Imo, vanilla/chocolate swirl is cool with ice cream, but not as cool with races.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

quote:

---

You know that isn't true. The proposition you object to so strenuously is that Isaiah 45:1 says what it says. Your continued misrepresentation - which at this stage can only be intentional - only proves my point. Understanding the Bible is against your religion.

---

Such a desperate grasping at straws, and strawmen here. Cyrus is not a contender for the Messiah. Call him tomato, or call him messiah, or call him Popeye, it matters not. He was, as the Antichrist may be, anointed for a purpose. Whoopee do. No one said that Cyrus came from a virgin, or a plethora and virtual armada of other prophesied things, did they???Get on topic here.

quote:

---

As is quite obvious it is your interpretation that is controlled by preconceptions. The idea that Daniel refers to Jesus at all is a preconception.. The invention of a massive gap between the 69th and 70th "week" is based solely on your preconceptions. Your refusal to accept the clear words of Daniel 8 is based on preconceptions.

---

So make up your mind here! Is your defense attempt claiming that the bible is wrong, or that the dates must be wrong!!?? You have no case within the bible, is that where you choose to be trounced? Fine with me.Your grasping at ludicrous straws, trying to claim Greece was more than the empire in the time and place it was in, is unsupportable by the bible. Now what? Make your final retreat into denial with no possible evidence, that the book was misdated??? Or try to fight a contextual biblical case???

quote:

---

And it would be an understatement to accuse you of cherry-picking. Even ripped out of context Daniel 8:28 did not support your presumed gap in the 490 year. And the context clearly contradicts your reading by placing the End Times in the Hellenistic period.

---

Daniel 8 only goes up to verse 27. Try to focus here.The events of Dan 9 demand that a sequential fulfillment be the order of the day! How would you build the street or wall, and have a decree, then several hundred years? Etc?? The prophesy was to finish the whole Jewish history. That never happened in a year, or a century, or whatever, if you notice!!

I suppose 167-164 BC would be it, unless there are earlier ones from other sources. Or would it be 200 years after the Book of Daniel was written?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.