Dating book Free xxx az chat lines

Rated 3.96/5 based on 518 customer reviews

The second part of this argument says that if Daniel were an unknown, but well knowledgeable Jew (as he would have had to have been to know Babylonian history as well as he does) he would have certainly followed in the footsteps of a well respected prophet.In writing his book he presumes to appear as a prophet himself, encouraging his people to persevere through persecution, he would undoubtedly try to make his work seem as Scriptural as possible.The second section can either be construed as prophecy, or history containing some prophecy, depending on the date one assumes that the book was written.In either case, most scholars agree that chapters seven through twelve tell the story of the battles of the Near East, from the sixth century to the second and/or the first centuries B. The battles are between the four successive kingdoms of the Babylonians, the Medo-Persians or the Medians then the Persians, the Greeks, and possibly the Romans.It is very likely that he himself would be referring to historical sources, such as Jeremiah, which uses the Palestinian dating system.

dating book-18

dating book-19

dating book-83

The only conclusion that one can reach, other than some other information which has been lost to us today, is that the author was indeed alive during the events, in 539 BC (Waltke, pg. The third main historical argument concerns the identity of Darius the Mede, mentioned in chapters five, six, nine, and eleven.

The first, if the author of Daniel lived in the second century during the persecution, therefore in Palestine, one would naturally assume that he would use his native system of dating, and not the ancient, relatively unknown system of Babylonian dating.

This would be especially true if the author's purpose was to encourage the people of his day who were currently suffering persecution also, as the proponents of the second century date of writing believe.

The mention of him as the last king of Babylon in Daniel seemed to be an unreconcilable error to historians and critics.

Secular sources have, since ancient times, stated that Nabonidus was the last king of Babylon (p. Then, with the discovery of the Nabonidus Chronicle, Daniel was proven correct.

Leave a Reply