Date of Daniel

Most scholars agree that Daniel, as he claims,

penned the book bearing his name. The historicity of the
author is supported by Ezekiel 14:14, 14:20 and 28:3
written after the date Daniel obtained his position in the
king's court. And interestingly, Jesus himself referred to
Daniel as a prophet although technically Daniel did not
receive revelation directly from God (Mathew 24:15;
Mark 13:14) 1.
But partly because of his strikingly accurate
predictions concerning Persia, Greece and Rome, critics
assert that his book must have been written in the time
of Maccabees, 300 years later than what Daniel attests2.
Note that this controversy has little impact on our
Messianic discussion since virtually all scholars agree
that Daniel's book was completed at least 150 years
before Christ. Nevertheless, that does not lessen our
desire to obtain the facts.
It's difficult to believe second century B.C. Jews
would approve of a contemporary claiming to be a sixth
century B.C. writer, but that is what some critics have
claimed. During the third century A.D., the pagan and
devout enemy of Christianity, Poryphyry, wrote the

work Against Christians in which he challenged the

authenticity of Daniel3. Prior to this, and for thirteen
centuries afterward, the consensus was that Daniel wrote
the book in the sixth century B.C.4 Then again in the
seventeenth through nineteenth centuries, some critics
joined Poryphyry in asserting that Daniel's book had
authenticity problems. Their Higher Criticism objections
(interpreting the Bible in a non-literal way and using
contexts outside the writing) are addressed below.

Argument 1: There's historical error between dates

given in Daniel 1:1 and Jeremiah 25:1, 9; 46:2
Response: Archaeological discoveries have shown
that the Babylonians and Hebrews used different
systems to count ruling years. Daniel followed the
Babylonian system, while Jeremiah, still in Judah, used
the Hebrew / Palestinian system5. If the author of the
book of Daniel lived in Palestine during the second
century B.C. persecution, naturally 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
his suffering people as the proponents of the second
century B.C. date assert. Also, since the author was very

Appendix D - Interesting Things Jesus Said

knowledgeable of Babylonian history, he would have

certainly followed the precedence of a respected prophet
such as Jeremiah who used the Palestinian dating
system.
In writing his book, the author appears as a prophet
himself, encouraging his people to persevere through
persecution, so he undoubtedly would want to make his
work seem as Scriptural as possible. In the second
century B.C. he would have no incentive to employ a
different, obscure dating system, contradicting the wellknown prophet Jeremiah6.

Argument 2: Daniel portrays Belshazzar as a ruler

when Babylon fell while cuneiform records show
Nabonidus on the throne
Response:

Because

of

recent

archaeological

evidence, arguments such as this one alleging historical

error are rarely asserted today. Discovery of the
Nabonidus Chronicle reveals that Belshazzar, as coregent, would have been in charge of governmental
affairs when his father Nabonidus was away for
extended periods of time. When Babylon was overtaken
in 539 B.C., Nabonidus was actually in Syria7. In fact,
this actually supports the sixth century theory. During

the second century B.C. the author of Daniel would not

know of Nabonidus leaving Belshazzar in charge since
all knowledge of Belshazzar was lost by at least 450
B.C.8

Appendix D - Interesting Things Jesus Said

Argument 3: Darius the Mede, mentioned in chapters

Five, Six, Nine, and Eleven, is not found in secular
texts
Response: It is true that Darius the Mede does not
appear in known secular documents, but purely secular
confirmation is not a requirement given that these texts,
such as the cuneiform tablets, have many gaps
themselves. Also, there exist very few alternative
ancient sources, the majority of them being Greek and
separated from Daniel's record by two or more centuries.
In the case of Darius the Mede, it is important to
understand that Darius assigned Daniel, a captive
Hebrew, to a high government position at the objection
of other officials. After their plot against Daniel was
uncovered, Darius had them executed along with their
families. This likely caused great animosity between the
remaining officials and the king. Then when Darius
decreed that the entire kingdom must fear before the
God of Daniel, inevitably it caused deep resentment
among the powerful Babylonian clergy. It would not be
surprising if scribes later removed Darius from
governmental records at the behest of his enemies.
Although we cannot identify Darius the Mede from
secular tablets discovered so far, the Nabonidus

Chronicle makes it clear that there was another ruler

under Cyrus leading Babylon. One possible identity of
Darius is Ugbaru, a general who conquered Babylon and
then died shortly after his victory at Shea.
Although this Mede may have been Darius, the
evidence is stronger that it was Gubaru (also known as
Gobyrus mentioned in Xenophon's Cyropaedia). He was
governor of Gutium who seized Babylon for Cyrus, and
became viceroy over Mesopotamia for fourteen years,
exercising royal powers. Ancient documents show that
Gubaru was not only governor of Babylon, he ruled over
Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine down to the Egyptian
border. So it appears that Gubaru ruled over the same
territory as Darius at the same time. Scholar W. F.
Albright states, "It seems to me highly probable that
Gubaru did actually assume royal dignity, along with the
name 'Darius' perhaps an old Iranian royal title, while
Cyrus was absent on an Eastern campaign9."
And finally, it is not completely surprising that
secular texts do not refer to Gubaru as a king. The same
can be said about Belshazzar, although the Persian
Verse Account of Nabonidus definitely states that
Nabonidus entrusted kingship to his son10.

Appendix D - Interesting Things Jesus Said

Argument 4: Daniel's entire book relates to Antiochus

Epiphanes
Response: Some critics maintain that Antiochus IV
Epiphanes (175-163 B.C.), who ruled during the
Maccabean period, is the subject of Daniel's book. The
theory is that a member of a religious sect known as
Hasidim wrote it in the second century B.C.
Those who take this stance must explain the purpose
of chapter four as no affliction of the type ascribed here
to Nebuchadnezzar ever afflicted Antiochus. And we
should question how encouraging it would be for the
Jews to know that their persecutor, after going crazy and
disappearing for awhile, would come back to torment
them as Nebuchadnezzar did.
There are many other sections of the book, which
don't parallel Antiochus, or other events of that era. Old
Testament

scholar

Desmond

Ford

states,

"Nebuchadnezzar, despite his vices, is open to

conviction. He confesses his ill conduct and reverences
Daniel's God. Even Belshazzar honors the Jewish
messenger of evil tidings rather than vent his rage on the
unfortunate emissary of the Gods. As for Darius, he is
obviously attached to Daniel and longs to see him

delivered. None of these monarchs correspond to that

'vile' person Epiphanes11."
The logical conclusion is that chapters one through
six refer to the exilic times (period that the Israelites
were in exile). Not only is there such great detail about
the exilic period, more than any found in other literature
since then12, there is very little that is similar to the
Maccabean Age.

Argument 5: Daniel's use of language shows a later

date of origin
Response: The book of Daniel was written in two
languages: sections 1:1-2:4a and 8:1-12:13 are Hebrew
while sections 2:4b-7:28 are Aramaic. It seems that this
was Daniel's deliberate device, reserving Aramaic for
parts that had universal appeal or special relevance to
Gentile nations and Hebrew mainly for his Jewish
audience.
One controversy is a small number of Greek words
that the book contains. However, archeological evidence
has demonstrated extensive contact between Greece and
the nations surrounding the Mediterranean Sea well
before the sixth century B.C.13 In fact, "an avalanche of
evidence has demonstrated the presence of Greek

Appendix D - Interesting Things Jesus Said

language in Semitic milieu long before the sixth century

B.C.14" On the other hand, if the book was written
between 170-164 B.C. during Greek control of
Palestine, we would expect a plethora of Greek words in
the text.
The Hebrew word for Greeks, Yawan, used to
identify settlements in lonia on the western coast of
Turkey, indicates some type of contact even before 1000
B.C.15 Greeks entered the Near East by the ninth century
B.C., and built a temple by 675 B.C. Furthermore,
Greek pottery was found in abundance dating to the
seventh century B.C. Two documents dating from 551
B.C. were also discovered that describe trade between
the Neo-Babylonians of the Near East, and the
merchants of Greek Tyre and Yamana16.
The only Greek words that have seriously come into
question are the names of three musical instruments
(Daniel 3:5, 7, 10, 15) used to honor Nebuchadnezzar.
These three are the harp, zither, and lyre, and are
actually all of Mesopotamian origin17. These certainly
would have fit in such a ceremony. After extensive
research, Mitchell and Joyce concluded in their work
The

Musical

Instruments

in

Nebuchadnezzars

Orchestra the following: "With such scanty material for

any identification of these instruments, it may equally be

argued that a sixth-century date for the orchestra cannot
be categorically denied18."
The Aramaic of Daniel is remarkably similar to early
examples of the language found in other documents such
as the Elephantine papyri and the Old Aramaic treaty
texts from Sefire written in Imperial Aramaic19. The
language grew through the Near East court system and
later became widespread during seventh through fifth
centuries B.C.20
Furthermore, the Aramaic of the book does not
conform to much later samples of the language, like that
of the Genesis Apocryphon found at Qumran (see
information on the Dead Sea Scrolls below).
"When the Aramaic vocabulary of Daniel is
examined, nine-tenths of it can be attested immediately
from West Semitic inscriptions or papyri from the 5th
century B.C. or earlier. The remaining words have been
found in sources such as Nabatean or Palmyrene
Aramaic, which are later than the 5th century B.C.
While it is at least theoretically possible that this small
balance of vocabulary suddenly originated after the 5th
century B.C., it is equally possible to argue from a 5th
century B.C. written form to an earlier oral one. By far

Appendix D - Interesting Things Jesus Said

the most probable explanation, however, is that the

missing tenth represents nothing more serious than a gap
in our current knowledge of the linguistic situation,
which we may confidently expect to be filled in process
of time21."
Additionally, there are borrowed Persian words
appearing in Daniel's work and all of these words have
been determined to be of the Old Persian or
Achaemedian tongue22. As Cyrus was Persian, Daniel
would have learned Persian to retain his position23.
Actually, the Persian expressions in Daniel seem to be
strong evidence for an early time of composition, for
they are older Persian words that ceased to be used by
about 300 B.C.24
Another questioned term is the word Chaldean as it
is used in a dual manner, different from anywhere else in
the Old Testament. It is commonly used in the ethnic
sense of a Chaldean, but in Daniel it is also used in a
restricted sense of one who is a magician or sorcerer.
This apparent anachronism is no longer a problem as we
have discovered that Herodotus (c. 450 B.C.) in Persian
Wars, uses Chaldean in both senses, and it is now
accepted that their religious practices went back at least
as far as Cyrus25.

Argument 6: Daniel was not part of the prophet canon

Response: Daniel is currently placed in the
Kethubhim, the later collection of the Jewish canonical
parts, rather than in the Prophets, where many critics
feel Daniel should have been placed if it were truly
written in the sixth century B.C. However, there are very
old books placed in the Kethubhim, such as Job, the
Psalms, and the writings of Solomon26. First century
A.D. Jewish historian Josephus placed Daniel among the
thirteen prophets in his work Against Apion 1:4027. And
in reality, Daniel was not placed in the Kethubhim, as
opposed to the Prophet Canon, until the fourth century
A.D.28

Further Evidence of Early Date

Dead Sea Scrolls
The Dead Sea Scrolls consist of roughly 870
documents, including texts from the Hebrew Bible.
They were discovered between 1947 and 1956 in eleven
caves in and around the Wadi Qumran near the ruins of
the ancient settlement of Khirbet Qumran on the
northwest shore of the Dead Sea. The texts, written in
Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, are of great religious and

Appendix D - Interesting Things Jesus Said

historical significance as they include some of the only

known surviving copies of Old Testament documents.
One of the eight manuscripts of Daniel discovered at
Qumran (4QDanC) has been dated to 125 B.C. Some
scholars have argued there would be insufficient time
for this book to have gained such universal acceptance if
written only 40 years earlier29.
Daniel researcher R.K. Harrison argues, "Such a
period of composition is in any event absolutely
precluded by the evidence from Qumran partly because
there are no indications whatever that the sectaries
compiled any of the Biblical manuscripts recovered and
partly because there would, in the latter event, have been
insufficient time for Maccabean composition to be
circulated, venerated, and accepted as canonical
Scripture by a Maccabean sect30."

Alexander
Josephus states that the prophecies of Daniel were
shown to Alexander the Great when he entered
Jerusalem in 332 B.C., more than 150 years before the
Maccabean period. Historian Josephus states, "When the
book of Daniel was shown to him, in which he had
declared that one of the Greeks would destroy the

empire of the Persians, he believed himself to be the one

indicated31."

Greek Translation
The Septuagint (LXX) is the name commonly
designated for a Greek translation of the Old Testament
by Jewish scholars in Egypt that came to be used by the
Jews of the Diaspora (disbursement from Israel).
Scholars generally agree that Daniel's book had been
translated into The Septuagint by 130 B.C. However,
under the Maccabean thesis, this means that only thirty
years after Daniel was written, the book had been
received into the Jewish Canon, carried to Alexandria,
Egypt approximately 300 miles away, and translated
into Greek. This is highly unlikely32.

Ezekiel
Ezekiel, the sixth century prophet, mentioned Daniel
three times in his book (14:14, 20; 28:3) and these
references appear to be decisive evidence for the
traditional dating. However, after the textual discoveries
at Ras Shamra, which in part describes pagan culture,
some scholars have attempted to explain these passages
by claiming Ezekiel was referring to a mythological

Appendix D - Interesting Things Jesus Said

figure named Daniel appearing in the Ugaritic epic The

Tale of Aqhat. The problem with this theory is that the
character was actually an idolater. It should be obvious
that Ezekiel was referring to Daniel the Jewish prophet.

Summary
Although additional information, yet uncovered,
may provide strong justification for rejecting Daniel's
date of origin, we must agree with the traditional view.
Daniel recorded his prophecies in the sixth century B.C.
and therefore this is event eP.

1. Walvoord, J.F., Daniel: The Key to Prophetic

Revelation (1971), p11.
2. Ibid.
3. Ferch, A.J., The Book of Daniel and the Maccabean
Thesis, Andrews University Seminary Studies 21
(1983), p. 129.
4. Walvoord, p11.
5. Richards, L.O., Richard's Complete Bible Handbook
(1987), p. 361.
6. Waltke, B.K., The Date of the Book of Daniel,
Bibliotheca Sacra 133 (1976), p. 326.
7. Richards, p. 362.

8. Archer, G., Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (1982),

p. 289.
9. Journal of Biblical Literature (1921), Vol. XL, p.
112.
10. Insight on the Scriptures vol. 1, International Bible
Students Association (1988), p. 581-584.
11. Ford, D., Daniel (1978), p. 34-35.
12. Wiseman, D.J., Babylonia, New Bible Dictionary
(1982), p. 263.
13. Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (2003), p. 387.
14. Vasholz, R., Qumran and the Dating of Daniel,
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 21
(1978), p. 316.
15. Yamauchi, E.M., Daniel and Contacts Between the
Aegean and the Near East Before Alexander, The
Evangelical Quarterly 53 (1981), p. 40.
16. Oppenheim, A. L., Essay on Overland Trade in the
First Millenium B.C., Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21
(1983), p. 236-254.
17. Eerdman's Handbook to the Bible (1973).
18. Mitchell, T.C. and Joyce, R., The Musical
Instruments in Nebuchadnezzars Orchestra, D. J.
Wiseman, ed., Notes on Some Problems in the Book of
Daniel, (1965), p. 19-27.

Appendix D - Interesting Things Jesus Said

19. Vasholz, p. 316.

20. Rosenthal, F. A Grammar of Biblical Aramaic
(1963) as quoted in Waltke, p. 322-323.
21. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia vol. 1, p.
860.
22. Vasholz, p. 316ff; Wiseman, p. 117.
23. Waltke, p. 323-324.
24. Holman, p. 387.
25. Harrison, p. 1113.
26. Archer, p. 380.
27. Bartlett, p. 176-178.
28. Whitcomb, p. 263.
29. Holman, p. 386.
30. Harrison, p. 1126-1127.
31. Jewish Antiquities, XI, 337 [viii, 5].
32. Holman, p. 387.