Nairaland Forum

Welcome, Guest: Join Nairaland / Login / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 1247971 members, 1665472 topics. Date: Thursday, 02 October 2014 at 09:26 AM

The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. - Religion - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. (4068 Views)

The 100 Names Of God With Bible Reference. / Religion Section Reference Library (sticky) / The 6th And 7th Books Of Moses (1) (2) (3) (4)

(0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (Reply) (Go Down)

The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 2:03pm On Feb 24, 2012
I just read an interesting (Christian) defense of the historicity of the book of Daniel.

The Book of Daniel

As we proceed the Book of Daniel will become relevant to our examination of evidences for the accuracy Judeo-Christian theology. This relevance will be explained when we engage this examination. For now, however, it is first important to discuss the reliability and historicity of the Book of Daniel. Or more specifically, to address the scholarly objections to a 6th century dating of Daniel.

(NOTE: Later it will be shown that the Book of Daniel is sufficient to conclusively demonstrate the existence of prophecy and the supernatural within the Judeo-Christian scriptures and therefore the reliability of Judeo-Christian theology even if the scholarly dating of this book to the 2nd century is accepted.)

According to the Bible (specifically the Book of Daniel itself), Daniel was a prophet who lived during the 6th century B.C.

"Daniel - In the Bible, a Hebrew prophet of the sixth century B.C." - The American Heritage¨ Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.

"Daniel - 1: the Jewish hero of the Book of Daniel who as an exile in Babylon interprets dreams, gives accounts of apocalyptic visions, and is divinely delivered from a den of lions 2: a book of narratives, visions, and prophecies in canonical Jewish and Christian Scripture -- see BIBLE table." - Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary

Chapter 1 of the Book of Daniel informs us that Daniel was taken captive into exile in Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar (II) when he conquered Israel's southern kingdom of Judah.

Daniel 1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. 2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god. 3 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes; 4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. 5 And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king. 6 Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: 7 Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego, 18 Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in, then the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar. 19 And the king communed with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore stood they before the king. 20 And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm.

From the historical record we know that these events took place in 586 B.C.

"Judaism - After Nebuchadrezzar's decisive defeat of Egypt at Carchemish (605 BCE), Jeremiah identified the scourge as Babylon. King Jehoiakim's attempt to be free of Babylonia ended with the exile of his successor, Jehoiachin, along with Judah's elite (597); yet the court of the new king, Zedekiah, persisted in plotting new revolts, relyingÑagainst all experienceÑon Egyptian support." - Britannica.com

"Judaism - In 587/586 BCE the doom prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel came true. Rebellious Jerusalem was reduced by Nebuchadrezzar, the Temple was burnt, and much of Judah's population dispersed or deported to Babylonia." - Britannica.com

"Diaspora - The first significant Jewish Diaspora was the result of the Babylonian Exile (q.v.) of 586 BC. After the Babylonians conquered the Kingdom of Judah, part of the Jewish population was deported into slavery." - Britannica.com

"Jerusalem - Jerusalem became the spiritual and political capital of the Hebrews. In 586 B.C. it fell to the Babylonians, and the Temple was destroyed." - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Nothing in Daniel's record at this point conflicts with our modern understanding of history. Instead, what Daniel reports is completely consistent with what we now know of history, that upon conquering Judah, Nebuchadnezzar did take captive many of the nobles and people and bring them back to Bablyon. The second chapter of the book states that Daniel was one of these captives who became one of the chief ministers of the court of King Nebuchadnezzar and his successors through a series of events, initiated by Daniel's interpretation of a Nebuchadnezzar's dream.

Complete Article - http://www.biblestudying.net/christianity3.html


Why is it that many atheists are of the view that in acknowledging historical texts, books in the bible should be exempted? For example, when an atheist disputes teh existence of Jesus, he will demand that one should provide him with sources outside of scripture. Is this a reasonable demand? Are scriptural texts not themselves ancient writings which record many well known facts?

Discuss?
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by PA1982(f): 2:32pm On Feb 24, 2012
Hmm. The historical accuracy of Daniel isn't quite so evident, you know.


THE BOOK OF DANIEL

I believe that the historical reliability of the Scripture should be tested by the same criteria used by all historical documents - Josh McDowell

Louis W. Cable

The Old Testament Book of Daniel plays a very important role in Christian theology. It is viewed by many Christians as a reliable source of information foretelling future events thereby greatly enhancing Bible credibility. In fact, Christian apologists maintain that because it mentions the coming of an "anointed prince," Daniel 9:24-26 actually foretell the coming of Jesus. Also, the Book of Daniel served as a model for the writers of the New Testament Book of Revelation as well as for the "Olivet Discourse" found in the 24th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew. But just how reliable is the Book of Daniel?

According to the story, the book was written by the prophet Daniel who, as a young man, was among the captives taken to Babylon following the defeat of Judah by King Nebuchadnezzar in the 6th century (1:6.) Daniel, again according to the story, remained in Babylon for the rest of his life where he eventually rose to a high government position as a result of his God-given ability to interpret dreams and visions (1:17.) He went on to serve under four kings: Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Darius the Mead, and the Persian conqueror, Cyrus the Great.

While in Babylon, Daniel claims to have experienced a series of mysterious visions revealing the future of the Jewish people and the tribulation they were to face. These prophetic visions span the time from 587 to the period of Jewish persecution under Antiochus IV (174-164). However, some investigators maintain that the Book of Daniel is a forgery written by an unknown author or authors between 168 and 164 long after the events "foretold" in the alleged prophetic visions had already occurred3. It is also widely believed that the "prophet Daniel" is a fictitious character who, in reality, never existed. The purpose of this paper is to present a summary of the evidence supporting these charges. But, first, let us briefly review of the history of that period.

Nebuchadnezzar, the second king of the Babylonian empire, ruled from 605 to 562. In 587 he defeated Judah. As a result many Jews were carried off into exile in Babylon. However, in 539 the Persians under Cyrus the Great defeated Babylon and allowed the Jewish exiles to return to their homeland thus ending the period known as "The Babylonian Exile." For the next 200 years the Jews enjoyed a period of religious freedom.

In 334 Alexander the Great of Macedonia defeated the Persians, and the conquered lands became a part of Greek empire. Following Alexander's sudden death in 312, the Greek empire split into four smaller realms. Palestine came under the domination of the Ptolemies. In 198 the Seleucids, under the leadership on Antiochus the Great, took control of Palestine from the Ptolemies. The subsequent imposition of Greek Hellenism threatened traditional Jewish culture and religion. This development, along with increased taxation, led to widespread unrest and resentment among the Jewish people throughout the region.

Antiochus IV, known to the Jews as Epiphanes (the madman), ascended to the throne in 174 and decreed that all Jews must accept Hellenization. The Jewish religion was outlawed, Jewish scripture was forbidden, and unclean swine were sacrificed to the Greek god, Zeus, on the alter of the Jerusalem temple. This provocation became known as the "abomination that maketh desolate" (Daniel 11:31). As a result, the Jews revolted under the leadership of Judas Maccabaeus in what became known as the Macabean Revolt. Antiochus was defeated, and in 164 traditional Jewish worship was restored throughout Palestine. Thus ended the period covered by the so-called prophetic visions of Daniel.

The claim that the Book of Daniel was not written until after these events had already occurred is very convincing. The later date is evident from its contents and style, and from comparison to other ancient data. The evidence is given below in summary:

Literary Style: The Book of Daniel is written in both Hebrew and Aramaic. These language did not came in to general use among the Jewish people until long after the Babylonian exile. Also, the book contains several Persian and Greek words that were not known in ancient Babylon.

In Daniel 9:2, Daniel is pictured studying "the books," wherein the prophecies of Jeremiah are contained. There was no such collection of sacred books in the alleged time of Daniel.

Daniel Not Among the Prophets: In the Christian Bible Daniel is considered a major prophet. In the Hebrew Bible, however, Daniel is not included among the prophets. This exclusion indicates that both the book and its author were unknown as recently as 200 when the prophetic canon was fixed.

Daniel is not mentioned in the Old Testament: Outside of the Book of Daniel the name "Daniel" never appears in the Old Testament. There are, however, several references to a Dan'el. These references point, not to the Babylonian Daniel, but to a very ancient king who is classified with the likes of Noah and Job. Scholars suggest that these references are most likely based on King Dan'el mentioned in the Canaanite Ras Shamra tablets of the fourteenth century.

No Reference to Daniel Before 200: There is no reference to Daniel in any non-canonical literature before the second century. There is also no reference to Daniel on Babylonian, Median, or Persian monuments and inscriptions. This is an odd omission indeed considering Daniel's purported high rank plus his alleged service under four kings as is claimed in the Book of Daniel.

Theology is too Advanced: The theological ideals and conceptions of Daniel more closely resemble Jewish teachings and writings of the second and first centuries than of the time of the exile. For example Daniel's idea of a heavenly kingdom more closely resembling that of the New Testament.

Historical Inaccuracies: The historical blunders evident in the Book of Daniel are not only numerous they are also very revealing because they are ones that a person living in that age would never have made. For example, Daniel gives the succession of Babylonian kings as 1) Nebuchadnezzar 2) Belshazzar, whom he misidentifies as the son of Nebuchadnezzar, 3) Darius the Mede, and 4) Cyrus the Great. The historically accurate sequence is 1) Nebuchadnezzar, 2) Evil-Merodach, 3) Neriglassar, 4) Nabonidus, 5) Belshazzar, son of Nabonidus, and 6) Cyrus the Great5. Nebuchadnezzar's reign was not succeeded by that of Belshazzar's as Daniel claims.

The most obvious historical error, however, concerns the fictitious Darius the Mede. The writer of Daniel mistakenly inserts Darius the Mede as king of Babylon between the reigns of Belshazzar and Cyrus the Great (Daniel 5:30-31). All efforts to identify Darius the Mede as an actual historical person have thus far failed. There were Babylonian kings known as Darius but they came after Cyrus.

Daniel's Predictions Analyzed: The most conclusive evidence for a Maccabean date for the writing of the Book of Daniel is found in the analysis of Daniel's visions and the prophecies arising from them. The visions pertaining to events between the fifth and third centuries are brief, sketchy, and historically unreliable. Actually, they amount to no more than clumsy attempts to portray known historical events in a prophetic style. The writer did not predict the future so much as he reiterated the past. As the author approaches his own era, however, the details in the visions and the events they claim to prophesy become much more precise . The events immediately prior to and including the reign of Antiochus IV (175-164) and his persecution of the Jews are historically accurate. But, events extending into the author's immediate future do not agree at all with known history. For example, instead of dieing in a battle somewhere between Jerusalem and the Mediterranean Sea as the writer predicted (11:40-45), Antiochus IV actually died far to the east in modern day Iran6.

Some Glaring Omissions: The writer of the Book of Daniel was convinced that he was living in the "last days". But he was obviously wrong about that. In fact, the most trying days of tribulation for the Jewish people lay ahead. The Judao/Roman war, still considered the most devastation war ever to have occurred in the middle east, began in 67 CE and ended in 70 CE with the total defeat of the Jewish people and the destruction of the Temple. No Judas Maccabaeus arose to lead them in a successful revolt against the Romans as had happened in the Maccabean period. Yet Daniel, the self-proclaimed prophet of Jewish tribulation, said nothing about this tragedy. Nor did he mention the Nazi Holocaust, another devastating atrocity for the Jewish people. Both of these historically documented episodes far surpassed the persecution perpetrated upon them by Antiochus IV.

Some famous stories from the Book of Daniel analized:

In addition to it's lurid visions and amazing "predictions," the Book of Daniel contains several astounding stories tirelessly repeated by Christian clergy. These stories are widely known throughout Christendom and enjoy great popularity. Included are, "The Golden Image", "The Fiery Furnace", and "Daniel in the Lions' Den". So, let us now take and objective look at these stories.

The Golden Image

Daniel 3:1 ~ Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold, whose height was threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof six cubits: he set it up in the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon.

No clergy person, as far as I know, has ever sat down and computed the volume of the king's golden image. So, let's see just what we are dealing with here. At eighteen inches per cubit the image would be 90 feet tall by nine feet wide. Although the depth is not given, a conservative estimate would be nine feet because in order to be stable when set upright the structure's depth would have to be at least equal to its breadth.

The total volume of the image is a whopping 270 cubic yards of gold. Not only would that be more gold than possibly could have been in Nebuchadnezzar's royal treasury, it is probably more gold than was in the combined treasuries of all the kingdoms in the middle east of that time. But, another astonishing factor to consider is the weight of such a structure.

I called several jewelers regarding this question and got a figure of 3 ounces for one cubic inch of gold. From there I figured that if there are 1728 cubic inches in one cubic foot, a cubic foot of gold would weigh 324 pounds. A cubic yard of gold, which consists of twenty seven cubic feet, would weigh 8748 pounds. Therefore, a structure comprised of 270 cubic yards of gold would weigh a whopping 1181 tons.

Gold smelters normally are rather small things because they usual process relatively small amounts of the precious metal. So, no gold smelter in the world could have handled such a project. Even if they had, it would have been impossible to have moved it with the primitive technology of that day, let alone sat it upright.

Christian apologists might offer as an explanation the possibility that the image was made in small pieces like a jigsaw puzzle and assembled at the site. But, even if the amount of gold needed for was somehow make available, such a project would have tied up the best craftsmen in the entire middle east and would have required many years to complete. The cost, in addition to that of the gold, would have been outlandishly enormous. Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego would, in all probability, have died of old age before the subject image was completed.

It should also be noted that in all the royal Babylonian archives that archaeologists have so far discovered, not a single reference to such an image as this, or any decree to worship it, is yet to be discovered.

The Fiery Furnace

Daniel 3:27 ~ And the princes, governors, and captains, and the king's counsellors, being gathered together, saw these men, upon whose bodies the fire had no power, nor was an hair of their head singed, neither were their coats changed, nor the smell of fire had passed on them.

First, if the story of the golden image is debunked, that of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (hereafter referred to as "the three stooges"wink surviving the fiery furnace is debunked also. But let us consider some of the more preposterous aspects of that outlandish story.

Because they refused to obey the king's order to worship the golden image, the three stooges, who had only a short time earlier been appointed by the king to "rule over the affairs of the province" (v49), were to be cast immediately into a fiery furnace. In his rage, the king directed that the furnace be heated to seven times hotter than normal. They were then cast in. By that time the furnace was so hot until the king's men carrying out the order were killed.

The king, however, was astonished to see not only the three stooges standing unharmed amidst the flames but a fourth stooge had mysteriously appeared and was standing with them. The king was so amazed that he went right up to the mouth of the furnace to get a better look. Although the intensity of the heat had killed his men, he somehow remained unharmed. About that time the three stooges came walking out, probably arm-in-arm, completely unharmed.

In verse 28 we learn that the fourth stooge is an angel - a "guardian" angel, no doubt. Anyway, the king was so impressed that he issued a decree that "every people, nation, and language, which speak anything amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort". He then promoted the three stooges, but to what is anybody's guess.

So much for the fiery furnace episode.

Daniel in the Lions' Den

Daniel 6:22 ~ My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, that they have not hurt me".

In this story King Darius was informed by certain of his followers that Daniel had been caught worshiping a god other than that of the Babylonians. Because this was a capital offense, Daniel was cast into a den of hungry lions. But, God protected him. When King Darius saw what had happened he was so impressed that he decided it was time for a little reverse justice. Whereupon he ordered that those who had informed on Daniel be thrown into the lion's den along with their wives and children.

As noted above there is absolutely no historical, archaeological, or literary data to prove that there ever was a "King Darius" of Babylon. Darius is a myth, therefore, the story of Daniel in the lion's den is another Bible hoax.

____________________________________________________________________________

1 Compiled by Louis W. Cable.

2 All dates are BCE (Before the Christian Era) unless otherwise noted.

3 Greenberg, Gary; 101 Myths of the Bible, 2002, pages 287-289.

4 Shepherd, Brodrick D., Beasts, Horns and the Antichrist, Cliffside Publishing House, 1944, p. 21.

5 Greenberg, Gary, 101 Myths of the Bible, 2002, pages 287-289.

6 Encyclopedia Britannica 2002 Deluxe Edition.

7 Till, Farrell, "Silliness in the Book of Daniel"; The Skeptical Review, vol. 9, no. 6; Nov/Dec 1998.

8 Benson, Andrew D., The True Origins of Christianity and the Bible, Prudential Publishing Co., 1997, p.17.

http://www.websitesonadime.com/ffwic/bookofdaniel.htm
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 2:35pm On Feb 24, 2012
^ You know, I am not a bible apologist - and I certainly do not believe that all that is in the Bible is true. There are a great many myths contained therein as well as outrightly manipulated text. Nevertheless that is not what makes me want to have this discussion. My issue is why would someone state that people such as Moses or Daniel or perhaps Jesus never existed simply because the ancient writings recording their activities are contained in the Bible?
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 2:37pm On Feb 24, 2012
Gold smelters normally are rather small things because they usual process relatively small amounts of the precious metal. So, no gold smelter in the world could have handled such a project. Even if they had, it would have been impossible to have moved it with the primitive technology of that day, let alone sat it upright.

I would be hesitant about this sort of argument in light of the existence of such monuments as the Pyramids, teh construction of which remains a mystery till this day!
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by plaetton: 4:25am On Feb 25, 2012
Religious books are written for religious purposes not for historical accuracy. Biblical accounts hardly meet the thresholds of reliablity because they are usually written with a specific religious authority ,for a specific audience, and with specific ecclessiastical agendas.
For example , even the christians do not want you to apply standard academic criteria to analyse scripture, since ,according to most them, applying carnage (common sense) knowledge to understand scriptural issues is futile. What is required is faith, they always say.

We have to  consider that the  old testament was written and compiled by yahwehist scribes around 600 -650bc in babylon ,and the new testament by unknown writters writing for a Hennenic audience centuries after the pupported events.
Thereafter, the early church fathers most likely added, deleted, redacted and selected what should be included in the bible. 35 or so non-cannonical books were rejected because they were alleged to have been spurious in content and authorship.

If you now consider the fact that the  originals of these manuscripts are not available for analysis, and that all we have are edited copies of  edited copies of copies of  translated copies of translated copies, then its easy to imagine all could have been lost in translation. .
Therefore, this document was written, compliled,  translated, and periodically edited, all along by people who have a peculiar world view and who share  a vested interest in propagating and maintaining such worldview.


The book of Job, for example, have been shown to have been written by more than two different authors in several different time periods in locations not remotely close to ancient isreal. Most likely a myth or legend borrowed from another culture.
Ezekeil is also said to have been written by two different authors with many revisions.
it should never bee taken seriously as a historical source.

And by the way, athiests are not the only ones who point out the non-historicity of jesus .He is too conspicously absent for a great man who lived and influenced many during an era of great literary activity.

The vatican has miles of underground libraries of ancient texts and scrolls(probably looted from the great library of Alexandria) that may never ever be in the public domain. I suspect that they must be protecting a truth so precious and fragile, that it must be protected by a battalion of falsehoods.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by PA1982(f): 9:16am On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight-
Read the entire discussion about the gold needed for the reported structure
The total volume of the image is a whopping 270 cubic yards of gold. Not only would that be more gold than possibly could have been in Nebuchadnezzar's royal treasury, it is probably more gold than was in the combined treasuries of all the kingdoms in the middle east of that time. But, another astonishing factor to consider is the weight of such a structure.

I called several jewelers regarding this question and got a figure of 3 ounces for one cubic inch of gold. From there I figured that if there are 1728 cubic inches in one cubic foot, a cubic foot of gold would weigh 324 pounds. A cubic yard of gold, which consists of twenty seven cubic feet, would weigh 8748 pounds. Therefore, a structure comprised of 270 cubic yards of gold would weigh a whopping 1181 tons.

We're talking about 270 cubic yards of gold and 1181 tons.
It's simply not on.
The measurements stated in the text are crook.

For me, however,the most convincing arguments were the really striking historical errrors.
And that the language and 'theology' of the text is more accord with the second century BC, not the sixth BC.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Joagbaje(m): 9:33am On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight:

Why is it that many atheists are of the view that in acknowledging historical texts, books in the bible should be exempted? For example, when an atheist disputes teh existence of Jesus, he will demand that one should provide him with sources outside of scripture. Is this a reasonable demand? Are scriptural texts not themselves ancient writings which record many well known facts?

You made a great point deep sight . The bible is not only a spiritual book. It's also a hystorically accurate documentation, the bible had actually helped apmany archeologists in their findings.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by abubello(m): 9:50am On Feb 25, 2012
Examples of the hundreds of biblical contradictions are the conflicting genealogies of Jesus (Mt. 1:1-16 vs. Lk. 3:23-38), the inconsistent stories of Judas' death (Mt. 27:5 vs. Acts 1:18), and the contradictory accounts of Paul's conversion (Acts 9:7 vs. Acts 22:9).
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Joagbaje(m): 10:04am On Feb 25, 2012
There's no historical conflict. For example . Mattew and Luke gave the different lineage . Luke gave the blood line through mary Mattew gave through Joseph
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by mazaje(m): 10:14am On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight:


Why is it that many atheists are of the view that in acknowledging historical texts, books in the bible should be exempted? For example, when an atheist disputes teh existence of Jesus, he will demand that one should provide him with sources outside of scripture. Is this a reasonable demand? Are scriptural texts not themselves ancient writings which record many well known facts?

Discuss?

The bible is a collection of stories from older civilizations with a new twist. . . . . .Nothing more, nothing less. All of the books were written when there were no genre life fiction or real life, all were written when literacy was only for the elites . . . .A lot of the books were written long after the events they recorded, example the book of Daniel. . . Scriptural texts are ancient text with a twist and a purpose, they are NOT historical books because they are heavily salted and filled with mythology and superstition which can not be separated from reality. . .The stories in scriptures may contain the names of places and real people but doesn't make the stories true, just as than the real places in the Greek myths are not evidence for Hercules.

Remember Troy. . . The city was once thought to be mythical but was later found by archeologist, does that mean that all the Gods talked about by the people are real?. . . . . The "Odyssey and the Iliad" dealt with a city that was supposed to be a myth. It was found as well. Now because it was found, does that make Athena, Poseidon, Odysseus, Circe and the other Gods, monster and people real?
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by mazaje(m): 10:16am On Feb 25, 2012
Joagbaje:

There's no historical conflict. For example . Mattew and Luke gave the different lineage . Luke gave the blood line through mary Mattew gave through Joseph

Where does it say so in the bible?. . . . .This is just the false excuse that apologist love to bandy about. . .
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by abubello(m): 11:09am On Feb 25, 2012
Joagbaje:

There's no historical conflict. For example . Mattew and Luke gave the different lineage . Luke gave the blood line through mary Mattew gave through Joseph
[/b]th

The bolded is a big lie, both Mathew and luke claimed to give Jesus's geneology through Joseph- according to matthew Joseph is the son of [b]Jocob
while luke claims that the same joseph is the son of Heli. cf Mathew 1:6-16 and Luke 3:23-31.

By the way you cleverly ignore the other historical inconsistencies raised in my earlier post
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 1:01pm On Feb 25, 2012
plaetton:

Religious books are written for religious purposes not for historical accuracy. Biblical accounts hardly meet the thresholds of reliablity because they are usually written with a specific religious authority ,for a specific audience, and with specific ecclessiastical agendas.
For example , even the christians do not want you to apply standard academic criteria to analyse scripture, since ,according to most them, applying carnage (common sense) knowledge to understand scriptural issues is futile. What is required is faith, they always say.

We have to consider that the old testament was written and compiled by yahwehist scribes around 600 -650bc in babylon ,and the new testament by unknown writters writing for a Hennenic audience centuries after the pupported events.
Thereafter, the early church fathers most likely added, deleted, redacted and selected what should be included in the bible. 35 or so non-cannonical books were rejected because they were alleged to have been spurious in content and authorship.

If you now consider the fact that the originals of these manuscripts are not available for analysis, and that all we have are edited copies of edited copies of copies of translated copies of translated copies, then its easy to imagine all could have been lost in translation. .
Therefore, this document was written, compliled, translated, and periodically edited, all along by people who have a peculiar world view and who share a vested interest in propagating and maintaining such worldview.


The book of Job, for example, have been shown to have been written by more than two different authors in several different time periods in locations not remotely close to ancient isreal. Most likely a myth or legend borrowed from another culture.
Ezekeil is also said to have been written by two different authors with many revisions.
it should never bee taken seriously as a historical source.

And by the way, athiests are not the only ones who point out the non-historicity of jesus .He is too conspicously absent for a great man who lived and influenced many during an era of great literary activity.

The vatican has miles of underground libraries of ancient texts and scrolls(probably looted from the great library of Alexandria) that may never ever be in the public domain. I suspect that they must be protecting a truth so precious and fragile, that it must be protected by a battalion of falsehoods.

Sincerely, I agree with virtually 100 per cent of your words above. My issue is this - is it probable that Moses, Daniel, and Jesus never existed?
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 1:05pm On Feb 25, 2012
mazaje:

The bible is a collection of stories from older civilizations with a new twist. . . . . .Nothing more, nothing less. All of the books were written when there were no genre life fiction or real life, all were written when literacy was only for the elites . . . .A lot of the books were written long after the events they recorded, example the book of Daniel. . . Scriptural texts are ancient text with a twist and a purpose, they are NOT historical books because they are heavily salted and filled with mythology and superstition which can not be separated from reality. . .The stories in scriptures may contain the names of places and real people but doesn't make the stories true, just as than the real places in the Greek myths are not evidence for Hercules.

Remember Troy. . . The city was once thought to be mythical but was later found by archeologist, does that mean that all the Gods talked about by the people are real?. . . . . The "Odyssey and the Iliad" dealt with a city that was supposed to be a myth. It was found as well. Now because it was found, does that make Athena, Poseidon, Odysseus, Circe and the other Gods, monster and people real?


Hmm, ati gbo. My question is, in light of all the writings, is it tenable to say that Moses, Jesus and Daniel, never existed? I hope you know that aside from the four canonical gospels, Jesus had been wriiten about in a great many other non-canonical gospels? What level of fantasy would permit that? Esp as he is not described as Posiedon or other such?
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 1:09pm On Feb 25, 2012
PA1982:

Deep Sight-
Read the entire discussion about the gold needed for the reported structure
We're talking about 270 cubic yards of gold and 1181 tons.
It's simply not on.
The measurements stated in the text are crook.

For me, however,the most convincing arguments were the really striking historical errrors.
And that the language and 'theology' of the text is more accord with the second century BC, not the sixth BC.


Have you undertaken a specific study of what it took to construct the pyramids? It is so mind boggling, when you have the details. So much so that there are now theories of extra terrestial involvement. Watch the NAT geo SERIES - "Ancient Aliens".

Where is Kunle Oshob?
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by PastorAIO: 2:13pm On Feb 25, 2012
Joagbaje:

There's no historical conflict. For example . Mattew and Luke gave the different lineage . Luke gave the blood line through mary Mattew gave through Joseph
abubello:

[/b]th

The bolded is a big lie, both Mathew and luke claimed to give Jesus's geneology through Joseph- according to matthew Joseph is the son of Jocob while luke claims that the same joseph is the son of Heli. cf Mathew 1:6-16 and Luke 3:23-31.

By the way you cleverly ignore the other historical inconsistencies raised in my earlier post



I am ready to wager my last pant that Jo will never come to address this assertion that he is lying. Who wants to challenge me?
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by mazaje(m): 2:43pm On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight:

Hmm, ati gbo. My question is, in light of all the writings, is it tenable to say that Moses, Jesus and Daniel, never existed? I hope you know that aside from the four canonical gospels, Jesus had been wriiten about in a great many other non-canonical gospels? What level of fantasy would permit that? Esp as he is not described as Posiedon or other such?

I believe that there is a man behind the Jesus legend, just as there is a man behind the Mohammed legend and other religious figures and Legends. . . .I have read some materials about the mythical Jesus proponents, I don't care much about their position but they do have some very valid points. . . .Firstly, EVERYTHING we know about Jesus were NOT written by any body who knows him personally or have ever meet him in person. . . .Everything about the Jesus stories were written by unknown men very long after the character died. . . .
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Martian(m): 2:54pm On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight:

Have you undertaken a specific study of what it took to construct the pyramids? It is so mind boggling, when you have the details. So much so that there are now theories of extra terrestial involvement. Watch the NAT geo SERIES - "Ancient Aliens". Where is Kunle Oshob?

No DeepSight, Just No!!! NatGeo shows are usually real but they sometimes have to cater to the fringe conspiracy theorists in order to keep the advertisement dollars coming in. Shows like "Ancient Aliens" and "Finding Bigfoot" are NOT to be taken seriously.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Aliens
Tsoukalos is a 1998 graduate of Ithaca College in Ithaca, New York, with a degree in sports information and communication.

Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Martian(m): 2:59pm On Feb 25, 2012
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by plaetton: 3:23pm On Feb 25, 2012
Apollonius of Tyana was a historical 1st century AD neo-pythogorean philosopher who would have been a contemporary of Jesus. He is reputed to have displayed extra-ordinary magical and healing powers. He had disciples and travel around the known world preaching about virtue.
What is also interesting about him is that Apostle Paul's missionary journeys seem to mirror those of Apolllonius of Tyana, Suggesting that Paul might have been a follower.
Another interesting fact, funny thought, is that when confronted about that similarities between the life Jesus and Apollonius of Tyana, the church fathers dismissed him as a crony of the devil ,who was sent by the devil in advance of Jesus, to decieve the world by mimmicking Jesus.
so they labelled him the anti-chist. And so that is how history forgot about Apollonius of Tyana.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 5:12pm On Feb 25, 2012
Martian:

No DeepSight, Just No!!! NatGeo shows are usually real but they sometimes have to cater to the fringe conspiracy theorists in order to keep the advertisement dollars coming in. Shows like "Ancient Aliens" and "Finding Bigfoot" are NOT to be taken seriously.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Aliens
Tsoukalos is a 1998 graduate of Ithaca College in Ithaca, New York, with a degree in sports information and communication.

I am aware of this and I absolutely disagree.

1. In the first place please note that the facts you mentioned above have absolutely NOT discredited the point that the construction of the Egyptian pyramids remains a marvel and mystery till this day - something that will present a huge challenge to even modern construction techniques - not to speak about the hammer and chisel technques that are said to have constructed the pyramids. Only persons who are not aquainted with teh size of the rocks involved and the heights to which they were lifted would not understand the point being made.

2. The pointers to ancient extra-terrestial or other bits of information are quite alot. There are dozens of ancient artworks of things that could only be described as spacecraft. The minimum that is obvious is that there is a huge gap in history somehwere.

3. Remember to be careful about qualifications. People with no qualifications in specific studies often exhibit surprising knowledge in such fields provided they have taken an avid interest in researching the subject.

4. I would not accept your assessment of the quality of the Ancient Aliens Series. A great deal of history and science is involved in the production.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Martian(m): 5:47pm On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight:

I am aware of this and I absolutely disagree.
You are aware the show is BS and wild assumptions but you choose to believe it?!!!

Deep Sight:

1. In the first place please note that the facts you mentioned above have absolutely NOT discredited the point that the construction of the Egyptian pyramids remains a marvel and mystery till this day - something that will present a huge challenge to even modern construction techniques - not to speak about the hammer and chisel technques that are said to have constructed the pyramids. Only persons who are not aquainted with teh size of the rocks involved and the heights to which they were lifted would not understand the point being made.
When answering to skepticism about how such heavy stones could have been moved without machinery, Redford says, "I usually show the skeptic a picture of 20 of my workers at an archaeological dig site pulling up a two-and-a-half ton granite block." He added, "I know it's possible because I was on the ropes too."[/b]http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080328104302.htm

http://www.skepdic.com/dvinefal.html
This fallacy is also a variation of the alien fallacy: I can't figure this out, so aliens must have done it. Or, This is amazing; therefore, aliens did it. Or, I can't think of any other explanation; therefore, aliens did it. Or, this is just too weird; so, aliens are behind it.

[b]If something were to happen to our civilization and records were lost, will future generations look at the ISS and and claim it has  evidence of "Ancient Aliens"

Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Martian(m): 5:57pm On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight:

2. The pointers to ancient extra-terrestial or other bits of information are quite alot. There are dozens of ancient artworks of things that could only be described as spacecraft. The minimum that is obvious is that there is a huge gap in history somehwere.

Maybe Elijah's fiery chariot from heaven was also a spacecraft.

Deep Sight:

3. Remember to be careful about qualifications. People with no qualifications in specific studies often exhibit surprising knowledge in such fields provided they have taken an avid interest in researching the subject.

Hmmm, I'll still rather listen to Neil Degrasse Tyson when it comes to things about space than listen to some sports journalist who makes a living doing tv shows about science fiction speculations. That's just me though.

Deep Sight:

4. I would not accept your assessment of the quality of the Ancient Aliens Series. A great deal of history and science is involved in the production.

Says who? History channel and the alien guy?
In American media, science, history, facts and common sense usually play second fiddle to the bottom line.
The show is bs!!!
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Martian(m): 6:05pm On Feb 25, 2012
If you really think this civilization can't construct those pyramids in Egypt, I don't know what world you live in. This is just a mock up in Vegas, so imagine if we really wanted to build the "Great Pyramid". They used "hammer and chisel" techniques. We got machines.

Fially, saying Ancient Aliens are responsible is discounting human ingenuity. Humans have been capable of awesomeness since time immemorial, grin

Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 6:23pm On Feb 25, 2012
^ Are u having a laff? Men do you know what the Egyptian pyramids took to build - with the available tachniques then? And you are posting this joke above - were the same size of stones even used? Abeg make I no start. Anyway you missed the point. The point was about what PA1982 said - and basically i mentioned the pyramids to show that staggering and hard-to-believe feats were acheived by the ancients. That was the point.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Martian(m): 6:36pm On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight:

^ Are u having a laff? Men do you know what the Egyptian pyramids took to build - with the available tachniques then? And you are posting this joke above - were the same size of stones even used? Abeg make I no start. Anyway you missed the point. The point was about what PA1982 said - and basically i mentioned the pyramids to show that staggering and hard-to-believe feats were acheived by the ancients. That was the point.
You really think the pyramids could have been constructed by aliens as if humans are not intelligent enough to do it. Common Man!!!! If we are capable of sending unmanned vehicles to Mars due to thousands of years of accumulated knowledge, why do you think the Egyptians, Mayans and Aztecs couldn't have used their accumulated knowledge to build pyramids. Seriously dude!!! You'll rather believe a tv show called "Ancient Aliens". I posted the above to illustrate how we could build those pyramids with stones, rocks or whatever and HAVE THEM LOOK BETTER THAN THE PYRAMIDS DID IN THEIR HEYDAY.

Deep Sight:

The point was about what PA1982 said - and basically i mentioned the pyramids to show that staggering and hard-to-believe feats were acheived by the ancients. That was the point.

Then you decided to attribute those "staggering achievements" to ancient aliens.  If I'm laughing at anything, it's that and the fact that you think the Alien Guy is an authority.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by mazaje(m): 6:44pm On Feb 25, 2012
Deepsight are you saying that the pyramids were built by ancient aliens?. . .Is that your position? Really?. . .
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 6:48pm On Feb 25, 2012
Martian:

You are aware the show is BS and wild assumptions but you choose to believe it?!!!
When answering to skepticism about how such heavy stones could have been moved without machinery, Redford says, "I usually show the skeptic a picture of 20 of my workers at an archaeological dig site pulling up a two-and-a-half ton granite block." He added, "I know it's possible because I was on the ropes too."[/b]http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080328104302.htm

http://www.skepdic.com/dvinefal.html
This fallacy is also a variation of the alien fallacy: I can't figure this out, so aliens must have done it. Or, This is amazing; therefore, aliens did it. Or, I can't think of any other explanation; therefore, aliens did it. Or, this is just too weird; so, aliens are behind it.

[b]If something were to happen to our civilization and records were lost, will future generations look at the ISS and and claim it has evidence of "Ancient Aliens"



No! For crying out loud, read the posts! PA1982 spoke about the fact that some incredible feats were described in Daniel. So please get the context of my comments. My comments were that there have been also astonishing feats in history very hard to acheive - such as the pyramids. That is exactly why I stated that some of these feats have been so astonishing that extra terrestial involvment had been alluded to. The point is simply that indeed PA1982 may not use the incredible nature of those feats as an argument in light of the fact that there have been many astonishing ancient acheivements - such as the pyramids. By the way, i really dont think you have a careful study of what building the pyramids took - especially considering the interior designs.

I hope you get the point now.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by mazaje(m): 6:51pm On Feb 25, 2012
^^

OK, Roger. . .
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by DeepSight(m): 6:52pm On Feb 25, 2012
mazaje:

Deepsight are you saying that the pyramids were built by ancient aliens?. . .Is that your position? Really?. . .

No, I am not saying this. Someone made a comment regarding some amazing constructions described in Daniel. I simply pointed out that there exist some amazing ancient constructions - the pyramids - which are so amazing that people even attribute them to aliens! Therefore for me one should nor seek to denigrate ancient texts based on the "amazingness" of the structures described. If the pyramids has been destroyed and then described in an ancient biblical text, certainly skeptics would contend that no such structure was possible.

I really need to be sure that people are schooled on exactky what building the pyramids entailed.
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by Martian(m): 7:34pm On Feb 25, 2012
Deep Sight:

No! For crying out loud, read the posts! PA1982 spoke about the fact that some incredible feats were described in Daniel. So please get the context of my comments. My comments were that there have been also astonishing feats in history very hard to acheive - such as the pyramids. That is exactly why I stated that some of these feats have been so astonishing that extra terrestial involvment had been alluded to. The point is simply that indeed PA1982 may not use the incredible nature of those feats as an argument in light of the fact that there have been many astonishing ancient acheivements - such as the pyramids. By the way, i really dont think you have a careful study of what building the pyramids took - especially considering the interior designs.
I hope you get the point now.

I got that point but my point is that you really think ETs could have been responsible and you keep appealing to incredulity by saying " By the way, i really dont think you have a careful study of what building the pyramids took - especially considering the interior designs.".
You sound like the Pyramids were so intricately designed for that period, that "Aliens" could have been involved. As if you are the only one that knows just what it took. Then I provided a link with a quote from someone that actually has knowledge in that field but you'll rather accept the "history and science" behind a sci fi show. That's what we have been talking about. Here are your words after I provided links to show that the show is absolute BS:

Deep Sight:

I[b] am aware of this and I absolutely disagree. [/b]

1. In the first place please note that the facts you mentioned above have absolutely NOT discredited the point that the construction of the Egyptian pyramids remains a marvel and mystery till this day - something that will present a huge challenge to even modern construction techniques - not to speak about the hammer and chisel technques that are said to have constructed the pyramids. Only persons who are not aquainted with teh size of the rocks involved and the heights to which they were lifted would not understand the point being made.

2. The pointers to ancient extra-terrestial or other bits of information are quite alot. There are dozens of ancient artworks of things that could only be described as spacecraft. The minimum that is obvious is that there is a huge gap in history somehwere.

3. Remember to be careful about qualifications. People with no qualifications in specific studies often exhibit surprising knowledge in such fields provided they have taken an avid interest in researching the subject.

4. I would not accept your assessment of the quality of the Ancient Aliens Series. A great deal of history and science is involved in the production.

PA1982 also said, the amount of gold needed for such a monument would have been impossible to procure during that period and that's when YOU introduced the "Anciet Aliens" to "fill in the gap".
Re: The Historicity Of The Books Of The Bible - Reference: Daniel. by mrmayor(m): 8:00pm On Feb 25, 2012
Joagbaje:

There's no historical conflict. For example . Mattew and Luke gave the different lineage . Luke gave the blood line through mary Mattew gave through Joseph

@Joabgaje,

I'm not derailing this thread but Jesus is not the Son of Joseph, can't be from Joseph bloodline.

(0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (Reply)

Therapeutic Use Of Psalms, Right Or Wrong? / Mysterious Secrets Of The Dark Kingdom / Why Pastors Children Often Embrace Cultism, Prostitution, Etc?

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2014 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See Nairalist and How To Advertise. 209
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.