Dating an ex from years ago
They too agreed with Porphyry, that such long-range prophecies were impossible, so the book must have been written during the Maccabean age (second century BC; Baldwin, pg. Then in 1980, Klaus Koch wrote a powerful book questioning the Exilic date of writing (sixth century BC), and describing the Maccabean theory (Ferch, pg. However, I will attempt to show that the evidence points to an early date for the writing of Daniel, placing it in the sixth century BC.
In Matthew , Jesus is discoursing in what we tend to call the "Little Apocalypse." In it, Jesus mentions Daniel, and a quote from his book.
The literary arguments, for the most part, stem from contentions that many of the words used in Daniel are from an era much later than the sixth century, therefore the book couldn't have been written at that time.
The counter-arguments for this type also uses recent findings to prove that the words used by Daniel can definitely have come from the sixth century, therefore their contentions are invalid.
The book of Daniel is an apocalyptic of the Old Testament.
It is divided into two main parts: history and prophecy.
Critics using this argument see a conflict between this verse and Jeremiah 25:1, where he refers to "the fourth year of Jehoiakim," whereas Daniel 1:1 refers to the same event occurring in the "third year of the reign of Jehoiakim." This apparent error is actually a cultural difference of dating systems.
Jesus also calls that Daniel a profhtou, or "one who proclaims inspired utterances on behalf of God" (Louw).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.Chapter eleven is the focus of most of the controversy, as, according to most scholars, it gives a very detailed account of the battles of Antiochus Epiphanes.If it weren't for the great details here, most people could assume that the book was written in the sixth century, and that the author got lucky with his vague allusions.
The mention of him as the last king of Babylon in Daniel seemed to be an unreconcilable error to historians and critics.