Too Good To Be True - Story of Daniel :(

Post Reply New Topic

I was reading up on the Biblical prophet Daniel in wiki and was saddened to discover scholars think he never actually existed!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_(biblical_figure)


All those ancient alien theories ffft out the window.

I see the Bible as being a collection of mythology and folklore mixed with a small amount of history anyway. I mean, I think Jesus was a real person, and a revolutionary, but I don't think he was a demigod, nor did he have supernatural powers.

Why does it make you sad? If Daniel never existed then we should be glad, because if the Bible is anything to go by he was a monster, a tyrant of the worst kind.

Nah, Daniel was a captive who kept his wits about him, was saved from the lions by divine intervention, had visions and interpreted dreams for King Nebuchadnezzar. Daniel was you basic survivor.

Why do you spend time on the Bible when you could be spending time on modern life? Ethics I would like to think have improved since ancient times, not declined.

I think you will agree that some of it is fiction, perhaps admittedly some might be based on fact (?). But why spend so much time on it? Your time could be better spent elsewhere. Why spend time on a body of work that is so difficult to comprehend, it is impossible to know what the actual intent was of what was written. Modern Christianity relies on twisting Bible verses to make it fit into acceptance in modern culture. The Bible is built on sand. Why pay any attention to it at all?

You mean Danel, not Daniel, and that's "The Tale of Aqhat." Danel was an idolator, hardly a good example for the Hebrew people. Ezekiel would not have referred to Danel. Daniel, on the other hand, more likely was a real 6th century person.

I enjoyed bible stories when younger. I found them interesting to listen to. I focus on parts of the Bible I like. One thing I find fascinating about Daniel in particular is Ancient Alien Theorists wonder if he saw actual UFOs. I find the unknown very interesting and fascinating. One of my favorite experiences in life is not knowing and just wondering about something. Maybe it triggers a chemical reaction in my brain. The idea of possibly finding out aliens from another planet or moon visited earth at one time thrills me to no end.

If Daniel never existed and is just a myth among the Hebrews, maybe they are the ones who saw UFOs. I like to wonder what people from long ago experienced. This is why I wish I were immortal. It wouldn't be awful. It's not an terrible idea to me, never being able to die. I am the type that says, hell ya! Bring it! I want to be able to exclaim, I was there! I saw that! Instead I am like everyone else, wondering what people have seen throughout history and not knowing for certain.

Wikipedia has its own merits but as regards the Old Testament, there are more reliable sites in the internet. Here's one,

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/index.jsp

For some weird reason I ended up getting Daniel mixed up with David.

Senility must be setting in.

You're not alone. This is common and it has happened to me, too.

Daniel? He was in danger of persecution on numerous occasions from actual oppressive despots, and was courageously faithful. It is true that notwithstanding that he was still able at certain points to rise to positions of authority under the same despots, so if you were really trying to malign him you could accuse him of collaboration and treason to the recently annexed Kingdom of Judah. If you meant Nebuchadnezzar or indeed God you should have said as much, otherwise your post seems to me slightly confused, if not nonsensical - unless you have lived a very sheltered life indeed, and are ignorant alike of ancient and modern history, to regard Daniel as the depths of tyrannical depravity; forgive my somewhat harsh tone. It is probable that Lintar was sad that supposedly sceptical scholars would be naive enough to dismiss out of hand the existence of a historical figure for arguably ideological reasons. The original posterdoes believe in the historicity of Daniel, so would not be cheered that others should not do so, as it would not alter the historical reality of human persecutors such as Nebuchadnezzar, or according to you Daniel, or indeed the highly polemical and contentious theodical statement you may conceivably have been trying to make about God. What did you mean by the statement, please clarify, it is both confusing and offensive.

Could you have been thinking of King David? I which case I retract the above as I am rather inclined to agree with you based on the Biblical record, especially the latter part of his reign.

But they lived several centuries apart! Besides, they have different names. This is what happens with the decline in Biblical knowledge and history of religions generally; whether one supports or opposes a faith-tradition, it should at least be done knowledgeably! I hope I have not come across as harsh and condescending by the way.

Correct - there is a Canaanite mythical hero with a cognate name to the exilic Judean prophet Daniel; they should not be confused. I have come across the view amongst some sceptical scholars that the similarity might be evidence of their identity and therefore the non-historicity of Daniel, which seems quite a weak argument by scholarly standards of rigour, and likely to be influenced by ideological considerations in my view.

And alien theories such as those of Eric Von Daniken remain unaffected being popular neither with sceptical or theologically conservative interpreters of Holy Scriptures, as poor Dr. Jackson, incidentally a namesake of our Biblical hero, found when all bar one fellow scholar walked out of his admittedly contentious and iconoclastic lecture - just as well, or he would never have travelled through the Stargate! Sorry about introducing a tone of possibly incongruous and irreverent levity.

No problem. Sometimes that happens to me, too
Nice to know I'm not alone.

For some reason, which the Jewish scholars know best, the Book of Daniel is not counted among the prophets; it is in the "Writings" along with Job, Proverbs, Psalms, Chronicles, Ruth, Song of Songs, etc. Also, for some reason which they know best, several other books are counted among the prophets, like Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, 1-2 Kings.

I wouldn't take wikipedia's word on such a loaded subject. And I also wouldn't use an appeal to authority to treat anything like a foregone conclusion. The insatiable revisionist urges of a number of biblical scholars lately have been proven to be inane when we apply their same standards (which actually disparage most historiographers), and find that we can't even say Julius Caesar, Gaius Maro, or Augustus Caesar were real people either. The confirmation bias used against biblical accounts is incredible when you compare it to what classical period scholars like Sherwin N. White find to be perfectly acceptable methods for determining historicity.

So, were Caligula, Julius Caesar, or Vespasian real people? They had an enormous political and cultural impact, but the same amount of contemporary written material, often written as much as four centuries after the facts (as is the case with Julius Caesar).