2006-06-13 - Daniel
Author: The following is taken from Halley's Handbook:
"The book itself represents Daniel as its author (7:1, 28; 8:2; 9:2; 10:1,
2; 12:4, 5). Its genuineness was sanctioned by Christ (Matthew 24:15). It
was so accepted by Jews and Early Christians. Porphyry, an infidel of the
3rd century a.d. propounded the theory that the book was a forgery of the
period of the Maccabean revolt (168-164 b.c.). However, the traditional view
that the book is a true historical document dating from the days of Daniel
himself persisted unanimously among Christian and Jewish scholars, till the
rise of modern criticism.
"And now the critics, in the name of 'modern scholarship,' have revived the
theory of Porphyry, and put it forth as a settled fact, that the book was
written by an unknown author, who, living 400 years after the days of Daniel,
assumed Daniel's name, and palmed off on his own generation his own spurious
work, as the genuine work of a hero long dead...." 3
"So when you see standing in the holy place `the abomination
that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniellet the
reader understand" (Matthew 24:15).
The problem, of course, is that critics start from the premise that there
is no "supernatural" and therefore there is no foreknowledge from God. Like
the Jesus Seminar, which decides what Jesus did or didn't say, there is a
total rejection of God's involvement in the world and the lives of men.
Obviously, if there is no supernatural, there can be no prophecy.
"If the book is not exactly what it professes to be, how can we think that
God could be a party to the deception? For writers to put forth their own
ideas, in the names of heroes who lived long before, is not even common honesty.
We suspect that the real crux of the attempt to discredit the book of Daniel
is the unwillingness of intellectual pride to accept the marvelous miracles
and amazing prophecies recorded in the book."4
3 Halley, Henry H., Halley's Bible Handbook, Zondervan
Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI, 1965, p. 341342.
4 Ibid., p. 342.
Comments or Questions?