However, careful readers are immediately presented with an apparent historical contradiction. The following essay will provide a description of the problem, evaluate the various explanations that have been proposed to solve the problem, and conclude with a solution that best fits the evidence.ĭaniel begins his book with a historical reference to “the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah” (1:1), which is generally considered to be the first year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign (605 B.C.E.). Among the many apparent historical inconsistences noted by biblical critics is that of the chronological relationship between Daniel 1 and 2. Everything from the dating of Daniel to the historical figure of Daniel has been the subject of intense debate between liberal and conservative Christians. The wind and waves of criticism have primarily swirled and blown around the historicity of the book itself. For centuries, the book of Daniel has been a storm centre for biblical scholarship.
0 kommentar(er)
