User talk:Til Eulenspiegel/Origins of the Book of Daniel: Timeline

Hi 'Til, this is a very helpful timeline and you've obviously put a lot of work into it. I have some suggestions for minor improvements and I hope that you find them helpful.

The entry for 522 discusses the identification of the king in the story of Bel and the Dragon. In the earliest version of the story, it is likely that the king was identified simply as an anonymous 'king of Babylon'. It is probable that the king was later identified with a historical Persian king to tie it in to the book of Daniel (eg Collins, commentary).

The entry for 135 suggests that I Maccabees 'quotes' Daniel. This is possible but not certain. The phrase 'desolating abomination' could be original to Daniel, or it could simply be a common catch phrase in use at the time. Either way, it does suggest a reasonably close link in time between the two documents. I can't recall whether there are any other specific instances of common terminology, but I'm fairly sure that the above example is the main one.

The entry for 33 doesn't specifically state that Jesus was the originator of the idea that Daniel's prophecy was about to be fulfilled, but it seems to imply it. This expectation was probably fairly widespread - it is certainly evident in some of the Qumran material (see eg FF Bruce, The time is fulfilled).

90 - it is probably anachronistic to speak of a "Hebrew canon' around 90CE.

94 - Josephus does apply Daniel 8 to Antiochus and this seems to be the common Jewish interpretation of the chapter that is also reflected in patristic commentary. However, Josephus also clearly reflects the widespread belief that other Danielic prophecies applied to Rome.

150 - the Theodotian who lived around this time is no longer believed to be the author of the "Theodotian" version of Daniel, as the evidence suggests it emerged prior to the turn of the eras (see Collins, commentary). Its use is evident, for example, in passages in the gospels.

367 - 'not sure whether this was really a milestone in terms of influence on Christian praxis. The church in both east and west has continued to use the expanded canon right up to the present day, with the exception of protestant denominations. Additionally, Athanasius included Baruch and II Jeremiah in his canon, while Esther was excluded (according to Wikipedia :)). Sineaste (talk) 05:20, 19 November 2012 (UTC)