Newsgroups: talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.religion.christian,alt.politics.correct,alt.christnet,talk.religion.misc,rec.arts.sf.written,alt.fan.heinlein,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.folklore.urban,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.christnet.bible,talk.abortion,alt.blasphemy,alt.postmodern,sci.lang,alt.catastrophism,alt.fan.publius,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,talk.atheism,alt.philosophy.debate
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!commpost!usenet
From: pardoej@lonnds.ml.com (Julian Pardoe LADS LDN X1428)
Subject: Re: DANIEL A FICTION (WAS: Re: Noah & other bible myths)
Message-ID: <Dv04Mw.KAr@tigadmin.ml.com>
Sender: usenet@tigadmin.ml.com (News Account)
Reply-To: pardoej@lonnds.ml.com
Organization: Merrill Lynch Europe
References: <4sqjdq$lr4@atlas.xylogics.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 15:06:32 GMT
Lines: 37
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:191702 sci.lang:58131

In article <4sqjdq$lr4@atlas.xylogics.com>, jking@alnitak.xylogics.com (Jack King) writes:
-->Libertarius (attila1@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
-->
-->:      It would also help if you would read some scholarly work on
-->: the Book of Daniel. At least look it up in the Encyclopaedia
-->: Britannica, or something. You might be surprised how many scholars
-->: disagree with the "fundamentalist" idea of Daniel or the Bok attributed
-->: to Daniel.
-->
-->I am well aware of the critics who question the authenticity of Daniel 
-->assuming the position taken by a third century heathen philosopher and
-->enemy of Christianity, Porphyry, who contended that the book of Daniel was 
-->forged by a Palestinian Jew around the time of Antiochus Epophanes. This
-->forger, he theorizes, took past events and made them appear to be
-->prophecies.  The genuineness of the Book of Daniel was not seriously
-->questioned, however, from that day until the early part of the 18th
-->century.  Why?  Nope, I'll take Jesus' word for it when he validates
-->not only Daniel, but his prophecy (Math 24:15).
-->
-->Jack
-->

Please show some consideration for other Usenet users and trim
the newsgroups list before posting.  This discussion is not
relevant to sci.lang, nor to many of the other groups to which
you posted it.

Thanks -- jP.

PS: I wouldn't read to much into the fact that ``The genuineness of the Book
of Daniel was not seriously questioned, however, from that day until the early
part of the 18th century''.  People weren't really in the habit of critically
analysing the Bible other than from a theological viewpoint during the Middle
Ages.



