Page 94 - Daniel
P. 94
Richardson, and R. Gregor Smith, eds. (London: SCM, 1956), 169–72.
29 Wilson comments, “When one asserts that the author of Daniel has ‘confused’ events or
persons, it is not enough for him to affirm that the author was thus confused. This confusion is
a matter of evidence. With all due deference to the opinion of other scholars, I am firmly
convinced that no man to-day has sufficient evidence to prove that the author of Daniel was
confused. There are no records to substantiate the assertions of confusion” (Robert Dick
Wilson, “Book of Daniel,” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, ed., vol. 2
[Chicago: Howard-Severance, 1930], 128). Wilson then deals with the major criticisms of the
critics. The most important of these concerns Darius the Mede (Dan. 5:31). For further
discussion of this problem see the introduction to chapter 6.
30 Leupold, Daniel, 119.
31 Young, Daniel, 77.
32 Henry A. Ironside, Lectures on Daniel the Prophet (New York: Loizeaux, 1920), 36–37.
33 Keil, Daniel, 109.
34 Culver, Daniel, 115–20.
35 Leupold, Daniel, 121.
36 William Whiston, Complete Works of Flavius Josephus (repr. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1980), 224.
37 Miller, Daniel, 84.
38 Josephus, “Jewish Antiquities,” in Josephus, 6:476–77.
