Religion and Theology

The book of Daniel is controversial in many respects. First, some scholars questioned the authorship of the book on the ground. The apocalyptic character of the book seems to stretch beyond its historical location. Second, if the book of Daniel is to be considered spurious on the ground that it presents miracles, it would necessarily follow that most of the book in the Bible would also be eliminated as valid inspired writings. The third criticism of the book is concentrated on the perceived reductions and tempering of the book. According to some scholars, the original book of Daniel is Aramaic while the tempered versions are either Hebrew or Babylonian. Other criticisms are directed towards the content of the book itself. For example, according to the book, Daniel describes Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon who besieged the city of Jerusalem (Daniel, 246). If this event occurred before the Battle of Carchemish, then Nebuchadnezzar was not yet king of Babylon.

To most scholars though, the book is a genuine historical and theological document. The book parallels the basic theme in the New Testament  the salvation of man by the grace of God. In its broad revelation, the book overwhelmingly describes a universal, omnipotent, omnipresent, and all-powerful God. This reflects the thematic unity of Old Testament writings. In a sense, the book may also be considered a transition book because it tackles both the first and second coming of Christ. Again, this validates the claim of other Old Testament texts.

In sum, the book of Daniel may be considered as the prophetic revelation of the Old Testament. It is a description of history, of the future, of a God-given promise. The book is both sufficient and complete, as far as history and theology are concerned.