The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 38 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Daniel 9 as part of an apocalyptic book?
Open accessAbstract
Daniel 9 relates how Daniel studies the Hebrew Holy Scriptures and finds the prophecy of Jeremiah that Jerusalem will lie desolate for seventy years. He reacts by devoting himself to prayer and fasting in order to remind God of this promise of restoring his people. The better part of the chapter is dedicated to the contents of his prayer. During the prayer, the man, Gabriel, appears with the intent to give Daniel an understanding of the meaning of the seventy years, which is the measure of the punishment of Israel�s transgression and sin and which will end with eternal righteousness, when the Holy of Holies will be anointed. The Book of Daniel consists of two sections: the tales of the first six chapters and the visions of the last six chapters. This article asked the question: what role does Daniel 9 play as a part of the apocalyptic section of the book? Is Daniel�s prayer and Gabriel�s revelation apocalyptically conditioned? Why did the author or compiler include it in the book and, especially, in the second, apocalyptic section of the book? The conclusion of this article was that Daniel 9 was placed intentionally by the compiler in the latter half of the book because of the revelation about the seventy weeks, which is in line with the last three chapters� indication of the end times and Israel�s elevation to become the ruler of the earth. Several arguments were formulated to support this conclusion.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This article argues that Daniel 9 belongs intentionally in the apocalyptic second half of the Book of Daniel, not among the tales of Daniel 1–6. Its placement is supported by Daniel 9’s view of time, determinism, angelic revelation, pesher-style interpretation, and terminological links with Daniel 10–12.
Key findings
- Daniel 9 is best read as an integral part of the apocalyptic visions because it shares the apocalyptic mode of Daniel 7–8 and 10–12: an otherworldly mediator (Gabriel), revelation of a transcendent reality, deterministic history, symbolic numbers, and concern with theodicy.
- The “seventy weeks” of Daniel 9:24 are interpreted as 490 years, based on reading Jeremiah 25:11–12 in two ways, as *shav’uim* [weeks] or *shiv’im* [seventy]; the three periods are described as 49 years, 434 years, and seven years, with the “half a week” of Daniel 9:27 as three and a half years.
- The article links Daniel 9:24–27 directly to Daniel 10–12 through shared terminology and interpretation, and notes that Daniel 9 is in Hebrew alongside Daniel 7–8 and 10–12, unlike the Aramaic section Daniel 2:4b–6:29.
- The conclusion is that Daniel 9 was placed intentionally by the compiler in the latter half of the book because its revelation about the seventy weeks aligns with the last three chapters’ indication of the end times and Israel’s elevation to rule the earth.
Methods
- Design: a theological-exegetical argument asking whether Daniel 9 belongs to the apocalyptic section of Daniel or to the tales; the article answers through exegesis and genre discussion.
- Data: biblical texts including Daniel 9, Daniel 7–8 and 10–12, Jeremiah 25:11 and 29:10, Leviticus 26:31–35, 2 Chronicles 36:21, plus secondary scholarly literature on apocalypticism and Daniel.
- Analysis: exegetical observations on Daniel 9, comparison with characteristics of apocalyptic literature, discussion of pesher interpretation, and evaluation of historical references such as Antiochus IV, Onias III, and the Maccabean period.
Limitations
- The paper states that the Hebrew text of Daniel 9:26–27 is “uncertain and obscure in many places” and difficult to translate sensibly; it suggests this obscurity may have been deliberate in a politically dangerous time.
- The paper notes that interpretation of the three periods has led to “many views and opinions,” and it cites warnings that the author’s original intention was not to provide calculations of distant events.
- Evident from the text: the article is an exegetical and definitional argument rather than an empirical study, and it acknowledges that “apocalyptic” and “apocalypticism” are “notoriously slippery words,” that genre classification “lies in the eye of the beholder,” and that not all researchers agree on definitions or on whether Daniel 2 belongs to the apocalyptic visions.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
33 Sources not found · 22 Own interpretation · 5 No basis given · 1 No full text of the sources · 1 Not checked yet · 1 Own result
In the paper
“In this way, each year of the Jeremiah prophecy is interpreted as a week of years, as a Sabbath year of seven years, in the sense used by 2 Chronicles 36:21 of the land laying fallow for seventy Sabbaths for the jubilee-years that Israel did not keep.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 2 Chronicles 36:21
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the same reason, the covenant name of Israel's God, YHWH, is used for the first time in this book in the prayer (already in Dn 9:2 -'as revealed by YHWH to the prophet Jeremiah').”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The interpretation is based on reading a single word in Jeremiah 25:11-12 in two different ways, as shav'uim [weeks] or shiv'im [seventy] (Achtemeier 1987:79).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Achtemeier 1987:79
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The reference to angels in the Book of Daniel is also an argument for a later date (Wallace 1979:160).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wallace 1979:160
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The time designation of verse 27, 'half a week', is the three and a half years of the Maccabean revolution that had transpired at the time when the vision is written down, as in Daniel 7:25; 8:14 and 12:7 (Lucas 2002:244-245).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lucas 2002:244-245
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This was most probably done on purpose to obscure the meaning in a politically dangerous time when many Jews were accused of treason (Le Roux 1995:32).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Le Roux 1995:32
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that Daniel 9 is in Hebrew, alongside Daniel 7-8 and 10-12, is an indication that the author was of the opinion that it belongs to the apocalyptic section of the book.”
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Book of Daniel is a compilation in two parts, with Daniel 1-6 as tales and Daniel 7-12 as apocalyptic visions.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The discovery of pesharim literature at Qumran made it clear that Daniel 9 is following pesher procedures to interpret Jeremiah's prophecy to make it relevant for a new day and situation (Dimant 1993:58;Walfish 2004Walfish :1883)).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dimant 1993:58
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Walfish 2004:1883
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Daniel 9's view of time accords with that found in apocalyptic thinking.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The climax of the message is reached when the ruler is reciprocated for his humiliation of God's people by punishment in 164 BCE when Antiochus IV died, far from his home and people.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Antiochus IV died in 164 BCE far from his home and people.
- Rests on an assumption: The ruler in Daniel's message refers to Antiochus IV.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 46
- It may state two separate claims as one. 29
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The terminology of Daniel 9:27 concurs with that of Daniel 10-12 and forms a direct link between the interpretation of the angel to Daniel in chapter 9 and the interpretation of the vision in Daniel 10-12.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The prayer is contained in verses 4-19 and is written in better Hebrew than the rest of the chapter, as well as the other Hebrew parts of the Book of Daniel (Wills 2004(Wills :1659)).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wills 2004:1659
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Only in Daniel 9 is a reference to the Torah of Moses and the exodus to be found, but some researchers see this prayer as a secondary interpolation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Antiochus' persecution led to: a failure of nerve, a despair of man's ability to effect the kingdom of God through his own efforts and a conviction that the situation could only get worse until God himself broke in to terminate the present evil age and inaugurate the ideal.(Larue 1968:3)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Larue 1968:3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Hellholm (1986:26-27) sees the shortcoming of Semeia's definition in that it does not state what the function of apocalypses is and he proposes that the function is 'intended for a group in crisis with the purpose of exhortation and/or consolation by means of divine authority' (Hellholm 1986:27).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hellholm 1986:27
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The new expected to be realised is incomparable with the known because 'apocalyptic eschatology is the mode assumed by the prophetic tradition once it had been transferred to a new and radically altered setting in the postexilic community' (Hanson 1995:10).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hanson 1995:10
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Von Rad (1965:303) is of the opinion that, to a certain degree, there is no connection between prophecy and apocalypticism, except in the fact that both are oriented towards the future.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Von Rad 1965:303
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“even though most researchers agree that the prayer forms a supplement that was not originally part of the narrative (Kirkpatrick 2005:117).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kirkpatrick 2005:117
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In the first two apocalyptic visions of the second part of the Book of Daniel, in Daniel 7 and 8, the history of the time before Antiochus IV Epiphanes' arrival on the scene is described with the purpose of demonstrating that Israel's God is in control of history (Lucas 2002:223).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lucas 2002:223
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A characteristic of apocalypse without an otherworldly journey, such as the visions of Daniel, is that it always contains an overview of the history in one form or another, in the form of ex eventu prophecy of history.For this reason is can also be named historical apocalypse.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is also a characteristic of apocalyptic texts, where obscurity and secrecy play an important role to conceal the radical political message it contains: that the Jewish nation would become the new power ruling over the whole earth.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Apocalypticism is a crisis phenomenon illustrating in what way the values and structures of a minority group has become meaningless and requires to be replaced by a new meaning system that displaces and alienates the minority group further from the majority group.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The many historical inconsistencies found throughout the book continues in Daniel 9 and is one of the important arguments for dating the book much later than the Babylonian exile in the sixth century BCE, where most historical information relating to the second century BCE is accurate (Lucas 2002:213).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lucas 2002:213
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In this way, the author wants to encourage the listeners to be courageous during the religious and political persecution of the Jews as a result of their obstinacy against Antiochus' measures to Hellenise the Jewish population (Alobaidi 2006:559).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Alobaidi 2006:559
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 'seventy weeks' in verse 24 refers to 490 years, the true prediction of Jeremiah according to the revelation given by Gabriel to Daniel.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“History is moulded in the form of prophecy so that it seems to be predetermined with the purpose to give readers and listeners the idea that the description of the narrator can be trusted, also in terms of the prediction of the future (Helberg 1994:93).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Helberg 1994:93
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of Daniel 9 the narrative satisfies all these requirements.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The conclusion of this article was that Daniel 9 was placed intentionally by the compiler in the latter half of the book because of the revelation about the seventy weeks, which is in line with the last three chapters' indication of the end times and Israel's elevation to become the ruler of the earth.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The last three chapters of Daniel indicate the end times and Israel's elevation to become the ruler of the earth.
- Rests on an assumption: The Book of Daniel was compiled by a single compiler who intentionally placed Daniel 9 in the latter half.
In the paper
“The Book of Daniel should be seen as a unique and distinctive piece of literature with a clearly defined witness of its own (Porteous 1979:16)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Porteous 1979:16
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The Hebrew text of verses 26-27 is uncertain and obscure in many places and it is difficult to make a sensible translation (Péter-Contesse & Ellington 1993:255).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Péter-Contesse & Ellington 1993:255
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The compilation of the book in two parts is perhaps not intended to carry that much weight, as the author had the narratives at hand, reinterpreted them in terms of the new situation and added own compositions to further elucidate the crisis caused by Antiochus' menace to Jewish identity.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Book of Daniel is a compilation in two parts, with Daniel 1-6 as tales and Daniel 7-12 as apocalyptic visions.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Antiochus IV's oppression of Jews becomes the catalyst for apocalyptic thought patterns, whilst the roots of the thinking lie in Israel's sacral history.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The historical crisis under Antiochus IV is the setting for Daniel.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“'End times' refers to the end of Jewish exile, interpreted here in terms of the end of Antiochan suppression and persecution.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“This is because of the many quotations from the rest of the Old Testament, whilst the numerous Greek, Aramean and Persian expressions that characterise the rest of the book are also found lacking (Le Roux 1995:109;Porteous 1979:137).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Le Roux 1995:109
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Porteous 1979:137
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The research into apocalypticism produced a useful distinction between a literary genre (apocalypse), a social ideology (apocalypticism) and literary ideas and motifs (apocalyptic eschatology).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Vorster 1986:158
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The distinction does not solve all related problems; thus Martínez (1987:230) shows that the restriction of apocalypticism to a literary genre is too reductionist to give justice to the term's associations.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Martínez 1987:230
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The purpose of the pesher is to bridge the gap between the original prophetic word of encouragement and the present reality, to actualise and contextualise the message for different circumstances (Elman 2004(Elman :1853)).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Elman 2004:1853
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The distinguishing factor between prophecy and apocalypticism lies in the way the vision of the future is integrated with the events of daily life in prophecy, whilst the vision of the future needs a radical break with ordinary history in apocalypticism (Hanson 1976:32).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hanson 1976:32
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The role of angels as interpreters of visions and dreams is exclusive to apocalyptic literature and is one of the important indicators that readers have to interpret a text in apocalyptic terms.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Book of Daniel consists of two sections: the tales of the first six chapters and the visions of the last six chapters.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both subgenres also contain a worthy figure from ancient times as the receiver of the revelation, as part of the pseudonimity of the literature type and part of the narrative relates how the revelation was received.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The penitential prayer with its confession of sins reflects and expresses Deuteronomistic theology, that God consequently punishes sins, but retracts his punishment when his people respond with repentance and confession (DiTomasso 2005:212;Zenger 1998:93).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites DiTomasso 2005:212
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Zenger 1998:93
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The problem is that no concrete evidence exists to endorse this derivation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“If the answer is negative, as is probably the case, they would have read it against the context of similar literature that they knew, which would be the prophecies and dreams found in the rest of the Old Testament, political pseudo-prophecies, interpretation of dreams known from Babylon of the second century and the tales found in the first part of the Book of Daniel (Knibb 2002:19).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Knibb 2002:19
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Daniel strives to establish a pure Yahwism, a struggle that was already expressed by the priest-prophet Elijah (LaCocque 1988:124).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites LaCocque 1988:124
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Koch (1987:240) is, however, correct when he states that wisdom literature does not show any form of critical agreement or parallels with the Book of Daniel and wisdom literature of the second century does not show any interest in eschatological themes (cf.Wisdom of Jesus Ben Sirach for one example of this).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Koch 1987:240
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Daniel paints history in a deterministic sense in the service of his view of the future and human beings are seen as the victim of decisions taken long ago without having any say in it.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the emphasis in the narrative is on the dénouement of the enigma of Jeremiah's time designation in Gabriel's revelations which have all the elements in common with the description of an apocalypse and apocalyptic ideology and therefore the inference is made that Daniel 9 forms an integral part of the visions of the second part of the Book of Daniel.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A relation between wisdom tradition and apocalypticism can be shown, but apocalypticism finds its other parent in prophecy (Baldwin 1978:50).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Baldwin 1978:50
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is characterised by radical pessimism, where all human intervention is liquidated and the expectation is exclusively focused on the utopia with its new symbolic coherence.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The root from which apocalypticism grew was the wisdom tradition (Von Rad 1965:303-305), as can be seen in the title of the alleged author as 'wise man' and not 'prophet', Daniel's predictions flowing not from a prophetic impulse but the interpretation of dreams and the intention of the book not to partake in social and political conflicts but to describe history in a deterministic tonality (Soggi”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Von Rad 1965:303-305
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Soggin 1984:291-292
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These literature types display a clear polemical character as an instrument to propagandise for resistance against the Hellenisation policies of the Greek-Syrian tyrants with its cultural and religious syncretism, but also against the Jewish party that was willing to compromise their faith by supporting Antiochan efforts.”
boostedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There is no expectation of salvation in the present; salvation will be eschatological and in the future (Von Rad 1965:303).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Von Rad 1965:303
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“As already argued in the section about the exegesis of Daniel 9, apocalypticism originated in a radical break with how the present and past is viewed, in order to reinterpret it in the light of a totally new future (Vorster 1986:160).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Vorster 1986:160
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Apocalyptic literature treats good and evil as timeless factors and the only interest lies with the last generation of Israel who will experience the end of times.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Daniel 9 can be described as apocalyptic in essence, a text of revelatory literature with a narrative in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being and disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial, insofar as it involves another, supernatural world.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During the second century, Hellenism stimulated the rise of an apocalyptic movement amongst Jews in the crisis caused by Antiochus' policies that threatened the soul of the religion and identity of the Jewish people.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The historical crisis under Antiochus IV is the setting for Daniel.
In the paper
“The Book of Daniel is supplemented by the tales of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, the Prayer of Azariah, Tobit and the Letter of Jeremiah (Knibb 2002:24).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Knibb 2002:24
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Allegorical codes are utilised to summarise the whole historical process under a few denominators and objectify it conceptually and history is schematised and unified by reducing it to a few primary powers that are determining it.Humans are only in a limited sense agents in the events with limited power of choice.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The irreconcilability between prophecy and apocalypticism he finds in the different views of history, with prophecy finding its roots in Israel's salvation history and the tradition of election, whilst apocalypticism never refers to the patriarchal, exodus, Zion or David traditions.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Von Rad 1965:303
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“It is my tentative judgment that wisdom was wedded to the tradition of apocalyptic eschatology as part of efforts being made by visionary circles to establish their credentials in the third and second century BCE, at a time when prophetic figures were being regarded with a great deal of skepticism and even animosity by many religious leaders (Hanson 1979:9).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hanson 1979:9
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
The last three chapters of Daniel indicate the end times and Israel's elevation to become the ruler of the earth.
“which is in line with the last three chapters' indication of the end times and Israel's elevation to become the ruler of the earth.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Book of Daniel was compiled by a single compiler who intentionally placed Daniel 9 in the latter half.
“Daniel 9 was placed intentionally by the compiler in the latter half of the book”
The paper relies on this without support.
Antiochus IV died in 164 BCE far from his home and people.
“when Antiochus IV died, far from his home and people.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The ruler in Daniel's message refers to Antiochus IV.
“The climax of the message is reached when the ruler is reciprocated for his humiliation of God's people by punishment in 164 BCE when Antiochus IV died”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Book of Daniel is a compilation in two parts, with Daniel 1-6 as tales and Daniel 7-12 as apocalyptic visions.
“The compilation of the book in two parts is perhaps not intended to carry that much weight”
The paper relies on this without support.
The historical crisis under Antiochus IV is the setting for Daniel.
“Antiochus IV's oppression of Jews becomes the catalyst for apocalyptic thought patterns”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Some exegetical observations of Daniel 9
“In the second period, Zeus was worshipped in the temple and the Jewish worship service suppressed.”
§ Some exegetical observations of Daniel 9
“The third period starts with Antiochus IV halting the temple service after the siege of Jerusalem by his general Apollonius in 167 BCE.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Some exegetical observations of Daniel 9
“In seven short and balanced statements in verse 24,”
§ Some exegetical observations of Daniel 9
“God states that the measure of transgression will be filled, sin will be complete, iniquity expiated, eternal righteousness ushered in, prophetic vision ratified and the Holy of Holies anointed.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Some exegetical observations of Daniel 9
“The third period starts with Antiochus IV halting the temple service after the siege of Jerusalem by his general Apollonius in 167 BCE.”
§ Some exegetical observations of Daniel 9
“The first section starts with the dethronement of Onias III as part of Antiochus' Hellenisation policy in order to suppress Jewish rebelliousness, and which pleased many influential Jews.”
Citations
Cites
The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity
Collins, A. Y., & Rowland, C. (1984) · Journal of Biblical Literature · doi:10.2307/3260801 · Cited by 297
The Dawn of Apocalyptic. The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology
Willi-Plein, I., & Hanson, P. D. (1979) · Vetus Testamentum · doi:10.2307/1517322 · Cited by 182 · cited 2×
“…of apocalyptic eschatology as part of efforts being made by visionary circles to establish their credentials in the third and second century BCE, at a time when prophetic figures were being regarded with a great deal of skepticism and even animosity by many religious leaders (Hanson 1979:9).”
BackgroundBright, J. (1959) · Cited by 148
Doctorow, E. L. (1971) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 96
A History of Israel in Old Testament Times
Bright, J., & Herrmann, S. (1976) · Journal of Biblical Literature · doi:10.2307/3265589 · Cited by 93 · cited 6×
“Herodotus (Histories 3.89) relates that Darius established twenty satrapies, a figure exaggerated by Esther 1:1.”
BackgroundInfluentialDaniel: With an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature
Rowland, C., & Collins, J. J. (1987) · Journal of Biblical Literature · doi:10.2307/3260654 · Cited by 85 · cited 1×
“…with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial, insofar as it involves another, supernatural world (Collins 1984:4).”
BackgroundEinleitung in das Alte Testament
(1893) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783111422268 · Cited by 72
A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming
Vannoy, J. R. (1999) · Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society · Cited by 62
The Book of Daniel and the Apocryphal Daniel Literature
DiTommaso, L. (2005) · doi:10.1163/9789047407591 · Cited by 55
Adeyemo, T. (2006) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 49
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Balzer, H.R., 1991, 'Eschatological elements as permanent qualities in the relationship between God and nation in the Minor Prophets', Old Testament Essays 4(3), 408-414.
- Burden, J.J., 1993, 'Daniël', in Die Bybel in praktyk, pp. 1221-1244, CUM Books, Vereeniging.
- Davies, P.R., 1985, Daniel. Old Testament guides, JSOT Press, Sheffield.
- Dimant, D., 1993, 'The Seventy-Weeks chronology (Dan 9, 24-27) in the light of new Qumranic texts', in A.S. van der Woude (ed.), The Book of Daniel in the light of new findings, pp. 187-210, Leuven University Press, Leuven.
- Elman, Y., 2004, 'Classical rabbinic interpretation', in A. Berlin & M.Z. Brettler (eds.), The Jewish study Bible, pp. 1844-1862, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
- Fiorenza, E.S., 1983, 'The phenomenon of early Christian apocalypse', in D. Hellholm (ed.), Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean world and the Near East, Proceedings of the International Colloquim on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, Sweden, August 12- 17, 1979, pp. 181-303, J.C.B. Mohr, Tübingen.
- Grabbe, L.L., 1989, 'The social setting of Jewish apocalypticism', Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha 4, 27-47.
- Hanson, P.D., 1976, 'Apocalypticism', in C.M. Layman (ed.), The interpreter's one- volume commentary on the Bible, Suppl., pp. 27-28, Collins, London. PMid:980517
- Helberg, J.L., 1994, Die boek Daniël. Skrifuitleg vir Bybelstudent en gemeente, N.G. Kerk-Uitgewers, Cape Town. PMid:8029177
- Joubert, W.H., 1979, 'Power and responsibility in the Book of Daniel', DTh dissertation, Department of Theology, University of South Africa.
- LaCocque, A., 1988, Daniel and his time. Studies of personalities of the Old Testament, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia.
- Larue, G., 1968, Old Testament life and literature. Chapter 29: The period of Jewish independence, viewed 01 January 2012, from http://www.infidels.org/library/ modern/gerald_larue/otll/chap29.html
- Le Roux, J., 1993, 'Daniël het al die datum van die wederkoms aangekondig', in F.A. Swanepoel (ed.), Die wederkoms in die jaar 2000!..., pp. 1-9, C.B. Powell- Bybelsentrum, Pretoria.
- Nel, M., 1997, ''n Aktualisering van die apokaliptiese openbarings in die Daniëlboek', MDiv dissertation, Reformed Theological College, University of Pretoria.
- Nel, M., 2000, ''n Teologies-hermeneutiese ondersoek na Daniël 1 en 2', PhD dissertation, Reformed Theological College, University of Pretoria.
- Valeta, D.M., 2008, Lions and ovens and visions. A satirical reading of Daniel 1-6. Hebrew Bible monographs, vol. 12, Sheffield Phoenix, Sheffield.
- Von Rad, G., 1965, Old Testament, vol. 2, The theology of Israel's prophetic tradition, transl. D.M.G. Stalker, SCM, London.
- Vorster, W.S., 1986, 'Tekste met 'n apokaliptiese perspektief', in F. Deist & W. Vorster (eds.), Woorde wat ver kom. Die literatuur van die Ou Testament, part 1, pp. 158- 176, Tafelberg, Cape Town.
- Walfish, B.D., 2004, 'Medieval Jewish interpretation', in A. Berlin & M.Z. Brettler (eds.), The Jewish study Bible, pp. 1876-1899, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
- Wansbrough, H. (ed.), 1985, The New Jerusalem Bible, std edn., Darton, Longman & Todd, London.
- Wills, L.M., 2004, 'Daniel', in A. Berlin & M.Z. Brettler (eds.), The Jewish study Bible, pp. 1640-1665, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Life in the Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel
der Walt, C. V. (2021) · Reformed theology in Africa series · doi:10.4102/aosis.2021.bk281.06 · Cited by 7
Life in the Former Prophets: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings
Firth, D. G., & Fellowship, T. (2021) · Reformed theology in Africa series · doi:10.4102/aosis.2021.bk281.05 · Cited by 7
Life in the Minor Prophets: Hosea – Malachi
Snyman, S. D. (2021) · Reformed theology in Africa series · doi:10.4102/aosis.2021.bk281.07 · Cited by 6
Biblical Theology of Life in the Old Testament
Boshoff, W., Branch, R. G., Firth, D. G., et al. (2021) · Reformed theology in Africa series · doi:10.4102/aosis.2021.bk281 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Nel, M.
- Affiliations
- North-West University (ZA)
- Corresponding author
- Nel, Marius
- ORCID
- Nel, Marius
- Venue
- Verbum et Ecclesia
- Publisher
- AOSIS
- Published
- 2013-02-28
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1609-9982 (ISSN-L)
- 2074-7705
- OpenAlex
- W2055662437
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2021: 4
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Verbum et Ecclesia (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Boloka Institutional Repository (North-west University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Religion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Reformation and Early Modern Christianity
- Keywords
- Daniel 9, apocalyptic literature, Book of Daniel, Jeremiah, Gabriel, end times, Holy of Holies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-23, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-23 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
