|
'''[[User talk:Nique1287/Archive 1|Archive 1]]''': Join date - February 11, 2007
{{Books of the Old Testament}}
'''[[User talk:Nique1287/Archive 2|Archive 2]]''': February 17, 2007 - April 27, 2007
{{Books of Ketuvim}}
:''This article is about the Biblical book. For the novel by [[E. L. Doctorow]], see [[The Book of Daniel (novel)]]. For the [[NBC]] show, see [[The Book of Daniel (television)]].''
== Death Note characters ==
The '''Book of Daniel''', written in [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]] and [[Aramaic language|Aramaic]], is a book in both the Hebrew Bible ([[Tanakh]]) and the Christian [[Old Testament]]. The book is set during the [[Babylonian Captivity]], a period when Jews were deported and exiled to [[Babylon]]. The book revolves around the figure of [[Daniel]], an Israelite who becomes an advisor to [[Nebuchadrezzar II|Nebuchadnezzar]], the ruler of Babylon from [[605 BC]] - [[562 BC]].
I did not check the history page and did not see that kana in every name is not needed. Sorry about that! :D I was trying to improve the overall article. I still feel that the kana is necessary. Thanks for your comments in the edit summary. Please accept my apologies for any edits that I made. All the best for the rest of May. [[User:Sjones23|Sjones23]] 20:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
The book has two distinct parts: a series of narratives and four apocalyptic visions. Three of the narratives involve Daniel, who has the gift of prophecy, interpreting the meaning of dreams and divine omens. Two other narratives feature Israelites who have been condemned for their piety being miraculously saved from execution. In the second part of the book, the author reveals and partially interprets a set of visions which are described in the [[Grammatical person|first person]].
I also apologize for any rudeness or sarcasm. I haven't destroyed anything nor have I done anything wrong. [[User:Sjones23|Sjones23]] 20:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
The dating and authorship of Daniel has been a matter of great debate. The traditional view holds that the work was written by a prophet named Daniel who lived during the sixth century BC. Modern views generally regard the book as having been written much later, during the mid second century BC. According to these, the author gave the book the appearance of having been written some 400 years earlier in order to establish credibility by including correct "predictions" of numerous historical events which had occurred during the fifth to second centuries BC. A third view argues that while parts of Daniel were written during the second century BC, other parts may have been written by other authors at an earlier date.
Thanks for your comments, both on the article, David Hoope and its talk page. Once again, please accept my apologies. As you said, David Hoope is a romanized English name (featured in all anime and manga, but the kana doesn't exist, except for the Japanese interwiki website and other Japanese sources). Thanks again for all of your comments and everything you have done for me. :D All the best for the upcoming summer [[User:Sjones23|Sjones23]] 00:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
==Narratives in Daniel==
The first part, the first six chapters, comprises a series of lightly connected court tales, connected instructive narratives, or miracle tales. The first story is in Hebrew; then Aramaic is used from ch. 2:4, beginning with the speech of the "[[Chaldea]]ns" through chapter seven. Hebrew is then used from chapter eight through chapter twelve. Three sections are preserved only in the [[Septuagint]], and are considered [[apocrypha]]l by Protestant Christians and Jews, and [[deuterocanonical books|deuterocanonical]] by Catholic and Orthodox Christians.
== A Barnstar for you! ==
#Daniel refuses to eat meat at court
#Nebuchadnezzar dreams of an [[Nebuchadnezzar's statue vision in Daniel 2|idol of four metals]] with feet of mixed iron and clay, which Daniel interprets as four successive empires (compare [[Fifth Monarchy Men|Fifth Monarchy]])
#The story of the [[fiery furnace]], in which Ananias (Hananiah/Shadrach), Azariah (Abednego), and Mishael (Meshach) refuse to bow to a golden idol and are thrown into a furnace; God preserves them from the flames
#Nebuchadnezzar tells of his dreams of a tall tree, and his losing and regaining his mind
#[[Belshazzar|Belshazzar's Feast]], where Daniel interprets the writing ''[[The writing on the wall|mene mene tekel upharsin]]''
#Daniel in the lions' den
#[[Susanna (Book of Daniel)|Susanna]] and the elders (apocryphal to Jewish and Protestant canons)
#[[Bel and the Dragon]] (apocryphal to Jewish and Protestant canons)
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
[[Protestant]] and [[Judaism|Jewish]] editions omit the sections that do not exist in the [[Masoretic text]]: in addition to the two chapters containing accounts of Daniel and Susanna and of Bel and the Dragon, a lengthy passage inserted into the middle of Daniel 3; this addition contains the prayer of Azariah while the three youths were in the fiery furnace, a brief account of the angel who met them in the furnace, and the hymn of praise they sang when they realized they were delivered. [[The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children]] are retained in the [[Septuagint]] and in the [[Eastern Orthodoxy|Eastern Orthodox]], [[Oriental Orthodox]], and [[Catholic]] [[Biblical canon|canons]]; the "Song of the Three Holy Youths" is part of the [[Matins]] service in Orthodoxy, and of [[Lauds]] on Sundays and feast days in Catholicism.
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Barnstar-rotating.gif|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Tireless Contributor Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I know I thanked you way back for your efforts on [[Death Note]], but I didn't give you a barnstar for all the work you've put in with that one, and some other pages that I've seen you edit. So I present to you the Tireless Contributor Barnstar!. [[User:Juhachi|'''<font color="0066cc">十</font>''']][[User talk:Juhachi|'''<font color="ff66cc">八</font>''']] 23:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
|}
== Commas ==
The narratives are set in the period of the [[Babylonian captivity]], first at the court of [[Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon|Nebuchadnezzar]] and later at the court of his successors [[Belshazzar]] and a 'King Darius' of unclear identity (see 'Historical Accuracy' and 'Date' below). Daniel is praised in ''Easton's Bible Dictionary'', 1897, as "the historian of the Captivity, the writer who alone furnishes any series of events for that dark and dismal period during which the harp of Israel hung on the trees that grew by the Euphrates. His narrative may be said in general to intervene between Kings and [[Books of Chronicles|Chronicles]] on the one hand and [[Ezra]] on the other, or (more strictly) to fill out the sketch which the author of the Chronicles gives in a single verse in his last chapter: 'And them that had escaped from the sword carried he (i.e., Nebuchadnezzar) away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia' (2 Chr. 36:20)."
Ah, I see where the confusion lies. In American English (I gather you are from Canada), commas always go inside the quotation marks. How exactly are these disputes setled on Wikipedia? Obviously there are folks from America, Canada, the UK, ect. Is there a concensus on which type of English is to be used?
Daniel appears as an interpreter of dreams and visions in these narratives, though not as a prophet.
And I'm working on posting my argument against Death Note 13's names. I'm looking for certain images to post since I don't have a scanner of my own.
==Apocalyptic visions in ''Daniel''==
The second part, the remaining six chapters, are visionary, an early example of [[apocalyptic literature]], in which the author, now speaking in the first person, reveals a vision entrusted to him alone. The historical setting of the first chapters does not appear, except in briefest form, consisting of regnal dates. This section too consists of text from two languages, part (to 7:28) written in Aramaic, the rest (chapters 8-12) in Hebrew. The apocalyptic part of ''Daniel'' consists of three visions and one lengthened prophetic communication, mainly having to do with the destiny of Israel:
Good day, sir!
# The vision in the first year of [[Belshazzar]] the king of [[Babylon]] (7:1) concerning four great beasts (7:3) representing four future kings (7:17) or kingdoms (7:23), the fourth of which devours the whole earth, treading it down and crushing it (7:23); this fourth kingdom produces ten kings, and then a special, eleventh person arises out of the fourth kingdom that subdues three of the ten kings (7:24), speaks against the Most High and the saints of the Most High, and intends to change the times and the law (7:25); after a time and times and half a time (three and a half years), this person is judged and his dominion is taken away (7:26); then, the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven are given to the people of the saints of the Most High (7:27)
# The vision in the third year of Belshazzar concerning a [[Domestic sheep|ram]] and a male [[goat]] (8:1-27); Daniel interprets the goat as the "kingdom of Yawan" that is, the Hellenistic kingdom (8:21)
# The vision in first year of [[Darius I|Darius]] the son of [[Xerxes I of Persia|Ahasuerus]] (9:1) concerning [[Prophecy of Seventy Weeks|seventy weeks]], or seventy "sevens", apportioned for the [[History of ancient Israel and Judah|history of the Israelites]] and of [[Jerusalem]] (9:24)
# A lengthy vision in the third year of [[Cyrus the Great|Cyrus]] king of [[History of Persia|Persia]] (10:1 - 12:13)
[[User:Chibi Gohan|Chibi Gohan]] 02:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
The prophetic and [[eschatology|eschatological]] visions of Daniel, with those of Ezekiel and Isaiah, are the scriptural inspiration for much of the apocalyptic ideology and symbolism of the [[Qumran]] community's [[Dead Sea scrolls]] and the early literature of Christianity. "Daniel's clear association with the Maccabean Uprising in Palestine was undoubtedly one of the reasons why the Rabbis, following the uprisings against Rome, downgraded it from its position among the 'Prophets'" (Eisenman 1997, p 19f).
In Daniel are the first references to a "kingdom of God", and the most overt reference to the resurrection of the dead in the Tanakh.
About Mikami's Deletion: How come you're sourcing the English manga now? I thought the Japanese version was the precedent.
==Historical accuracy==
Certain statements in Daniel are considered to be in conflict with other historical accounts. This is one reason why some modern historians of Babylonia or [[Achaemenid Dynasty|Achaemenid Persia]] do not adduce the narratives of ''Daniel'' as source materials. Other reasons for reservations are given in ''Dating'' below.
Volume 10, in the Japanese version, is titled "Deletion." (The inside cover without the dust jacket says, in plain English, "Volume 10: Deletion.").
The four objections given below represent, in order of significance, the major instances of error historians generally find in Daniel.
Inside the book, it says the book is titled "sakujo" in Japanese.
===Identity of "Darius the Mede"===
Mikami chants "sakujo."
[[Darius the Mede]] is a figure unknown by that name outside the Book of Daniel. Most secular historians view his presence in the book as simply a mistake of a much later author, who has perhaps inadvertently placed the Persian King [[Darius I]] at an earlier date than he actually reigned.
Therefore, "sakujo"="deletion."
Among writers trying to maintain an early date for the Book of Daniel, there are three main interpretations of the identity of Darius the Mede. The first, proposed by H.H. Rowley in ''Darius the Mede and the Four World Empires in the Book of Daniel'', concludes that Darius is just another name for [[Cyrus the Great]], who captured Babylon on October 15th, 539 BC Another view, promoted by John Whitcomb (though first proposed by Babelon in 1883) in his 1959 book, ''Darius the Mede'' says that Darius is another name for the historical figure of [[Gubaru]] (sometimes spelled as Ugbaru). This view is popular with more conservative segments of Christianity. The third view sees Darius as another name for [[Astyages]], the last Mede king who was ultimately deposed by Cyrus.
Not to mention the fact that "sakujo" isn't a verb, but a noun (therefore it can't mean "delete.").
'''"Darius the Mede" as Cyrus the Great:''' Unlike Gubaru or Astyages, Cyrus the Great of Persia was the king who took over the Babylonian Empire. Cyrus was also married to a Mede, and himself had Mede blood. An analysis of variant early texts, particularly the Septuagint, reveals that the names "Darius" (DRYWS in Hebrew) and "Cyrus" (KRWS) are reversed in 11:1, and may have been miscopied elsewhere{{fact}}. The appellation "Mede" (Heb. MADAI) may have been used as an ethnic term to apply to Persians as well{{fact}}, who were of the same race.
[[User:Chibi Gohan|Chibi Gohan]] 18:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
'''"Darius the Mede" as Gubaru/Ugbaru:''' Gubaru is the historical general known to have actually led the army that captured Babylon (see Pierre Briant below), according to Nabonidus. It is possible that Cyrus would have rewarded Gubaru with a regional governorship for capturing the capital of the Babylonian Empire and virtually ending the war. Furthermore, the Bible claims{{fact}} that Darius ruled during the reign of Cyrus and was "made king" over the Chaldeans.
Hm, I suppose in that respect "delete" makes more sense. I won't fuss about it anymore. : )
'''"Darius the Mede" as Astyages:''' The opening line of "Bel and the Dragon" references Astyages, who was indeed the last king of the Medes before Cyrus; but a nearly identical verse is added in the Greek after the end of Dan. 6, only reading "Darius" in place of "Astyages". Astyages is the only one of the three known to be both a Mede and a king.
[[User:Chibi Gohan|Chibi Gohan]] 18:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
On the difficulty of ascertaining the correct view, Rowley admits: "[T]he references to Darius the Mede in the book of Daniel have long been recognized as providing the most serious historical problems in the book." Rowley refers to the personage whom Daniel describes as taking control of Babylon after Belshazzar is deposed. Daniel describes this personage as ''Darius the Mede,'' who rules over Babylon in chapters 6 and 9. Daniel reports that Darius was 'about 62 years old' when he was 'made king over Babylon'
== [[:Image:Leo.gif]] ==
Secular historians have criticized this account for three reasons. First, no secular history speaks of any 'Darius the Mede,' and second, the Persians at that point in history had control over the [[Medes]]. Third, the contemporary history given from cuneiform documents of the period, such as the [[Cyrus Cylinder]] and the [[Babylonian Chronicle]], leaves no room for any Mede occupation of Babylon before the Persians under Cyrus conquered it. It has been suggested[http://www.2think.org/hundredsheep/bible/comment/daniel.shtml#7-3] that the author's apparent confusion on this issue could be due to his reliance on Jeremiah (see Daniel 9:2): and Jeremiah prophesied (in Jeremiah 51:11), at the height of the Median empire's power, that Babylon would fall to the Medes. An author writing centuries later, and under the impression that Jeremiah was a true prophet, might simply assume that a Mede ''must'' have taken Babylon.
Hello Nique1287, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as [[Wikipedia:Fair use|fair use]]. The image ([[:Image:Leo.gif]]) was found at the following ___location: [[User:Nique1287]]. This image or media will be removed per [[WP:NONFREE|statement number 9 of our non-free content policy]]. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the [[Creative Commons]] or [[GFDL]] license or released to the [[public ___domain]]. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. [[User:Gnome (Bot)]][[User talk:Gnome (Bot)|-talk]] 13:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
== Barnes & Noble early manga releases ==
Christian historians counter by claiming that the kingdom of 'Darius' is mentioned as only containing the 'Chaldeans' - the area around the city of Babylon. This would then make Darius a vassal king under the reign of Cyrus; something not uncommon for the Persians. Further, Astyages the Mede had been Cyrus' grandfather, and even though the Persians had absorbed the Mede empire, many Medes were still in positions of power, such as satraps, governors, and generals, in the Persian empire.
Dunno why, but I have noticed that B&N likes to ignore the street date on quite a few manga, at least in some stores. I bring this up because I remember a quick thing a month or so back on the [[Bleach (Manga)|Bleach]] page where I said a volume was out because it was at B&N and you reverted me. Looks like it happened again recently on that page, although I'm not sure if the person who added it got it from B&N. I have already seen Bleach 19 on sale there. Maybe you should add something to the talk page or a hidden inline comment saying that the number of volumes out shouldn't change until the official street date or something... --[[User:GhostStalker|<font color="gold">'''Ghost'''</font><font color="blue">'''Stalker'''</font>]]<small>([[User talk:GhostStalker|Got a present for ya!]] | [[Special:Contributions/GhostStalker|Mission Log]])</small> 16:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
===Belshazzar===
'''Akk. bêl-šar-usur'''. For many years Belshazzar was an enigma for historians. The book of Daniel states that he was “king” (Ar. מֶלֶך) the night that Babylon fell (chap. 5) and says that his “father” (Ar. אַב) was Nebuchadnezzar (5:2, 11, 13, 18). Prior to 1854, archeologists and historians knew nothing of Belshazzar outside the book of Daniel. Indeed, while both Xenophon (Cyropaedia, 7.5.28-30) and Herodotus (The Histories, 1.191) recount the fall of Babylon to Cyrus the Great, neither gives the name of the king of Babylon. Further, both Berossus’ and Ptolemy’s king lists have [[Nabonidus]] (Akk. Nabû-nā'id) as the last king of Babylon with no mention of Belshazzar. This led Ferdinand Hitzig to claim in 1850 that Belshazzar was a "figment of the Jewish writer's imagination."
== Gackt article ==
From that time new evidence from Babylon has verified the existence of Belshazzar as well as his co-regency during the absence of his father, Nabonidus, in Temâ. For example, In the Nabonidus Cylinder, Nabonidus petitions the god Sin as follows: “And as for Belshazzar my firstborn son, my own child, let the fear of your great divinity be in his heart, and may he commit no sin; may he enjoy happiness in life". In addition, The Verse Account of Nabonidus (British Museum tablet 38299) states, “[Nabonidus] entrusted the army (?) to his oldest son, his first born, the troops in the country he ordered under his command. He let everything go, ''entrusted the kingship'' to him, and, himself, he started out for a long journey. The military forces of Akkad marching with him, he turned to Temâ deep in the west” (Col. II, lines 18 - 29. 18). In line with the statement that Nabonidus "entrusted the kingship" to Belshazzar in his absence, there is evidence that Belshazzar's name was used with his father's in oath formulas, that he was able to pass edicts, lease farmlands, and receive the "royal privilege" to eat the food offered to the gods.
I'm sorry, but the article's previous approach towards the artist's year of birth was in no way compliant with [[WP:V]], [[WP:RS]] and most importantly, [[WP:BLP]]. No matter what "consensus" has previously been reached on the talk page, in order for the previous status quo to be acceptable with regard to Wikipedia policy, one would have to provide [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] for the following assertions:
The available information concerning Belshazzar's co-regency goes silent after Nabonidus' fourteenth year. According to the Nabonidus Chronicle, Nabonidus was back from Temâ by his seventeenth year and celebrated the New Year’s Festival (Akk. ''Akitu''). Whether Belshazzar continued his co-regency with his father after his return or not cannot be demonstrated from the available documents. Some have claimed that the non-observance of the ''Akitu'' during Nabonidus' absence demonstrates that Belshazzar should not be called "king" since it shows that he could not officiate over the festival. However, The Verse Account of Nabonidus says, "Nabonidus said: 'I shall build a temple for him (the Moon god Sin)...till I have achieved this, till I have obtained what is my desire, I shall omit all festivals, I shall order even the New Year's festival to cease!'" Thus, the halting of the ''Akitu'' seems to have been done by the king's command rather an inability on the part of Belshazzar. Some have also stated that he should not be called "king" as he is never designated as such in the available documents. While it is true that none of the documents explicitly call Belshazzar "king," the preceding paragraph shows that the documents do show Belshazzar acting in the capacity of king. Further, the Aramaic term מלך (''mlk'', king) could be used to translate titles of lesser high ranking officials as can be seen in the case of a 9th century BC Akkadian/Aramaic bilinguagal inscription found at Tell Fekheriyeh in 1979 which reads "king" for the Akkadian "governor".
* The artist has made a thorough effort to keep his year of birth a secret. Just not mentioning it on his website hardly qualifies as thorough.
No known extrabiblical text indicates a blood relation between Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar. Historians have objected to this aspect of the record in Daniel. There were several rulers over Babylon between the death of Nebuchadnezzar and the rulership of Nabonidus/Belshazzar. Many scholars have attributed the lack of mention of these rulers as indicating the author mistakenly thought that the two rulerships were consecutive. As the editors of the ''Jewish Encyclopedia'' (1901-1906) put it, indicating the belief that Daniel was written much later (see 'Date'), "during the long period of oral tradition the unimportant kings of Babylon might easily have been forgotten, and the last king, who was vanquished by Cyrus, would have been taken as the successor of the well-known Nebuchadnezzar." Based on this reasoning, historians have considered the reference to Belshazzar's relationship to Nebuchadnezzar simply an error based on the above misconception.
* There are indeed conflicting sources for the year of birth (IMDB, while nice to have for some information, remains a user edited site) and hence a genuine controversy on the matter exists.
* The artist ever made this outlandish Norwegian vampire statement and on more than one occasion, lest it cannot be dismissed as an out-of-context or offhand joke.
Until these sources are provided, the year 1973 is backed by a perfectly acceptable source and on top of that, the article looks a lot less like someone just could not resist the urge to emphasize on just how very mysterious and special the artist at hand really really is. Have a nice day - [[User:Cyrus XIII|Cyrus XIII]] 23:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
===Madness of Nebuchadnezzar===
A third significant objection by historians is the account of the insanity suffered by Nebuchadnezzar found in the fourth chapter of Daniel. In the [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] a fragment known as ''The Prayer of Nabonidus'' (4QPrNab) discusses a disease suffered by Nabonidus, and it is thought ([http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/babylon04.html 1]) that the insanity of Nebuchadnezzar discussed by Daniel is actually evidence that an oral tradition of one strange disease was actually transmogrified through retelling into a tale mistakenly recorded by Daniel.
== FFVII spoiler tag ==
===Date of Nebuchadnezzar's first siege of Jerusalem===
The Book of Daniel begins by stating:
Maybe it would be better if you wait a little while until I finished typing the talk section before reverting. It happens that I am not a strong supporter and thus did nothing like reverting the page immediately, if it happens to be a strong supporter, you might face an edit war, and you were on the 3rd revert(actually, 5th on the overall reverting), thus violating the 3RR rule. It would be more polite to wait for the discussion, if the editor has says so on the comment. Anyhow, just telling you about this, I don't care if spoiler tags are there or not. [[User:Mythsearcher|MythSearcher]]<sup>[[User talk:Mythsearcher|talk]]</sup> 15:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
:In the third year of the reign of Jehoi'akim king of Judah came Nebuchadnez'zar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. And the Lord gave Jehoi'akim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god. ([[King James Version]])
:The revert I made and the talk page entry is only 5 minutes time lag, it is also due to a server too busy database lock that delayed it for another 2 minutes. Yes, you are right, I can make the talk entry first, that would make more sense, I agree with you, but still, if something like this happens, at least wait for 5~10 minutes before reverting, that makes a lot of difference. At least it minimize the number of edits and talks like this. [[User:Mythsearcher|MythSearcher]]<sup>[[User talk:Mythsearcher|talk]]</sup> 17:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
==Orphaned non-free image (Image:NearDNmanga.jpg)==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:NearDNmanga.jpg]]'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a [[WP:FU|claim of fair use]]. However, the image is currently [[Wikipedia:Orphan|orphaned]], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. [[WP:BOLD|You may add it back]] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see [[Wikipedia:Non-free content#Policy|our policy for non-free media]]).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "[[Special:Contributions/{{PAGENAME}}|my contributions]]" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on [[wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Orphaned --> [[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] 07:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
This appears to be a description of the first siege of Jerusalem in [[597 BC]], which occurred in the twelfth year of Jehoiakim and into the reign of his son Jehoiachin. (see [[Second Book of Kings|2 Kings]] 24 and 2 Chronicles 36). The third year of Jehoiakim (606 BC), saw Nebuchadrezzar not yet King of Babylon, and the Egyptians still dominant in the region. Advocates of an early date of Daniel generally explain this by positing an additional, otherwise unmentioned, siege of Jerusalem in [[605 BC]], shortly after the [[Battle of Carchemish]].
==Orphaned non-free image (Image:MelloDNmanga.jpg)==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:MelloDNmanga.jpg]]'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a [[WP:FU|claim of fair use]]. However, the image is currently [[Wikipedia:Orphan|orphaned]], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. [[WP:BOLD|You may add it back]] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see [[Wikipedia:Non-free content#Policy|our policy for non-free media]]).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "[[Special:Contributions/{{PAGENAME}}|my contributions]]" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on [[wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Orphaned --> [[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] 08:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
==Dating==
Traditionally, the book of Daniel was believed to have been written by its namesake during and shortly after the [[Babylonian captivity]] in the sixth century BC. In this point of view, the book is a work of divinely-inspired prophecy which correctly predicts book's content and world events for at least 400 years after its original composition. According to the synoptic Gospels, [[Jesus]] indicated that some of the propecies of Daniel would be fulfilled in the [[Last days]] right before the [[Resurrection of the dead]] and [[Judgement day]], as the text of Daniel itself indicates.
== Redemption (song) ==
While most conservative Christian and Orthodox Jewish scholars still assert this as a realistic date, the consensus of modern scholars is that [[archaeology]] and [[textual analysis]] argue for a considerably later date. In this view, some (if not all) of the book was written around 165 BC. In this view, the second-century author gave the book the appearance of having been written some 400 years earlier in order to establish credibility by including correct "predictions" of numerous historical events which had occurred during the fifth to second centuries BC.
You might be interested in a discussion on [[:Talk:Redemption (song)]], since we previously discussed the artist in question (glad we reached a compromise). - [[User:Cyrus XIII|Cyrus XIII]] 13:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
A third alternative is that the book is a collection of stories dating from different times throughout the Hellenistic period (with some of the material possibly going back to the latest Persian period), with the visions in chapters 7-12 having been added during the mid-second century BC.
== [[List of Death Note manga]] ==
John Collins finds it impossible for the "court tales" portion of Daniel to have been written in second Century BC due to textual analysis. In his [[1992]] ''Anchor Bible Dictionary'' entry for the Book of Daniel, he states "it is clear that the court-tales in chapters 1-6 were 'not written in Maccabean times'. It is not even possible to isolate a single verse which betrays an editorial insertion from that period." Some scholars disagree with this, and still date this section to the Maccabean revolt along with the vision chapters.
I noticed you seem be in a bit of an edit war, here. Please do bear in mind that we have talk pages for a reason. If other editors are ignoring discussion, they can be sorted out via [[WP:3RR|the three revert rule]] or the [[WP:AN|admin noticeboard]] (or [[WP:AN/I|incidents board]]). [[WP:TALK]] is a great link to show newcomers, if they're not aware of how to make good use of talk pages -- nine times in ten, we can't start [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] unless people stop edit warring and start talking. – <span style="font-family: Garamond">[[User:Luna Santin|<font color="#1E90FF">'''Luna Santin'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Luna Santin|talk]])</span> 23:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
===Content===
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Death_Note_manga&diff=140994035&oldid=140993652 One], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Death_Note_manga&diff=141017291&oldid=141009176 two], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Death_Note_manga&diff=141027387&oldid=141024365 three], and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Death_Note_manga&diff=141087177&oldid=141086569 four] reverts inside 24 hours. I'm afraid edit warring is taken quite seriously. I've blocked you from editing for 24 hours; you can appeal with the {{tl|unblock}} template. – <span style="font-family: Garamond">[[User:Luna Santin|<font color="#1E90FF">'''Luna Santin'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Luna Santin|talk]])</span> 17:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
====Antiochus IV Epiphanes====
Most interpreters find that references in the ''Book of Daniel'' reflect the persecutions of Israel by [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] (175–[[164 BC]]), and consequently date its composition to that period. In particular, the vision in Chapter 11, which focuses on a series of wars between the "King of the North" and the "King of the South," is generally interpreted as a discussion of Near Eastern history from the time of [[Alexander the Great]] down the era of Antiochus IV, with the "Kings of the North" being the Seleucid kings and the "Kings of the South" being the Ptolemaic rulers of Egypt. This conclusion was first drawn by the philosopher [[Porphyry of Tyros]], a third century [[paganism|pagan]] [[Neoplatonism|Neoplatonist]] whose fifteen-volume work ''Against the Christians'' is only known to us through [[Jerome]]'s reply. Jerome accepted much (but not all) of Porphyry's interpretation of the vision, but held to the traditional view of Daniel's date and held that the similarities to actual history were due to Daniel's being a true prophet, rather than to a late date for the book. Porphyry, then, was the only known critic to doubt Daniel's early date until the seventeenth century. Many historians hold that the book was written to influence Jews living under Antiochus' persecution. They believe that the events described in the visions match well the events during the [[Maccabean]] era while the book errs on major points of Babylonian history.
::No, I won't contest it. I should have taken it to somewhere else, the talk page or reported the user's actions or something instead of just reverting constantly, though I did try to discuss it on one of the IP talk pages for the anon in question only to have my comment [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A141.150.118.248&diff=139076699&oldid=139013564 vandalised] by that anon, but I do realize I was still in the wrong with what I did, as much as he was, and I need a wikibreak anyway. I shouldn't have let it get to me so much. Thanks, though. :) [[User:Nique1287|Nique]] <small>[[User_talk:Nique1287|talk]]</small> 17:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
====Four Kingdoms====
Most biblical scholars assume that the four kingdoms beginning with Nebuchadnezzar, mentioned in the "[[Nebuchadnezzar's statue vision in Daniel 2|statue vision]]" of chapter 2, are identical to the four "end-time" kingdoms of the vision in chapter 7, and usually consider them to represent (1) Babylonia, (2) Media, (3) Persia, and (4) Greece (Collins). Some conservative Christians identify them as (1) Babylonia, (2) "Medo-Persia," (3) Greece, and (4) Rome (e.g. Young); others (e.g. Stuart, Lagrange) have advocated the following schema: (1) the Neo-Babylonian, (2) the Medo-Persian, (3) the Greek empire of Alexander, and (4) the rival [[Diadochi]], viz. Egypt and Syria.
==AfD nomination of [[Plotline of Neon Genesis Evangelion]]==
===Language===
I've nominated [[Plotline of Neon Genesis Evangelion]], an article you created, for [[WP:AfD|deletion]]. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that [[Plotline of Neon Genesis Evangelion]] satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]" and the [[WP:DP|Wikipedia deletion policy]]). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plotline of Neon Genesis Evangelion{{{order|}}}]] and please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of [[Plotline of Neon Genesis Evangelion]] during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDWarning --> [[User:Jay32183|Jay32183]] 20:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
The final major area of debate regarding the dating of Daniel regards the language used. The two reference points used for dating the Aramaic are the Samaria correspondence (4th century BC) and the [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] (2nd century BC-1st century AD). According to John Collins in his 1993 commentary, ''Daniel, Hermennia Commentary'', the Aramaic in Daniel is almost universally held by scholars to be of a later form than that used in the Samaria correspondence, but is regarded by many as slightly earlier than the form used in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Consequently the Aramaic tales in chapters 2-6 are held by some to have been written earlier in the Hellenistic period than the rest of the book, with the vision in chapter 7 being the only Aramaic portion dating to the time of Antiochus. The Hebrew in the book is, for all intents and purposes, identical to that found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, suggesting a second century BC date for the Hebrew portions of the book (chapters 1 and 8-12). [http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/2001/3/013mail.html 2]
====LoanLight's words==Death==
''We've long since decided that Matsuda didn't kill him'' - Why didn't you say so earlier then?
There are three Greek words used within the text which have long been considered evidence for a late dating of Daniel. All three Greek words are used for musical instruments. The existence of the Greek word 'symphonia' was cited by Rowlings as having its earliest use in second century BC, but modern scholarship now knows its use much earlier, both in the sense of a specific instrument and as a term referring to a group of instruments playing in unison. Pythagoras used the term to denote an instrument in sixth century BC, while its use to refer to a group performing together is found in the sixth century BC 'Hymni Homerica, ad Mercurium 51' Despite their early use in Greek however, there is no evidence for the use of these instruments in Mesopotamia in the Neo-Babylonian period where they are said to be used in Daniel, and their mention in the book is generally taken as an anachronism.
Can I get a link to the discussion, I couldn't find a suitable heading in the archives of [[Talk:List of characters in Death Note]] either. Thanks --[[User:EZio|eZio]] 19:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
:As far as I understand, Shinigami(Gods of Death) as their name suggests are beings who take your life (soul) after your lifespan is over and then do whatever they are supposed to do with it. They don't ''decide'' when one dies. This is from mythology, not Death Note. So in essence even though a person might be dying say by falling off a cliff or by a gunshot wound, it is the God of Death who actually kills him by taking the soul. This is why I am confused about the whole "Who Killed Light Issue". Now coming to Death Note, I've seen the last episode and the reason of death can be speculative to say the least. No one can prove that the shots fired by Matsuda were fatal or not. I mean how can one? It's an anime. And neither does the anime show Ryuk's note with Light written on it, they show him writing something, but nothing explicit like showing the name actually written. Now this might sound cheesy, but so does the claim of Matsuda not firing at him in critical areas. I'm not trying to prove that Matsuda killed him. I'm merely suggesting it as a possiblity. Don't you think there is the slightest possiblity that Matsuda's shot were fatal, and since Light's lifespan was coming to and end, Ryuk was doing his part of bieng a Shinigami and hence writing his name in his note? -[[User:EZio|eZio]] 21:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
There are also nineteen Persian loan-words in the book, most of them having to do with governmental positions.
== Apology for edit war ==
====Use of the word 'Chaldeans'====
The book of Daniel uses the term "[[Chaldea]]n" to refer both to a Babylonian ethnic group and to astrologers in general. According to Montgomery and Hammer, Daniel's use of the word 'Chaldean' to refer to astrologers in general is an anachronism, as during the Neo-Babylonian and early Persian periods when Daniel is said to have lived it referred only to an ethnicity. Compare the later [[Chaldean Oracles]].
Just wanted to apologize for causing you any mental pain over the edit war, should've just went to the discussion page from the beginning. I understand what you mean with the official release dates being important, just that we think a little different on what was important. Again, just wanted to say sorry for being rude about it, I let my temper get to me, and it's sort of sad it was over such a silly thing. I still think when I edited my Talk Page that was hilarious. On the same topic, I was being very immature, and thus I apologize again. We both looked kinda stupid with what we did, so, how about next time we work together to make wikipedia a better place instead of another edit war, deal?. [[User:Kooper113|Kooper113]] 20:40, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
==Unity of Daniel==
The scholarship concerning the question of unity in Daniel differs greatly from the scholarship concerning the dating. Whereas almost all scholars conclude a second century dating of the book in its final form, scholarship varies greatly regarding the unity of Daniel. Many scholars, finding portions of the book dealing with themes they do not believe fit with the time of Antiochus, conclude separate authors for different portions of the book. Included in this group are Barton, L. Berthold, Collins, and H. L. Ginsberg. Some historians who support that the book was a unified whole include J.A. Montgomery, S.R. Driver, R. H. Pfeiffer, and H.H. Rowley in the latter's aptly titled treatise ''The Unity of the Book of Daniel.''
Those who hold to a unified Daniel claim that their opponents fail to find any consensus in their various theories of where divisions exist. Montgomery is particularly harsh to his colleagues, stating that the proliferation of theories without agreement showed a "bankruptcy of criticism." They also charge that composite theories fail to account for the consistent thematic portrayal of Daniel's life throughout the book of Daniel.
==Christian uses of ''Daniel''==
As mentioned above, the prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Children from the [[deuterocanon]]ical parts of ''Daniel'' are widely used in Orthodox and Catholic prayer.
The various episodes in the first half of the book are used by Christians as moral stories, and are often seen to foreshadow events in the [[gospel]]s.
The apocalyptic section is primarily important to Christians for the image of the "[[Son of Man]]" (Dan. 7:13). According to the gospels, [[Jesus]] used this title as his preferred name for himself. The connection with Daniel's vision (as opposed to the usage in the [[Book of Ezekiel]]) is made explicit in the Gospels of [[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] and [[Gospel of Mark|Mark]] (Matt 27:64; Mk 14:62). Christians see this as a direct claim by Jesus that he is the [[Messiah]].
==Influence of Daniel==
Due to the specificity of its prophecy and its place in both the Jewish and Christian canons, the book of Daniel has had great influence in Jewish and Christian history.
The Book of Daniel is included in the Hebrew Bible, the [[Tanakh]], in the section known as the ''[[Ketuvim]]'' (''Hagiographa'', or the "Writings") . Daniel was considered a prophet at [[Qumran]] (4Q174 [4QFlorilegium]<!--opaque to the average reader-->) and later by [[Josephus]] (''Antiquity of the Jews'' 10.11.7 §266) and the author (the "[[Pseudo-Philo]]") of ''Liber antiquitatum biblicarum'' (L.A.B. ["Book of Biblical antiquities"] 4.6, 8), and was grouped among the prophets in the [[Septuagint]], the Jewish Greek Old Testament, and by Christians, who place the book among the prophets. However, ''Daniel'' is not currently included by the Jews in the section of the prophets, the [[Nebiim]].
The Jewish exegete Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon, sometimes called simply RaMBaM and later called [[Maimonides]], was so concerned that the "untutored populace would be led astray" if they attempted to calculate the timing of the Messiah that it was decreed that "Cursed be those who predict the end times." This verbiage can be both found in his letter [[The Yemen Epistle|Igeret Teiman]] and in his booklet ''The Statutes and Wars of the Messiah-King.''
Rabbi [[Judah Loew ben Bezalel]] lamented that the times for the fulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel "were over long ago" (Sanhedrin 98b, 97a).
Traditional Christians have embraced the prophecies of Daniel, as they believe they clearly illustrate that Jesus Christ of Nazareth must be the [[Messiah]], and also because in [[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 24 Jesus himself is quoted as describing Daniel's prophecies as applying to future events immediately preceding Judgement Day, and not to Epiphanes who had lived some 175 years earlier. They consider the [[Prophecy of Seventy Weeks]] to be particularly compelling due to what they interpret to be prophetic accuracy. Many Orthodox Jews believe that the prophecy refers to the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] by the Romans in 70 AD. Secular scholars however, believe that the prophecy better fits the reign of Antiochus, and that it is an example of ''[[vaticinium ex eventu]]'' (prophecy after the fact).
Medieval study of [[angel]]s was also affected by this book, as it is the only Old Testament source for the names of two of the [[archangel]]s, [[Gabriel (archangel)|Gabriel]] and [[Michael (archangel)|Michael]] (Dan 9:21; 12:1). The only other angel given a name in the Old Testament is [[Raphael (archangel)|Raphael]], mentioned in the deuterocanoncial [[Book of Tobit]].
==Traditional tomb sites of Daniel==
A [[tomb]] said to be the last resting place of the prophet Daniel is located in the [[Kirkuk Citadel]] in the city of [[Kirkuk]] in [[Iraq]]. There is a [[mosque]] built on the tomb, the mosque has [[arches]] and [[pillars]] and two [[domes]] on a decorated base and beside it there are three [[minarets]] belonging to the end of the [[Mongolian]] reign. The mosque is about 400 square meters, it has four illusions tombs of Daniel, [[Hannah]], [[Ezra]] and [[Michael]].
Another tomb in [[Susa]], [[Iran]], also claims to be that of Daniel.
==See also==
* [[Book of Revelation]]
* [[Apocalypse]]
* [[Biblical archaeology]] (reference to [[Nabonidus]] cylinder)
* [[Christian eschatology]]
* [[Summary of Christian eschatology]]
==External links==
*[[Judaism|Jewish]] translations:
** [http://www.chabad.org/library/archive/LibraryArchive2.asp?AID=15773 Daniel (Judaica Press)] translation with [[Rashi]]'s commentary at Chabad.org
*[[Christian]] translations:
**[http://www.gospelhall.org/bible/bible.php?passage=Daniel+1 ''Online Bible'' at GospelHall.org]
** [http://www.anova.org/sev/htm/hb/27_daniel.htm ''Daniel'' at The Great Books] (New Revised Standard Version)
** [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible%2C_King_James%2C_Daniel ''Daniel'' at Wikisource] (Authorised King James Version)
** [http://st-takla.org/pub_Deuterocanon/Deuterocanon-Apocrypha_El-Asfar_El-Kanoneya_El-Tanya__7-Daniel.html The Book of Daniel] (Full text from [http://www.st-takla.org St-Takla.org], also available in [http://st-takla.org/pub_Deuterocanon/Deuterocanon-Apocrypha_El-Asfar_El-Kanoneya_El-Tanya__7-Daniel_.html Arabic])
'''Related Articles''':
*[http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=34&letter=D ''Jewish Encyclopedia'':] Daniel
*[http://othello.alma.edu/~07tmhopk/bookofdaniel.html Detailed Overview] Exposition on Daniel
* [http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/4/4danie96.html Daniel in the Historians' Den] - An analysis of the book's origins, from a skeptical perspective.
* [http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1998/4/984bad.html Bad History in the Book of Daniel] - An analysis on the book's historical flaws.
*[http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.asp?id=375&chapterid=1§ionid=1&pageid=1 Life-Study of ''Daniel''] - online study of the Book of Daniel, from a Christian perspective
*[http://www.kolumbus.fi/hjussila/rsla/OT/OT12.html A discussion of Jewish beliefs about the Messiah]
*[http://www.tektonics.org/af/danieldefense.html Book of Daniel Defended] A summary of conservative answers to objections to Daniel's historicity.
*[http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/reprints/Linguistic-Argument-for-the-Dat.pdf "The Linguistic Argument for the Date of Daniel"] by W.D. Jeffcoat, M.A. ([[PDF]]), from a conservative Christian perspective
*[http://www.biblequery.org/dan.htm Historical Questions About Daniel] - A Q&A format defense of Daniel's early dating.
*[http://www.2think.org/hundredsheep/bible/comment/daniel.shtml Revealing Daniel] - Skeptical analysis of the book.
*[http://www.myjewishlearning.com/texts/bible/TO_Writings_2140/BickermanDaniel.htm Daniel: Wise Man and Visionary, by Elias Bickerman]
* [http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_daniel.html ''Daniel'' by Rob Bradshaw] Detailed dictionary-style article.
==References==
*E. J. Bickerman, ''Four Strange Books of the Bible'', 1967. ISBN 0-8052-0774-0.
**A standard analysis.
*[[Robert Eisenman]], ''James the Brother of Jesus'', 1997. ISBN 0-14-025773-X.
**"Eisenman here sets out a fascinating and controversial theory that puts St. James at the center of the story as the heir to Jesus' teachings."
*[[Pierre Briant]], From Cyrus to Alexander. Librairie Artheme Fayard (Paris), 1996. (Translation by Peter Daniels, 2002) p. 42.
*John F. Walvoord, ''Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation'', 1989. ISBN 0-8024-1753-1.
**"A detailed, systematic analysis of the Book of Daniel with emphasis on studying and refuting nonbiblical views."
*[http://www.tektonics.org/guest/danielblast.html The Date of Daniel]
**A conservative rebuttal to secular viewpoints on the dating of Daniel.
*[http://www.atheists.org/christianity/daniel.html Daniel in the Debunkers Den]
**An atheists viewpoint of errors in Daniel.
*[http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1998/6/986lions.html Lion 1 Daniel 0]
**One of several articles on attacking a conservative viewpoint.
*[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/book_daniel.html D.J. Wiseman, T.C. Mitchell & R. Joyce, W.J. Martin & K.A. Kitchen, ''Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel''. London: The Tyndale Press, 1965.]
**A symposium of Daniel by conservative scholars.
*Easton's bible dictionary
[[Category:Christian eschatology|Daniel, Book of]]
[[Category:Ketuvim|Daniel, Book of]]
[[Category:Old Testament books|Daniel]]
<!-- The below are interlanguage links. -->
[[bg:Книга на пророк Даниил]]
[[cs:Kniha Daniel]]
[[de:Buch Daniel]]
[[es:Libro de Daniel]]
[[fi:Danielin kirja]]
[[fr:Livre de Daniel]]
[[he:ספר דניאל]]
[[id:Kitab Daniel]]
[[ja:ダニエル書]]
[[jv:Daniel]]
[[ko:다니엘 (구약성서)]]
[[nl:Daniël (Hebreeuwse Bijbel)]]
[[pl:Księga Daniela]]
[[pt:Livro de Daniel]]
[[sv:Daniels bok]]
[[zh:但以理書]]
| 