tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4648300866401965494.post2718514174562474820..comments2023-06-21T02:30:06.647-07:00Comments on Project: The King and I: Book of DanielBrucehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08310824690509335801noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4648300866401965494.post-78772484321414546792011-12-11T08:02:51.456-08:002011-12-11T08:02:51.456-08:00The extra bits are from the Septuagint the early G...The extra bits are from the Septuagint the early Greek version of the Bible so they do pre-date the New Testament. For the early Christians the Greek version of the Bible was the version used, Greek being the common language of the eastern Roman Empire (Hebrew had become strictly a language of ritual and scripture so few people especially thse not raised Jewish knew it) so it became the standard version. <br /><br />Why the rest of Daniel was split between Hebrew and Aramaic is debated. It would make sense if the stories were in one and the visions in the other as then it would be separate bits brought together later. Perhaps your suggestion is correct but the first change is right in the middle of a story. To be exact, <br /><br />"Then the astrologers answered the king," is in Hebrew and it switches to Aramaic for “May the king live forever! Tell your servants the dream, and we will interpret it” and for the next few chapters.Erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18037406583478493064noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4648300866401965494.post-14157429959253786712011-12-11T07:11:08.149-08:002011-12-11T07:11:08.149-08:00Thanks again for the info Erp. I'm guessing t...Thanks again for the info Erp. I'm guessing the language difference is due to the collection/preservation process. They took the best, most intact documents available.<br />As for the extra bits, the Catholics are big on story telling. A few more can't hurt.Brucehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08310824690509335801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4648300866401965494.post-72638359780870251782011-12-10T18:18:57.773-08:002011-12-10T18:18:57.773-08:00Daniel is also interesting in that it was apparent...Daniel is also interesting in that it was apparently written in two languages (or three if we count the deuterocanonical bits not found in the Jewish or Protestant Bibles that were in Greek). From the beginning until chapter 2 first half of verse 4 it is in Hebrew, second half of verse 4 until the end of chapter 7 in Aramaic and the rest of the book in Hebrew again. What is odd is that it does not follow the other major dividing point which is chapters 1-6 are stories about Daniel (or about Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego) and chapters 7-12 are visions.Erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18037406583478493064noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4648300866401965494.post-70352707647626340882011-12-10T12:03:31.550-08:002011-12-10T12:03:31.550-08:00Ah Daniel. In the Jewish Tanakh Daniel is classif...Ah Daniel. In the Jewish Tanakh Daniel is classified as a 'writing' along with Esther, Ruth, Psalms... not as a 'prophet'; the Christian Bibles puts the book in with the Prophets. Daniel is also longer in the Roman Catholic/Orthodox Bible than in most Protestant Bibles (the extra bits include Daniel saving the life of a woman accused of adultery when he shows the stories of the two accusers don't agree and Daniel demonstrating that the god, Bel, wasn't the one eating the offerings left for him).Erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18037406583478493064noreply@blogger.com