Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 28/06/2004 07:34, George F. Somsel wrote:

> ...
>
> That is one way of handling the problem.  Since, however, it is generally
> conceded that the Book of Daniel was an ex eventu (or at least
> contemporaneus) writing, it would be surprising to find him making such a
> mistake.  My inclination is to accept that he knew whereof he spoke.
>  

But this compounds the backwardness of your argument. You presuppose 
that Daniel was writing ex eventu and on that basis derive Hebrew 
lexical principles? Anyway your presupposition is far from generally 
conceded. It seems to me that it is accepted mainly by those who 
presuppose that genuine predictive prophecy is impossible, and are 
prepared to reject as a deliberate lie the explicit statement in verse 1 
dating this vision to the third year of Belshazzar.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/