Right, you make a compelling case, making it appear that Daniel 11:36-39 was composed out of a jewish contemporary reading of the Antiochus coins, and written at a late date like around 165BC, centuries after Daniels life. However, I want to point out, that such views have also been aired on other scriptures of the Bible, like e.g. the gospel of John, which were swept aside when a very old quotation of the gospel of John was found, putting its date back to no later than 125AD. So even though your case seems compelling right now, we should keep in mind that future discoveries may well falter the case. The fact that you default to not make sense of the rest of the prophecy, does weaken your case. Anyway, in total it was a worthwile watch.
None of the Bible is inaccurate, and how is Daniel who was not living in this time frame wrote the scriptures in Daniel? See I have a problem with that now. Daniel was living long before that, and the 6th century.. how was he going to write anything in the second century when he lived in the sixth century? God inspired him to write these things, that have not come to pass yet. How come he just didn't go ahead and identify Rome if they had already passed? Because he didn't know what nation it was going to be but the Greeks were already bidding for territory so were the Persians, there were a lot of wars going on back then even worse including Rome, so why would he not have mentioned the wrong by name as he did The meds and the Persians, and Greece?
Lovely video, keep it up!
Right, you make a compelling case, making it appear that Daniel 11:36-39 was composed out of a jewish contemporary reading of the Antiochus coins, and written at a late date like around 165BC, centuries after Daniels life. However, I want to point out, that such views have also been aired on other scriptures of the Bible, like e.g. the gospel of John, which were swept aside when a very old quotation of the gospel of John was found, putting its date back to no later than 125AD. So even though your case seems compelling right now, we should keep in mind that future discoveries may well falter the case. The fact that you default to not make sense of the rest of the prophecy, does weaken your case. Anyway, in total it was a worthwile watch.
None of the Bible is inaccurate, and how is Daniel who was not living in this time frame wrote the scriptures in Daniel? See I have a problem with that now. Daniel was living long before that, and the 6th century.. how was he going to write anything in the second century when he lived in the sixth century? God inspired him to write these things, that have not come to pass yet. How come he just didn't go ahead and identify Rome if they had already passed? Because he didn't know what nation it was going to be but the Greeks were already bidding for territory so were the Persians, there were a lot of wars going on back then even worse including Rome, so why would he not have mentioned the wrong by name as he did The meds and the Persians, and Greece?
well because the bible is a collection of myths.