/lit/ - Literature

>>19371751
Kind of. He is correct in that "Daniel" didn't live during the Babylonian exile and it probably was some jew seething at the Seleucids. Linguistic analysis confirms this, but I cant really tell you how, I am no expert. One part of the source material was written in Hebrew, the other in Aramaic, so probably more than one author.
Where the poster is wrong though, is that Pseudo-Daniel is "completely accurate" in his predictions. Yes, he wrote the events in retrospect (VATICINIVM EX EVENTV in cumgenius larpspeak), but it's not like he had good history materials. Check out the very first verse in Daniel
>pic related
It's historically inaccurate. Same for the prophecy about the statue in Nebuchadnezzar's dream: It's very vague, and that's why autists interpret whatever they want into it. Traditionally the silver part is supposed to be the Median Empire, but it coexisted with Babylon, both succumbing to the Achaemenids. But hey, because holy texts can't be flawed and written just by humans, it opens the door for mental gymnastics from nuttcases on youtube or American Protestant cults that can interpret freely what fits their flavour of the year.