Was Daniel an Eyewitness of 6th-Century B. C. Events
Part Two by Everette Hatcher III 2001 / March-April 5 Did the Book of Daniel err when it presented Belshazzar as the King of Babylon (Dan. 5)? William Sierichs, Jr., asserted that Belshazzar “was never the king” ( TSR, Vol. 9.6, p.2), and Dave Matson made this same point twice ( TSR, Vol. 9.6, p. 12, Vol. 10.1, p. 15). Moreover, Sierichs and Matson are not the only ones who hold this view (E.W. Heaton, The Book of Daniel, Torch Bible Commentaries, London: SCM, 1956, p. 63; Brodrick D. Shepherd, Beasts, Horns, and the Anti-Christ, Grassy Creek, NC: Cliffside Publishing House, 1994, p. 23; Russell, p. 83). Earlier I quoted the critic Philip Davies concerning this. Davies noted, “This is still sometimes repeated as a charge against the historicity of Daniel, and resisted by conservative scholars. But it has been clear since 1924 (J. A. Montgomery, Daniel, International Critical Commentary, Edinburgh: T and T Clark, New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1927, pp. 66-67) that ...