Chapter 3

Studies In The Book Of Daniel: A Discussion of the Historical Questions by Robert Dick Wilson



  IT has been shown in the first chapter that the records preserved to us from the nations of antiquity that were contemporaneous with the Israelites during the whole period in which the Old Testament books were written are few, partial, biased, and lacunose. We have shown, also, that the Hebrew documents themselves do not present us with a full or continuous account of the history of the Israelitish people. The silence, therefore, of these documents with regard to an event or person is no sufficient evidence that the person did not live, or that a given event did not occur. In the present chapter this conclusion will be illustrated by a consideration of the objection made to the expedition of Nebuchadnezzar against Jerusalem in the third year of Jehoiakim on the ground that the records contemporary with Daniel do not mention it.


  Concerning the statement of Dan. 1:1, that Daniel “was brought to the court of Nebuchadnezzar in the third year of Jehoiakim,” De Wette–Schrader says:

  It is clearly false, because according to Jer. 25:1, 46:2, the fourth year of Jehoiakim is the first of Nebuchad–

Page 43

nezzar; and according to Jer. 25:9, and also according to 36:9, the Chaldeans had not yet come to Jerusalem in the fifth year of Jehoiakim. Besides the captivity under Zedekiah, history knows of no other than that under Jehoiachin in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar.1 Chronicles alone2 tells of a captivity of Jehoiakim. This last place the composer probably used and got his date from 2 Kings 24:1.3

  Professor Prince says:

  It is known from Jer. 25:1, and 36:9, 29, that Nebuchadnezzar did not begin his reign in Babylon until the fourth year of Jehoiakim in Judah, and that the Babylonians in the ninth month of the fifth year of Jehoiakim had not yet come to Jerusalem, which was taken in July, 586 B.C. The origin of the error has been traced to a false combination of 2 Ch. 36:6 ff., and 2 K. 24:1.4

  Mr. A. R. Bevan says:

  The statement in v. 1 that Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem in the third year of Jehoiakim seems to be due to a combination of 2 K. 24:1, 2, with 2 Ch. 36:6. In Kings, the “three years” are not, of course, the first three years of Jehoiakim’s reign, nor is there any mention of a siege. The idea that Jerusalem was captured under Jehoiakim appears first in Chronicles, but no date is given. The author of Daniel follows the account in Chronicles, at the same time assuming that the “three years” in Kings date from the beginning of Jehoiakim’s reign, and that “the bands of the Chaldeans” were a regular army commanded by Nebuchadnezzar.5

1 2 Kings, 24:12 ff. According to Jer. 52:28, in the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar.

2 2 Chron. 36:6 f.     3 Einleitung, 8th ed., p. 486.     4 Commentary on Daniel, p. 18.

5 The Book of Daniel, p. 57.

Page 44

  Dr. Driver says:

  That Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem, and carried away some of the sacred vessels in “the third year of Jehoiakim” (Dan. 1:1 f.), though it cannot, strictly speaking, be disproved, is highly improbable; not only is the book of Kings silent, but Jeremiah in the following year (c. 25, & c., see v. 1) speaks of the Chaldeans in a manner which appears distinctly to imply that their arms had not yet been seen in Judah.1


  The main assumption in all of these objections is that the silence of the book of Kings and other sources with regard to an expedition of Nebuchadnezzar against Jerusalem in Jehoiakim’s third year renders improbable the statement of Daniel that such an expedition did occur.


  An attempt will now be made to show that this silence does not render such an expedition improbable. Having in the first chapter discussed this kind of argument in general, I shall confine myself in this chapter to a consideration of the argument from silence in so far merely as it affects the particular statements of Dan. 1:1.

  1. First of all, let us gather all the evidence that contemporary documents afford concerning the life of Jehoiakim, beginning with the Book of Kings. All that this book has to say on this subject will be found in 2 Kings 23:36, 37, and.24:1-7, which the American Standard Version renders as follows:

1 LOT p. 498.

Page 45

  23:36. Jehoiakim was twenty and five years old when he began to reign; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem: and his mother’s name was Zebidah the daughter of Pedaiah Rumah. (37) And he did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, according to all that his fathers had done.

  24:1. In his days Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years; then he turned and rebelled against him. (2) And Jehovah sent against him bands of the Chaldeans, and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of Jehovah, which he spake by his servants the prophets. (3) Surely at the commandment of Jehovah came this upon Judah, to remove them out of his sight, for the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he did, (4) and also for the innocent blood that he shed; for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood: and Jehovah would not pardon. (5) Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? (6) So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers; and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead. (7) And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land; for the king of Babylon had taken, from the brook of Egypt to the river Euphrates, all that pertained to the king of Egypt.

  It will be noted that Jehoiakim reigned eleven years. Since, according to Jer. 25:1, the first year of Nebuchadnezzar corresponded to the fourth year of Jehoiakim, they must have reigned eight years contemporaneously. Yet all that the book of Kings has to say in regard to the relations between Babylon, Egypt, and Jerusalem during these eight years is:

  First, that in Jehoiakim’s days Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon came up against Jerusalem, and that Jehoiakim served him three years.

Page 46

  Secondly, that then Jehoiakim rebelled again against him.

  Thirdly, that the king of Egypt did not come again out of his land, because the king of Babylon had taken all that belonged to him from the brook (wady) of Egypt to the river Euphrates.

  It will be noted, further, that the book of Kings does not say in what year Nebuchadnezzar came up. The only notes of time are, that he came up in Jehoiakim’s days, and that Jehoiakim served him three years. Unless it can be shown that the phrase “King of Babylon” cannot be used proleptically, or that Nebuchadnezzar cannot have been called king before his father’s death,1 he may have come during Jehoiakim’s reign at any time not earlier than the latter’s third year. If Jehoiakim’s rebellion was in his own eleventh year, this would leave time for the three years of service immediately before he rebelled, that is, from the eighth to the eleventh year of Jehoiakim’s reign.

  It will be noted, also, that Nebuchadnezzar may have come up against Judah and Jerusalem, during the period between the fall of Nineveh and the death of Jehoiakim, a number of times every year, for aught we know to the contrary. Frequent expeditions across the Euphrates were customary on the part of the kings of the Assyrians, who immediately preceded the Babylonians in the government of Syria and Palestine. Thus, Shalmaneser III says that he crossed the Euphrates twenty-two times in the first twenty-two years of his reign.2 Is there any reason for supposing that what had been done by this king of Assyria

1 For a discussion of these questions, see Chapter V.

2 Obelisk Inscription of Nimrud 27, 33, 37, 45, 57, 85, 87, 89, 91, 96, 97, 99, 100, 102, 104.

Page 47

may not have been done, also, by the king of Babylon? What was possible for one was possible, also, for the other. Shalmaneser speaks of crossing the Amanus mountains seven times and of coming against the cities of Kati of Kana (Cilicia) four times,1 Why may Nebuchadnezzar not have crossed Lebanon and have come against Judah in like manner, and any number of times that seemed best to him, for the accomplishment of his aims of conquest? It will not be sufficient to say in answer to this, that these campaigns could not have taken place, inasmuch as no mention of them is made on the monuments of Nebuchadnezzar; because we have no inscriptions of his that record his campaigns. We know from his building inscriptions and from the fragments of his one historical inscription that the lands to the west of the Euphrates were subject to him, and that he invaded Egypt once, at least. We are told in the writings of Berosus, Megasthenes, and Abydenus that he ruled over Egypt, Syria, Phenicia, Arabia, and Judea, and other Mediterranean lands. We are told in the Scriptures outside of Daniel that he was in possession of Syria and conquered Judea and was to be given Tyre and Sidon and Egypt. How many years and how many expeditions it took to make these conquests, we are not informed; but all authorities combine in pointing to the beginning of his reign and the years immediately preceding this, as a time of great and almost continuous activity in warlike enterprises. Consequently it is not a sufficient proof of his having made no expeditions against Judah before the fourth year of Jehoiakim to say that the Scriptures outside of Daniel do not mention such an expedition. This will appear from the following sections:

1 Id., 132, 135.

Page 48

  II. For all that Jeremiah, the prophet, has to say about the reign of Jehoiakim is as follows. In ch. 25:1–3, he says that the word of the Lord came to him:

  In the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. The which Jeremiah the prophet spake unto all the people of Judah, and to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, From the thirteenth year of Josiah the son of Amon king of Judah, even unto this day, that is the three and twentieth year, the word of the Lord hath come unto me, and I have spoken unto you, rising early and speaking; but ye have not hearkened.

  In 25:8, 9, he adds:

  Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts; Because ye have not heard my words, Behold, I will send and take all the families of the north, saith the Lord, and Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will bring them against this land, and against the inhabitants thereof, and against all these nations round about, and will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, and an hissing, and perpetual desolations.

  In 26:1, and 27:1, it is said that the word of the Lord came unto Jeremiah in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, probably meaning his first or accession’s year. In the former, the prophet says that if they will not hearken unto Jehovah, He will make the temple like Shiloh and the city a curse to all the nations of the earth; in the latter, he says that all nations shall serve Nebuchadnezzar. In 35:1, life tells of a prophecy unto the house of the Rechabites, who came to him in the days of Jehoiakim, and explained

Page 49

their presence in Jerusalem by saying (v. 11): “it came to pass, when Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up into the land, that we said, Come, and let us go to Jerusalem for fear of the army of the Chaldeans, and for fear of the army of the Syrians; so we dwell at Jerusalem.”

  In chapters 36, 45, and 46, we have prophecies from the fourth year of Jehoiakim and in 36:9, from his fifth year. In 36:1–8, he speaks of a roll which he gave to Baruch to be read by him in the house of the Lord. In 36:9, he says that Baruch read the roll, apparently a second time, in the ninth month of the fifth year; and in the 29th and 30th verses, we learn that there were written in the roll the words. “The king of Babylon shall certainly come and destroy this land…and Jehoiakim shall have none to sit upon the throne of David; and his dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the night to the frost.” After the roll had been burned by Jehoiakim, we are told that another roll was written containing, the same words, and also “there were added besides unto them many like words” (v. 32). Chapter 45 is a prophecy to and concerning Baruch which is said to have been written in the fourth year of Jehoiakim.

  In 46:1, 2, is recorded the “word of the Lord which came to Jeremiah the prophet against the Gentiles; Against Egypt, against the army of Pharaoh–Necho king of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates in Carchemish, which Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon smote in the fourth year of Jehoiakim.” In this chapter it says that the Egyptians shall stumble and fall toward the north by (’al) the river Euphrates (v. 6); for the Lord God of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by (’el) the river Euphrates (v. 10); and that Egypt and all

Page 50

her helpers shall be delivered into the land of Nebuchadnezzar (v. 26).1

  From these passages we learn:

  1. That the book of Jeremiah does not pretend to give us a history of the events of the time of Jehoiakim. The prophecies of the 26th and 27th chapters are from the beginning of his reign; those of the 25th, 36th, 45th, and 46th are from his fourth year, except a part of the 36th, which is from his fifth year; and the prophecy concerning the Rechabites in the 35th chapter is said to be from “the days of Jehoiakim.” Moreover, we are expressly told in 36:32, that many words like to those which have been preserved to us were added unto them by Baruch. We have, therefore, in the book as it stands, only selections and fragments of the records of Jeremiah.

  2. That even of the few records of the reign of Jehoiakim preserved in the passage above mentioned, but a small number refer directly to international events. Thus, chapter 35 concerns the Rechabites and chapter 45, Baruch the scribe of Jeremiah; chapter 36 gives an account of the roll that was written by Baruch and burned by the king; chapters 25, 26, and 27, are directed against Judah, and the nations round about, and especially against Jerusalem and the temple, naming Nebuchadnezzar as God’s servant and instrument in the punishment of the nations and the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple; chapter 46 alone is concerned exclusively with foreign affairs, viz. with Egypt and Babylon.

  3. That Jeremiah mentions specifically no expedition of Nebuchadnezzar against Judah or Jerusalem in the days of Jehoiakim.

1 See, also, 1:3; 22:18, 19.

Page 51

  4. But he implies in a number of places that such expeditions had been made. For,

  (1) Jehoiakim had been made king by Pharaoh-Necho. When Necho was defeated and his power destroyed at Carchemish in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, Jerusalem would inevitably fall under the domination of Nebuchadnezzar.

  (2) Jeremiah says that the Rechabites came and settled in Jerusalem for fear of the army of the Chaldeans, when Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came into the land.

  (3) Jeremiah says that Nebuchadnezzar should certainly come and destroy the land and that the dead body of Jehoiakim should be cast out, apparently by the Chaldeans.

  5. The only dates given are “The days of Jehoiakim” (35:1), “the fourth year of Jehoiakim” (36:1; 25:10; 46:2), and “the fifth year of Jehoiakim” (36:9); the fourth year of Jehoiakim is synchronized with the first year of Nebuchadnezzar (25:1); and it is stated that Jeremiah prophesied for 23 years from the 13th year of Josiah to the 4th year of Jehoiakim.

  III. The book of Chronicles says with regard to the reign of Jehoiakim:

  The king of Egypt made Eliakim his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem, and turned his name to Jehoiakim. And Necho took Jehoahaz his brother, and carried him to Egypt. Jehoiakim was twenty and five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem; and he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord his God. Against him came up Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon, and bound him in fetters, to carry him to Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar also carried off the vessels of the house of the Lord to Babylon, and put them in his temple at Babylon,

Page 52

Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and his abominations which he did, and that which was found in him, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah. (2 Chron. 36:4–8.)

  It will be noted that here it is expressly stated:

  1. That Nebuchadnezzar did come up to Jerusalem in the days of Jehoiakim.

  2. That he bound Jehoiakim in chains to carry him to Babylon.

  3. That Nebuchadnezzar at this time carried some of the vessels of the house of Jehovah to Babylon and put them in the temple at Babylon.

  IV. Neither Ezekiel, nor any other Old Testament book except Jeremiah, Kings, Chronicles, and Daniel, mentions Jehoiakim.

  V. Outside the Scriptures, the testimony of the monuments bearing upon this time is as follows:

  1. The monuments of Egypt which mention Necho’s operations in Syria consist merely of the fragments of a stele bearing his name in hieroglyphic. This stele was found at Sidon.1

  2. The records of Nebuchadnezzar contain nothing bearing directly upon the subject of his warlike expeditions, except the fragment found in Egypt referring to an Egyptian campaign in his 37th year.2 The contract tablets are absolutely silent upon the political actions of his reign. As to the building inscriptions we might infer3 that at the time when these buildings were erected,

1 Breasted’s History of Egypt, p. 405, and PSBA xvi, 91.

2 Zehnpfund-Langdon, Die Neo-Babylonischen Köningsinschriften, p. 207. English original p. 182.

3 This inference is to be made from his mention of the cedar beams with which he rebuilt Borsippa (Langdon, I, Col. ii, 2) Such as Ezida (XI, Col. i, 21, and especially VII, Col. i, 25), and other of his works (id. V, Col. i, 22); his reference to the temple roofs (IX, Col. ii, 19), and his royal palace for which he brought “great cedars from Lebanon” (IX, Col. iii, 26); the great cedar beams of Emahtila (XIII, Col. i, 41,42) of Ekua and other temples and shrines (id. XV, Col. iii, 27, 41, 51. Col. vi, 2, 4, and Col. viii, 3, Col. ix, 3, 10 et al., XVI, Col. i, 20), and especially from XVII, Col. iii, where he speaks of summoning the princes of the land of the Hittites beyond the Euphrates westward over whom he exercised lordship. (XVII, Col. iii, 8-22.)

Page 53

he held dominion over Syria, including as far as Mt. Lebanon at least.

  VI. Lastly, I shall quote what the profane historians say about these times.

  1. Josephus, in his Antiquities, XI, vi, 1–3, says:

  In the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim, one whose name was Nebuchadnezzar took the government over the Babylonians, who at the same time went up with a great army to the city Carchemish, which was at Euphrates, upon a resolution he had taken to fight with Necho, king of Egypt, under whom all Syria then was. And when Necho understood the intention of the king of Babylon, and that this expedition was made against him, he did not despise his attempt, but made haste with a great band of men to Euphrates to defend himself against Nebuchadnezzar; and when they had joined battle, he was beaten, and lost many ten thousands in the battle. So the king of Babylon passed over Euphrates, and took all Syria, as far as Pelusium, excepting Judea. But when Nebuchadnezzar had already reigned four years, which was the eighth of Jehoiakim’s government over the Hebrews, the king of Babylon made an expedition with mighty forces against the Jews, and required tribute of Jehoiakim, and threatened, on his refusal, to make war against him. He was frightened at his threatening, and bought his peace with money, and brought the tribute he was ordered to bring for three years. 2. But on the third year, upon hearing that the king of the Babylonians made an expedition against the Egyptians, he did not pay his

Page 54

tribute… 3. Now a little time afterwards, the king of Babylon made an expedition against Jehoiakim, whom he received into the city and then out of fear of the foregoing predictions of this prophet [i.e., of Jeremiah], as supposing that he should suffer nothing that was terrible, because he neither shut the gates, nor fought against him; yet when he was come into the city, he did not observe the covenant he had made; but he slew such as were in the flower of their age, and such as were of the greatest dignity, together with their king Jehoiakim, whom he commanded to be thrown before the walls, without any burial; and made his son Jehoiachin king of the country and of the city: he also took the principal persons in dignity for captives, three thousand in number, and led them away to Babylon; among whom was the prophet Ezekiel, who was then but young. And this was the end of king Jehoiakim, when he had lived thirty-six years, and of them reigned eleven.

  Further, in his work against Apion, i, 19, Josephus says that Berosus in his History comes at length to “Nabolassar [Nabopolassar], who was king of Babylon and of the Chaldeans,” and that Berosus in relating the acts of this king “describes to us how he sent his son Nabuchodonosor against Egypt, and against our land, with a great army, upon his being informed that they had revolted from him; and how by that means, he subdued them all.”

  From these accounts of Josephus, we learn:

  (1) That Nebuchadnezzar, before he became king, was sent by his father on an expedition against Egypt and Palestine.

  (2) That Nebuchadnezzar took the government over the Babylonians in the fourth year of Jehoiakim.

  (3) That Nebuchadnezzar defeated Necho at Carchemish.

Page 55

  (4) That Nebuchadnezzar conquered Syria as far as Pelusium, excepting Judea, immediately after the battle of Carchemish.

  (5) But that he did not make an expedition against Jerusalem till the eighth year of Jehoiakim, which was his own fourth year.

  (6) That Jehoiakim paid tribute for three years.

  (7) That Jerusalem was taken in the eleventh year of Jehoiakim; at which time Jehoiakim himself was killed and his body thrown before the wall without any burial.

  2. In addition to the above, Berosus has the following to say about Nebuchadnezzar, to wit:

  His father having perceived that the Egyptians and others had revolted, sent his son Nabuchodonosor with a great army against Egypt and against the land of Judea, who overpowered them and set fire to the temple which was in Jerusalem; and having entirely removed all the people who were in the country settled them at Babylon. It came to pass also that the city was in a state of desolation for a space of 70 years, until Cyrus king of the Persians. And he [i.e., Berosus] says, that the Babylonians ruled over Egypt, Syria, Phenicia, and Arabia, and surpassed in deeds all who had been kings before him over the Chaldeans and Babylonians.1

  Further, he says:

  When Nabopolassar his [Nebuchadnezzar’s] father, heard that the satrap who had been stationed in Egypt and in the plains of Cœle–Syria and Phenicia had revolted, not being able longer to endure the evil, having entrusted to his son Nebuchadnezzar, who was then in full manhood, some parts of the army, he sent him against him [i.e., Nabopo-

1 Josephus, Contra Apion, i, 19.

Page 56

lassar sent Nebuchadnezzar against the satrap who had revolted]. And Nebuchadnezzar having joined battle with the rebel overpowered him and made the country a province under his dominion. And it happened that at this time his father Nabopolassar was seized with a lingering ailment and died in the city of the Babylonians after he had been king 29 years. Nebuchadnezzar having learned, shortly after, of the death of his father, after he had set in order the affairs in Egypt and the rest of the countries and had committed to some of his friends the captives of the Jews and Phenicians and Syrians and of the nations belonging to Egypt to bring into Babylonia with the bulk [lit. heavy part] of the army and the remainder of the spoils; he himself with a very few attendants hastened through the desert to Babylon, where he found that the affairs had been managed by Chaldeans and the kingdom watched over by the best one of them, so that he became lord of the whole of the government of his father, and he gave orders to appoint settlements for the captives in the fittest places of Babylonia, while he himself from the spoils of the war adorned the temple of Bel and other temples in a lavish manner.1

  He then describes the walls and palaces, adding:

  In these royal palaces he built lofty stone substructures and made the prospect as like to a mountain as possible by planting trees of all sorts and by making what is called a paradise; because his queen, who had been brought up in Media, desired a mountainous situation.2

  3. Eusebius says that Abydenus in his history of the Assyrians has preserved the following fragment of Megasthenes, a Greek historian who lived about 300 B.C., and was a trusty ambassador of Seleucus Nicator3:

1 Cont. Ap., i, 19.    2 Id., i, 20.

3 Abydenus himself died in 268 B.C., having written, among other works, a history of Assyria. He is said to have been a pupil of Berosus.

Page 57

“Nebuchadnezzar, having become more powerful than Hercules, invaded Libya and Iberia, and when he had rendered them tributary, he extended his conquests over the inhabitants of the shores upon the right of the sea”1 These statements of Abydenus, taken from Megasthenes, are so indefinite as to be worthless as testimony in regard to the matter under discussion.

  4. No other sources make any mention of the deeds of Jehoiakim, or of any other events recorded in the Scriptures as having occurred in his days.


  Summing up the testimony, we find:

  1. That Kings, Chronicles, Berosus, Josephus, and Daniel all affirm that Nebuchadnezzar did come up against Jerusalem in the days of Jehoiakim.

  2. That Chronicles, Daniel, Berosus, and Josephus unite in saying that Nebuchadnezzar carried many captives from Judea to Babylon in the reign of Jehoiakim.

  3. That Berosus supports the statement of Daniel with regard to the carrying away of some of the vessels of the house of the Lord by saying that Nebuchadnezzar brought spoils from Judea which were put in the temple of Nebuchadnezzar in Babylon.

  4. That Berosus supports Daniel in declaring an expedition against Jerusalem to have occurred before the death of Nabopolassar.

  5. That since Nabopolassar died while Nebuchadnezzar was in the midst of his expedition against Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar may have been king de jure before he came up against Jerusalem; for it would take

1 Eusebius, Prep. Evan., lib. x.

Page 58

the news of the death of Nabopolassar several weeks to reach Jerusalem, and in those weeks there would have been abundance of time for Nebuchadnezzar to have captured Jerusalem, especially if Jehoiakim surrendered at this time without fighting or after a brief siege, as Josephus says that he did in his eleventh year.1

  6. That the book of Jeremiah is silent with regard to all of these events. It does not say that Nebuchadnezzar did not come up to Jerusalem in the reign of Jehoiakim. It simply says nothing about it. Why it says nothing about it we do not know. The expedition or expeditions may have been mentioned in “the many like words” recorded by Baruch (Jer. 36:32), which have not been preserved for us.

  7. That, finally, the statement of Daniel 1:1–3, that Nebuchadnezzar came up against Jerusalem in the third year of Jehoiakim and carried captive to Babylon certain of the nobility, and some of the vessels of the house of the lord, stands absolutely unimpugned by any testimony to be produced from any reliable source of information.

1 Jos., Ant. X, vi, 3. Josephus says that Jehoiakim received Nebuchadnezzar into the city out of fear of a prediction of Jeremiah “supposing that he should suffer nothing that was terrible, because he neither shut the gate, nor fought against him.”

Page 59

Home Up Chapter 4

Studies In The Book Of Daniel: A Discussion Of The Historical Questions by Robert Dick Wilson. New York and London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, The Knickerbocker Press, 1917.

E-Text transcribed by hand from the 1917 edition.

Please do not take my material without permission! You are welcome to link to these pages.

[Display Problems?]