The debate over the date of composition of the book of Daniel did not exist in the time of Jesus the Messiah. It appeared much later, with the rise of historical and literary criticism of the Bible, especially from the eighteenth century onward (the Age of Enlightenment), and developed in the nineteenth century with modern exegesis.
Origin of the debate
Ancient tradition (before the eighteenthᵉ century)
In Judaism and Christianity, Daniel was unanimously regarded as a prophet of the Babylonian exile (sixth century BC).
The prophecies were received as authentic and inspired.
No debate over the dating existed: the reading was confessional and traditional.
Emergence of modern criticism (eighteenth century)
With the Enlightenment, thinkers begin to apply a rational and historical approach to the biblical texts.
The idea that prophecies could announce the future with precision is called into question.
Scholars propose that Daniel was written after the events it describes, that is, in the second century BC, under Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
Développement au XIXᵉ siècle
Historical-critical exegesis takes shape in the German and French universities.
The linguistic arguments (late Aramaic, Greek), literary arguments (apocalyptic style) and historical arguments (accuracy up to Antiochus IV but not beyond) are systematized.
From then on, dating to the second century becomes the dominant position in academic research.
Confessional reactions
The Churches and some traditional exegetes continued to defend a composition in the sixth century, insisting on the prophetic value of the text.
The debate has therefore remained lively between the confessional reading and the critical reading, especially in the twentieth century.
Synthesis
Before the eighteenth century: no debate, Daniel is a prophet of the exile.
Eighteenth century: birth of the debate with rationalist criticism.
Nineteenth century: affirmation of the second-century dating in academic research.
Twentieth century to today: persistent tension between the confessional reading (sixth century) and the critical reading (second century).
The origin of this debate lies mainly in a divergence of perspectives concerning the nature and interpretation of prophetic words. For some, this debate is explained by a questioning of, or a lack of trust in, the prophetic words as they are transmitted in the Bible. Whereas the confessional reading considers these words as authentically inspired and prophetic. The question here is therefore mainly that of the inerrancy of the Bible.