Book of Daniel

Note: this article is being expanded and improved for balance and accuracy. Please be patient.

---

The complete Book of Daniel [Hebrew: דניאל] of 14 chapters, translated from a Hebrew original which has been lost, is found in the books of the Septuagint, the Old Testament of the apostles and the early Christian Church, accepted as inspired and canonical by the Orthodox Church in the Greek Orthodox Bible, and in the books of the Old Testament of the Vulgate and included in the canon of inspired scripture by the Third Council of Carthage (397). It is included in the canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible. Since the Council of Trent it is dogmatically accepted as inspired and canonical "with all its parts" by the Catholic Church in the Catholic Bible—books of the Bible accepted as divinely inspired by the majority of Christian believers in the United States and throughout the world.

The shorter Masoretic Hebrew book of Daniel of 12 chapters is ranked by the Jews in that division of the Tanakh called the Ketuvim, or Writings. The Book of Daniel has never been ranked among the Nevi'im, or Prophets, by the Jews.

A major portion of the 3rd chapter and the 13th and 14th chapters of Daniel were first removed from the Christian Old Testament and placed in the Apocrypha as separate books by Martin Luther in the 16th century. These separated texts are regarded as apocryphal by less than one-third of Christian believers, most of whom have never read them.

In printed editions of the King James Bible in the 16th through early 20th centuries these separated texts of the Apocrypha are given the following titles:

• "The Song of the Three Holy Children. Which followeth in the third Chapter of Daniel after this place—fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace. That which followeth is not in the Hebrew, to wit, and they walked.... unto these words, Then Nebuchadnezzar... verse 24." (62 verses)
• "The History of Susanna. Set apart from the Beginning of Daniel, because it is not in the Hebrew, as neither the Narration of Bel and the Dragon"
• "The History of the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon, cut off from the end of Daniel"

Contents

The Masoretic Hebrew Book of Daniel consists of two distinct parts. The first part, consisting of the first six chapters, is chiefly historical; and the second part, consisting of the remaining six chapters, is chiefly prophetical.

The historical part of the book treats of the period of the Captivity, written around 530 B.C. Daniel is

"the historian of the Captivity, the writer who alone furnishes any series of events for that dark and dismal period during which the harp of Israel hung on the trees that grew by the Euphrates. His narrative may be said in general to intervene between Kings and Chronicles on the one hand and Ezra on the other, or (more strictly) to fill out the sketch which the author of the Chronicles gives in a single verse in his last chapter: 'And them that had escaped from the sword carried he [i.e., Nebuchadnezzar] away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia'." (2 Chronicles 36:20).

The prophetical part consists of three visions and one lengthened prophetical communication. Some suggest that the second part was written hundreds of years later, perhaps based on an oral tradition, but it was nevertheless certainly written well before Christ.

The Christian Old Testament Book of Daniel in both the Septuagint and the Vulgate consists of two distinct kinds of narrative, historical and prophetic, in three parts. In the Septuagint, the first part begins with the first chapter narrative of Daniel, a youth, saving Susanna from the death sentence of the two corrupt judges, with the first part of the book thus consisting of the first seven chapters, which are chiefly historical; the second part, consisting of six chapters, primarily relating visions sent to Daniel and interpreted by Gabriel, is chiefly prophetical; and the third part, consisting of one chapter, is chiefly historical. In the 5th century, the 1st chapter of Daniel in the Septuagint was moved by Jerome and placed in his Vulgate translation near the end of the book as the 13th chapter of Daniel, so that in the Vulgate the first part of Daniel consists of six chapters, the second part six chapters, and the third part two chapters. In accordance with the ancient traditional reading of the text of the Bible in the Christian Church, Jerome elected to leave in their traditional place in the text in the 3rd chapter of Daniel the 62 verses he did not find in any of the Hebrew manuscripts he had available to him; but he noted critically that they are "not in the Hebrew".

Chapter summaries

The following chapter summaries are from the Douay-Rheims Bible.

Part one, historical narratives:

(1) Daniel and his companions are taken into the palace of the king of Babylon: they abstain from his meat and wine, and succeed better with pulse and water. Their excellence and wisdom.

(2) Daniel, by divine revelation, declares the dream of Nabuchodonosor, and the interpretation of it. He is highly honoured by the king.

(3) Nabuchodonosor sets up a golden statue; which he commands all to adore: the three children for refusing to do it are cast into the fiery furnace; but are not hurt by the flames. Their prayer and canticle of praise. (the chapter is 100 verses)

(4) Nabuchodonosor's dream, by which the judgments of God are denounced against him for his pride, is interpreted by Daniel, and verified by the event.

(5) Baltasar's profane banquet: his sentence is denounced by a handwriting on the wall, which Daniel reads and interprets.

(6) Daniel is promoted by Darius: his enemies procure a law forbidding prayer; for the transgression of this law Daniel is cast into the lions' den: but miraculously delivered.

Part two, prophesies:

(7) Daniel's vision of the four beasts, signifying four kingdoms: of God sitting on his throne: and of the opposite kingdoms of Christ and Antichrist.

(8) Daniel's vision of the ram and he goat interpreted by the angel Gabriel.

(9) Daniel's confession and prayer: Gabriel informs him concerning the seventy weeks to the coming of Christ.

(10) Daniel having humbled himself by fasting and penance seeth a vision, with which he is much terrified; but he is comforted by an angel.

(11) The angel declares to Daniel many things to come, with regard to the Persian and Grecian kings: more especially with regard to Antiochus as a figure of Antichrist.

(12) Michael shall stand up for the people of God: with other things relating to Antichrist, and the end of the world.

Part three, historical narratives:

(13) The history of Susanna and the two elders.

(14) The history of Bel, and of the great serpent worshipped by the Babylonians.

Prophecy

Statue of Nebuchadnezzar's dream

The statue of this dream had a head of gold, body and arms of silver, thighs of brass, legs of iron, and feet of iron and clay. Daniel interpreted this to be kingdoms, with the head of gold being Neo-Babylon, and other kingdoms not as rich but stronger after. These subsequent kingdoms are often viewed as

• (starting with the arms of silver) Medo-Persia (2 arms for 2 peoples but still connected by the upper body as 1 nation),
• Alexander the Great's Grecian empire (bronze, or steel ),
• pagan Rome (2 legs for 2 empires, western and eastern)
• and the feet being Europe after Rome.

This particular view seems to be based on an interpretation of "the prince of the covenant" (Daniel 11:22) as being only Jesus Christ and no other.

When "the prince of the covenant" (11:22) is interpreted as Onias III the anointed high priest, "because of the piety of the high priest Onias and his hatred of wickedness" (2 Maccabees 3:1), who was treacherously assassinated on the secret order of Menelaus by the assassin Andronicus under Antiochus IV Epiphanes, then the kingdoms foreseen by Daniel are viewed as

• Ancient Babylon, the head of gold,
• the Kingdom of the Medes (silver),
• the kingdom of the Persians and Medes (bronze),
• the kingdom of the Greeks, established by Alexander the Great, which was divided (iron, iron and clay, and clay), primarily into the two kingdoms of the Ptolemies in Egypt (in the south) and the Seleucids in Syria (in the north) which fought each other for control of Judea.

This particular view sees the two legs and feet of iron and clay as the mixed rule of the Ptolemies and Seleucids, and the toes of clay as the successors of Alexander's generals, whose Hellenistic suppression was finally removed from Judea in the time of Simon the high priest, son of Mattathias.

Four Beasts

Daniel saw 4 beasts. They were a lion, a bear, a leopard, and a different beast. These prophecies are often viewed as the same as the vision of the statue, with the lion being Neo-Babylon, the bear being Medo-Persia, the leopard being Greece, and the Beast being Rome; or the lion as the Ancient Kingdom of Babylon, the bear as the Kingdom of the Medes, the leopard as the Kingdom of Persia, and the Different Beast as the Kingdom of the Greeks, with Antiochus IV in particular as the little horn speaking great things who was suddenly broken after 2,300 evenings and mornings (8:9-14).

See Literalist Bible chronology

Ram and He-Goat

These visions are of a Ram, a He-Goat, and a little horn. These are viewed often as Medo-Persia, Greece, and papal Rome; or as Medo-Persia with two horns (both great, but one, Persia, greater than the subordinated other, Medea), which was conquered by the He-Goat Alexander (the notable or conspicuous single horn), with Antiochus IV Epiphanes as the little horn, broken "without hand" by no human hand. 2 Maccabees 9:5 and 9:28

Greek and Persian words

The Book of Daniel contains words having either Greek or Persian origin. This has caused some continuing dispute among historians and theologians in explaining how such words, particularly the Greek ones, ended up in the predominantly Hebrew Book of Daniel. Some see this as evidence that the extant Masoretic Hebrew text of Daniel in the Palestinian canon of the Jews is an abbreviated version of the longer Hebrew original text (now lost) which underlies the rabbinical Greek translation of Daniel in the Septuagint, which predates the time of Jesus.

Dispute on Authorship

Due to the fact that the book contains prophecies that were fulfilled in the 4th century BC, many modernist scholars have asserted that this book was not written by Daniel the 6th century BC, but by a later person. However, both Scriptural and textual arguments support the traditional view.

1. Jesus (Matthew 24:15; 25:31; 26:64) and His apostles (1 Corinthians 6:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:3) testify that the book was written by "the prophet Daniel," and that it is authoritative.

2. The prophet Ezekiel testifies that Daniel was known for his wisdom and righteousness (Ezekiel 14:14, 20; 28:3).

3. The character and records of the book are also entirely in harmony with the times and circumstances in which the author lived.

4. The linguistic character of the book is, moreover, just such as might be expected. Certain portions (Dan. 2:4; 7) are written in the Chaldee (Aramaic) language, and the portions written in Hebrew are in a style and form having a close affinity with the later books of the Old Testament, especially with that of Ezra. The writer is familiar both with the Hebrew and the Chaldee, passing from the one to the other just as his subject required. This is in strict accordance with the position of the author and of the people for whom his book was written. That Daniel is the writer of this book is also testified to in the book itself (7:1, 28; 8:2; 9:2; 10:1, 2; 12:4, 5).

Additionally, findings in the Dead Sea Scrolls dating to the 2nd century BC referred to Daniel as a prophet, which supports the traditional view, as it is unlikely that Daniel would have been accepted as a prophet had the book been written several years previously rather than several centuries previously.

Dispute on canonicity

Dr. John Oakes represents the view of many Christians who reject the rabbinical additions to Daniel as not inspired or reliable "for at least three reasons".

1. The Jews, the arbiters of the Old Testament canon do not include them.

2. The additions were most likely not even originally in Hebrew or Aramaic and

3. The actual content does not have the marks of inspired writing.

First objection: The Jews did not accept them

This presents a problem. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to determine the canon of sacred scripture, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.

Second objection: They were not written in Hebrew

In response to the rise of the Christian sect and the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70, Jewish rabbis at the Council of Jamnia (some say there was no such council ) in A.D. 90 discussed rejecting the Septuagint which Christians were using with great effect in favor of selected Hebrew language scriptural texts, omitting certain books such as Baruch, Judith, Maccabees, Sirach, and Tobit (some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic which were relatively recent Jewish contributions of the 3rd through the 1st centuries before Christ) which had become part of Jewish culture. Jamnia considered 4 criteria to determine which of the Writings - such as Ecclesiastes, Esther, and Song of Songs - should be retained for the Hebrew canon for Judaism:

the book should conform to the Torah;

it was written before the time of Ezra (circa 450 BC);

it was written in Hebrew;

and it was composed in Judah or Israel.

Although some books of the Old Testament were discussed in Judea at the Pharisaic Council of Jamnia in A.D. 90, the canon itself was not a topic of consideration and this group in fact had no decision-making power.

Historically, Jewish scholars since the 2nd century have considered the canon closed since the time of Malachi, and have not included the books of the Protestant Apocrypha, which were written subsequent to his time. At the same time they simultaneously excluded as condemned and false the writings of the "heretics" (the minim, including Christians, called nozrim, no§rim, "Nazarenes"), and cursed Christians in a synagogue service "benediction" against them and others. Palestinian texts of the Eighteen Benedictions from the Cairo Genizah present a text of the benediction which identifies the minim:

"For the apostates may there be no hope unless they return to Your Torah. As for the no§rim and the minim, may they perish immediately. Speedily may they be erased from the Book of Life, and may they not be registered among the righteous. Blessed are You, O Lord, Who subdues the wicked."

While other specimens of the Palestinian liturgy show slight variation, the no§rim, (usually translated “Christians”) and minim are included in the best texts of this benediction. The fact remains that the no§rim were included with apostates and heretics and the wicked in the Genizah documents.

Third objection: They do not have the "marks" of inspired writing

This is the principle of "private judgment", which is highly subjective, and can be in error. With regard to what texts belong in the Bible it is a certainty that the expertise and judgment of the ancients among the Jews before the time of Christ should not be lightly dismissed.

"We attach great importance to the reading [text] of the Septuagint, because it was translated 280 years before Christ, by men who had every facility for ascertaining the real meaning of the Hebrew text, and their work was honoured by the cordial approbation of the Sanhedrim of Alexandria, at a time when Hebrew learning was at its highest state of perfection in that city."

—John Grigg Hewlett, D.D. Bible difficulties explained (1860), p. 162 –book in the public domain

Marcion, around A.D. 140 declared that the entire Old Testament was "obviously" not of God. He dismissed the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John, he edited the Gospel of Luke to purify it, and he threw out four of Paul's 14 Epistles as writings contrary to the Gospel. He was condemned as a heretic for his views about the nature of God and salvation.

The Deuterocanonicals were disputed from the 1st century to the 16th century, and include 7 books of the New Testament which many Christians and some individual scholars of those centuries confidently asserted were not authentic, but were clearly perceived by them as spurious writings.

The deuterocanonical Old Testament scriptural texts are:

• Tobit
• Judith
• Greek rabbinical Additions to Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4-16:24)
• Wisdom (or Wisdom of Solomon)
• Wisdom of Jesus ben Sira (or Sirach or Ecclesiasticus)
• Baruch, including the Letter of Jeremiah (Additions to Jeremiah in the Septuagint)
• Greek rabbinical Additions to Daniel:

• Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children (Vulgate Daniel 3:24-90)
• Susanna (Vulgate Daniel 13, Septuagint prologue to Daniel)
• Bel and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14, Septuagint epilogue of Daniel)

• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees

The deuterocanonical New Testament scriptural texts are:

• The Epistle to the Hebrews
• The Epistle of James
• The Second Epistle of Peter
• The Second Epistle of John
• The Third Epistle of John
• The Epistle of Jude
• The Apocalypse of John (also known as the Book of Revelation)

The meaning of the term "deuterocanonical" is therefore not identical with "apocryphal".

In 1539 Martin Luther declared that four of the New Testament deuterocanonicals are clearly hostile to the Gospel because they do not have "the marks of inspired scripture" and do not clearly "preach Christ": Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation—he held that they were not on the same level as the pure scriptures. He found several books of the Bible to be clearly lacking the "marks of inspired writing".

"The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible."

"The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish foolishness."

"Of very little worth is the Book of Baruch, whoever the worthy Baruch might be."

"...the epistle of St. James is an epistle full of straw, because it contains nothing evangelical." "If nonsense is spoken anywhere, this is the very place. I pass over the fact that many have maintained, with much probability, that this epistle was not written by the apostle James, and is not worthy of the spirit of the apostle."

"John records but few of the works of Christ, but a great deal of his preaching, whereas the other three evangelists record many of His works, but few of His words. It follows that the gospel of John is unique in loveliness, and of a truth the principal gospel, far, far superior to the other three, and St. Paul and St. Peter are far in advance of the three gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke."

Luther complained about the Book of Revelation:

"to my mind it bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character... Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it."

Luther admitted adding the word 'alone' to Rom. 3:28 of his own volition:

"If your Papist annoys you with the word ('alone'), tell him straightway, Dr. Martin Luther will have it so: Papist and ass are one and the same thing. Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by: the devil's thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge. Luther will have it so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom."

In 1546 at the Council of Trent the bishops of the Catholic Church dogmatically "added" the Deuterocanonicals, the 7 disputed New Testament books along with the 7 disputed books and parts of 2 other books of the Old Testament "with all their parts", to the canon of the Bible. The leaders of the Roman Catholic Church had definitively found all 73 books of the Catholic Bible to be "certainly" inspired scripture, given by God himself. Writers who point out that the Apocrypha were added to the Bible by the Catholic Church do not include the fact that the disputed books of Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude and Revelation were added to the Bible by the Catholic Church at the same time.

The Friends (Quakers) do not define any writing as canonical but what each person, "led by the spirit and light of Christ", has determined to be scripture or recognizes as inspired.

"Now the Lord's power was so mighty upon me, and so strong in me, that I could not hold, but was made to cry out and say, "Oh! no; it is not the scriptures;" and told them it was the Holy Spirit, by which the holy men of God gave forth the scriptures, whereby opinions, religions, and judgments were to be tried; for it led into all Truth, and so gave the knowledge of all Truth." —from the Journal of George Fox.

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have taken a form of "private judgment" as an infallible guide. They quote Moroni 10:4

"And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things."

Some individuals, whom Mormon missionaries have instructed to use this test as a form of certain discernment, have experienced a kind of negative affirmation in the form of an intuitive insight or feeling that indicates, "Yes, these things are not so". But others have interpreted the affirmative feeling that they experienced in response to the prayer as meaning instead, "Yes, these things are so".

Historical-critical researchers who use the literary methods of Higher Criticism seek to find out all they can with regard to the portion of the Bible they are studying; the author, the date, the circumstances, and purpose of its writing. The Higher Criticism means nothing more than the study of the literary structure of the various books of the Bible, and more especially of the Old Testament. Historical criticism assumes the time-conditions; the historical character of the Scriptures. This does not necessarily mean that the individual historical critic conceives of God revealing Himself objectively within history, but that he conceives the production of Scripture to have taken place within historical causes. What one scholar holds to be very probable another considers to be very unlikely. The regular majority of intelligent higher critical scholars who take the Bible seriously have found the Bible to be historically reliable and truthful and unique as a very credible witness to what the Lord of history has actually done in history, and as documents in character superior to all the ethical rationalism of the writings of secular humanists. This includes those deuterocanonicals called "apocrypha".

"The more conservative theologians who employ the historical-critical method believe that the Scriptures are 'more than the writings of mortal men'..." —(Siegbert W. Becker, "The Historical-Critical Method of Bible Interpretation", page 4. bold-face emphasis added.)

They have found that the Scriptures are unique among world literature, and that the Bible is of a wholly different order from the pagan mythologies of the nations.

The highly educated scholars who have elected to participate in the Jesus Seminar are fully persuaded from reading all of the varied translations and early extant manuscripts of the Gospels and discussions with other Biblical scholars that it is "obviously evident" to them, and a "virtual certainty", that almost none of the words and teachings attributed to Jesus are authentic, but are instead fabrications by unknown individuals in the Christian Church who were promoting their own slanted theological points of view. Other highly educated scholars are firmly convinced by their studies and reading of the Bible that the entire canon of the Orthodox Bible is authentic and inspired.

Those who have adopted the views of Liberal Christianity tend to see religious knowledge emerging from research and the use of reason, as superior to Biblical revelation. Thus the liberal idea of religion as a personal relationship with God is one which is not necessarily bound to a Biblical doctrinal basis. This stands in in contrast to salvation resulting from faith in the Biblically substantiated gospel of grace, and in conformity with orthodox theological beliefs. They see the controversy over canonicity of any part of the Bible as pointless and somewhat irrelevant. Reading the texts of scripture does not indicate to them personally that one part is superior to another, or that any of it is inspired by God, although many of them acknowledge that some of it tends to be "inspiring" as a classic of world literature.

It is evident that those portions of the Book of Daniel called The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children, Story of Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon, cannot be evaluated solely on the basis of Jewish rejection, apparent lack of evidence of an original Hebrew text, and subjective assessment of content according to what seems to the reader to be marks of inspired writing.

Every person who approaches Bible study, usually to learn about the historical events it relates, is heavily influenced by the hermeneutical theory, or interpretive understandings, he or she brings to the text, consciously or unconsciously. According to Dr. J. Philip Hyatt, very little of the Bible relates history for its own sake, or for the purposes that a modern historian would adopt. It is, therefore, history of a special order, designed not simply to inform the reader, but to awaken in the reader a response to what the Lord of history has done.

See also

Apocrypha

Deuterocanonicals

Biblical Canon

External links

Introduction to the Book of Daniel (usccb.org)

Jewish Encyclopedia. Daniel, book of

Early Jewish Writings. Daniel (earlyjewishwritings.com)

Catholic Encyclopedia. Daniel (newadvent.org)

Topical Bible: Book of Daniel (biblehub.com)

Jerome's Commentary on Daniel

The Old Testament Text. (wmcarey.edu/browning/Classes)

• Codex Vaticanus (orthodoxwiki.org)

• THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

• THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

• Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament

• Catholic Encyclopedia: Canon of the Old Testament (discusses differences in the canon)

• Catholic Encyclopedia: Apocrypha

• Jerome on the Canon translation of Jerome's Prologus Galeatus to 1 Kings (bible-researcher.com)

• Edmon Gallagher on Jerome's Prologus and the Council of Hippo regarding the Canon (oxfordpatristics.blogspot.com).
  See also Jerome's Prologus Galeatus and the Old Testament Canon of North Africa, Studia Patristica 69: 2013

• Wisconsin Lutheran. Fourth Century Christianity. Jerome – Commentary on Daniel (fourthcentury.com) This commentary was largely aimed at the criticisms of Porphyry, who took the Book of Daniel as relating to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes.

• Associates for Biblical Research. New Light on the Book of Daniel from the Dead Sea Scrolls Technical - Jul 31, 2012 - by Gerhard Hasel PhD (biblearchaeology.org)

• Time-Stamp for the Book of Daniel. Worst Case view of the Book of Daniel. Evidence of the Dead Sea Scrolls. When was the book of Daniel written? (harvardhouse.com)

• A Letter to Origen from Africanus About the History of Susanna. (forerunner.com) Sextus Julius Africanus (c. 160 – c. 240) was a Christian traveller and historian of A.D. the late 2nd and early 3rd century

• Catholic Encyclopedia. Letter to Africanus (newadvent.org) Origen Adamantius (Ὠριγένης Ἀδαμάντιος, Ōrigénēs Adamántios; 184/185 – 253/254) was a scholar and early Christian theologian who was born and spent the first half of his career in Alexandria. He was a prolific writer in multiple branches of theology, including textual criticism, biblical exegesis and hermeneutics, philosophical theology, preaching, and spirituality.

• OrthodoxWiki. Prayer of the Three Holy Children (orthodoxwiki.org)

• Evidence for Christianity. Are the additions to Daniel (Prayer of Azariah, Suzannah, Bel and Dragon) inspired and reliable? Posted on March 18, 2013 by John Oakes PhD (evidenceforchristianity.org)
• How then do you explain the LXX & MT versions of Daniel & the story of Bel & the Dragon? Posted on March 6, 2008 by John Oakes PhD (evidenceforchristianity.org)

• Early Jewish Writings. Bel and the Dragon (earlyjewishwritings.com)

• The Apocrypha Book 'Bel and the Dragon' Justifiably not Considered Scripture. By Edward G. Rice 13 Sep 1998. Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the course Old Testament Introduction #208 Video Studies Program (based on fall semester 94), Professor Charles E. McLain, Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary (gsbaptistchurch.com)

• The Old Testament Canon and the Apocrypha. Part 3: From Jerome to the Reformation. William Webster (christiantruth.com)
• Luther Had His Chance (orthodoxinfo.com)
• Refuting an Attack on the Deuterocanonicals. A Response to 11 ‘reasons’ that the Deuterocanonicals Should be Thrown Out of the Bible, By Matt1618. Introduction (matt1618.freeyellow.com)
• Roman Catholic and Orthodox Faith Examined, and The Apocrypha: "Reasons why the Apocrypha does NOT belong in the Bible!" (bible.ca)
• CARM Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry: Reasons why the Apocrypha does not belong in the Bible, by Ryan Turner (carm.org)
• Reasoning From the Scriptures with Ron Rhodes Critique of Chapter 2, Does the Apocrypha Belong in the Bible?, by Matt1618
• Background and History to the Apocrypha, By David Phillips Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (churchsociety.org)

Greek and English Septuagint
Latin and English Vulgate
Kings James Apocrypha Online