Jeffro
It’s not the “ Maccabean hypothesis”, it’s just the actual basis.
--
Not so as it can be properly termed the 'Maccabean Thesis' or as the said scholar terms it as the 'Maccabean Hypothesis'. Your actual basis is actually your opinion.
--
Haha. Of course it’s not historical. There isn’t even a suitable seven-year period in Nebuchadnezzar’s reign for it to have happened. But let the apologist movement spill forth (already attempting to water down to ‘a period of time’)... 😂 Can’t guarantee I’ll bother responding to your nonsense further though.
--
So if the tree dream in Dan.4 is not historical and if it the book of Daniel is of the 2nd century BC presented as history then why was such such a tree dream included in the book?
scholar JW