I was writing a essay to myself about problems with Christianity; I thought I would flesh out all the main arguments, but I got stuck on a problem with why the Sadduccees didn't believe in the resurrection.
Matt 22:23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,....
The Pharisees were pressed by the Sadduccees as to whether they could "prove" resurrection from the scriptures. They came up with some pretty lame stuff:
Rabbi Gamliel 50AD
Isaiah 26:19: Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
Song of Solomon 7:9 And the roof of thy mouth like the best wine for my beloved, that goeth down sweetly, causing the lips of those that are asleep to speak.
Rabbi Meir (139-163AD)
Exodus 15:1 Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea.
Why would they be so desperate, when Daniel 12 contains everything a boy could need?
Looking at the Qumran finds, we see that there are 8 copies of Daniel (they were Daniel fetishists), but the most complete scroll still has no chapter 12.
The most extensively preserved scroll of the book of Daniel from Qumran is one from Cave 4: 4QDana, which contains large portions of Daniel. Preserved are parts of Daniel 1:16–20; 2:9–11, 19–49; 3:1, 2; 4:29, 30; 5:5–7, 12–14, 16–19; 7:5–7, 25–28; 8:1–5; 10:16–20; 11:13–16. Scroll 4QDanb contains Daniel 5:10–12, 14–16, 19–22; 6:8–22, 27–29; 7:1–6, 11(?), 26–28; 8:1–8, 13–16; and 4QDanc has Daniel 10:5–9, 11–16, 21; 11:1, 2, 13–17, 25–29 (Ulrich 1987:18).
Also I noticed that the Septuagint version, has a chapter 13 and 14 added. The controversial part of Daniel, which holds all the accurate prophecy is chap 11.
Christian apologists point out the accurate language and loanwords in earlier chapters. We know that Biblical documents tend to grow in length. So, I'm wondering if the scroll could have been constructed from a genuine early Daniel, with chap 11 added.
The perplexing problem is that chap 12 gives a perfect explanation for how the scroll could have been faked, namely, that it was hidden from view until some idiot revealed it. It would be impossible to have all these accurate prophecies and let people look at them, because they would influence events, so it's totally plausible that nobody saw it until some certain late date, around the Maccabean 160BC date. Christians are all so focused on early-dating Daniel to 580BC, that none of them mention when the scroll was supposedly revealed to the Jews. Surely this would have been an astounding moment, causing much discussion?
It does seem like someone got hold of an original old scroll, and then tacked on chap 11, then 12.... then 13 and 14
I can't find any info on the subject, written by someone sane.