Daniel - Chapters 1 to 6

DANIEL CHAPTERS 1-6

DANIEL 1

1:1 The royal line which had reigned in Jerusalem for 400 years, back almost to the time of the first Nebuchadnezzar six dynasties ago in Babylon, the line to which God had committed himself to forever, has been treated as a series of puppet kings to be bullied, manoeuvred, and moved about by Nebuchanezzar whose name will stand for worldly achievement, glory, power, and might in the future.

To all appearances, the God of Jerusalem has been defeated by the gods of Babylon. Removing the possessions of the Jerusalem temple and taking them to a temple in Babylon encourages this impression. But then don’t go by outward appearances!

The Jews are not mere pawns on a political and geographical chessboard. To be in the hand of Nebuchadnezzar is not to be out of the control of God. The story of God’s acts in history has not come to an end. The presence of the Jerusalem temple vessels in Babylon (safe in a temple treasury there) may itself even offer quiet testimony to the fact that God is still at work, his purpose is intact, even though now being pursued in a surprising way in a surprising place.

Daniel offers no answer to the question “Why are we here in exile?” It was simply God’s will.

1:2 Shinaras a term for Babylonia, the southeastern part of modern Iraq, is an archaism in the  Old Testament (e.g., Gen 10:10; 11:2; 14:1, 9; Josh 7:21; Isa 11:11; Zech 5:1)

“His god” is probably Marduk/Bel (cf. 4:5)

1:3-4 The world always wants the best, but these young men determined to give their best to the Lord. It is possible to serve the Lord even in Babylon. Think of Joseph in Egypt and Esther in Persia. Don’t complain about the place where God puts you. Ask Him to use you while you are there.

1:4 The phrase “language … of the Chaldeans” refers to the Babylonian language written in ancient cuneiform. Although Aramaic was the language of the empire, literature was still written in cuneiform. The term “Chaldeans” (kasdim, Heb.) is used in Daniel in two senses: ethnic (5:30; perhaps 1:4; 3:8) and religious (2:2, 4, 5, 10; 4:7; 5:7, 11).

In the former sense, the term (kaldu, Babylonian) was originally used of certain tribes living in southern Mesopotamia, who eventually gained control of Babylon (cf. Is. 13:19; 23:13; 43:14; 47:1, 5; 48:14, 20). After losing control of Babylon for a while, they regained it in 627 b.c. under Nabopolassar, whose dynasty continued with his son Nebuchadnezzar.

Thus, the term “Chaldean” in an ethnic sense is equivalent to “Babylonian.”

The other use of the term, which was probably spelled differently at first, refers to a class of astrologer-priests noted for their literary scholarship.

1:7The four Hebrews discovered a thoroughness in the Babylonian attempts to erase from their minds all memory of former religious commitment.

Their names, all of which in some way incorporated the name of the true God, were replaced with names containing references to the gods of Babylon:

Daniel (“God is my Judge”) to Belteshazzar (“Lady protect the king”)

Hananiah (“God has been gracious”) to Shadrach (“I am very fearful [of god]”)

Mishael (“Who is what God is?”) to Meshach (“I am of little account”)

Azariah (“The Lord has helped”) to Abed-Nego (“Servant of the shining one” [i.e. Nebo]).

1:8Having to live in a foreign country is a defiling experience for Jews (cf. Hos 9:3–4; Amos 7:17). Various considerations might lead Jews in exile to fear defilement through what they ate.

Meat and wine is festival food, and abstaining from it is a sign of mourning or penitence and would be appropriate in exile: cf. 10:3; Isa 22:13. (see also previous notes)

1:12Ten days simply suggests a period short enough not to arouse suspicion yet long enough for effects to be seen (cf. Gen 24:55).

1:17“God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom: and Danielhad understanding in all visions and dreams.^”The library Asshurbanipal in Niniveh assembled in the seventh century is dominated by divinatory texts that record phenomena of various kinds and the events they had preceded. (Most of the tablets are now in the British Museum)

1:21The length of Daniel’s ministry is indicated here. The prophet arrived in Babylon in 605 b.c. and was still a Babylonian official when Cyrus the Persian conquered Babylon in 539 b.c. This is the point of the verse. In fact, according to 10:1, he continued as an official under the Persians until the third year of Cyrus (536 b.c.).

The world wants to change you and make you a “conformer,” but God can help you become a “transformer” (Rom. 12:1–2). Daniel and his friends had a new home, strange new names, new teachings, and were even offered a new diet; but they kept the same heart’s dedication to the Lord (Prov. 4:23).

God can give us favour in difficult places (v. 9). Daniel was courteous his guards and did not create problems for them. He was following the counsel of Jeremiah (Jer. 29) and the example of Joseph (Gen. 39:4).

In Mark 7 discipleship expresses itself by repudiating the distinction between clean and unclean food; in this way believers will demonstrate that the source of moral defilement lies elsewhere.

Acts 10 takes the same stance on a different basis: God is now abolishing the distinction between clean and unclean, which symbolizes and reinforces that between Israel and other peoples, because the gospel first preached to Jews is now to be preached to gentiles also.

When everything in your life is upset and you find yourself in new circumstances that you cannot control, let the Lord take over and work out the plan He has in mind. If your heart is right with Him, His hand will work for you.

Dare to Be a Daniel

DANIEL 2

In Dan 2 the God of Daniel is the central figure and not the courtier.The story of the court, its structure, plot, motifs, words, and phrases parallel the story of Joseph and the Egyptian ruler in Gen 40–41. Unlike Joseph, Daniel offers no practical suggestions arising from the dream.

In both a heathen king has his anxiety aroused by dreams. He summons magicians (the word comes only in Gen 41, Exod 8–9, and Dan 1–2) and other sages, but none can offer an interpretation.

Both stories refer to the king’s anger with his advisers, which leads them to be entrusted to the attention of his chief of police.

Eventually a young Israelite who has been in exile in the king’s custody for two years and who may be able to interpret the dream is discovered and brought hastily before him. In response to the king’s inquiry about his ability as a dream interpreter, he denies possessing such ability in himself; it is God who must give any explanation of the dream. The dream, he declares, concerns future events affecting the king, which the young man explains, adding that the message is certain to come true. As a consequence the king determines to put the young man in a position of honor as prime minister over the whole land.

2:1–13Nebuchadnezzar had a dream for which he demanded not merely the interpretation, but the contents of the dream itself—a much harder demand, not to say impossible. His own wise men, the Chaldeans, were not able to tell him the dream or its meaning, so he made the sweeping decision that all the wise men (including Daniel and his companions) should be destroyed!

2:2“Magicians”or “diviners” is a translation of hartummim (Hebrew), referring to those involved in various kinds of divination. Originally an Egyptian word (Gen. 41:8, 24; Ex. 7:11), the term was used in Babylon of those skilled in dream interpretation. It is used for dream interpreters at the Assyrian court and in the Old Testament for the magicians of Egypt to whom Joseph proved superior.

“Astrologers” translates the Hebrew ˒ashaphim, known in Babylon as those skilled at performing incantations, especially for healing (a related word is translated “heal” in 2 Kin. 5:3, 6).

“Sorcerers” renders mekashephim (Heb.), a more common word for those who used incantations in the practice of sorcery or witchcraft.

“Chaldeans” translates kasdim (Heb.), the most distinguished priestly caste of wise men in Babylon, who probably served as custodians of the mysteries of ancient Babylonian religion (see 1:4, note).

In v. 27, a fifth group, the “soothsayers” (gozrin, Aram.), is included.

The five classes constituted a school of wisdom, and as such exercised considerable influence on the affairs of state. Daniel and his three friends had been thoroughly trained in the wisdom of all these groups. This makes the contrast between Daniel’s religion of revelation and the ludicrous expressions of superstition in Babylon even more amazing. Daniel had obviously learned their ways and methods without gullibly accepting their doctrines.

2:4The Chaldeans addressed Nebuchadnezzar in Aramaic. The specific mention of this fact serves notice that the next section of the book (2:4b—7:28) will be written in Aramaic.

Nebuchadnezzar could conquer empires, but he could not conquer his own anger (v. 12; 3:13, 19; Prov. 16:32). He understood how to defeat the enemy, but he could not understand the message of God.

2:14–30Daniel committed himself to reveal the dream and its interpretation,

2:17, 18He called upon his companions to seek God’s face in prayer. For them, as for the Chaldeans, it was a matter of life and death (v. 18), indicating that the Hebrews were numbered as part of this college of wisdom.

In answer to prayer, Daniel learned from the Lord in a night vision the nature of the dream and the interpretation of it.

In thanks Daniel blessed the God of heaven with a beautiful prayer of praise.

Then he went to Arioch to prevent further killing of the wise men of Babylon. Brought by Arioch intothe presence of the king, Daniel revealed the source of his divinely revealed secret.

Daniel had patience and self-control and could explain the mysteries of God. A pure heart is better than a powerful throne. His faultless wisdom are attested in v. 21. That God alone has light and understands things hidden from all men who are in darkness, is affirmed in v. 22. Compare Isaiah “Lord of light and darkness” (45:3, 7; cf. v 22)

“Mystery” (v 18) appears in the Old Testament only in Dan 2; 4:6. At Qumran it becomes almost a technical term for an enigma that can only be interpreted by God’s revelation, and particularly for God’s hidden purpose at work in history despite its sin.

Mystērion (Greek)appears twenty-one times in Paul’s letters out of a total of twenty-seven New Testament occurrences. Usually it points not to some future event hidden in God’s plan, but to his decisive action in Christ here and now.

Paul normally employs the term with reference to its disclosure or its being revealed (Rom 16:25–26; 1 Cor 2:10; Col 1:26–27; Eph 1:9; 3:3, 5).

“The name of God” (v 20) is another reverential substitute for “Yahweh” (cf. v 19). The name stood for the person. The same was true of the name by which a deity was known: God is revealed in his name.

Daniel and his friends knew the “God of heaven” –

• Who is merciful (v. 18)
• Answers prayer (vv. 19–23; James 1:5)
• Reveals secrets (v. 28).

The “wisdom” of vv 20–23 is supernatural insight rather than human, rational knowledge. It is not something human beings achieve but something they receive from God by revelation. (cf Christ the Wisdom of God, I Cor.1:18-31) Daniel disclaimed any unique wisdom in the matter, explaining that the matter was revealed to the king by means of a faithful and sovereign God (v. 30).

2:31–35 Daniel made known that the king had seen a great image, both splendid and awesome. This image’s head was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. Nebuchadnezzar watched while a stone ... cut out without hands destroyed the image and became a great mountain, filling the whole earth.

Because the four men could come to God’s throne, they had no fear of Nebuchadnezzar’s throne.When he explained the dream, Daniel gave the glory to God and shared the credit with his three friends. He also saved the lives of the king’s wise men (the Chaldeans) when he could have exposed them as frauds (cf v5).

The presence of a believer can mean deliverance for unbelievers (Job 42:7–10; Acts 27:21–25), and we must be forgiving to our enemies. After all, we want to win them to the Saviour.

2:36–45 The image represented the four Gentile powers that would exercise world dominion, ruling over the Jewish people.

• Nebuchadnezzar, an absolute monarch (Babylon), was the head of gold (v. 38).
• Persiawas the arms of silver, one arm representing Media and the other Persia. Silver is superior to gold in strength.
• Greece, the third kingdom. The image’s belly and thighs are of bronze, the metal associated with the conquering legions of Alexander the Great. Bronze is stronger than either gold or silver, but the statue’s value continues to decline.
• The iron refers to the Roman Empire, at one point in time the strongest of all. Yet it, too, divided into the two empires—the East and the West, and in the last days ultimately will become a confederation of many kingdoms (the toes) containing iron and clay, a mixture of strength and weakness. The toes representing ten kingdoms.

This remarkable prophecy of Daniel was fulfilled exactly as he predicted. Babylon fell to the Medes and the Persians, the Persian Empire to Alexander and the Macedonians, and the four divisions of Alexander’s empire to Rome. The West continues today in the heritage of the vast Roman Empire. The final manifestation of that Roman Empire awaits the fulfillment of the last days.

Note the decreasing value of the metals and the increasing strength (except in the feet of iron and clay). Note also that man pictures his empires as valuable metals whereas God pictures those same kingdoms as wild beasts (chap. 7). The Lord Jesus is the stone ... cut out ... without hands. He will destroy the four kingdoms and rule over the whole earth, his kingdom standing forever.

Isaiah, too, suggests that silver and gold, bronze and iron, end up useless as clay (40:19; 45:2; 41:25).

Daniel and his friends knew that God:

• Establishes rulers (v. 37) God gave Nebuchadnezzar not only Jerusalem (1:2) but all his royal might and power (v 37, cf. 5:18), indeed authority over all creation (v 38).
• Will one day set up His kingdom (v. 44).

2:44One final feature of the vision records the ultimate reason for the dream. The vulnerable toes of the great image become the target of a stone which comes from nowhere. The stone has been “cut out” without hands, an indication that the stone, unlike the great image, is not of human origin.

Striking the toes of the image, the stone renders a crushing blow to the iron and clay composition. The entire image falls, being utterly destroyed in that fall. This stone, which “became a great mountain and filled the whole earth” (v. 35), is identified as the kingdom of God. The empires that Daniel and the readers knew did disappear; the rule of the God of heaven was re-established in Jerusalem.

The crag from which the rock came (v 45) might be a symbol for God himself in his strength and reliability (Deut 32:18; Ps 18:3).

Following the destruction of the image, the kingdom of God continues forever in full strength.

It appears that the dream had four results:

(1) the dream and its interpretation brought Daniel to prominence in Babylon with Nebuchadnezzar (vv. 46–49);

(2) the dream further served as an initial warning to Nebuchadnezzar that he, though great, was not invincible, and must prepare for the ultimate dissolution of his kingdom unless he humbled himself to the true God;

(3) the dream must have provided immense consolation to Daniel and the Hebrew captives, assuring them that ultimately God’s kingdom would be triumphant, overcoming all of the ruthless reigns of earthly sovereigns;

(4) Nebuchadnezzar was thereby introduced to the true and living God (v. 47).

2:46–49 When King Nebuchadnezzar heard Daniel’s wisdom, he made him ruler over the whole province of Babylon, and chief administrator over all the wise men of Babylon. The three other Jewish youths were made deputies or assistants.

 DANIEL 3

The reality of the holocaust that followed prevents us from regarding chapters such as Dan 3 as children’s stories. Jer 29:21–23 tells of the burning of two patriotic prophets by Nebuchadnezzar.

This event involves three kinds of people, all of whom are still in our world.

Conformers3:1–7 Nebuchadnezzar ... made an idolatrous image of gold.

3:1The crisis was spawned through the effort of Nebuchadnezzar to produce greater unity in Babylon through the erection of a colossus, perhaps an immense image of himself, on the plain of Dura, and the compulsory worship of the image.

Whatever the nature of the statue, it held religion and state together. The institution that claims absolute authority is inclined also to claim the sanctions of religion. Empires can have feet of clay and can fall apart, so it is as well to use all means to reinforce their strength and unity

“Dura” must have been a plain near the capital, Babylon, and should not be identified with other locations on the Tigris and near Assyria which go by the same name. The enormous image was 60 cubits in height. A cubit is just less than 18 inches, thus bringing the image to a height of nearly 90 feet.

The setting up of statues is a familiar feature of the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek empires. “Gold” may imply gold plating rather than solid gold (Isa 40:19), though Herodotus (1.183) describes a Bel statue made of 800 talents (22 tons) of gold.

He then commanded that when they heard horn, flute, harp, lyre, and psaltery, in symphony with all kinds of music, all men were to fall down to worship it. Any who refused would be cast ... into a fiery furnace.

Concerning the instruments mentioned (v. 5) - None are used in Israelite worship; most are foreign terms for instruments used in secular contexts. They thus imply a double judgment on the alien, pagan nature of the ceremony Nebuchadnezzar is inaugurating.

• The “horn” was an instrument similar to the ram’s horn or shophar (Heb.) used by the Hebrews, but not in worship.
• “Flute” refers to an instrument consisting of reeds of varying thicknesses bound together.
• The “harp” represented a stringed instrument like a zither. The “lyre” was a four-stringed musical piece with a sharp, clear tone.
• The “psaltery” was similar, differing in the construction of the strings with reference to the sounding board.
• The phrase “in symphony with” (sumponeyah, Aram.) is often taken to refer to a sixth instrument somewhat like bagpipes, originally Greek (sumphonia, Gk.), but this meaning has been shown to have developed after Daniel’s time.

The Babylonians’ love for song is attested in Ps. 137:3. The fact that some of these instruments have Greek names is no argument for a late date for Daniel, since Greek products and trading cities existed through much of western Asia as early as the sixth century bc.

Informers3:8–12 Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego, as faithful Jews, refused to worship the idol and were reported by certain Chaldeans to the king.

These were some of the Chaldeans whose lives Daniel and his friends had saved (2:24). Unsaved people do not appreciate what believers do for them. These men wanted only to win the king’s favour and get the high offices he had given to the three Jews (2:49).

Transformers(cf Rom. 12:1–2). 3:13–21 He gave them a chance to change their minds, but they would not. Their confidence in deliverance was magnificent. But even “if not,” they would still be true to the Lord. So the king ordered the fiery furnace heated seven times hotter than usual, and then commanded that the three Jews be thrown into it fully clothed.

The burning of criminals is referred to occasionally throughout the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek periods (Jer 29:22; Herodotus 1.86; 4.69; 2 Macc 7; 13:4–8).

The three men did not know for sure that God would deliver them; but even if He did not, they would still obey the Lord and not worship the king and his idol. Did they trust Isaiah 41:10 and 43:2?

There were contexts in the Old Testament when bowing before foreign idols was not condemned (2 Kgs 5:18–19). Moses himself had said they would do so in exile (Deut 4:27–28).

3:16  Complying with the king’s proposal would have meant violating the second commandment (cf. Ex. 20:4). The answer of the three men to the threats of Nebuchadnezzar is classic. They affirmed their confidence in God to deliver them from death, but also declared that they would still remain faithful to Yahweh and refuse to worship the idol at Dura even if God did not deliver them.

Its challenge is to a bold trust and obedience that gives Caesar what is his, but reserves what is God’s for God. The confession of the three is the more remarkable because it is made without reference to the prospect of resurrection.

3:21The furnace, perhaps some type of kiln, had an opening at the top through which the disobedient were to be dropped, and openings at the bottom for refueling and through which the flames could be observed.

3:22–25The tremendous heat ordered by the king was scarcely essential, but it does cast light on the abusive temper of the monarch. The heat was so intense that the men who served as executioners died from sheer exposure to it (v. 22).

Then when the astonished Nebuchadnezzar looked into the furnace, he saw four men—the three Jews and a fourth whose form was like the Son of God (New King James) or a son of the gods.

The precise identification of this heavenly guest cannot be known. Either he was an angel sent by God to deliver the three Hebrews or else this is a Christophany (a preincarnate appearance of Christ), in which the Lord Himself joined the three to provide a rescue so thorough that the clothing was not even burned, and the smell of smoke was undetectable on the men.

 But no matter how the king viewed him God used him to save the three faithful men. The Lord either saves us out of troubles or He is with us in the troubles. (Isa 43:1–3 promised God’s own presence when Israel walks through the fire.)

3:26–30 The Jews were unharmed. The fire had burned only the cords that bound them. Afflictions succeed in accomplishing God’s purposes and setting us free from the things that bind us. The king was so impressed that he forbade anyone to speak against the God of the Jews and promoted the three young men in the province of Babylon. All this in spite of the fact that they had frustrated his word!

The fire brought them two blessings: the presence of the Lord came and walked with them, and they were set free from their bonds. Fellowship and freedom are often found in the midst of the furnace if you are committed to the Lord.

Nebuchadnezzar was not content to be the “head of gold” (2:38); he wanted to be represented by a whole image of gold! The people were happy to conform to his desires as long as he spared their lives and gave them what they needed.

3:25Nebuchadnezzar’s astonishment at counting four living and unharmed figures in the furnace was heightened Nebuchadnezzar recognized the obvious and concluded that no god he had known would be able to accomplish such a feat. Apparently Nebuchadnezzar alone sees the “divine being”.

As chapter 2 shows that there is a God who can reveal the mysteries of heaven, so chapter 3 shows that there is a God who can intervene in individual and national life, discrediting human pretensions and the monuments that embody them.

 DANIEL 4

The three friends have disappeared, and henceforth the book entirely focuses on Daniel as its hero.

The basic story is of the threatening royal dream interpreted by no one but an exiled Jew. It parallels Gen 41again; the king’s description of the interpreter, as one in whom is the spirit of a holy god.

The question, who is king?—Job 33 parallels the motif of God’s speaking through a dream to warn a man of the judgment coming upon his pride, then drawing him through illness to prayer, repentance, restoration, and testimony.

Chapter 4 is centrally concerned with the kingship of Nebuchadnezzar and the kingship or rule of the Most High No other chapter of the Old Testament uses as often the title Most High: (4:2, 17, 24, 25, 32, 34.)

The central image, the tree, appears widely in this period, but the description of the tree and its felling, and the motif of the humbling of a proud monarch, seem dependent on passages such as Ezek 17 (the Judean king as a tree planted, uprooted, replanted, fruitful, and protective [cf. Lam 4:20]; see especially vv 23:24).

The felling of the tree proves who is king. The tree speaks of a human authority that has its place (cf. v 33 [36]) but has to be kept in its place.

Only a tree that stands for God’s own rule will ultimately be allowed to grow so high and broad that the birds of the heavens shelter in its branches (Mark 4:30–32).

4:1This chapter of Daniel consists of a proclamation of Nebuchadnezzar in which he recounts the sequence of events which transpired in his God-induced humiliation.

Some scholars object that the proud, self-centered king who erected an image of himself at Dura would never condescend to tell a story of his own humiliation. The power of God, however, can change even a king’s proud heart.

The story actually helps the king by explaining the reason for his temporary insanity. It also shows the restoration of the sovereign to his kingdom to be the result of the hand of God.

Nebuchadnezzar’s second dream accomplished three things:

1. It warned the king that his pride would lead to judgment (v. 37; Prov. 16:18);
2. It exposed the incompetence of his magicians (vv. 6–7);
3. And it gave Daniel another opportunity to glorify the God of heaven.

4:1–9 Here Nebuchadnezzar the king witnesses to the greatness of the Most High God and to an experience in his life which led to his conversion (vv. 1–3).

He had a dream which his own wise men were unable to interpret, so he sent for Daniel and told him the dream.

4:4In the Aramaic text this is the first verse of the chapter.

4:5Visions occur with some frequency in the Bible. More than twice as many are related in the O.T. as in the N.T. However, more than half of the references in the O.T. are found in the apocalyptic books of Ezekiel and Daniel.

Visions constituted one of the methods employed by God in the giving of revelation. Although other methods were employed with greater frequency, such as the quiet direction of God’s Spirit and audible communication, visions were used whenever the message was to be given in vivid detail.

These visions were not, strictly speaking, synonymous with dreams; but a state of slumber, whether natural or induced, seems to have been the primary circumstance whenever God revealed His message to the prophets in a vision.

Daniel’s visions of the rise and fall of world empires, John’s visions in Revelation, and Paul’s vision of the poignant appeal of the man from Macedonia are representative of the use God made of visions.

4:10–15b He had seen a tree, high, beautiful, and fruitful. The tree ... reached to the heavens and spread out to the ends of all the earth. A watcher, a holy one coming down from heaven, ordered the tree to be chopped down, leaving only a stump and roots in the ground.

The interpretation refers to the royal dynasty, which will be cut down (the present king) but will survive as a stump with the potential for renewed growth (a new king); cf. Isa 6:13; 11:1; also Job 14:7–9.

“Supernatural watchmen” is one of a number of expressions for heavenly beings in Daniel; for others see 3:28; 7:16; 10:13. It uses the image of a human court to picture God’s management of the affairs of heaven and earth.

4:15–18 Then the holy ones described a man losing his senses and becoming like a wild beast of the earth for seven years.

4:19–26 The dream’s meaning is actually rather obvious—its interpretation requires little more than Nathan’s “You are the man” (2 Sam 12:7).

Danieltold the king of his dream. He would lose his throne, and he would become insane for seven years, living like an animal in the field. The stump signified that throne would not be destroyed but would be restored.

4:19Daniel begins by expressing his wish that the dream were to apply to Nebuchadnezzar’s enemies rather than to him.

The tree which the king saw in the dream represented himself. (see previous notes in Daniel on trees in mythology) The order to fell the great tree prophecied of a temporary form of insanity known as lycanthropy in which a man imagines himself to be some form of animal.

The word derives from the Greek lukos, or “wolf,” and anthropos, meaning “man.” (The medical name for his condition is boanthropy [ox-man] – a rare form of monomania)

During this diseased period, Nebuchadnezzar would find it impossible to continue with the affairs of state (v. 25). Yet control would not be irretrievable, since the stump with its root would be left (v. 26).

The purpose of the lycanthropy was to remind the king of the transcendent sovereignty of the Lord (v. 25). The same assertion was made one year later when the sentence was executed (v. 32).

A fragmentary cuneiform text apparently refers to some mental disorder on Nebuchadnezzar’s part, and perhaps to his neglecting and leaving Babylon. (Grayson, Texts, 87–92; cf. Hasel, Andrews University Seminar Studies 19 [1981] 41–42).

4:27–37 Daniel also counseled the king to change his ways. However, after twelve months of impenitence on the king’s part, the vision came to pass. For seven years he lived like a beast. At the end of that time, he turned to God and acknowledged that He is the Most High ... who lives forever. He was then restored to the glory of his kingdom.

It was not easy for Daniel to give the king the message of the dream. Nebuchadnezzar had a short temper, and he might have ordered Daniel to be killed. Nathan had a similar situation when he had to confront David with his sins (2 Sam. 12). But when your ways please the Lord, you do not worry about your enemies (Prov. 16:7).

God gave the king a year’s opportunity for repentance (v. 29), but he continued in his sins. Then God humbled him. The king learned his lesson, and when he was restored, he gave glory to God.

4:32, 33Nebuchadnezzar’s lycanthropy was not a light case. The king was so thoroughly deluded by hallucinations of his new role as beast that he was driven from the palace and from polite society. The expression “seven times shall pass over you” in v. 32 could mean seven months, seven seasons, or seven years.

Nebuchadnezzar’s banishment from human society into the wild is similar to that experienced by the Old Testament’s first human beings (Gen.3, that, too, is a story about a quasi-royal figure, and involving a tree of life). The desire to be like God led to humanity’s losing even its authority over the animals. Babel led to confusion (Gen.11).

4:37The conclusion of the matter came in the return of the king’s sanity and his restoration to the throne of Babylon. This verse reflects Nebuchadnezzar’s conclusions regarding the dealings of God with men. Whether this confession may be construed as a conversion and a true submission to God is the subject of conjecture.

The whole incident evidently occurred late in his reign, and evidence suggests that the king died shortly thereafter.

Rule on earth as well as the rule of heaven come to belong to the one who becomes poor in spirit (cf. Matt 5:3)

No matter what position we have in life, God gave it to us, and He is sovereign. When man tries to take the place of God, he becomes like a beast. God still resists the proud but gives grace to the humble (Prov. 3:34).

 DANIEL 5

The events in this chapter occurred several years after those recorded in chapter 4. Belshazzar was co-regent with his father Nabonidus, which explains why Daniel was named third ruler in the kingdom (v. 29).

5:1–4 Belshazzar was the son of Nabonidus and the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar (“father” in v. 2 may also mean “grandfather”). He made a great feast, using the sacred gold and silver vessels which ... Nebuchadnezzar had stolen from the temple ... in Jerusalem for an idolatrous carnival. The king and his entourage drank themselves drunk on wine, and praised the gods of gold and silver, bronze and iron, wood and stone.

5:1The introduction of Belshazzar into the narrative has for years provided liberal interpreters with a classic case of supposed biblical error. No such character existed in Babylonian records, and liberal scholarship concluded that Belshazzar was a figment of the author’s imagination.

However, numerous relatively recent archaeological discoveries of unearthed tablets clearly establish not only the existence of Belshazzar but also his association with his father Nabonidus, king of Babylon.

The following outline of the Babylonian monarchy can now be established. Nebuchadnezzar died in 562 b.c. and was succeeded by his son, Evil-Merodach (Babylonian Amel-Marduk; cf. 2 Kin. 25:27), who was then assassinated by Neriglissar, his own brother-in-law. Neriglissar reigned four years, then died in 556 b.c., leaving the throne to his infant son, Labashi-Marduk.

After nine months, Labashi-Marduk was deposed by an anti-Marduk priestly revolution, and Nabonidus was made king in 556 b.c. He was a scholar and antiquarian, and a worshiper of the moon-god Sin, rather than of Marduk, the god of Babylon.

Most of his time was spent in Tema in northern Arabia trying to placate his god, who he believed had been offended. Although Nabonidus was officially king, he left Babylon and the rule to his son Belshazzar in 550 bc.

5:2Nabonidus was Belshazzar’s father. He may have married one of Nebuchadnezzar’s daughters upon usurping the throne. Otherwise, the term “father” may be intended in a figurative sense.

5:5–9 While he and his lords became drunken and riotous, the fingers of a man’s hand appeared, writing on the ... wall. The terrified king offered a purple robe, a chain of gold, and promotion to be one of three rulers (probably with Nabonidus and Belshazzar), to anyone who could interpret the writing.

5:7 Belshazzar promised Daniel a post as “third” ruler in the land (vv. 16, 29). Why not make him second? The answer verifies again the astonishing accuracy of the biblical materials. Nabonidus was first, Belshazzar second, and Daniel would have to be third. Therefore, the events of ch. 5 must be dated in 539 b.c.

Nabonidus had fled, leaving Belshazzar to rule in Babylon. Believing the city to be impregnable (Herodotus says they regarded the Persian siege “with indifference,” since they had stocked the city well with provisions), on a day memorializing some noteworthy event, Belshazzar ordered a momentous celebration, which quickly degenerated into a drunken orgy.

Amid this celebration the king ordered the use of the sacred vessels from the temple in Jerusalem for the drinking of wine and the praising of pagan deities. (cf v1)

According to Herodotus, when the city was taken (by secretly diverting the Euphrates River which ran through it) “there was a festival going on, and they continued to dance and enjoy themselves, until they learned the news the hard way.”

5:10–16 At the queen’s suggestion, Daniel was summoned to interpret the writing. Even after all these years and the changes in government, the excellent wisdom and spirituality of Daniel were remembered at least by someone. So Daniel was brought in before the king.

The king may have been new, but the sin was old: pride and self-confidence. At that very hour, Darius was besieging the city; but so certain was Belshazzar of his defences that he ridiculed Yahweh and praised the false gods of Babylon. It was Proverbs 16:7 over again.

God gave Nebuchadnezzar a year to repent, but He judged Belshazzar that very night. The king had not learned from those who had gone before, and Daniel told him so (vv. 17–23). But it was too late!

5:17–24 After reviewing the experience of Nebuchadnezzar and boldly rebuking Belshazzar for desecrating the vessels of the temple by using them in a drunken, idolatrous feast, Daniel proceeded to reveal the writing and its meaning.

5:17The contrast between Daniel’s demeanor here as a prophet of judgment, and before Nebuchadnezzar in 4:19, is instructive. Daniel spurned the offer of gifts from Belshazzar, knowing them to be meaningless.

He agreed to interpret the strange writing, and preached to Belshazzar a considerable sermon (vv. 18–23) in which he pointed out the lessons learned by Nebuchadnezzar at the hand of God, all of which obviously had failed to impress Belshazzar.

 5:25–31 The mysterious writing on the wall was unintelligible to the Babylonians, whether because of a strange script that may have been employed, or simply the terseness and ambiguity of the inscription. The language, as Daniel explained, was Aramaic, but there would originally have been no vowels. These were supplied, under the inspiration of God, by Daniel. Without them, the wise men probably read the inscription as “mina, mina, shekel, and half-shekels,” which made no sense to them.  

• The term mene(Aram.) could be the monetary “mina,” or a participle meaning “numbered.” Its repetition produces the sense “thoroughly numbered.” God had set limits on Belshazzar’s kingdom.
• The term tekel(Aram.) could be a monetary unit corresponding to the Hebrew shekel, or a participle meaning “weighed.” As a verbal form it is unusual and could be a combination of the verbs taqal(Aram.), “weigh,” and qalal (Heb.), “be light.” Belshazzar was weighed in the balances, and found wanting.
• The final word upharsin(Aram.) could also be a monetary unit, a half-mina or half-shekel, or a plural participle from the verb paras, “divide,” meaning “and divided.” (PHARSIN is the plural of PERES. The “U” means “and.”)                        Belshazzar’s kingdom was divided, and given to the Medes and Persians. That same night, the Medo-Persian armies marched into Babylon, slew Belshazzar, and seized world dominion. Darius the Mede was the new king.

The ambiguity of these terms may explain the wise men’s inability to decipher them. The message of Daniel’s interpretation is that Belshazzar’s kingdom had been numbered for destruction. The king himself is weighed and found wanting. The kingdom was to be taken away and given to the Medes and the Persians. The word for “Persia” had the same consonants as the word for “divide.”

5:31This verse is 6:1 in the Aramaic text. With Belshazzar slain (v. 30) and Nabonidus exiled, the Chaldean Empire was ended. Though Herodotus indicates that Babylon fell as a consequence of the diverting of the waters of the Euphrates, the more plausible Babylonian account (given in the “Cyrus Cylinder” and the “Babylonian Chronicle”) explains it as the result of treason and subterfuge from within, resulting in the opening of the gates to the conquering armies of Cyrus’s general Ugbaru (also called Gubaru), governor of Gutium.

At this point the most difficult historical problem in the book is confronted. None of the ancient historians and none of the cuneiform inscriptions have thus far confirmed the existence of a leader at that time named Darius.

Our knowledge of the administration of Babylon following the Persian conquest is sketchy. It was made a Persian satrapy consisting of Babylonia and the Babylonian Empire west of the Euphrates (“Ebernari”). Cambyses, Cyrus’s son, was declared king of Babylon but was shortly removed.

An individual named Gubaru (not the same as Cyrus’s general, who died in November, 539 b.c.) served as satrap. One named Gubaru is said to have appointed governors under him. Cyrus was soon engaged in military affairs that occupied him for most of the remainder of his reign. He consequently entrusted the administration of the empire to Gubaru.

It may be Gubaru whom Daniel identifies as “Darius the Mede.” Darius I (“the Great”) was in his twenties when he began to reign in 522 b.c., and was not Median but Persian. Daniel intentionally distinguishes the Darius of his book by calling him “the Mede.”

Furthermore, according to the writing on the wall it was the Persians, not the Medes, who were to take the kingdom (see 5:25–28). We know, however, that at least two of Cyrus’s generals were Medes, and that he appointed Medes in administrative positions.

The phrase “received the kingdom” can be translated “took over kingship.” It has been suggested that “Darius” may have been a title meaning “The Royal One.” Whether or not “Darius the Mede” may be identified with the satrap Gubaru, it would be foolish to dismiss the evidence of Daniel as unhistorical in view of the experience regarding the historicity of Belshazzar (see 5:1, note; note that extrabiblical evidence for the existence of Pontius Pilate was only discovered in 1961), as well as our limited knowledge of Persian affairs at that time.

The message of chapter 5 is clear - The self-confident sinner had better beware (Luke 11:16–21), and so should a proud world that says, “peace and safety!” (1 Thess. 5:1–11). In Noah’s day and in Abraham’s day, judgment came when people least expected it (Luke 17:26–32). It will happen again.

 DANIEL 6

In this chapter, perhaps one of the best known in the whole Bible, Daniel is living under Persian rule. He has been promoted by Darius the king to become one of three governors to be over the one hundred and twenty satraps. Due to the Spirit in Daniel, Darius gave thought to setting him over the whole realm.

Daniel faced three crises, and the Lord gave him victory in each one.

The work crisis(1–5). When the other officers heard that Daniel might be promoted, they were envious and wanted to get rid of him.

Officials who were jealous of Daniel and who knew that they would never find him guilty of any real crime persuaded the king to pass a law forbidding prayer to anyone but Darius for thirty days. Once the decree became law, it could not be changed. Daniel’s steadfastness is a challenge to us (1 Pet. 3:13–17).

6:3Darius the Mede obviously recognized in Daniel an asset upon which he could capitalize. Accordingly, Daniel was made an administrative supervisor, together with two others, who in turn governed through 120 lower officials.

Daniel’s clear ascendancy became the cause of jealousy and envy among the other governors and satraps (v. 4), and this eventually led to the plot to depose him (vv. 5–9).

This plan designed to ensnare Daniel was doubtless presented to Darius in Daniel’s absence, with the idea that such a plan would bring increased unity to the Mede’s rule and authority.

The unbelieving world does not want a believer in charge, even if he or she is gifted and efficient. The light always reveals what happens in the darkness (Eph. 5:8–13).

The prayer crisis(6–17). The officers lied when they used the word all, for that gave the king the idea that Daniel agreed with them.

King Darius signed the written decree.

(In Esther, King Ahasuerus was also duped by his subjects into making an “unalterable” law condemning God’s people.)

6:10Especially notable is the fact that Daniel’s knowledge of the decree of Darius not only failed to dissuade him from his practice of seeking God’s face three times each day, but also created a desire in him to seek God’s face immediately.

The trap was sprung, and, though Darius was pained by his own decree (v. 14), the strict nature of the law of the Medes and the Persians compelled him to send Daniel to the den of lions (vv. 16, 17).

Daniel, threatened by the lion’s den, (like Esther, facing Ahasuerus), was in danger of losing his live. Both depended on their God to save them, facing danger heroically. Both were foreigners in the Persian Empire.

In each case, a Persian king regretted signing a decree into an irrevocable law. In both accounts, God’s people were saved from their enemies.)

But no laws or threats could keep Daniel from his times of prayer. Is prayer to you a matter of life and death? It was to Daniel!

Dariustrieduntilsunset to free Daniel, but the decree was unalterable, so he was compelled to have Daniel cast ... into the den of lions. Nevertheless, this pagan king encouraged Daniel that the God whom Daniel served continually would deliver him.

It is beautiful to see how even unbelievers will sometimes pick up on the faith and morals of consistent believers whom they observe at close hand. Only too often Christians fail their unsaved friends and relatives by not having as high standards of faith and practice as the world expects from God’s people.

The faith crisis(18–28). Rejecting his usual nightly entertainment, Darius spent the night fasting.

6:22One should not imagine that Daniel knew from the outset of the experience that rescue would be forthcoming. He was advanced in years, and there was no reason to suppose that God would intervene to spare his life again. Courage and steadfastness in faith motivated him to continue his walk with God.

Very early in the morning, the worried king ... went in haste to the den and found the Jewish prophet unharmed by the lions.

In typical fashion the Daniel gave the Lord the glory: “My God sent His angel and shut the lions’ mouths, so that they have not hurt me.”

God did not keep Daniel out of the den; He protected him in the den. Why? Because Daniel had faith in the Lord (v. 23; Heb. 11:33) and was faithful to the Lord (Ps. 18:17–24). Perhaps Daniel meditated on Psalm 37:1–15 and Proverbs 11:8.

Then Daniel’s accusers were cast to the lions and devoured. The result of all this was that King Darius issued a decree to all peoples, nations, and languages honoring the God of Daniel.

Nonetheless, when the king hastened to the den at daybreak and shouted his inquiry, Daniel was able to respond that he and the placid lions had had company during the night. God’s angel had temporarily tamed the lions.

When the lions are about to attack, trust the Lord and claim His promises.