Page 1 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
Precept Upon Precept Daniel Part One, Lesson Three, Chapter Two Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012 Karen Molle, Precept Leader Prayer Requests: Please continue in prayer for Delynda's Dad and Mom; for our church and pastor; for her concerning patience (one of her weakest points—her words, not mine!) for Shannon K.'s salvation, a place to live, and a job for the upcoming election for president. Praise for answered prayer for our nation and leadership to turn to God and repent: 2 Chronicles 7:14 > and My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land. for salvation for Chip and Jennifer that D. will draw close to God during this especially sorrowful time in her life Oh Ladies! Wasn't today's class just wonderful? Your participation shared God's Words so splendidly with all of us. Let's all now apply what we saw about Daniel's godly life to our own lives and meditate on those things that we learned about God and He will be glorified. Thank you so much—you make the class better than it's ever been. P.S. Remember to do Days 1-3 of Lesson Four for next week's discussion. Love you all—hugs and squeezes, Karen
1
Daniel Part One, Lesson Three b Chapter 1 Lesson emphasis: Daniel 1
Review: Brief review of the theme of Daniel and main segments of the book: Daniel is about kings and kingdoms. The theme is: God Most High rules over the realm of mankind. Chapters 1-6 are chronological. Chapters 7-12 fit chronologically into the events of 1-6. In the first six chapters, Daniel interprets kings' dreams. In the last chapters, Daniel dreams and an angel interprets. Daniel Chapter One Chapter Theme: In Babylon, Daniel and his three friends refuse to defile themselves with the king's food and wine and then enter into the king's service. Daniel 1:1-2. vv. 1. The third year of Jehoiakim king of Judah Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, besieged Jerusalem. Jeremiah and Isaiah had given Israel warnings of divine judgment (Deffinbaugh 1995): Look up Jeremiah 32:26-‐32; Isaiah 39:5-‐7 â Now from this first captivity most interpreters think the seventy years are to be dated, though Jerusalem was not destroyed, nor the captivity completed, till about nineteen years after, In that first year Daniel was carried to Babylon, and there continued the whole seventy years (see v. 21). (Henry n.d.) 1
All references in Arial: Daniel Part 1 Leader Guide, Lesson 3, Chapter 1. 2006 Precept Ministries International.
Page 2 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
v. 2. The Lord gave Jehoiakim to Nebuchadnezzar and he was taken to Shinar, another name for Babylon. God also gave the Babylonian king some of the vessels of His temple in Jerusalem, which Nebuchadnezzar put into his god's treasury. Daniel was fully convinced that it was God who gave Jehoiakim king of Judah, into the hands of Nebuchad-‐ nezzar. It was this knowledge which enabled Daniel to deal with his own circumstances in the godly manner evident throughout the Book of Daniel. (Deffinbaugh 1995) The Lord gave. From the very beginning of this record, it is made clear that Nebuchadnezzar’s success was not through his prowess alone; it was the work of the one true God, who brought about the complete collapse of the Judean monarchy and the deportation of the people of Jerusalem into exile.2 (Archer 1986) That Daniel’s God was not asleep but in full command of the situation is indicated by the name for deity se-‐ lected by the author. In v. 2 the word translated “Lord” is not Yahweh but ʾădōnay, and this fact is sig-‐ nificant. “Owner, ruler, or sovereign” is the meaning of ʾădōnay, the equivalent of kyrios in the New Tes-‐ tament and in the LXX and Theodotion. By the use of this expression, Daniel was emphasizing â the sovereignty of Yahweh, which is the dominant theme of the book. It continues to dominate the entire Book of Daniel, â along with the accompanying theme of God’s unwavering purpose to bring his people back to repentance through disciplinary suffering, so equipping them spiritually for restoration to the Land of Promise. (Archer 1986) along with some of the vessels of the house of God. including the gold and silver cups and utensils used in the temple ceremonies in Jerusalem. (Henry n.d.) The Jews fondly trusted to the temple to defend them, though they went on in their iniquity. And now, to show them the vanity of that confidence, the temple is first plundered. Those vessels which were most valuable, Nebuchadnezzar brought as trophies of victory to the house of his god, to whom, with a blind devotion, he gave praise of his success; and having appropriated these vessels, in token of gratitude, to his god, he put them in the treasury of his god. (Henry n.d.) Particular mention is made of the taking away of the vessels of the house of God because we shall find afterwards that â the profanation of them was that which filled up the measure of the Chaldeans’ iniq-‐ uity, ch. 5:3. But observe, It was only some of them that went now; some were left them yet upon trial, to see if they would take the right course to prevent the carrying away of the remainder. (Henry n.d.) See the righteousness of God—his people had brought the images of other gods into his temple, and now he suffers the vessels of the temple to be carried into the treasuries of those other gods. (Henry n.d.) the temple of his god. Nebuchadnezzar’s name contains the designation of the god Nabu/Nebo, but “his god” probably refers to Marduk (Bel), the chief god of Babylon who of course was worshiped by the king. Goldingay notes that “Nebuchadnezzar’s inscriptions refer most to Marduk, Nabu being his fa-‐ ther’s god.” Nebuchadnezzar also named his son Amel-‐Marduk (called Evil-‐Merodach in Jer 52:31–34 and 2 Kgs 25:27–30), which means “man of Marduk,” suggesting that his principal god was Marduk. (Miller 2001) Shinar is a term used for Babylon with the nuance of a place hostile to faith (Walvoord n.d.) and was syn-‐ onymous with opposition to God; it was the place where wickedness was at home (Zc 5:11) and up-‐ rightness could expect opposition. (Miller 2001) It is associated with Nimrod (Gen 10:10), became the locale of the Tower of Babel (Gen 11:2), and is the place to which wickedness is banished (Zec 5:11). (Walvoord n.d.) v. 3,6. During the first siege, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were taken captive to Babylon. They were evidently among either the royal family or the nobles of Judah. Why were the Jews in Babylon in the first place? They were in Babylon because of the rebellion of their nation against their God. Israel had been warned, but they turned against God. Court officials is a translation of the Hebrew sārîs. A sārîs could refer to a literal eunuch (cf. Isa 56:3), but the term also was employed in a general sense to designate any official. Since the king wanted young
Page 3 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
men who were “without any physical defect” (v. 4), we may assume they were not mutilated in this manner. Likely it was only those in charge of the king’s harems who were made eunuchs. (Miller 2001) The children and young men, especially such as were of noble or royal extraction, that were sightly and promising, and of good natural parts, were carried away. Thus was the iniquity of the fathers visited upon the children. These were taken away by Nebuchadnezzar, (1.) As trophies, to be made a show of for the evidencing and magnifying of his success. (2.) As hostages for the fidelity of their parents in their own land, who would be concerned to conduct themselves well that their children might have the better treatment. (Henry n.d.) (3.) As a seed to serve him. He took them away to train them up for em-‐ ployments and promotions under him. (Henry n.d.) (4.) Further, their careful training and preparation to be his servants might serve Nebuchadnezzar well in later administration of Jewish affairs. (Walvoord n.d.) (5.) Concerning the purpose of taking these captives, Baldwin comments, “A few choice hostages from the Judean court would weaken resources there, prove useful to the conqueror and reinforce Judah’s vassal status.” This passage demonstrates at least a partial fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy that descendants of Hezekiah would be taken as officials to Babylon (cf. Isa 39:7). (Miller 2001) v. 4. Daniel and his friends were youths. According to "Daniel's Time Chart" used in Lessons One and Two, he was about 15 years old. They were good-looking, intelligent young men with skills to serve in Nebuchadnezzar's court. So Nebuchadnezzar put them into training and assigned them new names (v. 7). Nebuchadnezzar resolved to pool the best brains and abilities discoverable in the ranks of the nations he had conquered. Since the hostages from Judah included the finest of the royalty and nobility, it was rea-‐ sonable to open up special opportunities for gifted young Jews at the royal academy in Babylon. (Archer 1986) Intelligence was of the utmost importance to Nebuchadnezzar. “Showing intelligence” is a translation of the Hebrew word maśkîlîm (root=śākal, “to be prudent”), which means in this verbal form “having in-‐ sight” or “comprehension.” Here it speaks of the ability to learn or comprehend information and would include secular as well as religious instruction. (Miller 2001) Why would Nebuchadnezzar choose the young? He chose such as were young, because they would be pliable and tractable, would forget their own people and incorporate with the Chaldeans. (Henry n.d.) serving in the king's court. not only to attend his royal person, but to preside in his affairs. (Henry n.d.) The literature and language of the Babylonians would be the general body of knowledge known and studied in Babylon. (Miller 2001) Babylonian religion had always required a thorough knowledge of Sumerian literature—religious, magical, astrological, and scientific. (Archer 1986) Daniel and his friends would have known several other languages, including Hebrew, Aramaic, and, later, Persian. (Miller 2001) Babylon was the learning center of the day and had acquired the remarkable library left by the Assyrian ruler Ashurbanipal (669–626 b.c.). According to Wiseman, Babylonian texts indicate that the schools of the day copied sign lists, word lists, paradigms, legal materials, all kinds of religious documents, fables, omen texts including those about “devils and evil spirits,” astrological and mathematical texts, econom-‐ ic data, as well as historical materials. Obviously Babylon’s religious teachings were part of the youths’ instruction, but this should occasion no difficulty. These teenagers had no choice in the matter, and as Young points out, “That the youths did not accept the superstitious and false elements in this wisdom is shown by the later examples of their steadfast faith in God.” (Miller 2001) v. 5. What were some of the pressures that Daniel and his friends may have faced with this issue of the king's food and drink? At the very beginning of their career in a three-‐year program, the young Yahweh worshipers were faced with a (1) clear-‐cut issue of obedience and faith. They were doubtless (2) subjected to intense social pressure from their classmates and teachers to do what everyone else was doing. (3) They might have argued with themselves about the apparent folly of letting a ceremonial
Page 4 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
quibble destroy their chances of attaining high positions in the government. (4) Should they not accept the royal diet and thus avoid giving needless offense to their classmates or to the officials of the king himself? Where else in the Bible did we see a choice about whether or not to eat a food in order to obey God? It is significant that precisely in the matter of forbidden food, in which Satan successfully tripped up Adam and Eve, these four Hebrew youths passed their first test with flying colors. (Archer 1986) v. 6. These only of the captives are to figure in the narrative following, and no other names are given. The corrupting influences of Babylon were probably too much for the others, and they were useless in God’s hands. (Walvoord n.d.) v. 7. Most of the time people refer to Daniel's friends by the Babylonian names, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, rather than their Jewish names. Significantly, all of their Hebrew names indicate their relationship to the God of Israel, and in the customs of the time, connote devout parents. This perhaps explains why these, in contrast to the other young men, are found true to God: they had godly homes in their earlier years. (Walvoord n.d.) Daniel—God is my Judge; Hananiah—The grace of the Lord; Mishael—He that is the strong God; Azariah—The Lord is a help. (Henry n.d.) What could have been a motive in changing the boy's names from Hebrew to Chaldean ones? The commander of the officials changed the names of Daniel and his fellows, partly to show his authority over them and their subjection to him, and partly in token of their being naturalized and made Chalde-‐ ans. (Henry n.d.) Daniel is given the name of Belteshazzar, identical to Belshazzar and meaning “protect his life,” or prefera-‐ bly “May Bel protect his life” (see Dan 4:8). Bel was a god of Babylon (cf. Baal, the chief god of the Ca-‐ naanites). (Walvoord n.d.) Hananiah was given the name of Shadrach. Leupold interprets this as being a reference to the compound of Sudur, meaning “command,” and Aku, the moon-‐god. Hence the name would mean “command of Aku.” Young considers the name a perversion of Marduk, a principal god of Babylon. (Walvoord n.d.) Mishael is given the name of Meshach. Leupold considers this to be a contraction of Mi-‐sha-‐aku meaning, “who is what Aku (the moon-‐god) is?” (Walvoord n.d.) Azariah is given the name of Abed-‐nego which probably means “servant of Nebo” with Nebo corrupted to nego. Nebo was considered the son of the Babylonian god Bel. (Walvoord n.d.) Discuss: Any of the following three points in Nebuchadnezzar’s program for the Hebrew captives could have posed a problem for Daniel and his friends: (1) Exchanging their Hebrew names for Gentile names. (a) The Babylonian names were not a matter of choice for either Daniel or his three friends. (b) Likely Daniel was aware of an Old Testament precedent for a heathen king giving a new (foreign) name to a Hebrew in his service. (c) â In the Old Testament Scriptures, name-‐giving was most significant when God gave the name. (Deffinbaugh 1995) (2) Attending a Babylonian school. (a) The purpose of the Babylonian education was not to brainwash the Hebrew captives, in this au-‐ thor's opinion, but to teach them to speak, read and write Aramaic, the language of the land. As pol-‐ ytheists, the Babylonians were not threatened by differing religions or other gods. Opposing opin-‐ ions: This is the view of Lehman Strauss and of Donald K. Campbell: “I take it that they were really being permitted an unlimited indulgence, which was a part of Nebuchadnezzar’s brain-‐washing de-‐ vice. It was the king’s subtle method of orientation, a clever scheme to denationalize them com-‐ pletely. This same form of denationalization and brain-‐washing is being carried on by communists in our day.” Lehman Strauss, Daniel (Neptune, New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1969, p. 37).
Page 5 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
“Daniel and his friends had to be reeducated if they were to be of any value to Nebuchadnezzar. They were to be indoctrinated or brainwashed so that they would no longer think or act like Jude-‐ ans, but like Babylonians.” Donald K. Campbell, Daniel: Decoder of Dreams (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1977, p. 9). (b) Second, in Deffinbaugh's opinion, education is not to brainwash but communicate ideas. The student is not compelled to agree, or to believe what he is taught. (c) Third, these young men were not highly impressionable children who would unquestioningly accept anything they had been taught. These were well-‐taught men grounded in the Old Testament scrip-‐ tures. Daniel is certainly familiar with the prophecy of Jeremiah at least, and probably much more (see Daniel 9:1-‐19). They had the Old Testament scriptures as the standard by which to judge all they were being taught, and they evidenced the courage to stand on their own. (Deffinbaugh 1995) (3) Participating in the government of a Gentile nation which had no fear of God, which worshipped heathen gods, and which had overcome the southern kingdom of Judah. Why did Daniel have no difficulty with becoming a part of the government which defeated his own nation and destroyed the temple? (a) First, the Jews had sinned, the judgment of Judah had been prophesied, and the defeat of Jehoiakim by Nebuchadnezzar was at the hand of God (1:2). The sovereign God who raises up kings and puts them down (see Daniel 2:21) is the one who gave Judah into the hands of the Babylonians. (b) â Second, to seek Babylon’s well-‐being was to be obedient to God’s instructions, as given by the prophet Jeremiah: Jeremiah 29:4-‐7 NAS95 4 "Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon, 5 'Build houses and live in them; and plant gardens and eat their produce. 6 'Take wives and become the fathers of sons and daugh-‐ ters, and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; and multiply there and do not decrease. 7 'Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the LORD on its behalf; for in its welfare you will have welfare.' Neither Jeremiah nor the Jews of Judah were to pray for the people of Judah because the time for their judgment had come (Jeremiah 7:16-‐20 NAS95 16 "As for you, do not pray for this people, and do not lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with Me; for I do not hear you. 17 "Do you not see what they are doing in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? 18 "The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the queen of heaven; and they pour out drink offerings to other gods in order to spite Me. 19 "Do they spite Me?" declares the LORD. "Is it not themselves they spite, to their own shame?" 20 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, "Behold, My anger and My wrath will be poured out on this place, on man and on beast and on the trees of the field and on the fruit of the ground; and it will burn and not be quenched."). They were, however, to pray for the well-‐being of the Babylonians. They were also in-‐ structed to work for the welfare of that place (Jeremiah 29:7). In seeking the good of Babylon, they were seeking their own welfare. Daniel’s years of service to Babylon greatly benefited the king and his captors. It also benefited the Jews. Daniel was not defiling himself by his involvement with Neb-‐ uchadnezzar or his government. Instead he was obeying God’s commands as given through Jeremi-‐ ah. (Deffinbaugh 1995) v. 8. This verse is significant. Daniel decided that he would not defile himself by eating things unclean according to the law of the Lord. He knew what the Lord had said, and he had seen what had happened to his people for disobeying the Lord. By their compliance they would please everybody. But they would not please God, to whom they were sur-‐ rendered body and soul. So at the start of their career, they faced squarely their priorities and deter-‐ mined to trust God to see them through the perils of noncompliance and possible forfeiture of all that they had gained. By their early refusal to disobey God, they prepared themselves for future greatness as true witnesses for the one true God in the midst of a degenerate pagan culture. (Archer 1986)
Page 6 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
Here obedience to Scripture’s divine commands may be observed. This is one reason God blessed Daniel with such great insight. He acted upon the spiritual light he had, and God honored his faithfulness by imparting more. (Miller 2001) Gāʾal (defile) occurs eleven times in the Old Testament (e.g., Mal 1:7, 12; Ezra 2:62; Neh 7:64; Isa 59:3) and refers to moral or ceremonial defilement. In this case Daniel would have been defiled on both counts. (Miller 2001) What may have been some of Daniel's reasons deciding to not eat the king's food? 1. They were scrupulous concerning the meat, lest it should be sinful. Sometimes such meat would be set before them as was expressly forbidden by their law, as swine’s flesh; or they were afraid lest it should have been offered in sacrifice to an idol, or blessed in the name of an idol. Providence seemed to lay this meat before them; being captives they must eat what they could get and must not disoblige their masters; yet, if the command be against it, they must abide by that. 2. They were jealous over themselves, lest, though it should not be sinful in itself, it should be an occasion of sin to them, lest, by indulging their appetites with these dainties, they should grow sinful, voluptuous, and in love with the pleasures of Babylon. Those that would excel in wisdom and piety must learn betimes to keep under the body and bring it into subjection. (Henry n.d.) 3. The food provided did not meet the requirements of the Mosaic law in that it was not prepared according to regulations and may have included meat from forbidden animals…Daniel’s handling of this problem sets the spiritual tone for the entire book. (Walvoord n.d.) What are some ways in which Daniel's decision would have been a courageous act? All of these fac-‐ tors could have caused some people to compromise, but Daniel and his friends remained faithful to their God. (1) To refuse the royal diet could have been taken as an insult to the king and as an act of di-‐ rect disobedience to Nebuchadnezzar’s orders. (2) Pressure from Daniel’s peers most certainly made the decision difficult. Everyone else was doing it. By choosing this course of action, Daniel and his friends were setting themselves apart from the others. Now they were different, strange. (3) Such unor-‐ thodox behavior could have jeopardized their chances for advancement. (4) The quality of food would have been attractive. It was the best in the land. (5) Their new location may have tempted them to be unfaithful. Judah was nine hundred miles away; parents and friends would never know whether or not they kept God’s laws. Yet Daniel and his friends were aware of a very important fact. â Other people might not know their actions, but God would know, and someday all will give an account of themselves to him. (6) It would have been natural to argue that since God had not protected them from captivity— this horrible situation—they did not have to be careful to obey his commands. They could have become bitter toward God during this time. Sometimes believers fall into this trap. (Miller 2001) vv. 9-16. As the Lord gave Daniel favor and compassion from the commander of the officials, he received the overseer's permission not to eat the kings' food and wine. Like Joseph son of Jacob, who had commended himself to Potiphar and to the warden of his prison, Daniel must have shown an attitude of sincere good will and faithfulness to duty toward those over him. v. 9. Favor (ḥesed) in this context suggests goodwill, and compassion (raḥămîm) conveys compassion or a tender feeling. Ashpenaz had genuinely grown to admire and feel affection toward these Jewish cap-‐ tives. God’s common grace, which operates in the hearts of unbelievers, is exemplified here. (Miller 2001) v. 10. What was Ashpenaz's reasoning for refusing Daniel's request? Ashpenaz openly disclosed why permission could not be granted. He greatly feared the king. He would not allow Daniel's request for fear that doing so would adversely affect Daniel and himself. (Deffinbaugh 1995) The information the commander gave Daniel was of great value. What did Daniel come to understand after this conversation with Ashpenaz? Daniel understood that his actions would affect his superiors
Page 7 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
as well as himself. He needed to act in a way to please God and to protect and prosper his superiors. (Deffinbaugh 1995) vv. 11-‐16. How did Daniel resolve the issue? v. 11. Daniel sought out his immediate superior, referred to as the overseer in whom Ashpenaz had put in charge. Since he was directly involved with Daniel, Daniel sought him out, not in an effort to circumvent Ashpenaz, but because he was in a position to execute and evaluate Daniel’s proposed plan of action. (Deffinbaugh 1995) vv. 12-16. Daniel proposed a ten-day test to his overseer appointed by the commander. The overseer agreed, and the Hebrew youths were successful. v. 12. Vegetables is a translation of the Hebrew zērōaʿ, which means basically “that which grows from sown seed.” The term would include not only vegetables but fruits, grains, and bread that is made from grains. Daniel’s diet was similar to many so-‐called health food diets today. By this request Daniel was not suggesting that eating meat was wrong (cf. 10:2), for a meat diet was permitted and in some in-‐ stances even commanded in the law (e.g., in the case of the Passover lamb and other sacrifices). He sought to exclude these items from his diet for reasons stated previously. (Miller 2001) vv. 13-‐14. What was the goal of feeding the young men the choice food? The goal was peak perfor-‐ mance, physically and mentally. The “control group,” against whom Daniel and his friends could be compared, was the rest of the Hebrew trainees. (Deffinbaugh 1995) What was accomplished by the compromise? If Daniel’s group could match or surpass the others, then the goal of the Babylonian officials was obtained, yet in a way that did not defile the Hebrew youths. Daniel’s proposal is submissive because it seeks the permission of the one directly in charge; it seeks to fulfill the purposes of Daniel’s superiors. (Deffinbaugh 1995) v. 14. This was the first-‐recorded exercise of faith on Daniel’s part, and it served to prepare him for the even greater testings that were to follow. It proved completely successful. (Archer 1986) vv. 15-‐16It would seem God divinely intervened not only making the condition of Daniel and his friends markedly superior, but in a very short period of time. Daniel’s proposal not only preserved the purity of these four Jews, but it did so in a way that benefitted their superiors. After all, if Daniel and his friends were so obviously superior to the rest, the king would give some of the credit to those in charge of them. (Deffinbaugh 1995) v. 17. All abilities and gifts ultimately come from the Lord, who is the source of all blessings (cf. Jas 1:17). This verse makes it clear that Daniel and his friends were granted special intellectual ability by the Lord, not because of their diet, but because of his approval of their faith and commitment to his word. (Archer 1986) The expression every branch of literature and wisdom has reference to literature and the wisdom to un-‐ derstand it. As Keil puts it, Daniel “needed to be deeply versed in the Chaldean wisdom, as formerly Mo-‐ ses was in the wisdom of Egypt (Acts vii. 22), so as to be able to put to shame the wisdom of this world by the hidden wisdom of God.” (Walvoord n.d.) The young prophet was miraculously endowed with a gift highly prized in that day, especially in Babylon— the ability to understand all kinds of visions and dreams. (Miller 2001) There are two reasons for directing attention to the fact that Daniel could understand visions and dreams at this point in the book. First, dream interpretation was an important part of Babylonian wisdom, and the Babylonians firmly believed that the gods spoke through dreams. That Daniel had this gift was noteworthy. Second, the statement prepares the reader for the dreams and visions that follow. (Miller 2001)
Page 8 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
This was not a foolish boast but an actual fact necessary to understand Daniel’s role as a prophet in the chapters which followed. In this, Daniel differed from his companions as a true prophet. His ability to discern and interpret visions and dreams primarily had in view the interpretation of the dreams and vi-‐ sions of others. (Walvoord n.d.) vv. 18-20. They obeyed the Lord, and He took care of them, even in the king's training. When they were presented to King Nebuchadnezzar, he found them ten times better in understanding and wisdom than all of his magicians and conjurers. v. 19. Nebuchadnezzar himself apparently was in charge of the oral exams. (Archer 1986) He could do it, being a man of parts and learning himself, else he would not have come to be so great; and he would do it, for it is the wisdom of princes, in the choice of the persons they employ, to see with their own eyes, to exercise their own judgment, and not trust too much to the representation of others. (Henry n.d.) v. 20 wisdom. the Hebrew omāh was primarily concerned with living responsibly before God and coping successfully with every problem or task confronting him as a servant of God. (Archer 1986) Understanding is a term that emphasizes the power of discernment, the ability to distinguish between ap-‐ pearance and reality, between the false and the true, between the evil and the good. It implies a kind of perceptiveness that can see through any deception or specious appearance and grasp the issue in its proper light. In the administration of the affairs of a great empire, King Nebuchadnezzar felt a special need for advisors who possessed this kind of discernment and could warn him against ill-‐considered measures that might horn out badly. (Archer 1986) Magician. The word literally means “engraver” or “writer” and only secondarily “diviner, astrologer, magi-‐ cian.” Strictly speaking, ḥarṭōm seems to describe persons who wrote with a stylus on clay tablets, in this case the religious scribes or sacred writers who recorded and preserved the materials used in the Babylonian religious activities. These wise men meticulously chronicled, for example, the movements of the heavenly bodies in order to gain religious wisdom from them. (Miller 2001) Although we may assume trickery often was involved, the Babylonian magicians performed serious func-‐ tions. Supposedly in touch with the world of the spirits and the gods, these individuals were the advis-‐ ers to the king on virtually every matter. They employed rites and spells intended to heal, exorcise de-‐ mons, or counter an evil spell placed upon the sufferer. Omens were studied in order to understand the future, and astrology played an important part in this activity. Techniques, such as examining a sheep’s liver (hepatoscopy), also were employed in decision making (cf. Ezek 21:21). Dream interpretation was another function of these wise men as may be observed from ancient sources and the Book of Daniel it-‐ self. Primarily the official magicians were protective and benevolent, but there were unofficial sorcer-‐ ers who dealt in black magic and were supposedly in league with evil forces. Daniel’s cohorts, however, were of the benevolent variety and sought to protect the king and the kingdom from the various evils that might arise and to interpret the various messages the gods might convey. Yet sorcery of any kind is demonic and severely condemned in Scripture (e.g., Lev 19:26). (Miller 2001) Conjurers. “Conjurers” with their magic spells and incantations were believed to be able to communicate with the spirit world. (Miller 2001) It certainly involved the use of uttered spells or potent combina-‐ tions of words or phrases thought to possess the ability to accomplish desired magical results. (Archer 1986) But what about the involvement of these four faithful Hebrews in the occult arts? Observe in this connection that the text does not state that the four Hebrews actually engaged in the practice of divina-‐ tion or conjuration themselves, which would doubtless have been forbidden them (cf. Deut 18:10–12). It simply states that they attained oma bînāh (wisdom and understanding). This implies that in the at-‐ tainment of results, the securing of a knowledge of the future or of what would be the best decision to make on the part of the government in view of unknown future contingencies, or the like, Daniel and his three colleagues far excelled the professional heathen diviners and conjurers. (Archer 1986) Examples of Daniel’s superiority appear in chapter 2, where he alone could reconstruct Nebuchadnezzar’s dream about the fourfold image, chapter 4, where he alone could interpret the warning dream of the
Page 9 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
felled tree; and chapter 5, where he alone could interpret the mysterious handwriting on the wall. In none of these instances is there any indication that Daniel resorted to occult practices; To whom did Daniel go for his wisdom and understanding? he simply went to God directly in prayer, and God re-‐ vealed the answer to him. (Archer 1986) ten times better. By this is meant that they had high intelligence and keen discernment in the matters which they had studied. (Walvoord n.d.) Their straightforward character and honesty, as well as the deep insight of these young men into the real meaning of their studies, must have stood in sharp contrast to the wise men of the king’s court, who of-‐ ten were more sly and cunning than wise. Nebuchadnezzar, himself an extraordinarily intelligent man as manifested in his great exploits, was quick to respond to these bright young minds. (Walvoord n.d.) v. 21. Daniel stayed in the king's service for the entire 70 years of captivity, into the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia. Daniel also was blessed by the Lord with a long life, probably about eighty-‐five or ninety years (ca. 620–535 b.c.). (Miller 2001) He lived and prophesied after the first year of Cyrus; but that is mentioned to intimate that he lived to see the deliverance of his people out of their captivity and their return to their own land. (Henry n.d.) Daniel’s retirement must have taken place some years before his death, for he spoke of receiving his revela-‐ tions in “the third year of Cyrus” (10:1), or two years after his retirement. (Archer 1986) What are some applications that you gleaned from this chapter? In this chapter believers are shown that those who are faithful to God will reap divine blessings, a truth that should be an encouragement to Christians today. The world with all of its attractions and pressures still lures the believer to com-‐ promise (and even to forsake) the faith, but Daniel is a reminder that serving the Lord pays great divi-‐ dends. Yet the author did not mean to teach that believers are always (as in this chapter) granted worldly success as he makes abundantly clear in subsequent passages (e.g., 3:18; 7:25; 8:24). Faithful-‐ ness is invariably rewarded, but that reward may be in the next life. (Miller 2001) There is also a message in this story about the believer’s participation in society, particularly in the polit-‐ ical arena. Sometimes Christians tend to avoid political involvement, but Daniel exemplifies active ser-‐ vice in governmental affairs under divine leadership. On the other hand, the story teaches that there should be limits to one’s commitment to the state. When the believer is asked to commit acts that vio-‐ late God’s laws, refusing is not only acceptable but a biblical directive. This lesson will be reiterated in later chapters. (Miller 2001) In every age, God is looking for those whom He can use. Here were four young men whose testimony has been a source of strength to every saint in temptation. Certainly Daniel would not have been recog-‐ nized as a prophet of God and the channel of divine revelation if he had not been a man of prayer and of uncompromising moral character, whom God could honor fittingly. Daniel and his companions rep-‐ resent the godly remnant of Israel which preserved the testimony of God even in dark hours of aposta-‐ sy and divine judgment. The noble example of these young men will serve to encourage Israel in their great trials in the time of the end. (Walvoord n.d.) Conclusion: (1) Daniel and his friends are examples of godly Jews in contrast to the Jewish nation as a whole. 2) Daniel 1 puts forward ideals for which every true Christian should strive: physical and mental excel-‐ lence, employed to please God and men. (3) Daniel teaches us about our Christian witness and evangelism. (4) Holiness requires a commitment to be pure, a plan to accomplish this purpose, and persistence in carry-‐ ing out the plan. (5) God was still at work in the lives of His people, even in the days of Judah’s judgment and captivity. (6) Wisdom does not come from men, but from God. True wisdom comes only from God. True wisdom comes from the Word of God.
Page 10 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
Wisdom comes to those who put God’s Word into practice. God’s wisdom comes to all those who seek it diligently and ask for it in faith (7) God graciously grants not only wisdom, but fellowship to encourage his people to do what is pleasing in His sight. (Deffinbaugh 1995) Enrichment The first six chapters are for you if you are a teenager going to school where you are surrounded constantly by those who seem to have no interest in what God is like, or in the things of God. Daniel and his friends were themselves teenagers when they were first taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar and carried off to the land of Babylon. As they began their career of faith, they did so with a total lack of understanding of life and with all the insecurity of a teenager in a hostile environment. The book records in these first six chapters the pressure they underwent as they stood for their faith in the midst of these difficult sur-‐ roundings. In chapter 1 the young men are confronted with the necessity of changing their diet. Ordinarily, there would be nothing particularly significant in that. Many of us could stand that, perhaps frequently. But these young men already have been told by God what they are not to eat, and the very things that they were told not to eat are the things that are required eating for them as prisoners in the palace of the king of Babylon. What are they to do? This king is the most powerful tyrant who shall ever have lived on earth. The Bible itself records that there was no king that had ever lived before Nebuchadnezzar or would ever live after him who was equal to him in authority. There were no restraints whatsoever upon what he desired to do. His word was absolute law. He could take any man's life at any time. Later on in his reign, he took the lives of the sons of the king of Judah as their father watched and then had the father's eyes put out. Another man was burned to death over a slow fire. This king was an expert in torture. So these young teenagers facing this test know that they have to either comply with the king's demands or forfeit their lives. What can they do? They feel all the pressure and they hear all the familiar arguments that any person hears today to try to get them to give up acting on the basis of faith. They surely hear the argument, in what-‐ ever form it took in those days, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." "Everybody else is doing this; what difference does it make what you eat? So what if you have a ham sandwich with these Babyloni-‐ ans? What's the difference?" After all, they are prisoners in a country far away from home. Their own country has been laid waste. Who will know, or care, what they do? They feel that pressure. But these young men stand fast and God honors them. God gives them the grace to stand despite that pressure, and as a result they are exalted and given positions of authority and re-‐ sponsibility in that kingdom. This story of repeated pressure goes right on through this book. 3 Bibliography Archer, G. L., Jr. The Expositor's bible Commentary, Volume 7: Daniel and the Minor Prophets. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986. Deffinbaugh, Robert. Commentary on the Book of Daniel. unknown city: Biblical Studies Press, 1995. Goldingay, J. E. Vol. 30: Word Biblical Commentary: Daniel. Dallas: Word Incorporated, 2002. Henry, Matthew. Matthew Henry's commentary on the whole Bible: Complete and unabridged in one volume. Peabody: Hendrickson. Ironside, H. A. Lectures on Daniel the Prophet (2nd Edition). New York: Loizeaux Bros., 1953.
3 Copyright © 2010 by Ray Stedman Ministries — This material is the sole property of Ray Stedman Ministries. It may be copied for
personal non-‐commercial use only in its entirety free of charge. All copies must contain this copyright notice and a hyperlink to www.RayStedman.org if the copy is posted on the Internet. Please direct any questions you may have to
[email protected].
Page 11 of 11 Daniel Part One, Lesson Three Class Notes: 10-‐9-‐2012
Miller, S. R. The New American Commentary (55-‐116), Volume 18: Daniel (electronic ed.). Logos Library System. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001. Walvoord, John F. "Commentary on the Book of Daniel." www.walvoord.com.
