Daniel’s Interpretation and Exhortation
(4:19-27)
It was a while before he could bring himself to speak (the Aramaic literally says, "He was stupified for one hour
It could also mean, ‘was stricken dumb for an hour’
"--but the word for "hour" [saah] does not necessarily mean anything more definite than "a time"). At the king's insistence, however, Daniel finally began to speak.
Daniel prefaced his interpretation with a sincere expression of his love and concern for the king. He wished that the dream applied to the king’s enemies and not the king himself. Daniel is truly committed to serve his king and to contribute to his well-being.
In Daniel, we see a man who not only understands biblical submission, but one who practices it. He now reveals to Nebuchadnezzar the meaning of his dream, concluding with a course of action which might avert or delay the adversity of which the king is warned.
The “tree” was not created primarily for its own greatness or glory. It was to provide shelter and food for the birds of the air and the beasts of the field, providing for and protecting the earthly animals.4
The text’s inference is that Nebuchadnezzar failed to grasp the purpose for his kingdom in the divine economy.
He looked at his kingdom in terms of how well it promoted and displayed his own power and glory, not in terms of the purpose for which God had ordained it.
Vs. 22
The phrase "distant parts of the earth" in v. 22 raises the question of the meaning of "earth," a word whose scope always depends on its context.
Here it seems to refer to the farthest reaches of the Semitic world as established by the earliest empires of Hammurabi's Babylon and the eighth-century Assyrian rulers.
Undoubtedly the regions of Media to the northeast and of Elam, Persia, and India were well known to the Near East as totally distinct cultures from those of Mesopotamia and points west.
Most classical writting was grandiose and would claim that the kings ruled the world.
Back in the Sumerian period, King Amar-Enzu referred to himself as lugal dubdalimmubak ("king of the Four Quarters" of the earth) in his dedicatory building inscriptions, even though his empire was far more circumscribed than Nebuchadnezzar's.
Reluctantly, Daniel reveals to king Nebuchadnezzar that a time of divine discipline lies ahead. Instead of being a great tree, from which the earthly creatures may find food and shelter, the tree will be cut down and join the earthly creatures.
- Daniel had grown to truly __Love___ the king.
Rather than remain as a tree, the king is about to become bird-like and beast-like. His hair will become like eagles’ feathers and his nails like birds’ claws (verse 33). His food will be that of the beasts of the field. He will graze like a beast and live in the field without shelter, so that the dew of heaven will drench him (verse 25). Even his thinking will be beast-like (verse 16).
All that happens to the king will be done not for his ultimate destruction, but for his deliverance and restoration.
The time of his humiliation is seven years.
Note: this is 10% of the time he kept God’s people in captivity
The basis for his restoration will be his acknowledgment of the sovereignty of Almighty God, who rules in heaven, and who both raises up kings and puts them down. His restoration to sanity and power will come when he acknowledges that he is God’s unworthy servant, who has been given power to benefit and bless others rather than exalt and glorify himself.
Verse 26
Heavens - 08065 !ymf shamayin (Aramaic) shaw-mah' -yin
corresponding to 08064; TWOT-3038 “the abode of God and Angels”
rule - why didn’t Daniel say God rules? Could it be he includes the council of angels here - the watchers, whom God allows to rule with Him in some way?
- In vs. 27 Daniel instructs the king to __turn__ from his __pride__ so that his dream might not be fulfilled.
Daniel goes beyond the dream and its meaning to urge the king to take preventative measures, forestalling if possible this divine discipline and prolonging his prosperity. Daniel exhorts the king to:
-
“break away from his sins” and
-
to “do righteousness,”
-
to cease his “iniquities” and
-
to “show mercy to the poor.”
Note: The Latin Vulgate here says ‘ cancel thy sins by deeds of charity and acts of kindness to the poor ‘ , and is used as a proof text for penance in the Catholic Church, however, you can in no way render the text in that manner!
It is here that the king’s sins are more specifically exposed and the nature and manifestation of true repentance is made known to the king. His pride and arrogance are exposed as the root of his sin. The fruit of his sin seems to be self-promotion and the oppression of the poor.
It is imperative that we see Daniel linking pride and oppression in this text. The king’s pride has resulted in the oppression of the poor. The king’s humiliation is to be the cure, resulting in justice and mercy. What is the connection between pride and oppression?
- The kings _PRIDE_______ was __OPPRESSIVE_________.
o I used to be on of those prideful people until I met someone as arragant as I was.
P - PEOPLE
R - RUINING
I - INTEGRITY &
D - DEMONSTRATING
E - EMPTINESS
Vs. 28-29
Pride is a kind of plagiarism. It attempts to grasp for ourselves the glory which belongs to another. Nebuchadnezzar took all the glory for the greatness of his kingdom; he did not give glory to God.
In effect, he began to set himself in the seat of God, reminiscent of other glory-seeking creatures, including Satan himself (see Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28).
Taking glory which does not belong to us causes us to see ourselves as better than others. Pride ignores and denies the truth that prosperity comes from God, as a gift of His grace, and not the reward for our greatness.
Pride also interprets others’ poverty as proof of inferiority and the penalty for inferiority. Sooner or later, pride justifies the use of power as rightly taking advantage of the poor to gain from their weakness.
The Christian’s perception of wealth and poverty is the opposite—the strong are to help the weak. The pagan perception of wealth and poverty assumes the strong have the right to gain at the expense of the weak. Pride then has led to oppression.
Nebuchadnezzar seems to have attempted to heed Daniel’s advice for a year, but pride welled up within him again.
He retained a profound admiration for what he had done in beautifying his capital. In fact, his works there were most impressive.
The celebrated Ishtar Gate (excavated by Robert Koldewey and the Deutsche Orientgesellschaft c. 1900) seems to have been erected by him, along with the enameled-brick facing, displaying a procession of dragons and bulls.
The East India House Inscription, now in London, refers to about twenty temples he rebuilt or refurbished in Babylon and Borsippa, and also to a vast system of fortifications and large shipping docks (cf. Ira M. Price, The Dramatic Story of Old Testament History [Philadelphia: Revell, 1925], p. 356).
On one of his inscriptions, Nebuchadnezzar boasted, "The fortifications of Esagila [the temple of Marduk] and Babylon I strengthened, and established the name of my reign forever" (cf. George A. Barton, Archaeology and the Bible [Philadelphia: American Sunday School Union, 1916], p. 479).
To this inscription he appended a prayer to Marduk: "O Marduk, lord of the gods, my divine creator, may my deeds find favor before thee ... Thou art indeed my deliverer and my help, O Marduk; by thy faithful word which does not change, may my weapons advance, be sharp and be stronger than the weapons of the foe!" At the time of his enthronement, he had composed a hymn that included this humble petition to Marduk: "I am the prince who obeys thee, the creation of thy hand. Thou art my creator, and the sovereignty over the hosts of men thou hast entrusted to me. According to thy mercy, O lord, which thou hast extended over all of them, incline unto compassion thine exalted power, and set the fear of thy godhead in my heart. Grant that which may seem good unto thee" (Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, vol. 1, pl. 53).
I would submit that this was written prior to Nebuchadnezzar taking the throne in 605bc, as he calls himself prince here.
Also, you can even see in his writtings here that he had a grasp on the true God’s characteristics, he just didn’t know who the true God was. He was seeking God!
Further, I would suggest that when all the Chaldeans and astrologers and wise men and soothsayers could not tell him his dream to save their lives, he became disolutioned with his gods (as we discussed), and finally in this chapter will embrace the Almighty God of Daniel.
If Nebuchadnezzar was to be “saved” from divine chastening, he must recognize that his position and power were not a reward for his merits, but a gift of divine grace. He must cease using his power to further his personal “kingdom” and begin using his position and power to benefit the weak and the oppressed. This would be true repentance, and it might prolong his prosperity.
Dostları ilə paylaş: | 
