Daniel Prophet and Man of God

2 See, for example, 2 Kings 18:28-35.

1 The marginal note in the NASB at Daniel 1:3, indicates that Ashpenaz was the chief of Nebuchadnezzar’s “eunuchs.” It is not clear just how literally the term “eunuch” should be taken. In Isaiah 56:3, the same Hebrew term is rendered “eunuch” and quite obviously refers to one who cannot produce offspring. At best, we can only say that castration was a possibility.

2 Only some of the vessels from the temple were taken to Babylon at the time Daniel was taken captive. Later, all the remaining vessels were taken there (see 2 Chronicles 36:18). These temple vessels play a prominent role in the events of Daniel 5.

3 Shinar was introduced in the Book of Genesis. This is where Nimrod built the first city (10:10), where the Tower of Babel was constructed (11:2), and where wickedness is to be banished (Zechariah 5:5-11).

4 See also 2 Kings 20:16-18.

5 I do think he would have been offended to learn that Daniel and his friends believed food from his table would defile them.

6 See, for example, the renaming of Abram to Abraham in Genesis 17:5, or the naming of Joseph’s sons in Genesis 41:50-52. When a name has a significant meaning to be impressed upon the reader, we will be informed of the meaning of the name and of its significance. Unless God makes a point of a man’s name, I am not inclined to think that we should.

1 Daniel asked God to supernaturally reveal what men did not and could not know, but he asked men like Arioch what he did know. God gave Daniel favor with Arioch so that he was willing to tell him what he needed to know.

2 I think this expression, “times and epochs” is broad enough to include the various “dispensations.” The God of heaven is the One who brings about the “times of the Gentiles.”

3 There is actually no evidence that Arioch ever found Daniel, as he claims. While we might assume Arioch found Daniel to arrest him, this may not have been the case at all. Daniel’s friends were at his home, where he later joined them. Since his friends needed to be filled in on what was happening (2:17), it seems likely that Daniel was not at home, to be found or arrested, but that somehow he learned of the order to arrest all the wise men. I think Daniel sought out Arioch to find out what was happening. This would mean that Arioch did not really “find” Daniel in the first place. We know from verse 24 that Daniel “went in to Arioch.” In Arioch’s behalf, it should be pointed out that he had great faith in Daniel. By taking credit for finding Daniel and claiming he could meet the king’s demands, Arioch might benefit from Daniel’s success, but he also stood to suffer with Daniel if he failed. Arioch linked his fate with Daniel’s. The executioner could have been executed if Daniel was not able to tell the dream and its meaning.

4 Note that wisdom is not included here as a description of Nebuchadnezzar, as it is linked with power in Daniel’s prayer in verse 20.

5 In the beginning (verse 1) of this chapter, we were told that the king had dreams (plural), not just a dream (singular). Nebuchadnezzar, much like the Pharaoh of Joseph’s day, may have had more than one dream. Phaoah’s dreams were similar in nature and identical in meaning (see Genesis 41:1-8). Joseph pointed out to Pharaoh that since there were two dreams, the matter was determined and irreversible (Genesis 41:32). It may have been very much the same with Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams. Daniel’s words suggest this could be the case.

6 We may be able to determin the significance of the Metal involved. One commentator stated they decrease in their atomic weight, others have postulated that it is a comparison to the Temple - Gold in the Holy of Holies, Silver in the inner court, bronze in the outer court, and then iron (This may be a good project for Shawn or Alex. Maybe our new student, Steve, could tackle this (Steve can be included in the list of the ‘best students’ also).

7 As we discussed this trend from the greater (gold) to the lesser (iron and clay), Tom Wright, a colleague in ministry, suggested an explanation for this progression from gold to silver, to brass, to iron, to iron and clay. He remembered the Old Testament precedent in the tabernacle. As one moved away from the holiest place, which is nearest to the presence of God, the metals used in the tabernacle became less precious. In the holy of holies, there was gold. Then, as one moved away from this most holy place, the items became silver, then bronze, and finally iron. Tom’s observation is worthy of our reflection and further study. During these first years of Babylonian captivity, God was still close (so to speak) to His people. He was surely close to Daniel and his friends. But as this nation continued to rebel, God became more and more distant, until, in the 400 silent years, God was silent, and seemed almost to have completely forsaken His people. As the Gentile kingdoms came and went, God became increasingly distant from His people and from the Gentile governments which ruled over them.

1 Leupold in Daniel, Key to Understanding Prophecy

2 Oppert, ‘Scientific Expedition of Mesopotamia’, pg 238 ff

3 Biblical Background, by Adams and Callaway, pg. 124

4 ‘The Bible as History’, Keller, pg. 305

5 ‘The Musical Inst. In Neb.’s Wrchastra’, Mitchell and Joyce, pg.19-21

6 While there seems to be a connection between the statue of chapter 2 and the image of chapter 3, there are striking contrasts between these two representations. Consider these contrasts:

Images of Chapter 2: (a) divine origin; (b) a vision only; (c) made of different metals; (d) not an object of worship; (e) privately revealed to Nebuchadnezzar; (f) fairly well described; (g) prompted king to bow down.

Images of Chapter 3: (a) human origin; (b) a reality; (c) made only of gold; (d) an object of worship; (e) revealed to all; (f) described only generally; (g) men commanded to bow down.

7 The term worship is employed 11 times in chapter 3 in reference to the king’s image.

8 One can see how disturbing the refusal of three high-level leaders to fall in worship would have been to Nebuchadnezzar. If the leaders were to worship first, followed by the people, what rebellion might that produce in the general population? These men were setting a bad example before all, and at the first ceremony of worship. Such disobedience would not be tolerated by the king.

9 This linking of the three friends of Daniel with the Jews was to work in favor of the Jews, as we shall soon see.

10 Wood, ‘Commentary on Daniel’

11 What a picture this is of their future deliverance from Babylonian captivity. They were, in Babylon, delivered from the bondage of idolatry. They were not in any way adversely affected by the fire of tribulation in Babylon.

1 There is, of course, a sense in which Daniel and his three friends are the central characters, which I would not dispute. But notice that while Nebuchadnezzar is prominent in every chapter (1-4), Daniel is not referred to in chapter 3, and his three friends are unnamed after chapter 3. Only Nebuchadnezzar is present in all four of the first chapters of Daniel.

2 Charles Pfeiffer, Wycliffe Bible Commentary, page783

3 Norman Porteous, Daniel - A Commentary, p.68

4 The accuracy of this imagery is interesting. Today, in the Pacific Northwest, environmentalists are seeking to prevent the cutting down of those trees which provide a habitat for the spotted owl.

5 Documents from Old Testament Times, Dr. W. Thomas, pg. 90,91

1 Documents from Old Testament Times, Dr. W. Thomas, pg. 90,91

2 Archeology and Bible History, J. Free. Pg. 232

3 For further information concerning the identification of Belshazzar in recent archaeological findings see John F. Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), pp. 113-115, and Edward J. Young, The Prophecy of Daniel (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1949), pp. 115-118.

4 Chuck Smith, Luke Commentary Chpt. 17:11-14, Calvary Archives.

5 Page 122, Daniel, key to Prophecy by J. Walvoord.

6 Athenaeus, in Persian History

7 It is generally understood and accepted that the term “father” was used more loosely in the Old Testament of one’s forefather, who may have been a grandfather or even a more distant “father.”

8 See Daniel 1:2; 2 Kings 24:13; 25:15; Ezra 1:7, 11.

9 It is interesting that the descending order of these metals is the same as that found in Daniel 2 for the metals which represented the various kingdoms. See Daniel 2:32.

10 See Daniel 5:19.

11 Kraeling, Rand Mcnally Bible Atlas, pg. 327

12 Various theories attempt to identity the “queen” in this text. The best seems to be that this was not the king’s wife but rather his mother. Her words sound more like that of a mother than a wife, and she seems to have a better knowledge of previous history than Belshazzar. Furthermore, she was not present at the banquet, which would not have been unusual if this were the king’s mother (who wants his mother to see him drunk and disorderly?). It would have been a social blunder if it were his wife; it was, after all, a banquet at which the king, his nobles, wives and concubines were present (see verse 2).

13 It seems to be fairly conclusively proven, for example, that all three terms are units for the measurement of weight. Various theories also show how the letters and words were arranged. There even seem to be puns or word plays here. See Walvoord, pp. 127-129 and Baldwin, pp. 123-125.

14 See Jeremiah 18:5-8; Jonah 3.

15 Archeology and the Bible, pg. 60-64. G. Barton

1 See Joyce C. Baldwin, Daniel: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1978), pp. 26-28. See also John F. Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), pp. 132-134.

2 Archeology and the Bible, pg. 60-64. G. Barton

3 Even though verses 1-9 are one paragraph, a rather clear sequence is indicated. The repeated “then” signals us to this sequence. I have sought to indicate this sequence by the arrangement of these verses.

4 Baldwin points out that the Persian kingdom would become the largest kingdom in history: “The Persian empire, which incorporated that of the Medes, a vast area forming an arc to the north of the Babylonian territories, extended eventually to Asia Minor, Libya and Egypt to the west, and to the Indus river and the Aral Sea to the east. It was the largest empire the world had yet seen, hence the urgent need for an efficient organization from the beginning.” Baldwin, p. 126.

5 In several ways, the concerns of Daniel’s peers, the leaders of this Medo-Persian kingdom, were nearly identical with the concerns of the leaders of Israel regarding Jesus. They feared Jesus’ integrity (holiness) and his authority. They dared not allow Jesus to rule over them.

6 Note the word “all” in verse 7, which was surely meant to include Daniel.

7 It is also possible that the opposition of the conspirators was motivated by ant-Jewish prejudice and hatred. In this case, if they were ever to succeed in doing away with the Jews and their religion, they would first have to do away with Daniel.

8 A dramatic change took place at the time of our Lord’s coming to the earth. The ministry of prophet, priest, and king converged in the person and work of Christ, our great Prophet, Priest, and King. The place of blessing changed from Jerusalem to Jesus (compare Genesis 28:10-17 with John 1:43-51 and 4:19-26). In the eternal kingdom, the “New Jerusalem” will come down to earth from heaven, and there will be no temple, for God Himself will be our dwelling place (Revelation 21).

9 The king also fasted that night. Did he fast according to the Old Testament Law? Did he make petition to the Lord for Daniel’s safety? From all the king is reported to have said and done, this would not be surprising.

10 The fate of these families is consistent with the prayer of the psalmist in Psalm 137:7-9.

11 While some render these words in such a way as to identify Darius as Cyrus (“So this Daniel enjoyed success in the reign of Darius even in the reign of Cyrus the Persian”), I find this straining a little too much. Darius was called “the Mede” (Daniel 5:31); Cyrus was called “the Persian” (6:28).

1 “The personal cost of receiving divine revelation is never underestimated in the Old Testament (cf. Je. 4:19; Ezk. 3:15; Zc. 9:1; 12:1, AV, RV), and the book of Daniel insists here and in subsequent chapters (8:27; 10:1, 10, 11, 15, 18) on the anxiety and psychological turmoil involved in receiving, even at God’s hand, understanding of the future course of history.” Joyce C. Baldwin, Daniel: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1978), p. 143.

2Daniel - a Midrashic, Talmudic, and Rabbinic Commentary.Mesorah Publications. NY

3 “Everything in chapter 7 is on a world-wide scale, the empires of the beasts, the judgment, and the nations that worship and serve the one like mortal man. All distinctions of race and colour and nationality are stripped away and one apparently human figure represents the whole human race.” Joyce C. Baldwin, Daniel: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1978), p. 150.

4 It is not altogether accurate to refer to chapters 1-6 as historical and 7-12 as prophetic. Chapter 2 contains a very significant prophecy, revealed by God to king Nebuchadnezzar. Chapter 9, on the other hand, has a historical account of Daniel’s study of Jeremiah and of his prayers of repentance and petition for Israel’s restoration and return to the land of promise.

5 Walvoord thinks this is the year 553 B.C., some 14 years before the fall of Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar died in 562 B.C., some 9 years before Belshazzar’s reign began. See John F. Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 149.

6 Compare Jeremiah 49:14-22, 28, where Nebuchadnezzar is compared to a lion and an eagle.

7 During my school teaching days, I tried to make my students think I had “eyes in the back of my head” so that no matter what they did--even if my back was turned--they could not escape my all-seeing eyes or my discipline.

1Dr. Dougherty, 552 when Nobonidus went to Temes, ‘he have rulership to his son’.

2 Walvoord demonstrates that recent archaeological findings tell us Daniel’s vision in chapter 8 was received some 12 years before the fatal feast of Belshazzar. John F. Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 179.

3 “Beginning in 1884, the site of ancient Susa, then a large mound, has been explored and has divulged many archeological treasures. The code of Hammurabi was found there in 1901. The famous palace referred to by Daniel, Esther and Nehemiah was begun by Darius I and enlarged by later kings. Remains of its magnificence can still be seen near the modern village of Shush.” Walvoord, p. 181.

4 “All of this, of course, was fulfilled dramatically in history. The forces of Alexander first met and defeated the Persians at the Granicus River in Asia Minor in May 334 B.C., which was the beginning of the complete conquest of the entire Persian Empire. A year and a half later a battle occurred at Issus (November 333 B.C.) near the northeastern tip of the Mediterranean Sea. The power of Persia was finally broken at Gaugamela near Nineveh in October 331 B.C.” Walvoord, p. 183.

“Alexander, who had conquered more of the world than any previous ruler, was not abl61e61 to conquer himself. Partly due to a strenuous exertion, his dissipated life, and a raging fever, Alexander died in a drunken debauch at Babylon, not yet thirty-three years of age. His death left a great conquest without an effective single leader, and it took about twenty years for the empire to be successfully divided.” Walvoord, p. 184.

5 “Practically all commentators, however, recognize the four horns as symbolic of the four kingdoms of the Diadochi which emerged as follows: (1) Cassander assumed rule over Macedonia and Greece; (2) Lysimacus took control of Thrace, Bithynia, and most of Asia Minor; (3) Seleucus took Syria and the lands to the east including Babylonia; (4) Ptolemy established rule over Egypt and possibly Palestine and Arabia Petraea. A fifth contender for political power, Antigonus, was soon defeated.” Walvoord, p. 184.

6 See also Daniel 11:16, 41, 45; Jeremiah 3:19; Ezekiel 20:6, 15; Malachi 3:12.

“These conquests, of course, are confirmed in the history of Syria, especially under Antiochus Epiphanes, the eighth king in the Syrian dynasty who reigned 175-164 .C. (I Macc 1:10; 6:16). In his lifetime, he conducted military expeditions in relation to all of these areas . . . . The land of Israel indeed became the battle ground between Syria and Egypt, and the setting of some of Antiochus Epiphanes’ most significant blasphemous acts against God. According to 1 Maccabees 1:20, Revised Standard Version, Antiochus first invaded Egypt and then Jerusalem: ‘after subduing Egypt, Antiochus returned in the one hundred and forty-third year. He went up against Israel and came to Jerusalem with a strong force.’” Walvoord, p. 185.

7 See Deuteronomy 17:3; Isaiah 24:21; 40:26; Jeremiah 8:2; Zephaniah 1:5.

8 See Exodus 29:38-42.

9 “The obscurity of the first part of this verse is noted in the margin of the RSV and has puzzled translators from early times. The grammar is difficult and the sense hard to establish.” Joyce C. Baldwin, Daniel: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1978), p. 157.

10 In chapter 7, only three verses are devoted to the first three beasts, one verse per beast. Nine verses are devoted to the fourth beast and the “little horn,” three verses to the fourth beast and six verses to the horn. In chapter 8, three verses are devoted to a description of the ram (who appears to be the second beast of chapter 7), six verses to the goat (who seems to be the third beast of chapter 7), and ten verses to the “little horn.” In both chapters, the “little horn” is the center of attention.

11 “Up to Daniel 8:11, it is not difficult to find fulfillment of the vision in the history of the Medo-Persian, Alexandrian, and post-Alexandrian periods. Beginning with verse 11, however, expositors have differed widely as to whether the main import of the passage refers to Antiochus Epiphanes, with complete fulfillment in his lifetime, or whether the passage either primarily or secondarily refers also to the end of the age, that is, the period of great tribulation preceding the second coming of Jesus Christ . . . As Montgomery states, verses 11 and 12 ‘constitute . . . the most difficult short passage of the book.’” Walvoord, p. 186.

12 “The Seventh Day Adventists understood that the two thousand and three hundred days referred to years which, on the basis of their interpretation, were to culminate in the year 1844 with the second coming of Christ.” Walvoord, p. 188.

13Daniel, a Talmudic and Midrashic Commentary, pg. 229. Mesorah Publishing

14pg. 230m Daniel, a Talmudic and Midrashic commentary.

15 The Book of Daniel is unique in that this is the only Old Testament book to name any angels. Gabriel is referred to twice by name in Daniel (8:16; 9:21) and Michael three times (10:13, 21; 12:1).

16 In Daniel, “the end” is found in 9:26; 11:6, 27, 35, 40, 45; 12:4, 6, 9, 13.

17 Baldwin, p. 159.

18 See also Daniel 11:36; Isaiah 10:5-11, 25; Jeremiah 10:10.

19 The “king” would have been Belshazzar. Daniel was employed by the king, and yet we learn from chapter 5 that this king seems to have known nothing about Daniel, especially of his unusual wisdom and skill in the interpretation of visions and dreams.

1 Daniel makes a point of telling us in chapter 9 that this Gabriel who appeared to Daniel in chapter 9 was the very same person who appeared to him in chapter 8 (see 9:21).

Daniel – Coastland University Pastor Brett Peterson