<title type="x-IS">INTRODUCTION</title>
 Daniel, that is, "God is my judge"; probably of the blood royal (compare <reference osisRef="Dan.1.3">Da 1:3</reference>, with <reference osisRef="1Chr.3.1">1Ch 3:1</reference>, where a son of David is named so). Jerusalem may have been his birthplace (though <reference osisRef="Dan.9.24">Da 9:24</reference>, "thy holy city," does not necessarily imply this). He was carried to Babylon among the Hebrew captives brought thither by Nebuchadnezzar at the first deportation in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. As he and his three companions are called (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.4">Da 1:4</reference>) "children," he cannot have been more than about twelve years old when put in training, according to Eastern etiquette, to be a courtier (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.3">Da 1:3</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.6">6</reference>). He then received a new name, by which it was usual to mark a change in one's condition (<reference osisRef="2Kgs.23.34">2Ki 23:34</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Kgs.24.17">24:17</reference>; <reference osisRef="Ezra.5.14">Ezr 5:14</reference>; <reference osisRef="Esth.2.7">Es 2:7</reference>), Belteshazzar, that is, "a prince favored by Bel" (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.7">Da 1:7</reference>). His piety and wisdom were proverbial among his countrymen at an early period; probably owing to that noble proof he gave of faithfulness, combined with wisdom, in abstaining from the food sent to him from the king's table, as being polluted by the idolatries usual at heathen banquets (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.8-Dan.1.16">Da 1:8-16</reference>). Hence Ezekiel's reference to him (<reference osisRef="Ezek.14.14">Eze 14:14</reference>, <reference osisRef="Ezek.14.20">20</reference>; <reference osisRef="Ezek.28.3">28:3</reference>) is precisely of that kind we should expect; a coincidence which must be undesigned. Ezekiel refers to him not as a writer, but as exhibiting a character righteous and wise in discerning secrets, in those circumstances now found in his book, which are earlier than the time when Ezekiel wrote. As Joseph rose in Egypt by interpreting Pharaoh's dreams, so Daniel, by interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's, was promoted to be governor of Babylonia, and president of the Magian priest-caste. Under Evil-merodach, Nebuchadnezzar's successor, as a change of officers often attends the accession of a new king, Daniel seems to have had a lower post, which led him occasionally to be away from Babylon (<reference osisRef="Dan.8.2">Da 8:2</reference>, <reference osisRef="Dan.8.27">27</reference>). Again he came into note when he read the mystic writing of Belshazzar's doom on the wall on the night of that monarch's impious feast. Berosus calls the last Babylonian king Nabonidus and says he was not killed, but had an honorable abode in Carmania assigned to him, after having surrendered voluntarily in Borsippa. Rawlinson has cleared up the discrepancy from the Nineveh inscription. Belshazzar was joint king with his father, Evil-merodach or Nabonidus (called Minus in the inscriptions), to whom he was subordinate. He shut himself up in Babylon, while the other king took refuge elsewhere, namely, in Borsippa. Berosus gives the Chaldean account, which suppresses all about Belshazzar, as being to the national dishonor. Had Daniel been a late book, he would no doubt have taken up the later account of Berosus. If he gave a history differing from that current in Babylonia, the Jews of that region would not have received it as true. Darius the Mede, or Cyaxares II, succeeded and reigned two years. The mention of this monarch's reign, almost unknown to profane history (being eclipsed by the splendor of Cyrus) is an incidental proof that Daniel wrote as a contemporary historian of events which he knew, and did not borrow from others. In the third year of Cyrus he saw the visions (the tenth through twelfth chapters) relating to his people down to the latest days and the coming resurrection. He must have been about eighty-four years old at this time. Tradition represents Daniel as having died and been buried at Shushan. Though his advanced age did not allow him to be among those who returned to Palestine, yet he never ceased to have his people's interests nearest to his heart (Da 9:3-19; 10:12).

<hi type="bold">Authenticity of the Book of Daniel. <reference osisRef="Dan.7.1">Da 7:1</reference>, <reference osisRef="Dan.7.28">28</reference>; <reference osisRef="Dan.8.2">8:2</reference>; <reference osisRef="Dan.9.2">9:2</reference>; <reference osisRef="Dan.10.1">10:1</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.12.4">2; 12:4</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.12.5">5</reference>, testify that it was composed by Daniel himself. He does not mention himself in the first six chapters, which are historical; for in these it is not the author, but the events which are the prominent point. In the last six, which are prophetical, the author makes himself known, for here it was needed, prophecy being a revelation of words to particular men. It holds a third rank in the Hebrew canon: not among the prophets, but in the Hagiographa (Chetubim), between Esther and Ezra, books like it relating to the captivity; because he did not strictly belong to those who held exclusively the profession of "prophets" in the theocracy, but was rather a "seer," having the gift, but not the office of prophet. Were the book an interpolated one, it doubtless would have been placed among the prophets. Its present position is a proof of its genuineness, as it was deliberately put in a position different from that where most would expect to find it. Placed between Esther, and Ezra and Nehemiah, it separated the historical books of the time after the captivity. Thus, Daniel was, as Bengel calls him, the politician, chronologer, and historian among the prophets. The Psalms also, though many are prophetical, are ranked with the Hagiographa, not with the prophets; and the Revelation of John is separated from his Epistles, as Daniel is from the Old Testament prophets. Instead of writing in the midst of the covenant people, and making them the foreground of his picture, he writes in a heathen court, the world kingdoms occupying the foreground, and the kingdom of God, though ultimately made the most significant, the background. His peculiar position in the heathen court is reflected in his peculiar position in the canon. As the "prophets" in the Old Testament, so the epistles of the apostles in the New Testament were written by divinely commissioned persons for their contemporaries. But Daniel and John were not in immediate contact with the congregation, but isolated and alone with God, the one in a heathen court, the other on a lonely isle (<reference osisRef="Rev.1.9">Re 1:9</reference>). Porphyry, the assailant of Christianity in the third century, asserted that the Book of Daniel was a forgery of the time of the Maccabees (170-164 B.C.), a time when confessedly there were no prophets, written after the events as to Antiochus Epiphanes, which it professes to foretell; so accurate are the details. A conclusive proof of Daniel's inspiration, if his prophecies can be shown to have been before the events. Now we know, from Josephus [Antiquities, 10.11.7], that the Jews in Christ's days recognized Daniel as in the canon. Zechariah, Ezra, and Nehemiah, centuries before Antiochus, refer to it. Jesus refers to it in His characteristic designation, "Son of man," <reference osisRef="Matt.24.30">Mt 24:30</reference> (<reference osisRef="Dan.7.13">Da 7:13</reference>); also expressly by name, and as a "prophet," in <reference osisRef="Matt.24.15">Mt 24:15</reference> (compare <reference osisRef="Matt.24.21">Mt 24:21</reference>, with <reference osisRef="Dan.12.1">Da 12:1</reference>, &c.); and in the moment that decided His life (<reference osisRef="Matt.26.64">Mt 26:64</reference>) or death, when the high priest adjured him by the living God. Also, in <reference osisRef="Luke.1.19-Luke.1.26">Lu 1:19-26</reference>, "Gabriel" is mentioned, whose name occurs nowhere else in Scripture, save in <reference osisRef="Dan.8.16">Da 8:16</reference>; <reference osisRef="Dan.9.21">9:21</reference>. Besides the references to it in Revelation, Paul confirms the prophetical part of it, as to the blasphemous king (<reference osisRef="Dan.7.8">Da 7:8</reference>, <reference osisRef="Dan.7.25">25</reference>; <reference osisRef="Dan.11.36">11:36</reference>), in <reference osisRef="1Cor.6.2">1Co 6:2</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Thess.2.3">2Th 2:3</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.2.4">4</reference>; the narrative part, as to the miraculous deliverances from "the lions" and "the fire," in <reference osisRef="Heb.11.33">He 11:33</reference>, <reference osisRef="Heb.11.34">34</reference>. Thus the book is expressly attested by the New Testament on the three points made the stumbling-block of neologists--</hi>the predictions, the narratives of miracles, and the manifestations of angels. An objection has been stated to the unity of the book, namely, that Jesus quotes no part of the first half of Daniel. But <reference osisRef="Matt.21.44">Mt 21:44</reference> would be an enigma if it were not a reference to the "stone that smote the image" (<reference osisRef="Dan.2.34">Da 2:34</reference>, 35, 44, 45). Thus the New Testament sanctions the second, third, sixth, seventh, and eleventh chapters. The design of the miracles in the heathen courts where Daniel was, as of those of Moses in Egypt, was to lead the world power, which seemed to be victorious over the theocracy, to see the essential inner superiority of the seemingly fallen kingdom of God to itself, and to show prostrate Israel that the power of God was the same as of old in Egypt. The first book of Maccabees (compare 1 Maccabees 1:24; 9:27, 40, with <reference osisRef="Dan.12.1">Da 12:1</reference>; <reference osisRef="Dan.11.26">11:26</reference>, of the Septuagint) refers to Daniel as an accredited book, and even refers to the Septuagint Alexandrian version of it. The fact of Daniel having a place in the Septuagint shows it was received by the Jews at large prior to the Maccabean times. The Septuagint version so arbitrarily deviated from the Hebrew Daniel, that Theodotius' version was substituted for it in the early Christian Church. Josephus [Antiquities, 11.8.5] mentions that Alexander the Great had designed to punish the Jews for their fidelity to Darius, but that Jaddua (332 B.C.), the high priest, met him at the head of a procession and averted his wrath by showing him Daniel's prophecy that a Grecian monarch should overthrow Persia. Certain it is, Alexander favored the Jews, and Josephus' statement gives an explanation of the fact; at least it shows that the Jews in Josephus' days believed that Daniel was extant in Alexander's days, long before the Maccabees. With Jaddua (high priest from 341-322 B.C.) the Old Testament history ends (<reference osisRef="Neh.12.11">Ne 12:11</reference>). (The register of the priests and Levites was not written by Nehemiah, who died about 400 B.C., but was inserted with divine sanction by the collectors of the canon subsequently.) An objection to Daniel's authenticity has been rested on a few Greek words found in it. But these are mostly names of Greek musical instruments, which were imported by Greece from the East, rather than vice versa. Some of the words are derived from the common Indo-Germanic stock of both Greek and Chaldee: hence their appearance in both tongues. And one or two may have come through the Greeks of Asia Minor to the Chaldee. The fact that from the fourth verse of the second chapter to the end of the seventh, the language is Chaldee, but the rest Hebrew, is not an argument against, but for, its authenticity. So in Ezra the two languages are found. The work, if that of one author, must have been composed by someone in the circumstances of Daniel, that is, by one familiar with both languages. No native-born Hebrew who had not lived in Chaldea would know Chaldee so well as to use it with the same idiomatic ease as his native tongue; the very impurities in Daniel's use of both are just such as were natural to one in his circumstances, but unnatural to one in a later age, or to one not half Hebrew, half Chaldean in residence as Daniel was. Those parts of Daniel which concern the whole world are mostly Chaldee, then the language of the world empire. So Greek was made the language of the New Testament, which was designed for the whole world. Those affecting the Jews, mostly Hebrew; and this not so impure as that of Ezekiel. His Chaldee is a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic. Two predictions alone are enough to prove to us that Daniel was a true prophet. (1) That his prophecies reach beyond Antiochus; namely, he foretells the rise of the four great monarchies, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome (the last not being in Daniel's time known beyond the precincts of Italy, or rather of Latium), and that no other earthly kingdom would subvert the fourth, but that it would divide into parts. All this has come to pass. No fifth great earthly monarchy has arisen, though often attempted, as by Charlemagne, Charles V, and Napoleon. (2) The time of Messiah's advent, as dated from a certain decree, His being cut off, and the destruction of the city. "He who denies Daniel's prophecies," says Sir Isaac Newton, "undermines Christianity, which is founded on Daniel's prophecies concerning Christ."

 Characteristics of Daniel. The vision mode of revelation is the exception in other prophets, the rule in Daniel. In Zechariah (Zec 1:<reference osisRef="1Cor.6.15">1-6:15</reference>), who lived after Daniel, the same mode appears, but the other form from the seventh chapter to the end. The Revelation of St. John alone is perfectly parallel to Daniel, which may be called the Old Testament Apocalypse. In the contents too there is the difference above noticed, that he views the kingdom of God from the standpoint of the world kingdoms, the development of which is his great subject. This mode of viewing it was appropriate to his own position in a heathen court, and to the relation of subjection in which the covenant-people then stood to the world powers. No longer are single powers of the world incidentally introduced, but the universal monarchies are the chief theme, in which the worldly principle, opposed to the kingdom of God, manifests itself fully. The near and distant are not seen in the same perspective, as by the other prophets, who viewed the whole future from the eschatological point; but in Daniel the historical details are given of that development of the world powers which must precede the advent of the kingdom [Auberlen].

 Significance of the Babylonian Captivity. The exile is the historical basis of Daniel's prophecies, as Daniel implies in the first chapter, which commences with the beginning, and ends with the termination, of the captivity (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.1">Da 1:1</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.21">21</reference>; compare <reference osisRef="Dan.9.1">Da 9:1</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.9.2">2</reference>). A new stage in the theocracy begins with the captivity. Nebuchadnezzar made three incursions into Judah. The first under Jehoiakim (606 B.C.), in which Daniel was carried away, subjected the theocracy to the Babylonian world power. The second (598 B.C.) was that in which Jehoiachin and Ezekiel were carried away. In the third (588 B.C.), Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and carried away Zedekiah. Originally, Abraham was raised out of the "sea" (<reference osisRef="Dan.7.2">Da 7:2</reference>) of the nations, as an island holy to God, and his seed chosen as God's mediator of His revelations of love to mankind. Under David and Solomon, the theocracy, as opposed to the heathen power, attained its climax in the Old Testament, not only being independent, but lord of the surrounding nations; so that the period of these two kings was henceforth made the type of the Messianic. But when God's people, instead of resting on Him, seek alliance with the world power, that very power is made the instrument of their chastisement. So Ephraim (722 B.C.) fell by Assyria; and Judah also, drawn into the sphere of the world's movements from the time of Ahaz, who sought Assyrian help (740 B.C., <reference osisRef="Isa.7.1-Isa.7.25">Is 7:1-25</reference>) at last fell by Babylon, and thenceforth has been more or less dependent on the world monarchies, and so, till Messiah, was favored with no revelations from the time of Malachi (four hundred years). Thus, from the beginning of the exile, the theocracy, in the strict sense, ceased on earth; the rule of the world powers superseding it. But God's covenant with Israel remains firm (<reference osisRef="Rom.11.29">Ro 11:29</reference>); therefore, a period of blessing under Messiah's kingdom is now foretold as about to follow their long chastisement. The exile thus is the turning point in the history of the theocracy, which Roos thus divides: (1) From Adam to the exodus out of Egypt. (2) From the exodus to the beginning of the Babylonian captivity. (3) From the captivity to the millennium. (4) From the millennium to the end of the world. The position of Daniel in the Babylonian court was in unison with the altered relations of the theocracy and the world power, which new relation was to be the theme of his prophecy. Earlier prophets, from the standpoint of Israel, treated of Israel in its relation to the world powers; Daniel, from Babylon, the center of the then world power, treats of the world powers in their relation to Israel. His seventy years' residence in Babylon, and his high official position there, gave him an insight into the world's politics, fitting him to be the recipient of political revelations; while his spiritual experiences, gained through Nebuchadnezzar's humiliation, Belshazzar's downfall, and the rapid decay of the Babylonian empire itself, as well as the miraculous deliverances of himself and his friends (the third through sixth chapters), all fitted him for regarding things from the spiritual standpoint, from which the world's power appears transient, but the glory of God's kingdom eternal. As his political position was the body, the school of magicians in which he had studied for three years (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.4">Da 1:4</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.5">5</reference>) was the soul; and his mind strong in faith and nourished by the earlier prophecies (<reference osisRef="Dan.9.2">Da 9:2</reference>), the spirit of his prophecy, which only waited for the spirit of revelation from above to kindle it. So God fits His organs for their work. Auberlen compares Daniel to Joseph: the one at the beginning, the other at the end of the Jewish history of revelation; both representatives of God and His people at heathen courts; both interpreters of the dim presentiments of truth, expressed in God-sent dreams, and therefore raised to honor by the powers of the world: so representing Israel's calling to be a royal priesthood among the nations; and types of Christ, the true Israel, and of Israel's destination to be a light to lighten the whole Gentile world, as <reference osisRef="Rom.11.12">Ro 11:12</reference>, <reference osisRef="Rom.11.15">15</reference> foretells. As Achilles at the beginning, and Alexander at the end, of Grecian history are the mirrors of the whole life of the Hellenic people, so Joseph and Daniel of Israel.

<hi type="bold">Contents of the Book. Historical and biographical introduction in the first chapter. Daniel, a captive exile, is representative of his nation in its servitude and exile: while his heavenly insight into dreams, far exceeding that of the magi, represents the divine superiority of the covenant-people over their heathen lords. The high dignities, even in the world, which he thereby attained, typify the giving of the earth-kingdom at last "to the people of the saints of the Most High" (<reference osisRef="Dan.7.27">Da 7:27</reference>). Thus Daniel's personal history is the typical foundation of his prophecy. The prophets had to experience in themselves, and in their age, something of what they foretold about future times; just as David felt much of Christ's sufferings in his own person (compare Ho 1:<reference osisRef="2Cor.9.10">2-9, 10</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.9.11">11</reference>; 2:3). So <reference osisRef="Jonah.1.1-Jonah.1.17">Jon 1:1-17</reference>, &c. [Roos]. Hence biographical notices of Daniel and his friends are inserted among his prophecies. The second through twelfth chapters contain the substance of the book, and consist of two parts. The first (the second through seventh chapters) represents the development of the world powers, viewed from a historical point. The second (the eighth through twelfth chapters), their development in relation to Israel, especially in the future preceding Christ's first advent, foretold in the ninth chapter. But prophecy looks beyond the immediate future to the complete fulfilment in the last days, since the individual parts in the organic history of salvation cannot be understood except in connection with the whole. Also Israel looked forward to the Messianic time, not only for spiritual salvation, but also for the visible restoration of the kingdom which even now we too expect. The prophecy which they needed ought therefore to comprise both, and so much of the history of the world as would elapse before the final consummation. The period of Daniel's prophecies, therefore, is that from the downfall of the theocracy at the captivity till its final restoration, yet future--</hi>the period of the dominion of the world powers, not set aside by Christ's first coming (<reference osisRef="John.18.36">Joh 18:36</reference>; for, to have taken the earth-kingdom then, would have been to take it from Satan's hands, <reference osisRef="Matt.4.8-Matt.4.10">Mt 4:8-10</reference>), but to be superseded by His universal and everlasting kingdom at His second coming (<reference osisRef="Rev.11.15">Re 11:15</reference>). Thus the general survey of the development and final destiny of the world powers (the second through seventh chapters) fittingly precedes the disclosures as to the immediate future (the eighth through twelfth chapters). Daniel marks the division by writing the first part in Chaldee, and the second, and the introduction, in Hebrew; the former, referring to the powers of the world, in the language of the then dominant world power under which he lived; the latter, relating to the people of God, in their own language. An interpolator in a later age would have used Hebrew, the language of the ancient prophets throughout, or if anywhere Aramaic, so as to be understood by his contemporaries, he would have used it in the second rather than in the first part as having a more immediate reference to his own times [Auberlen].
 <title type="x-s">CHAPTER 1</title> <title type="x-s3"><reference osisRef="Dan.1.1-Dan.1.21">Da 1:1-21</reference>. The Babylonian Captivity Begins; Daniel's Education at Babylon, &C.</title>

<hi type="bold">1. third year--</hi>compare <reference osisRef="Jer.25.1">Jr 25:1</reference>, "the fourth year; Jehoiakim came to the throne at the end of the year, which Jeremiah reckons as the first year, but which Daniel leaves out of count, being an incomplete year: thus, in Jeremiah, it is "the fourth year"; in Daniel, "the third" [Jahn]. However, Jeremiah (<reference osisRef="Jer.25.1">Jr 25:1</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jer.46.2">46:2</reference>) merely says, the fourth year of Jehoiakim coincided with the first of Nebuchadnezzar, when the latter conquered the Egyptians at Carchemish; not that the deportation of captives from Jerusalem was in the fourth year of Jehoiakim: this probably took place in the end of the third year of Jehoiakim, shortly before the battle of Carchemish [Fairbairn]. Nebuchadnezzar took away the captives as hostages for the submission of the Hebrews. Historical Scripture gives no positive account of this first deportation, with which the Babylonian captivity, that is, Judah's subjection to Babylon for seventy years (<reference osisRef="Jer.29.10">Jr 29:10</reference>), begins. But <reference osisRef="2Chr.36.6">2Ch 36:6</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Chr.36.7">7</reference>, states that Nebuchadnezzar had intended "to carry Jehoiakim to Babylon," and that he "carried off the vessels of the house of the Lord" thither. But Jehoiakim died at Jerusalem, before the conqueror's intention as to him was carried into effect (<reference osisRef="Jer.22.18">Jr 22:18</reference>, <reference osisRef="Jer.22.19">19</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jer.36.30">36:30</reference>), and his dead body, as was foretold, was dragged out of the gates by the Chaldean besiegers, and left unburied. The second deportation under Jehoiachin was eight years later.

INTRODUCTION Daniel, that is, "God is my judge"; probably of the blood royal (compare Da 1:3, with 1Ch 3:1, where a son of David is named so). Jerusalem may have been his birthplace (though Da 9:24, "thy holy city," does not necessarily imply this). He was carried to Babylon among the Hebrew captives brought thither by Nebuchadnezzar at the first deportation in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. As he and his three companions are called (Da 1:4) "children," he cannot have been more than about twelve years old when put in training, according to Eastern etiquette, to be a courtier (Da 1:3, 6). He then received a new name, by which it was usual to mark a change in one's condition (2Ki 23:34; 24:17; Ezr 5:14; Es 2:7), Belteshazzar, that is, "a prince favored by Bel" (Da 1:7). His piety and wisdom were proverbial among his countrymen at an early period; probably owing to that noble proof he gave of faithfulness, combined with wisdom, in abstaining from the food sent to him from the king's table, as being polluted by the idolatries usual at heathen banquets (Da 1:8-16). Hence Ezekiel's reference to him (Eze 14:14, 20; 28:3) is precisely of that kind we should expect; a coincidence which must be undesigned. Ezekiel refers to him not as a writer, but as exhibiting a character righteous and wise in discerning secrets, in those circumstances now found in his book, which are earlier than the time when Ezekiel wrote. As Joseph rose in Egypt by interpreting Pharaoh's dreams, so Daniel, by interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's, was promoted to be governor of Babylonia, and president of the Magian priest-caste. Under Evil-merodach, Nebuchadnezzar's successor, as a change of officers often attends the accession of a new king, Daniel seems to have had a lower post, which led him occasionally to be away from Babylon (Da 8:2, 27). Again he came into note when he read the mystic writing of Belshazzar's doom on the wall on the night of that monarch's impious feast. Berosus calls the last Babylonian king Nabonidus and says he was not killed, but had an honorable abode in Carmania assigned to him, after having surrendered voluntarily in Borsippa. Rawlinson has cleared up the discrepancy from the Nineveh inscription. Belshazzar was joint king with his father, Evil-merodach or Nabonidus (called Minus in the inscriptions), to whom he was subordinate. He shut himself up in Babylon, while the other king took refuge elsewhere, namely, in Borsippa. Berosus gives the Chaldean account, which suppresses all about Belshazzar, as being to the national dishonor. Had Daniel been a late book, he would no doubt have taken up the later account of Berosus. If he gave a history differing from that current in Babylonia, the Jews of that region would not have received it as true. Darius the Mede, or Cyaxares II, succeeded and reigned two years. The mention of this monarch's reign, almost unknown to profane history (being eclipsed by the splendor of Cyrus) is an incidental proof that Daniel wrote as a contemporary historian of events which he knew, and did not borrow from others. In the third year of Cyrus he saw the visions (the tenth through twelfth chapters) relating to his people down to the latest days and the coming resurrection. He must have been about eighty-four years old at this time. Tradition represents Daniel as having died and been buried at Shushan. Though his advanced age did not allow him to be among those who returned to Palestine, yet he never ceased to have his people's interests nearest to his heart (Da 9:3-19; 10:12). Authenticity of the Book of Daniel. Da 7:1, 28; 8:2; 9:2; 10:1, 2; 12:4, 5, testify that it was composed by Daniel himself. He does not mention himself in the first six chapters, which are historical; for in these it is not the author, but the events which are the prominent point. In the last six, which are prophetical, the author makes himself known, for here it was needed, prophecy being a revelation of words to particular men. It holds a third rank in the Hebrew canon: not among the prophets, but in the Hagiographa (Chetubim), between Esther and Ezra, books like it relating to the captivity; because he did not strictly belong to those who held exclusively the profession of "prophets" in the theocracy, but was rather a "seer," having the gift, but not the office of prophet. Were the book an interpolated one, it doubtless would have been placed among the prophets. Its present position is a proof of its genuineness, as it was deliberately put in a position different from that where most would expect to find it. Placed between Esther, and Ezra and Nehemiah, it separated the historical books of the time after the captivity. Thus, Daniel was, as Bengel calls him, the politician, chronologer, and historian among the prophets. The Psalms also, though many are prophetical, are ranked with the Hagiographa, not with the prophets; and the Revelation of John is separated from his Epistles, as Daniel is from the Old Testament prophets. Instead of writing in the midst of the covenant people, and making them the foreground of his picture, he writes in a heathen court, the world kingdoms occupying the foreground, and the kingdom of God, though ultimately made the most significant, the background. His peculiar position in the heathen court is reflected in his peculiar position in the canon. As the "prophets" in the Old Testament, so the epistles of the apostles in the New Testament were written by divinely commissioned persons for their contemporaries. But Daniel and John were not in immediate contact with the congregation, but isolated and alone with God, the one in a heathen court, the other on a lonely isle (Re 1:9). Porphyry, the assailant of Christianity in the third century, asserted that the Book of Daniel was a forgery of the time of the Maccabees (170-164 B.C.), a time when confessedly there were no prophets, written after the events as to Antiochus Epiphanes, which it professes to foretell; so accurate are the details. A conclusive proof of Daniel's inspiration, if his prophecies can be shown to have been before the events. Now we know, from Josephus [Antiquities, 10.11.7], that the Jews in Christ's days recognized Daniel as in the canon. Zechariah, Ezra, and Nehemiah, centuries before Antiochus, refer to it. Jesus refers to it in His characteristic designation, "Son of man," Mt 24:30 (Da 7:13); also expressly by name, and as a "prophet," in Mt 24:15 (compare Mt 24:21, with Da 12:1, &c.); and in the moment that decided His life (Mt 26:64) or death, when the high priest adjured him by the living God. Also, in Lu 1:19-26, "Gabriel" is mentioned, whose name occurs nowhere else in Scripture, save in Da 8:16; 9:21. Besides the references to it in Revelation, Paul confirms the prophetical part of it, as to the blasphemous king (Da 7:8, 25; 11:36), in 1Co 6:2; 2Th 2:3, 4; the narrative part, as to the miraculous deliverances from "the lions" and "the fire," in He 11:33, 34. Thus the book is expressly attested by the New Testament on the three points made the stumbling-block of neologists-- the predictions, the narratives of miracles, and the manifestations of angels. An objection has been stated to the unity of the book, namely, that Jesus quotes no part of the first half of Daniel. But Mt 21:44 would be an enigma if it were not a reference to the "stone that smote the image" (Da 2:34, 35, 44, 45). Thus the New Testament sanctions the second, third, sixth, seventh, and eleventh chapters. The design of the miracles in the heathen courts where Daniel was, as of those of Moses in Egypt, was to lead the world power, which seemed to be victorious over the theocracy, to see the essential inner superiority of the seemingly fallen kingdom of God to itself, and to show prostrate Israel that the power of God was the same as of old in Egypt. The first book of Maccabees (compare 1 Maccabees 1:24; 9:27, 40, with Da 12:1; 11:26, of the Septuagint) refers to Daniel as an accredited book, and even refers to the Septuagint Alexandrian version of it. The fact of Daniel having a place in the Septuagint shows it was received by the Jews at large prior to the Maccabean times. The Septuagint version so arbitrarily deviated from the Hebrew Daniel, that Theodotius' version was substituted for it in the early Christian Church. Josephus [Antiquities, 11.8.5] mentions that Alexander the Great had designed to punish the Jews for their fidelity to Darius, but that Jaddua (332 B.C.), the high priest, met him at the head of a procession and averted his wrath by showing him Daniel's prophecy that a Grecian monarch should overthrow Persia. Certain it is, Alexander favored the Jews, and Josephus' statement gives an explanation of the fact; at least it shows that the Jews in Josephus' days believed that Daniel was extant in Alexander's days, long before the Maccabees. With Jaddua (high priest from 341-322 B.C.) the Old Testament history ends (Ne 12:11). (The register of the priests and Levites was not written by Nehemiah, who died about 400 B.C., but was inserted with divine sanction by the collectors of the canon subsequently.) An objection to Daniel's authenticity has been rested on a few Greek words found in it. But these are mostly names of Greek musical instruments, which were imported by Greece from the East, rather than vice versa. Some of the words are derived from the common Indo-Germanic stock of both Greek and Chaldee: hence their appearance in both tongues. And one or two may have come through the Greeks of Asia Minor to the Chaldee. The fact that from the fourth verse of the second chapter to the end of the seventh, the language is Chaldee, but the rest Hebrew, is not an argument against, but for, its authenticity. So in Ezra the two languages are found. The work, if that of one author, must have been composed by someone in the circumstances of Daniel, that is, by one familiar with both languages. No native-born Hebrew who had not lived in Chaldea would know Chaldee so well as to use it with the same idiomatic ease as his native tongue; the very impurities in Daniel's use of both are just such as were natural to one in his circumstances, but unnatural to one in a later age, or to one not half Hebrew, half Chaldean in residence as Daniel was. Those parts of Daniel which concern the whole world are mostly Chaldee, then the language of the world empire. So Greek was made the language of the New Testament, which was designed for the whole world. Those affecting the Jews, mostly Hebrew; and this not so impure as that of Ezekiel. His Chaldee is a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic. Two predictions alone are enough to prove to us that Daniel was a true prophet. (1) That his prophecies reach beyond Antiochus; namely, he foretells the rise of the four great monarchies, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome (the last not being in Daniel's time known beyond the precincts of Italy, or rather of Latium), and that no other earthly kingdom would subvert the fourth, but that it would divide into parts. All this has come to pass. No fifth great earthly monarchy has arisen, though often attempted, as by Charlemagne, Charles V, and Napoleon. (2) The time of Messiah's advent, as dated from a certain decree, His being cut off, and the destruction of the city. "He who denies Daniel's prophecies," says Sir Isaac Newton, "undermines Christianity, which is founded on Daniel's prophecies concerning Christ." Characteristics of Daniel. The vision mode of revelation is the exception in other prophets, the rule in Daniel. In Zechariah (Zec 1:1-6:15), who lived after Daniel, the same mode appears, but the other form from the seventh chapter to the end. The Revelation of St. John alone is perfectly parallel to Daniel, which may be called the Old Testament Apocalypse. In the contents too there is the difference above noticed, that he views the kingdom of God from the standpoint of the world kingdoms, the development of which is his great subject. This mode of viewing it was appropriate to his own position in a heathen court, and to the relation of subjection in which the covenant-people then stood to the world powers. No longer are single powers of the world incidentally introduced, but the universal monarchies are the chief theme, in which the worldly principle, opposed to the kingdom of God, manifests itself fully. The near and distant are not seen in the same perspective, as by the other prophets, who viewed the whole future from the eschatological point; but in Daniel the historical details are given of that development of the world powers which must precede the advent of the kingdom [Auberlen]. Significance of the Babylonian Captivity. The exile is the historical basis of Daniel's prophecies, as Daniel implies in the first chapter, which commences with the beginning, and ends with the termination, of the captivity (Da 1:1, 21; compare Da 9:1, 2). A new stage in the theocracy begins with the captivity. Nebuchadnezzar made three incursions into Judah. The first under Jehoiakim (606 B.C.), in which Daniel was carried away, subjected the theocracy to the Babylonian world power. The second (598 B.C.) was that in which Jehoiachin and Ezekiel were carried away. In the third (588 B.C.), Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and carried away Zedekiah. Originally, Abraham was raised out of the "sea" (Da 7:2) of the nations, as an island holy to God, and his seed chosen as God's mediator of His revelations of love to mankind. Under David and Solomon, the theocracy, as opposed to the heathen power, attained its climax in the Old Testament, not only being independent, but lord of the surrounding nations; so that the period of these two kings was henceforth made the type of the Messianic. But when God's people, instead of resting on Him, seek alliance with the world power, that very power is made the instrument of their chastisement. So Ephraim (722 B.C.) fell by Assyria; and Judah also, drawn into the sphere of the world's movements from the time of Ahaz, who sought Assyrian help (740 B.C., Is 7:1-25) at last fell by Babylon, and thenceforth has been more or less dependent on the world monarchies, and so, till Messiah, was favored with no revelations from the time of Malachi (four hundred years). Thus, from the beginning of the exile, the theocracy, in the strict sense, ceased on earth; the rule of the world powers superseding it. But God's covenant with Israel remains firm (Ro 11:29); therefore, a period of blessing under Messiah's kingdom is now foretold as about to follow their long chastisement. The exile thus is the turning point in the history of the theocracy, which Roos thus divides: (1) From Adam to the exodus out of Egypt. (2) From the exodus to the beginning of the Babylonian captivity. (3) From the captivity to the millennium. (4) From the millennium to the end of the world. The position of Daniel in the Babylonian court was in unison with the altered relations of the theocracy and the world power, which new relation was to be the theme of his prophecy. Earlier prophets, from the standpoint of Israel, treated of Israel in its relation to the world powers; Daniel, from Babylon, the center of the then world power, treats of the world powers in their relation to Israel. His seventy years' residence in Babylon, and his high official position there, gave him an insight into the world's politics, fitting him to be the recipient of political revelations; while his spiritual experiences, gained through Nebuchadnezzar's humiliation, Belshazzar's downfall, and the rapid decay of the Babylonian empire itself, as well as the miraculous deliverances of himself and his friends (the third through sixth chapters), all fitted him for regarding things from the spiritual standpoint, from which the world's power appears transient, but the glory of God's kingdom eternal. As his political position was the body, the school of magicians in which he had studied for three years (Da 1:4, 5) was the soul; and his mind strong in faith and nourished by the earlier prophecies (Da 9:2), the spirit of his prophecy, which only waited for the spirit of revelation from above to kindle it. So God fits His organs for their work. Auberlen compares Daniel to Joseph: the one at the beginning, the other at the end of the Jewish history of revelation; both representatives of God and His people at heathen courts; both interpreters of the dim presentiments of truth, expressed in God-sent dreams, and therefore raised to honor by the powers of the world: so representing Israel's calling to be a royal priesthood among the nations; and types of Christ, the true Israel, and of Israel's destination to be a light to lighten the whole Gentile world, as Ro 11:12, 15 foretells. As Achilles at the beginning, and Alexander at the end, of Grecian history are the mirrors of the whole life of the Hellenic people, so Joseph and Daniel of Israel. Contents of the Book. Historical and biographical introduction in the first chapter. Daniel, a captive exile, is representative of his nation in its servitude and exile: while his heavenly insight into dreams, far exceeding that of the magi, represents the divine superiority of the covenant-people over their heathen lords. The high dignities, even in the world, which he thereby attained, typify the giving of the earth-kingdom at last "to the people of the saints of the Most High" (Da 7:27). Thus Daniel's personal history is the typical foundation of his prophecy. The prophets had to experience in themselves, and in their age, something of what they foretold about future times; just as David felt much of Christ's sufferings in his own person (compare Ho 1:2-9, 10, 11; 2:3). So Jon 1:1-17, &c. [Roos]. Hence biographical notices of Daniel and his friends are inserted among his prophecies. The second through twelfth chapters contain the substance of the book, and consist of two parts. The first (the second through seventh chapters) represents the development of the world powers, viewed from a historical point. The second (the eighth through twelfth chapters), their development in relation to Israel, especially in the future preceding Christ's first advent, foretold in the ninth chapter. But prophecy looks beyond the immediate future to the complete fulfilment in the last days, since the individual parts in the organic history of salvation cannot be understood except in connection with the whole. Also Israel looked forward to the Messianic time, not only for spiritual salvation, but also for the visible restoration of the kingdom which even now we too expect. The prophecy which they needed ought therefore to comprise both, and so much of the history of the world as would elapse before the final consummation. The period of Daniel's prophecies, therefore, is that from the downfall of the theocracy at the captivity till its final restoration, yet future-- the period of the dominion of the world powers, not set aside by Christ's first coming (Joh 18:36; for, to have taken the earth-kingdom then, would have been to take it from Satan's hands, Mt 4:8-10), but to be superseded by His universal and everlasting kingdom at His second coming (Re 11:15). Thus the general survey of the development and final destiny of the world powers (the second through seventh chapters) fittingly precedes the disclosures as to the immediate future (the eighth through twelfth chapters). Daniel marks the division by writing the first part in Chaldee, and the second, and the introduction, in Hebrew; the former, referring to the powers of the world, in the language of the then dominant world power under which he lived; the latter, relating to the people of God, in their own language. An interpolator in a later age would have used Hebrew, the language of the ancient prophets throughout, or if anywhere Aramaic, so as to be understood by his contemporaries, he would have used it in the second rather than in the first part as having a more immediate reference to his own times [Auberlen]. CHAPTER 1 Da 1:1-21. The Babylonian Captivity Begins; Daniel's Education at Babylon, &C. 1. third year-- compare Jr 25:1, "the fourth year; Jehoiakim came to the throne at the end of the year, which Jeremiah reckons as the first year, but which Daniel leaves out of count, being an incomplete year: thus, in Jeremiah, it is "the fourth year"; in Daniel, "the third" [Jahn]. However, Jeremiah (Jr 25:1; 46:2) merely says, the fourth year of Jehoiakim coincided with the first of Nebuchadnezzar, when the latter conquered the Egyptians at Carchemish; not that the deportation of captives from Jerusalem was in the fourth year of Jehoiakim: this probably took place in the end of the third year of Jehoiakim, shortly before the battle of Carchemish [Fairbairn]. Nebuchadnezzar took away the captives as hostages for the submission of the Hebrews. Historical Scripture gives no positive account of this first deportation, with which the Babylonian captivity, that is, Judah's subjection to Babylon for seventy years (Jr 29:10), begins. But 2Ch 36:6, 7, states that Nebuchadnezzar had intended "to carry Jehoiakim to Babylon," and that he "carried off the vessels of the house of the Lord" thither. But Jehoiakim died at Jerusalem, before the conqueror's intention as to him was carried into effect (Jr 22:18, 19; 36:30), and his dead body, as was foretold, was dragged out of the gates by the Chaldean besiegers, and left unburied. The second deportation under Jehoiachin was eight years later.


<hi type="bold">2. Shinar--</hi>the old name of Babylonia (<reference osisRef="Gen.11.2">Ge 11:2</reference>; <reference osisRef="Gen.14.1">14:1</reference>; <reference osisRef="Isa.11.11">Is 11:11</reference>; <reference osisRef="Zech.5.11">Zec 5:11</reference>). Nebuchadnezzar took only "part of the vessels," as he did not intend wholly to overthrow the state, but to make it tributary, and to leave such vessels as were absolutely needed for the public worship of Jehovah. Subsequently all were taken away and were restored under Cyrus (<reference osisRef="Ezra.1.7">Ezr 1:7</reference>).

<hi type="bold">his god--</hi>Bel. His temple, as was often the case among the heathen, was made "treasure house" of the king.

2. Shinar-- the old name of Babylonia (Ge 11:2; 14:1; Is 11:11; Zec 5:11). Nebuchadnezzar took only "part of the vessels," as he did not intend wholly to overthrow the state, but to make it tributary, and to leave such vessels as were absolutely needed for the public worship of Jehovah. Subsequently all were taken away and were restored under Cyrus (Ezr 1:7). his god-- Bel. His temple, as was often the case among the heathen, was made "treasure house" of the king.


<hi type="bold">3. master of ... eunuchs--</hi>called in Turkey the kislar aga.

<hi type="bold">of the king's seed--</hi>compare the prophecy, <reference osisRef="2Kgs.20.17">2Ki 20:17</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Kgs.20.18">18</reference>.

3. master of... eunuchs-- called in Turkey the kislar aga. of the king's seed-- compare the prophecy, 2Ki 20:17, 18.


<hi type="bold">4. no blemish--</hi>A handsome form was connected, in Oriental ideas, with mental power. "Children" means youths of twelve or fourteen years old.

<hi type="bold">teach ... tongue of ... Chaldeans--</hi>their language and literature, the Aramaic-Babylonian. That the heathen lore was not altogether valueless appears from the Egyptian magicians who opposed Moses; the Eastern Magi who sought Jesus, and who may have drawn the tradition as to the "King of the Jews" from <reference osisRef="Dan.9.24">Da 9:24</reference>, &c., written in the East. As Moses was trained in the learning of the Egyptian sages, so Daniel in that of the Chaldeans, to familiarize his mind with mysterious lore, and so develop his heaven-bestowed gift of understanding in visions (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.4">Da 1:4</reference>, 5, 17).

4. no blemish-- A handsome form was connected, in Oriental ideas, with mental power. "Children" means youths of twelve or fourteen years old. teach... tongue of... Chaldeans-- their language and literature, the Aramaic-Babylonian. That the heathen lore was not altogether valueless appears from the Egyptian magicians who opposed Moses; the Eastern Magi who sought Jesus, and who may have drawn the tradition as to the "King of the Jews" from Da 9:24, &c., written in the East. As Moses was trained in the learning of the Egyptian sages, so Daniel in that of the Chaldeans, to familiarize his mind with mysterious lore, and so develop his heaven-bestowed gift of understanding in visions (Da 1:4, 5, 17).


<hi type="bold">5. king's meat--</hi>It is usual for an Eastern king to entertain, from the food of his table, many retainers and royal captives (<reference osisRef="Jer.52.33">Jr 52:33</reference>, <reference osisRef="Jer.52.34">34</reference>). The Hebrew for "meat" implies delicacies.

<hi type="bold">stand before the king--</hi>as attendant courtiers; not as eunuchs.

5. king's meat-- It is usual for an Eastern king to entertain, from the food of his table, many retainers and royal captives (Jr 52:33, 34). The Hebrew for "meat" implies delicacies. stand before the king-- as attendant courtiers; not as eunuchs.


<hi type="bold">6. children of Judah--</hi>the most noble tribe, being that to which the "king's seed" belonged (compare <reference osisRef="Dan.1.3">Da 1:3</reference>).

6. children of Judah-- the most noble tribe, being that to which the "king's seed" belonged (compare Da 1:3).


<hi type="bold">7. gave names--</hi>designed to mark their new relation, that so they might forget their former religion and country (<reference osisRef="Gen.41.45">Ge 41:45</reference>). But as in Joseph's case (whom Pharaoh called Zaphnath-paaneah), so in Daniel's, the name indicative of his relation to a heathen court ("Belteshazzar," that is, "Bel's prince"), however flattering to him, is not the one retained by Scripture, but the name marking his relation to God ("Daniel," God my Judge, the theme of his prophecies being God's judgment on the heathen world powers).

<hi type="bold">Hananiah--</hi>that is, "whom Jehovah hath favored."

<hi type="bold">Shadrach--</hi>from Rak, in Babylonian, "the King," that is, "the Sun"; the same root as in Abrech (<reference osisRef="Gen.41.43">Ge 41:43</reference>, Margin), "Inspired or illumined by the Sun-god."

<hi type="bold">Mishael--</hi>that is, "who is what God is?" Who is comparable to God?

<hi type="bold">Meshach--</hi>The Babylonians retained the first syllable of Mishael, the Hebrew name; but for El, that is, God, substituted Shak, the Babylonian goddess, called Sheshach (<reference osisRef="Jer.25.26">Jr 25:26</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jer.51.41">51:41</reference>), answering to the Earth, or else Venus, the goddess of love and mirth; it was during her feast that Cyrus took Babylon.

<hi type="bold">Azariah--</hi>that is, "whom Jehovah helps."

<hi type="bold">Abed-nego--</hi>that is, "servant of the shining fire." Thus, instead of to Jehovah, these His servants were dedicated by the heathen to their four leading gods [Herodotus, Clio]; Bel, the Chief-god, the Sun-god, Earth-god, and Fire-god. To the last the three youths were consigned when refusing to worship the golden image (<reference osisRef="Dan.3.12">Da 3:12</reference>). The Chaldee version translates "Lucifer," in <reference osisRef="Isa.14.12">Is 14:12</reference>, Nogea, the same as Nego. The names thus at the outset are significant of the seeming triumph, but sure downfall, of the heathen powers before Jehovah and His people.

7. gave names-- designed to mark their new relation, that so they might forget their former religion and country (Ge 41:45). But as in Joseph's case (whom Pharaoh called Zaphnath-paaneah), so in Daniel's, the name indicative of his relation to a heathen court ("Belteshazzar," that is, "Bel's prince"), however flattering to him, is not the one retained by Scripture, but the name marking his relation to God ("Daniel," God my Judge, the theme of his prophecies being God's judgment on the heathen world powers). Hananiah-- that is, "whom Jehovah hath favored." Shadrach-- from Rak, in Babylonian, "the King," that is, "the Sun"; the same root as in Abrech (Ge 41:43, Margin), "Inspired or illumined by the Sun-god." Mishael-- that is, "who is what God is?" Who is comparable to God? Meshach-- The Babylonians retained the first syllable of Mishael, the Hebrew name; but for El, that is, God, substituted Shak, the Babylonian goddess, called Sheshach (Jr 25:26; 51:41), answering to the Earth, or else Venus, the goddess of love and mirth; it was during her feast that Cyrus took Babylon. Azariah-- that is, "whom Jehovah helps." Abed-nego-- that is, "servant of the shining fire." Thus, instead of to Jehovah, these His servants were dedicated by the heathen to their four leading gods [Herodotus, Clio]; Bel, the Chief-god, the Sun-god, Earth-god, and Fire-god. To the last the three youths were consigned when refusing to worship the golden image (Da 3:12). The Chaldee version translates "Lucifer," in Is 14:12, Nogea, the same as Nego. The names thus at the outset are significant of the seeming triumph, but sure downfall, of the heathen powers before Jehovah and His people.


<hi type="bold">8. Daniel ... would not defile himself with ... king's meat--</hi>Daniel is specified as being the leader in the "purpose" (the word implies a decided resolution) to abstain from defilement, thus manifesting a character already formed for prophetical functions. The other three youths, no doubt, shared in his purpose. It was the custom to throw a small part of the viands and wine upon the earth, as an initiatory offering to the gods, so as to consecrate to them the whole entertainment (compare <reference osisRef="Deut.32.38">De 32:38</reference>). To have partaken of such a feast would have been to sanction idolatry, and was forbidden even after the legal distinction of clean and unclean meats was done away (<reference osisRef="1Cor.8.7">1Co 8:7</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.8.10">10</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Cor.10.27">10:27</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.10.28">28</reference>). Thus the faith of these youths was made instrumental in overruling the evil foretold against the Jews (<reference osisRef="Ezek.4.13">Eze 4:13</reference>; <reference osisRef="Hos.9.3">Ho 9:3</reference>), to the glory of God. Daniel and his three friends, says Auberlen, stand out like an oasis in the desert. Like Moses, Daniel "chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season" (<reference osisRef="Heb.11.25">He 11:25</reference>; see <reference osisRef="Dan.9.3-Dan.9.19">Da 9:3-19</reference>). He who is to interpret divine revelations must not feed on the dainties, nor drink from the intoxicating cup, of this world. This made him as dear a name to his countrymen as Noah and Job, who also stood alone in their piety among a perverse generation (<reference osisRef="Ezek.14.14">Eze 14:14</reference>; <reference osisRef="Ezek.28.3">28:3</reference>).

<hi type="bold">requested--</hi>While decided in principle, we ought to seek our object by gentleness, rather than by an ostentatious testimony, which, under the plea of faithfulness, courts opposition.

8. Daniel... would not defile himself with... king's meat-- Daniel is specified as being the leader in the "purpose" (the word implies a decided resolution) to abstain from defilement, thus manifesting a character already formed for prophetical functions. The other three youths, no doubt, shared in his purpose. It was the custom to throw a small part of the viands and wine upon the earth, as an initiatory offering to the gods, so as to consecrate to them the whole entertainment (compare De 32:38). To have partaken of such a feast would have been to sanction idolatry, and was forbidden even after the legal distinction of clean and unclean meats was done away (1Co 8:7, 10; 10:27, 28). Thus the faith of these youths was made instrumental in overruling the evil foretold against the Jews (Eze 4:13; Ho 9:3), to the glory of God. Daniel and his three friends, says Auberlen, stand out like an oasis in the desert. Like Moses, Daniel "chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season" (He 11:25; see Da 9:3-19). He who is to interpret divine revelations must not feed on the dainties, nor drink from the intoxicating cup, of this world. This made him as dear a name to his countrymen as Noah and Job, who also stood alone in their piety among a perverse generation (Eze 14:14; 28:3). requested-- While decided in principle, we ought to seek our object by gentleness, rather than by an ostentatious testimony, which, under the plea of faithfulness, courts opposition.


<hi type="bold">9. God ... brought Daniel into favour--</hi>The favor of others towards the godly is the doing of God. So in Joseph's case (<reference osisRef="Gen.39.21">Ge 39:21</reference>). Especially towards Israel (<reference osisRef="Ps.106.46">Psa 106:46</reference>; compare <reference osisRef="Prov.16.7">Pr 16:7</reference>).

9. God... brought Daniel into favour-- The favor of others towards the godly is the doing of God. So in Joseph's case (Ge 39:21). Especially towards Israel (Psa 106:46; compare Pr 16:7).


<hi type="bold">10. worse liking--</hi>looking less healthy.

<hi type="bold">your sort--</hi>of your age, or class; literally, "circle."

<hi type="bold">endanger my head--</hi>An arbitrary Oriental despot could, in a fit of wrath at his orders having been disobeyed, command the offender to be instantly decapitated.

10. worse liking-- looking less healthy. your sort-- of your age, or class; literally, "circle." endanger my head-- An arbitrary Oriental despot could, in a fit of wrath at his orders having been disobeyed, command the offender to be instantly decapitated.


<hi type="bold">11. Melzar--</hi>rather, the steward, or chief butler, entrusted by Ashpenaz with furnishing the daily portion to the youths [Gesenius]. The word is still in use in Persia.

11. Melzar-- rather, the steward, or chief butler, entrusted by Ashpenaz with furnishing the daily portion to the youths [Gesenius]. The word is still in use in Persia.


<hi type="bold">12. pulse--</hi>The Hebrew expresses any vegetable grown from seeds, that is, vegetable food in general [Gesenius].

12. pulse-- The Hebrew expresses any vegetable grown from seeds, that is, vegetable food in general [Gesenius].


13-15. Illustrating <reference osisRef="Deut.8.3">De 8:3</reference>, "Man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord."

13-15. Illustrating De 8:3, "Man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord."


<hi type="bold">17. God gave them knowledge--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Exod.31.2">Ex 31:2</reference>, <reference osisRef="Exod.31.3">3</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Kgs.3.12">1Ki 3:12</reference>; <reference osisRef="Job.32.8">Job 32:8</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jas.1.5">Jas 1:5</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.17">17</reference>).

<hi type="bold">Daniel had understanding in ... dreams--</hi>God thus made one of the despised covenant-people eclipse the Chaldean sages in the very science on which they most prided themselves. So Joseph in the court of Pharaoh (<reference osisRef="Gen.40.5">Ge 40:5</reference>; <reference osisRef="Gen.41.1-Gen.41.8">41:1-8</reference>). Daniel, in these praises of his own "understanding," speaks not through vanity, but by the direction of God, as one transported out of himself. See my Introduction, "Contents of the Book."

17. God gave them knowledge-- (Ex 31:2, 3; 1Ki 3:12; Job 32:8; Jas 1:5, 17). Daniel had understanding in... dreams-- God thus made one of the despised covenant-people eclipse the Chaldean sages in the very science on which they most prided themselves. So Joseph in the court of Pharaoh (Ge 40:5; 41:1-8). Daniel, in these praises of his own "understanding," speaks not through vanity, but by the direction of God, as one transported out of himself. See my Introduction, "Contents of the Book."


<hi type="bold">18. brought them in--</hi>that is, not only Daniel and his three friends, but other youths (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.3">Da 1:3</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.19">19</reference>, "among them all").

18. brought them in-- that is, not only Daniel and his three friends, but other youths (Da 1:3, 19, "among them all").


<hi type="bold">19. stood ... before the king--</hi>that is, were advanced to a position of favor near the throne.

19. stood... before the king-- that is, were advanced to a position of favor near the throne.


<hi type="bold">20. ten times--</hi>literally, "ten hands."

<hi type="bold">magicians--</hi>properly, "sacred scribes, skilled in the sacred writings, a class of Egyptian priests" [Gesenius]; from a Hebrew root, "a pen." The word in our English Version, "magicians," comes from mag, that is, "a priest." The Magi formed one of the six divisions of the Medes.

<hi type="bold">astrologers--</hi>Hebrew, "enchanters," from a root, "to conceal," pactisers of the occult arts.

20. ten times-- literally, "ten hands." magicians-- properly, "sacred scribes, skilled in the sacred writings, a class of Egyptian priests" [Gesenius]; from a Hebrew root, "a pen." The word in our English Version, "magicians," comes from mag, that is, "a priest." The Magi formed one of the six divisions of the Medes. astrologers-- Hebrew, "enchanters," from a root, "to conceal," pactisers of the occult arts.


<hi type="bold">21. Daniel continued ... unto ... first year of Cyrus--</hi>(<reference osisRef="2Chr.36.22">2Ch 36:22</reference>; <reference osisRef="Ezra.1.1">Ezr 1:1</reference>). Not that he did not continue beyond that year, but the expression is designed to mark the fact that he who was one of the first captives taken to Babylon, lived to see the end of the captivity. See my Introduction, "Significance of the Babylonian Captivity." In <reference osisRef="Dan.10.1">Da 10:1</reference> he is mentioned as living "in the third year of Cyrus." See Margin Note, on the use of "till" (<reference osisRef="Ps.110.1">Psa 110:1</reference>, <reference osisRef="Ps.112.8">112:8</reference>). <chapter eID="Dan.1"/>

21. Daniel continued... unto... first year of Cyrus-- (2Ch 36:22; Ezr 1:1). Not that he did not continue beyond that year, but the expression is designed to mark the fact that he who was one of the first captives taken to Babylon, lived to see the end of the captivity. See my Introduction, "Significance of the Babylonian Captivity." In Da 10:1 he is mentioned as living "in the third year of Cyrus." See Margin Note, on the use of "till" (Psa 110:1, 112:8).


<title type="x-s2">CHAPTER 2</title> <title type="x-s3"><reference osisRef="Dan.2.1-Dan.2.49">Da 2:1-49</reference>. Nebuchadnezzar's Dream: Daniel's Interpretation of It, and Advancement.</title>

<hi type="bold">1. second year of ... Nebuchadnezzar--</hi><reference osisRef="Dan.1.5">Da 1:5</reference> shows that "three years" had elapsed since Nebuchadnezzar had taken Jerusalem. The solution of this difficulty is: Nebuchadnezzar first ruled as subordinate to his father Nabopolassar, to which time the first chapter refers (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.1">Da 1:1</reference>); whereas "the second year" in the second chapter is dated from his sole sovereignty. The very difficulty is a proof of genuineness; all was clear to the writer and the original readers from their knowledge of the circumstances, and so he adds no explanation. A forger would not introduce difficulties; the author did not then see any difficulty in the case. Nebuchadnezzar is called "king" (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.1">Da 1:1</reference>), by anticipation. Before he left Judea, he became actual king by the death of his father, and the Jews always called him "king," as commander of the invading army.

<hi type="bold">dreams--</hi>It is significant that not to Daniel, but to the then world ruler, Nebuchadnezzar, the dream is vouchsafed. It was from the first of its representatives who had conquered the theocracy, that the world power was to learn its doom, as about to be in its turn subdued, and for ever by the kingdom of God. As this vision opens, so that in the seventh chapter developing the same truth more fully, closes the first part. Nebuchadnezzar, as vicegerent of God (<reference osisRef="Dan.2.37">Da 2:37</reference>; compare <reference osisRef="Jer.25.9">Jr 25:9</reference>; <reference osisRef="Ezek.28.12-Ezek.28.15">Eze 28:12-15</reference>; <reference osisRef="Isa.44.28">Is 44:28</reference>; <reference osisRef="Isa.45.1">45:1</reference>; <reference osisRef="Rom.13.1">Ro 13:1</reference>), is honored with the revelation in the form of a dream, the appropriate form to one outside the kingdom of God. So in the cases of Abimelech, Pharaoh, &c. (<reference osisRef="Gen.20.3">Ge 20:3</reference>; <reference osisRef="Gen.41.1-Gen.41.7">41:1-7</reference>), especially as the heathen attached such importance to dreams. Still it is not he, but an Israelite, who interprets it. Heathendom is passive, Israel active, in divine things, so that the glory redounds to "the God of heaven."

CHAPTER 2 Da 2:1-49. Nebuchadnezzar's Dream: Daniel's Interpretation of It, and Advancement. 1. second year of... Nebuchadnezzar-- Da 1:5 shows that "three years" had elapsed since Nebuchadnezzar had taken Jerusalem. The solution of this difficulty is: Nebuchadnezzar first ruled as subordinate to his father Nabopolassar, to which time the first chapter refers (Da 1:1); whereas "the second year" in the second chapter is dated from his sole sovereignty. The very difficulty is a proof of genuineness; all was clear to the writer and the original readers from their knowledge of the circumstances, and so he adds no explanation. A forger would not introduce difficulties; the author did not then see any difficulty in the case. Nebuchadnezzar is called "king" (Da 1:1), by anticipation. Before he left Judea, he became actual king by the death of his father, and the Jews always called him "king," as commander of the invading army. dreams-- It is significant that not to Daniel, but to the then world ruler, Nebuchadnezzar, the dream is vouchsafed. It was from the first of its representatives who had conquered the theocracy, that the world power was to learn its doom, as about to be in its turn subdued, and for ever by the kingdom of God. As this vision opens, so that in the seventh chapter developing the same truth more fully, closes the first part. Nebuchadnezzar, as vicegerent of God (Da 2:37; compare Jr 25:9; Eze 28:12-15; Is 44:28; 45:1; Ro 13:1), is honored with the revelation in the form of a dream, the appropriate form to one outside the kingdom of God. So in the cases of Abimelech, Pharaoh, &c. (Ge 20:3; 41:1-7), especially as the heathen attached such importance to dreams. Still it is not he, but an Israelite, who interprets it. Heathendom is passive, Israel active, in divine things, so that the glory redounds to "the God of heaven."


<hi type="bold">2. Chaldeans--</hi>here, a certain order of priest-magicians, who wore a peculiar dress, like that seen on the gods and deified men in the Assyrian sculptures. Probably they belonged exclusively to the Chaldeans, the original tribe of the Babylonian nation, just as the Magians were properly Medes.

2. Chaldeans-- here, a certain order of priest-magicians, who wore a peculiar dress, like that seen on the gods and deified men in the Assyrian sculptures. Probably they belonged exclusively to the Chaldeans, the original tribe of the Babylonian nation, just as the Magians were properly Medes.


<hi type="bold">3. troubled to know the dream--</hi>He awoke in alarm, remembering that something solemn had been presented to him in a dream, without being able to recall the form in which it had clothed itself. His thoughts on the unprecedented greatness to which his power had attained (<reference osisRef="Dan.2.29">Da 2:29</reference>) made him anxious to know what the issue of all this should be. God meets this wish in the way most calculated to impress him.

3. troubled to know the dream-- He awoke in alarm, remembering that something solemn had been presented to him in a dream, without being able to recall the form in which it had clothed itself. His thoughts on the unprecedented greatness to which his power had attained (Da 2:29) made him anxious to know what the issue of all this should be. God meets this wish in the way most calculated to impress him.


4. Here begins the Chaldee portion of Daniel, which continues to the end of the seventh chapter. In it the course, character, and crisis of the Gentile power are treated; whereas, in the other parts, which are in Hebrew, the things treated apply more particularly to the Jews and Jerusalem.

<hi type="bold">Syriac--</hi>the Aramean Chaldee, the vernacular tongue of the king and his court; the prophet, by mentioning it here, hints at the reason of his own adoption of it from this point.

<hi type="bold">live for ever--</hi>a formula in addressing kings, like our "Long live the king!" Compare <reference osisRef="1Kgs.1.31">1Ki 1:31</reference>.

4. Here begins the Chaldee portion of Daniel, which continues to the end of the seventh chapter. In it the course, character, and crisis of the Gentile power are treated; whereas, in the other parts, which are in Hebrew, the things treated apply more particularly to the Jews and Jerusalem. Syriac-- the Aramean Chaldee, the vernacular tongue of the king and his court; the prophet, by mentioning it here, hints at the reason of his own adoption of it from this point. live for ever-- a formula in addressing kings, like our "Long live the king!" Compare 1Ki 1:31.


<hi type="bold">5. The thing--</hi>that is, The dream, "is gone from me." Gesenius translates, "The decree is gone forth from me," irrevocable (compare <reference osisRef="Isa.45.23">Is 45:23</reference>); namely, that you shall be executed, if you do not tell both the dream and the interpretation. English Version is simpler, which supposes the king himself to have forgotten the dream. Pretenders to supernatural knowledge often bring on themselves their own punishment.

<hi type="bold">cut in pieces--</hi>(<reference osisRef="1Sam.15.33">1Sa 15:33</reference>).

<hi type="bold">houses ... dunghill--</hi>rather, "a morass heap." The Babylonian houses were built of sun-dried bricks; when demolished, the rain dissolves the whole into a mass of mire, in the wet land, near the river [Stuart]. As to the consistency of this cruel threat with Nebuchadnezzar's character, see <reference osisRef="Dan.4.17">Da 4:17</reference>, "basest of men"; <reference osisRef="Jer.39.5">Jr 39:5</reference>, <reference osisRef="Jer.39.6">6</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jer.52.9-Jer.52.11">52:9-11</reference>.

5. The thing-- that is, The dream, "is gone from me." Gesenius translates, "The decree is gone forth from me," irrevocable (compare Is 45:23); namely, that you shall be executed, if you do not tell both the dream and the interpretation. English Version is simpler, which supposes the king himself to have forgotten the dream. Pretenders to supernatural knowledge often bring on themselves their own punishment. cut in pieces-- (1Sa 15:33). houses... dunghill-- rather, "a morass heap." The Babylonian houses were built of sun-dried bricks; when demolished, the rain dissolves the whole into a mass of mire, in the wet land, near the river [Stuart]. As to the consistency of this cruel threat with Nebuchadnezzar's character, see Da 4:17, "basest of men"; Jr 39:5, 6; 52:9-11.


<hi type="bold">6. rewards--</hi>literally, "presents poured out in lavish profusion."

6. rewards-- literally, "presents poured out in lavish profusion."


<hi type="bold">8. gain ... time--</hi>literally, "buy." Compare <reference osisRef="Eph.5.16">Ep 5:16</reference>; <reference osisRef="Col.4.5">Col 4:5</reference>, where the sense is somewhat different.

<hi type="bold">the thing is gone from me--</hi>(See on <reference osisRef="Dan.2.5">Da 2:5</reference>).

8. gain... time-- literally, "buy." Compare Ep 5:16; Col 4:5, where the sense is somewhat different. the thing is gone from me-- (See on Da 2:5).


<hi type="bold">9. one decree--</hi>There can be no second one reversing the first (<reference osisRef="Esth.4.11">Es 4:11</reference>).

<hi type="bold">corrupt--</hi>deceitful.

<hi type="bold">till the time be changed--</hi>till a new state of things arrive, either by my ceasing to trouble myself about the dream, or by a change of government (which perhaps the agitation caused by the dream made Nebuchadnezzar to forebode, and so to suspect the Chaldeans of plotting).

<hi type="bold">tell ... dream, and I shall know ... ye can show ... interpretation--</hi>If ye cannot tell the past, a dream actually presented to me, how can ye know, and show, the future events prefigured in it?

9. one decree-- There can be no second one reversing the first (Es 4:11). corrupt-- deceitful. till the time be changed-- till a new state of things arrive, either by my ceasing to trouble myself about the dream, or by a change of government (which perhaps the agitation caused by the dream made Nebuchadnezzar to forebode, and so to suspect the Chaldeans of plotting). tell... dream, and I shall know... ye can show... interpretation-- If ye cannot tell the past, a dream actually presented to me, how can ye know, and show, the future events prefigured in it?


<hi type="bold">10. There is not a man ... that can show--</hi>God makes the heathen out of their own mouth, condemn their impotent pretensions to supernatural knowledge, in order to bring out in brighter contrast His power to reveal secrets to His servants, though but "men upon the earth" (compare <reference osisRef="Dan.2.22">Da 2:22</reference>, 23).

<hi type="bold">therefore, &c.--</hi>that is, If such things could be done by men, other absolute princes would have required them from their magicians; as they have not, it is proof such things cannot be done and cannot be reasonably asked from us.

10. There is not a man... that can show-- God makes the heathen out of their own mouth, condemn their impotent pretensions to supernatural knowledge, in order to bring out in brighter contrast His power to reveal secrets to His servants, though but "men upon the earth" (compare Da 2:22, 23). therefore, &c.-- that is, If such things could be done by men, other absolute princes would have required them from their magicians; as they have not, it is proof such things cannot be done and cannot be reasonably asked from us.


<hi type="bold">11. gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh--</hi>answering to "no man upon the earth"; for there were, in their belief, "men in heaven," namely, men deified; for example, Nimrod. The supreme gods are referred to here, who alone, in the Chaldean view, could solve the difficulty, but who do not communicate with men. The inferior gods, intermediate between men and the supreme gods, are unable to solve it. Contrast with this heathen idea of the utter severance of God from man, <reference osisRef="John.1.14">Joh 1:14</reference>, "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us"; Daniel was in this case made His representative.

11. gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh-- answering to "no man upon the earth"; for there were, in their belief, "men in heaven," namely, men deified; for example, Nimrod. The supreme gods are referred to here, who alone, in the Chaldean view, could solve the difficulty, but who do not communicate with men. The inferior gods, intermediate between men and the supreme gods, are unable to solve it. Contrast with this heathen idea of the utter severance of God from man, Joh 1:14, "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us"; Daniel was in this case made His representative.


12-13. Daniel and his companions do not seem to have been actually numbered among the Magi or Chaldeans, and so were not summoned before the king. Providence ordered it so that all mere human wisdom should be shown vain before His divine power, through His servant, was put forth. <reference osisRef="Dan.2.24">Da 2:24</reference> shows that the decree for slaying the wise men had not been actually executed when Daniel interposed.

12-13. Daniel and his companions do not seem to have been actually numbered among the Magi or Chaldeans, and so were not summoned before the king. Providence ordered it so that all mere human wisdom should be shown vain before His divine power, through His servant, was put forth. Da 2:24 shows that the decree for slaying the wise men had not been actually executed when Daniel interposed.


<hi type="bold">14. captain of the king's guard--</hi>commanding the executioners (Margin; and <reference osisRef="Gen.37.36">Ge 37:36</reference>, Margin).

14. captain of the king's guard-- commanding the executioners (Margin; and Ge 37:36, Margin).


<hi type="bold">15. Why is the decree so hasty--</hi>Why were not all of us consulted before the decree for the execution of all was issued?

<hi type="bold">the thing--</hi>the agitation of the king as to his dream, and his abortive consultation of the Chaldeans. It is plain from this that Daniel was till now ignorant of the whole matter.

15. Why is the decree so hasty-- Why were not all of us consulted before the decree for the execution of all was issued? the thing-- the agitation of the king as to his dream, and his abortive consultation of the Chaldeans. It is plain from this that Daniel was till now ignorant of the whole matter.


<hi type="bold">16. Daniel went in--</hi>perhaps not in person, but by the mediation of some courtier who had access to the king. His first direct interview seems to have been <reference osisRef="Dan.2.25">Da 2:25</reference> [Barnes].

<hi type="bold">time--</hi>The king granted "time" to Daniel, though he would not do so to the Chaldeans because they betrayed their lying purpose by requiring him to tell the dream, which Daniel did not. Providence doubtless influenced his mind, already favorable (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.19">Da 1:19</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.20">20</reference>), to show special favor to Daniel.

16. Daniel went in-- perhaps not in person, but by the mediation of some courtier who had access to the king. His first direct interview seems to have been Da 2:25 [Barnes]. time-- The king granted "time" to Daniel, though he would not do so to the Chaldeans because they betrayed their lying purpose by requiring him to tell the dream, which Daniel did not. Providence doubtless influenced his mind, already favorable (Da 1:19, 20), to show special favor to Daniel.


17. Here appears the reason why Daniel sought "time" (<reference osisRef="Dan.2.16">Da 2:16</reference>), namely he wished to engage his friends to join him in prayer to God to reveal the dream to him.

17. Here appears the reason why Daniel sought "time" (Da 2:16), namely he wished to engage his friends to join him in prayer to God to reveal the dream to him.


18. An illustration of the power of united prayer (<reference osisRef="Matt.18.19">Mt 18:19</reference>). The same instrumentality rescued Peter from his peril (<reference osisRef="Acts.12.5-Acts.12.12">Ac 12:5-12</reference>).

18. An illustration of the power of united prayer (Mt 18:19). The same instrumentality rescued Peter from his peril (Ac 12:5-12).


<hi type="bold">19. revealed ... in ... night vision--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Job.33.15">Job 33:15</reference>, <reference osisRef="Job.33.16">16</reference>).

19. revealed... in... night vision-- (Job 33:15, 16).


<hi type="bold">20. answered--</hi>responded to God's goodness by praises.

<hi type="bold">name of God--</hi>God in His revelation of Himself by acts of love, "wisdom, and might" (<reference osisRef="Jer.32.19">Jr 32:19</reference>).

20. answered-- responded to God's goodness by praises. name of God-- God in His revelation of Himself by acts of love, "wisdom, and might" (Jr 32:19).


<hi type="bold">21. changeth ... times ... seasons--</hi>"He herein gives a general preparatory intimation, that the dream of Nebuchadnezzar is concerning the changes and successions of kingdoms" [Jerome]. The "times" are the phases and periods of duration of empires (compare <reference osisRef="Dan.7.25">Da 7:25</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Chr.12.32">1Ch 12:32</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Chr.29.30">29:30</reference>); the "seasons" the fitting times for their culmination, decline, and fall (<reference osisRef="Eccl.3.1">Ec 3:1</reference>; <reference osisRef="Acts.1.7">Ac 1:7</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Thess.5.1">1Th 5:1</reference>). The vicissitudes of states, with their times and seasons, are not regulated by chance or fate, as the heathen thought, but by God.

<hi type="bold">removed kings--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Job.12.18">Job 12:18</reference>; <reference osisRef="Ps.75.6">Psa 75:6</reference>, <reference osisRef="Ps.75.7">7</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jer.27.5">Jr 27:5</reference>; compare <reference osisRef="1Sam.2.7">1Sa 2:7</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.2.8">8</reference>).

<hi type="bold">giveth wisdom--</hi>(<reference osisRef="1Kgs.3.9-1Kgs.3.12">1Ki 3:9-12</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jas.1.5">Jas 1:5</reference>).

21. changeth... times... seasons-- "He herein gives a general preparatory intimation, that the dream of Nebuchadnezzar is concerning the changes and successions of kingdoms" [Jerome]. The "times" are the phases and periods of duration of empires (compare Da 7:25; 1Ch 12:32; 29:30); the "seasons" the fitting times for their culmination, decline, and fall (Ec 3:1; Ac 1:7; 1Th 5:1). The vicissitudes of states, with their times and seasons, are not regulated by chance or fate, as the heathen thought, but by God. removed kings-- (Job 12:18; Psa 75:6, 7; Jr 27:5; compare 1Sa 2:7, 8). giveth wisdom-- (1Ki 3:9-12; Jas 1:5).


<hi type="bold">22. revealeth--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Job.12.22">Job 12:22</reference>). So spiritually (<reference osisRef="Eph.1.17">Ep 1:17</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.18">18</reference>).

<hi type="bold">knoweth what is in ... darkness--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Ps.139.11">Psa 139:11</reference>, <reference osisRef="Ps.139.12">12</reference>; <reference osisRef="Heb.4.13">He 4:13</reference>).

<hi type="bold">light ... him--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Jas.1.17">Jas 1:17</reference>; <reference osisRef="1John.1.4">1Jo 1:4</reference>). Apocalypse (or "revelation") signifies a divine, prophecy a human, activity. Compare <reference osisRef="1Cor.14.6">1Co 14:6</reference>, where the two are distinguished. The prophet is connected with the outer world, addressing to the congregation the words with which the Spirit of God supplies him; he speaks in the Spirit, but the apocalyptic seer is in the Spirit in his whole person (<reference osisRef="Rev.1.10">Re 1:10</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Cor.4.2">4:2</reference>). The form of the apocalyptic revelation (the very term meaning that the veil that hides the invisible world is taken off) is subjectively either the dream, or, higher, the vision. The interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream was a preparatory education to Daniel himself. By gradual steps, each revelation preparing him for the succeeding one, God fitted him for disclosures becoming more and more special. In the second and fourth chapters he is but an interpreter of Nebuchadnezzar's dreams; then he has a dream himself, but it is only a vision in a dream of the night (<reference osisRef="Dan.7.1">Da 7:1</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.7.2">2</reference>); then follows a vision in a waking state (<reference osisRef="Dan.8.1-Dan.8.3">Da 8:1-3</reference>); lastly, in the two final revelations (<reference osisRef="Dan.9.20">Da 9:20</reference>; <reference osisRef="Dan.10.4">10:4</reference>, <reference osisRef="Dan.10.5">5</reference>) the ecstatic state is no longer needed. The progression in the form answers to the progression in the contents of his prophecy; at first general outlines, and these afterwards filled up with minute chronological and historical details, such as are not found in the Revelation of John, though, as became the New Testament, the form of revelation is the highest, namely, clear waking visions [Auberlen].

22. revealeth-- (Job 12:22). So spiritually (Ep 1:17, 18). knoweth what is in... darkness-- (Psa 139:11, 12; He 4:13). light... him-- (Jas 1:17; 1Jo 1:4). Apocalypse (or "revelation") signifies a divine, prophecy a human, activity. Compare 1Co 14:6, where the two are distinguished. The prophet is connected with the outer world, addressing to the congregation the words with which the Spirit of God supplies him; he speaks in the Spirit, but the apocalyptic seer is in the Spirit in his whole person (Re 1:10; 4:2). The form of the apocalyptic revelation (the very term meaning that the veil that hides the invisible world is taken off) is subjectively either the dream, or, higher, the vision. The interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream was a preparatory education to Daniel himself. By gradual steps, each revelation preparing him for the succeeding one, God fitted him for disclosures becoming more and more special. In the second and fourth chapters he is but an interpreter of Nebuchadnezzar's dreams; then he has a dream himself, but it is only a vision in a dream of the night (Da 7:1, 2); then follows a vision in a waking state (Da 8:1-3); lastly, in the two final revelations (Da 9:20; 10:4, 5) the ecstatic state is no longer needed. The progression in the form answers to the progression in the contents of his prophecy; at first general outlines, and these afterwards filled up with minute chronological and historical details, such as are not found in the Revelation of John, though, as became the New Testament, the form of revelation is the highest, namely, clear waking visions [Auberlen].


<hi type="bold">23. thee ... thee--</hi>He ascribes all the glory to God.

<hi type="bold">God of my fathers--</hi>Thou hast shown Thyself the same God of grace to me, a captive exile, as Thou didst to Israel of old and this on account of the covenant made with our "fathers" (<reference osisRef="Luke.1.54">Lu 1:54</reference>, 55; compare <reference osisRef="Ps.106.45">Psa 106:45</reference>).

<hi type="bold">given me wisdom and might--</hi>Thou being the fountain of both; referring to <reference osisRef="Dan.2.20">Da 2:20</reference>. Whatever wise ability I have to stay the execution of the king's cruel decree, is Thy gift.

<hi type="bold">me ... we ... us--</hi>The revelation was given to Daniel, as "me" implies; yet with just modesty he joins his friends with him; because it was to their joint prayers, and not to his individually, that he owed the revelation from God.

<hi type="bold">known ... the king's matter--</hi>the very words in which the Chaldeans had denied the possibility of any man on earth telling the dream ("not a man upon the earth can show the king's matter," <reference osisRef="Dan.2.10">Da 2:10</reference>). Impostors are compelled by the God of truth to eat up their own words.

23. thee... thee-- He ascribes all the glory to God. God of my fathers-- Thou hast shown Thyself the same God of grace to me, a captive exile, as Thou didst to Israel of old and this on account of the covenant made with our "fathers" (Lu 1:54, 55; compare Psa 106:45). given me wisdom and might-- Thou being the fountain of both; referring to Da 2:20. Whatever wise ability I have to stay the execution of the king's cruel decree, is Thy gift. me... we... us-- The revelation was given to Daniel, as "me" implies; yet with just modesty he joins his friends with him; because it was to their joint prayers, and not to his individually, that he owed the revelation from God. known... the king's matter-- the very words in which the Chaldeans had denied the possibility of any man on earth telling the dream ("not a man upon the earth can show the king's matter," Da 2:10). Impostors are compelled by the God of truth to eat up their own words.


<hi type="bold">24. Therefore--</hi>because of having received the divine communication.

<hi type="bold">bring me in before the king--</hi>implying that he had not previously been in person before the king (see on <reference osisRef="Dan.2.16">Da 2:16</reference>).

24. Therefore-- because of having received the divine communication. bring me in before the king-- implying that he had not previously been in person before the king (see on Da 2:16).


<hi type="bold">25. I have found a man--</hi>Like all courtiers, in announcing agreeable tidings, he ascribes the merit of the discovery to himself [Jerome]. So far from it being a discrepancy, that he says nothing of the previous understanding between him and Daniel, or of Daniel's application to the king (<reference osisRef="Dan.2.15">Da 2:15</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.2.16">16</reference>), it is just what we should expect. Arioch would not dare to tell an absolute despot that he had stayed the execution of his sanguinary decree, on his own responsibility; but would, in the first instance, secretly stay it until Daniel had got, by application from the king, the time required, without Arioch seeming to know of Daniel's application as the cause of the respite; then, when Daniel had received the revelation, Arioch would in trembling haste bring him in, as if then for the first time he had "found" him. The very difficulty when cleared up is a proof of genuineness, as it never would be introduced by a forger.

25. I have found a man-- Like all courtiers, in announcing agreeable tidings, he ascribes the merit of the discovery to himself [Jerome]. So far from it being a discrepancy, that he says nothing of the previous understanding between him and Daniel, or of Daniel's application to the king (Da 2:15, 16), it is just what we should expect. Arioch would not dare to tell an absolute despot that he had stayed the execution of his sanguinary decree, on his own responsibility; but would, in the first instance, secretly stay it until Daniel had got, by application from the king, the time required, without Arioch seeming to know of Daniel's application as the cause of the respite; then, when Daniel had received the revelation, Arioch would in trembling haste bring him in, as if then for the first time he had "found" him. The very difficulty when cleared up is a proof of genuineness, as it never would be introduced by a forger.


<hi type="bold">27. cannot--</hi>Daniel, being learned in all the lore of the Chaldeans (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.4">Da 1:4</reference>), could authoritatively declare the impossibility of mere man solving the king's difficulty.

<hi type="bold">soothsayers--</hi>from a root, "to cut off"; referring to their cutting the heavens into divisions, and so guessing at men's destinies from the place of the stars at one's birth.

27. cannot-- Daniel, being learned in all the lore of the Chaldeans (Da 1:4), could authoritatively declare the impossibility of mere man solving the king's difficulty. soothsayers-- from a root, "to cut off"; referring to their cutting the heavens into divisions, and so guessing at men's destinies from the place of the stars at one's birth.


<hi type="bold">28. God--</hi>in contrast to "the wise men," &c. (<reference osisRef="Dan.2.27">Da 2:27</reference>).

<hi type="bold">revealeth secrets--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Amos.3.7">Am 3:7</reference>; <reference osisRef="Amos.4.13">4:13</reference>). Compare <reference osisRef="Gen.41.45">Ge 41:45</reference>, Zaphnath-paaneah, "revealer of secrets," the title given to Joseph.

<hi type="bold">the latter days--</hi>literally, "in the after days" (<reference osisRef="Dan.2.29">Da 2:29</reference>); "hereafter" (<reference osisRef="Gen.49.1">Ge 49:1</reference>). It refers to the whole future, including the Messianic days, which is the final dispensation (<reference osisRef="Isa.2.2">Is 2:2</reference>).

<hi type="bold">visions of thy head--</hi>conceptions formed in the brain.

28. God-- in contrast to "the wise men," &c. (Da 2:27). revealeth secrets-- (Am 3:7; 4:13). Compare Ge 41:45, Zaphnath-paaneah, "revealer of secrets," the title given to Joseph. the latter days-- literally, "in the after days" (Da 2:29); "hereafter" (Ge 49:1). It refers to the whole future, including the Messianic days, which is the final dispensation (Is 2:2). visions of thy head-- conceptions formed in the brain.


29. God met with a revelation Nebuchadnezzar, who had been meditating on the future destiny of his vast empire.


<hi type="bold">30. not ... for any wisdom that I have--</hi>not on account of any previous wisdom which I may have manifested (<reference osisRef="Dan.1.17">Da 1:17</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.20">20</reference>). The specially-favored servants of God in all ages disclaim merit in themselves and ascribe all to the grace and power of God (<reference osisRef="Gen.41.16">Ge 41:16</reference>; <reference osisRef="Acts.3.12">Ac 3:12</reference>). The "as for me," disclaiming extraordinary merit, contrasts elegantly with "as for thee," whereby Daniel courteously, but without flattery, implies, that God honored Nebuchadnezzar, as His vicegerent over the world kingdoms, with a revelation on the subject uppermost in his thoughts, the ultimate destinies of those kingdoms.

<hi type="bold">for their sakes that shall make known, &c.--</hi>a Chaldee idiom for, "to the intent that the interpretation may be made known to the king."

<hi type="bold">the thoughts of thy heart--</hi>thy subject of thought before falling asleep. Or, perhaps the probation of Nebuchadnezzar's character through this revelation may be the meaning intended (compare <reference osisRef="2Chr.32.31">2Ch 32:31</reference>; <reference osisRef="Luke.2.35">Lu 2:35</reference>).

30. not... for any wisdom that I have-- not on account of any previous wisdom which I may have manifested (Da 1:17, 20). The specially-favored servants of God in all ages disclaim merit in themselves and ascribe all to the grace and power of God (Ge 41:16; Ac 3:12). The "as for me," disclaiming extraordinary merit, contrasts elegantly with "as for thee," whereby Daniel courteously, but without flattery, implies, that God honored Nebuchadnezzar, as His vicegerent over the world kingdoms, with a revelation on the subject uppermost in his thoughts, the ultimate destinies of those kingdoms. for their sakes that shall make known, &c.-- a Chaldee idiom for, "to the intent that the interpretation may be made known to the king." the thoughts of thy heart-- thy subject of thought before falling asleep. Or, perhaps the probation of Nebuchadnezzar's character through this revelation may be the meaning intended (compare 2Ch 32:31; Lu 2:35).


31. The world power in its totality appears as a colossal human form: Babylon the head of gold, Medo-Persia the breast and two arms of silver, Græco-Macedonia the belly and two thighs of brass, and Rome, with its Germano-Slavonic offshoots, the legs of iron and feet of iron and clay, the fourth still existing. Those kingdoms only are mentioned which stand in some relation to the kingdom of God; of these none is left out; the final establishment of that kingdom is the aim of His moral government of the world. The colossus of metal stands on weak feet, of clay. All man's glory is as ephemeral and worthless as chaff (compare <reference osisRef="1Pet.1.24">1Pe 1:24</reference>). But the kingdom of God, small and unheeded as a "stone" on the ground is compact in its homogeneous unity; whereas the world power, in its heterogeneous constituents successively supplanting one another, contains the elements of decay. The relation of the stone to the mountain is that of the kingdom of the cross (<reference osisRef="Matt.16.23">Mt 16:23</reference>; <reference osisRef="Luke.24.26">Lu 24:26</reference>) to the kingdom of glory, the latter beginning, and the former ending when the kingdom of God breaks in pieces the kingdoms of the world (<reference osisRef="Rev.11.15">Re 11:15</reference>). Christ's contrast between the two kingdoms refers to this passage.

<hi type="bold">a great image--</hi>literally, "one image that was great." Though the kingdoms were different, it was essentially one and the same world power under different phases, just as the image was one, though the parts were of different metals.

31. The world power in its totality appears as a colossal human form: Babylon the head of gold, Medo-Persia the breast and two arms of silver, Græco-Macedonia the belly and two thighs of brass, and Rome, with its Germano-Slavonic offshoots, the legs of iron and feet of iron and clay, the fourth still existing. Those kingdoms only are mentioned which stand in some relation to the kingdom of God; of these none is left out; the final establishment of that kingdom is the aim of His moral government of the world. The colossus of metal stands on weak feet, of clay. All man's glory is as ephemeral and worthless as chaff (compare 1Pe 1:24). But the kingdom of God, small and unheeded as a "stone" on the ground is compact in its homogeneous unity; whereas the world power, in its heterogeneous constituents successively supplanting one another, contains the elements of decay. The relation of the stone to the mountain is that of the kingdom of the cross (Mt 16:23; Lu 24:26) to the kingdom of glory, the latter beginning, and the former ending when the kingdom of God breaks in pieces the kingdoms of the world (Re 11:15). Christ's contrast between the two kingdoms refers to this passage. a great image-- literally, "one image that was great." Though the kingdoms were different, it was essentially one and the same world power under different phases, just as the image was one, though the parts were of different metals.