v.
3: “How great are His signs… His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom…”
At last, an enduring recognition and
affirmation of the great truth of Dan. 2:44!
"In the days of those kings the God of heaven
will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not
be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms,
but it will itself endure forever.”
This declaration from Nebuchadnezzar also
recalls Ps. 145:10-13:
10 All Your
works shall give thanks to You, O LORD,
And Your godly ones shall bless You.
11 They shall
speak of the glory of Your kingdom
And talk of Your power;
12 To make known
to the sons of men Your mighty acts
And the glory of the majesty of Your kingdom.
13 Your kingdom
is an everlasting kingdom,
And Your dominion endures throughout all generations.
The chapter’s unfolding events, in which Nebuchadnezzar
is graciously smitten and suddenly incapacitated by the mighty hand of God,
will permanently etch in his mind the temporal rule of vainglorious earthly rulers.
4.
The Reception of the Dream (4:4-7).
v.
4: “I, Nebuchadnezzar, was at rest… and flourishing…”
o
At
this juncture (i.e., the latter portion of his reign), the great King was enjoying
international peace & domestic bliss, delighting in a period of rest from
foreign disturbances while his empire flourished in a state of internal peace &
prosperity.
o
This
account follows Nebuchadnezzar’s weary & mixed 13-year campaign against
Tyre and his Divinely-allotted, compensatory success against Egypt (568/67 BC)
in fulfillment of Jer. 43:9-13 & 44:30, which was also recorded in Ezek.
29:17-20:
Ezek. 29:17-20: Now in the twenty-seventh year,
in the first month, on the first of the month, the word of the LORD came to me
saying, "Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon made his army labor
hard against Tyre; every head was made bald and every shoulder was rubbed bare.
But he and his army had no wages from Tyre for the labor that he had performed
against it." Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, "Behold, I will give
the land of Egypt to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. And he will carry off her
wealth and capture her spoil and seize her plunder; and it will be wages for his
army. I have given him the land of Egypt for his labor which he performed,
because they acted for Me," declares the Lord GOD.”
o
The
events of chapter 4 also follow the successful and magnificent rebuilding of
Babylon in accordance with the grandiose goals that Nebuchadnezzar had set for
the capital of the civilized world (cf., Dan. 4:30).
o
“rest” (shelâh) indicates a carefree attitude; a state
of ease & security…
o
“flourishing” (ra‛ănan); indicates prosperity, or the sort
of vitality associated with growing and thriving vegetation; “green.”
o
Such
pictures establish a correspondence between the King’s life-circumstances and
the imagery of the dream that follows.
o
“house… palace.” Albert Barnes suggests the possibility
in his classic commentary that the use of two distinct terms may
indicate tranquility within two distinct spheres: namely, both the
domestic sphere of private family relations, as well as the sphere of political
and governmental concerns.
o
With
the threat of all potential foreign opposition and internal insurrection
suppressed, and with his major goals & building projects achieved, the stage
is now set for the unexpectedly gloomy and ominous dream of v. 5. What else
was there to disturb his rest—save for the correcting and omnipotent Hand of
God?
o
This
dramatically unfolding sense of “calm-before-the-storm” reminds
us of various Scriptural passages that also relate unto a false sense of
security in the face of impending Divine Judgment (cf., Deut. 29:19, Isa.
56:12, Dan. 5:3-6, 2Peter 3:3-7)…
o The popular attitude
preceding the eschatological Day of the Lord:
1 Thess. 5:2-3: “For you yourselves know full
well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. While
they are saying, "Peace and safety!" then destruction will come upon
them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not
escape.”
Luke 17:27-30: "And just as it happened in
the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: they were
eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in
marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and
destroyed them all. It was the same as happened in the days of Lot: they were
eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were
planting, they were building; but
on the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from
heaven and destroyed them all. It will be just the same on the day that the Son
of Man is revealed.”
o The attitude of the Rich
Fool in our Lord’s Parable:
Luke 12:19-20: And I will say to my soul,
"Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years to come; take your ease,
eat, drink and be merry." But God said to him, “You fool! This very night
your soul is required of you; and now who will own what you have prepared?”
o This false sense of
security prior to impending disaster mirrors that of his grandson Belshazzar in
Dan. 5:1-4.
v.
5: "I saw a dream and it made me fearful…”
o
This
same apprehension accompanied the King’s earlier dream of the Great Colossus
(Dan. 2:1, 3).
o
Again,
we see dreams functioning as an important OT-era form of Divine revelation
and means of warning (cf., Gen. 20:3, unto Abimelech; Gen. 31:24, unto
Laban; Gen. 41:1-8, unto Pharaoh; Dan. 2:1, unto Nebuchadnezzar; also, Matt.
27:19, unto Pilate’s wife). Note the comments of Elihu unto Job:
Job 33:14-18: "Indeed God
speaks once, or twice, yet no one notices it. In a dream, a vision of the
night, when sound sleep falls on men, while they slumber in their beds, then He
opens the ears of men, and seals their instruction, that He may turn man aside
from his conduct, and keep man from pride; He keeps back his soul from the pit,
and his life from passing over into Sheol.
o
Dreams
can arise from many sources, however, and were thus of limited value as
a source of revelation. According to the Torah (Deut. 13:1-5), a “dreamer of
dreams” was subject to a variety of tests measuring their conformity and
fidelity to prior prophetic revelation.
o
Today’s
highly subjective “dream analysis therapy” is associated with either an
occultic or Freudian worldview and is thus to be studiously avoided by the
Christian believer.
o
With
the completion of the Biblical Canon, believers today are directed to the final
and objective, utterly infallible and all-sufficient prophetic counsel of
Sacred Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16-17)—the “more sure word of prophecy” (2
Pet. 1:19).
v.
6-7: “So I gave orders to bring into my presence all the wise men of Babylon...”
o
WHY
did the King summon the failed counselors of Dan. 2:2-12—whom the King had long
ago correctly identified as frauds and humbugs?
o
WHY
didn’t the King repeat the test of chapter 2 (i.e., compel the wise men of
Babylon to relate the unrevealed details of the dream)?
o
WHY
didn’t the advisors take advantage of the situation and manufacture a “smooth” and
readily palatable interpretation?
o
WHY
didn’t the King summon Daniel first, instead of last?
RESPONSE to the above:
o
The
dream was obviously and self-evidently ominous with regard to its
message!
o
The
King simply did not want the hear the truth, which he correctly recognized
as hurtful to his person and fortunes. Instead, he desired an implausible, but nevertheless
soothing and ear-tickling interpretation.
o
The
King knew that he could rely upon his ambitious and dishonest, ever-scheming
(Dan. 3:8-12) court toadies and sycophants to supply a flattering and
reassuring interpretation.
o
Perhaps,
however, they too suspected the obvious—and feigned ignorance!
o
This
incident parallels the reluctance of King Ahab of Israel to summon the genuine
prophet Micaiah and content himself with the soothing counsel 400 false
prophets (I Kings 22:5-28).
I Kings 22:7-9: But Jehoshaphat
said, "Is there not yet a prophet of the LORD here that we may inquire of
him?" The king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, "There is yet one man
by whom we may inquire of the LORD, but I hate him, because he does not
prophesy good concerning me, but evil. He is Micaiah son of Imlah." But
Jehoshaphat said, "Let not the king say so." Then the king of Israel
called an officer and said, "Bring quickly Micaiah son of Imlah."
o
The
stock and trade of false prophets is to say “Peace!” to the wicked…
Jer. 14:13: Then I said:
“Ah, Lord GOD, behold, the prophets say to them, ‘You shall not see the sword,
nor shall you have famine, but I will give you assured peace in this place.’”
Jer. 5:30-31: An appalling and
horrible thing has happened in the land: the prophets prophesy falsely, and the
priests rule at their direction; my people love to have it so, but what will
you do when the end comes?
o
In
contrast, the righteous trust in Lord, despite the “bad news” of present life-circumstances…
Ps. 112:7: He is not afraid
of bad news; his heart is firm, trusting in the LORD.
o
And
True Love manifests itself in TRUTH—as opposed to false flattery and deception…
Pro 27:5-6: Better is open
rebuke than hidden love. Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the
kisses of an enemy.
o Today’s non-Christian
counselors often fill the same need for inane self-assurance with their
“positive,” coddling advice—while dutifully ignoring man’s basic sin problem.
o
Despite
the King’s grave suspicions of their charlatanism and with full knowledge of
their quackery, he had nonetheless retained them in his service—due,
doubtless, to the important institutional role they played within the Empire’s formal
political structure, underscoring its religious/ideological basis. In this
world, political concerns often serve to trump and outweigh the truth!
v.
8: "But finally Daniel came in before me…”
o Despite his respect for
Daniel, and even though Daniel retained his position as “chief of the
magicians” (v. 9), the King seeks his counsel LAST!
o Men—even Christian
men—often seek out human wisdom and choose to favor its proposed cures
and expedients, rather than pursue the counsel of God and His prescribed
remedies, as expressed in His unerring Word!
o Despite his misgivings
that the true interpretation will prove to be ominous, something within the
King ultimately demands the Truth—and thus calls for the servant of the
Truth!
v.
8: “Daniel…whose name is Belteshazzar…”
o Belteshazzar was the Gentile name
associated with a pagan deity that was bestowed upon the young Daniel many
years earlier, signifying the King’s mastery over him, and to encourage his cultural
assimilation (Dan. 1:7).
o Undoubtedly, the King here
employs this name due to the simple fact that Daniel would have been universally
known as “Belteshazzar” unto the international audience addressed by the
King’s proclamation.
o Yet, despite the fact
that his servant is a foreign captive, the King demonstrates an extraordinary measure
of respect for both the prophet and his God, employing the Hebrew name “Daniel”
(“God is my Judge”). Indeed, the King dramatically encounters God as Judge
in the overwhelming and powerful judicial overtones of this unfolding narrative!
v.
8: “Belteshazzar according to the name of my god…”
o
Retrospectively,
perhaps a reference to the fact that at time of these events, the King was
still counted a servant and patron of the of gods—especially of Marduk,
ruler of the Babylonian pantheon.
v.
8: “Daniel…in whom is a spirit of the holy gods…” (cf., vv. 9, 18; 5:11,
14).
o
A
phrase with a certain degree of ambiguity attached to it, in association
with unresolved technical and grammatical debates.
o
While
a solid majority of translations follow the above (NASB) plural rendering (“gods”)
with its polytheistic overtones, the NKJV favors the LXX rendering: “in
him is the Spirit of the Holy God…”
o
While
both renderings—“God” or “gods”—are grammatically possible—various
considerations (e.g., the plurality of the adjective “holy,” as well as the surrounding
context) have caused most translators to favor the former rendering.
o
If
“gods” is correct, then we are again dealing with a retrospective reference
that expresses the fact that at time of the described events, the King remained
an unsaved polytheist.
o
On
the other hand, if “God” is favored as a reference to the one Holy God
of Israel, then the passage recalls the statement of Pharaoh given in the
aftermath of Joseph’s interpretation of his dreams:
Gen. 41:38: And Pharaoh said to his servants, “Can
we find a man like this, in whom is the Spirit of God?”
v.
9: “…tell me the visions of my dream”
o
Inasmuch
the King himself relates the details of the dream unto Daniel (vv.10-18)—in
contrast to the authenticating test of chapter 2—it is probably better to
understand the above in harmony with the NET translation:
“…consider my dream that I saw and set
forth its interpretation!”
o
Daniel
already has the King’s confidence; a repeat of the test of chapter 2 is deemed unnecessary.
Note that Daniel’s legendary reputation for wisdom as a discerner of secrets is
described by one of his own contemporaries—Ezekiel! Here, God speaks
with sarcasm concerning the purported wisdom of the Prince of Tyre:
Ezek. 28:3 (ISV) “Look! You're wiser than Daniel, aren't
you? No secret is too mysterious for you!”
