Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 3:30
Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, in the province of Babylon.
30. promoted ] made to prosper (cf. Dan 6:28), i.e. supported them in different ways in the discharge of their office, and so ensured their success (Dan 2:49).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Then the king promoted Shadrach … – Margin, made to prosper. The Chaldee means no more than made to prosper. Whether he restored them to their former places, or to higher honors, does not appear. There would be, however, nothing inconsistent with his usual course in supposing that he raised them to more exalted stations.
In the province of Babylon – See the notes at Dan 2:49. The Greek and the Arabic add here, And he counted them worthy to preside over all the Jews that were in his kingdom. But nothing of this is found in the Chaldee, and it is not known by whom this addition was made.
In the Vulgate and the Greek versions, and in some of the critical editions of the Hebrew Scriptures (Walton, Hahn, etc.), the three first verses of the following chapter are subjoined to this. It is well known that the divisions of the chapters are of no authority, but it is clear that these verses belong more appropriately to the following chapter than to this, as the reason there assigned by the monarch for the proclamation is what occurred to himself Dan 3:2, rather than what he had witnessed in others. The division, therefore, which is made in our common version of the Bible, and in the Syriac and the Arabic, is the correct one.
Practical Remarks
I. The instance recorded in this chapter Dan 3:1-7 is not improbably the first case which ever occurred in the world of an attempt to produce conformity in idolatrous worship by penal statute. It has, however, been abundantly imitated since, alike in the pagan and in the nominally Christian world. There are no portions of history more interesting than those which describe the progress of religious liberty; the various steps which have been taken to reach the result which has now been arrived at, and to settle the principles which are now regarded as the true ones. Between the views which were formerly entertained, and which are still entertained in many countries, and those which constitute the Protestant notions on the subject, there is a greater difference than there is, in regard to civil rights, between the views which prevail under an Oriental despotism, and the most enlarged and enlightened notions of civil freedom. The views which have prevailed on the subject are the following:
1. The general doctrine among the pagan has been, that there were many gods in heaven and earth, and that all were entitled to reverence. One nation was supposed to have as good a right to worship its own gods as another, and it was regarded as at least an act of courtesy to show respect to the gods that any nation adored, in the same way as respect would be shown to the sovereigns who presided over them. Hence, the gods of all nations could be consistently introduced into the Pantheon at Rome; hence, there were few attempts to proselyte among the pagan; and hence, it was not common to persecute those who worshipped other gods. Persecution of idolaters by those who were idolaters was, therefore, rarely known among the pagan, and toleration was not contrary to the views which prevailed, provided the gods of the country were recognized. In ancient Chaldea, Assyria, Greece, and Rome, in the earliest ages, persecution was rare, and the toleration of other forms of religion was usual.
2. The views which have prevailed leading to persecution, and which are a violation, as we suppose, of all just notions of liberty on the subject of religion, are the following:
(a) Those among the pagan which, as in the case of Nebuchadnezzar, require all to worship a particular god that should be set up. In such a case, it is clear that while all who were idolaters, and who supposed that all the gods worshipped by others should be respected, could render homage; it is also clear that those who regarded all idols as false gods, and believed that none of them ought to be worshipped, could not comply with the command. Such was the case with the Jews who were in Babylon Dan 3:8-18, for supposing that there was but one God, it was plain that they could not render homage to any other. While, therefore, every idolater could render homage to any idol, the Hebrew could render homage to none.
(b) The views among the pagan prohibiting the exercise of a certain kind of religion. According to the prevailing views, no mode of religion could be tolerated which would maintain that all the gods that were worshipped were false. Religion was supposed to be identified with the best interests of the state, and was recognized by the laws, and protected by the laws. To deny the claim, therefore, of any and of all the gods that were worshipped; to maintain that all were false alike; to call on men to forsake their idols, and to embrace a new religion – all this was regarded as an attack on the state. This was the attitude which Christianity assumed toward the religions of the Roman empire, and it was this which led to the fiery persecutions which prevailed there. While Rome could consistently tolerate any form of idolatry that would recognize the religion established by the state, it could not tolerate a system which maintained that all idolatry was wrong. It would allow another god to be placed in the Pantheon, but it could not recognize a system which woud remove every god from that temple. Christianity, then, made war on the system of idolatry that prevailed in the Roman empire in two respects: in proclaiming a purer religion, denouncing all the corruptions which idolatry had engendered, and which it countenanced; and in denying altogether that the gods which were worshipped were true gods – thus arraying itself against the laws, the priesthood, the venerable institutions, and all the passions and prejudices of the people. These views may be thus summed up:
(aa) all the gods worshipped by others were to be recognized;
(bb) new ones might be introduced by authority of the state;
(cc) the gods which the state approved and acknowledged were to be honored by all;
(dd) if any persons denied their existence, and their claims to homage, they were to be treated as enemies of the state.
It was on this last principle that persecutions ever arose under the pagan forms of religion. Infidels, indeed, have been accustomed to charge Christianity with all the persecutions on account of religion, and to speak in high terms of the mild tolerance of the ancient pagans; of the universal toleration of polytheism; of the Roman princes beholding without concern a thousand forms of religion subsisting in peace under their gentle sway. – Gibbon. But it should be remembered that pagan nations required of every citizen conformity to their national idolatries. When this was refused, persecution arose as a matter of course. Stilpo was banished from Athens for affirming that the statue of Minerva in the citadel was no divinity, but only the work of the chisel of Phidias. Protagoras received a similar punishment for this sentence: Whether there be gods or not, I have nothing to offer. Prodicus, and his pupil Socrates, suffered death for opinions at variance with the established idolatry of Athens. Alcibiades and Aeschylus narrowly escaped a like end for a similar cause. Cicero lays it down as a principle of legislation entirely conformable to the laws of the Roman state, that no man shall have separate gods for himself; and no man shall worship by himself new or foreign gods, unless they have been publicly acknowledged by the laws of the state. – De Legibus, ii. 8. Julius Paulus, the Roman civilian, gives the following as a leading feature of the Roman law: Those who introduced new religions, or such as were unknown in their tendency and nature, by which the minds of men might be agitated, were degraded, if they belonged to the higher ranks, and if they were in a lower state, were punished with death. See MIlvaines Lectures on the Evidences of Christianity, pp. 427-429.
(c) The attempts made to produce conformity in countries where the Christian system has prevailed. In such countries, as among the pagan, it has been supposed that religion is an important auxiliary to the purposes of the state, and that it is proper that the state should not only protect it, but regulate it. It has claimed the right, therefore, to prescribe the form of religion which shall prevail; to require conformity to that, and to punish all who did not conform to the established mode of worship. This attempt to produce conformity has led to most of the persecutions of modern times.
3. The principles which have been settled by the discussions and agitations of past times, and which are recognized in all countries where there are any just views of religious liberty, and which are destined yet to be universally recognized, are the following:
(a) There is to be, on the subject of religion, perfect liberty to worship God in the manner that shall be most in accordance with the views of the individual himself, provided in doing it he does not interfere with the rights or disturb the worship of others. It is not merely that men are to be tolerated in the exercise of their religion – for the word tolerate would seem to imply that the state had some right of control in the matter – but the true word to express the idea is liberty.
(b) The state is to protect all in the enjoyment of these equal rights. Its authority does not go beyond this; its duty demands this. These two principles comprise all that is required on the subject of religious liberty. They have been in our world, however, principles of slow growth. They were unknown in Greece – for Socrates died because they were not understood; they were unknown in Rome – for the state claimed the power to determine what gods should be admitted into the Pantheon; they were unknown even in Judea – for a national or state religion was established there; they were unknown in Babylon – for the monarch there claimed the right of enforcing conformity to the national religion; they were unknown in Europe in the middle ages – for all the horrors of the Inquisition grew out of the fact that they were not understood; they are unknown in Turkey, and China, and Persia – for the state regards religion as under its control. The doctrine of entire freedom in religion, of perfect liberty to worship God according to our own views of right, is the last point which society is to reach in this direction. It is impossible to conceive that there is to be anything beyond this which mankind are to desire in the progress toward the perfection of the social organization; and when this shall be everywhere reached, the affairs of the world will be placed on a permanent footing.
II. In the spirit evinced by the three young men, and the answer which they gave, when accused of not worshipping the image, and when threatened with a horrid death, we have a beautiful illustration of the nature and value of the religion of principle, Dan 3:12-18. To enable us to see the force of this example, and to appreciate its value, we are to remember that these were yet comparatively young men; that they were captives in a distant land; that they had no powerful friends at court; that they had had, compared with what we now have, few advantages of instruction; that they were threatened with a most horrid death; and that they had nothing of a worldly nature to hope for by refusing compliance with the kings commands. This instance is of value to us, because it is not only important to have religion, but to have the best kind of religion; and it is doubtless in order that we may have this, that such examples are set before us in the Scriptures. In regard to this kind of religion, there are three inquiries which would present themselves: On what is it founded? what will it lead us to do? and what is its value?
(1) It is founded mainly on two things – an intelligent view of duty, and fixed principle.
(a) An intelligent view of duty; an acquaintance with what is right, and what is wrong. These young men had made up their minds intelligently, that it was right to worship God, and that it was wrong to render homage to an idol. This was not obstinacy. Obstinacy exists where a man has made up his mind, and resolves to act, without any good reason, or without an intelligent view of what is right or wrong, and where he adheres to his purpose not because it is right, but from the influence of mere will. The religion of principle is always found where there is an intelligent view of what is right, and a man can give a reason for what he does.
(b) This religion is founded on a determination to do what is right, and not to do what is wrong. The question is not what is expedient, or popular, or honorable, or lucrative, or pleasant, but what is right.
(2) What will such a religion lead us to do? This question may be answered by a reference to the case before us, and it will be found that it will lead us to do three things:
(a) To do our duty without being solicitous or anxious about the results, Dan 3:16.
(b) To put confidence in God, feeling that if he pleases he can protect us from danger, Dan 3:17.
(c) To do our duty, whatever may be the consequences – whether he protects us or not, Dan 3:18,
(3) What is the value of this kind of religion?
(a) It is the only kind in which there is any fixed and certain standard. If a man regulates his opinions and conduct from expediency, or from respect to the opinions of others, or from feeling, or from popular impulses, there is no standard; there is nothing settled or definite. Now one thing is popular, now another; today the feelings may prompt to one thing, tomorrow to another; at one time expediency will suggest one course, at another a different course.
(b) It is the only kind of religion on which reliance can be placed. In endeavoring to spread the gospel; to meet the evils which are in the world; to promote the cause of temperance, chastity, liberty, truth, and peace, the only thing on which permanent reliance can be placed is the religion of principle. And
(c) It is the only religion which is certainly genuine. A man may see much poetic beauty in religion; he may have much of the religion of sentiment; he may admire God in the grandeur of his works; he may have warm feelings; easily enkindled on the subject of religion, and may even weep at the foot of the cross in view of the wrongs and woes that the Saviour endured; he may be impressed with the forms, and pomp, and splendor of gorgeous worship, and still have no genuine repentance for his sins, no saving faith in the Redeemer.
III. We have in this chapter Dan 3:19-23 an affecting case of an attempt to punish men for holding certain opinions, and for acting in conformity with them. When we read of an instance of persecutions like this, it occurs to us to ask the following questions: What is persecution? why has it been permitted by God? and what effects have followed from it?
(1) What is persecution? It is pain inflicted, or some loss, or disadvantage in person, family, or office, on account of holding certain opinions. It has had two objects: one to punish men for holding certain opinions, as if the persecutor had a right to regard this as an offence against the state; and the other a professed view to reclaim those who are made to suffer, and to save their souls. In regard to the pain or suffering involved in persecution, it is not material what kind of pain is inflicted in order to constitute persecution. Any bodily suffering; any deprivation of comfort; any exclusion from office; any holding up of one to public reproach; or any form of ridicule, constitutes the essence of persecution. It may be added, that not a few of the inventions most distinguished for inflicting pain, and known as refinements of cruelty, have been originated in times of persecution, and would probably have been unknown if it had not been for the purpose of restraining men from the free exercise of religious opinions. The Inquisition has been most eminent in this; and within the walls of that dreaded institution it is probable that human ingenuity has been exhausted in devising the most refined modes of inflicting torture on the human frame.
(2) Why has this been permitted? Among the reasons why it has been permitted may be the following:
(a) To show the power and reality of religion. It seemed desirable to subject it to all kinds of trial, in order to show that its existence could not be accounted for except on the supposition that it is from God. If men had never been called on to suffer on account of religion, it would have been easy for the enemies of religion to allege that there was little evidence that it was genuine, or was of value, for it had never been tried. Compare Job 1:9-11. As it is, it has been subjected to every form of trial which wicked men could devise, and has shown itself to be adapted to meet them all. The work of the martyrs has been well done; and religion in the times of martyrdom has shown itself to be all that it is desirable it should be.
(b) In order to promote its spread in the world. The blood of the martyrs has been the seed of the church; and it is probable that religion in past times has owed much of its purity, and of its diffusion, to the fact that it has been persecuted.
(c) To fit the sufferers for an exalted place in heaven. They who have suffered persecution needed trials as well as others, for all Christians need them – and theirs came in this form. Some of the most lovely traits of Christian character have been brought out in connection with persecution, and some of the most triumphant exhibitions of preparation for heaven have been made at the stake.
(3) What have been the effects of persecution?
(a) It has been the settled point that the Christian religion cannot be destroyed by persecution. There is no power to be brought against it more mighty than, for example, was that of the Roman empire; and it is impossible to conceive that there should be greater refinements of cruelty than have been employed.
(b) The effect has been to diffuse the religion which has been persecuted. The manner in which the sufferings inflicted have been endured has shown that there is reality and power in it. It is also a law of human nature to sympathize with the wronged and the oppressed, and we insensibly learn to transfer the sympathy which we have for these persons to their opinions. When we see one who is wronged, we soon find our hearts beating in unison with his, and soon find ourselves taking sides with him in everything.
IV. We have in this chapter Dan 3:24-27 an instructive illustration of the protection which God affords his people in times of trial. These men were thrown into the furnace on account of their obedience to God, and their refusal to do what they knew he would not approve. The result showed, by a most manifest miracle, that they were right in the course which they took, and their conduct was the occasion of furnishing a most striking proof of the wisdom of trusting in God in the faithful performance of duty, irrespective of consequences. Similar illustrations were furnished in the case of Daniel in the lions den Dan 6:16-22, and of Peter Act 12:1-10. But a question of much interest arises here, which is, What kind of protection may we look for now?
(1) There are numerous promises made to the righteous of every age and country. They are not promises indeed of miraculous interference, but they are promises of an interposition of some kind in their behalf, which will show that it is not vain thing to serve God. Among them are those recorded in the following places: Isa 54:7-8; Mat 5:4; Job 5:19,
(2) In regard to the kind of interposition that we may look for now, or the nature of the favors implied in these promises, it may be observed:
(a) That we are not to look for any miraculous interpositions in our favor.
(b) We are not to expect that there will he on earth an exact adjustment of the Divine dealings according to the deserts of all persons, or according to the principles of a completed moral government, when there will be a perfect system of rewards and punishments.
(c) We are not to expect that there will be such manifest and open rewards of obedience, and such direct and constant benefits resulting from religion in this world, as to lead men merely from these to serve and worship God. If religion were always attended with prosperity; if the righteous were never persecuted, were never poor, or were never bereaved, multitudes would be induced to become religious, as many followed the Saviour, not because they saw the miracles, but because they did eat of the loaves and fishes, and were filled: Joh 6:26. While, therefore, in the Divine administration here it is proper that there should be so many and so marked interpositions in favor of the good as to show that God is the friend of his people, it is not proper that there should be so many that men would be induced to engage in his service for the love of the reward rather than for the sake of the service itself; because they are to be happy, rather than because they love virtue. It may be expected, therefore, that while the general course of the Divine administration will be in favor of virtue, there may be much intermingled with this that will appear to be of a contrary kind; much that will be fitted to test the faith of the people of God, and to show that they love his service for its own sake.
V. We have, in Dan 3:28-30, a striking instance of the effect which an adherence to principle will produce on the minds of worldly and wicked men. Such men have no love for religion, but they can see that a certain course accords with the views which are professedly held, and that it indicates high integrity. They can see that firmness and consistency are worthy of commendation and reward. They can see, as Nebuchadnezzar did in this case, that such a course will secure the Divine favor, and they will be disposed to honor it on that account. For a time, a tortuous course may seem to prosper, but in the end, solid fame, high rewards, honorable offices, and a grateful remembrance after death, follow in the path of strict integrity and unbending virtue.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Dan 3:30
Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego in the province of Babylon.
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego
Whenever we hear of anyones appointment to a Government place, the first question we ask is, How did he get it? generally, in order to ascertain whether or not we have at command any interest like that which has proved successful. And so it is interesting to enquire how these men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, came to be promoted in the province of that Babylon which, after all, is not so unlike this Babylon. Of course, we know how it came to pass, as we have read it in the lesson over and over again. But let us try to place ourselves in the position of persons who did not know any more than the fact that they had been promoted. What would be your conjecture as to the way in which they obtained royal favour? I venture to say that you would at once make up your mind that the promotion had been the result of trimming of some kind, or of what is pleasantly called sensible and wise compromise. I see the spirit everywhere. The genius and the man of principle in politics is nowhere, except he be wanting to do work in a crisis. And, in the most worldly-wise church on earth, the asserting diplomatist is everything and the argumentative genius is nothing. The one is laden with honours; the other is reserved for use, to be turned on and turned off according to circumstances. If you say, The miracle made all the difference; let there be as much time-serving and compromise as you please in the present day; still, if anything like what we read in the chapter before us actually took place even now, no Government–Liberal or Conservative–could resist the claims of such men as Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego. Even admitting that, which I do not for a moment, I ask what caused the startling occurrence which you say would have established their claims and ensured their promotion? It did not come down from Heaven as something to mark its favourites, and to terrify the heathen monarch, and cause him to act in a conciliatory spirit towards the subjects of a superior power. No; what did it effect? This only as far as the king was concerned. It impressed upon him the character of the men with whom he bad to deal. The deliverance called attention to and attested the character of these men; but it was the character thus attested which secured their promotion. To understand their characters we must, I think, do two things:
1. We must get rid of the very prevalent idea that those who are spoken of with approval in the Bible were good as a matter of course, and breathed in and exhaled piety, virtue, and self-denial, in the ordinary course of things; while, on the other hand, those who are condemned, being, by supposition, in the same atmosphere, are much more inexcusable than we should be for not being good! I cannot attempt to prove the absurdity of this notion; I can only remind you that it is absurd. But besides getting rid of the idea that it was easy for these men to do as they did, I think that, in order to appreciate their character, we must try to ascertain how they could have done otherwise–with a view to promotion–if they bad lived in our own enlightened days. How could they have proceeded to reason with their consciences if they had had the advantage of our superior knowledge? They had many ways of escape. As loyal subjects, it was their duty to do what the king commanded; and, of course, this strong loyal feeling would be somewhat strengthened by the consideration of the alternative of the fire in the event of its repression! These men might, then, have reasoned themselves into compliance on the grounds that they ought to obey the powers that be; and their loyalty might have been stimulated and confirmed by the contemplation of the alternative furnace. When I hear or read the case of these men quoted as instances in which the Church opposed the State, and received Divine sanction, and am asked to regard Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego as prototypes of modern violators of the law as declared by the courts to which they voluntarily submitted themselves when they entered the ministry of the English Church, by virtue of which they hold their position and emoluments, and from which they can withdraw when they please–I feel myself unable to argue with those who can be deluded by that fallacy. The parallel to Shadrach, Meshach, and Aben-nego is not the man who receives position or emolument, or both, from State and from Establishment, and then disobeys the law as declared constitutionally by the State; but the dissenter who refuses to worship what he considers the golden image set up by the State, and who refuses position and emolument rather than be under the control of the State, or, in other words, of the House of Commons. Whether he be right or wrong is another question. But he is intelligible; he may quote Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, because he gets nothing from Nebuchadnezzar the king; but if I disobey the law, I cannot claim martyrdom on such Scriptural authority. I am the recognised officer of Nebuchadnezzar, and my duty is to obey his law, which I accepted with my eyes open, or to cease to be under that law, which I can do when I please. You must bear with me here when I say that my argument will not be touched by saying that these were men serving the true God, and that they were asked to worship an idol. They were asked under pressure to do what they thought to be wrong. Whether or not they judged rightly is not the question. They were men who had no contract with the State. But setting aside the loyalty plea altogether, if they had consulted me as to how they had best manage their conscience in view of the objectionable furnace; I mean if they had consulted me as one whose sole business it was to get them out of the difficulty and keep them out of the fire, I should have said, Look at it in this way; the whole thing is a matter of form. Why should you be burnt for a form? Bow down with your body; that is nothing; you are not bowing down with your heart; that is everything. What would be the answer to this plea about mere form? Simply this: Form is nothing and heart is everything; but the association of ideas is such, with such beings as we are, that when a form becomes associated width an idea, it will be a matter of much time and much labour to sever them. The British flag is so much woollen material, but if you insult it, you insult the great nation which is in idea associated with it. And so, if these men had there and then bowed down–no matter what was in their heart–they would simply have created a wrong impression, sacrificed principle, or, to put it in plainer words, acted a lie. Again, they could have said that they might cause a disturbance by disobeying the royal command, and that as Jehovahs servants they ought to promote peace. What is the answer? Certainly peace, but not at the price of principle. Again, they might have said that everyone was going, and that they had better not be singular. I say they might have said this, for it would be no argument. And looking for a practical answer in this eminently practical age, I should like to know how many of the reforms of various kinds of which we are all proud were brought about and worked by men who were not singular for many a long day. But they might have had a still more subtle and refined reason for obedience. By this single compliance, they might have said in their hearts and said to one another, they should conciliate the king, and so be able to do him spiritual good afterwards! But, after all, the very best of their conceivable arguments would come to this. They must sum it up into this simple question, Shall I do evil that good may come? They said No. What was right they knew; what might be the result of doing it they did not know, and it was no concern of theirs. Obedience is our business. Its result, with all reverence I say it, is Gods business. Our next step He generally makes plain enough. This was their practical faith, and this must be ours, if we would have the form who walks with us in the midst of our fiery trials–whether seen or hidden–to be the form of the Son of God. Thesemen were promoted to place; why? Because they had shown themselves to be a power. And a power they would have been–in spite of Nebuchadnezzar and every other king who ever lived before or since, whether they got the places or not. Why? Because against royalty, against public opinion, and in the face of death, they acted according to their conscience, and trusted to that God whose candle within them they knew that conscience to be. The alternative presented to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego is essentially the same as that which presents itself often to everyone, high and low, young and old. We all have to face it, not once, but ten thousand times in life. And we do know that when that Book is opened, the dead–amongst whom you and I must one day be numbered–shall be judged, as we now judge Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, according to the things that are written in that Book. (J. C. Coghlan,
D. D.)
.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 30. Then the king promoted, &c.] He restored them to the offices which they held before the charge of disobedience and treason was brought against them.
At the end of this verse the Septuagint add, “And he advanced them to be governors over all the Jews that were in his kingdom.” This may be the meaning of the latter verse. They were more likely to be set over the Jews than over the Chaldeans.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
They that honour God, them will God honour. To suffer, and suffer shame and pains, for God, is to honour God. Joh 21:19; 1Pe 4:14. It is probable that the Chaldeans used to reproach the God of the Jews, and more upon this account, because for his sake these his servants refused conformity to Babylonish idolatry; and their common quarrel with the people of God was upon the account of their religion; thus here in this instance, and thus in Daniels case, Dan 6:4,5; thus Haman, Est 3:8. Also for that very thing they make them disloyal, and breakers of the kings laws. Now God would vindicate his people herein, and make this great king to do it too, knowing it was a grief of heart for these men, Shadrach, &c., to hear the name of God abused by idolaters and profane wretches, and doubtless they complained to the king of it, who did them right by this severe decree, as long as it lasted, seeing the king moreover thought fit to promote them to honour, i.e. he did restore them to their places, as the word signifies, and made an addition to their former dignities.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, in the province of Babylon,…. He restored them to their places of trust and profit, and increased their honours: or, “made them to prosper”, as the word x signifies; they flourished in his court, and became very great and famous. The Septuagint and Arabic versions add,
“and he counted them worthy to preside over all the Jews that were in his kingdom.”
x “prosperare fecit”, Munster; “prosperari jussit”, Junius Tremellius, Piscator “prosperos felicesque fecit”, Gejerus.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
This seems to be of slight consequence; but yet it was not added in vain. We are to understand that the miracle was confirmed throughout the whole province and region, because all the Chaldeans knew those three men were cast into the furnace, and then afterwards shared in the imperial sway and were restored to their former honors. In consequence of this event, God’s power could not be unknown. It was just as it God had sent forth three heralds through the whole region, who everywhere proclaimed how they were wonderfully delivered from death by God’s special interposition. Whence, also, it would be understood how worthless were all the deities then worshipped in Chaldea, and how that great deity whose statue Nebuchadnezzar had set up had been despised, and how the true God proved his consistency in snatching his servants from death.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(30) Promotedi.e., he reinstated them to their former posts, from which they had been temporarily deposed.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
30. Compare Dan 2:48-49. The LXX. adds to this verse, “And he advanced them to be governors over all the Jews that were in his kingdom.” On this Adam Clarke remarks, justly, “They were more likely to be set over the Jews than over the Chaldeans.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in the province of Babylon.’
His final act was to promote the three men to more powerful positions in the province of Babylon.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Dan 3:30. Then the king promoted Shadrach, &c. Or, “Restored them to their former places and dignities,” according to the force of the original word. The LXX add at the end of the verse, And he advanced them to be governors over all the Jews who were in his kingdom.
REFLECTIONS.1st, The king had, as we read in the former chapter, made a noble confession of the glory of Daniel’s God; but the conviction is soon forgotten, and his attachment to idolatry prevails: and, as we too often see the dog return to his vomit again,
1. He erects a golden image of immense size, thirty yards high or upwards. At what time, or on what occasion, this was done, is not said.
2. A general summons is sent to all the magistrates, governors, and officers, civil, military, and religious, throughout his vast empire, to attend the dedication of this image; who instantly assembled, ready to obey the king’s injunction.
3. A proclamation is made to all the vast assembly of the king’s pleasure, that the moment they heard the burst of instruments of music collected on that occasion, to celebrate the praises of their deity, they should unanimously prostrate themselves before him, on penalty, in case of refusal, of being cast into a burning fiery furnace. Thus has the devil prepared every engine to seduce or compel the sinner into his service, both the soft blandishments of sense to allure, and fearful punishments threatened to extort a compliance.
4. All testified a ready submission. No sooner was the signal given than the adoring assembly are prostrate on the plain. When it is dangerous to be singular, and pleasure invites, few will hesitate about the consequences of yielding to the temptation.
2nd, We have,
1. The malicious accusation brought against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, for disobedience to the king’s command. Instead of complying with such gross idolatry, they had resolved to endure any torments rather than commit so great a crime. Many had, no doubt, envied their advancement, and gladly embraced this occasion to ruin them. They therefore, with warmest wishes for his prosperity, address the king, as his most faithful and loyal subjects, who had the honour of his government most at heart, remind him of the decree that he had issued, and inform him of the disregard paid to it by these three men; a crime, they insinuate, aggravated by their ingratitude herein shewn for the favours which they had received, in being raised from captives to the highest posts of the state, and which, should they be overlooked in this their contempt of the king’s commands, would reflect dishonour on his government, be of the worst consequence to the kingdom, and have a bad influence on the people. Daniel is not mentioned: it should seem he was absent, or too high in the king’s favour to be meddled with.
2. The king, exasperated at the information, in a rage commands these men to be seized, and brought into his presence. With fury sparkling in his eyes, and terror in his voice, he demands of them an answer to the accusation, whether it was true; or, as the words may be rendered, Is it of purpose that you have done this, contumaciously, in defiance of my authority and in contempt of my gods? Once more he offers to prove them; if they will now comply to worship the golden image, all shall be well; if not, the furnace is ready, and they shall instantly be cast into the flames, from which he defies their God to save them. A dire alternative! to bow or burn. How thankful ought we to be, that we are not driven to this trying proof of our constancy; and that the fires, once kindled by popish idolaters in this land for the like purpose, are now extinguished!
3. With unshaken fortitude and sedateness of mind, they mildly unite in their reply, not reproaching him as tyrannical, but meekly resigning themselves up to God in the way of duty, and with deliberate courage determined to abide by their resolution, whatever the consequence might be. They seek no evasion, ask for no respite; for, where duty is plain, to deliberate is sinful, and to parley the prelude of compliance with the temptation, O Nebuchadnezzar, we are not careful to answer thee in this matter. Carnal reason indeed might have suggested a thousand palliatives to excuse the sin; but, where God’s commandment was so express, these gracious souls could not hesitate a moment whether they should obey God or man. They want no time to word their answer. They cannot, dare not, do it. Their lives were dear to them; but death, with all its terrors, cannot shake their steady souls: they are content by faith to commit their lives to his care who gave them, and can preserve them, if he pleases, in the burning fiery furnace, or deliver them from it. However, whether God was pleased miraculously to interpose for them or not, their purpose is fixed; they will not serve his gods nor worship his image. Note; (1.) In the way of duty we must never be careful about consequences. (2.) If we have true faith in God, it will cast out enslaving fear, and enable us in the day of trial to commit our all into his hand, confident that he will support us under our sufferings, or deliver us out of them. (3.) The way to be ready for the severest conflicts is daily to deny ourselves. They who first refused to eat of the king’s meat, were now enabled to refuse to worship his gods.
3rdly, An answer so firm, and yet withal so sedate, might have been expected to have wrought some relentings in the tyrant’s mind, especially after the confessions that himself had made of the glory of that God to whom they so faithfully adhered: but we see that it was quite otherwise.
1. The monarch, exasperated, with fury in his looks, like a fiend of darkness, as if the furnace should be the emblem of the rage with which his bosom burned, commanded it to be heated seven times hotter than usual; which, if his passion would have admitted of deliberation, he must have seen would be a favour, instead of an aggravation of the punishment, and serve but the sooner to dispatch these martyrs for the truth; but God over-ruled the tyrant’s rage, to make his own glory more illustrious in their deliverance. In haste they are hurried to the flames, caught up, as they stood, in their clothes, bound by the mightiest men of Nebuchadnezzar’s army, and cast into the fiery furnace; which, being so intensely heated, and the urgency of the king’s command hurrying the men who bore them too near the mouth, the flame instantly slew them. A righteous judgment, it should seem, upon them who were the ready instruments of this tyrant’s cruelty, and probably the very persons who had lodged the accusation against these children of the Most High. Note; (1.) Could men see their own countenances, when rage foams between their lips and flashes from their eyes, they would startle at themselves as devils in a human form. (2.) Terrible was this furnace: we cannot look into it without horror: yet here a moment would end the martyr’s sufferings: but there is a fiercer fire kindled for sinners in hell, which tortures eternally, where death brings no relief, but the smoke of the torment ascendeth for ever and ever, and they have no rest day nor night. (3.) Persecutors of God’s people may expect that he will avenge their wrongs.
2. God is pleased astonishingly to interpose for the rescue of his faithful servants. Struck with terror and astonishment at the death of his mighty warriors, the king hastily arose; and how great his surprise, when, in the midst of that furnace where the objects of his rage had fallen bound, he beholds four persons loose, walking unhurt in the midst of the flames! He calls his counsellors, asks them concerning the order for the execution of these men, and they declare it was punctually executed. He looks attentively on the sight: three of the persons are well known to him; the fourth he conceived to be like some heavenly messenger, a son of God; either one of the angelic host, or, which possibly he might have heard from Daniel, that uncreated angel of the covenant the Lord Christ, who had of old so often appeared to his people in a human form. Approaching then the mouth of the furnace, with high respect he now addresses those servants of the most high God whom he had treated so cruelly, and invites them by name to come forth: nor did they delay to obey him; and, to the astonishment of all those princes and governors who surrounded the king, walked out of the midst of the fire, with not a hair singed, nor so much as the smell of fire arising from them or their garments. Note; (1.) The afflictions into which God’s faithful people are cast, resemble this furnace: far from being able to hurt them, they only consume the cords of corruption which fettered them, and set them more at liberty to walk with God; and the presence of Jesus in the midst of them not only prevents their trials from being painful, but enables them to count them all joy. (2.) They who are enabled confidently to trust in God, often experience wonderful deliverances. (3.) God will make those proud men, who have persecuted his people, bow at their feet, and know that he hath loved them. (4.) Every saved sinner comes into the presence of the eternal King, as these three worthies, a brand plucked out of the burning.
4thly, Struck with deep conviction by what he had beheld,
1. This mighty monarch adores the power and grace of that glorious God, whose wondrous interposition appeared in the deliverance of these his faithful servants. It now was evident, that no other god could deliver as he had done, and that his care and kindness never deserted those who steadily adhered to him in the hour of trial. Thus can God change the voice even of persecutors, and teach blasphemers to bless and praise.
2. He commends the courage and constancy of these three worthies, who dared contradict a king armed with fury, and, with a noble contempt of life, resolved to cleave to their own God, in the face of a fiery furnace, committing themselves with unshaken confidence into his hands. Note; (1.) A steady adherence to the cause of God and truth will often extort approbation even from enemies, while they who meanly desert their principles will only render themselves despicable even in the eyes of those who seduced them. (2.) When sin or death must be the alternative, we may emphatically say, to die is gain. (3.) They who are enabled to trust God, will assuredly prove true to him.
3. He issues an edict, forbidding, on the severest penalties, any of his subjects to speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego. As the Chaldeans had taken the Jews captives, they probably thought and spoke contemptuously and blasphemously of their God; which must have grieved exceedingly the faithful in Babylon: but now, though they are not converts to his worship, they are taught to think highly of his glory; since, by the confession of their king, none of their gods, not even their admired Bel, could deliver after this manner. Note; It is a mercy when the lips of adversaries are sealed up with conviction, though their hearts may be as far as ever from true conversion.
4. He highly promoted these three men in the province of Babylon: so that they received a present reward of their fidelity. For sometimes God gives in this world, to those who dare hazard all for his sake, an hundred fold, and in the world to come life everlasting.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
REFLECTIONS
READER! can you desire a stronger explanation of what scripture continually holds forth, between the righteous and the wicked; between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not; than what is here brought before us. Behold the daring impiety of the Babylonish King and his nobles! Behold their cruelty also. Then mark the end of these men! Look, on the other hand, at the Lord’s servants! see what confidence faith in the Lord Jesus can and will induce. And behold, how the Lord bears testimony to his people, and confirms the dependence of his redeemed. And such, depend upon it, more or less will it be in every instance. Faith in Jesus enables the believer to triumph, when all outward circumstances are most unpromising and dark. Hence some of the martyrs of God have been enabled to sing songs of rejoicing, even in the flames. They well knew, that however painful to the body, it was full of blessedness to the soul; and therefore, these afflictions were but the light afflictions of a moment, which were working out for them a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory!
Precious Jesus! make both him that writes and him that reads, if it be thy blessed will, followers of them, who through faith and patience inherit the promises. And seeing that we are thus encompassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, may we run also the race that is set before us, looking unto thee the Author and Finisher of our faith. Amen.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Dan 3:30 Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, in the province of Babylon.
Ver. 30. Then the king promoted. ] Restored them to their dignities, and strictly forbade others to malign or molest them.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Dan 3:30
Dan 3:30 ThenH116 the kingH4430 promotedH6744 Shadrach,H7715 Meshach,H4336 and Abednego,H5665 in the provinceH4083 of Babylon.H895
Dan 3:30
Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, in the province of Babylon.
The Chaldeans who instigated this whole affair have the tables turned on them. Instead of ridding themselves of the Israelite governors in the Babylonian province, they saw them promoted to higher offices yet. They should count themselves fortunate that they did not lose their lives over this incident. The instigators who undertook a similar plot against Daniel under king Darius were not so fortunate and paid for their treachery with their lives and the lives of their entire families.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
the king: 1Sa 2:30, Psa 91:14, Joh 12:26, Rom 8:31
promoted: Chal, made to prosper, Psa 1:3
Reciprocal: Pro 22:11 – the king Dan 3:1 – in the province
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Dan 3:30. To promote is from a word that merely means to advance, whether in matters of temporal success and prosperity or otherwise. All that we can understand from it is that the king bestowed some additional favors upon them besides the position of trust they already had.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Dan 3:30. Then the king promoted Shadrach, &c. He not only reversed the attainder of these three men, but restored them to their places in the government, nay, and preferred them to greater and more advantageous trusts than they had held before; or, as the margin reads it, He made them to prosper. The LXX., add at the end of the verse, And he advanced them to be governors over all the Jews who were in his kingdom. Their promotion, which was much to their own honour, would be still more to the comfort of their brethren in captivity in those parts.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego also received the king’s blessing. He approved their faith in Yahweh, who had demonstrated Himself to be as powerful as His three faithful followers had claimed that He was.
"This historical incident seems to have prophetic significance as well. In the coming Tribulation a Gentile ruler (Dan 7:8) will demand for himself the worship that belongs to God (2Th 2:4; Rev 13:8). Any who refuse to acknowledge his right to receive worship will be killed (Rev 13:15). Assuming political and religious power, he will oppress Israel (Rev 13:7). Most of the people in the world, including many in Israel, will submit to and worship him. But a small remnant in Israel, like the three in Daniel’s day, will refuse. Many who will not worship the Antichrist will be severely punished; some will be martyred for their faithfulness to Jesus Christ. But a few will be delivered from those persecutions by the Lord Jesus Christ at His second coming [cf. Zec 13:8; Rev 12:10-17].
"In the forthcoming Tribulation period God will do for this believing remnant what He did for Daniel’s three companions. They withstood the decree of the king, and though they were not exempted from suffering and oppression they were delivered out of it by the God they trusted." [Note: Pentecost, p. 1340.]
This chapter advances the revelation in the preceding ones. Previously, God had revealed Himself as the only God who can reveal mysteries: things previously unknown but now made clear by Him. The image that Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream, and that Daniel interpreted (ch. 2), was a revelation of future world kingdoms and their characteristics. Chapter 3 shows that Yahweh is powerful enough to control history miraculously. He does so to remain true to His promises to His people, and to deliver those who put their trust in Him. He can reveal the future, but He can also bring it into existence. Chapter 2 demonstrates the wisdom of God, and chapter 3 the power of God primarily (cf. Dan 2:20-23). The witness to Yahweh’s superior powers was the most powerful human being of his day: King Nebuchadnezzar. Thus there should be no question about the Lord’s greatness.