Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 6:14
Then the king, when he heard [these] words, was sore displeased with himself, and set [his] heart on Daniel to deliver him: and he labored till the going down of the sun to deliver him.
14. was sore displeased with himself ] was sore displeased (R.V.): ‘with himself’ is incorrect. The expression is the Aram. equivalent of the Heb. phrase found in Jon 4:1; Neh 2:10; Neh 13:8.
laboured ] rather, continued striving; Theod. , Pesh. . The idea expressed by the word is that of struggling.
to deliver him (second time)] to rescue him (R.V.: so Dan 6:27 A.V.); a different word from the one rendered ‘deliver’ just before.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Then the king, when he heard these words, was sore displeased with himself – That is, for having consented to such a decree without deliberation, or with so much haste – or for having consented to it at all. It is remarkable that it is not said that he was displeased with them for having proposed it; but it is clear that he saw that the guilt was his own for having given his assent to it, and that he had acted foolishly. There is no evidence as yet that he saw that the decree had been proposed for the purpose of securing the degradation and ruin of Daniel – though he ultimately perceived it Dan 6:24; or if he did perceive it, there was no way of preventing the consequences from coming on Daniel – and that was the point that now engrossed his attention. He was doubtless displeased with himself,
(1) because he saw that he had done wrong in confirming such a decree, which interfered with what had been tolerated – the free exercise of religion by his subjects;
(2) because he now saw that it was foolish, and unworthy of a king, thus to assent to a law for which there was no good reason, and the consequences of which he had not foreseen; and
(3) because he now saw that he had involved the first officer of the realm, and a man of unsullied character, in ruin, unless some way could be devised by which the consequences of the statute could be averted.
It is no uncommon thing for men to be displeased with themselves when they experience the unexpected consequences of their follies and their sins. An instance strongly resembling that here stated, in its main features, occurred at a later period in the history of Persia – an instance showing how the innocent may be involved in a general law, and how much perplexity and regret may be caused by the enactment of such a law. It occurred in Persia, in the persecution of Christians, 344 a.d. An edict appeared, which commanded that all Christians should be thrown into chains and executed. Many belonging to every rank died as martyrs. Among these was an eunuch of the palace, named Azades, a man greatly prized by the king. So much was the latter affected by his death, that he commanded the punishment of death should be inflicted from thenceforth only on the leaders of the Christian sect; that is, only on persons of the clerical order. – Neanders Church History, Torreys Translation, vol. iii. p. 146.
And set his heart on Daniel to deliver him – In what way he sought to deliver him is not said. It would seem probable from the representation in the following verse, that it was by an inquiry whether the statute might not properly be changed or cancelled, or whether the penalty might not be commuted – for it is said that his counselors urged as a reason for the strict infliction of the punishment the absolute unchangeableness of the statute. Perhaps he inquired whether a precedent might not be found for the abrogation of a law enacted by a king by the same authority that enacted it; or whether it did not come within the kings prerogative to change it; or whether the punishment might not be commuted without injury; or whether the evidence of the guilt was perfectly clear; or whether he might not be pardoned without anything being done to maintain the honor of the law. This is one of the most remarkable instances on record of the case of a monarch seeking to deliver a subject from punishment when the monarch had absolute power, and is a striking illustration of the difficulties which often arise in the administration of justice, where the law is absolute, and where justice seems to demand the infliction of the penalty, and yet where there are strong reasons why the penalty should not be inflicted; that is, why an offender should be pardoned. And yet there is no improbability in this statement about the perplexity of the king, for
(1) there were strong reasons, easily conceivable, why the penalty should not be inflicted in this case, because
(a) the law had been evidently devised by the crafty enemies of Daniel to secure just such a result;
(b) Daniel had been guilty of no crime – no moral wrong, but had done only what should commend him more to favor and confidence;
(c) his character was every way upright and pure;
(d) the very worship which he had been detected in had been up to that period allowed, and there was no reason why it should now be punished, and
(e) the infliction of the penalty, though strictly according to the letter of the law, would be manifestly a violation of justice and equity; or, in other words, it was every way. desirable that it should not be inflicted.
(2) Yet there was great difficulty in pardoning him who had offended, for
(a) the law was absolute in the case;
(b) the evidence was clear that Daniel had done what the law forbade;
(c) the law of the realm prohibited any change;
(d) the character and government of the king were involved in the matter. If he interposed and saved Daniel, and thus suffered the law to be violated with impunity, the result would be that there would be a want of stability in his administration, and any other subject could hope that he might violate the law with the same impunity. justice, and the honor of the government, therefore, seemed to demand that the law should be enforced, and the penalty inflicted.
(3) It may be added, that cases of this kind are frequently occurring in the administration of law – cases where there is a conflict between justice and mercy, and where one must be sacrificed to the other. There are numerous instances in which there can be no doubt that the law has been violated, and yet in which strong reasons exist why the offender should be pardoned. Yet there are great difficulties in the whole subject of pardon, and there are more embarrassments in regard to this than anything else pertaining to the administration of the laws. If an offence is never pardoned, then the government is stern and inexorable, and its administration violates some of the finest and most tender feelings of our nature for there are cases when all the benevolent feelings of our nature demand that there should be the remission of a penalty – cases, modified by youth, or age, or sex, or temptation, or previous character, or former service rendered to ones country. And yet pardon in any instance always does just so much to weaken the strong arm of the law. It is a proclamation that in some cases crime may be committed with impunity. If often exercised, law loses its force, and men are little deterred from crime by fear of it. If it were always exercised, and a proclamation were sent forth that anyone who committed an offence might be pardoned, the authority of government would be at an end. Those, therefore, who are entrusted with the administration of the laws, are often substantially in the same perplexity in which Darius was in respect to Daniel – all whose feelings incline them to mercy, and who yet see no way in which it can be exercised consistently with the administration of justice and the prevention of crime.
And he labored – He sought to devise some way in which it might be done.
Till the going down of the sun – Houbigant understands this, Until the sun arose; but the common rendering is probably the correct one. Why that hour is mentioned is not known. It would seem from the following verse that the king was pressed by his counselors to carry the decree into execution, and it is probable that the king saw that the case was a perfectly clear one, and that nothing could be hoped for from delay. The law was clear, and it was equally clear that it had been violated. There was no way, then, but to suffer it to take its course.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 14. The king – was sore displeased with himself] And well he might, when through his excessive folly he passed a law that, for its ostensible object, would have been a disgrace almost to an idiot.
And set his heart on Daniel] He strove by every means to get the law annulled. He had no doubt spoken to several of his lords in private, and had gone from one to another till the going down of the sun.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
He was not wroth with Daniel, as Nebuchadnezzar upon the accusation against the three young men, Dan 3:19, but he was angry with himself, that he should be so moved by his courtiers, against an innocent person of so much honour and honesty. This made him labour to save Daniel till sun-set. Sometimes blaming his own inadvertency and levity in so rash and sinful a decree. Sometimes considering the great reverence of so holy a man. Then the cruelty and craft in laying snares by laws made on purpose, against the best people in his court and kingdom. Then withal how hard it was to break or elude a law that was by custom unalterable, and how unsafe to reject his princes when they pleaded for the king and his laws.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
14. displeased with himselfforhaving suffered himself to be entrapped into such a hasty decree (Pr29:20). On the one hand he was pressed by the immutability of thelaw, fear that the princes might conspire against him, and desire toconsult for his own reputation, not to seem fickle; on the other, byregard for Daniel, and a desire to save him from the effects of hisown rash decree.
till . . . going down of . .. sunThe king took this time to deliberate, thinking thatafter sunset Daniel would be spared till morning, and that meanwhilesome way of escape would turn up. But (Da6:15) the conspirators “assembled tumultuously”(literally) to prevent this delay in the execution, lest the kingshould meantime change his decree.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then the king, when he heard these words, was sore displeased with himself,…. Or “at it” e; or “with him”; with Daniel, not so much for what he had done, but that he had not done it with more caution, or more privately, that it might not have been known: or rather, as we render it, “with himself”, that he should so rashly sign the decree, without considering the consequences of it; for he now found that he was circumvented by his princes, and that their design was not his honour and glory, but the destruction of Daniel: or the sense in general is, that what he heard was very disagreeable, afflictive, and distressing to him:
and set his heart on Daniel to deliver him; he resolved, if possible, to do it; he applied his mind to it; he turned his thoughts wholly that way, and contrived all ways and means to effect it: R. Mattathiah, in Saadiah, interprets the phrase of his offering money as a ransom for his life:
and he laboured till the going down of the sun to save him; from the will of the princes, and from the jaws of the lions: very probably it was early in the morning these princes found Daniel at prayer, who went immediately to the king with their accusation; so that he was all day labouring with all his might and main to find out ways and means to save his darling favourite; he studied to put such a sense upon his decree, that it might not reach Daniel’s case; he strove to make the princes easy, and to persuade them to drop the affair, and not insist on the execution of the decree.
e “super eo”, Montanus; “super ipsum”, De Dieu.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
In the first place, Daniel recites that the king was disturbed, when he perceived the malice of his nobles which had formerly escaped him; for their intention and their object had never occurred to him; he perceives himself deceived and entrapped, and hence he is disturbed. Here again we are taught how cautiously kings ought to avoid depraved counsels, since they are besieged on every side by perfidious men, whose only object is to gain by their false representations, and to oppress their enemies, and those from whom they hope for booty or who may favor their evil courses. Because so many snares surround kings, they ought to be the more cautious in providing against cunning. They are too late in acknowledging themselves to have been overreached, when no remedy is left, partly through fear, and partly through wishing to consult their own credit; and they prefer offending God to suffering any outward disrespect from men. Since, therefore, kings consider their own honor so sacred, they persevere in their evil undertakings, even when their conscience accuses them; and even if justice itself were to appear visibly before them, yet this restraint would not be sufficient to withhold them, when ambition urges them in the opposite direction, and they are unwilling to lose the slightest portion of their reputation among men. The case of Darius supplies us with an example of this kind.
First of all, it is said, He was sorrowful when he heard these words, and was anxious till the setting of the sun about the way of snatching Daniel from death He wished this to be done, if his own honor were sound and safe, and his nobles were satisfied. But on the one side, he fears disunion if his nobles should conspire to produce disturbance; and on the other side, he is moved by a foolish fear, because he does not wish to incur the charge of levity which awaited him, and hence he is vanquished and obeys the lusts of the wicked. Although, therefore, he labored till the setting of the sun to free Daniel, yet that perverse shame prevailed of which I have spoken, and then the fear of dissension. For when we do not lean upon God’s help, we are always compelled to vacillate, although anxious to be honestly affected. Thus Pilate wished to liberate Christ, but was terrified by the threats of the people, when they denounced against him the displeasure of Caesar. (Joh 19:12.) And no wonder, since faith is alone a certain and fixed prop on which we may lean while fearlessly discharging our duty, and thus overcome all fears. But when we want confidence, we are, as I have said, sure to be changeable. Hence Darius, through fear of a conspiracy of his nobles against himself, permitted Daniel to be an innocent sufferer from their cruelty. Then that false shame is added which I have mentioned, because he was unwilling to appear without consideration, by suddenly revoking his own edict, as it was a law with the Medes and Persians that whatever proceeded from kings was inviolable! Daniel now states this. He says, those men assembled together; when they saw the king hesitate and doubt, they became fierce and contentious with him. When it is said they meet together, this relates to their inspiring him with fear. They say, Know, O king! He knew it well enough, and they need not instruct him in any unknown matter, but they treat him in a threatening manner. “What? dost thou not see how utterly the royal name will be hereafter deprived of its authority if he violates thine edict with impunity? Will you thus permit yourself to become a laughingstock? Finally, they intimate, that he would not be king unless he revenged the insult offered him by Daniel in neglecting his commandment. Know, therefore, O king, that the Persians and Medes — he was himself king of the Medes, but it is just as if they said, What kind of rumor will be spread through all thy subject provinces; for thou knowest how far this prevails among the Medes and Persians — the king must not change his edict. If, therefore, thou shouldst set such an example, will not all thy subjects instantly rise against thee? and wilt thou not be contemptible to them?” We see, then, how the satraps rage against their king, and frighten him from any change of counsel. And they also join the edict with the statute, which the king had resolved upon, with the view of impressing upon him the necessity of not changing a single decree which he had often and repeatedly sanctioned. It follows:
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
14. It has been suggested that a counter edict condemning the executioners of the former edict to a similar punishment with Daniel might have saved the king’s honor. (Compare Est 8:11.) Certainly the later Persian kings had no difficulty in persuading their jurists to interpret these immutable laws to suit themselves.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
What a train of evils the king by his inconsiderateness had brought himself into? But is there not somewhat like the language of faith, and that in lively exercise, in what the king said to Daniel? Well might Darius spend the night fasting, when for aught he knew, a faithful servant of his, and by his appointment also, was in the same night devoured by lions.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Daniel In the Den
Dan 6:14-23
We have seen in what position Darius was placed by the scheming men whose case we have perused: “The king, when he heard these words, was sore displeased with himself.” That was good, but it was too late. Is it possible for reflection to come too late in life? Do some men knock at the door when it cannot be opened? What a mystery is this above all mysteries: that men reasoning, reflective, gifted men should thus play the fool! If the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness; if the reasoner that is in thee have taken to this folly, how profound, yea, possibly how incurable is this insanity! What is it that has fallen within us some little outside work, some squares of the trellis-work up which the vines climb? No, no; the fall as we feel it, not as we are taught it; for teach a man anything, and he can contradict you, or argue against you, or fee himself to lie against you, but the fall as we feel it is a total fall. We have all gone together: reason, imagination, conscience, will, understanding, judgment describe the attributes and qualities of the mind as you will, yet there is the felt fact that we are the subjects of an awful apostasy. Would it were only taught to us in reading books! How then we could speak against it with vehemence, which, if lacking in argument, would be tremendous in impertinence. But it is in the heart; if our heart condemn us, why do we allow a perverted reason to indulge the licence of a loose tongue, and aggravate our fall by large effusions of impious senselessness? Let us take care lest our reflection come too late, lest our displeasure do but add to the agony felt in consequence of our sin. Hear the voice of nature, reason, experience, history, which calls us to halt, and think, and pray, and go home to tell in tears what we cannot tell in words.
The men who stood before Darius had, unfortunately for themselves, a case:
“Then these men assembled unto the king, and said unto the king, Know, O king, that the law of the Medes and Persians is, That no decree nor statute which the king establisheth may be changed” ( Dan 6:15 ).
What is God always doing? Setting law aside. That seems strange. Certainly, God must be strange. God’s government must be immeasurable in its inner thought, in its outward relation; it must be under his hand; it must lie well within the sweep of his omnipotence. Why does God set law aside? For man’s sake. Law could never turn aside from the punishment of sin; the law must have its pound of flesh. Law is stern, resolute, implacable. Certainly; it must be so. Law could never accommodate itself. If this universe were wholly a question of what we understand by law, forgiveness would be impossible. The man sinned; all the laws possible to our imagination cannot alter that fact. There is the stain; there is the wound; there is the black spot on the disc of ineffable purity: what hands may touch it, remove it? what catharism can cleanse with effectual detergency that black sin? Then comes into operation what we understand by the gospel. We cannot explain it, but God has put a new word into human speech; he has so used the word himself that we have become familiar with it; now we talk right eloquently about pardon, forgiveness, forgetfulness; now we speak of the miracle of God taking up our sin and casting it behind him. Law never did that. Herein is love, the greater law, the law that goes where mere statute and precept can never enter. A mystery, certainly; of all mysteries the Cross is the culmination and the clouded glory. Let us never understand that the gospel is simple in the sense of having in it nothing profound, philosophical, rational, going deeper than all known philosophy and reason, and opening up a new kingdom of thought and a new universe of moral possibility. The gospel is simple in that a child can begin to take hold of it, but it is like its Origin and Author, infinite, eternal, requiring all the summer day of heaven to understand its beginning. When we see persons so very anxious about law we are partly surprised and superficially interested. They do not know what the law is in all the fulness of its meaning, and in all the possibilities of its application. That God could turn round and face a inner with tears in the divine eyes is the impossibility of thought, but he did it. This is the gospel. Once wounded, insulted, dishonoured, disobeyed, what has law for man but that God should turn his back upon him and go externally from him? But there is a heart in the universe; there is a Father-Mother looking over all things, handling and directing all things, leaving doors open that prodigals may come home again in the dead of night, and making proposals that the veriest sinners may accept, and accepting may themselves live again. It is because we are lost in this thought that we begin to feel its possible reality and truthfulness. When we can measure God we shall no longer adore him; to know him without knowing him touches, inspires, sanctifies our reverence.
How had Daniel lived? He had so lived as to make a very distinct impression upon the minds of those who had observed him, and he had so lived as to give a marvellous impression respecting his religion: “Now the king spake and said unto Daniel,” with a choking voice, more man than king, more mother than father “Thy God whom thou servest continually, he will deliver thee.” A beautiful sight when a heathen stands on tiptoe and just sees the dawn of the gospel throughout, just beholds the eyelids of the morning, the morning that comes with full explanations and great deliverances, the gospel that uses law and elevates upon it as upon a pedestal the evangel of God! How Daniel must have lived so to impress Darius! Up to this time Daniel has been more than chief of the magicians even in the heathen imagination; he has displayed “an excellent spirit”; there has been moral beauty, there has been moral earnestness, in the man not seen in other persons; Daniel has acquired a ghostly influence. Any mastery that you can explain you may outlive; any preaching that you can account for is poor preaching; any influence that has a beginning and an ending, a measurable and estimable quality and value, is a dying influence. Only the spirit lives; only the spiritual is the immortal. Daniel had so lived as to exert a ghostly influence upon the conscience and imagination and whole feeling of the people. They could not understand him. Nor was he a young man; yet he was getting younger as the years increased. There is no old age possible on earth to the good man. Such a man gets younger; he is nearing the morning; he is just about to wake. Old age! shall we call threescore years and ten old? The tree in the forest laughs at the foolish suggestion. Is a man a hundred years old? He is an old man, but he is a young being. If we live and move and have our being in God, we grow God ward, youth ward, summerward; always throwing off some old self, and rising into some new manhood, and realising some larger inheritance. This is the spirit and this the power of true religion in the soul. Darius had no doubt about Daniel’s faith. We do not know what Darius said except in the letter; we should have heard how he said it, with what pathos and unction, how now he turned preacher and exhorted Daniel, as if with pre-Christian comfort, to hold himself steadfastly in God, for the lions of the forest were but the creatures of his power. It is touching to hear a heathen man’s first prayer. He will not be very grammatical or precise, formal, or distinguished by coinciding with precedent; yet what praying it is! What life it takes out with it! The whole heart throbs in every syllable. What beautiful preaching is the first preaching of a heathen man as we have it here! “Thy God whom thou servest” “servest continually”; why, he has hit all the thoughts: he has got hold of the case as it was in its reality. “Thy God”: personal God; as if all thine; for so God treats each man, as if he were an only child, and lavishes his love upon him. “Whom thou servest,” “servest continually”: here is service, obedience, faithfulness, steadfastness, continuity, persistence, perseverance; a service without distraction, flaw, hesitation; a concentrated worship.
What will the upshot be? Deliverance. Darius saw the working of that law. Truly man cannot serve God for nought. When Peter told the Lord that he had “left all” to follow him, such a torrent fell upon Peter as drowned him altogether and never did he appear so pitiable a spectacle as when that deluge fell upon him: “Verily I say unto you, there is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel’s, but he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.” How Peter’s poor “all” was lost in that cataract like a tiny pebble! He never mentioned the subject again. Blessed is he who makes a fool of himself only once. What impression are we making upon the heathen, upon observers, upon the Dariuses who are looking at us? Do they expect us to be delivered, honoured, crowned? Or are we so full of doubts and hesitations and controversies, and so busy resolutionising ourselves into orthodoxy, that the world cares nothing about us and thinks we might be poor picking even for the lions? What impression are we making as to our Christian faith? Do worldly people say, “You cannot hurt these Christians: if you smite them on the one cheek they turn the other; if you pour contempt upon their prayers they only pray more vehemently; and if for a moment they seem to be forsaken by their God he quickly follows up the forsakenness with everlasting kindness: you cannot hurt them, you cannot stop them, you cannot hunger them into submission; it is not in the power of thirst to make them cease their prayer; when the throat is dried up and they have no more power of speech, they will look the agony of their trust, and God will answer them as if they had spoken to him many words”? The Daniels of today are poor creatures. They are anxious about their orthodoxy; would walk miles to declare themselves orthodox; would not for the world sit next to an Agnostic, even in an omnibus, if they knew it: but what are they in spiritual regnancy, supreme force, real influence upon the world? Let us take the question to heart and wrestle with it when we have most power in prayer.
So Daniel’s fate came upon him, and there was a point at which there was nothing between him and destruction but God. It is well to be shut up with God and to God. Men begin to pray when the rock closes in upon them, and they can see no pathway through it or over it. Then the rock becomes an altar, and when the eyes are closed in prayer, a door is opened, and the rock becomes a highway. Have we been shut up to God? Have we ever been so poor that we had not one morsel of bread for the next hunger fit? Many Christians have been in that fix. But the bread has come. Have we ever been closeted with a supremely loved one after all the physicians have gone home, and there has been nothing between us and the last wrestle but God? Even when we have failed in that controversy, so far as physical relationship is concerned, there has stolen into the heart a consciousness of triumph, and we have stood over the dead dear one more than conqueror. To have been conqueror was good; but who could explain the words “more than conqueror”? as if a thousand victories gathered themselves around the head like a divinely fashioned diadem! These are mysteries which we know of, to which we could testify, but which perhaps are sometimes at least better hidden in the heart, as fruit to eat in winter, as water to drink in desert lands.
When the king saw what happened he was “exceeding glad” for Daniel. He was glad that his mistake had proved itself to be such; that a mischievous plot had come to nothing. We know the meaning of this action in our own souls. We have lived to thank God that he turned a deaf ear to some prayers. We have had as much occasion to bless God for his denials as for his concessions and benefactions. We have lived to thank God that sometimes our best programme has been burned to ashes, and our strongest policy has been turned to confusion. Once we thought we could not do without it. God knew that we only wanted time in order to see the case in its proper lights and bearings, and then we should come back to him and say, Bless thee, loving Father, for saying “No” to us; if thou hadst given us our way at that time thou wouldst have slain us; we thank thee with full hearts that we did not go to that city, that we did not get our own policy assured to us as we desired it to be; we cannot thank thee sufficiently that thou didst forbid us to go down the brink to pluck that tempting flower: we never should have returned again. Let us be quiet, patient, hopeful, trustful. It is very bitter at first not to have one’s own way; everything seems so simple, clear, reasonable: why should we not be permitted to realise our pleasure? We cannot tell; we wait; and in a year or two we come back to say, God’s love was shown in God’s denial.
A wonderful chapter is all this. Here you have the power of numbers on the one side, and the power of one man on the other; you see on the one hand the power of anger, on the other hand the power of holiness: here you see God known through a man. God comes to be known as the “God of Daniel.” From the beginning he has incarnated himself in definite personalities. He was the God of Moses, the God of Hezekiah, the God of Daniel far better than if we had found here endless polysyllables, as God eternal, infinite, majestic, immortal, immutable; we might have lost ourselves in that grandeur: but when we read of the God of Daniel we realise an incarnation before the time.
What was it that was asked of Daniel? That he would suspend his prayers for thirty days. Why not do it for so short a time? Thirty days would soon be over; then the people would be foiled, the law would be kept, the king would be preserved from doing a very cruel deed, and Daniel would be glorified in the sight of the kingdom. Only thirty days! It is so we reason now. Only a signature, only a compromise, only a word; it may be spoken by the lips, and not by the heart: only a vow, modified and weakened by a mental reservation. Of such an “only” Daniel knew nothing; he was simple, frank, straightforward, honest through and through, because holy. Thirty days without prayer! Nay, say thirty days without sight, without hearing, without food, without friendship, without communication with the outer world; let all these combine in one agonising deprivation, and they do not touch the good man’s meaning when he thinks of not speaking to God for thirty days. Why not have spoken to him in secret? Because religion has a public aspect as well as a secret phase and relation. Why not have closed the windows that looked towards Jerusalem and walked abroad and prayed in heart, looked a heathen and been a true worshipper? Because frankness, truthfulness, can have only one policy and one purpose; it cannot double itself, or so modify itself as to destroy its distinctive and immediate effect and influence. Daniel must pray as it were in form, by the appointed way. There are persons now who think they can be Christians at home; they need not go to church; they say they can read the Bible at home, and I say they cannot. The Bible is a book that is made to be read in public as well as in private. There are some portions you can never touch the meaning of till you read them in the great congregation; then by a touch human and divine the whole thing comes up before us in the amplitude, glory, and mystery of its meaning. There are those who think they can pray at home. They can only pray a little there; the great prayer is in the congregation, in the fellowship of prayer, in the communion of saints, in the realisation of the household of faith. Prayer at home we must have; reading at home we cannot do without; but the public aspect of these things is as important as the private. Daniel therefore must have his windows open. He must make his testimony and his declaration very simple and clear. If you are trying to win the worldling’s applause by not going to church, but praying a good deal in secret, you are playing the fool; you are trying to do what is impossible to be done. You have no right to look a worldling, you have no title to exclude yourself from your Father’s house: he does not call upon you to make for yourselves a hole in the rock where you will be hidden and unknown; he asks you to come to his holy mount; he loves to see his hosts gathered together; and over all voices there comes one sweet appeal, fit for Sabbath morning: “Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together, for ye belong to one another.” All voices are required to make up the one voice, all tones to constitute the complete music. Do not give up your forms, your altars, your manner of testimony; abide by them, and God, who ruleth all, will accept the altar you have built accept it by burning it with his own fire.
Prayer
Almighty God, when thou dost ask us great questions we can only answer, Thou knowest. Thou dost train us by asking us questions; thou dost challenge us, and there is no answer in our mind; we fall down before God and say, Thou knowest. We cannot follow the way of the Lord; as the heaven is high above the earth, so is the Lord’s way above our way, and the Lord’s thought above our thought. We will therefore stand before God, and say, Thou knowest; thy will be done: the Lord reigneth. We have come to thank thee for all thy succour and love; we have come to thank thee in the name of Jesus Christ our Saviour. We have all things and abound if we have Christ; there is no want to them that have the Cross. To that, Cross do thou bring our love in willing and adoring consent; may it be the inspiration of our life, the object of our manhood, by which we are known; may we live in its spirit; may we exemplify its purpose. We have come to kiss the hand that has given us all we have. Thou openest thine hand and satisfiest the desire of every living thing. There is no complaint in thy universe where there is obedience; there is no want to them that fear thee. Thou hast many ways in which thou dost sustain all life: it is not for us to say it must be so, or thus, or otherwise; it is for us to say, God’s will be done. We cannot say this but for the grace of God; we know the words, but we cannot utter their spirit unless the Holy Ghost dwell within us. Good is the will of the Lord; hard is the will of the Lord; inscrutable is the will of the Lord: yet thou hast taught us to say willingly and lovingly, The will of the Lord be done. Hear us in our various pleas, petitions, thanksgivings, and adorations. Thou hast made us one, yet thou hast made us variously; behold us in our varied unity, in our united variety, and come to each as each may be able to receive thee. To some come as a light, for they have sat long in darkness, and they have brooded sorely in the night of desolation. Come to others like the summer in all its plentifulness, for they have suffered famine; they have not known sufficiency; they have desired to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living, but their eyes have long been holden. Come to the churchyard of all and raise the dead; we would not that thou shouldst raise them in body, but that we should have them in our love evermore, a bright vision in the memory, a tender object in all the outgoing of the heart’s deepest solicitude. The Lord look upon us in all our relations, and bless us according to our necessity. We pray always for broken hearts; there are broken hearts under laughter that is assumed; there are shattered lives that never tell the story of their ruin; there are souls that long for God, but dare not say so in the hearing of men. Thou knowest our ambitions, our plans, our purposes, and our desires; if it be for our soul’s good, frustrate them all and burn them with unquenchable fire. Create in us thine own purpose, thou Holy Spirit; fashion us to thine own will, and use us to thine own ends. Take of the things of Christ, and show them unto us; show them all, show them every day; they will be above the brightness of the sun in their glory, and at night-time they will put out all the stars. Blessed be the Christ of God, our Saviour and our hope; to him we give ourselves day by day; to him we would live, for him we would serve, and him we would see when this mortal shall put on immortality. Amen.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
Dan 6:14 Then the king, when he heard [these] words, was sore displeased with himself, and set [his] heart on Daniel to deliver him: and he laboured till the going down of the sun to deliver him.
Ver. 14. Then the king, when he heard these words, was sore displeased with himself. ] As good reason he had; but Sero inquit Nero. Now he found himself circumvented by his wily flatterers; but why was he such an Epimetheus or after wise?
And set his heart on Daniel.
And laboured till the going down of the sun.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Dan 6:14-15
14Then, as soon as the king heard this statement, he was deeply distressed and set his mind on delivering Daniel; and even until sunset he kept exerting himself to rescue him. 15Then these men came by agreement to the king and said to the king, Recognize, O king, that it is a law of the Medes and Persians that no injunction or statute which the king establishes may be changed.
Dan 6:14 The King realizes that he has been used in a scheme to destroy Daniel (cf. Dan 6:24), but is powerless (cf. Dan 6:16; Dan 6:18-19) in the legal circumstances to forestall his own royal edict (cf. Dan 6:12; Dan 6:15).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
with himself = concerning it.
laboured = was exerting himself
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Dan 6:14
Dan 6:14 ThenH116 the king,H4430 whenH1768 he heardH8086 these words,H4406 was soreH7690 displeasedH888 withH5922 himself, and setH7761 his heartH1079 onH5922 DanielH1841 to deliverH7804 him: and he labouredH1934 H7712 tillH5705 the going downH4606 of the sunH8122 to deliverH5338 him.
Dan 6:14
Then the king, when he heard these words, was sore displeased with himself, and set his heart on Daniel to deliver him: and he laboured till the going down of the sun to deliver him.
Darius was upset with himself. He had been manipulated and he knew it. He then set out to find a way to deliver Daniel from the sentence of death which the decree demanded. Darius did not want to have Daniel thrown to the lions. Obviously Daniel was held in high esteem by Darius, being advanced in age and absolutely trustworthy. Darius spent the whole day working to find a way he could spare Daniel. But as we will see, the architects of this plot were not going to give up so easily and give Darius any opportunity to back out of the law.
This is pure speculation, but this servant of Christ cannot help but to place himself in Darius’ shoes and try to imagine what could have been going through his mind during this few hours before sundown while he was trying to save Daniel’s life. If it had have been me in this predicament, the first thing I would have done if I did not want the lions to kill Daniel would be to make sure those lions were well fed before sundown. It would make no difference whether the lions were bloated or starved if God chose to save Daniel, however, I cannot help but to speculate on Darius’ course of action . I pray for the tolerance of my brothers and sisters in this matter.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
was sore: The king now clearly perceived for what purpose the decree had been solicited; and was exceedingly displeased with himself that he had suffered himself to be so deluded. Dan 3:13, Mat 27:17-24, Mar 6:26, Luk 23:13-21, Joh 19:7-12
and he: He strove during the whole day, by every means, to evade or annul the edict; but the foolish constitution of his government – exactly the reverse of the happy rule for the conduct of our gracious monarchdid not allow them to pardon any person who had broken one of their decrees, however arbitrary and unreasonable. 2Sa 3:28, 2Sa 3:29
Reciprocal: 2Ch 11:16 – set Est 2:1 – he remembered Pro 18:13 – that Dan 6:23 – was Hag 1:5 – Consider your ways Mat 14:9 – sorry Mat 19:22 – he went 2Co 7:11 – indignation
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Dan 6:14. The king realized he had been entrapped into something he would not have done had he known what these men were plotting. He had no Ut feeling against Daniel but was displeased with himself. Labored . . . to deliver him. We are not told what the king did in his labor,” whether he was acting the part of an unscrupulous lawyer and trying to find some technical loophole, or thought perhaps that it he would not be in too much of a burry in putting the edict into execution, something, somehow, might turn up that would release Daniel.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Dan 6:14-15. Then the king, when he heard these things, was sore displeased with himself Having too late discovered that the princes, in procuring him to sign this decree, had no other end or aim, but to take advantage of it to the prejudice of Daniel. The word , here rendered displeased, which in Hebrew signifies to be rotten, is used in Chaldee for such great distress as preys upon the mind, and occasions rottenness in the bones. The meaning is, that the king was very much troubled, and exceedingly vexed with himself. And set his heart on Daniel to deliver him The LXX. render it, , a very strong expression, implying that his anxiety to save him was so great as to throw him into an agony. And he laboured till the going down of the sun Endeavouring to find out some exception for him from the law, and being in a great strait through the necessity he was under to have the law executed, and the regard he had for Daniel. Then these men assembled unto the king These were bold men, and resolved to pursue their point and have their will, rather than the king should have his, in this case. The king wished to retrieve an evil act, and to retract, or at least to mitigate, a rigid and rash decree, which was acting an honourable and princely part; but they insist that the law must have its course, and its sentence be fully executed on him, who, they urged, had violated it, because it was a fundamental maxim in the constitution of the government of the Medes and Persians, that no decree or statute which the king established should be changed.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Daniel had so won the king’s favor that Darius immediately and energetically began trying to rescue his friend. Nebuchadnezzar had become angry with Daniel’s three friends when they refused to idolize him (Dan 3:19), but Darius became angry with himself for signing the decree (cf. Dan 2:1; Dan 3:13; Dan 5:6; Dan 5:9). This shows how much he respected and valued Daniel.