Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 4:8
But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name [was] Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god, and in whom [is] the spirit of the holy gods: and before him I told the dream, [saying],
8. at the last ] It is difficult to understand how the Aram. can bear this meaning; though no doubt something substantially similar is what is intended. Behrmann renders, ‘And (so it was) till another came in before me, (even) Daniel’; and Bevan (changing a point), ‘And yet another came in before me, (even) Daniel.’
according to the name of my god ] viz. Bel. The ‘Bel’ in Belteshazzar is not really the name of the god, but (as explained on Dan 1:7) is part of the word balsu, ‘his life’; but it may be only an assonance, not an etymology, which the king is represented as expressing, just as Hebrew writers say, for instance, that Cain or Moses was so called because of the verbs ‘I have gotten,’ ‘I have drawn out,’ although philologically Cain cannot possibly mean ‘gotten,’ or Moses ‘drawn out.’
in whom is the spirit, &c.] imitated, it seems, from Gen 41:38 (of Joseph), ‘a man in whom the spirit of God is.’ On the sense of ‘spirit’ in the O.T., see on Joe 2:28 (in the Cambridge Bible).
the holy gods ] Nebuchadnezzar expresses himself as a polytheist: though in Dan 4:3 ; Dan 4:34-35 he uses language indistinguishable from that of pure monotheism. The same expression occurs in the Phnician inscription of Eshmunazar, king of Sidon (3 4 cent. b.c.), lines 9 and. 22 [239] . On the sense attaching to the term ‘holy’ (which has here hardly any ethical connotation, and means rather what we should express by ‘divine’), see Hastings’ Dict. of the Bible, ii. 395 7; and cf. Sanday-Headlam, Comm. on the Epistle to the Romans, on Dan 1:7.
[239] Hogarth, Authority and Archology (1899), p. 137 f.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
But at the last – After the others had shown that they could not interpret the dream. Why Daniel was not called with the others does not appear; nor is it said in what manner he was at last summoned into the presence of the king. It is probable that his skill on a former occasion Dan. 2 was remembered, and that when all the others showed that they had no power to interpret the dream, he was called in by Nebuchadnezzar. The Latin Vulgate renders this, Donee collega ingressus est – until a colleague entered. The Greek, heos, until. Aquila and Symmachus render it, until another entered before me, Daniel. The common version expresses the sense of the Chaldee with sufficient accuracy, though a more literal translation would be, until afterward.
Whose name was Belteshazzar – That is, this was the name which he bore at court, or which had been given him by the Chaldeans. See the note at Dan 1:7.
According to the name of my god – That is, the name of my god Bel, or Belus, is incorporated in the name given to him. This is referred to here, probably, to show the propriety of thus invoking his aid; because he bore the name of the god whom the monarch had adored. There would seem to be a special fitness in summoning him before him, to explain what was supposed to be an intimation of the will of the god whom he worshipped. There is a singular, though not unnatural, mixture of the sentiments of paganism and of the true religion in the expressions which this monarch uses in this chapter. He had been a pagan all his life; yet he had had some knowledge of the true God, and had been made to feel that he was worthy of universal adoration and praise, Dan. 2. That, in this state of mind, he should alternately express such sentiments as were originated by paganism, and those which spring from just views of God, is not unnatural or improbable.
And in whom is the spirit of the holy gods – It is not easy to determine whom he meant by the holy gods. It would seem probable that this was such language as was dictated by the fact that he had been an idolater. He had been brought to feel that the God whom Daniel worshipped, and by whose aid he had been enabled to interpret the dream, was a true God, and was worthy of universal homage; but perhaps his ideas were still much confused, and he only regarded him as superior to all others, though he did not intend to deny the real existence of others. It might be true, in his apprehension, that there were other gods, though the God of Daniel was supreme, and perhaps he meant to say that the spirit of all the gods was in Daniel; that in an eminent degree he was the favorite of heaven, and that he was able to interpret any communication which came from the invisible world. It is perhaps unnecessary to observe here that the word spirit has no intended reference to the Holy Spirit. It is probably used with reference to the belief that the gods were accustomed to impart wisdom and knowledge to certain men, and may mean that the very spirit of wisdom and knowledge which dwelt in the gods themselves seemed to dwell in the bosom of Daniel.
And before him I told the dream – Not requiring him, as he did before Dan. 2, to state both the dream and its meaning.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Daniel came in before me; whether sent for by the king, or brought in by another, appears not, but he was last, that it might appear he had the true understanding of these secrets; for if he had come first, before the rest had done their best in trying all their skill in vain, they would have said they knew as well as he, and so God would not have had the glory; but now it is plain the Spirit of God in the prophet did all.
The holy gods; he speaks in the plural, like an idolater, and because he calls him
Belteshazzar, according to the name of his god, i.e. Bel or Baal. By the
spirit of the gods he means the spirit of divination, or prophecy of future contingent things, which God only knows, and reveals by his Spirit as he pleaseth, which none of the magicians were endued with.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
8. Belteshazzarcalled so fromthe god Bel or Belus (see on Da1:7).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
But at the last Daniel came in before me,…. Whether sent for or no is not clear; the reason why he came not with the rest might be because he did not associate with them; nor did they care he should be among them, and present at this time; and it may be the king had forgot the knowledge he had of dreams; or, however, did not choose to send for him until he had tried all his wise men; and so it was ordered by the providence of God, and which is the chief reason of all, that he should come last, that the skill of the magicians might appear first to be baffled, and that Daniel, or rather Daniel’s God, might be more known, and might be glorified:
whose name was Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god; so called by him and his courtiers, after the name of his god Bel, with which this name of Daniel begins; [See comments on Da 1:7]:
and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods: meaning either the holy angels, as Saadiah or speaking in his Heathenish manner, having imbibed the notion of many gods, some holy, and some impure; or it may be, speaking in the dialect of the Jews, he may mean the one true God who is holy, and from whom alone is the spirit of prophecy or of foretelling things to come; which he knew by former experience Daniel had:
and before him I told the dream, saying; as follows:
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Here the king of Babylon addresses Daniel kindly, since he saw himself deserted by his own teachers. And hence we gather that no one comes to the true God, unless impelled by necessity. Daniel was not either unknown or far off; for we saw him to have been in the palace. Since then the king had Daniel with him from the first, why did he pass him over? Why did he call the other Magi from all quarters by his edict? Hence, as I have said, it clearly appears he would never have given glory to God, unless when compelled by extreme necessity. Hence he never willingly submitted to the God of Israel; and his affections were clearly but momentary, whenever they manifested any sign of piety. Because he besought Daniel so imploringly, we see his disposition to have been servile; just as all proud men swell out when they do not need any one’s help, and become overbearing in their insolence; but when they are reduced to extremity, they would rather lick the dust than not obtain the favor which they need. Such was the king’s disposition, since he willingly despised Daniel, and purposely preferred the Magi. But as soon as he saw himself left in difficulties, and unable to find any remedy except in Daniel, this was his last refuge; and he now seems to forget his own loftiness while speaking softly to God’s holy Prophet. But I shall proceed with the rest to-morrow.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(8) At the last.On account of his position as the chief of the governors of the wise men, Daniel would not come in till last.
Belteshazzar.See Note on Dan. 1:7; Introduction, 6.
The spirit . . .He means his own gods, for though he recognised Jehovah to be a high God, yet he acknowledged Him only as one out of many.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
8. How remarkably similar is this to the account in chapter ii! Brown, in his recent Hebrew Lexicon, objects to the connection of the name Belteshazzar with Bel, as “inexplicable;” but see note Dan 1:6-7. Vigouroux ( Dictionnaire, 5:1893) gives a number of abbreviations precisely similar to this in which the first term the divine name is omitted. The express statement of this verse, that Daniel was named after Nebuchadnezzar’s favorite god, seems to exclude such derivations as those of Strassmaier, and others, who would make the first term Belit or Balat. Most of the inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar were written in glorification of Bel, whom he calls “the joy of my heart.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But at last Daniel came in before me, whose name was Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy God, and I told the dream before him.’
At length Daniel arrived, possibly having been recalled from some distant city. And Nebuchadnezzar draws attention to the fact that his name has within it a syllable that connects with the name of Bel, the name of one of Nebuchadnezzar’s gods. (It was quite common to use word play when dealing with names). The fact that he saw that as significant may suggest that ‘in whom is the spirit of the holy gods’ in his eyes refers mainly to Bel. But Daniel and his readers would connect it with the Spirit of God. Then Nebuchadnezzar told Daniel his dream. His confidence in him was such (as he now revealed) that he felt no need to test him out.
We may see the use of the name Daniel as due to the influence of Daniel, or even introduced by Daniel (thought of as meaning ‘God judges on my behalf’) when he copied the decree for Israelite consumption, to stress that it was God who would judge and make clear the dream. Nebuchadnezzar would use the name Belteshazzar.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Dan 4:8. Whose name was Whose name is.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Dan 4:8 But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name [was] Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god, and in whom [is] the spirit of the holy gods: and before him I told the dream, [saying],
Ver. 8. But at last Daniel came in before me. ] And why “at last?” Why was he not sooner sent for? If the soothsayers and sorcerers could have served the turn, Daniel had never been sought to. This is the guise of graceless men; they run not to God till all other refuges fail them.
According to the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Belteshazzar. See note on Dan 1:7.
god. Chaldee. ‘elah. App-4.
spirit. Hebrew. ruach. App-9.
holy. See note on Exo 3:5.
gods. Chaldee. ‘elahin (plural) App-4.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Dan 4:8-9
Dan 4:8 But atH5705 the lastH318 DanielH1841 came inH5954 beforeH6925 me, whoseH1768 nameH8036 was Belteshazzar,H1096 according to the nameH8036 of my god,H426 and in whomH1768 is the spiritH7308 of the holyH6922 gods:H426 and beforeH6925 him I toldH560 the dream,H2493 saying,
Dan 4:9 O Belteshazzar,H1096 masterH7229 of the magicians,H2749 becauseH1768 IH576 knowH3046 thatH1768 the spiritH7308 of the holyH6922 godsH426 is in thee, and noH3809 H3606 secretH7328 troublethH598 thee, tellH560 me the visionsH2376 of my dreamH2493 thatH1768 I have seen,H2370 and the interpretationH6591 thereof.
Dan 4:8-9
But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name was Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods: and before him I told the dream, saying, O Belteshazzar, master of the magicians, because I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee, and no secret troubleth thee, tell me the visions of my dream that I have seen, and the interpretation thereof.
This had been going on for some time when Daniel came before Nebuchadnezzar. The king had sought the counsel of his mystics and astronomers first without consulting Daniel. There are a number of explanations for this. Perhaps Nebuchadnezzar wanted to put them to the test first in order to give them an opportunity to validate his declining belief in his gods. At this point in his life, Nebuchadnezzar knew the God of the Israelites was the supreme God but he still clung to the belief in his gods as well. Notice Nebuchadnezzar affirmed that Daniel’s Babylonian name, Belteshazzar, was “according to the name of my god”. Nebuchadnezzar’s worshipped the false god named Marduk, also known as Bel. Notice here that Nebuchadnezzar still referred to “Bel” as his god.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Belteshazzar: Dan 1:7, Dan 5:12, Isa 46:1, Jer 50:2
and in: Dan 4:9, Dan 4:18, Dan 2:11, Dan 5:11, Dan 5:14, Num 11:17-30, Isa 63:11
Reciprocal: Gen 40:8 – Do not Gen 40:9 – a vine Gen 41:38 – in whom Isa 37:24 – General Isa 41:28 – I beheld Dan 1:20 – the magicians Dan 2:26 – Daniel Dan 2:47 – a revealer Dan 3:14 – my gods Dan 4:17 – the holy Dan 4:19 – Daniel Dan 10:1 – whose
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Dan 4:8-9. But at the last Daniel came in before me Whether sent for by the king, or brought by another, appears not, but he was last, that it might appear that he only, or rather, his God, who revealed them to him, had the true understanding of these secrets: for if he had come first, or before the rest had tried all their skill in vain, they would have been ready to affirm they understood the interpretation of the dream as well as he, and so God would not have had the glory of it; but now it was evident that the interpretation was from the Spirit of God enlightening the prophet. In whom is the spirit of the holy gods Who is enlightened by the gods, or heavenly powers, with a supernatural degree of knowledge, such as none of the wise men of Babylon can attain to. The original words, however, may be rendered, the holy God, as they are in the Greek and Arabic: and it is probable that this king had now the one true God in his mind. O Belteshazzar, master Or, chief, of the magicians, as Wintle translates the words. That he was superior to, or placed as a governor over, all the magicians, or wise men, see on Dan 1:20; Dan 2:48. Because I know that the spirit of the holy gods Or rather, of the holy God, is in thee, and that no secret troubleth thee Or, is difficult to thee. The LXX. read, , is not impossible to thee. Thou art not at a loss to find out any secret thing whatsoever. Tell me the visions of my dream, and the interpretation thereof Nebuchadnezzar tells the dream himself in the following words; so that the meaning of this sentence must be, Tell me the interpretation of the dream. The LXX. translate it thus: Hear the vision of my dream, which I saw, and tell me the interpretation thereof.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
4:8 But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name [was] {d} Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god, and in whom [is] the spirit of the holy gods: and before him I told the dream, [saying],
(d) This no doubt was a great grief to Daniel not only to have his name changed, but to be called by the name of a vile idol, which thing Nebuchadnezzar did to make him forget the true religion of God.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Daniel may not have been with the king’s other advisers because he occupied a position in the government that required his presence elsewhere. The king described Daniel by using both his Hebrew and Babylonian names. This would have had the double effect of causing those who read this decree to recognize Daniel by his common Babylonian name, and to honor Daniel’s God (cf. Dan 4:37). Nebuchadnezzar probably meant that "a spirit of the holy gods" (cf. Dan 4:17)-in a pagan sense-indwelt Daniel, since he used a plural adjective (translated "holy") to describe the noun ("gods"). [Note: See Leupold, p. 176, and Driver, p. 48.] However, we should probably not be dogmatic on this point since "holy" can mean divine rather than morally pure. [Note: Young, p. 99.] In this case the king may have meant "the Spirit of the holy God." The true interpretation lies buried in the theological understanding of Nebuchadnezzar, which the text leaves unclear. I suspect that Nebuchadnezzar was speaking as a polytheist rather than as a monotheistic believer in Yahweh.
"Seeing that Nebuchadnezzar recognized another as ’my god,’ it is doubtful if he regarded Jehovah as the only holy God." [Note: Culver, "Daniel," p. 783.]
"Several questions are called forth by this vs. Why did Dan. appear only after the wise men had failed to interpret the dream? Why, if Dan. was so well known for his ability to interpret dreams, and if he occupied a position of prominence over the wise men, was he not summoned first of all? . . .
"The king . . . had not forgotten Dan. Rather, his dream apparently caused him to realize that he would suffer humiliation, and probably this humiliation would be at the hands of Dan.’s God. . . . With this God, Neb., as yet, wanted no dealings. If others can interpret the dream, he will go to them rather than to Dan." [Note: Young, p. 100.]