{"id":21751,"date":"2022-09-24T09:10:07","date_gmt":"2022-09-24T14:10:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-daniel-13\/"},"modified":"2022-09-24T09:10:07","modified_gmt":"2022-09-24T14:10:07","slug":"exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-daniel-13","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-daniel-13\/","title":{"rendered":"Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 1:3"},"content":{"rendered":"

And the king spoke unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring [certain] of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes; <\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

3<\/strong>. Ashpenaz<\/em> ] No satisfactory explanation of this name has yet been found. Ap<\/em> in old Persian means a horse<\/em> (Sansk. apa<\/em>); but the name as a whole, in its present form, is not explicable from either Persian or Babylonian. LXX. has . The word is not improbably a corrupt form (like ‘Holophernes,’ in Judith; or ‘Osnappar,’ Ezr 4:10<\/span>).<\/p>\n

the master of his eunuchs<\/em> ] Eunuchs were, and still are, common in Oriental Courts; they sometimes attained to great influence with the monarch, and were treated by him as confidential servants. Eunuchs are often represented on the Assyrian monuments, where they are readily recognizable by their bloated and beardless faces (cf. Smith, D. B.<\/em> 2 s. v.; Rawlinson, Ancient Monarchies<\/em> 4 , i. 496 8, iii. 221 223). The ‘master,’ or superintendent, of the eunuchs would have the control of the eunuchs employed in the palace, and would naturally hold an important position at court. The principal eunuch, with other eunuchs under him, would have the care of the royal harem; and the training of youths for the service of the king was a duty which would be naturally entrusted to him [178] . Cf. the prophecy, 2Ki 20:18<\/span> (= Isa 39:7<\/span>); though it is not said that Daniel and his companions were made eunuchs, and it is too much to infer this (as has been done) from the statement that they were put in charge of the ‘master of the king’s eunuchs’: in Persia eunuchs superintended the education of the young princes (Rawl. Anc. Mon.<\/em> 4 , iii. 221); and in Turkey, Rycaut states (see the note below), a eunuch had charge of the royal pages.<\/p>\n

[178] In Turkey, as described by Rycaut in 1668 ( The Ottoman Empire<\/em>, p. 35 ff.) the office was divided, the women being under the charge of a black eunuch, called Kuzlir Agasi<\/em>, and the selected youths who were being educated in the Seraglio as pages for the royal service (together with the white eunuchs employed about the Court) being under the superintendence of a white eunuch, the Capa Aga<\/em> (p. 25 ff.).<\/p>\n

bring<\/em> ] bring<\/em> in<\/strong> (R.V.), viz. into the palace ( Dan 1:18<\/em><\/span>).<\/p>\n

children of Israel<\/em> ] The expression would include, at the time here referred to, men of Benjamin and Levi, as well as of Judah (cf. Ezr 1:5<\/span>; Ezr 4:1<\/span>; Ezr 10:9<\/span>), perhaps also men of other tribes who had migrated into the territory of Judah.<\/p>\n

and of the<\/em> seed royal<\/strong>, and of the<\/em> nobles<\/strong> ] If the first (‘and’) is to be taken in its obvious sense, the reference must be to members of the royal family and nobility of Babylon (so Prof. Bevan). Most commentators render both<\/em> (cf. Dan 8:13<\/span>; Jer 32:20<\/span>; Psa 76:7<\/span> [A.V. 6]), though that is hardly a sense which it would naturally convey in the present sentence. Perhaps it is best to understand it in the sense of and in particular<\/em> (cf. Dan 8:10<\/span>).<\/p>\n

of the seed<\/em> royal<\/strong> ] Lit. seed of royalty<\/em>, or of the kingdom:<\/em> so Jer 41:1<\/span> (= 2Ki 25:25<\/span>); Eze 17:13<\/span>. Not necessarily the descendants of the reigning ‘king.’ LXX. ‘of the royal race.’<\/p>\n

nobles<\/strong> ] Heb. partmim<\/em>, elsewhere only in Est 1:3<\/span>; Est 6:9<\/span>: the Pers. fratama<\/em>, Sansk. fratema<\/em>, akin etymologically to -, – . “The phrase martiy fratam<\/em>, ‘foremost men,’ occurs several times in the Achaemenian inscriptions” (Bevan).<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

3 5<\/strong>. Nebuchadnezzar’s purpose to have certain noble and promising youths educated for the king’s service.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs – <\/B>On the general reasons which may have influenced the king to make the selection of the youths here mentioned, see the analysis of the chapter. Of Ashpenaz, nothing more is known than is stated here. Eunuchs were then, as they are now, in constant employ in the harems of the East, and they often rose to great influence and power. A large portion of the slaves employed at the courts in the East, and in the houses of the wealthy, are eunuchs. Compare Burckhardts Travels in Nubia, pp. 294, 295. They are regarded as the guardians of the female virtue of the harem, but their situation gives them great influence, and they often rise high in the favor of their employers, and often become the principal officers of the court. The chief of the black eunuchs is yet, at the court of the Sultan, which is arranged much in accordance with the ancient court of Persia, an officer of the highest dignity. He is called Kislar-Aga, the overseer of the women, and is the chief of the black eunuchs, who guard the harem, or the apartments of the females. The Kislar-Aga enjoys, through his situation, a vast influence, especially in regard to the offices of the court, the principal Agas deriving their situations through him. See Jos. von Hammers des Osmanischen Reichs Staatsverwalt, Thes i. s. 71, as quoted in Rosenmullers Alte und neue Morgenland, ii. 357, 358.<\/P>

That it is common in the East to desire that those employed in public service should have vigorous bodies, and beauty of form, and to train them for this, will be apparent from the following extract: Curtius says, that in all barbarous or uncivilized countries, the stateliness of the body is held in great veneration; nor do they think him capable of great services or action to whom nature has not vouchsafed to give a beautiful form and aspect. It has always been the custom of eastern nations to choose such for their principal officers, or to wait on princes and great personages. Sir Paul Ricaut observes, That the youths that are designed for the great offices of the Turkish empire must be of admirable features and looks, well shaped in their bodies, and without any defect of nature; for it is conceived that a corrupt and sordid soul can scarcely inhabit in a serene and ingenuous aspect; and I have observed, not only in the seraglio, but also in the courts of great men, their personal attendants have been of comely lusty youths, well habited, deporting themselves with singular modesty and respect in the presence of their masters; so that when a Pascha Aga Spahi travels, he is always attended with a comely equipage, followed by flourishing youths, well clothed, and mounted, in great numbers. – Burder. This may serve to explain the reason of the arrangement made in respect to these Hebrew youths.<\/P>

That he should bring certain of the children of Israel – <\/B>Hebrew, of the sons of Israel. Nothing can with certainty be determined respecting their age by the use of this expression, for the phrase means merely the descendants of Jacob, or Israel, that is, Jews, and it would be applied to them at any time of life. It would seem, however, from subsequent statements, that those who were selected were young men. It is evident that young men would be better qualified for the object contemplated – to be trained in the language and the sciences of the Chaldeans Dan 1:4<\/span> – than those who were at a more advanced period of life.<\/P>

And of the kings seed, and of the princes – <\/B>That the most illustrious, and the most promising of them were to be selected; those who would be most adapted to accomplish the object which he had in view. Compare the analysis of the chapter. It is probable that the king presumed that among the royal youths who had been made captive there would be found those of most talent, and of course those best qualified to impart dignity and honor to his government, as well as those who would be most likely to be qualified to make known future events by the interpretation of dreams, and by the prophetic intimations of the Divine will.<\/P><\/p>\n

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Dan 1:3-4<\/span><\/p>\n

Children in whom was no blemish.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Piety at Court<\/strong><\/p>\n


I.<\/strong> THE HISTORY OF <\/strong>DANIEL<\/strong>S FIRST APPEARANCE<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>It is evident that this lad had come in with the others when Nebuchadnezzar led home his captives from the smoking ruins of Jerusalem. <\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Suddenly comes a summons for this young Hebrew to take a position at court (Dan 1:3-5<\/span>). Nebuchadnezzar appears to have determined to bring forward into his service some of this captive race. Quite likely his reasons were these: <\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> He desired to gain the advantage of outside talent; the long siege had taught him the stubbornness, gifts, and availability of the Jewish character. <\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> He planned to propitiate the whole race by choosing some of their number for high office; while so strong an element of his population was in a sort of sullen opposition to his government, there was always danger around the throne. <\/p>\n

(3)<\/strong> He wished to add the strange power of their divine inspiration to such forces of magic as he held under his control now (Dan 1:20<\/span>). <\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>The group of companions thus strangely thrown together has enough of picturesqueness in it, if nothing else, to attract attention. Only three besides Daniel are mentioned by name, but there were others associated in the transaction. It is always a serious moment when any young man is summoned to come to the front. Good men are often found in the unlikeliest places, even in our day. <\/p>\n


II.<\/strong> THE DESCRIPTION OF <\/strong>DANIEL<\/strong>S PERSONAL ENDOWMENTS <\/strong>(verse 4). <\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>For one thing, he was finely fashioned in figure and stature. This makes us think how the Israelites once admired Saul, the son of Kish, when he came to the throne; and how the same wayward people afterwards went into rebellion with Absalom, won by his height and his hair. <\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>He was nobly born. These all were to be of the kings seed, and of the princes, when the selection was made. Some say that Daniel was a descendant of Hezekiah, concerning whose Sons it was once predicted that they should reign in Babylon. We need not reason much concerning birth or rank, for Gods choice of us is all we can wish. <\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>He was liberally educated. That counts grandly in the career of each young man; for knowledge is power. The Israelites were not an intellectual race, as a whole; most of the people were farmers, and had flocks and fields; it was an agricultural nation, rather than a scientific. But Daniel had been taught to study, and had learned to think. <\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>He was religiously trained. Those old Jews made thorough and honest work of this part of their duty. Here our golden text comes in with all its power: Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to Thy word. <\/p>\n

5. <\/strong>He was studious in taste. There is an expression in the narrative which is very significant (verse 20). We are told that when in consultation with these Hebrew advisers, the king found them ten times better than his magicians and astrologers; the original word is hands; they were ten hands above them in wisdom and understanding; they were, hand over hand, superior to them in common-sense and, intelligence. <\/p>\n

6. <\/strong>He was eminent in the Divine favour (verse 17.) The Lord even then was giving help from heaven to this young man for his calling. <\/p>\n


III.<\/strong> THE TEMPTATION TO WHICH DANIEL WAS SUBJECTED <\/strong>(verses 5-7). <\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The kings plan was this: he designed to swerve these men out from the straight lines of traditional fidelity and belief, and commit them to the orthodox religion of his own country. <\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> He adroitly caused their Hebrew names to be changed; from suggesting Jehovahs worship and service, they suggested the following of false gods and profane policies. <\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> He proposed a distinct political aggrandizement; these captive slaves were to be admitted at court as the peers of the realm. <\/p>\n

(3)<\/strong> He offered them free education; they were to be instructed in the Chaldean language and lore. <\/p>\n

(4)<\/strong> He furnished them full support gratis; he actually descended into details; he appointed the portion of provisions, and of the wine he himself was accustomed to drink. <\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>But the implied condition was this: the whole thing was an adroit ruse and a snare. It made at least four distinct pledges for an alienation of all that these young Hebrews cherished. <\/p>\n

(1)<\/strong> They should surrender their religion; <\/p>\n

(2)<\/strong> They should drift away from their national speech, history, and hope; <\/p>\n

(3)<\/strong> They should take part with the traditional oppressors of their fathers; <\/p>\n

(4)<\/strong> Worst, and fatallest, of all, they should enter upon the service of a religion of idolatry. <\/p>\n


IV.<\/strong> THE EXPEDIENT OF ESCAPE WHICH <\/strong>DANIEL PROPOSED<\/strong>, (verses 8-14). <\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Observe carefully what Daniel did not do. He did not decline the chance given him for conspicuous service. He only avoided the embarrassing conditions attached to it. He was willing to be useful, if so splendid an opportunity was offered him; but he would not peril his convictions, nor sacrifice his principles. No young man has any right to refuse an opening in life that is advantageous; he must just accept the gift which in the providence of God comes to him, and then consecrate it to the service of God and his fellow-men. <\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Observe the devoutness and trust of the piety these young Hebrews exhibited. <\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Finally, observe the superb success these young men achieved. The ten days passed; they were fairer and fatter. But there were now three years more before they should come before the king; and still they trusted God.. It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth. (C. S. Robinson, D<\/em>.D<\/em>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Bible Biography<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>The narrative of striking facts and the delineation of celebrated characters, is perhaps, of all methods of instruction, the most effective. No one is ignorant of the power of example both for good and evil. Such is mans nature, that he is more guided by the practice of others than by his own reason. A child writes more easily after a copy than by rule. Men are prone to imitate whatever they see done, be it good or bad, emulating the one and aping the other. <\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Examples inform and impress the mind in a manner more compendious, easy, and pleasant than precepts or any other instrument or way of discipline. Precepts are abstract, naked, powerless–without a hold on either the fancy, sense, or memory; like the shadows of a passing cloud, too subtle to make any great impression, or leave any remarkable footsteps. But example comes home with irresistible power and strikes out its likeness. Precept is the man chiselled out, standing mute in the awful majesty of a statue of Praxiteles; example is the man with the life-speaking eye, the grace of living motion, and the lips parted with instructive lessons. The most successful professors of arts and sciences explain, illustrate, and confirm their general rules and precepts by particular examples. Mathematicians demonstrate their theorems by schemes and diagrams; orators back their enthymemes with inductions; philosophers urge the reason and nature of things, and then throw themselves aback on the practice of Socrates, Zeno, and such like personages. Politics are more easily and clearly drawn out of veritable history than out of books De Republica<\/em>. Artificers describe models, and set patterns before their learners with greater success than if they merely delivered accurate rules and precepts to them. Nor is the ease at all different when these principles are applied to morals. Seneca says that the crowd of philosophers which followed Socrates derived more of their ethics from his manners than his words. It is said of Origen, the most learned man of his age, the author of a Hexapla–a man that employed seven amanuenses at once–that he recommended religion more by his example than by all he wrote. One good example may represent more fully and clearly the nature of virtue than a thousand eloquent descriptions of it. Is it faith we have to acquire? Then we have but to look at Abraham. Is it wisdom, constancy, humility, and resolution? Behold Moses. Is it zeal, patience, perseverance, and piety? Then look at Peter, Paul, and John. <\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Good examples are powerful, because they persuade and incline us to follow them by plausible authority. In a word, examples incite our passions and impel us to duty. It is by reading and studying the lives of those who have distinguished themselves above the rest of mankind, that we may both amuse and instruct ourselves. History has, therefore, done well in immortalizing those men who have, by their talents or genius, or by their enterprise and benevolence, done much for the well-being of their fellowmen. Two important particulars are worthy of being mentioned here and remembered; namely, that the field is open to all, and that special Divine energy is promised to all that will trust in God, and walk in the way of his commandments. Circumstances aid great men, but do not make them. On the contrary, great men make circumstances. (W<\/em>. A<\/em>. Scott, D<\/em>.D<\/em>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

True Nobility<\/strong><\/p>\n


I.<\/strong> WHAT DO WE KNOW OF THE PERSONALITIES OF THESE YOUNG<\/strong>–MEN<\/strong>? <\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>They appear to have been nobly born. At all events, if the instructions which Ashpenaz received were literally carried out, that must have been the case. Birth, however, is nothing if it be a mans sole claim upon the esteem of his fellows. <\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>But Daniel and his friends were both noble and good, not only of the kings, seed but children of the living God. When one thinks of the temptations to which those of high rank are exposed, it would almost appear that a pious prince is one of the most admirable of men. Of old, man, for his sin, was doomed to labour for his bread in the sweat of his brow. But the curse has proved, in the good providence of God, the greatest boon which fallen man could have bestowed upon him. Let us think with prayerful sympathy of those perils of a life of leisure and temptation to which some by their birth are exposed, while we thank God for our own humbler, and, it may be, safer lot. <\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Then, further, we may gather from the text that the personal appearance of these four young nobles was attractive. They were children in whom was no blemish, but well-favoured (Josephus, Ant.10; 10, 1). The body, it is true, is only the house which the spirit inhabits. But while the tenant is of infinitely more importance than his dwelling, we have no right to despise either a goodly home or a comely body. If the whole man belongs to God, physical beauty is a gift which the fortunate possessor of it may use for the glory of Him who bestowed it. <\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>But the beauty of these young Hebrews was not that of those who have only their faces and forms to recommend them. The powers of their minds were of no mean order (verse 17). Observe here that their knowledge and skill, their learning and wisdom, are directly traced to the hand of the Giver of all good. How apt we are, if we excel our fellows in the matter of intellectual ability, to become proud of our superiority! Ours! It is not ours; it is Gods. Did you ever reflect that the mental ability with which a sceptic argues out his conclusions, with which even an atheist seeks to disprove the existence of God, is the glorious gift of God Himself, prostituted to ignoble uses, and turned in defiance against its Maker and Giver? How sure and immovable the truth must be, and how certain, if I may use the expression, must God be of its ultimate triumph, when he allows men to go on year after year using the precious endowments which He has given, and could in a moment take away, for the purpose of endeavouring to overthrow His dominion ever the minds and hearts of their fellows! <\/p>\n

5. <\/strong>Once more, here, the story of these comely and accomplished youths touches our deepest sympathies when we read that they were involuntary exiles from their native land. We cannot but think that they loved their country. Who shall, say what sorrows pierced the heart of this young prince, thus, with his companions, doomed to mourn, in the land and at the court of a heathen conqueror, not only his own sad fate, but still more grievously the appalling desolation which had befallen the land of his birth? <\/p>\n


II.<\/strong> OF COURSE IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE BUT THAT THESE YOUNG EXILES SHOULD HAVE THEIR FAITH SORELY TRIED<\/strong>. The king, with that lavish and somewhat indelicate kindness so often associated with despotic power, doubtless meant them well. He had not, it is true, consulted their feelings in tearing them away from the land of their birth, but in his rough way he desired to treat them kindly. Yet to partake of the food and drink thus provided was just what they could not do. It was not wine as wine, any more than it was meat as meat, that they refused. Times are changed with us now, and our difficulties are not of the precise nature either of these captive Hebrews, or of the early Christians (1Co 8:1-13<\/span>). But though customs change and ceremonial observances vanish away, principles <\/em>abide unchanged for evermore. One of the favourite texts in the unwritten and unholy Bible of the world is, When you are in Rome you must do as Rome does. Few of us dare to be singular. And yet to be right we must often be singular, not in phraseology, or tone, or look, or garb, but in character and conduct. What would some of us have said if we had been placed in the circumstances described in the text? On the one hand, there was food of the daintiest, wine of the richest; on the other, danger of displeasing the king, and perhaps being cast into an Oriental dungeon. Would it have been a thing to be wondered at if Daniel had reasoned thus; What does it matter? The notions of our father are antiquated. Moses was well enough in his day, but that day is a long time since. Other times, other manners. Its our policy now to please the king. He would have had his meat and drink, but he would have lost his God, turned his back upon his early faith, forgotten his country, become a Babylonian idolater, and his life, unwritten and unsung, would have sunk into the oblivion which his time-serving cowardice deserved. (J<\/em>. R<\/em>. Bailey<\/em>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Excellence in Youth<\/strong><\/p>\n

Children in whom was no blemish. Such as were Joseph, David, Artaxerxes Longimanus, Germanicus, and others, in whom beauty proved to be the flower of virtue as Chrysippus called it. Of Galba the Emperor once said, that his good wit dwelt in an ill house, like an excellent instrument in a bad case; whereas Vatinius the Roman was not more misshapen in body than in mind. The heathens also advise us to beware of those whom nature hath set a mark upon. (J<\/em>. Trapp<\/em>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The Four Hebrew Children<\/strong><\/p>\n


I.<\/strong> THE BODY<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

As they were princes they were chosen to be pages of the king of Babylon. They were to be fed for three years with all the royal dainties. Most boys would have blest their good fortune, and taken their fill of all that was going in the palace. But these Jewish boys refused the kings meat and wine, lest they should eat anything forbidden by their religion. And they grew fairer and fatter than all the children in the palace. Like them, you should religiously think about what you eat and drink. The children who are content with plain food become the healthiest and fairest men and women. You will smile with suspicion when I tell you what is the healthiest place in all Scotland, and perhaps in the world. Sir Robert Christion proves that it is Perth Prison. For every man who dies inside it, about ten men of the same age die outside. Many of the prisoners have uneasy minds, and their lives have been wild, but no matter: they have by necessity what our four boys had by choice,–water, and the plainest food, and splendid health. Their food costs fourpence a day. I was in Richmond, Virginia, shortly after the great war. Nearly the whole city was a mass of blackened ruins. Two things, they said, astonished them during the siege; first, that they could live on so very little; and secondly, that fewer people died in days of starvation, than in days of abundance. They made the same discovery during the cotton famine in Lancashire. Plenty, it seems, harms more by its excesses than poverty by its privations. Your eating and drinking help greatly to form your character; for your diet influences the soul as well as the body. That Turk was much mistaken, who, when about to drink wine, warned his soul to quit the body for a little, lest it should be harmed. How many evils have sprung from luxurious living? It destroyed Rome, after Rome had conquered the whole world. How safe and noble is the spirit of these boys! They did not despise the body, as monks do: in the spirit of the Bible they honoured it as the handmaid of the soul. They were not as those who live to eat, but who eat to live. By keeping under their bodies they escaped being castaways. <\/p>\n


II.<\/strong> THE MIND<\/strong>.–They were young thinkers, quickwitted, and eager to learn. Well-favoured and without blemish, they had minds to match their bodies. Your mind is nobler far than your body, and nobler than all the things your eyes behold. The powers of mind are more valued than powers of body by all but savages and stupid people. Often the body is the grave of the spirit; and many value the mind as the minister of the body: they would use it as a sort of chief cook or confectioner for the body. Yet he hardly lives at all, whose mind is not thoughtful. When the mind is not trained or used, man sinks toward the level of the sheep feeding in the pastures, and of the oxen fattening in the stall. His history is made up of nothings. For life without thought is death to all but the body. With many boys and girls the powers of the mind are roused at first as by a kind of sudden conversion. A book, or a conversation, or a lesson, or even a problem in arithmetic–I have known such cases–deeply stirs the mind and makes the youth conscious of new powers. From that day he tastes the sweets of thinking, and burns with the love of knowledge. William Arnot tells that the first time he read a book of his own accord, he was half-intoxicated with the new-found pleasure. Many a writer has used with real affection the words, my master, as remembering how much he owes to his teacher. Thus also students long ago called their university, Alma Mater, that is, Bountiful Mother. Their university cherished them into mental health and joy, even as a kind mother cherishes her dear children. Because the powers of the mind are so great you should be careful to read only healthy books. If the books of your boyhood are bad, you will regret the reading of them as long as you live. <\/p>\n


III.<\/strong> THE SOUL<\/strong>.–As the mind is nobler than the body, so the soul is nobler than the mind. The soul is the man, the mind is the souls servant, and the body is the servants servant. As thought is the life of the mind, so true Christian life is the grandeur of the soul. Their state of body and mind was most helpful to their soul. Their minds were not dulled by overfeeding, nor were their souls clogged with stupid minds. We wonder at their holy lives in such a wicked palace, and at their perfect boldness. The poets speak of a river that preserves the sweetness of its waters amid the bitterness of the sea, and of an animal that lives in the midst of the fire; and such-like were their lives. There is a little insect that gathers around itself a viewless coat of air, and goes down clad in it to the bottom of the sea. The little diver moves about at its ease, unhurt amid the stagnant waters. The grace of God wove such a garment of Heavens air around these children, that they passed unhurt through the poisoned atmosphere of Babylon. It made them the children of Heaven, and gave them a nobility of nature more than nature can give. (J<\/em>. Wells, M<\/em>.A<\/em>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Education and training of youth<\/strong><\/p>\n

Those raw country lads with the hulking, slouching gait which gives such a look of clumsiness and stupidity just need training. They are the rough material of which a vast deal may be made. You have in them the water-worn pebble which will yet take on a beautiful polish. Take him and send him to a college for four years; let him then become a tutor in a good family, and before long you find him with the quiet, self-possessed air and easy address of the gentleman who has seen the world. Remember this and look with respect on the diamond that only needs to be polished, the people of whom more might have been made. (H<\/em>. O<\/em>. Mackey<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Daniels Education<\/strong><\/p>\n

From the beginning of next chapter, it appears, that astrology was a principal branch of learning among the Chaldeans. As Daniel was afterwards appointed master of the magicians, we see no reason to doubt that he was taught this, and the other occult sciences of Babylon. We are warranted, from Daniels tenderness of conscience, to conclude that he neither believed in astrology, nor practised it; but we see no sin in his becoming acquainted with it, just as we see no sin in a Christian being taught the mythology of Greece and Rome, or in a missionary studying the superstitious of the Hindoos. (J<\/em>. White<\/em>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

A wise royal policy<\/strong><\/p>\n

The instructions, which Nebuchadnezzar gave respecting the education of these young men, show that he had the talents of a statesman, as well as of a general, and that he had an enlargement of view worthy of him who was to be the golden-head in the image of empire. It would have been well for the world if he, and all kings and emperors had always showed as much wisdom in the selection, and care about the education, of those who were to rule under them. (J. White.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The College Student<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Young men may be carried into captivity by their enemies. There is a captivity more galling than the one into which Daniel was transported, it is the captivity of evil habit. Men do not go into that wittingly. Slyly and imperceptibly are the chains forged upon them, and one day they wake up to find themselves away down in Babylon. Men talk of evil habits as though they were light and trivial; but they are scorpion whips that tear the flesh; they make a road of spikes more bloody than the path of a Brahmin; they are the poisonous robe of Nessus; they are the sepulchre in which millions are buried alive. The young are in more peril because they are unsuspecting. <\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>Early impressions are almost ineffaceable. Daniel had a religious bringing up. From the good meaning of his name I know he had a pious parentage. When I find what Daniel is in Jerusalem I am not surprised to find what he is in Babylon. The father plans the character of the child, and its destiny for time and eternity; then the son completes the structure. <\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>The beauty of Christian sobriety. The meat and the wine that were to come to Daniels table were to come from the Kings table. Daniel had no right to take that food. He chose pulse. It was a miracle that he did not dwindle away. When God for his self-denial puts upon him this benediction he puts a benediction upon all Christian sobriety. <\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>The beauty of youthful character remaining incorrupt away from home. If Daniel had plunged into every wickedness of the city of Babylon, the old folks at home would never have heard of it. But Daniel knew that Gods eye was on him. That was enough. There are young men not so good away from home as at home. God forbid that any of us, through our misconduct, should bring disgrace upon a fathers name, or prove recreant to the love of a mother. (T<\/em>. De Witt Talmage, D<\/em>.D<\/em>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Mens qualifications for public service<\/strong><\/p>\n

It was like the proud spirit of the King to surround himself with all spendour of talent that should throw additional glory on himself and on his throne. Accordingly directions to select candidates for the public service were given to Aspenaz, the chief of the eunuchs. Of him we know nothing more than is stated in the first chapter of the Book of Daniel. He belonged to a class always existing in Oriental courts, often high in royal favour, of large influence, authority and power. This individual appears to have been marked by much wisdom, considerate care, a gracious bearing, and courtly courtesy. That he regarded Daniel with favour and tender love, should be his passport to our esteem. The King prescribed the qualifications of the candidates. <\/p>\n

1. <\/strong>Some of these were physical. Vigour and beauty were required. Probably Daniel was tall, strong, well-built, handsome. <\/p>\n

2. <\/strong>The King required knowledge. Skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science. They were to be generally intelligent, and in particular, acquainted with the science of their country, namely–music, architecture, natural history, agriculture, morals, theology, and prophecy. There is reason to believe that in many of these departments the Hebrews were in advance of the Babylonians. The King proposed to turn their superiority to account. He was evidently a broad-minded and sagacious man. <\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>The next requirement was what we understand by capacity. Such as had ability in them to stand in the Kings palace. Ability is here the Hebrew word for strength, power, resource of almost any kind. The King required general capacity, not overlooking moral qualifications. <\/p>\n

4. <\/strong>They were to be teachable. Without that spirit, these tall, handsome men would be but as ornamental logs of wood in the palace of the King. Present attainment in knowledge and in moral culture is as nothing compared with the capacity of receiving more, and power to do more in the future. (H<\/em>. T<\/em>. Robjohns, B<\/em>.A<\/em>.)<\/p>\n

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Verse 3<\/span>. Master of his eunuchs<\/B><\/I>] This word eunuchs<\/I> signifies officers about or in the palace, whether literally eunuchs or not.<\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

These here called eunuchs were chief among the kings servants, and they are called <\/P>

eunuchs because many of them were such of old among all the princes of the East, and at this day, but they were not all such, Jer 52:25<\/span>. The word translated <\/P>

eunuch signifies also <\/P>

chamberlain; such was <\/P>

Hatach, Est 4:5<\/span>; such were <\/P>

Bigthana and <\/P>

Teresh, Est 6:2<\/span>, and <\/P>

Harbonah, Est 7:9<\/span>, and <\/P>

Ashpenaz in the text, the master of the kings eunuchs, who had set <\/P>

Melzar over Daniel and his companions, Dan 1:11<\/span>. <\/P>

Here was fulfilled what the prophet Isaiah had foretold king Hezekiah, Isa 39:7<\/span>. Some think Daniel and his companions were made eunuchs in a strict sense, which doth not appear to be probable; but rather to be bred up in the court for officers, and thereby to alienate their minds from the religion of their country, and from seeking the welfare and return of their people; but God had otherwise appointed by this education of them, as appears in many signal testimonies of the presence and power of God with them, for the conviction of idolaters that God was above all gods. <\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

3. master of . . . eunuchs<\/B>calledin Turkey the kislar aga.<\/I> <\/P>

of the king’s seed<\/B>comparethe prophecy, 2Ki 20:17<\/span>; 2Ki 20:18<\/span>.<\/P><\/p>\n

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

And the king spake unto Ashpenaz, the master of his eunuchs<\/strong>,…. That is, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon spake to this officer of his, whose name was Ashpenaz; which, according to Saadiah, signifies a man of an angry countenance; but Hillerus e derives it from the Arabic word “schaphan”, as designing one that excels in wit and understanding; for which reason he might have the command of the eunuchs, many of which the eastern princes had about them, particularly to wait upon their women, or to educate youth, as the Turks have now; though, as R. Jeshuah in Aben Ezra observes, the word signifies ministers, and may intend the king’s nobles and courtiers, his ministers of state; and so this Ashpenaz may be considered as his prime minister, to whom he gave orders,<\/p>\n

that he should bring certain of the children of Israel<\/strong>; whom he had taken and brought captive to Babylon, and were disposed of in some part or another of the city and country; and out of these it was his will that some should be selected and brought to his court:<\/p>\n

and of the king’s seed, and of the princes<\/strong>: or, “even f of the king’s seed, and of the princes”; not any of the children of Israel, but such as were of the blood royal, or of the king of Judah’s family, or some way related to it; or, however, that were of princely birth, the children of persons of the first rank, as the word g may signify; or of nobles and dukes, as Jarchi interprets it.<\/p>\n

e Onomast. Sacr. p. 752, 753. f , so is sometimes rendered; see Noldius. p. 276. g “ex Graeca voce” , Grotius, Junius.<\/p>\n

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

The name , sounding like the Old Persian Ap <\/em>, a horse<\/em>, has not yet received any satisfactory or generally adopted explanation. The man so named was the chief marshal of the court of Nebuchadnezzar. (the word used for , Dan 1:7<\/span>, Dan 1:9<\/span>, belongs to the later usage of the language, cf. Jer 39:3<\/span>) means chief commander of the eunuchs, i.e., overseer of the srail, the Kislar Aga, and then in a wider sense minister of the royal palace, chief of all the officers; since frequently, with a departure from its fundamental meaning, designates only a courtier, chamberlain, attendant on the king, as in Gen 37:36<\/span>. The meaning of , more definitely determined by the context, is to lead<\/em>, i.e., into the land of Shinar, to Babylon. In , Israel<\/em> is the theocratic name of the chosen people, and is not to be explained, as Hitz. does, as meaning that Benjamin and Levi, and many belonging to other tribes, yet formed part of the kingdom of Judah. … , as well of the seed … as also<\/em>. is the Zend. frathema<\/em>, Sanscr. prathama <\/em>, i.e., persons of distinction, magnates<\/em>. , the object to , designates youths of from fifteen to twenty years of age. Among the Persians the education of boys by the began, according to Plato ( Alcib<\/em>. i. 37), in their fourteenth year, and according to Xenophon ( Cyrop<\/em>. i. 2), the were in their seventeenth year capable of entering into the service of the king. In choosing the young men, the master of the eunuchs was commanded to have regard to bodily perfection and beauty as well as to mental endowments. Freedom from blemish and personal beauty were looked upon as a characteristic of moral and intellectual nobility; cf. Curtius, xvii. 5, 29. , blemish<\/em>, is written with an , as in Job 31:7<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Dan 1:4-5<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> , skilful, intelligent<\/em> in all wisdom, i.e., in the subjects of Chaldean wisdom (cf. Dan 1:17<\/span>), is to be understood of the ability to apply themselves to the study of wisdom. In like manner the other mental requisites here mentioned are to be understood. , having knowledge, showing understanding<\/em>; , possessing a faculty for knowledge, a strength of judgment<\/em>. , in whom was strength<\/em>, i.e., who had the fitness in bodily and mental endowments appropriately to stand in the palace of the king, and as servants to attend to his commands. ( to teach them<\/em>) is co-ordinate with ( to bring<\/em>) in Dan 1:3<\/span>, and depends on ( and he spake<\/em>). For this service they must be instructed and trained in the learning and language of the Chaldeans. refers to the Chaldee literature, and in Dan 1:17<\/span> , and to conversation or the power of speaking in that language. , Chaldeans<\/em>, is the name usually given (1) to the inhabitants of the Babylonian kingdom founded by Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, and (2) in a more restricted sense to the first class of the Babylonish priests and learned men or magi, and then frequently to the whole body of the wise men of Babylon; cf. at Dan 2:2<\/span>. In this second meaning the word is here used. The language of the is not, as Ros., Hitz., and Kran. suppose, the Eastern Aramaic branch of the Semitic language, which is usually called the Chaldean language; for this tongue, in which the Chaldean wise men answered Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 2:4<\/span>.), is called in Dan 2:4<\/span>, as well as in Ezr 4:7<\/span> and Isa 36:11<\/span>, the , Aramaic<\/em> (Syriac), and is therefore different from the language of the .<\/p>\n

But the question as to what this language used by the Chaldeans was, depends on the view that may be taken of the much controverted question as to the origin of the , . The oldest historical trace of the lies in the name ( Ur of the Chaldees<\/em>, lxx ), the place from which Terah the father of Abraham went forth with his family to Charran in the north of Mesopotamia. The origin of Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees, when taken in connection with the fact (Gen 22:22<\/span>) that one of the sons of Nahor, Abraham’s brother, was called ( Chesed<\/em>), whose descendants would be called , appears to speak for the origin of the from Shem. In addition to this also, and in support of the same opinion, it has been noticed that one of Shem’s sons was called ( Arphaxad<\/em>). But the connection of with is unwarrantable; and that Nahor’s son was the father of a race called , is a supposition which cannot be established. But if a race actually descended from this , then they could be no other than the Bedouin tribe the , which fell upon Job’s camels (Job 1:17<\/span>), but not the people of the Chaldees after whom, in Terah’s time, Ur was already named. The sojourn of the patriarch Abraham in Ur of the Chaldees finally by no means proves that Terah himself was a Chaldean. He may have been induced also by the advance of the Chaldeans into Northern Mesopotamia to go forth on his wanderings.<\/p>\n

This much is at all events unquestionable, and is now acknowledged, that the original inhabitants of Babylonia were of Semitic origin, as the account of the origin of the nations in Gen 10 shows. According to Gen 10:22<\/span>, Shem had five sons, Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram, whose descendants peopled and gave name to the following countries: – The descendants of Elam occupied the country called Elymais, between the Lower Tigris and the mountains of Iran; of Asshur, Assyria, lying to the north-the hilly country between the Tigris and the mountain range of Iran; or Arphaxad, the country of Arrapachitis<\/em> on the Upper Tigris, on the eastern banks of that river, where the highlands of Armenia begin to descend. Lud, the father of the Lydians, is the representative of the Semites who went westward to Asia Minor; and Aram of the Semites who spread along the middle course of the Euphrates to the Tigris in the east, and to Syria in the west. From this M. Duncker ( Gesch. des Alterth.<\/em>) has concluded: “According to this catalogue of the nations, which shows the extension of the Semitic race from the mountains of Armenia southward to the Persian Gulf, eastward to the mountains of Iran, westward into Asia Minor, we follow the Semites along the course of the two great rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris, to the south. Northwards from Arphaxad lie the mountains of the Chasdim, whom the Greeks call Chaldaei, Carduchi, Gordiaei, whose boundary toward Armenia was the river Centrites.”<\/p>\n

“If we find the name of the Chaldeans also on the Lower Euphrates, if in particular that name designates a region on the western bank of the Euphrates to its mouth, the extreme limit of the fruitful land watered by the Euphrates towards the Arabian desert, then we need not doubt that this name was brought from the Armenian mountains to the Lower Euphrates, and that it owes its origin to the migration of these Chaldeans from the mountains. – Berosus uses as interchangeable the names Chaldea and Babylonia for the whole region between the Lower Euphrates and the Tigris down to the sea. But it is remarkable that the original Semitic name of this region, Shinar<\/em>, is distinct from that of the Chaldeans; remarkable that the priests in Shinar were specially called Chaldeans, that in the fragments of Berosus the patriarchs were already designated Chaldeans of this or that city, and finally that the native rulers were particularly known by this name. We must from all this conclude, that there was a double migration fro the north to the regions on the Lower Euphrates and Tigris; that they were first occupied by the Elamites, who came down along the Tigris; and that afterwards a band came down from the mountains of the Chaldeans along the western bank of the Tigris, that they kept their flocks for a long time in the region of Nisibis, and faintly that they followed the Euphrates and obtained superiority over the earlier settlers, who had sprung from the same stem (?), and spread themselves westward from the mouth of the Euphrates. The supremacy which was thus established was exercised by the chiefs of the Chaldeans; they were the ruling family in the kingdom which they founded by their authority, and whose older form of civilisation they adopted.”<\/p>\n

If, according to this, the Chaldeans are certainly not Semites, then it is not yet decided whether they belonged to the Japhetic race of Aryans, or, as C. Sax<\/p>\n

(Note: In the Abhdl<\/em>. “on the ancient history of Babylon and the nationality of the Cushites and the Chaldeans,” in the Deutsch. morg. Ztschr.<\/em> xxii. pp. 1-68. Here Sac seeks to prove “that the Chaldeans, identical with the biblical Chasdim, were a tribe ruling from ancient times from the Persian Gulf to the Black Sea, and particularly in Babylonia, which at length occupied the southern region from the mouth of the Euphrates to the Armeneo-Pontine range of mountains, but was in Babylonia especially represented by the priest caste and the learned.” This idea the author grounds on the identification of the Bible Cushites with the Scythians of the Greeks and Romans, the evidence for which is for the most part extremely weak, and consists of arbitrary and violent combinations, the inconsistency of which is at once manifest, as e.g., the identification of the with the , Gen 10:14<\/span>, the conclusions drawn from Eze 29:10<\/span> and Eze 38:5<\/span>. of the spread of the Cushites into Arabia and their reception into the Scythian army of the northern Gog, etc. In general, as Sax presents it, this supposition is untenable, yet it contains elements of truth which are not to be overlooked.)<\/p>\n

has recently endeavoured to make probable, to the Hamitic race of Cushites, a nation belonging to the Tartaric (Turamic) family of nations. As to the Aryan origin, besides the relation of the Chaldeans, the Gordiaei, and the Carduchi to the modern Kurds, whose language belongs to the Indo-Germanic, and indeed to the Aryan family of languages, the further circumstance may be referred to: that in Assyria and Babylonia the elements of the Aryan language are found in very ancient times. Yet these two facts do not furnish any conclusive evidence on the point. From the language of the modern Kurds being related to the Aryan language no certain conclusion can be drawn as to the language of the ancient Chaldees, Gordiaei, and Carduchi; and the introduction of Aryan words and appellations into the language of the Semitic Assyrians and Babylonians is fully explained, partly from the intercourse which both could not but maintain with Iranians, the Medes and Persians, who were bordering nations, partly from the dominion exercised for some time over Babylonia by the Iranian race, which is affirmed in the fragments of Berosus, according to which the second dynasty in Babylon after the Flood was the Median. Notwithstanding we would decide in favour of the Aryan origin of the Chaldeans, did not on the one side the biblical account of the kingdom which Nimrod the Cushite founded in Babel and extended over Assyria (Gen 10:8-12<\/span>), and on the other the result to which the researches of the learned into the antiquities of Assyria regarding the development of culture and of writing in Babylonia,<\/p>\n

(Note: The biblical tradition regarding the kingdom founded by Nimrod in Babel, Duncker (p. 204) has with arbitrary authority set aside, because it is irreconcilable with his idea of the development of Babylonian culture. It appears, however, to receive confirmation from recent researches into the ancient monuments of Babylonia and Assyria, which have led to the conclusion, that of the three kinds of cuneiform letters that of the Babylonian bricks is older than the Assyrian, and that the oldest form originated in an older hieroglyphic writing, of which isolated examples are found in the valley of the Tigris and in Susiana; whence it must be concluded that the invention of cuneiform letters did not take place among the Semites, but among a people of the Tauranian race which probably had in former times their seat in Susiana, or at the mouth of the Euphrates and the Tigris on the Persian Gulf. Cf. Spiegel in Herz.’s Realencyclop<\/em>., who, after stating this result, remarks: “Thus the fact is remarkable that a people of the Turko-Tartaric race appear as the possessors of a high culture, while people of this tribe appear in the world’s history almost always as only destitute of culture, and in many ways hindering civilisation; so that it cannot but be confessed that, so far as matters now are, one is almost constrained to imagine that the state of the case is as follows,” and thus he concludes his history of cuneiform writing: – ”Cuneiform writing arose in ancient times, several thousand years before the birth of Christ, very probably from an ancient hieroglyphic system of writing, in the region about the mouths of the Euphrates and the Tigris on the Persian Gulf. It was found existing by a people of a strange race, belonging neither to the Semites nor to the Indo-Germans. It was very soon, however, adopted by the Semites. The oldest monuments of cuneiform writing belong to the extreme south of the Mesopotamian plain. In the course of time it pressed northward first to Babylon, where it assumed a more regular form than among the Assyrians. From Assyria it may have come among the Indo-Germans first to Armenia; for the specimens of cuneiform writing found in Armenia are indeed in syllabic writing, but in a decidedly Indo-Germanic language. How the syllabic writing was changed into letter-(of the alphabet) writing is as yet obscure. The most recent kind of cuneiform writing which we know, the Old Persian, is decidedly letter-writing.” Should this view of the development of the cuneiform style of writing be confirmed by further investigations, then it may be probable that the Chaldeans were the possessors and cultivators of this science of writing, and that their language and literature belonged neither to the Semitic nor yet to the Indo-Germanic or Aryan family of languages.)<\/p>\n

make this view very doubtful.<\/p>\n

If, then, for the present no certain answer can be given to the question as to the origin of the Chaldeans and the nature of their language and writing, yet this much may be accepted as certain, that the language and writing of the was not Semitic or Aramaic, but that the Chaldeans had in remote times migrated into Babylonia, and there had obtained dominion over the Semitic inhabitants of the land, and that from among this dominant race the Chaldees, the priestly and the learned cast of the Chaldeans, arose. This caste in Babylon is much older than the Chaldean monarchy founded by Nebuchadnezzar.<\/p>\n

Daniel and his companions were to be educated in the wisdom of the Chaldean priests and learned men, which was taught in the schools of Babylon, at Borsippa in Babylonia, and Hipparene in Mesopotamia (Strab. xvi. 1, and Plin. Hist. Nat.<\/em> vi. 26). Dan 1:5<\/span>. To this end Nebuchadnezzar assigned to them for their support provision from the king’s household, following Oriental custom, according to which all officers of the court were fed from the king’s table, as Athen. iv. 10, p. 69, and Plut. probl<\/em>. vii. 4, testify regarding the Persians. This appears also (1Ki 5:2-3<\/span>) to have been the custom in Israel. , the daily portion<\/em>, cf. Exo 5:13<\/span>, Exo 5:19<\/span>; Jer 52:34<\/span>, etc. comes from path<\/em>, in Zend. paiti<\/em>, Sanscr. prati <\/em> = , , and bag, in Sanscr. bhaga <\/em>, portion, provision, cf. Eze 25:7<\/span>. With regard to the composition, cf. The Sanscr. pratibhagha <\/em>, a portion of fruits, flowers, etc., which the Rajah<\/em> daily requires for his household; cf. Gildemeister in Lassen’s Zeits.f. d. Kunde des Morg.<\/em> iv. 1, p. 214. therefore means neither ambrosia, nor dainties, but generally food, victuals, food of flesh and meal in opposition to wine, drink ( is singular), and vegetables (Dan 1:12<\/span>).<\/p>\n

The king also limits the period of their education to three years, according to the Persian as well as the Chaldean custom. does not depend on (Dan 1:3<\/span>), but is joined with , and is the final infinitive with explicative, meaning, and that he may nourish them<\/em>. The infinitive is expressed by the fin. verb , to stand before (the king). The carrying out of the king’s command is passed over as a matter of course, yet it is spoken of as obeyed (cf. Dan 1:6<\/span><\/em>.).<\/p>\n

Dan 1:6-7<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> Daniel and his three friends were among the young men who were carried to Babylon. They were of the sons of Judah, i.e., of the tribe of Judah. From this it follows that the other youths of noble descent who had been carried away along with them belonged to other tribes. The name of none of these is recorded. The names only of Daniel and his three companions belonging to the same tribe are mentioned, because the history recorded in this book specially brings them under our notice. As the future servants of the Chaldean king, they received as a sign of their relation to him other names, as the kings Eliakim and Mattaniah had their names changed (2Ki 23:34<\/span>; 2Ki 24:17<\/span>) by Necho and Nebuchadnezzar when they made them their vassals. But while these kings had only their paternal names changed for other Israelitish names which were given to them by their conquerors, Daniel and his friends received genuine heathen names in exchange for their own significant names, which were associated with that of the true God. The names given to them were formed partly from the names of Babylonish idols, in order that thereby they might become wholly naturalized, and become estranged at once from the religion and the country of their fathers.<\/p>\n

(Note: “The design of the king was to lead these youths to adopt the customs of the Chaldeans, that they might have nothing in common with the chosen people.” – Calvin.)<\/p>\n

Daniel, i.e., God will judge, received the name Belteshazzar<\/em>, formed from Bel<\/em>, the name of the chief god of the Babylonians. Its meaning has not yet been determined. Hananiah<\/em>, i.e., the Lord is gracious, received the name Shadrach<\/em>, the origin of which is wholly unknown; Mishael<\/em>, i.e., who is what the Lord is, was called Meshach<\/em>, a name yet undeciphered; and Azariah<\/em>, i.e., the Lord helps, had his name changed into Abednego<\/em>, i.e., slave, servant of Nego<\/em> or Nebo<\/em>, the name of the second god of the Babylonians (Isa 46:1<\/span>), the being changed by the influence of in into (i.e., Nego<\/em> instead of Nebo<\/em>).<\/p>\n

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Here Daniel pursues his narrative, and shows the manner in which he was led away together with his companions. The king had demanded young men to be brought, not from the ordinary multitude, but from the principal nobility, who stood before him, that is, ministered to him. Hence, we ascertain why Daniel and his companions were chosen, because they were noble young men and of the royal seed, or at least of parents who surpassed others in rank. The king did this purposely to show himself a conqueror; he may also have taken this plan designedly, to retain hostages in his power; for he hoped, as we shall see, that those who were nourished in his palace would be degenerate and hostile to the Jews, and he thought their assistance would prove useful to himself. He also hoped, since they were born of a noble stock, that the Jews would be the more peaceable, and thus avoid all danger to those wretched exiles who were relations of the kings and the nobles. With regard to the words, he calls this Aspenaz the prince of eunuchs, under which name he means the boys who were nourished in the king’s palace to become a seminary of nobles; for it is scarcely possible that this Aspenaz was set over other leaders. But we gather from this place, that the boys whom the king held in honor and regard were under his custody. The Hebrews calls eunuchs סריסים, serisim, a name which belongs to certain prefects; for Potiphar is called by this name though he had a wife. So this name is everywhere used in Scripture for the satraps of a king; (Gen 37:36<\/span>; Gen 40:2<\/span>\ud83d\ude09 but since satraps also were chosen from noble boys, they were probably called eunuchs, though they were not made so, yet Josephus ignorantly declares these Jewish children to have been made eunuchs. But when eunuchs existed among the luxuries of Oriental kings, as I have already said, those youths were commonly called by this name whom the king brought up as a kind of school of nobles, whom he might afterwards place over various province. <\/p>\n

The king, therefore, commanded some of the children of Israel of the royal seed and of the nobles to be brought to him. So the sentence ought to be resolved; he did not command any of the common people to be brought to him, but some of the royal race, the more plainly to show himself their conqueror by doing all things according to his will. He means those “elders” who yet were in chief authority under the king of Judah. And Daniel also was of that tribe, as we shall afterwards see. The word פרתמים, pharthmim, “princes,” is thought to be derived from Perah, which is the Euphrates, and the interpreters understand prefects, to whom the provinces on the banks of the Euphrates were committed; but this does not suit the present passage where Jews are treated of. We now see the general signification of this name, and that all the elders ought to be comprehended under it. (73) — The rest tomorrow. <\/p>\n

(73) ‘This word has caused great difference of opinion among commentators. Theodotion does not attempt to explain it. Symmaehus takes it for the Parthians. Jerome interprets it by tyranni , and Saadias by their off-spring. Aben-Ezra considers it a foreign word; and R. Salom. Jarehi calls it Persian, and translates it “leaders” Hottinger and Aug. Pfeiffer both treat it as Persian, but derive it from different roots. “Nobles” or “elders” seems its best English equivalent. <\/p>\n

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

HOMILETICS<\/em><\/p>\n

SECT. II.THE FOUR CAPTIVE YOUTHS (Chap<\/em>. Dan. 1:3-7<\/span>)<\/p>\n

Among the youths of noble or princely birth taken from Jerusalem to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar as trophies of his conquest [7], and perhaps as hostages for the good behaviour of those who were left behind, were Daniel and his three companions, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. These, according to a custom prevalent in Babylon, similar to that of the Ottoman court which in more modern times originated the institution of the Janissaries [8], were, at the kings command, immediately placed under the charge of an officer called Ashpenaz [9], the chief of the eunuchs [10]. To this often influential class these captive youths were henceforth to belong, having been selected for their handsome appearance, intelligence, and good address [11]. In token of their entire subjection to their Babylonian master, their names, according to a common usage, were changed for others intended apparently to obliterate all traces of their race and nation, and still more of their religion, and to mark<\/em> them, if it could not also make<\/em> them, worshippers of the gods of their new sovereign [12], as well as his property and slaves. Designed for high stations at court and about the kings person, they were for three years to be dieted in a way judged most fitted to promote their health and more especially their good appearance; while they were carefully instructed in the learning [13] and language of the Chaldans [14]. These captive youths, and Daniel more especially, were to be Gods chosen instruments in effecting, by their influence at court, the predicted restoration of their exiled countrymen at the appointed period. Observe from the passage<\/p>\n

[7] Certain of the children of Israel and of the kings seed, and of the princes<\/em>. When Darius Hystaspes succeeded Cyrus, he obtained from Babylonia and the rest of Assyria a thousand talents of silver and five hundred boy-eunuchs. Keil observes that (partemim<\/em>) is the Zend prathema<\/em> (Sansc. prathama<\/em>), denoting persons of distinctionmagnates, princes.<\/p>\n

[8] The Janissaries were originally Christian youths who had been taken captive by the Turks and brought to the Ottoman court, after which they were placed under the care of the chief of the white eunuchs, under whom they were trained and educated, taught some trade, and brought up in the religion of their masters. Those most gifted were employed about the rulers person, and in due time advanced to high and suitable offices in the state, to military commands, and to the government of provinces. Their Christian names were changed for such as their Moslem masters delighted in.Kitto;<\/em> also Rankes Ottoman Empire<\/em>.<\/p>\n

[9] Ashpenaz<\/em>. Keil observes that the name has not yet received any satisfactory or generally adopted explanation. He thinks the person so named was the chief marshal of Nebuchadnezzars court. Dr. Rule thinks he might be called master of the household. Junius observes that the word in the Chaldaic denotes the master of the chiders (objurgantium<\/em>), or, as Willet translates it, the master of the comptrollers, i.e<\/em>., the chief comptroller and governor of the kings house.<\/p>\n

[10] Eunuchs<\/em>. Dr. Rule remarks that the name (sarisim<\/em>) may simply indicate members of the kings household; the name being applied to officers in or about the palace, whether literally and physically eunuchs or not.<\/p>\n

[11] Well-favoured<\/em>. The Assyrian and Babylonian kings, wishing to add to the lustre and magnificence of their court, admitted into their palace none but young persons of high birth, distinguished for the gracefulness of their person and the beauty of their countenance.Gaussen<\/em>.<\/p>\n

[12] Gave names<\/em>. Daniel, which in Hebrew denotes, God is my Judge, was changed, according to the name of Nebuchadnezzars god (Dan. 4:8<\/span>), into Belteshazzar, or Bels treasurer, or the Depositary of Bels secret things; but according to Gesenius and Nork, the Prince of Bel. Azariah, or The Help of the Lord, was changed into Abednego, the servant of Nego, or the Brightness, i.e<\/em>., of the Sun or Fire, or perhaps one of the planetsalso objects of Babylonian worship. The other two names given for Mishael and Hananiah believed to have also an idolatrous meaning, although not so obvious. Shadrach, according to some, is The Inspiration of Rach or the Sun; and Meshach, a devotee of Shach or Venus, the festival goddess. Kitto observes that the practice of changing the names of slaves is as ancient as the time of Joseph, whose name was changed by his Egyptian master to Zaphnath-Paaneah, or the Revealer of Secrets. In modern times the practice prevailed in the case of Negro slaves.<\/p>\n

[13] Might teach the learning of the Chaldeans<\/em>. According to Pliny and Strabo, the priest-caste among the Babylonians had educational establishments in certain cities; for instance, in Babylon itself, Borsippa in Babylonia, and Hipparene in Mesopotamia.Hengstenberg<\/em>. According to Plato and Xenophon, the education of royal officers in Persia did not begin until they had passed fourteen years of age, and youths did not enter into the kings service until they had completed their sixteenth or seventeenth year.Rule<\/em>. An objection has been made to the genuineness of the Book of Daniel on the ground that it is improbable that Daniel, with his strict principles, should be willing to be taught the principles of the magi. But Moses also was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians (Act. 7:22<\/span>). As Moses acquired the secular knowledge of the Egyptians without their debasing superstitions, so might Daniel that of the Babylonians. Nor was that learning all superstitious. Their philosophers were chiefly engaged about astronomy; and the Greeks thought that the birthplace of philosophy in general was among the magi of Persia and the Chaldees of Babylonia or Assyria. But the futility of the objection is at once obvious; at Babylon the kings will was law, and especially with his slaves. The passage is rather a confirmation of the genuineness of the book, as affording an example of agreement with the customs and usages of the time and country.<\/p>\n

[14] The language of the Chaldeans<\/em>. Michaelis, Winer, and others have supposed that by the language of the Chaldeans we are to understand that of the Chaldeans proper, and not the Eastern Araman branch, which is usually called the Chaldaic, and which in chap. Dan. 2:4<\/span>, as in Ezr. 4:7<\/span> and Isaiah 38<\/span>, is called the Aramaic or Syriac. Hengstenberg thinks it to be the court language, spoken by the monarch himself and his attendants, which appears from chap. Dan. 2:4<\/span> not to be the Aramaic, as that is said to be the language in which the Babylonian sages answered the king. The exact knowledge of the languages prevalent in Babylon in the time of Daniel, as shown by the book, no contemptible proof of its genuineness. Keil thinks the language of the Chaldeans in the text to be that of the Babylonish priests and learned men or magi, called also Chaldeans in a more restricted sense, the same being afterwards applied to the whole body of the wise men of Babylon (Dan. 2:2<\/span>). He adds: If for the present no certain answer can be given to the question as to the origin of the Chaldeans and the nature of their language and writing, yet this much may be accepted as certain, that the language and writing of the Chaldees (, casdim<\/em>) was not Semitic or Aramaic, but that the Chaldeans had in remote times migrated into Babylonia, and there had obtained dominion over the Semitic inhabitants of the land; and that from among this dominant race the Chaldees, the priestly and the learned class of the Chaldees, arose. This class in Babylon is much older than the Chaldean monarchy founded by Nebuchadnezzar. This instruction in the wisdom of the Chaldeans, Auberlen thinks, tended, at all events, to develop the high prophetical gifts which Daniel possessed by nature; and that a similar school was thus provided for Daniel to that which his Egyptian education was to Moses, or which study of philosophy is for the theologian of our own day. Dr. Rule observes that seven or eight centuries later than Daniel, the learning of the Chaldeans or Babylonians was described as comprising astronomy, astrology, divination, augury, incantations, and the science of dreams and prodigies. Although idol-worshippers, Justin Martyr, in his Exhortation to the Greeks, affirms that the Babylonians differed widely from the Greeks and from all other idolaters of the world, inasmuch as they acknowledged a supreme and self-existent God.<\/p>\n

1. The literal fulfilment of Gods word<\/em>. The good King Hezekiahs foolish vanity entailed a chastisement which, according to the word of the prophet, was to fall upon his descendants. Some of them were to become eunuchs in Babylon (Isa. 39:7<\/span>; 2Ki. 20:18<\/span>). Probably Daniel and his three companions were thus made examples, that no word of God, whether in promise or threatening, falls to the ground. Heaven and earth may pass away, but my word shall not pass away.<\/p>\n

2. The inscrutable providence of God<\/em>. It is one of the mysteries of that providence that the innocent suffer with and through the guilty. Both rulers and people in Israel had deeply revolted from Jehovah. But it might be asked of those four godly youths, What had they done? When the scourge slayeth suddenly, it mocketh at the trial of the innocent. Yet God is still infinitely wise and just and good. A gracious end in view, though hidden at the time. Children often made to feel the effects of a parents sin, while these effects may be graciously overruled for their eternal good. The captivity of these youths made to turn to their own benefit and that of others. Apparent evil often a real good. Ye thought evil against me, but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive (Gen. 1:20<\/span>).<\/p>\n

3. The sovereignty of divine grace<\/em>. Nothing is said of the parents of these youths. The royal seed had become a reprobate one. Both the sons of Josiah who succeeded him on the throne were wicked. The princes of Jerusalem imitated them in their sin. Grace makes exceptions. Perhaps these youths were judiciously taken away from the evil example of the rest. Safer perhaps at the time to live in Babylon than in Jerusalem. One might hope from the character of these four youths that they had been taught the fear of God at home. But graceless parents may have gracious children. Grace steps in and makes men to differ. The wind bloweth where it listeth. Saints found in Csars household, and a godly Obadiah in Ahabs court.<\/p>\n

4. Mercy remembered in the midst of judgment<\/em>. Preparations for the purposed and promised deliverance of Israel made from the very commencement of their captivity. One of the very first captives to be made Gods chosen instrument in bringing it about. The edict of Cyrus, at the end of the predicted seventy years, the result of Daniels influence at the Babylonian and Persian courts. The same influence doubtless effectual in mitigating the sufferings of his fellow-exiles [15]. A silver lining often in the darkest cloud. Gods bow of mercy set in the cloud of mans deepest misery. Mercy and judgment the alto and bass in the believers song.<\/p>\n

[15] The Lord in His great mercy had prepared for His people an influence in Babylon that must have mitigated the severity of bondage when the ten thousand captives [with Jehoiachin] were added to all that went before. The king and the princes indeed were prisoners of war; but young men of royal blood are at the head of the government, naturalised, and in rank next the imperial throne, but known as worshippers of the God of heaven, and as confessors of that God in opposition to the gods of the country, in full enjoyment of religious liberty and protected in the exercise of their sacred right by a decree in honour of Daniels God.Rule<\/em>.<\/p>\n

5. Gods instruments prepared for their work<\/em>. Daniel and his three companions prepared beforehand for the part they were to perform in the relief and deliverance of their countrymen. Gifted by nature and endowed by grace, they received an education at the Babylonian court that fitted them for the post they were to occupy about the kings person and in the government of the country. Capacity for learning, united with conscientious application and the divine blessing given in answer to prayer, made the youthful exiles ten times more able to answer the kings questions than all the wise men in the realm, and so prepared the way for their future elevation. The influence of that education in reference to the exercise of Daniels prophetical gift also not to be entirely overlooked.<\/p>\n

6. Grace superior to circumstances<\/em>. Captivity in a heathen land, residence in an idolatrous and luxurious court, a three years course of study pervaded with idolatry and superstition, the constant presence of the followers of a false religion and a low morality, all combined are unable to crush out the piety of these young men. Circumstances changed their names but not their nature. With names imposed upon them that seemed to designate them the worshippers of idols, they were enabled by grace to remain the faithful servants of the true God. The religion produced by the Holy Spirit in the soul is fast coloursnot painted, but engrained.<\/p>\n

7. The value of gracious principles in early life<\/em>. Only the presence of divine grace in the soul able to withstand the temptations of the world and to conquer in the battle of life. Evil communications corrupt good manners only when those manners are not the fruit of a divine principle implanted in the soul. This is the victory that overcometh the world, even your faith. Only an apparently<\/em> renewed Demas will forsake the truth, having loved this present world. Renewed by the Spirit and grafted into Christ, we are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, and made more than conquerors through Him that loved us. Probably these youths taught like Timothy to know the Holy Scriptures from early childhood. Daniel may have had a Eunice for his mother, though her name is not recorded. His early youth spent in the reign of good Josiah, who apparently died only four years before he was taken captive to Babylon. Few men have become at once great and good who have not been able to connect their religion with a mothers prayers and the instruction received at a mothers knee. One thing concerning these four youths is certain, that in early life they had been taught to say in truth, Thy word have I hid in my heart, that I might not sin against Thee.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

(3) Ashpenaz . . . his eunuchs<\/strong>i.e.,<\/em> the courtiers or attendants upon the king. (See marginal translation of Gen. 37:36<\/span>; and compare Jer. 39:3<\/span>, where a Rab-saris, or chief of the courtiers, is mentioned. See also Isa. 39:7<\/span>.)<\/p>\n

The kings seed.<\/strong>According to the story of Josephus (Ant.<\/em> x. 10, 1), Daniel and the three holy children were all connected with Zedekiah. The context makes this opinion perfectly admissible.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

3<\/strong>. <\/strong> Ashpenaz <\/strong> Compare Gen 10:3<\/span>. This name as it stands is not Babylonian, but resembles Persian. It is found in several inscriptions of the Persian period. However, one recension and various early quotations, made probably from the original LXX., give a very different name here, Abiesdri, <\/em> or Abriesdri, which Lenormant partially unites to the Hebrew, making the name Assa-ibn-zir, “the goddess has molded the germ.” <\/p>\n

Master of his <\/strong> eunuchs <\/strong> That is, courtiers. <\/em> This title even Hugo Winckler, as late as 1890, supposed to be a mere Hebrew fiction, being, as he thought, absolutely unknown at the Assyrian or Babylonian court; but Mr. Pinches, in 1889, found on a brick in the British Museum this very name as a title of one of the highest Babylonian officials, the Hebrew Rab-sarisim <\/em> (or Sar-sarisim, Dan 1:7<\/span><\/em>; Dan 1:10<\/span>), corresponding almost exactly with the Babylonian Rabu-saresu, <\/em> “chief of the chiefs.” Noldeke has also found this as an hereditary title on a recently discovered Phoenician inscription ( Revue des Etudes Juives, <\/em> 1895, p. 119). <\/p>\n

Of the king’s seed, and of the princes <\/strong> This may refer to the children of the Babylonian king and his nobles. The word for “princes” is generally regarded as Persian.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

‘And the king spoke to Ashpenaz, the master of his palace servants (officers, nobles, eunuchs), that he should bring in certain of the children of Israel, even of the seed royal and of the nobles, youths in whom was no blemish, but well favoured and skilful in all wisdom, endowed with knowledge, and understanding learning, with the ability to serve in the king’s palace and to teach them the letters and tongue of the Chaldeans.’<\/p>\n

The selected captives taken back to Babylon were looked on fairly favourably because they were treaty hostages rather than defeated foe. Jerusalem had not been captured, it had compromised and yielded. They were all young men from the nobility, young men of education, who it was considered would fit in in court circles. The rather exaggerated description, the kind often used of promising young men, has in mind not only how things were but also how things would turn out. They were promising graduates. They were ‘skilful in all wisdom, endowed with knowledge, and understanding learning’. They had had the best education of the day, and certainly this was how Daniel would turn out to be. The words may well have been quoted from a court memorandum. By incorporating these young men into the court Nebuchadnezzar hoped to seal the treaty. This whole event was prophesied by Isa 39:7<\/span>, where the prophet foresaw the rise of Babylon and the consequences for Judah.<\/p>\n

Ashpenaz – the meaning of the name is uncertain, but it has been found in non-Biblical texts. The word that is sometimes translated ‘eunuchs’ actually has a wider meaning (it was used of the married Potiphar – Gen 37:36<\/span>) indicating palace servants, chief men, nobles, officers, although they would include eunuchs among them who had charge of the harems. The fact that these young men were ‘without blemish’ is against any idea that they were made eunuchs. The king liked to be surrounded by ‘perfect’ young men, not sing-song voices. ‘The master’ – or Rab – was a title regularly applied to Babylonian high officials (e.g. 2Ki 18:17<\/span>; Jer 39:3<\/span>).<\/p>\n

‘Children of Israel’, the ancient name for all Israel. By the time that this was written any strict distinction between Judah and Israel had ceased to be. Ezekiel also spoke of the people of Jerusalem and Judah as the children of Israel.<\/p>\n

‘Youths.’ Probably of about fourteen or fifteen. Thus in the eyes of the day recognised adults.<\/p>\n

‘Of the children of Israel, (even) of the seed royal and of the nobles.’ Some would see this as signifying different groups, the captive children of Israel, royal offspring (‘the seed of kingship’) and nobles from various countries. But the Israelite hostages would certainly include royal seed and the sons of nobles. However they were certainly introduced into a group which included other royal seed and nobility.<\/p>\n

‘And to teach them the letters and tongue of the Chaldeans.’ They were to learn the ancient Babylonian wisdom, the ancient cuneiform scripts, the ancient Akkadian language, and the lore of the magicians and astrologers; what passed for great wisdom in the ancient Near East, a well rounded education.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Dan 1:3<\/strong><\/span>  And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes; <\/p>\n

Dan 1:3<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> <\/strong> Word Study on “Ashpenaz” <\/em><\/strong> The name Ashpenaz ( ) (H828<\/span>) is used only one time in the Old Testament (Dan 1:3<\/span>). There is uncertain on the meaning of this foreign name. Gesenius<\/em> says the name means, “horse’s nose.” This individual was the chief eunuch in King Nebuchadnezzar’s court ( Gesenius<\/em>, Strong<\/em>), and possibly his prime minister. [62]<\/p>\n

[62] John Gill, Daniel,<\/em> in John Gill’s Expositor, <\/em> in e-Sword<\/em>, v. 7.7.7 [CD-ROM] (Franklin, Tennessee: e-Sword, 2000-2005), comments on Daniel 1:3<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Dan 1:4<\/strong><\/span>  Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.<\/p>\n

Dan 1:4<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> “Children in whom was no blemish” – <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> Barnes notes that the word “blemish” refers to physical “imperfections,” and quotes 2Sa 14:25<\/span> as an example of Absalom’s unblemished features. [63] <\/p>\n

[63] Albert Barnes, Notes, Critical, Illustrative, and Practical, on the Book of Daniel <\/em> (New York: Leavitt and Allen, 1853), 89.<\/p>\n

Dan 1:4<\/strong><\/span> “but well favoured” – <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> The phrase “well favoured” literally means, “a good appearance” in the Hebrew. <\/p>\n

Dan 1:4<\/strong><\/span> “and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans” <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> In addition to their physical appearance, young men were sought of superior intellectual abilities. Scholars suggest that Daniel and his three friends were most likely of royal descent of the tribe of Judah because from Dan 1:3<\/span> the group taken captive were skilful and well educated and of royal lineage.<\/p>\n

2Sa 14:25<\/span>, “But in all Israel there was none to be so much praised as Absalom for his beauty: from the sole of his foot even to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him.”<\/p>\n

Dan 1:4<\/strong><\/span> <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> John Gill and Zckler refer to a number of ancient sources and modern scholars to support the view that kings of antiquity often chose the strongest, comeliest, and tallest of youth to serve in their courts. [64] <\/p>\n

[64] Otto Zckler, The Book of the Prophet Daniel, <\/em> in Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, <\/em> trans. <\/em> James Strong (New York: Charles Scriber’s Sons, 1876), 59; and John Gill, “Introduction,” in Daniel<\/em>, in John Gill’s Expositor, <\/em> in OnLine Bible<\/em>, v. 2.0 [CD-ROM] (Nederland: Online Bible Foundation, 1992-2005), notes on Daniel 1:4<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Dan 1:3-4<\/strong><\/span> <\/strong> Comments <\/em><\/strong> <\/strong> The Children of Israel – Dan 1:3-4<\/span><\/em><\/strong> tells us of the carrying away of Daniel and his three friends to Babylon. The event of the carrying away of the sons of Israel into the kingdom of Babylon was prophesied by Isaiah to King Hezekiah one hundred years earlier (c. 700 B.C.) (see 2Ki 20:16-18<\/span>, Isa 39:5-7<\/span>). Moses spoke of this event in more general terms when listing the curses that God will bring upon His people Israel as a form of divine judgment (Deu 28:32-33<\/span>).<\/p>\n

2Ki 20:16-18<\/span>, “And Isaiah said unto Hezekiah, Hear the word of the LORD. Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store unto this day, shall be carried into Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith the LORD. And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.”<\/p>\n

Isa 39:5-7<\/span>, “Then said Isaiah to Hezekiah, Hear the word of the LORD of hosts: Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith the LORD. And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.”<\/p>\n

Deu 28:32-33<\/span>, “Thy sons and thy daughters shall be given unto another people, and thine eyes shall look, and fail with longing for them all the day long: and there shall be no might in thine hand. The fruit of thy land, and all thy labours, shall a nation which thou knowest not eat up; and thou shalt be only oppressed and crushed alway:”<\/p>\n

Young men were more teachable than older men. The old men had their cities and families destroyed and would have been rebellious, and women took a more passive role in the Oriental societies. These young men were to be shaped and molded as a group of ethnic leaders representing the nations under Babylon that could communicate with their people about the issues regarding Babylonian rule. The king could present them as mediators in disputes and offer a friendly face to represent the Empire before its subject nations, hopefully enhancing peaceful relationships.<\/p>\n

Barnes tells us that it was a common oriental practice, ancient and modern, to place eunuchs in the royal courts and in the homes of the wealthy. [65] Therefore, it is believed that Daniel and his three friends were made eunuchs at the time of their deportation to Babylon. The popular belief that Daniel and his friends were made eunuchs in the king’s court, suggested since the time of Josephus<\/em> ( Antiquities<\/em> 10.10.1), is based upon Dan 1:3<\/span> and Isa 39:5-7<\/span>. However, Zckler does not believe there is enough evidence to justify this commonly held view, since the text does not directly make this statement. [66]<\/p>\n

[65] Albert Barnes, Notes, Critical, Illustrative, and Practical, on the Book of Daniel <\/em> (New York: Leavitt and Allen, 1853), 88.<\/p>\n

[66] Otto Zckler, The Book of the Prophet Daniel, <\/em> in Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, <\/em> trans. <\/em> James Strong (New York: Charles Scriber’s Sons, 1876), 58.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Dan 1:3-4<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>The masterthe king’s seed<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> The princethe royal seed: <\/em>the Hebrew word for princes partemim. <\/em>Aquila and the LXX, as cited in Montfaucon’s Hexapla, render it , choice persons, <\/em>and another Greek version , noble, well-born; <\/em>it seems a compound of the Persic per, <\/em>from the Hebrew peer, to be glorious, honourable; <\/em>and tam, perfect; <\/em>and so expresses the most honourable, <\/em>or noble. <\/em>Bishop Chandler observes, that the word or enters into the composition of several names of the princes and nobles among the Medes and Persians, as Pharnaces, Pharnaspes, Pharnuchus, Phraortes, Phraates, Phradates, <\/em>&c. See his Vindication, book 1: p. 58 and Parkhurst on the word . The prince of the eunuchs was directed to make choice of such persons as had the best accomplishments both of body and mind; as being the more fit to attend at court. The word ieladim, <\/em>rendered children, <\/em>does not extend to childhood, <\/em>but refers to more advanced years; (comp. 2Ki 2:23-24<\/span>.) nor can we suppose Daniel or his companions to have been less than eighteen or twenty years of age at this time; as may be concluded from Daniel’s being put into a considerable post and employment in the government soon after. Houbigant renders it, youths; <\/em>and so it should be rendered throughout the chapter. Instead of, Skilful in all wisdom,<\/em> Houbigant has it, apt, <\/em>or fit to understand wisdom, to learn knowledge, and<\/em> to attain science; <\/em>for, says he, a knowledge and skill in all <\/em>the sciences was not required in these young men, <\/em>but only a facility to learn them; and it appears from the 17th verse, that they did learn letters and wisdom while they were educated under the prince of the eunuchs. Instead of, And whom they might teach, <\/em>we may read, And that he should have them taught.<\/em> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

What the immediate design of this heathenish monarch was is not said; but it is blessed to watch how the Lord over-rules it for his glory and his people’s happiness. Jesus is always ordering all things to this end, whatever the designs of the Church’s enemies may be. Oh! that the people of God could always keep this in view!<\/p>\n

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Dan 1:3 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring [certain] of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes;<\/p>\n

Ver. 3. And the king spake unto Ashpenaz.<\/strong> ] Which signifieth in the Chaldee tongue the chief chider, or controller of the king’s house, as Ctesias useth Ashpamithres for chief priests. To this great officer the king commendeth the care of his school. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

And of the king’s seed, and of the princes.] As having been better bred, and so more hopeful. Here Nebuchadnezzar, minding nothing but the glory of his court by these noble waiters, unwittingly maketh way for the Church’s comfort.<\/p>\n

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Dan 1:3-7<\/p>\n

3Then the king ordered Ashpenaz, the chief of his officials, to bring in some of the sons of Israel, including some of the royal family and of the nobles, 4youths in whom was no defect, who were good-looking, showing intelligence in every branch of wisdom, endowed with understanding and discerning knowledge, and who had ability for serving in the king’s court; and he ordered him to teach them the literature and language of the Chaldeans. 5The king appointed for them a daily ration from the king’s choice food and from the wine which he drank, and appointed that they should be educated three years, at the end of which they were to enter the king’s personal service. 6Now among them from the sons of Judah were Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah. 7Then the commander of the officials assigned new names to them; and to Daniel he assigned the name Belteshazzar, to Hananiah Shadrach, to Mishael Meshach and to Azariah Abed-nego.<\/p>\n

Dan 1:3 Ashpenaz His name’s meaning is uncertain (BDB 80), but (1) a possible Persian origin would suggest guest or chief eunuch or (2) an Armenian origin, guest, friend, or stranger.<\/p>\n

NASBthe chief of his officials<\/p>\n

NKJVthe master of his eunuchs<\/p>\n

NRSVhis palace master<\/p>\n

TEVhis chief official<\/p>\n

NJBhis chief eunuch<\/p>\n

This title reflects an Akkadian phrase, he who is of the king’s head, therefore, it contains no implication of castration. In Isa 56:3; Jer 38:7, and Est 2:3 the Hebrew term (BDB 710) reflects castration. In Gen 37:36; Gen 39:1 it is used of Potiphar, who was married (cf. Gen 39:7). The term came to be used generally of court officials. Some were castrated, especially those who worked with the harem, but not all. Josephus says the youths were tortured (i.e. castrated, cf. Antiq. 10.10.1).<\/p>\n

to bring some of the sons of Israel The VERBAL is an INFINITIVE CONSTRUCT. There are also two in Dan 1:4 and one in Dan 1:5.<\/p>\n

This fulfills Isa 39:5-7 and 2Ki 20:16-18. Israel here refers to Jacob, not the northern Ten Tribes. Nebuchadnezzar took youths from all the people groups he conquered and used them in his palace and courtroom as a way of showing his military conquests (cf. Dan 1:10 and H.C. Leupold, Exposition of Daniel, p. 58).<\/p>\n

NASBsome of the royal family and of the nobles<\/p>\n

NKJVsome of the king’s descendants and some of the nobles<\/p>\n

NRSV, TEVsome. . .of the royal family and of the nobility<\/p>\n

NJBa certain number of boys of royal or noble descent<\/p>\n

The term royal (BDB 574) is from the Hebrew root mlk – king (BDB 572). The fact that Nebuchadnezzar could do this showed his total control of Palestine. The added word nobility is another Persian loan word (BDB 832).<\/p>\n

Dan 1:4 youths This word has a wide usage (BDB 409) from newborns (cf. Exo 1:17-18; Exo 3:6-10; 2Sa 12:5) to young men able to be trained for court service (cf. Dan 1:4; Dan 1:10; Dan 1:15; Dan 1:17). Therefore, the age of these four youths cannot be determined by the word, but only by context.<\/p>\n

no defect This word (BDB 548) is used in Leviticus in relation to (1) acceptable priests (cf. Lev 21:16-24) and (2) acceptable sacrifices for complete destruction (cf. Lev 22:17-25). Its basic meaning is perfection or completeness. These youths had to be physically and intellectually the best of the captive youths of Judah.<\/p>\n

NASBshowing intelligence in every branch of wisdom, endowed with understanding and discerning knowledge<\/p>\n

NKJVgifted in all wisdom, possessing knowledge and quick to understand<\/p>\n

NRSVversed in every branch of wisdom, endowed with knowledge and insight<\/p>\n

TEVintelligent, well-trained, quick to learn<\/p>\n

NJBversed in every branch of wisdom, well-informed, discerning<\/p>\n

There must have been some kind of testing and questioning involved in the choice. These skills were developed in training, but present before their capture. These were bright, insightful, and teachable young men.<\/p>\n

Basically the word wisdom (BDB 315) has a practical orientation, like the Proverbs. Wisdom Literature in the OT was a guide for the individual to learn how to have a happy and successful life. Israel developed a group of wise men or sages (cf. Jer 18:18) who advised their kings.<\/p>\n

the literature and language of the Chaldeans This refers to the cuneiform language. In northern Babylon this was known as Akkadian (Semitic); in southern Babylon as Sumerian (non-Semitic). These youth would be trained in several related languages, but all written in cuneiform script.<\/p>\n

The context seems to imply a knowledge of all Chaldean literature (ethnic sense, cf. Gen 11:28; Gen 11:31; 2 Kings 24-25; often in Isaiah and Jeremiah; Dan 1:4; Dan 5:30; Dan 9:1; Ezr 5:12) rather than just magical, astrological, and religious texts (magi sense, cf. Dan 2:2-5; Dan 2:10; Dan 4:4; Dan 5:7; Dan 5:11, used by Herodotus, Diodorus, and Strabo).<\/p>\n

Chaldeans Herodotus (450 B.C.), Hist. I, uses this term to refer to an ethnic group (cf. 2Ki 24:1-4; Dan 5:30) as well as a priestly class (cf. Dan 2:2; Dan 3:8; Dan 4:7; Dan 5:7; Dan 5:11) whose usage goes back to Cyrus II. Even before this Assyrian records used the term (BDB 505) in an ethnic sense (cf. R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 1113). Also read the good discussion of the possibility of a confusion of two similar terms (i.e. Kal-du vs. Kasdu) in The Expositors’ Bible Commentary, vol. 7, pp. 14-15 or Robert Dick Wilson, Studies in the Book of Daniel, series 1.<\/p>\n

Because Gen 11:28 states that Ur of the Chaldeans was the home of Terah and his family. Chaldeans may have been ethnically Semitic (i.e., same racial group as the Hebrews).<\/p>\n

Dan 1:5<\/p>\n

NASBthe king’s choice food<\/p>\n

NKJVthe king’s delicacies<\/p>\n

NRSVthe royal rations<\/p>\n

TEVas members of the royal court<\/p>\n

NJBfrom the royal table<\/p>\n

These youths, like all the youths, both those in training and those who served Nebuchadnezzar, shared in the king’s food and drink (literally in Persian, kingly delicacies, or honorific gifts, or royal table rations (cf. BDB 834 and Dan 1:5; Dan 1:8; Dan 1:13; Dan 1:15-16; Dan 11:26). These royal provisions were a real honor and perk. This was the best quality and best variety of food available anywhere. It was also provided to Jehoiachin in exile (cf. 2Ki 25:30; Jer 52:34). However, it was not levitically clean (cf. Leviticus 11; Deuteronomy 14). It was not kosher.<\/p>\n

NASBenter the king’s personal service<\/p>\n

NKJVserve before the king<\/p>\n

NRSVcould be stationed in the king’s court<\/p>\n

TEVappear before the king<\/p>\n

NJBenter the royal service<\/p>\n

This is literally stand before the king, (BDB 763, KB, Qal IMPERFECT), which is an idiom for service (cf. Deu 10:8; Deu 17:12; Deu 18:5; Deu 18:7). The NRSV catches the historical setting of Nebuchadnezzar stationing young men from all the conquered lands around his court room to show how extensive his empire was.<\/p>\n

Dan 1:6 Daniel His name means God (El) is my Judge (BDB 193).<\/p>\n

Hananiah His name means YHWH (iah) has been gracious (BDB 337).<\/p>\n

Mishael His name means Who is what God (El) is (BDB 567).<\/p>\n

Azariah His name means YHWH (iah) has helped (BDB 741).<\/p>\n

Dan 1:7 The names were changed to: (1) break the ties with the past or (2) associate with the Babylonian deities.<\/p>\n

Belteshazzar This is the Babylonian name, balatsu-usur, which means protect his life (BDB 117). Many suppose that the name of the Babylonian god Nabu (Nebo) was the assumed prefix.<\/p>\n

It is also possible that another origin is Belet-sar-usur, meaning lady (wife of Marduk or Bel) protect the king (cf. A. R. Millard, Daniel 1-6 and History, EQ, XLIX, 2, 1977 mentioned in Tyndale Commentary, p. 81 footnote #1).<\/p>\n

Shadrach Scholars suppose that the later Jewish scribes slightly changed the Babylonian names to make fun of their gods. The original Akkadian names may have meant Command of Aku (the Sumerian moon god (BDB 995). Joyce G. Baldwin, Daniel, Tyndale Commentaries p. 81, says that Shadrach comes from Saduraku, which means I am very fearful (of God). Obviously these Babylonian names are lost to us because later Jewish scribes substituted vowels to make puns on the names in order to ridicule them.<\/p>\n

Meshach Originally this would have been Who is what Aku is (BDB 568). Again Joyce G. Baldwin, in the Tyndale Commentaries on Daniel, says it is from Mesaku, meaning I am of little account, p. 81.<\/p>\n

Abed-nego Originally this would have been Servant of Nabu (BDB 715, the Babylonian god of wisdom, also called Nebo).<\/p>\n

Joyce G. Baldwin, in the Tyndale commentary on Daniel, says it is from an Aramaic word play on servant of the shining one (Nabu), p. 81.<\/p>\n

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

the master of his eunuchs. Hebrew. rab sarisayn = master or chief of the eunuchs; whence the title “Rab-saris” in 2Ki 18:17. See note there. Called “prince” in Dan 1:7. <\/p>\n

children = sons. <\/p>\n

and = even, or both. Some codices, with six early printed editions, omit this “and”: reading “sons of Israel, of the king’s seed” (or “seed-royal”). <\/p>\n

princes = nobles. Hebrew. partemim, a Persian word, found only here and Est 1:3; Est 6:9. Not the same word as in verses: Dan 1:7, Dan 1:8, Dan 1:10, Dan 7:11, &c. <\/p>\n

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Dan 1:3-4<\/p>\n

Dan 1:3 And the kingH4428 spakeH559 unto AshpenazH828 the masterH7227 of his eunuchs,H5631 that he should bringH935 certain of the childrenH4480 H1121 of Israel,H3478 and of the king’s seed,H4480 H2233 H4410 and ofH4480 the princes;H6579 <\/p>\n

Dan 1:4 ChildrenH3206 in whomH834 was noH369 H3605 blemish,H3971 but well favoured,H2896 H4758 and skilfulH7919 in allH3605 wisdom,H2451 and cunningH3045 in knowledge,H1847 and understandingH995 science,H4093 and suchH834 as had abilityH3581 in them to standH5975 in the king’sH4428 palace,H1964 and whom they might teachH3925 the learningH5612 and the tongueH3956 of the Chaldeans.H3778 <\/p>\n

Dan 1:3-4<\/p>\n

And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes. Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.<\/p>\n

This abduction and enslavement of the royal sons and nobles of the royal bloodline of Judah was in fulfillment of a prophecy by Isaiah to king Hezekiah about a hundred years earlier (2Ki 20:18, Isa 39:7). God knew the sons of Hezekiah and the Israelites would fall away into heathen abominations and left this warning in words that could not be misunderstood, yet the warning given a century earlier went unheeded. <\/p>\n

By direct order of the king, Ashpenaz who was the master of the king’s eunuchs was directed to select certain outstanding children of noble blood from among the children of Israel. This was by no means limited to just the nobles and princes. Any outstanding individual who exhibited the desired qualities would have been included, however the princes and children of royal bloodline were preferred for a number of reasons. The capturing and enslavement of the noble children of a conquered country was a symbol of the king’s conquest before his people. To have the children of a deposed king serving in one’s court was like having a trophy of the conquest always present in view of the king, his subjects and the other captives from the overthrown nation. It was customary for the conquering empire to exact a regular tribute, usually once a year, from the overthrown nation. A puppet ruler would be set upon the throne having been forced to swear an oath of allegiance to the empire. The conquering king would naturally try and select one that would be subservient to him and keep his oath of allegiance. Having his brothers, sisters, cousins, and other relatives in captivity and within easy reach probably gave the king some leverage in that regard. At the very least, it guaranteed a replacement for the throne if it became necessary to do so, especially in the mind of the puppet ruler should he decide to revolt and withhold the tribute money. <\/p>\n

Only the best of the best would do as trophies for Nebuchadnezzar’s courts. He wanted his servants in the palace court to look good and be able to serve well. It is likely that since Daniel and his three companions were placed under the care of the master of the eunuchs that they became eunuchs as well. This is not known for certain but it is a possibility, the likelihood of which is strengthened by there being no record of a wife or children of any of the four captives. This practice was one way of assuring the docility of male captives within the palace of a king with a large collection of wives and concubines. The Biblical record never comes out and directly affirms that Daniel and his companions were eunuchs but Isaiah’s prophecy to king Hezekiah as recorded in 2Ki 20:17-18 leaves little doubt: “Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store unto this day, shall be carried into Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith the Lord . And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon”.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Foretold, 2Ki 20:17, 2Ki 20:18, Isa 39:7, Jer 41:1 <\/p>\n

Reciprocal: 1Sa 8:15 – officers 2Ch 18:8 – officers Est 1:10 – chamberlains Isa 56:3 – neither Jer 29:2 – eunuchs Dan 1:7 – the prince Dan 11:8 – their precious vessels<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Dan 1:3. The first king means Nebuchadnezzar and the next is Jehoiakim. Ashpmaz was an important servant under the king of Babylon, whose specific duty was to oversee the other servants or any others who might become subject to the king. This man was told by his master to bring from Jersalem to Babylon some ot the king’s seed. That does not mean exclusively his bodily offspring, for we shall see that others were taken. But it includes men near the king within the royal family, and also some of his princes which means outstanding men in his service.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Dan 1:3-4. And the king spake unto Ashpenaz, master of the eunuchs One of the chief officers of his palace; the officers that attended about the persons of the eastern kings being commonly eunuchs, (a custom still practised in the Ottoman court,) such being employed as guardians over the women which the kings kept for their pleasure. That he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and, or rather, even, of the kings seed The conjunction copulative being often used by way of explication. And thus Isaiahs prophecy was punctually fulfilled, Isa 39:7. Children in whom was no blemish He was directed to make choice of such as were comely, and had no defect or deformity of body, to which the Hebrew word , here used, is chiefly applied, answerable to the Greek . But by the subsequent characters in the verse, it should seem that the young men were to be as complete in every respect as was possible, perfect in their mental as well as corporal powers. The greatest care seems to have been required as to the accomplishments of their minds, and on this account three several expressions are made use of, the particular force of each of which it may not be easy to ascertain. Perhaps, says Mr. Wintle, the first relates to the best and most excellent natural abilities; the second, to the acquisition of the greatest improvements from cultivation; and the third, to the communication of their perceptions in the happiest manner to others. He translates the clause as follows: Ready of understanding in all wisdom, and of skill in science, and expert in prudence. Or, more generally, the expressions may only signify that they were to be such as had been instructed, and had made proficiency, in every thing that was taught in the land of Judea. And such as had ability in them to stand in the kings palace Not only being of a strong constitution to endure the fatigue of long waitings, in or near the royal presence, during which they were not permitted to sit down; but qualified for every business in which they might be employed, and to do credit to the situation in which they were to stand. And whom they might teach the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans As Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, so we are not to wonder that Daniel was taught the learning of the Chaldeans; and that he so far excelled in it, as to be placed at the head of the magi: see Dan 4:9. It must be observed that the word , rendered children in the beginning of this verse, does not signify persons in a state of childhood, but refers to those of more advanced years. The expression is applied to Rehoboams counsellors, 1Ki 12:8, who cannot be thought to have been mere children. Nor can we suppose Daniel and his companions to have been less than eighteen or twenty years of age at this time, as may be concluded from Daniels being put into considerable posts in the government soon after.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

1:3 And the king spake unto {c} Ashpenaz the master of his {d} eunuchs, that he should bring [certain] of the children of Israel, and of the {e} king’s seed, and of the princes;<\/p>\n

(c) Who was as master of the guards.<\/p>\n

(d) He calls them “eunuchs” whom the King nourished and brought up to be rulers of other countries afterwards.<\/p>\n

(e) His purpose was to keep them as hostages, and so that he might show himself victorious, and also by their good entreaty and learning of his religion, they might favour him rather than the Jews, and so to be able to serve him as governors in their land. Moreover by this means the Jews might be better kept in subjection, fearing otherwise to bring hurt upon these noble men.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

B. Nebuchadnezzar’s training program for promising youths 1:3-7<\/span><\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Nebuchadnezzar’s enlightened policy was to employ the best minds in his kingdom in government service, regardless of their national or ethnic origin. We do not know how many other Jews and Gentiles were the classmates of Daniel and his three friends. However, they were evidently the only ones who expressed a desire to observe the Jewish dietary laws (Exo 34:15; Leviticus 11; Deuteronomy 14; cf. Deu 8:3; Pro 20:1).<\/p>\n

"In selecting these youths for education in the king’s court in Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar was accomplishing several objectives. Those carried away captive could well serve as hostages to help keep the royal family of the kingdom of Judah in line. Their presence in the king’s court also would be a pleasant reminder to the Babylonian king of his conquest and success in battle. Further, their careful training and preparation to be his servants might serve Nebuchadnezzar well in later administration of Jewish affairs." [Note: Walvoord, p. 34.] <\/span><\/p>\n

There has been some question whether Daniel and his three friends were castrated and made eunuchs. This possibility seems unlikely since there is no direct evidence of this in the text. Josephus implied that they may have become eunuchs.<\/p>\n

"He [Nebuchadnezzar] also made some of them [the most noble of the Jewish children] to be eunuchs; which course he took also with those of other nations whom he had taken in the flower of their age, and afforded them their diet from his own table, and had them instructed in the institutes of the country, and taught the learning of the Chaldeans . . ." [Note: Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 10:10:1. So also Culver, p. 773.] <\/span><\/p>\n

The Hebrew word saris<\/span> ("official," Dan 1:3) can mean both "court official" (cf. Gen 37:36, where it describes Potiphar, who was married) and "eunuch" (Isa 56:3; cf. 2Ki 20:18). These youths were without defects (Dan 1:4). If Nebuchadnezzar wanted youths without defects, it seems unreasonable that he would then turn around and give them a major defect (cf. Lev 21:17). [Note: See The New Bible Dictionary, 1962 ed., s.v. "Eunuch," by R. J. A. Sheriffs.] <\/span><\/p>\n

Josephus also wrote that Daniel and his three peers "were four of the family of Zedekiah." [Note: Josephus, 10:10:1.] <\/span> This may be accurate or only Jewish tradition, but clearly they were either members of the royal family or children of Judean nobles (Dan 1:3; cf. Isa 39:6-7).<\/p>\n

The three-year program of study that Daniel and his three companions underwent involved study of the literature and language of the Chaldeans (Dan 1:4). The term "Chaldean" has a double meaning in the Book of Daniel. In some places, including here, it refers to ethnic southern Babylonians (cf. Dan 3:8; Dan 5:30; Dan 9:1). In others, it describes a class of astrologers and priests that emerged from the ethnic Chaldeans (Dan 2:2; Dan 2:4-5; Dan 2:10; Dan 4:7; Dan 5:7; Dan 5:11).<\/p>\n

"The Babylonian sages combined many of the functions fulfilled by wise men, prophets, and priests in Israel, though they are to be distinguished from those cultic functionaries who were more especially concerned with the temple and its ritual. They were the guardians of the sacred traditional lore developed and preserved in Mesopotamia over centuries, covering natural history, astronomy, mathematics, medicine, myth, and chronicle. Much of this learning had a practical purpose, being designed to be applied to life by means of astrology, oneirology, hepatoscopy and the study of other organs, rites of purification, sacrifice, incantation, exorcism and other forms of divination and magic." [Note: Goldingay, p. 16.] <\/span><\/p>\n

Evidently what these young men studied was the history and literature of this ancient part of the world. This included the old Akkadian and the ancient Sumerian cultures from which the Babylonian had developed. Learning the language of a people is one of the best ways to absorb the worldview of its people. Thus Nebuchadnezzar was seeking to acculturate these youths and make them thoroughly Babylonian.<\/p>\n

"In order to witness to their God in the Babylonian court they had to understand the cultural presuppositions of those around them, just as the Christian today must work hard at the religions and cultures amongst which he lives, if different thought-worlds are ever to meet." [Note: Baldwin, pp. 80-81.] <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

This is a dangerous task, however (cf. Deu 12:30; 1Co 10:12; Col 2:8). [Note: See Whitcomb, p. 32.] <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

". . . Daniel had no physical blemish and was pleasing in appearance. Mentally, he was intelligent, knowledgeable, and quick to learn. Socially, he was poised and able to live in the king’s court without creating embarrassment for himself or others." [Note: Donald K. Campbell, Daniel: Decoder of Dreams, p. 9.] <\/span><\/p>\n

Notice the similarity between Daniel’s experience and character-and Joseph’s-throughout this chapter.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

And the king spoke unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring [certain] of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes; 3. Ashpenaz ] No satisfactory explanation of this name has yet been found. Ap in old Persian means a horse (Sansk. apa); but the name … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 1:3”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-21751","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21751","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21751"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21751\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21751"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21751"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21751"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}