{"id":21783,"date":"2022-09-24T09:11:02","date_gmt":"2022-09-24T14:11:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-daniel-214\/"},"modified":"2022-09-24T09:11:02","modified_gmt":"2022-09-24T14:11:02","slug":"exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-daniel-214","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-daniel-214\/","title":{"rendered":"Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 2:14"},"content":{"rendered":"

Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise [men] of Babylon: <\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

14<\/strong>. answered with counsel and<\/em> discretion<\/strong> ] lit. returned counsel and<\/em> discretion<\/strong> (or tact<\/strong>): lit. taste<\/em>, and so figuratively of the faculty which discriminates and selects what is suitable for a given occasion. Cf. 1Sa 25:33<\/span>, ‘And blessed be thy discretion<\/em> ’ (R.V. marg.<\/em>), of the tact displayed by Abigail in averting David’s vengeance from Nabal; Job 12:20<\/span>, ‘and taketh away the discretion<\/em> of the elders;’ Pro 26:16<\/span> (the same phrase as here), ‘than seven men answering with discretion<\/em> ’ (lit. returning discretion<\/em>).<\/p>\n

Arioch<\/em> ] The name, in Gen 14:1<\/span>, of an ancient king of Ellasar (Larsa, in S. Babylonia); and, no doubt, borrowed thence, both here and in Jdt 1:6 (where it is the name of a ‘king of the Elymaeans’). “The name was Sumerian and not used at that period [Nebuchadnezzar’s] of Babylonian history” (Sayce, in Hastings’ Dict. of the Bible, s.v.<\/em>).<\/p>\n

captain of the king’s guard<\/em> ] ‘Captain of the guard’ is the same expression which occurs in 2Ki 25:8<\/span> ff., Jer 39:9<\/span> ff., of an officer of Nebuchadnezzar, and (with sar<\/em> for rab<\/em>) in Gen. (Gen 37:36<\/span>, Gen 39:1<\/span>, al.<\/em>) of an officer of Pharaoh. It is lit. ‘captain (or superintendent, chief) of the slaughterers’ (viz. of animals [ not<\/em> executioners]): the royal butchers came in some way to form the royal body-guard (cf. W. R. Smith, OTJC<\/em> [206][207] , p. 262 f.). The use of the same term in reference to two such different countries as Egypt and Babylon, shews that, though it happens only to be applied to foreigners, it was really a native Hebrew title.<\/p>\n

[206] TJC.<\/em> W. Robertson Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church<\/em>, ed. 2, 1892.<\/p>\n

[207] W. Robertson Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church<\/em>, ed. 2, 1892.<\/p>\n

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

Then Daniel answered – <\/B>Margin, returned. The original literally is, returned counsel and wisdom, meaning, that he returned an answer which was replete with wisdom. It would seem probable that Arioch had communicated to Daniel the decree of the king, and had stated to him that he was involved in that decree, and must prepare to die.<\/P>

Counsel and wisdom – <\/B>That is, wise counsel. He evinced great prudence and discretion in what he said. He made such a suggestion to Arioch as, if acted on, would stay the execution of the sentence against all the wise men, and would secure the object which the king had in view. What was the exact nature of this answer is not mentioned. It is probable, however, that it was that he might be enabled to disclose the dream, and that he made this so plausible to Arioch, that he was disposed to allow him to make the trial. It is evident that Arioch would not have consented to arrest the execution of the sentence, unless it had appeared to him to be in the highest degree probable that he would be able to relieve the anxiety of the king. Knowing that the main object of the king was to obtain the interpretation of his dream, and seeing that this object was not any the more likely to be secured by the execution of this stern decree, and knowing the high favor with which Daniel had been received at court Dan 1:19-21<\/span>, he seems to have been willing to assume some measure of responsibility, and to allow Daniel to make his own representation to the king.<\/P>

To Arioch the captain of the kings guard – <\/B>Margin, chief of the executioners, or slaughter-men, or chief marshal. Greek, <\/SPAN><\/span> archimageiro<\/I> tou<\/I> basileos<\/I> – chief cook of the king. The Vulgate renders this, Then Daniel inquired respecting the law and the sentence of Arioch, the commander of the royal army. The Chaldee word rendered guard is <\/span> tabachaya’<\/I>. It is derived from <\/span> tabach<\/I>, to slaughter; to kill animals; and then to kill or slay men. The noun, then, means a slaughterer or slayer; a cook; an executioner, or one who kills men at the will of a sovereign, or by due sentence of law. There can be no doubt that the word here refers to Arioch, as sent out to execute this sentence; yet we are not to regard hint as a mere executioner, or as we would a hangman, for undoubtedly the king would entrust this sentence to one who was of respectable, if not of high rank. It is probable that one of the principal officers of his body-guard would be entrusted with the execution of such a sentence. In 1Sa 8:13<\/span>, the word is rendered cooks. It does not elsewhere occur. That he was not a mere executioner is apparent from the title given him in the next verse, where he is called the kings captain.<\/P>

Which was gone forth to slay … – <\/B>He had gone to execute the decree, and its execution had already commenced.<\/P> <\/p>\n

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

Verse 14. Captain of the king’s guard<\/B><\/I>] Chief of the king’s<\/I> executioners<\/I> or slaughter men<\/I>. Margin, rab tabachaiya,<\/I> chief of the butchers, he that took off the heads of those whom the king ordered to be slain, because they had in any case displeased him. “Go and bring me the head of Giaffer.” The honourable butcher went and brought the head in a bag on a dish. It was Herod’s chief butcher that brought the head of John the Baptist in a dish to the delicate daughter of Herodias. This was the custom of the country. No law, no judge, no jury. The will or caprice of the king governed all things. Happy England! know and value thy excellent privileges!<\/P> <\/p>\n

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

14. captain of the king’sguard<\/B>commanding the executioners (Margin;<\/I> and Ge37:36<\/span>, Margin<\/I>).<\/P><\/p>\n

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

Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom<\/strong>,…. In a discreet manner, using soft words and gentle language, humbly and modestly inquiring what should be the meaning of all this. The Vulgate Latin version is, “he inquired of the law and decree” i; what was the reason of the king’s orders, which this officer had in commission to execute; with which others agree: or, “he made to return the counsel and decree” k, as some choose to render it; he stopped the execution of it for the present, by his inquiries and prudent behaviour but neither seem to agree with what follows; the first sense is best:<\/p>\n

to Arioch the captain of the king’s guards<\/strong>: there was a king of this name, Ge 14:1<\/span>, this man, according to the Septuagint version, and others that follow it, was the chief of the king’s cooks; and Aben Ezra says the word in the Arabic language so signifies: or, as it may be rendered, “the chief of the slaughterers” l; the executioners of malefactors, so Jarchi; he was the king’s chief executioner, with which agrees the business he was now charged with: the Vulgate Latin version calls him the prince of the militia; and others the king’s provost marshal:<\/p>\n

which was gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon<\/strong>; who by the king’s order went forth from the court into the city, to slay all in Babylon who went under the character of wise men; they were not among those that could not answer the king’s demand, since they declared none could do it; and therefore he ordered them all to be slain, as a set of useless men in his kingdom.<\/p>\n

i “interrogavit de lege et decreto”, V. L.; “super consilio”, Munster, Calvin; “de eo consilio”, Castalio. k “Redire fecit consilium et statutum”, Pagninus, Montanus; “reverti fecit”, Michaelis. l “principem carnificum”, Montanus, Grotius.<\/p>\n

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

Daniel’s willingness to declare his dream to the king; his prayer for a revelation of the secret, and the answer to his prayer; his explanation before the king.<\/em> <\/p>\n

Dan 2:14<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> Through Daniel’s judicious interview of Arioch, the further execution of the royal edict was interrupted. , he answered, replied, counsel and understanding<\/em>, i.e., the words of counsel and understanding; cf. Pro 26:16<\/span>. The name Arioch<\/em> appears in Gen 14:1<\/span> as the name of the king of Ellasar, along with the kings of Elam and Shinar. It is derived not from the Sanscr. arjaka <\/em>, venerabilis <\/em>, but is probably formed from , a lion, as from nisr<\/em> = . is the chief of the bodyguard<\/em>, which was regarded as the highest office of the kingdom (cf. Jer 39:9<\/span>, Jer 39:11<\/span>; Jer 40:1<\/span>.). It was his business to see to the execution of the king’s commands; see 1Ki 2:25<\/span>; 2Ki 25:8<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:15<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The partic. Aph. standing after the noun in the stat. absol. is not predicative: “on what account is the command so hostile on the part of the king?” (Kran.), but it stands in apposition to the noun; for with participles, particularly when further definitions follow, the article, even in union with substantives defined by the article, may be and often is omitted; cf. Son 7:5<\/span>, and Ew. 335 a<\/em>. , to be hard, sharp<\/em>, hence to be severe<\/em>. Daniel showed understanding and counsel in the question he put as to the cause of so severe a command, inasmuch as he thereby gave Arioch to understand that there was a possibility of obtaining a fulfilment of the royal wish. When Arioch informed him of the state of the matter, Daniel went in to the king – i.e., as is expressly mentioned in Dan 2:24<\/span>, was introduced or brought in by Arioch – and presented to the king the request that time should be granted, promising that he would show to the king the interpretation of the dream.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:16-17<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> With the construction is changed. This passage does not depend on , time<\/em>, namely, to show the interpretation (Hitz.), but is co-ordinate with the foregoing relative clause, and like it is dependent on . The change of the construction is caused by the circumstance that in the last passage another subject needed to be introduced: The king should give him time, and Daniel will show the interpretation. The copulative before (interpretation) is used neither explicatively, namely, and indeed<\/em>, nor is it to be taken as meaning also<\/em>; the simple and<\/em> is sufficient, although the second part of the request contains the explanation and reason of the first; i.e., Daniel asks for the granting of a space, not that he might live longer, but that he might be able to interpret the dream to the king. Besides, that he merely speaks of the meaning of the dream, and not also of the dream itself, is, as Dan 2:25<\/span>. show, to be here explained (as in Dan 2:24<\/span>) as arising from the brevity of the narrative. For the same reason it is not said that the king granted the quest, but Dan 2:17<\/span><\/em>. immediately shows what Daniel did after the granting of his request. He went into his own house and showed the matter to his companions, that they might entreat God of His mercy for this secret, so that they might not perish along with the rest of the wise men of Babylon.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:18<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The final clause depends on (Dan 2:17<\/span>). The is to be interpreted as explicative: and indeed<\/em>, or namely<\/em>. Against this interpretation it cannot be objected, with Hitz., that Daniel also prayed. He and his friends thus prayed to God that He would grant a revelation of the secret, i.e., of the mysterious dream and its interpretation. The designation “God of heaven” occurs in Gen 24:7<\/span>, where it is used of Jehovah; but it was first commonly used as the designation of the almighty and true God in the time of the exile (cf. Dan 2:19<\/span>, Dan 2:44<\/span>; Ezr 1:2<\/span>; Ezr 6:10<\/span>; Ezr 7:12<\/span>, Ezr 7:21<\/span>; Neh 1:5<\/span>; Neh 2:4<\/span>; Psa 136:26<\/span>), who, as Daniel names Him (Dan 5:23<\/span>), is the Lord of heaven; i.e., the whole heavens, with all the stars, which the heathen worshipped as gods, are under His dominion.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:19<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> In answer to these supplications, the secret was revealed to Daniel in a night-vision. A vision of the night is not necessarily to be identified with a dream. In the case before us, Daniel does not speak of a dream; and the idea that he had dreamed precisely the same dream as Nebuchadnezzar is arbitrarily imported into the text by Hitz. in order to gain a “psychological impossibility,” and to be able to cast suspicion on the historical character of the narrative. It is possible, indeed, that dreams may be, as the means of a divine revelation, dream-visions, and as such may be called visions of the night (cf. Dan 7:1<\/span>, Dan 7:13<\/span>); but in itself a vision of the night is a vision simply which any one receives during the night whilst he is awake.<\/p>\n

(Note: “ Dream<\/em> and vision<\/em> do not constitute two separate categories. The dream- image<\/em> is a vision, the vision while awake is a dreaming – only that in the latter case the consciousness of the relation between the inner and the outer maintains itself more easily. Intermediate between the two stand the night-visions<\/em>, which, as in Job 4:13<\/span>, either having risen up before the spirit, fade away from the mind in after-thought, or, as in the case of Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 2:29<\/span>), are an image before the imagination into which the thoughts of the night run out. Zechariah saw a number of visions in one night, Dan 1:7<\/span>; Dan 6:15<\/span>. Also these which, according to Dan 1:8<\/span>, are called visions of the night are not, as Ew. and Hitz. suppose, dream-images, but are waking perceptions in the night. Just because the prophet did not sleep, he says, Daniel 4, ‘The angel awaked me as one is awaked out of sleep.<\/em> ‘“ – Tholuck’s Die Propheten<\/em>, u.s.w., p. 52.)<\/p>\n

Dan 2:20<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> On receiving the divine revelation, Daniel answered ( ) with a prayer of thanksgiving. The word retains its proper meaning. The revelation is of the character of an address from God, which Daniel answers with praise and thanks to God. The forms , and in the plur. and , which are peculiar to the biblical Chaldee, we regard, with Maur., Hitz., Kran., and others, as the imperfect or future forms, 3rd pers. sing. and plur., in which the instead of the is to be explained perhaps from the Syriac praeform. , which is frequently found also in the Chaldee Targums (cf. Dietrich, de sermonis chald. proprietate <\/em>, p. 43), while the Hebrew exiles in the word used instead of as more easy of utterance. The doxology in this verse reminds us of Job 1:21<\/span>. The expression “ for ever and ever<\/em> ” occurs here in the O.T. for the first time, so that the solemn liturgical Beracha ( Blessing<\/em>) of the second temple, Neh 9:5<\/span>; 1Ch 16:36<\/span>, with which also the first (Psa 45:14<\/span>) and the fourth (Psa 106:48<\/span>) books of the Psalter conclude, appears to have been composed after this form of praise used by Daniel. “The name of God” will be praised, i.e., the manifestation of the existence of God in the world; thus, God so far as He has anew given manifestation of His glorious existence, and continually bears witness that He it is who possesses wisdom and strength (cf. Job 12:13<\/span>). The before the is the emphatic re-assumption of the preceding confirmatory , for<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:21-23<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The evidence of the wisdom and power of God is here unfolded; and firs the manifestation of His power. He changes times and seasons<\/em>. lxx, Theodot. , would be more accurately , as in Act 1:7<\/span>; 1Th 5:1<\/span>; for the Peschito in these N. T. passages renders by the Syriac word which is equivalent to , according to which is the more general expression for time = circumstance of time, for measured time, the definite point of time. The uniting together of the synonymous words gives expression to the thought: ex arbitrio Dei pendere revolutiones omnium omnino temporum, quaecunque et qualia-cunque illa fuerint <\/em>. C. B. Mich. God’s unlimited control over seasons and times is seen in this, that He sets up and casts down kings. Thus Daniel explains the revelation regarding the dream of Nebuchadnezzar made to him as announcing great changes in the kingdoms of the world, and revealing God as the Lord of time and of the world in their developments. All wisdom also comes from God. He gives to men disclosures regarding His hidden counsels. This Daniel had just experienced. Illumination dwells with God as it were a person, as Wisdom, Pro 8:30<\/span>. The Kethiv<\/em> is maintained against the Keri<\/em> by , Dan 5:11<\/span>, Dan 5:14<\/span>. With the perf. the participial construction passes over into the temp. fin.<\/em>; the perfect stands in the sense of the completed act. Therefore (Dan 2:23<\/span>) praise and thanksgiving belong to God. Through the revelation of the secret hidden to the wise men of this world He has proved Himself to Daniel as the God of the fathers, as the true God in opposition to the gods of the heathen. = , and now<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:24-25<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> Hereupon Daniel announced to the king that he was prepared to make known to him the dream with its interpretation. , for that very reason<\/em>, viz., because God had revealed to him the king’s matter, Daniel was brought in by Arioch before the king; for no one had free access to the king except his immediate servants. , he went<\/em>, takes up inconsequenter<\/em> the ( intravit<\/em>), which is separated by a long sentence, so as to connect it with what follows. Arioch introduced (Dan 2:25<\/span>) Daniel to the king as a man from among the captive Jews who could make known to him the interpretation of his dream. Arioch did not need to take any special notice of the fact that Daniel had already (Dan 2:16<\/span>) spoken with the king concerning it, even if he had knowledge of it. In the form , Dan 2:25<\/span>, also Dan 4:3<\/span> (6) and Dan 6:19<\/span> (18), the Dagesch lying in , Dan 2:24<\/span>, is compensated by an epenthetic n: cf. Winer, Chald. Gram<\/em>. 19, 1. , in haste<\/em>, for the matter concerned the further execution of the king’s command, which Arioch had suspended on account of Daniel’s interference, and his offer to make known the dream and its interpretation. for , cf. Winer, 15, 3. The relative , which many Codd<\/em>. insert after , is the circumstantially fuller form of expression before prepositional passages. Cf. Dan 5:13<\/span>; Dan 6:14<\/span>; Winer, 41, 5.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:26-28<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> To the question of the king, whether he was able to show the dream with its interpretation, Daniel replies by directing him from man, who is unable to accomplish such a thing, to the living God in heaven, who alone reveals secrets. The expression, whose name was Belteshazzar<\/em> (Dan 2:26<\/span>), intimates in this connection that he who was known among the Jews by the name Daniel was known to the Chaldean king only under the name given to him by the conqueror – that Nebuchadnezzar knew of no Daniel, but only of Belteshazzar. The question, “ art thou able<\/em>?” i.e., has thou ability? does not express the king’s ignorance of the person of Daniel, but only his amazement at his ability to make known the dream, in the sense, “art thou really able?” This amazement Daniel acknowledges as justified, for he replies that no wise man was able to do this thing. In the enumeration of the several classes of magicians the word is the general designation of them all. “But there is a God in heaven.” Daniel “declares in the presence of the heathen the existence of God, before he speaks to him of His works.” Klief. But when he testifies of a God in heaven as One who is able to reveal hidden things, he denies this ability eo ipso <\/em> to all the so-called gods of the heathen. Thereby he not only assigns the reason of the inability of the heathen wise men, who knew not the living God in heaven, to show the divine mysteries, but he refers also all the revelations which the heathen at any time receive to the one true God. The in introduces the development of the general thought. That there is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, Daniel declares to the king by this, that he explains his dream as an inspiration of this God, and shows to him its particular circumstances. God made known to him in a dream “what would happen in the end of the days.” = designates here not the future generally (Hv.), and still less “that which comes after the days, a time which follows after another time, comprehended under the ” (Klief.), but the concluding future or the Messianic period of the world’s time; see Gen 49:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n

From in Dan 2:29<\/span> that general interpretation of the expression is not proved. The expression of Dan 2:28<\/span> is not explained by the of Dan 2:29<\/span>, but this relates to Nebuchadnezzar’s thoughts of a future in the history of the world, to which God, the revealer of secrets, unites His Messianic revelations; moreover, every Messianic future event is also an (cf. Dan 2:45<\/span>), without, however, every being also Messianic, though it may become so when at the same time it is a constituent part of the future experience and the history of Israel, the people of the Messianic promise (Kran.). “The visions of thy head” (cf. Dan 4:2<\/span> [5], Dan 4:7<\/span> [10], Dan 4:10<\/span> [13], Dan 7:1<\/span>) are not dream-visions because they formed themselves in the head or brains (v. Leng., Maur., Hitz.), which would thus be only phantoms or fancies. The words are not a poetic expression for dreams hovering about the head (Hv.); nor yet can we say, with Klief., that “the visions of thy head upon thy bed, the vision which thou sawest as thy head lay on thy pillow,” mean only dream-visions. Against the former interpretation this may be stated, that dreams from God do not hover about the head; and against the latter, that the mention of the head would in that case be superfluous. The expression, peculiar to Daniel, designates much rather the divinely ordered visions as such, “as were perfectly consistent with a thoughtfulness of the head actively engaged” (Kran.). The singular goes back to (thy dream) as a fundamental idea, and is governed by in the sense: “thy dream with the visions of thy head;” cf. Winer, 49, 6. The plur. is used, because the revelation comprehends a series of visions of future events.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:29-30<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The pronoun ( as for thee<\/em>), as Daniel everywhere writes it, while the Keri<\/em> substitutes for it the later Targ. form , is absolute, and forms the contrast to the ( as for me<\/em>) of Dan 2:30<\/span>. The thoughts of the king are not his dream (Hitz.), but thoughts about the future of his kingdom which filled his mind as he lay upon his bed, and to which God gave him an answer in the dream (v. Leng., Maur., Kran., Klief.). Therefore they are to be distinguished from the thoughts of thy heart<\/em>, Dan 2:30<\/span>, for these are the thoughts that troubled the king, which arose from the revelations of the dream to him. The contrast in Dan 2:30<\/span><\/em> and Dan 2:30<\/span><\/em> is not this: “not for my wisdom before all that live to show,” but “for the sake of the king to explain the dream;” for is not the preposition of the object, but of the means, thus: “not by the wisdom which might be in me.” The supernatural revelation ( (<) ) forms the contrast, and the object to which points is comprehended implicite<\/em> in , for in the words, “the wisdom which may be in me before all living,” lies the unexpressed thought: that I should be enlightened by such superhuman wisdom. , “ that they might make it known<\/em>:” the plur. of undefined generality, cf. Winer, 49, 3. The impersonal form of expression is chosen in order that his own person might not be brought into view. The idea of Aben Ezra, Vatke, and others, that angels are the subject of the verb, is altogether untenable.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:31-45<\/span><\/p>\n

The Dream and Its Interpretation.<\/em> – Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream a great metallic image which was terrible to look upon. ( behold<\/em>), which Daniel interchanges with , corresponds with the Hebrew words , , or . is not an idol-image (Hitz.), but a statue<\/em>, and, as is manifest from the following description, a statue in human form<\/em>. is not the indefinite article (Ges., Win., Maur.), but the numeral. “The world-power is in all its phases one, therefore all these phases are united in the vision in one<\/em> image” (Klief.). The words from to contain two parenthetical expressions, introduced for the purpose of explaining the conception of ( great<\/em>). is to be united with . here and at Dan 7:20<\/span>. is used by Daniel as a peculiar form of the demonstrative pronoun, for which Ezra uses . The appearance of the colossal image was terrible, not only on account of its greatness and its metallic splendour, but because it represented the world-power of fearful import to the people of God (Klief.).<\/p>\n

Dan 2:32-36<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The description of the image according to its several parts is introduced with the absolute , concerning this image<\/em>, not: “this was the image.” The pronoun is made prominent, as , Dan 4:15<\/span>, and the Hebr. more frequently, e.g., Isa 23:13<\/span>. , plural – its singular occurs only in the Targums – corresponding with the Hebr. , the breast<\/em>. , the bowels, here the abdomen enclosing the bowels, the belly<\/em>. , the thighs<\/em> ( hfte<\/em>) and upper part of the loins. Dan 2:33<\/span>. , the leg<\/em>, including the upper part of the thigh. is partitive: part of it of iron<\/em>. Instead of the Keri<\/em> prefers the fem. here and at Dan 2:41<\/span> and Dan 2:42<\/span>, with reference to this, that is usually the gen. fem.<\/em>, after the custom of nouns denoting members of the body that are double. The Kethiv<\/em> unconditionally deserves the preference, although, as the apparently anomalous form, which appears with this suffix also in Dan 7:8<\/span>, Dan 7:20<\/span>, after substantives of seemingly feminine meaning, where the choice of the masculine form is to be explained from the undefined conception of the subjective idea apart from the sex; cf. Ewald’s Lehr. d. hebr. Sp.<\/em> 319.<\/p>\n

The image appears divided as to its material into four or five parts – the head, the breast with the arms, the belly with the thighs, and the legs and feet. “Only the first part, the head, constitutes in itself a united whole; the second, with the arms, represents a division; the third runs into a division in the thighs; the fourth, bound into one at the top, divides itself in the two legs, but has also the power of moving in itself; the fifth is from the first divided in the legs, and finally in the ten toes runs out into a wider division. The material becomes inferior from the head downward – gold, silver, copper, iron, clay; so that, though on the whole metallic, it becomes inferior, and finally terminates in clay, losing itself in common earthly matter. Notwithstanding that the material becomes always the harder, till it is iron, yet then suddenly and at last it becomes weak and brittle clay.” – Klief. The fourth and fifth parts, the legs and the feet, are, it is true, externally separate from each other, but inwardly, through the unity of the material, iron, are bound together; so that we are to reckon only four parts, as afterwards is done in the interpretation. This image Nebuchadnezzar was contemplating (Dan 2:34<\/span>), i.e., reflected upon with a look directed toward it, until a stone moved without human hands broke loose from a mountain, struck against the lowest part of the image, broke the whole of it into pieces, and ground to powder all its material from the head even to the feet, so that it was scattered like chaff of the summer thrashing-floor. does not mean: “which was not in the hands of any one” (Klief.), but the words are a prepositional expression for without<\/em>; , not with = without<\/em>, and expressing the dependence of the word on the foregoing noun. Without hands<\/em>, without human help, is a litotes for: by a higher, a divine providence<\/em>; cf. Dan 8:25<\/span>; Job 34:20<\/span>; Lam 4:6<\/span>. , as one = at once<\/em>, with one stroke. for is not intransitive or passive, but with an indefinite plur. subject: they crushed<\/em>, referring to the supernatural power by which the crushing was effected. The destruction of the statue is so described, that the image passes over into the matter of it. It is not said of the parts of the image, the head, the breast, the belly, and the thighs, that they were broken to pieces by the stone, “for the forms of the world-power represented by these parts had long ago passed away, when the stone strikes against the last form of the world-power represented by the feet,” but only of the materials of which these parts consist, the silver and the gold, is the destruction replicated; “for the material, the combinations of the peoples, of which these earlier forms of the world-power consist, pass into the later forms of it, and thus are all destroyed when the stone destroys the last form of the world-power” (Klief.). But the stone which brought this destruction itself became a great mountain which filled the whole earth. To this Daniel added the interpretation which he announces in Dan 2:36<\/span>. , we will tell<\/em>, is “a generalizing form of expression” (Kran.) in harmony with Dan 2:30<\/span>. Daniel associates himself with his companions in the faith, who worshipped the same God of revelation; cf. Dan 2:23<\/span><\/em>.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:37-38<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The interpretation begins with the golden head. , the usual title of the monarchs of the Oriental world-kingdoms (vid., Eze 26:7<\/span>), is not the predicate to , but stands in apposition to . The following relative passages, Dan 2:37<\/span><\/em> and Dan 2:38<\/span>, are only further explications of the address King of Kings<\/em>, in which is again taken up to bring back the predicate. , wherever, everywhere<\/em>. As to the form , see the remarks under at Dan 3:3<\/span>. The description of Nebuchadnezzar’s dominion over men, beasts, and birds, is formed after the words of Jer 27:6<\/span> and Jer 28:14<\/span>; the mention of the breasts serves only for the strengthening of the thought that his dominion was that of a world-kingdom, and that God had subjected all things to him. Nebuchadnezzar’ dominion did not, it is true, extend over the whole earth, but perhaps over the whole civilised world of Asia, over all the historical nations of his time; and in this sense it was a world-kingdom, and as such, “the prototype and pattern, the beginning and primary representative of all world-powers” (Klief.). , stat. emphat.<\/em> for ; the reading defended by Hitz. is senseless. If Daniel called him (Nebuchadnezzar) the golden head, the designation cannot refer to his person, but to the world-kingdom founded by him and represented in his person, having all things placed under his sway by God. Hitzig’s idea, that Nebuchadnezzar is the golden head as distinguished from his successors in the Babylonian kingdom, is opposed by Dan 2:39<\/span>, where it is said that after him (not another king, but) “another kingdom” would arise. That “Daniel, in the words, ‘Thou art the golden head,’ speaks of the Babylonian kingdom as of Nebuchadnezzar personally, while on the contrary he speaks of the other world-kingdoms impersonally only as of kingdoms, has its foundation in this, that the Babylonian kingdom personified in Nebuchadnezzar stood before him, and therefore could be addressed by the word thou<\/em>, while the other kingdoms could not” (Klief.).<\/p>\n

Dan 2:39<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> In this verse the second and third parts of the image are interpreted of the second and third world-kingdoms. Little is said of these kingdoms here, because they are more fully described in Daniel 7, 8 and 10. That the first clause of Dan 2:39<\/span> refers to the second, the silver part of the image, is apparent from the fact that Dan 2:38<\/span> refers to the golden head, and the second clause of Dan 2:39<\/span> to the belly of brass. According to this, the breast and arms of silver represent another kingdom which would arise after Nebuchadnezzar, i.e., after the Babylonian kingdom. This kingdom will be , inferior to thee<\/em>, i.e., to the kingdom of which thou art the representative. Instead of the adjective , here used adverbially, the Masoretes have substituted the adverbial form , in common use in later times, which Hitz. incorrectly interprets by the phrase “downwards from thee.” Since the other, i.e., the second kingdom, as we shall afterwards prove, is the Medo-Persian world-kingdom, the question arises, in how far was it inferior to the Babylonian? In outward extent it was not less, but even greater than it. With reference to the circumstance that the parts of the image representing it were silver, and not gold as the head was, Calv., Aub., Kran., and others, are inclined to the opinion that the word “inferior” points to the moral condition of the kingdom. But if the successive deterioration of the inner moral condition of the four world-kingdoms is denoted by the succession of the metals, this cannot be expressed by , because in regard to the following world-kingdoms, represented by copper and iron, such an intimation or declaration does not find a place, notwithstanding that copper and iron are far inferior to silver and gold. Klief., on the contrary, thinks that the Medo-Persian kingdom stands inferior to, or is smaller than, the Babylonian kingdom in respect of universality; for this element is exclusively referred to in the text, being not only attributed to the Babylonian kingdom, Dan 2:37<\/span>, in the widest extent, but also to the third kingdom, Dan 2:39<\/span>, and not less to the fourth, Dan 2:40<\/span>. The universality belonging to a world-kingdom does not, however, require that it should rule over all the nations of the earth to its very end, nor that its territory should have a defined extent, but only that such a kingdom should unite in itself the , i.e., the civilised world, the whole of the historical nations of its time. And this was truly the case with the Babylonian, the Macedonia, and the Roman world-monarchies, but it was not so with the Medo-Persian, although perhaps it was more powerful and embraced a more extensive territory than the Babylonian, since Greece, which at the time of the Medo-Persia monarchy had already decidedly passed into the rank of the historical nations, as yet stood outside of the Medo-Persian rule. But if this view is correct, then would universality be wanting to the third, i.e., to the Graeco-Macedonian world-monarchy, which is predicated of it in the words “That shall bear rule over the whole earth,” since at the time of this monarchy Rome had certainly passed into the rank of historical nations, and yet it was not incorporated with the Macedonian empire.<\/p>\n

The Medo-Persian world-kingdom is spoken of as “inferior” to the Babylonian perhaps only in this respect, that from its commencement it wanted inner unity, since the Medians and Persians did not form a united people, but contended with each other for the supremacy, which is intimated in the expression, Dan 7:5<\/span>, that the bear “raised itself up on one side:” see under that passage. In the want of inward unity lay the weakness or the inferiority in strength of this kingdom, its inferiority as compared with the Babylonian. This originally divided or separated character of this kingdom appears in the image in the circumstance that it is represented by the breast and the arms. “Medes and Persians,” as Hofm. ( Weiss. u. Ef<\/em>. i. S. 279) well remarks, “are the two sides of the breast. The government of the Persian kingdom was not one and united as was that of the Chaldean nation and king, but it was twofold. The Magi belonged to a different race from Cyrus, and the Medes were regarded abroad as the people ruling with and beside the Persians.” This two-sidedness is plainly denoted in the two horns of the ram, Daniel 8.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:39<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> Dan 2:39<\/span><\/em> treats of the third world-kingdom, which by the expression , “another,” is plainly distinguished from the preceding; as to its quality, it is characterized by the predicate “of copper, brazen.” In this chapter it is said only of this kingdom that “it shall rule over the whole earth,” and thus be superior in point of extent and power to the preceding kingdoms. Cf. Dan 7:6<\/span>, where it is distinctly mentioned that “power was given unto it.” Fuller particulars are communicated regarding the second and third world-kingdoms in Daniel 8 and Dan 10:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:40-43<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The interpretation of the fourth component part of the image, the legs and feet, which represent a fourth world-kingdom, is more extended. That kingdom, corresponding to the legs of iron, shall be hard, firm like iron. Because iron breaks all things in pieces, so shall this kingdom, which is like to iron, break in pieces and destroy all these kingdoms.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:40-41<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> Instead of , which is formed after the analogy of the Syriac language, the Keri<\/em> has the usual Chaldee form , which shall correspond to the preceding , Dan 2:39<\/span>. See the same Keri<\/em> Dan 3:25<\/span>; Dan 7:7<\/span>, Dan 7:23<\/span>. does not mean just as<\/em> (Ges., v. Leng., Maur., Hitz.), but because<\/em>, and the passage introduced by this particle contains the ground on which this kingdom is designated as hard like iron. , breaks in pieces<\/em>, in Syriac to forge, i.e., to break by the hammer, cf. , bruised<\/em> grain, and thus separated from the husks. is referred by Kran., in conformity with the accents, to the relative clause, “because by its union with the following verbal idea a blending of the image with the thing indicated must first be assumed; also nowhere else, neither here nor in Daniel 7, does the non-natural meaning appear, e.g., that by the fourth kingdom only the first and second kingdoms shall be destroyed; and finally, in the similar expression, Dan 7:7<\/span>, Dan 7:19<\/span>, the stands likewise without an object.” But all the three reasons do not prove much. A mixing of the figure with the thing signified does not lie in the passage: “the fourth (kingdom) shall, like crushing iron, crush to pieces all these” (kingdoms). But the “non-natural meaning,” that by the fourth kingdom not only the third, but also the second and the first, would be destroyed, is not set aside by our referring to the before-named metals, because the metals indeed characterize and represent kingdoms. Finally, the expressions in Dan 7:7<\/span>, Dan 7:19<\/span> are not analogous to those before us. The words in question cannot indeed be so understood as if the fourth kingdom would find the three previous kingdoms existing together, and would dash them one against another; for, according to the text, the first kingdom is destroyed by the second, and the second by the third; but the materials of the first two kingdoms were comprehended in the third. “The elements out of which the Babylonian world-kingdom was constituted, the countries, people, and civilisation comprehended in it, as its external form, would be destroyed by the Medo-Persia kingdom, and carried forward with it, so as to be constituted into a new external form. Such, too, was the relation between the Medo-Persian and the Macedonian world-kingdom, that the latter assumed the elements and component parts not only of the Medo-Persian, but also therewith at the same time of the Babylonian kingdom” (Klief.). In such a way shall the fourth world-kingdom crush “all these” past kingdoms as iron, i.e., will not assume the nations and civilisations comprehended in the earlier world-kingdoms as organized formations, but will destroy and break them to atoms with iron strength. Yet will this world-kingdom not throughout possess and manifest the iron hardness. Only the legs of the image are of iron (Dan 2:41<\/span>), but the feet and toes which grow out of the legs are partly of clay and partly of iron.<\/p>\n

Regarding , see under Dan 2:33<\/span>. means clay, a piece of clay<\/em>, then an earthly vessel<\/em>, 2Sa 5:20<\/span>. in the Targums means potter<\/em>, also potter’s earth<\/em>, potsherds<\/em>. The serves to strengthen the , as in the following the addition of , clay<\/em>, in order the more to heighten the idea of brittleness. This twofold material denotes that it will be a divided or severed kingdom, not because it separates into several (two to ten) kingdoms, for this is denoted by the duality of the feet and by the number of the toes of the feet, but inwardly divided; for always in Hebr., and often in Chald., signifies the unnatural or violent division arising from inner disharmony or discord<\/em>; cf. Gen 10:25<\/span>; Psa 55:10<\/span>; Job 38:25<\/span>; and Levy, chald. Worterb. s. v.<\/em> Notwithstanding this inner division, there will yet be in it the firmness of iron. , firmness<\/em>, related to , Pa. to make fast<\/em>, but in Chald. generally plantatio <\/em>, properly a slip, a plant.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:42-43<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> In Dan 2:42<\/span> the same is aid of the toes of the feet, and in Dan 2:43<\/span> the comparison to iron and clay is defined as the mixture of these two component parts. As the iron denotes the firmness of the kingdom, so the clay denotes its brittleness. The mixing of iron with clay represents the attempt to bind the two distinct and separate materials into one combined whole as fruitless, and altogether in vain. The mixing of themselves with the seed of men (Dan 2:43<\/span>), most interpreters refer to the marriage politics of the princes. They who understand by the four kingdoms the monarchy of Alexander and his followers, think it refers to the marriages between the Seleucidae and the Ptolemies, of which indeed there is mention made in Dan 11:6<\/span> and Dan 11:17<\/span>, but not here; while Hofm. thinks it relates to marriages, such as those of the German Kaiser Otto II and the Russian Grand-Duke Wladimir with the daughters of the Kaiser of Eastern Rome. But this interpretation is rightly rejected by Klief., as on all points inconsistent with the text. The subject to is not the kings, of whom mention is made neither in Dan 2:43<\/span> nor previously. For the two feet as well as the ten toes denote not kings, but parts of the fourth kingdom; and even in Dan 2:44<\/span>, by , not kings in contradistinction to the kingdoms, but the representatives of the parts of the kingdom denoted by the feet and the toes as existing contemporaneously, are to be understood, from which it cannot rightly be concluded in any way that kings is the subject to ( shall mingle themselves<\/em>).<\/p>\n

As, in the three preceding kingdoms, gold, silver, and brass represent the material of these kingdoms, i.e., their peoples and their culture, so also in the fourth kingdom iron and clay represent the material of the kingdoms arising out of the division of this kingdom, i.e., the national elements out of which they are constituted, and which will and must mingle together in them. If, then, the “mixing themselves with the seed of men” points to marriages, it is only of the mixing of different tribes brought together by external force in the kingdom by marriages as a means of amalgamating the diversified nationalities. But the expression is not to be limited to this, although , Ezr 9:2<\/span>, occurs of the mixing of the holy nation with the heathen by marriage. The peculiar expression , the seed of men<\/em>, is not of the same import as , but is obviously chosen with reference to the following contrast to the divine Ruler, Dan 2:44<\/span>., so as to place (Kran.) the vain human endeavour of the heathen rulers in contrast with the doings of the God of heaven; as in Jer 31:27<\/span> is occasioned by the contrast of . The figure of mixing by seed is derived from the sowing of the field with mingled seed, and denotes all the means employed by the rulers to combine the different nationalities, among which the connubium <\/em> is only spoken of as the most important and successful means.<\/p>\n

But this mixing together will succeed just as little as will the effort to bind together into one firm coherent mass iron and clay. The parts mixed together will not cleave to each other. Regarding , see under Dan 2:20<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:44<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The world-kingdom will be broken to pieces by the kingdom which the God of heaven will set up. “In the days of these kings,” i.e., of the kings of the world-kingdoms last described; at the time of the kingdoms denoted by the ten toes of the feet of the image into which the fourth world-monarchy extends itself; for the stone (Dan 2:34<\/span>) rolling against the feet of the image, or rather against the toes of the feet, breaks and destroys it. This kingdom is not founded by the hands of man, but is erected by the God of heaven, and shall for ever remain immoveable, in contrast to the world-kingdoms, the one of which will be annihilated by the other. Its dominion will not be given to another people. , his dominion<\/em>, i.e., of the kingdom. This word needs not to be changed into , which is less suitable, since the mere status absol.<\/em> would not be here in place. Among the world-kingdoms the dominion goes from one people to another, from the Babylonians to the Persians, etc. On the contrary, the kingdom of God comprehends always the same people, i.e., the people of Israel, chosen by God to be His own, only not the Israel , but the Israel of God (Gal 6:16<\/span>). But the kingdom of God will not merely exist eternally without change of its dominion, along with the world-kingdoms, which are always changing and bringing one another to dissolution, it will also break in pieces and destroy all these kingdoms ( , from , to bring to an end, to make an end to them<\/em>), but itself shall exist for ever. This is the meaning of the stone setting itself free without the hands of man, and breaking the image in pieces.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:45<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The before , which is wanting in Dan 2:34<\/span>, and without doubt is here used significantly, is to be observed, as in Dan 2:42<\/span> “the toes of the feet,” which in Dan 2:33<\/span> were also not mentioned. As it is evident that a stone, in order to its rolling without the movement of the human hand, must be set free from a mountain, so in the express mention of the mountain there can be only a reference to Mount Zion, where the God of heaven has founded His kingdom, which shall from thence spread out over the earth and shall destroy all the world-kingdoms. Cf. Psa 50:2<\/span>; Isa 2:3<\/span>; Mic 4:2<\/span>.<\/p>\n

The first half of the 45th verse (down to ) gives the confirmation of that which Daniel in Dan 2:44<\/span> said to the king regarding the setting up and the continuance of the kingdom of God, and essentially belongs to this verse. On the other hand, Hitz. (and Kran. follows him) wishes to unite this confirmatory passage with the following: “because thou hast been that the stone, setting itself free from the mountain, breaks in pieces the iron, etc., thus has God permitted thee a glimpse behind the veil that hides the future,” – in order that he may conclude from it that the writer, since he notes only the vision of the stone setting itself free as an announcement of the future, betrayed his real standpoint, i.e., the standpoint of the Maccabean Jew, for whom only this last catastrophe was as yet future, while all the rest was already past. This conclusion Kran. has rejected, but with the untenable argument that the expression, “what shall come to pass hereafter,” is to be taken in agreement with the words, “what should come to pass,” Dan 2:29<\/span>, which occur at the beginning of the address. Though this may in itself be right, yet it cannot be maintained if the passage Dan 2:45<\/span><\/em> forms the antecedent to Dan 2:45<\/span><\/em>. In this case ( this<\/em>), in the phrase “ after this<\/em> ” (= hereafter, Dan 2:45<\/span>), can be referred only to the setting loose of the stone. But the reasons which Hitz. adduces for the uniting together of the passages as adopted by him are without any importance. Why the long combined passage cannot suitably conclude with there is no reason which can be understood; and that it does not round itself is also no proof, but merely a matter of taste, the baselessness of which is evident from Dan 2:10<\/span>, where an altogether similar long passage, beginning with ( forasmuch as<\/em>), ends in a similar manner, without formally rounding itself off. The further remark also, that the following new passage could not so unconnectedly and baldly begin with , is no proof, but a mere assertion, which is set aside as groundless by many passages in Daniel where the connection is wanting; cf. e.g., Dan 4:16<\/span><\/em>, Dan 4:27<\/span>>. The want of the copula before this passage is to be explained on the same ground on which Daniel uses ( stat. absol.<\/em>, i.e., without the article) instead of , Ezr 5:8<\/span>. For that means, not “a (undefined) great God,” but the great God<\/em> in heaven, whom Daniel had already (Dan 2:28<\/span>) announced to the king as the revealer of secrets, is obvious. Kran. has rightly remarked, that may stand “in elevated discourse without the article, instead of the prosaic , Ezr 5:8<\/span>.” The elevated discourse has occasioned also the absence of the copula, which will not be missed if one only takes a pause at the end of the interpretation, after which Daniel then in conclusion further says to the king, “The great God has showed to the king what will be hereafter.” , after this<\/em> which is now, does not mean “at some future time” (Hitz.), but after that which is at present, and it embraces the future denoted in the dream, from the time of Nebuchadnezzar till the setting up of the kingdom of God in the time of the Messiah.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:45<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong> The word with which Daniel concludes his address, , firm, sure<\/em>, is the dream, and certain its interpretation, is not intended to assure the king of the truth of the dream, because the particulars of the dream had escaped him, and to certify to him the correctness of the interpretation (Kran.), but the importance of the dream should put him in mind to lay the matter to heart, and give honour to God who imparted to him these revelations; but at the same time also the word assures the readers of the book of the certainty of the fulfilment, since it lay far remote, and the visible course of things in the present and in the proximate future gave no indication or only a very faint prospect of the fulfilment. For other such assurances see Dan 8:26<\/span>; Dan 10:21<\/span>, Rev 19:9<\/span>; Rev 21:5<\/span>; Rev 22:6<\/span>.<\/p>\n

We shall defer a fuller consideration of the fulfilment of this dream or the historical references of the four world-kingdoms, in order to avoid repetition, till we have expounded the vision which Daniel received regarding it in Daniel 7.<\/p>\n

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

The Dream Revealed to Daniel; Daniel’s Thanksgiving.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/I><\/span><\/P> <\/TD>

B. C.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN> 603.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> <\/TABLE>

      14 Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise men<\/I> of Babylon:   15 He answered and said to Arioch the king’s captain, Why is<\/I> the decree so<\/I> hasty from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel.   16 Then Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would give him time, and that he would show the king the interpretation.   17 Then Daniel went to his house, and made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions:   18 That they would desire mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men<\/I> of Babylon.   19 Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven.   20 Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his:   21 And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:   22 He revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is<\/I> in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him.   23 I thank thee, and praise thee, O thou God of my fathers, who hast given me wisdom and might, and hast made known unto me now what we desired of thee: for thou hast now<\/I> made known unto us the king’s matter.<\/P>

      When the king sent for his wise men to tell them his dream, and the interpretation of it (v.<\/I><\/span> 2<\/span>), Daniel, it seems, was not summoned to appear among them; the king, though he was highly pleased with him when he examined him, and thought him ten times<\/I> wiser than the rest of his wise men, yet forgot him when he had most occasion for him; and no wonder, when all was done in a heat, and nothing with a cool and deliberate thought. But Providence so ordered it; that the magicians being nonplussed might be the more taken notice of, and so the more glory might redound to the God of Daniel. But, though Daniel had not the honour to be consulted with the rest of the wise men, contrary to all law and justice, by an undistinguishing sentence, he stands condemned with them, and till he has notice brought him to prepare for execution he knows nothing of the matter. How miserable is the case of those who live under arbitrary government, as this of Nebuchadnezzar’s! How happy are we, whose lives are under the protection of the law and methods of justice, and lie not thus at the mercy of a peevish and capricious prince!<\/P>

      We have found already, in Ezekiel, that Daniel was famous both for prudence and prayer; as a prince he had power with God and by man; by prayer he had power with God, by prudence he had power with man, and in both he prevailed. Thus did he find favour and good understanding<\/I> in the sight of both, and in these verses we have a remarkable instance of both.<\/P>

      I. Daniel by prudence knew how to deal with men, and he prevailed with them. When Arioch, the captain of the guard,<\/I> that was appointed to slay all the wise men of Babylon, the whole college of them, seized Daniel (for the sword of tyranny, like the sword of war, devours one as well as another<\/I>), he answered with counsel and wisdom<\/I> (v.<\/I><\/span> 14<\/span>); he did not fall into a passion, and reproach the king as unjust and barbarous, much less did he contrive how to make resistance, but mildly asked, Why is the decree so hasty?<\/I> v.<\/span> 15<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. And whereas the rest of the wise men had insisted upon it that it was utterly impossible for him ever to have his demand gratified, which did but make him more outrageous, Daniel undertakes, if he may but have a little time allowed him, to give the king all the satisfaction he desired, v.<\/I><\/span> 16<\/span>. The king, being now sensible of his error in not sending for Daniel sooner, whose character he began to recollect, was soon prevailed upon to respite the judgment, and make trial of Daniel. Note, The likeliest method to turn away wrath, even the wrath of a king, which is as the messenger of death, is by a soft answer,<\/I> by that yielding which pacifies great offences;<\/I> thus, though where the word of a king is there is power,<\/I> yet even that word may be repelled, and that so as to be repealed; and so some read it here (v.<\/I><\/span> 14<\/span>): Then Daniel returned,<\/I> and stayed the counsel and edict, through Arioch, the king’s provost-marshal.<\/I><\/P>

      II. Daniel knew how by prayer to converse with God, and he found favour with him, both in petition and in thanksgiving, which are the two principal parts of prayer. Observe,<\/P>

      1. His humble petition for this mercy, that God would discover to him what was the king’s dream, and the interpretation of it. When he had gained time he did not go to consult with the rest of the wise men whether there was anything in their art, in their books, that might be of use in this matter, but went to his house,<\/I> there to be alone with God, for from him alone, who is the Father of lights, he expected this great gift. Observe, (1.) He did not only pray for this discovery himself, but he engaged his companions to pray for it too. He made the thing known<\/I> to those who had been all along his bosom-friends and associates, requesting that they would desire mercy of God concerning this secret,<\/I>Dan 2:17<\/span>; Dan 2:18<\/span>. Though Daniel was probably their senior, and every way excelled them, yet he engaged them as partners with him in this matter, Vis unita fortior–The union of forces produces greater force.<\/I> See Esth. iv. 16<\/span>. Note, Praying friends are valuable friends; it is good to have an intimacy with and an interest in those that have fellowship with God and an interest at the throne of grace; and it well becomes the greatest and best of men to desire the assistance of the prayers of others for them. St. Paul often entreats his friends to pray for him. Thus we must show that we put a value upon our friends, upon prayer, upon their prayers. (2.) He was particular in this prayer, but had an eye to, and a dependence upon, the general mercy of God: That they would desire the mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret,<\/I> v.<\/span> 18<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. We ought in prayer to look up to God as the God of heaven,<\/I> a God above us, and who has dominion over us, to whom we owe adoration and allegiance, a God of power, who can do everything. Our savior has taught us to pray to God as our Father in heaven.<\/I> And, whatever good we pray for, our dependence must be upon the mercies of God<\/I> for it, and an interest in those mercies we must desire; we can expect nothing by way of recompence for our merits, but all as the gift of God’s mercies. They desired mercy concerning this secret.<\/I> Note, Whatever is the matter of our care must be the matter of our prayer; we must desire mercy of God concerning this thing and the other thing that occasions us trouble and fear. God gives us leave to be humbly free with him, and in prayer to enter into the detail of our wants and burdens. Secret things belong to the Lord our God,<\/I> and therefore, if there be any mercy we stand in need of that concerns a secret, to him we must apply; and, though we cannot in faith pray for miracles, yet we may in faith pray to him who has all hearts in his hand, and who in his providence does wonders without miracles, for the discovery of that which is out of our view and the obtaining of that which is out of our reach, as far as is for his glory and our good, believing that to him nothing is hidden, nothing is hard. (3.) Their plea with God was the imminent peril they were in; they desired mercy of God in this matter, that so Daniel and his fellows might not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon,<\/I> that the righteous might not be destroyed with the wicked. Note, When the lives of good and useful men are in danger it is time to be earnest with God for mercy for them, as for Peter in prison, Acts xii. 5<\/span>. (4.) The mercy which Daniel and his fellows prayed for was bestowed. The secret was revealed unto Daniel<\/I> in a night-vision,<\/I> v.<\/span> 19<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. Some think he dreamed the same dream, when he was asleep, that Nebuchadnezzar had dreamed; it should rather seem that when he was awake, and continuing instant in prayer,<\/I> and watching in the same,<\/I> the dream itself, and the interpretation of it, were communicated to him by the ministry of an angel, abundantly to his satisfaction. Note, The effectual fervent prayer of righteous men avails much.<\/I> There are mysteries and secrets which by prayer we are let into; with that key the cabinets of heaven are unlocked, for Christ has said, Thus knock, and it shall be opened unto you.<\/I><\/P>

      2. His grateful thanksgiving for this mercy when he had received it: Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven,<\/I> v.<\/span> 19<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. He did not stay till he had told it to the king, and seen whether he would own it to be his dream or no, but was confident that it was so, and that he had gained his point, and therefore he immediately turned his prayers into praises. As he had prayed in a full assurance that God would do this for him, so he gave thanks in a full assurance that he had done it; and in both he had an eye to God as the God of heaven.<\/I> His prayer was not recorded, but his thanksgiving is. Observe,<\/P>

      (1.) The honour he gives to God in this thanksgiving, which he studies to do in a great variety and copiousness of expression: Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever.<\/I> There is that for ever<\/I> in God which is to be blessed and praised; it is unchangeably and eternally in him. And it is to be blessed for ever and ever;<\/I> as the matter of praise is God’s eternal perfection, so the work of praise shall be everlastingly in the doing. [1.] He gives to God the glory of what he is in himself: Wisdom and might are his, wisdom and courage<\/I> (so some); whatever is fit to be done he will do; whatever he will do he can do, he dares do, and he will be sure to do it in the best manner, for he has infinite wisdom to design and contrive and infinite power to execute and accomplish. With him are strength and wisdom,<\/I> which in men are often parted. [2.] He gives him the glory of what he is to the world of mankind. He has a universal influence and agency upon all the children of men, and all their actions and affairs. Are the times changed? Is the posture of affairs altered? Does every thing lie open to mutability? It is God that changes the times and the seasons,<\/I> and the face of them. No change comes to pass by chance, but according to the will and counsel of God. Are those that were kings removed and deposed? Do they abdicate? Are they laid aside? It is God that removes kings.<\/I> Are the poor raised out of the dust,<\/I> to be set among princes?<\/I> It is God that sets up kings;<\/I> and the making and unmaking of kings is a flower of his crown who is the fountain of all power, King of kings and Lord of lords.<\/I> Are there men that excel others in wisdom, philosophers and statesmen, that think above the common rate, contemplative penetrating men? It is God that gives wisdom to the wise,<\/I> whether they be so wise as to acknowledge it or no; they have it not of themselves, but it is he that gives knowledge to those that know understanding,<\/I> which is a good reason why we should not be proud of our knowledge, and why we should serve and honour God with it and make it our business to know him. [3.] He gives him the glory of this particular discovery. He praises him, First,<\/I> For that he could make such a discovery (v.<\/I><\/span> 22<\/span>): He reveals the deep and secret things<\/I> which are hidden from the eyes of all living. It was he that revealed to man what is true wisdom when none else could (Job 27:27<\/span>; Job 27:28<\/span>); it is he that reveals things to come to his servants and prophets. He does himself perfectly discern and distinguish that which is most closely and most industriously concealed, for he will bring into judgment every secret thing;<\/I> the truth will be evident in the great day. He knows what is in the darkness,<\/I> and what is done in the darkness, for that hides not from him,<\/I>Psa 139:11<\/span>; Psa 139:12<\/span>. The light dwells with him,<\/I> and he dwells in the light<\/I> (1 Tim. vi. 16<\/span>), and yet, as to us, he makes darkness his pavilion.<\/I> Some understand it of the light of prophecy and divine revelation, which dwells with God and is derived from him; for he is the Father of lights,<\/I> of all lights; they are all at home in him. Secondly,<\/I> For that he had made this discovery to him. Here he has an eye to God as the God of his fathers;<\/I> for, though the Jews were now captives in Babylon, yet they were beloved for their father’s sake.<\/I> He praises God, who is the fountain of wisdom and might, for the wisdom and might he had given him, wisdom to know this great secret and might to bear the discovery. Note, What wisdom and might we have we must acknowledge to be God’s gift. Thou hast made this known to me,<\/I> v.<\/span> 23<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. What was hidden from the celebrated Chaldeans, who made the interpreting of dreams their profession, is revealed to Daniel, a captive-Jew, a babe, much their junior. God would hereby put honour upon the Spirit of prophecy<\/I> just when he was putting contempt upon the spirit of divination.<\/I> Was Daniel thus thankful to God for making known that to him which was the saving of the lives of him and his fellows? Much more reason have we to be thankful to him for making known to us the great salvation of the soul, to us and not to the world,<\/I> to us and not to the wise and prudent.<\/I><\/P>

      (2.) The respect he puts upon his companions in this thanksgiving. Though it was by his prayers principally that this discovery was obtained, and to him that it was made, yet he owns their partnership with him, both in praying for it (it is what we desired of thee<\/I>) and in enjoying it–Thou hast made known unto us the king’s matter.<\/I> Either they were present with Daniel when the discovery was made to him, or as soon as he knew it he told it them (heureka, heureka<\/B><\/I>—I have found it, I have found it<\/I>), that those who had assisted him with their prayers might assist him in their praises; his joining them with him is an instance of his humility and modesty, which well become those that are taken into communion with God. Thus St. Paul sometimes joins Sylvanus, Timotheus, or some other minister, with himself in the inscriptions to many of his epistles. Note, What honour God puts upon us we should be willing that our brethren may share with us in.<\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

PRAYER FOR WISDOM UNDER PRESSURE<\/strong><\/p>\n

Verses 14-18:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Verse 14 begins <\/strong>Daniel’s response to his death sentence that was brought to him by Arioch, captain of the king’s guard. His name had been included in the list of all the wise men of Babylon who were to be slain or executed by this captain of the king’s executioners, v. 24; Much as that one of Pharaoh, Gen 37:36<\/span>; 1Ki 2:25<\/span>; 2Ki 6:8<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Verse 15 relates <\/strong>that Daniel asked Arioch, the king’s executioner, for an explanation of why the decree had come so hastily from the king. And Arioch related the whole story to Daniel, a matter about which he had had no previous knowledge, Jer 39:13<\/span>. Why, Daniel wanted to know, had he not had an opportunity to confer with His God and the king before he had been sentenced to be executed. His was a reasonable redress of grievance, See?<\/p>\n

Verse 16 certifies <\/strong>that Daniel’s inquiry and complaint was carried to the king and the king granted Daniel an interview to hear the king’s problem. When he heard it, he assured the king that if he would grant him a reasonable time he would both tell him the dream and give him the meaning thereof in detail. He did not beg the issue, as the fake magicians had done, v. 10, 1. There is a God who supplies the needs of His own under all their testings, 1Co 10:31<\/span>; Php_4:19.<\/p>\n

Verses 17, 18 declare <\/strong>that when king Nebuchadnezzar had granted a hearing, and then a stay of execution for a time to Daniel, he went directly to his three Jewish colleagues, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah; And he requested them to pray for Divine mercies from the living God for them, that Daniel might know the vanished dream and unknown meaning of it, so much desired and required by Nebuchadnezzar. They prayed for God to be revealed through Daniel, and in order that they might not be executed with the rest of the wise men of Babylon. And the “effectual fervent prayer” of those righteous men did avail much, Jas 5:16<\/span>. See also Dan 4:37<\/span>; Dan 5:23<\/span>; The same use of Prayer delivered Peter from prison and magnified God, Act 12:5-12<\/span>.<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Nebuchadnezzar had often heard of Daniel, and had been compelled to admire the dexterity of his genius, and the singular gift of his wisdom. How comes it, then, that he passed him by when he had need of his singular skill? Although the king anxiously inquires concerning the dream, yet we observe he does not act seriously; since it would doubtless have come into his mind, “Behold, thou hadst formerly beheld in the captives of Judah the incredible gift of celestial wisdom — -then, in the first place, send for them!” Here the king’s sloth is detected because he did not send for Daniel among the rest. We have stated this to be governed by the secret providence of God, who was unwilling that his servant should mix with those ministers of Satan, whose whole knowledge consisted in juggling and errors. We now see how the king had neglected the gift of God, and had stifled the light offered to him; but Daniel is next dragged to death. Therefore, I said, that tyrants are, for this reason, very unjust, and exercise a cruel violence because they will not undertake the labor and trouble of inquiry. Meanwhile we see that God wonderfully snatches his own people from the jaws of death, as it happened in Daniel’s case; for we may be surprised at Arioch sparing his life when he slew the others who were natives. How can we account for Daniel meeting with more humanity than the Chaldeans, though he was a foreigner and a captive? Because his life was in the hand and keeping of God, who restrained both the mind and the hand of the prefect from being immediately savage with him. But it is said — Daniel inquired concerning the counsel and the edict Some translate prudently and cunningly and עטא, gneta, signifies “ prudence, ” just as טעם , tegem, metaphorically is received for “ intelli gence” when it signifies taste. (126) But we shall afterwards find this latter word used for an edict, and because this sense appears to suit better, I therefore adopt it, as Daniel had inquired of the prefect the meaning of the edict and the king’s design. Arioch also is called the Prince of Satellites. Some translate it of executioners, and others of cooks, for טבח, tebech, signifies “ to slay,” but the noun deduced from this means a cook. Thus Potiphar is called, to whom Joseph was sold. (Gen 39:1<\/span>.) It seems to me a. kind of absurdity to call him the prince of gaolers; and if we say the prefect of cooks, it is equally unsuitable to his office of being sent to slay the Chaldeans. I therefore prefer interpreting it more mildly, supposing him to be the prefect of the guards; for, as I have said, Potiphar is called רב טבחים , reb tebechi, and here the pronunciation only is changed. It follows: <\/p>\n

(126) So translated in Auth. Verses, Exo 16:31<\/span>; Num 11:8<\/span>; Job 6:6<\/span>; and Jer 48:11<\/span>. <\/p>\n

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

(14) Arioch.<\/strong>See Note on Gen. 14:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n

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

14-16<\/strong>. <\/strong> Daniel, having been informed of the decree, addresses Arioch ( Iri-Aku<\/em>) the captain, or rather “chief executioner,” of the royal bodyguard an officer well known from the inscriptions ( tabihu<\/em>) so wisely: diplomatically asking, “Why is the decree so cruel [or, bitter] on the part of the king?” that, although opposing the decree (for to “answer” always means “to take the opposite side,” Behrmann), he learns from this officer the entire story, and immediately, either in person or by petition, addresses Nebuchadnezzar, asking for a definite time, which is not named, with the implied promise that if this is given him he will show to the king the meaning of his dream.<\/p>\n

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

‘Then Daniel returned answer, with wisdom (counsel) and prudence, to Arioch, the captain of the king’s guard, who had gone out to slay the wise men of Babylon.’<\/p>\n

Fortunately for the wise men it seems that only limited forces had been sent out to carry out the sentence, made up of Arioch, captain of the king’s own guard, and a few chosen men. Thus the matter was proceeding slowly. And when Arioch came with his men to where Daniel and his companions were, and read out the decree, Daniel approached him with wisdom and prudence, seeking to delay him.<\/p>\n

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

The Lord Gives Daniel the Interpretation of the Dream <\/strong> In Dan 2:14-30<\/span> the Lord gives Daniel the interpretation of the king’s dream.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:20<\/strong><\/span> Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his:<\/p>\n

Dan 2:20<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> The king’s dream of which Daniel received the interpretation reveals God in His infinite wisdom and might, far above all kings of the earth. <\/p>\n

Dan 2:21<\/strong><\/span>  And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:<\/p>\n

Dan 2:21<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> “And he changeth the times and the seasons” <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> The king’s dream of which Daniel received the interpretation reveals how God was changing the times and seasons of man’s history in order to fulfill His divine plan of redemption. The time of Israel’s preeminence in history was ending and the “Times of the Gentiles” (Luk 21:24<\/span>) was being ushered in. This dream reveals the kings and the kingdoms that would rise and fall during the Times of the Gentiles.<\/p>\n

Luk 21:24<\/span>, “And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”<\/p>\n

God can literally change time and seasons on earth. We have several dramatic examples in the Old Testament. <\/p>\n

A. Illustrations of times:<\/p>\n

1. God changed the calendar.<\/p>\n

Exo 12:2<\/span>, “This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you.” <\/p>\n

2. God stopped the sun and moon.<\/p>\n

Jos 10:12-13<\/span>, “Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies.” <\/p>\n

3. God moved back time.<\/p>\n

2Ki 20:11<\/span>, “And Isaiah the prophet cried unto the LORD: and he brought the shadow ten degrees backward, by which it had gone down in the dial of Ahaz.”<\/p>\n

B. Illustration of seasons:<\/p>\n

1. Aaron’s almond rod budded almonds.<\/p>\n

2. Isaac reaped 100-fold during a famine.<\/p>\n

3. Elijah prayed on Mt. Carmel for rain.<\/p>\n

4. God brings rain and drought. <\/p>\n

Dan 2:21<\/strong><\/span> <\/strong> Comments Dan 2:1-49<\/span><\/em><\/strong> places emphasis upon God’s predestined plan of redemption for the Gentiles. Thus, Daniel’s comments in Dan 2:21<\/span> regarding the fact that God changes times and seasons, and removes kings and sets up kings reflects God divinely orchestrates and predestines the “Times of the Gentiles.”<\/p>\n

Illustration – Dan 2:21<\/span><\/em><\/strong> not only refers to the divine changing of the times and seasons of God’s plan for the redemption of mankind, but it also refers to the fact that God divinely appoints for us as His children certain times and seasons on our spiritual journey. I have seen God’s hand divinely changing the seasons, or types of ministry, in my life on a number of occasions. After having helped start a church in my hometown from 1985-88, the Lord spoke to my heart to return to Fort Worth and finish my seminary training. I moved back to Fort Worth in 1988 after receiving a word from the Lord and multiple dreams. I took the job that He divinely gave to me and worked faithfully. After four years as a maintenance man at an apartment complex while finishing my master’s degree, I felt that a change was about to come. I waited and within weeks was promoted as a supervisor in the same company. I worked this job for four years while learning how to manage a company under a godly businessman who taught me many principles of management. In 1997, after eight wonderful years with this company, I had four dreams of being interviewed by my pastor and his colleague. I also felt restless on my job that I had enjoyed and prospered in for so many years. Within a few weeks, I was called to my pastor’s office and asked to go to the mission field. All of these seasons of change in my life have been orchestrated by God. This is the way that we enter into God’s plan for our lives. We should learn how to wait upon the Lord and let Him guide us through our particular times and seasons.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:20-21<\/strong><\/span> “Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his. And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings” <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> Daniel is about to interpret the king’s dream by describing a great statue which represents the kingdoms that are going to rule over the earth. These empires are Babylon, Media-Persia, Greece and finally Rome. Bible scholars suggest that the fall of the nation of Israel and the rule of Babylon ushered in the “times of the Gentiles,” which refers to the period in human history when the world is ruled by Gentile nations. Thus, Daniel is speaking prophetically in Dan 2:20-21<\/span> about the changes in times and seasons which God, in His infinite wisdom and might, is about to implement as a part of His divine plan of redemption. Within the context of Daniel this statement in Dan 2:20-21<\/span> refers to the fact that the time of the Gentiles has begun. This phrase is placed beside the phrase “He removes kings and sets up kings,” suggesting that these times and seasons will be determined by the change of kings and kingdoms, as revealed in the interpretation of this dream. Note Jesus’ reference to the “Times of the Gentiles.” Jesus described it in the plural as “times” because there are four kingdoms that make up this period of divine history. <\/p>\n

Luk 21:24<\/span>, “And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”<\/p>\n

Dan 2:22<\/strong><\/span> He revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:22<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> The king’s dream of which Daniel received the interpretation reveals deep and secret things of God regarding His plan of redemption for mankind.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:23<\/strong><\/span> I thank thee, and praise thee, O thou God of my fathers, who hast given me wisdom and might, and hast made known unto me now what we desired of thee: for thou hast now made known unto us the king’s matter.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:23<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> <\/strong> Comments – <\/em><\/strong> Daniel expresses his thankfulness for God revealing these things to him in a night vision.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:26<\/strong><\/span> The king answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Art thou able to make known unto me the dream which I have seen, and the interpretation thereof?<\/p>\n

Dan 2:26<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> <\/strong> Comments <\/em><\/strong> The king wanted more than an interpretation. He demanded that the wise man reveal his dream prior to its interpretation as evidence of a divine interpretation.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:28<\/strong><\/span> But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these;<\/p>\n

Dan 2:28<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> <\/strong> Comments <\/em><\/strong> Daniel was careful to give the Lord glory in all situations.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:29<\/strong><\/span> As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed, what should come to pass hereafter: and he that revealeth secrets maketh known to thee what shall come to pass.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:30<\/strong><\/span><\/strong> But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king, and that thou mightest know the thoughts of thy heart.<\/p>\n

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

Daniel Prepares to Interpret The King’s Dream<\/p>\n

v. 14. Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom,<\/strong> with sound and prudent advice, to Arioch, the captain of the king’s guard,<\/strong> who was also in charge of the sentence of execution, which was gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon; <\/p>\n

v. 15. he answered and said to Arioch, the king’s captain,<\/strong> thereby displaying the wisdom for which he afterward became so famous, Why is the decree so hasty from the king?<\/strong> Why the furious and sharp command, which came upon the people concerned like a bolt out of the blue sky? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel,<\/strong> giving him the information which he sought. <\/p>\n

v. 16. Then Daniel went in,<\/strong> naturally after being properly announced, and desired of the king that he would give him time,<\/strong> postponing the execution of the cruel decree for some days, and that he would show the king the interpretation,<\/strong> thereby giving the king a definite promise. <\/p>\n

v. 17. Then Daniel went to his house and made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions,<\/strong> who were of one mind with him in their observation of the religion of their fathers, <\/p>\n

v. 18. that they would desire mercies of the God of heaven,<\/strong> the fulfillment of their united prayers being represented as a taking of gifts from before the throne of God, concerning this secret, that Daniel and his fellows,<\/strong> his Jewish companions, should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon,<\/strong> whose death, according to the king’s decree, seemed inevitable. <\/p>\n

v. 19. Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision,<\/strong> the Lord Himself granting the knowledge needed in this urgent case. Then Daniel,<\/strong> properly giving all glory and honor to God alone, blessed the God of heaven,<\/strong> the one and only Lord. <\/p>\n

v. 20. Daniel answered and said,<\/strong> responding, as it were, to the goodness of God with his hymn of praise, Blessed be the name of God forever and ever,<\/strong> this name including His entire essence and attributes; for wisdom and might are His,<\/strong> the two qualities coming into consideration here; <\/p>\n

v. 21. and He changeth the times and the seasons,<\/strong> as would appear in the carrying out of the king’s prophetic vision; He removeth kings and setteth up kings,<\/strong> all the events in the history of nations being determined by Him; He giveth wisdom unto the wise and knowledge to them that know understanding,<\/strong> Daniel thus tracing his own accomplishments entirely to the gift of God; <\/p>\n

v. 22. He revealeth the deep and secret things,<\/strong> which are hidden before the eyes of such as are mere human beings; He knoweth what is in the darkness,<\/strong> what is covered before human eyes, and the light dwelleth with Him,<\/strong> abiding with Him as His possession, so that He is the Source of all light, physical and spiritual. <\/p>\n

v. 23. I thank Thee and praise Thee, O Thou God of my fathers,<\/strong> of the patriarchs of the Jewish nation, who hast given me wisdom and might and hast made known unto me now what we desired of Thee,<\/strong> that for which they had so eagerly implored Him; for Thou hast now made known unto us the king’s matter,<\/strong> the very thing which the Chaldeans had declared to be an impossibility. <\/p>\n

v. 24. Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch, whom the king had ordained to destroy the wise men of Babylon; he went and said thus unto him, Destroy not the wise men of Babylon,<\/strong> their execution thus being summarily stayed; bring me in before the king, and I will show unto the king the interpretation. <\/p>\n

v. 25. Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste and said thus unto him, I have found a man of the captives of Judah that will make known unto the king the interpretation. <\/p>\n

v. 26. The king,<\/strong> having duly received Daniel in audience, answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Art thou able to make known unto me the dream which I have seen and the interpretation thereof? <\/p>\n

v. 27. Daniel answered in the presence of the king,<\/strong> whose amazement at his assertion concerning his ability to undertake what the wisest of the realm had found beyond their wisdom had just appeared in his question, and said, The secret which the king hath demanded cannot the wise men, the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, show unto the king,<\/strong> it was clearly impossible for any mere man, no matter what degree of wisdom was his, to solve the king’s difficulty; <\/p>\n

v. 28. but there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets,<\/strong> possessing the attribute of omniscience of which the heathen gods and their servants knew nothing, and maketh known to the King Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days,<\/strong> at the period to which the believers of the Old Testament were looking forward with such intense eagerness. Thy dream and the visions of thy head,<\/strong> those which he saw in his mind, upon thy bed are these: <\/p>\n

v. 29. As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed,<\/strong> he was engaged with these problems, what should come to pass hereafter; and He that revealeth secrets,<\/strong> the one true God, whom the Jews worshiped, maketh known to thee what shall come to pass. <\/p>\n

v. 30. But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living,<\/strong> because he possessed such an extraordinary measure of wisdom by virtue of his own efforts or natural abilities, but for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king, and that thou mightest know the thoughts of thy heart. <\/strong> The indefinite expression was used purposely, so that the person of Daniel might be as little conspicuous as possible. When God endows a person with unusual understanding and wisdom in the interest of His Word and work, it behooves such a person to be properly humble, giving the glory to God alone and working in His service with cheerful energy. <\/p>\n

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Dan 2:14<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>The captain of the king’s guard<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> Literally, chief of the king’s executioners. Gr. : the chief butcher. The term rab tabbachaiaa, <\/em>may probably mean, the leader of the guard appointed for capital punishments; Nor does this office seem to have been at all infamous; for Arioch had free access to the king, as we find at Dan 2:25<\/span> see also 1Sa 15:33<\/span>. And perhaps his office might be to execute any of the king’s commands on his subjects, whether they related to honour or dishonour, to life or to death. The same title is given to Nebuzar-adan, 2Ki 25:8<\/span> and from the character of the commander, it seems to mean a person of the first authority over the soldiery. Mr. Bruce speaks of an officer called the executioner of the camp, whose business it was to attend at capital punishments; and this officer belonged only to a detachment of the royal Abyssinian army. <\/p>\n

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

I hope that the Reader will find cause in these verses, as in the former, to watch the Lord’s over-ruling providence in the things here related. For what but that Almighty power, which worketh for his own glory and his people’s welfare, could have stayed the mind of the King to suspend his wrath, and stop the execution of his decree. For so absolute were those monarchs, that none dared oppose them. And yet here is a poor youth, a foreigner, yea, a captive, hath influence, when the wise men could not be heard. And who but the Lord God of Israel could have wrought this? Oh! how sure and how blessed is that certain truth. Pro 31:1<\/span> .<\/p>\n

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

Dan 2:14 Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise [men] of Babylon:<\/p>\n

Ver. 14. Then Daniel answered with counsel.<\/strong> ] Retulit consilium et causum; <\/em> a<\/em> he conferred with Arioch the chief slaughterman, giving him good reasons wherefor to defer further execution. This good turn he did for the magicians and astrologers who were his utter enemies. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

a<\/em> Tremel.<\/p>\n

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

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Dan 2:14-16<\/p>\n

14Then Daniel replied with discretion and discernment to Arioch, the captain of the king’s bodyguard, who had gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon; 15he said to Arioch, the king’s commander, For what reason is the decree from the king so urgent? Then Arioch informed Daniel about the matter. 16So Daniel went in and requested of the king that he would give him time, in order that he might declare the interpretation to the king.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:14<\/p>\n

NASBdiscretion and discernment<\/p>\n

NKJVcounsel and wisdom<\/p>\n

NRSVprudence and discretion<\/p>\n

TEVchoosing his words carefully<\/p>\n

NJBshrewd and cautious words<\/p>\n

This kind of approach (BDB 1096, 1094) characterizes the way these four Hebrew youths dealt with Babylonian court intrigue and political pressure. God’s wisdom enabled them to fit in, but also stand out!<\/p>\n

Arioch This proper name (BDB 1082) is also found in Gen 14:9 as the name of one of the kings who took Lot captive.<\/p>\n

the captain of the king’s bodyguard The term bodyguard (BDB 1094) is literally the chief slaughter (KB 368, possibly from butcher) or executioner. In Dan 2:15 he is called the King’s commander (cf. 2Ki 25:8; 2Ki 25:11).<\/p>\n

Dan 2:15<\/p>\n

NASB, NKJV,<\/p>\n

NRSVurgent<\/p>\n

TEV, NJBharsh<\/p>\n

This Aramaic word is used only here and in Dan 3:22. Its basic meaning is harshness (BDB 1093), but it can mean suddenly or urgently (Davidson, Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, p. 272).<\/p>\n

Dan 2:16 The king is more patient with Daniel’s request for time than he was with the group of wise men’s request (cf. Dan 2:8).<\/p>\n

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

counsel and wisdom = prudence and discretion. <\/p>\n

Arioch. An ancient Babylonian name, preserved and handed down from Gen 14:1 = Iri-Aku. <\/p>\n

guard = executioners. Compare Gen 37:36; Gen 39:1; Gen 40:3. 2Ki 25:8. Jer 39:9. <\/p>\n

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

Dan 2:14-15<\/p>\n

Dan 2:14 ThenH116 DanielH1841 answeredH8421 with counselH5843 and wisdomH2942 to AriochH746 the captainH7229 ofH1768 the king’sH4430 guard,H2877 whichH1768 was gone forthH5312 to slayH6992 the wiseH2445 men of Babylon:H895 <\/p>\n

Dan 2:15 He answeredH6032 and saidH560 to AriochH746 the king’sH1768 H4430 captain,H7990 WhyH5922 H4101 is the decreeH1882 so hastyH2685 fromH4481 H6925 the king?H4430 ThenH116 AriochH746 made the thing knownH3046 H4406 to Daniel.H1841 <\/p>\n

Dan 2:14-15<\/p>\n

Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon: He answered and said to Arioch the king’s captain, Why is the decree so hasty from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel.<\/p>\n

There is an obvious relationship evident here between Daniel and Arioch. The king’s guard had been dispatched to find and execute all the wise men of Babylon. Arioch was probably going to have to dispatch Daniel and his companions himself, probably right there in the palace royal. It is quite possible he was standing in front of Daniel with his sword drawn at this point. Daniel did not even know what was going on and asked Arioch why the king’s decree was so urgent. Obviously Nebuchadnezzar lashed out in a rage without thinking about what he was doing. There was enough of relationship between the captain of the king’s guard and Daniel that he explained to Daniel what was going on. This alone could have cost Arioch his life if this had not gone well. This is the second time we have seen someone under the rule of a tyrant like Nebuchadnezzar risk their lives to help Daniel. <\/p>\n

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

Wisdom Granted in the Hour of Need <\/p>\n

Dan 2:14-35<\/p>\n

The action of Daniel in this supreme crisis is very instructive. He reckoned absolutely on God, and in his chivalrous endeavor to save the lives of the aged men, the heads of the college in which he had been trained. He never doubted that God would be His stay. A prayer meeting was convened to ask for the merciful interposition of the God of heaven, and at its close Daniel seems to have lain down to sleep in unwavering faith. In this act we are reminded of Jesus sleeping amid the storm. Only a heart so pure and true, so trustful and godly, could have slept within the shadow of so terrible a menace. It was in a night-vision that he beheld the majestic procession of empire, from the gold of absolute monarchy to the clay and metal of constitutional government. Note his care to give all the glory to God and to take the humble position of the mere channel through which the divine message was transmitted to the king.<\/p>\n

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

captain <\/p>\n

Or, executioner, Dan 2:24. <\/p>\n

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

answered: Chal, returned <\/p>\n

with: 2Sa 20:16-22, Ecc 9:13-18 <\/p>\n

captain of the king’s guard: or, chief marshall, Chal, chief of the executioners, or slaughter-men. Gen 37:36, Jer 39:9, Jer 52:12, Jer 52:14, *marg.<\/p>\n

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

Dan 2:14. The executioner found Daniel and informed him of the king’s decree. Daniel would have been helpless had he tried to resist the actions of the officer, and it would also have been helpless had he tried to resist the actions of the officer, and it would also have been foolish to use any rash language to him, especially since the executioner had no choice in the matter. Instead of such a course, Daniel spoke with counsel and wisdom, which is defined in the lexicon as prudence and judgment.<\/p>\n

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

Dan 2:14. Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom This seems to be better rendered in the Vulgate, namely, Tunc Daniel requisivit de lege atque sententia ab Arioch Then Daniel inquired of Arioch concerning the law and decree, namely, which the king had made for destroying the wise men: that is, he inquired the reason of the decree and judgment issued against them; for as he had not been called in unto the king with the other wise men, he probably was ignorant of all that had passed with regard to the kings dream. The word , here rendered wisdom, usually signifies an edict, or public decree, set forth by authority. Captain of the kings guard Literally, chief of the kings executioners. Greek, , the chief butcher [or chief cook.] The term , may probably mean, the leader of the guard appointed for capital punishments. Nor does this office seem to have been at all infamous; for Arioch had free access to the king, as we find, Dan 2:25 : see also 1Sa 15:33. And perhaps his office might be to execute any of the kings commands on his subjects, whether they related to honour or dishonour, to life or to death. The same title is given to Nebuzar-adan, 2Ki 25:8; and from the character of the commander, it seems to mean a person of the first authority over the soldiery. Mr. Bruce (Trav., p. 455) speaks of an officer, called the executioner of the camp, whose business it was to attend at capital punishments; and this belonged only to a detachment of the royal Abyssinian army. Wintle.<\/p>\n

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

Dan 2:14-24. Daniel Volunteers to Explain the Dream.To save the magicians from their doom, Daniel offers to tell the king his dream and prays to God to make the thing clear to him.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:14. Arioch: Eri-Aku (Servant of the Moon-god, see on Dan 2:17), an old Sumerian (p. 51) name which, according to Sayce, was not in use in the time of Nebuchadnezzar. It occurs in Gen 14:1, whence many scholars think our author derived it.captain of the guard: lit. captain of the slaughterers or butchers. The same expression occurs in Gen 37:36; Gen 39:1, 2Ki 25:8, Jer 39:9.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:18. the God of heaven: this title for God is often found in post-exilic literature, especially in Ezra and Nehemiah. It indicates, as Charles suggests, the growing transcendence of Jewish thought concerning God.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:20-23. Daniels hymn of praise. This hymn emphasizes (a) the might, (b) the wisdom of God, especially the latter. The might of God is illustrated in Dan 2:21 by His influence in history. He changeth times and seasons, i.e. the course of history does not run smoothly. There are constant crises and changes, empires are overthrown, new forces arise, and all these are due to the intervention of God.<\/p>\n

Dan 2:21 b Dan 2:23 describes the wisdom of God. God is the source of all light and knowledge, and it is because of this that he has made clear to Daniel the kings dream.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

3. Daniel’s request for time 2:14-16<\/span><\/p>\n

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

When Daniel learned of his sentence, he responded with customary discretion and discernment (cf. Dan 1:8; Dan 1:12), not with objections (cf. Dan 2:10-11) or anger (cf. Dan 2:12). Perhaps the king’s decision in itself did not surprise Daniel since he surely realized that many of the wise men were charlatans. However, the harshness of the verdict puzzled him. Clearly the court officials, including the king himself, had come to respect Daniel highly, since they listened to him and granted his requests.<\/p>\n

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

Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise [men] of Babylon: 14. answered with counsel and discretion ] lit. returned counsel and discretion (or tact): lit. taste, and so figuratively of the faculty which discriminates and selects what is suitable … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 2:14”<\/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-21783","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21783","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=21783"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21783\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21783"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21783"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21783"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}