The king answered, and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar – <\/B>See the notes at Dan 1:7<\/span>. The king may have addressed him by this name, and probably did during this interview. This was the name, it would seem, by which he was known in Babylon – a name which implied honor and respectability, as being conferred on one whom it was supposed the principal Babylonian divinity favored.<\/P> Art thou able to make known unto me the dream? – <\/B>One of the first points in the difficulty was to recal the dream itself, and hence, this was the first inquiry which the king presented. If he could not recal that, of course the matter was at an end, and the law would be suffered to take its course.<\/P> <\/p>\n By this name of <\/P> Belteshazzar<\/B> he had given Daniel, he took courage as if he might expect some great thing from him; for the word signifies the keeper of secret treasure, i.e. to lay up and bring forth. <\/P> Art thou able, <\/B>& c.? as if he had said, I question if thou canst, seeing all my wise men cannot do it; canst thou presume to do more than all they? <\/P> <\/p>\n The king answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar<\/strong>,…. The name given him by the prince of the eunuchs, Da 1:7<\/span>, and by which he was known to Nebuchadnezzar; and very likely he called him now by this name, which is the reason of its being mentioned:<\/p>\n art thou able to make known unto me the dream which I have seen, and the interpretation thereof<\/strong>? this he said, either as doubting and questioning, or as admiring that one so young should be able to do that, which his seniors, the wise men in Babylon, could not do; or he put this question, as impatient to hear what he must expect from him, whether the performance of his promise, or such an answer as the wise men had given him.<\/p>\n The king uses these words through his despair of all interpretation, since he perceived all the Magi in this respect without judgment and understanding; for he was at first persuaded that the Magi alone were the possessors of wisdom. Since he had asked them in vain, the error with which he was imbued, as I have said, prevented him from hoping for anything better elsewhere. Through surprise, then, he here inquires, as if the thing were impossible, Have you that power? There is no doubt that God drew this interrogation from the proud king to render his grace in Daniel more illustrious. The less hope there was in the king himself, the more there was in the revelation of both dignity and reverence, as we shall afterwards see; for the, king was astonished, and fell prostrate through stupor upon the earth before a captive! This is the reason wily Daniel relates the use of this interrogation by the king. It now follows, — <\/p>\n (26) Whose name was Belteshazzar.<\/strong>A parenthetic clause, introduced to remind the reader that by this name only Daniel was known to the king. (Comp. Dan. 4:8<\/span>.)<\/p>\n Art thou able.<\/strong>The king does not pretend to be ignorant of the person of Daniel. He had, in fact, only recently (Dan. 1:19-20<\/span>) examined him in matters of wisdom and understanding. What surprises him is, that after the wise and experienced had failed to tell him his dream, one so young and a mere novice should succeed.<\/p>\n ‘The king answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, “Are you able to make known to me the dream which I have seen, and its interpretation?” ’<\/p>\n The king came straight to the point. He wanted no more excuses. The question was, could the man do what all had said was impossible, or was he too a charlatan?<\/p>\n ‘Whose name was Belteshazzar.’ That is the name under which he would have been introduced. But Daniel was his preferred name, for it was the name which demonstrated that he belonged to God.<\/p>\n Dan 2:26 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 Ver. 26. The king answered and said to Daniel, a<\/em> whose name was Belteshazzar.] So the king and courtiers had called him; but he took no felicity in that idolatrous appellation, which signified a treasurer to Bel, or Baal. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Art thou able?<\/strong> ] Interrogatio regis admiratoria.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> Daniel se Danielem nominat.<\/em> <\/p>\n Belteshazzar. See note on Dan 1:7. <\/p>\n Dan 2:26<\/p>\n Dan 2:26 The kingH4430 answeredH6032 and saidH560 to Daniel,H1841 whoseH1768 nameH8036 was Belteshazzar,H1096 ArtH383 thou ableH3546 to make knownH3046 unto me the dreamH2493 whichH1768 I have seen,H2370 and the interpretationH6591 thereof? <\/p>\n Dan 2:26 <\/p>\n 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 Nebuchadnezzar asked Daniel to confirm what Arioch had announced to him. Nebuchadnezzar is interested in knowing what Daniel had to say but there is no hint in the text here that he was in any way going to retreat from his decree to have the wise men slain if someone could not tell him what the dream was and what it meant. <\/p>\n Daniel: Dan 1:7, Dan 4:8, Dan 4:19, Dan 5:12 <\/p>\n Art: Dan 2:3-7, Dan 4:18, Dan 5:16, Gen 41:15, 1Sa 17:33<\/p>\n Dan 2:26. In Dan 1:20 Is a statement that might seem to have made the inquiry of the present verse unnecessary. However, that other occasion only pertained to matters supposed to be within the mental qualifications of magicians or astrologers and Chaldeans, and the king had been told that they were not able to solve such a problem as the present situation presented. Now comes this Daniel Who, though found in the first interview with him to exceed the other wise men, was yet in their classification, Hence it was consistent to ask him the questions of the present verse.<\/p>\n Dan 2:26-29. The king said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar <\/p>\n See note on Dan 1:7; Art thou able to make known to me the dream? &c. The king seems to have questioned whether he could make his promise good. The less likely, however, it appeared to the king that Daniel should do this, the more God was glorified in enabling him to do it. Daniel answered, Cannot the wise men, &c. Daniels words, as here translated, bear the interrogative form; but not in the original. They seem to be more accurately translated by the LXX., , The mystery concerning which the king inquires, it does not belong to the wise men, &c., to declare to the king. Or, as the Vulgate has it, the wise men cannot declare. But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets Daniel assumes nothing to himself, but gives the glory to God alone, whose knowledge, as he tells the king, infinitely exceeds that of all the wise men of Chaldea, and of the gods, or demons, which they consulted, or worshipped. And at the same time he also, with great generosity, pleads the cause of the wise men, who could not tell the dream; alleging in their excuse, that such knowledge was not attainable by any mere human ability; and that he should have been as much at a loss as they, had not God been pleased to reveal it unto him: see Dan 2:30. The modesty and humility of Daniel, in this whole address to the king, are highly deserving of our notice and imitation. The soothsayers, here mentioned, were not noticed among the several sorts of pretenders to wisdom, named in Dan 2:2. The word so rendered, derived from , to cut, is thought by some to signify either the aruspices, who examined the liver and entrails of beasts by cutting them open; or those diviners who, by the disposition and combination of numbers, made amulets, or charms, by which they pretended to foretel future events. Rabbi Jacchiades favours the latter opinion, supposing that the aruspices were scarcely known in the East. And maketh known what shall be in the latter days Or, what shall come to pass hereafter, as it is expressed Dan 2:29; Dan 2:45. O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed Daniel, by way of introduction to his telling the king what had been the subject of his dream, informs him of what he meditated, or thought, before he fell asleep, namely, that he revolved in his mind what should be the future condition of the vast empire which he had erected by his various conquests. This surely must have excited in Nebuchadnezzar a great admiration of the God whom Daniel worshipped.<\/p>\n Arioch had focused on Daniel as the solution to the king’s problem. Nebuchadnezzar viewed him the same way. Daniel, however, quickly redirected the king’s attention from himself and placed it where it belonged, on God who revealed the future. No human being, neither the Babylonian wise men nor himself, could provide what the king required. Daniel used a new name for one of these groups of seers here: "diviners," meaning astrologers. [Note: See Leupold, p. 105.] <\/span> They tried to draw information about the future from the heavens, but "the God of heavens" had revealed the mystery.<\/p>\n Specifically it was information about "the end of the days" that God had given Daniel for the king (Dan 2:28). This phrase occurs first in Gen 49:1 and always refers to the future. The context determines how much of the future is in view, but it usually focuses on Messiah’s appearance. This phrase "refers to the future of God’s dealings with mankind as to be consummated and concluded historically in the times of the Messiah." [Note: Robert D. Culver, Daniel and the Latter Days, p. 107.] <\/span><\/p>\n "In the context of Daniel 2, ’the latter days’ include all the visions which Nebuchadnezzar received and stretches from 600 B.C. to the second coming of Christ to the earth." [Note: Walvoord, p. 61. See his extensive study of this phrase on pp. 60-61.] <\/span><\/p>\n Young, an amillennialist, took this phrase as equivalent with "the last days," to which the New Testament writers referred, which we are now in (cf. Act 2:16-17; 1Ti 4:1; 2Ti 3:1; Heb 1:1; 1Jn 2:18). [Note: Young, p. 70.] <\/span> This seems wrong in view of what the dream revealed.<\/p>\n 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? The king answered, and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar – See the notes at Dan 1:7. The king may have addressed him by this … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 2:26”<\/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-21795","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21795","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=21795"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21795\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21795"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21795"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21795"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"