Daniel The Man who Feared God 2016

Salvation I (19-30)

1. 
   How did Nebuchadnezzar’s react when the three men refused to serve his gods or worship the golden image he had set up?
   
   1. 
      Great Exasperation – Nebuchadnezzar became very angry or furious.
      
      1. 
         He seems to have had a temper (2.12; 3.13).
         
      2. 
         His anger with their unwillingness to bow before his image, caused him to revoke their second chance to worship the image.
         
      3. 
         Temperamental anger is generally a reaction of the base, brutish sinful nature of mankind.
         
         1. 
            Nebuchadnezzar, in this anger, replaced the majesty of a prince with a miserable passion that distorted his face into ugly contortions. He probably became red (or ‘blue’) in his rage.
            
         2. 
            As men grow more powerful, the power consumes them and they expect to be obeyed. As a result, they often (usually) become more violent and more prone to anger. They may hide it from their broader constituency but display it with their immediate subordinates. For example, a number of US presidents (and/or their wives) have been noted for their extreme tempers): Bill Clinton¹⁷⁷, Hillary Clinton¹⁷⁸, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson and Harry Truman, etc.¹⁷⁹ Paul Martin, Prime Minster of Canada, was also known for having a fiery temper.¹⁸⁰
            
         3. 
            One writer said, “Most Presidents—and nearly all successful Presidents—have displayed some kind of temper at some time in their tenures. It’s simply too difficult to get that far in politics without so valuable a tool. Sooner or later any President is going to have to get tough with truculent senators, evil foreign dictators, willful special-interest groups, corrupt criminal syndicates, recalcitrant state governors, shilly-shallying bureaucrats, and feckless relations. And then there’s the rest of us. Any man who could get to be President without becoming at least occasionally fed up with all the silly, self-serving demands we make of him would have to be possessed of an almost unnatural serenity.”¹⁸¹
            
         4. 
            Christians are not to give in to the passion of anger (2 Cor 12.20; Gal 5.20; Eph 4.30, 31; Col 3.8; 1 Tim 2.8; Jam 1.19, 20). Anger grieves Holy Spirit and breaks the Ten Commandments). The Larger Catechism, Q136, speaks of sinful anger being forbidden by the 6^th Commandment.
            
         5. 
            It is possible to have a righteous anger (e.g., against sin); but this should not be used as an excuse for Christians to be angry (Eph 4.26).
            
   2. 
      Got Even – Temperamental anger leads to further sins through its desire to get even and strike at others.
      
      1. 
         Satan uses temperamental anger as a means of controlling and consuming his human subjects. Anger boils the blood, builds bitterness, and broods bondage.
         
      2. 
         What is the first recorded example of this kind of anger?
         
         1. 
            Cain became angry with Abel (Gen 4.5-7) and then he killed his brother to vent his anger (Gen 4.8).
            
         2. 
            Temperamental anger is not content to burn within the subject but lashes out against the objects of the anger.
            
      3. 
         What action did Nebuchadnezzar take to get even?
         
         1. 
            He ordered the furnace heated seven times hotter.
            
         2. 
            How could the fire be made seven times hotter?
            
            1. 
               Using available materials (e.g., dung, dried reeds, wood, charcoal, and possibly coal) the hottest fire available would likely not have exceeded 1,500^oC. Pumping more air (oxygen) into a fire with bellows will increase the combustion process and raise the temperature, but will not make it burn seven times hotter. Adding more carbon-based fuel will increase the size of the fire, but not markedly change the temperature. In addition, the surface temperature of the sun is about 6,000^oC (with hydrogen burn or nuclear fusion).
               
            2. 
               Nebuchadnezzar couldn’t perform a miracle, so we do not need to think that he actually made the fire hotter than would be naturally available.
               
            3. 
               In addition, what we have recorded is a statement of Nebuchadnezzar’s arrogant command, not necessarily a statement of historical fact.
               
            4. 
               We may interpret this in different ways:
               
               1. 
                  They added much more fuel (seven times) to the fire and blew in more air with bellows, making it somewhat hotter and much larger, extending the heat to a wider area.
                  
               2. 
                  Figuratively (Ps 12.6; 24.16) they added more fuel/air to make it as hot as they could. This is the idea of completeness or intensity with seven as a symbolical representation (Gen 33.3; Lev 4.5; Mt 18.21).
                  
         3. 
            What was Nebuchadnezzar’s purpose for heating the fire hotter?
            
            1. 
               It would not have made their death any more certain or painful and likely would have made little practical difference in how fast they would have died.
               
            2. 
               Rather it was a symbol for heightening the punishment because Nebuchadnezzar viewed their disobedience to be seven times more grievous and he wanted the punishment to fit the crime and their death to be heightened in ignominy.
               
            3. 
               Nebuchadnezzar was sending a stern warning to any who might think of rebelling against his commands.
               
   3. 
      Guaranteed Execution – Nebuchadnezzar wanted to ensure the impossibility of a failure in the execution of the three men.
      
      1. 
         What actions did he take to ensure the ‘impossibility’ of a failure in their execution?
         
         1. 
            He commanded that the fire be made hotter. [We considered this above.]
            
         2. 
            He commanded that they be bound.
            
      2. 
         Why did he command that they be bound? So that:
         
         1. 
            They could not struggle and offer resistance against their executioners.
            
         2. 
            There was no chance of them running out of the fire through the opening at ground level.
            
      3. 
         The point of these actions was to exclude the possibility of natural or supernatural intervention, by either the men themselves or the god’s of Babylon. What Nebuchadnezzar discounted was the real possibility of intervention by the true God, Creator and Sovereign over the universe.
         

2. 
   What demonstrates the urgency of the king’s command?
   
   1. 
      They were tied up while still wearing their garments
      
      1. 
         The Aramaic words used for the listed items of clothing are not easy to translate. The most accurate translation may be something like, boots, leggings/trousers, turbans, and robes.
         
      2. 
         In the ancient world, into the modern era, it was common practice to remove the clothing of anyone who was being executed (e.g., Mt 27.35).
         
      3. 
         Clothing was valuable and people did not want to waste clothes by leaving them on an executed person. The clothing of the court administrators in ancient Babylon would have been especially valuable and it is unlikely that the clothes would have been left on the men to be burned up with them, if it had not been for the urgency of the king’s command.
         
      4. 
         Execution in nakedness was a means of exposing the criminal or political opponent to additional shame.
         
      5. 
         This execution was to be different:
         
         1. 
            Their clothes would have been burnt with them, implying that even their very clothing was polluted by their unwillingness to participate in the king’s prescribed worship observance.
            
         2. 
            All of their clothing items are identified from their boots or leggings to their turbans.
            
   2. 
      The soldiers who carried the three men to the top of the furnace were killed by the heat.
      
      1. 
         There was no time for the soldiers to make any provision for their own protection. For example, they could not take precautions to let the heaviest flames die down, wait until the wind shifted the flames and smoke, or use some form of a device to keep away from the worst of the flames (e.g., a spear or javelin to use as a goad).
         
      2. 
         The death of the soldiers reminds us that it is wrong for a person to hide behind the command of another to commit sin. We must never do wrong because we are commanded to, and use the excuse, “But he told me to do it.” Nevertheless, the soldiers executing the sentence of death did not expect that they would die from the heat and probably took pleasure in casting the three to their apparent deaths.
         
      3. 
         Their death also points out that God was able to protect his servants from death, whereas Nebuchadnezzar, with claims to deity, could not protect his own servants.
         
      4. 
         A note in an apocryphal addition to Daniel says that the flames ascended forty-nine cubits above the mouth of the furnace. We will make further reference to the apocryphal additions to Daniel below.
         
   3. 
      They were thrown into a burning furnace to execute them as quickly as possible.
      
      1. 
         They were not tied to stakes with wood piled around them (as for example, in executions at the time of the Inquisition, in England during the days of Henry VIII or Mary, or in Scotland during the time of the Covenanters).
         
      2. 
         What kind of furnace was it?
         
         1. 
            The furnace may have been a brick kiln used for firing bricks on the plain of Dura. Remains of furnaces for this purpose have been found in excavations outside of the ruins of ancient Babylon.¹⁸²
            
         2. 
            The bricks baked in these kilns (see 2 Sam 12.31) were not sun-dried like in Egypt, but were made of fired white clay mixed with organic material (e.g., straw or reeds) and glazed with coloured ceramics and often had symbols of the empire included stamped into them. Five different stamps have been found with Nebuchadnezzar’s inscription (name and dedication).¹⁸³ Glazed bricks from the time of Nebuchadnezzar can be seen in many museums around the world.
            
         3. 
            Baking bricks in Mesopotamia was a well-developed technique by the time of Nebuchadnezzar. We find a reference to the technique in the Bible from a time that was about 2,000 years earlier (Gen 11.3).
            
         4. 
            The bricks would have been stacked and fired in batches.
            
      3. 
         What did the furnace look like?
         
         1. 
            It was large enough for the men to walk inside of it. The remains of brick-firing furnaces from around ancient Babylon indicate that the furnaces could have been as high as a modern 2-3 storey building with a footprint the size of modern house. They had a large enough opening (flue) at the top through which the men could be thrown down into the furnace.
            
         2. 
            It could have been built into the side of a hill or have been like a small pyramid, with a ramp/path to the top. It had a main opening in the top used as a flue or chimney and a large opening in the side for entry to stack the bricks and to place the fuel (the fuel was placed in openings along the walls, called fire-mouths, which would have had individual air draws for controlling the temperature).¹⁸⁴ The opening in the side also permitted observers to look into the kiln to watch the brick firing process (the colour of the bricks and ceramic surfaces would be used as a temperature guide).
            
   4. 
      Between verses 23 and 24, the Greek Septuagint (LXX) version of the OT includes an additional account about Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.
      
      1. 
         This addition is usually called the Prayer of Azariah (i.e., Abednego) and the Song of the Three Young Men.
         
      2. 
         It is one of the three apocryphal additions to the book of Daniel (the other two are Susana, inserted as chapter 13, and Bel and the Dragon, added as chapter 14).
         
      3. 
         The apocryphal additions to the book of Daniel are not included in Protestant translations of the Bible:
         
         1. 
            They are only known in Greek manuscripts and are not found in Hebrew manuscripts of the OT, and were not considered to be canonical by the Jews.
            
         2. 
            Jesus appears to have accepted the Hebrew canon. The order of the books in both the Greek and Latin versions of the OT is not the same as the order that was accepted by the Jewish rabbis before the time of Christ. In both the Latin and the Greek OT, the books of Chronicles usually appear following the books entitled Kings. However, in the Hebrew order, 2 Chronicles is the last book of the canon. Thus, Jesus’ in referring (Mt 23.35) to the prophets who were killed from Abel (Gen 4.8) to Zechariah (2 Chron 24.20-21), is essentially saying, “From the beginning to the end of the Bible”. By making this reference, Jesus endorses the Hebrew OT canon— which does not contain the books of the Apocrypha—as Scripture.
            
         3. 
            No NT writer quotes from the Apocrypha.
            
         4. 
            Jerome rejected the Apocryphal books when he translated the Bible into Latin around 450 AD because no Hebrew version of these texts could be found. They eventually were accepted by the Church during the middle ages and added to the Vulgate.
            
         5. 
            The Protestant Reformers rejected these books during the Reformation as lacking divine authority.
            
         6. 
            The Roman Catholic Council of Trent (the Counter Reformation) declared, in 1546 that the Apocryphal books were to be accepted as Scripture.
            
         7. 
            The King James Version (1611) included other portions of the Apocrypha between the OT and the NT.¹⁸⁵
            
         8. 
            The Apocrypha was no longer included in printings of most Protestant Bibles after the British and Foreign Bible Society, in 1824, resolved: “that no pecuniary grants be made by the Committee of this Society for the purpose of aiding the printing or publishing of any edition of the Bible, in which the Apocrypha shall be mixed and interspersed with the Canonical Books of Holy Scriptures.” The society reversed its position in 1966.¹⁸⁶
            
      4. 
         The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three consists of the following sections, in 68 verses:
         
         1. 
            Introduction (1¹⁸⁷; 24¹⁸⁸)
            
         2. 
            Prayer of praise and acknowledgement of God’s justice in punishing Israel (2-10; 25-33)
            
         3. 
            Request for deliverance and punishment of enemies of Israel (11-22; 34-45)
            
         4. 
            Narrative of the heating of the furnace and descent of the Angel of the Lord (23-27; 46-50): “23 And the king’s servants, that put them in, ceased not to make the oven hot with rosin, pitch, tow, and small wood; 24 So that the flame streamed forth above the furnace forty and nine cubits. 25 And it passed through, and burned those Chaldeans it found about the furnace. 26 But the angel of the Lord came down into the oven together with Azarias and his fellows, and smote the flame of the fire out of the oven; 27 And made the midst of the furnace as it had been a moist whistling wind, so that the fire touched them not at all, neither hurt nor troubled them.”¹⁸⁹
            
         5. 
            Song of praise (28-68; 51-90). Most of this portion of the Apocrypha is incorporated into the Order for Morning Prayer in the 1559 Anglican book of Common Prayer¹⁹⁰ after the Te Deum.
            
      5. 
         The account may be based on truth and may have been handed down from the time of Daniel along with the Scriptural account. It could also have been an addition invented later by someone who supposed what they might have said while in the fire. Whether or not it is accurate, we cannot determine. One portion of the apocryphal additions (Bel and the Dragon) seems to be mythical. Even if this account is historically accurate that does not mean that it belongs in the Bible. There were other historical records of Israel (outside of the Bible) passed down by the Jews which are not included in the OT Scriptures (for example, the names of the magicians whom Moses encountered in Pharaoh’s court [2 Tim 3.8]; the dispute over Moses’ body [Jude 9], and Enoch’s words mentioned in Jude 14, 15).
         
      6. 
         Calvin in his commentary on Daniel makes no reference to this apocryphal addition to Daniel. Matthew Henry refers to it but does not accept it as Biblical.
         

3. 
   What did Nebuchadnezzar observe in the furnace?
   
   1. 
      He saw four (men), fine, and free.
      
   2. 
      Free:
      
      1. 
         They were loosed form their bonds.
         
         1. 
            The ropes that had bound them may have burned away, but their bodies and clothes (27) were not burned.
            
      2. 
         They walked in the midst of the fire unharmed.
         
         1. 
            The edge of the heat from the fire had killed the soldiers who took them to the mouth of the furnace, but the three men who had been thrown into the midst of the fire had not been hurt by the fire.
            
         2. 
            Nebuchadnezzar may have seen fakirs (or their equivalent in his day) walking on hot coals as part of the pagan religious rituals. The firewalkers who had learned how to walk on hot coals¹⁹¹ may have claimed mystical powers and deceived the people. But, even a skilled firewalker could not accomplish what these men were doing.
            
         3. 
            The furnace (assuming that it was a brick kiln) would have been large (at least as big as a modern two storey house).
            
            1. 
               The three men would have had room to walk among the stacked bricks that were being fired.
               
            2. 
               They would have been walking on a paved surface.
               
            3. 
               They would not have been walking on coals or burning wood. The fire would have been in inset areas in the walls of the furnace.
               
   3. 
      Fine:
      
      1. 
         They had suffered no ill consequences from being thrown from the roof into the centre of the furnace, or from the heat of the fire.
         
         1. 
            They were not seen lying in agony on the hot floor of the furnace.
            
         2. 
            They did not display any signs of being in pain.
            
         3. 
            They were not seen running for the exit.
            
      2. 
         How was this possible?
         
         1. 
            Their walking freely in the fire was a miracle: a direct action of God which temporarily suspends the proximate means (‘laws’) by which God normally directs events in the natural realm.
            
            1. 
               Nebuchadnezzar would have understood that the free walking of the men in the fire could only be explained by divine intervention.
               
            2. 
               We must not be sceptical about God’s power to protect these three men from the heat of a furnace.
               
               1. 
                  God created, and is sovereign master of, all the natural realm. He can do what he pleases with it.
                  
               2. 
                  Preventing harm to three men who are walking in a furnace displays, relatively, an insignificant control of nature compared with creating the universe, creating life, or raising a dead person back to life.
                  
         2. 
            God promised that he will protect his people, even at times from the heat of a fiery furnace (Is 43.2).
            
         3. 
            They received the promise by faith (Heb 11.34).
            
   4. 
      Four:
      
      1. 
         He saw a fourth person with the three men.
         
      2. 
         The three men were having some form of communion, discussion, or fellowship with the fourth person—this is implied by their walking together in the midst of the furnace.
         
   5. 
      What was the nature of Nebuchadnezzar’s reaction to seeing the four, fine and free?
      
      1. 
         Total surprise: astonished or amazement.
         
         1. 
            He was so surprised that he arose in haste, or leaped to his feet.
            
         2. 
            He asked his advisers to confirm for him that they had thrown three men into the furnace.
            
            1. 
               He might have wondered if he could trust his own eyes and memory.
               
            2. 
               He might have thought that he was losing his mind or hallucinating.
               
         3. 
            He realized that what he was seeing was not possible in mere human terms, or even possible by the power of his gods.
            
      2. 
         Why was he looking into the opening of the furnace?
         
         1. 
            It appears that he may have been sitting on a chair (throne) at a distance from the opening of the furnace to watch what would happen to three men.
            
         2. 
            He may have had a passing curiosity about the nature of the God they worshiped and was, in effect, calling their bluff—“Okay, let’s see if the God you worship can save you!”
            
         3. 
            He likely had a morbid curiosity, and wanted to see the three suffer in agony to assuage his anger. He pulled up a seat to watch the spectacle of their execution. Men throughout history (whether in the circus in Rome, a hanging during the Middle Ages, or at a boxing match or hockey game today) have had a blood lust.
            
         4. 
            Nebuchadnezzar lived in a more openly cruel cultural context than we ‘civilized’ Westerners live in and it would have been natural for him to watch the execution to its completion to ensure that the men were fully dead. [I used the word ‘openly’ because man’s heart has not changed. Men are just as cruel today but prefer their cruelty to be vicariously offered through TV and movies or somewhat hidden such as in abortion.]
            
      3. 
         God can cause astonishment and fear of him to come upon the hearts of those who are adamantly in rebellion against him.
         
         1. 
            This is not an astonishment of respect, or a fear in awe, that accompanies conversion. Rather, it is the reaction of someone who has been caught red-handed in sin. God reminds mankind that he sees all and knows all.
            
         2. 
            Even the greatest tyrant or dictator can be made to pause and consider, by God.
            
         3. 
            The reaction of Nebuchadnezzar at seeing the four, fine, and free is a reminder to all mankind that they are in for a much greater surprise at the end of time when Christ returns to claim the bodies of his people from their graves, to judge all people, and to establish his eternal Kingdom. At that time men will plead with the mountains to fall on them to hide them from Christ (Rev 6.16).
            

4. 
   Who was the fourth person in the furnace with the three men?
   
   1. 
      Nebuchadnezzar said that the fourth person had the appearance of a son of the gods.
      
      1. 
         The KJV/NKJV translation (‘the Son of God’) is not a legitimate translation. Nebuchadnezzar didn’t know of the Trinity or of Christ and wasn’t even speaking prophetically but in ignorance (as for example, Caiaphas did; Jn 11.49-51) from his superstitious and polytheistic perspective. The correct, and literal translation is, ‘a son of the gods’ as in the NIV and ESV.
         
      2. 
         What he saw in the fourth person impressed him so much that he thought the person to be a demi-god, angel or a divine being of some kind. In Nebuchadnezzar’s pantheon, the gods had human-like bodies but were more impressive than mere men.
         
   2. 
      What might it have been about the appearance of the fourth person that impressed Nebuchadnezzar?
      
      1. 
         He (or his clothing) might have been gleaming or dazzling (Mk 9.3). If so, the light radiating from the person could have been brighter than the flames coming from the fires along the walls of the furnace.
         
      2. 
         Bright light is associated with the gods in pagan religions and with God in the Bible (7.9; Ps 104.2). As we noted when considering the brightness of the image that Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream (chapter 2), there is an association between light and the gods in most ancient pagan pantheons.
         
      3. 
         The fourth person may also have been taller than the other three men and possibly appeared dressed in a magnificent robe (e.g., of gold).
         
      4. 
         In addition, the fourth person may have had a natural appearance of authority and leadership.
         
   3. 
      Opinions vary among Christian interpreters as to whom the fourth person was.
      
      1. 
         An angel – A rational creature sent as a messenger of God
         
         1. 
            Angels appear to be called sons of god (Job 38.7; Ps 89.6; Heb: sons of God, or ‘sons of gods’ בְנֵ֥י אֵלִים).
            
         2. 
            Daniel later refers to an angel shutting the lions’ mouths when he was thrown into their den (6.22).
            
         3. 
            References to angels being sent as God’s messengers include: Gen 19.1-22 (21 implies it is God speaking, but it may be an angel empowered to make decisions on behalf of God); 21.17; 32.1; Exodus 14.19 (this may have been a Christophany); Daniel 10.13, 21; Luke 1.11, 19, 26.
            
      2. 
         A theophany – The appearance of the LORD in a human form; i.e., God the Father or a member of the Trinity
         
         1. 
            References to God generically and members of the Trinity appearing in human form on earth prior to Christ include: Genesis 16.7-11 (10 implies that it is God speaking); 19.1-22 (21 implies it is God speaking, but it may be an angel); 18.1-3; 22.11, 15-16; 31.11; Exodus 3.2; Numbers 22.22-35; Judges 6.11-16 (14 LORD, 15 Lord); Judges 13.1-22). Note: Some of these theophanic appearances also refer to the ‘angel of the LORD’.
            
      3. 
         A Christophany – The specific appearance of the pre-incarnate Christ in a human form.
         
         1. 
            Some argue that this could not have been the pre-incarnate Lord, because Nebuchadnezzar did not deserve a vision of Christ in his glory. However, Christ in the flesh appeared to men who did not deserve to see him and will appear in his glory to all men, including those who do not deserve to see him. Regardless, if the fourth person was the third person of the Trinity, his appearance was not primarily for the benefit of Nebuchadnezzar but for the encouragement of the three men.
            
         2. 
            A references to the second person of the Trinity, specifically, appearing in human form may be found in Joshua 5.13-15 (the fact that he accepted worship indicates that he was not a created angel; contrast with Rev 19.10).
            
      4. 
         The person appearing with the three was likely Christ himself in pre-incarnate form.
         
   4. 
      Whoever the person was specifically, it would have been a great encouragement for the three men to have him present.
      
      1. 
         They were vindicated for their stand against participation in pagan worship.
         
      2. 
         Their faith in God’s ability to overrule the most powerful king on earth was proved valid and rewarded.
         
      3. 
         They were given assurance of eternal deliverance form the fires of Hell.
         

5. 
   What happened after Nebuchadnezzar saw the four men in the furnace?
   
   1. 
      Nebuchadnezzar approached the opening of the furnace.
      
      1. 
         The fire was still blazing hot (26), in contrast to what the Apocryphal addition (13.26¹⁹²) suggests and it would have been dangerous to approach too near.
         
      2. 
         Why? Because his curiosity had been aroused, he had to find out how this strange thing had happened.
         
   2. 
      He shouted to the three, commanding them to come out of the furnace.
      
      1. 
         Because the fire was blazing it would have been accompanied by a roaring noise and would have drowned out normal (non-miraculous) speech, so he had to yell to the three to come out.
         
      2. 
         His curiosity overcame his anger against the three men and he wanted them to come out so he could find out why they had not perished.
         
      3. 
         His command for them to come out of the furnace was an admission that his punishing them in the furnace had not been right. If he had still believed his punishment of them had been right he would have commanded his men to bar the opening and add more fuel to the furnace.
         
   3. 
      He honoured the three men.
      
      1. 
         How did he honour them?
         
         1. 
            He called them servants of the Most High God.
            
      2. 
         How does this contrast with his previous attitude toward them?
         
         1. 
            He had been furious with them (19).
            
         2. 
            He had probably called them all kind of names including: rebels, traitors, ingrates, irreligious atheists, etc.
            
      3. 
         Where did Nebuchadnezzar learn to refer to God as ‘Most High God’?
         
         1. 
            It is possible that he is not rising above his polytheistic paganism. The term ‘Most High God’ could be used to refer to Bel Marduk or generically Baal. ‘Bel’ or ‘Baal’ is a title and honorific meaning ‘master’ or ‘lord’ that was applied to various gods in the Western Levant. Philo of Byblos reports that in the ancient Semitic religions, the creator god was known as Elion (Biblical El Elyon = God most High), who was the father of the divinities.¹⁹³
            
         2. 
            However, it is also possible (and probable) that he is acknowledging a God (the true God) who is above all the gods of his pantheon—Jehovah/Yahweh.
            
            1. 
               He had taken Jews captive and had removed the vessels from the Temple (1.2) so likely had some conscious awareness of Jehovah/Yahweh as God Most High.
               
            2. 
               He was, undoubtedly, aware of the God professed by Daniel and the three men in the furnace.
               
            3. 
               He may have been aware of the concept of the Most High God from the vestiges of the true religion throughout the Middle East. For example, Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High. (Gen 14.18; also 19, 20, 22)
               
            4. 
               Daniel had made reference to God as being above the pagan god’s when he had provided an interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream about the statue made of different materials (2). He had referred to God as the God in heaven (2.28) implying that God is above all other gods.
               
            5. 
               As Paul tells us (Rom 1.19-21), all men know that there is one true God.
               
            6. 
               This does not mean Nebuchadnezzar abandoned polytheism, but it is nevertheless striking that Nebuchadnezzar admitted that there could be a God more powerful than any of his deities.
               
         3. 
            The term ‘Most High (Highest) God’ or ‘Most High’ occurs 13 times in Daniel, more than in any other book except in the Psalms.
            
            1. 
               Six of these occurrences in Daniel (4.2, 17, 24-25, 32, 34) are spoken by Nebuchadnezzar.
               
   4. 
      The men came out of the furnace.
      
      1. 
         Notice that the text says that they came out from the ‘fire’. Why does it not say from the ‘furnace’, as earlier in the same verse (26).
         
      2. 
         It may be that God is making a clear demonstration of his power. The fire was still burning as hot as ever. Anyone else who came too close would have been killed.
         
      3. 
         If the fire had been extinguish someone might have thought, or claimed, that they survived because the fire had died down. Rather God saved them out of the fire that should have killed them.
         
      4. 
         God displays his power, at times, in conspicuous ways to demonstrate the foolishness of paganism and the reality of his existence.
         
         1. 
            When God had the Israelites cross the Jordan River, it was at the time of peak-flood. He pushed back the waters and held them back, in effect saying to the Canaanites that their god of the storm was no match for him.
            
         2. 
            Elijah soaked the wood on the altar before he called down fire from heaven.
            
         3. 
            Elijah didn’t go into Heaven by walking up a mountain trail and then climbing a ladder. Rather, God sent a fiery chariot to collect him.
            
         4. 
            Jesus took a few small fish and loaves of bread and fed thousands. Then the disciples collected twelve baskets of fragments. Jesus didn’t just feed the people he created, out of little, an abundance of food.
            
         5. 
            Jesus didn’t just turn a few skins of water into wine but rather turned the water in six large jars into the best wine the steward had ever tasted.
            
      5. 
         God used even their exit from the fire as a witness and reminder to Nebuchadnezzar that he (the king) wasn’t dealing with a mere lackey, but rather with the Sovereign Lord of the Universe.
         
   5. 
      The administrators crowded around the three men and examined their bodies and clothing for damage.
      
      1. 
         How had the administrators changed?
         
         1. 
            Previously, these men had accused Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego of being irreligious and insubordinate, and wanted them destroyed.
            
         2. 
            Suddenly the administrators became very interested in the well-being of the men they had hated just a few minutes before.
            
            1. 
               Crowds are fickle, for example, one day the crowd is praising Jesus with Hallelujah’s; a few days later it is calling for his crucifixion.
               
            2. 
               In our day, the crowds that adore a president at his election quickly turn against him. Popular singers and actors can quickly become unpopular if they don’t follow a politically correct agenda.
               
         3. 
            The change in their behaviour is almost a laughable irony. It reminds us that God will have the last laugh over all those who oppose his holiness (Ps 2.1-4; 37.13; 59.8).
            
      2. 
         What did the administrators discover?
         
         1. 
            The men’s bodies had not been harmed in any way by the fire.
            
         2. 
            Their clothes were not singed and had no smell of smoke on them.
            
         3. 
            We can imagine the administrators crowding around the three men, touching their clothing and beards and smelling their clothes. It would have been a comical sight.
            
         4. 
            The irony in the actions of the administrators is evident.
            
            1. 
               They had demanded that the three men take part in the irrational and meaningless worship of an idol, and then they were confronted with true spiritual realities in the existence and power of God.
               
            2. 
               They had denied rationality in calling for worship of an idol and then turned to the use of rational, empirical means to examine the results of a true miracle.
               
            3. 
               All men, without the true religion are equally rationally inconsistent—plunging into false and irrational beliefs (e.g., mysticism or materialism) and then attempting to use rational means to deny ultimate reality (e.g., the existence of a supernatural, infinite God).
               
      3. 
         Why are we told this information about the reaction and action of the administrators?
         
         1. 
            The listing of three different tests—un-singed hair, unharmed cloaks, no smell of fire—provide three elements of circumstantial evidence. They stand as three witnesses (Dt 17.6; 19.15) to validate the truth of these events.
            
         2. 
            The presence of so many hostile eyewitnesses would validate the events as actually having happened.
            
         3. 
            Video cameras were not available in those does so no one could claim that that special effects had been used—like shooting the walk of the three men with a green-screen background and superimposing their images on an image of a fiery furnace.
            
         4. 
            We are presented with historical fact, not a vision or a myth. No one can honestly claim that the events described did not happen. They can only attribute them to magic or miracle.
            
            1. 
               Anyone considering NT miracles has to face the same three choices: myth, magic, or miracle; either the account is a lie, it can be attributed to some devilish deception, or it is a true miracle from God.
               
            2. 
               For example, some people dismiss the resurrection of Jesus Christ as a myth in spite of the reliable evidence including eyewitness accounts. Some might claim that it was some form of a magic trick or attribute the resurrection to the work of Satan (i.e., black magic). In reality, the resurrection is a miracle of God.
               
            3. 
               All claimed supernatural occurrences, including those in the Bible (e.g., Jonah and the fish, feeding the 5,000, water into wine, etc.), must fall into one of these three categories: myth, magic, or miracle.
               
         5. 
            God is given the glory through the recounting of this precise examination of the men and their clothing by their enemies. God alone could have protected the men in these, normally, life-destroying circumstances.
            

6. 
   What are the main components of Nebuchadnezzar’s speech in response to the miracle?
   
   1. 
      Acknowledgement – He began by acknowledging that God is worthy of praise.
      
      1. 
         Is this statement Nebuchadnezzar’s profession (or confession) of saving faith? Can anyone praise God who is not a true believer?
         
      2. 
         Nebuchadnezzar realized that no other god could have done what God did by sending his messenger (angel or Christ) to rescue the three men from the furnace. So he felt constrained to acknowledge God in some way. Without doubt, his acknowledgement is that God is truly unique.
         
      3. 
         Does the fact that he used the word ‘blessed’ or ‘praise’ indicate that he has had a conversion experience? Does it indicate that he wants to honour God as the only true God?
         
         1. 
            The word translated ‘blessed’/’praised’ can be used in the context of general honouring or greeting and not necessarily to mean true worship (1 Sam 15.13; 2 Ki 10.15; Zech 11.5).
            
         2. 
            Since he referred to God as the ‘God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego’ and ‘their own God’ it appears that he still believes that God is merely a tribal god and just one of many gods—even though he is more powerful than the other gods.
            
      4. 
         His profession that God is worthy of praise or honour is based on a general sense of awe at what he has seen rather than an adoration of the true God. His awe is similar to that which would be experienced by someone who stands at the edge of the Grand Canyon or beside Angel Falls¹⁹⁴ in Venezuela or Victoria Falls on the Zambezi River between Zambia and Zimbabwe¹⁹⁵; or by someone in an Apollo spacecraft seeing the earth rise over the moon’s horizon.
         
      5. 
         Even seeing a miracle will not necessarily convert a person and turn awe into adoration (Lk 16.29-31; Jn 12.37).
         
   2. 
      Admiration – He admired the conviction of the three men. Nebuchadnezzar was impressed not only with the fact that they had been rescued, but also with the conviction the men displayed.
      
      1. 
         What three things caused his admiration?
         
         1. 
            Their trust in God. Expressions of true trust in God are rare. People who display sincere trust in God that is followed by principled action, stand out from mere professors who are all talk and no action.
            
         2. 
            Their defiance of the king’s command. People who are willing to directly defy the command of a ruler based on a principle stand out from the rest of mankind who are mere pragmatists and follow or disobey commands not out of conviction but out of the perceived benefit (immediate or long term) derived from compliance or disobedience.
            
         3. 
            Their willingness to give up their lives rather than worship any god, but the true God. A willingness to follow beliefs to the death is beyond understanding for most people who cling to life at the expense of truth, principle, or conviction.
            
            1. 
               It is true that some adherents of false religions show a fanaticism that makes them willing to give up their lives for their beliefs. For example, Islamic Jihadists will carry bombs strapped around their bodies into crowds and blow up themselves for what they perceive to be the advancement of Islam.
               
            2. 
               Fanaticism and true conviction look similar. While the average, unprincipled person may claim that both are extreme and equivalent, they know (in their hearts/guts) that there is a difference between fanaticism or misplaced religious zeal and true conviction. What is the difference?
               
               1. 
                  Fanaticism is an emotion of excessive, uncritical devotion for a religious or political cause and has no tolerance for contrary ideas or opinions.
                  
               2. 
                  Christian conviction is a balanced emotional response based on reasoned faith in Christ that does not use force or abuse to further its objective of glorifying God.
                  
      2. 
         God lets the world know who his true people are in every generation. They stand out from the mass of humanity because of their explicit trust in him (Jn 13.34, 35; 17.21).
         
         1. 
            Sadly, this often leads to their being persecuted for their faith since people do not like Christian convictions because it reminds them of their accountability to God.
            
   3. 
      Announcement – He made a decree protecting the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego from slander.
      
      1. 
         What would have been the result?
         
         1. 
            True worship would have been protected, at least during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. This did not mean that Judaism [or more accurately ‘Yahwehism’] (the OT equivalent of Christianity) became the official religion of the state.
            
         2. 
            However, it is a form of religious toleration; with observance of the true religion accepted/permitted among many. It would be similar to Iraq today, in its constitution, officially declaring Christianity as a permitted or tolerated religion.
            
         3. 
            In theory, if not in practice (compare Esther 3), it should have made it more difficult for the antagonists of the Jews in captivity to stop their proto-synagogue¹⁹⁶ worship or to hinder them from Sabbath observance or from maintaining their dietary practices.
            
      2. 
         We cannot understand Nebuchadnezzar’s announcement as a normative example for all civil magistrates, as the account is recording historical events without making a comment on the propriety of the action.
         
         1. 
            We cannot conclude from this example that it is necessarily right for a civil government to pronounce toleration of Christianity among other permitted religions, because toleration of Christianity with many other religions is not proper. There is only one true religion and it is wrong for men to treat Christianity as one among equivalents or equals.
            
         2. 
            However, in a situation where there is persecution of Christians (e.g., in Orissa province in India, Iraq, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Indonesia, etc.) we should pray for (where possible, demand) the governments of those countries to permit and tolerate Christian worship and protect Christians from abuse.
            
         3. 
            Christianity moved from being a pariah in the Roman Empire, to being tolerated along with paganism, to becoming the official state religion of the empire. In Russia, during the latter part of the 20^th century, Christianity moved from being outlawed to being accepted and then endorsed (at least the Orthodox wing). In China, we have seen Christianity move from being outlawed (if not explicitly, at least in practice) to being tolerated. However, we see the opposite happening throughout the West. We see toleration (and endorsement) of every form of false religion and increasing suppression of Christianity (e.g., removing the Ten Commandments from public display, prohibiting prayer in the name of Christ in government meetings and schools, outlawing distribution of Christian literature at public events attended by Muslims, etc.).
            
         4. 
            If a pagan king can place restraints on the abuse of God, the true religion and God’s people, then it seems to be obvious that countries which have Christianity as part of their historical legacy, should also restrict such abuses.
            
         5. 
            In fact, we can go further—since it is wrong for people to participate in false worship, it is legitimate and proper for a State to enact legislation supporting true Christianity and even to outlaw the practice of false religions.
            
            1. 
               Does a person have a right to express a false religion (publicly)? Examples:
               
               1. 
                  Should a Muslim woman be allowed to refuse to uncover her face for a security photo, on the claim of ‘religion’?
                  
               2. 
                  Should Sikhs be permitted on commercial airplanes with their ceremonial daggers?
                  
               3. 
                  Should religious sects be permitted to sacrifice animals?
                  
               4. 
                  Should NA Indians be permitted to smoke peyote in their pantheistic rituals?
                  
               5. 
                  Should polygamy in the name of Islam or some forms of Mormonism be permitted?
                  
               6. 
                  What should be done about female genital mutilation in the name of some forms of Islam?
                  
               7. 
                  Should Druidic or Aztec worship practices be stopped from performing human sacrifices?
                  

1. 
   What does the Bible say about false religious practices?
   
   1. 
      Christianity is the only true religion. All other religions are false, and impostors or imitators of the true religion (Jn 14.6; Acts 4.12; Phil 2.9-11).
      
   2. 
      Man does not have a right to proclaim atheism or any false religion, nor to endorse the existence of a plurality of religious views (Ex 20.4-6; Dt 8.19; Ps 53.1; Mt 4.10; Acts 17.22-31).
      
2. 
   What do the Westminster standards say about the role of the civil magistrate with respect to false religious practices?
   
   1. 
      “The civil magistrate … it is his duty, to take order, that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire; that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed; and all the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed. …”¹⁹⁷
      
   2. 
      “The sins forbidden in the second commandment are, … anywise approving, any religious worship not instituted by God himself; tolerating a false religion ...”¹⁹⁸
      
   3. 
      “The duties required in the second commandment are, … the disapproving, detesting, opposing, all false worship; and, according to each one's place and calling, removing it, and all monuments of idolatry.”¹⁹⁹
      
1. 
   Most people do not realize that it is impossible to have religious tolerance, permitting different religious practices and expressions of morality to co-exist in a society. Why?
   
   1. 
      The question is not whether the Government legislates morality; the question is whose standard will it be? Will it be the standards of God from the Bible, Secular Humanism, or the ‘standard’ from another religion?
      
   2. 
      The idea that we can reject all religiously-based moral systems as a foundation for government is spurious. It is merely a form of institutionalized Secular Humanism—which is a religion.
      
   3. 
      It is naïve to think that opposites can co-exist in mutual respect. One view eventually has to prevail over the other and generally it is the majority’s (whether or not it is valid) view that will prevail. When reduced to its simplest form, the end is arrived at among human contenders when one man’s opinion becomes supreme—might makes right.
      
   4. 
      It is impossible for pluralism to work in practice or even in theory because there can be no objective means of adjudicating between the conflicting systems and priorities. It is impossible to be fair. The only means of deciding who is in the ‘right’ is to cater to those who scream the loudest (e.g., witness the homosexual activists’ reaction against Proposition 8 in California), have the most political influence, buy elections, or are the favourites of those who are in power.
      
   5. 
      Pluralism can last at most for only a short time and then it turns into intolerance against Christianity.
      
      1. 
         Where falsehood is permitted, truth will be suppressed and driven out.
         
      2. 
         False religions cannot co-exist with the true religion, Islam, etc. will drive out Christianity.
         
      3. 
         Secular Humanism is a false religion and it will drive out Christianity. For a time, Secular Humanism and Islam can work together because they both hate Christianity.
         
2. 
   However, given the tendency of sinful natures to abuse power, there are dangers in outlawing false religious practices:²⁰⁰ What are some of these dangers?
   
   1. 
      How do you avoid the possibility of false professions of faith to gain office, power, or influence?
      
   2. 
      Would tolerance allow the ‘right’ to private beliefs?
      
   3. 
      What should be done with dissent?
      
   4. 
      Where could people go if they didn’t agree?
      
   5. 
      What should be done about the outward practice of falsehood (e.g., building of mosques and animal sacrifices)?
      
   6. 
      How should people be treated who continue to practice false religions?
      
   7. 
      How do we avoid an inquisition?
      
3. 
   A truly Christian government²⁰¹ may not be possible in this sinful world, however we are to pray for it and do whatever is our power to bring about.
   
1. 
   Alert – He gave an alert or warning to any who might think of disobeying, that punishment would follow a breach of his command. What would be the punishment?
   
   1. 
      Dismemberment, death and destruction.
      
   2. 
      Where have we seen this before? This is essentially the same punishment Nebuchadnezzar promised the wise men if they were unable to provide an interpretation of his dream (2.5).
      
   3. 
      It must have been Nebuchadnezzar’s favourite threat. Ancient Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian kings were known for their barbarity. This barbarity continues today in the lands of the ME that have succumbed to Islam.
      
   4. 
      We noted when considering the previous occurrence of this threat, that:
      
      1. 
         To cut a human body into pieces was considered about as degrading a curse as possible.
         
         1. 
            The Babylonians believed that a soul of a body that was not buried properly would torment the living. They invested effort in preparing bodies with spices and perfumes to help it enter the netherworld of the dead.²⁰²
            
         2. 
            When Babylonian and Assyrian kings wanted to curse someone they would speak of casting a body aside with no burial and the mutilation of a dead body was viewed as a terrible punishment.²⁰³
            
         3. 
            Muslims continue the same practice: “Thousands of Iraqi Christians have found threats like this under their front doors or stoops, in stairwells or shoved through their courtyard gates: "Be informed that we will cut your heads and leave your dead bodies with no organs and no heads in your stores and houses. We know your houses and we know your family. We will kill you one after the other. Depart the Muslim areas.”²⁰⁴
            
      2. 
         To turn a house into a pile of rubble (ruins) was also considered to be a curse.
         
         1. 
            The Aramaic word used here for rubble/ruins can also be translated as “ash heap” or “garbage-heap” or “public latrine”.
            
2. 
   Affirmation – He affirms the uniqueness of God.
   
   1. 
      What is the focus of his observation about God?
      
      1. 
         He focuses on the work God performed, the miracle of saving the men, rather than on the attributes of God—although some attributes of God are implied by the action God took (e.g., almighty power, compassion).
         
      2. 
         Even in this, he cannot see the illogic of his position. He believes in gods that cannot perform miracles and yet is only willing to profess the true God who can perform miracles as a better god; not the ultimate and only God.
         
   2. 
      In professing God as better/best, is his profession a saving profession?
      
      1. 
         Professing that God is able to work miracles is not equivalent to saving faith.
         
      2. 
         Miracles have two primary purposes in scripture: 1) to prepare minds and hearts for saving faith, 2) to confirm the one performing the miracle as God’s messenger.
         
      3. 
         But belief in miracles alone is not sufficient to save a person. Adherents of false religions can believe that miracles are performed by their fakirs, priests, monks, and ‘holy’ men but that is not the same as believing in God as saviour.
         
      4. 
         Even belief in God as the only one who can perform miracles (or empower his agents to perform miracles) is not enough to save. Satan and the demons believe that God, Jesus as the God-man, and prophets/apostles can perform miracles. But that belief cannot save them (Lk 8.28; Jam 2.19).
         
   3. 
      What would have been necessary for Nebuchadnezzar to have voiced a saving profession of faith?
      
      1. 
         Give up his own national deities by acknowledging them to be nothing more that vain imaginations (Jonah 2.8; Ezk 6.6).
         
      2. 
         Declare Jehovah/Yahweh to be the only God; not just one of many gods; not just the most powerful of many gods (1 Ki 18.39).
         
      3. 
         Confess Jehovah/Yahweh to be his personal God (Ex 15.2)
         
      4. 
         Repent of his sins, particularly in false worship, and seek to serve the true God obediently (Josh 24.15).
         
      5. 
         Look to God’s Messiah as saviour (Job 19.25-27; Num 24.17).
         

7. 
   Why did God work this miracle?
   
   1. 
      Advance his glory.
      
      1. 
         The hotter the furnace, the tighter the cords, and the stronger the soldiers throwing the men in, the harder it was for the observers to claim that the survival of the three men was natural or could be attributed to some remarkable fortuitous circumstances. Rather, the administrators would have been constrained to acknowledge that what they had seen was nothing other than a miracle.
         
      2. 
         The wicked intentions of the administrators were over-ruled by God. Those who had plotted in anger and hatred became, instead, consumed by curiosity.
         
   2. 
      Demonstrate his power.
      
      1. 
         We may not be the recipients of such visible and obvious a miracle as that which was provided for Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego and was shown to those who accused them of being irreligious and insubordinate, and wanted them destroyed.
         
      2. 
         And, we don’t need to debate the question of whether God still performs miracles today. If we get into this debate, we lose sight of a greater reality.
         
         1. 
            Let us refresh our memories as to what is a miracle: “a miracle is a direct action of God which temporarily suspends the proximate means (‘laws’) by which God normally directs events in the natural realm.”
            
      3. 
         All of our existence is miraculous.
         
         1. 
            We came into existence from nothing by the direct creative act of God at our conception. Creation of a human life is a miracle—it is an immediate or direct action of God which temporarily suspends the proximate means (‘laws’) by which God normally governs and administers events in the natural real. The natural order of matter is that it is not to be alive.
            
            1. 
               Contrary to what Evolutionists and Materialist claim natural physical systems cannot generate life. For example, the PBS Nova program ‘Life’s Special Miracle’²⁰⁵ uses the word ‘creation’ with respect to life but attributes life to DNA replication. The programs ignores the question of what life is and how it comes into existence. It also doesn’t address the question of where the information in the DNA came from originally. It focuses rather on the mechanics of physical reproduction of genetic information.
               
            2. 
               Even intelligent, rational creatures cannot generate, build, or create life. Life is a phenomenon created only by God through a miracle.
               
         2. 
            Our daily existence is also miraculous. Because we are so used to being alive and moving about each day we do not stop to consider what is actually going on with our existence and miss the miraculous. The sustenance of life is a direct action of God which suspends the proximate means by which he normally governs and administers events in the natural realm.
            
            1. 
               The ‘natural’ order of matter is not life sustaining, even in a sinless universe. When God created matter (Gen 1.1, 2) matter was formless and lifeless. With the introduction of sin, matter/energy is subject to decay (Gen 3.17; Rom 8.21).
               
            2. 
               God literally holds the universe together moment by moment (Col 1.17; Acts 17.28). Athanasius said that if God were not holding the universe together, “we should consequently see not an ordered universe, but disorder, not arrangement but anarchy, not a system, but everything out of system, not proportion but disproportion.”²⁰⁶
               
         3. 
            The new birth is a miracle. It defies the natural order which is spiritual death.
            
            1. 
               Many in the Church today seek after sign miracles and miss the greatest miracle of all—turning hearts of granite into living cells and wills of lead into joyful wonder.
               
            2. 
               Only God, in Jesus, can release mankind from the crippling grip of Satan (Ps 146.8).
               
            3. 
               It is also amazing, and a miracle, when God’s people are able to stand firm for truth, against sinful compliance to evil commands, as did Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, than their being saved from the fiery furnace. It shows that God had saved his people by grace and is working his grace in them.
               
         4. 
            All believers in Jesus will experience another miracle. We will be taken into eternity.
            
            1. 
               Our current bodies were designed for this physical realm and, with the introduction of sin, have become subject to decay. We will be given new bodies (1 Cor 15.35-49) fit our new existence.
               
            2. 
               We will be given new homes in the New Heavens and Earth (2 Pet 3.13; Rev 21.1).
               
            3. 
               We will be sustained by God for eternity
               
      4. 
         The God who created the human eye can certainly perform physical miracles today. But Jesus didn’t heal every blind eye in his day and we are not to expect that kind of healing (or other types of miracles) today since the age of sign-miracles to validate the Messiah has ceased.
         
   3. 
      Frustrate the impious.
      
      1. 
         We may have the thoughts of Job (21.7), Asaph (Ps 73.3), Jeremiah (12.1), or Habakkuk (1.2-4) and believe that the way of the wicked prospers. But this is not true.
         
         1. 
            God confounds the worldly wise and frustrates their ambitions.
            
         2. 
            God brings to nothing human replacements for his glory and opposes those who despise his glory.
            
            1. 
               False religions self-destruct in mutually destructive internecine conflicts.
               
            2. 
               False philosophies wallow in their self-deluded inconsistencies.
               
            3. 
               False hopes lie in ruins—shattered in the collapsed walls of the stock market, the gutters of perversion, and the cracked pavements of broken relationships.
               
      2. 
         The Babylonians worshiped a god of fire, so God showed them, by despising and restraining the flames, that their god was inconsequential compared with his power. While Bel could not save his worshippers from being burned at the mouth of the furnace, God could save his people from the very midst of the furnace.
         
      3. 
         God removed all room for doubt and unbelief in him as the true God, by releasing his servants from the fire. God continues to provide men in every generation and geography with more than sufficient evidence of his existence and power in every dimension of their lives. Men are without excuse before God.
         
   4. 
      Encourage his people.
      
      1. 
         Nebuchadnezzar was in the process of taking the Jews into captivity. Their oppression would last 70 years as foretold by Jeremiah (Jer 25.11, 12; 29.10; Dan 9.2). The salvation of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego from the furnace on the plains of Dura would remind them that God was in control and he could bring them through the furnace of captivity as easily as he brought the three men through the brick-firing kiln.
         
      2. 
         The salvation (and promotion; 30) of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego would provide some relief from hatred against the true religion.
         
         1. 
            The three men, along with Daniel, could be a positive influence for the preservation of the Jews and help to protect them from oppression. Another example of a force for good in the governments of the oppressive empire, during the time of the Jewish Captivity, was Mordecai.
            
         2. 
            Opponents of the true religion would be constrained somewhat from blasphemy and murderous hatred by the presence of these godly men in positions of power in the heart of the empire.
            

8. 
   What was the outcome of this test of wills between the accusatory wise men and the accused servants of God?
   
   1. 
      The three were promoted in the province of Babylon.
      
      1. 
         They were promoted to positions that were higher than the ones they had been given previously (2.49).
         
      2. 
         They were likely promoted above (some of) those who had accused them of being irreligious and insubordinate. This must have really irked their enemies for the rest of their lives (compare the situation between Haman and Mordecai; Esther 6.11-13).
         
   2. 
      Were they actually promoted?
      
      1. 
         Some suggest that they were only restored to their previous positions. Others suggest that we can understand the meaning as ‘caused to prosper’
         
      2. 
         We will accept the word of God at face value and conclude that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were given (more) important positions in the province of Babylon.
         
   3. 
      Kings, presidents, governors, and prime ministers promote those who are reliable.
      
      1. 
         Generally, the most reliable people they will be able to find are Christians who do their jobs to the best of their abilities and live quiet lives of service (Prov 10.4; 12.24; 22.29).
         
      2. 
         The objective for obeying God should not be to gain promotion in this world. However, obedience to God often results in advancement and material prosperity—they are the blessings for obedience.
         

9. 
   What are some lessons that we can derive from this section?
   
   1. 
      Power – God can do anything; but contradict his own nature. He is all-powerful.
      
      1. 
         Miracles are exceptional to us but not to God. We noted that God performs miracles in the physical, temporal realm moment by moment:
         
         1. 
            We came into existence from nothing by the direct creative act of God at our conception.
            
         2. 
            Our daily existence is also miraculous.
            
            1. 
               The ‘natural’ order of matter is not life sustaining, even in a sinless universe.
               
            2. 
               God literally holds the universe together moment by moment (Col 1.17; Acts 17.28).
               
      2. 
         We should not stumble over the miracle of saving the three men from the furnace. Preventing harm to them while they walked in the furnace is a, relatively, insignificant control of nature compared with creating the universe, creating life, or raising someone to life.
         
      3. 
         While we believe that miracles are possible today, we are not to expect them. The God who created the human eye can certainly perform physical miracles today. But, Jesus didn’t heal every blind eye in his day and we are not to expect that kind of healing (or other types of miracles) today since the age of sign-miracles to validate the Messiah has ceased.
         
   2. 
      Praise – Even pagans will praise God, in spite of their adherence to false religions.
      
      1. 
         Eventually every proud knee will be humbled and bow before Jesus (Phil 2.9, 10).
         
         1. 
            Those who repent of their sins and believe in Jesus bow in love to him.
            
         2. 
            At the Judgement Day the remainder of mankind, even the proudest of the proud, will fall in awe and fear before the judge of all the earth.
            
         3. 
            Nebuchadnezzar, like Pharaoh (Ex 18.11), began the process of bowing in his mortal existence. His profession of God’s greatness is a token of the future reality that awaits all men—they will acknowledge God as the only God even from the depths of eternal Hell.
            
   3. 
      Protection – God protects his people and is especially caring of those who obey him under difficult, life threatening, situations.
      
      1. 
         It might appear at times that God deserts his people. When the three men were thrown into the furnace, they may have thought that God had forsaken them.
         
      2. 
         The miracle of their salvation from the fire and the presence of Christ with them in the fire, tells us that God is with his people in their infirmities, troubles, persecutions, trials and temptations.
         
         1. 
            George Whitfield, for example, appeals to these events for his own encouragement on his return from Georgia to England: “With a particular fear and trembling I think of going to London; but He who preserved Daniel in the den of lions, and the Three Children in the fiery furnace, will, I hope, preserve me from the fiery trial of popularity, and from the misguided zeal of those, who, without cause, are my enemies.”²⁰⁷
            
      3. 
         This does not mean that every believer will be protected in every adverse circumstance in this life.
         
         1. 
            God’s purposes are deeper and larger that we can ever understand or imagine at this time, with our finite understanding: ‘In this era, God saves whom he wanted, so that the works of his magnificence would be revealed to the whole world. But those for whom he desired martyrdom, he crowned them and brought them to himself. If he removed the three young men from danger, it was so that the boasting of Nebuchadnezzar might appear as nothing, for God wanted to demonstrate that “what is impossible for man is possible for God” ... God proved that he is able to remove his servants from danger when he wants.’ ²⁰⁸
            
         2. 
            His purposes may include allowing us to be subjected to persecution and, an apparently, premature death.
            
         3. 
            However, the protection of the three is a promise to us that God will walk with us through whatever circumstances come our way.
            
         4. 
            God will never leave us or abandon us (Josh 1.5; Ps 37.25; Is 41.10; Jn 14.18; Heb 13.5).
            
         5. 
            He will be with us even through the valley of the shadow of death.
            
         6. 
            For the Christian, death is a shadow, and we must look beyond death and into eternity to see God’s working out his great plan for our lives.
            
   4. 
      Presence – The men had the privileged of meeting with Christ in pre-incarnate form. That meeting with Christ was a blessing to their souls. We cannot meet, today, with Christ in bodily form. But, he is present in spirit with his people. Jesus is present with us now, walking in our midst as surely as he did in the furnace on the plains of Dura. We should praise God for the privilege we have of knowing Jesus and having him walking beside us.
      
   5. 
      Prophecy – The presence of Christ in the midst of the furnace was a prophecy of his planned incarnation.
      
      1. 
         He took bodily form not only to console the three men, but to proclaim his intention of coming to earth in a true human nature.
         
      2. 
         His incarnation had been proclaimed from the time of curse against sin in the Garden (Gen 3.15).
         
      3. 
         As history progressed and revelation became fuller, the coming of the Messiah as the God-man became more clearly defined.
         
      4. 
         We have the advantage of hind-sight and understand the nature of his incarnation as the suffering servant.
         
      5. 
         There is a prophecy yet to be fulfilled. His presence in the furnace in bodily form, and subduing he flames of the furnace, reminds us that he is coming once again with fire to consume this world and to save his people forever from the flames of Hell’s furnace. Soli Deo Gloria—to God alone the glory!