Daniel The Man who Feared God 2016

Situation (7-13)

1. 
   What request did the astrologers make of the king? (7)
   
   1. 
      They asked a second time for the king to inform them of the contents of his dream and then claimed that they would interpret it. They could think of no new way to encourage the king to provide them with the information they needed so they had to fall back on repeating the request they had made previously (4).
      
   2. 
      What, probably, were the feelings they had at this point?
      
      1. 
         It is probable that they made this petition with great fear and desperation. Their ‘bluff had been called’ and they knew that their inability to interpret dreams has been found out.
         
      2. 
         They had been discovered to be frauds and were embarrassed.
         

2. 
   What was Nebuchadnezzar’s, correct, understanding of the astrologer’s situation? (8, 9)
   
   1. 
      He was certain, and correct, that they were repeating their request to ‘gain time’ (or we would say today ‘buy time’ or ‘stall for time’) because they knew that he was not going to supply them with the contents of his dream and was not going to change his demand for them to reveal it.
      
      1. 
         The Aramaic here reads: ‘of a certainty’ and can mean: ‘absolute certainty’.
         
   2. 
      He had correctly established in his mind that the astrologers were unable to meet his demand that they reveal the contents of his dream.
      
      1. 
         He had concluded that there was collusion (a conspiracy) among them and that they were all acting together to resist him, hoping that in their unity they might change his mind.
         
         1. 
            The Aramaic idiom: ‘Until the time is changed’ cam be re-expressed in modern idiom as: ‘hoping the situation will change’ or as ‘until things change’.
            
      2. 
         He was sure that they were evading the reality that they were frauds.
         
      3. 
         He was certain that their claims were lies and, as such, they were corrupt/wicked.
         

3. 
   What had Nebuchadnezzar firmly decided? Why? (8, 9)
   
   1. 
      Their sentence and final disposition had been firmly decided and decreed.
      
      1. 
         Again he repeats his previous statement (5) that his decision is unalterable (8): “the word from me is firm” [ESV] “I have firmly decided” [NIV].
         
      2. 
         There final disposition is in accordance with law as he has decreed it (9): “there is but one sentence for you” [ESV], “there is just one penalty for you” [NIV]. The law (sentence) against you is one and unchangeable.
         
   2. 
      Nebuchadnezzar’s patience had reached its limit. He appears to have become exasperated with them. They thought that their request to have the contents of the dream explained was reasonable. He, in turn, believed that his request was even more reasonable: to have them reveal the contents to demonstrate that they really could interpret dreams.
      
      1. 
         In fact, both requests were reasonable.
         
      2. 
         From a human perspective, their request is valid since men cannot discern the thoughts of other men.
         
      3. 
         From his perspective, his request was also valid—since they claimed to have supernatural abilities there should be no reason for them not to be able to meet his demand and validate their claim. His test was really no different from what someone might do who had found a purse and asked a claimant to correctly describe it and its contents in order to verify her ownership.
         
      4. 
         In the end, his request prevailed because of his absolute authority over his subjects. The king’s decree was to be their will and action.
         
   3. 
      Nebuchadnezzar may have resented their repeated request, for another reason:
      
      1. 
         The astrologers likely had served his father and were older than he was.
         
      2. 
         They may have been condescending and contemptuous of his youth (if he was born in 630 BC, as is believed, he was still under the age of 30 when he had the troubling dream that is recorded in this chapter).
         
      3. 
         He was ready to put them in their place and remind them and all his subjects that he was the king of the greatest empire that had ever been formed in the ME, until that day.
         

4. 
   What does Nebuchadnezzar accuse the astrologers of doing? (9)
   
   1. 
      He accuses them of conspiring to tell him misleading (lies) and wicked things.
      
   2. 
      Instead of challenging them directly with respect to their inability to interpret dreams, he accuses them of being in collusion to deceive him.
      
   3. 
      Was this a fair accusation?
      
      1. 
         To this point, they had not explicitly lied, as they had not yet attempted to provide an interpretation of the dream. Only, once they had told him what they believed to be the contents of dream, and it was shown to be incorrect, could he accuse them of lying.
         
      2. 
         They had even confessed their inability to divine the content of his dream. This was true. They however continued to claim that if they knew the contents of the dream they could give a valid interpretation; so in this respect were lying.
         
      3. 
         As an analogy, if someone announced that he had found a purse and asked anyone claiming it to describe it and its contents, he could not accuse someone who came forward of being duplicitous and a fraud until after she had presented an invalid description.
         

5. 
   To what universal truths do the astrologers appeal? (10, 11)
   
   1. 
      The astrologers asserted that there was not a man on earth who could report the contents of the king’s dream. From a human perspective, this is true since no man (mere human) can read the mind of another man.
      
   2. 
      No king, no matter how great, has asked such a thing of his wise men.
      
      1. 
         This is probably true. No ‘great’ king before Nebuchadnezzar is reported to have presented such a difficult challenge.
         
      2. 
         In the Bible, the only king requesting an interpretation of his dream, prior to the time of Daniel, was the Pharaoh at the time of Joseph. He provided the contents of his dream to his wise men, he did not ask them to ‘read’ his mind.
         
      3. 
         There doesn’t appear to be any record in secular writings of a request that is similar to Nebuchadnezzar’s. If there had been, and the record of it still existed, scholars would have, by this time, cross-referenced the record to the account in Daniel.
         
   3. 
      Only the gods can reveal dreams and their meanings.
      
      1. 
         In this, they are partially correct.
         
      2. 
         They realize that dream interpretation is beyond natural human abilities.
         
      3. 
         Ultimately, only God can know the mind of men (Ps 94.11; 139.2; Mt 9.4; Lk 9.47).
         
      4. 
         However, being polytheistic⁷² they attribute the ability to interpret dreams to their gods, whereas in reality it resides only with the true God. As we noted (when we considered 1.17) Satan does not have the ability to use dreams to foretell the future and no natural dream can foretell the future. God alone can provide revelatory dreams and their meaning.
         

6. 
   What do the astrologers admit?
   
   1. 
      However bold their claim (to be dream interpreters) had been in the past, they now admit their own limitations and inability.
      
   2. 
      Their arts and powers were severely limited.
      
   3. 
      They understood that there was a greater mind than the human mind. Without realizing it, they admit that God has divine omniscience.
      
   4. 
      They do not have access to the gods (11) and so really cannot provide dream interpretations.
      
   5. 
      The idols to which they offered prayers and sacrifices were nothing but dumb objects with no eyes to see or ears to hear.
      
   6. 
      Nebuchadnezzar really wasn’t divine (since the gods do not dwell among men) contrary to the popular teaching of their religious system, where the king was considered to be a god in human form.
      
   7. 
      They had deceived the king with their previous interpretations. If only the gods can provide dream interpretations, then how had they been able to provide them in the past?
      
   8. 
      These admissions would have been startling and difficult for them since they considered themselves to be worthy of great respect in the king’s court and among the common people. It would have been very difficult for these proud men to admit their insufficiencies. But the fear of execution forced them to swallow their false, swollen pride.
      

7. 
   What is the nature of the astrologers’ final appeal?
   
   1. 
      It is a form of begging or pleading. They say, in effect, “We cannot do what you ask, so don’t ask it.”
      
      1. 
         They hope that the king will accept the reality that what he asks is impossible, from a human perspective.
         
      2. 
         However, Nebuchadnezzar was an absolute monarch who believed that no law, tradition, or request from a subject, could be above his whim or will. We who live in the West, influenced by the English, American and French revolutions, have difficulty understanding the concept of monarchies or governments that are not constrained by ‘popular sovereignty’ and the rule of law.
         
      3. 
         We might find Nebuchadnezzar’s demand unreasonable, but the wise men of his day would have realized that the king had the ‘right’ to ask of them something unreasonable or impossible even if it led to their death.
         
   2. 
      They use subtle flattery.
      
      1. 
         They implied that Nebuchadnezzar was “great and mighty” [NIV] (“great and powerful” [ESV], “lord, or ruler” [NKJV])
         
         1. 
            Ascriptions such as, ‘Great King, mighty King, King of Assyria/Babylon’ have been found on clay bricks, clay tablets, obelisks, and wall reliefs.
            
         2. 
            For example: “Shalmaneser, the great king, the mighty king, king of the universe, King of Assyria, son of Assur-nasir-pal, the great king, the mighty king, king of the universe, king of Assyria, son of Tukulti-Ninurta, the mighty king, king of the universe, king of Assyria (brick from) the construction of the ziggurat in Kalhu.” ^73,74,75
            

8. 
   What in the astrologers’ answer would have angered the king?
   
   1. 
      They compare himself with other kings.
      
      1. 
         Nebuchadnezzar would have considered himself the greatest king ever to walk the earth. What other kings may have done is irrelevant from his perspective.
         
      2. 
         By putting the king in the same class as other kings, the astrologers have effectively knocked Nebuchadnezzar off his high pillar.
         
   2. 
      They tell the king that what he asks is not possible to achieve.
      
      1. 
         An absolute monarch, who expected to have his will heeded immediately, would not be pleased to have his subjects tell him that what he wished done would not be.
         
      2. 
         The astrologers effectively rebuke the king by suggesting that what he wishes done, no king should desire or request.
         
      3. 
         It is common for men who cannot be convinced by reason to become angry and provoked when their wills are thwarted.
         
   3. 
      They admit that their inability to provide an interpretation of the dream is evidence that their mystical arts are useless.
      
      1. 
         They effectively tell the king that their powers are a mere sham and that they have been lying to, and fooling, the kings before him.
         
   4. 
      In verse 12, the expression “angry and very furious,” indicates Nebuchadnezzar’s mounting anger.
      
      1. 
         This is a typical construct in Semitic languages: to emphasize the importance of something, a writer repeats a word either directly or with a synonym (e.g., “dying you shall die” Gen 2.17). This repetition takes the place of ‘very’ or ‘surely’ as the means of emphasizing the importance of the idea.
         
   5. 
      As a result of their excuses and duplicity Nebuchadnezzar’s anger reached its peak
      

9. 
   What was to be the apparent conclusion of the confrontation between Nebuchadnezzar and the astrologers? (12-13)
   
   1. 
      Nebuchadnezzar ordered the execution of all the wise men, including the specific class of astrologers who were the ones in the confrontation.
      
   2. 
      Why were all the wise men to be executed? Why not just those who had challenged Nebuchadnezzar?
      
      1. 
         There was one decree for them all (2, 9).
         
      2. 
         The astrologers represented the rest of the wise men, so all of the wise men stood condemned, without exception.
         
      3. 
         The failure of one class of wise men reflected on the entire contingent. The king thought in ancient Middle East covenantal concepts. A king represented an entire nation, a father a family, a class of wise men, the entire contingent.
         
   3. 
      Who was to be killed? The wise men in all the empire, only in the province/territory of Babylon (2.48, 49; 3.1), or only in the city of Babylon (4.29)?
      
      1. 
         Given that the decree extended to all classes of wise men, and not just the interpreters of dreams, it likely had broad geographic extent as well.
         
      2. 
         The decree applied not only to those currently serving in the king’s court, but also to all wise men, including those not present. Thus Daniel and his friends, who were not present at the confrontation between Nebuchadnezzar and the astrologers, were included within the scope of the decree.
         
      3. 
         The fact that the wise men had to be assembled for the execution hints at a broader application that those near at hand to the throne room.
         
      4. 
         The decree, therefore, likely included all wise men throughout the entire kingdom. However, in practice, most of the wise men in Nebuchadnezzar’s service would likely have been in close proximity.
         

10. 
    How was the execution to be accomplished?
    
    1. 
       It is possible that each individual was to be killed wherever he was found.
       
    2. 
       It is also possible that the wise men were to be rounded up for a mass, public execution. A public display would have catered to the people’s desire for entertainment and blood-lust and reinforced the King’s autocratic authority.
       

11. 
    What does this decree tell us about Nebuchadnezzar?
    
    1. 
       He wielded temporally absolute and arbitrary power.
       
    2. 
       While more lenient than most kings of his era, he was still a tyrant—commanding death when he could not comprehend truth.
       

12. 
    Why was Daniel not among the astrologers in the court at the time of these events?
    
    1. 
       Daniel was probably not part of the order of astrologers—the dream interpreters.
       
    2. 
       He may not yet have actually commenced his service in the court, even though he had just graduated from the training program.
       

13. 
    What are some lessons that we can derive from this section?
    
    1. 
       Duplicity – Worldly men serving kings and others in positions of authority easily become sycophants, toadies and panderers. We see this among the astrologers who attempt to use flattery to assuage the king’s anger. We also see examples of their duplicity in that for (probably) many years they had been making claims to be wise counsellors to kings. However, when their lives were on the line, and they were asked to perform, they admitted that they were frauds.
       
    2. 
       Danger – Nebuchadnezzar’s use of autocratic authority to decree the execution of the wise men teaches us of the dangers of placing absolute power in the hands of mortals. As Lord Acton said in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” When leadership is not tempered by Biblical wisdom it can only tend to autocracy and tyranny. Consider fascism and communism as modern examples which replaced hereditary kings with similar evils. We must not think that democracies are any better. The ‘will of the people’ can be as tyrannical as the will of oligarchs when it is based on selfish striving for rights and entitlements. No form of government, per se, is better than any other. We are not to put our faith and hope in a form of government but in God’s providential governance over all governors.
       
    3. 
       Demonic – This account reminds us that astrology and the arts of other enchanters and magicians is mere nonsense and the fruit of the demonic. The ancient wise men were made to look foolish by the king when he asked them to provide a true demonstration of their professed abilities. It is the same today, even with our professed modern wisdom, many of the counsellors to kings, presidents, prime ministers, and governors, are charlatans:
       
       1. 
          Their economic and social policies are mystical hokum, for example:
          
          1. 
             Tinkering with interest rates to stimulate the economy is like trying to turn a ship in a narrow channel in deep darkness while looking behind at the wake.
             
          2. 
             Creating gun registries and not allowing honest citizens to own/carry guns ensures that criminals know that there will not be any guns to oppose their activities.
             
          3. 
             Raising taxes and stifling growth to increase government revenue rather than allowing economic growth to produce a larger tax base. People do not tolerate tax increase and either hide their income in black-market transactions or flee the political jurisdiction (consider Detroit and Michigan as prime example).
             
          4. 
             Legislating school integration and sending children by bus to other schools, resulting in ‘white flight’, more extreme segregation, and inferior educational opportunities for black students.
             
       2. 
          Their military advice is a sham, for example:
          
          1. 
             Ignoring the reality of war. Once wars are engaged they need to be fought to the death. It is silly for one country to attempt to ‘play fairly’ when the enemy takes advantage of every appeasement (e.g., treating terrorists as criminals needing a trial rather than as wicked and vicious enemies).
             
          2. 
             Thinking that you can appease Islam and work with Islamic regimes to conquer terrorism.
             
       3. 
          Their scientific advice is foolishness, for example:
          
          1. 
             Outlawing the incandescent light bulb, claiming that this will reduce energy consumption (which it may) and in turn reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (which it probably won’t), when the alternatives may be far worse polluters (e.g., mercury from florescent ballasts).
             
          2. 
             Subsidizing ethanol production and hybrid cars to decrease dependence on fossil-fuels without out considering the true life-cycle costs and impact of skewing markets (e.g., increasing the price of food).
             
    4. 
       Divinity – To God alone belongs the ability to foretell the future. We are not to resort to any means of fortune telling or future prognostication. Even when we consider the prophecies in the Bible we are to apply them with great care. We are, for example, to believe that Jesus will return on the Last Day, as the Bible says (Acts 10.1, 11; 1 Thes 4.16). But we are not to create systems for placing dates on when the final events will occur (Mt 24.36-51).
       
    5. 
       Delusion – Men think that they are masters of their own destinies and too smart to need God. God will confound the wisdom of the worldly wise just as he did the wise men of Nebuchadnezzar’s court by making them look like fools (Is 44.25; 53.19;Rom 1.22; 1 Cor 1.20).