I. DANIEL THE INTERPRETER--Chapters 1-6
C. The Image of Gold--3:1-30
1. The nature--vv. 1-7
a. Its description--v.
1
(1)
Certainly made in view of the events of Chapter 2--"We are not
told how long an interval had elapsed
between the king's dream of chapter 2 and the construction
of this image of chapter 3; however, it is not
difficult to conceive something of what probably was in
his mind. In his remarkable dream.
Nebuchadnezzar had seen himself portrayed as the head of gold
of an image representing world
dominion. Now we find him making a whole image of gold
in honor of the empire which he had
constructed, such as had never before existed." (Newell, 44)
(II)
Considerable time may have elapsed between Chapters 2 and 3.--"The exact
date of the erection of the
image, however, is debated [as much in Daniel is]. The Septuagint
and Theodotion connect the event with
the destruction of Jerusalem, which, according to 2 Kings
25:8-10 and Jeremiah 52:12, places this event
in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar. There
is no certainty, however, that there is a relationship
between the destruction of Jerusalem and the erection
of the image, although the general narrative and the
fact that Daniel apparently is away would imply considerable
passage of time. It may well be, however,
that twenty years elapsed between chapter 2 and chapter
3." (Walvoord, 80)
(III)
Size
(A) 60 cubits high-- 90 feet
(B) Six cubits wide--9 feet
(C) These numbers are the numbers of man--this shows that
it is not of God.
(D) "The obvious intent was to impress by the size of the
image rather than by its particular features."
(Ibid.)
(IV)
The word image is used in broadest sense, but doubtlessly was in human
form.
(V)
Its material
(A) Possibly of solid gold --he could afford it.
(B) Probably made of wood overlaid with gold.
(VI)
Its place
(A) Plain of Dura
(B) "The consensus of conservative scholarship is that
the most probable location is a mound located six
miles southeast of Babylon consisting of
a large square of brick construction which would have
ideally served as a base for such an image as
Nebuchadnezzar erected." (Walvoord, 81)
(VII)
Its significance
(A) "According to the common view (. . .), Nebuchadnezzar wished
to erect a statue as an expression of
his thanks to his god Bel for his great victories,
and on that account also to consecrate it with religious
ceremonies." (Keil, 119)
(B) ". . . the statue was not the image of a god, because
a distinction is made between falling down to it
and the service to his god which Nebuchadnezzar
required (ver. 12, 14, 18) from his officers of state.
This distinction, however, is not well supported;
for in these verses praying to the gods of
Nebuchadnezzar is placed on an equality with
falling down before the image. But on the other hand,
the statue is not designated as the image of
a god, or the image of Belus; therefore, we agree, with
Klief, in his opinion, that the statue was a
symbol of the world-power established by Nebuchadnezzar,
so that the falling down before it was a
manifestation of reverence not only to the world-power, but
also to its gods; and that therefore the Israelites
could not fall down before the image, because in doing
so, they would have rendered homage at the same
time also to the god or gods of Nebuchadnezzar, in
the image of the world-power." (Keil,
120)
b. Its dedication--vv.
2-7
(I)
Those invited
(A) Their titles
(1) Princes
(a) Satraps
(b) Administrators
(c) Chief representatives
of the king
(2) Governors
(a) Perfects
(b) Military chiefs
(c) Commanders
(3) Captains
(a) Governors of civil
government
(b) Presidents
(4) judges
(a) Counsellors
(b) Chief arbitrators
(5) Treasurers--superintendents of the
public treasury
(6) Counsellors
(a) Different from the
counsellors who are judges; they were arbitrators
(b) Law officers
(c) Guardians of the
law
(7) Sheriffs
(a) Magistrates
(b) Judges in the strictest
sense of the word
(c) This writer suspects,
although he can't prove it, that these terms had to do with the degree of
judgment or
arbitrating. It may be that this term is like our judges in local courts
whereas the
other are
higher levels.
(8) Rulers
(a) Lesser officials of
the provinces
(b) Under the chief governor
(Daniel?)
(9) Might include people in general
(B) The listing of the officials partly Persians
(l) Another case of much ado about
nothing
(2) "It would be natural for Daniel, who may
have written or at least edited this passage.after the
Persian government had come
to power, to bring the various offices up-to-date by using current
expressions.
The fact that Daniel was so familiar with these offices is another
evidence that he lived
in the sixth century B. C."
(Walvoord, 82)
(3) This list helps date this book as sixth century
and refutes the critics second century data.
(II)
Their placing
(A) Before the image awaiting the call to universal worship
(B) The problem here of Greek words
(1) The word in question is herald.
(a) The word is
karoz.
(b) It resembles the Greek
word kerux.
(2) Also some of the instruments in verse
5 seem to be of Greek origin,
(3) Critics use this to claim second century
authorship.
(4) Some have challenged the critics.
(a) Are these actually Greek
words?
(b) Karoz has been
traced to a Persian word, khrausa, meaning caller.
(5) "Conservative biblical scholarship has fully
answered the objection of critics which would tend to
reflect upon the accuracy
and historicity of the book of Daniel. Robert Dick Wilson,
for instance,
has pointed out that
the argument actually boomerangs as, if Daniel was written in
a Greek
period, there would be many
more Greek words than the few that occur here and there. The fact is
that there is nothing strange
about some amount of Greek influence in Babylonian culture in view
of
the contacts between them
and the Greeks. Greek traders were common in Egypt and western
Asia from the seventh century
B. C. onward.” (Walvoord, 83-84)
(III)
The instruments
(A) The list
(1) Cornet
(a) A horn instrument
(b) Probably made from the
horn of a beast
(2) Flute
(a) Probably made of
reeds
(b) Like a fife
(3) Harp
(a) A stringed instrument
(b) Probably "U" shaped like
a lyre
(4) Sackbut--a triangular board with strings
(5) Psaltery--a 20 stringed instrument
(6) Dulcimer--a wind instrument
(7) A miscellaneous group of instruments
(a) Collectively called,
all kinds of music
(b) May have included a
choir
(B) The problem
(1) Some of the instruments are said to
be of Greek origin.
(2) Some of the same things that were said
about the word herald would apply here.
(3) "Recent studies on the musical instruments
mentioned in Daniel 3 conducted by T. C. Mitchell and
R. Joyce have given support
to the authenticity of these instruments in the sixth century B. C.
Further studies by Yamauchi
support the conclusion that Greek words in Daniel are not to be
unexpected and in fact refer
to the interchange of cultures in the ancient world." (Walvoord, 84)
(IV)
The proclamation
(A) When the music sounds
(1) FaIl prostrate
(2) Do homage
(B) Refusal was an act of hostility.--"A refusal to yield
homage to the gods of the kingdom they regarded
as act of hostility against the kingdom
and its monarch, while every one might at the same time honour
his own national god. This acknowledgment,
that the gods of the kingdom were the more powerful,
every heathen would grant; and thus Nebuchadnezzar
demanded nothing in a religious point of view
which every one of his subjects could not
yield. To him, therefore, the refusal of the Jews could not
but appear as opposition to the greatness of
his kingdom." (Keil, 124)
(C) The punishment
(1) Cast into a fiery furnace
(2) The furnace
(a) "Montgomery suggests
that the furnace 'must have been similar to our common lime-kiln, with a
perpendicular
shaft from the top and an opening at the bottom for extracting the fused
lime.'"
(Walvoord,
85)
(b) "This would explain both
the way in which the victims were put into the furnace and the
circumstances
which permitted the king to see what was happening inside the furnace."
(Ibid.)
(3) The threat of punishment was enough
to make most of the group comply.
(4) The phrase, the same hour should not
be pressed as to mean immediately. Verse 8 and following
would suggest that this is
the case.
2. The accusation--vv. 8-12
a. Chaldeans--vv.8,
9
(I)
They bring the accusation before the king.
(II)
"Undoubtedly there was resentment against these Jews who had been placed
by Nebuchadnezzar in
charge of the province of Babylon because they were
of another race and of a captive people."
(Walvoord, 86)
(III)
"Note that they were betrayed by the very 'Chaldeans' whom their own countryman
Daniel had saved in
the nick of time (2:24) not long before this [unless twenty
years had elapsed as previously mentioned].
The innate hatred of Gentiles for Jews fairly exudes from
verse 12, in the accusation concerning the three
Hebrews: 'There are certain Jews whom thou hast set over
the affairs of the province of Babylon'--
professional jealousy also, no doubt, going back to the scenes
of Chapter 1:19, 20." (Newell, 47)
(IV)
They remind the king of his decree and the punishment for
disobedience.
b. Three accusations
--vv 10-12
(I)
They don't regard the king--"The form of the accusation is almost a
rebuke to the king himself. It is clear
that the Chaldeans had deep-seated resentment against the Jews
and felt the king had made a serious
mistake in trusting these foreigners with such high offices.
They remind the king that these men are Jews,
different in race and culture from the Babylonians. The
king had set them over the affairs of the province
of Babylon, the most important province in the empire
and the key to political security for the entire
realm. The personal loyalty of such officers should
be beyond question; but, as the Chaldeans point out,
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego had not shown any regard for
the king himself." (Walvoord, 86)
(II)
They do not serve the king's gods.--"The second accusation that they do not
serve Nebuchadnezzar's
gods is more than merely a religious difference. The whole
concept of political loyalty, of which the
worship of the image was an expression, is bound up in
the idea that Nebuchadnezzar's gods have
favored him and given him victory. To challenge
Nebuchadnezzar's gods, therefore, is to challenge
Nebuchadnezzar himself and to raise a question as to the political
integrity of the three accused men."
(Ibid.)
(III)
They refuse to worship the golden image.
(IV)
Why wasn't Daniel included?
(A) Maybe because of his high position, they did not dare
accuse Daniel.
(B) More probable, Daniel was absent for some reason, perhaps
on government business.
3.The refusal--vv. 13-18
a. The anger of
Nebuchadnezzar--v. l3
(I)
The Chaldeans were successful in their objective.
(II)
"The argument and accusation of the Chaldeans had a telling effect
upon Nebuchadnezzar who regarded
the disobedience of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego not
only a threat to his political security but also
a personal affront." (Walvoord, 87)
(III)
Because of their position, which perhaps they held for several years,
the king gives the three a trial.
b. The. trial of
the three companions--vv. 14-18
(I)
Is the accusation true?
(A) This was undoubtedly said sarcastically.
(B) That this is the sense is seen by his question.
(II)
The two questions
(A) Do you not serve my gods?
(1) He distinguishes between his gods and the
golden image.
(2) "Nebuchadnezzar speaks of his god in
contrast to the God of the Jews" (Keil and Delitzsch, 126)
(B) Do you not worship the golden image?
(1) This shows the political nature of the
decree.
(2) This alone would condemn them, but so would
the other question.
(III)
The reiteration of the decree and punishment
(A) "He gives them the opportunity to obey the command to worship,
restating in full the description of
the music and the obligation to fall down and
worship. He makes clear the alternative that they 'shall be
cast the same hour into the midst of a
burning fiery furnace.' The repetition of the entire edict no doubt
was done with a flourish; and, although he was
probably well aware of the jealousy of the Chaldeans
and took this into account, he makes it clear
that there is no alternative, but to worship the image."
(Walvoord, 87)
(B) He concludes that no god can deliver them.
(1) "For the purpose of giving strength
to his threatening, Nebuchadnezzar adds that no god would
deliver them out of his
hand. In this Hite. is not justified in supposing there is included
a
blaspheming of Jehovah
like that of Sennacharib, Isa. xxxvii.10. The case is different.
Sennacharib
raised his gods above Jehovah,
the God of the Jews; Nebuchadnezzar only declares that
deliverance out of the fiery
furnace is a work which.no god can accomplish, and in this he only
indirectly likens the God
of the Jews to the gods of the heathen." (Keil, 126)
(2) "It is amazing fact that Nebuchadnezzar adds
the challenging question, 'Who is that God that shall
deliver you out of my
hands’ He is quite conscious of the demonstration of the
superiority of the
Hebrews over Babylonian gods
in interpreting his dream in chapter 2, but he cannot bring himself to
believe that the God of
the Jews would be able in these circumstances to deliver these three
men
from his hand." (Walvoord,
88)
(IV)
The reply by the three companions
(A) Their answer is not a long discourse on why they could not
comply.
(B) The word careful
(1) A technical word for need
(2) Can be rendered, "We have no need to answer
in this matter."
(C) Their reply
(l) The nature of it shows faith.
(a) God's ability to
deliver
(b) God exercising that ability.
(2) "They state positively that their God is
able to deliver them from a fiery furnace. The article should
be omitted before 'burning
fiery furnace' in verse l7, with the resultant meaning that He could
deliver
them from any fiery furnace,
not just the one immediately at hand. They not only affirm that their
God is able but that He will
deliver them." (Walvoord, 89)
(3) Although the article is included as in the
Authorized Version, that does not preclude that God could
deliver them from any fiery
furnace; the reference was to this particular furnace.
(4) They faced the possibility that God might
not choose to deliver them--"The expression, 'But if not,'
should be understood as referring
to the deliverance not to the ability of God. They take into
consideration that sometimes
it is not the purpose of God to deliver faithful ones from martyrdom.
Even if God does not
deliver them, however, this will not change their decision in which they
refuse
to worship the gods of
Babylon as well as the golden image." (Ibid.)
(5) "The three simply see that their standpoint
and that of the king are together different, also that their
standpoint can never be clearly
understood by Nebuchadnezzar [cf. 1 Corinthians 2:14], and
therefore they give up any
attempt to justify themselves. But that which was demanded of
them
they could not do, because
it would have been altogether contrary to their faith and their
conscience. And then
without fanaticism they calmly decline to answer, and only say, 'Let him
do
according to his own will’;
thus without superstitiousness committing their deliverance to God."
(Keil, 127)
(6) They had the faith that says, "Though He
slay me, yet will I trust in Him." (Job l3:l5)
(7) Thus, one can see the calm acceptance of
God's will whether it meant death or rescue.
4. The punishment--vv. 19-23
a. The rage of
Nebuchadnezzar--v. 19a
(I)
Their determination was proof of the accusation to Nebuchadnezzar.
(II)
"His anger knows no bounds as stated in the expression 'full of fury'
or 'filled with anger.' He is as angry
as he possibly could be under any circumstance, his face is
distorted, his pride has been severely
punctured, and he gives the foolish order to heat the furnace
seven times hotter than usual, as if this would
increase the torment." (Walvoord, 89)
b. The command of
Nebuchadnezzar--vv. 19b-20
(I)
Ordered them bound and cast into the furnace
(II)
"The Strongest men in the army are selected, who bind Shadrach, Meshach,
and Abednego as
preliminary to casting them in the burning fiery furnace. The
Scriptures relate that they are bound in their
coats, hose, hats as well as other garments. Normally
criminals are stripped before execution; but in view
of the form of the execution and the haste of the
whole operation, there was no particular point in
stripping off their clothes. This later becomes
a further testimony to the delivering power of God."
(Walvoord, 90)
(III)
Their clothing
(A) Inner garments--those worn next to the body
(B) Hats
(C) Coats--mantles
(D) Other pieces of clothing --"The separate articles
of clothing, consisting of easily inflammable
material, are doubtlessly mentioned with reference
to the miracle that followed, that even these
remained unchanged (ver. 27) in the fiery furnace."
(Keil, 129)
c. The three cast
in the furnace-- vv. 21-23
(I)
"While the men were prepared for execution, the furnace is heated until is
extremely hot. This would not
necessarily take very long, but it must have added a high note
of tension to the entire situation as the
multitude waited probably in dead silence. When the furnace
reached its proper heat, the king demanded
immediate execution of his orders. In casting the
three men into the furnace, the strong men who did it
were killed by the flame which reached out to take their lives.
As the decree had indicated that they
should.be thrown into the midst of the furnace, so it
was executed." (Walvoord, 90)
(II)
Some say that verse 23 is a needless duplication--"Actually the narrative
reads very well as it is, and the
objections are without proper ground. Even in ordinary
narrative important facts are sometimes repeated
more than once. Nebuchadnezzar had now accomplished his
purpose, his decree had been fulfilled, and
he could leave the furnace the task of consuming these
men who had challenged his authority and his
gods." (Ibid.)
5. The miraculous deliverance--vv. 24-27
a. The astonished
king--vv. 24, 25
(I)
Obviously, the king was sited where he could see the whole affair, including
being able to see the interior
of the furnace.
(II)
Four men in the furnace
(A) "What he saw, however, brought him to complete astonishment.
He could not believe his eyes and in
his excitement stood up and asked his counsellors
whether the three men had not been cast bound into
the midst of the fire. The occasion
of his question was what he saw; instead of three men, he saw
four; instead of being bound, they were
free; instead of writhing in anguish in the flames, they were
walking about in the fire and making no attempt
to come out; further it was quite apparent that they
were not hurt; most astounding of all,
he had the impression that 'the form of the fourth is like the Son
of God.'" (op. cit., 91)
(B) The fourth person
(1) Like the Son of God
(2) Most scholars render this as a son of
the gods (as does Keil, 130)
(3) "While it is entirely possible that the fourth
person in the fiery furnace was indeed the Son of God,
it would be doubtful whether
Nebuchadnezzar would comprehend this, unless he had prophetic
sight. The Aramaic
form elahin is plural and whenever used in the Aramaic section of
Daniel
seems to be a plural in number,
as the singular is used when the true God is meant." (Ibid.)
(4) Though this writer is convinced that the
Son of God, Jesus, was there, Nebuchadnezzar doubtlessly
did not so recognize Him
as such. It is, therefore, unnecessary to render it as a son of
the gods.
(5) Certainly His presence added to the king's
astonishment.
b. The addressing
king--vv. 26, 27
(I)
He commands the three to come forth.
(A) Call them the servants of the Most High God.
(B) "It was immediately apparent to Nebuchadnezzar, as well
as the others who watched, that the God of
Shadrach, Meshach , and Abednego, was greater
than the gods of Babylon. In using the expression,
'the most high God,' Nebuchadnezzar was not
disavowing his own deities but merely recognizing on the
basis of the tremendous miracle which had
been performed that the God of Israel was higher, hence
'the Most high God.'" (Walvoord, 91-2)
(C) Though the three could not obey, the king in worshipping
the image, they could and did obey this
command.
(II)
The assembled group were witnesses of this deliverance by God--"There
could be little question that a
mighty miracle had been performed. The hair of the
three Hebrews had not been singed, their garments in
which they had been bound had not changed, and not even the
smell of fire was retained. . . . The fire
had damaged their garments in no way; only the ropes which bound
them, the symbols of
Nebuchadnezzar's unbelief and wrath, were destroyed in the flames."
(Walvoord, 92)
(III)
"Just as the reign of Nebuchadnezzar is symbolic of the entire
period of the times of the Gentiles, so
the deliverance of Daniel's three companions is typical
of the deliverance of Israel during the period of
Gentile domination. Particularly at the end of the
Gentile period Israel will be in fiery affliction." (Ibid.)
6. The decree of Nebuchadnezzar--vv.
28-30
a. Nebuchadnezzar
praises God--v. 28.
(I)
"The marvellous deliverance of the three from the flames of the
furnace produced such an impression on
Nebuchadnezzar that he changed his earlier and humbler judgment
(ver. l5) regarding the God of the
Jews, and spoke now in praise of the might of this
God." (Keil, 131-2)
(II)
"Just as Nebuchadnezzar had acknowledged Daniel's God at the conclusion of
chapter 2, so here
Nebuchadnezzar admitting the power of the God of
Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego issues a decree
in oriental style commemorating the event. First, he
recognizes the delivering power of their God 'who
hath sent his angel and delivered his servants that trusted
in him.' That the heathen gods used messengers
to accomplish their purpose was generally believed, and
Nebuchadnezzar analyzes the event in this way.
Although there is no clear proof that the fourth person
in the furnace with Sadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego was actually deity or an angel--as all we have is
Nebuchadnezzar's conclusion on the basis of
what he saw, it may well be that the protector of Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego was Christ Himself
in the form
of an angel." (Walvoord, 92-3)
(III)
"Nebuchadnezzar not only recognizes the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego but now belatedly
commends them for their trust in God even though it resulted
in changing his word. He recognizes the
superior obligation of the men not to worship any deity
except their own. This was a remarkable
admission for a king in Nebuchadnezzar's situation." (Walvoord,
93)
(IV)
Note that there is no real conversion on the part of Nebuchadnezzar
to the true God.
b. Nebuchadnezzar
makes a decree--v. 29
(I)
"In it, he does not deprecate his own gods but recognizes the fact of the
power of the God of Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego. He calls upon all the people in
his realm not to say anything amiss concerning
this God at the threat of being cut to pieces and their
houses made a dunghill. That the king has the power
to do this was obvious to everyone. The basis of his
decree is the simple statement, 'because there is no
other God that can deliver after this sort' It is clear
at this point that though Nebuchadnezzar is greatly
impressed, he has not yet been brought to the place where he
is willing to put his trust in the God of
Israel." (Ibid.)
(II)
Though Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged God as being superior to his gods, he
did not come to full faith.
Rather he decreed that any showing any form of disrespect
to the God of the Israelites, he was to be put
to death and his house made a dunghill.
c. Nebuchadnezzar
promotes the three friends of Daniel--v. 30
(I)
The nature of the promotion not stated.
(II)
"The chain of events which had brought about this miracle also consolidated
the position of Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego as principal officials in the province
of Babylon. Whatever their former rank
and authority, they are now promoted. Although probably
in the same office, they were relieved of any
opposition and had the special favor of the king in what
they did." (Ibid.)
(III)
The important lessons
(A) "If we attentively consider the import of this
narrative in its bearing on the history of the Kingdom of
God, we learn how the true worshippers of the
Lord under the dominion of the world-power could
and would come into difficulties, imperilling
life, between the demands of the lords of this world and
the duties they owe to God. But we also
learn, that if in these circumstances they remain faithful to
their God, they will in a wonderful manner be
protected by Him; while He will reveal His omnipotence
so gloriously that even the heathen world rulers
will be constrained to recognize their God and to give
Him glory." (Keil, 133)
(B) “Taken as a whole, chapter 3 is a thrilling account
of young men who remained true to God under
severe trial. The common excuses for moral
and spiritual1compromise, especially the blaming of
contemporary influences, are contradicted by
the faithfulness of these men. In spite of separation from
parents and of the corrupting influences
of Babylonian religion, political pressure, and immorality, they
did not waver in, their hour of testing."
(Walvoord, 94)