Text and Exposition
I. STORIES ABOUT DANIEL (1:1â6:28)
A. Daniel and the Three Friends in Nebuchadnezzarâs Court (1:1â21)
OVERVIEW
The opening chapter of Daniel introduces the âcourt storiesâ section of the book (chs. 1â6). These stories are narrative episodes told in the third person and relate the exploits of Daniel and his three companions during their captivity in Babylon. The content of ch. 1 may be outlined in four units: the first (vv.1â2) provides the setting of the book of Daniel (the royal court of King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylonia and his successors; v.1), and the central theological theme of the book (Godâs sovereignty, as âthe Lord deliveredâ Jehoiakim to the Babylonians; v.2); the second (vv.3â7) introduces the main characters, or protagonists, of the narrativesâthe Hebrew captives Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah; the third (vv.8â17) offers clues as to the key elements of the âplotâ of the book as a narrative, especially nonconformity to the dominant culture (v.8), the testing of faith in God (v.12), and divine provision (v.17); the final literary unit (vv.18â21) foreshadows the outcome of the court stories of the first half of the bookâthe success and longevity of the four Hebrew captives as officials in the royal court of Babylon.
1. Historical Introduction (1:1â2)
1In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it. 2And the Lord delivered Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, along with some of the articles from the temple of God. These he carried off to the temple of his god in Babylonia and put in the treasure house of his god.
COMMENTARY
1 King Jehoiakim (609â597 BC) was installed as a âpuppet kingâ by Pharaoh Neco of Egypt after the death of King Josiah (cf. 2Ki 23:30, 34). The third year of Jehoiakimâs reign dates Nebuchadnezzarâs siege of Jerusalem and Danielâs subsequent captivity to 605 BC. This date accords with the accession-year method characteristic of the Babylonian system for computing regnal years (i.e., reckoning a kingâs first full year of kingship to commence on the New Yearâs Day after his accession to the throne, or 608 BC for Jehoiakim; cf. Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon, 16â18). Critics point to the chronological discrepancy in the biblical reporting of the date of the event in that Jeremiah synchronizes the first year of Nebuchadnezzarâs reign with the fourth year of King Jehoiakimâs reign (Jer 25:1, 9; cf. Porteous, 25â26). Yet if one assumes that Jeremiah is based on a nonaccession-year method of reckoning regnal years (more common to Egyptian and Syro-Palestinian practice), the difficulty fades and the dates are readily harmonized (cf. Longman and Dillard, 376â77).
Beyond this, critics dispute the historical veracity of Danielâs report of a Babylonian siege of Jerusalem in 605 BC because there is no record of such an incursion into Palestine at that time (cf. Redditt, 43). There is, however, indirect evidence for a Babylonian campaign in Palestine in 605 BC. Josephus (Ag. Ap. 1:19) cites a Babylonian priest-historian named Berossus, who recorded that Nebuchadnezzar was engaged in campaigns in Egypt, Syria, and Phoenicia at the time his father died (cf. Wiseman, Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon, 15). Further, a cuneiform tablet published in 1956 indicates that Nebuchadnezzar âconquered the whole area of the Hatti-countryâ shortly after the battle of Carchemish in 605 BC. The geographical term âHattiâ would have included the whole of Syria and Palestine at this time period (cf. Miller, 57; see also Donald J. Wiseman, Chronicles of the Chaldean Kings [London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1961], 69).
The siege of Jerusalem in 605 BC, then, was the first of three major invasions of Palestine by Babylonians (although there is no reference to armed conflict in vv.1â2, and the verb âbesiegedâ [Heb. áčŁwr] may suggest more threat than substance, as evidenced in Goldingayâs [3] translation âblockadedâ; cf. Wood, 30, who comments that âlikely only token resistance was made, with the Judeans recognizing the wisdom of peaceful capitulationâ).
The second incursion occurred at the end of Jehoiakimâs reign in 598 BC, when King Nebuchadnezzar was finally in a position to move against the disloyal Judean vassal (Jehoiakim had rebelled earlier against Babylonia ca. 603 BC; cf. 2Ki 24:1â7). By the time Nebuchadnezzar reached Jerusalem, Jehoiakim had died and Jehoiachin his son was king of Judah (2Ki 24:8). As a result of this invasion of Judah, King Jehoiachin was deposed and exiled along with ten thousand citizens of Jerusalem (including Ezekiel; 2Ki 24:10â17; cf. Eze 1:1â2).
The third Babylonian invasion of Judah was swift and decisive. Nebuchadnezzar surrounded Jerusalem in 588 BC and after a lengthy siege, the city was sacked, Yahwehâs temple was plundered and destroyed, and Davidic kingship in Judah ceased (2Ki 24:18â25:21).
Nebuchadnezzar II was the eldest son of Nabopolassar and is considered one of the greatest kings of ancient times. He ruled the Babylonian Empire from 605â562 BCâan empire that stretched across the ancient Near East from Elam in the east to Egypt in the west. Miller, 56, notes that the writer of Daniel refers proleptically to Nebuchadnezzar as âking of Babylon,â since he was actually crowned king some two or three months after the siege of Jerusalem.
The city of Babylon lay on the Euphrates River, some fifty miles south of modern Baghdad in Iraq. It reached the height of its splendor as the capital of the Chaldean or Neo-Babylonian Empire because of the extensive building activities of Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar. The storied Hanging Gardens of Babylon were counted among the âwondersâ of the ancient world. The prophet Jeremiah predicted the overthrow of Babylon as divine retribution for her evil deeds (Jer 25:12â14; cf. Isaiahâs prophecy in Isa 13:2â22 against the city of Babylon during the Assyrian period). In the NT, Babylon symbolizes the decadence and wickedness of Rome (cf. 1Pe 5:13; Rev 14:8).
2 From the outset of the book, the record clearly indicates that Nebuchadnezzarâs success is not entirely his own doing. The Lord âdeliveredâ (cf. NASB, âgaveâ) Jehoiakim into the hands of King Nebuchadnezzar in that he permitted the Babylonian subjugation of Judah. (See NIDOTTE, 3:206, on the use of the Heb. verb nÄtan [âto giveâ] to connote âhand over in judgment.â) This introductory statement reveals the unifying theme for the whole book: Godâs sovereign rule of human history. Godâs judgment of the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah was not capricious or arbitrary. The threat of divine punishment, including exile from the land of the Abrahamic promise, was embedded in the blessings and curses of the Mosaic covenant (cf. Lev 18:24â30; 26; Dt 28). Owing to Godâs covenantal faithfulness, he was extremely patient and longsuffering with his people Israel, warning them through his prophets over centuries of the dire consequences of habitual covenantal disobedience (cf. Ne 9:29â32). Daniel was not oblivious to all this, as attested by his prayer for his people (Da 9:4â11).
Placing objects plundered from the temples of vanquished enemies as trophies of war in the temple(s) of the gods of the victors was common practice in the biblical world (e.g., 1Sa 5:2). The act symbolized the supremacy of the deities of the conquering nation over the gods of the peoples and nations subjugated by the imperialist armies (cf. BBCOT, 287). The articles or vessels from the Jerusalem temple confiscated by Nebuchadnezzar are not itemized. It is possible these articles were given as tribute to Nebuchadnezzar in order to lift the siege against the city (after the earlier example of the payments made by kings Ahaz and Hezekiah to the Assyrians; cf. 2Ki 16:8; 18:15). The temple treasury cache may have included gold and silver ceremonial cups and utensils displayed to the envoy of the Babylonian king Merodach-Baladan by King Hezekiah a century earlier (cf. 2Ki 20:12â13). The prophet Isaiah rebuked Hezekiahâs pride and predicted his treasures would be plundered and carried off to Babylon (Isa 39:6; cf. the prohibition in Dt 17:17 against stockpiling wealth given to the Hebrew kings in anticipation of an Israelite monarchy).
Later, King Belshazzar paraded these gold and silver goblets before his nobles at a great feast, precipitating the episode of the writing on the wall and the demise of his kingship (Da 5:1â2, 25â31). Finally, some of these implements may have been part of the larger inventory of temple treasure plundered by the Babylonians that King Cyrus of Persia restored to the Hebrews and that were relocated in Judah when the exiles returned to the land under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (Ezr 1:7â11). All this serves as a reminder that everything under heaven belongs to God and that he providentially oversees what belongs to himâwhether his people Israel or drinking bowls from his temple (cf. Job 41:11).
The historical setting laid out in the opening verses is also important to the theology of exile developed in the book of Daniel. It is clear from Danielâs prayer in ch. 9 that he is aware of Jeremiahâs prophecies projecting a Babylonian exile lasting some seventy years (Da 9:2; cf. Jer 25:12; 29:10). The date formulas in books of subsequent prophets of the exile, such as Jeremiah (e.g., Jer 52:31) and Ezekiel (e.g., Eze 1:2), serve as âcovenantal time-clocksâ of sorts as they track the chronological progression of Godâs judgment against his people for their sin of idolatry in anticipation of the restoration of Israel to the land of covenantal promise (Jer 44:3â6; cf. Lev 18:24â30). Elements of Danielâs âtheology of exileâ developed in later sections of the commentary include: the value of prayer for Hebrews in the Diaspora, the role obedience and faithfulness to God play in the success of the Hebrews in the Diaspora, and insights into the nature and character of divine justice and human suffering in the light of the persecution experienced by Israel during and after the Babylonian exile.
More significant for the Hebrews was the crisis in theology created by the historical setting of the Babylonian exile. The Israelites, the people of Yahweh, lost possession of their land, had their temple razed, and had the office of kingship eradicated in one fell swoop to the marauding hordes of King Nebuchadnezzar and the gods of Babylonia. As Wallace, 31, observes, the Hebrews needed a new theology. Godâs people needed a âDiaspora theologyâ addressing the problem of how to live as a minority group in an alien majority culture sometimes hostile, sometimes friendly; how were they to âfit in without being swallowed up?â The remainder of ch. 1 and the rest of the court stories take up the challenge of answering this very question.
NOTES
1 The form of the name
(
nebĂ»kadneÊŸáčŁáčŁar, âNebuchadnezzarâ) given in Daniel is also found in 2 Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. The alternative spelling
(
nebĂ»kadreÊŸáčŁáčŁar, âNebuchadrezzarâ) appears in Jeremiah (except ch. 28) and Ezekiel. According to Wiseman (
Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon, 2â3), there is no need to assume that the name Nebuchadnezzar reflects an Aramaic pronunciation shift from
r to
n since an Aramaic tablet dated to Nebuchadrezzarâs thirty-fourth year spells the name with
n after the (dental)
d. The name probably means âO Nabu, protect my offspringâ (so Wiseman, ibid.,...