the Week of Proper 19 / Ordinary 24
free while helping to build churches and support pastors in Uganda.
Click here to learn more!
Read the Bible
Wycliffe Bible
Daniel 6:9
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- CondensedParallel Translations
So King Darius signed the written edict.
Therefore king Daryavesh signed the writing and the interdict.
Wherefore king Darius signed the writing and the decree.
Therefore King Darius signed the document and injunction.
Thereupon, King Darius signed the document, that is, the injunction.
So King Darius signed the law.
So King Darius signed the document, that is, the injunction.
Wherefore King Darius sealed the writing and the decree.
Therefore King Darius signed the document, that is, the injunction.
Therefore King Darius signed the written decree.
So King Darius made the law and had it written down.
Now, your majesty, issue this decree over your signature, so that it cannot be revoked, as required by the law of the Medes and Persians, which is itself irrevocable."
Therefore king Darius signed the writing and the decree.
So King Darius made the law and signed it.
Then King Darius signed the writing and issued the decree.
And so King Darius signed the order.
So the king, Darius, signed the writing and the interdict.
All on account of this, King Darius signed the document and the decree.
So Darius made the wrytynge, and confirmed it.
Wherefore king Darius signed the writing and the interdict.
For this reason King Darius put his name on the writing and the order.
Now, O king, establish the interdict, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not.'
Wherefore King Darius signed the writing and the decree.
Wherefore king Darius sealed the writing and decree.
Then king Darius commanded the decree to be written.
Wherefore king Darius signed the writing and the interdict.
Therefore king Darius signed the writing and the interdict.
Therefore king Darius signed the writing and the interdict.
Wherefore king Darius signed the writing and the decree.
So King Darius issued the written interdict.
Therefore King Darius signed the written decree.
So King Darius signed the law.
So King Darius made the law and wrote his name on it.
Therefore King Darius signed the document and interdict.
Wherefore, King Darius, signed the writing and the interdict.
So king Darius set forth the decree, and established it.
Therefore King Darius signed the document and interdict.
Therefore king Darius hath signed the writing and interdict.
King Darius signed the decree.
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
signed: Psalms 62:9, Psalms 62:10, Psalms 118:9, Psalms 146:3, Proverbs 6:2, Isaiah 2:22
Reciprocal: Proverbs 18:13 - that Isaiah 10:1 - them Daniel 2:13 - the decree
Cross-References
These ben the generaciouns of heuene and of erthe, in the day wherynne the Lord God made heuene and erthe,
This is the book of generacioun of Adam, in the dai wher ynne God made man of nouyt. God made man to the ymage and licnesse of God;
And Enoth yede with God; and Enoth lyuede after that he gendride Matusalem thre hundrid yeer, and gendride sones and douytris.
And Enoth yeed with God, and apperide not afterward, for God took hym awei.
These ben the generaciouns of Noe. Noe was a iust man and perfit in hise generaciouns; Noe yede with God,
And so thou schalt make it. The lengthe of the schip schal be of thre hundrid cubitis, the brede schal be of fifti cubitis, and the hiynesse therof schal be of thretti cubitis.
Also the Lord seide to Noe, Entre thou and al thin hous in to the schip, for Y seiy thee iust bifore me in this generacioun.
These ben the generaciouns of the sones of Noe, Sem, Cham, and Jafeth. And sones weren borun to hem aftir the greet flood.
Forsothe aftir that Abram bigan to be of nynti yeer and nyne, the Lord apperide to hym, and seide to him, Y am Almyyti God; go thou bifore me, and be thou perfit;
and blesside his sone Joseph, and seide, God, in whos siyt my fadris Abraham and Isaac yeden; God, that fedith me fro my yong wexynge age til in to present day;
Gill's Notes on the Bible
Wherefore King Darius signed the writing and the decree. Moved to it by the number and importunity of his principal men; and chiefly through affectation of deity, which this law gave him; and that he might have an opportunity of ingratiating himself into his new subjects by his munificence and liberality, not being aware of the snare laid for his favourite, Daniel.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Now, O king, establish the decree - Ordain, enact, confirm it.
And sign the writing - An act necessary to make it the law of the realm.
That it be not changed - That, having the sign-manual of the sovereign, it might be so confirmed that it could not be changed. With that sign it became so established, it seems, that even the sovereign himself could not change it.
According to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not - Margin, Passeth. Which does not pass away; which is not abrogated. A similar fact in regard to a law of the Medes and Persians is mentioned in Esther viii., in which the king was unable to recall an order which had been given for the massacre of the Jews, and in which he attempted only to counteract it as far as possible by putting the Jews on their guard, and allowing them to defend themselves. Diodorus Siculus (lib. iv.) refers to this custom where he says that Darius, the last king of Persia, would have pardoned Charidemus after he was condemned to death, but could not reverse what the law had passed against him. - Lowth. “When the king of Persia,” says Montesquieu (Spirit of Laws, as quoted by Rosenmuller, Morgenland, in loc.), “has condemned any one to death, no one dares speak to him to make intercession for him. Were he even drunk when the crime was committed, or were he insane, the command must nevertheless be executed, for the law cannot be countermanded, and the laws cannot contradict themselves. This sentiment prevails throughout Persia.” It may seem singular that such a custom prevailed, and that the king, who was the fountain of law, and whose will was law, could not change a statute at his pleasure.
But this custom grew out of the opinions which prevailed in the East in regard to the monarch. His will was absolute, and it was a part of the system which prevailed then to exalt the monarch, and leave the impression on the mind of the people that he was more than a man - that he was infallible, and could not err. Nothing was better adapted to keep up that impression than an established principle of this kind - that a law once ordained could not be repealed or changed. To do this would be a practical acknowledgment that there was a defect in the law; that there was a want of wisdom in ordaining it; that all the circumstances were not foreseen; and that the king was liable to be deceived and to err. With all the disadvantages attending such a custom, it was judged better to maintain it than to allow that the monarch could err, and hence, when a law was ordained it became fixed and unchanging.
Even the king himself could not alter it, and, whatever might be the consequences, it was to be executed. It is evident, however, that such a custom might have some advantages. It would serve to prevent hasty legislation, and to give stability to the government by its being known what the laws were, thus avoiding the evils which result when they are frequently changed. It is often preferable to have permanent laws, though not the best that could be framed, than those which would be better, if there were no stability. There is only one Being, however, whose laws can be safely unchanging - and that is God, for his laws are formed with a full knowledge of all the relations of things, and of their bearing on all future circumstances and times. It serves to confirm the statement here made respecting the ancient custom in Media and Persia, that the same idea of the inviolability of the royal word has remained, in a mitigated form, to modern times.
A remarkable example of this is related by Sir John Malcolm, of Aga Mohammed Khan, the last but one of the Persian kings. After alluding to the present case, and that in Esther, he observes, “The character of the power of the king of Persia has undergone no change. The late king, Aga Mohammed Khan, when encamped near Shiraz, said that he would not move until the snow was off the mountains in the vicinity of his camp. The season proved severe, and the snow remained longer than was expected; the army began to suffer distress and sickness, but the king said while the snow remained upon the mountain, he would not move; and his word was as law, and could not be broken. A multitude of laborers were collected and sent to remove the snow; their efforts, and a few fine days, cleared the mountains, and Aga Mohammed Khan marched.” - History of Persia, i. 268, quoted in the Pict. Bible, in loc.
