the Week of Proper 28 / Ordinary 33
Click here to learn more!
Verse- by-Verse Bible Commentary
New American Standard Bible
Bible Study Resources
Nave's Topical Bible - Government; Magician; Rulers; Scofield Reference Index - Kingdom; Times of the Gentiles; Torrey's Topical Textbook - Houses; Punishments;
Clarke's Commentary
Verse Daniel 2:5. Ye shall be cut in pieces — This was arbitrary and tyrannical in the extreme; but, in the order of God's providence, it was overruled to serve the most important purpose.
These files are public domain.
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "The Adam Clarke Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​acc/​daniel-2.html. 1832.
Bridgeway Bible Commentary
Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (2:1-23)
Soon after completing their early training, Daniel and his friends were faced with a severe test. Nebuchadnezzar had a dream and wanted his wise men to tell him its meaning. However, he would not, or could not, tell them the dream. He insisted that they first describe the dream to him accurately, and then he could be sure that their interpretation also was accurate (2:1-6). The wise men replied that the king’s demand was unreasonable. No person anywhere had such knowledge (7-11). Furious at their reply, the king ordered that all Babylon’s wise men be executed (12).
Perhaps Daniel and his friends had kept themselves separate from the Babylonian magicians and sorcerers, for they did not appear with them before the king. When the king’s guards came to arrest them to be executed, Daniel bravely went to the king and successfully asked for extra time to consider the matter (13-16). He immediately returned home and gathered his three friends with him to pray to their God (17-18).
That night God revealed the dream and its interpretation to Daniel in a vision. Without waiting to check with the king whether his vision of the dream was the same as the king’s, Daniel confidently thanked God for answering his prayer (19). He praised God as the all-wise and all-powerful ruler of the world, who controls history, determines the destinies of kings, gives wisdom to the faithful and reveals mysteries to his servants (20-23).
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Fleming, Donald C. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Fleming's Bridgeway Bible Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​bbc/​daniel-2.html. 2005.
Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible
"Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the enchanters, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, to tell the king his dreams. So they came in and stood before the king. And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit is troubled to know the dream. Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in the Syrian language, O king, live forever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation. The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me: if ye make not known unto me the dream and the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill. But if ye show the dream and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honor: therefore show me the dream and the interpretation thereof. They answered the second time and said, Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation. And the king answered and said, I know of a certainty that ye would gain time, because ye see the thing has gone from me. But if ye make not known unto me the dream, there is one law for you; for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed: therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can show me the interpretation thereof."
THE KING'S DEMAND
Certainly His Majesty was in a vile mood! The KJV indicates that Nebuchadnezzar had actually forgotten the dream; but our version seems to reveal the king's utmost distrust of the alleged "wise men" who had been summoned. The last two lines of the passage cited here reveal the king's purpose of requiring the wise men to tell him the dream in order that he might also trust them to reveal the interpretation of it. In this light, we do not know whether Nebuchadnezzar had actually forgotten the dream, or if he had merely decided to test his enchanters and magicians by requiring them to repeat the dream.
Of interest is the mention of the Chaldeans in this passage. `This was a name that came to be applied to the astrologers, soothsayers, magicians, enchanters, diviners and wise men as a class, and without reference to race. The inclusion of Daniel in the number here indicates as much. (See the introduction for more on this.) It will be noted that the Chaldeans also included a special group who bore that name; but they seem to have been spokesmen for the entire group.
In Daniel 2:4 b, the Syrian language is introduced, not by the author of Daniel, but by the Chaldeans; and Daniel, the faithful author was able to report the proceedings in the language by which the communications were carried on. It is a virtual certainty that only Daniel could have done such a thing. The preposterous notion that some forger some four hundreds years subsequent to the times of Daniel could have done this is such an outlandish improbability that it seems impossible that intelligent writers should have been deceived by it. This Syrian language (the 6th century Aramaic) continues through Daniel 7.
"O king, live forever" Such language of respect and servility was the stock in trade of all flatterers and courtiers at oriental courts. The king in this instance was unmoved by all the high sounding words. He wanted one thing, actually two, (1) the dream repeated to him, and (2) its proper interpretation. After all, the thing that the king required was not all that unreasonable. Is it not true, that if a man can reveal the future, he should have no trouble remembering someone else's dream? Something had compelled the king to believe that the alleged wise men could not do either!
"Ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses made a dunghill" Such cruel and excessive punishments were common in the behavior of oriental despots; and there is no doubt that the whole confraternity of the wise men were threatened at this juncture with destruction. The Chaldean spokesmen repeatedly informed the king that they would be unable to interpret the dream unless they were given the essentials of the dream to form the basis of their interpretation; but the king refused to be moved.
Coffman's Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.
Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​bcc/​daniel-2.html. Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.
Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible
The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me - The Vulgate renders this, “Sermo recessit a me” - “The word is departed from me.” So the Greek, Ὁ λόγος ἀπ ̓ ἐμοῦ ἀπέστη Ho logos ap' emou apestē. Luther, “Es ist mir entfallen” - “It has fallen away from me,” or has departed from me. Coverdale, “It is gone from me.” The Chaldee word rendered “the thing” - מלתה mı̂llethâh - means, properly, “a word, saying, discourse” - something which is “spoken;” then, like דבר dâbâr and the Greek ῥῆμα rēma, a “thing.” The reference here is to the matter under consideration, to wit, the dream and its meaning. The fair interpretation is, that he had forgotten the dream, and that if he retained “any” recollection of it, it was only such an imperfect outline as to alarm him. The word rendered “is gone” - אזדא 'azeddâ' - which occurs only here and in Daniel 2:8, is supposed to be the same as אזל 'ăzal - “to go away, to depart.” Gesenius renders the whole phrase, “The word has gone out from me; i. e., what I have said is ratified, and cannot be recalled;” and Prof. Bush (in loc.) contends that this is the true interpretation, and this also is the interpretation preferred by John D. Michaelis, and Dathe. A construction somewhat similar is adopted by Aben Ezra, C. B. Michaelis, Winer, Hengstenberg, and Prof. Stuart, that it means, “My decree is firm, or steadfast;” to wit, that if they did not furnish an interpretation of the dream, they should be cut off. The question as to the true interpretation, then, is between two constructions: whether it means, as in our version, that the dream had departed from him - that is, that he had forgotten it - or, that a decree or command had gone from him, that if they could not interpret the dream they should be destroyed. That the former is the correct interpretation seems to me to be evident.
(1) It is the natural construction, and accords best with the meaning of the original words. Thus no one can doubt that the word מלה millâh, and the words דבר dâbâr and ῥῆμα rēma, are used in the sense of “thing,” and that the natural and proper meaning of the Chaldee verb אזד 'ăzad is, to “go away, depart.” Compare the Hebrew (אזל 'âzal) in Deuteronomy 32:36, “He seeth that their power is gone;” 1 Samuel 9:7, “The bread is spent in our vessels;” Job 14:11, “The waters fail from the sea;” and the Chaldee (אזל 'ăzal) in Ezra 4:23, “They went up in haste to Jerusalem;” Ezra 5:8, “We went into the province of Judea;” and Daniel 2:17, Daniel 2:24; Daniel 6:18 (19), 19(20).
(2) This interpretation is sustained by the Vulgate of Jerome, and by the Greek.
(3) It does not appear that any such command had at that time gone forth from the king, and it was only when they came before him that he promulgated such an order. Even though the word, as Gesenins and Zickler (Chaldaismus Dan. Proph.) maintain, is a feminine participle present, instead of a verb in the preterit, still it would then as well apply to the “dream” departing from him, as the command or edict. We may suppose the king to say, “The thing leaves me; I cannot recal it.”
(4) It was so understood by the magicians, and the king did not attempt to correct their apprehension of what he meant. Thus, in Daniel 2:7, they say, “Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation thereof.” This shows that they understood that the dream had gone from him, and that they could not be expected to interpret its meaning until they were apprised what it was.
(5) It is not necessary to suppose that the king retained the memory of the dream himself, and that he meant merely to try them; that is, that he told them a deliberate falsehood, in order to put their ability to the test. Nebuchadnezzar was a cruel and severe monarch, and such a thing would not have been entirely inconsistent with his character; but we should not needlessly charge cruelty and tyranny on any man, nor should we do it unless the evidence is so clear that we cannot avoid it. Besides, that such a test should be proposed is in the highest degree improbable. There was no need of it; and it was contrary to the established belief in such matters. These men were retained at court, among other reasons, for the very purpose of explaining the prognostics of the future. There was confidence in them; and they were retained “because” there was confidence in them. It does not appear that the Babylonian monarch had had any reason to distrust their ability as to what they professed; and why should he, therefore, on “this” occasion resolve to put them to so unusual, and obviously so unjust a trial?
For these reasons, it seems clear to me that our common version has given the correct sense of this passage, and that the meaning is, that the dream had actually so far departed from him that he could not repeat it, though he retained such an impression of its portentous nature, and of its appalling outline, as to fill his mind with alarm. As to the objection derived from this view of the passage by Bertholdt to the authenticity of this chapter, that it is wholly improbable that any man would be so unreasonable as to doom others to punishment because they could not recal his dream, since it entered not into their profession to be able to do it (Commentary i. p. 192), it may be remarked, that the character of Nebuchadnezzar was such as to make what is stated here by Daniel by no means improbable. Thus it is said respecting him 2 Kings 25:7, “And they slew the sons of Zedekiah ‘before his eyes,’ and put out the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him with fetters of brass, and carried him to Babylon.” Compare 2 Kings 25:18-21; Jeremiah 39:5, following; Jeremiah 52:9-11. See also Daniel 4:17, where he is called “the basest of men.” Compare Hengstenberg, “Die Authentie des Daniel,” pp. 79-81. On this objection, see Introduction to the chapter, Section I. I.
If ye will not make known, unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof - Whatever may be thought as to the question whether he had actually forgotten the dream, there can be no doubt that he demanded that they should state what it was, and then explain it. This demand was probably as unusual as it was in one sense unreasonable, since it did not fall fairly within their profession. Yet it was not unreasonable in this sense, that if they really had communication with the gods, and were qualified to explain future events, it might be supposed that they would be enabled to recal this forgotten dream. If the gods gave them power to explain what was to “come,” they could as easily enable them to recal “the past.”
Ye shall be cut in pieces - Margin, “made.” The Chaldee is, “Ye shall be made into pieces; “referring to a mode of punishment that was common to many ancient nations. Compare 1 Samuel 15:33 : “And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.” Thus Orpheus is said to have been torn in pieces by the Thracian women; and Bessus was cut in pieces by order of Alexander the Great.
And your houses shall be made a dunghill - Compare 2 Kings 10:27. This is an expression denoting that their houses, instead of being elegant or comfortable mansions, should be devoted to the vilest of uses, and subjected to all kinds of dishonor and defilement. The language here used is in accordance with what is commonly employed by Orientals. They imprecate all sorts of indignities and abominations on the objects of their dislike, and it is not uncommon for them to smear over with filth what is the object of their contempt or abhorrenee. Thus when the caliph Omar took Jerusalem, at the head of the Saracen army, after ravaging the greater part of the city, he caused dung to be spread over the site of the sanctuary, in token of the abhorrence of all Mussulmans, and of its being henceforth regarded as the refuse and offscouring of all things. - Prof. Bush. The Greek renders this, “And your houses shall be plundered;” the Vulgate, “And your houses shall be confiscated.” But these renderings are entirely arbitrary. This may seem to be a harsh punishment which was threatened, and some may, perhaps, be disposed to say that it is improbable that a monarch would allow himself to use such intemperate language, and to make use of so severe a threatening, especially when the magicians had as yet shown no inability to interpret the dream, and had given no reasons to apprehend that they would be unable to do it. But we are to remember
(1) the cruel and arbitrary character of the king (see the references above);
(2) the nature of an Oriental despotism, in which a monarch is acccustomed to require all his commands to be obeyed, and his wishes gratified promptly, on pain of death;
(3) the fact that his mind was greatly excited by the dream; and
(4) that he was certain that something portentous to his kingdom had been prefigured by the dream, and that this was a case in which all the force of threatening, and all the prospect of splendid reward, should be used, that they might be induced to tax their powers to the utmost, and allay the tumults of his mind.
These files are public domain.
Barnes, Albert. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​bnb/​daniel-2.html. 1870.
Calvin's Commentary on the Bible
Here the king requires from the Chaldeans more than they professed to afford him; for although their boasting, as we have said, was foolish in promising to interpret any dream, yet they never claimed the power of narrating to any one his dreams. The king, therefore, seems to me to act unjustly in not regarding what they had hitherto professed, and the limits of their art and science, if indeed they had any science! When he says — the matter or speech had departed from him, the words admit of a twofold sense, for
He afterwards adds threats, clearly tyrannical; unless they expound the dream their life is in danger No common punishment is threatened, but he says they should become “pieces ” — if we take the meaning of the word to signify pieces. If we think it means “blood, ” the sense will be the same. This wrath of the king is clearly furious, nay, Nebuchadnezzar in this respect surpassed all the cruelty of wild beasts. What fault could be imputed to the Chaldeans if they did not know the king’s dream? — surely, they had never professed this, as we shall afterwards see; and no, king had ever demanded what was beyond the faculty of man. We perceive how the long manifested a brutal rage when he denounced death and every cruel torture on the Magi and sorcerers. Tyrants, indeed, often give the reins to their lust, and think all things lawful to themselves; whence, also, these words of the tragedian, Whatever he wishes is lawful. And Sophocles says, with evident truth, that any one entering a tyrant’s threshold must cast away his liberty; but if we were to collect all examples, we should scarcely find one like this. It follows, then, that the king’s mind was impelled by diabolic fury, urging him to punish the Chaldees who, with respect to him, were innocent enough. We know them to have been impostors, and the world to have been deluded by their impositions, which rendered them deserving of death, since by the precepts of the law it was a capital crime for any one to pretend to the power of prophecy by magic arts. (Leviticus 20:6.) But, as far as concerned the king, they could not be charged with any crime. Why, then, did he threaten them with death? because the Lord wished to shew the miracle which we shall afterwards see. For if the king had suffered the Chaldeans to depart, he could have buried directly that anxiety which tortured and excruciated his mind. The subject, too, had been less noticed by the people; hence God tortured the king’s mind, till he rushed headlong in his fury, as we have said. Thus, this atrocious and cruel denunciation ought to have aroused all men; for there is no doubt that the greatest and the least trembled together when they heard of such vehemence in the monarch’s wrath. This, therefore, is the complete sense, and we must mark the object of God’s providence in thus allowing the king’s anger to burn without restraint. (111) It follows —
(111) Calvin is correct in preferring the sense of “pieces” to that of “blood;” for
These files are public domain.
Calvin, John. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​cal/​daniel-2.html. 1840-57.
Smith's Bible Commentary
Chapter 2
Now in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep was taken from him. Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, to show the king his dream. So they came and they stood before the king. And the king said unto them, I've dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream. So the Chaldeans spoke to the king in Syriac ( Daniel 2:1-4 ),
And so part of this book is written, and in fact, at this point from chapter 2 verse Daniel 2:4 on to chapter 7 verse Daniel 2:28 , this book is written, because it says they spoke to him in Syriac, the book is written in this language of Aramaic, which it was the ancient Syrian language.
O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will show you the interpretation. The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, I forgotten it: if you will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation, you'll be cut to pieces, and your houses shall be made of dunghill. But if you show the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive from me gifts, rewards, great honor: therefore show me the dream, and the interpretation. They answered again and said, Let the king just tell the servants his dream, and we will show you the interpretation. And the king answered and said, I know of certainty that you would gain the time, because you see that I have forgotten the dream. But if you will not make known unto me the dream, there is but one decree for you: for you have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed: therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that you can show me the interpretation thereof. The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said, Look there's not a man on the earth that can show the king's matter: therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that has asked such things of any of his magicians, or astrologers, or Chaldeans ( Daniel 2:4-10 ).
Oh, come on, king, you know. Let's be fair. No man knows what a man dreams. No man can show you this. Look in history, no king has ever demanded such a ridiculous thing from his counselors.
It's a rare thing that the king requires, there's none other that can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh ( Daniel 2:11 ).
Now, they were dealing with the wrong man because Nebuchadnezzar was a hothead. He was always becoming angry and very furious, until his conversion.
For this cause the king was angry and very furious, and he commanded that all of the wise men be destroyed. And the decree went forth that the wise men should be slain; and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain ( Daniel 2:12-13 ).
Now, we notice the tremendous power of Nebuchadnezzar. Autocratic control. He was the final word. His word was law. He could order these men all eliminated. Cut them to pieces. His word was law. When we get into the next empire, as we get into chapter 5 and 6, as we get into the Medo-Persian Empire, we notice that when the king made a decree and signed it, that he was subject then to the law of the Medes and the Persians, which once a decree had been signed it could not be changed. He did not have the same type of autocratic control and power as did Nebuchadnezzar. Probably no man has been vested with so much power in the history of mankind as was Nebuchadnezzar. So much control over the world and over the lives of people. That is why in the interpretation of his dream, he said, "Your kingdom will be replaced by an inferior kingdom." Not inferior as far as strength, but the Medo-Persian Empire was very powerful and very wealthy, but as far as the as the control by the king, much less. He was subject to the laws of the land, whereas Nebuchadnezzar was the law himself. His word became law.
So he was very furious. He ordered the execution of his wise men.
And Daniel answered with the counsel and wisdom to Arioch who was the captain of the king's guard, who was commissioned to go out and to slay all of the wise men: And he said to Arioch, Why is the decree so hasty from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel. Daniel went in, and he desired of the king that he would give him a little time, then he promised to show the king the interpretation. Then Daniel went to his house, and made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions: That they would desire mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret, that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon ( Daniel 2:14-18 ).
So Daniel went in to the king and he said, "Look, give me a little time. I'll come and I'll tell you the dream and the interpretation." Then he went to his buddies and said, "Hey, it's time for a prayer meeting, fellows. We got to get some information, you know. Our necks are on the line."
Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven ( Daniel 2:19 ).
Now it is, I think, important to the story and for us to know that Daniel at this point was probably around nineteen or twenty years of age. He was probably around sixteen years old when he was carried as a captive to Babylon. Just a very young man. Just a very young man when he purposed in his heart he wasn't going to defile himself with the king's meat. It shows that somewhere along the line Daniel had excellent training in the ways of God and in the things of God. That even by the age of sixteen these things were so deeply embedded that as he is carried away to far country, where he is away from the influences, the spiritual influences under which he grew up, still he maintains such integrity in spiritual matters. Absolutely glorious to behold. And to realize that even as a very young man he had such high principles, high ideals. And the depth of his spiritual character is expressed here after God reveals to him the dream and the interpretation. As we read Daniel's response to God and realize, here is just a young man in a far country, but he shows such depth of spiritual character.
Daniel answered [the Lord] and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his: And he changes the times and the seasons: he removes kings, and sets up kings: he gives wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding: He reveals the deep and secret things: he knows what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him. I thank thee, and praise thee, O thou God of my fathers, who has given me wisdom and might, and has made known unto me now what we desired of thee: for you have now made known unto us the king's matter ( Daniel 2:20-23 ).
And this to me is just a marvelous expression of praise and thanksgiving unto God, which shows a real depth of spiritual character in such a young man. I think that a lot of times we perhaps think, "Well, you know, he's too young to really have much spiritual maturity or to be able to share much in spiritual things." But I look at Daniel; I look at Jeremiah. These young men who started their ministry so early and the depth of spiritual understanding that they had, even while young.
Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch, whom the king had ordained to destroy the wise men of Babylon: he went in and said thus unto him; Destroy not the wise men of Babylon: bring me in before the king, and I will show unto the king the interpretation. Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste, and said unto him, I have found a man of the captives of Judah, that will make known unto the king the interpretation. The king answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Art thou able to make known unto me the dream which I have seen, and the interpretation thereof? And Daniel answered in the presence of the king, and said, The secret in which the king has demanded cannot the wise men, the astrologers, the magician, the soothsayers, show unto the king; But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and makes known unto the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these ( Daniel 2:24-28 );
Now, first of all, make note that Daniel does not take personal credit for the interpreting of the dream. King says, "I understand you can make known to me the dream and the interpretation." Daniel says, "Look, the wise men, the astrologers, none of them can do it, but there is a God in heaven who reveals things." And he gives credit to God for the interpretation, for the understanding and the interpretation of the dream. I think that this is something that if anyone is at all interested in becoming involved in the work of the Lord it is important to note this particular aspect of Daniel. That he was not about to take credit for what God had done. He immediately points to God as the source and he gives credit to God. He does not let the king give him credit or give him honor, but he points the king to God. "There's a God in heaven who reveals things and He has made known."
Secondly, the dream is for the latter days. So it is a dream that has prophetic significance. The things that are going to come to pass here on the earth.
But as for me ( Daniel 2:30 ),
Now notice he is not taking credit.
as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than anyone else, but for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king, that you may know the thoughts of your heart ( Daniel 2:30 ).
"God didn't do this for me 'cause I'm something special or because I have anything over anybody else." He's not trying to exalt himself in this at all. He does seek to exalt God, but not seeking to promote or exalt himself. It so important for anyone involved in any kind of ministry not to try to exalt yourself, but to just seek to bring glory to God.
Now he tells the king what he dreamed. But notice he said,
Thou, O king, saw, and behold a great image. This image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; in the form thereof was awesome ( Daniel 2:31 ).
So you saw this great image, awesome, bright.
The image head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, his legs of iron, his feet part iron and part of clay. And you were watching till a stone was cut without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, the gold, broke into pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole eaRuth ( Daniel 2:32-35 ).
So this was the dream that Nebuchadnezzar had that troubled him.
This is the dream; [Daniel said,] and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king. Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beast of the field, the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and have made thee ruler over them all. For thou art this head of gold ( Daniel 2:36-38 ).
Now, we skipped a verse, and it is an important verse, and I'm going to go back to it, verse Daniel 2:29 . He said,
As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thine mind upon thy bed, what should come to pass hereafter: and he that reveals secrets is made known unto thee what should come to pass ( Daniel 2:29 ).
Before Nebuchadnezzar had gone to sleep, he was wondering in his mind, "What's going to happen to the world? What does the future hold?" And so this dream pertains to the future. God is in this dream giving him history in advance, as He lays out the kingdoms that would rule over the earth. The first world-governing empire, the Babylonian Empire, the head of gold.
But after thee there shall arise another kingdom that is inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which will bear rule over all the eaRuth ( Daniel 2:39 ).
Notice these are world-dominating empires bearing rule over all the earth.
And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and subdues all things: and as iron that breaks all things, shall it break in pieces and bruise. And whereas you saw the feet and the toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly weak, or brittle. And whereas you saw iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men ( Daniel 2:40-43 ):
That is, there would not be a monarchy but there would be more of a democracy kind of a thing, a confederacy of states, but not a strong dictatorship or monarchy as such. "You saw the iron mixed with the miry clay they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men."
and they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Forasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: the dream is certain, the interpretation is sure ( Daniel 2:43-45 ).
So, this great image, the head of gold representing the Babylonian Empire, the first world-dominating empire, which was to be replaced by an inferior empire. The arms and chest of silver or the Medo-Persian Empire, which was to be replaced by the brass stomach or the Grecian Empire, which was to be supplanted by the legs of iron, the Roman Empire. But then he saw the feet of iron and clay with ten toes, weaker than just the iron because you have the mixture of iron and clay. Not a strong monarchy, but more of a confederacy. And yet, it is related to the Roman Empire because it is part iron. So because of this, and of course, the subsequent vision of Daniel in chapters 7 and 8, in which Daniel declares that the second empire will be the Medo-Persian and the third would be the Grecian. And, of course, we know from history that the fourth was the Roman Empire.
Bible scholars for years have been looking for a confederacy of European nations to join together with treaties that would become and will become the final world-governing empire. Since the Roman Empire, there has not been a world-governing empire. It was, of course, Hitler's dream to become a world ruler. And he sought to establish a world-governing empire through the super race. But he never accomplished his dream. It is the goal of communism to develop a world-dominating empire. The communists will not fulfill their dreams. But Bible scholars, and I can show you books that were written back in the twenties, back in the thirties by Bible scholars, Dr. Talbot, Arnold Gabbling, William Newell, who all in their books predicted that there will arise in Europe a confederacy of ten nations who will link themselves together with treaties. And that this ten-nation federation in Europe will become the final world-dominating empire. Because the ten toes are part iron, the nations that become, or joined together, will be related to the Roman Empire, or nations that were involved in the Roman Empire. But because there is also the mixture of clay, so that you have a democracy among them, the nations having equal parts it won't be one nation ruling over them all, but the nations ruling together as a confederacy. So that we as Bible students have been watching Europe for the development of a ten nation European community. And, of course, at the beginning of this year, among the Bible scholars there was tremendous excitement as Greece signed the treaty and became officially the tenth nation of the European community.
Now, the thing that is especially relevant and significant is verse Daniel 2:44 of chapter 2, where the Lord said, "And in the days of these kings," that is the ten kings when this ten nation European confederacy has been formed, "in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed." So that he does declare that the coming of Christ will take place during the time of the rule of these ten kings of the European community.
The fact that the European community has been formed is extremely significant from a biblical standpoint. Now there are many other passages that relate to this in the scriptures. The ruler that will ultimately arise from this ten-nation European confederacy. The power that will be given to him and his rule over the earth as is described in other passages throughout the Bible. As well as Daniel gives us quite a bit of insight towards the latter part of the book of Daniel concerning this man of sin that is going to arise. But to me, the really exciting thing is that we, in seeing the formation of the European community, could very well be seeing exactly what Daniel was prophesying here as we see the Roman Empire, in a sense, being revived in the European community. And we see its growing strength, especially in economy. And we see its industrial might as it is being developed. The European community has a potential GMP that is double that of the United States. And it is certainly one of the most powerful forces in the world today as far as economic and industrial. It is not yet a military force. That will come later, but I'm always excited to realize that it's during the time of the ten kings that the God of heaven shall set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed. The coming of Christ and the kingdom of Christ upon the earth. The stone, not cut with hands, that grows into a mountain that cover the earth. And to realize that we are coming to those days. We see, it's just almost incredible that we see the ten-nation European community being formed. Now, they say, "But Spain and Portugal want to come in." That is correct, then there'll be twelve. Well, there will be ten. Maybe Greece will drop out or maybe the Lord will come before Spain and Portugal can get in. But there will be ten.
We will get in Daniel, chapter 7, a corresponding vision of Daniel, in which it will amplify just a little more fully. This ten horns that come out of this Roman Empire, and the little horn that arises and destroys three and all, but we'll get to that when we get to chapter 7. But nonetheless, I cannot read this second chapter of Daniel and look at what's happening in the world today without getting extremely excited. Because we're coming right down. And like the Lord said, "The dream is certain and the interpretation is sure." And it has followed the very sequences that were predicted. And it is significant that since the Roman Empire you have not had a world-governing empire. And yet there will be one final world-governing empire, ten kings related to the Roman Empire.
Then king Nebuchadnezzar fell on his face, and worshipped Daniel, and he commanded that they should offer an oblation and sweet odors unto him. And the king answered Daniel, and said, Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing that you can reveal this secret. Then the king made Daniel a great man, and gave him many great gifts, and made him a ruler over a whole province of Babylon, and a chief of the governors over the wise men of Babylon. And then Daniel requested of the king, that he set Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, over the affairs of the province of Babylon: that Daniel sat in the gate of the king ( Daniel 2:46-49 ).
So Daniel spoke to them about his three friends and got them important positions. "
Copyright © 2014, Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, Ca.
Smith, Charles Ward. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Smith's Bible Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​csc/​daniel-2.html. 2014.
Dr. Constable's Expository Notes
2. The failure of the king’s wise men 2:4-13
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Constable, Thomas. DD. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Dr. Constable's Expository Notes". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​dcc/​daniel-2.html. 2012.
Dr. Constable's Expository Notes
It is unclear in the text whether the king had really forgotten his dream or was just withholding it to test his counselors. The Authorized Version implies that he had forgotten it, by translating Daniel 2:5; Daniel 2:8: "The thing is gone from me." However, the NASB’s, "The command from me is firm," suggests that Nebuchadnezzar was referring to his command rather than his dream. The NIV and TNIV rendering is similar.
"The king was a young man who had been extraordinarily successful in his military conquests. He undoubtedly had developed a great deal of confidence in himself. It is entirely possible that the wise men were much older than the king, having served Nebuchadnezzar’s father. It would be understandable that the king might have previously been somewhat frustrated by these older counselors and may have had a real desire to be rid of them in favor of younger men whom he had chosen himself. Nebuchadnezzar might well have doubted their honesty, sincerity, and capability, and may even have wondered whether they were loyal to him. He may also have questioned some of their superstitious practices." [Note: Walvoord, p. 50. Cf. Culver, p. 778.]
Regardless of what Nebuchadnezzar may or may not have remembered, his desire to validate the interpretation that his advisers would propose is beyond doubt. They claimed to offer infallible supernatural guidance. If they failed, they would suffer excruciating dismemberment and humiliation. If they succeeded, gifts, a special reward, and great honor would be theirs (cf. Joseph, Mordecai, and Daniel).
"The violence and peremptoriness of the threatened punishment is in accordance with what might be expected at the hands of an Eastern despot; the Assyrians and Persians, especially, were notorious for the barbarity of their punishments." [Note: S. R. Driver, The Book of Daniel, p. 20.]
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Constable, Thomas. DD. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Dr. Constable's Expository Notes". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​dcc/​daniel-2.html. 2012.
Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
The king answered and said to the Chaldeans,.... In the same language they spoke to him:
the thing is gone from me; either the dream was gone from him; it was out of his mind, he had forgot it, and could not call it to remembrance; he had been dreaming of monarchies and kingdoms, which are themselves but dreams and tales, and empty things that pass away, and which he might have learned from hence: or, as it may be rendered, "the word is confirmed by me" z. Saadiah says, that some observe that the word here used has the signification of strength or firmness; and so Aben Ezra interprets the word, is stable and firm; to which agrees the Syriac version,
"most sure is the word which I pronounce;''
referring not to the dream, but to what follows the king's declaration, both with respect to threatenings and promises:
if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof; the king speaks as if he thought it was in their power, but they were unwilling to do it; though no doubt, had they been able, they would have readily done it, both for their credit and advantage:
ye shall be cut in pieces; not only cut in two, but into various pieces, limb by limb, as Agag by Samuel, and the Ammonites by David; and which was a punishment often inflicted in the eastern nations; as Orpheus was cut to pieces by the Thracian women, and Bessus by order of Alexander the great a; much the same punishment as, with us, to be hanged, drawn, and quartered:
and your houses shall be made a dunghill; be destroyed, and never rebuilt more, but put to the most contemptible uses: and this was common among the Romans; when any were found plotting against the government, or guilty of treason, they were not only capitally punished, but their houses were pulled down, or the names of them changed; or, however, were not used for dwelling houses; so the house of Caius Cassius was pulled down and demolished for his affectation of government, and for treason; and that of M. Maulins Capitolinus, who was suspected of seizing the government, after he was thrown from the rock, was made a mint of; and that of Spuflus Melius for the same crime, after he had suffered, was by reproach called Aequimelium; and of the like kind many instances are given b and so among the Grecians; Pausanias c relates of Astylus Crotoniata, that by way of punishment, and as a mark of infamy upon him for a crime he had done, his house was appointed for a public prison. Herodotus d reports Leutychides, general of the Lacedemonians in Thessalian expedition, that having received money by way of bribery, for which he was tried and condemned, though he made his escape, his house was demolished; and the same usage and custom remains to this day in France: thus the unhappy Damien, a madman, who of late stabbed the French king; one part of his sentence was, that the house in which he was born should be pulled down, as he himself also was pulled and cut to pieces; see
2 Kings 10:27.
z מלתא מני אזדא "verbum a me firmum, [vel] firmatum", Michaelis; "a me decretum et statutum", L'Empereur. a Vid. Curtium, l. 7. c. 5. p. 206. b Vid. Alex. ab Alex. Genial. Dier. l. 3. c. 23. c Eliac. 2. sive l. 6. p. 366. d Erato, sive I. 6. p. 72.
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernised and adapted for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rights Reserved, Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855
Gill, John. "Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​geb/​daniel-2.html. 1999.
Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible
Nebuchadnezzar's Forgotten Dream. | B. C. 603. |
1 And in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep brake from him. 2 Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, for to show the king his dreams. So they came and stood before the king. 3 And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream. 4 Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriac, O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation. 5 The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me: if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill. 6 But if ye show the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore show me the dream, and the interpretation thereof. 7 They answered again and said, Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation of it. 8 The king answered and said, I know of certainty that ye would gain the time, because ye see the thing is gone from me. 9 But if ye will not make known unto me the dream, there is but one decree for you: for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed: therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can show me the interpretation thereof. 10 The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said, There is not a man upon the earth that can show the king's matter: therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such things at any magician, or astrologer, or Chaldean. 11 And it is a rare thing that the king requireth, and there is none other that can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh. 12 For this cause the king was angry and very furious, and commanded to destroy all the wise men of Babylon. 13 And the decree went forth that the wise men should be slain; and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain.
We meet with a great difficulty in the date of this story; it is said to be in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel 2:1; Daniel 2:1. Now Daniel was carried to Babylon in his first year, and, it should seem, he was three years under tutors and governors before he was presented to the king, Daniel 1:5; Daniel 1:5. How then could this happen in the second year? Perhaps, though three years were appointed for the education of other children, yet Daniel was so forward that he was taken into business when he had been but one year at school, and so in the second year he became thus considerable. Some make it to be the second year after he began to reign alone, but the fifth or sixth year since he began to reign in partnership with his father. Some read it, and in the second year, (the second after Daniel and his fellows stood before the king), in the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar, or in his reign, this happened; as Joseph, in the second year after his skill in dreams, showed and expounded Pharaoh's, so Daniel, in the second year after he commenced master in that art, did this service. I would much rather take it some of these ways than suppose, as some do, that it was in the second year after he had conquered Egypt, which was the thirty-sixth year of his reign, because it appears by what we meet with in Ezekiel, that Daniel was famous both for wisdom and prevalence in prayer long before that; and therefore this passage, or story, which shows how he came to be so eminent for both these must be laid early in Nebuchadnezzar's reign. Now here we may observe,
I. The perplexity that Nebuchadnezzar was in by reason of a dream which he had dreamed but had forgotten (Daniel 2:1; Daniel 2:1): He dreamed dreams, that is, a dream consisting of divers distinct parts, or which filled his head as much as if it had been many dreams. Solomon speaks of a multitude of dreams, strangely incoherent, in which there are divers vanities,Ecclesiastes 5:7. This dream of Nebuchadnezzar's had nothing in the thing itself but what might be paralleled in many a common dream, in which are often represented to men things as foreign as are here mentioned; but there was something in the impression it made upon him which carried with it an incontestable evidence of its divine original and its prophetic significancy. Note, The greatest of men are not exempt from, nay, they lie most open to, those cares and troubles of mind which disturb their repose in the night, while the sleep of the labouring man is sweet and sound, and the sleep of the sober temperate man free from confused dreams. The abundance of the rich will not suffer them to sleep at all for care, and the excesses of gluttons and drunkards will not suffer them to sleep quietly for dreaming. But this recorded here was not from natural causes. Nebuchadnezzar was a troubler of God's Israel, but God here troubled him; for he that made the soul can make his sword to approach to it. He had his guards about him, but they could not keep trouble from his spirit. We know not the uneasiness of many that live in great pomp, and, one would think, in pleasure, too. We look into their houses, and are tempted to envy them; but, could we look into their hearts, we should pity them rather. All the treasures and all the delights of the children of men, which this mighty monarch had command of, could not procure him a little repose, when by reason of the trouble of his mind his sleep broke from him. But God gives his beloved sleep, who return to him as their rest.
II. The trial that he made of his magicians and astrologers whether they could tell him what his dream was, which he had forgotten. They were immediately sent for, to show the king his dreams,Daniel 2:2; Daniel 2:2. There are many things which we retain the impressions of, and yet have lost the images of the things; though we cannot tell what the matter was, we know how we were affected with it; so it was with this king. His dream had slipped out of his mind, and he could not possibly recollect it, but he was confident he should know it if he heard it again. God ordered it so that Daniel might have the more honour, and, in him, the God of Daniel. Note, God sometimes serves his own purposes by putting things out of men's minds as well as by putting things into their minds. The magicians, it is likely, were proud of their being sent for into the king's bed-chamber, to give him a taste of their office, not doubting but it would be for their honour. He tells them that he had dreamed a dream,Daniel 2:3; Daniel 2:3. They speak to him in the Syriac tongue, which was then the same with the Chaldee, but now they differ much. And henceforward Daniel uses that language, or dialect of the Hebrew, for the same reason that those words, Jeremiah 10:11, are in that language because designed to convince the Chaldeans of the folly of their idolatry and to bring them to the knowledge and worship of the true and living God, which the stories of these chapters have a direct tendency to. But Daniel 8:1-27; Daniel 8:1-27 and forward, being intended for the comfort of the Jews, is written in their peculiar language. They, in their answer, complimented the king with their good wishes, desired him to tell his dream, and undertook with all possible assurance to interpret it, Daniel 2:4; Daniel 2:4. But the king insisted upon it that they must tell him the dream itself, because he had forgotten it and could not tell it to them. And, if they could not do this, they should all be put to death as deceivers (Daniel 2:5; Daniel 2:5), themselves cut to pieces and their houses made a dunghill. If they could, they should be rewarded and preferred, Daniel 2:6; Daniel 2:6. And they knew, as Balaam did concerning Balak, that he was able to promote them to great honour, and give them that wages of unrighteousness which, like him, they loved so dearly. No question therefore that they will do their utmost to gratify the king; if they do not, it is not for want of good-will, but for want of power, Providence so ordering it that the magicians of Babylon might now be as much confounded and put to shame as of old the magicians of Egypt had been, that, how much soever his people were both in Egypt and Babylon vilified and made contemptible, his oracles might in both be magnified and made honourable, by the silencing of those that set up in competition with them. The magicians, having reason on their side, insist upon it that the king must tell them the dream, and then, if they do not tell him the interpretation of it, it is their fault, Daniel 2:7; Daniel 2:7. But arbitrary power is deaf to reason. The king falls into a passion, gives them hard words, and, without any colour of reason, suspects that they could tell him but would not; and instead of upbraiding them with impotency, and the deficiency of their art, as he might justly have done, he charges them with a combination to affront him: You have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me. How unreasonable and absurd is this imputation! If they had undertaken to tell him what his dream was, and had imposed upon him with a sham, he might have charged them with lying and corrupt words; but to say this of them when they honestly confessed their own weakness only shows what senseless things indulged passions are, and how apt great men are to think it is their prerogative to pursue their humour in defiance of reason and equity, and all the dictates of both. When the magicians begged of him to tell them the dream, though the request was highly rational and just, he tells them that they did but dally with him, to gain time (Daniel 2:8; Daniel 2:8), till the time be changed (Daniel 2:9; Daniel 2:9), either till the king's desire to know his dream be over, and he grown indifferent whether he be told it or no, though now he is so hot upon it, or till they may hope he has so perfectly forgotten his dream (the remaining shades of which are slipping from him apace as he catches at them) that they may tell him what they please and make him believe it was his dream, and, when the thing which is going, is quite gone from him, as it will be in a little time, he will not be able to disprove them. And therefore, without delay, they must tell him the dream. In vain do they plead, 1. That there is no man on earth that can retrieve the king's dream, Daniel 2:10; Daniel 2:10. There are settled rules by which to discover what the meaning of the dream was; whether they will hold or no is the question. But never were any rules offered to be given by which to discover what the dream was; they cannot work unless they have something to work upon. They acknowledge that the gods may indeed declare unto man what is his thought (Amos 4:13), for God understands our thoughts afar off (Psalms 139:2), what they will be before we think them, what they are when we do not regard them, what they have been when we have forgotten them. But those who can do this are gods, that have not their dwelling with flesh (Daniel 2:11; Daniel 2:11), and it is they alone that can do this. As for men, their dwelling is with flesh; the wisest and greatest of men are clouded with a veil of flesh, which quite obstructs and confounds all their acquaintance with spirit, and their powers and operations; but the gods, that are themselves pure spirit, know what is in man. See here an instance of the ignorance of these magicians, that they speak of many gods, whereas there is but one and can be but one infinite; yet see their knowledge of that which even the light of nature teaches and the works of nature prove, that there is a God, who is a Spirit, and perfectly knows the spirits of men and all their thoughts, so as it is not possible that any man should. This confession of the divine omniscience is here extorted from these idolaters, to the honour of God and their own condemnation, who though they knew there is a God in heaven, to whom all hearts are open, all desires known, and from whom no secret is hid, yet offered up their prayers and praises to dumb idols, that have eyes and see not, ears and hear not. 2. That there is no king on earth that would expect or require such a thing, Daniel 2:10; Daniel 2:10. This intimates that they were kings, lords, and potentates, not ordinary people, that the magicians had most dealings with, and at whose devotion they were, while the oracles of God and the gospel of Christ are dispensed to the poor. Kings and potentates have often required unreasonable things of their subjects, but they think that never any required so unreasonable a thing as this, and therefore hope his imperial majesty will not insist upon it. But it is all in vain; when passion is in the throne reason is under foot: He was angry and very furious,Daniel 2:12; Daniel 2:12. Note, It is very common for those that will not be convinced by reason to be provoked and exasperated by it, and to push on with fury what they cannot support with equity.
III. The doom passed upon all the magicians of Babylon. There is but one decree for them all (Daniel 2:9; Daniel 2:9); they all stand condemned without exception or distinction. The decree has gone forth, they must every man of them be slain (Daniel 2:13; Daniel 2:13), Daniel and his fellows (though they knew nothing of the matter) not excepted. See here, 1. What are commonly the unjust proceedings of arbitrary power. Nebuchadnezzar is here a tyrant in true colours, speaking death when he cannot speak sense, and treating those as traitors whose only fault is that they would serve him, but cannot. 2. What is commonly the just punishment of pretenders. How unrighteous soever Nebuchadnezzar was in this sentence, as to the ringleaders in the imposture, God was righteous. Those that imposed upon men, in pretending to do what they could not do, are now sentenced to death for not being able to do what they did not pretend to.
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is available on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library Website.
Henry, Matthew. "Complete Commentary on Daniel 2:5". "Henry's Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/​commentaries/​mhm/​daniel-2.html. 1706.