Tag: daniel

We are in Daniel 6, the historical story of Daniel in the lions’ den.  But he’s not there yet.  As we learned in vv. 1-3, Darius was about to appoint Daniel as the supreme leader of the land, over everyone else but Darius himself.

Then we read…

4 Then the high officials and the satraps sought to find a ground for complaint against Daniel with regard to the kingdom, but they could find no ground for complaint or any fault, because he was faithful, and no error or fault was found in him. 5 Then these men said, “We shall not find any ground for complaint against this Daniel unless we find it in connection with the law of his God.”

6 Then these high officials and satraps came by agreement to the king and said to him, “O King Darius, live forever! 7 All the high officials of the kingdom, the prefects and the satraps, the counselors and the governors are agreed that the king should establish an ordinance and enforce an injunction, that whoever makes petition to any god or man for thirty days, except to you, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions. 8 Now, O king, establish the injunction and sign the document, so that it cannot be changed, according to the law of the Medes and the Persians, which cannot be revoked.” 9 Therefore King Darius signed the document and injunction.

Once it became clear just how much favor Daniel had garnered with King Darius, the other high officials and satraps “sought to find a ground for complaint against Daniel with regard to the kingdom” (v. 4).  As soon as Daniel’s peers heard of the king’s plan to promote him, they determined to sabotage his success.  They thought, “Surely, as long as Daniel had been around, there were some skeletons in his closet.”

The accusers’ (note the plural “presidents and satraps”) plan was similar to that of the Babylonian officials who had tried to topple Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego (ch. 3). They knew that Daniel was a God-fearing man who did not worship pagan idols.  So, they laid a trap for him believing that he would remain faithful to his faith, to his God.

Collusion often arises when the ungodly are exposed by the people of God.  They then band together.  Daniel had no intention of competing with or discrediting these other officials, but such is the inevitable result of his superior performance.  It is impossible to shine for the kingdom of light without exposing the kingdom of darkness.  Much like Herod and Pilate at the crucifixion of Jesus, competing leaders temporarily bury their differences in order to attack a mutual enemy.

These officials sought to turn Darius against Daniel, figuring that this would open up the “slot” for one of them to fill.  You see, they are all jockeying for position.  Each one wants to move higher up the food chain.  Make no mistake, they are not friends, not in normal circumstances.  And yet here they are all united in their determination to get rid of Daniel.  This is the work of the enemy, Satan.  A believer with a strong testimony will attract opposition from many sides.

This passage illustrates 2 Timothy 3:12, Paul’s warning to Timothy: “Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted…”  Persecution should be expected.  We should not be “surprised” by it (1 Pet. 4:12).  It is no “stranger” to the man or woman who seeks to follow Christ faithfully.

Their jealousy parallels the animosity of “certain Chaldeans” toward “the Jews” in 3:8-12.  Anti-Semitism appears to have been at least a part of their jealousy (cf. v. 13; 3:12).

They looked for some basis for making an accusation against Daniel, something that would put him in disfavor with the king.  It isn’t by accident the Greek title for the Devil is διάβολος [diabolos]: from δια [dia] (“against”) + βολος [bolos] (“to throw”).  He is the “accuser of the brethren” (Rev. 20:10) and those in his kingdom are eager to follow in his footsteps.  As Joseph Seiss says, “It is the nature of the devil to be the accuser of the good and of those who are favored for their worth; and all his children have the same family trait” (Seiss, Voices from Babylon; or, the Records of Daniel the Prophet, p. 164).

The problem for the jealous leaders was that they could find no fault in Daniel to expose. His faithfulness was so constant and so evident that they had no grounds on which to accuse him before the king. 

Our text says, “but they could find no ground for complaint or any fault, because he was faithful, and no error or fault was found in him” (Dan. 6:4).  In other words, they couldn’t find any faults by either commission OR omission in Daniel’s behavior.  The word for “error” (shalu) carries the thought of neglect; being used, for instance, in Ezra 4:22, “Take heed now that you fail not to do this.”  Daniel was found without guilt both as to the way he did things and in not neglecting matters that should be done.

No corruption and no negligence—what a reputation for any employee!  This “report card” is what any of us would love to possess.  Daniel was not only capable of doing the job (v. 3), but a man of high integrity (v. 4) and a man under authority.

Corruption is doing things that will hurt your employer, usually financially.  Negligence is failing to do what will help your employer, again usually financially.  Corruption refers to dishonest or illegal behavior, such as taking bribes or engaging in fraudulent practices. Negligence, on the other hand, refers to a failure to exercise the care that a reasonable person would exercise, resulting in harm or loss.  Whereas corruption is more deliberate; negligence is more carelessness.  Behind both of them is selfishness and laziness.

I’ve seen what corruption can do in a country like Haiti.  There, millions of dollars were pumped into their economy by the United States with nothing to show for it.  Those monies were pocketed by corrupt officials.  Even at the airport you have to pay bribes.

Negligence not only costs businesses because of lost productivity, but workplace injuries multiply.  Medical expenses for injured employees, compensation claims and the cost of increased insurance premiums can quickly add up. Indirect costs such as lost productivity and the expenses associated with training new employees due to high turnover rates further exacerbate the financial strain on a company just due to negligence.

Daniel’s co-workers spied on everything and they had more than seventy years of data to pour over.  They checked his paperwork, his finances, queried his contacts, checked out his house and possessions, all the while looking for dirt.  Most investigations would be able to turn up plenty of dirt because as the saying goes, “everyone has a skeleton in their closet.”

But the private investigator couldn’t find anything.  Nothing showed up on the wiretaps or phone records.  A computer guru couldn’t find anything suspicious in his digital footprint; nothing on Babylonian Facebook, Twitter, or email.  There was no porn on his hard drive, no Internet searches for bad stuff found in his search history.  He was clean as a whistle.

Let me ask you this: If a group of people were determined to get rid of you, what would they find on you?  What if you couldn’t successfully hide everything, would you be disqualified?

As followers of Jesus, this ought to be the goal we strive to reach.  This is what should be “normal” for us.  It shouldn’t be the reserve of super saints only.  And yet our cynicism of character extends even to fellow followers of Jesus, especially ones who have achieved high positions of leadership in denominations or over large churches. Bill Hybels is still fresh in many minds, along with Steve Lawson and Tony Evans.   These were our heroes, yet they, like us, have clay feet.   But if Daniel could do it in an age before the Holy Spirit gave him the kind of help He does to us and in a culture which gave him no support to follow the true God, we who have the Spirit dwelling in our very hearts and our church fellowship and at least some cultural support should find it to be no problem.  So…how do we do it? 

They found absolutely nothing on Daniel!  Daniel had been faithful from the beginning up to the present day.  His commitment to God (Daniel 1:8) made him the ideal employee who always faithfully served whatever king was in power.

Imagine if all the followers of Jesus just got those three things right what a difference it would make in our culture!  Imagine being totally trustworthy.  We never broke confidence and consistently did what we said we would do.  We’ve all but given up on having leaders we can actually trust.  Followers of Jesus ought to be the ones to change this impression. 

Imagine if there was no negligence among us.  We always did what we were responsible to do and never left anything undone through laziness or disregard.  We got things done on time and completed everything we were given to accomplish, even if no one was watching and we received no bonus for doing it. 

How many elected leaders get into office and get so focused on the trappings of the position that they forget about doing what they actually signed up to do.?  Again, we Christians ought to be the ones to stop that trend no matter the position we hold. 

Imagine if there was no corruption in us.  We always did what was right and couldn’t be persuaded to do what was wrong no matter how sweet the offer was.  How many folks have a price at which they are willing to forego their professed values in favor of whatever is offered in exchange for it?  These are mercenaries.  As soon as we reveal ourselves to be mercenaries, our values are gone and we are worshiping money, not God.  Mercenaries sow cultural cynicism.  Followers of Jesus can have no part in that. 

Leon Wood notes: “This is remarkable.  Because of his position, Daniel must have been responsible in many areas, with many different people working under him.  Yet he and apparently his staff, were found to be free from fault.  He must have engaged people of integrity and then inspired them by his own exemplary life and ability that nothing wrong, either in efficiency or morality, could be found” (A Commentary on Daniel, p. 158).

Today when good men refuse to run for office it is because of ubiquitous investigative reports looking for dirt.  It seems absolutely incredible that Daniel’s accusers could find nothing on Daniel.  They found him faithful—he was trustworthy; honest—there was no corruption; and diligent—no negligence could be found.  What a contrast to Daniel’s accusers!

Clarence Macartney has imagined the conversation that might have taken place between Daniel’s would-be accusers:

One of them says, “Let us ‘frame’ Daniel.  Let us forge letters and bring them to the king, stating that Daniel has been in treasonable correspondence with foreign princes and that he plans to rebel against Darius and overthrow his dynasty.”  But one of the others answers: “No, there is no use in trying that.  Daniel has served too long and too loyally under three kings…for anyone to believe such a charge against him as that.  Then another makes this suggestion: “Daniel has charge of the finances of the realm.  Let us charge him with…dishonesty.”  But another answers, “That, too, will be in vain.  No charge against the honesty of Daniel, who has handled the funds of three kingdoms will be entertained for a moment….Then the third conspirator comes forward with his suggestion:  There is only one plan that will work.”  “What is that?” asks the others.  “We must devise some plan,” says he, “by which Daniel’s loyalty to the king will be brought into collision with his loyalty to God….We will persuade Darius to sign a decree to the effect that for thirty days no prayer shall be made to any man or to any God save Darius.  That will do the business; for if there is anything that is certain, it is that Daniel will never obey such a decree.”

As H. A. Ironside says,

Themselves corrupt, they tried to find occasion against him, taking it for granted that he was actuated by the same selfish motives as they were. But though they endeavored in every way to obtain proof of some dereliction of duty on his part, concerning which they might accuse him to the king, they at last were forced to confess, “We shall not find any occasion against this Daniel, except we find it against him concerning the law of his God” (Lectures on Daniel the Prophet, 2^nd ed., p. 99).

But we’re getting a little ahead of ourselves.

Daniel was not sinless, but in the eyes of these men (his enemies), he was blameless (a quality to which elders should aspire, 1 Tim. 3:2).  You and I, every man, should aspire to be blameless.

Now, a person might assume that a faultless individual would be praised or even emulated by others.  But such a view would be naive—out-of-touch with the Biblical reality of sin.

“Plato was of [the] opinion that if perfect truth and virtue were to come from heaven and manifest their real glory among men, all would at once bow down and worship them.  But he did not understand the depths of human depravity.  Perfect truth and virtue did come from heaven in the person of Jesus Christ, and stood before the eyes of men for years and years in untainted beauty and glory; but the children of this world, rulers and mobs, cried, ‘Away with Him!’ and crucified Him” (Joseph Seiss, Voices from Babylon; or, the Records of Daniel the Prophet, p. 169).

The Apostle John says this about the incarnation of Jesus:

19 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. 20 For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. (John 3:19-20)

In the same way, by virtue of God’s blessing on his life and his irreproachable character, Daniel was a beacon of light amidst the pagan darkness.  He was an obstacle to those who desired to profit from their political positions through unethical means.  They “loved the darkness.”  Thus, they hated Daniel and tried to get him removed because his life convicted them of their own sins.

In Daniel they found neither corruption nor negligence, neither a failure of commission or omission, and they hated him for it.  The same with Jesus.  “Caiphas and his crowed looked in vain for some infraction of any one of the 613 commandments of the Mosaic Law, scouring the private and public life of the Lord Jesus in their hopeless quest.  There was nothing” (John Phillips, Exploring the Book of Daniel, p. 99).  That backfired too.

We are aware that corruption is very common among government officials.  Lord Acton well said, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Here is a list of the corruption found among members of the 100th U.S. Congress (researched by Rodney Storz).

• 29 arrested for spousal abuse;
• 7 convicted of fraud;
• 19 arrested for writing bad checks;
• 117 bankrupted two or more businesses;
• 14 arrested on drug charges;
• 8 arrested on shoplifting charges;
• 21 with lawsuits against them;
• 84 charged with driving while intoxicated.

Daniel was neither corrupt (intentionally doing things that served himself), nor negligent (failing to do the things that would help the king and his kingdom).  How few of us would deserve an A+ in both “no corruption” and “no negligence.”  But Daniel did!

Calvin notes that this is not Daniel’s own estimation of himself, but the voice of the Holy Spirit.  It is not only what the evil spies could not deny in Daniel’s example, but the witness of the Holy Spirit here in Daniel 6 that this was the reality in Daniel’s life.

The fact that this is recorded in Scripture shows that this was not only man’s estimation of Daniel, but God’s estimation as well.  Even before the very watchful eyes of God which see everything, Daniel was a man of integrity.  For a man, there are very few compliments that hold higher merit than being called a man of integrity. 

Because Daniel is a man of integrity, he had nothing to fear.  It is noteworthy that Daniel had nothing to fear from his colleagues’ close probing of how he executes his office.  He knew they were not going to find anything against him.

If you grew up in church like I did, you remember those flannelgraph stories of Bible characters.  Not every story could be pictured through flannelgraph, but one of the easiest stories to show and tell was Daniel in the lion’s den.

Daniel 6 is an amazing story of God’s sovereign protection of His servant and a favorite Sunday school story of how God stopped the mouths of lions.  Daniel never aimed to be a spectacular hero of the faith, just aspired to be faithful and dependable.  Daniel had been faithfully serving the Lord in pagan Babylon for nearly seventy years. He was now about eighty—three to eighty-five years old.  He never preached a revival like Jonah, or turned the nation around like Josiah, but he just plodded on, reading the Scriptures, praying and serving.

“The iniquity of world rulers during the ‘times of the Gentiles’ has not yet been examined to the last detail.  These monarchs have sponsored idolatry in the past, and they will again in the prophetic future.  They became deranged by their senseless, overbearing pride in the past, and they will again in the predicted future.  They were blatantly impious in their desecration of holy things in the past, and they will be again in the foretold future. … But that is not all; there is yet a final touch.  Man will finally seek to displace God altogether” (Feinberg, Daniel: The Kingdom of the Lord, p. 73).

Verse 31 of Daniel 5 marks an historic transition.  On October 12, 539 B. C., Belshazzar reigned as king of Babylon.  On October 13, Darius the Mede took over at the age of sixty-two.  Bible scholars have disagreed over whether Darius and Cyrus were the same person (maybe a name like Julius Caesar) or whether Darius was the general who reigned for a short period of time in Babylon before Cyrus took over.

Daniel himself was around 85 at this time.  In his life, the words of Psalm 92:14 concerning righteous men had been fulfilled, “They will still bear fruit in old age, they full of sap and green.” 

What we observe in Daniel 6 is that certain leaders under King Darius conspire to accuse Daniel (vv. 1-5).  They convince the king to sign a thirty-day ordinance that prayer be made only to him and that those who refuse be cast into a den of lions (vv. 6-9).  Daniel, however, maintains his practice of prayer to God (v. 10), and, thus, Darius orders him to be thrown into the den (vv. 10-17).  The next morning Darius learns that God has saved Daniel from the lions (vv. 18-22) and then he orders that Daniel be removed from the den and the accusers and their families be thrown into it instead (vv. 23-24).  A new decree orders everyone to tremble and fear before Daniel’s God (vv. 25-27). (Expository Commentary)  Amazing story, isn’t it?  And like all the stories in God’s Word, it truly happened.

As with most of the book of Daniel, each chapter is written in the form of a chiasm, a literary device in which the beginning and ending statements match, as well as others throughout the chapter.

The narrative begins and ends with Daniel experiencing favor under the reign of Darius (1 and 1’).  Between these descriptions of Daniel prospering are two occasions of Darius issuing a command, or decree.  Darius signs a document stating that everyone must pray only to him for thirty days (2), but later he decrees that people are to tremble before Daniel’s God (2’).  Conspirators go to Darius to accuse Daniel of violating the law about prayer (3), but in an ironic and fitting twist to the story, the accusers themselves are thrown into the lions’ den (3’).

King Darius cannot renege on his ordinance to punish anyone who prays to someone other than him, so he is greatly distressed when the conspirators accuse Daniel (4).  The king’s distress turns to great relief and gladness, however, when he learns that Daniel has been spared from death (4′).  Even though Darius had reluctantly ordered Daniel’s death (5), God had sent an angel to close the mouths of the lions and thus deliver Daniel (5′).

The center of the chiasm is Darius’s sleepless night and hasty return to the den the next morning (6).  These verses (vv. 18-20) may have been placed at the center of the chapter because they indicate the king’s hope that Daniel would survive: “O Daniel, servant of the living God, has your God, whom you serve continually, been able to deliver you from the lions?” (v. 20).  The previous events in chapter 6 lead up to that suspenseful and hopeful question, and everything that happens afterward proves that the power of God has indeed delivered his servant. (Expository Commentary)

Chapter 6 is the first narrative in the book that takes place under the Medo-​Persian Empire.  The events of chapters 1-5 were under Babylonian kings; now the Medo-​Persians rule.  

This chapter marks the end of the historical portion of the book. The remaining chapters concern prophetic revelation unfulfilled during Daniel’s lifetime.

Chapter 6 is also part of the book’s Aramaic chiasm (chs. 2-7), strategically matching chapter 3, where another divine deliverance took place, Daniel’s three friends from the fiery furnace.

Darius Shows Favor to Daniel (6:1-3)

In vv. 1-3 the new king, Darius, shows favor to Daniel.

According to Daniel 5:31, Darius the Mede was sixty-two when he conquered Babylon (in 539 B.C.).  This conqueror was the ruler of the Medo-Persian empire, located in modern-day Iran, which means “the land of the Aryans.”  These Aryan-speaking people settled on the highland around 1500 B.C. 

This means that Darius was born around the same time that Daniel had been taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar!

The two Aryan tribes that attained the greatest importance were the Medes and the Persians.  The Medes dominated the Persians until Cyrus the Great conquered the Medes around 559 B.C.  He gave the Medes and the Persians equal power so that foreigners spoke of either the Persians and the Medes (Esther 1:19) or “the Medes and Persians” (Daniel 5:28).  We know from history that Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon in 539 B.C.

This is the second kingdom (the chest and arms of silver) represented in Nebuchadnezzar’s vision in Daniel 2 and the ram with two horns in Daniel 8.  See also Daniel 7.

Daniel 6 begins with these words:

1 It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom 120 satraps, to be throughout the whole kingdom; 2 and over them three high officials, of whom Daniel was one, 

It is likely that Darius established the structure of Medo-Persian government in the first year of his reign.  It was his responsibility to appoint administrators over the whole territory recently won from the Babylonians.  Since Darius’ rule over Babylon was relatively short-lived, this governmental reorganization occurred soon after the fall of Babylon to Medo-Persia.  

Why did it “please” Darius to make Daniel one of the three “presidents” of Babylon?  Leon Wood suggests, “Perhaps Darius recognize the honor which Belshazzar had bestowed on Daniel that last night before the fall of Babylon.  It may be, too, that the king had learned of Daniel’s remarkable prediction of that fall and believed that such a man could make a valuable contribution to his new government” (A Commentary on Daniel, p. 156).  Obviously Daniel was a capable administrator.  That has been proven throughout the book.  As we have noted (chapter 4), he likely played a major role in helping Nebuchadnezzar’s administration stay intact during the seven years of Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity.

Part of this governmental structure involved 120 satraps “to be throughout the whole kingdom.”  In charge of these 120 satraps were “three high officials, of whom Daniel was one.”  Daniel’s humility and unwillingness to compromise to gain a promotion in chapter 5 now results in an unsought promotion because of divine favor.

Thus, Daniel was appointed a “leader of leaders.”  He was now the top banana, the head honcho, court guy numero uno.  And that would get under the skin of others who thought themselves worthy of that honor.

The remainder of verse 2 highlights Daniel’s role in this new government.  Notice that all the satraps would now report to Daniel:

to whom these satraps should give account, so that the king might suffer no loss.

Officers of any king were supposed to serve to the benefit of the kingdom, and Darius made his appointments accordingly.  An important function of government was the collection and administration of taxes within the king’s realm (see Ezra 4:13).  This, however, provided ample opportunity for graft and embezzlement as monies funneled through the levels of government.

It appears that the king suspected that some officials were participating in graft and bribery and the revenue stream was being compromised.  Convinced of Daniel’s integrity, he may have sought to use him to expose and stem this financial loss.  If true, this would only fuel more fury and opposition by Daniel’s peers who feared exposure of their own graft and bribery.

It is possible that Darius also somehow knew of Daniel’s trustworthy service to king Nebuchadnezzar.  He believed that in Daniel’s hands his kingdom would not experience political intrigue or financial loss.  There would be no skimming with Daniel in charge.  In addition, he believed that in Daniel’s hands his kingdom would prosper.  Again, Darius is attempting to solidify the organizational structure of his new kingdom. 

Furthermore, if he learned of Daniel’s prediction regarding Belshazzar’s downfall, he presumably would have trusted Daniel even more.  It would seem like, at least to him, that Daniel was “in his corner.”

And thus Daniel served as a top official in at least three administrations spanning 6 decades.  He brought real value to every employer he had ever served.  That is something that all of us should seek to do.  Whoever you work for, you should concentrate on bringing real value to your employer.  Make him or her look good and it will also pay off for you.  Teach your children to go above and beyond, adding real value to the business.

We don’t know how long Daniel served in this role, possibly just a couple of years.  But then, Darius planned to promote Daniel even further.

When a kingdom changes, everything is new and no one knows the former administration.  Would one really expect, then, to read verse 3?

 3 Then this Daniel became distinguished above all the other high officials and satraps, because an excellent spirit was in him. And the king planned to set him over the whole kingdom.

Here was this old man showing how valuable he was, above everybody else!  He didn’t let anything slow him down!

Daniel apparently had some time in office under Darius to “distinguish” himself “above all the other high officials and satraps.”  The Aramaic uses a participle here to indicate continuing action, he was “regularly distinguishing himself over the other two presidents, as well as the 120 satraps” (Leon Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, p. 157).  So it may have been a few months, but probably not much longer, before Darius decided to make this decision to promote Daniel even higher.

Daniel would have distinguished himself in his competency in the job, in his integrity in doing his job in a way that never took advantage of the king but always did what would benefit the king, and even in his early eighties, Daniel was a man with remarkable capacity.  This was on small task the king was giving him, administrating a large land mass roughly half the size of the United States—in a day before cell phones, email or fax machines!

Again we notice the “excellent spirit” that stood out and caused others to take notice (cf. 5:12)..  Daniel’s “excellent spirit” was manifested by the quality of his work and provided a natural testimony that was evident to others. “Do you see a man skillful in his work?  He will stand before kings; He will not stand before obscure men” (Prov. 22:29).

Now in his eighties, Daniel still stood out from others, just as he had as a teenager (1:17-20).  Daniel understood his position within the pagan government was by God’s providential design.  He served under successive pagan kings with the same diligence as if serving God directly.

Paul tells Christian slaves in Colossians 3:22-24: “Bondservants, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord.  Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for me, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward.  You are serving the Lord Christ.”

This “excellent spirit” likely refers to the integrity and skill by which he accomplished his work for the king.  Just as the excellency of God expresses the brilliance of His perfections (all His attributes as they work together), so Daniel’s “excellency” was a reflection of that “glory” of God.  But “excellent spirit” could also refer to the attitude with which Daniel did his work.  He always did it diligently, faithfully and joyfully.

The Aramaic word yatar carries the idea of pre-eminence.  Here was someone whose spirit was pre-eminent over the flesh.  He was a man who walked in the spirit.  When your spirit joined with the Spirit of God takes the leadership role over the flesh you have an excellent spirit.  It will not be so much a trait that you see in yourself but that others notice in you.

Believers make their maximum testimony in organizations by showing their spiritual stability; doing a good job, yes, but the one thing that should characterize a believer is that he is reliable, that when given a job to do he does the best that he can do with what he’s got.  He may not have as much skill as the man next door; he may not be as high IQ as the next person, you don’t have to worry about that, God doesn’t expect you to do something with things that you don’t have but God does expect you to do everything you can with what you’ve got.  And the result is an impact for Jesus Christ.  You do your job as unto the Lord; Colossians 3 gives some New Testament counterpart instructions on this; do your job as unto the Lord, not as unto man [Col. 3:23] (Clough, Lessons in Daniel, 20:271).

Do you possess an excellent spirit?  Would others say that you have an excellent spirit?  What can you do to pursue an excellent spirit?

Darius was so impressed with Daniel that he planned to promote him to his highest rank yet: a position “over the whole kingdom.”  Only Darius would be of higher rank.  This plan, however, was about to be sabotaged by some jealous co-workers.  Every had any of those?  Someone has said that jealousy is the tribute mediocrity pays to genius.  Jealousy is what motivated Joseph’s brothers to sell him into slavery (Acts 7) and what drove the religious leaders to crucify Christ (Matt. 27:18).

The greatest tribute to Daniel was the fact that those fellows who worked with him knew what he was and tried in every way to get rid of him, but they could not.

Alexander McClaren expresses the wonder of Daniel’s character in the midst of the culture he lived in:

“It’s remarkable that a character of such beauty and consecration as Daniel’s could be rooted and grow out of the court where Daniel was.  For this court was half shambles and half pigsty.  It was filled with luxury and sensuality and lust and self-seeking and idolatry and ruthless cruelty.  And in the middle of this there grow up that fair flower of character, pure and stainless by the acknowledgement of his enemies” (David Jeremiah, The Handwriting on the Wall, p. 115-116).

The promotion of Daniel by Darius also says much about the leadership of Darius as king.  It is a rare thing and a blessing when a king or other high-level leader recognizes and advances truly-qualified individuals, not promoting them in return for bribery or political favors or prejudices.

No wonder Daniel provoked the jealousy of others.  Not only was he “practically perfect in every way” but they were being passed up for promotion by this Jew!  And they were very, very race-conscious, like most people throughout history.  But it wasn’t just jealousy that motivated them.  It was also Daniel’s honesty and scrupulousness.  His good example magnified their bad example.  He made them look bad and could easily have gotten them in trouble.

It is quite possible that Cyrus was already looking with favor upon the request of the Jews for release or had already promulgated the decree cited in Ezra 1:2-4 (which is dated in Ezra 1:1 as the “first year of Cyrus king of Persia,” i.e., c. 539-538), when all this is going on.

Daniel was a righteous person, but this did not shield him from persecution, just as Jesus and Paul warned their disciples.  Once again, things were about to get hairy, literally.

Things are looking good, but the Enemy is about to attack.

The message of judgment has been written and now read by Daniel.  Belshazzar and the Babylonian kingdom had been weighed and come up short, so they would be overthrown by the Medo-Persian empire.

Only two things remain: Belshazzar rewarding Daniel and Belshazzar taking his last breath.

Belshazzar fulfilled his promise to the handwriting analyst, but it was the last thing he did!

Then Belshazzar gave the command, and Daniel was clothed with purple, a chain of gold was put around his neck, and a proclamation was made about him, that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom. (Dan. 5:29)

Daniel, however was unimpressed with the king’s promises.  They were worthless.  The God of Israel had already written the word bankrupt over Belshazzar and all that he had.  Daniel had everything he needed, for he had God (Psalm 73:25-26).

30 That very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was killed. 31  And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.

“The most famous military tactic in history may be the Greeks’ use of a giant wooden horse to sneak soldiers into the city of Troy.  But ranking right up there with the Trojan horse is the story of how the Medo-Persian armies captured Babylon.  Scholars debate whether the Trojan horse is fact or legend, but Cyrus’s conquest of Babylon is a certified fact” (David Jeremiah, Agents of Babylon, p. 162).

After conquering numerous other enemies, Cyrus faced his greatest challenge— the huge walled city, 24 square kilometres of Babylon. Xenophon records the following surmising of Cyrus, “But I am sure I cannot see how any one could take by storm, walls so massive and so high.”

Both Herodotus and Xenophon record that Cyrus resolved to lay siege on Babylon and wait until the people within the walls ran out of food.  He was informed (perhaps by Gadatas and Gobryas—two defectors from Babylon) that the great city had more than 20 years of food supplies.  Cyrus became frustrated, but then a plan came to him, perhaps from one of his advisers or perhaps from his own design.  The walls were too thick to break.  The gates were too strong.  There was only one fathomable way to get in—the Euphrates River, which went through the middle of the city.

The highly regarded Greek historian Herodotus wrote a full account of the event:

“Cyrus, having thus stationed the bulk of his army near the passage of the river where it enters Babylon, and again having stationed another division beyond the city, where the river makes its exit,…gave orders to his forces to enter the city as soon as they should see the stream fordable.  Having thus stationed his forces and given these directions, he himself marched away with the ineffective part of his army, and having come to the lake, Cyrus…diverted the river, by means of a canal, into a lake, which was before the swamp, he made the ancient channel fordable by the sinking of the river.

When this took place, the Persians who were appointed to that purpose close to the stream of the vier, which had now subsided to about the middle of a man’s thigh, entered Babylon by this passage….It is related to the people who inhabited this city, that…the Babylonians who inhabited the centre knew nothing of the capture (for it happened to be a festival)l but they were dancing at the time, and enjoying themselves….And thus Babylon was taken for the first time. (Herodotus, vol. 1, trans. Henry Carey, pp. 190-191).

So on the night of October 11, 539 B.C., the Medo-Persian army slipped beneath the wall of Babylon and put Belshazzar to death.  “Daniel 4 marks the end of Nebuchadnezzar, the builder of Babylon.  Chapter 5 marks the end of Belshazzar and Babylon.  The head of gold on the colossus was now defeated by the chest and arms of silver.  Babylon was absorbed into the inferior empire of the Medes and Persians” (David Jeremiah, Agents of Babylon, p. 163).

Grant Jeffrey comments: “Despite Cyrus’ brilliant strategy of diverting the Euphrates River to allow his army to breach the city gates, his plan of attack would not have succeeded without the misplaced confidence of the Babylonian army.  Babylonian soldiers were so confident in their city’s defenses that they minimized the threat of the Persian army while it remained outside the city.  In addition, many of the Babylonian troops were drunk from joining in the spirit of the king’s wine-fueled banquet.  Once the Persian armies joined forces in the center of Babylon, they [easily] overran the city’s key defenses” (Countdown to the Apocalypse, p. 88).

As we close this chapter, we need to heed the words of John F. Walvoord:

The downfall of Babylon is in type the downfall of the unbelieving world. In many respects, modern civilization is much like ancient Babylon, resplendent with its monuments of architectural triumph, as secure as human hands and ingenuity could make it, and yet defenseless against the judgment of God at the proper hour.  Contemporary civilization is similar to ancient Babylon in that it has much to foster human pride but little to provide human security.  Much as Babylon fell on that sixteenth day of Tishri (Oc. 11 or 12) 539 B.C., as indicated in the Nabonidus Chronicle, so the world will be overtaken by disaster when the day of the Lord comes (1 Th 5:1-3).  The disaster of the world, however, does not overtake the child of God; Daniel survives the purge and emerges triumphant as one of the presidents of the new kingdom in chapter 6.

And in the words of Isaiah:

23 who brings princes to nothing,
    and makes the rulers of the earth as emptiness.

24 Scarcely are they planted, scarcely sown,
    scarcely has their stem taken root in the earth,
when he blows on them, and they wither,
    and the tempest carries them off like stubble.

The doom of Babylon here foreshadows the doom of Babylon the Great, the most of harlots (Rev. 17:5).  People today may laugh when we tell them that our modern civilization is doomed, but I’m certain that Belshazzar never conceived in his mind that his mighty empire would be overthrown as well.

A hymn by Knowles Shaw entitled “The Handwriting on the Wall,” has this for the first and fourth verses:

At the feast of Belshazzar, and a thousand of his lords,
While they drank from golden vessels, as the Book of Truth records;
In the night as they revel in the royal palace hall,
They were seized with consternation,– ’twas the hand upon the wall.

So our deeds are recorded, there’s a Hand that’s writing now;
Sinner, give your heart to Jesus, to His royal mandate bow;
For the day is approaching, it must come to one and all,
When the sinner’s condemnation will be written on the wall.

The chorus goes:

‘Tis the hand of God on the wall, (on the wall,)
‘Tis the hand of God on the wall; (on the wall;)
Shall the record be, “Found wanting,” or shall it be, “Found trusting!”
While that hand is writing on the wall? (writing on the wall.)

This is not fiction.  It is not a fairy tale.  It is the consistent truth of God throughout the ages.  We will be held accountable for how we’ve lived our lives, and most particularly what we have done with Jesus Christ.  “[He who] has the Son has life” (1 John 5:12)

John Phillips finishes with this insight into prophecy:

“Immediately after the flood, Noah made a remarkable prophecy regarding his sons (Gen. 9:18-27).  He passed over his second son, Ham, in silence because of his misbehavior.  He prophetically cursed Ham’s son, Cannan, because he would be the father of the foul and wicked Canaanite nations who so filled and defiled the Promised Land.  He blesses his youngest son, Shem—from him would come the Semitic people, particularly Abraham and, above all, the Lord Jesus Himself.  Finally, he blessed his oldest son, Japheth.  To him he promised enlargement, political domination, and a prominent place in ‘the tents of Shem.’

Satan immediately set about the task of proving Noah to be a false prophet.  The first great empires were Hamitic and Semitic—the Egyptian Empire was Hamitic, and the Assyrian and Babylonian empires were both Semitic.  But, with the death of Belshazzar, world empires passed into the hands of Japheth—where it has been ever since, and where it will remain until the Antichrist comes to revive the Old Roman Empire, rule the world, and be swept away by the returning Christ” (John Phillips, Exploring the Book of Daniel, pp. 95-96)

History is “his story,” the story of God and His determination to be glorified among the nations.  He glorifies himself in salvation through judgment.  Over and over again throughout history God rescues his people by judging other nations.  Everything is set up now for the fulfillment of God’s promise through Jeremiah and Isaiah that Cyrus would allow the exiled Jews to return to their homeland (Ezra 1:1-5).

Babylon was being judged.  Babylon was the instrument that God used to discipline His own people, but like many others, they have overplayed their stewardship with cruelty and harshness and blasphemy.  Now it was time for Babylon to fall.

Our salvation also comes through judgment.  Although we deserve to die for our sins, God sent His one and only Son, His dearly loved Son, to die on the cross, to receive our judgment in his body on the tree.

This is the only way that salvation comes, through judgment.  Now, you can stand there in your sins, proud of yourself for being your own person, and you will die in your sins and face eternal judgment, or you can accept the judgment of God’s Son on the cross as payment for your sins.

When some people approached Jesus, assuming that some recent tragedies meant that God was judging them, we read

1 There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. 2 And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? 3 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. 4 Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? 5 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:1-5)

Jesus’s message:  Any time we hear of a tragedy, or someone experiencing terrible things, it is a message to us that we need to repent.

One of the most amazing things I found about the history of World War II is that as Berlin was about to fall and Hitler and all his leaders were down in a concrete bunker and the whole city was surrounded by the Red Army and the forces were crumbling at that moment, even after Hitler had committed suicide, the Nazi officials had a party, a big celebration.

We all have a tendency to try to dull the pain, to soften the blow and it is easy to try to party our way into ignoring the realities around us.

And so from the Scripture comes this slogan, “Let us eat and drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.”  And nothing could have ever been said more truthfully about Babylon.  Actually, it wasn’t tomorrow, it was tonight.

What should they have been doing?  They should have been taking the time repenting.  They should have been on their faces before God, seeking His forgiveness, not drinking from His vessels and praising idols of gold and wood and stone, getting drunk.  But you know, it’s not very different in God’s own people either.

In Isaiah 22, writing about the fall of Jerusalem they did the same thing. This is what Isaiah says about the fall of Jerusalem,

12 In that day the Lord God of hosts
    called for weeping and mourning,
    for baldness and wearing sackcloth;
13 and behold, joy and gladness,
    killing oxen and slaughtering sheep,
    eating flesh and drinking wine.
“Let us eat and drink,
    for tomorrow we die.”
14 The Lord of hosts has revealed himself in my ears:
“Surely this iniquity will not be atoned for you until you die,”
    says the Lord God of hosts.

Sure, there are biblical reasons to celebrate and the appropriate times to celebrate.  But beware of using anything—parties, drugs, alcohol, sex—whatever, to avoid the necessity of dealing with our inner evils and repenting of them.

Scripture identifies a distinction between true repentance and a worldly sorrow.  ^“For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death” (2 Cor. 7:10).  Paul goes on to describe the characteristics of true repentance. “For see what earnestness this godly grief has produced in you, but also what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what longing, what zeal, what punishment!  At every point you have proved yourselves innocent in the matter” (2 Cor. 7:11).  Scripture gives examples of some, like David, who repented from the heart (Ps. 51) and others, like Cain and Saul, who hated the consequences of their sin, but not the sin itself (Gen. 4; 1 Sam. 15).

Repentance should become a regular spiritual discipline in our lives, a practice that we engage in daily, or every time we need it.  Any time we are conscious of having sinned, we should practice biblical repentance and confession (1 John 1:9).

Don’t end up like Belshazzar.  Listen to God’s reproof and repent of your sins.

In this chapter highlighting God’s message of judgment against Belshazzar, Daniel has been presenting to Belshazzar God’s reasons for this final judgment.  Daniel 5:23

23 but you have lifted up yourself against the Lord of heaven. And the vessels of his house have been brought in before you, and you and your lords, your wives, and your concubines have drunk wine from them. 

Daniel has shown that Belshazzar exhibited overweening pride, had blasphemed God by using the vessels of the temple for pagan rituals and had worshipped idols.

Fourth, not only was Belshazzar prideful and unrepentant, history records his cruel and impulsive character:

Even the heathen historian Xenophon pronounces him an “impious” man, and instances his passionate cruelty in slaying one of his nobles for anticipating him in striking down the game in a hunt, and in mutilating a courtier at a banquet because one of the women said he was handsome (Joseph Seiss, Records from Babylon; or, The Records of Daniel the Prophet, p. 141).

Like the overzealous farmer-land owner in Luke 12, Belshazzar was a “fool” whose soul would be required of him that night.  As Job rightly says, “In his hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind” (Job 12:10).  We breathe so naturally and never have to think about it, but the day God decides He doesn’t want us to breathe any longer, it’s all over.  How tragic that Belshazzar had used the breath God gave him to curse His name!

Belshazzar’s familiarity with Nebuchadnezzar’s madness should have engendered a measure of humility leading to a circumspect use of authority motivated by respect for the God of Israel.  Instead, he brazenly mocked God through his flagrant desecration of the temple vessels at the riotous party.

Bruce Wilkinson, the one-time director of Walk thru the Bible ministries, had a sermon entitled “The Three Chairs.”  He bases it off of Judges 24:15-16; Judges 2:7, 10.  In the first chair, the chair of commitment, is Joshua, who “knew the works of God.”  The second chair are the elders, the next generation, who know “about God and His works.”  The third chair is the next generation who “did not know the Lord nor the work which He had done for Israel.”  The point is, every generation needs to recapture really knowing God and experiencing His works.  Don’t settle for a second-hand faith.

Like many of the wicked, Belshazzar wouldn’t submit to God or retain him in his thoughts (Job 15:20-25; Psa. 10:4; Prov. 18:12).

Woe to those who rise early in the morning, [That] they may follow intoxicating drink; Who continue until night, [till] wine inflames them! The harp and the strings, The tambourine and flute, And wine are in their feasts; But they do not regard the work of the LORD, Nor consider the operation of His hands. (Isa. 5:11-12)

Here is a frequent pattern of history: the excellence and character of a predecessor degenerates in the descendant.  In the same way that great nations, having experienced God’s blessings, tend to abandon His ways and degenerate with time, so too many family lines.  It is a rare and precious result when the character and godliness of a father or mother is successfully passed on to a son or grandson.

When men refuse to repent and do not respond to the promptings of God to turn to him, then eventually because of His holiness and justice, He will act in judgment.  Nebuchadnezzar had sinned in many ways but had eventually turned to the Lord and experienced His mercy and grace. But that would not be the case with king Belshazzar.

Daniel then read and interpreted the oracle.  Could Daniel read it?  Of course he could.  He had been reading God’s words for eighty years.  Sure, it was a coded message, but to Daniel this was very much like a message from home.

24 “Then from his presence the hand was sent, and this writing was inscribed. 25 And this is the writing that was inscribed: Mene, Mene, Tekel, and Parsin.

Scholars have wearied themselves trying to figure out how Daniel got his interpretation from these three apparently Aramaic words.  Their explanations have been as diverse as those of Belshazzar’s wise men probably were.  It seems best to simply take Daniel’s interpretation at face value. 

It has been said that Daniel could interpret these words because he recognized his Father’s handwriting (G. Campbell Morgan, p. 64).

Three words in Aramaic, the first word repeated for emphasis.  These are words used for measuring quantities and weighting good on a scale for purchase or trade, and apportioning items.

The meaning of that phrase seals the fate of Babylon.

Generally, here is what they mean:

• Mene (“numbered” or “counted”):  Belshazzar had been measured, counted and scrutinized.  This word is repeated twice to emphasize the care with which he had been measured.

Empires rise and empires fall.  The bounds of their existence is not determined by man, no matter how extraordinary his brilliance, wealth, or power.  Nor are they set by the “watchers” who rule in high.  They are set by God.  The sandglass for the Babylonian empire had run out.

“There is a kind of double meaning in the verb ‘to number.’  It means not only, ‘to count’ but ‘to fix the limit of’ as is also the case in our common expression that a man’s days are ‘numbered’” (H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Daniel, p. 234).  “A Divine sentence of destruction upon the king and his people, that was called forth by the insolent presumption of the present ruler . . .” (Zöckler, The Book of the Prophet Daniel, p. 127  “One wonders how long it might be before the Lord God places our own country on His scales” (Paul Benware, Daniel’s Prophecy of Things to Come, p. 108).

Stephen R. Miller (b. 1949) comments, “‘Mene’ was written twice to stress that the divine decision was certain of fulfillment.  So the message literally reads ‘Numbered, numbered, weighted, and divided (Miller, Daniel (The New American Commentary), 165).”

• Tekel (“weighed”): Belshazzar had been weighed according to God’s standards of righteousness and had fallen short (Rom. 3:23).

There was no point in giving Belshazzar time to repent.  He had sinned willingly and wantonly (see above) against great light (the example of Nebuchadnezzar).  Daniel had clearly confronted Belshazzar with the reality that he had not done this ignorantly.  He said “though you knew all this.”  “You knew it, Belshazzar, and still did not humble yourself.”  It proves the principle, to whom much is given, much is required.

As the old poem puts it,

There is a line by us unseen

That crosses every path—

The hidden boundary between

God’s patience and His wrath.

Indeed, the doomed one’s path below

May bloom as Eden bloomed;

He did not, does not, will not know,

Or feel that he is doomed.

The Scriptures everywhere assure us that “the Lord is a God of knowledge, and by Him actions are weighed” (1 Sam. 2:3).  Solomon writes : “All the ways of a man are pure in his own eyes; but the Lord weighs the spirit” (Prov. 16:2).  “He puts every Belshazzar and every other person in His balances, weighs every soul, marks every folly, and records every good and every deficiency.  Every opportunity misimproved, every admonition disregarded, every ungrateful feeling indulged, every impulse of pride entertained, every instance of power abused or talents squandered, every word and act of profanity, every neglect and slight of Jehovah’s messengers, every effort to get away from duty, every attempt to drown serious thoughts by sensual excesses, every sending away of God’s servants to wait for a more convenient season, every contempt for the Bible and for those who believe and follow it, every thought and passion, or idle word that men speak,—all of them, singly and together, are surveyed and weighed, and written down in heaven against the day of final account” (Joseph Seiss, Voices from Babylon; or, The Records of Daniel the Prophet, pp. 158-159).

John speaks of the Great White Throne judgment in Revelation 20:11-12, 15.  There is not a single person on earth whose works would be worthy enough for them to gain a “not guilty” verdict before that throne!  All manmade efforts will be found wanting.  All our righteousnesses are like filthy rags (Isa. 64:6).  We fall woefully short of His glory (Rom. 3:23).  Psalm 130 says…

³ If you, O Lord, should mark iniquities,
    O Lord, who could stand?
⁴ But with you there is forgiveness,
    that you may be feared.

But we don’t have to depend upon our own efforts.  Peter, the disciple, wrote, “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God,” (1 Pet. 3:18).  Our works, “the unrighteous,” will never measure up.  But Christ’s work, “the righteous One,” was perfectly obedient and went to the cross not to pay for his own sins, but for ours, enabling us to be brought to God.

• Upharsin (“and divided,” or “halved”): This is a reference to Babylon being divided between the Medes and Persians.

“Little had this drunken king known that, even as his revelry was at its height, the engineers of the Persian army were diverting the Euphrates and that the enemy was marching into the city on the riverbed” (John Phillips, Exploring the Book of Daniel, p. 94).

Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin
Consonants	Pointed (Vowels Added) Coin	Interpretation
מנא [mnʾ]	מְנֵא [menēʾ] mina	מְנָה [menâ] “numbered” (Dan. 5:26)
תקל [ṯql]	תִּקַּל [tiqqal] shekel376	תְּקִילְתָּה [teqîlettâ] “weighed” (Dan. 5:27)
פרס [p̄rs]	פְּרֵס [perēs] half-mina	פְּרִיסַת [perîsaṯ] “divided” [in two: Medes and Persians] (Dan. 5:28)

This is the shortest prophecy in the Bible, just four words, shorter even than Jonah’s message to Nineveh, just 8 words in English, “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!”

No wonder the kingdom psychics had been unable to decipher it.  It was a cryptic code, impossible to make sense of unless one already knew its meaning.  Daniel could read it because God had revealed its meaning to him.

Leon Wood wraps up the meaning of this scene for us: “In summary, Daniel’s interpretation set forth that Belshazzar’s kingdom would be destroyed, for the reason that he had been found lacking in moral and spiritual value, and that the encroaching enemy, the Medes and Persians, would absorb the kingdom into their larger domain” (Leon Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, p. 150).

At this very moment, the armies of the Medo-Persians were already creeping in under the city walls through the gates, ready for the kill.

The Bible tells us that God weighs us in the scales.  In Job 31:6 Job cries out, “(Let me be weighed in a just balance, and let God know my integrity!)  In 1 Samuel 2:3 we read, “Talk no more so very proudly, let not arrogance come from your mouth; for the Lord is a God of knowledge and by him actions are weighed.”

The New Testament idea of “walking worthy” of God has this same idea of being weighed or measured out so that the “weight” of our actions matches the “weight” of God’s glory, lest we “fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23).

Adlai Stevenson (1900-1965), supported by Harry S. Truman to succeed him (although he lost to Dwight David Eisenhower), once said, “Man is a strange animal.  He generally cannot read the handwriting on the wall until his back is up against it.”  Belshazzar now knew what God had written.

“As God had judged Nebuchadnezzar’s pride by removing him from the throne, so He would judge Belshazzar’s pride by taking the kingdom from him and giving it to another people” (Pentecost, “Daniel,” p. 1346).

Like Belshazzar, the key question is, knowing that reality of God’s judgment against sin, will we heed it, or will we go on our merry ways ignoring God’s warnings?

Jesus and the apostles warn us as believers that we will one day give an account for our lives—for our words, our actions and even our thoughts and motives.

Jesus said, in Matthew 12:36-37

I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned. 

Paul tells believers

we make it our aim to please him. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. (2 Corinthians 5:9b-10)

Yes, we will face a judgment.  However, our judgment is not related to our sinfulness, because Paul clearly states “there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1).  Rather, this is an examination of our record of service, whether we will be rewarded for things we have done.

1 Corinthians 3:11-15 is speaking of that same judgment, the judgment of believers for the sake of rewards…

For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw—each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

More dreadful is the judgment of unbelievers at the Great White Throne judgment in Revelation 20.

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. 

If you are not a Christian, if your name is not found in the book of life because you have not put your trust in Jesus Christ, oh unbeliever, do that today.  Do not wait, for judgment is certain and final.

You may be a religious person.  You might be a devout Baptist or Methodist or Lutheran or Presbyterian.  You might be Muslim or Buddhist.  Standing before that Great White Throne will be many who have believed in many gods and many who have believed in no god.

What will happen to these religious people?  Jesus told us: “22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

It doesn’t matter what religious works, even what spectacular ministries they have conducted, the key factor is whether Jesus knows them, whether their names are in the book of life.

Daniel has been asked to interpret the handwriting on the wall and offered great rewards.  His response to the king is found in verse Daniel 5:17.

17 Then Daniel answered and said before the king, “Let your gifts be for yourself, and give your rewards to another. Nevertheless, I will read the writing to the king and make known to him the interpretation. 

After reproving the king and plainly stating that no rewards the king could give would determine the message he would bring, he agreed to interpret the handwriting on the wall.  Daniel was not a profit for sale, someone who would hedge his message to please his audience.

Daniel consented to interpret the message because he understood it was a message of judgment from God intended for Belshazzar.  Depending on Belshazzar’s spiritual condition, the message would either lead to his bona fide repentance and salvation, or serve to confirm his hardened heart in judgment. It was not Daniel’s job to know the result, but only to faithfully deliver the message.

That is true for every preacher of the Word of God.  Our responsibility is to faithfully deliver the message, no matter how encouraging or how damning, and leave the results to God’s Spirit.

In the 1988 U. S. Presidential election, a vice-presidential candidate debate took place between Republican Senator Dan Quayle and Democrat Senator Lloyd Bentsen.  Quayle, 41, who was constantly on the defensive because of his youth, at one point compared his experience to that of John F. Kennedy when that man ran for president.  The much older Bentsen retorted, “Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy.  I knew Jack Kennedy.  Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine.  Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.”

In vv. 18-23, old Daniel essentially gave this young, upstart, interim king the same treatment.  “Belshazzar, I served Nebuchadnezzar.  I knew Nebuchadnezzar.  Nebuchadnezzar was a friend of mine.  Belshazzar, you’re no Nebuchadnezzar.”

Daniel then rehearses the story of Nebuchadnezzar’s humbling (Daniel 4).  His purpose in doing so was to impress upon Belshazzar the need for him to humble himself and repent now, before it is too late.  Nebuchadnezzar had, eventually, humbled himself.  The question is, “Will you, Belshazzar?”

18 O king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father kingship and greatness and glory and majesty. 19 And because of the greatness that he gave him, all peoples, nations, and languages trembled and feared before him. Whom he would, he killed, and whom he would, he kept alive; whom he would, he raised up, and whom he would, he humbled. 20 But when his heart was lifted up and his spirit was hardened so that he dealt proudly, he was brought down from his kingly throne, and his glory was taken from him. 21 He was driven from among the children of mankind, and his mind was made like that of a beast, and his dwelling was with the wild donkeys. He was fed grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, until he knew that the Most High God rules the kingdom of mankind and sets over it whom he will.

God’s humbling of Nebuchadnezzar was not only a lesson for him, but also for his kingdom, and for his progeny — and not just his contemporaries but even his grandsons.  But this grandson didn’t take notice, and it was too late. “That very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was killed” (Dan. 5:30).

David Mathis says, “Learning from God’s humbling of others is vital for each of us, and not just in our own day but in the generations before us.  God not only means to humble us all individually — and he has his countless ways of doing so in the tough mercies of his providence — but he also means for us to humble ourselves in response to seeing others humbled, both around us and before us.  Wisdom not only humbles herself when prompted by her own humbling, but also in response to the humbling of others” https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/humbled-by-the-hand-of-god)

The contrast between Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar is highlighted from the opening sentence.  Daniel, began, “O king, the Most High God gave your father Nebuchadnezzar sovereignty and greatness and glory and splendor” (5:18).  By implication, Daniel was suggesting that the Most High had given no similar sovereignty or glory to Belshazzar (possibly because he, his father and others had usurped the throne?).  Yet even Nebuchadnezzar had received from the Lord true greatness and majesty, along with almost godlike powers to raise up and humble, to kill and keep alive; and when he became arrogant, the Lord had humbled him and brought him down from his lofty perch.

19 And because of the greatness that he gave him, all peoples, nations, and languages trembled and feared before him. Whom he would, he killed, and whom he would, he kept alive; whom he would, he raised up, and whom he would, he humbled. 20 But when his heart was lifted up and his spirit was hardened so that he dealt proudly, he was brought down from his kingly throne, and his glory was taken from him. 21 He was driven from among the children of mankind, and his mind was made like that of a beast, and his dwelling was with the wild donkeys. He was fed grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, until he knew that the Most High God rules the kingdom of mankind and sets over it whom he will.

Daniel hammered home the name “Most High God” (v. 18, 21) to whom actually belongs all the power and sovereignty.  Nebuchadnezzar had to learn this the hard way.

So the point of Daniel’s message to Belshazzar is clear and pointed:  Nebuchadnezzar did have something to be proud about, and yet the Lord had humbled him.  Belshazzar, who had accomplished nothing and fell far short of Nebuchadnezzar’s achievements, should have learned from this experience and humbled himself as well.  Instead, although Belshazzar knew what had happened to Nebuchadnezzar, he had still exalted himself against the Most High, sacrilegiously profaning the temple vessels from Jerusalem by using them in an idolatrous act of worship.

So Daniel brought this warning against him, explaining why God was warning him in this way:

22 And you his son, Belshazzar, have not humbled your heart, though you knew all this, 23 but you have lifted up yourself against the Lord of heaven. And the vessels of his house have been brought in before you, and you and your lords, your wives, and your concubines have drunk wine from them.  And you have praised the gods of silver and gold, of bronze, iron, wood, and stone, which do not see or hear or know, but the God in whose hand is your breath, and whose are all your ways, you have not honored.

Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah used the title “the Lord (or God) of heaven” to describe Yahweh because this was the title of the chief Syrian god and a title that other people in the Persian Empire gave to their chief god (c. Ezra 1:2; 5:11-12; 6:9-10; 7:12, 23; Neh. 1:4-5; 2:4, 20; Dan. 2:18-19, 34, 44; 5:23). This title implies God’s transcendence over all.

Daniel detailed four sins God was holding Belshazzar accountable for.

22 And you his son, Belshazzar, have not humbled your heart, though you knew all this,

“Daniel, God’s faithful prophet, did not tremble before the king. He had no fear; he had but one duty and responsibility: To be faithful to the Word of God written on the wall, and to tell the king exactly what God had spoken. That is the responsibility of every minister, evangelist, and Bible teacher. We are responsible only to God. A minister called and ordained of God to preach the Gospel, owes his first allegiance to God, regardless of the age or dispensation. He must fear no one save God—and that includes kings, governors, and rulers. He must reprove, rebut, and exhort. A minister need never apologize for preaching ‘Thus saith the Lord’” (Oliver B. Greene, Daniel, p. 196).

“One of the most amazing spectacles in this world is how little men really profit from the judgments of God” (Charles Feinberg, Daniel: The Kingdom of the Lord, p. 69). 

First, he rebuked Belshazzar’s sin: “you have not humbled your heart.”  Humility is often lacking in those of high position and influence. “The perpetual incense of flattery, coupled with the daily experience of being dependent on no one, and of having every one dependent upon himself, tempts an absolute monarch to feel himself almost a god.—Cowles.”

Instead of trusting in God for his protection, he trusted in the walls of his city.  Instead of humbling himself and looking up to God Most High, he worshiped idols who could do nothing for him.

“History is a superb teacher, but Belshazzar failed as a student.  He knew the history of Nebuchadnezzar’s pride and God’s subsequent judgment, but he failed to learn from it” (David Jeremiah, Agents of Babylon, p. 159).  He refused to humble himself.  “This was not a case of ignorance; it was arrogant defiance.  It matters what we know, and it matters how we respond” (Ibid, p. 159).

It reminds us of Paul’s diagnosis of all of us in our fallenness and depravity before God “makes us alive” (Eph. 2:5), “They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart” (Eph. 4:18).  Did you notice that last statement.  Yes, ignorance is there, but it is present because of our “hardness of heart.”  It is not a mental deficiency in us, but a moral deficiency.  That is why we need a new heart (Ezek. 36:25-27).

Let us take warning from this.

How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? (Heb. 10:29)

Paul tells us that it is not ignorance, but hardness of heart that condemns us (Eph. 4:18).

23 but you have lifted up yourself against the Lord of heaven. And the vessels of his house have been brought in before you, and you and your lords, your wives, and your concubines have drunk wine from them. 

Second, and more serious, Belshazzar had dishonored and demeaned the Most High, the God of heaven, “by taking precious implements created for His worship and desecrating them with the worst kinds of sinful indulgence.  It was a brazen display of impiety and contempt” (David Jeremiah, Agents of Babylon, p. 160).  This was blasphemy against God.

Sennacherib, king of Assyria, had made a similar mistake—exhibiting extreme pride and mocking God.  “‘Whom have you mocked and reviled?  Against whom have you raised your voice and lifted up your eyes to the heights?  Against the Holy One of Israel!” (Isaiah 20:37).

Jeremiah had predicted Babylon’s eventual fall from pride exhibited against the Holy One of Israel.  ““Summon archers against Babylon, all those who bend the bow. Encamp around her; let no one escape. Repay her according to her deeds; do to her according to all that she has done. For she has proudly defied the Lord, the Holy One of Israel” (Jere. 50:29).

The judgment of Belshazzar’s Babylon prefigures God’s judgment of the prideful works of man on a global scale in the ultimate day of the Lord.  “The haughty looks of man shall be brought low, and the lofty pride of men shall be humbled, and the Lord alone will be exalted in that day.  For the Lord of hosts has a day against all that is proud and lofty, against all that is lifted up—and it shall be brought low… And the haughtiness of man shall be humbled, and the lofty pride of men shall be brought low, and the Lord alone will be exalted in that day” (Isaiah 2:11-12, 17)

Third, and worst of all, Belshazzar dishonored the living God because he worshiped lifeless idols, using the instruments made for the worship of the one true God.

And you have praised the gods of silver and gold, of bronze, iron, wood, and stone, which do not see or hear or know, but the God in whose hand is your breath, and whose are all your ways, you have not honored.

Everything Belshazzar owned came from God (1 Chronicles 29:14).  But instead of worshipping the living God out of gratitude for His gifts, Belshazzar worshiped inanimate idols made of silver, gold, bronze, iron, wood and stone, which do not hear or see or know (Deuteronomy 4:28; Psalm 115:5-7; 135:16-17).

Belshazzar chose to worship dead images instead of the true living God of heaven, “in whose hand is the life of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind” (Job 12:10).  Thus, like these lifeless idols, he would die.

The problem with idols is, as we worship them we become like them.

“What we revere is what we resemble, either for ruin or for restoration!” says Gregory Beale in his monumental book We Become What We Worship.  His contention, based upon numerous Old Testament passages, is that we become like what we worship.

The Scriptures paint a realistic but unfavorable picture of the viability of idols. Unseeing eyes, unhearing ears, ignorant hearts. This is the idol in Isaiah 42:17-20 and also of the one who succumbs to idolatry in Isaiah 6:9-10. The equating of the two is obvious in Isaiah 43:8-10 and 44:8-20, esp. v. 18,

“They know not, nor do they discern, for he has shut their eyes, so that they cannot see, and their hearts, so that they cannot understand.”

Throughout the Bible there are literally hundreds of cases that illustrate this: Lot’s wife becoming salt (Gen 19:17, 26, Deut. 29:23), Solomon’s many wives leading to the division of his kingdom (1 Kings 11), the “belly-gods” of the Judaizers (Phil. 3:18-19), the creature worshippers in Romans 1:18-32. Psalm 115 gives us the locus classicus of this doctrine.

⁴ Their idols are silver and gold,
    the work of human hands.
⁵ They have mouths, but do not speak;
    eyes, but do not see.
⁶ They have ears, but do not hear;
    noses, but do not smell.
⁷ They have hands, but do not feel;
    feet, but do not walk;
    and they do not make a sound in their throat.
⁸ Those who make them become like them;
    so do all who trust in them.

Unlike the true, “living God,” Belshazzar’s gods “do not see or hear or know.”  The true, “living God,” whose hand wrote upon the wall, held Belshazzar’s life in His very hands (Job 12:10; Isa. 42:5; Acts 17:25-28).  If he were to withdraw His Spirit and breath, all flesh would perish (Job 34:14-15; Ps. 104:29).  None of the idols could do that.  And Belshazzar, “you have not honored” the true God.

This was Belshazzar’s grave mistake.  I hope that it is not yours.  Let me ask you, have you honored the true and living God, or do you unwittingly worship idols.

What are the idols of our day?  They are not made out of metal, but are mental idols, things like success, riches, fame, power, pleasure, sex, ambition, even our families and our ministries can become idols.

An idol is anything that we love and sacrifice for, anything we trust to give us the joy and satisfaction that truly only God can give us.

Let’s follow the Apostle John’s concluding advice in his first epistle:  “Little children, keep yourselves from idols.”

We are in Daniel chapter 5 this morning.  While Belshazzar’s face had turned pale and his insides were in turmoil at the sight of a hand writing on the wall, he had received no help from his royal advisors on how to interpret the strange writing.

Fortunately, the queen mother (either Belshazzar’s mother or grandmother) knew of a man who could interpret the writing.

10 The queen, because of the words of the king and his lords, came into the banqueting hall, and the queen declared, “O king, live forever!  Let not your thoughts alarm you or your color change.  11 There is a man in your kingdom in whom is the spirit of the holy gods. In the days of your father, light and understanding and wisdom like the wisdom of the gods were found in him, and King Nebuchadnezzar, your father–your father the king–made him chief of the magicians, enchanters, Chaldeans, and astrologers, 12 because an excellent spirit, knowledge, and understanding to interpret dreams, explain riddles, and solve problems were found in this Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar. Now let Daniel be called, and he will show the interpretation.”

She saw Daniel as a man with “understanding and wisdom” to interpret divine things, such that Nebuchadnezzar, his grandfather, had promoted him to “chief” among all the royal advisors.  She goes on in verse 12 to describe more about him.

This Daniel was different.  He had an “excellent spirit” (cf. Dan. 6:3).  The “spirit of excellence” is a heart attitude.  It is kin to the attitude Caleb possessed. “But because my servant Caleb has a different spirit and follows me wholeheartedly, I will bring him into the land he went to, and his descendants will inherit it” (Numbers 14:24).

Excellence is something that excels, goes beyond, predominates, and the word lying beyond this word excellent carries exactly that meaning.  An excellent spirit will always be noticed.  His excellent spirit was built off his own sense of power over himself (self-control), his prayerfulness and his perceptiveness.

What allowed Daniel to possess an excellent spirit is that he lived his life out of total respect and adoration of the true God.  Thus he reflected God’s excellence.

She says that Daniel also has “knowledge and understanding,” which allowed him to interpret Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams.  And he is able “to interpret dreams, explain riddles, and solve problems.”  Therefore, he can handle your difficulty.

Philip Long notes: “There is a subtle word-play in the queen-mother’s speech.  Daniel, she recalls, was able to “loosen knots” (verse 12, “solve problems”), which is ironic since the king had his “knots loosened” (verse 6, perhaps that he has soiled himself!).”

Daniel 5:5-12 – What was the Meaning of the Handwriting on the Wall?

Finally, the queen mother names him “Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar…”  Surprisingly, the queen referred to Daniel by his Jewish name, thus showing respect for his faith and background.  But Belshazzar, if he knew Daniel at all, would know him by the name given to him by Nebuchadnezzar, Belteshazzar.

She was convinced that Daniel would “show [you] the interpretation.”

“To this point in the book, the reader knows Daniel can interpret dreams. But the writing on the wall was not a dream.  When the hand appeared in 5:5, the scene is not attributed to a vision in Belshazzar’s mind.  And others were able to see the writing on the wall, though unable to interpret it (5:8).  Unlike the visions which were unclear in Nebuchadnezzar’s mind, here on the wall was an objective display.  This was more like a riddle, a puzzle.  But the queen believed Daniel could “explain riddles” and “solve problems,” so the writing on the wall would pose no difficulty for him (5:12)” (Mitch Chase, Daniel, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/commentary/daniel/ )

So Belshazzar calls for Daniel.

13 Then Daniel was brought in before the king.  The king answered and said to Daniel, “You are that Daniel, one of the exiles of Judah, whom the king my father brought from Judah. 14 I have heard of you that the spirit of the gods is in you, and that light and understanding and excellent wisdom are found in you. 15 Now the wise men, the enchanters, have been brought in before me to read this writing and make known to me its interpretation, but they could not show the interpretation of the matter. 16 But I have heard that you can give interpretations and solve problems. Now if you can read the writing and make known to me its interpretation, you shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around your neck and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.”

“Approximately 80-years-old now [and likely was asleep at this time of night], Daniel entered the banquet hall.  He did not have the same administrative relationship with Belshazzar that he had had with Nebuchadnezzar.  The reader does not know what changes had occurred, other than Daniel’s age and the fact that the Babylonian king was a different man who may have inclined toward different advisers.  Since the queen offered so much information about Daniel to her son (5:11–12), it seems that Belshazzar had little direct interaction with the man in his administration” (Mitch Chase, Daniel, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/commentary/daniel/)

David Jeremiah makes the points that although Daniel was now an octogenarian (80 years old) and no longer seemed to be actively serving in an official capacity, that God still used him.  He concludes, “Whatever your stage in life, stay spiritually healthy and ready to serve at a moment’s notice” (David Jeremiah, Agents of Babylon, p. 164).

He then quotes Joseph Parker, an English preacher:

“Preachers of the Word, you will be wanted someday by Belshazzar.  You were not at the beginning of the feast.  You will be there before the banquet hour is closed.  The king will not ask you to drink wine, but he will ask you to tell the secret of his pain, and heal the malady of his heart.  Just wait your time, preachers.  You are nobody now.  Who cares for preachers and teachers and seers, men of insight, while the wine goes around and the feast is unfolding its tempting luxuries.  But the preacher will have his opportunity.  They will send for him when all other friends have failed.  May he then come fearlessly, independently, asking only to be a channel through which divine communication can be addressed.  Then may he speak to the listening trouble of the world” (Preaching through the Bible)

“I find it interesting that Daniel, now in his eighties, wasn’t invited to Belshazzar’s banquet, but when a crisis hit, he was the one summoned to save the day” (David Jeremiah, Agents of Babylon, p. 157).  What Daniel saw must have broken his heart.

“Then Daniel was brought in…”  “We can be sure that Daniel cast a piercing look around the banquet hall as he came in with his escort.  The tables had food scattered all about, and wine was spilled everywhere.  The women were somewhat worse for the dissolute behavior of some of the men, and men and women alike were much the worse for drink.  The gods of Babylon were against the wall, too, dead to it all.  And—what was this in the hand of a harlot, lying on the floor among the debris of the feast:  Was that a sacred vessel that belonged to the temple of the living God in Jerusalem?  Were those priceless vessels now being used to slop wine in a drunkard’s shaking hands?  The king, as was all too evident, was regaling his shattered nerves with wine from vessels consecrated to the worship and service of the Holy One of Israel, God most High” (John Phillips, Exploring the Book of Daniel, pp. 89-90).

“You are the Daniel” might be better rendered, “Are you that Daniel…?”  Though Daniel was one of the chief ministers of state, who did “the king’s business” in the palace (Dan. 8:27) yet Belshazzar seems to have known nothing of him.  One would think the king would have some familiarity with Daniel who had served in the court just over a decade earlier.  But profligate rulers can be woefully out-of-touch with those who run their administration.

If the king was asking a question rather than making a statement (see above), then his interest in whether Daniel was a Jew may reflect his concern for having desecrated the temple vessels of the God of the Jews.

Notice that Belshazzar addresses him not as the one who had interpreted Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams and could possibly help him, but rather as “one of the exiles of Judah, whom the king my father brought from Judah.”  He wanted to put Daniel firmly in his place from the outset.

14 I have heard [from the queen mother] of you that the spirit of the gods is in you, and that light and understanding and excellent wisdom are found in you. 

There seems to be somewhat of an edge to Belshazzar’s statement, perhaps still feeling the sting of the queen mother’s rebuke.  It’s almost as if he is putting on record his skepticism in Daniel’s ability to do what the queen mother had claimed.  “I’ve heard it, but I don’t believe it.”

Daniel was the king’s last resort.  His brain trust had failed him.  The queen mother believed in him, but what could he really do?

In reality, true revelation, understanding and wisdom come from God.  No natural gifts can produce these abilities.

The secular world believes deep wisdom and insight can be attained independently of God.  Though academic attainments and understanding can be pursued apart from acknowledging God, it is God’s purpose to conceal certain things from those who reject Him while revealing them to those who appear to be more simplistic, but acknowledge Him (“babes,” Matt. 11:25; 16:17).  Those who reject God have no means of understanding spiritual things because they remain disconnected from God’s Spirit (John 3:12; Eph. 2:1; 5:14; Col. 2:13).  It is God’s Spirit that reveals deep spiritual matters (John 14:26; 1Cor. 2:10-13).

Those who don’t know God cannot benefit from His special revelation. Even worse, sometimes God actively frustrates those who attempt to attain wisdom apart from Him (Job 12:17-25; Isa. 19:12-13; 44:25; Rom. 1:21-22, 28; 1 Cor. 1:20).

“As in the previous instances in Daniel 2 and 4, the wisdom of the world is demonstrated to be totally unable to solve its major problems and to understand either the present or the future.  Daniel as the prophet of God is the channel through which divine revelation would come, and Belshazzar in his extremity was willing [now] to listen” (John Walvoord, p. 124).

15 Now the wise men, the enchanters, have been brought in before me to read this writing and make known to me its interpretation, but they could not show the interpretation of the matter. 16 But I have heard that you can give interpretations and solve problems.

All the positive aspects of a relationship with God helped Daniel whereas the negative aspects hampered the wise men of Belshazzar’s court.  Daniel’s education and wisdom had grown during his schooling in Babylon, but it was his relationship with God that refined and amplified his natural ability and insight, enabling him to interpret dreams and the handwriting on the wall.

“Now if you can read the writing and make known to me its interpretation, you shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around your neck and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.” (Dan. 5:16b)

“Too often the world, like Belshazzar, is not willing to seek the wisdom of God until its own bankruptcy becomes evident. Then help is sought too late, as in the case of Belshazzar, and the cumulative sin and unbelief which precipitated the crisis in the first place becomes the occasion of downfall” (John Walvood, Daniel: The Key to Revelation).

“The king promised many gifts if Daniel could interpret the handwriting.  He even promised him the third position in the kingdom (after himself and his father Nabonidas).  Daniel wisely declined the king’s gifts, since he probably realized that the kingdom could last only for a few [more] hours.  How true it is of this world in which we live.  Satan promises us wealth and fame, but alas, it can only last for an hour and then it is gone forever” (Jim Gerrish, A Short Study in the Book of Daniel, https://www.wordofgodtoday.com/short-study-of-daniel/)

How does Daniel respond?  How does this mature, wise leader respond to the king’s offer?

17 Then Daniel answered and said before the king, “Let your gifts be for yourself, and give your rewards to another. Nevertheless, I will read the writing to the king and make known to him the interpretation. 

Since Belshazzar was defensive and skeptical towards Daniel, Daniel’s response omits the usual deferential politeness of the Babylonian court.  In fact, Daniel proceeds to scold Belshazzar like he was a naughty school boy.  While Daniel seemed to love and show deference to King Nebuchadnezzar, he has no love for Belshazzar.  Why the difference?  Because Belshazzar profaned the holiness of Daniel’s God by drinking to his pagan gods from the vessels that belonged to the holy God.

Daniel’s reply to the king was in every sense a sermon, and a powerful one at that.  The prophet began by declining the offered gifts.  This had the effect, whatever Daniel’s reason for doing so may have been, of helping Belshazzar realize that these gifts would not influence his interpretation of the writing.

One measure of a true man or woman of God is whether he or she can be swayed by bribery or reward (Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:13).  “He was like Abraham who told the king of Sodom that he wouldn’t even take a shoelace from him (Gen. 14:22-23).  The apostle Paul said, ‘I have not coveted anyone’s silver or gold or clothing’ (Acts 20:33).”  This was the stance of Elisha before Namaan, the king of Syria—after his leprosy had been healed by God (2 Kings 5:15-16).  Unfortunately, Elisha’s servant Gehazi had not learned this important lesson from his master (2 Kings 5:25-27).

Unlike Balaam in the service of Balak (Num. 22:7), but more like Ahijah before the wife of Jeroboam (1 Kings 14:6-16) and Peter before Simon Magus (Acts 8:18-20), Daniel’s service could not be purchased.  He bluntly told Belshazzar he could keep his rewards.

In fact, it is foolish for those seeking to understand a message from God to make such an offer as it can only serve to tempt God’s messenger to shy away from telling the hard, unvarnished truth.  This may also explain why Daniel refused the offer prior to the interpretation, but accepted it afterwards (Dan. 5:29): for it guaranteed the interpretation was not influenced by the potential of reward.  For the faithful minister, the Word of God must be given the same before both kings and paupers.

“This refusal of the royal presents was designed merely to decisively reject, at the outset, and in a manner becoming the prophet of Jehovah, any influence that might be brought to bear on him. It is not, therefore, a pert expression, which the king might justly punish, nor is it inconsistent with the fact that Daniel ultimately accepted the reward offered for the interpretation, Dan. 5:29, since he regarded it as a recognition of his God” (Zöckler, The Book of the Prophet Daniel).

Let me close by quoting Reuben Bredenhof

Paul was mindful of how the love of money can have a corrupting influence on a pastor’s ministry.  This awareness is clear from Paul’s words of farewell to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20.  There he insists that while he was among them, he “coveted no one’s silver or gold” (Acts 20:33), but he was willing to work with his hands to support himself and his companions.  And thinking of his flashy rivals in Corinth, Paul denounces those who “peddle the Word of God” for personal profit (2 Cor. 2:17).

Despite Scripture’s repeated warnings, this is still a real temptation for those serving in ministry.  Perhaps a pastor wants to take a position at a particular church because it offers to pay substantially more than his present congregation.  Maybe a pastor is quick to complain that he needs a raise in his salary, or he seeks to maximize every monetary benefit available to him.  But a pastor must tread carefully.  Even the appearance of being engrossed with material things can be seriously detrimental to his relationship with the congregation.  This in turn can hinder the believers’ growth in faith.  Paul’s pleading words to the Corinthians remind us about what should take priority: “I do not seek yours”—that is, the believers’ material possessions—“but you” (2 Cor. 12:14).  A love of money can unduly sway a pastor’s preaching, detract from his credibility, or even sink his ministry entirely.  So a faithful pastor never seeks material gain, but always the congregation’s continued maturity in Christ.

The pastor’s challenge is the same that is faced by all Christians.  By nature we want to stand on our rights and we demand our entitlements.  Greed is ever-prowling.  Yet Scripture exhorts all believers to be content with what we have (1 Tim. 6:5).  When we are saved by Christ and have freely received his eternal inheritance, we have the ultimate reason to be content.  Besides, God the Father has graciously promised to supply all our daily needs (Heb. 13:5).  With confidence in God’s promise to provide, pastors can keep their focus on doing the work of dedicated ministry.  Such a contented approach to money not only sets a good example to the congregation, it also honors Christ and his gospel.

Belshazzar is shaking in his boots.  A hand has appeared out of the darkness and has written something on the wall of the banqueting hall where Belshazzar and his nobles were having a grand party.

He “screams out” in alarm and urgency and the verb here is a participle, used with a to-be verb to imply a continuous action: he “was screaming and kept on screasming” for his advisors.

7 The king called loudly to bring in the enchanters, the Chaldeans, and the astrologers. The king declared to the wise men of Babylon, “Whoever reads this writing, and shows me its interpretation, shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around his neck and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.”  8 Then all the king’s wise men came in, but they could not read the writing or make known to the king the interpretation.  9 Then King Belshazzar was greatly alarmed, and his color changed, and his lords were perplexed.

“Whoever reads this writing, and shows me its interpretation” is the request of the king.  This is the common futile pattern of secular leaders seeking secular wisdom.  Assemble the best of the (secular) best while rejecting those who fear and acknowledge God and possess a genuine understanding of His revelation.  Instead, rely on these secular “experts” to explain things that ultimately originated with God.

Again, there is a promise of riches: “shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around his neck…”  Clothing someone in purple meant giving him royal authority (cf. Esth. 8:15).  The necklace of gold would have had symbolic as well as monetary value. 

Daniel would later reluctantly receive this honor (Dan. 5:29) but had little use for it because he possessed the true riches of God.

This offer of being third ruler remained a puzzle for hundreds of years. If Belshazzar was king, why wouldn’t he offer Daniel the position as second ruler, as Pharaoh offered Joseph (Gen. 41:40-44) and Ahasuerus offered Mordecai (Esther 10:3)?  Again, the Nabonidus Cylinder reveals that Belshazzar shared a co-regency with Nabonidus, his father; thus he could only legitimately offer the prized person “third ruler.”

But, as in every case in the book of Daniel, the king’s advisors could not help him.  They “could not read the writing or make known to the king the interpretation.”   Tom Constable wittily observes, “Scholars have wearied themselves trying to figure out how Daniel got his interpretation from these three apparently Aramaic words.  They have been as unsuccessful as Belshazzar’s original wise men were.”

The verse mentions two deficiencies of the wise men. They were unable to 1) read the writing; 2) make known its interpretation. Their inability to “read” the writing could mean either the text itself was incomprehensible or it could not be understood.

The Lord had said through Isaiah, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate” (quoted in 1 Corinthians 1:19).  He definitely frustrated these wise men. 

Andy Woods identifies several reasons why these wise men could not read or interpret the message.

Various aspects of the message may have served to conceal its meaning:

• Language – The language the message was written in. Daniel’s interpretation (Dan. 5:25-28) implies the message was written in Aramaic.
• Characters – The form or style of characters (letters) used to write the message. Were the characters of an unfamiliar or specialized form known to Daniel but not the wise men?
• Arrangement – The arrangement of the characters forming the message. Were the letters placed in an unusual order such as an anagram?
• Encipherment – Were the characters of the message encoded using a cabalistic method such as atbash?
• Additional Revelation – Was the message sufficient on its own, once decoded, to be understood?  Or was additional information needed to make sense of the fragmentary writing?  As mentioned previously, by this time Daniel had additional revelation from God regarding aspects of Babylon’s fall that may not have been known to the wise men.

https://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/Book_of_Daniel/commentary/htm/chapters/05.html#38811

Whatever impediments they may have had in interpreting this message, Daniel, as always, had one major advantage: direct revelation from the Most High God.  Daniel had additional information provided prior to the events of this night (through study of the OT prophets) and possibly received additional direct revelation at the very moment he was called upon to interpret its meaning.

Daniel’s explanation of the words making up the message seems to indicate the writing was in Aramaic.  If the message was in Aramaic—and assuming it was rendered using characters familiar to readers of that time—the words on their own proved insufficient to give the interpretation.  Special revelation allowed Daniel to go beyond the words themselves and their arrangement to deliver the full meaning of the message.

Charles Feinberg gives an example: “A small child could read ‘H₂O’ with no trouble, but he probably could not understand that it signifies water.  So it was with these wise men; they could read what the words said, but they could not explain what they meant” (Charles Feinberg, A Commentary on Daniel:  The Kingdom of the Lord, p. 67).

Even if the wise men were able to read the individual letters and identify the words, the words themselves convey a fragmentary idea—not the full meaning Daniel is able to attribute to them.

Again, the key is revelation directly from God through the mouth of His prophet, Daniel.  Once again, the wisdom of this world is foolishness (1 Corinthians 1:20-21).

Perhaps the eyes of the wise men were judicially blinded by God (Job 12:17-25; Isa. 19:3, 12-13; 29:10-12; 44:25; Jere. 50:35-36; Rom. 1:21; 1 Cor. 1:20).  Of course, all idolators, like their idols are blind (Isa. 6:9-10).  And Satan blinds the minds of unbelievers (2 Cor. 4:3-4).

Whatever the case, the words of Isaiah were fulfilled in the inability of the wise men to provide the answers the king of Babylon sought that night.  Isaiah 47:12-13:

12 Stand fast in your enchantments
    and your many sorceries,
    with which you have labored from your youth;
perhaps you may be able to succeed;
    perhaps you may inspire terror.
13 You are wearied with your many counsels;
    let them stand forth and save you,
those who divide the heavens,
    who gaze at the stars,
who at the new moons make known
    what shall come upon you.

The Most High had confronted this young king with his arrogance, idolatry and blasphemy.  He would not stand by and allow His holy vessels to be profaned in front of all these people.  So Belshazzar faced the judgment of God.

Tremper Longman III writes:

We do not have to look too far to see contemporary misuses of God’s Word that look eerily similar to Belshazzar’s profanation of the holy vessels.  Not everyone who practices a postmodern approach to the Bible is guilty of profanation … however, it is wrong simply to assume the validity of the culture that we happen to live in without submitting it to a biblical critique.  Unfortunately, there are too many examples of the reverse, submitting the Bible to a postmodern critique.

One glaring example may be found in a recent interpretation of Psalm 24. (D. J. A. Clines, A World Established on Water: Psalm 24. Valley Forge, Pa: Trinity Press International, 1993, 79-90).  This essay’s purpose is to demonstrate an approach to the text as well as to discuss Psalm 24.  The author proclaims the postmodern dictum that texts have no determinate meaning.  There is no presence, divine or authorial, to rein in our interpretation.  We, as readers, can ascribe whatever meaning we like to the text.  He promotes the idea that Biblical interpreters should simply cut the cloth of the text to fit the needs of the audience who is paying for our skills.  Nonetheless, with a move that seems to fit uneasily with his idea that the text itself has no meaning, he argues that Psalm 24 presents a view of God and war that he finds repulsive and argues that we must read “against the grain” of the apparent meaning of this text.  Belshazzar takes the holy vessels of God and mocks God by drinking and toasting his idols; is Clines’ treatment of the Bible far removed from this act? (emphasis added) (Tremper Longman, Daniel, p. 154).

Was the message intended to be understood?  Polaski notes several examples of inscriptions that were meant to be seen but not necessarily read.  Inscriptions were power-plays and intended to send a message, even to people that could not read the message (657).  Often inscriptions were about more than recording an event.  They were a guarantee the event happened or would happen.  Thus, the judgement on Babylon certain is “written in stone” quite literally.

As Tom Constable says, “The night of revelry became a night of revelation.”

The fact that none of his wise men could interpret what was written alarmed Belshazzar even more, and it puzzled his nobles.

9 Then King Belshazzar was greatly alarmed, and his color changed, and his lords were perplexed.

This verse forms an inclusio with verse 6, where the king’s fear and color were noted.  Verse 9 also mentions a perplexed look shared by the thousand lords as their leader’s mind and body pulsed and flushed with fear.

The word “perplexed” has the idea of “be bewildered, be baffled” and likely contains the connotation of fear and dread.  Normally confident in their own abilities and the resources of their counselors, these gifted and powerful secular men have come to the end of their resources.

Fortunately, the queen mother came to the rescue.  Andy Woods comments: “Here we see a frequent theme in Scripture: when leading men are out-of-step with God resulting in troublesome circumstances, a woman brings a stabilizing perspective.”  (Consider Deborah, Abigail)  Duguid notes that this would have “been humiliating in an ancient cultural context” (Iain M. Duguid, Daniel: Reformed Expository Commentary, p. 80).

The banquet hall was in confusion. Belshazzar was shaking in sheer terror. The wise men were quaking, because they might be put to death due to their inability to interpret the handwriting on the wall (cf. Daniel 2:5).  And the nobles were faking it, trying to stay cool, calm, and collected.

Fortunately the queen mother was nearby and could hear the frightened voices.

10 The queen, because of the words of the king and his lords, came into the banqueting hall, and the queen declared, “O king, live forever!  Let not your thoughts alarm you or your color change.  11 There is a man in your kingdom in whom is the spirit of the holy gods. In the days of your father, light and understanding and wisdom like the wisdom of the gods were found in him, and King Nebuchadnezzar, your father–your father the king–made him chief of the magicians, enchanters, Chaldeans, and astrologers, 12 because an excellent spirit, knowledge, and understanding to interpret dreams, explain riddles, and solve problems were found in this Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar. Now let Daniel be called, and he will show the interpretation.”

Some take the queen of Daniel 5 as the Babylonian queen Nitocris.  But there is a lack of consensus as to whose queen Nitocris was.  She has been variously identified as: the wife of Nebuchadnezzar, the wife of Evil-Merodach, the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar and wife of Nabonidus and the mother of Nabonidus.  Whether Nitocris or not, this queen is likely either the wife, mother, or grandmother of Belshazzar. 

Presumably the queen mother, often a significant political figure in an ancient court. In the OT, cf. 1 Kings 15:13; 2 Kings 11:1-3; 24:13; Jere. 13:18; as “senior counsellor to king and people,” she could “provide a stabilizing, moderating influence in the political system” and “could circumscribe royal power to some extent and could represent the interests of people or court before the king” (N.-E. A. Andreasen, “The Role of the Queen Mother in Israelite Society,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 45 [1983] 191, 194).

Although she had not been present at the beginning of the festivities, as queen mother she had approved access to the king at any time.  “Such queen mothers enjoyed rare authority which exceeded even that of the chief wife or queen of the reigning monarch” (Leupold, Exposition of Daniel, p. 225).

It seems that all that can be said with certainty concerning Nitrocris is she was a Babylonian queen whose identity remains uncertain.

However, her message to Belshazzar was quite certain.  Knowing how alarmed he was (v. 10), she introduces him to “a man in your knowledge in whom is the spirt of the holy gods.”  Whether Belshazzar knew about Daniel or not, he had forgotten about him.

Since Daniel 8:1, 27 record Daniel serving in the administration in the third year of King Belshazzar, Belshazzar had either forgotten about him or had made no use of Daniel’s capabilities and skills…until now.

This woman proceeded to do for Belshazzar what Arioch had done for Nebuchadnezzar, namely, to bring Daniel to the king’s attention (cf. 2:25).  The implication of her speech is that Belshazzar ought to have known to whom he should turn when in need of divine illumination—and he would have known, if only he were more like Nebuchadnezzar.

Without explicitly mentioning Daniel’s name, the queen gave a brief history of Daniel’s relationship with Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 5:11; cf. 2:48).  Given her seeming first-hand knowledge of these interactions with Nebuchadnezzar could mean that Nitocris was Nebuchadnezzar’s wife.  Her description of Daniel in 5:11 was meant to stir the king’s desire to see him before she actually names him in verse 12.

Not only in her estimation did Daniel have the “spirit of the holy gods” in him, but “In the days of your father, light and understanding and wisdom like the wisdom of the gods were found in him, and King Nebuchadnezzar, your father–your father the king–made him chief of the magicians, enchanters, Chaldeans, and astrologers,”

The words of the queen do fall short of acknowledging the God of Israel praised by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 4:37).  After witnessing the results of divine intervention, unbelievers generally interpret the hand of God within the confines of their own pagan world view

We are in Daniel chapter 5.  So far we’ve seen Belshazzar, as prophecy had predicted, engaged in a drunken revelry.  Even worse, he had blasphemed the Most High God by taking some of the vessels of the Jewish temple and drinking wine from them in honor of his own gods, the gods he believed were superior to the god of the forsaken Jews.

But all of that was about to come to an abrupt stop.

What is the significance of the handwriting on the wall?  Lennox writes, “It would be hard to imagine a more spectacular breach of the first commandment: You shall have no other gods before me.  Centuries earlier the hand of God had written the Ten Commandments on two tablets of stone and given them to Moses, the great lawgiver.  That [same] hand had now written once more: this time on the wall of Belshazzar’s palace” (John Lennox, Against the Flow: The Inspiration of Daniel in an Age of Relativism, p. 182).

5 Immediately the fingers of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall of the king’s palace, opposite the lampstand.  And the king saw the hand as it wrote. 

Suddenly, a hand appeared and began writing on the wall.  Belshazzar was terrified. The music stopped, and the dancing girls stood still.  All eyes are now on the king.  Even a belly full of wine couldn’t make him courageous in this ominous setting.  Belshazzar sobered up pretty quickly.

“Immediately” underscores how quickly judgment fell in response to the actions recorded in the previous verse.  Again, it magnifies the similarity with Nebuchadnezzar’s proud boasting (Dan. 4:31) and how quickly that triggered God’s humiliation of these proud kings.  This was in order that the offender might recognize that his punishment was not inflicted upon him for any other reason but his blasphemy.

Holed up within what was believed to be an impenetrable fortress with supplies sufficient for many years, Babylon’s lords believed themselves secure and invulnerable.  Their confidence was in their fortifications and their false gods.  Yet, they would find themselves in a similar position as the rich man who trusted in his many goods:

19 And I will say to my soul, “Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.”’ 20 But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required of you, and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’ 21 So is the one who lays up treasure for himself and is not rich toward God” (Luke 12:19-21)

Neither powerful defenses nor plenteous riches will protect us from eternal judgment.

Whenever we find ourselves in a time of peace or surplus, there is a tendency to begin to trust in our conditions and to forget how they came to be—by the mercy and grace of God.  The longer these conditions prevail, the more likely we [misattribute] blessings from God to another cause—attributing them to our own cleverness or prowess—in a vain pattern of self-elevation.  But each day we live, each meal we eat, each breath we take, is ultimately a gift from God.  We need to remember to retain an understanding of dependency and thankfulness to our Lord.  The more we remember God in consideration of our place, the less surprised we will be when and if our condition changes—even if suddenly and radically.  The wicked, being mindless of the things of God, are unprepared for their sudden loss (Job 15:20-27).  This unpreparedness for coming judgment—continuing in blasphemy and riotous living as it nears—is a characteristic of an ungodly culture.  The intrusion of the future Day of the Lord upon a God-rejecting world will make the fall of Belshazzar’s Babylon look insignificant in comparison. (Andy Woods, https://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/Book_of_Daniel/commentary/htm/chapters/05.html#36786)

2 For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. (1 Thessalonians 5:2-3)

Now, getting back to our text…

5 Immediately the fingers of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall of the king’s palace, opposite the lampstand.  And the king saw the hand as it wrote. 

God used this supernatural manifestation to rivet the attention of everyone at the feast.  The sight was designed to frighten the celebrants and elicit the sober attention of the king. “Belshazzar must have set the all-time record for sobriety.  Gone was the smirk, the defiance of God; instead he had a look of stark terror” (David Jeremiah, Handwriting on the Wall, p. 105).

“Suddenly the king’s eyes went wide.  The bowl fell from his hands and clattered to the table.  Wine dribbled down his beard, and he collapsed in his chair, staring in horror above the Temple lampstand” (David Jeremiah, Agents of Babylon, p. 143).

“This writing appears on a wall “near the lampstands” so the king can clearly see the hand writing the words.  This writing is an inscription and is a parody of Assyrian or Babylonian official writing.  Just as the King of Babylon inscribes words on statues or walls, so too the Lord is inscribing his own imperial edict for the king to read” (Philip J. Long, https://readingacts.com/2020/02/01/daniel-55-12-what-was-the-meaning-of-the-handwriting-on-the-wall/)

The detached hand wrote on the wall “opposite the lampstand,” which illuminated the writing for all to see. This “lampstand” may have been one of the items from the Jerusalem temple.  In the actual Jerusalem temple, the bread of the Presence had stood opposite the lampstand (1 Kings 7:48-50; Exod. 25:23-26:37) to remind the people of Israel of God’s provision and sustenance.  If this lampstand was now in Belshazzar’s palace, then instead of illuminating an object of provision, it was illuminating a sign of judgment (Rodney Storz, Daniel: The Triumph of God’s Kingdom).

Belshazzar’s Feast, Rembrandt

The hand wrote upon the “plaster” on the wall.  Here is a significant detail in the Scriptural record that may seem unimportant: the material the fingers wrote upon, plaster.  This detail has archaeological and biblical significance.  The plaster is archaeologically significant because the hall where this event likely transpired has been excavated confirming this detail. The walls of the banquet hall included an area opposite the entrance that, like the ruins of palaces at Nineveh, was covered in white plaster.

“In the ruins of Nebuchadnezzar’s palace archaeologists have uncovered a large throne room 56-60 feet wide and 173 feet long which probably was the scene of this banquet.  Midway in the long wall opposite the entrance there was a niche in front of which the king may well have been seated.  Interestingly, the wall behind the niche was covered with white plaster as described by Daniel, which would make an excellent background for such a writing” (John Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation).

The plaster is biblically significant due to a theme running throughout Scripture: God’s standard of judgment written on stone (or materials related to stone, such as dust):

• The Ten Commandments were written by the finger of God upon stone (Exod. 24:12; 31:18; 32:36; 34:1, 28; Deut. 5:22; 9:10; 10:4).
• Judgment against Belshazzar is written in plaster (made of dust from stones, Dan. 5:5).
• Jesus appears to have written concerning judgment in the dirt, in response to the accusers of the woman caught in adultery (John 8:6).
• Believers are an epistle of God written on the heart rather than stone (2 Cor. 3:3-7).
• Believers will receive a new name written on stone (Rev. 2:17).

The writing on the plaster of the wall by the finger of God serves a similar function in this chapter: Belshazzar is evaluated and found wanting—he does not even come close to measuring up to God’s standards, as set forth in the Ten Commandments and the rest of the law.  The common theme among these passage involves: 1) the finger of God; 2) writing on stone-like material; 3) the divine requirements or evaluation of the character of men.

The writing on stone serves as a witness against those whom it evaluates (Josh. 4:9, 20; Josh. 8:32). In some passages, stones themselves become a witness (Matt. 3:9; Luke 3:8; 19:40).  A special irony is found regarding the judgment of Babylon written in plaster.  The kings of Babylon had sought to immortalize their glory by writing on their own stones!

Norman W. Porteous (1898-2003) summarizes, “The mysterious hand had written not so much in warning as in judgment.” (Porteous, Daniel: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 81). For Belshazzar, the party was over.

So Belshazzar saw the back of God’s hand, writing an ominous message upon the wall.  But what did it say?  What did it mean?

6 Then the king’s color changed, and his thoughts alarmed him; his limbs gave way, and his knees knocked together.

Up to now, the king’s demeanor had appeared bold, as if assured of Babylon’s impregnability.  But Jeremiah reveals he feared what might come of the siege.  Jeremiah 50:43, “The king of Babylon heard the report of them, and his hands fell helpless; anguish seized him, pain as of a woman in labor.”

He experienced what is technically called delirium tremens—wild, terrifying hallucinations brought on by heavy drinking.  Only these weren’t just hallucinations in his own deranged mind, but something that everyone could clearly see with their own eyes.

“The king’s body was seized by a fit of uncontrollable trembling.  Gone now were the proud glance and the sheering score.  The man shook in his shoes.  Moreover, his thoughts troubled him.  Conscience was awake at least and baying in his soul.  It could be seen on his whitened countenance.  The apparition had appeared too hard on the heels of the king’s blasphemous boasts and guilty behavior.  Belshazzar could have had no doubt that Jehovah, the God of the Jews, whose golden vessels he had desecrated, had spoken.  The message was there, etched on the wall by the finger of God, over near the golden candelabrum.  But the writing made no sense” (John Phillips, Exploring the Book of Daniel, p. 88).

“’Then the king’s face grew pale,’ instantly all the blood drains out of his face, ‘and his thoughts alarmed him;’ I want you to notice that this is a principle here that’s true of every carnal Christian and every non-Christian.  When an individual is on negative volition and operating on the sin nature his conscience is always sensitive and will always give testimony to his failures, given the right circumstances.  And no matter how skilled you might be at covering up your conscience and hardening your conscience and suppressing it, sooner or later you’re going to get into some situation and all of a sudden all those things in your conscience are going to come bubbling to the surface and you’re going to become overwhelmed with guilt and guilt always comes along with its handmaiden, fear, which is the fear of discovery and the fear of having to pay the consequences for our actions” (Dean, Lessons on Daniel, 22.261).

“The writing on the wall he could neither read nor understand; but his conscience had written bitter things against him, which now being held to the fire of God’s wrath become legible.” (John Trapp)

Just the appearance of the hand would have alarmed him, but his fears would have multiplied at the thought that the message must be ominous.

While Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams caused him to be “troubled” or frightened,” Belshazzar’s reaction is absolute terror, he turns pale, and his legs give way.  Literally this is the “bands/knots of his legs were loosed”, he comes very near to fainting and falling over.  This idiom can be translated a number of different ways, the NRSV, for example, has “his knees knocked together.”  Seow suggests that the idiom could be translated “his bowels were loosed” (Daniel, 79).  We know what that means!

A prophecy by Isaiah concerning the overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus may have this event in view.  Isaiah prophesies:

Thus says the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus,
    whose right hand I have grasped,
to subdue nations before him
    and to loose the belts of kings,
to open doors before him
    that gates may not be closed (Isaiah 45:1)

Belshazzar would have been better served studying the Hebrew Scriptures rather than the palace’s wine-tasting menu!

“One might have thought the king was having a heart attack.  Barely able to stand, his face was ashen and seized with terror.  The raucous laughter turned to deafening silence with all eyes on the king.  The king’s eyes were fixed upon the hand as it wrote.  As a sense of foreboding and panic fell on the crowd, all eyes turned to the mysterious writing on the wall.  The king’s actions alarmed all who were present” (Bob Deffinbaugh, Daniel: Relating Prophecy to Piety).

It is an appalling scene when a sinning mortal knows that the great God has come to meet him in the very midst of his sins!—How changed the scene from the glee of his blasphemous revelry to this paleness of cheek, convulsion of frame, remorse of conscience, and dread foreboding of doom!  Many a sinner has had a like experience, and other thousands must have it!—Cowles.

Oh that God’s Spirit might bring every sinner to such a bracing experience, that they might cry out for mercy!

Well, Belshazzar certainly wanted to know what this message was.  The ominous silence descending upon the gathering at the sight of the hand and the king’s startled reaction was shattered by the panicky summons of the king for his advisors.

He “screams out” in alarm and urgency and the verb here is a participle, used with a to-be verb to imply a continuous action: he “was screaming” for his advisors.

7 The king called loudly to bring in the enchanters, the Chaldeans, and the astrologers. The king declared to the wise men of Babylon, “Whoever reads this writing, and shows me its interpretation, shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around his neck and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.”  8 Then all the king’s wise men came in, but they could not read the writing or make known to the king the interpretation.  9 Then King Belshazzar was greatly alarmed, and his color changed, and his lords were perplexed.

Just like his grandfather Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 2:2; 4:6) and Pharoah before him (Gen. 41:8) the king summons his best advisors in his time of need.  And, just like Nebuchadnezzar and the Pharaoh, the assembled wisdom of those without knowledge of God will prove inadequate.

By now these people must have been some of the most nervous folks in Babylon.  So far, they had batted a big zero in interpreting any king’s visions and dreams.  Their score was to remain unchanged.  The blindness of the wise men went deeper than their inability to interpret the message; they could not even read it.

Where was Daniel?  It is possible that Daniel was in retirement.  “Historians tell us that after Nebuchadnezzar died, all of the ministers who were at the core of the palace regulars were banished and sent away from the throne….When Belshazzar sent out invitations to his Debauchery Ball, Daniel was not on the guest list” (David Jeremiah, Handwriting on the Wall, p. 99).

“Whoever reads this writing, and shows me its interpretation” is the request of the king.  This is the common futile pattern of secular leaders seeking secular wisdom.  Assemble the best of the (secular) best while rejecting those who fear and acknowledge God and possess a genuine understanding of His revelation.  Instead, rely on these secular “experts” to explain things that ultimately originated with God.

Again, there is a promise of riches: “shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around his neck…”  Clothing someone in purple meant giving him royal authority (cf. Esth. 8:15).  The necklace of gold would have had symbolic as well as monetary value. 

Daniel would later reluctantly receive this honor (Dan. 5:29) but had little use for it because he possessed the true riches of God.

This offer of being third ruler remained a puzzle for hundreds of years. If Belshazzar was king, why wouldn’t he offer Daniel the position as second ruler, as Pharaoh offered Joseph (Gen. 41:40-44) and Ahasuerus offered Mordecai (Esther 10:3)?  Again, the Nabonidus Cylinder reveals that Belshazzar shared a co-regency with Nabonidus, his father; thus he could only legitimately offer the prized person “third ruler.”

But, as in every case in the book of Daniel, the king’s advisors could not help him.  They “could not read the writing or make known to the king the interpretation.”   Tom Constable wittily observes, “Scholars have wearied themselves trying to figure out how Daniel got his interpretation from these three apparently Aramaic words.  They have been as unsuccessful as Belshazzar’s original wise men were.”

We are still examining what Daniel says about Belshazzar’s ill-fated party on the night that the Medo-Persians invade and conquer Babylon and kill king Belshazzar.  So far we’ve read…

1 King Belshazzar made a great feast for a thousand of his lords and drank wine in front of the thousand.  2 Belshazzar, when he tasted the wine, commanded that the vessels of gold and of silver that Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken out of the temple in Jerusalem be brought, that the king and his lords, his wives, and his concubines might drink from them.

The biggest mistake that Belshazzar made that night was treating the vessels from God’s house in a profane manner.  This was something, as we saw, that Nebuchadnezzar had never done.  Even worse, it was a direct offense against the Most High God.

The Scriptures tells us that these gold and silver goblets were holy unto the Lord, like the pieces of the tabernacle the Lord told Moses to make.  For example, the altar of incense (Exodus 30:1-10) was “most holy to the lord.”  

There were special instructions on to how to treat this altar.  Special poles were made to carry the altar of incense so no human hand would ever touch it.  The ark of the covenant was another piece of the tabernacle that was “most holy to the Lord.”  It too was to be carried using poles, so no human hand would touch it. 

In their previous dedication and service of God, some of these vessels were so holy that, on penalty of death, they could not even be handled by Levites.  They were reserved for use by the Aaronic priesthood (Num. 18:1-4).  Some of them had carried the blood of solemn sacrifices.

God revealed how seriously He takes the holy nature of these special objects in the days of King David.  When the Israelites were returning the ark to Jerusalem, they ignored the rule of treating the ark as holy by carrying it with two poles.  Instead, they set the ark on a new cart.  As they were walking, the oxen stumbled, and the ark began to fall off.  Uzzah reached out his hand to keep the ark from falling, and God struck him dead instantly “because of his irreverent act” (2 Samuel 6:7).

What?  Why did God do that?  Even King David was upset with God. “David was angry because the Lord’s wrath had broken out against Uzzah” (v. 8).  What we need to realize is that God is holy, and we are sinful.  We are much more filthy than the ground upon which the ark would have fallen.  We must not profane the holy things of God.  If that is how God treated Uzzah who truly was trying to help, how much more was Belshazzar in trouble by using God’s holy vessels for such revelry.

And what about us?

We don’t have the holy temple vessels anymore, but that does not mean there is not an application for us to realize here.  Paul wrote about this in his letters. “Flee from sexual immorality. … Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?  You are not your own; you were bought with a price. Therefore honor God with your body” (1 Corinthians 6:18-20).

And in another place he wrote, “It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you” (1 Thessalonians 4:3-6).  We are the holy vessels of God and should use our bodies only for holy, not profane, ends.

Belshazzar seems to choose only the more valuable gold vessels for his purpose.  Belshazzar made three mistakes: (1) he took the sacred vessels and used them for a profane purpose.  (2) instead of worshipping the God of heaven as he drank from them, he praised the gods of silver and gold.  (3) and most significantly, he took for himself that which belonged to God.  In doing all this Belshazzar was taunting the Hebrew God with this act of desecration.

These vessels had remained in the temple treasury, but now Belshazzar calls for them to be brought out so that his wives, concubines, and lords could drink from them—an act that would certainly outrage a Jew.  And it was not pleasing to the LORD God either! 

“The presence of the king’s ‘wives’ and ‘concubines’ was usually not tolerated at banquets.  It was, however, permitted when degeneracy began to run rampant” (Leupold, p. 216. Cf. Esth. 1:10-12).  The wives and concubines may not have been present when the feast began but were brought in as the wine eroded restraint.

David Jeremiah makes the point that normally these social strata of people don’t associate together.  So, for example, when Persian King Xerxes gave a banquet for his officials, scripture tells us that Queen Vashti had her own feast for the women (Esther 1:2-3, 9).  “When this protocol was violated, it usually meant that sensuality was involved” (Agents of Babylon, p. 150).  “This was a real taboo, but he threw all restraints aside and did exactly as he pleased” (David Jeremiah, Handwriting on the Wall, p. 99).

In doing this, Belshazzar went beyond anything “Nebuchadnezzar his father” had done.

3 Then they brought in the golden vessels that had been taken out of the temple, the house of God in Jerusalem, and the king and his lords, his wives, and his concubines drank from them. 4 They drank wine and praised the gods of gold and silver, bronze, iron, wood, and stone.

Not only does Belshazzar profane God’s glory by using the holy vessels for profane uses, but he also used them to worship his gods.  By using these holy objects for the purpose of drinking in praise of his own gods he was making the Most High subservient in his mind.  And why not?  These Jews had been subservient to the Babylonians his whole life.

The Babylonian’s incorrectly attributed their ascendancy (and assumed invulnerability during the siege) to their false gods instead of the One True God.  Yet Habakkuk 1:6-11 reveals the truth—that it was the God of the Jews who had raised up and empowered Babylon to judge His people:

6 I am raising up the Babylonians, that ruthless and impetuous people, who sweep across the whole earth to seize dwellings not their own.  7 They are a feared and dreaded people; they are a law to themselves and promote their own honor.  8 Their horses are swifter than leopards, fiercer than wolves at dusk. Their cavalry gallops headlong; their horsemen come from afar. They fly like an eagle swooping to devour; 9 they all come intent on violence. Their hordes advance like a desert wind and gather prisoners like sand.  10 They mock kings and scoff at rulers. They laugh at all fortified cities; by building earthen ramps they capture them.  11 Then they sweep past like the wind and go on— guilty people, whose own strength is their god.”

The way the holy vessels were employed at the party seems to have been an intentional slight of Israel’s God—placing Him below Babylon’s gods—who had seemingly been proved superior due to the capture of “His people” and the vessels from “His house.”  The sacred vessels of the living God were being desecrated in praise of dead idols.

Relocation of the vessels to a Babylonian god’s temple (1:2) had defiled them already, but the attendees of the banquet defiled them further not only when they “drank wine” from them but also when they “praised the gods of gold and silver, bronze, iron, wood, and stone.”

Drinking from the Temple items is done before an audience.  This is a public mocking of the God of the Judean exiles.  Even Nebuchadnezzar had treated the Temple items with some respect when he placed them in the house of his gods (Dan 1:1-2).  Even for a Babylonian, Belshazzar has lost all sense of decency!

But the God of Israel will not be made subservient to any other god.  He says, “I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth” (Psalm 46:10).  Again he says, “For great is the Lord and most worthy of praise; he is to feared above all gods.  For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the Lord made the heavens” (Psalm 96:4, 5).  He will not share his glory with another!  To do so is idolatry.  Belshazzar is now openly mocking the one true God.  It was an open insult to the Most High.

Why does God get so upset over this?  Why is it important to Him to receive the praise that is due Him?

As a young man, C. S. Lewis was more than a little agitated by the persistent demand, especially in the Psalms, that we all “praise God.”  What made it even worse is that God himself called for praise of God himself.  This was almost more than Lewis could stomach.  What kind of “God” is he who incessantly demands that his people tell him how great he is?  Lewis was threatened with a picture of God in which he appeared as little better than a vain woman demanding compliments.  Thanking God for his gifts was one thing, but this “perpetual eulogy” was more than Lewis could stomach.

Early in his Christian life, C.S. Lewis struggled with the idea that God demands our praise and commands us to give Him glory.  However, he soon realized that this “stumbling block” was due to his misconception of God and a misunderstanding of what praise really is.  He writes in his book, Reflections on the Psalms:

The most obvious fact about praise—whether of God or anything—strangely escaped me.  I thought of it in terms of compliment, approval, or the giving of honour.  I had never noticed that all enjoyment spontaneously overflows into praise unless …shyness or the fear of boring others is deliberately brought in to check it.  The world rings with praise—lovers praising their mistresses, readers their favourite poet, walkers praising the countryside, players praising their favourite game – praise of weather, wines, dishes, actors, motors, horses, colleges, countries, historical personages, children, flowers, mountains, rare stamps, rare beetles, even sometimes politicians or scholars.  I had not noticed how the humblest, and at the same time most balanced and capacious, minds, praised most, while the cranks, misfits, and malcontents praised least…Except where intolerably adverse circumstances interfere, praise almost seems to be inner health made audible.…

I had not noticed either that just as men spontaneously praise whatever they value, so they spontaneously urge us to join them in praising it: “Isn’t she lovely?  Wasn’t it glorious?  Don’t you think that magnificent?”  The Psalmists in telling everyone to praise God are doing what all men do when they speak of what they care about.  My whole, more general, difficulty about the praise of God depended on my absurdly denying to us, as regards the supremely Valuable, what we delight to do, what we indeed can’t help doing, about everything else we value.

I think we delight to praise what we enjoy because the praise not merely expresses but completes the enjoyment; it is its appointed consummation.

It is not out of compliment that lovers keep on telling one another how beautiful they are; the delight is incomplete till it is expressed… If it were possible for a created soul fully… to “appreciate”, that is to love and delight in, the worthiest object of all, and simultaneously at every moment to give this delight perfect expression, then that soul would be in supreme beautitude…

The Scotch catechism says that man’s chief end is “to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.”  But we shall then know that these are the same thing.  Fully to enjoy is to glorify. In commanding us to glorify Him, God is inviting us to enjoy Him.¹

While God as our Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer certainly deserves our praise, isn’t it amazing again to realize His lovingkindness towards us, as in commanding us to give Him praise, He is offering us the supreme in joy and fullness of life.  It makes you want to shout out loud and share the goodness of God with others.

Belshazzar and his guests may have directed their attention to the gods because of the encroaching Medo-Persian army, which—according to the Babylonian Chronicle—had defeated Nabonidus and the Babylonian army merely fifty miles from Babylon two days earlier.  In all likelihood, Belshazzar had become aware of this defeat, yet he held the banquet in a brazen display of invincibility—and, as it turned out, delusion.  Lennox writes, “For Belshazzar, nothing was sacred, except possibly himself—his position, wealth, and power” (John Lennox, Against the Flow: The Inspiration of Daniel in an Age of Relativism, p. 182).

David Guzik notes: “The scene of partying while a hostile army surrounded the city reminds us of the spirit of our present age.  Many today have the idea that the best response to the seeming danger of the times is to forget about it and escape into the pursuit of pleasure.”

It reminds me of what Jesus said about the generation preceding the return of Christ: “37 For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, 39 and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. (Matthew 24:37-39)

And in the Gospel of Luke (21) Jesus warns: 34 “But watch yourselves lest your hearts be weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and cares of this life, and that day come upon you suddenly like a trap. 35 For it will come upon all who dwell on the face of the whole earth. 36 But stay awake at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are going to take place, and to stand before the Son of Man.”

People and nations may come and go, but human nature remains the same.

Gathering the vessels from the Jewish temple served the purpose of reminding the partiers of a previous victory, and Belshazzar hoped it would boost morale.  “As if these dung-hill deities had mastered and spoiled the God of Israel… This was blasphemy in a high degree, and therefore presently punished by God.” (Trapp)

In his book Voices from Babylon, Joseph Seiss writes, “Not only their ill-timed merriment, their trampling on the customary proprieties, and their drunkenness, but even their foolhardy and blasphemous insults to the most high God, is veiled over and cloaked with a pretense of devotion!  This was as far as it was possible for human daring and infatuation to go.  It was more than the powers of Heaven could quietly endure.  The divine resentment broke forth on the spot” (pp. 145-146).

It was at this point that God unmistakably records his judgment against King Belshazzar.  In what happens next, God was basically telling Belshazzar, “Enough is enough.  Your number is up!”

⁴ Do you not know this from of old,
    since man was placed on earth,
⁵ that the exulting of the wicked is short,
    and the joy of the godless but for a moment?
⁶ Though his height mount up to the heavens,
    and his head reach to the clouds,
⁷ he will perish forever like his own dung;
    those who have seen him will say, ‘Where is he?’ (Job 20:4-7)

Zophar’s words were not appropriate to Job, but they would certainly apply in this moment to Belshazzar, and to anyone who defies the holiness of God.

Belshazzar didn’t know it, but he was celebrating his own funeral.  The prophet Jeremiah gave specific details about Babylon’s fall more than fifty years before it happened.

• A northern nation would conquer the city (Jeremiah 50:1-3, 9, 41).
• This nation would be associated with the Medes (Jeremiah 51:11, 26, 28-29).
• Babylon was described as a greatly fortified city, in which they would trust (Jeremiah 51:53 ,58).
• Babylon would be taken by a trick or a snare (Jeremiah 50:24).
• The city’s demise would involve the drying up of water, her “fountain” (Jeremiah 51:36-37), obstructing the flow of the Euphrates river (Jere. 51:32)
• This would be accomplished while a great feast was in progress (Jeremiah 51:39).
• Both government officials and military officers would be so drunk they would be sleepy (Jeremiah 51:57).
• This would be accomplished when Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson was in power (Jeremiah 27:6-7).

The word “immediately” or “suddenly” shows that the party suddenly took a sharp turn.  God crashed the party.  The music stopped and every eye turned to the handwriting on the wall.

The revelry soon took a sharp turn for the macabre when a disembodied hand crashed the party (Daniel 5:5).  One wonders:  Was Belshazzar initially ticked that someone was writing graffiti on his wall??  But his drunken high would be suddenly replaced by a dreadful fear.

In Daniel 5 King Belshazzar, king of Babylon, throws a mega party.  This is the chapter of the hand writing on the wall and it spells doom for Belshazzar, so why is Belshazzar partying the night away?  We saw last week that in Daniel 5:1 our text reads: “King Belshazzar made a great feast for a thousand of his lords and drank wine in front of the thousand.”  This might put Beverly Hills and New York City parties to shame!

But why did King Belshazzar do this?

First, it could have been a show of power the day before a big battle, just like the banquet King Xerxes hosted in the days of Esther before he left to try to conquer the Greeks.  Knowing the Persians were ready to attack Belshazzar was perhaps boasting about his power and strength to his nobles.  He may have felt invincible or maybe he was trying to bolster the confidence of his generals. There seems to be no mention of this in the text, however.

A second possibility is that realizing that the Persians were right at the door, in a fatalistic way, he knew there was nothing he could really do about it and was basically saying, “Eat, drink, for tomorrow we die.”  The Babylonian Chronicle indicates that only a few days earlier, Cyrus the Persian had defeated Nabonidus and the Babylonian army near Sippar, only fifty miles north of Babylon. Thus, Belshazzar could have been struck with fear and been resigned to defeat.

https://www.history.com/articles/mesopotamia

A third scenario seems most plausible.  King Belshazzar, although he likely had information about the surrounding Persian forces and their recent victories, remained blissfully ignorant and completely oblivious to the fact that Babylon the Great was about to be invaded.  He didn’t let himself believe that this danger was imminent.  “He was a riotous, arrogant young man who loved his wine and loved to throw banquets.  Banquets like this were celebrated on a regular basis.  It just so happened this occurred on the night that Babylon would fall” (Daniel 5:30)

This scenario seems most plausible because history records that the Persian army conquered Babylon with a sneak attack. The city of Babylon was considered invincible.  The city of Babylon had not fallen to an invading army for 1,000 years because of its strong fortifications.  There were double walls all around the city, and the walls were too thick to destroy by ancient methods.  There were 100 gates of bronze.  There was also a wide moat full of water that surrounds the wall and forms its outer boundary.  The Euphrates river ran through the middle of the city, but its waters were large, deep, and swift.

“Belshazzar felt secure, for the drawbridges had been drawn up, the brazen gates barred, and  Belshazzar knew that the walls of the city were impregnable; and he was confident that his soldiers from their position on the lofty walls would be able to destroy any who should attempt to batter down the gates.  The city also was provisioned for several years’ siege, and with the tillable ground within the city walls its capture could be postponed indefinitely” (Clarence Larkin, Book of Daniel).

“While people are saying, ‘There is peace and security,’ then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.” (1 Thess. 5:3)

But the Lord had determined that Babylon’s time had come: “The Lord brings the counsel of the nations to nothing; he frustrates the plans of the peoples.  The counsel of the Lord stands forever, the plans of his heart to all generations” (Psalm 33:10-11).  The will of God would be done, no matter what.

“Belshazzar had been indifferent to the information God had given his grandfather Nebuchadnezzar in his famous dream (Dan. 2).  It was decreed that the head of gold (Babylon) would be replaced by the breast and arms of silver (the Medo-Persian Empire).  Daniel had seen this truth further verified in his vision recorded in Daniel 7, when he saw the Babylonian lion defeated by the Medo-Persian bear (Dan 7:1-5).  This was in the first year of Belshazzar (Dan. 7:1).  In his arrogant false confidence, Belshazzar was defying the will of God.  “He says to himself, ‘Nothing will shake me; I’ll always be happy and never have trouble’” (Psalm 10:6)” (Warren Wiersbe, Wiersbe Bible Commentary:  Old Testament, p. 1361).

Belshazzar’s name means “Bel has protected the king,” which may have given him an added sense of invincibility.  Herodotus and Xenophon both mention that a festival was underway in Babylon when the city fell and Joyce Baldwin comments, “With the armies of a conqueror pressing at the capital this deputy ruler took refuge in an orgy of wine” (Joyce Baldwin, Daniel: An Introduction and Commentary, p. 119).

But the Euphrates River ran right through the middle of the city, and the plan was for some men from the Persian army to go upstream and dam the river. In a few hours the water stopped flowing, and the Persian army walked into the city under the walls using the muddy riverbeds.  There was no resistance by the Babylonian army, and Babylon fell that very night as a result of the judgment of God.  Why didn’t King Belshazzar see the handwriting on the wall?  Oh, but he did. (Daniel 5:5-7)

Daniel was not present at these festivities (cf. v. 13), either because he had not been invited or because his former prominence had discontinued under Belshazzar’s rule (cf. v. 10-12, where the queen informed the king about Daniel, as if he was unknown to him).  Possibly Daniel had retired from public service.