Tag: faith

God has miraculously delivered Daniel from the lion’s den, something that Darius, despite his power and authority as king of the Medo-Persian empire, could not do.  Thus, Darius declares:

25 Then King Darius wrote to all the peoples, nations, and languages that dwell in all the earth: “Peace be multiplied to you. 26 I make a decree, that in all my royal dominion people are to tremble and fear before the God of Daniel,

for he is the living God,
    enduring forever;
his kingdom shall never be destroyed,
    and his dominion shall be to the end.
27 He delivers and rescues;
    he works signs and wonders
    in heaven and on earth,
he who has saved Daniel
    from the power of the lions.”

28 So this Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian.

For Darius to have issued such a document means that he was greatly impressed with the power of Daniel’s God, even as Nebuchadnezzar had been (cf. 2:47; 3:28-29; 4:1-3, 34-37).

The Book of Daniel follows a familiar pattern. God’s people stand firm in their convictions, God honors and protects them, and the testimony of God’s work makes the ungodly see and tell of the greatness of God (1:20; 2:46-47; 3:28-30; 4:34-37; 5:29).  The point is plain: when we stand firm in godly convictions and honor God even when it costs something, others will see that testimony and be impressed.  Sometimes it will “see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation” (1 Pet. 2:12) and other times it will “silence the ignorance of foolish people” (1 Pet. 2:14).

Darius wrote a message to “all the peoples, nations, and languages that dwell in all the earth.” Such universal language appeared earlier (3:4, 7, 29; 4:1) and indicated a comprehensive application of “Peace be multiplied to you” (6:25), a typical wish for peace for all.  What came next would distinguish the king’s decree from the other message he had written.

Darius decreed, “In all my royal dominion people are to tremble and fear before the God of Daniel.”  God had glorified Himself in His miraculous deliverance of Daniel.  Even Darius could see that.

The king was so impressed by God’s intervention and his protection of Daniel that he wanted everyone to respond in a way he deemed appropriate: before a God who rescued his servant from lions, trembling and fear was warranted.

Matthew Henry acknowledges: “But, though this decree goes far, it does not go far enough; had he [Darius] come up to his present convictions, he would have commanded all men not only to fear before this God, but to love him and trust in him, to forsake the service of their idols, and to worship him only.”

At this point, Darius praises “the God of Daniel.”  It isn’t enough to say, “the God of Daniel.”  Saving faith says, “the God of Darius.”  Similarly for us, it is not enough to know that Jesus is a Savior; He must be “my Savior” or “your Savior.”  You must know that you are a sinner in need of forgiveness of sins and believe that Jesus died on the cross to do so for you.

Isaiah 45 and Cyrus having his heart stirred by God to release the captives, very possibly shows that his faith, too, grew and became his own.

Darius goes on to explain this new decree: “He is the living God, enduring forever; his kingdom shall never be destroyed, and his dominion shall be to the end.”  He had already called the Lord “the living God” (v. 20), but now he wanted everyone to know more about this deity.  Since God endured forever, it made sense that his kingdom and dominion would last forever as well.  It was significant that Darius—an emperor, no less—acknowledged that God’s kingdom would endure, implying that his own Medo-Persian kingdom would not.  Nor would any of man’s kingdoms.  Nebuchadnezzar had eventually made similar statements about God’s kingdom (4:3, 34).

Elaborating on the reasons people should tremble and fear Daniel’s God, Darius wrote, “He delivers and rescues; he works signs and wonders in heaven and on earth, he who has saved Daniel from the power of the lions” (6:27).  These exclamations point particularly to Daniel’s deliverance.  This is the nature of the God of Daniel.

The last phrase clarifies that Darius was not thinking of some abstract notion of deliverance.  Instead, he had specifically in mind Daniel’s deliverance from the den of hungry lions.  

Warren Wiersbe says, “The theology expressed in the decree of Darius is as true as anything written by Moses, David, or Paul.  Jehovah is the living and eternal God whose kingdom will never be destroyed (v. 26; see Deut. 5:26; Josh. 3:10; Psa 42:2; Jere. 10:10; Psa. 145:13; Rev. 11:15).  He is the God who saves people and rescues them from danger and death, and who performs signs and wonders (Dan. 6:27; see 3:28-29; 4:3; Deut. 6:22; Neh. 9:10; Psa. 74:9; 105:26-36; 135:9; Jere. 32:20-21)” (The Wiersbe Bible Commentary: OT Volume, p. 1368).

Gleason Archer Jr. summarizes:

“Three emphases stand out in this passage: (1) Daniel’s God is alive and shows that he lives by the way he acts in history, responding, like a real person, to the requirement of justice and the needs of his people; (2) God’s rule is eternal and will never pass away (as do empires built by human power), even though the Hebrew monarchy did not survive its apostasy; (3) God miraculously delivers his true worshipers, performing wonders both in heaven and on earth.  He has furnished objective proof of his eternal power and godhead, in contrast to all the other deities, whose existence is at best conjectural and traditional” (Gleason Archer, Jr. “Daniel” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, p. 83).

Nebuchadnezzar had extolled God’s power in rescuing Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego from the fiery furnace (3:28-29), and he also spoke of “signs” and “wonders” (4:3).  In chapter 6, God once again displayed his mighty power, prevailing over the conspiracy of the high officials and satraps, the concession of the reluctant king, and the appetite of savage beasts.  All should fear and tremble before this mighty God.

No conspiracy of man, concession of a king or hunger of a beast can stand in the way of God’s sovereign providential care and power for His servants.

Daniel served “the living God” who has an everlasting kingdom (6:26).  As proven with Daniel’s deliverance, this God rescues and performs wonders and saved Daniel from the power of the lions (6:27).

Again, “Daniel’s God is alive and shows that he lives by the way he acts in history, responding, like a real person, to the requirements of justice and the needs of his people” (Gleason Archer Jr., “Daniel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, p. 83).

“He calls him ‘the living God,’ not only because he has life in himself, but out of himself, and is also the origin and fountain of life.  This epithet ought to be taken actively, for God not only lives but has life in himself; and he is also the source of life, since there is no life independent of him” (John Calvin, Commentary on the Prophet Daniel).

Paul says of this God, possibly quoting a secular poet:

“‘In him we live and move and have our being’” (Acts 17:28)

And the Psalmist says in Psalm 36

8 They feast on the abundance of your house,
    and you give them drink from the river of your delights.
9 For with you is the fountain of life;
    in your light do we see light.

It is as though God was giving two witnesses to His people Israel: Nebuchadnezzar and Darius.  Both monarchs testified to the living and eternal God’s unshakable sovereignty, grace, and power in heaven and on earth (cf. 4:3, 34-35).  These testimonies certainly would have encouraged the Israelites to trust Him in spite of the circumstances of the exile.

Warren Wiersbe writes, “The Jews had been humiliated by the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple because their defeat made it look as though the false gods of the Babylonians were stronger than the true God of Israel… Jehovah hadn’t been honored by his own people, but now He was receiving praise from pagan rulers whose decrees would be published throughout the Gentile world.  These decrees were a witness to the Gentiles that there was but one true God, the God of the Jews; but the decrees were also a reminder to the Jews that Jehovah was the true and living God.”

“Once again, during this time of Israel’s helplessness with her survival in doubt, Yahweh of hosts acted redemptively to strengthen his people’s faith in him. On the eve of their return to the Land of Promise under the leadership of Zerubbabel, God reassured them that he was still the same as in the days of Moses and was able to take them back to Canaan, where they could establish a new commonwealth in covenant fellowship with him” (Gleason Archer, “Daniel,” p. 83).

Darius declared of Daniel’s God, “his kingdom shall never be destroyed, and his dominion shall be to the end.”

The enduring nature of God’s kingdom is one of the main themes in the book of Daniel (Dan. 2:44; 4:3; 7:14, 18, 24) in contrast with the impermanent kingdoms of man.  The “kingdoms of this world” rise, rule for a period, and then fall, in a recurring cycle throughout history (Dan. 7:27; Rev. 11:15).

And so we continue to pray, “Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” [emphasis added] (Matt. 6:10).

Darius also proclaims

He delivers and rescues;
    he works signs and wonders
    in heaven and on earth,
he who has saved Daniel
    from the power of the lions.

Up to this point in the book of Daniel, God has rescued:

• Daniel and his companions from the possible disfavor of the steward of the chief of the eunuchs (Dan. 1:9-16)
• Daniel, his companions, and the wise men from destruction at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 2:19-23)
• Daniel’s companions from the fiery furnace (Dan. 3:23-27)
• Nebuchadnezzar from madness (Dan. 4:36-37)
• Daniel through a change of regimes from Babylon to Persia (Dan. 5:31)
• Daniel from the lions’ den (Dan. 6:20-22)

Paul appears to allude to this chapter in his letter to young Timothy: “But the Lord stood with me and strengthened me, so that the message might be preached fully through me, and that all the Gentiles might hear. And I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion” [emphasis added] (2Tim. 4:17).

What is the point of these narratives?

Why does Daniel record all of these narratives in between the great prophecies of Daniel 2 and 7? Why does he write about world rulers who are trying to stamp out faithful people of God? Why does he write about God’s miraculous intervention, protection, and sovereignty in the lives of these Jewish men?

If you’re familiar with the prophecies of Daniel, you quickly see the answers to these questions. Daniel goes on to predict another world ruler who will raise himself up at the end of human history. Like these ancient kings, this world ruler will persecute people for following God for a short period of time. Like these ancient kings, this world ruler will accept worship and even deify himself. Like these ancient kings, he will change the laws of the State in order to contradict God and persecute his people.

Daniel wrote these narratives 2,500 years ago, but they still speak to us today. Daniel and his friends are saying, “We stood before tyrants and refused to compromise. But the worst tyranny is still to come… Will you compromise?”

These narratives aren’t cute little Sunday school lessons. They speak to the faithfulness of God’s people in the past for those of us who will be in the great Tribulation of the future.

What about this man Darius?

I hold to the identity that Darius and Cyrus are the same person.

Some factors in favor of understanding Darius and Cyrus to be the same person include the fact that Cyrus had combined the Median and Persian dynasties under his sole control by seizing power from his Median grandfather.  Through his mother, he was a royal descendant of the Median kingdom; through his father, he was an heir in the line of the Persian throne.  Cyrus may have wanted to emphasize both aspects of his kingship.

It was quite common for ancient kings to have more than one name: personal names and throne names, or names reflecting additions to the kingdom.  The Greek historian Herodotus notes that Cyrus was not this king’s original name, but that he had been given a different name by his Median mother.  In chapter 6, Darius exercises sweeping, empire-wide authority—an unlikely role for a temporary regent in Babylon (Daniel 6:25).  Finally, the events in Daniel 6 and 9 seem to span more time than the very brief administration of Cyrus’s agent Gubaru in Babylon.  The name Darius was also used as the royal name of three of Cyrus’s successors.

While this is not conclusive, there is no glaring evidences against this position.

Does he (Darius, also known as Cyrus) become a believer in the one true God?  We do know that he will later allow the Jews to return to their homeland. Ezra 1:1-4 says that “the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus…” so he made a proclamation that they may return.

Also, Isaiah 45:1-7 prophesied 150 years before Cyrus was even born that he would be Israel’s deliverer.  This would be like Abraham Lincoln predicting that Barack Obama would be our first black president!

1 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:
2 “I will go before you
    and level the exalted places,
I will break in pieces the doors of bronze
    and cut through the bars of iron,
3 I will give you the treasures of darkness
    and the hoards in secret places,
that you may know that it is I, the Lord,
    the God of Israel, who call you by your name.
4 For the sake of my servant Jacob,
    and Israel my chosen,
I call you by your name,
    I name you, though you do not know me.
5 I am the Lord, and there is no other,
    besides me there is no God;
    I equip you, though you do not know me,
6 that people may know, from the rising of the sun
    and from the west, that there is none besides me;
    I am the Lord, and there is no other.
7 I form light and create darkness;
    I make well-being and create calamity;
    I am the Lord, who does all these things.

I find myself in agreement with the late J. Dwight Pentecost: “It wouldn’t surprise me to find these men [Nebuchadnezzar, Darius] in heaven. It wouldn’t surprise me, but I can’t say.”

The world needs men who cannot be bought; whose word is their bond; who put character above wealth; who possess opinions and a will; who are larger than their vocations; who do not hesitate to take chances; who will not lose their individuality in a crowd; who will be honest in small things as in great things; who will make no compromise with wrong; whose ambitions are not confined to their own selfish desires; who will not say they do it “because everyone else does it;” who are true to their friends through good report and evil report, in adversity as well as in prosperity; who do not believe that shrewdness, cunning and hardheadedness are the best qualities for winning success; who are not ashamed or afraid to stand for the truth when it is unpopular, who can say “no” with emphasis, although all the rest of the world says “yes.”

Quoted in: Ted W. Engstrom, The Making of a Christian Leader, Zondervan, 1976, p. 120.

So this Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian (Dan. 6:28)

Daniel being cast into the lion’s den was unfair and unjust.  Why would God allow that to happen?  Ultimately, it would result in Daniel’s rescue, but even more importantly, it would be for God’s glory.

At the king’s command, the men who had falsely accused Daniel were brought in and thrown into the lions’ den, along with their wives and children. And before they reached the floor of the den, the lions overpowered them and crushed all their bones (Dan. 6:24)

No one had to ask Darius to do this, he was ready and willing to bring justice to those who plotted against Daniel.  The implication is that the king lost no time in bringing retribution to Daniel’s accusers.  These men had not only wronged Daniel, but the king himself.  They had insulted him by resorting to trickery to accomplish their purpose.  It is unlikely that all 122 officers were thrown to the lions, but only those who reported back to the king Daniel’s “rebellion.”  They were the instigators of this plot to get rid of Daniel.

These accusers had carefully laid their snare not realizing that the trap they set for Daniel would become their own undoing (cf. Psa. 37:14-15; Psa. 7:15; 9:15; 35:7-8; Esther 7:9-10).  In Proverbs 11:3, Solomon points out: “The integrity of the upright guides them, but the crookedness of the treacherous destroys them.”

It is likely that Darius would have punished these men even if Daniel would have died in the lions’ den.  Their foolishness is revealed in the fact that they had not realized this possibility from the first.  “What were we thinking?” may now have been running through their minds.

They wouldn’t have known this proverb, but Daniel certainly did, “Whoever digs a pit will fall into it, and a stone will come back on him who starts it rolling” (Prov. 26:27).  Likewise, in the Psalms, David (Psalm 7) says…

14 Behold, the wicked man conceives evil and is pregnant with mischief and gives birth to lies.  15 He makes a pit, digging it out, and falls into the hole that he has made.  16 His mischief returns upon his own head, and on his own skull his violence descends.

Not all judgment (vengeance) happens in this life.  But eventually, even if not until eternity, every wrong will be righted and every good deed rewarded.

These men are identified as those “who had falsely accused Daniel.”  Accused is from an Aramiac word meaning, “‘had eaten the pieces of.’  The Aramaic expression is ironic, in that the accusers who had figuratively ‘eaten the pieces of Daniel’ will themselves be literally devoured by the lions.”

When accusing Daniel before the king, his accusers had singled out his nationality as a Jew (Dan. 6:13).  Now, like Haman in Esther’s time, they find themselves on the receiving end of God’s solemn promise to the Jews, beginning with Abraham (Gen. 12:3) and extending through Isaac and Jacob (Gen. 27:29; Isa. 49:26), not only to “bless those who bless you,” but to “curse those who curse you.”  As with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the fiery furnace, Daniel’s preservation is evidence of God’s ongoing promise to preserve Israel.

The king applied the lex talionis (law of retaliation) and cast his friend’s accusers into the very den in which they had placed Daniel (cf. Gen. 12:3; Esth. 7:9-10; Gal. 6:7).

Darius ordered Daniel’s accusers to be thrown into the den of lions—“they, their children, and their wives.”  Their demise was an example of the justice we sometimes see in the OT (cf. Esther 7:7-10, also Josh. 7:24; 1 Sam. 15:2-3), where the families of God’s enemies die with them.  Something that we have to remember more seriously is that other people will be hurt by our sins.  We do not sin in isolation.  It does affect others in our orbit.  “It is one thing to bear my own judgment.  But worst of all is realizing that the consequences of my sin spilled over onto innocent people I love” (William Peel, Living in the Lions Den Without Being Eaten, p. 155).

This reminds me of several Old Testament passages which predict the same kind of punishment coming upon those who intend to harm God’s people.  For example, Proverbs 26:27 says, “Whoever digs a pit will fall into it, and a stone will come back on him who starts it rolling.”  The hostile enemy (described in Prov. 26:23-24) is preparing a hidden trap for someone, but he is the one who will be harmed.

Likewise, Psalm 7:15-16 says, 15 “He makes a pit, digging it out, and falls into the hole that he has made.  16 His mischief returns upon his own head, and on his own skull his violence descends.”  These verses are axiomatic, describing the normal course of life for the one who plans and then conducts evil.  In the providence of God, like a boomerang, it returns back to the evil perpetrator.

Daniel did not take revenge on these men.  I want you to recognize that.  God never wants us to get revenge on those who “do us wrong,” but return evil with good (Romans 12:17-21).  It was God, exercising justice for Daniel.  Daniel, like Jesus after him, “22He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. 23When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly.”  Our responsibility is to trust God and do good to those who attack us.  God is the one who will exercise justice and make all things right—if not for us now in this life, He will in eternity, where it really counts!

The message of the expression of falling in the pit you have dug or a stone rolling back upon your own head is a warning against plotting harm, emphasizing a principle of divine justice or the law of “sowing and reaping”—that actions, whether good or evil, will eventually return to the person who initiated them.  Of course, the most well-known example illustrating this principle is the biblical story of Haman, who was hanged on the very gallows he had prepared for Mordecai.

And, of course, this is exactly what happened to Daniel’s antagonists, they were eaten by the very lions they had planned would take care of their “Daniel problem.”  Let’s learn from this: Whatever evil we plan against another child of God will never pay off in the end, it will fall back upon us.  These men were cast into the lion’s den.

This was obviously severe, but it was also according to ancient customs among the Persians.  An ancient writer named Ammianus Marcellinus wrote of the Persians, “The laws among them are formidable… by which, on account of the guilt of one, all the kindred perish.”

“What Darius did seems arbitrary and unjust. But ancient pagan despots had no regard for the provision in the Mosaic law (Deut. 24:16): ‘Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.’  (Even in Israel this humanitarian rule had been flouted, as when Abimelech ben Gideon had nearly all his father’s sons massacred, or when Queen Athaliah nearly exterminated the Davidic royal line and Jehu had all Ahab’s sons decapitated.)” (Gleason Archer, Jr. “Daniel,” p. 82).

We question the justice of the command that the wives and children were also implicated.  The Mosaic law clearly forbade such cruelty.  We read: “Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin” (Deut. 24:16).  The only known instance in which such a thing was done among the Israelites was at the execution of Achan (Josh. 7:24), where his family was stoned along with him.

Though Darius was not instructed by God to destroy the families along with the men, the situation may have been similar to the Canaanites whom God instructed Israel to purge from the Promised Land.

Apparently, Darius’ act of vengeance was not unusual among the Persians.  The king may have been afraid that the offspring of those condemned to death would later plot to take revenge upon the king.  Wiping out the whole family would certainly take care of that threat.

“What kind of parents do we have here displayed in Persia?  Manipulators, liars, murderers, unchecked and unhinged; do you know what those kids would have become?  Manipulators, liars, murderers because as the saying goes, “the apple does not fall far from the tree.”  You think the wives are innocent?  Show me the woman behind the man and I’ll show you the man.  Wives have far more influence over their husbands, for good or bad, than they could possibly fathom.  And this is why God saw, I believe, this whole picture, these people were gone.  I mean, there was no opportunity for a change of life, they were just as guilty as their husbands, they were just as guilty as their parents and so the whole crowd there is thrown into the lions’ den, because the apple does not fall far from the tree” (Leon Woods, Commentary on the Book of Daniel).

Barnes’ Notes comments on this: “The same thing substantially occurs in the course of Providence, or the administration of justice now.  Nothing is more common than that the wife and children of a guilty man should suffer on account of the sin of the husband and father.  Who can recount the woes that come upon a family through the intemperance of a father? And in cases where a man is condemned for crime, the consequences are not confined to himself. In shame and mortification, and disgrace; in the anguish experienced when he dies on a gibbet; in the sad remembrance of that disgraceful death; in the loss of one who might have provided for their wants, and been their protector and counselor, the wife and children always suffer; and, though this took another form in ancient times, and when adopted as a principle of punishment is not in accordance with our sense of justice in administering laws, yet it is a principle which pervades the world-for the effects of crime cannot and do not terminate on the guilty individual himself.”

We don’t know exactly “why?” this happened, but we know this is what a sovereignly good, just and wise God wanted.

Although this might seem unfair, throughout biblical history God has identified men as representative of their families, tribes or even all of humanity.  God usually operates on the principle of federal headship or corporate solidarity.  Adam sinned, and as a result we sinned in him and are made liable to death, even infants who did not willfully break a commandment like Adam did. Listen to what Paul writes in Romans 5:12-14:

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned — for before the law was given, sin was in the world.  But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.  Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

Lest we cry “foul” that we are all condemned in Adam, though in our eyes we have not sinned like him, do we really want to forfeit that we are declared righteous in Christ, even though we definitely do not deserve that?

Verses 15-19 of Romans 5 goes on to say, most gloriously:

15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. 17 For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. 18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.

This also fulfills a New Testament Scripture which encourages us to be ready and bold in our witnessing: “but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame” (1 Pet. 3:15-16).

Speaking of having a good conscience, it reminds me of a story about Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the author of the Sherlock Holmes mysteries.

This story has been attributed to Mr. Conan Doyle: A friend of his had often been told that there is a skeleton in the cupboard of every household, no matter how respectable that household may be; and he determined to put this opinion to a practical test. Selecting for the subject of his experiment a venerable Archdeacon of the Church, against whom the most censorious critic had never breathed a word, he went to the nearest post-office, and dispatched a telegram to the revered gentleman: ‘All is discovered! Fly at once!’ The Archdeacon disappeared, and has never been heard of since. (Tit-Bits, a magazine edited by the same man as The Strand, George Newnes, there was an article published on September 18, 1897 (No. 831 – Vol. XXXII) 

Darius had no “distress” regarding sentencing these men to death.  While Darius was happy with Daniel’s deliverance, he was not happy with Daniel’s accusers.  He probably would have cast these accusers to the lions even if Daniel had perished in the lion’s den.

The conspirators had hoped that Daniel would die in the lions’ den, yet that fate was theirs instead.  As soon as the accusers were thrown into the den, “The lions overpowered them and broke all their bones in pieces” before their bodies could even fall to the ground!  His enemies succumb to the very punishment they had arranged for Daniel (cf. Esther 7:10; Proverbs 1:17-18).

This carnage just confirms that Daniel’s protection was not due to any natural cause, such as any lion’s inability or lack of appetite or being sickly.  His survival could be explained only by divine deliverance.  God had “stopped the mouths” of these lions (Heb. 11:23) because Daniel was a God-worshiper.

Every Sunday school child knows how God delivered Daniel from the den of hungry lions, and how the evil men who plotted Daniel’s fall had breakfast with the lions that morning (6:24).  Someone jokingly remarked that the lions could not eat Daniel because he was all backbone! 

On the other hand, David Jeremiah says, “Instead of a tough old Jew, they got a lot of tender, spineless [filleted] Persians for breakfast” (The Handwriting on the Wall, p. 126).  Prepared to order!

The commentator, D. A. Carson, remarks here that “By faith (23) he had experienced the powers of the age to come (Heb. 6:5) in which lions are tamed (Isa. 11:7)” (D.A. Carson,  New Bible Commentary: 21^st Century edition Rev. Ed.).

David Guzik makes two insightful comments:

• First, this illustrates the work of the cross in reverse: the guilty were punished in the place of the innocent.
• Second, this also illustrates a principle of spiritual warfare.  God will cause our enemy to be impaled on the same snare set for us (Psalm 7:14-16).

Arno C. Gaebelein made this gospel connection:  Well may we think here of another law and another love. God, a holy and righteous God and a God of love, found a way to save man.  God’s holy law condemns man, who is a sinner and the curse of the law rests upon him.  God’s love is set upon the world, and He “so loved the world that He gave His only Begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”  The curse of the law came upon Him who knew no sin and who was made sin for us, and therein is love manifested.  Daniel is cast into the lions’ den as our blessed Lord was given to the lion (Psalm 22:21), and a stone is laid upon the mouth of the den and it is sealed with the king’s signet.  He is so to speak in a grave, as good as dead in the eyes of the world, for who has ever heard of hungry lions not devouring a man.  And all this brings before us that other place, the tomb in the garden, where He was laid and the stone before it, which bore the seal of the Roman world power.  But as Daniel could not be hurt by the lions, so He who went into the jaws of death could not be holden by death.  The tomb is empty and He is victor over death and the grave.  All this is blessedly foreshadowed in this experience of God’s prophet.

God had delivered Daniel from the hungry lions.  Because of his righteousness and faithfulness and because of God’s grace, God had answered Daniel’s prayer for “help” in his time of need.

If there had been sin in Daniel’s life, God may not have answered.  I say “may not,” because He is sovereign and God could still overcome our sinfulness.  But the reality is, sin does shut God’s ears to our prayers.

King David wrote, “If I had cherished sin in my heart, the Lord would not have listened” (Psalm 66:18).  And Peter wrote, “Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers” (1 Peter 3:7).

If we cherish sin in our heart, meaning that we delight in it and coddle it and refuse for a time to repent of it, our prayer life will be negatively impacted.  Even not respecting our wives can hinder our prayers.  So we first need to confess our sins and repent of our sins.

Even Daniel will later pray, “We do not make requests of you because we are righteous, but because of your great mercy” (Daniel 9:18).

Well, fortunately the king did not have to wait long for an answer, although he may not have answered right away.  This may have been because Daniel was still sound asleep!

Daniel’s voice was much more peaceful and confident than Darius’ plaintive cry.

Suddenly, out of the darkness, Daniel’s untroubled voice greeted the king and answered his question: “My God sent his angel and shut the lions’ mouths, and they have not harmed me, because I was found blameless before him; and also before you, O king, I have done no harm.”  No harm. 

Unlike Darius, who called this God “your God” (v. 20), Daniel was unashamed to call him “my God.”  Daniel doesn’t say “my parent’s God” or “my friends’ God.”  He says it was “my God.”  This is the covenantal relationship that God had promised to Israel and to us under the new covenant, “I will be your God and you will be my people.”

After the exile from Eden and the dispersion of the nations from Babel, God approaches Abraham to make His covenant, “to be God to you and to your offspring after you” (Gen 17:7).  Though Adam and Noah had some form of covenant relationship with God, the promise “to be God to you” is first used after the Babel event.  If God is intentionally comparing Himself to the gods of the nations, this only makes sense!

In the Exodus, the Covenant Formula is connected to God’s revelation of His personal name YHWH, the LORD: “I will take you to be my people, and I will be your God, and you shall know that I am the LORD your God, who has brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians” (Ex 6:7).

Jeremiah recognizes this. His prophecy reiterates the Covenant Formula three times.  The first two times, Israel’s idolatry is highlighted, and Jeremiah is told not to intercede for them (Jer 7, 11).  The third time, however, the Covenant Formula is connected to the promise of a Messianic Mediator: “Their prince shall be one of themselves; their ruler shall come out from their midst; I will make him draw near, and he shall approach me, for who would dare of himself to approach me? declares the LORD. And you shall be my people, and I will be your God” (Jer 30:21, 22).

By the indwelling Spirit of God, believers have become the beneficiaries of all these promises (2 Cor 6:16, 18), and when Christ returns, they will be fully realized: “And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God… The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son’” (Rev 21:3, 7).

Daniel was always quick to give God the glory (Dan. 6:22; see 2:27-28; 4:25; 5:21-23).

Daniel began with the typical “O King, live forever,” which in other cases may seem nothing more than a mere formality, but here seems to be the heartfelt affection of Daniel towards this king who obviously cared for what happened to him.  Daniel knew that the king did not intend this to happen to him.  And it shows that Daniel never intended to be disloyal to the king but intended to serve him.

Hearing Daniel’s voice was enough to indicate that he was alive, but Daniel wished to witness to him how it had happened.  God had sent his angel to deliver him.

James Graham imagines what might have happened that night in the lions’ den:

“As the guards closed the aperture and went their way, Daniel slid gradually to the floor of the den. The big lions that had come bounding from their cabins at the inflow of light all stop suddenly short as a steed reined up by a powerful hand on the bridle. The initial roars died away as they formed a solid phalanx and looked toward this man who stood in their caverns. Others of the great beasts yawned and laid down on the floor, but not one made a move to advance toward their visitor. ‘Thanks be unto Jehovah,’ breathed the prophet. ‘He has stopped the mouths of these fierce beasts that they will do me no harm,’ and he sat down on the floor of the den and leaned his back against the wall to make himself comfortable for the night.

Soon two cub lions moved in his direction, not stealthily or crouching as though to attack, but in obvious friendliness, and one lay on each side of Daniel as though to give him warmth and protection in the chilly dungeon.  Presently their mother, an old lioness, crept over and lay in front of the prophet.  He gently stroked their backs as they each turned their heads and licked his hand….Enclosed by the lioness and her cubs, the head of the patriarch was gradually pillowed on the back of one of the cubs as the four slept soundly in perfect peace and tranquility” (The Prophet Statesman, quoted on Donald Campbell, Daniel: Decoder of Dreams, pp. 74-75).

The angel not only closed the mouths of the lions but kept Daniel company throughout the night!  We don’t always know when angels are present with us (Heb. 13:2), but we do know that they are present to minister to us (Heb. 1:14).

It is possible that this heavenly emissary had been just as visible to Daniel as the fourth person in the fiery furnace had been to Nebuchadnezzar.  The same ministering spirit sent to accompany and aid them was with Daniel.

David encourages us by telling us, “The angel of the Lord encamps around those who fear him, and delivers them.  The young lions suffer want and hunger; but those who seek the Lord lack no good thing.” (Psalm 34:7, 10).  Maybe Daniel remembered this verse.  Daniel had experienced God’s miraculous and providential protection before.

The New Testament tells us that we, too, face a lion, Satan.  We are told, “Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.  Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world” (1 Peter 5:8-9).

Daniel proclaims:

My God sent his angel and shut the lions’ mouths, and they have not harmed me, because I was found blameless before him; and also before you, O king, I have done no harm” (Dan. 6:22).

“A believer who knows how to kneel in prayer has no problem standing in the strength of the Lord” (Warren Wiersbe, Weirsbe Bible Commentary: OT Volume, p. 1366).

Daniel is not averse to declaring his innocence of the charges against him, but of prior importance to him is his innocence before God.  And even before asserting that, he gives God full credit for his survival.

When we go against the “laws of the land,” when we practice civil disobedience, we’d better be sure that we are remaining “blameless before [God],” that we are doing what is right and just in His eyes.  What Daniel cared most about was the approval of God above all else.  He feared God more than man and violated a temporary mandate in order to follow God in his daily pattern of prayer.

But, in reality, Daniel had not rebelled against the king.  He knew that the king had been tricked into this decree forbidding prayer to anyone but the king.  Daniel was still loyal to this king.  

Amazing, isn’t it?  God is sovereign over all things.  Hungry lions around Daniel didn’t eat him because “My God sent his angel and shut the lions’ mouths.”  Angels are “ministering spirits” (Heb. 1:14) who serve at God’s command and although His power is greater, it was their power that shut the mouths of the lions because it pleased God to do that.

“How the angel stopped the lions’ mouths, whether by the brightness of his presence, or threatening them with his finger (Numbers 22:27, 33), or by making a rumble amongst them like that of an empty cart upon the stones, or by presenting unto them a light fire (which things lions are said to be terrified with), or by causing in them a satiety, or by working upon their fantasy, we need not inquire,” says John Trapp.

As in the deliverance of Daniel’s three Jewish friends (3:25, 28), God had used an angel to rescue Daniel.  The lions spared Daniel not because they lacked an appetite but because an angel shut their mouths (cf. Heb. 11:33).

As with Daniel’s three friends, it is possible that this was “the angel of the Lord” who was with Daniel and protected him.

A teacher once asked a Sunday school class if they thought Daniel was afraid, and one little girl answered, “I don’t think he was scared, ‘cause one of the lions was the Lion of the tribe of Judah who was in there with him.” That child knew her Bible. (David Jeremiah, Handwriting on the Wall, p. 126).

His claim of being “blameless” does not mean that he was sinless, only that he was not guilty of this charge of disloyalty to the king.  Although Daniel defended his innocence, he didn’t need to.  Darius knew the score.  Daniel did break the king’s law, but he did not go against the king or against the king’s best interests.  Daniel is an example of obedient disobedience.  Daniel’s lack of harm corresponded to his lack of blame: before God and before the king, Daniel had committed no act worthy of death in the lions’ den.

“Daniel’s faithfulness got him into trouble (v. 10); his faith got him out of it (see Heb. 11:33)” (The Nelson Bible, p. 1431).

“This miracle takes its position among that series of marvellous events in Old and New Testament history in which the life and work of isolated distinguished messengers of revelation appear, by virtue of Divine grace, to have restored the paradisaical dominion of man over nature, so that the beasts of the desert yield him a ready obedience as their rightful lord.  We class here, prior to the time of Daniel, the ravens of Elijah (1 Kings 17:4) and the bears of Elisha (2 Kings 2:24); and in N. T. times, the sojourning of the Saviour with the beasts of the desert, immediately subsequent to his temptation (Mark 1:13), Paul’s escape from injury by the viper on the island of Malta (Acts 28:5; cf. Mark 16:18)” (Zockler, The Book of the Prophet Daniel, p. 146).

Just because the angel had stopped the mouths of the lions doesn’t mean that Daniel would have been completely safe, for they still had dangerous claws.  But Daniel was not harmed in any way.

Ancient monuments discovered in the ruins of Babylon reveal several depictions of prisoners being eaten by lions.  An inscription and a stone carving of lions killing prisoners were also discovered near Daniel’s tomb at Susa, Iraq (Albert Barnes, Notes on the Book of Daniel, p. 273.  The monuments were discovered by Capt. Robert Mignan of the East India Company a century and a half ago.)

Now we see Darius’ delight.

“Then the king was exceedingly glad, and commanded that Daniel be taken up out of the den” (Dan. 6:23a)

The king’s distress (vv. 14, 18) gave way to exceeding gladness.  When we see God’s amazing, providential power displayed in our lives, it should produce joy, exceeding great joy!

Actually, anytime God shows His grace towards us, and we should notice it, then give thanks to Him for it, our hearts will be filled with joy.

Are you missing joy in your life?  Then be observant.  See how God has been gracious to you.  Don’t forget to give thanks and you will begin to experience joy.  (The Greek words charis, eucharisteo and cara are the words for “grace,” “giving thanks,” and “joy.”  See how God connects them and shows how it is a progression?)

“The quality of gratitude has become an academic sensation, with psychologists learning that it has the power to literally change the presets of our personalities.  There’s a heavenly algorithm to it.  It’s a way of calculating grace.  Counting your blessings lets you multiply joy, subtract sorrow, and gain the dividends of a balanced mind.  It changes the factors of life, alters the equations, and rounds up the heart” (Robert J. Morgan, Mediterranean Sea Rules, p. 90).

The king was exceedingly glad because he still had his trusted president available for service, he was relieved of guilt feelings towards him, and he would not have to live with a memory that the trickery of Daniel’s accusers had worked.  Maybe he was also very glad that Daniel’s God had proven to be so powerful and sovereign.

Commanding that Daniel be “taken up out of the den” probably shows that Darius was too impatient to unseal the stone placed over the ground-level entrance to the lion’s den.

“So Daniel was taken up out of the den, and no kind of harm was found on him, because he had trusted in his God” (Dan. 6:23b).

God rescued Daniel from the lions.  “For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to give strong support to those whose heart is blameless toward him” (2 Chron. 16:9).  Daniel’s heart was blameless because he was trusting in God’s power and protection and was living for God’s glory.

So Darius had Daniel extracted from the den, and undoubtedly marveled that he had sustained no injuries whatsoever.  The repetition of this idea of “no harm” (cf. v. 22) likely means that the king checked Daniel over thoroughly and examined him carefully and found it incredible that one could spend a whole night with the lions and escape unharmed.  Certainly all who witnessed the miracle (including some of his accusers) had to be enormously impressed at the discovery that Daniel had suffered no injury whatsoever.

The same had been true of his three friends and their experience in the fiery furnace (cf. 3:27).  Compare the accounts of Peter’s and Paul’s releases from prison in Acts 12 and 16.  Some see Daniel’s deliverance as typical of the faithful remnant’s deliverance during the future days of Antichrist’s sway.

Prayer unleashes the power of God to do his will, but we must believe he will do amazing things.  “Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us . . .” (Ephesians 3:20). 

Jesus said to his disciples:

Have faith in God. I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, “Go, throw yourself into the sea,” and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. (Mark 11:22-24)

We don’t get God to do our will by believing or claiming.  He is not a vending machine serving our needs.  God is sovereign and committed to working out His will, not ours.  But faith is needed in our prayers.  Faith is a basic trust that God does hear and answer prayer.

Daniel had prayed without doubting (James 1:6-8) and God answered.

The king had seen God’s power manifested in Daniel’s rescue and he was delighted.

Our text is clear to tell us the reason for Daniel’s deliverance, “because he had trusted in his God.”  This statement was generally true of Daniel throughout his whole life, but never more so evident and effective than in this case.  And Darius witnessed it.

Michael Andrus says, “In 1 Peter, a New Testament epistle that majors on suffering, we read that “For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly” (1 Peter 2:19).  It is commendable because that is what Jesus did and we should follow in His steps.  Though Jesus was absolutely sinless (which none of us can claim), it says that “When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly” (1 Pet. 2:23).  That’s the key—knowing whom to trust when you’re treated unfairly.  Put your trust in Jesus.

The Judean exile had survived the night, as Darius had hoped, so the king ordered Daniel to “be taken up out of the den,” much to the chagrin of the high officials and satraps who had conspired to put him there.  Their plans had failed.

When Daniel emerged, “no kind of harm was found on him, because he had trusted in his God.”  This degree of protection parallels the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who emerged from the fiery furnace without singed hair, damaged cloaks, or even the smell of smoke on them (3:27).

It was because both Daniel and his friends trusted God.  “Though his cause was righteous and he was unjustly accused, those things alone did not protect him before the lions.  Daniel needed a living, abiding faith in God, even in the most difficult circumstances” (David Guzik).  It is not our faith, per se, but the object of our faith that makes the difference.  Daniel “had trusted in his God.”

It may seem that Darius violated his own royal injunction by removing Daniel, but in fact the king had followed the letter of the new law precisely.  The injunction stipulated that violators would be cast into the den of lions (6:7, 12), but it did not instruct the king on what to do if the violator survived!  Darius followed the law, and acted in response to a circumstance the law did not address.  This whole ordeal demonstrated his commitment “to the law of the Medes and Persians” while at the same time displaying his authority as king.

Daniel’s rising from the den is a picture of resurrection from the dead, just as Isaac’s deliverance from near-sacrifice is described as a figurative resurrection by the author of Hebrews (Heb. 11:19).  The same concept is found in Jesus’ interpretation of the story of Jonah (Matt. 12:40; cf. Jonah 2:1-10).  It assures us that, whatever the danger and the outcome of our trials, ultimately we, too, will rise from the dead.

Welcome back to our study of Daniel.  We are in that familiar story about Daniel in the lion’s den.  We saw last week that Daniel has indeed been cast into the lion’s den.

16 Then the king commanded, and Daniel was brought and cast into the den of lions. The king declared to Daniel, “May your God, whom you serve continually, deliver you!”  17 And a stone was brought and laid on the mouth of the den, and the king sealed it with his own signet and with the signet of his lords, that nothing might be changed concerning Daniel.  18 Then the king went to his palace and spent the night fasting; no diversions were brought to him, and sleep fled from him.

We ended by noting the differences between Daniel and Darius on this night, that while Darius could not sleep, Daniel likely slept like a baby, protected from harm by God’s sovereign protection.

In contrast to Nebuchadnezzar, who showed no compassion for Daniel’s three friends and wanted them to die, Darius spent a fitful night without food, entertainment, or sleep.  His sleep “fled” from him.  “Apparently the king rolled and tossed in his bed, his mind going over the plight of Daniel, the fruitlessness of his efforts to deliver him, the craft of the accusers, his own stupidity in being tricked, and the measures he might take in retaliation against the schemers” (Leon Woods, A Commentary on Daniel, p. 170).

There was a lot on Darius’ mind.  No wonder he couldn’t sleep.

Have you ever laid awake wishing you had said or done things differently, or stewing over what someone had done to you?  I’ve had night when thoughts swirled in my head—things that others have said or done to me, things that I should have said or done (or wished I hadn’t said or done).  We all have worries or regrets that keep us awake at nights.  Paul tells us to turn those over to God (Phil. 4:6-7) and Peter tells us to “cast your cares” upon Him (1 Pet. 5:7).

Being in distress Darius returned to his palace and “spent the night fasting” and avoiding any diversions.  There was no eating and no entertainment.  No music or dancing girls to take his mind off his troubles.  His mind was preoccupied with Daniel and what was to become of him.  He was obviously worried about Daniel.

While it is unlikely that he spent time praying to Daniel’s God, he might have prayed to his own gods.  Our text doesn’t say, only that he “fasted” and couldn’t sleep.  What else do you do?

Some do find it possible that Darius, through previous interactions with Daniel, was beginning to believe in Daniel’s God.  Perhaps this fledgling believer was praying, as best he knew how, to the Most High God.  William Peel imagines him praying his first prayer, maybe something like this:

“Most High God of Daniel and the Hebrew exiles, I don’t even know if You exist.  Daniel says you rescue and save, and he trusts You implicitly.  He says Your dominion reaches throughout the earth even into this palace, and I guess into the lions’ den.  If You are who Daniel believes You to be, rescue my friend from the power of the lions.”

We do know that later (Isa. 45:1-6) Cyrus (and these two names may be referring to the same person) is one of God’s elect servants, so it is possible that even now he is praying to God himself.

Without any resources to save Daniel, the king was put in a hard place—forcing him to turn to the only remaining resource: Daniel’s God.  The king found himself in a “divine squeeze” with only one place to turn.

“Why does God bother people?  Why does God agitate people?  Because He loves people, He wants people, men and women, to enter into a right relationship with Him.  And if a person is not in a right relationship with Him, He sics what we would call the hounds of heaven on that person and just keeps annoying them over and over and over again until they reach a point where they trust in what Jesus has done for them and they become saved at that point. Aren’t you glad that God loves us enough to bother us?” (Woods, Daniel)

Have you ever woken up in the middle of the night and couldn’t go back to sleep?  Is it possible that God is trying to get your attention to pray about something or to re-think some situation?

Even though Darius had made a rash decision that put him in this predicament, it seems that God had sovereignly planned this so that Darius would now find himself at wits end, with nary a thing that he could do to change things, and in his desperation he would have to turn to God.

His mind was occupied with Daniel’s predicament, and nothing could distract him from these thoughts, not even sleep.  Undoubtedly, Daniel had a better night’s rest than Darius.  We can be sure that Daniel prayed in the lions’ den, because it was simply his habit to pray. 

Notice the stark contrast between this powerful king and a convicted criminal.  While Darius could not sleep, Daniel slept like a baby.  As James Montgomery Boice says, with the lions’ mouths shut and Daniel’s accusers outside, Daniel was in “the safest place in all of Babylon” (Daniel: An Expositional Commentary, p. 71).

“Now verse 18 is the most beautiful illustration of two men, two different situations, one with the Word, one without the Word.  Over here you have Darius; here you have Daniel.  Darius is in a palace, Darius in his environment has wealth, power, Darius has all the means for human enjoyment.  Darius has everything that most people could want.  Daniel is in a dirty den, a den of lions, full of manure, full of dead bodies that have been thrown down there, the flies are eating the skin off the people that had been thrown down there before, I just want you to get the picture of it, and it’s not just the sweet little den that you see in your Sunday School material.  Sunday School artists never did read the Word too carefully and when they come to these scenes they don’t present them in all their gore.  Now the Holy Spirit, when He writes Scripture He lets it all hang out so you’ll get the point. (Clough, Lessons on Daniel, 22:278).  Yet here is Darius, stressed and distressed; and there is Daniel in perfect peace.  Daniel refused to surrender to fear, for He had heard of the way his friends had been delivered from the fiery furnace.  Daniel may have meditated on Psalm 4:8 while surrounded by the lions.  “In peace I will both lie down and sleep, for You alone, O Lord, make me dwell in safety.”

It just reminds us that peace and joy are not dependent upon our circumstances, they are the fruit of the Spirit’s work within us and can be present no matter what we are going through.  This is why Paul and Silas could sing hymns in the night while sitting in stocks and in prison.

This is why Paul explained to the Philippians, who had sent some financial support his way:

I have learned, in whatever situation I am, to be content. 12 I know how to be brought low, and I know how to abound. In any and every circumstance, I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance and need. 13 I can do all things through him who strengthens me. (Phil. 4:11b-13).

Daniel didn’t need to start praying when he was cast into the lion’s den, for that was his continual habit.  Even before he entered the lions’ den he had been consistently praying.  G. Campbell Morgan, known as the “Prince of Expositors,” points out: “When our lives are centred in God, we can ever afford to leave circumstances to the compulsion of the One in Whom we trust.  The occasional is always affected by the habitual.”  If we practice to trust God in believing prayer, then when the more difficult trials come, we will continue to trust Him.

Perhaps Daniel prayed Psalm 22:21-22 “Save Me from the lion’s mouth… I will declare Your name to My brethren; in the midst of the assembly I will praise You.”  These are words of David and Christ on the cross, but every believer may apply them when we face terrible trials.

Well dawn arrived like molasses in January, but at first light the king jumped out of bed and ran to the “tomb.”  He was eager to discover what had happened to this man who trusted in his God.

I remember as a teenager listening to Pat Terry’s song Daniel, and at this point it went like this:

Early in the morning when the sun came up
The king was feeling down
He went to the lions’ den, he looked in the window
And what do you think he found?
Oh, Daniel was leading all the lions in a hymn
They were clapping their big brown paws
He said an angel of the Lord done arrived last night
And he clamped them lions’ jaws.

Yes, Darius got up at daybreak and went in haste to the lion’s den.  We can imagine him just waiting in anticipation for the first glimmer of dawn so he could see how Daniel fared.  Was Daniel still there, whole and not torn to the bone, or was Daniel hidden in the bellies of the lions?

If he had had no faith at all that Daniel’s God could deliver, he probably wouldn’t have bothered.  But he was there…and quickly.  He didn’t send a messenger, he himself ran to the lion’s den.  Again, this man was no spring chicken himself, being 62 years of age (Dan. 5:31).

[Evidently one night in the lions’ den was the minimum sentence that the law required…likely because nothing would be left but a few bones picked clean.  So the king had fulfilled the principle of Medo-Persian law because he had not revoked the penalty of casting a violator into the den of lions.]

Darius would have been unable to see into the lion’s den because it would have been completely dark down in that hole, so he called out to Daniel, “O Daniel, servant of the living God, has your God, whom you serve continually, been able to deliver you from the lions?” (6:20)

Would there be an answer as his question echoed in the well of the lion’s den?

As he neared the lion’s den he cried out in anguish, with a loud, troubled voice from the top opening:

 “O Daniel, servant of the living God, has your God, whom you serve continually, been able to deliver you from the lions?” (Dan. 6:20)

There must have been some belief there, or he wouldn’t have bothered to call out.  Who else had ever survived a night in the lion’s den?  Once again, he made reference to Daniel’s “continual service” to his God.  This is what had gotten Daniel into trouble, but it is also what Darius found so commendable in Daniel.

Darius knew that Daniel worshiped “the living God,” and he wanted to know if his God had indeed delivered him from the lions.  That God is a “living God” is significant.  It is obviously here a contrast to the deadness of the idols that everyone else worshipped.  If Daniel’s God was alive then He could act in his behalf!  The living God could keep His servant alive.  The king regarded Daniel’s fate as a test of whether his God was really alive or just an unproved supposition, like all the deities the non-Jews worshipped.  If the Hebrew God really existed, He would preserve His faithful servant from death…and if anyone deserved well from his God, it was Daniel.

Unlike the idols (and the god of Deism), our God is intimately involved in the everyday matters of life. He numbers the hairs on our head (Matt. 10:30; Luke 12:7; Luke 21:18), knows when seemingly insignificant creatures perish (Matt. 10:29; Luke 12:6), and hears those who call out to Him.

By preserving Daniel all night amidst the lions, God had demonstrated His active intervention, preventing the mauling and death of Daniel by these lions.  Daniel’s miraculous preservation in the midst of voracious beasts provided undeniable evidence that the God of Israel is indeed the living God!

The issue of God’s ability to deliver was previously voiced in the narrative of the three faithful friends of Daniel, who declared to Nebuchadnezzar, “Our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace” (3:17).  Chapters 3 and 6, each evoking God’s ability to deliver his servant(s) from death, are paired in the Aramaic chiasm of the book, and furthermore, the two chapters are arranged chiastically, with each central section (3:16-18; 6:18-20) reporting dialogue concerning God’s ability to deliver.

There, in Daniel 3:16-18, we read:

16 Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered and said to the king, “O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter.  17 If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king.  18 But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.”

These three Hebrew men were convinced that God “is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king,” but at the same time they acknowledged and even accepted the fact that this may not be God’s will.  They didn’t know that God would deliver them, but were confident that He could deliver them.

Here in Daniel 6 we see some of the same language:

19 Then, at break of day, the king arose and went in haste to the den of lions. 20 As he came near to the den where Daniel was, he cried out in a tone of anguish.  The king declared to Daniel, “O Daniel, servant of the living God, has your God, whom you serve continually, been able to deliver you from the lions?”

“Has your God, Daniel, been able to deliver you from the lions?”  As before, God was not only able, but willing.  Not only could He deliver his servants, but He did!

Daniel’s preservation among the beasts foreshadows the preservation of believers and the Jewish nation during the Great Tribulation, when the beasts revealed to the Apostle John in the book of Revelation hold sway over the world (Rev. 13:1, 11).  It will be a terrible time in which to live, but God is still able, even then, to protect His people.

God is still able to protect His children today.

When John Paton was a missionary in New Hebrides in the mid 1800s, hostile natives surrounded his mission headquarters one night, intent on burning the Paton Family out and killing them.  John and his wife prayed all during the terror-filled night that God would deliver them.  When daylight came, they were amazed to see the attackers [inexplicably] had left.

A year later, the chief of the tribe converted to Jesus Christ.  Rev. Paton, remembering what had happened, asked the chief what had kept him and his men from burning down the house and killing them.  The chief replied in surprise, “Who were all those men you had with you there?”  The missionary answered, “There were no men there; just my wife and I.”

The chief argued that they had seen many men standing guard — hundreds of big men in shining garments with drawn swords in their hands.  They seemed to circle the mission station, and they were afraid to attack.  Only then did John Paton realize that God had sent His angels to protect them.  The chief agreed there was no other explanation.

Paul Dye was a missionary abducted by Columbian guerillas in 1985.  He had flown in to Puinave village because Tim Cain was sick and needed medical help.  Little did they know that they were flying into a trap.  The guerillas commandeered the airplane and forced Paul to fly them to another location.  Unaware of where he was, with the plane parked some distance away, Paul awaited an opportunity to escape.  Fortunately, he had remembered to get a second key and hide it in his shoe.

One night, he snuck out of camp, making little noise and God kept every guard asleep.  He made it to the plane, but had to remove debris and take off in the dark.  In the air he could fly by instruments but did not know where he was.  Running out of gas, he knew he had to put the plane down…and ended up landing in a pasture just before a fence, in about the only place he could land between forest and gullies.  Yes, God can still deliver us today.

Again, Darius seems to have a budding faith in the one True God, Daniel’s God.  First, he expressed the strong wish that Daniel’s God would deliver him and then ran to the “tomb” to see, showing that he really believed that God could deliver Daniel.  Second, when Daniel’s response from below indicated that he was alive, Darius is not said to have been amazed, as though not really believing this might happen, but only “very glad” at the good news.  Thirdly, he then issues the remarkable decree recorded (vv. 25-27), much like the earlier decree of Nebuchadnezzar, calling on people of his domain to give respect to this God.  So, these may be indications that Darius had faith in Daniel’s God, at least to deliver Daniel.

We are in the book of Daniel, chapter 6, that famous story of Daniel in the lion’s den.  But we haven’t gotten quite that far yet.

Daniel has been trapped, as was desired by his jealous co-workers, but a hasty decision made by King Darius “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” (Dan. 6:7).  Of course, Daniel couldn’t do that.  He wasn’t about to pray to any man, for he knew the true God and would pray only to Him.

Doing that, however, got him in trouble with the law.

11 Then these men came by agreement and found Daniel making petition and plea before his God. 12 Then they came near and said before the king, concerning the injunction, “O king! Did you not sign an injunction, that anyone who makes petition to any god or man within thirty days except to you, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions?” The king answered and said, “The thing stands fast, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be revoked.” 13 Then they answered and said before the king, “Daniel, who is one of the exiles from Judah, pays no attention to you, O king, or the injunction you have signed, but makes his petition three times a day.”

Their conspiracy worked.  Daniel was destined to be Cat Chow!

But Darius was troubled.

14 Then the king, when he heard these words, was much distressed and set his mind to deliver Daniel.  And he labored till the sun went down to rescue him. 15 Then these men came by agreement to the king and said to the king, “Know, O king, that it is a law of the Medes and Persians that no injunction or ordinance that the king establishes can be changed.”

First, he didn’t want to lose Daniel, a man he greatly respected and trusted.  Second, he likely was distressed that he had made such a rash decision and that he had been shortsighted to sign the decree.  He realized he had been duped and railroaded into this decision.

One of the lessons we can learn from this scenario is the danger of making rash decisions.  The king had been flattered by this request from his officials, and likely somewhat pressured into making it since “everybody” thought this was a super idea, but he didn’t take the time to think through the consequences. If he seriously thought of himself as “god” earlier, he certainly felt helpless now.

Proverbs 18:13 says, “If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.”

Proverbs 20:25 says, “It is a snare to say rashly, ‘It is holy,’ and to reflect only after making vows.”

Ecclesiastes 5:4-5 warns us: “When you vow a vow to God, do not delay paying it, for he has no pleasure in fools. Pay what you vow.  It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay.”

Herod would find himself in a similar position hundreds of years later—regretting his vow to Herodias’ daughter compelling him to reluctantly sever the head of John the Baptist (Mark 6:26).

Whatever the reason, it seems the king failed to thoughtfully evaluate the situation.  “He should have asked himself, ‘Why all this sudden show of loyalty to me?  Why isn’t Daniel among those who propose this law?  What would the long-term results of this be? Do the officers who propose it have any ulterior motives?’  But flattery was stronger than reflection in this case, and the outrage was committed” (Daniel Feinberg, A Commentary on Daniel: The Kingdom of the Lord).

Nebuchadnezzar had become angry with Daniel’s three friends when they refused to idolize him (3:19), but Darius became angry with himself for signing the decree (cf. 2:1; 3:13; 5:6, 9).  This shows how much he respected and valued Daniel.

We can be sure that he wasn’t happy with Daniel’s enemies, but he knew that ultimately he was responsible.  Like Darius, our foolish decisions often haunt us.  Often all we can do is pray and ask God to mercifully and miraculously intervene when we make foolish decisions.

“How often it is that we are blinded to the nature of our actions until we encounter their irrevocable consequences!” (Edward Dennett, Daniel the Prophet: and the Times of the Gentiles, p. 85).

Years ago, while living in Washington, D. C., I read a leadership book by Peter Senge entitled The Fifth Discipline.  In it he talked about the “law of unintended consequences.”  The law of unintended consequences, often cited but rarely defined, is that actions of people — and especially of government—always have effects that are unanticipated or unintended.   Of course, some of those outcomes can be positive, but often they are negative.

Or we’ve all seen a cartoon or a Facebook or YouTube reel which illustrates the foibles of those trying to trim or cut down a tree.

Darius tried to get himself, and Daniel, out of this predicament.  He strove from noon to sunset trying to think of a way to rescue Daniel.  We don’t know if he met with his lawyers to see if there was a loophole he could exploit, or whether he had the authority to set it aside, or maybe there had been past cases where a case like this had been rescinded.  What about a presidential pardon?  What if we over-feed the lions or put Daniel in a suit of armor?

Could it be that God would save him?  In all probability Darius had also heard of the deliverance of Daniel’s three comrades from Nebuchadnezzar’s fiery furnace.  Would God to the same for Daniel?

He labored “till the sun went down” trying to find a way to rescue Daniel.  But he could not.  Humanly speaking, there was no possible way for Daniel to survive this ordeal.  The law was the law was the law.

According to ancient eastern custom, the execution was carried out on the evening of the day that the accusation was made and found valid, when “the sun went down.”

Typically, during all this, Daniel remained quiet.  While everyone else was screaming and accusing, Daniel let his integrity speak for him,  After all, his name was Daniel, “God is my judge.”  He humbled himself under the mighty hand of God and waited, just like Jesus did, “When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly” (1 Pet. 2:23).

Ultimately, Darius had to condemn Daniel to the lion’s den.

Seeing his distress, the high officials and satraps don’t want Darius to reneg on his decision.  For a third time they come in concert.  Daniel’s accusers remind the king that he could not change the statute once it had been signed into law. 

“Then these men came by agreement to the king and said to the king, ‘Know, O king, that it is a law of the Medes and Persians that no injunction or ordinance that the king establishes can be changed’” (Dan. 6:15).

Using words similar to verse 8, they reminded him that Medo-Persian ordinances could not be revoked, and Darius himself had already used the language of irrevocability (v. 12); despite his desire to spare Daniel, doing so would be going against “the law of the Medes and Persians.”  To do so would undermine the very foundation of his kingdom.

Darius couldn’t do that.  The king relinquished his efforts at stalling to find a way of deliverance for Daniel.  Unable to set aside or overrule his immutable decree, the king was forced to enact the prescribed sentence.  In this, we see an admirable aspect of the king’s character: he recognizes his legal obligation, though it runs counter to his great personal desire.  As friend and admirer of Daniel he would release him, but as king of Medo-Persia he must enforce the law.  He must do what was “right” in the eyes of the law and thus in his own eyes.

“Though absolutely blameless, Daniel was thrown into the den of lions.  He suffered because of the jealousy of others” (Edward J. Dennett, Daniel the Prophet: and the Times of the Gentiles, p. 85). 

With all possibilities for delivering Daniel exhausted, Darius finally gave the order for Daniel to be cast to the lions.  So “Then the king commanded, and Daniel was brought and cast into the den of lions.  The king declared to Daniel, “May your God, whom you serve continually, deliver you!” (Dan. 6:16)

“They had him!  Or so they thought!  They forgot that he was praying to and asking for help from the God who delivers” (William Peel, Living in the Lion’s Den Without Being Eaten, p. 151).

At this time in history, lions were hunted by royalty of Babylonia and Persia (Donald Wiseman, Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon, p. 112).  Lions were captured alive and placed within royal zoos (Shea, Daniel and the Lion of Babylon, p. 70).

The lions’ den appears to have been a large pit in the ground with an opening above that a large stone sealed, probably in order to keep people from stumbling into it.  Such pits were commonly used as cisterns to store water or as prisons. We notice that Daniel had to be lifted up out of it (v. 23), and others when thrown into it fell down toward its bottom (v. 24). 

“Its construction may therefore have been similar to that of the fiery furnace, upon the whole (see on chap. 3:6)—an opinion which seems to derive additional support from the manner in which Darius was enabled to converse with Daniel while in the den, even before the stone was removed from its opening (v. 21 et seq.).”  (Zöckler, The Book of the Prophet Daniel, p. 144).

A number of scholars consider that these “lions dens” not only had a whole at the top, but one on the side as well, for the purpose of bringing lions in and taking refuse out.

“This den was a cesspool is what it was; you had decaying human flesh in this place; it was the execution chamber and that is where Daniel spent his evening.”  (Clough, Lessons on Daniel, 22.287).

Darius’ idea seems to have been that he had wanted to save Daniel, but had failed.  Now Yahweh must save him. “May your God, whom you serve continually, deliver you!”  This was, at least, a vague hope of Darius.  We do not know, of course, if Darius knew about Yahweh’s deliverance of Daniel’s three friends.  But Daniel certainly did.

There are significant parallels and contrasts between the words that take Daniel’s three friends to the furnace (3:15–18) and those that take Daniel to the lion pit. There the king asked, “Who ever is the god who could deliver you from my power?”  Here the king declares, “Your God, whom you honor so consistently, he must deliver you” (compare his acknowledgment of “the living God” in v 21 [20]).

Darius had a kind of faith, but it was faith born out of Daniel’s trust in the Lord.  The idea was, “I tried my best to save you Daniel, but I failed.  Now it is up to your God.”  And he seemed to believe that Daniel’s God could rescue him!

Darius knew Daniel’s testimony, that he “served” [his God] continually.”  Oh, what a testimony, to be known by the world as someone who consistently and constantly serves the God of heaven even in the face of sacrificing one’s life.

Many of us occasionally represent God well with godly character and wisdom before the world, but then invariably counter-act the good by then making bad choices.  Daniel’s testimony was made by continual service.

Bound by the iron-clad wording of the royal injunction, Darius ordered that Daniel be cast into the lions’ den.   But notice that he appealed to Daniel’s God to deliver him.

He told Daniel, “May your God, whom you serve continually, deliver you!”  This statement recognized Daniel’s devotion to God and expressed Darius’s hope that the punishment would fail through his God’s deliverance.  It may also signal a budding faith in Darius’ heart.

However, Stephen Miller explains: “The KJV and NASB construe this statement as a prediction that God “will rescue” Daniel, whereas the NIV and NRSV consider the declaration to be a wish on Darius’s part that God “may . . . rescue” him.  The verb (an imperfect form of šêzib) may be translated in either manner.  Since Darius was an unbeliever, the king would not have had sufficient faith in Yahweh to affirm that Daniel would certainly be delivered, and v. 20 indicates that the king was not positive Daniel would be saved.  The words express the king’s hope” (Stephen R. Miller, Daniel, p. 185)

“[Daniel] had been faithful in praying, leaving the matter in God’s hands.  Now it seemed that God was not to spare him.  Many years before, it had seemed the same to Daniel’s three friends as they had faced the fiery furnace.  Knowing the kind of person Daniel was, however, one can believe that he faced the challenge no less courageously than they” (Leon Wood,  A Commentary on Daniel, p. 167).

“For Daniel and his three Hebrew friends, faith was a commitment to omnipotence, not outcome.  As the three friends said before being thrown in the fiery furnace, God is able to save, whether He chooses to or not.  In either case, our trust is in Him and whatever outcome He deems best.  That’s a faith that surely pleases God” (David Jeremiah, Agents of Babylon, p. 190).

“Now the beautiful thing about this is Darius is forced into the position of having to trust the Lord.  See how effective and efficient God works; the whole situation looks like it’s messed up; everything is falling apart, and what happens?  In the end Darius has to trust the Lord; a tremendously efficient teaching system” (Clough, Lessons on Daniel, 21:280).

Leon Wood contends, regarding the wish that Darius voiced, “shows that Daniel had been busy in witnessing to him, as he had been years earlier to Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar….Darius clearly had been impressed with Daniel’s faithfulness in life behavior to his God; no doubt a telling factor in molding the king’s own thinking.  One’s life conduct is so important if his oral testimony is to be effective” (A Commentary on Daniel, p. 168).

Darius had kept his end of the matter by ordering Daniel, an exile from Judah now in his eighties, to be thrown to the lions.  If Daniel’s God happened to intervene and deliver the faithful servant, it was out of the king’s hands.

To secure the lions’ den, “A stone was brought and laid on the mouth” of it, and then Darius sealed it “with his signet and the signet of the lords.”  No one would chance trying to rescue Daniel, and Daniel himself certainly would be unable to escape: breaking the king’s seal without authorization would warrant death.  And Darius knew that Daniel had powerful enemies who would seek to kill him if the lions didn’t.  In this case, not only the king’s signet, but also those of the lords, were used, indicating that approval of both parties would be needed to remove the stone.

Like Pilate, hundreds of years later (Matt. 27:55-56), a stone was laid over the entrance (Dan. 6:17) and the king officially authorized the securing of the chamber so that interlopers could not affect the seemingly certain outcome: neither Daniel nor Jesus would ever be seen again.   That was the intention.  Daniel’s night in the den and his raising from peril do serve as an analogy, or type for the death and resurrection of Jesus.

In the sovereignty of God, the stone was sealed to vouch the miraculous nature of Daniel’s preservation.  With Daniel’s fate sealed, the conspirators went home to celebrate.  But with Daniel’s God on the throne, while the king of Babylon tossed and turned (Dan. 6:18), the King of kings protected Daniel from harm.  Even with all the danger surrounding him, Daniel likely got a good night’s sleep.

Several of Daniel’s co-workers were jealous of his rise to power.  Daniel was being placed basically second-in-command.  Being an outsider made this inconceivable to them and no one likes to be bypassed when promotions are being made.  While they could find no skeletons in his closet with regard to his work life, they did come up with a plan to trap Daniel.  Knowing that Daniel would continue to pray faithfully to his God, they tricked king Darius into signing a decree that “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” (Dan. 6:7).

Over the last three weeks we’ve seen that this did not deter Daniel at all from praying at his window three times a day as was his habit.  He knew that the injunction had been made and still prayed to the only true God.

10 When Daniel knew that the document had been signed, he went to his house where he had windows in his upper chamber open toward Jerusalem. He got down on his knees three times a day and prayed and gave thanks before his God, as he had done previously. 11 Then these men came by agreement and found Daniel making petition and plea before his God. 12 Then they came near and said before the king, concerning the injunction, “O king! Did you not sign an injunction, that anyone who makes petition to any god or man within thirty days except to you, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions?” The king answered and said, “The thing stands fast, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be revoked.” 13 Then they answered and said before the king, “Daniel, who is one of the exiles from Judah, pays no attention to you, O king, or the injunction you have signed, but makes his petition three times a day.”

Ligon Duncan reminds us that temptation that Daniel faces is part of a larger Satanic strategy.  The satraps, yes, were tempting Daniel because they wanted to get him out of the way.  But the satraps were just dupes for Satan.  Satan himself was simultaneously working in the designs of these petty officials.  Satan was simultaneously attempting to vex Daniel’s soul and to use his own integrity as leverage against God’s kingdom in the time of Darius.  Satan had been attempting to wear out and wear down Daniel since the first day of the captivity and this is just yet another expression of Satan’s assaults on Daniel.  As Sinclair Ferguson has said, “Temptation to compromise is never an isolated incident in our spiritual life, but it is part of the larger strategy of Satan against us.”

It is quite possible that Daniel’s willingness to not compromise, but to stand firm in His principles, which brought him into a very dangerous situation, one that the true God rescued him from, was just the testimony that Darius needed to push him, humanly speaking, in the direction of allowing the Jews to return to Jerusalem.

We may never realize how important it is for us to maintain our integrity, even in the smallest of activities, so that God can receive the glory and His work can be done.  God would use this heathen ruler Darius to release His people from exile.

Daniel 6:10-13 is framed by an inclusio: Daniel violated the injunction by praying three times a day (v. 10), and the conspirers informed Darius that Daniel had violated the injunction by praying three times a day (v. 13).

It’s remarkable how people can work together quickly and efficiently to do evil but find it so much more difficult to get together to do any good!  “Their feet are swift to shed blood,” says Paul (Rom. 3:15), quoting Isaiah 59:7.

The conspirators knew where Daniel lived, and they conspired to go to his home and catch him in the act of praying to God.  It would be difficult to universally enforce the new royal injunction regarding prayer, but the jealous leaders were not interested in the prayer habits of the masses.  They cared only about Daniel.  He was their target.  He was the one they wanted to bring down.

If they observed him from outside his own residence, which seems most likely, he may not have even known that they were there though he could have easily suspected it.  The implication is that they went immediately to the king with this information.

Since Daniel’s habit was to pray three times a day with his windows open, the conspirers needed only to observe whether Daniel maintained his practice.  Evidence of his thrice-daily prayer pattern would have been visible to onlookers below and, given his character, it was unlikely he would deny the charge if it were brought up.

Events were working just as they had planned.  The trap was ready to be sprung.  The high officials and satraps who had previously manipulated Darius now came to him and underhandedly inquired whether they correctly understood the injunction.  “Just so we know for sure, what was the injunction again?”

It may have been hard for them to keep their composure and their overeagerness likely gave away their glee in asking this question.  Notice how they presented the situation to the king as if they had nothing to do with it.

“Did you not sign an injunction, that anyone who makes petition to any god or man within thirty days except to you, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions?” (Dan. 6:11)

The king confirmed their understanding, insisting the injunction could not be revoked.  He affirmed that “the thing stands fast, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be revoked” (Dan. 6:12b).  Now, with the king’s repeated affirmation that the law was in place and could not be altered, they were ready to reveal the victim.

[In the book of Daniel, the Medes are mentioned before the Persians (c.f. Dan. 5:28; 6:8, 12, 15; 8:20) indicating that the events of this chapter transpired during the early stages of Medo-Persian alliance (539-537 B.C.), when the Medes still retained ascendancy over the Persians.  Likely in the first year of Darius’ reign. 

By the time the book of Esther was written (450-331 B.C.), the Persians had attained the more prominent role (as predicted by Dan. 8:3; 20) and are mentioned before the Medes (Est. , 1:3, 14, 18-19; 10:2).

There is historic evidence documenting the permanent nature of Persian law. Approximately one hundred years after the rule of Darius, the book of Esther provides further witness to the unchangeable nature Medo-Persian law (Est. 1:19; 8:8).]

Whereas in Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon the king reigned supreme, in Medo-Persia the king was subject to previously-established law and could not overturn it.  Some commentators see Darius’ inability to change the law—the fact that he was bound by his own law—as one aspect of the inferiority of the Medo-Persian kingdom (represented by silver, Dan. 2:32, 39) in comparison with the Neo-Babylonian kingdom (represented by gold, Dan. 2:32, 37).

According to the book of Esther, the king’s decree had to be put into writing and sealed before it was considered immutable: “You yourselves write a decree concerning the Jews, as you please, in the king’s name, and seal it with the king’s signet ring; for whatever is written in the king’s name and sealed with the king’s signet ring no one can revoke” (Est. 8:8).

It seems the king had been easily convinced to sign the decree.  It may have appealed to his pride (a common malady of kings in this book).  It was early in his reign over Babylon and the king likely viewed the decree as a means of asserting his authority over the populace, a quick way to guarantee their allegiance.

The law was irrevocable.  There was nothing King Darius could do to reverse it.

[“The rigidity of the Medo-Persian law was not always a bad thing.  Later, in the days of Ezra, the adversaries of Judah wrote letters to Ahasuerus, the Persian king, slandering the Jews and endeavoring to have a decree signed to present the Jews from continuing with the work of reconstruction.  They succeeded (Ezra 4:1-24).  Later, the decree of Cyrus was found the original document that led to the repatriation of the Jews in the Promised Land.  That changed the whole picture.  The original decree had to stand.  The law of the Medes and Persians guaranteed that.  Then Cyrus threw the weight of his administration behind the original decree and added clauses that greatly helped the continuation of the work in Israel (Ezra 5:1-6, 15) (John Phillips, Exploring the Book of Daniel, p. 103).]

No loophole in the ironclad law of the Medes and Persians could be found to release Daniel.

Having reminded the king of the irrevocability of his law, they then identified Daniel as a violator of that law.  The conspirators had the king right where they wanted him; it was time to expose Daniel as a lawbreaker: “Daniel, who is one of the exiles from Judah, pays no attention to you, O king, or the injunction you have signed, but makes his petition three times a day.”  

They showed no respect to Daniel who held a higher office than they did, but disdainfully called him “one of the exiles from Judah” (Dan. 6:13, niv). These proud men didn’t realize that God was with His exiled people and within the next twenty-four hours would vindicate His servant (Warren Wiersbe, Be Resolute, p. 78).

They accused Daniel of knowingly ignoring not only the injunction but the king himself.  In other words, this was not just a legal violation, but a personal offense.  Of course, these charges were not true.  Daniel intended no disrespect for the king, but he had a higher respect for God.  They accused Daniel of rebellion.  They thought they had “check mate.”

Notice that they described Daniel as “one of the exiles from Judah” (cf. 2:25; 5:13), rather than as a royal cabinet minister.  They imply that Daniel’s rebellion was due to him being a Jew.  “Now he’s showing his true nature by disloyalty to you, King Darius.”  Maybe they were implying that Darius had been foolish to appoint Daniel to such an exalted position.

And it was a subtle reminder that he was formally a slave.  He was “one of the exiles” from that country Nebuchadnezzar had defeated not once, not twice, but three times.  They were evidently hoping that Daniel’s Jewish nationality, religion and background would contribute to Darius’ distaste for him.  They also used almost the same words that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego’s accusers had used against them, when they charged Daniel with disregarding the king (cf. 3:12).

The other ministers may imply that as a foreigner he cannot really be trusted, or that as an exile his maintaining his alien religious practices is a political act, an act of rebellion; but the hint of anti-Semitism may be stronger here than it was in vv. 4–6

When God’s people adhere to God’s priorities, it can be misinterpreted as an intentional slight to secular positions of authority. It is not that we disregard others—Jesus commands us to serve others with humility and love our neighbors—but that we consider God (the Creator) to be on an entirely different plane than men (mere creatures).  We must please God and when that commitment collides with our allegiance to men, it is that allegiance to men that must give way.

When our lives reflect God’s priorities we can expect persecution in response.  God’s people in every age have been falsely accused, cruelly persecuted, and unjustly killed.  “Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution” (2 Tim. 3:12, NKJV).  The Puritan preacher Henry Smith said, “God examines with trials, the devil with temptations and the world with persecutions.”  Another Puritan, Richard Baxter, said that God’s people should be more concerned that they deserved the persecution than that they be delivered from it, because deserving it would be evidence of their faithfulness to the Lord.

We will never fit in—we are different, by God’s design.  He wants us to be different, to be set apart for His glory.  This was the very thing Haman despised and emphasized in his complaint concerning the Jews:

Then Haman said to King Ahasuerus, “There is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of your kingdom.  Their laws are different from those of every other people, and they do not keep the king’s laws, so that it is not to the king’s profit to tolerate them.” (Esther 3:8)

Notice how similar Haman’s accusations are:  they violate our laws and have no respect for us.

And that is the dilemma we face when we go against the flow of our culture.  We cannot live in ways that violate God’s law, no matter what our government says.  But we can disobey in a respectful way, in a way that shows that we still value the very people who are against us.

Our refusal to endorse the world’s ungodly programs and skewed priorities will inevitably be viewed as a threat to secular society.

“If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:19)

These men emphasized that Daniel “pays no attention to you, O king, or the injunction you have signed, but makes his petition three times a day.”  They bend the truth here.  Of the three charges, only the last one was actually true.  Even then, they had not seen him pray three times that day, but knowing his habit, they assumed, it based upon observing his one time of prayer that day.

So, the conspiracy was working, Daniel was trapped.  Darius was also trapped.  Maybe his response surprised the conspirators.  “Then the king, when he heard these words, was much distressed…” (Dan. 6:14a).  This is not the reaction they had hoped for.

The king is displeased: perhaps with Daniel, for ignoring his injunction; perhaps with the ministers, for engineering Daniel’s downfall; perhaps with himself, for being manipulated by them into becoming the victim of his own power and authority; perhaps with the situation in general into which he is now cornered (cf. Herod, Mark 6:26).

On the contrary, Darius “was much distressed and set his mind to deliver Daniel.”  He did not want Daniel to die, and he spent the rest of the day seeking a way to rescue him.  Like Nebuchadnezzar, Darius had a high regard for Daniel, probably an affection for him as well.  Darius had known Daniel too long and well to believe any such charges of disloyalty, even if brought by his officers.

So this greatly distressed him.  First, he didn’t want to lose Daniel, a man he greatly respected and trusted.  Second, he likely was distressed that he had made such a rash decision and that he had been shortsighted to sign the decree.  He realized he had been duped and railroaded into this decision.

While most versions present this as “distress within himself,” the KJV and NKJV translate “distressed with himself.”  That may be true as well.  If so, it is an admirable quality in King Darius.  Instead of blaming others, he knew that he was at fault.  Yes, he had been trapped, but he took responsibility for unwittingly making this law.

Darius realizes that he is trapped.  He cannot suspend the law for Daniel, else he risks the collapse of social order and perhaps even the state itself.

Darius will learn some things from this, as any leader should when they make decisions that backfire.  But we will look at that next week.