9/01/22 – Daniel 5:1-9

 

In this passage we continue to look at the events relating to the king and the royal palace at Babylon. While significant prophecy has already been studied (Ch.2 & Ch.4), much of it has centred around the life of the king and his interaction with Daniel and his three companions. Firstly, the king was Nebuchadnezzar (Ch.1-4) and now Belshazzar (Ch.5). Darius is also mentioned in relation to Daniel and the lions’ den in Ch.6.

However, from Daniel Ch.7 onward, the emphasis is on prophecy alone, much of it dealing with the end-times (the great tribulation and the times leading up to it).  

 

Daniel 5:1Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand.

 

greatrab (Aramaic) (great) Interestingly, this adjective, when used as a noun, means captain or chief (translated “the captain” in Daniel 2:14). It relates to the power and authority that comes from being a captain or chief.

feast – Derives from a word meaning “bread”.

lordsrabrᵉban (Aramaic) (lord; noble) This word is derived from rab which is translated “great” in this verse.

 

Belshazzar was drinking wine in view of all those thousand nobles and lords; that is, he would have been at a table (possibly on an elevated dais) where everyone could see him. It suggests that he was drinking much wine, probably to excess, setting an example for all others at the feast to follow. In a way, he was probably saying to do what he (the king) was doing. In those days it would have been bad etiquette to not follow the king’s example at such a feast. By imitating the king, they supposedly showed their respect for his authority.

 

History records that the last Chaldean king of Babylon was Nabonidus who reigned from 556 – 539 BC. Daniel 5:11 says that Belshazzar’s father was Nebuchadnezzar (also see Vs 2 below), yet the term merely signifies that Belshazzar was probably a descendant of Nebuchadnezzar. It is possible that it simply refers to Belshazzar being one of the rulers of Nebuchadnezzar’s empire.

 It is said that his mother was descended from Nebuchadnezzar but then no historical proof can be found for this. History is quite vague on many details of this time. History even suggests that Belshazzar may have merely claimed to have been descended from Nebuchadnezzar, yet was not actually related to him. Some suggest that Belshazzar was actually Nabonidus but it does appear that they were two separate people. It is likely that Nabonidus was the official king while Belshazzar did all the day-to-day business of running Babylon. Some historical sources suggest that Nabonidus was absent from Babylon a lot of the time during his rule from 556 – 539 BC (he liked archaeology and digs), and that he was absent on such travels when Cyrus took Babylon in 539 BC, returning some days later after the defeat of his kingdom. Nabonidus may have been Belshazzar’s father but this, though likely, cannot be proven. Belshazzar, therefore, probably acted as regent king, with the authority to act as king while Nabonidus was absent.

 

Daniel 5:2Belshazzar, whiles he tasted the wine, commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels which his father Nebuchadnezzar had taken out of the temple which [was] in Jerusalem; that the king, and his princes, his wives, and his concubines, might drink therein.

 

tasted – This is that word translated “a decree” in Daniel 4:6 where good judgment was apparently related to one’s ability to properly taste wine. Barnes says: “The word here rendered decree (טעם ṭe‛êm) means, commonly, "taste, flavor," as of wine; then "judgment, discernment, reason;" and then a judgment of a king, a mandate, edict.” Here in Vs 1 above, it would simply refer to the king perhaps tasting as a wine connoisseur would, judging it as to its quality. Probably Belshazzar’s “judgment” was related to how much pleasure he could derive from something. It was good if he could enjoy it!

 

the golden and silver vessels – Note Daniel 1:2And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his (Nebuchadnezzar’s) hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god.

Nebuchadnezzar had taken these vessels from the temple in Jerusalem to offer to “his god”. However, because they would have originally been consecrated to God for use in the temple (set apart for His service or made holy), Belshazzar would have been committing a great offence to God. That which has been offered on God’s altar may not be taken back again and used for profane purposes.

 

In Acts 5:1-11, Ananias and Sapphira promised to give to God the money they gained when they sold a piece of land. In spite of that promise, they withheld some of that money, and paid for this offence against God with their lives. Do not take back from God that which has been set apart for His use and service!

 

Do not promise to God that which you are not prepared to carry out. Note Jephthah’s rash promise to God.

Judges 11:30-31; 34-3530And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, 31Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.

34And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances: and she [was his] only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter. 35And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said, Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art one of them that trouble me: for I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and I cannot go back.

 

Belshazzar here was literally taking back from God that which had been set apart for God. This “stealing” from God would cost him his kingdom and his life!

 

princes – Translated “lords” in Vs 1 above.

 

wives – or “consorts”, ones with some legal status (which concubines apparently lacked). A concubine would have related to our “de facto” wives of today, biblically without legal standing. Children of “wives” might have legal rights (such as right to inheritance of the throne) that the children of “concubines” might lack.

his wives, and his concubines – It was common for those with power and authority (or even riches) in those days to take wives for themselves whenever they chose to.

While it was not customary then to have women at such feasts, possibly Belshazzar was boasting about himself with his wives and concubines, noting that none of the others appears to have had their wives and/or concubines present.

 

Note that Solomon’s downfall into the sin that marked the end of his life was largely caused by his worldly desire for the pleasures of whatever woman he wanted.

1 Kings 11:1-81But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, [and] Hittites; 2Of the nations [concerning] which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: [for] surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love. 3And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart. 4For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, [that] his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as [was] the heart of David his father. 5For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. 6And Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord, and went not fully after the Lord, as [did] David his father. 7Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that [is] before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon. 8And likewise did he for all his strange wives, which burnt incense and sacrificed unto their gods.

 

As Belshazzar did, so must his people do likewise! If Belshazzar desires to sin, then his people must be made to sin with him. To not do so could have cost them their noble positions and even their lives.

 

Daniel 5:3Then they brought the golden vessels that were taken out of the temple of the house of God which [was] at Jerusalem; and the king, and his princes, his wives, and his concubines, drank in them.

 

So they brought the vessels as commanded in Vs 2 above. It doesn’t mention the silver vessels here but we can assume that they were brought as well.

And the king drank from one and all those present at the feast also drank from them (in imitation of the king as they were required to do). So many who sin great sins want others also to join them in their sin. So many not only greatly sin themselves but are also responsible for leading others around them into sin. It is true that we can do nothing without it having some effect on the lives of others around us. Therefore we are to abstain, not just from sinful activities, but from all activities that might seem to be sinful (or could cause others to be led into sin, even if what we do is not sinful in itself).

1 Thessalonians 5:22Abstain from all appearance of evil. (where “appearance” means “the external or outward appearance” and is derived from a word meaning to see or to know)

 

Daniel 5:4They drank wine, and praised the gods of gold, and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone.

 

This act of using God’s consecrated (set apart as holy) vessels to worship all their false gods must be seen as the turning point in this passage. The next verse commences with “In the same hour”, signifying that what happened in Vs 5 below was directly connected with the actions in Vs 4. It was when those vessels were profaned in this way that God acted by bringing judgment upon all present. Of course, it was Belshazzar who cops the brunt of this judgment, but his lords also, and all of Babylon, will be hurt by this judgment, particularly those nobles who might no longer have any jurisdiction once another army with another ruler took over their city (along with all its empire). Note that Babylon was literally the household of the empire.

Daniel 4:30The king spake, and said, Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty? (where “the house of the kingdom” means that the city of Babylon was itself the royal palace of this mighty empire)

 

Daniel 5:5In the same hour came forth fingers of a man’s hand, and wrote over against the candlestick upon the plaister of the wall of the king’s palace: and the king saw the part of the hand that wrote.

 

In that same hour – or “At that moment” or “Immediately”. Thus it is a consequence of the unholy use of God’s holy vessels.

fingers of a man’s hand – Not necessarily the whole hand but at least the fingers of that hand were visible. It was enough to see that it was part of a hand.

over against – or “in front of”, or “near” or “opposite”. Here it would imply that the writing was on that part of the wall that was lit by the candlestick so that it would be clearly seen.

plaister – or “plaster”

part of the hand – Literally “palm of the hand”

 

The king saw that part of the hand that wrote; he didn’t necessarily see all the hand. It must have been visible to others also (probably to all at that feast) because the wise men (Vss 7 & 8 below) were able to see it (but could not read it – Vs 8 below).

 

Daniel 5:6Then the king’s countenance was changed, and his thoughts troubled him, so that the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote one against another.

 

countenance – literally “brightness” or “splendour”. The same word is translated “brightness” in Daniel 4:36aAt the same time my reason returned unto me; and for the glory of my kingdom, mine honour and brightness returned unto me;

 

the king’s countenance was changed – He lost his appearance of vigour; we may assume that his face became pallid (pale) with fear. He no longer looked like the confident king who had been just before drinking with them with a face representing his enjoyment of pleasure.

 

His thoughts frightened, alarmed and dismayed him, so much that his knees knocked together. He trembled so much that he was unable to sit (or stand) still. The great ruler of Babylon is the picture of terror here.

 

Daniel 5:7The king cried aloud to bring in the astrologers, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers. [And] the king spake, and said to the wise [men] of Babylon, Whosoever shall read this writing, and shew me the interpretation thereof, shall be clothed with scarlet, and [have] a chain of gold about his neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.

 

shall read – or “proclaim” or “declare” That is, to declare or to proclaim what it means (its interpretation).

 

the third ruler – Clearly Belshazzar was not the second ruler in this empire, so it must mean a third ruler along with two others. Belshazzar is most likely ruling when Nabonidus is absent; thus two rulers already. Therefore this could add another ruler, a third one, at this time, to rule along with the other two, or else to rule as the third highest in the land (after Nabonidus and Belshazzar).  Barnes says: “The Chaldee is, "and shall rule third in the kingdom," and the idea would seem rather to be that he should be of the third rank or grade in office.” Cambridge refers to it as “and shall rule as one of three in the kingdom”.

 

While magicians are called at previous times, they do not appear to be called this time. Either it may be assumed that they were called (as one of the Chaldeans) – most likely, or perhaps they were not called for some reason this time - unlikely.

Daniel 2:2Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, for to shew the king his dreams. So they came and stood before the king.

Daniel 4:6-76Therefore made I a decree to bring in all the wise [men] of Babylon before me, that they might make known unto me the interpretation of the dream. 7Then came in the magicians, the astrologers, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers: and I told the dream before them; but they did not make known unto me the interpretation thereof.

 

scarlet – The word used is actually purple or red-purple. In those days scarlet was only worn by important people, second only to purple (which was the colour reserved for kings and emperors). Here, “clothed with scarlet” literally means being clothed with purple, thus signifying that the one who could read and interpret this writing would be given a position somewhat equal to the king or emperor himself.

 

a chain of gold – This was also a symbol of great authority, often worn by those who were granted the authority of the king to act on his behalf. The giving of the king’s own ring also signified such authority vested in the person receiving the ring. Note that Pharaoh gave Joseph both his ring and a gold chain.

Genesis 41:41-4241And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt. 42And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph’s hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;

 

Daniel 5:8Then came in all the king’s wise [men]: but they could not read the writing, nor make known to the king the interpretation thereof.

 

they could not read the writing – It is not made clear why they couldn’t read the writing, yet it is also apparent that they were able to see the writing on the wall. It has been suggested that it may have been in characters that they were unfamiliar with, or it may have been written in a language that they didn’t know, or that the words were written in such a way that made them difficult to comprehend. However, it is clear that the main reason they were not able to read the writing would have been that it was for Daniel alone to be given the task of being God’s spokesman in proclaiming to Belshazzar his profane and blasphemous actions. It had to be a man of God who spoke God’s judgment upon the king here. Therefore it is quite possible that God simply withheld the ability of the wise men to read the writing in order that Daniel would be the one chosen to speak for God.

And, of course, not being able to read the writing automatically made it impossible for the wise men to interpret it. Thus Daniel being the only one able to read the writing meant that he was also the only one able to interpret it.

 

As on the previous occasions, all his wise men are unable to read the writing nor to interpret it. Once again this sets the scene for Daniel (as God’s spokesman) to give God’s answer. We’ll look further at this aspect next time.

 

Note that the wise men were not threatened with fire consequences if they failed as Nebuchadnezzar did.

Daniel 2:5-65The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me: if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill. 6But if ye shew the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore shew me the dream, and the interpretation thereof.

 

Daniel 5:9Then was king Belshazzar greatly troubled, and his countenance was changed in him, and his lords were astonied.

 

In Vs 6 above the king’s countenance was changed and his thoughts troubled him so that his knees knocked together with fear. This was before he called all his wise men to tell him what it was about. Now, after his wise men have utterly failed to produce any answers, he is not just “troubled” (Vs 6 above) but “greatly troubled”! Previously his countenance was changed (that is, his face revealed the fear he felt) but here it is “changed in him” (literally “changed upon him”). This does suggest an even greater change in his countenance than before in Vs 6.

If Belshazzar was worried before his wise men were called, then he is much more worried now, more afraid, more panic, more terror, in fact, so much so that his lords (who were at his feast) were astonished (perplexed). This was not the king they knew; such a man could not possibly be their king if such an event gave him such terror.

Ellicott says: “The terror of Belshazzar and his lords is caused by the impression that the inability of the wise men to read the inscription is the portent of some terrible calamity.

 

Do not ever consider that this life is there to be enjoyed at all costs. The truth is that this life is merely a preparation for the eternal world to come. If you wish to enjoy life for your time here on earth, then you may forfeit your option for an eternal life in heaven. Belshazzar considered that the enjoyment of this world to be the best that life could offer, yet in the end it destroyed him.

John 12:25He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.

Belshazzar loved his life yet lost it. He failed to properly prepare for the eternal world.

Matthew 16:24-2524Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any [man] will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.

Look at Demas as a NT example, Demas who loved this present world (too) much (2 Timothy 4:10 – “For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world ….”) and consequently departed from ministry with Paul. “Demas” derives from a word (demos) meaning the common mass of people in the world. Demas is said to mean “governor of the people” or “popular (with people)”. To be popular or a leader of people is more important to some than to be a servant of God. But for the Christian it is better to “be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness” (Psalm 84:10).

 

To the Daniel page

 

To the New Testament page

 

To the Old Testament page

 

To Messages and Teachings page

 

To Sermons & Messages page

 

To Sermons by Date Index

 

To Calvinist Heresies page

 

To Posts / Blog / News page

 

List of all my posts on this site

 

To Comments page

 

Hoppers Crossing Christian Church homepage