Foreword:
The Book of Daniel forms part of the “Writings” in the Hebrew Bible, but is grouped under the “Prophets” in our Bible. The name of Daniel means “God is (my) Judge”. He was a young nobleman of Judah taken to Babylon in the first deportation (605 B.C.). The book covers the historical period of the Babylonian Empire till the first years of the Persian era. Daniel most likely lived to his eighties. The book’s significance goes beyond this historical period within which the sovereignty of God is demonstrated, as it contains prophecies that were fulfilled in the time (and in the person) of Jesus Christ and those that will pertain to the End-time. It is the amazing accuracy of the prophecies which covered the next few hundred years after Daniel that has caused many modern scholars to date the book to the 2nd century B.C. However, in spite of confessing their disbelief in predictive prophecies, they formulate arguments based on the extensive use of Aramaic (2:4b – 7:28), the supposed used of Greek terms (for musical instruments) and other so-called evidence to conclude that the book of Daniel could not have been composed by Daniel, and certainly not during the sixth century B.C. Allow me simply to quote from Goldingay who, in my opinion, gives a fair-minded view on this issue as follows:
“The Aramaic of the book…is a form of Imperial Aramaic, the international language of the Middle East through much of OT times…It contains a fair number of Akkadian and Persian words and in chapter 3, three Greek ones and matches the stories’ setting in the eastern dispersion. It is distinguishable from the later Aramaic of Qumran but might be dated anywhere between the late sixth and early second centuries, B.C., though the spelling may have been updated later in the light of the ongoing development of the living language…The Greek words hardly necessitate a very late date, given the spread of Greek culture in the East, even in the Palestine.”
(Word Biblical Commentary, Goldingay, xxv)
The reading of the book of Daniel is key to the understanding of the book of Revelation. As one source puts it, “Material from every chapter of Daniel is either quoted or alluded to in Revelation” (The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible), and it provides a link to the gospel account as well — Luke begins his gospel account with the appearance of Gabriel at the time of the evening sacrifice; Mark begins his gospel account with Jesus proclaiming that the rule of God which Daniel promised is at hand; and John expands on the message of resurrection in Daniel 12.
Unlike the study of other books in the Bible, each day in our Devotion Guide we shall cover the entirety of each incident as much as possible, thus covering a larger section each day.
(1) From the perspective of the Jews, like Daniel, what do the events of vv. 1-2 signify to you — the defeat of the nation, the destruction of the temple with even its sacred articles carried off to the temple of Babylonian idols and yourself being exiled?
(2) What could you look forward to as an exile? What could you do for the Lord and for your country?
(3) What might be the purpose of Nebuchadnezzar’s policy of vv. 3-5?
(4) What might Daniel be like in modern-day terms since he met the criteria set out by the king?
(5) The meanings of the new (Babylonian) names given to the four Jewish men probably are:
- Belteshazzar: Bel (i.e. Marduk) will protect
- Shadrach: Command (or inspired) of Aku, the Sumerian moon god;
- Meshach: Belonging to Aku: and
- Abednego: Servant of Nego (likely corruption of the word, Nebo, a Babylonian god)
What might be the purposes of giving them such new names? Did it work?
(6) Daniel knew that the royal food and wine would have been sacrificed to their gods, but as exiles did they really have a choice? Was he prepared to face the consequence of such a daring request?
(7) Was the amazing outcome a result of a vegetarian diet or a miracle from God?
(8) What lesson can you learn from Daniel and his friends in this respect?
(9) What role were Daniel and his friends being trained for? As God-fearing Jews, what kind of an environment were Daniel and his friends being put into by God? What particular challenges would they face?
(10) Can you recall from your study of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, when was the first year of King Cyrus? How long a period of time had Daniel remained there (“there” likely means in Babylon)?
(11) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
我們會在本年這最後兩個星期研讀舊約但以理書。請慢慢細讀每天指定的經文至少兩遍，然後反複思考問題。
前言：
但以理書在希伯來文聖經被編在《著作書》(Writings) 內，即《律法書》和《先知書》以外的部分。在基督教的聖經中，是被列入「先知書」中。但以理這名字的意思是 “神是(我的) 審判”。在巴比倫攻陷耶路撒冷時(主前605年)，他是第一批被擄的猶大國民中一位年輕貴族。這卷書記載由巴比倫王國時代至波斯王國初期的事蹟。故此，一般相信但以理是活到八十多歲。不過，這卷書的重要性是在乎顯出神在掌管人類的歷史遠超上述的年代，因為其中的預言提到基督耶穌的年代和在祂身上的應驗，更涉及末世的。由於這書卷對巴比倫和及後數百年歷史的預言都非常準確地應驗了，不少新派學者(可惜也包括不少現代福音派的學者) ，因不相信預言可以這樣的應驗，就借藉眾多的所謂證據，認為這書並非是但以理所寫的，也非主前六世紀的著作，而是主前二世紀的著作。這些所謂證據包括書中2:4下至7:28是以亞蘭文寫的、其中三種樂器的名稱是希臘文等等。容許我在此，簡單引用解經Goldingay對這些批評學論據的回應，供大家思想：
「這書中的亞蘭文……是屬於宮廷的亞蘭文，是舊約時代中東一帶的國際言語……書中也有一些Akkadia和波斯文字，並在第三章引用了三個希臘的名詞，(這些) 都與所載事蹟的東方背景吻合。那些亞蘭文與在昆侖/
但以理書對我們能明白啟示錄尤為重要。像Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible所言“但以理書的每一章都被啟示錄引用或提及” 。不但如此，路加福音一開始，就提到在獻早/晚祭時，同樣有天使迦百列的顯現；馬可福音也在開始時，也論到主耶穌宣告但以理所預言的神國度的臨近；約翰福音也清楚的論及但以理書第十二章中的復活。
因這書卷多是很詳盡的記錄各事蹟，我們會先盡量把每個事蹟完整的來讀，再加以靈修反思。故此每日研讀的經文篇幅會比平時較長。
但以理書1:1-21
(1) 像但以理一樣的猶太人，他們會對1:1-2所記載的事情有什麼感想：特別聖殿被毁、聖物被擄到偶像的殿中、自己在被擄的人當中？
(2) 作為俘虜，你會怎樣看前景？你能為神、為國家作什麼？
(3) 尼布甲尼撒在1:3-5所提的政策有什麼作用？
(4) 按王所定被選拔的資格，以今天而論，我們可以用什麼人與但以理相比？
(5) 這四位猶太人得的新(巴比倫) 名字，意思大概是：
a. 伯提沙撒： “伯/Bel” —即巴比倫的神—會保護；
b. 沙得拉： “亞古/Aku” —即月神—所命令或啟示；
c. 米煞：屬於 “亞古” 的；
d. 亞伯尼歌： “尼歌/Nego or Nebo” —即巴比倫另一位神—的僕人。
這樣給他們改名的主因何在？
(6) 巴比倫宮廷的膳食固然是與從廟宇拜過偶像的祭物有關。但作為被擄的人，他們可有選擇的餘地？他們這樣的要求，是否沒有想及可能帶來的後果？
(7) 他們這樣奇特的健壯，是因吃素餐之故，還是神的作為？
(8) 在此，你能從但以理和三友身上學到什麼？
(9) 但以理和三友受訓是為要承擔什麼重要的位份？作為敬虔的猶太人，神放他們在什麼環境中？他們要面對什麼特別的挑戰？
(10) 我們剛剛讀完以斯拉記和尼希米記。你還記得古列元年是歷史中那一年？換句話說，但以理至少活了多久？
(11) 請停下來思想今日對你主要的提醒是什麼？你可以怎樣應用在自己的生命中？
“But Daniel resolved not to defile himself with the royal food and wine...” (Dan. 1:8)
From the time of children’s Sunday School, the book of Daniel has been one of the most intriguing books in the Bible to me — the stories of Daniel in the lions’ den and the golden statue of Nebuchadnezzar left a deep impression in my mind. But since I accepted Christ as my Lord and Savior at the end of my high school years, it has been its spiritual lessons that continue to draw me to this book, especially the lives of Daniel and his three friends whose lives, to me, define what true faith in God is.
I have no idea how young Daniel and his three friends were when they were chosen to be trained in the language and literature of the Babylonians in order that they might enter into the king’s service. But to be offered such an opportunity was like being recruited into Harvard — a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, not to mention that the alternative would be to remain as exiles in a foreign land, living under oppression.
However, Daniel and his friends did not allow such an opportunity of promotion and affirmation of their smartness to get to their heads. They knew who they were — part of a people that had sinned against their Lord and were receiving the just punishment of God in being exiles in a foreign land. Their hearts were with their homeland, and their spirits remained steadfastly devoted to their God. Their present demise only served to heighten their sense of loyalty and repentance to Yahweh. This was fully played out in their refusal to be defiled by the royal food and wine.
It is not hard to understand that, given the pagan practices of the time in Mesopotamia, the royal food and wine would be involved in the sacrificial rites of the gods of the Babylonians, and the consumption of such would amount to participation at the sacrifices of these pagans. But to refuse to consume the food and wine as provided by the king would amount to more than political suicide. Given the ruthless nature of Nebuchadnezzar, they could be executed for their defiance:
- Should they not just go with the flow? God should understand that as exiles they really did not have a choice?
- They could first establish their credibility before the king and then gradually refrain from eating or drinking the royal meal;
- Such alienation would hurt their cause, if they wished to influence their peers to know the truthfulness of their religion!
As it turned out, their commitment to honor God and not to defile themselves paid dividends. God indeed honors those who honor Him, just as He promises in 1 Samuel 2:30.
「但以理卻立志不以王的膳和王所飲的酒玷污自己，所以求太監長容他不玷污自己。」 (但1:8)
自從小時在主日學讀到但以理書以來，這書是聖經中最吸引我的書卷之一；尤其是但以理在獅子坑和三友不拜王的金像的故事，給我留下很深的印象。自我在高中時正式接受主之後，這書卷中人物的屬靈榜樣成為更大的吸引，因為但以理與三友的生命，給我立下真正信仰的定義。
我不曉得但以理與三友實質上有多年輕，但被選中，受巴比倫最好的教育，更得以在結業時，進入宮廷侍立，就好像現在得進哈佛就讀一樣—是千載難逢的機會。對於身為被擄的他們，就更是喜出望外的好消息，因為這是走出過著被欺壓的人生的良機。
但是，但以理與三友卻絕對沒有被這高升、被抬舉的機會沖昏了頭腦。他們仍深知自己是誰—是得罪了神的子民的一分子、現在的被擄是神的審判的後果。因此，他們的心仍屬耶路撒冷、他們的靈仍是以耶和華為首。他們身處巴比倫更提高了他們需悔改、忠於神的心。這些心志就在拒用王膳之事上表明出來。
他們當然是知道王膳是來自於偶像廟宇的敬拜，因此，用王膳就肯定會玷污自己。但拒絕用王指派的飲食，豈是政治前途盡毀這樣簡單！按尼布甲尼撒的殘暴本性，這一定會招至殺身之禍：
- 為何他們不忍辱負重？神豈是不知道他們沒有選擇的處境嗎？
- 現時尚未有機會顯示才華，對宮廷沒有什麼貢獻；倒不如稍後，待討好了膳長才作此要求吧。
- 這樣的標奇立異，豈不引起同僚的反感嗎？這樣孤立自己豈是神的心意呢！
我不曉得這四個年輕人有否討論到以上的利害關係，但我們卻知道他們終於作出什麼的決定，更知道他們這樣的尊重神，結果帶來的是神對他們的尊重；正如神在撒母耳記上2:30所言。
(1) The king’s demand seemed absurd at first sight. However, if the interpretation was to be true, it had to have come from a divine source. Was his request to prove the divinity of the source too unreasonable? Why or why not?
(2) What might be the possible reason that Daniel and his friends were not summoned before the king at all for such an important occasion?
(3) Why would the king grant Daniel time?
(4) What did Daniel and his friends do during the time granted by the king?
(5) Judging from his praise to God in vv. 20-23, do you think Daniel expected God to reveal the king’s dream to him? Why or why not?
(6) Reflect on his praise further and see what Daniel has learned about God through
a. His answer to his prayer;
b. The contents of the dream revealed to him.
(7) Before giving his answer, why did Daniel seize the chance to give credit to God and deflect any glory to himself?
(8) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
請慢慢細讀每天指定的經文至少兩遍，然後反複思考問題。
(1) 尼布甲尼撒對術士們的要求，看來頂不合理。但若然能真正解夢，豈不是一定出於神靈嗎？故此，他要求解夢者能知夢，是否真不合理？為什麼？
(2) 你以為眾哲士被召來解夢時，竟沒有但以理與三友的份兒，何故？
(3) 為何王允許但以理寬限的請求？
(4) 在這寬限期間，但以理與三友作了什麼？
(5) 按但以理在2:20-23對神的讚美，你認為但以理以為神一定會給他智慧，讓他知夢並能解夢嗎？為什麼？
(6) 請細思他的讚美歌：藉著經歷神答應禱告和認識夢的內容，這讚美反映出但以理對神加深了什麼的認識？
(7) 他在為王解夢前所說的話主要強調什麼？用意何在？
(8) 今日對你主要的提醒是什麼？你可以怎樣應用在自己的生命中？
“As for me, this mystery has been revealed to me, not because I have greater wisdom than other living men, but so that you, O king, may know the interpretation and that you may understand what went through your mind.” (Dan. 2:30)
Christianity stands out as a “Revealed Religion” to distinguish it from other religions or religious systems which claim no origin outside the created order; such may be described as “man-made”. As a result, allow me to quote from Gatiss:
“Christian theology claims not to be the accumulation of ancient wisdom — mankind's best thoughts on the topics of the day, nor is it ‘an exercise in religious self-expression’…To claim Christianity is a revealed religion is to set it apart from the Aristotelian idea of an inactive God, discovered through argumentation. Usually, it also refers to an active deity involved in a purposeful act of revealing, rather than a passive God who allows himself/itself to be revealed. Integral to the Christian claim is that God himself is both the agent and the object of revelation.” (Lee Gatiss, Is Christianity a Revealed Religion)
This was exactly the point Daniel tried to make as he was about to tell Nebuchadnezzar not only the interpretation of his dream, but the content of his dream as well.
“As for me, this mystery has been revealed to me, not because I have greater wisdom than other living men, but so that you, O king, may know the interpretation that went through your mind.” (Dan. 2:30)
As wise and well educated as he was, he maintained that such knowledge about God and God’s plan cannot come from human wisdom. It is absolutely the prerogative of God to reveal or not to reveal. I believe that as much as Daniel and his three friends believed that God would reveal the dream and its interpretation to them or one of them, they knew it was ultimately God’s prerogative.
In the same vein, our Lord rebukes
those who think that by human wisdom they can know the mystery of God,
“I praise you Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and revealed them to little children. “ (Matt. 11:25)
Indeed, God has chosen to reveal to Daniel not because he is wise, but because he, like a child, acknowledges his utter ignorance before God and expresses his total dependency on God.
「 至於那奧祕的事顯明給我，並非因我的智慧勝過一切活人，乃為使王知道夢的講解和心裡的思念。」 (但2:30)
基督教是一個啟示的宗教，這是與世上其他宗教極重要的分別。其他的宗教純粹是出於人的範疇、人的猜測。Gatiis就啟示宗教的特性作出以下的分析：
「基督教的神學(因而) 宣稱自己並非是古人智慧的累積—並非是人類對某些事情上思想的精髓；也不是宗教自我表達的操練……稱基督教為啟示宗教是指出它是有別於亞理斯多德的主張，他以神為靜止的，是可以經(哲理) 辯論發現的。基督教稱有位主動的神，刻意的向人作出啟示的舉動，而非消極的被人發現。基督教宣稱，神自己是那啟示者，也是啟示的目標。」
(Lee Gatiss, Is Christianity a Revealed Religion).
這正是但以理向尼布甲尼撒說明夢的真相之前，要弄清楚的。他說：「只有一位在天上的神能顯明奧秘的……至於那奧祕的事顯明給我，並非因我的智慧勝過一切活人，乃為使王知道夢的講解和心裡的思念」 (2:28, 30) 。
是的，智慧如但以理，也受了高深的教育，他仍堅持屬於神的奧秘和神的心意，不是人的智慧能參透，完完全全是神的主權所定，是否向人啟示出來。我相信，就是但以理與其三友，一方面在禱告時有信心神會向他們啟示；但同時他們是知道，最後的決定完全屬於神。
照樣，我們的主也曾斥責那些以為憑人的聰明通達就能夠認識神的人：「父阿，天地的主，我感謝你！因為你將這些事向聰明通達人就藏起來，向嬰孩就顯出來。」(太11:26)
是的，神選擇向但以理啟示祂的奧秘，不是因為他的聰明智慧，而是因他像嬰孩一樣，承認自己在神面前的無知，也向神表達他完全的信靠。
As a devotional study, we will not concern ourselves with all the debates regarding the identification of the world powers depicted by the statue, but the dream obviously portrays human kingdoms and contrasts them to the Kingdom of Heaven that will finally come and destroy all human dominions.
Irrespective of variations in our application of the dream to history, the following are worth noting:
(1) “The God of heaven has given you dominion and power and glory; in your hands He has placed mankind and the beasts of the field and the birds of the air.” (2:37-38)
a. Does this statement apply only to the Golden Head, Nebuchadnezzar?
b. What is the responsibility given by God to each of the world powers?
(2) What might the decrease in the value or preciousness of the metal in the successive powers indicate?
(3) List the features of the rock, the manner it crushes the statue and the kingdom it will become. What does it reveal about Christ, His coming and the “End-time”?
(4) What did Daniel emphasize in the conclusion of his interpretation in v. 45? (Also look up Rev. 22:6.)
(5) How did the king respond to Daniel’s interpretation and why?
(6) What did he learn about the God of Daniel?
(7) What was God’s purpose in giving Nebuchadnezzar such a dream? Does it necessarily mean that Nebuchadnezzar believed in the God of Daniel? Why or why not?
(8) With Daniel being exalted to such a high position within such a world power:
a. What might it mean to his people in exile?
b. What might be the message to them?
c. What might be the message to us today?
(9) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
Note: To many conservative scholars, Daniel’s interpretation, without being hard-pressed, does reflect the actual course of history following the Babylonian dynasty:
a. The Golden Head, as Daniel explains is that of Babylon.
b. The Silver chest and arms — likely Medo-Persia
c. The Bronze belly and thigh — likely Greece
d. The Iron legs — likely Rome with its Eastern and Western Empires
e. The mixed iron and clay feet and toes: This is the less certain part which could depict the diversified rulers and dynasties that governed the Roman Empire or the various world powers that would eventually terminate at the complete rule by Christ.
請慢慢細讀每天指定的經文至少兩遍，然後反複思考問題。
因為是靈修式讀經，我們不會花時間研究那眾多有關這大像所預言的歷史應驗的辯論；但這夢確是論到世上霸權的興衰，並世上霸權終於消失，為神國所取代。
(1) 請細讀2:37-38這句話：
a. 這句話是否單單適用於尼布甲尼撒王呢？
b. 神既是那賦予權柄者，祂同時賦予君王什麼責任？
(2) 這像從頭到腳，顯示的金屬各有不同，可有什麼特別意思？
(3) 請留意對「石塊」的詳細形容和描述：它對末世和基督的再來給我們有什麼提醒？
(4) 但以理以什麼來結束他的講論？與啟示錄22:6有什麼相似之處？
(5) 王對但以現的講解作出怎樣回應？為何會如此？
(6) 他對但以理的神增加了什麼認識？
(7) 為何神要給尼布甲尼撒這個夢？王是否因此相信耶和華神？為什麼？
(8) 但以理既得高位，作了這世上霸權首府的總理：
a. 這對被擄的猶太人有什麼影響？
b. 對他們有什麼信息？
c. 對我們今天的信息又是什麼？
(9) 今日對你主要的提醒是什麼？你可以怎樣應用在自己的生命中？
註：較保守的解經家一般認為這大像所預言的歷史，非常吻合自巴比倫朝代以來的世界史：
1. 金頭：正如但以理所指出，就是巴比倫
2. 銀胸與臂：是瑪代、波斯；
3. 鋼腹與腰：是希臘；
4. 鐵腿：是(東、西羅馬)
5. 半泥半鐵腳：可能是指衰落、分裂的羅馬，或是羅馬之後至今的世上政權，最後引至基督再來完全掌權的時候。
“Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell prostrate before Daniel and paid him honor and ordered that an offering and incense be presented to him.” (Dan. 2:46)
The king’s reaction to Daniel’s revelation of his dream and its meaning is not totally unexpected, because it had to be divine revelation. Even the astrologers admitted to the king that “No one can reveal it to the king except the gods…” (2:11) and Daniel further made plain who this God is, the God in heaven (2:28).
But I suspect Nebuchadnezzar was more absorbed by the dream and its interpretation in that he was the golden head of the statue. He was the king of kings who had been given “dominion and power and might and glory”, and in whose hand had been placed “mankind and the beasts of the field and the birds of the air” (2:37-38).
As much as he humbled himself before Daniel and acknowledged his God as the God of gods and the Lord of kings, he did not necessarily submit to Him. The fact that he went on to make an image for all to worship (in chapter 3), whether an image of one of his gods or himself, clearly indicated that he had maintained the worship of his gods and continued with his ruthless rule.
One wonders why he would not worship Yahweh alone after such an extraordinary act of God in giving him the dream and enabling Daniel, and Daniel only, to reveal its meaning to him.
I believe it might have something to do with his system of belief or more accurately, the system of pagan belief. In the pagan belief systems of his time, the gods are deities who do not necessarily care about the affairs of humankind; even if they do, they do not take too active a part in it. While they might punish and reward people based on their deeds, they can be swayed by their allegiance, most notably by their building of great temples and their offering of lavish sacrifices. The way Nebuchadnezzar treated Daniel was his way of expressing his utmost respect for his God. However, it does not necessarily translate into any ethical behavioral change, nor a rejection of all other gods, since He is “the God of all gods” (2:47).
Furthermore, apart from ethnic pride, it was not easy for Nebuchadnezzar to get rid of his “tribal” concepts, and thus he saw Yahweh still as the God of Daniel, for he referred to Him before Daniel as “your God” (2:47).
This reminds me of the mistake I made in not taking into consideration any pagan belief system as I led someone with traditional ancestral worship background to Christ. Once she was converted to Christ, she prayed to the Lord Jesus instead of her other gods, except that she prayed to Jesus by burning incense. Based on her pagan belief, that was the only way she knew how to pray all her life before her conversion. Once we found out, we quickly taught her the proper way to pray, and that is in spirit and in truth.
「當時，尼布甲尼撒王俯伏在地，向但以理下拜，並且吩咐人給他奉上供物和香品。」 (但2:46)
尼布甲尼撒聽完神藉著但以理述說夢的本身和夢的講解之後，所作出的反應是可以了解的。就如那些術士所言，「除了不與世人同居的神明，沒有人在王面前能說出來」(2:11) 。所以王知道但以理所說的肯定是神的啟示。但以理也趁機向他介紹這位天上的神(2:28) 。
可惜的是，我相信尼布甲尼撒在整個事情中，最著意的，也是最自鳴得意的，就是他自己是那大像的金頭，並且「神已將國度，權柄，能力，尊榮都賜給」他了，還有「凡世人所住之地的走獸，並天空的飛鳥，祂都交付」他手！(2:37-38)
所以，雖然他確實謙卑自己，甚至向但以理下拜，更稱神為「萬神之神，萬王之王」，但這並非是說，他從此就轉向敬拜這位神。及後在第三章我們讀到他竟鑄立金像，強迫所有人去敬拜它，就證明他仍是敬拜自己民族的神靈和偶像；絕對沒有改變他的殘暴性情。
我們不禁的問：為何有這奇妙的經歷，藉著夢的講解，知道那位才是至大至高的神，仍不去信祂？為何仍不去拜祂？
我相信這是與古時神靈的敬拜和信仰的模式有關。一般古代信奉神靈的觀念，是以為神靈在天，不會理會俗世人間的事情。就算間中有參與，也非長久的所為。對，這些神靈會賞善懲惡，但也可因人的供奉，特別是為神靈建造廟宇和獻上祭物所討好的。尼布甲尼撒這樣待但以理，也是出於這些觀念，向他和他的神表示敬重，但與單單信奉祂和引至行為的改變則絕對無關。他對神的觀念仍停留在「萬神之神」的觀念上，因此他仍以祂為但以理(意即猶太人) 的神；他是照舊供奉自己(即巴比倫人) 的神。
這對我們有機會跟拜偶像和其他神靈的人談道的人，是一個很好的提醒。我們要用時間去了解他們的神觀，不然我們就是說服了他們，知道我們所信的主是至大至高的神，他們可能包括基督耶穌為他們信奉的神之一，也可能仍以供奉其他神靈的心態來信耶穌。
(1) Now Nebuchadnezzar built an enormous statue of gold:
a. So, what impact might the dream in chapter 2 and its interpretation have had on the king?
b. Did it help that the king had humbled himself and submitted to the “God of gods” (2:46-47)?
c. The Bible does not say in whose image this statue was made. Do you think it was made in the image of one of the Babylonian gods, or in the image of Nebuchadnezzar? Why?
(2) The building of such a huge statue obviously took a long time. The three friends of Daniel would also have had ample time to consider what to do at the dedication ceremony, which they were obliged to attend, due to their positions.
a. What might they have done to prepare for this occasion?
b. What are the pros and cons that they might have considered?
c. What was the basis of their final decision?
(3) What official positions did the three friends of Daniel hold at the time and who were the people who came forward to denounce them? What might be their motive?
(4) Although the king was filled with rage, did he simply go ahead and have the three friends thrown into the fire?
(5) Why did the king make such an exception and give them a second chance? Did he have any choice?
(6) Although he was giving them a second chance, how did he end his warning? Did he mean what he said? Why or why not?
(7) The reply of the three friends’ was one that defines what true biblical faith is:
a. Did they believe in the power of God to rescue them from the fiery furnace?
b. Did they believe that God would rescue them from the fiery furnace?
c. What if God, in His sovereign will, chose not to rescue them? Would they renounce their faith in God? Why not?
d. How did their decision define what true biblical faith is?
(8) What about your faith in God? — Is yours one that depends on whether or not God will answer your prayer, especially in rescuing you or your loved one from death?
(9) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
請慢慢細讀每天指定的經文至少兩遍，然後反複思考問題。
(1) 尼布甲尼撒鑄造了一個巨型金像：
a. 你以為鑄造這金像與第二章的夢和其講解有關嗎？為什麼？
b. 先前的夢有否叫王謙卑下來，信服他所稱的「萬神之神」(2:47) ？
c. 聖經沒有說這像是誰的像。你認為它是一座神像，還是尼布甲尼撒自己的像？為什麼？
(2) 鑄造這像一定需要一段時日，但以理與三友一定有時間思量對策，怎樣面對這「開光」儀式：
a. 那三友怎樣作好準備去面對這不能不出席的儀式？
b. 他們會思量到什麼利害關係？
c. 他們最後的決定以什麼為基礎？
(3) 這三人當時在國中的身份是什麼？那些人起來控告他們？他們的動機是什麼？
(4) 王既是沖沖大怒，為何他不立刻執刑？
(5) 為何王要給他們多一次的機會？王有其他的選擇嗎？
(6) 王雖然給予他們機會，但他怎樣警告他們呢？為什麼？
(7) 這三人給王的回覆，充份的把聖經中的「信」表明出來：
a. 你認為他們是否相信神有大能拯救他們？
b. 你認為他們是否相信神一定會拯救他們？
c. 如果神選擇不拯救他們，他們會否因此就不信神，或以神為不可信？
d. 從他們身上你可以怎樣為真的「信」下個定義？
(8) 你今日對神的「信」是什麼的「信」？與神應允你禱告與否有關嗎？
(9) 今日對你主要的提醒是什麼？你可以怎樣應用在自 己的生命中？
“But even if He does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.” (Dan. 3:18)
Death, whether it is our own or that of one of our loved ones, often is the ultimate test of our faith in God.
I have come across many Christians who faced death in such a calm manner that reflected their true faith in the atoning sacrifice of Christ and their submission to His will. It is not that they would not miss their loved ones and feel sorrowful for the sadness that they would cause their loved ones, but the assurance of eternal life and the forgiveness of their sins gave them peace that transcended such sorrows.
However, I have also met many Christians who faced death with not only sadness, but fear. Not that they did not have faith in God, nor did they doubt their eternal destiny, but they departed without demonstrating much difference from any unbeliever.
The saddest situation that I have come across involved believers who turned away from their faith in God because God would not heal their loved one, one who had truly been born again in Christ, and He allowed that one to die. While I do not wish to be harsh on them, it does invite the question whether their belief in the Lord Jesus is based on whether their prayers are answered or not — this is typical of the religions of the pagan.
I have had the blessing of having walked alongside a few Christians who, in spite of what was perceived as the untimely death of their loved ones — children or spouses c were able to give thanks to God, even under these circumstances. This kind of faith resembles the faith of Job and that of the three friends of Daniel. Some theologians call it, “Disinterested Faith”— a faith in God that is not based on “interest”.
Job lost basically most if not all of his possessions. Worse, he lost all of his ten children, and yet in extreme grief and sorrow, he said, “Naked I came from my mother’s womb, naked I will depart. The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away, may the name of the Lord be praised.” (Job 1:21)
In the same way, the three friends of Daniel were facing the fiery furnace, and yet they refused to bow down to the image set up by Nebuchadnezzar with these words, “But even if He does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.” (Dan. 3:18)
Today, God continues to seek those who would follow the footsteps of Job and of the three friends of Daniel.
What kind of faith do you have?
「即或不然，王啊，你當知道我們決不事奉你的神，也不敬拜你所立的金像。」 (但以理書3:18 )
死亡的威脅往往是我們與神的關係一個終極的試驗，這包括我們自己的死亡和所至愛的人的死亡。
我遇見不少面對死亡而顯露平安的信徒。這當然顯示他們信仰的真實，不但相信因信主而罪得赦和有永生，更願意順服神的旨意和時候。這並不是說，他們不懷念家人，或沒有想到家人因他們的離去而哀傷。不過，至終，神的同在和應許給他們有出人意外的平安。
不過我也遇到在面臨死亡時，感到驚惶、憂愁的信徒。不是說他們不是真正的信主，也不是說他們沒有永生的把握；乃是說在臨終的時刻，他們卻未能顯出信徒與非信徒的分別。
最可惜的是，我也遇到一些信徒，在親愛的人回天家時，他們卻因此離開了神。他們覺得神沒有聽他們的懇求，神太早取了他們所愛的回天家。我當然不想苛責這些信徒，因為他們的苦痛是外人所不能了解的。但可惜的是，在這沉痛的時刻，他們卻也未能顯出信徒與非信徒的分別。
不過，我能有福份與一些在失去至愛的人—包括兒女、配偶—雖然也有太早離世的感受，卻在極度的苦痛中，竟能說出順服的說話。他們的順服，往往叫我想起約伯和但以理的三個朋友的生命。這些人與主的關係，是神學家所稱的「即或不然的信仰/Dis-interested Faith」。
約伯在損失差不多所有的財物和喪失所有十個兒女時，在極度的哀痛中說出這句順服的話：「我赤身出於母胎，也必赤身歸回；賞賜的是耶和華，收取的也是耶和華。耶和華的名是應當稱頌的。」(伯1:21)
同樣的，但以理的三個朋友，在面對火窰的威脅時，堅定的對王說：「即便如此，我們所事奉的神能將我們從烈火的窯中救出來。王啊，他也必救我們脫離你的手；即或不然，王啊，你當知道我們決不事奉你的神，也不敬拜你所立的金像。」(但3:17-18)
今天，神正繼續尋找跟隨約伯和但以理的三友腳踪的人。不曉得，你的信仰是否像他們一樣呢？
(1) Can you blame Nebuchadnezzar for changing his attitude toward the three friends? Why or why not?
(2) Why did he order the furnace to be heated seven times hotter than usual? Would not a normal furnace be enough to burn them to death?
(3) Did he really need “the strongest soldiers” to tie them up?
(4) What did the killing of these soldiers by the fire indicate?
(5) The fourth person in the fire looked like “a son of the gods”— what does it mean? Who is this fourth person?
(6) How does this scene depict God’s promise to be with us always in Matthew 28:20?
(7) Does His presence necessarily mean that we will not be harmed, as happened in the case of the three friends of Daniel? Why or why not?
(8) Apart from the fact that they were unharmed, what does the detailed description of their clothes and smell indicate?
(9) How did the king show his reverence and submission to the God of the three friends?
(10) How did the king describe the faith of these three Jews? Does it necessarily mean that he believed in their God? Why or why not?
(11) What lesson can we learn from the three friends about non-conformity to the pressure we face in society?
(12) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
請慢慢細讀每天指定的經文至少兩遍，然後反複思考問題。
(1) 你能否責怪王向三人「變了臉色」？為什麼？
(2) 為何王要命令把窰火更加七倍？不加熱度豈不也足以致死嗎？
(3) 是否真的需要軍中(最) 強壯的來扔他們在火中？
(4) 扔三人的壯士們反被燒死：這一連串的形容的總意是什麼？
(5) 火中出現的第四個人「相貌好像神子」是什麼意思？你以為他是誰？
(6) 這個情景與馬太福音28:20的應許有關係嗎？
(7) 神所應許的同在，是否一定等如我們會像那三友一樣不至遭害？為什麼？
(8) 這三人固然得神的拯救，但對他們的頭髮和衣裳等的描述有什麼用意？
(9) 王怎樣表達他對這三人的神的敬重和順服？
(10) 王怎樣形容這三人與神的關係？
(11) 我們從這三人的榜樣可以學到怎樣面對世俗壓力的功課？
(12) 今日對你主要的提醒是什麼？你可以怎樣應用在自己的生命中？
“But there are some Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon…who pay no attention to you, O king. They neither serve your gods nor worship the image of gold you have set up.” (Dan. 3:12)
Often in a small group discussion, as we talk about the pressure of conformity imposed by the culture, I hear over and over again comments like this, “It is simply not practical to practice the teachings of the Bible in the marketplace all the time.”
When I pressed further for “practical” examples, I received answers like the following:
- If you do not pay under-the-table money, you will not be able to get the contract;
- If you do not play Mahjong (or go to the bar or nightclub) with them, you will be considered an outsider and there will not be any chance of promotion;
- Everybody is doing it; it is really no big deal (they are referring to not reporting certain income or the padding of their expense report).
The truth of the matter is, these are not life and death situations and all amount to whether we are willing to forgo extra income or suffer financial losses ultimately.
The situation faced by the three friends in not bowing to the image set up by the king was a matter of life and death, and of course that involved their whole family, not to mention the loss of their high position and lucrative income. Their special diet exemption back in their days of training, no doubt, would have attracted jealousy from their peers. Their continued practice of their religion which would likely have involved the observance of Sabbath, would have raised the eye-brows of many influential officials in the court. Now, with blatant disobedience to the royal decree to bow at the dedication ceremony of the golden statue, it offered their long-time adversaries the golden opportunity to put them away. Yet, they did not flinch for a second!
How could they maintain such a strong, uncompromising attitude in such a serious matter and at such a critical time? The answer should not be hard to understand as Jesus exhorts us:
“He who is faithful in a very little thing is faithful also in much; and he who is unrighteous in a very little thing is unrighteous also in much.” (Lk. 16:10)
I have not seen anyone who compromised on “small things” being used by God for anything significant for His Kingdom.
「現在有幾個猶大人，就是王所派管理巴比倫省事務的沙得拉、米煞、亞伯尼歌；王啊，這些人不理你，不事奉你的神，也不敬拜你所立的金像 。」 (但3:12)
很多時候，在小組討論或主日學的課堂中，我聽到關於要按聖經真理的教導，在文化潮流中逆流而上的反對聲。他們往往會這樣說：「這是行不通的，特別在商場上。」
每當我邀請他們列出具體的事例時，他們會舉出像以下的例子：
- 不給黑錢，生意根本做不成的；
- 你若果不與他們(指同事、上司或生活上的友好) 打麻雀、喝酒或到夜總會，根本就沒有升職或作買賣的機會；
- 人人都是這樣做啦！(通常是指逃稅等事) 。
其實，這些都絕非是生、死的關鍵；只不過是財物的損失，甚至是收入多少的問題。
但對但以理和三友而言，他們所面對的是生死關頭，更是涉及家人的安危，不用說前途、高位的損失了。他們在受訓時，堅持不用王膳，相信早已被同僚所非議。他們平日對守摩西律法的堅持，相信一定包括守安息日，也更叫周圍的人看得不順眼。現在竟公然的抗王命，不向金像下拜，當然成為妒忌他們的宮中人仕最佳的機會，一次過除掉他們。誰知，這三人是毫不懼死的！
他們究竟為何能在這極重要的事情上，在這極危險的時刻，能毫不妥協的忠於神呢？其實，這是不太難明白的，因為主耶穌是這樣教訓我們說：
「人在最小的事上忠心，在大事上也忠心；在最小的事上不義，在大事上也不義。」(路16:10)
原來，我們是否被主看為忠心，是先從所謂的「小事」上，被祂所衡量的。
(1) What might be the reason that Nebuchadnezzar chose to tell his own story?
(2) Since Daniel had previously told the interpretation of his dream back in chapter two, Nebuchadnezzar knew that the Spirit of God was in Daniel:
a. Why then would he still consult his other magicians, enchanters, astrologers and diviners?
b. Why then did he continue to call Daniel Belteshazzar, after the name of his own god?
(3) What was God’s purpose in inflicting him with this unusual illness? (See note below.)
(4) As Daniel interpreted the dream to the king, what advice did he give to the king?
(5) Did his advice have any impact on the king? Why or why not?
(6) Why is it so hard for the king to humble himself? Is it hard for you too?
(7) What could God have done, instead of inflicting this arrogant king with a likely 7-year period of unusual illness (i.e. the whole tree could have been cut or uprooted, why would God allow the stump to remain)?
(8) The story opens and ends with a poem of praise (v. 3 and vv. 34-35):
a. How did he address God?
b. What was being repeated in both poems? What does this tell us about what he had learned from this particular experience?
c. In the closing poem, can you tell what he did learn about the sovereignty of God?
(9) Did Nebuchadnezzar regret having to go through such a process of humbleness? How can we tell?
(10) Have you been disciplined or humbled by God? Do you cherish or regret such an experience? Why or why not?
(11) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
Note:
“The illness described in Daniel 4:22-34 appears to have been a delusional disorder…Lycanthropy, in which patients imagine themselves to be wolves, is one such disorder.”
(Archaeological Study Bible, 1391)
請慢慢細讀每天指定的經文至少兩遍，然後反複思考問題。
(1) 為何尼布甲尼撒會把這「醜事」公諸於世？
(2) 但以理既然曾為王解夢，地位得以高升；王亦知道他裡頭有神的靈，
a. 為何王仍向其他術士求夢的講解？
b. 為何他仍以巴比倫名字稱但以理？
(3) 為何神要這樣讓尼布甲尼撒變成野獸一樣？(請看下面的註釋)
(4) 但以理在解夢之餘，怎樣勸告王？
(5) 王有否聽從他的勸告？何以見得？
(6) 為何謙卑自己對王而言是如此的困難？你是否也感到謙卑不易？
(7) 除了用這方法叫王如野獸般生活(相信是有七年的時光) ，其實神可有其他方法來處理這狂傲的外邦王嗎？
(8) 這篇敍事是以詩歌作始和終的(4:3; 34-35) ：
a. 尼布甲尼撒在此怎樣稱呼神？
b. 這兩首的詩歌重複之處是什麼？這樣的重複叫我們看到這次的經歷叫王認識到什麼？
c. 從結尾詩歌所特別提到的，你可以看出王對神的主權有什麼加深的認識？
(9) 你認為王對這經歷猶有餘悸，還是有感激之情？
(10) 你曾否經歷過神的管教？你的感受與尼布甲尼撒有別嗎？
(11) 今日對你主要的提醒是什麼？你可以怎樣應用在自己的生命中？
註：「但以理書4:22-34所形容的病症似是一種幻覺、失常的病...... 像Lycanthropy一類的病，使患者以為自己是狼」(Archaeological Study Bible, 1391)
“Therefore, O king, be pleased to accept my advice: Renounce your sins by doing what is right and your wickedness by being kind to the oppressed…” (Dan. 4:27)
Although it is debatable whether Nebuchadnezzar did eventually get converted to worship Yahweh alone as his God, one thing is more than obvious and that is God has chosen to give him many chances to repent and to know Him.
Nebuchadnezzar might not be aware of it; he was being used by God to discipline His people for their sins of idol worship and for turning away from Him. In other words, his rise to power was not accidental, but part of the eternal plan of God to bring about the salvation for His people. The destruction of the nation of Israel, that was effected through his hands, lasted for some 2,500 years.
And for whatever reason, God saw fit to allow him to know His sovereign will of putting an eventual end to all human dominions through the dream of the huge statue (Dan. 2). In preparation for this revelation, God had posted Daniel and his three friends close to Nebuchadnezzar, so that he would not only understand the dream, but realize beyond a doubt that it came from the God of Heaven. Unfortunately, instead of converting him to worship the One True God of Heaven and to understand his role in His eternal plan, the dream appeared to give him the delusion that as the “golden head”. His power was assured and he, somehow, deserved to be the most powerful ruler ever lived. His building of the golden image (Dan. 3), I believe, was greatly influenced by Daniel’s interpretation of the dream.
But in God’s mercy, his ruthless arrogance brought him face to face with the God of the three defiant friends of Daniel. Once again, he had to humble himself to acknowledge the greatness of this God of Heaven. However, presumably he had not turned away from his other gods, or his wickedness, or his arrogance.
Then, God gave him one more dream to warn him of the discipline he would receive from the hands of God — the illness that would turn him into a wolf-like being. Again, it was Daniel who interpreted the dream for him and gave him a very stern warning, “Therefore, O king, be pleased to accept my advice: Renounce your sins by doing what is right and your wickedness by being kind to the oppressed…” (Dan. 4:27)
It is interesting to note that in the dream, the tree would not be totally cut off, but a stump would remain. Why would God be so gracious to such a ruthless ruler? Why would He give him chance after chance? Would he now listen to the advice of Daniel and repent? The answer is no — he did not change a bit, and 12 months later, the prophecy of Daniel came true.
Personally, I believe that eventually Nebuchadnezzar had learned his lesson, and my belief is not so much based on his words of humility said after he was restored to sanity and power, but on the fact that he acknowledged what God did was just (in punishing him) and that “those who walk in pride, He is able to humble” (Dan. 4:37). My belief is based on the mercy of God. I believe that God’s persistent pursuit of Nebuchadnezzar would not be in vain.
「王啊，求你悅納我的諫言，以施行公義斷絕罪過，以憐憫窮人除掉罪孽，或者你的平安可以延長。」(但 4:27)
當然，我們很難知道尼布甲尼撒是否至終悔改，轉而單單敬拜耶和華神。解經家就此也是眾說紛紜的，但肯定的是，神給了他多次的機會來認識祂。
相信尼布甲尼撒是不曉得自己是被神用來懲治祂百姓的叛逆、離開祂去拜偶像所犯的大惡的工具。換句話說，他之獲得權勢，並非是偶然的；也不是他真正的本事，乃是神揀選了他來扮演這引至日後救恩計劃實現的過程中的一個角色。以色列國在這過程中要遭亡國二千多年的命運，竟是藉著他的手帶來的。
神也揀選向他顯露祂的永遠計劃，藉著大像之夢，叫他曉得不但人間的霸權興衰全操在祂手中，而且人間的權勢至終要遭神所毀滅，引進神國度的建立(但2)。聖經沒有說明為何神要特別向他顯露，但卻給我們看到，神有預早的安排：就是藉著把但以理和三友放在宮廷中，好使王的夢得以清楚的被解說，並叫王曉得，誰才是萬神上的真神。誰知這夢的講解，似乎叫他更狂傲，以為自己既是天上的神所揀選、設立，成為「金頭」，就再一無所懼。在第三章他所建的金像恐怕是與先前這夢有關的。
但在神的憐憫底下，他的狂傲使他面對三個毫不畏懼他的但以理的三友；藉著他們對神的至死忠心，他再次認識到這位神的大能，更叫他曉得什麼是真正的敬畏神！可惜，尼布甲尼撒絕對沒有謙卑、悔改、離棄他的暴行。然而奇中之奇，神再給這樣的一位暴君另外一個夢，警告他將要面對神的管教—就是他將如牛吃草。這夢再一次由但以理為他解明，並向他作出忠告：「王啊，求你悅納我的諫言，以施行公義斷絕罪過，以憐憫窮人除掉罪孽，或者你的平安可以延長。」(4:27)
這夢最奇特的地方，在乎那樹沒有被連根拔起，反而尚留樹墩。為甚麼神要給這樣的一個暴君留餘地？為何一再的給他悔改的機會？這一次，尼布甲尼撒會聽但以理的勸諫嗎？答案是否定的！王並沒有聽勸，結果過了十二個月，預言終於應驗在他身上。
我個人相信尼布甲尼撒至終應該是學到功課的。不過，我這樣的相信，不是全基於他這一次在病復後所說出謙卑的話；也不是全因他似乎是願意公然的為這事作見證，承認神所作的(相信是指管教他這事) 全都誠實和公平；乃更因為我相信神的憐憫。祂這樣用祂的慈悲、憐憫追逐尼布甲尼撒是不會徒然的！
(1) For a king to throw a lavish banquet was not that unusual. What then made this banquet thrown by King Belshazzar so offensive to God?
(2) What does the statement that “As they drank the wine, they praised the gods of gold and silver…” reflect?
(3) To be frightened by the appearance of the fingers writing on the wall is understandable, but what made it more frightening was the circumstance under which it happened. See if you can imagine the scene preceding the appearance of the fingers, and why the king was so frightened that “his knees knocked together and his legs gave way” (5:6).
(4) Based on how the Queen mother introduced Daniel, and how Belshazzar talked to him, what seemed to have happened to Daniel since the death of Nebuchadnezzar?
(5) By what name did the Queen mother call Daniel?
(6) Why did Daniel respond with rudeness to this king, when before he seemed to be very respectful toward Nebuchadnezzar?
(7) Why did Daniel find it necessary to bring up the incident concerning the illness of Nebuchadnezzar to Belshazzar at this time?
(8) How did this add to his guilt?
(9) Scholars cannot determine the exact meaning of the three words on the wall, except to assume that they were basically nouns that denote measurement. But the best explanation has already been provided by Daniel:
a. Mene (a mina): Daniel explained that it means God has numbered the king’s days, and brought it to an end;
b. Tekel (a shekel): Daniel explained that the king has been weighed on the scales and found wanting;
c. Peres (half): Daniel prophesied that his kingdom is divided to the Medes and Persians.
What does each of these terms mean to you?
(10) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
Note:
請慢慢細讀每天指定的經文至少兩遍，然後反複思考問題。
(1) 身貴為王，盡情揮霍的擺設筵席是不足為怪的。伯沙撒王所擺設的筵席，為何會這樣招惹神的憤怒？
(2) 為何會一面飲酒，一面「讚美金銀銅木石所造的神」？有什麼特別意思？
(3) 看見指頭在牆上寫字當然是可怕的，但指頭出現的場合如何使這情景更加可怕，以至王「腰骨好像脫節、雙膝彼此相碰」呢？
(4) 按著太后對但以理的介紹和王對但以理的稱呼，你可以意會到在尼布甲尼撒死後，但以理遭遇到怎樣的對待？
(5) 太后怎樣稱呼但以理？
(6) 但以理為何這樣無禮的回答王？這似與他對尼布甲尼撒王的態度很不同。為什麼？
(7) 為何但以理特別要提到尼布甲尼撒以前的經歷？
(8) 這裡的提說怎樣定了王的罪？
(9) 學者對手指在牆上所寫的字是什麼，沒有一致的定論；其實但以理已解釋清楚了：
a. 彌尼: 即是彌那(以結45:12) ，為貨幣單位，但以理說這是指神已數算了王的年日；
b. 提客勒：相等於舍客勒，為重量的單位，但以理說這是指神將他稱在天秤裡，顯出其虧欠；
c. 毘勒斯：是分開之意，但以理說這是指他的國分裂為瑪代、波斯。
以上的字義對你有什麼意思？
(10) 這書卷對你主要的提醒是什麼？你可以怎樣應用在自己的生命中？
註(一) ：不少新派的學者曾因世界史從沒有伯沙撒為巴比倫王的記載，而以他為虛構人物，認為足以證明但以理書的不可信。但十九世紀的考古發現，卻證實真有其人，其父Nabonidus因熱愛考古，在這出現「寫字在牆上」的期間前，離國遠道往亞拉伯去，以至將國權分授兒子。這更解釋到為何伯沙撒只能給予但以理國中的第三位。
註(二) ：牆上所寫的第三個字，毘勒斯，清楚的指到巴比倫國是要被「分」的。這正顯示當時的波斯國尚未統一，乃是瑪代與波斯共分權勢的時代！故此大利烏「可能是一位不知名的王，登基時用的名字」(Word, Goldingay, 112)
“That very night, Belshazzar, king of the Babylonians was slain, and Darius the Mede took over the kingdom at the age of sixty-two.” (Dan. 5:30-31)
These two verses in the book of Daniel (5:30-31) have been a hot topic of debate, speculation and the basis of attacks by those who seek to discredit the credibility of the book based on historicity.
One thing that was held as an obvious error was that for over two thousand years, no extant historical documents outside of the Bible (except the deuterocanonical Book of Baruch which depended on Daniel as its source) mentioned the name of Belshazzar as a king of Babylon, let alone the last king of Babylon.
The next issue was that nowhere, again, in any extra-biblical document, was there any Darius called Darius the Mede.
And finally, Cyrus the Great was the Persian king who overthrew the last of the Babylonian kings, not Darius.
Since, the discovery of the Nabonidus Cylinder by J.G. Taylor in 1854 and the subsequent purchase of the Verse Account of Nabonidus by the British Museum in 1879, the first issue about the existence of Belshazzar had been put to rest.
Both discoveries confirmed that Belshazzar was the son of this last king of Babylon, Nabonidus, who was so interested in archaeology that he designated his son as his co-regent and went on his expedition in Arabia. This fully collaborates with the account of Daniel, especially in explaining why Belshazzar could only offer him the 3rd highest position in the nation.
As some readers have noticed, I often quote from the work of Keil and Delitszch in this Devotional Guide. Although they belonged to a former generation, they produced some of best German commentaries which ignore modern criticism. They view the Old Testament and the New Testament as the “revealed word of God”, and regard the development of German theological science as a passing phase of error.
However, it is interesting to read their more than 11 pages of argument on who Belshazzar might be. Their exhaustive treatment of the accounts of historians like Herodotus and Josephus was very scholarly and fair-minded. However, given the fact that the Nabonidus Cylinder and the Verse Account of Nabonidus had not yet been discovered, they concluded that Belshazzar was most likely the same person as Nabonidus.
While
I admire Keil and Delitzsch’s commitment to view the
Bible as the “revealed word of God’, this particular issue
teaches me two important lessons.
If we truly commit to viewing the Bible as the “revealed word of God",
(1) It is best to follow the advice of an old Rabbinic adage: Confess what we do not know (especially when it comes to the issue of apparent discrepancies between the Bible and secular historical accounts); and(2) It is prudent to judge secular historical accuracies by the biblical accounts and not vice-versa; and to not rush to conclude that scribal errors account for supposed discrepancies.
「當夜，迦勒底王伯沙撒被殺。瑪代人大利烏年六十二歲，取了迦勒底國。」(但5:30-31)
但以理書第五章結束的兩節是解經家歷代以來所激辯的。特別新派的學者一直用來攻擊但以理書的可靠性。
他們認為既然二千多年來的世界史從沒有記載伯沙撒這人為巴比倫王，他更非巴比倫歷史上最後的一位帝王，明顯的，這人名是但以理書的作者所虛構的。
再者，世界史上也從沒有「瑪代人大利烏」這稱號的王。最後，歷史記載古列為推翻巴比倫的波斯王，並非是任何一個的大利烏。
但自從1854年出土的Mabonidus Cylinder，一個筒形的文物為J.G.Taylor所發現的，加上1879年英國博物館收購的Verse Account of Nabonidus，伯沙撒這人的真相大白，「但以理」得以平反(至少在這事上) 。
按這件出土文物的記載，歷史上所記載的巴比倫最後一位王 Nabonidus, 原來是熱衷考古的，甚至被喻為考古之父。因他要遠道到亞拉伯考古發掘，故將軍權交給兒子伯沙撒，更任命他與他同位作王。這更叫我們明白到為何伯沙撒只能封但以理為國中的第三位！
一些讀者可能留意到，我愛引用Keil & Delitszch的釋經見解，原因是：他們雖然是十九世紀的解經家，卻是德國少有忠於聖經的學者。在釋經時，他們盡量不以聖經批評學為準，而篤信聖經是神啟示的話；並且認為德國的聖經批評學的錯誤是必成過去的！
不過話雖如此，他們就伯沙撒是誰，用了超過十一頁的篇幅來討論。他們引用古時的著名歷史家如Herodotus和約瑟夫等的著作，力求公允的作出推論。可惜當時上述兩件出土文物尚未公諸於世，他們的結論是，伯沙撒應該就是Nabonidus。
一方面，我非常敬重Keil & Delitszch二人以聖經為神啟示的話語的堅持，另一方面，我從這件事中有以下的感想：
1. 像猶太拉比所傳流的一句諺語所言，不清楚答案時，最好是說：我不知道！
2. 我們應看聖經的可靠性高於世界歷史的可靠性。在二者有衝突時，不要這麼快的說：一定是聖經抄寫錯誤。