Read-Post Through the Bible

[daniel1212av]

5. If we search into the things of God, we shall find some things very plain and easy to be understood, as the waters that were but to the ankles, others more difficult, and which require a deeper search, as the water to the knees or the loins, and some quite beyond our reach, which we cannot penetrate into, or account for, but, despairing to find the bottom, must, as St. Paul, sit down at the brink, and adore the depth, Rom_11:33. It has been often said that in the scripture, like these waters of the sanctuary, there are some places so shallow that a lamb may wade through them, and others so deep that an elephant may swim in them. And it is our wisdom, as the prophet here, to begin with that which is most easy, and get our hearts washed with those things before we proceed to that which is dark and hard to be understood; it is good to take our work before us.


III.The extent of this river: It issues towards the east country, but thence it either divide itself into several streams or fetches a compass, so that it goes down into the desert, and so goes into the sea, either into the dead sea, which lay south-east, or the sea of Tiberias, which lay north-east, or the great sea, which lay west, Eze_47:8. This was accomplished when the gospel was preached with success throughout all the regions of Judea and Samaria (Act_8:1), and afterwards the nations about, nay, and those that lay most emote, even in the isles of the sea, were enlightened and leavened by it. The sound of it went forth to the end of the world; and the enemies of it could no more prevail to stop the progress of it than that of a mighty river.

IV. The healing virtue of this river. The waters of the sanctuary, wherever they come and have a free course, will be found a wonderful restorative. Being brought forth into the sea, the sulphureous lake of Sodom, that standing monument of divine vengeance, even those waters shall be healed (Eze_47:8 ), shall become sweet, and pleasant, and healthful. This intimates the wonderful and blessed change that the gospel would make, wheresoever it came in its power, a a great change, in respect both of character and condition, as the turning of the dead sea into a fountain of gardens. When children of wrath became children of love, and those that were dead in trespasses an sins were made alive, then this was fulfilled. The gospel was as that salt which Elisha cast into the spring of the waters of Jericho, with which he healed them, 2Ki_2:20, 2Ki_2:21. Christ, coming into the world to be its physician, sent his gospel as the great medicine, the panpharmacon; there is in it a remedy for every malady. Nay, wherever these rivers come, they make things to live (Eze_47:9), both plants and animals; they are the water of life, Rev_22:1, Rev_22:17. Christ came, that we might have life and for that end he sends his gospel. Every thing shall live whither the river comes. The grace of God makes dead sinners alive and living saints lively; everything is made fruitful and flourishing by it. But its effect is according as it is received, and as the mind is prepared and disposed to receive it; for (Eze_47:11) with respect to the marshes and miry places thereof, that are settled in the mire of their own sinfulness, and will not be healed, or settled in the moisture of their own righteousness, and think they need no healing, their doom is, They shall not be healed; the same gospel which to others is a savour of life unto life shall to them be a savour of death unto death; they shall be given to salt, to perpetual barrenness, Deu_29:23. Those that will not be watered with the grace of God, and made fruitful, shall be abandoned to their own hearts' lusts, and left for ever unfruitful. He that is filthy, let him be filthy still. Never fruit grow on thee more for ever. They shall be given to salt, that is, to be monuments of divine justice, as Lot's wife that was turned into a pillar of salt, to season others.
V.
VI.The great plenty of fish that should be in this river. Everything living moving thing shall be found here, shall live here (Eze_47:9), shall come on and prosper, shall be the best of the kind, and shall increase greatly; so that there shall be a very great multitude of fish, according to their kinds, as the fish of the great sea, exceedingly many. There shall be as great plenty of the river fish, and as vast shoals of them, as there is of salt-water fish, Eze_47:10. There shall be no great numbers of Christians in the church, and those multiplying like fishes in the rising generations and the dew of their youth. In the creation the waters brought forth the fish abundantly (Gen_1:20, Gen_1:21), and they still live in and by the waters that produced them; so believers are begotten by the word of truth (Jam_1:18), and born by it (1Pe_1:23), that river of God; by it they live, from it they have their maintenance and subsistence; in the waters of the sanctuary they are as in their element, out of them they are as fish upon dry ground; so David was when he thirsted and panted for God, for the living God. Where the fish are known to be in abundance, thither will the fishers flock, and there they will cast their nets; and therefore, to intimate the replenishing of these waters and their being made every way useful, it is here foretold that the fishers shall stand upon the banks of this river, from En-gedi, which lies on the border of the dead sea, to En-eglaim, another city, which joins to that sea, and all along shall spread their nets. The dead sea, which before was shunned as noisome and noxious, shall be frequented. Gospel-grace makes those persons and places which were unprofitable and good for nothing to become serviceable to God and man.

VI. The trees that were on the banks of this river - many trees on the one side and on the other (Eze_47:7), which made the prospect very pleasant and agreeable to the eye; the shelter of these trees also would be a convenience to the fishery. But that is not all (Eze_47:12); they are trees for meat, and the fruit of them shall not be consumed, for it shall produce fresh fruit every month. The leaf shall be for medicine, and it shall not fade, This part of the vision is copied out into St. John's vision very exactly (Rev_22:2), where, on either side of the river, is said to grow the tree of life, which yielded her fruit every month, and the leaves were for the healing of the nations. Christians are supposed to be these trees, ministers especially, trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord (Isa_61:3), set by the rivers of water, the waters of the sanctuary (Psa_1:3), grafted into Christ the tree of life, and by virtue of their union with him made trees of life too, rooted in him, Col_2:7. There is a great variety of these trees, through the diversity of gifts with which they are endued by that one Spirit who works all in all. They grow on the bank of the river, or they keep close to holy ordinances, and through them derive from Christ sap and virtue. They are fruit-trees, designed, as the fig tree and the olive, with their fruits to honour God and man, Jdg_9:9. The fruit thereof shall be for meat, for the lips of the righteous feed many. The fruits of their righteousness are one way or other beneficial. The very leaves of these trees are for medicine, for bruises and sores, margin. Good Christians with their good discourses, which are as their leaves, as well as with their charitable actions, which are as their fruits, do good to those about them; they strengthen the weak, and bind up the broken-hearted. Their cheerfulness does good like a medicine, not only to themselves, but to others also. They shall be enabled by the grace of God to persevere in their goodness and usefulness; their leaf shall not fade, or lose its medicinal virtue, having not only life in their root, but sap in all their branches; their profession shall not wither (Psa_1:3), neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed; that is, they shall not lose the principle of their fruitfulness, but shall still bring forth fruit in old age, to show that the Lord is upright (Psa_92:14, Psa_92:15), or the reward of their fruitfulness shall abide for ever; they bring forth fruit that shall abound to their account in the great day, fruit to life eternal; that is indeed fruit which shall not be consumed. They bring new fruit according to their months, some in one month and others in another: so that still there shall be one or other found to serve the glory of God for the purpose he designs. Or each one of them shall bring forth fruit monthly, which denotes an abundant disposition to fruit-bearing (they shall never be weary of well-doing), and a very happy climate, such that there shall be a perpetual spring and summer. And the reason of this extraordinary fruitfulness is because their waters issued out of the sanctuary; it is not to be ascribed to any thing in themselves, but to the continual supplies of divine grace, with which they are watered every moment (Isa_27:3); for, whoever planted them, it was that which gave the increase. — Henry 

[daniel1212av]

Eze 47:13-23 
We are now to pass from the affairs of the sanctuary to those of the state, from the city to the country. 1. The Land of Canaan is here secured to them for an inheritance (Eze_47:14): I lifted up my hand to give it unto your fathers, that is, promised it upon oath to them and their posterity. Though the possession had been a great while discontinued, yet God had not forgotten his oath which he swore to their fathers. Though God's providences may for a time seem to contradict his promises, yet the promise will certainly take place at last, for God will be ever mindful of his covenant. I lifted up my hand to give it, and therefore it shall without fail fall to you for an inheritance. Thus the heavenly Canaan is sure to all the seed, because it is what God, who cannot lie, has promised. 2. It is here circumscribed, and the bounds and limits of it are fixed, which they must not pass over to encroach upon their neighbours and which their neighbours shall not break through to encroach upon them. We had such a draught of the borders of Canaan when Joshua was to put the people in possession of it, Num_34:1, etc. That begins with the salt sea in the south, goes round and ends there. This begins with Hamath about Damascus in the north, and so goes round and ends there, Eze_47:20. Note, It is God that appoints the bounds of our habitation; and his Israel shall always have cause to say that the lines have fallen to them in pleasant places. The lake of Sodom is here called the east sea, for it, being healed by the waters of the sanctuary, it is no more to be called a salt sea, as it was in Numbers. 3. It is here ordered to be divided among the tribes of Israel, reckoning Joseph for two tribes, to make up the number of twelve, when Levi was taken out to attend the sanctuary, and had his lot adjoining to that (Eze_47:13, Eze_47:21): You shall inherit it, one as well as another, Eze_47:14. The tribes shall have an equal share, one as much as another. As the tribes returned out of Babylon, this seems unequal, because some tribes were much more numerous than the other, and indeed the most were of Judah and Benjamin and very few of the other ten tribes; but as the twelve tribes stand, in type and vision, for the gospel-church, the Israel of God, it was very equal, because we find in another vision an equal number of each of the twelve tribes sealed for the living God, just 12,000 of each, Rev_7:5, etc. And to those sealed ones these allotments did belong. It intimates likewise that all the subjects of Christ's kingdom have obtained like precious faith. Male and female, Jew and Gentile, bond and free, are all alike welcome to Christ and made partakers of him. 4. The strangers who sojourn among them, who shall beget children and be built up into families, and so help to people their country, shall have inheritance among the tribes, as if they had been native Israelites (Eze_47:22, Eze_47:23), which was by no means allowed in Joshua's division of the land. This is an act for a general naturalization, which would teach the Jews who was their neighbour, not those only of their own nation and religion, but those, whoever they were, that they had an opportunity of showing kindness to, because from them they would be willing to receive kindness. It would likewise invite strangers to come and settle among them, and put themselves under the wings of the divine Majesty. But it certainly looks at gospel-times, when the partition-wall between Jew and Gentile was taken down, and both one in Christ, in whom there is no difference, Rom_10:12. This land was a type of the heavenly Canaan, that better country (Heb_11:16), in which believing Gentiles shall have a blessed lot, as well as believing Jews, Isa_56:3. — Henry 

[daniel1212av]

  Ezekiel 48:1-35  Now these are the names of the tribes. From the north end to the coast of the way of Hethlon, as one goeth to Hamath, Hazarenan, the border of Damascus northward, to the coast of Hamath; for these are his sides east and west; a portion for Dan.  (2)  And by the border of Dan, from the east side unto the west side, a portion for Asher.  (3)  And by the border of Asher, from the east side even unto the west side, a portion for Naphtali.  (4)  And by the border of Naphtali, from the east side unto the west side, a portion for Manasseh.  (5)  And by the border of Manasseh, from the east side unto the west side, a portion for Ephraim.  (6)  And by the border of Ephraim, from the east side even unto the west side, a portion for Reuben.  (7)  And by the border of Reuben, from the east side unto the west side, a portion for Judah.  (8 ) And by the border of Judah, from the east side unto the west side, shall be the offering which ye shall offer of five and twenty thousand reeds in breadth, and in length as one of the other parts, from the east side unto the west side: and the sanctuary shall be in the midst of it.  (9)  The oblation that ye shall offer unto the LORD shall be of five and twenty thousand in length, and of ten thousand in breadth.  (10)  And for them, even for the priests, shall be this holy oblation; toward the north five and twenty thousand in length, and toward the west ten thousand in breadth, and toward the east ten thousand in breadth, and toward the south five and twenty thousand in length: and the sanctuary of the LORD shall be in the midst thereof.  (11)  It shall be for the priests that are sanctified of the sons of Zadok; which have kept my charge, which went not astray when the children of Israel went astray, as the Levites went astray.  (12)  And this oblation of the land that is offered shall be unto them a thing most holy by the border of the Levites.  (13)  And over against the border of the priests the Levites shall have five and twenty thousand in length, and ten thousand in breadth: all the length shall be five and twenty thousand, and the breadth ten thousand.  (14)  And they shall not sell of it, neither exchange, nor alienate the firstfruits of the land: for it is holy unto the LORD.  (15)  And the five thousand, that are left in the breadth over against the five and twenty thousand, shall be a profane place for the city, for dwelling, and for suburbs: and the city shall be in the midst thereof.  (16)  And these shall be the measures thereof; the north side four thousand and five hundred, and the south side four thousand and five hundred, and on the east side four thousand and five hundred, and the west side four thousand and five hundred.  (17)  And the suburbs of the city shall be toward the north two hundred and fifty, and toward the south two hundred and fifty, and toward the east two hundred and fifty, and toward the west two hundred and fifty.  (18)  And the residue in length over against the oblation of the holy portion shall be ten thousand eastward, and ten thousand westward: and it shall be over against the oblation of the holy portion; and the increase thereof shall be for food unto them that serve the city.  (19)  And they that serve the city shall serve it out of all the tribes of Israel.  (20)  All the oblation shall be five and twenty thousand by five and twenty thousand: ye shall offer the holy oblation foursquare, with the possession of the city.  (21)  And the residue shall be for the prince, on the one side and on the other of the holy oblation, and of the possession of the city, over against the five and twenty thousand of the oblation toward the east border, and westward over against the five and twenty thousand toward the west border, over against the portions for the prince: and it shall be the holy oblation; and the sanctuary of the house shall be in the midst thereof.  (22)  Moreover from the possession of the Levites, and from the possession of the city, being in the midst of that which is the prince's, between the border of Judah and the border of Benjamin, shall be for the prince. 

(23)As for the rest of the tribes, from the east side unto the west side, Benjamin shall have a portion. (24)  And by the border of Benjamin, from the east side unto the west side, Simeon shall have a portion.  (25)  And by the border of Simeon, from the east side unto the west side, Issachar a portion. (26)  And by the border of Issachar, from the east side unto the west side, Zebulun a portion. (27) And by the border of Zebulun, from the east side unto the west side, Gad a portion.  (28)  And by the border of Gad, at the south side southward, the border shall be even from Tamar unto the waters of strife in Kadesh, and to the river toward the great sea.  (29)  This is the land which ye shall divide by lot unto the tribes of Israel for inheritance, and these are their portions, saith the Lord GOD.

(30)  And these are the goings out of the city on the north side, four thousand and five hundred measures.  (31)  And the gates of the city shall be after the names of the tribes of Israel: three gates northward; one gate of Reuben, one gate of Judah, one gate of Levi.  (32)  And at the east side four thousand and five hundred: and three gates; and one gate of Joseph, one gate of Benjamin, one gate of Dan.  (33)  And at the south side four thousand and five hundred measures: and three gates; one gate of Simeon, one gate of Issachar, one gate of Zebulun.  (34)  At the west side four thousand and five hundred, with their three gates; one gate of Gad, one gate of Asher, one gate of Naphtali.  (35)  It was round about eighteen thousand measures: and the name of the city from that day shall be, The LORD is there.

[daniel1212av]

Eze 48:1-35 
Here is a description of the several portions of the land belonging to each tribe. In gospel times, behold all things are become new. Much is wrapped up in emblems and numbers. This method God has used to state mysterious truths in his word, not to be more clearly revealed till the proper time and season. But into the church of Christ, both in its state of warfare and triumph, there is free access by faith, from every side. Christ has opened the kingdom of heaven for all believers. Whoever will, may come, and take of the water of life, of the tree of life, freely. The Lord is there, in his church, to be nigh unto them in all they call upon him for. This is true of every real Christian; whatever soul has in it a living principle of grace, it may truly be said, The Lord is there. May we be found citizens of this holy city, and act agreeably to that character; and have the benefit of the Lord's presence with us, in life, in death, and for evermore. — MHCC

Eze 48:1-29 
The division of the land, like the definition of the boundaries (Eze_47:15), commences in the north, and enumerates the tribes in the order in which they were to receive their inheritances from north to south: first, seven tribes from the northern boundary to the centre of the land (Eze_48:1-7), where the heave for the sanctuary, with the land of the priests and Levites and the city domain, together with the prince's land on the two sides, was to be set apart (Eze_48:8-22; and secondly, the other five tribes from this to the southern boundary (Eze_48:23-29). Compare the map on Plate IV.

The new division of the land differs from the former one effected in the time of Joshua, in the first place, in the fact that all the tribe-portions were to extend uniformly across the entire breadth of the land from the eastern boundary to the Mediterranean Sea on the west, so that they were to form parallel tracts of country; whereas in the distribution made in the time of Joshua, several of the tribe-territories covered only half the breadth of the land. For example, Dan received his inheritance on the west of Benjamin; and the territories of half Manasseh and Asher ran up from the northern boundary of Ephraim to the northern boundary of Canaan; while Issachar, Naphtali, and Zebulon received their portions on the east of these; and lastly, Simeon received his possession within the boundaries of the tribe of Judah. And secondly, it also differs from the former, in the fact that not only are all the twelve tribes located in Canaan proper, between the Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea; whereas previously two tribes and a half had received from Moses, at their own request, the conquered land of Bashan and Gilead on the eastern side of the Jordan, so that the land of Canaan could be divided among the remaining nine tribes and a half. But besides this, the central tract of land, about the fifth part of the whole, was separated for the holy heave, the city domain, and the prince's land, so that only the northern and southern portions, about four-fifths of the whole, remained for distribution among the twelve tribes, seven tribes receiving their hereditary portions to the north of the heave and five to the south, because the heave was so selected that the city with its territory lay near the ancient Jerusalem. - In Eze_48:1-7 the seven tribes which were to dwell on the north of the heave are enumerated. The principal points of the northern boundary, viz., the way to Chetlon and Hazar-Enon, the boundary of Damascus, are repeated in Eze_48:1 from Eze_47:15, Eze_47:17, as the starting and terminal points of the northern boundary running from west to east. The words אֶל־יַד חֲמָת fix the northern boundary more precisely in relation to the adjoining territory; and in 'וְהָיוּ  the enumeration of the tribe-lots begins with that of the tribe of Dan, which was to receive its territory against the northern boundary. לֹו refers to the name דָּן which follows, and which Ezekiel already had in his mind. פּאַת קָדִים הַיָּם is constructed asyndetôs; and פְּאַת is to be repeated in thought before הַיָּם: the east side (and) the west (side) are to belong to it, i.e., the tract of land toward its west and its east side. The words which follow, דָּן אֶחָד, are attached in an anacoluthistic manner: “Dan (is to receive) one portion,” for “one shall belong to Dan.” To אֶחָד we are to supply in thought the substantive חֶבֶל, tribe-lot, according to Eze_47:13. “The assumption that one tribe was to receive as much as another (vid., Eze_47:14), leads to the conclusion that each tribe-lot was to be taken as a monas” (Kliefoth). In this way the names in Eze_48:2-7, with the constantly repeated אֶחָד, must also be taken. The same form of description is repeated in Eze_48:23-28 in the case of the five tribes placed to the south of the heave. - In the order of the several tribe-territories it is impossible to discover any universal principle of arrangement. All that is clear is, that in the case of Dan, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, and Ephraim, regard is had to the former position of these tribe-territories as far as the altered circumstances allowed. In the time of the Judges a portion of the Danites had migrated to the north, conquered the city of Laish, and given it the name of Dan, so that from that time forward Dan is generally named as the northern boundary of the land (e.g., as early as 2Sa_3:10, and in other passages). Accordingly Dan receives the tract of land along the northern boundary. Asher and Naphtali, which formerly occupied the most northerly portions of the land, follow next. Then comes Manasseh, as half Manasseh had formerly dwelt on the east of Naphtali; and Ephraim joins Manasseh, as it formerly joined the western half of Manasseh. The reason for placing Reuben between Ephraim and Judah appears to be, that Reuben was the first-born of Jacob's sons. The position of the termuah between Judah and Benjamin is probably connected with the circumstance that Jerusalem formerly stood on the boundary of these two tribes, and so also in the future was to skirt Benjamin with its territory. The other tribes had then to be located on the south of Benjamin; Simeon, whose territory formerly lay to the south; Issachar and Zebulon, for which no room was left in the north; and Gad, which had to be brought over from Gilead to Canaan.

In Eze_48:8-22, the terumah, which has already been described in Eze_45:1-7 for a different purpose, is more precisely defined: first of all, in Eze_48:8, according to its whole extent - viz. twenty-five thousand rods in breadth (from north to south), and the length the same as any one (= every one) of the tribe-lots, i.e., reaching from the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea (cf. Eze_45:7). In the centre of this separated territory the sanctuary (the temple) was to stand. בְּתֹוכֹו, the suffix of which refers ad sensum to חֶלֶק instead of תְּרוּמָה, has not the indefinite meaning “therein,” but signifies “in the centre;” for the priests' portion, in the middle of which the temple was to stand, occupied the central position between the portion of the Levites and the city possession, as is evident from Eze_48:22. The circumstance that here, as in Eze_45:1., in the division of the terumah, the priests' portion is mentioned first, then the portion of the Levites, and after this the city possession, proves nothing so far as the local order in which these three portions followed one another is concerned; but the enumeration is regulated by their spiritual significance, so that first of all the most holy land for the temple and priests is defined, then the holy portion of the Levites, and lastly, the common land for the city. The command, that the sanctuary is to occupy the centre of the whole terumah, leads to a more minute description in the first place (Eze_48:9-12) of the priests' portion, in which the sanctuary was situated, than of the heave to be lifted off for Jehovah. In Eze_48:10, לְאֵלֶּה, which stands at the head, is explained by לַכֹּהֲנִים which follows. The extent of this holy terumah on all four sides is then given; and lastly, the command is repeated, that the sanctuary of Jehovah is to be in the centre of it.

[daniel1212av]

In Eze_48:11, הַמְקֻדָּשׁ is rendered in the plural by the lxx, Chald. and Syr., and is taken in a distributive sense by Kimchi and others: to the priests whoever is sanctified of the sons of Zadok. This is required by the position of the participle between לַכֹּהֲנִים and מִבְּנֵי צָדֹוק (compare 2Ch_26:18, and for the singular of the participle after a previous plural, Psa_8:9). The other rendering, “for the priests is it sanctified, those of the sons of Zadok,” is at variance not only with the position of the words, but also with the fact, namely, that the assignment to the priests of a heave set apart for Jehovah is never designated as קִדֵּשׁ, and from the nature of the case could not be so designated. The apodosis to Eze_48:11 follows in Eze_48:12, where לַכֹּהֲנִים is resumed in לָהֶם. תְּרוּמִיָּה is an adjective formation derived from תְּרוּמָה, with the signification of an abstract: that which is lifted (the lifting) from the heave, as it were “a terumah in the second potency” (for these formations, see Ewald, §§164 and 165). This terumiyah is called most holy, in contrast with the Levites' portion of the terumah, which was קֹדֶשׁ (Eze_48:14). The priests' portion is to be beside the territory of the Levites, whether on the southern or northern side cannot be gathered from these words any more than from the definition in Eze_48:13 : “and the Levites beside (parallel with) the territory of the priests.” Both statements simply affirm that the portions of the priests and Levites were to lie side by side, and not to be separated by the town possession. - Eze_48:13 and Eze_48:14 treat of the Levites' portion: Eze_48:13, of its situation and extent; Eze_48:14, of its law of tenure. The seemingly tautological repetition of the measurement of the length and breadth, as “all the length and the breadth,” is occasioned by the fact “that Ezekiel intends to express himself more briefly here, and not, as in Eze_48:10, to take all the four points of the compass singly; in 'all the length' he embraces the two long sides of the oblong, and in '(all) the breadth' the two broad sides, and affirms that 'all the length,' i.e., of both the north and south sides, is to be twenty-five thousand rods, and 'all the breadth,' i.e., of both the east and west sides, is to be ten thousand rods” (Kliefoth). Hitzig has missed the sense, and therefore proposes to alter the text. With regard to the possession of the Levites, the instructions given in Lev_25:34 for the field of the Levites' cities - namely, that none of it was to be sold - are extended to the whole of the territory of the Levites: no part of it is to be alienated by sale or barter. And the character of the possession is assigned as the reason: the first-fruit of the land, i.e., the land lifted off (separated) as first-fruit, is not to pass into the possession of others, because as such it is holy to the Lord. The Chetib ya`abowr יַעֲבֹור is the correct reading: to pass over, sc. to others, to non-Levites.

Eze_48:15-18 treat of the city possession. As the terumah was twenty-five thousand rods in breadth (Eze_48:8 ), after measuring off ten thousand rods in breadth for the priests and ten thousand rods in breadth for the Levites from the entire breadth, there still remain five thousand rods עַל, in front of, i.e., along, the long side, which was twenty-five thousand rods. This remnant was to be חֹל, i.e., common (not holy) land for the city (Jerusalem). לְמֹושָׁב, for dwelling-places, i.e., for building dwelling-houses upon; and לְמִגְרָשׁ, for open space, the precinct around the city. The city was to stand in the centre of this oblong. Eze_48:16 gives the size of the city: on each of the four sides, four thousand five hundred rods (the חמשׁ, designated by the Masoretes as כתיב ולא קרי, has crept into the text through a copyist's error); and Eze_48:17, the extent of the open space surrounding it: on each side two hundred and fifty rods. This gives for the city, together with the open space, a square of five thousand rods on every side; so that the city with its precinct filled the entire breadth of the space left for it, and there only remained on the east and west an open space of ten thousand rods in length and five thousand rods in breadth along the holy terumah. This is noticed in Eze_48:18; its produce was to serve for bread, i.e., for maintenance, for the labourers of the city (the masculine suffix in תְּבוּאָתֹה refers grammatically to הַנֹּותָר). By עֹבְדֵי הָעִיר Hitzig would understand the inhabitants of the city, because one cultivates a piece of land even by dwelling on it. But this use of עָבַד cannot be established. Nor are עֹבְדֵי הָעִיר the workmen employed in building the city, as Gesenius, Hävernick, and others suppose; for the city was not perpetually being built, so that there should be any necessity for setting apart a particular piece of land for the builders; but they are the working men of the city, the labouring class living in the city. They are not to be without possession in the future Jerusalem, but are to receive a possession in land for their maintenance. We are told in Eze_48:19 who these workmen are. Here הָעֹבֵד is used collectively: as for the labouring class of the city, people out of all the tribes of Israel shall work upon the land belonging to the city. The suffix in יַעַבְדוּהוּ points back to הַנֹּותָר. The transitive explanation, to employ a person in work, has nothing in the language to confirm it. The fact itself is in harmony with the statement in Eze_45:6, that the city was to belong to all Israel. Lastly, in Eze_48:20 the dimensions of the whole terumah, and the relation of the city possession to the holy terumah, are given. כָּל־הַתְּרוּמָה is the whole heave, so far as it has hitherto been described, embracing the property of the priests, of the Levites, and of the city. In this extent it is twenty-five thousand rods long and the same broad. If, however, we add the property of the prince, which is not treated of till Eze_48:21-23, it is considerably longer, and reaches, as has been stated in Eze_48:8, to the boundaries of the land both on the east and west, the Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea, as the several tribe-territories do. But if we omit the prince's land, the space set apart fro the city possession occupied the fourth part of the holy terumah, i.e., of the portion of the priests and Levites. This is the meaning of the second half of Eze_48:20, which literally reads thus: “to a fourth shall ye lift off the holy terumah for the city possession.” This is not to be understood as meaning that a fourth was to be taken from the holy terumah for the city possession; for that would yield an incorrect proportion, as the twenty thousand rods in breadth would be reduced to fifteen thousand rods by the subtraction of the fourth part, which would be opposed to Eze_48:9 and Eze_48:15. The meaning is rather the following: from the whole terumah the fourth part of the area of the holy terumah is to be taken off for the city possession, i.e., five thousand rods for twenty thousand. According to Eze_48:15, this was the size of the domain set apart for the city.

In Eze_48:21-23 the situation and extent of the prince's possession are described. For Eze_48:21, vid., Eze_45:7. הַנֹּותָר, the rest of the terumah, as it has been defined in Eze_48:8, reaching in length from the Jordan to the Mediterranean. As the holy terumah and the city possession were only twenty-five thousand rods in length, and did not reach to the Jordan on the east, or to the sea on the west, there still remained an area on either side whose length or extent toward the east and west is not given in rods, but may be calculated from the proportion which the intervening terumah bore to the length of the land (from east to west). אֶל־פְּנֵי and עַל־פְּנֵי, in front of, or along, the front of the twenty-five thousand rods, refer to the eastern and western boundaries of the terumah, which was twenty-five thousand rods in length.

[daniel1212av]

In Eze_48:21 the statement is repeated, that the holy terumah and the sanctuary were to lie in the centre of it, i.e., between the portions of land appointed for the prince on either side; and lastly, in Eze_48:22 it is still further stated, with regard to the prince's land on both sides of the terumah, that it was to lie between the adjoining tribe-territories of Judah (to the north) and Benjamin (to the south), so that it was to be bounded by these two. But this is expressed in a heavy and therefore obscure manner. The words בְּתֹוךְ אֲשֶׁר לַנָשִׂיא יִהְיֶה, “in the centre of that which belongs to the prince,” belong to הָעִיר... וּמֵאֲחֻזַּת, and form together with the latter the subject, which is written absolutely; so that מִן is not used in a partitive, but in a local sense (from), and the whole is to be rendered thus:

In Eze_48:21-23 the situation and extent of the prince's possession are described. For Eze_48:21, vid., Eze_45:7. הַנֹּותָר, the rest of the terumah, as it has been defined in Eze_48:8, reaching in length from the Jordan to the Mediterranean. As the holy terumah and the city possession were only twenty-five thousand rods in length, and did not reach to the Jordan on the east, or to the sea on the west, there still remained an area on either side whose length or extent toward the east and west is not given in rods, but may be calculated from the proportion which the intervening terumah bore to the length of the land (from east to west). אֶל־פְּנֵי and עַל־פְּנֵי, in front of, or along, the front of the twenty-five thousand rods, refer to the eastern and western boundaries of the terumah, which was twenty-five thousand rods in length. In Eze_48:21 the statement is repeated, that the holy terumah and the sanctuary were to lie in the centre of it, i.e., between the portions of land appointed for the prince on either side; and lastly, in Eze_48:22 it is still further stated, with regard to the prince's land on both sides of the terumah, that it was to lie between the adjoining tribe-territories of Judah (to the north) and Benjamin (to the south), so that it was to be bounded by these two. But this is expressed in a heavy and therefore obscure manner. The words בְּתֹוךְ אֲשֶׁר לַנָשִׂיא יִהְיֶה, “in the centre of that which belongs to the prince,” belong to הָעִיר... וּמֵאֲחֻזַּת, and form together with the latter the subject, which is written absolutely; so that מִן is not used in a partitive, but in a local sense (from), and the whole is to be rendered thus:

And as for that which lies on the side of the possession of the Levites, and of the possession of the city in the centre of what belongs to the prince, (that which lies) between the territory of Judah and the territory of Benjamin shall belong to the prince. Hitzig's explanation - what remains between Judah and Benjamin, from the city territory to the priests' domain, both inclusive, shall belong to the prince - is arbitrary, and perverts the sense. The periphrastic designation of the terumah bounded off between the prince's land by the two portions named together without a copula, viz., “possession of the Levites and possession of the city,” is worthy of notice. This periphrasis of the whole by two portions, shows that the portions named formed the boundaries of the whole, that the third portion, which is not mentioned, was enclosed within the two, so that the priests' portion with the sanctuary lay between them. - In Eze_48:23-27 the rest of the tribes located to the south of the terumah are mentioned in order; and in Eze_48:28 and Eze_48:29 the account of the division of the land is brought to a close with a repetition of the statement as to the southern boundary (cf. Eze_47:19), and a comprehensive concluding formula.

If now we attempt, in order to form a clear idea of the relation in which this prophetic division of the land stands to the actual size of Canaan according to the boundaries described in Eze_47:15., to determine the length and breadth of the terumah given here by their geographical dimensions, twenty-five thousand rods, according to the metrological calculations of Boeckh and Bertheau, would be 10·70 geographical miles, or, according to the estimate of the Hebrew cubit by Thenius, only 9·75 geographical miles.

(Note: According to Boeckh, one sacred cubit was equal to 234-1/3 Paris lines = 528.62 millimètres; according to Thenius = 214-1/2 P. l. = 481.62 millim. Now as one geographical mile, the 5400th part of the circumference of the globe, which is 40,000,000 metres, is equivalent to 7407.398 metres = 22, 803.290 old Paris feet, the geographical mile according to Boeckh is 14, 012-1/10 cubits = 2335-1/2 rods (sacred measure); according to Thenius, 15, 380-1/6 cubits = 2563-1/3 roads (s. m.), from which the numbers given in the text may easily be calculated.)

The extent of Canaan from Beersheba, or Kadesh, up to a line running across from Râs esh-Shukah to the spring El Lebweh, is 3 1/3 degrees, i.e., fifty geographical miles, ten of which are occupied by the terumah, and forty remain for the twelve tribe-territories, so that each tribe-lot would be 3 1/3 geographical miles in breadth. If, now, we reckon three geographical miles as the breadth of each of the five tribe-lots to the south of the terumah, and as the land becomes broader toward the south a breadth of 3-4/7 geographical miles for the seven tribe-lots to the north, the terumah set apart in the centre of the land would extend from the site of Jerusalem to Dothan or Jenin. If, however, we take into consideration the breadth of the land from east to west in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, or where the Jordan enters the Dead Sea, Canaan is eleven geographical miles in breadth, whereas at Jenin it is hardly ten geographical miles broad. If, therefore, the length of the terumah (from east to west) was fully ten geographical miles, there would only remain a piece of land of half a mile in breadth on the east and west at the southern boundary, and nothing at all at the northern, for prince's land. We have therefore given to the terumah upon the map (Plate IV) the length and breadth of eight geographical miles, which leaves a tract of two miles on the average for the prince's land, so that it would occupy a fifth of the area of the holy terumah, whereas the city possession covered a fourth. No doubt the breadth of the terumah from south to north is also diminished thereby, so that it cannot have reached quite down to Jerusalem or quite up to Jenin. - If, now, we consider that the distances of places, and therefore also the measurements of a land in length and breadth, are greater in reality than those given upon the map, on account partly of the mountains and valleys and partly of the windings of the roads, and, still further, that our calculations of the Hebrew cubit are not quite certain, and that even the smaller estimates of Thenius are possibly still too high, the measurements of the terumah given by Ezekiel correspond as exactly to the actual size of the land of Canaan as could be expected with a knowledge of its extent obtained not by trigonometrical measurement, but from a simple calculation of the length of the roads. - But this furnishes a confirmation by no means slight of our assumption, that the lengths and breadths indicated here are measured by rods and not by cubits. Reckoned by cubits, the terumah would be only a mile and a half or a mile and two-thirds in length and breadth, and the city possession would be only a third of a mile broad; whereas the prince's land would be more than six times as large as the whole of the terumah, - i.e., of the territory of the Levites, the priests, and the city, - thirteen times as large as the priests' land, and from thirty to thirty-two times as large as the city possession = proportions the improbability of which is at once apparent. — K+D

[daniel1212av]

Eze 48:31-35 
We have here a further account of the city that should be built for the metropolis of this glorious land, and to be the receptacle of those who would come from all parts to worship in the sanctuary adjoining. It is nowhere called Jerusalem, nor is the land which we have had such a particular account of the dividing of any where called the land of Canaan; for the old names are forgotten, to intimate that the old things are done away, behold all things have become new. Now, concerning this city, observe here, 1. The measures of its out-lets, and the grounds belonging to it, for its several conveniences; each way its appurtenances extended 4500 measures 18,000 in all, Eze_48:35. But what these measures were is uncertain. It is never said, in all this chapter, whether so many reeds (as our translation determines by inserting that word, Eze_48:8, each reed containing six cubits and span, Eze_40:5, and why should the measurer appear with the measuring reed in his hand of that length if he did not measure with that, except where it is expressly said he measured by cubits?) or whether, as others think, it is so many cubits, because those are mentioned Eze_45:2 and Eze_47:3. Yet that makes me incline rather to think that where cubits are not mentioned must be intended so many lengths of the measuring reed. But those who understand it of so many cubits are not agreed whether it be meant of the common cubit, which was half a yard, or the geometrical cubit, which, for better expedition, is supposed to be mostly used in surveying lands, which, some say, contained six cubits, others about three cubits and a half, so making 1000 cubits the same with 1000 paces, that is, an English mile. But our being left at this uncertainty is an intimation that these things are to be understood spiritually, and that what is principally meant is that there is an exact and just proportion observed by Infinite Wisdom in modelling the gospel church, which though now we cannot discern we shall when we come to heaven. 2. The number of its gates. It had twelve gates in all, three on each side, which was very agreeable when it lay four square; and these twelve gates were inscribed to the twelve tribes. Because the city was to be served out of all the tribes of Israel (Eze_48:19) it was fit that each tribe should have its gate; and, Levi being here taken in, to keep to the number twelve Ephraim and Manasseh are made one in Joseph, Eze_48:32. On the north side were the gates of Reuben, Judah, and Levi (Eze_48:31), on the east the gates of Joseph, Benjamin, and Dan (Eze_48:32), on the south the gates of Simeon, Issachar, and Zebulun (Eze_48:33), and on the west the gates of Gad, Asher, and Naphtali, Eze_48:34. Conformable to this, in St. John's vision, the new Jerusalem (for so the holy city is called there, though not here) has twelve gates, three on a side, and on them are written the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel, Rev_21:12, Rev_21:13. Note, Into the church of Christ, both militant and triumphant, there is a free access by faith for all that come of every tribe, from every quarter. Christ has opened the kingdom of heaven for all believers. Whoever will may come and take of the water of life, of the tree of life, freely. 3. The name given to this city: From that day, when it shall be newly-erected according to this model, the name of it shall be, not, as before, Jerusalem - The vision of peace, but which is the original of that, and more than equivalent to it, Jehovah Shammah - The Lord is there, Eze_48:35. This intimated, (1.) That the captives, after their return, should have manifest tokens of God's presence with them and his residence among them, both in his ordinances and his providences. They shall have no occasion to ask, as their fathers did, Is the Lord among us, or is he not? for they shall see and say that he is with them of a truth. And then, though their troubles were many and threatening, they were like the bush which burned but was not consumed, because the Lord was there. But when God departed from their temple, when he said, Migremus hinc - Let us go hence, their house was soon left unto them desolate. Being no longer his, it was not much longer theirs.

(2.) That the gospel-church should likewise have the presence of God in it, though not in the Shechinah, as of old, yet in a token of it no less sure, that of his Spirit. Where the gospel is faithfully preached, gospel ordinances are duly administered, and God is worshipped in the name of Jesus Christ only, it may truly be said, The Lord is there; for faithful is he that has said, and he will be as good as his word, Lo, I am with you always even unto the end of the world. The Lord is there in his church, to rule and govern it, to protect and defend it, and graciously to accept and own his sincere worshippers, and to be nigh unto them in all that they call upon him for. This should engage us to keep close to the communion of saints, for the Lord is there; and then whither shall we go to better ourselves? Nay, it is true of every good Christian; he dwells in God, and God in him; whatever soul has in it a living principle of grace, it may be truly said, The Lord is There. (3.) That the glory and happiness of heaven should consist chiefly in this, that the Lord is there. St. John's representation of that blessed state does indeed far exceed this in many respects. That is all gold, and pearls, and precious stones; it is much larger than this, and much brighter, for it needs not the light of the sun. But, in making the presence of God the principal matter of its bliss, they both agree. There the happiness of the glorified saints is made to be that God himself shall be with them (Rev_21:3), that he who sits on the throne shall dwell among them, Rev_7:15. And here it is made to crown the bliss of this holy city that the Lord is there. Let us therefore give all diligence to make sure to ourselves a place in that city, that we may be for ever with the Lord. — Henry 

The end of the book of Ezekiel.  Thanks be unto God.

[daniel1212av]

The book of Daniel the prophet. In this book all italicized words copied from the Bible and commentaries, the original formatting of which is lost when posting (unless individually coded), should appear. Thank God for a formula to do that all at once using OpenOffice.

Daniel - Daniel was of noble birth, if not one of the royal family of Judah. He was carried captive to Babylon in the fourth year of Jehoiachin, B. C. 606, when a youth. He was there taught the learning of the Chaldeans, and held high offices, both under the Babylonian and Persian empires. He was persecuted for his religion, but was miraculously delivered; and lived to a great age, as he must have been about ninety-four years old at the time of the last of his visions. The book of Daniel is partly historical, relating various circumstances which befell himself and the Jews, at Babylon; but is chiefly prophetical, detailing visions and prophecies which foretell numerous important events relative to the four great empires of the world, the coming and death of the Messiah, the restoration of the Jews, and the conversion of the Gentiles. Though there are considerable difficulties in explaining the prophetical meaning of some passages in this book, we always find encouragement to faith and hope, examples worthy of imitation, and something to direct our thoughts to Christ Jesus upon the cross and on his glorious throne. — MHCC 

Daniel - An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Book of the Prophet Daniel

The book of Ezekiel left the affairs of Jerusalem under a doleful aspect, all in ruins, but with a joyful prospect of all in glory again. This of Daniel fitly follows. Ezekiel told us what was seen, and what was foreseen, by him in the former years of the captivity: Daniel tells us what was seen, and foreseen, in the latter years of the captivity. When God employs different hands, yet it is about the same work. And it was a comfort to the poor captives that they had first one prophet among them and then another, to show them how long, and a sign that God had not quite cast them off. Let us enquire,  I. Concerning this prophet His Hebrew name was Daniel, which signifies the judgment of God; his Chaldean name was Belteshazzar. He was of the tribe of Judah, and, as it should seem, of the royal family. He was betimes eminent for wisdom and piety. Ezekiel, his contemporary, but much his senior, speaks of him as an oracle when thus he upbraids the king of Tyre with his conceitedness of himself: Thou art wiser then Daniel, Eze_38:3. He is likewise there celebrated for success in prayer, when Noah, Daniel, and Job are reckoned as three men that had the greatest interest in heaven of any, Eze_14:14. He began betimes to be famous, and continued long so. Some of the Jewish rabbin are loth to acknowledge him to be a prophet of the higher form, and therefore rank his book among the Hagiographa, not among the prophecies, and would not have their disciples pay much regard to it. One reason they pretend is because he did not live such a mean mortified life as Jeremiah and some other of the prophets did, but lived like a prince, and was a prime-minister of state; whereas we find him persecuted as other prophets were (ch. 6), and mortifying himself as other prophets did, when he ate no pleasant bread (Dan_10:3), and fainting sick when he was under the power of the Spirit of prophecy, Dan_8:27. Another reason they pretend is because he wrote his book in a heathen country, and there had his visions, and not in the land of Israel; but, for the same reason, Ezekiel also must be expunged out of the roll of prophets. But the true reason is that he speaks so plainly of the time of the Messiah's coming that the Jews cannot avoid the conviction of it and therefore do not care to hear of it. But Josephus calls him one of the greatest of the prophets, nay, the angel Gabriel calls him a man greatly beloved. He lived long an active life in the courts and councils of some of the greatest monarchs the world ever had, Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, Darius; for we mistake of we confine the privilege of an intercourse with heaven to speculative men, or those that spend their time in contemplation; no, who was more intimately acquainted with the mind of God than Daniel, a courtier, a statesman, and a man of business? The Spirit, as the wind, blows where it lists. And, if those that have much to do in the world plead that as an excuse for the infrequency and slightness of their converse with God, Daniel will condemn them. Some have thought that he returned to Jerusalem, and was one of the masters of the Greek synagogue; but nothing of that appears in scripture; it is therefore generally concluded that he died in Persia at Susan, where he lived to be very old.  II. Concerning this book. The first six chapters of it are historical, and are plain and easy; the last six are prophetical, and in them are many things dark, and hard to be understood, which yet would be more intelligible if we had a more complete history of the nations, and especially the Jewish nation, from Daniel's time to the coming of the Messiah. Our Saviour intimates the difficulty of apprehending the sense of Daniel's prophecies when, speaking of them, he says, Let him that readeth understand, Mat_24:15. The first chapter, and the first three verses of the second chapter, are in Hebrew; thence to the eighth chapter is in the Chaldee dialect; and thence to the end is in Hebrew. Mr. Broughton observes that, as the Chaldeans were kind to Daniel, and gave cups of cold water to him when he requested it, rather than the king's wine, God would not have them lose their reward, but made that language which they taught him to have honour in his writings through all the world, unto this day. Daniel, according to his computation, continues the holy story from the first surprising of Jerusalem by the Chaldean Babel, when he himself was carried away captive, until the last destruction of it by Rome, the mystical Babel, for so far forward his predictions look, Dan_9:27. The fables of Susannah, and of Bel and the Dragon, in both which Daniel is made a party, are apocryphal stories, which we think we have no reason to give any credit to, they being never found in the Hebrew or Chaldee, but only in the Greek, nor ever admitted by the Jewish church. There are some both of the histories and of the prophecies of this book that bear date in the latter end of the Chaldean monarchy, and others of both that are dated in the beginning of the Persian monarchy. But both Nebuchadnezzar's dream, which Daniel interpreted, and his own visions, point at the Grecian and Roman monarchies, and very particularly at the Jews' troubles under Antiochus, which it would be of great use to them to prepare for; as his fixing the very time for the coming of the Messiah was of use to all those that waited for the consolation of Israel, and is to us, for the confirming of our belief, That this is he who should come, and we are to look for no other. — Henry 

Daniel - The Book of Daniel Commentary by A.R. Faussett

Introduction

Daniel, that is, “God is my judge”; probably of the blood royal (compare Dan_1:3, with 1Ch_3:1, where a son of David is named so). Jerusalem may have been his birthplace (though Dan_9:24, “thy holy city,” does not necessarily imply this). He was carried to Babylon among the Hebrew captives brought thither by Nebuchadnezzar at the first deportation in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. As he and his three companions are called (Dan_1:4) “children,” he cannot have been more than about twelve years old when put in training, according to Eastern etiquette, to be a courtier (Dan_1:3, Dan_1:6). He then received a new name, by which it was usual to mark a change in one’s condition (2Ki_23:34; 2Ki_24:17; Ezr_5:14; Est_2:7), Belteshazzar, that is, “a prince favored by Bel” (Dan_1:7). His piety and wisdom were proverbial among his countrymen at an early period; probably owing to that noble proof he gave of faithfulness, combined with wisdom, in abstaining from the food sent to him from the king’s table, as being polluted by the idolatries usual at heathen banquets (Dan_1:8-16). Hence Ezekiel’s reference to him (Eze_14:14, Eze_14:20; Eze_28:3) is precisely of that kind we should expect; a coincidence which must be undesigned. Ezekiel refers to him not as a writer, but as exhibiting a character righteous and wise in discerning secrets, in those circumstances now found in his book, which are earlier than the time when Ezekiel wrote. As Joseph rose in Egypt by interpreting Pharaoh’s dreams, so Daniel, by interpreting Nebuchadnezzar’s, was promoted to be governor of Babylonia, and president of the Magian priest-caste. Under Evil-merodach, Nebuchadnezzar’s successor, as a change of officers often attends the accession of a new king, Daniel seems to have had a lower post, which led him occasionally to be away from Babylon (Dan_8:2, Dan_8:27). Again he came into note when he read the mystic writing of Belshazzar’s doom on the wall on the night of that monarch’s impious feast. Berosus calls the last Babylonian king Nabonidus and says he was not killed, but had an honorable abode in Carmania assigned to him, after having surrendered voluntarily in Borsippa. Rawlinson has cleared up the discrepancy from the Nineveh inscription. Belshazzar was joint king with his father, Evil-merodach or Nabonidus (called Minus in the inscriptions), to whom he was subordinate. He shut himself up in Babylon, while the other king took refuge elsewhere, namely, in Borsippa. Berosus gives the Chaldean account, which suppresses all about Belshazzar, as being to the national dishonor.

[daniel1212av]

Had Daniel been a late book, he would no doubt have taken up the later account of Berosus. If he gave a history differing from that current in Babylonia, the Jews of that region would not have received it as true. Darius the Mede, or Cyaxares II, succeeded and reigned two years. The mention of this monarch’s reign, almost unknown to profane history (being eclipsed by the splendor of Cyrus) is an incidental proof that Daniel wrote as a contemporary historian of events which he knew, and did not borrow from others. In the third year of Cyrus he saw the visions (the tenth through twelfth chapters) relating to his people down to the latest days and the coming resurrection. He must have been about eighty-four years old at this time. Tradition represents Daniel as having died and been buried at Shushan. Though his advanced age did not allow him to be among those who returned to Palestine, yet he never ceased to have his people’s interests nearest to his heart (Dan_9:3-19; Dan_10:12).

Authenticity of the Book of Daniel. Dan_7:1, Dan_7:28; Dan_8:2; Dan_9:2; Dan_10:1, Dan_10:2; Dan_12:4, Dan_12:5, testify that it was composed by Daniel himself. He does not mention himself in the first six chapters, which are historical; for in these it is not the author, but the events which are the prominent point. In the last six, which are prophetical, the author makes himself known, for here it was needed, prophecy being a revelation of words to particular men. It holds a third rank in the Hebrew canon: not among the prophets, but in the Hagiographa (Chetubim), between Esther and Ezra, books like it relating to the captivity; because he did not strictly belong to those who held exclusively the profession of “prophets” in the theocracy, but was rather a “seer,” having the gift, but not the office of prophet. Were the book an interpolated one, it doubtless would have been placed among the prophets. Its present position is a proof of its genuineness, as it was deliberately put in a position different from that where most would expect to find it. Placed between Esther, and Ezra and Nehemiah, it separated the historical books of the time after the captivity. Thus, Daniel was, as Bengel calls him, the politician, chronologer, and historian among the prophets. The Psalms also, though many are prophetical, are ranked with the Hagiographa, not with the prophets; and the Revelation of John is separated from his Epistles, as Daniel is from the Old Testament prophets. Instead of writing in the midst of the covenant people, and making them the foreground of his picture, he writes in a heathen court, the world kingdoms occupying the foreground, and the kingdom of God, though ultimately made the most significant, the background. His peculiar position in the heathen court is reflected in his peculiar position in the canon. As the “prophets” in the Old Testament, so the epistles of the apostles in the New Testament were written by divinely commissioned persons for their contemporaries. But Daniel and John were not in immediate contact with the congregation, but isolated and alone with God, the one in a heathen court, the other on a lonely isle (Rev_1:9). Porphyry, the assailant of Christianity in the third century, asserted that the Book of Daniel was a forgery of the time of the Maccabees (170-164 b.c.), a time when confessedly there were no prophets, written after the events as to Antiochus Epiphanes, which it professes to foretell; so accurate are the details. A conclusive proof of Daniel’s inspiration, if his prophecies can be shown to have been before the events. Now we know, from Josephus [Antiquities, 10.11.7], that the Jews in Christ’s days recognized Daniel as in the canon. Zechariah, Ezra, and Nehemiah, centuries before Antiochus, refer to it. Jesus refers to it in His characteristic designation, “Son of man,” Mat_24:30 (Dan_7:13); also expressly by name, and as a “prophet,” in Mat_24:15 (compare Mat_24:21, with Dan_12:1, etc.); and in the moment that decided His life (Mat_26:64) or death, when the high priest adjured him by the living God. Also, in Luk_1:19-26, “Gabriel” is mentioned, whose name occurs nowhere else in Scripture, save in Dan_8:16; Dan_9:21. Besides the references to it in Revelation, Paul confirms the prophetical part of it, as to the blasphemous king (Dan_7:8, Dan_7:25; Dan_11:36), in 1Co_6:2; 2Th_2:3, 2Th_2:4; the narrative part, as to the miraculous deliverances from “the lions” and “the fire,” in Heb_11:33, Heb_11:34. Thus the book is expressly attested by the New Testament on the three points made the stumbling-block of neologists - the predictions, the narratives of miracles, and the manifestations of angels. An objection has been stated to the unity of the book, namely, that Jesus quotes no part of the first half of Daniel. But Mat_21:44 would be an enigma if it were not a reference to the “stone that smote the image” (Dan_2:34, Dan_2:35, Dan_2:44, Dan_2:45). Thus the New Testament sanctions the second, third, sixth, seventh, and eleventh chapters. The design of the miracles in the heathen courts where Daniel was, as of those of Moses in Egypt, was to lead the world power, which seemed to be victorious over the theocracy, to see the essential inner superiority of the seemingly fallen kingdom of God to itself, and to show prostrate Israel that the power of God was the same as of old in Egypt. The first book of Maccabees (compare 1 Maccabees 1:24; 9:27, 40, with Dan_12:1; Dan_11:26, of the Septuagint) refers to Daniel as an accredited book, and even refers to the Septuagint Alexandrian version of it. The fact of Daniel having a place in the Septuagint shows it was received by the Jews at large prior to the Maccabean times. The Septuagint version so arbitrarily deviated from the Hebrew Daniel, that Theodotius’ version was substituted for it in the early Christian Church. Josephus [Antiquities, 11.8.5] mentions that Alexander the Great had designed to punish the Jews for their fidelity to Darius, but that Jaddua (332 b.c.), the high priest, met him at the head of a procession and averted his wrath by showing him Daniel’s prophecy that a Grecian monarch should overthrow Persia. Certain it is, Alexander favored the Jews, and Josephus’ statement gives an explanation of the fact; at least it shows that the Jews in Josephus’ days believed that Daniel was extant in Alexander’s days, long before the Maccabees. With Jaddua (high priest from 341-322 b.c.) the Old Testament history ends (Neh_12:11). (The register of the priests and Levites was not written by Nehemiah, who died about 400 b.c., but was inserted with divine sanction by the collectors of the canon subsequently.) An objection to Daniel’s authenticity has been rested on a few Greek words found in it. But these are mostly names of Greek musical instruments, which were imported by Greece from the East, rather than vice versa. Some of the words are derived from the common Indo-Germanic stock of both Greek and Chaldee: hence their appearance in both tongues. And one or two may have come through the Greeks of Asia Minor to the Chaldee. The fact that from the fourth verse of the second chapter to the end of the seventh, the language is Chaldee, but the rest Hebrew, is not an argument against, but for, its authenticity. So in Ezra the two languages are found. The work, if that of one author, must have been composed by someone in the circumstances of Daniel, that is, by one familiar with both languages. No native-born Hebrew who had not lived in Chaldea would know Chaldee so well as to use it with the same idiomatic ease as his native tongue; the very impurities in Daniel’s use of both are just such as were natural to one in his circumstances, but unnatural to one in a later age, or to one not half Hebrew, half Chaldean in residence as Daniel was. Those parts of Daniel which concern the whole world are mostly Chaldee, then the language of the world empire. So Greek was made the language of the New Testament, which was designed for the whole world. Those affecting the Jews, mostly Hebrew; and this not so impure as that of Ezekiel. His Chaldee is a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic. Two predictions alone are enough to prove to us that Daniel was a true prophet. (1) That his prophecies reach beyond Antiochus; namely, he foretells the rise of the four great monarchies, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome (the last not being in Daniel’s time known beyond the precincts of Italy, or rather of Latium), and that no other earthly kingdom would subvert the fourth, but that it would divide into parts. All this has come to pass. No fifth great earthly monarchy has arisen, though often attempted, as by Charlemagne, Charles V, and Napoleon. (2) The time of Messiah’s advent, as dated from a certain decree, His being cut off, and the destruction of the city. “He who denies Daniel’s prophecies,” says Sir Isaac Newton, “undermines Christianity, which is founded on Daniel’s prophecies concerning Christ.”

[daniel1212av]

Characteristics of Daniel. The vision mode of revelation is the exception in other prophets, the rule in Daniel. In Zechariah (Zechariah 1:1-6:15), who lived after Daniel, the same mode appears, but the other form from the seventh chapter to the end. The Revelation of St. John alone is perfectly parallel to Daniel, which may be called the Old Testament Apocalypse. In the contents too there is the difference above noticed, that he views the kingdom of God from the standpoint of the world kingdoms, the development of which is his great subject. This mode of viewing it was appropriate to his own position in a heathen court, and to the relation of subjection in which the covenant-people then stood to the world powers. No longer are single powers of the world incidentally introduced, but the universal monarchies are the chief theme, in which the worldly principle, opposed to the kingdom of God, manifests itself fully. The near and distant are not seen in the same perspective, as by the other prophets, who viewed the whole future from the eschatological point; but in Daniel the historical details are given of that development of the world powers which must precede the advent of the kingdom [Auberlen].

Significance of the Babylonian Captivity. The exile is the historical basis of Daniel’s prophecies, as Daniel implies in the first chapter, which commences with the beginning, and ends with the termination, of the captivity (Dan_1:1, Dan_1:21; compare Dan_9:1, Dan_9:2). A new stage in the theocracy begins with the captivity. Nebuchadnezzar made three incursions into Judah. The first under Jehoiakim (606 b.c.), in which Daniel was carried away, subjected the theocracy to the Babylonian world power. The second (598 b.c.) was that in which Jehoiachin and Ezekiel were carried away. In the third (588 b.c.), Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and carried away Zedekiah. Originally, Abraham was raised out of the “sea” (Dan_7:2) of the nations, as an island holy to God, and his seed chosen as God’s mediator of His revelations of love to mankind. Under David and Solomon, the theocracy, as opposed to the heathen power, attained its climax in the Old Testament, not only being independent, but lord of the surrounding nations; so that the period of these two kings was henceforth made the type of the Messianic. But when God’s people, instead of resting on Him, seek alliance with the world power, that very power is made the instrument of their chastisement. So Ephraim (722 b.c.) fell by Assyria; and Judah also, drawn into the sphere of the world’s movements from the time of Ahaz, who sought Assyrian help (740 b.c., Isa_7:1-25) at last fell by Babylon, and thenceforth has been more or less dependent on the world monarchies, and so, till Messiah, was favored with no revelations from the time of Malachi (four hundred years). Thus, from the beginning of the exile, the theocracy, in the strict sense, ceased on earth; the rule of the world powers superseding it. But God’s covenant with Israel remains firm (Rom_11:29); therefore, a period of blessing under Messiah’s kingdom is now foretold as about to follow their long chastisement. The exile thus is the turning point in the history of the theocracy, which Roos thus divides: (1) From Adam to the exodus out of Egypt. (2) From the exodus to the beginning of the Babylonian captivity. (3) From the captivity to the millennium. (4) From the millennium to the end of the world. The position of Daniel in the Babylonian court was in unison with the altered relations of the theocracy and the world power, which new relation was to be the theme of his prophecy. Earlier prophets, from the standpoint of Israel, treated of Israel in its relation to the world powers; Daniel, from Babylon, the center of the then world power, treats of the world powers in their relation to Israel. His seventy years’ residence in Babylon, and his high official position there, gave him an insight into the world’s politics, fitting him to be the recipient of political revelations; while his spiritual experiences, gained through Nebuchadnezzar’s humiliation, Belshazzar’s downfall, and the rapid decay of the Babylonian empire itself, as well as the miraculous deliverances of himself and his friends (the third through sixth chapters), all fitted him for regarding things from the spiritual standpoint, from which the world’s power appears transient, but the glory of God’s kingdom eternal. As his political position was the body, the school of magicians in which he had studied for three years (Dan_1:4, Dan_1:5) was the soul; and his mind strong in faith and nourished by the earlier prophecies (Dan_9:2), the spirit of his prophecy, which only waited for the spirit of revelation from above to kindle it. So God fits His organs for their work. Auberlen compares Daniel to Joseph: the one at the beginning, the other at the end of the Jewish history of revelation; both representatives of God and His people at heathen courts; both interpreters of the dim presentiments of truth, expressed in God-sent dreams, and therefore raised to honor by the powers of the world: so representing Israel’s calling to be a royal priesthood among the nations; and types of Christ, the true Israel, and of Israel’s destination to be a light to lighten the whole Gentile world, as Rom_11:12, Rom_11:15 foretells. As Achilles at the beginning, and Alexander at the end, of Grecian history are the mirrors of the whole life of the Hellenic people, so Joseph and Daniel of Israel.

Contents of the Book. Historical and biographical introduction in the first chapter. Daniel, a captive exile, is representative of his nation in its servitude and exile: while his heavenly insight into dreams, far exceeding that of the magi, represents the divine superiority of the covenant-people over their heathen lords. The high dignities, even in the world, which he thereby attained, typify the giving of the earth-kingdom at last “to the people of the saints of the Most High” (Dan_7:27). Thus Daniel’s personal history is the typical foundation of his prophecy. The prophets had to experience in themselves, and in their age, something of what they foretold about future times; just as David felt much of Christ’s sufferings in his own person (compare Hos_1:2-9, Hos_1:10, Hos_1:11; Hos_2:3). So Jon_1:1-17, etc. [Roos]. Hence biographical notices of Daniel and his friends are inserted among his prophecies. The second through twelfth chapters contain the substance of the book, and consist of two parts. The first (the second through seventh chapters) represents the development of the world powers, viewed from a historical point. The second (the eighth through twelfth chapters), their development in relation to Israel, especially in the future preceding Christ’s first advent, foretold in the ninth chapter. But prophecy looks beyond the immediate future to the complete fulfillment in the last days, since the individual parts in the organic history of salvation cannot be understood except in connection with the whole. Also Israel looked forward to the Messianic time, not only for spiritual salvation, but also for the visible restoration of the kingdom which even now we too expect. The prophecy which they needed ought therefore to comprise both, and so much of the history of the world as would elapse before the final consummation. The period of Daniel’s prophecies, therefore, is that from the downfall of the theocracy at the captivity till its final restoration, yet future - the period of the dominion of the world powers, not set aside by Christ’s first coming (Joh_18:36; for, to have taken the earth-kingdom then, would have been to take it from Satan’s hands, Mat_4:8-10), but to be superseded by His universal and everlasting kingdom at His second coming (Rev_11:15). Thus the general survey of the development and final destiny of the world powers (the second through seventh chapters) fittingly precedes the disclosures as to the immediate future (the eighth through twelfth chapters). Daniel marks the division by writing the first part in Chaldee, and the second, and the introduction, in Hebrew; the former, referring to the powers of the world, in the language of the then dominant world power under which he lived; the latter, relating to the people of God, in their own language. An interpolator in a later age would have used Hebrew, the language of the ancient prophets throughout, or if anywhere Aramaic, so as to be understood by his contemporaries, he would have used it in the second rather than in the first part as having a more immediate reference to his own times [Auberlen].  — JFB

[daniel1212av]

Daniel - Introduction to the Book of Daniel

Section I. The Life of Daniel

Of Daniel little more is known, or can now be ascertained, than is recorded in this book. There are two other persons of this name mentioned in the Bible - a son of David 1Ch_3:1; and a Levite of the race of Ithamar Ezr_8:2; Neh_10:6. The latter has been sometimes confounded with the prophet, as he is in the apocryphal addenda to the Septuagint.

Daniel, supposed commonly to be the same person as the author of this book, is twice mentioned by Ezekiel, once as deserving to be ranked with Noah and Job, and once as eminent for wisdom. “Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord God” Eze_14:14. “Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee” Eze_28:3. Whether this is the Daniel who is the author of this book, however or whether this was some ancient patriarch whose name had been handed down by tradition, and whose name was assumed” by the author of this book in later times, has been a question among recent critics, and will properly come up for examination under the next section in this Introduction.

Assuming now that the book is genuine, and that it was written by him whose name it bears, all that is known of Daniel is substantially as follows:

He was descended from one of the highest families in Judah, if not one of royal blood (notes at Dan_1:3; Josephus’ Ant. b. x. chapter x. Section 1). His birthplace was probably Jerusalem (compare Dan_9:24), though it is not absolutely certain that this passage would demonstrate it.
Of his first years nothing is recorded. At an early age we find him in Babylon, among the captive Hebrews whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away at the first deportation of the people of Judah, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. He is mentioned in connection with three other youths, apparently of the same rank, Hananiah, Mishacl, and Azariah, who, with him, were selected for the purpose of being instructed in the language and literature of the Chaldeans, with a view to their being employed in the service of the court Dan_1:3-4. His age at that time it is impossible to determine with accuracy, but it is not; improbable that it was somewhere about twelve or fifteen years. In Dan_1:4, he and his three friends are called “children” (ילדם  yelâdı̂ym). “This word properly denotes the period from the age of childhood up to manhood, and might be translated boys, lads, or youth” - (Prof. Stuart on Daniel, p. 373).

Ignatius (Ep. ad Magn.) says that Daniel was twelve years of age when he went into exile; Chrysostom says that he was eighteen (Opp, vi., p. 423); Epiphanius says, ἔτι νήπιος ὤν  eti nēpios ōn; Jerome calls him admodum puer. These are, of course, mere conjectures, or traditions, but they are probably not far from the truth. Such was the age at which persons would be most likely to be selected for the training here referred to. The design of this selection and training is not mentioned, but in the circumstances of the case it is perhaps not difficult to conjecture it. The Hebrews were a captive people. It was natural to suppose that they would be restless, and perhaps insubordinate, in their condition, and it was a matter of policy to do all that could be done to conciliate them. Nothing would better tend to this than to select some of their own number who were of their most distinguished families; to place them at court; to provide for them from the royal bounty; to give them the advantages of the best education that the capital afforded; to make an arrangement that contemplated their future employment in the service of the state, and to furnish them every opportunity of promotion. Besides, in the dialog of the government with the captive Hebrews, of which, from the nature of the case, there would be frequent occasion, it would be an advantage to have native-born Hebrews in the confidence of the government, who could be employed to conduct that contact.

In this situation, and with this view, Daniel received that thorough education which Oriental etiquette makes indispensable in a courtier (compare Plato, Alcib. Section 37), and was more especially instructed in the science of the Chaldeans, and in speaking and writing their language. He had before evidently been carefully trained in the Hebrew learning, and in the knowledge of the institutions of his country, and was thoroughly imbued with the principles of the religion of his fathers. An opportunity soon occurred of putting his principles to the test. Trained in strict religious principles, and in the sternest rules of temperance in cating and drinking, and fearing the effect of the luxurious living provided for him and his companions by the royal bounty, he resolved, with them, to avoid at once the danger of conforming to the habits of idolaters; of “polluting” himself by customs forbidden by his religion, and of jeoparding his own health and life by intemperate indulgence. He aimed, also, to secure the utmost vigour of body, and the utmost clearness of mind, by a course of strict and conscientious temperance. He obtained permission, therefore, to abstain from the food provided for him, and to make an experiment of the most temperate mode of living Dan_1:8-14. “His prudent proceedings, wise bearing, and absolute refusal to comply with such customs, were crowned with the divine blessing, and had the most splendid results.”

After the lapse of three years spent in this course of discipline, Daniel passed the examination which was necessary to admit him to the royal favor, and was received into connection with the government, to be employed in the purposes which had been contemplated in this preparatory training Dan_1:18-20. One of his first acts was an interpretation of a dream of Nebuchadnezzar, which none of the Chaldeans had been able to interpret, the result of which was that he was raised at once to that important office, the governorship of the province of Babylon, and the head inspectorship of the sacerdotal caste Dan. 2.

Considerably later in the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, we find Daniel interpreting another dream of his, to the effect that, in consequence of Iris pride, he would be deprived for a time of his reason and his throne, and would be suffered to wander from the abodes of men, and to live among wild beasts, but that after a time he would be again restored. The record which we have of this is found in a proclamation of the king himself, which is preserved by Daniel Dan. 4. In the interpretation of this remarkable dream, and in stating to the king - the most proud and absolute monarch of the earth at that time - what would come upon him, Daniel displays the most touching anxiety, love, and loyalty for the prince, and shows that he was led to this interpretation only by the conviction of the truth. In view of a calamity so great, he exhorted the monarch yet to humble himself and to repent of his sins, and to perform acts of charity, with the hope that God might be merciful, and avert from him a doom so humiliating - so much to be dreaded Dan_4:19-27.

Under the immediate successor of Nebuchadnezzar - Evil-Merodaeh - Daniel appears to have been forgotten, and his talents and his former services seem to have passed away from the recollection of those in power. His situation at court appears to have been confined to an inferior office Dan_8:27, and it would seem also that this led him occasionally, if not regularly, away from Babylon to some of the provinces to attend to business there. (Compare the notes at Dan_8:2). This was not strange. On the death of a monarch, it was not unusual to discharge the officers who had been employed in the government, as, at the present time, on the death of a king, or a change of dynasty, the members of the cabinet are changed; or as the same thing happens in our own country when a change occurs in the chief magistracy of the nation.  Sir John Chardin, in his Manuscript Notes on Persia, says that, in his time, on the death of a Shah or king, all the soothsayers and physicians attached to the court were at once dismissed from office; the former because they did not predict his death, and the latter because they did not prevent it.

It is to be remembered also, that Daniel was raised to power by the will of Nebuchadnezzar alone, and that the offices which he held were, in part, in consequence of the service which he had rendered that prince; and it is not strange, therefore, that on a change of the government, he, with perhaps the other favorites of the former sovereign, should be suffered to retire. We find consequently no mention made of Daniel during the reign of Evil-Merodach, or in the short reign of his successor; we lose sight of him until the reign of Belshazzar, the last king of Babylon, and then he is mentioned only in connection with the closing scene of his life Dan. 5. In consequence of a remarkable vision which Belshazzar had of a handwriting on the wall, and of the inability of any of the wise men of the Chaldeans to read and interpret it, Daniel, at the instance of the queen-mother, who remembered his former services at court, was called in, and read the writing, and announced to the king the impending destiny of himself and his empire. For this service he was again restored to honor, and the purpose was formed to raise him to an exalted rank at court - a purpose which was, however, frustrated by the fact that Babylon was that very night taken, and that the government passed into the hands of the Medes and Persians.

[daniel1212av]

It was under this king, however, that Daniel had two of his most remarkable visions Dan. 7; 8 respecting future events - visions which, perhaps, more definitely than any other in the Scriptures, disclose what is to occur in the ages to come.

 After the conquest of Babylon by the united arms of the Medes and Persians, under the reign of Darius or Cyaxares, Daniel was raised again to an exalted station. The whole kingdom was divided into one hundred and twenty provinces, and over these three presidents or chief governors were appointed, and of these Daniel had the first rank Dan_6:1-3. The reasons of this appointment are not stated, but they were doubtless found in such circumstances as the following: that it was desirable for Darius to employ some one who was familiar with the affairs of the Babylonian empire; that Daniel probably had knowledge on that subject equal or superior to any other one that could be found; that, he had long been employed at court, and was familiar with the laws, usages, and customs that prevailed there; that he knew better than anyone else, perhaps, what would secure the tranquility of that portion of the empire; that, being himself a foreigner, it might be supposed better to employ him than it would be a native Chaldean, for it might be presumed that he would be less inimical to a foreign dominion.

Under these circumstances he was again raised to a high rank among the officers of the government; but his elevation was not beheld without malice and envy. Those who might have expected this office for themselves, or who were dissatisfied that a foreigner should be thus exalted, resolved, if possible, to bring him into such a situation as would ruin him Dan_6:4. To do this, they determined to take advantage of a principle in the government of the Medes and Persians, that a law having once received the royal sanction could not be changed; and by securing the passing of such a law as they knew Daniel would not obey, they hoped to humble and ruin him. They, therefore, under plausible pretences, secured the passing of a law that no one in the realm should be allowed for a certain time to offer any petition to any God or man, except the king, on penalty of being thrown into a den of lions. Daniel, as they anticipated, was the first to disregard this law, by continuing his regular habit of worshipping God, praying, as he had been accustomed, three times a-day, with his window open. The consequence was, that the king, there being no way to prevent the execution of the law, allowed it to be executed. Daniel was cast into the den of lions, but was miraculously preserved; and this new proof of his integrity, and of the divine favor, was the means of his being raised to more exalted honor Dan. 6.

In this situation at court, and with these advantages for promoting the interests of his people, he employed himself in seriously and diligently securing the return of the exiles to their own country, though it does not appear that he himself returned, or that he contemplated a return. It is probable that he supposed that at his time of life it would not be wise to attempt such a journey; or that he supposed he could be of more use to his countrymen in Babylon in favoring their return than he could by accompanying them to their own land. His position at the court of the Medo-Persian government gave him an opportunity of rendering material aid to his people, and it is not improbable that it was through his instrumentality that the decree was obtained from Cyrus which allowed them to return. One of the designs of Providence in raising him up was, doubtless, that he might exert that influence at court, and that he might thus be the means of restoring the exiles. He had at last the happiness to see his most ardent wishes accomplished in this respect.

In the third year of Cyrus, he had a vision, or a series of visions Dan. 10–12, containing minute details respecting the history and sufferings of his nation to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, concluding with a more general representation Dan_12:1-13 of what would occur in the last days of the world’s history. — Barnes   (abridged)

[daniel1212av]

  Daniel 1:1-21  In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.  (2)  And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his 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.  (3)  And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes;  (4)  Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.  (5)  And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king.  (6)  Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah:  (7)  Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego. 

(8 ) But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king's meat, nor with the wine which he drank: therefore he requested of the prince of the eunuchs that he might not defile himself.  (9)  Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs.  (10)  And the prince of the eunuchs said unto Daniel, I fear my lord the king, who hath appointed your meat and your drink: for why should he see your faces worse liking than the children which are of your sort? then shall ye make me endanger my head to the king.  (11)  Then said Daniel to Melzar, whom the prince of the eunuchs had set over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah,  (12)  Prove thy servants, I beseech thee, ten days; and let them give us pulse to eat, and water to drink.  (13)  Then let our countenances be looked upon before thee, and the countenance of the children that eat of the portion of the king's meat: and as thou seest, deal with thy servants.  (14) So he consented to them in this matter, and proved them ten days.  (15)  And at the end of ten days their countenances appeared fairer and fatter in flesh than all the children which did eat the portion of the king's meat.  (16)  Thus Melzar took away the portion of their meat, and the wine that they should drink; and gave them pulse.

(17)  As for these four children, God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom: and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams.  (18)  Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in, then the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar.  (19)  And the king communed with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore stood they before the king.  (20)  And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm.  (21)  And Daniel continued even unto the first year of king Cyrus.

[daniel1212av]

Daniel 1 - INTRODUCTION TO DANIEL 1.

This chapter begins with an account of the first captivity of the Jews, in the times of Jehoiakim; of which captivity Daniel was one, and it is mentioned on his account, Dan_1:1, who, with others, were selected by the order of the king of Babylon, to be educated in the learning of the Chaldeans, and to be maintained at his expense, in order to be his ministers, Dan_1:3, but Daniel and his three companions refused the king's meat and wine, lest they should be defiled; in which they were indulged by their governor, after trial being made, that they were fairer and fatter for it, Dan_1:8, and, at the end of the time appointed, they appeared to have a large share of knowledge, wisdom, and learning; upon which they were taken into the king's court and service, Dan_1:17, and the chapter is concluded with observing the long continuation of Daniel here, even to the first year of Cyrus, Dan_1:21.  — Gill

Daniel 1 -
This chapter gives us a more particular account of the beginning of Daniel's life, his original and education, than we have of any other of the prophets. Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, began immediately with divine visions; but Daniel began with the study of human learning, and was afterwards honoured with divine visions; such variety of methods has God taken in training up men for the service of his church. We have here,  I. Jehoiakim's first captivity (Dan_1:1, Dan_1:2), in which Daniel, with others of the seed-royal, was carried to Babylon.  II. The choice made of Daniel, and some other young men, to be brought up in the Chaldean literature, that they might be fitted to serve the government, and the provision made for them (Dan_1:3-7).  III. Their pious refusal to eat the portion of the king's meat, and their determining to live upon pulse and water, which, having tried it, the master of the eunuchs allowed them to do, finding that it agreed very well with them (Dan_1:8-16).  IV. Their wonderful improvement, above all their fellows, in wisdom and knowledge (Dan_1:17-21). — Henry 

Dan 1:1-7 
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in the first year of his reign, took Jerusalem, and carried whom and what he pleased away. From this first captivity, most think the seventy years are to be dated. It is the interest of princes to employ wise men; and it is their wisdom to find out and train up such. Nebuchadnezzar ordered that these chosen youths should be taught. All their Hebrew names had something of God in them; but to make them forget the God of their fathers, the Guide of their youth, the heathen gave them names that savoured of idolatry. It is painful to reflect how often public education tends to corrupt the principles and morals.

Dan 1:8-16 
The interest we think we make for ourselves, we must acknowledge to be God's gift. Daniel was still firm to his religion. Whatever they called him, he still held fast the spirit of an Israelite. These youths scrupled concerning the meat, lest it should be sinful. When God's people are in Babylon they need take special care that they partake not of her sins. It is much to the praise of young people, not to covet or seek the delights of sense. Those who would excel in wisdom and piety, must learn betimes to keep the body under. Daniel avoided defiling himself with sin; and we should more fear that than any outward trouble. It is easier to keep temptation at a distance, than to resist it when near. And we cannot better improve our interest in any with whom we have found favour, than to use it to keep us from sin. People will not believe the benefit of avoiding excess, and of a spare diet, nor how much they contribute to the health of the body, unless they try. Conscientious temperance will always do more, even for the comfort of this life, than sinful indulgence.

Dan 1:17-21 
Daniel and his fellows kept to their religion; and God rewarded them with eminence in learning. Pious young persons should endeavour to do better than their fellows in useful things; not for the praise of man, but for the honour of the gospel, and that they may be qualified for usefulness. And it is well for a country, and for the honour of a prince, when he is able to judge who are best fitted to serve him, and prefers them on that account. Let young men steadily attend to this chapter; and let all remember that God will honour those who honour him, but those who despise him shall be lightly esteemed. — MHCC

Dan 1:1-7 

We have in these verses an account,

I.Of the first descent which Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in the first year of his reign, made upon Judah and Jerusalem, in the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim, and his success in that expedition (Dan_1:1, Dan_1:2.): He besieged Jerusalem, soon made himself master of it, seized the king, took whom he pleased and what he pleased away with him, and then left Jehoiakim to reign as tributary to him, which he did about eight years longer, but then rebelled, and it was his ruin. Now from this first captivity most interpreters think the seventy years are to be dated, though Jerusalem was not destroyed, nor the captivity completed, till about nineteen years after, In that first year Daniel was carried to Babylon, and there continued the whole seventy years (see Dan_1:21), during which time all nations shall serve Nebuchadnezzar, and his son, and his son's son, Jer_25:11. This one prophet therefore saw within the compass of his own time the rise, reign, and ruin of that monarchy; so that it was res unius aetatis - the affair of a single age, such short-lived things are the kingdoms of the earth; but the kingdom of heaven is everlasting. The righteous, that see them taking root, shall see their fall, Job_5:3; Pro_29:16. Mr. Broughton observes the proportion of times in God's government since the coming out of Egypt: thence to their entering Canaan forty years, thence seven years to the dividing of the land, thence seven Jubilees to the first year of Samuel, in whom prophecy began, thence to this first year of the captivity seven seventies of years, 490 (ten Jubilees), thence to the return one seventy, thence to the death of Christ seven seventies more, thence to the destruction of Jerusalem forty years.

II.The improvement he made of this success. He did not destroy the city or kingdom, but did that which just accomplished the first threatening of mischief by Babylon. It was denounced against Hezekiah, for showing his treasures to the king of Babylon's ambassadors (Isa_39:6, Isa_39:7), that the treasures and the children should be carried away, and, if they had been humbled and reformed by this, hitherto the king of Babylon's power and success should have gone, but no further. If less judgments do the work, God will not send greater; but, if not, he will heat the furnace seven times hotter. Let us see what was now done. 1. The vessels of the sanctuary were carried away, part of them, Dan_1:2. They fondly trusted to the temple to defend them, though they went on in their iniquity. And now, to show them the vanity of that confidence, the temple is first plundered. Many of the holy vessels which used to be employed in the service of God were taken away by the king of Babylon, those of them, it is likely, which were most valuable, and he brought them as trophies of victory to the house of his god, to whom, with a blind devotion, he gave praise of his success; and having appropriated these vessels, in token of gratitude, to his god, he put them in the treasury of his temple. See the righteousness of God; his people had brought the images of other gods into his temple, and now he suffers the vessels of the temple to be carried into the treasuries of those other gods. Note, When men profane the vessels of the sanctuary with their sins it is just with God to profane them by his judgments. It is probable that the treasures of the king's house were rifled, as was foretold, but particular mention is made of the taking away of the vessels of the sanctuary because we shall find afterwards that the profanation of them was that which filled up the measure of the Chaldeans' iniquity, Dan_5:3. But observe, It was only part of them that went now; some were left them yet upon trial, to see if they would take the right course to prevent the carrying away of the remainder. See Jer_27:18. 2. The children and young men, especially such as were of noble or royal extraction, that were sightly and promising, and of good natural parts, were carried away. Thus was the iniquity of the fathers visited upon the children. These were taken away by Nebuchadnezzar, (1.) As trophies, to be made a show of for the evidencing and magnifying of his success. (2.) As hostages for the fidelity of their parents in their own land, who would be concerned to conduct themselves well that their children might have the better treatment. (3.) As a seed to serve him. He took them away to train them up for employments and preferments under him, either out of an unaccountable affectation, which great men often have, to be attended by foreigners, though they be blacks, rather than by those of their own nation, or because he knew that there were no such witty, sprightly, ingenious young men to be found among his Chaldeans as abounded among the youth of Israel; and, if that were so, it was much for the honour of the Jewish nation, as of an uncommon genius above other people, and a fruit of the blessing. But it was a shame that a people who had so much wit should have so little wisdom and grace. Now observe,

[daniel1212av]

II. 1. The directions which the king of Babylon gave for the choice of these youths, Dan_1:4. They must not choose such as were deformed in body, but comely and well-favoured, whose countenances were indexes of ingenuity and good humour. But that is not enough; they must be skilful in all wisdom, and cunning, or well-seen in knowledge, and understanding science, such as were quick and sharp, and could give a ready and intelligent account of their own country and of the learning they had hitherto been brought up in. He chose such as were young, because they would be pliable and tractable, would forget their own people and incorporate with the Chaldeans. He had an eye to what he designed them for; they must be such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, not only to attend his royal person, but to preside in his affairs. This is an instance of the policy of this rising monarch, now in the beginning of his reign, and was a good omen of his prosperity, that he was in care to raise up a succession of persons fit for public business. He did not, like Ahasuerus, appoint them to choose him out young women for the service of his government. It is the interest of princes to have wise men employed under them; it is therefore their wisdom to take care for the finding out and training up of such. It is the misery of this world that so many who are fit for public stations are buried in obscurity, and so many who are unfit for them are preferred to them. [2.] The care which he took concerning them. First, For their education. He ordered that they should be taught the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans. They are supposed to be wise and knowing young men, and yet they must be further taught. Give instructions to a wise man and he will increase in learning. Note, Those that would do good in the world when they grow up must learn when they are young. That is the learning age; if that time be lost, it will hardly be redeemed. It does not appear that Nebuchadnezzar designed they should learn the unlawful arts that were used among the Chaldeans, magic and divination; if he did, Daniel and his fellows would not defile themselves with them. Nay, we do not find that he ordered them to be taught the religion of the Chaldeans, by which it appears That he was at this time no bigot; if men were skilful and faithful, and fit for his business, it was not material to him what religion they were of, provided they had but some religion. They must be trained up in the language and laws of the country, in history, philosophy, and mathematics, in the arts of husbandry, war, and navigation, in such learning as might qualify them to serve their generation. Note, It is real service to the public to provide for the good education of the youth. Secondly, For their maintenance. He provided for them three years, not only necessaries, but dainties for their encouragement in their studies. They had daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank, Dan_1:5. This was an instance of his generosity and humanity; though they were captives, he considered their birth and quality, their spirit and genius, and treated them honourably, and studied to make their captivity easy to them. There is a respect due to those who are well-born and bred when they have fallen into distress. With a liberal education there should be a liberal maintenance.

III. A particular account of Daniel and his fellows. They were of the children of Judah, the royal tribe, and probably of the house of David, which had grown a numerous family; and God told Hezekiah that of the children that should issue from him some should be taken and made eunuchs, or chamberlains, in the palace of the king of Babylon. The prince of the eunuchs changed the names of Daniel and his fellows, partly to show his authority over them and their subjection to him, and partly in token of their being naturalized and made Chaldeans. Their Hebrew names, which they received at their circumcision, had something of God, or Jah, in them: Daniel - God is my Judge; Hananiah - The grace of the Lord; Mishael - He that is the strong God; Azariah - The Lord is a help. To make them forget the God of their fathers, the guide of their youth, they give them names that savour of the Chaldean idolatry. Belteshazzar signifies the keeper of the hidden treasures of Bel; Shadrach - The inspiration of the sun, which the Chaldeans worshipped; Meshach - Of the goddess Shach, under which name Venus was worshipped; Abed-nego, The servant of the shining fire, which they worshipped also. Thus, though they would not force them from the religion of their fathers to that of their conquerors, yet they did what they could by fair means insensibly to wean them from the former and instil the latter into them. Yet see how comfortably they were provided for; though they suffered for their fathers' sins they were preferred for their own merits, and the land of their captivity was made more comfortable to them than the land of their nativity at this time would have been.

Dan 1:8-16 

We observe here, very much to our satisfaction,

II.That Daniel was a favourite with the prince of the eunuchs (Dan_1:9), as Joseph was with the keeper of the prison; he had a tender love for him. No doubt Daniel deserved it, and recommended himself by his ingenuity and sweetness of temper (he was greatly beloved, Dan_9:23); and yet it is said here that it was God that brought him into favour with the prince of the eunuchs, for every one does not meet with acceptance according to his merits. Note, The interest which we think we make for ourselves we must acknowledge to be God's gift, and must ascribe to him the glory of it. Whoever are in favour, it is God that has brought them into favour; and it is by him that they find good understanding. Herein was again verified That work (Psa_106:46), He made them to be pitied of all those that carried them captives. Let young ones know that the way to be acceptable is to be tractable and dutiful.

II.That Daniel was still firm to his religion. They had changed his name, but they could not change his nature. Whatever they pleased to call him, he still retained the spirit of an Israelite indeed. He would apply his mind as closely as any of them to his books, and took pains to make himself master of the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans, but he was resolved that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king's meat, he would not meddle with it, nor with the wine which he drank, Dan_1:8. And having communicated his purpose, with the reasons of it, to his fellows, they concurred in the same resolution, as appears, Dan_1:11. This was not out of sullenness, or peevishness, or a spirit of contradiction, but from a principle of conscience. Perhaps it was not in itself unlawful for them to eat of the king's meat or to drink of his wine. But, 1. They were scrupulous concerning the meat, lest it should be sinful. Sometimes such meat would be set before them as was expressly forbidden by their law, as swine's flesh; or they were afraid lest it should have been offered in sacrifice to an idol, or blessed in the name of an idol. The Jews were distinguished from other nations very much by their meats (Lev_11:45, Lev_11:46), and these pious young men, being in a strange country, thought themselves obliged to keep up the honour of their being a peculiar people. Though they could not keep up their dignity as princes, they would not lose it as Israelites; for on that they most valued themselves. Note, When God's people are in Babylon they have need to take special care that they partake not in her sins. Providence seemed to lay this meat before them; being captives they must eat what they could get and must not disoblige their masters; yet, if the command be against it, they must abide by that. Though Providence says, Kill and eat, conscience says, Not so, Lord, for nothing common or unclean has come into my mouth. 2. They were jealous over themselves, lest, though it should not be sinful in itself, it should be an occasion of sin to them, lest, by indulging their appetites with these dainties, they should grow sinful, voluptuous, and in love with the pleasures of Babylon. They had learned David's prayer, Let me not eat of their dainties (Psa_141:4), and Solomon's precept, Be not desirous of dainties, for they are deceitful meat (Pro_23:3), and accordingly they form their resolution. Note, It is very much the praise of all, and especially of young people, to be dead to the delights of sense, not to covet them, not to relish them, but to look upon them with indifference. Those that would excel in wisdom and piety must learn betimes to keep under the body and bring it into subjection. 3. However, they thought it unseasonable now, when Jerusalem was in distress, and they themselves were in captivity. They had no heart to drink wine in bowls, so much were they grieved for the affliction of Joseph. Though they had royal blood in their veins, yet they did not think it proper to have royal dainties in their mouths when they were thus brought low.