Nebuchahnezzar Dreamed Dreams. Daniel 2:1, 2 The Wise Men of Babylon J. White. In the conclusion of last chapter, we are informed that Daniel "had understanding in all visions and dreams." Events are now ordered so that he shall have an opportunity of exercising his skill on a more illustrious theatre. "And in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar the king dreamed dreams." Nebuchadnezzar's dream was not of an ordinary kind. It was not caused by the ordinary working of a mind agitated by anxiety, or excited by ambition. It came immediately from that great and only God of whom Nebuchadnezzar was ignorant. It was so ordered, for reasons that will afterwards appear, that Nebuchadnezzar forgot what his dream was. But it was also ordained that he should not forget that he had a dream of a most wonderful kind. The impression made upon his mind was deep, and painful, and permanent. He could not forget it. It filled his whole soul. He was so troubled that he could neither compose himself to sleep nor be at rest when awake. Nebuchadnezzar, — the great, the terrible, the invincible, — who had already stormed so many towns, conquered so many countries, routed so many armies, and who, like the eagle in the tempest, seemed to exult in the storm of battle — Nebuchadnezzar troubled by a dream! How completely are the greatest of men in the hand of Jehovah. How easily can he make the stoutest among them to quail. And may we not reflect, if this transient glimpse into the invisible world — if this unveiling of a portion of time and space, so small when compared with eternity and infinity, produced such trouble of mind, what amazement and terror will seize upon the souls of the ungodly, when the gates of the invisible world shall be thrown wide open, and the spirit, disentangled from matter, shall enter, and feel itself encompassed on all sides, not with the vision, but with the reality of the spiritual world — encircled with what is infinite and eternal — and penetrated by the holiness of Him that sitteth upon the throne. Being greatly troubled by his dream, Nebuchadnezzar was anxious to regain his composure. He was an idolater, and, consequently, ignorant of those hidden sources of comfort that are opened up to a believer in his time of need. ( J. White. ) The Lost Dream W.A. Scott, D.D. And as to the sneering Infidel question, How could a forgotten dream trouble the king? it seems quite a sufficient answer to ask whether its propounders have common sense enough to dream? For every one must know from experience that the mind is often greatly agitated by visions of the night, which vanish, leaving only a general impression. It is easy to suppose cases where the agitation would be even increased by the very fact that the particulars were no longer remembered, and the relief that might be hoped for could not, therefore, be so readily obtained. The dimness, indistinctness, mysteriousness of the subject only increases the agitation. The king knew three things. He had had a dream. It was lost; but still it greatly troubled him. He, therefore, called for his wise men. 1. How poor and wretched a creature is a man left to the power of fierce and ungovernable passions! How contemptible a figure does the great King of Babylon make in demanding what was impossible! Hot-headed and furious men are generally without reason, and deaf to all remonstrances. How blessed are your privileges, that you live under constitutional laws, and are not subject to the arbitrary power of a tyrant! Magna Charta, Habeas Corpus, and trial by jury are blessings that cannot be too highly valued. 2. In the rise and fall of nations, shadowed forth in prophecy, and presented in history, it is of great importance to bear in mind the fact that the Supreme Being does rule over all the inhabitants of the world, and yet does no violence to the free agency of any rational creature. The mightiest planets in the highest heavens sweep round in their orbits at his bidding, and so arise and fall the mighty dynasties of our race, both in ancient and modern times, and in both the Old and New World. Not a few seem to think that God's providence was concerned with ancient nations, but has ceased to take notice of modern nations. This is nothing but practical atheism. God is not less vigilant and supreme now, in the midst of our inventions and improvements, than He was in the days of Jerusalem and Babylon. The celebrated and pious Bogue was in the habit of saying, when he took up the papers in the time of Napoleon the Great, to read what was passing: "Let us see how God governs the world." 3. In the history of nations there are always two classes of interests and facts very distinct, and yet exercising over each other a powerful influence. I mean political and religious events. The first relates to kings, emperors, rulers, cabinets, and forms of government; the second relates to the moral character, religious sentiment of the people, and pertains to the salvation of their souls and the condition of the Church of the living God. These interests must necessarily exercise over each other a powerful influence. The history of nations and the history of the Church of Christ reflect mutually the state of the other. 4. Finally, here you are taught where to go in all cases of difficulty. How did Daniel obtain the knowledge of the lost dream? By asking for it. He prayed to God. He sought help in the right direction. We do not, indeed, expect miracles now, yet we do expect answer to prayer. ( W.A. Scott, D.D. ) Dreams and Dreamers C. Leach, D.D. Dreams have played an important part in the history of the world. God seems to have made large use of the visions of the night and, of dreams to call men into His service, to commission them to do His will, execute His judgments, and to reveal His gracious purposes concerning the world. It was in a vision that God revealed to the patriarch Abraham that his seed should be as the stars of heaven for number. Nor is the New Testament without them. After our Lord Jesus Christ came and revealed God, life; immortality, salvation, and peace, the use of vision and dream did not cease. It was in a dream that Joseph was warned to flee into Egypt, and thus secure the safety of Christ. When the time had come that the Gospel of the grace of God should be preached to the Gentiles, God revealed His will in the matter to Peter in a vision on the housetop at Jaffa. But among all the dreams and visions of which we have read, there are but few more remarkable and important than this, which filled the slumbers of Nebuchadnezzar, and slipped from his memory afterwards. I. We will consider THE DREAMER. The dreamer of the text was an Eastern monarch. There he is in secure possession of his throne. Famed as a skilful soldier and victor, he is the mightiest monarch on the face of the earth. Babylon, the seat of his empire, the place of his throne, is among the most imposing and great of the ancient cities of the world. This is the home of this royal dreamer. See him in the midst of it. Seated on his throne, around him stand his chief men of state, his eunuchs, priests, princes, and captains, all in their many-coloured and glittering garbs. He is troubled. What has gone wrong? Has some part of his kingdom broken out into rebellion? Has the death-plague seized upon his friends and chief councillors? Nay, he has had a dream, a simple dream. The world owes a great deal to its dreamers. Some have blessed the world by the great victories which they won. What a great and noble company the dreamers make. John Bunyan dreamed the "Pilgrim's Progress," a book which, next to the Bible, which it illustrates, has had a larger circulation than any other book in the world. That was a grand dream, and the world owes much to it. Columbus was a dreamer. He had visions of another and a great land across an unexplored and unknown ocean. Sir Christopher Wren was a dreamer. He had a vision of St. Paul's, and it grew up in the city of London. II. THE DREAM. The dreamer was a mighty monarch. The dream was worthy of the dreamer.. However great the dreamer, the dream was not less so. He Went to rest that night with his mind full of great and important thoughts. He thought of what wars had been, and wondered what wars would be. He knew himself secure on his throne then. But did he think that soon he would be gone? He wondered "what should come to pass hereafter." It was a great dream. No idolater ever had a greater dream, and but few men any so great. He went out far beyond himself. The present did not satisfy him. He wanted to pull back the curtain and see what was beyond. Have we not all had dreams like this? Think you that this king was the only man who ever felt dissatisfied with the present? Have not we all tried to look beyond? I have had a vision of God; it may have been a dream, but I have thought about Him. I have looked around me in the world, and have seen traces of Him. The great mountains and the mighty ocean, which I have seen in the majesty of its fury, have said something to me of the greatness of God. I seem to have had visions of love, and mercy, and pity, but I can't quite find out myself, I want some one to interpret. I can't myself quite solve it all. "Canst thou by searching find out God?" asks one in ancient days who also had dreams about God. Then I have had dreams of the soul and its destiny. I have dreamed of "what shall come to pass hereafter." Then I have had visions and dreams of a future in which justice and righteousness shall prevail, in which the glaring iniquities and wrongs of this present life shall all be set right. But have we not had dreams of another sort? Sometimes we have felt with sorrow and shame our own weakness and badness. We have become conscious that we were out of harmony with things around us. There is a something within us which speaks to us. Call it conscience or anything else — there it is. I have dreamed of forgiveness, how to get it, and where. Who can tell me? Who can interpret for me all these dreams of mine? Is there any Daniel whom I can call into court who shall reveal to me all these secrets? III. THE INTERPRETATION of this dream. Daniel was able to tell the king his dream, and also to expound it. And what an exposition it was! Kingdom succeeds kingdom, monarch follows monarch. The Babylonian head of gold, the Persian breast of silver, the Grecian thighs of brass, and the Roman legs of iron, all come and go as Daniel expounds the dream.. There are two things we must note in this interpretation. 1. The Christ kingdom symbolised by the stone cut from the mountain without hands. 2. The second thing I wish to note is that this Christ prefigured by the mountain stone is the interpreter of all my dreams of God, the soul, and a future state. In His school I get my answer. I have been to other schools and could not learn. Nebuchadnezzar summoned all his wise monk They were accustomed to interpret dreams, but they were perplexed now. When I come to Christ He interprets my dream. Be not only reveals God to me, but He tells me of His love and kindness. God is love. God is a Father. God cares for me. Jesus Christ tells me how I can be at peace with God through Himself. He tells me about things which are to come to pass. Jesus Christ is God's answer to all my questions, and visions, and dreams. ( C. Leach, D.D. ) Human Wisdom Tested and Found Wanting The Southern Pulpit. I. THE DREAM. The first verse states that this vision occurred in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar; i . e ., in the second year of his solo sovereignty. His father, Nabopolassar, being now dead, the empire devolved upon Nebuchadnezzar alone. 1. The dream reveals the nature of his ambitions. It shows that his mind was busy with projects of conquest, and the cares of government, and the hopes of secure power. How natural that these engrossing thoughts of his waking hours should pursue him in sleep and give complexion to the visions of the night. 2. But the dream was sent by Divine agency. It was not only natural, but also supernatural. This is not the first nor only time that God has vouchsafed to make his revelations to heathen minds. Balaam is a notable instance of prophetic gifts bestowed upon unworthy persons. All extraordinary channels of Divine communications were no doubt selected for a purpose; and while the light of revelation shines steadily upon his own chosen people, yet he vouchsafes occasional flashes upon other minds to illuminate some truth which may be best illuminated in that way. 3. The dream is forgotten. Strangely given, it was strangely recalled. The honour shall be God's and God's alone. God will show by an infallible sign that it is His revelation, and will not suffer the Chaldean sages to tinker with its interpretation. Nothing remained but the disturbing sense of having seen strange things, and an abiding conviction that these things were closely related to his destiny. To whom shall he turn in his perplexity? II. THE DEMAND. We may well imagine the surprise and alarm of the sooth-sayers and magicians when they become acquainted with the nature of the king's demand. Had they been quite sure that the king had indeed forgotten his dream they might have very easily invented one to satisfy him; but I suppose they were apprehensive lest this was only a snare cunningly placed by this intelligent monarch to expose their duplicity. It seemed to them the safer plan, then, not to hazard so dangerous an expedient, but to declare their inability to do more than interpret the dream when told. The king, however, reiterates his demand. 1. The Chaldeans maintain that this demand is unjust in that it was without precedent. There is a true and a false law of precedent. It is undoubtedly true that whoever demands or enacts a new thing, a thing counter to existing usages, must have strong and unquestionable reasons for such a course. There are always presumptions against novelties and innovations, and one who appeals to custom has an undeniably strong ground to rest upon. On the other hand, the law of precedent can create nothing more than presumption. It still leaves the reason of the thing to be inquired into. It is probable the imperious temper of this monarch would not be baulked by an appeal to customary usages. 2. They further maintain the injustice of this demand on the ground that it is beyond human power to comply with it. They say: "There is none other that can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh." Some have supposed this declaration that the dwelling of the gods "is not with flesh" to be indicative of scepticism. It was the cardinal belief of the Babylonians that the gods were very near to men. Their temples, and sacrifices, and priestly rites proceeded upon that belief. These Chaldeans, then, are supposed, under the influence of their great peril, to betray here their utter disbelief in these hollow mockeries. And the lesson is drawn from it: "Alas, that this unbelief should so often, in Christian as well as in Pagan times, have found a nest for itself so near the altar!" But I would rather believe that these Chaldeans, whose studies brought them in contact with the mighty works of God, had more exalted conceptions of the deity than those which prevailed among the masses. 3. In this view the demand was not so unreasonable as the Chaldeans would make it appear. They had wilfully imposed upon both king and people, laying claim to mysterious arts by which they could read secret things; and had no doubt taken care that this faith in their powers should be implicit and well-nigh unlimited. They could scarcely complain, then, when they are taken at their word. Skilled in plausibility and ambiguity, they no doubt relied on these powers to cover up a failure when one occurred, and to impose successfully upon the credulity of the king. 4. It is a great gain to the cause of truth when impositions are detected. So, then, Nebuchadnezzar deserves praise for pressing this matter to a decisive issue. The cause of religion no doubt suffers a shock when priestly pretensions are thrown in the crucible and tested, but it rises from such shocks to greater stability, and usefulness, and power. III. THE DECREE. Whatever may be said of his demand, certainly the decree of the king is indefensible. These wise men had done nothing worthy of death. Moreover, there were many among the Chaldeans who laid no claim to magic powers, but who contented themselves with the sciences, as patient and laborious students, and it was not only manifest injustice, but strange impolicy to include them in this sweeping condemnation. Yet more, why should Daniel and his friends, who had but just passed their novitiate and who had not been consulted at all, share their fate? But rage is blind and knows no discrimination. There are not wanting some, as an illustration of this spirit, who would obliterate Christianity because of unworthy Christians; and no one can estimate what man has suffered from this stupid lack of the power of rational discrimination. IV. CONCLUSION. What a striking picture is here presented us of Nebuchadnezzar and his wise men trying, by human devices, to arrive at the mind of God! How we yearn for man when we behold his boundless aspirations confronted by his impotent nothingness! But it was well that human skill should first exhaust its resources in endeavouring to know the mind of God. It was a proper prelude to God's revelation, this confession of impotence: "There is none other that can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh." It is a law of God's providence that He will not intervene until man has discovered his own absolute inability, and felt his imperative need. ( The Southern Pulpit. ) The Dream of Humanity Bp. Boyd Carpenter. There is no function in life which can compare for one moment to that of him who can minister to the perplexities of his fellow-men. The story connected with these words is very simple and well known. The king had dreamed a dream, and when he woke in the morning he could not recall it to his mind. A vague sense of the splendour of that dream haunted his imagination and memory. He felt that there was bound up in it some deep and mysterious truth. He hardly liked to let the whole remembrance of it quite go. He had around him his Chaldeans and his wise men, and he turned to them for aid, and their answer was that their function was limited only to the interpretation of dreams; it was not their function to enter upon a process of thought-reading unless there were present in the mind of him who demanded the interpretation the subject matter of those thoughts. In the emergency the difficulty was solved by a Jewish exile; to him it was given to be the reviver and interpreter of the dream. And we, perhaps, may feel that that ancient story is not wholly lost to us when we cast oar mind upon our own lives, and remember how much we, too, have been haunted by some magnificent dream. When the vision of what life really was, with its deep and solemn significance, was granted to us, we, awaking with the impression of all life's business, lost the vivid force of that dream — we could not recall it, and we turned to the seers about us. They are plentiful to seek, the wise and the unwise, the weak and the strong, the false and the true, and we, haunted by the remembrance of that vision of what life's deep significance is, turn in vain to these. And yet the conditions may teach us what are the real features and the real capacities of the true prophet. If I am not mistaken, the story suggests to us that there are two great elements which are essential in order that a man may be a real helper of his fellow men, the true prophet of his age. The condition which the king insists upon supplies one of these — it is that he should have touch with human nature; and his interpretation of the dream suggests the other — he must have some knowledge of the law and order of life. These two were just those that were vouchsafed to Daniel. 1. The first is knowledge of human nature. Let me ask you to put yourselves for the moment in the position of those who had this somewhat unreasonable demand made upon them. Their answer to his demand was very simple and fair. "We are perfectly ready," they said, "to interpret your dream, but our ministrations extend thus far; tell us the dream and we will tell the meaning." But the king, whose vision was elevated, perhaps, by the dream which he had experienced, began to see that he was surrounded by those who were in a large measure but charlatans; and prompted by this, he perhaps insists all the more pertinaciously on the condition. "You profess to be able to interpret my dreams. How do I know that your interpretations are true? Tell me what the dream was, and I can verify your accuracy. In other words, vindicate your pretensions in a sphere where I can test them, and then I will be able to give you my faith in the sphere where I cannot test them. I cannot verify your interpretations, but I can verify your statement of what passed through my mind. You profess to explain my life to me, and all the destiny that awaits it; if it be in your power to do this, show, first, that you understand me, and then I will believe that you can unfold my destiny." And that, in itself, when you come to study it, is no unfair condition. It may be unreasonable in the circumstances in which it was used, but there is a vein of reason, and there is a vein of fairness in it; for when you reflect upon it there is no power in a man to teach and to speak concerning the future, unless he has a certain knowledge of the present. The man who can read deepest into the circumstances and the situation of the present is the man who is far the more likely to be able to forecast the future. You would not entrust your case to the doctor who had no knowledge of your symptoms. You would believe that the man, and the man only, who could read into your symptoms, would be able to track the probable development of the disease. It is the same in nature. The naturalist cannot predict a harvest except he understands the nature of the seed, and it is just in proportion as he is possessed of the power of insight that he is possessed of the power of foresight. That is taught us in the pages of history. As long as men thought, as it were, to out-manoeuvre Nature, and to read her secrets by ignoring her face, they simply courted defeat. These were the astrologers, the charlatans of science; but the moment they took up the other attitude, and began to scan closely the features of nature, and sought earnestly to understand the meaning of her thoughts, they began to discover her laws, and discovering them they had the power by which they could predict what would be the evolution of those laws. And if that be true in the law and order of nature, has it its counterpart in the moral order also? Place ourselves for a moment in the position of the king. Daniel comes and unfolds to him the vision. That splendid vision, that noble and colossal figure, represented what had passed through the king's mind, not that night only, but every night. It had been the dream of his life, the splendour and the magnificence of his position; the glorious headship which he held over the empire which he thought his own, from the high 'vantage ground of which he looked down in proud contempt upon human kind. His thoughts were read. The man's heart is read; his vision, and all the subtle play of his thoughts is unfolded to him. "The man that can toll me these secrets of my heart is the man into whose hand I will place my destiny and bid him point the way along the track of my life. He can understand what is the outcome of this career of mine who thus understands me." And wherever men have been in the position of prophets of their age, their strength and power has depended upon their capacity to read the minds and the play of thought of the men of their age. If they are not familiar with this life they cannot have any power to deal with the life that lies beyond. The men who stood in their day foremost had an intimate knowledge of human nature. Take, for example, what, after all, is an illustration in the same direction. This Book of God has found its dominion over the minds and the lives of men because it has always displayed itself as a book well read in the deeps of human nature. "I say," said one, rising from the perusal of it, "the person who wrote that Book knew me." "I believe," said one, who was cut off only too early in his splendid and promising career, "I believe it to be God's Book because it is man's Book;" that is to say, it has such a power to fit into the needs of human kind that it vindicates its divine strength because of the very humanity of its methods. And this is what we may call the divine key to the method which God Himself has adopted in the life and pattern of Jesus Christ. He comes into our midst to be the Divine Teacher. He understands men. "Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig-tree I saw thee — I knew the devout aspirations of thy life," and that breaks down the thought. "This teacher understands me. Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God; Thou art the Judge of Israel." Sometimes we feel ourselves a little disheartened. The cynic turns aside and says, "It is true your Christianity is played out, your religion effete." I say it is an unwise thing for a man to echo these doleful plaints. May it not be the case that we have lost touch with humanity, that we have failed to understand human nature as it is before us in the century in which we live; that we have allowed, so to speak, our Christian teaching to grow fossilised, and the fossilised thing has lost its life and the hands and feet of its movement, and it cannot grasp upon the heart of humanity again? 2. But let us look at this second condition — the knowledge of a Divine order. What was the interpretation of the dream? Here stood this colossal figure, glittering with its varied metals. By-and-by, "without hands," came the stone which smote upon it, and then, as in a moment, all the magnificence dropped into pieces, and these huge masses of metal, which had been the admiration of the world a moment ago, are lifted as things light, as "the char upon the summer threshing-floor," and swept away, and the little stone begins to grow, and to take the place of this great image, and to fill the world itself. Of course, you may say the figure represented the empires which were existing and which were to follow — Persia, Greece, Rome, or, if you will have it so, the Egyptian or the Syrian kingdoms; but whatever the historical interpretation, the ethical interpretation is for you and me. That splendid dream, and that magnificent figure which appeared in the king's dream, is the dream of man in all ages; it is the dream of self-realisation. He who dreams is king. He sees that grand figure bearing human form, dominating the plain; and this is the ambition of men in all ages; but as he beholds he sees it in its glory and in its weakness. He sees it in its splendour — there is the effort of man to realise himself. It was so with all those who endeavoured to establish any solid, single monarchy. From the days of Nebuchadnezzar or Nimrod, if you will, to the days of Napoleon, this has been the same dream, "I will take my idea, and I will impress it upon the world, and I will mould that earth and all the creatures that are in it to my will, and I shall dominate all." That is the ambition; what I want you to notice is, that it is the effort of a man to realise self in some form or other. That is an instinct which does not simply breathe into the hearts of' great conquerors, or great founders of monarchies; there is not a human being created with a soul or an intelligence that had not had the dream that he will realise himself. The artist who seeks to cast his ideas on the canvas so as to speak his thoughts in richness and detail to his follow men — he is seeking to realise himself — his own idea painted there. Even in the home life you can see it. This joy of home life has largely its play and its beauty because it is the very thing in which we see that in our children we live again — we realise ourselves in them. This instinct of self-realisation is at the root of man's best ambitions as well as his worst, and as it is at the root of them you can understand why it is, but the life and the form of that which was given him from God; for God Himself, if we may in reverence say it, has made His world but the picture of the same principle in Himself. The world is God realising Himself in material beauty; the page of history is God realising Himself in moral order, and this Christian revelation is God realising Himself in spiritual splendour to humanity; and I am not surprised if this, the very impulse of God, be self-realisation that He may manifest His greatness and His love, that therefore we, drawing our life from His hand, should be filled with a like instinct. But while this colossal figure in the vision is shown in its splendour, it is also shown in its weakness. This little stone, without hands, should demolish the whole; man's best and noblest dreams, man's most brilliant ambitions, are destined to be overthrown. And why? This stone represents precisely that unseen, that handless power which has not its origin in the conceptions of man, but in the nature of things; it is just the picture of what you see in nature. Man builds his noble shrines, he rears his sumptuous palaces, he spreads abroad the magnificent tokens of his power; but law, re-written deep down in the heart of nature, lays its hand upon all these creations of man's genius, and overturns all that man creates. In the precincts of moral order the law will overturn also; under this condition, all that is up built disregarding God's eternal law must perish. It is not merely because man made it that it must die, but it is that man made it in violation of eternal law. Three laws were violated in its erection — the law of time and growth, the law of righteousness, the law of solidarity. The law of time, because this is that which is built up, made — it does not grow in contradistinction to the stone "without hands." That grows, this is made. That which is made, as it were, is merely built and at variance with the law of growth. The things which are alive grow, and in those things in which there is any moral life there is the capacity of growing. All the best things of this world grow, but the impatience of man hastens them onward. God will make a kingdom, but men with their impatience say, "We will make it in our own time," and therefore at all costs — at the cost of blood, at the cost of righteousness, the kingdoms are made. These empires have perished. Why? Because they violated eternal laws of God; and as surely as the power of natural law can overthrow every shrine of human erection, so surely must every kingdom, every monarch, every race, every nationality, every church die and perish, if it tries to construct itself out of God's due time and out of God's due order. And as it thus violated the law of growth, by the very impatience of its construction, you know that it violated the law of rectitude. Men often imagine that they can do the right thing, but that they can do it in any way they please. There are two sentinels that stand at the outgoing of the temple of God; the one is the sentinel of a right way and the other of a right thing, and you are not permitted to build where God builds for all eternity, unless you be directed by the right thing and also by the right way. The weakness of life, as we often see it, is that men are passionately devoted to some great and noble enterprise, but they undermine the very foundations of their own edifice, because, while they seek the right thing they miss the right way, and that is the secret of many a failure. It sinned also against the law of solidarity. If you look at the construction of this image, you will find that it is merely a piling together: there is no homogeneity about it, it is heterogeneous; I am of gold, and I will be the head of all; I am of silver, and I will be the strength of all; I am of brass and I will be power of fertility to all, and my iron heel shall be planted upon all. Christ has made all men to be of one blood upon the face of the earth, and the kingdom which He establishes shall be built up not with materials which shall represent the dignity, the glory, or the pre-eminence of one nation or one people over another, but that wider and better

Benson Commentary Daniel 2:1 And in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep brake from him. Daniel 2:1 . In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar — That is, according to the Babylonian account, or the fourth according to the Jewish; that is, in the second year of his reigning alone, or the fourth from his first reigning jointly with his father. Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams — Having subdued all his enemies, and firmly established his throne, it is probable he was thinking upon his bed (see Daniel 2:29 ) what should come to pass hereafter: what should be the future success of his family and kingdom, and whether any, or what, families and kingdoms might arise after his own: and as our waking thoughts usually give some tincture to our dreams, he dreamed of something to the same purpose, which astonished him, but which he could not rightly understand. The dream affected him strongly at the time; but awaking in confusion, he had but an imperfect remembrance of it; he could not recollect the particulars. It is said he dreamed dreams, because though it was but one continued dream, it contained divers scenes of affairs, being a description of the succession of the four monarchies which were to continue, under different forms, unto the end of the world. Wherewith his spirit was troubled — The Hebrew expression, ?????? ???? , denotes that his spirit was violently agitated, or in such consternation as to affect his body, and disturb his rest. And his sleep brake from him — Or, went from him, as a like phrase is rendered Daniel 6:18 . Daniel 2:2 Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, for to shew the king his dreams. So they came and stood before the king. Daniel 2:2 . Then the king commanded to call the magicians and the astrologers — Concerning the meaning of these two words, see note on Daniel 1:20 . Daniel and his companions were not called among them; perhaps because the Chaldeans despised them as youths and strangers, and would not have them thought equal in knowledge to themselves. And the sorcerers — This word is always taken in an ill sense by the sacred writers, signifying a sort of necromancers, that through diabolical arts pretended to an acquaintance with departed spirits, from ??? Š, præstigiis uti, to use deceitful tricks, or enchantments. They were, perhaps, not very unlike the sortilegi, or fortune-tellers of the ancient Romans; and exercised themselves in various sorts of juggling tricks, or enchantments, which were supposed to be performed by the assistance of demons: see note on Isaiah 29:4 . And the Chaldeans — The Chaldeans were so much addicted to the study of the motions of the heavenly bodies, and to make prognostications from thence, that the word Chaldean is used, both in Greek and Latin writers, for an astrologer. Diodorus, lib. 2., speaking of the Chaldeans, says, They employ their whole time in philosophy and divination, and are trained up to them from their childhood: and Strabo, lib. xvi, makes a distinction, and observes, that the word is sometimes applied to the nation, sometimes to the sect. Curtius, lib. 5. cap. 1, describes them thus: “Chaldæi siderum motus et statas temporum vices ostendere soliti:” “The Chaldeans are accustomed to show the motions of the stars, and the appointed changes of times:” and Cicero, De Divin., p. 4, “Chaldæi — diuturna observatione siderum scientiam putantur effecisse, ut prædici posset quid cuique eventurum et quo quisque fato natus esset:” “The Chaldeans, by the long observation of the stars, are thought to have formed a science, whereby may be foretold what is about to happen to every one, and to what fate every one is born.” These passages may serve to show the opinion that was commonly entertained of these Chaldeans; and therefore we shall be less surprised to find, at Daniel 2:4 , this name, according to the general sense of it, used for the magicians of every sort. To show the king his dreams — Dreams were often considered by the heathen as giving particular intimations of the will of Heaven; and hence the expression of Homer, in his first Iliad, ??? ??? ? ’ ???? ?? ???? ???? , For dreams descend from Jove. And in the beginning of his second Iliad, he has, by a bold and beautiful prosopopœia, conveyed the will of Jupiter to Agamemnon in a dream, investing ??????? (a dream) with all the qualities of a divine messenger. Diog. Laert. makes mention of a dream of Socrates, whereby he foretold his death within three days; and most of the schools among pagan philosophers gave credit to dreams, and considered them as revealing the will of the gods: see Wintle. Daniel 2:3 And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream. Daniel 2:4 Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriack, O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will shew the interpretation. Daniel 2:4 . Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriac — The ancient Chaldee and the Syrian language were the same: see Genesis 31:47 ; 2 Kings 18:26 ; Ezra 4:7 . This language is found in its greatest purity in the books of Daniel and Ezra. The following part of the chapter, from this verse, is written in Chaldee, and so on to the end of the seventh chapter: the reason of which seems to be, that what is said from hence to the end of that chapter, relates chiefly to the Chaldeans, or the inhabitants of Babylonia; whereas what follows, from the beginning of the eighth chapter, refers mostly to the Jewish people, and therefore is written in Hebrew. Daniel 2:5 The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me: if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill. Daniel 2:5-6 . The king said, The thing is gone from me — That is, he could not recollect the substance, much less all the particulars of it; some traces of it, however, must have remained in his mind, by which he thought the whole might be brought back to his remembrance, if his wise men could give him any clew to his dream, or hit, any way, upon the subject of it. This, without doubt, was the state of his mind; for unless some traces of his dream, however imperfect, had remained in it, his wise men would have endeavoured to impose upon him, and have told him any dream they could devise. If ye will not make known the dream, ye shall be cut in pieces — Literally, be made into pieces. So Syriac; that is, utterly destroyed, as the LXX. and the Vulgate render it. A kind of punishment, of which other places in Scripture make mention: see the margin. And your houses shall be made a dunghill — That is, shall be entirely pulled down, and never rebuilt. The ground of this threatening of the king is, that the eastern nations esteemed it a very grievous punishment inflicted upon any one to efface his memory, which in a great measure would be done by pulling down his house, and preventing its being ever rebuilt. The LXX. read, ?? ????? ???? ?????????????? , your houses shall be plundered, and the Vulgate: your houses shall be confiscated, or taken for the king’s use. This proud king seemed determined to exercise the bitterest acts of cruelty against his magicians, and to blot out the very traces of their memory, if they did not gratify his unreasonable but anxious wishes. We meet with a like denunciation from this haughty monarch, Daniel 3:9 . But if ye show the dream, &c., ye shall receive gifts — As I have threatened you with death, and the destruction of all you have, if you do not perform what I require: so I promise you honour and great rewards if you do perform it. Daniel 2:6 But if ye shew the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore shew me the dream, and the interpretation thereof. Daniel 2:7 They answered again and said, Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will shew the interpretation of it. Daniel 2:7-8 . They answered, Let the king tell his servants the dream — But this the king could not do; and yet, unless he could do it, they could not proceed one step toward the gratifying of his desires. The king said, I know of a certainty that ye would gain time — “You only want to protract the time, either that the dream may return, or that my uneasiness may be dissipated, and that, occupied in other affairs, I may think no more of the dream. But I will have from you immediately a positive answer, and a precise explication.” However tyrannical this may appear in the king, his reasoning must be allowed to be very just and right: for if the astrologers could obtain from their gods the knowledge of future events by the explication of a dream, certainly the same gods could have made known to them what the dream was. The original expression means, to buy, or redeem, time, and may be properly applied to men’s using their utmost endeavours to free themselves out of some imminent danger, or difficulty, gaining time being of considerable advantage to that purpose. Daniel 2:8 The king answered and said, I know of certainty that ye would gain the time, because ye see the thing is gone from me. Daniel 2:9 But if ye will not make known unto me the dream, there is but one decree for you: for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed: therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can shew me the interpretation thereof. Daniel 2:9 . If ye will not make known the dream, &c., there is but one decree for you — No alteration will be made as to my declaration; and you have nothing to expect but the execution of the sentence which I have passed upon you. For ye have prepared lying and corrupt words — The king’s meaning seems to be, that he found by their behaviour, they were ready, in case he told his dream, to invent and give some kind of plausible interpretation of it; or such a one as might, in some way or other, be applicable to whatever events should follow it: in short, that he found their pretended knowledge to be all imposture, since, if they were able to foretel things not yet come to pass, they might certainly tell things already past, and so inform him what was the subject of his dream. Till the time be changed — Till there be such an alteration of things, that neither my dream, nor your interpretation, may be thought of any more. Or, as some think, this may be spoken of the wise men framing excuses, in order to delay their punishment, in hopes there might be some change in things, or in the king’s mind, whereby they might escape it. From what he says, however, in the conclusion of the verse, it seems to be rather an insinuation, that they intended to forge or invent an interpretation of his dream, not being able to show the true interpretation of it. Daniel 2:10 The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said, There is not a man upon the earth that can shew the king's matter: therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such things at any magician, or astrologer, or Chaldean. Daniel 2:10-11 . The Chaldeans answered, There is not a man upon the earth that can show the king’s matter — Here the wise men are driven to acknowledge their inability, and their excuse is, that they could indeed tell what dreams signified, if the dreams were told them; but as to telling what a person had dreamed, it was above the power of any art or knowledge but that of the gods, who knew all things. But this reasoning was weak, and showed the king’s accusation to be just, namely, that they had prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before him; or, that their business and skill were only to invent or affix such interpretations of dreams as they thought suitable, without having any real knowledge at all of future things. Daniel 2:11 And it is a rare thing that the king requireth, and there is none other that can shew it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh. Daniel 2:12 For this cause the king was angry and very furious, and commanded to destroy all the wise men of Babylon. Daniel 2:12-13 . For this cause the king was angry and very furious, &c. — The king, in his rage and fury, probably did not think of sending for Daniel, which made Daniel try to get admission to the king, Daniel 2:14 , to prevent his own destruction, as well as that of the other wise men. And they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain — Though, as it appears, they had not been summoned with the wise men of Chaldea. This was extremely unjust to Daniel and his companions; for it is highly probable they would have received no share of the gifts, and rewards, and great honour, which the other wise men would have received could they have told the king’s dream, therefore they ought not to have been involved in their punishment. But those concerned in the execution of the decree, being armed with power, did not attend to the voice of justice: absolute power, indeed, too seldom does. Daniel 2:13 And the decree went forth that the wise men should be slain; and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain. Daniel 2:14 Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king's guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon: Daniel 2:14 . Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom — This seems to be better rendered in the Vulgate, namely, Tunc Daniel requisivit de lege atque sententia ab Arioch — Then Daniel inquired of Arioch concerning the law and decree, namely, which the king had made for destroying the wise men: that is, he inquired the reason of the decree and judgment issued against them; for as he had not been called in unto the king with the other wise men, he probably was ignorant of all that had passed with regard to the king’s dream. The word ???? , here rendered wisdom, usually signifies an edict, or public decree, set forth by authority. Captain of the king’s guard — “Literally, chief of the king’s executioners. Greek, ??????????? , the chief butcher [or chief cook.] The term ?? ?????? , may probably mean, the leader of the guard appointed for capital punishments. Nor does this office seem to have been at all infamous; for Arioch had free access to the king, as we find, Daniel 2:25 : see also 1 Samuel 15:33 . And perhaps his office might be to execute any of the king’s commands on his subjects, whether they related to honour or dishonour, to life or to death. The same title is given to Nebuzar-adan, 2 Kings 25:8 ; and from the character of the commander, it seems to mean a person of the first authority over the soldiery. Mr. Bruce ( Trav., p. 455) speaks of an officer, called the executioner of the camp, whose business it was to attend at capital punishments; and this belonged only to a detachment of the royal Abyssinian army.” — Wintle. Daniel 2:15 He answered and said to Arioch the king's captain, Why is the decree so hasty from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel. Daniel 2:15-16 . Why is the decree so hasty from the king? — So precipitate, or, as Wintle renders it, so urgent, to slay the innocent, who were never called, and knew nothing of the matter? The word ?????? , here used, signifies both hasty and pressing. So the Syriac. The LXX. render it, ? ??????? , shameful; the Vulgate translates the verse thus: He (namely, Daniel) asked him who had received authority from the king, for what reason so cruel a sentence had gone forth from the presence of the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel — Acquainted him with the whole affair, of which, it is evident, he knew nothing before. Then Daniel went in — Or, went up, as ?? properly signifies; that is, either to the palace or throne of the king; and desired of the king that he would give him time, &c. — The king’s anger was now abated; and withal the providence of God was visible, in inclining the king’s heart to allow Daniel that favour which he had before denied to the magicians; and that he would show the king the interpretation — Daniel promised this, in confidence that God, to whom he intended to make application by prayer, would discover to him both the dream and its interpretation. Doubtless God inspired him with a persuasion to this purpose. Daniel 2:16 Then Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would give him time, and that he would shew the king the interpretation. Daniel 2:17 Then Daniel went to his house, and made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions: Daniel 2:17-18 . Then Daniel went to his house — Which, it seems, was near the palace, that he might there be alone with his God; for from him alone, who is the Father of lights, he expected this important discovery. Nor did he only pray for it himself, but engaged his companions also to unite their supplications to his. That they would desire mercies — Chaldee, ????? ?????? , et misericordiam petendam esse, that mercy must be asked, of the God of heaven — In applying to God for any blessing, all our dependance must be on his mercy and compassion, for we can expect nothing by way of recompense for our merits. Concerning this secret — Namely, that it might be discovered unto them. Observe, reader, whatever is the matter of our care, or occasions us trouble or fear, we must spread before God in prayer; for God gives us leave to be humbly free with him, and in prayer to enter into the detail of our wants and burdens. The danger here equally threatened Daniel and his friends, and therefore it was fit they should all join in prayer for the averting of it. And here we see the power and efficacy of united addresses to Heaven, and the important benefits which the fervent prayers of a few holy men may sometimes bring down upon a multitude. Daniel’s prudence, and his piety, with that of his friends, were the means of saving the lives of all the wise men of Babylon! Daniel 2:18 That they would desire mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon. Daniel 2:19 Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven. Daniel 2:19-23 . Then was the secret revealed — It is generally thought that this secret was revealed to Daniel only, and that in sleep, by a dream, or, as it is here termed, a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven — He does not stay till he had told what had been revealed to him to the king, and seen whether he would own it to be his dream or not; but, being confident it was so, and that he had gained his point, he immediately turns his prayers into praises. As he had prayed in full assurance that God would do for him what he asked, so he gives thanks in full assurance that he had done it, and in both he has an eye to God as the God of heaven. Daniel answered and said — “In the latter part of this and the next three verses, Daniel celebrates the praises of the Almighty in a simple, but truly sublime and animated strain of warm and unaffected piety, makes especial mention of his wisdom and power, and illustrates the display of those attributes in several instances, apposite to the subject and occasion.” — Wintle. For wisdom and might are his — His wisdom appears in ordering the great affairs of the world, and his might, or power, in bringing them to pass. To the same purpose Jeremiah styles him, great in counsel, and mighty in work, Jeremiah 32:19 . And he changeth the times, &c. — The great changes of the world are brought to pass by removing kings and translating their dominions to others; by raising some empires, and pulling down others. Of this, Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, which was then revealed to Daniel, contains several signal instances, as it comprehends the succession of the four great monarchies of the world. He knoweth what is in the darkness, &c. — The most secret things are manifest to him; he discerns them while they yet lie hid in their causes, and discovers and brings them to light at the proper time. I praise thee, &c., who hast given, or, because thou hast given, me wisdom and might — Namely, the means and power of saving myself and others from the greatest danger. Daniel 2:20 Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his: Daniel 2:21 And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding: Daniel 2:22 He revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him. Daniel 2:23 I thank thee, and praise thee, O thou God of my fathers, who hast given me wisdom and might, and hast made known unto me now what we desired of thee: for thou hast now made known unto us the king's matter. Daniel 2:24 Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch, whom the king had ordained to destroy the wise men of Babylon: he went and said thus unto him; Destroy not the wise men of Babylon: bring me in before the king, and I will shew unto the king the interpretation. Daniel 2:24-25 . Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch — Daniel, having been thus divinely instructed, was desirous to save the lives of the wise men of Babylon, who were unjustly condemned, as well as his own; and, being now prepared, he goes immediately to Arioch, and bespeaks the reversing of the sentence against them. Though there might be some among them, perhaps, who deserved to die, as magicians, by the law of God; yet that which they here stood condemned for was not a crime worthy of death or of bonds: and others of them probably employed themselves in laudable studies, and searches after useful knowledge. Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste — Or, very speedily, as the Syriac reads it; and said, I have found a man that will make known unto the king, the interpretation — Jerome remarks here the manner of courtiers, Qui cum bona nunciant, sua videri volunt, who, when they relate good things, are willing to have them thought their own, and to have merit ascribed to themselves. But Daniel was far from assuming any merit to himself, and therefore ascribes entirely to God the ability which he had to make known to the king the dream and the interpretation of it. Daniel 2:25 Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste, and said thus unto him, I have found a man of the captives of Judah, that will make known unto the king the interpretation. Daniel 2:26 The king answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Art thou able to make known unto me the dream which I have seen, and the interpretation thereof? Daniel 2:26-29 . The king said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar — See note on Daniel 1:7 ; Art thou able to make known to me the dream? &c. — The king seems to have questioned whether he could make his promise good. The less likely, however, it appeared to the king that Daniel should do this, the more God was glorified in enabling him to do it. Daniel answered, Cannot the wise men, &c. — Daniel’s words, as here translated, bear the interrogative form; but not in the original. They seem to be more accurately translated by the LXX., ?? ????????? ? ???????? ??????? ??? ???? ????? — ?????????? ?? ??????? , The mystery concerning which the king inquires, it does not belong to the wise men, &c., to declare to the king. Or, as the Vulgate has it, “the wise men cannot declare.” But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets — Daniel assumes nothing to himself, but gives the glory to God alone, whose knowledge, as he tells the king, infinitely exceeds that of all the wise men of Chaldea, and of the gods, or demons, which they consulted, or worshipped. And at the same time he also, with great generosity, pleads the cause of the wise men, who could not tell the dream; alleging in their excuse, that such knowledge was not attainable by any mere human ability; and that he should have been as much at a loss as they, had not God been pleased to reveal it unto him: see Daniel 2:30 . The modesty and humility of Daniel, in this whole address to the king, are highly deserving of our notice and imitation. The soothsayers, here mentioned, were not noticed among the several sorts of pretenders to wisdom, named in Daniel 2:2 . The word so rendered, derived from ??? , to cut, is thought by some to signify either the aruspices, who examined the liver and entrails of beasts by cutting them open; or those diviners who, by the disposition and combination of numbers, made amulets, or charms, by which they pretended to foretel future events. Rabbi Jacchiades favours the latter opinion, supposing that the aruspices were scarcely known in the East. And maketh known what shall be in the latter days — Or, w hat shall come to pass hereafter, as it is expressed Daniel 2:29 ; Daniel 2:45 . O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed — Daniel, by way of introduction to his telling the king what had been the subject of his dream, informs him of what he meditated, or thought, before he fell asleep, namely, that he revolved in his mind what should be the future condition of the vast empire which he had erected by his various conquests. This surely must have excited in Nebuchadnezzar a great admiration of the God whom Daniel worshipped. Daniel 2:27 Daniel answered in the presence of the king, and said, The secret which the king hath demanded cannot the wise men , the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, shew unto the king; Daniel 2:28 But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these; Daniel 2:29 As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed, what should come to pass hereafter: and he that revealeth secrets maketh known to thee what shall come to pass. Daniel 2:30 But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king, and that thou mightest know the thoughts of thy heart. Daniel 2:30 . This secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living — Namely, to merit such a discovery, or qualify me for receiving it. No praise is due to me on this occasion. Observe, reader, it well becomes those whom God has highly favoured and honoured, to be humble and low in their own eyes; and to lay aside all opinion of their own wisdom and worthiness, that God alone may have all the praise of what they are, and have, and do. But for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king — For the sake of Daniel’s brethren and companions in tribulation, who had by their prayers helped him to obtain this discovery, and so might be said to make known the interpretation; that their lives might be spared, that they might come into favour and be preferred, and that all the people of the Jews might fare the better in their captivity for their sakes. This is the sense of the words, according to the common translation; but the marginal reading is thought by many to be more agreeable to the context, which if we follow, the meaning of the clause is, “Not for any wisdom of mine, but that the king may know the interpretation,” &c. “The impious king,” says Jerome, “had a prophetic dream, that, the saint interpreting it, God might be glorified, and the captives, and those who served God in captivity, might receive great consolation. We read the same thing of Pharaoh; not that Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar deserved to see such things, but that Joseph and Daniel, interpreting them, might be preferred to all others.” And, as Jerome observes afterward, “That Nebuchadnezzar might admire the grace of divine inspiration, he (Daniel) not only told him the dream which he was favoured with, but even the secret thoughts of his heart previous to the dream.” Daniel 2:31 Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible. Daniel 2:31 . Thou, O king, sawest, and behold, a great image — “It appears, from ancient coins and medals, that cities and people were often represented by figures of men and women. A great, terrible human figure was therefore a proper emblem of human power and dominion; and the various metals of which it was composed not unfitly typified the various kingdoms which should arise. It consisted of four different metals, gold, and silver, and brass, and iron, mixed with clay; and these four metals, according to Daniel’s own interpretation, mean so many kingdoms; and the order of their succession is clearly denoted by the order of the parts; the head and higher parts signify the earlier times, and the lower parts the latter times. Hesiod, who lived two hundred years before Daniel, spoke of the four ages of the world under the symbols of these metals; so that this image was formed according to the commonly received notion, and the commonly received notion was not first propagated from hence.” — Bishop Newton. This image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee — This image, says Grotius, appeared with a glorious lustre in the imagination of Nebuchadnezzar, whose mind was wholly taken up with admiration of worldly pomp and splendour; but the same monarchies were represented to Daniel under the shape of fierce and wild beasts, chap. 7., as being the great supporters of idolatry and tyranny in the world. And the form thereof was terrible — The success which accompanied their arms made them feared and dreaded by all the world. Daniel 2:32 This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, Daniel 2:32-33 . This image’s head was of fine gold — The Babylonian monarchy had arrived to the height of glory under Nebuchadnezzar, (see Daniel 2:37-38 ,) who likewise improved and adorned the city of Babylon to such a degree as to make it one of the wonders of the world; so that this empire might justly be compared to a head of gold. His breast and his arms of silver — The second monarchy, of Medes and Persians, would be inferior to the first: see note on Daniel 2:39 . His belly and his thighs of brass, his legs of iron — These emblems denoted the strength of the third and fourth monarchies, and the irresistible force with which they should subdue their adversaries. Iron and brass are the emblems of strength in the prophetical writings; and they were in other respects emblematical of these empires, as we shall see by and by. His feet part of iron and part of clay — By this was signified the Roman empire in its declining state, as will be shown presently. Daniel 2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. Daniel 2:34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Daniel 2:34-35 . Thou sawest till a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image, &c. — Here the whole image is represented as destroyed by a great stone falling upon its feet and breaking them to pieces, whereby the whole image was overset and broken. In like manner the kingdom of Christ, a kingdom of God’s own erecting, was to break to pieces and destroy the fourth and last empire, in which the remainder of the others was comprehended, and at length to put an end to all earthly rule, authority, and power, 1 Corinthians 15:24 . The Jews, as well as Christians, agree that by the stone here is meant the Messiah, or his kingdom, and indeed it is a very apt description of it; for without any visible means, or adequate assistance of human power, it arose, prevailed mightily, and increased to a high degree of strength and greatness, and will still increase, until it become superior to, and swallow up, all the kingdoms of the earth. Then was the iron, the brass, &c., broken to pieces, and became like the chaff, &c. — There was no sign or remainder left of their former greatness. The same expression is used by Isaiah 41:15 , where see the note. The expressions in both places allude to the thrashing-floors in the eastern countries, which were usually placed on the tops of hills. And the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, &c. — This denotes the advancement and increase of Christ’s kingdom, that it should from small beginnings proceed to fill the whole earth; as if a stone by degrees should grow to a mountain. Thus Christ is described as going forth conquering and to conquer, Revelation 6:2 . Ch

Expositor's Bible Commentary Daniel 2:1 And in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep brake from him. THE DREAM-IMAGE OF RUINED EMPIRES "With thee will I break in pieces rulers and captains." - Jeremiah 51:23 THE Book of Daniel is constructed with consummate skill to teach the mighty lessons which it was designed to bring home to the minds of its readers, not only in the age of its first appearance, but forever. It is a book which, so far from being regarded as unworthy of its place in the Canon by those who cannot accept it as either genuine or authentic, is valued by many such critics as a very noble work of inspired genius, from which all the difficulties are removed when it is considered in the light of its true date and origin. This second chapter belongs to all time. All that might be looked upon as involving harshnesses, difficulties, and glaring impossibilities, if it were meant for literal history and prediction, vanishes when we contemplate it in its real perspective as a lofty specimen of imaginative fiction, used, like the parables of our Blessed Lord, as the vehicle for the deepest truths. We shall see how the imagery of the chapter produced a deep impress on the imagination of the holiest thinkers-how magnificent a use is made of it fifteen centuries later by the great poet of medieval Catholicism. It contains the germs of the only philosophy of history which has stood the test of time. It symbolises that ultimate conviction of the Psalmist that "God is the Governor among the nations." No other conviction can suffice to give us consolation amid the perplexity which surrounds the passing phases of the destinies of empires. The first chapter serves as a keynote of soft, simple, and delightful music by way of overture. It calms us for the contemplation of the awful and tumultuous scenes that are now in succession to be brought before us. The model which the writer has had in view in this Haggadah is the forty-first chapter of the Book of Genesis. In both chapters we have magnificent heathen potentates-Pharaoh of Egypt, and Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon. In both chapters the kings dream dreams by which they are profoundly troubled. In both, their spirits are saddened. In both, they send for all the " Chakamim " and all the " Chartummim " of their kingdoms to interpret the dreams. In both, these professional magicians prove themselves entirely incompetent to furnish the interpretation. In both, the failure of the heathen oneirologists is emphasised by the immediate success of a Jewish captive. In both, the captives are described as young, gifted, and beautiful. In both, the interpretation of the King’s dream is rewarded by the elevation to princely civil honours. In both, the immediate elevation to ruling position is followed by life-long faithfulness and prosperity. When we add that there are even close verbal resemblances between the chapters, it is difficult not to believe that the one has been influenced by the other. The dream is placed "in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadrezzar." The date is surprising; for the first chapter has made Nebuchadrezzar a king of Babylon after the siege of Jerusalem "in the third year of Jehoiakim"; and setting aside the historic impossibilities involved in that date, this scene would then fall in the second year of the probation of Daniel and his companions, and at a time when Daniel could only have been a boy of fifteen. The apologists get over the difficulty with the ease which suffices superficial readers who are already convinced. Thus Rashi says "the second year of Nebuchadnezzar," meaning "the second year after the destruction of the Temple," i.e. , his twentieth year! Josephus, no less arbitrarily, makes it mean "the second year after the devastation of Egypt." By such devices anything may stand for anything. Hengstenberg and his school, after having made Nebuchadrezzar a king, conjointly with his father-a fact of which history knows nothing, and indeed seems to exclude-say that the second year of his reign does not mean the second year after he became king, but the second year of his independent rule after the death of Nabopolassar. This style of interpretation is very familiar among harmonists, and it makes the interpretation of Scripture perpetually dependent on pure fancy. It is perhaps sufficient to say that Jewish writers, in works meant for spiritual teaching, troubled themselves extremely little with minutiae of this kind. Like the Greek dramatists, they were unconcerned with details, to which they attached no importance, which they regarded as lying outside the immediate purpose of their narrative. But if any explanation be needful, the simplest way is, with Ewald, Herzfeld, and Lenormant, to make a slight alteration in the text, and to read "in the twelfth " instead of "in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar." There was nothing strange in the notion that God should have vouchsafed a prophetic dream to a heathen potentate. Such instances had already been recorded in the case of Pharaoh, { Genesis 41:1-57 } as well as of his chief courtiers; { Genesis 11:1-32 } and in the case of Abimelech { Genesis 20:5-7 }-It was also a Jewish tradition that it was in consequence of a dream that Pharaoh Necho had sent a warning to Josiah not to advance against him to the Battle of Megiddo. Such dreams are recorded in the cuneiform inscriptions as having occurred to Assyrian monarchs. Ishtar, the goddess of battles, had appeared to Assur-bani-pal, and promised him safety in his war against Teumman, King of Elam; and the dream of a seer had admonished him to take severe steps against his rebel brother, the Viceroy of Babylon. Gyges, King of Lydia, had been warned in a dream to make alliance with Assur-bani-pal. In Egypt Amen-meri-hout had been warned by a dream to unite Egypt against the Assyrians. Similarly in Persian history Afrasiab has an ominous dream, and summons all the astrologers to interpret it; and some of them bid him pay no attention to it. Xerxes (Herod., 3:19) and Astyages (Herod., 1:108) have dreams indicative of future prosperity or adversity. The fundamental conception of the chapter was therefore in accordance with history-though to say, with the "Speaker’s Commentary," that these parallels "endorse the authenticity of the Biblical narratives," is either to use inaccurate terms, or to lay the unhallowed fire of false argument on the sacred altar of truth. It is impossible to think without a sigh of the vast amount which would have to be extracted from so-called "orthodox" commentaries, if such passages were rigidly reprobated as a dishonour to the cause of God. Nebuchadrezzar then-in the second or twelfth year of his reign-dreamed a dream, by which (as in the case of Pharaoh) his spirit was troubled and his sleep interrupted. His state of mind on waking is a psychological condition with which we are all familiar. We awake in a tremor. We have seen something which disquieted us, but we cannot recall what it was; we have had a frightful dream, but we can only remember the terrifying impression which it has left upon our minds. Pharaoh, in the story of Joseph, remembered his dreams, and only asked the professors of necromancy to furnish him with its interpretation. But Nebuchadrezzar is here represented as a rasher and fiercer despot, not without a side-glance at the raging folly and tyranny of Antiochus Epiphanes. He has at his command an army of priestly prognosticators, whose main function it is to interpret the various omens of the future. Of what use were they, if they could not be relied upon in so serious an exigency? Were they to be maintained in opulence and dignity all their lives, only to fail him at a crisis? It was true that he had forgotten the dream, but it was obviously one of supreme importance; it was obviously an intimation from the gods: was it not clearly their duty to say what it meant? So Nebuchadrezzar summoned together the whole class of Babylonian augurs in all their varieties-the Chartummim , "magicians," or book-learned; the Ashshaphim , "enchanters"; the Mekashaphim , "sorcerers"; and the Kasdim , to which the writer gives the long later sense of "dream-interpreters," which had become prevalent in his own day. In later verses he adds two further sections of the students-the Khakhamim , "wise men," and the Gazerim , or " sooth-Sayers. "attempts have often been made, and most recently by Lenormant, to distinguish accurately between these classes of magi, but the attempts evaporate for the most part into shadowy etymologies. It seems to have been a literary habit with the author to amass a number of names and titles together. It is a part of the stateliness and leisureliness of style which he adopts, and he gives no indication of any sense of difference between the classes which he enumerates, either here or when he describes various ranks of Babylonian officials. When they were assembled before him, the king informed them that he had dreamed an important dream, but that it produced such agitation of spirit as had caused him to forget its import. He plainly expected them to supply the failure of his memory, for "a dream not interpreted," say the Rabbis, "is like a letter not read." Then spake the Chaldeans to the king, and their answer follows in Aramaic ("Aramith"), a language which continues to be used till the end of chapter 7. The Western Aramaic, however, here employed could not have been the language in which they spoke, but their native Babylonian, a Semitic dialect more akin to Eastern Aramaic. The word "Aramith" here, as in Ezra 4:7 , is probably a gloss or marginal note, to point out the sudden change in the language of the Book. With the courtly phrase, "O king, live forever," they promised to tell the king the interpretation, if he would tell them the dream. "That I cannot do," said the king, "for it is gone from me. Nevertheless, if you do not tell me both the dream and its interpretation, you shall be hacked limb by limb, and your houses shall be made a dunghill." The language was that of brutal despotism such as had been customary for centuries among the ferocious tyrants of Assyria. The punishment of dismemberment, dichotomy, or death by mutilation was common among them, and had constantly been depicted on their monuments. It was doubtless known to the Babylonians also, being familiar to the apathetic cruelty of the East. Similarly the turning of the houses of criminals into draught-houses was a vengeance practised among other nations. On the other hand, if the "Chaldeans" arose to the occasion, the king would give them rewards and great honours. It is curious to observe that the Septuagint translators, with Antiochus in their mind, render the verse in a form which would more directly remind their readers of Seleucid methods. "If you fail," they make the king say, "you shall be made an example, and your goods shall be forfeited to the crown." With "nervous servility" the magi answer to the king’s extravagantly unreasonable demand, that he must tell them the dream before they can tell him the interpretation. Ewald is probably not far wrong in thinking that a subtle element of irony and humour underlies this scene. It was partly intended as a satirical reflection on the mad vagaries of Epiphanes. For the king at once breaks out into fury, and tells them that they only want to gain (lit. "buy") time; but that this should not avail them. The dream had evidently been of crucial significance and extreme urgency; something important, and perhaps even dreadful, must be in the air. The very raison d’etre of these thaumaturgists and stargazers was to read the omens of the future. If the stars told of any human events, they could not fail to indicate something about the vast trouble which overshadowed the monarch’s dream, even though he had forgotten its details. The king gave them to understand that he looked on them as a herd of impostors; that their plea for delay was due to mere tergiversation; and that, in spite of the lying and corrupt words which they had prepared in order to gain respite "till the time be changed"-that is, until they were saved by some "lucky day" or change of fortune { Esther 3:7 }-there was but one sentence for them, which could only be averted by their vindicating their own immense pretensions, and telling him his dream. The "Chaldeans" naturally answered that the king’s request was impossible. The adoption of the Aramaic at this point may be partly due to the desire for local colouring. No king or ruler in the world had ever imposed such a test on any " Kartum " or " Ashshaph " in the world. No living man could possibly achieve anything so difficult. There were some gods whose dwelling is with flesh; they tenant the souls of their servants. But it is not in the power of these genii to reveal what the king demands; they are limited by the weakness of the souls which they inhabit. It can only be done by those highest divinities whose dwelling is not with flesh, but who "haunt The lucid interspace of world and world," and are too far above mankind to mingle with their thoughts. Thereupon the unreasonable king was angry and very furious, and the decree went forth that the magi were to be slain en masse . How it was that Daniel and his companions were not summoned to help the king, although they had been already declared to be "ten times wiser" than all the rest of the astrologers and magicians put together, is a feature in the story with which the writer does not trouble himself, because it in no way concerned his main purpose. Now, however, since they were prominent members of the magian guild, they are doomed to death among their fellows. Thereupon Daniel sought an interview with Arioch, "the chief of the bodyguard," and asked with gentle prudence why the decree was so harshly urgent. By Arioch’s intervention he gained an interview with Nebuchadrezzar, and promised to tell him the dream and its interpretation, if only the king would grant him a little time-perhaps but a single night. The delay was conceded, and Daniel went to his three companions, and urged them to join in prayer that God would make known the secret to them and spare their lives. Christ tells us that "if two shall agree on earth as touching anything that they ask, it shall be done for them." The secret was revealed to Daniel in a vision of the night, and he blessed "the God of heaven." Wisdom and might are his. Not dependent on "lucky" or "unlucky" days, He changeth the times and seasons; He setteth down one king and putteth up another. By His revelation of deep and sacred things-for the light dwelleth with Him-He had, in answer to their common prayer, made known the secret. Accordingly Daniel bids Arioch not to execute the magians, but to go and tell the king that he will reveal to him the interpretation of his dream. Then, by an obvious verbal inconsistency in the story, Arioch is represented as going with haste to the king, with Daniel, and saying that he had found a captive Jew who would answer the king’s demands. Arioch could never have claimed any such merit, seeing that Daniel had already given his promise to Nebuchadrezzar in person, and did not need to be described. The king formally puts to Daniel the question whether he could fulfil his pledge; and Daniel answers that, though none of the " Khakhamim ," " Ashshaphim ," " Chartummim ," or " Gazerim " could tell the king his dream, yet there is a God in heaven-higher, it is implied, than either the genii or those whose dwelling is not with mortals-who reveals secrets, and has made known to the king what shall be in the latter days. {Comp. Genesis 20:3 , Genesis 41:25 Numbers 22:35 } The king, before he fell asleep, had been deeply pondering the issues of the future; and God, "the revealer of secrets,". {Comp. Genesis 41:45 } had revealed those issues to him, not because of any supreme wisdom possessed by Daniel, but simply that the interpretation might be made known. The king had seen a huge, gleaming, terrible colossus of many colours and of different metals, but otherwise not unlike the huge colossi which guarded the portals of his own palace. Its head was of fine gold; its torso of silver; its belly and thighs of brass; its legs of iron; its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. But while he gazed upon it as it reared into the sunlight, as though in mute defiance and insolent security, its grim metallic glare, a mysterious and unforeseen fate fell upon it. The fragment of a rock broke itself loose, not with hands, smote the image upon its feet of iron and clay, and broke them to pieces. It had now nothing left to stand upon, and instantly the hollow multiform monster collapsed into promiscuous ruins; Its shattered fragments became like the chaff of the summer threshing-floor, and the wind swept them away; { Psalm 1:4 Isaiah 41:15 Jeremiah 51:33 , etc.} but the rock, unhewn by any earthly hands, grew over the fragments into a mountain that filled the earth. That was the haunting and portentous dream; and this was its interpretation:- The head of gold was Nebuchadrezzar himself, the king of what Isaiah had called "the golden city" { Isaiah 14:4 } -a King of kings, ruler over the beasts of the field, and the fowls of heaven, and the children of men. After him should come a second and an inferior kingdom, symbolised by the arms and heart of silver. Then a third kingdom of brass. Finally a fourth kingdom, strong and destructive as iron. But in this fourth kingdom was an element of weakness, symbolised by the fact that the feet are partly of iron and partly of weak clay. An attempt should be made, by intermarriages, to give greater coherency to these elements; but it should fail, because they could not intermix. In the days of these kings, indicated by the ten toes of the image, swift destruction should come upon the kingdoms from on high; for the King of heaven should set up a kingdom indestructible and eternal, which should utterly supersede all former kingdoms. "The intense nothingness and transitoriness of man’s might in its highest estate, and the might of God’s kingdom, are the chief subjects of this vision." Volumes have been written about the four empires indicated by the constituents of the colossus in this dream; but it is entirely needless to enter into them at length. The vast majority of the interpretations have been simply due to a priori prepossessions, which are arbitrary and baseless. The object has been to make the interpretations fit in with preconceived theories of prophecy, and with the traditional errors about the date and object of the Book of Daniel. If we first see the irresistible evidence that the Book appeared in the days of Antiochus Epiphanes, and then observe that all its earthly "predictions" culminate in a minute description of his epoch, the general explanation of the four empires, apart from an occasional and a subordinate detail, becomes perfectly clear. In the same way the progress of criticism has elucidated in its general outlines the interpretation of the Book which has been so largely influenced by the Book of Daniel-the Revelation of St. John. The all-but-unanimous consensus of the vast majority of the sanest and most competent exegetes now agrees in the view that the Apocalypse was written in the age of Nero, and that its tone and visions were predominantly influenced by his persecution of the early Christians, as the Book of Daniel was by the ferocities of Antiochus against the faithful Jews. Ages of persecution, in which plain-speaking was impossible to the oppressed, were naturally prolific of apocalyptic cryptographs. What has been called the "futurist" interpretation of these books-which, for instance, regards the fourth empire of Daniel as some kingdom of Antichrist as yet unmanifested-is now universally abandoned. It belongs to impossible forms of exegesis, which have long been discredited by the boundless variations of absurd conjectures, and by the repeated refutation of the predictions which many have ventured to base upon these erroneous methods. Even so elaborate a work as Elliott’s " Horae Apocalyptica e" would now be regarded as a curious anachronism. That the first empire, represented by the head of gold, is the Babylonian, concentrated in Nebuchadrezzar himself, is undisputed, because it is expressly stated by the writer. { Daniel 2:37-38 } Nor can there be any serious doubt, if the Book be one coherent whole, written by one author, that by the fourth empire is meant, as in later chapters, that of Alexander and his successors-"the Diadochi," as they are often called. For it must be regarded as certain that the four elements of the colossus, which indicate the four empires as they are presented to the imagination of the heathen despot, are closely analogous to the same four empires which in the seventh chapter present themselves as wild beasts out of the sea to the imagination of the Hebrew seer. Since the fourth empire is there, beyond all question, that of Alexander and his successors, the symmetry and purpose of the Book prove conclusively that the fourth empire here is also the Graeco-Macedonian, strongly and irresistibly founded by Alexander, but gradually sinking to utter weakness by its own divisions, in the persons of the kings who split his dominion into four parts. If this needed any confirmation, we find it in the eighth chapter, which is mainly concerned with Alexander the Great and Antiochus Epiphanes; and in the eleventh chapter, which enters with startling minuteness into the wars, diplomacy, and intermarriages of the Ptolemaic and Seleucid dynasties. In Daniel 8:21 we are expressly told that the strong he-goat is "the King of Grecia," who puts an end to the kingdoms of Media and Persia. The arguments of Hengstenberg, Pusey, etc., that the Greek Empire was a civilising and an ameliorating power, apply at least as strongly to the Roman Empire. But when Alexander thundered his way across the dreamy East, he was looked upon as a sort of shattering levin-bolt. The interconnection of these visions is clearly marked even here, for the juxtaposition of iron and miry clay is explained by the clause "they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: {Comp. Jeremiah 31:27 } but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay." This refers to the same attempts to consolidate the rival powers of the Kings of Egypt and Syria which are referred to in Daniel 11:6-7 ; Daniel 11:17 . It is a definite allusion which. becomes meaningless in the hands of those interpreters who attempt to explain the iron empire to be that of the Romans. "That the Greek Empire is to be the last of the Gentile empires appears from Daniel 8:17 , where the vision is said to refer to ‘the time of the end.’ Moreover, in the last vision of all (Daniel chapters 10-12), the rise and progress of the Greek Empire are related with many details, but nothing whatever is said of any subsequent empire. Thus to introduce the Roman Empire into the Book of Daniel is to set at naught the plainest rules of exegesis." The reason of the attempt is to make the termination of the prophecy coincide with the coming of Christ, which is then-quite unhistorically-regarded as followed by the destruction of the fourth and last empire. But the interpretation can only be thus arrived at by a falsification of facts. For the victory of Christianity over Paganism, so decisive and so Divine, was in no sense a destruction of the Roman Empire. In the first place that victory was not achieved till three centuries after Christ’s advent, and in the second place it was rather a continuation anti defence of the Roman Empire than its destruction. The Roman Empire, in spite of Alaric and Genseric and Attila, and because of its alliance with Christianity, may be said to have practically continued down to modern times. So far from being regarded as the shatterers of the Roman Empire, the Christian popes and bishops were, and were often called, the " Defensores Civitatis ." That many of the Fathers, following many of the Rabbis, regarded Rome as the iron empire, and the fourth wild beast, was due to the fact that until modern days the science of criticism was unknown, and exegesis was based on the shifting sand. If we are to accept their authority on this question, we must accept it on many others, respecting views and methods which have now been unanimously abandoned by the deeper insight and advancing knowledge of mankind. The influence of Jewish exegesis over the Fathers - erroneous as were its principles and fluctuating as were its conclusions-was enormous. It was not unnatural for the later Jews, living under the hatred and oppression of Rome, and still yearning for the fulfilment of Messianic promises, to identify Rome with the fourth empire. And this seems to have been the opinion of Josephus, whatever that may be worth. But it is doubtful whether it corresponds to another and earlier Jewish tradition. For among the Fathers even Ephraem Syrus identifies the Macedonian Empire with the fourth empire, and he may have borrowed this from Jewish tradition. But of how little value were early conjectures may be seen in the fact that, for reasons analogous to those which had made earlier Rabbis regard Rome as the fourth empire, two mediaeval exegetes so famous as Saadia the Gaon and Abn Ezra had come to the conclusion that the fourth empire was-the Mohammedan! Every detail of the vision as regards the fourth kingdom is minutely in accord with the kingdom of Alexander. It can only be applied to Rome by deplorable shifts and sophistries, the untenability of which we are now more able to estimate than was possible in earlier centuries. So far indeed as the iron is concerned, that might by itself stand equally well for Rome or for Macedon, if Daniel 7:7-8 ; Daniel 8:3-4 ; Daniel 11:3 did not definitely describe the conquests of Alexander. But all which follows is meaningless as applied to Rome, nor is there anything in Roman history to explain any division of the kingdom ( Daniel 2:41 ), or attempt to strengthen it by intermarriage with other kingdoms ( Daniel 2:43 ). In the divided Graeco-Macedonian Empires of the Diadoehi, the dismemberment of one mighty kingdom into the four much weaker ones of Cassander, Ptolemy, Lysimachus, and Seleucus began immediately after the death of Alexander (B.C. 323). It was completed as the result of twenty-two years of war after the Battle of Ipsus (B.C. 301). The marriage of Antiochus Theos to Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus, {B.C. 249, Daniel 11:6 } was as ineffectual as the later marriage of Ptolemy V (Epiphanes) to Cleopatra, the daughter of Antiochus the Great (B.C. 193), to introduce strength or unity into the distracted kingdoms. { Daniel 11:17-18 } The two legs and feet are possibly meant to indicate the two most important kingdoms-that of the Seleucidae in Asia, and that of the Ptolemies in Egypt. If we are to press the symbolism still more closely, the ten toes may shadow forth the ten kings who are indicated by the ten horns Daniel 7:7 . Since, then, we are told that the first empire represents Nebuchadrezzar by the head of gold, and since we have incontestably verified the fourth empire to be the Greek Empire of Alexander and his successors, it only remains to identify the intermediate empires of silver and brass. And it becomes obvious that they can only be the Median and the Persian. That the writer of Daniel regarded these empires as distinct is clear from Daniel 5:31 ; Daniel 5:6 . It is obvious that the silver is meant for the Median Empire, because, closely as it was allied with the Persian in the view of the writer, { Daniel 6:9 ; Daniel 6:13 ; Daniel 6:16 ; Daniel 8:7 } he yet spoke of the two as separate. The rule of "Darius the Mede," not of "Cyrus the Persian," is, in his point of view, the "other smaller kingdom" which arose after that of Nebuchadrezzar. { Daniel 5:31 } Indeed, this is also indicated in the vision of the ram; { Daniel 8:3 } for it has two horns, of which the higher and stronger (the Persian Empire) rose up after the other (the Median Empire); just as in this vision the Persian Empire represented by the thighs of brass is clearly stronger than the Median Empire, which, being wealthier, is represented as being of silver, but is smaller than the other. Further, the second empire is represented later on by the second beast, { Daniel 7:5 } and the three ribs in its mouth may be meant for the three satrapies of Daniel 6:2 . It may then be regarded as a certain result of exegesis that the four empires are- (1) the Babylonian; (2) the Median; (3) the Persian; (4) the Graeco-Macedonian. But what is the stone cut without hands which smote the image upon his feet? It brake them in pieces, and made the collapsing debris of the colossus like chaff scattered by the wind from the summer threshing-floor. It grew till it became a great mountain which filled the earth. The meaning of the image being first smitten upon its feet is that the overthrow falls on the iron empire. All alike are agreed that by the mysterious rock-fragment the writer meant the Messianic Kingdom. The "mountain" out of which (as is here first mentioned) the stone is cut is "the Mount Zion." It commences "in the days of these kings." Its origin is not earthly, for it is "cut without hands." It represents "a kingdom" which "shall be set up by the God of heaven," and shall destroy and supersede all the kingdoms, and shall stand for ever. Whether a personal Messiah was definitely prominent in the mind of the writer is a question which will come before us when we consider the seventh chapter. Here there is only a Divine Kingdom; and that this is the dominion of Israel seems to be marked by the expression, "the kingdom shall not be left to another people." The prophecy probably indicates the glowing hopes which the writer conceived of the future of his nation, even in the days of its direst adversity, in accordance with the predictions of the mighty prophets his predecessors, whose writings he had recently studied. Very few of those predictions have as yet been literally fulfilled; not one of them was fulfilled with such immediateness as the prophets conceived, when they were "rapt into future times." To the prophetic vision was revealed the glory that should be hereafter, but not the times and seasons, which God hath kept in His own power, and which Jesus told His disciples were not even known to the Son of Man Himself in His human capacity. Antiochus died, and his attempts to force Hellenism upon the Jews were so absolute a failure that, in point of fact, his persecution only served to stereotype the ceremonial institutions which-not entirely proprio motu , but misled by men like the false high priests Jason and Menelaus-he had attempted to obliterate. But the magnificent expectations of a golden age to follow were indefinitely delayed. Though Antiochus died and failed, the Jews became by no means unanimous in their religious policy. Even under the Hasmonaean princes fierce elements of discord were at work in the midst of them. Foreign usurpers adroitly used these dissensions for their own objects, and in B.C. 37 Judaism acquiesced in the national acceptance of a depraved Edomite usurper in the person of Herod, and a section of the Jews attempted to represent him as the promised Messiah! Not only was the Messianic prediction unfulfilled in its literal aspect "in the days of these kings," but even yet it has by no means received its complete accomplishment. The "stone cut without hands" indicated the kingdom, not-as most of the prophets seem to have imagined when they uttered words which meant more than they themselves conceived-of the literal Israel, but of that ideal Israel which is composed, not of Jews, but of Gentiles. The divinest side of Messianic prophecy is the expression of that unquenchable hope and of that indomitable faith which are the most glorious outcome of all that is most Divine in the spirit of man. That faith and hope have never found even an ideal or approximate fulfilment save in Christ and in His kingdom, which is now, and shall be without end. But apart from the Divine predictions of the eternal sunlight visible on the horizon over vast foreshortened ages of time which to God are but as one day, let us notice how profound is the symbolism of the vision-how well it expresses the surface glare, the inward hollowness, the inherent weakness, the varying successions, the predestined transience of overgrown empires. The great poet