Then the King commanded and they brought Daniel.
The Example of Daniel
It is the property of pure religion to invest the man who possesses it with excellencies which bear no resemblance to the “fashion of the world.” His ambition rises beyond all human distinctions. Those endowments of mind and of character which arrested the admiration of Darius, and induced the smile of his complacency, awakened at the same time the direful spirit of envy in the breast of his courtiers, who could not endure to contemplate the rising glory of the “man whom the king delighted to honour.”
1. The text records the sentiments of an inspired prophet respecting the interference of human authority in the concerns of religion. Daniel honoured the King, but would not render to him the homage which interfered with the claims of God and the rights of conscience. Does it become Christians to evince less of fortitude and firm decision of soul?
2. In the temper and conduct of Daniel we may learn how all good men should act under the rod of oppression. To lawful authority obedience is due; but to yield submission to the will of a capricious tyrant, arrayed in the trappings of assumed and self-constituted authority, to a task dreadfully irksome to a reflecting mind. Absolute power cannot govern the region of the soul. If the Christian had power, he has no disposition to render evil for evil. His temper is that of meekness, and peace, and goodwill towards men. He, therefore, is not fitted to subvert establishments and to dethrone tyrants. His spirit gives him patience to endure, but inspires no feeling of resistance; and he prefers being made the victim rather than the agent of vengeance.
3. The case of the afflicted prophet reminds us how religious persecution defeats its object, by extending the cause which it is intended to repress. It was Daniel’s fortitude in subduing misfortunes, and his faith which conquered death, that made his religion popular.
4. The holy fortitude and triumph of the persecuted prophet, show that God affords support to his servants under the pressure of their heaviest trials. (Chap. 6:16, 28) (S. Curwen.)
The Den of Lions
The precedency given to Daniel did not suit the mind of the other presidents and princes for various reasons. They were still jealous of the power of this foreign worshipper of Jehovah, and doubtless they were well convinced that, so long as Daniel had the final authority over the treasury accounts, there would be small chance for them to enrich themselves at the expense of the king’s exchequer. They therefore immediately formed a plot for Daniel’s overthrow. They perfectly understood that they could not sustain any ordinary charge against this man of blameless character and spotless integrity. So they resorted to craft. If Daniel was to be caught at all, it must be through his religious fidelity. The light that had shone so steadfastly and brilliantly in that great city for more than sixty years was not now to be hidden under a bushel. He disdained to condescend to unworthy compromises or cowardly evasions.
I. DANIEL DELIVERED TO THE LIONS. In the delivery of Daniel, to be cast into the den of lions, we are reminded at once of the similar fate which befell the three young princes, his early friends. Darius had been more boastful in the decree which made him god for thirty days, than had Nebuchadnezzar, who only ordered that his god should be worshipped by everybody; yet he had less power than his more modest predecessor. We cannot but reflect on the latent sarcasm involved in the boasted despotic power of earthly monarchs. Their power is always absolute to do evil, but limited to do good. Zedekiah could consent to the imprisonment of Jeremiah, but said he had not power to deliver him out of the hands of the nobles, his enemies. Herod had power to deliver John the Baptist to the executioner, but no power to save him from the result of his rash vow. Pilate seemed to have no power to save Jesus from his malicious enemies, but had power to deliver Him to the cross. And so we might further illustrate this power for evil, this impotence for good, when it is vested in the hands of the kings of the earth; but these cases will suffice. It was thus that Darius exercised his power and exhibited his powerlessness, when he ordered Daniel to be cast to the lions.
1. The king’s speech.
“Thy God, whom thou servest continually, he will deliver thee.” Thus he shifted responsibility from his own hands upon the God of Daniel, whom he had denied. So perhaps Herod hoped that somehow John the Baptist might be delivered out of Herodias’ hands. So perhaps Pilate may have thought. Darius seemed not only to desire that God would deliver Daniel, but had a strong hope that he would. Perhaps Daniel had told him how, forty or fifty years before, God had delivered his three friends out of the fiery furnace; for Darius seemed to know a good deal of Daniel and his God. But this good-will, and even this gleam of faith in the power of God to deliver his servant, did not excuse his own evil act in delivering the innocent to death. If God does not interpose to frustrate our evil doings or overrule them for good, that does not make our sin the less, though it brings equal glory to God.
2. The double sealing of the den.--“And a stone was brought and laid upon the month of the den; and the king sealed it with his own signet and with the signet of his lords, that the purpose might not be changed concerning Daniel.” This reminds us very much of what the rulers of the Jews did when Jesus was buried. Did these lords fear that somehow Daniel would come out of that den of lions? It would almost seem so. There is always a fear in the heart of those who fight against God that he will defeat them.
II. THE DISTRESS OF THE KING.
1. A troubled conscience.--“The king went to his palace and spent the night fasting; and his sleep went from him.” It was well that he did so; though it had been better had he boldly delivered Daniel. How often, when we weakly yield to sin, and suffer the torture of an offended conscience, we try to compensate for our sin by some acts of self-denial. If the fasting was a sign of repentance, it was well; but if it was simply to ease the pain of conscience, and seek in that way to atone for the evil, it was a mere mockery. We are so often quick to sin and slow to repent; prompt in doing wrong, but dilatory in making reparation. We are not sorry that the king had a bad night of it. We have had bad nights ourselves, and know how he felt. On the other hand, we cannot but think how differently the night was spent, by Daniel. Peter slept quietly in his gaol while the angel was coming to deliver him; and Paul and Silas waked the prison’s echoes with nightly song. Happy children and servants of God, who can be at peace, can sleep soundly or sing gleefully in lion’s den or prison’s dungeon, while the monarch persecutors spend nights with tortured consciences in their splendid palaces!
2. A morning drive.--“The king arose very early in the morning, and went in haste to the den of lions.” He could not spend the whole night in his bed. With the first suggestion of dawn he was up and his chariot was ordered, and he drove in haste to the place where Daniel was quietly reposing with the lions and God’s angel. This indeed is a strange spectacle, for the monarch of the world thus to be attending upon a condemned servant of God. The spirit of God working in the conscience of Darius, compelled him to do the same thing; as once before the fear of Zedekiah brought him to the dungeon of Jeremiah, the imprisoned prophet. God knows how to bring down the head of the proud as well as how to lift up the humble. Happy we if we also may always repent in time.
3. The king’s lamentable cry.--“O Daniel, servant of the living God, is thy God, whom thou servest continually, able to deliver thee from the lions?” The king was deeply distressed and in an agony of anxiety. He had admired Daniel, and had listened to the old prophet’s teaching concerning Jehovah. It all came back to him now; and he was both ready to publicly confess the excellency of the believer’s character, and the dignity and sovereignty of the believer’s God. In this “lamentable cry” there was both penitence and acknowledgment. What a splendid character he gave to Daniel: “Servant of the living God, whom thou servest continually.” He also confessed God in a wonderful way: “The Living God.” Thus he brushed aside all the pretensions of the idol gods, and gave honour to Jehovah. Daniel’s teachings had not been in vain.
III. DANIELS’S TRIUMPH. That must have been a welcome sound to the king’s ear, when the voice of Daniel answered back in clear, calm, and humbly triumphant tone, “O king, live for ever.” Human nature would have been inclined to have added. “But no thanks to you.”
1. Praise to God.--“My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions mouths, that they have not hurt me.” In this he takes pains to ascribe his deliverance to his God. Here is a strong emphasis upon the fact that the Living God is not to be confounded with the false gods of the heathen. He is a God of providence, who watches over his servants and keeps his promise with them.
2. A defence of his innocency.--“Forasmuch as before him innocency was found in me; and also before thee, O king, I have done no hurt.” Daniel does not boast of his goodness, but would set before the king that the favour of God to his servants in such a case is not regardless of the law of righteousness. Daniel had honoured God at a time when the world-power was denying and deriding him.
3. Daniel delivered out of the den.--Then was the king exceeding glad for him, and commanded that they should take Daniel out of the den.” Thus was Daniel delivered out of the den, and out of the hands of his enemies. His character was vindicated, and better still, his God was magnified and honoured.
IV. THE EDICT OF THE KING. God has never left the world without a witness for him; and now the last witness is being given to the nations by the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. When this testimony is complete he will take to himself his great power, and finish the work in righteousness; he will set up his King upon the double throne of heaven and earth, and reign therein world without end. (G. F. Pentecost, D.D.)
The Den of Lions
Almost every bas-relief exhumed in recent years, has some figure of the lion. Dens of them were kept for the royal pleasure, or to be the swift executioners of the realm. Here, in this lesson, is a series of striking contrasts, between the King and his Jewish officer.
1. The one does wrong and hopes; the other does right and trusts. The deification of rulers was their general, as still the Russians regard the Tsar, and till lately, the Japanese the Mikado. The jewelled crown and sceptre were the signs of omnipotence. Darius had the ideas of his own time. In a way, he believed in his own divine nature. The flattery of courtiers was pleasing, and the imposing displays, in capital and campaign, helped to foster the self-delusion. It would never do for the Median lord to confess a mistake. We turn to look at that sincere, calm soul, whose love for his home wavered not through a life-time. A life of devotion was not to be abandoned because of any proclamation from men. Spiritual communion was as essential, after the famous behest, as before it was issued.
2. The one regards death as a sure agent, the other as under divine control. The love of life is an instinct. No one in his senses courts death. The taking of life is the last dread resort of the civil law. The unscrupulous ruler can rely on it to work his will. Daniel felt that if God had more for him to do in witnessing to the truth here, all the brute creation could not harm him. Death is not a certain victor when it suddenly confronts us.
3. The one decreed a universal religion; the other preached and practiced it daily. The safety of Daniel was proof enough to the king that the God of Daniel was no myth, but the living God. So he published an edict, demanding of all homage to Jehovah. But piety can never be the fruit of proclamation. In striking contrast with such, pretensions and wholesale religionism, there went forth, from the testing place, the plain lover of God, and preacher of righteousness, to take up his responsible duties as before, and to kneel in grateful acknowledgment of Jehovah’s protection and furtherance. (De Witt S. Clark.)