1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it. 2 And the LORD gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with some of the articles of the house of God, which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the articles into the treasure house of his god.
“Jehoiakim's father, King Josiah, was killed at Megiddo in the battle of Haran in 609 BC (2 Kings 23:34). Jehoiakim's brother Jehoahaz became king in place of Josiah but was later dethroned by the Egyptian Pharaoh Neco, who then appointed Jehoiakim king over Judah. This king's original name was Eliakim, but according to Second Chronicles 36:2–4, Neco change his name to Jehoiakim (cp. 2 Kings 23:34)… [SO] the King was a vassal of the Egyptian Pharaoh Neco, who had appointed him to rule over Judah.” (Daniel- Wisdom to the Wise, Zdravko Stefanovic)
“‘The book opens with a synopsis of the first Jewish deportation in 605 B.C. (cf. 2 Kings 24:1-2; 2 Chronicles 36:6).’ [Note: D. J. Wiseman, The Chronicles of the Chaldean Kings, pp. 25, 46-47, and 66-69, validated this date.] Daniel and his three friends were part of the nobles and royal families taken from Jerusalem as captives then. We know nothing more about Daniel's family background.” (Dr. Thomas Constable) "... Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came against him (the king of Judah), and bound him in fetters to carry him to Babylon: 2 Chronicles 36:6. But promising fidelity, the king of Babylon restored him to his kingdom, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years: 2 Kings 24:1." (Coke's Commentary)
Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem… ”Strictly Nebuchadnezzar was not king at the time of his besieging of Jerusalem. He became king later in the year when his father Nabopolassar died. But the description is read back so as to identify clearly who was being spoken about. Note also that it is said that ‘he besieged it’ not that he took it. A long siege would have been necessary to take this strong city and Nebuchadnezzar was interrupted by news of his father’s death, which necessitated his return to Babylon to establish his position. The city was never taken at the time, although terms were agreed.” (Pett’s Commentary)
And the LORD gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with some of the articles of the house of God… “To the faithful, this bold statement of trust says that God was still in control. It was a source of strength and courage. After all, had not God through the prophet Jeremiah, called King Nebuchadnezzar ‘My servant’ (Jer. 27:6)? Had he not put a time limit to the period of the exile in Babylon (Jer. 29:10)? That same Lord gave Judah’s king, the captives, and the holy objects into the enemies hand.
As the neighboring nations saw Jerusalem's defeat in the temple vessels taken to the Mesopotamia, they must have concluded that Yahweh, the God who's dwelling was in that city, was defeated by the god Marduk (Bel) and was now let captive to Babylonia. 'Wars were fought in a god's name and plunder thus belonging to him. The temple articles are his booty,’ [Word Biblical Commentary] symbolizing the captivity of conquered gods as well as people. Since the Jews did not have an image of their God, the Babylonians carried off their temple vessels instead. [The New Interpreter's Bible] To all appearances, the God of Jerusalem had been defeated by the gods of Babylon.” (“Daniel- Wisdom to the Wise” by Zdravko Stefanovic)
which he carried into the land of Shinar… “The intentional use of the archaic name Shinar for Babylon takes the reader back to the story recorded in Genesis 11 in which the human race tries to defy God’s plan by building an opposing city-tower (symbolizing human works) intended to be the capital of the world. Told ‘not without humor,’ (Doukhan) the story reports that the project was in the end aborted, resulting in a new – taunting – name given to the place: Babel, or ‘confusion.’ In the following chapter of Genesis (chap. 12), God told Abram to leave this place of rebellion and confusion and go to a land that he promised to give to Abram's descendants so that ‘all peoples on earth will be blessed through you’ (Gen.12:3). Abrams journey of faith started in Haran (Gen. 12:4) and continued as far as Bethel (Gen. 12:8), until he reached Negev or the south (Gen. 13:3). YEARS LATER, Abraham's grandson Jacob backtracked his father's journey of faith after he deceived his brother and was forced to flee his father’s home. Jacob left Beersheba (Gen. 28:10), the main town in the Negev, travel to Bethel (Gen. 28:19), and finally reached his destination, the city of Haran, located in Mesopotamia (Gen. 29:4). IN A SIMILAR WAY, Abrahams descendants, by leaving the Promised Land and going into exile in the land of Shinar, were reversing their forefather’s journey of faith. Now with the covenant broken by the descendants of Abraham, there was– by means of a captivity – a movement back to Shinar. The use of the term ‘Israelites,’ or literallly ‘the sons of Israel [Jacob],’ in verse 3 is probably intentional, reminding the reader that these characters were actually the descendants of Jacob. As they were on their way to Mesopotamia, they were in reality following the footsteps of their ancestors Jacob, who was the first family member to reverse Abrahams journey of faith to the Promised Land. IN THE EYES OF THE BIBLICAL PROPHETS, the land of Babylonia was a center of idolatry. The prophet Zachariah was told in a vision that he land of Shinar was the ‘dwelling of iniquity and wickedness’ (Zech. 5:5–11)” [Daniel- Wisdom to the Wise by Stefanovic]
3 Then the king instructed Ashpenaz, the master of his eunuchs, to bring some of the children of Israel and some of the king’s descendants and some of the nobles, 4 young men in whom there was no blemish, but good-looking, gifted in all wisdom, possessing knowledge and quick to understand, who had ability to serve in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the language and literature of the Chaldeans.
“Ashpenaz was the person in charge of the education of the royal youth. He was directly responsible to the king for their successful training (vs. 18)." (Zdravko Stefanovic) He was instructed by Nebuchadnezzar "to bring some of the children of Israel.” “Choice captives were selected for special training so they could serve at the court. Then, if they ever return to their homeland, they would function as a vital links between the palace in the provinces in the empire. The young men were between fifteen and eighteen years old, an ideal teachable age. The text discloses several criteria for their selection: family background, physical appearance, intellectual capabilities combined with readiness to learn quickly, and palace manners (etiquette). Physically they had to be without without any defect. The Bible uses the same language to describe the priest and the sacrifices in the sanctuary (Lev. 21:17–23; 22:18–25) but also young people like Absalom (2 Sam. 14:25)...“ [Daniel- Wisdom to the Wise- Stefanovic]
some of the King’s descendants and.. nobles... It is generally agreed that the king of Judah's descendants are referenced here but, it "is not very clear whether these two terms express a single concept, something like ‘the royal family, that is, the nobility,’ with the conjunction functioning here as an explicitive, or if the two have separate meanings, as is reflected in this translation. The title 'happart'mim' 'nobility,' comes from Persia and is used only here and in Esther 1:3 and 6:9. This detail gives additional information about the family backgrounds of Daniel and his friends. They may have been members of the royal family of Davidic descent or of the noble families from Judah. Ancient traditions relate the four young men to either King Zedekiah (Josephus) or King Hezekiah (Jerome). [Doukhan] In either case, they would have already had some kind of diplomatic training back in their homeland." (Zdravko Stefanovic)
The expression "young men" in verse 4, “means that the youth were in their adolescent years (Gen. 7:30). It has been suggested that the four Hebrews were between fifteen and eighteen years old when they were taken to Babylon. A scholar has called this 'a teachable age.' Joseph was around eighteen when sold in the slavery (Gen. 37:2). The same plural noun, ‘young men’ is used in first Kings 12:8 to describe the friends of King Rehoboam who grew up with him and were his counselors…” (Stefanovic), rather than the elders of Israel, giving him bad advise.
To whom they might teach the language…of the Chaldeans which most likely included Akkadian, which was a Semitic language. The language of the sons of Israel is Hebrew... but there is no conflict of interests here with leaning the native language. "It is amazing what pains some saintly people have taken in order to win souls for Christ! When John Wesley was crossing the seas on his way to Georgia, he found on board a number of German emigrants who were also crossing to the Western lands. He was seized by a passionate desire to speak to them about the love of the Saviour, but he was hampered by the hindrance of an unknown tongue. He did not know German, and so an intimate communion was impossible. There and then he set himself to learn the language. For many hours every day he laboriously pursued the study, until, long before the journey ended, he was able to tell his German brothers the uplifting story of the Christ of God. Keith Falconer was once in great need of information which would enormously help him in his sacred work. He found, however, that the information was buried in the Dutch language, which was altogether unknown to him. There and then he set himself to learn Dutch, and mastered it in order that he might gain the hidden treasure." (Hartley Aspen)
However, the literature of the Chaldeans would not jive with the Hebrew mindset based on the liiterature of the Hebrews— the Bible. The king was hoping to make "enchanters, astrologers and diviners" of them. (Dan. 5:7) These, including the study of astrology, are largely religious and therefore prohibited. The young men took the classes prescribed by the king of Babylon. It is not illegal to learn of other religions, but rather to practice them. It may help our witness. And who knows but that we might learn something more biblical than our current understanding of Scriptures. Surely some of their religion spilled off into so-called sciences in their curriculum.
“A certain enthusiasm of heart and a deep moral purpose are as needful for true advance in science as the clear light of the understanding itself. May the study of science afford illustrations, enforcements, helps to a religious life? Yes. Religion and science both rest upon truth. It is truth that religion recognises. It is truth that science seeks. They cannot be irreconcilable, and finally they must be one. It must be remembered, that no finality has been reached in either sphere. Dogmatism is as impertinent as it is unphilosophical. The very principles of some of our sciences have been reversed within a few years. And in religion, men’s conceptions are ever changing, growing in their sweetness, in their scope. Is the study of science to be pursued without any religious thoughts being associated with it? Certainly not. Both religion and morality aid scientific investigation. The man of science will not gain his highest purpose unless he seek in the subject of his learning, to find the supreme God. Two points. The first relates to the care which the scientific student must; observe when he transfers his attention from the objects of his proper pursuit to other occupations. And be careful that you do not forget in science that you have human duties. All knowledge is but the means to that nobility of living which we gather up in the word 'service.'" (Llewellyn D. Bevan, L.L.B.)
5 And the king appointed for them a daily provision of the king’s delicacies and of the wine which he drank, and three years of training for them, so that at the end of that time they might serve before the king. 6 Now from among those of the sons of Judah were Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. 7 To them the chief of the eunuchs gave names: he gave Daniel the name Belteshazzar; to Hananiah, Shadrach; to Mishael, Meshach; and to Azariah, Abed-Nego. 8 But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king’s delicacies, nor with the wine which he drank; therefore he requested of the chief of the eunuchs that he might not defile himself.
The king appointed them “A DAILY PORTION. Hebrew, ‘the thing of a day in his day;’ that is, he assigned to them each day a portion of what had been prepared for the royal meal. It was not a permanent provision, but one which was made each day “ (Barnes Notes) AND THREE YEARS OF TRAINING. “The Babylonians planned the education process that lasted three years, after which the young men's progress would be evaluated with a final test, a part of which was an interview with King Nebuchadnezzar (Dan.1:18-19). Upon successfully passing that examination, the young men would be qualified to ‘stand before the king,’ a term for royal service that had both secular (1 Kings 10:8; 12:8) and religious (2 Chron, 29:11) connotations.” [“Daniel- Wisdom to the Wise”- Zdravko Stefanovic] Perhaps, Nebuchadnezzar “thought they might be cured, not only of all homesickness, as ordinarily understood--the wasting regret and longing for Zion, and the God of Zion, but of those home ideas and affections which are at the root of all patriotism worthy of the name.” (Canon Ainger) Let us never grow too content with this world’s mammon. Let us rather, be like Moses and Daniel, and forsake it, looking instead to that Eternal City with a Foundation whose Builder and Maker is God.
Daniel purposed in his heart not to defile himself with food from the king’s table. Objections: Meat offered to idols existed in that day, was well as NT times. Also: “Certain types of meat proscribed in the Bible, such as pork (Lev. 11; Deut. 14), were served to the officials in Babylon. Babylonian soldiers regularly ate pork and horsemeat while in service for the king. (H. W. F. Saggs) And the original Hebrew word translated in this verse as ‘defile’ is associated with blood in the Bible (Isa. 59:3; 63:3; Lam. 4:14) The eating of any kind of animal, clean or unclean, that hadn't been slaughtered in such a way as to drain its blood would defile a Hebrew person (Lev. 17:10-14). The prohibition, ‘You must not eat meat that has its life blood still in it’ (Gen. 9:4), is very old and categorically echoed many times in the Pentateuch. [It was sacred because “the life of the flesh is in the blood.” (Lev. 17:11)] In Babylon, the blood was not drained when an animal was slaughtered for consumption, so defilement by blood was virtually unavoidable. The presence of the menu of pork together with meat filled with blood pose a serious problem for the Hebrew young men. AS FOR THE WINE that is mentioned in this verse, in Bible times, only the Nazarites practiced total abstinence from grape juice, both for minute and unfermented (Num. 6:3). There are several pages, found mostly in the wisdom books that speaks of drinking in very negative terms: for example ‘wine is a mocker and strong drink a brawler; whoever is lead astray by them is not wise’ (Prov. 20:1). The story of the Recabites from Jeremiah 35 may also shed some light on Daniel's refusal to drink the wine from the Kings table. POLITICAL: In the ancient world, eating at the same table with someone meant to establish a strong bond with that person. A number of Biblical examples illustrate the widely held concepts that to share table fellowship with a person meant one’s readiness to make a covenant with that person or a pledge of such complex loyalty as to become one with that person (Exod. 34:15; Dan. 11:26; Matt. 26: 26–28; Luke 15:1, 2; 1 Cor. 8:7; 10:14–22; Rev. 30:20)…” (Zdravko Stefanovic)
“Daniel… was a religious man from home! He was a man who took the commandments into captivity with him! Alas! there are some of us who can throw off our old selves, and do in Rome as the Romans do with a vengeance. Daniel, driven into captivity, took his religion with him. When we are thrown into difficult circumstances, do we take our religious faith with us? When we go to other countries, do we take the old home training? Do we repeat the commandments as they were thundered from Sinai, and do we re-pronounce the oath we took when we gave ourselves to the Saviour, as He hung upon the cross, and welcomed us to His love, and kingdom, and service? That is a poor religion which can be put off like a garment we are tired of for the time being, and can be put on again to serve occasion.” (J. Parker, D.D.)
Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. All four Hebrew names listed here are theophoric – i.e., they contain a form of the devine name in them. Daniel's name... means ‘God is my judge!’ The word 'judge’ is frequently used in the Bible in a positive way, with a meaning of ‘deliver’ or ‘savior’ (cf. Judges 2:16, 18; 3:9, 15; 6:14)... ‘Hananiah.’ This name, which also appears else where the Bible means ‘Yahweh is gracious/merciful.’ ‘Mishael.’ Although the meaning of this Hebrew name is not very clear, it is attested else where in the Bible. It probably means something like ‘who is what God is!’ ‘Azariah.’ This name is based on the common Hebrew verb, … ‘to help,’ which occurs frequently in the Bible. It means ‘Yahweh has helped.’ It is also found the name Ebenezer ‘the stone of help.’… SCHOLARS HAVE SUGGESTED that all the Babylonian names in the Hebrew Masoric Text ‘may be deliberately corrupted forms of names extolling pagan gods.’… The suggestion has been made because no reconstruction of the four Babylonian names ‘is completely convincing.’ [Seow] The question is then raised regarding the possible reason for the corruption of these new names. Rather than be accidental, the change must have been intentional – the author of the book (Daniel) corrupting the names expressed his disagreement with the religious teaching behind them. His point, then, would be that neither Bel nor his consort Belet (Belit) nor his son Nebo (or Nabu) could protect the life of the king. Only Yahweh, the God of Israel, could do that. It is interesting to notice that in writing his book, Daniel used his Hebrew name for more frequently than his Babylonian name, Belteshazzar.
‘Shadrach,… Meshach.’ These two names are also theophoric; they are related to the name of the moon-god Aku. Scholars are still debating their meaning. ‘Abednego.’ The Babylonian form of this name, which is frequently attested in the text, is Ardi-Nabu. The first element of this name as given in Daniel corresponds to a common Semitic word… ‘a servant.’ The second element is more problematic. They can be translated as ‘shiny one,’ but this is somewhat forced. More common in Babylon were names based on the name of the god Nebo (or Nabu). In that case the meaning of the name Abednego would have been ‘the servant of Nebo.’ This is another case of the intentional distortion of a name with the purpose of giving an early indication that young men in Babylon tried to resist the surrounding idolatrous influence." (Zdravko Stefanovic)
Daniel was more interested in the new name that God promises also to us in Revelation 2:17: “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes I will give some of the hidden manna to eat. And I will give him a white stone, and on the stone a new name written which no one knows except him who receives it.”
“And a new name - So Jacob, after his victory, gained the new name of Israel. Wouldest thou know what thy new name will be? The way to this is plain, - overcome. Till then all thy inquiries are vain. Thou wilt then read it on the white stone.” (Wesley Notes on Rev. 2:17)
9 Now God had brought Daniel into the favor and tender love of the chief of the eunuchs. 10 And the chief of the eunuchs said to Daniel, “I fear my lord the king, who has appointed your food and drink. For why should he see your faces looking worse than the young men who are your age? Then you would endanger my head before the king.”
Now God had brought Daniel into the favor and tender love of the chief of the eunuchs. “The favour of others towards the godly is the doing of God. [As it was in Abraham’s case...] So in Joseph's case (Ge 39:21). Especially towards Israel …” (Jamieson-Fausset-Brown) “The close correspondence between Daniel and Joseph has been frequently remarked. Each finds favour with his master, and afterwards with a foreign monarch. The grace of God enables each to overcome the temptations into which his circumstances lead him. The acute natural faculties of each are miraculously increased by God; and, lastly, each is sent into a foreign land to comfort exiled Israel. (See Genesis 39:21; 1Kings 8:50; Nehemiah 1:11; Psalm 106:46.) No less striking is the resemblance of Nebuchadnezzar to Pharaoh.” (Ellicott's Commentary)
“Thus humbly they bespeak the butler, or purveyor, though themselves were nobly descended. God had made them captives, and they now carry their sails accordingly.” (Trapp’s Commetary)
11 So Daniel said to Melzar whom the chief of the eunuchs had set over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, 12 “Please test your servants for ten days, and let them give us vegetables to eat and water to drink. 13 Then let our appearance be examined before you, and the appearance of the young men who eat the portion of the king’s delicacies; and as you see fit, so deal with your servants.” 14 So he consented with them in this matter, and tested them ten days.
15 And at the end of ten days their features appeared better and fatter in flesh than all the young men who ate the portion of the king’s delicacies. 16 Thus the steward took away their portion of delicacies and the wine that they were to drink, and gave them vegetables.
Notice that Daniel uses their Hebrew names... And the chief of the eunuchs, “having put off Daniel with the above answer, seems to have left him…” (Gill’s Exposition) And it may be that he suggested it to him to apply to this other person. Thus: “By these words Daniel secures Melzar against fear and danger, only by ten days’ trial; which was a fair and reasonable proffer. Thus the servants of God must carefully do, when they have good offices done them by the servants of princes, as Elijah was careful of good Obadiah, 1 Kings 18:11,12, to secure him from death.” (Poole’s Commentary) Perhaps they were converted to the faith and now feared the Supreme King of Israel- the King of kings and Lord of lords- more than the king of Babylon.
And let them give us vegetables to eat and water to drink. This was not Daniel’s regular diet but rather a partial fast that lasted for the 3-years of training. The servants of the king allowed the 10-day test. “’Vegetables… Water.' A more precise meaning of the Hebrew term for hazzero’im ‘the vegetables,’ is ‘seeds,’ or better ‘grains’ or ‘cereals.’ It possibly includes seed-bearing plants or the plant food that grows from seeds. Its mentioned here with plain water takes the reader back to the Genesis creation story, in which God prescribe the ideal human diet before the Fall: fruit, seeds, and water (Gen. 1:29). This reveals an old type of wisdom that considers a ‘close connection between plain living and high thinking.’ In the Bible, meat and wine were foods of festivity (Isa. 22:13) and a symbol of the power of the wealthy. “ (Zdravko Stefanovic) “Fairer and fatter - The blessing of God upon homely fare, affords often more health and strength, than more costly fare to them that eat the fat, and drink the sweet.” (Wesley Notes)
17 As for these four young men, God gave them knowledge and skill in all literature and wisdom; and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams.
Understanding in all visions and dreams. “Meaning in the liberal sciences, and natural knowledge, and not in the magical areas which are forbidden; (Deuteronomy 18:11). So that he alone was a Prophet, and none of the others: for by dreams and visions God appeared to his Prophets; (Numbers 12:6)” (Geneva Study Bible)
"God thus made one of the despised covenant-people eclipse the Chaldean sages in the very science on which they most prided themselves. So Joseph in the court of Pharaoh (Gen 40:5; 41:1-8). Daniel, in these praises of his own ‘understanding,’ speaks not through vanity, but by the direction of God, as one transported out of himself.” (Jameison-Faussett-Brown) They applied themselves to study, but “God formed the intellect; he preserves the exercise of reason; he furnishes us instructors; he gives us clearness of perception; he enables us to take advantage of bright thoughts and happy suggestions which occur in our own minds, as much as he sends rain, and dew, and sunshine on the fields of the farmer, and endows him with skill. Compare Isaiah 28:26, ‘For his God doth instruct him.’” (Barnes' Notes)
18 Now at the end of the days, when the king had said that they should be brought in, the chief of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar. 19 Then the king interviewed them, and among them all none was found like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah; therefore they served before the king.
Of the Hebrews, Azariah’s name was always listed last, “reminding the reader that ‘Yahweh has helped’ all four of them to accomplish this outstanding success… The text is not explicit on whether the four Hebrews openly talked about their God during the questioning [oral exam]. But the insistence of the book’s author on Yahweh’s powerful presence in the lives of these young men, as well as their presence at the palace, all pave the way for future witnessing in Babylon and confrontation that this activity unavoidably entails.” (Zdravko Stefanovic) There was none like these four; so, they served before the king; they were counted among his wisemen.
20 And in all matters of wisdom and understanding about which the king examined them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers who were in all his realm.
“The Greeks learned in order to understand;the Hebrews learned in order to revere!” (Abraham Joshua Heschel)— and to exalt their Maker, Sustainer and Redeemer!!! "Daniel and his companions represent the godly remnant of Israel which preserved the testimony of God even in the dark hours of apostasy and divine judgement." (Walvoord)
He found them ten times better. “And thus did God pour contempt upon the pride of the Chaldeans, and put honour on the low estate of his people.” (John Wesley)
Yahweh God grant us the “grace to know thee in these things; and cause us to stand before thee in those subjects of wisdom and learning; beyond all the knowledge of worldly skill that we may discover from whom, and by whom, we derive understanding in that knowledge which maketh wise unto salvation, through the faith that is in Christ Jesus!” (Hawker's Poor Man's Commentary) This is the only way to stand before Him in the Last Day Judgement--our oral exam before our Maker-- and to be found acceptable in His sight.
21 Thus Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.
“That is, he was esteemed in Babylon as a prophet as long as that commonwealth stood.” (Geneva Study Bible)— “to the end of the Chaldean empire.” (Clarke Commentary).. and beyond. Daniel lives to see the delivery prophesied by Isaiah! “So, this chapter opens with the mention of a defeat of a Judean ruler by a triumphant Babylonian king, and closes with an allusion to the future triumph of someone who was ‘anointed’ by God to be His shepherd and to say to Babylon’s watery deep, ‘Be dry!’ and of Jerusalem, ‘Let it be rebuilt,’ and of the temple, ‘Let its foundation be laid’ (Isa. 44:26-28) In this way, the end of chapter 1 anticipates the fulfilling of the word spoken to Moses to describe a future time when ‘the LORD your God will bring you back from captivity, and have compassion on you, and gather you again from all the nations where the LORD your God has scattered you. If any of you are driven out to the farthest parts under heaven, from there the LORD your God will gather you, and from there He will bring you. Then the LORD your God will bring you to the land which your fathers possessed, and you shall possess it. He will prosper you and multiply you more than your fathers.’ (Deut. 30:3-5).” (Zdravko Stefanovic)
“Living in a cross cultural setting, Daniel and his friends learn what it means to be torn apart by tension between attitudes of assimilation and separation, of being in the world but not of it (John 17:11–16). In spite of all they faced, they were brave enough to stand for their principles. It has been observed that 'the relationship between faith and culture is a question which runs through the Old Testament.' (Goldingay)
In this story, we see Daniel actively involved in working with God in the context of the divine plan. He risked his own head when he decided not to eat from the Kings table. 'Fidelity comes before survival.' (Berrigan) 'For Joseph in Egypt, resistance to the temptation of his master’s wife was a matter of principle, a statement of who he was. For Daniel the resistance to the temptation of the King's pleasurable delicacies and wine was a statement of who he was.' (Seow) [They were both commandment keepers-Joseph victorious over adultery and Daniel over idolatry.] Both men [here] 'serve as models for godly behavior to God's people who live in a foreign culture.' (Longman)
...
According to the story of Daniel 1, God does not work for his people; rather, he works with them. He acts like the true Immanuel, 'God with us' (Matt. 1:23). 'Daniel and his companions represent the godly remnant of Israel which preserve the testimony of God even in the darkest hours of apostasy and divine judgment.' (Walvoord) A precious lesson that they learned – also demonstrated later in Christ's temptation – was that the cross comes before the crown. As the ancient Romans like to say 'Per aspera ad astra'- 'through suffering to glory!' (literally, 'through thorns to the stars.') The four Hebrews were able to 'gain wisdom and prestige without losing holiness' (Goldingay) They were destined 'to be a covenant for the people/and a light for the Gentiles' (Isaiah 42:6).
Wisdom comes from God. In the Bible, wisdom is a spiritual and ethical virtue, not just a natural outcome of one's hard work. It's a gift from God. As such, wisdom, along with all the other virtues, is not self-serving but points to its divine source. True wisdom is not blended with mere intellectual curiosity but with the trust in God's leading. 'Society often judges the person of faith as intellectually weak, and science does not easily accommodate itself with simplistic biblical explanations.' (Doukhan)Yet both faith and wisdom are defined gifts. Respect for God, who holds the first place in a believer's life, is the beginning of wisdom. Job 28:28 says 'the fear of the Lord – that is wisdom, / and to shun evil is understanding.' Biblical wisdom books, such as Psalms and Proverbs, call a righteous person 'wise,' while the wicked is considered a 'fool.'
Jesus Christ did not separate faith from wisdom. According to Him, it is 'a wise man who built his house on the rock' (Matt. 7:24), and it was the wise bridesmaids who were ready for the coming of the bridegroom (Matt. 25:10). The concept of 'spiritual wisdom' is one of the key themes in Daniel's book. There are strong links in the second half of the book between wisdom and the apocalyptic visions that portray spiritual warfare. Lastly, the book of Daniel, just like the rest the Bible, teaches that at its foundation, wisdom is not a lesson to be learned as much as a relationship to be enjoyed (Prov. 8:17).” [More Reflections from Daniel 1- Exceprt from from “Daniel- Wisdom to the Wise”- Zdravko Stefanovic]