Daniel Chapter 1: Faithfulness in Babylon

[David]

We are beginning a verse-by-verse study through the Book of Daniel. Daniel was taken from Jerusalem into Babylon, yet he remained faithful to God in a place that did not honor Him. His example gives us much to consider about obedience, prayer, courage, and trusting God when the world around us is opposed to His truth.

Please read Daniel chapter 1 and share your thoughts or questions. Let us stay close to what the passage actually says, consider its context, and use the rest of Scripture to help us understand it. I will participate and answer what I can.

 

[bobinfaith]

Hello David;

Great timing! Hazel and I are finishing Ezekiel tonight and will begin reading Daniel 1 - 3 tomorrow. I'll follow up with Daniel Chapter 1: Faithfulness in Babylon.

God bless you.

Bob

 

[Rose]

Hi David , can you trace the events leading to Daniel 1:1? What did Babylon want to accomplish with names, education, and diet? Why target young men from the royal family and nobility? Why did Daniel refuse the food/wine, but agree to learn the language and literature? What's the significance of v21 -"And Daniel remained there until the first year of King Cyrus." TIA

 

[David]

Rose, these are the right questions, because Daniel 1 is not mainly about four young men surviving a difficult situation. It is about whether God’s people will acknowledge that the Lord rules when the world appears to be in control.

What led to Daniel 1:1? Judah had repeatedly sinned against the Lord. Long before Babylon carried Daniel away, Isaiah told Hezekiah that Babylon would take the treasures of Jerusalem and that some of his descendants would serve in the palace of Babylon’s king: “Behold, the days are coming, when all that is in your house... shall be carried to Babylon” (Isaiah 39:6-7). When Nebuchadnezzar came against Jerusalem in Jehoiakim’s reign, Daniel does not leave us to conclude that Babylon had somehow defeated God. “And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand” (Daniel 1:2). Babylon moved its army, but God governed the outcome.

Why did Babylon take young men from the royal family and nobility? Because an empire does not only conquer land. It seeks to capture the future. If you take the strongest, most capable, and most influential young men from a nation, train them in your own system, give them new names, feed them from your table, and place them in your service, what are you trying to produce? You are trying to make them think, live, and serve as though they belong to you. Sounds a lot like what Satan tries to do.

It is like taking a young tree from its soil, putting it in a new pot, surrounding it with different roots, and attempting to train every branch toward another direction. Babylon could change Daniel’s location, education, language, and name. But could Babylon change the root of his allegiance? That was the real issue.

Their names were changed from names connected with the God of Israel to names associated with Babylonian gods. Their education was intended to prepare them for Babylonian service. The king’s food and wine placed them at the king’s table. Babylon was saying, in effect, “You now receive your identity, wisdom, provision, and future from us.” But Daniel knew that no king can give what belongs to God alone.

Why, then, did Daniel learn the language and literature but refuse the food and wine? Scripture does not condemn knowledge itself. Daniel could learn Babylon’s language without worshiping Babylon’s gods. He could understand its literature without allowing its falsehood to rule his heart. Truth does not fear examination, because all truth belongs to God. But Daniel knew the king’s food and wine involved defilement. The text does not specify every reason, though it may have included food forbidden by God’s law and association with idolatry. What matters is that Daniel saw a line God had drawn, and he would not cross it.

This exposes a question for us. Are we willing to live in the world without allowing the world to define us? It is easy to call compromise wisdom when compromise gives us a seat at the king’s table. But what is gained if we retain the opportunity and lose the obedience? Daniel did not make purity an idol, nor did he act arrogantly. He respectfully sought permission. Yet he had “resolved that he would not defile himself” (Daniel 1:8). His first concern was not comfort, advancement, safety, or even personal success. His concern was that God be honored by his obedience.

And what happened? God gave Daniel favor (Daniel 1:9). God gave the four young men learning and skill (Daniel 1:17). Their wisdom was found to be far beyond the others (Daniel 1:20). The lesson is not that faithfulness always produces immediate earthly ease. The lesson is that God is able to preserve and use those who refuse to dishonor Him, and He does so for His own glory.

Verse 21 brings the whole chapter into focus: “And Daniel was there until the first year of King Cyrus.” Babylon seemed immovable when Daniel arrived. Yet Daniel lived through its fall and into the reign of Cyrus. Daniel 10:1 shows he was still alive in Cyrus’s third year, so Daniel 1:21 emphasizes the length and significance of Daniel’s service. The empire that renamed him did not endure. The God whose name Daniel honored did.

That is the point we must not miss. Kings rise, kingdoms boast, cultures pressure, and systems try to claim the hearts of God’s people. But “the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will” (Daniel 4:17). The question is not whether Babylon can change the scenery around us. The question is whether we will remain God’s servants when obedience costs us something, so that He, not we, receives the glory.

If you want more, here you go:

God's Man for a Time of Crisis, Part 1​

Daniel 1:1–2

God's Man for a Time of Crisis, Part 2​

Daniel 1:1–2

An Uncompromising Life​

Daniel 1:1–8

The Consequences of an Uncompromising Life, Part 1​

Daniel 1:8–9,12

God's Man for a Time of Crisis, Part 1​

Daniel 1:1–2

God's Man for a Time of Crisis, Part 2​

Daniel 1:1–2

An Uncompromising Life​

Daniel 1:1–8

The Consequences of an Uncompromising Life, Part 1​

Daniel 1:8–9,12

The Consequences of an Uncompromising Life, Part 2​

Daniel 1:10–21

The Consequences of an Uncompromising Life, Part 2​

Daniel 1:10–21

 

[Rose]

Since I'm focusing on verses 1–2, I was looking for some extra insights and found this great article: Taken into Exile (Daniel 1:1-2)

 

[Rose]

Rose, these are the right questions, because Daniel 1 is not mainly about four young men surviving a difficult situation. It is about whether God’s people will acknowledge that the Lord rules when the world appears to be in control.

What led to Daniel 1:1? Judah had repeatedly sinned against the Lord. Long before Babylon carried Daniel away, Isaiah told Hezekiah that Babylon would take the treasures of Jerusalem and that some of his descendants would serve in the palace of Babylon’s king: “Behold, the days are coming, when all that is in your house... shall be carried to Babylon” (Isaiah 39:6-7). When Nebuchadnezzar came against Jerusalem in Jehoiakim’s reign, Daniel does not leave us to conclude that Babylon had somehow defeated God. “And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand” (Daniel 1:2). Babylon moved its army, but God governed the outcome.

Why did Babylon take young men from the royal family and nobility? Because an empire does not only conquer land. It seeks to capture the future. If you take the strongest, most capable, and most influential young men from a nation, train them in your own system, give them new names, feed them from your table, and place them in your service, what are you trying to produce? You are trying to make them think, live, and serve as though they belong to you. Sounds a lot like what Satan tries to do.

It is like taking a young tree from its soil, putting it in a new pot, surrounding it with different roots, and attempting to train every branch toward another direction. Babylon could change Daniel’s location, education, language, and name. But could Babylon change the root of his allegiance? That was the real issue.

Their names were changed from names connected with the God of Israel to names associated with Babylonian gods. Their education was intended to prepare them for Babylonian service. The king’s food and wine placed them at the king’s table. Babylon was saying, in effect, “You now receive your identity, wisdom, provision, and future from us.” But Daniel knew that no king can give what belongs to God alone.

Why, then, did Daniel learn the language and literature but refuse the food and wine? Scripture does not condemn knowledge itself. Daniel could learn Babylon’s language without worshiping Babylon’s gods. He could understand its literature without allowing its falsehood to rule his heart. Truth does not fear examination, because all truth belongs to God. But Daniel knew the king’s food and wine involved defilement. The text does not specify every reason, though it may have included food forbidden by God’s law and association with idolatry. What matters is that Daniel saw a line God had drawn, and he would not cross it.

This exposes a question for us. Are we willing to live in the world without allowing the world to define us? It is easy to call compromise wisdom when compromise gives us a seat at the king’s table. But what is gained if we retain the opportunity and lose the obedience? Daniel did not make purity an idol, nor did he act arrogantly. He respectfully sought permission. Yet he had “resolved that he would not defile himself” (Daniel 1:8). His first concern was not comfort, advancement, safety, or even personal success. His concern was that God be honored by his obedience.

And what happened? God gave Daniel favor (Daniel 1:9). God gave the four young men learning and skill (Daniel 1:17). Their wisdom was found to be far beyond the others (Daniel 1:20). The lesson is not that faithfulness always produces immediate earthly ease. The lesson is that God is able to preserve and use those who refuse to dishonor Him, and He does so for His own glory.

Verse 21 brings the whole chapter into focus: “And Daniel was there until the first year of King Cyrus.” Babylon seemed immovable when Daniel arrived. Yet Daniel lived through its fall and into the reign of Cyrus. Daniel 10:1 shows he was still alive in Cyrus’s third year, so Daniel 1:21 emphasizes the length and significance of Daniel’s service. The empire that renamed him did not endure. The God whose name Daniel honored did.

That is the point we must not miss. Kings rise, kingdoms boast, cultures pressure, and systems try to claim the hearts of God’s people. But “the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will” (Daniel 4:17). The question is not whether Babylon can change the scenery around us. The question is whether we will remain God’s servants when obedience costs us something, so that He, not we, receives the glory.

If you want more, here you go:

God's Man for a Time of Crisis, Part 1​

Daniel 1:1–2

God's Man for a Time of Crisis, Part 2​

Daniel 1:1–2

An Uncompromising Life​

Daniel 1:1–8

The Consequences of an Uncompromising Life, Part 1​

Daniel 1:8–9,12

God's Man for a Time of Crisis, Part 1​

Daniel 1:1–2

God's Man for a Time of Crisis, Part 2​

Daniel 1:1–2

An Uncompromising Life​

Daniel 1:1–8

The Consequences of an Uncompromising Life, Part 1​

Daniel 1:8–9,12

The Consequences of an Uncompromising Life, Part 2​

Daniel 1:10–21

The Consequences of an Uncompromising Life, Part 2​

Daniel 1:10–21

Thanks, David. Will try to listen to the first 2 sermons tonight. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Rose]

Why, then, did Daniel learn the language and literature but refuse the food and wine? Scripture does not condemn knowledge itself. Daniel could learn Babylon’s language without worshiping Babylon’s gods. He could understand its literature without allowing its falsehood to rule his heart. Truth does not fear examination, because all truth belongs to God. But Daniel knew the king’s food and wine involved defilement. The text does not specify every reason, though it may have included food forbidden by God’s law and association with idolatry. What matters is that Daniel saw a line God had drawn, and he would not cross it.

This exposes a question for us. Are we willing to live in the world without allowing the world to define us? It is easy to call compromise wisdom when compromise gives us a seat at the king’s table. But what is gained if we retain the opportunity and lose the obedience? Daniel did not make purity an idol, nor did he act arrogantly. He respectfully sought permission. Yet he had “resolved that he would not defile himself” (Daniel 1:8). His first concern was not comfort, advancement, safety, or even personal success. His concern was that God be honored by his obedience.

What's your view of Alistair Begg's advising a grandmother to attend her grandchild's same-sex or transgender wedding?

 

[Rose]

How will you explain Mark 7:18-19 in relation to Daniel's not wanting to eat the king's food?

 

[David]

What's your view of Alistair Begg's advising a grandmother to attend her grandchild's same-sex or transgender wedding?

I used to enjoy listening to Alistair Begg and I referred other people to his teaching. I appreciated much of his preaching because he often handled Scripture carefully. But when I heard the counsel he gave to the grandmother about attending her grandson’s wedding to a transgender person and even taking a gift, I could not agree with it. Begg later doubled down on what he said publicly rather than withdrawing it.

For me, that crossed an important line. I believe Christians are commanded to love sinners. We should show kindness, compassion, patience, and speak the truth of the gospel. But love does not require us to participate in or give the appearance of approving what God has called sin.

Scripture says, “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Ephesians 5:11).

Romans 12:9 says, “Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.”

That is the tension Christians must maintain. We are not called to hate people. We are called to genuinely love them while refusing to call evil good or place ourselves in a position where our actions can reasonably be understood as celebrating what God has forbidden.

A wedding ceremony is not merely having dinner with sinners. It is a public celebration and recognition of a union. That is why I do not think Jesus eating with sinners is a good comparison. Jesus ate with sinners in order to call sinners to repentance. He was never participating in a ceremony celebrating their sin.

Since Alistair Begg made that statement, was challenged about it, and continued to defend the counsel, I stopped listening to him and I no longer refer people to his teaching. That does not mean I hate him or consider everything he has ever taught false. I pray for him, and I hope he will reconsider this issue in the light of Scripture.

I think this also illustrates something much larger that Christians need to recognize. Deception rarely walks through the front door announcing itself as deception. It usually comes quietly, wrapped in words like compassion, love, tolerance, and maintaining relationships.

That is exactly why Scripture says, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

We cannot allow even respected teachers to become our final authority. If something sounds compassionate but contradicts the plain teaching of Scripture, then Scripture must win.

That applies to Alistair Begg, it applies to every preacher we listen to, and it applies to you and me as well.

 

[David]

How will you explain Mark 7:18-19 in relation to Daniel's not wanting to eat the king's food?

Rose, that is a good question. Daniel and his friends were living under the Mosaic Law, where God had given Israel specific dietary commands. So when Daniel “purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king’s meat” (Daniel 1:8), he was seeking to remain faithful to what God had commanded Israel at that time.

Mark 7 comes much later, and Jesus is dealing especially with the Pharisees’ idea that ceremonial uncleanness came from what entered a person from the outside. Jesus said: “Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly...” (Mark 7:18-19).

Then Jesus immediately explains where true defilement comes from: “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders...” (Mark 7:21).

So I do not see a contradiction. Daniel was obeying the dietary requirements God had given Israel under the Law. Jesus was teaching that food itself is not what makes a person morally unclean before God. The real source of moral defilement is the sinful heart.

There may also have been more involved with the king’s food than simply whether a certain animal was clean or unclean. Daniel 1 does not tell us every detail. The food may have been connected with idolatry or prepared in ways contrary to God’s commands. I would rather not go beyond what Scripture actually tells us. What we know for certain is that Daniel believed eating it would defile him, and he chose obedience to God instead.

That actually makes Daniel’s example even more important. He was not inventing his own standard of holiness. He was trying to remain faithful to the revelation God had given him.

Mark 7 does not teach that God’s commands to Daniel were meaningless. It shows us something deeper: a man can avoid certain foods and still have a wicked heart. External observance can never replace inward obedience to God. So I would say Daniel 1 shows faithfulness to the commands God had given Israel, while Mark 7 shows that the ultimate problem of sin is not food entering the stomach, but evil coming from the heart.

 

[David]

Rose, I read through the article and I thought the main point was very good. Daniel 1:2 really stands out to me because it says, “the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand.” Babylon may have looked victorious, but God was still completely in control.

I also appreciated the way the article connected Daniel’s situation with the pressure to conform. He was living in a culture that wanted to reshape his identity and loyalties, yet he still had to decide where obedience to God came first. That is something we can certainly relate to today.

There were a few places where I thought the writer went a little beyond what Scripture directly says, so I would just be careful to separate what the Bible clearly states from what we may infer from it.

But the main truth in those opening verses is powerful. God had warned Judah, God judged Judah, and even in exile He had not lost control of His people or His purposes.

It reminds me of the world we live in today. The pressure usually is not to deny God outright, but to slowly adjust our convictions so they fit the culture around us. Daniel lived in Babylon, learned its language, and functioned within its society, but when Babylon crossed a line God had drawn, Daniel knew where his loyalty belonged. That is still the challenge for us today.

 

[bobinfaith]

What's your view of Alistair Begg's advising a grandmother to attend her grandchild's same-sex or transgender wedding?

I used to enjoy listening to Alistair Begg and I referred other people to his teaching. I appreciated much of his preaching because he often handled Scripture carefully. But when I heard the counsel he gave to the grandmother about attending her grandson’s wedding to a transgender person and even taking a gift, I could not agree with it. Begg later doubled down on what he said publicly rather than withdrawing it.

For me, that crossed an important line. I believe Christians are commanded to love sinners. We should show kindness, compassion, patience, and speak the truth of the gospel. But love does not require us to participate in or give the appearance of approving what God has called sin.

Scripture says, “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Ephesians 5:11).

Since Alistair Begg made that statement, was challenged about it, and continued to defend the counsel, I stopped listening to him and I no longer refer people to his teaching. That does not mean I hate him or consider everything he has ever taught false. I pray for him, and I hope he will reconsider this issue in the light of Scripture.

That applies to Alistair Begg, it applies to every preacher we listen to, and it applies to you and me as well.

Hello Rose and David;

When Rose asked about Alistair Begg struck a nerve with me. Rightfully so. I used to listen to Begg weekly on Christian talk radio. One day he preached on something I was struggling with so I called his main office at Parkside Church in Cleveland, Ohio. The person who took my call would not connect me to him or take a message because she said, "chances were he would not return my call."

I'll never forget that day. This was 17 years ago and since have personally kept him and my selfcheck in prayer.

The man knows his Bible and is an anointed preacher but then I learned about Begg's advice to the Grandmother, and heard both sides, especially his. Begg defended his position but in a smug disposition and even made humor of it. I'm sorry but that sent a wrong message to me. I'll leave it at that.

In the meantime, God has raised many new and anointed ministers. He never runs out of righteous reinforcements.

I'll be back to join in the study of Daniel 1, 2, 3.

God bless us all.

Bob

 

[Rose]

We can learn about the background of King Jehoiakim by reading 2 Kings 23:34–24:7, 2 Chronicles 36:1–8, Jeremiah 22:13–19, and 36:27–32. The prophet Jeremiah was a contemporary of Jehoiakim and was used by God to speak directly to him.
Source: Jack W. Hayford - Until the End of Time, Revealing the Future of Humankind.

 

[Rose]

Why did 'Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego' become more recognizable in history than Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah?

 

[bobinfaith]

Good morning,

Last night we began our study of Daniel 1 - 3. God raised and referred to Nebuchadnezzar as "His servant" and would make sure His will be done and the captive of the Israelites would fall into place for 70 years. Israel didn't take God's Covenant serious in obedience but persisted in their sin, idolatry and rebellion against God.

As the Lord retained Jehoiakim king of Judah (he would later rebel against Nebuchadnezzar) He would also anoint Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah as servants to Nebuchadnezzar. God would anoint them especially their unwavering faith in the furnace and promote them as officers in the provinces of Babylon. Daniel's gift from God enabled him to interpret Nebuchadnezzar's dreams and promoting Daniel but to remain at the palace.

Daniel 1 - 3 started off with many powerful events and what stands out with me is all this was new to Daniel which led him in his increasingly powerful prayers and praise to our Almighty God, as well as Nebuchadnezzar's sudden belief;

Daniel 1:46-47, 46 Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell prostrate before Daniel and paid him honor and ordered that an offering and incense be presented to him. 47 The king said to Daniel, “Surely your God is the God of gods and the Lord of kings and a revealer of mysteries, for you were able to reveal this mystery.” - NIV

God bless everyone.

Bob

 

[David]

Why did 'Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego' become more recognizable in history than Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah?

I think the main reason is that Scripture keeps using the Babylonian names in the part of Daniel that most people remember. : )

When we first meet them, their Hebrew names are Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah (Daniel 1:6). Then the prince of the eunuchs gives them new Babylonian names: “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego” (Daniel 1:7). What is interesting is that Daniel does not immediately forget their Hebrew names. In Daniel 2:17, when Daniel asks them to pray with him about Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, Scripture still calls them “Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.” But by the time we get to Daniel 3, the fiery furnace chapter, Scripture repeatedly calls them Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. Those names appear over and over in one of the best-known accounts in the whole book: “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, answered and said to the king...” (Daniel 3:16).

Then comes that unforgettable statement: “Our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace... But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods” (Daniel 3:17-18). So I think that is largely why those names became the ones people remember. The names Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego are attached to the fiery furnace account, and Daniel 3 repeats them again and again.

But there is something else worth noticing. Those were not the names their families gave them. Babylon gave them those names.

Babylon could change what people called them, but Babylon could not change whom they belonged to.

That may be one of the beautiful lessons hiding in the background of Daniel. Their names were changed, their country was taken from them, they were placed in a pagan culture, and they were commanded to bow before a false image. Yet when the real test came, they still knew exactly who their God was. Maybe the better question for us is this: How much can the world change around us before it begins changing who we are?

For Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, Babylon changed the names on the outside, but it never conquered the faith on the inside.

 

[David]

Good morning,

Last night we began our study of Daniel 1 - 3. God raised and referred to Nebuchadnezzar as "His servant" and would make sure His will be done and the captive of the Israelites would fall into place for 70 years. Israel didn't take God's Covenant serious in obedience but persisted in their sin, idolatry and rebellion against God.

As the Lord retained Jehoiakim king of Judah (he would later rebel against Nebuchadnezzar) He would also anoint Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah as servants to Nebuchadnezzar. God would anoint them especially their unwavering faith in the furnace and promote them as officers in the provinces of Babylon. Daniel's gift from God enabled him to interpret Nebuchadnezzar's dreams and promoting Daniel but to remain at the palace.

Daniel 1 - 3 started off with many powerful events and what stands out with me is all this was new to Daniel which led him in his increasingly powerful prayers and praise to our Almighty God, as well as Nebuchadnezzar's sudden belief;

Daniel 1:46-47, 46 Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell prostrate before Daniel and paid him honor and ordered that an offering and incense be presented to him. 47 The king said to Daniel, “Surely your God is the God of gods and the Lord of kings and a revealer of mysteries, for you were able to reveal this mystery.” - NIV

God bless everyone.

Bob

There is a lot happening very quickly in those first three chapters, and I think one of the strongest things running through all of it is that God is the One in control, even when everything looks like Babylon is winning. Daniel 1:2 starts by saying, “the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand.” That really sets the tone. Nebuchadnezzar may have thought Babylon had conquered Judah by its own strength, but Daniel tells us right away that God had given Judah into his hand. That fits with Jeremiah 25:9, where God even calls Nebuchadnezzar “my servant” in the sense that God was using him to carry out judgment.

And I agree with you about Daniel and his three friends. What strikes me is that they were young men suddenly placed in a completely different world, yet God was already preparing them for it. Daniel 1:17 says, “God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom.” They were not surviving Babylon because they were naturally clever enough. God was giving them what they needed to remain useful and faithful where He had placed them.

Then Daniel 2 takes that even further. Daniel does not take credit for interpreting the dream. He says plainly, “there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets” (Daniel 2:28). I really like that. Daniel had an extraordinary gift, but he kept pointing past the gift to the God who gave it.

I can see why you would point to Daniel 2:47 as an important moment for Nebuchadnezzar. He clearly recognizes something real about Daniel’s God when he says He is “a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets.” At the same time, I think Daniel 3 shows that Nebuchadnezzar still had more to learn about God, especially when it came to idolatry and his own pride. So I would probably view Daniel 2 as an important step in what God was showing him, rather than say with certainty that this was the point of his salvation.

That actually makes the progression through these chapters interesting. In Daniel 2 he acknowledges Daniel’s God because of the dream. In Daniel 3 he sees God deliver Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego from the furnace. Then by Daniel 4 God deals directly with Nebuchadnezzar’s own pride. It almost seems like God keeps confronting him with more and more truth. I know He has done this with me.

And Daniel and his friends are right there in the middle of it, not because Babylon has changed them, but because God is using their faithfulness in Babylon to make Himself known. That is probably one of the things I am enjoying most about Daniel already. The story looks like it begins with Judah losing to Babylon, but from the very first chapter God keeps showing us that He has never lost control of anything.

 

[David]

Something else struck me as we have been going through Daniel 1. The chapter begins with Judah suffering the consequences of years of rebellion against God. Daniel 1:2 does not simply say that Nebuchadnezzar was stronger and defeated Judah. It says, “the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand.” That changes how I read the whole chapter.

Daniel and his friends are living in Babylon because their nation had repeatedly refused to listen to God. They are surrounded by the consequences of compromise, and then in verse 8 we read, “But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself.” I think that contrast is worth thinking about.

Judah had compromised with the nations around them until God finally brought judgment. Now Daniel is actually living inside a pagan nation, yet he determines that Babylon is not going to make him unfaithful to God. They could change his surroundings, educate him in Babylonian learning, and even give him a Babylonian name, but when Daniel believed something would defile him before God, that is where he drew the line.

Maybe Daniel had learned something that Judah as a nation had refused to learn. Compromise with sin always costs more than we think it will. Daniel did not wait until the pressure came and then decide what he believed. Somewhere in his heart, the matter had already been settled. God came first.

That makes me wonder if one of the lessons in Daniel 1 is that we need to settle our biblical boundaries before the pressure comes. It is much harder to decide where you stand when everyone around you is already pushing you to move.

 

[David]

Daniel and his friends were not faithful because Babylon was easy to live in. They had been taken from their homeland, placed under a foreign king, given a new education, new names, and a new future. Yet Babylon could change their surroundings without changing whom they served. Daniel “purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself” (Daniel 1:8).

That is where faithfulness is tested. It is not difficult to say we belong to the Lord when obedience costs little. The test comes when the world expects us to conform, when doing right may cost comfort, acceptance, opportunity, or safety. Jesus said, “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me” (Luke 9:23).

Daniel did not remove himself from Babylon. He learned its language and literature, served in its government, and treated its officials with respect. But when Babylon required him to cross a line God had drawn, he would not do it. He did not become rude, proud, or rebellious. He respectfully made his request, but he would not compromise obedience to God.

This is important for us. We live in the world, but we are not to be shaped by it. Romans 12:2 says, “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.” The question is not whether the world around us will pressure us. It will. The question is whether we will remain faithful when obedience is not convenient.

Jesus understands the cost of obedience. “For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Hebrews 4:15). He calls His people to follow Him, even when the path is narrow and others turn away. Daniel 1 reminds us that the Lord is able to sustain those who honor Him, but our first concern must be obedience, not the outcome.

 

[David]

@Rose, this is the study you wanted to begin, and I am glad you did. Take your time and continue whenever you are ready. I will be here to follow along, help where I can, and learn with everyone else.

 

[Rose]

Good morning,

Last night we began our study of Daniel 1 - 3. God raised and referred to Nebuchadnezzar as "His servant" and would make sure His will be done and the captive of the Israelites would fall into place for 70 years. Israel didn't take God's Covenant serious in obedience but persisted in their sin, idolatry and rebellion against God.

As the Lord retained Jehoiakim king of Judah (he would later rebel against Nebuchadnezzar) He would also anoint Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah as servants to Nebuchadnezzar. God would anoint them especially their unwavering faith in the furnace and promote them as officers in the provinces of Babylon. Daniel's gift from God enabled him to interpret Nebuchadnezzar's dreams and promoting Daniel but to remain at the palace.

Daniel 1 - 3 started off with many powerful events and what stands out with me is all this was new to Daniel which led him in his increasingly powerful prayers and praise to our Almighty God, as well as Nebuchadnezzar's sudden belief;

Daniel 1:46-47, 46 Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell prostrate before Daniel and paid him honor and ordered that an offering and incense be presented to him. 47 The king said to Daniel, “Surely your God is the God of gods and the Lord of kings and a revealer of mysteries, for you were able to reveal this mystery.” - NIV

God bless everyone.

Bob

 

[Yesua888]

I Think this is so Important (and will be sharing it elsewhere):

"How important this is for us to remember. Even during our hardest moments, when life seems out of control or hardly worth living anymore, we need to remember that God is with us and He is for us (Romans 8:31).

We may believe that our situation is due to unfortunate accidents, or due to the malevolence of wicked people, but in reality it is all always under the control of a all-loving and all-wise God. If we remember that no sparrow falls to the ground without God’s knowledge (Matthew 10:29) and that he knows every hair of our heads (Luke 12:7), then we can be assured that even the most trivial events do not escape either his notice or his control. At the other extreme, God is still in control of even the most wicked, heinous sins that were ever committed against the most innocent Person who ever lived (Acts 4:28). Although sinners were responsible, it was all according to God’s plan. Everything…everything that we experience in life, no matter how difficult or how much it may seem to be meaningless, is God’s purpose for us. All of these circumstances, the good and the bad, are God’s means of sanctifying us. “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28). And that “good,” the very best thing for us, is defined in verse 29 as being “conformed to the image of his Son,” becoming more and more like Jesus Christ.

“All things” includes both the good and the bad. In other words, God uses the good things, like our obedience and faith and sacrifice and Bible reading and prayer and worship and fellowship to conform us to the image of His Son, but He will also use the bad things like trials, sickness, pain, financial hardship, rebellious children, a failed marriage, being hated and mistreated, as ways to conform us to the image of His Son.

In fact, we usually learn how to love not by being around lovely, lovable, loving people, but by being around unlovely, unlovable, unloving people. We learn patience not by getting whatever we want right away, but by having to wait in lines, or wait for our birthday. The fruit of the Spirit grows best in difficulties."

 

[Rose]

What great sins did Jehoiakim commit? Was there another king worse than him?

 

[David]

I Think this is so Important (and will be sharing it elsewhere):

"How important this is for us to remember. Even during our hardest moments, when life seems out of control or hardly worth living anymore, we need to remember that God is with us and He is for us (Romans 8:31).

We may believe that our situation is due to unfortunate accidents, or due to the malevolence of wicked people, but in reality it is all always under the control of a all-loving and all-wise God. If we remember that no sparrow falls to the ground without God’s knowledge (Matthew 10:29) and that he knows every hair of our heads (Luke 12:7), then we can be assured that even the most trivial events do not escape either his notice or his control. At the other extreme, God is still in control of even the most wicked, heinous sins that were ever committed against the most innocent Person who ever lived (Acts 4:28). Although sinners were responsible, it was all according to God’s plan. Everything…everything that we experience in life, no matter how difficult or how much it may seem to be meaningless, is God’s purpose for us. All of these circumstances, the good and the bad, are God’s means of sanctifying us. “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28). And that “good,” the very best thing for us, is defined in verse 29 as being “conformed to the image of his Son,” becoming more and more like Jesus Christ.

“All things” includes both the good and the bad. In other words, God uses the good things, like our obedience and faith and sacrifice and Bible reading and prayer and worship and fellowship to conform us to the image of His Son, but He will also use the bad things like trials, sickness, pain, financial hardship, rebellious children, a failed marriage, being hated and mistreated, as ways to conform us to the image of His Son.

In fact, we usually learn how to love not by being around lovely, lovable, loving people, but by being around unlovely, unlovable, unloving people. We learn patience not by getting whatever we want right away, but by having to wait in lines, or wait for our birthday. The fruit of the Spirit grows best in difficulties."

Yes, I think this is extremely important, especially as we study Daniel. Daniel 1:2 begins by telling us, “the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand.” From Daniel’s perspective, his whole world had been turned upside down, yet God had not lost control.

I especially like the connection to Romans 8:28-29. We need to remember that Scripture does not say everything that happens to us is good. Some things are genuinely painful, sinful, and evil. What it says is that God is able to work through “all things” for the good of those who love Him, and verse 29 shows that part of that good is conforming us to the image of Christ.

The cross is the greatest example. Wicked men were responsible for what they did to Jesus, yet Acts 4:27-28 shows that God’s purpose was still being accomplished.

So when difficult circumstances come, our confidence is not that everything happening around us is good. Our confidence is that nothing is outside God’s knowledge or sovereignty, and He can even use what was meant for evil to accomplish His purposes in His people.

Daniel certainly learned that in Babylon.

 

[David]

What great sins did Jehoiakim commit? Was there another king worse than him?

Jehoiakim was a wicked king. The Bible tells us that he "did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD" (2 Kings 23:37). But Jeremiah describes him in more detail. He was covetous, shed innocent blood and committed acts of oppression and violence. "Thine eyes and thine heart are not but for thy covetousness, and for to shed innocent blood, and for oppression, and for violence, to do it." (Jeremiah 22: 17) He built a great house for himself but did not pay the workers fairly (Jeremiah 22:13).

What I find interesting about Jehoiakim is his reaction to Gods word. When the scroll was read to him he cut it with a knife and threw it in the fire. Piece by piece (Jeremiah 36:23). Not only did he not listen to Gods word but he tried to have Jeremiah and Baruch arrested. He also had the prophet Urijah brought back from Egypt and put to death (Jeremiah 26:20-23).

I think Jehoiakim was a wicked king but I don't believe he was the worst king that Judah had. Manasseh could be considered worse. He made Judah worship idols. Practiced witch craft and sorcery. Made his son pass through the fire and shed so much innocent blood that it says "from one end to another" (2 Kings 21:16).

Manasseh humbled himself before the Lord and turned to Him (2 Chronicles 33:12-13). Jehoiakim heard Gods word time and time again and refused to turn.

Maybe that is what makes Jehoiakim so bad. He wasn't sinning because God was being quiet. God gave him his word and he chose to not listen.