Deeper Commentary

Dan 5:1 Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand- Belshazzar was the effective king of Babylon whilst Nabonidus was in north Africa. Belshazzar means "Bel Protect the King", and he clearly believed that Bel would protect Babylon even with the Medes approaching- and he believed this to the extent of recklessly feasting with the Medes outside the gates. Again, we find the historical accounts in Daniel to be deconstructions of the supposed power of the Babylonian gods, who are revealed as powerless before Yahweh's purpose; just as the dream of Dan. 2 had depicted. The feast was likely an annual religious festival, and Cyrus / Darius planned the attack at precisely that time. Again, we see the victory as being a victory specifically against the guardian gods of Babylon. The destruction of Babylon whilst feasting was specifically foretold (Is. 21:4,5; Jer. 50:24; 51:39,57).

Dan 5:2 Belshazzar, while he tasted the wine, commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels- This was a conscious act of blasphemy. The God of Israel had foretold in Dan. 2 that Babylon would be taken over by another empire; and Jeremiah had made it clear in the previous generation that although Babylon would take Jerusalem, Babylon would also fall to her enemies (Jer. 50:28 etc.). Belshazzar seems to have been aware of this, and with enemy armies outside the gates, he trusts in his god to preserve him and mocks Yahweh. He was turning the table of Yahweh into the table of Bel and the gods supposed to preserve Babylon. In essence we commit the same sin if we turn the Lord's table into our table, in glorification of our own religion and worldview.

Which Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken out of the temple which was in Jerusalem; that the king and his lords, his wives and his concubines, might drink from them- The miserable critics point out that Belshazzar's father was the usurper Nabuna'id [Nabonidus]. But "father" simply means 'ancestor' in practice, and could refer to Nebuchadnezzar as his grandfather (as in Gen. 28:13; 32:9), which he could have been, if Nabuna'id had Belshazzar through one of Nebuchadnezzar's daughters. Indeed this would appear a likely and logical way for Nabuna'id to enforce his claim to the throne and establish his dynasty. That Belshazzar was the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar is confirmed by Jer. 17:27: "All the nations shall serve him (Nebuchadnezzar) and his son, and his son's son until the very time of his land come". But father-son relationships were presented at the time in a far less specific sense than the terms are used today.

Dan 5:3 Then they brought the golden vessels that were taken out of the temple of God’s house which was at Jerusalem; and the king and his lords, his wives and his concubines, drank from them- "The temple of God's house" means not generally 'the temple' ["God's house"] but specifically the holy and most holy place. There would not have been many "golden vessels" there; just those used for pouring out the blood on the day of atonement. They would therefore have passed these vessels between them all, as they all drunk from them (:23), rather like a mock communion service. It was very deep blasphemy. It seems that the golden candlestick from the holy place was also present (:5). They were pretending that their table of drunken revelry was the most holy place of the Jerusalem temple.

Dan 5:4 They drank wine, and praised the gods of gold, and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone- They were imitating the worship of Yahweh (see on :3), and replacing Him with their gods. The golden vessels were now see as part of the paraphernalia of the worship of their golden gods. Gold, silver, brass, iron and a little stone all feature in the vision of Dan. 2. In Dan. 3, Nebuchadnezzar tried to say that the vision was wrong and he as the golden head was going to be the entire image. So here, they were saying that their gods of those same metals were the true gods and that the image was really just a composite of their gods, with the king of Babylon as the eternal head of it.

Dan 5:5 In the same hour came forth the fingers of a man’s hand, and wrote opposite the lampstand- This candlestick may have been the one taken from the holy place of the Jerusalem temple; as noted on :3, they were pretending that their table of drunken revelry was the most holy place of the Jerusalem temple.

On the plaster of the wall of the king's palace- Literally, "the chalk"; and this was exactly how the palace walls unearthed in Nineveh appear to have been constructed.

And the king saw the part of the hand that wrote- "The palm". I will suggest on :8 that the hand covered the writing, and only Daniel could as it were make the Angelic hand move to reveal it (:24). This would explain the confusion between the palm and the fingers which wrote.

 

Dan 5:6 Then the king’s appearance changed, and his thoughts alarmed him; the joints of his thighs were loosened, and his knees struck one against another- This is the picture of a man facing Divine judgment. We should all be there; the wonder is that for us, as Paul explains in Romans, we are there, but then saved from it by grace through Christ. And it is the picture of the middle eastern world, and indeed the whole planet, on the eve of Divine judgment (Lk. 21:25).

Dan 5:7 The king cried aloud to bring in the enchanters, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers. The king spoke and said to the wise men of Babylon, Whoever shall read this writing, and show me its interpretation, shall be clothed with purple, and have a chain of gold about his neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom- It was the job description of the wise men to interpret such things; to offer them huge reward for doing their job indicates not only the king's desperation, but also the tacit recognition that usually they could not really accurately interpret such things. History was of course repeating, for this was the very scene of Dan. 2, when the image vision was interpreted as meaning that Babylon too must pass over to others. Belshazzar should have perceived the similarities, and called for Daniel immediately. Again we note the similarities with Joseph (Gen. 41:42), who would have been a great role model for Daniel. We too will find such role models in the Bible as we face our various life experiences.

 

Dan 5:8 Then came in all the king’s wise men; but they could not read the writing, nor reveal to the king the interpretation- As noted on :7, this is a conscious repetition of the scene in Dan. 2. But Belshazzar failed to respond appropriately. Perhaps they couldn't read the writing because the Angelic hand was covering it, and only Daniel had the power to remove that hand (:24).

Dan 5:9 Then was king Belshazzar greatly troubled, and his appearance was changed, and his lords were perplexed- Lk. 21:25 appears to allude here. The king was on the eve of God's judgment, and he knew it. Why be so worried about what could have been shrugged off as an optical illusion? He was after all quite drunk. We see in this matter evidence enough that even the most hardened blasphemers have a conscience, somewhere deep down. This should encourage us to never consider anyone not worth witnessing to. There is a gap in every heart and psyche which only the gospel of God's Kingdom can satisfy. We were wired that way. The description is that of Nebuchadnezzar when he realized that the three Jewish friends were being preserved in the fire by an Angel (Dan. 3:24), and of Nebuchadnezzar when he saw the revelation of his own downfall (Dan. 4:5). The historical incidents in Daniel all share such points of commonality, to demonstrate the same Divine hand in the affairs of men. He works according to a similar imprint and hallmark. And that continues to this day. It is why we can look back upon our lives and see that they make sense. "Appearance" is the same original word translated "brightness"; Nebuchadnezzar's appearance was likewise changed but he repented, and it changed back to how it previously was (Dan. 4:36). But Belshazzar would not repent. He failed to learn from history. The same word is used of the bright appearance of the image in Dan. 2:31, which was to be changed and brought to nothing. Time and again, we see the basic truth of that image revealed in the immediate history of those times.

Dan 5:10 Now the queen because of the words of the king and his lords came into the banquet house: the queen spoke and said, O king, live forever; don’t let your thoughts trouble you, nor let your appearance be changed- This may refer to the king's mother, the queen mother, hence she is mentioned separately to his wives in :2,3. As noted on :2, this would then refer to Nebuchadnezzar's daughter, who would therefore have remembered Daniel's interpretations.

 

Dan 5:11 There is a man in your kingdom, in whom is the spirit of the holy gods; and in the days of your father light and understanding and wisdom, like the wisdom of the gods, were found in him. The king Nebuchadnezzar your father, the king, I say, your father, made him master of the magicians, enchanters, Chaldeans, and soothsayers- The history of Daniel and his interpretations was therefore well known, although Belshazzar had put it out of his mind, even though he knew Daniel and employed him as one of his workers (Dan. 8:1,27). We too can put inconvenient truth far from our minds instead of recalling it to mind and being humbled by it unto repentance. We note her laboured emphasis of the fact that Nebuchadnezzar was his ancestor, which may have been counted on the basis that she was a daughter or granddaughter of Nebuchadnezzar. She was aware of Nebuchadnezzar's repentance and perhaps hoped that Belshazzar would likewise humble himself.

Dan 5:12 Because an excellent spirit, and knowledge, and understanding, the interpreting of dreams, and revealing of strange messages, solving of problems and dissolving of doubts, were found in the same Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar. Now let Daniel be called, and he will show the interpretation- Daniel was still working for Belshazzar and was therefore known (Dan. 8:1,27). The way he is spoken of as being somewhat distant and unknown therefore suggests he had been ousted from the ranks of the dream interpreters, or had removed himself from them, and was working for the king in a different capacity. We too may need to remove ourselves from situations where we are in a conflict of conscience, even if it means a loss of power and kudos.

Dan 5:13 Then was Daniel brought in before the king. The king spoke and said to Daniel, Are you that Daniel, who are of the children of the captivity of Judah, whom the king my father brought out of Judah?- We must remember that Belshazzar knew Daniel and employed him (Dan. 8:1,27). "Are you that Daniel...?" doesn't have to mean that Belshazzar didn't know or recognize him; it is similar to Saul enquiring who David was after the victory over Goliath (1 Sam. 17:55,56), and David enquiring who Bathsheba was, when she was his next door neighbour and wife of his loyal friend Uriah (2 Sam. 11:3). To enquire who someone was must be read as a Semitic literary device, and not literally. The idea was in all these examples: 'I want you to do something for me and serve me as I ask you'.

Dan 5:14 I have heard of you, that the spirit of the gods is in you, and that light and understanding and excellent wisdom are found in you- The wise man all claimed that they could interpret dreams because they possessed "the spirit of the gods". But their failure meant that they were charlatans, or that in fact the gods of Babylon whom they were so strongly trusting in that evening were not in fact the true God. God so often leads men to situations where they are forced to jettison their myths and favoured beliefs, and accept His truth. But in the final analysis, Belshazzar still would not do this.

Dan 5:15 Now the wise men, the enchanters, have been brought in before me, that they should read this writing, and tell me its interpretation; but they could not show the interpretation of the thing- As noted on :14, this was a tacit admission that the gods were not in fact in touch with Belshazzar and his courtiers. But as explained on :1 and :2, they were desperately trusting those gods to deliver them from the armies outside the city walls. God was nudging Belshazzar towards total repentance, but he resisted, although accepting the theoretical truth of Daniel's interpretation.

Dan 5:16 But I have heard of you, that you can give interpretations, and dissolve problems; now if you can read the writing, and tell me its interpretation, you shall be clothed with purple, and have a chain of gold about your neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom- As noted on :17, that kingdom was about to fall. All such rewards would be only for a few more hours at the most. Perhaps the "third ruler" meant being one of the three rulers of Dan. 2:49, who had once been comprised of Daniel's friends. It's as if the king was promising to return the Jews to the places from which they had been deposed. But such symbolic repentance was too little and too late now.

Dan 5:17 Then Daniel answered before the king, Let your gifts be to yourself, and give your rewards to another- This was said not only because Daniel didn't want to again be in a position where his conscience to God would be hopelessly compromised. He knew from Dan. 2 and from the writing on the wall that the kingdom of Belshazzar was about to fall. To be made third ruler in that kingdom for just a few more moments was not what anyone wanted. Daniel would have been aware of Is. 13:15, which in the context of the fall of Babylon had warned: "he that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword". As it happened, the honours were forced upon Daniel, but God recognized that this was not Daniel's will. We too may find ourselves promoted to situations we would rather not be in, and God understands that. It is for us like Daniel to seek to remove ourselves from those situations as best we can.

Nevertheless I will read the writing to the king, and tell him the interpretation- The difference between reading and interpreting it would suggest that the writing was in an alphabet unknown to the king; perhaps it was in Hebrew.

Dan 5:18 As for you, O king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father the kingdom, and greatness, and glory, and majesty- To call Yahweh the most high was in direct criticism of the mockery of Yahweh and glorification of the Babylonian gods which had been going on. Daniel could well have been executed for this, but like Joseph and Samuel before him, he spoke forth God's truth as he had done in Dan. 2 and Dan. 4.

Dan 5:19 And because of the greatness that He gave him, all the peoples, nations, and languages trembled and feared before him: whom he would he killed, and whom he would he kept alive; and whom he would he raised up, and whom he would he put down- This is all the language of Yahweh Himself. But these possibilities were all given to Nebuchadnezzar by God. He had such power in order to make him later reflect that indeed, such Divine possibilities could only have been given him by God. Our experiences of exaltation are used likewise. We may reflect: 'How could I have ever... passed that exam, held that job down, done that or this'. The experiences are given so that we may realize that it was all of God, and be humbled; but if we fail to make that realization, then we end up proud and playing God.

Dan 5:20 But when his heart was lifted up, and his spirit was hardened so that he became proud, he was deposed from his kingly throne, and they took his glory from him- The hardening of Pharaoh's heart was from God. Here too, the psychological attitudes of Nebuchadnezzar were confirmed by God. The spirit of God works in this way, confirming our spirit. Which is why our spirit, our mind, our deepest inner heart, is so significant. For God confirms us in it. Pride is a hardening of the spirit or the heart / mind. "They took his glory from him" would confirm what we suggested on Dan. 4:32, that Nebuchadnezzar's own courtiers robbed him of his glory rather than nursing him through a psychological illness.

Dan 5:21 And he was driven from men, and his heart was made like an animal’s, and his dwelling was with the wild donkeys; he was fed with grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of the sky; until he knew that the Most High God rules in the kingdom of men, and that He sets up over it whomsoever He will- The humiliation was "until" he recognized the truth of the Dan. 2 image vision. But the prophecy of Dan. 4 had been that he would be in this humbled situation for a period of "seven times". We noted there that "times" is undefined; it could have referred to seven days, periods of time, weeks or years. In this sense God's time periods are open ended and capable of redefinition. And of course Nebuchadnezzar didn't have to repent; repentance had to be from the heart, of his choice. The "seven times" prophecy regarding Nebuchadnezzar could have been falsified by his refusal to repent, and we will see something similar in later time periods in Daniel regarding Israel's repentance, especially in the prophecy of the sevens in Dan. 9. This is how we can have a sense of excitement with God as we read His words and consider the open ended possibilities which stretch before us.

Dan 5:22 You, his son, Belshazzar, have not humbled your heart, though you knew all this- We are intended to learn from the experiences of others, both contemporary with us and as recorded in the Bible. As noted on Mt. 21:32, the Jews of the Lord's day were held guilty for not repenting when they saw the example of prostitutes and tax collectors repenting. We may not be humbled ourselves as Nebuchadnezzar was, but if we see others humbled, then we are expected to take the lesson and humble ourselves. The experiences of those around us are therefore not random, but brought into our lives by God so that we might learn from them. And we are held responsible for our response to them. This has very far reaching practical consequence, and gives an urgency and significance to social life of an altogether different dimension to what most experience.

Dan 5:23 But have lifted up yourself against the Lord of heaven; and they have brought the vessels of His house before you, and you and your lords, your wives and your concubines, have drunk wine from them; and you have praised the gods of silver and gold, of brass, iron, wood, and stone, which don’t see, nor hear, nor know; and the God in whose hand your breath is, and whose are all your ways, you have not glorified- Realizing the basic truths about our nature, that we are not our own, that our fragile breath is in God's hands, with nothing inherently immortal within us, and that our ways are "His" in that they are known to Him... will lead us to humility and repentance. All true theology must have its issue in practice. "The God, in whose hand your breath (spirit) is" was language which pointed to how the same Angelic hand  had written on the wall.

Dan 5:24 Then was the part of the hand sent from before him, and this writing was inscribed- I have explained on :5 and :8 that the hand wrote the words and then the palm of that Angelic hand covered the words. Only Daniel had the power to remove that Angelic hand.

Dan 5:25 MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN- This could be rendered: "There is counted a mina, a shekel, and two half minas"; for justification of the translation, see R.H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel p. 135. "Mene" is the word used for counting or numbering. This has more obvious connection with the interpretation of the words given in :26-28. The mina would then refer to Nebuchadnezzar, the shekel (a 60th part of a mina) to Belshazzar, who was found of little weight or account; and the two half minas would then refer to the Medes and Persians. Indeed the word "upharsin" in Aramaic sounds like "and the Persians". The repetition of the word "mene", "numbered", is another connection with the dream which Joseph interpreted for another king; it was stated twice because the fulfilment was so certain and would begin fulfilment immediately (Gen. 41:32). As noted on :26-28, the original text carries the implication that these things were immediately happening. But Belshazzar only theoretically accepted that, by still trying to promote Daniel within his already ended kingdom.

Some texts read just one "mene", and there is only one "mene" referred to in the interpretation in :26. The words refer to weights- a minah (60 shekels), a tsekel or one shekel, and upharsin, two half shekel pieces, referring initially to the Medes and Persians. This makes a total of 62 shekels- the age of Darius when he took the kingdom (:31).

Dan 5:26 This is the interpretation of it: MENE; God has numbered your kingdom, and brought it to an end- As noted on :28, the original suggests that it has now imminently been ended, although Belshazzar's response in elevating Daniel reflects how he only accepted the truth of these words on a theoretical and not a personal level. Numbering is a figure for the final judgment (Job 31:4), the final taking of account; but the essence of judgment day is right now, before the God who weighs and numbers actions and lives as they happen.

Dan 5:27 TEKEL; you are weighed in the balances, and are found wanting- As noted on :26 and :28, the original implies that this was the situation at that moment. There was no desperate plea from Belshazzar for mercy, no statement of repentance, but rather he continued with life as it had been by elevating Daniel within his already ended kingdom. And this is a cameo of so much human response before God's word. The final judgment of men is likened to a weighing in the balances (Job 31:4,6), but the essence of judgment is going on right now in this life. "We make the answer now".

Dan 5:28 PERES; your kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians- The original implies that this is imminently happening. But by elevating Daniel to third ruler in the kingdom, Belshazzar showed that he only theoretically acknowledged this truth, just as some terminally ill people deny the realities right up to the end. And so it is with us all; we have a tendency to think that God's urgent word is not true quite as stated, although on another level we may genuinely accept the truth of it. The division of the kingdom could refer to it being given to both Medes and Persians, but 'division' may more carry the sense of dividing it out, to others, just as required by the image vision of Dan. 2. We note that division is judgment; so often the enemies of Israel were judged by being divided against themselves. Those who make the Lord's house divided are effectively working out their own judgment / condemnation. The division of the kingdom perhaps also alludes to the divided state of the kingdoms of men presented in the image of Dan. 2.

Dan 5:29 Then commanded Belshazzar, and they clothed Daniel with purple, and put a chain of gold about his neck, and made proclamation concerning him, that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom- This response was surprising in that to give such bad news would typically have warranted immediate execution. Belshazzar humbled himself and tried to return Daniel to the three senior rulers, who had once been comprised of his Jewish friends (Dan. 2:49). But Belshazzar's humility and apparent repentance was too little and too late. To accept the truth of God's word is not of itself enough. The way he proclaimed Daniel to a third ruler in his kingdom was of itself a tacit reflection of his inability to accept that his kingdom had been ended and given to the Medes (:28). The gold chain, purple clothing which was the insignia of the kingdom and proclamation was all so bizarre to Daniel, who knew that at that moment, the kingdom was ended. All our exaltation in this life is similarly inappropriate and meaningless. For the end of all things is at hand, and the judge stands before the door.

Dan 5:30 In that night Belshazzar the king of the Chaldees was slain- It is hard to know whether this was by his courtiers, or as a result of the Medes entering Babylon. There may indeed be a gap of some years between the death of Belshazzar and Darius taking the kingdom (:31). Such gaps in history are found at other points in the Biblical narrative. We think of how in 1 Kings 14, Ahijah states to Jeroboam's wife that Abijah would die, Jeroboams dynasty would be overthrown, and Israel's kingdom ended. These things appear to all happen at the same time, when there were significant time periods between them. However, I have noted on :25-28 that the idea is that these things happened immediately, at that moment; and this leads me to support the traditional view that immediately, that night, the Medes took Babylon. This is also the implication of Jeremiah's prophecies, that in the night of her feasting, Babylon would fall. H.P. Mansfield gives relevant support for this: "Xenophon (Cyrop. 7:5) is quoted as stating: "But Cyrus, when he heard that there was to be such a feast in Babylon in which all the Babylonians would feast and revel through the whole night, on that night, as soon as it began to grow dark, taking many men, opened the dams into the river (i.e. he opened the dykes which had been made by Semiramis and her successors to confine the waters of the Euphrates to one channel), and allowed them to again flood the country, so that he could enter Babylon beneath its walls in the channel of the river". He quotes the address of Cyrus to his army: "Now let us go up against them. Many of them are asleep; many of them are intoxicated; and all of them are unfit for battle". Herodotus (Book 1:19) states: "it was a day of festivity among them; and whilst the citizens were engaged in dance and merriment, Babylon was. for the first time, thus taken". Isaiah predicted that the gates of brass would no longer provide a defence, and that the "bars of iron would be cut asunder'" (Is. 45:2). Herodotus states that these brazen gates were situated along the banks of the river, but at the time of the attack, some of them had been left open, probably by some within the city who had come to terms with the Persians".

Dan 5:31 Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old- "Darius the Mede" may be another name for Cyrus (so D.J. Wiseman),  Cambyses the son of Cyrus (so Boutflower) or Gubaru, whom Cyrus appointed as governor of Babylon immediately the city fell (Whitcomb and several other prominent commentators, although this runs into difficulty at Dan. 9:1). "Darius" may well be a title [meaning 'subduer'] rather than a name. The Medes took Babylon by diverting the flow of the Euphrates and entering the city along the river bed; this is the historical basis for the imagery of the drying up of the Euphrates in the last days, so that Babylon falls(Rev. 16:15,16). The "kings of the east" of the last days therefore correspond to the hordes of various Arabian mercenaries who were used by the Medes as soldiers. We can already see the development of such groups in the Middle East today. See on :25 for the significance of the age 62.