DANIEL CHAPTER FIVE [Part 6] – By Bro. David Rice
THE LAST KING OF BABYLON – A STUDY OF DANIEL, CHAPTER FIVE
“They brought the golden vessels that were taken out of the temple of the house of God which was at Jerusalem, and the king, and his princes, his wives, and his concubines, drank in them … and praised the gods of gold and of silver … In the same hour came forth fingers of a man’s hand, and wrote over against the candlestick upon the plaister of the wall of the king’s palace … Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin” (Daniel 5:3-5, 25).
[A]As we saw in our previous studies, King Nebuchadnezzar thrice praised the God of Heaven and announced it to all his realm. But the last king of Babylon, Belshazzar, had a different character. “Thou his son, O Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart, though thou knewest all this; But hast lifted up thyself against the Lord of heaven” (Daniel 5:22, 23). This king lost his life that very night to the invading armies of Cyrus.1 {(1) The unrighteous character of Belshazzar is also indicated by a story told by the Greek writer Xenophon, in his work Cryopaedia. His work is not a strictly historical account, but may reflect history. He writes that the general of Cyrus who took the city had formerly been an ally and servant of Belshazzar. This servant of Belshazzar was called Gobryas by Xenophon, but evidently refers to the general named Ugbaru who led the forces of Cyrus into Babylon (not to be confused with Gubaru, who was later appointed governor of governors by Cyrus – whereas Ugbaru died a few weeks after the fall of Babylon).
On a hunting expedition, Belshazzar slew the son of “Gobryas” out of jealousy, if Xenophon here recounts something historical. Gobryas subsequently shifted his allegiance, and took his revenge upon Belshazzar at the fall of the city. “Gobryas and Gadatas and their troops found the gates leading to the palace … dealing blows right and left they came into the presence of the king; and they found him already risen with his dagger in his hand. And Gadatas and Gobryas and their followers overpowered him; and those about the king perished also” (Xenophon, Cryopaedia VII, 5, 27-30, cited by Whitcomb, page 77).}
The fifth chapter of the Book of Daniel describes the night Babylon fell, and Persia assumed the empire. God’s prophet, the aged and noble statesman Daniel, was an eyewitness of the events. His record makes it clear that the hand of God was in the matter. Babylon’s seventy years had expired. Jeremiah had predicted that after all nations would drink of God’s judgment through Babylon, then “the king of Sheshach (Babylon)2{(2) Sheshach is sometimes considered a cryptogram for Babylon. As is commonly known, the Hebrew alphabet of 22 letters are mostly consonants. In ancient times the vowels were supplied by familiarity with the word, but not expressed in writing. Later a system of pointing’s was developed to indicate the vowel sounds. So the word Sheshach is composed in Hebrew of the three letters SSK, and Babylon of the three letters BBL (for Babel). These two words are related as explained in a comment in the NIV Study Bible. “The cryptogram is formed by substituting the first consonant of the Hebrew alphabet for the last, the second for the next-to-last, etc.”} shall drink after them” (Jeremiah 25:26) – and they did.
BELSHAZZAR
There was a time, not so long ago, when men of learning questioned the very existence of this king. History knows, and has known for many years, who were the kings of the Babylonian Empire founded during the latter years of Nabopolassar. They were …
So who was Belshazzar? For many years this question lay as a charge against the integrity of the book of Daniel, for history evidently lost the memory of Belshazzar. Critics charged that the apparent mistake in Daniel proved the book was not written by a prophet contemporary with the events, else it would not contain such a shocking error as to misname the last king of Babylon.
However, the matter has long since been resolved. When archaeologists recovered some of the tablet records of ancient Babylon, in the mid-1800s, they found that Nabonidus had a son named Bel-sar-usur – the Belshazzar of the Book of Daniel. He is called “son of the king” in several records,3 {(3) See Nabonidus and Belshazzar, by Raymond Philip Dougherty, 1929, pages 82 to 87, for several examples.} and was the firstborn son of Nabonidus. To him the aged emperor committed the daily governance of Babylon. Here is a translation of an old cuneiform tablet respecting this.
“In the beginning of the third year, he (Nabonidus) entrusted the military camp to his first born (son). He put under his command the army of all the lands. He let everything go and entrusted the kingship to him and, as for himself, he took the path to distant regions. The military forces of Akkad (Babylon) taking the field with (him), he set out towards the city Teima, in the midst of Amurru” (The Reign of Nabonidus, Paul-Alain Beaulieu, 1989).
Thus from the third year of the emperor Nabonidus forward, his son Belshazzar was the sitting monarch in Babylon, ruling on behalf of his father. When the fateful day of God’s judgment came, it fell upon the reckless Belshazzar. Before the fall of the city the elderly Nabonidus led his army in the field of battle against the armies of Cyrus, but could not prevail. After the fall of Babylon Nabonidus returned to the city, presented himself to Cyrus, and received kindly treatment from the new ruler.
MORE ABOUT BELSHAZZAR
With this identification of Belshazzar, we can now better interpret a trace history did record pertaining to this person. The Greek historian Herodotus speaks of a queen Nitocris, described as a woman of great intelligence, and he details her accomplishments. Then he says, “The expedition of Cyrus was directed against her son, who, like his father, was called Labynetus and was king (of Babylon).”4{(4) Herodotus says “Assyria,” but he and other authors use this designation for what we know as the empire of Babylon, presumably because the empire of Babylon ruled what had formerly been the empire of Assyria. The reference is Herodotus, Book I, section 188.} Evidently Labynetus is Herodotus’ version of the name Nabonidus, who according to this was the husband of Nitocris, and had a son also sometimes called Labynetus – the Belshazzar of Daniel.5 {(5) This is the evident meaning if there is to be any consistency between Herodotus and Daniel. This is also supported by the thoughtful and scholarly work of Philip Raymond Dougherty of Yale University, in his 1929 book, Nabonidus and Belshazzar, pages 38-42 – and by Paul-Alain Beaulieu, The Reign of Nabonidus, 1989, page 80, last paragraph.}
Nitocris is thought to be an Egyptian name. Philip Raymond Dougherty reasoned that Nitocris may have been a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, from a secondary wife obtained in a marriage agreement with Egypt early in his reign.6 {(6) Nabonidus and Belshazzar, pages 42-63. His position is reasoned at length, but the evidence is insufficient to be conclusive.} If so, this would make Belshazzar the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar, consistent with his description as son (grandson) of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 5:22). Verses 11, 13, 18[Dan. 5:11,13,18] all refer to Nebuchadnezzar as father (grandfather) of Belshazzar.
MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN
These were the words supernaturally inscribed on the wall of the otherwise festive hall. They were inscribed by the fingers of a hand that had no arm or body attached. Probably they were written in large letters visible to all. A hush would have descended quickly upon the riotous assembly, as one by one the celebrants recognized a message from on high was being delivered. The boisterous mirth was at an end. A sense of foreboding[or trouble] spread across the hall.
They did not yet apprehend the meaning, but the conscience of the king and other revellers correctly sensed that a message to them from the divine courts, intruding on their reckless carousing, would not be a commendation. “Then the king’s countenance was changed, and his thoughts troubled him, so that the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote one against another” (Daniel 5:6).
Outside the city gathered the armies of Cyrus. The impregnable walls of Babylon gave Belshazzar a false sense of security, until this moment. Now dread seized him – and properly so. He cried aloud an order, “Bring in the astrologers, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers.” The order was urgent, and the king offered the highest inducements – “Whosoever shall read this writing, and shew me the interpretation thereof, shall be clothed with scarlet, and have a chain of gold about his neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom” (Daniel 5:7).
Notice the offer of “third ruler.” Belshazzar could offer no higher, since he himself was second ruler. This detail again shows the accuracy of Daniel’s report.
Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin – weighed in the balances, found wanting, kingdom divided to Medes and Persians.
“Then came in all the king’s wise men: but they could not read the writing, nor make known to the king the interpretation thereof” (Daniel 5:8). The words Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin, are apparently Aramaic words. Certainly the king’s advisors could read the words. But they could not perceive the sense of the words – the cryptic message intended by them.
“Then was king Belshazzar greatly troubled … and his lords were astonished” (Daniel 5:9). Verse one says “a thousand of his lords” were present.[Dan. 5:1] The handwriting on the wall was against them as well, for they were the leadership of the empire then collapsing.
At this point the “Queen” advised Belshazzar of the prophet Daniel. “There is a man in thy kingdom, in whom is the spirit of the holy gods; and in the days of thy father light and understanding and wisdom … was found in him; whom the king Nebuchadnezzar thy father (exalted)” (Daniel 5:11). This queen is supposed by many to be the Queen mother, that is, mother of Belshazzar and wife of Nabonidus, namely Nitocris referred to earlier. She had witnessed the wisdom of Daniel during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who had died 23 years before. Belshazzar readily received the advice of his elderly and experienced mother.
Daniel was summoned. “Are you that Daniel, of the captivity of Judah, whom the king my father (grandfather) brought out of Jewry? I have even heard of thee, that … excellent wisdom is found in thee” (Daniel 5:14). Then the gifts were offered, but Daniel did not require them. He would give the meaning as a servant of God, “not for filthy lucre” (1 Peter 5:2). All the servants of God should have the same attitude.
First Daniel reminded Belshazzar that Nebuchadnezzar learned humility under the hand of God, but Belshazzar, who knew this, had “not humbled thine heart … but hast lifted up thyself against the Lord of heaven” (Daniel 5:22, 23). Then he gave the meaning.
“Mene” means numbered. “Tekel” means weighed. “Peres,” the root of Upharsin, means “divided.” Thus the message was, “numbered, numbered, weighed, divided.” And the meaning? “God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it. Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting. Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians” (Daniel 5:26-28). It was doom indeed, and it was executed that very night.
Now Belshazzar was humbled – but too late to avoid the judgment. He gave Daniel the promised rewards, even though Daniel did not require them. “And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about 62 years old.”[Dan. 5:31] Thus closed the history of the Babylonian Empire.
DARIUS THE MEDE
Because history does not speak of “Darius the Mede” – or any Darius who took the throne of Babylon from Nabonidus or Belshazzar – the identification of this person has been a puzzle. Once it was supposed that his rule of the empire preceded Cyrus, but this view has been laid to rest. Cyrus was the master of the Medes and Persians before, during, and after the fall of Babylon. Only some days after the taking of Babylon, Cyrus rode into the city as the acknowledged master of the empire. This is the testimony of scripture also, for Isaiah 45:1, 2 tell us Cyrus was the ruler anointed of God to conquer Babylon and free the Jewish people to return to Israel.
Here is a translation of a text known as the Nabonidus Chronicle, a record contemporary with those times, which parallels and augments the record in Daniel. Our comments are in {braces}, and the bold words are our emphasis.
“In the month Tasritu {Tishri}, when Cyrus did battle at Opis on the (bank of) the Tigris against the army of Akkad {Babylon}, the people of Akkad retreated. He carried off the plunder (and) slaughtered the people. On the fourteenth day (of Tasritu), Sippar was captured without a battle. Nabonidus fled. On the sixteenth day (of Tasritu), Ugbaru, governor of Gutium, and the army of Cyrus, entered Babylon without a battle. Afterwards, after Nabonidus retreated, he was captured in Babylon. Until the end of the month (of Tasritu), the shield-(bearers) of Gutium surrounded the gates of the Esagil (a temple in Babylon). There was no interruption of whatever (rites) in the Esagil and the (other) temples, and no (ritual) date was missed. On the third day of the month Arahsamnu, Cyrus entered Babylon. The drinking tubes were filled in his presence. There was peace in the city when Cyrus spoke greetings to all of Babylon. He (Cyrus), appointed Gubaru governor of all the governors in Babylon. From the month Kislimu to the month Addaru, the gods of Akkad that Nabonidus had brought to Babylon returned to their cult places. On the night of the eleventh day of the month Arahsamnu, Ugbaru died” (The Reign of Nabonidus, Paul-Alain Beaulieu, 1989, pages 224, 225).
Who, then, was Darius the Mede? There are two credible options for this. Perhaps he was Gubaru, appointed by Cyrus to govern the city. This view is ably supported in the study titled Darius the Mede, by John Whitcomb, 1963. In this case Darius was a subordinate of Cyrus, appointed by Cyrus.
Another view has been promoted by D. J. Wiseman, formerly keeper of antiquities in the British Museum. His view is that Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Persian are the same person. The father of Cyrus was Persian, the mother of Cyrus was Median, and “Darius the Mede” would be the Median designation of this conqueror.
This view is supported by Daniel 6:28, translating the Hebrew waw as “even” rather than “and.” “So this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, even in the reign of Cyrus the Persian.”[Dan. 6:28] Compare this to a similar construction in 1 Chronicles 5:26, which identifies one king with two separate names. Here is that text in the NASB version. “So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul, king of Assyria, even the spirit of Tilgath-pilneser king of Assyria.”[In Tamil use JW translation]
Our view is the second one – Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Persian are the same person – but in either case it makes no difference in the dates assigned the fall of Babylon, or the release of the Jews. Babylon fell to the armies of Cyrus on the Julian date October 12, 539 BC. Cyrus rode into the city October 29 the same year. This year of conquest was counted the accession year of Cyrus as “King of Lands.” The famous decree issued by Cyrus freeing the Jewish people to return to Israel and rebuild their temple came during the first regnal year of Cyrus, which began in the spring of 538 BC.
THE NIGHT OF REVELRY
It seems fitting that the precipitous doom of Babylon fell on a night of revelry, for it links the punishment to the arrogant disregard for the hand of God. Remember that on this night they were sacrilegiously using the precious vessels from God’s temple for common use, evidently to imbibe alcohol.
But though fitting, it seems peculiar that with the armies of Cyrus gathered about the city, Belshazzar would be so careless as to be partying with his nobles inside, rather than attending to the crisis. But this record also is a mark of the accuracy of the testimony, for the same fact is noted by two other records. It is noted by the Greek historian Herodotus. “There was a festival going on, and they continued to dance and enjoy themselves, until they learned the news the hard way. That, then, is the story of the first capture of Babylon” (The Histories I, 191). It is also noted by the Greek writer Xenophon. He writes that an attacking general said, “it would not surprise us to find the palace-gates unbarred, for this night the whole city is given over to revelry” (Cryopaedia VII, 5, 25).
Belshazzar was confident of his defences, but there was more to this party than simple foolishness. The date the city fell was the usual time scheduled for a festival in honour of the moon God. Notice in the Nabonidus Chronicle cited above, the date the armies of Cyrus took the city was the 16th of Tashritu. “According to the chronicle, Babylon was taken on the sixteenth of Tasritu. Accepting that Nabonidus imposed new features of the cult of Sin {the moon god} in the capital after his return from Teima, it is conceivable that festivals linked with the cult of Sin at Harran were transplanted to Babylon, perhaps even the akitu festival. This festival started on the seventeenth of Tasritu. As Babylon was captured on the eve of the seventeenth, the festivities mentioned by Herodotus {and Xenophon} and the Book of Daniel may have been those of the Harran akitu festival, as celebrated in the capital by the supporters of Nabonidus” (The Reign of Nabonidus, Paul-Alain Beaulieu, 1989).
NOTE THE LESSONS
In all of this there are lessons for the New Creation, to avoid anything akin to a spirit of unholiness, following the world in their licentious practices, or reflecting by our conduct any lack of respect or reverence for things godly. Probably all Christians who live Christian principles have experienced something of loss for the sake of conscience, if only the disesteem of the world. If this is our privilege, let us recognize it as a mark of devotion and faith toward God, and be pleased to have our faith demonstrated in any way which God chooses.
“All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution (small or great)” (2 Timothy 3:12). “But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness” (1 Timothy 6:11). “Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart” (2 Timothy 2:22). “Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14). “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” (Matthew 5:8).
DEEPER MEANING IN THE MESSAGE OF DOOM
There is a deeper meaning in the message of doom which carries down to our day. Babylon, which took the Israelites captive for so long, was a type, picture, or illustration of Papacy which ruled Europe from Rome and held the true Church, spiritual Israelites, captive so long during the dark ages. This application has a long history in Protestant interpretation, and is rooted soundly in the symbols of Revelation (chapters 17, 18).[Rev. 17;18]
There Papacy is an unholy woman, given over to the political powers, and thus styled a harlot in the intense symbolism used respecting her in scripture. The great Reformation of the 16th century was a blow to her prestige and authority, and the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars which followed were a further mighty blow. But the 2520 years allotted for Gentile Dominion would close with 1914, and the outbreak of World War I. The kings of Europe, joined with Papacy, fell under the Lord’s judgment, which continued through World War II.
Some expositors note that the words of judgment against Belshazzar contain a count of 2520, the number of years the Gentile kingdoms would exercise power until their judgment began. Mene and Tekel are close to units of weight used for gold and silver, namely the mena and shekel. Using a mena of 50 shekels, and a shekel of 20 gerahs (Exodus 30:13), the total gerahs in mena, mena, shekel, division (of mena), would be 1000, 1000, 20, 500. The sum of these, 2520, is the number of years from Babylon’s conquest of Israel (beginning in 607 BC), until World War I (beginning in 1914).
Notice the connection elsewhere between shekels of silver and numbers of years, in the purchase price Abraham paid for the burial plot for Sarah. The price was 400 shekels. This payment represented that Abraham would not receive the land for a gift, until after 400 years, which God said would pass before Abraham’s seed would receive from God. (See Genesis 15:13, 23:15, 16).
Thus by many varied and thoughtful ways does God intertwine His plans into the prophetic narratives. “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter” (Proverbs 25:2).
DANIEL THE PROPHET
In all of these experiences, Daniel represented the Lord’s people. He was the one gifted by God with an insight into the meaning of the “handwriting on the wall.” So the Lord’s people today, those called to reign with Christ in glory, are graciously informed of God about His plans and purposes. Others may see the signs, perhaps tremble as Belshazzar, “hearts failing them for fear … looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken” (Luke 21:26). But we see the meaning.
The present heavens (spiritual institutions, false churches) and earth (political ruler ship) will pass away. But the Kingdom of Christ will replace them and be far superior. As Cyrus was later received by the crowds, so Christ the conquering king will be received by the world.
But what of Daniel? He received the gifts promised for his service – a gold chain, scarlet robe, and third place in the kingdom. So the Lord’s people – if we are faithful to God – will receive the “gold” of immortality, the “scarlet robe” of kingly authority, and “third place in the kingdom” following God and His son, Jesus Christ.
With such a remarkable privilege, shall we not bend every effort to please our Heavenly Father, and be faithful to him? Let our lights shine, let us be noble as Daniel, and speak what we know of God’s coming kingdom.
DANIEL REPRESENTS THE CHURCH
We noted in our studies of the previous chapters that Daniel represents the Church through their afflictions in the Gospel Age. The first three chapters represent three persecuting powers the Dragon (civil power), Beast (Papacy), and False Prophet (Protestant Powers).
Chapters four, five and six show these powers coming to a close. In Chapter four Nebuchadnezzar, representing civil power, lost his dominion. Here Babylon, representing Papacy in Revelation, loses its dominion. [B]In the next chapter we will see a picture of the fall of the last power.
– By Br. David Rice – From Faithbuilders Fellowship, June 2006.
===================
Good subject.
- As we saw in our previous studies – Refer “Nebuchadnezzar’s Madness – A Study Of Daniel, Chapter Four” By Br. David Rice from Faithbuilders Fellowship, April 2006.
- In the next chapter we will see a picture of the fall of the last power – Refer “Daniel and the Lion’s Den” By Br. David Rice from Faithbuilders Fellowship, July, August 2006.
Leave a Reply