Study Focus: Daniel 6, 1 Sam. 18:6–8, Matt. 6:6, Acts 5:27–32, Mark 6:14–26, Heb. 11:35–38.
Introduction: Daniel 6 highlights the faithfulness of Daniel. He was willing to be devoured by lions rather than compromise his relationship with God. Eventually his faithfulness to God and loyalty to the king were vindicated.
Lesson Themes:
Faithfulness. In spite of the decree that forbade petition to any god or man but to the king only, Daniel continued to pray toward Jerusalem. He could have shut the windows and prayed in secret; instead, he decided not to compromise his testimony. His commitment to the truth ranked much higher than the protection of his own life.
Vindication. As a result of Daniel’s loyalty to God, the angel of the Lord closed the mouths of the hungry lions. Daniel was protected and vindicated before the king and those who sought to take his life. The experience of that most remarkable Hebrew exile stands as a token of God’s ultimate vindication of His people throughout the ages as they are opposed and persecuted by the powers of evil.
Life Application: Aspiring Christian politicians often point to the experience of Daniel as a justification for entering the fray of public service. What a blessing for the church and society if every Christian politician and public officer would emulate the faithfulness of Daniel!
Part II: Commentary
Faithfulness. Daniel was one of three governors in charge of supervising the satraps by checking their assignments and auditing their accounts in order to prevent loss to the king’s revenues and assure the proper functioning of the government (Dan. 6:2). Fraud and bad management have been a problem since ancient times. Some ancient Near Eastern texts also reflect the climate of competition, rivalry, and intrigue among court scholars and advisors, who often addressed the king with accusations against a real or perceived competitor. So, in this regard, the situation reflected in the court of King Darius was not exceptional, in that the governors and satraps wanted to get rid of Daniel. Jealousy may have played a major role, given that Daniel was to be appointed by the king as a kind of prime minister. In connection with this possibility, we should also bear in mind that the integrity of Daniel may have been a stumbling block to those seeking personal advantages and illicit profit from public office. Finally, these corrupt officials may have turned against Daniel because he was a Jew (Dan. 6:13, compare with Dan. 3:12), and, as such, he was faithful to his God rather than to their gods.
In spite of the royal decree, Daniel does not change his prayer habits. He continues to pray three times a day (compare with Ps. 55:17). Daniel’s house likely had an upstairs private room on its flat roof. From a window facing the west, Daniel prayed toward Jerusalem where the temple lay in ruins. At the inauguration of the temple, Solomon instructed the people to pray toward the temple (see 1 Kings 8:35, 38, 44, 48). David seems to have practiced the same principle (see Ps. 5:7, Ps. 28:2). Jerusalem became the locus of God’s presence because the temple stood there. Hence, such a gesture symbolized commitment to Yahweh, the God who chose Jerusalem as the place where He would put His name. Moreover, Daniel hoped for the restoration of Jerusalem as the fulfillment of the covenant promises (Jeremiah 31 and Ezekiel 36). Daniel was a resident alien in Babylon; his true citizenship was in Jerusalem.
So the first thing we learn about Daniel from this narrative is his professional integrity as an officer of the empire. Most certainly, Darius invited Daniel to serve because of his unblemished reputation as a public servant. In addition, Daniel’s integrity was also clearly perceived by his enemies. In this regard, two observations bear mentioning. First, Daniel’s enemies recognized that they could not find anything against him in his service to the king: “So the governors and satraps sought to find some charge against Daniel concerning the kingdom; but they could find no charge or fault, because he was faithful; nor was there any error or fault found in him” (Dan. 6:4, NKJV). Second, the most impressive aspect of the enemies’ plotting lies in the fact that they perceived that Daniel’s ultimate loyalty was to his God. This devotion indicates that Daniel lived his faith and expressed his convictions openly. Everyone knew what mattered most to Daniel. So, the enemies decided to strike him at the heart of his core conviction. In doing this, they did not expect Daniel to compromise but to remain faithful so that he could be put to death. Daniel, however, perceived no conflict between his responsibilities as a government officer and as a servant of the true God. In fact, Daniel took his public service as an opportunity to honor the God who is the ultimate sovereign over everything.
Vindication. Probably the most salient feature of the narrative about Daniel in the lion’s den is the fact that Daniel was delivered from the lions. This happy ending is consistent with other biblical narratives, such as the deliverance of Daniel’s friends from the fiery furnace, as well as the restoration of Job. Above all, it is consistent with the Bible’s macro-narrative itself, which concludes with the destruction of evil and the establishment of God’s eternal kingdom. Daniel’s vindication over his enemies points to the ultimate vindication of God’s people, as depicted in the prophetic section of Daniel (Daniel 7–12). It does not mean, however, that every faithful servant that is persecuted will be delivered as Daniel was. The gallery of martyrs throughout history shows that sometimes God allows His servants to pay the ultimate price for their loyalty without apparent vindication this side of heaven. But the deliverance of Daniel stands as a token of God’s eschatological vindication of His people and shows that He holds the ultimate power over the forces of evil. The God who prevented the lions from devouring Daniel will eventually forever silence Satan, the ultimate lion and accuser of the brethren (1 Pet. 5:8).
Daniel’s faithfulness to God found expression in his allegiance to God’s law. Thus, when human law conflicted with God’s law, Daniel showed no hesitation about which law to obey. The decree was issued according to the law of the Medes and Persians, “which does not alter” (Dan. 6:8, NKJV). Here a conflict between two laws—both claiming immutability—emerges, which will reach eschatological proportions in the attempt of the little horn to change the times and the law (Daniel 7). So, if the law of the Medes and Persians cannot be altered, what about the law that reflects the character of God? The conflict between the eternal law of God and human counterfeits is a crucial aspect of the great conflict encapsulated in the experience of Daniel. As much as Daniel was loyal to the state, when the laws of the state conflicted with the law of God, he demonstrated no hesitancy over which law to obey.
Daniel’s faithfulness was vindicated by God. Darius had no doubt about the integrity of Daniel, so much so that he made strenuous efforts to find a loophole in the imperial law. Eventually the king was forced to give in, though with hopes that the God of Daniel would deliver him. According to the biblical narrative, the stone that sealed the mouth of the cave was sealed with the king’s “own signet ring and with the signets of his lords” (Dan. 6:17, NKJV). This double sealing was intended to ensure that Daniel’s fate remained unchanged. As plausibly suggested by a commentator: “The accusers, who likely were present and wanted the lords’ signet seal used, would have desired in this way to insure against the possibility of the king himself sending men to rescue Daniel; and the king would have wanted to insure against these accusers’ trying to take Daniel's life some other way, if the lions did not.”—Leon J. Wood, A Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1973), p. 169.
But the vindication of Daniel implied the condemnation of those who plotted against him. This outcome is the dark but necessary side of vindication. The king commanded that Daniel’s enemies be thrown into the same pit to which Daniel had been consigned, which resulted in their destruction by the lions. To the modern/postmodern mind, it is difficult to accept the fact that the king included the families in the punishment of the conspirators. However, note that the king was simply following an ancient, though horrible, practice. God did not command that to be done. What God did was to save Daniel from the lions, which made clear the prophet’s innocence in all matters related to the king. But above all, we should bear in mind that it was not only Daniel who was vindicated; God Himself was also vindicated before Darius. The king finally confessed that the God who delivered Daniel was the true and living God: “His kingdom ... shall not be destroyed, and His dominion shall endure to the end” (Dan 6:26, NKJV). These words aptly conclude the narrative section and encapsulate the core of the theological message conveyed by the prophetic section.
Part III: Life Application
“Dear youth, what is the aim and purpose of your life? Are you ambitious for education that you may have a name and position in the world? Have you thoughts that you dare not express, that you may one day stand upon the summit of intellectual greatness; that you may sit in deliberative and legislative councils, and help to enact laws for the nation? There is nothing wrong in these aspirations. You may every one of you make your mark. You should be content with no mean attainments. Aim high, and spare no pains to reach the standard.”—Ellen G. White, Messages to Young People, p. 36.
1. What kind of public offices, if any, are compatible with the Christian life?
2. Where and how do you draw the line between loyalty to the state and loyalty to God?
3. If Daniel is a model, what are the four things that he did that aspiring politicians and public officers would do well to emulate? (Dan. 6:10, 11).
Adjust My Preferences
Welcome! Please set your reading preferences below.
You can access this panel later by clicking the
preference icon
in the top right of the page.
Key Text: Daniel 6
Study Focus: Daniel 6, 1 Sam. 18:6–8, Matt. 6:6, Acts 5:27–32, Mark 6:14–26, Heb. 11:35–38.
Introduction: Daniel 6 highlights the faithfulness of Daniel. He was willing to be devoured by lions rather than compromise his relationship with God. Eventually his faithfulness to God and loyalty to the king were vindicated.
Lesson Themes:
Life Application: Aspiring Christian politicians often point to the experience of Daniel as a justification for entering the fray of public service. What a blessing for the church and society if every Christian politician and public officer would emulate the faithfulness of Daniel!
Part II: Commentary
Faithfulness. Daniel was one of three governors in charge of supervising the satraps by checking their assignments and auditing their accounts in order to prevent loss to the king’s revenues and assure the proper functioning of the government (Dan. 6:2). Fraud and bad management have been a problem since ancient times. Some ancient Near Eastern texts also reflect the climate of competition, rivalry, and intrigue among court scholars and advisors, who often addressed the king with accusations against a real or perceived competitor. So, in this regard, the situation reflected in the court of King Darius was not exceptional, in that the governors and satraps wanted to get rid of Daniel. Jealousy may have played a major role, given that Daniel was to be appointed by the king as a kind of prime minister. In connection with this possibility, we should also bear in mind that the integrity of Daniel may have been a stumbling block to those seeking personal advantages and illicit profit from public office. Finally, these corrupt officials may have turned against Daniel because he was a Jew (Dan. 6:13, compare with Dan. 3:12), and, as such, he was faithful to his God rather than to their gods. In spite of the royal decree, Daniel does not change his prayer habits. He continues to pray three times a day (compare with Ps. 55:17). Daniel’s house likely had an upstairs private room on its flat roof. From a window facing the west, Daniel prayed toward Jerusalem where the temple lay in ruins. At the inauguration of the temple, Solomon instructed the people to pray toward the temple (see 1 Kings 8:35, 38, 44, 48). David seems to have practiced the same principle (see Ps. 5:7, Ps. 28:2). Jerusalem became the locus of God’s presence because the temple stood there. Hence, such a gesture symbolized commitment to Yahweh, the God who chose Jerusalem as the place where He would put His name. Moreover, Daniel hoped for the restoration of Jerusalem as the fulfillment of the covenant promises (Jeremiah 31 and Ezekiel 36). Daniel was a resident alien in Babylon; his true citizenship was in Jerusalem. So the first thing we learn about Daniel from this narrative is his professional integrity as an officer of the empire. Most certainly, Darius invited Daniel to serve because of his unblemished reputation as a public servant. In addition, Daniel’s integrity was also clearly perceived by his enemies. In this regard, two observations bear mentioning. First, Daniel’s enemies recognized that they could not find anything against him in his service to the king: “So the governors and satraps sought to find some charge against Daniel concerning the kingdom; but they could find no charge or fault, because he was faithful; nor was there any error or fault found in him” (Dan. 6:4, NKJV). Second, the most impressive aspect of the enemies’ plotting lies in the fact that they perceived that Daniel’s ultimate loyalty was to his God. This devotion indicates that Daniel lived his faith and expressed his convictions openly. Everyone knew what mattered most to Daniel. So, the enemies decided to strike him at the heart of his core conviction. In doing this, they did not expect Daniel to compromise but to remain faithful so that he could be put to death. Daniel, however, perceived no conflict between his responsibilities as a government officer and as a servant of the true God. In fact, Daniel took his public service as an opportunity to honor the God who is the ultimate sovereign over everything.
Vindication. Probably the most salient feature of the narrative about Daniel in the lion’s den is the fact that Daniel was delivered from the lions. This happy ending is consistent with other biblical narratives, such as the deliverance of Daniel’s friends from the fiery furnace, as well as the restoration of Job. Above all, it is consistent with the Bible’s macro-narrative itself, which concludes with the destruction of evil and the establishment of God’s eternal kingdom. Daniel’s vindication over his enemies points to the ultimate vindication of God’s people, as depicted in the prophetic section of Daniel (Daniel 7–12). It does not mean, however, that every faithful servant that is persecuted will be delivered as Daniel was. The gallery of martyrs throughout history shows that sometimes God allows His servants to pay the ultimate price for their loyalty without apparent vindication this side of heaven. But the deliverance of Daniel stands as a token of God’s eschatological vindication of His people and shows that He holds the ultimate power over the forces of evil. The God who prevented the lions from devouring Daniel will eventually forever silence Satan, the ultimate lion and accuser of the brethren (1 Pet. 5:8). Daniel’s faithfulness to God found expression in his allegiance to God’s law. Thus, when human law conflicted with God’s law, Daniel showed no hesitation about which law to obey. The decree was issued according to the law of the Medes and Persians, “which does not alter” (Dan. 6:8, NKJV). Here a conflict between two laws—both claiming immutability—emerges, which will reach eschatological proportions in the attempt of the little horn to change the times and the law (Daniel 7). So, if the law of the Medes and Persians cannot be altered, what about the law that reflects the character of God? The conflict between the eternal law of God and human counterfeits is a crucial aspect of the great conflict encapsulated in the experience of Daniel. As much as Daniel was loyal to the state, when the laws of the state conflicted with the law of God, he demonstrated no hesitancy over which law to obey. Daniel’s faithfulness was vindicated by God. Darius had no doubt about the integrity of Daniel, so much so that he made strenuous efforts to find a loophole in the imperial law. Eventually the king was forced to give in, though with hopes that the God of Daniel would deliver him. According to the biblical narrative, the stone that sealed the mouth of the cave was sealed with the king’s “own signet ring and with the signets of his lords” (Dan. 6:17, NKJV). This double sealing was intended to ensure that Daniel’s fate remained unchanged. As plausibly suggested by a commentator: “The accusers, who likely were present and wanted the lords’ signet seal used, would have desired in this way to insure against the possibility of the king himself sending men to rescue Daniel; and the king would have wanted to insure against these accusers’ trying to take Daniel's life some other way, if the lions did not.”—Leon J. Wood, A Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1973), p. 169. But the vindication of Daniel implied the condemnation of those who plotted against him. This outcome is the dark but necessary side of vindication. The king commanded that Daniel’s enemies be thrown into the same pit to which Daniel had been consigned, which resulted in their destruction by the lions. To the modern/postmodern mind, it is difficult to accept the fact that the king included the families in the punishment of the conspirators. However, note that the king was simply following an ancient, though horrible, practice. God did not command that to be done. What God did was to save Daniel from the lions, which made clear the prophet’s innocence in all matters related to the king. But above all, we should bear in mind that it was not only Daniel who was vindicated; God Himself was also vindicated before Darius. The king finally confessed that the God who delivered Daniel was the true and living God: “His kingdom ... shall not be destroyed, and His dominion shall endure to the end” (Dan 6:26, NKJV). These words aptly conclude the narrative section and encapsulate the core of the theological message conveyed by the prophetic section.
Part III: Life Application
“Dear youth, what is the aim and purpose of your life? Are you ambitious for education that you may have a name and position in the world? Have you thoughts that you dare not express, that you may one day stand upon the summit of intellectual greatness; that you may sit in deliberative and legislative councils, and help to enact laws for the nation? There is nothing wrong in these aspirations. You may every one of you make your mark. You should be content with no mean attainments. Aim high, and spare no pains to reach the standard.”—Ellen G. White, Messages to Young People, p. 36.
1. What kind of public offices, if any, are compatible with the Christian life?
2. Where and how do you draw the line between loyalty to the state and loyalty to God?3. If Daniel is a model, what are the four things that he did that aspiring politicians and public officers would do well to emulate? (Dan. 6:10, 11).