Daniel 4.19-Daniel Was Upset Because Of The Meaning Of The Dream And Tells Nebuchadnezzar He Wishes The Dream And Its Interpretation Were For His Enemies
Wenstrom Bible Ministries
Pastor-Teacher Bill Wenstrom
Wednesday September 26, 2012
Daniel: Daniel 4:19-Daniel Was Upset Because Of The Meaning Of The Dream And Tells Nebuchadnezzar He Wishes The Dream And Its Interpretation Were For His Enemies
Lesson # 125
Please turn in your Bibles to Daniel 4:19.
Daniel 4:19 “Then Daniel, whose name is Belteshazzar, was appalled for a while as his thoughts alarmed him. The king responded and said, ‘Belteshazzar, do not let the dream or its interpretation alarm you.’ Belteshazzar replied, ‘My lord, if only the dream applied to those who hate you and its interpretation to your adversaries!’” (NASB95)
“Then Daniel, whose name is Belteshazzar, was appalled for a while as his thoughts alarmed him” tells the reader the next event that took place after Nebuchadnezzar communicated to Daniel the content of his dream and requested that Daniel tell him the dream’s interpretation.
“Was appalled” is the third person masculine singular hitpaʿʿel (Hebrew: piel) middle perfect form of the verb šemǎm (שְׁמַם) (shem-am´), which means “to be shocked, appalled.”
This verb denotes that Daniel was struck with surprise, terror, horror and disgust as a result of receiving the interpretation of the king’s dream from the Holy Spirit and speaks of being in a state of horror with emphasis on fear and terror.
“For a while” is composed of the preposition k- (כְּ־) (kee) “for” and its object is the feminine singular noun šā∙ʿā(h) (שָׁעָה) (shaw-aw´), and this is followed by the feminine singular adjective ḥǎḏ (חַד) (khad), which together are translated “for a while.”
The noun šā∙ʿā(h) literally means “an hour” and the adjective ḥǎḏ literally means “one.”
The noun šā∙ʿā(h) is the object of the preposition k-, which means “about” since it functions as a marker of an indeterminate unit of time and thus this prepositional phrase literally means “about one hour” or “about one unit of time.”
However, this is obviously a temporal idiom since it is ridiculous to think that Daniel stood in front of the king for about an hour.
This expression should thus be understood idiomatically referring to a brief period of time of undetermined length.
“As his thoughts alarmed him” presents the result of Daniel being shocked for a brief period of time as a result of God the Holy Spirit telling him the meaning of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream.
“His thoughts” is composed of the masculine plural construct form of the noun rǎʿ∙yôn (רַעְיֹון) (rah-yone´), “thoughts,” which is modified by the third person masculine singular pronominal suffix hû(ʾ) (הוּא) (who), “his.”
The noun rǎʿ∙yôn is in the plural construct form and means “thoughts” in the sense of contemplation or reasoning with focus on the content of Daniel’s thought.
This indicates that Daniel’s thought pattern or train of thought was contemplating or reasoning about the interpretation of the king’s dream, which he received from the Holy Spirit.
“Alarmed him” is composed of the third person masculine plural paʿʿel (Hebrew: piel) active imperfect form of the verb behǎl (בְּהַל) (bĕ-hal´), “alarmed” and its direct object is the third person masculine singular pronominal suffix hû(ʾ) (הוּא) (who), “him.”
The verb behǎl means “to cause one to be terrified” and is a stronger word than the verb šemǎm which means “was shocked” and thus the former denotes that Daniel’s thoughts “caused him to be terrified” as a result of God the Holy Spirit communicating to him the meaning of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream.
“My lord” is composed of the masculine singular construct form of the noun mā∙rē(ʾ) (מָרֵא) (maw-ray´), “lord” which is modified by the first person singular pronominal suffix –î (־י) (ee), “my.”
The noun mā∙rē(ʾ) means “lord” in the sense of one who has authority to rule over others and is used by Daniel to describe the king’s authority over him.
Next, we have the figure of ellipsis meaning that the writer under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is deliberately omitting (though implied) the third person masculine singular qal active jussive form of the verb hǎwā(h) (הֲוָה) (hav-aw´), which means “to be.”
The jussive conjugation of the verb is expressing Daniel’s strong desire that the content of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and its interpretation would be applied to the king’s enemies.
“To those who hate you” is composed of the masculine plural peʿal (Hebrew: qal) active participle form of the verb śenā(ʾ) (שְׂנָא) (sen-ay´), “those who hate” and its direct object is the second person masculine singular pronominal suffix -ḵ (־ךְ), “you.”
The verb śenā(ʾ) means “to hate” and refers to an enemy, i.e. one who is in a state of enmity with another implying intense hostility and hate toward them and thus refers to Nebuchadnezzar’s enemies.
The substantive participle form of the verb śenā(ʾ) is the object of the preposition lĕ, which is a marker of opposition indicating that Daniel desires that the content of the king’s dream would be “against” those who hate the king.
“And its interpretation to your adversaries” is an emphatic clause meaning that it is advancing upon and intensifying the previous desire that the content of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream would be against those who hate him.
The advancement and intensification is from the content of the dream to its interpretation.
“To your adversaries” is composed of the preposition lĕ (לְ) (leh), “to” and its object is the masculine plural construct form of the noun ʿār (עָר) (awr), “adversaries” which is modified by the second person masculine singular pronominal suffix -ḵ (־ךְ), “your.”
The noun ʿār means “adversaries, enemies” and is the object of the preposition lĕ, which functions once again as a marker of opposition indicating that Daniel desires that the interpretation would be “against” the king’s enemies.
Daniel 4:19 “Then, Daniel, whose name is Belteshazzar, was shocked for a brief period of time so that his thoughts caused him to be terrified. The king responded and said, ‘Belteshazzar, don’t let the content of the dream as well as the interpretation cause you to be terrified.’ Belteshazzar replied and said ‘May the content of the dream be against those who hate you, indeed, its interpretation against your enemies.’” (My translation)
Daniel’s statement “may the content of the dream be against those who hate you, indeed, its interpretation against your enemies” seems to indicate that Daniel was personally attached to the king and respected him somewhat.
Daniel would have respected the king for at least three reasons.
First and foremost, Daniel understood and he was placed under the king’s authority by God (cf. Exodus 22:28; Romans 13:1-7).
He knew from Jeremiah that God had given Nebuchadnezzar his power and authority and had delivered Israel and Judah into the king’s power as a result of Israel and Judah’s disobedience (Jeremiah 27).
Also, the king’s dream recorded in Daniel chapter two made clear to Daniel that God was using Nebuchadnezzar.
Secondly, Nebuchadnezzar had promoted Daniel and his three friends, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to positions of great authority in the Babylonian government (cf. Daniel 2:48-49) and had prospered his three friends (Daniel 3:30).
Now, it may be objected that Daniel and his three friends were unjustly put under the sentence of death as we read in Daniel chapter two but Daniel 1:19-20 makes crystal clear that the king respected Daniel and his three friends and thus, the king unknowingly had put them under the sentence of death.
Also, Daniel chapter three records that Nebuchadnezzar executed Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego because they refused to worship the gold statue he erected of himself as a result of their desire to obey their God.
God delivered these three from the king’s power which as a result caused Nebuchadnezzar to place his faith in their God since Daniel 3:28 records that the king praised their God and no unbeliever is recorded in Scripture as praising God, only believers.
This leads to the third reason why Daniel thought well of Nebuchadnezzar, namely the king was a fellow believer now.
Though the king mistreated the poor as Daniel tells the king in Daniel 4:27 and was extremely arrogant before God as revealed in Daniel 4:29-30, Daniel’s attitude toward the king was that the king was a fellow believer.
So Daniel’s desire in Daniel 4:19 that the content of the dream and its interpretation would be applied to Nebuchadnezzar’s enemies expresses Daniel’s brotherly love for the king.
Daniel did not want to see the king disciplined by God and thus this teaches church age believers today to not desire to see their fellow believer disciplined by God but that they repent by confessing their sins and obeying God so that they are back in fellowship with God.
Daniel’s desire that the king would not be disciplined by God but rather that the king would repent as he tells the king in Daniel 4:27 corresponds to the prophets of Israel and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.
In Exodus 32, God sought to destroy Israel and yet Moses interceded for the nation that the Lord would spare her.
David did not desire to see God kill Saul even though Saul had persecuted him and the prophets like Jeremiah wept over God disciplining the nation of Israel.
Abraham interceded for Lot who had disrespected him so that Lot would not be destroyed with the rest of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Daniel’s desire that the content and interpretation of the king’s dream would be against his enemies rather than the king was a demonstration of the love of God in his life with regards to the king.
God’s love always has the best interests of another in mind, which is the case here in Daniel 4:19 with Daniel expressing the fact that he had the king’s best interests in mind.