THE SERVANT, HIS SUPPORT AND CONTINUANCE (3)
[p. 398] THE SERVANT, HIS SUPPORT AND CONTINUANCE (3)
Daniel 5:17 - 28; Daniel 6:10 - 16; Daniel 6:25 - 28
JT We do well to keep our eye on the last verse read. In the closing verse of chapter 1 it is said that “Daniel continued unto the first year of king Cyrus”; it is said of him here that he “prospered in the reign of Darius, and in the reign of Cyrus the Persian”. It is a practical word for us in our service: to continue and prosper.
Our inquiry at this time lies in relation to the public departure from the truth (chapter 5), and God taking account of that, numbering, weighing, and dividing; and then the definite deterioration of the rule of the gentiles to the level — not yet of democracy, but of limited monarchy, the king himself being bound by the law. The period of absolute monarchy continued through Belshazzar’s reign, but he was wholly out of accord with the gold. In this well-known chapter, the prominence given to his use of wine is to be noted. It says, “Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his nobles, and drank wine before the thousand. Belshazzar, while he tasted the wine, commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken out of the temple which was in Jerusalem; that the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines, might drink in them. Then 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 nobles, his wives and his concubines, drank in them. They drank wine, and praised the gods of gold and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone”, (chapter 5:1 - 4).
FWW Do you suggest that these principles are at work today, and we have to serve as to them?
JT Well, we have the instruction here as to how we [p. 399] are to serve in changed circumstances, because circumstances are constantly changing. But the principles on which we are moving do not change. There must therefore be continuance in the divine principles. There is a great difference between the attitude of the king in this chapter towards Daniel and the attitude of the king in chapter 4. Daniel is scarcely known; in fact, the king’s inquiry is, “Art thou that Daniel, of the children of the captivity of Judah?” But, then, he had something to distinguish him besides the fact that he was of the captivity, and Belshazzar must have known this. The queen made no reference to the captivity.
Ques What had you in mind in regard to wine in these circumstances?
JT It is to call attention to the contrast here to what becomes kings. According to Proverbs 31:4, “it is not for kings to drink wine”. You see a shameful drop from this when you see royalty dragged down to the level of debauchery. I think it is to call attention to that, that such prominence is given to the use of wine by Belshazzar.
Ques Is the contrast in Daniel, a man filled, as we may say, with the Spirit of God?
JT We are not to be drunk with wine, but filled with the Spirit.
Rem The queen said, “There is a man in thy kingdom in whom is the spirit of the holy gods”.
JT She was probably the queen-mother; I think she is the overcomer here. That is, God has someone in the time of a ‘down-grade’ to lift up a voice against it. There is always someone to lift up his voice for the Lord.
WHM Someone like Pilate’s wife, about whom you were speaking yesterday.
JT That is what I was thinking. The queen-mother here is the overcomer, to a certain point. She was not in the debauchery: “The queen, by reason of the words of the king and his nobles, came into the banquet-house”.
[p. 400] It seems she came in to meet the crisis. God never leaves Himself without witness, even though the witness be very feeble.
WHM Daniel looked toward Jerusalem and prayed three times a day. Is your thought in reading the last verse that “they shall prosper that love thee”, (Psalm 122:6)?
JT Yes; he loved Jerusalem. The emphasis is on Daniel, beginning with chapter 1, his refusal of the king’s meat, and now his prosperity; not only that he continued till Cyrus, but he prospered during his reign.
JC Do you mean that what is effective in the testimony is in a subjective line?
JT Yes. So that the queen here knew of Daniel, saying that there was a man in the kingdom who had the Spirit. Belshazzar had wine. The influence of wine marked that banquet-hall, and the man’s hand appears; pointing to the Son of man. All judgment is in the hands of the Son of man, which is, I take it, to assure mankind that if judgment is executed, it is not for want of feeling, want of sympathy. God is obliged to do it from the exigencies of His own nature. Judgment is His strange work, but He is obliged to resort to it. And in using a man’s hand, it shows He is not without feeling. “The queen spoke and said, O king, live for ever! let not thy thoughts trouble thee ... There is a man in thy kingdom in whom is the spirit of the holy gods”. She would not mean much, because of her limited knowledge, but the Holy Spirit records it here to show that she understood that Daniel had a spirit beyond what was merely human — “the spirit of the holy gods”. It was supernatural, it was outside of ordinary man.
JHT What is the secret of this prosperity that you spoke of?
JT I suppose the kneeling down. Chapter 1 gives us the fundamental element of Daniel’s constitution; he added to his faith, virtue. Peter gives the list of additions,
[p. 401] and I think chapter 1 is the first: having faith, have virtue in it, power to say ‘No’ to what is damaging, and ‘Yes’ to what is of God.
Chapter 1 is the first thing. Chapter 2 is the priestly side, which is emphasised in chapter 6, that at all cost he would maintain his active priestly relations with God, and have an eye to His chief interest on earth. You hear much in prayer oftentimes, and very little with regard to the chief interest of God on earth. No one can prosper without that. As has been remarked, “they shall prosper that love thee”.
JHC Would the assembly today answer to Jerusalem?
JT Oh, yes; it is the chief interest of God on earth. However desolate Jerusalem was, it was the divine selection. “Here will I dwell, for I have desired it” (Psalm 132:14). That was in Daniel’s heart, he loved Jerusalem.
HB Why does Daniel go into his house and kneel down at the open windows? Could he not have done it more secretly?
JT I think to show that he was not going to allow the enemy to hinder his service, to show that priestly service is to go on.
ASL “As he did aforetime”.
JT That is the idea. Why should God be robbed? In principle, Daniel is laying down his life.
JB “The righteous are bold as a lion”, (Proverbs 28:1).
JT Exactly.
WSS It almost seems as if the pressure had brought to light the secret of his prosperity.
JT That is the point; when you are forced to the wall, the secret of your power is brought to light. Here is a man alone: notice that these men came in “a body” not in an assembly. It is not a question of intelligence, but of the number of persons. That is to say, we are now on the ground of politics. Chapter 6 is politics. So that it is a question of the number, the [p. 402] number of votes, as is commonly said. These men came in a body to see Daniel pray.
But we are going too fast; we ought not to pass the queen-mother so quickly, because she is a very fine figure. She had no part in the banquet; it was a drunken scene.
JT-l Does she illustrate the Lord’s words to Philadelphia, “thou ... hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name” (Revelation 3:8)?
JT Well, she is an important character here; she came in to meet the crisis. She was not without sympathy for her son (or grandson), but she had in her mind that there was a spiritual man in his kingdom. He was not at a distance — “a man in thy kingdom”. God had a witness there, and that witness was in keeping with the hand that was seen on the wall. She was stressing the fact that this man had something different from the natural, and for us that is the Spirit of God. 1 Corinthians enlarges on this.
JT-l It stands out in the midst of apostasy. Does Daniel represent the Lord, in some way, just at this juncture?
JT I think he does. What one would seek to bring out is the importance of witness. As we have said many times, “for a testimony to them”. What we are coming to now is not the disciplinary act of God, but a punitive act of God, and He will act in direct retribution. He did not do so to Nebuchadnezzar. And I think that in our dispensation, up to the present time, the government of God in the main has had the testimony in view; His actions have not been punitive, strictly. Terrible things have happened during the last two thousand years, but in the main they have resulted in a way being made for the testimony, that the gospel might have free course.
Ahab’s history is a good illustration of God’s present attitude towards christendom. Ahab is said to have been a worse king than all who preceded him, and that before [p. 403] he married Jezebel. Jezebel made him worse. But God singles out that man to give him Elijah the prophet and several other prophets. So the Syrians attack, and God says, I will give them into your hand, and you are to lead the army, composed of the servants of the princes of the provinces (see 1 Kings 20:13,14). And on two occasions God gives that man remarkable victories. After the first great defeat of the Syrians, they say, “Jehovah is a god of the mountains, but he is not a god of the valleys” (verse 28). Well, God would show, through Ahab, that He was the God of the valleys as well, and the second defeat is irretrievable; there is a tremendous slaughter of the Syrians by Israel, who had before the battle looked like two flocks of goats in the presence of such a vast opposing multitude. But it was God, acting through Ahab (see 1 Kings 20). So that I think what we should see is that God is still going on in grace, not because of favourable conditions, but in spite of adverse conditions. It is to show His grace and patience. But that will come to an end. He had gone on with Nebuchadnezzar, and others, but the time had come now for judgment of that phase of the gentile system. It was numbered and found wanting. God is still acting in grace; while Christ is on the Father’s throne, that will continue, but it will not continue for ever. The servant is to observe the fingers of a man’s hand writing. It is the Son of man. All judgment is given to the Son of man; the Father judges no one (see John 5:22).
WCG Do you mean that the two deliverances you mentioned in connection with Ahab would set forth the deliverance of the Reformation?
JT Well, that sort of intervention, and what is more recent. God goes on to witness in the public body in spite of the terrible conditions.
ASL God takes note of the smallest movements towards Himself. “Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me?” therefore, “I will not bring the evil in his days”. He was a wicked man, but he humbled himself, (1 Kings 21:29).
JT Well, that is the light, I am sure, in which you would stand up to preach; any movement in anyone, be he a prince or a beggar, toward God, is owned of Him.
FI Where do you place the queen-mother in this present application?
JT Such persons may exist, who are christians. During the war voices were lifted up in favour of the people of God; otherwise, there would have been no provision made for them, but there was provision made for them. There is no justification for a christian to be anywhere but actually out on the side of Christ, but God knows how to adjust, with His own righteousness, His use of anyone who may be in worldly associations.
GRG Does she represent love?
JT Yes. She was concerned for her son; but she knew Daniel and the kind of spirit he had.
JHC Had you anything in your mind as to why she speaks of him as “a man”?
JT I think there is a link between that reference and the hand that wrote on the wall. The fingers of a man’s hand would mean that God is not acting arbitrarily, that He has no pleasure in judgment, it is His strange work, and if He has to resort to it, it is because of the exigencies of His nature. It is really the exigencies of His love, if God brings in a scene for His pleasure, it is surely love to remove what this banquet represents. What is it but man in Satan’s hands?
JHT If the Lord hides His identity — the fingers only seen — would the man that the queen brings forward be the answer, as standing in public testimony?
JT There is certainly correspondence between the fingers and the man who had the Spirit. He is still here, but he is not going to act or speak out of accord with the writing on the wall. His testimony corresponds exactly.
[p. 405] What is written is written; it is only for Daniel to explain the words. They are terrible — the very reverse of the gospel! There is no time given to Belshazzar: “that night was Belshazzar ... slain”. The judgment was swift.
JT-l There was no word of counsel given to Belshazzar, as to Nebuchadnezzar.
JT Knowing that the time of judgment is near should affect us. “Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord we persuade men”, (2 Corinthians 5:11).
The vessels of the house of God are seen here. They had been placed by Nebuchadnezzar in the treasure-house of his god, but now they are prostituted to a man’s lust. It is as Belshazzar tasted the wine that he commanded them to be brought in, and he, his nobles, his wives and his concubines drank in them. You could hardly conceive of anything more offensive to God.
ASL And this by a man who was the son of Nebuchadnezzar who became converted, and gave such a testimony. So that the queen says, “the king thy father”. It would recall to him that he was not following the steps of his father.
JT Daniel says, “Let thy gifts be to thyself, and give thy rewards to another; yet will I read the writing to the king, and make known to him the interpretation. O thou king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar thy father the kingdom”. I think we do well to take notice of this, because we should be concerned that there should be such a testimony today. “There is a man in thy kingdom” — we need to be like that man, men who have the Spirit. I am thinking of the crises that have arisen in human affairs, how God overrules to bring to light men who have the Spirit.
JHT You get a man who corresponds with this queen in Gamaliel (Acts 5) standing up and saying, “if it be from God ...”.
JT Yes, a man that God used at that juncture; he spoke as having some knowledge of God. There can be [p. 406] no doubt that this queen was acquainted with Daniel; doubtless she often heard him speak.
WH So that the witness was there?
JT That is it, God had His witness in the queen, who called attention to Daniel.
OM Would the queen have been impressed by the bearing of Daniel, as a man who was like God?
JT I think she would; she must have been acquainted with him.
WSS There are two thoughts here — “a man ... in whom is the spirit of the holy gods”, and, of an “excellent spirit”. It says in Proverbs 17:27 “a man of understanding is of an excellent spirit”. That should characterise us.
JT It is a great thing for the brethren to have before them that God would develop spirituality. Paul says, “I think that I also have God’s Spirit”, (1 Corinthians 7:40). He distinguishes between his own faculty of judgment and the Spirit of God. We have to distinguish between our own spirits and the Spirit of God. The Spirit forms a man — including his spirit — and then uses him. The vessel God uses is thus the whole man; the Holy Spirit in him is distinct.
WSS I was thinking of the necessity of the two things. You get suggested in Joshua, “a man in whom is the Spirit”; and in Caleb, a man of “another spirit”, (Numbers 14:24).
JT That is what Jehovah had in mind: the man who was to lead His people had the Spirit (see Numbers 27). The queen-mother had this thought; she also referred to the kind of spirit that Daniel himself had — an “excellent spirit”.
LM And she does not speak of him as a captive, but as “a man in thy kingdom”; she had discernment as to something there that was really to be appreciated.
JT She says, “There is a man in thy kingdom in whom is the spirit of the holy gods; and in the days of [p. 407] thy father, light and understanding and wisdom, like the wisdom of the gods was found in him; and the king Nebuchadnezzar thy father, even the king thy father, made him master of the scribes, magicians, Chaldeans, and astrologers; forasmuch as an excellent spirit, and knowledge, and understanding, interpreting of dreams, and shewing of hard sentences, and solving of problems, were found in the same Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar. Now let Daniel be called, and he will shew the interpretation” (verses 11,12). That is a very fine speech, showing what God may have in high places, that in a crisis calls attention to what He has in His own direct testimony here — those in whom the Spirit is.
Ques Do we get the same thing in the chief butler, with regard to Pharaoh’s dreams? The butler draws attention to Joseph, (Genesis 41).
JT Yes, only his testimony is not equal to that of the queen here; still, it was testimony.
RA Is it necessary for a person to be under the control of the Spirit in order to come out in witness?
JT That is the divine thought, for it is only by the Spirit that God can be rightly presented. How great a thing it has to be — a vessel in whom the Spirit of God can bear testimony! We cannot, however, regard the queen in our chapter in this way, but rather as a person whom God uses providentially.
Rem There are many believers that might not altogether come out in testimony whom God may use in this way.
JT Yes. The Spirit, however, is the power of testimony. Let us remember that! The testimony is in the power of the anointing.
Ques Does not Peter’s first epistle show that it was always that? “In which (Spirit) also going he preached to the spirits which are in prison” (chapter 3:19).
Rem But, as you said, persons may be used of God who cannot be said to be characterised by [p. 408] the Spirit.
JT Yes; but the Lord stands up and says, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach”, (Luke 4:18). His ministry was in the power of the Spirit. He did not enter on His ministry until He was anointed. That principle continues. So that the Holy Spirit, as coming down at Pentecost, is not viewed as coming into the saints, but upon them. That is, it is a question of testimony.
FI Do you think this chapter would warrant us to render testimony as to the destruction of the apostate system?
JT Surely. The handwriting is on the wall, and we do not want to be out of accord with it. Of course we have not the whole truth here, because no space for repentance is given; judgment descended that night. But with us it is not so: whilst we announce the judgment of God, we announce the gospel.
Rem Paul says, “Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom”, (Colossians 1:28). There is warning in that way.
JT We see here that God deals with man on the principle of weighing and measuring, taking great pains, using the fingers. Fingers here point to God entering into details in His dealings with the public body, bringing out His fairness, that He omits nothing; He takes account of everything.
WHM The queen had evidently been watching Daniel; her instincts were of God. She had seen how he was prospering toward God.
JT She knew him, and knew where he was; whereas the king did not. The king says, “Art thou that Daniel, of the children of the captivity of Judah, whom the king my father brought out of Judah?” (verse 13). This is how he refers to him.
WSS The queen-mother suggests something that we should be exercised about — recognition of what is [p. 409] spiritual.
JT Yes; and to reckon that God will have witnesses, persons in high places, or, maybe, low places, who are conversant with what is really of Him in this world.
JHT Proverbs speaks about a false balance being an abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is His delight (see chapter 11:1). Is that what we get in the weighing?
JT Yes; how God deals with the public system, even as He deals with all of us. He is a God of measure. So that the explanation is, “MENE, God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it; TEKEL, Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting; PERES, Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians”.
FWW The writing here reminds us of the writing on the ground by the Lord’s finger, in John 8.
JT Now, chapter 6 is a new feature of the gentile system. The deterioration has set in, but God has a man who has a certain regard for Him. The evil now is not in the king, but in what corresponds to the second part of the constitution of this country — the lords and commons. The king corresponds somewhat with the queen of chapter 5. The evil now is in “the presidents and the satraps”. Satan is working through them. Yet how remarkable that God should have a king who regards Daniel! So that there is something there to check the enemy’s working.
Ques Do you mean that the kingdom had degenerated into a republic?
JT Well, it was practically that. The king was bound by the laws; it was what you might call ‘a limited monarchy’.
JHT Is not the number one hundred and twenty (verse 1) interesting and instructive, in contrast to what you get in the Acts, where, quite apart from the world’s system, you have one hundred and twenty on whom the Spirit came?
JT Yes, indeed. It is a number that is made by [p. 410] 12 times 10. It would represent administrative authority in responsibility. In the enemy’s power it is a very terrible thing. At Pentecost it is the power of God controlling the persons mentioned.
FS Do you distinguish between the “powers that be” and the politicians?
JT I do. I should not pray for a politician, as such, but as he gets into power I should. But although these men were in power they were serving the enemy. “These presidents and satraps came in a body to the king” (verse 6). They were acting against Daniel, who was God’s servant.
JB Do you think the degeneration of the kingdom is shown here, in that they compel the king to make a decree?
JT It brings out the weakness of the position, that they used the king for their own ends. The suggestion comes from them; he is just a tool in their hands. They wanted to attack Daniel. It is Satan’s device to get rid of the testimony; the leading men, the statesmen of the realm, coming under the power of Satan. So that the idea of the voice of the people being the voice of God is blasphemous. Here it is the voice of Satan.
EW The whole effort is in relation to Daniel worshipping his God.
JT That is it; the enemy had his eye on the testimony. In chapter 5 the queen had called attention to Daniel, and he had spoken the mind of God to the king; and so in chapter 6 the whole machinery of the realm is moved to get rid of Daniel. Daniel is praying to God. How Satan hates praying people!
JG Do we find that at the end of 2 Timothy? Paul, the vessel of the testimony, is in similar circumstances; he speaks about being delivered out of the mouth of the lion, that “the proclamation might be fully made” (chapter 4:17). God would have the proclamation still made known.
JT Quite so; he says, “At my first answer”. One would like to know what he said, but it is not recorded. It was, no doubt, a full statement of the truth. But then, the Lord stood by him, that by him the preaching might be fully known. God had selected that man that by him the preaching should be presented, and God would stand by him. Daniel represents that here.
WSS Do we see another part of the secret of Daniel’s prosperity in verse 4? They could not find occasion against him concerning the kingdom it, says, “inasmuch as he was faithful”.
JT Quite so; they resolved that the only way to get at him was in regard to his relations with God. It is the priestly service here, a praying man. Chapter 5 calls attention to Daniel as having the Spirit, and chapter 6 shows how it is maintained. It is all very well if you get the victory one day, but what will you do the next day? You give an address, and you feel supported by the Lord, but the next night you may be flat, you may not have any power. How are you to continue in power in your service? By praying. Chapter 6 calls attention to that.
GFG Do we see here what you were referring to last night, one taking root downward? In Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, Daniel is ruler over the province of Babylon and chief of the governors over all the wise men; then in Belshazzar’s reign he is clothed with purple and made third ruler in the kingdom; and in Darius’ kingdom he is one of three presidents having jurisdiction over all, and his service so surpassing and his spirit so excellent, that the king thought to appoint him over the whole realm.
JT Yes. His prosperity is evidently founded in prayer. Luke’s gospel opens up what that means. Daniel is the praying man, and Satan would destroy him.
Rem It is instructive to see that as Aaron trimmed the lamps every morning, and when he lighted them every evening, incense was offered up on the altar (Exodus 30:7,8)
[p. 412] indicating that if the light is to be maintained, it is in the power of priestly intercession with God.
HCL What is the thought in the kingdom being silver?
JT Just gradual deterioration. You cannot make anything more out of it. It is a less valuable metal than gold.
GWW There is deterioration, as you were saying, but Daniel is found in the same spirit under the silver kingdom as he was under the gold. He was not deteriorating.
JT That is the thing; he goes on and prospers.
GWW The queen said that Daniel had an excellent spirit, and chapter 6 shows that he continues in this.
Rem We get that same thought suggested in Joseph; whether it is in his father’s house, or over the land of Egypt, the same spirit comes out.
WHM The Lord made him prosper, whether in his father’s house, in the prison, or ruling Egypt.
JT What God would do today is to bring out correspondence with what was at the beginning. He would show that there is no deterioration, and that involves prayer. Deterioration means that I am depending on myself. That was Nebuchadnezzar’s breakdown: “Is not this great Babylon, that I have built?” If prayer is continued, we shall be in accord with the beginning. And I think that is what God would bring about, that the end should be as the beginning.
JHC It is interesting to see that when the bride describes her beloved, she says not only that “his head is as the finest gold”, but His legs are like “pillars of marble, set upon bases of fine gold”, (Song of Songs 5:11,15).
JT That is a striking contrast. One of the most important features of this book is the continuance of Daniel, and how he stands in his lot at the last; the moral application is that there is to be continuance, there is to be no deterioration in our testimony, but the maintenance of [p. 413] the Spirit of Christ, and the intelligence that is spoken of here as in Daniel. So that God has such a testimony to call attention to, right to the end of the gentile monarchies.
ASL And the word to the churches, seven times repeated, is really a word to the individual at the close of each church: “To him that overcometh”. “Hold fast what thou hast” — perseverance maintains what is of God.
JT Your thought is that deterioration is prevented by the overcomer?
ASL That is right, and the great exercise with each of us should be to be an overcomer. You may say, I have been in fellowship for fifty years. But are you an overcomer in the fellowship! For this we need to go to Gilgal.
JT So that in this chapter we have direct testimony to the second phase of the gentile domination; and there is a word sent out similar to that of Nebuchadnezzar: “Then king Darius wrote unto all peoples, nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth: Peace be multiplied unto you. I make a decree, That in every dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel; for he is the living God, and steadfast for ever, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, and his dominion shall be even unto the end. He saveth and delivereth, and he worketh signs and wonders in the heavens and on the earth: who hath saved Daniel from the power of the lions”. So that this second phase, that of the Medes and Persians, is favoured by God also, and this remarkable testimony goes out.
WCG Does it not show that if God is trusted and there is correspondence to His character, conspirators will fall into the pit that they dig?
JT So that the evil is dealt with, as Daniel’s would-be murderers are cast relentlessly into the den of lions and destroyed.
Ques Is that why it says, “I make a decree”?
JT Yes, he does not call others into it. He returns to the ‘gold’; there is thus recovery, but of course it was not maintained.
HB-t Would you say a little about the lions?
JT Well, I suppose they are chosen as instruments of cruelty. The passage shows what God can be to us in their very midst.
ASL Our adversary, the devil, is likened to a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour, but there is One who can stop his mouth.
JT The king spoke to Daniel in a mournful voice. Poor, helpless, man, bound by his ministers! As regards himself, he is with Daniel; he spoke with a mournful voice, which is touching, showing his feelings. “O Daniel, servant of the living God, hath thy God whom thou servest continually been able to save thee from the lions?” He notes that he served Him continually. And “Then Daniel spoke unto the king, O king, live for ever! My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions’ mouths, that they have not hurt me; forasmuch as before him innocence was found in me” (verses 21,22), that is, before God, “and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt”. Note that the “living God” is an addition here. He is now known as the living God, and so introduced as such in the proclamation.
WSS Does that suggest that in spite of all the deterioration outwardly, where there is appreciation of what God is there is increase? Nebuchadnezzar speaks of Him as the God of heaven, but Darius speaks of Him as the living God.
ASL Daniel speaks of Him as “My God”. Remarkable testimony from these two kings, Nebuchadnezzar and Darius!
JT Very remarkable! I was thinking of it as spread abroad in their empires. And now it is our time — the iron and the miry clay. We want to bring in the Spirit of Christ so that God can call attention to this as [p. 415] a testimony.
AED Have you in mind in all this the man of Macedonia whom Paul saw?
JT Yes; that vision to the apostle enters into what we were saying, because Macedonia represents the third gentile monarchy. “Come over ... and help us”, he is saying to a despicable man, as the Greeks would regard Paul. He is not of Alexander’s type — Alexander would not appeal to a man like Paul. This is the kind of man that God would have in Europe, a man that would look to Paul. He is not the “O man” in Romans 2. That “O man” that Paul addresses is the characteristic Greek. “Thou art inexcusable, O man, every one who judges”, that is the Greek; he is inexcusable. But the man who says “Come over ... and help us” is needy and dependent.
JHT The man who goes into Europe can call attention to himself as in keeping with that: “I myself, Paul, entreat you by the meekness and gentleness of the Christ”, (2 Corinthians 10:1).
JT That is the testimony, I am sure, the kind of testimony that God would present to the last phase of the gentile system.
WHM And the first thing at Philippi is prayer. Paul found a river where prayer was wont to be made; and faith then comes in, in the jailer. Here, Daniel’s prayer and faith are both emphasised.