The Book of Daniel by Editor

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Aug 13, 1908

The Book of Daniel

By Editor

The Rights of Conscience

THE EDITOR

Then Nebuchadnezzar in his rage and fury commanded to bring Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. Then they brought these men before the king. Nebuchadnezzar answered and said unto them, Is it of purpose, O Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, that ye serve not my god, nor worship the golden image which I have set up? Now if ye be ready that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of music, ye fall down and worship the image which I have made, well: but if ye worship not, ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that god that shall deliver you out of my hands? Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer thee in this matter. If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace; and he will deliver us out of thy hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up. Dan. 3: 13-18.

Nebuchadnezzar Appointed King

By divine appointment Nebuchadnezzar was ruler over the nations. Through the prophet Jeremiah, Jehovah had sent this message to the various kings: “Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel, Thus shall ye say unto your masters: I have made the earth, the men and the beasts that are upon the face of the earth, by my great power and by my outstretched arm; and I give it unto whom it seemeth right unto me. And now have I given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant; and the beasts of the field also have I given him to serve him. . . . And it shall come to pass, that the nation and the kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith Jehovah, with the sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand.” Not only were the heathen nations made subject to Nebuchadnezzar, but the chosen people were also brought under his rule. If therefore it were ever true of any monarch that he ruled by divine right, it would be emphatically so in the case of Nebuchadnezzar. But in the face of all this, the three captives from Jerusalem dared to assert the rights of conscience as superior to the authority of the king.

Inasmuch as the course of the three Hebrews received the approval of heaven in a very singular manner, it is plain that

Nebuchadnezzar attempted the exercise of a power which was not granted to him by Jehovah, and the lesson is clearly taught that there is a limit to the authority of rulers.

The Origin of Civil Government

The necessity for civil government is one of the results of sin. Because men do not love their neighbors as themselves, it is necessary that there should be some means for protecting each man in the exercise of his rights and of preventing some from trespassing upon the rights of others. The principle of government was therefore established by God as a means through which he would prevent the exercise of that selfishness which unrestrained would soon enslave the whole human family. Concerning this it is written: “Let every soul be in subjection to the higher powers: for there is no power but of God; and the powers that be are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power, withstandeth the ordinance of God; and they that withstand shall receive to themselves judgment. For rulers are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. And wouldest thou have no fear of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise from the same: for he is a minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be in subjection, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. For for this cause ye pay tribute also; for they are ministers of God’s service, attending continually upon this very thing. Render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.”

Interpreting this instruction in the light of God’s providential dealings with the nations and with individuals, it is evident that no particular form of government was divinely ordained, and that upon no particular class was conferred the right to rule, but that the genius of government was ordained for the purpose of restraining those who would not recognize the authority of God. The purpose, then, of civil government is to protect men in their God-given rights, rather than to confer any rights, and the sphere of civil government is limited to the relations between man and man. This principle has been well expressed in these words: “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He can not rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so; because it will make him happier; because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil in case he do otherwise. To justify that, the conduct from which it is desired to deter him, must be calculated to produce evil to some one else. The only part of the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.”

The Privilege of Choice

It is a principle of the divine government not to force the consciences of men, and what God himself does not do, he has never authorized men to do. Every being is left perfectly free to serve or not to serve, to worship or not to worship, the Creator; but if any man chooses to serve or to worship, the King of heaven has never authorized any earthly ruler to interfere with the operation of that choice. This is the lesson so clearly taught in the experience of the three Hebrews.

The Boastful Challenge

The fact that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego had been appointed “over the affairs of the province of Babylon” did not prevent their being summoned into the royal presence as transgressors of his command, when their refusal to worship the image had been reported to the king. With a forbearance which was hardly to be expected after the announcement made by the herald that “whoso falleth not down and worshipeth shall the same hour be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace,” these three men are given one more opportunity to show their loyalty to the king of Babylon, with the assurance that if they persist in their disregard of the royal mandate the original decree will be carried out; and said the king, “Who is that god that shall deliver you out of my hands?” This boastful inquiry sounds like the echo of the words of Sennacherib when he threatened the destruction of Jerusalem: “Hath any of the gods of the nations ever delivered his land out of the hand of the king of Assyria? Where are the gods of Hamath and of Arpad? where are the gods of Sepharvaim, of Hena, and Ivvah? have they delivered Samaria out of my hand? Who are they among all the gods of the countries, that have delivered their country out of my hand, that Jehovah should deliver Jerusalem out of my hand?” To this question the three accused men made a fitting reply, leaving the responsibility with Him whose servants they were. “We have no need to answer thee in this matter.” Jehovah had answered Sennacherib’s blasphemous claims by sending his angel to destroy the army of the invader. If it be to his glory, he can make a similar answer to Nebuchadnezzar’s inquiry by delivering his servants from the burning fiery furnace. But the decision of the three Hebrews does not depend upon any assurance of miraculous deliverance, and in the face of threatened death they declare: “We will not serve thy gods, not worship the golden image which thou hast set up.”

The Liberty of the Gospel

This expression of the right of the individual conscience as against the abuse of civil power is a most remarkable one. Such a thing was unheard of among the pagan nations, among whom religion and the state were closely identified, and the authority of government over the conscience was unquestioned. But the liberty of the gospel was to be proclaimed in Babylon,—the liberty conferred by the God of heaven upon all his subjects,—the liberty to refuse him, and also the liberty of the individual to serve him under all circumstances,—a liberty with which even King Nebuchadnezzar, whom God had already owned as his servant, would not be permitted to interfere.

False and True Reasoning

It should be noted that the royal command did not forbid the Hebrews from worshiping their own God, but only required that they should also acknowledge the gods of Babylon. Reasoning on grounds of expediency, these captives might have concluded that they would be justified in a mere outward form of worship, a mere formal acknowledgment of the gods of Babylon, while still maintaining the worship of the God of their fathers. Thus did the Romans seek to persuade the early Christians that the mere casting of a pinch of incense to one of their deities was a slight matter, an easy way to purchase freedom for Christianity; but the true Christian recognizes that it is with the mind that he serves the law of God, and that a decision once made to acknowledge other gods is a denial of the true God and a forfeiture of his liberty.

The Minority Conscience

Although “all the people, the nations, and the languages, fell down and worshiped the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up,” yet the three Hebrews did not recognize the right even of this great majority to control them in the matter of conscience. By this course, to which divine approval was afterward given, they established that principle which has been thus formulated: “The rights of conscience are individual and personal, and are not to be settled by the arithmetic of putting many consciences on the one side, against a few on the other. The conscience of a single man, peaceably exercised, is for him good against the right of the whole race to invade it by any compulsory process, when religion is the matter to which it refers. . . . God has established no visible authority among men, either in any single man or any number of men, whose decisions in matters of religious faith are a final law to every individual.”

These principles are the glory of Christianity, the essential features of the gospel; and the testimony borne to them by the three Hebrew captives was in fulfilment of the divine purpose that the gospel of the kingdom should be proclaimed in Babylon.