The Book of Daniel by Editor

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · May 28, 1908

The Book of Daniel

By Editor

Nebuchadnezzar’s Expedition against Jerusalem

THE EDITOR

In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God; and he carried them into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure-house of his god. Dan. 1: 1, 2.

WITH a simple and direct statement of facts the book of Daniel is introduced to us. The time is the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim. The circumstances under which this king of Judah came to the throne are briefly recorded in these words: after the three months’ reign of his brother Jehoahaz,—“the king of Egypt deposed him [Jehoahaz] at Jerusalem, and fined the land one hundred talents of silver and one talent of gold, and the king of Egypt made Eliakim his [Jehoahaz’] brother king over Judah and Jerusalem, and changed his name to Jehoiakim.”

It thus appears that at this time Jerusalem had fallen under the power of Egypt; and as a part of his campaign to seize upon the possessions of the king of Egypt, Nabopolassar, who had associated Nebuchadnezzar with himself on the throne of Babylon, sent him to wrest Palestine from the control of Necho, king of Egypt; and so it was that at the time designated “came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.”

To the ordinary writer of history it would seem only natural that victory should attend the arms of Nebuchadnezzar. The superior force would, of course, conquer the weaker. But there is a philosophy in this history which must not be overlooked. The success of this campaign against Jerusalem was directly traceable to the wicked course of king Manasseh which had culminated threescore and ten years previous to this time in his own capture and in his being carried a prisoner to Babylon. The record is in these words: “Surely at the commandment of Jehovah came this upon Judah, to remove them out of sight, for the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he did, and also for the innocent blood that he shed; for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood: and Jehovah would not pardon.”

Daniel declares “the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his [Nebuchadnezzar’s] hand,” and the sacred historian announces the reason for Judah’s downfall thus: “And Judah was carried away captive to Babylon for their transgression.”

The Date of the Captivity

As to the chronology, it is clear, when all the statements bearing upon the matter are taken into consideration, together with the different methods of reckoning the regnal periods by the Babylonians and the Hebrews, that this victory over Jehoiakim was gained by Nebuchadnezzar previous to the time when he was the sole occupant of the throne of Babylon; for we are told that the fourth

year of Jehoiakim was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, and we further learn from Daniel’s record that the “second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar,” when he dreamed the dream recorded in the second chapter of this book, was at least three years after the conquest of Jerusalem, inasmuch as Daniel and his companions were in training three years before they were prepared to stand before the king. “According to the canon of Ptolemy, the accuracy of which has been fully established, the reign of Nebuchadnezzar dates from B. C. 604, i. e., his accession was in the year beginning the first Thoth (which fell in January) B. C. 604, and the history leaves no doubt it was early in that year.” Among the Hebrews it was the custom to compute regnal years from Nisan to Nisan, as stated in the Mishna: “On the first of Nisan is a new year for the computation of the reign of kings, and for festivals.” To this statement the editors of the English translation of the Mishna append this note: “The reign of the Jewish kings, whatever the period of accession might be, was always reckoned from the preceding Nisan; so that if for instance, a Jewish king began to reign in Adar [the twelfth month of the Jewish year], the following month (Nisan) [the first month in the Jewish year] would be considered as the commencement of the second year in his reign. This rule was observed in all legal contracts, in which the reign of kings was always mentioned.” “In B. C. 604 the first Nisan fell on or about the first of April, and according to Jewish reckoning, the king’s second year would begin on that day, no matter how recently he had ascended the throne. Therefore, ‘the fourth year of Jehoiakim that was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar,’ is the year beginning Nisan B. C. 605; and the third of Jehoiakim in which Jerusalem was taken and the servitude began, was the year beginning Nisan B. C. 606.” Therefore, the time of this first expedition of Nebuchadnezzar against Jerusalem, which marked the beginning of the seventy years of Babylonish captivity, was B. C. 606.

The Downfall of Jerusalem

As it is not necessary to the purpose of his narrative, Daniel makes no mention of the experiences which followed this first expedition of Nebuchadnezzar against Jerusalem. It may be well, however, in this connection to note the simple facts: Jehoiakim became the obedient vassal of Nebuchadnezzar for three years, “then he turned and rebelled against him.” The remaining eight years of Jehoiakim’s reign were filled with bloody warfare, for “Jehovah sent against him bands of the Chaldeans, and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of Jehovah, which he spake by his servants the prophets.” In the brief reign of Jehoiachin “the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up to Jerusalem, and the city was besieged,” and the king was carried to Babylon and Zedekiah his brother was set on the throne. Although this king promised allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar, yet he rebelled against him and “the chiefs of the priests, and the people, trespassed very greatly after all the abominations of the nations; and they polluted the house of Jehovah which he had hallowed in Jerusalem. And Jehovah, the God of their fathers, sent to them by his messengers, rising up early and sending, because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling-place: but they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and scoffed at his prophets, until the wrath of Jehovah arose against his people, till there was no remedy.” As the direct consequence of this apostasy from God and this neglect to listen to his warning messages, Jerusalem was utterly overthrown, the house of God burned, the wall of the city was broken down, and those who escaped the slaughter in the siege were carried away to Babylon.

The Failure of Formal Religion

Not only was Jehoiakim king of Judah given into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, but also “part of the vessels of the house of God.” Nebuchadnezzar carried these “into the land of Shinar to the house of his god: and he brought the vessels into the treasure-house of his god.” Thus to all outward appearances the religion of Babylon was demonstrated to be superior to the religion of Jerusalem, and the gods of Babylon to the God of Jerusalem. It was only in appearance, however, for the truth of the matter was that the people of Jerusalem had apostatized from the true God and had perverted the true religion of Jehovah into a worthless round of forms and ceremonies. The number of ceremonies was multiplied, and the forms of religion were rigidly followed; but instead of being an expression of faith in the provision that God had made for salvation from sin through the merits of the great sacrifice, they had been changed into a means of self-salvation, and were made to minister to that pride of heart which refuses to acknowledge the utter helplessness of the creature, and his entire dependence upon the Creator. Thus in Jerusalem had been adopted the very essence of every heathen religion,—righteousness by works,—and as Jerusalem had enjoyed greater light than the surrounding nations, so the rejection of that light brought an experience of greater wickedness and deeper moral darkness than existed among the other nations; and glory and strength having thus departed while their increasing pride and self-confidence forbade more careful preparation for defense, they were easily conquered by their enemies.

It is worthy of note that it was the Lord himself who gave the vessels of his house into the hand of the king of Babylon. It was his own effort to teach his people to place confidence in the spiritual rather than in the material, in the thing signified rather than in the sign, in the God of the house rather than in the house itself. The vessels which had been constructed according to his own directions, and the service which had been instituted under his explicit instructions, and the temple itself which had been erected by his own command at infinite cost both of money and effort, were all nothing, unless they served as the means of bringing his people into fellowship with himself. The vessels must be transferred into the hands of the heathen, the service must be discontinued, the temple itself must be consumed in the flames, and the people must be scattered as captives in strange lands, if necessary as the means of showing the utter futility of the mere outward forms of worship, and of restoring to his people that vital truth of the gospel, the indwelling presence of God as the heart and soul of true religion.

The Power of True Religion

But not only was the lesson of salvation by faith to be taught to the people of Jerusalem, but the same gospel was to be proclaimed to the people of Babylon, and in carrying out his purposes in spite of the failure of his people to be the willing channel for the light, God so ordered the circumstances that the vital truths of the gospel should stand out with clearness, and that the apparent failure of the religion of Jerusalem should contribute to the greater triumph of the true religion. In proud Babylon, “the glory of the Chaldees’ excellency,” it would be made to appear that through the true service of the God of heaven would be revealed in the experiences of humble believers a power greater than that exercised by the king of Babylon, and a wisdom far superior to that exhibited by the wise men of Babylon. The king of Babylon might conquer the king of Jerusalem, and as trophies of his victory he might carry away some of the sacred vessels from the temple to adorn the heathen temple at Babylon, and he might carry away captive from Jerusalem to Babylon those whose professed faith in the protecting power of their God had seemed fruitless, yet the God of heaven was overruling in all these apparent untoward circumstances, working out his own plan and preparing the way for the fulfilment of his own purposes. Even then present to the divine mind was the utter and final overthrow of both typical and anti-typical Babylon and the eternal glory of the new Jerusalem, with the Lord God the Almighty, and the Lamb, as the temple thereof. And even out of Babylon itself, that center of heathenism, which during its whole history had stood for salvation through the might of one’s own power—righteousness by works—were to be gathered through the proclamation of the true gospel—righteousness by faith—some who would dwell eternally in that new Jerusalem; and the book of Daniel will reveal the divine method for so proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom as to bring to confusion those who lift themselves up against the God of heaven.