that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, pipe, lute, sambuca, psaltery, bagpipe, and all kinds of music, ye fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up;
At the sound of the band, every person in the empire must drop to the ground before a statue. One decree turns politics into religion, and raises a question that outlives Babylon: how far does a ruler's power reach?
Nebuchadnezzar ruled many nations at once. One writer shows what the civil power wanted from a single religion.
The first thing the civil power sets up is idolatry. The aim is to establish one religion for everyone. But it always separates the people from the true God, and puts something else in His place. This becomes an occasion for testing the faithfulness of God's people, and the manner of it. … Satan drives the civil powers to establish unity, so that everything under their authority is well ordered and regulated.
The band does not accompany the worship. It starts it.
The signal to worship the image was a burst of all kinds of music from the finest band in the king's dominions. Where religious feelings did not exist, the sweet and sensuous sounds of harmony had to produce them. How subtle the schemes of Satan! For here we really have the history of all religious music. It appeals to nature and stirs natural emotions. But the Spirit of God has no part in them, for those who worship God "must worship in spirit and truth."
Nothing in the decree is hard to do. One writer shows why that made it so easy to accept.
From man's point of view, this was a very simple religion. All it demanded was a simple act of prostration before an image, and then the matter was at an end. Such a religion was well suited to man's fallen nature. A magnificent image appealed to the sight. Beautiful music charmed the ear. One act of bowing was over in a moment. It made no demand on the purse, and raised no question of sins to trouble the conscience.
The first instrument named is a horn. A Bible dictionary gives the word behind it.
In Daniel 3:5-15 the word is qeren and means "horn or cornet."
Older translations call one of these instruments a "dulcimer." It was not a stringed instrument.
sumponyah. A musical instrument made of two pipes inserted into a leather bag, somewhat like the bagpipes, or the Italian sampogna. Daniel 3:5, 10, 15. It was not, like the modern dulcimer, made with strings.
Obedience to rulers is a duty. But this decree crossed a line.
The decree needs a little examination. It was the intrusion of man's will into God's domain. Obedience to the powers that be is a sacred duty. But we can give that obedience only within the circle of their own lawful authority. Sometimes rulers step outside this circle. The rulers in Jerusalem did it when they ordered the apostles not to teach or preach in the name of Jesus. They must be answered as Peter and John answered them: "We must obey God rather than men." Nebuchadnezzar was an absolute monarch. Yet when he issued his decree he stepped outside his own domain, and claimed for himself what was due to God alone.
One writer sees this scene repeated at the far end of history, when the image of the beast appears.
Something remarkable happened at the beginning of the times of the Gentiles. Nebuchadnezzar, the first head, claimed almost divine honours for himself. He made a great image, and the worship of it was to set up a super-religion, uniting the different religions across his wide dominions. So he glorified himself. But a mere handful of godly Jews defied him, and he was defeated when he tried to wipe them out. … Our chapter shows us that the times of the Gentiles will end just as they began, and with even greater success, it seems. Those who refuse to worship the image of the beast will be killed. This time God will not step in to frustrate the plans of these wicked men, as He once did with Nebuchadnezzar.
- Signal — the music is not background. It is the trigger, making religious feeling where none exists.
- Strategy — one forced religion was the cheapest way to hold a many-tongued empire together: the true God pushed out, something else put in His place.
- Simplicity — one bow, one moment, no cost, no question of sin: the decree asked just what fallen nature is willing to give.
- Stop — obey rulers inside the circle of their lawful authority. When they claim what is due to God alone, obey God rather than men.
- Sequel — the times of the Gentiles open with Nebuchadnezzar's golden image and close with the image of the beast — this time with no rescue.
and whosoever doth not fall down and worship shall that same hour be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace.
Nebuchadnezzar has set up a towering golden image. He has gathered every official of his empire to its dedication. Now the herald names the price of refusal: instant death in a blazing furnace. One sentence turns a ceremony into a test of who owns a person's conscience — the king, or God.
The empire had many peoples to hold together, and the image was the king's way of doing it. One writer names the motive:
The first thing the civil power sets up is idolatry. The aim is to establish a religious unity. But it always separates the people from the true God and puts something else in His place. This situation becomes a test of the faithfulness of God's people, and of the way they show it... This is not an unusual way with Satan. He stirs up in the civil power the desire for unity. And nothing moves the masses more powerfully than the influence of religion.
The demand was short and the penalty was plain. The problem was not the harshness but the subject. A ruler may command inside his own sphere, and here he stepped outside it:
The decree would be easily understood: it was simple and brief, and the penalty was plain... It was, as noted before, the intrusion of man's will into God's domain. Obedience to the powers that be is a sacred duty. But we can give that obedience only within the circle of their own lawful authority. If they step outside this circle, they must be told what Peter and John answered: "We must obey God rather than men." The rulers in Jerusalem stepped outside it when they commanded the apostles not to teach or preach in the name of Jesus. Nebuchadnezzar was an absolute monarch, yet he stepped outside his own domain. When he issued his decree, he claimed for himself what was due to God alone.
The threat of the furnace frightened almost nobody, because almost nobody wanted to refuse. That is the quiet horror of the scene:
From man's point of view, this was a very simple religion. All it required was a simple act of bowing down before an image, and then the matter was finished. Such a religion suited man's fallen nature perfectly. There was a magnificent image to appeal to the eye, and beautiful music to charm the ear. There was one single act of bowing that was over in a moment, that cost nothing, and that raised no question of sins to make the conscience uncomfortable. The severe penalties for refusing would hardly trouble the natural man. He would be quite ready to obey an order that asked so little.
The furnace belonged to the ordinary industry of the city. The story itself shows how big it was:
People used furnaces for many things: smelting raw metal, refining metal in crucibles, making lime and bricks, and baking as an oven... The fiery furnace in Babylon must have been very large for four people to walk about inside it. It may have been the furnace they used for their bricks.
Seen from God's side, the decree was something the world had never seen before:
Seen in the light of the true God, the king's command was an outburst of gross and furious idolatry. Never before had man set up such an imposing idol. Never before had all the nations of the earth been commanded to bow down to one idol under threat of a terrible death. It was the utter denial and setting aside of the rights of God. Sadly, such is man. God put him into the place of universal power over the world, and he uses that power at once to deny God.
This threat was not the last of its kind:
It is remarkable that at the beginning of Gentile supremacy men were forced, under threat of death, to worship an image. That image stood for the greatness and majesty of the first empire (Dan. 3). Now at the close of Gentile rule it is repeated. How incorrigible human nature is!
Another writer warns that freedom of conscience will not last:
Again and again the civil power has claimed to be the religious power too, wherever it could. Liberty of conscience is a precious gift. But in our days it is the sign that absolute authority is decaying. It will not last. In the end it will give way to the worst form of spiritual tyranny the world has ever seen.
- Motive: the image was a tool of empire. The state used religion to bind many peoples together, and left the true God out.
- Overstep: obey rulers inside their lawful sphere. Nebuchadnezzar claimed what belongs to God alone, so the answer is "We must obey God rather than men."
- Cheapness: one bow, no money, no conscience troubled. The demand cost nothing, so the death penalty alarmed almost no one.
- Outrage: easy as it was, the command set aside the rights of God. Man used world-wide power to deny the One who gave it.
- Repeat: what opened Gentile rule returns at its close. Our freedom of conscience is a pause in that pattern, not the end of it.
Therefore at that time when all the peoples heard the sound of the cornet, pipe, lute, sambuca, psaltery, and all kinds of music, all the peoples, the nations, and the languages fell down [and] worshipped the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up.
The music sounds, and in a single moment an entire empire drops to the ground before a statue of gold. Commentators see more here than ancient idolatry. The scene shows how fast a whole world can unite around a lie, why such a religion appeals, and what it costs the few who keep standing.
The command was extreme, but the act it asked for was small. That is what made it work.
From man's point of view, this was a very simple religion. All it asked was one act of bowing down before an image, and then the matter was over. Such a religion suited man's fallen nature well. There was a magnificent image to please the eye and beautiful music to charm the ear. The bowing was over in a moment. It cost nothing, and it raised no question of sins to make the conscience uncomfortable. The harsh penalty for refusing would hardly trouble the natural man. He would be quite ready to obey an order that made such small demands.
Two things pressed on the crowd at once: the glitter of the gold and fear of the great.
Gold dazzles the ungodly, and fear of the great makes them slaves to man. Music too has its seductive power over the senses… Music has its charms, just as gold has its glitter. In the same way, pleasure, getting wealth, and love of praise from people trap souls today — not only the open sinner and the ungodly, but, sadly, many of the professed people of God as well.
The verse turns on hearing. Music was the cue to bow.
The signal to worship the image was a burst of music. Every kind of music sounded, played by the finest band in all the king's dominions. Where religious feelings did not exist, the sweet and sensuous sounds of harmony had to produce them. How subtle are the schemes of Satan! Here we have the history of all religious music. It appeals to nature and stirs natural emotions. But the Spirit of God has no part in these, for those who worship God "must worship in spirit and truth." All these devices only deceive souls through their enjoyment of what is natural. At the same time they shut God out and hide the spiritual condition of the professed worshippers.
Why would a king bother? The reason offered is political: his empire was too mixed to hold together without one shared religion.
His empire must have been an immense mixture, made up of countless languages (see vv. 4-8) and religions. In political terms, all of them would tend to disturb the peace of his realm. So if a common religion could weld his varied territories together, it would strengthen his empire and improve the welfare of his subjects.
God had given Nebuchadnezzar his power. What he did with it first is what makes this moment so serious.
Seen in the light of the true God, the king's command was an outburst of gross and furious idolatry. Never before had man set up such an imposing idol. Never before had all the nations of the earth been commanded to bow down to one idol on pain of a terrible death. It was the complete denial and setting aside of the rights of God. Sadly, such is man. God put him in the place of universal power over the world, and he at once uses that power to deny God.
The verse says everyone fell down. Yet some did not, and they may have been more than three.
But there were some apart from that idolatrous crowd; very few, sadly! though no doubt there were others hidden. We may be bold enough to say there was one not mentioned here — Daniel himself. Whatever the truth about that, his three companions were not there. This made them offensive to others, all the more because their high position in the province of Babylon kept them in public view.
One writer reads the plain of Dura as a first sketch of a final scene.
Is it not striking that everything in our own time is moving toward a common religion?… It is certain that the last head of Gentile power will do exactly what the first Gentile head attempted. Revelation 13 shows this clearly. Woe to the godly in those days! The flames of persecution will blaze out then more fiercely than ever before. But He cared for Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego twenty-five centuries ago. He will know how to strengthen faithful witnesses like them in that last terrible crisis.
- Motive — one religion could weld a mixed empire together, so unity, not devotion, drove the decree.
- Method — gold for the eye, music for the ear, fear for the rest. The appeal was to the senses, never to the conscience.
- Ease — one brief act of bowing cost nothing and raised no question of sin. It suited fallen nature.
- Insult — man took the power God gave him and used it at once to set aside God's rights.
- Exception — "all" was not quite all. A hidden few stood, and the God who kept them will strengthen faithful witnesses at the end.
Whereupon at that time certain Chaldeans came near, and accused the Jews.
The crowd has bowed down before the king's image. Then a small group of men steps forward with information for the king. Here a private refusal becomes a public charge. Why did anyone notice three men left standing? And what drove the accusers to speak?
The refusal of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego was not hidden in a crowd. Their rank made them visible. Everyone could see they were not bowing with the crowd. One writer also notes who is missing from the whole chapter:
But there were some apart from that idolatrous throng; very few, sadly! though no doubt there were others hidden. We may be bold enough to say there was one not mentioned here — Daniel himself. However that may be, his three companions were not there. This made them offensive to others. Their position in the province of Babylon was a high one, so it exposed them to more public notice. Of course the king's displeasure fell on them.
Another writer takes this silence about Daniel as encouragement for less gifted servants:
It is striking that Daniel is not mentioned in this chapter, and that fact should encourage us. Why he is not mentioned, and where he was, is not revealed. But it is encouraging to know this: when a servant of striking courage and power is absent, God can take up servants of lesser gifts and use them with great effect.
The words "certain Jews" in the charge that follows are not neutral. They point to foreign birth, captive origin, and promotion over the king's own loyal subjects:
The accusation was subtle. The accusers framed it in the way most likely to arouse the anger of the king. But its motive is very clear, and jealousy is written plainly upon it. "There are certain Jews" — men of a foreign race, from a hostile nation, among those brought here as captives, and men you have promoted over the heads of your own loyal subjects. It is these who have set themselves up against your royal command. They barely hide their hatred. Before charging the three with refusing to worship the king's image, they say, "they do not serve your gods." The king knew this well from Daniel, and he had appointed them to their posts of honour anyway. But the Chaldeans could not bear to see the servants of the true God so exalted.
There is a bitter irony here. The men now informing on the three had once faced death themselves. They escaped only because these same men prayed:
We might have known nothing of it but for the "certain Chaldeans" who "came forward and maliciously accused the Jews." These Chaldean accusers bring their faithfulness to light. The wickedness and contemptible trickery of the accusers is all the more obvious when we remember one thing: they owed their lives to the faithful prayers of these very "Jews." If their God had not revealed to them the king's forgotten dream, they would already have lost their heads — "torn limb from limb," with their houses "laid in ruins" (chap. 2:5).
The accusers did not simply report a fact. They shaped it, aiming every detail at the king's pride:
The enemies of these godly men, delighted to find an occasion of discrediting them before the king, approach Nebuchadnezzar with flattering phrases, and remind the king of the decree he has made and the penalty he has imposed for disobedience... They remind the king that he himself had appointed these men to the high position they held, and this was how they repaid him. They press the fact that they are not ordinary rank and file, but men set over the affairs of the main provinces — facts that would magnify their offence in the king's eyes.
What looks like a loyalty dispute is something larger. One writer places the king's real fault in where his authority stopped:
The image and its dedication not only set aside the rights of God, but also trampled underfoot the consciences of men. By acting this way, the king had gone outside the circle of his own lawful authority and intruded into God's domain. This brings to the front certain God-fearing men who will obey God rather than men, whatever it costs. Here are certain Jews who are ready to obey the king within his own sphere. But they flatly refuse to obey him if he takes over the rights of God.
Writers read this scene as more than an old court intrigue. The accusation, the furnace, and the deliverance form a shape that reappears:
The first Gentile empire became idolatrous, and so will the last, as we may learn from Revelation 13. God's faithful remnant met hostility and persecution under the king of Babylon. It will meet them again under the last head of the Roman empire... So the history of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego is full of encouragement — above all for the Jewish remnant in the last days, and also for the saints of God in every age surrounded by the fires of persecution.
- Visibility invites attack. High position made the three impossible to overlook. Faithfulness on public view draws notice that hidden faithfulness never draws.
- Envy accuses. The charge sounds like loyalty to the king. Its wording shows jealousy and hatred at seeing foreigners promoted.
- Ingratitude accuses. The informers owed their own lives to the prayers of the men they were reporting.
- Conscience is the real battleground. The king had stepped outside his lawful sphere into God's. Inside that sphere, the three were ready to obey.
- The pattern repeats. What happened under the first Gentile empire will happen again under the last. That makes this story encouragement, not just history.
They spoke and said to the king Nebuchadnezzar, O king, live for ever!
In this verse the accusers open with the polished greeting of the royal court. Only then does the real business come out: a charge against three men who would not bow to the king's golden statue.
The greeting is not warmth. It is flattery with a purpose. One writer traces how the accusers build their case, step by step:
These godly men had enemies. Those enemies were delighted to find a chance to discredit them before the king. They approach Nebuchadnezzar with flattering words. They remind him of the decree he has made, and of the penalty he has set for disobedience. Then they tell him that three leading men have disregarded the king and his gods, and have refused to worship the image. They remind him that he himself had appointed these men to their high position, and this was how they repaid him.
Strip the politeness away and the motive shows. These men resented foreigners holding office over them:
The accusation was subtle. They phrased it in the way most likely to arouse the anger of the king. But its motive is very plain. Jealousy is written all over it. "There are certain Jews" — men of a foreign race, from a hostile nation, brought here as captives. And you promoted them over the heads of your own loyal subjects. These are the ones who have set themselves against your royal command. Hatred is barely hidden too. Before they charge the three with refusing to worship the king's image, they say, "They do not serve your gods."
The crowd bowed. A few did not, and their high position made them impossible to overlook:
But some stood apart from that idolatrous crowd. Very few, sadly, though no doubt there were others hidden. We may be bold enough to say there was one not mentioned here — Daniel himself. However that may be, his three companions were not there. This made them offensive to others, above all because their high position in the province of Babylon exposed them to more public notice. Of course the king singled them out for his displeasure.
These accusers owed their own lives to the men they are now betraying:
What moved others, and brought them to their knees before the impressive image of the king, did not affect the three Hebrew witnesses at all. They refused outright to bow the knee. We might have known nothing about it except for the "certain Chaldeans" who "came forward and maliciously accused the Jews." These Chaldean accusers bring their faithfulness to light. The base wickedness and contemptible trickery of the accusers is all the clearer when we remember one thing: they owed their own lives to the faithful prayers of these very "Jews". If their God had not revealed the king's forgotten dream to them, they would already have lost their heads.
The king had crossed a line, and that is what made these men refuse:
The image and its dedication not only set aside the rights of God, but also trampled the consciences of men underfoot. In acting this way, the king had stepped outside the circle of his own lawful authority. He had intruded into God's domain. This brings to the front certain God-fearing men who, whatever the cost, will obey God rather than men. Here we find certain Jews. They are ready to obey the king within his own sphere. But if he takes over the rights of God, they refuse outright.
People who live this way will always draw complaints. The pressures that move everyone else do not move them:
They are the irritating substance that vexes the godless fellowship of the world. Its best-laid plans are either frustrated or spoiled by their stubbornness. They are always in the way, a brake on the wheel, or a barrier in the path of human prosperity, as men understand it. They are not governed by the same thoughts that govern the rest of men... No one can accuse them of rioting, and they do not stir up rebellion. They are quiet, inoffensive and law-abiding — as long as the law does not come between their conscience and God. If it does, their submission to it ends at once.
- Flattery first. The accusers bless the king first, then use his own decree and its penalty to make the charge as damaging as possible.
- Jealousy underneath. The wording — foreigners, captives, promoted over locals — exposes envy and hatred, not loyalty.
- Rank exposed them. Their high office in the province put their refusal in full public view.
- Gratitude forgotten. The very men who owed their lives to these Jews' prayers are the ones who now hand them over.
- Conscience is the line. They obeyed the king inside his own sphere. They refused only where he claimed what belongs to God — and their accusers put that refusal on record for ever.
Thou, O king, hast made a decree, that every man that shall hear the sound of the cornet, pipe, lute, sambuca, psaltery, and bagpipe, and all kinds of music, shall fall down and worship the golden image;
The accusers do not name the three men yet. First they stand before Nebuchadnezzar and read his own decree back to him — the music, the bowing, the golden image. That recital sets the trap. Once the king hears his own words repeated, refusing to bow counts as defiance of the throne.
The accusers recite the decree before they name anyone. One writer looks at the motive behind the wording of the charge that follows.
If the accusation was subtle, and framed in the way most likely to rouse the king's anger, its motive is very plain. Jealousy is written all over it. "There are certain Jews" — men of a foreign race, from a hostile nation, brought here as captives. You promoted them over the heads of your own loyal subjects. These are the ones who have set themselves against your royal command. The hatred is barely hidden. Before charging them with refusing to worship the king's image, they say, "They do not serve your gods."
The decree covered every people, nation and language — and that scope was the point of it.
His empire must have been an enormous mixture of countless languages and religions. In political terms, all of them would tend to unsettle the peace of his realm. So if a shared religion could weld his varied dominions together, that would strengthen his empire and promote the welfare of his subjects. Whatever his thoughts, this was the course he took. He made the magnificent image, and he decided it should serve as the god for "all the people, the nations, and the languages" under his authority.
The verse names one instrument after another. Why should a burst of music be the signal to worship?
The signal for worshipping the image was the burst of all kinds of music from the finest band in all the king's dominions. If religious feelings did not exist, sweet and sensuous sounds had to produce them. How subtle the schemes of Satan! For here we really have the history of all religious music. It appeals to nature and produces natural emotions. But the Spirit of God has no part in these, for those who worship God "must worship in spirit and truth." All these devices only deceive souls through their enjoyment of what is natural. At the same time they shut God out and hide the real spiritual condition of the professed worshippers.
Notice how little the decree asked: hear the music, then bow.
From man's point of view this was a very simple religion. All it required was one act of bowing before an image, and then the matter was finished. Such a religion was well suited to man's fallen nature — a magnificent image to appeal to the eye, beautiful music to charm the ear, one single act of bowing that was over in a moment. It cost nothing, and it raised no question of sins to make the conscience uncomfortable. The severe penalties for refusing would hardly trouble the natural man. He would be quite ready to obey a command that asked so little.
A king may command. The question is how far that command may reach. One writer marks the line.
Everywhere the New Testament commands submission to these, and this is to be the Christian's path in the middle of political turmoil and confusion… But suppose these authorities — emperors, kings, or magistrates — travel outside their own province, as Nebuchadnezzar did. Suppose they try to put their own will in the place of the word of God, and to force that will on the consciences of their subjects, putting themselves, in fact, in the place of God. Then, out of sheer faithfulness to God, the believer is bound to disobey, whatever it costs. The limit of his obedience to kings is obedience to God in obeying them.
The pattern in this decree — a forced image, a signal, a death sentence — does not end with Babylon.
Revelation 13 predicts very similar things for the end of the age, but with even more striking features. Instead of all kinds of music, the false prophet will have power to give life and speech to the image of the beast. Anyone who refuses to worship will be killed.
- The decree recited — the accusers repeat the king's own words first, so a refusal to bow looks like contempt for the throne. Jealousy over three promoted foreigners drives the charge.
- The decree's purpose — one shared religion, meant to weld a mixed empire of many languages and gods into one.
- The decree's method — a golden image for the eye, a full orchestra for the ear, stirring religious feeling where none existed.
- The decree's appeal — one brief act of bowing. It cost nothing and raised no question of sin, so the crowd obeyed. Only three refused.
- The decree's limit — obey rulers inside their own sphere. When they put their will in the place of God's word and bind it on the conscience, faithfulness to God means refusing, whatever it costs. Revelation 13 shows the same decree returning in a worse form.
and [that] whosoever doth not fall down and worship, shall be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace.
The men who accuse Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego invent nothing. They quote the king's own words back to him, penalty included. Verse 11 is the threat at the heart of the whole chapter: bow to the image, or burn.
The decree asked for very little, and that was part of its power. Commentators note how well it suited human nature, and how little the furnace frightened the crowd.
From man's point of view, this was a very simple religion. All it asked was one act of bowing down before an image, and then the matter was over. Such a religion suited man's fallen nature perfectly. There was a splendid image to please the eye, and beautiful music to charm the ear. The bowing was over in a moment. It cost no money, and it raised no question of sins to make the conscience uncomfortable. The harsh penalty for refusing would hardly trouble the natural man. He would be quite ready to obey an order that asked so little.
The king backed his order with a furnace. But he had no right to give that order. Obedience to rulers is real, and it has a limit.
Obedience to the governing authorities is a sacred duty. But that obedience can only be given within the circle of their own lawful authority. If they step out of this circle, as the rulers in Jerusalem did when they ordered the apostles not to teach or preach in the name of Jesus, they must be told what Peter and John answered: "We must obey God rather than men." Nebuchadnezzar was an absolute monarch. Yet when he issued his decree, he stepped outside his own domain and claimed for himself what was due to God alone.
Repeating the sentence is a tactic. It leaves the king no room to back down. Then they name the offenders and sharpen the charge.
The enemies of these godly men were delighted to find a way to discredit them before the king. They come to Nebuchadnezzar with flattering words. They remind him of the decree he has made, and of the penalty he has set for disobedience. Then they tell him that three leading men have ignored the king and his gods, and have refused to worship the image. They remind the king that he himself had given these men the high position they held, and this is how they repaid him. They stress that these are not ordinary men in the ranks, but men set over the affairs of the main provinces — points that would make their offence look far worse to the king.
The threat was not symbolic. Such furnaces had everyday industrial uses. This one was big enough for several people to walk around inside.
Furnaces were used for many purposes: smelting raw metal, refining metal in crucibles, making lime and bricks, and baking as an oven. The fiery furnace in Babylon must have been very large, for four people to walk about inside it. It may have been the furnace they used for their bricks.
The three men did not resist arrest or fight the sentence. They drew the line in one place only.
The confidence of these men in God is very beautiful. Yet it does not lead, as we might expect, to their escape from the threatened penalty. Their faith is tested, and God does not appear to step in. The king is left free to carry out his wicked will. Where conscience is at stake, they stand firm against the king. Where only their bodies are at stake, they offer no resistance. They act in the spirit of the Lord's words to His disciples: "Do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do" (Luke 12:4).
The king carried out the penalty of verse 11. The fire destroyed only what held the men captive.
There were several faithful, godly men — Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego — who would not bow down to the idol. What is the result? They are cast into the burning, fiery furnace. And what does the fire do for them? It burns off all their bonds, sets them free, and puts them into the company of the Son of God. There they are in liberty. God takes care of them.
- Cheap bow. The image cost the worshipper nothing: one quick bow, no money, no awkward questions about sin. That is why almost everyone bowed.
- Overreach. The king reached past his lawful authority and claimed what belongs to God alone. At that point the answer must be that we obey God rather than men.
- Trap. The accusers quote the penalty first, then name three men the king had promoted himself. They shape the charge to make his anger certain.
- Line drawn. The furnace could claim their bodies but not their conscience. They refused the king at the one point, and offered no resistance at the other.
- Reversal. The fire burned only their bonds. It set them free and placed them in the company of the Son of God. The threatened end became their liberty.
There are certain Jews whom thou hast appointed over the administration of the province of Babylon Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego these men, O king, regard thee not; they serve not thy gods, nor worship the golden image that thou hast set up.
Three men had risen to the top of Babylon's administration. Rivals who watched them refuse to bow now name them to the king. Their charge is built with care. Why does faithfulness to God so often reach the ears of power through the mouths of the jealous?
The report is not neutral. One writer shows the motive behind its careful wording:
If the accusation was subtle, and framed in the way most likely to arouse the anger of the king, its motive is very clear. Jealousy is written plainly on it. "There are certain Jews" — men of a foreign race, belonging to a hostile nation. They were brought here as captives. You have promoted them over the heads of your own loyal subjects. And it is these men who have set themselves against your royal command. They hardly hide their hatred either. Before charging them with refusing to worship the king's image, they say, "They do not serve your gods." … It was a happy thing for Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego that their accusers could find nothing against them except the law of their God.
Others besides the three may have kept away from that crowd. High office is what made these men easy to find:
There were some apart from that idolatrous crowd; very few, sadly, though no doubt there were others hidden. We may be bold enough to say there was one not mentioned here — Daniel himself. However that may be, his three companions were not there. This made them offensive to others. Their position in the province of Babylon was a high one, and it exposed them to more public notice. Of course the king singled them out for his displeasure.
Another writer makes that exposure a rule, not an accident:
They are faithful, and they refuse outright to acknowledge any god but their own, who is the true God… The nearer we are to the power of the world, the more likelihood there is of suffering if we are faithful.
The accusers owed their own lives to the men they now accused:
We might have known nothing of it except for "certain Chaldeans" who "came near and accused the Jews." These Chaldean accusers bring out the faithfulness of the three. Their own base wickedness and contemptible trickery is all the more obvious when you remember one thing. They owed their lives to the faithful prayers of these very "Jews." If their God had not revealed to them the king's forgotten dream, they would already have lost their heads.
The accusers also reminded the king that he had promoted these men himself. That reminder was aimed at his anger, and it carries a warning:
They would cunningly increase the king's anger against these "certain Jews." They did it by reminding him, in a roundabout way, of the advancement he had given them when he set them over the affairs of the province of Babylon. Truly, favours granted by the world, or asked from it, are of doubtful advantage to the faithful. They as often prove to be live bombs, or blessings hardly worth having.
The charge that they "pay no attention" to the king went too far. One writer describes how far God's people obey their rulers:
They do the best they can for the country in which they live. They pray for kings and for all who exercise authority. They cannot be accused of riot, nor are they stirrers of rebellion. They are quiet, inoffensive, and law-abiding, so long as the law does not come between their conscience and God. If it does, their submission to it comes to an abrupt end. At all cost they will obey God rather than men.
One writer sees the same clash returning at the end of history:
Here one religion is required of everyone, set up by the king, not by God… In the last days the faithful Jews will be in the furnace of tribulation because they will not comply with the imperial religion. God will deliver them, and the nations will glorify Him: compare Revelation 13. So the first mark of Gentile supremacy is idolatry.
- Jealousy accuses. The report is not about law and order. Envy drives it. The king had promoted foreigners over his own officials, and hatred shows through the words.
- Height exposes. Their high position in the province put them in public view. That is why the accusers picked them out.
- Nearness costs. The closer the faithful stand to worldly power, the more likely they are to suffer. These three would own no god but the true one.
- Favour betrays. Their accusers turn the king's own promotion into a weapon. Gifts from the world often prove to be live bombs.
- Conscience draws the line. These men are quiet, law-abiding citizens. When a law steps between them and God, their submission stops.
Then Nebuchadnezzar in rage and fury commanded to bring Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego. Then were these men brought before the king.
Nebuchadnezzar had promoted these three men himself. Now his officials have accused them, and the furious king calls them back in — but the contest starting here is far larger than three officials and one furnace.
The accusers named the three men, and named the promotion the king had given them. That detail was chosen to sting. One writer shows how the king's temper swept away his own earlier confession about God:
Jealousy and hatred may have shaped the way they made the accusation, but it was well aimed at Nebuchadnezzar's conscience. One might suppose that mentioning his promotion of the three Jews would surely bring back that eventful day. Daniel had unfolded his secret and its meaning, and Daniel's words had drawn a confession from the king's lips. But if so, all of it was forgotten in his "rage and fury" at the men who had dared to ignore his absolute and overbearing will. The knowledge God had given to Daniel had, in a way, served the king's desire. Now faithfulness to God crossed his will.
Their accusers turned the very thing that had raised them up into a weapon against them. One writer draws a warning from it:
They would cunningly increase the king's anger against these "certain Jews" by quietly reminding him of the advancement he had given them by setting them over the affairs of the province of Babylon. Truly, favours the world grants, or favours we ask from it, are of doubtful advantage to the faithful. They just as often prove to be live bombs, or blessings hardly worth having. And that can be said of favours the world gives freely. So what should we think of the advantages Christians gain from it at the cost of compromise and departure from the express Word of God?
The verse ends with the three men standing in front of the king. What marks them out is how they stood there:
"Men," in the truest sense of that word, they proved themselves to be. We often speak of them as "the three Hebrew children," but they behaved like men before the furious king. His fierce look and his threatening words did not move them.
The king had used his power to make worship a matter of law:
The Gentile ruler uses his power to set up a religion tied to the politics of the kingdom, a religion for present earthly purposes. Where this is the case, religion cannot be left between God and the conscience. It is no longer a matter of real conviction about God and His truth, and no one is free to judge the fraud. The king forces his invented worship on every subject, under penalty of death.
Yet God's people make the least troublesome subjects a ruler could have — up to one point:
They do the best they can for the country in which they live. They pray for kings and for all who exercise authority. No one can charge them with riot, and they do not stir up rebellion. They are quiet, inoffensive and law-abiding, as long as the law does not come between their conscience and God. If it does, their obedience to it stops at once. At all cost they will obey God rather than men.
With this command the king takes a further step, and it changes who he is fighting:
Now the king has gone a step further in wickedness. In setting up the image he had already set aside the rights of God, to whom worship alone is due; but now he openly defies God. This is claiming omnipotence. When man does this, his defeat is not far off. The contest is now no longer between these Jewish captives and the earthly king of kings. It is between Nebuchadnezzar and the God of gods.
One writer sees more here than ancient history. This scene points ahead to a last ruler who will force one religion on everyone:
It is certain that the last head of Gentile power will do exactly what the first Gentile head attempted. Revelation 13 shows this clearly. It will go hard with the godly in those days! The flames of persecution will blaze out then more fiercely than ever before. But He cared for Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego twenty-five centuries ago. He will know how to strengthen faithful witnesses like them in the last dreadful crisis.
- Promotion — The honours the king gave them became the handle their accusers grabbed. Favours from the world can turn into weapons.
- Provocation — What enraged Nebuchadnezzar was not disloyalty. It was faithfulness to God crossing his will, and he forgot his own earlier confession about God.
- Position — Believers are the quietest subjects a nation can have. When a law steps between conscience and God, their submission stops.
- Person to Person — By openly defying God, the king turned a dispute with three captives into a contest with God Himself. His defeat was near.
- Pattern — The first Gentile ruler forced one religion on everyone, and the last one will do the same. The God who held these three will hold His witnesses then.
Nebuchadnezzar spoke and said unto them, Is it of purpose, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, that ye serve not my god, nor worship the golden image that I have set up?
Three men who held high office in Babylon now stand before the most powerful king on earth. He gives them one question: is the report about them true? It looks like a routine legal enquiry. It is the opening move in a fight over who owns a person's conscience.
Nebuchadnezzar treats this as a matter of loyalty to his decree. One writer weighs the two sides of the scene, names the real question, and points out that the king stretches the charge past his own law.
Morally, it was a deeply impressive scene. On one side stood Nebuchadnezzar, the mightiest king the world had ever seen, surrounded by all the show and splendour of his court and kingdom. On the other side stood three men of a despised race, whatever post they held in the government at that moment. And the question about to be raised was this: who is the master of men's consciences, God or man? Nebuchadnezzar raised it himself. First he asked them if the accusation was true. Notice that he goes beyond his own decree here. He accepts the extra charge the Chaldeans had brought — that the three did not serve the king's gods.
This same man had bowed before Daniel not long before and praised his God. That impression did not last.
It is sobering to see how quickly the impression on the king's mind faded. The last thing he did before setting up this image was to fall on his face before Daniel and pay him honours that were almost divine. He had even said, "It is true that your God is a God of gods and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, since you could reveal this secret." But it was another matter when he found his power challenged and his image despised, despite the burning fiery furnace.
The words "my gods" and "that I have set up" point to the problem. Authority itself is not the issue. The issue is a ruler reaching into territory that was never his.
The image and its dedication did not only set aside the rights of God; they also trampled on the consciences of men. By acting this way, the king stepped outside the circle of his own lawful authority and pushed into God's territory. This brings to the front certain God-fearing men who will obey God rather than men, whatever it costs. Here are Jews who are ready to obey the king within his own sphere, but flatly refuse to obey when he seizes the rights of God.
When the king pushed further and demanded to know which God could rescue them from his hand, a deeper trait of that kind of power showed itself.
Impiety not only refuses to respect the conscience, but, what is worse, disallows the rights of God. Respect for the conscience is necessary enough, but the rights of God are infinitely more so. Observe the words of the king: "Who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hand?" This is impiety.
The king calls them Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. Those are not the names their parents gave them.
Daniel means "God is my judge." Hananiah means "Beloved of the Lord." Mishael means "Who is as God." Azariah means "The Lord is my help." These beautiful names were soon swapped for names with pagan meanings, to blot out the very memory of Jehovah. Daniel became Belteshazzar (Bel's prince). Hananiah became Shadrach (lit up by the sun-god). Mishael became Meshach (who is like Shach — Venus). Azariah became Abednego (the servant of Nego).
The accusation was true, and they did not soften it.
Yes, it was true. They were men of moral fibre, men of faith, men who had convictions. For those convictions they were ready to go into the fire, and to die if they had to, rather than violate their conscience or deny the one true God. He was their God. They prayed to Him alone, they worshipped Him alone, and they feared Him above every earthly ruler.
This moment shows where obedience to government stops. It is not a call to rebellion.
The New Testament everywhere commands submission to the authorities over us. This is to be the path of the Christian in the middle of political unrest and confusion... But these authorities — emperors, kings, or magistrates — may travel outside their own province, as Nebuchadnezzar did. They may try to put their own will in the place of the word of God, and to press that will on the consciences of their subjects, putting themselves, in fact, in the place of God. Then, in real faithfulness to God, and at whatever cost, the believer is bound to disobey, like these three exiles. The limit of his obedience to kings is obedience to God in obeying them.
- Question. The king asks if the report is true. In doing so he raises the real issue himself: who is master of men's consciences, God or man?
- Overreach. He widens the charge past his own decree. He steps outside his lawful authority into God's domain, trampling the consciences of men and setting aside the rights of God.
- Forgetfulness. The man now demanding worship had just called their God a God of gods. That impression faded as soon as anyone challenged his power.
- Names. He calls them by the Babylonian names chosen to blot out the memory of Jehovah. The names changed; the men did not.
- Line. Obedience to rulers is real, but it has a limit. It ends the moment obeying them means disobeying God — whatever that costs.
Now if ye be ready at the time that ye hear the sound of the cornet, pipe, lute, sambuca, psaltery, and bagpipe, and all kinds of music, to fall down and worship the image that I have made, [well] but if ye worship not, ye shall be cast that same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace and who is the God that shall deliver you out of my hands?
Nebuchadnezzar gives three Jewish officials one last chance to bow when the music plays. Then he goes too far. He asks which god could rescue them from his hands. That question turns a quarrel about a statue into a contest with God, and it raises an older question: who is master of a person's conscience?
The king does not execute at once. He argues, and repeats the terms. What makes this striking is what he had said only a chapter earlier.
It is solemn to see how quickly the impression on the king's mind faded. Just before this image was set up, he fell on his face before Daniel and paid him almost divine honours. He had even said, "Truly, your God is God of gods and Lord of kings, and a revealer of mysteries, for you have been able to reveal this mystery." But it was another matter when he finds his power disputed and his image despised, despite the burning fiery furnace.
The king thinks he is testing three officials. The real question is much bigger.
In moral terms, it was a deeply impressive scene. On one side stood Nebuchadnezzar, the mightiest ruler the world had ever seen, surrounded by all the splendour and magnificence of his court and kingdom. On the other side stood three men of a despised race... And the question about to be raised was this: Who is the master of men's consciences, God or man? ... Last of all, his rage carried him beyond every limit. He dared anyone greater than himself to step in, and so claimed to be all-powerful himself... This was truly a challenge thrown down. The conflict now begun was between Nebuchadnezzar and God.
The king's words are worse than rude. They show a fixed principle in human power that forgets who gave it.
Impiety not only refuses to respect the conscience, but, what is worse, it disallows the rights of God. Respect for the conscience is necessary enough, but the rights of God are infinitely more so. Look at the words of the king: "And who is the god who will deliver you out of my hands?" (v. 15). This is impiety. It is the principle of blasphemy that marks the beast at all times and in every situation. His thought is of the power the beast has and holds. May we remember that it is God who has given it, and who overrules it!
Their answer meets the king's boast head on. It begins with what they know of God.
The opening words of their answer — "our God whom we serve" — give the secret of their confidence. They knew God, and can say "our God." A true knowledge of God is the secret of power before men. Moreover, however great the position they hold before men, it is God they serve. The king had defied God when he said, "And who is the god who will deliver you out of my hands?" These faithful men calmly take up the challenge. With the confidence of faith they say, "our God... is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace," and further, "He will deliver us out of your hand, O king."
Their refusal is narrow. It touches one command only.
It is not God's way, at present, to meet power with power... Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego never set themselves to resist Nebuchadnezzar in his wickedness... But still these godly men do not pretend that he is a false king because he sets up and enforces idolatry. For the Christian, the question is not about the king, but how he ought to behave himself. It is not his business to meddle with others. He is called to walk, relying on God, in obedience and patience. In the vast majority of everyday duties, we can obey God by obeying the laws of the land where we live.
The king asked a question and got an answer he could see. His own idol never spoke for itself.
What happened on the plain of Dura was enough to make him acknowledge only the one true God. For if the idol was a god, why did he not defend himself against those who refused to honour him? The king set out to avenge his idol. Instead he found himself facing the power of the one God he had defied, as Pharaoh once did: "And who is the god who will deliver you out of my hands?" He learns that there is One who can deliver in a wonderful way.
- Challenge. The king boasted that no god could rescue from his hands. That turned a local loyalty test into a contest between Nebuchadnezzar and God Himself.
- Conscience. By demanding worship he reached past his own authority. The question raised was simple: who is master of a person's conscience, God or man?
- Confidence. The three men answered with "our God whom we serve." Knowing God is what gave them power to stand before an angry king.
- Conduct. Their refusal was narrow. They did not rebel or deny the king's office. They said no only where his will replaced God's.
- Conclusion. The king who asked "who is the god who will deliver you?" learned by sight that there is One who delivers in a way no other can.