Daniel 4:33. Is there any evidence in history of Nebuchadnezzar’s absence temporarily from the Throne?
Verse 32 uses a word which can mean “seasons”. Seven seasons. Summer and winter are the seasons counted at this time and place. Three and one half years. Halley quotes one of Nebuchadnezzar’s inscriptions (per Sir Henry Rawlinson), as a possible suggestion of these awful years of his life, watered down a bit so as not to expose the menial life he lived:
“For four years the residence of my kingdom did not delight my heart. In no one of my possessions did I erect any important building by my might. I did not put up buildings in Babylon for myself and the honor of my name. In the worship of Merodach my god I did not sing his praise, nor did I provide his altar with sacrifices, nor clean the canals.”
Medical people have devised a definition of Nebuchadnezzar’s plight under the term “lycanthropy.” It is, per Wikipedia, “a rare psychiatric syndrome that involves a delusion that the affected person can transform into, has transformed into, or is, a non-human…
Daniel 5:2. Was Belshazzar the last king of Babylon?
History records that Nabonidas was the last king of Babylon, but also that he was co-regent with his son Belshazzar, due to the sickness of some sort, of the father.
Daniel 5:2, 11. Was Nebuchadnezzar the father of Belshazzar? Was he raised by grandpa?
The queen’s reference to Nebuchadnezzar as Belshazzar’s “father” when he was most likely his grandfather, has baffled some.
It is suggested, that, again, due to the illness of his real father, Nabonidas, Nebuchadnezzar took over the fathering responsibilities for his grandson, and that therefore the Emperor was the only true father that Belshazzar knew.
This is speculation, and cannot be confirmed historically. Yet.
Daniel 5:31. Why is there no “Darius the Mede” in history? Or is there? Co-regent?
Once more we are faced with a name that does not compute. Note that the “Medes” are always mentioned first when we talk of the two Kingdoms: “The Medes and the Persians.” The combined title is “Medo-Persia.”
It would seem that Media was at first the dominant power, and that it was later superseded by the growing Persian might.
Though Darius’s name was phased out in the Persian history books, so that Cyrus could shine, it is quite possible that Darius was the main man for a while.
Co-regency is the bottom line answer here. Remember that the two arms on the visionary statue represent a two-part Kingdom, even as the two legs stood for eastern and western Rome. In between Medo-Persia and east-west Rome stood the mid-section, united Greece.
In the animal visions, it is a “lop-sided” bear that bears the image. A bear with two sides, as has every bear, but with one side higher than the other. Media and Persia were not equals, only partners. First the Median side was higher, then the Persian side.
Daniel 7:1. Is there any reason to believe that the animal vision speaks of Empires other than the statue vision of Nebuchadnezzar? That is, do we need a “modern” interpretation of “modern” nations here?
No, For example, the 1st animal of chapter 7 has its wings plucked, reminding us of Nebuchadnezzar himself, as the head in the statue was meant to reference.
Also, the 4th item in both series is “strong”, “crushes”, “shatters,” the other kingdoms.
And, the final human kingdom before Jesus’ ultimate one, is referenced by the number “10” (toes, horns).
After Nebuchadnezzar’s statue nations was to come a kingdom that would never be destroyed. It would “crush” others. And after the animal vision is the same picture. Great dominion. Not destroyed.
Daniel 7. Since there is no difference in the chapter two and chapter seven identities, why the repetition?
Details. There are things said in the animal descriptions that cannot be said in the statue. Three “ribs” representing three nations. A flying leopard, incredible speed, that confirms this is about Alexander the Great and no other. There are also more details about the Kingdom of the Son of Man.
Older
Top
