Daniel 2:36 Commentary and Bible Study

Having revealed the content of the dream, Daniel now interprets it. Nebuchadnezzar knew that since Daniel had now discerned the dream by divine revelation, he could be trusted to interpret it correctly - God had given him the interpretation. Daniel stands as the spokesman for all four of the young men – ‘we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king’ – because they had prayed together and the Lord had answered their collective prayer. At every step he is careful not to act proudly. He has the gift of prophecy, but he embraces the others. That is recognised by Nebuchadnezzar, for he later rewards them all. ‘Thou, O king, art a king of kings’ – on earth Nebuchadnezzar was unrivalled in power. This is not flattery, but fact. In his day, although his empire was limited to the then known world, he was without equal, and all conquered nations had to accept him as their overlord. But Daniel is running into trouble. Nebuchadnezzar was such a proud ruler, convinced that he deserved all credit for the empire he had built – he says exactly this a little later (Daniel 4:30) – and yet now Daniel says, God has allowed it. It is a powerful way of indicating that Nebuchadnezzar does not rule except by God’s permission. Daniel credits God with the glory, not Nebuchadnezzar: ‘For the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. ³⁸ And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all.’ The king’s exaltation has come from God, and therefore he should not boast as if he had obtained this eminence by his own skill or power. What courage Daniel had in coming and speaking so boldly to such a king! ‘All that we receive comes from God. The Lord, who is accountable to no one, has chosen to give to you a place which is unique in the history of the world. The very beasts of the field, as it were, look up and see you as ruling over them.’ Nebuchadnezzar is the head of gold. In his case the image which depicts world empires, and the head of the image which represents the Babylonian empire in particular, is encapsulated in this one man. Babylon was the greatest empire in terms of the length of time it stood; the civilisation could be traced back for roughly two thousand years: under other names, but the same people generally speaking. It was certainly the greatest in its degree of control. Babylon is the best of empires, the greatest, and yet this does not imply that God views it as good. Far from it! Babylon is used in the Bible as a symbol of a world in opposition to God. According to God’s purpose even Judah has been subjected to his power, but not forever. The Neo-Babylonian empire started by Nabopolassar, Nebuchadnezzar’s father, lasted less than seventy years after this prophetic dream. ‘And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee’ – going down from the head represents the passing of time. It is represented by the image’s breast and arms of silver (verse 32). That would be a shock to Nebuchadnezzar. After him, after the empire that he represented would come another empire. His great enterprise would be superseded. It would fall; it would be no more, and it would be succeeded by another kingdom which would also answer to the characteristics of a world empire, but what came after would be inferior. Daniel lived to see this momentous convulsion of history when Babylon fell to the Medes and the Persians (Daniel 5:31). Babylon which seemed to be so invincible was replaced by another empire according to the God given dream. In fact, the Medo-Persian Empire was geographically greater than the Babylonian Empire, but in other respects it was inferior. The Medo Persian empire was divided; it never conquered Greece. The following empires never had the same power as the head of gold. It was never so united, and it was much shorter – not 2000 years, but 200 years. In duration and in unity it was a much inferior thing. ‘And another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.’ The second was silver; the third is of brass or rather bronze. Again it was inferior, and shorter still: the empire of the Greeks – still more extensive due to Alexander the Great's conquests, but inferior in so many ways and never united. Alexander’s empire stretched from Macedonia to parts of India in the east, and to Egypt in the south. Indeed in his twenties when he surveyed his empire, he wept because he had nothing else to conquer. But Alexander, never had the power of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar would take young men and brainwash them to go back refashioned as Babylonian officials, loyal to empire. Subsequent empires were always dependent on vassals – states that were protected in exchange for recognition of their overlord. ‘And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron’. In a geographical sense Rome was greater than all previous empires, but again inferior in unity. The Roman Empire was never united; it was reduced to provincialism. It was the most formidable in many ways: it crushed wherever it went. ‘For as much as iron, breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things, and as iron, that breaketh all these, shall it brake in pieces crush and bruise’; it was a brutal empire in its conquests, and in its manner, but it was fractured. The extent of its disunity is described in verses 41-43. An attempt was constantly being made to unite iron elements of the empire (probably ethnic Roman) with clay elements (probably the various foreign conquered peoples), but the unity often broke down and there were rebellions in far flung places which frequently needed to be suppressed. In verse 43 is an intriguing statement, for which there are various interpretations: ’Whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.’ It may speak of the great experiment to bind foreign peoples to Rome by intermarrying with their royal families and their peoples, and that persisted really until the beginning of the last century of the empire. But it won’t work, says the prophecy, if that is what it refers to. It will not hold the empire together. So gold was the characterising feature of Babylon, silver of Medo-Persia, bronze of Greece, and iron of Rome.