 |
| King Nebuchadnezzar Turned Into An Animal: unknown German artist, Regensburg, 1410 |
That God rules over Kings is clear, but far from being any divine endorsement or authorization of rulers, Daniel 4 is instead a warning to those rulers against pride, hubris, arrogance, presumption, oppression, or misuse of power.
It does not tell believers to assume that rulers have God's sanction, or must be doing God's will because He put them in power. Quite the contrary: It tells rulers that they should use any power that God may choose to allow them, with consciousness of God.
It is an instruction to rulers, kings, emperors, to humble themselves before God, or God might choose to humble or remove them.
The narrative of the chapter is a familiar Sunday School story, written by Nebuchadnezzar himself. Nebuchadnezzar had a troubling dream and called for Daniel to interpret it. The dream was of a great tree, which was cut down to a stump. Daniels's interpretation was that this great King Nebuchadnezzar would be cut down, mid reign.
Daniel's interpretation concluded with Daniel's appeal to Nebuchadnezzer to change his arrogant ways (verse 27):
"Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor; if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity.Nebuchadnezzar seems to have taken the warning at first, but after 12 months, his pride got the better of him:
"The king spake, and said, Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?"
That declaration of hubris triggered the nightmare scenario. Madness descended on Nebuchadnezzar, and he became like an animal, unable to reason. The Kingdom was taken from him. He was driven out to "dwell with the beasts," unclothed, hair like eagles' feathers, nails like birds claws, for seven "times" (possibly seven years).
After those "seven times" of madness, living with the animals, Nebuchandezzaar's reason and kingdom were restored, and he was able to write the remarkable first person account. He concludes:
He learned that God rules, and can give kingdoms, or take them away, set up kings, or cut them down, at His whim, and none can question God's doings.
He learned that a claim that "I built this," tempts God to prove that, no, he didn't. God gave it him, and could as easily take it away.
Does this chapter tell us that every king, every ruler, every president, governor, prime minister, of every nation on earth for all time is individually selected, appointed, ordained, authorized, by God, as part of a minutely detailed, pre-ordained, exact plan? I do not think so. I don't read that into it. God can set up or remove anyone He chooses. He certainly has that power. God also has options, adapting to the free will choices people make. But to take the book of Daniel as being typical of how God works with all rulers, would carry the story way beyond it's lessons. It would take away any free will among the nations. We would all just be marionettes, dancing on God's strings. How far down should we carry that? Is it only at national level, or God being in control, would He not govern at the state and local level as well? Is every election outcome of every school board pre-ordained? What about within the church? Does God select the doorkeepers of every congregation, or does He expect us to practice some discretion?
I have been shocked and appalled lately to hear preached from church platforms that we should not criticize unrighteous presidents, because "God rules . . . and gives it to whomsoever He will." Even worse, they have defended wicked rulers as God's chosen agents, doing God's will. That God allows "the basest of men" to rule, should never be taken as evidence that God actually desires unrighteous rulers. Israel demanded a king, and God gave them one, but He rebuked Israel for wanting one and warned them of the consequences. Israel's demand was a rejection of God, but the lesson is, be careful what you ask for. The Old Testament is one long account of God's repeated condemnation of ungodly, unrighteous kings, as virtually all of them are. If our consciences are so seared that we no longer care about the wicked example set by those basest of men, we are in trouble.
Most political issues should be of little concern to believers. We know that God does rule. All that we may have is God's gift. We did not build it, and need not concern ourselves with defending it. The immorality of unbelievers is not our affair. This does not justify us sitting idly by, but warns us that we too must "break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor;"
I should also point out that the prophet Daniel was far from an apolitical disinterested bystander. Quite the opposite. Daniel was in a highly political position, as ruler of the province of Babylon, and in charge of all the king's counsellors: A political position that made Daniel and his associates the objects of repeated political plots to destroy them. I would hesitate to carry that too far as an example to us, but those of you who claim to understand and interpret visions of the future, like Daniel's, might want to warn the president about hubris.
"And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honored him that lives for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation: And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he does according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou? At the same time my reason returned unto me; and for the glory of my kingdom, mine honor and brightness returned unto me; and my counsellors and my lords sought unto me; and I was established in my kingdom, and excellent majesty was added unto me. Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, all whose works are truth, and his ways judgment: and those that walk in pride he is able to abase."So, Nebuchadnezzar learned that kings and rulers should not get too big for their britches, lest they wear none.
He learned that God rules, and can give kingdoms, or take them away, set up kings, or cut them down, at His whim, and none can question God's doings.
He learned that a claim that "I built this," tempts God to prove that, no, he didn't. God gave it him, and could as easily take it away.
Does this chapter tell us that every king, every ruler, every president, governor, prime minister, of every nation on earth for all time is individually selected, appointed, ordained, authorized, by God, as part of a minutely detailed, pre-ordained, exact plan? I do not think so. I don't read that into it. God can set up or remove anyone He chooses. He certainly has that power. God also has options, adapting to the free will choices people make. But to take the book of Daniel as being typical of how God works with all rulers, would carry the story way beyond it's lessons. It would take away any free will among the nations. We would all just be marionettes, dancing on God's strings. How far down should we carry that? Is it only at national level, or God being in control, would He not govern at the state and local level as well? Is every election outcome of every school board pre-ordained? What about within the church? Does God select the doorkeepers of every congregation, or does He expect us to practice some discretion?
I have been shocked and appalled lately to hear preached from church platforms that we should not criticize unrighteous presidents, because "God rules . . . and gives it to whomsoever He will." Even worse, they have defended wicked rulers as God's chosen agents, doing God's will. That God allows "the basest of men" to rule, should never be taken as evidence that God actually desires unrighteous rulers. Israel demanded a king, and God gave them one, but He rebuked Israel for wanting one and warned them of the consequences. Israel's demand was a rejection of God, but the lesson is, be careful what you ask for. The Old Testament is one long account of God's repeated condemnation of ungodly, unrighteous kings, as virtually all of them are. If our consciences are so seared that we no longer care about the wicked example set by those basest of men, we are in trouble.
Most political issues should be of little concern to believers. We know that God does rule. All that we may have is God's gift. We did not build it, and need not concern ourselves with defending it. The immorality of unbelievers is not our affair. This does not justify us sitting idly by, but warns us that we too must "break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor;"
I should also point out that the prophet Daniel was far from an apolitical disinterested bystander. Quite the opposite. Daniel was in a highly political position, as ruler of the province of Babylon, and in charge of all the king's counsellors: A political position that made Daniel and his associates the objects of repeated political plots to destroy them. I would hesitate to carry that too far as an example to us, but those of you who claim to understand and interpret visions of the future, like Daniel's, might want to warn the president about hubris.
It seems to me that the real lesson we should take from Daniel chapter 4 is that God's "plan" depends on no one. Human rulers, kings, presidents, nations, empires, armies, are all inconsequential. There is no individual upon whom God (or his plan) depend. Trump/Biden? Makes no difference to God. Americans, in their nationalistic pride, may be foolish enough to think God would somehow feel that our petty politics are important, but to God, presidents are freely interchangeable. There is nothing that only one person could or would do that no one else could do. God can replace anyone, anytime, for any reason, at His whim. Rulers: Don't get impressed with yourselves. To God, you are nothing. Rulers who get too proud, invite God to humble them. Take warning.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletesorry, accidentally deleted your question while trying to edit my reply. Please repeat the excellent question.
DeleteYou mention that "most political issues should be of little concern to believers". Does this insinuate that there are SOME political issues that should be of concern to a believer? If so, what are they. And where do we draw the line?
DeleteThat's a really good question, that I was trying carefully to evade, with the weasel words, "most" and "little." but you caught me at it. I didn't say "No concern." I think we should be aware of, and interested in, events going on around us. I do not think we should be concerned in the sense of worried about anything in politics, but there are things we might need to respond to. "Concerned" in the sense of "involved" is a big subject, and a difficult question that I don't have the answer to. (This question is left as an exercise for the student)
DeleteOr, an actual answer to your question might be found in Daniel's advice, quoted above, in verse 27: "break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor." Our concerns should be focused on: Our own sins; and: The needs of the poor. If we focus on those, I don't think we can go far wrong. Most of politics gets it backwards, focusing on our own "needs," and the sins of the poor. (well, the sins of the rich and powerful have been getting a lot of headlines lately, but they tend to have fewer political consequences)
Delete