The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 115

thus suffering sncrifloa nnd incenAo to be ecribe of the un_iverse, who henrs the •nprcmo offerod to him, from thnt subsisting in sceptre, the interpreter of the, cr:kstin.l tho timo of tha Macco.becs. No writer of spheres." In p. 189 Ncrge.l is n<lnrrss<:r! "" tho.t period would ho.ve written B sacred "great prince of the greateet go,IR, who hna rom1moo in which ho represented 0, servant brought up the gren,test gorls." Tn his 'L& of God 1·cceiving idolatrous hononrR. The Mngie,' p. 175, he givee on e.d,lrees to Bililc- nttitudo of lo.tor Judo.ism is exemplifie1l by mulu-hi, regarded e.s nu Accadinn name of Jcphot-ibn-Ali, who so.ye that though" No- Me.rduk, in which he is called "god of buchadnezzar commo.nded that sacrifices ba gode." In his 'Hibbert Lcctnre,'pp. 97-10•~. brought to him as to e. god, ho (Daniel) Professor Rnyce, on the contrast between tlw does not say the.t he brought them to him. religion of Babylon and that of Persia in Most probably Daniel prohibited him from this respect, says the.t N cbuchadnczza.r cnlls doing so." Meroclach "lord of all," yet declares him Ver. 47.-The king answered unto D•niel, the "son of the gods." The same titles and said, Of a truth it is, that your God is e. a.re given to Merode.ch and to Samas, and God of gods, and e. Lord of kings, and a yet Se.me.a is distinct from Merodach-he Revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldest is his comrade in the struggle with the reveal this secret. The versions do not asse.ile.nte of Oris, the moon-god. 1 At the exhibit e.ny important variation from the same time, we must observe the limitations Me.ssoretio text. We must observe the of Nebuche.dnezzaT's praise-it is simply ns pluro.l form of the pronoun "your," imply- the Revealer of secrets that he praises e.nd ing the Hebrew nation as a whole, or e.t honours the God of Daniel. all events the three youths along with Vere. 48, 49.-Then the king me.de Do.Diel Do.niel. It must be noted that the titles a great man, and gave him m!llly great gifts, are not in the emphe.tio state, but are simply and me.de him ruler over the whole province absolute, implying that Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, e.nd chief of the governors over simply placed the God of heaven, the God Bll the wise men of Babylon. Then Daniel of Daniel, in his pantheon, as one of the requeGted of the king, e,p.d he .set She.drach, superior gods. The historical difficulty that Meshe.ch, e.nd Abed-nego, over the affairs of some have soon in Nebuchadnezzar making the province of :Ba.bylon: tut Daniel sat in this confession to God, and yet straightwe.y the ge.te of the king. In the Greek ver- framing e. golden image, is due to e. failure sions there is not much to be observed. The to understand the attitude of e. polytheist Septuagint renders the last clause of ver. to his gods. To the hen.then his god is e. 48 "chief and ruler (apxov-ra o:al f,-yovµ,vov) person he is afraid of, much more powerful of e.11 tho wise men of Babylon," reading than he is himself, e.ble to do him much ill, iilt'gan instead of signeen. Theodotion's is e. or, on the other hand, able to bestow upon fairly accurate rendering of the Massoretic him much good, but able to be deceived, text, as is also Jerome. The Peshitta ren- cajoled, e.nd flattered. In worshipping his ders this clause, " He made Daniel head deities the hen.then feels that any breach over all the mighty men (rabi~eela),and over of sacred etiquette in regard to e.ny deity all the wise men of Babylon." The trans- ie fe.r more certain of bringing down the lator must he.ve inserted, or found before vengeance of the aggrieved power the.n e.ny him inserted, the preposition Si, ('el), "over,'' crime, however heinous. He would be most between rab and s-ignee11, evidently a. false potent in prayer who could go over all the reading, due to ignorance of the form Baby- deities of the pantheon, and give to ea.eh his lonian and Assyrian titles assumed. Tbe or her appropriate title. Thus the Hindus word Jll', or E9, was originally maintained tell tales of fokirs whose power over the gods we.a due to this. Ono of the forms of to be Persian. Hitzig connects it with e.n this religious etiquette wo.s to address each Arabic root, :sajcm, but the true derivation deity e.e if he were the supreme god who is now found to be shalmn (Assyrian), alone deserved worship. Lenormant ('Les "governor." It appears in Hebrew in Jere- Premicres Civilizations,' ii. 159) gives e.n miah, Ezekiel, and the <leutero-Ise.iah, as address to the god Hourki, or Sin, in which well as in Ezra e.nd N ehemie.h, showing he is called "prince of the gods of heaven tho unlikelihood of any Persian derivation. o.nd earth, the good god, the great god, l:litzig appears to regard Daniel e.s made father of gods e.nd men, tho lord who tho king's regent over the whole empire of extends his power over heaven and earth." Babylon; but this is not at all the meaning Jn the so.me work (p. 178) there is e.n address of the words. We must not be led a.way to to llfordul, (Meroduoh), tho fovourito deity of N obuchadnozzar, in whioh he is co.llocl 1 Compnre 'Inscription of Ti~lnth-pile- "god of gods, king of heaven and earth." ser,' • Rt,cords of the Past,' N.S., i. 92; nrnl A little further on in the snme work (p. 18-1) also• Inditi House Inscription of Nchucl1a,l- Nchu iB milled "the supremo intelligrnco, nPzzar,' N.S., iii. 112.  76 'I'll!<~ BOOK OF DANJJU,. [crt. n.,l~Hl,