Walvoord writes that “the controversy over Belshazzar....has become one of the most complicated problems in the entire book.” Walvoord quotes Bible critics James A. Montgomery as saying the story of Belshazzar is “unhistorical” and also H. H. Rowley arguing that calling Belshazzar a king “must still be pronounced a grave historical error.”[1]
The problem with the critics is that Belshazzar is not mentioned by the ancient writers such as Herodotus (484 – 425 BC). Herodotus was an ancient Greek historian who became known as “The Father of History.” When the “Father of History” does not mention Belshazzar, the critics as usual jump to the conclusion that Daniel has historical errors. Daniel five fits the theme of Daniel.
I. Our Sovereign God Blesses Godly Character (Daniel 1)
II. Our Sovereign God Controls the Nations (chapters 2-7)
A. Our Sovereign God Gives Wisdom (2:1-30)
B. Our Sovereign God Predicts the Future (2:31-49) (“The Times of the Gentiles”)
C. Our Sovereign God Tests our Faith (3:1-30)
D. Our Sovereign God Humbles the Proud (4-5). Two examples (Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel four and Belshazzar in Daniel five).
o Nebuchadnezzar died in 562 B.C. after a 43 year reign. About 30 years have elapsed since chapter four. Daniel is in his early eighties.
o Evil-Merodach, Nebuchadnezzar’s son, succeeded his father. He released Jehoiachin from prison and was kind to Jehoiachin in 2 Kings 25:27-30; Jeremiah 52:31-34.
o Neriglissar, Evil-Merodach’s brother-in-law, murdered Evil-Merocach in 560. He ruled four years.
o His young son, Labashi-Marduk, ruled only nine months and was assassinated the same year by a gang led by Nabonidus, Nebuchadnezzar’s son-in-law.
o Nabonidus reigned for seventeen years. For fourteen years he reigned from Arabia. The so-called Nabonidus Chronicle is incomplete, but it tells of the return of Nabonidus to Babylon to perform the new year festival. The date is missing, but ‘seventeenth year” is conjectured, for the armies of Cyrus were closing in. The month Tashritu (the seventh month) is named in connection with the attack of Cyrus on the Babylonian army at Opis on the Tigris and the revolt of the city and its massacre. ‘The 15th day Sippar was seized without battle. Nabonidus fled. The 16th day Gobryas the governor of Gutium and the army of Cyrus entered Babylon without battle.’ Presumably this was the event referred to in Daniel 5:30, though it was during the next month that Cyrus entered the city in person (2 November 539).[2]
o The secular historians omit Belshazzar, Nabonidus’ son who started his reign in 553 B.C. This is why Belshazzar could offer Daniel the “Triumvir” or third ruler in 5:29. Belshazzar’s name means Bel, another name for the Babylonian god Marduk, protects the king.” Critics like James A. Montgomery and H. H. Rowley reject the authenticity of Belshazzar because his name was not found in history.
But with the discovery of the Nabonidus cylinders from Ur (in 1854), his son’s name Belshazzar,[2] was discovered. The cylinders state that Nabonidus prays to the moon goddess Sin: that his son may be faithful to her cult: “May it be that I, Nabonidus, king of Babylon, never fail you. And may my firstborn, Belshazzar, worship you with all his heart."[3]
More recent critics argue that although now Belshazzar has been mentioned in history, he has never been mentioned as king. Here is another quote from the Nabonidus cylinder: "[Nabonidus] entrusted the army to his oldest son, his first born, the troops in the country he ordered under his command. He let everything go, entrusted the kingship to him, and, himself, he started out for a long journey. The military forces of Akkad marching with him, he turned to Temâ deep in the west."[4]
1. The Pride of Belshazzar (5:1-16)
a) Belshazzar’s contempt for man (5:1)
In 5:1, Belshazzar hosted a debauched party for 1000 of his nobles while his enemies the Persians surrounded the city possibly to build morale, since the city was under siege. Constable refers to the ancient Greek historian Herodotus. Babylon occupied about 14 square miles with a double wall system enclosing a moat between the two walls. The outer wall was 87 feet thick, wide enough for four chariots to drive abreast on. It was 350 feet high with 100 gates, plus hundreds more towers that reached another 100 feet above the walls.[5] Belshazzar will experience Proverbs 16:18: “Pride goes before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.”
b) Belshazzar’s contempt for the God of Nebuchadnezzar and Israel (5:2-4)
Nebuchadnezzar was the “father” or forefather of Belshazzar as David was the father of Jesus in Matthew 1:1. Belshazzar in his drunkenness wants to please his gods by blaspheming Israel’s God by sinfully drinking out of the vessel carried back from the defeat of Jerusalem in 1:1-2. Belshazzar “tasted” not only the flavor but the costly effects of his wine. He also experienced Proverbs 20:1.
Evidently the vessels taken from the Jerusalem temple had been stored as trophies of war for 47 years and not used previously. Their presence in the warehouses of Babylon was sufficient humiliation of Yahweh who, in the minds of the Babylonians, could not prevent their theft. However, using these vessels in praise of Babylon’s gods was even more sacrilegious than just possessing them (Constable). Proverbs 20:1 warns against the effects of drinking. But Belshazzar’s greater sin was the rejection of the one true God. The Holy Spirit convicts of the sin of unbelief or rejecting Christ as Savior in John 16:8-9.
c) God’s message to the proud (5:5-12)
The fear of the unsaved is demonstrated in (5:5-7). “In the ruins of Nebuchadnezzar’s palace archeologists have uncovered a large throne room 56 feet wide and 173 feet long which probably was the scene of this banquet. Midway in the long wall opposite the entrance there was a niche in front of which the king may well have been seated. Interestingly, the wall behind the niche was covered with white plaster as described by Daniel, which would make an excellent background for such a writing.”[6]
Unlike Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, which was private to him, the handwriting was public to all participating in the sacrilege. God’s supernatural message brought the fear of God to the blasphemous party. Belshazzar could offer the position of third in the kingdom because he was coregent to his father.
The inability of unsaved to understand God’s message is seen (5:8). Even greater fear returned when the wise could not give the meaning (5:9). The queen-mother is probably the wife of Nabonidus and daughter of Nebuchadnezzar and thus Belshazzar’s mother. She has intimate knowledge of Daniel’s ability. She used the description of Daniel as did her father in 4:8, 9, 18. Perhaps an indication that she also now was a believer.
What a drastic contrast between proud and arrogant Belshazzar and humble Daniel who had “an excellent spirit” (5:12) that is an excellent attitude. This virtue is repeated in 6:3. The queen-mother had known Daniel for about 66 years. His testimony was God honoring.
c) The reaching out to believers for help in times of crises (5:13-16). The world has knowledge but not wisdom as previously seen in Daniel 2 and 4. When really severe crises arise, it is often the man or woman of God that others turn to for answers. Belshazzar knew Daniel was from “Jewry” or Judah, the place from where the sacred vessels he had been desecrating. Belshazzar tells Daniel, “I have heard of you” in 5:14, 16. What testimony preceded Daniel? He was godly, which included and “excellent attitude” and he was wise. He did not cause problems; he helped solve “problems” (5:12) or knotty problems.
2. The Humbling of Belshazzar (5:17-28)
a) Nebuchadnezzar hardened his heart in pride (5:17-21)
G. R. King calls Daniel’s reply a sermon and “What a great sermon it is” (Daniel, p.148). The theme of the sermon was God is Sovereign. The first main division was: Yet Nebuchadnezzar was proud (vv.20-21) and God humbled him. Daniel does not respect Belshazzar as he does Darius in 6:2 whom he addresses with “O king, live forever.” Daniel began and ended his first point with “the most high God” in 5:18 and 21 i.e., The God you just blasphemed. Respect has to be earned. God sovereignly gave Nebuchadnezzar his kingdom and power in verse 19 (which he had abused) and Nebuchadnezzar had human responsibility in 5:20. God humbled Nebuchadnezzar in 5:20-21.
b) Belshazzar did not humble himself (5:22-23)
The second main division was: Belshazzar did not humble himself (22-23) and God will humble you.
Belshazzar is in stark contrast to Nebuchadnezzar.
Nebuchadnezzar was the only king and Belshazzar was number two.
Nebuchadnezzar had no example to learn from like Belshazzar had.
Nebuchadnezzar stole the sacred vessels; Belshazzar blasphemed God with those vessels. Belshazzar sinned against much more light and therefore his judgment was more severe as Daniel eloquently declares in 5:22-23. Daniel’s rebuke reminds us of Proverbs 21:1. What he did have in common with Nebuchadnezzar was his pride.
God judges the proud. The judgment was pronounced (5:25-28).
Joyce Baldwin explains away the supernatural.
Here then was the king, confronted with three words indicating measures of weight, mina, shekel, half (as it might be ‘ton, hundredweight, quarter’), and claiming to have seen a magical hand writing them! In view of the effects of much wine the appearance of a hand is not difficult to account for, and it was suggested many years ago that ‘the words Mene, Tekel, Parsin are just what would be suitable to a steward’s room, which may have communicated with the banqueting hall … Some serving man may have left the door into the banqueting hall open so that the words caught the king’s eye at a moment when his conscience was struggling with his clouded brain, and the lights of the candlestick may have contributed to produce the awful effect. Nevertheless, it was a message from God, though produced, as Divine messages usually are, by natural means’. The suggestion accounts for the facts recorded, and in no way detracts from the truth of verse 24.
Scholars have wearied themselves trying to figure out how Daniel got his interpretation from these three apparently Aramaic words. They have been as unsuccessful as Belshazzar’s original wise men were. It seems best to me simply to take Daniel’s interpretation at face value even though we may not be able to understand completely how he arrived at it. It has been said that Daniel could interpret these words because he recognized his Father’s handwriting (Constable quotes Campbell at the end).
The three words indicated that Belshazzar’s minutes maybe hours were numbered, but so is every person (Hebrews 9:27) . He was weighted in God’s balance and found wanting or lacking. “The thought here is that Belshazzar was found too light immoral and spiritual worth to balance out God’s standard of righteousness (cf. 1 Sam. 2:3; Job 31:6; Ps. 62:9; Prov. 16:2.”[7] The third word means divided. Ironically, as Daniel interpreted God’s verdict against Babylon, the Medes and Persians were already pouring into the city (Constable) who would divide or separate Belshazzar’s kingdom from him.
The judgment fulfilled (5:29-31) on October 12, 539 B.C. This judgment fulfilled Daniel 5:28 and Isaiah 13:17-22; 21:1-10; 47:1-5, and Jeremiah 51:33-58.
Eighty years later, Herodotus pictured Babylon’s fall as follows. “Hereupon the Persians who had been left for the purpose at Babylon by the river-side, entered the stream, which had now sunk so as to reach about midway up a man’s thigh, and thus got into the town. Had the Babylonians been appraised of what Cyrus was about, or had they noticed their danger, they would never have allowed the Persians to enter the city, but would have destroyed them utterly; for they would have made fast all the street-gates which gave upon the river, and mounting upon the walls along both sides of the stream, would so have caught the enemy as it were in a trap. But, as it was, the Persians came upon them by surprise and took the city. Owing to the vast size of the place, the inhabitants of the central parts (as the residents at Babylon declare), long after the outer portions of the town were taken, knew nothing of what had chanced, but as they were engaged in a festival, continued dancing and revelling [sic] until they learnt the capture but too certainly” (Herodotus, 1:191).
“The downfall of Babylon is in type the downfall of the unbelieving world [cf. Rev. 17—18]. In many respects, modern civilization is much like ancient Babylon, resplendent with its monuments of architectural triumph, as secure as human hands and ingenuity could make it, and yet defenseless against the judgment of God at the proper hour. Contemporary civilization is similar to ancient Babylon in that it has much to foster human pride but little to provide human security. Much as Babylon fell on the sixteenth day of Tishri (Oc. 11 or 12) 539 B.C., as indicated in the Nabonidus Chronicle, so the world will be overtaken by disaster when the day of the Lord comes (1 Th 5:1-2; Rev 19:15-16). The disaster of the world, however, does not overtake the child of God;
Daniel survives the purge and emerges triumphant as one of the presidents of the new kingdom in chapter.”[8] “As God had judged Nebuchadnezzar’s pride by removing him from the throne, so He would judge Belshazzar’s pride by taking the kingdom from him and giving it to another people.”[9]
This judgment portends the future defeat of Gentiles nations
1. The Medes and the Persians were the second phase of the Times of the Gentiles predicted by Daniel in 2:32 and 39.
2. The judgment of future Gentile nations will happen in Rev 19:15-16.
[1] Quoted in Walvoord (114-115).
[2] Baldwin, J. G. (1978). Daniel: An Introduction and Commentary (Vol. 23, p. 133). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
[3] Nabonidus Cylinder, iii.3-31
[4] Nabonidus Cylinder, ii. 18-29
[5] Herodotus, 1:178-83.
[6] Walvoord, p. 120. Cf. Montgomery, p. 253; Kraeling, p. 327; and Young, p. 120.
[7] Leon Wood, p. 150).
[8] (Walvoord, p. 131. For the Nabonidus
Chronicle reference, see John C. Whitcomb, Darius the Mede, p. 73).
[9] (Pentecost).