Daniel 5:13-30

The Writing on the Wall Interpreted

13 Then Daniel was brought in before the king. The king said to Daniel, “So you are Daniel, one of the exiles of Judah, whom my father the king brought from Judah? 14 I have heard of you that a spirit of the gods is in you, and that enlightenment, understanding, and excellent wisdom are found in you. 15 Now the wise men, the enchanters, have been brought in before me to read this writing and tell me its interpretation, but they were not able to give the interpretation of the matter. 16 But I have heard that you can give interpretations and solve problems. Now if you are able to read the writing and tell me its interpretation, you shall be clothed in purple, have a chain of gold around your neck, and rank third in the kingdom.”

17 Then Daniel answered in the presence of the king, “Let your gifts be for yourself, or give your rewards to someone else! Nevertheless I will read the writing to the king and let him know the interpretation. 18 O king, the Most High God gave your father Nebuchadnezzar kingship, greatness, glory, and majesty. 19 And because of the greatness that he gave him, all peoples, nations, and languages trembled and feared before him. He killed those he wanted to kill, kept alive those he wanted to keep alive, honored those he wanted to honor, and degraded those he wanted to degrade. 20 But when his heart was lifted up and his spirit was hardened so that he acted proudly, he was deposed from his kingly throne, and his glory was stripped from him. 21 He was driven from human society, and his mind was made like that of an animal. His dwelling was with the wild asses, he was fed grass like oxen, and his body was bathed with the dew of heaven, until he learned that the Most High God has sovereignty over the kingdom of mortals, and sets over it whomever he will. 22 And you, Belshazzar his son, have not humbled your heart, even though you knew all this! 23 You have exalted yourself against the Lord of heaven! The vessels of his temple have been brought in before you, and you and your lords, your wives and your concubines have been drinking wine from them. You have praised the gods of silver and gold, of bronze, iron, wood, and stone, which do not see or hear or know; but the God in whose power is your very breath, and to whom belong all your ways, you have not honored.

24 “So from his presence the hand was sent and this writing was inscribed. 25 And this is the writing that was inscribed: MENE, MENE, TEKEL, and PARSIN. 26 This is the interpretation of the matter: MENE, God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end; 27 TEKEL, you have been weighed on the scales and found wanting; 28 PERES, your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.”

29 Then Belshazzar gave the command, and Daniel was clothed in purple, a chain of gold was put around his neck, and a proclamation was made concerning him that he should rank third in the kingdom.

30 That very night Belshazzar, the Chaldean king, was killed. 31 And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old. (Daniel 5:13-30, NRSV)

On April 26, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One), comments were repeated from April 14, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One); the comments are repeated here with editing and supplement:

As noted yesterday, the queen mother remembers Daniel’s help and advises Belshazzar to call him. Amy-Jill Levine notes that she is “the only woman to speak in the book” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., on Dan. 5:10-22). “The account may reflect knowledge of Nebuchadnezzar’s wife who, according to Herodotus, had exceptional wisdom and political ability.” Her advice is taken, and “Daniel was brought in before the king. The king said to Daniel, ‘So you are Daniel, one of the exiles of Judah, whom my father the king brought from Judah?’ ” (Dan. 5:13). “Reference to the exile,” says Levine, “makes a fitting start to a chapter that concludes with the fall of Babylon (5:30)” (ibid., on v. 13). Pamela J. Milne, revised by John J. Collins, notes that “the new king does not seem to know Daniel; see vv. 11-12; Ex. 1:8” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Dan. 5:13). The king praises (flatters?) Daniel. “I have heard of you that a spirit of the gods is in you, and that enlightenment, understanding, and excellent wisdom are found in you” (v. 14). He presents his own version of the situation. “Now the wise men, the enchanters, have been brought in before me to read this writing and tell me its interpretation, but they were not able to give the interpretation of the matter” (v. 15). So he offers honors to Daniel if he can read and interpret the handwriting. “But I have heard that you can give interpretations and solve problems. Now if you are able to read the writing and tell me its interpretation, you shall be clothed in purple, have a chain of gold around your neck, and rank third in the kingdom” (v. 16). As “third in the kingdom,” Daniel would be below only “the king and crown prince” (as noted by Levine yesterday, op. cit., on v. 7, with ref. to 2:48).

But the offer of rank within the doomed kingdom, as we know, would soon be meaningless. Daniel, at any rate, seems to disregard the offer. ““Let your gifts be for yourself,” he says, “or give your rewards to someone else! Nevertheless I will read the writing to the king and let him know the interpretation” (v. 17). Daniel reminds the king of Nebuchadnezzar’s troubles “until he learned that the Most High God has sovereignty over the kingdom of mortals, and sets over it whomever he will” (v. 21), and rebuke’s him for not learning from his father’s mistake. “And you, Belshazzar his son, have not humbled your heart, even though you knew all this!” (v. 22). Daniel lists Belshazzar’s grievous sins. “You have exalted yourself against the Lord of heaven!” says Daniel, and he details the sacrilege of desecrating the temple vessels (v. 23). The writing on the wall is interpreted (vv. 24-28). Levine says, “MENE (Heb. ‘mina’) is a large weight and is related to the word ‘count’; TEKEL (Heb. ‘shekel’), related to the word ‘weight,’ is one-sixtieth of a mene; PARSIN are two spheres, with one sphere (or PERES) equaling a halfshekel; it is interpreted as meaning ‘divide’ ” (op. cit., on v. 25). Levine also notes that “the weights, which match the descending values of the metals in 2:32, symbolize Nebuchadnezzar’s successors, from Belshazzar through the Medes and the Persians” (ibid., on v. 28).

The king’s response is to reward Daniel as promised earlier, and Daniel appears to accept it (v. 29), but there is no repentance, only disaster. “That very night Belshazzar, the Chaldean king, was killed” (v. 30). The reference to “Darius the Mede” (v. 31 NRSV = Aram. 6:1) is problematic, but the lesson is clear. The Neo-Babylonian Empire did not last a full century; it was overthrown in one night by the army of Cyrus the Persian, which in 539 B.C., according to Herodotus, entered Babylon through the river bed without a battle (Histories, 1.189-191, cf. http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/babylon07.html, accessed again April 29, 2009).

1 John 5:13-20 (21)

Epilogue

13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

14 And this is the boldness we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. 15 And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him. 16 If you see your brother or sister committing what is not a mortal sin, you will ask, and God will give life to such a one-to those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin that is mortal; I do not say that you should pray about that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that is not mortal.

18 We know that those who are born of God do not sin, but the one who was born of God protects them, and the evil one does not touch them. 19 We know that we are God’s children, and that the whole world lies under the power of the evil one. 20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. (1 John 5:13-20 (21), NRSV)

On May 22, 2008 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 18, Year Two), comments were repeated with editing and supplement from April 26, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One), when comments were repeated from February 23, 2006 (Thursday in the week of the Seventh Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two) when they were repeated from April 14, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One). They are repeated again here:

In reflection on his earlier discussions, John begins with assurance to his readers. “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life” (1 Jn. 5:13). And he urges his readers to pray: “If we ask anything according to his will, he hears us” (v. 14).. And he adds, “if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him” (v. 15). Although we are grateful for this promise, we should not misunderstand. C. H. Dodd reminds us:

Nothing, however, leads us to suppose that God will grant just anything we choose to ask, simply because we want it. There are limiting conditions. In iii. 22 the condition is that of obedience to God; in John xv. 7 it is that we should remain in Christ, and have his words remaining in us; in John xiv. 14 it is that prayer should be in the name of Christ. . . . For prayer rightly considered is not a device for employing the resources of omnipotence to fulfil our own desires, but a means by which our desires may be redirected according to the mind of God, and made into channels for the forces of His will. (Johannine Epistles, the Moffatt Commentary, 1946, p. 134, on 1 Jn. 5:14).

If we come to realize that God really has our own best interest at heart, then we should want our desires to be in tune with his. The illustration of prayer that follows is about intercession: “If you see your brother or sister committing what is not a mortal sin, you will ask, and God will give life to such a one–to those whose sin is not mortal” (v. 16a). The discouragement of prayer for one who has committed “the sin that is mortal” (v. 16b) is not a prohibition. By the later church’s definitions of “mortal” or “deadly sins,” we would be advised not to pray for gluttons! Dodd doesn’t decide precisely what sin John has in mind here except to say, “It seems that the writer is thinking of an overt sinful act or course of action, and not of an inward state of mind, for it is something that can be observed by others and known for what it is” (ibid., p. 135, on 1 Jn. 5:17, cf. pp. 135-137).

If we have in mind any case where, to our limited view, such a prayer seems unlikely to be answered, we may recall what Jesus said when a man had refused what looked like his only chance of salvation–For men it is impossible, but not for God; anything is possible for God (Mark x. 27). (ibid., p. 137)

“All wrong-doing is sin,” says John, “but there is sin that is not mortal” (v. 17). Pheme Perkins says the words “to those whose sin is not mortal [distinguish] a category of sin that cannot be forgiven. Elsewhere such sin is denying that God’s Spirit is at work in Jesus (Mk. 3:28-30) or apostasy from Christian faith (Heb. 6:4-6). Here, the expression probably refers to the secessionists. Their break with the community means that they no longer dwell with God or have the Spirit (2:19-25)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on 1 Jn. 5:16-17).

The Epistle closes with a few reminders. “Those who are born of God do not sin [perhaps, ‘make a habit of sinning,’ present tense], but the one who was born of God [i.e. the Son of God] protects them” (v. 18, cf. 3:8-10). We “are God’s children,” but “the whole world lies under the power of the evil one” (v. 19). We live in two different worlds, as it were. Because the Son of God has come, we have understanding, we know God, and have eternal life through him (v. 20). And the last word, closing the “Epistle” more like a homily, as it began, than a letter, says, “Little children, keep yourselves from idols” (v. 21). According to Perkins,

Though it [1 John] lacks the formal features of an ancient letter–such as the opening greeting, designation of recipients and sender, reference to local persons, sender’s plans, and concluding greeting (see 2 and 3 John)–1 John presents itself as an authoritative, written communication between the sender and its audience (1:4; 2:1, 7-8, 12-14, 21, 26). (ibid., in the Introduction to “The First Letter of John”)

Luke 5:1-11

Jesus Calls the First Disciples (Mt 4.18-22; Mk 1.16-20)

5:1 Once while Jesus was standing beside the lake of Gennesaret, and the crowd was pressing in on him to hear the word of God, 2 he saw two boats there at the shore of the lake; the fishermen had gone out of them and were washing their nets. 3 He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon, and asked him to put out a little way from the shore. Then he sat down and taught the crowds from the boat. 4 When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, “Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch.” 5 Simon answered, “Master, we have worked all night long but have caught nothing. Yet if you say so, I will let down the nets.” 6 When they had done this, they caught so many fish that their nets were beginning to break. 7 So they signaled their partners in the other boat to come and help them. And they came and filled both boats, so that they began to sink. 8 But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man!” 9 For he and all who were with him were amazed at the catch of fish that they had taken; 10 and so also were James and John, sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. Then Jesus said to Simon, “Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching people.” 11 When they had brought their boats to shore, they left everything and followed him. (Luke 5:1-11, NRSV)

On September 29, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two), comments were repeated from September 30, 2007 (the Sunday closest to September 28, Year One), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from October 2, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to September 28, Year Two), when they were repeated from April 14, 2005 (Thursday of the week of the Third Sunday of Easter, Year One). The revised comments are repeated again here:

Consider this passage and a similar passage from John’s Gospel:]

In Luke this account of the Miraculous Draught of Fish comes within a series of episodes in which he clearly follows Mark’s order: the Healing of Peter’s Mother-in-law (Mk. 1:29; Mt. 8:14-15; Lk. 4:38-39), the Sick Healed at Evening (Mk. 1:32-34; Mt. 8:16-17; Lk. 4:40-41), Jesus Departs from Capernaum (Mk. 1:35-38; Lk. 4:42-43), the First Preaching Tour in Galilee (Mk. 1:39; Mt. 4:23; Lk. 4:44) . . . the Cleansing of the Leper (Mk. 1:40-45; Mt. 8:1-4; Lk. 5:12-16), and the Healing of the Paralytic (Mk. 2:1-12; Mt. 9:1-8; Lk. 5:17-20) (cf. Aland, secs. 37-43, pp.35 -41).

In response to some critics, I. Howard Marshall denies that Luke has “created his story simply on the basis of what he read in Mk.:

The fact that Luke has omitted Mark’s story of the call of the four fishermen shows clearly that he regarded this story as equivalent to it. . . . [for] the fact that it occurs at a different position in the narrative and that its contents go well beyond Mk. prove this point. Nevertheless, it is clear that Luke knew Mark’s account and that it has influenced his own telling of the story; parallelism with Mk. can be seen in vs. 1-3, 10f., and many scholars would claim that Luke has drawn on Mk. for most or all of the material in these verses. (Commentary on Luke, NIGTC, 1978, p. 199 on Lk. 5:1-11)

But more significant, perhaps, is what Marshal calls the

parallel to the part of the incident not recorded in Mk., namely the miraculous catch of fish, in Jn. 21:1-14. The two stories show a considerable amount of agreement in detail: after fishing all night, the disciples have caught nothing. Jesus commands them to let the nets down. They do so, and make an enormous catch. The effect on the nets is noted. Peter (in Jn., the beloved disciple) reacts to the miracle. Jesus is called Lord. The other fishermen present say nothing. The motif of following Jesus is present, and the catch of fish is symbolic of missionary success. (ibid., pp. 199-200, on Lk. 5:1-11, citing Brown, John, II, 1090)

Remarkably, while Luke’s account of Jesus calling four disciples (cf. Mark 1:16-20) comes here, the part about the miraculous draught of fish, which has no parallel in Mark, is similar to an account which John puts after the resurrection of Jesus in a kind of epilogue (Jn., chap. 21). In Luke, Jesus gets into the boat and teaches the crowds on the shore (Lk. 5:3), whereas, in John, Simon Peter and six other disciples have gone fishing (Jn. 21:2-3a), and Jesus appears later on the beach (v. 4). In both accounts, the disciples have apparently spent the previous night fishing with no success (Lk. 5:5; Jn. 21:3b), but they are directed to try again. “Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch,” says Jesus, according to Luke (Lk. 5:4). A similar instruction is given in John’s account after a question about their fishing success, a question that implies a negative answer (introduced in Greek by the negative particle mhv (mē), “Children, you have no fish, have you?” (Jn. 21:5). In John, Jesus knows what people are thinking (cf. 2:24-25). “Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch,” says Jesus to Simon in Luke (Lk. 5:4). In John, he says, “Cast the net to the right side of the boat, and you will find some” (Jn. 21:6a). In both accounts the result is a miraculous catch, more than the fishermen can handle. “When they had done this,” says Luke, “they caught so many fish that their nets were beginning to break” (Lk. 5:6). After calling for help from “their partners in the other boat” (v. 7a), they “filled both boats, so that they began to sink” (v. 7b). John’s report of the success is brief. “So they cast it [the net, on the right side of the boat as directed], and now they were not able to haul it in because there were so many fish” (Jn. 21:6b).

There are significant differences between the two reports, of course, not least in the setting. In Luke, in human terms, at least, the disciples know from the beginning with whom they are dealing–at least they know that it is Jesus. Even so there is recognition involved. When Simon Peter sees the miraculous catch, he falls to his knees, and says, “Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man!” (Lk. 5:8). The statement is more about Peter’s humility and sense of inadequacy than about his desire for Jesus to leave. In John’s account, it is at this point that Peter, prompted by the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” recognizes the Lord (Jn. 21:7). In John’s account, Jesus invites the disciples to breakfast on the beach (vv. 9-10), and we are told the size of the catch, “large fish, a hundred fifty-three of them,” but “though there were so many, the net was not torn” (v. 11). In Luke’s account, after noting the disciples amazement (Lk. 5:9-10), Jesus, in a statement that relates to Mark’s account of the call of the disciples (Mk. 1:16-20, esp. v. 19), says to Peter, “Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching people” (Lk. 5:10). And the result is stated: “When they had brought their boats to shore, they left everything and followed him” (v. 11; cf. Mk. 1:20; Mt. 4:22). This also relates to the context in John, where the breakfast is followed by Jesus’ conversation with Peter, asking about Peter’s love for him, and urging him to “Feed my lambs/sheep” (Jn. 21:15, 16, 17).

Marshall leaves aside “the analysis of John’s narrative, since there is no evidence,” he says, “that Luke was dependent upon it. The question is rather that of the relation between the traditions used by the two Evangelists” (ibid., p. 200). He does note that the “motif of following Jesus is present [in both accounts], and the catch of fish is symbolic of missionary success” (ibid., p. 200 on Lk. 5:1-11, citing Brown, John, II, 1090). He notes that Luke’s account

singles out one particular episode by the Lake of Gennesaret, and then lets the spotlight fall upon one particular group of hearers, Simon and his companions, who not only listened to his preaching, but also responded to his command to go and fish in an unpropitious situation. When their obedience resulted in a miraculous catch of fish, Simon was overwhelmed with a sense of the holiness of Jesus as the Lord. But Jesus summoned him to join him in a new task of ‘catching’ men, and Simon and his companions (including the sons of Zebedee) abandoned their previous way of life to join him in his mission. (op. cit., p. 199)

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net