Daniel 6:1–28

6:1–2 King Darius installed “120 satraps” and “over them three high officials.” This authority structure was probably in place within the first year after Darius’s arrival and included Daniel as one of the three high officials (or presidents); to Daniel, “these satraps should give account, so that the king might suffer no loss.”

A satrap was a protector of the kingdom, so Darius’s appointment of Daniel shows the king’s great trust in the Hebrew prophet. Darius likely believed Daniel could stave off signs of political corruption, especially financial loss. He probably learned about Daniel’s faithful service to Nebuchadnezzar, which explained his confidence. Furthermore, if he learned of Daniel’s prediction regarding Belshazzar’s downfall, he presumably would have trusted Daniel even more.

6:3 Now in his eighties, Daniel still stood out from others, just as he had as a teenager (1:17–20). His “excellent spirit” probably refers to his humble and wise demeanor. Darius was so impressed with Daniel that he planned to promote him to his highest rank yet: a position “over the whole kingdom.”

6:4–5 Once it became clear how much favor Daniel had garnered with King Darius, the other high officials and satraps “sought to find a ground for complaint against Daniel with regard to the kingdom.” They wanted to turn Darius against Daniel; with Daniel out of the way, one of them could fill the vacancy. Their jealousy parallels the animosity of “certain Chaldeans” toward “the Jews” in 3:8–12.

The problem for the jealous leaders was that they could find no fault in Daniel to expose. His faithfulness was so constant and evident that they had no grounds on which to accuse him before the king. Their jealousy led them to agree, “We shall not find any ground for complaint against this Daniel unless we find it in connection with the law of his God.” If Daniel’s faithfulness was unwavering, they could use that faithfulness against him.

6:6–9 The high officials and satraps conspired together and came to the king, who remained unaware of their plan. They addressed him with the common expression “O King Darius, live forever!” The leaders hoped to manipulate him unwittingly to facilitate Daniel’s demise. They claimed that all the important people the king valued had agreed that a royal ordinance should be made concerning prayer: “Whoever makes petition to any god or man for thirty days, except to you, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions.”

The nature of their request accomplished two goals. First, it flattered the king, as prayer would be made to him for thirty days, and such flattery increased the likelihood of his consent. For thirty days he would be the people’s god! Second, by focusing on the matter of prayer, the leaders could use Daniel’s faithfulness against him. They were confident that if Darius issued an order contrary to Daniel’s devotion, Daniel would remain faithful to “the law of his God” (v. 5).

The conspirators knew that an incentive for obedience might be necessary, so they suggested that violators “be cast into the den of lions.” With the fear of death hanging over them, the people would comply.

The high officials and satraps insisted that Darius “establish the injunction and sign the document, so that it cannot be changed, according to the law of the Medes and the Persians, which cannot be revoked.”¹ What appealed to the leaders was the irrevocable nature of Medo-Persian injunctions; otherwise the king might change his mind, when he discovered that Daniel was a violator. The conspirators successfully manipulated Darius (v. 9); all they needed now was time for Daniel to violate this royal injunction.

6:10 The law became public knowledge. Daniel’s behavior is described with great detail, noting his knowledge of the law and his place and habit of prayer. First, Daniel “knew that the document had been signed.” Either the king spoke directly to his leaders about it—since probably not all 120 satraps had been present for the meeting with Darius in verses 6–9—or Daniel found out indirectly from a royal representative.

Second, Daniel “went to his house where he had windows in his upper chamber open toward Jerusalem.” Windows facing Jerusalem were a symbol of hope for return from exile. Solomon had prayed that if God’s people were ever exiled and then repented “with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their enemies, who carried them captive, and [prayed] to you toward their land” (1 Kings 8:48), then God would hear from heaven and forgive them and grant them compassion (vv. 49–50). Daniel knew the curse of exile was temporary. Moreover, he knew that since Babylon had been conquered, the return was imminent.

Third, facing Jerusalem in his upper room, Daniel “got down on his knees three times a day and prayed and gave thanks before his God, as he had done previously.” During one of those previous times, Daniel had received the revelation of the seventy weeks (Dan. 9:1–3, 20–27), a revelation that would have strengthened his resolve during exile. “As he had done previously” shows that Daniel did not alter his behavior after finding out about the royal injunction. It is not specified how long Daniel had been practicing such prayerful devotion, but it is reasonable to assume he maintained such practice throughout his decades in this foreign land. No matter what ruler he served, no matter what empire was in power, no matter what rank he held, no matter how many friends or enemies he made, no matter how acceptable or risky his devotion, Daniel was a man of prayer.

Daniel 6:10–13 is framed by an inclusio: Daniel violated the injunction by praying three times a day (v. 10), and the conspirers informed Darius that Daniel had violated the injunction by praying three times a day (v. 13).

6:11 The conspirators knew where Daniel lived, and they agreed to go to his home and catch him praying to God. It would be difficult to universally enforce the new royal injunction regarding prayer, but the jealous leaders were not interested in the prayer habits of the masses. They cared only about Daniel. Since Daniel’s habit was to pray three times a day with his windows open, the conspirers needed only to observe whether Daniel maintained his practice. Evidence of his thrice-daily prayer pattern would have been visible to onlookers below and, given his character, it was unlikely he would deny the charge.

6:12–13 The high officials and satraps who had previously manipulated Darius now came to him and inquired whether they correctly understood the injunction. The king confirmed their understanding, insisting the injunction could not be revoked. The conspirators had the king right where they wanted him; it was time to expose Daniel as a lawbreaker: “Daniel, who is one of the exiles from Judah, pays no attention to you, O king, or the injunction you have signed, but makes his petition three times a day.” They accused Daniel of knowingly ignoring not only the injunction but the king himself.

6:14 The king’s reaction may have surprised the accusers, who surely hoped that knowledge of betrayal would provoke rage and swift action. On the contrary, Darius “was much distressed and set his mind to deliver Daniel.” He did not want Daniel to die, and he spent the rest of the day seeking a way to rescue him.

6:15 The accusers would not tolerate the king’s reluctance. Using words similar to verse 8, they reminded him that Medo-Persian ordinances could not be revoked, and Darius himself had already used the language of irrevocability (v. 12); despite his desire to spare Daniel, doing so would be going against “the law of the Medes and Persians.”

6:16–17 Bound by the wording of the royal injunction, Darius ordered that Daniel be cast into the lions’ den. He told Daniel, “May your God, whom you serve continually, deliver you!” This statement recognized Daniel’s devotion to God and expressed Darius’s hope that the punishment would fail. Darius had kept his end of the matter by ordering Daniel, an exile from Judah now in his eighties, to be thrown to the lions. If Daniel’s God happened to intervene and deliver the faithful servant, it was out of the king’s hands.

To secure the lions’ den, “A stone was brought and laid on the mouth” of it, and then Darius sealed it with his signet and the signet of the lords. No one would chance trying to rescue Daniel, and Daniel himself certainly could not escape: breaking the king’s seal without authorization would warrant death.

6:18–19 Darius returned to his palace and “spent the night fasting” and avoiding any diversions. His fasting was not for religious reasons; he was simply too overwhelmed to eat. His mind was occupied with Daniel’s predicament, and nothing could distract him from these thoughts, not even sleep. Finally, at daybreak, Darius went to the den. His concern for Daniel was evident: he did not send a messenger but rushed there himself.

6:20 Darius neared the lions’ den and cried out in anguish to Daniel: “O Daniel, servant of the living God, has your God, whom you serve continually, been able to deliver you from the lions?” Darius knew that Daniel worshiped “the living God,” yet he was unsure if Daniel’s God had the power to deliver him from the lions. The issue of God’s ability was previously voiced in the narrative of the three faithful friends of Daniel, who declared to Nebuchadnezzar, “Our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace” (3:17). Chapters 3 and 6, each evoking God’s ability to deliver his servant(s) from death, are paired in the Aramaic chiasm of the book, and furthermore, the two chapters are arranged chiastically, with each central section (3:16–18 and 6:18–20) reporting dialogue concerning God’s ability to deliver.

6:21–22 Daniel greeted the king and answered his question: “My God sent his angel and shut the lions’ mouths, and they have not harmed me, because I was found blameless before him; and also before you, O king, I have done no harm.”

As in the deliverance of Daniel’s three Jewish friends (3:25, 28), God had used an angel to rescue Daniel. The lions spared Daniel not because they lacked an appetite but because an angel shut their mouths (cf. Heb. 11:33). Daniel’s lack of harm corresponded to his lack of blame: before God and before the king, Daniel had committed no act worthy of death in the lions’ den.

6:23 The king’s distress (vv. 14, 18) gave way to exceeding gladness. The Judean exile had survived the night, as Darius had hoped, so the king ordered Daniel to “be taken up out of the den,” much to the chagrin of the high officials and satraps who had conspired to put him there. When Daniel emerged, “no kind of harm was found on him, because he had trusted in his God.” This degree of protection parallels the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who emerged from the fiery furnace without singed hair, damaged cloaks, or the smell of smoke on them (3:27).

It may seem that Darius violated his own royal injunction by removing Daniel, but in fact the king had followed the letter of the new law precisely. The injunction stipulated that violators would be cast into the den of lions (6:7, 12), but it did not instruct the king on what to do if the violator survived! Darius followed the law, and acted in response to a circumstance the law did not address. This whole ordeal demonstrated his commitment “to the law of the Medes and Persians” while at the same time displaying his authority as king.

Daniel’s rising from the den is a picture of resurrection from the dead, just as Isaac’s deliverance from near-sacrifice is described as a figurative resurrection by the author of Hebrews (Heb. 11:19). The same concept is found in Jesus’ interpretation of the story of Jonah (Matt. 12:40; cf. Jonah 2:1–10).

6:24 Darius ordered Daniel’s accusers to be thrown into the den of lions—“they, their children, and their wives.” Their demise was an example of the justice we sometimes see in the OT (cf. Est. 7:7–10). They hoped Daniel would die in the lions’ den, yet that fate was theirs instead. As soon as the accusers were thrown into the den, “The lions overpowered them and broke all their bones in pieces” before their bodies could even hit the ground! This carnage confirms that Daniel’s protection was not due to any natural cause, such as any lion’s inability or lack of appetite. His survival could be explained only by divine deliverance.

6:25 Darius wrote a message to “all the peoples, nations, and languages that dwell in all the earth.” Such universal language appeared earlier (3:4, 7, 29; 4:1) and indicated a comprehensive application of “Peace be multiplied to you” (6:25), a typical wish for peace. What came next would distinguish the king’s decree from the other message he had written.

6:26–27 Darius decreed, “In all my royal dominion people are to tremble and fear before the God of Daniel.” The king was so impressed by God’s intervention and his protection of Daniel that he wanted everyone to respond in a way he deemed appropriate: before a God who rescued his servant from lions, trembling and fear was warranted.

Darius explained his new decree: “He is the living God, enduring forever; his kingdom shall never be destroyed, and his dominion shall be to the end.” He had already called the Lord “the living God” (v. 20), and now he wanted everyone to know more about this deity. Since God endured forever, it made sense that his kingdom and dominion would last forever as well. It was significant that Darius—an emperor, no less—acknowledged that God’s kingdom would endure, implying that the Medo-Persian kingdom would not. Nebuchadnezzar had made similar statements about God’s kingdom (4:3, 34).

Elaborating on the reasons people should tremble and fear Daniel’s God, Darius wrote, “He delivers and rescues; he works signs and wonders in heaven and on earth, he who has saved Daniel from the power of the lions” (6:27). The last phrase clarifies that Darius was not thinking of some abstract notion of deliverance. Instead, he had specifically in mind Daniel’s deliverance from the den of hungry lions. Nebuchadnezzar had extolled God’s power in rescuing Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego from the fiery furnace (3:28–29), and he also spoke of “signs” and “wonders” (4:3). In chapter 6, God continued displaying his mighty power, prevailing over the conspiracy of the high officials and straps, the concession of the reluctant king, and the appetite of savage beasts. All should fear and tremble before this mighty God.

6:28 At or near the end of each narrative in chapters 1–6, at least one person is promoted or prospers in some way (table 1.6).