Scripture Daily

Context No. 1224 of 4322 · Daniel (Greek)

Context · Reflection

Daniel (Greek) 14:6-12: in context

6Then the king said to him, “Don’t you think that Bel is a living god? Don’t you see how much he eats and drinks every day?” 7Then Daniel laughed, and said, “O king, don’t be deceived; for this is just clay inside, and brass outside, and never ate or drank anything.” 8So the king was angry, and called for his priests, and said to them, “If you don’t tell me who this is who devours these expenses, you shall die. 9But if you can show me that Bel devours them, then Daniel shall die; for he has spoken blasphemy against Bel.” Daniel said to the king, “Let it be according to your word.” 10Now there were seventy priests of Bel, besides their wives and children. The king went with Daniel into Bel’s temple. 11So Bel’s priests said, “Behold, we will leave; but you, O king, set out the food, and mix the wine and set it out, shut the door securely, and seal it with your own signet. 12When you come in the morning, if you don’t find that Bel has eaten everything, we will suffer death, or else Daniel, who speaks falsely against us.”

This is from Bel and the Dragon, among the Greek additions to Daniel. The Persian king challenges Daniel: is not Bel a living god? Look how much he eats and drinks every day. Daniel laughs and tells the king plainly, do not be deceived; this Bel is clay inside and bronze outside, and has never eaten or drunk anything. The king, angry, demands proof, and threatens death either to the priests, if they cannot show Bel really eats, or to Daniel, if he can. The priests, confident in their trick, propose that the king set out the food, seal the temple door, and see in the morning whether Bel has eaten it.

Daniel's response to the impressive claim is worth noticing: he laughs. The king points to the daily disappearance of a mountain of food as proof that Bel is a living god, and everyone has apparently believed it for years. Daniel is not fooled for a second; he sees through the whole thing and says so plainly, it is clay and bronze, it never ate anything. The rest of the story will show how the priests were secretly eating the food through a hidden door, but Daniel did not need to see the trick to know the idol was a fraud; he knew a lump of clay and bronze cannot eat. There is a kind of discernment here that comes from a settled knowledge of what God is and what an idol is not. The appearance was convincing, the food really did vanish, the crowds really did believe, and yet Daniel could laugh at it because he knew the difference between the living God and a decorated statue. Sometimes the faithful response to an impressive religious claim is not anxious investigation but the clear-eyed confidence that a thing which cannot act is not God, however convincing the show. The idol's daily meal was a fraud, and Daniel knew it before he ever found the trapdoor.

Am I taken in by impressive religious claims and shows, or do I have Daniel's settled discernment, able to laugh at what cannot act because I know the difference between the living God and a decorated fraud?

Sources