Scripture Daily

Context No. 231 of 4322 · Daniel (Greek)

Context · Reflection

Daniel (Greek) 13:1-6: in context

1A man lived in Babylon, and his name was Joakim. 2He took a wife, whose name was Susanna, the daughter of Helkias, a very fair woman, and one who feared the Lord. 3Her parents were also righteous, and taught their daughter according to the law of Moses. 4Now Joakim was a great rich man, and had a beautiful garden next to his house. The Jews used to come to him, because he was more honorable than all others. 5The same year, two of the elders of the people were appointed to be judges, such as the Lord spoke of, that wickedness came from Babylon from elders who were judges, who were supposed to govern the people. 6These were often at Joakim’s house. All that had any lawsuits came to them.

Susanna's story is one of the Greek additions to the book of Daniel, and this passage is only the opening scene, before anything has gone wrong. It sets its stage carefully, the way a story does when it wants you to feel the contrast that is coming.

Almost everyone introduced here is good. Joakim is a wealthy and honorable man in Babylon, so respected that the Jewish community gathers at his house. His wife Susanna is beautiful and God-fearing, the daughter of righteous parents who raised her in the law of Moses. It is a settled, upright household. Then the narrator introduces the threat, and does not hide it. Two elders of the people were appointed judges that year, and the text stops to attach an old warning to them: this is what the Lord meant when he said that wickedness came out of Babylon from elders who were set up as judges, the very men who were supposed to govern the people. They are often at Joakim's house, because everyone with a lawsuit comes to them.

The danger is placed exactly where a person would least think to guard against it, inside the office built to protect people. The men with the power to condemn are the ones the story marks as corrupt, before they have done anything yet. Where have I assumed safety simply because the person held a trusted position?

Sources