BOOK OF DANIEL – The Complicity of the Injunction.

Posted by on Nov 1, 2018 in Uncategorized | Comments Off on BOOK OF DANIEL – The Complicity of the Injunction.

The Complicity of the Injunction.

Not until we read our next passage of Scripture do we see that those against Daniel numbered far more than 122 individuals. Daniel 6:6-9 tells us, “Then these commissioners and satraps came by agreement to the king and spoke to him as follows: “King Darius, live forever! All the commissioners of the kingdom, the prefects and the satraps, the high officials and the governors have consulted together that the king should establish a statute and enforce an injunction that anyone who makes a petition to any god or man besides you, O king, for thirty days, shall be cast into the lions’ den. Now, O king, establish the injunction and sign the document so that it may not be changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which may not be revoked.” Therefore King Darius signed the document, that is, the injunction.” (NASB)

There is a subtle lie in the statement that these officials made to Darius. Be sure not to miss it. They told Darius that all the overseers, the prefects, the satraps, the high officials, and the governors had consulted together. That was a blatant lie. The one person who shone with integrity above anyone else was neither there nor had been consulted – Daniel. Given the fact that Darius intended to appoint Daniel above all of the overseers and satraps why did he not ask where Daniel was or what he thought of the injunction? Scripture does not say why. Perhaps he was carried away by the moment. Notice how they immediately pay respect to Darius by the comment, “King Darius, live forever!” Darius was either duped or complicit in their plan by not challenging the request. There is no hint that he even questioned what they asked. It would not be difficult to argue that Darius was happy to accept their perceived adoration. Even going as far as to say that if he signed the injunction, it would become an enforcement against anyone who made a petition to any god or man except himself. The Medo-Persian rulers believed they were the official representatives of the gods. The subtle wording of the overseers and satraps may have even played into the mind of Darius of an assumption of deity on his part. If the injunction was only for one month then it would not have caused a backlash from the priests or the people. After all, he could easily have said this brief decree was for the benefit of the nation’s unity.

One wonders why such a document could not be revoked or changed. However, should we even question why? Would we cry foul if the decrees of God could be revoked or changed on a whim? Of course we would. Then why should it be difficult to accept the Medo-Persian rule which had similar standards? This law was established for many years. We see it in action by the evil deeds of Haman in the book of Esther. A reading of the book of Esther reveals that the original edict to annihilate the Jews could not be reversed. Ultimately, a later edict was signed that allowed the Jews to defend themselves against those seeking their destruction but that first edict was not canceled or revoked (see Esther 1:19; 3:10-15; 8:8-12). Just like King Ahasuerus, King Darius would learn that he had been used as a puppet and duped into committing evil by his very own officials.

The implication of the passage of Scripture suggests that these officials knew Daniel would break the law of the injunction in less than thirty days. They were confident. They had studied their prey well. Daniel was very predictable, which allowed them to be confident in asking for the injunction for such a short period of time. One can imagine these men being eager to rid themselves of Daniel. They were thirsty for his death by the mouths of lions devouring him. Only thirty days to wait and they would be rid of this tiresome Jew forever.

Or so they thought…….