Daniel 3:16-18

3:16 Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego replied to King Nebuchadnezzar, ¹  “We do not need to give you a reply ²  concerning this. 3:17 If ³  our God whom we are serving exists, ⁴  he is able to rescue us from the furnace of blazing fire, and he will rescue us, O king, from your power as well. 3:18 But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we don’t serve your gods, and we will not pay homage to the golden statue that you have erected.”

Daniel 6:7-11

6:7 To all the supervisors of the kingdom, the prefects, satraps, counselors, and governors it seemed like a good idea for a royal edict to be issued and an interdict to be enforced. For the next thirty days anyone who prays ⁵  to any god or human other than you, O king, should be thrown into a den of lions. 6:8 Now let the king issue a written interdict ⁶  so that it cannot be altered, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be changed. ⁷  6:9 So King Darius issued the written interdict.

6:10 When Daniel realized ⁸  that a written decree had been issued, he entered his home, where the windows ⁹  in his upper room opened toward Jerusalem. ¹⁰  Three ¹¹  times daily he was ¹²  kneeling ¹³  and offering prayers and thanks to his God just as he had been accustomed to do previously. 6:11 Then those officials who had gone to the king ¹⁴  came by collusion and found Daniel praying and asking for help before his God.

[3:16]  ¹ tc In the MT this word is understood to begin the following address (“answered and said to the king, ‘O Nebuchadnezzar’”). However, it seems unlikely that Nebuchadnezzar’s subordinates would address the king in such a familiar way, particularly in light of the danger that they now found themselves in. The present translation implies moving the atnach from “king” to “Nebuchadnezzar.”

[3:16]  ² tn Aram “to return a word to you.”

[3:17]  ³ tc The ancient versions typically avoid the conditional element of v. 17.

[3:17]  ⁴ tn The Aramaic expression used here is very difficult to interpret. The question concerns the meaning and syntax of אִיתַי (’itay, “is” or “exist”). There are several possibilities. (1) Some interpreters take this word closely with the participle later in the verse יָכִל (yakhil, “able”), understanding the two words to form a periphrastic construction (“if our God is…able”; cf. H. Bauer and P. Leander, Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramäischen, 365, §111b). But the separation of the two elements from one another is not an argument in favor of this understanding. (2) Other interpreters take the first part of v. 17 to mean “If it is so, then our God will deliver us” (cf. KJV, ASV, RSV, NASB). However, the normal sense of ’itay is existence; on this point see F. Rosenthal, Grammar, 45, §95. The present translation maintains the sense of existence for the verb (“If our God…exists”), even though the statement is admittedly difficult to understand in this light. The statement may be an implicit reference back to Nebuchadnezzar’s comment in v. 15, which denies the existence of a god capable of delivering from the king’s power.

[6:7]  ⁵ tn Aram “prays a prayer.”

[6:8]  ⁶ tn Aram “establish a written interdict and inscribe a written decree.”

[6:8]  ⁷ tn Or “removed.”

[6:10]  ⁸ tn Aram “knew.”

[6:10]  ⁹ sn In later rabbinic thought this verse was sometimes cited as a proof text for the notion that one should pray only in a house with windows. See b. Berakhot 34b.

[6:10]  ¹⁰ map For the location of Jerusalem see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[6:10]  ¹¹ sn This is apparently the only specific mention in the OT of prayer being regularly offered three times a day. The practice was probably not unique to Daniel, however.

[6:10]  ¹² tc Read with several medieval Hebrew MSS and printed editions הֲוָה (havah) rather than the MT הוּא (hu’).

[6:10]  ¹³ tn Aram “kneeling on his knees” (so NASB).

[6:10]  sn No specific posture for offering prayers is prescribed in the OT. Kneeling, as here, and standing were both practiced.

[6:11]  ¹⁴ tn Aram “those men”; the referent (the administrative officials who had earlier approached the king about the edict) has been specified in the translation for clarity.