“In the same hour came forth fingers of a man’s hand, and wrote over against the candlestick upon the plaster of the wall of the king’s palace: and the king saw the part of the hand that wrote. Then the king’s countenance was changed, and his thoughts troubled him, so that the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote one against another” (Daniel 5:5,6).
The occurrences described in this chapter took place nearly a quarter of a century after Nebuchadnezzar’s death. The glory of the Babylonian kingdom began rapidly to wane, and its influence to decline, after his death. No successor of his attained any fame. Nebuchadnezzar, according to the Scriptural account, was succeeded by his son Evil-Merodach. This information is given by the sacred historian in connection with one of Evil-Merodach’s first acts — that of the release of Jehoiachin, king of Judah, who had been in prison since being taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar, thirty-seven years before (2 Kings 25:27-30, Jeremiah 52:31-34). Daniel makes no mention of any of Nebuchadnezzar’s successors save that of Belshazzar.
Scholars for many years were confused by the account in Chapter Five, which speaks of Belshazzar as being the king when Babylon fell and the great city was captured by the Medes and Persians, as it seemed to conflict with the secular records. Skeptics formerly made use of this in their efforts to overthrow the Divine authenticity of the Book of Daniel. They declared that no king of that name ever occupied the throne of Babylon, as the secular historians of those times do not make mention of Belshazzar. However, like all other seeming disagreements with the ancient historians, when sufficient facts are known, the Bible account is always proved to be the true, the correct one; and so with this. The following from the International Encyclopedia explains the matter, and is sufficient to establish the truth of this most remarkable occurrence associated with the fall of Babylon, recorded in this chapter:
“Belshazzar, or Belsaruzar, a Babylonian ruler of the Chaldean dynasty, was slain about 538 BC, when Babylon was taken by the Medes and Persians, as related in the Book of Daniel (Chapter Five). This account, which speaks of him as the king of Babylon, and as warned of his doom by the handwriting on the wall, long confused scholars, since it conflicted with the narratives of other writers. Herodotus (I, 184, 89) calls the last king Labynetus and says that he was defeated in the open field, while Berosus in Josephus (Apion I, 20), calls him Nabonnedus, stating that he was blockaded in Borsippa (Birs-i-Nimrud), and finally surrendered to Cyrus, being assigned an honorable retirement in Carmania. That truth lies on both sides has become known through cuneiform inscriptions discovered in 1854 and deciphered by Rawlinson, which state that Belsaruzar [Belshazzar], the eldest son of Nabonnedus, was associated with his father on the throne. Belshazzar [or Belsaruzar] at first conducted the campaign against Cyrus, but afterwards was left to govern and hold the city (and so perished) while Nabonnedus took the field. The latter, returning to the relief of Babylon, was defeated and took refuge in Borsippa. In Daniel 5:2, Belshazzar is spoken of as the son of Nebuchadnezzar, but the word ‘father’ is properly translated ancestor or grandfather.”
It would seem that Nabonnedus was the husband of one of Nebuchadnezzar’s daughters. He had, through a conspiracy, succeeded in taking possession of the throne. The twenty-three years that elapsed between Nebuchadnezzar’s death and the fall of Babylon, seems to be made up of conspiracies and murders in connection with the throne power. The historians’ accounts of those times are more or less confusing and contradictory. The following is understood by many scholars to be the real facts:
“When Nebuchadnezzar died, his only son, Evil-Merodach took the throne; but he reigned only two years, when he was murdered and supplanted by his brother-in-law, Neriglissar, who reigned four years. After him his son, a mere boy, was made king. He held his place for only nine months, when he fell a victim to the conspiracy of Nabonnedus, who, together with his own son, Belshazzar, whom he made co-regent with himself, were the last kings of Babylon.”
The chapter opens with a statement giving the information that “Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand.” There has been much discussion and surmising as to what was the occasion or object of this feast. This, however, does not seem of much consequence. It may be true, as some writers have expressed, that reports or rumors had been received that his father, Nabonnedus, had met with some temporary success or victory in his warring against Cyrus, and that Belshazzar instituted a feast of rejoicing over the supposed success. However, no matter what may have been its cause, it was made by Belshazzar an occasion to satisfy his dissolute, pleasure-loving spirit, as the narrative plainly intimates. Whatever may have been the cause, it seems evident that he felt quite secure from any enemy attack — that the great walls of defense around the city, and the strong gates at the end of the broad streets at the rivers brink, were sufficient to hold back any foe from entering the city, either by land or water.
The record tells us that Belshazzar made a feast to his lords. It would seem from what can be learned from the brief references to him in connection with this account that he was a young man, given up to the lowest vices of self-indulgence, and allowed nothing to restrain him in the gratification of his desires.
It is certain that he made a great ado, both in the preparation and observance of this feast. It was made, as the record shows, an occasion of general license and carousing on the part of himself and his lords, and even his wives and concubines were called in before it was over.
“The ‘great feast’ turned out to be a scene of mere bacchanalian orgies, in which the king led off. It was not the custom of kings to eat and drink before their subjects; but here all restraints were thrown aside. The dignity of the monarch was all sunk in the loose hilarity of the occasion. Drinking wine was a chief part of the performance, and Belshazzar familiarly joined the thousand of his lordly guests to do royal justice to it. He ‘drank wine before the thousand,’ and drank till he felt it, and continued to drink till it became his counselor and put all sorts of wild thoughts into his head.”
Xenophon informs us that Gobryas, one of Cyrus’ generals, said at the time the command was given for the assault to be made on the city, “I should not be surprised if the doors of the palace are now open, for the whole city seems tonight to be given up to revelry.” It seems evident that Cyrus had been informed concerning the feast and had anticipated that the night in the city would be spent in reveling and drunkenness.
We are told in verse two that while Belshazzar tasted the wine, he commanded that the gold and silver vessels which his grandfather, Nebuchadnezzar, had taken out of the Jewish temple at the time he captured Jerusalem be brought into the banquet hall. We have brought to our attention in this act of Belshazzar a fact which has been illustrated in every generation of man’s history. This fact is that when men are under the influence of wine, or other intoxicating drinks, all kinds of wild fancies take possession of their minds and they will do many evil things in a spirit of bravado, which they would not be guilty of when sober. It is quite evident that these vessels had always been considered by Nebuchadnezzar as sacred, and that they had never been used for any purpose whatever since the capture of Jerusalem. It would seem that even Belshazzar in his sober moments would have respected the sacred character of these vessels, which he knew had been devoted to the service of religion. When he instituted the feast, it seems probable that he had no thought of making use of these vessels for such a purpose. The words of Daniel (verse 23) would imply that the king intended this particular act to be an expression of his contempt for the God of Israel. It is expressly stated that the vessels were to be brought into the impious feast that his lords and his wives and his concubines might drink out of them, and they “praised the gods of wood and stone which see not, nor hear, nor know.” These vessels had all been consecrated to Jehovah to be used only in connection with His worship, and He always respects whatever is truly consecrated to Him.
We have every reason to believe that Belshazzar knew of his grandfather’s respect for the God of the Hebrews, and of his having held these vessels to be sacred — to be used only in connection with the worship of Jehovah. But the wine-crazed king had neither respect nor reverence for his grandfather, or for what was consecrated or devoted to the God of Israel. The influence of the wine had destroyed all such feelings, if he ever had them, and had aroused in him a spirit of insolent independence, which caused his naturally evil nature to triumph over all the reverence or perhaps fear that had influenced others before him; and he would use these vessels to do honor to his drunken revelers, that they might drink from them. One has said,
“It was of no use to remonstrate with such a libertine, if any had been so disposed; therefore the golden vessels were brought, and he and his lords and his women ‘drank in them.’ If any compunctions were felt on the subject, they had to be stifled and suppressed in the presence of his Imperial Majesty. So ‘they drank wine, and praised the gods of gold, and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone.’ Not only their ill-timed merriment, their trampling on the customary proprieties, and their drunkenness, but even their foolhardy and blasphemous insult to the Most High God, is veiled over and cloaked up with a pretense of devotion!”
It was not the usual custom for women in these eastern countries to be present and engage in these feasts, but in this case all the usual customs were disregarded when the bacchanalian feast reached a certain stage. Mr. Barnes suggests that “The ‘wives and concubines’ were probably not present when the feast began, for it was made for ‘his lords’; but when the scenes of revelry had advanced so far that it was proposed to introduce the sacred vessels of the temple, it would not be unnatural to propose also to introduce the females of the court.” We have related a similar occurrence in the Book of Esther, at a feast which the Persian king Ahasuerus gave. We there read that “On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine,” he commanded that Vashti his queen should be brought into his presence, the object being to make a show of her beauty. The writer already quoted says that “Nothing can well be conceived more senseless and stupid than what it is said they did at this feast, and yet it is a fair illustration of what occurs in all the festivals of idolatry. And is that which occurs in more civilized, Christian lands, in the scenes of carousal and festivity, more rational than this? It was not much worse to lavish praises on idol gods in a sense of revelry than it is to lavish praises on idol men now; not much less rational to ‘toast’ gods than it is to ‘toast’ men.”
In the Midst of the Revelry, the Mysterious Hand
It has been of rare occurrence that the great God has interfered in man’s impious acts, but in this case, under the peculiar circumstances, an exception to the general rule was made. All in an instant when the sensual feast was at its height and the wild hilarity seemed unrestrainable, there came a most startling interruption, which, as is usually the case in such instances, suddenly brought to a halt the orgies and sobered not only the king but all the revelers in the great banquet hall. The king himself seems to be the one who first witnessed the strange and startling sight. As he looked toward the candlestick, which perhaps had been brought into the great hall, together with the sacred vessels, he beheld a sight that caused a great change in his countenance, which plainly indicated that he was moved with fear and terror; and the sacred record informs us that “his knees smote one against another.” That which caused this sudden interruption of the impious proceedings is recorded in verse five and reads: “In the same hour came forth fingers of a man’s hand, and wrote over against the candlestick upon the plaster of the wall of the king’s palace; and the king saw the part of the hand that wrote.” A noted writer remarks:
“Belshazzar had as much of power, and of drink withal, to lead him to defiance of God as any ruffian under heaven; and yet when God, as it were, lifted up but His finger against him, how poorly did he crouch and shiver. How did his joints loose, and his knees knock together.”
Commenting on Belshazzar’s dissolute conduct and this most fearful, startling, and above all, strange and mysterious interruption to the sensual feast, the eloquent Joseph Seiss writes:
“This was as far as it was possible for human daring and infatuation to go. It was more than the powers of Heaven could quietly endure. The Divine resentment broke forth on the spot. ‘In the same hour came forth fingers of a man’s hand, and wrote over against the candlestick upon the plaster of the wall of the king’s palace.’ The moment of doom had been reached, and here was the miraculous writing of the sentence. There was no legerdemain, no deception, about it. ‘The king saw the part of the hand that wrote.’ His own eyes followed it as it traced the mystic letters where no hand of mortal could reach to do it. He beheld the black characters it left frowning down upon him from the palace wall. He saw the consternation of men and heard the shrieks of women. He could not read the letters nor decipher their meaning, but his conscience took alarm, and he could not treat it with indifference. All his courage, daring, and proud bravado quite broke down. …
“Alas, alas for the dignity and bravery of those who think it mean, little, and cowardly to fear God! They may think it manly to set at naught the scruples of a tender conscience and all dread of Jehovah’s judgments, but their superior stateliness is the first to give way when the trying moment comes. Nor is there a more craven cowardice or dastard pusillanimity than that which underlies the noisy courage of men who defy God and glory in trampling moral restraints beneath their feet. Show me a man who thinks it great and heroic to despise the bonds of piety and the inculcations of religion, and I will show you a miserable poltroon at heart. The audacious and defiant king Belshazzar is horror-stricken and unmanned in the midst of all his gallant valor before a handwriting on the wall, not a single syllable of which he could read!”
The terror-stricken king, after the effects produced by the suddenness of the startling interruption to the feast had to some extent subsided, seems to have recovered his self possession sufficiently to call for his astrologers and soothsayers. The highest honors of the kingdom were to be given to the man who could read the mysterious writing. He should be clothed in purple; he should have a chain of gold about his neck; he should be the third ruler in the kingdom. This latter expression is generally understood to mean next in authority to himself, as he was next in authority to his father. The wise men and the astrologers came in and gazed with astonishment and amazement at the mysterious writing, but none were able to read it. The fear and terror of the situation was only increased by their presence and failure.
It is impossible even to imagine the alarm and bewilderment that was crowded into the brief period which elapsed before there entered the great palace hall the queen mother. It would seem that she was the only woman of the palace who had taken no part in the impious banquet feast. This woman, the wife of Nabonnedus, and, what is more significant, the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, seems to have been the only one in the palace who had profited by Jehovah’s judgment and mercy upon her father. She had in remembrance those far away days when the young Hebrew captive, Daniel, had interpreted the dream of empires that had been given in a night vision to Nebuchadnezzar. She remembered how her father had honored this young man and how during the great monarch’s life time he had been such a trustful, faithful servant, counselor, adviser, and yet fearless reprover of the king. All these things had made an indelible impression upon her mind.
We next read: “Now the queen, by reason of the words of the king and his lords, came into the banquet house,” that is, she was moved by hearing the commotion. Immediately taking in the situation, but doubtless not having any suspicion of what was the significance of the handwriting, she first addressed Belshazzar in the formal salutation customary in eastern countries. She next sought to calm his fears, and then coming directly to the matter which was troubling his mind and the minds of all present, she said:
“There is a man in thy kingdom, in whom is the spirit of the holy gods; and in the days of thy father [margin, grandfather] light and understanding and wisdom, like the wisdom of the gods, was found in him; whom the king Nebuchadnezzar thy father, the king, I say, thy father, made master of the magicians, astrologers, Chaldeans and soothsayers; forasmuch as an excellent spirit, and knowledge, and understanding, interpreting of dreams, and shewing of hard sentences, and dissolving of doubts, were found in the same Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar: now let Daniel be called, and he will shew the interpretation. Then was Daniel brought in before the king” (Daniel 5:11-13).
It would seem that though Daniel was living in Babylon at this time, for some reason he was not as well known as formerly. Evidently he was still known to the queen mother. Perhaps she had kept up an acquaintance with him because of his services and his former relations to her father. Daniel had evidently been out of favor with King Belshazzar and his court and had been treated with indifference, or perhaps he may have been forgotten altogether. Indeed it would seem from Belshazzar’s words to Daniel when requesting that he interpret the hand-writing, that Belshazzar was not personally acquainted with him. One writer has accounted for Daniel’s not appearing at the first summons on the ground that Belshazzar in his terror forgot to summon the fourth order, consisting of the magicians and Daniel their chief. It is notable that this class is not mentioned in the summons made by Belshazzar (compare Daniel 2:2 with 5:7). However, this does not seem to account for the fact, for the queen mother informs Belshazzar that his grandfather had made Daniel master of all these different orders. A most reasonable explanation as given by Albert Barnes is that on the occasion of Nebuchadnezzar’s death Daniel had been removed from his position as head over the wise men, magicians, astrologers, etc. This writer states that it was a custom when a Persian king died that the physician, as also those holding the positions referred to, be driven from the court for not preventing the king’s death. If such was the custom of the ancient Babylonian court, we have certainly a most satisfactory explanation of why Daniel, who would be living to some extent a retired, private life during the reign of Evil-Merodach and his successors, was not known by Belshazzar.
In so far as the record in the Book of Daniel is concerned, this was Daniel’s first appearance before Belshazzar. If he had been there before, it was as one unnoticed and unknown. It is quite reasonable to suppose that if Daniel continued to hold a position in the government all the time from Nebuchadnezzar’s death, the very character of the men who succeeded Nebuchadnezzar on the throne was such as to make Daniel’s services unappreciated, if not undesired. It was in the first and third years of Belshazzar that Daniel had two of the most remarkable prophetic visions recorded in the book, but there is nothing in the two chapters, the seventh and eighth, which record these visions, that gives us any information respecting his relation to the court of Belshazzar. At the time that Daniel was summoned into the king’s presence to interpret the handwriting on the wall, he must have been at least eighty-five years old. The overthrow of Babylon, which occurred at this time, brought him into prominence again in public affairs connected with the Medo-Persian Empire, as we shall see later.
It is difficult to imagine a scene more startling, more dreadful, more tragical, indeed, more dramatical, than this one that took place in connection with the sudden and abrupt termination of the great feast of bacchanalian hilarity and sacrilege. Poets, painters, and dramatists have seized upon this tragical event as one of the greatest scenes of human history, most worthy of portrayal by their artistic skill. The spacious palace hall, with its lofty walls; the magnificent architecture and gorgeous furnishings; the beautiful, yet lewd paintings and idolatrous statuary; the splendid decorations, all representing the highest type of artistic skill of debased humanity; the immense assemblage representing the elite of Babylonian society — all served to add to the dramatic effect of this grand display of Divine displeasure and omnipotence that now took place and transformed the drunken revelings into a solemn judgment assize.
The grand and solemn climax was reached as the aged Daniel entered the banquet hall. All eyes now became riveted with eager, anxious expectation upon the grave face of the venerable Prophet of Jehovah. All heathen court formalities were forgotten, laid aside, as the aged Prophet with grave countenance and subdued expression was ushered into the presence of the guilty monarch. With stammering tremulous voice, in marked contrast to his usual demeanor on all court occasions, the fear-distressed king addressed the aged man:
“Art thou that Daniel which art of the children of the captivity of Judah, whom the king my [grand] father brought out of Jewry? I have even heard of thee, that the spirit of the gods is in thee, and that light and understanding and excellent wisdom is found in thee. And now the wise men, the astrologers, have been brought in before me, that they should read this writing, and make known unto me the interpretation thereof; but they could not show the interpretation of the thing. And I have heard of thee, that thou canst make interpretations, and dissolve doubts; now if thou canst read the writing, and make known to me the interpretation thereof, thou shalt be clothed with scarlet, and have a chain of gold about thy neck, and shalt be the third ruler in the kingdom” (Daniel 5:13-16).
Daniel’s reply is characteristic of the man — indeed of every true man of God, when placed under circumstances to proclaim a message from God: “Let thy gifts be to thyself, and give thy rewards [margin “fee”] to another.” Regarding this last expression Mr. Barnes has said that “Gesenius supposes that the word used here is of Persian origin. It means a gift, and, if of Persian origin, is derived from a verb meaning to load with gifts and praises, as a prince does an ambassador.” The sense here seems to be, that “Daniel was not disposed to interfere with the will of the monarch if he chose to confer gifts and rewards on others, or to question the propriety of his doing so, but that, so far as he was concerned, he had no desire of them for himself, and could not be influenced by them in what he was about to do.” “Yet,” said Daniel, “I will read the writing unto the king, and make known to him the interpretation.”
The saying is indeed a true one, that “truth is stranger than fiction,” and it has its illustration in the case before us. The “great feast” of drunken orgies, which was conducted with such noisy defiance of Jehovah, in sacrilegiously drinking from the sacred vessels, ended with a sermon delivered by one of God’s faithful preachers unto which, in the Divine providence, this sinful, presumptuous king, together with all his lords and the elite representatives of the society of the doomed city, was the willing and eager listener. It was similar to one of those occasions which years afterwards our Savior referred to, in which some of his servants would be called to deliver discourses to kings and princes and judges. The history of the Church of Christ has recorded many of these; as for instance the experience of Luther before the great assembly of rulers and church prelates of Rome, and that of John Knox before the king of England.
The sermon of the Hebrew Prophet was one most thoroughly adapted (although not prepared beforehand) to the occasion. It was addressed especially to the dissolute king, although full of lessons to the vast assemblage that heard it, as well as to all who have read it with proper attention since. It is introduced by calling the attention of the impious king, Belshazzar, to the fact that the most high God gave to Nebuchadnezzar, his grandfather, the kingdom, which he, Belshazzar, by inheritance had been entrusted with. He informs Belshazzar that all the majesty, all the honor, all the glory that his grandfather possessed, was bestowed upon him by the same God who was now speaking in the mysterious writing emblazoned on the wall of the palace. The great preacher declares that it was on account of the majesty the most high God gave to Nebuchadnezzar that all peoples, nations, and languages trembled and feared before him; and then as if to bring home to Belshazzar the magnitude of his own sinful pride and irreverence, the Prophet rehearses how the most high God dealt with his grandfather when he became lifted up with sinful pride and vainglory. He reminds him that Nebuchadnezzar was deposed from his kingly throne, and that all his honor and glory and majesty was taken from him. The aged Seer continues with a description of the terrible punishment that was imposed upon Belshazzar’s great ancestor, and then concludes his introduction by relating how Nebuchadnezzar was brought to view himself and his great sin in its true light, and to humble himself before the most high God, and give reverence to Him.
It would be perfectly in accord with the words which follow to imagine a pause on the part of Daniel, and then with grave demeanor, fastening his eyes upon the trembling king, and making a pointed application of this narrative, saying: “And thou his [grand] son, O Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart, though thou knewest all this; but hast lifted up thyself against the Lord of heaven.” The Prophet next proceeds to hold up before the king the crowning feature, the culmination of his sinful, dissolute life, which was that he had caused the sacred vessels of the Lord’s house to be brought into this bacchanalian feast, and to show his contempt and defiance of the Most High he had drunk wine out of these sacred vessels, and caused his lords, his wives and concubines to do the same. One has said:
“A splendid sermon also was it. With what grand and affecting reminiscences of Nebuchadnezzar did it begin! In what sharp contrast did it sketch the effeminacy and impiety of Belshazzar! With what directness did it point out the inexcusable and defiant wickednesses of its chief hearer! With what solemn and unflinching faithfulness did it tell the sentence God had written, and make known the doom which it was now too late to escape! It almost takes one’s breath to hear the massive utterances roll from that holy preacher’s lips. The solemnity of the scene almost overwhelms us.
“Transfer yourself into that royal banquet hall, and listen. There stands the tall and reverend Prophet. Nothing of the obsequious courtier is upon him now. He has not a word of sympathy for the king in his guilty alarm. His voice, his brow, his words, his composed manner and solemnity, are all in deep accord with the Spirit which had traced those letters and with the awful sentence which was in them. He saw that the end of the impious contemner of the Almighty had come. He knew that he was about to utter [almost] the last words the royal sinner should ever hear in this world. And he spake exactly as became the occasion. Fixing his eyes upon the pale and trembling criminal, now ripe for destruction, he measuredly said:
“ ‘O thou king, the most high God gave Nebuchadnezzar thy father a kingdom, and majesty, and glory, and honor. And, for the majesty that He gave him, all people, nations, and languages, trembled and feared before him: whom he would he slew, and whom he would he kept alive, and whom he would he set up, and whom he would he put down. But when his heart was lifted up, and his mind hardened to deal proudly, he was made to come down from his kingly throne, and they took his glory from him. And he was driven from the sons of men; and his heart was made like the beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild asses; they fed him with grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven; till he knew that the most high God ruled in the kingdom of men, and that He appointeth over it whomsoever He will. And thou his son, O Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart, though thou knewest all this; but hast lifted up thyself against the Lord of heaven; and they have brought the vessels of His house before thee, and thou, and thy lords, thy wives, and thy concubines, have drunk wine in them; and thou hast praised the gods of silver, and gold, of brass, iron, wood, and stone, which see not, nor hear, nor know; and the God in whose hand thy breath is, and whose are all thy ways, hast thou not glorified. Then was the part of the hand sent from Him, and this writing was written. And this is the writing that was written, MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN’ ” (Joseph Seiss).
Scholars tell us that the word MENE means simply numbered. The word is repeated, doubtless for the sake of emphasis. The word TEKEL has the significance of short weight, lacking. PERES means divided, and in its plural form conveys with it the thought of broken or crushed to pieces — destroyed. The Prophet’s knowledge of the fact that Babylon’s fall was near — a knowledge that was communicated to him by the revealing angel (Daniel 7 and 8) — enabled him to make a special application of the ominous handwriting. And it is not difficult to imagine with what intense interest the guilty monarch and his dissolute court listened to the venerable Prophet, as with slow, measured tones he said:
“This is the interpretation of the thing: MENE; God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it. TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting. PERES; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.”
It would seem that neither Belshazzar nor any of the vast assemblage gathered in the banquet hall realized how near was the time when the Divine sentence was to be executed. This is seen in the fact that the doomed monarch immediately gave command that the reward promised should be given to Daniel, and the proclamation was immediately made to the assembly of his lords and nobles that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom.¹ The sacred historian informs us, however, that the judgment came that very same night: “In that night was Belshazzar the king of the Chaldeans slain.”
It seems evident that even while the Prophet was pronouncing the doom, the armies of the Medes and Persians were taking possession of the city. While the feasting and reveling in fancied security was going on, the general of the united forces of Cyrus and Darius had perfected his plans. The waters of the great River Euphrates that ran through the center of the city were diverted from their course, leaving the riverbed dry, and as the armies of the Persian king made their way under the great walls through the riverbed, they found, as had been foretold 150 years before, the gateways at the river’s brink (which were usually closed at night) wide open. The great city which had been deemed impregnable was soon in the possession of the Median host, and the palace where the great feast was being held was doubtless soon filled with soldiers, and the last king of the great Babylonian Empire was slain.
The Prophet Jeremiah in foretelling the fall of the city, describes briefly the suddenness of the surprise, indeed the announcement of the sentinels that the great city had fallen:
“The mighty men of Babylon have forborn to fight, they have remained in their holds: their might hath failed. One post [sentinel] shall run to meet another, and one messenger to meet another, to show the king of Babylon that his city is taken at one end, and that the passages are stopped, and the reeds they have burned with fire, and the men of war are affrighted” (Jeremiah 51:30-32).
One hundred and fifty years prior to this, the Prophet Isaiah had foretold the captivity of the Israelitish nation to the great empire of Babylon; and also prophesied of their deliverance and return again to their native land. Under Divine inspiration he had even mentioned by name the individual that would be in command in connection with the capture of the city, and bring about their deliverance. He was none other than Cyrus the Great, mentioned by all historians. The prophecy reads:
“Thus saith the Lord that confirmeth the word of His servant, and performeth the counsel of His messengers; that saith to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be inhabited; and to the cities of Judah, Ye shall be built, and I will raise up the decayed places thereof; that saith to the deep, Be dry, and I will dry up thy rivers; that saith of Cyrus, He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure; even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid. Thus saith the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut. I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight; I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron; and I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I, the Lord, which call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel. For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name; I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known Me” (Isaiah 44:24-28, 45:1-4).
A Second, a Mystic Babylon
The Prophet Jeremiah, who was divinely inspired to portray the doom of Babylon, and also to describe some of the events connected with its fall, was instructed of Jehovah to publicly proclaim it and to write it all in a book. The closing words of his prophecy are very significant, in that similar words are used by St. John the Revelator, as he closes the Divine description of the fall of another, an even greater Babylon — the great false religious system divinely named, “BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH” (Revelation 17:5). These two great prophets of God, though living over seven hundred years apart, use the same figure in foretelling the fall of the two Babylons. The words in Jeremiah are addressed by the great Jehovah to the Prophet, and read: “And it shall be, when thou hast made an end of reading this book, that thou shalt bind a stone to it, and cast it into the midst of Euphrates: and thou shalt say, Thus shall Babylon sink, and shall not rise from the evil that I will bring upon her” (Jeremiah 51:63,64). The words, having reference to the great symbolic Babylon, are vastly more significant to us today, in that they relate to the great religious system that has existed in the world for over twelve centuries now — the great mystic Babylon that has corrupted the truth of God and blinded and deceived the whole world respecting the character and plan of God. The words of the revealing angel as recorded by St. John are: “And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all” (Revelation 18:21). Concerning the connection between literal and symbolic Babylon, that is that the prophecies referring to the literal city and empire of ancient Babylon have a double significance, the following words from the pen of Mr. Russell are very significant and instructive to the Lord’s people of the present time:
“The thoughtful Bible student must of necessity have always in view the many correspondencies which the Scriptures institute between literal Babylon and mystic Babylon, and when studying the account of the fall of literal Babylon his attention is naturally drawn also to the foretold fall of mystic Babylon in the end of this Age. Indeed, he must be comparatively blind who cannot see that the wonderful prophecies which speak of the fall of Babylon (Isaiah 14:22, Jeremiah 50 and 51) were not wholly fulfilled by Cyrus the Persian. The fall of literal Babylon, while it was sudden, and while it made a great commotion amongst the nations, lacks much of filling to the full the prophetic picture. Much of the prophecy still waits for fulfilment in mystic or symbolic Babylon today; and this fact is abundantly supported by the prophecies of the Book of Revelation, written centuries after the fall of literal Babylon, which unmistakably refer to symbolic Babylon, and use language almost identical with that of Jeremiah (see Revelation 16:19-18:21).
“The correspondencies between the two are very significant. Literal Babylon is represented as being situated on many waters — the River Euphrates and many canals connected with it; likewise mystic Babylon is said to sit upon many waters, which are defined as ‘peoples, nations, and tongues.’ Just as literal Babylon of old was captured by the diversion of the literal waters, so symbolic Babylon is to fall by reason of the diversion of the symbolic Euphrates, which in Revelation 16:12, it is foretold, shall be ‘dried up — that the way of the kings of the East might be prepared.’
“The kings of the East, or kings from the sunrising, are, we understand, the kings of Christ’s Kingdom, who are also priests — the Body of Christ, the Royal Priesthood. ‘Thou hast made us unto our God kings and priests, and we shall reign on the earth.’ From this standpoint of view, Cyrus and his army, overthrowing literal Babylon, was a figure or illustration of Messiah, King of kings and Lord of lords, who with his faithful will shortly overthrow mystic Babylon, and take possession of the world in the name of Jehovah, to establish the Kingdom for which he taught us to pray, ‘Our Father Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth as it is done in heaven.’
“This likeness of Cyrus to Messiah is not merely in the particulars [above] noted. It should be remembered that the name, Cyrus, signifies ‘the sun,’ and that thus in his name he reminds us of the prophecy of Christ, ‘The Sun of Righteousness shall arise with healing in his beams.’ Through the Prophet Isaiah (44:28) the Lord speaks of Cyrus as His shepherd, who would lead back Israel, and again (45:1-14) He calls him His anointed. In this prophecy Cyrus is evidently indicated, and yet just as evidently a greater than he is indirectly referred to, namely the Prince of the kings of the earth, who in Revelation is shown as drying up the symbolic Euphrates and destroying symbolic Babylon, and delivering spiritual Israel. And the time for the fulfilment of the symbol is clearly indicated, by the drying up of the Euphrates under the sixth vial of the ‘Day of Wrath’: and the fall of Babylon under the seventh vial, resulting in the liberty of all of God’s people from the thraldom, through false doctrine, which has been upon them for lo, these many years, is portrayed as resulting.
“Babylon literal fell because, when tried in the balances by the Lord, she was found wanting: mystic Babylon falls for a similar reason. Literal Babylon never was Israel, but the Israelites were for a time swallowed up in Babylon: likewise, mystic Babylon never was spiritual Israel, though for a long time spiritual Israel has been in captivity to mystic Babylon. As the same Cyrus who overthrew literal Babylon made the proclamation which permitted literal Israel to return from captivity, so it is the King of kings who, upon taking his great power as earth’s new king will set free all of the Lord’s people — and in advance he sends the message to those who have ears to hear, saying, ‘Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of demons and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird…. Come out of her, My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.’ ”
Mr. Russell proceeds to unfold what seems to him a correspondence, more in detail with the events, etc., that occur prior and subsequent to the downfall of literal and symbolic Babylon. His words are very interesting and significant, especially to those who at the present time see clearly that the Divine prophecies indicate the imminence of the final collapse of mystic Babylon and her degenerate daughters:
“The great feast which preceded the fall of Babylon would seem to correspond well with the great denominational union expected soon, and the season of rejoicing which will accompany it. The gold and silver vessels of the Lord’s house which were profaned may fitly represent not only the precious truths of Divine revelation, but also the Lord’s consecrated people — the golden vessels representing the ‘little flock,’ and the more numerous silver vessels representing the ‘great company.’ What may be the character of the defilement and injury of these is of course problematical, but in any case we remember that those consecrated vessels were all highly honored, and restored to the temple by Cyrus, and likewise we know that not only the truths of Divine revelation will all be cared for by our Lord, but also that all that are his shall be glorified in the spiritual Temple which he will rear shortly.”
As we view the religious condition of the world today, particularly Christendom, who can doubt that the great Mother system of Romanism and her Protestant offspring, the various sects and denominations, are in the widest sense of the symbol, pictured in symbolic Babylon the Great? Who, that has a clear apprehension of what constitutes the true Church of our Lord Jesus Christ, and contrasts it with the great worldly profession of this twentieth century seen all around us, can possibly doubt that the further language of the writer just quoted is true: “The spirit of the world has so fully taken possession of the ecclesiastical powers of Christendom, that reformation of the systems is impossible; and individuals can escape their fate only by a prompt and timely withdrawal from them. The hour of judgment is come.” And even now it is seen by the Lord’s watchful people that these great systems are being weighed in the balances of Divine truth and are found wanting.
“It is indeed a notable fact that in the judgment of Christendom, even by the world at large, the standard of judgment is the Word of God. The heathen hold up the Bible, and boldly declare, ‘You are not as good as your book.’ They point to its blessed Christ, and say, ‘You do not follow your pattern.’ And both the heathen and the masses of Christendom take up the golden rule and the law of love, wherewith to measure the doctrines, institutions, policy and general course of Christendom; and all alike testify to the truth of the strange handwriting on her festive walls — ‘Thou art weighed in the balances and found wanting.’ ”
What Lessons May We Draw?
The chronological order of the events preceding, or leading up to the utter collapse of literal Babylon, seem in perfect correspondence to what we learn in the Apocalyptic visions seen by St. John concerning the same of mystic Babylon. Viewing the matter from this standpoint we believe it reasonable to forecast these events as follows:
Just as at that time the Lord’s faithful servant, Daniel, was made acquainted with the fact that literal Babylon was doomed, that she was “weighed in the balances and found wanting,” so the Lord’s faithful servants of these days would be made acquainted with the fact that mystic Babylon’s doom is soon to take place — that she is “weighed in the balances and found wanting.” Furthermore, if the great feast of Belshazzar corresponds with the great denominational union and the rejoicing over it expected soon, as the above writer has expressed as seeming to be the case, then of course, the great event is still in the future, as it is quite evident that this union is not yet fully consummated. Other Scriptures seem clearly to teach that such a church union may be expected before the final collapse; and many things transpiring in the churches today seem to be shaping for such a union.
If it be proper to trace the correspondence still further, would it not be reason- able to believe that while the watchful ones of the Lord’s people already see clearly that the great religious systems of Babylon the Great and her degenerate daughters are now doomed — “weighed in the balances and found wanting” — as was true in the case of Daniel concerning literal Babylon, even before the great feast of Belshazzar, would it not be reasonable to believe that the handwriting on the wall would represent some very startling event to occur in the world subsequent to the consummation of, and the rejoicing over the great federation or union of Christendom? And to carry the correspondence to its logical conclusion, would it not be reasonable to believe that this great and startling occurrence, whatever it may be, will be made known to the great leaders of Christendom by the Lord’s people interpreting it to signify the immediate downfall of Babylon the Great? While there can be no question that very many prophecies proclaim with startling clearness the complete downfall of Babylon the Great as one of the approaching events, the typical correspondencies above noted will require the lapse of but a few years, at the most, to confirm their correctness. However, it is not so much this great event itself that we look for to occur, but rather that which this event will usher in, namely the Marriage of the Lamb, and the rising of the Sun of Righteousness with healing for all.
The Sceptre of a Holy King
“It will be order then,
Under the sceptre of a holy King.
Each creature, low and high, angels and men,
To the great concord sweetly ministering.
Self-will unknown, true harmony restored,
Happy obedience to the righteous Lord;
The multitude of wills all lost in One —
The Will that rules from the eternal throne;
Disorders, strifes, confusions, groans and cries
Then ended in the endless harmonies.”
(1) (Note from previous page.) It has seemed strange to some that Daniel, after having stated that he did not desire these gifts, should accept them when he had complied with the king’s request and made known the interpretation. When the offer was made to him he plainly stated his wishes, declaring that he did not desire any honor bestowed upon himself; but after he had performed the duty, it would not have been proper to resist the king’s command. Knowing Daniel’s character as we do, we may be assured that he did not receive them voluntarily, and that he would have continued to decline, if it were possible to have done so with propriety.