Daniel and his three associates each had two names – a Jewish and a Babylonian. Jim Jordan points out in his recent commentary that the Jewish names are used when the men pray and the Babylonian names when they advise the king. They apparently have no moral qualms about this dual identity, this divided political and social self.
But it’s striking that in chapter 2 Daniel interprets the king’s dream as “Daniel.” Nebuchadnezzar addresses him as Belteshazzar (2:26), but it’s as “Daniel,” the Jewish prophet, that he receives the answer to the mystery of the king’s dream (2:17-24). Daniel takes on the identity of Belteshazzar before the king, but he still speaks in the name of the “God of heaven” (2:37).
Deliver Us from Evil
In a recent New York Times article entitled “Freedom With a Side of Guilt: How Food Delivery…
Natural Law Needs Revelation
Natural law theory teaches that God embedded a teleological moral order in the world, such that things…
Letters
Glenn C. Loury makes several points with which I can’t possibly disagree (“Tucker and the Right,” January…