▼ The LXX introduces this chapter with the following chronological note: “in the eighteenth year of.” Such a date would place these events at about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. (cf. 2 Kgs 25:8). However, there seems to be no real basis for associating the events of Daniel 3 with this date.

▼ There is no need to think of Nebuchadnezzar’s image as being solid gold. No doubt the sense is that it was overlaid with gold (cf. Isa 40:19; Jer 10:3–4), with the result that it presented a dazzling self-compliment to the greatness of Nebuchadnezzar’s achievements.

▼ According to a number of patristic authors, the image represented a deification of Nebuchadnezzar himself. This is not clear from the biblical text, however.

▼ Aram “sixty cubits.” Assuming a length of 18 inches for the standard cubit, the image would be 90 feet (27.4 m) high.

▼ Aram “six cubits.” Assuming a length of 18 inches for the standard cubit, the image would be 9 feet (2.74 m) wide.

▼ The dimensions of the image (ninety feet high and nine feet wide) imply that it did not possess normal human proportions, unless a base for the image is included in the height dimension. The ancient world knew of other tall statues. For example, the Colossus of Rhodes – the huge statue of Helios which stood (ca. 280–224 B.C.) at the entrance to the harbor at Rhodes and was one of the seven wonders of the ancient world – was said to be seventy cubits (105 ft or 32 m) in height, which would make it even taller than Nebuchadnezzar’s image.

▼ The specific duties of the seven types of officials listed here (cf. vv. 3, 27) are unclear. The Aramaic words that are used are transliterations of Akkadian or Persian technical terms whose exact meanings are uncertain. The translations given here follow suggestions set forth in BDB.

▼ Aram “Nebuchadnezzar the king.” The proper name and title have been replaced by the relative pronoun (“he”) in the translation for stylistic reasons.

▼ The LXX and Theodotion lack the words “that Nebuchadnezzar had erected.”

▼ According to BDB 1097 s.v. כָּרוֹז the Aramaic word used here is a Greek loanword, but other scholars have argued instead for a Persian derivation (HALOT 1902 s.v. *כָּרוֹז).

▼ Aram “in strength.”

▼ Aram “they are saying.”

▼ The word zither (Aramaic קִיתָרוֹס [qitaros]), and the words for harp (Aramaic פְּסַנְתֵּרִין [p^esanterin]) and pipes (Aramaic סוּמְפֹּנְיָה [sumpon^eyah]), are of Greek derivation. Though much has been made of this in terms of suggesting a date in the Hellenistic period for the writing of the book, it is not surprising that a few Greek cultural terms, all of them the names of musical instruments, should appear in this book. As a number of scholars have pointed out, the bigger surprise (if, in fact, the book is to be dated to the Hellenistic period) may be that there are so few Greek loanwords in Daniel.

▼ The imperfect Aramaic verbs have here an injunctive nuance.

▼ Aram “in that hour.”

▼ Aram “all the peoples.”

▼ Though not in the Aramaic text of BHS, this word appears in many medieval Hebrew MSS, some LXX MSS, and Vulgate. Cf. vv. 5, 10, 15.

▼ This expression is absent in Theodotion.

▼ Aram “men.”

▼ Aram “ate the pieces of.” This is a rather vivid idiom for slander.

▼ Aram “answered and said,” a common Aramaic idiom that occurs repeatedly in this chapter.

▼ O king, live forever! is a comment of typical court courtesy that is not necessarily indicative of the real sentiments of the speaker. Ancient oriental court protocol could sometimes require a certain amount of hypocrisy.

▼ Daniel’s absence from this scene has sparked the imagination of commentators, some of whom have suggested that perhaps he was unable to attend the dedication due to sickness or due to being away on business. Hippolytus supposed that Daniel may have been watching from a distance.

▼ Aram “in anger and wrath”; NASB “in rage and anger.” The expression is a hendiadys.

▼ The Aramaic infinitive is active.

▼ Aram “these men.” The pronoun is used in the translation to avoid undue repetition.

▼ Aram “hand.” So also in v. 17.

▼ 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.”

▼ Aram “to return a word to you.”

▼ The ancient versions typically avoid the conditional element of v. 17.

▼ 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.

▼ Aram “the appearance of his face was altered”; cf. NLT “his face became distorted with rage”; NAB “[his] face became livid with utter rage.”

▼ Aram “he answered and said.”

▼ This is sometimes taken as a comparative: “[some of the] strongest.”

▼ There is a great deal of uncertainty with regard to the specific nature of these items of clothing.

▼ Aram “into the midst of the furnace.” For stylistic reasons the words “the midst of” have been left untranslated.

▼ Aram “caused to go up.”

▼ The Aramaic verb is active.

▼ Aram “the flame of the fire” (so KJV, ASV, NASB); NRSV “the raging flames.”

▼ Aram “into the midst of the furnace.” For stylistic reasons the words “the midst of” have been left untranslated.

▼ The deuterocanonical writings known as The Prayer of Azariah and The Song of the Three present at this point a confession and petition for God’s forgiveness and a celebration of God’s grace for the three Jewish youths in the fiery furnace. Though not found in the Hebrew/Aramaic text of Daniel, these compositions do appear in the ancient Greek versions.

▼ Aram “we threw…bound.”

▼ Aram “into the midst of.”

▼ The phrase like that of a god is in Aramaic “like that of a son of the gods.” Many patristic writers understood this phrase in a christological sense (i.e., “the Son of God”). But it should be remembered that these are words spoken by a pagan who is seeking to explain things from his own polytheistic frame of reference; for him the phrase “like a son of the gods” is equivalent to “like a divine being.”

▼ Aram “answered and said.”

▼ Aram “from the midst of the fire.” For stylistic reasons the words “the midst of” have been left untranslated.

▼ Aram “in their bodies.”

▼ Aram “the fire did not have power.”

▼ Aram “answered and said.”

▼ The king identifies the “son of the gods” (v. 25) as an angel. Comparable Hebrew expressions are used elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible for the members of God’s angelic assembly (see Gen 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Pss 29:1; 89:6). An angel later comes to rescue Daniel from the lions (Dan 6:22).

▼ Aram “they changed” or “violated.”

▼ Aram “so that they might not.”

▼ Aram “from me is placed an edict.”

▼ Aram “speaks negligence.”

▼ Aram “and the king.” The proper name has been supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.