Daniel 1:3-7,  And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes;  Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.  And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king’s meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king.  Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah:  Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego.

Daniel 1:8-16,  But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king’s meat, nor with the wine which he drank: therefore he requested of the prince of the eunuchs that he might not defile himself.  Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs.  And the prince of the eunuchs said unto Daniel, I fear my lord the king, who hath appointed your meat and your drink: for why should he see your faces worse liking than the children which are of your sort? then shall ye make me endanger my head to the king.  Then said Daniel to Melzar, whom the prince of the eunuchs had set over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah,  Prove thy servants, I beseech thee, ten days; and let them give us pulse to eat, and water to drink.  Then let our countenances be looked upon before thee, and the countenance of the children that eat of the portion of the king’s meat: and as thou seest, deal with thy servants.  So he consented to them in this matter, and proved them ten days.  And at the end of ten days their countenances appeared fairer and fatter in flesh than all the children which did eat the portion of the king’s meat.  Thus Melzar took away the portion of their meat, and the wine that they should drink; and gave them pulse.

In verses 3-7 we are given Nebuchadnezzar’s program for the blending of the captives from Jerusalem into his court system that they may be useful in government service.

Among the many captives taken from Judah, four young men stand out and it is through these four young men that we learn of this program.

Nebuchadnezzar’s program begins with an edict that the choicest of the young men of Judah were to attend Babylonian schools.

They were to enroll in these schools using Babylonian names which they were given and while in these schools they were to follow a diet which was provided from the king’s table.

And their ultimate vocation from these efforts was to participate in the government of a Gentile nation which worshipped false gods, a government which feared not the God of their homeland, Israel.

Now the matter of defilement came up with Daniel and his three friends.

This defilement did not concern their attendance at Babylonian schools, it did not concern the fact that they now had new Babylonian names, nor did it concern the fact that they would serve in the government of this heathen nation.

What it did concern was the eating of the food that was prepared for the king’s table.

Daniel and his friends had no opposition to attending heathen schools, nor did they oppose the receiving of new names filled with references to the gods of Babylon, nor did they oppose their serving in the government of this heathen king.

These things they were not opposed to but they were opposed to the eating of the food from the king’s table and this opposition was clearly communicated to the king’s representative.

From this selection we can learn much.

Daniel and his friends were discerning in their opposition and this can be a lesson to us in what we choose to oppose for what we choose to oppose ought to be Biblically based.

We can never get into trouble with God if we oppose what is Biblically based but how troubles mount when we go out on our own and oppose things that God does not.

Now as to attending a Babylonian school there is no doubt that they would have been taught some things that were contrary to God’s word.

Their faith would have been challenged during their three year enrollment.

But based upon their lack of opposition to this schooling Daniel did not think that their attendance would defile them.

As I said in a previous lesson it does not seem that Nebuchadnezzar’s purpose was to convert these men to the religion of Babylon.

As polytheists, the Babylonians were not threatened by different religions or other gods as long as there was allowance for many gods.

The purpose of the schooling was to teach them to speak, read and write Aramaic, the language of the land and the learning of the Chaldeans.

This education of the captives did not appear to be brainwashing but to be a communication of ideas where the student was not forced to agree or to believe what he was taught.

Secular education in itself is not evil.

The wisdom and knowledge of God are quite able to hold itself up in good stead anywhere secular education operates.

These men were not young children who could be impressed to accept anything they were taught but they were well prepared men with scriptural foundations to their lives.

These were men who had been trained up in the way they should go and now that they were mature they would not depart from that training.

They were equipped with standards by which to judge all that they were being taught and they had the character to stand for what they believed.

It is easy to accomplish the first part in our children but make sure the second part, that of strong character is also imparted to your children, that they will use that training to stand for God in any circumstance.

There were more than four children of Israel transported to Babylon that had the proper training but we do not hear about them for apparently they had not the right character to stand.

Training is good, but if it is not converted into practical use for God, of what use is it?

The second thing that Daniel accepted was the new name that he received from the king.

He presented no opposition to this, although I don’t suppose he was happy about it nor do I suppose the Hebrews used these new names among themselves.

The book of Daniel is not the book of Belteshazzar.

But one thing I remember from my youth is the old adage that we who were called nasty names by other children said was this:

This was something that our parents gave us to arm us against those uncouth names that other children chose to call us.

It is a different age we live in for in our age many parents instead of arming their children with simple sayings like this choose to get involved against those who are calling the names.

Here again we see a devolution of character building.

But we were not to be upset by name callers for they did no harm to us like the harm that would come from sticks and stones.

Another thing about names is that when others call you by a name other than your own you cannot do anything about it.

It does not change who you are.

Shakespeare said it about a rose when he said:

You cannot change the character of the rose by giving it another name.

It’s sweet aroma will not be affected.

You can call garlic a rose but it will still smell like garlic.

Daniel’s name meant "God is judge."

His new name Belteshazzar meant "Whom Bel favors."

Hananiah’s name meant "Beloved of the Lord," while his new name Shadrach meant "Illumined by the sun god."

Misheal meant "Who is as God", while his new name Meshack meant "Who is like Venus."

And Azariah’s name, meaning "The Lord is my help," was changed to Abednego, a heathen name meaning "The servant of Nego."

These names did nothing to change the character of these men.

They had no say in the matter nor do you, when is comes to others calling you by some strange name.

The king and anyone else in his court could call Daniel whatever he wanted for he was in authority.

Daniel knew of this practice from the life of Joseph where Pharaoh gave Joseph the name "Zaphenath-paneah" (Genesis 41:45).

Joseph did not reject this name and there is no indication that God considered the name as defiling to Joseph.

The practice of giving names is clearly associated with authority.

Parents give their children names because they are in authority.

Adam was given authority over all the animals and because of this he named the animals.

He was given authority over his mate Eve and because of this he named her Woman and Eve.

God changed the names of Abram to Abraham and Sarai to Sarah, which was an indication of his authority over them as new creations.

So this renaming of the captives was simply an expression of the king’s authority and therefore Daniel and his friends had no reason to oppose their renaming.

They knew, and God knew whose authority they were ultimately under.

But Daniel knew that their exile was a just exile and put in place by the God of Israel as Daniel wrote of in verse 2.

And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand.

And in addition to this knowledge Daniel also knew that it was God’s will for the exiles to accept this and to get on with life in the new country.

The prophet Jeremiah wrote the exiles a letter which told them God’s mind on this when he wrote in Jeremiah 29:4-7.

So here we see instructions to Daniel and the exiles to seek

Babylon’s well-being and by doing so be obedient to God’s instructions,

False prophets had been telling Judah that their captivity in Babylon would be short.

But Jeremiah told them God’s truth that their stay would be 70 years and because of this they were to settle in and build houses, plant gardens, marry and beget children.

Also they were to be contributing citizens of their land of exile and to pray for the well being of the Babylonians.

So Daniel was secure in his knowledge that he was not defiling himself.

He was secure in the knowledge that his serving in the Babylonian government was in effect benefiting the Jew’s welfare and would contribute to their eventual release after the 70 year period.

So we see that Daniel and his friends raised no objections to attending Babylonian schools.

They did they oppose the receiving of new names filled with references to the gods of Babylon.

Nor did they oppose their serving in the government of this heathen king but the one thing that they thought of as defiling was the eating of food from the king’s table.

As we know the books of Moses are filled with details concerning the Israelite diet.

These details are explicit and meant to separate the children of God from the heathen.

Daniel had no reason to think that Nebuchadnezzar would accommodate his table to the captives that were spoils of war.

His food would in many cases be identified as unclean by the law of Moses.

The food and wine served at Nebuchadnezzar’s table may have been associated with the worship of heathen gods, similar to the problem described in 1 Corinthians 8-10.

Daniel was sensitive to this and immediately took action to avoid personal defilement.