the book called Daniel is one of the inspired books of the Word. Although doubts have been cast upon its Divine origin and authenticity, owing to some difficulties in its literal statements, yet we have sufficient authority for accepting it as a part of Divine Revelation, or the Word of God, not only because it was quoted by the Lord Himself, but from the fact that it is included in the list of books that constitute the Word, as given in the writings of the New Church.

In these writings portions of it are explained according to their spiritual meaning. The book itself is both historical and prophetical. In the work entitled "Arcana Coelestia" (n. 1183), we find the "land of Shinar" mentioned, and we are there told that in that land profane worship prevailed — that is, such worship as was holy in externals but evil in internals. In this passage the second verse of the first Chapter of Daniel is quoted, and the carrying away of the Jews into Babylon is referred to as an historical relation. The fact that they were carried there and held captive has, probably, never been disputed, but the date assigned to this event in connection with the name of the King of Judah, is thought by some commentators to be erroneous.

Although the different events recorded in the book are generally believed to have taken place about 600 B. C., yet the composition of a part, at least, of the book has been ascribed by some writers to a period as late as 176-164, B. C., in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. If we had certain evidence that the book was not written by Daniel himself, this would not destroy its spiritual value. All that is contained in the five books of Moses was not written by him, but they were written by some hand; partly by Moses and partly by some one after his death. This fact does not weaken their authority nor destroy their spiritual meaning.

The book called Daniel is not only twofold in character, historical and prophetical, but it is written in two languages, Hebrew and Aramaic. Chapter i. and chapters viii. to xii. are written in Hebrew, and from chapter ii. ver. 4 to the end of chapter vii. is written in Aramaic.,

The book is usually divided according to these differences. But there seems to be no reason for such a division, so far as its spiritual meaning is concerned. It has been suggested that the whole book was originally written in Hebrew and afterwards in Aramaic, but that portions of the original Hebrew were lost, and that these were afterwards supplied from copies in Aramaic.

We do not regard these questions as unimportant, by any means, although a few only, even among Biblical scholars, can arrive at a final conclusion regarding them.

We are obliged to treat the Word as we now possess it, believing that under the Divine Providence it has been preserved and handed down to us.

We should regard the book of Daniel as a whole, knowing that it was written for the sake of its spiritual meaning, and not for the purpose of recording historical events in a connected series. Wherever its statements and allusions seem to conflict with the facts of actual history, we may be sure that these apparent difficulties can be reconciled. Two instances of this kind may be mentioned. When Belshazzar is spoken of, he is called the son of Nebuchadnezzar ; but it seems to have been satisfactorily shown that he was not the son but the grandson of that king.

In the spiritual sense, this apparent inaccuracy does not impair the meaning or change it. A grandson equally with a son denotes some derivative principle, here a false principle derived from evil. Similar instances of this use of the term son, and also of the term brother, may be found in the Word.

Another instance, more difficult to be reconciled, is the statement in regard to the transfer of the Babylonish empire. In chapter v. ver. 31, we read: "And Darius, the Mede, received the kingdom, being about three score and two years old." But in the history of those times gathered from ancient documents, it is related as a positive undoubted fact, that it was Cyrus who acquired the kingdom of Babylon. The only way to reconcile the difference is to suppose that this Darius of the book of Daniel was some prince to whom the power of governing .Babylonia was delegated by Cyrus.

The book of Daniel does not contain a connected history of natural events, but all the historical events mentioned have been recorded for the sake of their spiritual meaning. This maybe said of all the historical parts of the Word, even of the Gospels.

In regard to the prophetic visions of Daniel, it is very plain, in the light of the explanations given in the writings of the New Church, that they can only be interpreted according to the law of correspondence and representation, and that no explanation can be satisfactory which makes reference only to a succession of empires, or to merely natural events.

Even when this book of Daniel is explained with reference to the state of the Christian church, especially of the Roman Catholic and Protestant branches, there is some danger of making the application too literal, making allusion to the outward condition of churches, rather than to principles of Divine truth and their operation, from which the internal quality of the church is made known. By a careful study of the book and of such explanations of it as are given in the writings of the New Church, we may see that principles, true or false, are always treated of, and outward changes or conditions are shown to be illustrations of the operation of these principles in the human mind and therefore in the church.

In studying the Word of the Lord in the light of true doctrine, we should rise above merely external things and endeavor to see its spiritual meaning, not only in relation to churches and dispensations, which is called the historical-spiritual sense, but in reference to individual states of life and especially to our own life.

What, then, is the spirit and purpose of this revelation, contained in the book of Daniel? What are the particulars contained in the spiritual sense of it ? To know these things we must first have some idea of the general subjects treated of. There are three general subjects treated of in the whole book. These are "the Consummation, or last time of the Church," "the Coming of the Lord," and "the New Church," signified in the Apocalypse by the New Jerusalem. "Wherever Daniel is mentioned by name in the Sacred Scriptures, he represents whatever is prophetic concerning the Coming of the Lord—and the state of the church at the last times." (AC 3652.)

The captivity of the Jews in Babylon represents a state of the church and of the human mind in which man has fallen under the influence of the infernal love of dominion, the love of ruling over others originating in the love of self. Babylon always denotes that evil love, and to be in Babylon is to be under its influence.

So many allusions to Babylon and direct statements regarding it are found in the Sacred Scriptures, especially in the prophecy of Isaiah and in the book of Revelation, that no doubt can be entertained that this is its spiritual meaning. Indeed, from the first mention of Babylon in Genesis to the declarations in the Apocalypse with regard to "Babylon the Great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth," its representation is uniform. This has long been recognized by writers on the meaning of Scripture symbols. But only in the writings of the New Church do we find an explanation of the particulars involved or expressed, especially with reference to the different ages or dispensations. The Jewish Church finally came under the influence of this evil love to such a degree that it was brought to an end. This is denoted by the captivity of Israel and Judah.

This love of dominion existed with the priests and kings of that church long before its end. Its final consummation was represented by the taking of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and the carrying of a number of its inhabitants into captivity, just as an individual loses power over himself and all freedom of action when he allows himself to be governed by this evil love, or is carried away by it, even for a time.

At the end of every church or dispensation, however, there are remains of good out of which a new church can be formed. The old must be utterly vastated or consummated before anything new can spring up. Indeed there must be a judgement upon the old. The evil love of ruling over others is allowed to extend itself to the utmost limit, that is, as far as it can go, until it is consummated by its own fury; then it is overthrown and a new life springs up. In all the past history of the human race there has been this extremity of evil, the growth of the lust of dominion, which continues until it produces insanity and destroys itself. This is plainly shown in what is said of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar. But the remains of good (the "small remnant") although they may be obscured for a time, and become apparently lifeless, are continually sustained and kept alive by the Lord.

These remains are represented by Daniel and his companions who are spoken of as certain of the children of Israel who are of the "King's seed." To be of the King's seed is to be in truths from the Lord.

The position and conduct of Daniel in Babylon is somewhat like that of Joseph in Egypt. In the highest sense, both of them represent the Lord.

The parallel between Daniel and the Lord may be seen somewhat from the life of the Lord as given in the Gospel. Regarding Daniel as representing the Lord as Divine Truth, we see that this truth has, at first, little or no power. It is apparently completely subject to the love of dominion exercised both spiritually and naturally, in Church and State. Nebuchadnezzar represents the love of dominion on the natural plane of life. There was no true church remaining in Babylonia; but the spiritual power was represented by the magicians, soothsayers, and astrologers.

The similarity of the book of Daniel to the book of Revelation called the Apocalypse, has been frequently alluded to. The visions of Daniel and John are of a similar character. The book of Daniel is apocalyptic. It is full of wonderful imagery, which clearly points to a future state of the church. Swedenborg says, in explanation of the Apocalypse, that "it does not treat of successive states of the church, still less of the successive states of kingdoms, as some have hitherto believed; but therein, from beginning to end, the last state of the church in the heavens and upon the earth, and then the Last Judgement, and after this a New Church which is the New Jerusalem." (AR 2.)

The same statement may be made with reference to the book of Daniel. It is a book of the last times, showing the cause of the decline of every church and the loss of spiritual life in the individual man. Babylon, in the Apocalypse, is the Roman Catholic religion; in the book of Daniel it is the love of dominion, not only in the Roman Catholic Church, but in all churches from the beginning of the decline of the Most Ancient Church to the end of the First Christian Church. The second part of the three-fold subject, namely, the Coming of the Lord, is vividly portrayed in Daniel's own visions of the Lord as narrated in the seventh and tenth chapters.

In these chapters the prophetic character of the book, as relating to the Lord's Coming, is more plainly seen. To these visions we find much reference in the writings of the New Church.

This book has been little understood either in the Jewish Church or in the Christian Church. It could not be understood without a revelation of its spiritual meaning. Swedenborg has not given a connected relation of this spiritual meaning as he has of the Apocalypse. We must, therefore, make use of the explanations given of some portions of it, and rely upon a knowledge of the general law of interpretation to explain the rest.

In regard to the Apocryphal additions to the book of Daniel found in the Septuagint version, which are comprised under four books called: "The Prayer of Azarias," "The Song of the Three Children," "The History of Susanna," and "The Narrative of Bel and the Dragon," but little needs to be said. They are generally acknowledged to form no part of the original, but to have been constructed from it with fabulous and fanciful additions. Jerome, who translated them with the canonical parts of the book of Daniel from the Greek of Theodotion, declared that Daniel as received by the Hebrews contained neither of the last three named, and he probably included the "Prayer of Azarias."

it is not well to dwell too much upon the personal character of the prophets. They simply represent the Lord as the great Prophet and Teacher. As representative men their private or personal character is not to be reflected upon, except so far as it serves to explain and illustrate the manifestation of the truth through them. In fact, we know but little about them — that is, nothing reliable beyond what is found in the letter of the Scriptures.

Daniel is not to be excepted from this rule of interpretation, although more is said of his personal life and experiences than of the other prophets. In the book called by his name, especially in its historical statements, the experiences of himself and other Hebrew young men who were with him in Babylon are narrated.

The additions to these statements, found in the Apocryphal books, are not worthy of credence. While, then, we must respect the principle of interpretation, above stated, we must recognize the fact that the natural life of such representative characters, their education, and, in some cases, their previous calling fitted and prepared them for their spiritual mission.

We know nothing definite of Daniel's parentage, but we have reason to believe that he sprang from a royal family, for Nebuchadnezzar, the king, commanded Ash-penaz, the master of the eunuchs, to carry with him to Babylon, of the children of Israel, some who were "of the seed royal" and of the "nobles," "youths in whom there was no blemish, but well favored and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge and understanding science, and such as had ability to stand in the king's palace, and that he should teach them the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans." (Chap. 1:3, 4.)

Josephus says that Daniel was the son of Zedekiah, the last King of Judah, whose name was changed from Mattaniah by Nebuchadnezzar, when he made him king instead of Jehoiachin. (See 2 kings 24:17.) It is supposed by some that Daniel and his three companions were made eunuchs in the palace of the king, as Isaiah prophesied to King Hezekiah. (See 2 kings 20:18; Is. 39:7.) Of this, however, some doubt may be entertained. The Hebrew word saris has been translated, in some passages, chamberlain — an office which did not at a later day necessarily require a eunuch. The words of the prophecy would, however, if interpreted literally, sustain the supposition.

Daniel must have been prepared for his future office as a prophet of the Lord, first by his education and training in Jerusalem before he was carried into Babylon.

Nebuchadnezzar seems to have desired to make use of the knowledge possessed by the Jews for the glory of his kingdom, and to add to it the science and learning of the magicians, astrologers, and soothsayers of Chaldea, one of the former seats of the Ancient Church. In this way Daniel was prepared for receiving Divine truths and for becoming a chosen instrument for revealing hidden things by means of which the state of the church could be judged and known.

He did not understand the meaning of the revelations given to him in their relation to the internal or spiritual state of the church, but he could judge of the state of the world around him, and the worship of the Babylonians which was opposite to the worship of Jehovah. He set his face towards Jerusalem and prayed to the God of Israel, and not to the gods of the nations around him. The state of things around him in Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom was typical of the state of the church when the love of dominion, springing from the love of self, prevails over love to the Lord. At the same time he was enabled to describe the things shown to him in vision, which were antetypes of natural things and thus represented and signified the state of the church on earth. His very name has reference to the Divine judgement, for Daniel means, "God is Judge."

In his prophetic character, he not only represents what all the prophets do — that is, the truth itself which reveals and foretells the future state of the church— but in a special and peculiar manner he represents the Lord as a revealer of Divine truths by which human souls are liberated from the bondage of evil. Daniel was a light in a dark place, as Joseph was in Egypt. His life and experiences resemble those of Joseph in many ways. Carried into captivity, he learned submission in order that he might command. Amid luxury and vice he abstained from them, and was thus, like John the Baptist, a Nazarite — or one set apart and consecrated, by a vow, to stand before the Lord as well as before an earthly king in a pure and holy life. There is something sublime in his self-denial and renunciation of evil, which marks him in a peculiar manner as a representative of the Divine prophet, who was wiser than the sons of men, and "purer than snow and whiter than milk."

In the explanations given in the writings of the New Church of that portion of the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew in which the prophecy of Daniel is alluded to, we read that "Daniel represents, when mentioned by name, whatever is prophetic concerning the coming of the Lord, and (in that chapter of Matthew especially) the state of the church at the last times." (AC 3652.) Again, it is there stated that the expression, "spoken of by Daniel the prophet, signifies in the internal sense, by the prophets; for where any prophet is mentioned by name in the Word, it does not mean that prophet, but the prophetic Word itself, because names in no case penetrate into heaven; nevertheless each prophet has a distinct signification." These teachings indicate that Daniel represents the Lord, especially as He manifests Himself at the end of the church, and in His coming to judgement, not only in His first coming, but in every appearing of the Son of Man when the darkness and desolation of the night are passing away, and the dawn is breaking.

"It is well to note here that Swedenborg, in the printing of the work called "True Christian Religion," placed immediately after the title page, two passages from the Word to indicate the character of that work. The first of these passages is from the book of Daniel (chap. 7:13, 14), which contains Daniel's vision of the Son of Man with the clouds of heaven; the second is from the book of the Revelation of John where the New Heaven and the New Earth and the New Jerusalem are spoken of. This not only shows that the prophecy of Daniel treats of the Lord's coming, but it also connects it directly with the descent of the New Jerusalem. Thus Swedenborg indicated plainly what modern commentators have partially seen — the resemblance between Daniel's visions and those of John the Revelator. They are similar, not only because they treat of the same subjects, but because their vision was of a similar nature. The subjects principally treated of, in both of these books, is the "Consummation of the Age, or the Last Time of the Church," the "Coming of the Lord," and the "New Heaven and the New Church." This is explained in chapter xiv. of the "True Christian Religion," in which passages from these two prophetical books of the Word are extensively quoted.

What was the character of the visions of Daniel and John is fully explained in n. 157 of the "True Christian Religion." There we read:

Since by the spirit of man is meant his mind, therefore by "being in the spirit," which is sometimes said in the Word, is meant a state of the mind separate from the body; and because in that state the prophets saw such things as exist in the spiritual world, therefore that is called the vision of God. Their state, then, was such as that of spirits themselves and angels in that world. In that state the spirit of man like his mind, as to sight, may be transported from place to place, the body remaining in its own. This is the state in which T have now been for twenty-six years, with this difference, that I have been in the spirit and at the same time in the body, and only sometimes out of the body. That Ezekiel, Zechariah, Daniel, and John when he wrote the Revelation, were in that state is evident from the following passages.

Quotations are then given from these prophets and from John.

There can be no doubt that Daniel before he was carried into captivity had been educated in the law of Moses and in a knowledge of Jehovah. He obeyed and worshiped the God of Israel when he was in Babylon, rather than the false gods around him. He had strength to resist the seductive influences of the royal court of Babylon, because of his previous education and training at Jerusalem. He was in the king's house, but did not eat of the king's meat. Thus must every child of God who would become gifted with a knowledge of heavenly and Divine things, be prepared by abstinence from the indulgence of selfish and worldly loves for spiritual illumination. But Daniel was not only prepared by his education in Jerusalem, but by instruction in the knowledge of ancient things, or in the learning of the Chaldeans, in the palace of the king and by his direction. Thus he was like Moses, who was "learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians." (Acts 7:22.) We may believe that he received from the Magi, or wise men of that country, a knowledge of natural science, so far as it was known at that clay, and especially of the correspondence of earthly things with heavenly. He was thus prepared for his holy office, for the opening of his spiritual sight, and for his actual intromission into the spiritual world. In the passage already quoted from the "True Christian Religion" (n. 157), the nature of his vision is plainly taught. It was not simply a mental state due to natural causes, but an actual opening of his spiritual senses so that he was present with angels and spirits in the spiritual world.

It may be thought from its being said that an angel spoke to him, and especially that Michael helped him and Gabriel spoke to him (chap. 8:16; 9:21; 10:13), that he was instructed as to the spiritual meaning of his visions by an individual angel. But we are informed in the work concerning "Heaven and its Wonders and concerning Hell," that Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael are only angelic societies which are so named from their functions. (No. 52.)

Are we not to understand therefore, that while Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, and others had visions of angels, one or more appearing to them, that they were brought into actual communication with one or more heavenly societies, so that they received by influx some knowledge from these societies in regard to the Lord and His love and what He was about to do for human redemption, the individual angels serving only as representatives or messengers. The prophets were not instructed as to the spiritual meaning of these heavenly communications. Each heavenly society has its own peculiar function. The function of the society denoted in the Word by Gabriel must have reference to the Lord's coming to judgement. It was Gabriel who announced the Lord's birth to the Virgin Mary. This view may be fully confirmed by reference to the work entitled "The Apocalypse Revealed" (n. 548), where we are taught that by Michael is meant the ministry of those who prove from the Word that the Lord is the God of heaven and earth, and that God the Father and He are one, as the soul and body are one, also that man must live according to the precepts of the Decalogue, and that he then has charity and faith; and that "by Gabriel is meant the ministry of those who teach from the Word that Jehovah came into the world, and that the human which He there begat is the Son of God and Divine."

From these things adduced from the writings of Swedenborg, the Servant of the Lord, in making known His Second Coming, something may be understood of the prophetic character of Daniel.

As the initials only of the English titles of the works referred to are used, a Table is here added of the Titles, somewhat abbreviated.

Exceptions are the Latin titles "Dicta Probantia" (Dict. P.), the "Coronis," and the "Adversaria" (Adver.).

All the references have been taken from the Index of Le Boys Des Guays.

the carrying away of the Jews into Babylon, by Nebuchadnezzar, in the reign of Jehoiakim, King of Judah, is an historical fact. There seems to be some doubt, however, as to the precise date of the event. The opening verse of chapter one of this book is in these words:

In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim King of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon to Jerusalem, and besieged it.

In the prophecy of jeremiah, 36:1, we read:

And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah, King of Judah, this word came to Jeremiah from the Lord.

Then follows the prophecy which was read before the king and so angered him that he burnt up the roll on which it was written, piecemeal, in the fire by which he was warming himself in his winter palace.

Dr. William Smith, remarking on the apparent difficulty in the dates, says:

The simplest explanation is, that the advance of Nebuchadnezzar from Babylon began in the third year of Jehoiakim, but that Jerusalem was not taken until the fourth.

We would emphasize the doctrine of the New Church familiar to our readers, that the Word of the Lord, as given in history and prophecy, was written solely for the sake of its spiritual meaning. We need not be troubled, therefore, concerning any apparent difficulties in its literal statements. The "third year" denotes a state of fullness; here it denotes a state in which evil had come to the full, when there was a complete vastation of the church. Its worship became profane and idolatrous, and it fell under the dominion of the love of ruling from the love of self.

It may be well, however, to refer to some of the historical facts connected with the story of the captivity, as they now seem to have been established. Jehoiakim, whose original name was Eliakim, was set up to be King of Judah, by Necho, King of Egypt.

After the battle of Carchemish, near the Euphrates, when the Egyptians were defeated by the Babylonians, Jerusalem was besieged and captured by Nebuchadnezzar. He first took Jehoiakim prisoner, but afterwards suffered him to remain in Jerusalem as a vassal king, tributary to the Babylonian power. After three years, Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. Jerusalem was then again attacked, not by Nebuchadnezzar in person, but by numerous bands of Syrians, Moabites, and Ammonites, who were then subject to the King of Babylon. Jehoiakim was killed, his body was cast out, and afterwards buried in an ignominious manner beyond the gates of Jerusalem, as prophesied by Jeremiah.

Sometime afterwards Jehoiachin, the son of Jehoiakim, sometimes called Jechoniah, reigned for three months. But there was again a rebellious spirit manifested, and Jehoiachin was taken prisoner, carried into Babylon, and held there in close captivity for thirty-six years. A large number of captives — among them Daniel and his royal companions — were carried away at the first capture of Jerusalem, and another portion, said to number ten thousand, were taken into captivity with Jehoiachin. (2 kings 24:14.)

The fact is now established that Nebuchadnezzar was coregent with his father Nabopolasser, in the latter part of his father's reign and that he was called king by anticipation. At the time of the battle of Carchemish and the first siege of Jerusalem, he was not sole and absolute King of Babylon. The time of Daniel's probation, according to chapter one, verse five, was three years, but it was in the second year of the king's actual reign that he was brought before him to interpret his dream.

These things will not be regarded, however, as of primary importance if we believe that the literal narrative is simply a vehicle for communicating the spiritual meaning, which relates not to the rise and fall of kingdoms, but to the state of the church and of the human mind in which the church is established.

The spiritual sense of the Word is threefold. In its highest or inmost sense it treats of the Lord and the glorification of His humanity, in the next lower sense it reveals the laws and processes of man's regeneration, and in its lowest sense — called the historical-spiritual sense — it treats of the different states of the church. The prophecy of Daniel relates more particularly to the consummation of the church and the coming of the Lord to judgement.

Jehoiakim, it is plain from Jeremiah, was a profane and idolatrous king. He represents, therefore, the evil love of dominion in the church, which leads to profanation. What then is represented by Nebuchadnezzar? Both were kings, and both sought dominion. The kingdom of Judah was a theocracy. The civil power and the ecclesiastical power were united, and Jehovah alone was the head of the church. Nevertheless, there was a priesthood and a sovereignty. When these became perverted the whole church was perverted.

The nations and peoples outside of Canaan represented the natural or external principles of human life and the natural degree of the mind. When this plane of the mind is altogether separated from what is spiritual, the natural love of dominion seeks preeminence. This is destructive of the church and of all genuine religion. Nebuchadnezzar represents this natural evil love which seeks to make all things subservient to it.

In AC 10227, we read:

By Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babel, is meant the profane that vastates, which is the case when the truths and goods of the church serve for means to favor the evils of the love of self and of the world, by wrong application, for in such case the evils of those loves are inwardly in the heart, and the holy things of the church are in the mouth.

When the love of self takes the place of love to the Lord within the church, then the church falls a prey to the natural love of dominion, exercised on the natural plane of life, and all things are made subservient to it. Nebuchadnezzar was a waster and destroyer. It was predicted by Jeremiah that all who remained in Jerusalem would be destroyed by him. (Chap. xxxi.)

Now by the King of Babylon coming against Jerusalem, is meant that the church comes under the dominion of this natural evil love, and those within the church who have profaned holy things will lose all spiritual freedom. This is the spiritual meaning of Jeremiah's prediction.

But the church may continue to exist, externally, with all its outward forms of worship, after it has lost its spirituality and has come under the evil love of dominion. The captivity in Babylon is the bondage of the man of the church to this natural evil love of dominion, which usurps the place of love to the Lord. The individual who exercises it claims the worship which belongs to the Lord alone. The profanation of holy things is represented by the carrying away of the sacred vessels out of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar, and their being used at Belshazzar's feast by the revellers.

In order to have a general idea of the spiritual meaning of this book called Daniel, we must think, in the first place, of the state of the Jewish Church as depicted by Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. The Jewish Church had already profaned and adulterated holy things. The first conquest of the kingdom of Israel, and the captivity of its people by the Assyrians, denotes the perversion of the intellectual principle of the mind and its subjection to false reasonings, while the conquest of the kingdom of Judah, and the captivity of its people in Babylon, denotes the subjection of the will principle to the infernal love of dominion.

The Jewish Church, at the period of the second captivity, was vastated. If it had not been Nebuchadnezzar could not so easily have led the men of Judah into captivity, after destroying so many of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. But while the church in its external form may be destroyed, when men cease to love and obey its holy truths, yet these truths themselves can never be wholly extinguished. Even after the church has fallen under the dominion of the love of self, some truths remain in the minds of a few. There is a "small remnant" by which the human race can be saved from utter extinction.

Daniel and the other children of the King's seed, "well-favored and in whom there was no blemish," represent the truths of the church which remain, and serve as new seed from which faith in the Lord may be born anew.

The gift of prophecy was not entirely lost even after the Jewish Church became corrupt. The prophets condemned the evils around them — Isaiah and Jeremiah in Jerusalem, and Ezekiel and Daniel in Babylon — and they suffered much, thus representing how the holy truths of the church and the Lord Himself suffered at the hands of evil men.

Daniel and his companions represent those who are in states of innocence, with whom the truth is preserved in dark and evil states of the church and amid much persecution. They would not eat of the king's meat in Babylon, some of which, doubtless, was offered to idols.

Nebuchadnezzar's command to his eunuch, or chamberlain, to bring these children of Judah into his palace that they might be taught the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans, denotes the will and purpose of those who are in the love of dominion from the love of self to make the truths of the church and all its holy principles subservient to their own selfish ends.

In the historical-spiritual sense, the. particulars related in this chapter have reference to the state of the Jewish Church at its end, especially at the time of the Lord's coming, when its consummation was complete. They also refer to the state of the Christian Church at its end, especially when the Church of Rome attempted to bring the whole world under its dominion. The Roman Catholic religion is denoted by Babylon, but wherever the infernal love of dominion prevails there is Babylon. At the end of every church the natural selfish love of ruling over others prevails. Its object is worldly gain or power. The devil offered the Lord all the kingdoms of this world, and the glory of them, if He would fall down and worship him, but the Lord answered him: "You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only shall you serve."

The Roman Church has distinguished itself by efforts to obtain civil power for the sake of maintaining its own supremacy. But this end can no longer be secured, since "Babylon has fallen." Since the Last Judgement this power has been fully overcome in the spiritual world, so that neither the Roman Church, nor any other, can now on obtain power over the souls of men, or deprive them of spiritual freedom. The church will not rule over the State, nor will the State rule over the church, but each will perform its own use in the world and fill its own proper sphere.

As to Daniel he not only represents the truth remaining at the end of the Church, but, in the highest sense, he represents the Lord Himself as Divine Truth coming to judge the state of the church.

His conduct in refusing the king's meat and feeding on pulse, beautifully shows forth the nature of spiritual abstinence from natural evil delights which would destroy- all remains of good in the soul.

The Lord, while He was tempted as to all the evils to which humanity was subject, resisted and overcame all these evils of every degree, and thus accomplished the work of redemption from the evil power.

He fulfilled the law of the Nazarite, not naturally — for He "came eating and drinking" — but spiritually, that is in a perfectly pure and holy life. He was a Nazarite, indeed, "purer than snow and whiter than milk."

In all matters of wisdom and understanding Daniel. and his three companions were found to be ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers in the kingdom.

This was when they were brought before the king at the end of their probation. When the Lord stood in the temple before the doctors, He was found to possess wisdom much greater than theirs. Wherever the Divine Truth begins to gain a permanent influence in the human mind, it will be found to be higher than all the reasonings of the natural man. Daniel raised to power in Babylon represents the supremacy of Divine truth, and his three companions represent all inferior and subordinate truths of different degrees.

As Nebuchadnezzar became acquainted with Daniel, and learned what wisdom he possessed, he decided to make use of it to increase his own power. He found that it gave him more power than all the knowledge of the magicians and astrologers. Truths of a spiritual nature give greater power for evil as well as for good, but they are finally taken away from those who do not make good use of them.

In the last verse of this chapter it is written: "And Daniel continued even to the first year of King Cyrus"; and in the twenty-eighth verse of the sixth chapter, we find these words: "So this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, and in the reign of Cyrus, the Persian." It was Cyrus, King of Persia, the real conqueror of Babylon, who assisted the Jewish people to return to their own land, and to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem, restoring to them the vessels of gold and silver that had not been destroyed.

We are told in AC 8989 that "Cyrus represents the Lord as to the Humanity."

The life of Daniel in Babylon, with the other captive Jews, represents the state of the church at its consummation, when the truth is held in subjection to the power of evil and remains only with a few; but the beginning of the reign of Cyrus denotes the coming of the. Lord, first to restore natural freedom and then to establish a New Church in which the truth will be all powerful to overcome the dominion of evil, and whose members will acknowledge the Lord in His Divine Humanity and worship Him alone.

nearly the whole of the second chapter of Daniel is filled with an account of Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the great image and the interpretation of it by Daniel.

Dreams are commonly thought of, at this day, as something unreal, having no meaning. Such was not the case with the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar. In those days, and for a long period afterwards, revelations or communications from heaven were made by means of dreams. This may be seen from the Old Testament and from the New. It is a little remarkable that Nebuchadnezzar was not able to recall his dream of the great image, although he must have had an impression that it was of consequence to him. He had more than one dream, and the impressions they produced upon his mind induced anxiety and fear. They troubled him.

In the spiritual sense of the Word this dream denotes the revelation of Divine Truth. The particulars of the dream relate to the state of the church. This is especially seen in the interpretation given by Daniel. The state of the church, especially with respect to its consummation and the second coming of the Lord, could not have been known without a revelation from the Lord.

The nature of Divine revelation, even as to its form and manifestation, and especially as to its spiritual meaning, is such that it cannot be understood except by those who are enlightened by the Lord in a state of obedience, and who are in the desire of being led by the Lord. Those who are under the influence of the love of dominion cannot know the nature of Divine revelation; they regard the Word of the Lord in the same light as they do any human production, and they endeavor to interpret it to suit their own evil desires.

Nebuchadnezzar preeminently represents those who are in this evil love of dominion. His kingdom was Babylon, which always denotes the rule or government of this evil love in the human mind; that is, it denotes the church and the human mind entirely subject to the love of ruling over others from the love of self. There is, however, a good love of dominion and, in one sense, even Nebuchadnezzar represents this love, as we shall presently show.

When Nebuchadnezzar found that he could not remember his dream— it was gone from him — he called to him the magicians, the astrologers, the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans. It is not fully understood, at this day, what these several classes of men were, but enough is known to give us a general idea about them. We find them and their arts spoken of in the writings of the New Church. The magicians of Chaldea like those of Egypt were enabled by means of a knowledge of correspondences to induce a belief in the reality of certain things which were in fact unreal. They captivated the senses, charming and deceiving. In this way we are told they perverted correspondences and obtained power over the minds of others by objective means.

The astrologers were probably a distinct class from the magicians. They devoted themselves to the study of the heavenly bodies, and attributed to them or some of them certain attributes and powers and even worshiped them. They read in the stars the signs of future events and conditions of life. The sorcerers were another distinct class who acted directly upon the mind, producing a kind of mental stupor so as to keep one under their influence. In AR 462, there are three kinds of sorcery spoken of as follows:

Sorceries were in use among the ancients and were performed in three ways: first, by keeping the hearing and thus the mind of another continually intent upon his words and sayings, without retaining aught from them; and, at the same time, by an aspiration and inspiration of thought conjoined with affection, by means of the breath, into the sound of the voice, whereby the hearer is incapable of thinking anything from himself; in this manner did the lovers of falsehood pour in their falsities with violence. Secondly, they infused a persuasion, which was done by detaining the mind from everything of a contrary nature, and directing the attention exclusively to the idea involved in that which was uttered by themselves, hence the spiritual sphere of his mind dispelled the spiritual sphere of the mind of another, and stifled it; this was the kind of spiritual fascination which the magi of old made use of, and which was spoken of as the tying up and binding the understanding. The latter kind of sorcery pertained only to the spirit or thought but the former to the lips or speech also. Thirdly, the hearer kept his mind so fixed in his own opinion, that he almost shut his ears against hearing anything from the speaker, which was done by holding the breath and sometimes by a tacit muttering and thus by a continual negation of his adversary's sentiment. This kind of sorcery was practised by those who heard others, but the two former by those who spoke to others. These three kinds of sorcery prevailed among the ancients, and prevail still among infernal spirits; but with men in the world there remains only the third kind, and this with those, who, from the pride of their own intelligence, have confirmed in themselves the falsities of religion.

As to the word "Chaldeans," the term was probably applied at one time in a general way to all the inhabitants of Chaldea, but here it seems to denote a learned class who were known as such and who formed colleges for the cultivation of learning. Swedenborg not only says that the Chaldeans possessed a knowledge of correspondences but that they were acquainted with the internal sense of the Word. (AC 9011.) Whether they retained this knowledge at the time of Nebuchadnezzar is doubtful. But it is sufficient for us to know that neither they with all their learning, nor the magicians, astrologers, and sorcerers were able to read in the memory of the king the dream he had.

All these four classes of men represent those who pervert and profane the truth for their own selfish ends. Had they been permitted they would have interpreted the dream in such a way as to flatter and deceive the king, and thus confirm their own power. There are those even at the present day, who, although they deny the Divine in their hearts, are yet willing to use the Word for their own evil ends, and thus to falsify and profane it. Indeed, we must understand that every one who is in self-love and from this principle desires to gain power, either natural or spiritual, necessarily falsifies the truths of the Word when they are known to him. But many are kept in ignorance of the Word to prevent them from doing this. That all those upon whom the King of Babylon depended failed him, shows us that no one can from himself enter into a knowledge of Divine revelation or interpret the heavenly meaning of what the Lord has revealed. Daniel was able to do this because he was in illustration from the Lord. "The secret was revealed to Daniel in a night vision." He said to the king: "But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but to the intent that the interpretation may be made known to the king, and that you might know the thoughts of your heart." (Chap. ii. ver. 30.)

The image was described by Daniel: "This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, his legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay."

In the "Coronis," no. 2, we are told that "four churches have existed on this earth since the creation of the world, the Aclamic, the Noahtic, the Israelitish, and the Christian, which manifestly appears in Daniel, first by the statue seen by Nebuchadnezzar in a dream, and afterwards from the four beasts rising up out of the sea."

The common method of interpretation which finds in the four parts of the statue a reference to four earthly or political kingdoms, generally believed to be the Babylonian, the Medo-Persian, the Greek, and the Roman, is wholly inadequate for conveying the spiritual meaning, as may be seen from this little work called the "Coronis." This traditional interpretation is naturally drawn from the interpretation of the dream given by Daniel, understood only according to the letter.

In AR 913, which is referred to in the "Coronis," and more fully in AC 10030, we find a particular explanation of the meaning of the parts of the great image. It is to be understood that this great image represents the successive states of the church. We are not to confine the interpretation to the four churches above named, as represented by the gold, the silver, the, brass, and the iron. Each one of these four churches or dispensations has had its different changes corresponding to the different parts of the image. In "Coronis" no. 5 we read: "There have been four successive states or periods of every one of the above-named churches." Much confusion about the meaning of the Book of Daniel has arisen from ignorance of the true method of spiritual interpretation, and from attempting to apply the prophecy almost wholly to the Roman Catholic Church. That Babel or Babylon refers to this church or its religion, especially in the seventeenth chapter of the Apocalypse, is plainly taught in the writings of the New Church. But this great image represents all the states of the church down to the period of the Last Judgement and the Second Coming of the Lord. This last period is denoted by these words: "And whereas you saw iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men; but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron does not mingle with clay."

This is the explanation of these words given in AR 913 -

By iron is signified the truths of faith, as was said; but when there is no truth of faith, but faith without truth, then the iron is mixed with miry clay, which do not cohere. By the seed of man, with which they should mingle themselves, the truth of the Word is signified. This is the state of the church at this day.

Swedenborg wrote these words, probably, in the year 1765.

Although, then, the Christian Church is represented particularly by the legs of iron, and its state of consummation when there is no faith remaining by the feet part of iron and part of clay, yet we are not to forget that the Christian Church has had its state of love or charity grounded in innocence represented by the head of gold, its state of faith represented by the breast and arms of silver, and its state of natural good represented by the belly and thighs of brass.

As to the preceding dispensations they must also have reached a state similar to the last state of the Christian Church, although it is with some difficulty that we apply the correspondence of the feet of iron mixed with miry clay to the lowest states of the Most Ancient Church and the Ancient Church respectively. Christians have been taught to think of the last state of the Jewish Church as the lowest of all, and the Lord's first advent as the period when a new humanity began to be formed. With many this idea still remains. They do not know that the first Christian Church has been spiritually consummated. The stone cut out of the mountain without hands, that smote the image and break it in pieces, they believe to be Jesus Christ; but Swedenborg teaches that this stone or rock denotes the doctrine of the New Church revealed by the Lord at His Second Coming, by which a final judgement was executed upon the states of all in the world of spirits at that time (1757), and also upon the first Christian Church as it then existed in the world. The coming of the Lord in the spirit and power of His Word, "in all His glory," is foretold in the seventh chapter of Daniel where the "Ancient of Days" is spoken of as appearing after the beasts have risen from the sea.

We can have very little knowledge of the successive states of the Most Ancient Church and of the Ancient Church as they were manifested outwardly in the world. We know, however, that they, like the two succeeding dispensations came to an end from the loss of charity, or love, as the ruling principle of heavenly life. They successively declined from the celestial love of good which is the love of good for its own sake, or the purest form of it, to the spiritual love of good, to which man is led by the truths of faith, and then to the natural love of good to which man is led by obedience; and finally to the love of what was not good, but which they called good because it ministered to selfish delight and pleasure. The fall was not occasioned by one act of disobedience, but by successive departures from the centre of life. In the last state they corrupted all good and profaned every truth that remained — the iron was mixed with miry clay. This was the lowest state of each of these two dispensations — the Most Ancient and the Ancient — although the human race had not sunk so low as it did at the end of the Jewish and the Christian Dispensations.

In the Old Testament we have a literal history of the Jewish Church, not however full and connected. We may trace somewhat, in the Bible stories, the successive changes and final consummation of that church. The same general causes operated to produce its decline and consummation as in the former churches. It was not, however, a real church, but only the representative of a true church, having no spiritual faith or heavenly charity within it. And yet so long as its members preserved the outward forms of Divine worship which were prescribed to them under the Mosaic law, the church itself was preserved from destruction, but as soon as its members fell into disobedience and the open indulgence of evil, the church began to decline and finally came to an end. The judgement upon it took place when the Lord came into the world. The great image seen by Nebuchadnezzar in his dream was as fully representative of this church as of the two former ones.

Now when we come to the Christian Church, it would seem as if the facts of its history would supply us with the means of ascertaining whether its successive states were not also represented by the great image. But this can only be seen by those who view these facts in the light of the revelations made to the New Church. No one in the Christian world could fully know or understand the causes of the decline of the Christian Church, or believe that it came to an end spiritually, and was judged, unless the Lord had revealed such knowledge from heaven. There were no "wise men," none in the East or in the West, in any part of the Christian world, in the Greek, Roman Catholic, or Reformed Churches, who could read or understand the meaning of the great image, maximus homo, or the church viewed collectively as one man in the sight of the Lord. This is evident from the conflicting and erroneous interpretations which have been put upon this book called Daniel, and the Apocalypse.

Referring again to the little work called the "Coronis," we find that the four successive changes of state in each one of the above-named churches are said to be: "first the appearance of the Lord Jehovih and redemption, and the morning or rise of the church; second, its instruction, and its day or progression; third, its declension, and its evening or vastation; fourth, its end, and its night or consummation." Now in reference to the sources of knowledge respecting the changes in the Christian Church we read in the "Brief Continuation of the Coronis" the following:

The periodical changes which succeeded in the fourth or Christian Church are described in the Word both of the Old and New Testaments; in particular, its rise or morning is described in the Evangelists, in the Acts, and in the writings of the Apostles; its progression towards mid-day, in the ecclesiastical history of the first three centuries; its declension or evening, in the history of the following ages; and its vastation, and final consummation, or night, in the Apocalypse.

Here, then, we have the sources of information — the Word, the Apostolic writings, and the history of the Christian Church. The Apostolic writings and ecclesiastical history must be interpreted in the light of the revelations made to the New Church in order to be understood as the fulfillment of prophecy. To understand how the great image seen by Nebuchadnezzar in his dream typifies all the successive states of the Christian Church, we must study all these sources of information. The book called Daniel and the Apocalypse refer more particularly to the judgement upon this church, its consummation, and the coming of the Lord to establish a New Church. The Reformation is often taken as the beginning of a new era in the Christian Church, but it was only the beginning of the end. The age represented by gold did not extend as far as the third century, perhaps, not longer than the time when the beloved apostle, John, passed into the spiritual world, or about the end of the first century. The second or silver age lasted until near the close of the third century, from whence it began to decline. The succeeding ages can only be defined as they are represented by the brass and the iron, by a careful study of ecclesiastical history.

As to the interpretation of the dream or the explanation given by Daniel, it must be observed that the king becomes the representative of the image. Here there is just as much need of a spiritual interpretation as in the language describing the dream itself. It is somewhat like the explanation of the parable of the Sower, given by the Lord, and that parable itself. Both need to be spiritually unfolded.

Nebuchadnezzar primarily represents the kingdom of love, which is the government of heaven and should be of the church on earth. Daniel said to him, "You are that head of gold." As the King of Babylon he represented the dominion of the Divine Love. This is the head of the image. There is a good love of dominion. It is the love of ruling for the sake of serving, or for the sake of use. When this love is turned to the opposite and becomes the love of ruling from the love of self, then the church comes to an end. So Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom came to an end. The second kingdom is not referred to as of silver, but the third is spoken of as of brass, and the fourth, it is said, shall be as "strong as iron." The different kingdoms simply denote the prevalence or rule of certain principles in the human mind, thus the successive states of the church, just as in the image. The "kingdom which shall never be destroyed" is the final reign of the Lord in His Divine Humanity as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. The truth which is revealed by Him at His Second Coming, especially the doctrine that His humanity is. Divine, is compared to a stone cut out of the mountain without hands, because this doctrine is not derived from the self-derived intelligence of man, but from the Lord alone.

We are not to understand that the Divine homage paid to Daniel by Nebuchadnezzar represents the pure worship of the Lord. The worship of those who are represented by Nebuchadnezzar is not from a free and rational principle — it is not the worship of the Father in spirit and in truth. It is a compulsory worship from fear and not from love. Those who are in the love of dominion are governed by no other motive. They are compelled to acknowledge the power of Divine Truth, but they desire to make use of the knowledge they possess for their own power and gain.

in studying the text of this chapter of Daniel, in connection with the references given to it by Swedenborg in his explanations of the Word, it is well to note that he adds to it three verses of the following chapter, giving to this one thirty-three verses, and making the thirty-third verse answer to verse three of chapter four. Nebuchadnezzar is a representative of the infernal love of dominion which endeavors to reduce all things into submission to itself, to gain power over the souls of men, and even to invade heaven itself. It may be said that this infernal love has prevailed in all ages and among all classes of men, unless we except the state of mankind before the fall, which was one of innocence and trust in the Lord.

It is customary to regard Babylon as a type of the Roman Catholic Religion. In the explanations given by Swedenborg he shows how the Roman Catholic Church, through the papal power, has exercised this unholy love and brought its members into entire subjection. When they have refused obedience to its decrees, it has pronounced excommunication upon them, and the punishments of hell have been held out to them as their lot after death. (See AE 1029.) The conduct of the rulers of this church is foretold in this chapter in what is said of the conduct of the Chaldeans, who accused the Jews of not worshiping the golden image which Nebuchadnezzar set up. (Verses 8-12.)

The Chaldeans denote those who are in falsities. The rage of the king against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego — called in the Hebrew tongue, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah — who were accused, knew no bounds, and he ordered these three men to be cast into the furnace of fire. The imagery prefigures the hatred of the rulers of the Church of Rome against those who would not obey them.

But we must not narrow down our interpretations to one age of the Christian Church. We should endeavor to learn not only its particular meaning with reference to one church or dispensation, but its larger and more universal meaning. Babylon, under the Hebrew form, Babel, is spoken of in Genesis, where the building of the tower of Babel is described. There it refers to the prevalence of the love of dominion in the Ancient Church, denoted by Noah, which came to an end from that cause.

The same infernal love prevailed in the Jewish Church. This church or its members would have been utterly destroyed, naturally as well as spiritually, had it not been kept alive by outward conformity to the law. It was necessary to preserve some knowledge of Jehovah through the written Word which was committed to their keeping. Their worship was profaned before the captivity, and at the best it had never been anything more than the semblance or outward representation of the pure worship of the Lord. In all the permissions of the Divine Providence He regards the preservation of the truth in some form as the final end. Had all knowledge of God been lost with the Jewish people or nation, a New Church could not have been raised up at the time of the Lord's coming on the earth. The final consummation of the Jewish Church through the love of dominion and the consequent profanation of the Word, is foretold in the prophecy of Isaiah, chapter four, under the figure of Babylon, and the Divine judgement upon it in chapters twenty-one, forty-seven, and forty-eight.

Babylon is also spoken of when the future state of the Christian Church is foretold in the Book of Revelation, called "The Apocalypse," particularly in the seventeenth chapter of that book, under the figure of a woman sitting upon a scarlet-colored beast. In the explanations of the meaning of the Apocalypse given to the New Church, it is declared that the woman thus described represents and signifies the Roman Catholic Religion, which, although originally founded upon the Word, was afterwards wholly corrupted and finally judged.

We have, therefore, types of this love of dominion in all parts of the Word, as it has been manifested in all the different churches and branches thereof. In the universal, spiritual meaning its corrupting influence is portrayed with reference to every individual man who suffers himself to be governed by it.

The story contained in this third chapter of Daniel illustrates in a vivid manner how this evil love endeavors to bring all men under its dominion, and, failing that, to visit them with cruel punishment; and, on the other hand, how those who are subjected to danger and sufferings are preserved from destruction by the Lord.

The king Nebuchadnezzar made a golden image, sixty cubits high and six cubits broad, and set it up in the plain of Dura in the province of Babylon. The image was probably gilded and not of solid gold. The measurements given are probably Babylonian, and may be taken as one hundred feet and ten feet, respectively, English measure. This gilded image is not described as to its form or features. It was doubtless in the human form and may have been an image of the king himself.

We know that it represents the love of dominion from the love of self which filled the heart of the king. From this infernal love he desired to have all nations and people bow down to him. He made himself a god. Gold corresponds to the good of love, the celestial principle which leads men to worship the Lord, to acknowledge all good to be from Him who is the highest good, and to desire that this good may be received by all. But when this good becomes adulterated, mixed with the evil of man's selfish nature and turned into its opposite, the gold denotes what may appear to be good in external form, but which is internally evil. It is like gilded fruit which is rotten within. With the evil the good they seek is their own pleasure, and their delight is to persuade others to accede to their wishes or to compel them to yield obedience to their commands. The worship of the golden calf by the Israelites was the lowest manifestation of this love which seeks its gratification in sensual and corporeal pleasures. All who are under the influence of the love of dominion springing from the love of self, give themselves up to such pleasures. History affords us notable examples of the vice and luxury of kings who have exercised despotic power.

It is not said that Nebuchadnezzar, at first, commanded all the people in his kingdom to worship this image. He sent and gathered all the princes, governors, captains, judges, treasurers, councillors, sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, and commanded them to come to the dedication of the image. But when these officers were gathered together and stood before the image, the herald cried aloud and proclaimed to all people, nations, and languages present, that when they heard the sound of different musical instruments they should fall down and worship this image of gold. Whatever is done by a subordinate or agent, by command of another, is done by the will of the principal. Kings and potentates exercise dominion through their subordinates. The Pope of Rome executes his decrees through his cardinals, archbishops, and bishops; and these decrees are just as binding upon the people under them as if he were to command them directly in his own person.

He excites the affections of these subordinates so that they desire to exercise dominion themselves. The sounds of musical instruments correspond to the influence of a variety of affections, by which men are led to take delight in certain good or evil things. In this case, the affections of the people were excited to lead them to worship the golden image. Thus, according to the spiritual idea, men come under the influence of the love of self.

The love of ruling over others is often manifested in a stronger degree by a subordinate ruler than by a principal. But in whatever degree it may exist it always looks to self-elevation and not to the good of others. Where the freedom of others is not regarded, in the exercise of authority, government is not from heaven. No one can be led to good, except in a state of freedom and in the exercise of rationality. It is not difficult, therefore, to see that the worship of the golden image denotes the submission of the human will and understanding to the influence of self-love, either in ourselves or in others. Those who come under its influence are always ready to accuse others of evil, especially when others are not willing to yield submission to their personal authority. They become filled with the fire of hatred towards those who do not pay them homage, and act towards them with cruelty. The history of the Christian Church is filled with examples of this kind.

We are not to understand that this evil arises from the exercise of authority in one particular form of government more than in another. Whenever the government is that of the human will arbitrarily exercised without any law, that is, uninfluenced by the truth and without regard to the good of all, it is infernal, not heavenly.

The three men of the Jews who refused to bow down to the golden image, represent all those in the church who acknowledge and worship the Lord, and are therefore unwilling to come under the dominion of self-love whether exercised by one man or by many. This love, however, may become dominant in the individual without its being exercised directly over others. The idolatry of self is more dangerous than the worship of others. We may submit to the will of others and love them with natural affection for something which appears good in them. But, if we worship ourselves, we desire that all should honor, love, and obey us.

These three men of the Jews had all along refused to be fed with the king's meat. They received knowledge from their God, were governed by His spirit, and therefore could not worship any other. The command of the king to cast them into the furnace of fire is indicative of the burning hatred of the evil love of ruling over others exercised towards those who will not come under their dominion. As before remarked, the pains and torments of hell-fire were promised to those who did not confess that they believed in the decrees of the pope. But the Lord protects those who put their trust in Him. Latimer and Cranmer endured the torment of the flames while proclaiming their faith. It is declared in the narrative that these three men were cast into the furnace of fire "bound, in their hosen, their tunics, and their mantles, and their other garments," and that while those who cast them in were burned with the flame of the fire, the Jews came out unhurt; indeed, that "the fire had no power upon their bodies, nor was an hair of their head singed, neither were their hosen changed, nor had the smell of fire passed on them." This has been regarded by many as one of the most wonderful miracles recorded in the Bible. It seems to show that under certain conditions fire will not burn or destroy. If this is true spiritually, if men or spirits can be protected by the Lord from the fire of hatred and passion which would destroy them, cannot the same power, without violating any law of order, overcome the influence of the natural elements? "When you walk through the fire, you shall not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon you." (Isa. 43:2.)

The human body can be protected from the action of heat by moisture. Men handle molten metal in this way. It is a little remarkable that some such idea seems to have been in the mind of the one who wrote the "Song of the three Hebrew Children" in the Apocryphal additions to the Book of Daniel, where we are told that they were "surrounded by a moist, whistling wind." May we not rather say that they were surrounded by a natural atmosphere, corresponding to the spiritual atmosphere, which was produced by the presence of angels, by whom they were protected. The Divine power overruled the action of the elements, as was the case when the Lord walked upon the Sea of Galilee and quelled the storm. The spiritual meaning seems to require actuality in the things recorded, otherwise there would be no basis for this meaning and we might be led to doubt the truth of the whole narrative. Some in the New Church have believed that the whole transaction took place in the spiritual world, and they confirm this idea by the statement in the narrative that when the king looked into the furnace he saw four men, and that the "form of the fourth was like the Son of God." The inference is that the spiritual sight of the king was opened — that he saw the spiritual forms of the three men, and the fourth form was that of an angel who was filled with the Divine Spirit or Presence, and is therefore called the "Son of God," according to the common version.

This commingling of natural scenes with spiritual ones is difficult to understand, although there are similar things in other parts of the Word, as in the case of Abraham entertaining three angels at the door of his tent. The theophanies of Scripture are too frequent to admit of denial unless we reject the Word entirely. Let us not, however, regard the term "Son of God" as the same as that used in the New Testament. In fact the correct translation is "son of the gods" — as in the text of the Revised Version. The fourth form, I take it, was that of an angel, and such an appearance could not have been an object of natural sight. Let us be careful, however, how we treat the Word in the letter, or do away with the literal statements of natural fact or spiritual phenomena. The statement is plainly made that the three men came forth out of the midst of the fire, and those who cast them into the fire were burned themselves — a fulfillment of the spiritual law that the evil which men would do to others returns upon themselves.

The king, when he saw that these men walked forth unhurt, commanded that they should be promoted in the province of Babylon. This may not be taken as an evidence of change of heart on the part of the king. Evil-minded men do from compulsion what they will not do voluntarily.

In conclusion we submit the caution to adhere to the mode of interpretation given in the writings of the New Church. Where it is stated in the letter of the Word that things were seen in vision, or where angels are mentioned as appearing to men, we must interpret such statements in the light of what is taught in the New Church of the relation of the natural world to the spiritual world and of man's spiritual nature and connection with that world, and not relegate to the domain of speculation what is clearly revealed by the Lord in His Holy Word.