John Calvin Commentary Daniel 5:21

"and he was driven from the sons of men, and his heart was made like the beasts`, and his dwelling was with the wild asses; he was fed with grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven; until he knew that the Most High God ruleth in the kingdom of men, and that he setteth up over it whomsoever he will." — Daniel 5:21 (ASV)

First, with respect to the text, verbally it is “he put.” Some translate this as “he placed his own heart among the brutes,” which makes tolerable sense. Others, however, rather refer this action to God, who placed Nebuchadnezzar’s heart among beasts. We know how often the noun substantive is defective in Hebrew and Chaldee. Hence, we may also translate it verbally as: Nebuchadnezzar himself placed his own heart—that is, he assimilated his own senses to the brutes, so as to differ in no respect from them.

It may also mean that God placed Nebuchadnezzar’s heart among the brutes—that is, God infatuated him so as to render him like them. Others take the word שוי (shevi) absolutely, but it ought rather to be explained actively. Again, some translate the next clause as “Made him taste the grass, like a brute,” while others translate it as “that the grass supported him.”

The number is changed, but there is no doubt about the sense. For if we read, “The herb of the field supported him,” the expression will be indefinite, similar to many others previously noticed. But if anyone prefers using the plural number, the sense will be equally suitable, for then it would read, “the herbs of the field gave him nourishment.”

This verse does not need a long explanation, since Daniel only repeats what he had formerly written. His grandfather, Nebuchadnezzar, although not changed into a wild beast, was driven from the common society of men, and his whole body was deformed, while he abhorred the habits of men and preferred to dwell with the brutes.

This was a horrible prodigy, especially in so great a monarch. It was an example worthy of being handed down by posterity even to a thousand generations, had the monarchy endured so long. But his grandson quickly forgot this event, and thus he is deservedly convicted of the basest slothfulness.

This is the reason Daniel repeats the history: He was driven, Daniel says, from the children of men; his heart was placed among the beasts, meaning Nebuchadnezzar was deprived of reason and judgment. We know this to be the principal difference between men and brutes: men understand and reason, but brutes are carried away by their senses.

God, therefore, set forth a memorable example by despoiling this king of his reason and intelligence. His dwelling, Daniel says, was with the wild asses. Formerly, Nebuchadnezzar had dwelt in a palace, conspicuous throughout the world, from whom all the peoples of the East sought their laws.

Since he was habitually worshipped as a god, this was a horrible judgment. He afterwards dwelt among wild beasts and like a bull received his sustenance from the grass of the field. This was in stark contrast to when he had previously reveled in every delicacy, accustomed to luxurious habits and the entire wealth of a kingdom, especially since we know how luxuriously the Orientals indulged themselves.

Babylon was the mother of all indulgences. When the king’s condition was thus changed, no one could be ignorant of its cause: it was not mere chance or accident, but the rare and singular judgment of God!

He afterwards adds what he had formerly said: His body was moistened by the dews of heaven, until he acknowledged God to reign supreme in the kingdom of men. Here again the purpose of the punishment is expressed: that Nebuchadnezzar might feel himself to have been made king by divine power, and to show how earthly kings could not stand unless God propped them up by His hand and influence.

They think themselves placed beyond the changes of fortune. Although they verbally boast of reigning by the grace of God, they yet despise every deity and transfer the glory of the divinity to themselves! We gather from these words that this is the folly of all kings.

For if Nebuchadnezzar had been persuaded that God appoints kings, that they depend upon His will, and that their fall or stability is according to His decree, he would not have needed this punishment. As these words clearly imply, he then excluded God from the government of the world. But this is common with all earthly kings, as I have recently stated.

All kings indeed will profess something, but the Holy Spirit does not regard those false protestations, as they are called. Hence, in the character of King Nebuchadnezzar, we have set before us, as in a mirror, the drunken confidence of all kings, who suppose they stand by their own power and free themselves from the authority of God, as if God were not seated as a judge in heaven.

Nebuchadnezzar, therefore, had to be humbled until he acknowledged God’s reign on earth. This was necessary because the common opinion portrayed God as confined to heaven, as if He were contented with His own ease and careless of the affairs of the human race.

Finally, it is added, and whom he wills, he exalts, or sets up. What was said obscurely is here better expressed, since Nebuchadnezzar, by being severely punished and subdued, acknowledged the reign of God on the earth.

For when earthly kings see themselves surrounded by guards, powerful in riches, and able to collect mighty armies by their nod; when they see that they inspire universal terror, they think God is deprived of His rights and are unable to conceive of any change. This is as it is said in the Psalms of all the proud (Psalms 10:4), and as Isaiah says to the same effect: Even should a blast pass by, or a deluge overwhelm the whole earth, yet evil shall not touch us (Isaiah 28:15).

It is as if they had said, "Although God should thunder from heaven, yet we shall be safe from all disaster and disturbance." Kings persuade themselves of this. Hence, they only begin to acknowledge God as king of the earth when they feel themselves in His hand and at His disposal, to cast down those whom He has raised up and to exalt the lowly and abject, as we have already seen.

This clause of the verse, then, is an explanation of the former sentence. It now follows: