OET interlinear DAN 2:43

Section 2:1–49: Daniel explained the king’s dream

These Notes interpret Daniel 2:1–49 as a complete narrative unit. However, in some languages it may be helpful to divide this chapter into more than one section and to give each section a separate heading. For example:

1. The BSB has four sections.

   1. Nebuchadnezzar’s Troubling Dream (2:1–13)

   2. The Dream Revealed to Daniel (2:14–23)

   3. Daniel Interprets the Dream (2:24–45)

   4. Nebuchadnezzar Promotes Daniel (2:46–49)

2. The GNT has three sections:

(a) Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (2:1–13)

(b) God shows Daniel what the dream means (2:14–23)

(c) Daniel tells the king the dream and explains it (2:24–49)

This section tells how Nebuchadnezzar had a disturbing dream. He asked his advisers to tell him what he had dreamed and its meaning. They were unable to do so, and the king threatened them with death. But God revealed the meaning of the dream to Daniel. Daniel then told the king what he had dreamed and what it meant. The king honored Daniel and Daniel’s God.

The climax of this narrative occurs in 2:47. There the king declared that the God whom Daniel worshiped was the greatest of all gods.

Special Translation Problems:

1. Lists: The author of the book of Daniel liked to use lists (2:2, 10). However, the author did not intend for these lists to be complete or exact. The lists usually provide examples of the types of people or things that belong in a certain group or category. The Notes will suggest options on how to translate these lists.

2. Synonyms: The text often uses different terms for similar ideas. For example, there are several verbs that mean “to reveal” or “to make known.” There are three different Aramaic verbs in 2:40 that mean “crush, break to pieces.” In some languages it may be difficult or confusing to use several different words for similar ideas. The Notes will suggest how you might translate these similar words and terms.

3. Poetry: You will need to think carefully about how you will translate the poetic section in this chapter (2:20–23). Authors of Hebrew poetry usually wrote using matching pairs of lines. The relationship between these parallel lines differs. Sometimes the second line repeats the information in the first line using different words. Sometimes the second line contrasts with the first line. Hebrew poetry also has word plays, figurative speech, and alliteration. It may not always be easy to translate these literary features into your language. The Notes will suggest ways of translating the different features of Hebrew poetry. For more information about how to translate Hebrew poetry, see the Bible Translation Handbook of the Psalms. The poetry in 2:20–23 is a song of praise or thanksgiving. If your language has a special poetic form that fits this song, you can use it here.

4. Ambiguity: In the section where Daniel interpreted the last part of the king’s dream, there are a number of ambiguous references. For example, in 2:44a Daniel referred to “those kings” without identifying who those kings were. In 2:44b Daniel spoke of “all these kingdoms.” The ambiguity may be deliberate, since the dream itself is a mystery. It will be important not to over-interpret these passages by assuming a particular historical context. The Notes will suggest several options for how to translate these verses.

5. Repetition: Daniel interpreted the meaning of the first three kingdoms in a very brief way. He used many more words to describe the fourth kingdom (2:36–45). In this section he also repeated much of what was described before. In this way, Daniel emphasized the fourth kingdom as the most important. Some of the repetition in this section emphasizes specific ideas. Sometimes the repetition has another function. You will need to evaluate if this kind of repetition is natural in your language. If not, you will need to find another way to emphasize these ideas.

Paragraph 2:39–2:43

In this paragraph, Daniel explained that the other parts of the statue represented three kingdoms that would have power after Nebuchadnezzar. Scholars disagree as to which historical kingdoms these are. These different views should not influence the way you translate. Scholars also differ in the way they interpret the fact that the metals progressively decline in value. It is best to translate this section as literally as possible.

As you saw the iron mixed with clay,

• And as you saw that baked clay was mixed with the iron,

• You saw the iron and the clay were mixed together,

so the peoples will mix with one another,

• so its people will be a mixture.

• which shows/means that the kingdom will be a combination/alliance of people,

but will not hold together

• But they will not remain/hold together

• but it will eventually break up.

any more than iron mixes with clay.

• just as iron cannot remain mixed with clay.

• For iron cannot really combine with clay.

General Comment on 2:43a–d

In 2:43 two comparisons are made between the statue’s feet and the fourth empire. In 2:43a and 2:43d Daniel talked about the statue, and in 2:43b and 2:43c, he talked about the empire. In some languages it may be natural to reorder these verse parts to put the references to the statue together and the references to the empire together. For example:

^43aYou saw the iron and clay mixed together, ^43dbut iron and clay do not hold together. ^43bIn the same way the people of the fourth kingdom will be a mixture, ^43cbut they will not be united as one people. (NCV)

Another possibility is to put either the statue or the empire as the first half of both the comparisons. For example:

^43aYou saw the iron and clay mixed together. ^43bIn this way the people of the fourth kingdom will be mixed together. ^43dBut iron cannot stick to clay. ^43cAnd in this way the people will not be united.