5

In Daniel 5:7, Belshazzar promised that whosoever read and interpreted the handwriting on the wall would be made the third ruler of his kingdom. This promise was fulfilled in verse 29 when Daniel was proclaimed the third ruler after reading and interpreting the said writing. I find it difficult to understand why third ruler. If Belshazzar was the king at that time and the Bible did not mention that he already had a second ruler, why not make Daniel the second ruler instead?

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5

Nabonidus The King of Babylon (1st ruler) during the events of Daniel Ch. 5 had engaged Cyrus’ forces in battle but was Nabonidus took refuge in Borsippa (SSW of Babylon) and he left his Son, Belshazzar, to rule while he was engaging Cyrus, thus Belshazzar was acting as King Regent (2nd ruler), thus he could only offer Daniel 3rd place in rulership.

Improve this answer
4
  • 1
    Thank you. It sure makes sense. But I'm not very clear yet.Who was Nabonidus? How is Belshazzar his son and the son of Nebuchadnezzar at the same time?
    – Ere Oludiya
    Nov 19, 2018 at 14:38
  • 1
    @Ere Oludiya Nebuchadnezzar was the Grandfather of Belshazzar, thus he is called his son. In eastern cultures, middle east, a grandson is just called a "son."
    – user26950
    Nov 19, 2018 at 14:44
  • 1
    Okay. That means one can rightly infer that Nabonidus was the son of Nebuchadnezzar.
    – Ere Oludiya
    Nov 19, 2018 at 14:52
  • 1
    Yes as they were a dynasty of Kings of Babylon.
    – user26950
    Nov 19, 2018 at 15:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.