Daniel 1

Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself, then asked. Wesley: meats forbidden by the law; delicacies that would gratify the flesh; things consecrated to idols; fare unsuited to the people’s affliction. A rare pattern of avoiding occasions of evil—not a diet campaign. A purpose in the heart under the Most High. Grace assists; it does not empty the asking. He could have taken the table; he does not. The fork of sovereignty waits on v. 9’s “God made”; here the human yes is named without Pelagian leftover. Prevenient and assisting grace meet a will that actually purposes.

Calvin: he endured what he could neither cast off nor escape, yet took care not to depart from the fear of God nor become a stranger to his race. Not superstition about meats—“to the pure all things are pure”—but he abstained at first from court luxuries to escape being tampered with. God enlightened his mind by His Spirit as soon as he prayed. He was also adviser to his companions.

The Spirit governs the purpose. Shared with Wesley: he will not defile himself, and he asks. The food is not a modern cause. The fork is how the next verse’s favor arrives.

Now God made Daniel find kindness and compassion in the chief’s sight. Wesley will mark the blessing on the later test; here the giving is already named. The Most High rules a courtier’s pity without canceling the fear of v. 10.

God moved Ashpenaz to kindness, but it was still Ashpenaz’s own compassion, and he still feared the king (v. 10). Arminians see favor here as a gift that opens a door without forcing every word the official would say. Daniel asked respectfully; God gave favor; the chief official still had to decide.

Calvin: God placed him in favor and pity before that prefect. He ascribes the benefit to God, who bent the heart of a man otherwise unsoftened to clemency and humanity. Minds and hearts are so governed by God’s secret instinct that He changes their affections just as He pleases. On both sides the will is in God’s power—to bend to humanity or to harden what was tender.

“Gave” means effectual rule, not a bare permission after the fact. The chief’s kindness is God’s actual hand, including the means. Second causes remain; they are established, not erased. Nothing happens but what He has knowingly and willingly decreed, yet He is not the author of the court’s idolatry.

The chief fears the king who assigned the food: worse faces would endanger his head. Wesley’s pattern of avoiding evil meets a man who will not risk that head. The refusal is honest, not a foil for politics.

Fear is a second cause. Favor in v. 9 did not erase the chief’s calculation. Agency stands on both sides of the table—Daniel asked; Ashpenaz declines. God still rules; the head is still at stake.

Calvin: his humanity is praised not for granting the prayer but for burying in silence what might have brought death. He feared the king who had ordered the food. He is not to be blamed as if he feared man more than God, for he could not have any knowledge of God. He clung to Babylon’s religion while treating the youths civilly.

Even the refusal sits inside providence. He will not grant it, and he does not accuse. The secret instinct of v. 9 has not yet opened the door; another servant will.

Daniel turns to the steward set over the four. Wesley’s pattern continues: he does not drop the purpose when the first door closes. A second ask is still an ask, not a slogan.

After a no, he purposes still. Grace that assists a first resolve assists a second approach. No Pelagian leftover—he is already a man God has favored—and no fatalism that treats the chief’s fear as the last word.

Calvin: singular constancy. After a vain first try he did not cease. If we do not retrace our steps but try all ways, we show the root of piety. It might have seemed excusable after the first repulse; he goes to the servant. Voluntarily to incur risk was no common prudence; he was directed by God’s Spirit to this act of prudence.

The Spirit is the author of the next step. Held in common: he speaks to the steward. The test of v. 12 is coming as means, not as magic.

“Test your servants ten days; vegetables and water.” Wesley: pulse and water against the king’s meat—not a diet as identity, but a rare pattern of avoiding occasions of evil. Ten days is a finite prove.

They propose means a steward can actually run. Human prudence under the Most High. The outcome is not bargained as a prosperity deal; they ask to be seen and dealt with according to what appears (v. 13).

Calvin: without doubt, when Daniel brought this forward, he was directed by the Spirit and impelled to make this request. It would not have been duty but rashness had he been the author of the plan without assurance of the issue. Pulse and water: not because wine or flesh were unlawful (save to Nazarites), but he was unwilling to accustom himself to palace delicacies and forget Abraham’s family.

The plan is gift, not cleverness alone. Both traditions agree: vegetables and water for ten days. No diet-war as a modern cause.

Compare our appearance with those who eat the king’s food, and deal with us as you see. Wesley’s later note will call the result the blessing of God upon homely fare. Here they submit the proof to the steward’s eyes.

They do not demand a miracle on the calendar. They risk looking worse. Faith that will not defile itself still leaves the steward free to judge. Agency on his side remains.

Calvin: the scheme is cautious enough for the servant—no crime if faces are fresh. Daniel did not speak without due consideration, but was assured of the event by the Spirit of God.

God can make pulse serve as manna. Both readings: the steward is asked to look. The contrast is not invented as prosperity versus fatalism; it is a prove in the open.

He listened and tested them ten days. Wesley’s reasons for the purpose now meet a steward’s consent. Listening is a human act under the giving of v. 9.

Melzar hears and runs the test. The Most High rules; the steward still says yes. Second causes are not theater.

Calvin: the servant could not make the same objection as the prefect. God rendered this man tractable and governed the whole event. Do not ascribe it entirely to human kindness: he never could have obtained it until the man perceived it could be granted safely.

Providence includes the steward’s interest and the ten days. Held in common: he listened. The result of v. 15 will show whose blessing it was.

At ten days they looked better and fatter than those who ate of the king’s delicacies. Wesley: the blessing of God upon homely fare affords often more health and strength than costly fare to them that eat the fat and drink the sweet.

God answers the prove without turning vegetables into a law for every table. The youths remain under the Most High; the other youths are not a political foil. Health here is gift meeting resolve, not a slogan about diet.

Calvin: this surprising event—neither leanness nor debility from mean food. God testified by the result that He had advised them. Man lives not by bread alone: we are nourished by God’s secret blessing; bread has no life in it of itself. Pulse can become as manna when the Lord turns it so.

The fatter flesh is God’s hand, not the virtue of legumes. Wesley reads it the same way: homely fare, and the blessing is the Lord’s.

The steward takes away their portion and wine and gives them vegetables. Wesley’s pattern holds for the rest of the training years implied here. The table is settled without a manifesto.

The steward keeps saying yes day after day. Daniel’s purpose stands; Melzar’s practice stands. God gave favor; humans keep keeping the diet. The story is holiness in exile, not a campaign.

Calvin: when Melsar saw he could gratify them without danger and even profit, he was humane and easily dealt with. Daniel’s intention: we ought not to ascribe it to the kindness of man that they remained pure. God openly shows how all the praise was due to Himself, to exercise their gratitude.

The standing diet is providence, including a steward’s self-interest. Both readings: vegetables instead of the king’s food. The four remain unspotted worshipers under names the palace gave.