The king assigned them daily provisions of the royal food and wine.This phrase indicates the king's intention to integrate the young men into Babylonian culture and society. The royal food and wine symbolize the wealth and luxury of the Babylonian court, contrasting with the simpler diet of the Israelites. This provision was meant to ensure the captives' physical well-being and to entice them with the benefits of serving the king. The food and wine also represent a potential challenge to the Jewish dietary laws, as seen in
Leviticus 11 and
Deuteronomy 14, which Daniel and his friends later address by requesting a different diet. This situation foreshadows the tension between maintaining faithfulness to God's laws and adapting to a foreign culture.
They were to be trained for three years,
The three-year training period reflects the thorough preparation required for service in the Babylonian court. This education likely included learning the language, literature, and customs of the Babylonians, as well as the study of astrology and other sciences. The duration of the training underscores the importance of the role these young men were to play in the king's service. This period of preparation can be compared to the time of testing and preparation seen in other biblical narratives, such as Joseph's time in Egypt or Moses' years in Midian.
after which they were to enter the king’s service.
Entering the king's service signifies the culmination of their training and the beginning of their roles as advisors or officials in the Babylonian empire. This service would place them in positions of influence, allowing them to impact the decisions of the king and the direction of the empire. The phrase also highlights the sovereignty of God, who places His people in strategic positions to fulfill His purposes, as seen in the stories of Joseph, Esther, and Nehemiah. This service foreshadows the significant roles Daniel and his friends will play in the unfolding narrative of the book, demonstrating God's faithfulness and the power of living a life committed to His principles.
Persons / Places / Events
1.
DanielA young Hebrew man of noble or royal descent, taken into Babylonian captivity. Known for his wisdom, faithfulness, and ability to interpret dreams.
2.
King NebuchadnezzarThe king of Babylon who conquered Jerusalem and initiated the Babylonian captivity. He ordered the training of select young men from Israel.
3.
BabylonThe empire that conquered Judah and took many Israelites into captivity. It was a center of power and culture in the ancient world.
4.
The King's TableRefers to the food and wine provided by King Nebuchadnezzar for the young men being trained for service in his court.
5.
Three Years of TrainingThe period during which Daniel and his companions were to be educated in the language and literature of the Chaldeans, preparing them for service in the king's court.
Teaching Points
Faithfulness in AdversityDaniel's commitment to God's laws, even in captivity, teaches us the importance of remaining faithful to God regardless of our circumstances.
Cultural Engagement with DiscernmentWhile Daniel learned the language and literature of the Chaldeans, he discerned where to draw the line, reminding us to engage with culture without compromising our values.
God's Sovereignty in TrialsThe situation illustrates God's control over history and His ability to use even difficult circumstances for His purposes and the good of His people.
Preparation for ServiceThe three years of training can be seen as a period of preparation, encouraging us to view our own times of learning and growth as preparation for future service to God.
Bible Study Questions and Answers
1.What is the meaning of Daniel 1:5?
2.How can we apply Daniel's resolve to avoid defilement in our lives today?
3.What does Daniel 1:5 teach about God's sovereignty over earthly authorities?
4.How does Daniel's situation relate to Romans 12:2 about not conforming?
5.In what ways can we prepare to stand firm in our faith like Daniel?
6.How does Daniel 1:5 illustrate the importance of obedience to God's commands?
7.Why did the king assign daily provisions from his own table in Daniel 1:5?
8.How does Daniel 1:5 reflect the cultural assimilation practices of ancient Babylon?
9.What theological implications arise from the king's food and wine in Daniel 1:5?
10.What are the top 10 Lessons from Daniel 1?
11.Is there archaeological evidence for a program of Babylonian re-education as described in Daniel 1:3–5, especially for captives like Daniel?
12.What distinguishes angels from humans?
13.In Daniel 5:1, why does the text present Belshazzar as king of Babylon when historical records identify Nabonidus as the last king?
14.What does the Bible say about the King of the South?What Does Daniel 1:5 Mean
The king assigned them daily provisions of the royal food and wine• The verse opens by telling us, “The king assigned them daily provisions of the royal food and wine”. This was no casual gesture. Nebuchadnezzar deliberately chose the diet, rhythm, and atmosphere for his new servants.
• Such a daily allotment meant:
– Dependence on the king for survival (compare2 Kings 25:29–30 where Jehoiachin received a daily ration from the Babylonian court).
– Subtle pressure to accept Babylonian culture and even its idolatrous associations; royal food would often be offered to pagan deities first (see1 Corinthians 10:19–21).
– A test of loyalty: “Whoever eats my bread has lifted up his heel against Me” (John 13:18) shows how table fellowship signifies allegiance.
• For Daniel and his friends, to eat or not to eat became a spiritual decision (v. 8). Their refusal echoesRomans 12:2—“Do not be conformed to this world.”
• The king’s generosity was real, yet it carried a spiritual price tag. Daniel’s discernment recognized that physical sustenance is never neutral—“Whether you eat or drink, do all to the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31).
They were to be trained for three years• The next phrase states, “They were to be trained for three years”. Babylon offered the finest education in language, literature, astronomy, and statecraft (v. 4).
• Key observations:
– Three years reflects intentional, thorough indoctrination, not a crash course.Acts 7:22 notes that “Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians,” showing previous precedents of God’s people learning in foreign courts.
– God is not opposed to education; He is opposed to compromise.Luke 2:52 records that Jesus “grew in wisdom,” underscoring that learning can honor God when truth is sifted from error.
– The length allowed God to prove His servants over time. Faithfulness over years—not moments—qualifies a believer (Luke 16:10).
• While curriculum and environment were Babylonian, identity and conviction remained Hebrew.Psalm 1:1–2 contrasts the blessed man who delights in God’s law with those who walk in the counsel of the wicked; Daniel models that blessed path inside a pagan classroom.
After which they were to enter the king’s service• Finally, the verse concludes, “after which they were to enter the king’s service”. Nebuchadnezzar’s motive was clear: populate his administration with the best minds from the conquered nations.
• From heaven’s perspective, this placement fulfilledProverbs 22:29—“Do you see a man skillful in his work? He will stand before kings.”
• Joseph’s journey to Pharaoh’s court (Genesis 41:46) and Esther’s rise in Persia (Esther 2:17) show the same pattern: God positions faithful people in influential spheres.
• Service to an earthly king did not cancel allegiance to the heavenly King.Daniel 6 later shows him praying toward Jerusalem even while serving Babylon.Colossians 3:23 reminds believers, “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord.”
• The ultimate goal was not merely governmental efficiency; it was God’s sovereign plan to exalt His name among the nations (Isaiah 45:5–6).
summaryDaniel 1:5 describes a calculated program of provision, education, and appointment aimed at reshaping exiled youths into Babylonian officials. The daily royal diet tested loyalty, the three-year training targeted their worldview, and the promised service sought to secure their talents for the empire. Yet at every turn God enabled Daniel and his friends to live set apart—receiving knowledge, demonstrating excellence, and ultimately serving a human king without compromising devotion to the King of kings.
(5)
A daily portion.--(Comp.
Jeremiah 52:34.) The meat was solid food, as opposed to the wine and vegetables which formed so important a part of Babylonian diet. The food appears to have been sent from the king's table.
Three years.--The king appears to have had sufficient insight into the extraordinary character of these youths, to enable him to prescribe not only the subjects of their studies, but also the length of their course of instruction. It appears that Nebuchadnezzar was a man of far higher character than many Assyrian and Babylonian kings. We shall see, in the course of the boot, that his heart was fitted for the reception of Divine truth, and that in the end he was brought to know the true God.
Verse 5. -
And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king. The only thing to be noticed in the LXX. Version of this verse is the fact that
מָנָה is taken to mean "give a portion" - a meaning which seems to be implied in
מָנות (
Nehemiah 8:10), hence the translation
δίδοσθαι...ἐκθέσιν. Further, the translator must have had
חַמּ מֵ אֵת as in
2 Kings 25:29. The mysterious
פַּת־בַג (
path-bag), translated "meat," has caused differences of rendering. The Syriac Peshitta transfers it. Professor Bevan speaks as if it were common in Syriac, but Castell gives no reference beyond Daniel. (Brockei-mann adds, Ephrem Syrus, Isaac Antiochenus, Bar Hebraeus). It is to be observed that the Syriac form of the word has
teth, not
tan, for the second radical. This is a change that would not likely take place had the Hebrew form been the original, whereas from the fact that
path means in Hebrew "a portion," if the Hebrew were derived from the Syriac the change would be intelligible. It is confounded in
Daniel 11:26 with
פָתוּרָא (
pathura), "a table." It seems not improbable that both the LXX. and Theodotion read
pathura. The word
path-bag does not seem to have been known in Palestine; it does not occur in Chaldee, but does in Syriac. This is intelligible if the chapter before us is condensation from a Syriac original rendered into Hebrew: the word
path-bag, being unintelligible, is transferred. The etymology of the word is alleged to be Persian, but on this assumption it is a matter of dispute what that etymology is. One derivation is from
pad or fad, "father" or "prince," or
pat or
fat, idol,' and
bag (
φαγῶ), food; another is from
pati-bhagu, "a portion." The question is complicated by the fact that in
Ezekiel 25:7 we have in the K'tbib
בַג (bag), meaning "food." In that case
path-bag would mean "a portion of food." The reading of the K'thib is not supported by the versions. In Daniel the word simply means "food," such as was supplied to the king's table. We see in the slabs from the palace of Kou-youn-jik the nature of a royal feast. Animal food predominated. We cannot avoid referring to a singular argumentative axiom implied in all the
discussions on Daniel. Critics seem to think that when they prove that certain words in Daniel are Persian, they thus prove Daniel was written nearly a couple of centuries after the Persian domination had disappeared.
Of the wine which he drank. It is to be noted that there is a restriction. The wine supplied was the wine which the king drank - wine of which an oblation had been offered to idols. In thus bringing up hostages at his own table, Nebuchadnezzar was following a practice which has continued down to our own day. The son of Theodore of Magdala was brought up at the court of our queen. It was the regular practice, as we know, in Imperial Rome. Sennacherib speaks of Belibus, whom he made deputy-king in Babylon, as brought up "as a little dog at his table" (Bellino Cylinder, Sehrader, vol. 2. p. 32, Engl, trans.).
So nourishing them three years. This was the period during which the education of a Persian youth was continued. It is probable, as we have seen, that these youths were about sixteen or seventeen. At the end of three years they would still be very young. The grammatical connection of the word
legaddelam is somewhat singular. The Septuagint reading probably had the first word in this verse in the infinitive also. This is more grammatical, as it brings the whole under the regimen of the opening clause of ver. 3. The force of the word before us is represented in "bringing up." The verb in its simple form means "to be strong," "to be great," hence in the intensive form before us, "to make great," "to bring up."
That at the end thereof they might stand before the king. "Standing before the king" means usually becoming members of the council of the monarch, but in the present instance this does not seem to be the meaning. They were to be presented before the king, and in his presence they were to be examined. They were, then, possibly to be admitted into the college of astrologers and soothsayers, but only in lowly grade. Irrespective of the fact that they would at the latest be twenty or twenty-one when this season of education was over, an(t, even making all allowance for Eastern precocity, this is too young an age for being a member of a royal privy council. But the next chapter relates an event which appears to be the occasion when they stood before the king, for they were not summoned with the wise men to the king's presence to interpret his dream.
Parallel Commentaries ...
Hebrew
The kingהַמֶּ֜לֶךְ(ham·me·leḵ)Article | Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 4428:A kingassignedוַיְמַן֩(way·man)Conjunctive waw | Verb - Piel - Consecutive imperfect - third person masculine singular
Strong's 4487:To weigh out, to allot, constitute officially, to enumerate, enrollthemלָהֶ֨ם(lā·hem)Preposition | third person masculine plural
Strong's Hebrewdailyבְּיוֹמ֗וֹ(bə·yō·w·mōw)Preposition-b | Noun - masculine singular construct | third person masculine singular
Strong's 3117:A dayprovisionsדְּבַר־(də·ḇar-)Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 1697:A word, a matter, thing, a causeof the royalהַמֶּ֙לֶךְ֙(ham·me·leḵ)Article | Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 4428:A kingfoodבַּ֤ג(baḡ)Preposition | Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 6598:Portion, delicaciesand wine.וּמִיֵּ֣ין(ū·mî·yên)Conjunctive waw, Preposition-m | Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 3196:Wine, intoxicationThey were to be trainedוּֽלְגַדְּלָ֖ם(ū·lə·ḡad·də·lām)Conjunctive waw, Preposition-l | Verb - Piel - Infinitive construct | third person masculine plural
Strong's 1431:To grow up, become greatfor threeשָׁל֑וֹשׁ(šā·lō·wōš)Number - feminine singular
Strong's 7969:Three, third, thriceyears,שָׁנִ֣ים(šā·nîm)Noun - feminine plural
Strong's 8141:A yearat the endוּמִ֨קְצָתָ֔ם(ū·miq·ṣā·ṯām)Conjunctive waw, Preposition-m | Noun - feminine singular construct | third person masculine plural
Strong's 7117:A termination, a portion, afterof which they were to enterיַֽעַמְד֖וּ(ya·‘am·ḏū)Verb - Qal - Imperfect - third person masculine plural
Strong's 5975:To stand, in various relationsthe king’s service.הַמֶּֽלֶךְ׃(ham·me·leḵ)Article | Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 4428:A king
Links
Daniel 1:5 NIVDaniel 1:5 NLTDaniel 1:5 ESVDaniel 1:5 NASBDaniel 1:5 KJV
Daniel 1:5 BibleApps.comDaniel 1:5 Biblia ParalelaDaniel 1:5 Chinese BibleDaniel 1:5 French BibleDaniel 1:5 Catholic Bible
OT Prophets: Daniel 1:5 The king appointed for them a daily (Dan. Da Dn) 
