Journal of Adventist Mission Studies
Missiological Implications of
Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
SUNG IK KIM
Introduction
Dreams and visions play an important role in salvation history (cf.
Num 12:6; 1 Sam 3:1; 28:6, 15). In the Old Testament, God signied dreams
and visions as one means of communicating with the gentiles as well as
his people (Gen 20:6; 40:5; 41:1-7; Num 12:6; cf. Gen 28:12; 31:10-11; 37:5, 9;
Judg 7:5; 1 Kgs 3:5, 15; Joel 2:28). The New Testament also emphasizes the
revelatory nature of dreams and visions. This is especially true of some
of the visions in Acts because they marked the advance of the gospel into
the gentile world (Acts 9:1-9; 10; 11:1-8; 16:9-10; 26:9-10). This shows that
God reveals his divine purpose to save nations through the mediums of
dreams and visions.
Although dreams and visions are one of the dominant mediums of mis-
sio Dei (God’s Mission) in the Bible, it is unusual to nd Christians who
pay much aention to dreams and visions in the Western Christian world
today. The subject is not even treated seriously in academic theological
circles in spite of being evident in Scripture that God uses supernatural
dreams and visions to reach and save unreached people.
There are twenty-six occurrences of dreams and thirty occurrences of
visions in the book of Daniel, indicating that the book of Daniel is a major
resource for the study of dreams and visions in the Bible. The dreams
and visions of the book function as an important means to convey the
messages of God to heathen kings as well as to Daniel. One of the most
powerful examples of God’s mission in the book of Daniel can be found
in the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar. Thus, this paper seeks to investigate
the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar in order to draw out their missiological
implications.
1
Kim: Missiological Implications of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews University, 2012
111
2012, no. 2
The Book of Daniel as a Mission Document
Although Israel was to be a blessing to “all peoples on earth” (Gen
12:3; Ps 67), the people largely failed to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod
19:6, NIV). Because of her compromise with the idolatrous religions of the
very people Israel was to reach, God judged both Israel and Judah with
exile in Assyria and Babylon. However, Walter C. Kaiser explains another
signicant reason for the exile: “Yahweh must send his people into exile in
order for them to act in accordance with his desire that the nation of Israel
should be his agents whereby he could bless all the families of the earth”
(2000:13). Kaiser suggests that the exile forced the Jews into a missional
situation.
Johannes Blauw proposes that the apocalyptic literature, particularly
the book of Daniel, which gives insight into the secrets of a universal fu-
ture, motivated not only Jewish missionary consciousness in the Diaspora,
but also impacted the New Testament church (1974:60). Robert H. Glover
suggests the same theme: “He [Daniel] and his fellow Jews of the captivity
and later Dispersion were theistic missionaries among the peoples of the
East, as well as of southern Europe and northern Africa, right to the time
of Christ” (1946:21). Thus, J. Herbert Kane suggests that “it was during
this period that Israel’s missionary role completely changed and became
centrifugal” (1976:30).
The book of Daniel gives an excellent example of witness in exile.
Daniel served God as a cross-cultural missionary in a heathen kingdom,
Neo-Babylon. Even in tragedy, God brought his servants, Daniel and his
friends, into circumstances where they were able to witness in a way that
extended far beyond their lile family circle in Judah (Shea 1996:35). They
seemed to understand why they were in exile and what they needed to
do there to achieve God’s plan. Because of its missional perspectives, the
subject of God’s sovereignty in saving the nations is especially dominant
in the book of Daniel.
Identity of the Dream Giver
The reason why God communicated with the heathen king Nebuchad-
nezzar through dreams is because dreams were prevalent throughout
antiquity (Kelsey 1973:45-48). In the Ancient Near East, the dreams expe-
rienced by kings were considered a royal privilege (Oppenheim 1956:188)
and the customary way in which the divine world communicated with
human beings (Goldingay 1989:52). People often slept near a holy place
in the hope of receiving dreams from their gods (Pfandl 2004:22). Thus,
Gerhard Pfandl also points out that “possibly, because of the Babylonian
2
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies, Vol. 8 [2012], No. 2, Art. 8
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/jams/vol8/iss2/8
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32597/jams/vol8/iss2/8/
112
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies
preoccupation with dreams, God chose this means to communicate with
Nebuchadnezzar” (2004:22).
In chapters 2 and 4 of Daniel, God uses dreams to reveal his identity to
the heathen king with a salvic purpose.
Daniel 2
It was God who revealed his will to the heathen king Nebuchadnezzar
through dreams to show his purpose for all people. After dreaming, Ne-
buchadnezzar’s mind was troubled and he could not sleep because he re-
membered the fact that he had dreamed, but could not remember the con-
tent (2:1, 3). John F. Walvoord explains this as part of God’s intervention
just as in the case of Ahasuerus’ sleeplessness (Esth 6; 1971:47). The use of
plural “dreams” also parallels Pharaoh’s dreams. Just as Pharaoh’s two
dreams were given to stress that “the maer has been rmly decided by
God, and God will do it soon” (Gen 41:32), so God impressed Nebuchad-
nezzar with the dreams to show his sovereignty. Some scholars believe
that the use of the plural “dreams” (2:1) indicates a state of dreaming rather
than several dreams (Miller 1994:77; Montgomery 1927:142; Young 1949:56).
However, that argument does not answer the question as to why the king
used the singular form in chapter 4.
In Daniel 2:29, Daniel also pointed out that the reason why God gave
the king dreams was because the king’s mind had turned “to things to
come” before he dreamed. This suggests that God had revealed the dream
to satisfy Nebuchadnezzar’s desire to know the future (Miller 1994:90).
Concerning the king’s desire to know the future, Zdravko Stefanovic gives
some hints focused on Daniel 2:1, which says the dreams were given in the
second year of his reign (2007:80). Nebuchadnezzar’s long reign is usually
divided in two parts: the rst part as Nebuchadnezzar the Destroyer, and
the second part as Nebuchadnezzar the Builder. The rst years of Nebu-
chadnezzar’s reign were characterized by extensive military campaigns.
However, heavy taxes as well as other forms of subjugation were causing
rebellions throughout the empire. In response to this uncertainty, the king
desired to know his future and God gave him dreams about the future of
the world.
In fact, in several places, Daniel designates God as a dream giver. In
2:19 he says, “the secret was revealed to Daniel in a night vision” and in
2:28-29, God reveals mysteries and is called “the revealer of mysteries.”
This means that Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams as well as Daniel’s interpreta-
tion were a result obtained by direct revelation from God (Lucas 2002:72).
Thus, James Montgomery calls the statement, “there is a God in heaven,”
who is the dream giver and revealer of secrets, as “the supreme theme of
the book” and “the cardinal principle of the book” (1927:162).
3
Kim: Missiological Implications of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews University, 2012
113
2012, no. 2
The dramatic story of Daniel 2 climaxes in the king’s praise to God
and his falling prostrate before Daniel (v. 46) and also in the promotion
of Daniel and his friends to high positions in the court (v. 48). This recalls
a passage from Isaiah which speaks of God’s sovereignty (Seow 2003:35):
Thus says the Lord GOD: “Behold, I will lift My hand in an oath
to the nations, And set up My standard for the peoples; They shall
bring your sons in their arms, And your daughters shall be carried on
their shoulders; Kings shall be your foster fathers, And their queens
your nursing mothers; They shall bow down to you with their faces to the
earth, And lick up the dust of your feet. Then you will know that I am
the LORD, For they shall not be ashamed who wait for Me”. (Isa 49:22, 23,
NIV; emphasis supplied)
The last section of Isaiah’s prediction shows a glimpse of God’s pur-
pose for all people which seems to be achieved in the story of Daniel and
his three friends. God gives dreams even to a heathen king to reveal his
sovereignty and show his purpose for the future.
Daniel 4
The narrative in Daniel 4 is mainly a type of personal testimony given
by Nebuchadnezzar himself. In this occasion, the king remembered the
contents of the dream, but was frightened because of the unexpected fall-
ing of the tree in his second dream, much like his fear because of the sud-
den destruction of the statue in his rst dream (Stefanovic 2007:153). He
designated God as “the Most High God” (cf. 3:26) who has performed
miraculous signs and wonders for him (v. 2). However, it was Daniel who
revealed the identity of the dream giver. The dream contained a decree
that the Most High had issued (vv. 24, 25). The holy messengers had come
down from heaven to give the king a dream (vv. 13, 17) that was derived
ultimately from God. Furthermore, Daniel’s interpretation also was a di-
rect witness about God which introduced God as a dream giver to the
heathen king (see Kim 2005:222-224).
Surprisingly, Nebuchadnezzar testied not only concerning the iden-
tity of the dream giver but also about his personal encounter with the
Most High God in the judgmental scene (vv. 31-32). In the testimony of
the king, “a voice” which he heard from heaven (v. 31) reveals God’s will
(Stefanovic 2007:167). After the king was restored, as a sign of recognition
to the voice as God’s, the king blessed the most High and praised, exalted,
and honored the King of Heaven. He concludes that God is able to humble
those who walk in pride (vv. 34-37).
It is notable that in the story of Nebuchadnezzar, God is presented as
a dream giver to communicate his salvic message in the context of judg-
4
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies, Vol. 8 [2012], No. 2, Art. 8
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/jams/vol8/iss2/8
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32597/jams/vol8/iss2/8/
114
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies
ment as given through the heathen king’s personal testimony.
Purpose of Dreams
The story of Nebuchadnezzar shows that God gives dreams even to
heathen kings if they contribute to his purpose. The purpose is disclosed
in the process of interpretation of the dreams.
Declaration of God’s Sovereignty and His Kingdom
God had demonstrated his sovereignty over the kingdoms of this
world through the king’s dream, and Daniel had courageously interpreted
it straightforwardly in a cultural seing where it was customary to aer
the sovereign and avoid telling him anything disagreeable or that he did
not want to hear (Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary 1953-57:4:788).
Although some scholars persist that the king “had forgoen the details of
the dreams that had been haunting him” (Baldwin 1978:87), careful con-
sideration of details in chapter 2 leads to the conclusion that “although
the king’s mind was deeply impressed, he found it impossible, when he
awoke, to recall the particulars of the dream” (Collins 1993:156).
The question is why Nebuchadnezzar resorted to asking the wise men
to tell him both the dream and its meaning. It seems it was God’s provi-
dence to let the king forget the detailed content of the dreams for the sake
of missio Dei. As a maer of fact, in the ancient world, it was believed
that if a person forgot his dreams, it meant that his god was angry with
him (Oppenheim 1956:237). The kingdom of Babylon was a society where
dreams were regarded as both sacred and meaningful. Thus, to cross this
cultural gulf, God had to use dreams sensitively and creatively as a me-
dium to communicate the knowledge of the true God.
To the request of Nebuchadnezzar to tell him the content of the dream
and its interpretation (2:2, 3), the wise men answered that no one could do
such a thing except the gods, who do not live among men (v. 11). In fact,
the function of the wise men’s ritual at the palace was both explanatory
and therapeutic (Collins 1993:156). They commonly used dream books to
explain the symbols and the meaning of dreams and treat dream-related
problems. As experts, they also were supposed to conduct appropriate
rituals to do away with the evil powers that were behind the dreams (Op-
penheim 1956:219). The confession of their impotence concerning knowl-
edge of the dream content shows that they considered communication
with the higher world impossible (Stefanovic 2007:88).
Daniel also agreed with the honest confession of the wise men by
pointing out that “there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries” (vv.
27-28). Daniel’s answer clearly indicates that the purpose of the dreams
5
Kim: Missiological Implications of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews University, 2012
115
2012, no. 2
was to reveal to Nebuchadnezzar God’s sovereignty for the world and the
coming of the ultimate kingdom of God. It is important to notice that Dan-
iel begins and ends his speech before the heathen king by referring to his
God. Just as Joseph did in the court of Pharaoh (Gen 41:16, 25), Daniel also
readily admits that only God knows the future and can reveal it (2007:88).
Even some Jewish authors persist that “a dream comes when there
are many cares” (Eccl 5:3) and “a man is only shown in a dream what
emanates from the thoughts of his heart” (The Babylonian Talmud, Bera-
kot, 55b). However, saying that Nebuchadnezzar’s dream came as God’s
answer to the king’s desire to know what would happen in days to come,
Daniel builds a strong missiological bridge between God in heaven and
Nebuchadnezzar.
Acknowledgement of God’s Sovereignty
In chapter 4, after giving the interpretation of another dream that Ne-
buchadnezzar had, Daniel again revealed that the purpose of the dream
was to bring Nebuchadnezzar to the point where he would “acknowledge
that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them
to anyone he wishes” (v. 25). The verb “acknowledge” (y
e
da’, to know) is
one of the key terms that regulates the covenant relationship between God
and human beings. The same usage is found in the Exodus narrative to
show that God’s ultimate purpose was to lead the Egyptians to the knowl-
edge of him who is the only God who rules the world (Exod 7:5, 17; 8:10;
9:29). This shows that the purpose of the king’s second dream also was
salvic rather than judgmental.
The verdict of the observers also declare a similar purpose: “The holy
ones declare the verdict, so that the living may know that the Most High is
sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes
and sets over them the lowliest of men” (v. 17). The expression, “the Most
High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone
he wishes” has been called “one of the immortal sentences of the Hebrew
Scriptures” because of its strong emphasis on God’s sovereignty (Mont-
gomery 1927:236). Together with the message of God’s sovereignty, the
verdict in the king’s dream was for “the living,” that is, all human beings,
which means that “God’s dealings with Babylon and its king were to be
an illustration to other nations and their kings of the results of accepting
or rejecting the divine plan” (Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary 1953-
57:4:790).
The verdict of the second dream was also for the king himself. First
of all, the king expressed that the second dream was performed for him
by the Most High God (v. 2). The expression, “for me,” implies his di-
rect and personal encounter with God (Stefanovic 2007:152). Furthermore,
6
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies, Vol. 8 [2012], No. 2, Art. 8
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/jams/vol8/iss2/8
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32597/jams/vol8/iss2/8/
116
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies
although the verdict predicted a calamity because of the king’s pride, a
second chance was oered if he might repent (v. 26). This shows that the
humbling experiences were not meant to destroy the king but to help him
recognize the sovereignty of God. “It is signicant that the kingdom of
Nebuchadnezzar will be returned only when he realizes that he does not
really have a kingdom” (Smith-Christopher 1996:75). After the seven years
of calamity and after the king had repented and acknowledged the sover-
eignty of God (4:34), God’s purpose was achieved. Now, it seems evident
that Nebuchadnezzar accepted God as the Most High God in an absolute
sense as well as a dream giver.
From the above discussion, it is clear that Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams
were salvic means used by God to bring the king and the people of his
nation to recognize and praise the sovereign God.
Missiological Implications of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
Means of Mission
Some Western Christians treat dreams as merely psychological phe-
nomena, feeling “dream revelation would seem to be unnecessary in
light of the fact that both the Old and New Testament records have now
been completed” (Miller 1994:71). Another problem is that too often mis-
sionaries treat those who claim to have encountered supernatural beings
through the medium of visions or dreams as having active imaginations
or as dabbling in the demonic (Love 2000:292).
Providentially, dreams and visions are drawing aention in modern
missionary circles because they have become a major means for conver-
sion in Islamic and animistic areas (Bulkelly 1999:15-22). For example,
according to a report in 2007 on the motivations of converts from Islam
to Christianity between 1991-2001 27 percent of the converts said that
dreams and visions were a major factor in their conversion. Even more
interesting was the fact that 40 percent of them testied that they had seen
a dream or a vision before their conversion, while 45 percent had had one
after their conversion (Woodberry, Shubine, and Marks 2007). I believe
that God communicates to Muslims through dreams and visions because
they are living in cultures and worldviews where dreams and visions are
considered as very important aspects of religious life.
Thus, it is notable that God used dreams in the book of Daniel as a way
to communicate in the heathen kingdom of Babylon his salvic message.
The examples in the Book of Daniel present strong support for the idea
that God can use dreams and visions to draw non-Christians into a saving
relationship with him even today.
Richard Love proposes some missiological implications for dreams
and visions in the modern mission eld: (1) dreams and visions are bibli-
7
Kim: Missiological Implications of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews University, 2012
117
2012, no. 2
cal and play an important part in life for people in the Two-Thirds World;
(2) God speaks through dreams and visions to convert sinners even today;
(3) because many of the unreached are beyond the reach of the gospel and
because much of the world is illiterate, dreams and visions may still serve
to move people along in their understanding of who God is (2000:291, 292).
Biblical Based Interpretations of Dreams
Before too strongly arming the need for dreams and visions in God’s
mission, it is important to remember that “the Bible is the exclusive me-
dium of special revelation, whereas dreams and visions are at best only
supplementary and secondary” (Love 2000:291, 292). The reason why God
gives an interpretation of a dream indicates that the interpretation is re-
garded as important as the dream itself (Everts 1992:231). This is because
dreams are not always divinely inspired.
Thus, new converts in an area where the inuence of dreams is domi-
nant must learn to examine their dreams and visions in the light of Scrip-
ture (Deut 13:1-5). Those who experience dreams and visions also need to
submit their dreams and visions to the leaders of their churches to have
them help determine if God is speaking. However, the authority of the
interpreter should also be tested by the biblical message (cf. Isa 8:20). The
most important aspect in this maer of visions and dreams is that the mes-
sage conveyed through a vision or dream must always be in harmony
with the message of the Bible. The church, as a corporate body, also has
a role to play in the interpretation of dreams and visions, testing them
against God’s Word.
Importance of the Dream Interpreter
In the rst story in chapter 2, God gave dreams to Nebuchadnezzar, but
the next morning he could not even remember the content of the dreams.
The wise men of the Babylonian court acknowledged their limitation, but
God prepared an interpreter for the king. Through Daniel’s courageous
intervention, the king was willing to grant a delay in the execution of the
wise men, whereas he was unwilling to do that for the wise men in re-
sponse to their request for information about the dream.
The issue here is not the interpretation of the king’s dreams, but its
content, which is unusual. The king’s mystery could be ascertained only
through divine revelation, and Daniel arms this (2:28) and so does Ne-
buchadnezzar (v. 47; Towner 1984:32). It is noticeable that the supernatu-
ral solution to the supernatural problem came to Daniel through a night
vision (v. 22). This is a good example showing that biblical revelation
is a result of divine initiative, not of human initiation or manipulation
8
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies, Vol. 8 [2012], No. 2, Art. 8
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/jams/vol8/iss2/8
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32597/jams/vol8/iss2/8/
118
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies
(Stefahnovic 2007:94). In the heathen court, Daniel acknowledged that the
interpretation came from God who “reveals mysteries” (v. 28) and who
is called “the revealer of mysteries” (v. 29). Other biblical prophets also
claimed this kind of insight (1 Kgs 22:19-23; Jer 23:18; Amos 3:7), which
was given in response to prayer (Hab 2:1-3; 2007:91).
In chapter 4, the king remembered the content of the dream, but the
wise men again failed to reveal its meaning. The failure of the other wise
men once again heightened the challenge to Daniel, who already had a
reputation because of his special divine gift (v. 8; Goldingay 1989:91). Dan-
iel received another opportunity to witness to the fact that his ability to
explain the meaning of dreams came from divine revelation. Interestingly,
in this chapter more frequently than in any other in this book, Daniel is re-
ferred to by his Babylonian name, Belteshazzar (cf. Dan 1:7; 2:26; 4:8, 9, 18,
19; 5:12; 10:1). Perhaps this is so because the story was not only intended
to be proclaimed throughout the Babylonian Empire, but also to give the
story more authenticity (Stefahnovic 2007:163).
In chapter 4 the issue was the opposite of the previous occasion. The
focus was not on the content of the king’s dream, but its interpretation.
There is a possibility that even if the wise men knew the meaning of the
dream, they were afraid to voice it because of the dream’s contents. Final-
ly, cornered, Nebuchadnezzar now had no choice but to hear the Hebrew
prophet’s interpretation (v. 8). Once again, an unexpected truth hits him,
a disturbing truth with a divine origin. Ironically, Daniel, who was named
after the god Marduk (Bel), was able to help the king, while the wise men
who served that god were unable to help the king who was a Marduk
worshipper (2007:154, 164).
The role of Daniel, chief of the magician in Babylon, seems now to be
well established and the king is condent that Daniel can resolve the mys-
tery (4:9). Even Nebuchadnezzar recognizes that Daniel’s insight is the
result of his close relationship with his God (vv. 9, 18). Yet, at the same
time Nebuchadnezzar is doing his best to show his respect to his own god
through relating to Daniel’s Babylonian name, Belteshazzar (v. 8). This
gives a hint that at the moment of his dreaming and in the process of
its interpretation, “Nebuchadnezzar appears to lack understanding about
where the source of Daniel’s great wisdom is to be found” (Smith-Chris-
topher 1996:75).
When God reveals the meaning, the content of the dream makes Daniel
perplexed and even afraid (v. 19). In ancient times, the role of messengers
who deliver bad news was dangerous and they often paid for it as if they
were responsible for it. Because of this, it seems that “the king reassures
Daniel that he is not to fear for his fate” (Godlingay 1989:94).
Daniel responds to the king by saying that he wishes the dream ap-
9
Kim: Missiological Implications of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews University, 2012
119
2012, no. 2
plied to the king’s enemies (v. 19). These words resemble those used by
Assyrian and Babylonian dream interpreters when they performed their
sacred rituals to dispel the evil eects of dreams (Stefahnovic 2007:162).
The content here, however, portrays Daniel’s function more like a He-
brew prophet (who proposes ethical means of averting divine judgments)
than like a Babylonian exorcist (Collins 1993:229). At last, Daniel repeats
the king’s dream in a summary fashion and proceeds to tell its meaning,
concluding it with a strong appeal to repent.
The dream story of Nebuchadnezzar shows that before God gives a
dream, he prepares an interpreter (cf. Gen 41:1-8). Without Daniel, no one
in the court would have been able to recognize the content and under-
stand God’s message contained in the dream. The book of Daniel shows
clearly that the role of the interpreter is just as important as the content
and interpretation of a dream.
It is also interesting to note that the role of dream interpreters is promi-
nent in Islamic, Shamanistic, and even Buddhist societies. Although many
people who dream have some common understanding as to the contents
of their dreams, most of them end up going to a dream interpreter to nd
out the exact spiritual meaning of their dreams. In such contexts, mission-
aries could and should function as dream interpreters. If they are reluctant
to ll this role the people will visit local interpreters just as King Nebu-
chadnezzar did when he asked the wise men to explain the content and
meaning of his dreams.
Guidelines for Dream Interpretation
The book of Daniel suggests four characteristics of dreams that come
from God (Kim 2005:128-129). First, in the book of Daniel, either the per-
son receiving the dream or the interpreter prepared by God to explain the
dream emphasized the importance of the content to them. To Daniel, as
interpreter of Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams, “the content of the message re-
ceived from God” seems to be the “real object of aention” (Rice 2000:622).
Second, Daniel’s dreams and visions usually involved an encounter
with a supernatural being when communication took place. This aspect
of a personal encounter with a supernatural being can distinguish such
dreams from common, or self reective dreams.
Third, those who receive dreams or visions usually are unable to in-
terpret them by themselves. God often provides an interpreter, although
sometimes there can be a delay until God sends someone. The role of an
interpreter is often as essential as the content of the dreams. It is interest-
ing to note that in the Muslim world God often prepares people with a
dream or vision that they only understand many years later.
Finally, those who received dreams and visions often cannot under-
10
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies, Vol. 8 [2012], No. 2, Art. 8
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/jams/vol8/iss2/8
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32597/jams/vol8/iss2/8/
120
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies
stand what they saw. Thus, an aitude of humility and a realization that
only God can give the interpretation of dreams should be a top priority
for those who are engaged in cross-cultural ministry in areas of the world
where dreams are important (Rice 2000:28).
Conclusion
This article dealt with two dreams of Nebuchadnezzar that were used
by God for cross-cultural communication to achieve God’s purpose for
all people. God used dreams to convey his messages and fulll his pur-
pose to save nations in the Bible. The story of Nebuchadnezzar especially
shows that God uses dreams to reveal his sovereignty, his judgment, and
his control of world history even to a heathen king. Through this research,
it is clear in the Bible that dreams are often used as a means God uses to
communicate with people who do not know him.
Thus, the Christian witness needs to encourage and show an interest
in dreams where people in the dream dominant society experience. God’s
people can also be used by God to introduce those who have dreams to
experience a Christian interpretation. It is true that the most important
aspect in this maer of dreams is that the message conveyed through a
dream must always be in harmony with the message of the Bible. The
church, as a corporate body also has a role to play in the interpretation of
dreams and visions, testing them against God’s Word. To do this more ef-
fectively, Christian interpreters need to be trained in the biblical perspec-
tives of dream interpretation. This is especially important in areas where
the inuence of dreams is dominant.
Works Cited
Baldwin, Joyce G. 1978. Daniel: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Tes-
tament Commentaries. Vol. 21. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarity.
Blauw, Johannes. 1974. The Missionary Nature of the Church: A Survey of the Biblical
Theology of Mission. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
Bulkelly, Kelly. 1999. Visions of the Night: Dreams, Religion, and Psychology. Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.
Collins, John J. 1993. Daniel. Hermeneia—A Critical and Historical Commentary
on the Bible. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress.
Everts, Janet M. 1992. Dreams in the NT and Greco-Roman Literature. Anchor Bible
Dictionary. Edited by David N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday. 2:231-
232.
Glover, Robert H. 1946. The Bible Basis of Missions. Los Angeles, CA: Bible of Los
Angeles.
Goldingay, John E. 1989. Daniel. Word Biblical Commentary. Vol. 30. Waco, TX:
Word.
11
Kim: Missiological Implications of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews University, 2012
121
2012, no. 2
Kaiser Jr., Walter C. 2000. Mission in the Old Testament: Israel as a Light to the Nations.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker.
Kane, J. Herbert. 1976. Christian Missions in Biblical Perspective. Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker.
Kelsey, Morton T. 1973. God, Dreams, and Revelation: A Christian Interpretation of
Dreams. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg.
Kim, Sung Ik. 2005. Proclamation in Cross-cultural Context: Missiological Implica-
tion of the Book of Daniel. Ph.D. Dissertation, Andrews University.
Love, Richard D. 2000. Dreams and Visions. Evangelical Dictionary of World Mission.
Edited by A. Sco Moreau. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker. 292.
Lucas, Earnest C. 2002. Daniel. Apollos Old Testament Commentary. Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Miller, Stephen R. 1994. Daniel. New American Commentary. Vol. 18. Nashville,
TN: Broadman & Holman.
Montgomery, James A. 1927. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of
Daniel. New York: Scribner.
Oppenheim, A. Leo. The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East with a
Translation of an Assyrian Dream-Book. American Philosophical Society New
Series. Vol. 46, pt. 2. Lancaster, PA: Lancaster Press, 1956.
Pfandl, Gerhard. 2004. Daniel: The Seer of Babylon. Hagerstown, MD: Review and
Herald.
Rice, George E. 2000. “Spiritual Gift.” In Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theolo-
gy. Commentary Reference Series. Edited by Raoul Dederen. Hagerstown,
MD: Review and Herald. 12:610-650.
Seow, C. L. 2003. Daniel. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. 1953-57. Daniel. Edited by F. D. Nichol.
Washington, DC: Review and Herald. 4:743-881.
Shea, William H. 1996. Daniel 1-7: Prophecy as History. Abundant Life Bible Ampli-
er. Boise, ID: Pacic Press.
Smith-Christopher, Daniel L. 1996. The Book of Daniel: Introduction, Commentary,
and Reections. The New Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. 7. Nashville, TN: Abing-
don.
Stefanovic, Zdravko. 2007. Daniel: Wisdom to the Wise: Commentary on the Book of
Daniel. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.
The Babylonian Talmud. Berakot. 55-58.
Towner, W. Sibley. 1984. Daniel. Interpretation. Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press.
Walvoord, John F. 1971. Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation. Chicago, IL: Moody.
Woodberry, J. Dudley, Russell G. Shubin, and G. Marks. 2007. Why Muslims Fol-
low Jesus: The Results of a Recent Survey of Converts from Islam. hp://
www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/october/42.80.html (accessed 2
November 2012).
Young, Edward J. 1949. The Prophecy of Daniel: A Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans.
12
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies, Vol. 8 [2012], No. 2, Art. 8
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/jams/vol8/iss2/8
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32597/jams/vol8/iss2/8/
122
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies
Sung Ik Kim received his PhD in Religion with an em-
phasis in Mission and Ministry from Andrews University
and is a professor in the Theology Department at Sah-
myook University in Seoul Korea.
13
Kim: Missiological Implications of Nebuchadnezzar’s Dreams
Published by Digital Commons @ Andrews University, 2012
