Daniel 4:27 (v. 24 in the Aramaic) reads:
Therefore, O king, may my advice be acceptable to you: Redeem your sins by beneficence and your iniquities by generosity to the poor; then your serenity may be extended." (1985 JPS Tanakh)
Within the context, Daniel is telling the king that, while he will eventually be the recipient of God’s judgment, he can delay it by almsgiving, showing the dynamic relationship between God’s foreknowledge and human free-will, and that there can be some things that will come to pass, but that much of the future is still “open” (cf. D&C 3:3). As one scholarly commentary on Daniel wrote:
[27 (24)] The advice with which Daniel concludes his speech to the king has often puzzled readers since it seems unrelated to the problems that the dream and its interpretation have identified. First, one should recognize that Daniel does not suggest that this course of action will avert the judgment. The decree is irrevocable. This stance is at odds with the Mesopotamian understanding of ominous dreams and signs. Indeed, the purpose of mantic experts was both to interpret the omen and to advise on the appropriate course of action for deflecting the fate (Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East [Gorgias, 2008], 239). Here, however, Daniel offers only the possibility of delaying the time before the judgment is executed and thereby extending Nebuchadnezzar’s present state of tranquil contentment (cf. 4:4 [1], where the same word, “content/tranquil,” is used [šlh]).
Second, Daniel’s suggestion of “almsgiving” and “showing mercy to the poor” are not actions directly correlated with Nebuchadnezzar’s failure to recognize the sovereignty of the Most High. Although the term ṣidqā has the broader meaning of “righteousness, right conduct” in earlier Aramaic (and in Biblical Heb. Cognate), it comes to mean “almsgiving.” Here the parallelism with “showing mercy to the poor” indicates that it has that more specific meaning, and this is how both the O[ld]G[reek] and Th[eodotian] translate it. During the Second Temple period almsgiving became the premier social virtue and was assumed to have general efficacy in softening the heart of the Deity (cf. Sir 3:30). In the book of Tobit, too, almsgiving is distinctly emphasized (4:5-10; 12:6-10; for a history of this development, see Gary A. Anderson, Sin: A history [Yale, 2009]). The scene ends abruptly with Daniel’s words of advice. Nebuchadnezzar’s reaction is not given, nor does Daniel appear further in the narrative. Did Nebuchadnezzar heed Daniel’s advice? The fact that the punishment does not occur until twelve months later (v. 26) suggests that he may have done as Daniel advised and so delayed the judgment. Nevertheless, just as Nebuchadnezzar in previous narratives both understands and fails to understand the significance of the divine revelations to him, his subsequent actions indicate that he has not grasped the full import of the dream. (Carol A. Newsom, Daniel [Old Testament Library; Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2014], 145, square brackets added for clarification, emphasis in bold added)
Such also refutes the concept of Total Depravity as the king, who was unregenerate, could still please God by his good works (almsgiving), but in the Reformed view, unregenerate man cannot please God by their good works.
