The books of Ezra and Nehemiah bear the names of the key person in each of the books. Until the third century a.d., though, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah were regarded as a single book. Both books contain material found in the other, and they complete each other. The separation of the book in the Christian community took place through the influence of the Vulgate, the Latin translation prepared by Jerome who, following Origen before him, separated Ezra-Nehemiah into two distinct books. In the Jewish community, Ezra and Nehemiah were not separated into two distinct books until the fifteenth-century printing of the Hebrew Bible. In the Hebrew Bible, Ezra-Nehemiah is part of the third division of the canon, called the Writings (Hb ketuvim).
Eleven of Jerusalem's gates and the only one that is sealed. This gate existed during the time of Jesus but would have been destroyed in a.d. 70. The gate in the photo was built around a.d. 640. This is called the Golden Gate and is situated on the eastern side of Jerusalem just below the Temple Mount. A Jewish tradition says that the Messiah will enter Jerusalem through this gate. The Chronicler gives considerable attention to the temple and reminds his readers of God's presence in Israel's history as symbolized by the temple.
Circumstances of Writing
Author: The books of Ezra and Nehemiah are anonymous. Ancient Jewish sources usually credit Ezra as the author of Ezra-Nehemiah. More likely Ezra-Nehemiah was written by the "Chronicler," the person (or persons) responsible for 1 and 2 Chronicles. Not only is Ezra-Nehemiah linked to Chronicles at its introduction (Ezra 1:1-2 = 2 Chron. 36:22-23), it also shares many similarities in language, terminology, themes, and perspective.
Background: It is probably safe to assume that Ezra-Nehemiah was written soon after the conclusion of Nehemiah's ministry. Most likely the book was written no later than 400 b.c.
In Ezra-Nehemiah it is clear that Ezra came to Jerusalem first, probably in 458 b.c., and that Nehemiah followed him 13 years later, probably in 445 b.c. Nehemiah made no mention of Ezra, his ministry, or his reforms. Ezra and Nehemiah appear together in only two events. In Nehemiah 8, the context is the reading of the law to the people, while in Nehemiah 12 the two joyous processions walking around the city walls in the dedication ceremony include Ezra (Neh. 12:36) and Nehemiah (Neh. 12:38).
Message and Purpose
Ezra continues where 2 Chronicles left off. While it provides us with key historical insights, it is rich in messages for God's people.
The continuity of God's people: The events in Ezra-Nehemiah connect the Israelites with the preexilic community. The returning exiles experienced a new exodus and remained a part of God's redemptive plan. God even used pagan leaders like Cyrus and Artaxerxes to restore His people.
Holiness: For the people to continue the covenant relationship with God, it was important for them to be separate and remain pure in matters of doctrine, ethics, and customs. Prior to the exile, the people experienced judgment because of their inability to remain single-mindedly faithful in their relationship to their covenant God. Ezra-Nehemiah shows us a renewed interest in remaining separated unto God.
Scripture: Ezra and Nehemiah reaffirm the centrality of the law in the life and practice of the Israelite community. They knew the authority of Scripture, but they were called back from their neglect of its teachings. Multiple times they showed that the people worked and behaved in accordance with what Moses had written (Ezra 3:2; 6:18; Neh. 8:14-15; 13:1-3). Ezra and Nehemiah may give us the best example of the power of God at work through the written Word.
Worship: The returning exiles built an altar to sacrifice to God before they rebuilt the temple. Only after the place of worship was finished did they rebuild the walls. They got the projects in proper order, because worship and a proper relationship with God precede everything else.
Prayer: Alongside worship is an abundance of prayer in these books. Two extensive prayers are recorded (Ezra 9; Neh. 9). Prayer and fasting are mentioned multiple times as they set out on tasks, and the whole rebuilding of the wall was bathed in prayer. Prayer is combined with action throughout Nehemiah, and both books underscore the need to approach God constantly in prayer.
Contribution to the Bible
The events that occurred in Ezra and Nehemiah—the rebuilt temple, the stabilizing of Jerusalem, and the Jewish community that developed—all played key roles in the life and ministry of Jesus recorded in the Gospels. The rebuilt temple may have paled in comparison to Solomon's temple, but it would serve the Jews for centuries until Christ removed the need for a physical temple.
Structure
Ezra-Nehemiah was written in two related but distinct languages: Hebrew and Aramaic. The Hebrew sections generally reflect the style of the postexilic era with some evidence of the impact of Aramaic on the language. Aramaic, a Semitic language similar to Hebrew, occurs in two sections in the book of Ezra (Ezra 4:8–6:18; 7:12-26). During the Persian period (ca 540 to 330 b.c.), Aramaic was the official language of diplomacy and commerce.
Ezra-Nehemiah is similar to Samuel and Kings, and especially Chronicles, in that many sources were utilized in its composition. These include two majo
r types of sources. Much of Ezra-Nehemiah consists of material from the Ezra Memoir and the Nehemiah Memoir. The Ezra Memoir, usually written in the first person, includes Ezra 7–10, along with Nehemiah 8 and probably chapter 9 as well, but embedded in this memoir are lists and records from other sources used by Ezra. The composition of the Nehemiah Memoir is regarded as including Nehemiah 1–7 as well as 11–13. But here also Nehemiah incorporated lists and records in his memoir. Ezra-Nehemiah also contains many lists, genealogies, inventories, letters, and census records throughout the book. For a community attempting to reestablish itself after the disaster of 586 b.c. and the subsequent exile to Babylon, this material was crucial in reordering their life as a community.
1:1 The firstyearofCyrus refers to the first year of his rule over Babylonia (538 b.c.) and not the first year of his reign in Persia that began in 559 b.c. and continued until 530 b.c. The word from Jeremiah may allude to his prophecy of the 70 years of captivity (Jer. 29:10-14). More likely it is a reference to Jer. 51:11, "the Lord hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes." The same vocabulary occurs here in Ezra 1:1 where the Lordstirred up the spirit (cp. Jer. 51:1) ofCyrus.
1:2-3 The "proclamation" (v. 1), often referred to as the "Edict of Cyrus," reflects Cyrus's policy to allow exiles to return to their homeland. The edict, from the closing words of 2 Chronicles (2 Chron. 36:23), appears in the book of Ezra in two versions: here in Hebrew, reflecting a strong Jewish perspective, and in 6:3-5 written in Aramaic (the language of diplomacy in the Persian Empire), which appears to be an official court memorandum. Some scholars question whether a Persian king would refer to God as theLordGodofheaven. Possibly this reflects a paraphrase provided by the Jewish leaders in Babylon. One of Cyrus's assignments was that they build a houseatJerusalem in Judah, meaning the temple, the house of theLord. The Babylonians had destroyed Solomon's temple in 586 b.c.
1:4 It is not clear if the menofhis place refer to Jewish men or the entire population. If it refers to all the people, there may be a parallel here to the "spoiling of the Egyptians" (Exod. 3; 11; 12). As the birth of the nation began with the spoils of the Gentiles, so the new beginning of God's people began with the silver and gold of their former oppressors.
1:5 The kingdom of Judah, conquered by the Babylonians in 586 b.c., consisted primarily of the region of JudahandBenjamin. Thus the exiles who returned represented three tribal groups: Judah, Benjamin, and Levi (thepriests, and the Levites).
1:7 The vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had taken when the Babylonians sacked the temple were not only extremely valuable but were of priceless spiritual worth to the returning exiles. Though plundered from Solomon's temple, they would again be used in worship in the second temple and would be an additional link to the worshipping community that existed before the great catastrophe of 586 b.c.
1:8 Both the name and title of Mithredath are Persian. This is the first mention of the enigmatic Sheshbazzar (v v. 8,11; 5:14,16). His name is Babylonian ("May Shamash [the sun god] protect the father"). His title, prince (Hb nasiy') of Judah, is only used of one other person (1 Chron. 2:10; cp. Num. 2:3).
1:11 The figure of 5,400 is over twice the total of the figures given in verses 9-10. Probably only the largest items were specified in the inventory. The term captivity (Hb golah) can refer to either the exile to Babylon or the people of the exile. All but one of the 12 occurrences of the term in Ezra (6:21) refer to the people of the exile.
2:1 The list of returnees probably reflects not just the return from Babylon led by Sheshbazzar, but multiple waves of exiles over several decades. While it is possible that thechildrenoftheprovince refers to the region in Babylon where the exiles had lived, it more likely refers to the province of Judah to which they returned. The province, called Yehud by the Persians, was probably much smaller than the hereditary territory of Judah (see note at 10:7-8). Nebuchadnezzar's series of deportations (597–582 b.c.) were now being reversed by God's power. Each returnee came back to hiscity, emphasizing the continuity between the preexilic nation and the postexilic nation.
2:2 The names of the Jewish leaders who returned reflect the history of their nation. One name is Persian (Bigvai) while three others are Babylonian (Zerubbabel . . . Mordecai, and Bilshan). Zerubbabel probably served as the second governor of Yehud (Judah) after Sheshbazzar. As a grandson of king Jehoiachin, he was a crucial link with the Davidic dynasty. In the biblical books from the postexilic era, Zerubbabel is nearly always mentioned along with Jeshua, a grandson of Jozadak, Israel's last high priest before the destruction of the temple in 586 b.c. Thus Zerubbabel and Jeshua together link the reborn community in Yehud with the royal and priestly lines of preexilic Israel.
Nehemiah in this verse does not refer to the central figure in the book by that name, who arrived in Jerusalem almost 80 years later. A third person named Nehemiah is mentioned in Neh. 3:16, a ruler over the region of Beth-Zur. Neither does the name Mordecai refer to the Mordecai in the book of Esther, who appeared a half-century after this one.
2:3-60 These lists appear to be based on the nearly identical version in Neh. 7:8-60. The divergences between the two are mostly inconsequential, consisting of alternative spellings of proper names and minor differences in the numbers. The primary purpose of these lists was to ensure that those who returned to Judah were authentic Israelites. In both Ezra and Nehemiah, the purity of the people is emphasized.
2:3-35 The first list consists of Israelite laymen. In verses 3-20 they are listed by the names of their family patriarchs, and in verses 21-35 according to locality of origin. In verses 3-21 the returnees are referred to as the children of these family leaders (lit "sons"; Hb beney). In verses 22-35 they are more commonly called the men (Hb anshey) of the family leader. The variation is probably only stylistic.
2:20 The parallel list of the childrenof Gibbar (Neh. 7:25) reads "Gibeon," the town northwest of Jerusalem. It is difficult to decide which is original since the names that precede the verse are personal names while those that follow are place names.
2:21-35 All these places are in the immediate area surrounding Jerusalem. It reflects the greatly reduced size of Judah in the years before 586 b.c. Many of the towns were from the tribal area of Benjamin, north of Jerusalem. The only towns mentioned south of Jerusalem are Beth-lehem and Netophah.
2:36-39Priests make up about 10 percent of the returnees. Other priests returned later, because 8:2 mentions priestly families of Phinehas (Exod. 6:23; Num. 25:1-11) and Ithamar, Aaron's fourth son (Exod. 6:23).
2:40 Compared to the priests, the return of only 74 Levites seems very low. Possibly the nature of their work and their lowly status either kept them from being captured and deported in the first place, or it did not motivate many of them to return home. Many years later when Ezra was preparing to return (8:15), his recruitment efforts resulted in only 38 Levite volunteers.
2:41 The presence of singers was important in establishing the continuity of worship as it existed before the exile. The term translated "singers" (Hb meshorrim) may be too narrow, as 1 Chron. 15:16-20 suggests that it included instrumentalists and worship leaders. Perhaps "musicians" better fits the context. Asaph was from the tribe of Levi.
2:42 Like the singers, the porters' position was established by King David (1 Chron. 9:18-27) and was regarded as part of the tribe of Levi (1 Chron. 6), although these gatekeepers are mentioned separately.
2:43-58 The Nethinims (temple servants) were the fifth group of temple personnel (after priests, Levites, singers, and porters), and they had the lowest status. The Hebrew term is from the verb ntn, "to give." They are the "given" ones, or "devoted" ones, designated to serve in the temple and its worship. Solomon'sservants were part of this same group. A majority of the names are either foreign or are nicknames, reflecting their lowly status.
2:59-63 The final groups are of questionable status: three clans of laymen who could not verify their genealogy (v v. 59-60) and three clans of priestly families who could not prove their priestly lineage (v v. 61-64). The laymen, identified according to their former residences in Babylon, presumably were allowed to remain in the Jewish community. The situation of the priests was more difficult. Because the purity of the priesthood and the temple was at stake, priests who could not prove their lineage were disqualified from their posts. This was not only a loss of status but of livelihood as well since priests were not allotted land and were dependent on the gifts given to the temple.
No mention of the use of the mysterious Urim and Thummim is found in the postexilic era. The term Tirshatha is an uncommon word for "governor," appearing only five times in the OT, all in Ezra-Nehemiah. The word is probably derived from the Old Persian language meaning "excellency." The term is later used to describe Nehemiah (Neh. 8:9; 10:1). Here it probably refers to Zerubbabel, although some scholars prefer Sheshbazzar.
2:64-65 The congregation (Hb qahal) described the entire worshipping community, including both men and women. The sum of the returnees in the above list is only 29,818; probably the discrepancy reflects the number of women who also returned. While some commentators regard the presence of only 12,542 women as unlikely, it may suggest that most of those who returned were unattached, single men. The 42,360 returnees did not include the slaves who were regarded as property. The singers listed here are not those who participated in the temple worship but entertainers employed by wealthy families.
2:66-67 Since asses were the least expensive beast of burden, it is not surprising that they outnumbered the others by far.
2:68-70 Just as Israelites gave gold and silver toward the construction of the tabernacle in Moses' time (Exod. 35:21-29), so once again some of the people offered money freely for the reconstruction of the temple. These drams (Hb darkemonim) probably refer to the Greek drachma. Both temple personnel and laymen had now returned to their cities and towns from which they or their forefathers had been exiled.
3:1-13 Neither Haggai nor Zechariah, who prophesied about the temple during this time, ever mentioned an early attempt to lay the foundation of the temple in the time of Cyrus as described in this chapter. They only recounted the laying of the foundation and the building of the temple during the time of Darius, with the completion of the temple in 516 b.c. The chronological indicators in the passage (v v. 6,8; 4:5,24; 5:1-2) attest to a short-lived attempt to rebuild in the time of Cyrus (3:1–4:3) followed by a second, ultimately successful attempt during the time of Darius (chaps. 5–6).
3:1-2Theseventhmonth was September–October 537 b.c. Taking the lead in reviving the proper sacrificial system was Jeshua the sonofJozadak (see note at 2:2). In Haggai he is always referred to as "Joshua," an alternative spelling, and nearly always called the "high priest," though never in Ezra-Nehemiah. Just as Joshua built an altar to the Lord when the people entered the promised land "as it is written in the book of the law of Moses" (Josh. 8:30-31), so those returning to the promised land built theirs the same way, with uncut stones that no iron tool had touched (Deut. 27:5-6).
3:3 The morning and evening burntofferings were the basic daily sacrifices in which the entire lamb was burned up (see v. 5). The "burnt offerings" were part of the consecration of the new altar. Twice before in Israel's history the daily burnt offerings had ceased under godless kings and were reinstated, first by Joash (2 Chron. 24:14) and later by Hezekiah (2 Chron. 29:7,27-29). The term the people of those countries often has a pejorative sense. Here it probably refers to those with no desire to see a reconstituted Jewish population in the land.
3:4 The seventh month was also the time for the celebration of the feastof tabernacles, a harvest festival in which Israel remembered their sojourn in the wilderness and God's provision. The sacrifices during the seven-day festival were offered in accordance with the law of Moses as written in Num. 29:12-38, and would include 71 bulls, 15 rams, 105 lambs as well as seven goats—a major financial sacrifice for the small postexilic community.
3:5 The mention of continualburntoffering (Hb 'olat tamid) is to show how the normal daily sacrificial schedule of offerings, as compared to the burnt offering at the dedication of the altar (v. 3), was reestablished. The new moons were the offerings for the beginning of each month (Hb chodashim). New moon celebrations were prescribed in the Mosaic law (Num. 28:11-15). They included the blowing of trumpets (Num. 10:10) along with the sacrifice of two bulls, a ram, and seven one-year-old male lambs, plus a male goat as a sin offering.
3:6 The firstdayoftheseventhmonth would most likely have been September 17, 538 b.c.
3:7 As soon as the sacrificial system was in place, the next order of business was the acquisition of building material. Payment was made to the people of Zidon and Tyre who cut down the famous cedars of Lebanon and floated the logs down the coast to Joppa, just south of present day Tel-Aviv, for transit overland to Jerusalem. While masons (stonecutters) were also hired, they were not as numerous as Solomon's 80,000 who worked on the first temple (2 Chron. 2:18) since some of the stones from the rubble of the first temple could be reused.
3:8 During the seven months preceding the secondmonth of the secondyear, enough of the temple site had been cleared that work on the foundation could begin. Zerubbabel and Jeshua the priest led laymen as well as priests and Levites in the joint effort. In 5:16 Sheshbazzar is mentioned as laying the foundation of the temple. As the official governor, maybe he was credited with this event even though Zerubbabel carried on most of the work and would later succeed Sheshbazzar as governor.
3:10 The continuity of the people with their preexilic forefathers is again emphasized in the phrase afterthe ordinance of David. When David brought the ark of the covenant into Jerusalem (1 Chron. 16:4-6), the Levites were to "thank and praise" while the priests blew the trumpets and Asaph played the cymbals. Here the descendants of Asaph used the cymbals and the current priests blew their trumpets.
3:11 The Levites' antiphonal refrain, becausehe is good, for his mercy endureth for ever toward Israel, is found in slightly varying forms in the Psalms (Ps. 100:4-5; 106:1; 107:1, 118:1; 136:1). The shout (Hb teru'ah) was commonly used in battle but also for other significant events, such as the shout of the people when the ark of the covenant was brought into Jerusalem by King David (1 Chron. 15:28).
3:12-13 The episode described here is not the same event as that described in Hag. 2:1-5 which occurred almost 20 years later when the building of the temple finally resumed. Here the author prepares the way for chapter 4 with the opposition of enemies. Not only did the Lord's people hear the sound but so did their adversaries, who tried to thwart their plans.
4:1-2 The author's description of those who offered to help with the construction as adversaries shows that their offer was not what it seemed. Their identity is clarified in that they had been brought to Judah by Esar-haddonking of Assyria. Second Kings 17 describes the policy of the Assyrian kings who deported many of the people in the northern kingdom of Israel and replaced them with people from Babylon and beyond. Though the events in 2 Kings 17 occurred half a century before Esar-haddon, he apparently carried on the practice of resettlement.
The claim of these enemies that they also worshipped yourGod was probably true. The problem was that they worshipped the God of Israel along with the false gods of their homeland (2 Kings 17:3-22). If Zerubbabel allowed these people to help in the construction, it would be impossible to prevent them from worshipping them in Judah as well. Zerubbabel and the other returnees knew well the terrible price their nation had paid for their syncretistic practices and could never allow such a practice again.
4:3 In refusing their help, Zerubbabel did not cite their religious syncretism as the issue but focused on the legal decree of Cyrus that they were to build the temple (1:2-3). Yehave nothing to do with us is a variation on a Hebrew idiom that means "we have no common interests" (see note at 2 Sam. 16:10).
4:4-5 These verses highlight one aspect of the opposition from thepeople of the land (see note at 3:3): they hired or bribed officials to act against them. In the vast Persian Empire, bribery of government officials was commonplace.
4:6-23 This unusual passage has confused and challenged interpreters. It is bracketed by statements (v v. 4-5,24) describing the cessation of building until the time of Darius. Chapter 5 continues with the renewed work in building the temple during the time of Darius. Yet in 4:6-23 the events described take place during the reigns of Ahasuerus (Xerxes) and Artaxerxes, successive kings in Darius's dynasty. Some critical scholars have charged that the author of Ezra-Nehemiah was chronologically confused. Such an assertion is unwarranted and unnecessary when one realizes that the author is not writing a chronological but a thematic account, here on the topic of foreign resistance to reconstruction efforts. Authors in the ancient world commonly ordered their material thematically rather than chronologically.
4:6 While earlier scholars identified Ahasuerus with various individuals, nearly all today identify him as Xerxes, the son of Darius. Ahasuerus (Xerxes) is mentioned nowhere else in the OT except for the book of Esther where he plays a central role.
4:7 Another letter was written to thwart the plans of the returned exiles, this time to Artaxerxes who took the throne following the death of his father Xerxes. His reign lasted over 40 years (465–425 b.c.). The ministry of Ezra and Nehemiah occurred during his reign, as well as the last writing prophet, Malachi. The Persian name Mithredath suggests he may have been a Persian official. The Hebrew name Tabeel ("God is good") finds its equivalent in the Aramaic name Tobiah, but it is unlikely the Tabeel mentioned in this verse is Tobiah, the Ammonite official who opposed Nehemiah (Neh. 2:10,19).
4:8-6:18 With this verse begins the first of two sections written not in Hebrew but in Aramaic (4:8–6:18; 7:12-26). Aramaic, like Hebrew, is a Semitic language. It originated in Syria in the second millennium b.c. The Aramaic sections in the OT (here and in Dan. 2:4–7:28) are written in "Official Aramaic" (or "Royal Aramaic"), a standardized language of government and diplomacy used throughout the Persian Empire. By the time of Jesus, Aramaic was the "mother tongue" of the Jewish people in Judaea. The Gospel of Mark records several quotes in Aramaic by Jesus. The first occurred as Jesus brought Jairus's daughter back to life (Mark 5:41) with the command Talitha koum ("Damsel, I say unto thee, arise"). Jesus later opened the ears of a deaf man (Mark 7:34) with the command Ephphatha ("Be opened"). Several Aramaic words and phrases are preserved in Paul's writings, such as Abba (Rom. 8:15) and Marana tha (1 Cor. 16:22).
4:8 The title chancellor is literally "master of decrees" (Aram be'el-te'em), a high-ranking official.
4:9-10 The difficult Aramaic in verse 9b prohibits certainty in interpretation. It is not clear if the terms refer to officials or locations. Asnappar (Ashurbanipal) followed Esar-haddon (see note at v v. 1-2) as king of Assyria (668–627 b.c.).
4:11 The authors of the letter specified their residences as onthis side the river, which became the standard administrative and political designation in the Persian Empire for the vast area from the west side of the Euphrates River to the Mediterranean Sea. This region is also referred to as the "Trans-Euphrates."
4:12 This is the first occurrence of the word Jews in Ezra-Nehemiah. "Jew" (Aram yehuday; Hb yehudi) was derived from the word "Judah" (Hb yehudah). The Hebrew word yehudi appears in 2 Kings 16:6 where it is translated "Judahites," referring to those who lived in the kingdom of Judah. During the postexilic era the term became the standard designation of the entire religious community of Israel, whether located in the land of Israel or elsewhere.
4:13 Xerxes' battles with the Greeks were a financial drain on the empire. Later, Artaxerxes' suppression of the revolt in Egypt was an additional financial burden. Rehum knew that Artaxerxes could not afford the loss of toll,tribute, and custom.
4:14Wehavemaintenance from the king's palace translates an obscure Aramaic phrase (lit "We have salted the salt of the king"). On the suspicion that a scribal error has altered the original sentence, some scholars note that a minor change of the Aramaic verb would yield a more understandable rendering: "We have eaten the salt of the king." In the OT law, there are several references to the "salt of the covenant" (Lev. 2:13; Num. 18:19), suggesting that salt, a valuable commodity in the ancient world, was used in the ritual of making a covenant.
4:16 A letter marked by exaggeration aimed at inciting suppression of the Jews reached its crescendo: failure to stop the Jews from rebuilding would cause Artaxerxes to lose the whole Trans-Euphrates region.
4:20Mightykings is possibly a reference to foreign kings, such as Assyrian and Babylonian kings who once controlled the entire Jewish region and collected tribute. However, the context gives no indication of a change in subject. This most naturally suggests that Israelite kings were in view. If this is correct, it is possibly another aspect of exaggerating the threat posed by the Jews and Jerusalem.
4:22 The purpose of the command was to avoid further damage to King Artaxerxes.
4:23 This forced stoppage must have been a painful and humiliating experience for the Jewish people.
4:24 The verse begins with an Aramaic preposition, be'dayin, which suggests that verse 24 temporally follows verse 23. But as pointed out above, verses 6-23 form a parenthesis in which letters written to the Persian kings illustrate opposition to the Jews (see note at 4:6-23). Thus verse 5 and verse 24 serve as parallel bookends that bracket the lengthy parenthesis of verses 6-23.
5:1-6:22 After the thematic presentation of local opposition in chapter 4, the author returns to the situation in Darius's day when construction was resumed and completed (chaps. 5–6). The rebuilt temple and the fully restored sacrificial system not only demonstrated their continuity with the people of God before the exile but also served as a visible sign of God's restoration of what had been lost.
5:1 The impetus for a renewed attempt at construction began when two prophets brought God's word to the Jews. In his first oracle, Haggai asked the Jewish community, "Is it itme for you, O ye, to dwell in your cieled houses and this house lie waste?" (Hag. 1:4). That same year ZechariahsonofIddo encouraged the people to respond to God's promise of future glory for Jerusalem. In this present verse Zechariah is said to be the "son of Iddo" while in Zech. 1:1 he is the "son of Berechiah, son of Iddo." This is no contradiction. The term "son" (Aram bar) and its Hebrew equivalent (ben) can refer to a descendant such as "grandson." Thus Zech. 1:1 and Ezra 5:1 are both correct.
5:2 Haggai and Zechariah also pointed to Zerubbabel and Jeshua as those who led the people (2:2; 3:2,8; 4:3) in the renewed construction. Helpingthem did not imply manual labor but encouragement and moral support for those doing the work.
5:3-5Tatnai is called governor (Aram pechah) of the Trans-Euphrates region, even though he probably served as "sub-governor" under Ushtanu, a new governor appointed by Darius in 520 b.c., the year when construction on the temple resumed. Zerubbabel is also called "governor" (Hb pechah; Hag. 1:14; 2:2,21), although he answered to Tatnai and was responsible solely for the region of Yehud (Judah).
Tatnai's question may have been a genuine concern for the legal authorization of the construction. The word wall translates an Aramaic term ('usharna) that could refer to wood used in the walls (v. 8) and the roof. While Tatnai wanted to confirm the legality of the construction, he did not forbid it while waiting for an answer by letter.
5:5 The idiom "the eye(s) of the Lord" occurs elsewhere in the OT (Job 36:7; Ps. 33:18; 34:15). In Ezra, a common idiom for God's providential care is "the hand of the Lord was upon us" (Ezra 7:6,9; 8:18). This verse contains the first mention of theelders of the Jews in the postexilic era. In the Persian period, real power was in the hands of the Persian-appointed authorities, while the elders more often were called together to witness important events and judicial decisions.
5:8 Previously some scholars dismissed as implausible the use of the description houseofthegreatGod by a Persian official. However, the same term has been found in inscriptions at Persepolis, the great city of Darius and Xerxes.
5:11 While the title "God of heaven" is used 12 times in Ezra-Nehemiah, this is the only use of the title Godofheavenandearth in the Bible. The apostle Paul used a similar description in Athens, referring to God as "Lord of heaven and earth" (Acts 17:24). Solomon's name is not used here, only an oblique reference to agreatkingofIsrael.
5:12 They acknowledged that the cause of their nation's destruction and exile was their forefathers' failure to keep the covenant (2 Chron. 36:15-21; Neh. 1:5-11; 9:5-37; Jer. 4–6).
5:13 Although Cyrus was king of Persia, he also referred to himself as king of Babylon after he conquered Babylon in 539 b.c. Here the central claim of the Jewish leaders is put forth: Cyrus issued a decree granting them permission to rebuild.
5:15 The Neo-Babylonian kings who preceded Darius also showed great concern that fallen temples should be restored exactly on their original locations, strengthening the sense of continuity and legitimacy of the rebuilt temples.
5:16 The Jewish elders' claim that Sheshbazzar . . . laidthefoundation has been the subject of debate (see note at 3:8). The claim that it had been under construction sincethat time even until now is also difficult since both Haggai and Zechariah, as well as Ezra (4:5,23), say that construction had ceased for nearly 20 years. The claim about ceaseless building appears to be a prevarication on the part of the Jewish elders, borne out of fear that any mention of a long halt of construction would weaken their case that their rebuilding efforts were sanctioned.
5:17 Tatnai suggested that a search be undertaken of the treasure house (royal archives) in Babylon for Cyrus's decree allowing the Jewish exiles to return to their homeland. The record of the decree in fact was found in the Persian summer capital of Achmetha (Ecbatana; 6:2). It appears that neither Sheshbazzar nor Zerubbabel had an official copy, since none was shown to their early opponents (4:1-5) or to Tatnai.
6:1-5 The first version of the Edict of Cyrus (1:2-4) was written in Hebrew and reflected a strong Jewish perspective. The second version given here, in Aramaic, explicitly decreed that funding for the temple would begiven out of the king's house. Some scholars have dismissed this version as a literary fiction because they assume a Persian king would have no interest in paying to rebuild a houseof God at Jerusalem. Yet archaeological evidence shows that Persian kings, including Darius, were involved in state-supported reconstruction of temples outside Persia. Presumably, subjects are easier to govern when they are allowed to worship as they please.
6:3 The phrase letthe foundations thereof be strongly laid translates a difficult and uncertain Aramaic phrase. Other translations assume the text is corrupted and change the term "foundations" (Aram 'ushohe) to "fire-offerings" (Aram 'eshohe), thus reading "where the fire-offerings are brought."
The dimensions of the temple listed here are problematic. Only its width and height are mentioned, suggesting a cube that would be far larger than Solomon's glorious temple, which was 60 cubits long, 20 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high (1 Kings 6:2). The text in Ezra 6:3 might reflect an ancient scribal error. It is most likely that the second temple would either be identical in size to Solomon's or smaller due to economic necessity.
6:4 The construction technique of threerows of great stones, and a row of new timber was based on the construction of Solomon's temple (1 Kings 6:36).
6:6-7 Just as God was watching over His people (5:5) while they waited for Darius's decision, so His care for them was seen in Darius's decision that prohibited Tatnai and the other Persian officials from hindering the work of the temple.
6:8-10 Darius's decree not only provided funds for reconstruction but for the daily sacrificial offerings as well. His motivation was not wholly altruistic, but that the people would prayfor the king and his sons. While Darius was a devotee of Ahuramazda, he was willing to take spiritual support from any source.
6:11 The unusual terms in this Aramaic phrase have led some to translate it as "let him be set upon it (the beam) and struck," that is, flogged. However, hanged or "impaled" is probably correct. The Greek historian Herodotus claimed that Darius impaled 3,000 rebellious Babylonians when he recaptured the city.
6:13-15Tatnai and his Persian colleagues knew how dangerous it was to disobey the king of Persia. The construction of the temple was done according to the decrees of Cyrus,and Darius, and Artaxerxes king of Persia. The mention of Artaxerxes is odd since he became king a half-century after the temple was completed. Chapters 1–6 were probably the last chapters of Ezra-Nehemiah to be written. The author of this section, well aware both of Artaxerxes' opposition (4:6-22) and his support (7:11-26), included Artaxerxes in the list of those whose decrees involved the construction of the temple, even though his support came long after the events described in 6:13-15. Construction was most likely completed on March 12, 516 b.c.
6:16 In the OT law, the people were commanded to worship and celebrate their festivals with joy (Deut. 12:7,12,18; 16:11,14). Just as the dedication of the first temple filled the people with joy (1 Kings 8:66), and as the rededication of the temple and the restoration of Passover in Hezekiah's day brought joy (2 Chron. 30:21), so now with the second temple the people responded with great joy.
6:19-20 The author had used Aramaic from 4:8–6:18 since he was working with official Persian correspondence written in Aramaic. With that correspondence completed, he returned to Hebrew. The new temple allowed the full implementation of the sacrificial system that existed before the disaster of 586 b.c. when the first temple was destroyed. This celebration of passover (Hb pesach)—probably April 21, 516 b.c.—would have been a momentous occasion for God's people to remember their forefathers' deliverance from Egypt as well as their own deliverance from exile.
6:21 The OT law allowed even foreigners to celebrate Passover (Exod. 12:48-49) as long as they were circumcised. Those who had separatedthemselves at least included proselytes. Likely it also included Israelites who had never been exiled but had remained in the land and continued to worship the God of Israel.
6:22 The feastof unleavened bread began the day after Passover (Exod. 12:14-20). The reference to King Darius of Persia as the kingof Assyria seems unusual since the Assyrian Empire had collapsed more than a century earlier, but just as the Babylonians saw themselves as the successors of the Assyrians, so the Persian kings regarded themselves as the successors of the Assyrians and the Babylonians.
7:1-10:44 The second major part of Ezra consists primarily of the Ezra Memoir, which tells of the ministry of Ezra the scribe in bringing spiritual renewal to the Jewish people. The final verses of chapter 6 take place in April 516 b.c. while the opening verses of chapter 7 begin with Ezra's journey to Jerusalem in 458 b.c., a gap of over 50 years. This section is written in Hebrew, except for the copy of Artaxerxes' letter (7:12-26) in Aramaic.
7:1 Ezra's name is a short form of the common Hebrew name Azariah, meaning "Jehovah has helped," and is often followed by various titles, such as "Ezra the priest" (v. 12; 10:10,16; Neh. 8:2), "Ezra the scribe" (Neh. 8:4,13, 12:36), "Ezra the priest, the scribe" (Ezra 7:11; Neh. 8:9), and "Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law" (Ezra 7:21). The genealogy given for Ezra is representative and not complete, as a comparison with 1 Chron. 6:3-15 demonstrates.
7:6 Ezra was a scribe (Hb sopher), which in this context means more than reading, writing, and keeping records; it identifies a Torah expert who could read and interpret the law. Some scholars understand the term here and in verse 11 as designating Ezra as a Persian government official. However, it probably more accurately refers to his role in the Jewish community as a teacher and interpreter of the law.
7:7 Those returning to the land with Ezra are listed in the same order as in the return under Zerubbabel and Jeshua almost 80 years before (2:2-53).
7:8-9 Ezra's journey toward Jerusalem probably began on April 8, 458 b.c., but 8:15-31 tells of an immediate delay when it was discovered that no Levites were present. Taking the shortest route, this would be a journey of about 500 miles. However, such a route across the desert would be unlikely in summer, particularly during a time of political upheaval that made travel even more dangerous. The more common route covered about 900 miles. After a fourteen-week pilgrimage, they probably arrived in Jerusalem on August 4, 458 b.c.
7:10 Ezra's greatness is seen is his resolve to seek . . . do, and teach God's law to God's people.
7:11-28 Ezra came to Jerusalem bearing a letter from King Artaxerxes authorizing him and everyone who wanted to come with him to go to Jerusalem (v. 13). Some scholars in the past have dismissed this letter (v v. 12-26) as literary fiction. However, most now recognize its essential integrity. The letter was written in Aramaic (4:8) that was common to its era and in a format common throughout the Persian period. It is possible that Ezra himself composed the letter and submitted it to Artaxerxes for royal approval.
7:11 This verse, written in Hebrew, provides an introduction to Artaxerxes' letter that was written in Aramaic (v v. 12-26).
7:12 Artaxerxes used the common royal Persian title kingofkings, used in the NT in reference to God (1 Tim. 6:15; Rev. 19:16). The word law here is not the common Hebrew word torah but the word dath, a Persian loanword (data) found in postexilic biblical Hebrew and Aramaic.
7:14 The Greek historian Herodotus described the practice of a Persian king having seven trusted advisers. Esther 1:13-14 names Xerxes' seven trusted counselors and states that they had personal access to the king.
7:15-17 Funds for Ezra's journey to Jerusalem and the purchase of sacrificial animals there came from the royal treasury and from gifts gathered from the Jewish exiles in Babylon.
7:19 It is not clear what the royal vessels (Aram ma'n) were. In 5:14 the same term is used to describe the gold and silver articles looted from the temple by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 b.c. and returned by King Cyrus (1:7).
7:21-22 The provisions that Ezra was entitled to were used daily in the sacrifices at the temple. The quantities listed here would be sufficient for approximately two years. The hundred talents (7,500 pounds) ofsilver was an enormous amount. The entire annual tax for the "Beyond the River" region was 350 talents.
7:23 King Darius had asked the Jewish community to pray for the king and his sons (6:10). Now Artaxerxes commanded that the regular sacrifices and worship be properly maintained.
7:24 Persian texts and Greek writings about Persian practice confirm that exemption from taxes was granted to temples and the sacred personnel who served there.
7:25 The charge given to Ezra here is not clear. He was to appoint magistratesandjudges, but it is not certain how their roles related to those of the regular Persian judges and officials. Probably these judges and magistrates dealt only with cases specific to the OT law.
7:26 Those who refused to keep thelaw were subject to typical Persian punishments. Imprisonment was not stipulated in OT law, but it did occur in preexilic Israel, for example, in the case of Jeremiah the prophet (Jer. 37–38).
7:27-28 With the completion of the official letter written in Aramaic (v v. 12-26), the author reverts to Hebrew. Here in verse 27 begins the first words of Ezra in the Ezra Memoir.
8:1-14 Almost 80 years before Ezra came to Jerusalem, Zerubbabel and Jeshua led the first return of the Babylonian exiles to the land of their forefathers (chap. 2). The list of returnees at that time (2:2-61) numbered over 40,000 men (2:64) while the list here involves only about 1,500 men. In chapter 2 the list records the laity, the priests, and then the Levites. In chapter 8 the priests are mentioned first (v. 2a) followed by those of royal lineage (v v. 2b-3a) and then the listing of the laity (v v. 3b-14).
8:2aGershom and Daniel represented the two branches of the Aaronic priesthood. Gershom traced his ancestry through Phinehas (Exod. 6:25), the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron. Ezra himself was from this priestly lineage.
8:2b-3a Hattush's royal lineage from King David would certainly have been important to the postexilic community in Jerusalem. First Chronicles 3:19-22 gives his genealogy as: Zerubbabel/Hananiah/Shecaniah/Shemaiah/Hattush.
8:15 It appears there were not enough priests to carry the gold and silver donated to the temple (v v. 24-30) and that the Levites were needed for this task. Ezra also wanted his group of returnees to be representative of the nation as a whole, where each major group took part in the return to the land of their ancestors.
8:16 This list is unusual in that it mentions three individuals named Elnathan who are not differentiated by a genealogical description, such as "son of X." The phrase menof understanding (Hb meninim) can be understood as a title ("teachers").
8:17 The distinguished entourage was sent to ask Iddo for Levites to join the exiles in their return to the land. Their request was significant, asking people to leave their homes and family on short notice for a difficult 900-mile journey.
8:21 The term little ones is not the normal Hebrew term for children but one (Hb taph) that indicates those unable to walk on the journey, such as the elderly, the infirm, and young children.
8:24-25 Ezra appointed 12 priests and 12 Levites to bring their treasure to Jerusalem, both the gifts from those joining Ezra on the journey and those given by King Artaxerxes and his officials.
8:28-29 Ezra charged the 12 priests and 12 Levites entrusted with the treasure to recognize their status before God and the community. Both they and the offerings had been made holy, or set apart to God, dedicated to Jehovah and His worship.
8:31 The actual departure for Jerusalem took place onthetwelfthdayofthefirstmonth, not the first day of the first month (probably April 8, 538 b.c.) as originally planned because of the need to find Levites to join the returnees (v v. 15-20).
8:33-34Meremoth is probably the same person mentioned in Neh. 3:4 where he is referred to as "Meremoth son of Uriah, son of Hakkoz" (also Neh. 3:21). Ezra notes that everything was verified bynumberand by weight. Because Ezra came to Jerusalem bearing huge financial gifts from the king, he would need to certify to Artaxerxes that these gifts arrived at the temple.
8:35-36 The first-person narrative by Ezra is interrupted by these two verses in which the author or editor describes the response of the returnees to God's goodness. The emphasis on the number twelve and its multiples probably reflects the theological emphasis of all Israel being represented in the return to the land.
9:1-3 The phrase whenthese things were done links this section with the worship of Ezra and the people (8:35) and the distribution of Artaxerxes' edicts to the local Persian authorities (8:36). However, many scholars suggest that between the end of chapter 8 and the beginning of chapter 9 there originally stood the account of Ezra's reading of the law to the people now found in Nehemiah 8 (or possibly Neh. 8–9). There is no reason why Ezra could not have read the law on multiple occasions.
9:1 Ezra had not long returned from delivering the king's edicts (8:36) when some leaders presented him with a genuine threat to the postexilic Jewish community—intermarriage between Jews and pagans. Probably the early groups returning from Babylon had included more men than women, making it more difficult to find a wife. Moreover, marrying a foreign wife was not always forbidden. Joseph and Moses each had a foreign wife. But intermarriage with local Canaanite groups was forbidden "that they teach you not to do after all their abominations" (Deut. 20:18). King Solomon's example certainly was remembered, as his numerous foreign wives "turned away his heart after other gods" (1 Kings 11:4). The extent of the problem is shown in that all three major groups of the community were involved—the people, the priests, and the Levities.
9:2 The situation was made even worse because the princesand rulers had taken the lead in this unfaithfulness. The issue was not racial but religious. God had chosen Israel to be His "peculiar treasure" and His "holy nation" (Exod. 19:5-6). His plan to bring blessing and life to all the peoples of the earth meant that His chosen people should maintain their identity. From them would come God's servant who would be "a light of the Gentiles" (Isa. 42:6) and would bear the "iniquity of us all" (Isa. 53:6).
9:3 Ezra identified personally with the sins of his people, responding with actions associated with repentance, mourning, and astonishment.
9:4-5 Those who gathered around Ezra trembledat the words of the God of Israel—a phrase that occurs in three other OT passages (10:3; Isa. 66:2,5). It identified them as people fully committed to keeping God's law. Ezra got up from his heaviness (Hb ta'anet), a term that occurs only here in the Hebrew Bible but does occur in postbiblical Hebrew and in Aramaic. It probably implies a penitential act in this context.
9:6-15 Ezra's penitential prayer of confession, written in late biblical Hebrew, is similar to others from the postexilic era in content, style, and theological perspective (Neh. 1:5-11; 9:6-38; Dan. 9:4-19). It differs from them in that there is no petition or request to God. Its focus is confession.
9:6-7 Ezra began his prayer with his own shame and embarrassment but quickly shifted to a corporate confession of the nation's sins. In referring to fathers, he may have been looking back several generations to those who sinned before the destruction of the temple and the exile (5:12), but it is more likely that he used the term to go all the way back to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Deut. 6:10; 8:1; 2 Chron. 34:21). Thus Israel's entire history was a story of failure and guilt.
9:8-9 The nail (Hb yathed) is a metaphor for the idea of permanence (Isa. 33:20) and stability (Isa. 22:23-25). That the postexilic community existed and had a temple was a sign of God's undeserved mercy. The reference to bondage may be misconstrued when read through the lens of American history. The postexilic people did not experience racially based slavery. Yet without question, they understood that they were not a free people. Except for a brief period during the time of the Maccabees (163–60 b.c.), they would remain under the control of foreign powers throughout the rest of biblical history.
9:10-12 Ezra's mention of the prophets reflects usage common in later OT texts that certainly includes Moses as well as others who spoke for God. The commandments that the people had forsaken are spelled out in verses 11-12. The focus is the necessity of avoiding defilement of themselves and their nation through association with pagan people.
9:13-15 Ezra warned God's people that to intermarry with pagans once again could lead God to consume them all. God had been merciful before when they sinned in this way because they remain, but they should not presume upon His grace. They needed to repent, specifically in the necessary but heart-breaking task of sending away their foreign wives and children (chap. 10).
10:1 The term confessed is from a Hebrew verb (yadah) that usually means "to praise, to give thanks." But in this verbal root (Hb hithpael), it has the connotation of "confessing" (Lev. 5:5), as God is praised when His people acknowledge their sin and guilt before Him.
10:2-4 Shecaniah's radical solution of sending away the foreign wives and their children was not an expression of racial prejudice but an act to insure the survival of God's covenant people (9:14). The translation here follows most modern translations in reading "my lord" (Hb 'adoni) rather than the Masoretic Text "Lord" (Hb 'adonay). The context suggests that Shecaniah was referring to Ezra and not to God.
10:7-8 J. Blenkinsopp suggests the size of the Persian province of Yehud (Judah) was "no more than about thirty-five miles north to south and twenty-five miles east to west." Thus threedays was sufficient time to notify the entire populace and for them to travel to Jerusalem. The term forfeited (Hb charam) is the word used in the OT to put something under the "ban," as were cities during the time of Joshua that were totally destroyed. It can also refer to things that were totally consecrated to divine use, as in the case of Achan (Josh. 6–7), who stole items under the ban.
10:9 The threats for noncompliance with the proclamation had their desired effect. AllthemenofJudahandBenjamin met on the twentieth day of the ninth month—December 458 b.c.
10:12-14 It is significant that the people asked that individual cases of foreign marriage be handled by rulers (Hb sar) and not by priests who would seem to be the most likely ones to deal with these decisions. Since many priests were some of the worst offenders (v v. 18-22; 9:1), this disqualified them in the eyes of the people, who preferred to have respected family chiefs (10:16) deal with this issue.
10:16-17 The family leaders selected by Ezra probably met from December 29, 458 to March 27, 457 b.c.
10:18-44 The list of offenders, which concludes the book of Ezra, reflects a "top down" progression that begins with the high priest's own family (v v. 18-19). If the population of Judah at that time was over 30,000 and only 113 people were identified as involved in the sin of intermarriage, this would be only one-third of one percent of the population. Ezra's ministry did not end the problem of intermarriage. Over 20 years later Nehemiah confronted it once again (Neh. 13:23-29).
10:18-19 The first four offenders were priests, who vowed to put away their foreign wives and offereda ram of the flock for their trespass. While this action is recorded only here, it is probable that this was the pattern for all who were found guilty. To give one's hand is to make a pledge (Ezek. 17:18).
10:20-22 Offenders from the three other priestly families (Immer, Harim, and Pashur) represented in the return (2:37-39) are listed.
10:34 The second mention (v. 29) of the family name Bani is unusual since family names were usually unique and served as identifiers for their descendants. The name Uel does not occur anywhere else in the OT. A variant of Uel is Joel.
10:40 The name Machnadebai is probably not a Hebrew name and is found nowhere else in the OT. Its position in the verse may suggest that it originally designated a family group, possibly Zaccai's descendants (2:9).
10:44 The abrupt ending of the book of Ezra, with no summations or conclusions, is attributable to the fact that Ezra was originally joined with Nehemiah. Thus this was not originally a closing to a book, but merely a closing to the section on Ezra's early ministry. The focus then shifted to Nehemiah, who, like Ezra, faithfully served God.
