Ezra Chapters 3-4 Commentary

Ezra Chapters 3-4

Chapter 3 3:1 The seventh month would be equivalent to our September-October, the month of Tishri. It took Ezra and his company four months to make the journey from Babylon to Jerusalem (Ezra 7:9). It is unlikely that the first exodus under Zerubbabel made it any quicker. At any rate, by the seventh month, the people were fairly well settled in their cities, and it was time for the actual work of restoration to begin. “As one man”: That is, with a common purpose. Remember, the seventh month was a very religious month and an ideal time to start such a restoration. Three religious festivals were held in the seventh month: the Feast of Trumpets (Leviticus 23:23-25), the Day of Atonement (23:26-32), and the Feast of Tabernacles (23:33-36).

3:2 Remember, Jeshua is of high priestly lineage, and Zerubbabel is a descendant of David. Thus the political and religious leadership bands together to rebuild the altar of burnt offering. The rebuilding of this altar was of primary importance, for such was needed to offer sacrifices ensuring the people remained right with God. “As it is written in the law of Moses”: See Exodus 27:1-8; Leviticus 6:12; 9:24. The above phrase is often found in Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 7:10; 10:3; 8:8-9; Nehemiah 10:34,36).

This sets the tone for this restoration movement. “Apostasy from God’s divine law had resulted in captivity; restoration demanded a return to the original plan. King Josiah had followed this divine pattern in his efforts to reform and save the kingdom of Judah some years before (2 Kings 22:823:24), and any apostasy from God’s Book today must be corrected in precisely the same way. Anything short of this would be that much short of a restoration: there is absolutely no substitute for as it is written (1 Corinthians 4:6)” (Winters p. 14).

3:3 They determined the exact spot where the previous altar had stood so that it would be a true restoration of the original. Note, they were able

1

to restore the altar of burnt offering. Following God’s instructions is a real and practical goal which can be accomplished. “For they were terrified because of the peoples of the lands”: The people who scared them were foreigners living in Palestine who had been deported by the Assyrian Empire years previously (2 Kings 17:24ff). The verse implies that this threatening situation had brought home to the Jews their need of Divine help, and therefore access to God which was ensured at the altar (Exodus 29:43). Such fear also made them very careful concerning the details in God’s law. The altar was set in its traditional and proper place.

The sacrifices that were offered were the first sacrifices to be offered here in fifty years, going back to 586 B.C. 3:4 As previously noted the Feast of Booths took place during the 15 th-21st days of the seventh month (Leviticus 23:33-36, 39-43). Once again, everything was done according to the “ordinance”. God’s commands were being followed right down to the smallest detail, and no one complained! It is so easy to take the truth for granted. But if you had not had the truth and then found it, you too would be very appreciative for every detail.

3:5-6 It is clear from these verses that the people really wanted to do exactly what God had commanded in the Law. For a description of these, and for a detailed list of the requirements for the seventh-month feast days, see Numbers chapter 29. “It would have been easy to rest content with the bare fact of arrival and resettlement in the homeland.

But there was the King’s business—the Temple—to attend to” (Kidner p.

45).

3:7 “Negotiations with the Sidonians and Tyrians were completed. Like Solomon before them, the Jews would exchange agricultural products for cedar from Lebanon. The logs were transported from the mountains to the Mediterranean Sea, lashed together, and floated to the seaport at Joppa. Those logs would then be hauled by animal power up to the heights of Jerusalem. This transaction between two separate provinces of the Persian empire would not have been possible without the permission of King Cyrus” (Smith p. 677).

“Even though the Jewish community was small….the people set high standards of workmanship in doing God’s work. They chose capable, talented masons and carpenters; they sent for the best grade wood from Lebanon” 1

1

The New American Commentary, Mervin Breneman p. 93 2

3:8-9 In the second month of the second year of the their return (537 B.C.), the work on the temple was ready to begin. Solomon also began building his temple in the second month (1 Kings 6:1). This was the month after the Passover, or April-May in our calendar, the beginning of the dry season. The enthusiasm of the group is indicated by the fact that, “all who came from the captivity” offered their services. The Levites, as a group, supervised the workmen. “All of this Levitcal involvement was to make sure everything was ritually correct” (Smith p. 678). The temple built

by Solomon had been started 430 years earlier (966 B.C.). Centuries earlier the Levites had been involved in the construction of the tabernacle (Exodus 38:21). All of this indicates serious and solemn planning, and a consecrated determination to in every way return to the ancient order.

3:10-11 Nothing is mentioned about the actual process of laying the temple foundation or the length of time involved. Note that worship was at the center of their daily lives and that their worship was anything but dry or apathetic. Even though only the foundation existed, the people still thanked God for His goodness. Note the expression, “according to the directions of King David”. The order followed was the same as when David brought the ark to Jerusalem (1 Chronicles 16:5-6), and when the ark was brought into the temple during Solomon’s reign (2 Chronicles 5:12-13).

3:12-13 Yet there existed in the crowd old men who had seen Solomon’s temple when they were children, and this new temple that they now saw rising up before them seemed nothing by comparison. “The older priests, Levites, and family heads, who remembered Solomon’s temple, wept because this temple would be much simpler than the former one. Others shouted for joy because their desire and longing of many years was being fulfilled” (Breneman p. 96). The end of verse 13 infers that many of the inhabitants in the land heard all this noise and knew that something was happening in Jerusalem.

This feeling of disappointment and discouragement would grow in the nation. Haggai would have to preach against those who basically said that rebuilding the temple wasn’t worth it, if it didn’t resemble the temple that Solomon had constructed (Haggai 2:1-4). And Zechariah would have to challenge those who “despised the day of small things” (4:10). I think we can learn the lesson here that bigger isn’t always better, and that we need to be thankful for what we do have or what we are accomplishing for God.

3

Chapter 4 4:1 “From this point onwards right to the end of Nehemiah there is conflict. Nothing that is attempted for God will go unchallenged, and scarcely a tactic be unexplored by the opposition. This chapter describes the opening of hostilities by the opposition” 2 “The enemies of Judah”: The word “enemies” clears the air as to what is happening in these verses.

The Israelites are not being rude to people who just want to help. Rather, the offer of help is actually an attempt to undermine the effort to rebuild the temple. “First they offered to help in the construction process, thereby hoping to infiltrate the ranks and sidetrack the building project” (Bible Knowledge Comm. p. 660).

4:2 “Esarhaddon” was the son of Sennarcherib, who ruled Assyria from 681-669 B.C. These inhabitants in the land could trace their ancestry in Palestine to a deportation during the reign of this ruler. While such people did worship the true God, they also worshipped many false gods and had a syncretistic form of worship (2 Kings 17:29, 32-34,41). “Judah and Benjamin’s enemies were also appealing on the basis of the fact that they, like the Jews, were a ‘displaced people’, having been brought in from the outside. In a sense they were downplaying the nation of Israel’s ‘roots’ in the land” (Bible Knowledge Comm. p. 660). These people worshipped Jehovah only because they believed Him to be the God who controlled the new land where they had settled.

4:3 The Jewish leaders saw through these professed believers and refused to compromise. They didn’t have the same convictions, they did not submit to the authority of God’s word, and they were not dedicated to the true God, therefore, they could not be fellowshipped or given partnership in this spiritual project. “If one set of religious convictions is true, an opposing set must be false. The clear logic of this simple proposition has been obscured by modern muddled thinking. The danger of syncretism is ever present” (Breneman p. 97).

Many today would label these Jews as being hateful, self-righteous or unloving, yet their decision to resist all attempts to simply “agree to disagree” with the surrounding false religions in the area, is one reason why we still have the Old Testament Scriptures and why Jesus was born of a faithful Jewish woman. Next time someone gives you a hard time about standing for the truth---just remember, your unpopular stand is 2

Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, Derek Kidner, p. 48 4

seeing to it that future generations will be able to hear the truth (2 Timothy 2:2).

4:4 So much for being helpful! The mask is now removed and the true motives of such people are now manifested. “The true spirit of those who offered to ‘help’ with the temple now became manifest” (Smith p. 679).

This is why we must stand for the truth, for how a person reacts to the truth reveals their true motivation. If we refuse to compromise, then we will be admired and supported by those who love the truth, and we will be ridiculed and opposed by those who want to serve someone other than God (2 Thess. 2:10-12). We need to have the courage to allow the truth to determine who our friends will be.

4:5 This intimidation first took the form of hiring (bribing?) royal counselors (probably Persian governors) to throw up bureaucratic road blocks to the construction effort. Assuming 537 B.C., as the year in which the temple reconstruction was started, this would mean that the delaying tactics of the Samaritans continued for up to 16 years, or to 521 B.C., the date when Darius Hystaspis came to the throne.

Examples of Opposition “Any idea that the Jews had overestimated their enemies is soon dispelled by this glimpse of things to come” (Kidner p. 50) 4:6 These letters to and from Artaxerxes are out of place chronologically, but they follow here logically to show that the opposition Ezra had begun to describe (verses 1-5) continued on for many years—to 485 B.C., the year Xerxes began to reign, and on into the days of Artaxerxes (464-424).

Artaxerxes was the king who was reigning during the events recorded in chapters 7-10. Therefore the letters in verses 6-24 were written nearly 80 years later than Ezra 4:1-5. Ezra was not being deceptive by placing the letters here in his book since he clearly dated them by the ruler under which they were written.

“Ahasuerus”is the Hebrew name for “Xerxes”. There is some question concerning which Persian king is under consideration in this chapter.

Some see two kings mentioned in this chapter. Xerxes, also known as Ahasuerus in the Book of Esther, ruled from 485-465 B.C. And then Artaxerxes, who came to the throne by murdering his older brother, and who reigned from 464-424. Kidner believes the Xerxes mentioned in verse 6, as simply marking the passage of time, followed by the writer talking 5

about the opposition that occurred during the reign of his son Artaxerxes in verses 7-23. All of this means that while Esther was facing an enemy of God’s people in Persia, there were also many enemies of the Jews in Palestine and other regions.

4:7 “Bishlam” (BISH lum); “Mithredath” (MITH reh dath); “Tabeel” (TAB ih uhl), might have been men from Samaria (4:7). Aramaic was the official language of trade and business during this time.

4:8 “Rehumn” (REE huhm), and “Shimshai” (SHIM shigh), were probably Persian officials who sympathized with the enemies of the Jews.

4:9 In their introduction to the Persian monarch they tried to point out that the participants in this opposition were from various parts of the world.

That is, their complaint wasn’t merely from a single isolated group.

4:10 The name “Osnappar” (oz NAP purr), probably refers to the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal. “The long list was calculated to impress, as were the fulsome tributes to the tyrannous Osnapar (669-627 B.C.), who, like his predecessors, had uprooted whole populations” (Kidner pp. 51-52).

4:11-16 The opposition was obviously not against the rebuilding of the temple which had been completed in 515 B.C.. The opposition was against an attempt to begin rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem. The apparent reason for the complaint was that if the city was allowed to be fortified, then Jerusalem and the territory which Jerusalem would control would no longer pay taxes or tribute money to the Persian Empire. The letter also added that if the city of Jerusalem was fortified then the Jews would take back all the territory they had previously occupied and the Persian king would have no territory left west of the Euphrates.

The Jews who came out of Persia in verse 12 probably refers to the group that Ezra led to Palestine in 458 B.C. (Ezra 7). Some of the letter takes on added meaning or emphasis when we consider various circumstances in the Persian Empire at this time. After the costly campaigns against the Greeks, the empire could not afford to lose any more revenue. The early years of Artaxerxes’ reign had been difficult, and there were a number of rebellions in the west; so even though these dangers were exaggerated in the letter, they would arouse concern in the king, causing him to take notice and act. Although the Jews had often been rebellious under the Assyrian and Babylonian kings, certainly this little band of Jews would not pose a serious threat to Artaxerxes.

6

The Reply 4:17-23 In his reply, the Persian monarch actually strengthened the position of the Israelites by leaving open the possibility that their work might resume later by his permission. This, of course, did happen under the leadership of Nehemiah (444 B.C.). Searches had been made in the national archives when it was discovered that Jerusalem had indeed been a powerful city and had ruled over all the territory in Palestine.

4:24 This verse actually picks up where verse 5 stopped. Remember verses 6-23 are talking about the rebuilding of the entire city, while verses 1-5 and 24 are talking about the rebuilding of the temple. Work on the temple was suspended until the second year of Darius (520 B.C.). This was some 18 years after the people had returned to the land. Darius I (522486) took over the Persian Empire after the civil war following the death of Cambyses. By his second year, he had put down the rebellions in the empire. Under his rule the Persian Empire would reach its greatest power and splendor.

7