Ezra 4
Tap any word to open its Greek or Hebrew word and Strong’s lexicon entry right here, and any name to open its Bible Dictionary entry. Read this chapter with JFB commentary · Search the Bible
The Law
History
Poetry & Wisdom
The Prophets
The Gospels & Acts
The Letters
Prophecy
“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” — John 5:39
1Now when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the children of the captivity builded the temple unto the LORD God of Israel;
CHAPTER 4
Ezr 4:1-6. The Building Hindered.
1. the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin--that is, strangers settled in the land of Israel.
2Then they came to Zerubbabel, and to the chief of the fathers, and said unto them, Let us build with you: for we seek your God, as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto him since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assur, which brought us up hither.
2. we seek your God, as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto him since the days of Esar-haddon ... which brought us up hither--A very interesting explanation of this passage has been recently obtained from the Assyrian sculptures. On a large cylinder, deposited in the British Museum, there is inscribed a long and perfect copy of the annals of Esar-haddon, in which the details are given of a large deportation of Israelites from Palestine, and a consequent settlement of Babylonian colonists in their place. It is a striking confirmation of the statement made in this passage. Those Assyrian settlers intermarried with the remnant of Israelite women, and their descendants, a mongrel race, went under the name of Samaritans. Though originally idolaters, they were instructed in the knowledge of God, so that they could say, "We seek your God"; but they served Him in a superstitious way of their own (see on 2Ki 17:26-34, 41).
3But Zerubbabel, and Jeshua, and the rest of the chief of the fathers of Israel, said unto them, Ye have nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God; but we ourselves together will build unto the LORD God of Israel, as king Cyrus the king of Persia hath commanded us.
3. But Zerubbabel and Jeshua ... said ... Ye have nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God--This refusal to co-operate with the Samaritans, from whatever motives it sprang, was overruled by Providence for ultimate good; for, had the two peoples worked together, familiar acquaintanceship and intermarriage would have ensued, and the result might have been a relapse of the Jews into idolatry. Most certainly, confusion and obscurity in the genealogical evidence that proved the descent of the Messiah would have followed; whereas, in their hostile and separate condition, they were jealous observers of each other's proceedings, watching with mutual care over the preservation and integrity of the sacred books, guarding the purity and honor of the Mosaic worship, and thus contributing to the maintenance of religious knowledge and truth.
4Then the people of the land weakened the hands of the people of Judah, and troubled them in building,
4-5. Then the people of the land weakened the hands of the people of Judah, &c.--Exasperated by this repulse, the Samaritans endeavored by every means to molest the workmen as well as obstruct the progress of the building; and, though they could not alter the decree which Cyrus had issued regarding it, yet by bribes and clandestine arts indefatigably plied at court, they labored to frustrate the effects of the edict. Their success in those underhand dealings was great; for Cyrus, being frequently absent and much absorbed in his warlike expeditions, left the government in the hands of his son Cambyses, a wicked prince, and extremely hostile to the Jews and their religion. The same arts were assiduously practised during the reign of his successor, Smerdis, down to the time of Darius Hystaspes. In consequence of the difficulties and obstacles thus interposed, for a period of twenty years, the progress of the work was very slow.
5And hired counsellors against them, to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia.
6And in the reign of Ahasuerus, in the beginning of his reign, wrote they unto him an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem.
6. in the reign of Ahasuerus, in the beginning of his reign, wrote they ... an accusation--Ahasuerus was a regal title, and the king referred to was successor of Darius, the famous Xerxes.
7And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of their companions, unto Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian tongue, and interpreted in the Syrian tongue.
Ezr 4:7-24. Letter to Artaxerxes.
7. in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, &c.--The three officers named are supposed to have been deputy governors appointed by the king of Persia over all the provinces subject to his empire west of the Euphrates.
the Syrian tongue--or Aramæan language, called sometimes in our version, Chaldee. This was made use of by the Persians in their decrees and communications relative to the Jews (compare 2Ki 18:26; Is 36:11). The object of their letter was to press upon the royal notice the inexpediency and danger of rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem. They labored hard to prejudice the king's mind against that measure.
And in the days of Artaxerxes. See the comment on Ezr_4:6. If Artaxerxes be the Pseudo-Smerdis, we can readily understand why an application was not made to him at once, and how it came about that the Jews recommenced their building, as they appear from Ezr_4:12, Ezr_4:13 to have done. The Pseudo-Smerdis was a usurper; his reign was a time of partial anarchy; in a distant part of the empire it would not be known for a while who was king. Men would be thrown on themselves, and would do as it seemed good in their own eyes. Later, there may have been some doubt whether a king, who was known to be a religious reformer, would follow the policy of his predecessor with respect to the Jews, or reverse it. Hence a delay, and then a more formal application than before for a positive decree to stop the building (see Ezr_4:21). The rest of their companions. Literally, of their companies—the abstract for the concrete. The writing of the letter was written in the Syrian tongue. Rather, "in the Syrian fashion," i.e. in Syriac characters. And interpreted in the Syrian tongue. Or "translated into the Syriac language." The character and the words were alike Syriac. Ezra gives the letter in Chaldee.
8Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe wrote a letter against Jerusalem to Artaxerxes the king in this sort:
Rehum the chancellor. Literally, "the lord of judgment." It may be conjectured that Rehum was the sub-satrap (ὑποσατράπης, Xen.), of the province of Samaria. And Shimshai the scribe. Or "secretary." Herodotus tells us that in every Persian province the governor had a secretary attached to him, who was appointed by the crown, and acted as a check upon his nominal master (Herod; 3:128). The position assigned to Shim-shai in this chapter (see especially Ezr_4:9, Ezr_4:17, Ezr_4:23) is such as might be expected under these circumstances.
9Then wrote Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, and the Elamites,
9. the Dinaites--The people named were the colonists sent by the Babylonian monarch to occupy the territory of the ten tribes. "The great and noble Asnappar" was Esar-haddon. Immediately after the murder of Sennacherib, the Babylonians, Medes, Armenians, and other tributary people seized the opportunity of throwing off the Assyrian yoke. But Esar-haddon having, in the thirtieth year of his reign, recovered Babylon and subdued the other rebellious dependents, transported numbers of them into the waste cities of Samaria, most probably as a punishment of their revolt [Hales].
The Dinaites, etc. It is curious that the Samaritans, instead of using a general appellation, describe themselves under the names of the various nations and cities which had furnished the colonists of whom they were the descendants. It would seem that they were not yet, in the time of the Pseudo-Smerdis, amalgamated into a single people. From the list of names we may gather that the colonists of Esar-haddon's time had been derived chiefly from Southern Babylonia and the adjacent regions of Susiana, Persia, and Elymais. The Babylonians, Susanchites, and Elamites speak for themselves, and require no explanation. The Archevites are the people of Ereeh or Orchoe (now Warka), a city to the south-east of Babylon. The Apharsites are no doubt Persians; the Dehavites, Dai or Dahae, a tribe located in Persia Proper ('Herod.,' 1:125). If uncertainty attaches to any of the names, it is to two only—the Dinaites and the Tarpelites. Of these, the Dinaites are probably the people of Dayan, a country bordering on Cilicia, whose inhabitants are often mentioned by the Assyrian monarchs. The Tarpelites have been regarded as the people of Tripolis; but it is improbable that that city had as yet received its Greek name. Perhaps they are the Tuplai, or people of Tubal, mentioned in Scripture and the Assyrian inscriptions, the letter r being a euphonic addition, as in Darmesek for Dammesek sharbith for shebeth, and the like.
10And the rest of the nations whom the great and noble Asnapper brought over, and set in the cities of Samaria, and the rest that are on this side the river, and at such a time.
The rest of the nations whom the great and noble Asnapper brought over. Nothing more is known of "the great and noble Asnapper," who is here mentioned as bringing the colonists and setting them in the cities of Samaria. We must suppose him to have been an officer employed by Esar-haddon on this service. The name is Assyrian in form, and may have meant "Asshur pursues." The rest that are on this side the river. Rather, "across the river." As Romans in North Italy, writing to Rome, would have spoken of themselves as "Transpadani," so Persian subjects, writing to Susa from the west of the Jordan, speak of theft country as "across the Jordan." And at such a time. Rather, "and so forth." This and the preceding verse set forth the address of Rehum's letter. The whole address not being given, the writer ends with the phrase uk'eneth, which means "and so forth," or "et cetera" (comp. Ezr_7:12).
11This is the copy of the letter that they sent unto him, even unto Artaxerxes the king; Thy servants the men on this side the river, and at such a time.
This is the copy of the letter. The address having been given, the writer now proceeds to the contents of the letter. Thy servants the men on this side the river, etc. This was a sort of heading inside the letter—a repetition in brief of the address.
12Be it known unto the king, that the Jews which came up from thee to us are come unto Jerusalem, building the rebellious and the bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and joined the foundations.
12. the Jews which came up from thee to us--The name "Jews" was generally used after the return from the captivity, because the returning exiles belonged chiefly to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. Although the edict of Cyrus permitted all who chose to return, a permission of which some of the Israelites availed themselves, the great body who went to settle in Judea were the men of Judah.
The Jews which came up from thee. i.e. from the central provinces—from that part of the empire where thou dwellest. To us. To our part of the world—to Palestine. Are … building the rebellious and the bad city. The ground of this accusation must be sought in the various revolts of the Jews from the Babylonians recorded in 2Ki_24:1-20; 2Ki_25:1-30. There had been one, or perhaps two, previous revolts from Assyria (2Ki_18:7; 2Ch_33:11); but of these the Samaritans probably knew nothing. They would, however, be likely to know that before Nebuchadnezzar took the extreme measure of removing the Jews from their own land to Babylon, they had rebelled against him three several times—once under Jehoiakim (2Ki_24:1), once under his son Jehoiachin (2Ki_24:9, 2Ki_24:10), and once under Zedekiah, the last king (2Ki_24:20). Thus they had a basis of truth on which to ground their charge that Jerusalem was "the rebellious and the bad city." And have set up the walls thereof. It appears very clearly from the book of Nehemiah that the walls of Jerusalem were not restored till his time, seventy-five years after this. The Samaritans, however, would naturally exaggerate, and call the rebuilding of the temple, and of a certain number of dwelling-houses, a fortifying of the place. The exaggeration, however, is not so great in the Chaldee text as in the Authorized Version. What is said seems to be, that "they are setting up the walls and joining the foundations." That the work was far from complete is admitted in the next verse. We may doubt whether it was really begun.
13Be it known now unto the king, that, if this city be builded, and the walls set up again, then will they not pay toll, tribute, and custom, and so thou shalt endamage the revenue of the kings.
13. toll, tribute, and custom--The first was a poll tax; the second was a property tax; the third the excise dues on articles of trade and merchandise. Their letter, and the edict that followed, commanding an immediate cessation of the work at the city walls, form the exclusive subject of narrative at Ezr 4:7-23. And now from this digression [the historian] returns at Ezr 4:24 to resume the thread of his narrative concerning the building of the temple.
Then will they not pay toll, tribute, and custom. This was plausible reasoning. In Greece, if a subject city set to work to fortify itself, rebellion was immediately anticipated, not unfairly. But the circumstances of the Persian empire were different. In the remoter parts of that empire the central government was weak, and disorders frequently occurred. A city might need fortifications to protect it against its immediate neighbours, when it had not the slightest intention of asserting independence. Judging from the later history, which shows no revolt of the Jews against Persia, we may say that the accusation now alleged was unfounded, though perhaps it was not made in bad faith. Toll, tribute, and custom represent the chief heads of Persian taxation, which, however, did not include "custom" in our sense of the word. The three terms used by the Samaritans really represent, respectively, "tribute," or the money payment required from each province, "provision," or the payment in kind equally required (Herod; 1.192; 3.91), and "toll," or contributions from those who made use of the Persian highways. According to the Samaritans, none of these would be paid by the Jews if Jerusalem was once fortified. And so thou shalt endamage the revenue. The general meaning is given correctly enough by this rendering, but "revenue" is not expressly mentioned. Aphthom, the word so translated, means really "at length," "at last." Translate, "And so at last thou shalt endamage the kings."
14Now because we have maintenance from the king’s palace, and it was not meet for us to see the king’s dishonour, therefore have we sent and certified the king;
14. we have maintenance from the king's palace--literally, "we are salted with the salt of the palace." "Eating a prince's salt" is an Oriental phrase, equivalent to "receiving maintenance from him."
We have maintenance from the king's palace. The marginal rendering is better, and shows the true sense. "Eating a man's salt" in the East is deriving one's subsistence from him. The man who eats another's salt is bound to look after his interests. It was not meet for us to see the king's dishonour. Rather, "the king's detriment or loss"—it was not meet for us to stand by tamely and see the king stript of his due.
15That search may be made in the book of the records of thy fathers: so shalt thou find in the book of the records, and know that this city is a rebellious city, and hurtful unto kings and provinces, and that they have moved sedition within the same of old time: for which cause was this city destroyed.
That search may be made in the book of the records of thy fathers. It was the practice at the Persian court to register all important events in a book, which from time to time was read to the kings (Est_2:23; Est_6:1). The Samaritans suggest a consultation of this book, which would at any rate contain their own previous accusations against Jerusalem (supra, Ezr_4:5, Ezr_4:6), and might make some mention of the revolts from Babylon (see the comment on Ezr_4:12). For which cause was this city destroyed. This was the great fact on which the Samaritans relied. Nebuchadnezzar had only destroyed Jerusalem in consequence of repeated rebellions. True; but no sufficient indication that there would be revolt from Persia, which was anti-idolatrous, and had proved herself so true a friend to the Jews.
16We certify the king that, if this city be builded again, and the walls thereof set up, by this means thou shalt have no portion on this side the river.
Thou shalt have no portion on this side the river. It is not quite clear whether the river intended here and in Ezr_4:10 is the Euphrates or the Jordan. Generally in the Old Testament hannahar means the Euphrates, but the exaggeration is gross if that river was intended here. Only twice in their history had the Israelites advanced their frontier as far as that stream—under Solomon (1Ki_4:21) and under Menahem (2Ki_15:16); in their present depressed condition it was absurd to imagine that they could rival those early glories. But jealousy does not stop to weigh the reasonableness of its accusations.
17Then sent the king an answer unto Rehum the chancellor, and to Shimshai the scribe, and to the rest of their companions that dwell in Samaria, and unto the rest beyond the river, Peace, and at such a time.
Then sent the king an answer. The complaint made was of such importance that an answer was returned without delay. It was addressed both to Rehum and Shimshai, since they were independent authorities.. Peace, and at such a time. "Peace" (sheldm) is the ordinary Oriental salutation. The other word, uk'eth, is taken by our translators to refer to the date; but it really means, like uk'eneth (Ezr_4:10), "and so forth," or "et cetera."
18The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me.
The letter hath been plainly read before me. Despatches are read to, not by, Oriental sovereigns, who have often no literary education. (Compare Est_6:1.)
19And I commanded, and search hath been made, and it is found that this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that rebellion and sedition have been made therein.
I commanded, and search has been made. The Pseudo-Smerdis, who was a fanatical adherent of Magism, which disallowed temples altogether (Herod; 1.130), and who had already destroyed the temples of Ormuzd in Persia ('Behistun Ins.,' col. 1. par. 14, 5), was naturally willing enough to do as the Samaritans desired, and stop the restoration of the Jewish temple. Accordingly, he had a search made among the state records, and found, as they had expected he would, evidence of insurrections on the part of the Jews against the foreign countries to which they had been subject, as Assyria (2Ki_18:7) and Babylon (2Ki_24:1; Jer_52:3), and also proof of the formidable power possessed by certain Jewish or Israelite kings; upon which he thought himself justified in complying with the Samaritan request, and ordering the work that was going on at Jerusalem to cease (see Ezr_4:21).
20There have been mighty kings also over Jerusalem, which have ruled over all countries beyond the river; and toll, tribute, and custom, was paid unto them.
Mighty kings. David and Solomon best answer to this description, possessing as they did a kingdom which extended from the Euphrates to the borders of Egypt (1Ki_4:21, 1Ki_4:24), and drawing tribute from the various petty princes or chiefs of the nations dwelling within those limits (2Sa_8:6-12; 1Ki_10:14, 1Ki_10:25). Josiah had perhaps, more recently, possessed an almost equally extensive sway.
21Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me.
Until another commandment shall be given. It can scarcely be supposed that the Pseudo-Smerdis had any intention of issuing "another commandment;" but, since "the laws of the Medes and Persians," as a general rule, "altered not" (Est_1:19; Dan_6:15), it may well be that the clause before us was one inserted as a matter of form in most decrees, to prevent them from being irrevocable.
22Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage grow to the hurt of the kings?
23Now when the copy of king Artaxerxes’ letter was read before Rehum, and Shimshai the scribe, and their companions, they went up in haste to Jerusalem unto the Jews, and made them to cease by force and power.
They went up in haste. The "adversaries" lost no time. Having obtained the decree which forbad further building, they proceeded with it to Jerusalem, and by a display of force compelled the Jews to submission. No doubt resistance might have been made, but resistance would have been rebellion.
24Then ceased the work of the house of God which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia.
24. Then ceased the work of the house of God--It was this occurrence that first gave rise to the strong religious antipathy between the Jews and the Samaritans, which was afterwards greatly aggravated by the erection of a rival temple on Mount Gerizim.
Then ceased the work … until the second year of the reign of Darius. The interval of compelled inaction was not long. The Pseudo-Smerdis reigned, at the utmost, ten months; after which a revolution occurred, and the throne was occupied by Darius, the son of Hystaspes. If the work was resumed early in this monarch's second year, the entire period of suspension cannot have much exceeded a year and a half. King of Persia. There is probably no intention of distinguishing the Darius of this book from "Darius the Mede" (Dan_5:31; Dan_6:1). "King of Persia" is appended to his name merely out of respect and honor, as it is to the names of Cyrus (Dan_1:1, Dan_1:2, Dan_1:8), Artaxerxes I. (Dan_4:7), and Artaxerxes II. (Dan_6:14). Such a superfluous attachment to his name of the style and title of a monarch is common throughout the Old Testament, and generally marks a distinct intention to do the individual honour (see Gen_41:46; 1Ki_3:1; 1Ki_9:11, 1Ki_9:16; 1Ki_11:18; 2Ch_36:22, etc.).
BIBLE