We shall continue
the study of the book of Ezra of the Old Testament this week.
As the rebuilding effort was stalled shortly after the laying of the foundation of the temple in 538 B.C., God raised up prophets Haggai and Zechariah to prophesy and encourage the people to resume the work during the reign of Darius, likely around 519 and 518 B.C. Once again, the opposition reared its ugly head, but the people of God did not yield to their pressure, and work continued while a letter or report was sent to Darius by the governor of Trans-Euphrates and his associates:
(1) Presumably, they could not find any record in Babylon, but they continued the search in Ecbatana, the summer palace of the Persian king and found the original decree of Cyrus—such an effort was commendable, not because Darius was a worshipper of Yahweh, but a generous king who sought to honor the major gods worshipped among his populace (according to other historical accounts). In any case, God can use non-believing kings and rulers to achieve His purpose. Can you think of any other similar incidents in the Scriptures?
(2) Vv. 3-5 give more details on the contents of Cyrus’ decree. Compare this to 1:2-4 and see what additional information and insights you can gain from this decree.
(3) Compare the desired size as decreed by Cyrus to that of Solomon’s temple (in 1 Ki. 6:2). What might be the intent of Cyrus?
(4) What was the immediate verdict of Darius on the petition by the Trans-Euphrates officers in v. 7? Why would he consent with the Jews, apart from possible political expediency?
(5) In addition to allowing the continuation of the rebuilding of the temple, Darius gave further orders in vv. 8-10 to support their work. They included the expenses of “these men” which is further expanded as what was needed for burnt offerings and what was needed for daily offerings. What was his purpose of so doing, according to v.10?
(6) As was typical of a royal decree of the time, a curse was pronounced on any violators or offenders to the decree.
a. Do you think the Jewish leaders and their people expected such an outcome?
b. What might they be doing during this process of petition, as led by Haggai and Zechariah?
c. What lesson may we learn, as we face opposition in the world against the Lord and His people?
(7) Can you imagine how this petitioning governor and his associates felt upon receipt of this edict from the king? What did they do about it?
(8) Pause and reflect on the main message to you today. How may you apply it to your life?
“Now then, Tattenai, governor of Trans-Euphrates, and Shethar-Bozenai and you, their fellow officials of that province, stay away from there.” (Ezr. 6:6)
In order to fulfill His promise to His people, God has moved the heart of a gentile king in Cyrus to enable His people to return to Jerusalem from exile (Ezr. 1:1). While out of their weaknesses and the reality of official opposition, the rebuilding effort was stalled for some 20 years (from 538 B.C. to 519 B.C.), the work was resumed through the preaching and prophesying of two faithful prophets, Haggai and Zechariah. It does not meant the opposition would cease automatically, but it does mean that when His people would trust Him and obey His commands, God will do His part to honor His promise. And so, while the opposition thought they had the king on their side, as it turned out, they were completely wrong. Scholars and historians, in general, considered the edict of Darius as nothing more than political expediency:
“These verses (i.e. Ezr. 6:8-10) picture Darius as a generous king. This is in conformity with what we know about him from other sources. He had a special interest in restoring specific cults in his empire and contributed to the restoration liberally. We know of these activities from the West among the Greeks, and even in Egypt (e.g. the cult of Neith). He had an interest in particulars about the cultic practices and prescribed minute detail, perhaps because of the ancient Near Eastern belief that the correct procedure had to be followed in order not to anger a specific god. In the light of this situation his generosity can be understood, as also the careful description of the sacrifices…probably informed by Jews close to his court…It is also notable that these prescriptions covered only the daily sacrifices, and not the special ones associated with great festivals. In exchange for his liberal supply of sacrificial material he asked for prayers for him and his sons…although Darius revered Ahuramazda especially, it is understandable that in a world of polytheism he would want to make sure that he was in the favor of every god in his empire.” (NICOT, Ezra & Nehemiah, 47-8)
Granted the above explanation by Charles Fensham is quite reasonable, it only serves to reaffirm to us that God can use anyone—even a polytheistic king like Darius to accomplish His plan for His people.
This “second” temple was completed in the 6th year of the reign of King Darius which would be in B.C. 516.
(1) The Bible attributes this eventual completion of the project to the continuous preaching of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah by saying that, “So the elders of the Jews continued to build and prosper under the preaching of…” (6:14a):
a. In other words, without their preaching, what would have happened?
b. How then should we view preaching in terms of its importance to the life of individual believers and that of the church?
(2) The Bible also relates the completion of the temple to the “command of the God of Israel and the decrees of Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes, kings of Persia” (6:14b):
a. What is the Bible trying to say to us?
b. How important is the sequence of this statement?
(3) Although the celebration of the dedication of the temple, in terms of emotion, was not as dramatic as the laying of the foundation in 3:13, still the Bible says, it was celebrated with joy (6:16). If you were Haggai or Zechariah, in what ways was this dedication an occasion of joy to you?
(4) Quite a number of bull, rams and lambs were used as sacrifices in the dedication of the temple. Just for the sake of interest, compare that to the sacrifices made at the dedication of the first temple in 1 Kings 8:63:
a. The sacrifices made in this second dedication could not even come close to Solomon’s. Does it matter? Why or why not?
b. There was also a lack of eloquent prayer like Solomon’s too (1 Ki. 8:22-53). Does it matter? Why or why not?
(5) Unlike the dedication of Solomon’s temple, because of timing, this particular dedication was followed by the celebration of Passover. What special significance might this celebration of Passover by the “exiles” be at this time?
(6) It is worth-noting that during these 21 years of stalling of the rebuilding project, some of the exiles had associated themselves with “unclean practices” of their neighbors already (6:21):
a. What lesson can we learn as a result?
b. How important is the presence of God’s temple and the restoration of worship to the spiritual well-being of God’s people?
(7) We know that the Feast of Unleavened Bread is celebrated as part of and immediately following the Passover. What lessons should these people of God learn from this particular celebration of Unleavened Bread?
(8) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem...when true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth.” (Jn. 4:21-23)
Some commentators opine that the offering of only 100 bulls, 200 rams, 400 male lambs and in particular only 12 male goats for a sin offering signified the relative poverty of the exiles who returned to Jerusalem. Of course, these offerings could not compare to the 22,000 cattle and 120,000 sheep and goats offered by Solomon at the dedication of the first temple (1 Ki. 8:63), but it does not necessarily mean that these exiles were poor. In the words of Haggai, some of them lived in “paneled houses” which was sign of relative affluence (Hag. 1:4).
But poor or not, it was not important to the worship of the Lord:
- As magnificent as the temple of Solomon was, it was still completely destroyed in 586/7 B.C., lasting some 365 years;
- This second temple which was completed in 516 B.C. would eventually be destroyed in 70 A.D., lasting 585 years;
- The first temple was dedicated with great pomp and circumstance, with unparalleled number of animals, with the joy of the spirit of wealth and military power and victory;
- The second temple was dedicated with far less fanfare, but with the joy of humbleness and contrition, hence the specification of 12 male goats as a sin offering;
- The first temple was dedicated with one of the most eloquent and longest prayers in the Bible, offered by Solomon who used far more time to build his own palace (a total of 13 years, almost double that of the 7 years he used to build the temple);
- There were no prayers recorded for the dedication of the second temple, but the Bible does remind us that the completion of the temple was a result of the preaching of the prophets.
In a way, I’d rather be present at the dedication of the second temple. It was a different kind of joy, or perhaps, a joy that was more pleasing to the Lord because it was a joy sprung from a spirit of total dependence, of contrition and of unworthiness—a spirit of true gratitude!
However, there was also a sense of “exclusivity” as they purposely excluded their neighboring Samaritans from their celebration, perhaps, rightfully so at the time. That rejection had led the Samaritans to develop their worship of Yahweh in their own mountain (Mount Gerizim) and to develop their own Pentateuch (likely around 432 B.C.) Such was the background to the encounter of Jesus with the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4. At that time, the second temple desecrated by Antiochus Epiphanes (around 167/8 B.C.) was being refurbished by Herod to its former glory. But Jesus foretold its destruction and wept for Jerusalem (Matt. 24:2; 23:37-39), because they had misplaced the focus of their worship—the temple in essence had become their idol, while “the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks.” (Jn. 4:23)
Perhaps, there is a lesson for us today. We see that the restoration of temple worship had enabled those who had defiled themselves by following the unclean practices of their neighbors (notably the Samaritans) to separate themselves once again to the Lord; however, they eventually reduced their worship into mere observance of external cultic rituals and legalistic adherence to the “dos” and “don’ts” of the Law in arrogant discrimination against the Samaritans. Likewise, our worship with other believers within the church which God has graciously provided for us is of utmost importance to our identity and separation from the world as well, but it cannot become a fortress within which we shield ourselves without reaching out to others for whom Jesus has come and died, or it will become our idol as well.
The first group of returnees came back at the decree of Cyrus in 538 B.C. and they laid the foundation of the temple; the work was stalled for some 20 years till 519 B.C. and the temple was eventually completed in 516 B.C. Now Ezra came back with a group of people under a decree by Artaxerxes in 458 B.C.:
(1) Scholars in general opine that Ezra was holding a respectable position, some kind of a secretary for the Persian king, to the point that the king “had granted him everything he asked” (presumably concerning the journey), and with his influence as a priest, he was able to recruit other priests, Levites, singers, gatekeepers and temple servants to come along with him:
a. What do you think was the reason that God sent Ezra back at this time to Jerusalem some 58 years after the temple was completed?
b. What might have happened to the people in Jerusalem during these years?
(2) Of all people in this book, only Ezra’s genealogy was being spelled out in detail:
a. To which important ancestor was Ezra’s genealogy traced back to?
b. Was there a need to trace his ancestry in such detail?
(3) “Ezra had devoted himself” to the law is best and more literally translated as “Ezra had set his heart” on (three aspects related to) the law: a. the study, b. the observance, and c. the teaching.
a. What is the importance of the studying of the law?
b. What is the importance of the observing of the law?
c. What is the importance of the teaching of the law?
d. Which is worse: studying without observing, or teaching without observing?
e. Which is worse: teaching without studying or teaching without observing?
f. How important is it to do all three?
(4) How long did his journey take? (A direct route from Babylon to Jerusalem is said to be about 500 miles.)
(5) His safe arrival was marked by the words “for the gracious hand of his God was on him” (7:9). What does this particular remark mean?
(6) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“For Ezra had devoted himself to the study and observance of the Law of the Lord, and to teaching the decrees and laws in Israel.” (Ezr. 7:10)
It is interesting to note that Ezra only appears on the scene some 58 years after the completion of the rebuilding of the temple, and 79 years after the decree by Cyrus calling upon the people of Israel to return to Jerusalem. In other words, he was more than likely not even born during those two monumental occasions. Yet the Book of Ezra, which is primarily about the two events, is named after him.
I do not think it was because he wrote the book that it bears his name, since according to Jewish traditions, even the books of Nehemiah and 1 and 2 Chronicles are believed to be penned by him as well. The importance of his appearance signifies an important truth in the Bible that the building of the temple of God is not an end in itself. The temple is meant not only as a place where God is worshipped, but where the Law of God is to be taught. Even in Old Testament times, the worship of Yahweh could not be done in a vacuum, but within the confines of the Law.
What a message to us today!
Certainly, the centrality of worship in the life of believers cannot be overstated. But still, its centrality is founded on the Word of God. No matter how emotional, how sensational, how exhilarating and how real a worship experience appears to be, if it is not in tune with the revealed Word of God or based on a proper understanding of the Word of God, it is to not a true worship.
Apparently, a lack of a competent teacher or a lack of emphasis on the teaching of the Law of Moses has caused the worship of Yahweh to deteriorate into a meaningless ritual, and especially one that did not affect the daily life of the worshippers who quickly integrated once again with the pagan neighbors. But in God’s foresight, He raised up Ezra from among the families of the priests who did not choose to return 79 years ago. He promoted him to prominence among the elites in the Persian Empire, and yet Ezra had not lost his bearing. As a priest and among the elites of the Persians, he not only devoted himself to the studying of the Law, but also to its observance, to the point that even the king took notice not only of his learning, but his character and trusted him enough to “grant him everything he asked for” (Ezr. 7:6).
God raised up Ezra to ensure that the restoration of the worship of Yahweh was not in name only, but in essence as well—one that brings transformation to the lives of the worshippers. But it has to begin with the teaching of the Word and for the teacher it begins with diligence in its study and its observance.
Today’s passage is primarily a study of the contents of the letter written by King Artaxerxes and given to Ezra:
(1) How did the King address Ezra? What might be the importance of such an address?
(2) Whom did he specifically allow or encourage to go with Ezra? What might be its implication?
(3) The mention of the king plus his seven advisors, in the opinion of many scholars, serves to validate the authenticity of this letter, as it reflects a genuine historical knowledge of the Persian Empire. More importantly, what did the freewill offering of the king and the seven advisors signify?
(4) While the total amount of offerings was impressive (see 8:26-27), it is the different sources that would be even more meaningful. Who were the people listed by the king as having made an offering for the temple of God in Jerusalem?
(5) What was the main purpose of such offerings?
(6) The king specified that other needs for the temple might also be supplied from the royal treasury; do you think it was right for Ezra to do so?
(7) As we know, church ministers in some European countries, like Croatia, still derive their salaries from the government. Do you think it is proper to do so?
(8) While keeping a cap on the supply to the temple, the king explained his reasoning in v. 23 for his generous action towards the temple of God. What was it and what do you think about such a motive?
(9) By exempting the “ministers” of the house of God, the king was in essence sanctioning Judaism as one of the recognized religions in Persia. These days in North America, there is constant political pressure for the abolition of whatever tax exemptions that have been granted to the church ministers and the church. Should we fight to maintain such exemptions or not? Why?
(10) What did the letter from the king mean to Ezra? How did he view the provision that was coming from a secular king for God’s work?
(11) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“Praise be to the Lord, the God of our fathers, who has put into the king’s heart to bring honor to the house of the Lord in Jerusalem in this way.” (Ezr. 7:27)
The use of government funding for the work of God is certainly not an easy issue to deal with. Apart from the pros and cons that are normally associated with government funding, it is the basic biblical principle that is of the greatest importance. So, the important question we tend to ask in the case of Ezra is whether his use of the king’s funding an example that we can follow.
I do not think that the action by Ezra can be used as an example to decide if we can use government funding or not because of the two unique aspects associated with this funding:
1. The granting of funding by any government normally carries with it its influence, if not outright control. One of the reasons why Ezra was receptive to the king’s provision was perhaps that it was entirely up to him to direct the use of the money, with no strings attached. In fact, to affirm that Ezra could really use the royal treasury’s funding as he wished, the king gave him power to form a local government that operated with its own law, the Law of Moses, obviously, up to the point that it did not contradict or overrule the law of Persia (Ezr. 7:25).
2. The other factor that must have influenced Ezra to use the funding from this secular king was the central mission of his journey: In his letter the king said, “You are sent by the king and his seven advisors to inquire about Judah and Jerusalem with regard to the Law of your God which is in your hand” (Ezr. 7:14). In other words, the mission of Ezra was to inspect and ensure that the people of Judah and Jerusalem lived by the Law of Moses. It was obvious that Ezra had the opportunity to teach the Law of Moses even among the ruling elites of the Persian Empire. Not that the king and his seven advisors necessarily believed in Yahweh as a result, at least they had come to believe that the Law of Moses would make good citizens out of the Jews and their strict adherence to the Law of Moses would even guarantee peace in the region—it would be one fewer headache for the king. Therefore, to Artaxerxes, Ezra’s mission had little to do with religion, but it was a political assignment; and as an officer of the court of Artaxerxes, Ezra was simply dispensing his duty which in his opinion, was a movement of the hands of God (Ezr. 7:27).
Perhaps, a better case study would be Nehemiah, and we shall ponder further upon this issue when we come to the book of Nehemiah.
Ezra now gave a list of the family heads who went up with him. While the list numbered the people that followed the head of the family, no number was given of the priestly families descended from Aaron and the royal family descended from David. So the list did not serve to count those who accompanied Ezra, but perhaps served to highlight the important influence of Ezra.
(1) Why was Ezra so concerned that there were no Levites (assistant to the priests)? What might this indicate concerning the condition back in Jerusalem?
(2) Ezra probably used his influence to make Iddo, likely the chief of these temple servant clans, select some 228 men to go back to Jerusalem with him. How would these temple servants feel being drafted involuntarily into going back to a less affluent land in Jerusalem? What do you think they were doing in Babylon?
(3) What was the purpose of the fasting proclaimed by Ezra? In what way was it an act of “humbling themselves”?
(4) Why was Ezra “ashamed” to ask for protection from the king?
(5) In proclaiming this fast, Ezra appeared to have chosen the occasion to teach his men a biblical principle in v. 22. What was it?
(6) What, according to Ezra, was the result of their fasting?
(7) What can we learn from Ezra in our reflection of the above questions?
(8) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“When I checked among the people, and the priests, I found no Levites there.” (Ezr. 8:15)
As Ezra gathered together the group of Israelites who voluntarily returned to Jerusalem with the blessing of the king, he was surprised to find no Levites among them, and he had to use his clout to influence Iddo, probably the leader of the local Levites, to send some of them to go with him. We cannot help but ask: “Why were there no Levites who would jump at the opportunity to return to serve at the temple in Jerusalem?”
As we know, Levites serve as assistants to the priests in the service of the temple of God, and like the priests, they have no entitlement to any land in Israel because the Lord makes it clear that “the Levites have no share or inheritance among their fellow Israelites; the Lord is their inheritance, as the Lord your God told them” (Deut. 10:9).
Now that they were in exile, away from their homeland, it appears that they were free to pursue whatever career they desired as there was no temple in which they could serve. It is true that it was during this particular time of exile that a “synagogue” was established, almost as a substitute for the temple. I said “almost” because there were no sacrifices possible away from the temple.
We also learn that, since they did not have to play their ritualistic role and could pursue their own career, they were also able to accumulate not only wealth and but properties just as other Jews did. In the New Testament, we learn that Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus who owned land (Acts 4:37).
In other words, by returning to Jerusalem, they would once again be subjected to the observance of the Law of Moses which would mean that they would have to return to serve as assistants to the priests of the temple as their full-time calling, and there would not be any inheritance (meaning land) for them to share. No wonder no Levites were willing to return to Jerusalem with Ezra. Just as the first group of returnees were only those “whose heart God had moved” (Ezr. 1:5), this second group of returnees too, comprised only of people whose heart God had moved.
(1) The offerings from the king and his court translated into 25 tons of silver, 3¾ tons of silver articles, 3¾ tons of gold, 20 bowls of gold etc. which were “enormous sums, worth millions of dollars" (Gaebelein, Ezra, 660). What did such enormous sums of offerings from the Persian leaders mean to the people of Israel at a time like this, politically and spiritually?
(2) Ezra was concerned that there were no Levites among his group of returnees. From this passage, what important function did these Levites serve?
(3) Do you agree that it was an important function? Why or why not?
(4) Ezra took the opportunity to remind the leading priests and the chosen Levite leaders that, “You as well as those articles are consecrated to the Lord” (8:28). What does it mean and what is the significance of such a reminder at this time of their journey back to Jerusalem? (Note that they were undoubtedly at least the second generation of exiles in Babylon.)
(5) The journey took some four months, and with the kind of wealth they carried but without military protection (which Ezra could have requested), their safe arrival in Jerusalem was indeed God’s protection. How does this example of Ezra speak to you personally? How may you apply it to your life or that of the church?
(6) “Everything was accounted for by number and weight, and the entire weight was recorded at that time” (8:34). What can we learn from the way Ezra handled these offerings, especially when it comes to the handling of money or property of the church?
(7) You may want to compare the sacrifices made here with those offered at the dedication of the temple (6:17). Can you single out one type of offering (and the animal) that was identical in both occasions? What is its significance?
(8) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“Then the exiles who had returned from captivity sacrificed burnt offerings to the God of Israel: twelve bulls for all Israel, ninety-six rams, seventy-seven male lambs, and as a sin offering, twelve male goats. All this was a burnt offering to the Lord.” (Ezr. 8:35)
As I mentioned before, the first groups of returnees under Zerubbabel were mainly from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, apart from the priests and Levites. This second group was much smaller in number, hardly representative of all Israel. However, as they made their sacrifices before the Lord in this second temple, in both occasions, they made it very clear that they were making it on behalf of all Israel:
- As the first group of returnees made offerings at the dedication of the temple, it is said, “(A)s a sin offering for all Israel, twelve male goats, one for each of the tribes of Israel” (Ezr. 6:17).
- Then as the second group of returnees offered their sacrifices, apart from the same sin offering, made with twelve male goats, the rest were also made on behalf of the whole people of God, “twelve bulls for all Israel” (Ezr. 8:35).
There were indeed many weaknesses and sins that the Israelites had committed that should serve as “examples” and “warnings” for us (1 Co. 10:11). However here is one example, repeated throughout the entire Old Testament, that we need to learn from them, and that is the fact that they understood that they were a faith community, one people under God. Except in the period of the Judges, their norm was not to privatize their faith. They understood that they were accountable to God and to one another.
In this age of individualism, we have allowed this secular notion to permeate into the life of the church. Each denomination cares only about their own territory, each church operates for their own well-being, and each believer pursues their own spirituality and relationship with God. True, we all come into the family of God by individual birth through faith in Jesus Christ, but let’s not forget that we are all born into the same “family” of God, or as the Apostle Paul puts it, “Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it” (1 Co. 12:27). No surgery can separate us apart from any part of this body.
At the time of the return of the second group of Jews led by Ezra in 458 B.C., there was a lapse of 80 years since the return of the first group. It is obvious that Ezra is now regarded as the spiritual leader with his credential as a renowned teacher of the Law of Moses. One of the first things that was brought to his attention was that the local leaders and officials had led the way in marrying gentile women of the neighboring peoples:
(1) What did Ezra do when he heard of the situation?
(2) Was he overreacting or not? Why?
(3) Who else joined him?
(4) What happened to the rest of the people?
(5) What was Ezra up against?
(6) What did he do about it, apart from expressing signs of dismay and grief?
(7) It was not he who sinned. Why did he pray as if he was part of it? Was he?
(8) We can divide this great prayer into:
a. V. 6—Expression of shame: Have you ever felt such shame about your sins?
b. V. 7—Acknowledgement of sins of the fathers: They were still under foreign rule!
c. Vv. 8-9—God’s amazing mercy at present: How amazing was God’s mercy according to Ezra?
d. Vv. 10-12—Confession—breaking of God’s command: Why did God prohibit inter-marriages with their neighbors?
e. V. 13—Gravity of their sin: In what did Ezra see that God had punished them less than their sins deserved? Is it true in your case?
f. Vv. 14-15—Facing the consequences before the righteous God: What did Ezra see as the possible consequence of their sin now?
(9) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“O my God, I am too ashamed and disgraced to lift up my face to you, my God, because our sins are higher than our heads and our guilt has reached to the heavens.” (Ezr. 9:6)
Yesterday, we considered how the exiles who returned to Jerusalem, whether it was the first group or the second group, presented their sacrifices, especially the sin offering, on behalf of all the twelve tribes of Israel.
However, to present the sin sacrifice is one thing, to truly feel contrite and even abhorrence of their sins is quite another. The latter is found in the prayer of Ezra.
The prayer by Ezra in 9:6-15 was such a great prayer that is worth emulating by all of us for these reasons:
- He was genuinely horrified by the sins of the people: This is the problem with Christians today. We lack the same sense of horror toward sin. We take sins too lightly, ours and the society’s. How much we need that sense of horror and shame expressed by Ezra. His is a reflection of true contrition, not just a general sense of remorse.
- He not only interceded for his people, but he totally identified himself with them. “The iniquities which have mounted up since ancient times, but especially, since the last days of the kings of Judah, which have caused the Exile, are also the responsibility of the later generations. It is as if Ezra has realized that immediately in front of them are all the cumulative iniquities which have heaped up through history. What an extraordinary view of sin!” (Fensham, Ezra & Nehemiah, 128).
We always long for revival. Perhaps, we should first pray for the restoration of a true sense of shame and horror toward our sins, and the total identification with the sins of our generation, if not that of past generations.