The Altar Restored and the Temple Foundation Laid

Ezr 3:5-6 And afterward, i. e. , after the feast of tabernacles, they offered the continual, i. e. , the daily, burnt-offering, and (the offerings) for the new moon, and all the festivals of the Lord (the annual feasts). עלות must be inserted from the context before לחדשׁים to complete the sense. “And for every one that willingly offered a free-will offering to the Lord.

” נדבה is a burnt-offering which was offered from free inclination. Such offerings might be brought on any day, but were chiefly presented at the annual festivals after the sacrifices prescribed by the law; comp. Num 29:39. - In Ezr 3:6 follows the supplementary remark, that the sacrificial worship began from the first day of the seventh month, but that the foundation of the temple of the Lord was not yet laid.

This forms a transition to what follows.

Ezr 3:7 Preparations were also made for the rebuilding of the temple; money was given to hewers of wood and to masons, and meat and drink (i. e. , corn and wine) and oil to the Sidonians and Tyrians (i. e. , the Phoenicians; comp. 1Ch 22:4), to bring cedar trees from Lebanon to the sea of Joppa (i. e. , to the coast of Joppa), as was formerly done by Solomon, 1Ki 5:6.

, 2Ch 2:7. כּרשׁיון, according to the grant of Cyrus to them, i. e. , according to the permission given them by Cyrus, sc. to rebuild the temple. For nothing is said of any special grant from Cyrus with respect to wood for building. רשׁיון is in the O. T. ἁπ. λεγ. ; in Chaldee and rabbinical Hebrew, רשׁא and רשׁי mean facultatem habere; and רשׁוּ power, permission.

Ezr 3:8-13 The foundation of the temple laid. - Ezr 3:8 In the second year of their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem, i. e. , after their arrival at Jerusalem on their return from Babylon, in the second month, began Zerubbabel and Joshua to appoint the Levites from twenty years old and upwards to the oversight of the work (the building) of the house of the Lord.

That is to say, the work of building was taken in hand. Whether this second year of the return coincides with the second year of the rule of Cyrus, so that the foundations of the temple were laid, as Theophil. Antioch. ad Autolic . lib. 3, according to Berosus, relates, in the second year of Cyrus, cannot be determined. For nothing more is said in this book than that Cyrus, in the first year of his reign, issued the decree concerning the return of the Jews from Babylon, whereupon those named in the list, Ezra 2, set out and returned, without any further notice as to whether this also took place in the first year of Cyrus, or whether the many necessary preparations delayed the departure of the first band till the following year.

The former view is certainly a possible though not a very probable one, since it is obvious from Ezr 2:1 that they arrived at Jerusalem and betook themselves to their cities as early as the seventh month of the year. Now the period between the beginning of the year and the seventh month, i. e. , at most six months, seems too short for the publication of the edict, the departure, and the arrival at Jerusalem, even supposing that the first year of Cyrus entirely coincided with a year of the Jewish calendar.

The second view, however, would not make the difference between the year of the rule of Cyrus and the year of the return to Jerusalem a great one, since it would scarcely amount to half a year. ויּעמידוּ... החלּוּ, they began and appointed, etc. , they began to appoint, i. e. , they began the work of building the temple by appointing. Those enumerated are-1.

Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two rulers: 2. The remnant of their brethren = their other brethren, viz. , a , the priests and Levites as brethren of Joshua; b , all who had come out of captivity, i. e. , the men of Israel, as brethren of Zerubbabel. These together formed the community who appointed the Levites to preside over, i. e. , to conduct the building of the temple.

For the expression, comp. 1 Chron 23:4-24.

Ezr 3:8-13 The foundation of the temple laid. - Ezr 3:8 In the second year of their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem, i. e. , after their arrival at Jerusalem on their return from Babylon, in the second month, began Zerubbabel and Joshua to appoint the Levites from twenty years old and upwards to the oversight of the work (the building) of the house of the Lord.

That is to say, the work of building was taken in hand. Whether this second year of the return coincides with the second year of the rule of Cyrus, so that the foundations of the temple were laid, as Theophil. Antioch. ad Autolic . lib. 3, according to Berosus, relates, in the second year of Cyrus, cannot be determined. For nothing more is said in this book than that Cyrus, in the first year of his reign, issued the decree concerning the return of the Jews from Babylon, whereupon those named in the list, Ezra 2, set out and returned, without any further notice as to whether this also took place in the first year of Cyrus, or whether the many necessary preparations delayed the departure of the first band till the following year.

The former view is certainly a possible though not a very probable one, since it is obvious from Ezr 2:1 that they arrived at Jerusalem and betook themselves to their cities as early as the seventh month of the year. Now the period between the beginning of the year and the seventh month, i. e. , at most six months, seems too short for the publication of the edict, the departure, and the arrival at Jerusalem, even supposing that the first year of Cyrus entirely coincided with a year of the Jewish calendar.

The second view, however, would not make the difference between the year of the rule of Cyrus and the year of the return to Jerusalem a great one, since it would scarcely amount to half a year. ויּעמידוּ... החלּוּ, they began and appointed, etc. , they began to appoint, i. e. , they began the work of building the temple by appointing. Those enumerated are-1.

Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two rulers: 2. The remnant of their brethren = their other brethren, viz. , a , the priests and Levites as brethren of Joshua; b , all who had come out of captivity, i. e. , the men of Israel, as brethren of Zerubbabel. These together formed the community who appointed the Levites to preside over, i. e. , to conduct the building of the temple.

For the expression, comp. 1 Chron 23:4-24.

Ezr 3:8-13 The foundation of the temple laid. - Ezr 3:8 In the second year of their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem, i. e. , after their arrival at Jerusalem on their return from Babylon, in the second month, began Zerubbabel and Joshua to appoint the Levites from twenty years old and upwards to the oversight of the work (the building) of the house of the Lord.

That is to say, the work of building was taken in hand. Whether this second year of the return coincides with the second year of the rule of Cyrus, so that the foundations of the temple were laid, as Theophil. Antioch. ad Autolic . lib. 3, according to Berosus, relates, in the second year of Cyrus, cannot be determined. For nothing more is said in this book than that Cyrus, in the first year of his reign, issued the decree concerning the return of the Jews from Babylon, whereupon those named in the list, Ezra 2, set out and returned, without any further notice as to whether this also took place in the first year of Cyrus, or whether the many necessary preparations delayed the departure of the first band till the following year.

The former view is certainly a possible though not a very probable one, since it is obvious from Ezr 2:1 that they arrived at Jerusalem and betook themselves to their cities as early as the seventh month of the year. Now the period between the beginning of the year and the seventh month, i. e. , at most six months, seems too short for the publication of the edict, the departure, and the arrival at Jerusalem, even supposing that the first year of Cyrus entirely coincided with a year of the Jewish calendar.

The second view, however, would not make the difference between the year of the rule of Cyrus and the year of the return to Jerusalem a great one, since it would scarcely amount to half a year. ויּעמידוּ... החלּוּ, they began and appointed, etc. , they began to appoint, i. e. , they began the work of building the temple by appointing. Those enumerated are-1.

Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two rulers: 2. The remnant of their brethren = their other brethren, viz. , a , the priests and Levites as brethren of Joshua; b , all who had come out of captivity, i. e. , the men of Israel, as brethren of Zerubbabel. These together formed the community who appointed the Levites to preside over, i. e. , to conduct the building of the temple.

For the expression, comp. 1 Chron 23:4-24.

Ezr 3:8-13 The foundation of the temple laid. - Ezr 3:8 In the second year of their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem, i. e. , after their arrival at Jerusalem on their return from Babylon, in the second month, began Zerubbabel and Joshua to appoint the Levites from twenty years old and upwards to the oversight of the work (the building) of the house of the Lord.

That is to say, the work of building was taken in hand. Whether this second year of the return coincides with the second year of the rule of Cyrus, so that the foundations of the temple were laid, as Theophil. Antioch. ad Autolic . lib. 3, according to Berosus, relates, in the second year of Cyrus, cannot be determined. For nothing more is said in this book than that Cyrus, in the first year of his reign, issued the decree concerning the return of the Jews from Babylon, whereupon those named in the list, Ezra 2, set out and returned, without any further notice as to whether this also took place in the first year of Cyrus, or whether the many necessary preparations delayed the departure of the first band till the following year.

The former view is certainly a possible though not a very probable one, since it is obvious from Ezr 2:1 that they arrived at Jerusalem and betook themselves to their cities as early as the seventh month of the year. Now the period between the beginning of the year and the seventh month, i. e. , at most six months, seems too short for the publication of the edict, the departure, and the arrival at Jerusalem, even supposing that the first year of Cyrus entirely coincided with a year of the Jewish calendar.

The second view, however, would not make the difference between the year of the rule of Cyrus and the year of the return to Jerusalem a great one, since it would scarcely amount to half a year. ויּעמידוּ... החלּוּ, they began and appointed, etc. , they began to appoint, i. e. , they began the work of building the temple by appointing. Those enumerated are-1.

Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two rulers: 2. The remnant of their brethren = their other brethren, viz. , a , the priests and Levites as brethren of Joshua; b , all who had come out of captivity, i. e. , the men of Israel, as brethren of Zerubbabel. These together formed the community who appointed the Levites to preside over, i. e. , to conduct the building of the temple.

For the expression, comp. 1 Chron 23:4-24.

Ezr 3:8-13 The foundation of the temple laid. - Ezr 3:8 In the second year of their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem, i. e. , after their arrival at Jerusalem on their return from Babylon, in the second month, began Zerubbabel and Joshua to appoint the Levites from twenty years old and upwards to the oversight of the work (the building) of the house of the Lord.

That is to say, the work of building was taken in hand. Whether this second year of the return coincides with the second year of the rule of Cyrus, so that the foundations of the temple were laid, as Theophil. Antioch. ad Autolic . lib. 3, according to Berosus, relates, in the second year of Cyrus, cannot be determined. For nothing more is said in this book than that Cyrus, in the first year of his reign, issued the decree concerning the return of the Jews from Babylon, whereupon those named in the list, Ezra 2, set out and returned, without any further notice as to whether this also took place in the first year of Cyrus, or whether the many necessary preparations delayed the departure of the first band till the following year.

The former view is certainly a possible though not a very probable one, since it is obvious from Ezr 2:1 that they arrived at Jerusalem and betook themselves to their cities as early as the seventh month of the year. Now the period between the beginning of the year and the seventh month, i. e. , at most six months, seems too short for the publication of the edict, the departure, and the arrival at Jerusalem, even supposing that the first year of Cyrus entirely coincided with a year of the Jewish calendar.

The second view, however, would not make the difference between the year of the rule of Cyrus and the year of the return to Jerusalem a great one, since it would scarcely amount to half a year. ויּעמידוּ... החלּוּ, they began and appointed, etc. , they began to appoint, i. e. , they began the work of building the temple by appointing. Those enumerated are-1.

Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two rulers: 2. The remnant of their brethren = their other brethren, viz. , a , the priests and Levites as brethren of Joshua; b , all who had come out of captivity, i. e. , the men of Israel, as brethren of Zerubbabel. These together formed the community who appointed the Levites to preside over, i. e. , to conduct the building of the temple.

For the expression, comp. 1 Chron 23:4-24.

Ezr 3:8-13 The foundation of the temple laid. - Ezr 3:8 In the second year of their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem, i. e. , after their arrival at Jerusalem on their return from Babylon, in the second month, began Zerubbabel and Joshua to appoint the Levites from twenty years old and upwards to the oversight of the work (the building) of the house of the Lord.

That is to say, the work of building was taken in hand. Whether this second year of the return coincides with the second year of the rule of Cyrus, so that the foundations of the temple were laid, as Theophil. Antioch. ad Autolic . lib. 3, according to Berosus, relates, in the second year of Cyrus, cannot be determined. For nothing more is said in this book than that Cyrus, in the first year of his reign, issued the decree concerning the return of the Jews from Babylon, whereupon those named in the list, Ezra 2, set out and returned, without any further notice as to whether this also took place in the first year of Cyrus, or whether the many necessary preparations delayed the departure of the first band till the following year.

The former view is certainly a possible though not a very probable one, since it is obvious from Ezr 2:1 that they arrived at Jerusalem and betook themselves to their cities as early as the seventh month of the year. Now the period between the beginning of the year and the seventh month, i. e. , at most six months, seems too short for the publication of the edict, the departure, and the arrival at Jerusalem, even supposing that the first year of Cyrus entirely coincided with a year of the Jewish calendar.

The second view, however, would not make the difference between the year of the rule of Cyrus and the year of the return to Jerusalem a great one, since it would scarcely amount to half a year. ויּעמידוּ... החלּוּ, they began and appointed, etc. , they began to appoint, i. e. , they began the work of building the temple by appointing. Those enumerated are-1.

Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two rulers: 2. The remnant of their brethren = their other brethren, viz. , a , the priests and Levites as brethren of Joshua; b , all who had come out of captivity, i. e. , the men of Israel, as brethren of Zerubbabel. These together formed the community who appointed the Levites to preside over, i. e. , to conduct the building of the temple.

For the expression, comp. 1 Chron 23:4-24.

Ezr 4:1-2 The adversaries of the Jews prevent the building of the temple till the reign of Darius (Ezr 4:1, Ezr 4:2). When the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the community which had returned from captivity were beginning to rebuild the temple, they came to Zerubbabel, and to the chiefs of the people, and desired to take part in this work, because they also sacrificed to the God of Israel.

These adversaries were, according to Ezr 4:2, the people whom Esarhaddon king of Assyria had settled in the neighbourhood of Benjamin and Judah. If we compare with this verse the information (2Ki 17:24) that the kings of Assyria brought men from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria, and that they took possession of the depopulated kingdom of the ten tribes, and dwelt therein; then these adversaries of Judah and Benjamin are the inhabitants of the former kingdom of Israel, who were called Samaritans after the central-point of their settlement.

הגּולה בּני, sons of the captivity (Ezr 6:19, etc. , Ezr 8:35; Ezr 10:7, Ezr 10:16), also shortly into הגּולה, e. g. , Ezr 1:11, are the Israelites returned from the Babylonian captivity, who composed the new community in Judah and Jerusalem. Those who returned with Zerubbabel, and took possession of the dwelling-places of their ancestors, being, exclusive of priests and Levites, chiefly members of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, are called, especially when named in distinction from the other inhabitants of the land, Judah and Benjamin.

The adversaries give the reason of their request to share in the building of the temple in the words: ”For we seek your God as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto Him since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assyria, which brought us up hither. ” The words זבחים אנחנוּ ולא are variously explained. Older expositors take the Chethiv ולא as a negative, and make זבחים to mean the offering of sacrifices to idols, both because לא is a negative, and also because the assertion that they had sacrificed to Jahve would not have pleased the Jews, quia deficiente templo non debuerint sacrificare ; and sacrifices not offered in Jerusalem were regarded as equivalent to sacrifices to idols.

They might, moreover, fitly strengthen their case by the remark: “Since the days of Esarhaddon we offer no sacrifices to idols. ” On the other hand, however, it is arbitrary to understand זבח, without any further definition, of sacrificing to idols; and the statement, “We already sacrifice to the God of Israel,” contains undoubtedly a far stronger reason for granting their request than the circumstance that they do not sacrifice to idols.

Hence we incline, with older translators (lxx, Syr. , Vulg. , 1 Esdras), to regard לא as an unusual form of לו, occurring in several places (see on Exo 21:8), the latter being also substituted in the present instance as Keri. The position also of לא before אנחנוּ points the same way, for the negative would certainly have stood with the verb. On Esarhaddon, see remarks on 2Ki 19:37 and Isa 37:38.

Ezr 4:1-2 The adversaries of the Jews prevent the building of the temple till the reign of Darius (Ezr 4:1, Ezr 4:2). When the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the community which had returned from captivity were beginning to rebuild the temple, they came to Zerubbabel, and to the chiefs of the people, and desired to take part in this work, because they also sacrificed to the God of Israel.

These adversaries were, according to Ezr 4:2, the people whom Esarhaddon king of Assyria had settled in the neighbourhood of Benjamin and Judah. If we compare with this verse the information (2Ki 17:24) that the kings of Assyria brought men from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria, and that they took possession of the depopulated kingdom of the ten tribes, and dwelt therein; then these adversaries of Judah and Benjamin are the inhabitants of the former kingdom of Israel, who were called Samaritans after the central-point of their settlement.

הגּולה בּני, sons of the captivity (Ezr 6:19, etc. , Ezr 8:35; Ezr 10:7, Ezr 10:16), also shortly into הגּולה, e. g. , Ezr 1:11, are the Israelites returned from the Babylonian captivity, who composed the new community in Judah and Jerusalem. Those who returned with Zerubbabel, and took possession of the dwelling-places of their ancestors, being, exclusive of priests and Levites, chiefly members of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, are called, especially when named in distinction from the other inhabitants of the land, Judah and Benjamin.

The adversaries give the reason of their request to share in the building of the temple in the words: ”For we seek your God as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto Him since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assyria, which brought us up hither. ” The words זבחים אנחנוּ ולא are variously explained. Older expositors take the Chethiv ולא as a negative, and make זבחים to mean the offering of sacrifices to idols, both because לא is a negative, and also because the assertion that they had sacrificed to Jahve would not have pleased the Jews, quia deficiente templo non debuerint sacrificare ; and sacrifices not offered in Jerusalem were regarded as equivalent to sacrifices to idols.

They might, moreover, fitly strengthen their case by the remark: “Since the days of Esarhaddon we offer no sacrifices to idols. ” On the other hand, however, it is arbitrary to understand זבח, without any further definition, of sacrificing to idols; and the statement, “We already sacrifice to the God of Israel,” contains undoubtedly a far stronger reason for granting their request than the circumstance that they do not sacrifice to idols.

Hence we incline, with older translators (lxx, Syr. , Vulg. , 1 Esdras), to regard לא as an unusual form of לו, occurring in several places (see on Exo 21:8), the latter being also substituted in the present instance as Keri. The position also of לא before אנחנוּ points the same way, for the negative would certainly have stood with the verb. On Esarhaddon, see remarks on 2Ki 19:37 and Isa 37:38.

Ezr 4:3 Zerubbabel and the other chiefs of Israel answer, “It is not for you and for us to build a house to our God;” i. e. , You and we cannot together build a house to the God who is our God; “but we alone will build it to Jahve the God of Israel, as King Cyrus commanded us. ” יחד אנחנוּ, we together, i. e. , we alone (without your assistance). By the emphasis placed upon “our God” and “Jahve the God of Israel,” the assertion of the adversaries, “We seek your God as ye do,” is indirectly refuted.

If Jahve is the God of Israel, He is not the God of those whom Esarhaddon brought into the land. The appeal to the decree of Cyrus (Ezr 1:3, comp. Ezr 3:6, etc.) forms a strong argument for the sole agency of Jews in building the temple, inasmuch as Cyrus had invited those only who were of His (Jahve’s) people (Ezr 1:3). Hence the leaders of the new community were legally justified in rejecting the proposal of the colonists brought in by Esarhaddon.

For the latter were neither members of the people of Jahve, nor Israelites, nor genuine worshippers of Jahve. They were non-Israelites, and designated themselves as those whom the king of Assyria had brought into the land. According to 2Ki 17:24, the king of Assyria brought colonists from Babylon, Cuthah, and other places, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children of Israel.

Now we cannot suppose that every Israelite, to the very last man, was carried away by the Assyrians; such a deportation of a conquered people being unusual, and indeed impossible. Apart, then, from the passage, 2Ch 30:6, etc. , which many expositors refer to the time of the destruction of the kingdom of the ten tribes, we find that in the time of King Josiah (2Ch 34:9), when the foreign colonists had been for a considerable period in the country, there were still remnants of Manasseh, of Ephraim, and of all Israel, who gave contributions for the house of God at Jerusalem; and also that in 2Ki 23:15-20 and 2Ch 34:6, a remnant of the Israelite inhabitants still existed in the former territory of the ten tribes.

The eighty men, too, who (Jer 41:5, etc.) came, after the destruction of the temple, from Shechem, Shiloh, and Samaria, mourning, and bringing offerings and incense to Jerusalem, to the place of the house of God, which was still a holy place to them, were certainly Israelites of the ten tribes still left in the land, and who had probably from the days of Josiah adhered to the temple worship.

These remnants, however, of the Israelites inhabitants in the territories of the former kingdom of the ten tribes, are not taken into account in the present discussion concerning the erection of the temple; because, however considerable their numbers might be, they formed no community independent of the colonists, but were dispersed among them, and without political influence. It is not indeed impossible ”that the colonists were induced through the influence exercised upon them by the Israelites living in their midst to prefer to the Jews the request, 'Let us build with you;' still those who made the proposal were not Israelites, but the foreign colonists” (Bertheau).

These were neither members of the chosen people nor worshippers of the God of Israel. At their first settlement (2Ki 17:24, etc.) they evidently feared not the Lord, nor did they learn to do so till the king of Assyria, at their request, sent them one of the priests who had been carried away to teach them the manner of worshipping the God of the land. This priest, being a priest of the Israelitish calf-worship, took up his abode at Bethel, and taught them to worship Jahve under the image of a golden calf.

Hence arose a worship which is thus described, 2Ki 17:29-33 : Every nation made gods of their own, and put them in the houses of the high places which the Samaritans, i. e. , the former inhabitants of the kingdom of the ten tribes, had made, every nation in their cities wherein they dwelt. And besides their idols Nergal, Asima, Nibhaz, Tartak, they feared Jahve; they sacrificed to all these gods as well as to Him.

A mixed worship which the prophet-historian (2Ki 17:34) thus condemns: “They fear not the Lord, and do after their statutes and ordinances, not after the law and commandment which the Lord commanded to the sons of Jacob. ” And so, it is finally said (2Ki 17:41), do also their children and children’s children unto this day, i. e. , about the middle of the Babylonian captivity; nor was it will a subsequent period that the Samaritans renounced gross idolatry.

The rulers and heads of Judah could not acknowledge that Jahve whom the colonists worshipped as a local god, together with other gods, in the houses of the high places at Bethel and elsewhere, to be the God of Israel, to whom they were building a temple at Jerusalem. For the question was not whether they would permit Israelites who earnestly sought Jahve to participate in His worship at Jerusalem-a permission which they certainly would have refused to none who sincerely desired to turn to the Lord God-but whether they would acknowledge a mixed population of Gentiles and Israelites, whose worship was more heathen than Israelite, and who nevertheless claimed on its account to belong to the people of God.

To such, the rulers of Judah could not, without unfaithfulness to the Lord their God, permit a participation in the building of the Lord’s house.

Ezr 4:4 In consequence of this refusal, the adversaries of Judah sought to weaken the hands of the people, and to deter them from building. הארץ עם, the people of the land, i. e. , the inhabitants of the country, the colonists dwelling in the land, the same who in Ezr 4:1 are called the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin. ויהי followed by the participle expresses the continuance of the inimical attempts.

To weaken the hands of any one, means to deprive him of strength and courage for action; comp. Jer 38:4. יהוּדה עם are the inhabitants of the realm of Judah, who, including the Benjamites, had returned from captivity, Judah being now used to designate the whole territory of the new community, as before the captivity the entire southern kingdom; comp. Ezr 4:6.

Instead of the Chethiv מבלּהים, the Keri offer מבהלים, from בהל, Piel , to terrify, to alarm, 2Ch 32:18; Job 21:6, because the verb בלה nowhere else occurs; but the noun בּלּהה, fear, being not uncommon, and presupposing the existence of a verb בּלהּ, the correctness of the Chethiv cannot be impugned.