Ezra 1 commentary

The Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus. The hearts of kings are in the hand of the Lord. God governs the world by his influence on the spirits of men; whatever good they do, God stirs up their spirits to do it. It was during the captivity of the Jews, that God principally employed them as the means of calling the attention of the heathen to him. Cyrus took it for granted, that those among the Jews who were able, would offer free-will offerings for the house of God. He would also have them supplied out of his kingdom. Well-wishers to the temple should be well-doers for it.

The same God that raised up the spirit of Cyrus to proclaim liberty to the Jews, raised up their spirits to take the benefit. The temptation was to some to stay in Babylon; but some feared not to return, and they were those whose spirits God raised, by his Spirit and grace. Whatever good we do, is owing to the grace of God. Our spirits naturally bow down to this earth and the things of it; if they move upward in any good affections or good actions, it is God who raises them. The calls and offers of the gospel are like the proclamation of Cyrus. Those bound under the power of sin, may be made free by Jesus Christ. Whosoever will, by repentance and faith, return to God, Jesus Christ has opened the way for him, and raises him out of the slavery of sin into the glorious liberty of the children of God. Many that hear this joyful sound, choose to sit still in Babylon, are in love with their sins, and will not venture upon a holy life; but some break through all discouragements, whatever it cost them; they are those whose spirit God has raised above the world and the flesh, whom he has made willing. Thus will the heavenly Canaan be filled, though many perish in Babylon; and the gospel offer will not have been made in vain. The bringing back the Jews from captivity, represents the redemption of sinners by Jesus Christ.

THE BOOK OF EZRA

Commentary by Robert Jamieson

CHAPTER 1

Ezr 1:1-6. Proclamation of Cyrus for Building the Temple.

1. in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia--The Persian empire, including Persia, Media, Babylonia, and Chaldea, with many smaller dependencies, was founded by Cyrus, 536 B.C. [Hales].

that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled--(See Jr 25:12; 29:10). This reference is a parenthetic statement of the historian, and did not form part of the proclamation.

2. The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth--Though this is in the Oriental style of hyperbole (see also Da 4:1), it was literally true that the Persian empire was the greatest ruling power in the world at that time.

he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem--The phraseology of this proclamation, independently of the express testimony of Josephus, affords indisputable evidence that Cyrus had seen (probably through means of Daniel, his venerable prime minister and favorite) those prophecies in which, two hundred years before he was born, his name, his victorious career, and the important services he should render to the Jews were distinctly foretold (Is 44:28; 46:1-4). The existence of predictions so remarkable led him to acknowledge that all his kingdoms were gifts bestowed on him by "the Lord God of heaven," and prompted him to fulfil the duty which had been laid upon him long before his birth. This was the source and origin of the great favor he showed to the Jews. The proclamation, though issued "in the first year of Cyrus" [Ezr 1:1], did not take effect till the year following.

3. Who is there among you of all his people--The purport of the edict was to grant full permission to those Jewish exiles, in every part of his kingdom, who chose, to return to their own country, as well as to recommend those of their countrymen who remained to aid the poor and feeble on their way, and contribute liberally towards the rebuilding of the temple.

5-6. Then rose up the chief of the fathers, &c.--The paternal and ecclesiastical chiefs of the later captivity, those of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with some also from other tribes (1Ch 9:3), who retained their attachment to the pure worship of God, naturally took the lead in this movement. Their example was followed by all whose piety and patriotism were strong enough to brave the various discouragements attending the enterprise. They were liberally assisted by multitudes of their captive countrymen, who, born in Babylonia or comfortably established in it by family connections or the possession of property, chose to remain. It seems that their Assyrian friends and neighbors, too, either from a favorable disposition toward the Jewish faith, or from imitation of the court policy, displayed hearty good will and great liberality in aiding and promoting the views of the emigrants.

Ezr 1:7-11. Cyrus Restores the Vessels.

7. Cyrus ... brought forth the vessels of the house of the Lord--Though it is said (2Ki 24:13) that these were cut in pieces, that would not be done to the large and magnificent vases; and, if they had been divided, the parts could be reunited. But it may be doubted whether the Hebrew word rendered cut in pieces, does not signify merely cut off, that is, from further use in the temple.

8. Shesh-bazzar, the prince of Judah--that is, Zerubbabel, son of Salathiel (compare Ezr 3:8; 5:16). He was born in Babylon, and called by his family Zerubbabel, that is, stranger or exile in Babylon. Shesh-bazzar, signifying "fire-worshipper," was the name given him at court, as other names were given to Daniel and his friends. He was recognized among the exiles as hereditary prince of Judah.

11. All the vessels of gold and of silver were five thousand and four hundred--The vessels here specified amount only to the number of 2499. Hence it is probable that the larger vases only are mentioned, while the inventory of the whole, including great and small, came to the gross sum stated in the text.

them of the captivity that were brought up from Babylon unto Jerusalem--All the Jewish exiles did not embrace the privilege which the Persian king granted them. The great proportion, born in Babylon, preferred continuing in their comfortable homes to undertaking a distant, expensive, and hazardous journey to a desolate land. Nor did the returning exiles all go at once. The first band went with Zerubbabel, others afterwards with Ezra, and a large number with Nehemiah at a still later period.

Now in the first year - This is word for word with the two last verses of the preceding book; which stand here in their proper place and connection, but there are entirely destitute of chronological connection and reference.

Cyrus - This prince, so eminent in antiquity, is said to have been the son of Cambyses king of Persia, and Mandane, daughter of Astyages king of the Medes; and was born about six hundred years before Christ. Josephus accounts for his partiality to the Jews from this circumstance; that he was shown the places in Isaiah the prophet where he is mentioned by name, and his exploits and conquests foretold: see Isa 44:28; Isa 45:1, etc. Finding himself thus distinguished by the God of the Jews, he was anxious to give him proofs of his gratitude in return; and so made the decree in favor of the Jews, restored their sacred vessels, gave them liberty to return to their own land, and encouraged them to rebuild the temple of Jehovah, etc.

It is very probable that when Cyrus took Babylon he found Daniel there, who had been long famed as one of the wisest ministers of state in all the East; and it is most likely that it was this person who pointed out to him the prophecy of Isaiah, and gave him those farther intimations relative to the Divine will which were revealed to himself. Of his death there are contradictory accounts. Herodotus says, that having turned his arms against the Massagetes, and killed the son of Tomyris their queen, the mother, impatient to avenge the death of her son, sent him a defiance; promised to glut him with blood; and, having attacked him, pretended to be worsted and to fly; and thus she drew him and his army into an ambuscade, where he was routed and slain, and a considerable part of his army destroyed. The enraged queen having found his body, cut off his head, and threw it into a vessel full of human blood, with this most bitter sarcasm: - Ευ μεν, εμευ ζωσης τε και νικωσης ες μαχην, απωλεσας παιδα τον εμον, ἑλων δολῳ· σε δ' εγω, καταπερ ηπειλησα, αἱματος κορεσω. - Herod. Clio, c. 214. "Although living and victorious, thou hast destroyed me in slaying my son, whom thou hast overcome by deceit; but, as I have threatened, I will now slake thy thirst with blood."

Cyrus, thy thirst was blood, now drink thy fill.

By - Jeremiah - This prophet, Jer 25:12; Jer 29:11, had foretold that the Babylonish captivity should last only seventy years: these were now ended; Cyrus had given the Jews permission and encouragement to return to Judea, and rebuild the temple of the Lord; and thus the prediction of Jeremiah was fulfilled.

The Lord God of heaven - It is not unworthy of remark, that in all the books written prior to the captivity, Jehovah is called The Lord of Hosts; but in all the books written after the captivity, as 2 Chronicles, Ezra Nehemiah, and Daniel, he is styled The God of Heaven. The words however have the same meaning.

All the kingdoms of the earth. At this time the empire of the Medo-Persians was very extensive: according to ancient writers, Cyrus, at this time, reigned over the Medes, Persians, Hyrcanians, Armenians, Syrians, Assyrians, Arabians, Cappadocians, Phrygians, Lydians Phoenicians, Babylonians, Bactrians, Indians, Saci, Cilicians, Paphlagonians, Moriandrians, and many others. His empire extended on the East, to the Red Sea; on the North, to the Euxine Sea; on the West, to the island of Cyprus and Egypt; and on the South, to Ethiopia.

Whosoever remaineth in any place - Every one was at liberty to go, but none was obliged to go. Thus their attachment to God was tried; he whose heart was right with God went; he who was comfortably settled in Babylon, might go if he chose. Those who did not go, were commanded to assist their brethren who went.

Vessels of silver - Articles of silver, gold, etc.

The king brought forth the vessels - See on Ezr 1:9-11 (note).

Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah - This was probably the Chaldean name of him who was originally called Zerubbabel: the former signifies joy in affliction; the latter, a stranger in Babylon. The latter may be designed to refer to his captive state; the former, to the prospect of release. Some think this was quite a different person, a Persian or Chaldean, sent by Cyrus to superintend whatever officers or men Cyrus might have sent to assist the Jews on their return; and to procure them help in the Chaldean provinces, through which they might be obliged to travel.

All the vessels - were five thousand and four hundred - This place is without doubt corrupted; here it is said the sum of all the vessels, of every quality and kind, was five thousand four hundred; but the enumeration of the articles, as given in Ezr 1:9, Ezr 1:10, gives the sum of two thousand four hundred and ninety-nine only. But we can correct this account from 1 Esdras 2:13, 14.

I shall set both accounts down, that they may be compared together. Ezr 1:9, Ezr 1:11 1 Esdras 2:13, 14 Golden chargers 30 Golden cups 1000 Silver chargers 1000 Silver cups 1000 Knives 29 Silver censers 29 Golden basons 30 Golden vials 30 Silver basons, second sort 410 Silver vials 2410 Other vessels 1000 Other vessels 1000 Said to be 5400 - only 2499 Total 5469 Difference of the first account from itself: 2901 Difference of the second account from the first: 69

According, therefore, to the sum total in Ezra, the sum total in Esdras is only 69 different. See the next chapter, Ezra 2 (note).

It may be said that the vessels did actually amount to 5400, and that the chief of them only were intended to be specified; and these happen to amount to 2499; but that it was not the design of Ezra to insert the whole; and that the ninth verse should be considered as stating, And of the chief of them, that is, the gold and silver articles, this is the number. But the expression in Ezr 1:10, other vessels, sets this conjecture aside: the place is most manifestly corrupted.

Fulfilled - Nebuchadnezzar carried many of the Jews into captivity in the first year of his reign (the fourth of Jehoiakim). He reigned forty - five years, his son Evil - merodach twenty - three, and his grandson Belshazzar, three years, which make up the seventy years foretold by Jeremiah. First year - Of his reign in Babylon: for he had been king of Persia for many years.

All, &c. - In those parts of the world; all that vast empire formerly under the Assyrians and Babylonians. The gift of which he ascribes to the great God; by that express prophecy of Isaiah concerning him, Isa 44:28 45:1,13, so long before he was born; which prophecy the Jews had doubtlessly shewed him, which also carried a great evidence with it, especially to him who was so highly encouraged by it: or by a special illumination which God vouchsafed to him, as he did to Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, and some other Heathen princes.

Then rose up, &c. - These being a new generation, went out like their father Abraham, from this land of the Chaldees, not knowing whither they went.

Strengthened their hands - God can, when he pleases, incline the hearts of strangers to be kind to his people; yea, make those strengthen their hands, who formerly weakened them.

Sheshbazzar - Zerubbabel; the Chaldeans called him Sheshbazzar, that is, Joy in tribulation, but among his own people he was called Zerubbabel, a stranger in Babylon. So he looked upon himself, tho' (Josephus says) he was captain of the life - guard.

1 NOw in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia , (that the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled) the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying,

To wit, of his Empire or Reign in Babylon: For he had now been King of Persia for many Years.

i. e. Put into him a Mind and Will to this work.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word]. [illegible: 1 word]. 22▪ [illegible: 1 word]. 25. 12. [illegible: 1 word]. 10.; [illegible: 1 span].

2 Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The LORD God of Heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth , and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah.

To wit, in those parts of the World, all that vast Empire formerly under the Assyrians and Babylonians. The Gift of which he ascribes to the great God, either by virtue of those common notions which were in the Minds of the Heathens, who though they worshipped Idols, yet many of them did acknowledge a true and supream God: Or by that clear and express Prophecy of Isaiah concerning him, Isa. 44. 28. & 45. 1, 13. so long before he was born; which Prophecy the Jews had doubtless shewed him, which also carried a great evidence with it, especially to him who was so highly gra[illegible: 1+ letters]ified and incouraged by it: or by a special Illumination which God vouchsafed to him, as he did to Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, and some others of the Heathen Princes.

Either by his Prophets, Isaiah formerly, or Daniel now: or by an inward suggestion to his Mind.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word] 44. 28. [illegible: 1+ letters] [illegible: 1+ letters]5. 13.

3 Who is there among you of all his people ? his God be with him , and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the LORD God of Israel, (he is the God) which is in Jerusalem .

To wit, of Israel. A material clause; by vertue of which they justly refused the help of those Aliens who pretended to join with them in the building, ch. 4. 2, 3.

Let his God help him, as I also shall do.

Or only, in Ierusalem, as it is in the Hebrew. So it notes the place where he allows and requires them to build it.

4 And whosoever remaineth , in any place where he sojourneth, let the men of his place help him with silver, and with gold , and with goods, and with beasts, besides the free-will-offering for the house of his God that is in Jerusalem.

Who, when his Brethren were gone up, was desirous to go with them, but forced to tarry there for want of necessaries for his Journey.

I require my Officers to take care that they may be supplied, either by the voluntary Contributions of the People; or by a moderate Tax to be laid either only upon those Jews who were resolved to stay, or upon the Gentiles also; which the Persian Monarchs being absolute had a power to do; and which was the more reasonable because the King himself submitted to it, and bore a great part of the burden, and because it was for the House of that great God to whom they all owed their present Peace and great felicity.

Which upon this occasion I give you leave to transport.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word]. [illegible: 1 word] [illegible: 1+ letters]im [illegible: 1 word] ▪

5 Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin , and the priests and the Levites, with all them whose spirit God had raised to go up , to build the house of the LORD which is in Jerusalem.

And with them some of other Tribes, as appears from 1 Chr. 9. 3. but these only are named, because they were most considerable for number and quality.

To whom God had given that pious Disposition, and that Fortitude and Resolution which it required to break through their difficulties, which were great and many, such as their present penury, the length, and hazards, and costliness of the journey, their settlements in comfortable Habitations, their dispersion in several and distant places, which hindred the Conjunction of their Counsels and Actions, the multitude of their Enemies, the actual possession of their Country by others, the great backwardness of many of their own Brethren to go with them, and many other discouragements.

6 And all they that were about them, strengthened their hands with vessels of silver, with gold, with goods, and with beasts, and with precious things, besides all that was willingly offered.

Either because they had embraced, or at least favoured the Jewish Religion, concerning which they were instructed by the Israelites that had now for a long time dwelt among them: or rather, that they might hereby gratifie the Kings humour, and purchase his favour: for they perceived him to be hearty and forward in the work.

Marginal references: That is, helped them.

7 Also Cyrus the King brought forth the vessels of the house of the LORD, which Nebuchad-nezzar had brought forth out of Jerusalem , and had put them in the house of his gods:

Obj. These are said to have been cut in pieces, 2 Kin. 24. 13. how then are they here returned? Ans. That Hebrew word used 2 Kin. 24. 13. signifies not so properly to cut in pieces, as to cut off, as from the use of the word, Deut. 25. 12. 2. Sam. 4. 12. 2 Kin. 18. 16. Ier. 9. 26. And these vessels when they were taken away from the Temple, might very well be said to be cut off from it, because they had for so long time been so constantly, and as it were inseparably united to it, and kept in it. In like manner the meat-offering and drink-offering are said to be cut off from the house of the Lord, Joel 1. 9. And it is very improbable that they should deface and cut in pieces these magnificent Vessels which they could so easily transport whole to Babylon. Although if some of the larger of them had been cut into two or more parts, yet the parts of them might be delivered to the Jews, who could without great difficulty restore them to their former Unity and Form.

Marginal references: 2 Kin. 24. 13. 2 Chr. 36. 7.

8 Even those did Cyrus king to Persia bring forth by the hand of Mithredath the treasurer, and numbered them unto Sheshbazzar the prince of Judah .

i. e. He caused them to be delivered to the Jews by number.

i. e. Zorobabel, as appears by comparing ch. 3. 8. with 5. 16. to whom the Persians, or rather the Chaldeans, had given this name of Sheshbazzar, as they gave other names to Daniel and his companions, Dan. 1. 7.

And the Captain and Governour of these returning Jews, chap. 2. 2. So the Scepter is not yet departed from Iudah.

Marginal references: See Ch. 5. 14.

9 And this is the number of them: thirty chargers of gold, a thousand chargers of silver, nine and twenty knives :

Large Knives used in the killing of the Sacrifices, which are here mentioned, because the Hafts of them were made of, or covered with Gold or Silver.

10 Thirty basons of gold, silver basons of a second sort , four hundred and ten: and other vessels a thousand .

The first or chief were of Gold, and these of Silver are called the second, or next to them for worth and use.

He speaks of vessels of a middle size; for great and small were 5400, as it follows here. Or, as some render it, other vessels by thousands: they were not distinctly numbred according to their various forms and uses, but were promiscuously put together by thousands.

The Book of Ezra

Introduction

1. Name and Contents, Object and Plan of the Book of Ezra

The book of Ezra derives its name of עזרא in the Hebrew Bible, of Ἔσδρας in the Septuagint, and of Liber Esdrae in the Vulgate, from Ezra, עזרא, the priest and scribe who, in Ezra 7-10, narrates his return from captivity in Babylon to Jerusalem, and the particulars of his ministry in the latter city. For the sake of making the number of the books contained in their canon of Scripture correspond with the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, the Jews had from of old reckoned the books of Ezra and Nehemiah as one; whilst an apocryphal book of Ezra, composed of passages from the second book of Chronicles, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and certain popular legends, had long been current among the Hellenistic Jews together with the canonical book of Ezra. Hence our book of Ezra is called, in the catalogues of the Old Testament writings handed down to us by the Fathers (see the statements of Origen, of the Council of Laodicea, Can. 60, of Cyril, Jerome, and others, in the Lehrbuch der Einleitung, 216, Not. 11, 13), Ἔσδρας πρῶτος (α), and the book of Nehemiah Ἔσδρας δεύτερος (β), and consequently separated as I. Ezra from the book of Nehemiah as II. Ezra; while the Greek book of Ezra is called III. Ezra, to which was subsequently added the falsely so-called book of Ezra as IV. Ezra. In the Septuagint, the Vet. Itala, and the Syriac, on the contrary (comp. Libri V. T. apocryphi syriace e recogn. de Lagarde), we find the Greek book of Ezra placed as Ἔσδρας πρῶτον before the canonical book, and the latter designated Ἔσδρας δεύτερον.

The book of Ezra consists of two parts. The first part, comprising a period anterior to Ezra, begins with the edict of Coresh (Cyrus), king of Persia, permitting the return to their native land of such Jews as were exiles in Babylon, and prescribing the rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem (Ezr 1:1-4); and relates that when the heads of the nation, the priests and Levites, and many of the people, made preparations for returning, Cyrus had the sacred vessels which Nebuchadnezzar had carried away from Jerusalem brought forth and delivered to Sheshbazzar (Zerubbabel), prince of Judah (Ezr 1:5-11). Next follows a list of the names of those who returned from captivity (Ezra 2), and the account of the building of the altar of burnt-offerings, the restoration of divine worship, and the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezr 3:1-13). Then the manner in which the rebuilding of the temple was hindered by the Samaritans is narrated; and mention made of the written accusation sent by the adversaries of the Jews to the kings Ahashverosh and Artachshasta (Ezr 4:1-7): the letter sent to the latter monarch, and his answer thereto, in consequence of which the rebuilding of the temple ceased till the second year of Darius, being inserted in the Chaldee original (Ezr 4:24). It is then related (also in Chaldee) that Zerubbabel and Joshua, undertaking, in consequence of the prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah, the rebuilding of the temple, were immediately interrogated by Tatnai the Persian governor and his companions as to who had commanded such rebuilding; that the reply of the Jewish rulers was reported in writing to the king, whereupon the latter caused search to be made for the edict of Cyrus, and gave command for the continuance and furtherance of the building in compliance therewith (Ezra 5:1-6:13); that hence the Jews were enabled to complete the work, solemnly to dedicate their now finished temple (Ezr 6:14-18), and (as further related, Ezr 6:19-22, in the Hebrew tongue) to celebrate their passover with rejoicing. In the second part (Ezra 7-10), the return of Ezra the priest and scribe, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, from Babylon to Jerusalem, with a number of priests, Levites, and Israelites, is related; and (Ezr 7:1-10) a copy of the royal decree, in virtue of which Ezra was entrusted with the ordering of divine worship, and of the administration of justice as prescribed in the law, given in the Chaldee original (7:11-26), with a postscript by Ezra (Ezr 7:27.). Then follows a list of those who went up with Ezra (Ezr 8:1-14); and particulars given by Ezra himself concerning his journey, his arrival at Jerusalem (8:14-36), and the energetic proceedings by which he effected the separation of the heathen women from the congregation (9:1-10:17); the book concluding with a list of those who were forced to put away their heathen wives (10:18-44).

The first year of the rule of Cyrus king of Persia corresponding with the year 536 b.c., and the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Longimanus) with 458 b.c., it follows that this book comprises a period of at least eighty years. An interval of fifty-six years, extending from the seventh year of Darius Hystaspis, in which the passover was celebrated after the dedication of the new temple (Ezr 6:19-22), to the seventh of Artaxerxes, in which Ezra went up from Babylon (Ezr 7:6), separates the events of the first part from those of the second. The narrative of the return of Ezra from Babylon in Ezr 7:1 is nevertheless connected with the celebration of the passover under Darius by the usual formula of transition, “Now after these things,” without further comment, because nothing had occurred in the intervening period which the author of the book felt it necessary, in conformity with the plan of his work, to communicate.

Even this cursory notice of its contents shows that the object of Ezra was not to give a history of the re-settlement in Judah and Jerusalem of the Jews liberated by Cyrus from the Babylonian captivity, nor to relate all the memorable events which took place from the departure and the arrival in Judah of those who returned with Zerubbabel and Joshua, until his own return and his ministry in Jerusalem. For he tells us nothing at all of the journey of the first band of returning exiles, and so little concerning their arrival in Jerusalem and Judah, that this has merely a passing notice in the superscription of the list of their names; while at the close of this list he only mentions the voluntary gifts which they brought with them for the temple service, and then just remarks that they-the priests, Levites, people, etc. - dwelt in their cities (Ezr 2:70). The following chapters (Ezra 3-6), moreover, treat exclusively of the building of the altar of burnt-offering and the temple, the hindrances by which this building was delayed for years, and of the final removal of these hindrances, the continuation and completion of the building, and the dedication of the new temple, by means of which the tribe of Judah was enabled to carry on the worship of God according to the law, and to celebrate the festivals in the house of the Lord. In the second part, indeed, after giving the decree he had obtained from Artaxerxes, he speaks in a comparatively circumstantial manner of the preparations he made for his journey, of the journey itself, and of his arrival at Jerusalem; while he relates but a single incident of his proceedings there-an incident, indeed, of the utmost importance with respect to the preservation of the returned community as a covenant people, viz., the dissolution of the marriages with Canaanites and other Gentile women, forbidden by the law, but contracted in the period immediately following his arrival at Jerusalem. Of his subsequent proceedings there we learn nothing further from his own writings, although the king had given him authority, “after the wisdom of his God, to set magistrates and judges” (Ezr 7:25); while the book of Nehemiah testifies that he continued his ministry there for some years in conjunction with Nehemiah, who did not arrive till thirteen years later: comp. Neh 8-10 and Neh 12:36, Neh 12:38.

Such being the nature of the contents of this book, it is evident that the object and plan of its author must have been to collect only such facts and documents as might show the manner in which the Lord God, after the lapse of the seventy years of exile, fulfilled His promise announced by the prophets, by the deliverance of His people from Babylon, the building of the temple at Jerusalem, and the restoration of the temple worship according to the law, and preserved the re-assembled community from fresh relapses into heathen customs and idolatrous worship by the dissolution of the marriages with Gentile women. Moreover, the restoration of the temple and of the legal temple worship, and the separation of the heathen from the newly settled community, were necessary and indispensable conditions for the gathering out of the people of God from among the heathen, and for the maintenance and continued existence of the nation of Israel, to which and through which God might at His own time fulfil and realize His promises made to their forefathers, to make their seed a blessing to all the families of the earth, in a manner consistent both with His dealings with this people hitherto, and with the further development of His promises made through the prophets. The significance of the book of Ezra in sacred history lies in the fact that it enables us to perceive how the Lord, on the one hand, so disposed the hearts of the kings of Persia, the then rulers of the world, that in spite of all the machinations of the enemies of God’s people, they promoted the building of His temple in Jerusalem, and the maintenance of His worship therein; and on the other, raised up for His people, when delivered from Babylon, men like Zerubbabel their governor, Joshua the high priest, and Ezra the scribe, who, supported by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, undertook the work to which they were called, with hearty resolution, and carried it out with a powerful hand.

2. Unity and Composition of the Book of Ezra

Several modern critics (Zunz, Ewald, Bertheau, and others) have raised objections both to the single authorship and to the independent character of this book, and declared it to be but a fragment of a larger work, comprising not only the book of Nehemiah, but that of Chronicles also. The section of this work which forms our canonical book of Ezra is said to have been composed and edited by some unknown author about 200 years after Ezra, partly from an older Chaldee history of the building of the temple and of the walls of Jerusalem, partly from a record drawn up by Ezra himself of his agency in Jerusalem, and from certain other public documents. The evidence in favour of this hypothesis is derived, first, from the fact that not only the official letters to the Persian kings, and their decrees (Ezr 4:8-22; Ezr 5:6-17; Ezr 6:6-12; Ezr 7:12-26), but also a still longer section on the building of the temple (Ezra 4:23-6:18), are written in the Chaldee, and the remaining portions in the Hebrew language; next, from the diversity of its style, its lack of internal unity, and its want of finish; and, finally, from the circumstance that the book of Ezra had from of old been combined with that of Nehemiah as one book. These reasons, however, upon closer consideration, prove too weak to confirm this view. For, to begin with the historical testimony, Nägelsback, in Herzog’s Realencycl. iv. p. 166, justly finds it “incomprehensible” that Bertheau should appeal to the testimony of the Talmud, the Masora, the most ancient catalogues of Old Testament books in the Christian church, the Cod. Alexandr., the Cod. Friderico Aug., and the lxx, because the comprehension of the two books in one in these authorities is entirely owing to the Jewish mode of computing the books of the Old Testament. Even Josephus (c. Ap. i. 8) reckons twenty-two books, which he arranges, in a manner peculiar to himself, into five books of Moses, thirteen of the prophets, and four containing hymns to God and moral precepts for man; and Jerome says, in Prol. Gal., that the Hebrews reckon twenty-two canonical books, whose names he cites, after the number of the letters of their alphabet, but then adds that some reckoned Ruth and Lamentations separately, thus making twenty-four, because the Rabbis distinguished between שׁ and שׂ, and received a double Jod (יי) into the alphabet for the sate of including in it the name יהוה, which when abbreviated is written יי. The number twenty-four is also found in Baba bathr. fol. 14. Hence we also find these numbers and computations in the Fathers and in the resolutions of the councils, but with the express distinction of I. and II. Ezra. This distinction is not indeed mentioned in the Talmud; and Baba bathr., l.c., says: Esra scripsit librum suum et genealogias librorum Chr. usque ad sua tempora. But what authority can there be in such testimony, which also declares Moses to have been the author not only of the Pentateuch, but also of the book of Job, and Samuel the author of the books of Judges, Ruth, and Samuel? The authority, too, of Cod. Alex. and Cod. Frid. Aug. is opposed to that of Cod. Vatic. and of the lxx, in which the books Ezra and Nehemiah are separated, as they likewise are in the Masoretic text, although the Masoretes regarded and reckoned both as forming but one book.Though Zunz and Ewald appeal also to the Greek book of Ezra, in which portions of Chronicles and of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah are comprised, it is not really to be understood how any critical importance can be attributed to this apocryphal compilation. Besides, even if it possessed such importance, the circumstance that only the two last chapters of Chronicles, and only Neh 7:73-8:13 of Nehemiah, are comprised in it, says more against than in favour of the assumed single authorship of the three canonical books.

This mode of computation, however, affords no ground for the supposition that the books of Ezra and Nehemiah originally formed one work. For in this case we should be obliged to regard the books of the twelve minor prophets as the work of one author. If the number of books was to be reduced to twenty-two or twenty-four, it was necessary to combine smaller works of similar character. The single authorship of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah is most decidedly negatived, not only by the superscription of the latter book, דּברי נחמיה בּן־חכליה, there being in the entire Old Testament no other instance of a single portion or section of a longer work being distinguished from its other portions by a similar superscription, with the name of the author; but also by the fact already brought forward in the introduction to Chronicles, Comm. on Chron. p. 384, that no reason or motive whatever can be perceived for a subsequent division of the historical work in question into three separate books, on account of its reception into the canon.

The contents, too, and the form of this book, present us with nothing incompatible either with its single authorship or independence. The use of the Chaldee tongue for the official documents of the Persian kings and their subordinates cannot surprise us, this being the official language in the provinces of the Persian empire west of the Euphrates, and as current with the returning Jews as their Hebrew mother tongue. It is true that the use of the Chaldee language is not in this book confined merely to official documents, but continued, Ezr 4:8-22, in the narrative of the building of the temple down to the dedication of the rebuilt temple, 4:23-6:18; and that the Hebrew is not employed again till from Ezr 6:19 to the conclusion of the book, with the exception of Ezr 7:12-26, where the commission given by Artaxerxes to Ezra is inserted in the Chaldee original. We also meet, however, with the two languages in the book of Daniel, Dan 2, where the Magi are introduced, Dan 2:4, as answering the king in Aramaic, and where not only their conversation with the monarch, but also the whole course of the event, is given in this dialect, which is again used Dan 3-7. Hence it has been attempted to account for the use of the Chaldee in the narrative portions of the book of Ezra, by the assertion that the historian, after quoting Chaldee documents, found it convenient to use this language in the narrative combined therewith, and especially because during its course he had to communicate other Chaldee documents (Ezr 5:6-17 and Ezr 6:3-12) in the original. But this explanation is not sufficient to solve the problem. Both here and in the book of Daniel, the use of the two languages has a really deeper reason; see Dan 2:14.. With respect to the book in question, this view is, moreover, insufficient; because, in the first place, the use of the Chaldee tongue does not begin with the communication of the Chaldee documents (Dan 4:11), but is used, Dan 2:8, in the paragraph which introduces them. And then, too, the narrator of the Chaldee historical section, Ezr 5:4, gives us to understand, by his use of the first person, “Then said we unto them,” that he was a participator in the work of rebuilding the temple under Darius; and this, Ezra, who returned to Jerusalem at a much later period, and who relates his return (Ezr 7:27) in the first person, could not himself have been. These two circumstances show that the Chaldee section, 4:8-6:18, was composed by an eye-witness of the occurrences it relates; that it came into the hands of Ezra when composing his own work, who, finding it adapted to his purpose as a record by one who was contemporary with the events he related, and a sharer in the building of the temple, included it in his own book with very slight alteration. The mention of Artachshasta, besides Coresh and Darjavesh, in Ezr 6:14, seems opposed to this view. But since neither Ezra, nor a later author of this book, contemporary with Darius Hystaspis, could cite the name of Artaxerxes as contributing towards the building of the temple, while the position of the name of Artaxerxes after that of Darius, as well as its very mention, contradicts the notion of a predecessor of King Darius, the insertion of this name in Ezr 6:14 may be a later addition made by Ezra, in grateful retrospect of the splendid gifts devoted by Artaxerxes to the temple, for the purpose of associating him with the two monarchs whose favour rendered the rebuilding of the temple possible (see on Ezr 6:14). In this case, the mention of Artaxerxes in the passage just cited, offers no argument against the above-mentioned view of the origin of the Chaldee section. Neither is any doubt cast upon the single authorship of the whole book by the notion that Ezra inserted in his book not only an authentic list of the returned families, Ezra 2, but also a narrative of the building of the temple, composed in the Chaldee tongue by an eye-witness.

All the other arguments brought forward against the unity of this book are quite unimportant. The variations and discrepancies which Schrader, in his treatise on the duration of the second temple, in the Theol. Studien u. Kritiken, 1867, p. 460f., and in De Wette’s Einleitung, 8th edit. 235, supposes he has discovered in the Chaldee section, first between Ezra 4:8-23 and Ezr 5:1-6, Ezr 5:14, Ezr 5:15, on the one hand, and Ezr 4:24 on the other, and then between these passages and the remaining chapters of the first part, Ezr 1:1-11, Ezr 3:1-13, Ezr 4:1; Ezr 7:24, and Ezr 6:14, Ezr 6:16-18, Ezr 6:19-22, can have no force of argument except for a criticism which confines its operations to the words and letters of the text of Scripture, because incapable of entering into its spiritual meaning. If the two public documents 4:8-23 differ from what precedes and follows them, by the fact that they speak not of the building of the temple but of the building of the walls of Jerusalem, the reason may be either that the adversaries of the Jews brought a false accusation before King Artachshashta, and for the sake of more surely gaining their own ends, represented the building of the temple as a building of the fortifications, or that the complaint of their enemies and the royal decree really relate to the building of the walls, and that section 4:8-23 is erroneously referred by expositors to the building of the temple. In either case there is no such discrepancy between these public documents and what precedes and follows them as to annul the single authorship of this Chaldee section; see the explanation of the passage. Still less does the circumstance that the narrative of the continuation and completion of the temple-building, Ezra 5:1-6:15, is in a simply historical style, and not interspersed with reflections or devotional remarks, offer any proof that the notice, Ezr 4:24, “Then 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,” and the information, Ezr 6:16-18, that the Jews brought offerings at the dedication of the temple, and appointed priests and Levites in their courses for the service of God, cannot proceed from the same historian, who at the building of the temple says nothing of the offerings and ministrations of the priests and Levites. Still weaker, if possible, is the argument for different authorship derived from characteristic expressions, viz., that in Ezr 4:8, Ezr 4:11, Ezr 4:23; Ezr 5:5-7, Ezr 5:13-14, Ezr 5:17, and Ezr 6:1, Ezr 6:3, Ezr 6:12-13, the Persian kings are simply called “the king,” and not “king of Persia,” as they are designated by the historian in Ezr 4:7, Ezr 4:24, and elsewhere. For a thoughtful reader will scarcely need to be reminded that, in a letter to the king, the designation king of Persia would be not only superfluous, but inappropriate, while the king in his answer would have still less occasion to call himself king of Persia, and that even the historian has in several places - e.g., Ezr 5:5-6; Ezr 6:1 and Ezr 6:13 - omitted the addition “of Persia” when naming the king. Nor is there any force in the remark that in Ezr 5:13 Coresh is called king of Babylon. This epithet, דּי־בבל, would only be objected to by critics who either do not know or do not consider that Coresh was king of Persia twenty years before he became king of Babylon, or obtained dominion over the Babylonian empire. The title king of Persia would here be misleading, and the mere designation king inexact, - Cyrus having issued the decree for the rebuilding of the temple not in the first year of his reign or rule over Persia, but in the first year of his sway over Babylon.

In Part II. (Ezra 7-10), which is connected with Part I. by the formula of transition האלּה הדּברים אחר, it is not indeed found “striking” that the historian should commence his narrative concerning Ezra by simply relating his doings (Ezr 7:1-10), his object being first to make the reader acquainted with the person of Ezra. It is also said to be easy to understand, that when the subsequent royal epistles are given, Ezra should be spoken of in the third person; that the transition to the first person should not be made until the thanksgiving to God (Ezr 7:27); and that Ezra should then narrate his journey to and arrival at Jerusalem, and his energetic proceedings against the unlawful marriages, in his own words (Ezra 8 and Ezr 9:1-15). But it is said to be “striking,” that in the account of this circumstance Ezra is, from Ezr 10:1 onwards, again spoken of in the third person. This change of the person speaking is said to show that the second part of the book was not composed by Ezra himself, but that some other historian merely made use of a record by Ezra, giving it verbally in Ezra 8 and Ezr 9:1-15, and in Ezra 7 and 10 relating Ezra’s return from Babylon, and the conclusion of the transaction concerning the unlawful marriages, in his own words, but with careful employment of the said record. This view, however, does not satisfactorily explain the transition from the first to the third person in the narrative. For what could have induced the historian, after giving Ezra’s record verbally in Ezra 8 and Ezr 9:1-15, to break off in the midst of Ezra’s account of his proceedings against the unlawful marriages, and, instead of continuing the record, to relate the end of the transaction in his own words? Bertheau’s solution of this question, that the author did this for the sake of brevity, is of no force; for Ezra 10 shows no trace of brevity, but, on the contrary, the progress and conclusion of the affair are related with the same circumstantiality and attention to details exhibited in its commencement in 8 and 9. To this must be added, that in other historical portions of the Old Testament, in which the view of different authorship is impossible, the narrator, as a person participating in the transaction, frequently makes the transition from the first to the third person, and vice versa. Compare, e.g., Isa 7:1. (“Then said the Lord unto Isaiah, Go forth,” etc.) with Isa 8:1 (“Moreover, the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll,” etc.); Jer 20:1-6, where Jeremiah relates of himself in the third person, that he had been smitten by Pashur, and had prophesied against him, with Jer 20:7., where, without further explanation, he thus continues: “O Lord, Thou hast persuaded me, and I was persuaded;” or Jer 28:1 (“Hananiah ... spake unto me ... the Lord said to me”) with Jer 28:5 (“Then the prophet Jeremiah said to the prophet Hananiah”), and also Jer 28:6; while in Jer 28:7 immediately following, Jeremiah writes, “Hear thou now this word which I speak in thine ears.” As Jeremiah, when here narrating circumstances of his own ministry, suddenly passes from the third to the first person, and then immediately returns to the third; so, too, might Ezra, after speaking (Ezr 7:1-10) of his return to Jerusalem in the third person, proceed with a subsequent more circumstantial description of his journey to and arrival at Jerusalem, and narrate his acts and proceedings there in the first person (Ezra 8 and Ezr 9:1-15), and then, after giving his prayer concerning the iniquity of his people (Ezr 9:1-15), take up the objective form of speech in his account of what took place in consequence of this prayer; and instead of writing, “Now when I had prayed,” etc., continue, “Now when Ezra had prayed,” and maintain this objective form of statement to the end of Ezra 10. Thus a change of author cannot be proved by a transition in the narrative from the first to the third person. As little can this be inferred from the remark (Ezr 7:6) that “Ezra was a ready scribe in the law of Moses,” by which his vocation, and the import of his return to Jerusalem, are alluded to immediately after the statement of his genealogy.

The reasons, then, just discussed are not of such a nature as to cast any real doubt upon the single authorship of this book; and modern criticism has been unable to adduce any others. Neither is its independence impeached by the circumstance that it breaks off “unexpectedly” at Ezra 10, without relating Ezra’s subsequent proceedings at Jerusalem, although at Ezr 7:10 it is said not only that “Ezra had prepared his heart ... to teach in Israel statutes and judgments,” but also that Artaxerxes in his edict (Ezr 7:12-26) commissioned him to uphold the authority of the law of God as the rule of action; nor by the fact that in Neh 8-10 we find Ezra still a teacher of the law, and that these very chapters form the necessary complement of the notices concerning Ezra in the book of Ezra (Bertheau). For though the narrative in Neh 8-10 actually does complete the history of Ezra’s ministry, it by no means follows that the book of Ezra is incomplete, and no independent work at all, but only a portion of a larger book, because it does not contain this narrative. For what justifies the assumption that “Ezra purposed to give an account of all that he effected at Jerusalem?” The whole book may be sought through in vain for a single peg on which to hang such a theory. To impute such an intention to Ezra, and to infer that, because his ministry is spoken of in the book of Nehemiah also, the book of Ezra is but a fragment, we should need far more weighty arguments in proof of the single authorship of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah than the defenders of this hypothesis are able to bring forward. In respect of diction, nothing further has been adduced than that the expression עלי אלחי כּיד, so frequently recurring in Ezra (Ezr 7:28; compare Ezr 7:6, Ezr 7:9; Ezr 8:18, Ezr 8:22, Ezr 8:31), is also once found in Nehemiah (Neh 2:8). But the single occurrence of this one expression, common to himself and Ezra, in the midst of the very peculiar diction and style of Nehemiah, is not the slightest proof of the original combination of the two books; and Neh 2:8 simply shows that Nehemiah appropriated words which, in his intercourse with Ezra, he had heard from his lips. - With respect to other instances in which the diction and matter are common to the books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, we have already shown, in the introduction to Chronicles, that they are too trifling to establish an identity of authorship in the case of these three books; and at the same time remarked that the agreement between the closing verses of Chronicles and the beginning of Ezra does but render it probable that Ezra may have been the author of the former book also.

3. Composition and Historical Character of the Book of Ezra

If this book is a single one, i.e., the work of one author, there can be no reasonable doubt that that author was Ezra, the priest and scribe, who in Ezra 7-10 narrates his return from Babylon to Jerusalem, and the circumstances of his ministry there, neither its language nor contents exhibiting any traces of a later date. Its historical character, too, was universally admitted until Schrader, in his beforenamed treatise, p. 399, undertook to dispute it with respect to the first part of this book. The proofs he adduced were, first, that the statement made by the author, who lived 200 years after the building of the temple, in this book, i.e., in the chronicle of the foundation of the temple in the second year after the return from Babylon, concerning the cessation of the building till the second year of Darius, and its resumption in that year, is unhistorical, and rests only upon the insufficiently confirmed assumption that the exiles, penetrated as they were with ardent love for their hereditary religion, full of joy that their deliverance from Babylon was at last effected, and of heartfelt gratitude to God, should have suffered fifteen years to elapse before they set to work to raise the national sanctuary from its ruins; secondly, that the accounts both of the rearing of the altar, Ezr 3:2 and Ezr 3:3, and of the proceedings at laying the foundations of the temple, together with the names, dates, and other seemingly special details found in Ezr 3:1-13, Ezr 4:1-5, Ezr 4:24; Ezr 6:14, are not derived from ancient historical narratives, but are manifestly due to the imagination of the chronicler drawing upon the documents given in the book of Ezra, upon other books of the Old Testament, and upon his own combinations thereof. This whole argument, however, rests upon the assertion, that neither in Ezr 5:2 and Ezr 5:16, in Hag 1:2, Hag 1:4, Hag 1:8, Hag 1:14; Hag 2:12, nor in Zec 1:16; Zec 4:9; Zec 6:12-13; Zec 8:9, is the resumption of the temple building in the second year of the reign of Darius spoken of, but that, on the contrary, the laying of its foundations in the said year of Darius is in some of these passages assumed, in others distinctly stated. Such a conclusion can, however, only be arrived at by a misconception of the passages in question. When it is said, Ezr 5:2, “Then (i.e., when the prophets Haggai and Zechariah prophesied) rose up Zerubbabel and Jeshua ... and began to build the house of God” (שׁריו למבנא), there is no need to insist that בּנא often signifies to rebuild, but the word may be understood strictly of beginning to build. And this accords with the fact, that while in Ezr 3:1-13 and 4 nothing is related concerning the building of the temple, whose foundations were laid in the second year of the return, it is said that immediately after the foundations were laid the Samaritans came and desired to take part in the building of the temple, and that when their request was refused, they weakened the hands of the people, and deterred them from building (Ezr 4:1-5). Schrader can only establish a discrepancy between Ezr 5:2 and Ezr 3:1-13 and 4 by confounding building with foundation-laying, two terms which neither in Hebrew nor German have the same signification.

Still less can it be inferred from the statement of the Jewish elders (Ezr 5:16), when questioned by Tatnai and his companions as to who had commanded them to build the temple, “Then came the same Sheshbazzar and laid the foundation of the house of God, which is in Jerusalem, and since that time even until now hath it been in building,” that the building of the temple proceeded without intermission from the laying of its foundations under Cyrus till the second year of Darius. For can we be justified in the supposition that the Jewish elders would furnish Tatnai with a detailed statement of matters for the purpose of informing him what had been done year by year, and, by thus enumerating the hindrances which had for an interval put a stop to the building, afford the Persian officials an excuse for consequently declaring the question of resuming the building non-suited? For Tatnai made no inquiry as to the length of time the temple had been in building, or whether this had been going on uninterruptedly, but only who had authorized them to build; and the Jewish elders replied that King Cyrus had commanded the building of the temple, and delivered to Sheshbazzar, whom he made governor, the sacred vessels which Nebuchadnezzar had carried away to Babylon, whereupon Sheshbazzar had begun the work of building which had been going on from then till now. Moreover, Schrader himself seems to have felt that not much could be proved from Ezr 5:2 and Ezr 5:16. Hence he seeks to construct the chief support of his theory from the prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah. In this attempt, however, he shows so little comprehension of prophetic diction, that he expounds Haggai’s reproofs of the indifference of the people in building the temple, Hagg. Hag 1:2, Hag 1:4, Hag 1:8, as stating that as yet nothing had been done, not even the foundations laid; transforms the words, Hag 1:14, “they came and did work in the house of the Lord” (יעשׂוּ מלאכה בב), into “they began to build;” makes Hagg. Ezr 2:18, by a tautological view of the words למן היּום אשׁר יסּד, mean that the foundations of the temple were not laid till the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month of the second year of Darius (see the true meaning of the passage in the commentary on Haggai); and finally, explains the prophecies of Zechariah (Zec 1:16; Zec 4:9; Zec 6:12; Zec 8:9) concerning the rearing of a spiritual temple by Messiah as applying to the temple of wood and stone actually erected by Zerubbabel. By such means he arrives at the result that “neither does the Chaldee section of Ezra (Ezra 5), including the official documents, say anything of a foundation of the temple in the second year after the return from Babylon; nor do the contemporary prophets Haggai and Zechariah make any mention of this earlier foundation in their writings, but, on the contrary, place the foundation in the second year of Darius: that, consequently, the view advocated by the author of the book of Ezra, that the building of the temple began in the days of Cyrus, and immediately after the return of the exiles, is wholly without documentary proof.” This result he seeks further to establish by collecting all the words, expressions, and matters (such as sacrifices, Levites, priests, etc.) in Ezr 3:1-13 and 4 and Ezr 6:16-22, to which parallels may be found in the books of Chronicles, for the sake of drawing from them the further conclusion that “the chronicler,” though he did not indeed invent the facts related in Ezr 3:1-5, and Ezr 6:16-22, combined them from the remaining chapters of the book of Ezra, and from other books of the Old Testament, - a conclusion in which the chief stress is placed upon the supposed fact that the chronicler was sufficiently known to have been a compiler and maker up of history. Such handling of Scripture can, however, in our days no longer assume the guise of “scientific criticism;” this kind of critical produce, by which De Wette and his follower Gramberg endeavoured to gain notoriety sixty years ago, having long been condemned by theological science. Nor can the historical character of this book be shaken by such frivolous objections. Three events of fundamental importance to the restoration and continuance of Israel as a separate people among the other nations of the earth are contained in it, viz.: (1) The release of the Jews and Israelites from the Babylonian captivity by Cyrus; (2) The re-settlement in Judah and Jerusalem, with the rebuilding of the temple; (3) The ordering of the re-settled flock according to the law of Moses, by Ezra. The actual occurrence of these three events is raised above all doubt by the subsequent historical development of the Jews in their own land; and the narrative of the manner in which this development was rendered possible and brought to pass, possesses as complete documentary authentication, in virtue of the communication of the official acts of the Persian kings Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes-acts of which the whole contents are given after the manner, so to speak, of State papers-as any fact of ancient history. The historical narrative, in fact, does but furnish a brief explanation of the documents and edicts which are thus handed down.

For the exegetical literature, see Lehrb. der Einleitung, p. 455; to which must be added, E. Bertheau, die Bücher Esra, Nehemia, und Ester erkl., Lpz. (being the seventeenth number of the kurzgef. exeget. Handbuchs zum A. T.).

I. The Return of the Jews from Babylon under Cyrus. Restoration of the Temple and of the Worship of God at Jerusalem - Ezr 1:1

When the seventy years of the Babylonian captivity had elapsed, King Cyrus, by an edict published in the first year of his rule over Babylon, gave permission to all the Jews in his whole realm to return to their native land, and called upon them to rebuild the temple of God at Jerusalem. The execution of this royal and gracious decree by the Jews forms the subject of the first part of this book - Ezr 1:1-11 and 2 treating of the return of a considerable number of families of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi, under the conduct of Zerubbabel the prince and Joshua the high priest, to Jerusalem and Judaea; the remaining chapters, Ezra 3-6, of the restoration of the worship of God, and of the rebuilding of the temple.

THe edict of Cyrus, the departure from Babylon, the restitution of the sacred vessels

In the first year of his rule over Babylon, Cyrus king of Persia proclaimed throughout his whole kingdom, both by voice and writing, that the God of heaven had commanded him to build His temple at Jerusalem, and called upon the Jews living in exile to return to Jerusalem, and to build there the house of the God of Israel. At the same time, he exhorted all his subjects to facilitate by gifts the journey of the Jews dwelling in their midst, and to assist by free-will offerings the building of the temple (Ezr 1:1-4). In consequence of this royal decree, those Jews whose spirit God had raised up prepared for their return, and received from their neighbours gifts and free-will offerings (Ezr 1:5 and Ezr 1:6). Cyrus, moreover, delivered to Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah, the vessels of the temple which Nebuchadnezzar had brought from Jerusalem to Babylon.

Ezr 1:1 The edict of Cyrus. - Ezr 1:1 The opening word, “and in the first year,” etc., is to be explained by the circumstance that what is here recorded forms also, in 2Ch 36:22 and 2Ch 36:23, the conclusion of the history of the kingdom of Judah at its destruction by the Chaldeans, and is transferred thence to the beginning of the history of the restoration of the Jews by Cyrus. כּורשׁ is the Hebraized form of the ancient Persian Kurus, as Κῦρος, Cyrus, is called upon the monuments, and is perhaps connected with the Indian title Kuru; see Delitzsch on Isa 44:28. The first year of Cyrus is the first year of his rule over Babylon and the Babylonian empire.Duplex fuit initium, Cyri Persarum regis; prius Persicum, idque antiquius, posterius Babylonicum. de quo Hesdras; quia dum Cyrus in Perside tantum regnaret, regnum ejus ad Judaeos, qui in Babylonia erant, nihil adtinuit. - Cleric. ad Esr. 1:1. פּרס - in the better editions, such as that of Norzi and J. H. Mich., with Pathach under ר, and only pointed פּרס with a graver pause, as with Silluk, 4:3, in the cuneiform inscriptions Pâraça - signifies in biblical phraseology the Persian empire; comp. Dan 5:28; Dan 6:9, etc. לכלות, that the word of Jahve might come to an end. כּלה, to be completed, 2Ch 29:34. The word of the Lord is completed when its fulfilment takes place; hence in the Vulg. ut compleretur, i.e., למלּאות, 2Ch 36:21. Here, however, כּלות is more appropriate, because the notion of the lapse or termination of the seventy years predominates. The statement of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 25:11, etc., Jer 29:10; comp. 2Ch 36:21) concerning the desolation and servitude of Judah is here intended. These seventy years commenced with the first taking of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, when Daniel and other youths of the seed-royal were carried to Babylon (Dan 1:1-2) in the fourth year of King Jehoiakim; see the explanation of Dan 1:1. This year was the year 606 b.c.; hence the seventy years terminate in 536 b.c., the first year of the sole rule of Cyrus over the Babylonian empire. Then “Jahve stirred up the spirit of Coresh,” i.e., moved him, made him willing; comp. with this expression, 1Ch 5:26 and Hag 1:14. ויּעבר־קול, “he caused a voice to go forth,” i.e., he proclaimed by heralds; comp. Exo 36:6; 2Ch 30:5, etc. With this is zeugmatically combined the subsequent בּמכתּב וגם, so that the general notion of proclaiming has to be taken from יעבר קול, and supplied before these words. The sense is: he proclaimed throughout his whole realm by heralds, and also by written edicts.

Ezr 1:2

The proclamation - “Jahve the God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and He hath charged me to build Him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah” - corresponds with the edicts of the great kings of Persia preserved in the cuneiform inscriptions, inasmuch as these, too, usually begin with the acknowledgment that they owe their power to the god Ahuramazdâ (Ormuzd), the creator of heaven and earth.Comp. e.g., the inscription of Elvend in three languages, explained in Joach. Ménant, Exposé des éléments de la grammaire assyrienne, Paris 1868, p. 302, whose Aryan text begins thus: Deus magnus Auramazdâ, qui maximus deorum, qui hanc terram creavit, qui hoc coelum creavit, qui homines creavit, qui potentiam (?) dedit hominibus, qui Xerxem regem fecit, etc. An inscription of Xerxes begins in a similar manner, according to Lassen, in Die altperisischen Keilinschriften, Bonn 1836, p. 172.

In this edict, however, Cyrus expressly calls the God of heaven by His Israelitish name Jahve, and speaks of a commission from this God to build Him a temple at Jerusalem. Hence it is manifest that Cyrus consciously entered into the purposes of Jahve, and sought, as far as he was concerned, to fulfil them. Bertheau thinks, on the contrary, that it is impossible to dismiss the conjecture that our historian, guided by an uncertain tradition, and induced by his own historical prepossessions, remodelled the edict of Cyrus. There is, however, no sufficient foundation for such a conjecture. If the first part of the book of Ezra is founded upon contemporary records of the events, this forbids an à priori assertion that the matter of the proclamation of Cyrus rests upon an uncertain tradition, and, on the contrary, presupposes that the historian had accurate knowledge of its contents. Hence, even if the thoroughly Israelitish stamp presented by these verses can afford no support to the view that they faithfully report the contents of the royal edict, it certainly offers as little proof for the opinion that the Israelite historian remodelled the edict of Cyrus after an uncertain tradition, and from historical prepossessions. Even Bertheau finds the fact that Cyrus should have publicly made known by a written edict the permission given to the Jews to depart, probable in itself, and corroborated by the reference to such an edict in Ezr 5:17 and Ezr 6:3. This edict of Cyrus, which was deposited in the house of the rolls in the fortress of Achmetha, and still existed there in the reign of Darius Hystaspis, contained, however, not merely the permission for the return of the Jews to their native land, but, according to Ezr 6:3, the command of Cyrus to build the house of God at Jerusalem; and Bertheau himself remarks on Ezr 6:3, etc.: “There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the statement that Cyrus, at the time he gave permission for the re-settlement of the community, also commanded the expenses of rebuilding the temple to be defrayed from the public treasury.” To say this, however, is to admit the historical accuracy of the actual contents of the edict, since it is hence manifest that Cyrus, of his own free will, not only granted to the Jews permission to return to the land of their fathers, but also commanded the rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem. Although, then, this edict was composed, not in Hebrew, but in the current language of the realm, and is reproduced in this book only in a Hebrew translation, and although the occurrence of the name Jahve therein is not corroborated by Ezr 6:3, yet these two circumstances by no means justify Bertheau’s conclusion, that “if Cyrus in this edict called the universal dominion of which he boasted a gift of the god whom he worshipped as the creator of heaven and earth, the Israelite translator, who could not designate this god by his Persian name, and who was persuaded that the God of Israel had given the kingdom to Cyrus, must have bestowed upon the supreme God, whom Cyrus mocked, the name of Jahve, the God of heaven. When, then, it might further have been said in the document, that Cyrus had resolved, not without the consent of the supreme God, to provide for the rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem, - and such a reference to the supreme God might well occur in the announcement of a royal resolution in a decree of Cyrus, - the Israelite translator could not again but conclude that Cyrus referred to Jahve, and that Jahve had commanded him to provide for the building of the temple.” For if Cyrus found himself impelled to the resolution of building a temple to the God of heaven in Jerusalem, i.e., of causing the temple destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar to be rebuilt, he must have been acquainted with this God, have conceived a high respect for Him, and have honoured Him as the God of heaven. It was not possible that he should arrive at such a resolution by faith in Ahuramazdâ, but only by means of facts which had inspired him with reverence for the God of Israel. It is this consideration which bestows upon the statement of Josephus, Antt. xi. 1. 1, - that Cyrus was, by means of the predictions of Isaiah, Isa 41:25., Isa 44:28; Isa 45:1., who had prophesied of him by name 200 years before, brought to the conviction that the God of the Jews was the Most High God, and was on this account impelled to this resolution, - so high a degree of probability that we cannot but esteem its essence as historical.

For when we consider the position held by Daniel at the court of Darius the Mede, the father-in-law of Cyrus, - that he was there elevated to the rank of one of the three presidents set over the 120 satraps of the realm, placed in the closest relation with the king, and highly esteemed by him (Dan 6), - we are perfectly justified in adopting the opinion that Cyrus had been made acquainted with the God of the Jews, and with the prophecies of Isaiah concerning Coresh, by Daniel.Hence not only ancient expositors, but also in very recent times Pressel (Herzog’s Realencycl. iii. p. 232), and A. Koehler, Haggai, p. 9, etc., defend the statement of Josephus, l.c., ταῖτ ̓ (viz., the previously quoted prophecy, Isa 44:28) οὖν ἀναγνόντα καὶ θαυμάσαντα τὸ θεῖον ὁρμή τις ἔλαβε καὶ φιλοτιμία ποιῆσαι τὰ γεγραμμένα, as historically authentic. Pressel remarks, “that Holy Scripture shows what it was that made so favourable an impression upon Cyrus, by relating the rôle played by Daniel at the overthrow of the Babylonian monarchy, Dan 5:28, Dan 5:30. What wonder was it that the fulfiller of this prediction should have felt himself attracted towards the prophet who uttered it, and should willingly restore the vessels which Belshazzar had that night committed the sin of polluting?” etc. The remark of Bertheau, on the contrary, “that history knows of no Cyrus who consciously and voluntarily honours Jahve the God of Israel, and consciously and voluntarily receives and executes the commands of this God,” is one of the arbitrary dicta of neological criticism.

Granting, then, that the edict of Cyrus may have been composed in the current language of the realm, and not rendered word for word in Hebrew by the biblical author of the present narrative, its essential contents are nevertheless faithfully reproduced; and there are not sufficient grounds even for the view that the God who had inspired Cyrus with this resolution was in the royal edict designated only as the God of heaven, and not expressly called Jahve. Why may not Cyrus have designated the God of heaven, to whom as the God of the Jews he had resolved to build a temple in Jerusalem, also by His name Jahve? According to polytheistic notions, the worship of this God might be combined with the worship of Ahuramazdâ as the supreme God of the Persians. - On וגו עלי פּקד, J. H. Mich. well remarks: Mandavit mihi, nimirum dudum ante per Jesajam Isa 44:24-28, Isa 45:1-13, forte etiam per Danielem, qui annum hunc Cyri primum vivendo attigit (Dan 1:21; Dan 7:1) et Susis in Perside vixit Dan 8:2 (in saying which, he only infers too much from the last passage; see on Dan 8:2).

Ezr 1:3

In conformity with the command of God, Cyrus not only invites the Jews to return to Jerusalem, and to rebuild the temple, but also requires all his subjects to assist the returning Jews, and to give free-will offerings for the temple. מי בכם, who among you of all his people, refers to all those subjects of his realm to whom the decree was to be made known; and all the people of Jahve is the whole nation of Israel, and not Judah only, although, according to Ezr 1:5, it was mainly those only who belonged to Judah that availed themselves of this royal permission. עמּו אלהיו יהי, his God be with him, is a wish for a blessing: comp. Jos 1:17; 1 Esdras 2:5, ἔστω; while in 2Ch 36:23 we find, on the other hand, יהוה for יהי. This wish is followed by the summons to go up to Jerusalem and to build the temple, the reason for which is then expressed by the sentence, ”He is the God which is in Jerusalem.”

Ezr 1:4 וגו וכל־הנּשׁאר are all belonging to the people of God in the provinces of Babylon, all the captives still living: comp. Neh 1:2.; Hagg. Ezr 2:3. These words stand first in an absolute sense, and וגו מכּל־מּקמות belongs to what follows: In all places where he (i.e., each man) sojourneth, let the men of his place help him with gold, etc. The men of his place are the non-Israelite inhabitants of the place. נשּׂא, to assist, like 1Ki 9:1. רכוּשׁ specified, besides gold, silver, and cattle, means moveable, various kinds. עם־הנּדבה, with, besides the free-will offering, i.e., as well as the same, and is therefore supplied in Ezr 1:6 by על לבד. Free-will offerings for the temple might also be gold, silver, and vessels: comp. Ezr 8:28; Exo 35:21.

Ezr 1:5

In consequence of this royal summons, the heads of the houses of Judah and Benjamin, of the priests and Levites, - in short, all whose spirit God stirred up, - rose to go up to build the house of God. The ל in לכל serves to comprise the remaining persons, and may therefore be rendered by, in short, or namely; comp. Ewald, §310, a. The relative sentence then depends upon כּל without אשׁר. The thought is: All the Jews were called upon to return, but those only obeyed the call whom God made willing to build the temple at Jerusalem, i.e., whom the religious craving of their hearts impelled thereto. For, as Josephus says, Antt. xi. 1: πολλοὶ κατέμειναν ἐν τῇ Βαβυλῶνι τὰ κτήματα καταλιπεῖν οὐ θέλοντες.

Ezr 1:6

All their surrounders assisted them with gifts. The surrounders are the people of the places where Jews were making preparations for returning; chiefly, therefore, their heathen neighbours (Ezr 1:4), but also those Jews who remained in Babylon. חזּקוּ בידיהם is not identical in meaning with יד חזּק, to strengthen, e.g., Jer 23:14; Neh 2:18; but with החזיק בּיד, the Piel here standing instead of the elsewhere usual Hiphil: to grasp by the hand, i.e., to assist; comp. Lev 25:34. על לבד, separated to, besides; elsewhere joined with מן, Exo 12:37, etc. התנדּב connected with כּל without אשׁר, as the verbum fin. in Ezr 1:5, 1Ch 29:3, and elsewhere. האלהים לבית must, according to Ezr 1:4, be supplied mentally; comp. Ezr 2:68; Ezr 3:5; 1Ch 29:9, 1Ch 29:17.

Ezr 1:7

King Cyrus, moreover, caused those sacred vessels of the temple which had been carried away by Nebuchadnezzar to be brought forth, and delivered them by the hand of his treasurer to Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah, for the use of the house of God which was about to be built. הוציא, to fetch out from the royal treasury. The “vessels of the house of Jahve” are the gold and silver vessels of the temple which Nebuchadnezzar, at the first taking of Jerusalem in the reign of Jehoiakim, carried away to Babylon, and lodged in the treasure-house of his god (2Ch 36:7 and Dan 1:2). For those which he took at its second conquest were broken up (2Ki 24:13); and the other gold and silver goods which, as well as the large brazen implements, were taken at the third conquest, and the destruction of the temple (2Ki 25:14.; Jer 52:18.), would hardly have been preserved by the Chaldeans, but rather made use of as valuable booty.

Ezr 1:8

Cyrus delivered these vessels יד על, into the hand of the treasurer, to whose care they were entrusted; i.e., placed them under his inspection, that they might be faithfully restored. ממרדת is Mithridates. נּזבּר, answering to the Zend gazabara, means treasurer (see comm. on Dan. p. 514, note 4). This officer counted them out to the prince of Judah Sheshbazzar, undoubtedly the Chaldee name of Zerubbabel. For, according to Ezr 5:14, Ezr 5:16, שׁשׁבּצּר was the governor (פּחה) placed by Cyrus over the new community in Judah and Jerusalem, and who, according to Ezr 1:11 of the present chapter, returned to Jerusalem at the head of those who departed from Babylon; while we are informed (Ezr 2:2; Ezr 3:1, Ezr 3:8, and Ezr 4:3; Ezr 5:2) that Zerubbabel was not only at the head of the returning Jews, but also presided as secular ruler over the settlement of the community in Judah and Jerusalem. The identity of Sheshbazzar with Zerubbabel, which has been objected to by Schrader and Nöldeke, is placed beyond a doubt by a comparison of Ezr 5:16 with Ezr 3:8, etc., Ezr 5:2 : for in Ezr 5:16 Sheshbazzar is named as he who laid the foundation of the new temple in Jerusalem; and this, according to Ezr 5:2 and Ezr 3:8, was done by Zerubbabel. The view, too, that Zerubbabel, besides this his Hebrew name, had, as the official of the Persian king, also a Chaldee name, is in complete analogy with the case of Daniel and his three companions, who, on being taken into the service of the Babylonian king, received Chaldee names (Dan 1:7). Zerubbabel, moreover, seems, even before his appointment of פּחה to the Jewish community in Judah, to have held some office in either the Babylonian or Persian Court or State; for Cyrus would hardly have entrusted this office to any private individual among the Jews. The meaning of the word שׁשׁבּצּר is not yet ascertained: in the lxx it is written Σασαβασάρ, Σαβαχασάρ, and Σαναβάσσαρος; 1 Esdras has Σαμανασσάρ, or, according to better MSS, Σαναβασσάρ; and Josephus, l.c., Ἀβασσάρ.

Ezr 1:9-10

The enumeration of the vessels: 1. אגרטלים of gold 30, and of silver 1000. The word occurs only here, and is translated in the Septuagint ψυκτῆρες; in 1 Esdr. 2:11, σπονδεῖα. The Talmudic explanation of Aben Ezra, “vessels for collecting the blood of the sacrificed lambs,” is derived from אגר, to collect, and טלה, a lamb, but is certainly untenable. עגרטל is probably connected with Arab. qarṭallah, the rabbinical קרטיל, the Syriac karṭālā', the Greek κάρταλλος or κάρταλος, a basket (according to Suidas), κάρταλος having no etymology in Greek; but can hardly be derived, as by Meier, hebr. Wurzelwörterbuch, p. 683, from the Syriac ‛rṭl , nudavit, to make bare, the Arabic ‛arṭala, to make empty, to hollow, with the sense of hollow basins. 2. מחלפים   29. This word also occurs only here. The Sept. has παρηλλαγμένα (interpreting etymologically after חלף),   1 Esdr. θυΐ́σκαι, the Vulg. cultri, sacrificial knives, according to the rabbinical interpretation, which is based upon חלף, in the sense of to pierce, to cut through (Jdg 5:26; Job 20:24). This meaning is, however, certainly incorrect, being based linguistically upon a mere conjecture, and not even offering an appropriate sense, since we do not expect to find knives between vessels and dishes. Ewald (Gesch. iv. p. 88), from the analogy of מחלפות (Jdg 16:13, Jdg 16:19), plaits, supposes vessels ornamented with plaited or net work; and Bertheau, vessels bored after the manner of a grating for censing, closed fire-pans with holes and slits. All is, however, uncertain. 3.   כּפורים, goblets (goblets with covers; comp. 1Ch 15:18) of gold, 30; and of silver, 410. The word משׁנים is obscure; connected with כּסף כּפורי כּס it can only mean goblets of a second order (comp. 1Ch 15:18). Such an addition appears, however, superfluous; the notion of a second order or class being already involved in their being of silver, when compared with the golden goblets. Hence Bertheau supposes משׁנים to be a numeral corrupted by a false reading; and the more so, because the sum-total given in Ezr 1:11 seems to require a larger number than 410. These reasons, however, are not insuperable. The notion of a second order of vessels need not lie in their being composed of a less valuable metal, but may also be used to define the sort of implement; and the difference between the separate numbers and the sum-total is not perfectly reconciled by altering משׁנים into אלפים,     2000. 4. 1000 other vessels or implements.

Ezr 1:11 “All the vessels of gold and of silver were five thousand and four hundred.” But only 30 + 1000 אנרטלים, 29 מחלפים, 30 + 410 covered goblets, and 1000 other vessels are enumerated, making together 2499. The same numbers are found in the lxx. Ancient interpreters reconciled the difference by the supposition that in the separate statements only the larger and more valuable vessels are specified, while in the sum-total the greater and lesser are reckoned together. This reconciliation of the discrepancy is, however, evidently arbitrary, and cannot be justified by a reference to 2Ch 36:18, where the taking away of the greater and lesser vessels of the temple at the destruction of Jerusalem is spoken of. In Ezr 1:11 it is indisputably intended to give the sum-total according to the enumeration of the separate numbers. The difference between the two statements has certainly arisen from errors in the numbers, for the correction of which the means are indeed wanting. The error may be supposed to exist in the sum-total, where, instead of 5400, perhaps 2500 should be read, which sum may have been named in round numbers instead of 2499.Ewald (Gesch. iv. p. 88) and Bertheau think they find in 1 Esdr. 2:12, 13, a basis for ascertaining the correct number. In this passage 1000 golden and 1000 silver σπονδεῖα, 29 silver θυΐ́σκαι, 30 golden and 2410 silver φιάλαι, and 1000 other vessels, are enumerated (1000 + 10000 + 29 + 30 + 2410 + 1000 = 5469); while the total is said to be 5469. But 1000 golden σπονδεῖα bear no proportion to 1000 silver, still less do 30 golden φιάλαι to 2410 silver. Hence Bertheau is of opinion that the more definite statement 30, of the Hebrew text, is to be regarded as original, instead of the first 1000; that, on the other hand, instead of the 30 golden כּפורים,    1000 originally stood in the text, making the total 5469. Ewald thinks that we must read 1030 instead of 1000 golden אגרטלים (σπονδεῖα), and make the total 5499. In opposition to these conjectures, we prefer abiding by the Hebrew text; for the numbers of 1 Esdras are evidently the result of an artificial, yet unskilful reconciliation of the discrepancy. It cannot be inferred, from the fact that Ezra subsequently, at his return to Jerusalem, brought with him 20 golden כּפורים, that the number of 30 such כּפורים given in this passage is too small. הגּולה העלות עם, at the bringing up of the carried away, i.e., when they were brought up from Babylon to Jerusalem. The infinitive Niphal העלות, with a passive signification, occurs also Jer 37:11. List of Those Who Returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua - Ezra 2

The title (Ezr 2:1 and Ezr 2:2) announces that the list which follows it (vv. 3-67) contains the number of the men of the people of Israel who returned to Jerusalem and Judah from the captivity in Babylon, under the conduct of Zerubbabel, Joshua, and other leaders. It is composed of separate lists: of the families of the people, vv. 3-35; of the priests and Levites,Ezr 2:36-42; of the Nethinims and servants of Solomon, vv. 43-58; of families who could not prove their Israelite descent, and of certain priests whose genealogy could not be found, Ezr 2:59-63; and it closes with the sum-total of the persons, and of their beasts of burden, Ezr 2:64-67. This is followed by an enumeration of the gifts which they brought with them for the temple (Ezr 2:68 and Ezr 2:69), and by a final statement with regard to the entire list (Ezr 2:70). Nehemiah also, when he desired to give a list of the members of the community at Jerusalem, met with the same document, and incorporated it in the book which bears his name (Neh 7:6-73). It is also contained in 1 Esdr. 5:7-45. The three texts, however, exhibit in the names, and still more so in the numbers, such variations as involuntarily arise in transcribing long lists of names and figures. The sum-total of 42,630 men and 7337 servants and maids is alike in all three texts; but the addition of the separate numbers in the Hebrew text of Ezra gives only 29,818, those in Nehemiah 31,089, and those in the Greek Esdras 30,143 men. In our elucidation of the list, we shall chiefly have respect to the differences between the texts of Ezra and Nehemiah, and only notice the variations in 1 Esdras so far as they may appear to conduce to a better understanding of the matter of our text.

Ezra

The Jewish church puts on quite another face in this book from what it had appeared with; its state much better, and more pleasant, than it was of late in Babylon, and yet far inferior to what it had been formerly. The dry bones here live again, but in the form of a servant; the yoke of their captivity is taken off, but the marks of it in their galled necks remain. Kings we hear no more of; the crown has fallen from their heads. Prophets they are blessed with, to direct them in their re-establishment, but, after a while, prophecy ceases among them, till the great prophet appears, and his fore-runner. The history of this book is the accomplishment of Jeremiah's prophecy concerning the return of the Jews out of Babylon at the end of seventy years, and a type of the accomplishment of the prophecies of the Apocalypse concerning the deliverance of the gospel church out of the New-Testament Babylon. Ezra preserved the records of that great revolution and transmitted them to the church in this book. His name signifies a helper; and so he was to that people. A particular account concerning him we shall meet with, ch. vii., where he himself enters upon the stage of action. The book gives us an account, I. Of the Jews' return out of their captivity, ch. i., ii. II. Of the building of the temple, the opposition it met with, and yet the perfecting of it at last, ch. iii.-vi. III. Of Ezra's coming to Jerusalem, ch. vii., viii. IV. Of the good service he did there, in obliging those that had married strange wives to put them away, ch. ix., x. This beginning again of the Jewish nation was small, yet its latter end greatly increased.

In this chapter we have, I. The proclamation which Cyrus, king of Persia, issued out for the release of all the Jews that he found captives in Babylon, and the building of their temple in Jerusalem, ver. 1-4. II. The return of many thereupon, ver. 5, 6. III. Orders given for the restoring of the vessels of the temple, ver. 7-11. And this is the dawning of the day of their deliverance.

The Proclamation of Cyrus. (b. c. 536.)

1 Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying, 2 Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and he hath charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. 3 Who is there among you of all his people? his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel, (he is the God,) which is in Jerusalem. 4 And whosoever remaineth in any place where he sojourneth, let the men of his place help him with silver, and with gold, and with goods, and with beasts, beside the freewill offering for the house of God that is in Jerusalem.

It will be proper for us here to consider, 1. What was the state of the captive Jews in Babylon. It was upon many accounts very deplorable; they were under the power of those that hated them, had nothing they could call their own; they had no temple, no altar; if they sang psalms, their enemies ridiculed them; and yet they had prophets among them. Ezekiel and Daniel were kept distinct from the heathen. Some of them were preferred at court, others had comfortable settlements in the country, and they were all borne up with hope that, in due time, they should return to their own land again, in expectation of which they preserved among them the distinction of their families, the knowledge of their religion, and an aversion to idolatry. 2. What was the state of the government under which they were. Nebuchadnezzar carried many of them into captivity in the first year of his reign, which was the fourth of Jehoiakim; he reigned forty-five years, his son Evil-merodach twenty-three, and his grandson Belshazzar three years, which make up the seventy years. So Dr. Lightfoot, It is charged upon Nebuchadnezzar that he opened not the house of his prisoners, Isa. xiv. 17. And, if he had shown mercy to the poor Jews, Daniel told him it would have been the lengthening of his tranquillity, Dan. iv. 27. But the measure of the sins of Babylon was at length full, and then destruction was brought upon them by Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Persian, which we read of, Dan. v. Darius, being old, left the government to Cyrus, and he was employed as the instrument of the Jews' deliverance, which he gave orders for as soon as ever he was master of the kingdom of Babylon, perhaps in contradiction to Nebuchadnezzar, whose family he had cut off, and because he took a pleasure in undoing what he had done, or in policy, to recommend his newly-acquired dominion as merciful and gentle, or (as some think) in a pious regard to the prophecy of Isaiah, which had been published, and well known, above 150 years before, where he was expressly named as the man that should do this for God, and for whom God would do great things (Isa. xliv. 28; xlv. 1, &c.), and which perhaps was shown to him by those about him. His name (some say) in the Persian language signifies the sun, for he brought light and healing to the church of God, and was an eminent type of Christ the Sun of righteousness. Some was that his name signifies a father, and Christ is the everlasting Father. Now here we are told,

I. Whence this proclamation took its rise. The Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus. Note, The hearts of kings are in the hand of the Lord, and, like the rivulets of water, he turneth them which way soever he will. It is said of Cyrus that he knew not God, nor how to serve him; but God knew him, and how to serve himself by him, Isa. xlv. 4. God governs the world by his influence on the spirits of men, and, whatever good is done at any time, it is God that stirs up the spirit to do it, puts thoughts into the mind, gives to the understanding to form a right judgment, and directs the will which way he pleases. Whatever good offices therefore are, at any time, done for the church of God, he must have the glory of them.

II. The reference it had to the prophecy of Jeremiah, by whom God had not only promised that they should return, but had fixed the time, which set time to favour Sion had now come. Seventy years were determined (Jer. xxv. 12; xxix. 10); and he that kept the promise made concerning Israel's deliverance out of Egypt to a day (Exod. xii. 41) was doubtless as punctual to this. What Cyrus now did was long since said to be the confirming of the word of God's servants, Isa. xliv. 26. Jeremiah, while he lived, was hated and despised; yet thus did Providence honour him long after, that a mighty monarch was influenced to act in pursuance of the word of the Lord by his mouth.

III. The date of this proclamation. It was in his first year, not the first of his reign over Persia, the kingdom he was born to, but the first of his reign over Babylon, the kingdom he had conquered. Those are much honoured whose spirits are stirred up to begin with God and to serve him in their first years.

IV. The publication of it, both by word of mouth (he caused a voice to pass throughout all his kingdom, like a jubilee-trumpet, a joyful sabbatical year after many melancholy ones, proclaiming liberty to the captives), and also in black and white: he put it in writing, that it might be the more satisfactory, and might be sent to those distant provinces where the ten tribes were scattered in Assyria and Media, 2 Kings xvii. 6.

V. The purport of this proclamation of liberty.

1. The preamble shows the causes and considerations by which he was influenced, v. 2. It should seem, his mind was enlightened with the knowledge of Jehovah (for so he calls him), the God of Israel, as the only living and true God, the God of heaven, who is the sovereign Lord and disposer of all the kingdoms of the earth; of him he says (v. 3), He is the God, God alone, God above all. Though he had not known God by education, God made him so far to know him now as that he did this service with an eye to him. He professes that he does it, (1.) In gratitude to God for the favours he had bestowed upon him: The God of heaven has given me all the kingdoms of the earth. This sounds a little vain-glorious, for there were many kingdoms of the earth which he had nothing to do with; but he means that God had given him all that was given to Nebuchadnezzar, whose dominion, Daniel says, was to the end of the earth, Dan. iv. 22; v. 19. Note, God is the fountain of power; the kingdoms of the earth are at his disposal; whatever share any have of them they have from him: and those whom God has entrusted with great power and large possessions should look upon themselves as obliged thereby to do much for him. (2.) In obedience to God. He hat charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem; probably by a dream or vision of the night, confirmed by comparing it with the prophecy of Isaiah, where his doing it was foretold. Israel's disobedience to God's charge, which they were often told of, is aggravated by the obedience of this heathen king.

2. He gives free leave to all the Jews that were in his dominions to go up to Jerusalem, and to build the temple of the Lord there, v. 3. His regard to God made him overlook, (1.) The secular interest of his government. It would have been his policy to keep so great a number of serviceable men in his dominions, and seemed impolitic to let them go and take root again in their own land; but piety is the best policy. (2.) The honour of the religion of his country. Why did he not order them to build a temple to the gods of Babylon or Persia? He believed the God of Israel to be the God of heaven, and therefore obliged his Israel to worship him only. Let them walk in the name of the Lord their God.

3. He subjoins a brief for a collection to bear the charges of such as were poor and not able to bear their own, v. 4. "Whosoever remaineth, because he has not the means to bear his charges to Jerusalem, let the men of his place help him." Some take it as an order to the king's officers to supply them out of his revenue, as ch. vi. 8. But it may mean a warrant to the captives to ask and receive the alms and charitable contributions of all the king's loving subjects. And we may suppose the Jews had conducted themselves so well among their neighbours that they would be as forward to accommodate them because they loved them as the Egyptians were because they were weary of them. At least many would be kind to them because they saw the government would take it well. Cyrus not only gave his good wishes with those that went (Their God be with them, v. 3), but took care also to furnish them with such things as they needed. He took it for granted that those among them who were of ability would offer their free-will offerings for the house of God, to promote the rebuilding of it. But, besides that, he would have them supplied out of his kingdom. Well-wishers to the temple should be well-doers for it.

5 Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and the Levites, with all them whose spirit God had raised, to go up to build the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem. 6 And all they that were about them strengthened their hands with vessels of silver, with gold, with goods, and with beasts, and with precious things, beside all that was willingly offered. 7 Also Cyrus the king brought forth the vessels of the house of the Lord , which Nebuchadnezzar had brought forth out of Jerusalem, and had put them in the house of his gods; 8 Even those did Cyrus king of Persia bring forth by the hand of Mithredath the treasurer, and numbered them unto Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah. 9 And this is the number of them: thirty chargers of gold, a thousand chargers of silver, nine and twenty knives, 10 Thirty basons of gold, silver basons of a second sort four hundred and ten, and other vessels a thousand. 11 All the vessels of gold and of silver were five thousand and four hundred. All these did Sheshbazzar bring up with them of the captivity that were brought up from Babylon unto Jerusalem.

We are here told,

I. How Cyrus's proclamation succeeded with others. 1. He having given leave to the Jews to go up to Jerusalem, many of them went up accordingly, v. 5. The leaders herein were the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, eminent and experienced men, from whom it might justly be expected that, as they were above their brethren in dignity, so they should go before them in duty. The priests and Levites were (as became them) with the first that set their faces again towards Zion. If any good work is to be done, let ministers lead in it. Those that accompanied them were such as God had inclined to go up. The same God that had raised up the spirit of Cyrus to proclaim this liberty raised up their spirits to take the benefit of it; for it was done, not by might, nor by power, but by the Spirit of the Lord of hosts, Zech. iv. 6. The temptation perhaps was strong to some of them to stay in Babylon. They had convenient settlements there, had contracted an agreeable acquaintance with the neighbours, and were ready to say, It is good to be here. The discouragements of their return were many and great, the journey long, their wives and children unfit for travelling, their own land was to them a strange land, the road to it an unknown road. Go up to Jerusalem! And what should they do there? It was all in ruins, and in the midst of enemies to whom they would be an easy prey. Many were wrought upon by these considerations to stay in Babylon, at least not to go with the first. But there were some that got over these difficulties, that ventured to break the ice, and feared not the lion in the way, the lion in the streets; and they were those whose spirits God raised. He, by his Spirit and grace, filled them with a generous ambition of liberty, a gracious affection to their own land, and a desire of the free and public exercise of their religion. Had God left them to themselves, and to the counsels of flesh and blood, they would have staid in Babylon; but he put it into their hearts to set their faces Zionward, and, as strangers, to ask the way thither (Jer. l. 5); for they, being a new generation, went out like their father Abraham from this land of the Chaldees, not knowing whither they went, Heb. xi. 8. Note, Whatever good we do, it is owing purely to the grace of God, and he raises up our spirits to the doing of it, works in us both to will and to do. Our spirits naturally incline to this earth and to the things of it. If they move upwards, in any good affections or good actions, it is God that raises them. The call and offer of the gospel are like Cyrus's proclamation. Deliverance is preached to the captives, Luke iv. 18. Those that are bound under the unrighteous dominion of sin, and bound over to the righteous judgment of God, may be made free by Jesus Christ. Whoever will, by repentance and faith, return to God, his duty to God, his happiness in God, Jesus Christ has opened the way for him, and let him go up out of the slavery of sin into the glorious liberty of the children of God. The offer is general to all. Christ makes it, in pursuance of the grant which the Father has made him of all power both in heaven and in earth (a much greater dominion than that given to Cyrus, v. 2) and of the charge given him to build God a house, to set him up a church in the world, a kingdom among men. Many that hear this joyful sound choose to sit still in Babylon, are in love with their sins and will not venture upon the difficulties of a holy life; but some there are that break through the discouragements, and resolve to build the house of God, to make heaven of their religion, whatever it cost them, and they are those whose spirit God has raised above the world and the flesh and whom he has made willing in the day of his power, Ps. cx. 3. Thus will the heavenly Canaan be replenished, though many perish in Babylon; and the gospel-offer will not be made in vain. 2. Cyrus having given order that their neighbours should help them, they did so, v. 6. All those that were about them furnished them with plate and goods to bear the charges of their journey, and to help them in building and furnishing both their own houses and God's temple. As the tabernacle was made of the spoils of Egypt, and the first temple built by the labours of the strangers, so the second by the contributions of the Chaldeans, all intimating the admission of the Gentiles into the church in due time. God can, where he pleases, incline the hearts of strangers to be kind to his people, and make those to strengthen their hands that have weakened them. The earth helped the woman. Besides what was willingly offered by the Jews themselves who staid behind, from a principle of love to God and his house, much was offered, as one may say, unwillingly by the Babylonians, who were influenced to do it by a divine power on their minds of which they themselves could give no account.

How this proclamation was seconded by Cyrus himself. To give proof of the sincerity of his affection to the house of God, he not only released the people of God, but restored the vessels of the temple, v. 7, 8. Observe here, 1. How careful Providence was of the vessels of the temple, that they were not lost, melted down, or so mixed with other vessels that they could not be known, but that they were all now forthcoming. Such care God has of the living vessels of mercy, vessels of honour, of whom it is said (2 Tim. ii. 19, 20), The Lord knows those that are his, and they shall none of them perish. 2. Though they had been put into an idol's temple, and probably used in the service of idols, yet they were given back, to be used for God. God will recover his own; and the spoil of the strong man armed shall be converted to the use of the conqueror. 3. Judah had a prince, even in captivity. Sheshbazzar, supposed to be the same with Zerubbabel, is here called prince of Judah; the Chaldeans called him Sheshbazzar, which signifies joy in tribulation; but among his own people he went by the name of Zerubbabel—a stranger in Babylon; so he looked upon himself, and considered Jerusalem his home, though, as Josephus says, he was captain of the life-guard to the king of Babylon. He took care of the affairs of the Jews, and had some authority over them, probably from the death of Jehoiachin, or Jeconiah, who made him his heir, he being of the house of David. 4. To him the sacred vessels were numbered out (v. 8), and he took care for their safe conveyance to Jerusalem, v. 11. It would encourage them to build the temple that they had so much rich furniture ready to put into it when it was built. Though God's ordinances, like the vessels of the sanctuary, may be corrupted and profaned by the New-Testament Babylon, they shall, in due time, be restored to their primitive use and intention; for not one jot or tittle of divine institution shall fall to the ground.

CHAP. I Verſe 1. Now in the firſt year of Cyrus King of Perſia,]

Ver. 1. NOw] Heb. And; for the former Hiſtory, recorded in the Chronicles, is continued by Ezra that ready Scribe, and perfect in the Law, Chap. 7.6. Yet not ſo prompt or perfect can I deeme him, as that he ſhould, by memory, reſtore the Bible that was burnt, together with the Temple,Irenae. Tertuil. Clem. Alexi Hieron. Aug. Euſeb. Alſted. Chron pag. 267. Acts & Mon. by the Babylonians. And yet that was the opinion of many Ancients, grounded upon ſome paſſages in that Apocryphal Eſdras. We reade alſo of one Johannes Gatius Ciphaleditanus, who, out of the vaine confidence of his learning and memory, was wont to give out, that if the Holy Scripture ſhould be loſt out of the world, he would not doubt (by Gods grace) to reſtore it whole again. Of Cranmer indeed (a far better man, and a profounder Divine) it is ſtoried, that he had got moſt of the New Teſtament by heart. And of Beza, that being above eighty years of age, he could ſay perfectly without book, and Greek Chapter in Saint Pauls Epiſtles.M. Leigh. A[illegible: 1 letter] not. on John 5.39.

In the firſt year] Heb. In the one year. The Hebrews oft uſe One for Firſt. So do alſo the Apoſtles in Greek, Matth. 28.1. John 20.1, 19.1 Cor. 16.2. Rev. 6.1. One, being the firſt number; neither was it without a myſtery that Pythagoras bade his Scholars ever to have reſpect, [non-Latin text not transcribed]: as Moſes alſo his, ſaying, Hear O Iſrael, the Lord our God is one Lord, Deut. 6.4.

Of Cyrus] Heb. Coreſh, ſo named by God above an hundred years before he was born,See the like Joſiah, 1 Ki[illegible: 1 letter] 13.3. Iſay 40.28. and ſo honoured by the Perſians (as the founder of their Monarchy) that they liked the better of all that were Hawk-noſed, like unto him. The Perſian word ſignifieth a Lord, or great Prince, as Hen. Stephanus noteth: and thence the Greeks have their [non-Latin text not transcribed], Authority, [non-Latin text not transcribed], Lord: and We our word Sir, as ſome will have it. Plutarch in Artaxerxes ſaith, that the Perſians call the Sunne Cyrus. And it may very well be ſo,Peacham. for the Hebrews alſo call the Sunne [non-Latin text not transcribed] Cheres, from its gliſtering brightneſſe.

King of Perſia] So he had beene above twenty years before this, and done many great exploits: but this was the firſt year of his Empire, of his Coſmocratie, of the Monarchy tranſlated from the Babylonians to the Perſians. The greateſt Kingdomes have their times and their turnes, their riſe and their ruine, when they ſhall live by fame onely. Perſia, having oft changed her Maſters ſince Cyrus, remaineth a flouriſhing Kingdome to this day; but wholly Mahometan. Turk. Hiſt. [illegible: 1 letter]ol. 5. Which abominable ſuperſtition the Turks received from them, when in the year 1030. they won that Countrey under their Sultan Tangrolipix. Where it is hard to ſay (ſaith mine Author) whether nation loſt more, the Perſians by the loſſe of ſo great a Kingdome, Blounts Voy. into the Leu. pag. 81. or the Turks by embracing ſo great a vanity. To this day they acknowledge the Perſians better Mahometans then themſelves, which maketh the Turks farre better ſouldiers upon the Chriſtian then upon the Perſian.

That the Word of the Lord] For, it was He that ſpake by the mouth of his holy Prophets, Luke 1.70. and his word cannot be broken,Pſal. 31.5. John 10.35. for he is the God of Amen, asthe Prophet David ſomewhere calleth him; and all his promiſes are the iſſue of a moſt faithful and right Will void of all inſincerity and falſhood, Prov. 8.8.

By the mouth of Jeremy] That admirable Preacher (as Keckerman calleth him) that moſt eminent Prophet (as another) with whoſe writings,De Rhet. Eccleſ about this very reſtauration, Daniel conſulted, and therehence collected, that the time was come, Dan. 9.2. which put him upon that heavenly prayer: for he knew that Gods promiſes muſt be put in ſuit; and and it was to him that the Angel afterwards ſaid, I came for thy word, Dan. 10.14. God will come, according to his promiſe, but he will have his peoples prayers lead him. This liberty here granted to the Jewes, after ſo long captivity, was the fruit of many prayers, founded upon the promiſe, Jer. 25.12. and 29.10.

Might be fulfilled] As indeed it was exactly by the death of Belſhazzar ſlaine by Cyrus, who ſucceeded him, Dan. 5.30. In that night was Belſhazzar ſlaine, becauſe then exactly the ſeventy years were ended. So, for the ſame reaſon it is noted, Exod. 12.40, 41. that at midnight the firſt-borne of Egypt were ſlaine, becauſe juſt then the four hundred or four hundred and thirty years foretold were expired. So punctual is God in keeping his word. It is not here, as with men, A day breaketh no ſquare, &c. for he never faileth at his time.

The Lord ſtirred up the ſpirit] It was the mighty and immediate work of God (in whoſe hand are the hearts of all, both Kings and Captives, Lords and Loſels) to bring this wiſe and great Prince, in the very firſt entrance into his Monarchy, before things were fully ſettled, to diſmiſſe ſo great and ſo united a people (in reſpect of their cuſtome and religion) and ſo given to inſurrection (as was generally held) into their owne Countrey, with ſuch a faire and full Patent. This was the Lords owne work, and it was juſtly marvellous in the eyes of his people; who could hardly believe their owne eyes, but were for a while, like them that dreame. Then was their mouth filled with laughter, and their tongue with ſinging, &c. Pſal. 126.1, 2. Then was the great power and goodneſſe of God, in ſtirring up Cyrus to do this, acknowledged. Then alſo was the Kings clemency and courteſie no leſſe cried up and magnified then was that of Flaminius the Roman General at Athens, where for delivering them from ſervitude, he was little leſſe then deified: Or, that of our Queene Elizabeth, who for her merciful returning home certaine Italians that were taken priſoners in the eighty eight Invaſion, was termed Saint Elizabeth, by ſome at Venice: Whereof one told the Lord Carleton (afterwards Viſcount Dorcheſter) being there Embaſſadour, that although he were a Papiſt, yet he would never pray to any other Saint, but that Saint Elizabeth.

That he made Proclamation] Heb. He cauſed a voice to paſſe] ſc. by his Meſſengers and Miniſters. The Poſts went out, being haſtened by the Kings commandment, Eſth. 3.15. even thoſe Angarii. The Lord Chriſt alſo proclaiming liberty to the captives, and the opening of the priſon to them that are bound, Eſay 61.1. cauſeth his Word to run and to be glorified, to ſpread like a Sun-beame, as Euſebius ſaith the Goſpel did at firſt; to be carried as on Eagles wings, or on Angels wings, as it was thorough all Chriſtendome, when Luther firſt ſent forth his book De Captivitate Babylonicâ, of the Babyloniſh Captivity.

And put it alſo in writing] That it might be poſted up, and every where publiſhed. Vox audita perit: littera ſcripta manet, Chriſt hath written for us alſo the great things of his Law: And ſhould they then be counted a ſtrange thing? Hoſ. 8.12. See the Notes there. His Goſpel likewiſe he hath written to you that beleeve on the name of the Sonne of God, 1 John 5.13. and ponder his Paſſion eſpecially which is therefore ſo particularly ſet downe by four faithful Witneſſes, Sphinx Philoſ. that men may get it written not on the nailes of their hands (as one once did) but upon the tables of their hearts, there to abides as a perpetual picture; Non ſcripta ſolùm, ſed & ſculpta, as He ſaid, that we therein beholding, as in a glaſſe, the love of our Lord, might be changed into the ſame image, till our hearts became a very lump of love to him who loved us, and waſhed us from our ſinnes in his owne blood, and made us Kings and Prieſts unto God and his Father, Rev. 1.5, 6.

Ver. 2. The Lord God of heaven hath given me] This good language Cyrus might well learn of Daniel, who flouriſhed under his reign, Dan. 6.28. & probably acquainted him with the propheſies that went before of him, Iſa. 44.28. and 45.1. Jaddus the High-Prieſt did the like (many years after) to Alexander the Great: who not only thereupon ſpared the Jewes, but highly honoured them, as Joſephus relateth. Here then we ſee this Potentate of the earth giveth unto the Lord the glory due unto his Name, Pſal. 29.1, 2. acknowledging him the bleſſed and onely Potentate, 1 Tim. 6.16. One that both is in the heavens, and alſo doeth whatſoever he pleaſeth, both in heaven and in earth, Pſal. 115.3. and 135.6. The God of heaven, ſaith He, hath given me all the Kingdomes of the earth. This was farre better then that of Alexander the Great, whom when Lyſippus had pictured looking up to heaven with this Poſie, Iuppiter aſſerui terram mihi, tu aſſere coelum, &c. Alexander was ſo delighted with it, that he proclaimed that none ſhould take his picture but Lyſippus. Plin. lib. 6. cap. 16.

All the Kingdomes of the earth] i. e. Many of them, ſo that he was [non-Latin text not transcribed] a mighty Monarch, an abſolute Emperour. But to be [non-Latin text not transcribed] ſole Lord of the whole world, was never yet granted to any: though the great Cham of Cataia is reported to cauſe his Trumpets to be founded, every day aſſoone as he hath dined,Heyl. Geog. in token that he giveth leave to other Princes of the earth (whom he ſuppoſeth to be his vaſſals) to go to dinner. And the proud Spaniard (who affecteth to be Catholick Monarch) was well laughed at by Sir Francis Drake and his company,Camd. Eliſ. for his device of a Pegaſus flying out of a Globe of the earth ſet up in the Indies with this Motto —totus non ſufficit orbis. But he affecteth an univerſal Monarchy: and ſo perhaps did Cyrus, which maketh him here ſpeak ſo largely.

And he hath charged me] Et ipſe commiſit mihi, ſo Junius rendereth it. The word ſignifieth to viſit one, either for the better or the worſe. But according to the Chaldee and Syriack uſe, it ſignifieth to charge or command, as it is here, and 2 Chon. 36.22. fitly rendered. But how knew Cyrus this charge of Almighty God; otherwiſe then by books? Like as Daniel (who probably ſhewed him thoſe Propheſies of Eſay concerning him) underſtood by Jeremy 25.12. and 29.10. that the ſeventy years captivity were accompliſhed: and by Ezekiel, chap. 31.1, 2, 3. &c. (which he had read, likely, and revolved) he was the better able to give a right interpretation of Nebuchadnezzars dreame, Dan. 4.

To build him an houſe at Jeruſalem] i. e. To rebuild that which had beene once built by Solomon (whence Hegeſippus, not having the Hebrew tongue, will have Hieruſalem ſo named quaſi [non-Latin text not transcribed] Solomons Temple) a ſtately houſe indeed, and one of the ſeven wonders of the world. For albeit it was but one hundred and twenty foot long, and fourty foot broad; whereas the Temple at Epheſus was two hundred fourty and five foot long, and two hundred and twenty foot broad: Yet for coſtly and choyce materials, for curious and exact workmanſhip, for ſpiritual employment, and for myſtical ſignification, never was there the like edifice in the world. And happy had it beene for Cyrus, if laying aſide all his warlike expeditions and atchievements, he had wholly applyed himſelf to the building of this holy houſe, and to the ſtudy of thoſe things, that there he might have learned for his ſouls health.

Jeruſalem which is in Judah] Jeruſalem was part of it in Judah, and part in the tribe of Benjamin. The houſe here mentioned (viz. the Temple) ſtood in Benjamin, as was foretold it ſhould by Moſes, four hundred and fourty years before it was firſt built by Solomon, Deut. 33.12. And of Benjamin he ſaid, The beloved of the Lord, that is, Benjamin his darling, ſhall dwell in ſafety by him, and the Lord ſhall cover him all the day long, and he ſhall dwell betweene his ſhoulders, that is, betwixt thoſe two mountains, Moriah and Sion, wherein the Temple was built. Now becauſe Benjamin was the leaſt of all the tribes of Iſrael, and becauſe ſo much of it as lay within Judah (Joſh: 19.1, 9.) was comprized under Judah (1 Kings 11.13.) therefore is the Temple here ſaid to be in Jeruſalem which is in Judah. Hereby alſo this Jeruſalem in Judah is diſtinguiſhed from any other Jeruſalem, if there were any place in the world ſo called beſides. We reade of Pope Sylveſter the ſecond (who ſold his ſoul to the Devil for the Popedome) that ſaying Maſſe in a certaine Church in Rome, Funcc. Chronol. Jacob. Reu. pag. 109. called Jeruſalem, he fell ſuddenly into a Fever, whereof he died, the Devil claiming his owne: For the bargaine betwixt them was, that he ſhould continue Pope, till he ſang Maſſe in Jeruſalem: and now intellexit ſe à Diabolo amphiboliâ vocis circumventum: little dreamt the Pope of any other Jeruſalem but this in Judah, and this coſt him his life,Lib. 5. cap. 17. Anno Dom. 1003. Euſebius telleth us that Montanus the Haereſiarch called his Pepuza and Tymium (two pelting pariſhes in Phrygia) Jeruſalem; as if they had beene the only Churches in the world. Hiſt. David. George. p. 3. Hofman the Anabaptiſt had the like conceit of Straſburg in Germany; and Becold of Munſter; both which places they called the new Jeruſalem.

Ver. 3. Who is there among you of all his people] Many there were among them that affirmed deeply of being the people of God, who yet (tanquam monſtra marina) paſſed by this Proclamation with a deaf eare; and preferring haram domeſticam arae dominicae a ſwineſty before a Sanuctary, choſe rather to abide in Babylon, and there to dwell amongſt plants and hedges, 1 Chron. 4.23. making pots for the Kings garden, then to go up to Jeruſalem. So that, beſides this O yes, by the King, God was faine to cry, Ho, Ho, come forth and flee from the Land of the North: Deliver thy ſelf, O Zion, that dwelleſt with the daughter of Babylon, Zech. 2.6, 7. Ariſe ye, and depart: for this is not your reſt, becauſe it is polluted: it ſhall deſtroy you even with a ſore deſtruction, Mic. 2.10. Look how the Eagle hath much ado to get her young ones out of the neſt, pricking and beating them with her wings and talons; ſo was it here: and neither ſo could the Lord prevaile with the moſt of them, being as loth to depart, as Lot was out of Sodom, vel canis ab uncto cerio, or a dog from a fat morſel.

His God be with him] And then he needs no better company, no greater happineſſe: for he is ſure of a confluence of all comforts, of all that heart can wiſh, or need require. Tua praeſentia, Domine, Laurentio ipſam craticulam fecit dulcem, Aug. ſaith an Ancient, Thy preſence ſweeteneth all our occurrences. This was therefore a good wiſh of King Cyrus; neither did he therein any diſſervice to himſelf; for God hath promiſed to bleſſe thoſe that bleſſe any of his, Gen. 12.3. and not to let a good wiſh to ſuch go unrewarded, 2 Cor. 13.9.

Let him go up and build, &c.] As God had charged him, verſe 2. ſo doth he them. And it is as if he ſhould have ſaid with that Father. Unleſſe I ſtir up your hearts, as the Lord hath done mine, unleſſe I lay Gods charge upon you to ſet ſtrenuouſly upon this ſervice of his,Bern. Vobis erit damnoſum, mihi periculoſum. Timeo itaque damnum veſtrum, timeo damnationem meam, ſi tacuero. If now you go not up upon ſo great encouragement, God will ſurely bemeet with you.

He is the God] The onely true God, John 17.3. none like him, Mic. 7.18. The Lord your God is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords, a great God, a mighty and a terrible, Deut. 10.17. Is it not fit therefore that he have a Temple, a place of divine worſhip, which the Heathens deny not to their dunghill-deities?

Which is in Jeruſalem] That City of the great King, where he kept his Court, and afforded his ſpecial preſence, not of grace onely in his Ordinances, but of glory alſo ſometimes in his holy Temple, 2 Chron. 5.14. as in another heaven.

Ver. 4. And whoſoever remaineth in any place where he ſojourneth] Heb. Gar-ſhom. A name that Moſes gave his eldeſt ſonne borne in his baniſhment; for he ſaid I have beene a ſtranger in a ſtrange land, Exod. 2.22. Theſe poore captives had beene longer ſo then Moſes in Midian, and met with more hard meaſure, Pſal. 137.1, 8. But as thoſe who are borne in hell know no other heaven (as the Proverb is) ſo fared it not with a few of theſe; loth to be at the paines, and run the hazard of a voyage to the holy Land. A little with eaſe is held beſt. Let us who are ſtrangers here, haſte homeward, heaven-ward. Some of theſe poore Jewes had a minde to returne; but wanted meanes. For theſe neceſſitous people the King takes care and courſe here, that they be ſupplied and ſet forward on their journey after a godly ſort, or worthy of God, (as Saint John phraſeth it, 3 John 6.) who elſe will require it.

Let the men of his place] Whether Jewes or Proſelytes, brethren by race, grace, or place onely.

Help him wish ſilver] Heb. Give him a lift out of the duſt, as Jobs friends did him off the dunghill: as Joſeph did his brethren when he filled their bags, [non-Latin text not transcribed]. and returned them their moneys; And as all Chriſtians are bound and bid to ſupport or ſhoar up their weaker brethren, 1 Theſſ. 5 14.

With ſilver an with gold] Theſe are notable good levers at a dead lift in this preſent world, where money beares the maſtery, and anſwereth all things: Eccleſ. 10.14. a ſatisfactory anſwer it giveth to whatſoever is deſired, or demanded: He that helpeth a man therefore in his neceſſity with ſilver and gold, is a friend indeed. Let a man make God his friend, and then (ſaith Eliphaz,) the Almighty ſhall be his gold, and he ſhall have plenty of ſilver, Job 22.25. Jacob ſhall be ſure of ſo much as ſhall bring him to his journeys end, a ſufficiency (if not a ſuperfluity) of all things, needful to life and godlineſſe.

And with goods] Heb. Recuſh (whence haply our Engliſh words Riches and Caſh) chattels, movables, gathered ſubſtance, as the word ſignifieth, which whoſoever he was that firſt called ſubſtance, was utterly miſtaken; ſith wiſdome onely (that is, godlineſſe) is durable ſubſtance, Prov. 8.21. Wealth is but a ſemblance, Proverbs 23.5. 1 Corinth. 7.31. And he that firſt called Riches Goods, Pſal. 4.6. was a better huſband then Divine. But it may be thought, the moſt are ſuch husbands: ſith the common cry is, Who will ſhew us any good? a good booty, a good bargaine, a good beaſt, &c.? That one thing neceſſary that is both Bonum hominis, The good of man, Micah 6.84 and Totum hominis, The whole of man, Eccleſ. 12.13. lieth wholly neglected by the moſt.

And with beaſts] Thoſe moſt ſerviceable creatures both ad eſum & ad uſum, for food and other uſes, as Sheep, Horſes, Camels, Dromedaries, ſwift, patient, painful.

Beſides the free-will-offering] Which the King preſumeth all Gods free-hearted people (Voluntieres, every ſoul of them, Pſal. 110.3.) will be moſt forward unto,See Lev. 5.6, 12. and 14.10, 21, 30. In Pſal. 1. in ſo good a work, ſo acceptable a ſervice. God ſtraineth upon no man, Exod. 25.2. and 35.5. Lex quaerit voluntarios, The Law calleth for Volunteires, ſaith Ambroſe. See Eſay 56.6. and 2 Cor. 8.12. and 9.7. and learne to come off roundly and readily in works of Piety and Charity: for elſe all's loſt; ſith Virtus nolentium nulla eſt, unwilling ſervice is nothing ſet by.

That is in Jeruſalem] This City he ſo often nameth,Pſal. 137:6. that he may ſeeme delighted with the very mention of it: and to be of the ſame minde with thoſe pious captives, that vowed to preferre Jeruſalem (that joy of the whole earth) before their chief joy, to make it aſcend above the head of their joy, as the Hebrew hath it.

How then ſhould it chear up our hearts to think of heaven, and that we are written among the living in Jeruſalem, Eſay 4.3? fellow-citizens with the Saints, and of the houſhold of heaven, Eph. 2.19?

Verſe 5. Then roſe up the chief of the fathers] Thoſe, who are therefore crowned and chronicled in the next Chapter. Thoſe Magnates Magnites, that drew on others by their example. Thoſe Viri gregis, he-goats before the flocks, men of publike places and authority, active for Reformation, who hearkened to that divine call, Jer. 50.8. Remove out of the middeſt of Babylon, and go forth out of the land of the Caldeans, and be as the hegoats before the flocks. Theſe Nobles aroſe, being rowſed and raiſed by that Noble Spirit of God, Pſal. 51.12. that Kingly ſpirit, the Chaldee rendereth it; ſuch as was found in Araunah that famous Jebuſite, 2 Sam. 24.23. with Zech. 9.7. and is a quickening Spirit in every good ſoul, cauſing them to make riddance, as Baruc did, Nehem. 3.20.Gen. 29. Ambroſe. and to take long ſtrides toward heaven, as Jacob did toward Padan-Aram: for, Neſcit tarda molimina Spiritus ſancti gratia. The Spirit of grace knoweth no ſlow paces;Mantuan; but is quick of diſpatch. Up get theſe Chieftains when once they hear, Surge, age, Summe Pater, as one ſaid once to the Biſhop of Rome, exciting him to make warre upon the Turk.

And the Prieſts and the Levites] Fit it was that theſe ſhould be of the firſt and forwardeſt at Temple-work: whoſe proper employment is was to teach Jacob Gods judgements, and to put incenſe before him continually, Deut, 33.10. to wait at the Altar, and to be partakers with the Altar, 1 Cor, 9.13.

With all them whoſe ſpirit God had raiſed up] Not of Judah and Benjamin onely (thoſe beſt of the Tribes, and trueſt to their Princes and principles) but alſo of Ephraim and Manaſſeh, 1 Chron. 9.3. with Ezek. 37.16, 17, 21, 22. even as many of the Iſraelites, as were acted by Gods Spirit of judgement and of burning, Iſa. 4.4. firing them up to an holy contention in ſo noble and neceſſary a buſineſſe, and leading them into the land of uprightneſſe, Pſal. 143.10. The fruit of this good Spirit is in all goodneſſe and righteouſneſſe and truth, Epheſ. 5.9. the work of it upon the ſonnes of God who are led by it, Rom. 8.14. is not onely an external invitation by the Word and Sacraments, or a meere moral perſwaſion (Cyrus his Proclamation here would have availed but little with this people, if God had not moved their hearts) but an effectual drawing of the heart whereby operating irreſiſtibly the ſinner is converted: and whereby cooperating infallibly he perſevereth in grace unto the very end, John 6.44. This conduct of the holy Spirit we muſt both earneſtly beg with David, Pſal. 14.10. and as carefully obſerve and obey his motions, as ever David did the out-goings of God in the tops of the mulberry trees, 1 Chron. 14.15. for theſe are the ſound of his goings, and the footſteps of his Anointed, Pſal. 89.51.

To build the houſe of the Lord] This was that they aimed at, rather then their owne liberty. Choice and excellent ſpirits can eaſily drowne all ſelf-reſpects in the glory of God. It was the care of thoſe good people in Joels dayes, that there might be a meat-offering and a drink-offering unto the Lord their God, what-ever became of their owne Carcaſſes, Joel 2.14. And when the daily ſacrifice ceaſed by the tyranny of Antiochus, they looked upon it as an abomination of deſolation, Dan. 9.27. The Jewes at this day are very earneſt to be rebuilding the deſtroyed Temple at Jeruſalem, out of their blinde zeale: but they have neither any Cyrus to encourage them (Julian the Apoſtate once did, in ſpight to the Chriſtians, but it came to nothing) nor the Spirit of God to excite them to ſuch an unwarrantable work.

Verſe 6. And all they that were about them] Both their countrymen the Jewes (that thought not good to go themſelves, or not yet, till they ſhould ſee further; there is none ſo wiſe as the ſluggard, Prov. 26.16.) and others of the neighbourhood: for the Egyptians may lend Jewels to the Iſraelites, dogs may lick Lazarus his ulcers, and the earth may help the woman, by opening her mouth, and ſwallowing up the ſtood caſt out after her by the Dragon to drown her, Rev. 12.16.

Strengthened their hands] Which elſe, for want of ſuch ſupport, would have hung down, and their feeble knees buckled under them, ere they had come to their countrey: neither could they, without ſuch ſupplies, have ſo comfortable carried on the work they went about. For, if wiſdome be a defence, or a ſhadow, to thoſe that have ſeene the Sunne (as in the former verſe) and are ſcorched with the hear of it, ſo is money too, ſaith Solomon, Eccleſ. 7.12. and though Wiſdome without wealth is good, yet it is better with an inheritance, verſe 11. which is not only an ornament, but an inſtrument of vertue. When men go on Virtute duce, comite fortunâ, then it is well with them, as it was with good Joſiah, Jer. 22.15, 16. But Agur would not be poor, leſt he ſhould be put upon ill courſes, Prov. 30.9. put to his ſhifts Poor Hagar, when the water was ſpent in the bottle, caſt the childe under the ſhrubs, Gen. 21.15.

With veſſels of ſilver, with gold, with goods, and with beaſts] See the Note on Verſe 4. Theſe are things that men do not uſually ſo eaſily part with to others, till they needs muſt. Euclio in the Comedian ſits abrood upon his heaps and hoards, and will not be drawn off. Shall Nabal take his bread and his fleſh, and give it to thoſe he knows not, 1 Sam. 25? Miſers will as ſoon part with their blood as their good whence the Chaldees call their money Dam, that is, blood. Many a man ſhewes himſelf like the Corniſh-chough, which will ſteale a piece of money, and hiding it in ſome hole, will never help her ſelf or any other with it afterwards. Hermocrates being loth that any man ſhould enjoy his goods after him, made himſelf by his Will, heir of his own goods. Athenaeus telleth of one, that at his death devoured many pieces of Gold, and ſewed the reſt in his coat, commanding that they ſhould be all buried with him. But theſe in the text ſeeme to have beene of the race of thoſe Perſians ſpoken of, Iſa. 13.17. which regarded not ſilver, and as for gold they cared not much for it. Or, if they were Proſelytes to the Church, then they had learned (with Tyrus now alſo converted) to give over heaping and hoarding of wealth, and therewith to feed and cloath Gods poor Saints; and ſo to furniſh them for their journey to their Fathers houſe, that they may eat ſufficiently, and have durable cleathing, Iſa. 23.18. This was Gods work upon their hearts; And Quando Chriſtus magiſter, quàm citò diſcirur quod decetur? Auguſtine. Whereunto may be added, that Cyrus, who ſet forth this Edict, as he was an abſolute Sovereigne, (and ſo his word went for a law) ſo he was a gracious and courteous Prince, it a ut Patris nomen meruerit, ſo that he merited the name and title of Father of his Countrey, and might command any thing of them.

And with precious things] Even the very beſt of the beſt they had. The word ſignifieth praeſtantiſſimum & pretioſiſſimum in quocunque genere fructuum, metallorum, gemmarum, veſtium, the choyceſt and chiefeſt of all kinde of commodities.Such as Eleazar gave to Rebecca and her brother Gen. 24. & ſuch as Jehoſaphat gave his younger ſon[illegible: 1 letter], 2 Chron. 21.3. For the purchaſe of the pearle of price, the wiſe Merchant makes a thorough ſale of all. Barnabas parteth with his lands, Zacheus with his goods, Matthew with his meat, the Centurion with his money, to build thoſe Synagogues that wicked Antiochus had thrown down, and theſe in the Text, with their moſt precious things, to reedifie that Temple that Nebuchadnezzar had burnt.

Beſides all that was willingly offered] A free-will offering then there was (as verſe 4.) brought in by Gods willing people, Pſal. 110.3. that wait for Gods Law, as Eſay 42.8. and hold with that Ancient, that it is nimis anguſta innocentia, ad legem bonum eſſe, to do no more ſervice to God then needs muſt to get ſo much grace onely as will keep life and ſoul together, (that is, ſoul and hell aſunder,) this they judge to be a low and unworthy ſtraine of ſome good people. David voweth free-will-offerings often,Pſal. 5.6. 1 Chr. 29, 8, 9. and could beteeme God a great deale more love and ſervice then he is able to performe to him. Thoſe good ſouls, Zach. 8.21. call upon themſelves and one another,1 Sam. 1.4.21. Luke 2.41, 42: to be continually going before the Lord, and to ſeek the Lord of hoſts, I (ſaith each for himſelf) will go alſo. Hannah went up with her husband every year to the Feaſt: ſo did the Virgin Mary to the Paſſeover with her Sonne Jeſus: yet none were expreſſely commanded ſo to do but males; and thoſe alſo nothing under twenty years of age, as fit to be numbered, Exod. 30.14. So thoſe amongſt us that hear week-day-Sermons, as Mary did, Luke 10.42. and many other good people in our Saviours dayes, Luke 19.47, 48. and 21.37, 38. Hereby we ſhall ſhew our love, and do a ſervice highly accepted in heaven.

Verſe 7. Alſo Cyrus the King brought forth the veſſels] For example to others, & juſſit, & geſſit, he did himſelf what he commanded to be done, and ſo became a living Law, a walking Statute. So Juſtinian would not put the veſſels of the Temple (taken by Titus) and recovered from Genſericus into the publike treaſury, but reſtored them.

Which Nebuchadnezzar had brought forth] With profane and ſacrilegious hands, ſome of theſe ſacred veſſels and utenſils of the Temple, he had cut in pieces, 2 Kings 24.13. and others he carried away, 2 Chron. 36.7. whole and entire. This he did out of covetouſneſſe (that auri ſacra fames) and in ſcorne of all religion (rather then hatred of the Jewiſh ſuperſtition, or to avenge the quarrel of Gods Covenant) like as for the ſame reaſon his ſucceſſour Cambyſes deſtroyed the Egyptian Idols.Virg. Iſa. 10.

And had put them] There was a ſweet providence in that: to the end that being there reſerved, they might in due time be reſtored (as here they are) to the houſe of God at Jeruſalem. And although that was a moſt unfit place to keep them in (for what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols?) and Belſhazzar moſt profanely abuſed them,2 Cor. 6.16. Dan. 5.2. in that drunken feaſt of his (hence he is called the feſtival King, Ezek. 21.5. 6.) yet being ſanctified againe, and dedicated to the true and firſt owner, the God of Iſrael, they might lawfull be made uſe of. Not only things indifferent abuſed, may yet be uſed in the ſervice of God (as thoſe ſix water-pots were by our Saviour, John 2. though they had beene ſuperſtitiouſly abuſed for private purification) but alſo Idolatrous things and places. As Gideon took the Bullock appointed for Baal and the Grove, and offered the Bullock with that wood in ſacrifice to the Lord, Judg. 6.26. The like the Bethſhemites did by the Philiſtines Cart and Kine. The Mount of Olives was ſhamefully abuſed to idolatry by Solomon and others, ſo that it was called The Mount of corruption, 2 Kings 23.13. and yet was it our Saviours uſual Oratory, or place of Prayer.

In the houſe of his Gods] Bel and Nebo, Eſay 46.1. Theſe were Babylons chief gods. The Original of Bel is ſaid to be this: Ninus having made an Image of his father Belus, all that came to ſee it were pardoned for all their offences: whence in time that Image came to be worſhipped, and then afterwards a multitude more; Inſomuch as, [non-Latin text not transcribed], &c. Hef. that in Heſiods time the number of Heatheniſh gods was grown to thirty thouſand. And in China at this day ſome tell us that there are no fewer then an hundred thouſand Idols.

O curas hominum! O quantum eſt in rebus inane! [non-Latin text not transcribed]. &c.

Gods theſe Mawmets are called here; not becauſe they were ſo, (for there is one God onely, ſaid Pythagoras, and other Heathens) but becauſe Nebuchadnezzar falſely held them ſo. Like as elſewhere the gods of Damaſcus are ſaid to have ſmitten Ahaz, who therefore ſacrificed to them, 2 Chron. 20.23. not as if thoſe Idols were any thing in the world, or could do any thing at all to him, Jer. 10.5. 1 Cor. 8.4. but onely that he conceited ſo; and that the devil (who is [non-Latin text not transcribed], as Syneſius truly ſaith) abuſed his credulity.

Ver. 8. Even thoſe did Cyrus King of Perſia] ſo ſtiled, becauſe though he was Monarch of many Countries, yet Perſia was his hereditary Kingdom, and Perſepolis the place of his reſidence: which great City was afterwards burnt by Alexander the Great, at the motion and by the requeſt of a baſe harlot.

By the hand of Mithridath the treaſurer] Heb. Gizbar; Inde Gaſpar, ſaith one. Mithridates King of Pontus was famous in after-ages, or rather infamous for his craft in ſaving himſelf,Val. Max. and his cruelty to the Roman Merchants, trading thorow his territories, killing fourſcore thouſand of them with one letter.

And numbred them unto Shezbazzar] Joy in tribulation; this is the ſignification of the word: A fit name for a Prince,Neminen à ſe dimiſit triſtem. Sucton. who ſhould be Decliciae orbis, as Titus the Emperour, of whom it is ſaid, that he never ſent away any ſuitor ſad or diſcontented: and remembring on a day that he had not done any poor man good, he cried out to his friends, Hodie non regnavimus: Amici, diem perdidi, accounting that day loſt wherein he had not ſhewed ſome man courteſie. Such a gracious Prince was Job, chap. 29.12. I delivered the poore that cried, ſaith He,Grand. Sign. Se[illegible: 1 letter]ag 148. and the fatherleſſe, and him that had none to help him. The great Turk ſtileth himſelf The worlds refuge: profeſſing that all that lament unto him ſhall have redreſſe and ſuccour. James the fifth of Scotland was called The poor mans King, for his readineſſe to right and relieve the afflicted. Zerubbabel, however he came by this name Shesbazzar (for that he was the man I take for granted, Ezra 5.16. with chap. 3.8. Zech. 4.9. though Junius think otherwiſe) he deſerved it doubtleſſe: and of him it might well be ſaid,Vopiſous. as the Hiſtorian doth of Probus the Emperour, Si probi nomen non haberet, habere cognomen poſſet, Speed. 723. pity he had beene called any thing but Probus, ſo honeſt a Prince he was: think the like here. The Parliament here held Anno 1376, was called The Good Parliament: and another not long after Parlamentum benedictum. The bleſſed Parliament. God grant us ſuch a one next; for at preſent we are without any, but not without cauſe to cry out,This was written, May 18. 1653. as thoſe in Jeremy, chap. 8.20, 22. The harveſt is paſt, the Summer is ended, and we are not helped. Is there no balme in Gilead? is there no Phyſician there? Why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered? We looked for peace, but no good came: and for a time of health, and behold trouble, ver. 15.

Verſe 9. And this is the number of them] Had they not beene things of great price and uſe, they would not have beene numbered, Cant. 6.8. The Queenes and Concubines are numbered how many; but not the Virgins, that bring not forth fruit to God. Men uſe not to count how many pibbles they have in their yard, or piles of graſſe in their field, as they do how many pence in their purſe, or ſheepe in their fold. When the Great God ſhall count his peoples flittings, bottle up their teares (as ſweet water) book up their ſighs (as memorable matters) Pſal. 56.8. ſhall we not ſay of them as the Jewes did of Lazarus, when Jeſus wept, Behold how he loves them? When the very hairs of their head are all numbered, Matth. 10.30. ſo that not one of them falleth to the ground without their heavenly Father, what ſtore think we, ſetteth He by their perſons, by their performances? I know thy work, and thy labour, Rev. 2.19. I pitie this people, they have beene with me now three dayes, and faſting they are, and farre from home, and faint they may, if ſent away empty, Matth. 15.32. Lo, is not this a wonderful condeſcenſion, that Chriſt ſhould conſider tantus tantillos & tales, and reckon every circumſtance of their ſervice ſo particularly and punctually, that he might give to every man according to his works? Oh his Jewels, his book of remembrance, &c. Mal. 3.16, 17! See the Notes there.

Thirty chargers] Serving to hold ſuch parts of the Sacrifices as were to be eaten by the Prieſts and others.

Nine and twenty knives] Sacrificing knives, richly hafted.

Verſe 10. Thirty baſins of gold] Theſe were to hold the ſprinkling-water, or blood.

And other veſſels] Of ſundry ſorts, whereof ſee 1 Kings 7.50.

Verſe 11. All the veſſels of gold and of ſilver] Thoſe beſt of mettals, and therefore fitteſt for his uſe and ſervice, who is Good, Pſal. 106.1. Better, Pſal. 108.9. Beſt, Phil. 1. 23. goodneſſe it ſelf, Matth. 19.17. Whoſe great purſe is the Earth, with All that is either on it or in it, Pſal. 24.1. whoſe great ſtorehouſe are the Stars and Planets, the Sun eſpecially making theſe mettals, and cauſing plenty, Deut. 28.12. Let us laviſh out of the bag, and when we have honoured the Lord with the Beſt of our beſt, cry out with David, Of thine owne, Lord, have we given thee, and with Juſtinian, 1. Chron. 29.6 Cedren. dedicating a very rich Communion-table, [non-Latin text not transcribed] &c.