Q: In Era 1:1, who wrote this book?

A: The Book of Ezra does not say directly. Ezra was a learned scribe, and it is very likely that he wrote the book between 456 B.C. and 444 B.C.. The use of first person in Ezra 7-10 indicates that it was Ezra, though it is possible parts could have been written down by someone else later.

   The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.651 says that the style of Chronicles and Ezra are similar, so perhaps Ezra wrote both.

   It is usually thought that some events of Ezra were earlier than Nehemiah and some at the same time. On the other hand, Nehemiah 3:1 says that when Nehemiah was in Jerusalem the high priest of Eliashib, and in Ezra 10:6 it says that Ezra went to the room of Jehohanan the son of Eliashib. But on the first hand, Ezra 10:6 no where does it say that Eliashib was the high priest when Ezra went ot his room.

   Some liberal critics say that Ezra and Nehemiah were written much later, during the time of Alexander of Macedon (c.330 A.C.), because Nehemiah 12:11,22 mentions Jaddua, and at the time of Alexander there was a high priest with the same name. However, is not necessarily the same Jaddua. It is more likely that the later Jaddua was a grandson of the earlier one, (like the names Tobias and Artaxerxes). Likewise it is thought that Josephus got mixed up in the Persian period because there were two kings named Artaxerxes and two named Darius.

   See Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.14-16, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.579,582, the New International Bible Commentary p.488, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.294, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.471 for more info.

Q: In Era 1:1-10:44, what are some interesting features of this book?

A: About a quarter of the book is in what is called “Imperial Aramaic” (verses 4:7-6:18 and 7:12-26), which are mainly the official documents. Daniel is also written in both Hebrew and Aramaic. Ezra has 280 total verses, of which only 109 verses are narrative, 44 verses are letters, 10 verses are prayer. It has 111 verses registering people. The first two verses of Ezra are the same as the last two verses of 2 Chronicles. Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 are virtually the same. (So if you want to memorize scripture and get double the benefit….). This has some people thinking that the same author wrote Ezra and 2 Chronicles. But a more likely scenario is that 2 Chronicles was written after Ezra, and Ezra was once of the sources that the chronicler used.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.580,587, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.471, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.297, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.652 for more info.

Q: In Ezr, what manuscripts do we have preserved today from this period?

A: Besides the Bible, there are a number of Greek and other writings, but this answer only addresses physical writing archaeologists have actually found preserved today. Here are some of them from 850 B.C. up to about 400 B.C..

The Moabite Stone. (850 B.C.) A photograph is in A General Introduction to the Bible p.335. See The Bible As History p.237 for the text, and the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1145-1146 for more info.

At Beir Allah in the Jordan Valley, a schoolboy’s writing practice mentions Balaam son of Beor three times. It was radiocarbon dated to 800/760 B.C. Listen to the John Ankerberg tape on Exploding the J.E.P.D Theory by Walter Kaiser, Jr., or read The NIV Study Bible 1985 p.223 for more info.

Shalmaneser III texts (836 B.C.) in Assyria. Mention of the Medes and Tubal peoples.

Sargon texts (732 B.C.) in Assyria. Mentions the Tubal people.

Sargon II texts (722-705 B.C.)

The Assyrian Words of Ahiqar (700-400 B.C. Aramaic, and possibly Akkadian) (An English translation of this is in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha volume 2 p.494-507).

Many other Assyrian records

Many Babylonian Records

Persian Behistun Rock

Aramaic copy of the Behistun rock in Elephantine Island in southern Egypt

The Babylonian column copy of the Behistun rock

The Cyrus Cylinder (c.438 B.C.) You can see a picture of it in the Rose Book of Charts, Maps & Time Lines p.78.

In the Elephantine papyri (Cowley #21), Darius commands the Jews there to observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread. See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary p.649.

Elephantine papyrii Cowley #30 (407 B.C.) The letter dictated by Jedaniah to Bagohi, the governor of Judha asking for help in rebuilding the temple of “YHW” in Elephantine. This letter mentions the sons of Sanballat [sn’blt], called the governor of Samaria. See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary volume 4 p.570, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.677, and Persia and the Bible p.242 for more info. The Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea scrolls vol.2 p.824 says this letter was dated by the writer as November 25, 407 B.C. Eerdmans’ Bible Dictionary p.817 says that the Egyptians and the Persian governor Vidranga destroyed the temple at Elephantine in 419 B.C.

The Samarian Papyri from Wadi ed-Daliyeh (WDSP 11 front 13) mentions Sanballat [sn’blt]. See The Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls vol.2 p.824 for more info.

Ostraca on Elephantine Island. See Persia and the Bible p.245-246.

Murashu banking documents in Nippur. These texts have the names of 2,500 individuals, 70 of which are Jewish. See The Bible Almanac p.396 and Persia and the Bible p.243 for more info.

Samarian Papyrii

A memorandum by Bagoas, the Persian governor of Judah.

Over 30 tablets in Susa, and 1 tablet in Borsippa mention up to four Persian officials named “Marduku” or “Marduka”.

Two hall inscriptions in caves 11 miles west of Amman, Jordan mention “Tobiah” in Aramaic. (From 590 B.C. to as late as 200 B.C.)

Q: In Ezr, what is an outline of this book?

A: Here is a high-level outline.

1-6 Return and rebuilding the Temple

..1-2 The return under Zerubbabel (538 B.C.)

….1 Cyrus’ decree and preparations

….2 The roll of 50K returnees

..3-6 Rebuilding the Temple

….3 Building the altar and temple foundation

….4 Opposition under Cyrus, Ahasuerus, and Artaxerxes

…5 Further opposition under Darius

…6 Temple completion under Darius

7-10 Return and rebuilding the community

..7-8 The return under Ezra (458 B.C.)

….7 The decree of Artaxerxes I

….8 List of 4-5K returnees and their trip

..9-10 Rebuilding the community

.…9 Mixed marriages and Ezra’s prayer

.…10 The peoples’ confession and covenant

Q: In Ezr 1:1-10:44 why was all the material in Ezra put in Ezra?

A: Scripture does not say. Some feel that less detail could have been put there. On the other hand, more details and perhaps documents could have been added. But it appears that the overriding reason for the material that Ezra put there is to demonstrate and document how God fulfilled His prophecy to restore the Jews to the Promised land after the seventy years of captivity.

   See the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.4-5 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 1:1, why was this called the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia, since he had been king of Persia prior to the conquest of Babylonia as Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.435 mentions?

A: Cyrus became king of Anshan in 559 B.C. and king of the Medes as well as the Persians in 550 B.C. However, this was the first year of his reign over this vast Empire of Babylon and Persia. According to Persia and the Bible p.89, William H. Shea studied the over 400 places where Cyrus was given a title, and in 90 percent of the cases he was called “King of Babylon, King of lands.” The Cyrus Cylinder calls Cyrus, “King of the World, Great King, Legitimate King, King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad, King of the Four Quarters (of the Earth).” Shea also found that Cyrus was first called “King of Lands” at the beginning of 538 B.C., but he was not called “King of Babylon, King of Lands” until the end of 538 B.C. He thinks the reason is that the governor, Gubaru, bore the title King of Babylon, until his death that year.

   Just as a duke who becomes king lists his first year as his being king, not being duke, Cyrus’ first year is counted from the time he was Emperor of the Empire. “The Empire” included Babylon as one of its capital cities.

   See Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.10-11, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.654 and the New International Bible Commentary p.489 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 1:1, could the 70 years refer to the length of the Babylonian Empire, or the Temple, as the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.436-437,449 suggests?

A: It refers to the length of time Judah served Babylon. First let’s see precisely what the Bible claims, and then what history confirms.

Jeremiah 25:11-12; 29:10,16 claims:

1) The country of Judah would become a wasteland, and they would serve Babylon for seventy years

2) After 70 years, Babylonia would be punished (Jeremiah 25:12)

3) Jeremiah 29:10 adds that after 70 years, the exiles would return.

4) Jeremiah 29:16 adds that not everyone would go into exile.

While it does not say Jerusalem would be totally destroyed, one could imply that. However, it does not specify how long Jerusalem was destroyed. It is the serving of Babylon, not the destruction of Jerusalem, which was prophesied to be 70 years.

Historically, Judah served Babylon from 605 B.C. to 538 B.C.. This is about 68 of our years. However, prophecies were given in terms of the religious, lunar year, which was 360 days.

   Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.449 also speculates that it might refer to the time the Temple was destroyed, since it was destroyed in 587/586 B.C. and not rebuilt until 516 B.C., which is exactly 70 365-day years. While this is 70 years, this is a coincidence.

Q: In Ezr 1:1, was the actual exile only 49 years, from 587/586-538 B.C., as the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.436 says?

A: Many people were exiled in 605 B.C. for the full 70 years. Complicating this is the fact that others were exiled for only 49 years. Regardless, the prophecy was for Judah serving Babylon for 70 years.

Q: In Ezr 1:1-4, why would the Persian king decide to help the Jews here?

A: The ultimate reasons is that God moved Cyrus to do this. Also, not only did the Persian king allow the Jews to return, but the archaeologist Rassam unearthed what is called “The Cyrus Cylinder”, where Cyrus recorded his capturing Babylon and decree that other peoples could return home too. There is no evidence that Cyrus believed in the true God; rather He used the divine name when speaking about the Jews as he used the names of other gods in speaking about the other peoples.

   According to The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.654, the Cyrus Cylinder says in part: “May all the gods whom I have resettled in their sacred cities daily ask Bel and Nebo for a long life for me.” (Bel and Nebo were Babylonian gods.) See also Hard Sayings of the Bible p.248 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 1:1-4 what else does the Cyrus Cylinder say?

A: Persia and the Bible p.90 mentions that the nineteenth century Bible critic Julius Wellhausen and many others doubted there ever was a decree for the Jews to return home. However, according to Persia and the Bible p.87, the Cyrus Cylinder was discovered by Rassam in 1879; the same page has a photograph of it. The Cyrus Cylinder primarily was a propaganda tool by Cyrus to show the Babylonians he was their friend, and not just a conqueror to be opposed. Cyrus called himself “King of the World, Great King, Legitimate King, King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad, King of the Four Quarters [of the Earth] (p.89). It also says, “When I, well-disposed, entered Babylon, I set up the seat of dominion in the royal palace amidst jubilation and rejoicing. Marduk the great god caused the big-hearted inhabitants of Babylon to … me. I sought did not allow any to terrorize the land of [Sumer] and Akkad. I kept in view the needs of Babylon and all its sanctuaries to promote their wellbeing.” (p.87) It also claims that Cyrus entered the city “without fighting or battle”. This is true, as Cyrus entered the city 17 days after the Persians made a surprise attack and captured the city.

   The Cyrus Cylinder also says about the exiled peoples, “I (also) gathered their former inhabitants and returned (to them) their habitations.” (p.91)

   The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.246 says the Cyrus Cylinder was made c.536 B.C.

Q: In Ezr 1:5-11, why was the Persian king so generous in providing gold and silver to Ezra?

A: Scripture gives one reason, and barely hints at a second probable reason.

First, Ezra 1:7 says that among the items the king returned were the temple items that were taken from the Israelites by the Babylonians. Conquerors would typically carry off the idols of the conquered peoples, but since there were no idols in Jerusalem they carried off the temple furnishings instead. In the Persian Cyrus Cylinder, recording when the Persians sent the captive peoples back to their homes, it also mentions returning their gods to them.

Second, Ezra 1:6 says, somewhat mysteriously, that the king wanted to “encourage them”. Why would the king want to do this? To see why, why have to look at the political situation at the time.

   Darius I, the father or Xerxes I, the king in Esther, was assassinated in his bedroom by Artabanus in 464 A.D. The king in Ezra, Artaxerxes I, was the third son of Xerxes and Amestris. He was only 18 years old at the time. But in that year Artaxerxes managed to kill both Artabanus and one of his older brothers, named Darius, and defeat his other older brother, Hystaspes, in battle. However, that year a ten-year long revolt started in Egypt, with the help of 200 Greek ships. Megabyzus, the Persian satrap of Syria, defeated the Egyptian rebels in 465 B.C., promising clemency to the Egyptian rebel leader, Inarus. Unfortunately, Inarus was impaled at the command of Artaxerxes I’s mother queen Amestris, which caused Megabyzus to revolt. In the middle of all of this, in 458 B.C., the king encouraged Ezra and most exiles to return to Jerusalem. The Persian king wanted a loyal buffer state east of Egypt and south of Syria. Thus, it makes sense, as Ezra 1:6 says, that the Persian King wanted to “encourage them”.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.570-571,604,605 and Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.26 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 1:5-11, what should you do if a generous blessing is unexpectedly dropped in your lap?

A: Of course praise and thank God for it, but there is more too. Let other people know what God has done. Also, you can ask if God might have given you this blessing for a purpose. Perhaps it was given so that you could be in a position to help others. Be careful though; you might find that you have a lot of new “friends” ,but not necessarily true friends.

Q: In Ezr 1:8, what do the names of these Jews mean?

A: Mithredath means “given by Mithra”. Mithra was a major Persian god on the side of good. Zerubbabel means “seed of Babylon”, where he was born.

   Sheshbazzar is a non-Hebrew name of uncertain meaning. Perhaps it was another name for Shenazar, and Shenazar was the fourth son of Jeconiah (1 Chronicles 3:18) the former king of Judah, and thus an uncle of Zerubbabel. That would make sense that Sheshbazzar was called the prince of Judah.

   A few say that Shezbazzar might be another name for Zerubbabel. However, When Critics Ask p.213-214 points out that it would not make so much sense to have two non-Hebrew names. It also says Shezbazzar might be another name for Shealtiel, who apparently died shortly after the laying of the foundation. Or else Shezbazzar might be the governor of the Jews just prior to Zerubbabel, and when Shezbazzar died Zerubbabel took over. Also, the New International Bible Commentary p.490 mentions that is Shezbazzar is not Zerubbabel because Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel is mentioned in Ezra 5:2, and Sheshbazzar prince of Judah is mentioned, in the past tense, as having lived to set the foundation of the temple in Ezra 5:16?

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.656 and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.605 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 1:9-10, why does the total of the mentioned articles, 2,499, not equal the total number of gold and silver items, 5,400 in 1:11?

A: The list consists only of dishes pans(?), bowls, and other major articles. The grand total, perhaps including some broken pieces, includes things not listed. The difference in numbers is too large to be just a typographical error. See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.655 for essentially the same answer.

Q: In Ezr 2:1-70, did the Jews prosper under the Persians?

A: Yes. Apart from the Bible we have extra-Biblical evidence that they did quite well.

   There are numerous clay tablets of wealthy bankers in Nippur called “Murashu and Sons” who loaned money. Their texts have the names of 2,500 individuals, and 70 names are Jewish. Interestingly the clay tablets show that many of these Jews had both Jewish and non-Jewish names. Also, Jews were found in 28 of 200 settlements around Nippur. Photographs of two of these tables are in The Bible Almanac p.396. Also see Persia and the Bible p.243 for more info.

   There was a Jewish military garrison near Aswan in southern Egypt, and they built a temple/synagogue to “Yaho”, according to Persia and the Bible p.244.

   Many Jews lived on Elephantine Island in southern Egypt, according to Aramaic papyri and ostraca that mention the Sabbath and Passover, according to Persia and the Bible p.245-246. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary p.649 says that in the Cowley Papyrii #21, Darius II commanded the Jewish colony on Elephantine Island to observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.607 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2, what was the estimated population of the Israelites prior to their exile?

A: According to The Expositor’s Bible Commentary volume 4 p.566 and ANET p.491, in the eighth century it is estimated there were 500,000 to 700,000 Israelites in the northern kingdom and 220,000 to 300,000 Israelites in Judah.

Q: In Ezr 2, since an estimated 1.5 to 3 million Israelites and Jews scattered in the Persian Empire, why did only about 50,000 people return to Jerusalem?

A: Most were disobedient and did not want to return, although a few might have been slaves and had no choice. Ezra himself recognized they were only a small remnant in Ezra 9:15. The Israelites were exiled over 200 years earlier, and almost all of them were assimilated and lost their national identity. Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.437 astutely points out that “The fact that they donated objects of value to help those who were planning to make the trip indicates that they were reasonably well-to-do and might have seen no point in leaving a place where they were prosperous and secure and where by now they felt at home.” But as such, the returnees only occupied land that was about 25 miles from north to south and 32 miles from east to west, a third being desert.

   We also know that many Jews were prosperous form the Murashu tablets. These were about 730 clay tablets of loans made by a banker in Nippur named Murashu as well as his sons. About 60 Jewish names appear as debtors to Murashu.

   Of course it is generous that Jews who chose to remain donated money for those who returned home. However, God did not want their donations; God wanted them to return home themselves.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.569,570, the New International Bible Commentary p.490 and the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.295 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2, how long would it take for people to travel from Babylon to Jerusalem?

A: The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.658 says it would take about four months. However, it points out that Ezra did not mention this because the emphasis was on rebuilding, not on the hardships returning.

Q: In Ezr 2:1-70, what are the differences in numbers with Neh 7:7-72?

A: Here are the two lists and the differences. The next question discusses reasons for the differences.

(There are also 50 bowls in Nehemiah.)

   The apocryphal book of 1 Esdras also lists the returnees. According to The Expositor’s Bible Commentary volume 4 p.618 and The NIV Study Bible 1985 p.676, it has 25,947 men of Israel (compared with 24,144 for Ezra and 25,406 for Nehemiah), 5,288 priests (vs. 4,289 for Ezra and Nehemiah), 341 Levites, singers, gatekeepers compared to 341 for Ezra, 372 Temple servants vs. 392 for Ezra and Nehemiah, and 652 men of unproven origin, vs. 652 for Ezra.

   The total number of people are far greater than the those listed, so the listing is not exhaustive. For example, Ezra has the family of Magbish, and Nehemiah does not. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.687 says the total might also include northern tribes and women and children.

   Of the 50 common numbers there are 22 total differences. There are 12 single-digit differences, and Nehemiah has the larger number in 7 of them. There are 10 multi-digit differences, and Nehemiah has the larger number in 7 of them. For contrast, let’s look at the Hebrew vs. Greek Septuagint: for Ezra there are 2 differences (both are single-digit), and for Nehemiah 10 differences (5 of which are single-digit).

Q: In Ezr 2:1-70 and Neh 7:7-72, just how accurately did ancient scribes transmit lists of numbers?

A: Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.230-231 gives us two good examples for comparison in ancient documents.

The army of Frada: The Persian Behistun Rock inscription says the army of Frada had 55,243 dead and 6,572 prisoners in the Babylonian column. An Aramaic translation found on Elephantine Island in Egypt says the number of prisoners was 6,972, one digit off from the Behistun Rock inscription. In a duplicate copy of the Babylonian column found at Babylon, the number of prisoners was 6,973, one digit difference from the Aramaic translation.

The rebel army of Frawartish: The Persian Behistun Rock says 2,045 were killed and 1,558 taken prisoner in the rebel army of Frawartish. The Aramaic copy has over 1,575 as the number of prisoners.

   These examples originally came from F.W. Konig, Relief and Inschrift des Konigs Dareios I am Felsen von Bagistan [Leiden: Brill, 1938) p.48,45).

Q: In Ezr 2:1-70, why do the numbers of returned people differ from Neh 7:7-72?

A: It probably is due to a combination of a number of reasons.

Simple copyist errors: In the manuscripts today, there have been some copyist errors. Many copyist errors would be changing or leaving out a digit. In the Hebrew vs. Septuagint there are 2 differences in Ezra (both single-digit) and 10 differences in Nehemiah (5 are single-digit). Thus one would expect simple copyist errors to explain around 2 to 5, or possibly up to 10 of the 22 differences. Since The number of times Nehemiah is larger in 7 out of 12 single-digit differences, there is no statistically significant trend of one being larger.

Cipher lists: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.606 and The NIV Study Bible 1985 p.674 says that the differences might be due to using “cipher lists”, where a vertical stroke represented “1” and a horizontal stroke represented “10”, and the start of the letter of the Hebrew word me’ah represented hundreds. This would lead to greater copying errors.

Change in the way numbers were written: The way Hebrews wrote numbers changed about this time. Formerly the Hebrews used old “round letters”, and changed to “square” letters. This would cause more copyist errors. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.667 mentions that the Moabites spoke a dialect of Hebrew and still used the old round letters in the ninth century B.C.. The Encyclopedia Britannica volume 1 (1956) p.684 says, “the earliest records of Aramaic go back to about 800 B.C…. The alphabet at this time differs little from that of the Moabite Stone.” It says there were two tendencies, which were completed during the time of the Persians

1) the opening of the heads of letters beth, daleth, and resh. And angles became more rounded and ligatures developed. This might be expected to explain more errors.

The lists were made at different times: Of the 10 multi-digit differences, Nehemiah is larger in 7 of them. On one hand, the differences probably are not due to more exiles returning, as the totals match exactly. On the other hand, or the returnees, more people might have been found in the listed clans and villages. 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.139-140 and the Commentary by Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown volume 1 p.289 mention that Ezra 2:1 says this is the list was made of those who left for Babylon, apparently prior to them arriving at Jerusalem. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.229 also adds that there might have been some last minute decisions to join with a clan or village.

Different lists: How did these lists come about? It is not that God dictated these numbers to a scribe, but rather two or more people counted and made these lists. They were probably originally separate lists because: Ezra separates the men of Bethlehem and Netophah while Nehemiah combines them. Magbish is absent in Nehemiah. They exchange the order of Lod etc. and Jericho. Nehemiah divides the numbers more than Ezra.

Nehemiah’s list was a copy. Note carefully that Nehemiah 7:5 does not say these were the exactly correct number of people who returned. Rather, Nehemiah simply says he found a list, and this is what the list said. The list might be incorrect, but Nehemiah is correctly relating what the list said. See the next question for the implications of this.

   See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.166-167, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.229-231, When Critics Ask p.214, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.717-721 and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.658,687-688, and 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.139-140 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2:1-70 and Neh 7:7-72, how does this relate to inerrancy?

A: Some critics of inerrancy see the discrepancies between these lists as one of the most serious challenges to the inerrancy of the Bible. Actually it does no such thing. First a “red herring” which is an incorrect answer, then a common Christian answer, and finally the most probable answer.

Incorrect answer: Both lists are correct, but the lists are different because they were made at slightly different times. By the time the later list was compiled, a few more people had come, some had left, and the offerings were different.

However, the total number of additional people coming and people leaving had to match exactly, since the overall totals are identical. This would be highly unlikely if the lists were both completely correct but at different times.

Common answer: While we do not possess the original manuscripts, inerrancy [allegedly] means the two lists had to be identical in the original manuscripts. However, a combination of simple copyist errors, and a change in the alphabet around that time, which produced more copyist errors, is responsible for the differences in numbers that should have been common between the two lists. (Nothing prevents one list from having details the other list does not have.)

However, 22 differences out of 50 numbers is a large number of differences, even with the writing change that occurred about that time.

Most probable answer: Nehemiah inerrantly copied the list that was available to him (and that list had errors). It was accurate enough to give a representation of how many returned, but Nehemiah’s qualification cautions us that this list is not guaranteed to be without error. This is analogous to the Bible inerrantly recording the Pharisee’s errors, Jephthah’s rashness, and Abraham’s foolishness, without explicitly telling us whether or not we are to believe and do those things too.

   Why did the Bible not tell us the precise numbers of everyone in Nehemiah’s time? Probably because it is not important. 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 2:9 tell us we are not to devote ourselves to endless genealogies.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.658 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2:1-70 and Neh 7:7-72, which list is more correct?

A: While we cannot be certain, Ezra is probably more correct for the following reasons:

1. The Apocryphal book of 1 Esdras also lists the returnees, and it is closer to Ezra. One of the differences between Hebrew and Septuagint versions in Nehemiah would make two of Nehemiah’s numbers agree with Ezra. Thus, at least the Septuagint translators thought Ezra was more correct.

2. Nehemiah himself said this was the list he found, without saying everything on it was correct.

However, there are individual scribal errors in both. Here is an analysis of some of the individual differences, with the number in Ezra being given first.

200 vs. 245 singers (Nehemiah 7:68). The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.658,687 suggests that Ezra is correct, because a scribe might have accidentally picked up the number 245 Nehemiah 7:67. Then he might have omitted Nehemiah 7:68.

61,000 drachmas vs. a sum of 41,000 Bible Difficulties & Seeming Contradictions p.167 indicates that 61,000 in Ezra is a typo and should be 41,000.

Q: In Ezr 2:2,14, are Nehemiah, Mordecai, and Bigvai the same people as in the books of Nehemiah and Esther?

A: No, they are not. The governor (Tirshatha) Nehemiah came later. Mordecai and Esther were later, and Bigvai, meaning “happy” in Persian would not be an uncommon name.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.656 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2:3-70, why do you think Ezra (and God) included such a long list of names?

A: From a human perspective, there was a certain excitement in knowing who was returning. Second, It was also a “vetting” of who was a true Israelite who returned. Third, future generations could look back and say, “I belong” based on these names. /From God’s perspective, God watches over every detail of who does what.

   Tony Evans adds that this was a “roll call” of those who left the comfort and convenience of where they were at, and committed to being a part of ministry instead of just sitting on the sidelines.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.656 and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.453 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2:6-7, if a believer has fallen away from God, and wants to come back, what would you advise them to do?

A: First of all, assure them that God forgives and that God will receive them. Depending on what they did, if possible, make restitution for what they took or ruined. They might be living with consequences of their sin; while God could take those consequences away, many times He does not. But if they bear up under God’s discipline, and choose now to follow Him, God can bring blessing out of their renewed obedience to Him.

   Interestingly in Ezra 2:6, some of the returnees were from Pahath-Moab. This name means “governor of Moab”, and it might refer to Reubenites whom the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser III settled in Moab. Other returnees came from Elam in Ezra 2:7. Elam is in southwestern Iran, and some Israelites were forcibly settled there.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.608 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2:42, why did a lot of gatekeepers, 139, return?

A: It has been estimated that before the exile there were about 5,000 gatekeepers, so a majority did not. Gatekeepers did more than stand at a gate; they kept up the grounds and essentially were janitors too. In fact, our word “janitor” comes from the Latin word for door, janua. So these people had steady but low-paying jobs. Perhaps they were not distracted by getting rich in the Babylonian and later Persian empires.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.612 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2:59-63, what do you do when you are in “no man’s land” in a ministry?

A: These men said they could serve as priests, but there was no record that they were descended from priests. Either they really were descendents, but the records were lost, they were not really priests (and knew it), or perhaps they parents and grandparents said they were a priestly family but they were wrong. So the governor (Tirshatha), which was Nehemiah decided that they would not serve as priests until a priest with the Urim and Thummim could decide. We do not have a record of when or if they was ever decided for most of them. However, one priestly family, the sons of Koz/Hakkoz in Ezra 2:61 was later able to be considered a priestly family. Meremoth son of Uriah in Ezra 8:33, son of Uriah, the son of Hakkoz in Nehemiah 3:4,21, was considered a part of the priests in Nehemiah 3.

   When you seem to have an opportunity to serve in an important capacity, and your way is barred (rightfully or wrongfully), what can you do? You could become bitter, or at least disappointed. Or, if God has closed a door you could instead serve in a different capacity, through a door that God has opened. As one Christian has said, “disappointment is His appointment.” God does not care how high a human position you have; He cares about your heart in serving Him.

   See the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.300, the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.40-43, the New International Bible Commentary p.490, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.474 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2:64, why was the entire multitude 42,360 when summing the lists in Ezra, Nehemiah, and 1 Esdras give 29,818, 31,089, and 30,143 men respectively?

A: The “whole assembly” would include women and children. This means that relatively few women and children came during this migration; it was mostly men. This explains why there might have been a lot of pressure to intermarry with non-Israelites.

   See the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.30 and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.618 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 2:69, just how much wealth is this?

A: 61,000 drachmas of gold would be about 1,000 pounds (500 kilograms), and 5,000 minas of silver would be about 3 tons (2.9 metric tons) according to footnotes in the NIV 1985.

Q: In Ezr 2:70, what are ways we are Christians can “stand up and be counted” today?

A: We can stand up by not neglecting to meet together, as Hebrews 10:25 commands. We can vote for honorable candidates, who do not advocate wicked things. Like the wealthy leaders in Ezr 2:69-70, we can freely donate money for God’s work. We can publicly bear the name of Christian.

Q: In Ezr 3:1-12, how did this revival differ from the revival of Josiah in 2 Chr 34?

A: In Josiah’s revival, the people were still in disobedience just prior to the revival, they had to find a copy of the Law, and they were under a great threat at that time (Assyria). This was a revival of repentance under threat of punishment.

In Ezra’s revival they had already repented of idolatry, they had already read the law, and they were there to build the Temple and city. This was a revival of dedication and building.

In summary, the first revival was a turning back from evil, and Ezra’s revival was moving forward to build. There is a proper place for both kinds of revivals.

Q: In Ezr 3:2, why would it be harder than expected to build an altar to God?

A: To build it in that place, they first had to clear the rubble of the ruined first temple. The peoples around them would also be against their efforts. The seventh month here would be in September-October 537/536 B.C.

   On the other hand, the Persian government would have no objection to yet another altar. According to Major Cities of Bible Times p.32-48, Babylonian texts mention 50 temples plus 180 open-air shrines for the goddess Ishtar, 300 shrines for the Igigi gods, and 1`,200 shrines for the Anunnaki gods. The Jews wanted to build just one. (taken from The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.622)

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.658-659, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.453, and the New International Bible Commentary p.490 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 3:8, why were Levites 20 years and older appointed to service, since Num 4:3,47 and 1 Chr 23:3,24,27 show only Levites 30 years and older could minister, and Num 8:24 says that only Levites 25 years and older could work in the Tent of Meeting?

A: Ezra 2:40 and Neh 7:43 both say that only 74 Levites returned. They probably felt they had to use younger Levites because there were so few. See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.153-154 and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.624 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 3:10 and Hag 1:15, did the building occur in 520 B.C. while Darius I reigned, or did it start under Cyrus I around 537 B.C. as Ezr 3:8-13 says?

A: Both are true. It started in 537 B.C. under Cyrus I, was stopped due to opposition for 16 years, and re-started under Darius I in 520 B.C. It was completed in 516/515 B.C.. See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.231, When Critics Ask p.214-215, and 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.140 for more info

Q: In Ezr 3:11-13 and Hag 2:1-9, why would some rejoice and some weep?

A: A similar thing occurs when the temple is finished in Haggai 2:1-9. It is sort of like asking if a glass if half full or half empty. All these 70+ years (since 587/586 B.C.) there was no altar or temple, and the temple was finally rebuilt, to offer sacrifices to God. But on the other hand, this small start seemed so insignificant compared to the former magnificence of Solomon’s Temple and it courtyards. Some focused on what was and what could have been. Others focused on the progress made and the future that it promised.

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.490, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.474, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.659, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.454, and the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.301 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 4, what is the chronology?

A: Here is a chronology of the different sections of Ezra 4. Note that Xerxes and Artaxerxes I are different people. Also, note that four things are being built: the altar, the temple foundation, the rest of the temple, and the walls of Jerusalem.

   See 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.141, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.455, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.654,661, the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.55, and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.624 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 4:2, who exactly were the Samaritans?

A: The Samaritans were a mixed people who lived north of Jerusalem. They were a mixture of poor Israelites from the northern kingdom, plus a few conquered people the Assyrian King Sargon II (722-705 B.C.) imported and a larger second batch under King Esarhadden (681-669 B.C.) plus a third batch imported under his son Ashurbanipal (669-627 B.C.). The Babylonians apparently did not import any peoples into Samaria though.

   Religiously they worshipped the True God plus other deities. When the Arab Bedouins found the Dead Sea scrolls in 1962, they also found a cave in Wadi Daliyeh. It had two to three hundred skeletons of families who had fled from Alexander of Macedon in 331 B.C. In the writings they left, many of their names reflected Edomite, Aramaic, Moabite, Canaanite, and Babylonian idols.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.660-661 and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.3 p.626 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 4:2, were the Samaritans sincere in offering to help the Jews?

A: They probably were not sincere, but might have wanted to infiltrate the workers. The Samaritans forcibly stopped the rebuilding of the walls, for Mt. Gerazim in Samaria was a “competitor” as a worship center. The Samaritans probably thought there was nothing inconsistent with the Temple to God and their eclectic worship according to Ezra 4:2. However, the Jews were right to refuse the Samaritan’s help because they also worshipped other gods (2 Kings 17:34) in addition to the One True God and the golden calves. However, rebuffing the Samaritans would cause them to oppose the building.

   But contrary to this, the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.441 thinks the Samaritans were sincere here. But if they were sincere in wanting the temple built, once they were not allowed to help they tried to discourage and trouble the people in Ezra 4:4. They hired counselors, i.e. bribed them, in Ezra 4:5. Finally they wrote a letter accusing them of wanting a wall to rebel against the Persians in Ezra 4:6. If they were sincere, as Asimov claims, then why would they later discourage them and write a letter accusing them?

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.660-661, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.454, the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.58-59, the New International Bible Commentary p.491, and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.622 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 4:3, why did the Jews refuse outside help?

A: If you need food or necessities, help from non-believers generally is fine. But if you are doing something for God’s work, it is better to have believers volunteer than unbelievers. Should we accept help from non-believers for God’s ministry? 3 John 7 also mentions not receiving help from pagans. It is one thing to accept help to give to the poor, and another to accept help to preach the gospel. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.248-249 and 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.140-141 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 4:7-16, how do you respond when you are sacrificially working hard for God’s kingdom, and all of a sudden all your work has been neutralized by the opposition?

A: They people could have become discouraged, or just given up. But the same Persian king, Artaxerxes, later allowed them to rebuild the walls under Nehemiah starting in 445/444 B.C. First of all, evil opposition to God’s work should neither be unexpected nor disheartening. If opposition happened to Moses, to Joshua, to Ezra and Nehemiah, to Jesus, to Paul, and to the other apostles, why should you act surprised if it every happens to you?

   Second, there is a saying in baseball, “don’t turn one mistake into two.” If you make an embarrassing mistake, such as letting a ground ball go between your legs, or dropping a fly ball, you can feel so bad moping about that, that you fail to see the next ball hit your way and you mess up on that one too. When you mess up in a serious way, you need to pick yourself up, resolve to keep trying or try harder, and keep on going. When an opportunity closes down, be ready for when another opportunity opens up.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.455 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 4:8-6:18 and Ezr 7:12-26, why was this written in Aramaic?

A: Nothing says that Ezra or his secretaries had to write in the same language. Perhaps different secretaries wrote down different parts. Also, Daniel 2:4b-7:28 was also written in Aramaic, as well as Jeremiah 10:11.

   As Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.446 points out, the Samaritan’s letter to the king was in Aramaic, and thus it makes sense to quote the letter in Aramaic.

Q: In Ezr 4:9 (KJV), should the word be “Dinaites” (i.e., the Dai-ia-e-ni people), or the Aramaic word “judges”?

A: It is the latter according to The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.630.

Q: In Ezr 4:9, who are the Dehavites?

A: It used to be thought they were the Daoi of Herodotus and the Dahae of Pliny and Virgil. These people lived east of the Caspian Sea. However, it is now thought the Hebrew is not the name of a people, but the word di-hu which means “that is”. Then Ezra 4:9 reads “Susians, that is, the Elamites”. See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.630 and the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.447 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 4:13 (KJV), what does “endamage” mean?

A: This means to harm or cause damage. The damage here would be loss of revenue for the king.

Q: In Ezra 4:13, just how much tax did the Persian kings collect?

A: Across the empire, the Persian king collected an estimated 25 million to 35 million U.S. dollars per year, according to The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.631-632. Palestine was a part of the fifth satrapy, which according to Herodotus book 3 ch.89-97 was only assessed 350 silver talents, or $680,000 U.S. Other places had to also make non-monetary contributions in kind, and they often exceeded the monetary contributions. Palestine did not have to make any contributions in kind, and so the Persians taxed Palestine rather lightly. See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.631-632 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 4:15,19, how should believers react when they wrongly are accused of sedition and insurrection?

A: Sedition means treason against the government, and insurrection means revolt. Assuming they in fact are not treasonous, believers should deny the charges. However, do not let your denial be so poorly phrased that it adds suspicion to the accusation. As a very rough measure, perhaps a denial should be about a lengthy as the accusation.

Q: In Ezr 4:23, did rebuilding the temple cease because of foreign armies, or the indifference of the people as Hag 1:2 says?

A: An army might have caused it to stop temporarily, but once it stopped, the indifference of the people kept it from restarting, even after it was OK to do so in 522 B.C.. See When Critics Ask p.215 and Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.231-232 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 5:1, were these prophets the same ones who wrote books of the Bible?

A: Yes, Haggai and Zechariah were the same. Haggai preached from August to December 520 B.C. Zechariah prophesied from October/November 520 B.C. for two years.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.662,664, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.455, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.303, the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.4 part 3 p.76, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.475 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 5:1 and 6:14, was Zechariah the Son of Iddo, or the son of Berekiah, the son of Iddo, in Zech 1:1?

A: Zechariah was the son of Berekiah and grandson of Iddo. According to The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.7 p.607, in Semitic languages the word for “son” can mean descendant.

Q: In Ezr 5:3, what was significant about Tattenai’s visit?

A: Tattenai was an official government investigator (frasaka) or inquisitor (patifrasa). Zerubbabel and the Jews were likely terrified that Tattenai would immediately command the building to cease. When we questioned if the Jews had authority to build either the temple or the wall, a wrong answer could stop the building of both right away.

   But Tattenai does not seem to be for or against the Jews, he just wanted the laws and authority to be followed. When they answered him reasonably, telling about Cyrus’ decree, and the return of the temple furnishings, Tattenai listened but would not believe them without corroborating evidence from the Persian archives. Tattenai gave the Jews the benefit of the doubt, and allowed the building to continue while the search was being made, though. On thing about most bosses is that they too have a boss. Tattenai would not want Darius to learn that he was letting things slide. So Tattenai “upward-delegated” the responsibility to Darius. Tattenai explained everything to Darius, who made a search for the decree.

   One commentator, Batten, in 1913, mistakenly identified Tattenai with Ushtannu, the satrap over all Babylon and the Trans-Euphrates. However, archaeologists have found a Babylonian record, dated June 5, 502 B.C. mentioning “Ta-at-tan-ni as the pahat (governor) who was a subordinate of the satrap.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.636, the New International Bible Commentary p.492 and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.662 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 5:7, did Darius have to deal with a lot of letters from his officials?

A: Archaeologists have found several thousand texts from the capital city Persepolis between 509-494 B.C. and over 100 texts from 492-458 B.C.

   As for a king’s reply, there is a pagan temple in Xanthos in Lycia in southwestern Asia Minor, with a similar decree of permission from the Persian king. It is written in Greek, Lycian, and Aramaic. Cyrus repaired temples in Uruk and Ur. Cambyses repaired the temple at Sais in Egypt. Darius rebuilt a temple at Hibis in Egypt.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.637,642-643 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 5:11, what is interesting about how they told Tattenai their story?

A: From what was said here, Nebuchadnezzar was NOT responsible for destroying the temple and carried off the people, God was, and Nebuchadnezzar was just His agent. God did that, and their ancestors were to blame because of their sin.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.663 and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.455 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 5:16, what does the name “Zerubbabel” mean?

A: It means child/seed of Babylon, since Zerubbabel was born there, according to the New International Bible Commentary p.490 and Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.439.

Q: In Ezr 6:1, why would the Persians search the archives in Babylon, since Susa was a Persian capital?

A: They searched the archives (literally “house of books”) in Babylon, and could not find any decree. But providentially, those tablets were in Ecbatana (Acmetha) in Media, and they found them there. The Persian Empire had four capitals: Susa (or Shushan), Persepolis, Ecbatana, and Babylon. Of the four capitals, the decree was found in Ecbatana, because that was apparently where Cyrus had spent the summer in 538 B.C. when he wrote the decree. In general, Persian kings spent the winter in Babylon and the summers in Susa or Ecbatana.

   735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.141 mentions that Ezra 6:2 is the only reference in the Bible to Ecbatana.

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.493 and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.641 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 6:1, what is the importance of the decree?

A: A king would honor the decree of a previous king. So Darius was happy to help the Jews, both because they were authorized under Cyrus, and Jerusalem could be a buffer fort against Egypt or any rebels. So finding this ancient decree was a sigh of relief to the Jews. Note that not only did Darius honor the decree, in verses 8-10 Darius also generously provided provision and materials for the rebuilding, and in verses 11-12 threatened harm to any who would oppose the rebuilding. (Darius impaled 3,000 Babylonians after Babylon rebelled according to both the Behistun inscription and Herodotus book 3 no.159.) Darius was trying to butter up the Jews so that they would be loyal to him, this would be the way to do it.

   Sacrifices were regularly offered for the king according to 1 Maccabees 7:23; 12:11; 2 Maccabees 3:35; 13:23; and Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews book 12 no.2.5.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.644 and the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.4 part 3 p.87-88 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 6:8, why would a Persian king pay a great amount of money to rebuild the Jews’ temple in Jerusalem?

A: Many times kings built temples, which also served the “practical” purpose of making loyal subjects. 735 Baffling Bible Questions Answered p.141 says that Cyrus also repaired temples at Uruk and Ur. Persia and the Bible p.91 says that Cyrus repaired the temple at Uruk, the Enunmakh temple at Ur, and temples in Babylon. Archaeologists have found a memorandum about the Jewish Temple that was written by Bagoas, the Persian governor of Judah and Delaiah. It says, “to build it on its site as it was before, and the meal-offering and incense to be made on the altar as it used to be.”

Q: In Ezr 6:15-22, what is the significance of this celebration?

A: The annual celebration of the Passover commemorated God protecting the Israelites when they came out of Egypt during the Exodus. They could not celebrate in the temple for over 70 years, because they had no temple, since it was destroyed on August 12, 586 B.C.. But after all that time, they were overjoyed that they could finally celebrate in the newly dedicated temple.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.664 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 6:17-22, how does this compare with the temple and sacrifices under Solomon?

A: This temple was 90 feet high and 90 feet wide. At its dedication 100 bulls, 200 rams, 400 male lambs, and 12 goats were offered. This sacrifice might seem like a large scale, until you compare it with Solomon’s temple.

   In Solomon’s time the temple was 90 feet long, 30 feet wide, and 45 feet high. according to 1 Kings 6:2. It was decked out in fine cedar and gold. At its dedication 22,000 oxen, 120,000 sheep were offered according to 1 Kings 8:63.

   See the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.4 part 3 p.83-84, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.305, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.476 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 6:20 (KJV), what does “kill the Passover” mean?

A: The King James Version accurately translated this phrase, which sounds strange to modern ears. This expression means to kill the Passover lamb as a sacrifice.

Q: In Ezr 6:22, why is Darius called the “king of Assyria” here, when he was king of Persia?

A: The Assyrian and Babylonian empires had vast lands before the Persians conquered everything. Instead of trying to assimilate everyone to be Persian, they thought it best to allow conquered people to keep their own identities. So Persia was for Persians (and Medes), and Darius of king of Persian, Babylonia, Assyria, Syrian, Asia Minor, and Egypt.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.647-648, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.664, New International Bible Commentary p.493, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.477 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 7:1, when did this chapter occur?

A: There was a 57/58-year gap between Ezra 6 (in 516 B.C.) and Ezra 7 (458 B.C.). The events of Esther happened in between. Ezra arrived during the time that Egypt, with the help of Athens and the Delian League, had temporarily succeeded in revolting from Persia from 460 to 451 B.C

    See the New International Bible Commentary p.493, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.477, the Keil-Delitzch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.94, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.665 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 7:1 was Seriah the father of Ezra?

A: No, because the priest Seriah was executed by the Babylonians in 588/587 B.C. and Ezra and his companions traveled between April 8 and august 4, 458 B.C. Joshua in Ezra 2:2 was likely a grandson of Seriah. Ezra was likely the great-grandson or great-great-grandson of Seriah. In Hebrew, “son” can mean descendant. Seriah was a famous ancestor, and Ezra was called after him.

   As an aside, Seraiah means “Yahweh is Prince”, and Ezra is a shortened form of Azariah (Yahweh has helped), which was a common name.

   See the Keil-Delitzch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.94-95, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.649,650, and the New International Bible Commentary p.493 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 7:6, could Ezra have arrived either in 458 B.C. or 398 B.C.?

A: No. However, the skeptical Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.450,451 claims it could be either one, because there is no clear way to know whether the reigning Persian king was Artaxerxes I or Artaxerxes II.

   While Ezra does not explicitly say “I” or “II’, it must be “I”, because 398 B.C. is too late a time period for the Temple not being completed. Furthermore, people often distinguish between two kings of the same name once the second reigns, but they do not distinguish when only 1 of the kings has lived.

   However, the time of Ezra and Nehemiah had to be under Artaxerxes I, because an Elephantine papyrus (Cowley #30) dated by the scribe as November 25, 407 B.C., mentions Sanballat [sn’blt], the governor of Samaria who is mentioned in Nehemiah. See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary volume 4 p.570, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.677, and Persia and the Bible p.242 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 7:6, Ps 45:1; and Prov 22:29, what does a “ready scribe” mean?

A: The Hebrew word here, mahir, literally means “quick” or “swift”. This means he was skilled at his work and can get the job done efficiently. As evidence, Ezra reported in detail on the travel. Curiously, in the capital of Persepolis there are over 300 Persian travel texts, so it was normal to document official travel.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.649,653 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 7:17, is there any precedent of a Persian king allowing a non-Persian priest to re-establish his sacrifices and re-establish (non-Persian) religious laws?

A: Yes, because the king apparently was concerned that the people continued to follow their own customs, as a part of obedience to Persia. According to Persia and the Bible p.256, there is a very close parallel in the decree of Darius I to Udjahorresnet/ Udjahorresenet, an Egyptian priest who restored the Egyptian religion at Sais in Egypt. Darius him with gathering “wise men of Egypt” to codify the Egyptian laws in both demotic script Egyptian and Aramaic. Scribes in Egypt took from 518 to 503 B.C. to do this.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.654-655 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 8:15, why was it significant that there were no Levites among them?

A: The king specified that they were to go to promote obedience to the Torah, and there were no Levites going. Also, in carrying all the material, Ezra wanted Levites to handle the temple furnishings. So Ezra went to the town of Casiphia, where many Levites lived, and persuaded about 18 Levites and 220 temple servants to return to Jerusalem in Ezra 8:18-20.

   See the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.306 and the New International Bible Commentary p.494 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 8:15-21, why did they pray now for safety?

A: A small group of exiles (1,772 men, which might be 3,000 to 5,000 people total) was taking the 900 mile journey to return. They were given about 25 tons of silver, 3.75 tons of gold, and bronze objects. They were afraid of being ambushed along the way, as Ezra 8:31 says. Ezra, who was not a Persian official, did not ask for a military escort, while Nehemiah, a court official, did in Nehemiah 2:7-9. Either way was OK.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.667, the Keil-Delitzch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.3 part 3 p.111, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.306, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.478, the New International Bible Commentary p.494, and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.458 for more info.

Q: In Esth 8:17, is this the same Iddo who was the father of Zechariah in Zech 1:1?

A: No, because Zechariah prophesied before Ezra 7-8, so Zechariah’s father probably was not alive at this time. But it could have been a son or grandson of Zechariah’s father, carrying the same name.

Q: In Ezr 8:21-22, why did they fast here and not ask the Persians for protection?

A: The Jews had already made a request of the king once. Ezra 8:22-23 says that it would seem strange to ask again for troops, since they had already said that God would protect them. Of course, one means God could have used to protect the Jews could have been Persian troops. However, as 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.315 points out, it is one thing to accept help that is freely volunteered, and another to ask for help.

Q: In Ezr 8:25-29, since you trust God’s servants and leader, is it still OK to have financial checks and audits on them?

A: Sure. That is why Ezra weighed out the silver, gold, and other articles in Ezra 8:25 when he gave those over to them, and they would weight them again in Ezra 8:29 to make sure they did not take any of them. They were told in advance that there would be a second weighing after they arrived. Sometimes there can be dishonest people who you do not suspect. So it is a good thing to subject God’s servant show handle money and riches to be subject to audits and financial accountability. If you are an honest person who have been entrusted with money or other things, you should not feel offended that you are asked to be subject to an audit. It is good to have financial controls, not only to prevent stealing, but to show everyone, both in the church and outside of it, that there is strong evidence that money has not been pilfered.

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.495 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 8:27, 1 Chr 29:7, and Neh 7:70, are these coins Persian darics or Greek drachmas?

A: It is either a Persian daric or a locally minted silver coin in the style of the Greek drachma.

   Archaeologists have found several “drachmas” from Persian times in Beth Zur (Khirbet et-Tubeiquah), south of Jerusalem and 4 1/2 miles (7 km) north of Hebron. These drachmas were not minted in Greece, but in Judah in the “drachma style”. It mentions an article that says that the Jews were permitted to mint their own silver coins with the name of the province “Yehud” in archaic Hebrew script. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1799 also mentions there was a local mint in Palestine in Persian times.

   However, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary volume 4 p.620-621 also mentions a second theory. The Hebrew word here, darkemonim, and a similar word in Ezra 8:27 and 1 Chronicles 29:7, adarkonim, might refers to the Persian daric, which was a gold coin named after the Persian word for gold: dari. A soldier would be paid one of these per month for his wages.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary volume 4 p.620-621 and Can Archaeology Prove the Old Testament? p.44 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 9:1-2, when should you tell someone about the sins of another, and when should you keep silent?

A: First of all, recognize that there is a temptation to gossip, to tell everyone indiscriminately, and gossip is a sin. Beyond that, determine that, for God’s glory, what needs to be said, in how much detail, and to whom. Some leaders here came to Ezra because Ezra was the spiritual leader of the community, and Ezra needed to act, warning people of this sin, and expelling from the assembly those who persisted in the sin.

   When there is a sin, the scope of those who need to know about the situation, or the church discipline, are roughly the scope of those who already knew something was happening, plus leaders who are spiritual overseers. They need to know what happened, but do not need to know all the “GSD”, or gross sin details involved.

Q: In Ezr 9:1-2; Ex 34:16; and Dt 7:1-3, why did many Jewish men marry pagan wives?

A: Apparently many more men returned from captivity than women. They wanted to marry someone, and it looked like God was not providing a wife for them right now, so they took matters into their own hands.

   A second reason might be brought up by Malachi, who prophesied in between Ezra 6 and 7. Malachi 2:11 mentions men divorcing the wives of their youth and marrying another instead.

   This prohibition was not because they were a different race, because Moses married a Cushite, and Ruth was a Moabitess. Also, the Aramaeans and Elamites were Semites too, but the problem was that they served a different god. Perhaps that is why each marriage had to be investigated. If a wife had converted to Judaism, like Ruth did, then she would be considered Jewish and allowed to stay. That is why it took a whole three months to investigate the cases of these marriages.

   It is sad to see these men. They started off well forsaking the comfort of where they lived in Mesopotamia and Persia, and obeyed the call to return to Jerusalem. But they did not finish well. After they returned, and married their pagan wives, the children would grow up either learning to worship the pagan gods, or at the least learning that it was not too important which gods you worshipped.

   But why would the children leave with the mothers? In Jewish as well as Babylonian culture, when a marriage ended with divorce, the children stayed with the mother. According to the Code of Hammurabi 137 ANET p.172, the children had to grow up before the divorced wife could remarry.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.669, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.478, the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.308-309, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.669-671 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 9:3, Num 14:6; Josh 7:6; Esth 4:1; Job 1:20; Isa 36:22; Jer 41:5; and Mt 26:65 what does it mean when a Jewish person tears his robes?

A: Ezra initially might have been very happy to return to Jerusalem, but his joy was short-lived, and things became painful. Tearing your robes was a customary sign of great grief, distress, or blasphemy. It ruins the robes such that they cannot be mended, so it is only done for something considered extremely serious. When Job lost his children, wealth, and everything else, he tore his robes. Ezra saw this problem as one of similar seriousness.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.664, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.669, and The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.459 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 9:3-10, just how serious was this compromise?

A: This compromise was not an outright rejection of God, but a mixing of trying to follow God and still following the sin of marrying outside the faith too. Ezra saw this as so serious that he tore his robes. Ezra prayed and fasted all day before responding. In verse 9:6 Ezra felt shame before God for what these other people had done. Ezra and the other leaders had worked so, so hard to guide the people to proper worship and obedience to God, and then a number of them turned around and did this.

   Ezra saw that compromise with the pagan gods led Israel and Judah astray from the time of Judges to the Exile, and now he was witnessing history about to repeat itself. Ezra was determined to break the cycle.

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.495 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 9:3-10; 1 Cor 7:10-16, is it OK for a Christian today marry a non-Christian?

A: No. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 shows that we are not to be yoked with unbelievers. But if you did marry a non-Christian, either because of you became a Christian after the marriage, or else because of your sin, 1 Corinthians 7:10-16 says you should not seek a divorce. If they spouse seeks a divorce, that is OK, we are called to peace in 1 Corinthians 7:15. But we are not to initiate divorce.

  If a spouse has died it is OK to marry again, but still the marriage should be in the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:39).

   Paul even recommends and encourages young widows to marry again in 1 Timothy 5:14. Those who think widows should be discouraged from marrying are going against what God taught through the apostle Paul (sorry Jerome). An elder or deacon should be a “one-woman man” though according to 1 Timothy 3:2,12. Widows who are supported by the church should not have married again according to 1 Timothy 5:9.

   See The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.460, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.667, and the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.479-480 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 9:3-10, how is it that some in church can start off very well and finish very poorly?

A: Ezra 9-10 is a sad ending to an otherwise happy book. Korah, Achan, Gideon, Judas, Ananias and Sapphira, Demas, all started out well and ended poorly. Demas never had to volunteer to accompany Paul on his missionary journey in the first place, but he admirably did. But then he loved the world and turned back. People can follow God for a while, but turn away if they feel God did not meet their conditions for following him, they have root of bitterness, or their faith is shaken by hypocrisy they see in some others.

   See the New International Bible Commentary p.495 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 9:3-10, how should we react when we find out a believe has been involved in a serious sin?

A: Don’t be too quick to say, “that is OK, God is very pleased with you no matter how much you rebel and profane His Holy Name.” In fact, don’t ever give that impression at all. It is very serious, not only for the believer, but also for others, both Christians and non-, who see the believer’s witness. We should be mournful and try to bring back the person to repentance.

   Note that Ezra was mourning and felt ashamed, despite that fact that he did not do those wrong things himself. But he was sorrowful that God’s people had done that, and corporately he was a part of God’s people.

   See the Evangelical Commentary on the Bible p.307 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 9:4 (KJV), what does “astonied” mean?

A: This King James Version word means “astonished” as the NKJV translates, “confounded” as the WEB translates, or “sat there in horror” as the BSB translates. The NET Bible says more colloquially, “quite devastated”.

Q: In Ezr 10:1 (KJV), what does “weep very sore” mean?

A: This means they wept a lot. The BSB says, “wept bitterly” and NKJV says, “wept very bitterly”.

Q: In Ezr 10:2-3, what did Ezra do here?

A: Ezra, very wisely, did nothing. It was quite clear what needed to be done. Ezra was weeping and bowing to God, and let the people come to the obvious conclusion on what they were to do.

   See The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.668-669 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 10:11,19,44, was Ezra wrong to force the Jewish men to divorce their non-Jewish wives, as Asimov’s Guide to the Bible p.452 says?

A: No. They knew they were wrong to marry these pagan wives, and divorce was permitted in the Old Testament. At this time, the Jews were in the “fight of their life” to preserve their religion and culture from being lost to assimilation.

   Also, while this contradicts Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 7:12, Paul had not been born yet, and marriage rules for everyone after Jesus came differ from the prior rules for Jews during Old Testament times.

   See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.249-250, 735 Bible Questions Answered p.142, and When Critics Ask p.215-216 for more info.

Q: In Ezr 10:12, are there things other people tell you that you ought to be doing, and you see no bad consequences for doing so, but you are not going to because you know you are set apart as God’s child?

A: It can be partying, sex outside of marriage, getting drunk, drugs, or other things from evil that others think they can get away with, and think you can too. Perhaps you can get away with them, at least until this life ends. But if you realize who you are, a child of God, you will not do those things, simply because you will not want to, because you want to please your Lord.

Q: In Ezr 10:44, what is interesting about the counts here?

A: Overall, about 111, 0.4 %, of the 28,774 men had intermarried. But of the Levites, 6 out of 74, or 8.1%, and 3 out of 139, or 2.2% of the gatekeepers had married. It Levites (but not priests) and gatekeepers had a disproportionate number of intermarriages. One way this sort of makes sense is that originally Ezra did not have any Levites. So Ezra stopped by Casiphia and persuaded some Levites to come. Perhaps they were not so willing initially, and we do not know if they married the foreign wives before or after they returned to Judah. Either way, the ones who knew the law the best were the ones who had the most pagan spouses.

   On the other hand, elders examined each marriage. If the wife had converted to Judaism, then she would have been considered Jewish and that would be fine.

   Though the men put away their unbelieving wives now, later, Nehemiah had to deal with the same situation in Nehemiah 10:31.

   See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : Old Testament p.669-671, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.676-677, The Tony Evans Bible Commentary p.460, and the Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol.4 part 3 p.135 for more info.

Q: In Ezr, what are some of the earliest manuscripts that still exist today?

A: Dead Sea scrolls: (c.1 B.C.) 1 copy of Ezra-Nehemiah (4Q117), according to The Dead Sea Scrolls Today p.30 and the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.436-438. It is combined with Ecclesiastes and is called 4Q110, according to the Dead Sea Scrolls Translated p.481. Dead Sea scroll researcher Nathan Jastrum says this was a small fragment. (Issues etc. radio program April 17, 1999)

4Q117 is three fragments of Ezra 4:2-6 (Hebrew); 4:9-11 (Aramaic); 5:17-6:5 (Aramaic). All or parts of 50 words

Overall, preserved in the Dead Sea scrolls are the following 14 verses out of 280 total verses of Ezra (5 %).

Ezr 4:2-6,9-11; 5:17; 6:1-5. See The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls p.423 for more details.

Christian Bible manuscripts, from about 350 A.D., contain the Old Testament, including Ezra.

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.) has preserved all of Ezra.

Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.) has preserved all of Ezra from Ezra 9:9 on.

Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D.) has preserved all of Ezra.

Q: Which early writers referred to Ezra?

A: The only Pre-Nicene Christian writer who referenced or alluded to verses in Ezra was Origen (225-254 A.D.), who alluded to it. He said, “But someone else will say that the temple spoken of was not that built by Solomon, for that it was destroyed at the period of captivity, but the temple built at the time of Ezra, with regard to which the forty-six years can be shown to be quite accurate.” Origen’s Commentary on John book 10 ch.22 p.403

After Nicea

Eusebius of Caesarea (318-339/340 A.D.)

Athanasius (367, 325-373 A.D.)

Ambrose of Milan (370-390 A.D.)

Gregory Nanzianus (330-391 A.D.) mentions Ezra in his poem of scripture. Gregory's poem is (in Greek) in Gregory vol.37 of Migne's Patrologia Graeca, cols. 471-474 (Carmina Dogmatica, Book 1, section 1, Carmen XII) See http://www.bible-researcher.com/gregory.html for more info.

Pacian of Barcelona (342-379/392 A.D.) alludes to Ezra.

Epiphanius of Salamis (Implied) (360-403 A.D.)

Rufinus (374-406 A.D.)

John Chrysostom (-407 A.D.) quotes from Ezra

Council of Carthage (219 bishops) (393-419 A.D.)

Sulpitius Severus (363-420 A.D.)

Jerome (373-420 A.D.) discusses the books of the Old Testament. He specifically discusses Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, the Pentateuch, Job, Jesus son of Nave [Joshua], Judges, Ruth, Samuel Kings (2 books), twelve prophets, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai,, Zechariah, Malachi, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah, Letter 53 ch.7-8 p.99-101.

Pope Leo I of Rome (440-460 A.D.) alludes to Ezra.

Q: In Ezr, what are some of the translation differences between the Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek Septuagint?

A: Here are a few of the translation differences, primarily focusing on Ezra 2, with the Hebrew/Aramaic given first, followed by the Greek.

Ezr 2:1 “sons of the province who went up out of captivity, of those who had been exiled.” vs. “people of the land that went up, of the number of prisoners were removed”

Ezr 2:2 “of the men of the people” vs. “of the people”

The 52 numbers (167 digits in English) from Ezra 2:3-69 in Hebrew and Greek Septuagint match exactly except for:

Ezr 2:24 “42” vs. “43”

Ezr 2:39 “1,017” vs. “1,007”

(Two typos out of 52 numbers is about 4% difference, or two digits out of 167 digits is 1% difference.)

Ezr 2:25 “Kiriath Arim” vs. “Kiriath Jearim” (We know of a Kiriath Jearim, but not a Kiriath Arim, so Arim is probably a typo)

Ezr 4:23 “force to stop” vs. “force to stop with horses and an [armed] force.” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary vol.4 p.634

   Bibliography for this question: the Hebrew translation is from Jay P. Green’s Literal Translation and the Septuagint rendering is from Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton’s translation of The Septuagint : Greek and English. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary and the footnotes in the NASB, NIV 1985, NKJV, and NRSV Bibles also were used.

For more info please contact Christian Debater™ P.O. Box 144441 Austin, TX 78714. www.BibleQuery.org