Jan Paron, PhD | October 22, 2021
With the intermarriage dilemma in focus, this essay aims to show how regathered Israel interpreted and responded to “yet now there is hope in Israel in spite of this” from Ezr 10:2-11 in relation to Dt 6:4 during the rebuilding of the temple period as exhibited by the returnees’ actions in the book of Ezra. The intermarriages of the exiled golah from Babylon with those outside their community occurred during their post-exilic reformation upon resettling in the Yehud Persian province of Jerusalem and Judah. The exiled returned there without their cultural identity markers customarily associated with their independent statehood, land, temple, and king. Moffat noted this necessitated the golah reconstruct their identity.[1] Thus, they formed new social ones as assimilation influenced their cultural practices.
The returnees did carry over the ancestral lineage of their father’s house, as noted in the genealogical listings in chapters two and eight to the new community. The lineages highlighted their maintenance of Jewish heritage in keeping to the exclusion of foreign nations. Those relocating back to Israel from the first wave of exiled returnees had to prove their descendancy from Israel (Ezr 2:59). The names listed in chapters 1-6 provided genealogical tracings reminiscent of pre-exilic history. Like the genealogical descendent tracings from the early return, Ezra listed those who returned with him from Babylonia by their father’s house (8:1). Perhaps, in their identity reformation over the subsequent generations, they lost their original sense and purpose as God’s chosen during the resettlement process by not separating themselves from the people of the land through marriage. Though, the text does not specify the reason for intermarriage, we only can ascertain from a distant reader location that economics, politics, marriage partners, or assimilation influences resulted in them compromising the holy seed through outside marriages. While modern readers may view intermarriage as a discriminatory practice of exclusion,[2] the post-exiled perspective understood breaking covenant through intermarrying as separating the golah community from the Lord God would incur His wrath. Nonetheless, Christ followers can learn from Israel’s pagan joining about being “unequally yoked together with unbelievers” (1 Cor 6:14) and its effects upon spiritual growth and relationship with God.[3]
To comprehend the holy seed defilement in Ezr 10 and development of their theology of hope in this context requires a look at the golah departure from exile. Chronicling the history that led to the foreign marriage crisis among the returnees from exile in 10:2-11, events begin with their initial release. King Cyrus Persia issued a proclamation allowing the remnant of Israel, the golah captives from Babylon, to return to the Yehud to rebuild the Temple of the Lord in Jerusalem (1:1-3). Cyrus’ action initiated a fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecy for the completion of a seventy-year exile, and the remnant’s hoped for mercy from the Lord God for their restoration to the land (Jer 25:11-12).[4]
Several rulers and generations of the resettled golah later, King Artaxerxes of Persia in the seventh year of his reign, decreed Ezra should conduct an inquiry into the situation in Judah and Jerusalem based on God’s law (Ezr 7:14). Ezra also had directions to continue support for the temple as well as teach and implement the law of the God of heaven (7:21). The king described Ezra as a priest and teacher of the law (v. 14). In this capacity and under the king’s authority, Ezra left for Jerusalem with the second wave of exiled returnees (v. 13).
With his authority in hand and God’s favor upon him, Ezra traveled to Jerusalem to teach the golah community the statutes and rules under the law of Moses (7:10). What did Ezra learn about the state of the resettled remnant in the period subsequent to their earlier return to the Yehud? [5] Leaders brought to his attention the people of Israel, including the priests and Levites, had not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands (9:2).[6] [7] Redditt referred to the peoples of the land as all residents of post-exilic Yehud who had not been in exile, including those who had “separated themselves from the unclean practices of their Gentile neighbors in order to seek the Lord, the God of Israel” (6:21).[8]Consequently, the parameters of the new community exclusively limited itself to those who had returned from exile.[9] A widespread problem occurred that more than likely involved generations of golah men marrying outside the holy seed community with inhabitants of the Yehud and surrounding nations (3:3; 4:4). Whether a singular or multiple abominations, it resulted in men from the first wave of returnees intermarrying with pagan women, thus mixing the holy seed with the peoples of the lands (v. 3). To compound their trespasses, the leaders and rulers led the way in their unfaithfulness to the God of Israel and the breaking of the law of Moses.[10] Further, it added to the remnants’ prior iniquities from the days of their ancestral fathers (9:7).
The Lord God left Israel with commandments to guide them to successful possession of the land He would give them (Dt 4:1; 5:1; 6:4). The completion of His preparation of the golah community as a new creation led the way for the new creation of believers in Christ. It also served an eschatological purpose for the final, new creation’s habitation in the millennial kingdom. In this reshaping of His people to holiness, He left guideposts with the law. As such, the Deuteronomic Code prohibits marriage with the peoples of the land, reasoning that the foreign wives would lead the sons away from following Yahweh to serve other gods away from the premise of faithfulness to the Shema, “the Lord our God is one!” (Dt 6:4b; e.g., Exo 34:11-12, 16).[11] To intermarry would arouse the Lord’s anger suddenly to destroy them (Dt 7:3-4).[12]
Ezra’s prayer in 9:8 on behalf of Israel prepared the way for the returnees’ conviction to rise, with Ezr 10:2-11 providing the framework for the golah theology of hope with their self-initiated actions of change towards it. The theology develops espoused through their deeds and works. Nevertheless, unless the returnees embraced Ezra’s prayers, hope would go no farther. Upon realizing their trespasses, the people of Israel expressed repentant emotions towards their guilt, providing an initial step toward living out their hope. Faced with possible judgment, the gathering of people included men, women, and children who also wept bitterly with Ezra as he confessed, wept, and bowed down prostrate (10:1).
The marriage crisis came to a head in 10:2, opening with the golah community reaction to Ezra’s public intercession. Shechaniah responded to the foreign marriages that threatened assimilation with those other than the holy seed. He addressed Ezra from among all those who wept very bitterly around Ezra as he prayed (10:1).[13] The large assembly felt the gravity, immensity, and widespread conviction over their actions with the hope that the Lord God would extend mercy upon them and bring them once again into covenant with Him through the upholding of the Shema (Dt. 4:1; 5:1; 6:4; v. 2). As a resolution, Shechaniah proposed covenant renewal with the Lord by putting away the foreign wives and children born to them according to the law (10:3). The law of the Lord transliterates to tôrâ in Hebrew, denoting instruction about life.[14] Thus, the law goes beyond statutes and rules, binding Israel in a faithful covenant to the Lord their God.[15] Further, the Shema of Dt 6:5 commands Israel to love the Lord their God with all their heart, soul, and strength as an obedient people with the right moral condition to possess the good land of which the LORD swore to their fathers (Dt 6:18; Ezr 9:12). We who belong to Christ also comprise Abraham’s seed as heirs to the promise (Gal 3:29). Thus, faithfulness to one Lord, our God in covenant by loving Him with all our heart, soul, and mind applies to us as well for righteous living (Mt 32:37; Mk 12:29-30).
Shechaniah’s compelling plea set in motion the reformation of the community back into covenant and aligned to the Shema (Dt 6:4). In his address, he confessed to their trespasses against God in marrying foreign women (Ezr 10:2). Perhaps, the righteous Lord God of Israel of whom Ezra petitioned would hear their cries of repentance and forgive their iniquities of abominations with the peoples of the land. The hope for Israel subsequently would emanate from the community’s own corrective actions of putting away the wives from the peoples of the land in fulfilling the law of Moses (10:3). He urged them to get up and take ownership and responsibility for the matter to make things right (v. 4). Confession, reversal of the abomination, and adherence to law would lead to forgiveness from their iniquity from a righteous God who would bestow His grace upon the returned exiles.
Once again, Ezra entered the picture, affirming Shechaniah’s covenant plea. Ezra demanded that the leaders, Levites, and all Israel swear an oath to put away their foreign wives and children from their marriage (v.5). All the people had to right the wrong to form a holy community. Afterwards, Ezra withdrew from the house of God and fasted mourning the guilt of the golah (v. 6). To put or send away indicates divorce. Marrying foreign women stood contrary to God’s law as illegal (Dt 7:3) by violating the endogamy of marrying within Israel and joining in exogamous marriage. The putting away of foreign wives and their children guarded the holy seed. Klingbeil called the exogamous marriages in Ezra “when not to tie the knot.” Though lighthearted, his reference helps the reader from a Western social location understand the issues from the fifth century BC Yehud through a 21st-century lens.[16]
In viewing initiation of the oath through a gender-oriented, female lens, it would affect many foreign women and children. It leaves the modern reader wondering about the rights and compensation for divorced, pagan women as recipients of such a drastic measure. Who took care of the women once they divorced? Did their ancestral family care for them, or did shame leave them to fend for themselves? Why did the children have to suffer from Israel’s actions? Johnson asserts we discount race and gender involved in the socially-constructed intermarriage issue, rather understand it in the context of the Achaemenid Empire emblematic of an identity issue resulting from exile.[17] To balance emotions involved in divorce, the interpreter has to separate loss of family and identity traumatized by exile against maintaining purity of the holy seed to allow God’s redemptive purpose for Israel to occur. As a minority population, the community had to guard their identity established by the Lord God of Israel against a land governed by polytheistic gods to avoid decimating the seed and land. Fensham supported their action bringing to the forefront the influence mothers brought to their children along with traditions of the foreign society. Thus, they presented a stumbling block to Israel.[18] While we may view it as harsh by modern standards, the measure had to occur to restore hope to Israel.
Returning to the actions reflective in the golah theology of hope, the elders and leaders began fixing the wrong of their actions. They issued a proclamation to all descendants of captivity in the Yehud to gather in Jerusalem in three days (v. 7-8). They backed it up with harsh penalties for non-compliance with property confiscation and separation from the exilic community (v. 8). The imposition of a stringent penalty suggests opposition among the congregation of the exiles and the need to break a hardened will contrary to the one true God (Dt 6:4). We may look at the measures for anyone objecting to divorcing their foreign wives as too much to ask but reframing the scenario to recreate authentic covenant for a new creation with the God of Israel provides a different vantage point. Part of their theology of hope must show full obedience, not partial.
Thus, within the fixed period, all the people gathered in the house of God’s open square in the heavy rain. They forged ahead trembling and distress despite rain and discomfort over the seriousness of the matter (Ezr 10:9). Once again, Ezra addressed the assemblage to confess their sin of intermarriage to foreign women adding to the guilt of Israel. In a stronger term, perhaps driving the point home more, the NIV states committed treason (10:10), implying a betrayal of God and all of Israel past and present. In this verse, it means having committed a terrible sin (NLT). Nevertheless, even this sin leaves room for God’s grace and forgiveness. The passage closes with those from captivity confessing to their sins in mass and agreeing to separate themselves from their pagan wives (v. 11). In addition to full obedience to God, this action suggests that the exiled must show a united confession enveloped in genuine submission and humility. Separation from the pagan wives, in their eyes, would separate them back to God. As Christians, our iniquities also separate us from God, requiring us to confess and turn from sin.
Upon reading the passage we see a people whom God had risen from dry bones in the valley and returned them once again to the land. As Covenant Maker and Keeper, the Lord God upholds His promises from Ez 37:6,13-14 as He begins the restoration process upon their return to the land. While the golah began united in the rebuilding process of the Temple in Jerusalem and initiating worship practices, the returnees fell short in observing the marriage requirements of not separating themselves from the peoples of the land. Intermarriage led to the syncretic practices of idolatry, drawing them away from faithfulness to the Lord our God as one (Dt 6:4). Once again, they break covenant, and their abominations add to those of their fathers. We can see ourselves in this same position. Through new birth, Jesus makes us a new creation purified in Him. However, the redeemed often fall back to sin pulled by the influences of the world. The flesh takes over, opening the door to the return of old habits. Christ desires we live as a restored community intimately in covenant with Him. Nevertheless, the same theology of hope that the exiled realized finds itself in the New Covenant as well–one of continued grace, mercy, and forgiveness of sin to lead a reformed life. We can learn from their mistakes and apply them to our lives. Jesus as Yahweh, desires to bring us in covenant from creation to new creation in the eschaton perfected in His image.
The passage closed (Ezr 10:11) with the exiled community’s theology of hope based on decisive actions of putting their faith to work in word and deed premised upon forgiveness of sins from the God of grace. In brief, they communally confessed to iniquities admitting their trespasses and taking ownership of their abomination (10: 2). This led to the initiation of covenant renewal with the Lord taking steps to put away the foreign wives and children born to them according to the law (vv. 3-4). Then all Israel swore an oath to uphold the intermarriage divorces (v. 5). All would return in three days, backed up by strong measures for noncompliance. Right standing in covenant required full obedience (vv. 7-8). Finally, they confessed their transgressions once again in trembling and humility to the Lord God of their fathers to do His will and put away their pagan wives from the peoples of the land (vv. 9-11). Repentance must have the intent to follow through and turn from sin. In turn, from confession and ownership to right attitudes and actions in obedience, they established the hope for Israel for favor from the God of grace. They also took steps to bind themselves to observe the Lord’s command from the Shema of Dt 6:4: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one!” While we may look at the remedy for their abominations as harsh to the affected, the remnant had to take these measures to preserve the purity of the holy seed incurred by their rebellious syncretic practice of intermarriage. Their polluting the seed endangered the remnant and land, thus, placing themselves out of alignment to God’s redemptive purposes continuing into the millennial kingdom. We, too, must live our faith out in words and deeds. Our Christian walk individually and collectively must include the earnest and daily crucifying the flesh of that same sinful nature from the first Adam. However, we look to the second Adam who bore our sin on the cross, forgiving our sins. Jesus is that same God of mercy.
Bibliography
Ackroyd, Peter R. Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century B. C. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986.
Allen, Leslie C. Ezekiel, Vol. 29. Word Bible Commentary. Edited by John D. W. Watts and James W. Watts. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990.
Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Ezra-Nehemiah: A Commentary. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 2015.
__________. Judaism, the First Phase: The Place of Ezra and Nehemiah in the Origins of Judaism. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2009.
Boadt, Lawrence. “Book of Ezra.” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol D-G. Edited by David N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
__________. Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction. New York: Paulist Press, 2012.
Bickerman, Elias Joseph. “The Edict of Cyrus in Ezra 1.” Journal of Biblical Literature 65, no. 3 (1946): 249-275.
Bimson, John J. “Book of Ezra.” In Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, edited by Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 223-225. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.
Brett, Mark G. ed. Ethnicity and the Bible. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2002.
Bryan, S. M. “The End of Exile: The Reception of Jeremiah’s Prediction of a Seventy-Year Exile.” Journal of Biblical Literature 137, no. 1 (January 2018): 107–126.
Cezula, Ntozakhe Simon. “The concept of “the holy seed” as a coping strategy in Ezra-Nehemiah and its implications for South Africa.” Acta Theologica 38 no.1 (2018)
__________. “Waiting for the Lord: The Fulfilment of the Promise of Land in the Old Testament as a Source of Hope.” Scriptura 116, no. 1 (2017), 1-15.
Chicago Manual of Style: The Essential Guide for Writers, Editors, and Publishers. 17th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017.
Childs, Brevard. Introduction to the Old Testament Scripture. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 2011.
Duggan, Michael W. “Ezra.” In The Old Testament and Ethics, edited by Joel B. Green and Jacqueline E. Lapsley, 82-83 Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013.
Edin, Gary. Ezra/Nehemiah: A Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition. Kansas City, Beacon Hill Press, 2017.
Eichrodt, Walther Theology of the Old Testament. Translated by J. A. Baker. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1961.
Estelle, Bryan D. Echoes of Exodus: Tracing a Biblical Motif. Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press, 2018.
Fensham, F. Charles. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1982.
Fried, Lisbeth. Ezra and the Law in History and Tradition. Studies on Personalities of the Old Testament. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2014.
Glissman, Volker. Out of Exile, Not out of Babylon: The Diaspora Theology of the Golah. Mzuzu: Muzuni Press, 2019.
Goldingay, John A. “Ezekiel.” Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible. Edited by James D. G. Dunn and John W. Rogerson. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003.
Goswell, Gregory. “The Absence of a Davidic Hope in Ezra-Nehemiah.” Trinity Journal 33, no. 1 (April, 2002): 19–31.
Grabbe, Lester, L. An Introduction to Second Temple Judaism: History and Religion of the Jews in the Time of Nehemiah, the Maccabees, Hillel, and Jesus. London: T&T Clark, 2002.
Graham, M. Patrick. Richard R. Marrs, and Steven L. McKenzie. Worship and the Hebrew Bible: Essays in Honor of John T. Willis. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Supplement Series. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999.
Harmon, Matthew S. Rebels and Exiles: A Biblical Theology of Sin and Restoration. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2020.
Hawk, L. Daniel. “Ezra-Nehemiah: An Introduction and Study Guide. Israel’s Quest for Identity.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 81, no. 4 (2019): 722–25.
Houten, Christians van. The Alien in Israelite Law. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.
Johnson, Willa Mathis. The Holy Seed Has Been Defiled: The Interethnic Marriage Dilemma in Ezra 9-10. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, Ltd., 2011.
Kamsen, Joel and Tihitshak Biwul. “The Restoration of the Dry Bones in Ezekiel 37:1-14: An Exegetical and Theological Analysis.” Scriptura 118 (2019:1), pp. 1-10.
Klein, Ralph W.. “Book of Ezra.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol D-G, edited by David N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Klingbeil, Gerald A. “When Not to “Tie the Knot”: A Study of Exogamous Marriage in Ezra-Nehemiah Against the Backdrop of Biblical Legal Tradition.” Faculty Publications (2016): 378.
Knoppers, Gary N. Exile and Restoration Revisited: Essays on the Babylonian and Persian Periods in Memory of Peter R. Ackroyd Bob Becking On the Identity of Foregn Women New York T & T Clarke, 2009.
Korada, Manoja Kumar. 2018. “Seeing Discontinuity in Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah through Reforms.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 61 (2018): 287–305.
LaSor, William Sandord, David Allan Hubbard, Frederic William Bush, and Leslie C. Allen. Old Testament Survey: The Message Form, and Background of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, Co. 1996.
Lee, Lydia. Mapping Judah’s Fate in Ezekiel’s Oracles Against the Nations. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2016.
Leuchter, Mark. “The Exegesis of Jeremiah in and beyond Ezra 9-10.” Vetus Testamentum 65, no. 1 (2015): 62–80.
Longman III, Tremper. The Message of the Prophets: A Survey of the Prophetic and Apocalyptic Books of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2010.
Mein, Andrew. Ezekiel and the Ethics of Exile. Oxford Theological Monographs. Oxford: OUP Oxford, 2006.
Mendenhall, George. “Covenant.” The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol A-C. Edited by David Freeman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Miller, Maxwell J. and John H. Hayes. A History of Ancient Israel and Judah. 2nd ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.
Myers, Jacob. Ezra-Nehemiah. Anchor Yale Bible. New York: Yale University Press, 1983.
__________. The Design and Themes of Ezekiel’s Program of Restoration.” Interpretation 58, no. 4 (2007): 585-625.
Pakkala, Juna. The Concept of Exile in Ancient Israel and Its Historical Contexts, edited by Ehud Ben Zvi and Christopher Levin. New York: DeGruyter, 2010, 91-101.
Pearce, Laurie E. “Identifying Judeans and Judean Identity in the Babylonian Evidence.” in Exile and Return: The Babylonian Context, edited by Jonathan Stökl, Caroline Waerzeggers, and Jonathan Stökl. Berlin: CPI Books, 2015.
Phaipi, Chingboi Guite. “The First Encounter of the Golah and Their “Adversaries” (Ezra 4:1–5): Who Are the Adversaries, and on What Is the Adversity Based?” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 20, no. 20 (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5508/jhs29563.
__________. Rebuilding a Post-exilic Community: The Golah Community and the “Other” in the Book of Ezra. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2019.
Redditt, Paul L. Ezra-Nehemiah: Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary. Macon: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 2014.
Sabo, Peter J. Moabite women, “Transjordanian women, and incest and exogamy: The gendered dimensions of boundaries in the Hebrew Bible.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 45, no. 1 (August 2023): 93-110.
Schultz, Samuel J. The Old Testament Speaks: A Complete Survey of Old Testament History and Literature. New York: HarperOne, 2000.
Scott, James E. A Conversation with N. T. Wright. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2017.
Smith-Christopher, Daniel L.”Exclusion, Transformation, and Inclusion of the ‘Foreigner’ in Post-exilic Biblical Theology” In Ethnicity in the Bible, edited by Mark G. Brett, 117-142. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, Inc., 1996.
__________. A Biblical Theology of Exile. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002.
Staples, Jason A. The Idea of Israel in Second Temple Judaism: A New Theory of People, Exile, and Israelite Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2021.
Stökl, Jonathan and Caroline Waerzeggers. Exile and Return: The Babylonian Context. Beihefte Zur Zeitschrift Für Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 478 (2015).
Tiemeyer, L. D. “Book of Ezekiel.” in The Dictionary of the Old Testament Prophets. Edited by Mark J. Boda and J. Gordon McConville. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2012.
Van Seters, John. Dating the Yahwists History: Principles and Perspectives.” Biblica 96, no. 1 (2015, 1-25.
Venter, Pieter M. 2018. “The Dissolving of Marriages in Ezra 9–10 and Nehemiah 13 Revisited.” Hervormde Teologiese Studies 74 (2018): 1–13.
Walton, John H. Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.
Washington, Harold C. 2003. “Israel’s Holy Seed and the Foreign Women of Ezra-Nehemiah: A Kristevan Reading.” Biblical Interpretation 11, no. 3-4 (January 2003): 427–37.
Williamson, H. G. Ezra, Nehemiah. Waco: World Book, Publishers, 1985.
Yamauchi, E. M. Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. in The Dictionary of Old Testament Historical Books, edited by David N. Freedman, Bill T. Arnold, and H. G. M. Williamson. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2005.
[1] Donald P. Moffat, Ezra’s Social Drama, Identity Formation, Marriage and Social Conflict in Ezra 9 and 10 (New York: Bloomsbury, 2013), 26-27.
[2]Charles F. Fensham, F. Charles. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1982), 124. Fensham explained the term holy seed does not pertain to any racial prejudice, rather, God’s elect people of Israel (Ex 19:6) to carry his revelation and be a light to the nations (Is 42:6). It pertained to living in relationship with the Lord and His people. Once broken, they lose their status as the people of God (Hos 1:9). Intermarriage with foreign nations and being contaminated with their idol worship, endangered the true religion from losing its pure character.
[3] “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?” (1 Cor 6:14).
[4] S. M. Bryan, “The End of Exile: The Reception of Jeremiah’s Prediction of a Seventy-Year Exile,” Journal of Biblical Literature, 137 (2018): 107. Bryan added that while set in the past, the fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecy reflected the captives’ belief that their exile had ended (See Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). Further, the return of the exiled relates to a hoped-for experience of God’s mercy at the end of seventy weeks of years.Conceivably, his same hope parallels God’s restoration of Israel as noted in Ez 37:6. In 37:1-14, the prophet’s oracles provided renewal and restoration that included a future, united Israel of Judah and Israel (vv. 15-21) as part of the book’s primary purpose of judgment and salvation for Israel and the nations.
[5]The first returnees arrived in 539 BC, while the second in 458 BC with an 81-year difference if accurately dated.
[6] The people of the land refer to their abominations of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites (9:2).
[7] Joseph Blenkinsopp, Ezra/Nehemiah (Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015). Blenkinsopp felt that based on the public reading of the law in Neh 8, a gap of five to nine months existed between Ezra’s arrival and before the marriage issue was brought to Ezra’s attention.
[8] Paul L. Redditt, Ezra-Nehemiah: Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary (Macon: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 2014), 193.
[9] Walter C. Kaiser and Paul D. Wegner, A History of Israel: From the Bronze Age Through the Jewish Wars (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2016), 600. Kaiser highlighted the fact that during the early post-exilic period that the Jews remained scattered all over the Persian Empire although allowed to return. Few left. Further, other Jewish centers developed around Babylon and flourished throughout the empire. Some Jews like Nehemiah prospered in the Persian government. Also, Egypt had a strong Jewish presence.
[10] Segueing into Israel’s hope for restoration from exile upon their recognition of sin in 10:2, it suggests they desired God to bestow His grace upon them by forgiving their abominations.
[11] “for you shall worship no other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God” (Exo 34:14).
[12]Perhaps, with God’s judgment in mind, Ezra petitioned the Lord God of Israel that He would not incur His anger and utterly destroy them without remnant or escape (9:15).# His prayer leads to the community’s response to hope for Israel in 10:2-11.
[13]It appeared that he had some type of authority as a lay leader speaking for the golah. The assembled came from among those who trembled at the words of the God of Israel because of the exile’s unfaithfulness (v. 3; cf. 9:3). Either Ezra’s prayer of guilt and confession (9:6-15) convicted them and/or they represented those who remained faithful to the law of Moses.
[14]Jim Edlin, Ezra/Nehemiah: A Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition (Nazarene Publishing House). Elin noted that as God’s divine words, it “conveys insight about what God thinks about life and is, therefore, a revelation of God’s will. It includes not only statements of truth but also stories that illustrate that truth.” Further, tôrâ can refer to their covenant relationship with the Lord as noted in Exodus and Deuteronomy. Edlin emphasized the significance of the law for ancient Israel since it shaped the covenant community into what the Lord deemed for them by reflecting His character as well as desire for covenant relationship. It also would provide them a better life.
[15] Edlin, Ezra/Nehemiah: A Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition, ch. 7. He further stated, “In Deut 4:5-8 Moses put it this way: See, I have taught you decrees and laws as the LORD my God commanded me, so that you may follow them in the land you are entering to take possession of it. Observe them carefully, for this will show your wisdom and understanding to the nations, who will hear about all these decrees and say, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.” What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the LORD our God is near us whenever we pray to him? And what other nation is so great as to have such righteous decrees.”
[16] Gerald A. Klingbeil, “When Not to “Tie the Knot”: A Study of Exogamous Marriage in Ezra-Nehemiah Against the Backdrop of Biblical Legal Tradition,” Faculty Publications (2016): 378.
[17]Willa Mathis Johnson, The Holy Seed Has Been Defiled: The Interethnic Marriage Dilemma in Ezra 9-10 (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, Ltd., 2011), 15.
[18] Fensham, The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah,135.
Like this:
Like Loading...
perSpectives 12 