Deeper Commentary
Ezra 2:1 Now these are the children of the
province, who went up out of the captivity of those who had been carried
away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away to Babylon- The
majority of Jews preferred to stay in Persia / Babylon. Archaeological and
inscription evidence (see Jacob Neusner, A History of the Jews in
Babylonia), as well as Josephus, suggests there may have been 1
million of them in Persia at the time of Cyrus. Ezra 2:1 may suggest that
only a relatively few Jews who lived in the province of Babylon returned (one out of
127 provinces), even though there were significant numbers of Jews in all
the provinces, as the book of Esther makes clear (as also does Nehemiah
1:8, which says that the Babylonian captivity fulfilled God’s prophecy to
scatter Israel amongst all nations). The Persian records even suggest that
some of those who obeyed the call to 'return' actually only made a
pilgrimage to Jerusalem and then returned to their homes in Persia. And the mighty political and
linguistic changes taking place purely for our sakes are often
ignored by us. Like the Jews in Babylon, we figure that surely
such huge changes couldn’t have occurred only for us. But they
do, and have done. Isaiah frequently shows the folly of worshipping
Babylonian idols. And yet it seems that it was Judah’s worship of these
idols that kept them in Babylon. See on Is. 50:10,11.
Ezra 2:2 who came with Zerubbabel, Jeshua, Nehemiah, Seraiah, Reelaiah,
Mordecai, Bilshan, Mispar, Bigvai, Rehum, Baanah. The number of the men of
the people of Israel- The mention of 11 leaders perhaps leaves us
wondering why not 12; perhaps the implication is that the intention of
regathering all 12 tribes was not to be fulfilled completely.
The way Zerubbabel (Ezra 2:2; Neh. 7:5-7), Ezra (Ezra 7:8; 8:32) and Nehemiah (Neh. 2:11; 13:7) are described as ‘coming to Jerusalem’ may hint that they could have fulfilled this coming of Yahweh to Zion; they could have been Messianic figures (Neh. 2:11; 13:7). When Nehemiah speaks of them having been redeemed by Yahweh’s “strong hand” (Neh. 1:10). he is using the language of Is. 40:10, regarding how Yahweh would come to Zion and save Israel from Babylon and restore them to the land “with strong hand”. Nehemiah saw the prophecy could have been fulfilled then.
Ezra 2:3 The children of Parosh, two thousand one hundred and seventy-two-
"Children of..." can be understood literally; or the 'children of' a
geographical area are the people who live in it. It seems that in :3-19 we
have a list of the literal families who returned. Then in :20-35 those who
returned, arranged according to geographical localities; in :36-39 the
numbers of the priests, arranged according to families, and then according
to their localities (:40-42); then the families of the Nethinim (:43-54)
and of Solomon's servants (:55-57).
Ezra 2:4 The children of Shephatiah, three hundred and seventy-two-
The Persian and Babylon practice was to replace Hebrew names with local
names, as we see with Daniel and his friends. The fact some retained their
Hebrew names, especially a name like "Yah has judged", may be an
indication of faith; although it may also have been mere cultural loyalty.
Ezra 2:5 The children of Arah, seven hundred and seventy-five- "Arah"
is 'wandering', perhaps aware that the Jews had been exiled to the east
just as Cain was to wander east of Eden.
Ezra 2:6 The children of Pahathmoab, of the children of Jeshua and Joab,
two thousand eight hundred and twelve- 2818 in Neh. 7:11. The numbers
in the parallel record in Neh. 7 are often higher. I suggest that that was
a list of those who began the journey, or expressed interest in it;
whereas Ezra 2 is the list of those who completed it. And there was far
more interest in starting the journey than actually finishing it, as we
see in response to the Gospel of the Kingdom today.
Ezra 2:7 The children of Elam, one thousand two hundred and fifty-four-
Elam was the name of a neighbouring nation, so we wonder whether this was
a Jew very influenced by secularism who then repented and had a spiritual
revival. And he was one of the largest families to return.
Ezra 2:8 The children of Zattu, nine hundred and forty-five- Neh.
7:13 says 845. 100 didn't actually make it. There was far more interest in
starting the journey than actually finishing it, as we see in response to
the Gospel of the Kingdom today.
Ezra 2:9 The children of Zaccai, seven hundred and sixty- "Pure",
perhaps once a Nazirite (Lam. 4:7 s.w.).
Ezra 2:10 The children of Bani, six hundred and forty-two- "Builder",
perhaps so named because he was keen to rebuild Jerusalem.
Ezra 2:11 The children of Bebai, six hundred and twenty-three-
"Bebai" isn't a Hebrew word; some of the exiles had so assimilated that
they only had local Persian names. To leave all they had known was
therefore a major challenge.
Ezra 2:12 The children of Azgad, one thousand two hundred and twenty-two-
The differing sizes of the families may not simply mean that some were
larger than others, but that some families divided more than others over
this question of returning to Judah. Some stayed, and others went. And of
course many families didn't respond at all.
Ezra 2:13 The children of Adonikam, six hundred and sixty-six- 'Lord
of the sunrise', a pagan, cultic name; again reflecting the extent to
which the exiles had assimilated. I have noted on Esther how "Esther" and
"Mordecai" were both local names associated with idolatry.
Ezra 2:14 The children of Bigvai, two thousand and fifty-six- A
relatively large number. We are again faced with the question of why some
families and geographical areas responded to the call more than others.
Ezra 2:15 The children of Adin, four hundred and fifty-four- "Adin"
is s.w. "given to pleasures" (Is. 47:8). And yet the message of return to
restore the Kingdom was somehow attractive even to such a person.
Ezra 2:16 The children of Ater, of Hezekiah, ninety-eight- "Ater" is
'maimed'. Perhaps he was an invalid, which might account for the
relatively small family size. The call of the Kingdom is going to be more
attractive to those in such situations.
Ezra 2:17 The children of Bezai, three hundred and twenty-three-
Perhaps the same as Besai one of the Nethinim (:49).
Ezra 2:18 The children of Jorah, one hundred and twelve- We note the
lack of the 'Yah' prefix or suffix in these names. Those who responded
were apparently secular people, not known for their devotion to Yahweh.
That may explain why the records of Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai and Malachi
complain that they were not well motivated and were largely only looking
for personal benefit and advantage through returning to Judah. See on :19.
Ezra 2:19 The children of Hashum, two hundred and twenty-three-
"Enriched" or 'seeking enrichment'; see on :18.
Ezra 2:20 The children of Gibbar, ninety-five- "Children of..." can
be understood literally; or the 'children of' a geographical area are the
people who live in it. It seems that in :3-19 we have a list of the
literal families who returned. Then in :20-35 those who returned, arranged
according to geographical localities; in :36-39 the numbers of the
priests, arranged according to families, and then according to their
localities (:40-42); then the families of the Nethinim (:43-54) and of
Solomon's servants (:55-57).
"Gibbar" is Gibeon in Benjamin (Neh. 7:25), and we note that a disproportionate number of the returnees were from Benjamin.
Ezra 2:21 The children of Bethlehem, one hundred and twenty-three-
These are pathetically small numbers, bearing in mind there were around 1
million Jews in the empire (see on :1).
Ezra 2:22 The men of Netophah, fifty-six- Counted together with
Benjamin in Neh. 7. The majority of those who returned were from Benjamin
and Judah. The prophetic vision of all the tribes of Israel returning
didn't come about at the time.
Ezra 2:23 The men of Anathoth, one hundred and twenty-eight- The very
existence of "men of Anathoth" who returned was a sign of God's grace. For
because of their persecution of Jeremiah, Jer. 11:21,23 had prophesied:
"There shall be no remnant of them, for I will bring evil upon the men of
Anathoth". Perhaps like Nineveh some repented and therefore the threatened
judgment didn't come about; or Jeremiah prayed for them his enemies and
was heard; or Yahweh simply pitied His people.
Ezra 2:24 The children of Azmaveth, forty-two- The small number was
because this was known as literally "fields" near to Jerusalem (Neh.
12:29). And yet 42 people returned from this area. Whereas from far larger
settlements, not one.
Ezra 2:25 The children of Kiriath Arim, Chephirah, and Beeroth, seven
hundred and forty-three- They may have been listed together because
these villages were close to each other, or they travelled together as if
one family. The men of Kirjathjearim (s.w. "Kiriath Arim") had looked
after the ark previously (1 Sam. 7:1,2) and been blessed for it. There had
been a faithful prophet there at the time of the captivity (Jer. 26:20);
these considerations may account for the relatively large number who
returned from that area.
Ezra 2:26 The children of Ramah and Geba, six hundred and twenty-one-
"Gaba" is s.w. "Gibeah of Benjamin" (Jud. 20:10). This was a priestly
city, given to the Levites, although very few Levites returned (Josh.
21:17).
Ezra 2:27 The men of Michmas, one hundred and twenty-two- The order
of the towns appears to be geographical, as "Michmas" was close to "Geba"
(s.w. "Gibeah") of :26 (1 Sam. 14:5).
Ezra 2:28 The men of Bethel and Ai, two hundred and twenty-three-
Mentioned together because they were geographically close (Josh. 7:2;
8:9). Bethel was in the ten tribe kingdom, so it seems that some of the
Israelites did return along with Judah; but not to the extent of the
prophetic vision, whereby a repentant Israel and Judah would be united
together in a reestablished Kingdom of God in the land.
Ezra 2:29 The children of Nebo, fifty-two- Neh. 7:33 "the other
Nebo", perhaps to differentiate it from Nebo in Moab; or as LXX "Nabia".
Ezra 2:30 The children of Magbish, one hundred and fifty-six- There
is no other reference to this village. The impression is given that those
who returned were largely from insignificant villages rather than the
larger cities. Perhaps it was in those areas that there was greater
faithfulness to Yahweh. Or perhaps the urban dwellers didn't want to
return and rebuild their cities, whereas the rural dwellers guessed that
their land would still be there for them to take.
Ezra 2:31 The children of the other Elam, one thousand two hundred and
fifty-four- LXX Elamar. We wonder why so many, relatively speaking,
should return from an unknown small village. Perhaps there was a community
of faithful there.
Ezra 2:32 The children of Harim, three hundred and twenty- Whilst in
this section we are reading of the names of towns and not people, this
location is unknown, and means 'flat nosed' as if referring to a person.
Perhaps the interesting case of the person Harim is being emphasized, in
that people from his village also returned with him. See on :39.
Ezra 2:33 The children of Lod, Hadid, and Ono, seven hundred and
twenty-five- Neh. 7:37 gives 721. The fact is noted that even four
people began the journey, or were willing to start it, but didn't make it.
These details show the abiding value to God of every human person.
Ezra 2:34 The children of Jericho, three hundred and forty-five-
There was a community of "sons of the prophets" there which may account
for this (2 Kings 2:5).
Ezra 2:35 The children of Senaah, three thousand six hundred and thirty-
A relatively large number. We are again faced with the question of
why some families and geographical areas responded to the call more than
others. The larger cities such as Lachish had apparently not a single one
who returned from there.
Ezra 2:36 The priests: the children of Jedaiah, of the house of Jeshua,
nine hundred and seventy-three- As noted on :3, in :36-39 we have the
numbers of the priests, arranged according to families, and then according
to their localities (:40-42). They were not particularly faithful for by
the time Ezra came, many of them had married Gentile women.
Ezra 2:37 The children of Immer, one thousand and fifty-two- Only
four courses of priests returned, when there were supposed to be 24 of
them , namely Pashhur, Jedaiah, Immer, and Hardin (1 Chron. 24:7, 8,14).
The priesthood had been deeply corrupt at the time of the exile, and it
seems most of them preferred to remain in Babylon.
Ezra 2:38 The children of Pashhur, one thousand two hundred and forty-seven- Perhaps descendants of the unfaithful Pashur the priest of Jer. 20:1-3.
Ezra 2:39 The children of Harim, one thousand and seventeen- "Harim"
means 'snubnosed'; the priest in whom there was a physical defect, such as
to exclude him from priestly service. For this is the word used of how a
'flat nosed' man was excluded from priestly service (Lev. 21:18). Perhaps
they were eager at the chance to serve in the restored temple, guessing
that the regulations would be relaxed due to the relative lack of priests
and Levites returning. Or the idea could simply be that the requirements
of the law were not followed by the priests who returned.
Ezra 2:40 The Levites: the children of Jeshua and Kadmiel, of the children
of Hodaviah, seventy-four- As noted on :3, in :36-39 we have the
numbers of the priests, arranged according to families, and then according
to their localities (:40-42). These Levites of :40 are the ordinary
Levites; :41 refers to the Levites who sung, and :42 to those who kept the
gates. But only two families of the ordinary mass of Levites returned- a
pathetic response.
Ezra 2:41 The singers: the children of Asaph, one hundred and
twenty-eight- This was very poor response. We note that apparently
the famous singing families of Heman and Jeduthin didn't return (1 Chron.
25:1).
Ezra 2:42 The children of the porters: the children of Shallum, the
children of Ater, the children of Talmon, the children of Akkub, the
children of Hatita, the children of Shobai, in all one hundred and
thirty-nine- This is a very small number for the families of the gate
keepers. The number of ordinary Levites compared to priests is very low
(4289 priests, and 341 Levites). There were far more Levites than there
were priests, but it seems the Levites didn't want to return and do the
dirty work; everyone wanted to be religious leaders. Hence Ezra's problem
in finding Levites to return (Ezra 8:15). We can note that it was this
tension between Levites and priests which resulted in Korah's rebellion
(Num. 16:1-10).
Ezra 2:43 The Nethinim: the children of Ziha, the children of Hasupha, the
children of Tabbaoth- The Nethinim were grouped beneath the Levites
but above "the servants of Solomon" (Ezra 2:55). "Nethinim" is literally
'those who are given' and many presume they were originally the
Gibeonites, who were 'given' by Joshua to the Levites to do their more
menial work (Josh. 9:3-27). Whenever Gentiles were captured in war, some
of them would have been devoted to Yahweh in that they were given to His
service through joining the Nethinim (Num. 31:28). Thus in Ezra 8:20 we
find mention of some "whom David and the princes had appointed (Heb.
‘given’) for the service of the Levites".
Ezra 2:44 the children of Keros, the children of Siaha, the children of
Padon- These names could well be Persian and not Hebrew. The Nethinim
were Gentiles (see on :43), and had unsurprisingly adopted Persian names
in the exile. But they wanted to return to rebuild Judah. It's hard to
guess whether the push or pull factor was strongest. Perhaps they felt
they had never been accepted in Persian society just as they hadn't been
in Jewish society and therefore felt a 'push' from exile; or perhaps they
were truly faithful to the God of Israel they served, and were thereby
'pulled' by that back to His service.
Ezra 2:45 the children of Lebanah, the children of Hagabah, the children
of Akkub- "Lebanah" is "the moon"; "Hagabah" is "the locust". These
names suggest a high level of assimilation into Persian society.
Ezra 2:46 the children of Hagab, the children of Shamlai, the children of
Hanan- We note the lack of the 'Yah' prefix or suffix in these names.
Those who responded were apparently secular people, not known for their
devotion to Yahweh. That may explain why the records of Ezra, Nehemiah,
Haggai and Malachi complain that they were not well motivated and were
largely only looking for personal benefit and advantage through returning
to Judah. See on Ezra 2:19.
Ezra 2:47 the children of Giddel, the children of Gahar, the children of
Reaiah- "Reaiah", 'Yah has seen', is one of the few names which has
the 'Yah' suffix. And he was of the Nethinim, a Gentile, who had retained
his devotion to Yahweh despite being made a servant of Yahweh's apostate
people.
Ezra 2:48 the children of Rezin, the children of Nekoda, the children of
Gazzam- "Nekoda" is a female name. This female head of house, a
Gentile of the Nethinim, meaning literally "speckled" (s.w. Gen.
30:33,35), led her family back to Judah when many Jews wouldn't respond.
Ezra 2:49 the children of Uzza, the children of Paseah, the children of
Besai- We note that "Uzza" and not "Uzziah" is mentioned; as noted on
:46, the 'Yah' suffix or prefix is notably missing in these names.
"Paseah" means 'limping', suggesting as noted on :32,48,51,52 that it was
those who had some physical infirmity who returned. Thus was fulfilled
Jeremiah's prophecy of limping Jacob returning from Babylon to Zion. And
today likewise, it is those who are marginalized for whatever reason who
are more likely to respond to the Gospel of the restored Kingdom.
Ezra 2:50 the children of Asnah, the children of Meunim, the children of
Nephisim- "Meunim" is literally 'from Maon', a location in the desert
where Nabal and Abigail were from (1 Sam. 25:2). Perhaps some of their
Gentile servants became Nethinim and remained faithful- despite all the
bad examples they saw from God's ethnic people.
Ezra 2:51 the children of Bakbuk, the children of Hakupha, the children of
Harhur- "Hakupha" means bent or crooked; "Harhur" means 'inflamed'-
suggesting as noted on :32,48,52 that it was those who had some physical
infirmity who returned.
Ezra 2:52 the children of Bazluth, the children of Mehida, the children of
Harsha- "Bazluth" means 'peeled skin'; see on :32. "Harsha" is
'magician', confirming the impression that those who returned weren't the
religious zealous but generally very secular people.
Ezra 2:53 the children of Barkos, the children of Sisera, the children of
Temah- These names are all non-Hebrew; the Nethinim were originally
Gentile, and these ones appear to have retained that despite returning to
the land. The question is whether they were as it were pushed or pulled to
return to the land; see on :44.
Ezra 2:54 the children of Neziah, the children of Hatipha- These
names could arguably include the 'Yah' suffix, although most of the
Nethinim and even the Jews listed here don't have 'Yah' within them. They
were of the Nethinim, Gentiles, who had retained their
devotion to Yahweh despite being made servants of Yahweh's apostate
people.
Ezra 2:55 The children of Solomon’s servants: the children of Sotai, the
children of Hassophereth, the children of Peruda- As noted on :43,
these appear to have been reckoned beneath the Nethinim. "They have been
traditionally understood to be the descendants of those inhabitants of the
land ‘that were left of the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the
Hivites and the Jebusites’ of whom Solomon had hired ‘bondservants’ for
the work of building his temple (1 Kings 5:13)". It was therefore the most
despised classes who responded to the call of the Kingdom. And it is the
same today.
Ezra 2:56 the children of Jaalah, the children of Darkon, the children of
Giddel- "Jaalah" is the word for "profit" used of the idols whom
Israel believed would profit them (Is. 44:9,10; 47:12; Jer. 2:8,11; 16:19
etc.). This again rather suggests that the majority of those who returned
were secular folks who were not doing so from religious, spiritual motives
but for secular reasons.
Ezra 2:57 the children of Shephatiah, the children of Hattil, the children
of Pochereth Hazzebaim, the children of Ami- Shephatiah, "Yah has
judged", is one of the few names in these lists which includes 'Yah'.
Amongst these largely secular people who returned (judging by their names)
there were some who were doing so from spiritual reasons. But they were a
minority. And that impression accords with the historical information
about their later behaviour in the land as found in Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai
and Malachi.
Ezra 2:58 All the Nethinim, and the children of Solomon’s servants, were
three hundred and ninety-two- This figure is exactly the same as that
given in Neh. 7:60, whereas the numbers in the parallel record in Neh. 7
are often higher when it comes to the Jews who returned. I suggest that
that was a list of those who began the journey, or expressed interest in
it; whereas Ezra 2 is the list of those who completed it. And there was
far more interest in starting the journey than actually finishing it, as
we see in response to the Gospel of the Kingdom today. But the despised
Gentile classes of the Nethinim and Solomon's servants were actually more
committed.
Ezra 2:59 These were those who went up from Tel Melah, Tel Harsha, Cherub,
Addan, and Immer; but they could not show their fathers’ houses, and their
genealogy, whether they were of Israel- These people may have
included Gentiles; for it is unlikely that many Jews apart from the
Levites could prove their descent, and that is why those who returned are
not listed according to their tribes. Indeed it would appear that the
genealogical records were destroyed when the temple was burnt. So the
reference here may be to those who lived near to the original encampments
of the exiles who wanted to return with them. This had been the prophetic
vision- that Judah and Israel would repent, Babylon would be judged and
fall, and the repentant remnant of the Gentiles would return with the
repentant ones of God's people to form a new, multiethnic people of God in
His restored Kingdom. But the impenitence of God's people meant that
things didn't work out like that. Babylon didn't "fall" in the way that
was potentially possible, the majority of God's people chose to remain in
exile. And only a handful of Gentiles returned, probably the poorest of
the land, perhaps captives from other nations who had been grouped along
with the Jews, and likely motivated by the chance of a better life.
Ezra 2:60 the children of Delaiah, the children of Tobiah, the children of
Nekoda, six hundred and fifty-two- As explained on :59, these were
likely Gentiles, and their names suggest that. However, "Delaiah" means
'Yah has delivered', so perhaps this was a Gentile who wished to share in
Yahweh's deliverance from Babylon / Persia.
Ezra 2:61 Of the children of the priests: the children of Habaiah, the
children of Hakkoz, the children of Barzillai, who took a wife of the
daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and was called after their name-
Barzillai was famous in Israel from the times of David. This priestly
family had taken the name of this family, seeking for kudos and prestige;
and thereby had lost their priestly lineage.
Ezra 2:62 These sought their place among those who were registered by
genealogy-
Ezra
2:62 records Judah being ‘reckoned by genealogies’, using the same Hebrew
word which is the hallmark of the Chronicles genealogies (1 Chron. 4:33;
5:1,7,17; 7:5,7,9,40; 9:1,22). And in this context, Is. 40:26 compares
God’s ‘bringing out’ of Judah from Babylon with His ‘bringing out’ the
stars by their individual names, all wonderfully known to Him. Ps. 87:6
had prophesied something similar about the restoration of Zion’s fortunes:
“The LORD shall count, when he writeth up the people, that this man was
born there”. The Kingdom of God was to be the restoration of Israel’s
Kingdom- but they had to actually get on and restore it rather than wait
for it to come.
But they were not found: therefore were they deemed polluted and put from the priesthood- There is a clear connection here with Is. 43:28: "Therefore I will profane the princes of the sanctuary; and I will make Jacob a curse, and Israel an insult". They were put forth "as polluted from the priesthood" (Ezra 2:62). This is tacit proof enough that the restoration from Babylon failed to be the potential restoration prophesied. Indeed, the behaviour of the Jews at that time attracted further curses and judgment.
Ezra 2:63 The governor told them that they should not eat of the most holy
things, until there stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim-
This
situation precluded the fulfilment of the restoration prophecy of Ezekiel
42:13: “Then said he unto me, The north chambers and the south chambers,
which are before the separate place, they be holy chambers, where the
priests that approach unto the LORD shall eat the most holy things”. The
same words are found in Ezra 2:63 and Nehemiah 7:65- it wasn’t possible
for the priests to eat of the holy things [signifying God’s acceptance of
His people], because there was no record of their genealogy. Their names
were not written in the “register” in fulfilment of Ezekiel 13:9: “neither
shall they be written in the writing [s.w. ‘register’, Ezra 2:62] of the
house of Israel”. Only if a priest stood up with urim and thummim could
they eat of the holy things. And this never happened. These were two engraven stones carried in a
pouch in the breastplate which flashed out Divine decisions (see H.A.
Whittaker,
Samuel, Saul And David for an excellent study of this). Zechariah 3:9
prophesies that Joshua the High Priest would have the engraven stone with
seven eyes- the urim and thummim. It would thereby have been possible for
a priesthood who had lost their genealogy record during the sacking of the
first temple to eat the holy things, and thus fulfill Ezekiel 42:13. In a
restoration context, Is. 66:21 had prophesied that Yahweh would regather
Judah, “And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith
the LORD”. This implies, surely, that He would accept some as Levites who
could not otherwise prove they were. Zechariah 6:11,13 speaks of Joshua
being crowned with the High Priestly mitre and ‘bearing the glory’, i.e.
carrying the urim and thummim in the breastplate. But all this was
conditional on Joshua’s obedience: “This shall come to pass,
if ye will diligently obey” (Zech. 6:15). Because Joshua failed, he didn’t
have urim and thummim, therefore no decision could be given about who was
an acceptable priest, and therefore the ‘Kingdom’ prophecy of Ezekiel
42:13 was left unfulfilled. So much depended upon that man. And likewise,
the eternal destiny of many others depends on us. Isaiah’s prophecies of
the restoration feature “the servant”- who was a symbol of both the people
and a Messianic individual. His success was bound up with theirs. Thus Is.
65:9: “And I will bring forth a seed [singular] out of Jacob, and out of
Judah an inheritor [singular] of my mountains: and mine elect [plural]
shall inherit it, and my servants [plural] shall dwell there”. His
obedience would enable the peoples’ establishment as the Kingdom.
Ezra 2:64 The whole assembly together was forty-two thousand three hundred
and sixty- As noted on :1, this was but a tiny minority of the 1
million or so exiles in Babylon / Persia; and the prophetic intention that
the ten tribes returned at the same time was not realized, because they
too preferred the life of exile from God rather than returning to Him.
Ezra 2:65 besides their male servants and their female servants, of whom
there were seven thousand three hundred and thirty-seven: and they had two
hundred singing men and singing women- 7337 servants for 42360 people
(:64) suggests that on average each family had a servant. We therefore get
the impression that those who returned weren't the poorest of society,
although as noted with regards to the meanings of their names above in
this chapter, many of them were probably slightly marginalized. They
returned seeking material benefit (Hag. 1:9), as lower middle class people
often do; rather than seeking to do God's work. See on :67.
Ezra 2:66 Their horses were seven hundred and thirty-six; their mules, two
hundred and forty-five- See on :67. This picture of the Jews
returning on various animals is to be connected with the prophecies of the
restoration, where the leaders of the nations of their exile were to also
make the journey to Zion, carrying the children of the Jews (Is.
49:22,23); and using all the animals here listed in order to bring the
Jews back to Zion, and then help them rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Is.
60:4-10). But this is very different to the scene we have here; of a very
few Gentiles returning with a few Jews (see on :59), and those Jews not
even having enough animals for each of them to ride on (see on :67).
Comparison with the prophecies of what was potentially possible makes for
a rather sad impression. So much Divine potential was wasted; just as it
is by the millions who refuse the call to the Kingdom today. See on :69.
Ezra 2:67 their camels, four hundred and thirty-five; their donkeys, six
thousand seven hundred and twenty- Haggai's criticism of the
returnees is more understandable if we understand that most of them were
the lower classes, who hadn't 'made it' in Babylon. It would be fair to infer that
only the lower class Jews returned from Babylon. The record in Ezra 2:64-70
speaks of 42,360 people returning, along with 7,337 servants and 200
singers, making a total of 49,837. And yet only 8,100 animals went with
them to transport them. This means that many would have walked. They
carried 5,400 vessels for use in the temple- so the picture could be that
their more wealthy brethren laded them with goods, but only the poor
returned. Further, the list of towns of origin in Ezra 2 suggests it was
mainly those who had originally lived in peripheral villages who returned,
rather than the inhabitants of Jerusalem and larger cities.
Ezra 2:68 Some of the heads of fathers’ households, when they came to the
house of Yahweh which is in Jerusalem, offered willingly for God’s house
to set it up in its place-
Note the stress on "some"; see on :52. It's stressed twice that only "some" of the returned
exiles supported the work of the temple (Ezra 2:68-70)- which was supposed
to be the main reason for their return. This hardly sounds like the glorious,
positive, confident return of the captives to Zion prophesied in the
restoration prophecies.
Ezra 2:69 they gave after their ability into the treasury of the work
sixty-one thousand darics of gold, five thousand minas of silver and one
hundred priests’ garments- This may sound significant, but it is
nothing compared to the entire wealth of the lands of their exile which
was intended to be brought to Jerusalem at the restoration (Is. 60:5-10).
See on :66.
Ezra 2:70 So the priests, and the Levites, and some of the people, and the
singers, and the porters, and the Nethinim, lived in their cities, and all
Israel in their cities-
The
priests in the restored Kingdom were to live in one specific area near the
temple (Ez. 45:4), whereas under the Mosaic Law, the priests were given
land to live on in each of the various tribes of Israel. And yet the
record of the restoration stresses that the priests lived not around the
temple, but in various cities throughout Judah (Ezra 2:70; Neh. 7:73;
11:3,20; 12:44). Note the word "some"; see on :68.
Previous Chapter
