Friday 8th May
Read Ezra 4:6-10
“At the beginning of the reign of Xerxes, they lodged an accusation against the people of Judah and Jerusalem.
7 And in the days of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel and the rest of his associates wrote a letter to Artaxerxes. The letter was written in Aramaic script and in the Aramaic language.
8 Rehum the commanding officer and Shimshai the secretary wrote a letter against Jerusalem to Artaxerxes the king as follows:
9 Rehum the commanding officer and Shimshai the secretary, together with the rest of their associates – the judges, officials and administrators over the people from Persia, Uruk and Babylon, the Elamites of Susa, 10 and the other people whom the great and honourable Ashurbanipal deported and settled in the city of Samaria and elsewhere in Trans-Euphrates.” (NIVUK)
The kings mentioned in Ezra-Nehemiah are the great kings of the age. Beginning with Cyrus, then Darius (the period in which the second temple was rebuilt), and moving onto Xerxes (Esther) and Artaxerxes, during which the walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt. Throughout this entire period God’s people’s efforts to rebuild were constantly, and usually successfully, thwarted.
The temple rebuilding efforts we have been considering (Cyrus/Darius), with the establishment of the altar (Ezra 3:1-6) and laying of the foundations (Ezra 3:7-13), and the opposition described (Ezra 4:1-5) is given flesh at the end of this chapter (Ezra 5-6). But the narrative is interrupted (v6-23) by these names and out of place/time kings (Xerxes/Artaxerxes)! What are we to make of this deliberately confusing excursus? Is this just a scribal accident?
That this is ‘out of place’ (imagine a set of brackets opening (v6) and closing (v23)) is clear from the context and names and the reference to the building of the walls of Jerusalem (v12). I am not easily convinced by arguments of accidental misplacement. So what can we learn if it is deliberate?
One thing we can learn is that God’s people during this period were beleaguered on every side. The signatories to this correspondence emphasise that every layer of society from one end of the empire to the other, and all the peoples of the region forced in from elsewhere, were united against them. If the entire community came together in joy to lay the foundation of the new temple then the impression this letter seeks to give is that all of the surrounding civilization was ultimately opposed! That the temple and city walls were eventually rebuilt can only be an act of providence. This city, on this hill, is surprising in nearly every way.
““You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:14-16) (NIV)
