TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Commentary on Ezra 4 verses 6–16
Cyrus stedfastly adhered to the Jews' interest, and supported his own grant. It was to no purpose to offer any thing to him in prejudice of it. What he did was from a good principle, and in the fear of God, and therefore he adhered to it. But, though his reign in all was thirty years, yet after the conquest of Babylon, and his decree for the release of the Jews, some think that he reigned but three years, others seven, and then either died or gave up that part of his government, in which his successor was Ahasuerus (Ezr 4:6), called also Artaxerxes (Ezr 4:7), supposed to be the same that in heathen authors is called Cambyses, who had never taken such cognizance of the despised Jews as to concern himself for them, nor had he that knowledge of the God of Israel which his predecessor had. To him these Samaritans applied by letter for an order to stop the building of the temple; and they did it in the beginning of his reign, being resolved to lose no time when they thought they had a king for their purpose. See how watchful the church's enemies are to take the first opportunity of doing it a mischief; let not its friends be less careful to do it a kindness. Here is,
I. The general purport of the letter which they sent to the king, to inform him of this matter. It is called (Ezr 4:6) an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem. The devil is the accuser of the brethren (Rev 12:10), and he carries on his malicious designs against them, not only by accusing them himself before God, as he did Job, but by acting as a lying spirit in the mouths of his instruments, whom he employs to accuse them before magistrates and kings and to make them odious to the many and obnoxious to the mighty. Marvel not if the same arts be still used to depreciate serious godliness.
II. The persons concerned in writing this letter. The contrivers are named (Ezr 4:7) that plotted the thing, the writers (Ezr 4:8) that put it into form, and the subscribers (Ezr 4:9) that concurred in it and joined with them in this representation, this misrepresentation I should call it. Now see here, 1. How the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and his temple, with their companions. The building of the temple would do them no harm, yet they appear against it with the utmost concern and virulence, perhaps because the prophets of the God of Israel had foretold the famishing and perishing of all the gods of the heathen, Zep 2:11; Jer 10:11. 2. How the people concurred with them in imagining this vain thing. They followed the cry, though ignorant of the merits of the cause. All the several colonies of that plantation (nine are here mentioned), who had their denomination from the cities or countries of Assyria, Chaldea, Persia, etc., whence they came, set their hands, by their representatives, to this letter. Perhaps they were incensed against these returned Jews because many of the ten tribes were among them, whose estates they had got into their possession, and of whom they were therefore jealous, lest they should attempt the recovery of them hereafter.
III. A copy of the letter itself, which Ezra inserts here out of the records of the kingdom of Persia, into which it had been entered; and it is well we have it, that we may see whence the like methods, still taken to expose good people and baffle good designs, are copied.
1.They represent themselves as very loyal to the government, and greatly concerned for the honour and interest of it, and would have it thought that the king had no such loving faithful subjects in all his dominions as they were, none so sensible of their obligations to him, Ezr 4:14. Because we are salted with the salt of the palace (so it is in the margin), "we have our salary from the court, and could no more live without it than flesh could be preserved without salt;" or, as some think, their pay or pension was sent them in salt; or "Because we had our education in the palace, and were brought up at the king's table," as we find, Dan 1:5. These were those whom he intended to prefer; they did eat their portion of the king's meat. "Now, in consideration of this, it is not meet for us to see the king's dishonour;" and therefore they urge him to stop the building of the temple, which would certainly be the king's dishonour more than any thing else. Note, A secret enmity to Christ and his gospel is often gilded over with a pretended affection to Caesar and his power. The Jews hated the Roman government, and yet, to serve a turn, could cry, We have no king but Caesar. But (to allude to this), if those that lived upon the crown thought themselves bound in gratitude thus to support the interest of it, much more reason have we thus to argue ourselves into a pious concern for God's honour; we have our maintenance from the God of heaven and are salted with his salt, live upon his bounty and are the care of his providence; and therefore it is not meet for us to see his dishonour without resenting it and doing what we can to prevent it.
2.They represent the Jews as disloyal, and dangerous to the government, that Jerusalem was the rebellious and bad city (Ezr 4:12), hurtful to kings and provinces, Ezr 4:15. See how Jerusalem, the joy of the whole earth (Psa 48:2), is here reproached as the scandal of the whole earth. The enemies of the church could not do the bad things they design against it if they did not first give it a bad name. Jerusalem had been a loyal city to its rightful princes, and its present inhabitants were as well affected to the king and his government as any of his provinces whatsoever. Daniel, who was a Jew, had lately approved himself so faithful to his prince that his worst enemies could find no fault in his management, Dan 6:4. But thus was Elijah most unjustly charged with troubling Israel, the apostles with turning the world upside down, and Christ himself with perverting the nation and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar; and we must not think it strange if the same game be still played. Now here,
(1.)Their history of what was past was invidious, that within this city sedition had been moved of old time, and, for that cause, it was destroyed, Ezr 4:15. It cannot be denied but that there was some colour given for this suggestion by the attempts of Jehoiakim and Zedekiah to shake off the yoke of the king of Babylon, which, if they had kept close to their religion and the temple they were now rebuilding, they would never have come under. But it must be considered, [1.] That they were themselves, and their ancestors, sovereign princes, and their efforts to recover their rights, if there had not been in them the violation of an oath, for aught I know, would have been justifiable, and successful too, had they taken the right method and made their peace with God first. [2.] Though these Jews, and their princes, had been guilty of rebellion, yet it was unjust therefore to fasten this as an indelible brand upon this city, as if that must for ever after go under the name of the rebellious and bad city. The Jews, in their captivity, had given such specimens of good behaviour as were sufficient, with any reasonable men, to roll away that one reproach; for they were instructed (and we have reason to hope that they observed their instructions) to seek the peace of the city where they were captives and pray to the Lord for it, Jer 29:7. It was therefore very unfair, though not uncommon, thus to impute the iniquity of the fathers to the children.
(2.)Their information concerning what was now doing was grossly false in matter of fact. Very careful they were to inform the king that the Jews had set up the walls of this city, nay, had finished them (so it is in the margin) and joined the foundations (Ezr 4:12), when this was far from being the case. They had only begun to build the temple, which Cyrus commanded them to do, but, as for the walls, there was nothing done nor designed towards the repair of them, as appears by the condition they were in many years after (Neh 1:3), all in ruins. What shall be given, and what done, to these false tongues, nay, which is worse, these false pens? sharp arrows, doubtless, of the mighty, and coals of juniper, Psa 120:3, Psa 120:4. If they had not been perfectly lost to all virtue and honour they would not, and if they had not been very secure of the king's countenance they durst not, have written that to the king which all their neighbours knew to be a notorious lie. See Pro 29:12.
(3.)Their prognostics of the consequences were altogether groundless and absurd. They were very confident, and would have the king believe it upon their word, that if this city should be built, not only the Jews would pay no toll, tribute, or custom (Ezr 4:13), but (since a great lie is as soon spoken as a little one) that the king would have no portion at all on this side the river (Ezr 4:16), that all the countries on this side Euphrates would instantly revolt, drawn in to do so by their example; and, if the prince in possession should connive at this, he would wrong, not only himself, but his successors: Thou shalt endamage the revenue of the kings. See how every line in this letter breathes both the subtlety and malice of the old serpent.
Continue studying Ezra 4:8 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
Ezra 4:8 marks a critical juncture in the post-exilic restoration of Jerusalem, detailing the formal and high-level opposition orchestrated against the returning Jewish community. This verse introduces Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe, two influential Persian officials who collaboratively drafted and dispatched an accusatory letter to King Artaxerxes. This act signifies a major escalation in the adversaries' strategy, moving beyond localized harassment to leverage the vast bureaucratic and political power of the Persian Empire, aiming to halt the divinely mandated rebuilding efforts in Jerusalem.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
Ezra 4:8 effectively employs several literary devices to convey its message and set the stage for the unfolding narrative. The verse utilizes Foreshadowing with the phrase "in this sort," which hints at the detailed and accusatory content of the letter to be revealed in the verses that follow, building suspense for the reader and emphasizing the formal nature of the impending conflict. A strong element of Conflict is immediately established, pitting the powerful Persian officials against the vulnerable Jewish returnees and their divine mission. The mention of "Jerusalem" serves as Metonymy, representing not just the physical city but the entire Jewish community, their identity, their aspirations for national and spiritual restoration, and ultimately, God's redemptive plan. The specific naming of "Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe" also provides Characterization through their titles, immediately informing the reader of their authority, their strategic roles, and the formal, bureaucratic nature of the opposition. This precision underscores the organized and strategic nature of the adversaries' efforts, highlighting the formidable challenge faced by God's people.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Ezra 4:8 powerfully illustrates the recurring biblical theme of opposition to God's work and His people. From the earliest days of creation to the establishment of the Church, those who seek to advance God's kingdom have consistently faced resistance, often from powerful, organized, and seemingly insurmountable human forces. This opposition is not merely incidental but often a manifestation of spiritual warfare, where the enemy seeks to thwart divine purposes and discourage God's servants. Yet, the narrative of Ezra, even in moments of setback like the temporary halting of the work, ultimately testifies to God's unwavering sovereignty. He uses even the resistance of adversaries to refine His people's faith, demonstrate His ultimate power, and ultimately fulfill His promises. The letter to Artaxerxes, though successful in its immediate aim, ultimately failed to permanently derail God's plan for Jerusalem. This serves as a profound reminder that while human opposition may delay or complicate, it cannot ultimately defeat the divine will and purpose.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Ezra 4:8 offers timeless insights for believers today, reminding us that pursuing God's purposes often invites opposition. This resistance may not always be overt physical attack but can manifest as bureaucratic hurdles, false accusations, political maneuvering, legal challenges, or even subtle discouragement from within or without. The sophisticated nature of the opposition in Ezra—involving high-ranking officials and formal accusations—underscores the need for spiritual discernment. We must recognize that behind human resistance, there can be spiritual forces at play, seeking to hinder the advance of God's kingdom. This verse calls us to persevere in faith, even when faced with seemingly insurmountable obstacles or unjust treatment. It encourages us to respond with wisdom, prayer, and a steadfast trust in God's ultimate sovereignty, knowing that His purposes will prevail despite human efforts to thwart them. Our focus should remain on God's call and His empowering presence, rather than on the strength or cunning of the opposition.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Who were Rehum and Shimshai, and why were they significant?
Answer: Rehum was "the chancellor" (Aramaic bᵉʻêl ṭᵉʻêm), a high-ranking Persian administrative or judicial official, possibly a provincial governor or chief magistrate in the Trans-Euphrates province. Shimshai was "the scribe" (Aramaic çâphêr), an official secretary highly skilled in drafting and recording formal documents. Their significance lies in their official capacities: they were not merely disgruntled citizens but powerful figures within the Persian bureaucracy. Their collaboration meant that the letter they wrote was an official, legally framed document, carrying immense weight and authority with King Artaxerxes. This made their opposition particularly formidable and effective in halting the rebuilding efforts, as detailed in Ezra 4:21-24.
Why does Ezra 4 seem to jump chronologically, mentioning Artaxerxes before Darius, who reigned earlier?
Answer: Ezra 4 is structured thematically rather than strictly chronologically, to highlight the persistent and ongoing nature of opposition faced by the Jewish returnees across different Persian reigns. While Ezra 4:1-5 describes opposition to the Temple rebuilding during the time of Cyrus and Darius, Ezra 4:6-23 then shifts to later periods (Xerxes and Artaxerxes) to illustrate the opposition to the rebuilding of the city walls. This literary choice emphasizes that the adversaries' efforts were a continuous pattern of resistance against any Jewish restoration, regardless of the specific project or reigning monarch. The narrative returns to the chronological flow concerning the Temple's completion in Ezra 5 and Ezra 6.
What was the "sort" of letter they wrote, and what were its main accusations?
Answer: The phrase "in this sort" foreshadows the detailed content of the letter, which is fully presented in Ezra 4:9-16. The letter was a formal accusation designed to portray the Jewish people as rebellious and a threat to Persian imperial authority. Its main accusations included:
These accusations were strategically crafted to appeal to the king's primary concerns: imperial stability, control, and revenue, thereby successfully persuading him to issue a decree to stop the work (Ezra 4:17-22).
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
Ezra 4:8, with its vivid depiction of organized, high-level opposition to God's people and their work, finds profound Christ-centered fulfillment. Jesus, the ultimate builder of God's spiritual temple, the Church, faced the most intense and insidious opposition imaginable. From the moment of His birth, through His public ministry, and culminating in His crucifixion, He was relentlessly opposed by religious and political powers, much like Rehum and Shimshai. The accusations leveled against Him were often false, politically motivated, and strategically designed to undermine His authority and mission, echoing the strategic misinformation used against Jerusalem. Yet, unlike the temporary halt in Ezra's time, Christ's work could not be stopped. His death on the cross, seemingly a triumph for His adversaries, was in fact His greatest victory, disarming the spiritual powers and authorities that fueled such opposition (Colossians 2:15). Through His resurrection, He definitively established that "the gates of hell shall not prevail" against His Church (Matthew 16:18). Believers, as members of His body, are called to continue His work of building the spiritual kingdom, and like Him, will inevitably face opposition (John 15:20). However, our perseverance is rooted not in our strength, but in the finished work of Christ, who has already triumphed over the accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10) and guarantees the ultimate success of His divine purposes. The "rebuilding" we are engaged in is the spiritual house of God, built on the foundation of Christ Himself (Ephesians 2:20-22), and no earthly or spiritual opposition can ultimately thwart its glorious completion.