Ezra 4:9

Translation
King James Version
Then wrote Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, and the Elamites,
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
Then H116 wrote Rehum H7348 the chancellor H1169 H2942, and Shimshai H8124 the scribe H5613, and the rest H7606 of their companions H3675; the Dinaites H1784, the Apharsathchites H671, the Tarpelites H2967, the Apharsites H670, the Archevites H756, the Babylonians H896, the Susanchites H7801, the Dehavites H1723, and the Elamites H5962,
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
"From Rechum the district governor, Shimshai the secretary, their other colleagues, the judges, the officials, the Dina'im, the Afarsat'khim, the Tarp'lim, the Afarsim, the Ark'vim, the Bavlim, the Shushan'kayim, the Dehayim, the 'Elma'im,
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
From Rehum the commander, Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their associates—the judges and officials over Tripolis, Persia, Erech and Babylon, the Elamites of Susa,
Ask
American Standard Version
then wrote Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions, the Dinaites, and the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Shushanchites, the Dehaites, the Elamites,
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
then Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions, the Dinaites, and the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Shushanchites, the Dehaites, the Elamites,
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
Then wrote Rehum the chauncelour, and Shimshai the scribe, and their companions Dinaie, and Apharsathcaie, Tarpelaie, Apharsaie, Archeuaie, Bablaie, Shushanchaie, Dehaue, Elmaie,
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
Then Rehum counsellor, and Shimshai scribe, and the rest of their companions, Dinaites, and Apharsathchites, Tarpelites, Apharsites, Archevites, Babylonians, Susanchites, (who are Elamites),
Ask
See also
Ezra 5:6Ezra 6:62 Kings 17:242 Kings 17:302 Kings 17:31Esther 1:2Esther 2:3
See on the biblical-era map
The Reconstruction of the Temple
The Reconstruction of the Temple View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 12,120 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

Ezra 4:9 precisely identifies the key Persian officials and the diverse array of ethnic groups who collaboratively orchestrated a determined campaign to obstruct the Jewish people's efforts to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem after their return from Babylonian exile. This verse is crucial for understanding the organized, bureaucratic, and multi-ethnic nature of the opposition that sought to derail God's redemptive work through His chosen people.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: Ezra 4:9 is strategically placed within the broader narrative of Ezra, specifically in chapters 1-6, which detail the initial return of the Jewish exiles and their endeavors to re-establish their religious and national life in Judah. Following the decree of King Cyrus, the exiles, under the leadership of Zerubbabel and Jeshua, began the significant task of reconstructing the altar and laying the Temple's foundation, as recorded in Ezra 3:8-10. However, this progress was swiftly met with formidable resistance from "the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin," often identified as the Samaritans, whose initial overtures to help were rejected, leading to their opposition (Ezra 4:1-3). Ezra chapter 4 meticulously outlines the various tactics employed by these opponents, ranging from discouraging the people to dispatching formal, misleading accusations to the Persian king. Verse 9, therefore, serves as a critical identification of the specific authors and the diverse composition of the group that penned the influential letter to King Artaxerxes, a communication that would ultimately lead to a significant, temporary halt in the Temple's reconstruction.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: The historical backdrop of Ezra 4:9 is the vast administrative structure of the Persian Empire, particularly its governance of the province of Trans-Euphrates (Abar-nahara), the region situated west of the Euphrates River. Rehum, designated as "the chancellor" (or commissioner), and Shimshai, "the scribe," were high-ranking Persian officials. Rehum's role as chancellor indicates his authority in civil administration, legal matters, and financial oversight, while Shimshai's role as scribe highlights his responsibility for official correspondence, drafting documents, and maintaining records. Their positions underscore the bureaucratic and official nature of the opposition. The extensive list of peoples—Dinaites, Apharsathchites, Tarpelites, Apharsites, Archevites, Babylonians, Susanchites, Dehavites, and Elamites—reflects the complex demographic reality of the region. Many of these groups were not indigenous but had been forcibly resettled there by earlier Assyrian and Babylonian kings as a strategic imperial policy to dilute local populations, prevent rebellion, and ensure control. These diverse ethnic groups, now residing in the vicinity of Jerusalem, likely perceived the re-establishment of a strong, independent Jewish presence as a direct threat to their own land claims, political influence, or economic interests within the Persian provincial framework. Their collective action against the Jews was a calculated political maneuver aimed at maintaining their established status quo.
  • Key Themes: Ezra 4:9 powerfully illustrates several profound themes prevalent in the book of Ezra and the broader biblical narrative. Firstly, it highlights the Organized Opposition to God's Work. The resistance encountered by the returning exiles was not random or isolated but a calculated, concerted effort involving high-ranking officials and a diverse coalition of peoples, all united in their determination to stop the Temple's reconstruction. This theme frequently recurs throughout Scripture, demonstrating that when God's people are engaged in kingdom-advancing work, opposition often arises, as seen in the later resistance faced by Nehemiah in rebuilding Jerusalem's walls (Nehemiah 4:7-8). Secondly, the verse underscores the theme of Bureaucratic Obstruction. The specific roles of Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe demonstrate how administrative and legal channels can be manipulated to hinder righteous endeavors. Their method involved using official communication to disseminate misinformation and instill fear, a tactic that often proves highly effective in delaying or stopping projects, even those divinely ordained. Lastly, the extensive list of ethnic groups emphasizes the Diversity of Adversaries. This reveals the wide array of peoples who felt threatened by the Jewish return and restoration. This diversity also speaks to the vast reach and control of the Persian Empire, which had resettled various populations across its territories, creating a complex social and political landscape where the re-establishment of a strong Jewish presence was perceived as a destabilizing force.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • Chancellor (Aramaic, bᵉʻêl_ _ṭᵉʻêm', H1169): This Aramaic phrase literally translates to "master of decree" or "master of judgment." It designates a high-ranking civil administrator within the Persian provincial system, responsible for legal, administrative, and financial matters. Rehum's title indicates his significant authority and capacity to influence official policy, issue directives, and oversee the execution of royal commands, making him a formidable opponent to the Jewish rebuilding efforts. His role was crucial in legitimizing the opposition's claims through official channels, giving their grievances the weight of a bureaucratic complaint.
  • Scribe (Aramaic, çâphêr', H5613): This term refers to an official secretary or writer, responsible for drafting, copying, and maintaining official documents, letters, and records. Shimshai's role as scribe meant he was the one who meticulously composed the accusatory letter, ensuring it adhered to proper administrative protocol and presented the opposition's case in the most persuasive—and often misleading—manner to the king. His skill in written communication was a key tool in their bureaucratic obstruction, allowing them to frame their opposition within the legitimate bounds of imperial administration.

Verse Breakdown

  • "Then [wrote] Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions;": This initial clause identifies the principal authors and orchestrators of the accusatory letter. Rehum, the high administrative official, and Shimshai, the skilled scribe, are presented as the leading figures in this coordinated effort. The phrase "the rest of their companions" indicates that this was not merely an individual initiative but a collective endeavor, implying a network of like-minded individuals who supported and actively participated in the opposition. This highlights the organized and collaborative nature of the resistance, demonstrating a unified front against the Jewish rebuilding project.
  • "the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, [and] the Elamites,": This lengthy enumeration provides a detailed list of the diverse ethnic groups who comprised the "companions" and were either signatories or prominent supporters of the letter. These groups represent a cross-section of the populations forcibly resettled by earlier Assyrian and Babylonian empires into the region of Samaria and Trans-Euphrates. Their inclusion underscores the broad-based, multi-ethnic nature of the opposition, indicating that the Jewish return and rebuilding efforts were perceived as a significant threat by a wide array of local inhabitants, not just a single disgruntled faction. The specificity of this list lends historical authenticity to the account and emphasizes the formidable coalition arrayed against the returning exiles.

Literary Devices

Ezra 4:9 primarily employs Enumeration and Characterization. The most striking device is Enumeration, evident in the exhaustive list of nine distinct ethnic groups. This detailed catalog serves to emphasize the widespread and diverse nature of the opposition faced by the Jewish exiles. It is not merely a few disgruntled individuals, but a broad coalition of peoples from various backgrounds, united in their intent to hinder the rebuilding project. This extensive list creates a sense of overwhelming odds and highlights the formidable challenge confronting the returning community. Furthermore, the verse uses Characterization to define the nature of the opposition. By naming Rehum as "the chancellor" and Shimshai as "the scribe," the text immediately establishes the official, bureaucratic, and influential nature of the adversaries. This characterization reveals that the opposition was not merely physical or military, but also administrative and legal, operating through the established channels of the powerful Persian Empire.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

Ezra 4:9 provides a vivid illustration of the enduring biblical theme of opposition to God's redemptive purposes. Throughout Scripture, whenever God initiates a work of restoration, salvation, or kingdom advancement, there is often a corresponding, organized resistance from forces hostile to His will. This verse reminds us that such opposition is not always overtly spiritual but can manifest through political maneuvering, bureaucratic obstruction, and the collective efforts of diverse human agents. The detailed list of adversaries underscores that God's people are often called to persevere in the face of widespread and varied resistance, trusting that divine purposes will ultimately prevail. This struggle highlights the reality of spiritual warfare manifesting in tangible, earthly conflicts, serving as a reminder that God's plans are often realized amidst significant human and spiritual resistance.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

Ezra 4:9 offers profound insights for contemporary believers, serving as a sober reminder that efforts aligned with God's will are often met with significant, organized opposition. Just as the Jewish exiles faced bureaucratic and multi-faceted resistance in rebuilding the Temple, Christians today may encounter similar challenges when seeking to advance God's kingdom, whether in personal ministry, church projects, or societal transformation. This verse encourages us to recognize that opposition can come from diverse sources—not just outright enemies, but also those who feel threatened by the kingdom's expansion, and through official, seemingly legitimate channels. It calls us to discernment, to understand the nature of the resistance we face, and to remember that God's purposes are sovereign and will ultimately prevail, even if delayed. Our response should be marked by perseverance, prayer, and unwavering faith, knowing that the spiritual battle often manifests in practical, tangible resistance, but God's plan cannot be ultimately thwarted by human machinations.

Questions for Reflection

  • What forms of "organized opposition" do you observe against God's work in your community or the wider world today, and how might you respond?
  • How might "bureaucratic obstruction" manifest in modern contexts, and how can believers respond with wisdom, integrity, and prayer?
  • Considering the "diversity of adversaries" in Ezra 4:9, how does understanding the varied motivations of opposition help us to pray and act more effectively in our own contexts?
  • What lessons can we draw from the perseverance of the exiles in Ezra's time when facing delays or setbacks in our own spiritual endeavors or ministry?

FAQ

Who were Rehum and Shimshai, and why were they significant in this opposition?

Answer: Rehum was "the chancellor" (or commissioner), a high-ranking Persian administrative official responsible for overseeing a province or district within the vast Persian Empire. Shimshai was "the scribe," the official responsible for drafting, writing, and maintaining official documents and letters. They were significant because their positions gave them the authority and means to use the official channels of the Persian Empire to oppose the Jewish rebuilding efforts. By sending a formal letter of accusation to King Artaxerxes, they leveraged their administrative power to present a seemingly legitimate case against the Jews, which ultimately led to a royal decree halting the work (as seen in Ezra 4:21). Their roles highlight how bureaucratic and political systems can be manipulated to hinder righteous endeavors.

Why is there such a long list of different ethnic groups mentioned in Ezra 4:9?

Answer: The long list of ethnic groups (Dinaites, Apharsathchites, Tarpelites, Apharsites, Archevites, Babylonians, Susanchites, Dehavites, and Elamites) serves to emphasize the widespread and diverse nature of the opposition to the Jewish return. Many of these groups were not native to the region but had been forcibly resettled there by previous Assyrian and Babylonian kings as part of their imperial policy to prevent rebellion and consolidate control. These groups had established themselves in the land and likely viewed the returning Jews, with their claims to ancestral lands and their intent to rebuild Jerusalem, as a threat to their own status, land ownership, or influence within the Persian province of Trans-Euphrates. The enumeration underscores that the opposition was a broad, multi-ethnic coalition, not just a single disgruntled faction, making it a formidable challenge for the Jewish exiles. This diversity also reflects the complex demographic tapestry of the Persian Empire's provinces.

What was the ultimate outcome of the letter sent by Rehum and Shimshai?

Answer: The letter sent by Rehum and Shimshai, detailed in Ezra 4:11-16, successfully convinced King Artaxerxes to issue a decree to halt the rebuilding of the Temple. The king, influenced by the accusations that Jerusalem had a history of rebellion and that its rebuilding would threaten the royal revenues, commanded that the work cease immediately (see Ezra 4:21). This injunction led to a significant delay in the Temple's construction, which was not resumed until the second year of King Darius's reign, spurred by the prophetic ministries of Haggai and Zechariah (as recounted in Ezra 5:1-2). Despite this setback, God's ultimate purpose for the Temple's completion was not thwarted.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

Ezra 4:9, with its depiction of organized, multi-ethnic, and bureaucratic opposition to the rebuilding of God's dwelling place, powerfully foreshadows the ultimate and ongoing resistance faced by God's redemptive work through Christ and His Church. Just as the Temple's reconstruction was met with human machinations, so too was the coming of the Messiah opposed by the powers of darkness, manifesting through human agents. Jesus Himself warned His disciples that the world would hate them because it first hated Him (John 15:18-20). The spiritual forces behind the opposition in Ezra find their ultimate expression in Satan's ceaseless attempts to thwart God's kingdom, a battle that culminates in the cross, where Christ decisively triumphed over principalities and powers, disarming them and making a public spectacle of them (Colossians 2:15). Yet, the promise of Christ, "I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18), assures us that despite all opposition—whether bureaucratic, political, or spiritual—God's ultimate plan of salvation and the establishment of His eternal kingdom through the resurrected Christ cannot be ultimately thwarted. The Church, as the new Temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 3:16), continues to face spiritual warfare (Ephesians 6:12), but its foundation is Christ, and its ultimate victory is guaranteed by His finished work on the cross and His glorious return (Revelation 12:17).

Copy as

Commentary on Ezra 4 verses 6–16

I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points(1.) (2.) Details

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.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 6–16. Public domain.
Copy as
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying Ezra 4:9 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

Read & Compare

Commentaries

Original Language & Research

Sermons, Hymns & Audio

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.