When the enemies of Judah and Benjamin
The term "enemies" refers to the adversaries of the returning Jewish exiles. These were primarily the people who had settled in the land during the Babylonian exile, including Samaritans and other groups. Historically, these groups had mixed religious practices and were often at odds with the returning Jews who sought to reestablish pure worship of Yahweh. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin were the primary tribes that returned from exile, representing the southern kingdom of Judah. This context highlights the ongoing tension between the returning exiles and the inhabitants of the land.

heard that the exiles were building a temple
The exiles, led by figures such as Zerubbabel and Jeshua, had returned to Jerusalem with the primary goal of rebuilding the temple, which had been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC. The rebuilding of the temple was a significant event, as it symbolized the restoration of proper worship and the reestablishment of the Jewish community in their ancestral land. The act of rebuilding was not just a physical task but a spiritual renewal, fulfilling prophecies such as those found in Isaiah and Jeremiah about the return from exile.

for the LORD, the God of Israel
The phrase emphasizes the covenant relationship between Yahweh and the people of Israel. The temple was to be dedicated to the LORD, distinguishing the worship of Yahweh from the syncretistic practices of the surrounding peoples. This dedication underscores the theological significance of the temple as the dwelling place of God among His people, a theme that runs throughout the Old Testament. The focus on the "God of Israel" reaffirms the identity of the returning exiles as the chosen people, set apart for God's purposes. This also foreshadows the New Testament understanding of Jesus Christ as the true temple, where God's presence dwells among humanity.

they approached Zerubbabel and the heads of the families
This phrase indicates a formal approach to the leadership of the Jewish community. Zerubbabel, a descendant of King David, was the governor of Judah and played a key role in the rebuilding of the temple. The "heads of the families" refers to the leaders of the various clans or tribes who returned from exile. This approach signifies a request for collaboration in the temple rebuilding project, highlighting the importance of leadership in decision-making processes.

saying, “Let us build with you
The offer to help build the temple seems cooperative, but it is important to understand the underlying motives. Historically, the people making this offer were likely Samaritans, descendants of Israelites who had intermarried with foreign settlers brought in by the Assyrians. Their request to participate in the temple construction could be seen as an attempt to integrate or influence the religious practices of the returning exiles.

because, like you, we seek your God
This claim suggests a shared religious interest, but it is met with skepticism by the Jewish leaders. The Samaritans practiced a syncretistic form of worship, blending the worship of Yahweh with other deities, which was contrary to the pure worship commanded in the Mosaic Law. This phrase highlights the tension between maintaining religious purity and the pressures of external influences.

and have been sacrificing to Him since the time of King Esar-haddon of Assyria
King Esar-haddon reigned from 681 to 669 BC and was responsible for repopulating Samaria with foreign peoples after the Assyrian conquest. These settlers adopted a form of Yahweh worship, but it was mixed with pagan practices. The mention of Esar-haddon provides a historical anchor, indicating that these people had a long-standing, albeit compromised, tradition of worshiping Yahweh.

who brought us here.”
This phrase acknowledges the Assyrian policy of relocating conquered peoples to prevent rebellion. The settlers were brought to the region by Assyrian kings, including Esar-haddon, to replace the exiled Israelites. This relocation resulted in a mixed population with a diluted form of Israelite religion, which the returning exiles viewed with suspicion. The historical context underscores the complex identity and religious practices of the people offering to help, which were not fully aligned with the returning Jews' covenantal faith.

But Zerubbabel, Jeshua, and the other heads of the families of Israel replied
Zerubbabel and Jeshua were key leaders in the return from Babylonian exile. Zerubbabel, a descendant of David, served as governor, while Jeshua was the high priest. Their leadership was crucial in the rebuilding of the temple. The "heads of the families" refers to the tribal and clan leaders who represented the people. This collective leadership underscores the unity and shared responsibility among the Israelites in this significant task.

“You have no part with us in building a house for our God
This statement reflects the exclusivity of the covenant community. The returning exiles were determined to maintain the purity of their worship and religious practices, which had been compromised in the past. The refusal to allow others to participate in the temple construction was a protective measure to ensure that the worship of Yahweh remained untainted by foreign influences or syncretism.

since we alone must build it for the LORD, the God of Israel
The emphasis on "we alone" highlights the Israelites' understanding of their unique covenant relationship with God. This task was seen as a divine mandate, entrusted specifically to the people of Israel. The phrase "the God of Israel" reaffirms their identity as God's chosen people, distinct from the surrounding nations.

as Cyrus king of Persia has commanded us.”
Cyrus's decree, recorded in Ezra 1:1-4, allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple. This decree was seen as a fulfillment of prophecy, notably Isaiah 44:28 and 45:1, where Cyrus is called God's anointed. The mention of Cyrus underscores the providential role of foreign rulers in God's plan for His people, demonstrating that God can use even non-believers to accomplish His purposes.

Then the people of the land
This phrase refers to the inhabitants of the region surrounding Judah, primarily the Samaritans and other groups who had settled in the area during the Babylonian exile. These people were a mix of various ethnicities and religious practices, which often conflicted with the returning Jewish exiles' efforts to reestablish their distinct identity and worship of Yahweh. Historically, these groups had been relocated by the Assyrian Empire, as seen in 2 Kings 17:24, leading to tensions with the returning Jews.

set out to discourage the people of Judah
The opposition from the local inhabitants was a significant challenge for the returning exiles. This discouragement was not merely emotional but involved active efforts to hinder the rebuilding process. The discouragement can be seen as a tactic to prevent the reestablishment of a strong Jewish presence in the region, which could threaten the existing power dynamics. This opposition is a recurring theme in the post-exilic period, as seen in Nehemiah 4:1-3, where similar tactics are used against the rebuilding of Jerusalem's walls.

and make them afraid
Fear was a powerful tool used by the adversaries to halt the progress of the rebuilding efforts. This fear could have stemmed from threats of violence, political pressure, or economic sanctions. The use of fear is a common strategy of opposition throughout biblical history, as seen in the story of Nehemiah, where threats and intimidation were used to stop the work on the walls of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 6:9). The fear also reflects the vulnerability of the returning exiles, who were still establishing themselves in a land that had been under foreign control for decades.

to build
The building referred to here is the reconstruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a central aspect of Jewish identity and worship. The temple's rebuilding was crucial for the restoration of proper worship and the fulfillment of prophecies concerning the return from exile, such as those found in Isaiah 44:28 and Jeremiah 29:10. The temple also serves as a type of Christ, foreshadowing Jesus as the true temple (John 2:19-21), where God's presence dwells among His people. The opposition to the building project can be seen as an attempt to thwart God's redemptive plan, which ultimately finds fulfillment in Christ.

They hired counselors against them
This phrase indicates a deliberate and strategic opposition to the rebuilding efforts of the Jewish exiles. The hiring of counselors suggests a formal and possibly legal approach to thwart the plans of the Israelites. In the ancient Near Eastern context, counselors were often skilled in law and diplomacy, and their involvement implies that the opposition was well-organized and possibly involved in lobbying Persian officials. This reflects the broader theme of spiritual warfare and opposition faced by God's people throughout biblical history.

to frustrate their plans
The intent was to create confusion and delay in the rebuilding of the temple. This frustration of plans can be seen as a tactic used by adversaries to discourage and demoralize the Israelites. Theologically, this reflects the ongoing struggle between God's purposes and the forces that seek to hinder them. It also highlights the perseverance required by the faithful to overcome obstacles in fulfilling God's commands.

throughout the reign of Cyrus king of Persia
Cyrus the Great, who reigned from 559-530 BC, was the Persian king who initially allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple, as recorded in Ezra 1:1-4. His decree was seen as a fulfillment of prophecy (Isaiah 44:28, 45:1). However, despite his favorable policies, local opposition persisted, indicating that even when political conditions seem favorable, challenges can still arise.

and down to the reign of Darius king of Persia
Darius I, who reigned from 522-486 BC, eventually supported the completion of the temple, as seen in Ezra 6:1-12. The mention of his reign marks a period of continued opposition but also eventual triumph for the Israelites. This period saw the reaffirmation of the decree to rebuild, illustrating God's sovereignty and faithfulness in ensuring the fulfillment of His promises despite prolonged opposition.

At the beginning of the reign of Xerxes
This phrase refers to the early period of King Xerxes I's rule over the Persian Empire, which began in 486 BC. Xerxes, also known as Ahasuerus in the Book of Esther, was the son of Darius the Great. His reign is marked by significant events, including his failed invasion of Greece. The mention of Xerxes situates the narrative within a specific historical context, highlighting the ongoing challenges faced by the Jewish community during the Persian period. This period was characterized by political instability and power struggles within the empire, which often affected the smaller provinces like Judah.

an accusation was lodged
The term "accusation" indicates a formal complaint or charge brought against the Jewish people. In the context of the Persian Empire, such accusations could be politically motivated, often stemming from local opposition to the rebuilding efforts in Jerusalem. This reflects the broader theme of opposition faced by the Jewish community as they sought to reestablish themselves in their ancestral homeland. The use of legal and political means to hinder the Jews is a recurring theme in the post-exilic period, as seen in other parts of Ezra and Nehemiah.

against the people of Judah and Jerusalem
This specifies the target of the accusation: the Jewish community residing in the region of Judah, with Jerusalem as its center. The people of Judah were the descendants of those who had returned from the Babylonian exile, and they were in the process of rebuilding the temple and the city. The opposition they faced was not only political but also spiritual, as their efforts to restore worship and community life were seen as a threat by surrounding peoples. This opposition is reminiscent of the challenges faced by God's people throughout biblical history, where faithfulness to God's commands often led to conflict with surrounding nations. The mention of both Judah and Jerusalem underscores the significance of Jerusalem as the spiritual and political heart of the Jewish people.

And in the days of Artaxerxes king of Persia
Artaxerxes I reigned from 465-424 BC, a period marked by significant political and cultural developments in the Persian Empire. This era followed the return of the Jewish exiles to Jerusalem, which began under Cyrus the Great. Artaxerxes' reign is significant in biblical history as it includes the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, who were instrumental in the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its walls. The mention of Artaxerxes situates this event within a broader historical context, highlighting the ongoing challenges faced by the Jewish community in re-establishing themselves in their homeland.

Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his associates
These individuals were likely local officials or leaders in the region surrounding Jerusalem. Their names suggest a mix of Persian and possibly Babylonian origins, indicating the diverse population in the area under Persian rule. The opposition from these figures reflects the broader resistance faced by the Jewish people from neighboring groups who were threatened by the re-establishment of a strong Jewish presence in Jerusalem. This opposition is a recurring theme in the post-exilic period, as seen in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.

wrote a letter to Artaxerxes
The act of writing a letter to the king underscores the formal and serious nature of the opposition. It was common in the Persian Empire for local leaders to communicate with the king regarding regional issues. This letter represents an official complaint against the rebuilding efforts in Jerusalem, aiming to halt the progress by appealing to the king's authority. The use of written communication also highlights the administrative sophistication of the Persian Empire, which maintained control over vast territories through such correspondence.

It was written in Aramaic and then translated
Aramaic was the lingua franca of the Persian Empire, used for official documents and communication across different regions. The mention of translation suggests that the letter was initially composed in Aramaic, the language of administration, and then translated, possibly into Hebrew or another local dialect for the Jewish leaders. This detail emphasizes the multicultural and multilingual nature of the Persian Empire, as well as the challenges of communication and governance in such a diverse setting. The use of Aramaic also reflects the historical context of the Jewish people, who had adopted Aramaic during the Babylonian exile.

Rehum the commander and Shimshai the scribe
Rehum and Shimshai are identified as officials in the Persian administration. Rehum, likely a high-ranking officer, and Shimshai, a scribe, represent the bureaucratic structure of the Persian Empire, which was known for its efficient administration. Their roles suggest they had significant influence and authority in the region. The mention of these officials highlights the organized opposition faced by the Jewish people during the rebuilding of Jerusalem. This opposition is a recurring theme in the post-exilic period, as seen in other parts of Ezra and Nehemiah.

wrote the letter against Jerusalem
The act of writing a letter indicates the formal and legal approach taken by the adversaries of the Jews. This reflects the Persian Empire's reliance on written communication and decrees to manage its vast territories. The letter's purpose was to halt the rebuilding efforts in Jerusalem, which the local officials viewed as a threat to their power and influence. This opposition is reminiscent of the challenges faced by God's people throughout history, where external forces often attempt to thwart divine plans.

to King Artaxerxes
Artaxerxes I was the king of Persia from 465 to 424 BC. His reign is marked by various administrative reforms and interactions with the Jewish community. The mention of Artaxerxes connects this narrative to the broader historical context of the Persian Empire's rule over Judah. The king's involvement underscores the political complexities of the time, as local disputes often required intervention from the central authority. This reflects the broader biblical theme of God's sovereignty over earthly rulers, as seen in Proverbs 21:1.

as follows:
The phrase introduces the content of the letter, setting the stage for the detailed accusations against the Jews. This introduction emphasizes the formal nature of the communication and the seriousness of the charges. The letter's content, which follows in subsequent verses, reveals the tactics used by the adversaries to manipulate political power against the Jewish community. This mirrors the spiritual battles faced by believers, where accusations and opposition are common, as seen in Revelation 12:10.

From Rehum the commander
Rehum is identified as a leader or official, likely holding a significant position of authority. His role as "commander" suggests military or administrative leadership, which was common in the Persian Empire's governance structure. This reflects the organized and hierarchical nature of Persian rule, where local leaders were appointed to maintain order and implement the king's decrees.

Shimshai the scribe
Shimshai's role as a scribe indicates his responsibility for official documentation and communication. Scribes were essential in ancient administrations for recording decrees, correspondence, and legal matters. This highlights the importance of written records in maintaining the empire's vast bureaucracy and ensuring the king's commands were accurately conveyed and preserved.

and the rest of their associates
This phrase suggests a group of officials working together, likely forming a council or administrative body. Such collaboration was typical in ancient governance, where multiple officials would oversee different aspects of administration, ensuring comprehensive management of the region.

the judges and officials over Tripolis, Persia, Erech and Babylon
These locations represent significant regions within the Persian Empire. Tripolis, though not widely recognized in biblical texts, may refer to a tri-city area. Persia, the heart of the empire, indicates the central authority. Erech (Uruk) and Babylon were ancient cities with rich histories, known for their cultural and political significance. The mention of judges and officials underscores the structured legal and administrative systems in place to govern these diverse and influential regions.

the Elamites of Susa
Elamites were an ancient people with a long history predating the Persian Empire. Susa, their capital, became one of the empire's key administrative centers. This reflects the integration of various peoples and cultures within the Persian Empire, as well as the strategic importance of Susa as a hub for governance and communication. The Elamites' inclusion highlights the empire's diversity and the cooperation required among different ethnic groups to maintain stability and order.

and the rest of the peoples
This phrase refers to the various groups of people who were relocated by the Assyrian Empire. The Assyrians had a policy of deporting conquered peoples to prevent rebellion and to assimilate them into their empire. This practice led to a mix of cultures and religions, which later contributed to tensions between the Samaritans and the returning Jewish exiles.

whom the great and honorable Ashurbanipal deported
Ashurbanipal was one of the last great kings of the Assyrian Empire, reigning from 668 to 627 BC. Known for his military conquests and extensive library at Nineveh, he continued the Assyrian policy of deporting conquered peoples. This historical context highlights the long-standing enmity between the Jews and the Samaritans, as the latter were seen as foreigners and not true Israelites.

and settled in the cities of Samaria
Samaria was the capital of the Northern Kingdom of Israel before its conquest by the Assyrians in 722 BC. The resettlement of foreign peoples in Samaria led to the development of a mixed population, which practiced a syncretistic form of worship. This mixture of peoples and religions is significant in understanding the later conflicts between Jews and Samaritans, as seen in the New Testament (e.g., John 4:9).

and elsewhere west of the Euphrates
The phrase "west of the Euphrates" refers to the region known as "Beyond the River," which included territories under Persian control. This area was strategically important and often contested. The mention of this region underscores the vastness of the Assyrian and later Persian empires, which controlled diverse peoples and lands. The geopolitical dynamics of this area are crucial for understanding the challenges faced by the returning Jewish exiles in rebuilding Jerusalem and the Temple.

(This is the text of the letter they sent to him.)
The phrase introduces a formal communication, indicating the importance and official nature of the document. In the ancient Near East, letters were a primary means of communication between distant regions and rulers. This letter is part of a series of correspondences in the Book of Ezra, reflecting the political and social tensions during the rebuilding of Jerusalem. The use of written communication underscores the bureaucratic processes of the Persian Empire, which was known for its administrative efficiency.

To King Artaxerxes,
Artaxerxes I was the king of Persia from 465 to 424 BC. His reign is noted for its relative stability and the continuation of policies set by his predecessors, including the support of local governance and religious practices. The mention of Artaxerxes situates the events within a specific historical timeframe, providing context for the political dynamics at play. The king's role as a central authority figure highlights the dependence of regional leaders on the Persian throne for decisions affecting local governance.

From your servants,
The term "servants" reflects the hierarchical nature of the Persian Empire, where local leaders and officials were considered subordinates to the king. This language indicates loyalty and submission, which were expected in communications with the monarch. It also suggests a strategic approach by the letter writers to gain favor and ensure their concerns are taken seriously by the king.

the men west of the Euphrates:
This geographical reference identifies the senders as inhabitants of the region known as "Beyond the River," a term used in the Persian period to describe the area west of the Euphrates River, including parts of modern-day Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and Jordan. This region was a significant part of the Persian Empire, serving as a buffer zone against Egypt and other western territories. The mention of this location provides insight into the diverse population and the complex political landscape, where various ethnic groups and local leaders interacted under Persian rule.

Let it be known to the king
This phrase indicates the beginning of a formal report or letter to the king, likely King Artaxerxes of Persia. In the ancient Near East, such communications were common for maintaining control over vast empires. The phrase suggests an appeal to authority, seeking intervention from the king.

that the Jews who came from you to us
This refers to the Jewish exiles who returned from Babylonian captivity. The return was sanctioned by previous Persian rulers, such as Cyrus the Great, who issued a decree allowing the Jews to return and rebuild the temple (Ezra 1:1-4). The phrase highlights the connection between the Persian authority and the Jewish returnees.

have returned to Jerusalem
Jerusalem, the central city of Jewish worship and identity, had been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC. The return to Jerusalem was significant for the Jewish people, fulfilling prophecies such as those in Isaiah 44:28 and Jeremiah 29:10, which spoke of restoration after exile.

and are rebuilding that rebellious and wicked city
This accusation reflects the perspective of the surrounding peoples who opposed the rebuilding efforts. Historically, Jerusalem had been a center of resistance against foreign powers, including the Babylonians and Assyrians. The terms "rebellious" and "wicked" are likely intended to provoke fear in the king, suggesting potential insurrection.

They are restoring its walls
The restoration of the walls was crucial for the security and autonomy of Jerusalem. Walls symbolized strength and protection, and their reconstruction was a significant step in re-establishing the city. Nehemiah later played a key role in this effort (Nehemiah 2:17-18).

and repairing its foundations
Repairing the foundations indicates a comprehensive rebuilding effort, not just superficial repairs. This can be seen as a metaphor for spiritual renewal, as the physical restoration of Jerusalem paralleled the spiritual revival of the Jewish people. The foundations also symbolize the enduring promises of God to His people, as seen in prophecies like Isaiah 58:12.

Let it now be known to the king
This phrase indicates a formal communication to the Persian king, likely Artaxerxes I. The context is a letter from adversaries of the Jews who were rebuilding Jerusalem. Such letters were common in the ancient Near East as a means of influencing royal policy. The phrase underscores the political tension and the use of diplomacy to halt the rebuilding efforts.

that if that city is rebuilt
The city in question is Jerusalem, which had been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC. The rebuilding of Jerusalem was a significant event for the Jewish people, symbolizing the restoration of their national and religious identity. The opponents feared that a rebuilt Jerusalem would become a center of power and rebellion against Persian rule.

and its walls are restored
Walls were crucial for the defense and autonomy of ancient cities. The restoration of Jerusalem's walls would signify not only physical security but also political independence. Nehemiah later undertakes this task, highlighting its importance in the narrative of Israel's restoration.

they will not pay tribute, duty, or toll
Tribute, duty, and toll were forms of taxation imposed by empires on their subject territories. The concern expressed here is economic; a fortified Jerusalem might resist paying these taxes, which were vital for the maintenance of the Persian Empire. This reflects the broader theme of economic control as a means of imperial dominance.

and the royal treasury will suffer
The mention of the royal treasury emphasizes the financial implications of the city's potential independence. The Persian Empire relied on the wealth of its provinces to sustain its vast bureaucracy and military. The letter's authors appeal to the king's economic interests, suggesting that a strong Jerusalem could disrupt the flow of resources to the empire.

This passage highlights the intersection of political, economic, and religious factors in the post-exilic period. It also foreshadows the challenges faced by the Jewish community in re-establishing their homeland, a theme that resonates throughout the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Now because we are in the service of the palace
This phrase indicates the position and responsibility of the speakers, who are likely officials or subjects within the Persian Empire. The Persian Empire was known for its vast bureaucracy and administrative efficiency. Being in the service of the palace implies a duty to uphold the interests of the king and the empire. This reflects the hierarchical structure of ancient Near Eastern societies, where loyalty to the king was paramount. The palace, as a symbol of royal authority, underscores the importance of their role in maintaining order and allegiance.

and it is not fitting for us to allow the king to be dishonored
The concept of honor and shame was central in ancient cultures, including the Persian Empire. Dishonoring the king would not only be a personal failure but could also have broader political implications. The king was seen as a divine or semi-divine figure, and maintaining his honor was crucial for the stability of the realm. This phrase suggests a deep sense of duty and the potential consequences of failing to protect the king's reputation. It also reflects the biblical theme of respecting authority, as seen in passages like Romans 13:1-7, which emphasizes submission to governing authorities.

we have sent to inform the king
This action demonstrates the protocol of communication within the empire. Sending a message to the king was a formal process, often involving written correspondence or envoys. The act of informing the king suggests a proactive approach to governance and the importance of keeping the monarch aware of potential threats or issues. This aligns with the biblical principle of accountability and transparency, as seen in other scriptural narratives where leaders are informed of significant events or challenges, such as in the story of Nehemiah, who also communicated with the Persian king regarding the rebuilding of Jerusalem.

that a search should be made of the record books of your fathers.
The phrase suggests an appeal to historical records, emphasizing the importance of documented history in decision-making. In the ancient Near East, record-keeping was a common practice among empires like Babylon and Persia. These records were often stored in archives and could include decrees, treaties, and historical accounts. The reference to "your fathers" indicates reliance on ancestral wisdom and past governance, highlighting the continuity and authority of tradition. This appeal to records underscores the importance of truth and evidence in governance, a principle echoed in other biblical passages that emphasize the value of truth and justice (e.g., Proverbs 14:25).

In these books you will discover and verify that the city is a rebellious city,
The city in question is Jerusalem, known for its tumultuous history with various empires. The accusation of rebellion is rooted in historical events, such as the revolts against Babylonian and Assyrian rule. Jerusalem's reputation as a rebellious city is documented in other biblical texts, including 2 Kings 24:1 and Jeremiah 52:3, where the city's resistance against foreign powers is noted. This characterization serves as a warning to the Persian king about the potential threat posed by allowing the city to rebuild.

harmful to kings and provinces,
This phrase highlights the perceived threat Jerusalem posed to imperial stability. Historically, Jerusalem's strategic location made it a focal point for trade and military campaigns, which could disrupt regional control. The city's influence extended beyond its borders, affecting neighboring provinces. This concern for stability is a recurring theme in the Bible, where the actions of one city or nation can have broader implications, as seen in the narratives of Nineveh (Jonah 3) and Babylon (Revelation 18).

inciting sedition from ancient times.
The claim of inciting sedition reflects a long-standing view of Jerusalem as a center of resistance. This perception is supported by various biblical accounts of Israel's defiance against foreign domination, such as the Maccabean Revolt (1 Maccabees 1-4) and earlier conflicts with Philistines and Canaanites. The idea of ancient sedition ties into the broader biblical theme of God's people often being at odds with worldly powers, as seen in the lives of prophets like Elijah and Daniel, who stood against corrupt authorities.

That is why this city was destroyed.
The destruction of Jerusalem is a significant event in biblical history, occurring in 586 BC by the Babylonians. This destruction is seen as both a consequence of political rebellion and a divine judgment for the people's unfaithfulness, as prophesied in books like Jeremiah and Lamentations. Theologically, the destruction serves as a reminder of the consequences of sin and the need for repentance, a theme that resonates throughout the Bible and is fulfilled in the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, who offers restoration and hope beyond judgment.

We advise the king
This phrase indicates a formal communication to the king, likely King Artaxerxes of Persia. The use of "we" suggests a collective group, possibly officials or adversaries of the Jews, who are presenting their concerns. In the context of the Persian Empire, such advisories were common as the king relied on local governors and officials to maintain control over vast territories.

that if this city is rebuilt
The city in question is Jerusalem, which had been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC. The rebuilding of Jerusalem was a significant concern for surrounding peoples who feared the re-establishment of a strong Jewish presence. Historically, Jerusalem was a fortified city, and its reconstruction could symbolize a return to political and religious independence.

and its walls are restored
Walls in ancient times were crucial for a city's defense and autonomy. The restoration of Jerusalem's walls would not only provide physical security but also signify the restoration of the Jewish community's identity and strength. Nehemiah 1:3 later highlights the importance of the walls for the safety and dignity of the inhabitants.

you will have no dominion west of the Euphrates
This phrase reflects the geopolitical concerns of the time. The Euphrates River was a significant boundary in the ancient Near East, and control west of it was crucial for the Persian Empire's influence. The fear expressed is that a rebuilt Jerusalem could challenge Persian authority and disrupt the balance of power in the region. Historically, the area west of the Euphrates was a contested region, with various empires vying for control.

Then the king sent this reply:
This phrase indicates a formal response from the Persian king, Artaxerxes, to a letter he received. The context is the opposition faced by the Jews in rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem. The king's reply is significant as it reflects the political dynamics of the Persian Empire, where local governors and officials had to report to the central authority. This centralized control is consistent with the administrative practices of the Persian Empire, which was known for its efficient bureaucracy.

To Rehum the commander, Shimshai the scribe:
Rehum and Shimshai were officials in the Persian administration. Rehum, referred to as the commander, likely held a military or administrative leadership role, while Shimshai, the scribe, was responsible for official documentation and communication. Their involvement underscores the organized opposition to the Jewish rebuilding efforts, highlighting the political and social tensions between the returning exiles and the local populations. This opposition is a recurring theme in the post-exilic period, as seen in other parts of Ezra and Nehemiah.

And the rest of your associates living in Samaria:
The mention of Samaria is significant, as it was a region with a complex history of conflict and intermarriage between Israelites and foreign settlers. The Samaritans, who lived there, had a contentious relationship with the Jews, partly due to religious and ethnic differences. This tension is evident in the opposition to the rebuilding of the temple, as the Samaritans and other local groups sought to hinder the efforts of the returning exiles. The historical animosity between Jews and Samaritans is also reflected in the New Testament, particularly in the Gospels.

And elsewhere in the region west of the Euphrates:
This phrase refers to the broader administrative region known as "Beyond the River," which included territories west of the Euphrates River under Persian control. This area was strategically important for the Persian Empire, serving as a buffer zone against potential threats from the west. The inclusion of this region in the king's reply indicates the widespread nature of the opposition to the Jewish rebuilding efforts and the importance of maintaining control over these territories.

Greetings:
The use of "greetings" in official correspondence was a common practice in ancient Near Eastern cultures, reflecting a formal and respectful tone. This salutation sets the stage for the content of the king's message, which would have been received with great anticipation by the recipients. The formal nature of the greeting underscores the seriousness of the communication and the authority of the king's decree.

The letter you sent us
This phrase refers to the correspondence sent by the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin to King Artaxerxes, expressing their opposition to the rebuilding of Jerusalem. In the historical context, letters were a primary means of communication between distant regions and rulers. The use of written communication highlights the bureaucratic nature of the Persian Empire, which maintained control over its vast territories through such documentation. This letter is part of a series of exchanges that reflect the political tensions surrounding the rebuilding efforts after the Babylonian exile.

has been translated
The need for translation indicates the linguistic diversity of the Persian Empire, which included many different peoples and languages. Aramaic was commonly used as a lingua franca in the empire, and it is likely that the original letter was written in this language. The translation process underscores the administrative complexity of the empire and the importance of accurate communication in governance. This also reflects the broader biblical theme of God's work transcending language barriers, as seen in the New Testament with the spread of the Gospel to all nations.

and read in my presence
The phrase suggests that the letter was given significant attention by King Artaxerxes, who personally reviewed its contents. This indicates the seriousness with which the Persian administration regarded the situation in Jerusalem. The act of reading the letter in the king's presence also implies a formal and official response was forthcoming. In a broader biblical context, the reading of important documents in the presence of leaders is a recurring theme, as seen in the public reading of the Law in the Old Testament, emphasizing the authority and accountability of leadership.

I issued a decree, and a search was conducted.
This phrase reflects the authority of the Persian king, likely Artaxerxes, who had the power to issue decrees that affected the entire empire. The decree to search the archives demonstrates the administrative organization of the Persian Empire, which maintained records of past events and decrees. This action underscores the importance of historical records in decision-making processes. The search for records is reminiscent of other biblical instances where records played a crucial role, such as in the book of Esther, where the king's sleepless night led to the discovery of Mordecai's unrewarded loyalty (Esther 6:1-3).

It was discovered that this city has revolted against kings from ancient times,
The city in question is Jerusalem, which had a history of rebellion against foreign rulers. This historical context is significant, as Jerusalem had previously resisted Babylonian and Assyrian control, leading to its destruction and the exile of its people. The phrase "from ancient times" highlights the longstanding nature of Jerusalem's resistance, which can be traced back to the divided monarchy and the various conflicts with surrounding nations. This history of rebellion is documented in books like 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles, where the actions of kings such as Hezekiah and Zedekiah are recorded.

engaging in rebellion and sedition.
Rebellion and sedition were serious charges in the ancient world, often leading to severe consequences for the accused city or people. In the context of the Persian Empire, maintaining order and loyalty was crucial for the stability of the vast territories under its control. The accusation of rebellion aligns with the historical accounts of Jerusalem's resistance to foreign domination, as seen in the opposition to Babylonian rule (2 Kings 24:20) and the eventual fall of the city. This phrase also foreshadows the challenges faced by the returning exiles in rebuilding Jerusalem, as they encountered opposition from surrounding peoples who viewed them as a potential threat to regional stability.

And mighty kings have ruled over Jerusalem
This phrase highlights the historical significance of Jerusalem as a city of power and influence. Throughout its history, Jerusalem was ruled by several mighty kings, including David and Solomon, who established it as the political and spiritual center of Israel. The reference to "mighty kings" underscores the city's importance and the strength of its rulers. This aligns with biblical accounts in 2 Samuel and 1 Kings, where the reigns of David and Solomon are detailed, showcasing their military and administrative prowess.

and exercised authority over the whole region west of the Euphrates;
The region west of the Euphrates, often referred to as "Beyond the River," was a significant area in the ancient Near East, encompassing parts of modern-day Israel, Lebanon, and Syria. The phrase indicates the extent of the authority and influence that Jerusalem's kings had, reaching beyond their immediate borders. This reflects the historical reality of the Davidic and Solomonic empires, which expanded their territories and exerted control over neighboring regions. The mention of the Euphrates also connects to the broader biblical narrative of Israel's promised land, as seen in Genesis 15:18.

and tribute, duty, and toll were paid to them.
This part of the verse emphasizes the economic and political power wielded by the kings of Jerusalem. Tribute, duty, and tolls were common forms of taxation in the ancient world, used to support the ruling government and its projects. The payment of these by surrounding nations or regions indicates a recognition of authority and submission to Jerusalem's rulers. This practice is documented in various parts of the Old Testament, such as in 1 Kings 4:21, where Solomon's wealth and the tribute he received are described. It also reflects the broader theme of God's provision and blessing upon Israel when they were obedient to His covenant.

Now, therefore, issue an order for these men to stop
This phrase reflects the authority of King Artaxerxes of Persia, who was responding to a letter from the adversaries of the Jews. The historical context is crucial here; the Jews had returned from Babylonian exile and were attempting to rebuild Jerusalem. The opposition from local inhabitants, including Samaritans, was significant. This command shows the political power dynamics at play, where the Persian Empire had control over the region. The phrase also highlights the theme of opposition faced by God's people, a recurring motif throughout the Bible, seen in Nehemiah's struggles and the early church's persecution in Acts.

so that this city will not be rebuilt
The rebuilding of Jerusalem was a significant event in Jewish history, symbolizing restoration and hope. The city held religious, cultural, and political importance. The opposition to its rebuilding can be seen as an attempt to thwart God's plans for His people. This phrase connects to the broader biblical narrative of Jerusalem as a central place in God's redemptive history, seen in prophecies like those in Isaiah and Zechariah, and ultimately in the New Jerusalem described in Revelation.

until I so order
This clause indicates the temporary nature of the decree, suggesting that the situation could change with a future command. It reflects the sovereignty of earthly kings but also points to the ultimate sovereignty of God, who controls the hearts of kings (Proverbs 21:1). Historically, this foreshadows the eventual decree by King Cyrus, allowing the Jews to return and rebuild, as prophesied by Isaiah (Isaiah 44:28). It also typifies the waiting and perseverance required of God's people, trusting in His timing and purposes.

See that you do not neglect this matter.
This phrase is a directive from King Artaxerxes to his officials, emphasizing the importance of addressing the issue at hand. In the context of Ezra 4, the matter refers to the halting of the rebuilding of Jerusalem's walls. The king's command reflects the urgency and seriousness with which he views the potential threat posed by the Jews' construction efforts. Historically, this period was marked by political tension and power struggles in the Persian Empire, with local governors often having significant autonomy. The phrase underscores the importance of vigilance and obedience to royal decrees, a common theme in the governance of ancient empires.

Why allow this threat to increase
The "threat" mentioned here refers to the perceived danger that a fortified Jerusalem could pose to the stability and control of the Persian Empire over its territories. Jerusalem, with its strategic location, had the potential to become a center of rebellion. This reflects the broader historical context of the Persian Empire's efforts to maintain control over its vast and diverse territories. The fear of rebellion was a constant concern for empires, as seen in other biblical accounts such as the Roman Empire's dealings with Judea. This phrase highlights the political and military considerations that influenced decisions during this period.

and the royal interests to suffer?
The "royal interests" pertain to the economic, political, and strategic priorities of the Persian Empire. The empire relied on the loyalty and tribute of its provinces to maintain its power and wealth. Any disruption, such as a fortified and potentially rebellious Jerusalem, could threaten these interests. This concern for royal interests is echoed in other parts of the Bible, where the welfare of the kingdom is often linked to the obedience and loyalty of its subjects. The phrase also reflects the broader biblical theme of the consequences of disobedience and rebellion against divinely appointed authority, as seen in the narratives of Israel's kings and prophets.

When the text of the letter from King Artaxerxes was read
This phrase indicates the authority and influence of the Persian king, Artaxerxes, over the region, including Jerusalem. Artaxerxes I reigned from 465-424 BC, and his decrees were binding across the vast Persian Empire. The reading of the letter signifies the formal and official nature of the communication, emphasizing the power of written royal edicts in the ancient world. This reflects the centralized control of the Persian administration and the importance of documentation in governance.

to Rehum, Shimshai the scribe, and their associates
Rehum and Shimshai were local officials in the Persian administration, likely tasked with overseeing the affairs of the province that included Jerusalem. Their roles as governor and scribe, respectively, suggest a bureaucratic structure where local leaders were responsible for implementing the king's orders. This highlights the tension between the returning Jewish exiles and the local authorities who were often opposed to the rebuilding efforts. The mention of their associates indicates a group effort to enforce the king's command, reflecting the organized opposition to the Jewish community.

they went immediately to the Jews in Jerusalem
The immediacy of their action underscores the urgency and seriousness with which they treated the king's decree. This reflects the historical context of opposition faced by the Jews from surrounding peoples who were threatened by the re-establishment of Jerusalem. The phrase also highlights the geographical proximity and the direct impact of Persian authority on the Jewish community. The Jews in Jerusalem were in the process of rebuilding the temple, a task that was central to their identity and religious practice.

and forcibly stopped them
This action represents the culmination of the opposition's efforts to halt the rebuilding of the temple. The use of force indicates the intensity of the resistance and the lengths to which the local officials were willing to go to comply with the king's orders. This reflects the broader theme of spiritual warfare and opposition that God's people often face. The cessation of work on the temple was a significant setback for the Jewish community, yet it also set the stage for future prophetic fulfillment and the eventual completion of the temple under later Persian kings. This opposition can be seen as a type of the spiritual opposition faced by Christ and His followers, emphasizing perseverance and faith in the face of adversity.

Thus the construction of the house of God in Jerusalem ceased
The cessation of the temple's construction marks a significant moment in the post-exilic period. This interruption was due to opposition from surrounding peoples and political maneuvering, as detailed earlier in Ezra 4. The temple, central to Jewish worship and identity, was meant to be a place where God's presence dwelled among His people. The halt in construction reflects the spiritual and physical challenges faced by the returning exiles. This pause can be seen as a test of faith and perseverance for the Israelites, who had returned from Babylonian captivity with the hope of restoring their religious and national life.

and it remained at a standstill
The standstill lasted for several years, indicating a period of discouragement and stagnation for the Jewish community. This delay highlights the tension between divine promises and human obstacles. The prophetic voices of Haggai and Zechariah, who ministered during this time, encouraged the people to resume the work, emphasizing God's sovereignty and faithfulness. The standstill serves as a reminder of the importance of obedience and trust in God's timing, even when circumstances seem insurmountable.

until the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia
Darius I, also known as Darius the Great, reigned from 522 to 486 BC. His ascension to the throne brought a change in the political climate that allowed the Jews to resume construction. The second year of his reign corresponds to 520 BC, a pivotal year when the prophets Haggai and Zechariah began their ministries, urging the people to rebuild the temple. Darius's policies were more favorable to the Jews compared to his predecessors, reflecting God's providential hand in using foreign rulers to accomplish His purposes. This period marks a renewal of hope and divine intervention, as the temple's completion would eventually lead to the reestablishment of proper worship in Jerusalem.