THE SANCTUARY by Uriah Smith

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 2, 1876

FromThe Review and Herald, Review and Herald, Vol. 47, No. 9.

THE SANCTUARY.

By Uriah Smith

Ninth Paper.—The Commandment to Restore and Build Jerusalem.

As noticed last week, we must look to one, or all, of the decrees issued by Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes, for the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem. And the selection must be determined largely by a consideration of how much is embraced in the prophecy respecting the restoration of this city.

The promise embraced the restoration as well as the rebuilding of Jerusalem. To restore and build, is more than simply to build. The rebuilding of its demolished palaces, the re-opening of its deserted streets, the re-erection of its leveled walls, and the setting up again of its broken gates, would not alone meet the provisions of the prophecy. There must be the forms and privileges of religious worship, the regulations of society, judges to interpret, and officers to execute, the laws, and the re-establishment of that civil polity which made Jerusalem what she was before her fall.

The decree of Cyrus standing nearest to the prophecy respecting the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem, naturally first engages our attention.

Some have claimed that this decree of Cyrus must be the commandment in question, because God by the prophet Isaiah speaks of Cyrus as the one who should say to Jerusalem, “Thou shalt be built.” Isa. 44:28. But there are three conclusive objections to this view: 1. It is not Cyrus who, in the prophecy of Isaiah, says to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; but the Lord is the one who says this. See verses 26 and 27. 2. The decree of Cyrus pertained simply to the temple at Jerusalem: See Ez. 1:2. It did not even make provision for the building of the city, much less for those other provisions, which, as we have seen, must have been included in the prophecy. 3. From the date of this decree, B. C. 536, the sixty-nine weeks, or 483 years which were to extend to the Messiah the Prince, fall 53 years short of reaching even to the birth of Christ. An effort has consequently been made by those who take the decree of Cyrus to be the commandment in question, to change the date of that decree, placing it at a point late enough to harmonize with the prophecy respecting the Messiah. But this cannot be done, as we shall hereafter see.

By these remarks we do not design in the least to rob the decree of Cyrus of any measure of its importance. It occupies a prominent place in connection with the history of Jerusalem’s restoration. The work which Cyrus did was given him of the Lord to do. He was called by name over a hundred years before his birth, and his work in a measure at least pointed out. And that which his decree granted was one of the first steps, and a very necessary step in the work of restoration; but its provisions were too limited to meet the specifications of the prophecy. Some things, to be sure, would follow as a necessary consequence, such as the building of houses for the workmen, the opening of worship, and the carrying on of some necessary traffic. But the decree did not provide for them.

The decree of Darius stands next in order. It was occasioned by the following circumstances: The next year after the Jews had commenced the work under the decree of Cyrus, the enemies of the Jews made request that they be permitted to join them in the work. This the Jews refused, whereupon their enemies set themselves to work to trouble them in their building and to frustrate them in their purpose, “all the days of Cyrus, . . . even until the reign of Darius, king of Persia.” Ez. 4.

Seven years after issuing his decree, Cyrus died, and was succeeded by Cambyses, called in Ez. 4:6, Ahasuerus, who reigned seven years and five months, and who was in turn succeeded by Smerdis the Magian, called in Ez. 4:7, Artaxerxes, from whom the enemies of the Jews obtained an edict prohibiting the further prosecution of the work at Jerusalem. Ez. 4:21–24. But the land being smitten with barrenness, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, having made known to the Jews the cause of this calamity, exhorted them to resume the work of building the house of God, which they accordingly commenced again B. C. 520.

Again their enemies endeavored to hinder and stop them, and appealing to Darius who had now come to the Persian throne, he caused search to be made among the chronicles of the kingdom, and finding the decree of Cyrus, reaffirmed it, with some provisions of his own; and thus the work went forward prosperously again.

Here was a second decree. It was however only seventeen years from the decree of Cyrus, and therefore does not meet the prophecy any better than the former, in the matter of dates. And further, it was but a reaffirmation of the decree of Cyrus, and was therefore too limited in its provisions to constitute the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem. But it was a second step in the work, and, adding somewhat to the decree of Cyrus, was some advancement toward the end in view.

Third and last stands the decree of Artaxerxes Longimanus, as recorded in Ez. 7. This Artaxerxes was the Ahasuerus of the book of Esther, which will account for the remarkable favor he showed to the Jewish people. The decree which he issued was given to Ezra at the earnest solicitation of that man of God; for it is said that the king granted Ezra “all his request.”

A mere perusal of this decree shows its full and ample provisions. It is drawn up in a formal manner. It is expressly called “a decree.” It is written, not in Hebrew, but in Chaldaic or Eastern Aramaic. “Thus,” says Prof. Whiting, “we are furnished with the original document, by virtue of which Ezra was authorized to ‘restore and build Jerusalem’; or, in other words, by which he was clothed with power, not merely to erect walls or houses, but to regulate the affairs of his countrymen in general, to ‘set magistrates and judges which may judge all the people beyond the river.’ He was commissioned to enforce the observance of the laws of his God, and to punish those who transgressed with death, banishment, confiscation or imprisonment. See verses 23–27.”

No such ample powers as this decree conferred upon Ezra can be found in any previous or subsequent act of this kind. This, in connection with those which had been given before, contained all the provision that could possibly be made for any people who were still to be held tributary to the Persian throne. And we have in Ez. 6:14, a remarkable declaration showing that all three of these decrees are taken as the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem: “And they builded and finished it, according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to THE COMMANDMENT of Cyrus, and Darius, and Artaxerxes, king of Persia.” Here the decrees of these three several kings, are called “the commandment,” singular number, according to which the work in Jerusalem was finished. When therefore this last decree went forth from Artaxerxes, enlarging and completing all the provisions that had been made before, then the work was finished; and with the provisions of that decree carried out, the commandment “went forth” in the sense of the prophecy.

We shall next show that this decree went forth B. C. 457, and then test its agreement with the remainder of the prophecy. U. S.