Ezra 4:14, commentary and pictures

The verse is part of the letter sent by the adversaries of Judah, the Samaritans and neighboring peoples, to hinder the rebuilding of the temple after Zerubbabel and Jeshua refused them a share in the work. In it the Samaritan officials profess that because they are supported from the palace they cannot allow the king to suffer dishonor, and so must report the Jews out of loyalty to his revenue and honor. That loyalty was a pretext for charging that rebuilt Jerusalem would rebel and withhold toll, tribute and custom, a charge that mixed the true history of Jerusalem's past rebellion with the false claim that rebuilding would bring rebellion and loss. By such misrepresentation they obtained a royal order enforced by force that stopped the work for about fifteen years until the second year of Darius Hystaspes, when the decree of Cyrus was found and Darius commanded the work to go forward and be aided from tribute with animals, wheat, salt, wine and oil. The verse thus marks an attempt to hinder the restoration begun under Cyrus, not the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem from which the seventy weeks of Daniel 9:24 are reckoned, which is the decree of Artaxerxes in Ezra 7.

Samaritan Opposition and Letter

The verse belongs to the opposition of the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin to the rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem after the return from Babylon in B.C. 535. After Zerubbabel and Jeshua refused the Samaritans and neighboring peoples a part in rebuilding the temple and re-establishing worship, they set out to hinder the work. They hired counselors against the Jews at the Persian court all the time of Cyrus and Cambyses, sought to turn the king against them, and made completion of Zerubbabel's work appear impossible, helping create hatred between the two peoples.

It states the two professed reasons the Samaritan officials gave for informing the Persian king against the Jews, that they had maintenance and support from the king's palace and that it was not meet to watch the king suffer dishonor. They presented their report as required loyalty to the king's revenue and honor, claiming their livelihood and palace support obliged them to protect his interests and to report what they considered a threat to him. This stated concern for revenue and honor was the motive they professed for sending and certifying the matter to him.

The letter containing it was sent to the new Persian king holding undisputed rule after the death of Cambyses, called Artaxerxes in Ezra. He is identified as the impostor pseudo-Smerdis, Gomates the false Smerdis, also called Artaxerxes the Magian, who may have borne the name Artaxerxes. He took the kingdom by fraud for a short time around 522 B.C. and was killed in 522 B.C., opposed the work and ordered it stopped, though later kings reversed his action. One reading places the letter of Ezra 4:11-16 as written to Cambyses.

The professed loyalty served as a pretext for accusing the Jews of rebuilding rebellious Jerusalem and its walls. The writers warned that if the city and walls were finished it would rebel and withhold toll, tribute, and custom, harming royal revenue and authority. The letter's historical claim that Jerusalem had once rebelled was true, but its charge that rebuilding would lead to rebellion and loss of revenue was false, using a mixture of truth and falsehood to conceal the writers' own purpose and deceive the king.

Through misrepresentation and slander the opponents obtained a royal order absolutely forbidding the work. The Samaritans enforced the order by force, so the rebuilding ceased for about fifteen years after the laying of the foundation until the second year of Darius Hystaspes in B.C. 520. The work had languished and Jerusalem lay in disrepair during Haggai's time, about 520 B.C. Then Haggai and Zechariah stirred the people to build again, a new and honest governor sent an honest account, the earlier decree of Cyrus was found, and Darius decreed that the work should go on and be helped speedily with money from tribute and with bullocks, rams, lambs, wheat, salt, wine, and oil.

Seventy Weeks Starting Decree

Ezra 4:14 stands in the account of opposition to the Jews' rebuilding work, where their adversaries appealed to the Persian king on the ground that their place in the king's service made it improper for them to allow his dishonor, and sent a report against the work. In that setting the verse marks an attempt to hinder the restoration begun under Cyrus, not a decree authorizing the rebuilding of Jerusalem. It belongs to the record of trouble with the Samaritans and the stopping of the rebuilding work by Artaxerxes, or Smerdis the Impostor, and so forms part of the troubled history surrounding the decree to restore Jerusalem.

The letter of Ezra 4:11-16 is the letter of the Samaritan colony to Cambyses and shows the place of the second Persian edict. That second edict, the edict of Darius Hystaspes made about fourteen years after Cyrus and 550 years before the death of Christ, related to the temple only and was hindered so that it was not carried into effect. Therefore it cannot be the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem from which the four hundred and ninety years of the seventy weeks are reckoned. The decrees of Cyrus and Darius connected with Ezra 4 are distinct from the decree of Artaxerxes in Ezra 7, and the decree of Artaxerxes in Ezra 7, not the decrees connected with Ezra 4, gives the true date for the beginning of the seventy weeks of Daniel 9:24.

Persevering Despite Discouraging Circumstances

The troubles faced while rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple form the historical setting in which God's promises of protection and prosperity seemed marvelous. Fifteen years after the return from Babylon the temple remained much as when the joyous services were held at the laying of the foundation stones, because the neighboring inhabitants of Palestine wrote to the reigning king of Persia, a quite different man from Cyrus, professing loyalty to the throne while representing the Jews as rebellious in order to hinder the work, so that the king sent an order to discontinue it.

The Jews treated that command as making it impossible to go on and as an indication that God did not wish them to build the temple then, but that was self-made discouragement and an excuse for relinquishing an unpleasant undertaking. Opposing circumstances are not a sure sign from God to give up duty, for He does not always make the path of duty smooth. Duty must be found by using the mind and judgment He has given, asking Him for guidance, being willing and glad to do whatever He would like notwithstanding difficulties, and considering what would be thought right for another person in the same place and what in God's sight would be best.

The Jews could have answered the accusation, but the king's order did not prove that God wanted the work abandoned. No earthly monarch could prevent an undertaking God favored.