Interpretation of the book of the prophet Ezra

Chapter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 In the name of Ezra, three books are inscribed in our Bible texts, of which one (the first) is considered canonical, and two (the second and third) belong to the non-canonical section. The canonical book of Ezra in ancient times was combined with the book. Nehemiah. This can be concluded from the testimony of the Talmud (Baba Bathra15-a), Josephus (Contra Ar. I, 8), Melito of Sardis (Eusebius, Church History N, 26) and from lists of biblical books given by church teachers and councils. This is also supported by the fact that Masoretic notes, which usually take place at the end of books, are placed after Nehemiah 13.31, and in many Jewish codes, also in Greek. Vatican, beginning of the book. Nehemiah follows on the same line as the end of the book. Ezra (De Rossi, Variae lectiones V. T. IV, 157). In the Christian Church, Prince. Ezra was early separated from the book. Nehemiah, as can be seen from the testimonies of Origen and Jerome Ortig. in Ps. I, Hyer., Prol. galeat). Gradually this division became generally accepted and from 1525, from the time of the appearance of Bomberg's edition, it was included in the Hebrew Bible. Catholics, however, still have the book. Nehemiah is considered as the second part of the book. Ezra. Likewise, in scientific bibliological works both of these books are usually reviewed together, due to their undoubted close connection. According to its content, the book. Ezra and Nehemiah present an account of the history of the restoration of the Jewish community after the end of the Babylonian captivity. In particular, the book. Ezra is divided into two parts: I-VI and VII-X. The book begins with the decree of Cyrus about the release of the Jews from captivity and the message that according to this decree, a party of captives, consisting of members of the tribe of Judah and Benjamin and of priests and Levites, returned to Jerusalem under the leadership of Sheshbazzar (chap. 1). In ch. II provides a list of returned captives and donations to the church. Then, in Chapter III. the story is told about the construction of the altar, the restoration of worship and the founding of the church. B IV Ch. the writer reports obstacles to the construction of the church on the part of the Samaritans and their allies, and provides letters that the enemies of the Jews addressed to the Persian kings. In ch. V-VI we are talking about the resumption of the construction of the church, which had stopped due to the slander of enemies, about its completion and the consecration of the church around 516. The second part of the book. Ezra describes the events of Ezra's time. In particular, it reports here about the arrival of Ezra in Jerusalem in the 7th year of King Artaxerxes with a colony of returned captives, and a royal decree is given that defined the powers of Ezra (VII chapter); then (chap. VIII), a list of the captives who returned with Ezra is given and, finally, the activities of Ezra in Jerusalem are narrated (chap. IX and X). Book Nehemiah, which in its content is a direct continuation of the narrative of the book. Ezra, breaks down into three parts: I-VII, VIII-X, XI-XVIII. The first part deals with the circumstances of Nehemiah’s arrival in Jerusalem (I-VIII), his construction of walls (III-IV), the difficulties he encountered from the Samaritans and the Jews themselves (IV-VI), and a list of those who returned from captivity (VII). The second part describes the reformatory activity of Ezra, aimed at establishing the dominance of the law of Moses in life (VI11-X). Finally, the third part provides lists of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, priests and Levites (Nehemiah 11.1 – Nehemiah 12.1–24), reports on the consecration of the walls of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 12.27–47) and on the activities of Nehemiah upon his second arrival in the city after traveling to the court of the Persian king (XIII). Thus, the book. Ezra and Nehemiah set out the events that took place in the period 537–432 BC. From their content it is clear that they do not talk about everything that happened at the specified time. It is especially important to note here that the period of the history of the Jews from the completion of the construction of the church in 516, until the arrival of Ezra in Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artaxerxes ko or in 458 BC, is completely omitted. Obviously, like other biblical authors, the writers of the book. Ezra and Nehemiah mean to talk mainly about what is important from a theocratic point of view, in which, in their view, the care of the Lord for the chosen people at the end of the Babylonian captivity was especially clearly manifested. Regarding the form of the book. Ezra and Nehemiah should note that in 1Ezra 7.1-11 and at the conclusion of ch. 10 Ezra is spoken of in the third person, and in section 1 Ezra 7:27–9:15 - in the first; in the same way, Nehemiah is sometimes spoken of in the first person (I-VII, XII-XIII), sometimes in the third (VIII-X). In addition, the feature of the book. Ezra is that sections of 1Ezra 4.8–18 and 1Ezra 7.12–26 are written in Aramaic (Chaldean), and the rest in Hebrew. The question of the origin of the book. Ezra and Nehemiah are at present difficult to decide with complete certainty, both because of the lack of clear indications in the books themselves, and because of the lack of firm guidance in tradition. Regarding the book. Ezra's legend, attested in the Talmud (Baba Bathra 15-a: “Ezra wrote his book”), in the synopses of St. I. Athanasius and I. Chrysostom (“Ezra himself, who was a priest and reader, tells and records in it the return from captivity, etc.), apparently claims that the writer of the book was Ezra. This legend can be supported in part by the title of the book, as well as by the established understanding of the history of the Old Testament canon. Contents of the book. Ezra, and precisely the second part of it (chap. 7-10) also confirms the testimony of tradition. We are talking here about Ezra, and for the most part it is said directly on his behalf (1Ezra 7.27 - 1Ezra 9.1). Although in ch. X and the beginning of XI speak about Ezra in the third person, but these parts can also be considered written by Ezra: changing persons in the same work is permissible for one writer, and examples of such a literary device can be indicated both in biblical writing (Dan. 1:7, 10:12; Jer. 20:1, 7) and in non-biblical writing. Moreover, Chapter X is closely connected with IX, and section 1Ezra 7.1–11 represents a natural introduction to what follows, which talks about Ezra in the third person. If the section in question contains praise for Ezra and his genealogy, then this can hardly be seen as a desire for self-aggrandizement and therefore considered incompatible with the tradition of writing the section by Ezra himself. The second part of the book. Ezra (1Ezra 7.1) begins with the words: “after these events.” This indicates, apparently, the close connection of the second part with the first (chap. I-VI) and, therefore, that the latter was also written by Ezra. But Ezra was not an eyewitness to the events described in chapters I-VI and therefore could only present them on the basis of written documents. These documents can be presented either in the form of raw materials that Ezra independently processed, or in the form of an already processed composition, which Ezra just published, adding without changes to the part he himself compiled. The latter idea can be supported by the remark of 1Ezra 5.4 (“then we told them the names of those people”), which would hardly have been used by Ezra if he had been the compiler of ch. I-VI; but the first idea also has its defenders in science, The book of Nehemiah, on the basis of its inscription (Nehemiah 1.1) and some - however, not entirely clear - indications of tradition (2Mak 2.13; Baba bathra 15-a) is considered by many researchers to be the work of Nehemiah. The main proof that the book belongs to Nehemiah is that, telling about the events of Nehemiah’s time, the book for the most part (I-VII, XII-XIII) speaks of Nehemiah in the first person. As an objection to this opinion, they usually put forward the place Nehemiah 12.1–11, where the genealogy of the high priest Jesus is continued to Jaddui, and Nehemiah 13.28, where Nehemiah expels the son-in-law of Sanballat, the ruler of Samaria, from Jerusalem. According to the testimony of I. Flavius ​​(Ant. Jude 11:8, 5), Jaddui was the high priest during the time of Alexander the Great; Josephus Flavius ​​(Ant. Jude 11:7, 2) dates the fact of the expulsion of Manasseh to the same time. In view of the testimony of I. Josephus, the passages of Nehemiah 12.10–11 and Nehemiah 13.28 (and therefore the entire section XII-XIII) are believed to not have been written by Nehemiah. But the fact is that the news of I. Flavius ​​dating back to the 4th century is very confused and cannot be used to verify biblical instructions. On the other hand, if the reliability of the news of I, Flavius ​​is recognized, these verses could be considered a later addition. Regarding Nehemiah 12.10–11, in addition, it is possible to assume that here, in the genealogy of Jesus, not four high priests serving in succession over a hundred years are indicated, but only members of the same family, from which the last contemporary of Alexander Mac. – Nehemiah saw only children. Less clear is the origin of Ch. VIII-X. Due to the fact that the named section deals with Ezra itself, and also taking into account some of the features of the section in comparison with the rest of the book, some Protestant and Catholic exegetes consider the section compiled by Ezra, who owned the last edition of the book. But it is not without reason that they point out that there is too much difference between ch. VIII-X and the rest do not exist. If this section deals mainly with Ezra, it is because the section narrates religious activities, in which the leading role belonged to Ezra, and not to Nehemiah, who was the first in civil affairs. This can explain the difference between the section and the others in expressions - namely, that Nehemiah in the section is given the title of Tirshatha (Neh. 8.9 and Neh. 10.1), whereas earlier (1 Ezra 1:8, 5:14; Neh. 12.26) he was called pechah (governor). To what has been said, I must add that modern negative criticism recognizes the basis of the book. Ezra and Nehemiah are the original records (“memoirs”) of Ezra and Nehemiah, reproduced partly literally in the books. The difference between the views of criticism and the traditional ones in this case is that the final edition of the books is pushed back to a later time than the age of Ezra, and the editor of both books is considered to be the writer Prince. Paralipomenon and numerous interpolations are allowed. The main basis for such a view is the unity of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah with the book, usually assumed by many researchers. Paralipomenon. To prove this unity, they refer to: a) the general coloring of the language of the books, b) the similarity of individual expressions and c) the identity of the end of 2 Chron. and the beginning of Ezra 1. But the similarity in language and expressions, given the same subject matter of the narrative of both books, is quite natural and can only indicate that the books in question belong to the same era and, perhaps, were compiled by the same author, but not that they are parts of one whole. The same identity of the end of 2 Chronicles. and began Ezd. (the decree of Cyrus) is easier to understand if we assume the independence of both works. As for those historical errors that prompt representatives of negative criticism to push back the final edition of the book. Ezra and Nehemiah to a very late time and allow many interpolations in them, then (as will be clear from the commentary) references to these errors are either unfair or very controversial. Book Ezra and Nehemiah have always been highly respected in the Church and had divine authority, as a strictly historical work. Since the latest theories of the origin of the Pentateuch have shifted the center of gravity of biblical history and biblical writing into the post-exilic era, book. Ezra and Nehemiah, as the most important source for the study of the post-exilic era, naturally became the subject of numerous studies. At the same time, many authors questioned the historical accuracy of the narration of the books as a whole and in individual parts. Thus, Schrader rejected the historical authenticity of the testimony of 1Ezra 3.8 about the founding of the church in the second year of Cyrus, pushing this event back to the second year of Darius Hystaspes. Guanaquer rejected the accuracy of the chronological sequence of the books, making an attempt to prove that the arrival of Nehemiah in Jerusalem took place before the arrival of Ezra. Many researchers have rejected the authenticity of the royal decrees cited in the books, the Aramaic documents of 1Ezra 4, as well as the list of those who returned from captivity, classifying all this as the fabrications of the chronicler, i.e. a book editor who lived long after the events described in the books. Finally, Costers and Torrey rejected the fact of the return of the Jews under Cyrus, the evidence of the construction of the church by the returning Jews, and much more. The newest works, however, especially the work of Meyer (Meyer, Entstechung des Judenthums. Halle. 1896) contain many objections to the book. Ezra and Nehemiah have been refuted with sufficient convincing. It is especially important in this case that parallels from non-biblical literature can be considered to establish the reliability of those documents that are given in the book. Ezra. This largely confirms the accuracy of the author’s testimony in other parts. Only the chronology of the book excites bewilderment. Ezra and Nehemiah. When naming the names of the Persian kings (Artaxerxes, Darius), under whom certain events took place, the writer does not give these names immediate definitions. And since Persian history knows several kings who bore these names, it is difficult to say with certainty which king the writer is talking about in this or that case. Chronological order of events described in the book. Ezra and Nehemiah, therefore, are indicated differently by exegetes and can only be indicated with probability. Literature: 1) Russian: Doroshkevich, Chronology of the book. 1 Ezra and Nehemiah, Christ. Thurs. 1886, July–Aug. It's him. How the books of 1 Ezra and Nehemiah are compiled. Read General, loves, spirit. enlightenment 1891 December; Yanitsky, Origin and composition of the book. Nehemiah. Orlov. Eparch. Ved. 1881; Yungerov, Origin and historicity of the book. Ezra and Nehemiah. Right Interview. 1905.10; V. Popov, Return of the Jews from Babylonian captivity. Kyiv, 1905. 2) Foreign: From the extremely extensive Western literature about the book. Ezra and Nehemiah are the most valuable. Commentary by Ryssel Esra, Nehemia und Ester 1887, Bertholet Die Bücher Esra und Nehemia. 1902, Keil'ya Bibl. Komment über Chronik, Esra, Nehemia und Ester. Detailed index of foreign literature, see title. above the book Bertholet and V. Popov For examples, see Readings in General. love, spirit enlightenment 1891, 2, 553–559 You might be interested in: