Now when these things were done, the princes came near to me, saying, “The people of Israel, the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands, following their abominations, even those of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. For they have taken of their daughters for themselves and for their sons, so that the holy offspring have mixed themselves with the peoples of the lands. Yes, the hand of the princes and rulers has been chief in this trespass.”
When I heard this thing, I tore my garment and my robe, and pulled the hair out of my head and of my beard, and sat down confounded. Then everyone who trembled at the words of the God of Israel were assembled to me, because of their trespass of the captivity; and I sat confounded until the evening offering.
At the evening offering I arose up from my humiliation, even with my garment and my robe torn; and I fell on my knees, and spread out my hands to Yahweh my God; and I said, “My God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to you, my God; for our iniquities have increased over our head, and our guiltiness has grown up to the heavens. Since the days of our fathers we have been exceedingly guilty to this day; and for our iniquities we, our kings, and our priests, have been delivered into the hand of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, to plunder, and to confusion of face, as it is this day. Now for a little moment grace has been shown from Yahweh our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and revived us a little in our bondage. For we are bondservants; yet our God has not forsaken us in our bondage, but has extended loving kindness to us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to revive us, to set up the house of our God, and to repair its ruins, and to give us a wall in Judah and in Jerusalem.
“Now, our God, what shall we say after this? For we have forsaken your commandments, which you have commanded by your servants the prophets, saying, ‘The land, to which you go to possess it, is an unclean land through the uncleanness of the peoples of the lands, through their abominations, which have filled it from one end to another with their filthiness. Now therefore don’t give your daughters to their sons. Don’t take their daughters to your sons, nor seek their peace or their prosperity forever; that you may be strong, and eat the good of the land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children forever.’
“After all that has come on us for our evil deeds, and for our great guilt, since you, our God, have punished us less than our iniquities deserve, and have given us such a remnant, shall we again break your commandments, and join ourselves with the peoples that do these abominations? Wouldn’t you be angry with us until you had consumed us, so that there would be no remnant, nor any to escape? Yahweh, the God of Israel, you are righteous; for we are left a remnant that has escaped, as it is today. Behold, we are before you in our guiltiness; for no one can stand before you because of this.”
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 13, 15 From the time they came home under Zerubbabel until…
From the time they came home under Zerubbabel until the coming of Ezra, they had degenerated contrary to the Law of God, and married where it was not lawful, Deut. 7:3.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1–15 Ezr 9:1 Now when these things were done, the…
Ezr 9:1 Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, [doing] according to their abominations, [even] of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites.
Ver. 1. Now when these things were done] Here are post maxima gaudia luctus, Heaven’s joys are without measure or mixture; but this present life is overspread with sins and miseries, as with a filthy morphew. Of good Ezra, we may say as Pliny doth of Metellus, Metellus infelix dici non debet, felix non potest, Unhappy we may not call him, happy we cannot; witness the doleful discourse of this chapter.
Read full note →
The princes came to me] The better sort of them, that were sensible of the abuses, crept in, and desired a reformation. For some of the princes also and rulers had their hands elbow deep in the wickedness complained of, Ezr 9:2.
The people of Israel] The many, the common sort, that shallow-brained but many headed beast, that loves to follow the herd and do as the most do, though thereby they be utterly undone for ever.
And the priests, and the Levites] This was much; for these knew the law, and made their boast of it, Rom 2:18; Rom 2:23. They could not be ignorant of the unlawfulness of this mixing themselves in marriage with heathens not proselyted. Now sins against knowledge and conscience are of a double dye, of a crimson colour; and make a great breach, a deep gash in a man’s spirit, Isa 59:11-12. What was it that brought such roarings and troubles on them, and that when salvation was looked for? Our iniquities testify to our faces, and we know them.
Have not separated themselves] The separation of the saints from the wicked is a wonderful separation, Exo 33:16, such as was that of light from darkness in the creation. God hath brought them out of darkness into his marvellous light, 1Pe 2:9. Why then should they be unequally yoked together with unbelievers? what communion hath light with darkness? &c., 2Co 6:14.
Doing according to their abominations] How should they choose but do so when so matched and married? What is the reason the pope will not dispense in Spain or Italy, if a Papist marry a Protestant? yet here they will, but in hope thereby to draw more to them. The brown bread in the oven will be sure to fleece from the white; not that from it. So in married couples: seldom is the worse bettered by the good, but the contrary. See Neh 13:26.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv1–15 The princes; who feared God, and understood that Ezra…
The princes; who feared God, and understood that Ezra was come with large commission from the king, and with this design, to reform all disorders, whereof this was not the least. From the people of the lands, i.e. from the heathen nations round about them, which God had expressly commanded them to do, Deu 7:2,3. Doing according to their abominations, to wit, either,
1. Marrying promiscuously whomsoever they liked, as the heathens used to do; or,
Read full note →
2. Imitating them in their idolatrous or other wicked practices, into which they were drawn by their heathenish affinities; although they are not charged with any other crime besides their marriage in the following account of it.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On vv1, 5 Ezra, like Barnabas when he came to Jerusalem and…
Ezra, like Barnabas when he came to Jerusalem and saw the grace of God to his brethren there, no doubt was glad, and exhorted them all that with purpose of heart they would cleave to the Lord, Act 11:23. He saw nothing amiss (many corruptions lurk out of the view of the most vigilant rulers); but here is a damp upon his joys: information is brought him that many of the people, yea, and some of the rulers, had married wives out of heathen families, and joined themselves in affinity with strangers. Observe,
I. What the sin was that they were guilty of: it was mingling with the people of those lands (Ezr 9:2), associating with them both in trade and in conversation, making themselves familiar with them, and, to complete the affinity, taking their daughters in marriages to their sons. We are willing to hope that they did not worship their gods, but that their captivity had cured them of their idolatry: it is said indeed that they did according to their abominations; but that (says bishop Patrick) signifies here only the imitation of the heathen in promiscuous marriages with any nation whatsoever, which by degrees would lead them to idolatry. Herein, 1. They disobeyed the express command of God, which forbade all intimacy with the heathen, and particularly in matrimonial contracts, Deu 7:3. 2. They profaned the crown of their peculiarity, and set themselves upon a level with those above whom God had by singular marks of his favour, of late as well as formerly, dignified them. 3. They distrusted the power of God to protect and advance them, and were led by carnal policy, hoping to strengthen themselves and make an interest among their neighbours by these alliances. A practical disbelief of God's all-sufficiency is at the bottom of all the sorry shifts we make to help ourselves. 4. They exposed themselves, and much more their children, to the peril of idolatry, the very sin, and introduced by this very way, that had cone been the ruin of their church and nation.
Read full note →
II. Who were the persons that were guilty of this sin, not only some of the unthinking people of Israel, that knew no better, but many of the priests and Levites, whose office it was to teach the law, and this law among the rest, and in whom, by reason of their elevation above common Israelites, it was a greater crime. It was a diminution to the sons of that tribe to match into any other tribe, and they seldom did except into the royal tribe; but for them to match with heathen, with Canaanites, and Hittites, and I know not whom, was such a disparagement as, if they had had any sense, though not of duty, yet of honour, one would think, they would never have been guilty of. Yet this was not the worst: The hand of the princes and rulers, who by their power should have prevented or reformed this high misdemeanour, was chief in this trespass. If princes be in a trespass, they will be charged as chief in it, because of the influence their examples will have upon others. Many will follow their pernicious ways. But miserable is the case of that people whose leaders debauch them and cause them to err.
III. The information that was given of this to Ezra. It was given by the persons that were most proper to complain, the princes, those of them that had kept their integrity and with it their dignity; they could not have accused others if they themselves had not been free from blame. It was given to the person who had power to mend the matter, who, as a ready scribe in the law of God, could argue with them, and, as king's commissioner, could awe them. It is probable that these princes had often endeavoured to redress this grievance and could not; but now they applied to Ezra, hoping that his wisdom, authority, and interest, would prevail to do it. Those that cannot of themselves reform public abuses may yet do good service by giving information to those that can.
IV. The impression this made upon Ezra (Ezr 9:3): He rent his clothes, plucked off his hair, and sat down astonished. Thus he expressed the deep sense he had, 1. Of the dishonour hereby done to God. It grieved him to the heart to think that a people called by his name should so grossly violate his law, should be so little benefited by his correction, and make such bad returns for his favours. 2. Of the mischief the people had hereby done to themselves and the danger they were in of the wrath of God breaking out against them. Note, (1.) The sins of others should be our sorrow, and the injury done by them to God's honour and the souls of men is what we should lay to heart. (2.) Sorrow for sin must be great sorrow; such Ezra's was, as for an only son or a first-born. (3.) The scandalous sins of professors are what we have reason to be astonished at. We may stand amazed to see men contradict, disparage, prejudice, ruin, themselves. Strange that men should act so inconsiderately and so inconsistently with themselves! Upright men are astonished at it.
V. The influence which Ezra's grief for this had upon others. We may suppose that he went up to the house of the Lord, there to humble himself, because he had an eye to God in his grief and that was the proper place for deprecating his displeasure. Public notice was soon taken of it, and all the devout serious people that were at hand assembled themselves to him, it should seem of their own accord, for nothing is said of their being sent, to, Ezr 9:4. Note, 1. It is the character of good people that they tremble at God's word; they stand in awe of the authority of its precepts and the severity and justice of its threatenings, and to those that do so will God look, Isa 66:2. 2. Those that tremble at the word of God cannot but tremble at the sins of men, by which the law of God is broken and his wrath and curse are incurred. 3. The pious zeal of one against sin may perhaps provoke very many to the like, as the apostle speaks in another case, Co2 9:2. Many will follow who have not consideration, talent, and courage, enough to lead in a good work. 4. All good people ought to own those that appear and act in the cause of God against vice and profaneness, to stand by them, and do what they can to strengthen their hands.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv1–15 Now when these things were done,.... When the captives…
Now when these things were done,.... When the captives with Ezra had refreshed themselves, and weighed the money and vessels they brought, and put them into the hands of proper persons, and offered sacrifices, and delivered the king's commissions to his lieutenants and governors, and shown his own:
the princes came to me; some of the nobles of Israel, the most religious of them, who were concerned at the corruptions that were among them, though not a sufficient number to reform them:
Read full note →
saying the people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the land: but joined with them, though not in idolatrous practices, yet by marrying with them, which might lead them into them:
doing according to their abominations; not serving idols as they did, but imitating them in their marriages: even
of the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites; affinity with many of these was forbidden by an express law, Deu 7:1 all but the Moabites, Ammonites, and Egyptians, and from these for the same reason they were to abstain; namely, lest they should be drawn into idolatry; that the priests and Levites should do this, who ought to have known the law, and instructed the people better, was very sad and shocking.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15 Ezra is troubled at the marriages with strange women,…
Ezra is troubled at the marriages with strange women, ver. 1-4. His solemn confession to God, ver. 5-15.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15 The princes inform Ezra that many of the people…
CHAPTER IX
The princes inform Ezra that many of the people now settled
Read full note →
in the had married heathen wives; and several of the rulers
were principal offenders in this thing, 1, 2.
He is greatly afflicted, 3, 4.
His prayer to God on thus account, 5-15.
NOTES ON CHAP. IX
Verse 1. The people of Israel] These were they who had returned at first with Zerubbabel, and were settled in the land of Judea and whom Ezra found on his arrival to be little better than the Canaanitish nations from whom God had commanded them ever to keep separate.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15 Ezr 9:1. The princes came to me — Those…
Ezr 9:1. The princes came to me — Those who feared God, and understood that Ezra was come with a large commission and ample powers from the king, and with a design to reform all disorders, whereof this which they came to complain of was not the least: saying, The people, and the priests, &c., have not separated themselves from the people of the lands — From the heathen nations round about them, which God had expressly commanded them to do, (Deu 7:2-3,) but have associated with them both in trade and in conversation; have made themselves familiar with them; and, to complete the affinity, have taken the daughters of these heathen in marriages to their sons. Doing according to their abominations — Marrying promiscuously whomsoever they liked, as the heathen are wont to do, and imitating them in some of their wicked practices, into which they have been drawn by their heathenish affinities. To do abominations, is an expression, which, in Scripture language, generally means worshipping of idols; but here it seems only to signify imitating the heathen in promiscuous marriages with any nation whatsoever, a practice which, however, would soon have led them to commit idolatry.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15 Abominations - The mixed marriages had prevented that complete…
Abominations - The mixed marriages had prevented that complete separation of the people of God from the idolatrous rites, or “abominations,” which the Law required, and which was necessary for purity of religion. See 1Ki 11:2 note.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 Abominations, or sins, (Menochius) marrying with infidels, contrary to…
Abominations, or sins, (Menochius) marrying with infidels, contrary to the law, Exodus xxxiv. 15., and Deuteronomy vii. 3. (Du Hamel) --- Malachy[Malachias] (ii. 11.) reprehends this conduct, and threatens both rulers and people who tolerate it, with God’s indignation. (Worthington)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v1 The Chief Fault of the Time and its Removal
SECOND SECTION
The Chief Fault of the Time and its Removal
Read full note →
Ezra 9-10
A.—THE CHEIF FAULT OF THE TIME EZRA’S PENTITENTIAL PRAYER
Ezr_9:1-15
I. The Chief Fault of the Time, and Ezra’s Sorrow for It. Ezr_9:1-4
1Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. 2For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass. 3And when I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down astonied. 4Then were assembled unto me every one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the transgression of those that had been carried away and I sat astonied until the evening sacrifice.
II. Ezra’s Penitential Prayer. Ezr_9:5-15
5And at the evening sacrifice I arose up from my heaviness; and having rent my garment and my mantle, I fell upon my knees, and spread out my hands unto the Lord my God, 6And said, O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my God: for our iniquities are increased over our head, and our trespass is grown up unto the heavens. 7Since the days of our fathers have we been in a great trespass unto this day; and for our iniquities have we, our kings, and our priests, been delivered into the hand of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, and to a spoil, and to confusion of face, as it is this day. 8And now for a little space grace hath been shewed from the Lord our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give 9us a little reviving in our bondage. For we were bondmen; yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage, but hath extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to give us a reviving, to set up the house of our God, and to repair the desolations thereof, and to give us a wall in Judah and in Jerusalem. 10And now, O our God, what shall we say after this? for we have forsaken thy commandments, 11Which thou hast commanded by thy servants the prophets, saying, The land, unto which ye go to possess it, is an unclean land with the filthiness of the people of the lands, with their abominations, which have filled it from one end to another with their uncleanness. 12Now therefore give not your daughters unto their sons, neither take their daughters unto your sons, nor seek their peace or their wealth for ever: that ye may be strong, and eat the good of the land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children for eEzra Ezr_9:13 And after all that is come to pass upon us for our evil deeds, and for our great trespass, seeing that thou our God hast punished us less than our iniquities deserve, and hast given us such deliverance as this; 14Should we again break thy commandments, and join in affinity with the people of these abominations? wouldest not thou be angry with us till thou hadst consumed 15us, so that there should be no remnant nor escaping? O Lord God of Israel, thou art righteous; for we remain yet escaped, as it is this day: behold, we are before thee in our trespasses; for we cannot stand before thee because of this.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Ezr_9:1-4. To a positive strengthening of the life in accordance with the law belonged without doubt a long preparatory activity on the part of Ezra. It could not be accomplished by merely external arrangements or contrivances. Rather it was necessary that Ezra should bring about an internal change, excite a holy zeal for the law, as we see it break forth in fact at a later period (Nehemiah 8-10), and thus above all deepen and render more general the knowledge of the law. But already, at the outset, he had to undertake a negative improvement, the removal of a bad state of affairs that threatened their future. It was again the question as previously in the time of Zerubbabel, respecting their relation to the heathen, which was involved in their present political relations, especially their union with heathen under the same government. If, however, the problem in the time of Zerubbabel had been merely to ward off those who would unite with the congregation on the plea of a common worship of Jehovah, now the question was with reference to the exclusion of those with whom union had been established, notwithstanding difference of religion.
Ezr_9:1. And after the completion of these things,etc.—כַּלּוֹת is infin. nomin.=completion. אֵלֶּה is neuter, referring to the things mentioned in Ezr_8:33-36. This statement of time is somewhat indefinite—yet we are not to suppose that the length of time of the things here narrated was very long after chap. 8. The delivery of the gifts brought with them occurred on the fourth day after Ezra’s arrival; thus, on the fourth or fifth day of the fifth month (comp. Ezr_8:32 and Ezr_7:9); the bringing of the offerings, moreover, Ezr_8:35, without doubt soon followed, and so also the delivery of the royal decree to the officials (Ezr_8:36); the support on the part of the latter may be very well mentioned in Ezr_8:36 proleptically, or is to be understood of their promise. If a longer time had elapsed between Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem and chap. 9, it would not have been necessary for the princes of the congregation to have first made complaint respecting the evil circumstances in question, but Ezra would have observed them himself. Accordingly by the ninth month,—on the twentieth day of which, according to Ezr_10:9, the first assembly of the people was held respecting the affair here coming into question,—is meant without doubt the ninth of the first year that Ezra passed in Jerusalem.—The princes came to me.—הַשָּׂרִים (with the article) are not the princes as a whole—for according to Ezr_9:2 many of them participated in the guilt, and these would not have given information of themselves,—but the princes in distinction from the people. The princes distinguish as such who have not separated themselves, that is, kept themselves separate from the people of the land, three classes, that occur elsewhere, also along side of one another: the people of Israel—that is, the common people (יִשְׂרָאֵל is in apposition to הָעָם, comp. Jos_8:33; 1Ki_16:21);—the priests and Levites—comp. e.g. Ezr_2:70.—The people of the lands are the ἔθνη, and indeed, first of all, those in the vicinity, comp. Ezr_6:21. For the most part there were, without doubt, remnants of the ancient tribes of Canaan, whose abominations, according to the subsequent narrative, were peculiar to them; but probably during the exile other heathen races also had emigrated into the depopulated Palestine. Ezra and the princes thus, when they required a separation from all these heathen,—that is, excluded an intermarriage with them,—exceeded the letter of the law, which only prohibited intermarriage with the Canaanites (Exo_34:16; Deu_7:3),—but not because a certain Pharisaism had already made itself felt among them (O. v. Gerlach in his Biblework), but because it was absolutely necessary now if the congregation was to be preserved from sinking down into heathenism. The heathen dwelling in close vicinity to them, and not being separated in political affairs, the mixed marriages now threatened, if not positively forbidden, to become disproportionately numerous, whilst in former times they could never have been more than exceptional. And besides, these heathen were now essentially the same as the ancient Canaanites.—According to their abominations.—This briefly = as their abominations required. לַכְּנַעֲני does not then begin the enumeration of the races in question—which is against not only the accentuation which separates this clause so strongly from the nations, but also the position of the word, for the clause “according to their abominations” would not then have intervened, but should have followed the enumeration; and besides also the לְ before כְּנעֲנִי—which would have scarcely an analogy in its favor. Rather לַכְּנַעֲנִי, “belonging to the Canaanites;” briefly=as they were peculiar to the Canaanites, the Hittites, etc. The abominations are designated by this clause as the ancient ones, condemned by the prophets, and especially by Moses, long before; and all the various names of nations are mentioned because the abominations had been so many and so different among the different races. It was not the purpose to give a complete statement, else the Hivites (comp. Exo_3:8; Exo_13:5; Exo_23:23) and also the Girgashites (comp. Deu_7:1) would also have been mentioned.
Ezr_9:2. For they have taken of their daughters, etc.—namely, wives. comp. chap, Ezr_10:44; 2Ch_11:21, etc. The object נָשִׁים is in this connection, to a certain extent, to be understood of itself.—And have mingled themselves as the holy seed with the people of the land.—This has properly the same subject as the foregoing. The following זֶרַע הַקֹּדֶשׁ is to be placed in apposition with the subject, as it seems; that is to say, although they are a new and holy seed, or shoot, which, after the old tree had fallen by the severe judgments of God, was) to grow up into a new and better tree. Since the expression “holy seed” does not occur again elsewhere, it is not doubtful but that there is here a reference back to Isa_6:13. That at least the better part of the people had not yet by any means forgotten the ancient prophets, but preserved them at the present time to strengthen their faith, follows already from Haggai and Zechariah, where the Messianic promise, on the basis of the more ancient prophecy, yet again brought forth the richest flowers.—Yea, the hand of the princes—rulers hath been chief in this trespass.—In this unfaithfulness the princes had been leaders with their bad example, assuming thereby the responsibility, comp. Deu_13:10. מַעַל, properly unfaithfulness (comp. Lev_5:15) is spoken of, in so far as they had abandoned the blessing of the purity of Israel and periled thereby the higher blessings connected therewith. סְגָנִים = commanders, chiefs, is a word passing over from the ancient Persian into the Hebrew, comp. Isa_41:25.
Ezr_9:3. Ezra could not but express the deepest pain at this information, as well as the greatest displeasure, and indeed with the warmth of Oriental manners; none the less that there must be applied a remedy, only to be carried out with difficulty, and occasioning much sorrow. He expressed his grief by rending (tearing) his under and over-garment (comp. Lev_10:6 and Jos_7:6), his displeasure and anger by plucking out the hair of the head and beard (a part of it), comp. Neb. 13:25; that is to say, he hurt himself and disfigured his appearance (comp. Isa_50:6); if he had only been sad, he would have shaved his head; Job_1:20. In this condition he then sat down staring, שָׁמֵם in Piel expresses the being stiff and dull (hence also the being waste), comp. Isa_52:14.
Ezr_9:4. Ezra’s behaviour produced a profound impression upon those who feared God’s word; because of the unfaithfulness ofהַגוֹלָה, the people of God living in captivity Ezra continued his behaviour herein even when they assembled themselves unto him. According to Ezr_10:3 we are not to explain: all who trembled at the word of God on account of the unfaithfulness, etc.; although חָרֵד may be connected with עַל (Isa_66:2, where עַל, indeed=אֶל, in the sense of trembling towards, comp. Isa_66:5), but: all who allowed themselves to be frightened by God’s words, which referred to the unfaithfulness. God is here called the God of Israel because He had in the words in question called for the purity and dignity of Israel.
Ezr_9:5-15. At the time of the evening sacrifice, however, he arose from his mortification—הַּעֲנִית, humiliation, mortification, which had consisted in giving way to sorrow, but had certainly likewise been connected with fasting, and indeed accompanied with the rending of his over or under-garment; that is to say, in that he still continued or repeated the rending—in order now to spread out his hands to God as those who pray usually did (1 Kings 8 :, etc.), publicly uttering a penitential prayer.
Ezr_9:6. This penitential prayer would emphasize throughout what great reasons the congregation had of bewaring of the sins in question. He renders prominent in Ezr_9:6 how great guilt they already had upon them without this, and adds in Ezr_9:7 that sin has been the cause of all the misfortune and misery of Israel. He calls to mind in Ezr_9:9 that God’s grace had preserved only just such a remnant, but by no means had constituted a situation in Which they could dispense with Him. He confesses in Ezr_9:10-12 that God had expressly forbidden the sins now indulged in, and had made nothing less than the strength of the congregation, yea, the very possession of the land, conditional upon their obedience to his command. He then in Ezr_9:13-14 raises the painful and sad question, and draws the inference whether, if after so many chastisements, and after such an exhibition of favor, they should again be guilty of such a transgression of the divine command, whether God would not then really become angry unto their entire destruction. He concludes in Ezr_9:15 with the repenting confession that the Lord is righteous, that the congregation, however, cannot stand before Him. Ezra now prays expressly for forgiveness, as we might expect: he ventures not, he is ashamed, as he himself says, to lift up his face to the Lord. But such a penitential prayer and confession of sin is already in itself a pleading for grace; yea, works more powerfully indeed than a petition expressedly uttered. And, at any rate, it is, just as it is, very well calculated, at the same time, to bring the people to the lively consciousness of the perverseness of their sin.
Ezr_9:6. I am ashamed and blush.—בּוֹשׁ and נִכְלַם are joined together for emphasis, as in Jer_31:10, etc.—For our iniquities are increased over our head.—Occasioned by the transgression under consideration; all sins and transgressions whatever come to the remembrance of Ezra. He who already has so many sins upon him should take very particular care [ lest a new one should be added, especially when one has already been brought into such deep misery by the previous ones. רָבוּ from רָבָה has the same meaning as usually רַבּוּ from רָבַב לְמֲעלָה. = upwards, passes over easily in our author to the adverbial sense of “very abundantly” (comp. 1Ch_29:3), even with רָבָה (comp. 1Ch_23:17), but here in connection with ראשׁ retains its meaning as a preposition = beyond. The iniquities are regarded as a flood in which man soon perishes [comp. Psa_38:4, and the general use of water to indicate great troubles] [our trespasses—unto the haven—comp. 2Ch_28:9; thus the mercy of God is compared in extent with the heavens, vid Psa_36:5; Psa_57:10, etc.—Tr.].
Ezr_9:7. And for our iniquities we have been delivered—into the hands of the kings of the lands to the sword,etc.—To translate, with Bertheau, through the sword, is remote form the sense, and is not suited to the following “into captivity.” the shame is called that of the face because it especially works upon the face, as Dan_9:7.—As this day, namely, teaches or shows; כְּ in connection with הַיּוֹם הַזֶה is not = about or on, but has a comparative force, as also in Jer_44:6; Jer_22:23; 1Sa_22:8. The present teaches the here asserted delivering over, in so far as the congregation was still a גוֹלָה, comp. Ezr_9:4.
Ezr_9:8-9. It is true, the Lord has again allowed His grace to work after His anger, but not so that He could be dispensed with; only through Him has the congregation protection and continuance.—And now a little moment (comp. Isa_26:20) hath been grace from the Lord our God—namely, during the time from Cyrus to the present, which seems short in comparison with the long time of the previous chastisement, especially since the latter had begun already with the Assyrians (comp. Ezr_6:22 and Neh_9:32), and had properly been continued even to the time of Cyrus. Ezra would not so much praise the greatness of the divine grace, as if his thought had been that transgression ought to have been avoided out of thankfulness (for then he would have expressed himself in an entirely different manner), but he would say that the congregation, whatever it might be, was only through grace; and back of this lies the thought that with it they would forfeit their one and all.—To leave us a remnant and to give us a peg in his holy place.—לָנוּ = us, “the people as a whole,” in distinction from which the פְלֵיטָה is the congregation of the returned exiles. The peg,יָתֵד, is to be regarded as one driven into the wall, on which domestic utensils of any kind were hung, comp. Isa_22:23 sq.1 Hence we cannot understand thereby, either with Bertheau, the congregation itself (to make us a peg = a congregation of a reliable stock), or, with Keil, the temple, which is opposed by the words, “in the holy place;” rather “to give any one a peg in a house” (here in the temple, in the holy place) means to give him a part and right in the house, accept him as a coinhabitant in the house. It comes into consideration that God is often regarded as a Householder, and His people, in a similar manner, often as His family, who dwell with Him in His house (comp. Psa_15:1; Psa_23:6; Psa_27:4, etc.). We have an example in Isa_56:5 : I will give them hand and name in my house, where the יָר explained in so many different ways may be simply activity or right to be active, in general to stir one’s self.—That our God might lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage.—The infins. לְהָאִיר and לְתִתֵּנוּ are subordinated to the foregoing infinitives = that he thereby. The subject אֱלֹהֵינוּ appears in an independent position, as especially Isa_5:24; comp. Ewald, § 307, c, because the object עֵינֵינוּ had preceded and intervened between it and the infin. “The eyes enlighten” means to remove the night of trouble and weakness resting upon them, which was, according to that which follows, already indeed a night of death, and indeed by reviving, that is, by bestowing salvation, strength, encouragement, comp. Psa_13:4; Pro_29:13, especially also 1 Samuel 14, 27, 29.—מִחְיָה—preservation of life, or as here, reviving (comp. 2Ch_14:12), is used here for the adjective “revived,” whilst in Ezr_9:9 it retains its abstract meaning. מְעַט is added, without close connection, as Neh_2:12; Neh_7:4. The idea at the basis is, that national ruin is a death of the congregation, and that the re-establishment is an awakening from the dead. This re-establishment was a very incomplete one so long as the dependence on the powers of the world still endured, and the congregation must still be called הַגּוֹלָה. The reference to the prophecies of the prophets is here unmistakable. As the expression “holy seed,” already in Ezr_9:2, so also “leave a remant,” and the expression “peg,” remind us very decidedly of Isaiah, comp. chaps. Isa_1:9; Isa_22:23 sq.; Isa_56:5; the expression “revival” looks back upon Eze_37:1-14, where the figure on which it is based is carried out with great vividness and power. We see that the pious Israelites subsequent to the exile, Ezra before all, attentively took to heart the ancient prophecies of chastisements, and that which should follow them, in order to apply them without doubt to their own times.
Ezr_9:9. And hath extended mercy unto us before the kings of Persia, to give us revival.—The subject of the “giving” is not the Persian kings (Berth., Keil), which is opposed by the previous verse, and also by the fact itself; but God alone, whose it is alone to slay and make alive. It is not necessary, on this account, to make God the subject of the clause: to set up the house of our God, and erect its ruins. This infin. may be subordinated to the foregoing, so that the Jews become the subject = that we, etc. The subject of the last infin. to give us a wall in Judah and Jerusalem, is surely again God, and not one of the Persian kings (Berth. and Keil). The expression “give a wall” leads of itself more to God, for it is naturally to be understood figuratively, and indeed not of the temple, but in the more general sense of the protection which was afforded the congregation in Judah and Jerusalem against their oppressors, comp. Zec_2:5.
Ezr_9:10-12. The transgression here spoken of cannot be excused at all, with the plea, that it was not expressly forbidden.—And now, what shall we say?—for we have forsaken thy commandments,—not: that we have forsaken (Berth. and Keil), which would be weak. Ezra means: I may thus ask, for, etc.
Ezr_9:11 may be translated: thou who, or also, which thou hast commanded by thy servants, the prophets.—Ezra does not mention Moses in particular, but the prophets in general, not because the commands of the Pentateuch were not mediated or written down by Moses alone, but also by other organs, as Delitzsch in his introduction to Genesis supposes;—whether Ezra knew this, is at least very doubtful,—but because his thought is that God by His prophets has given or again enforced the commandments in manifold and oft-repeated ways, comp. Jdg_3:6; 1Ki_11:2. When a truth is under consideration, which is not represented by one prophet, but more or less by all, then it is usual to cite in general, as the author of the book of Kings also does. Moses is meant at any rate, yea chiefly. And this explains the fact that Ezra states the command, not it is true verbally from a passage in the Pentateuch, but yet formularized in a manner only appropriate to the Mosaic period, when they still had to take possession of Canaan. He has in mind before all Deu_7:1-3, as there also the entire manner of expression is undeniably that of Deuteronomy, but he draws into consideration, in a free manner, other passages, and indeed even from Leviticus, comp. especially Lev_18:24 sq. נִדָּה, the abominable, for which in Lev. only טֻמְאָה and תּוֹעֵבוֹת occur, is used in the Pentateuch of the impurity of the issues of blood in women, only subsequently by the prophets of other impurities likewise, especially also of ethical impurities (comp. 1Sa_1:17; Eze_7:20; Eze_36:17). It is preferred to its synonyms as an especially strong expression. מִפֶּה אֶל־פֶּה, does not mean, certainly: from side to side (Keil), or from one end to another (Berth., A. V.); for neither the one nor the other meaning has been proved, or etymologically established for פֶּה. In Isa_19:7 it is either the mouth, or the bed of the Nile (later in distinction from the bank, as the שָׂפָּה). פֶה is easily the equivalent of person, from person to person, is, however = on or in all persons,=throughout and everywhere. Comp. פֶּה לָפֶּה, 2Ki_10:21; 2Ki_21:16. It is worthy of attention, of course, that this method of expression only occurs of objects which hold men, of land, house and city, or of men themselves.
Ezr_9:12. Nor seek their peace nor their wealth forever.—These words are from Deu_23:7, where this is said with reference to the Moabites and Ammonites. It almost seems as if Ezra would have justified from the very letter of the law by this citation, his extension of the prohibition of intermarriage to the Moabites and Ammonites. The clause, that ye may be strong, reminds us of Deu_11:8; the next clause, and eat the good of the land, of Isa_1:19; the last clause, however: and possess it, or take possession of it for your children for ever, which does not occur in the Pentateuch in this form, rests on the promise that is often repeated, especially in Deuteronomy, that in case of obedience they would live long in the land that the Lord gave them. הוֹרִישׁ means here not give into possession (Berth., Keil), for then it must govern the double accusative (comp. Jdg_11:34; 2Ch_20:11), but “take into possession, possess.” For the children, posterity, that is, permanently.
Ezr_9:13-14. Thus there can be no question but that the new transgression is to be decidedly condemned. This follows, as well from the punishment for previous sins, as from the way of pardon.—And after all that is come upon us for our evil deeds, and for our great trespass.—The article before בָּא properly represents the relative, as Ezr_8:25; Ezr_10:14; Ezr_10:17; for בָּא cannot well be a participle; as such it would be in the plural. The continuation of this clause does not occur already in the second half of the ver. (Berth.); in this case the following כִּי would have to be taken in the sense of, in truth (after all, in truth hast Thou, our God, spared us), then Ezr_9:14 would be in too little connection; it would not appear that two kinds of things, that as well punishment as forgiveness formed the foundation of Ezr_9:14. Rather the second half of the verse verifies the thought, which is involved in the first, that the guilt was very great, and that it properly would have deserved still severer punishment, and thus entirely prepares the way for Ezr_9:14. Its sense is, at any rate, that the punishment has been less than the transgression. The words might mean: For thou, our God, hast restrained a part of our sins from below, so that they (namely, through their consequences, the visitations of punishment) have not gone entirely over our head, have not utterly ruined us; for there is no objection to taking מֵעֲוֹנֵנוּ partitively. Already Esdras has thus: ὁ κουφίσας τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν. In favor of this view is the fact that in this way לְמַטָֹּה would come into contrast with לְמַעֲלָה in Ezr_9:6, in which it is also found elsewhere, Jer_31:37. At all events, however, we may likewise explain: Thou hast restrained Thine anger or Thy punishment below the measure of our misdeeds, so that the punishment has not been as great as our misdeeds deserved (so J. H. Mich., Gesen., and Keil). לְמַטָּה, indeed, is nowhere else found with מִן, but perhaps only for the reason that it nowhere else is followed by a noun of closer definition.מִן follows, at least, the corresponding לְמַעֲלָה, 1Ch_29:3; the synonymous מִתַּחַת has usually לְ after it.
Ezr_9:14. Then should we again break thy commandments, and unite ourselves in marriage with, etc.—This question appeals to the general sentiment, and serves to emphasize very strongly the blamableness of the new transgression.—Wouldst thou not be angry with us, even to destruction?—עַד־כַּלֵּה, as 2Ki_13:17; 2Ki_13:19.
Ezr_9:15. Lord God of Israel, thou art righteous.—This concluding and confirming confession would not say: Thou art a severe judge, and must interfere against the congregation on account of its decline (Bertheau and Keil). The usual meaning of צַדִּיק (graciously righteous), is against this, and then also the following clause, “for we have remained over as an escaped remnant,” which is not = we have remained over merely as escaped, but: we have not been utterly ruined. Rather Ezra would say, that no one can reproach God for not doing all that could be expected.—Behold, we are before thee in our trespasses, etc.—This, the second half of the verse, constitutes a very suitable and logically conclusive antithesis to the foregoing. The more blameless God is the more deserving of punishment Israel’s guilt. The yodh in בְּאַשְׁמָתֵינוּ is found in the edition of R. Norzi and J. H. Mich.; but is missing in some MSS., and the pointing corresponds with the latter. Both methods of writing might in this case easily go on alongside of one another; the singular would be favored by Ezr_9:13, but the plural corresponds with the full-toned style of Ezra.—[We cannot stand before thee,e.g., as thy holy people, who are privileged to stand before their king.—Tr.]—Because of this.עַל־זֹאת = with this new evil deed.
thoughts upon the history of redemption
Ezr_9:1 to Ezr_3:1. If we act upon the supposition that the sacred Scriptures, even the Old Testament already, are to give us warning, exhortation, and instruction with reference to every situation and question of church, civil, or domestic life, yea, that the Old Testament very particularly comes into consideration for the details of life, it is natural that we should find in the opposition that Ezra makes in chapters 9 and 10 to intermarriage with the heathen, a warning or exhortation with reference to intermarriage with those of a different faith from our own. And in fact that which may be urged against such an application, e.g., that as Christians we rejoice in a greater liberty than the Jews; that mixed marriages have not been forbidden of themselves and under all circumstances, that the Christian church is never threatened with as great dangers as the Jewish congregation in the time of Ezra, that besides the piety of the Christian has a mightier protection and help than the religion of the Old Testament pious—all this is outweighed by the opposing facts. The wife is now on a greater equality with the husband than in ancient times, has a greater influence upon the man himself, as well as in the training of the children, may thus easily become more dangerous. Besides Christianity is much more internal and deep than Old Testament piety, more influential upon the heart and disposition upon all sides, and hence comes much more into consideration with reference to the married life, that rests upon internal communion. It is true there is very seldom in the mixed marriages of our times a question respecting the difference of religion; usually it is only respecting a difference in the confession of faith, or a different degree of vitality of Christian religiousness—and to place marriages of this kind on the same basis as those intermarriages with the heathen would be premature, yea unfair. Heathendom stood in an essential and indeed very positive contrast to Judaism. The different Christian confessions, on the other hand, have the essential things in common with one another. And between those which are distinguished merely by the degree of the vitality of their Christian religiousness, there is often no positive contrast at all; the less vital Christianity may be awakened and strengthened, especially if treated with love. But we must always recognise and take to heart, with reference to Ezra and his behaviour, the fact, that in the conclusion and conduction of a marriage those considerations which have respect to the interests of religion are more important than all others, and therefore a difference of confession, which threatens not to promote but diminish religious ardor, according to the nature of the case, which besides constantly disturbs or of itself renders impossible the internal living together in the highest and holiest spheres, which then likewise has so much that is unendurable with reference to the training of children, and involves so many difficulties; that likewise in the same manner, a lack of any religious faith, that places itself in open conflict with Christianity, that more earnestly considered, is to be regarded as a positively different religion, or wanders into scornfulness and frivolity,—these ought to be real hinderances to marriage for all Christians. As regards the lack of faith, of the kind here referred to, which manifestly must be placed on the same footing at least with heathenism, the apostle did not allow (1Co_7:12-13) that a Christian brother should marry an unbelieving wife, or the reverse, but only that he should retain her if he once had her. That a brother should marry an unbelieving (heathen) wife, he seems not to have regarded as at all possible. With reference to marriage with an unbeliever, we are to take to heart what he says in the subsequent context (1Co_9:16), What knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband, or what knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
2. The question how the congregation was to act towards others of a different faith, was now to be answered for the second time. It is not easy, with reference to this matter, to do exactly the right thing; for Christians, who more decidedly have the task of winning others for their faith, thus in no way should shut themselves off from them, it is still less easy than for the Israelites. But since all depends upon imparting to the others the best that we have, it follows that we must draw back, when this is impossible, especially if we incur the danger of losing this best thing ourselves. Under all circumstances it is self-evident that we should only cherish such an association as we can ever withdraw from if necessary.
3. No error is so conspicuous in the new congregation as that of intermarriage with the heathen. Not only Ezra but Nehemiah had still to contend with it (Neh_10:31; Neh_13:23 sq.), and as the princes, so indeed had the sons of the high-priests taken part in it (comp. Ezr_10:18). Without doubt there was a reason in the circumstances themselves. Usually new tasks are imposed as well upon the congregation as a whole, as also upon the individuals in the new relations. A new end is to be attained, and the difficulty of striving after this in the right manner often involves the temptation of approaching it in a false way. The task of the new congregation was to assume such a relation to the neighboring nations from whom they were no longer separated by political boundaries, as that they might ever be in the position in the fulness of time for fulfilling their missionary calling with reference to them. Accordingly the history itself urged onwards to a sort of approximation. Notwithstanding this, however, the institution of false relations, which could only render the accomplishment of their mission impossible, had no excuse.
4. Having lost their political independence, and reduced to a small number, the congregation, even their leaders or princes might have come upon the thought that it was not only allowable, but indeed was advisable, to enter into, closer relations with the heathen, who now were separated from them by so very little. They might have hoped that their people, on the basis of such a connection, might exercise a good influence with reference to religion and morals, and in consequence of this the congregation would gain the desirable increase; yet this error would not have been possible, if they had had the true singleness of heart towards the divine command. By the lack of this singleness, those who ought to have been to the rest of the congregation guides to good, became guides to evil. Ezra on his part, who did not lack this singleness, recognised in these very circumstances, with which the princes might justify the transgression under consideration, grounds for just the contrary, for a still more careful separation from the heathen. In fact, just because the congregation were without the protection of a political independence, because moreover they had become weak and despised on account of their small numbers, there was scarcely a doubt that the heathen, instead of allowing themselves to be influenced by the Israelites, would have become the influential factor for them, and they would have jeopardized the very existence of the congregation itself.
5. In a similar manner, as after other great judgments, as, for example, after the deluge, it became manifest after the exile likewise that the delivered, however excellent they proved to be at first, were unable to constitute a really new beginning, which should be pure and sinless, but ever only a continuation of the ancient sinful existence; that there was now no more sinless development, that rather sin breaks forth in new forms in the new relations which have been established by the judging and preserving providence of God, so that it needs ever anew a holy reaction against it on the part of the Lord. Nevertheless, of course, the judging and preserving acts of the Lord are not in vain. The congregation advances through them forwards, if not to a pure, yet to a better development, and their course, even if it is never that of a conqueror who has entirely overcome his hereditary enemy, is yet that of a victorious warrior, who at least beholds the complete victory and its noble prize at the end of his course. Nevertheless, the circumstance that among the princes many recognised the wrong as such, and sought to remove it with the help of Ezra, is a proof that the Lord at this time had provided a number of a better element, who already not only constituted a starting-point for His reaction, but also themselves began to react out of their own midst.
Ezr_9:5-15. 1. Before Ezra did anything else he expressed his sorrow for the failure of the congregation from the word of God, and indeed particularly by a penitential prayer, in which he included himself most devoutly within the congregation which had transgressed. The first thing with which to begin a true reformation will ever be the feeling of penitence, and in accordance with this a penitential prayer, which issues from the deepest conviction that we are involved in the sinfulness of the congregation, and which has to share in the fear of the threatening judgments, which, however, none the less manifests; the sharpest contrast to the sin in question. Such a penitential prayer, especially if it is connected with an humble recognition of the justice of the judgment that is feared, already has also the significance of a prayer for forgiveness, help, and preservation, just as the praise of the Lord as the God who hears prayer, affords redemption and salvation, at the beginning of those very Psalms, that are prayed out of deep need, and run out into a petition for redemption and salvation, is itself already a mighty petition, which in spite of every necessity joyfully praising God, is able without doubt to most powerfully move His paternal heart.
2. Ezra’s prayer very suitably unites various things, which must fill us with holy abhorrence of fresh transgressions after redemption; he reminds us at first of the fact that we are deeply involved in sin from our fathers, we might say, already by nature, and thus can not be too much on our guard against it, and at the same time, that it is our sins that have brought about the misery in which we all more or less live; so then that God has given us grace which certainly appears exceedingly great over against our sins and unworthiness, so that it must fill us with thankfulness and urge us to sanctification, which, however, over against the necessities of earth, is a small beginning of better things, easily lost again; furthermore, that the sin, that we might perchance be guilty of, is against God’s express command, and can never be justified; that God’s visitation of punishment, if we are not warned by His punishment or by His grace unto holiness, must necessarily become greater and more serious. These truths will have a preserving and improving power for the congregation of all times.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Ezr_9:1-2. We have the duty of keeping afar off from others. 1) When? If we can exercise no improving influence, but have to fear lest we be ruined with them. 2) Why ? because we have to preserve great blessings for ourselves and others. 3) How? with renunciation of temporal advantages, especially with self-denial.—The importance of a correct choice in marriage: 1) the injury that is done by a bad choice; it is not only temporal, but eternal; 2) the gain that we have in a good choice.—Starke: Marriage with an unbelieving woman is very dangerous, for she can convert a man easier than the man can convert her, 1Ki_10:4.—What other injuries unequal marriage may accomplish, vid. 2Ch_18:1.—The importance of true family life for the furtherance of church life: 1) Church life is a matter of the free resolution, which must be correctly guided by proper training; 2) church life is conditioned upon learning its advantages, as this is possible, first of all, only in the bosom of the family.
Ezr_9:5-15. The fundamental principles of true reformatory activity: 1) True simplicity of heart,—we must not allow ourselves to be led astray by the temptations that are often involved with sufficient strength in the relations given by God Himself; we must rather gladly and without reserve bow to the divine word; 2) true sorrow for the present transgressions, however difficult they may be to remove, they must yet be recognized seriously in their true character; 3) true fear of the divine judgment—it is a bitter, but indispensable medicine for the destructive wanderings from duty.—Brentius: Exprimitur affectus pietatis, qui in unoquoque debet geri erga proximum suum, videlicet quod unusquisque non debet aliter affici erga peccata proximi sui, quam si ipse ea perpetrasset. Sic affectus erat Abraham, erga Sodomitas, sic Samuel erga Saul, sic Daniel erga populum Judaicum. Et hic affectus multorum bonorum autor est, videlicet ne traducamus proximum nostrum, sed oremus pro eo, et castigemus eum, pro officio nostro.—Starke: Pious people laugh not at the sins of others, but are sad at heart on their account, Jeremiah 9; Gen_18:23; 2Sa_15:35; 2Co_11:29.—How inexcusable are the fresh transgressions of those who have been redeemed from the misery of sin. 1) Sin has already wrought misery enough. 2) God has shown His grace in delivering from it, which is exceedingly great, but may easily be lost again. 3) He has let us know His will. 4) His visitation of punishment will be still more severe.—Starke: The strongest walls and the surest fence about a city and village is God’s gracious care, Psa_3:4-7; Pro_18:10.—By the wickedness of the inhabitants is a land defiled; accordingly let us beware of sin. In the judgments of God we have to recognize His moderation, and thank God for it.—The true penitential prayer: 1) Recognition of sin in its entire greatness and ruin: 2) recognition of the divine grace; 3) recognition of the cleanness of the divine will; 4) recognition of the justice of the judgment to be feared.—Intercession of pastors for their congregations: 1) Out of love in spite of sin; 2) in faith in God’s grace; 3) in hope of a hearing.—Starke: Since Ezra in his prayer sets before him the entire people, he includes himself among them and accepts his share in the sins of the people, comp. Isaiah 59; Dan_9:5; Neh_1:6.—Teachers should particularly stand in the gap and seek to ward off the punishment of God by prayer. We often know not for the sake of what believer’s prayer God has spared a people and city.
[Scott: Silent grief and astonishment sometimes form the most expressive protestation against enormous crimes; and when men speak on such occasions it may be more effectual to address themselves to God than to the offender.—Henry: A practical disbelief of God’s all-sufficiency is at the bottom of all the sorry shifts we make to help ourselves.—The scandalous sins of professors are what we have reason to be astonished at.—An eye to God as our God will be of great use to us in the exercise of repentance.—There is not a surer or sadder presage of ruin to any people than revolting to sin, to the same sins again after great judgments and great deliverances.—Wordsworth: Observe, this confession and prayer of Ezra, the priest and scribe, the friend of the king of Persia, was in a public place, at a time of public resort to the temple. He was not ashamed of repentance and self-humiliation, and he showed publicly that his trust was in God’s help, vouchsafed to fervent prayer at the door of God’s house.—Tr.]
Footnotes:
[1][Rawlinson in loco thinks of the tent pin, which is driven into the earth to make the tent firm and secure, Isa_22:23; Isa_22:25.—Tr.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv3–5 when I heard this thing, I rent my garment…
when I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, &c.--the outer and inner garment, which was a token not only of great grief, but of dread at the same time of the divine wrath;
plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard--which was a still more significant sign of overpowering grief.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15 ISRAEL’S SIN OF HEATHEN INTERMARRIAGE MADE KNOWN TO EZRA,…
ISRAEL’S SIN OF HEATHEN INTERMARRIAGE MADE KNOWN TO EZRA, Ezr_9:1-2.
1. When these things were done — Namely, the treasures delivered, the burnt offerings offered, and the king’s commissions handed to the satraps and governors, as stated Ezr_8:33-36.
Read full note →
The princes — Certain distinguished and godly men among the chiefs of the new community at Jerusalem. Not all the princes came, for some were implicated in the trespass here confessed. Ezr_9:2.
People… priests… Levites — All classes were involved, even the ministers of the temple, who, above all, should have kept themselves pure. Nor were the rulers and princes clear, as the next verse shows.
Not separated themselves from the people of the lands — The people of the lands are the idolatrous nations in and about Palestine, named in this verse. With these nations, which were not extinct, but abode still in large numbers in various parts of the country, the returned exiles had largely mixed themselves. At the passover, held immediately after the feast of dedication, (Ezr_6:19-22,) a number joined the new community from “such as had separated themselves from the filthiness of the heathen of the land,” (Ezr_6:21,) — apparently Israelites who had not gone into exile, but, being left in the land, had intermarried with their heathen neighbours, and being without temple, priests, or worship, had gradually lost the knowledge and worship of Jehovah. These seem to have corrupted many of the Jews who had returned from exile, and during the half century or more from that time until Ezra’s arrival, this evil leaven had been spreading through the whole community. Not all the people were guilty, but the evil had affected all classes, and the commandments of the law forbidding intermarriage with these heathen nations (Exo_34:12-16; Deu_7:1-3) seem to have been forgotten, or else utterly ignored by even the leaders of the people.
Their abominations — Their idolatrous practices. On the strictly Canaanitish nations here mentioned, see note on Jos_3:10. The Ammonites and Moabites, whose country was east of the Jordan, had at different times long before this corrupted Israel with their abominations. Num_25:1; Jdg_10:6. The wars between Persia and Egypt had, doubtless, brought many Egyptians into contact with the Jews, and from the time of Solomon’s marriage with Pharaoh’s daughter (1Ki_3:1) the Egyptians had mingled more or less with the Israelites.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv1–15 Commencement of the Religious Reform
Commencement of the Religious Reform
Chap. Ezr_9:1-4. The Sin of the People
Read full note →
1. Now when these things were done] Cf. 2Ch_31:1. A very indefinite note of time. We have two dates given by which we can conjecture the length of the interval that had occurred since the events narrated at the close of the previous chapter. (1) The sacred gifts had been handed over to the care of the priests and Levites on the 4th day of the fifth month, ch. Ezr_7:8, Ezr_8:33. (2) The summons for the general assembly, convened to enquire into the people’s sin was sent out on the 27th date of the ninth month, ch. Ezr_10:8-9.—On the one hand, it is said, not very much time could have elapsed since Ezra’s arrival; for otherwise neither the subject of the complaint could have escaped his observation, nor the information have affected him with such astonishment. On the other hand, if, as is likely, the mention of ‘these things’ refers to the communication of the king’s commissions to the neighbouring satraps and governors, Ezra himself may at first have been occupied in these trans actions and perhaps have been absent from Jerusalem, attending in person at the courts of the local governors, to claim the Jewish privileges and exemptions. Furthermore Ezra would have made his ground secure with the princes of the people (Ezr_10:6), before proceeding to meet the question that had arisen with strong measures.
We therefore conjecture that the report of ‘the princes’ described in this verse was made about four months after the events described in ch. Ezr_8:31-35, and a week or two before the summons of the general assembly.
the princes] the leaders of the people, the chiefs of the fathers’ houses. The term does not mean the whole number, but rather representatives of the class. Many princes were implicated in the charge.
came to me] R.V. drew near unto me: more literally.
The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites] The three divisions of the Jewish settlement. ‘The people, namely Israel’ are the laity as distinguished from the priests and Levites. See Ezr_6:16, Ezr_7:13.
have not separated themselves] The explanation is given in Ezr_9:2. Compare also Ezr_6:21, ‘all such as had separated themselves unto them from the filthiness of the heathen of the land’. Idolatry was the inevitable evil attendant upon the mixed marriages with the heathen.
from the people of the lands] R.V. from the peoples of the lands—referring especially to the heathen of the neighbouring countries. See note on Ezr_6:21.
doing according to their abominations] The phrase ‘the abominations of the heathen’ (haggôyyim) is very familiar. Deu_18:9 : 1Ki_14:24 : 2Ki_16:3; 2Ki_21:2 : 2Ch_28:3; 2Ch_33:2; 2Ch_36:14. ‘The heathen’, thus usually found in connexion with this phrase, can hardly differ from ‘the peoples of the lands’. Their ‘abominations’, which primarily referred to the immoralities of their nature worship, are here associated with the mixed marriages, since the foreign wives introduced impure forms of worship among the Israelites. Others render ‘in respect of their abominations’.
even of the Canaanites &c.] The Hebrew preposition is better here rendered as expressing identification = ‘even’, ‘namely’ &c. than comparison = ‘according to’ (the abominations of). The eight nationalities here mentioned exemplify the possibilities of contamination from intercourse with ‘the peoples’. They differ therefore from the list of nations whose conquered territory the Israelites were to possess. Five in Exo_13:5, Canaanite, Hittite, Amorite, Hivite, Jebusite: six are named in Exo_3:8; Deu_20:17; Jos_9:1; Jos_12:8, Canaanite, Hittite, Amorite, Perizzite, Hivite, Jebusite: seven in Deu_7:1; Jos_3:10; Jos_24:11, Hittite, Girgashite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, Jebusite. Of the seven names occurring in these lists, two i.e. the Hivite and the Girgashite are not here mentioned. Three others are inserted, the Ammonite, the Moabite, and the Egyptian. (In the parallel passage of 1Es_8:69 ‘the Ammonites’ are omitted, and ‘the Edomites’ substituted for ‘the Amorites’—a change indicating the later date of this composition.) The position of the Ammonites, Moabites and Egyptians between the Jebusites and the Amorites is strange. But the list so far as it refers to contemporaneous influences, is illustrative rather than exhaustive of ‘peoples’ (a) not driven out of Palestine, (b) dwelling on the frontier of Israel. It combines typical names, familiar in the lists of the early writings of this people, with those of countries which were the chief source of more recent corruption.
The mention of the Ammonite, Moabite, and Egyptian together suggest the influence of Deu_23:3-7.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv1, 5 (1) Now when these things were done.—The remainder of…
IX.
(1) Now when these things were done.—The remainder of the book is occupied with the execution of Ezra’s function as a moral reformer. One chief disorder is mentioned, that of the mixed marriages (Ezr_9:2), which the new lawgiver evidently regarded as fatal to the purity of the Divine service, and to the design of God in separating for a season this peculiar people.
Read full note →
(1-4) The report of the abuse of mixed marriages is formally brought before Ezra.
(1) The princes—Heads of tribes, native rulers of Jerusalem, as distinguished from the satraps and governors. Zerubbabel’s office had no successor; and the term princes expressed rather their eminence than their authority, which had been powerless to check the abuses they complain of.
Doing according to their abominations.—Rather, as it regards their abominations. They are not charged with abandonment to idolatry, but with that peculiar laxity which appears in the sequel.
The Ammonites.—It is remarkable that all the ancient proscribed races are mentioned, and not the specific nations by the names of which the Samaritans were known, as if to make the case as hateful as possible. At the same time, many of these races still lingered in the neighbourhood of Judæa.
(2) The holy seed.—The “holy nation” or “peculiar people” of Exo_19:6 is called the “holy seed” by Isaiah (Ezr_6:13), with reference to its being preserved and kept holy amidst judgments; and here the same term is used with reference to its desecration by being made common among the nations.
The princes and rulers.—The upper classes, whether priests and Levites or laymen.
This trespass.—There is no question as to the unlawfulness of these intermarriages, nor any palliation on account of necessity. The rulers report it, and Ezra receives the report as evidence that the whole purpose of God with regard to the people was, at the very outset of their new economy, in course of being defeated by the guilt of the heads of Israel. Their delinquency as such is admitted on all hands.
(3) I rent my garment and my mantle.—The actions of Ezra betoken his horror and grief. But both the rending of the outer and inner garment and the plucking the hair were symbolical acts, teaching their lesson to the people who witnessed, and, as we see, were deeply impressed.
(4) Trembled.—In fear of the Divine judgments.
Transgression of those that had been carried away.—The usual name of the people at this time. During their captivity, however, they had not been thus guilty. It was the aggravation of their guilt that they committed the trespass now.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15 IN the interval between Zerubbabel"s rule and the coming…
IN the interval between Zerubbabel"s rule and the coming of Ezra from Babylon with a special commission appointing him governor of Judaea, the Jews seem to have been left without any strong controlling authority. The civil administration devolved upon a certain number of chiefs or "princes," who maintained order in Jerusalem, collected and remitted the tribute due to the Persian crown, and held courts to decide all causes, criminal and civil, in which only Jews were concerned. Tranquillity and order were sufficiently maintained in this way; but the governing power was weak, and in matters outside the range of the civil and criminal law men did pretty nearly "as it seemed good in their own eyes." During this interval of governmental debility, it appears that a fusion had begun between the Jews and the neighbouring nations. Although the law of Moses distinctly forbade intermarriage between the people of God and the idolatrous nations whose land they had inherited, and by implication forbade such unions with any neighbouring idolaters, the newly-returned Israelites, perhaps not fully provided with women of their own nation and religion, had taken to themselves wives freely from the idolatrous tribes and nations in their vicinity. They had intermarried with the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Amorites, the Egyptians, and even with the remnant of the Canaanites. Not only had this been done by the common people, but "the hand of the princes and rulers" had been "chief in this trespass". (Ezr_9:2) Nor had even the sacerdotal order kept itself pure. Priests and Levites, nay, the actual sons and nephews of the high priest Jeshua himself, were guilty in the matter, (Ezr_10:18) had taken to themselves wives of the accursed races, and "mingled themselves with the people of the lands". (Ezr_9:2) The danger to purity of religion was great. Those who married idolatrous wives were tempted, like Solomon, to connive at their introducing unhallowed rites into the holy city; while the issue of such marriages, influenced by their mothers, were apt to prefer heathenism to Judaism, and to fall away from the faith altogether. A fusion of the Jews with the Gentiles in Palestine at this time would have meant a complete obliteration of the Jews, who would have been absorbed and swallowed up in the far larger mass of the heathen without materially affecting it. Thus God"s purpose in singling out a "peculiar people" would have been frustrated, and the world left without a regenerating element. Considerations of this kind help us to understand the horror of Ezra when he understood what had taken place, (Ezr_9:3-6 Ezr_10:1) and enable us to estimate at its right value the zeal that he displayed in putting down the existing practice and establishing a better order of things. His task was lightened to him by the fact that a large religious and patriotic party rallied to him, and associated itself with his reforms; a party including many of the princes and elders, (Ezr_9:1 Ezr_10:8) and no doubt a certain number of the priests. He effected his reform by means of a commission of laymen, (Ezr_10:16) which in the space of little more than three months inquired into all the suspected cases, and compelled every person who had married an idolatrous wife to divorce her, and send her back, with any children that she had borne him, to her own people. Thus, for the time, the corruption was effectually checked, the evil rooted out and removed. We shall find, however, in Nehemiah, that it recurred in Neh_13:23 in combination with various other abuses, and had to be once more resisted and repressed by the civil power (ibid. ver. 30). This section is divisible into ten parts:
1. The complaint made by the princes to Ezra concerning the mixed marriages; (Ezr_9:1, Ezr_9:2)
Read full note →
2. Ezra"s astonishment and horror (ibid. vers. 3, 4);
3. His confession and prayer to God (ibid. vers. 5-15);
4. Repentance of the people, and covenant sworn to, on the recommendation of Shechaniah; (Ezr_10:1-5)
5. Ezra"s fast (ibid. ver. 6);
6. Proclamation summoning all the Jews to Jerusalem (ibid. vers. 7-9);
7. Address of Ezra, and consent of the people to put away the strange wives (ibid. vers. 10-14);
8. Opposition of Jonathan and others (ibid. ver. 15);
9. Accomplishment of the work (ibid. vers. 16, 17); and
10. Names of those who had married strange wives (ibid. vers. 18-44).
COMPLAINT OF THE PRINCES TO EZRA. (Ezr_9:1, Ezr_9:2) It is remarkable that complaint on a matter of religious transgression should have come from the secular, and not from the ecclesiastical, authorities of the city. But there clearly appears about this time some remissness and connivance at evil, if not even participation in it, on the part of the chief ecclesiastics. On this particular occasion, actual sons and nephews of Jeshua the high priest were among those who had married idolatrous wives, (Ezr_10:18) and afterwards, in Nehemiah"s time, not only did the high priest"s family indulge in similar alliances in Neh_13:4, Neh_13:28) but Eliashib actually assigned to one of the heathen, and one who was a bitter opponent of Nehemiah, a chamber in the temple itself (ibid. vers. 5, 9). When the heads of the sacerdotal order were themselves implicated in the abuses prevalent, it was perhaps not unnatural, though highly reprehensible, that the inferior clergy should be silent and stand aloof. By God"s good providence, however, it often happens that when things have come to this pass, and the priestly order is hopelessly corrupt, godly princes are raised up to take in hand religious reforms and carry them to a successful issue.
When these things were done. It must have been some considerable time afterwards. Ezra reached Jerusalem on the first day of the fifth month, (Ezr_7:9) rested three days, (Ezr_8:32) and on the fourth day of the same month made over the vessels to the temple authorities. It was not till the seventeenth day of the ninth month that, on Ezra"s motion, the matter of the mixed marriages was taken in hand. (Ezr_10:8, Ezr_10:9) Yet we cannot suppose that action was long delayed after the matter came to Ezra"s knowledge. The princes. The civil heads of the community, whom Ezra found at the head of affairs on his arrival, and whose authority he did not wholly supersede. (see Ezr_10:14, Ezr_10:16) The people of the lands. The idolatrous nations inhabiting the districts adjoining Palestine: Egyptians and Amorites on the south; Moabites and Ammonites on the east; Canaanites probably towards the north and the north-west. Doing according to their abominations. Rather, "in respect of their abominations." The complaint was not so much that the Jews had as yet actually adopted idolatrous functions, as that they did not keep themselves wholly aloof from them. The foreign wives would introduce idolatrous rites into their very houses.
Vers. 1-4.
An astounding discovery.
The previous chapter ended with every appearance of peace. The people already at Jerusalem, the new arrivals, the Persian authorities, seemed all of one mind. So far as the house and worship of Jehovah were concerned, and, therefore, so far as the welfare and prosperity of the returned remnant were concerned, there did not appear to be a cloud in the sky. But we have hardly begun this next chapter before we are in the midst of a storm. On the one side we hear the language of agitation and distress. On the other we see the silence of consternation and awe. Rightly to appreciate either we must dwell upon both. Let us ask
(1) What was the origin of this cry of distress;
(2) what its exact nature;
(3) what its immediate results.
I THE ORIGIN OF THE CRY. This was traceable, we believe, in large measure, to Ezra"s own arrival and influence. He had come to Jerusalem avowedly (see Ezr_7:25) for the purpose of giving instruction, and, where need was, of administering correction, in regard to that Law of Moses which he had studied so well. As we read the story, he had now been something more than three months in the holy city. (comp. Ezr_7:9, and Ezr_10:8, Ezr_10:9) During that time he certainly had not been silent as to the commands of that Law; but had doubtless both explained and enforced its directions and warnings with a clearness and force that made it in those comparatively book-less days almost a new thing in Jerusalem. Consider all that is implied in this connection in Neh_8:8. In the case of many of the inhabitants of Jerusalem this would have a twofold effect. It would at once enlighten their understanding (Rom_3:20; Rom_7:7) and arouse their fears. (2Ch_34:19-21) In proportion, also, as his work in these respects was made effectual by God"s blessing, in the same proportion would they be led to think and feel thus, not only about such open sins as Ezra might denounce by name, but also about any other offences which, from his position as a new-comer or other causes, might be known to themselves, but not to him. Violations of God"s law in connection with the peculiar privacy of domestic life in the East would be sins of this kind. It would be very difficult for Ezra, merely by seeing the heads of households in public, to know who might be found connected with them in the women"s apartments at home. Nor would he even learn this probably, in many cases, by seeing such men in their homes, as he would seldom, if ever, see the women themselves. (see Gen_18:9, and comp. "bring forth" in the margin of ch. 10:3) On the other hand, amongst those who listened to him there would be many who, as resident in Jerusalem from their birth, and not hitherto separated from others as Ezra was by position and character, might be perfectly well aware of what was thus unknown to himself. Such appears to have been the case. Some of his hearers knew of many marriages in Israel at large which they now found from his teaching, or else now felt more strongly than previously, to be contrary to God"s law. Such men would naturally begin to speak of these things to others like-minded, and afterwards would resolve with them unitedly on bringing the subject before their teacher. It is thus, apparently, that we find them speaking to him as in vers. 1, 2 of this chapter. Ezra had influenced them to such an extent that they could not help informing him about all. (comp. Act_19:18) That was clearly the first step. What steps should be taken afterwards they would learn from himself.
II THE CHARACTER OF THEIR CRY. In their way also of confessing the facts of the case to Ezra there is much to be noticed. We find, for example, that in speaking of the sin of these mixed marriages they acknowledge
1. Its national bearing. "The people the priests and the Levites the whole people, i.e. , including even those who ought to have been furthest from such a transgression, have been concerned in this evil. Either by example, in short, or else by connivance, we are all guilty in this respect.
2. Its intrinsic wickedness. Wherein and why were they bound to be separated from the neighbouring tribes? In respect of the "abominations" practised by them, and because of the exceeding danger to the Israelites themselves of pollution thereby. This may be the reason why they make mention here of three other nations (viz., Ammon, Moab, and Egypt) besides those Canaanitish nations which are expressly mentioned in that part of the Law referred to. In their then present critical and struggling condition there was similar danger to them from these quarters as well (Lange). From all those who "hated God". (see 2Ch_19:2) they rightly felt that they ought to be separated in such times as theirs.
3. Its deadly character. Instead of being thus "separated" from these dangerous neighbours, they had become united with them, in many cases, in the most intimate possible way, viz., by admitting the daughters of these idolaters to be the mothers and teachers of the Israel of the future, to the utter corruption in two ways of the "holy seed". (see Isa_6:13) ofGod"s people.
4. Its special aggravations. The very hands which "bare the sword", (Rom_13:4) and ought to have "restrained" and prevented this evil, were those stained by it most. "The princes and rulers" have been "chief in this trespass.
III The IMMEDIATE RESULTS of this unsparing confession. These appear to have been even more serious than the princes had expected.
1. On Ezra himself. What depth of grief as evidenced by the violent rending of both his outer and inner garment (vers. 3 and 5), more even than we read of in the case of Job (Job_1:20) after losing all his substance, and all his children as well. What depth of indignation as shown by the sudden injury done to himself, as it were, for being identified with such a nation (comp. somewhat similar case in. (Neh_13:25) What utter bewilderment and terror, sitting down in silence as one "stunned" and confounded, not knowing, in such circumstances, what to do or even to say. Nay, one had almost said, what despair so remaining, as in a kind of ecstasy, till all who truly sympathised with him in Jerusalem had heard of his grief and come to him.
2. On Ezras friends. What a picture of them is here presented to us. All "trembling" like Ezra himself. All silent, like Job"s friends, when first they came to him and beheld his grief. (Job_2:13) There are occasions when silence says most. It does so when it proclaims a sorrow to be too overwhelming to allow of speech. In such silence that afternoon passed, till the hour for the evening sacrifice had arrived, and the usual preparations were being made for its solemn observance. But not till that sacrifice spoke to them, as it were, like a voice from heaven was any other voice heard.
See, in conclusion, from this passage
1. How wide the grasp of God"s law. Even as given in a written form, and with a peculiar minuteness of specification, in the Pentateuch, we see that it was rather a thing of principle than precise enactment. Hence, in one way, its "exceeding breadth", (Psa_119:96) and its applicability, as here, to analogous cases as well as direct ones. Hence, also, the way in which we read of it as being an object of "love" and "delight". (Psa_1:2 Psa_119:97, Psa_119:113, Psa_119:165, etc.) Those who love it ask not how little, but how much, it implies.
2. How subtle the infection of sin. There is danger even in being witnesses of other men"s sins. (Psa_119:37) There is almost certain contraction of guilt in anything like intimacy with evil men. Observe on this point the sixfold warning of Pro_4:14-16. No privileges, no office, no rank secure exemption from this peril.
3. How especially destructive the sins of God"s people. What can be said or done for those who "hold the truth in unrighteousness"? (see 1Co_5:11) If it were not, in fact, for the voice of the "sacrifice," the "propitiation" appointed even for such, (1Jn_2:1, 1Jn_2:2) what must there be for them but despair?
HOMILIES BY J.S. EXELL.
Vers. 1-4.
Spiritual separation.
I THAT SEPARATION FROM THE WORLD IS A LAW OF THE SPIRITUAL LIFE. The Israelites must separate themselves from the people of the land (ver. 1). This separation is not
(1) local. The Israelites and Canaanites must live in the same world, in the same town, and often in the same house. This separation is not
(2) political. Both the Israelites and the Canaanites must act their part as citizens of the same state. This separation is not
(3) commercial. The Israelites have to do business with the Canaanites. This separation is
(4) spiritual. The good man is separate from the world by the moral dispositions and aims which are cherished by him; so that while he is in the same place, state, and business, he is of a different mind, temper, and character. Why must the good man thus separate himself from the world? True, he has sympathy with his comrades; he shares their manhood; he does not leave it in pride, or in sullenness; but
1. That he may maintain the dignity of the Christian life. The Israelites were the followers of Jehovah, and could not place themselves on the same platform with idolaters. There is a moral dignity about religion which must not be sacrificed by undue familiarity with the common things of the world. There is a dignity in the Divine name, in the cross of Christ, in spiritual devotion, in the truth of the gospel, in the hopes of the believer, which the good man must maintain, which is likely to be forfeited in worldly companionships. The sacred things of God must not be profaned by worldly associations. The rose must not cast in its lot with the nettle.
2. That he may exemplify the purity of the Christian life. The land of the people was unclean (ver. 11). Israel must not be contaminated by its abominations. The worldly life is sinful. The Christian life must be holy. Its commandments are holy. Its Supreme Example is sinless. Its duty is to manifest the beauty of holiness, and to inculcate the pursuit of piety. In order to this it must be separate from sinners.
3. That he may insure the safety of the Christian life. The Israelites were exposed to great danger by contact with the heathen, and separation was their only safeguard. Piety has no right to endanger itself by unholy associations; separation is safety.
4. That he may conserve the purposes of the Christian life. Israel had a mission to the other nations, and only by separation could it be accomplished; separation is necessary to the moral design of the Church.
II THAT THE LAW OF SPIRITUAL SEPARATION IS OFTEN VIOLATED BY CHRISTIAN MEN. It is difficult to separate from those amongst whom we live. It is not easy to avoid unholy contact with the people of the land who are so near to us. There are many temptations which attract the spiritual to the carnal. The people of the land have daughters to give in marriage, they have oftentimes prosperity and wealth; and these things are calculated to tempt the godly into unholy alliance (ver. 11). Great will be the condemnation of those who yield to this solicitation.
III THAT THE LAW OF SPIRITUAL SEPARATION IS CONDUCIVE TO THE PROSPERITY or THE CHURCH. "That ye may be strong, and eat the good of the land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children for ever" (ver. 12). E.
HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD Vers. 1-4.
Ezra"s grief.
when these things were done," viz., when the free-will offerings were deposited in the temple, when the sacrifices had been offered, when the king"s commissions had been delivered to his lieutenants and the governors of the provinces when all things promised well, a new cause of trouble arises. "The princes came," etc. (vers. 1, 2). Here we have
I THE CAUSE OF EZRA"S GRIEF.
1. The law of God was violated.
(1) The holy people had made marriages with strangers. God had separated the people of Israel to himself. (Deu_14:1, Deu_14:2) For them to form such affinities was against the law. (Deu_7:3) The marriage union of children of God with children of Satan is monstrous. It is an outrage against the spirit of the gospel. (2Co_6:14)
(2) They had in consequence been drawn into their abominations. This is just what might have been expected. This issue is constantly foreshown. (Exo_34:15-17) The effect of these unequal yokings upon Christians is most melancholy.
2. The violation of the law was general.
(1) The rulers were involved in it. The civil; the ecclesiastical. "The princes and rulers have been chief in this trespass." Being in it, this could not be otherwise. Position involves responsibilities. Those who are conspicuous for station should be conspicuous for goodness.
(2) The people were in it. Crime is contagious. Witness too often the tyranny and slavery of fashion. What absurdities are endured because prescribed by the leaders of fashion! How demoralising to a people is corruption in the court. The rulers could not reprove the people when implicated themselves.
3. The fact was incontestable.
(1) It was reported to Ezra by the princes. The representatives of David and Solomon were the princes of Judah. They had the rule over the people, and must be presumed to be well informed.
(2) But in this matter they cannot be mistaken, for they are themselves also in the transgression. They bear witness against themselves. Note here the power of conscience. Crime cannot be hidden for ever. The great day of judgment will bring all deeds of darkness to the light. Consider now
II THE DEPTH OF EZRA"S GRIEF (vers. 3, 4).
1. He rent his clothes.
(1) In early times emotion was commonly expressed in symbolical acts. This action was expressive of deep distress of soul (Gen_37:29, Gen_37:30; Lev_10:6 Lev_11:44; Jud_1:11:35; Job_1:20) The rending of the heart is the idea. (Joe_2:13)
(2) Ezra rent his garment. The word here rendered "garment" (dgB behged) is the common term for clothes. His rending the vestments personal to him would express his personal grief. The honour of God should be personal to each of us.
(3) He also rent his mantle. The term here employed (lyim m"il) describes an official robe. It is used for the robe of the ephod worn by the high priest; also for the kingly robe of David, and that of Saul, the skirt of which was cut off by David (1Sa_24:4; 1Ch_15:27) The "mantle" in which the ghost of Samuel was seen is described by the same word. (1Sa_28:14) In Ezra"s case it might be his official robe either as a priest or as a civil ruler, or both. In rending his mantle, therefore, he expressed his distress as representing the people. Religious men are the truest patriots.
2. He plucked off his hair.
(1) The hair of his head. As the head is the symbol of rule, so the hair of the head was regarded as a natural crown. (1Co_11:7) Righteousness is the crown of our glory. (2Ti_4:8) Sin plucks this crown from us, and reduces us to the deepest humiliation. (Neh_13:25) This humiliation was expressed by Ezra.
(2) The hair of his beard. This sign of manhood was regarded as a symbol of honour, and a greater insult could scarcely be given to an Oriental than to pluck or cut off his beard. (2Sa_10:5) This action of Ezra set forth how he regarded the honour of his nation to be wounded in the tenderest place by this mingling of the holy seed with the people of the land.
3. He sat down astonied.
(1) The state of silent, awful desolation in which Ezra sat is not inaptly expressed by this old English word, which suggests the idea of being stunned as by thunder. He was awed by hearing as it were the rumbling of the approaching thunder of God"s judgments upon a guilty people.
(2) Then were assembled to him "every one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel." The sympathy of a common fear brought them together, as a terrified flock would gather when the elements become sulphurous for the thunder-storm. Good men love to meet in joy; so do they love to meet in grief. Let us admire and imitate
(a) this zeal for God. This grief for his honour being outraged by sinners.
(b) This purest patriotism which repents vicariously for our people. J.A.M.
HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON Vers. 1-4.
Disappointment and disobedience.
And now then for rest and saris-faction! now for spiritual enjoyment! now for the continuous exercise of the soul m sacred privileges in the holy place! now for the goodly sight of a holy people walking in the commandments of the Lord blameless I Such was probably Ezra"s feeling as he first settled down in Jerusalem with the children of the captivity. It would have been natural and human for him to think thus; but if he did thus think he was mistaken. He was to be an instance of
I DISAPPOINTMENT the lot of the Christian workman. Hardly had he established himself in the city of God when he found, with painful experience, that it was an earthly Jerusalem in which he had come to dwell. Zerubbabel was dead, and Haggai was no longer prophesying, and some of those who had the direction of public affairs they are called (Ver. 1) came to Ezra with a very serious complaint. They came to tell him that several of the Jews, including many of the Levites, and even of the priests, and also (and notoriously) some of the princes, had broken the clear and plain commandment of the Law by mingling and even intermarrying with the people of surrounding lands, in fact with the heathen (see Exo_23:32, and Exo_34:12, Exo_34:15, Exo_34:16; Deu_7:3) It is not quite certain that they had not gone further than this in the way of laxity and worldliness; but as far as this they had certainly gone, and the fact that the leaders, secular and spiritual, were setting the example (ver. 2) made the matter one of the greatest consequence. The soul of Ezra was filled with sadness; with extreme disappointment and dismay that there should be found so serious a blemish in the holy nation. When he was thinking that everything promised well, here was an evil in the midst of them which threatened to undo all that had been done, to bring down the wrath of God, and to demolish the good work which he and others before and beside him had so laboriously built up. He "rent his garment and his mantle;" he" sat astonied until the evening sacrifice "(vers. 3, 4). Such is the common experience of Christian workmen. When the Master himself gathered disciples, the scribes and the Pharisees sought to sow estrangement and separation in their hearts. When Paul, with untiring labour, had founded Churches in Galatia, Judaising teachers followed, undermining his influence and corrupting the truth he had preached. When we think that all is going well with the cause of God, and that we may rest in spiritual enjoyment, then we, too often, find that tares are among the wheat, that dross is mixed up with the gold, that error is falsifying and distorting truth, that sin is in the Church of Christ. We need not look out for disappointment as a thing to be certainly found, but when it comes we may remember that it has been an invariable ingredient in the Christian workman"s cup, from the Master down to the humblest teacher, from apostolic clays to our own. It is trying in the last degree. It tries our patience, our trust in God, our confidence in his truth; but it leads us to him, as then it led Ezra, in humble, earnest, united prayer. The Jewish people at this period afford an instance of
II DISOBEDIENCE a recurring note in the life of the Christian Church. Disobedience had seriously affected the Jews from the highest social rank to the lowest. Princes, priests, Levites, and the common people were all compromised to a greater or less degree. The wrong-doing may not seem so flagrant to us as it did to Ezra, for wide-spread intercourse, national intermingling, is a marked feature of our times. But the one special virtue the Jewish Church was bound to exemplify was purity; its principal duty was to maintain separateness from surrounding evil. It was now failing in that respect in which it was most urgently required to be steadfast and true. Hence the intensity of the feeling of Ezra and those who "trembled at the words of the God of Israel" (vers. 3, 4). How often and how sadly has the Christian Church disappointed its Lord by disobedience to his will.
(1) Sinful alliances with the secular power which have corrupted and enfeebled it;
(2) guilty conformity to the
(a) idolatrous, or
(b) licentious, or
(c) convivial, or
(d) untruthful, or
(e) dishonest practices of an unrenewed, unpurified world;
(3) culpable disregard to his will respecting the equality of his disciples, and our duty to the "little child," the lowly and helpless member of his Church;
(4) faulty negligence to evangelise the surrounding and outlying world these are disobediences which
(a) disfigure the beauty of the Church,
(b) disappoint and displease the Master, and
(c) delay the conversion of the world. C.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v1 Ezra 9
FOREIGN MARRIAGES
Ezra 9
Read full note →
The successful issue of Ezras undertaking was speedily followed by a bitter disappointment on the part of its leader, the experience of which urged him to make a drastic reformation that rent many a happy home asunder and filled Jerusalem with the grief of broken hearts.
During the obscure period that followed the dedication of the temple-a period of which we have no historical remains-the rigorous exclusiveness which had marked the conduct of the returned exiles when they had rudely rejected the proposal of their Gentile neighbours to assist them in rebuilding the temple was abandoned, and freedom of intercourse went so far as to permit intermarriage with the descendants of the Canaanite aborigines and the heathen population of neighbouring nations. Ezra gives a list of tribal names closely resembling the lists preserved in the history of early ages, when the Hebrews first contemplated taking possession of the promised land, {Ezr_9:1} but it cannot be imagined that the ancient tribes preserved their independent names and separate existence as late as the time of the return-though the presence of the gypsies as a distinct people in England today shows that racial distinction may be kept up for ages in a mixed society. It is more probable that the list is literary, that the names are reminiscences of the tribes as they were known in ancient traditions. In addition to these old inhabitants of Canaan, there are Ammonites and Moabites from across the Jordan. Egyptians, and, lastly, most significantly separate from the Canaanite tribes, those strange folk, the Amorites, who are discovered by recent ethnological research to be of a totally different stock from that of the Canaanite tribes, probably allied to a light-coloured people that can be traced along the Libyan border, and possibly even of Aryan origin. From all these races the Jews had taken them wives. So wide was the gate flung open!
This freedom of intermarriage may be viewed as a sign of general laxity and indifference on the part of the citizens of Jerusalem, and so Ezra seems to have regarded it. But it would be a mistake to suppose that there was no serious purpose associated with it, by means of which grave and patriotic men attempted to justify the practice. It was a question whether the policy of exclusiveness had succeeded. The temple had been built, it is true, and a city had risen among the ruins of ancient Jerusalem. But poverty, oppression, hardship, and disappointment had settled down on the little Judaean community, which now found itself far worse off than the captives in Babylon. Feeble and isolated, the Jews were quite unable to resist the attacks of their jealous neighbors. Would it not be better to come to terms with them, and from enemies convert them into allies? Then the policy of exclusiveness involved commercial ruin, and men who knew how their brethren in Chaldaea were enriching themselves by trade with the heathen, were galled by a yoke which held them back from foreign intercourse. It would seem to be advisable, on social as well as on political grounds, that a new and more liberal course should be pursued, if the wretched garrison was not to be starved out. Leading aristocratic families were foremost in contracting the foreign alliances. It is such as they who would profit most, as it is such as they who would be most tempted to consider worldly motives and to forego the austerity of their fathers. There does not seem to have been any one recognised head of the community after Zerubbabel; the "princes" constituted a sort of informal oligarchy. Some of these princes had taken foreign wives. Priests and Levites had also followed the same course. It is a historical fact that the party of rigour is not generally the official party. In the days of our Lord the priests and rulers were mostly Sadducean, while the Pharisees were men of the people. The English Puritans were not of the Court party. But in the case before us the leaders of the people were divided. While we do not meet any priests among the purists, some of the princes disapproved of the laxity of their neighbours, and exposed it to Ezra.
Ezra was amazed, appalled. In the dramatic style which is quite natural to an Oriental, he rent both his tunic and his outer mantle, and he tore his hair and his long priestly beard. This expressed more than the grief of mourning which is shown by tearing one garment and cutting the hair. Like the high-priest when he ostentatiously rent his clothes at what he wished to be regarded as blasphemy in the words of Jesus, Ezra showed indignation and rage by his violent action. It was a sign of his startled and horrified emotions, but no doubt it was also intended to produce an impression on the people who gathered in awe to watch the great ambassador, as he sat amazed and silent on the temple pavement through the long hours of the autumn afternoon.
The grounds of Ezras grief and anger may be learnt from the remarkable prayer which he poured out when the stir occasioned by the preparation of the vesper ceremonies roused him, and when the ascending smoke of the evening sacrifice would naturally suggest to him an occasion for drawing near to God. Welling up, hot and passionate, his prayer is a revelation of the very heart of the scribe. Ezra shows us what true prayer is-that it is laying bare the heart and soul in the presence of God. The striking characteristic of this outburst of Ezras is that it does not contain a single petition. There is no greater mistake in regard to prayer than the notion that it is nothing more than the begging of specific favours from the bounty of the Almighty. That is but a shallow kind of prayer at best. In the deepest and most real prayer the soul is too near to God to ask for any definite thing; it is just unbosoming itself to the Great Confidant, just telling out its agony to the Father who can understand everything and receive the whole burden of the anguished spirit.
Considering this prayer more in detail, we may notice, in the first place, that Ezra comes out as a true priest, not indeed officiating at the altar with ceremonial sacrifices, but identifying himself with the people he represents, so that he takes to his own breast the shame of what he regards as the sin of his people. Prostrate with self-humiliation, he cries, "O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to Thee, my God,"and {Ezr_9:6} he speaks of the sins which have just been made known to him as though he had a share in them, calling them "our iniquities" and "our trespass." {Ezr_9:6} Have we not here a glimpse into that mystery of vicarious sin-bearing which is consummated in the great intercession and sacrifice of our Lord? Though himself a sinful man, and therefore at heart sharing the guilt of his people by personal participation in it, as the holy Jesus could not do, still in regard to the particular offence which he is now deploring. Ezra is as innocent as an unfallen angel. Yet he blushes for shame, and lies prostrate with confusion of face. He is such a true patriot that he completely identifies himself with his people. But in proportion as such an identification is felt, there must be an involuntary sense of the sharing of guilt. It is vain to call it an illusion of the imagination. Before the bar of strict justice Ezra was as innocent of this one sin, as before the same bar Christ was innocent of all sin. God could not really disapprove of him for it, any more than He could look with disfavour on the great Sin-bearer. But subjectively, in his own experience, Ezra did not feel less poignant pangs of remorse than he would have felt if he had been himself personally guilty. This perfect sympathy of true priesthood is rarely experienced, but since Christians are called to be priests, to make intercession, and to bear one anothers burdens, something approaching it must be shared by all the followers of Christ; they who would go forth as saviours of their brethren must feel it acutely. The sin-bearing sacrifice of Christ stands alone in its perfect efficacy, and many mysteries crowd about it that cannot be explained by any human analogies. Still, here and there we come across faint likenesses in the higher experiences of the better men, enough to suggest that our Lords passion was not a prodigy, that it was really in harmony with the laws by which God governs the moral universe.
In thus confessing the sin of the people before God, but in language which the people who shared with him a reverence for The Law could hear, no doubt Ezra hoped to move them also to share in his feelings of shame and abhorrence for the practices he was deploring. He came dangerously near to the fatal mistake of preaching through a prayer, by "praying at" the congregation. He was evidently too deeply moved to be guilty of an insincerity, a piece of profanity, at which every devout soul must revolt. Nevertheless the very exercise of public prayer-prayer uttered audibly, and conducted by the leader of a congregation-means that this is to be an inducement for the people to join in the worship. The officiating minister is not merely to pray before the congregation, while the people kneel as silent auditors. His prayer is designed to guide and help their prayers, so that there may be "common prayer" throughout the whole assembly. In this way it may be possible for him to influence men and women by praying with them, as he can never do by directly preaching to them. The essential point is that the prayer must first of all be real on the part of the leader-that he must be truly addressing God, and then that his intention with regard to the people must be not to exhort them through his prayer, but simply to induce them to join him in it.
Let us now inquire what was the nature of the sin which so grievously distressed Ezra, and which he regarded as so heavy a slur on the character of his people in the sight of God. On the surface of it, there was just a question of policy. Some have argued that the party of rigour was mistaken, that its course was suicidal, that the only way of preserving the little colony was by means of well-adjusted alliances with its neighbours-a low view of the question which Ezra would not have glanced at for a moment, because with his supreme faith in God no consideration of worldly expediency or political diplomacy could be allowed to deflect him from the path indicated, as he thought, by the Divine will. But a higher line of opposition has been taken. It has been said that Ezra was illiberal, uncharitable, culpably narrow, and heartlessly harsh. That the man who could pour forth such a prayer as this, every sentence of which throbs with emotion, every word of which tingles with intense feeling-that this man was heartless cannot be believed. Still it may be urged that Ezra took a very different view from that suggested by the genial outlook across the nations which we meet in Isaiah. The lovely idyll of Ruth defends the course he condemned so unsparingly. The Book of Jonah was written directly in rebuke of one form of Jewish exclusiveness. Ezra was going even further than the Book of Deuteronomy, which had allowed marriages with the heathen, {Deu_21:13} and {Deu_23:1-8} It cannot be maintained that all the races named by Ezra were excluded. Could it be just to condemn the Jews for not having followed the later and more exacting edition of The Law, which Ezra had only just brought up with him, and which had not been known by the offenders?
In trying to answer these questions, we must start from one clear fact. Ezra is not merely guided by a certain view of policy. He may be mistaken, but he is deeply conscientious, his motive is intensely religious. Whether rightly or wrongly, he is quite persuaded that the social condition at which he is so grievously shocked is directly opposed to the known will of God. "We have forsaken Thy commandments," he exclaims. But what commandments, we may ask, seeing that the people of Jerusalem did not possess a law that went so far as Ezra was requiring of them? His own language here comes in most appositely. Ezra does not appeal to Deuteronomy, though he may have had a passage from that book in mind, {Deu_7:3} neither does he produce the Law Book which he has brought up with him from Babylon and to which reference is made in our version of the decree of Artaxerxes: {Ezr_7:14} but he turns to the prophets, not with reference to any of their specific utterances, but in the most general way, implying that his view is derived from the broad stream of prophecy in its whole course and character. In his prayer he describes the broken commandments as "those which Thou hast commanded by Thy servants the prophets." This is the more remarkable because the prophets did not favour the scrupulous observance of external rules, but dwelt on great principles of righteousness. Some of them took the liberal side, and expressed decidedly cosmopolitan ideas in regard to foreign nations, as Ezra must have been aware. He may have mentally anticipated the excuses which would be urged in reliance on isolated utterances of this character. Still, on a survey of the whole course of prophecy, he is persuaded that it is opposed to the practices which he condemns. He throws his conclusion into a definite sentence, after the manner of a verbal quotation, {Ezr_9:11} but this is only in accordance with the vivid, dramatic style of Semitic literature, and what he really means is that the spirit of his national prophecy and the principles laid down by the recognised prophets support him in the position which he has taken up. These prophets fought against all corrupt practices, and in particular they waged ceaseless war with the introduction of heathenish manners to the religious and social life of Israel. It is here that Ezra finds them to be powerful allies in his stern reformation. They furnish him, so to speak, with his major premiss, and that is indisputable. His weak place is in his minor premiss, viz., in the notion that intermarriage with Gentile neighbours necessarily involves the introduction of corrupt heathenish habits. This he quietly assumes. But there is much to be said for his position, especially when we note that he is not now concerned with the Samaritans, with whom the temple-builders came into contact and who accepted some measure of the Jewish faith, but in some cases with known idolaters-the Egyptians, for instance. The complex social and moral problems which surround the quarrel on which Ezra here embarks will come before us more fully as we proceed. At present it may suffice for us to see that Ezra rests his action on his conception of the main characteristics of the teaching of the prophets.
Further, his reading of history comes to his aid. He perceives that it was the adoption of heathenish practices that necessitated the severe chastisement of the captivity. God had only spared a small remnant of the guilty people. But He had been very gracious to that remnant, giving them "a nail in His holy place"; {Ezr_9:8} i.e., a fixture in the restored sanctuary, though as yet, as it were, but at one small point, because so few had returned to enjoy the privileges of the sacred temple worship. Now even this nail might be drawn. Will the escaped remnant be so foolish as to imitate the sins of their forefathers, and risk the slight hold which they have as yet obtained in the renewed centre of Divine favour? So to repudiate the lessons of the captivity, which should have been branded irrevocably by the hot irons of its cruel hardships, what was this but a sign of the most desperate depravity? Ezra could see no hope even of a remnant escaping from the wrath which would consume the people who were guilty of such wilful, such open-eyed apostasy.
In the concluding sentences of his prayer Ezra appeals to the righteousness of God, who had permitted the remnant to escape at the time of the Babylonian Captivity, saying, "O Lord, the God of Israel, Thou art righteous, for we are left a remnant that is escaped, as it is this day." {Ezr_9:15} Some have supposed that Gods righteousness here stands for His goodness, and that Ezra really means the mercy which spared the remnant. But this interpretation is contrary to usage, and quite opposed to the spirit of the prayer. Ezra has referred to the mercy of God earlier, but in his final sentences he has another thought in mind. The prayer ends in gloom and despondency-"behold, we are before Thee in our guiltiness, for none can stand before Thee because of this." {Ezr_9:15} The righteousness of God, then, is seen in the fact that only a remnant was spared. Ezra does not plead for the pardon of the guilty people, as Moses did in his famous prayer of intercession. {Exo_32:31-32} As yet they are not conscious of their sin. To forgive them before they have owned their guilt would be immoral. The first condition of pardon is confession. "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." {1Jn_1:9} Then, indeed, the very righteousness of God favours the pardon of the stoner. But till this state of contrition is reached, not only can there be no thought of forgiveness, but the sternest, darkest thoughts of sin are most right and fitting. Ezra is far too much in earnest simply to wish to help his people to escape from the consequences of their conduct. This would not be salvation. It would be moral shipwreck. The great need is to be saved from the evil conduct itself. It is to this end that the very passion of his soul is directed. Here we perceive the spirit of the true reformer. But the evangelist cannot afford to dispense with something of the same spirit, although he can add the gracious encouragements of a gospel, for the only true gospel promises deliverance from sin itself in the first instance as from the greatest of all evils, and deliverance from no other evil except on condition of freedom from this.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On v1 CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.] We now come to the…
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.] We now come to the social and religious reformation effected by Ezra amongst the Jews who had previously returned to their own land (chaps. 9 and 10). And in this chapter we have—(i.) The complaint of the princes to Ezra concerning the mingling of the people of Israel with the idolatrous people of the lands (Ezr_9:1-2). (ii.) The great amazement and grief of Ezra because of this (Ezr_9:3-4). (iii.) The confession and prayer of Ezra for the people of Israel (Ezr_9:5-15).
Ezr_9:1. Now when these things were done] Some time seems to have elapsed between the events recorded in chap. 8 and those narrated in chap. 9. Ezra and his company arrived in Jerusalem “on the first day of the fifth month” (chap. Ezr_7:9), and on the fourth day of that month they delivered up the treasures in the Temple, and offered burnt offerings and sin offerings unto the Lord God (chap. Ezr_8:32-35). The next note of time is in chap. Ezr_10:9 : “It was the ninth month and the twentieth day of the month “when the great assembly took place at Jerusalem. This assembly had been summoned three days previously. So that there seems to have been an interval of more than four months between the arrival at Jerusalem and the events related in chaps. 9 and 10 Probably some portion of this time was occupied in making arrangements with the king’s satraps and governors (chap. Ezr_8:36). The people of the lands] are the dwellers in the adjacent districts, who are afterwards mentioned. Doing according to their abominations] It is better to omit “doing,” which has been unnecessarily supplied by the translators of the A.V. “Have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, according to their abominations, (even) of the Canaanites,” &c. Or, “in respect of their abominations, (even) of,” &c. The Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites] were descendants of the ancient Canaanites, whom Israel failed to exterminate, and who were not carried into captivity with the Israelites, but remained in some parts of Palestine. The Ammonites, the Moabites] dwelt on the east. The Egyptians and the Amorites] on the south.
Read full note →
Ezr_9:2. The holy seed] The expression is probably taken from Isa_6:13. By calling, by covenant, and by profession the Israelites were a separate people, a holy people (see Exo_19:5-8; Exo_33:16; chap. Ezr_6:20-21). Have mingled themselves with the people of the lands] thus violating an express command of the Lord their God (Deu_7:1-4). Yea, the hand of the princes and rulers have been chief] &c., i.e. the upper classes were the first to transgress in this respect.
Ezr_9:3. I rent my garment and my mantle] As an indication of his great grief and horror, he rent both his outer and inner garments. The custom was a very ancient and a very common one for expressing sorrow, and is frequently mentioned in the Bible (see Gen_37:29; Gen_37:34; Jos_7:6; 1Sa_4:12; 2Sa_1:11; 2Ki_2:12; Job_1:20, et al.) And plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard] This also was expressive of grief, horror, and moral indignation. To shave the head in great sorrow was not unfrequent amongst the Jews (Job_1:20); but this is the only example in the canonical Scriptures of a person plucking out his own hair by the roots in grief and indignation. And set down astonied] or “benumbed, stunned.”—Fuerst.
Ezr_9:4. Every one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel] &c. They trembled in their alarm because of the punishments threatened in the law of God for such transgressions as had been committed. I sat astonied until the evening sacrifice] Inasmuch as business is generally transacted in the morning in the East, the princes in all probability made their complaint to Ezra in the forenoon, in which case he sat stunned and silent for several hours.
Ezr_9:5. I arose up from my heaviness] Rather, as in margin: “affliction.” Fuerst: “self-affliction.” Keil: “mortification, or humiliation.” And having rent my garment and my mantle] This does not refer to the former rending (Ezr_9:3). For the second time he expresses his grief and horror in this manner.
Ezr_9:6. I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face] &c. Keil: “I am ashamed, and am covered with shame, to lift up,” &c. The same words are used together in Isa_45:16; Jer_31:19; and other places. Our trespass is grown up unto the heavens] Margin: “our guiltiness.” Keil: “our guiltiness is great, (reaching) unto the heavens.” (Comp. 2Ch_28:9.)
Ezr_9:7. Since the days of our fathers] This expression may be taken as reaching back to the time when their fathers came out of Egypt; but it seems probable that Ezra meant by it, since the time when under their kings idolatry and idolatrous customs were practised amongst them. To confusion of face] (comp. 2Ch_25:21; Dan_9:7-8). As it is this day] They were then in subjection to Artaxerxes.
Ezr_9:8. For a little space] or, a “little moment.” The eighty years that had elapsed since the emancipation by Cyrus he speaks of as “a little moment,” as compared either “with the long period of suffering from the times of the Assyrians (comp. Neh_9:32) till the reign of Cyrus” (Keil), or with “the long enjoyment of Divine favour from Abraham to Zedekiah” (Rawlinson). A remnant to escape] Keil: “rescued remnant.” Those who had returned to the land of their fathers were but “a remnant” as compared with the numerous population of former days. And to give us a nail in His holy place] Margin: “or, a pin: that is a constant and sure abode.” Fuerst: “יָתֵד = a peg, nail, driven into the wall (Isa_22:25; Eze_15:3); a tent pin, to which a tent is fastened (Jdg_4:21; Exo_27:19); the fastening being used as an image of being established (Isa_22:23); of remaining (Ezr_9:8). for which גָּדֵר stands in Ezr_9:9.” Ezra seems to have regarded the Temple as a pledge of their permanence, and a means of increased life and vigour; for he goes on to say: that our God may lighten our eyes] &c.
Ezr_9:9. For we were bondmen] Rather, “we are bondmen.” They were still subject to the Persian king. Only as regards the exercise of their religion were they granted independence. And to give us a wall] &c. This must be understood figuratively; for the walls of Jerusalem were not yet rebuilt (see Neh_1:3; Neh_2:13). God had disposed the Persian kings, Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes, to protect them in the possession of their country and capital. The wall is a figure of defence, safety, and continuance.
Ezr_9:11-12. Which Thou hast commanded by Thy servants the prophets, saying, The land] &c. This is not a verbal quotation, but a statement which correctly represents many passages of Scripture (see Exo_23:32-33; Exo_34:12-16; Lev_18:24-30; Deu_7:1-4; Deu_23:6, et al.)
Ezr_9:13. Hast punished us less than our iniquities deserve] The last word is supplied by the translators of the A.V. Margin: “Heb. ‘hast withheld beneath our iniquities.’ ” Fuerst: “Thou hast delivered (us) below our iniquities, i.e. undervaluing our iniquity.” Keil: “Thou hast spared us more than our iniquity deserved.” Or, “Thou hast checked, hast stopped, beneath our iniquities.” Though not a close rendering of the Hebrew, the A.V. gives the meaning of it. And hast given us such deliverance as this] Rather, “Thou hast given us (such) a remnant as this.”
Ezr_9:15. Thou art righteous] “Ezra appeals to the righteousness of God, … to rouse the conscience of the community, to point out to them what, after this relapse into their old abominations, they had to expect from the justice of God.”—Keil. Or, he acknowledges the justice of God in His dealings with them, by which they were reduced to a mere remnant. For we cannot stand before Thee because of this] (comp. Psa_76:7; Psa_130:3).
THE GOOD MAN’S SORROW OVER THE PEOPLE’S SIN
(Ezr_9:1-4)
Notice:
I. The painful communication made to Ezra. “Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying,” &c. (Ezr_9:1-2). Information is here given to Ezra—
1. Of a great sin committed. “The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, according to their abominations,” &c. The men of Israel had taken wives of the idolatrous Canaanites and other heathen peoples.
(1.) This was a positive transgression of a plain and oft-repeated command (see Exo_23:31-33; Exo_34:12-16; Deu_7:1-4; Jos_23:12-13).
(2.) It was a perilous transgression. Every sin is perilous. But this one was especially so. The foreign and idolatrous wives were likely to lead their husbands into their sinful customs; and yet more likely to train up their children in them. This was expressly pointed out to them by Moses: “They will turn away thy son from following Me, that they may serve other gods,” &c. (Deu_7:4). Their previous history contained evidence painfully abundant and conclusive of the danger of these prohibited marriages. Even Solomon, notwithstanding his great wisdom and that he was so richly blessed by God, erred greatly and sadly through the influence of heathen wives. “His wives turned away his heart after other gods” (1Ki_11:1-13). And this sin the Jews who had returned to their own land were guilty of.
2. Of the prevalence of this sin. No class of the community was free from it. “The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites” (Ezr_9:1) were all guilty of it. The evil was general in the community.
3. Of the aggravations of their sin.
(1.) “The priests and the Levites” (Ezr_9:1), whose business it was to teach the law and promote obedience to it, were themselves guilty of violating it in this respect. The law for the regulation of the marriages of priests was particularly strict (Lev_21:7; Lev_21:13-14); and by reason of this and of their sacred character and calling, their marriages with heathen wives were especially reprehensible.
(2.) The princes and rulers were foremost in the offence. “Yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass.” It was their duty to have maintained and enforced the observance of the law, yet they took the lead in violating it. Other and greater princes had done the same evil thing; e.g., Solomon, Ahab, et al. Again, the eminence of their position would impart great force to their example, and it was their duty to see that the excellence of the latter corresponded with the eminence of the former; but it was the opposite of this. In this matter, at least, their example was as pernicious as it was influential. (a.) This distressing communication was made to Ezra by persons of unimpeachable credibility. They were in responsible positions—“princes;”—and in making this statement, if they did not impeach themselves, they certainly impeached their order. It is probable that they had been stirred up to do so by the influence of Ezra. During the four months which had passed since his arrival at Jerusalem, he had been inquiring into the condition of the people (comp. chap. Ezr_7:14), and the administration of justice, and the measure of their acquaintance with the law (comp. chap. Ezr_7:25-26); he had also probably been expounding and applying the law; and the result was, that the minds of these princes were enlightened, their consciences were aroused to a sense of the sin which had been committed, and they went to Ezra and made known to him the sin which was so general in the community.
II. The effect which this communication produced upon Ezra. “And when I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle,” &c. (Ezr_9:3). The statement caused Ezra—
1. Great amazement. “I sat down astonied”—stunned. Domestic life in the East is characterised by great privacy; so that Ezra in making inquiries into the state of the people might well have been ignorant as to the occupants of the apartments of the women. The statement of the princes was quite a revelation to him, and filled him with bitter astonishment. The sins of religious people in our day might well utterly amaze a really godly man.
2. Deep grief. “I rent my garment and my mantle.” The usual mode of expressing sorrow amongst Eastern peoples was by tearing the garment. The tearing both the outer and the inner garments may betoken the intensity of Ezra’s distress. The prevalence of iniquity is ever a source of pain to the godly. It was so to the Psalmist: “I beheld the transgressors, and was grieved; because they kept not Thy word. Rivers of waters run down mine eyes,” &c. (Psa_119:158; Psa_119:136). And to Jeremiah: “Oh that my head were waters,” &c. (Jer_9:1; Jer_14:17). Ill fares it with the soul when we can contemplate sin without sorrow.
3. Intense moral indignation. “I rent my garment and my mantle, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down astonied.” Thus he expressed not only his surprise and grief, but also his utter abhorrence of the sin of which they were guilty. God has declared His hatred of sin (Jer_44:4); and as His servants grow in likeness to Him, their hatred of sin will also grow. We may not hate the sinner; while we condemn we may also pity him; but it behoves us to regard sin with repugnance and anger.
III. The effect of Ezra’s grief upon others. “Then were assembled unto me every one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel,” &c. Thus the distress of Ezra—
1. Excited their alarm. They “trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the transgression of those that had been carried away.” They were filled with fear lest the judgments pronounced upon those who were guilty of this sin should be inflicted upon them. They could not do otherwise than regard with consternation that which afflicted Ezra with so much distress.
2. Attracted them unto him. Every one who thus trembled at the words of God assembled unto Ezra. Some might have been drawn to him by curiosity; but certainly they who were alarmed because of the threatened punishments were not of the number. They came to him moved by deep concern on account of the guilt contracted, and by sympathy with his sorrow because of it. And he and they remained apparently speechless for a considerable time—probably for three or four hours. Emotions are sometimes too deep to find expression in words. At such times silence is more expressive than even the most mighty and moving words (comp. Job_2:13). Mark the power of one true and good man to influence others beneficially. The sorrow of such a man is deeply impressive; it awakens serious reflection, &c. And his moral indignation goes far to carry conviction of the sinfulness of that which enkindles it. (b).
CONCLUSION:
1. Separation from the world is obligatory upon the true Christian. We do not by this mean neglect of the secular duties of life. “Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.” “Diligent in business.” In business the Christian must associate with the worldly. Nor do we mean separation from political parties and pursuits. As citizens we have duties which we may not neglect without sin. Nor yet, retirement from the world into seclusion. “I pray not,” said our Lord, “That thou shouldest take them out of the world,” &c. We mean separation from the aims, principles, spirit, and society of the world. And this not from any Pharisaic conceit of our moral superiority, but for our own safety and usefulness, and for the honour of God. “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate,” &c. (2Co_6:14-18). (c).
2. Sin in others should be regarded by the true Christian with unfeigned sorrow, and reprobation of the sin. See how Ezra grieved! how our Lord wept over guilty Jerusalem! (d).
3. Sin in the avowed people of God is especially heinous and mournful. Their privileges are greater than those of the world, consequently their obligations also are greater, and their sin involves a darker guilt. It is a greater dishonour to God; it checks the progress of His cause and kingdom, &c.
4. Therefore it behoves Christians to give all diligence to walk holily and unblamably before God and before men. “Ye are My witnesses, saith the Lord.” Let us take heed that we be not found false witnesses. “Ye are the salt of the earth,” &c. (Mat_5:13-16). (e).
ILLUSTRATIONS
(a) If a man could be wicked and a villain to himself alone, the mischief would be so much the more tolerable. But the case is much otherwise. The plague flies abroad and attacks the innocent neighbourhood. The guilt of the crime lights upon one, but the example of it sways a multitude, especially if the criminal be of any note or eminence in the world. For the fall of such an one by any temptation (be it never so plausible) is like that of a principal stone, or stately pillar, tumbling from a lofty edifice into the deep mire of the street: it does not only plunge and sink into the black dirt itself, but it also dashes and bespatters all that are about or near it when it falls. Was it not thus with Samson, who, of a judge of Israel, and a terror to his enemies, a man all made up of miracle, rendered himself both the shame of the former and the contempt of the latter; a scoff and a byword to all the nations round about him (as every vicious and voluptuous prince must needs be); and all this by surrendering up his strength, his reason, and his royal trust to the charms of a brutish temptation, which quickly transformed and made him a more stupendous miracle of folly and weakness than ever he had been of strength; and a greater disgrace to his country than ever he had been a defence; or, in a word, from a judge of Israel, a woeful judgment upon it? And was it not thus also with David? This was the worst and most killing consequence of the temptation which he fell by (2Sa_12:14), that he had by that enormous act “given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme.” And no doubt the religion he professed, as well as the sin he had committed, was thereupon made “the song of the drunkards;” and many a biting jeer was obliquely cast at one, as well as directly levelled at the other.—R. South, D.D.
(b) The Christian ought to clear a space for himself wherever he goes. Little children, humble hearts, mourning souls, reverent, noble, heavenly-minded persons ought to come round him and say, “Welcome in God’s name. Don’t leave us; abide with us a long while.” But knaves and hypocrites, people who are rolling iniquity under their tongue as a sweet morsel—masked people—ought to feel terribly uncomfortable when a Christian man comes among them. They ought to know him from afar. There should be surrounding him a kind of atmosphere in which men that are evil cannot breathe and live—the knave should shrink away from his sight; the coward should hide himself in the lowest and vilest dust; and the man who was contemplating some keen, clever stroke, in which there should be dishonour and injustice, should feel himself paralysed, disabled, half-damned, in the presence of a man whose soul is afire with Divine truth.—Joseph Parker, D.D.
(c) The Jewish law shadowed out an everlasting truth. God’s people are an exclusive nation; God’s Church is for ever separated from the world. This is her charter, “Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be My sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.” God’s people may break that charter, but they do it at their own peril. And we may be very sure of this, when a religious person begins to feel an inclination for intimate communion with the world, and begins to break down that barrier which is the line of safety, the first step is made of a series of long, dark wanderings from God. We are to be separate, brethren, from the world. Mistake not the meaning of that word. The world changes its complexion in every age. Solomon’s world was the nations of idolatry lying round Israel. Our world is not that. The world is that collection of men in every age who live only according to the maxims of their time. The world may be a profligate world, or it may be a moral world. All that is a matter of accident. Our world is a moral world. The sons of our world are not idolaters, they are not profligate, they are, it may be, among the most fascinating of mankind. Their society is more pleasing, more lively, more diversified in information than religious society. No marvel if a young and ardent heart feels the spell of the fascination. No wonder if it feels a relief in turning away from the dulness and the monotony of home life to the sparkling brilliancy of the world’s society.… And yet now, pause.… The Christian must leave the world alone. His blessedness lies in quiet work with the Israel of God. His home in that deep, unruffled tranquillity which belongs to those who are trying to know Christ.—F. W. Robertson, M.A.
(d) You must learn to be good haters—but not of men. You do not need anything to instruct you on that point. You are too good in that already. You are to abhor evil. Ah! there are hundreds of men that know how to hate men, where there is one that knows how to love a man and hate evil. Because evil is offensive to God, because it is repugnant to the innate delicacy of every moral sentiment, because it wastes you, because it wastes your neighbour, because it is hurtful to society, because every benevolent instinct requires that you should hate that which is the common foe of all mankind, therefore you should hate evil. We are to hate all qualities and actions which corrupt the individual, which injure manhood in man; all that creates sorrow or suffering, or tends to do it. In short, we are to take our beginning in the law of God; and being filled with goodwill toward every living creature, that spirit breathing itself like summer throughout, we are to hate, come from what quarter it may, everything that injures society, that injures men in the mass, or that injures men in their individual capacity. Whether it be in their bodies, their souls, or their estate, whatever works mischief to mankind, you are to be its enemy. The want of this moral rebound, and of this indignation, will be found to be ruinous. The presence of it is wholesome. The absence of it is effeminating. It destroys the individual to whom it is lacking, and it is mischievous to the community in which it is lacking.—H. W. Beecher.
(e) It is recorded of Alexander the Great, that a soldier was reported to him as having betrayed great cowardice on a particular occasion, on which Alexander called him to him and asked his name. On hearing that his name was Alexander, he upbraided him with the dishonour that he brought on such a name, and entreated him either to change his manners or to change his name, asking him how he could dare, while known as Alexander, to act unworthily? And shall not the Christian remember the high and holy name by which he is called, and dread encountering the guilt and meanness of dishonouring his Head, who was “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners”? That name, in its very signification, tells him that he is related to the anointed One, and that (as the name implies) all His members, in their measure and degree, are anointed ones. How shall they who take this sacred unction upon them dare to dishonour this name, and so sin against Christ!—H. G. Salter.
THE GOOD MAN’S CONFESSION OF THE PEOPLE’S SIN
(Ezr_9:5-15)
We have here—
I. Deep personal shame and sorrow on account of the sins of the people. These feelings Ezra expresses by—
1. A symbolical action. “And at the evening sacrifice I arose up from my heaviness, and rent my garments and my mantle.” Thus before the assembled people he proclaims the grief and moral indignation with which he regarded their sin.
2. A suggestive attitude. “I fell upon my knees, and spread out my hands unto the Lord my God.” The posture indicates deep humiliation before God and earnest supplication unto Him.
3. An explicit avowal. Ezra said, “O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to Thee, my God.” In this avowal notice—
(1.) The shamefulness of sin. “Sin is a reproach to any people.” It is an “abominable thing.”
(2.) The good man is ashamed because of the sin of others. He feels the dishonour which is offered by it to God, and the ingratitude, folly, and wickedness of those who commit it. He cannot be an unmoved spectator of the workers of iniquity. The knowledge of human wickedness affects him as it did Ezra, or leads him to cry with the Psalmist, “Horror hath taken hold upon me because of the wicked that forsake Thy law.”
(3.) The good man is specially conscious of the shamefulness of sin when he draws near to God in worship. In the light of His presence the exceeding deformity and heinousness of sin are painfully clear; and the godly soul, burdened in feeling with the iniquities of others, is ashamed to lift up his face to God. (Comp. Isa_6:1-5.) (a).
II. Humble confession of the sins of the people. Ezra confesses—
1. The great accumulation of their sins. “Our iniquities are increased over our head, and our trespass is grown up into the heavens.” The idea seems to be that their iniquities, like waves of the sea, rolled over them threatening to overwhelm them; and their guilt was piled up to the very heavens. The confession of the Psalmist is similar: “Mine iniquities are gone over mine head,” &c. (Psa_38:4). “Mine iniquities have taken hold upon me,” &c. (Psa_40:12).
2. The long continuance of their sins. “Since the days of our fathers have we been in a great trespass unto this day.” From generation to generation they had been a perverse and rebellious people. A sad continuity in sin characterised their history.
3. The sore aggravations of their sins.
(1.) That they had been committed notwithstanding the Divine judgments. “For our iniquities have we, our kings and our priests, been delivered into the hands of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, and to a spoil, and to confusion of face, as it is this day.” God had visited them with heavy judgments, but they had not turned from their iniquities. He had severely reproved them, but they were not reformed. As a people they had suffered long and sorely for their sins, and yet they were still guilty of those sins.
(2.) That they had been committed notwithstanding the Divine mercies. Of these several are mentioned by Ezra. (i.) Mercy in the measure of the punishment inflicted upon them. “Thou our God hast punished us less than our iniquities deserve.” God might justly have entirely forsaken them, or have made an utter end of them; but in His wrath He had remembered mercy, (ii.) Mercy in disposing the Persian monarchs to treat them with so much generosity. “For we were bondmen, yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage, but hath extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia,” &c. “The Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia” (chap. Ezr_1:1) to grant them permission to return to their fatherland. He inclined the heart of Darius to treat them so favourably. And it was by His good hand upon Ezra that Artaxerxes “granted him all his request” (chap. Ezr_7:6). (iii.) Mercy in bringing a rescued remnant to their own land again. “And now for a little space grace hath been showed from the Lord our God, to leave us a remnant to escape,” &c. A considerable remnant of the people had been safely restored and comfortably settled in the country given by God to their fathers. (iv.) Mercy in enabling them to rebuild the Temple of their God. “To give us a nail in His holy place,” &c. “To set up the house of our God, and to repair the desolations thereof.” For a people in their circumstances this was a great achievement, and a great mercy from the Lord their God. To the pious amongst them it would be the crowning blessing that the Temple was restored, and that the ordinances of their holy religion were regularly and becomingly celebrated. (v.) Mercy in granting them security in their own land. Two expressions seem to suggest this: “To give us a nail in His holy place.” Margin: “Or, ‘a pin;’ that is, a constant and sure abode.” “And to give us a wall in Judah and Jerusalem;” not a literal wall, for as yet the walls of Jerusalem were not restored; but a shield and shelter, peace and protection. Their Samaritan enemies were restrained, and did not trouble them. And the officers of the Persian government favoured and supported them and the house of God. Yet despite all these mercies, they were now living in the regular practice of sin against their gracious God. How black the ingratitude of such conduct! And how foolish, for their sins might lead Him to withdraw His favour from them. Neither judgments nor mercies had availed to restrain them from heinous transgression.
(3.) That they had been committed against plain and positive commands. “And now, O our God, what shall we say after this? for we have forsaken Thy commandments, which Thou hast commanded by Thy servants, the prophets,” &c. (Ezr_9:10-12, and see Explanatory Notes on them). They could not plead ignorance or uncertainty of the law as an excuse for their evil doings.
(4.) That they had been committed against commands the reasons of which had been clearly set before them. It had been shown to them that obedience to these commands was necessary for—(i.) The maintenance of their power. “That ye may be strong.” (Comp. Deu_11:8.) As they mingled with the heathen they lost strength and courage. (ii.) Their enjoyment of the produce of the land. “And eat the good of the land.” (Comp. Isa_1:19.) They should eat it, and not strangers. They should eat it in peace and happiness. (iii.) Their continued possession of the land. “And leave it for an inheritance to your children for ever.” (Comp. Deu_11:9; Pro_13:22; Eze_37:25.) Their separation from the heathen was necessary to their secure possession of their country. Thus, these commands were not arbitrary, but reasonable; and the reasons for them were stated. Obedience would have been both rational and advantageous; it was both their duty and their interest. Yet they transgressed these commands. No obligation seemed strong enough to bind them to their duty in this respect; no motive adequate to constrain them to obedience. Most persistent and most aggravated were their sins. (b).
III. A solemn anticipation of the consequence of the continuance of the sins of the people. “And after all that is come upon us for our evil deeds, and for our great trespass,” &c. (Ezr_9:13-15).
1. Continuance in sin would lead to their utter end as a community. “And after all that is come upon us for our evil deeds, and for our great trespass, seeing that Thou our God hast punished us less than our iniquities deserve, and hast given us such deliverance as this; should we again break Thy commandments, and join in affinity with the people of these abominations, wouldest not Thou be angry with us till Thou hadst consumed us, so that there should be no remnant nor escaping?” This inquiry does not denote doubt, but certainty. Looking at God’s commands to them, and His past dealings with them, Ezra was convinced that if they persisted in these sinful alliances God would bring them to an utter end.
2. That such a consequence of continuance in sin would be just. “O Lord God of Israel, Thou art righteous,” &c. (Ezr_9:15). In His past dealings with them God had been just and merciful. He would still be just towards them. They were guilty before Him; they had nothing to plead in extenuation of their sins, but must leave themselves in His hands.
3. That such a consequence of continuance in sin was to be dreaded. This is quite clear from the close of Ezra’s humble appeal to God (Ezr_9:13-15). If sin be not truly repented of its consequences will be found to be dreadful. “Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” “He that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption.” “The wicked is driven away in his wickedness.”
LEARN:
1. The great evil of sin. It is evil in itself; it is a great wrong against God; it is terrible in its consequences, &c. (c).
2. The grand hope of the sinner. God is merciful as well as just. The greatest sinner, being penitent, may approach unto Him, and, confessing his sin, may obtain full and free forgiveness. “There is forgiveness with Thee,” &c. (Psa_130:3-4; Psa_130:7). “If we confess our sins,” &c. (1Jn_1:9). (d).
3. The right relation of the good man to sin. Like Ezra, he should hold it in abhorrence, should be burdened in feeling because of its prevalence in others, should exhibit to them its heinousness, and should humbly confess it before God. When iniquity abounds, let God’s faithful people “weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare Thy people, O Lord,” &c. (Joe_2:17). (e).
ILLUSTRATIONS
(a) Our whole lives present one unbroken series of duties neglected, of favours not acknowledged. And, oh! how do they appear, when we review them in the light of God’s countenance! When we see before us our Creator, our Preserver, our Benefactor, our Sovereign, and our Heavenly Father; when we see in Him, to whom all these titles belong, infinite excellence, perfection, glory, and beauty; when we see with what profound veneration, with what raptures of holy, grateful affection He is regarded and served by all the bright armies of heaven;—and then turn and contemplate our past lives, and reflect how they must appear in His sight, can we refrain from exclaiming with Job, “We have heard of Thee by the hearing of the ear, but now our eyes see Thee: wherefore we abhor ourselves, and repent in dust and ashes”? Must not each of us say with the Psalmist, “Innumerable evils have compassed me about; mine iniquities have taken hold upon me, so that I am not able to look up; they are more than the hairs of mine head; therefore my heart faileth me”? Nay, more, when you see what God is, and how He is worshipped in heaven, and then look at the coldness, the formality, the want of reverence with which you have often approached Him in prayer, and listened to His word, must you not feel conscious that should He call you into judgment you could not answer for one in a thousand of the iniquities which have stained your holy things, your religious duties?—E. Payson, D.D.
(b) The criminality of any sin is in proportion to the motives and obligations which opposed its commission. To sin against many and powerful motives indicates greater depravity, and is, of course, more criminal than to sin against few and feeble motives. Suppose a person is informed that if he commits a certain crime he shall be imprisoned. If, notwithstanding the threatening, he perpetrates the crime, he shows that be loves the crime more than he loves liberty. Again, suppose him to be assured that if he commits the crime he shall be put to death. Should he after that commit the crime, it would indicate greater depravity than before, it would show that he loved the crime more than life. But the Word of God threatens sinners with everlasting misery if they persist in sin, and promises them everlasting happiness if they will renounce it. I need not tell you that what is everlasting is in one respect infinite, viz., in duration. Here, then, are two infinitely powerful motives presented to the sinner to deter him from sin—infinite happiness and infinite misery. Every one, then, who persists in sin, notwithstanding these motives, shows that he loves sin more than everlasting happiness, that he hates holiness more than he dreads everlasting misery. His attachment to sin, and, of course, his depravity and criminality, are therefore boundless or infinite.—Ibid.
(c) Every sin is a violation of an infinitely perfect law. It will readily be allowed that to violate a good law is a greater evil than to violate a law the goodness of which is doubtful. It will also be allowed that if there were any law made by human governments, on obedience to which the honour, the welfare, and even the existence of a nation depended,—to violate that law would be the greatest crime which a subject could commit. Now the law of God is perfectly holy, just, and good. If it were universally obeyed, universal and endless happiness would be the consequence. But disobedience to this law tends to produce universal and endless misery. Take away the law and the authority of God, there would be no right but that of the strongest; violence, discord, and confusion would fill the universe; sin and misery would overspread the earth, would ascend to heaven, subvert the throne of Jehovah, and compel Him to live in the midst of a mad, infuriated mob, the members of which were continually insulting Him and injuring each other. Now every violation of God’s law tends to produce this effect.—Ibid.
Others may throw garlands upon sin, picturing the overhanging fruits which drop in her pathway, and make every step graceful as the dance; but we cannot be honest without presenting it as a giant, black with the soot of the forges where eternal chains are made, and feet rotting with disease, and breath foul with plagues, and eyes glaring with woe, and locks flowing in serpent fangs, and voice from which shall rumble forth the blasphemies of the damned.—T. De Witt Talmage, D.D.
(d) Confession is a necessary basis of forgiveness. Confession is not a simple act. Confession is in reality a multitudinous act; it is many acts in one; it is a convergence of right judgment, right feeling, and right action. There are kinds of confession which are wholly unavailing.… This is not the confession in which David poured out his soul; his words are full of heart. His language seems to be baptized with tears. Every word is a groan from the soul; and consequently his confession comes within the assurance of that world-enclosing and most blessed promise, that if we confess our sins, God will erase them from His book, and remember them no more for ever. Think of God forgetting. Think of the Infinite casting aught behind His back! Back of the Infinite! Where is that? He will put our sins away from Him, as far as the East is from the West. What geometrician can set forth in lines that distance, or tell in words the vastness of that immensity?—Joseph Parker, D.D.
(e) Abhorrence of evil is indispensable to the purity of a man’s own self who is in the midst of “a perverse and crooked generation.” I do not believe any man can avoid the formation of feeling, and to a certain extent the expression of it, and maintain himself incorrupt. It is unnatural. What would you give for a man’s humanity who could stand by and see a little boy deliberately tortured, and maintain a sweet and smiling face, and perfect equanimity, saying, “It is neither my child, nor the child of anybody that I know anything about;” and saying, “It is wrong; I suppose it is wrong; but there is no use of being excited about it”? What would you think of a man that could stand and look upon wickedness and not feel all his nature rebound at it? You cannot see a man steal (provided it is not yourself!) without the utmost horror. You never see a mean thing done (if it is only done by another) without some sensibility in regard to it.
Now, the expressions of these feelings are, by reaction, the modes in which moral sense, the repugnance to wickedness, to evil, is strengthened. And if you, for any reason, forbear to give expression to the feeling, it goes out for want of expression. It is like fire that is smothered. And the man who is so extremely prudent that he never does give utterance to his feelings of indignation against great wrongs, is a man that emasculates himself; and he becomes a moral eunuch. A man is not worthy of the name of man who has no power of indignation. A man is not worthy of being ranked in the roll of manhood who does not know how to issue soul-thunder.
The feeling, and suitable expression, of indignation, then, is not only salutary as a mode of penalty, and of restraint to the wickedness of society, but it is quite indispensable, also, to the moral purity of the individual, the spectator, himself. It is one of those exercises by which the very moral sense itself, the judge and test of all things right or wrong, is kept in tone.—H. W. Beecher.
EZRA’S HUMILIATION FOR THE SINS OF HIS PEOPLE
(Ezr_9:5-6)
I. The reason of his sorrow. Many of the people had connected themselves in marriage both with the Canaanites and other heathens around them. This he justly regarded as a most heinous evil.
1. As being a violation of an express command. Ezra himself speaks of it in this view (comp. Ezr_9:10-12 with Deu_7:2-3). It is possible that, whilst the generality sought only the gratification of their own corrupt appetites, “the princes and rulers, who were chief in this matter,” justified their conduct on the ground of policy. They might urge that, being few in number, it was desirable for their own preservation to make alliances with those whose hostility they feared. In this way many set their own reasonings in opposition to God’s revealed will. But reason is altogether out of place on such occasions. We are not at liberty to sit in judgment on God’s commands, and to determine how far it is expedient to obey them, &c.
2. As having an evident tendency to bring the people back to idolatry. It was for their idolatries that the nation had been sent into captivity; and a recurrence of the same evil was likely to result from so intimate a connection with idolaters. (Comp. Deu_7:4.) Their disregard of this danger showed how little they had profited by the judgments that had been inflicted on them, or the mercies that had been vouchsafed unto them. But thus it is with all who seek the friendship of the world: God has told them that “friendship with the world is enmity with God” (Jas_4:4); that it is impossible to maintain communion with both (Mat_6:24; 2Co_6:14-15); and that therefore all who cultivate the friendship of the world will be regarded and treated as the enemies of God (1Jn_2:15-17); yet they will run the risk, and for the sake of gratifying their corrupt wishes, will endanger the everlasting salvation of their souls.
II. The expressions of his sorrow.
1. The expression of his grief the instant he was informed of their misconduct. This was more violent than any of which we read in the Holy Scriptures. Often have men rent their mantle and their garments; but of him alone we are told that “he plucked off the hair of his head and of his beard.” He was almost distracted; he was so overwhelmed as to be incapable of speech or action; “he sat down astonied,” &c. Shall we think all this extravagant? No truly, if we duly estimate the evil they had committed, and the danger to which the whole nation was reduced. We are told of David, that “horror took hold upon him,” and that “rivers of tears ran down his cheeks,” &c. St. Paul appeals to God, that he had “great sorrow and continual heaviness in his heart,” &c.
2. His humiliation before God more particularly demands our attention. “At the time of the evening sacrifice,” as if revived and encouraged by the consideration of the great atonement, “he arose from his heaviness, and fell upon his knees,” and confessed with shame and anguish of heart both his own sins and the sins of all the people. What a just view had he of national transgressions. Many would have thought that because he disapproved of the evils that had been committed, he had no share in the guilt, nor any occasion to humble himself before God on account of them; but the members of the body politic are, in their corporate capacity, like the members of the natural body, all to a certain degree responsible for those evils which generally, though not universally, prevail among them. At the day of judgment indeed, none will have to answer for anything but what they themselves were personally guilty of; but in this world, where alone nations can be dealt with as nations, we should consider ourselves as participating in whatever relates to the nation at large. Oh that we felt for our own sins as he felt for the sins of others! We are told plainly enough what is that repentance which godly sorrow will produce (2Co_7:10-11); let us therefore look to it that we “approve ourselves to be clear in this matter.”
APPLICATION:
And now the evening sacrifice is just offered; “now once in the end of the world, hath Christ appeared,” &c. (Heb_9:26.) Let us spread before Him both our national and personal transgressions; not doubting but that “if we confess our sins, God is faithful,” &c. (1Jn_1:9).—C. Simeon, M.A.
EZRA’S ADDRESS
(Ezr_9:8)
Israel had often suffered for their sins, especially for idolatry. Worsted by enemies—latterly carried into captivity. Now, after seventy years, restored. Now Ezra relates his experience. Deep sorrow and shame for their sins (Ezr_9:2, &c.). His distress, prayer, and confession, &c. In the midst of this comes our text, full of instruction, counsel, &c. The subject shows—
I. The grace they had experienced.
Observe—
1. In bondage. Not desert, but grace—undeserved favour.
2. Grace from Jehovah, their covenant God.
3. Grace to preserve. “A remnant.” Seventy years’ captivity. Not all extinguished. Some kept, sustained—and a remnant only.
4. To be restored to their land—nation—city—worship—inheritances—and home.
II. The exalted position to which they had been raised.
1. “A nail,” or pin—these were inserted in the building of the place. Designed—
(1.) For ornament.
(2.) For usefulness.
(3.) For permanence. So Christ, the Messiah (Isa_22:23). Levites were nails, pins. The priests—the high priest—an exalted place. The musicians.
2. In the “holy place” of God. Tabernacle—Church of the old covenant. Not in palaces—schools of learning—halls of science—academies of philosophy; but in the far higher, holier Church of the living God. Observe this is expressive—
(1.) Of their honour—true dignity.
(2.) Of their security.
(3.) Of their privileges and favours.
III. The blessings connected with these privileges.
And here there is reference—
1. To spiritual illumination. “God may lighten,” &c. (Psa_13:3; Psa_34:5).
(1.) Eyes to see their own unworthiness.
(2.) Their own helplessness.
(3.) The Lord’s goodness.
(4.) The Lord’s will and ways.
2. Spiritual reviving. Rekindling of the fire—stirring up—re-inspiring—re-strengthening—reviving. Faith—hope—zeal—love—obedience.
3. Gratefulness for deliverances. In our bondage—that God should show grace. Deliverance from it, &c. And now gratefully reviewed, &c.
4. The brevity of these signal mercies—“a little space.” For working—fighting—building up ourselves. Also the Church—“a little space.” We are reminded of this—
(1.) By those who have passed away. The fathers, &c. Those we have known—succeeded.
(2.) By the advance we have made in life. Look back to childhood—youth, &c. How changed!
(3.) By the uncertain, fragmentary remains, we can only possess. “Time is short,” &c. “We spend our years as a tale that is told.” The Judge at the door. “I must work the works of Him that sent me while it is day,” &c. “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do,” &c. Let the subject be—
1. A test of character. Are we of the remnant? Called—the chosen—the faithful.
2. An appeal as to our position. In the Church, “a nail” or pin—somewhere.
3. A question as to our desires. Are we seeking the reviving?
4. An exhortation. Appeal to those outside the Church to come with us, &c.—Jabez Burns, D.D.
FORBIDDEN MARRIAGES
(Ezr_9:12)
“Give not your daughters unto their sons, neither take their daughters unto your sons.” The Israelites were prohibited from taking heathen women for their wives, and from giving their daughters in marriage to the heathen. And true Christians are commanded not to marry those who are not Christians. What are the reasons why such marriages should not be contracted? Because—
I. They are opposed to the express command of God. “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers,” &c. (2Co_6:14). “There is,” says Barnes, “a difference between Christians and those who are not so great as to render such unions improper and injurious. The direction here refers, doubtless, to all kinds of improper connections with those who were unbelievers. It has been usually supposed by commentators to refer particularly to marriage. But there is no reason for confining it to marriage. It doubtless includes that.” And M. Henry: “Those relations that are our choice must be chosen by rule; and it is good for those who are themselves the children of God to join with those who are so likewise; for there is more danger that the bad will damage the good than hope that the good will benefit the bad.” Again, St. Paul writes that Christians are to marry “only in the Lord” (1Co_7:39); which Alford explains thus: “i.e., within the limits of Christian connection—in the element in which all Christians live and walk—‘let her marry a Christian.’ So Tertull., Cypr., Ambros., Jerome, Grot., Est., Bengel, Rosenm., Olsh., Meyer, De W.” Whitby: “She must marry a believer, one who is in Christ by faith and profession.” And Barnes: “That is, only to one who is a Christian, with a proper sense of her obligations to Christ, and so as to promote His glory.” (a).
II. They are inconsistent with the most sacred aspects and ends of marriage. Marriage was instituted by God (Gen_2:20-24; Mat_19:4-6); and it was intended by Him to be a union of persons not merely as regards their temporal interests, but in their spiritual sympathies. In its best aspect marriage is a union of souls. (b). They who are thus united have sympathy with each other in their deepest, highest, and holiest experiences. They are one in soul, one in Christ, and one for ever. The marriage which is not a union of souls is defective, and it degrades the Divine institution. One of the ends contemplated in the institution of marriage was that they who are joined in this relation should be mutual helpers. Woman was created to be “an help meet for” man. And this must surely hold good in relation to the highest and most important concerns of life, viz., the salvation of their souls, or their life, health, and progress as spiritual beings. Husbands and wives should aid each other in their upward and heavenward path. But how can they do this if the genuine Christian is mated with one who is not a Christian? (c). The absence of this high and holy union is sometimes mournfully manifest in married life. How inexpressibly sad it is when in the sore troubles of life husband and wife look to different quarters for relief, and consolation, and help! The true Christian looks to the Heavenly Father, and obtains calmness and peace and hope, to which the unbelieving partner is a stranger. When their union should be most closely and preciously realised, the gulf which separates them is most painfully felt. In like manner the unbeliever is utterly unable to enter into the tenderest, holiest, and most cherished experiences—those of the religious life—of the Christian partner.
III. They imperil the salvation of the soul. The believing husband or wife may be successful in leading the unbelieving partner to real trust in Christ and hearty consecration to Him. But in very many instances the actual result is the opposite of this. “Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel; nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin” (Neh_13:26). “There is far greater ground of fear that they shall pervert you, than there is ground of hope that you shall convert them.” The risk of this kind which such marriages involve is one which no Christian is justified in deliberately encountering. (d).
“Maid, choosing man, remember this:
You take his nature with his name;
Ask, too, what his religion is,
For you will soon be of the same.”
IV. They are inimical to wise and harmonious home government. In such marriages there is a difference of opinion as to the ends to be sought and the methods to be employed in the government of the family; and as to the spirit which should pervade the home; and, further, as to the course of life to be pursued therein. Such differences must militate against the order and harmony which should characterise family life.
V. They are detrimental to the best interests of the children of the marriage. One of the objects contemplated in the institution of marriage was the production of “a godly seed” (Mal_2:15), and in the marriages which are Divinely forbidden this object is likely to be frustrated. The diversity of spirit, principles, aims, and methods, which exists where one parent is really a Christian and the other is not, must exert an injurious influence upon the children, (e). How many and forcible, then, are the reasons why Christians should marry “only in the Lord”!
ILLUSTRATIONS
(a) They that enter, or think of entering, into the married state, are required to do it in the Lord, as an only thing. Marry they may, “only in the Lord.” But when they neglect this, they leave out the only thing that can make a blessed marriage; which certainly must argue a very profane mind, when men and women dare venture, and rush upon a matter of so great importance as that, and leave out the very only thing that concerns them in it.—John Howe.
(b) The relation of which we now treat, instituted by the benevolent Creator Himself, is the closest, the most intimate and tender, of all earthly connections. Its closeness and endearing intimacy were evidently meant to be indicated by two circumstances:—
(1.) The manner of the formation of the first woman; not, as the man himself had been, from “the dost of the ground,” but from a bone of his own body; and that bone one of the safeguards of the most important and vital organs of his frame, being part of the protecting bulwarks of his heart—the fountain of life to his whole frame, and the seat of all his affections. I dare not for a moment doubt the emblematic significance of this remarkable fact. It is as far as possible from being fanciful. Adam himself perceived, and felt, and expressed it, when, on the delicate and lovely counterpart of himself being brought to him by the Divine Maker, he exclaimed, with new, and delightful, and sinless emotion: “This is now bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.” In our language the sentiment is not, and cannot be, correctly transfused. In the original the name for woman is simply that for man, with a feminine termination, which, from the structure of our language, we cannot imitate. The nearest approximation to it would be she-man; but, unfortunately, it sounds too ludicrously to be at all sufferable. To this original formation of woman Paul beautifully alludes, when he describes the very thing of which we have been representing it as significant of the tender care with which husbands should regard and cherish the chosen partners of their lives. “So ought men to love their wives,” &c. (Eph_5:28-30).
(2.) The second thing by which this was indicated was the pronouncing of this relation, by Jehovah Himself, superior in its imperative requisitions to every other. The relation of child to parent is specially tender and powerful; yet it must give way before the obligation under which that child, when he becomes a husband, is laid to the “wife of his youth:” “For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife.” It is the only one of life’s relations that is represented as constituting a species of identity—a dual unit: “Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.”—R. Wardlaw, D.D.
(c) Husband and wife should be as the milch-kine, which were coupled together to carry the ark of God; or as the two cherubim, that looked upon one another, and both upon the mercy-seat; or as the two tables of stone, on each of which were engraven the laws of God. In some families married persons are like Jeremiah’s two baskets of figs, the one very good, the other very evil; or like fire and water, whilst the one is flaming in devotion, the other is freezing in corruption. There is a twofold hindrance in holiness: first, on the right side; secondly, on the left. On the right side: when the wife would run in God’s way, the husband will not let her go: when the fore-horse in a team will not draw, he wrongs all the rest; when the general of an army forbids a march, all the soldiers stand still. Sometimes on the left: how did Solomon’s idolatrous wives draw away his heart from heaven? A sinning wife was Satan’s first ladder, by which he scaled the walls of Paradise, and took away the fort-royal of Adam’s heart from him. Thus, she that should have been the help of his flesh, was the hurt of his faith: his nature’s under propper becomes his grace’s under miner; and she that should be a crown on the head, is a cross on the shoulders. The wife is often to the husband as the ivy is to the oak, which draws away his sap from him.—W. Secker.
(d) Such unlawful unions have been usually advocated thus:—The godly party pretends to make no doubt but that the other party may be converted: “God can easily convert men when He will; and if there be but love, persons are easily won over to the same mind with those they love.” Answer—
(1.) Then it seems because you love an ungodly person, you will be easily turned to be ungodly. If so, you are not much better already. If love will not draw you to their mind to be ungodly, why should you think love will draw them to your mind to be godly? Are you stronger in grace than they are in sin?
(2.) If you knew well what grace is, and what a sinful, unrenewed soul is, you would not think it so easy a matter to convert a soul. Why are there so few converted, if it be so easy a thing? You cannot make yourselves better by adding higher degrees to the grace you have; much less can you make others better by giving them the grace which they have not.
(3.) It is true that God is able to convert them when He will; and it is true that, for aught I know, it may be done. But what of that? Will you in so weighty a case take up with a mere possibility? God can make a beggar rich, and for aught you know to the contrary, He will do it; and yet you will not therefore marry a beggar; nor will you marry a leper, because God can heal him; why then should you marry an ungodly person, because God can convert him? See it done first, if you love your peace and safety.—R. Baxter.
A consistent Christian young man became attached to a pleasure-loving and gay young lady, and married her against the advice of his brethren. Her influence silenced his prayers, estranged him from the house of God, and led him to her ways of pleasure. Sickness called his attention back to religion. Twice his wife had driven him from his duty. Now, in agony and remorse, with a fearful eternity before him, he gazed upon her and cried, “Rebecca, Rebecca, you are the cause of my eternal damnation!” and died.—Dict. of Illust.
(e) Hannah vows, if the Lord will give her a son, by bearing him, she will return that son to the Lord by serving Him (1Sa_1:11). A spouse should be more careful of her children’s breeding than she should be fearful of her children’s bearing. Take heed lest these flowers grow in the devil’s garden. Though you bring them out in corruption, yet do not bring them up to damnation. Those are not mothers, but monsters, that whilst they should be teaching their children the way to heaven with their lips, are leading them the way to hell with their lives. Good education it the best livery you can give them living; and it is the best legacy you can leave them dying. You let out your cares to make them great. Oh lift up your prayers to make them good; that before you die from them, you may see Christ live in them. Whilst these twigs are green and tender, they should be bowed towards God. Children and servants are in a family as passengers are in a boat; husband and wife, they are as a pair of oars to row them to their desired haven. Let these small pieces of timber be hewed and squared for the celestial building. By putting a sceptre of grace into their hands, you will set a crown of glory upon their heads.—W. Secker.
USE OF GOD’S DIVERSIFIED DISPENSATIONS
(Ezr_9:13-14)
I. God’s diversified dispensations towards us. God visited His people of old with alternate mercies and judgments; and thus He has dealt with us also.
1. He has visited our sins with judgments. And it is of the utmost importance that we should acknowledge the hand of God in them. They spring not out of the dust, &c. God uses men as instruments, just as He did the Assyrians and Chaldeans, to punish His people; but still it is His hand alone that inflicts the stroke (Psa_17:13; Isa_10:5-7; Isa_10:13-15; Isa_37:24-26; Gen_45:8). We must confess, however, that our sufferings have by no means equalled our deserts (Psa_103:10). Take any one of our national sins, &c. If God had proceeded against us according to the tremendous aggregate of our iniquities, we should have been made as Sodom and Gomorrah.
2. He has also vouchsaved us a deliverance. The “deliverance” granted to the Jews on their return from Babylon was not inferior to that which they had formerly experienced in their departure from Egypt. And has not ours also been exceeding great?… In this too must we view the hand of God. Whoever were the means, God was the author of it. It is He who produces all the changes in the state of individuals (1Sa_2:6-8), or of kingdoms (Jer_18:6-7; Jer_18:9). And as the discerning of His agency in our afflictions is necessary to effect our humiliation, so the beholding of it in our mercies is necessary to excite our gratitude.
II. The effect they should have upon us. If the destruction of sin be the end which God proposes to Himself in all His conduct towards us, then we should endeavour to make everything subservient to that end. The pointed interrogation in the text strongly shows in what light we should view a renewed violation of God’s commandments, after He has taken such pains to enforce the observance of them.
1. How unreasonable would it be! No man can read the account of Pharaoh’s obstinacy in the midst of all his successive judgments and deliverances, and not stand amazed at his more than brutish stupidity. Yet it is thus that we shall act, if we do not now put away our sins, &c. And how irrational such conduct would be God Himself tells us: He even calls heaven and earth to express their astonishment at it, &c. (Isa_1:2-3). And if we be guilty of it, He will justly vent His indignation against us, as He did against His people of old: “They are a perverse and crooked generation,” &c. (Deu_32:5-6).
2. How ungrateful! Ingratitude is considered as one of the greatest aggravations that can be found in any offence of man against his fellow-man; and how much more must it enhance the guilt we contract in our disobedience to God! See what a stress God Himself lays upon this in the transgressions of David (2Sa_12:7-9), and Solomon (1Ki_11:9), and Hezekiah (2Ch_32:25); and will it not stamp a tenfold malignity also on our offences? (Comp. Jer_7:9-10.)
3. How dangerous! This is particularly noticed by Ezra, in the words following the text; and the state of the Jews at this moment is an awful comment upon it. God tells us that, as the impenitence of the Jews was the reason of His continuing to afflict them (Isa_9:12; Isa_9:17; Isa_9:21; Isa_10:4), so He will “punish us seven times more for our sins” (Lev_26:18; Lev_26:21; Lev_26:24; Lev_26:28) if we now continue in them. To what a state of misery we may in that case expect to be reduced, we may judge from what was actually experienced by the Jewish nation (Jdg_10:11-14).
ADDRESS:
Remember that God is not an indifferent spectator of our conduct. Sin is that “abominable thing which His soul hateth” (Jer_44:4); and He will surely destroy either it or him that retains it. And if His judgments be not inflicted on the sinner in this life, there still is a future day of retribution, when every man shall give account of himself to God, and receive the just recompense of all his actions. Let every one of us shudder at the thought of ever again breaking the least of God’s commandments.—C. Simeon, M.A.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 Ezra's Indignation at Intermarriages with the Heathen
Ezra's Indignation at Intermarriages with the Heathen
1. The Canaanites, etc.] In the Law it was only with the various Canaanite nations that marriage was altogether forbidden (Exo_34:12-16; Deu_7:1-3). David was descended from a union between an Israelite and a Moabitess (Rth_1:4; Rth_4:17), and Solomon had married an Egyptian princess without reproach (1Ki_3:1). But the principle which excluded alliances with certain nations was doubtless felt to be applicable to others also, and Solomon's marriages with women of the Moabites and Ammonites had certainly been attended with calamitous results (1Ki_11:1-2).
Read full note →
3. Plucked off the hair] Baldness artificially produced was a sign of mourning: Isa_15:2; Isa_22:12; Jer_16:6; Amo_8:10; Job_1:20.
8. A nail] a figure for security: cp. Isa_22:23. In his holy place] i.e. Jerusalem: cp. Psa_24:3; Isa_56:7; Isa_57:13.
9. We were bondmen] RV 'we are bondmen': i.e. subjects of the Persians: cp. Neh_9:36. A wall] i.e. protection (RM 'a fence').
11. The filthiness of the people] The iniquity of the Canaanite peoples, whose land Israel had taken in possession, is alluded to in Gen_15:16; Deu_9:5 : cp. also 1Ki_21:26.
13. Such deliverance] RV 'such a remnant.'
15. For we.. escaped] better, 'for we are left but a remnant that is escaped.' God's righteousness had been vindicated by the almost complete destruction of the guilty people; but His mercy had been manifested in the survival of a few who were now imperilling themselves by fresh offences.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 1. Ezra’s astonishment and grief (Ezr 9:1-4)
CHAPTER 9
1. Ezra’s astonishment and grief (Ezr 9:1-4)
Read full note →
2. Ezra’s confession and prayer (Ezr 9:5-15)
Ezr 9:1-4. When all these things had been done (that are related in chapter 8:33-36) Ezra was confronted by a very sad condition of the people, and even the priests and the Levites. The princes (civil leaders) came to Ezra and told him that the demanded separation according to the law, between God’s people and the Canaanitish inhabitants of the land, had not been obeyed. The people had taken of their daughters for themselves and of their sons “so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of the lands; yea the hand of the princes and rulers hath been first in this trespass.” Not alone had they intermarried, but they were also doing according to their abominations. Not alone had they fallen into the evil things of the former inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, but they were also contaminated with the wicked things of the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians and the Amorites. In doing this they had wilfully broken the command of the Lord as given in Exo 34:12-16. God’s people were to be holy, a separated people. Israel was married unto Jehovah; their marriage to the heathen was disobedience to the law and unfaithfulness to Jehovah. It was an alliance with the world. God demanded separation of Israel; He demands the same of His people in the New Testament. “But as He who hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; because it is written, Be ye holy, for I am holy” (1Pe 1:15-16). Like Israel, believers in the New Testament are said to be married unto Christ (Rom 7:4; 2Co 11:2). And therefore God’s Spirit warns against alliance with the world. “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers” (2Co 6:14). “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world” (1Jn 2:15). “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore would be a friend of the world, maketh himself an enemy of God” (Jas 4:4). That the returned remnant, after a few years of the completion of the temple and after the gracious and remarkable deliverance from Babylon, could plunge into such depths of degradation, shows what the heart of man is. As it has been said, when saints fall into sin, it is sometimes into worse and grosser forms of sin than those committed by the people of the world. It equally manifests the infinite patience and long-suffering of God, in bearing with His people and not dealing with them at once in judgment.
Let us listen to the words of pious Ezra, what he said and did after receiving this sad report. “And when I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down astonished. Then were assembled unto me every one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the transgression of those that had been carried away; and I sat astonished until the evening sacrifice.” He was seized with horror. The rending of his garments was the outward expression of his indignation and grief (Gen 37:29; Lev 10:6; Jdg 11:35; Est 4:1). The plucking of the hair is also a sign of sorrow (Job 1:20; Eze 7:18). But how his heart must have felt the dishonor done to Jehovah’s holy Name! How he was deeply affected by the sins of the people. Would to God such a spirit of deep grief and humiliation were more manifested today over the sad and worldly conditions of those who profess that worthy Name! His grief and sorrow brought others, who were also trembling at the words of God, to his side, and he sat in their presence astonished till the evening sacrifice.
Ezr 9:5-15. When the evening sacrifice came he arose from his deep affliction and sorrow, with his garments rent. It is the sacrifice, the burnt offering, which leads him to approach God; he trusted in the efficacy of the sacrifice as the ground on which he could appear before God. He knew by sacrifice he could come near to God and receive the answer. All this blessedly foreshadows the sacrifice of Christ and our approach to God through His finished work on the cross. The prayer which follows is like Daniel’s great prayer (Dan 9:4-19). Daniel also received his answer at the time of the evening sacrifice. Ezra fell upon his knees and spread out his hands unto the LORD. What a confession of sins and deepest humiliation breathe in the opening sentences of this remarkable prayer! He is ashamed and blushes to lift his face up to God. Iniquities are owned as covering the head of the people and “the guiltiness is grown unto the heavens.” Not alone is the present guilt acknowledged, but he owns the guilt of the nation from its very start. Furthermore he declares God’s righteousness and justice in dealing with them in judgment. “For our iniquities have we, our kings, and our priests, been delivered into the hands of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, and to spoiling, and to confusion of face, as it is today.” He confessed the sins of the people and owned it all in His presence. Such humiliation and confession is always pleasing to God, for “God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble” (Jas 4:6).
Then, after having confessed and owned the sins of his brethren and justified God in His judgment upon them, he mentions the grace which had been manifested towards the people in bringing back the remnant from the captivity. The remnant through His mercy had escaped, and God had given them “a nail in His holy place” (Isa 22:23). Like a nail in the wall fixed and immovable, so God had established them in Jerusalem. And after the recital of all these mercies, he brings into the light of God’s presence their sin, their disobedience and ingratitude once more (Ezr 9:10-12).
It should also be observed that Ezra does not once pray for forgiveness. Nay, with any intelligence of the mind of God, it was impossible that he should do so. When there is known evil in our hearts or in the assembly, our first responsibility is to judge it, not to pray for forgiveness. Thus, when Joshua lay on his face before the LORD, after the defeat of Israel by the men of Ai, the LORD said, “Get thee up; wherefore liest thou thus upon thy face?” Israel hath sinned,” etc. And yet how often does Satan beguile the LORD’s people, in a time of manifested evil, by suggesting through one or another, Let us pray about it. Confess our sins we surely should, but even then only as seeking grace and strength to deal with the evil, and to separate ourselves from it; for if Ezra lay before the LORD in this chapter owning his people’s guilt, we shall see him in the next energetic in dealing with the sin he had confessed, and resting not until it had been put away. (E. Dennett, Exposition of Ezra.)
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On vv1, 5 The Evil of Intermarriages Exposed
The Evil of Intermarriages Exposed
v. 1. Now, when these things were done, namely, the delivery of the treasures and the money, the bringing of the sacrifices, and the paying of respects to the official representatives of the Persian king in the satrapy of which Judea was a part, the princes, certain chief men among the people, came to me, saying, The people of Israel and the priests and the Levites have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, of the remnants of the Gentile nations that were still found in the land, doing according to their abominations, showing a tendency to relapse once more into gross idolatry, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites, whose idolatrous practices had persisted in the country during all these centuries.
Read full note →
v. 2. For they, the Jews who had previously returned from Babylonia, have taken of their daughters for themselves and for their sons, so that the holy seed, the children of Israel as a peculiar people, as a nation consecrated to Jehovah, have mingled themselves with the people of those lands; yea, the hand of the princes and rulers, of the leaders of the people, hath been chief in this trespass, which was a plain violation of the divine Law, Deu 7:2-3. The mixed marriages threatened the purity of Israel and imperiled the higher blessings connected therewith.
v. 3. And when I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, both the inner dress and the outer cover, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, all signs of most overpowering grief and righteous anger, and sat down astonied, staring dully into nothingness, as one helpless in angry displeasure.
v. 4. Then were assembled unto me every one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel, those impressed with the terror of Jehovah’s possible wrath, because of the transgression of those that had been carried away, of those living in captivity, of the people who had returned with the first company of exiles; and I sat astonied until the evening sacrifice. Ezra foresaw the dangerous results of the condition as reported to him and was overwhelmed with the difficulty of correcting the evil. Mixed marriages are always dangerous, for experience has shown that the believing spouse is more often misled into misbelief and indifference than the unbelieving is brought to the knowledge of the truth.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15 have not separated themselves
have not separated themselves
have married people from other lands and have adopted their religion
Read full note →
translationWords
people group
Israel
priest
Levi
abomination
Canaan
Hittite
Perizzite
Jebus
Ammon
Moab
Egypt
Amorite
son
holy
faithless
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 14, 15 9:1–10:44 Ezra confronted the problem of intermarriage with idolatrous…
9:1–10:44 Ezra confronted the problem of intermarriage with idolatrous foreigners. The Jewish leaders had allowed this practice, though the early settlers had committed to keep separate from pagan influences (4:1-5). Ezra interceded on behalf of the nation and helped those convicted of their sins to make things right.
9:1-2 The events that follow took place approximately four months after Ezra’s arrival (cp. 7:9; 10:9). • Intermarriage with pagan foreigners was dangerous because Israelites could end up worshiping other gods and accepting the detestable practices of other religions (cp. Ezra 4:1-5; Deut 7:1-4). • the holy race has become polluted: Literally the holy seed has intermingled itself. Because Israel was a holy covenant nation (Exod 19:6), it was not to be involved with pagan practices (Lev 19:2-4; 20:6-8, 22-26). Therefore, the people were to avoid marriages with those who could influence Israelites to embrace such practices. When the religious and political leaders and officials intermarried with foreigners, they were in danger of leading others astray and destroying the unique identity of Israel as a holy people.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.