Ezra 10:1-17

The People's Response

10:1 While Ezra prayed and made confession, weeping and throwing himself down before the house of God, a very great assembly of men, women, and children gathered to him out of Israel; the people also wept bitterly. 2 Shecaniah son of Jehiel, of the descendants of Elam, addressed Ezra, saying, "We have broken faith with our God and have married foreign women from the peoples of the land, but even now there is hope for Israel in spite of this. 3 So now let us make a covenant with our God to send away all these wives and their children, according to the counsel of my lord and of those who tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law. 4 Take action, for it is your duty, and we are with you; be strong, and do it." 5 Then Ezra stood up and made the leading priests, the Levites, and all Israel swear that they would do as had been said. So they swore.

Mass Divorce of Foreign Wives

6 Then Ezra withdrew from before the house of God, and went to the chamber of Jehohanan son of Eliashib, where he spent the night. He did not eat bread or drink water, for he was mourning over the faithlessness of the exiles. 7 They made a proclamation throughout Judah and Jerusalem to all the returned exiles that they should assemble at Jerusalem, 8 and that if any did not come within three days, by order of the officials and the elders all their property should be forfeited, and they themselves banned from the congregation of the exiles.

9 Then all the people of Judah and Benjamin assembled at Jerusalem within the three days; it was the ninth month, on the twentieth day of the month. All the people sat in the open square before the house of God, trembling because of this matter and because of the heavy rain. 10 Then Ezra the priest stood up and said to them, "You have trespassed and married foreign women, and so increased the guilt of Israel. 11 Now make confession to the LORD the God of your ancestors, and do his will; separate yourselves from the peoples of the land and from the foreign wives." 12 Then all the assembly answered with a loud voice, "It is so; we must do as you have said. 13 But the people are many, and it is a time of heavy rain; we cannot stand in the open. Nor is this a task for one day or for two, for many of us have transgressed in this matter. 14 Let our officials represent the whole assembly, and let all in our towns who have taken foreign wives come at appointed times, and with them the elders and judges of every town, until the fierce wrath of our God on this account is averted from us." 15 Only Jonathan son of Asahel and Jahzeiah son of Tikvah opposed this, and Meshullam and Shabbethai the Levites supported them.

16 Then the returned exiles did so. Ezra the priest selected men, heads of families, according to their families, each of them designated by name. On the first day of the tenth month they sat down to examine the matter. 17 By the first day of the first month they had come to the end of all the men who had married foreign women. (Ezra 10:1-17, NRSV)

The following comments are compared with comments of November 6, 2005 (the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), but are largely rewritten here:

The people join in with Ezra’s prayer of confession (Ezra 9:5-15). “While Ezra prayed and made confession,” we are told, “weeping and throwing himself down before the house of God, a very great assembly of men, women, and children gathered to him out of Israel; the people also wept bitterly” (10:1). Tamara Cohn Eskenazi says, “Ezra’s confession attracts a crowd and inspires remorse and confession. The first person to speak up to Ezra is “Shecaniah son of Jehiel, of the descendants of Elam,” who says,

We have broken faith with our God and have married foreign women (wannōšev nāšîm nokrîyôth) from the peoples of the land, but even now there is hope for Israel in spite of this. So now let us make a covenant with our God to send away (l^ehôtsî’) all these wives and their children, according to the counsel of my lord and of those who tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law. Take action, for it is your duty, and we are with you; be strong, and do it. (Ezra 10:2-4, NRSV)

Eskenazi says that the words “Have married” literally mean “have been settled ,” that is, “established in the land”; and she adds, “Inheritance of land is a concern (see Ezra 9:12; Deut. 7)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., on Ezra 10:2). However, the phrase in question, “have married foreign women,” is not in the passive voice. William L. Holladay translates it, “make (a foreign woman) a resident, marry Ezr. 10:2” (Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon, 1971, s.v. bw1y!, yāšav, hif.). David J. A. Clines says, “Strangely, a Jehiel of the family of Elam was among those who had married foreign wives (see 10:26); so, if it is the same Jehiel, Shecaniah would have been advocating his own excommunication!” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Ezra 10:2; cf Eskenazi, on v. 2). But Hindy Najman offers, if not a different understanding, at least a different perspective: “Shecaniah speaks in the first person plural. For this reason, he is listed in rabbinic traditions as one of several exemplary leaders who take responsibility for the sins of the community and are thereby able to take the lead in resolving a problem (b Sanh. 11a)” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, p. 1685, on Ezra 10:2).

Clines interprets “send away” (v. 3) as “divorce,” and comments on the phrase, “According to the law”: “The law sanctions divorce in the case of a man finding some “uncleanness” in his wife (Deut. 24:1-4); apparently the law is here being applied to the case of the ritual ‘uncleanness’ of foreign birth. Previously, although the law forbade certain intermarriage, there was no rule about what action should be taken once it had occurred” (op. cit., on Ezra 10:3). “Remarkably,” says Eskenazi, “the children of such marriages are to be sent away too” (on v. 3). According to Najman, “The decision to expel all foreign wives and the children who were born to them is understood in rabbinic traditions to be the basis for the laws concerning matrilineal descent as a defining marker of Jewish identity (Gen. Rab. 7.2); biblical narratives suggest the priority of patrilineal descent in matters of genealogy and inheritance” (op. cit., on v. 3). Eskenazi says of Shecaniah’s words, “Take action, for it is your duty, and we are with you; be strong, and do it” (v. 4), that “The people authorize Ezra to act” (on v. 4).

Ezra responds by putting the proposal articulated by Shecaniah into effect. “Then Ezra stood up and made the leading priests, the Levites, and all Israel swear that they would do as had been said. So they swore” (v. 5). Eskenazi observes that “Only after he has been invited to do so does Ezra assume leadership” (on v. 5). But as Najman observes, “Ezra requires the leadership of the returning community to take an oath to act in accordance with the law. Perhaps this is necessary in light of the charges that are made against the community leaders in 9:2” (on vv. 6-11). Due to the seriousness with which Ezra regards the situation, he withdraws and fasts overnight. “Then Ezra withdrew from before the house of God, and went to the chamber of Jehohanan son of Eliashib, where he spent the night. He did not eat bread or drink water, for he was mourning over the faithlessness of the exiles” (v. 6). “The sin,” says Najman, “is seen as so extreme that, like Moses after the construction of the golden calf, Ezra fasts completely (see Exod. 34:28; Deut. 9:18). All the “returned exiles” are summoned by proclamation to a meeting at Jerusalem (v. 7), with severe sanctions for failure to come: “and that if any did not come within three days, by order of the officials and the elders all their property should be forfeited, and they themselves banned from the congregation of the exiles” (v. 8). So the assembly was held in “the ninth month [Kislev = Nov.-Dec.], on the twentieth day of the month” (v. 9a). The unfavorable weather conditions perhaps symbolized the mood of the people, who “sat in the open square before the house of God, trembling because of this matter and because of the heavy rain” (v. 9b). Clines refers to the month as “December, when the heavy winter rains, and sometimes even snow, fall in Jerusalem, which lies 2,000 feet above sea level” (on v. 9).

When Ezra addresses the people, he says: “You have trespassed and married foreign women, and so increased the guilt of Israel. Now make confession to the LORD the God of your ancestors, and do his will; separate yourselves from the peoples of the land and from the foreign wives” (vv. 10-11). As Eskenazi notes, the phrase “married foreign women” implies “settled” here as in v. 2 (on vv. 10-11; cf. above). The people respond to Ezra, “"It is so; we must do as you have said” (v. 12). And the people propose a course of action. “But the people are many, and it is a time of heavy rain; we cannot stand in the open. Nor is this a task for one day or for two, for many of us have transgressed in this matter. Let our officials represent the whole assembly, and let all in our towns who have taken foreign wives come at appointed times, and with them the elders and judges of every town, until the fierce wrath of our God on this account is averted from us” (vv. 13-14). “This section of the narrative,” says Najman, “is deeply influenced by numerous Torah narratives involving the Israelites’ willingness to accept the authority of Moses and to agree to obey particular laws” (op. cit., p. 1686, on vv. 12-14). “Again,” says Eskenazi, “the community is responsible for action, devising a representative form (our officials) of governing for itself” (on v. 14). And the next verse describes a dissenting opinion. “Only Jonathan son of Asahel and Jahzeiah son of Tikvah opposed this, and Meshullam and Shabbethai the Levites supported them” (v. 15). Eskenazi notes this dissent also. “A minority opposition is registered, establishing that majority decision carries even without unanimity” (on v. 15). Clines, offers a less optimistic appraisal. “The appointment of a commission to examine the individual cases casts a veneer of propriety and legality over the proceedings, which had, however, been decided on by a popular assembly of which the vast majority had nothing to lose by the decision” (on vv. 10-14). He also has a different perspective on the minority opinion. “The opposition may be to the proposal to postpone the investigations, and these four men may be more rigorous, not more liberal, than the majority; the Levite Meshullam may well be Ezra’s companion in 8:16, and Shabbethai’s name suggests that he came from a strict ly religious family (cf. Isa. 58:13).

So the decision of the assembly is carried out. “Then the returned exiles did so. Ezra the priest selected men, heads of families, according to their families, each of them designated by name.” (v. 16a). A procedure is initiated that is completed in about three months. “ On the first day of the tenth month [Tevet = Dec.-Jan.] they sat down to examine the matter. By the first day of the first month [Nissan = Mar.-Apr.] they had come to the end of all the men who had married foreign women” (vv. 16b, 17).

or Nehemiah 1:1-11 (alternative reading, Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions)

For the text and comments of this reading see the text and comments of Thursday, November 1, 2007, ten days ago.

Acts 24:10-21

Paul's Defense before Felix

10 When the governor motioned to him to speak, Paul replied:

"I cheerfully make my defense, knowing that for many years you have been a judge over this nation. 11 As you can find out, it is not more than twelve days since I went up to worship in Jerusalem. 12 They did not find me disputing with anyone in the temple or stirring up a crowd either in the synagogues or throughout the city. 13 Neither can they prove to you the charge that they now bring against me. 14 But this I admit to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our ancestors, believing everything laid down according to the law or written in the prophets. 15 I have a hope in God--a hope that they themselves also accept--that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous. 16 Therefore I do my best always to have a clear conscience toward God and all people. 17 Now after some years I came to bring alms to my nation and to offer sacrifices. 18 While I was doing this, they found me in the temple, completing the rite of purification, without any crowd or disturbance. 19 But there were some Jews from Asia--they ought to be here before you to make an accusation, if they have anything against me. 20 Or let these men here tell what crime they had found when I stood before the council, 21 unless it was this one sentence that I called out while standing before them, 'It is about the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you today.' “ (Acts 24:10-21, NRSV)

On August 23, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to August 17, Year One), comments were repeated from October 12, 2006 (Thursday in the week of the Sunday closest to October 5, Year Two), when comments were combined with some revision from October 7, 2004 (two years ago on Thursday of the week of the Sunday closest to October 5, Year Two) and from August 18, 2005 (Thursday of the week of the 13^th Sunday after Pentecost, Year One). The following comments are based on those combined comments with comparison to comments from November 6, 2005 (the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One).

After Paul’s appearance in the temple in Jerusalem led to a riot and the arrest of Paul (Acts 21:27-40), and after further events, including the discovery of a plot against his life (23:12-35), Paul is moved to Caesarea, where he remains in custody for two years. Paul gets what amounts to an initial hearing before Felix the governor. Paul’s accusers arrive from Jerusalem to present their case against him (24:1-9). His Jewish accusers’ case for the prosecution is presented briefly (Acts 24:2-8) by an attorney (hrētōr) named Tertullus (v. 1), seconded, as it were, by “the Jews” (v. 9). Tertullus’ opening flattery is apparently “the customary method of opening a speech with praise that is intended to attract the attention and sympathy of the one being addressed” (Christopher R. Matthews, NOAB, 3^rd ed., on vv. 2-4). According to Tertullus, Paul is “a pestilent fellow, an agitator among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader (prōtostatēs) of the sect of the Nazarenes” (v. 5). “He even,” says Tertullus, “tried to profane the temple, and so we seized him” (v. 6). The Jews "joined in the charge by asserting that all this was true" (v. 9).

When the governor gives Paul the opportunity to speak in his own defense (v. 10a), his opening recognition of the governor is more restrained: “I cheerfully make my defense, knowing that for many years you have been a judge over this nation” (v. 10b). Paul begins his own defense by claiming to be innocent (vv. 11-13); it has been “not more than twelve days” since his arrival in Jerusalem (v. 11). He was not “disputing with anyone in the temple or stirring up a crowd” (v. 12). He "shifts the topic dramatically" with a play on the word "confess" (homologeo), translated "admit" in verse 14: "But this I admit to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our ancestors." "The Greek word . . . can refer to a judicial confession or to a confession of faith" (Beverly Roberts Gaventa, Harper-Collins Study Bible, 1^st ed., 1993, on Acts 24:14). Paul claims to believe “everything laid down according to the law or written in the prophets” (v. 14b), and to have a hope in the resurrection, “a hope that they themselves also accept” (v. 15). He strives “to have a clear conscience toward God and all people” (v. 16). His business in the temple was “alms to my nation” and “sacrifices” (v. 17), in particular, “the rite of purification” (v. 18). His accusers from Asia should be present to make accusation (v. 19), or the present accusers should report the “crime” found by the Jerusalem Council, which can only be his exclamation there, “It is about the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you today” (v. 21).

Felix postpones a decision until “Lysias the tribune comes down” (v. 22), and orders that Paul be kept “in custody” with some liberty (v. 23), “perhaps protective custody” (Matthews, on v. 23).

Luke 14:12-24

The text of this reading from Luke is presented in comparison with the parallel passage in Matthew 22:1-14 in the following table.

Recent comments on these passages from the perspective of Matthew’s version may be found in the Archive for July 8, 2007 (the Sunday closest to July 6, Year One). The following comments are based on those of November 6, 2005 (the Sunday closest to November 9, Year One), and of November 13, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year Two), when comments from November 8, 2004, two years earlier(Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 9, Year Two), and from May 21, 2005 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to May 18, Year One): were used.

Luke presents a paragraph of Jesus’ teaching on humility (Lk. 14:7-14) which has no parallel passage in the other Gospels except for a brief saying, “All who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted” (Mt. 23:12; cf. Lk. 18:14). His remarks about humility and hospitality (Lk. 14:7-11) lead to advice about inviting giving a banquet. He tells his host to give banquets for “the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind” (Lk. 14:13), rather than for “your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors” (v. 12). The principle is giving with no expectation of reciprocation, not giving “in case they may invite you in return” (v. 12). There are a few churches in Houston that take this advice literally, maintaining food pantries, some even feeding “street people” regularly on Sunday.

One of the dinner guests apparently expects to have the blessing of sharing in the “eschatological banquet”: “Blessed,” he says, “is anyone who will eat bread in the kingdom of God!” (v. 15). Jesus responds with the “parable” of the great dinner, and the reasons or excuses given by many for not coming.

The Parable of the Great Dinner puts the dinner invitation to the outcasts after the rejections and excuses of the first invited guests (vv. 18-20). In Matthew, the excuses are abbreviated (Mt. 22:3, 5), but a sinister note appears: "while the rest seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them." In both there is an emphasis on responding to God's invitation, but the incident of the guest who lacked the wedding robe (Mt. 22:11-14) focuses on the need to be worthy of entering the kingdom, whereas Luke's parable illustrates the instruction about hospitality. Both themes call for our serious consideration.

For Matthew, this parable follows the Parable of the Wicked Tenants (Mt. 21:33-46) as a part of a series of teachings and debates in Jerusalem during the final week (21:28-25:46). Luke gives it a setting as a part of Jesus’ teaching at “the house of a leader of the Pharisees” (Lk. 14:1), in response to an exclamation from “one of the dinner guests”: “Blessed is anyone who will eat bread in the kingdom of God!” (v. 15). For Luke, the dinner is given by “someone” (v. 16), whereas Matthew’s parable is about a “wedding banquet” given by a king (Mt. 22:1). Matthew’s detailed description of the preparations (v. 4; cf. Lk. 14:17) implies the importance of the occasion, and though both accounts decry the excuses of the first invited guests (Mt. 22:5-6; Lk. 14:18-20), Matthew’s account continues the focus on the rejection and killing of Jesus by the “wicked tenants” of the preceding parable. Those invited “made light of it and went away, one to his farm, another to his business, 6 while the rest seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them” (Mt. 22:5-6). Finally the owner of the house sends his slave “into the streets and lanes of the town” to “bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame” (v. 21; cf. Mt. 22:9-10), repeating the words that Jesus directed to his host earlier (v. 13).:

While Luke’s version of the parable implies eschatological judgment and rejection of the ones first invited, “none of those who were invited will taste my dinner” (Lk. 14:24), that is, exclusion from the “messianic banquet” (cf. Marion Lloyd Soards, NOAB, 3^rd ed., on Lk. 14:24), Matthew emphasizes this aspect with the removal of the guest “who was not wearing a wedding robe” (Mt. 22:11-14, cf. the parables of chaps. 24-25). We may take courage from the fact that those excluded from the banquet were not merely overlooked. There was a conscious rejection of the invitation on the part of those who did not come, but the invitation was thrown open to “everyone” (Mt. 22:9), to “the poor, the crippled, the blind, and the lame” (Lk. 14:21). Most of us are probably “crippled” in one way or another, but we are all invited.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net