Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ezra 2:59
And these [were] they which went up from Tel-melah, Tel-harsa, Cherub, Addan, [and] Immer: but they could not show their father’s house, and their seed, whether they [were] of Israel:
59 63. Israelites and Priests of uncertain genealogy
59. Tel-melah, Tel-harsa ] R.V., Tel-melah, Tel-harsha i.e. Salthill and Forest-hill, probably names of localities in Babylonia.
Cherub, Addan, and Immer ] These are names not of people, but, in all probability, of three villages in one district of Babylonia. Rawlinson suggests that Cherub is the Cheripha of Ptolemy, and that Tel-melah is Telme.
There are then three districts, Tel-melah, Tel-harsa, and Cherub-Addan-Immer, from which came the three families Delaiah, Tobiah and Nekoda.
Addan ] appears in Neh 7:59 ‘Addon’.
their fathers’ house ] their fathers’ houses R.V. They were able to show their recent ancestry, but not their descent from the great clans or households into which the tribes were divided. They could not prove either of the two greatest essentials in a Jewish genealogy, their place in the household or their membership in a tribe.
This technical failure to produce their genealogy probably deprived them of the full rights of citizenship. They were not refused participation in the Return. But the names do not appear in later lists, Ezr 10:25-43; Neh 10:1-27.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Tel-melah, Tel-harsa, Cherub, Addan, and Immer, were probably cities, or villages, of Babylonia, at which the Jews here spoken of had been settled. The first and third have been reasonably identified with the Thelme and Chiripha of Ptolemy. Of the rest, nothing is known at present.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Tel-mela, Tel-harsa; the names of the places whence they came, and where they had lived in the time of their captivity.
Cherub, Addan, and Immer; the names either of the heads of the families living in the places last mentioned, or of other places where the persons here understood had dwelt.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And these were they that went up from Telmelah, Telharsa,…. Places in the land of Babylon, see Isa 37:12.
Cherub, Addan, and Immer; but they could not show their father’s house, and their seed, whether they were of Israel; these were such that professed the Jewish religion, and went for Jews in Babylon, but could not trace their pedigree, and tell what family they were of, who their ancestors, and where they had lived in Judea; they had lost their genealogical tables, if they ever had any, and could not make it out, whether their parents were Israelites or proselyted Gentiles; or they were such who had been exposed, and taken out of the streets, and their parents unknown.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Those who went up with, but could not prove that they pertained to, the nation of Israel. Comp. Neh 7:61 and Neh 7:62. – Three such families are named, consisting of 652, or according to Nehemiah of 642, persons. These went up, with those who returned, from Tel-melah (Salthill) and Tel-harsa (Thicket or Forest Hill), names of Babylonian districts or regions, the situations of which cannot be ascertained. The words also which follow, , are obscure, but are certainly not the names of individuals, the persons who went up not being specified till Ezr 2:60. The words are names of places, but it is uncertain whether the three are used to express one or three places. In favour of the notion that they designate but one locality, may be alleged that in Ezr 2:60 only three races are named, which would then correspond with the districts named in Ezr 2:59: Tel-melah, Tel-harsa, and Cherub-Addan-Immer; a race from each district joining those who went up to Jerusalem. The three last words, however, may also designate three places in close proximity, in which one of the races of Ezr 2:60 might be dwelling. These could not show their father’s house and their seed, i.e., genealogy, whether they were of Israel. , as well as the suffixes of and , refers to the persons named in Ezr 2:60. They could not show that the houses of Delaiah, Tobiah, and Nekoda, after which they were called, belonged to Israel, nor that they themselves were of Israelitish origin. Cler. well remarks: Judaicam religionem dudum sequebantur, quam ob rem se Judaeos censebant; quamvis non possent genealogicas ullas tabulas ostendere, ex quibus constaret, ex Hebraeis oriundos esse . One of these names, Nekoda, Ezr 2:48, occurring among those of the Nethinim, Bertheau conjectures that while the sons of Nekoda here spoken of claimed to belong to Israel, the objection was made that they might belong to the sons of Nekoda mentioned Ezr 2:48, and ought therefore to be reckoned among the Nethinim. Similar objections may have been made to the two other houses. Although they could not prove their Israelite origin, they were permitted to go up to Jerusalem with the rest, the rights of citizenship alone being for the present withheld. Hence we meet with none of these names either in the enumeration of the heads and houses of the people, Neh 10:15-28, or in the list Ezra 10:25-43.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
TEXT, Ezr. 2:59-63
59
Now these are those who came up from Tel-melah, Telharsha, Cherub, Addan, and Immer, but they were not able to give evidence of their fathers households, and their descendants, whether they were of Israel:
60
the sons of Delaiah, the sons of Tobiah, the sons of Nekoda, 652.
61
And of the sons of the priests: the sons of Habaiah, the sons of Hakkoz, the sons of Barzillai, who took a wife from the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and he was called by their name.
62
These searched among their ancestral registration, but they could not be located; therefore they were considered unclean and were excluded from the priesthood.
63
And the governor said to them that they should not eat from the most holy things until a priest stood up with Urim and Thummim.
COMMENT
In Ezr. 2:59 the settlements in Babylon from which they came are mentioned; then the names of their families, first of the common people in Ezr. 2:60, and of those who claimed to be of the priesthood in Ezr. 2:61. Dr. Ironside compares these priests with some now, who cannot trace their genealogy but nevertheless insist on the Christian place as rightfully theirs. He cautions against presumptuously denying that they are born of God, yet says we cannot own them as such till they can give clear evidence of being indeed of the priestly company and partakers of the divine nature.[16][16] H. A. Ironside, Notes on The Books of Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther, p. 22.
Should these be censured for having lost the important records of their ancestry, thus their birthright and identity as Gods children and servants? Or should they be praised for the religious fervor that set them apart from those content to stay in Babylon, in spite of their lack of documents which would guarantee them the worldly benefits which their companions could claim? Enough that they were going back to scenes and circumstances reminiscent of their forefathers close walk with their God!
Those particularly who claimed priestly backgrounds had a special problem: they would be presiding over Israels religion as well as deriving their support from it, so great care must be taken to insure the correctness of their religious backgrounds. Priests, prophets, and kings were all messiahs: that is, they were anointed of God as His representatives to the people. No person who came from a foreign land could become a prophet of Israel; he must be from your own countrymen (Deu. 18:15; Deu. 18:18). The king also must be a native (Deu. 17:15); the wisdom of this requirement is recognized even in the American Constitution, which specifies that no one can become president of the United States who is not a citizen by birth.
The priest must meet an additional requirement: he must be not only an Israelite by birth, but he must be taken from the descendants of Aaron, of the tribe of Levi (Exo. 28:1 ff). No one must take this office on himself (Heb. 5:4). It had been one of the Levites above any of the other tribes who had demonstrated loyalty to Israels God against heathen gods and customs during the Wilderness Wanderings, at Baal-Peor (Num. 25:5-13); therefore they were chosen above the firstborn of all Israelites to serve in the house of the Lord and to protect the purity of the worship. It was essential then that priests be able to trace their descent from this tribe.
Ezr. 2:63. But for those of the priestly line who had lost evidence of their descent, there was a door left slightly open. They were not simply disfellowshipped. God had spoken through His priests in time past by means of Urim and Thummin, objects in the custody of the priests (Exo. 28:30, 1Sa. 28:6). If God wished the services of any of these men, He would restore the Urim and Thummim which seem to have been lost in the Captivity, that He might be consulted about each of these individuals. There is no record of the priests possession of these after the return from Captivity, therefore many authorities, though not all,[17] suppose that these men were never granted a full status as priests.
[17] G. Coleman Luck, Ezra and Nehemiah, p. 22.
WORD STUDIES
ZERUBBABEL: a seed of Babylon: a reminder that God preserved a seed of His people through the Babylonian Captivity, from which His nation would once again spring to life,
TEMPLE SERVANTS (Ezr. 2:43): literally, the Nethinim: those given. The word is a plural form; it comes from the word Nathan. These were the persons given to the priests to assist with the menial tasks of preparing for sacrifice and worship.
JESHUA, or its variant, JOSHUA: Jehovah is Salvation, or Salvation from Jehovah. This is the Hebrew equivalent of the Greek name, Jesus.
MINA: the basic meaning is to divide out, or measure out, or number. Money originally had to be measured, or weighed, at each transaction. This is the word Mene in the handwriting on the wall, in Dan. 5:25 f. Note that the consonants are the same as those in our word money, and in reverse order, the first two consonants in number. Can you find the two letters hidden in the denomination of a bill? In numismatics? Now you are looking at the building blocks of language!
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(59-63) Finally, those who had lost the records of their lineage are mentioned. Of the people, the children of three families from Tel-melah, Hill of salt, Tel-harsa, Hill of the wood, and a few other places, are mentioned. Of the priests, there are also three families without their genealogy.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
59. Tel-melah, Tel-harsa, Cherub, Addan, Immer These are the names of cities or districts in Chaldea, but they have not been identified with modern sites. Some take the last three to be names of persons.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The Enrolling Of The Non-Priests Who Could Not Prove Their Descent From Israel ( Ezr 2:59-60 ).
These appear to have been settled in the Babylonian cities described although the names of the cities mentioned are nowhere testified to in Babylonian records. This is not, however, surprising as few small cities and towns are. The fact that they stand out as those who could not prove their descent demonstrates how careful Jewish families were to keep records of descent. The main problem that would result from this would be the proving of their right to land in Israel. As they were presumably circumcised they would have the same rights as proselytes to take part in the worship of YHWH, and to be adopted as Israelites (Exo 12:48). Indeed the fact that they are listed demonstrates their acceptability to the other immigrants already listed, but it is noteworthy that their names do not occur later in Ezra/Nehemiah. They were not called on to seal the covenant, or to supervise the building of the wall in Jerusalem, and so on.
Ezr 2:59
‘And these were they who went up from Tel-melah, Tel-harsha, Cherub, Addan, and Immer; but they could not show their fathers’ houses, and their seed, whether they were of Israel,’
The Babylonian towns or districts mentioned are not testified to in inscriptions and records, apart from here. Note the two things that they could not do, they could not trace their father’s houses in Israel, and they could not prove that they were descended from Israelites. This would appear to confirm that the previous names have been names of pre-Exilic father’s houses.
It may well be that these particular people were the product of earlier exiles so that they had been in Babylonia for a long time. Thus the only method they had of attempting to demonstrate their Jewishness was by the naming of cities or districts known to have received exiles from Israel/Judah, combined of course with their circumcision and observance of the Sabbath.
Ezr 2:60
‘The sons of Delaiah, the sons of Tobiah, the sons of Nekoda, six hundred and fifty two.’
The name Delaiah was a good Israelite name. It was the name of a descendant of David in 1Ch 3:24, of the leader of the twenty third order of David’s priests (1Ch 24:18), and of one of the princes who pleaded with Jehoiakim not to destroy the roll containing the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jer 36:12; Jer 36:25). It was also the name of the father of the wary Shemaiah in Neh 6:10. But it was, of course, in itself, no proof of Israelite ancestry.
In contrast Tobiah and Nekoda are not found directly as Israelite names. Tobiah (‘Yah is good’) certainly has connections with Yahwism, but as far as we know was borne only by the Ammonite deputy of Sanballat, the governor of Samaria (Neh 2:10; Neh 4:7; Neh 6:1; Neh 6:14; Neh 6:17), who was probably a Yahwist of the debased (idolatrous) kind (Ezr 4:2), for he named his son Jeho-hanan (Neh 6:17). Nekoda is the name of the father’s house of one of the Nethinim (Ezr 2:48), but that may have been a foreign name.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The People and the Priests Without Genealogy
v. 59. And these were they which went up from Tel-melah, Tel-harsa, Cherub, Addan, and Immer, v. 60. the children of Delaiah, the children of Toblah, the children of Nekoda, six hundred fifty and two. v. 61. And of the children of the priests: the children of Habaiah, the children of Koz, the children of Barzillai, which took a wife of the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite and was called after their name, v. 62. These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found, v. 63. And the Tirshatha, v. 64. The whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
This inability to prove their stock of Israel is mentioned as a reproach. But yet we find that they were of those whose hearts the Lord had inclined to go to Jerusalem; were they not types also of those concerning whom we read in the last call of the Jews, who shall take hold of the skirts of a true Israelite, saying, we will go with you, for we have heard that God is with you. Zec 8:23 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Ezr 2:59 And these [were] they which went up from Telmelah, Telharsa, Cherub, Addan, [and] Immer: but they could not shew their father’s house, and their seed, whether they [were] of Israel:
Ver. 59. And these were they which went up from Telmelah, Telharsa, Cherub, &c. ] Places in Chaldaea where these Jews were scattered; as at this day their posterity are up and down in Turkey, and some parts of Christendom, a dejected and despised people.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Ezr 2:59-63
59Now these are those who came up from Tel-melah, Tel-harsha, Cherub, Addan and Immer, but they were not able to give evidence of their fathers’ households and their descendants, whether they were of Israel: 60the sons of Delaiah, the sons of Tobiah, the sons of Nekoda, 652. 61Of the sons of the priests: the sons of Habaiah, the sons of Hakkoz, the sons of Barzillai, who took a wife from the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and he was called by their name. 62These searched among their ancestral registration, but they could not be located; therefore they were considered unclean and were excluded from the priesthood. 63The governor said to them that they should not eat from the most holy things until a priest stood up with Urim and Thummim.
Ezr 2:59 Tel-melah The term tel meant a hill of ruins on which another city was built. The name means hill of salt (BDB 1068), which could denote a cultural way of cursing a defeated city (sowed it with salt so that nothing would grow, cf. Jdg 9:45) or a geographical place where salt is located (e.g., Salt Sea). This may refer to Thelma of Ptolemy (cf. The Pulpit Commentary, vol. 7, p. 18) located in lower Babylon near the Persian Gulf.
Tel-harsha This is another city in Babylon.
Ezr 2:61 the sons of Hakkoz It is possible when one compares Ezr 8:33 (Meremoth the son of Uriah the priest) with Neh 3:4 (Meremoth the son of Uriah the son of Hakkoz, also Ezr 2:21) that this man’s claims to priestly lineage may have been substantiated.
Barzillai the Gileadite This clan leader helped King David as he fled from Absalom (cf. 2Sa 17:27-29). David later tried to reward him for his service and friendship (cf. 2Sa 19:31-39).
Ezr 2:63 governor This Persian term, Tirshatha (BDB 1077) may mean the feared, an idiom for government office. It is used of Nehemiah in Neh 8:9; Neh 10:1. Sheshbazzar is called governor by a different name, Peha, which is an Assyrian term (BDB 1108) used in Ezra 5:36,14; Ezr 6:6-7; Ezr 6:13; Dan 3:2-3; Dan 3:27; Dan 6:8; and Hag 1:1; Hag 1:14; Hag 2:2; Hag 2:21. Both refer to the same office unless Sheshbazzar was subject to the satrap of Samaria.
NASB, NKJVmost holy things
NRSVmost holy food
TEVthe food offered to God
NJBthe consecrated food
This refers to the priests’ part of sacrifices.
Urim and Thummim This refers to the special, but unknown, means of knowing God’s will. It was kept in the ephod of the High Priest (cf. Exo 28:30; Lev 8:8; Num 27:21; Deu 33:8; 1Sa 28:6). They apparently had been lost or were unused for some reason (cf. Exo 28:30; Num 27:21).
For a good brief discussion of the current theories as to what they were and how they worked, see The New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE), vol. 1, pp. 329-330.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
of Israel. See note on Ezr 2:2, and compare 1Ki 12:17.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Ezr 2:59-63
Ezr 2:59-63
SOME WERE PUT OUT OF THE PRIESTHOOD
“And these were they that went up from Tel-melah, Tel-harsha, Cherub, Addan, and Immer; but they could not show their fathers’ houses, and their seed, whether they were of Israel: the children of Delaiah, the children of Tobiah, the children of Nekoda, six hundred fifty and two. And the children of the priests: the children of Ha-baiah, the children of Kakoz, the children of Barzillai the Gileaditc, and was called after their name. These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found: therefore were they deemed polluted and put from the priesthood. And the governor said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and Thummin.”
“The children of Barzillai the Gileadite” (Ezr 2:61). Barzillai, of course, was the famous friend of David who aided him during the rebellion of Absalom, a man of great wealth. Barzillai was not a priest; but his children, probably by his daughters who had married priests, and who therefore were indeed true sons of the priests; but they had retained the famous name of their distinguished ancestor. The priests, of course, intent on restricting everyone possible from joining their company, rejected their claims. The governor decided against them.
It is not exactly clear what the governor meant. There is no proof whatever that the Urim and Thummin survived the captivity, or for that matter, even the repeated sack of the temple; so what he might have meant was, that it would take a direct act of God to put the sons of Barzillai in the priesthood.
The heartless pride and arrogance of the Jewish priesthood are dearly visible here. “Concern for pedigree and purity can easily turn to pride and superiority; and this trend was tragically exemplified by many of the community’s later descendants.”
The Sadducees and Pharisees of the times of Christ prided themselves upon the purity of their descent from Abraham, supposing that their kinship with the patriarch alone would assure them of eternal life. How wrong they were! John the Baptist had warned them that God was “Able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham” (Mat 3:9); and Paul thundered the verdict in the ears of the nation that, “They are not all Israel who are of Israel” (Rom 9:6); but, alas, pride and arrogance can blind the eyes and harden the hearts of all who thus delude themselves.
E.M. Zerr:
Ezr 2:59-60. These towns w ere in the country of Babylon, and some of the Jews had been stationed there, but they were not able to prove their relation to Israelite blood. However, they were at least given the “benefit of the doubt” to the extent of being given what is popularly called “honorable mention” in our language.
Ezr 2:61-62. It had been established that no one should be allowed to have part in the priesthood but those in the blood line of Aaron. The Lord was very particular about this; so much so that he afflicted an otherwise good king with that most loathsome of diseases, leprosy, because he presumed to participate in the rights of the priesthood when he was not in that class. (2Ch 26:18.) There were certain persons who the inspired writer says were children of the priests. Yet they could not show their “birth certificate” and consequently were excluded from the group that would be allowed to act in the priestly service. As polluted does not mean that they were considered as actually polluted. But the dignity of the priesthood was so great and the Lord was so particular about it, that people whose blood relation was doubtful were as objectionable for that office as if they were literally polluted.
Ezr 2:63. Tirshatha is the original word, spelled out with English letters. The definition in Strong’s lexicon is, “of foreign derivation; the title of a Persian deputy or governor.” But that would not mean that this man was a Persian by blood. We recall that while the period of the captivity was over, all the people were still the subjects of the Persian Empire the same as other citizens of a country would be. That would account for the fact that the man authorized to take the lead in the movements would be called by the name used in the text. The evidence is, however, that he was of Jewish blood and understood the principles of the Mosaic law. The Urim and Thummim were the objects placed in the garments worn by the priest. See Exo 28:30. They were used in some supernatural manner in receiving communications from God (Heb 1:1), but were useless except when in the hands of the priest. (Num 27:21.) The persons mentioned in the preceding verse were excluded from the priesthood because of uncertain birth. Now the governor appointed by Cyrus to supervise the operations was not going to authorize any performance of the services until the lawful men showed up. They would be the men having the right to the priesthood; to handling the Urim and Thummim, which would be impotent in any other hands but those of a priest.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Telharsa: Neh 7:61, Tel-haresha, Addon
seed: or, pedigree
Reciprocal: Num 1:18 – their pedigrees 1Ch 9:1 – all Israel 2Ch 31:17 – genealogy Eze 13:9 – neither shall they be
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Ezr 2:59. Which went up from Tel-melah, &c. These were names of some cities in the Babylonish empire, from whence many went along with the Jews to Judea. They were of the Jewish religion, and probably were the children of those who had been carried captive before the general captivity; but they had lost their genealogies, and could not show from what families they were derived, and therefore could not obtain any certain possession in Judea, as those did who knew and could show to what family and city they belonged.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Israelites of doubtful origin 2:59-60
"We may infer from this pericope as it is clearly stated in 1Ch 5:17 and Neh 7:5 that Jewish families kept genealogies to prove their Jewish descent, and to ascertain that mixture with foreign groups was somehow excluded." [Note: Fensham, The Books . . ., p. 55.]
Even though these people could not establish their Jewish ancestry with certainty, the leaders of the restoration permitted them to return with those who could. It is understandable that some of the Jews born in Babylon, perhaps of mixed parentage, would have had trouble tracing their genealogies.
"Dr. Nelson Glueck, in commenting on the phenomenon of historical memory as evidenced in the Old Testament, relates an experience which Mr. A. S. Kirkbride had while serving with ’Lawrence of Arabia’ in 1917. ’He told me,’ writes Glueck, ’that on one occasion, while he was in an Arab encampment, an Arab got up and related the history of his forbearers back to forty generations, and that there were others in the assembly who obviously could have done the same, telling who married and who begat whom, and where they lived, and frequently what they had done, and where they wandered. Kirkbride said it sounded exactly like a chapter of genealogy out of the Bible’ (Newsletter of Nelson Glueck, Aug. 22, 1942)." [Note: David N. Freedman and G. Ernest Wright, eds., The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, p. 63.]