Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ezra 10:16
And the children of the captivity did so. And Ezra the priest, [with] certain chief of the fathers, after the house of their fathers, and all of them by [their] names, were separated, and sat down in the first day of the tenth month to examine the matter.
16, 17. The Commission at work
16. the children of the captivity did so ] For this expression cf. Ezr 10:7. The proposal was no sooner made than it was carried into execution. The personal influence of Ezra must account for the ready acquiescence of the people generally.
And Ezra the priest ] Ezra is here mentioned first, and it is probable that he presided over the court of enquiry. On his title ‘the priest’, cf. Ezr 7:11.
with certain chief of the fathers, after the house of their fathers ] R.V. with certain heads of fathers’ houses, after their fathers’ houses. The word ‘with’ does not appear in the Hebrew, but, if the existing text be correct, we clearly need some such copula, which is supplied in the LXX. and Vulg. The phrase ‘certain heads of fathers’ houses, after their fathers’ houses’ seems to mean that each ‘father’s house’ (cf. Ezr 2:3, &c.) was represented on the commission by its chief or head. Literally rendered, the Hebrew runs, ‘Ezra the priest, men, heads of fathers’ houses, &c.’
all of them by their names ] A full list of the households being furnished, the representative chiefs of certain ‘houses’ were required by name to attend. Cf. ‘were expressed by name’, Ezr 8:20.
were separated ] i.e. were set apart for the work. The use of this word ‘separated’ shows that a certain number and not all of the chiefs were employed on this occasion. The text is not quite free from suspicion. The absence of the copula before ‘men (or, certain) heads’ taken in conjunction with the reading of the Syriac Peshitto favours another rendering ‘And Ezra the priest separated (or set apart for the work) certain men (that were) heads &c.’ In other words Ezra made the necessary selection. Not all the heads of the great houses were summoned to sit on the commission. We read of ninety-eight in, Ezr 2:3-61, and this number would have been far too unwieldy for the purpose. Certain of them were therefore to be set apart from the whole number. And Ezra was the natural person to make the selection. Having recently arrived from Babylon, he would be impartial, while the fact of his having originated the whole movement marked him out to be head of the enquiry.
, and sat down ] R.V.; and they sat down. The R.V. separates the clause more-definitely from the preceding one. The Hebrew phrase is the same as the English ‘and the commission held its first sitting’.
in the first day of the tenth month ] The first of Tebeth (see Est 2:16), the Assyrian Tibi-tuv, about the same as our January.
to examine the matter ] The Hebrew word ‘to examine’ is of very strange form, and looks as if the name of ‘Darius’ had been carelessly introduced by a copyist in the place of the similar word ‘to examine’. He was perhaps reminded, by the look of the letters, of the word similarly formed composing the familiar name of the king.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Were separated, i.e. sequestered themselves from all other business, and gave themselves wholly to this.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And the children of the captivity did so,…. Put away their strange wives:
and Ezra the priest, with certain chief of the fathers, after the house of their fathers, and all of them by their names, were separated; from all their other business, and gave themselves up to attend to this wholly:
and sat down in the first day of the tenth month; the month Tebeth, which answers to part of December and January; this was ten days after the assembly of all the people met and broke up: these took their places in the great court, and there sat
to examine the matter; the accounts brought in from the several cities by the magistrates thereof, and recorded them.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
4. The decision is carried out.
TEXT, Ezr. 10:16-19
16
But the exiles did so. And Ezra the priest selected men who were heads of fathers households for each of their fathers households, all of them by name. So they convened on the first day of the tenth month to investigate the matter.
17
And they finished investigating all the men who had married foreign wives by the first of the first month.
18
And among the sons of the priests who had married foreign wives were found of the sons of Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brothers; Maaseiah, Eliezer, Jarib, and Gedaliah.
19
And they pledged to put away their wives, and being guilty, they offered a ram of the flock for their offense.
COMMENT
Ezr. 10:16 shows Ezra once more appointing men from the various households (clans) to help with this responsibility. These assembled within ten or eleven days. This is the point where we may ask what they had to investigate; was it only to discover every person in their communities who had offended or were they setting policies to check for sincere conversions among the parties involved?
Ezr. 10:17 relates the completion of the investigation three months later, on the first day of the year, exactly a year after Ezra had assembled his group of exiles to go up to Jerusalem (Ezr. 7:9).
Ezr. 10:18 demonstrates the extent of the sin, even within the priesthood. (Notice that again, as at Ezr. 10:5, the priests are listed first.) The book began with recognition for the fine work of the high priest Jeshua, son of Jozadak (Ezr. 2:2; Ezr. 3:2). It ends with the acknowledgment of the sin of some of his descendants and relatives. So the best of institutions must always be subject to reexamination.
According to Ezr. 10:19, the offending priests gave their hands (literal meaning of pledged) to put away their foreign wives; we are reminded how far back the binding nature of a handshake goes, along with some of our other customs. This would save their land from the continued burden of their error; but what about the wrong already done? The heathen women were themselves victims of an injury which could never be righted in this world. Therefore, to atone for their guilt, the priests offered a trespass offering. Details of this are given in Lev. 5:14-19; Num. 15:22-31. It was, you will notice, for unintentional sins (Lev. 5:17 f); there is no sacrifice in the O.T. for deliberate sins (Num. 15:30 f). This suggests that those who were involved may not have been aware of the law; perhaps this particular law had not been sufficiently publicized. Or they may not have been impressed with the seriousness of their act. Evidently they had not deliberately intended to disobey one of Gods laws. Most of our sins, then and now, probably would come under this category, because few people intend to do wrong deliberately. In most cases we are deceived, or misled, or thoughtless; but the consequences are still the same, and the damage is just as real.
While only the priests are mentioned as making this offering, it is possible that the other offenders did likewise.
WORD STUDIES
COVENANT (Ezr. 10:3, Berith): comes from the verb, eat. To make (literally, cut) a covenant, persons butchered and cut up a domestic vegetarian (peaceful) animal (see Genesis 15) and arrived at their agreements around a table of good fellowship. Peace treaties, religious obligations, personal contracts were all sealed in this way. Gods covenant with man always had this connotation of fellowship, or sharing, including His obligation to bless if the covenant was kept.
TAKE OATH (Ezr. 10:8, Shaba): swear, to seven oneself. Seven, a sacred number, calls attention also to offerings that would be made to seal an oath (Gen. 21:28 ff).
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
16. Children of the captivity did so That is, the persons implicated, and the whole people, adopted the plan arranged by Ezra.
After the house of their fathers So that every father’s house was represented.
All of them by their names The name of each of the more distinguished fathers was probably called, and from each family thus represented a person was chosen, and all these, with Ezra himself, were separated, that is, chosen and set apart, to examine the matter. They had the responsibility and control of the investigation and decision of each case, while the four persons named it the previous verse were probably required to act as secretaries for them.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Ezr 10:16 And the children of the captivity did so. And Ezra the priest, [with] certain chief of the fathers, after the house of their fathers, and all of them by [their] names, were separated, and sat down in the first day of the tenth month to examine the matter.
Ver. 16. And the children of the captivity did so ] Appointed such a course should be taken. And so it was a plain Plebiscitum, resolution of the people, and accordingly executed.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Ezr 10:16-17
16 But the exiles did so. And Ezra the priest selected men who were heads of fathers’ households for each of their father’s households, all of them by name. So they convened on the first day of the tenth month to investigate the matter. 17They finished investigating all the men who had married foreign wives by the first day of the first month.
Ezr 10:16 In spite of opposition, Ezra’s proposals were acted on by the heads of the families/clans.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
certain = men. Hebrew. ‘enosh. App-14.
chief = heads.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Ezr 10:16-17
Ezr 10:16-17
AND THE CHILDREN OF THE CAPTIVITY DID SO
“And the children of the captivity did so. And Ezra the priest, with certain heads of fathers’ houses, after their fathers’ houses, and all of them by their names, were set apart; and they sat down in the first day of the tenth month to examine the matter. And they made an end with all the men that had married foreign women by the first day of the first month.”
The opposition did not delay the repudiation of the foreign wives. Only about a week elapsed between the decision to do so and the first session of the commission appointed to execute it. “The case of each city (or village) was taken separately. The male inhabitants of full age attended, and the `elders and judges’ heard each case separately. The neighbors of each person investigated were available for questioning; and when a mixed marriage was proved, the wife was repudiated. In 112 cases, the commission decided that the foreign wives and the children born to them were to be sent away.” An emendation in the RSV results in the number being reduced to 111.
In any case, the number is surprisingly small. Out of at least 20,000 men, only a few more than a hundred were guilty of having violated God’s law in this matter. However, the importance of it was greatly intensified and augmented by the high social position and importance of the violators. If these had remained unpunished, or if their unlawful marriages had been allowed to stand, there is no way that Israel could have continued to maintain their distinction as a separate nation. Ezra’s listing the violators as to their distinction as priests, Levites, etc., doubtless had this very fact in focus. The whole project was completed in three months’ time, which allowed the better part of a whole day for the investigation of each one convicted.
E.M. Zerr:
Ezr 10:16. Children of the captivity were the ones who had been exiles, but had come back to Palestine in the days of Cyrus. They were the ones who had taken the unlawful wives after coming from Babylon. They had agreed to correct the situation by putting away the strange wives. The priests mentioned in Ezr 10:15 took active charge of the ceremonies, but the transaction needed to be “checked” by other and superior men. For this work Ezra took some chief fathers and sat down to the task of reviewing the work that had been done. They began their work the 1st day of the 10th month. It had been started about the 20th of the 9th month (Ezr 10:9), which means that Jonathan and his helpers got a 10-day start ahead of Ezra’s review work.
Ezr 10:17. First day of the first month means, of the next year following the arrival in Jerusalem; so that we see the work of Ezra in examining the work of Jonathan required two months. All of this shows that care was taken in this serious business, so that the national personnel would again be pure.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
tenth month
i.e. January.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
to examine the matter: Deu 13:14, Job 29:16, Joh 7:51
Reciprocal: Ezr 4:1 – children of the captivity Dan 5:13 – the children
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Ezr 10:16-17. Ezra the priest, &c., were separated, and sat down Sequestered themselves from all other business, and gave themselves wholly to this. They made an end, by the first day of the first month Three months, therefore, were spent in this disquisition, which shows that it was very exact.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
10:16 And the children of the captivity did so. And Ezra the priest, [with] certain chief of the fathers, after the house of their fathers, and all of them by [their] names, {k} were separated, and sat down in the first day of the tenth month to examine the matter.
(k) They went to the chief cities to sit on this matter which took three months to finish.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The completion of the proceedings 10:16-44
The people were able to complete the divorce proceedings in three months (Ezr 10:9; Ezr 10:17). A total of 113 Israelites had married and now divorced their foreign wives, only a small fraction of the total number of Jews then living in Judah. Of these, 16 were priests and 10 were Levites, about 25 percent of the total 113. Perhaps no Jewish women had married any Gentile men. A more likely possibility is that since women could not divorce their husbands in Israel, the Jewish women who had married Gentiles did not get divorces.
Was this plan one that God approved? The text does not give any statement from a prophet or other representative who spoke for God either way. However, for the reasons explained above-and since the writer devoted two chapters in this inspired book to the record of this incident-I think it was God’s will.
". . . although the law in general was known to the exiles, the finer distinctions and the interpretation of certain stipulations could have escaped them. Ezra was sent to teach them these distinctions and to interpret the law for them (Ezr 7:10). It is this lesson they had to learn in order to realize that their marriages to foreign women were wrong." [Note: Fensham, The Books . . ., p. 143.]
This reformation resulted in the continued racial, and more significantly, spiritual purity of Abraham’s descendants for another generation. However, Nehemiah faced the problem of mixed marriages again only a few years later (Neh 10:30; Neh 13:23).
"The Book of Ezra-Nehemiah presents Ezra as a strong personality. He did not emphasize the law as an end in itself; rather, he was convinced that the covenant community needed to return to God by taking seriously his revelation and applying it to every aspect of life." [Note: Breneman, p. 58.]