Tuesdays Are for the Old Testament
4/9/24
Lessing, R. Reed, & Steinmann, Andrew E. (2014). "Chapter Fourteen: Ezra and Nehemiah." In Prepare the Way of the Lord: An Introduction to the Old Testament. (pp. 243-266). St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House.
In introducing Ezra and Nehemiah, Lessing and Steinmann remark on the leadership and cooperative work shown in the books, rather than seeking t o view everything in terms of rebuilding a city and a temple (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 243).
Lessing and Steinmann identify four theories of authorship for the works. First, an early theory views Ezra as the author of these books and Chronicles (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 243). The writing in the three books is consistent, and the end of Chronicles matches the start of Ezra. However, Chronicles does seem to push beyond the likely age of Ezra, who would have been very old to see the latest of the family lines in Chronicles (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 244). Nehemiah continues a list of high priests continuing until about 370 BC, which would place the persons of Ezra and Nehemiah significantly over 100 years of age at the end of the events in the three works.
A second theory credits Ezra for the book with his name and Nehemiah for the book with his name (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 244). Again, Lessing and Steinmann consider the chronology too likely to exceed the lifespan of the respective authors.
A third theory, articulated in Germany in the 1830s, is that the Chronicler, a figure somewhat later than Ezra, wrote the works, which were later broken up (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 245). The theory is based on quotations from Chronicles in Ezra (or the other way around), as well as references in 1 Esdras. The assumption which governs this theory is that the apocryphal work is more reliable than the canonical. Additionally, though there are linguistic and stylistic similarities, these are also found in other post-exilic works. The theological emphases are similar, but not identical (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 246).
A fourth model, proposed by Cross, seems to Lessing and Steinmann as depending on speculative suppositions about the nature of the composition (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 246). They do not describe the Cross theory in any detail.
In recent decades the view that Ezra and Nehemiah were compiled by an unknown editor relying on source documents has emerged as a likely manner of composition (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 246). Lessing and Steinmann observe that the two books have normally been considered as one book, as they are still reckoned this way in the Jewish canon (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 247). This view of unity is normally accepted by the scholarly community as well. Lessing and Steinmann do note objections to the unity. Evidence of the concept of unity arises several centuries after the composition (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 248). The mention of the same characters in the same place at approximately the same time is not a strong indicator of the works being one. The two books also have differences in style, vocabulary, and ideology (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 248). The extensive use of source materials in the two works leaves little evidence of the identity of an author. Lessing and Steinmann conclude that the books deserve to be treated individually but as books which have points of connection.
As to the date of composition, Lessing and Steinmann place Nehemiah sometime after 336-331 BC, the reign of Darius III. Ezra could be dated any time after March 27, 457 BC, the last event in the book (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 249). Ezra references the first return of Jews from exile, based on a decree issued in 538 BC (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 250). Steinmann proposes a return somewhat after the decree, in 530. Ezra (7:7) returns to Jerusalem in the seventh year of the reign of Artaxerxes. This is a challenging date, as there were three rulers named Artaxerxes (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 251). Since there is extrabiblical evidence of Nehemiah's return in 445, and it is known that he and Ezra were in Jerusalem at the same time, Ezra's return would be in the reign of Artaxerxes I, and in 448-445 BC (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 251). Lessing and Steinmann discuss dating theories which place the events at another time, yet they find the theories lacking in one way or another. They conclude that Ezra most likely arrived in 458 BC, and that Nehemiah arrived in 445 BC (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 253).
From a literary standpoint, an important feature of Ezra and Nehemiah is the extensive use of a variety of sources (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 254). These source documents make up the vast majority of the text of the two books. Of additional interest is the use of documents in Aramaic rather than Hebrew (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 255).
Ezra 1-6 and 7-10 have parallel structures, each starting with a decree, then a movement to Jerusalem, work in Jerusalem, and a crisis overcome by God's servants (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 256). Lessing and Steinmann consider this to be a very careful arrangement.
Likewise, Nehemiah 1-6 and 7-13 are separate sections. In 1-6 the activity begins with the wall and moves toward the people's faith in God. In 7-13 the nation moves from the people's concerns back to the wall (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 257).
The worship of God's people in Jerusalem is a major theological theme (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 258). Ezra's focus is on the temple, while Nehemiah's is on the city. The re-establishment of historic worship is a major element.
Prayer is a prominent element in the books, with multiple examples of confession and intercession (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 258).
The re-establishment of Jerusalem is a third major theme (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 259). The security of Jerusalem after its desecration and destruction is part and parcel of the restoration of Israel into an eschatological kingdom (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 260).
Ezra and Nehemiah make at least 29 references to the Pentateuch. A strong image of the authority of Scripture is thus created (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 260). The writing is considered to be both the work of Moses and the work of God. There is, furthermore, an emphasis on the written nature of the Torah. This is an example of definitive, unchanging revelation (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 261).
Faithfulness in marriage is another key element in Ezra and Nehemiah. Lessing and Steinmann note the problems caused by intermarriage with the pagans around Judah. The intermarriages were not a problem per se, but would often draw people away from faithfulness to God (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 261). In Ezra and Nehemiah the first commandment takes precedence over the sixth, resulting in a need to end marriages involving pagans (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 262).
The idolatrous practices of other groups can lead God's people into sin. Therefore, we can see Ezra and Nehemiah as depicting sin through the lens of cooperation with pagans (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 262). God shows himself gracious by continually working for restoration of worship according to His will (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 262). God's restorative work is in clear view. he is the one who brings the Judeans back to Jerusalem, who sees that the temple is rebuilt, and who preserves a faithful people (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 263).
Lessing and Steinmann find "no direct messianic references" but do find a strong messianic hope (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 263). This is tied to the restoration of Jerusalem and God's new covenant (Jeremiah 31:27-40). The purification of the place and the people is linked to an eschatological and messianic hope (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 264).
4/9/24
Lessing, R. Reed, & Steinmann, Andrew E. (2014). "Chapter Fourteen: Ezra and Nehemiah." In Prepare the Way of the Lord: An Introduction to the Old Testament. (pp. 243-266). St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House.
In introducing Ezra and Nehemiah, Lessing and Steinmann remark on the leadership and cooperative work shown in the books, rather than seeking t o view everything in terms of rebuilding a city and a temple (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 243).
Lessing and Steinmann identify four theories of authorship for the works. First, an early theory views Ezra as the author of these books and Chronicles (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 243). The writing in the three books is consistent, and the end of Chronicles matches the start of Ezra. However, Chronicles does seem to push beyond the likely age of Ezra, who would have been very old to see the latest of the family lines in Chronicles (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 244). Nehemiah continues a list of high priests continuing until about 370 BC, which would place the persons of Ezra and Nehemiah significantly over 100 years of age at the end of the events in the three works.
A second theory credits Ezra for the book with his name and Nehemiah for the book with his name (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 244). Again, Lessing and Steinmann consider the chronology too likely to exceed the lifespan of the respective authors.
A third theory, articulated in Germany in the 1830s, is that the Chronicler, a figure somewhat later than Ezra, wrote the works, which were later broken up (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 245). The theory is based on quotations from Chronicles in Ezra (or the other way around), as well as references in 1 Esdras. The assumption which governs this theory is that the apocryphal work is more reliable than the canonical. Additionally, though there are linguistic and stylistic similarities, these are also found in other post-exilic works. The theological emphases are similar, but not identical (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 246).
A fourth model, proposed by Cross, seems to Lessing and Steinmann as depending on speculative suppositions about the nature of the composition (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 246). They do not describe the Cross theory in any detail.
In recent decades the view that Ezra and Nehemiah were compiled by an unknown editor relying on source documents has emerged as a likely manner of composition (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 246). Lessing and Steinmann observe that the two books have normally been considered as one book, as they are still reckoned this way in the Jewish canon (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 247). This view of unity is normally accepted by the scholarly community as well. Lessing and Steinmann do note objections to the unity. Evidence of the concept of unity arises several centuries after the composition (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 248). The mention of the same characters in the same place at approximately the same time is not a strong indicator of the works being one. The two books also have differences in style, vocabulary, and ideology (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 248). The extensive use of source materials in the two works leaves little evidence of the identity of an author. Lessing and Steinmann conclude that the books deserve to be treated individually but as books which have points of connection.
As to the date of composition, Lessing and Steinmann place Nehemiah sometime after 336-331 BC, the reign of Darius III. Ezra could be dated any time after March 27, 457 BC, the last event in the book (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 249). Ezra references the first return of Jews from exile, based on a decree issued in 538 BC (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 250). Steinmann proposes a return somewhat after the decree, in 530. Ezra (7:7) returns to Jerusalem in the seventh year of the reign of Artaxerxes. This is a challenging date, as there were three rulers named Artaxerxes (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 251). Since there is extrabiblical evidence of Nehemiah's return in 445, and it is known that he and Ezra were in Jerusalem at the same time, Ezra's return would be in the reign of Artaxerxes I, and in 448-445 BC (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 251). Lessing and Steinmann discuss dating theories which place the events at another time, yet they find the theories lacking in one way or another. They conclude that Ezra most likely arrived in 458 BC, and that Nehemiah arrived in 445 BC (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 253).
From a literary standpoint, an important feature of Ezra and Nehemiah is the extensive use of a variety of sources (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 254). These source documents make up the vast majority of the text of the two books. Of additional interest is the use of documents in Aramaic rather than Hebrew (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 255).
Ezra 1-6 and 7-10 have parallel structures, each starting with a decree, then a movement to Jerusalem, work in Jerusalem, and a crisis overcome by God's servants (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 256). Lessing and Steinmann consider this to be a very careful arrangement.
Likewise, Nehemiah 1-6 and 7-13 are separate sections. In 1-6 the activity begins with the wall and moves toward the people's faith in God. In 7-13 the nation moves from the people's concerns back to the wall (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 257).
The worship of God's people in Jerusalem is a major theological theme (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 258). Ezra's focus is on the temple, while Nehemiah's is on the city. The re-establishment of historic worship is a major element.
Prayer is a prominent element in the books, with multiple examples of confession and intercession (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 258).
The re-establishment of Jerusalem is a third major theme (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 259). The security of Jerusalem after its desecration and destruction is part and parcel of the restoration of Israel into an eschatological kingdom (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 260).
Ezra and Nehemiah make at least 29 references to the Pentateuch. A strong image of the authority of Scripture is thus created (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 260). The writing is considered to be both the work of Moses and the work of God. There is, furthermore, an emphasis on the written nature of the Torah. This is an example of definitive, unchanging revelation (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 261).
Faithfulness in marriage is another key element in Ezra and Nehemiah. Lessing and Steinmann note the problems caused by intermarriage with the pagans around Judah. The intermarriages were not a problem per se, but would often draw people away from faithfulness to God (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 261). In Ezra and Nehemiah the first commandment takes precedence over the sixth, resulting in a need to end marriages involving pagans (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 262).
The idolatrous practices of other groups can lead God's people into sin. Therefore, we can see Ezra and Nehemiah as depicting sin through the lens of cooperation with pagans (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 262). God shows himself gracious by continually working for restoration of worship according to His will (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 262). God's restorative work is in clear view. he is the one who brings the Judeans back to Jerusalem, who sees that the temple is rebuilt, and who preserves a faithful people (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 263).
Lessing and Steinmann find "no direct messianic references" but do find a strong messianic hope (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 263). This is tied to the restoration of Jerusalem and God's new covenant (Jeremiah 31:27-40). The purification of the place and the people is linked to an eschatological and messianic hope (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 264).
RSS Feed