Reading for November 2nd

Read Ezra 2.1-35. In 2.1-70: The first list of those who returned from Babylon. At first glance, the list would seem to be a well- organized, coherent presentation broken into sections by category of occupations. A closer examination reveals that some persons are idenitifed by their family lineage, others by their place of resdence. This and other differences suggest the list is a composite product, possibly listing returnees from several different stages of the formation of the community in Jerusalem. From the meager records have survived, the usual conclusion drawn is that following Cyrus's decree several different groups left Babylon for Jerusalem at different times. The list is repeated with some variations in Neh 7.6-73. From a close comparison of the two lists, the list here in Ezra 2 appears to summarize the information in Neh 7, and consequently may be derived from that list. The use of duplicate lists in Ezra-Nehemiah is a deliberate framing device by the author, directing the reader's attention to the level of the individulas who form the "house of God." In verse 2: They came with Zerubbabel, Jeshua, Nehemiah, Seraiah, Reelaiah ... : Several of these names are well-known govenors of Yehud, the persian province centered in Jerusalem, who were in office at various times from the sixth century onward. Others, such as Jeshua, were among the high priests. Some of the individuals were contemporaries of Nehemiah, bringing the close of the list to the mid fifth century. The incorporation of persons over such a range of time shows the essentially nonhistorical interest of the author. The number of the Israelite people: This term for number is more apporpriately "listing," since formal census does not follow. The first section (vv. 2b-20) lists names by clan group, the second (vv. 21-35) mainly by location, the third (vv. 36-39) lists priestly clans, the fourth (vv. 40-42) Levitical groups, and the fifth (vv. 43-58) various orders of Temple servants. These are followed by a miscellaneous group that could not demonstrate a connection to known family lineages (vv. 59-63). A numerical summary of the primary attributes of the community follows (vv. 64-67), then there is a report of the devotion of these goups to the Temple (vv. 68-70). The various numbers given are possible in some cases, though some of the amounts may be artifical, such as 666 (v. 13). Comments or Questions..