It also introduces us to one of the principal themes of Ezra-Nehemiah: the relationship between God's work and human work. Cyrus made his proclamation “that. On Reading Ezra-Nehemiah Ezra-Nehemiah, however, presents particular This is especially evident in the vexing relationship between Ezra and Nehemiah. See the two contrasting conceptions of Israel in Ezra-Nehemiah (exclusivist) and In relation to the use of the term “Israel,” it is important to note that Ezra 9 – 10 Der Kalender der Samaritaner anhand des Kitāb isāb as-sinīn und anderer .
The first step is identification. At long last, Esther identifies herself with her people. In this sense, she takes the same step Jesus was to take at his birth, identification of himself with humanity. The second step is service. She risks her position, her possessions, her life. Her high position now becomes a means of service, instead of self-service. Despite her initially faithless and unobservant history, God uses Esther, no less than he uses the morally exemplary Ezra and Nehemiah.
Did you cut corners to get your job? Nonetheless, God will use you to call an end to the deceptive practices in your workplace.
Have you made improper use of corporate assets? God may still use you to clean up the falsified records in your department. Past hypocrisy is no excuse for failing to heed what God needs from you now.
Esther is the model for all of us who have fallen short of the glory of God. We should embrace the particular opportunities we have. We may come to equate our value and our very existence with our positions. The higher our positions, the greater the danger. Esther ceases to see herself as a young Jewish woman, but only as the queen of Persia. To do the same makes us slaves to factors beyond our control. If becoming CEO or getting tenure or keeping a good job becomes so important that we cut off the rest of ourselves, then we have lost ourselves already.
Serving God requires risking our positions. If you use your position to serve God, you might lose your position and your future prospects. This is doubly frightening if you have become self-identified with your job or career.
It is no foolishness to risk what you cannot keep in order to gain what you cannot lose. For Esther and the Jews, the story has a happy ending. Esther risks approaching the king unbidden, yet receives his favor Es. She employs a clever scheme to butter him up over the course of two banquets Es.
The king revokes the judgment against the Jews Es.
Ezra–Nehemiah - Wikipedia
They in turn improve the lot of Jews throughout the Persian Empire Es. Haman and the enemies of the Jews are slaughtered Es. Yet it is a book of the Bible. Commentators therefore look for the veiled presence of God in Esther and generally point to the crucial verse: Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for such a time as this? The implication is that she has come to her position not by luck, or fate, or by her own wiles, but by the will of an unseen actor.
We can see the divine handwriting on the wall here. When a secular company eliminates bias in promotions and pay scales, is God at work there? If Christians have a chance to join with Jews and Muslims to make a case for reasonable religious accommodations in a corporation, should they see it as a work of God? If you can do good by taking a job in a compromised political administration, could God be calling you to accept the offer?
If you teach in a school that pushes you to the limits of your conscience, should you seek to leave, or should you redouble your commitment to staying?
All three are relatively short narratives about events happening during the reign of the Persian Empire. All three involve Persian kings and other government officials.
Williamson,  Sara Japhet, and Gary Knoppers. Many scholars accept these as genuine, but a study by Lester Grabbe indicates that while genuine Persian documents may underlie a number of them, they have been reworked to fit the purposes of later writers. Williamson sees three basic stages to the composition of Ezra—Nehemiah: He sees the account of the rebuilding of the Temple Ezra 5: This editor also added Ezra 1—5.
Ezra, Nehemiah & Esther and Work | Bible Commentary | Theology of Work
The combined text was then further developed by priestly circles who stressed Temple over Torah, transformed Ezra from scribe to priest, and stressed the primacy of the Babylonian returnees over those who had remained in the land, a distinction that had not appeared in the original Ezra material.
Still later, Levitical editors combined Ezra and Nehemiah to produce the final form of the book, reintroducing interest in Torah and stressing the primacy of the Levites. According to his study the original "Nehemiah memoir" was an account of the rebuilding of the city walls. Successive layers were then added to this, turning the building report into an account of Judah's restoration and depicting Nehemiah as a Persian governor who reforms the community of Israel.
Finally, after Ezra had come into existence through the combination of Ezra 1—6 with Ezra 7—10, the accounts of the repopulation and dedication of the city and the friction between Temple and torah were added to produce the final book of Nehemiah. Furthermore, Wright's article his main issue is of course the literature of the text.
The argument comes when Nehemiah notices that the Judeans were marrying people outside of their lands exogamy whose children spoke the same language. Although this came during the 52 days of the construction of the wall, we are not sure how he noticed the issue. The non clarity in the text according to Wright is as if Ezra already outlawed Judean men not to marry any one outside of their land, then why is Nehemiah noticing it thirteen years later.
According to Wright the issue in Ezra 9—10 is in the verse 24, where it says that half of the children spoke another language and did not know the language of Judah. Even though the issue in the text says it is not worried about the survival of the Judean language Nehemiah cannot endorse the exogamous marriage. After punishing the men, that is when he makes them take the oath however Wright's argument is if Nehemiah actually composed that text, in which he did not know a passage in Deuteronomy, then why does he compose an oath that does not match the issue that was in the previous verse.
Nehemiah 8—9, in which the two possibly by editorial error appear together, supports this scenario. The argument has some persuasive evidence; for example: Nehemiah's mission is to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, and Ezra 9: Nevertheless, there are counter-arguments to each of these and other arguments, and the date has not replaced the traditional one. Hayes points out that the theory is not correct arguing that the root cause is largely a fundamental and core belief found within the religious laws of the Judaeans.
Ezra, Hayes explains, imagined Israel as divinely ordained to remain pure and holy, set apart and without the influence of other nations in Canaan, just as the Priestly division were commanded, by God, to practice marriage exclusivity. Moral purity has familial implications, which the lack of may cause disruption in the cohesiveness of the family unit. Transgressing Israelite moral structure was feared to cause violations of the commandments, which ordained by God, must be adhered to maintain ethnical identity.
The influence of gentile women and culture upon Israelite men and posterity, through the eyes of ancient Judaean Priests, could turn Yahweh worshippers towards foreign deities and hedonism. Ritual purity stresses the importance of keeping to sacred practices dictated by revered predecessors and the Holy Scriptures.1 Dari Zerubabel, Ezra & Nehemia - Audio Vol 4 -19. KEMBALI DARI PEMBUANGAN - Bigman Sirait
Olyan believes that Ezra's expulsion of the gentiles could also be linked with the idea that outside lineage would initially pollute the priestly bloodline, acting as an apparatus to destroy "right" ritual practice. The motive behind prohibiting intermarriage with all Gentile women was due to the danger of assimilation resulting from the influence of social interaction with the surrounding nations. Thus, Ezra did not introduce the idea of matrilineal identity.
There are other similar nuances that lead some scholars to believe that they are from a similar source. However, there are also differences in the two sources that should not be forgotten.