The occasion of this letter was the resumption of the work of rebuilding the temple of the Lord at Jerusalem after an interval of sixteen years. The authors of it are Tatnai, the governor, probably of all the provinces west of the Euphrates, and Shethar-boznai, who may have been the scribe or secretary associated with him, as Shimshai was with Rehum (see Ezra 4:8). Or possibly Shethar-boznai was the leading man of the Apharsachites; for these are mentioned as more particularly "his companions." The Apharsachites probably called the attention of Tatnai to the matter, who attended to it in a spirit of fairness which favourably contrasts with the conduct of the former leaders of these instigators (see ch. 4.). Having authenticated the letter, the writers proceed to state -

I. WHAT THEY DID.

1. They surveyed the building.

(1) They describe it as "the house of the great God. The renown of his wonderful works in Egypt, in the wilderness, in Canaan had filled the world. They were judgments upon the little gods of the nations (see Exodus 8:10; Exodus 9:14; Exodus 12:12; Exodus 18:12; Numbers 33:4).

(2) They noted the importance of the building. "Great stones" (Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5, 6). "Timber laid in the walls." Beams of cedars from Lebanon. All work for God should be nobly done.

(3) They also noted the rapid progress of the work.

2. They interrogated the elders.

(1) Who commanded you to build this house? This question is radical. Not, Who hath authorised you to resume the building? but, Who authorised the commencement of the work?

(2) By whose authority do you "make up this wall"? Probably referring to their repairing of breaches in it made by the "people of the land" (see ch. 3:23).

(3) "What are the names" of the chiefs? Those who work for God with his approval need not fear the scrutiny of inquisitors.

II. WHAT THEY LEARNED.

1. That the builders professed themselves servants of the God of heaven and earth.

(1) What a glorious Being!

(2) What a noble service! Query - Are we his servants? This honour not limited now to Israelites It is common to all true builders of the spiritual temple.

2. That they were engaged in no novel business.

(1) "We build the house that was builded these many years ago." About five centuries had elapsed. But even Solomon's temple replaced the tabernacle which had been set up about five centuries still earlier. True religion may have external changes, but remains essentially the same.

3. That its ruin was occasioned by the rebellion of their fathers.

(1) God gave it up to desolation. The outward splendours of religion are nothing to him when the spirit of it is dead (see Matthew 23:37; Matthew 24:1, 2). The temple of Solomon in ruins was a fit emblem of humanity degraded by sin.

(2) Guilt is hereditary. "Our fathers had provoked," etc. They suffered; we suffer.

4. That the building is in process of restoration.

(1) "In the first year of Cyrus." Memorable for the termination of the seventy years of Jeremiah (2 Chronicles 36:21; Jeremiah 25:11, 12; Jeremiah 29:10; Daniel 9:2). In this memorable year "the king made a decree," etc.

(2) Vessels of the house also restored. These had been desecrated "in the temple of Babylon." This was the temple of Belus or Bel. This desecration of the vessels a figure of the condition of backsliders from God (see Acts 9:15; Romans 9:22; 2 Timothy 2:21).

5. The prominent place occupied by Sheshbazzar.

(1) Cyrus trusted him with the custody of the sacred treasure. Made him governor. He was of the seed royal of Judah.

(2) His people honoured him. He laid the foundation-stone. Conducts the work.

(3) Type of Christ.

III. THE RECOMMENDATION.

1. To test the question as to whether Cyrus authorised the work as alleged. Nothing to object to the fairness of this. It could only prejudice the Jews if found untrue.

2. To signify the king's pleasure to his servants that they might carry it out. It were well if all who oppose God's people were as reasonable as Tatnai. Opponents so honest and free from prejudice may have the honour, like Tatnai, of promoting the work of God (see Ezra 6:13). - J.A.M.

This letter has three chief divisions.

I. THE INQUISITION OF THE PERSIAN AUTHORITIES.

II. THE REPLY OF THE JEWISH LEADERS. It presents the following aspects of the work. That it was —

1. Not a mere human enterprise, but a Divine commission.

2. Not an innovation, but a restoration.

3. Not in a spirit of presumption and pride, but of obedience and humility.

4. Not in opposition to, but. in conformity with, royal authority.

5. Not political, but religious in its character.

III. THE APPEAL OF THE PERSIAN AUTHORITIES TO THE KING. Conclusion: Two things we may well admire and imitate.

1. The fairness of the Persian officials.

2. The faithfulness of the Jewish leaders.

(William Jones.)