Ezra 2:68

And some of the chief of the fathers, when they came to the house of the LORD which is at Jerusalem, offered freely for the house of God to set it up in his place:

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(68) They came to the site of the house not yet built, and offered for the building.

Benson Commentary

Ezra 2:68. When they came to the house of the Lord — That is, to the place in which the temple had stood, and where the ruins still remained. Offered freely — Made a new offering, besides that which they had brought out of Babylon, from their brethren there, mentioned Ezra 1:4; Ezra 1:6. By this it appears that the Jews were not made absolute slaves in Babylon, but had liberty to trade and get riches for themselves; some of them being advanced to considerable offices in the king’s court. Otherwise they could not have been able to offer such sums as are mentioned in the next verse.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

2:64-70 Let none complain of the needful expenses of their religion. Seek first the kingdom of God, his favour and his glory, then will all other things be added unto them. Their offerings were nothing, compared with the offerings of the princes in David's time; yet, being according to their ability, were as acceptable to God. The Lord will carry us through all undertakings entered on according to his will, with an aim to his glory, and dependence on his assistance. Those who, at the call of the gospel, renounce sin and return to the Lord, shall be guarded and guided through all perils of the way, and arrive safely at the mansions provided in the holy city of God.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

The sum total is given without any variation by Ezra, by Nehemiah (see the marginal reference), and by Esdras (1 Esdras 5:41), who adds, that in this reckoning only those of twelve years of age and upward were counted.

It is curious that the total 42,360, is so greatly in excess of the items. Ezra's items make the number 29,818; Nehemiah's 31,089, Esdras, 33,950. The original document was probably illegible in places, and the writers were forced to make omissions.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

68. some of the chief of the fathers, when they came to the house of the Lord offered freely for the house of God, &c.—The sight of a place hallowed by the most endearing and sacred associations, but now lying in desolation and ruins, made the wellsprings of their piety and patriotism gush out afresh. Before taking any active measures for providing accommodation to themselves and their families, the chief among them raised a large sum by voluntary contributions towards the restoration of the temple.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

To the house of the Lord, i.e. to the ruins of the house; or to the place where that house stood.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

And some of the chief of the fathers, when they came to the house of the Lord that is at Jerusalem,.... That is, when they came to the place where it formerly stood, and where were still the ruins of it:

offered freely for the house of God, to set it up in its place; to rebuild it upon the spot where it formerly stood; this they did besides the freewill offerings they brought with them from Babylon.

Geneva Study Bible

And some of the chief of the fathers, when they came to the house of the LORD which is at Jerusalem, offered freely for the house of God to set it up in his place:

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

68. some of the chief of the fathers] R.V. some of the heads of fathers’ houses, see note on Ezra 1:5.

when they came to the house of the Lord which is at Jerusalem] i.e. on their arrival at Jerusalem, where they were to rebuild the Temple. ‘The house of the Lord’, the site and the building are identified by the writer; if still in ruins, the house was about to be rebuilt, cf. Ezra 1:4-5, Ezra 3:8-9. In the writer’s mind ‘the house of the Lord’ is always standing at Jerusalem.

offered freely] R.V. offered Willingly. There was no reason for the A.V. to alter the rendering given in Ezra 1:6. The freewill offering was offered willingly (see Ezra 3:5); the adverb ‘freely’ introduces an ambiguity.

to set it up] lit. ‘to cause it to stand’ = to restore; the expression recurs chap. Ezra 9:9.

68, 69. This passage is given in greater accuracy of detail in Nehemiah 7:70-72.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 68. - Some of the chief of the fathers. That is, "Some of the heads of families." Each family went up under a recognized head or chief, the number of such heads being, as it would seem, nearly a hundred (vers. 3-61). When they came to the house of the Lord. No doubt considerable ruins of Solomon's temple existed when the exiles returned, and were easily to be recognized, both by their situation and by the size of the stones employed (1 Kings 5:17). The place occupied by these rums was that whereto the emigrants flocked, and about which they, in the first instance, located themselves. Offered freely for the house of God, to set it up in its place. The first object of the returned exiles was the rebuilding of the temple, and their offerings were consequently given expressly towards the expenses of this costly work. Ezra 2:68

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

Contributions towards the rebuilding of the temple, and concluding remarks. Comp. Nehemiah 7:70-73. - Some of the heads of houses, when they came to the house of Jahve, i.e., arrived at the site of the temple, brought free-will offerings (התנדּב; comp. 1 Chronicles 29:5) to set it up in its place (העמיד, to set up, i.e., to rebuild; identical in meaning both here and Ezra 9:9 with הקים). After their ability (כּכוחם; comp. 1 Chronicles 29:2) they gave unto the treasure of the work, i.e., of restoring the temple and its services, 61,000 darics of gold equals 68,625, and 5000 mina of silver, above 30,000, and 100 priests' garments. The account of these contributions is more accurately given in Nehemiah 7:70-72, according to which some of the heads of houses gave unto the work (מקצת as Daniel 1:2 and elsewhere); the Tirshatha gave to the treasure 1000 darics of gold, 50 sacrificial vessels (see on Exodus 27:3), 30 priests' garments, and 500 ... This last statement is defective; for the two Numbers 30 and 500 must not be combined into 530, as in this case the hundreds would have stood first. The objects enumerated were named before 500, and are omitted through a clerical error, מנים וכסף "and silver (500) mina." And some of the heads of houses (others than the Tirshatha) gave of gold 20,000 darics, of silver, 2200 mina; and that which the rest of the people gave was-gold, 20,000 darics, silver, 2000 mina, and 67 priests' garments. According to this statement, the Tirshatha, the heads of houses, and the rest of the people, gave together 41,000 darics in gold, 4200 mina in silver, 97 priests' garments, and 30 golden vessels. In Ezra the vessels are omitted; and instead of the 30 + 67 equals 97 priests' garments, they are stated in round numbers to have been 100. The two other differences have arisen from textual errors. Instead of 61,000 darics, it is evident that we must read with Nehemiah, 41,000 (1000 + 20,000 + 20,000); and in addition to the 2200 and 2000 mina, reckon, according to Nehemiah 7:70, 500 more, in all 4700, for which in the text of Ezra we have the round sum of 5000. The account of the return of the first band of exiles concludes at Ezra 2:70, and the narrative proceeds to the subsequent final statement: "So the priests, etc ... .dwelt in their cities." העם וּמן, those of the people, are the men of the people of Israel of Ezra 2:2, the laity as distinguished from the priests, Levites, etc. In Nehemiah the words are transposed, so that העם מן stand after the Levitical door-keepers and singers. Bertheau thinks this position more appropriate; but we cannot but judge otherwise. The placing of the people, i.e., the laity of Israel, between the consecrated servants of the temple (the priests and their Levitical assistants in the sacrificial service) and the singers and door-keepers, seems to us quite consistent; while, on the other hand, the naming of the שׁוערים before the משׁררים in Nehemiah seems inappropriate, because the performance of the choral service of the temple was a higher office than the guardianship of the doors. Neither can we regard Bertheau's view, that בּעריהם, which in the present verse follows והנּתינים, should be erased, as a correct one. The word forms a perfectly appropriate close to the sentence beginning with ויּשׁבוּ; and the sentence following, "And all Israel were in their cities," forms a well-rounded close to the account; while, on the contrary, the summing up of the different divisions by the words כל־ישׂראל in Nehemiah, after the enumeration of those divisions, has a rather heavy effect.

(Note: In 1 Esdr. 5:46, this verse, freely carrying out the texts of Ezra and Nehemiah, with regard also to Nehemiah 12:27-30, runs thus: "And so dwelt the priests, and the Levites, and the people, in Jerusalem and in the country, the singers also and the porters, and all Israel in their villages.")