Download this PDF file - University of Alberta - Journal Hosting

“IN CONVERSATION WITH ODED LIPSCHITS” 37stage in the history of the community and on the other the division isdetermined quite self-evidently along lines other than geographical.Whatever we make of Hanson’s theory of disenfranchised Levites, thefact that he sees them carrying a torch for Deutero-Isaiah suggests thatthey were not originally out of sorts with the Babylonian community,since part, at least, of Isaiah 40-55 must still be understood as addressedto that community whether or not the prophet was physically presentthere or in Judah (as Barstad has argued).Contemporary evidence, I would therefore maintain, presents avery different picture from the normal view. Where, then, does thelatter come from? Oded does not tell us where he gets it from, but formost it is, of course, the early chapters of Ezra. Closer examinationsuggests that things are not so simple, however.First, the only explicit evidence for tension with the Judeancommunity comes from Ezra 3:1-4:5, a passage which differs from allothers in Ezra 1-6 in not even purporting to be based on archivaldocuments. In 3:3 we are told that those engaged in the rebuilding ofthe temple “set the altar in its place, for fear was upon them because ofthe peoples of the lands” and this seems to be resumed in 4:4 where “thepeople of the land discouraged the people of Judah and made them afraidto build.” While it is more usual for the plural form of 3:3 to refer toforeigners, the familiar singular form of 4:4 suggests that this is meantto refer to those in the land who were not part of the so-called golahcommunity. Whichever way it is interpreted in detail, however, the factremains perfectly clear that it differs from the usage in the genuinelycontemporary writings of Haggai and Zechariah. At Hag. 2:4 the phraserefers without any doubt to the very community that the prophet isencouraging to engage in the rebuilding: “Yet now take courage, OZerubbabel, says the Lord; take courage O Joshua, son of Jehozadak,the high priest; take courage all you people of the land, says the Lord; work,for I am with you ….” This is the very opposite of the usage in Ezra 3and 4. Somewhat similarly, in Zech. 7:5 we find, “Say to all the people ofthe land and the priests, When you fasted and mourned in the fifthmonth, etc.” Admittedly, it is not clear (as in principle it is not clear inHaggai) whether the reference is to the returned exiles or to those whohad remained in the land, or to the two combined without distinction.What is clear, however, is that here too it is the community focussed onthe temple that is addressed, not some alternative hostile element in thepopulation. The conclusion is obvious. The language of Ezra 3:3 and4:4 reflects the usage of a much later editor, by whose time the phrasehad come to have negative overtones. It cannot be used to analyse thestate of relations between the various people groups at the time of thereturn itself, and it does not provide evidence of tension between thetwo communities.Similarly, the section at the start of Ezra 4 about the “adversariesof Judah and Benjamin” whose offer of help is rebuffed by the Judeansis difficult to evaluate historically. My own view is that there is somesound tradition behind this, and that it relates to inhabitants from thenorth (Samaria), not to the exilic Judean community at all. Certainly thatis how it seems to have been understood by the later editor whoinserted the “dischronologized” account in the remainder of chapter 4