Ezra 10:43-44 · Bible study
Ezra 10:43-44 Commentary: Textual Difficulties in the Final List
Hebrew · 8 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
An examination of the concluding names and textual difficulties in Ezra's list of those who married foreign wives and the community's faithful action.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The final names of offenders and the summary of the divorce action, with a note about children.
- Key words: “foreign women” (nokhri), “taken” (nasa), “children” (banim).
- Main debate: The clause about children, does it show thoroughness, difficulty, or God’s displeasure?
- Theological theme: Covenant faithfulness requires radical, costly obedience.
- Best use: Teaching on the seriousness of sin, corporate accountability, and the hope of restoration.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
43And from the descendants of Nebo: Jeiel, Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, Jaddai, Joel, and Benaiah.
44All these men had married foreign women, and some of them had children by these wives.
WEB World English Bible 2000
43Of the sons of Nebo: Jeiel, Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, Iddo, Joel, and Benaiah.
44All these had taken foreign wives. Some of them had wives by whom they had children.
KJV King James Version 1769
43Of the sons of Nebo; Jeiel, Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, Jadau, and Joel, Benaiah.
44All these had taken strange wives: and some of them had wives by whom they had children.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
43Of the sons of Nebo: Jeiel, Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, Iddo, and Joel, Benaiah.
44All these had taken foreign wives; and some of them had wives by whom they had children.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
43Of the sons of Nebo: Jeiel, Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, Jadau, and Joel, Benaiah;
44all these have taken strange women, and there are of them women--who adopt sons.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
43Of the children of Nebo: Jeiel, Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, Jaddai, and Joel, Benaiah.
44All these had taken foreign wives; and there were among them wives who had had children.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
43Of the sons of Nebo, Jehiel, Mathathias, Zabad, Zabina, Jeddu, and Joel, and Banaia.
44All these had taken strange wives, and there were among them women that had borne children.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Ezra 10:43
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators broadly agree that verses 43-44 complete the register of offenders who had taken foreign wives, with the final statement serving as a summary of the entire list from verse 18. The textual and grammatical difficulties in verse 44 have received particular attention. According to the Cambridge Bible, the Hebrew of the final clause is “beset with difficulties,” with masculine pronouns referring to women. Two main interpretations have emerged: the clause may highlight how the divorce action was complicated by the presence of children, or it may show how thoroughly the commission carried out its work, sending away even mothers with children. Keil and Delitzsch argue the latter, noting that separation from wives with children is “far more grievous.” Gill observes that the presence of children made the divorce “the more difficult,” but he also notes that the text does not explicitly command sending the children away, suggesting they may have been retained and educated in the true religion. Wesley sees the mention of children as evidence of God’s displeasure, since most wives were barren. Despite these differing emphases, all commentators affirm that the community acted decisively to obey the law.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Thoroughness of reform: The clause shows that even women who had born children were sent away, demonstrating complete obedience to God's command (Keil, Cambridge second interpretation).
- God's displeasure: The mention that only some had children implies infertility as a sign of divine disfavor toward these marriages (Wesley, Gill).
- Difficulty of divorce: The clause highlights how complicated the divorce was when children were involved, making the community’s action even more costly (Cambridge first interpretation, Gill).
What is clear: The passage concludes the register of offenders and records that the community acted to separate from foreign wives, though the exact nuance of the children clause remains debated.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose of the children clause | The clause adds information about the divorce action, indicating that the situation was not simple. | Some commentators (Keil, Cambridge second view) see it as showing thoroughness, even mothers with children were sent away. Others (Wesley, Gill) see it as showing God's displeasure (barrenness) or the difficulty of the divorce. |
| Disposition of the children | The text does not explicitly state what happened to the children after the divorce. | Shecaniah's proposal (Ezra 10:3) included sending away children, but the execution chapter does not mention it. Gill argues that children were likely retained and educated in the true religion; others assume they were sent away as part of the separation. |
| Double mention of Bani | The list contains two entries for the house of Bani (verses 29 and 34 of the longer catalogue). | The Cambridge Bible calls this an early scribal error; others suggest two different families with the same name could be the cause. |
| Textual integrity of verse 44 | The Hebrew of verse 44 is grammatically difficult, with masculine forms used for feminine referents. | Some see it as a copyist's error that crept into the text (Keil, Cambridge). Others see it as reflecting a late Hebrew trend to use masculine for feminine. |
Historical & Cultural Context
This passage concludes a long list of offenders in Ezra 10:18-43. The chapter recounts a solemn assembly during the ninth month (December), in heavy rain, where the people agreed to send away their foreign wives and children. The list follows a pattern: priests, Levites, singers, gatekeepers, and then the rest of Israel. The house of Nebo appears as one of the last families in the register. Cross-references show that the descendants of Nebo numbered fifty-two among the returnees (
).“The children of Nebo, fifty-two.”
— Ezra 2:29 (WEB)
The genealogical records tied the community’s identity to family lines, and the reform was necessary to prevent the influence of foreign religions, which had led to the exile. The mention that some of the men had children shows the depth of the sacrifice. A textual issue appears earlier in the chapter: the house of Bani is listed twice (verses 29 and 34), which the Cambridge Bible calls an early scribal error. The historical context includes the Persian period, with Ezra’s authority from King Artaxerxes. The people’s trembling and the heavy rain indicate the seriousness of the occasion. This action was not merely legalistic but aimed at preserving the covenant community for the coming of the Messiah. Christian readers have seen here a foreshadowing of the church’s call to be separate from the world’s values, while also recognizing the unique nature of the post-exilic situation.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note several textual difficulties. In verse 44, the Hebrew phrase “and there were of them wives, and they made sons” uses masculine suffixes (מהם, וישימו) where feminine would be expected. Keil and Delitzsch suggest this reflects a late Hebrew tendency to use masculine for feminine. The LXX renders freely “and they begat of them sons.” The Vulgate uses feminine verbs, giving “and some of the wives had borne children.” The name of Bani appears twice in the longer list (verses 29 and 34), which the Cambridge Bible calls an early error. The YLT translates “women who adopt sons,” reflecting a different reading of the same consonants. No significant variants affect the overall meaning of the passage.
Reception History
This passage has been read in various ways across church history. In Jewish tradition, the list underscores Ezra’s restoration of the Torah community. Early Christian writer Justin Martyr claimed that Ezra offered a paschal lamb and gave a messianic address, though this passage is not in the Masoretic text (Clarke cites this claim). Medieval Jewish commentators saw the divorce action as a precedent for prioritizing covenant identity. Protestant reformers like Calvin emphasized the danger of unequal yokes. In modern theology, the ethics of Ezra’s action have been debated: some see it as a drastic but necessary measure for the survival of the faith; others question whether it violated the spirit of the law. The passage remains a challenging witness to the cost of faithfulness and the community’s determination to obey God.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The completeness of the list: God sees every individual involved, and the community did not overlook anyone. The thoroughness of the registry reminds us that personal accountability matters within the body of faith.
- The cost of obedience: Sending away wives and children, especially those with children, shows how radical the step was. Obedience to God can require painful sacrifices, even the breaking of deep family ties.
- The hope of restoration: The community was purified and reestablished. God’s goal was not destruction but renewal. The chapter points forward to a faithful remnant.
Five-point outline
- Recognition of sin: Ezra’s prayer (chapter 9) and the people’s response (10:1-5).
- Public confession: The assembly in the rain, trembling before God (10:9-12).
- Thorough investigation: A commission examined each case over three months (10:16-17).
- Personal accountability: The long list of names shows that no one was exempt.
- Ongoing vigilance: The problem resurfaced in Nehemiah’s day (Nehemiah 13), proving that reform must be sustained.
Illustration hooks
- A person who chooses to end a relationship that pulls them away from faith, even when it costs them emotionally and socially.
- A church that exercises difficult discipline to preserve its witness, knowing it risks misunderstanding and hurt.
- A family that makes a hard decision about priorities, such as leaving a comfortable community to follow a clear calling.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Wasn’t this action unfair to the wives and children?
- Does God expect Christians today to separate from unbelieving spouses? (The New Testament teaches the opposite: 1 Corinthians 7:12-14.)
- How can we practice the kind of radical obedience seen here without becoming legalistic?
Leading a Discussion
These verses close a difficult chapter in Ezra. The community took drastic steps to restore covenant purity. The list of names and the note about children raise hard questions about obedience, cost, and grace. Use these questions to explore the passage together.
Discussion questions
- What stands out to you about the way this list ends? Why does the writer include these final details?
- Why do you think the text mentions that some of the men had children by their foreign wives? What does that add to the story?
- How do the commentators explain the grammatical oddities in verse 44? Does that change how you read the passage?
- What does this chapter teach about the seriousness of covenant commitment? How does the community’s response reflect their understanding of God’s holiness?
- In what ways might we need to “separate” from influences that lead us away from God? How does this apply in our daily lives?
- How does the gospel of grace speak into a story of such radical action? Where do you see hope in this chapter?
- What can we learn from the fact that the same problem appeared again in Nehemiah’s time (Nehemiah 13)?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Ezra 2:29 | The children of Nebo, fifty-two. |
| Nehemiah 7:33 | The men of the other Nebo: fifty-two. |
| Ezra 10:3 | Now therefore let’s make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives and those who are born of them, according to the counsel of my lord and of those who tremble at the commandment of our God. Let it be done according to the law. |
| Proverbs 2:16 | to deliver you from the strange woman, even from the foreigner who flatters with her words, |
| Proverbs 5:3 | For the lips of an adulteress drip honey. Her mouth is smoother than oil, |
| Proverbs 5:20 | For why should you, my son, be captivated with an adulteress? Why embrace the bosom of another? |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
7 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator notes that the public exposure of the offenders' names was itself a punishment and a warning. He also observes textual irregularities in the list, including a duplicate entry for Bani and a confusing final clause about wives and children that likely reflects an early copyist error.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Notes note that among the foreign wives taken, some had already given birth to children. This observation points to the real human cost and family ties involved in these marriages. It underscores the seriousness of the covenant violation, as children were already part of these unions.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill observes that many of the men who married foreign wives already had children, which made divorcing them especially difficult. He suggests that the children were not sent away but were instead kept and raised in the true faith, since Ezra gave no order to put them out. He also notes that those without children may have faced God's displeasure in that situation.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch notes that the mention of women who had borne sons highlights how severe the separation was, since parting from wives with shared children was far more painful. They then observe that this reform did not permanently solve the problem, as later under Nehemiah unlawful marriages reappeared, due to the community's long exposure to heathen surroundings.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange notes that Ezra did not step forward with a demand but waited for the congregation to initiate reform. Shechaniah, a layman, not a priest or prince, spoke first, showing the reformation arose from the people themselves and would only succeed that way.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry highlights the orderly thoroughness of this painful reformation. A commission was appointed, and they examined every case by name over three months. Even priests were found guilty and submitted, offering a ram for their trespass, showing that no rank was spared.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley sees the widespread barrenness among mixed-marriage couples as God's deliberate mercy: it limited the number of children, making the difficult process of divorce less entangled. He then observes that such corrupt practices, once introduced, resist all human reform — only the Redeemer can finally purge ungodliness from His people.