Matthew Levering's book on Ezra and Nehemiah forms part of a new theological commentary on the Bible and as such uses the biblical text as a source for doctrinal reflection. The question of the legitimacy of this undertaking is not addressed by the commentary itself and nor in my view should it be. Further, Levering situates the chosen books in the context of the broad sweep of biblical revelation, illustrating his remarks with references from both Old and New Testaments, an outlook he admits without apology as the goal of his work: ‘Through the commentary genre, I seek to explore how the books of Ezra and Nehemiah belong to the unified biblical revelation of God's covenantal gift of holiness' (p.19).
We see that his own ‘template’ of holy people, holy land, explained in his 2005 work Holy People, Holy Land: A Theological Introduction to the Bible (co-authored with Michael Dauphinais) guides the interpretation but it is his claim on the ‘commentary genre’ that is notable. Rather than addressing his interpretative skill to verses and pericopes, Levering uses the text to comment on his theology, which reaches into the New Testament and beyond. The whole bible is brought to bear upon the possible meaning of the stories of Ezra the Scribe and Nehemiah.
The book roughly divides into two to deal with each text, with an introduction and conclusion for both books. Then, each chapter of the biblical work merits a chapter in Levering's work, grouped again into two sections corresponding to Levering's own template: holy people, holy land. Theological thought flows from examining each chapter, but with an eye to the grand scheme of both the overall narrative and then its place in the whole of God's revelatory action in history. Individual verses are not cited and then examined; rather, Levering simply supports his theological interpretation of the entire chapter with suitable references from the text, along with references from other biblical books. The former quotations are distinguished from the latter by italic type. In this way the narrative of God's action through the deeds of Ezra and Nehemiah is not obscured in textual fragmentation.
In addition to biblical authorities, the Venerable Bede is our companion in interpretation and is the only ancient commentator cited. This shows the type of biblical interpretation in which Levering is engaged, for Bede finds in the story of Israel's restoration (as does Levering) a type of the temple fulfilment in the Incarnation, God coming to dwell with his holy people. It is an unapologetically Christian hermeneutic. Questions raised by employing other genres of biblical criticism are not addressed directly but mentioned in footnotes from noteworthy commentators such as F. C. Fensham, J. Blenkinsopp and G. F. Davies. Thus readers are alerted to historical-critical, textual or literary concerns without such information occluding Levering's theological argument. On the other hand, we are still enabled to measure the success of his interpretation in the light of recent study of the accounts of the Restoration.
Broadly speaking, the account of the rebuilding of the temple (Ezra) and the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Nehemiah) is situated alongside the call for the rebuilding of covenantal obedience to God's Law: to have a holy land you need a holy people. You need not only a place for God to dwell but an environment fit for God's presence. The success of Ezra and Nehemiah's restoration depends upon this latter type of holiness, purity most visible in the severing of marital ties to the nations. Levering's contention is that while these post-exilic leaders began to fulfil ‘the word of the Lord by the mouth of the prophet Jeremiah’ (Ezra 1.1) and restore the temple and God's people for God to once more dwell among them, such restoration is only completed in Christ, in whom Torah obedience and God's dwelling place are perfectly united: holy person, holy place. The goal is eschatological restoration. This is why Nehemiah's restoration ultimately fails to take root (Nehemiah 13).
Levering's interpretation is stimulating and his arguments persuasive although I think he relies too much upon the unity of biblical revelation to legitimise some textual comparisons. The least successful is his clause for clause parallel of Nehemiah's covenantal oath (Nehemiah 10) with the Lord's Prayer as found in Matthew 6.9–13. Although bolstered by other New Testament references, the comparisons are so general as to make the specificities of each text, and so the interpretative undertaking, irrelevant. Such a stretch in the imagination is only occasionally required however. On the whole, generous use of the vast resource of biblical revelation confirms and expands this exciting interpretation of Ezra and Nehemiah. Levering's new book fulfils its goal exceptionally and fully exhibits the qualities sought for in this new Brazos commentary series. It certainly provides an aid in preaching and teaching, and suitably demonstrates the continuing intellectual and practical viability of theological interpretation of the Bible.
