Ezra 4:6–23

The opposition extended from the days of Cyrus until the reign of Darius, Ezra 4:5. Two kings came between Cyrus and Darius. Ahasuerus (Cambyses) succeeded Cyrus. A letter was written to him (Ezra 4:6), but no answer is recorded. Another was sent to Artaxerxes (Pseudo-Smerdis), and both the letter and the reply are recorded... Ezra 4:6-23 are a parenthesis.

In between these kings came Ahasuerus, not the one mentioned in the book of Esther, but the one known as Cambyses. During his reign the opponents were very active. They wrote up an accusation against the Jews in Jerusalem, but apparently without any definite effect.

This is hardly the place to discuss the question of who Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes were. There is great difficulty in identifying them now with the monarchs of secular history. Probably the first was Xerxes, and the second Artaxerxes Longimanus.

This was the name given to a well dug by Isaac's servants, because the servants of Abimelech seized it. Genesis 26:21. Fürst says it means 'strife'; Gesenius says 'contention'. In Ezra 4:6, where the same word appears as a common noun, it is 'accusation'.

Some asked to share in the building. They called themselves 'worshippers,' but God called them 'adversaries.' The leaders refused their help, and that stirred up their hatred and hostility.

The enemy had presented himself as a friend. That called for special watchfulness and caution. But these men, who were rejected, very soon show their true character quite openly... The people had been firm and had resisted the tricks and cunning of the ancient serpent. But they become frightened when the adversary appears as a roaring lion. They forget that their enemy is a defeated enemy, and that he would have left anyone who stood up to him.

And so, these four hostile forces unite here to ruin the work of God: trickery, intimidation, accusation, and violence. Only faith could have resisted them. But the people had no faith at all. As a result, the building of the house stopped for fifteen years.

But mark this — and it is very important. God does not blame the king's command for the stopping of the work. The king did give in at last, and did yield to their persistent begging. But the Israelites had begun to stop before the king's order came. It was lack of faith, and not the king's authority, that stopped the work. And, dear friends, as a rule, is it not always so? The stopping of blessing among God's people is really never the work of the enemy outside. It is lack of faith, and so of faithfulness, within.

Until today, the work of God must be done by the people of God. If the world offers co-operation we have to refuse. If we do, then those who made the offer will soon show their true colours. But if we don't we will soon spoil the work. We end up being governed by the world's principles in the work we wanted to do for God.

From verses 6–23 we have the details of how the adversaries of God's people secured a royal decree. It was in their favour, and against the building of the temple. Their effort in the reign of Ahasuerus seems to have failed (v. 6). But they were not discouraged. They kept at their object in the reign of his successor, Artaxerxes, and then their efforts were rewarded.

Bishlam, Mithredath and Tabeel wrote a letter to King Artaxerxes. They were Persians and officials of the government, probably closely connected with the Samaritans and living in Jerusalem. (Ahasuerus is a royal title meaning "the venerable king." Artaxerxes is also such a title, meaning "the great king.")

The opposition had not weakened with the passing of time or because of the earlier failure. In fact it had increased, as is clear if we read verses 7–9. The letter went up in the names of certain men who were prominent among the people of the land. Behind it stood no less than nine of the tribes or peoples then living in the country around Palestine. It was clearly a very impressive document.

The verses of chapters 4:18–6:18 and 7:12–26 are not written in Hebrew but in Aramaic. Aramaic is a Semitic language, as is Hebrew. Aramaic was an official and an international trade language in the Persian Empire. The paragraphs mentioned above contain official documents written by or for the Persian court.

This is hardly the place to discuss the question of who Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes were. It is very hard now to identify them with the kings of secular history. Probably the first was Xerxes, and the second Artaxerxes Longimanus.

Ahasuerus (Cambyses) succeeded Cyrus. A letter went to him (Ezra 4:6), but no answer is recorded. Another went to Artaxerxes (Pseudo-Smerdis), and both that letter and the reply are recorded. … Ezra 4:6–23 are a parenthesis.

These "adversaries of Judah and Benjamin" had claimed a desire to help in building the temple, on the ground that they too sacrificed to the God of Israel. Yet in their accusation they leave out any reference to the temple, and speak only of the city. Their reason was obvious. The proclamation of Cyrus concerned the temple. So by accusing the Jews of building the city, they made their hints of rebellion and treason look plausible. The king's answer shows they had not miscalculated.

The letter is a very cleverly crafted document, full of misrepresentation and falsehood. They accused the Jews of building Jerusalem and setting up the wall. This was false, because only the house was being built, not the wall or the city. What they said about the city, its past record of rebellion, was true, and the accuser made use of the nation's past sins.

And so, these four hostile forces unite here to ruin the work of God: trickery, intimidation, accusation, and violence. Only faith could have resisted them. But the people had no faith at all, and so the building of the house stopped for fifteen years.

The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, except for Ezra 4:8 to Ezra 6:18; Ezra 7:12-26; Jeremiah 10:11; and Daniel 2:4 to Daniel 7:28. Those parts are in Chaldee, that is, Aramaic.

The letter is a carefully crafted document, full of misrepresentation and falsehood, inspired by the one who is "a liar and the father of lies." They accused the Jews of building Jerusalem and setting up the wall. This was false, because they were only building the house, not the wall or the city. What they said about the city — its old record of rebellion — was true, and the accuser made use of the past sins of the nation.

Were they really concerned about Persia? Only insofar as they could benefit through Persia. This was like the Pharisees telling Pilate about the Lord Jesus, "If you release this man, you are not Caesar's friend" (John 19:12). They had no love for Caesar, but used his name to frighten Pilate. These adversaries of Judah only wanted Artaxerxes to assume that the Jews would not pay tribute to Persia.

Notice that they do not accuse the people of rebuilding the temple. They do not say one word about it. Instead they speak of the city. Their aim is easy to discover. They wanted to stop the remnant from gathering together, because such a gathering would take away the enemy's power over the people of God... while scattered, they would easily become the prey of their adversaries. In the same way, Satan opposes the gathering of the children of God today. If he does not succeed in corrupting the sheep, he makes them quarrel, seizes them, and scatters them.

And so these four hostile forces come together again here to ruin the work of God: trickery, intimidation, accusation, and violence. Only faith could have resisted them. But the people had no faith at all, and so the building of the house stopped for fifteen years.

But many years passed before this ban came. The prophecies throw much light on the history of that time. From studying them and comparing their dates, it seems clear to me that the true hindrance was a lack of faith in the remnant... God was no more to be feared in the reign of Darius than in the reign of Cyrus or of Artaxerxes. The source of their weakness was that they had forgotten God. This shows the great grace of God in waking them up through the mouth of Haggai.

Yet the enemy could only delay, not frustrate, their purpose, which was of God.

There are several lessons to note in the record of what they did. The first is the union of all the various races of the land "against Jerusalem"... all these were banded together to frustrate the work of the Lord in the building of His house. The carnal mind is enmity against God. So when God and His testimony are in question, there is no difficulty in securing unity of aim and purpose among His enemies. However much they differ among themselves, and even hate one another, they have but one mind when God appears on the scene.

Even Herod and Pilate, who had been enemies before, became friends through their shared contempt of Christ.

Time and their earlier failure had not reduced the opposition. It had increased instead, as verses 7-9 make clear. The letter went up in the names of certain men who were prominent among the people of the land. Behind them stood no fewer than nine tribes or citizens or peoples who were living then in the country around Palestine. It was clearly a very imposing document.

They speak of themselves as representatives of many peoples whom Osnapper had taken captive and settled in the cities of Samaria. Whether they really represented those nations, as their letter claimed, may be very questionable. But they wanted their letter to look convincing.

They belonged to the nations that the kings of Assyria, as was their custom, moved to other countries after conquering them. Esar-haddon, the son of Sennacherib, followed the policy of Shalmaneser. The tribes of Israel that were never subdued went into captivity, and in their place he settled people from many different lands. He made them live in the cities of Samaria and in the land west of the Euphrates. The second book of Kings tells us about the religious condition of these nations. They kept their gods, and at the same time acknowledged the God of Israel: "So these nations feared the LORD and also served their carved images."

In speaking this way, they show no spiritual pride. They admit that they are under the king of the Gentiles because of their own unfaithfulness. But they have understood that they alone are called to this work, since they cannot in any way associate with the religious character of the people around them.

So in our chapter, Satan, though concealed, is the active agent in stirring up these various peoples in their action against the work of the remnant.

It must still be stressed that these adversaries could have had no power against the people of God, if the people themselves had not lost faith in God and heart for their work... It would have been the same with the remnant, but for their own laziness and unbelief. As already pointed out, it seems they stopped their work before the ban ever came.

The enemy could only delay their purpose, not frustrate it, for it was of God.

They belonged to the nations that the kings of Assyria conquered and then moved to other countries, as their custom was. Esar-haddon, the son of Sennacherib, followed the policy of Shalmaneser (2 Kings 17:3). He removed the tribes of Israel that still held out, and they went into captivity. In their place he put people from many different lands, settling them in the cities of Samaria and in the land west of the Euphrates (v. 10).

The second book of Kings (2 Kings 17:33) tells us about the religious state of these nations. They kept their own gods and at the same time acknowledged the God of Israel. In the words of the Bible, "these nations feared the LORD and also served their carved images" (2 Kings 17:41).

This mixture was not plain idolatry, and it makes us think of the blend we call Christendom, in whatever form it appears... where worship of the true God sits alongside the moral darkness of the world, and where what people profess has no relation to what ought to mark the people of God.

The first is the union of all the different races of the land "against Jerusalem"... all of them joined forces to block the Lord's work of building His house. The mind of the flesh is hostile to God. So when God and His testimony are at stake, His enemies agree on one aim and purpose without difficulty. They may differ among themselves, and even hate one another, yet they are of one mind when God comes on the scene. We see this clearly in the case of our blessed Lord, when the kings of the earth set themselves and the rulers took counsel together against the LORD and against His Anointed (Psalm 2). Even Herod and Pilate, who had been enemies before, became friends through their shared contempt of Christ.

So in our chapter Satan stays hidden, but he is the one stirring up these different peoples to act against the work of the remnant.

The letter went up in the names of leading men among the people of the land. It was backed by no fewer than nine of the tribes or citizens or peoples then living in the country around them. It was clearly a very impressive document.

They present themselves as representatives of many peoples whom Osnappar had taken captive and settled in the cities of Samaria (vv. 9-10). Whether they really spoke for those nations when they wrote may be very doubtful, but they wanted their letter to look convincing.

We must still stress that these enemies could have had no power against the people of God, if the people themselves had not lost faith in God and heart for their work. Paul wrote, "A wide door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many adversaries" (1 Cor. 16:9). Yet not one of his opponents could have hindered his work, because he was counting on Him who "opens, and no one will shut."

This statement betrays the speech of the "accuser of the brethren." It was false, and so it came from Satan, for "when he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies." They had not set up the walls of the city or joined its foundations at all. They had barely laid the foundation of the temple.

Verses 11-16 give us a copy of this letter. In it we see how skilfully the adversary can mix lies with facts, and so twist and misrepresent the case in question.

These "adversaries of Judah and Benjamin" had claimed they wanted to help build the temple, since they also sacrificed to the God of Israel. Yet their accusation leaves out the temple and speaks only of the city. Their reason was obvious. The proclamation of Cyrus was about the temple. So by accusing the Jews of building the city, they made the charges of rebellion and treason they were hinting at look plausible.

They wished to stop the remnant from gathering together. Such a gathering would take away the enemy's power over the people of God: "If this city is built and its walls are completed, by this means you will have no portion on this side of the river." Scattered, they would easily become the prey of their adversaries. In the same way Satan opposes the gathering of the children of God today. If he doesn't succeed in corrupting the sheep, he makes them fall out, seizes them, and scatters them.

It was true that the last few kings, and Zedekiah above all, had been bad men who could not be trusted. They broke their word in a rebellious spirit, and this gave some support to their accusation. But God had chosen this city from the first, and for a brief time it held dominion from Him. The bad behaviour of the last kings who reigned there gave them their chance to blacken the whole history of Jerusalem. It is a striking example of how unfaithful servants can dishonour the whole of God's work, and give the adversary the opportunity he wants.

Their last king, Zedekiah, had "sworn by God" to be faithful to Nebuchadnezzar, but he broke his oath and rebelled against the king of Babylon. So he brought about the destruction of Jerusalem and God's judgment on himself. There was truth, then, in the accusation that Jerusalem had been a rebellious city. The remnant were under the favour and protection of God, yet they now suffered, under His government in this world, the consequence of the sins of their fathers.

This was like the Pharisees telling Pilate about the Lord Jesus, "If you release this man, you are not Caesar's friend" (John 19:12). They had no love for Caesar, but used his name to frighten Pilate. But these adversaries of Judah only wanted Artaxerxes to suppose that the Jews would not pay tribute to Persia.

We must still stress one thing. These adversaries could have had no power against the people of God, if the people themselves had not lost faith in God and heart for their work.

No one discovered the falsehood that they were building the city and the wall. The enemy was successful. Yet a faithful God watched over it all.

They state firmly that if the city was rebuilt, its people would not pay tax, tribute or custom to Persia (v. 13). Were they really concerned about Persia? Only so far as they could gain through Persia. It was like the Pharisees telling Pilate about the Lord Jesus, "If you release this man, you are not Caesar's friend" (Jn. 19:12). They had no love for Caesar, but used his name to frighten Pilate.

The letter is a cleverly made document. It is full of false claims and lies, inspired by the one who is "the liar, and the father of it." They accused the Jews of building Jerusalem and setting up the wall. That was a lie. The Jews were building only the house of God, not the wall or the city. What they said about the city was true: it had rebelled in the past. The accuser used the nation's old sins. But God had shown grace to His people again and brought them back from captivity. They reminded the king of the danger if the city was rebuilt and fortified with a wall, and of the loss of revenue. So they put fear in his heart.

Cyrus's proclamation was about the temple. So by accusing the Jews of building the city, they made their hinted charges of rebellion and treason look believable. The king's answer shows they had judged it right.

They wanted to stop the remnant from gathering together. Such a gathering would take away the enemy's power over the people of God. Scattered, they would easily become the prey of their enemies.

So there was truth in the accusation that Jerusalem had been a rebellious city. The remnant themselves were under God's favour and protection. No one could harm them as long as they went forward trusting Him. Yet under His government in this world they were now suffering the consequence of the sins of their fathers. And it must still be stressed that these enemies could have had no power against the people of God, if the people themselves had not lost faith in God and heart for their work.

Two motives were pressed on the king: guarding against future danger, and the possible loss of revenue. The royal records confirmed what the letter said about the city's past. So the king wrote, "Therefore make a decree that these men be made to cease, and that this city be not rebuilt, until a decree is made by me. And take care not to be slack in this matter. Why should damage grow to the hurt of the king?" The adversaries succeeded. When they received the letter, they went up in haste, armed with royal authority, and made sure that no attempt to continue building the house of the Lord could succeed. They stopped them by force and power.

The Persians and Hindus use the phrase to "eat the salt" of their masters to mean that their employers feed them. We find this idea in Ezra 4:14, where the opponents of the Jews say, "We eat the salt of the palace," as the passage is more literally translated.

Were they really concerned about Persia? Only insofar as they could benefit through Persia. This was like the Pharisees telling Pilate concerning the Lord Jesus, "If you release this man, you are not Caesar's friend" (John 19:12). They had no love for Caesar, but used his name to frighten Pilate... They suggest a mere pleasing platitude to the king when they wrote that it was not proper for them to see the king's dishonour (v. 14).

A third thing that strikes us is the way they presented the matter. They wrote as if their whole concern was for the king's advantage and reputation, and they themselves had little interest in it. Artaxerxes, we understand, was a usurper, so he would be quick to fear anything that might challenge his authority. The great spiritual adversary, who lay behind these human adversaries, is not lacking in skill!

The letter is a very cunning document, full of misrepresentation and falsehood. It was inspired by him who is "the liar, and the father of lies." They accused the Jews of building Jerusalem and setting up the wall. This was a falsehood. They were only building the house, not the wall or the city. What they said about the city, its former character of rebellion, was true, and the accuser made use of the past sins of the nation. But God had again been gracious to His people and turned their captivity. They reminded the king of the danger if the city were built again and fortified with a wall, and of the loss of revenue, and so they put fear into the king's heart.

It was true that the last few kings, and Zedekiah above all, had been bad men and unreliable. They broke their word in a rebellious spirit, and this gave some support to the accusation. Yet God Himself had chosen the city, and for a brief time it held dominion from Him. The bad behaviour of the last kings who reigned there gave them their chance to smear the whole history of Jerusalem. It is a striking example of how unfaithful servants can dishonour the whole of God's work, and give the adversary the opening he wants.

Notice that they do not accuse the people of rebuilding the temple. They do not say one word about it. They speak of the city instead. Their aim is easy to see. They wanted to stop the remnant from gathering together, because such a gathering would take away the enemy's power over the people of God... but scattered, they would easily fall prey to their adversaries. In the same way, Satan opposes the gathering of the children of God today. If he cannot corrupt the sheep, he makes them fall out, seizes them, and scatters them.

We must still stress this. These adversaries could have had no power against the people of God, if the people themselves had not lost faith in God and heart for their work. The apostle wrote, "A wide door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many adversaries" (1 Corinthians 16:9). Yet not one of his opponents could have hindered his work, because he was counting on Him who "opens, and no one will shut."

Ancient nations made records on cylinders or slabs of stone, or on clay, which was then baked or dried in the sun. Many such tablets have been found in the excavations at Nineveh, Babylon and other places. The 'book of the records' was very likely a collection of stone or clay tablets. In some cases these have been found in such numbers as to form quite a library.

Then, assuming that the city was being rebuilt, they denounced it as a bad and rebellious place. It was true that the last few kings, and especially Zedekiah, had been bad men and unreliable. They broke their word in a rebellious spirit, and this gave some support to their accusation. God, however, had chosen the city at the first, and for a brief time it held dominion from Him. They got their chance to blacken the whole history of Jerusalem through the bad behaviour of the last kings who reigned there. It is a striking example of how unfaithful servants can dishonour the whole of God's work, and give the adversary the opening he wants.

Their last king, Zedekiah, had "sworn by God" to be faithful to Nebuchadnezzar. But he broke his oath and rebelled against the king of Babylon. This brought about the destruction of Jerusalem, and brought God's judgment on himself as well. So there was truth in the accusation that Jerusalem had been a rebellious city. The remnant themselves were under the favour and protection of God, and no one could harm them as long as they went forward in confidence in Him. Yet under His government in this world they now suffered the consequence of the sins of their fathers.

They asked the king for a search of the records to find out that Jerusalem was a rebellious city, causing harm to kings (of course such Gentile kings as Nebuchadnezzar). But they did not ask for the records of Cyrus having sent the Jews back to rebuild the temple.

The letter is a very cunning piece of work, full of misrepresentation and falsehood. The one who is "a liar and the father of lies" inspired it. They accused the Jews of building Jerusalem and setting up the wall. This was a falsehood, for only the house was being built and not the wall or the city. What they said about the city, its former character of rebellion, was true, and the accuser made use of the past sins of the nation. But God had again been gracious to His people and turned their captivity… The same accuser of our brothers, liar and falsifier, stood behind these letter writers, and he is still at work.

The adversaries of those days present the king with political reasons for preventing the reuniting of the people. Such motives carried great weight with this crafty, usurping king. In fact they were the only motives likely to catch his attention. The king notes that in former days Jerusalem once had powerful kings. If their throne were set up again, they would overshadow him. He also notes that the city had always shown itself rebellious towards any foreign rule. This is enough to stir him to put a stop to the work.

These "adversaries of Judah and Benjamin" had claimed they wanted to help build the temple, since they too sacrificed to the God of Israel. Yet in their accusation they say nothing about the temple. They speak only of the city. Their reason is obvious. The proclamation of Cyrus concerned the temple. So by accusing the Jews of building the city, they made their hinted charges of rebellion and treason look believable. The king's answer shows they had judged it right.

The two motives urged on the king were protection against future danger and the possible loss of revenue. The appeal worked. The royal records also confirmed what the letter said about the city's past. So the king wrote, "Give the command now to make these men stop, and that this city not be built, until I give another command. Be careful not to fail in this; why should damage grow to the hurt of the kings?" (vv. 17-22). The adversaries had succeeded. They received the letter and went up at full speed, armed with royal authority. They made sure no one could go on building Jehovah's house. "They made them cease," it says, "by force and power."

Verses 7-23 describe the more successful scheme in the days of the Pseudo-Smerdis. He was a Magian usurper who impersonated the true Smerdis, Cyrus' younger son, whom Cambyses had put to death... After little more than seven months the false Smerdis, the Artaxerxes of our chapter, was killed, and Darius, one of the highest Persian nobles, gained the kingdom. This may explain why the impostor knew nothing of Cyrus' policy and so listened readily to arguments against it. It also explains why, under God, the king who shared the mind of Cyrus looked seriously into the truth and stood by the measures that honoured the God and people of Israel.

They wanted to stop the remnant from gathering together. Such a gathering would take away the enemy's power over the people of God: "If this city is built and its walls are finished, you will have no portion on this side of the river." Scattered, they would easily become the prey of their enemies. In the same way Satan opposes the gathering of the children of God today. If he cannot corrupt the sheep, he makes them quarrel, seizes them, and scatters them.

Note this — it is a very important thing. God does not blame the stopping of the work on the king's command. The king did give in at last, and did yield to their constant pleading to stop the Israelites. The Israelites began to stop before the king's authority came. It was lack of faith, not the king's authority, that stopped the work; and, dear friends, as a rule, is it not always so? The ending of blessing among God's people is never the work of the enemy outside. It is lack of faith, and so of faithfulness, inside.

Altogether it is a sad chapter — the record of Satan's activity... God does not appear in it. To human eyes it looks as if the enemy has completely won. Yet though God does not step in, He is no uninterested spectator of what is happening. Whatever His people are, He remains faithful. He will have His people fully tested. But He only waits for the right moment to raise up a power the enemy cannot withstand.

Here there is a considerable gap. Several kings reigned between Cyrus and Darius, and they appear in the rest of the chapter. That part is an insert (verses 6-23), explaining what took place between those two points.

The adversaries were successful, and having received the letter, they went up as fast as they could, armed with royal authority, and effectively made sure no attempt could be made to continue the work of building the Lord's house. "They made them cease," it says, "by force and power."

The adversaries of those days present the king with political reasons for preventing the reuniting of the people. Such motives had great weight with this crafty, usurping monarch and, in fact, were the only motives that might draw his concern. The king notes that Jerusalem once had powerful kings. They would overshadow him if their throne were re-established. He also notes that the city had always shown itself rebellious against any foreign rule. This is enough to stir him to put a stop to the work.

Their last king, Zedekiah, had "sworn by God" to be faithful to Nebuchadnezzar, but he broke his oath and rebelled against the king of Babylon. So there was truth in the accusation that Jerusalem had been a rebellious city. The returned exiles were under God's favour and protection, and no one could harm them as long as they went forward in confidence in Him. Yet they now suffered, in His government in this world, the consequence of the sins of their fathers.

And so these four hostile forces unite here to ruin the work of God: trickery, intimidation, accusation, and violence. Only faith could have resisted them. But the people had no faith at all, and so the building of the house stopped for fifteen years.

But notice this — it is very important. God does not attribute the stopping of the work to the king's command. The king did give in at last, and did yield to their persistent begging to stop the Israelites. The Israelites began to stop before the king's authority arrived. It was lack of faith, not the king's authority, that stopped the work; and, beloved friends, as a rule, is it not always so? The ceasing of blessing among God's people is really never the work of the enemy outside, but lack of faith, and therefore of faithfulness, within.

These adversaries could have had no power against the people of God if the people themselves had not lost faith in God and heart for their work. The apostle wrote, "For a wide door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many adversaries" (1 Cor. 16:9); but not one of his opponents could have hindered his work, because he was counting on Him who "opens and no one will shut."

We can well imagine the scene when the letter was read before Rehum and Shimshai and their companions. They must have rushed up to Jerusalem in a fever of haste, and made them stop the work by force and power. "Then the work on the house of God that is in Jerusalem stopped, and it stopped until the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia." The returned exiles faced a hard test, and a decline set in at that time. Their former energy seems to have left them, as we find when we consider Haggai's message. Nor do we read anything at the close of this chapter about turning to the LORD in prayer.

Altogether it is a sad chapter — the account of Satan's activity. The only bright gleam in it is the faithfulness of the leaders of Israel in refusing an alliance with the world. The rest of the chapter is darkness. God does not appear in it; and, looked at with human eyes, it would seem as if the enemy had completely conquered. Yet while God does not step in, He is no uninterested spectator of what is taking place. Whatever His people are, He remains faithful. He will have His people thoroughly tested. But we shall see that He only waits for the right moment to raise up a power the enemy will not be able to withstand.