But with the passing of the years after the close of the captivity, conditions changed, and many new responsibilities 614 rested upon the leaders in Israel. The temple at Jerusalem had been rebuilt and dedicated, and more priests were needed to carry on its services. There was pressing need of men of God to act as teachers of the people. And besides, the Jews remaining in Babylon were in danger of having their religious liberty restricted. Through the prophet Zechariah, as well as by their recent experience during the troublous times of Esther and Mordecai, the Jews in Medo-Persia had been plainly warned to return to their own land. The time had come when it was perilous for them to dwell longer in the midst of heathen influences. In view of these changed conditions, the priests in Babylon should have been quick to discern in the issuance of the decree a special call to them to return to Jerusalem.

I årene efter fangenskabets ophør ændrede forholdene sig. Israels ledere fik mange nye pligter. Templet i Jerusalem var blevet genopbygget og indviet, og der behøvedes flere præster til at varetage tempeltjenesten. Der var også hårdt brug for gudfrygtige mænd til at undervise folket. Desuden var der fare for, at de jøder, som blev boende i Babylon, efterhånden ville miste deres religionsfrihed. Zakarias havde kraftigt opfordret jøderne i Medo-Persien til at rejse hjem, og de vanskeligheder, som de havde for kort tid siden under Ester og Mordokaj, var også en alvorlig advarsel til dem. Det var efterhånden blevet farligt for dem at bo i et land, hvor de var udsat for hedensk påvirkning. I betragtning af de ændrede forhold burde præsterne i Babylon øjeblikkelig have opfattet det nye dekret som en speciel opfordring til dem om at rejse tilbage til Jerusalem.