Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Nehemiah 11:1

And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts [to dwell] in [other] cities.

1. And ] The copula has no connexion with the preceding chapter, and probably marks the compilatory character of the passage.

rulers ] R.V. princes.

dwelt at (R.V. in) Jerusalem ] It has been suggested that this clause refers only to ‘the princes,’ who, before Nehemiah took the matter in hand, had resided in the country: in deference to his wishes or yielding to his entreaties these princes now dwelt in Jerusalem. But the difficulty remained how to secure the presence in greater numbers of those who, from lack of means or by reason of trade and occupation, could not so easily change their quarters. This explanation which treats the word ‘dwelt’ as equivalent to ‘came to dwell,’ derives considerable support from the word ‘also’ in the following clause.

Others find the explanation of the verse in the contrast between ‘the princes of the people’ and ‘the rest of the people.’ The former naturally had dwellings in Jerusalem; they lived there because concerned in the government of the community and able to afford a dwelling in the city. The latter, however, for the most part the middle and lower classes, lived in the country; and they, being no less eager than their superiors in rank for the defence of the Holy City, determined to recruit its numbers by a contingent of ten per cent.

cast lots ] Cf. on Neh 10:34.

the holy city ] Jerusalem is so-called also in Neh 11:18. The occurrence of this title in Scripture may be illustrated by Isa 48:2, ‘For they call themselves of the holy city,’ Isa 52:1, ‘O Jerusalem, the holy city,’ cf. Dan 9:24; Joe 3:17. In the N.T. it occurs in Mat 4:5; Mat 27:53; cf. Rev 11:2; Rev 21:2; Rev 21:10; Rev 22:19.

nine parts to dwell in other cities ] R.V. nine parts in the other cities.

‘In the cities,’ as the Hebrew has it, must denote the towns and villages of the country occupied by the Jewish community; cf. Neh 11:20.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Part III. MISCELLANEOUS

Ch. Neh 11:1 to Neh 12:26.

Lists.

Ch. Neh 12:27-43.

Dedication of the City Walls.

Neh 12:44-47.

Levitical Organization.

Ch. Neh 13:1-3.

Relations with Heathen.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Neh 11:1 to Neh 12:26 . Extracts from Registers and Public Lists

1, 2. Measures taken to increase the number of dwellers in Jerusalem.

This passage seems to take up the thread which had been dropped at Neh 7:4. Nehemiah had been rendered anxious by the fewness of the inhabitants in proportion to the size of the area of the city. The census which he undertook reminded him of the old register which had come to his notice (Neh 7:6-73); the memoirs of Nehemiah were then interrupted by a description of the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, and the Solemn Covenant (8 10). The Compiler returning to the subject of the paucity of dwellers in Jerusalem, briefly describes the method adopted of increasing their number, probably epitomizing the account which Nehemiah’s own Memoirs contained.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

To bring one of ten – Artificial enlargements of capitals by forcible transfers of population to them, were not unusual in ancient times. About 500 B.C., Syracuse became a great city in this way. Tradition ascribed the greatness of Rome, in part, to this cause.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Neh 11:1-19

And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem.

The holy city replenished

Jerusalem is called here the holy city, because there the temple was, and that was the place God had chosen to put His name there. Upon this account one would think the holy seed should all have chosen to dwell there. They declined, however. Either–

1. Because a greater strictness of conversation was expected from the inhabitants of Jerusalem than from others, which they were not willing to come up to; or–

2. Because Jerusalem, of all places, was most hated by the heathen, their neighbours, and against it their malicious designs were levelled, which made that the post of danger, as the post of honour uses to be, and therefore they were not willing to expose themselves there; or–

3. Because it was more for their worldly advantage to dwell in the country. We are here told–

I. By what means it was replenished.

1. The rulers dwelt there. The mighty are magnetic. When great men would choose the holy city for their habitation, it brings holiness into reputation, and their zeal will provoke very many.

2. There were some that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem, bravely postponing their own secular interest to the public welfare. The people blessed them. They praised them, they prayed for them, they praised God for them. Many that do not appear forward themselves for the public good will yet give a good word to those that do.

3. They, finding that yet there was room, concluded, upon a review of their whole body, to bring one in ten to dwell in Jerusalem, and who they should be was determined by lot-; the disposal they all knew was of the Lord. The proportion of one in ten seems to refer to the ancient rule of giving the tenth to God. And what is given to the holy city He reckons given to Himself.

II. By what persons it was replenished.

1. Many of the children of Judah and Benjamin dwelt there. Originally part of the city lay in the lot of those tribes and part in that of the other; but the greater part was in the lot of Benjamin; hence more families of that tribe abode in the city.

2. The priests and Levites did many of them settle at Jerusalem. Where else should men that were holy to God dwell, but in the holy city? (Matthew Henry.)

Repeopling the capital

This was altogether worthy of Nehemiahs practical sagacity. The restored walls of Jerusalem could not do much to promote its security and welfare so long as it was inhabited by a mere handful of people. It would be well if some Of our modern statesmen were to grasp the principle of this policy, and open their eyes to the fact that the chief wealth and strength of any nation must ever lie, not in massive fortifications or colossal armies, but in the numbers, the character, the patriotism, and the prosperity of its people. (T. Campbell Finlayson.)

The holy city

The two leading thoughts connected with the holy city in this phase of her history are singularly applicable to the Christian community.

I. Enclosed within walls, the city gained a peculiar character and performed a distinctive mission of her own. Our Lord was not satisfied to rescue stray sheep on the mountains only to brand them with His mark and then turn them out again to graze in solitude. He drew them as a flock after Himself, and His disciples gathered them into the fold of Christian fellowship. This is of as vital importance to the cause of Christianity as the civic organisation of Jerusalem was to that of Judaism. The Christian City of God stands out before the world on her lofty foundation, the Rock of Ages–a beacon of separation from Sin, a testimony to the grace of God, a centre for the confession of faith, a home for social worship, a rallying-point for the forces of holy warfare, a sanctuary for the helpless and oppressed.

II. The public duty of citizenship. The reluctance of Christians to accept the responsibilities of Church membership may be compared to the backwardness of the Jews to dwell in Jerusalem. (W. F. Adeney, M. A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER XI

Lots are cast that a tenth of the people may constantly dwell

at Jerusalem, and the other nine parts in the other cities and

villages, 1.

Some willingly offer themselves to dwell in Jerusalem, and the

people bless them, 2.

An enumeration of the families that dwell in Jerusalem, of

Judah, and Benjamin, 3-9;

of those of the priests, 10-12;

of the chiefs of the fathers, 13;

of the mighty men, 14;

of the Levites, 15-18;

of the porters, 19;

of the residue of Israel and the officers, 20-24.

The villages at which they dwelt, 25-35.

Certain divisions of the Levites were in Judah and Benjamin, 36.

NOTES ON CHAP. XI

Verse 1. To bring one of ten] Jerusalem certainly had many inhabitants at this time; but not sufficient to preserve the city, which was now encompassed with a wall, and the rebuilding of which was going on fast. Nehemiah therefore obliged one tenth of the country people to come and dwell in it, that the population might be sufficient for the preservation and defence of the city. Ten were set apart, and the lot cast among them to see which one of the ten should take up his residence in the city.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem, which their very office in some sort obliged them to do. To bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem; that the buildings of the city might be completed, and the honour and safety of it better provided for.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

1. the rulers . . . dwelt atJerusalemThat city being the metropolis of the country, it wasright and proper that the seat of government should be there. But theexigency of the times required that special measures should be takento insure the residence of an adequate population for the custody ofthe buildings and the defense of the city. From the annoyances ofrestless and malignant enemies, who tried every means to demolish therising fortifications, there was some danger attending a settlementin Jerusalem. Hence the greater part of the returned exiles, in orderto earn as well as secure the rewards of their duty, preferred toremain in the country or the provincial towns. To remedy this stateof things, it was resolved to select every tenth man of the tribes ofJudah and Benjamin by lot, to become a permanent inhabitant of thecapital. The necessity of such an expedient commended it to thegeneral approval. It was the more readily submitted to because thelot was resorted to on all the most critical conjunctures of theJewish history, and regarded by the people as a divine decision (Pr18:18). This awakened strongly the national spirit; and patrioticvolunteers came forward readily to meet the wishes of theauthorities, a service which, implying great self-denial as well ascourage, was reckoned in the circumstances of so much importance asentitled them to the public gratitude. No wonder that the conduct ofthese volunteers drew forth the tribute of public admiration; forthey sacrificed their personal safety and comfort for the interestsof the community because Jerusalem was at that time a place againstwhich the enemies of the Jews were directing a thousand plots.Therefore, residence in it at such a juncture was attended withexpense and various annoyances from which a country life was entirelyfree.

Ne11:3-36. THEIR NAMES.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem,…. Where it was proper they should, being the metropolis of the nation, both for the performance of their offices, and to protect and defend it, as well as to set an example to the people, and encourage them to dwell there also:

the rest of the people also cast lots to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city; so called, because of the temple and the worship of God in it; and so it is called by Julian the emperor g; and some h have thought that the Cadytis of Herodotus i is the same with Jerusalem, which had its name from , “holy”, and is now called by the Turks “cuds”, that is, “holy” k: now, though it was the chief city, and the place of public worship, yet the people were not forward of settling in it, partly because of the rage of the enemy, which this city was the butt of, and partly because it was more to their worldly advantage to dwell in the country, and where they could have better supplies; they consulted their own ease, safety, and profit; wherefore this method was taken to oblige some to dwell in it, by taking one out of ten by lot, that there might be a sufficient number to rebuild the houses of it, repopulate and defend it:

and nine parts to dwell in other cities; to which they belonged, or where they pleased, any where in the land of Israel.

g Ep. 25. p. 154. h Prideaux’s Connection, par. 1. p. 56, 57. i Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 159. & Thalia, sive, l. 3. c. 5. k Sandys’s Travels, l. 5. p. 121. Ed. 5.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Neh 11:1 and Neh 11:2 narrate the carrying out of Nehemiah’s resolution, Neh 7:4, to make Jerusalem more populous, and follow Neh 7:5 as to matter, but the end of Neh 10 as to time. For while Nehemiah, after the completion of the wall, was occupied with the thought of bringing into the thinly populated capital a larger number of inhabitants, and had for this purpose convoked a public assembly, that a list of the whole Israelite population of the towns of Benjamin and Judah might be taken in hand, the seventh month of the year arrived, in which all the people assembled at Jerusalem to perform those acts of worship and solemnities (described Neh 8-10) in which this month abounded. Hence it was not till after the termination of these services that Nehemiah was able to carry out the measures he had resolved on. For there can be no doubt that Neh 11:1 and Neh 11:2 of the present chapter narrate the execution of these measures. The statement that one in ten of all the people was appointed by lot to dwell in Jerusalem, and the remaining nine in other cities, and that the people blessed the men who showed themselves willing to dwell at Jerusalem, can have no other meaning than, that the inhabitants of Jerusalem were increased in this proportion, and that this was consequently the measure which God had, according to Neh 7:5, put it into Nehemiah’s heart to take. The statement taken by itself is indeed very brief, and its connection with Neh 7:5 not very evident. But the brevity and abruptness do not justify Bertheau’s view, that these two verses are not the composition of Nehemiah himself, but only an extract from a larger context, in which this circumstance was fully explained. For Nehemiah’s style not unfrequently exhibits a certain abruptness; comp. e.g., the commencements of chs. 5 and 6, or the information Neh 13:6, which are no less abrupt, and which yet no one has conceived to be mere extracts from some other document. Besides, as the connection between Neh 7:5 and Neh 11:1 is interrupted by the relation of the events of the seventh month, so, too, is the account of the building of the wall, Neh 4:17; Neh 6:15., and Neh 7:1, interrupted by the insertion of occurrences which took place during its progress. The first sentence, Neh 11:1, ”And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem,” cannot be so closely connected with the next, “and the rest of the people cast lots,” etc., as to place the rulers in direct contrast to the rest of the people, but must be understood by its retrospect to Neh 7:4, which gives the following contrast: The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem, but few of the people dwelt there; to this is joined the next sentence: and the rest of the people cast lots. The “rest of the people” does not mean the assembled people with the exception of the rulers, but the people with the exception of the few who dwelt at Jerusalem. These cast lots to bring ( ) one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem. The predicate, the holy city, occurs here and Neh 11:18 for the first time. Jerusalem is so called, on the ground of the prophecies, Joe 3:17 and Isa 48:2, because the sanctuary of God, the temple, was there. means, in the other cities of Judah and Benjamin. , those who showed themselves willing to dwell in Jerusalem, is taken by most expositors in contrast to those who were bound to do this in consequence of the decision of the lot; and it is then further supposed that some first went to Jerusalem of their free choice, and that the lot was then cast with respect to the rest. There are not, however, sufficient grounds for this conclusion, nor yet for the assumption that the decision of the lot was regarded as a constraint. The disposal of the lot was accepted as a divine decision, with which all had, whether willingly or unwillingly, to comply. All who willingly acquiesced in this decision might be designated as ; and these departed to Jerusalem accompanied by the blessings of the people. Individuals are not so much meant, as chiefly fathers of families, who went with their wives and children.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The Re-peopling of Jerusalem.

B. C. 444.

      1 And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts to dwell in other cities.   2 And the people blessed all the men, that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem.   3 Now these are the chief of the province that dwelt in Jerusalem: but in the cities of Judah dwelt every one in his possession in their cities, to wit, Israel, the priests, and the Levites, and the Nethinims, and the children of Solomon’s servants.   4 And at Jerusalem dwelt certain of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin. Of the children of Judah; Athaiah the son of Uzziah, the son of Zechariah, the son of Amariah, the son of Shephatiah, the son of Mahalaleel, of the children of Perez;   5 And Maaseiah the son of Baruch, the son of Colhozeh, the son of Hazaiah, the son of Adaiah, the son of Joiarib, the son of Zechariah, the son of Shiloni.   6 All the sons of Perez that dwelt at Jerusalem were four hundred threescore and eight valiant men.   7 And these are the sons of Benjamin; Sallu the son of Meshullam, the son of Joed, the son of Pedaiah, the son of Kolaiah, the son of Maaseiah, the son of Ithiel, the son of Jesaiah.   8 And after him Gabbai, Sallai, nine hundred twenty and eight.   9 And Joel the son of Zichri was their overseer: and Judah the son of Senuah was second over the city.   10 Of the priests: Jedaiah the son of Joiarib, Jachin.   11 Seraiah the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, was the ruler of the house of God.   12 And their brethren that did the work of the house were eight hundred twenty and two: and Adaiah the son of Jeroham, the son of Pelaliah, the son of Amzi, the son of Zechariah, the son of Pashur, the son of Malchiah,   13 And his brethren, chief of the fathers, two hundred forty and two: and Amashai the son of Azareel, the son of Ahasai, the son of Meshillemoth, the son of Immer,   14 And their brethren, mighty men of valour, a hundred twenty and eight: and their overseer was Zabdiel, the son of one of the great men.   15 Also of the Levites: Shemaiah the son of Hashub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, the son of Bunni;   16 And Shabbethai and Jozabad, of the chief of the Levites, had the oversight of the outward business of the house of God.   17 And Mattaniah the son of Micha, the son of Zabdi, the son of Asaph, was the principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer: and Bakbukiah the second among his brethren, and Abda the son of Shammua, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun.   18 All the Levites in the holy city were two hundred fourscore and four.   19 Moreover the porters, Akkub, Talmon, and their brethren that kept the gates, were a hundred seventy and two.

      Jerusalem is called here the holy city (v. 1), because there the temple was, and that was the place God had chosen to put his name there; upon this account, one would think, the holy seed should all have chosen to dwell there and have striven for a habitation there; but, on the contrary, it seems they declined dwelling there, 1. Because a greater strictness of conversation was expected from the inhabitants of Jerusalem than from others, which they were not willing to come up to. Those who care not for being holy themselves are shy of dwelling in a holy city; they would not dwell in the New Jerusalem itself for that reason, but would wish to have a continuing city here upon earth. Or, 2. Because Jerusalem, of all places, was most hated by the heathen their neighbours, and against it their malicious designs were levelled, which made that the post of danger (as the post of honour usually is) and therefore they were not willing to expose themselves there. Fear of persecution and reproach, and of running themselves into trouble, keeps many out of the holy city, and makes them backward to appear for God and religion, not considering that, as Jerusalem is with a special malice threatened and insulted by its enemies, so it is with a special care protected by its God and made a quiet habitation,Isa 33:20; Psa 46:4; Psa 46:5. Or, 3. Because it was more for their worldly advantage to dwell in the country. Jerusalem was no trading city, and therefore there was no money to be got there by merchandise, as there was in the country by corn and cattle. Note, All seek their own, not the things that are Jesus Christ’s, Phil. ii. 21. It is a general and just complaint that most people prefer their own wealth, credit, pleasure, ease, and safety, before the glory of God and the public good. People being thus backward to dwell at Jerusalem, now that it was poor, we are here told,

      I. By what means it was replenished. 1. The rulers dwelt there, v. 1. That was the proper place for them to reside in, because there were set the thrones of judgment (Ps. cxxii. 5), and thither, in all difficult matters, the people resorted with their last appeals. And if it were an instance of eminent affection to the house of God, zeal for the public good, and of faith, and holy courage, and self-denial, to dwell there at this time, the rulers would be examples of these to their inferiors. Their dwelling there would invite and encourage others to dwell there too. Magnates magnetes–the mighty are magnetic. When great men choose the holy city for their habitation their example brings holiness into reputation, and their zeal will provoke very many. 2. There were some that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem, nobly foregoing their own secular interest for the public welfare, v. 2. It is upon record, to their honour, that when others were shy of venturing upon difficulty, loss, and danger, they sought the good of Jerusalem, because of the house of the Lord their God. Those shall prosper that thus love Zion,Psa 122:6; Psa 122:9. It is said, The people blessed them. They praised them; they prayed for them; they praised God for them. Many that do not appear forward themselves for the public good will yet give a good word to those that do. God and man will bless those that are public blessings, which should encourage us to be zealous in doing good. 3. They, finding that yet there was room, concluded upon a review of their whole body to bring one in ten to dwell in Jerusalem; who they should be was determined by lot, the disposal whereof, all knew, was of the Lord. This would prevent strife, and would be a great satisfaction to those on whom the lot fell to dwell at Jerusalem, that they plainly saw God appointing the bounds of their habitation. They observed the proportion of one in ten, as we may suppose, to bring the balance between the city and country to a just and equal poise; so it seems to refer to the ancient rule of giving the tenth to God; and what is given to the holy city he reckons given to himself.

      II. By what persons it was replenished. A general account is here given of the inhabitants of Jerusalem because the governors of Judah looked upon them as their strength in the Lord of hosts their God, and valued them accordingly, Zech. xii. 5. 1. Many of the children of Judah and Benjamin dwelt there; for, originally, part of the city law in the lot of one of those tribes and part in that of the other; but the greater part was in the lot of Benjamin, and therefore here we find of the children of Judah only 468 families in Jerusalem (v. 6), but of Benjamin 928, Neh 11:7; Neh 11:8. Thus small were its beginnings, but afterwards, before our Saviour’s time, it grew much more populous. Those of Judah all descended from Perez, or Pharez, that son of Judah of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came. And, though the Benjamites were more in number, yet of the men of Judah it is said (v. 6) that they were valiant men, fit for service, and able to defend the city in case of an attack. Judah has not lost its ancient character of a lion’s whelp, bold and daring. Of the Benjamites that dwelt in Jerusalem we are here told who was overseer, and who was second, v. 9. For it is as necessary for a people to have good order kept up among themselves as to be fortified against the attacks of their enemies from abroad, to have good magistrates as to have good soldiers. 2. The priests and Levites did many of them settle at Jerusalem; where else should men that were holy to God dwell, but in the holy city? (1.) Most of the priests, we may suppose, dwelt there, for their business lay where the temple was. Of those that did the work of the house in their courses here were 822 of one family, 242 of another, and 128 of another, v. 12-14. It was well that those labourers were not few. It is said of some of them that they were mighty men of valour (v. 14); it was necessary that they should be so, for the priesthood was not only a work, which required might, but a warfare, which required valour, especially now. Of one of these priests it is said that he was the son of one of the great men. It was no disparagement to the greatest man they had to have his son in the priesthood; he might magnify his office, for his office did not in the least diminish him. (2.) Some of the Levites also came and dwelt at Jerusalem, yet but few in comparison, 284 in all (v. 18), with 172 porters (v. 19), for much of their work was to teach the good knowledge of God up and down the country, for which purpose they were to be scattered in Israel. As many as there was occasion for attended at Jerusalem; the rest were doing good elsewhere. [1.] It is said of one of the Levites that he had the oversight of the outward business of the house of God, v. 16. The priests were chief managers of the business within the temple gates; but this Levite was entrusted with the secular concerns of God’s house, that were in ordine ad spiritualia–subservient to its spiritual concerns, the collecting of the contributions, the providing of materials for the temple service, and the like, which it was necessary to oversee, else the inward business would have been starved and have stood still. Those who take care of the ta exo—the outward concerns of the church, the serving of its tables, are as necessary in their place as those who take care of its ta eso—its inward concerns, who give themselves to the word and prayer. [2.] It is said of another that he was the principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer. Probably he had a good ear and a good voice, and was a scientific singer, and therefore was chosen to lead the psalm. He was precentor in the temple. Observe, Thanksgiving is necessary in prayer; they should go together; giving thanks for former mercies is a becoming way of begging further mercies. And care should be taken in public service that every thing be done in the best manner, decently and in good order– in prayer, that one speak and the rest join–in singing, that one begin and the rest follow.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Nehemiah – Chapter 11

People of Jerusalem, Verses 1-19

Nehemiah 11 is the sequel to chapter 7. When the wall of Jerusalem was finished Nehemiah began to take note of its sparsity of settlement and lack of restored dwellings (Neh 7:4). To remedy this he seems to have hit upon the plan put into action here in chapter 11. The initial step is recorded in chapter 7, where the genealogical lists are consulted, evidently to ascertain the proportion of each repatriated family to the total population. Verse 1 of chapter 11 states that the leaders of Judah lived inside Jerusalem, but implies they were the only ones. The intent was to remove one in ten of all the people in the outlying towns and cities into Jerusalem. They would cast lots to determine who should be moved. However there were some who volunteered to move their residence into Jerusalem, and they received the blessing of the rest of the people. Evidently they all saw the need of repopulating the city, but most did not wish to move.

There follows through verse 19 the enumeration of the families who already were resident in Jerusalem at the time. They are divided by tribal families, or in the case of, the Levites, temple duties. They are called heads of the provinces, or of the particular area of service, or tribal division. These lived on their own property inside Jerusalem, and are divided into Israelites, priests, Levites, temple servants (or Nethinim), and Solomon’s servants (or descendants of his servants).

Those who traced their lineage back to the patriarch Judah are first named (verses 4-6). These are also called the sons of Perez, who was the leading son of Judah and ancestor of David. They numbered four hundred sixty-eight. The sons of Benjamin are listed in verses 6-7 and numbered nine hundred twenty-eight (Jerusalem had been in the allotment of the tribe of Benjamin, which may account for the larger number of Benjamites already living there). A man named Joel was overseer of the “Israelites,” and Judah the son of Hassenuah was second in command. It is not clear to which tribe they belonged.

The priests are sub-divided into three groups (verses 10-14). Of those who ministered in the temple there were eight hundred twenty-two. Other priestly leaders were two hundred forty-two, and there were one hundred twenty-eight called valiant warriors. The Levites are enumerated in verses 15-19 and include those in charge of the outside work of the temple and the leaders of the singing. They numbered two hundred eighty-four. The porters (or gatekeepers) were numbered separately, one hundred seventy-two. All of the people living in Jerusalem before the relocation of the tenth chosen by lot, as enumerated here, came to three thousand and forty-four.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

THE DIFFICULTIES OF REBUILDING

The opening chapter acquaints us with Nehemiahs very soul. The heart of the man is here exposed and the reader is permitted his deepest thought. He inquires after the remnant left in Jerusalem and learns that they are in great affliction and reproach, the walls of the city broken down, the gates burned, and he not only sits him down to weep, but mourns for days and fasts and prays before the God of Heaven, and his prayer as reported in chapter 1, Neh 1:5-11, is a model of intercession, while chapters 2 to 7 record the result of that petition before God.

These seven chapters suggest three things:

First, the strain of prayer and the exercise of patience. Chapters 1 and 2,

The words of Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah. And it came to pass in the month Chisleu, in the twentieth year, as I was in Shushan the palace,

That Hanani, one of my brethren, came, he and certain men of Judah; and I asked them concerning the Jews that had escaped, which were left of the captivity, and concerning Jerusalem.

And they said unto me, The remnant that are left of the captivity there in the province are in great affliction and reproach: the wall of Jerusalem also is broken down, and the gates thereof are burned with fire.

And it came to pass, when I heard these words, that I sat down and wept, and mourned certain days, and fasted, and prayed before the God of Heaven,

And said, I beseech Thee, O Lord God of Heaven, the great and terrible God, that keepeth covenant and mercy for them that love Him and observe His commandments:

Let Thine ear now be attentive, and Thine eyes open, that Thou mayest hear the prayer of Thy servant, which I pray before Thee now, day and night, for the Children of Israel Thy servants, and confess the sins of the Children of Israel, which we have sinned against Thee: both I and my fathers house have sinned.

We have dealt very corruptly against Thee, and have not kept the commandments, nor the statutes, nor the judgments, which Thou commandedst Thy servant Moses.

Remember, I beseech Thee, the word that Thou commandedst Thy servant Moses, saying, If ye transgress, I will scatter you abroad among the nations:

But if ye turn unto Me, and keep My commandments, and do them; though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the Heaven, yet will I gather them from thence, and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set My name there.

Now these are Thy servants and Thy people, whom Thou hast redeemed by Thy great power, and by Thy strong hand.

O Lord, I beseech Thee, let now Thine ear be attentive to the prayer of Thy servant, and to the prayer of Thy servants, who desire to fear Thy Name: and prosper, I pray Thee, Thy servant this day, and grant him mercy in the sight of this man. For I was the kings cupbearer (Neh 1:1-11).

Neh 2:1-20.

And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that wine was before him: and I took up the wine, and gave it unto the king. Now I had not been beforetime sad in his presence.

Wherefore the king said unto me, Why is thy countenance sad, seeing thou art not sick? this is nothing else but sorrow of heart. Then I was very sore afraid,

And said unto the king, Let the king live for ever: why should not my countenance be sad, when the city, the place of my fathers sepulchres, lieth waste and the gates thereof are consumed with fire?

Then the king said unto me, For what dost thou make request? So I prayed to the God of Heaven.

And I said unto the king, If it please the king, and if thy servant have found favour in thy sight, that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers sepulchres, that I may build it.

And the king said unto me, (the queen also sitting by him,) For how long shall thy journey be? and when wilt thou return? So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time.

Moreover I said unto the king, If it please the king, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the river, that they may convey me over till I come into Judah;

And a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the kings forest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the palace which appertained to the house, and for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall enter into. And the king granted me, according to the good hand of my God upon me.

Then I came to the governors beyond the river, and gave them the kings letters. Now the king had sent captains of the army and horsemen with me.

When Sanballat the Horonite, and Tobiah the servant, the Ammonite, heard of it, it grieved them exceedingly that there was come a man to seek the welfare of the Children of Israel.

So I came to Jerusalem, and was there three days.

And I arose in the night, I and some few men with me; neither told I any man what my God had put in my heart to do at Jerusalem: neither was there any beast with me, save the beast that I rode upon.

And I went out by night by the gate of the valley, even before the dragon well, and to the dung port, and viewed the walls of Jerusalem, which were broken down, and the gates thereof were consumed with fire.

Then I went on to the gate of the fountain, and to the kings pool: but there was no place for the beast that was under me to pass.

Then went I up in the night by the brook, and viewed the wall, and turned back, and entered by the gate of the valley, and so returned.

And the rulers knew not whither I went, or what I did; neither had I as yet told it to the Jews, nor to the priests, nor to the nobles, nor to the rulers, nor to the rest that did the work.

Then said I unto them, Ye see the distress that we are in, how Jerusalem lieth waste, and the gates thereof are burnt with fire: come, and let us build up the wall of Jerusalem, that we be no more a reproach.

Then I told them of the hand of my God which was good upon me; as also the kings words that he had spoken unto me. And they said, Let us rise up and build. So they strengthened their hands for this good work.

But when Sanballat the Horonite, and Tobiah the servant, the Ammonite, and Geshem the Arabian, heard it, they laughed us to scorn, and despised us, and said. What is this thing that ye do? will ye rebel against the king?

Then answered I them, and said unto them, The God of Heaven, He will prosper us; therefore we His servants will arise and build: but ye have no portion, nor right, nor memorial, in Jerusalem (Neh 2:1-20).

I sat down and wept, and mourned certain days, and fasted, and prayed before the God of Heaven (Neh 1:4). There are people who make easy work of prayer. They either repeat what their mothers taught them in infancy, Now I lay me down to sleep, or else they think over what they would like to have and lightly tell God about it at night or in the morning; or else they remember the famous story of the saint who was heard to say, Well, Lord, Pm glad we are on the same good terms! Good-night! and the whole exercise is finished. Or perhaps, as possibly the greater multitude, forget to pray before retiring, awake in the night and remember it, and while formulating the phrases, fall to sleep again.

There are people who never pray without agonizing. They hold a conviction that any appeal addressed to God must be voiced in sobs if heard in Heaven, and they take on prayer tones and assume sorrow, contrition, agony of soul, and such are wont to think that no one prays who does not cry aloud; but while such patented prayers produce strange and almost revolting feelings on the part of the discerning, it remains a fairly well established fact that true praying is no easy or lackadaisical task.

The prayer of Jacob at Peniel was no slight mental exercise. It consisted not in framing a few petitions. It is described in the Book as a wrestling with God all the night through, a clinging that would not let Him go without a blessing. Abraham in praying for Sodom, continued his petition; advanced his requests and did not let God go until the best possible proffer was secured. Moses in agony for Israel reached the point where he begged that if God would not bless them, He should blot his name out of the Book of remembrance. In Gethsemane, Jesus remained on knees and wrestled with the Father and not only cried in agony, If it be possible, let this cup pass from Me, but sweat great drops of blood.

Prayer is no mere passing of time in talk; prayer is no mere opportunity of literary expression or homiletical arrangement; prayer, at its best, is an agony; prayer, at its best, utterly exhausts; prayer consumes!

Christ, Himself, in teaching us how to pray, employed the illustration of the importunate widow who would not be turned aside but, prostrate before the unjust judge, kept her petitions going until he was wearied with her. Many times I have heard Dwight L: Moody pray and the memory of it will never pass from my mind. I am perfectly confident that a five-minute prayer passing Moodys lips exhausted him more than five hours of hard physical labor would have done; more than the hour sermon that followed, for while Moody assumed no agonizing tones, prayer with him was indeed a soul exercise. He went trembling into the presence of God, as Esther approached the king. He ordered his cause before Him as one who felt that the highest human interests and holiest were at stake. He came not back until he was conscious that he had been heard and his hearts request was fully before God.

Listen to the language of Nehemiahs prayer; I beseech Thee, O Lord God of Heaven * * Let Thine ear now be attentive and Thine eyes open. I pray before Thee now, day and night (Neh 1:3; Neh 1:6). Hear his confession of sin, Both I and my fathers house have sinned, Remember, I beseech Thee, and again, O Lord, I beseech Thee, let now Thine ear be attentive to the prayer of Thy servant. Grant him mercy in the sight of this man, for he was the kings cupbearer.

But if prayer is exhausting, to wait for the answer is equally if not more so; for the man who truly prays is impatient. He yearns; he longs! Nehemiahs prayer seems to have been made in the month Chisleu, or December, and he waited until Nisan or April, before he had a chance with the king. Four months is a long time to wait when every moment is freighted with anxiety. The reports that had come to him of the condition of his loved city and its sacred temple, and of these blood relatives to whom he was bound as only a Jew is bound to his own, made every day of waiting seem like an eternity.

John Knox was heard, in a secret place behind the hedge-row, to pray, O God, give me Scotland or I die. Three times the passer-by heard this petition, wrung from his soul, and yet even Knoxs agony never exceeded that of Nehemiahthe waiting, weeping man!

Think what it would mean to you if the temple that we are now demolishing at Tenth Street had been in such state for years, and the place to which we were once wont to go and gladly worship God, and in which we once waited with such delightful songs and profitable exercise of soul, was never to rise again, and we knew that only God could call back its towers and make possible the completion of its auditorium and breathe His own Spirit, like a soul, into the same!

Joseph Parker said, Can we hear of sacred places burning without a single tear? Could we hear of St. Pauls cathedral being burned down without feeling we had sustained an irreparable loss, and if anything happened to that grand old Abbey at Westminster, we should feel as if a sacred place was gone, a sanctuary indeed, and as if it were every Englishmans duty to help put it up again.

When the cathedral at Rheims was destroyed, the entire Christian world revolted and grieved, and justly so; but that was a matter of pride rather than of passion. We may be moved with the report that the mansion on the boulevard has burned, but the souls deeps are smitten when one stands before the smoldering ashes of his own home, the place where he has thought and wrought, hoped and helped, planned and prayed. In a great sense, such a place is an essential part of life itself, and to smite it is to smite the soul of man.

To wait for the new building to come, to abide patiently until the walls rise again, and to look unto God who alone can bring order out of chaos, victory out of defeat, restoration out of despair; that is the strain for which few men are sufficient, but under which Nehemiah stood steadfastly.

But the whole of exhausting is not in waiting. Nehemiah proved sufficient for a second thing, namely, the exhausting stimulus of seeing plans perfected.

There are people who imagine that all weariness is over when once a work is well begun, clearly under way, with every prospect of completion. On the contrary, the opposite is true. That is when and where the truest exhaustion takes place. Its exhilaration we grant; its stimulus is often mistaken for strength; but it is none the less consuming.

Some years ago Mrs. Riley and myself sat down to think through plans for a home. Weeks we spent upon those plans, and they were weeks of pleasure. Anticipation played conspicuous part and the enthusiasm of new thought for this convenience and that cheered and encouraged, but when the building time came, the constant watch and care-taking concern was exhausting.

The members of the building committee of the First Baptist Church would bear kindred testimony. I doubt if any building the city of Minneapolis holds, had more time expended in thinking through plans than the two buildings upon the plans of which we have been engaged for years. They have been drawn three times, and the utmost endeavor was put into every detail, and yet the actual construction itself, while stimulating, has proven also exhausting. It may be difficult for racers to wait the word Go, and it is; and when once the race is commenced, the very stimulus of prospective victory leads one to forget self and muscles are not conscious of the strain, but with joy yield themselves to their task. The goal, however, never fails to find an exhausted runner.

But the greatest difficulty of this rebuilding is found in a third circumstance, namely, the increasing load of every conceivable opposition.

This opposition took varied forms; in fact, almost every form possible to Satanic suggestion.

Its first form was scorn. Sanballat and Tobiah laughed, What do these feeble Jews? will they fortify themselves? will they sacrifice? will they make an end in a day? wilt they revive the stones out of the heaps of the rubbish which are burned?

Then, with a great guffaw they continued, Even that which they build, if a fox go up, he shall even break down their stone wall (Neh 4:2-3).

What so hard to endure as scorn; what so difficult to bear as a laugh? It stings like a hornet! It is one of the things against which it is hard to go. The Professor who teaches evolution also teaches his students that ridicule is an insult to science. They know its power and they also know that that subject deserves it; and on that account they wince at the very suggestion. But, on any subject, ridicule is hard to bear. However the true builder, a leader like Nehemiah and his co-laborers go on joining wall to wall and will not be laughed out of court on a great and needful enterprise.

Seeing this, Sanballat and Tobiah changed voices, and, joining with Arabians, Ammonites and Ashdodites, they were very wroth, and conspired all of them together to come and to fight against Jerusalem, and to hinder if (Neh 4:7-8). The man who makes fun of you, when he finds his laughter ineffective, and your success assured, comes to hate, and if possible, to hurt. Human nature does not change through the coming and going of the centuries. All our enemies are of a kind; mockery at first, murder afterward. But, Gods man can commonly meet the true adversaries, Satans servants.

A far more difficult opposition is that recorded in the fifth chapter, the opposition of ones own. The Jews now join their complaints with the others, and the great cry of the people and their wives against their brethren was this:

We, our sons, and our daughters, are many: therefore we take up corn for them, that we may eat, and live.

Some also there were that said, We have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses, that we might buy corn, because of the dearth.

There were also that said, We have borrowed money for the kings tribute, and that upon our lands and vineyards.

Yet now our flesh is the flesh of our brethren, our children as their children: and, lo, we bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants, and some of our daughters are brought unto bondage already: neither is it in our power to redeem them; for other men have our lands and vineyards (Neh 5:2-5).

For the moment they forgot that no man among them had sacrificed as Nehemiah had sacrificed, and, in reckoning their losses, they overlooked the circumstance that he had shaken his lap out, leaving himself nothing. That was a harder opposition than was created by Sanballat and Tobiah.

The disappointment of Christs life was not in the fact that He faced the Cross; He came to do that. It was not in the cruelty of the nails that crushed His tender flesh; from all eternity that had been anticipated! But, His agony was in the lifting up a heel against Him by one out of the little circle, dear to Him. Never was sarcasm reduced to such keen edge and more deeply felt than in the Garden of Gethsemane when Christ, looking into the face of Judas, said, FRIEND, wherefore art thou come?

FRIENDwhat that must have meant to Judas! If he knew the Scriptures, like a flash, Psa 41:9 filled his thought. My own familiar FRIEND, in whom I trusted, which did eat of My bread, hath lifted up his heel against Me (Psa 41:9).

And yet again how he would recall the words of the great Zechariah (Zec 13:6), And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in Thine hands? Then He shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of My FRIENDS.

Blessed is the man, the members of whose house join with him in his enterprises; and cursed indeed is he who endures their opposition.

But Satan has other methods of opposition than scorn, warfare and domestic rebellion. In the sixth chapter Sanballat tried to effect a companionship and consequent compromise with Nehemiah. Four times over he sends requesting that they meet together for a conference and adjust their differences. The recent Convention of Baptists is now heralded as a triumph of brotherly love. The whole session has gone by and only a single protest characterized it, and only one man voiced that complaint and the newspapers have been filled with jubilation of the reports of peace. The fundamentalists have subsided and the path of the future is smooth! Such is the glared acclaim; and that in the face of the fact that in the last twelve months the most flagrant denials of the faith that ever passed the lips of Baptist men, or dribbled from the pens of Baptist writers, have gone brazenly into print. The peace that comes by a compromise of principle, a conference that results to the satisfaction of Gods enemies, a conference that follows a fellowship of Satanic plans; these are, after all, the most effective hindrances to the truth of God. And it is written to the eternal credit of Nehemiah that he fell into no such trap, but declined the conference, resented the approach, rejoicing that he had escaped the pit digged for him, and recorded the fact that the wall was finished on the twentieth and fifth day of the month, being completed in fifty-two days.

And this same man who had led in the building now organized to hold what he had gained, and the result was a revival.

Mark

THE STABLE FEATURES OF THIS REVIVAL

It commenced in a careful canvass of returned captives. The seventh chapter of the Book of Nehemiah would amaze the modernist, should he read the same. That individual imagines that the social surveys of the last few years constitute a twentieth century novelty, but here three thousand years ago Nehemiah orders a census taken with a view to knowing the strength of Israel and sounding out his possible resources, the fuller carrying out of which has seldom been equalled and never surpassed. The report rendered by the commissioned workers was perfect. He took count of the last man and of his possessions, and when it was finished, Nehemiah knew how many people he had upon whom he could dependforty-two thousand three hundred sixty, besides seven thousand three hundred thirty-seven servants and two hundred forty-five singing men and singing women.

There is a suggestion there for modernists; better count rather than estimate! My candid judgment is that the one sin that characterizes more ministers than any other is estimating versus counting. I went into a church where the preacher had claimed a congregation of forty-four hundred, and counted exactly twenty-two hundred seats, including the choir gallery; and in another church largely over-estimated, reporting six thousand, and counted exactly thirty-two hundred including the choir. Better count than estimate. One might greatly reduce his crowd but would increase his reputation for veracity and increase his self-respect. The man who goes to battle had best not count on soldiers he does not have, and the church of God is militant and cannot win its victories with congregations that are estimated, but never existed.

The relation, however, to such a careful reckoning of ones resources to a revival is intimate and logical. I am inclined to think that of the years of my pastorate in this church, no single meeting held in it has accomplished more for it than the two years campaign that commenced with a most careful canvass of the membership. A canvass itself suffices to bring a conviction of responsibility to the individual, and to waken interest in the task to be undertaken by the entire people. Nehemiah knew the principles of a revival thirty centuries ago as well as the evangelist knows them today.

The second feature of this revival is significant in the last degree: The Word of God was produced and read to all the people.

It was no brief reading; it went on for hours, from morning until midday, .before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the Book of the Law (Neh 8:3).

There will never be a revival of religion without a revival of Bible reading. We are publishing more Bibles than ever before in human history, but the individual is not reading the Bible as much as his father did, and the whole church of God feels the relapse. When the Christian takes his Book in hand and abides with it by the hour, when the family begins the day by reading a chapter from the Book, when the, preacher turns from textual sermons and revives expository preaching, when the Sunday School ceases from lesson helps and pores over the text itself, the revival will be well on the way.

There never will be strength in the church until we feed on the Bread from Heaven and on the meat of Gods Word; until we hold the milk bottle of that same Word to the lips of babes. If we would have a revival we must bring the Bible from its shelf of neglect; if we would have a revival we must exalt it against the charges of infidelity; if we would have a revival we must rescue the people themselves from indifference to this Book. We are novel readers now; we are readers of the daily newspapers; some few of the more industrious, are magazine readers; a smaller company still, are book-readers, but the Church of God waits Bible reading; and if the day of Bible study should suddenly break in upon usand there are some signs of it then as sure as day follows night, an unspeakable blessing immeasurable in extent, infinitely desirable in character, will fall on the sons of man.

But note again, Repentance, fasting, and a fresh covenant follows (Neh 8:9 to Neh 12:39). Impenitent people will never become Bible students. The gormandizing crowd will never give itself to Gods Word; the pleasure-seeking will never enter into covenant with the Lord.

However, if, in the wisdom of His grace, the present Bible movement voices itself in the fundamentals association, and the thousands of Bible conferences that have been held, in the Bible Unions of China and England, and America, shall result in earnest and sincere and increasing study of the Scriptures, we may well expect repentance to follow. Men will break with sin and will no longer make a god of their bellies, but will fast; and out of this conviction self-control will come and a fresh covenant, made in sincerity, and destined to be kept in the power of the Holy Spirit.

So much for the stable features of revival, let us conclude our Book study with

THE STUBBORN FACTS OF RE-OCCUPATION

These are recorded in chapters 11 to 13, and the first one that we face is this: The Jerusalem dwellers were recorded as especially favored. The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city (Neh 11:1).

It is a significant suggestion: Jerusalem, the city of the king; Jerusalem, the captial city of the land; Jerusalem, the subject of every Jews love, and the choice of every Jews living.

It does make a difference where one lives. A Minneapolis minister, returning from the Orient, a few years since, in an address before the Baptist ministers, said, I spent some days in Jerusalem; it is a bum town!

But only the readers of the Old Testament know what the ancient Jerusalem was and what it meant to every living Jew. It was more than the capitol; it was more than the city of the king: it was more than beautiful; it was, to them, Divine! They believed that God Himself was there; and in a sense they were correct, for He had made every pledge of His Presence in the Temple, and He performed His promise. Ones life, in no small measure, is the result of ones location.

I think I may be pardoned in passing, if I pay tribute to this city. I declare it my conviction that life has meant more to me, that the burdens have pressed less heavily upon my shoulders, that the joy of living has itself been increased, and that I hold a confidence against decrepitude and old age that would be impossible, if I lived in a city less charming than this beautiful metropolis. Life is profoundly affected by location. In the northern woods of Minnesota I stumbled suddenly and unexpectedly upon a small house. I was hungry and supposed myself beyond the pale of civilization. Going in I was met at the door by a charming looking woman to whom I said, I am hungry and have a party of four friends with me; would it be possible for you to give us a dinner? She graciously answered, It would be a delight to give you a dinner; bring your friends in. When the dinner was over and I tried to pay her, she declined to receive anything, and it was only by leaving the money on the table that I could force it upon her. She said, I have not seen a living face, except that of my little son, for three months; you cannot imagine the pleasure this dinner has been to me, for it has meant companionship. I asked, Will you tell me why you live here away from all civilization and friends?

Yes, sir, I live here with pleasure and with joy. In Southern Illinois I dragged a miserable existence; in these north woods my health is recovered and living is a joy.

Who will say that location has nothing to do with living. Jerusalem! Ah, that was the city coveted by every Jew, and the tenth man permitted to dwell there dwelt not only nigh to the Temple but nigh to God; and whatever else may be said of the Jew, it was the acme of his existence that he believed God and sought to live near God.

You will find again that in this city special provision was made for the priests and Levites. God never forgets those He calls to be His special servants !

There are special promises made to all Gods people! In fact, Dean Frost, our former great-souled co-laborer, used to say that there were thousands of promises in the Bible, and that with a solitary exception, they were all made to Gods own, and that exception was salvation proffered to the sinner. But while all Gods people are the subject of promises, the servant whose entire time is devoted to Gods work is the subject of His special promise, and the object of His constant care. The Levite was never forgotten; the priest was never overlooked. By law the provisions made for them both were adequate.

I meet a good many ministers who tell me they feel it incumbent upon them to look out for themselves, and judging by their conduct, they are keen on the job. They hunt for positions; they seek compensation; they corral opportunities. It all raises a serious question, whether one has much to do with the subject of caring for himself if he be the true servant of God, or whether it is sufficient for him to devote himself to that service and leave the whole question of his care to Him who careth and never faileth.

Finally, by the Law of the Lord certain were excluded from the city. Chapter 13.

Mark who they were: Ammonites and Moabites were not to come into the congregation of God forever, and note the reason, They met not the Children of Israel with bread and with water, but hired Balaam against them that he should curse them (Neh 13:2).

It is a grievous thing to refuse help to Gods people in the hour of their need. It is more grievous, a thousand-fold, than the average man imagines. It is not a rejection of the people onlyit is a rejection of Him. The twenty-fifth chapter of Matthew is a further presentation of this subject. The great day of Judgment has come; men are separated to the right and to the left, after the manner of sheep and goats, and the King is saying to them on His right hand,

Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

For I was an hungred, and ye gave Me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave Me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took Me in:

Naked, and ye clothed Me: I was sick, and ye visited Me: I was in prison, and ye came unto Me.

Then shall the righteous answer Him, saying, Lord, when saw we Thee an hungred, and fed Thee? or thirsty, and gave Thee drink?

When saw we Thee a stranger, and took Thee in? or naked, and clothed Thee?

Or when saw we Thee sick, or in prison, and came unto Thee?

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me.

Then shall He say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

For I was an hungred, and ye gave Me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave Me no drink:

I was a stranger, and ye took Me not in: naked, and ye clothed Me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited Me not.

Then shall they also answer Him, saying, Lord, when saw we Thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto Thee?

Then shall He answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to Me.

And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal (Mat 25:34-46).

And yet this is not the only sin that excludes. After all, it is not sin that does exclude, save the sin of having rejected Jesus. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him (Joh 3:36).

Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley

EXPLANATORY NOTES.] This chapter is intimately connected with Neh. 7:4, showing Nehemiahs plan of increasing the population of the city. The genealogies and then the confession and covenant come in parentheticallythe former as part of the process in the plan, and the latter as chronologically happening while Nehemiah was maturing the plan.Crosby.

1.] The first sentence, Neh. 11:1, And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem, cannot be so closely connected with the next, And the rest of the people cast lots, &c., as to place the rulers in direct contrast to the rest of the people, but must be understood by its retrospect to Neh. 7:4, which gives the following contrast: The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem, but few of the people dwelt there; to this is joined the next sentence: And the rest of the people cast lots. The rest of the people does not mean the assembled people with the exception of the rulers, but the people with the exception of the few who dwelt at Jerusalem. These cast lots to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem.Keil. The holy city] The predicate, the holy city, occurs here and Neh. 11:18 for the first time. Jerusalem is so called, on the ground of the prophecies (Joe. 3:17 and Isa. 48:2), because the sanctuary of God, the temple, was there.Keil.

Neh. 11:3. The chief of the province] i. e. Judea. Nehemiah speaks of it as it then was, a small appendix of the present empireJamieson. Israel] This general name, which designated the descendants of Jacob, before the unhappy division of the two kingdoms under Rehoboam, was restored after the captivity, the Israelites being then united with the Jews, and all traces of their former separation being obliterated. Although the majority of the returned exiles belonged to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, they are here called Israel; because a large number out of all the tribes were now intermingled, and these were principally the occupiers of the rural villages, while none but those of Judah and Benjamin resided in Jerusalem.Jamieson.

Neh. 11:11. The ruler of the house of God] Assistant of the high priest (Num. 3:32; 1Ch. 9:11; 2Ch. 19:11).Jamieson.

Neh. 11:16. The oversight of the outward business of the house of God] Building, furniture, and things necessary for temple worship.

Neh. 11:17. The principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer] The precentor.

Neh. 11:23. It was the kings commandment] The king is not David, but the Persian king Artaxerxes (Ezr. 7:12, seq.).

Neh. 11:24. Pethahiah was at the kings hand in all matters concerning the people] This can scarcely be understood of a royal commissioner at Jerusalem, but certainly designates an official transacting the affairs of the Jewish community at the hand of the king, at his court.Keil.

Neh. 11:25-36.] The heads, who with their houses inhabited country districts, are here no longer enumerated, but only the towns, with their adjacent neighbourhoods, which were inhabited by Jews and Benjamites; and even these are but summarily mentioned.Keil.

Neh. 11:36. Of the Levites, &c.]Rather for the Levites, i. e. those who were not resident in Jerusalem were distributed in settlements throughout the provinces of Judah and Benjamin.Jamieson.

HOMILETICAL CONTENTS OF CHAPTER 11

Neh. 11:1-19. The Holy City Replenished.

Neh. 11:1. The Holy City.

Neh. 11:16. The Secular in Sacred Service.

Neh. 11:22-23. The Service of Song in the House of the Lord.

THE HOLY CITY REPLENISHED

Neh. 11:1-19. And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, &c.

JERUSALEM is called here the holy city, because there the temple was, and that was the place God had chosen to put his name there. Upon this account one would think the holy seed should all have chosen to dwell there. They declined, however. Either

1. Because a greater strictness of conversation was expected from the inhabitants of Jerusalem than from others, which they were not willing to come up to. Those who care not for being holy themselves are shy of dwelling in a holy city. They would not dwell in the New Jerusalem itself for that reason, but would wish to have a continuing city here on earth. Or

2. Because Jerusalem, of all places, was most hated by the heathen, their neighbours, and against it their malicious designs were levelled, which made that the post of danger, as the post of honour uses to be, and therefore they were not willing to expose themselves there. Fear of persecution and reproach, and running themselves into trouble, keeps many out of the holy city, and makes them backward to appear for God and religion; not considering that as Jerusalem is with a special malice threatened and insulted by its enemies, so it is with special care protected by its God, and made a quiet habitation. Or

3. Because it was more for their worldly advantage to dwell in the country. Jerusalem was no trading city, and therefore there was no money to be got there by merchandises, as there was in the country by corn and cattle. All seek their own, not the things that are Jesus Christs. It is a general and just complaint, that most people prefer their own wealth, credit, pleasure, ease, and safety before the glory of God and the public good. People being thus backward to dwell at Jerusalem now it was poor, we are here told

I. By what means it was replenished.

1. The rulers dwelt there. That was the proper place for them to reside in, because there were set the thrones of judgment, and thither in all difficult matters the people resorted with their last appeals. And if it were an instance of eminent affection to the house of God, zeal for the public good, and of faith, and holy courage, and self-denial, to dwell there at this time, the rulers would be examples of these to their inferiors. Their dwelling there would invite and encourage others to dwell there too: the mighty are magnetic. When great men would choose the holy city for their habitation, it brings holiness into reputation, and their zeal will provoke very many.

2. There were some that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem, bravely postponing their own secular interest to the public welfare. It is upon record, to their honour, that when others were shy of venturing upon difficulty, loss, and danger, they sought the good of Jerusalem, because of the house of the Lord their God: they shall prosper that thus love Zion. It is said the people blessed them. They praised them, they prayed for them, they praised God for them. Many that do not appear forward themselves for the public good will yet give a good word to those that do. God and man will bless those that are public blessings, which should encourage us to be zealous in doing good.

3. They, finding that yet there was room, concluded, upon a review of their whole body, to bring one in ten to dwell in Jerusalem; and who they should be was determined by lot, the disposal whereof all knew was of the Lord. This would prevent strife, and would be a great satisfaction to those on whom the lot fell to dwell at Jerusalem, that they plainly saw God appointing the bounds of their habitations. The proportion they observed of one in ten, as we may suppose it to bring the balance between the city and country to a just and equal poise, so it seems to refer to the ancient rule of giving the tenth to God. And what is given to the holy city he reckons given to himself.

II. By what persons it was replenished. A general account is here given of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, because the governors of Judah looked upon them as their strength in the Lord of Hosts their God, and valued them accordingly (Zec. 12:5).

1. Many of the children of Judah and Benjamin dwelt there. Originally part of the city lay in the lot of one of those tribes and part in that of the other; but the greater part was in the lot of Benjamin; hence more families of that tribe abode in the city. Those of Judah all descended from Perez or Pharez, that son of Judah of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came. The men of Judah were valiant men, fit for service, and able to defend the city in case of an attack. Judah has not lost its ancient character of a lions whelpbold and daring. Of the Benjamites that dwell in Jerusalem we are here told who was overseer and who his second (Neh. 11:9); for it is as necessary for a people to have good order kept up among themselves as to be fortified against the attacks of their enemies from abroad,to have good magistrates as to have good soldiers.

2. The priests and Levites did many of them settle at Jerusalem. Where else should men that were holy to God dwell but in the holy city? Most of the priests we may suppose dwelt there; for their business lay where the temple was. It is well those labourers were not few (Neh. 11:12-14). It was said of some of them that they were mighty men of valour (Neh. 11:14); and so they had need, for the priesthood was not only a work which required might, but a warfare which required valour especially now. Of one of these priests it is said he was the son of one of the great men, and it was no disparagement to the greatest man they had to have his son in the priesthood; he might magnify his office, for his office did not in the least diminish him. Some of the Levites also came and dwelt at Jerusalem; yet but few in comparison. Much of their work was to teach the good knowledge of God up and down the country, for which purpose they were to be scattered in Israel. As many as there was occasion for attended at Jerusalem; the rest were doing good elsewhere.Matthew Henry.

THE HOLY CITY

Neh. 11:1. Jerusalem the holy city

A sacred temple and a holy cityaids to faith in history of chosen people. Consecrated worshippers befit consecrated place.

I. The sacred city. Names.Jerusalem, the foundation of peace; Ariel, the unconquerable; or, as others, the hearth of God, i, e. the sacred hearth on which the unquenched fire burnt. The Holy City. As here. In later Arabic names. In Matthews Gospel. Central position.I have set Jerusalem in the midst of the nations and countries round about her (Eze. 5:5). In Hereford Cathedral there is a map of the world with Jerusalem as literal centre. The world is like to an eye; the white of the eye is the ocean surrounding the world; the black is the world itself; the pupil is Jerusalem, and the image in the pupil, the temple.Rabbins. Central to the people of the country. The mother-city. The seat of government. The home of the priests. Thither the tribes go up. Its elevation, says Dean Stanley, is remarkable; occasioned not from its being on the summit of one of the numerous hills of Judea, like most of the towns and villages, but because it is on the edge of one of the highest table lands of the country. To the traveller approaching the city from the east or west it must always have presented the appearance beyond any other capital of the then known worldwe may say beyond any important city that has ever existed on the earthof a mountain city; breathing, as compared with the sultry plains of Jordan, a mountain air; enthroned, as compared with Jericho or Damascus, Gaza or Tyre, on a mountain fastness. An impregnable city. Ravines and mountains. Natural position accounts for compactness. Hence Scripture references to the Mount of God; the kings are higher than the kings of the earth; the mountains are round about Jerusalem; Zion stands for ever.

Illustrations: I have set Jerusalem in the midst of the nations and countries that are round about her. In later times this passage was taken in the literal sense that Palestine, and Jerusalem especially, was actually the centre of the earth; a belief of which the memorial is yet preserved in the large round stones still kissed devoutly by Greek pilgrims, in their portion of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. It is one of the many instances in which the innocent fancy of an earlier faith has been set aside by the discoveries of later science. In the East probably there are still many points of this kind which have been long surrendered in the more stirring West. But there was a real truth in it at the time that the prophet wrote, which the subsequent course of history makes it now difficult for us to realize. Palestine, though now at the very outskirts of that tide of civilization, which has swept far into the remotest West, was then the vanguard of the Eastern, and therefore, of the civilized world; and, moreover, stood midway between the two great seats of ancient empire, Babylon and Egypt. It was on the high road from one to the other of these mighty powers, the prize for which they contended, the battlefield on which they fought, the lofty bridge over which they ascended and descended respectively into the deep basins of the Nile and Euphrates.Stanley.

Upon the broad and elevated promontory within the fork of the valleys of Jehoshaphat and Hinnom, lies the Holy City. All around are higher hills; on the east, the Mount of Olives; on the south, the Hill of Evil Counsel, so called, rising directly from the vale of Hinnom; on the west, the ground rises gently, to the borders of the Great Wady; while on the north, a bend of the ridge connected with the Mount of Olives bounds the prospect at the distance of more than a mile. Towards the S. W. the view is somewhat more open; for here lies the plain of Rephaim, commencing just at the southern brink of the valley of Hinnom, and stretching off S. W., where it runs to the western sea. In the N. W. too the eye reaches up along the upper part of the valley of Jehoshaphat, and from many points can discern the mosque of Neby Samwil, situated on a lofty ridge beyond the great Wady, at the distance of two hours.Robinson.

The Mount of Olives overtops even the highest part of the city by rather more than 100 feet, and the Temple Hill by no less than 300. Its northern and southern outliersthe Viri Galili, Scopus, and Mount of Offencebend round slightly towards the City, and give the effect of standing round about Jerusalem. Especially would this be the case to a worshipper in the temple.Grove.

II. The sacred city a sacred symbol. The Holy City. The City of our God. What is the all-time significance? A consecrated commonwealth. City and temple sacred. Festivals and fast-days, working-days and worshipping-daysall Gods. Her merchandise shall be holiness to the Lord. There shall not a hoof be left behind. On all things look for the image and superscription of God. Will the City of Vision descend? Or shall we ascend to it? The city lieth four square. Its twelve gates are open continually. It has no temple. There is no sacred spot because the city is the Lords; and all it contains. Bernard sings of Jerusalem the golden.

Illustrations: Narrow as are its boundaries, we have all a share in the possession. What a church is to a city Palestine is to the world.Crescent and the Cross.

Not only has the long course of ages invested the prospects and scenes of the Holy Land with poetical and moral associations, but these scenes accommodate themselves to such parabolical adaptation with singular facility. The passage of the Red Seathe murmurings at the waters of strifethe wilderness of lifethe Rock of Ages, Mount Sinai and its terrorsthe view from Pisgahthe passage of the Jordanthe rock of Zion, the fountain of Siloa, and the shades of Gehennathe lake of Gennesareth, with its storms, its waves, and its fishermenare well-known instances in which thelocal features of the Holy Lands have naturally become the household imagery of Christendom.Stanley.

The Gospel Church is called Jerusalem: in her is the peculiar presence of God; in her the tribes of holy men meet and serve him. O how beautiful and compact her form!how firm her foundation!how strongly fortified and protected, by the laws, perfections, and providences of God!how rich, wealthy, and free her true members!how readily they welcome others to reside with them! The heavenly state of glory is called Jerusalem, or the new JerusalemWood.

THE SECULAR IN SACRED SERVICE

Neh. 11:16. The outward business of the house of God

Outward and inwarda law of life as of temple service. In the temple of this world some of us must have the oversight of the outward business of the house of God. The priests were chief managers of the business within the temple gates, but this Levite was intrusted with the secular concerns of Gods house, that were subservient to its spiritual concerns; the collecting of the contributions, the providing of materials for the temple service, and the like, which it was necessary to oversee, else the inward business would have been starved and stood still. Those that take care of the outward concerns of the Church, the serving of its tables, are as necessary in their place as those that take care of its inward concerns, who give themselves to the word and prayer.Matthew Henry.

I. It is possible to secularise the sacred. When sacred service is entered upon from secular motives; when it is performed in a perfunctory manner; when any object less than God is regarded in its performance, we must needs pray for the forgiveness of the iniquity of our holy things. Elis sons were in the tabernacle. Priests of all religions have worshipped at an altar desecrated by their presence. An unhallowed hand may not bear up an ark. The grimmest pages of history are associated with holy service marred by unholy ambitionsby envy, hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness. A cowl does not make a monk. High office cannot elevate a base man.

The churl in spirit howeer he veil

His want in forms for fashions sake,
Will let his coltish nature break

At seasons through the gilded pale:
For who can always act? but he,

To whom a thousand memories call,
Not being less but more than all

The gentleness he seemed to be.

As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.

II. It is necessary to make the secular sacred. He can who thinks he can. Pauls application of the old fable in 1Co. 12:14-26, I had rather be a doorkeeper, &c. The Christian members of one of our religious communities annually covenant with God thusMake me what thou wilt, Lord, and set me where thou wilt; let me be a vessel of silver or gold, or a vessel of wood or stone, so I be a vessel of honour; of whatsoever form or metal, whether higher or lower, finer or coarser, I am content. If I be not the head, or the eye, or the ear, one of the nobler and more honourable instruments thou wilt employ; let me be the hand or the foot, one of the most laborious, and lowest, and most contemptible, of all the servants of my Lord. Application.

1. The secret of contentment. Self-humiliation is full of truth and reality. The hidden life more secure than the outer life. Circumstances change, character is permanent. Look within. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound, &c.

2. The law of growth. Develope thyself. To be, differs from to have. Be thy ambition to become pure in thought and feeling, strong in resolve and deed. Serve. Care not how, mind not where. Inasmuch as ye have done unto one of the least of these, my brethren, &c. And we may addand inasmuch as ye have rendered the least service to the least of these, my brethren, ye have rendered it unto me. But, like the angels, let us serve our brethren all for love, and nothing for reward.

THE SERVICE OF SONG IN THE HOUSE OF THE LORD

Neh. 11:22-23. Of the sons of Asaph, the singers were over the business of the house of God. For it was the kings commandment concerning them, that a certain portion should be for the singers, due for every day.

Music is the hand-maid of religion. Were we treating of music in general, and not of it in relation to religious life, we must treat of the science of music as developed in the East and West, as it has been affected in Catholic countries, and influenced by the Reformation. But our text-book is the Bible. The theme is the service of song in the house of the Lord. Music in the sanctuary is the music of the Hebrews, as it has come down to, and been developed in, the Christian Church.

Those who have deeply studied this subject inform us that the science of music amongst the Hebrews is only conjectural. But the practice of music meets us on almost every page of Hebrew history. In Genesis 4. we have an account of the first poet; the first dweller in tents; the first forger of metals; and the first musicianall descendants of Cain. Jubal was the father of all such as handle the harp and organthe harp standing as the representative of all stringed, and the organ of all wind, instruments. Attempts have been made to explain how this discovery of Jubals was handed down till after the Flood. But, as Mr. Aldis Wright, to whose article on music in Smiths Bible Dictionary, I am indebted for these historic facts, says, Conjectures are worse than an honest confession of ignorance. The Flood did not wash away every musical instrument, and for ever deprive the world of the solace which music gives. The shepherds of the uplands of Syria knew how to chase away care with songs, and thrill the emotions with tabret and harp. Wherefore didst thou fly away secretly? said Laban to Jacob, and didst not tell me, that I might have sent thee away with mirth, and with songs, with tabret and harp. On the banks of the Red Sea, Moses and the children of Israel sang their song of triumphal deliverance, and Miriam led a procession of women chanting in chorus: Sing ye to Jehovah, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. The song was accompanied by timbrels and dances; probably Miriam sang the solos, and the women took up the chorus; for it is said, Miriam answered them.

Music was early employed in the service of idolatry. You will recall the musical instruments when the image of gold was set up in the plains of Dura. An earlier instance is in connection with the golden calf which Aaron made. As Moses and Joshua came down from the mountain on which they had received the two tables of the law, a strange sound saluted their ears. To Joshua it seemed like a war-shout, but Moses said, It is not the voice of them that shout for the mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry being overcome, but the noise of them that sing do I hear. Rude and uncultivated must such music have been. Could much variation have been played on those silver trumpets which were used to intimate the striking of the tents and resuming of the wilderness journeys? Would those rams horns with which the priests brought down the walls of Jericho, or those trumpets which Gideons three hundred men blew, have been like the sound of one that had a pleasant voice and could play well on an instrument? The song of Deborah and Barak is metrical, and was probably intended to be sung with musical accompaniment as one of the peoples songs, like that with which Jephthahs daughter and her companions met Jephthah on his victorious return. The song with which the women of Israel hailed David after the slaughter of the Philistine was perhaps struck off on the excitement of the moment. They came out of all cities of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet King Saul with tabrets, with joy, and instruments of music. And the women answered one another as they played, and said, Saul has slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands.

So far there appears, to have been no systematic cultivation of music. When, however, the schools of the prophets were instituted music was taught. Professional musicians were attached to the kings person. David played before Saul. And when David became king he had about him singing men and singing women. Solomon says, I gat me men singers and women singers. He composed songs. When the ark was brought from the house of Obed-edom there must have been many skilled musicians in the country. With Chenaniah, the master of the song, at their head, David and the Levites brought up the ark with shouting, and with sound of the cornet, and with trumpets, and with cymbals, making a noise with psalteries and harps. Probably the Levites had all along practised music. Living a peaceful life they would be attracted to this peaceful art. It is likely that some SERVICE OF SONG was used in the tabernacle. But be this as it may, David was the patron, and the temple was the school, of music. The three divisions of the tribe of Levi had a representative family in the temple choir. David composed and taught them a chant. For ages it was used as Davids, and was sung on three great occasionsbefore the army of Jehoshaphat; on laying the foundation of the second temple; and by the army of the Maccabees. The chant is Psalms 136. Women were in the temple choir. We read of Hemans three daughters. Among those who returned from the captivity with Zerubbabel were two hundred singing men and singing women. Amongst the instruments played before the ark were trumpets, which appear to have been reserved for the priests. Being also employed in royal proclamations they set forth by way of symbol, the royalty of Jehovah, and sounded the alarm against his enemies. At the dedication of Solomons temple one hundred and twenty priests blew the trumpets, while the Levites with their instruments made one sound to be heard in praising the Lord. And in the restoration of worship by Hezekiah, when the burnt offering began the song of Jehovah began also, with the trumpets, and with the instruments of David, King of Israel. And all the congregation worshipped, and the singers sang, and the trumpeters sounded all until the burnt offering was finished. The altar was, in Scripture phraseology, the table of Jehovah, and the sacrifices were his feasts. And as at kings tables the musicians play, so at the table of the King of kings was this service rendered. The temple was Gods palace, and as the Levite sentries guarded the gates they sang, Bless ye the Lord, all ye servants of the Lord, which by night stand in the house of the Lord. Lift up your hands in the sanctuary, and bless the Lord. Many of the psalms we know were temple-songs. Of Davids influence on Hebrew song let an English poet speak

The harp the monarch-minstrel swept,

The king of men, the loved of Heaven,

Which music hallowed while she wept,

Oer tones her heart of hearts had given,
Redoubled be her tears, its chords are riven!

It softened men of iron mould,

It gave them virtues not their own;

No ear so dull, no soul so cold,

That felt not, fired not to the tone,
Till Davids lyre grew mightier than his throne!

It told the triumphs of our king,

It wafted glory to our God;

It made our gladdened valleys ring,

The cedars bow, the mountains nod;
Its sound aspired to heaven, and there abode!

Since then, though beard on earth no more,

Devotion, and her daughter Love,

Still bid the bursting spirit soar,

To sounds that seem as from above,
In dreams that days broad light cannot remove.

Solomon provided for the singers with the same munificence with which he adorned the temple.

But although music was consecrated in the temple it was not confined to the temple. Whatever adorns Gods service reacts on the homes and haunts of men. Music was enthroned in the temple, but it made its familiar abode in the homes of the Hebrew people. Kings had court musicians. And in the degenerate days of the later monarchs, the prophet tells us of the effeminate gallants of Israel stretched on beds of ivory, covered with perfumes; and as Nero fiddled whilst Rome was in flames, so they amid their nations wreck chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of music, like David. But because music may minister to vice that is no reason for deriding it. What may not? Many a Hebrew home was made joyous after a day of sultry heat, spent among the vines or in the sheep-folds, by family songs. Only when national sin had brought Gods curse upon the land could it be saidAll the merry-hearted do sigh. The mirth of tabrets ceaseth, the noise of them that rejoice endeth, the joy of the harp ceaseth. They shall not drink wine with a song. It was when heavy hearts sat by the waters of Babylon that joy-inspiring harps hung on the willows, and cunning hands no longer discoursed sweet music. Their bridal processions were accompanied with music and song. Love had its songs to embody its passion. Sorrow had its funereal chants. The grape-gatherers sang as they gathered in the vintage, and the wine-presses were trodden to the march of music. Women sang as they toiled at the mill. And as long as God smiled approval on the land of the Hebrew people, they were a people of song. Their land was a field which the Lord had blessed.
Music passed into the early Christian Church. Our Lord is found with his disciples singing a hymn. The Man of Sorrows was acquainted with song. Singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, is the burden of more than one New Testament passage. Changes it has undergone. By the inroads of barbarians; by the upgrowth of the Reformation; by modern revolutions; by persecutions; and by the misguided opposition of conscientious men, the service of song in the house of the Lord has been affected. It has been chastened, but not killed; cast down, but not destroyed.
Bring song into the sanctuary. The temple choir were Levites. The priests were of the same tribe. Pulpit and choir-gallery both have place. When the preacher fails with the Bible, the choir may succeed with the Hymn Book.
When we pass through the gate into the city we shall sing in. John looked, and lo! a Lamb stood on the Mount Zion, and with him an hundred and forty and four thousand redeemed from the earth. And he heard a voice as of the voice of many waters, as the voice of a great thunder, and as the voice of harpers, harping with their harps. Let us honour every faculty. Let us cultivate and consecrate our gifts. Let us all use the service of song to praise the Lord, whose mercyaccording to Davids chantendureth for ever.

ADDENDA TO CHAPTER 11
PRIESTS AND THE CONGREGATION

It is very worthy of notice that in the numbering of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, not the priests but the tribes of Judah and Benjamin take the lead, and only then follow the priests and Levites; so much the more worthy of notice, because in the new congregation, following the captivity, according to the entire direction which its development took, and according to everything which was considered as of the greatest moment, the high priests, and the priesthood in general, had a particularly high significance. It is as if the consciousness were indicated, that the priest and Levites, in spite of their distinction, which the Lord hath appointed to them in the affairs of Israel, had been nevertheless nothing at all if they had not had a congregation near and around them, and if they had not succeeded in obtaining satisfactory fruit for their activity, namely, a genuine and true piety, which should substantially prove they were not there in vain. Would also that Christian priests, that is, preachers of the gospel, might preserve a lively consciousness that it is not enough for them to have fellowship with their brethren in office, that they are nothing, and can profit and signify nothing, if not some, if only a small congregation stand by them, in whom the seed which they sow springs up, grows, and bears fruit.

HOLY PEOPLE ON SACRED SOIL

When one looks at the space which the Jewish congregation inhabited round Jerusalem, how very small was the territory occupied by the people of God, the only race which possessed a clear knowledge of the only true and holy God! A few miles, from three to six, north and south, east and west, comprised the entire district. Compared with our countries; yes, even with our provinces; this district appears to us almost as a vanishing nothing. And nevertheless what powers for the subjugation of entire humanity, for the transformation of all its relations, and for the subduing of all circumstances, has God the Lord been able to put in the people of this oasis, in the, at the same time, insignificant, and in many respects miserable race, which cultivated the ground there, or raised cattle! If anywhere, surely here arises a testimony for Pauls word, God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty (1Co. 1:27). A consoling promise also for Christendom in those times, in which it appears as though it were being compressed on all sides, and when it is in truth losing position after position. Let it lose in length and breadth in order afterwards to gain so much the more in height. Even the gates of hell cannot swallow up the Church of the Lord.Dr. Schultz, in Lange.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

TEXT AND VERSE-BY-VERSE COMMENT

III. Persons Bound by Vows are Listed, and Reforms on Nehemiahs Second Visit are Described: chapters 1113
A. The genealogies of residents of Jerusalem and names of other cities are listed.
1. An effort is made to increase Jerusalems population.

TEXT, Neh. 11:1-2

1

Now the leaders of the people lived in Jerusalem, but the rest of the people cast lots to bring one out of ten to live in Jerusalem, the holy city, while nine-tenths remained in the other cities.

2

And the people blessed all the men who volunteered to live in Jerusalem.

COMMENT

The story is resumed from chapter seven after the interruption of the great revival. Nehemiah had gotten the genealogical list to help trace the peoples present whereabouts; now an effort was about to be made to coax some of them to Jerusalem. With the citys walls repaired there was more protection for them. A strong Jerusalem would be a refuge in time of danger for all the surrounding townspeople and would help build a stable economy for the entire area. But people were needed to man the fortifications.

From Neh. 11:1 we judge that government officials were the largest part of its residents; the location of government buildings and agencies there would be responsible for that. Evidently it had been an almost empty city before the walls had been constructed. None really wanted to move there; it was the post in greatest danger; so the expedient of casting lots was resorted to. Families or clans would be the units involved; to select individuals would fragment families.

The volunteers of Neh. 11:2 then present a puzzle. Were they people who chose to move there, and thus reduced the number who must be chosen by lot?[77] Or were they the ones who allowed their names to be included in the drawing,[78] or were good sports about moving there when they lost? The lot is cast in Neh. 11:1; the volunteers are applauded in Neh. 11:2; we would have expected to hear mention of those chosen by lot, if they were a different group. At any rate, something of the desperate conditions of the city may be guessed from the applause they received for moving there.

[77] Interpreters Bible, op. cit., p. 771.

[78] Adenay, op. cit., p. 184.

WORD STUDY

LOT (Neh. 11:1, Goral; sound like gravel?): a small stone. Sometimes a number of stones, including one or more of an odd color, were shaken in a container and thrown onto the ground, thus deciding matters by chance; or they were shaken together and thrown into a vase, and each person drew one out, seeking for the odd-colored one. Eventually they were made into cubes and the faces numbered to form dice.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XI.

(1, 2) The history reverts to Neh. 7:5; lots are cast for the transfer of one-tenth of the people to the capital.

(1) And the rulers.The narrative joins on to Neh. 7:4. The festival month had prevented the immediate carrying out of the governors purpose.

The rest of the people.The rulers being already in the capital, Nehemiah ordered that one man in ten should be chosen by lot to transfer his family.

Jerusalem the holy city.Remembering the separation that had taken place (Nehemiah 9), and the recent covenant (Nehemiah 10), we see the solemnity of this epithet, now first used, and repeated in Neh. 11:18. Then shall Jerusalem be holy, and no strangers shall pass through her any more (Joe. 3:17). But the New Testament brings another comment on the phrase.

(2) The people blessed all the men that willingly offered themselves.We are not told that any compensation was made to them; and these words seem to indicate that the chosen ones freely submitted, their patriotism being applauded by all.Jerusalem was the post of danger, and in any case it was a hardship to leave their country possessions (Neh. 11:3).

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

THE INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM INCREASED, Neh 11:1-2.

According to Neh 7:4-5, the nation had assembled at Jerusalem to reckon its numbers and devise some plan for increasing the population of the city, which was large and but thinly peopled. Nehemiah improved the occasion, first of all, to instruct the people in the law, and observe the feasts of the seventh month, and also make provision for the regular observance of the temple service. The people were brought to feel their oneness, and caught again the enthusiasm and zeal of the true old theocratic spirit. Having devoted the three chapters preceding to a narration of those most important facts, the writer now proceeds to tell in a few words how the population of the holy city was increased.

1. The rulers dwelt at Jerusalem A noble example. While the city was exposed to dangerous attacks, and the inhabitants were few and feeble, the rulers stood at their posts of duty. So at a later day, when persecution drove all the Christian population from Jerusalem, the apostles remained there still. Act 8:1.

The rest of the people That is, all the people who were not residents of Jerusalem.

One of ten A tithe of the people. According to the register of chap. vii, the whole congregation numbered forty-two thousand three hundred and sixty. This number had probably not greatly varied since the time of Zerubbabel, and the population of the city was probably increased by not far from four thousand persons.

The holy city Jerusalem; so called from being the seat of the temple and of the national worship, and the center of numerous holy associations.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

The Repopulating Of Jerusalem And Establishment Of The Holy City ( Neh 11:1-20 ).

The establishing of Jerusalem as ‘the holy city’, a city cleansed of all defilement, was now seen as the first priority in order to fulfil the promises of the prophets (Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24). It was to be a purified city. And the walls of Jerusalem having been repaired and rebuilt it was seen as necessary for it to be fully inhabited by God’s people so that the city could be properly defended. This was essential, for if it was left as a virtual ‘ghost town’ it would undoubtedly attract unwelcome attention, especially as there were valuable things stored in the Temple which had to be considered, which would always be a temptation to outsiders. Furthermore there was also the danger that those who had previously sought to join with the worship in Jerusalem, but who were involved in idolatrous practises (Ezr 4:2-3; Neh 13:4-9), would take the opportunity to infiltrate Jerusalem. Indeed whilst Jerusalem remained virtually uninhabited it spelt instability for the whole nation, and could well have proved an overwhelming burden to the new nation who would feel responsibility for it without being in a position to properly defend it. Nehemiah’s solution, in cooperation with the leadership, was that one tenth of all true Israelites should move from their cities and dwell in Jerusalem, with the prospective inhabitants mainly being chosen by lot.

Here we call to mind Nehemiah’s description of the situation in Neh 7:4, ‘now the city was wide and large, but the people in it were few, and the houses were not built.’ There was thus nothing cheering about the prospect of moving into the city. Large parts of it were still in ruins, requiring work similar to that on the walls. And for those who moved in facilities would be few, apart from in those sections which had already been settled (e.g. by the Nephinim in the Ophel – Neh 3:26). Chapter 3 does, of course, make clear that Jerusalem did have a number of inhabitants (Neh 3:20; Neh 3:23; Neh 3:26; Neh 3:28). But they were apparently relatively few, and confined to one part of the city. There were simply not sufficient men available to be able to defend the city.

And defence of the city was a primary purpose of the move. This is brought out by the fact that the description that follows contains hints of military overtones. It speaks of ‘men of valour’ (verses Neh 8:14); ‘overseer/officer’ (Neh 11:9; Neh 11:14); ‘heads of families (or units)’ (Neh 11:13); and divisions into tribes as protectors of the sanctuary (as in Numbers 1-2). This confirms that one purpose of the resettlement of Jerusalem very much had defence in mind. It was seen as necessary in order to ensure the protection of ‘the holy city’ (Neh 11:1; Neh 11:18; compare Isa 48:2; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24), the city which was to be the foundation stone of the new Israel in its devotion to YHWH.

But there was another purpose, specifically brought out in Neh 11:1. There Nehemiah speaks of Jerusalem as ‘the holy city’, something emphasised again in Neh 11:18. Now the term ‘holy city’ had a prophetic background. It depicted the city as purified and made holy, with every vestige of uncleanness removed (Isa 52:1). It had in mind the future fulfilment of the purposes of God in bringing about everlasting righteousness (Dan 9:24). It depicted Jerusalem as the holy and pure city of God. And this was Israel’s vision at this time. Once Jerusalem was established as a purified city, free from all idolatry, surely God would begin to act on their behalf. It would be seen as a seal on the binding agreement that they had made with God.

Thus the re-establishment of a populated and religiously pure Jerusalem was not just seen as a political necessity, it could also be seen as being the first stage in bringing about the eschatological purposes of God. It had the ring about it of Hag 2:21-22. God was about to work!

Indeed we could say that in this chapter we have a wonderful picture of how God would work in later times in establishing a people for Himself, for He has appointed another ‘holy city’, a heavenly city, a new Jerusalem (Gal 4:21-31; Heb 12:22), which, as Revelation 21 makes clear, consists of all the people of God. It is founded on the twelve Apostles. It is protected by the people of God (the twelve tribes of ‘Israel’) who are its gates. That city too started off unpopulated. But God has populated it by choosing out a remnant for Himself, and everyone of them is named before Him, as in this chapter, for each is important to Him. It includes priests (intercessors), Levites (teachers), Singers and Musicians who lead the worship, Gate-keepers who watch for those who enter, Nethinim (humble servants), and ordinary men and women to defend the city, but all of them are chosen by God (Eph 1:4). So does history repeat itself, for God is the God of history.

Those Who Took Up Residence In The City.

We are now provided with a list of the names of those who repopulated the holy city. These joined with those who were already there (some of whose names are given in 1 Chronicles 9). Each of them was important to God, for they were chosen as His genuine people and in order that they might re-establish ‘the holy city’.

Neh 11:1

‘And the princes of the people dwelt (settled) in Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts in the (other) cities.’

This verse connects back to Neh 7:73, taking up where that left off. There we found that after the return the priests, Levites, gatekeepers, singers, temple servants and people of Israel ‘dwelt in their cities’. This indicates that they dwelt in many cities, but that would naturally include Jerusalem as Jerusalem would for some good number have been ‘their city.’ Now, however, there was to be a change in that situation. There was to be a wholesale movement into Jerusalem of both the princes of the people, and one tenth of the people who had previously dwelt elsewhere.

‘The princes of the people dwelt in Jerusalem’ does not mean that they were already doing so. Note how ‘dwelling in Jerusalem’ is mentioned twice in Neh 11:1, and then in Neh 11:2 and in Neh 11:3, in the other cases clearly referring to ‘taking up dwelling’. Thus the princes are being seen as the first to live up to their responsibility by taking up dwelling in the city. This was fitting as it had now become the leading city of the district, and was the city of a new beginning in the purposes of God. Their example was then followed by a tenth of the inhabitants of Judah, many of them chosen by lot, who followed their example. The remaining nine tenths of the population remained in their towns and cities.

Note the stress on Jerusalem as ‘the holy city’. The idea was that it was now to be seen as central to the purposes of God and therefore as set apart to Him And it was to be kept free from idolatry (something that the new Israel had already made great sacrifices to ensure, e.g. Ezr 4:3 and its consequences). It was very much describing what they saw as a new beginning, for in the light of the uses of the term elsewhere the idea was that it was to be seen as initiating a new fulfilment of the final purposes of God, with the city being holy because it had been purged of all uncleanness (compare Isa 52:1). Not only the Temple was now to be seen as holy, but the whole city as containing the Temple, and as the centre of the new community of God’s people. And this was because, as their binding agreement had made clear, it was ‘stayed upon the God of Israel’. We can compare the use of the term in Isa 48:2 where men used the title because they claimed, hypocritically, that they stayed themselves upon the God of Israel.

The appellation ‘the holy city’ is found in Neh 11:1; Neh 11:18; Isa 48:2; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24. In Isa 52:1 Jerusalem was spoken of as ‘the holy city’ in the terms of it being the city purified by God in the apocalyptic future, the city in which there would be no ‘uncleanness’. In Dan 9:24 it was the city in which all transgression was to be dealt with and the final purposes of God brought to fulfilment. It symbolised therefore the eschatological purification and triumph. The people had high hopes for the new Jerusalem. This makes even more poignant the fact that later they would allow it to be used for Sabbath breaking (Neh 13:15-22). It was the recognition of this fact that made Nehemiah so zealous to purify Jerusalem when it became tainted (chapter 13).

‘The rest of the people also cast lots.’ The casting of lots had been seen as a method of obtaining God’s will at least since the introduction of the Urim and Thummim. As we saw in Neh 10:34 it was used to determine when the providers of wood for the altar would fulfil their duties. It was a Scriptural method at a time when God was seen as personally acting on behalf of, and with, His people. Consider, for example, Num 26:55; Jos 7:14; Jos 7:16-18; Jos 14:2; Jos 18:6; 1Sa 10:20-21 ; 1Sa 14:41-42, and the principle enunciated in Pro 16:33.

Neh 11:2

‘And the people blessed all the men who willingly offered themselves to dwell in Jerusalem.’

Some of the people, like the princes, had voluntarily offered themselves for the purpose of populating Jerusalem, in spite of the hardships involved, and the people ‘blessed them’. Every volunteer meant one less conscripted person, which was one reason why they blessed them. But to volunteer was also probably seen as a sign of special dedication to God. It was no soft option. It meant an upheaval in their lives and a new beginning. But they had a desire to be the founders of the new Jerusalem, with all its glowing promise. Indeed, so important was this move seen to be that, as with the building of the wall (chapter 3), we are now given a roll-call of those involved. Their names would pass down through the generations. In the same way we too will be called ‘blessed’ if our names are written down in the Lamb’s Book of Life, as potential dwellers in the New Jerusalem, for that city really will be holy.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Following The Making Of The Renewed Covenant The Establishment Of The New Jerusalem And Of The Renewed Israel Is Described ( Neh 11:1-36 ).

Having renewed the covenant it was now necessary for the new Israel to be soundly established, and the words ‘we will not forsake the house of our God’ (Neh 10:39) are now shown to be carried into effect by the establishment of Jerusalem as ‘the holy city’ (Neh 11:1-20), surrounded by the ‘encamped’ tribes (Neh 11:20-36), and by the assurance of the legitimacy of its priests and Levites who were responsible for worship (Neh 12:1-26), headed up by the legitimate High Priests (Neh 12:10-11).

Chapter 11 is important in emphasising that the holy city was now to be re-established, with the portions of Judah and Benjamin in the land being restored to them. It indicates that YHWH was fulfilling His promises towards Israel. It also emphasises that His true worship is being consolidated as centred on Jerusalem as ‘the holy city’. The writer is not so much concerned with the very limited Persian province/district of Judah, as with demonstrating that the land as a whole had been restored to Judah/Benjamin much in line with what was described in the Book of Joshua. This was demonstrated by ignoring the fact that much of southern Judah was now occupied by the Idumaeans, and by including within the new Israel all Jewish settlements, whether in or outside the province of Judah. Such settlements were found in both in the Negeb (the southernmost part of old Israel), and in the Shephelah (the lowlands to the west). This enabled the presentation of a picture which depicted Judah/Benjamin as settled among the peoples and restored to its inheritance, with their holy city at the centre, a picture of the triumph of YHWH, . (We can compare how in the Book of Joshua we are given the impression that the land has been possessed, while at the same time it is made clear that not all the land has yet been possessed. It was a vision of what would be, rather than of the present reality, and yet given in accordance with the facts).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Establishment Of Jerusalem As The Holy City, Populated By True Israelites; Its Worship Conducted By Those Specifically and Provably Appointed By God; Accepted from God With Due Gladness And Praise; And Purified By the Removal Of All That Could Be Displeasing To God ( Neh 11:1 to Neh 13:31 ).

The Book closes with a description of the restoring of Jerusalem as the holy city. This was accomplished by:

Populating Jerusalem the holy city with members of the new true Israel who would defend it and (hopefully) maintain its purity (Neh 11:1-36).

Establishing the God-appointed leaders of worship whose genealogies demonstrate that they were of those appointed by God, maintaining the holiness of worship (Neh 12:1-26).

The celebration of gladness and thanksgiving for the completion of the wall and gates which made possible its being established as holy and the re-establishment of the system of tithes that ensured the maintenance of YHWH’s chosen appointees (Neh 12:27-47).

The purifying of the holy city from the defilements of Sabbath breaking and idolatry (Neh 13:1-31).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

List of the Leading Men

v. 1. And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem, the capital of the province. The rest of the people also cast lots to bring one of ten, of the ordinary people, to dwell in Jerusalem, the Holy City, and nine parts to dwell in other cities. Nehemiah’s purpose was to increase the population of the city, for the in. habitants were too widely scattered inside the walls. Cf Neh 7:4.

v. 2. And the people blessed all the men that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem, namely, those, in addition to the tenth part chosen by lot, who willingly gave up their own homesteads in order to protect the chief city.

v. 3. Now, these are the chief of the province that dwelt in Jerusalem, the leading men of Judea, a very small part of the vast Persian Empire; but in the cities of Judah dwelt every one in his possession In their cities, to wit, Israel, the common people as contrasted with the members of the tribe of Levi, the priests, and the Levites, and the Nethinim, and the children of Solomon’s servants, a class of people who ranked even below the Nethinim in the service of the Temple.

v. 4. And at Jerusalem dwelt certain of the children of Tudah and of the children of Benjamin. of the children of Judah, members of this tribe: Athaiah, the son of Uzziah, the son of Zechariah, the son of Amariah, the son of Shephatia]i, the son of Xahalaleel, of the children of Perez, Gen 38:29, only a few links in the genealogical chain being mentioned;

v. 5. and Maaseiah, the son of Baruch, the son of Col-hozeh, the son of Hazaiah, the son of Adaiah, the son of Joiarib, the son of Zechariah, the son of Shiloni, a family title leading back to Shelah, the son of Judah, 1Ch 9:5.

v. 6. All the sons, that is, the descendants, of Perez that dwelt at Jerusalem were four hundred threescore and eight valiant men.

v. 7. And these are the sons of Benjamin: Sallu, the son of Meshullam, the son of Joed, the son of Pedaiah, the son of Kolaiah, the son of Maaseiah, the son of Ithiel, the son of Jesaiah.

v. 8. And after him Gabbai, Sallai, other Benjamite chiefs, nine hundred twenty and eight.

v. 9. And Joel, the son of Zichri, was their overseer, a magistrate both over the descendants of Judah and of Benjamin; and Judah, the son of Seuuah, was second over the city, rather, was over the second city, the part of the city where Huldah, the prophetess, had formerly lived, 2Ki 22:14.

v. 10. of the priests: Jedaiah, the son of Joiarib, Jachin.

v. 11. Seraiah the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, was the ruler of the house of God, an assistant of the high priest, with extensive privileges, Num 3:32; 1Ch 9:11; 2Ch 19:11; 2Ch 31:13.

v. 12. And their brethren that did the work of the house, the relatives of the chiefs of the priests, all engaged in the ministry of the Temple, were eight hundred twenty and two; and Adaiah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Pelaliah, the son of Amsi, the son of Zechariah, the son of Pashur, the son of Malchih,

v. 13. and his brethren, chief of the fathers, this expression belonging to all the head men of the families mentioned in this list, two hundred forty and two; and Amashai, the son of Azareel, the son of Ahasai, the son of Meshillemoth, the son of Immer,

v. 14. and their brethren, mighty men of valor, that is, the relative, of Amasha’i, an hundred and twenty and eight; and their overseer, their chief or captain, was Zabdiel, the son of one of the great men, all his ancestors being remarkable for various reasons.

v. 15. Also of the Levites: Shemaiah, the son of Hashub, the son of Asrikam, the son of Hashabiah, the son of Bunni;

v. 16. and Shabbethai and Jozabad, of the chief of the Levite. had the oversight of the outward business of the house of God, all the work which did not concern sacrifices and worship, especially the collecting of provisions and the paying of bills.

v. 17. And Mattaniah, the son of Micha, the son of Zabdi, the son of Asaph, was the principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer, the choirmaster of the Temple chorus in the liturgy of the Temple services; and Bakbukiah, the second among his brethren, and Abda, the son of Shammu s, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun, member of an ancient musicians’ family and therefore well able to lead in thanksgiving and prayer.

v. 18. All the Levites in the Holy City were two hundred fourscore and four.

v. 19. Moreover, the porters, Akkub, Talmon, and their brethren that kept the gates, in charge of the various entrances to the Temple, were an hundred seventy and two. These were permanent residents of Jerusalem, because they were always on duty at the Temple. Like these people, all those engaged in the work of the Church should always be mindful of the great honor which I. theirs by virtue of their position.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

PART III.

ENLARGEMENT OF THE POPULATION OF JERUSALEM, WITH THE NUMBER OF THE ADULT MALES, AND THE NAMES OF THE CHIEFS. VARIOUS LISTS OF PRIESTS AND LEVITES AT DIFFERENT PERIODS (Neh 11:1-36; Neh 12:1-26).

EXPOSITION

THE nexus of Neh 11:1-36. is with Neh 7:4, Neh 7:5. Having spoken in that place of the insufficiency of the population of Jerusalem, Nehemiah now proceeds to explain the steps which he took to remedy it. He made, it would seem, a census of the entire nation, and required each town and district to transfer one-tenth of its population to the capital The men in the various localities determined among themselves by lot who should stay and who should go, and Nehemiah no doubt made the necessary arrangements for the reception of the newcomers at Jerusalem. Forced enlargements of capitals by transfers of this kind were not uncommon in the ancient world, where the strength of states was considered to depend very greatly upon the size and predominance of the capital. Thucydides attributes the greatness and prosperity of the Athenian community to an artificial enlargement of the population of Athens which he ascribes to Theseus. Other notorious instances are those of Syracuse, Megalopolis, and Tigranocerta. In Jerusalem at this time the special need of an increase in the number of the inhabitants was probably the defence of the walls. These had been rebuilt on the ancient foundations,their circuit was not much less than four miles,and to man them in case of attack, a large population was necessary. From a comparison of the numbers given in this chapter (verses 6-19) with those of 1Ch 9:9-22, it may be gathered that the result of Nehemiah’s arrangements was to give Jerusalem a population of about 20,000 souls.

Having been led, in speaking of this matter, to give a sort of catalogue of the chief dwellers at Jerusalem (verses 4-19), and another of the country towns and villages occupied at this time by those Israelites who had returned from the captivity (verses 25-35), Nehemiah is induced to insert, at this point, certain other lists or catalogues which he regards as worthy of being put on record. These lists are four in number, and occupy Neh 12:1-47. as far as Neh 12:26. They comprise

1. A list of the priestly and Levitical houses which returned with Zerubbabel (Neh 12:1-9);

2. A list of the high priests from Jeshua to Jaddua;

3. A list of the heads of the priestly courses in the time of the high priest Joiakim; and,

4. A list of the chief Levitical houses at the same period and afterwards.

Such lists possess at the present day but a very slight and secondary interest. Their formation, however, and safe preservation were, at the time, essential for the continuity of the nation’s history, and the maintenance of the priestly order in purity, and without admixture of laic elements. On the genealogy of the high priests more will be said in the special comment on the passage.

Neh 11:1

The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem. Jerusalem was the residence of all the nobles from the first (see Neh 2:16); no increase could be made in this element of the population. Nehemiah had to look lower, and to obtain his new settlers from the ranks of the “people.“ The people cast lots. No doubt under direction. The Jews had frequent recourse to the lot for the determining of doubtful matters, believing, as they did, that “the whole disposing thereof was of the Lord (Pro 16:33). Divine sanction had been given, in the course of the Jewish history, to the use of the lot for the selection of persons (Jos 7:16-18; 1Sa 10:19-21), for the distribution of lands (Num 26:25, Num 26:26), and for the determination of the order in which different bodies should execute an office (1Ch 24:5; 1Ch 25:8). In the democratic states of Greece it was used widely to determine between candidates for an office. One in ten. Ewald supposes that this was to be the proportion between the population of Jerusalem and the whole population of the country, and ascribes the fixing of the proportion to Zerubbabel. But there is no statement to this effect in either Ezra or Nehemiah, and the brief narrative of this verse seems to imply the addition of a tenth part of the country population to the previous population of Jerusalem, rather than the establishment of any definite proportion between the two. Nine parts. Literally, “nine hands,“ as in Gen 43:34; Gen 47:24.

Neh 11:2

The men that willingly offered themselves. Besides those on whom the lot fell, a certain number volunteered to change their residence and to transfer themselves and families from their country homes to Jerusalem. The people called down blessings upon them for their patriotism.

Neh 11:3

These are the chief of the province. A comparison is in the writer’s mind between the Jews of Palestine and those of the great Persian capitals, Babylon and Susa, to which, as a Persian official, he himself properly belongs. Compare Neh 1:3 and Ezr 2:1. That dwelt in Jerusalem. i.e. “that were entered in Nehemiah’s census among the inhabitants of Jerusalem after the transfer of population had been made.” The names which follow appear in most cases to be personal, but a certain number of them are names of families. In the cities of Judah dwelt every one in his possession. It follows that those who removed from the country districts to Jerusalem quitted their “possessions, often, it may be, exchanging riches for poverty, a comfortable house for one half in ruins (Neh 7:4), and the life of a small landed proprietor for that of an artisan or hired labourer. Hence the “blessings” called down by the people on those who volunteered (verse 2). Israel. Compare 1Ch 9:3, where we find that among those who had returned were mere-bers of the two great Israelitish tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim. On the Nethinims, and the children of Solomon’s servants, see the comment on Ezr 2:43, Ezr 2:55.

Neh 11:4

At Jerusalem dwelt certain of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin. It is not meant that all the dwellers in Jerusalem were of these two tribes, since among them were certainly Levites (Neh 11:10-19), Ephraimites, and Mansesites (1Ch 1:1-54. s. c.), together with Nethinims (Neh 11:21) who were of no tribe, and probably some representatives of all or most of the other tribes (see the comment on Ezr 2:70). But the present purpose of Nehemiah is to mention especially the Jewish and Benjamite chiefs. Athaiah, or Uthai, as the name is given in 1Ch 9:4. The son of Uzziah. The ancestors assigned to Athaiah here and in 1Ch 9:1-44. are wholly different, with the single exception of Pharez or Perez, the son of Judah. Both lists are of course abbreviations of a far longer one, and it has happened that the two writers have in no ease selected for mention the same name.

Neh 11:5

Maaseiah is called “Asaish“ in 1 Chronicles, and designated simply as “the Shilonite, or descendant of Shelah, the youngest son of Judah. Zechariah, the son of Shiloni. Rather, “the Shilonite.” The word ben, “son,” has been intruded into the text by a copyist, who thought that “Shiloni” was a personal name.

Neh 11:6

Valiant men. Or, “fighting men”men able to bear arms and serve in the wars.

Neh 11:7

And these are the sons of Benjamin. A verse equivalent to 1Ch 9:6 would seem to have fallen out here. Nehemiah cannot have intended to leave out the descendants of Zerah, who formed more than one-half of the Jewish element in the population of Jerusalem, and furnished 690 fighting men. Sallu the son of Meshullam. Compare 1Ch 9:7. The other names in the genealogy are different, the two writers singling out for mention different ancestors.

Neh 11:8

Neither Gabbai nor Sallai is mentioned in Chronicles, where the Benjamite chiefs inferior to Shallu are Ibneiah, Elah, and Meshullam (1Ch 9:8). Nine hundred and twenty-eight. Nine hundred and fifty-six, according to Chronicles (1Ch 9:9). Probably in one place or the other the figures have suffered corruption.

Neh 11:9

Their overseer. Probably the commandant of the city under Nehemiah. See 2Ki 25:19, where pakid has this sense. Judah was second. Next in authority to Joel.

Neh 11:10

Of the priests: Jedaiah the son of Joiarib, Jachin. Rather, “Of the priests, Jedaiah, Joiarib, Jachin.” The word ben, “son,” has once more accidentally crept in. The writer here passes from personal to famfiy names. Jedaiah and Joiarib were two of the chief priestly families, and are usually mentioned together (1Ch 24:7; Neh 12:6, Neh 12:19, etc.). Jachin was a priestly family of much less distinction, descended probably from the head of the twenty-first course in David’s time (1Ch 24:17).

Neh 11:11

Seraiah (called “Azariah” in 1Ch 9:11) designates the high priestly family of this time, as in Neh 10:2; Neh 12:1, Neh 12:12. The “Seraiah“ who gave name to it was probably the high priest taken prisoner by Nebu-zaradan, and put to death (2Ki 25:18-21). The son of Hilkiah. Really the grandson (Ezr 7:1). The son of Meshullam. Or “Shallum” (ibid. Neh 12:2). The ruler of the house of God. i.e. the high priest; or, rather, the family which furnished the high priests at this time. The actual high priest was Eliashib, the son of Joiakim, and grandson of Jeshua (see Neh 12:10; Neh 13:4).

Neh 11:12

Their brethren that did the work of the house. The priests of ordinary rank, whodivided originally into twenty-four, but now apparently into twenty-two, courses (Neh 12:2-7)had the care of the temple service in turn, amounted to the large number of 1192 persons, of whom between fifty and sixty would be employed in some work connected with the service at one time.

Neh 11:14

Their brethren, mighty men of valour. Not “men of great courage,” as Bp. Patrick explains, but “very able men for the work of the service of the house of God,” as our translators render the parallel passage of Chronicles (1Ch 9:13). Zabdiel, the son of one of the great men. Rather, as in the margin, “the son of Haggedolim.”

Neh 11:15, Neh 11:16

Also of the Levites: Shemaiah. Compare 1Ch 9:14. Shemaiah was a descendant of Merari. Together with Shabbethai and Jozabad (1Ch 9:16), he had the superintendence of the outward business of the house of God; or, in other words, of its worldly affairs and money matters. As in the Christian Church a special order was appointed “to serve tables” (Act 6:2-5), so in the Jewish the secular business of the temple was intrusted to a few carefully-selected persons of the inferior order of the ministry, who were known to have a special capacity for such matters (see 1Ch 26:29).

Neh 11:17

Mattaniah was the principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer. i.e. the “leader of the choir,” or “precentor.” Bakbukiah was second to him among his brethren; i.e. was his chief assistant. Abda (or “Obadiah,” 1Ch 9:16) held the third place.

Neh 11:18

All the Levites were two hundred fourscore and four. The small proportion borne by the Levites to the priests, which has been already noticed (see comment on Ezr 8:15), is here again apparent. They do not quite amount to one-third of the priests.

Neh 11:19

The porters, Akkub, Talmon. On these familiar names, see the comment upon Ezr 2:42. An hundred and seventy-two. In 1Ch 9:22 the number is said to have been 212.

Neh 11:21

The Nethinims dwelt in Ophel. See above, Neh 3:26 Ophel, the southern prolongation of the temple hill, was a sort of suburb of Jerusalem, sometimes reckoned as part of the city, sometimes as distinct from it. It was a convenient position for the Nethinims, who were employed in menial offices about the temple. Ziha seems to represent the leading Nethinim family (Ezr 2:43; Neh 7:46).

Neh 11:22

Properly, the whole of this verse forms a single sentence, and should run as follows:“And the overseer of the Levites in Jerusalem, Huzzi, the son of Bani, the son of Hashabiah, the son of Mattaniah, the son of Micha, of the sons of Asaph the singers, was over the business of the house of God.” As Shabbethai and Jozabad “had the oversight of the outward business” (Neh 11:16), so the internal business was under the superintendence of Huzzi, or Uzzi. Uzzi appears as taking part in the dedication of the wall (Neh 12:42).

Neh 11:23

For it was the king’s commandment concerning them. Artaxerxes, it appears, had assigned a certain stipend from the royal revenue for the support of such Levites as were singers, and this stipend had to be paid to them day by day. It is suggested as the grounds for this special favour

1. That the Levites engaged in the choral service were regarded as those especially who prayed “for the life of the king and of his sons” (Ezr 6:10); and,

2. That the singing Levites who returned from Babylon, being so few in number (128), had to be constantly on duty in the temple, and so needed a regular daily stipend. The nexus of this verse with the preceding one imp!ice that the payment in question was an important part of the internal business of the house committed to Uzzi.

Neh 11:24

Pethahiah of the children of Zerah. We have here an indication of the imperfection of the preceding catalogue, which has mentioned no descendants of Zerah among the Jews dwelling in Jerusalem, but made them all sons of Perez (Neh 11:6). As already observed, a verse equivalent to 1Ch 6:9 must have fallen out between 1Ch 6:6 and 1Ch 6:7 of this chapter. The exact office borne by Pethahiah cannot be determined; but he evidently held a confidential position, which made him an intermediary for certain purposes between the Persian king and the Jewish people. Perhaps he received and forwarded petitions and complaints.

Neh 11:25

And for the villages. Or, “And, as regards the villages.” The writer here at last passes away altogether from Jerusalem, and proceeds to speak of the country population of Judaea. This was chiefly located in villages or hamlets, to each of which was attached a territory suitable for cultivation. The principal of these settlements are now enumerated, and will be found to comprise seventeen places belonging to Judah, and fifteen belonging to Benjamin. Of these thirty-two, a considerable proper tion had subordinate hamlets attached to them. Kirjath-arba, or Hebron. During the captivity the old name had reasserted itself (see Jos 14:15). Dibon is not the important Moabite town whence came the famous “Moabite Stone,” but the city anciently called Dimonah, which is coupled with “Kabzeel” and “Moladah” in Jos 15:21-26. Jekabzeel is no doubt the ancient “Kabzeel” (Jos 15:21).

Neh 11:26

Joshua is a place not mentioned anywhere but here. Moladah occurs in Jos 15:26; Beth-phelet, no doubt the same as Beth-palet, in Jos 15:27.

Neh 11:27

Hazar-shual and Beer-sheba are united in Jos 15:28, and were no doubt near together. Hazar-shual means “the village of foxes.”

Neh 11:28

Ziklag is celebrated as the town given to David by Achish king of Gath (1Sa 27:6), and soon afterwards taken by the Amalekites (ibid. 30:1). Mekonah is a name which occurs only in this place.

Neh 11:29

En-rimmon, “the spring of Rimmon,” is to be identified with the “Ain and Rimmon” of Jos 15:32two neighbouring villages, which ultimately grew into one. Zareah is no doubt the “Zoreah” of Jos 15:33, which was in the Shephelah, or low coast tract. Jarmuth is the town of Piram, who warred with Joshua (Jos 10:3-27). Like Zareah, it lay in the low coast tract (Jos 15:35).

Neh 11:30

Zanoah and Adullam appear in close connection with Jarmuth in Jos 15:34, Jos 15:35. Zanoah was not a place of any importance, but Adullam, near which was David’s cave, is often mentioned. It had its own king in the time of Joshua (Jos 12:15), was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch 11:7), and remained a city of some strength under the Maccabees (2 Macc. 12:38). Lachish is a place even more celebrated than Adullam. Its king, Japhia, warred with Joshua (Jos 12:3-16). It was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch 11:9). Amaziah took refuge there when conspiracy threatened him at Jerusalem (2Ki 14:19); and Sennacherib “besieged it with all his power” (2Ch 22:9). Azekah is joined with Jarmuth and Adullam in Jos 15:35. Like Adullam and Lachish, it was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch 11:9). They (i.e. the children of Judah) dwelt from Beer-sheba to the valley of Hinnom. The southernmost and the northernmost parts of Judaea are here mentioned.

Neh 11:31

The children also of Benjamin from Geba dwelt at Michmash. Rather, “Also the children of Benjamin dwelt from Geba to Michmash, and Aija, and Bethel,” etc. Geba was reckoned an extreme city of Benjamin towards the west, and consequently occurs last in the first list of Joshua (Nehemiah 18:24). Its proximity to Michmash and Aija (Aiath) appears in Isa 10:28, Isa 10:29. All three places were in the near vicinity of Bethel.

Neh 11:32

Anathoth was on the road from Geba to Jerusalem (Isa 10:30), and was a Levitical city (Jos 21:18). Nob was still nearer to the capital, which could be seen from it (Isa 10:32). It was famous for the massacre of the priests by Doeg (1Sa 22:18, 1Sa 22:19). Ananiah is mentioned only in this place.

Neh 11:33

Hazor occurs as a Benjamite city here only. Ramah is the famous town, now er-Ram, so often mentioned as a little to the north of Jerusalem (Jos 18:25; Jdg 4:5; 1Ki 15:17; Isa 10:29; Jer 31:15). Gittaim is mentioned as a Benjamite town in 2Sa 4:3.

Neh 11:34

Hadid is joined with Lod and Ono in Ezr 2:33 and Neh 7:37. It is probably the modern Haditheh, three miles east of Ludd or Lod, in the Shephelah. Zeboim is not elsewhere mentioned as a town, but we hear of a “valley of Zeboim” in 1Sa 13:18, which seems to have lain east of Michmash, in the bleak country towards the Jordan. Neballat is not elsewhere mentioned.

Neh 11:35

Lod, now Ludd (called in the Acts of the Apostles Lydda), was at the eastern edge of the Shephelah, or low maritime plain, and about nine miles to the S.E. of Joppa. Unimportant during the early times, it became a place of considerable note under the Maccabees (1 Macc. 10:30, 38; 11:28, 34, 57, etc.), and so continued till the taking of Jerusalem by Titus, soon after which its name was changed to Diospolis. Ono is first mentioned in 1Ch 8:12 in combination with Lod, with which it is also joined in Ezr 2:33 and Neh 7:37. We do not know how it came to be called “the valley of craftsmen.”

Neh 11:36

Of the Levites were divisions in Judah and Benjamin. The exact sense is obscure, but we may gather from the passage that a certain number of Levites were dispersed among the Benjamite cities. They were not now numerous enough to have any cities to themselves.

HOMILETICS

Neh 11:1-36

Town and country. Variety in unity.

Nehemiah had been some time before (see Neh 7:4, Neh 7:5) impressed with the necessity of increasing the population of Jerusalem, and had taken preliminary steps; but other more pressing matters had intervened. He now proceeded with his design. His purpose was, that of the whole population one-tenth should inhabit the metropolis, and he arranged that the additional families to dwell there should be determined by lot. First, however, opportunity was given for volunteers to offer themselves, and many appear to have done so (verse 2), and gained for themselves the blessing of the people, who would have to supply a proportionately smaller number by the determination of the lot, each one’s chance of being called upon to break up his home and remove to Jerusalem being consequently lessened. It is difficult to understand how such an artificial increase of a city’s inhabitants could be successfully and permanently accomplished; bow, for instance, people from the country, chosen promiscuously, could accommodate themselves to life in the city; how suitable employments could be found for them, and how they could be supported during the period of transition. But this is not a solitary instance of the kind in ancient times (see note in ‘Speaker’s Commentary’). The necessity of increasing the population of Jerusalem appears from what is said in Neh 7:4; and the building of the wall would have been of little value otherwise. As the metropolis, and as “the holy city,” it was alike important that it should be well peopled. Following the brief notice in Neh 7:1 and Neh 7:2 of the steps taken for this purpose, we have in the rest of the chapter an account of the inhabitants, first of the city, and then of the country. It sets forth the variety in condition, avocations, etc. of the people, who yet were one both as a civil and a religious community; and may be employed as suggesting to us the variety in unity of the Christian Church.

I. There is VARIETY.

1. As to locality. As here some dwelt within the walls of Jerusalem, near the temple, the rest were scattered about the country; so the Church is scattered throughout the world, in every variety of situation, and comprises people of almost all languages, etc.

2. In occupations and functions. In Israel, the rulers and the ruled, craftsmen and agriculturists; and about the temple itself, priests, Levites, and Nethinims; singers, gate-keepers, etc. So in the Church. Every separate Church, which is really such, has its own special work; and within each Church every member has his own aptitudes and functions (see Rom 12:4 8), arising from the diversities of nature, education, grace, and office.

3. Of advantages and disadvantages. For livelihood, culture, religion. The city, the country town, the village, the mansion and the cottage, all present a mixture of both. Nearness to the house of prayer and religious instruction is one of the greatest advantages, and should be more considered than it often is by those who are choosing a residence; but when duty calls to a different position God can afford compensations for the loss. In like manner, of the various forms of Church order and life, no one monopolises all advantages, no one is without some special function.

4. Of characteristics. Every nation, every class in each, has its own peculiarities; every kind of employment stamps those engaged in it with some specialty of body or mind; yea, every individual differs from every other. We need not, then, be surprised that in religion there should be so many varieties; that even the members of the one Church of Christ should differ so widely. Differences in nature, education, social position, the time and manner in which the religious life is awakened, the influences under which it comes, the peculiarities of the Church, the minister, etc; all have their part in producing and perpetuating diversities of thought, life, etc. But notwithstanding so great diversity

II. There is UNITY.

1. Of race. All Israelites were of one family, descended from common ancestors. So all Christians have one Father, and have been born again by one Spirit.

2. Of faith and life. The Jews, when worthy of the name, were one in their religion, trusting and worshipping the same God, living according to the precepts of the same law. In like manner all true Christians are essentially alike in faith and character. The family features may be detected, notwithstanding their unlikeness in many respects. Genuine Christians of very different and possibly opposing Churches are more like each other, and more really united, than each is like, or united to, the untrue members of his own Church.

3. Of relationships. The Jews in city, town, or village were bound together by their common relation to their civil and religious rulers, their temple and their God, and their mutual relations and dependence as parts of one nation. So Christians are all one in Christ Jesus, having one God, one Saviour and Lord, living under the same rule and the same system of laws, enjoying the same care and protection, forming, whether they will or not, one body, the body of Christ, in which every member is joined to and dependent upon every other.

4. Of end. “This people have I formed for myself; they shall show forth my praise.” Such was the Divine purpose in respect to Israel; and such it is in respect to Christians. All are called to accomplish this end, and in their various ways they subserve it (see 1Pe 2:9).

III. THERE ARE DUTIES ARISING FROM THIS VARIETY IN UNITY.

1. Contentment of each with his own position. Whether in the city or the country, every Israelite might feel himself one of the Divinely-favoured people, a valuable member of the community if honestly doing his duty, and able to attain the great ends of life. Similarly, Christians may well be content with their various lots within the Church. Not, indeed, with a contentment that forbids inquiry and aspiration after fuller light and higher privilege, or such changes as may result therefrom; but with a contentment which will prevent repining and restlessness, and secure the fulfilment of the duties and the enjoyment of the advantages within reach. Each should love his own branch of the Church, seek to be a good member of it, and gain all the good he can from it. In respect to locality too, the dwellers in cities and towns and those in the country need not envy each other. God can be found and salvation realised everywhere. God’s temple is wherever is the contrite, believing, and praying heart; and wherever two or three meet in the name of Christ (Isa 57:15; Mat 18:20).

“While place we seek, or place we shun,
The soul finds happiness in none;
But with my God to guide my way,
‘Tis equal joy to go or stay.
Could I be cast where thou art not,
That were indeed a dreadful lot;
But regions none remote I call,
Secure of finding God in all.”

2. Mutual esteem and affection. Christians should recognise that they belong to one great society, of which every true Christian is a member; and learn to detect the essential features of a Christian, and honour all who possess them, whatever their subordinate peculiarities. He is a poor Christian who cannot say with St. Paul, “Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity.”

3. Mutual helpfulness. The country is as essential to the town as the town to the country. “The king himself is served by the field.” The peasant can even teach the citizen much of which he is ignorant. So Christians (individuals and Churches) can and ought to be helpers of each others’ knowledge and faith, holiness and joy; and none should be above receiving the assistance which others can render.

4. United action. As the people of Israel, from town and country alike, united to build the wall of Jerusalem, and repel the common enemies, so should Christians of every name be ready to unite in all ways possible and expedient, in order to promote the common good, to defend and propagate the common faith, and subdue all that is opposed to it; and thus to increase the one glorious kingdom to which they all belong, and magnify him whom they all alike adore and love.

5. Willingness of individuals to undertake more than their obvious share in labours or sacrifices for the common good. Like those who “willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem” (Neh 7:2).

6. Finally, let us each take heed that he really is one of “the Israel of God,” to whichever tribe or section he may belong, and wherever his lot may be cast.

Neh 11:2

Volunteers.

“And the people blessed all the men that willingly offered themselves,” etc. A large part of the work done for the good of the community is done by volunteersmen and women who ‘: willingly offer themselves” to do what in the abstract has no more claim on them than on others; and do it gratuitously. This is especially seen in the various departments of service in connection with religion and charity. Church officers, Sunday-school teachers, visitors of the poor, etc. Amount and value of their labours. Imagine them to cease! Notice

I. WHENCE VOLUNTARY DEVOTEMENT TO PARTICULAR CHRISTIAN SERVICES SPRINGS. It may, doubtless, arise in some cases from unworthy motives; but we speak of true Christian willingness as directed towards this or that branch of service.

1. Earnest piety and benevolence in general (see on Neh 3:20). Without which no service is truly Christian.

2. Felt aptitude and ability for the work chosen. Well is it when this feeling is not a delusion, and the willing are really the able; well also when the able are the willing, and so the work is not left to pious incompetence.

3. Special inclination for it. Which may arise from the congenial nature of the work, or the associations to which it introduces, or the special opportunities it is believed to afford for getting as well as doing good.

II. THE REWARD OF THOSE WHO DISPLAY IT.

1. The commendation of others. “The people blessed,” etc. The expectation of this should not be a principal motive, if only to prevent disappointment. For though a measure of it is usual, it is not always bestowed; and the opposite treatment is possible. Some who will do nothing themselves occupy themselves in reflections on those who are employed in good works. Others, however, will commend; some from hearty appreciationthe appreciation of gratitude from those who receive benefit, of sympathy from those of like mind, who are themselves at work, or who would, but cannot, devote themselves to such service, and rejoice that others both can and will. Commendations of less value will perhaps come from another quarter, i.e. from some who are too selfish or indolent to do their part; but feel more at ease in their negligence from knowing that others are generous and active. To praise them is felt as all but equivalent to cooperating with them, and it is a great deal cheaper. If commendation from others is altogether wanting, there will be

2. The pleasure of doing good. That satisfaction which springs from a sense of doing our duty, that delight which is inseparable from the exercise of benevolent affections, and that which arises from the perception of good done.

3. Personal benefit. Growth in goodness and nobleness. Increased likeness to Christ and to God.

4. The Divine commendation and recompense.

Neh 11:16

Church officers.

“The oversight of the outward business of the house of God.” What this business was in and about the temple. What it is in Christian Churches: care of the buildings, management of the finances, etc. The “oversight” is now exercised by church-wardens, deacons, treasurers, etc; according to the customs of each Church.

I. THE POSITION WHICH THIS “OUTWARD BUSINESS” OCCUPIES.

1. It is subordinate to the spiritual. For the sake of the latter it exists, and in order to its promotion should always be managed.

2. It is’ essential to the spiritual. As in this world the body to the action of the soul, or food and raiment to piety and virtue. Preachers must be fed and clothed and housed; congregations cannot meet at stated times without buildings, nor in comfort unless the buildings are bared for and money spent on them. Neglect of the outward will tell unfavourably on spiritual life and growth. Due care for it is promotive of these, as it enables ministers to preach, and congregations to hear and worship, with undisturbed minds. Very useful and honourable, then, is their office who have “the oversight of the outward business of the house of God.”

II. THE QUALITIES REQUIRED FOR THE DUE DISCHARGE OF ITS DUTIES. Besides the uprightness required in every kind of business.

1. Devoted love for the house of God. Awakening the desire to do all that is possible to secure the due order and the effectiveness of its services, and producing the conviction that it is an honour to be employed even in its humblest ministrations (see Psa 84:10). Such love will make the officers of a Church examples to others (as they should be) of generosity and activity.

2. Sympathy with, and kindly regard for, those engaged in spiritual ministrations. Arising from a high esteem of their work as we]l as their character, and impelling to every effort to facilitate their labours, and secure them such honourable and sufficient maintenance as will free them from all anxiety about worldly matters, and enable them to give themselves with undivided heart to their work. Inducing also care to maintain a good understanding between the pastor and the flock, and preserve the former from annoyance and needless interruption.

3. Diligence and fidelity in their work. The contrast between the style in which men holding office in the Church transact their own business, and that in which they transact the business of God’s house, is often very striking and discreditable.

4. The capacity for leading and stimulating their fellow-worshippers. There is often in a congregation much latent ability, and willingness too, to serve the Church by gift or labour, which need only to be called forth. One man with the power to call them forth may totally change for the better the condition of affairs.

5. Withal, indisposition to magnify their office unduly, or go beyond its bounds (see Rom 12:3 seq.). Finally, ministers and congregations enjoying the services of such officers have much reason for thankfulness and praise.

HOMILIES BY R.A. REDFORD

Neh 11:1-36

The true centralisation.

We separate the nation from the world not to surround it with a false patriotism which means self-interest, but that in the fulfilment of the Divine purpose and law we may be the greater blessing to mankind.

I. The true centre of the life of the community is THE RELIGIOUS CENTRE. Jerusalem as the sacred city. The secular and religious are not opposed. The man of God is the true man. There is no true strength and prosperity where there is an inversion of the Divine order. Put the centre where it ought to be. There have been men who have sanctified the earthly life in its highest forms by their recognition of the supreme claim of religion.

II. WILLINGNESS is the only sure foundation on which the Church’s glory can rest. We may appeal to Divine direction in the selection of our spiritual leaders; but it is those who willingly offer themselves who should be called to occupy the foremost places at Jerusalem.

III. While there is a boundless variety in human capability, there is a possibility of DISTRIBUTION which shall find room for all. The highest wealth and faculty should be gathered to the centre. The Church of God should present to the world the most conspicuous examples of sanctified genius and faithfully-used opportunity.R.

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

Neh 11:1, Neh 11:2

Duty: its peril, its excellency, and its reward.

We learn from Neh 7:4 that “the city was large and great, but the people were few therein.” Less than 50,000 inhabitants were scattered over Judaea; but these would not have been too many to have occupied Jerusalem itself. It was a matter of the first importance that the metropolis should be well supplied with those who would worship in her courts, and with those who would guard her walls. It was therefore the aim of Nehemiah and other patriotic men to promote a migration from the outlying towns and villages to Jerusalem. “The rulers dwelt there,” and they were anxious that many more should come in to swell the population. This ingathering supplies us with three lessons.

I. THAT THE PLACE OF PRIVILEGE IS THE POST OF DUTY AND OF DANGER. Jerusalem was “the holy city” (verse 1). It was “the city which God had chosen;” the place of his special manifestation; the spot where, as nowhere else, he could be approached and worshipped. Thither all who feared his name and sought his favour came with their offerings; there they presented the best they could bring on his altar, and bowed before his face. But this “holy city,” where the holy people might be well pleased and be rightly proud to dwell, was

(1) the place where special duty awaited the inhabitants. “The houses were not builded” (Neh 7:4); the ground was waste; ruins were everywhere about; there was hard work to be done from centre to circumference. Moreover, the walls had to be guarded; probably night and day there was vigilant watching to be observed, that there might be no possible surprise. It was also

(2) the post of special danger. Other places would be too insignificant to be attacked. If the enemy struck at all, Jerusalem would be his mark. So is it ever. The great city has many special privileges, but it has many peculiar perils, and some duties which are all its own. They who minister unto the Lord find even m their holy office obligations which impose the most serious responsibilities, and subtle spiritual dangers which call for unusual vigilance and prayer. It is well, indeed, to belong to those to whom God is near, with whom he dwells; but it is necessary to remember that side by side with special privilege there is always found

(a) some special obligations, and

(b) some peculiar perils.

II. THAT DUTY MAY BE DONE WITH VARIOUS DEGREES OF WORTHINESS AND ACCEPTABLENESS. There were two ways by which Jerusalem was replenished. They “cast lots to bring one of ten to dwell” there (verse 1); others “willingly offered themselves” (verse 2)they volunteered without being drawn. Looking at this procedure as a matter of morals, we should certainly estimate the action of the latter more highly than that of the former. These did well, but those did better. It was a right and an acceptable thing for men with their wives and families to leave their homes where they were doing well, and where they preferred to stay, in order to act up to their agreement with their fellows; it was a worthier and a more acceptable thing for others not to wait for this moral compulsion, but to offer themselves, and go of their own accord from the village where they were prosperous, comfortable, and out of the reach of attack, to live in the city where hardship and danger might look them in the face. With us, as with them, duty is done with different degrees of Divine approval. Secular duty, that of the business or the home, may be done faithfully but unreligiously, or it may be done conscientiously because religiously, all being done not as unto man only or chiefly, but “unto the Lord” (Eph 6:7). Sacred duty may be done as a matter of obligation only, or it may be discharged with willingness, even with an eager delight, because the purest and highest aims are kept well in view of the soul. The same acts, outwardly measured, are of very different weight in worthiness, tried in the balances of God. And sometimes of men, for it is true

III. THAT DISINTERESTED DEEDS WILL OFTEN DRAW DOWN THE BENEDICTION OF OUR KIND. “And the people blessed all the men that willingly offered themselves, etc. (verse 2). The inhabitants of Jerusalem evidently discriminated between those who were actuated by the more, and those governed by the less, generous inducements; and to the former they accorded hearty thanksthey “blessed them.” Concerning popular appreciation, it is well to learn from the experience of the past, or we shall suffer injury and loss. We must

(1) neither reckon upon it as certain, nor

(2) despise it as worthless.

We should

(a) pitch our life so high that, if needful, we can do without it, “seeking the honour that cometh from God only,” and satisfied with that.

“Men heed thee not, men praise thee not;
The Master praises;what are men?”

And yet we should

(b) so live that we may fairly hope to earn the benediction of our kind. While some skilful, selfish men have reaped the honours due only to disinterestedness, more often selfishness shows its cloven foot, and is contemned. And while some generous souls have lived and died unappreciated, more often kind-heartedness and self-forgetting love win an answering affection, and draw down the blessing of those who are enriched. For good as well as evil, “with what measure ye mete,” etc. (Mat 7:1). “Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure,” etc. (Luk 6:38). Live a life like that of Job, and you will be able to say as he said, “When the ear heard me, then it blessed me; and when the eye saw me, it gave witness to me” (Job 29:11).C.

Neh 11:3-36

Three elements in the Church of Christ.

In the first verse of this chapter Jerusalem is called “the holy city;” as such it was the type of the Church of Christ. In three respects it bore to the Christian Church a real and close resemblance.

1. It was a separated city; separated and fenced from surrounding idolatries and immoralities.

2. It was a distinguished city; distinguished by

(1) the manifested presence of God, and by

(2) the knowledge of his holy will.

3. It was a commissioned city; charged to hold and preserve a certain deposit of sacred truth against all the world. The Church of Christ is a body

(1) separated from surrounding irreligion, error, and folly;

(2) distinguished by the presence of the indwelling Spirit of God, and the graces he communicates;

(3) commissioned to carry the gospel of the grace of God to the utmost ends of the earth. There are to be in the Church what there were in the city, three things, viz.

I. THE ELEMENT OF ORDER. There were dwelling in Jerusalem “the rulers of the people” (Neh 11:1). Concerning these rulers, we are told who was “overseer” of the “sons of Benjamin” (Neh 11:9); who was “overseer” of the priests (Neh 11:14); who also of the Levites (Neh 11:22); we are told who was precentor, “the principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer” (Neh 11:17); who had “the oversight of the outward business of the house of God;’ (Neh 11:16), and who of the internal business (Neh 11:22). Everything was obviously ordered most carefully, and every one had his post at which to rule or serve. The “order” of the Church of Christ is something which has given rise to most serious differences and disputesalas! to much bitterness and bloodshed. There are advocates of

(1) one universal visible Church,

(2) national Churches,

(3) large closely-confederated Christian communities,

(4) separate societies united only by occasional non-legislative councils or unions.

But whatever the form which the Christian Church may take, whatever its method of organisation, order should always be conspicuously present. “God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all Churches of the saints” (1Co 14:33). Everything is to be done “in order’: (1Co 14:40). There are two complementary duties a Christian man may set before him: one,the bringing about, in an orderly way, that form of Church organisation which, after diligent study and patient observance, he considers to be after the will of Christ; the other,the taking his place in that particular Church of which he is a member, and filling it faithfully and peacefully. He who, in the name of order, brings about contention brings down on himself the condemnation of his Master (1Co 11:16).

II. THE ELEMENT OF VARIETY. Beside the governor were “rulers of the people” (Neh 11:1) generally; and, particularly, priests (Neh 11:10), and Levites (Neh 11:15), and porters (Neh 11:19), and singers (Neh 11:22); and, still more particularly,

(1) those who were engaged in the “outward business of the house of God” (Neh 11:16), and

(2) those who were occupied with the internal arrangements (Neh 11:22). All these various classes had their work to do; not one was redundant. Some were much higher than others, and did a work of a more valuable and a higher kind, but every one was needed in his place, and the security of Jerusalem, as well as the worship of God, would have been incomplete if all had not done their work at the appointed time and place. In the Christian Church are many services to be rendered, and many orders of servants. Some are higher, others lower. But from the man inspired of God to teach and kindle thousands of human souls, to “the doorkeeper of the house,” every one has his work to do for Christ and for man. One workman needs the other, and the world needs them all; and the eye cannot say to the foot, “I have no need of thee,” etc. If we “magnify our own office” that we may be found faithful therein, let us not disparage that of others, lest we be counted self- important by our brethren, and injurious by our Lord.

III. THE ELEMENT OF UNSUSPECTED STRENGTH. To the eye of flesh Jerusalem seemed weak enough at this time. If we include “the residue of Israel” that were in the cites of Judah (Neh 11:20), and those in the villages with their fields (Neh 11:25), all in the outlying provinces of Judah and Benjamin, they make but a very feeble band compared with other places then or with other communities now. How easily might they have been crushed and extirpated by the Persian power, so far as human calculations go. Yet they were the Church of God on earth, the custodians of his holy oracles, the chosen company from which should come forth the Divine Redeemer, and from which should go forth the Divine mission that is to transform the world. The Church of Christ may still seem small as compared with the “un-possessed land” of heathendom; individual Churches may seem weak in the midst of an all-surrounding and overtowering iniquity; but “God is in the midst of her;” his” right hand” is On her side. There is an unsuspected strength in the truth she holds, in the weapons she wields, in the cause of which she is the champion. In ways and by means quite unsuspected by her enemies, and equally unexpected by herself, God will make his Church his agent for the redemption of the world.C.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Neh 11:1. The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem Observing that the number of the inhabitants of Jerusalem was too few, Nehemiah had ordered that the principal men of the nation should, by way of example, fix their habitations there; causing at the same time the rest to cast lots, whereby a tenth part of the whole people of Judah and Benjamin became obliged to dwell at Jerusalem, though those who came voluntarily were better received. One reason why the bulk of the Jews, who were generally shepherds, and lovers of agriculture, might rather choose to live in the country than at Jerusalem, was, because it was more suited to their genius and manner of life; but at this time their enemies were so enraged to see the walls built again, and so restless in their designs to keep the city from rising to its former splendor, that it terrified many from coming to dwell there, thinking themselves more safe in the country, where their enemies had no pretence to disturb them. Though the casting of lots is certainly forbidden where the thing is done out of a spirit of superstition, or with a design to tempt God; yet on some occasions it is enjoined by God himself; and the most holy persons both in the Old and New Testament have practised it in particular cases. The wise man acknowledges the usefulness of this custom when he tells us, that the lot causeth contention to cease, and parteth between the mighty, Pro 18:18.; and therefore it was no bad policy, as things now stood, to take this method of division; since the lot, which all allowed was under the divine direction, falling upon such a person rather than another, would be a great mean, no doubt, of making him remove more contentedly into the city. See Le Clerc and Calmet.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Neh 11:1-36

1And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also [and the rest of the people] cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem, the holy city, and nine parts to dwell in [the] other cities. 2And the people blessed all the men that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem.

3Now [And] these are the chief of the province that dwelt in Jerusalem: but in the cities of Judah dwelt [and which dwelt in the cities of Judah] every one in his possession in their cities, to wit, Israel [i.e., the people], the priests, and the Levites, and the Nethinim, and the children [sons] of Solomons servants. 4And at Jerusalem dwelt certain of the children [sons] of Judah, and of the children [sons] of Benjamin. Of the children [sons] of Judah; Athaiah, the son of Uzziah, the son of Zechariah, the son of Amariah, the son of Shephatiah, the son of Mahalaleel, 5of the children [sons] of Perez (i.e., Pharez): and Maaseiah, the son of Baruch, the son of Col-hozeh, the son of Hozaiah, the son of Adaiah, the son of Joiarib, the son of Zechariah, the son of Shiloni [Shelahs family]. 6All the sons of Perez that dwelt at Jerusalem were four hundred three-score and eight valiant men.

7And these are the sons of Benjamin; Sallu the son of Meshullam, the son of Joed, the son of Pedaiah, the son of Kolaiah, the son of Maaseiah, the son of Ithiel, the son of Jesaiah [i.e., Isaiah]. 8And after him Gabbai, Sallai, nine hundred 9twenty and eight. And Joel the son of Zichri was their overseer: And Judah the son of Senuah was second over the city [was over the second city]. 10Of the priests: 11Jedaiah the son of Joiarib, Jachin. Seraiah, the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, was the ruler of the house of God. 12And their brethren that did the work of the house were eight hundred twenty and two: and Adaiah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Pelaliah, the son of Amzi, the son of Zechariah, the son of Pashur, the son of Malchiah, 13and his brethren, chief of the fathers, two hundred forty and two: and Amashai, the son of Azareel, the son of Ahasai, the son of Meshilliemoth, the son of Immer, 14and their brethren, mighty men of valour, a hundred twenty and eight, and their overseer was Zabdiel, the son of one of the great men [son of the mighty].

15Also [And] of the Levites: Shemaiah the son of Hashub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, the son of Bunni; 16and Shabbethai and Jozabad, of the chief of the Levites had the oversight of [were over] the outward business of the house of 17God. And Mattaniah, the son of Micha, the son of Zabdi, the son of Asaph, was the principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer [perhaps, the chief of the prai e-song who gave thanks at prayer-service]: and Bakbukiah the second among his brethren, and Abda the son of Shammua, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun.

18, 19All the Levites in the holy city were two hundred fourscore and four. Moreover [And] the porters, Akkub, Talmon, and their brethren that kept the gates, were a hundred seventy and two.

20And the residue of Israel, of the priests, and the Levites, were in all the cities of 21Judah, every one in his inheritance. But [And] the Nethinim dwelt in Ophel: and Ziha and Gispa were over the Nethinim. 22The overseer also [and the overseer] of the Levites at Jerusalem was Uzzi, the son of Bani, the son of Hashabiah, the son of Mattaniah, the son of Micha. [Some] Of the sons of Asaph, the singers 23were over the business of the house of God. For it [there] was the kings commandment concerning them, that a certain portion should be for the singers [and a sure ordinance concerning the singers] due for every day [the thing of a day on 24its day]. And Pethahiah, the son of Meshezabeel, of the children of Zerah, the son of Judah, was at the kings hand in all matters concerning the people.

25And [As] for the villages with their fields, some of the children [sons] of Judah dwelt at Kirjath-arba and in the villages [daughters] thereof, and at Dibon, and in 26the villages [daughters] thereof, and at Jekabzeel and in the villages thereof, and 27at Jeshua, and at Moladah, and at Beth-phelet, and at Hazar-shual, and at Beer-sheba, and in the villages [daughters] thereof, 28and at Ziklag, and at Mekonah, and 29in the villages [daughters] thereof, and at En-rimmon, and at Zareah, and at Jarmuth, 30Zanoah, Adullam, and in their villages, at Lachish and the fields thereof, at Azekah, and in the villages [daughters] thereof. And they dwelt from Beer-sheba into the valley of Hinnom.

31The children also of Benjamin [and the sons of Benjamin] from Geba dwelt at Michmash [dwelt from Geba to Michmash] and Aija, and Bethel, and in 32their villages [daughters], and at Anathoth, Nob, Ananiah, Hazor, Ramah, Gittaim. 33, 34, 35Hadid, Zeboim, Neballat, Lod, and Ono, the valley of craftsmen.

36And of the Levites were divisions in Judah, and in Benjamin [divisions of Judah were to Benjamin].

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

1 Neh 11:17. instead of being an error for , may be for , chief at the beginning of prayer he gave thanks.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The Places of Abode[1]

Neh 11:1. The rest of the people also.And the rest of the peoplethat is, other than the rulers.

Neh 11:2. That willingly offered themselvesi.e., those of the people, beside the tenth part chosen by lot, who also consented to dwell in Jerusalem as the place of greatest danger and need. (See Neh 7:4.)

Neh 11:3. The relative construction should be used with both clauses, thus: now these are the chiefs of the province who dwelt in Jerusalem, and those who dwelt in the cities of Judah (every one in his possession in their cities)to wit, Israel, etc.Israeli.e., the people of Israel as contrasted with priests, Levites, etc.The children of Solomons servants.See on Neh 7:57.

Neh 11:4. Athaiah was chief of the Bene-Pharets, or children of Perez (Pharez). See Gen 38:29; 1Ch 4:1. In 1Ch 9:4 he is called Uthai, and his genealogy traced by a different line.

Neh 11:5. Maaseiah was chief of the Shilonites or children of Shelah. His grandfather Colhozeh is probably the same as the father of Shallun in Neh 3:15. He is called Asaiah in 1Ch 9:5. Shiloni.Heb.: hash–shiloni. Not a mans name, but a familys title, to wit, the children of Shelah, Judahs son. See 1Ch 9:5. These descendants of Shelah are counted with those of Pharez. Athaiah and Maaseiah were thus the chiefs of Judah. Jeuel of the sons of Zerah, mentioned in 1Ch 9:6, is omitted here.

Neh 11:6. This verse appears to be out of its place. It should precede Neh 11:5.

Neh 11:7. The family of Jesaiah in Benjamin, of which Sallu was chief, is not otherwise known. Sallus pedigree is differently reckoned in 1Ch 9:7. The text in Chronicles is probably defective.

Neh 11:8. Gabbai and Sallai are other Benjamite chiefs.

Neh 11:9. Joel the son of Zichri was overseer (Heb.: pakid, ) over both the Judahites and Benjamites of the city. His office was possibly a police one. Judah the son of Senuahwas over the second city (not second over the city).The second city was a well-known part of Jerusalem. It was there Huldah the prophetess lived in Josiahs time. See 2Ki 22:14, where the Eng. vers. has college for the Heb. mishneh. In Zep 1:10 the Eng. vers. has second. It was probably the part of the city built up north of the temple. The parallel chapter in 1 Chron. (chap. 9), which seems to be very corrupt in its reading, appears to have Joel, the son of Zichri, in Elah, the son of Uzzi, the son of Michri, and to have Judah, the son of Senuah, in Hodaviah, the son of Hasenuah, the former a Benjamite, and the latter an ancestor of Sallu. That list also introduces as Benjamites Ibneiah, the son of Jeroham, and Meshullam, the son of Shephatiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah.

Joel and Judah were the two inspectors or overseers over the Judahites and Benjamites in the entire city.

Neh 11:10-11. There is great confusion in this part of the record, and we are not helped much by 1 Chronicles 9. Both lists have been copied probably from a defective record. Jedaiah, Joiarib and Jachin were the heads of three of the twenty-four courses of priests in Davids time (1Ch 24:7; 1Ch 24:17). Seraiah was high-priest before the captivity (1Ch 6:14). These names appear to be fragments of a record which in its fulness showed the heads of these families in Nehemiahs time. The phrase ruler of the house of God (negid beth ha–elohim) can belong to Ahitub or Seraiah. The Eng. vers. wrongly inserts was. It is a title of the high-priest. See 2Ch 31:13. Also compare 1Ch 9:11. Also see 1Ch 12:27, where Jehoiada (negid of the Aaronites) seems to be the same as Ahitub the father of Zadok.

In Neh 11:10 Jedaiah, the son of Joiarib, is doubtless wrong, and the form in 1Ch 9:10 should be followed, to wit, Jedaiah and Jehoiarib. In Neh 11:11 (as in 1Ch 9:11) the words the son of Meraioth are out of place and should follow Ahitub, as Meraioth was grandfather (1Ch 6:7) or great-grandfather (Ezr 7:3) of Ahitub. For this last discrepancy we may suppose the two sequences in the high-priesthood of Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok (one before Solomon, and the other after Solomon) are the occasion. One list has taken the latter, where Ahitubs grandfather is Azariah, and the other has taken the former where Ahitubs grandfather is Meraioth. [We use father and grandfather in the formal sense, denoting the proximity of the names in the records, not the actual relationship.]

Neh 11:12. And their brethreni.e., the brethren or kinsfolk of the chiefs of the priests whose names are lost in the above record (as we have seen in the preceding note). Adaiah was chief of the children of Malchiah, the head of the fifth course in Davids day (1Ch 24:9).

Neh 11:13. Chief of the fathers.This clause seems to be out of place, for we can hardly suppose that the Malchiah family were all chiefs. Adaiah had 242 in his kinsfolk, over whom he was chief, just as the representatives of the high-priests family and the families of Jedaiah, Joiarib and Jachin had 822 in their kinsfolk (Neh 11:12). This phrase chief of the fathers belongs to all these head men of families, and was probably at the head of the list originally. It may have found its place here from the analogy of the phrase mighty men of valour in Neh 11:14. See 2Ch 26:12 for a collocation of the two phrases. Amashai (Maasiai in 1Ch 9:12) was chief of the children of Immer, the head of the sixteenth course in Davids time. His pedigree in 1 Chronicles 9. is merely a corruption of this one.

Neh 11:14. Their brethren.Probably an error for his brethrenthat is, Amashais. Their overseer was Zabdiel.He was pakid (see on Neh 11:9) of all the priests. He is called son of the mighty onesa phrase that seems to denote a remarkable ancestry. The numbers here and in 1Ch 9:13 differ by 568. Errors in numbers and in names are almost necessities in transcribing.

Neh 11:15-17. This list of Levites omits the names of Heresh, Galal and Berechiah, given in 1Ch 9:15-16; but contains the names of Shabbethai and Jozabad not mentioned there. In this list (Neh 11:14) we have the son of Bunni (i.e., Bani, one of the families of Merari), where in 1Ch 9:14 we find of the sons of Merari. Bakbukiah here is Bakbakkar there. Zabdi here is Zichri there. Abda here is Obadiah there. Of the Levitical chiefs, Shabbethai and Jozabad had the oversight of the outward business of the house of God.That is, attended to the secular department of service as directors therein (comp. 1Ch 26:29). The principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer.Literally the chief of the beginning gave thanks to prayer. Some would read tehillah instead of tehhillah, a most natural correction. We should then have the chief of the praise-song [who] gave thanks (as introductory) to prayer.

Neh 11:18. These six (or nine) Levitical chiefs had a constituency of 284.

Neh 11:19. Akkub, Talmon.The list in 1 Chronicles 9 adds Shallum (as chief of all) and Ahiman, and makes the number 212 instead of 172. The account in 1 Chron. is much more extended on this matter of the porters, thus showing that this record (as is that also) is but a fragment of an older document. Both copies have been marred in the transcribing.

Neh 11:20. This verse belongs between Neh 11:24 and Neh 11:25, after Jerusalem is disposed of.

Neh 11:21. NethinimOphel.See on Neh 3:26.

Neh 11:22. The pakid (see on Neh 11:9)all the Levites, including the Nethinim, was Uzzi. The last clause should read: The singers of the sons of Asaph (or some of the sons of Asaph, the singers,see same construction in Neh 11:25) were over the business of the house of God. This business is not the outward business of Neh 11:16. If (with Keil) we disregard the Athnahh, we may consider Uzzis pedigree as going on in this last clause, thus: the son of Micha, of the sons of Asaph the singers in the service of the house of God. In this case the parallel with Neh 11:17 would be striking. There may be an omission in that verse before Mattaniah, and this Uzzi may be the first of the three leading singersBakbukiah and Abda being the other two. But see next note.

Neh 11:23. Read: for it was the kings commandment concerning them and a sure ordinance for the singers for each days duty (lit. the thing of a day on its day). Uzzi was pakid of the Levites generally, but the Asaphites took turns in directing the Levitical work. This 23d versemaking the singers (in the plural) the main subject, seems to show that our E. V. is right in stopping Uzzis genealogy (in Neh 11:22) at Micha, and then beginning a new passage. The Masorites took this view, as the Athnahh with Micha shows. There is probably some confusion between Neh 11:22 and Neh 11:15; Neh 11:17, if we may judge from the names. Compare the passage in 1 Chronicles 9.

Neh 11:24. Pethahiah of the Zerahites (or Zarhites) was at the hand of the king.This does not mean that he was at Susa, but that he was the kings special agent. Comp. 1Ch 23:28, where the Levites are said to be at the hand of the sons of Aaron. Pethahiahs office may have taken him often to Susa, and he would thus be the go-between between the king and Nehemiah.

Neh 11:25. Kirjath-Arbai.e., Hebron (Jos 14:15). The villages thereof.Lit. the daughters thereof. The word is a different one from that at the beginning of the verse (hatzr). It is repeated after Dibon, but the other word returns after Jekabzeel. This use of daughters for dependent towns is common in the earlier books. Dibon.Doubtless the Dimonah of Jos 15:22. Jekabzeel.The Kabzeel of Jos 15:21.

Neh 11:26. Jeshua. Probably the Shema, of Jos 15:26, the letters in Hebrew being easily mistaken in transcription. Moladah is El Milh. Beth-phelet.The Beth-palet of Jos 21:27.

Neh 11:27. Hazar-shuallike all the above, except Hebron and Moladah, is unknown.

Beersheba is Bir es-Seba, twenty-five miles south-west of Hebron, and ten miles west of Moladah.

Neh 11:28. Ziklag, conspicuous in Davids history (1 Samuel 30), is supposed to be Asluj, on the road from El Milh to Abdeh. Mekonahpossibly a mistake for Madmannah of Jos 15:30. It only requires a mem dropped and a daleth changed to a kaph.

Neh 11:29. En-rimmon is spoken of in Jos 15:32 as two places. Keil supposes them two towns closely neighboring which finally grew into one. Zareah.Zoreah (Jos 15:33) or Zorah (Jdg 13:2) is Zurah, fourteen miles west of Jerusalem. Jarmuth Isaiah 16 miles south-west of Jerusalem, on the slope of the mountain country, and about eight miles from the Shephelah or Philistine plain. It Isaiah 15 miles from Hebron.

Neh 11:30. Zanoah is Zanua, or, perhaps, Kh. Sanut. Adullamidentified by Ganneau with Sh. Mudhkur, on the east side of Wady Sur, near Socoh. Lachish36 miles south-west of Jerusalem. Azekah is Deir el Aashek. From Beersheba unto the valley of Hinnom (or valley of the sons, or son, of Hinnom) is a distance of nearly 50 miles.

Neh 11:31. Read: and the children of Benjamin dwelt from Geba to Michmash and Aija and Bethel and her villages.Geba is Jeba. Michmash is Mukhmas. Aija or Ai is probably Tell el Hajar, as Van de Velde thinks. Bethel is Beitin.

Neh 11:32. Anathoth is Anata, Jeremiahs birth-place. Nob is probably Neby Samwil, according to Lieut. Conders suggestion (Quarterly Statement of Pal. Expl. Fund. London, Jan. 1875). Ananiah is unknown.

Neh 11:33. Hazor is not identified. Ramah is Er-Ram. Gittaim is unknown.

Neh 11:34. Hadid is supposed to be near Lydda. Zeboim is not identified. Neballat is Beit Nebala, near Lydda.

Neh 11:35. Lod is Lydda (Ludd). Ono is believed to be near Lydda, at Kefr Anna. (See Van de Velde.) The valley of craftsmeni.e., Charashim (see 1Ch 4:14) was probably in the vicinity of Lydda.

Neh 11:36. Read: And of the Levites divisions of Judah went to Benjamin. These Levites were transferred from former stations in Judahite towns to stations in Benjamite towns.

HISTORICAL AND ETHICAL

1. Jerusalem was peculiarly the post of labor and danger,of labor, because the fortifications would require constant guarding, and of danger, because the enemies of the Jews would naturally concentrate their efforts against the holy city. A willing offering of any to dwell in Jerusalem was therefore a mark of self-denial for the sake of country and religion. The popular blessing fell upon such. Even those who did not so volunteer could not but admire this devotion, and join in the general admiration. Happy is the people, where there is such a cause for the public favor.

2. The additional population of Jerusalem included men of Judah, men of Benjamin, Levites, and Nethinim. There were, doubtless, remnants of the ten tribes with preserved pedigrees mingled with the returned Jews, as we find four centuries later Phanuel mentioned as of the tribe of Asher (Luk 2:36), but none of these seem to have been reckoned in the public genealogies. They had not come back with Zerubbabel, for it is not probable that many (if any) from the remnant of the ten tribes went into captivity under Nebuchadnezzar, unless we consider the coming to Jerusalem of divers of Asher and Manasseh and Zebulun in Hezekiahs day (2Ch 30:11) was a coming for a permanent abode. But we may believe, that, after the return, stragglers from the remnant of the northern kingdom joined the Jews at Jerusalem, for that in the north a remnant preserved the truth against all the immigration of heathen nations is evident from the appearance of Galilee in the New Testament period, which could not be owing simply to the Maccabean influences, such as are described in 1Ma 5:21, seq.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Neh 11:1-2. It might be very difficult for the poorer families of the congregation to find means of subsistence in Jerusalem, as there was no longer a royal court there, and a troop of higher officers, who could afford work and gain to the lower classes. They might find it much easier to get along in the country, where they could cultivate the ground. Nevertheless Nehemiah and the heads of the congregation had to insist upon it that as many as possible should settle again in Jerusalem. For this there were very urgent reasons. It was not the consideration alone that the congregation would only then be worthily represented to the neighboring people, and would only be in part secure, if it possessed a large, mighty, and nourishing chief city, to which, in times of danger, it could withdraw as to a trustworthy asylum. The main point was, that as many as possible of the congregation must live in direct proximity to the Temple and its service, that their connection with God could the better be furthered and fortified, and be promoted and consecrated, which was so desirable for it. There was the consideration that above all upon Zion and the mountain of the house of the Lord rested the promises of the prophets, and that especially from them the law and the word of the Lord should go forth. (Isa 2:2-4; Mic 4:1.) The congregation should feel itself called upon, as much as lay in its power, to help in the fulfilment of such promises, also to further as much as possible, the honoring of the Lord there in Jerusalem. It had certainly in the prophetic word a warrant that the Lord would here protect and bless it. At least equally urgent calls has Christendom not to scatter itself hither and thither into all sorts of sects and communities, neither to be satisfied with the observance of religion in their houses, but to hold faithfully to the one church, which is founded on Gods word and provided with His promises, and instead of despising it on account of its insignificance, poverty, and needs, all the more to raise it by all self-consecration and gratitude, even if one should thereby suffer disadvantages, and even dangers, in worldly things, and should draw upon himself slights and persecution. And let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering, for He is faithful that promised; not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is. (Heb 10:23-25.) That in which a sect has appeared to be preferable in power of love and sanctity has proved itself generally, in great part to be mere empty appearance.

Neh 11:3-19. It is very worthy of notice that in the numbering of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, not the priests but the tribes of Judah and Benjamin take the lead, and only then follow the priests and Levites; so much the more worthy of notice, because in the new congregation, following the captivity, according to the entire direction which its development took, and according to everything which was considered as of the greatest moment, the high-priests, and the priesthood in general, had a particularly high significance. It is as if the consciousness were indicated, that the priests and Levites, in spite of their distinction, which the Lord had apportioned to them in the affairs of Israel, had been nevertheless nothing at all, if they had not had a congregation near and around them, and if they had not succeeded in obtaining satisfactory fruit for their activity, namely, a genuine and true piety, which should substantially prove they were not there in vain. Would also that Christian priests, that is, preachers of the gospel, might preserve a lively consciousness that it is not enough for them to have fellowship with their brethren in office, that they are nothing, and can profit and signify nothing, it not some, if only a small congregation stand by them, in whom the seed which they sow, springs up, grows, and bears fruit. Starke: Neh 11:3. In every time there are some pious and God-fearing people who separate themselves from the world, and seek the good of their souls rather than of their bodies.

Neh 11:25-36. When one looks at the space which the Jewish congregation inhabited round Jerusalem, how very small was the territory occupied by the people of God, the only race which possessed a clear knowledge of the only true and holy God! A few miles, from three to six, north and south, east and west, comprised the entire district. Compared with our countries, yes, even with our provinces, this district appears to us almost as a vanishing nothing. And nevertheless what powers for the subjugation of entire humanity, for the transformation of all its relations, and for the subduing of all circumstances, has God the Lord been able to put in the people of this oasis, in the, at the same time insignificant, and in many respects miserable race, which cultivated the ground there or raised cattle! If any where surely here arises a testimony for Pauls word, God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. (1Co 1:27.) A consoling promise also for Christendom in those times in which it appears as though it were being compressed on all sides, and when it is in truth losing position after position. Let it lose in length and breadth, in order afterwards to gain so much the more in height. Even the gates of hell cannot swallow up the church of the Lord.

Starke: Neh 11:25. God collects to Himself a church from among many peoples by the word of the gospel, that the heavenly Jerusalem may be filled.

Footnotes:

[1]This chapter is intimately connected with chapter Neh 7:4, showing Nehemiahs plan of increasing the population of the city. The genealogies and then the confession and covenant came in parentheticallythe former as part of the process in the plan, and the latter as chronologically happening while Nehemiah was maturing the plan.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

We have in this chapter an account of the residence of the rulers and certain others who voluntarily undertook to make Jerusalem the place of their abode. The list also of those chosen by lot to dwell there.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

(1) And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts to dwell in other cities. (2) And the people blessed all the men, that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem.

It doth not appear what was the cause that the generality of the people were averse to live in Jerusalem. (As it was the holy city, one might have expected that they would have been more eager to have fixed their residence there, than in the distant villages or lesser towns of Israel). Probably the fear of the enemies of Israel, or the apprehension of the Persian power, under which they were in tribute. Certain it is, however, that those who volunteered to live there were considered true patriots, and had the blessing of the people. Reader! even now it requires much grace to step forward in the cause of Jesus, and declare ourselves to be volunteers in his cause.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Neh 11:16

What is the House of God? ‘A church.’ Not necessarily. ‘A chapel, a sanctuary, a tabernacle, a temple.’ Not necessarily. You may have a cathedral without a house of God, and you may find in some little thatched cottage or chapel on the hillside all the cathedrals out of heaven. Hence it is that we must not look at magnitudes, sizes, revenues, apparatus, but at the ideal, the symbolic, the spiritual, the sacramental; then the great may become little and the little may become great.

I. What was Jacob’s environment at that time? Churches, chapels, institutions? Not one. Yet he was in a walled place, walled in with light, and ministered to by ascending and descending angels. We must get the house of God and many other things back from little definitions and narrow and petty localizations, and regard the universe as God’s house. What was Jacob’s environment? Nature; the green earth, or the stony wilderness, or the blue heaven, or the rippling brook, or the flashing stream, each one, every one, all helping to make up a symbolic building.

II. Let us be very careful how we divide things into outward and inward. The time will come when we shall get rid of even Scriptural uses of outward, alien, strange, foreign. All these words are doomed to go. ‘I saw no temple therein,’ said John. Why did he not see a temple in heaven? Because heaven was all temple. He who lives in light does not even see the sun; he who lives in God has no moon, for he has no night. But men are crafty and expert almost at making little definitions, parties, separations, and the like.

III. There are persons who have carried their defining powers, if powers they be, into what are called ecclesiastical matters, so that now we have ‘The Temporalities’ and ‘The Spiritualities’. What man devised so insane a distinction? There is a sense, but a very poor, narrow sense not worth considering, in which the work of the Church may be divided into the temporal and the spiritual, but, properly regarded, in the spirit of Christ and in the spirit of the Cross, the gift of the poor man’s penny may be as true an act of worship as the singing of the anthem. There is nothing secular, or if there is anything that we call secular it is only for momentary convenience. He that made all things is God; He built the wall of the Church, and He will take care of the roof; it is His place.

Joseph Parker, City Temple Pulpit, vol. IV. p. 117.

References. XII. 42, 43. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvii. No. 1027. XII. 46. W. Garrett Horder, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlii. p. 226.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Neh 11

There is a close connection between this chapter and the opening portion of Neh 7 . The thought of the writer, or compiler, goes back to what was said in chap. Neh 7:4 of the scant population of Jerusalem, and he proceeds to tell us how the deficiency was remedied.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXIV

THE READING OF THE LAW AND RESETTLEMENT OF THE CITIES

Nehemiah 8-13

In Neh 8 we have Ezra coming on the scene again. The date of this appearance is 444 B.C., and we have not heard from him since 456 B.C. He had dropped out of this history for about twelve years. He must have been called away just after his work in 456 B.C. and after a space of about twelve years returned to Jerusalem. The occasion that called him forth then was the reading of the Law.

We come now to look at the work of Ezra, with Nehemiah sustaining him in his work of reform. The great task of Ezra was the bringing of the law of Moses to Jerusalem and the adoption of that as the law of the land for the people. By this law of Moses is doubtless meant the Pentateuch. Ezra had not produced this book of the law thus far. The time had not been ripe for the reading of the Law and its explanation to the people. But the city was now fortified and organization perfected. Then Ezra went forth and produced this book of the Law. We are told in Neh 8 that the people asked him to bring forth the book of the Law and read it.

Now we have a remarkable scene. It is unprecedented in history. One of the greatest revivals in the world now opened. He proceeded to organize the people. He had Levites and other officers to help him. A great assembly of all the people was convened. A pulpit had been built and Ezra took his place before all the people. He opened the book which was simply a roll. It was the law of Moses, that is, the laws of the Pentateuch. The great meeting went on. The Law was read by Ezra, and it was explained by the Levites.

The effect of the reading upon the people was that they began to weep. Why should they weep? Perhaps the reading was the setting forth of those awful chapters in Deuteronomy where the awful curses upon those who violated this Law were set forth. With their remembrance of what God had already done to them because they had violated this Law, and their remembrance of the sins they had committed, was enough to bring tears. Now Ezra tells them that they are not to weep; that this is a holy day, holy unto the Lord; so they should rejoice and not weep; that it was the joy of fellowship with God that was their strength.

Then follows the story of how they built booths and kept the feast. This was according to the law of Moses that had been read. They lived in these booths during the time of the feast, which was called the Feast of Tabernacles.

As soon as the feast was over the people again assembled. Six hours were spent in this meeting. Three hours in the reading of the Law, and three hours in the confessions of their sins and praying. This is a wonderful revival of religion. Neh 9 deals with confession and prayer. It is the recounting of a series of acts in the drama of redemption. There are three scenes in every act: God’s goodness in caring for his people, the people sinning and turning away from God, and God’s forgiveness and offer of restoration. The people at last read the lessons of their history and learn them well. Neh 9:37 speaks about their present condition: “It yields much increase to the kings whom thou hast set over us because of our sins; they have power over our bodies and over our cattle, and we are in great distress.” As an effect of this repentance (Neh 9:8 ) they made a covenant and wrote it, and the princes, the Levites and the priests set seal unto it.

Neh 10:1-27 give a list of those that sealed the covenant. These were the leading men of the nation. The rest of Neh 10 tells how they attempted to keep that covenant, how they gave the payment of the tithe regularly, and observed the sabbath. All this was in perfect keeping with the law of Moses. Thus Moses’ law was established in Jerusalem, and Judaism starts off on its great career.

They followed this with two ordinances: (1) They set aside one-third of a shekel for the Temple tax, and provided for the wood to be used in the sacrifice; (2) they instituted measures to increase the population. They wanted more men in the city. Many came to live in Jerusalem. In that way they increased the population considerably. The priests lived there, but not many of the people. We have this statement: “In Jerusalem dwelt certain of the children of Judah and Benjamin.” Of the priests, some of them lived in the city; the majority of them lived in the country villages outside of the city. A large majority of the common people also lived in the cities around Jerusalem.

Now the problem we have to deal with regarding the cities is not how to increase the population, but how to decrease it. People are rushing to the cities and crowding them. The measure that did most to bring the people to Jerusalem was the draft of one out of each ten who volunteered, and these were compelled to come and live in Jerusalem.

Then followed the account of the dedication of the walls. Now the manner of procedure was about this: They gathered together all the Levites, and brought them to Jerusalem. They came together at a certain signal, and the people, all of them that would come, were divided into two companies, Nehemiah at the head of one of the companies himself, and Ezra at the head of the other company. They marched upon the walls. The walls of the city were broad, and there was plenty of room for them to march upon them. They marched thus about the walls, one company one way and the other company the other way. They went on around until they met. This was a joyous occasion, a glorious day. Jerusalem had now been inaugurated as a fortified city, the city of Jehovah, the holy city of Jerusalem.

With that great dedication the first great work of Nehemiah was completed, but he attended to a few other matters, such as the appointment of Temple officers, treasurers, singers, chief singers as in the time of David, the separation of the foreign element, Ammonites and Moabites, from the congregation, and then he returned to Persia by authority of Artaxerxes and remained about one year, after which he returned to Jerusalem and found certain things in bad condition. The people had backslidden. He found that Eliashib the priest had prepared for Tobiah a great chamber in the Temple, where the treasures were kept. Nehemiah finds that he is allied with Tobiah, and casts him out with all the stuff of Tobiah, and cleanses the Temple.

Next, he orders that their portion be given to the Levites. They had failed to bring in all the tithes and the Levites were actually suffering. Nehemiah contends with the rulers saying, “Why is the house of God forsaken?”

Then he enforces the sabbath laws. People were working on the sabbath day. They were bringing in their produce on that day to have it ready for the market the next morning. Nehemiah prohibits that. They came up to the outside of the city walls on the sabbath day and waited there to enter bright and early on the morrow. Nehemiah found this out and put a stop to this also. Next he compels the Jews to put away their foreign wives. Ezra had dealt with that thing before. He went about weeping and bewailing the sins of the people in this matter. Now when Nehemiah came he did not cover himself with his mantle and weep. He cursed them and plucked off their hair and beard, and made them swear that they would not do this thing. He had back of him the authority of the great king. He also chased away the son-in-law of Sanballat. Here was a priest who had married the daughter of his enemy. When Nehemiah found that out he chased him away. We do not know how fast he ran, but he lost no time in escaping. The last item of Nehemiah’s reform is the cleansing of the priesthood, and thus he closes his book: “Remember me, O my God, for good.” He offered what he had done to the Lord and petitioned his kindly regard.

The book of Malachi has its setting right in these last verses of Nehemiah, and reflects the conditions herein set forth in a most emphatic condemnation of these evils.

QUESTIONS

1. How may we account for Ezra not appearing in the history before Neh 8 , and what occasion brought him forth before the people here?

2. Where did the people assemble on this occasion?

3. Who constituted this marvelous assembly?

4. How long did this continue and what was the method?

5. How did the people show their reverence for the Word of God?

6, What was the effect upon the people of the hearing of the Law, why did Ezra suppress their emotions and what did he recommend?

7. What great feast was here reset and how was it celebrated?

8. Describe the fast kept by the Jews, and the prayer which followed.

9. Recite the history from the creation to Abraham as recorded here.

10. Recite their history from Egypt to the establishment in the land as given here.

11. What was their history in the period of the judges according to Nehemiah?

12. What acknowledgment do they make here relative to Jehovah’s dealings with them?

13. Describe the covenant which followed.

14. What the ordinances made here also?

15. What methods did they adopt in populating Jerusalem and the cities round about?

16. Describe the dedication of the walls of Jerusalem.

17. What officers were appointed on this day of the dedication of the wall?

18. What law was discovered concerning the Ammonite and Moabite and what was the result?

19. What was the proof of Nehemiah’s leave of absence from Jerusalem and how long was he away?

20. Upon his return what evils did he find and how did he correct them?

21. What prophet comes in this period and what was his special message?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Neh 11:1 And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts [to dwell] in [other] cities.

Ver. 1. And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem ] This city, being before repaired, beginneth now to be repeopled. See Neh 7:4 . The rulers there took up their seat (as was fit, and as in all chief cities is usual), so that thither the tribes went up, the tribes of the Lord, &c. And there were set the thrones of judgment, Psa 122:5 .

The rest of the people also cast lots ] The dispose whereof is wholly of the Lord; and therefore none could reasonably repine.

To bring one of ten ] This shadowed out the paucity of those that shall inhabit the heavenly Jerusalem; according to Isa 6:13 Jer 3:14 . Christ at the last day will do as Joshua did (saith a divine) to find out who had stolen the Babylonish garment: there were many brought together, and all to find out one, Jos 7:21 . So all shall then appear; out of them a final number seducted, that have heard of Christ; out of them those that have professed him; and out of them, those that have professed in sincerity; and these,

– Numero vix sunt totidem, quot

Thebarum portae, vel divitis ostia Nili. (Juvenal, Sat. 13.)

How many, think you, shall be saved in this city? (said Chrysostom to the people of Antioch, where he had long preached, and was much admired). It will be a hard speech to you, but I will speak it; though there be so many thousands of you, yet there cannot be found a hundred that shall be saved; and I doubt of them too; for what villany is there in youth! what sloth in old age! and so he goes on.

The holy city ] Jerusalem is so called, because God had chosen it to set his name there. The heathen God haters had always an edge against it, and this made people so unwilling to inhabit it. Our Edward I had too high a conceit of it, when he charged his son upon his death bed to carry his heart there, and left 32,000 pounds for that purpose.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Nehemiah Chapter 11

They further joined together and sealed the covenant before the Lord after their Jewish manner, in Neh 10 . We have the rulers also, in Neh 11 ; and then we have an account of the priests and Levites that went up with Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, in Neh 12 . On all these details I forbear to enter tonight. It would occupy me longer than would be reasonable; but I may observe that the last chapter gives us a final view of the work of Nehemiah.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Neh 11:1-2

1Now the leaders of the people lived in Jerusalem, but the rest of the people cast lots to bring one out of ten to live in Jerusalem, the holy city, while nine-tenths remained in the other cities. 2And the people blessed all the men who volunteered to live in Jerusalem.

Neh 11:1 the leaders of the people lived in Jerusalem Since the terrible siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C., no one wanted to live in the city. The leaders (the wealthy laymen, cf. Neh 11:3) and the temple personnel were the only large groups that lived within the city’s walls (cf. Neh 11:3; Neh 2:16-17). They were to be joined by 10% of the Jewish population of the surrounding towns plus any volunteers (cf. Neh 11:2). This involved leaving established homes and farms. This same subject is first introduced in Neh 7:4.

cast lots This VERB (BDB 656, KB 709, Hiphil PERFECT) means casting lots (cf. 1Ch 24:31; 1Ch 25:8; 1Ch 26:13-14; Est 3:7; Est 9:24). This had religious connotations (cf. Neh 10:34; Num 26:55-56; Jos 14:2; Pro 16:33; Pro 18:18). It was a way to know the will of YHWH, as was the Urim and Thummim (cf. Exo 28:30; Lev 8:8; Num 27:21). The Urim was used exclusively by the High Priest, but lots were used to know YHWH’s will by others (cf. NIDOTTE, vol. 1, pp. 840-842).

the holy city This was a way of referring to the place where YHWH dwelt (cf. Isa 48:2; Isa 52:1; Dan 9:24).

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

rulers = princes.

dwelt. At this time more thickly peopled than Neh 7:4.

holy. See note on Exo 3:5.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 11

And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, that one in ten might dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts to dwell in other cities ( Neh 11:1 ).

So when they came back, they actually inhabited quite a bit of the territory down towards Hebron, Beersheba, on up to Ramallah, Bethel, and all. Quite a bit of territory. There was only about 50,000 of them. And so they decided that one in ten, which means about 5,000 would dwell in Jerusalem. They wanted to maintain the capital city so they’d have a place of worship and all and the rest of the people… of course, Jerusalem isn’t that good a farm territory. There’s much better farming down in some of the valleys around Jerusalem than there is in Jerusalem itself. Down into, down towards Hebron, the Eshcol Valley and all, much better farming. Even down towards Bethlehem and the valley is down through there. So one in ten with… So they cast lots to find out which one would stay in Jerusalem and the rest would move into the surrounding territories and live in the surrounding territories. And so we have the names of the families upon whom the lots were drawn who should dwell in Jerusalem. And then beginning with verse Neh 11:20 , the names of the families that were to dwell in the other cities round about. And some of the cities and the villages where they were to dwell. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Neh 11:1-2

Introduction

INCREASING THE POPULATION OF JERUSALEM

Several scholars link this chapter with Nehemiah 7, viewing the intervening three chapters as a unit; and it is true that Neh 7:4 speaks of the fact that Jerusalem was a large area compared with the few people that lived in it. However, the unity of the Book of Nehemiah is apparent in the fact that every word of it pertains to the safety of the city of Jerusalem. The reading of the Mosaic law (Nehemiah 7), the extended confession and prayers of the people (Nehemiah 9), and the covenant of the people determined to obey God, ratified by an oath and a curse, and sealed by the leaders of the whole community (Nehemiah 10) – all of that was as intimately connected with the safety of Jerusalem as was the building of the wall itself, in fact, even more so.

Nehemiah was getting ready to dedicate the wall; and, in all probability, he had invited Ezra to be present for that occasion. Both Nehemiah and Ezra, were fully aware that all of Israel’s disastrous sorrows and defeats had come about solely because of their shameful neglect of the very things covered in these three chapters (Nehemiah 8-10). Those great leaders, seeing that the physical wall was built, sponsored and ordered the rebuilding of Israel’s spiritual wall as well. That was done in these intervening three chapters; and the dedication was very properly delayed until that was done. The Book of Nehemiah is a unity, logically and skillfully put together.

But what about differences in style, language, vocabulary, and other oddities in those intervening chapters? The widespread disagreement of scholars and their conflicting views regarding what they are pleased to call “the sources” of these chapters exhibit, “A diversity that may seem bewildering and lead to skepticism with regard to a critical approach itself.” Indeed, indeed! The simple truth is that by far the most rational and satisfactory understanding of the Book of Nehemiah is that of accepting it, first and last, and everything in between, as the production of Nehemiah.

That he included lists and events, words and sayings, that may have been originally derived from other sources than his own pen is obviously true; but so what? Is it not true with all authors? And, as we have often stressed, twentieth century scholars are simply too late, by entire millenniums of time, to be entrusted with their presumed prerogative of revising the Bible.

This eleventh chapter fits in perfectly with what precedes it: (1) the physical wall was built; (2) the spiritual basis of Israel’s safety was strengthened; and (3) now the population of Jerusalem needed to be increased as an additional element of their safety. Some of the critics would have proceeded differently; but this is the way Nehemiah did it.

“The artificial enlargement of capital cities by transferring inhabitants into them was common in ancient times. Tradition ascribed the greatness of Rome, in part, to this plan; and in 500 B.C., Syracuse became a great city in this way.” Rawlinson cited, “Megalopolis, Tigranocerta and Athens,” as other cities made great by this procedure. In this chapter, Nehemiah proceeded to build up the strength of Jerusalem in the same manner.

Neh 11:1-2

CASTING LOTS TO SEE WHO WOULD MOVE INTO THE CITY

“And the princes of the people dwelt in Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one in ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts in the other cities. And the people blessed all the men that willingly offered themselves to dwell in Jerusalem,”

“The circuit of the wall of Jerusalem at this time was about four miles,”[4] and there were simply not enough people living in the city to defend a wall of that length. The unwillingness of the people to live inside an unwalled city had brought about this situation; but now that the wall was built, some volunteered to live there. That it was still considered dangerous, however, was indicated by the “blessing” of those who volunteered. Also, it could have been no secret, that their primary duty would be to defend the walls against any attack.

“Jerusalem the holy city” (Neh 11:1). Jerusalem was called the holy city because the temple was located therein.

“The rest of the people cast lots” (Neh 11:1). “The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord” (Pro 16:33). “In the course of Jewish history, they east lots in the selection of persons (Jos 7:16-18), for the distribution of lands (Num 26:25-26), and for determining the order in which persons should execute an office (1Ch 24:5)”; and, in the previous chapter of Nehemiah, it is written that they cast lots to decide who would bring the wood for the temple, and when they would do so. And even in the NT, they cast lots to determine who would be numbered among the twelve apostles to take the place of Judas (Act 1:26).

E.M. Zerr:

Neh 11:1. There were too many of the people for all to reside in Jerusalem, and besides this, they had their individual homes and it was natural for them to want to live there. It was thought necessary, however, for some to remain in the city. So the rulers agreed to dwell in the city. That word is from SAR and Strong defines it, “a head person of any rank or class.” It could thus include men of the various offices if they happened to be outstanding through personal influence and efficiency. But it would be fair for them to have some help in the holy service, and the people agreed to furnish one out of every 10 to join their rulers in it. The selection was made by casting lots. See Pro 16:33 and Heb 1:1.

Neh 11:2. It was quite a sacrifice to to give up their home residences and dwell in the city. That was appreciated by the others who blessed them (extended best wishes) for the good deed. It was a service that benefited the whole congregation.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

We now begin the third and final division of the Book, in which is set forth the arrangements made for settlement of the cities. It is the last piece of history which the Old Testament contains. Some revelation of later conditions is obtainable from the study of the prophets, but nothing more is directly written until, after a lapse of four centuries, the history is resumed in the New Testament.

In this chapter begins the account of the settlement of Jerusalem particularly. Perhaps not more than fifty thousand of the people, all told, had returned from captivity. By no means all of these had come to Jerusalem. Many of them were scattered through the surrounding cities. Jerusalem was peculiarly difficult of settlement, in that it was the center of danger and of possible attack. It was therefore arranged that the princes should dwell in the city, and that ten per cent of the people, selected by lot, must take up their abode there. In addition to these, some voluntarily came forward to dwell in the place of danger. These were especially honored by all the people (11:2).

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

Chapter 11

A Willing People

The Bridegroom in the Canticles says: I went down into the garden of nuts to see the fruits of the valley, and to see whether the vine flourished, and the pomegranates budded. Or ever I was aware, my soul set me among the chariots of my willing people (Son 6:11, 12; 1911 Version); and in Psa 110:3 we read, Thy people shall be willing (or, a free-will offering) in the day of Thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.

Words like these form a fitting introduction to the chapter now soliciting our thoughtful consideration-a passage that seems to be filled only with hard names and meagre details if the important truth be passed over that it is Gods own inspired honor-roll, never to be forgotten, of His willing people. Then indeed we recognize in it such a delightful valley as that described in the Song where the vine is flourishing and the fragrant pomegranates budding for the delectation of Him who rejoices to dwell among His willing-hearted saints-made willing by His power working among them, manifested in holiness of heart and life, engendered and refreshed by the precious dews of the Holy Spirit.

A free-will offering was made, not now of money or other means, but of men devoted to the Lord, to dwell in Jerusalem, that the holy city might be furnished and defended. And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts to dwell in other cities. And the people blessed all the men that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem (vers. 1, 2). As before they had tithed their produce and possessions, so now they tithed themselves. But it was not conscription; for each one chosen responded with a free heart, glad thus to be especially linked with the defense and up-building of the city of the Name. They loved the place where Gods honor dwelt, and they were pleased to be at home there.

Of old, in the wilderness, it was the willing-hearted and the wise-hearted who built the sanctuary of the Lord; and may we not say that the willing-hearted are the wise-hearted? For surely it is the evidence of wisdom abiding in the heart when the whole life is freely devoted to the service of the Lord. And so when the evil had been put away from among the remnant of the Jews, and the interests of Jehovah had been made paramount to every other interest, it was the free and loyal service of His willing people that gave joy to the heart of God.

To most of us, perhaps, the details that follow in the balance of the chapter can, in the very nature of things, possess very little interest. It is a mere tabulation of families and individuals whose names to us are often well-nigh unpronounceable, and usually, forgotten almost as soon as read. But in the sight of God it is a tabulation of great importance, and, like other lists we have noticed in these post-captivity books, will be consulted at the judgment-seat of Christ. For these willing offerers will then learn how good was their choice when they accepted loss in this world that they might the better care for the city of Gods choice. Very little is said of these members of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin (vers. 4-9), and of Levi also who dwelt in Jerusalem (vers. 10-18), but every one is well known to the Lord, and every word and act that told their devotedness of heart to Himself will be manifested in that day. And, even now, where scholarship enables one to read something of the significance of these names, there are doubtless helpful lessons which for the present most of us fail to see.

The porters and servants (the Nethinim), yea, and the singers too-true sons of Asaph set over the business of the house of God who had their special portion by the kings commandment (vers. 19-23)-will all be called by name when Messiah sits upon His throne to reward every one who in every dispensation had respect unto the coming recompense. For it was just as truly a service for some to till the fields and dwell in the restored villages, thus holding all the land for God, so far as strength and numbers permitted, as it was for their willing-hearted brethren to abide in the city of the coming King (vers. 25-36). He valued all according to the intention of the heart, and He does the same to-day.

We would not therefore pass carelessly over what some might call so dry a chapter as this, but reading it thoughtfully and prayerfully let us challenge our own hearts as to how far we have been and are now characterized by the spirit of willing, joyous obedience to all that God has been pleased to make known to us concerning His holy desires. Words need not be multiplied on such a theme; but exercise may well be real and deep, lest in that day, when the record of our service is opened on high, there be only a blotted story of slothful, almost forced obedience, contrasting unfavorably indeed with the willing offering of these men of old.

In view of this may we be stirred up to heed the Christian poets words:

Go on, go on; theres all eternity to rest in,

And far too few are on the active service list;

No labor for the Lord is risky to invest in;

But nothing will make up should His well done be missed.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

III. THE PEOPLE ESTABLISHED, THE DEDICATION OF THE WALL, AND NEHEMIAHs FINAL ACTS

CHAPTER 11

1. The willing offerers (Neh 11:1-2)

2. The heads of the residents of Jerusalem (Neh 11:3-24)

3. The inhabitants outside of Jerusalem (Neh 11:25-36)

Neh 11:1-2. A splendid example of self-sacrifice is given in these two verses. Certain men willingly offered themselves to dwell in Jerusalem, and the people blest them for the willing sacrifice. It must be explained that Jerusalem was not then a very desirable place for residence. The enemies of the city seeking to destroy the fortifications and harm the inhabitants were constantly active. There was much danger for those who dwelt in the city itself. For this reason the great majority of the returned captives preferred to live outside of the walls of Jerusalem. It was decided to make every tenth man to dwell in Jerusalem. The decision was made by lot. But then these volunteers came to the front and displayed self denial and courage.

Neh 11:3-24. Here is another register of names recorded in Gods book, and not forgotten by Him. The children of Judah, the children of Benjamin, the priests who acted as temple officials, the Levites, the Nethinim, and those with special callings are all named. Some day the Lord will be their Rewarder for their faithful service, as He will be the Rewarder of all His people.

Neh 11:25-36. Those who lived outside of Jerusalem, in villages, are tabulated in the closing verses of this chapter.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

the rulers: Neh 7:4, Neh 7:5, Deu 17:8, Deu 17:9, Psa 122:5

cast lots: Jerusalem certainly had many inhabitants at this time, but not sufficient to preserve the city, which was now encompassed with a wall, the building of which was going on fast. Nehemiah, therefore, obliged one-tenth of the country people to come and dwell in it, that the population might be sufficient for the defence of the city. Some volunteered their services, which was at that time considered a sacrifice to patriotism; as Jerusalem then afforded very few advantages, and was a place of considerable danger: hence “the people blessed them that willingly offered themselves.” Neh 10:34, Jos 18:10, 1Ch 26:13, Pro 16:33, Act 1:24

one of ten: Jdg 20:9, Jdg 20:10

the holy: Neh 11:18, Isa 48:2, Isa 52:1, Mat 4:5, Mat 27:53

Reciprocal: Num 3:17 – Gershon 1Ch 8:28 – dwelt 1Ch 9:3 – Jerusalem 1Ch 9:34 – chief fathers Neh 4:22 – every one Pro 18:18 – General Isa 1:21 – the faithful Eze 48:19 – shall serve Zec 12:6 – Jerusalem shall

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

THE TWO VERSES that open chapter 11 may perhaps surprise us. We might have thought that, Jerusalem now being a walled city, there would have been strong competition among the people for the privilege of dwelling in it, but evidently it was not so. On the contrary, the country towns of Judah were more attractive, and therefore lots were cast, and one in ten of the people, on whom the lot fell, had to dwell in the city and if any offered themselves willingly to dwell there, the people blessed them, as though they made a sacrifice in so doing. The rest of the chapter puts on record the names of those who did dwell there, and also gives some details of their positions and the services they rendered. Their names may mean little to us, but may be important in the coming day of Israel’s restoration and blessing.

What we may learn from it is surely this, that any sacrifice made, or service rendered, for God’s work and interests is not forgotten but rather recorded before Him. The names of those who did not dwell in Jerusalem, but had more pleasure in the other places, are forgotten. Malachi tells us that in his day, ‘a book of remembrance was written’ before the Lord, ‘for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon His name’. That book was not peculiar to Malachi’s day. It existed in Nehemiah’s day, and exists in our day too. Let us not forget that!

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

Neh 11:1. The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem Where their very office, in some sort, obliged them to dwell; and where, it seems, Nehemiah had desired the principal men of the nation, by way of example, to fix their habitations. The rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem That the building of the city might be completed, and the honour and safety of it better provided for. The bulk of the Jews, it appears, rather chose to live in the country than at Jerusalem. One reason of which might be, that they were generally shepherds, and lovers of agriculture, and therefore the country was more suited to their genius and manner of life than the city. Add to this, that their enemies were now so enraged to see the walls built again, and so restless in their designs to keep Jerusalem from rising to its former splendour, that many were terrified from coming to dwell there, thinking themselves more safe in the country, where their enemies had no pretence to disturb them. In order, therefore, to compel a certain proportion of them to remove to the city, the expedient of casting lots is resorted to. Though the casting of lots be certainly forbidden, where the thing is done out of a spirit of superstition, or with a design to tempt God; yet on some occasions it is enjoined by God himself, and the most holy persons, both in the Old and New Testaments, have practised it in particular cases. The wise man acknowledges the usefulness of this custom when he tells us that the lot causeth contention to cease, and parteth between the mighty, Pro 18:18; and therefore it was no bad policy, as things now stood, to take this method of division; since the lot, which all allowed was under the divine direction, falling upon such a person rather than another, would be a great means, no doubt, to make him remove more contentedly into the city.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Neh 11:1. To bring one in ten to dwell in Jerusalem. The inhabitants were not yet sufficiently numerous for the public works and services, and for the defence of the city. Hence it became necessary to draught a tenth of the rural population for these purposes.

Neh 11:11. Ruler of the house of God. A secular officer, having charge of the temporal affairs; but not to interfere with the offices and duties of religion, which belonged to the priests and levites.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

PART V (Nehemiah 11-13). The Population of Jerusalem and Judah. The Dedication of the Walls Internal Organisation.

Neh 11:1-36. The Population of Jerusalem and Judah.This section consists of lists of the dwellers in Jerusalem and in the provincial towns of Judah.

Neh 11:1 f. The need of increasing the population of Jerusalem was obvious from what is said in Neh 7:4, for the bulk of the people lived in the provincial towns and in the country villages (cf. Neh 7:73).

Neh 11:3-24. The lists here given enumerate the chief laymen dwelling in Jerusalem (Neh 11:3-9), the priests (Neh 11:10-14), the Levites (Neh 11:15-18; cf. 1Ch 9:14-18), and the gatekeepers (Neh 11:19); in Neh 11:20-24 some miscellaneous notes are added.

Neh 11:25-36. Then follows a geographical list of the provincial towns in which the children of Judah dwelt; Judan towns (Neh 11:25-30), Benjaminite towns (Neh 11:31-36).

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

THE INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM AND OTHER CITIES

(vv. 1-25)

Jerusalem being God’s center, the leaders of the people lived there, but the people evidently preferred other places, so that the proposal was made to cast lots as to who should live in Jerusalem. One out of ten were required to live there (v. 1). However, there were some who willingly offered to live there, and the people blessed these for their faith in doing so. There is a spiritual lesson in this. Do we want to live as near as we can to the Lord? — for Jerusalem was His place of residence among the people. In the Church today the Lord Jesus Himself is the Center of gathering, and how good it is if we delight in keeping close to Him.

Verse 3 indicates a list of the heads of the provinces who lived in Jerusalem, but not including those who lived in their own possessions in their cities. There were evidently some priests, Levites and Nethinim who did not live in Jerusalem, though others did (v. 3). Not only those of the tribe of Levi lived in Jerusalem, but some people from Judah and from Benjamin. Those from Judah are listed in verse 4-6, then those from Benjamin in verses 7-9. The list of the priests follows in verses 10-14, and the Levites in verses 15-18, their total being 184, which was much lower than the number of the priests. The number of the gatekeepers was 172 (v. 19). The Nethinim (temple servants) lived in Ophel, which was in close proximity to Jerusalem (v. 21).

In the city the overseer of the Levites was Uzzi, he being evidently connected with the sons of Asaph, the singers in the house of the Lord (v. 22). All was well organized. We do not find such appointments in the New Testament. But we do find the Spirit of God present, who can order everything in a better and more orderly way than by having people appointed for each kind of service. The singers picture the kind of ministry that encourages the joy of the saints of God, to cause the worship of the Lord to overflow from hearts wrought upon by the Spirit of God. Thus, even at the hour of the Lord’s anticipating the unspeakable sorrow of the cross, it is said concerning Him and His apostles, “And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives” (Mar 14:26).

As regards the details of the people’s needs, Pethahiah was appointed to care for this; but in the Church of God such work should be done by shepherds (or pastors) who need no appointment whatever, but gladly serve because of genuine affection for the Lord and concern for the souls of saints. 1Pe 5:2 encourages elders among the saints to “Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion, but willingly, not for dishonest gain, but eagerly ; nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.”

Verses 25-36 list the cities outside of Jerusalem with their nearby villages, some being in the area of Judah and some in Benjamin (vv. 25,36), for Jerusalem was virtually on the border of these two tribes. But we are shown here that God is vitally concerned as to where people live, and takes full account of this. Too frequently saints of God consider only the advantages to themselves in deciding where they should live, whether their employment in a certain place promises a high salary, whether a location is near to friends or relatives, or whether it is in an apparently pleasant neighborhood. If such things have too strong an attraction for us, ought we not to stop and consider that the Lord has a vital interest in this matter? Do we consider His interests first? What about being near to an assembly where we can be a blessing to others?

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

FOURTH DIVISION

The Administration of the City

Nehemiah 11. The Distribution of the People.

Nehemiah 12. The Dedication of the Walls.

Nehemiah 13. The Discipline of the City.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PEOPLE

Nehemiah 11

The subject of Chapter 11 is the distribution of the people in the city and the province. As a result of this distribution Jerusalem is peopled by a certain number of the children of Judah (4-6), and of Benjamin (7-9); a considerable number of priests (10-14); some Levites (15-18); and the porters (19). Then in the province we find the residue of Israel, composed of priests, Levites and Nethinims (20, 21); the children of Judah (25-30); and Benjamin (31-35).

The distribution of the people throughout the Land is important when viewed in connection with the walls and the gates, which form the great subject of the Book of Nehemiah. For this distribution clearly shows that the walls were not erected to confine the people of God on the one hand, or to exclude them on the other. There were children of Judah and Benjamin, priests and Levites dwelling without the walls as well as within, and rightly so according to the ordering of God. We must remember that it was a nation that went into captivity, and not only the citizens of Jerusalem, and it was a remnant of this nation that returned.

To understand the necessity for the walls and gates we must bear in mind that, in the first instance, God delivered a remnant of His people from captivity and brought them back to the Land, under Zerubbabel, in order to build the house of the Lord (Ezr 1:2; Ezr 1:3). But the house being built, it became a necessity to build the walls and set up the gates to maintain the sanctity of the house of the Lord.

The walls and gates were not erected in order that a few within the walls might claim exclusive right to the house of the Lord, or to exclude those without the walls having access to the house. Had those within put forward any such claim it would not only have been the height of presumption, but would also have been the gravest possible abuse of the walls and gates. It would have been using the walls and gates for the exaltation of themselves, the exclusion of many of the Lord’s people from their privileges, and the denial of the rights of the Lord.*

{*In the days of Ezekiel the inhabitants of Jerusalem actually claimed this ultra-exclusive position. They said to “all the house of Israel ” “get you far from the Lord: unto us is this land given in possession” (Eze 11:14; Eze 11:15). Thus it was claimed that those alone within the city possessed the privileges of God’s people.

The twofold way in which Jehovah rebukes their assumption – their exclusive and self-satisfied claim – is significant. First the immediate result of this exclusive claim on the part of Jerusalem was that “the glory of the Lord went up from the midst of the city” (23). They lost that which they exclusively claimed, for God will not connect His glory with the spiritual pride and assumption of men Second, as to “all the house of Israel” – the excluded – the Lord says “Yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come” (16). This latter was but a provisional exercise of mercy and compassion (yet none the less real): for God’s purpose is to have all His people “in the land of Israel” (17); separate from evil (18); united in heart (19); obedient to the word and in enjoyment of relationship with God (20). Ultimately as we know this purpose will be brought to pass.

So that neither could the inhabitants of Jerusalem lay exclusive claim to the privileges of the presence of the Lord (in fact the Presence departs from them), nor could the people of Jehovah be deprived of that Presence elsewhere when once that first glory had departed from Jerusalem.}

Let us then clearly recognise that the people were brought back to the Land to build the house and that the walls became necessary, when the house was built, in order to maintain its sanctity. Without the walls the house could not be maintained in the holiness that becometh God’s house for ever. Without the house the walls would only have enclosed a select company seeking their own exaltation by the exclusion of others. Rightly used the walls maintain the holiness of God’s house and thus secure the privileges of God’s house for all the people of God. If abused they simply become the badge of a party, and the security of a sect.

Thus the right apprehension of this portion of the Book of Nehemiah is of the deepest importance to those, who, in our day, have been delivered from men’s systems, in order to seek, once again, to maintain the principles of God’s house. Taking heed to the lessons of the story of this remnant, such would be saved from many pitfalls into which it is very easy to slip. We should indeed realize that without separation from evil it is impossible to maintain the holiness of God’s house, but we should also realize the grave danger that exists of abusing the undoubted truth of separation in order to form a select company which excludes many of the people of God, denies the Lord His rights, and in the end loses the very truth of the house of God which a true separation from evil would maintain.

Such is the great lesson we can learn from the distribution of the people. The method of the distribution has also a voice for us, reminding us that if we seek to walk in the light of the house of God we must be prepared, like the remnant in Nehemiah’s day, for circumstances of great weakness. The distribution by lot is a witness to this weakness. That such a method was necessary made manifest how small was the number that had returned to God’s Land. Already we have learned that “the city was large and great and the people were few therein” (7: 4). And yet, if their numbers were small their zeal for the house of God was great. Thus it came to pass, that those outside the city – “the rest of the people” – in their desire to support the house and the city, resort to casting lots, and in self-denial give up every tenth man to live within the walls; and further express their good will by blessing those “that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem.”

How different will it be in the coming day of Jerusalem’s glory. Then indeed the city will still be “large and great,” but no longer will the people be few. In that day the Land will be too narrow by reason of the inhabitants; and of the city, they will say, “The place is too strait for me that I may dwell” (Isa 49:14-21). This indeed reminds us (to borrow the thought of another), that reformation, and restoration, and revivals, however bright and blessed, fall far short of the glory that is to come. There had been reformation in the days of the kings; there had been restoration in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, and these restored saints had enjoyed their revivals, but whether reformation, restoration or revival it was ever in circumstances of outward weakness. Nor is it otherwise to-day. Christendom has also had its reformation; we too have witnessed restoration and revival, but ever in circumstances of weakness, for however wide God’s ground may be, it will ever be too narrow for religious flesh; and though the house of God embraces all His people it will ever be but a “few” who will be prepared to walk according to its principles and thus enjoy its privileges.

Well for us if we recognise and accept the circumstances of outward weakness, for then we shall not be diverted from the path of separation because those who take the path are few in number. We shall then walk in the light of the glory that is coming, knowing that if we maintain the truth, and walk in the light of the house of God we are maintaining that which will come into full display in the new heavens and the new earth. There indeed we shall find the tabernacle of God in the beauty of holiness, but the weakness will have passed for ever. The weakness will pass but the house will remain. Does it not encourage and hearten us to remember that what we maintain in weakness will be displayed in glory?

Furthermore may we not say that even the walls and the gates are not permanent? They will indeed be ever necessary while the house of God is in an evil world. But the house will remain when the walls are no longer needed.

It is true the heavenly city has its jasper walls and gates of pearl, for though the city presents the Church of God all glorious, yet it presents the Church in relation to a world in which evil will still exist, even if restrained. But in vision John carries us beyond the millennial day into that fair scene, where all former things are passed away, he sees descending the holy city new Jerusalem. But what he actually sees in the new earth is, not a city, but the dwelling place of God. “Behold,” said a great voice out of heaven, “the tabernacle of God is with men.” The tabernacle of God is there but the city walls and gates are for ever gone. No walls will be needed where there is no evil to exclude. There will be no more separation for there will be no more sea.

Fuente: Smith’s Writings on 24 Books of the Bible

11:1 And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, {a} to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts [to dwell] in [other] cities.

(a) Because their enemies dwelt round about them, they provided that it might be replenished with men, and used this policy because there were few who offered themselves willingly.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

B. The Residents of the Land 11:1-12:26

When the exiles returned to the Promised Land, living in Jerusalem was not an attractive prospect because the city lay in ruins. However, with the rebuilding of the temple and the walls, the capital became a more desirable place to live. Nehemiah as governor saw the wisdom of populating Jerusalem with pureblooded Jews and set about to encourage the people to live within the city walls. Most of this section of the book (Neh 11:3 to Neh 12:26) is a parenthetical interjection into the chronological progression of the narrative.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

1. The residents of Jerusalem 11:1-24

Some leaders had already chosen to live in Jerusalem (Neh 11:1). Nehemiah initiated a plan to determine which one family in ten, of those not living in the city, would move into it (Neh 11:1). Additional immigrants volunteered to live there (Neh 11:2). There was a cross section of leaders, therefore, who lived in Jerusalem, while other leaders lived in the other towns of Judah (Neh 11:3).

"The city wall was built, and now a new measure to safeguard the city was instituted, namely, to repopulate it." [Note: Fensham, p. 244.]

The residents of Jerusalem included Jews from the tribes of Judah (Neh 11:4-6) and Benjamin (Neh 11:7-9). There were twice as many from Benjamin as from Judah. There were priests (Neh 11:10-14), Levites (Neh 11:15-18), and gatekeepers (Neh 11:19). The rest lived in the outlying towns (Neh 11:20), except for the temple servants (Neh 11:21). The Ophel was apparently a leveled mini-valley (or perhaps a low hill) between the City of David and the temple area. [Note: Breneman, p. 259.] Pethahiah appears to have been an adviser to the Persian king (Artaxerxes) in matters of Jewish affairs (Neh 11:24). Compare 1Ch 9:2-34 for a similar list. Estimates of Jerusalem’s population at this time vary from 4,800 [Note: M. Broshi, "La population de l’ancienne Jerusalem," Revue Biblique 92 (1975):9-10.] to 8,000 [Note: D. E. Gowan, Bridge Between the Testaments, p. 20.] .

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

THE HOLY CITY

Neh 11:1-18

WE have seen that though the two passages that deal with the sparsity of the population of Jerusalem are separated in our Bibles by the insertion of the section on the reading of The Law and the formation of the covenant, they are, in fact, so closely related that, if we skip the intermediate section, the one runs on into the other quite smoothly, as by a continuous narrative, {Neh 8:18} that is to say, we may pass from Neh 7:4 to Neh 11:1 without the slightest sign of a junction of separate paragraphs. So naive and crude is the chroniclers style, that he has left the raw edges of the narrative jagged and untrimmed, and thereby he has helped us to see distinctly how he has constructed his work. The foreign matter which he has inserted in the great gash is quite different in style and contents from that which precedes and follows it. This is marked with the Ezra stamp, which indicates that in all probability it is founded on notes left by the scribe, but the broken narrative in the midst of which it appears is derived from Nehemiah, the first part consisting of memoirs written by the statesman himself, and the second part being an abbreviation of the continuation of Nehemiahs writing. The beginning of this second part directly links it on to the first part, for the word “and” has no sort of connection with the immediately preceding Ezra section, while it exactly fits into the broken end of the previous Nehemiah section, only with his characteristic indifference to secular affairs, in comparison with matters touching The Law and the temple worship, the chronicler abbreviates the conclusion of Nehemiahs story. It is easy to see how be constructs his book in this place. He has before him two documents-one written by Nehemiah, the other written either by Ezra or by one of his close associates. At first he follows Nehemiah, but suddenly he discovers that he has reached the date when the Ezra record should come in. Therefore, without any concern for the irregularity of style that he is perpetrating, he suddenly breaks off Nehemiahs narrative to insert the Ezra material, at the end of which he simply goes back to the Nehemiah document, and resumes it exactly where he has left it, except that now, after introducing it in the language of the original writer, he compresses the fragment, so that the composition passes over into the third person. It is not to be supposed that this is done arbitrarily or for no good reason. The chronicler here intends to tell his story in chronological order. He shows that the course of events referred to at the opening of the seventh chapter really was broken by the occurrences the record of which then follows. The interruptions in the narrative just correspond to the real interruptions in the historical facts. History is not a smooth-flowing river, its course is repeatedly broken by rocks and shoals, and sometimes entirely deflected by impassable cliffs. In the earlier part of the narrative we read of Nehemiahs anxiety on account of the sparsity of the population of Jerusalem, but before he was able to carry out any plans for the increase of the number of inhabitants the time of the great autumn festivals was upon him, and the people were eager to take advantage of the public holidays that then fell due in order to induce Ezra to read to them the wonderful book he had brought up from Babylon years before, and of which he had not yet divulged the contents. This was not waste time as regards Nehemiahs project. Though the civil governor stood in the background during the course of the great religious movement, he heartily seconded the clerical leaders of it in their efforts to enlighten and encourage the people, and he was the first to seal the covenant which was its fruit. Then the people who had been instructed in the principles of their faith and consecrated to its lofty requirements were fitted to take their places as citizens of the Holy City.

The “population question” which troubled Nehemiah at this time is so exactly opposite to that which gives concern to students of social problems in our own day, that we need to look into the circumstances in which it emerged in order to understand its bearings. The powerful suction of great towns, depleting the rural districts and gorging the urban, is a source of the greatest anxiety to all who seriously contemplate the state of modern society, and consequently one of the most pressing questions of the day is how to scatter the people over the land. Even in new countries the same serious condition is experienced-in Australia, for instance, where the crowding of the people into Melbourne is rapidly piling up the very difficulties sanguine men hoped the colonies would escape. If we only had these modern facts to draw upon, we might conclude that a centripetal movement of population was inevitable. That it is not altogether a novelty we may learn from the venerable story of the Tower of Babel, from which we may also gather that it is Gods will that men should spread abroad and replenish the earth.

It is one of the advantages of the study of history that it lifts us out of our narrow grooves and reveals to us an immense variety of modes of life, and this is not the least of the many elements of profit that come to us from the historical embodiment of revelation as we have it in the Bible. The width of vision that we may thus attain to will have a double effect. It will save us from being wedded to a fixed policy under all circumstances, and it will deliver us from the despair into which we should settle down, if we did not see that what looks to us like a hopeless and interminable drift in the wrong direction is not the permanent course of human development. It is necessary to consider that if the dangers of a growing population are serious, those of a dwindling population are much more grave.

Nehemiah was in a position to see the positive advantages of city life, and he regarded it as his business to make the most of them for the benefit of his fellow countrymen. We have seen that each of the three great expeditions from Babylon up to Jerusalem had its separate and distinctive purpose. The aim of the first, under Zerubbabel and Jeshua, was the rebuilding of the temple, the object of the second, under Ezra, was the establishment of The Law, and the end of the third, under Nehemiah, was the fortification and strengthening of the city. This end was before the patriotic statesmans mind from the very first moment when he was startled and grieved at hearing the report of the ruinous condition of the walls of Jerusalem which his brother brought to him in the palace at Susa. We may be sure that with so practical a man it was more than a sentimental reverence for venerated sites that led Nehemiah to undertake the great work of fortifying the city of his fathers sepulchres. He had something else in view than to construct a huge mausoleum. His aim had too much to do with the living present to resemble that of Rizpah guarding the corpses of her sons from the hovering vultures. Nehemiah believed in the future of Jerusalem, and therefore he would not permit her to remain a city of ruins, unguarded, and a prey to every chance corner, He saw that she had a great destiny yet to fulfil, and that she must be made strong if ever she was to accomplish it. It is to the credit of his keen discernment that he perceived this essential condition of the firm establishment of Israel as a distinctive people in the land of Palestine. Ezra was too literary, too abstract, too much of an idealist to see it, and therefore he struggled on with his teaching and exhorting till he was simply silenced by the unlooked-for logic of facts. Nehemiah perfectly comprehended this logic, and knew how to turn it to the advantage of his own cause.

The fierce antagonism of the Samaritans is an indirect confirmation of the wisdom of Nehemiahs plans. Sanballat and his associates saw clearly enough that, if Jerusalem were to become strong again, the metropolitan pre-eminence-which had shifted from this city to Samaria after the Babylonian conquest-would revert to its old seat among the hills of Judah and Benjamin. Now this pre-eminence was of vital importance to the destinies of Israel. It was not possible for the people in those early days to remain separate and compact, and to work out their own peculiar mission, without a strong and safe centre. We have seen Judaism blossoming again as a distinctive phenomenon in the later history of the Jews, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. But this most wonderful fact in ethnology is indirectly due to the work of Ezra and Nehemiah. The readiness to intermarry with foreigners shown by the contemporaries of the two great reformers proves conclusively that, unless the most stringent measures had been taken for the preservation of its distinctive life, Israel would have melted away into the general mass of amalgamated races that made up the Chaldaean and Persian empires, The military protection of Jerusalem enabled her citizens to maintain an independent position in defiance of the hostile criticism of her neighbours, and the civil importance of the city helped to give moral weight to her example in the eyes of the scattered Jewish population outside her walls. Then the worship at the temple was a vital element in the newly modelled religious organisation, and it was absolutely essential that this should be placed beyond the danger of being tampered with by foreign influences, and at the same time that it should be adequately supported by a sufficient number of resident Jews. Something like the motive that induces the Pope to desire the restoration of the temporal power of the Papacy-perfectly wise and reasonable from his point of view-would urge the leaders of Judaism to secure as far as possible the political independence of the centre of their religion.

It is to be observed that Nehemiah desired an increase of the population for the immediate purpose of strengthening the garrison of Jerusalem. The city had been little better than “a lodge in a garden of cucumbers” till her new governor had put forth stupendous efforts which resulted in converting her into a fortress. Now the fortress required to be manned. Everything indicates anxiety about the means of defence. Nehemiah placed two men at the head of this vital function-his own brother Hanani, whose concern about the city had been evinced in his report of its condition to Nehemiah at Susa, and Hananiah the commandant of the citadel. This Hananiah was known to be “faithful”-a great point while traitors in the highest places were intriguing with the enemy. He was also exceptionally God-fearing, described as one who “feared God above many”-another point recognised by Nehemiah as of supreme importance in a military officer. Here we have an anticipation of the Puritan spirit which required the Cromwellian soldiers to be men of sterling religious character. Nehemiah would have had no hesitation if he had been placed in the dilemma of the Athenians when they were called to choose between Aristides the good and Themistocles the clever. With him-much as brains were needed, and he showed this in his own sleepless astuteness-integrity and religion were the first requisites for an office of responsibility.

The danger of the times is further indicated by the new rule with regard to the opening of the gates. Oriental custom would have permitted this at dawn. Nehemiah would not allow it before the full daytime, “until the sun be hot.” Levites were to mount guard by day-an indication of the partially ecclesiastical character of the civil government. The city was a sort of extended temple, and its citizens constituted a Church watched over by the clergy. At night the citizens themselves were to guard the wails, as more watchers would be needed during the hours of darkness to protect the city against an assault by surprise. Now these facts point to serious danger and arduous toil. Naturally many men would shrink from the yoke of citizenship under such circumstances. It was so much pleasanter, so much easier, so much quieter for people to live in the outlying towns and villages, near to their own farms and vineyards. Therefore it was necessary to take a tenth of the rural population in order to increase that of the town. The chronicler expressly notes that “the rulers of the people” were already dwelling in Jerusalem. These men realised their responsibility. The officers were to the fore; the men who needed to be urged to their duty were the privates. No doubt there was more to attract the upper classes to the capital, while their agricultural occupations would naturally draw many of the poorer people into the country, and we must not altogether condemn the latter as less patriotic than the former. We cannot judge the relative merits of people who act differently till we know their several circumstances. Still it remains true that it is often the man with the one talent who buries his charge, because with him the sense of personal insignificance becomes a temptation to the neglect of duty. Hence arises one of the most serious dangers to a democracy. When this danger is not mastered, the management of public affairs falls into the hands of self-seeking politicians, who are ready to wreck the state for their private advantage. It is most essential, therefore, that a public conscience should be aroused and that people should realise their duty to their community-to the town in which they live, the country to which they belong.

Nehemiahs simple expedient succeeded, and praise was earned by those Jews who yielded to the sacred decision of the lot and abandoned their pleasant rustic retreats to take up the more trying posts of sentinels in a garrison. According to his custom, the chronicler proceeds to show us how the people were organised. His many names have long ceased to convey the living interest that must have clustered round them when the families they represented were still able to recognise their ancestors in the roll of honour. But incidentally he imports into his register a note about the Great Kings concern for the temple worship, from which we learn that Artaxerxes made special provision for the support of the choristers, and that he entertained a Jewish representative in his court to keep him informed on the condition of the distant city. Thus we have another indication of the royal patronage which was behind the whole movement for the restoration of the Jews. Nevertheless the piteous plaint of the Jews on their great fast day shows us that their servitude galled them sorely. Men who could utter that cry would not be bribed into a state of cheerful satisfaction by the kindness of their master in subscribing to their choir fund, although doubtless the contribution was made in a spirit of well-meaning generosity. The ideal City of God had not yet appeared, and the hint of the dependence of Jerusalem on royal patronage is a significant reminder of the sad fact. It never did appear, even in the brightest days of the earthly Jerusalem. But God was teaching His people through the history of that unhappy city how high the true ideal must be, and so preparing them for the heavenly city, the New Jerusalem.

Now we may take the high ideal that was slowly emerging throughout the ages, and see how God intends to have it realised in the City of God which, from the days of Saint Augustine, we have learnt to look for in the Church of Christ. The two leading thoughts connected with the Holy City in the phase of her history that is now passing under our notice are singularly applicable to the Christian community.

First, the characteristic life of the city. Enclosed within walls, the city gained a peculiar character and performed a distinctive mission of her own. Our Lord was not satisfied to rescue stray sheep on the mountains only to brand them with His mark and then turn them out again to graze in solitude. He drew them as a flock after Himself, and His disciples gathered them into the fold of Church fellowship. This is of as vital importance to the cause of Christianity as the civic organisation of Jerusalem was to that of Judaism. The Christian City of God stands out before the world on her lofty foundation, the Rock of Ages-a beacon of separation from sin, a testimony to the grace of God, a centre for the confession of faith, a home for social worship, a rallying point for the forces of holy warfare, a sanctuary for the helpless and oppressed.

Second, the public duty of citizenship. The reluctance of Christians to accept the responsibilities of Church membership may be compared to the backwardness of the Jews to dwell in their metropolis. Like Jerusalem in the time of Nehemiah, the City of God today is an outpost in the battlefield, a fortress surrounded by the enemys territory. It is traitorous to retire to the calm cultivation of ones private garden-plot in the hour of stress and strain when the citadel is threatened on all sides. It is the plain duty of the people of God to mount guard and take their turn as watchmen on the walls of the Holy City.

May we carry the analogy one step further? The king of Persia, though his realm stretched from the Tigris to the Aegean, could not give much effectual help to the true City of God. But the Divine King of kings sends her constant supplies, and she too, like Jerusalem, has her Representative at court, One who ever lives to make intercession for her.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles