Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Nehemiah 13:23
In those days also saw I Jews [that] had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, [and] of Moab:
23. saw I Jews ] R.V. saw I the Jews. The article which the R.V. rightly renders shows that Nehemiah is not making a general charge against the Jewish nation, but reports what he had seen in the instance of a certain set of Jews. It has been suggested that Nehemiah came across them in the course of a journey (cf. Neh 13:15) through the southern districts of the Judean territory.
that had married wives (R.V. women)] R.V. marg. ‘Heb. had made to dwell with them ‘. LXX. . Cf. Ezr 10:2; Ezr 10:10; Ezr 10:14; Ezr 10:17-18.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
23 29. Nehemiah’s protest against mixed marriages, cf. Neh 9:2, Neh 10:28; Neh 10:30; Ezr 9:1 ff; Ezr 10:1 ff.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Ashdod; a city of the Philistines, 1Sa 5:1,2, &c.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
In those days also I saw Jews that married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab. Ashdod, or Azotus, as it is called in Ac 8:40, was one of the five cities of the Philistines; which, though none of the seven nations with whom marriage was forbid, yet it was very unfit and improper to marry with them, Jud 14:3. This place was a mart of the Arabians h, where they sold their goods, to which the Jews might resort, and thereby be ensnared into such marriages; and which with the Ammonites and Moabites were unlawful, Ne 13:1.
h Mela de Situ Orbis, l. 1. c. 10.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Marriages with foreign wives dissolved. – Neh 13:23 and Neh 13:24. “In those days I also saw, i.e., visited, the Jews who had brought home Ashdodite, Ammonite, and Moabite wives; and half of their children spoke the speech of Ashdod, because they understood not how to speak the Jews’ language, and according to the speech of one and of another people.” It is not said, I saw Jews; but, the Jews who … Hence Bertheau rightly infers, that Nehemiah at this time found an opportunity of seeing them, perhaps upon a journey through the province. From the circumstance, too, that a portion of the children of these marriages were not able to speak the language of the Jews, but spoke the language of Ashdod, or of this or that nation from which their mothers were descended, we may conclude with tolerable certainty, that these people dwelt neither in Jerusalem nor in the midst of the Jewish community, but on the borders of the nations to which their wives belonged. like Ezr 10:2. precedes in an absolute sense: and as for their children, one half (of them) spake. (comp. 2Ki 18:26; Isa 36:11; 2Ch 32:18) is the language of the Jewish community, the vernacular Hebrew. The sentence is an explanatory parenthesis, still depending upon : spake according to the language, i.e., spake the language, of this and that people (of their mothers). The speech of Ashdod is that of the Philistines, which, according to Hitzig ( Urgeschichte u. Mythol. der Philister), belonged to the Indo-Germanic group. The languages, however, of the Moabites and Ammonites were undoubtedly Shemitic, but so dialectically different from the Hebrew, that they might be regarded as foreign tongues.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Dismissal of Strange Wives. | B. C. 434. |
23 In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab: 24 And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews’ language, but according to the language of each people. 25 And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves. 26 Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin. 27 Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives? 28 And one of the sons of Joiada, the son of Eliashib the high priest, was son in law to Sanballat the Horonite: therefore I chased him from me. 29 Remember them, O my God, because they have defiled the priesthood, and the covenant of the priesthood, and of the Levites. 30 Thus cleansed I them from all strangers, and appointed the wards of the priests and the Levites, every one in his business; 31 And for the wood offering, at times appointed, and for the firstfruits. Remember me, O my God, for good.
We have here one instance more of Nehemiah’s pious zeal for the purifying of his countrymen as a peculiar people to God; that was the thing he aimed at in the use of his power, not the enriching of himself. See here,
I. How they had corrupted themselves by marrying strange wives. This was complained of in Ezra’s time, and much done towards a reformation, Ezra ix. and x. But, when the unclean spirit is cast out, if a watchful eye be not kept upon him, he will re-enter; so he did here. Though in Ezra’s time those that had married strange wives were forced to put them away, which could not but occasion trouble and confusion in families, yet others would not take warning. Nitimur in vetitum–we still lean towards what is forbidden. Nehemiah, like a good governor, enquired into the state of the families of those that were under his charge, that he might reform what was amiss in them, and so heal the streams by healing the springs. 1. He enquired whence they had their wives, and found that many of the Jews had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab (v. 23), either because they were fond of what was far-fetched or because they hoped by these alliances to strengthen and enrich themselves. See how God by the prophet reproves this, Mal. ii. 11. Judah has dealt treacherously, and broken covenant with God, the covenant made in Ezra’s time with reference to this very thing; he has profaned the holiness of the Lord by marrying the daughter (that is, the worshipper) of a strange god. 2. He talked with the children, and found they were children of strangers, for their speech betrayed them. The children were bred up with their mothers, and learned of them and their nurses and servants to speak, so that they could not speak the Jews’ language, could not speak it at all, or not readily, or not purely, but half in the speech of Ashdod, or Ammon, or Moab, according as the country was which the mother was a native of. Observe, (1.) Children, in their childhood, learn much of their mothers. Partus sequitur ventrem–they are prone to imitate their mothers. (2.) If either side be bad, the corrupt nature will incline the children to take after that, which is a good reason why Christians should not be unequally yoked. (3.) In the education of children great care should be taken about the government of their tongues, that they learn not the language of Ashdod, any impious or impure talk, any corrupt communication.
II. What course Nehemiah took to purge out this corruption, when he discovered how much it had prevailed.
1. He showed them the evil of it, and the obligation he lay under to witness against it. He did not seek an occasion against them, but this was an iniquity to be punished by the judge, and which he must by no means connive at (v. 27): “Shall we hearken to you, who endeavour to palliate and excuse it? No, it is an evil, a great evil, it is a transgression against our God, to marry strange wives, and we must do our utmost to put a stop to it. You beg that they may not be divorced from you, but we cannot hearken to you, for there is no other remedy to clear us from the guilt and prevent infection.” (1.) He quotes a precept, to prove that it was in itself a great sin; and makes them swear to that precept: You shall not give your daughters unto their sons, c., which is taken from Deut. vii. 3. When we would reclaim people from sin we must show them the sinfulness of it in the glass of the commandment. (2.) He quotes a precedent, to show the pernicious consequences of it, which made it necessary to be animadverted upon by the government (<i>v. 26): Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? The falls of great and good men are recorded in order that we may take warning by them to shun the temptations which they were overcome by. Solomon was famous for wisdom; there was no king like him for it; yet, when he married strange wives, his wisdom could not secure him from their snares, nay, it departed from him, and he did very foolishly. He was beloved of God, but his marrying strange wives threw him out of God’s favour, and went near to extinguish the holy fire of grace in his soul: he was king over all Israel; but his doing this occasioned the loss of ten of his twelve tribes. You plead that you can marry strange wives and yet retain the purity of Israelites; but Solomon himself could not; even him did outlandish women cause to sin. Therefore let him that thinks he stands take heed lest he fall when he runs upon such a precipice.
2. He showed himself highly displeased at it, that he might awaken them to a due sense of the evil of it: He contended with them, v. 25. They offered to justify themselves in what they did, but he showed them how frivolous their excuses were, and argued it warmly with them. When he had silenced them he cursed them, that is, he denounced the judgments of God against them, and showed them what their sin deserved. He then picked out some of them that were more obstinate than the rest, and fit to be made examples, and smote them (that is, ordered them to be beaten by the proper officers according to the law, Deu 25:2; Deu 25:3), to which he added this further mark of infamy that he plucked off their hair, or cut or shaved it off; for it may so be understood. Perhaps they had prided themselves in their hair, and therefore he took it off to deform and humble them, and put them to shame; it was, in effect, to stigmatize them, at least for a time. Ezra, in this case, had plucked off his own hair, in holy sorrow for the sin; Nehemiah plucked off their hair, in a holy indignation at the sinners. See the different tempers of wise, and good, and useful men, and the divers graces, as well as divers gifts, of the same Spirit.
3. He obliged them not to take any more such wives, and separated those whom they had taken: He cleansed them from all strangers, both men and women (v. 30), and made them promise with an oath that they would never do so again, v. 25. Thus did he try all ways and means to put a stop to this mischief and to prevent another relapse into this disease.
4. He took particular care of the priests’ families, that they might not lie under this stain, this guilt. He found, upon enquiry, that a branch of the high priest’s own family, one of his grandsons, had married a daughter of Sanballat, that notorious enemy of the Jews (Neh 2:10; Neh 4:1), and so had, in effect, twisted interests with the Samaritans, v. 28. How little love had that man either to God or his country who could make himself in duty and interest a friend to him that was a sworn enemy to both. It seems this young priest would not put away his wife, and therefore Nehemiah chased him from him, deprived him, degraded him, and made him for ever incapable of the priesthood. Josephus says that this expelled priest was Manasseh, and that when Nehemiah drove him away he went to his father-in-law Sanballat, who built him a temple upon Mount Gerazim, like that at Jerusalem, and promised him he should be high priest in it, and that then was laid the foundation of the Samaritans’ pretensions, which continued warm to our Saviour’s time. John iv. 20, Our fathers worshipped in this mountain. When Nehemiah had thus expelled one that had forfeited the honour of the priesthood he again posted the priests and Levites every one in his business, v. 30. It was no loss to them to part with one that was the scandal of their cloth; the work would be done better without him. When Judas had gone out Christ said, Now is the Son of Man glorified,Joh 13:30; Joh 13:31. Here are Nehemiah’s prayers on this occasion. (1.) He prays, Remember them, O my God! v. 29. “Lord, convince and convert them; put them in mind of what they should be and do, that they may come to themselves.” Or, “Remember them to reckon with them for their sin; remember it against them.” If we take it so, this prayer is a prophecy that God would remember it against them. Those that defile the priesthood despise God, and shall be lightly esteemed. Perhaps they were too many and too great for him to deal with. “Lord” (says he), “deal thou with them; take the work into thy own hands.” (2.) He prays, Remember me, O my God! v. 31. The best services done to the public have sometimes been forgotten by those for whom they were done (Eccl. ix. 15); therefore Nehemiah refers it to God to recompense him, takes him for his paymaster, and then doubts not but he shall be well paid. This may well be the summary of our petitions; we need no more to make us happy than this: Remember me, O my God! for good.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Mixed Marriage Again, Verses 23-31
Finally, Nehemiah was compelled to cope with the problem of mixed marriage again. It had been a major problem for Ezra almost immediately upon his arrival in Jerusalem about twenty-five year before (see Ezra, chapters 9,10). The people must have had a shallow faith in God indeed to revert so readily into a practice they knew was contrary to the law of their God. It is so much like people today who think God will overlook their transgression (Jas 4:17; 1Jn 3:4).
The transgression was very promiscuous. As Nehemiah went about he observed the children of the mixed marriages speaking in a polyglot tongue, unable to speak and understand the language of the Jews. Most of the marriages it seems had been with the Moabites, Ammonites, and Ashdodites. The latter were from Ashdod, a city of the Philistines.
Verse 25 might seem to indicate that Nehemiah became violent and beside himself in his treatment of the offenders. That is hardly the case, though he did treat them with severity. Contending with them surely means that he brought them to a reckoning in his presence. As to the “curse,” this does not mean he was guilty of uttering blasphemy but charged them with the curse of God, which they brought upon themselves by their act. Striking was permitted for offenders against God’s law (De 25:2-3). Plucking out the hair was a sign of distress and shame, such as was due in this case. Finally Nehemiah made the offenders swear not to give their daughters to the pagan men, or to take their daughters for their sons or for themselves.
Nehemiah preached to them an admonitory sermon the truth of which they knew well. Solomon was a well known example. He had been a greatly admired king in Israel and the known world. He was also beloved of the Lord, who granted him surpassing wisdom. Yet he offended in taking strange women into his house, for which God punished even so great a one as he. The influence for them was that the Lord who would judge the great Solomon for transgressing His commandment concerning mixed marriage would surely also judge them who were lesser than Solomon.
Again the most notorious example of the transgression was in the household of the high priest. God’s own representative for Israel had allowed his grandson to marry the daughter of the pagan Sanballat, who had tried so hard to keep Nehemiah from building the wall! Over and over in the law it was stated that those guilty of infranctions in God’s law should be cut off from His people. Thus Nehemiah treated the young priest son-in-law of Sanballat, casting him out of the priesthood.
Nehemiah prayed that the Lord would take note of those guilty of these things, who defiled the priesthood and the covenant with God, and judge it in His wisdom. So Nehemiah purified the priesthood from the pollution of pagan marriages and reappointed the priests and Levites in their work. The matter of the wood supply was addressed again also. Nehemiah made arrangements for an adequate supply for the burning of the offerings. He also arranged for the bringing of the firstfruits to the priests.
These lessons should be stressed for this chapter: 1) ignorance of God’s law does not excuse His children from its penalties for transgression; 2) wrong examples by God’s preachers cause very great transgression among their followers; 3) God’s people will usually respond when the right example is set; 4) God’s people are expected to have set times for His worship; 5) the people of the Lord should not encourage the profanation of His day of worship; 6) though others transgress it is not necessary to allow oneself to be guilty by condoning their transgression; 7) false teaching needs to be treated with severity; 8) men ought to profit by the example of those whom the Lord punished for transgression in the past; 9) God’s servants should leave behind them a legacy of lasting good for the cause of Christ.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
5. Nehemiah deals with the problem of mixed marriages.
TEXT, Neh. 13:23-29
23
In those days I also saw that the Jews had married women from Ashdod, Ammon, and Moab.
24
As for their children, half spoke in the language of Ashdod, and none of them was able to speak the language of Judah, but the language of his own people.
25
So I contended with them and cursed them and struck some of them and pulled out their hair, and made them swear by God, You shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor take of their daughters for your sons or for yourselves.
26
Did not Solomon king of Israel sin regarding these things? Yet among the many nations there was no king like him, and he was loved by his God, and God made him king over all Israel; nevertheless the foreign women caused even him to sin.
27
Do we then hear about you that you have committed all this great evil by acting unfaithfully against our God by marrying foreign women?
28
Even one of the sons of Joiada, the son Eliashib the high priest, was a son-in-law of Sanballat the Horonite, so I drove him away from me.
29
Remember them, O my God, because they have defiled the priesthood and the covenant of the priesthood and the Levites.
COMMENT
In Neh. 13:23, Ashdod was a city in the old Philistine area, in the present day Gaza strip. With the change of one letter Ammon becomes Amman, and we have its approximate present-day location. The people of Moab lived at the southeastern end of the Dead Sea.
The language of Ashdod, Neh. 13:24, is now known to have been quite similar to Hebrew, as Aramaic was (and so were the Moabite and Ammonite languages), but still a separate language[84] (as Dutch and German, or French and Spanish, or Spanish and Portuguese). The children were closer to their mothers through most of the day, so they spoke their language more than Hebrew.
[84] Op. cit., p. 217.
In Neh. 13:25, contended is the same as reprimanded in Neh. 13:17. Curse may be a little too strong. The Anchor Bible gives its literal translation as to be light, and gives the possible translation, treat with contempt. This would seem to be more in keeping with Nehemiahs character. But he also struck some of them and pulled out their hair. We recall that when Ezra was faced with the same kind of a situation, the hair that was pulled was his own! Perhaps there is an illustration here of the nature of the offices of the two men: the one, Gods priest and mans intercessor; the other, Gods chosen vessel still, but mans ruler. We gather that there are times for both kinds of action. What he achieved by this method was an oath that they would no longer participate in or allow mixed marriages. There is no mention of divorce, as there was in Ezra (Neh. 10:11).
Neh. 13:26-27 give the argument which Nehemiah used. If the great King Solomon, powerful among the nations, loved by God (that is the meaning of his personal name, Jedediah, 2Sa. 12:24 f), and able to rule over all Israel, could not take foreign wives without being led to forsake God and sin, how did they think they could do this without sinning, weak as they were?
A little curiosity, going back to Neh. 13:26, is the KJV reference to outlandish women, reminding us that the derivation and original English meaning of the word had reference to women from outside the land of Solomon.
The information in Neh. 13:28 has not been given us previously; it is given here for the first time.
Now Nehemiahs prayer, in Neh. 13:29, is not for himself directly but against those of the Levitical line, priests and Levites alike, who had violated the covenant (Num. 25:12) which God had made originally with their forefathers because they had stood more firmly against intermarriage and defilement with foreigners than any of the other tribes.
WORD STUDIES
EVER (Neh. 13:1 : Olam): for ever, everlasting. Basically it means hidden (as in the secret sins of Psa. 90:8): where the beginning or end is obscure or uncertain or indefinite. It is applied to (1) the past, or antiquity, time long past or even only a lifetime, the days of old, Mic. 7:14; or of a long time, Isa. 42:14; (2) the future, i.e., of the end of one life, Deu. 15:17; (3) end of an age or race or dynasty, limited by the length of their obedience, 1Sa. 2:30. (4) The laws are for ever (Passover, Exo. 12:14), yet they are superseded now. (5) The earth and universe are forever (Psa. 104:5), though we know they will pass away. (6) Only when the term is used of God does it have the idea of absolute eternality (Psa. 90:2).
The people of the O.T. did not have an everlasting promise; they found no need to coin a word for an idea which they didnt have, or barely had, in their mind. Only Jesus could complete that picture for them (2Ti. 1:10).
LOVED (Neh. 13:26 : Aheb): to breathe after, long for, desire; the meaning is akin to Agape in the N.T. Israel loved Joseph, Gen. 37:3 f; Jacob loved Rachel, Gen. 29:18; Hosea was told to love his wife in spite of her unworthiness, Hos. 3:1; God loved His people, Deu. 23:5; and we must love God, Deu. 6:5.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(23) Saw I Jews.The punishment shows that these were exceptional cases; but the transgression was of the most flagrant kind (see Neh. 13:1).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
(23-29) The mixed marriages again.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
FOREIGN MARRIAGES DISSOLVED, Neh 13:23-31.
“The sin of mixed marriages was one of the crying sins of the Jews at this time. The greatness of the sin arose from the fact that it tended to defeat one of the purposes of the Mosaic economy. God isolated the Jews from all other nations that they might be a nursery for the great ideas of religion that were to be elaborated in the history of the world, and a stock from which he would bring forth the Messiah. All mingling with other nations, who had not been trained in this way and preserved for this purpose, tended to defeat this design. Especially was this true of matrimonial alliances. Heathen women retained a natural longing for the indulgences of their own religion, and easily led their husbands into guilty compliances. The women of Moab and Philistia, and the wives of Solomon, furnish mournful proofs of this fact. They led their infatuated husbands and paramours into the grossest idolatry. They, therefore, who chose heathen wives, thereby rejected the God of Israel.” T.V. Moore.
23. Saw I Jews That is, he observed, or his attention was called to, certain Jews who had contracted foreign marriages. Perhaps he observed this during some journey through the province, for these Jews seem not to have lived in Jerusalem.
Had married wives Literally, had caused to dwell. An expression originating in the custom of the husband’s bringing his wife home to dwell in his own house.
Ashdod One of the principal cities of the Philistines. See on Jos 11:22.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Separation From Idolatrous Foreign Women ( Neh 13:23-27 ).
Nehemiah’s final act to which he calls God’s attention is his purifying of Jerusalem (or possibly of the new Israel) from idolatrous foreign women. It is made clear that these women had not converted to Yahwism, nor had they brought up their children to be Yahwists, otherwise they would have ensured that they knew Hebrew and/or Aramaic so that they might be able to understand the Scriptures. This was something that was incumbent on every Jew, and on every convert. Thus, as with Tobiah, Jerusalem was defiled by their presence. Furthermore otherwise genuine Yahwists (as Solomon had been) were being led astray. It is this last fact that is the emphasis of the passage.
There is no suggestion that the situation was widespread, as it had been in the days of Ezra 9-10. Rather it is revealed as a local affair dealt with locally. It had been over twenty years since Ezra had taken action against marriages with idolatrous foreign women. Now the practise had begun to creep back, and Nehemiah deals with it in his usual forthright manner.
It should be noted that in Neh 4:7 the Ashdodites and the Ammonites were of those who actively opposed the building of the wall. They had been no friends of the Jews.
Ashdod was the name of the Persian province bordering Judah on the west. Moab and Ammon were to the east. Unlike in the time of Ezra the idolatrous foreign marriages here appear to have been limited to women of these three areas.
Neh 13:23-24
‘In those days also I saw the Jews who had married women of Ashdod, of Ammon, of Moab, and their children spoke half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews’ language, but according to the language of each people.’
Ashdod was the name of the Persian province to the west and its notabilities would probably have had constant contact with Jerusalem, which was now the capital city of the province of Judah. These marriages may thus have been limited to the Jewish aristocracy who were seeking political and trading influence. Alternately, but less likely, they may simply have been cross border marriages. But if the latter were the case we would have expected the children soon to learn Aramaic as they mixed with Jewish children. They would not be brought up in the same isolation as the children of wealthy aristocrats. The situation therefore smacks very much of children brought up in an exclusive environment, with Ashdod-speaking servants being responsible for their education. The Moabites and Ammonites spoke a language basically similar to the Jews, as we know from the Moabite inscription, although it might not have sounded like it to Nehemiah. But probably their children were not so discernibly ignorant of Hebrew and Aramaic as the children of Ashdod, which may explain the cryptic ‘spoke half in the speech of Ashdod’. Their languages were, however, sufficiently different that it would cause misunderstanding when hearing the reading of the Scriptures, but it would certainly not have appeared to be as barbaric as the language of Ashdod.
With regard to Ammon and Moab, we know of the intermarriages of the daughters of Jewish aristocrats with Tobiah and his son, who were both Ammonites, for we have been told that Tobiah was son-in-law to a prominent Jew named Shechaniah the son of Arah, and that his son Johanan had married the daughter of Meshullam the son of Berechiah (Neh 6:18), a prominent wallbuilder (Neh 3:4; Neh 3:30) and priest (Neh 3:28; Neh 3:30). Both Shechaniah and Meshullam would presumably be of the Jewish aristocracy. We can therefore understand a tendency for some who supported Tobiah to encourage intermarriage with aristocratic Ammonite sons and daughters. Once again political and trading influence was probably at stake. And as Ammonites and Moabites were closely allied, and were brother tribes, it would be natural for aristocratic Moabite men and women also to be involved.
What appears to have shocked Nehemiah the most was the inability of children of half the marriages to speak anything other than ‘the speech of Ashdod’. In other words they only spoke a language which was totally beyond understanding. This was possibly what first drew the situation to his attention. There may not only have been one language spoken in Ashdod. It was a Persian province including a number of nations. ‘The speech of Ashdod’ may not therefore signify a single language, but any language spoke in Ashdod. All would have appeared equally barbaric. And as we have suggested above their ‘speaking only the speech of Ashdod’ clearly indicated that they were not being brought up to understand the Jewish Law, which could only have bad consequences for the future. Thus underlying his horror at their not speaking Hebrew/Aramaic was a recognition of the fact that they were being brought up to worship the gods of Ashdod. And at the best this could only lead to syncretism. He could see Israel slowly slipping away from the pure worship of YHWH.
Note On The Words ‘and their children spoke half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews’ language, but according to the language of each people.’
It is clear that this is unlikely to mean that their children each spoke half Ashdod, half Hebrew, for then it could not have been said of them that they could not speak in the Jewish language. There would have been many bi-linguists in Jerusalem who were pure Yahwists so that being bilingual would not have been a matter for concern. It may signify:
That half the children spoke in the Ashdod speech, as their mothers came from Ashdod, while the other half spoke in either Ammonite or Moabite (‘according to the language of each people’).
That being aristocrats the Jews in question had more than one wife so that some of their children were brought up to speak Hebrew, because they had mothers who were Yahwists, while the others were brought up to speak the Ashdod languages because their mothers came from Ashdod. The latter would then have been brought up to worship the gods of Ashdod.
That half the children of Ashdod mothers had not learned to speak Hebrew, whilst the other half had. This might explain why only some were severely punished.
Without more information we cannot be dogmatic, but whichever way it was it disturbed Nehemiah sufficiently to cause him to take drastic action, because he recognised the danger of encroaching idolatry.
End of note.
Neh 13:25
‘And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, “You shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor take their daughters for your sons, or for yourselves.”
It appears from what happened that the Jews involved were summoned together before Nehemiah to present their defence, for we learn that he ‘contended with them’ (see Neh 13:26), whilst Neh 13:27 (‘shall we then listen to you?’) certainly suggests that they put forward a bold defence. We are probably not to see in this description that Nehemiah lost his temper and began pulling at their beards, (for that the incident would have had to be very local indeed), but rather that he passed a judicial sentence on them, solemnly cursing them and sentencing some of them to be beaten and have hairs pulled out, either of their beards or their heads. To decimate a man’s beard and hair was to subject him to shame (compare 2Sa 10:4; Isa 3:24; Isa 15:2; Jer 48:37; Eze 29:18). Thus by this they were being publicly shamed. We can compare how God’s Servant described a similar punishment applied to himself in Isa 50:6, something clearly designed to humiliate him. In Ezr 9:3 we find how Ezra subjected himself to the same humiliation, although in his case self-imposed.
They were also made to swear before God that they would not in future “give your daughters to their sons, nor take their daughters for your sons, or for yourselves.” This was Biblical language based on the requirements of the Law (Deu 7:3; Exo 34:16). It will be noted that it is not specifically said they were required to put away their wives, and if that was the case it may be an indication of the high status of their wives. (Even Nehemiah had to consider possible appeals to the King of Persia). In that was so the situation was unlike that in Ezra. On the other hand it may be that divorcing their foreign wives was implied in the verdict (‘or for yourselves’) and was simply not mentioned in this very abbreviated account.
Neh 13:26
“Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? Yet among many nations was there no king like him, and he was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel. Nevertheless even him did foreign women cause to sin.”
Nehemiah then gave a powerful Scriptural example in order to back up his case. He pointed them back to Solomon, outstanding among kings, beloved of God and granted the kingship of Israel by Him. Yet even this king who was so great and powerful, and owed God so much, was led astray into idolatry by his foreign wives (1Ki 11:1-8). What chance was there then for lesser people to resist the temptations put in their way by idolatrous foreign wives.
Neh 13:27
“Shall we then listen to you to do all this great evil, to trespass against our God in marrying foreign women?”
Thus in view of the example of Solomon their persuasive arguments carried no weight. It is quite clear that the husbands were seeking to put up a defence for their actions, a defence which Nehemiah swept aside. Note how he describes marrying idolatrous foreign wives as a ‘great evil’. It was no light matter. And by it they were trespassing against God and His word. It is difficult in the light of this to see how he could do anything other than insist that they divorce their idolatrous foreign wives.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Intermarriages Forbidden
v. 23. In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Asbdod, v. 24. and their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, v. 25. And I contended with them, v. 26. Did not Solomon, king of Israel, sin by these things? v. 27. Shall we, then, hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives? v. 28. And one of the sans of Joiada, the son of Eliashib, the high priest, was son-in-law to Sanballat the Horonite, v. 29. Remember them, O my God, because they have defiled the priesthood, v. 30. Thus cleansed I them from all strangers, v. 31. and for the wood-offering, at times appointed,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Here we have recorded another instance of the zeal of Nehemiah in reforming abuses, both as it concerned the divine honor, and the people’s happiness. Nothing could be more important than the preservation of God’s people to themselves. The Lord by the prophet complained of this abuse. I had planted thee (said God) a noble vine, wholly a right seed; how then art thou turned into the degenerate plant of a strange vine unto me. Jer 2:21 . And spiritually considered, did it not all along point to the undefiled union between Jesus and his church; – Jesus and his people? How sad a breach then was this ungracious alliance in God’s Israel? And that even the sons of the Priests should be foremost in this degeneracy! Nehemiah closes his book with once more repeating his prayer, for the Lord’s remembrance of him. And that blessed promise which God hath left upon record by his servant the prophet seems to be a sweet answer. The Lord hearkened and heard it; and a book of remembrance was written before him. And the Lord adds, and they shall be mine, saith the Lord of hosts, in the day when I make up my jewels. Mal 3:16-17 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Neh 13:23 In those days also saw I Jews [that] had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, [and] of Moab:
Ver. 23. In those days saw I Jews ] Outwardly, at least (as the apostle distinguishes, Rom 2:28 ), and that also was then a prerogative, Rom 3:1 , and shall appear to be so again, when their long looked for conversion day is come, Rom 11:26 .
That had married wives of Ashdod
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Neh 13:23-29
23In those days I also saw that the Jews had married women from Ashdod, Ammon and Moab.
24As for their children, half spoke in the language of Ashdod, and none of them was able to speak the language of Judah, but the language of his own people. 25So I contended with them and cursed them and struck some of them and pulled out their hair, and made them swear by God, You shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor take of their daughters for your sons or for yourselves. 26Did not Solomon king of Israel sin regarding these things? Yet among the many nations there was no king like him, and he was loved by his God, and God made him king over all Israel; nevertheless the foreign women caused even him to sin. 27Do we then hear about you that you have committed all this great evil by acting unfaithfully against our God by marrying foreign women? 28Even one of the sons of Joiada, the son of Eliashib the high priest, was a son-in-law of Sanballat the Horonite, so I drove him away from me. 29Remember them, O my God, because they have defiled the priesthood and the covenant of the priesthood and the Levites.
Neh 13:23 in those days I saw that the Jews had married women There is some problem as to the relationship between Ezra 9, 10 and Nehemiah 10. We cannot answer all of the questions about this, but it is obvious that it was a recurring problem which was not solved by either leader.
Ashdod, Ammon, and Moab Not only were these pagan people, but they were enemies of the returning Jews. Their inclusion in the people of God was mandated by Moses (cf. Neh 13:1).
Neh 13:24 As for their children, half spoke in the language of Ashdod The Hebrew idiom is difficult to translate. It is not certain if they spoke a mixture of one language and the other or simply spoke the other, but it does show the major problem of these mixed marriages was that the education of the children was being done by their pagan mothers. This corrupted the purity of the monotheism of YHWH. These children could not read nor understand God’s word.
the language of Judah This must refer to Hebrew (cf. 2Ch 32:18). The other people groups in the Persian Province Beyond the River probably spoke a dialect of Aramaic (although it is possible they retained a working knowledge of the ancient tribal language) as did most Jews. The need for a knowledge of Hebrew (learned in synagogue school) was to be able to read and understand God’s word.
Neh 13:25 This shows the emotional intensity and the seriousness of their sin (cursed [BDB 886, KB 1103, Peel IMPERFECT]; struck [BDB 645, KB 697, Hiphil IMPERFECT]; pulled out their hair [BDB 595, KB 634, Qal IMPERFECT]; made them swear [BDB 989, KB 1396, Hiphil IMPERFECT]; also in Neh 13:28, drove them away [BDB 137, Hiphil IMPERFECT]).
I contended with them The VERB (BDB 936, KB 1224, Qal IMPERFECT) is used several times in this context (cf. Neh 13:11; Neh 13:17; Neh 13:25; and Neh 5:7).
Neh 13:26 See the tragic account in 1 Kings 11.
Neh 13:27 by acting unfaithfully against our God This term unfaithfully (BDB 591, KB 612, Qal INFINITIVE CONSTRUCT) is also used in Ezr 10:2; Ezr 10:10 to describe Jews marrying pagan women. In Arabic this same root is used for treason, treachery, and betrayal. God is the victim! This term speaks of intimate, personal relationships (cf. Num 5:11-31, esp. Neh 13:12; Neh 13:27). This is the very VERB used to describe Moses’ act of rebellion in striking the rock (cf. Num 20:10-12; Num 27:12-14).
Neh 13:28 even one of the sons of Joiada This shows that the family of the high priest was involved in these inter-racial marriages even to the point of marrying the daughter of Sanballat, the enemy of the people of God. Neh 13:29 records Nehemiah’s prayer/curse!
Neh 13:29 Remember them Another prayer of Nehemiah, but this one is a curse!
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
had married. Notwithstanding the covenant of Neh 10:30 and Ezr 10:12, Ezr 10:14.
Ashdod. Now, Esdud. Jos 15:46
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Neh 13:23-31
Neh 13:23-31
NEHEMIAH FACES THE RECURRENCE OF SINFUL MARRIAGES WITH PAGANS
“In those days also saw I the Jews that had married women of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab: and their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the language of Judah, but according to the language of each people. And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters for your sons, nor for yourselves. Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, and he was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel.’ nevertheless, even him did foreign women cause to sin. Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to trespass against our God in marrying foreign women?
“And one of the sons of Joiada, the son of Elisashib the High Priest, was son-in-law to Sanballat the Horonite: therefore I chased him from me. Remember them, O my God, because they have defiled the priesthood, and the covenant of the priesthood, and of the Levites.
“Thus cleansed I them of all foreigners, and appointed charges for the priests and for the Levites, every one in his work; and for the wood-offering, at times appointed, and for the first-fruits. Remember me, O my God, for good.”
“Remember me, O my God, for good” (Neh 13:31) This is the fourth of these little prayers in this chapter; and this proliferation of Nehemiah’s earnest appeals to God may be understood to indicate his recognition of the desperate extremity into which the Chosen People had fallen. Candidly, there was little that any human being, or that even God Himself, could do for Israel that had not already been done, over and over again.
Not only had a son of the High Priest married a pagan; but Eliasbib the High Priest himself was “allied with Tobiah,” probably by marriage; and the profaning of the priesthood was by no means restricted to these two violations. Again, we refer to Mal 2:2 as the verdict of God Himself regarding Israel’s priests. By the times of Christ, the party of the Sadducees (among the priests) were outright atheists, not believing in angels, spirits, the resurrection or anything else that the word of God teaches (Mat 22:23); and they had preempted unto themselves alone the office of the High Priest. They along with the Herodians and Pharisees were the false shepherds who seduced and destroyed the vast majority of the Chosen People (Zechariah 11).
E.M. Zerr:
Neh 13:23-24. A reformation of the marriage situation had been carried out before this (Ezra 9, 10), but here were some who either were overlooked at that time, or had relapsed into the unlawful relationship again. And, as usual, when the good associates with the bad, the latter has the greater influence. The children of these unlawful marriages took up the language of the heathen.
Neh 13:25. Cursed them means he described their sinful state to their face. He even used physical punishment on some of them. Since the Mosaic system of government was civil as well as religious, it was fitting that special offenders be so punished.
Neh 13:26-27. Nehemiah strengthened his criticism of their conduct by citing the case of Solomon. Even as great a man as he was affected by evil surroundings through his unlawful marriages. Outlandish Is from NOKRI and Strong’s definition is, “strange, in a variety of degrees and applications (foreign, non-relative, adulterous, different).” In 1Ki 11:1 Solomon is said to have loved many strange (Noma) women. As far as the information goes, all of Solomon’s wives were from a land outside of his own proper country. The force of the word may be seen by writing it “out-landish.”
Neh 13:28. There was one special case of unlawful marriages noted by Nehemiah. A grandson of the high priest had gone so far as to marry a daughter of Sanballat, the-man who was the enemy of the work from the first. Chased is from BARACH which is defined as follows: “a primitive root; to bolt, i. e. figuratively to flee suddenly.”–Strong. The expression, then, means that Nehemiah used some kind of force that caused this man to run away as in fear.
Neh 13:29. Nehemiah was especially grieved because the sacred office of the Levitical priesthood had been defiled.
Neh 13:30. The holy office was rectified by expelling all strangers, people of foreign blood, and placing the wards or charges with the proper persons.
Neh 13:31. Nehemiah completed the reformative work so that the service could again be pure. He asked to be remembered only in proportion to the good he had done.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
married: Heb. made to dwell with them, Neh 10:30, Ezr 9:2, Ezr 9:11, Ezr 9:12, Ezr 10:10, Ezr 10:44, 2Co 6:14
Ashdod: 1Sa 5:1
Ammon: Neh 13:1-3
Reciprocal: Gen 19:38 – children Exo 34:16 – General Lev 21:15 – profane Deu 7:3 – General Deu 23:3 – Ammonite Deu 23:6 – Thou shalt Jos 11:22 – Ashdod Jos 15:46 – near Jos 23:12 – shall make Jdg 3:6 – General 1Ki 11:1 – loved 1Ki 16:31 – took to wife 2Ch 22:3 – his mother Ezr 9:14 – join in Ezr 10:12 – so must we do Neh 4:7 – Ashdodites Pro 28:4 – but Isa 2:6 – and they Jer 25:20 – remnant Hos 5:7 – begotten Hos 7:8 – he hath Mal 2:11 – and hath 2Co 11:29 – and I burn
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Neh 13:23. Also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod A city of the Philistines; of Ammon and of Moab They had married strangers, though not long before they had most solemnly promised not to do so, Neh 10:30. So hard a thing it is perfectly to root out tares, which will be continually springing up again.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
13:23 In those days also saw I Jews [that] had married wives of {l} Ashdod, of Ammon, [and] of Moab:
(l) Which was a city of the Philistines and they had married wives from it and so had corrupted their speech and religion.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
5. The rebuke of mixed marriages 13:23-29
Nehemiah confronted this problem as Ezra had several years earlier (Ezra 9-10). The text records only Nehemiah’s words to the people, but since we know what kind of person he was, we can safely assume that he followed up his words with action. Evidently some of these Jews had divorced their Jewish wives to marry foreigners (Mal 2:10-16). Plucking the beard (Neh 13:25) was a form of punishment (cf. Isa 50:6), and it was a public disgrace (2Sa 10:4). The marriage of Joiada’s son to a foreigner (Neh 13:28) was especially bad since he was the grandson of the high priest, and priests were to marry only Jewish virgins (Lev 21:14).
"Any person in the high-priestly lineage could become high priest. It was thus a dangerous situation." [Note: Fensham, p. 267.]
In the ancient East, marriages involving prominent families were often arranged to secure political advantage and to form alliances. Probably this was the case in the marriage of the high priest’s grandson and Sanballat’s daughter. Again, a similar prayer by Nehemiah marks off this significant reform (Neh 13:29; cf. Neh 13:14). [Note: The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, p. 681, contains a helpful chart of 13 problems Nehemiah faced and how he dealt successfully with each one.]
". . . Will Israel survive just to repeat the sins of the past? Intermarriage dragged Solomon and the entire nation into a vortex of doom that led to the exile. Will the postexilic generation go the same way?" [Note: Tremper Longman III and Raymond B. Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 212.]