hide text
The focus of restoration activities in Nehemiah is on the walls of Jerusalem. In Ezra it was the altar of burnt offerings and especially the temple in Jerusalem.
"The orientation of Nehemiah is more civil and secular than that of Ezra, but it is also written from the priestly point of view."5
The walls of the city had lain in ruins since 586 B.C. Then Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, had breached them, entered Jerusalem, burned the temple, carried most of the remaining Jews off to Babylon, and knocked the walls down. Consequently the few Jews who remained could not defend themselves (2 Kings 25:1-11). The returned exiles had attempted to rebuild the walls in or shortly after 458 B.C., but that project failed because of local opposition (Ezra 4:12, 23).
The returned exiles had received permission to return to their land and to reestablish their unique national institutions. Therefore they needed to rebuild the city walls to defend themselves against anyone who might want to interfere with and to interrupt their way of life.
The month Chislev (v. 1) corresponds to our late November and early December. The year in view was the twentieth year of Artaxerxes' reign (i.e., 445-444 B.C.). Susa (or Shushan, in Hebrew) was a winter capital of Artaxerxes (cf. Esth. 1:2). The main Persian capital at this time was Persepolis.
Hanani (v. 2) seems to have been Nehemiah's blood brother (cf. 7:2). The escape in view refers to the Jews' escape back from captivity in Babylon. Even though they received official permission to return, Nehemiah seems to have regarded their departure from Babylon as an escape since the Babylonians had originally forced them into exile against their wills.
The news that Nehemiah received evidently informed him of the Jews' unsuccessful attempts to rebuild Jerusalem's walls in 458 B.C. (Ezra 4:23).
"It was an ominous development, for the ring of hostile neighbors round Jerusalem could now claim royal backing. The patronage which Ezra had enjoyed (cf. Ezra 7:21-26) was suddenly in ruins, as completely as the city walls and gates. Jerusalem was not only disarmed but on its own."6
Nehemiah's reaction to this bad news was admirable. He made it a subject of serious prolonged prayer (vv. 4, 11; 2:1). Daniel had been another high-ranking Jewish official in the Persian government, and he too was a man of prayer.
"Of the 406 verses in the book, the prayers fill 46 verses (11%), and the history accounts for 146 (36%). The various lists . . . add up to 214 verses or 53% of the total."7
Nehemiah began his prayer with praise for God's greatness and His loyal love for His people (v. 5). As Ezra had done, he acknowledged that the Jews had been guilty of sinning against God (cf. Ezra 9:6-7). They had disobeyed the Mosaic Law (v. 7). Nehemiah reminded God of His promise to restore His people to their land if they repented (vv. 8-9; cf. Deut. 30:1-5). He also noted that these were the people Yahweh had redeemed from Egyptian slavery for a special purpose (v. 10; cf. Deut. 9:29). He concluded with a petition that his planned appeal to the king would be effective (v. 11a).
"With the expression this manat the end of the prayer Nehemiah shows the big difference between his reverence for his God and his conception of his master, the Persian king. In the eyes of the world Artaxerxes was an important person, a man with influence, who could decide on life or death. In the eyes of Nehemiah, with his religious approach, Artaxerxes was just a man like any other man. The Lord of history makes the decisions, not Artaxerxes."8
"Although he is a layperson, he stands with the great prophets in interceding for his people and in calling them to be faithful to the Sinai covenant."9
Extrabiblical references that mention the office of cupbearer in the Persian court have revealed that this was a position second only in authority to the king (v. 11b).10Nehemiah was not only the chief treasurer and keeper of the king's signet ring, but he also tasted the king's food to make sure no one had poisoned it (Tobit 1:22).11
"From varied sources it may be assumed that Nehemiah as a royal cupbearer would probably have had the following traits: 1. He would have been well trained in court etiquette (cf. Dan. 1:4-5). 2. He was probably a handsome individual (cf. Dan. 1:4, 13, 15). 3. He would certainly know how to select the wines to set before the king. . . . 4. He would have to be a convivial companion to the king with a willingness to lend an ear at all times. . . . 5. He would be a man of great influence as one with the closest access to the king, and one who could well determine who could see the king. 6. Above all, Nehemiah had to be an individual who enjoyed the unreserved confidence of the king."12
Some commentators have concluded that Nehemiah as cupbearer must have been a eunuch.13This opinion rests on the translation of the Greek word eunouchos("eunuch") instead of oinochoos("cupbearer") in one version of the Septuagint. However this rendering appears to have been an error in translation since the Hebrew word means cupbearer.14
"Like many since his time, Nehemiah's greatness came from asking great things of a great God and attempting great things in reliance on him."15
Nehemiah prayed for four months about conditions in Jerusalem before he spoke to Artaxerxes about them (cf. 1:1; 2:1). Artaxerxes' reign began in the seventh Jewish month, Tishri (late September and early October), of 464 B.C.16Therefore Nehemiah presented his request in late March or early April of 444 B.C.
Nehemiah was probably very fearful (v. 2) because Artaxerxes could have interpreted sadness in his presence as dissatisfaction with the king.17
"Persian works of art such as the great treasury reliefs from Persepolis indicate that those who came into the king's presence did so with great deference, placing the right hand with palm facing the mouth so as not to defile the king with one's own breath . . ."18
Nehemiah realized that the moment had arrived for him to ask Artaxerxes to revise his official policy toward Jerusalem (1:11; Ezra 4:21). This too could have incurred the king's displeasure.
Nehemiah's walk with God is evident in that he talked to God as he was conversing with the king (v. 4; cf. 1 Thes. 5:17). Verse 4 contains a very beautiful example of spontaneous prayer, one of the best in the Bible.
"One of the most striking characteristics of Nehemiah was his recourse to prayer (cf. 4:4, 9; 5:19; 6:9, 14; 13:14)."19
"Quick prayers are possible and valid if one has prayed sufficiently beforehand. In this case Nehemiah's prayer is evidence of a life lived in constant communion with God. Nehemiah had prayed for months, but he knew he was completely dependent on God's work in the king's heart at this moment."20
God's working and our planning are not contradictory.
"Prayer is where planning starts."21
The text records that Nehemiah returned to Artaxerxes 12 years after the king had appointed him governor of Judah (5:14; 13:6). Nevertheless he may have also gone back sooner than that (v. 6).
One writer calculated the date of Artaxerxes' decree to rebuild Jerusalem as March 5, 444 B.C.22
"This date marks the beginning of Daniel's Seventy Weeks (Dan. 9:24-27). Sixty-nine of those seventy weeks (173,880 days) were literally fulfilled when Jesus entered Jerusalem, presented Himself at His royal entry' as Israel's messiah, on March 30, A.D. 33. The prophecy of Daniel was fulfilled to the very day (cf. Luke 19:40-42). The seventieth week of Daniel, the Tribulation (cf. Matt. 24:4-28; Rev. 6-19), will find its fulfillment in the future."23
The fortress by the temple (v. 8) was a citadel that stood just north of the temple. Its name in Hebrew was Birah (or in Greek, Baris). It was the forerunner of the Antonia Fortress that Herod the Great built and to which Luke referred in the Book of Acts (Acts 21:37; 22:24).24
". . . there were good political reasons for Artaxerxes to grant Nehemiah's request. Inaros had led a revolt in Lower Egypt in the late 460s, aided and abetted by Athens. The Persians had largely squashed this rebellion by 455, but pockets of resistance held out in the delta marshes thereafter. Then, early in the 440s, Megabyxos had led a revolt in Syria, which was probably put down just before Nehemiah made his request. Also, just about 445 the Athenians negotiated the Peace of Kallias with the Persians and hostilities between the two powers ceased. At this point in time Artaxerxes certainly recognized that a stronger Judah populated by loyal Jews would help to bring greater stability to Syria and would provide a bulwark on the border with Egypt."25
Because of the opposition of the Jews' neighbors, Artaxerxes sent a military escort to accompany Nehemiah to Jerusalem (v. 9). It is not certain how many Jews travelled with Nehemiah on this occasion. The writer gave us no numbers.
Sanballat may have originated in Horonaim in Moab, but he seems more likely to have come from one of the Beth-horons (Upper or Lower) located just a few miles northwest of Jerusalem (cf. Josh. 10:10-11).26The Elephantine papyri (ca. 400 B.C.) name him as the governor of Samaria, which he may have been then or after this event took place.27There was evidently a series of governors of Samaria named Sanballat.28Tobiah seems to have been a Jew--his name means "Yahweh is good"--who had attained a position similar to that of Sanballat in Ammon, east of Judah, under the Persians.29Scholars have traced nine generations of his influential family.30
Probably Nehemiah wanted to survey the damage to the walls secretly (v. 12) because, had Israel's enemies observed him, they might have stirred up the people of the land to riot against him.
"He wished to lay his plans without any possibility of leakage to the enemy before their execution began, and then to let the execution be so swift that the work would be finished before they could successfully appeal to the king against it once more."31
Perhaps Nehemiah only surveyed the southern parts of Jerusalem's wall because those were the only sections still standing.
"Jerusalem was always attacked where she was most vulnerable, from the north; thus there was little preserved in that direction."32
Another reason for Nehemiah's secrecy was probably that he wanted to formulate a plan before the Jews could marshal arguments why they could not rebuild the walls (v. 16). When he did present his ideas (vv. 17-18), the people responded positively. This is one evidence of Nehemiah's wisdom as a leader.
"There is evidence that Geshem[v. 19] (cf. 6:1ff.), far from being a negligible alien, was an even more powerful figure than his companions, though probably less earnestly committed to their cause. . . . From other sources it emerges that Geshem and his son ruled a league of Arabian tribes which took control of Moab and Edom (Judah's neighbors to the east and south) together with part of Arabia and the approaches to Egypt, under the Persian empire."33
Nehemiah continued the policy of not allowing the people of the land to help rebuild Jerusalem that Zerubbabel had begun (v. 20; cf. Ezra 4:3). He also continued to trust in God's enabling power primarily rather than in his own ability (v. 20; cf. John 15:5).
"Nehemiah was clearly a shaker, a mover, and a doer."34
Donald K. Campbell identified 21 principles of effective leadership that Nehemiah demonstrated in chapter 2.
"He established a reasonable and attainable goal
He had a sense of mission
He was willing to get involved
He rearranged his priorities in order to accomplish his goal
He patiently waited for God's timing
He showed respect to his superior
He prayed at crucial times
He made his request with tact and graciousness
He was well prepared and thought of his needs in advance
He went through proper channels
He took time (three days) to rest, pray, and plan
He investigated the situation firsthand
He informed others only after he knew the size of the problem
He identified himself as one with the people
He set before them a reasonable and attainable goal
He assured them God was in the project
He displayed self-confidence in facing obstacles
He displayed God's confidence in facing obstacles
He did not argue with opponents
He was not discouraged by opposition
He courageously used the authority of his position."35
