The princes of the people lived 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.
Parallel Translations
-
The princes of the people lived 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.
-
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 princes of the people dwelt 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.
Cross-references (14)
Passages linked to Nehemiah 11:1 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Isaiah 48:2 for they call themselves citizens of the holy city, and rely on the God of Israel; Yahweh of Armies is his name.
- Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake! Put on your strength, Zion. Put on your beautiful garments, Jerusalem, the holy city: for from now on the uncircumcised and the unclean will no more come into you.
- Nehemiah 10:34 We, the priests, the Levites, and the people, cast lots for the wood offering, to bring it into the house of our God, according to our fathers’ houses, at times appointed, year by year, to burn on Yahweh our God’s altar, as it is written in the law;
- Nehemiah 11:18 All the Levites in the holy city were two hundred eighty-four.
- Matthew 4:5 Then the devil took him into the holy city. He set him on the pinnacle of the temple,
- Deuteronomy 17:8-9 If there arises a matter too hard for you in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy within your gates, then you shall arise, and go up to the place which Yahweh your God chooses. You shall come to the priests who are Levites and to the judge who shall be in those days. You shall inquire, and they shall give you the verdict.
- Joshua 18:10 Joshua cast lots for them in Shiloh before Yahweh. There Joshua divided the land to the children of Israel according to their divisions.
- Judges 20:9-10 But now this is the thing which we will do to Gibeah: we will go up against it by lot; and we will take ten men of one hundred throughout all the tribes of Israel, and one hundred of one thousand, and a thousand out of ten thousand to get food for the people, that they may do, when they come to Gibeah of Benjamin, according to all the folly that the men of Gibeah have done in Israel.”
- 1 Chronicles 26:13 They cast lots, the small as well as the great, according to their fathers’ houses, for every gate.
- Nehemiah 7:4-5 Now the city was wide and large; but the people were few therein, and the houses were not built. My God put into my heart to gather together the nobles, and the rulers, and the people, that they might be listed by genealogy. I found the book of the genealogy of those who came up at the first, and I found this written in it:
- Psalms 122:5 For there are set thrones for judgment, the thrones of David’s house.
- Proverbs 16:33 The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from Yahweh.
- Matthew 27:53 and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection, they entered into the holy city and appeared to many.
- Acts 1:24 They prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two you have chosen
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (23 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain Because their enemies dwelt round about them, they provided…
Because their enemies dwelt round about them, they provided that it might be replenished with men, and used this policy, because there were few that offered themselves willingly.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Neh 11:1 And the rulers of the people dwelt…
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.
Read full note →
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.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem, which…
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.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain Jerusalem is called here the holy city (Neh 11:1),…
Jerusalem is called here the holy city (Neh 11:1), 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, Phi 2:21. 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, Neh 11:1. That was the proper place for them to reside in, because there were set the thrones of judgment (Psa 122:5), 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, Neh 11:2. 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.
Read full note →
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, Zac 12:5. 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 (Neh 11:6), 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 (Neh 11:6) 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, 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? (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, Neh 11:12-14. It was well that those labourers were not few. It is said of some of them that they were mighty men of valour (Neh 11:14); 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 (Neh 11:18), with 172 porters (Neh 11:19), 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, Neh 11:16. 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 exō 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 esō 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.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem,....…
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:
Read full note →
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.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain The rulers and men drawn by lot dwell at…
The rulers and men drawn by lot dwell at Jerusalem, ver. 1, 2. Their names, numbers and families, ver. 3-19. The cities and villages that were peopled by the rest, ver. 20-36.
To dwell - That the buildings of the city might be compleated, and the safety of it better provided for.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Lots are cast that a tenth of the people…
CHAPTER XI
Lots are cast that a tenth of the people may constantly dwell
Read full note →
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.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Neh 11:1. The rulers of the people dwelt at…
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.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain To bring one of ten - Artificial enlargements of…
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.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Lots. Those who had a mind to fix their…
Lots. Those who had a mind to fix their abode at Jerusalem, received every encouragement. But some were compelled, that the city might regain its ancient splendour, and become the bulwark of the nation. Josephus ([Antiquities?] xi. 5.) says, that Nehemias built at his own expense houses for the priest and Levites, who chose to reside there.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain 1And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem:…
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.
Read full note →
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 Solomon’s 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 [Shelah’s 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 king’s 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 king’s 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. הַתְּחִלָּה instead of being an error for הַתְּהִלָּה, may be for בַּתְּחִלָּה, “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 people—that is, other than the rulers.
Neh_11:2. That willingly offered themselves—i.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.Israel—i.e., the people of Israel as contrasted with priests, Levites, etc.The children of Solomon’s 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 man’s name, but a family’s title, to wit, the children of Shelah, Judah’s 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. Sallu’s 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, ἐπισκοπος) 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 Josiah’s 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 David’s 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 Nehemiah’s 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 Ahitub’s grandfather is Azariah, and the other has taken the former where Ahitub’s 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 brethren—i.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 David’s 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-priest’s 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 David’s time. His pedigree in 1 Chronicles 9. is merely a corruption of this one.
Neh_11:14. Their brethren.—Probably an error for “his brethren”—that is, Amashai’s. Their overseer was Zabdiel.—He was pakid (see on Neh_11:9) of all the priests. He is called son of the mighty ones—a 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. Nethinim—Ophel.—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 Uzzi’s 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 singers—Bakbukiah and Abda being the other two. But see next note.
Neh_11:23. Read: for it was the king’s commandment concerning them and a sure ordinance for the singers for each day’s 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 verse—making the singers (in the plural) the main subject, seems to show that our E. V. is right in stopping Uzzi’s 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 king’s special agent. Comp. 1Ch_23:28, where the Levites are said to be at the hand of the sons of Aaron. Pethahiah’s 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-Arba—i.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 (hatzér). 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-shual—like 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 David’s history (1 Samuel 30), is supposed to be Asluj, on the road from El Milh to Abdeh. Mekonah—possibly 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. Adullam—identified by Ganneau with Sh. Mudhkur, on the east side of Wady Sur, near Socoh. Lachish—36 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, Jeremiah’s birth-place. Nob is probably Neby Samwil, according to Lieut. Conder’s 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 craftsmen—i.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 Hezekiah’s 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 God’s 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 Paul’s 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 Nehemiah’s plan of increasing the population of the city. The genealogies and then the confession and covenant came in parenthetically—the former as part of the process in the plan, and the latter as chronologically happening while Nehemiah was maturing the plan.
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain THE INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM INCREASED, Neh_11:1-2.
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.
Read full note →
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.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 1. And] The copula has no connexion with the…
1. And] The copula has no connexion with the preceding chapter, and probably marks the compilatory character of the passage.
rulers] R.V. princes.
Read full note →
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.
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.
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.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (1, 2) The history reverts to Neh_7:5; lots are…
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.
Read full note →
(1) And the rulers.—The narrative joins on to Neh_7:4. The festival month had prevented the immediate carrying out of the governor’s 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).
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain ENLARGEMENT OF THE POPULATION OF JERUSALEM, WITH THE NUMBER…
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 (CH. Ne 11 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 (vers. 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 (vers. 4-19), and another of the country towns and villages occupied at this time by those Israelites who had returned from the captivity (vers. 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 ch. 12. as far as ver. 26. They comprise
Read full note →
1. A list of the priestly and Levitical houses which returned with Zerubbabel (vers. 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.
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 ("History of Israel," vol. 5. p. 159). 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.
Ch. 11. 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 (ver. 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 vers. 1 and 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 Rom_12:8) 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" (ver. 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.
HOMILIES BY R.A. REDFORD. Vers. 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 fulfillment 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 Vers. 1, 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" (ver. 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 (ver. 1); others "willingly offered themselves" (ver. 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. (ver. 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 thanks they "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". C. (Job_29:11)
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem.
Neh_11:1-19
And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem.
Read full note →
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.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain WE have seen that though the two passages that…
THE HOLY CITY
Neh_11:1-18
Read full note →
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.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain EXPLANATORY NOTES.] “This chapter is intimately connected with Neh_7:4,…
EXPLANATORY NOTES.] “This chapter is intimately connected with Neh_7:4, showing Nehemiah’s plan of increasing the population of the city. The genealogies and then the confession and covenant come in parenthetically—the 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.
Read full note →
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 empire”—Jamieson. 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 king’s commandment] The king is not David, but the Persian king Artaxerxes (Ezr_7:12, seq.).
Neh_11:24. Pethahiah … was at the king’s 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 Christ’s.” 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 lion’s whelp—bold 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 city—aids 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 Matthew’s 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 world—we may say beyond any important city that has ever existed on the earth—of 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 outliers—the Viri Galilæi, Scopus, and Mount of Offence—bend 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-days—all God’s. “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 Lord’s; 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 Sea—the murmurings at the ‘waters of strife’—the ‘wilderness’ of life—the ‘Rock of Ages, Mount Sinai and its terrors—the view from Pisgah—the passage of the Jordan—the rock of Zion, the fountain of Siloa, and the shades of Gehenna—the lake of Gennesareth, with its storms, its waves, and its fishermen—are 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 Jerusalem”—Wood.
THE SECULAR IN SACRED SERVICE
Neh_11:16. The outward business of the house of God
Outward and inward—a 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 God’s 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. Eli’s 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 ambitions—by envy, hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness. A cowl does not make a monk. High office cannot elevate a base man.
“The churl in spirit howe’er he veil
His want in forms for fashion’s 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.” Paul’s 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 thus—“Make 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 add—and 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 king’s 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 musician—all descendants of Cain. “Jubal was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ”—the 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 Jubal’s was handed down till after the Flood. But, as Mr. Aldis Wright, to whose article on music in Smith’s ‘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 Gideon’s 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 people’s songs, like that with which Jephthah’s 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 king’s 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 David’s, and was sung on three great occasions—before 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 Heman’s 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 Solomon’s 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 God’s 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 David’s 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,
O’er 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 David’s 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 day’s 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 God’s 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 nation’s 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 God’s curse upon the land could it be said—“All 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 mercy—according to David’s chant—endureth 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 Paul’s 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.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain Measures to Supplement the Population of Jerusalem
Measures to Supplement the Population of Jerusalem
1. This v. resumes the subject of the paucity of population in Jerusalem: see Neh_7:4. The rulers were already residing in the capital, and means were now taken to transport thither a proportion of the commons that had made their homes in the country towns (Neh_11:3). The city had received fortifications; but these were useless unless they were manned.
Read full note →
3. The province] i.e. Judæa: Ezr_5:8.
4. At Jerusalem, etc.] The list that follows apparently enumerates the provincial families that removed to Jerusalem. It likewise occurs, with some variations in the names and figures, in 1Ch_9:3.
9. Second over the city] presumably second to Joel: cp. Neh_11:17. But some render, 'over the second quarter of the city': cp. 2Ki_22:14; Zep_1:10.
14. The son of one of the great men] RV 'the son of Haggedolim.'
16. The outward business of] Perhaps the judicial administration described in 2Ch_19:8-10; 1Ch_26:29.
17. Was the principal, etc] i.e. led the praises of the Temple singers after prayer had been made. The second] i.e. to Mattaniah: cp. Neh_11:9.
20. This v. interrupts the account of the residents at Jerusalem: it should precede Neh_11:25.
22. The overseer, etc.] RV 'The overseer.. the son of Micha, of the sons of Asaph, the singers, over the business,' etc. The words over the business are connected with overseer. The business meant is the conduct of the Temple services.
23. For it was, etc.] RM 'for there was a commandment.. and a sure ordinance concerning the singers': The king] Artaxerxes: cp. Ezr_7:24.
24. Was at the king's hand] Possibly Pethahiah was a royal officer, subordinate to Nehemiah, having charge of civil, as distinct from ecclesiastical, matters.
25. The villages, with their fields] better, 'the villages in their fields,' i.e. the unwalled towns (Lev_25:31). Most of the names that follow occur in Jos_15:13.
31. From Geba dwelt] RV 'dwelt from Geba onward.'
35. The valley of craftsmen] RM 'Gehaharashim,' another locality.
36. And of the Levites, etc] RV and of the Levites, certain courses in Judah' (i.e. formerly reckoned to Judah) 'were joined to Benjamin.'
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain III. THE PEOPLE ESTABLISHED, THE DEDICATION OF THE WALL,…
III. THE PEOPLE ESTABLISHED, THE DEDICATION OF THE WALL, AND NEHEMIAH’s FINAL ACTS
CHAPTER 11
Read full note →
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 God’s 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.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain List of the Leading Men
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.
Read full note →
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 Malchiáh,
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 Shammus, 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.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 the people cast lots
the people cast lots
"the people threw marked stones"
Read full note →
to bring one of ten
"to bring one family out of every ten families"
translationWords
people group
life
Jerusalem
lots
holy
bless
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 11:1-36 The narrative returns to the issue of repopulating…
11:1-36 The narrative returns to the issue of repopulating the secure city of Jerusalem (see 7:1-5). The list of names roughly parallels the list in 1 Chr 9:2-17.
11:1-2 Sacred lots were probably the Urim and Thummim (10:34; Josh 7:14, 16-18; 14:2).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.