Holy Bible

The words of Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah. Nehemiah 1 The royal cup-bearer T. Rowson. I. LET US NOTICE THE WORDS ALLUDED TO BY NEHEMIAH. They were as follows: "And it came to pass in the month Chisleu, in the twentieth year," etc. 1. You observe that the time and the place of this conversation are given. It was at Shushan or Susa, the winter residence of the King of Persia. 2. There are places and periods that stand out more prominently than others in the history of most of us. "It came to pass in the month Chisleu," etc. 3. The particular matter referred to was a conversation he had with a kinsman of his, and with other co-religionists lately come from Palestine, respecting the state of the Jews there, "and concerning Jerusalem." Nehemiah was not indifferent to his country's condition. It was a twofold question that he put.(1) He wanted to know how it had fared with the Hebrews — "the delivered ones," "the escaped ones."(2) The other aspect of the question here put by Nehemiah has reference to Jerusalem. An exiled Londoner or Parisian's love for London or Paris would not, we may be sure, be deeper, stronger than that which Nehemiah must have had for the promised land, and for "the city, the place of his fathers' sepulchres." As was to be expected, he asked for information" concerning Jerusalem." It has been well said, "No place is so strong, no building so grand, no wall so firm, that sin cannot undermine and overthrow it." Let no man trust in ceremonies, or sacred-houses, or sacred traditions, so long as his heart is far from God, and his life is not in accord with His righteous creed. II. LET US NOTICE THE EMOTION OF NEHEMIAH ON HEARING THE TIDINGS ALLUDED TO. "I sat down and wept," he says, "and mourned certain days, and fasted." He also adds, "and prayed before the God of heaven." He wept. Nor was it weak or unmanly for him to do so. "His was the tear most sacred shed for others' pain." To weep at trifles, or at fictitious sorrows, may be effeminate; but 'twas no trifle, no imaginary sorrow, that now drew tears from Nehemiah. 1. His grief was further manifested by lamentation and fasting. 2. It was a profound grief which seized him. 3. It was a somewhat prolonged as well as profound grief. It lasted, at any rate, certain days. 4. It was a patriot's grief. 5. Again, it was a penitent grief. 6. Nehemiah's grief reminds us of another and yet more touching spectacle, the tears which Jesus shed over Jerusalem.And when He was come near, He beheld the city, and wept over it, etc. III. In the third place, LET US LOOK AT THE PRAYER WHICH NEHEMIAH WAS THUS PROMPTED TO OFFER, Let us learn that the province of prayer is not restricted to things spiritual. It embraces the affairs of everyday life, and all lawful undertakings great and small. ( T. Rowson. ) The typical patriot W. H. Booth. Nehemiah the civilian, as contrasted with Ezra the ecclesiastic, is brought before us in this book as the patriot deliverer of his people. I. The typical patriot Is PURELY DISINTERESTED IN PRINCIPLE. Personal ambition is sunk in desire for public good. Selfish motives are abandoned for generous impulses. 1. This does not prevent his rising to a position of honour even in an alien country. A good man is valued anywhere. Fidelity to convictions ever commands respect apart from the merit of the convictions themselves. Honour from an alien chief can only be allowed to the true patriot conditionally —(1) That no vital principle is sacrificed. Nehemiah evidently remained true to his nation and loyal to his God.(2) That it is made subservient to the interests of his people. At Shushan Nehemiah was really serving them better than he could do at Jerusalem until summoned there by Divine Providence. He was learning the principles of government at the centre of the most powerful government in the world. He had immediate access to the monarch himself. 2. He is always ready to surrender personal honour for his people's good —(1) If by so doing he can be of more service to his brethren. Self-sacrifice is the grand test of all pretension.(2) If personal honour be associated with his people's oppression. Learn — 1. By obedience we make the most stubborn laws of nature our servants. 2. By patience foes may be transformed into friends. 3. By the. discipline of adversity the foundations of prosperity are laid. II. The typal patriot IS LARGE-HEARTED IN HIS SYMPATHIES. 1. He manifests a real interest in the condition of his country (ver. 2). The words imply —(1) That Nehemiah was not a passive listener to the rehearsal of his people's affliction.(2) That he entered into particulars and was most minute in his inquiries. They who have no intention of practical sympathy are careful to elicit no tales of sorrow. 2. He takes upon himself the burden of his country's woes (ver. 4). III. The typal patriot RECOGNISES DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY IN HUMAN AFFAIRS. 1. By accepting the existence and authority of the King of kings. Not only as — (1) A dogma, but also as — (2) A regulative principle. "O Lord God of heaven, the great and terrible God." 2. By regarding Divine aid as superior to all other. (1) As the most powerful that can be obtained. (2) As controlling all other aid.Nehemiah seeks Divine assistance in urging his suit in his approaching interview with the king — (a) That he may reach the monarch's will by the most accessible channel. (b) That he may approach him at the most accessible moment. (c) That he may urge his request in the most prevalent form. 3. By regarding Divine aid as available through prayer. Nehemiah's prayer is one of the model prayers of the Bible, as — (1) Reverent in its attitude towards God (ver. 5). (2) Persistent in pressing its suit (ver. 6). (3) Penitent in its tone and temper (vers. 6, 7). (4) Scriptural in its argument (vers. 8, 9). (5) Childlike in its spirit (vats. 10, 11). (6) Definite in its aim (ver. 11).Learn — 1. Nehemiah is a type of Him who "though He was rich, yet for our sakes became poor," etc. 2. Intercessory prayer is the inspiration and the evidence of true patriotism. 3. Divine interposition is the safest to invoke in national crises. ( W. H. Booth. ) The pious patriot T. C. Finlayson. He was willing, moreover, to make no little sacrifice in the cause of patriotism. Even in asking the king for leave of absence on such a mission, he was probably risking the royal displeasure. No one could well predict how an Oriental despot would be likely to regard such a request. All might depend on the whim or caprice of the moment. That Nehemiah should wish to exchange Susa for Jerusalem — that he should desire to quit, even for a time, the sunlight of the royal presence which was condescending to shine upon him — might possibly be viewed as an insult. The very fact that he was a favourite might only increase the royal irritation. A tyrant likes his pets to appreciate their privileges; and Nehemiah, by asking for leave of absence, might only lose the royal favour and be deposed from his office. Then, again, even if his request should be granted, he would have to sacrifice for a time all the luxury and ease of his present position; he would have to subject himself to toil and danger; he would have to face the arduous journey between Susa and Jerusalem; and then, after arriving in the city of his fathers, he would have to confront the hostility of the surrounding tribes, and might even have to exchange the courtier's robes for the soldier's armour. But all these sacrifices Nehemiah was prepared to make in the cause of patriotism. His court life had not enervated his spirit. An intelligent and manly piety does not destroy or despise any of the natural affections. There is, indeed, a "pietism" which makes light of the ties of home and kindred, which disparages patriotism, as if it were inconsistent with the universal love inspired by the gospel, or which even ventures to taboo politics as a worldly region which a spiritual man ought rather to avoid. Let us beware of this false spirituality. The world of natural human relationships is God's world, and not the devil's; and if the devil has intruded into it, there is all the more need that it should be occupied by the earnest soldiers of God. Pietism may say, "Never mind the condition of the walls of Jerusalem: souls are the grand concern." But, in point of fact, the condition of walls may sometimes affect the condition of souls. Things external often stand in subtle relation to things spiritual. The body influences the mind; and the outward conditions of national existence may stand in the closest connection with the religious life of a people. Besides, it Ii natural that we should love our own country with a special affection; and a true religion does not destroy but consecrates all natural attachments. On the other hand, there are many politicians who are no patriots, and there is also a patriotism in which there is no godliness, There are men who take the keenest interest in politics merely because it furnishes an arena for the exercise of their faculties, the display of their talents, and the furtherance of their ambitions. And there are also true patriots — real lovers of their country — who yet never recognise the hand of God in national history, who never think of praying to God in connection with their plans, or of submitting their political projects and methods to the test of His will. Now, if a man's patriotism is his only religion, this is doubtless better than that his "god" should be his "belly," and that he should "glory in his shame." But still, this patriotism in which there is no regard for God is fraught with danger. For the grand and prime demand on every one of us is that we be the servants of the Most High, the soldiers of Christ, the loyal subjects of the Divine kingdom. And then it is our bounden duty to serve God in and through all our natural pursuits, affections, and relationships, and, amongst other things, to bring all our political theories, aims, and methods into the light of Christ and of His Spirit. We want, both in the Church and in the commonwealth, men and women in whom, as in Nehemiah of old, piety and patriotism are blended and intertwined. ( T. C. Finlayson. ) Divine purposes working through providence W. H. Booth. I. HERE IS EMINENT PIETY IN A MOST UNLIKELY PLACE (ver. 1). 1. Palaces are not generally favourable to piety —(1) Because unrestrained liberty usually degenerates into license and lavish luxury into licentiousness. Court morals are proverbially corrupt.(2) Because religion does not flourish amidst human pomp and the outward symbols of pride. A palace is, above all others, a theatre of human exaltation and proud display.(3) Because the commands of a sovereign are liable to clash with the mandates of Jehovah. 2. Piety is not impossible even in a palace —(1) Inasmuch as God will protect them who honour Him. If God has placed His servant in the palace to do His work, He will keep him there until the work is done.(2) Inasmuch as many eminent examples are recorded in Scripture. Not only Nehemiah, but Moses, Joseph, Obadiah, and Daniel. Learn — 1. Eminent piety does not depend upon the accidentals of a man's social position. 2. Exalted positions are less desirable than they appear. 3. The most desirable station in life is that in which we can serve God to the best advantage. II. HERE IS AN EVENT APPARENTLY TRIFLING LEADING TO RESULTS OF THE GREATEST MAGNITUDE (ver. 2). 1. The most trivial event may lead to the most momentous issues. The oak is contained in the acorn; the prairie is fired by a spark; a nation is plunged into war as the result of a jest. Many a quiet conversation has led to world-wide revolutions. 2. Nothing is therefore trivial to a wise man.Learn — 1. Every detail in a good man's life is part of a Divine plan. 2. To avoid crossing the Divine purpose and thwarting the Divine plan we must do all to the glory of God. III. HERE IS A STARTLING SUMMONS OF A MOST UNEXPECTED CHARACTER. Although no direct appeal was made, Nehemiah as truly heard the Divine call as Samuel the voice in the darkness, or Paul the voice of the vision, "Come over to Macedonia." 1. Here is an appeal for sympathy and help — not the less powerful because indirect. Mute appeals are often the most eloquent. AEschylus appealing for the life of his brother by holding up the stump of the arm he had lost in the service of his country. The high-priest in the holy place sprinkled the blood seven times without speaking. This appeal was — (1) The cry of humanity appealing to human sympathies. (2) The cry of brotherhood appealing to his kinship. (3) The cry of fatherland appealing to his patriotism. (4) The call of God. 2. Here is a summons which involved great sacrifice. Love never counts the cost. Sacrifice is its glory. Sincerity always distinguished from hypocrisy by this test. 3. Here is an unexpected summons promptly obeyed.Learn — 1. Life is full of surprises, and the tenure of ease uncertain. 2. The good man is prepared to follow the leadings of providence without hesitation and at any cost. IV. HERE IS A SAVIOUR RAISED UP IN A MOST UNLOOKED-FOR QUARTER. 1. God is ever training His agents for the work which He means them to accomplish. Nehemiah, Joseph, Moses, David, Cyrus, Paul, Luther, Wesley, and many others. 2. At the proper time God will bring His agents into contact with their life-work. 3. The qualifications of God's agents are not always recognised at first.Learn — 1. God uses the most unlikely agents. 2. God leads in the most unlooked-for ways. 3. God's redemptive scheme is the most incomprehensible of all mysteries. V. HERE IS A PICTURE OF THE DEMORALISING AND DISMANTLING TENDENCY OF SIN, ALIKE IN CITIES AND IN SOULS. 1. The inhabitants of Jerusalem were demoralised: "In great affliction and reproach." Long captivity and dependence had enervated them. Powers not used lapse into impotence. Sin cherished withers moral force. 2. The battlements of Jerusalem were dismantled. Thus does sin ever destroy defences and throw down battlements, leaving souls at the mercy of destructive forces which lead to eternal shame.Learn — 1. Sin reveals its deadly nature in its direful consequences even in this life. 2. These consequences are designed to act as warnings to unwary souls. 3. They suggest still more awful penalties in that world where judgment is untempered by mercy. ( W. H. Booth. ) The exile W. Ritchie. Nothing is here said of the parentage or early training of Nehemiah. We may suppose he grew up in a pious home, where daily prayers, and instructions, and acts of godliness were imbued with deep religious feeling. The early days of the future reformer were perhaps spent in listening to the recital of many an endeared memory of the land of Judah, and his young heart was probably taught to beat high with hope of the restoration of his people to their covenant inheritance. I. THE SITUATION HE OCCUPIED. The palace at Shushan was one of the most magnificent in the ancient world. The site of its ruins has been identified by modern travellers, and here large blocks of marble, with other fragments of splendid edifices, are often dug up — the relics of a grandeur that has long since passed away. The place of his abode offered many attractions to captivate a youthful mind. There were in the streets of that vast city the splendour and bustle of Oriental life. There might seem in all this "lust of the eye and pride of life" ominous danger to youthful piety. But it is a wonderful power, the grace of God in the human heart. It is marvellous in the souls it selects for saving change, in the places where it operates, and in the triumphs it achieves. Often it appears wanting in those who seem most favourably situated for its possession, while it reigns in hearts where it might seem impossible for it to live and grow. And in him God made the palace of a heathen prince the nursery and sanctuary of an eminent servant of His cause. In view of this, let none among us allege that their situation or circumstances render it impracticable for them to cultivate religion or abound in well-doing. Men may rush into temptation in their earthly business, and thereby raise up invincible barriers to the exercise of piety; but God, by His providence, never places any man in a situation where it is impossible for him to love and obey Him. If you are where God has placed you, be sure you may be, and do, what God requires you. In every situation of life there is enough to test the sincerity of faith in things unseen. II. THE SPIRIT HE DISPLAYED. It was a spirit of tender interest for the good of Jerusalem. The subjects of inquiry show the spirit of the man. He was living in ease and affluence himself, but he could not forget he was "of the stock of Israel," and he felt, therefore, the prosperity of religion bound up with that feeble remnant. He might have seen couriers arrive at the royal palace from distant regions, bearing tidings of fresh victories gained by Persian armies, and of new countries subjected to the Persian crown, and yet not be greatly moved by the intelligence; but the arrival of these fellow-saints stirred up his spirit within him to inquire concerning the state of the Church in the land of his fathers. Do we not see here that it is the history and condition of the cause of truth on earth which interests the wise and good? They may not, indeed, be unaffected by events which concern the welfare of mankind and illustrate the wisdom of God in His providence; but it is especially the progress of the kingdom of grace that engages the attention of its true subjects. It was a spirit of deep sorrow for the distress of his people in Judah. III. THE EXERCISES IN WHICH HE ENGAGED. Nehemiah "fasted and prayed." ( W. Ritchie. ) The use of a great purpose Scenes from the Life of Nehemiah. To a thoughtful mind there is much interest in the contemplation of the circumstances under which the great purpose of a life first rise into distinctness before the mind of one whose energies, henceforth, are to be used for his country and his God, and whose example stands before us as a noble incentive to steadfastness of purpose and courage in the performance of duty. ( Scenes from the Life of Nehemiah. ) Piety in unexpected places J. M. Randall. Fine gold has often been found under e, barren and unpromising surface. Rare jewels have been found in the crevices of rocks and in the pebbly beds of rivers. Exquisite flower's have peeped forth from the ledge of a stupendous Alpine rock, and have breathed their sweetness amid a wilderness of ice and snow. Palm-trees have lifted up their tall and elegant stems, adorned at the summit with long pendant leaves and enriched with nourishing fruit, in the midst of the sandy desert, and their life has been sustained by a hidden well of springing water at their root. This has often been the case with God's children — Joseph, Obadiah, saints in Caesar's household. Here Nehemiah in the court of one of the most luxurious eastern princes. ( J. M. Randall. ) Nehemiah and his contempories J. M. Randall. Nehemiah flourished four centuries before Christ. When consuls and dictators were beginning to play an important part in Roman politics; when Xenophon and Herodotus were historians and Phidias was sculptor; when Euripides, Sophocles, and Aristophanes wrote tragedy and comedy; when Socrates taught philosophy and Pericles was prime minister at Athens; and when the western nations of Europe were sunk in savage barbarism, Nehemiah was the devout cup-bearer at Shushan. We are not told from what tribe he sprang. His grandfather had been taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar; his father was born and educated at Babylon. Probably the beauty of his person and the sweetness of his manners, the extensive range of his intellect, and the integrity of his character, recommended Nehemiah to royal favour. ( J. M. Randall. ) I asked them concerning the Jews... and concerning Jerusalem Careful inquiry helpful to philanthropic effort W. P. Lockhart. Few portions of Scripture set forth more clearly than the Book of Nehemiah the power of one man to do great things for God when God is with him. With an earnest desire to work for God, Nehemiah first sought to gain accurate information, from a reliable source, both as to the need that existed and the nature of the work that had to be done. Careful inquiry respecting the field of any projected effort will often reveal much of which we had previously but little conception. This should not dishearten us, however, for we ought rather to remember that the deeper the darkness and degradation of those whom we seek to reach, the more needful is it to bring them under the enlightening and elevating power of the gospel of Christ. ( W. P. Lockhart. ) Man's love for the land of his birth Christian Age. Mr. Christie Murray, writing of the old Australian settlers, relates an incident to show how, after a long life of exile, they still pine for home and England. When his ship left Plymouth Sound a good deal of mud adhered to the anchor. After it was dried he broke off a bit, declaring, half in jest and half in earnest, that this piece of English earth should go with him around the world. In Australia he showed it to a white-haired ranchman among the hills. The old man eyed it wistfully. "Give it to me," he said at last. "You will see old England again; I never shall. I would value that bit of earth more than diamonds." Mr. Murray gave it to him, and continued his journey. When he came back, months later, he found that the old man had ridden more than a hundred miles to a settlement to buy a gay little plush stand and a glass case in which to preserve his treasure. De Maistre, describing the hut of the Moravian missionary in the most northern human settlement within the Arctic circle, says that he observed, suspended over the fireplace like a holy relic, a piece of rough, unbarked wood. He looked at it curiously. The Dane touched it with reverence. "It is a bit of the old oak-tree at home," he said, his eyes full of tears. Nothing can be more real than that clinging in the heart of a man to the land of his birth. It may be of all countries in the world the poorest, the least beautiful, the most insignificant. But it is his own, and if he is a genuine man the trifle which tells him of it, though he stands in a king's palace, will speak to him as with the power of his mother's voice. ( Christian Age. ) The wall of Jerusalem also is broken down, and the gates thereof are burned with fire. Walls and gates J. A. Lefevre, D. D. What, then, are the "walls and gates" of the New Testament? The Church is now catholic, and no longer national. It is not now a civil polity and the necessities of a civil community that determine the nature of these "walls and gates." Yet there are some things of prime importance, like the walls and gates of Jerusalem. I. THE SACRED OBSERVANCE OF THE LORD'S DAY. All history shows that whenever and wherever the Sabbath is overthrown the Church is perilously exposed, not only to decay, but even to extinction. II. A NUMEROUS CONGREGATION OF ATTENDANTS UPON THE ORDINANCES AND WORSHIP OF THE CHURCH. III. SABBATH SCHOOLS ARE "THE GATES" OF OUR JERUSALEM. IV. THE LIBERALITY AND SELF-SACRIFICE OF GOD'S PEOPLE. ( J. A. Lefevre, D. D. ) Interest in Jerusalem J. M. Randall. I. THE STORY OF JERUSALEM THROWS LIGHT UPON GOD'S MORAL GOVERNMENT. Great privileges involve great responsibilities. National sin brings national ruin. Nations are rewarded and punished in this world. II. IT IS A MARK OF REAL PIETY TO BE ZEALOUS FOR THE CAUSE AND KINGDOM OF GOD. How bitterly do Christians mourn over the wickedness around them, and the severe conflict they have to maintain in their own breasts. III. EVERY CHRISTIAN HAS, MORE OR LESS, TO TREAD A SOLITARY PATH, AND HIS DEEPEST SORROWS ARE FREQUENTLY THOSE WHICH HE CANNOT COMMUNICATE TO THE NEAREST AND DEAREST ON EARTH. Who would have thought that when his attendance upon the king was over for the day, Nehemiah would hasten to his chamber, weep bitter tears of grief, and mourn and pray? ( J. M. Randall. ) Jerusalem, the holy J. M. Randall. city: — Thoroughly to realise the sad tidings brought to Nehemiah, we must briefly recall the former history of Jerusalem. No city possesses so deep and thrilling an interest. Other cities may boast of a higher antiquity. Thebes and Nineveh may go back even to the repeopling of the world after the deluge. Other cities may claim a broader area, a more numerous population, a more extended commerce. Other cities may claim to be the centres of a far greater earthly dominion than was ever accorded to David. But whether in the past, the present, or the future, them is no interest like that which attaches to the holy city. ( J. M. Randall. ) Sin ruins a kingdom W. Jay. I. IF THERE BE A MORAL GOVERNOR OF THE UNIVERSE SIN MUST PROVOKE HIM. II. IF SIN PROVOKE GOD HE IS ABLE TO PUNISH IT. III. BODIES OF MEN PUNISHABLE IN THIS WORLD ONLY. IV. THERE IS A TENDENCY IN THE VERY NATURE OF SIN TO INJURE AND RUIN A COUNTRY. V. GOD'S DEALINGS WITH GUILTY NATIONS ARE CONFIRMED BOTH BY HIS WORD AND ALL HUMAN HISTORY. VI. GOD ALWAYS GIVES PREVIOUS INTIMATION OF HIS COMING TO JUDGE A NATION. VII. IF GOD FAVOURED A NATION WITH AN INTIMATION OF HIS WILL, THEIR SINS ARE AGGRAVATED BY MEANS OF THIS LIGHT. VIII. WHEN GOD HAS DISTINGUISHED A PEOPLE BY SINGULAR INSTANCES OF HIS FAVOUR, THAT PEOPLE WILL BE PROPORTIONALLY CRIMINAL UNLESS THEY DISTINGUISH THEMSELVES BY THEIR DEVOTEDNESS TO HIM. IX. WHEN A NATION IS UNDER CORRECTIONS OF THE ALMIGHTY, THEY ARE EMINENTLY SINFUL IF THEY DISREGARD THE TOKENS OF HIS WRATH. X. SHAMELESS SINNING IS A SURE PROOF OF GENERAL CORRUPTION. ( W. Jay. ) The walls of Jerusalem A. J. Griffith. What do we know of these walls previous to the time of Nehemiah? The city of Jerusalem passed into the hands of the Jews under David. He wrested the rocky stronghold of Zion, which commands Jerusalem, from the Canaanitish tribe of the Jebusites. He made it the capital of his kingdom. To secure his position David threw a wall round the entire city, including the fortress of Zion. In the reign of Solomon (B.C. 1016-976) this wall was greatly strengthened. Very large towers were erected at intervals upon it, and its height was increased. Probably also some outlying parts of the city were now comprised within its circuit. For nearly two centuries this wall remained intact. Jerusalem sustained several sieges; but it was only in the reign of Amaziah, in B.C. 826, that a breach was made in the fortifications. Jehoash, the king of Israel, " brake down the wall of Jerusalem, from the gate of Ephraim to the corner gate, four hundred cubits" ( 2 Kings 14:13 ). Through this gap in the wall, Josephus tells us, the victorious Jehoash drove his chariot into Jerusalem, leading Amaziah captive with him. Uzziah (B.C. 808) the succeeding king of Judah, was a prosperous and enterprising prince. He occupied himself for a large portion of his life in the improvement of his capital. He repaired the breach made by Jehoash, and built additional towers. Other portions of the walls that had been suffered to fall into decay were renewed. He was an artillerist; he equipped the walls and their towers with powerful engines for hurling stones and other missiles against besiegers. Jothan, his son (B.C. 756), also strengthened the walls by building new massive towers. The care which had been expended upon the fortifications of the city by successive kings, for so long a period, bore memorable fruit in the reign of Hezekiah. The tide of Assyrian invasion which then swept over Palestine, and which overwhelmed for ever the ten tribes of Israel, met with a check before the fortress of Jerusalem. In prospect of this invasion Hezekiah had repaired the walls wherever they had become dilapidated, and had erected an additional wall. While the city was invested the mysterious plague came upon the camp of the Assyrians, which swept off myriads of them in a single night. They were content to retire (B.C. 710) with a tribute paid by Hezekiah; the city itself, however, remained uncaptured. Manasseh, after his repentance (B.C. 677-642), paid attention to the fortifications of the city. "He did not only," says Josephus, "repair the old walls with great diligence, but added another wall to the former. He built, also, very lofty towers, and the garrisoned places before the city he strengthened not only in other respects, but with provisions of all sorts that they wanted." It was nearly forty years later that the series of calamities commenced which lasted for twenty years, and which culminated in the complete overthrow of this illustrious city. In B.C. 606 Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, entered Jerusalem, and after threatening Jehoiakim, the king, with captivity, left him in possession of his throne. He appeared before the city again nine years later; and Jehoiachin, who had succeeded his father Jehoiakim, surrendered Jerusalem to him with scarcely a struggle. Nebuchadnezzar carried him off with him to Babylon, and placed his uncle Zedekiah upon the throne in Jerusalem. Six years after this Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon, and after a siege of a year and a half, the severest it had undergone since it had been a Jewish city, a breach was made in the wall of Jerusalem, through which the Babylonian army poured into the city. Zedekiah and most of the people were transferred to Babylon. The royal palace, the temple, and all the principal buildings were burned, and the stately and massive walls were levelled to the ground, their circuit being only traceable by the vast heaps of rubbish left by the devastators. To restore these famous walls, to perform once more the work of David and Solomon and their successors, to reproduce in a few weeks the labour of centuries, this was the task which lay before Nehemiah. But what was their size? What were the -particulars of the work undertaken by Nehemiah? The city of Jerusalem is not at the present time a great city. The circumference of the modern wails is two and a half miles; and while the ancient walls would not in many portions coincide with the present, nevertheless the total circuit of the old walls would not greatly differ in length from those of the present time. It has been stated by the eminent architect, Mr. Ferguson, in Dr. Smith's "Dictionary of the Bible," Smith's Bible Dictionary s.v. that the area within the old walls was never more than one hundred and eighty acres; and he remarks, by way of comparison, that the building known as the Great Exhibition of 1851 covered eighteen acres, or a tenth part of the area of ancient Jerusalem. From this estimate it will be seen that the city was one of moderate dimensions. We must remember also that here and there portions of the wall were left standing. The foundations, too, would remain, throughout the entire circuit, as they originally were. The object of the invaders would be to render the fortifications incapable of serving any longer as a defence to the inhabitants; and this object would be gained without disturbing the foundations of the walls. The stones and rabble of which they had been built were not carried to a distance, but lay in heaps ready to the hands of the builders. This material would not, however, be available in every case. The limestone around Jerusalem, which was used in the construction of the important buildings, when exposed to fire (as many parts of the wall had been) rapidly disintegrated. It resembled the granite of which Chicago was built, and which crumbled to dust in the great fire which destroyed that city a few years since. This is the point of the taunt uttered by Sanballat ( Nehemiah 4:2 ): "Will these Jews revive the stones out of the heaps of the rubbish which are burned?" ( A. J. Griffith. ) City walls important A. J. Griffith. In the solicitude of Nehemiah over the ruined condition of the walls of Jerusalem we have brought into prominence an element in ancient national life which it is useful to understand, and which is the foundation and keystone of Nehemiah's subsequent action. It was the walls that made the nation in those days. The law which then prevailed ripen the face of the earth was the law of might. A town of any size was at the mercy of every roving, plundering horde, if it were unfortified. When once it was surrounded with strong walls, it became possible for the citizens to accumulate property, enact laws for the order and well-being of the citizens, and to elect magistrates to carry these laws into effect. With their erection dated the commencement of civic life. Where the city was large, the citizens became a nation. The Babylonian nat

Benson Commentary Nehemiah 1:1 The words of Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah. And it came to pass in the month Chisleu, in the twentieth year, as I was in Shushan the palace, Nehemiah 1:1 . The words of Nehemiah — Or, the acts, as the Hebrew word here used often signifies; that is, the things which Nehemiah did. In the month Chisleu — Which answers to part of our November and December. In the twentieth year — Namely, of the reign of Artaxerxes. As I was in Shushan the palace — In the region of Elimais, where the Persian kings kept their court in the winter, and which, from its pleasant and beautiful situation, was called by heathen writers Susa, which signifies a lily, or, as Athenaeus says, a rose. Nehemiah 1:2 That Hanani, one of my brethren, came, he and certain men of Judah; and I asked them concerning the Jews that had escaped, which were left of the captivity, and concerning Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:2 . I asked them concerning the Jews that had escaped — Either concerning those who were not carried captives when others were, but remained in the land; or rather, those that had escaped out of the slavery which they had endured in Assyria, Babylon, and other strange lands. Which were left of the captivity — The remnant of those numerous captives, now returned and settled in Jerusalem, and other parts of Judea. Though Nehemiah lived in ease, honour, and affluence himself, he could not forget that he was an Israelite, nor shake off the thoughts of his brethren, or his concern for their welfare. He therefore inquires in what condition they were, and whether Jerusalem was again become a flourishing city. Nehemiah 1:3 And they said unto me, The remnant that are left of the captivity there in the province are in great affliction and reproach: the wall of Jerusalem also is broken down, and the gates thereof are burned with fire. Nehemiah 1:3 . They said, The remnant that are left in the province — In Judea, which was now made a province under the Persian kings; are in great affliction and reproach — Despised and distressed by the neighbouring nations. The wall of Jerusalem also is broken down, &c. — The walls and gates continue as the Chaldeans left them after their conquest of the city, the Jews not being in a condition to rebuild them, nor having commission from the kings of Persia to do so, but only to build the temple, and their own private houses. This made their condition both very despicable, under the abiding marks of poverty and slavery, and very dangerous, for their enemies might, when they pleased, make an easy prey of them. Nehemiah 1:4 And it came to pass, when I heard these words, that I sat down and wept, and mourned certain days, and fasted, and prayed before the God of heaven, Nehemiah 1:4 . When I heard these words I sat down — Probably upon the ground, as the manner was, in great sorrow, and perhaps in ashes; and wept and mourned certain days — Thus the desolations and distresses of the church of Christ ought to be the matter of our grief, how much soever we live at ease. And fasted and prayed — Not in public, which he had no opportunity of doing, but before the God of heaven — Who sees in secret, and will reward openly. Nehemiah 1:5 And said, I beseech thee, O LORD God of heaven, the great and terrible God, that keepeth covenant and mercy for them that love him and observe his commandments: Nehemiah 1:6 Let thine ear now be attentive, and thine eyes open, that thou mayest hear the prayer of thy servant, which I pray before thee now, day and night, for the children of Israel thy servants, and confess the sins of the children of Israel, which we have sinned against thee: both I and my father's house have sinned. Nehemiah 1:6 . Which I pray before thee night and day — He refers to all the prayers which he had for some time been addressing to God, during his sorrow for the desolations of Jerusalem. Nehemiah 1:7 We have dealt very corruptly against thee, and have not kept the commandments, nor the statutes, nor the judgments, which thou commandedst thy servant Moses. Nehemiah 1:8 Remember, I beseech thee, the word that thou commandedst thy servant Moses, saying, If ye transgress, I will scatter you abroad among the nations: Nehemiah 1:9 But if ye turn unto me, and keep my commandments, and do them; though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the heaven, yet will I gather them from thence, and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set my name there. Nehemiah 1:9 . But if ye turn unto me, I will gather them from thence, &c. — This promise made by Moses he trusted God would fulfil, as he had the threatening. It is to be observed, that Nehemiah was directed in this prayer to God, and in his efforts for the restoration of Jerusalem, by the predictions of Moses, Deuteronomy 30:1-4 . And he plainly found the truth of that prophecy in the readiness of the king of Persia to grant his petition, which, no doubt, confirmed his faith in what Moses there declares. Nehemiah 1:10 Now these are thy servants and thy people, whom thou hast redeemed by thy great power, and by thy strong hand. Nehemiah 1:10 . Whom thou hast redeemed by thy great power, &c. — In days of old, and thy power is still the same; wilt thou not therefore still redeem them, and perfect their redemption? Let not them be overpowered by the enemy that have a God of infinite power on their side. Nehemiah 1:11 O Lord, I beseech thee, let now thine ear be attentive to the prayer of thy servant, and to the prayer of thy servants, who desire to fear thy name: and prosper, I pray thee, thy servant this day, and grant him mercy in the sight of this man. For I was the king's cupbearer. Nehemiah 1:11 . Who desire to fear thy name — Who are not only called by thy name, but really have a reverence for it: who now worship thee, and thee only, according to thy will, and have an awful sense of all the discoveries which thou art pleased to make of thyself. Those who truly desire to fear his name shall be graciously accepted of God. Grant him mercy in the sight of this man — The king, upon whom he was going to attend: who, though a god by office, was but a man by nature, and therefore his heart was wholly at God’s disposal. Favour with men is then comfortable, when we see it springing from the mercy of God. For I was the king’s cup-bearer — Whereby I had opportunity to speak to him, and some favour with him, which encouraged me to make this prayer, and to hope for some success. Many of the Jews, by the singular favour of God, obtained considerable dignities in their captivity, as Daniel and his companions, Zerubbabel and others; among whom was this pious man, who was advanced to this office of cup-bearer when he was but a youth; which, it must be observed, was a place of great honour and advantage in the Persian court, because of the privilege which it gave him who bore it, of being daily in the king’s presence, and the opportunity which he had thereby of gaining his favour for the procuring of any petition he should make to him. That it was a place of great temporal advantage, seems evident by Nehemiah’s gaining those immense riches which enabled him, for so many years, ( Nehemiah 5:14 ; Nehemiah 5:19 ,) out of his own privy purse only, to live in his government with great splendour and expense, without burdening the people at all. See Prideaux, Anno 445. Benson Commentary on the Old and New Testaments Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.

Expositor's Bible Commentary Nehemiah 1:1 The words of Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah. And it came to pass in the month Chisleu, in the twentieth year, as I was in Shushan the palace, NEHEMIAH THE PATRIOT Nehemiah 1:1-3 THE Book of Nehemiah is the last part of the chronicler’s narrative. Although it was not originally a separate work, we can easily see why the editor, who broke up the original volume into distinct books, divided it just where he did. An interval of twelve or thirteen years comes between Ezra’s reformation and the events recorded in the opening of Nehemiah. Still a much longer period was passed over in silence in the middle of Ezra. { Ezra 7:1 } A more important reason for the division of the narrative may be found in the introduction of a new character. The book which now bears his name is largely devoted to the actions of Nehemiah, and it commences with an autobiographical narrative, which occupies the first six chapters and part of the seventh. Nehemiah plunges suddenly into his story, without giving us any hints of his previous history. His father, Hacaliah, is only a name to us. It was necessary to state this name in order to distinguish the writer from other men named Nehemiah. There is no reason to think that his privileged position at court indicates high family connections. The conjecture of Ewald that he owed his important and lucrative office to his personal beauty and youthful attractions is enough to account for it. His appointment to the office formerly held by Zerubbabel is no proof that he belonged to the Jewish royal family. At the despotic Persian court the king’s kindness towards a favourite servant would override all claims of princely rank. Besides, it is most improbable that we should have no hint of the Davidic descent if this had been one ground of the appointment. Eusebius and Jerome both describe Nehemiah as of the tribe of Judah. Jerome is notoriously inaccurate; Eusebius is a cautious historian, but it is not likely that in his late age-as long after Nehemiah as our age is after Thomas A Becket-he could have any trustworthy evidence beyond that of the Scriptures. The statement that the city of Jerusalem was the place of the sepulchres of his ancestors { Nehemiah 2:3 } lends some plausibility to the suggestion that Nehemiah belonged to the tribe of Judah. With this we must be content. It is more to the point to notice that, like Ezra, the younger man, whose practical energy and high authority were to further the reforms of the somewhat doctrinaire scribe, was a Jew of the exile. Once more it is in the East, far away from Jerusalem, that the impulse is found for furthering the cause of the Jews. Thus we are again reminded that wave after wave sweeps up from the Babylonian plains to give life and strength to the religious and civic restoration. The peculiar circumstances of Nehemiah deepen our interest in his patriotic and religious work. In his case it was not the hardships of captivity that fostered the aspirations of the spiritual life, for he was in a position of personal ease and prosperity. We can scarcely think of a lot less likely to encourage the principles of patriotism and religion than that of a favourite upper servant in a foreign heathen court. The office held by Nehemiah was not one of political rank. He was a palace slave, not a minister of state like Joseph or Daniel. But among the household servants he would take a high position. The cupbearers had a special privilege of admission to the august presence of their sovereign in his most private seclusion. The king’s life was in their hands, and the wealthy enemies of a despotic sovereign would be ready enough to bribe them to poison the king, if only they proved to be corruptible. The requirement that they should first pour some wine into their own hands, and drink the sample before the king, is an indication that fear of treachery haunted the mind of an Oriental monarch, as it does the mind of a Russian czar today. Even with this rough safeguard it was necessary to select men who could be relied upon. Thus the cup-bearers would become "favourites." At all events, it is plain that Nehemiah was regarded with peculiar favour by the king he served. No doubt he was a faithful servant, and his fidelity in his position of trust at court was a guarantee of similar fidelity in a more responsible and far more trying office. Nehemiah opens his story by telling us that he was in "the palace," { Nehemiah 1:1 } or rather "the fortress," at Susa, the winter abode of the Persian monarchs-an Elamite city, the stupendous remains of which astonish the traveller in the present day-eighty miles east of the Tigris and within sight of the Bakhtiyari Mountains. Here was the great hall of audience, the counterpart of another at Persepolis. These two were perhaps the largest rooms in the ancient world next to that at Karnak. Thirty-six fluted columns, distributed as six rows of six columns each, slender and widely spaced, supported a roof extending two hundred feet each way. The month Chislev, in which the occurrence Nehemiah proceeds to relate happened, corresponds to parts of our November and December. The name is an Assyrian and Babylonian one, and so are all the names of the months used by the Jews. Further, Nehemiah speaks of what he here narrates as happening in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, and in the next chapter he mentions a subsequent event as occurring in the month Nisan { Nehemiah 2:1 } in the same year. This shows that he did not reckon the year to begin at Nisan, as the Jews were accustomed to reckon it. He must have followed the general Asiatic custom, which begins the year in the autumn, or else he must have regulated his dates according to the time of the King’s accession. In either case, we see how thoroughly un-Jewish the setting of his narrative is-unless a third explanation is adopted, viz. , that the Jewish year, beginning in the spring, only counts from the adoption of Ezra’s edition of The Law. Be this as it may, other indications of Orientalism, derived from his court surroundings, will attract our attention in our consideration of his language later on. No writer of the Bible reflects the influence of alien culture more clearly than Nehemiah. Outwardly, he is the most foreign Jew we meet with in Scripture. Yet in life and character he is the very ideal of a Jewish patriot. His patriotism shines, all the more splendidly because it bursts out of a foreign environment. Thus Nehemiah shows how little his dialect and the manners he exhibits can be taken as the gauge of a man’s true life. Nehemiah states that, while he was thus at Susa, in winter residence with the court, one of his brethren, named Hanani, together with certain men of Judah, came to him. { Nehemiah 1:2 } The language here used will admit of our regarding Hanani as only a more or less distant relative of the cupbearer, but a later reference to him at Jerusalem as "my brother Hanani" { Nehemiah 7:2 } shows that his own brother is meant. Josephus has an especially graphic account of the incident. We have no means of discovering whether he drew it from an authentic source, but its picturesqueness may justify the insertion of it here: "Now there was one of those Jews who had been carried captive, who was cupbearer to King Xerxes; his name was Nehemiah. As this man was walking before Susa, the metropolis of the Persians, he heard some strangers that were entering the city, after a long journey, speaking to one another in the Hebrew tongue, so he went to them and asked from whence they came, and when their answer was that they came from Judaea, he began to inquire of them again in what state the multitude was, and in what condition Jerusalem was, and when they replied that they were in a bad state, for that their walls were thrown down to the ground, and that the neighbouring nations did a great deal of mischief to the Jews, while in the daytime they over-ran the country and pillaged it, and in the night did them mischief, insomuch that not a few were led away captive out of the country, and out of Jerusalem itself, and that the roads were in the daytime found full of dead men. Hereupon Nehemiah shed tears, out of commiseration of the calamities of his countrymen, and, looking up to heaven, he said, ‘How long, O Lord, wilt thou overlook our nation, while it suffers so great miseries, and while we are made the prey and the spoil of all men?’ And while he staid at the gate, and lamented thus, one told him that the king was going to sit down to supper, so he made haste, and went as he was, without washing himself, to minister to the king in his office of cupbearer," etc. Evidently Nehemiah was expressly sought out. His influence would naturally be valued. There was a large Jewish community at Susa, and Nehemiah must have enjoyed a good reputation among his people; otherwise it would have been vain for the travellers to obtain an interview with him. The eyes of these Jews were turned to the royal servant as the fellow-countryman of greatest influence at court. But Nehemiah anticipated their message and relieved them of all difficulty by questioning them about the city of their fathers. Jerusalem was hundreds of miles away across the desert; no regular method of communication kept the Babylonian colony informed of the condition of the advance guard at the ancient capital; therefore scraps of news brought by chance travellers were eagerly devoured by those who were anxious for the rare information. Plainly Nehemiah shared this anxiety. His question was quite spontaneous, and it suggests that amid the distractions of his court life his thoughts had often reverted to the ancient home of his people. If he had not been truly patriotic, be could have used some device, which his palace experience would have readily suggested, so as to divert the course of this conversation with a group of simple men from the country, and keep the painful subject in the background. He must have seen clearly that for one in his position of influence to make inquiries about a poor and distressed community was to raise expectations of assistance. But his questions were earnest and eager, because his interest was genuine. The answers to Nehemiah’s inquiries struck him with surprise as well as grief. The shock with which he received them reminds us of Ezra’s startled horror when the lax practices of the Jewish leaders were reported to him, although the trained court official did not display the abandonment of emotion which was seen in the student suddenly plunged into the vortex of public life and unprepared for one of those dread surprises which men of the world drill themselves to face with comparative calmness. We must now examine the news that surprised and distressed Nehemiah. His brother and the other travellers from Jerusalem inform him that the descendants of the returned captives, the residents of Jerusalem, "are in great affliction and reproach" and also that the city walls have been broken down and the gates burnt. The description of the defenceless and dishonoured state of the city is what most strikes Nehemiah. Now the question is to what calamities does this report refer? According to the usual understanding, it is a description of the state of Jerusalem which resulted from the sieges of Nebuchadnezzar. But there are serious difficulties in the way of this view. Nehemiah must have known all about the tremendous events, one of the results of which was seen in the very existence of the Jewish colony of which he was a member. The inevitable consequences of that notorious disaster could not have come before him unexpectedly and as startling news. Besides, the present distress of the inhabitants is closely associated with the account of the ruin of the defences, and is even mentioned first. Is it possible that one sentence should include what was happening now, and what took place a century earlier, in a single picture of the city’s misery? The language seems to point to the action of breaking through the walls rather than to such a general demolition of them as took place when the whole city was razed to the ground by the Babylonian invaders. Lastly, the action of Nehemiah cannot be accounted for on this hypothesis. He is plunged into grief by the dreadful news, and at first he can only mourn and fast and pray.. But before long, as soon as he obtains permission from his royal master, he sets out for Jerusalem, and there his first great work is to restore the ruined walls. The connection of events shows that it is the information brought to him by Hanani and the other Jews from Jerusalem that rouses him to proceed to the city. All this points to some very recent troubles which were previously unknown to Nehemiah. Can we find any indication of those troubles elsewhere? The opening scene in the patriotic career of Nehemiah exactly fits in with the events which came under our consideration in the previous chapter. There we saw that the opposition to the Jews which is recorded as early as Ezra 4:1-24 , but attributed to the reign of an "Artaxerxes," must have been carried into effect under Artaxerxes Longimanus-Nehemiah’s master. This must have been subsequent to the mission of Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, as Ezra makes no mention of its distressful consequences. The news reached Nehemiah in the twentieth year of the same reign. Therefore the mischief must have been wrought some time during the intervening thirteen years. We have no history of that period. But the glimpse of its most gloomy experiences afforded by the detached paragraph in Ezra 4:1-24 , exactly fits in with the description of the resulting condition of Jerusalem in the Book of Nehemiah. This will fully account for Nehemiah’s surprise and grief; it will also throw a flood of light on his character and subsequent action. If he had only been roused to repair the ravages of the old Babylonian invasions, there would have been nothing very courageous in his undertaking. Babylon itself had been overthrown, and the enemy of Babylon was now in power. Anything tending to obliterate the destructive glory of the old fallen empire might be accepted with favour by the Persian ruler. But the case is quite altered when we think of the more recent events. The very work Nehemiah was to undertake had been attempted but a few years before, and it had failed miserably. The rebuilding of the walls had then excited the jealousy of neighbouring peoples, and their gross misrepresentations had resulted in an official prohibition of the work. This prohibition, however, had only been executed by acts of violence, sanctioned by the government. Worse than all else, it was from the very Artaxerxes whom Nehemiah served that the sanction had been obtained. He was an easy-going sovereign, readily accessible to the advice of his ministers; in the earlier part of his reign he showed remarkable favour towards the Jews, when he equipped and despatched Ezra on his great expedition, and it is likely enough that in the pressure of his multitudinous affairs the King would soon forget his unfavourable despatch. Nevertheless he was an absolute monarch, and the lives of his subjects were in his hands. For a personal attendant of such a sovereign to show sympathy with a city that had come under his disapproval was a very risky thing. Nehemiah may have felt this while he was hiding his grief from Artaxerxes. But if so, his frank confession at the first opportunity reflects all the more credit on his patriotism and the courage with which he supported it. Patriotism is the most prominent principle in Nehemiah’s conduct. Deeper considerations emerge later, especially after he has come under the influence of an enthusiastic religious teacher in the person of Ezra. But at first it is the city of his fathers that moves his heart. He is particularly distressed at its desolate condition, because the burial-place of his ancestors is there. The great anxiety of the Jews about the bodies of their dead, and their horror of the exposure of a corpse, made them look with peculiar concern on the tombs of their people. In sharing the sentiments that spring out of the habits of his people in this respect, Nehemiah gives a specific turn to his patriotism. He longs to guard and honour the last resting-place of his people; he would hear of any outrage on the city where their sepulchres are with the greatest distress. Thus filial piety mingles with patriotism, and the patriotism itself is localised, like that of the Greeks, and directed to the interests of a single city. Nehemiah here represents a different attitude from that of Mordecai. It is not the Jew that he thinks of in the first instance, but Jerusalem, and Jerusalem is dear to him primarily, not because of his kinsmen who are living there, but because it is the city of his fathers’ sepulchres, the city of the great past. Still the strongest feelings are always personal. Patriotism loves the very soil of the fatherland, but the depth and strength of the passion spring from association with an affection for the people that inhabit it. Without this, patriotism degenerates into a flimsy sentiment. At Jerusalem Nehemiah develops a deep personal interest in the citizens. Even on the Susa acropolis, where the very names of these people are unknown to him, the thought of his ancestry gives a sanctity to the far-off city. Such a thought is enlarging and purifying. It lifts a man out of petty personal concerns; it gives him unselfish sympathies it prepares demands for sacrifice and service. Thus, while the mock patriotism which cares only for glory and national aggrandisement is nothing but a vulgar product of enlarged selfishness, the true patriotism that awakens large human sympathies is profoundly unselfish, and shows itself to be a part of the very religion of a devoted man. Nehemiah 1:4 And it came to pass, when I heard these words, that I sat down and wept, and mourned certain days, and fasted, and prayed before the God of heaven, NEHEMIAH’S PRAYER Nehemiah 1:4-11 NEHEMIAH records the twofold effect of the melancholy news which his brother and the other travellers from Jerusalem brought him. Its first consequence was grief; its second prayer. The grief was expressed in the dramatic style of the Oriental by weeping, lamentations, fasting, and other significant acts and attitudes which the patriot kept up for some days. Demonstrative as all this appears to us. it was calm and restrained in comparison with Ezra’s frantic outburst. Still it was the sign and fruit of heart felt distress, for Nehemiah was really and deeply moved. Had the incident ended here, we should have seen a picture of patriotic sentiment, such as might be looked for in any loyal Jew, although the position of Nehemiah at court would have proved him loyal under exceptional circumstances. But the prayer which is the outcome of the soul-stirring thoughts and feelings of devout patriotism lifts the scene into a much higher interest. This prayer is singularly penetrating, revealing a keen insight into the secret of the calamities of Israel, and an exact perception of the relation of God to those calamities. It shows a knowledge of what we may call the theology of history, of the Divine laws and principles which are above and behind the laws and principles indicated by the expression "the philosophy of history." In form it is a combination of three elements, - the language of devotion cultivated by Persian sages, expressions culled from the venerated Hebrew law-book, Deuteronomy, and new phrases called out by the new needs of the immediate occasion. Nehemiah shows how natural it is for a person to fall into an accepted dialect of worship, even in an original prayer the end of which is novel and special. He opens his prayer with an expression that seems to be more Persian than Jewish. He does not make his appeal to Jehovah as the "God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," hut after the sacred name he adds the descriptive title "God of heaven." This is quite a favourite phrase of Nehemiah’s. Thus in describing his interview with Artaxerxes he says, "So I prayed to the God of heaven" { Nehemiah 2:4 } and at Jerusalem he answers the mockery of his opponents by exclaiming, "The God of heaven, He will prosper us." { Nehemiah 2:20 } Now the same expression is found repeatedly in the chronicler’s version of royal edicts-in the edict of Cyrus, { Ezra 1:2 } in the edict of Darius, { Ezra 6:10 } in the edict of Artaxerxes. { Ezra 7:12 ; Ezra 7:21 ; Ezra 7:23 } If it is indeed of Persian origin, the use of it by Nehemiah is most significant. In this case, while it indicates the speaker’s unconscious adoption of the language of his neighbours and shows him to be a Jew of Oriental culture, it also illustrates a far-reaching process of Providence. Here is an exalted name for God, the origin of which is apparently Gentile, accepted and used by a devout Jew, and through his employment of it passing over into the Scriptures, so that the religion of Israel is enriched by a phrase from abroad. It would be but a poor championship of the truth of the Hebrew revelation that would lead us to close our eyes to whatever of good is to be found outside its borders. Certainly we honour God by gladly perceiving that He has not left Himself entirely without witness in the dim-lit temple of Pagan thought. It is a ground for rejoicing that, while the science of Comparative Religion has not touched the unique preeminence of the Hebrew and Christian Faith, that science has been able to recover scattered pearls of truth that lay strewn over the waste of the world’s wide thinking. If in a few rare cases some such gems had been found earlier and even set in the crown of Israel, we can only be thankful that the One Spirit who is the source of all revelation has thus evinced the breadth of His activity. Nor should it disturb our faith if it could be proved that more important elements of our religion did not originate among the Jews, but came from Babylonian, Persian, or Greek sources, for why should not God speak through a Gentile if He chooses so to do? This is not a point of dogma. It is simply a question of fact to be determined by historical inquiry. We cannot say for certain, however, that Nehemiah’s phrase was coined in a Persian mint. Its novelty, its absence from earlier Hebrew literature, and its repeated appearance in the edicts of Persian kings favour the notion. But we know that before reaching us these edicts have been more or less translated into Hebrew forms of thought, so that the phrase may possibly be Jewish, after all. Still, even in that ease it seems clear that it must have been first used in the East and under the Persian rule. The widening of his horizon and the elevation of his idea of Providence which resulted from the experience of the exile helped to enlarge and exalt the Jew’s whole conception of God. Jehovah could no longer be thought of as a tribal divinity. The greater prophets had escaped from any such primitive notion much earlier, but not the bulk of the nation. Now the exiles saw that the domain of their God could not be limited to. the hills and valleys of Palestine. They perceived how His arm reached from the river to the ends of the earth, how His might was everywhere supreme, directing the history of empires, overthrowing great monarchies, establishing new world-powers. A more subtle movement of thought has been detected in the appearance of this suggestive phrase, "God of heaven." The idea of the transcendence of God is seen to be growing in the mind of the Jew. God appears to be receding into remote celestial regions-His greatness including distance. As yet this is only vaguely felt, but here we have the beginning of a characteristic of Judaism which becomes more and more marked in course of time, until it seems as though God were cut off from all direct connection with men on earth, and only administering the world through a whole army of intermediaries, the angels. After this phrase with the Persian flavour, Nehemiah adds expressions borrowed from the Hebrew Book of Deuteronomy, a book with ideas and words from which his prayer is saturated throughout. God is described on the one hand as "great and terrible," and on the other hand as keeping covenant and mercy for them that love Him and observe His commandments. { Nehemiah 1:5 ; See Deuteronomy 7:9 } The Deuteronomist adds "to a thousand generations"-a clause not needed by Nehemiah, who is now only concerned with one special occasion. The first part of the description is in harmony with the new and exalted title of God, and therefore it fits in well here. It is also suitable for the circumstances of the prayer, because in times of calamity we are impressed with the power and terror of Providence. There is another side to these attributes, however. The mention of them suggests that the sufferers have not fallen into the hand of man. Hanani and his fellow-Jews made no allusion to a Divine action; they could not see beyond the jealousy of neighbouring people in the whole course of events. But Nehemiah at once recognised God’s hand. This perception would calm him as he watched the solemn movement of the drama carried up into heavenly regions. Then, aided by the cheering thought which came to him from the book of Divine revelation on which his prayer was moulded, Nehemiah turns to the covenant-keeping mercy of God. The covenant which he appeals to here must be that of the Book of Deuteronomy; his subsequent reference to the contents of that book make this quite clear. It is important to see that Nehemiah recognises the relation of God’s mercy to His covenant. He perceives that the two go together, that the covenant does not dispense with the need of mercy any more than it forecloses the action of mercy. When the covenant people fall into sin, they cannot claim forgiveness as a right, nor can they ever demand deliverance from trouble on the ground of their pact with God. God does not, bargain with His children. A Divine covenant is not a business arrangement, the terms of. which can be interpreted like those of a deed of partnership, and put into force by the determinate will of either party. The covenant is, from the first, a gracious Divine promise and dispensation, conditioned by certain requirements to be observed on man’s side. Its very existence is a fruit of God’s mercy, not an outcome of man’s haggling, and its operation is just through the continuance of that mercy. It is true a promise, a sort of pledge, goes with the covenant, but that is a promise of mercy, a pledge of grace. It does not dispense with the mercy of God by converting what would otherwise be an act of pure grace on his part into a right which we possess and act upon of our own sole will. What it does is to afford a channel for the mercy of God, and to assure us of His mercy, which, however, remains mercy throughout. From another point of view the covenant and the mercy go together. The mercy follows the covenant. The expression "the unconvenanted mercies of God" has been used in bitter irony, as though any hope that depended on such mercies was poor indeed, a bare refuge of despair. But so to treat the unknown goodness of God is to discredit that "ceaseless, unexhausted love" which has given us the latest and highest and best name of God. We do not know how far the vast ocean of the loving kindness of God extends. On the other hand, certain definite assurances of mercy are given along the lines of a covenant. Therefore it is clearly wise and right for people who possess the covenant to follow those lines. Other people who are outside the covenant may meet with wonderful surprises in the infinite Fatherhood of God; but those of His children who are in the home must expect to be treated according to the established order of the house. No doubt they too will have their grand surprises of Divine grace, for God does not tie Himself to forms and rules at home while He exercises liberty abroad. To do so would be to make the home a prison. But still His revelation of methods of grace is a clear indication that it is our duty to observe those methods, and that we have no ground of complaint if we do not receive the grace we seek when we wilfully neglect them. Here then we see the necessity of studying the revelation of the will and mind of God. That prayer has most ground of hope in it which keeps nearest to the thought and spirit of Scripture. The terms of the covenant quoted by Nehemiah require obedience on the part of those who would receive mercy under it, and this obedience is needed in those who are seeking restoration and forgiveness as well as in those who have not fallen from the covenant throughout. The reference to "mercy" makes that clear. The penitent submits, and in the surrender of his will he is made the recipient of the Divine mercy. But behind the obedience is the spirit of love that prompts it. The mercy is for them that love God and observe His commandments. Love is the fulfilling of the law from the first. It is expected in the Old Testament as well as in the New; it is prescribed by the Deuteronomist as decidedly as by St. John, for it is the only ground of real obedience. The slavish terror of the lash which squeezes out a reluctant utterance of submission will not open the door for the mercy of God. The divine covenant secures mercy only for those who return to their allegiance in a spirit of love. Having thus set forth the grounds of his prayer in his address to God and his plea of the covenant, Nehemiah proceeds to invoke the Divine attention to his petition. There is an echo of the courtier, perhaps, in his request that God’s ear should be attentive and His eyes open: { Nehemiah 1:6 } but his whole conduct forbids the idea of servile obsequiousness. His prayer, he here says, is offered "day and night," so his report of it may be regarded as a sort of final summing up of a long, persevering succession of prayers. The unwearying persistence of the man reveals two favourable features in his character-his earnestness of purpose and his unflagging faith. Our Lord denounces "vain repetitions" { Matthew 6:7 } - i, e. , repetitions the very value of which is thought to reside in their number, as though prayer could be estimated arithmetically. But the prayer that is repeated simply because the worshipper is too persistent to be satisfied till it is answered does not come into the category of "vain repetitions": it is anything but empty. Immediately after his invocation of God’s gracious attention Nehemiah plunges into a confession of sin. Ezra’s great prayer was wholly occupied with confession, { Ezra 9:6-15 } and this mournful exercise takes a large place in Nehemiah’s prayer. But the younger man has one special ground of confession. The startling news of the ruinous condition of the recently restored city of Jerusalem rouses a sort of national conscience in his breast. He knows that the captivity was brought about as a chastisement for the sins of the Jews. That great lesson-so recklessly ignored when it was insisted on by Jeremiah-had been burnt into the deepest convictions of the exiles. Therefore Nehemiah makes no complaint of the cruel behaviour of the enemies of Israel. He does not whine about the pitiable plight of the Jews. Their real enemies were their sins, and the explanation of their present distress was to be found in their own bad conduct. Thus Nehemiah goes to the root of the matter, and that without a moment’s hesitation. Further, it is interesting to see how he identifies himself with his people in this confession. Living far from the seat of the evil, himself a God-fearing, upright man, he might have been tempted to treat the citizens of Jerusalem as Job’s comforters treated the patriarch of Uz, and denounce their sins from the secure heights of his own virtue. In declining to assume this pharisaic attitude, Nehemiah shows that he is not thinking of recent specific sins committed by the returned exiles. The whole history of Israel’s apostasy is before him; he feels that the later as truly as the earlier calamities flow from this one deep, foul fountain of iniquity. Thus he can join himself with his fathers and the whole nation in the utterance of confession. This is different from the confession of Ezra, who was thinking of one definite sin which he did not share, but which he confessed in a priestly sympathy. Nehemiah is less concerned with formal legal precepts. He is more profoundly moved by the wide and deep course of his people’s sin generally. Still it is a mark of self-knowledge and true humility, as well as of patriot