Bible Commentaries

A false prophet, hired by Tobiah and Sanballat, also sought, byprophesying that the enemies of Nehemiah would kill him in the night, tocause him to flee with him into the holy place of the temple, and toprotect his life from the machinations of his enemies by closing the templedoors. His purpose was, as Nehemiah subsequently learned, to seduce himinto taking an illegal step, and so give occasion for speaking evil of him.

Nehemiah 6:10

“And I came into the house of Shemaiah the son of Delaiah, theson of Mehetabeel, who was shut up.” Nothing further is known of thisprophet Shemaiah. From what is here related we learn, that he was one ofthe lying prophets employed by Sanballat and Tobiah to ruin Nehemiah. We are not told what induced or caused Nehemiah to go into the house ofShemaiah; he merely recounts what the latter was hired by his enemies toeffect. From the accessory clause, “and he was shut up,” we may perhapsinfer that Shemaiah in some way or other, perhaps by announcing that hehad something of importance to communicate, persuaded Nehemiah tovisit him at his house. עצוּר והוּא does not, however,involved the meaning which Bertheau gives it, viz., that Nehemiah went toShemaiah's house, because the latter as עצוּר could not come tohim. The phrase says only, that when Nehemiah entered Shemaiah'shouse, he found him עצוּר, which simply means shut up, shutin his house, not imprisoned, and still less in a state of ceremonialuncleanness (Ewald), or overpowered by the hand of Jahve - laid hold on bya higher power (Bertheau). It is evident from his proposal to Nehemiah, “Let us go together to thehouse of God,” etc., that he was neither imprisoned in his house, norprevented by any physical cause from leaving home. Hence it follows thathe had shut himself in his house, to intimate to Nehemiah that also he felthis life in danger through the machinations of his enemies, and that he wasthus dissimulating in order the more easily to induce him to agree to hisproposal, that they should together escape the snares laid for them byfleeing to the temple. In this case, it may be uncertain whether Shemaiahhad shut himself up, feigning that the enemies of Judah were seeking hislife also, as the prophet of Jahve; or whether by this action he wassymbolically announcing what God charged him to make known toNehemiah. Either view is possible; while the circumstance that Nehemiahin Nehemiah 6:12 calls his advice to flee into the temple aנבוּאה againsthim, and that it was quite in character with the proceedings of such falseprophets to enforce their words by symbolical signs (comp. 1 Kings 22:11), favours the former. The going into the house of God is moreclosely defined by ההיכל אל־תּוך, within the holy place; for they(the enemies) will come to slay thee, and indeed this night will they cometo slay thee.” He seeks to corroborate his warning as a special revelationfrom God, by making it appear that God had not only made known to himthe design of the enemies, but also the precise time at which they intendedto carry it into execution.

Nehemiah 6:11

Nehemiah, however, was not to be alarmed thereby, butexclaimed: Should such a man as I flee? and what man like me could go intothe holy place and live? I will not go in. וחי is the perf. withVav consecutive: that he may live. This word is ambiguous; it may mean:to save his life, or: and save his life, not, expiate such a transgression of thelaw with his life. Probably Nehemiah used it in the latter sense, having inmind the command, Numbers 18:7, that the stranger that cometh nigh shall beput to death.

Nehemiah 6:12

And I perceived, - viz. from the conduct of Shemaiah on myrefusal to follow his advice, - and, lo, not God had sent him (i.e., had notcommissioned or inspired him to speak these words; לא emphatically precedes אלהים: not God, but himself), but that hepronounced this prophecy against me, because Tobiah and Sanballat hadhired him. The verb שׂכרו (sing.) agrees only with the latterword, although in fact it refers to both these individuals.

Nehemiah 6:13-14

“On this account was he hired that I might be afraid, and doso; and if I had sinned (by entering the holy place), it (my sin) would havebeen to them for an evil report, that they might defame me.” The use ofלמאן before two sentences, the second of which expresses thepurpose of the first, is peculiar: for this purpose, that I might fear, etc.,was he hired. To enter and to shut himself within the holy place wouldhave been a grave desecration of the house of God, which would havegiven occasion to his enemies to cast suspicion upon Nehemiah as adespiser of God's commands, and so to undermine his authority with thepeople. - In Nehemiah 6:14 Nehemiah concludes his account of the stratagems of hisenemies, with the wish that God would think upon them according to theirworks. In expressing it, he names, besides Tobiah and Sanballat, theprophetess Noadiah and the rest of the prophets who, like Shemaiah,would have put him in fear: whence we perceive, 1st, that the case related(Nehemiah 6:10-13) is given as only one of the chief events of the kind (מיראים, like Nehemiah 6:9, Nehemiah 6:19); and 2nd, that false prophets were again busy in thecongregation, as in the period preceding the captivity, and seeking toseduce the people from hearkening to the voice of the true prophets ofGod, who preached repentance and conversation as the conditions ofprosperity.

The wall completed, and the impression made by this work upon theenemies of the Jews. - Nehemiah 6:15 The wall was finished on the twenty-fifth dayof the month Elul, i.e., of the sixth month, in fifty-two days. According tothis statement, it must have been begun on the third day of the fifth month(Ab). The year is not mentioned, the before-named (Nehemiah 2:1) twentiethyear of Artaxerxes being intended. This agrees with the other chronologicalstatements of this book. For, according to Nehemiah 2:1, it was in Nisan (the firstmonth) of this year that Nehemiah entreated permission of the king to goto Jerusalem; and we learn from Nehemiah 5:14 and Nehemiah 13:6 that he was governor inJerusalem from the twentieth year onwards, and must therefore have setout for that place immediately after receiving the royal permission. In thiscase, he might well arrive in Jerusalem before the expiration of the fourthmonth. He then surveyed the wall, and called a public assembly for thepurpose of urging the whole community to enter heartily upon the workof restoration (Nehemiah 2:11-17). All this might take place in the course of thefourth month, so that the work could be actually taken in hand in the fifth. Nor is there any reasonable ground, as Bertheau has already shown, fordoubting the correctness of the statement, that the building was completedin fifty-two days, and (with Ewald) altering the fifty-two days into twoyears and four months.

(Note: Ewald, Gesch. iv. p. 178, thinks that traces of the correctreading of this verse are found in the statement of Josephus, Ant. xi. 5. 7f., that the wall of Jerusalem was finished in two years and fourmonths, and that the word וּשׁנתים may have been omittedfrom Nehemiah 6:15 by an ancient clerical error, though he is obliged toadmit that Josephus in other instances gives no trustworthy datesconcerning Nehemiah, whom he makes arrive at Jerusalem in thetwenty-fifth, and complete the wall in the twenty-eight year ofXerxes. On the other hand, Bertheau has already remarked, that evenif שׁנתים is supplied, no agreement with the statement ofJosephus is obtained, since the question still remains how four monthscan be made out of fifty-two days, or vice versa, fifty-two days offour months. In fact, it is vain to seek for any common ground onwhich these two different statements can be harmonized; and hencethe two years and four months of Josephus can scarcely be regarded asfurnishing traces of another reading of the text.)

For we must in this case consider, 1st, the necessity for hastening thework repeatedly pointed out by Nehemiah; 2nd, the zeal and relativelyvery large number of builders - the whole community, both the inhabitantsof Jerusalem and the men of Jericho, Tekoa, Gibeon, Mizpah, etc. havingcombined their efforts; 3rd, that the kind of exertion demanded by suchlaborious work and unintermitted watchfulness as are described Neh 4,though it might be continued for fifty-two days, could scarcely endureduring a longer period; and lastly, the amount of the work itself, whichmust not be regarded as the rebuilding of the whole wall, but only as therestoration of those portions that had been destroyed, the repair of thebreaches (Nehemiah 1:3; Nehemiah 2:13; Nehemiah 6:1), and of the ruined gates, - a large portion ofwall and at least one gate having remained uninjured.). To thismust be added that the material, so far as stone was concerned, was closeat hand, stone needing for the most part to be merely brought out of theruins; besides which, materials of all kind might have been collected andprepared beforehand. It is, moreover, incorrect to compute the extent ofthis fortified wall by the extent of the wall of modern Jerusalem.

Nehemiah 6:16

The news that the wall was finished spread fear among theenemies, viz., among the nations in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem (comp. Nehemiah 4:1; Nehemiah 5:9); they were much cast down, and perceived “that this workwas effected with the help of our God.” The expression בעניהם יפּלוּ occurs only here, and must be explained accordingto פּניו יפּלוּ, his countenance fell (Genesis 4:5), andלב יפּל, the heart fails (i.e., the courage) (1 Samuel 17:32):they sank in their own eyes, i.e., they felt themselves cast down,discouraged.

To this Nehemiah adds the supplementary remark, that in those days evennobles of Judah were in alliance and active correspondence with Tobiah,because he had married into a respectable Jewish family.

Nehemiah 6:17

“Also in those days the nobles of Judah wrote many letters(אגּרתיהם מרבּים, they made many, multiplied, theirletters) passing to Tobiah, and those of Tobiah came to them.”

Nehemiah 6:18

For many in Judah were sworn unto him, for he was the son-in-law of Shecaniah the son of Arah; and his son Johanan had taken (to wife)the daughter of Meshullam the son of Berechiah. In this case Tobiah wasconnected with two Jewish families, - a statement which is made to confirmthe fact that many in Judah were שׁבוּעה בּעלי,associates of an oath, joined to him by an oath, not allies in consequence ofa treaty sworn to (Bertheau). From this reason being given, we mayconclude his affinity by marriage was confirmed by an oath. Shecaniah benArah was certainly a respectable Jew of the race of Arah, Ezra 2:5. Meshullam ben Berechiah appears among those who shared in the work ofbuilding, Nehemiah 3:4 and Nehemiah 3:30. According to Nehemiah 13:4, the high priest Eliashib wasalso related to Tobiah. From the fact that both Tobiah and his sonJehohanan have genuine Jewish names, Bertheau rightly infers that theywere probably descended from Israelites of the northern kingdom of theten tribes. With this the designation of Tobiah as “the Ammonite” may beharmonized by the supposition that his more recent or remote ancestorswere naturalized Ammonites.

Nehemiah 6:19

“Also they reported his good deeds before me, and uttered mywords to him.” טּובתיו, the good things in him, or “his goodqualities and intentions” (Bertheau). The subject of the sentence is thenobles of Judah. לו מוציאים, they were bringingforth to him. On this matter Bertheau remarks, that there is no reason forassuming that the nobles of Judah endeavoured, by misrepresenting anddistorting the words of Nehemiah, to widen the breach between him andTobiah. This is certainly true; but, at the same time, we cannot furtherinfer from these words that they were trying to effect an understandingbetween the two, and representing to Nehemiah how dangerous andobjectionable his undertaking was; but were by this very course playinginto the hands of Tobiah. For an understanding between two individuals,hostile the one to the other, is not to be brought about by reporting to theone what is the other's opinion of him. Finally, Nehemiah mentions alsothat Tobiah also sent letters to put him in fear (יראני, infin. Piel, like 2 Chronicles 32:18; comp. the participle above, Nehemiah 6:9 and Nehemiah 6:14). Theletters were probably of similar contents with the letter of Sanballat givenin Nehemiah 6:6.