Nehemiah 5:2

For there were that said, we, our sons, and our daughters, are many,.... Not that they complained of the number of their children, for a numerous offspring was always reckoned a blessing with the

For there were that said, We, our sons, and our daughters, are many: therefore we take up corn for them, that we may eat, and live. No JFB commentary on these verses.

We, our sons, and our daughters, are many; which is in itself a blessing, but to us is turned into a curse. We take up corn for them, i.e. we are forced by our and their necessities to take up corn, to wit, upon their own unreasonable terms, as is here implied, and plainly expressed in the following relation. Others, Let us take up, &c., i.e. seeing we do the public work, let provision be made for us and our children out of the public stock. But this is no petition, but a complaint, as will appear.

Nehemiah 5:2 For there were that said, We, our sons, and our daughters, [are] many: therefore we take up corn [for them], that we may eat, and live.Ver. 2. We, our sons, and our daughters are many] That is a mercy, had we but keeping for them. Their wives were very fruitful; sed luctuosa faecunditate (as Jerome saith of Laeta); for they had more mouths than meat for them. Tho young children asked for bread, and no man brake it unto them, Lamentations 4:4. Therefore we take up corn for them] Grain upon use, to keep us from starving; and that by pawning or selling our dear children to the rich creditors for servants; till we can redeem them, which we are never like to do, Nehemiah 5:5. That we may eat and live] Merely to keep us alive; for else we would never have made our poor children bondslaves. But Necessitas durum telum, hunger is so pinching a pain, that a woman will eat her own child, as in the siege of Jerusalem, Samaria, Saguntum; yea, a man his own flesh, rather than die with hunger. Hitherto the poorest sort. Follows now another cry.

(2) We take up.—Let us receive. This is a general appeal for the governor’s help.

Verse 2. We, our sons, and our daughters, are many] Our families are larger than we can provide for; we are obliged to go in debt; and our richer brethren take advantage of our necessitous situation, and oppress us. The details which are given in the next verse are sufficiently plain.

2. For there were that said] This and the two following verses describe the people’s complaint. Their misfortunes were brought to a climax by the condition of hostilities, which put an end to trade and threatened town and country with ruin. The class referred to in this verse are the labourers, who depended upon wages. We … are many] The number of the poorer population in comparison with the wealthy was probably disproportionately large. The community since the return under Zerubbabel had never been prosperous. It had suffered much from the ill-treatment of the neighbouring peoples, more especially of the Samaritans. The pressure of the work on the wall, coupled with the expectation of attack, brought matters to a crisis. It was impossible to obtain regular employment, and prices had gone up. They had no property like those mentioned in Nehemiah 5:3-4, upon the security of which they could borrow money. therefore we take up corn for them &c.] R.V. let us get corn &c. The words in the A.V. are ambiguous. The clause expresses the wish. It is the utterance of the poor who have grown desperate. They demand food for themselves and their families. They cannot acquiesce in starvation, when they know that wealthy capitalists—their own fellow-countrymen—have made money out of their necessities and could well afford in a time of common peril to render them relief. Hence the words have a ring of menace. ‘If we are not given corn, let us take it’. It was equivalent to a threat either to use violence or to surrender the city to its enemies. The Vulgate ‘accipiamus pro pretio eorum frumentum’ gives a different interpretation of the words. It supposes that these poor starving people offered to sell their children as slaves in order that they might get money to buy food for themselves. This gives a sense approximating that of the conjecture to read ‘’orebhim’ for ‘rabbim’, ‘We give in pledge our sons and our daughters.’ In favour of this conjecture it is claimed (1) that the alteration is very slight, (2) that it brings Nehemiah 5:2 into close parallelism with Nehemiah 5:3, (3) that it obviates the awkwardness of the present text ‘our sons and our daughters, we are many,’ (4) that the present text is at variance with Scripture in making the size of families a subject of complaint. The conjecture is ingenious. But the existing text gives a good sense (see above), and is supported by the versions, which do not show any variation of reading. The position of the words ‘our sons and our daughters, we’ &c. emphasizes the thought uppermost in the people’s mind. The conjecture doubtless increases the verbal parallelism between Nehemiah 5:2-3. But this parallelism does not exist between Nehemiah 5:3-4, and the proposed alteration gives an artificial appearance to the language used. Lastly the conjecture anticipates the statement contained in Nehemiah 5:5. The fact that parents were on the point of giving their children in pledge as slaves forms the climax of the complaint.

Are many - A slight emendation brings this verse into exact parallelism with the next, and gives the sense - “We have pledged our sons and our daughters, that we might get corn, and eat and live.” Compare Nehemiah 5:5.

2. There were that said — These seem to have been persons who held about the civil status of the Roman proletaries, who owned no property, but served the state with their children, and procured a