Nehemiah 8

Nehemiah 8:1-10

The Reading And Explaining To The People Of The Law Of Moses And A Review Of Their Past History, Leads To Them Establishing A Renewal Of Their Covenant With God (Nehemiah 8:1 to Nehemiah 10:39). Regardless of sources of which we cannot be sure, there can be no doubt that this whole section emphasises covenant renewal. The wall being built, this led on to a special renewing of the covenant.· It commences with the reading aloud and explaining of the Law, which has a deep effect on the people and results in a new obedience to the Law (chapter 8).· This is followed by a review of Israel’s past history before God, as they pray to Him acknowledging His covenant faithfulness (chapter 9).· We then have the signing of a covenant by the leaders of the people, which is explained in detailed terms chapter 10, and is based on the teaching of the Law, as the people through their leaders solemnly confirm the covenant.All these were an essential part of covenant renewal, emphasising that the people knew exactly the grounds on which they were responding to the covenant. It was on the basis of God’s renewed Law; it was based on prayerful consideration of what God had done for them throughout history in faithfulness to His covenant; and it made demands on them in accordance with that Law.

Nehemiah 8:9-12

The People Wept On Hearing The Law And Were Exhorted Not To Do So By Their Leaders On The Grounds That This Was An Occasion For Celebration (Nehemiah 8:9-12). It is apparent that there was a revival atmosphere at the gathering. God was present among them and His Holy Spirit was moving on men’s hearts through His chosen one in the same way as at the Exodus (Isaiah 63:11). In consequence God’s commands went deep into their hearts and they wept as they realised how far they had come short. But their leaders then called on them not to weep. Rather they were to rejoice, because it was YHWH’s holy day, a day when God was at work among them. And as a result they moved from weeping to rejoicing, figuratively feasting at God’s holy table, as the elders had at the Exodus (Exodus 24:9-11).In the Law the Feast of Trumpets (the new moon day of the seventh moon period) was specifically designated as a ‘holy day’ (Leviticus 23:24; Numbers 29:1-6).

It was a day of many offerings and sacrifices over and above the norm, a day especially set apart for YHWH in which no servile work was to be done.It is significant that here within this day on this occasion the whole of the festivities of the seventh month are encapsulated. First the proclamation of God’s truth takes place, like the blowing of a trumpet (Nehemiah 8:1-8), then there is responsive weeping as on the Day of Atonement (Nehemiah 8:9), and finally there is feasting as on the seven days of the Feast of Tabernacles (Nehemiah 8:10-12).Nehemiah 8:9‘And Nehemiah, who was the governor, and Ezra the priest the scribe, and the Levites who taught the people, said (singular verb) to all the people, “This day is holy to YHWH your God, do not mourn, nor weep.” For all the people wept, when they heard the words of the Law.’The weeping of the people, as God’s Holy Spirit brought home to them His words, demonstrated the genuineness of their feelings.

This was no formal hearing of the Law, or formal weeping in accordance with tradition. It was a genuine repentance for sin. The thought of how Jerusalem had been restored and was once more ‘whole’ had brought a new impetus to the Law (Torah - ‘instruction’), and it now came home to them with new meaning. It also brought home a new meaning to the seventh month. There was seen to be good reason for blowing the rams’ horns, and for heeding the words of God.The weeping of the people was such that it moved those who were responsible for them to respond, in order to deal with their anguish. And this their leaders and teachers naturally did.

Up to this point the governor Nehemiah had remained in the background as what was happening had come under the jurisdiction of Ezra’s appointment by Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:13-14; Ezra 7:25-26), but now, when the people wept and were distraught, it became the governor’s responsibility and he came to the fore. From our knowledge of his personal godliness we are not surprised at his intervention.

He would naturally feel responsibility for them. And along with his efforts were those of Ezra, as both Priest and Scribe, and of the teaching Levites. This is one of the rare places where Nehemiah and Ezra are mentioned side by side.Note On The Suggestion That The Name Of Nehemiah Be Excised From Nehemiah 8:9. Many scholars have suggested that the name of Nehemiah was inserted in Nehemiah 8:9 by a later copyist or editor. They feel his presence to be inconsistent. On what then do they base that idea?Firstly it is pointed out that Nehemiah and Ezra are only seen as acting together in only two places, here in Nehemiah 8:9, and in Nehemiah 12:36 (taken with Nehemiah 12:31). We must remember, however, that the tendency in the Book is only to mention those directly responsible for something. This lessens the impact of that fact. For while Ezra does indeed have only a small part to play in the Book of Nehemiah, it is understandable why that is so.

It is because the Book deals with concerns outside the jurisdiction of Ezra. He was not High Priest but an appointee of the Persian king charged with the maintenance, explanation and enforcement of the Law of God on all Jewish people (Ezra 7:14; Ezra 7:25).Furthermore, however closely allied to religious matters the first few chapters may be, they are not dealing with the interpretation and application of the Law, but with a political initiative which is very much dependent on Nehemiah’s personal relationship with the king.

And there the High Priest and the priests are very much involved as we have seen. Even in chapter 5 there was no dispute about the what the Law said. What Nehemiah was requesting went beyond the Law, even though observing its spirit. He was acting as a statesman with a background knowledge of the Law. No one disagreed about what the Law actually saidIt was only when the Law was to be read and expounded that Ezra’s jurisdiction applied. And we note that here in chapter 8 it was Ezra, and not the High Priest, who was called on for the purpose.

Had he not been the appointee of the king of Persia with specific authority on such matters this would have been an insult to the High Priest. But it is that very fact that explains why, apart from in this chapter, he is elsewhere in the Book only certainly mentioned once.

He is not, for example, mentioned in respect of the building of the wall. That was a practical, not a ‘legal’ matter. But that may also well have been because he was engaged in fulfilling what was his prime responsibility as established by the king, of promulgating the Law among all Jews in Beyond the River (assuming that he was still active in that process which is what this chapter suggests), and besides, he had no group of workmen on whom he could call. Nor was he probably a signatory to the covenant (see chapter 10), even though he may have had a hand in drawing it up. Again that would be because it was signed by heads of families, whilst he was not necessarily head of his family. It will, however, be noted that as the king’s appointed representative he was called on to participate in the dedication of the walls.In the same way we note that Nehemiah does not have a prominent part to play in chapter 8.

And the reason for that was that this did fall within Ezra’s jurisdiction. He was the government authorised expounder of the Law.

That is why Nehemiah only comes in when the people are visibly upset. He feels then that he is justified in intervening. Otherwise Nehemiah is seen by the original writer as simply not involved. In his view this was directly subject to Ezra as a religious matter to do with the meaning of the Law.Why then, in view of all this, should it be suggested that Nehemiah’s name was not originally in the text?The first ground put forward is that in the Septuagint, whilst Nehemiah is named, his description as ‘the governor’ is excluded. But whatever the reason for that, that can really only be used to suggest that the description is secondary, not that his name should be excluded. In contrast in 1 Esdras he is referred to by his description, and not by his name.

But before we make too much of the omission of his name we should notice that what is written in 1 Esdras is not simply a parallel to this chapter, but with Nehemiah’s name omitted. It is rather a whole rewriting of the narrative.

And when we take into account its context, an account of Ezra’s life, we can immediately understand why he excluded the name of Nehemiah. It was because his concentration was on Ezra. This therefore gives even more significance to the fact that he felt that he had at least to include the governor in terms of his description. The textual evidence for excluding Nehemiah’s name from the text here in Nehemiah 8:9 is therefore inconclusive and weak.The second ground put forward for excluding Nehemiah’s name is the use of singular verbs in Nehemiah 8:9-10. On this basis some have sought to exclude both Nehemiah and the Levites, suggesting that that is what the singular verb requires. But in fact many scholars accept that it would be consistent with Old Testament usage for a singular verb to be used when placed (in the Hebrew) before a composite group where it is expressing the action of that composite group as in Nehemiah 8:9.

We need then only to see that usage of a singular verb as also affecting the person of the verb in Nehemiah 8:10 for the difficulty to be removed. The verbs can then be seen as referring to Nehemiah, Ezra and the Levites, seen as acting as one.Thus in our view there are no solid grounds for excluding the name of Nehemiah from Nehemiah 8:9.End of note.Nehemiah 8:10‘Then he said to them, “Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions to him for whom nothing is prepared, for this day is holy to our Lord: nor be you grieved, for the joy of YHWH is your strength.’Whilst this could be seen as only spoken by Nehemiah (note the interest expressed in the needs of the poor), or Ezra, the verb should more probably be translated ‘they’ as indicating the composite group of Nehemiah, Ezra and the Levites, the singular being the result of the usage in the previous verse.It does, of course, summarise a number of instructions that were given.

Firstly that they should be positive and celebrate the feast with joy, eating of the best (not the fat potions which belonged to YHWH, but the fatter portions which were the best of what remained) and drinking of the best (the meaning of the word for ‘sweet’ is uncertain), out of the offerings that they had brought, while meanwhile ensuring provision for those who had been in no position to bring offerings (compare Deuteronomy 12:12; Deuteronomy 12:18; Deuteronomy 14:29; Deuteronomy 26:12). And this was because the day was ‘holy to YHWH’, separated off as His, and thus to be a time of rejoicing as signifying the solidity of God’s covenant with them. Nor were they to be grieved. Their repentance had been right, but now the sin offering had been offered in accordance with the Law’s requirements, and therefore their sins as a nation had been forgiven (Numbers 29:5). Thus their strength now lay in ‘the joy of YHWH’, the rejoicing that He aroused in them through their coming to him on the basis of His covenant which would make them strong and protect them from His judgment.Nehemiah 8:11‘So the Levites stilled all the people, saying, “Hold your peace, for the day is holy, nor be you grieved.”Nehemiah and Ezra would have spoken to the people as a whole, or possibly through their leaders. It was the Levites who went among the people (as they had when Ezra read the Law) and gave more personal teaching.

They too called on the people to cease their weeping because the day was holy to YHWH and therefore to be rejoiced in. It was not a day in which to be grieving, but a day for joy.Nehemiah 8:12‘And all the people went their way to eat, and to drink, and to send portions, and to make great mirth, because they had understood the words that were declared to them.’In consequence of the ministrations of Nehemiah, Ezra and the Levites the people responded, putting aside their weeping in order to eat and drink, and rejoice before YHWH.

And they ensured that portions of food and drink were supplied to those who had none, as had been required. But it was not done heedlessly or carelessly. It was done because they understood the word that had been declared to them. They recognised that weeping was no longer in order because they had received forgiveness, and were now securely enjoying His covenant protection. In the words of the Psalmist, ‘For his anger is but a moment. In his favour is life. Weeping may endure for a night, but joy comes in the morning (Psalms 30:5).There is a lesson for us all here in that we too should know times of weeping when we sin and displease God. But we must then be ready to accept His forgiveness and not continue in mourning over sin.

Rather we should rejoice in the forgiveness that is ours through Him, and go forward in the joy of the Lord. While weeping has its place, the Christian life should on the whole be one of continual joy, even when circumstances are hard.

Nehemiah 8:13-16

Occurrences On The Second Day Of The Seventh Month (Nehemiah 8:13-16). The Feast of Trumpets being over, the majority of the people returned home in order to fulfil their daily work responsibilities, mainly in the fields and among the flocks and herds. This was especially necessary due to the time spent by the adult males on building the wall. But the aristocrats, priests and Levites, who did not have the same responsibilities, again gathered, on the day after the Feast, in order to hear more of the Torah and what Ezra had to say concerning it. This was in fulfilment of the role assigned to him by the king of Persia. In consequence of this they found in Leviticus 23:40; Leviticus 23:42 the requirement for all Israel to live in booths over the Feast of Tabernacles.Nehemiah 8:13‘And on the second day were gathered together the heads of fathers’ (houses) of all the people, the priests, and the Levites, to Ezra the scribe, even to give attention to the words of the Law.’The second day was the day following the Feast of Trumpets (Rams’ Horns). On that day the leaders of tribes, sub-tribes, clans and wider families gathered together with the priests and Levites to hear a further reading of the Torah and to give attention to Ezra’s expounding of it.

They may well have been aroused by the previous day’s experience to recognise their need to have a greater understanding so as to guide their people. Their unanimous response indicates Ezra’s special and unique position.

Even the High Priest would presumably be present.Nehemiah 8:14-15‘And they found written in the Law, how YHWH had commanded by Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month, and that they should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying, “Go forth to the mount, and fetch olive branches, and branches of wild olive, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written.”These words are not specifically citing the Law, but drawing out from it its meaning. The important point learned by them was that they were to dwell in booths made of tree branches in commemoration of the time in the wilderness after Israel had been redeemed from Egypt. “You shall dwell in booths seven days – that your generation may know that I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths when I brought them out of the land of Egypt” (Leviticus 23:42-43). The idea of proclamation is found in Leviticus 23:4, whilst the feast was to observed ‘in the place which YHWH your God shall choose (Deuteronomy 16:15-16). Thus the writer adds here that they were to ‘publish and proclaim in all their cities and in Jerusalem’.The command is made in terms of the actual type of branches that they would use, given what was available in the land (which had not been available in the wilderness, thus ‘olive branches, wild olive branches, myrtle branches, palm branches and branches of thick trees’. Leviticus 23:40 cites ‘fruit of goodly trees, branches of palm trees and boughs of thick trees’ which would be available in the wilderness. In Nehemiah 8:15 the ‘goodly trees’ are spelled out in detail.

But note that in Leviticus they are not specifically said to be used in making the booths.‘Go forth to the mount’, in other words, to the place which YHWH has chosen (Deuteronomy 16-15-16). Thus they were to gather to Jerusalem to build their booths.

So Ezra has expanded on the ideas in Leviticus 23 and Deuteronomy 16 in order to give specific and detailed instructions concerning the building of the booths at Jerusalem.

Nehemiah 8:16-18

Their Observance Of The Feast Of Tabernacles (Nehemiah 8:16-18). The passage now jumps from the second day to the fifteenth day of the month, when the people having gathered their branches, assembled once more in Jerusalem for the seven day Feast of Tabernacles. There they erected booths to dwell in over the period of the Feast. The emphasis in the whole passage is not on outlining the Feasts of the month, (thus the observance of the Day of Atonement, which the people did not directly participate in publicly, is ignored), but on the reading out of and response to the Law followed by the building of booths in Jerusalem, commemorative of the Exodus, for the proper observance of the seven day Feast in fulfilment of that Law.Nehemiah 8:16‘So the people went forth, and brought them, and made themselves booths, every one on the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the broad place of the water gate, and in the broad place of the gate of Ephraim.’As a consequence of what their leaders had learned from the Law (the Torah), as the fifteenth day approached the people gathered branches and assembled in Jerusalem, where they made themselves booths. Those who had houses built the booths on the roofs of their houses, and in the courts of the bigger houses, while others built theirs in the courts of the house of God, and in the broad place by the Water Gate where they had previously assembled on the first day (Nehemiah 8:1), and in the broad place by the Gate of Ephraim. Thus Jerusalem was filled with booths, as they re-enacted the Exodus experience. They felt that they had taken part in a new Exodus.Nehemiah 8:17‘And all the assembly of those who were come again out of the captivity made booths, and dwelt in the booths; for since the days of Jeshua the son of Nun to that day the children of Israel had not done so.

And there was very great gladness.’So ‘those who had come out of the captivity’ dwelt in booths, just as those who had come out of captivity in Egypt had previously done. They made booths and dwelt in booths in commemoration of the Exodus, just as in Joshua’s day the people had done the same.

The phrase about those who had come out of captivity is used deliberately. They were thereby celebrating a new deliverance.‘For since the days of Jeshua the son of Nun to that day the children of Israel had not done so.’ This is not denying that the Feast of Tabernacles had been observed at various times throughout their history. We know that it had been (Judges 21:19; 1 Samuel 1:3; 1 Kings 8:2; 1 Kings 8:65; 2 Chronicles 7:9; Zechariah 14:16; Ezra 3:4). Nor is it denying that many of them had made booths during that Feast. Indeed it was a harvest feast and booths were regularly built at harvest times where workers could rest and sleep. Compare how Boaz himself slept overnight at the site of the harvest (Rth 3:7), although not in a booth.

And booths were built during pagan festivities in which Israelites engaged. Indeed booths had no doubt been erected at harvest times by the returnees.

But these were in order to aid ingathering (the feast was also called the Feast of Ingathering), and as a means of celebrating harvests, not as a symbol of deliverance from captivity. What is probably in mind is that booths had not been built for the purpose of commemorating the Exodus, and at the place which YHWH chose (the Tabernacle site and then the Temple site). After the time of Joshua Israel’s religious observance had gradually deteriorated, and dwelling in booths had been reinterpreted, with probably not all participating, especially in the great cities. But now Israel were being restored to their former faith, and this was to be a recognition that they were the people of God whom He had delivered from captivity.Nehemiah 8:18‘Also day by day, from the first day to the last day, he read in the book of the Law of God. And they kept the feast seven days, and on the eighth day was a solemn assembly, according unto the ordinance.’As well as sleeping in booths the people also listened to the Law (Torah) of Moses being read out to them day by day. On each day of the seven day feast Ezra read out to them sections of the book of the Law of God.

And they observed the Feast in accordance with the requirements laid out in that Law (Leviticus 23:33-36; Deuteronomy 31:10-13). Then on the eighth day there was a ‘solemn gathering and observance’, just as the Law required.

This requirement for the eighth day is found in Leviticus 23:33; Leviticus 23:39; Numbers 29:35-38 so that we know that Ezra was reading at least from Leviticus (compare earlier on Nehemiah 8:14-15 re Leviticus 23). The word translated ‘solemn assembly’ is a comparatively rare one. It refers to the whole day as a day of ‘holding back’, and includes the thought of rest from servile work. Thus the people gathered, restraining both themselves and their servants from work, so as to celebrate the Day.This day of complete rest, following immediately on a daily reading of the Law, and enforcing a period of meditation, had its inevitable consequence. The people had restrained their sorrow over sin (Nehemiah 8:9), which had initially been brought about by the reading of the Law, in order to observe the Feast with gladness. But meanwhile that sense of guilt had been increasing due to the hearing of the Law.

After the thrill and buoyancy of the Feast came the inevitable emotional collapse. Now they gave full rein to their sense of guilt.

And this caused them to remain in Jerusalem beyond the finalising of the Feast. Day by day throughout the Feast they had received more and more revelations out of the Law as it was read and interpreted daily. In consequence their feelings of guilt with regard to their failure to observe it fully would have been impressed on them more and more day by day. And this would no doubt having been exacerbated by the reading of the curses pronounced in Deuteronomy 27-28, which would presumably have been read on the last of the seven days of the Feast. It thus led to a renewed mourning over their sins and their failure to observe the covenant. And this was something which would now lead on to the proposal and acceptance of a renewed covenant (chapter 10).