READING ON NEHEMIAH 1
READING ON NEHEMIAH 1
FI What is the setting of this book in relation to the previous book?
JT It would appear from the first chapter of Ezra that he presents the divine intervention, God acting of Himself to bring about His thoughts; He acts outside of His people in Cyrus, whereas here you will observe that it is from the point of view of the exercise of one of the people. These two things run together in God’s ways — God’s sovereign action to bring about His thoughts, using whom He will, and then the exercise in His people who are found in relationship with Him, and who feel the conditions existent which are the outcome of their own guilt, their own conduct. So that what we have in Nehemiah 1 is what this brother or person has to say. It is a very interesting side of the thing — what he has to say as having gone through all that is recorded in chapter 1. They are the words of Nehemiah, a man who has had to do with God about things, who has humbled himself and has helped the people of God in very remarkable ways; so we do well to listen to what he has to say. He can say much that will be a guide to us in similar circumstances. The book of Ezra is an account of what God did; it is more historical: it begins, “In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia”, and goes on to tell us what God did. The writer’s name is not mentioned; it is just to tell us what God did. It says, “That the word of Jehovah by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, Jehovah stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia”.
But here in this chapter we get the words of Nehemiah, a man, as I have said, who has been through things with God and whom God has used;
[p. 197] Ezra would more correspond with divine intervention generally, as in the law and the prophets; Nehemiah is more in agreement with the Psalms, what one has been through.
Ques Do you think the name ‘Nehemiah’ which means ‘Comfort of Jehovah’ throws any light on the book?
JT It says, “that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God”, 2 Corinthians 1: 4. He evidently proved God in his experience.
Rem Ezra seems to deal more with the house of God, whilst Nehemiah is concerned about the walls of Jerusalem.
JT That is so. Ezra deals with the house.
Rem They say, “the wall of Jerusalem is in ruins”; would you mind saying a little about that?
JT You would expect Ezra’s ministry to have to do with the house, he being a priest. We have his genealogy carefully given to us, right back to Aaron; he is a priest and you would expect a priest to have to do with the house of God; God selected him for that purpose. Nehemiah is the governor and his ministry, I suppose, would take character from that, for he has the city before him.
Ques Would it refer to the preservation of things?
JT Quite. The Lord is pleased to be Governor to us in our small way now: “the government shall be upon his shoulder” (Isaiah 9: 6), meaning the universal government of God.
Haggai and Zechariah the prophets have to do with the recovery. Haggai treats of the governor, and Zerubbabel is called the governor in that book, but those he ruled over were a mere handful as compared with what David and Solomon ruled over, but he is a type of the Lord in His contentment to be Governor to us in our small circumstances; so [p. 198] that there is on the one hand that which regulates with authority, and on the other hand we have Joshua the priest, maintaining what is due to God, Godward. The same thoughts, I suppose, may be traced in Nehemiah and Ezra. There is the government of God which goes on among us, and the Lord is pleased to exercise that office, the office of Governor. Presently He will be Governor universally, but He is content to be with us now.
ESH It is very touching to think that we prove the Lord in this way in these days of weakness and outward ruin.
JT Nehemiah is occupying himself with the city; he had that in view.
Ques Is that why the Lord is presented to us in Matthew 2 in such small circumstances: “And thou Bethlehem, land of Juda, art in no wise the least among the governors of Juda”? Does the Governor come to light in connection with the feeble remnant that appreciate His rule, in view of the universal rule?
JT Quite. And so it runs right through Matthew. He is Governor. Government is emphasised in Matthew more than in the other gospels, even Pilate is called the governor. Government is the subject, so that in the end we are to apprehend the Lord in that light. It is not a question of His coming to our side or the exercise of grace, although grace is there, but rather that we come to Him; He sends a message through the angel to the women, “go quickly and say to his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and behold, he goes before you into Galilee, there shall ye see him”. It is not, ‘I shall see you’, but “they shall see me”. If you want to see the king, he does not say, ‘I will see you’; but you want to see him, you are the one in need, you have something to ask. Of course, if the king wants to send you somewhere, it is another matter. But Matthew is on the ground that you have a petition to ask and you [p. 199] want to see Him; you have to seek out the Lord. Hence He says, ‘they shall see Me in Galilee’. In John it is, “I will see you again” (John 16: 22), that is to say, His love for us would take Him to see us. In Matthew it is more distant, more government and authority; it is a question of One who has got everything in His hands; and, as in responsibility, you must go to Him; you can do nothing without Him. He says, ‘You will see Me there’, and then it says that they should see Him in the appointed place: they would see Him. Then He came up to them and they worshipped Him.
Rem The Lord is presented in that way in Matthew and at the end of that gospel it is recorded that He “stood before the governor”, Matthew 27: 11. The true Governor Himself is witnessing before Pontius Pilate a good confession; He is the One who is going to have universal sway, the blessed and only Ruler, King of kings and Lord of lords (1 Timothy 6: 15, 16).
JT Just so.
Ques What would answer to the exercise of Nehemiah as the result of the report that is brought to him?
JT I think he presents an exercise that is coming to those who have the light of God. He says, “Hanani, one of my brethren, came”; he is in relation with the brethren, he recognises that he is not the only one, because it says in verse 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 delight to fear thy name”. He is not like Elijah, who thinks he is the only one; he recognises others; this is a wholesome thing to be reminded of.
Ques Would it answer to 2 Timothy conditions, pursuing “righteousness, faith, love, peace, with those [p. 200] that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart”, 2 Timothy 2: 22?
JT There is no doubt about them being there; they are there.
Rem It seems that the one who brought this report was quite in sympathy with Nehemiah.
JT It says, “Hanani, one of my brethren, came, he and certain men of Judah”; there was a movement on their part; doubtless they had come all that way in deep concern, and they recognise that this brother was in a position to be of service, and they were not amiss, for he says, “I asked them concerning the Jews that had escaped, who were left of the captivity, and concerning Jerusalem”.
Ques Would you say that the Lord is taking account of our exercise?
JT Yes. I think Nehemiah might rise to be a sort of type of the Lord; he is in a position to serve here: but, anyway, he recognises them as his brethren and that they had come.
Ques Does not the fact that he enquires “concerning the Jews” indicate reproach?
JT I think so; only before that you have “one of my brethren”, that was their relation to him, and then there were the “men of Judah”; that is no mean term; it would remind us of greater things, Judah’s place. The term ‘Jews’ would denote reproach, they were brought down to narrow straits.
ESH Judah speaks of sovereignty on the one hand and strength on the other, “the lion which is of the tribe of Juda ... has overcome so as to open the book”, Revelation 5: 5.
Ques Would it correspond to those who wrote to Paul in relation to the state of things at Corinth?
JT Yes, “it has been shown to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of the house of Chloe, that there are strifes among you”, 1 Corinthians 1: 11. When he speaks of the one that they were to put [p. 201] away out of their midst he says, “It is universally reported that there is fornication among you”, 1 Corinthians 5: 1. But the state of division that existed amongst them was mentioned to him by certain of the household of Chloe. They had not written about that, although they had written to the apostle (1 Corinthians 7: 1); when we write about anything, or make enquiry, we often do not ask the question that should be asked. The real difficulty was division amongst them.
Ques Would the residue being in affliction and reproach apply to the present moment?
JT That is how things are, is it not? If you look abroad and see how things are among the saints, or if you take account of them locally, you have to admit that there is great weakness.
Rem Nehemiah is a man who felt things, but then it is to be noted that there were others who felt things; these men who came to him felt things; it was a terrible story they told. But evidently Nehemiah was more with God and they discerned it.
JT The question may arise as to how much we feel things with God.
ESH With Ezra it is a question of the house, is it not?
JT We want to get at the house. This brother (because that is what he is) wants to know about things and it is very important to get a true estimate of things as they are. If you are to serve the people of God, you want to have a true estimate of the conditions, and then the next thing is to bring in all the help you can. The first thing is that he humbles himself. Who can help in this matter? It says, “it came to pass, when I heard these words, that I sat and wept, and mourned for days, and fasted, and prayed before the God of the heavens”, and so on. He does not appeal to the God of Israel, that is to say, he has right instincts, he is intelligent. It would be unbecoming for him to appeal to the God of Israel here. It is “the God of the heavens”; that title relates to what is universal; it refers to what Nebuchadnezzar had to learn, that the heavens ruled. The Jews, although having ancient privileges, had to take their place with the nations. Nehemiah claims nothing on that line; he addresses the God of the heavens. Then he goes on to cite Scripture and certain promises that God had made anticipating these circumstances, and he brings this scripture to bear on the position.
Ques Does he recognise in that way that the whole position is forfeited on the responsible line?
JT I think so; “Call his name Lo-ammi; for ye are not my people” (Hosea 1: 9); they had no claim on God on that line; it was a question of the God of the heavens acting for them.
Rem You do not even get the God of Jacob referred to; there is the recognition of the conditions that had come in and Nehemiah identifies himself with it all.
Rem He falls back on the mercy of God.
JT He does, and he recognises in the title, the God of the heavens, that Israel had forfeited their privileges; he fasted and prayed.
FI Ezra recognises the same condition amongst the people of God, and yet he prays to the God of Israel.
JT Well, I think that is the priestly side. Nehemiah represents the government. A priest can always have access to God; he takes things up on spiritual lines, but the two things go together; we cannot ignore the government of God. Nehemiah would teach us to bow to the government of God, and not to assume that things were as they should be.
Ques Do you mean that we have to distinguish between our private intercourse with God and our public standing?
JT [p. 203] That is just the thing. Publicly you do not claim anything. You have forfeited all, but inwardly, according to John’s ministry, you have access to God. The things are all there, but they are not named. Generally, with John the things are there; there is “the beginning”, they are there, but you do not name them, nor do you claim them.
Ques It speaks of the wall of Jerusalem being in ruins, and its gates burned with fire; what is the distinction between the wall and the gates?
JT The wall is protection. The gates represent administration, and give access also to what is inside. There must always be the idea of administration at the gates, because it is a question of letting people in; so the angels are at the twelve gates of the holy city and the names of the twelve tribes are inscribed. It is a governmental, administrative thing, indicated in the number twelve. The wall being broken down would mean, in our day, that the principle of fellowship — that which excludes evil, would have ceased, and that there was no idea of something inside to which you had access. There might be something individual, but there is nothing going on in the way of administration or spiritual movement or access to what is of God, nothing going on in a systematic way. Fellowship implies that we are brought back to the divine order.
EG The walls are broken down, the gates are burned with fire; would one be on the line of responsibility and the other divine judgment coming in? There could not be any administration according to God, if the walls were broken down.
JT The conditions were most deplorable; there was nothing either for God or for man, you might say. The walls were broken down, that is there was no protection for the things of God; and there was nothing going on in the way of administration.
[p. 204] Rem These things were spoken of together by those who were sympathetic with God. Nehemiah, on the one hand, and those who came with him on the other.
JT That is how the matter begins on our side. In Ezra God begins Himself. In 1 Samuel the ark was taken and, unless God acted, everything was hopeless. But God did act, he acted among the Philistines so that they came up against a stone wall, they could not do anything. What were they going to do with the ark they had taken? As a matter of fact the ark dominated them, they were afraid. It was really in charge among the Philistines, so that the diviners say that it is a question of letting this go; there must be release; they quoted from Exodus — what Pharaoh had to come to, and what the Egyptians had to come to: they had to let the people go. Well, who did that? The people could not have done it. It was Jehovah who did it. They had to let the people go. So they say, ‘Now what you must do is, take two milch kine, on which there has come no yoke’. That was the tacit acknowledgment that they really had not taken possession of the ark at all, that they could not keep it, it was too great for them. “And send it away that it may go. And see, if it go up by the way of its own border to Beth-shemesh, it is he who has done us this great evil”. And the milch kine went straight forward on the way to Beth-shemesh, which was the place of the ark. There was the acknowledgment that God had come in of Himself. That is what you get in 1 Samuel 6. Well then, what is the corresponding state of the people? God is acting thus against the Philistines on their account; what is the state of the people? The next chapter tells us that the people came to Samuel and acknowledged their guilt and they poured water out before the Lord, corresponding really with Nehemiah; it was from their side and Samuel takes [p. 205] a sucking-lamb. It is not now something upon which the yoke had never come, that was the ark; but it is a sucking-lamb, it is something that is dependent, that is our side. If God has done that for us, then we are to be dependent on Him all the time. A sucking-lamb is a dependent creature, and it is offered up to God as a whole burnt-offering — it is one idea. And then it says God thundered with a great thunder on the Philistines. He did that in answer to the sucking-lamb. So that God’s sovereign action on the one hand, and our dependence on the other, is the way of deliverance.
Rem Nehemiah shows us how recovery in regard to separation and administration begins with himself.
JT That is the thing to see; they are the words of a man who has gone through all this and they are worth listening to. And so he goes over the ground and he says, “Let thine ear now be attentive”; he is dependent on God, he is speaking to God, “and thine eyes open, to hear the prayer of thy servant, which I pray before thee at this time ... confessing the sins of the children of Israel, which we have sinned against thee; both I and my father’s house have sinned”. He does not exonerate himself at all. Well, God will hear that. “We have acted very perversely against thee, and have not kept the commandments, nor the statutes, nor the ordinances that thou commandedst thy servant Moses. Remember, I beseech thee, the word that thou commandedst thy servant Moses, saying, If ye act unfaithfully, I will scatter you among the peoples; but if ye return to me and keep my commandments and do them, though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the heavens, yet will I gather them from thence, and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set my name there”. That is a most remarkable prayer, because he acknowledges that Israel is not on a different footing from the nations,
[p. 206] it is a question of the God of the heavens. But then God had spoken about them in these circumstances, and Nehemiah knew the scriptures well enough to quote them.
Rem Does this correspond with the second book of Psalms, where Jehovah’s name is so much omitted? The writer of the first psalm in the second book remembers having passed along with the multitude to the house of God, and his soul is disquieted within him; but he says, I will yet praise Him.
JT Yes, one of the sons of Korah is the writer; in the second book the people had no claim on God.
Ques Would you say a word on the application of the spirit of Nehemiah’s prayer to ourselves today?
JT It is a full acknowledgment of the guilt of the professing body. It contemplates a knowledge, I think, of the addresses to the seven assemblies in Asia, that is to say, what the Lord says to each assembly. Nehemiah here is able to refer to a scripture that fitted in with these circumstances. If you know the addresses to the assemblies, you will know what fits in with your own time, because that is church history, and you can cite that. If you can locate your position in the history, then you will know what word fits, because the Lord has a word to say to each assembly, and the Holy Spirit enlarges on that whatever it is. You are intelligent as to what fits in with your own time. There is an authoritative word to every assembly. But you are not called to hear that, that is put down, that is written, that is read; what the Lord says is written, but what the Spirit says is not written, “He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies”. That is for the present time, what the Spirit is saying. If you have your ear open for that, you will know the word of the Lord that covers your position and you can cite it.
[p. 207] Rem So that it would enable you intelligently and feelingly to pray for all God’s people.
JT So that you will put yourself in “the rest” (Revelation 2: 24) — not the Ephesian church, nor Smyrna, nor Pergamos, nor exactly Thyatira, but you can find out just where you are by the subject of the addresses to the assemblies, and then you will know the scripture that fits. Now, Nehemiah knew the scripture that fitted the position, showing he was conversant with Scripture.
Rem His attitude also was suitable.
JT I think that the word in 2 Timothy is very striking on that account. “Every scripture is divinely inspired, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be complete, fully fitted to every good work”, 2 Timothy 3: 16, 17. He knows the mind of God, he knows the scripture that applies to his own times, he is fully fitted. You will find in 2 Timothy and in John remarkable assertion of the authority of Scripture.
Ques Is what is written prominent where conditions are abnormal?
JT Scriptural authority is asserted. So that, after the Lord was raised. John tells us, the disciples believed the scripture and the word that Jesus had said (John 2: 22).
Rem The Scriptures in that way would correspond to the word of the Lord.
JT Well, they do, they are authoritative. You find that a man like Philip brings them in in regard of Christ: “We have found him of whom Moses wrote in the law, and the prophets, Jesus, the Son of Joseph, who is from Nazareth” — that is whom he had found. He knew that; he was conversant with Moses and the law and the prophets.
Rem The Lord said, “Ye search the scriptures” (John 5: 39) and “the scripture cannot be broken” (John 10: 35); that is a comfort to our hearts in a day of ruin.
JT So that Nehemiah here knows where to go to get a scripture. He could remind God of a promise which fitted. He might have gone to other scriptures where God had spoken of certain things as to which He would fulfil His promise, but this scripture fits exactly. He says, so to speak, ‘You said this in view of these very circumstances: remember, I beseech thee’.
Ques Does the scripture you were referring to earlier in the week, in John 11, answer to our own days?
JT I think so, there is nothing pretentious in the thought of gathering together into one the children of God who were scattered abroad (John 11: 52). It is what God is doing.
Ques Do you think it would help to remind God of any promise that relates to one individually as well as collectively?
JT Certainly scriptures that fit us individually can fit also the assembly’s position; one gets comfort in it. God loves to be trusted, He loves to be taken at His word. He is faithful. The apostle twice over in addressing the Corinthians, says, “God is faithful”. We can reckon on anything on His side.
In the addresses to the seven assemblies, the Lord has spoken in view of every possible circumstance that can arise in the history of the church; there is a word for every epoch. You want to know what place is yours, and make that the basis of your exercise. With us there is the additional thing, that the Holy Spirit speaks. We are not told what He says, the point is to listen to what He says, and if you do, you will have understanding of the times and you will know what Israel ought to do (1 Chronicles 12: 32).
[p. 209] You will know what God will do, because He has committed Himself in what the Lord has said to each assembly, and you know what to expect. The Lord has spoken an authoritative word to every assembly and that is written down. We do not have to hear that, we have to read that; it is written in a book and sent to the assemblies to be read. But we are not asked to read what the Spirit says, it is to hear what He is saying, a constant ministry.
Ques Would that apply universally? It is not only what the Spirit is saying locally.
JT You hear whatever He says; it is not only what He says to you locally, but what He says to the assemblies, to all of them.
Ques Would it be in keeping with Scripture?
JT It would, particularly with what the Lord says authoritatively, and there is a premium on reading it. But it would take libraries to contain what the Holy Spirit says, it is to be listened to.
ESH The thought of returning is very important, then the keeping of the commandments and the statutes and ordinances — it is very applicable to us in our day.
JT Yes, “if ye return to me, and keep my commandments and do them, though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the heavens, yet will I gather them from thence”. One has been encouraged to pray for the brethren in all the great religious bodies, at the greatest distance; you can begin with the Romish system, then there is the Greek system, and the Lutheran and then the Anglican and all these independent bodies in this country and America; the brethren are in all these things; but it says, though they be scattered to the uttermost part of the heavens, yet will I gather them; God will gather them. First there is the returning and then the keeping of the commandments. Shear-jashub means “a remnant shall return”. God says to Isaiah,
“[p. 210] Go out now to meet Ahaz, thou and thy son Shear-jashub, at the end of the aqueduct of the upper pool, on the highway of the fuller’s field”, Isaiah 7: 3. That is one of the principles of our times; “a remnant shall return”. Am I to be amongst them? That word might be circulated everywhere; it is a divine pronouncement. That boy was a testimony to Ahaz that that was going on, “a remnant shall return”. Am I amongst them? That is the thing here. Then the next thing is to keep His commandments, the principle of submission to the will of God; “He that has my commandments, and keeps them, he it is that loves me”, John 14: 21. God will bring us back from the uttermost distance, as He says here.
Rem God will carry out His own thoughts if there is the returning to Him.
JT What comes out here is not God’s sovereignty as in Ezra; but Nehemiah is to show that there is a corresponding movement of the brethren, and that runs right through; God provides for our day, but it is on moral lines; God acts on moral lines; He acts sovereignly, but on moral lines; there is the principle of returning and the principle of keeping His commandments; where these things are He will bring you to the utmost limit of blessing, where His Name is set, and that is where you get everything; all the spiritual things are there for us. It is well to begin intelligently as to the God of the heavens; it is not God in relationship with us but the God with whom we have to do; the privileges conferred have been forfeited, but in His mercy He brings us back to them all. Then you get the principle of gathering, and then, “I ... will bring them unto the place that I have chosen”. That was a spiritual thing. That is what was said in Exodus 15: He would bring them in and plant them in the mountain of His inheritance, in the place where He had chosen to dwell. You would surely know when you were there.
“And see! the Spirit’s power
Has ope’d the heavenly door,
Has brought us to that favoured hour
When toil shall all be o’er”. (74:5)
It is a spiritual thing.
Ques I suppose you could always look for this amongst those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart (2 Timothy 2: 22)?
JT Yes; they are there. Nehemiah goes on to say here, “prosper, I pray thee, thy servant this day, and grant him mercy in the sight of this man”. He is not occupied with the place of the king, he is before the God of the heavens; the king was only a man to him now.
Ques Why does he say that he was the king’s cupbearer?
JT I do not know whether it has a spiritual reference; that is what he was, anyway; he had access to the king; but before God he was just a man, he was not anything more.
EG He recognises that the hearts of all men are in God’s hands.
JT He does, indeed. He says, so to speak, ‘this man is in charge of things’ — it ought to have been a son of David or Solomon, but it is just this man. The Lord recognises Pilate as having power, and yet he says, ‘You would have no power at all except it were given you from above’. He recognises that the Romans were there in the government of God, and He submits to it.