And the princes of the people dwelt in Jerusalem; and the rest of the people cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem, the holy city, and nine parts in the cities.
The wall was rebuilt and the temple stood again — yet Jerusalem was almost empty. This chapter answers the question left hanging since chapter 7: who will live in the city God chose?
The problem was not defence but people. One writer ties this chapter back to an earlier report on the city:
The altar, the foundations, the temple, and the wall had been rebuilt, but "the city was wide and large, but the people within it were few, and no houses had been built." (Neh. 7:4) The question now raised is this: had the city been rebuilt only to stay deserted and empty of people? What was the use of defending it if no one gathered there?
Both the city's condition and the way people earned money worked against moving there:
Jerusalem no longer had the powerful attraction for the people of God that it once had. The visible glory of God no longer shone over the mercy seat in the Most Holy Place. No king from David's house was reigning... The city was badly decayed, and only slowly rising out of its heaps of burnt rubbish and scattered ruins. Money was made then from farming, so the country offered better hopes of gain.
Danger played its part too. One commentator writes that "there was much danger for those who lived in the city itself. For this reason most of the returned captives preferred to live outside the walls of Jerusalem." (Arno Clemens Gaebelein)
The leaders were living in the city before any lot was cast, and some others came by choice:
Jerusalem had always been the seat of authority, and it was still "the holy city." So the rulers, who were also men of wealth, would make their home inside its sacred walls. If they were men of faith, they would see the city not as it stood before their eyes, but as it would be in a future day — as "the city of the great King," and so "the perfection of beauty, the joy of the whole earth." ... Besides these, others willingly offered themselves to live in Jerusalem, and of these it is said that the people blessed them. Those on whom the lot fell went because they had to. Those who offered themselves willingly were moved by their own choice and affection.
Drawing lots did not mean leaving the outcome to chance. A reference work notes that "God overruled among His people how the lot should fall, as stated in Prov. 16:33: 'The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.'" (Morrish Bible Dictionary)
The need to draw lots at all showed how weak the remnant was:
Dividing the people by lot is a witness to this weakness. The fact that such a method was needed showed how small the number was that had returned to God's land... And yet, if their numbers were small, their zeal for the house of God was great. So those outside the city — "the rest of the people" — wanting to support the house and the city, turned to casting lots. In self-denial they gave up every tenth man to live inside the walls.
Moving to the holy city meant giving up home, family and land:
The godly Israelite had to give up the very inheritance he valued above everything else. He had to leave those close to him, his vine and his fig tree. He had to exile himself by choice from things he had every reason to hold on to... He had understood that Zion was "the holy city" (v. 1, 18), the city of God's own choice, the city He loved more than all the dwellings of Jacob.
One writer names what set the city apart: "It was God's presence, as far as it was given at that time, that gave its special blessedness to the city He chose, Mount Zion which He loved." (The Bible Treasury)
One writer draws out the lesson for believers today:
There is a spiritual lesson in this. Do we want to live as near as we can to the Lord? — for Jerusalem was where He lived among His people. In the Church today the Lord Jesus Himself is the Center of gathering. How good it is when we delight in keeping close to Him!
- Empty. The wall was up and the temple stood, but the city had few people — a defended city with no one gathered in it.
- Unattractive. No visible glory, no king, ruins underfoot, danger outside, better farming elsewhere. Only faith made Jerusalem worth choosing.
- Chosen. One in ten moved in by lot. The method itself showed how small the remnant was, and the nine who stayed gave up their tenth man.
- Willing. Others offered themselves by their own choice, not by lot, and the people blessed them for it.
- Near. The city was holy because God was there — and the same question stands today: do we want to live as close to the Lord as we can?
And the people blessed all the men that willingly offered themselves to dwell in Jerusalem.
Nehemiah 11 opens after the walls are finished. The building work could not answer one question: who will live inside the rebuilt city? Verse 2 names two groups — those chosen by lot, and those who offered themselves. The people bless the second group.
The walls were up, but few people lived inside them. Moving into the city meant real loss.
Had the city been rebuilt only to remain deserted and empty of inhabitants? What was the use of defending it if no one gathered there? ... Gathering in the holy city took much self-forgetfulness and devotion. The devout Israelite had to give up the very inheritance he valued above everything else. He had to leave those close to him, his vine and his fig tree. He had to choose to exile himself from the things he had every reason to hold on to, since God had given them to him.
It was not only loss of comfort. Living inside the walls carried risk.
We should explain that Jerusalem was not then a good place to live. The enemies of the city never stopped trying to destroy its defences and harm the people in it. There was much danger for those who lived in the city itself. So most of those who had come back from exile preferred to live outside the walls of Jerusalem.
The chapter names two routes into Jerusalem, and they are not the same thing.
Besides these, others "willingly offered to live in Jerusalem," and of them we read, "the people blessed" them. Those on whom the lot fell went because they had to. Those who offered themselves were moved by their own choice and affection. Offering themselves like this could only come from love for the place God had wanted and chosen as His dwelling. It was therefore evidence that they had in some measure entered into the mind and heart of God.
Nothing in the city's condition explained the choice.
In her present ruin, Jerusalem could attract the people of God only if they looked at her with the eyes of faith, from the standpoint of her future glory. Going to Jerusalem meant leaving everything else. It took a decision that faith alone could give and hope alone could sustain. This could only be an act of love and free devotion for the city of the great King. It was a self-denial that was not everyone's portion, and God did not ask it of them.
Those who stayed behind gave the blessing. They had already given up something themselves.
If their numbers were small, their zeal for the house of God was great. So those outside the city — "the rest of the people" — wanted to support the house and the city. They cast lots, and in self-denial gave up every tenth man to live within the walls. They also showed their goodwill by blessing those "who willingly offered to live in Jerusalem."
Another writer notes what the blessing revealed about the people who gave it.
If they did not have the energy to do the same thing, they could not help admiring those who did. Seeing the privilege these men would enjoy, they had to bless them. ... How often we still see believers who can admire how blessed it is to be devoted to Christ and His interests, without having the heart or courage to take that path themselves!
Jerusalem mattered because God had put His presence there. One writer turns the same question on us.
There is a spiritual lesson in this. Do we want to live as close as we can to the Lord? — for Jerusalem was His place of residence among the people. In the Church today the Lord Jesus Himself is the Centre of gathering. How good it is if we delight in keeping close to Him!
Another writer asks whether God's people today still give that blessing.
Can we say today that the people of God bless those who voluntarily offer themselves for this task? Is it not rather true that they oppose them and despise them? But they must be content to have the Lord's approval.
- Empty — the walls stood, but almost no one lived inside. Why defend a city no one gathered in?
- Costly — moving in meant leaving an inheritance, a vine and a fig tree, and facing enemies.
- Willing — the lot sent one man in ten. The volunteers went by choice and affection, and God never asked it of them.
- Seen by faith — the city held no attraction as it was; only faith looking at its future glory made the move make sense.
- Blessed — those who stayed honoured those who went. Where that honour is missing today, the Lord's approval is enough.