And there was a great cry of the people and of their wives against their brethren the Jews.
The wall is going up, the work is going well — and then a cry breaks out from inside the city. The danger is no longer the enemy outside the gate but hunger, debt and hard hearts among the builders themselves.
The story so far has been about enemies outside. Now it turns to the workers themselves. One writer notes that the account of the building stops here, and that the pause warns anyone busy fighting evil outside.
Nehemiah stops the story of the wall here. He turns aside to describe the state of things inside — among the people. And this teaches us much. If we are busy dealing with evil outside, we cannot afford to neglect our own moral state, or the state of the assembly. This has happened far too often. You will sometimes see people who fight hard for the truth completely neglect self-judgment and discipline in the house of God.
Another writer puts the greatest danger right after faithfulness, not before it.
Never are we in greater danger of acting in the flesh than when we have acted in faithfulness to the Lord. As one writer rightly said, "We can be lured into moral slackness because we are pleased with our separation in church matters."
The verse names two groups. Commentators read them as the poor and the rich within one nation, and the cry has hard facts behind it.
"The people and their wives" are clearly the poor, while "their Jewish brothers" are the rich. Division had come in because the rich oppressed the poor. They used the poverty of the poor to enrich themselves. Some of the poor had sold their sons and daughters to the rich for grain, so that they could eat and live. Others, pressed by the famine, had mortgaged their lands, vineyards and houses, or borrowed money to pay the king's tax. The rich had used the needs of their poorer brothers to grow richer, and to bring them completely under their power. The poor, bowed to the dust under the heavy burden of their bondage and need, raised "a great outcry."
The times were hard: a food shortage and heavy taxes. What turned hardship into scandal was the response of those who had money.
The daily needs of life, the hard times caused by a famine, and the weight of taxation should have drawn out the sympathy of the richer Jews. Instead they became an occasion for feeding the greed of the flesh… This was not a matter of ordinary business dealings. The rich used the needs and trials of the poor, which came from special circumstances such as a famine, to enlarge their own wealth.
This was not just unkind. It broke a plain command they already had.
Now, who had taken advantage of them when, in their hunger, they needed bread? It was their brothers: and yet the law of Moses forbade them to do this. An Israelite could lend to other nations, but he could not charge his brother interest (Deut. 23:19-20; Ex. 22:25). So the love of money led them into this great sin.
The verse repeats one word: brothers. One writer traces the whole trouble to that word.
Let us then seek to find the root of this festering sore. It lies in one word — used twice — "their brothers," "our brothers." They were brothers as common descendants of Abraham, and in a deeper sense too… So now "the Jews" were treating the people as if they were not their brothers. They completely forgot the common relationship in which they stood before God, and treated them as if they were strangers and pagans.
The cry sounds like rebellion. One writer judges it differently, and asks what had become of love among God's people.
The people's outward testimony went with praiseworthy activity. But their inward testimony left much to be desired, and scandalous events hindered it. What had brotherly relationships among the members of the people of God come to? Could devotion, pity and sympathy for the poor be found; and did love show itself as it should have? No… A great outcry! Complaints and accusations — and they were fully justified!
Writers apply the scene directly to movements of spiritual renewal, and see in it a reason such movements fade.
Again and again even in our day, the work of God in revival among His saints has been damaged in the same way. While outwardly the work of God has been carried on with diligence and success, even in building a wall of spiritual separation from the outside world, there has grown up a spirit of self-seeking within, and so damage and impoverishment for many humbler saints.
- Inside. The wall grew strong outside while the builders ruined each other inside. Zeal against evil outside never excuses neglect at home.
- Occasion. Famine and taxes were the setting. Greed was the sin, turning a neighbour's need into profit.
- Debt. Children sold, lands and houses mortgaged, money borrowed to pay the king's tax — that is what the outcry was about.
- Brothers. One repeated word carries the whole accusation: men treated their own brothers as strangers.
- Cry. The outcry was not rebellion but evidence. One writer calls it fully justified, because love had failed.
And there were that said, We, our sons and our daughters, are many, and we must procure corn that we may eat and live.
The wall of Jerusalem was going up fast, but a new sound rose with it, and it did not come from the enemy. Poor families with many children were out of food, and the people they cried out against were their own neighbours.
The enemy outside is not the only danger a work faces.
Instead of continuing the story of building the wall, Nehemiah turns aside to describe the state of things within — among the people. And this is most instructive. If we are busy dealing with evil from outside, we cannot afford to neglect our own moral condition or the condition of the assembly. This has too often been the case. You will sometimes see zealous defenders of the truth who take no care at all for self-judgment or for discipline in the house of God.
What makes it worse is who these people claimed to be:
It is moving to see and experience the most grievous selfishness among those who boasted of a return to divine ground.
The hunger had a cause, and the building work was part of it.
The work of rebuilding the walls was a labour of love; no wages were paid. While the people were busy with it, their other occupations, including farming, had to be neglected. As a result the poor were driven to mortgage their lands, vineyards and houses in order to buy grain, because of the shortage. The rich took advantage of this and enslaved their sons and daughters, and there seemed no prospect of redeeming them.
They are asking for food, so that the family does not die. That leaves a question for those who had plenty.
The poor asked for grain so that they might live. Where was love? When the rich, following the example of Christ, ought to have laid down their lives for their brothers, did they help them in the ordinary things of life? "But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?" (1 John 3:17)
The cry in verse 1 is against "their brothers the Jews." The poor use the same word of themselves.
"The people and their wives" are clearly the poor, while "their brothers the Jews" are the rich. Division came in when the rich oppressed the poor, using their poverty to enrich themselves… Let us then try to find the root of this festering sore. It lies in one word — used twice — "their brothers," "our brothers." They were brothers as common descendants of Abraham, and even in a deeper sense. As God's chosen people they stood alike on the ground of redemption, so all were on the same footing before Him… So now "the Jews" treated the people as if they were not their brothers. They gave no thought at all to the shared relationship they held before God, and handled them as if they were outsiders.
Israel's law did not forbid interest everywhere. It drew a line between Israelites, and the reason for that line matters.
The law forbade Israelites to charge interest to one another. Interest was not wrong in itself. It did not fit their exceptional standing and their relation as brothers by birth. They were free to lend at interest to Gentiles, but not to Jews. If a Jew sold himself into servitude, he went free in the seventh year, just as land returned to its true holder in the jubilee year. So the law restrained and regulated a failing people on the Lord's behalf.
Does grace ask less of us than the law asked of them?
The law forbade a Jew to charge interest when lending to a poor fellow Israelite. So now that we are under grace, should we ignore such instruction? Rather, under grace we might go much further, by giving instead of lending.
- Cry. The noise that stops the work comes from inside, not outside. Hungry families cry out against their own people while the wall goes up.
- Cause. No one was paid, and no one could farm. Their poverty grew out of the very work they were doing.
- Plea. "So let us get grain, that we may eat and keep alive" is a plea to survive. It tests whether love is real when a brother is in need.
- Brothers. The repeated word names the injury. They treated God's own chosen people as outsiders to profit from.
- Grace. The law fenced in a failing people by banning interest between brothers. Grace does not lower that fence. It moves past lending to giving.
And there were that said, We have had to pledge our fields, and our vineyards, and our houses, that we might procure corn in the dearth.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And there were that said, We have borrowed money for the king's tribute upon our fields and vineyards;
Nehemiah 5:4 records a third complaint: some had borrowed money to pay the Persian king's tax, pledging their fields and vineyards. Why were people back in their own land paying for the right to hold it, and paying their own brothers interest?
The chapter groups the complaints. Each group had a different reason for going into debt, and one class of people profited from all three.
Some had sold their sons and daughters to the rich for grain, that they might eat and live. For the same reason, under pressure from the famine, some had mortgaged their lands, vineyards, and houses. Others had borrowed money against their lands and vineyards to pay the king's tribute. The rich had used the needs of their poorer brothers to become richer, and to bring them completely under their power.
They had no choice about the tax. Paying it started a chain they could not stop. Land pledged and never redeemed meant children pledged next.
The king demanded this tribute from them (Middah. Ezra 6:8; Ezra 4:20). Everyone had to borrow from his brother, pledging his fields and vineyards. They could not repay the debt. So the land was no longer their own, and they also had to put their children to work as slaves. They could not buy them back, because the fields were in the hands of their brothers. What a miserable situation!
The tax bill points to something larger. The return from exile restored the city, but not the nation's freedom.
There is a return of captives from Babylon. Jerusalem is regained, rebuilt, repeopled. The house of God is raised up again, and the worship of His name and the service of His altar are observed again. But this state of things was something quite new. Israel was no longer a nation set in their own land, as under Joshua and the Judges. It was no longer a kingdom with one of their own children on the throne... The people were now subjects of a Gentile king. They owed him for permission to live in the land of their fathers, and to keep the laws and carry out the service of their God.
The tax came from outside. The interest did not. That is where the verse turns from misfortune into sin.
Some had mortgaged their lands and vineyards and houses to buy grain (v. 3). Others had borrowed money to pay tax on their lands and vineyards. It is evident too that the mortgages and borrowed money carried interest. This was plain disobedience to the law of God. The law said, "If you lend money to any of My people with you who is poor, you shall not be like a moneylender to him, and you shall not exact interest from him" (Ex. 22:25).
The ban had limits. It held between Israelites, and it rested on the nation's place before God.
The Israelites were forbidden to charge interest to one another. This was not because interest is wrong in itself. It was because charging it did not fit their exceptional standing and their tie as brothers by birth. They were free to lend at interest to Gentiles, but not to Jews. If a Jew sold himself into servitude, he went free in the seventh year. In the same way, land returned to its rightful holder at the jubilee.
The mortgages and loans looked normal in the world around them. That is the danger.
Few people read this account without condemning such gross disobedience. Yet what did it amount to? Simply taking up human thoughts instead of God's, and worldly customs and practices instead of those the Scriptures lay down. In a word, these Jews walked as men, and as men who hurried to get rich at the expense of their brothers! And is this sin unknown in the church of God? Do the customs of society and the sayings of the world not often force their way in among Christians? Do they not govern how Christians treat one another?
The law's ban on interest was not the end of the matter.
Under law, the Jews were forbidden to charge interest when lending to a poor Israelite. Now that we are under grace, should we ignore such instruction? Instead, under grace we might go much further, by giving instead of lending.
- Tax — Persia forced the tribute on them, and their fields and vineyards had to stand as security.
- Debt — Debt that cannot be repaid does not stay still: the land went first, then the children.
- Brother — The hardship came from the empire. The profit went to fellow Jews, who traded on their brothers' need.
- Law — Israel could not charge interest inside the family, because it clashed with their standing before God and their tie to one another.
- Grace — Normal business was worldly thinking dressed up. The answer now is not stricter lending, but open-handed giving.
yet now our flesh is as the flesh of our brethren, our children as their children; and behold, we must bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants, and some of our daughters are brought into bondage [already]; neither is it in the power of our hand [to redeem them], for other men have our fields and our vineyards.
Nehemiah 5 stops the story of the wall to expose the trouble inside: the poor had lost food, land, and finally children to their own countrymen. Here their protest peaks — the creditors are their own flesh and blood, yet the debt is taking their sons and daughters.
The enemy outside is not the problem in this chapter.
This is the deeply serious lesson of Nehemiah 5. The opening verses (1-5) expose the corruption of the flesh among those who were building the wall. The rich Jews took advantage of their poorer brothers' poverty and need to enrich themselves. Daily needs, the hard times caused by a famine, and the weight of taxation should have drawn out the sympathy of the richer Jews. Instead, they became a chance to feed the covetousness of the flesh.
The poor do not argue economics. They point to one word — and a commentator finds the root of the whole evil in it.
Let us then seek to discover the root of this festering sore. It lies in a word — used twice — "their brothers," "our brothers." They were brothers as common descendants of Abraham, and even in a deeper sense. As God's chosen people they shared one redemption, so all stood on the same footing before Him... Because of this, Malachi challenged them: "Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our fathers?" Yet now "the Jews" were dealing with the people as if they were not their brothers. They had completely forgotten the shared relationship in which they stood before God. So they treated them as if they were foreigners and pagans.
They had split one family into two classes:
The root of the trouble lay in the fact that they were viewing themselves as forming distinct classes of rich and poor, and forgetting that whether rich or poor they were "brothers."
The verse says it was not in their power to help it. Here is why the trap had closed.
Everyone had to borrow from his brother, pledging his fields and vineyards. Then they could not repay the debt. So the land was no longer their own, and they also had to put their children to work as slaves. They could not redeem them, because the fields were in the hands of their brothers. What a miserable situation! How clearly this shows that a testimony which looks right on the outside is no safety for us! It may even be a great snare in our practical life. Being satisfied that we hold a place of separation from the world may feed our spiritual pride. It can make us treat our moral slackness with our brothers as a small thing.
The law did not ban interest everywhere in Israel. It banned interest between brothers, and it gave the poor ways out.
Interest was forbidden between Israelites, not because it was wrong in itself. It did not fit their special standing, or their relation as brothers after the flesh. They were free to lend at interest to Gentiles, but not to Jews. If a Jew sold himself into servitude, the seventh year set him free, just as land returned to its true holder at the jubilee. So the law checked and regulated a failing people on the Lord's behalf. Sadly, self governed the nobles and rulers in the land.
Being right about the enemy is not the same as being right yourself.
If we are busy dealing with evil from outside, we cannot afford to neglect our own moral condition, or the condition of the assembly. This has happened too often. People who fight hard for the truth are sometimes seen to completely neglect self-judgment and discipline in the house of God. There is no sadder sight than a gathering that is completely careless about its own state and its failure to obey the word of God, while it proclaims the need of separation from evildoers or false doctrine.
If law set a floor under a poor brother, grace does not lower it.
The Jews under law were forbidden to charge interest when lending to another poor Israelite. Now that we are under grace, should we ignore such instruction? Rather, under grace we might go much further, by giving instead of lending.
- Brother forgotten — One word appears twice in the verse: brothers. The rich treated them as foreigners instead.
- Brother classified — Once people split into rich and poor instead of family, need becomes a chance to profit.
- Brother enslaved — Fields went first, then children. With the land in other hands, there was no way to buy them back.
- Brother protected — The law banned interest between Israelites and freed slaves in the seventh year. Self-interest ignored it.
- Brother served — Grace does not lower the standard the law set. It raises it, from lending to giving — and it starts with judging ourselves.
And I was very angry when I heard their cry and these words.
The builders had faced down the enemy outside, and the wall was going up. Now a cry rises from inside Jerusalem: the poorer Jews are being crushed by debt to the richer ones. Nehemiah's first recorded response is not a plan but an emotion: he burns with anger at what he hears.
The chapter turns our eyes from the enemy outside to the builders themselves.
We have noticed certain good features that marked the people in chapter 4. But as we start to read chapter 5, we discover that beneath the surface sad mischief had been at work. Under Nehemiah's leadership they met opposition from outside with courage. All the time, though, selfish oppression was going on within. The richer Jews had taken advantage of the plight many poorer ones had drifted into. The shortage of basic necessities had driven them to borrow money or raise mortgages, so as to get food for themselves and their families. Outwardly they presented a picture of commendable zeal in doing what was God's service at that moment. Inwardly they were guilty of much self-seeking and corruption.
The complaint was about lending at interest. Older translations call it "usury."
This word does not in Scripture mean, as it does now, undue interest, but simply interest of any kind. The Israelites were forbidden to demand interest from their brothers. This assumed the borrower was poor — otherwise he would not need to borrow. They were allowed to lend to strangers on interest... On the return of the Jews, Nehemiah sharply rebuked the nobles and the rulers for taking interest from their poorer brothers. Scripture strictly commands the rich to help the poor.
What made the practice wrong was not economics but relationship.
Lending at interest was forbidden among the Israelites toward one another. It was not wrong in itself. It simply did not fit their exceptional standing and their relation as brothers after the flesh.
Anger can be right or wrong. The test is who the injury fell on.
In Mark 3:5 we find the Lord angry, "grieved at their hardness of heart." We feel at once how unselfish this anger is. It is all for their sakes and for God's glory. Righteous anger never has self in any shape or form for its cause... In Nehemiah 5:6 we find Nehemiah very angry against gross injustice done by others, and to others, not against himself. So he did "well" to be angry. In Ephesians 4:26 we get the exhortation to "be angry and do not sin"; that is, not to store up anger and malice in our hearts.
Verse 6 leads straight into "I took counsel with myself" in verse 7. Nehemiah had no one else to turn to.
Nehemiah was rightly very angry when he heard this cry of oppression (v. 6). But there was no one whose help he could enlist in fighting the evil, because the nobles and rulers themselves were the offenders. So, in the energy of personal faith in the Lord, he rebuked the nobles and rulers. He told them they were guilty of charging interest to their own brothers. He called a great assembly, to have these matters publicly faced (v. 7).
Nehemiah's private thinking produced public courage, not delay.
He did not go and seek advice from anyone about what he must do, any more than on the night when he went around the walls of Jerusalem. "I consulted with myself," he said. He knew within himself what his responsibility was, both for the public testimony and for the moral life of the assembly. He did not fear to unmask the chief men in front of a large congregation. Fear of what people thought did not stop him when the truth was at stake.
His rebuke touched three relationships at once.
Nehemiah meets this evil by rebuking the nobles and bringing the matter before "a great assembly." He shows that to act like this toward their brothers did not fit the redemption from captivity they all shared. Toward God it showed a lack of holy fear. As for the nations, it would bring them into reproach (vv. 6-9).
The watching outsiders weigh how believers treat each other more than how carefully they keep their distance from the world.
Brothers who are still tied to the world in many ways often behave much better, out of devotion to their brothers, than others who strongly insist on outward separation. If these two things do not go together, the Christian testimony has no real value. But let us not forget that the world will be more impressed by a testimony given through brotherly love than by a testimony given through outward separation. This is why Nehemiah said to the chief men, "Ought you not to walk in the fear of our God to prevent the taunts of the nations our enemies?" (v. 9).
- Inside first. The wall held against the enemy outside while selfish oppression ran unchecked among the builders. Outward zeal was no guard against inward corruption.
- Brothers, not customers. Israelites could not charge each other interest of any kind. They could lend to a stranger on interest; to a poor brother they could not.
- Anger without self. His anger was over injustice done by others, to others, never to himself. That is the mark of anger that does not sin.
- Counsel then courage. The rulers themselves were guilty, so he took counsel with himself. Then he named the wrong to their faces before a great assembly.
- Watched by the world. The sin denied the redemption they all shared, showed no fear of God, and gave the watching nations something to mock.
And I consulted with myself; and I remonstrated with the nobles and the rulers, and said to them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother! And I set a great assembly against them.
Nehemiah came back to a ruined Jerusalem and set to work rebuilding its wall. Then he found a worse break inside the city. The poor among the returned exiles were mortgaging their land and selling their children, because the rich among them were lending at interest. This verse is his answer: he weighs the matter alone, charges the leading men to their faces, and calls a public assembly to hear it.
The word behind the charge is narrower in English today than in the law Nehemiah applied.
This word does not in Scripture mean, as it does now, excessive interest, but simply interest of any kind. The Israelites were forbidden to charge their brothers interest. The law always assumed the borrower was poor, since otherwise he would not need to borrow. To strangers, however, they were allowed to lend at interest... Scripture strictly commands the rich to help the poor.
That restriction was not a verdict on lending as such. It rested on who these people were to each other.
The law forbade the Israelites to charge one another interest. Lending at interest was not wrong in itself. It did not fit their exceptional standing, or their relation as brothers. They were free to lend at interest to Gentiles, not to Jews... So the law checked and regulated a failing people on the Lord's behalf. Sadly, it was self that ruled the nobles and rulers in the land.
Nehemiah's charge names the tie they were breaking: "each from his brother."
It lies in one word — used twice — "their brothers," "our brothers." They were brothers as common descendants of Abraham, and even in a deeper sense. As God's chosen people they stood alike on the ground of redemption, and all of them were therefore on the same footing before Him... It was in view of this that Malachi challenged them: "Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our fathers?" So now "the Jews" were dealing with the people as if they were not their brothers. They had completely forgotten the shared relationship in which they stood before God, and treated them as if they were foreigners.
Nehemiah takes counsel with no one. One writer explains why he could not.
The nobles and rulers, with whom in ordinary circumstances he might have taken counsel, were the chief offenders, so they could give him no light or help. This threw Nehemiah back on his own resources, or rather shut him up to God for guidance in the matter. When everyone has left the right path, the authority of the word of God is obscured as a result. Then the man of faith — one who wants to walk with God — cannot afford to consult others, or their advice may tie him up. He must act alone and for himself, whatever it costs, according to the Word. In that necessity he finds both strength and courage, because it produces confidence in the Lord and secures His presence.
Nehemiah does not settle it in private. He calls "a great assembly" to hear the charge.
He knew within himself what his responsibility was, both for the public testimony and for the moral life of the assembly. He was not afraid to expose the leading men in front of a large gathering; fear of what people thought did not stop him when the truth was at stake. In the same way, Paul reproached Peter in front of everyone at Antioch and opposed him to his face, because he was in the wrong.
The weight of the rebuke came from what Nehemiah had already done with his own money.
He is able to rebuke the offenders by contrasting their conduct with his own. He had redeemed his brothers from the nations; they had brought them into bondage to themselves... Nehemiah loved his brothers, and he grieved at the dishonour done to the Lord's name by their condition, so he spent his own money to redeem them. They loved themselves and wanted to grow richer, so they used their brothers' hardship to fasten a yoke of slavery on their necks.
One writer draws the lesson for how we treat one another, with the world looking on.
Nehemiah's rebukes remind us clearly that in all our conduct toward one another we should act as brothers, in the fear of God. Then we give the world no occasion to reproach us. His rebukes match what Paul urges on Titus: grace teaches us "to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age."
- Brother. The whole charge turns on one word. They lent at interest to brothers — people standing on the same ground of redemption before God.
- Law. The old word "usury" means interest of any kind, not excessive interest. The law allowed it with strangers and forbade it with a poor brother.
- Counsel. "I took counsel with myself" was necessity, not pride. The men he would usually consult were the guilty ones, so he was shut up to God.
- Courage. He named the offence to the leading men and called a great assembly to hear it, unafraid of their standing.
- Credibility. His own money had bought brothers out of slavery. That contrast carried the rebuke.
And I said to them, We, according to our ability, have redeemed our brethren the Jews, who were sold to the nations; and will ye even sell your brethren? or shall they be sold unto us? And they were silent and found no answer.
In Nehemiah 5 the trouble is among God's own people. Rich Jews were lending at interest and selling poorer Jews into slavery — and in verse 8 Nehemiah sets his own record against theirs.
Nehemiah uses the same word on both sides of his charge: brothers. One writer finds the whole failure there:
The root of the trouble was that they saw themselves as separate classes, rich and poor. They forgot that, rich or poor, they were "brothers."
That bond was more than family history. It rested on what God had done for all of them alike:
They were brothers as common descendants of Abraham, and even in a deeper sense. As God's chosen people they were alike on the ground of redemption, and all therefore were on the same footing before Him — the common objects of His grace... So now "the Jews" were dealing with the people as if they were not their brothers. They had completely forgotten the relationship they shared before God, and so they treated them as if they were foreigners and outsiders.
Nehemiah's question turns on a reversal. He had spent money to get these people out of foreign hands. The nobles were making money by putting them back under a yoke.
When Nehemiah came to Jerusalem, he had freed those Jews who were in bondage to the nations because of some debt. Now these rich money-lenders were selling their own brothers.
Another writer shows what that rescue required of them:
Speaking to the whole gathering, Nehemiah reminded them of what they had done. As far as God had given them the ability, they had redeemed their Jewish brothers out of bondage to the nations. This involved proper care and grace toward their brothers... They had once been gracious enough to redeem these people from slavery. Should the rich in Israel now be content to see them sold back into it?
Nehemiah can say "we" because he had paid the cost himself. His rebuke carries weight because his own conduct answers it first:
He is able to rebuke the offenders by setting their conduct beside his own. He had redeemed his brothers from the nations. They had brought them into bondage to themselves, lording it over God's heritage. It is a great blessing when a shepherd among the people of God can point to his own conduct as their guide... Nehemiah loved his brothers, and it grieved him that their condition brought dishonour on the Lord's name. So he spent his own wealth to redeem them. They loved themselves and wanted to grow richer. So they used their brothers' needs to bind the yoke of bondage on their necks.
Nehemiah says this to men standing before the whole gathering. He could not take advice from the usual leaders, because they were the ones at fault:
Normally he might have taken counsel with the nobles and rulers. But they were the chief offenders, so he could look for no light or help from them. So Nehemiah was thrown back on his own resources — or rather, he was shut up to God for guidance in the matter... He convicted them of their sin... and, according to the apostolic instruction, rebuked them before all.
The verse ends with no reply. One writer compares this with a later public correction:
Nehemiah's words here may remind us of how Paul spoke to Peter in public. Peter and other leaders had shown favouritism to Jewish believers over Gentile believers (Gal. 2:11-16). Paul did not first look for someone else to agree with him. He spoke straight to Peter in front of everyone, for he was a true prophet, speaking on God's behalf. Peter could not reply to Paul. In the same way, the nobles and rulers in Jerusalem had nothing to say to Nehemiah's faithful words (v. 8).
Being in the right place did not make them right. One writer draws the uncomfortable comparison:
This is solemn; and we may listen to this, and be warned. It tells us that those who had taken a right position were behaving worse than those still in a wrong one. The Jews at Jerusalem stood in a better religious position. Their brothers, still in Babylon, were in a purer moral condition.
- Brothers. The sin began when that one word was dropped. Rich and poor became classes instead of brothers, though both stood on the same ground of redemption before God.
- Bought. Nehemiah spent his own money to buy Jews out of foreign slavery. The nobles made money selling the same people back into it.
- Obliged. A shared redemption brings an obligation. Those once redeemed by grace cannot trade on a brother's need.
- Example. The rebuke carried weight because Nehemiah's own conduct was the opposite. A leader who can point to his own walk speaks with authority.
- Silenced. Nehemiah spoke faithfully and in the open, and looked for no ally first. The offenders had no answer.
And I said, The thing that ye do is not good. Ought ye not to walk in the fear of our God, so as not to be the reproach of the nations our enemies?
While the wall was going up, the richer exiles were charging their own struggling countrymen interest and pushing them into slavery. In verse 9 Nehemiah answers on two grounds: how they stand toward God, and how they look to the enemies watching outside.
The building work was going well. That is what makes the failure inside so serious.
In chapter 4 we noticed certain good features in the people. But as we start to read chapter 5, we discover that sad mischief had been at work under the surface. Under Nehemiah's leadership the people stood bravely against opposition from outside. All the while, selfish oppression was going on inside.
The law drew a line between lending to a fellow Israelite and lending to an outsider.
The law forbade Israelites to charge interest to one another. This was not because charging interest is wrong in itself. It was because it did not fit their special standing, or their relation to each other as brothers by birth. They were free to lend at interest to Gentiles, but not to Jews. If a Jew sold himself into slavery, he went free in the seventh year, just as land went back to its true owner at the jubilee. In this way the law checked and regulated a failing people on the Lord's behalf.
Corruption at the top raised a practical problem. Who could Nehemiah turn to for advice?
The nobles and rulers were the chief offenders. Normally he might have taken counsel with them, but no light and no help could come from them. So Nehemiah was thrown back on his own resources — or rather, he was left with God alone for guidance in the matter. When everyone has left the right path... the man of faith, the one who wants to walk with God, cannot afford to consult others, or their advice may tie his hands. He must act alone and for himself, whatever it costs, according to the Word.
His rebuke carried weight because his own conduct ran the opposite way.
Nehemiah loved his brothers, and he grieved that their condition brought dishonour on the Lord's name. So he spent his own money to buy them back. The nobles loved themselves, and they wanted to grow richer. So they used their brothers' need to fasten the yoke of slavery on their necks. Nehemiah showed the spirit of Christ (compare 2 Cor. 8:9), and they the spirit of Satan.
The fear of God shows in conduct toward other people. Paul makes the same point in his letter to Titus.
Nehemiah's rebukes remind us clearly that in all our conduct toward one another we should act as brothers, in the fear of God, so that we give the world no occasion to reproach us. His rebukes match what Paul tells Titus: grace teaches us to "live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age" (Titus 2:12). So we should act with self-restraint and consideration for our brothers, righteously toward those outside, and reverently toward God.
The second half of Nehemiah's appeal points outward. Israel claimed to belong to God, and the nations around could see how they lived.
They claimed, and claimed rightly, to be God's chosen people, set apart from all the other nations for His service. But if their way of life looked like the nations around them, what became of that claim? They did not stop being God's people. Yet by their conduct they denied it, and they publicly profaned the holy name they were called by. God's people can do no greater damage than to give the enemy just ground for taunting them about their practices.
So what do outsiders actually see?
Some believers are still tied to the world in many ways. Yet out of devotion to their brothers, they often behave much better than others who insist on outward separation. If these two things do not go together, Christian testimony has no real value. But let us not forget: the world is more impressed by a testimony of brotherly love than by a testimony of outward separation.
The appeal did not stop at words.
No wonder such a contrast silenced the guilty leaders. Nehemiah could invite anyone to examine him and his servants. His words carried such force that he called on them to stop behaving in a way so far beneath Israel, and to give back that very day what they had taken.
- Inside first. Courage against enemies outside can hide self-seeking inside. The wall was rising while the rich crushed the poor.
- Brothers, not customers. Charging interest was not wrong in itself. It was wrong between Israelites, because they were brothers.
- Fear of God. It shows in three places: restraint with brothers, fairness toward outsiders, reverence toward God.
- Life first, then rebuke. Nehemiah could confront the nobles because his own money had bought back the people they were selling.
- The world is watching. Brotherly love is the testimony outsiders notice. Without it, separation counts for nothing — and here it ended in property handed back the same day.
I also, my brethren and my servants, we might exact usury of them, money and corn. I pray you, let us leave off this usury.
Jerusalem's wall was going up, and inside the city the nobles were charging their poorer countrymen interest. In verse 10 Nehemiah stops accusing and says "let us." How does a leader correct a wrong he stands close to?
Nehemiah was a lender himself. He did not stand outside the problem and point at it.
Nehemiah added that he and his servants were also lending the people money. He certainly was not charging interest. Even so, he linked himself with all the money-lenders and urged, "Please, let us stop this usury!" (v. 10).
One commentator draws out the force of that "us."
Notice that he says, "let us." He put himself in grace alongside them in their sins. He admitted that he was one with them before God, and in this way he sought, in a spirit of meekness, to bring them back.
Older translations use "usury" where the ESV says "exacting of interest." The word did not then mean an outrageous rate.
This word does not in scripture mean, as it does now, excessive interest, but simply interest of any kind. The law forbade the Israelites to charge interest to their brothers. It always assumed the borrower was poor, since otherwise he would not need to borrow... Ex. 22:25; Lev. 25:35-38; Deut. 23:19-20. When the Jews returned home, Nehemiah gave the nobles and the rulers a sharp rebuke for taking interest from their poorer brothers. Neh. 5:3-13.
The ban had a boundary. It ran between an Israelite and an outsider, and it came with other protections for those who had fallen into debt.
Israelites were forbidden to charge usury to one another. Interest was not banned as a thing wrong in itself. It was banned because it did not fit their special standing before God, or their bond as brothers by birth. They were free to lend at interest to Gentiles, but not to Jews. If a Jew sold himself into servitude, he went free in the seventh year. In the same way, land returned to its true holder at the jubilee. In this way the law checked and regulated a failing people on Jehovah's behalf. Sadly, it was self that ruled the nobles and rulers in the land.
Trace it back and you reach a single word.
Let us then seek to find the root of this festering sore. It lies in a word used twice — "their brothers," "our brothers." They were brothers as common descendants of Abraham, and in a deeper sense too. As God's chosen people they all stood on the ground of redemption, so all were on the same footing before Him... So now "the Jews" were dealing with the people as if they were not their brothers. They had completely forgotten the relationship they all shared before God. So they treated their own people as if they were foreigners and heathen.
The same writer then turns the question on the reader today.
They had themselves received grace, and they were to show that grace to their brothers... In a word, these Jews walked as men, and as men who hurried to get rich at the expense of their brothers! And is this sin unknown in the church of God?
Nehemiah's appeal carried weight because his record ran the opposite way to theirs.
He is able to rebuke the offenders by contrasting their conduct with his own. He had redeemed his brothers from the heathen. They had brought their brothers into bondage to themselves, lording it over God's heritage. Nehemiah loved his brothers. He also grieved that their condition brought dishonour on Jehovah's name. So he spent his own money to redeem them. They loved themselves and wanted to grow richer, so they used their brothers' needs to fasten the yoke of bondage on their necks.
The appeal of verse 10 leads straight into a demand for repayment. Then comes a guard against second thoughts.
He urged them to stop charging interest. He also urged them to put right what was already done — to restore at once the vineyards, olive groves and houses, and the hundredth part of the money and grain, wine and oil that they had charged the people... But Nehemiah was not going to drop the matter there. He called the priests. In front of them he made the nobles and rulers swear to do as they promised. Nehemiah knew that even a ruler can find a clever way out of a promise if he is not held to it.
- Brother. The offence was not lending. It was lending to a brother. The law allowed interest from outsiders and banned it inside God's people.
- Forgotten. They forgot that bond and treated their own people as foreigners.
- Grace. They had received grace, so they owed grace. They were not to profit from a brother's need.
- Us. Nehemiah's plea puts him inside the guilty group. It rests on a life that spent money to free brothers, not to bind them.
- Restore. Stopping was only half. The money had to go back that same day. An oath sealed the promise so it could not fade away.
Restore, I pray you, to them this very day their fields, their vineyards, their olive-gardens, and their houses, also the hundredth [part] of the money, and of the corn, the wine and the oil, that ye have exacted of them.
The wall was going up and the enemy outside had backed off. Inside the city, though, richer Jews were squeezing the poor. Nehemiah's answer raises two questions: what had to go back, and what gave one man the right to demand it?
Nehemiah does not stop at "stop doing this." He tells them to hand back on the spot what they had already taken.
He then demanded full restitution... The appeal was effective... Had the oppression continued along with the internal strife, it would have ended in disaster. How often these internal quarrels and acts of injustice have brought reproach on the people of God.
Stopping does not close a wrong already done.
He urged them not only to stop charging interest, but to go back over what was already taken. They were to restore at once the vineyards, olive groves and houses, and the hundredth part of the money, grain, wine and oil that they had charged the people.
The practice behind this verse has a name in older translations: usury.
In Scripture this word does not mean unfair interest, as it does today. It means interest of any kind. Israelites could not charge interest to their brothers. The rule always assumed the borrower was poor — otherwise he would not need to borrow. To strangers, however, they were allowed to lend at interest.
Once the land was gone, a family had nothing left to give but its children.
Everyone had to borrow from his brother, pledging his fields and vineyards. Then, since they could not repay the debt, the land was no longer their own. They also had to hand over their children as slaves, and could not buy them back, because their fields were in the hands of their brothers.
Nehemiah could ask this because of the way he had lived among them.
He also had the rights of a governor — that is, to be fed at the people's expense — but he had given that right up completely... As for Nehemiah, he spent his own possessions to feed 150 Jews and rulers daily, not counting visiting guests. So he was qualified to exhort, and even to require, that this state of things should stop.
His own giving is what made the accusation land.
Nehemiah loved his brothers, and he grieved that their condition dishonoured Jehovah's name. So he spent his own money to redeem them. They loved themselves and wanted to grow richer. So they used the needs of their brothers to fasten the yoke of slavery around their necks.
Outward separation from the world is not, on its own, a testimony.
Some believers are still tied to the world in many ways. Out of devotion to their brothers, they often behave far better than others who strongly insist on outward separation. If these two things do not go together, the Christian testimony has no real value. The world is more impressed by a testimony of brotherly love than by one of outward separation.
They agreed — though commentators read the tone of their agreement differently. Rossier hears something flat in it, while noting the obedience was real and the congregation rejoiced.
Their words seem a little flat for people who are sorry and humbled: "We will restore these and require nothing from them. We will do as you say." But however that may be, they obeyed. That simple act of obedience produced joy in Israel.
Nehemiah did not leave the promise to their good intentions.
But Nehemiah was not going to drop the matter there. He called the priests, and in their presence he required an oath from the nobles and rulers that they would do as they promised. Nehemiah knew that even a ruler could slip out of a promise if he was not held to it. So the priests were witnesses to this oath, and had authority to see that it was kept.
This pattern — good work outside, self-seeking inside — did not stay in Nehemiah's day.
Again and again, even in our day, the work of God in revival among His saints has been damaged in the same way. Outwardly the work of God went on with diligence and success. It even built a wall of spiritual separation from the world outside. But inside, a spirit of self-seeking grew up, and with it harm and poverty for many humbler believers.
- Exacting. The charge was interest taken from poor brothers. The law forbade any interest at all in such cases.
- Stripping. Interest took fields, vineyards, olive orchards and houses — a family's living, and then its children.
- Restoring. Nehemiah asks them to undo the wrong the same day, not just stop it.
- Costing. He could ask it because he had already given up his own rights and spent his own money on the people.
- Rejoicing. They promised under oath, they obeyed, and that one day of obedience ended in praise.
And they said, We will restore [them], and will require nothing of them; so will we do, as thou hast said. And I called the priests, and took an oath of them, that they should do according to this promise.
Nehemiah has just confronted the rich leaders of Jerusalem for charging their own poor countrymen interest. Here they agree to give it all back, and Nehemiah makes them swear to it.
Nehemiah's charge was not that lending money is wrong. Lending at interest was forbidden inside Israel. One writer sets out the rule and the reason behind it:
Charging interest was forbidden among the Israelites toward one another. It was not forbidden because it is wrong in itself. It was forbidden because it did not fit their exceptional standing, or their relation to each other as brothers by birth. They were free to lend at interest to Gentiles, but not to Jews. And if a Jew sold himself into servitude, the seventh year set him free, just as land went back to its true owner at the jubilee. That is how the law checked and regulated a failing people on the Lord's behalf.
Nehemiah's rebuke carried weight because his own conduct stood beside theirs. One writer sets the two side by side:
Nehemiah loved his brothers, and it grieved him that their condition brought dishonour on the Lord's name. So he spent his own wealth to redeem them. They loved themselves and wanted to grow richer, so they used their brothers' needs to fasten the yoke of slavery around their necks. Nehemiah showed the spirit of Christ; they showed the spirit of Satan.
Their answer is not a pledge to behave better from now on. Nehemiah had asked for the past to be undone, and that is what they agree to:
He did not only urge them to stop charging interest. He urged them to undo what was already done — to give back at once the vineyards, olive groves and houses, and the hundredth part of the money and grain, wine and oil that they had charged the people. What else could the nobles and rulers do? They answered as they did: "We will restore these and require nothing from them. We will do as you say." If they had not responded this way, they would have been guilty of defying the law of God.
Nehemiah had argued well, but the change of mind is credited elsewhere. One writer marks the point simply:
So he pleads with them, and the result is that his rebuke was blessed by the Lord. "Then they said, We will restore them, and will require nothing of them; so will we do as you say."
Nehemiah did not treat their agreement as the end of the matter. He feared what might happen once the crowd went home:
The Lord was with His servant, and they consented to do as he had urged. But Nehemiah would not leave the matter in any doubt. Perhaps he also feared that once they went back to their homes they might be tempted to forget their promise. So he "called the priests and made them swear to do as they had promised."
Nehemiah asked for more than regret. That is what God looked for whenever one person wronged another:
God looked for confession and restitution whenever someone had committed a trespass. The second would show whether the first was sincere. It was not enough for a Jew who had wronged his brother to go and say, "I am sorry." He had to restore the thing in which he had trespassed, and add a fifth to it. Now, although we are not under the law, we may still gather much instruction from its institutions... If we have wronged anyone, it is not enough that we confess our sin to God and to our brother; we must make restitution. We are called to give practical proof that we have judged ourselves over the thing in which we trespassed.
- Restore, because they are brothers. Interest was not wrong in itself. God forbade it between Israelites because of their standing before Him and their bond as brothers.
- Restore, because the rebuke was credible. Nehemiah had spent his own money buying Jews back from foreign owners. He could set that beside what the nobles were doing to their own people.
- Restore today, not tomorrow. Nehemiah did not ask for better behaviour from now on. Fields, vineyards, houses and the money already taken had to go back at once.
- Restore under oath. Consent given in a public assembly can fade at home. So Nehemiah had the priests take an oath and hold the leaders to their word.
- Restore, or the sorrow was empty. Saying "I am sorry" was never enough. Giving back what you took is the practical proof that you have judged yourself.
Also I shook my lap, and said, So God shake out every man from his house and from his earnings, that performeth not this promise even thus be he shaken out and emptied! And all the congregation said, Amen! And they praised Jehovah. And the people did according to this promise.
Nehemiah has just confronted the wealthy leaders of Jerusalem. They had been making money off their own struggling countrymen, and now they agree to give it all back. This verse is how he closes the deal: a gesture, a curse on anyone who breaks the agreement, and the crowd's answer.
The thing being renounced was lending at interest to a fellow Israelite. One reference work notes that the word behind "usury" is broader than our modern sense of it, and explains why the practice was forbidden between brothers:
In Scripture this word does not mean, as it does now, excessive interest. It simply means interest of any kind. The Israelites were forbidden to charge interest to their brothers. The law always assumed the borrower was poor, since otherwise he would not need to borrow. To strangers, however, they were allowed to lend at interest. Ex. 22:25; Lev. 25:35-38; Deut. 23:19-20. When the Jews returned, Nehemiah sharply rebuked the nobles and the rulers for taking interest from their poorer brothers. Neh. 5:3-13. Scripture strictly commands the rich to help the poor.
Verse 12 already had their agreement. Nehemiah still brought in the priests and put the men under oath, and commentators read this as a realistic estimate of how easily such an agreement could evaporate:
Nehemiah knew that even a ruler could cleverly slip out of a promise if he is not held to it. So the priests stood as witnesses to this oath, with authority to make sure the men kept it.
Another writer gives two reasons for it:
The gesture is a picture drawn from clothing: the fold of the robe was where a man carried his goods, and Nehemiah emptied his out in front of them all.
Then Nehemiah shook out the fold of his garments and said, "So may God shake out each man from his house, and from his property, who does not perform this promise." At this, all the assembly responded, "Amen!" and praised the Lord.
Its force reached past the restitution owed that day and fixed a standard for the years ahead:
But he added a most solemn denunciation of such conduct for the future.
The crowd's single word was not mild approval. Its earliest uses in Scripture tie the speaker to a curse he has just heard:
A strong assertion of affirmation and assent. It first appears when a woman was suspected of being unfaithful to her husband. She had to drink the bitter water. The priest pronounced a curse upon her if she had been guilty, and the woman had to answer Amen, Amen. Num. 5:22. The same word followed each curse the priest read out on Mount Ebal: "And all the people shall say, 'Amen.'" Deut. 27:14-26.
Were these men really broken over what they had done? One writer leaves that open, and hears something flat in what they said:
Thanks be to God, Nehemiah had the joy of receiving a positive response. Did his exhortations deeply reach the consciences of those who had sinned? We cannot say. In any case, their words seem a little lifeless for people who are sorry and humbled: "We will restore these and require nothing from them. We will do as you say" (v. 12). But however that may be, they obeyed, and this simple act of obedience produces joy in Israel.
The verse closes with the people doing what they had promised. How long that took, the record does not say:
How long the process of restoring took we are not told, but the decisive action of Nehemiah was effective.
Nehemiah could ask this of others because he had first asked it of himself; verses 14-18 record a governor who never claimed his own allowance. The lesson drawn from it is blunt:
There is nothing like example. If you want devotedness, the great thing is to begin with yourself. Be devoted yourself. If you want love, show love. You will very often find that the men who most demand love are those who least show it.
- Promise — the men agreed to stop charging interest to poor fellow Israelites. They would also give back the land and money already taken. The law had forbidden this between brothers.
- Oath — a spoken yes was not enough. Nehemiah called the priests as witnesses, because even a ruler can slip out of a promise no one holds him to.
- Sign — shaking out the fold of his garment acted out the penalty. God would empty any man of house and property who broke his word — then and in the years after.
- Amen — the crowd's word was full agreement. In earlier Scripture the same word bound a person to a curse he had just heard.
- Deed — the account does not stop at the ceremony. The people did what they promised, and that obedience brought joy and praise to the Lord.