| From
the Church on the Hill
by D. Eric Williams Pastor, Cottonwood Community Church pastor@cottonwoodcommunitychurch.org [Continued from last week] Nehemiah understood the blessing of return to the Promised Land granted by the emperor Cyrus was contingent upon continued faithfulness to the covenant. The occupation of Judea and Jerusalem by the Jews was not up to the emperor but was in fact the prerogative of Yahweh Himself. Again, as promised, if God’s people responded to punishment, turn to Him and hear His voice, “. . .the LORD your God will bring you back from captivity, and have compassion on you, and gather you again from all the nations where the LORD your God has scattered you” (Deuteronomy 30:3), a promise substantially restated by God to Solomon upon the completion of the temple (2 Chronicles 7:14). These truths weighed heavily upon the mind of Nehemiah. He understood God had punished His people, had heard their cry for forgiveness and had blessed them with a return to the land. He also recognized blessings would continue to flow only if the people of God remained in right fellowship with Yahweh. We are told in 1:11 that Nehemiah was the cupbearer to the king. Much has been made of the fact that Nehemiah served the king in this manner. Indeed “studies have shown the importance of this position. In the ancient near Eastern court the cupbearer, with his direct access to the king, was regarded as important and influential” and the office was considered “a very particular distinction.” Indeed, Nehemiah is later appointed governor of Judea (Nehemiah 5:14), confirming the suspicion his activity as cupbearer displayed character qualities exceeding mere deportment adequate to royal attendance. He therefore shares characteristics common to Daniel, Mordecai and other Jews elevated to positions of responsibility in the Babylonian and later Medo Persian Empire (Daniel 2:49, 3:30, 6:1-2, Esther 8:2, 10:2). As such, Nehemiah would have generally been held in high esteem by his countrymen. Moreover, he would have been aware of his place as a leader in the community of God’s people. Hence, when Nehemiah received word from his brother Hanani (Nehemiah 1:2, 7:2) concerning the unfortunate conditions in Jerusalem he reacted as any pious Jew might but also as a Jew in a position of sociopolitical responsibility. This is not to suggest someone from among the proletariat would neglect prayer; it simply recognizes that Nehemiah would approach a time of prayer with the understanding of his office and responsibility. Thus the context for the prayer Nehemiah as recorded in 1:5-11 is that of a pious Jew, fully embracing the covenant of God, in understanding of the Mosaic blessing and cursing. He is a man of some quality and occupying a position of great responsibility in the court of the king. The king who is described in the text as Artaxerxes is generally understood to be Artaxerxes Longimanus who reigned from 465 to 424 BC. Nehemiah locates the events recorded in the first chapter as taking place “in the month of Chislev, in the twentieth year” (Nehemiah 1:1). Although there are a number of ways to understand the text it seems clear Nehemiah is referring to the twentieth year of Artaxerxes which would have been in 445 BC. This was a difficult time for the Persian king with ongoing instability in the trans-Euphrates region, especially Egypt. Peace and stability in Judea would be beneficial to Artaxerxes. Nehemiah as a trusted official of the king would have had a like interest in maintaining a Judean buffer zone. Certainly his overriding concerns would have been about the welfare of his people and the realization of God’s covenant blessings; nevertheless, we cannot discount the political interests of the cupbearer to the king of the Medo Persian Empire. [To be continued] |
 |