Nehemiah 1:3

Neh 1:3 And they said unto me, The remnant that are left of the captivity there in the province [are] in great affliction and reproach: the wall of Jerusalem also [is] broken down, and the gates thereof are burned with fire.

Ver. 3. Are in great affliction and reproach] The Church is heir of the cross, saith Luther, Ecclesia est haeres crucis, and it was ever the portion of God’s people to be reproached, as David was by Doeg with devouring words, Psa 52:1. Their breath as fire shall devour you, Isa 33:11.

The wall of Jerusalem also is broken down] So that thieves and murderers came in, in the night, saith Comestor here, and slew many of them.

And the gates thereof are burnt with fire] They were burnt by the Chaldeans, and never yet repaired. And to keep a continual great watch was too great a charge and trouble.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Neh 1:3. They said, The remnant that are left in the province — In Judea, which was now made a province under the Persian kings; are in great affliction and reproach — Despised and distressed by the neighbouring nations. The wall of Jerusalem also is broken down, &c. — The walls and gates continue as the Chaldeans left them after their conquest of the city, the Jews not being in a condition to rebuild them, nor having commission from the kings of Persia to do so, but only to build the temple, and their own private houses. This made their condition both very despicable, under the abiding marks of poverty and slavery, and very dangerous, for their enemies might, when they pleased, make an easy prey of them.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1:3 The wall of Jerusalem has been torn down: This probably refers to a recent setback in Jerusalem (see Ezra 4:6-23), not to the Babylonian conquest in 586 BC. • disgrace: Foreigners could gloat about the destroyed city, using it as evidence that Israel’s God was too weak to protect it (cp. Joel 2:17; Mic 7:8-10).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Meaning, in Judea.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 3. The wall of Jerusalem also is broken down] This must refer to the walls, which had been rebuilt after the people returned from their captivity: for it could not refer to the walls which were broken down and levelled with the dust by Nebuchadnezzar; for to hear of this could be no news to Nehemiah.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(3) And they said.—Nehemiah’s question and his friends answer refer first to the people and then to the city. As to the former the terms used have a deep pathos. Those who had returned to their country—now only the province—are, in the question, the Jews that had escaped; in the answer they are the Remnant that are left: both being from the captivity.

In great affliction and reproach.—In distress because of the contempt of the people around. All these expressions are familiar in the prophets; but they are united here in a peculiar and affecting combination. As to the city, the report is that the walls were still “broken down”: lying prostrate, with partial exceptions, as Nebuchadnezzar left them a hundred and forty-two years before (2Ki_25:10), and, moreover, what had not been recorded, “the gates thereof burned with fire.” Though the Temple had been rebuilt, there is no valid reason for supposing that. the walls of the city had been in part restored and again demolished.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And they said unto me, the remnant that are left of the captivity there in the province,.... In Judea, now reduced to a province of the Persian empire:

are in great affliction and reproach; harassed and distressed, calumniated and vilified, by their enemies the Samaritans:

the wall of Jerusalem also is broken down, and the gates thereof are burnt with fire; that is, its wall and gates were in the same condition in which Nebuchadnezzar had left them, for since his times as yet they had never been set up; for this is not to be understood of what was lately done by their adversaries, which is not at all probable.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

The attempt to rebuild the wall in the time of the Pseudo-Smerdis Ezr 4:12-24 had been stopped. It still remained in ruins. The Assyrian sculptures show that it was the usual practice to burn the gates.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Province of Judea, subject to the Persians, as it was afterwards to the Romans; though, at present, they were allowed to have governors of their own nation. (Menochius) --- Reproach, on account of the surrounding enemies. (Haydock) --- Fire, recently; (Menochius. See 1 Esdras iv. 12., and xi. 9.) or rather by Nabuchodonosor; as the kings of Persia would not suffer the city to be fortified, for fear of a fresh rebellion. (Lyranus) (Tirinus) --- We find that little progress (chap. ii., and iv.; Calmet) had at least been made in the work, though the blame must rather be laid on the enemies of Israel, than on several of the kings of Persia, who seem to have authorized the undertaking, which Cambyses, or Smerdis, had for a time interrupted. They only specify, indeed, that leave was granted to build the temple. But they allowed them to erect houses for themselves, which could not have been done to any purpose, among so many enemies, unless they had been defended by some sort of fortifications. (Haydock)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

In the province, i.e. in Judea, which was now made a province under the Persian monarchs: See Poole "Ezr 5:8".

In great affliction and reproach; despised and distressed by the neighbouring nations.

The wall is broken down, and the gates thereof are burned, i.e. the walls and gates continue in the same woeful plight in which Nebuchadnezzar left them; the Jews not being yet in a condition to rebuild them, nor having commission from the kings of Persia to do so, but only to build the temple and their own private houses. And this made their enemies scorn them; who also would have ruined them, but for fear of offending the Persian king.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

3. There in the province — The province of Judea. Comp. Ezr_5:8.

In great affliction and reproach — From the time of the arrival there of Zerubbabel and the first body of exiles until this date, the returned Jews had been vexed and troubled by neighbouring enemies — the descendants of the nations whom the eastern kings had settled in the cities of Samaria.

And though by the favour of the Persian kings they had succeeded in rebuilding the temple, they were still in a comparatively weak and helpless state, and their now implacable enemies, the Samaritans, would naturally take every opportunity that offered to trouble and distress them.

The wall… broken down, and the gates… burned — This partly explains their affliction and reproach. The returned exiles had never been able to rebuild the walls and gates of their loved city; and because they still remained in the ruined condition to which the Chaldean army had reduced them more than a century before, (2Ki_25:9-10,) it was a standing affliction and reproach to the Jews.

Some critics aver that this ruinous state of the wall and gates of Jerusalem must have been caused by some recent calamity — probably by those neighbouring heathen tribes whose daughters had been married to certain Jews, but had been lately put away by Ezra’s legislation, as described in Ezra 10. They urge that the destruction effected by Nebuchadnezzar’s army more than a hundred years before could have been no news to Nehemiah. But this, like the position of these same critics on the passage in Ezr_4:6-23, (where see notes,) lacks support in the Scripture history. If the walls of Jerusalem had ever been rebuilt since their destruction by Nebuchadnezzar, it is strange that no mention of it occurs in these histories. Their rebuilding by Nehemiah was considered of such importance that a considerable portion of this book is given to a description of it, and any previous work of the kind must have been of sufficient importance to demand, at least, a passing notice. But no such notice is found. The complaint of the Jews’ enemies in Ezr_4:12-16, that the returned exiles were building up the walls of the city, was, as we have shown in the notes there, a crafty misrepresentation, a perversion of the truth, for they were rebuilding the temple, not the city. A work of such importance as the rebuilding of the walls and gates of Jerusalem needs stronger evidence than that letter of the enemies of Judah, so manifestly given to misrepresentation, as the whole context shows.

It may not have been positively news to Nehemiah to be told that the walls and gates of Jerusalem were broken down and destroyed, but this fact was mentioned as showing the great cause or occasion of the affliction and reproach of the Jews at Jerusalem, and seems to have first suggested to Nehemiah the importance of having those walls and gates rebuilt. A work of such magnitude as the rebuilding of that ancient city, and especially of its defences, could not have been undertaken without express permission from the king, and no such permit had ever yet been granted since its destruction by the king of Babylon. The proclamations of Cyrus and Darius authorized only the rebuilding of the temple, and that any thing more than this had yet been attempted by the Jews is without proof.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The wall of Jerusalem also is broken down. It has been supposed, either that the demolition of the wall here referred to was quite recent, having occurred during the space of twelve years which intervenes between the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, or else that it belonged to a time of depression which followed shortly after the completion of the temple by Zerubbabel (Ewald, "History of Israel," vol. 5. pp. 120, 121, and 148, note 3, E. Tr.); but there is really no reason to believe that the demolition effected under the orders of Nebuchadnezzar (2Ki_25:10) had ever hitherto been repaired, or the restoration of the wall even attempted. The Samaritan accusation in Ezr_4:12 falls short of a statement that the wall was restored, and, if it asserted the fact, would be insufficient authority for it. The supposition of Ewald, that "as soon as the city was rebuilt, the attempt would be made to fortify it" (p. 121, note 3), ignores the jealousy of the Persians and their power to step in and prevent a subject town from fortifying itself.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The province - In Judea, now a province under the Persian monarchs. The wall, &c. - The walls and gates continue as Nebuchadnezzar left them; the Jews not being in a condition to rebuild them, nor having commission from the kings of Persia to do so.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

They said to me

Here "They" refers to Hanani and the other people who had come from Judah.

the province

Here "province" refers to Judah as an administrative district under the Persian Empire. AT: "the province of Judah" or "Judah" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

the wall of Jerusalem has been broken open, and its gates have been set on fire

This can be stated in active form. AT: "armies have broken open the wall of Jerusalem and have set its gates on fire" (See: Active or Passive)

translationWords

captive

trouble

Jerusalem

gate

fire

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

And they said to me They answered my first question first and my latter question last; first, concerning the Jews and afterwards, concerning the wall and the gates.

who remained Those Jews who remained in the province of Jerusalem are in great trouble and reproach because the gentiles plunder and pillage them.

and the wall of Jerusalem is breached And the wall of the city is breached, and the gates are burned with fire as they were before, for Israel had not built the wall of the city or its gates, only the Temple.

were burned Heb. נִצְתוּ, like נֻצְתוּ.

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.