Nehemiah 12:27 Commentary - Dr Peter Masters

Navigator

Nehemiah 12:27

Comments

The consecration or the dedication of the wall surely means the rededication and consecration of the entire city. The temple of course had been rebuilt some years previously, and now the walls have been rebuilt and we read about how the city began to be more properly inhabited, and the leaders were coming back into the city. By poll certain other of the returned Jews who lived in the villages and towns that had formed roundabout Jerusalem, well-selected families and volunteers, were brought into the city. So now what is in chapter 12 – the dedication of the wall – is clearly, as well, the dedication of the city. After all, what is a wall? As all the old preachers and writers like to point out: a wall is only significant in that it marks out and protects a city, so it is the dedication of all things. In verse 31 a procession begins: ‘I brought up the princes of Judah upon the wall’, and the plan was that the dedication would begin with a kind of procession. They mounted the wall at a given point and one half of the procession of the leaders, priests, and Levites went in one direction round the city, and the other half went in the other direction, and then they met at the temple (verse 40). That seems to have been the plan. And with them were singers and great festivities and rejoicing on the wall.In verse 33 we see the name Ezra right at the beginning of one of the processions. and so – assuming this is the same person, which seem to be clear from verse 36 – Ezra the scribe was in Jerusalem once again. We can only assume that Ezra, more times than Nehemiah, was in and out of the city going backwards and forwards to Susa the capital of the Persian Empire, or wherever ever he normally resided, and then back to Jerusalem. Because some of the scandals make no mention of the presence of Ezra, we can assume that he was not present in Jerusalem at that time, and that he travelled back and forth. But on this occasion he is here for the dedication at the same time as Nehemiah.In verse 35 we read about the priests or the priests’ sons who were qualified and appointed to play trumpets. Trumpets were never used in the psalm singing and the worship of ancient Israel. They were used only for very special purposes. They were used to call the people to worship. They were employed we are told in the Old Testament in both 1 and 2 Chronicles; they were employed on feast days and special days to summon the people, and they were played in the temple just for a time, but once the offering went up and the smoke ascended then the trumpets stopped. All the instruments stopped for a while, and the trumpets played no part in the worship beyond that. So they served to signal that something great and serious was happening. They were harsh in sound, and commanding in tone, and they summoned attention, and signalled solemnity and respect just at those certain times. But there is no such thing as a band or an orchestra such as we would know it with the full range of instruments, and here in this passage it is most specifically said that the rules of David were followed. By now they are getting on for being 550 years old, and yet they are meticulous in bringing back the rules of David – concerning instruments and who should play them and they use and so on – because those rules which God gave to David were normative, they were authoritative. These were the only instruments that were to be used in the temple worship, and only certain people from certain Levitical families would be players of instruments and singers of the psalms in the temple. We find here that these things are most scrupulously followed. Verse 36 and the second part, ‘with the musical instruments of David, the man of God.’ That means unquestionably the types of instruments appointed by David under inspiration. There were nine instruments named in the Bible that were well known to the Jews of old and only four of them were ever allowed in the temple, and the others were not allowed. So that was a great restriction on the music of those days. They could be joyful and they could sing loudly, and they had their full range of worship psalms: those of rejoicing and those of sadness and repentance. In fact the latter outnumbered the former, so much of the worship was solemn. But, of course, and they were able to sing with loud voices, and on this occasion they did so. This is mentioned in this very chapter (verse 42). Nevertheless there was a very significant restriction in instrumentation, and you can see why. It was so that instrumentation would not eclipse the worship and would not become the principal thing.

Application

You think of the sad thing that happened in church history to the Lutheran Church in Germany in the decades and the centuries following the Reformation. It began with such soundness and such clarity in its confessional standards. Yes, there were problems of course from our Baptist point of view, but nevertheless, it began as a gospel denomination. And yet, because high culture came in and music became so important – and in their case, music of a worshipful standard; not the kind of worldly music that evangelical churches seem to swerve towards today – it pretty well wrecked the Lutheran Church. The beauty of very sophisticated worship became more important than the content of the worship to so many people. Under God's arrangements for the Old Testament people that was never supposed to happen. So there were very considerable restrictions. Generally speaking, only stringed instruments were ever allowed to accompany sung worship either at home or in synagogues, but certainly in the temple. There was no loud percussion accompanying the worship in ancient times, even when they were rejoicing.

When it comes to any discussion on worship, there is a tremendous lightness with some of the evangelical leaders on this subject. They all say the same type of things. They say, ‘Ah, what we do is no different from Psalm 150’, and in their view Psalm 150 permits all kinds of instrumentation in the Christian church today. Why, is not Christ the same yesterday, today, and forever? And they could have every instrument under the sun in those days. But Psalm 150 cannot possibly be describing the instrumentation of temple worship, because if it were, the Bible would contradict itself. The rules in 1 and 2 Chronicles, laid down by inspiration of the Spirit and given to David are still being scrupulously observed wherever there was reform, 550 years later, as in this Book of Nehemiah. Those rules forbad any but four specified instruments in the temple. So Psalm 150 is not describing literal temple worship. There are three other psalms that mention instruments that are not prescribed for temple worship. In the case of the other three psalms, it is very obvious that they are not describing temple worship, but open-air thanksgiving festivities. Israel was a nation as well as a state, and because they were a nation they had open-air events: greater victory parades for battles in which God gave victory, when the little girls would dance in front of the procession with their tambourines, which were never allowed in the temple. So Psalm 150 is referring either to outdoor festivities – all forms of worship under the firmament, under heaven, not the direct worship of God according to his prescription in the temple – or else it's a highly figurative psalm, and it’s using the different instruments to suggest moods and tones for praise. The one thing it isn't, is a literal description of Old Testament praise.

Questions

Outline

Purpose

Introduction

Nehemiah 12:27 Commentary and Bible Study