Wotcher! Luther is perhaps the most prolific German thinker. Kant, Hegel, Marx… their corpus pales in the face of Luther. Also, unlike Luther, they weren't concerned with the canon-texts of Western Christianity as received. Nehemiah seems a problematic and deeply engaging "half-book" to me. The crux of the first exile and the second temple. The crux of empire versus refoundation of the Temple. Nehemiah's complex relationship with the state, and his inability to enter the temple. The significance of the text emphasised by name lists. It seems like a link between Kings/Chronicles and second temple texts. As someone without faith, who has only the text, when I read Nehemiah I **know** that my reading is deficient from lack of study and context. But I also assume that major critics of the text have said something awesome. And Luther is just such an expansive critic who was deeply dedicated to the value of the text. What does Luther himself in his works expound in exegesis of Nehemiah, or, if he does not conduct an exegesis, where does Nehemiah fit in within Luther's side comments? Luther is a major reader whose impressions of a central text I find critically interesting. And sadly, given my lack of scholarly training, I can't conduct an adequate search myself.

In Nehemiah 6:10-14, Shemaiah tries to get Nehemiah to meet with him in the temple and close the door, alleging (falsely) that people will try to kill Nehemiah at night otherwise. The goal was to get Nehemiah to sin, but Nehemiah refused, saying that someone like himself could never go to the temple to save his life. Would this contradict situation ethics? If Nehemiah followed situation ethics, wouldn't entering the temple to save his life been permissible?

The Book of Job indicates that angels were with God in the beginning, when the heavens and the earth were created > Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you > understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who > stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, > or who laid its cornerstone— while the morning stars sang together and > all the angels shouted for joy? (Job 38:4-7) Yet it is says elsewhere that angels were created during the six day creation week > Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, **and all the host of > them.** (Genesis 2:1) > > You alone are the LORD. You made the heavens, even the highest > heavens, **and all their starry host**, the earth and all that is on it, > the seas and all that is in them. You give life to everything, **and the > multitudes of heaven worship you.** (Nehemiah 9:6)

>“And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews’ language, but according to the language of each people.” (Nehemiah 13:24, KJV 1900) 1. What is this Jews' language mentioned in this verse? Is it the Biblical Hebrew language or the Mishnaic Hebrew language or the Aramaic language? 2. What is the speech of Ashdod? 3. What is half speaking? Did they mix both the languages and speak?

What is the significance of knowing that the queen was sitting next to the king during this conversation in Nehemiah? Was there some historical or cultural significance to the queen being present that adds an element to the story? > **Nehemiah 2:5-6 ESV** - And I said to the king, “If it pleases the king, and if your servant has found favor in your sight, that you send me to Judah, to the city of my fathers' graves, that I may rebuild it.” And the king said to me (the queen sitting beside him), “How long will you be gone, and when will you return?” So it pleased the king to send me when I had given him a time.

Nehemiah 9:2 NIV reads: “Those of Israelite descent had separated themselves from all foreigners.” Were there other people in Israel that didn’t have Israel descent at the time? And did they build the wall as well? Did they worship the same God? ‭

> Now Balak son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites, and Moab was terrified because there were so many people. Indeed, Moab was filled with dread because of the Israelites. > > The **Moabites** said to the elders of **Midian**, “This horde is going to lick up everything around us, as an ox licks up the grass of the field.” > > So Balak son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, sent messengers to summon Balaam son of Beor, who was at Pethor, near the Euphrates River, in his native land. *(Numbers 22:2-5a, NIV)*
> On that day the Book of Moses was read aloud in the hearing of the people and there it was found written that no **Ammonite** or **Moabite** should ever be admitted into the assembly of God, because they had not met the Israelites with food and water but had hired Balaam to call a curse down on them. (Our God, however, turned the curse into a blessing.) When the people heard this law, they excluded from Israel all who were of foreign descent. *(Nehemiah 13:1-3, NIV)* Why did the Israelites at the time of Nehemiah exclude the Ammonites and Moabites from entering the Temple, when it was originally the Midianites and Moabites who hired Balaam?

[This article](http://www.patheos.com/community/slacktivist/2010/05/29/sex-money-part-1/) presents the view that Christians should not charge interest on loans. As evidence, it cites [Nehemiah 5:9-10](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Nehemiah%205:9-10&version=KJV) : > **9** Also I said, It is not good that ye do: ought ye not to walk in the fear of our God because of the reproach of the heathen our enemies? > > **10** I likewise, and my brethren, and my servants, might exact of them money and corn: I pray you, let us leave off this usury. In light of this, why do many Christians think it is _not_ a sin to charge interest?