The Bible Says
Nehemiah 6:1-9 Meaning

In Nehemiah 6:1-9 Nehemiah recalls, Now when it was reported to Sanballat, Tobiah, to Geshem the Arab and to the rest of our enemies that I had rebuilt the wall and that no breach remained in it, although at that time I had not set up the doors in the gates (v. 1). Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem were influential leaders who opposed the Jewish effort to restore Jerusalem’s wall around the year 445 BC. Sanballat is usually identified as the governor of Samaria, Tobiah had ties to Ammonite leadership, and Geshem likely ruled over various Arab communities in the region. Their hostility was largely driven by fear of Jerusalem’s increasing stability and strength.

Nehemiah then describes how then Sanballat and Geshem sent a message to me, saying, Come, let us meet together at Chephirim in the plain of Ono. But they were planning to harm me (v. 2). The plain of Ono was a low-lying area northwest of Jerusalem, possibly around twenty to thirty miles away, making it distant enough that Nehemiah’s safety could be compromised. These enemies sought to lure him away from the protective environment of Jerusalem and disrupt the momentum of rebuilding work.

Nehemiah, discerning their scheme, explains, So I sent messengers to them, saying, I am doing a great work and I cannot come down. Why should the work stop while I leave it and come down to you? (v. 3). His refusal highlights that he placed a higher value on completing God’s mission than negotiating with hostile adversaries. By maintaining focus on the project, Nehemiah also demonstrated leadership and an unyielding devotion to securing Jerusalem.

Even so, his enemies persisted: They sent messages to me four times in this manner, and I answered them in the same way (v. 4). The repetition underlines the intensity of their manipulation attempts. Nehemiah’s steadfast responses serve as an example of spiritual alertness, showing how easily distractions can turn people away from God’s purposes if they lack unwavering resolve.

Determined, they escalated their tactics when Then Sanballat sent his servant to me in the same manner a fifth time with an open letter in his hand (v. 5). An open letter implied public accusations that anyone could read, building social pressure against Nehemiah. In ancient contexts, such letters often aimed to stir suspicion and create fear among communities already wary of upheaval.

That letter contained allegations saying, In it was written, It is reported among the nations, and Gashmu says, that you and the Jews are planning to rebel; therefore you are rebuilding the wall. And you are to be their king, according to these reports (v. 6). By framing Nehemiah’s efforts as treason against Persian authority, Sanballat sought to provoke official intervention. Such misrepresentations attempted to shift public perspective and undermine the integrity of the ongoing building effort.

Further unfounded claims arose: You have also appointed prophets to proclaim in Jerusalem concerning you, A king is in Judah! And now it will be reported to the king according to these reports. So come now, let us take counsel together (v. 7). This insinuation that Nehemiah sought a royal title was aimed at sowing fear of persecution and fracturing support within the Jewish community. Historical records of the time confirm that Persian kings rarely tolerated rivals, so threatening to spread this rumor had grave implications.

Nehemiah defended himself plainly, writing, Then I sent a message to him saying, Such things as you are saying have not been done, but you are inventing them in your own mind (v. 8). He refused to let these contrived stories gain a foothold, recognizing the serious consequences of false accusations. His boldness in addressing the claims underscored his commitment to truth and God’s calling.

The entire plot hinged on intimidation: For all of them were trying to frighten us, thinking, They will become discouraged with the work and it will not be done. But now, O God, strengthen my hands (v. 9). Rather than succumbing, Nehemiah turned to the Lord for renewed strength, revealing that prayer remained his prevailing strategy for overcoming adversity. This posture of reliance upon divine help typifies godly leadership amid external pressures and internal fears.