Nehemiah 6 2

Nehemiah 6:2 kjv

That Sanballat and Geshem sent unto me, saying, Come, let us meet together in some one of the villages in the plain of Ono. But they thought to do me mischief.

Nehemiah 6:2 nkjv

that Sanballat and Geshem sent to me, saying, "Come, let us meet together among the villages in the plain of Ono." But they thought to do me harm.

Nehemiah 6:2 niv

Sanballat and Geshem sent me this message: "Come, let us meet together in one of the villages on the plain of Ono." But they were scheming to harm me;

Nehemiah 6:2 esv

Sanballat and Geshem sent to me, saying, "Come and let us meet together at Hakkephirim in the plain of Ono." But they intended to do me harm.

Nehemiah 6:2 nlt

So Sanballat and Geshem sent a message asking me to meet them at one of the villages in the plain of Ono. But I realized they were plotting to harm me,

Nehemiah 6 verses

Nehemiah 6 2 Meaning

Nehemiah 6:2 reveals a cunning and deceptive ploy by Sanballat and Geshem, adversaries of God's work, who sent a seemingly harmless invitation to Nehemiah. They proposed a meeting in the remote Plain of Ono under the guise of conversation. However, the true intent behind their invitation was malicious, a plot to cause Nehemiah harm. This verse uncovers the insidious nature of their opposition, moving from open ridicule and threats to subtle treachery designed to incapacitate the leader and thereby halt the restoration of Jerusalem's walls.

Nehemiah 6 2 Context

Nehemiah 6:2 sits at a critical juncture in the book of Nehemiah. Chapters 4 and 5 detail the intense opposition Nehemiah faced in rebuilding Jerusalem's walls, including ridicule, threats of armed assault, and internal social injustices. By chapter 6, the wall's repair is nearing completion, with only the doors and gates remaining to be installed (Neh 6:1). This nearing completion heightens the urgency and desperation of Nehemiah's adversaries—Sanballat, Tobiah, and Geshem. Their previous tactics of mockery (Neh 4:1-3) and violent threats (Neh 4:7-8) had failed. Now, they resort to more insidious methods: a deceptive invitation, aiming to remove Nehemiah from the safety of Jerusalem, disrupt the work, and possibly eliminate him, thereby causing the project to collapse. The verse underscores the constant spiritual warfare Nehemiah endured as he sought to accomplish God's will amidst determined, resourceful enemies.

Nehemiah 6 2 Word analysis

• Sanballat and Geshem: These are key figures representing the primary opposition to Nehemiah's work. Sanballat was the governor of Samaria, Geshem the Arabian, and Tobiah the Ammonite were allied with him. Their names denote a regional political and ethnic coalition aimed at preventing the restoration of a strong Judean entity, which they viewed as a threat to their own influence. They were known adversaries with a clear record of antagonism (Neh 2:10, 2:19, 4:1-2).
• sent to me, saying: This indicates direct communication and a deliberate, formalized invitation, not a casual suggestion. The method aims to present a facade of sincerity or important discussion.
• 'Come and let us meet together': The Hebrew word for "meet together" is nivvah'dah (נִוָּעֲדָה), from the root ya'ad (יָעַד), which implies an appointed or arranged meeting. On the surface, it appears like a conciliatory gesture, a proposal to resolve differences. However, the subsequent phrase immediately unmasks this pretense. This invitation is a trap.
• among the villages in the plain of Ono: This phrase is highly significant.
  • "Ono" (אוֹנוֹ): A town located about 30-40 miles northwest of Jerusalem in the coastal plain of Sharon (near Lod). Its remoteness from Jerusalem meant Nehemiah would be far from the security of the city and its guards, isolated and vulnerable. It was not a neutral meeting ground, but a place chosen specifically for its distance and openness, conducive to an ambush or an unobserved seizure.
  • "plain" (בִּקְעַת - biq'at): An open, flat valley or plain, contrasting sharply with Jerusalem's fortified walls. An open area leaves Nehemiah exposed.
  • "villages" (בַּכְּפִירִים - bak'firim): While some translations render this as "in the villages" (small, unwalled settlements), others connect it to the root meaning of כפר as a covering or atonement. However, in this context, "villages" (or small unwalled hamlets) points to a location without strong defenses, making Nehemiah vulnerable, away from his secure base. The enemies' design was to lure him to a place where he would be defenseless and exposed.
• But they intended to do me harm: This concluding clause, introduced by "but" (וְהֵמָּה - vehēmâh), directly reveals the malicious, pre-meditated intent.
  • "intended" (חֹשְׁבִים - chosh'vim): From the verb chashav (חשׁב), meaning to think, devise, plan, or scheme. It emphasizes a deliberate, calculated plot rather than a sudden impulse.
  • "to do me harm" (לַעֲשׂוֹת לִי רָעָה - la'asot li ra'ah): Ra'ah (רָעָה) means evil, mischief, trouble, or injury. This confirms their true motive was not negotiation or peace, but Nehemiah's physical harm or incapacitation, designed to demoralize and disrupt the entire wall-building effort. Their spiritual aim was to stop God's work.

Nehemiah 6 2 Bonus section

The specific choice of "Ono" as the meeting place is noteworthy. It was outside the Judean territory that Nehemiah was focused on rebuilding, away from his power base, and within the likely sphere of influence of his adversaries. The Plain of Ono was significant geographically because it offered an ideal location for an ambush. In the historical and military context of the ancient Near East, meeting on "the plain" often meant meeting in an unfortified, open area where one was highly exposed. Nehemiah’s swift refusal, though articulated in the following verse, implicitly demonstrates his keen strategic awareness and spiritual insight into their motives. This interaction between the adversaries and Nehemiah also serves as a polemic against reliance on human negotiation in the face of spiritual opposition. Nehemiah does not attempt to "reason" with Sanballat and Geshem; he recognizes their evil intent immediately and responds with divine wisdom rather than political naivety. His decision underscores the understanding that some "invitations" are simply traps to halt God's work.

Nehemiah 6 2 Commentary

Nehemiah 6:2 stands as a potent reminder of the subtle, yet deadly, forms of opposition that spiritual work and faithful leadership often face. Having failed through open threats and ridicule, Sanballat and Geshem shifted their strategy to cunning deception. Their invitation to "meet together" appears conciliatory, perhaps even rational, on the surface. However, their true objective, clearly stated by the narrator as "they intended to do me harm," unveils the venomous intent lurking beneath the smooth words.

This incident highlights several key principles. Firstly, the enemy's persistence and adaptability: when one tactic fails, they will try another, often moving from overt hostility to insidious entrapment. Secondly, the vital importance of discernment. Nehemiah's enemies didn't overtly threaten him here; they invited him. A less discerning leader might have fallen into the trap, perhaps believing it was an opportunity for dialogue or fearing the consequences of appearing uncooperative. Nehemiah, however, possessed spiritual wisdom that allowed him to see beyond the superficial invitation to the malicious intent. This discernment likely stemmed from his constant communication with God (as seen throughout the book) and his understanding of his adversaries' long-standing nature. Thirdly, it reveals the enemy's desire to isolate the leader. By luring Nehemiah away to the remote plain of Ono, they sought to separate him from the protection of Jerusalem and his supporters, making him vulnerable to attack or capture. The attack wasn't directly on the wall but on its chief builder.

In essence, this verse portrays a spiritual ambush designed to incapacitate the leader of God's people, thereby thwarting God's redemptive work. It is a timeless example of how subtle distractions, deceptive invitations, and feigned peace can be more dangerous than open warfare, as they appeal to logic while harboring destruction.

• Practical Examples:
  • A church leader being invited by disgruntled former members to a "private, informal chat" at a secluded location, potentially a setup to discredit or entrap them.
  • A Christian seeking to live righteously being invited to a social gathering by an unsaved friend, disguised as harmless fun, but with the hidden intent of leading them into compromising situations.
  • Subtle flattery or promises from those who have shown a history of undermining efforts, aiming to divert attention or erode integrity.