Nemiah, chapter 6. This is where it gets interesting and has parallels in "this week's news"
By this time, there was no breach left in the wall. The bad guys ("Sanballat and Tobiah and Geshem the Arab and the rest of our enemies") were still around; and they used tactics that are still around today.
1) Distraction.
"Come and let us meet together at Hakkephirim in the plain of Ono."
The bad guys were sounding like they wanted to "make nice" and get together. Nehemiah knew that "sounding like" didn't mean that these guys actually had any intention of meeting with him in order to get along.
Four times they sent this invitation and four times Nehemiah answered, "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?"
2) The fifth time, they sent an "open letter" (yes, we do see this tactic today).
In the same way Sanballat for the fifth time sent his servant to me with an open letter in his hand. In it was written, "It is reported among the nations, and Geshem also says it, that you and the Jews intend to rebel; that is why you are building the wall. And according to these reports you wish to become their king. And you have also set up prophets to proclaim concerning you in Jerusalem, 'There is a king in Judah.' And now the king will hear of these reports. So now come and let us take counsel together."
Normally, these letter would have been sealed so that the person that the letter were meant for would see them before the recipient. Nehemiah was very specific: Sanballat sent his servant with an open letter. This was meant for "everybody" to see.
3) The world was meant to see these false accusations.
People who make false accusations generally don't care about what the accused actually says, much less care about what is meant. When they are called on their sin of false accusation, many times these false accusers respond with more accusations and/or claim victim status of their own. Nehemiah was clear about what he thought about the false accusations. I love his response (I think I'll remember it):
"No such things as you say have been done, for you are inventing them out of your own mind."
Why did Sanballat use this tactic? Nehemiah tells us, "For they all wanted to frighten us, thinking, "Their hands will drop from the work, and it will not be done."
4) Intimidation is still attempted today.
5) We read in verse 10 that Sanballat also had "hired guns" - false prophets who spoke lies, saying that they were from God, in order to put fear into Nehemiah.
Despite false accusations, despite people writing "open letters", despite lies spoken behind his back, despite "hired guns" ganging up on him - Nehemiah persevered.
The wall was rebuilt in 52 days. Fifty-two!
Keep in mind that Nehemiah didn't have cranes, bulldozers and power tools. I don't know how long Nehemiah's wall was, but Israel is planning a security fence around Jerusalem that would be 32 miles.
That is a big wall for men without gasoline or electricity to build in 52 days.
Does this apply today?
Absolutely!
I can apply it in a couple of different ways.
1) A few of us are familiar with the term "watchblogger". Bloggers that keep an eye on blogs who disagree with them - and then visit that blog for the express purpose of disagreement and/or keep to their own blog and post negatively about the blogs they are watching.
Yes. They are out there.
2) More to the point today is a topic I posted about a few days ago: Mark Driscoll. This is not part of the "blog world", but it has certainly been written about on blogs.
People have doctrinal disagreements. Deal with it - if you have a belief, there is somebody who has a belief that is just as strong as yours - but different.
In Seattle, we have a woman pastor. Earlier on her blog she clearly states that she believes that complementarian theology is oppressive to women, rather than being a Biblical creation order.
She states that she has an agenda and that she will not stop - to make a place for women in leadership in the church.
Like Sanballat, Madrid-Swetman wrote an "open letter" (published it on her blog). And folks are taking it and running with it. There is going to be a demonstration outside of Driscoll's church in early December.
People are planning of folks showing up for a show of "strength in numbers". My guess is that Driscoll won't be intimidated.
Are there more parallels? Accusations? Yes, there are.
Misogyny is one accusation. As one who has been falsely accused of hatred toward another person, seeing a brother in Christ accused of hatred by on who claims to be a Christian is glaring to me.
Make no mistake.
Nehemiah's critics wanted him silenced.
Watchbloggers want posts that disagree with them silenced.
Those who organized the protest want Driscoll silenced.
Elena
"Watchbloggers want posts that disagree with them silenced."
I disagree.
I think most bloggers (at least the serious ones who have been doing it for a while as something more than just an "everybody's doing it" thing) are interested in an exchange and examination of ideas. If you go to the top of the Ecosystem, that's basically what the top 100 do, and do well.
Ellen
I'm making three separate comments, since I'm addressing three things.
Until you repent of your false accusations, your lies, your personal digs and your hateful attitude that you have shown here, you are not welcome.
You have been confronted with truth
- that I have not deleted comments (frankly, I want your comments to be read so that you can be seen for what you really are and deleting them would get rid of evidence)
- that I ignored your request (that I had never seen) to stop calling you "Ellie/Zelie". The moment that you told me to my face, I dropped it. I gave you a way to check out the timing, but you refused to do so, saying that you'll take my word for it...but you continued. Those comments still stand on your blog. Double standard, anybody?
Those false accusations against me still stand on your blog.
I'll not interact with you on my blog until you repent of your attitudes and actions. I will not ban you or moderate you; nobody will be able to truthfully claim (although I suspect that it will be claimed) that I shut off any means of your repentence and restoration. I will not not delete comments and any repentance will stand as evidence that you've repented and changed.
But until you repent, I will not interact with you. I will respond to this comment, since I was not clear about your status here.
I realize that you will twist this so that you're the victim. You'll whine on your own blog about how I "hate" you (a false accusation) because you're Catholic (another false accusation). This is what I expect that you'll do and I would love for you to prove me wrong.
My comments are aimed at you, Elena. I suspect that they will be spun by Elena to make it look as though I have no interest in interaction with those who disagree with me (which would be a false accusation). Elena has a track record, which I've been very clear about and it is Elena that these comments are aimed at.
Elena, you claim to be a Christian, yet you refuse to repent of lies and false accusations. I'm asking you to consider your actions and attitudes and repent - so that we can enjoy restoration. I know the tactic that this request has been met with in the past and I hope that you will change.
Ellen
Second comment is to address Elena's comment.
Elena said, "I disagree.
Really?
"Watchblogger" is not a general term for bloggers and for most bloggers it does not apply. "Watchblogger" is a specific term for those who watch other blogs and comment only when disagreeing, only with the intent of disagreeing and only because they disagree.
A "watchblogger" may advertise these disagreements on their own blog, with derogatory language toward the one they disagree with. They frequently link to the offending blog when explicitly outlining the perceived offenses. A good example is "apprising.org", that exists to point out errors in others.
I maintain that those I refer to as "watchbloggers" (and I've explained the difference again) want to have posts (and I did say posts, not bloggers) that disagree with them silenced.
Interaction implies somewhat of an attitude of respect.
Making snide personal comments (by name) about other blog writers on one's blog is not the behavior of one who wishes interaction.
You have stated your displeasure at "allowing comments to stand" - if that isn't wanting them silenced, I don't know what is.
Many bloggers want interaction. But that is not what I'm talking about. A blogger who wants interaction and discusstion comments visits other blogs, does so with the intent of interaction.
Ellen
Third comment - to everybody else.
There are Roman Catholics/Pentecostals/Arminians that I truly enjoy interacting with. John, you are welcome here anytime.
Moonshadow - I adore! And I would have coffee with her (anywhere but Starbucks) anytime I could manage to get into the same city with her!
Any other denominations - agree or disagree - it's about sharpening iron and examining against Scripture. There are rules in my sidebar and I've been called on them myself a couple of times.
Most people are very welcome to discuss "whatever" here.
Elena
“Watchblogger” is not a general term for bloggers and for most bloggers it does not apply. “Watchblogger” is a specific term for those who watch other blogs and comment only when disagreeing, only with the intent of disagreeing and only because they disagree.
Do you have a link to the definition of a watchblogger? Googled several themes and variations and couldn't find a specific definition.
I think for most people, blogs are the soap box, where you can get things off of your chest, speak your mind, add your 2 cents. It makes sense that some of the time is spent with controversy. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.
A “watchblogger” may advertise these disagreements on their own blog, with derogatory language toward the one they disagree with.
or with civility. THere's an old saying that even bad publicity is still publicity! I tend to go with that. With millions of blogs in the blogisphere it's considered good form to link to blogs that you are specifically addressing, good, bad or otherwise! I always try to do that. I specifically have just referred people to my side bar for you and Carrie since you specifically asked NOT to be linked in posts.
on that note, I have gotten readers specifically because of disagreements on abortion and end of life issues because pro-choice blogs linked me! I get linked by one particular pro-choice blog several times a year, and in fact that blogger and I have become friends, although ideologically still distant. I appreciate the extra readership.
I maintain that those I refer to as “watchbloggers” (and I’ve explained the difference again) want to have posts (and I did say posts, not bloggers) that disagree with them silenced.
For example?
Interaction implies somewhat of an attitude of respect.
Making snide personal comments (by name) about other blog writers on one’s blog is not the behavior of one who wishes interaction.
Well not necessarily.
You have stated your displeasure at “allowing comments to stand” - if that isn’t wanting them silenced, I don’t know what is.
You'll have to refresh my memory on that one Ellen.
Many bloggers want interaction. But that is not what I’m talking about. A blogger who wants interaction and discusstion comments visits other blogs, does so with the intent of interaction.
Does such a blogger also shut down comments?
The moment that you told me to my face, I dropped it. I gave you a way to check out the timing, but you refused to do so, saying that you’ll take my word for it
I said I believed you. I believe you. I'm not going through 200 to 300 of blog views/day to find your specific one Ellen. Your word is good and I take it. I'm not sure why that annoys you so much.
It's pretty clear that you and I would probably never sit down to a cup of coffee and a piece of pie. We probably wouldn't be the best of friends in real life. I think you've got some issues and I don't want any part of them, but I really do wish you the best.
Ellen
Elena, your attitude makes you not welcome.
Please repent of your hateful attitude so that there can be restoration.
Carrie
Great Post, Ellen.
It is interesting how the same tactics used against Nehemiah are still used today.
Of course, the Word of God is always true and applicable no matter what century we are in.
Ellen
Thanks 😉
I've been reading a lot about Driscoll and the upcoming protest. It is amazing.
People are forming brand new blogs that focus on Mark Driscoll and his "misogyny". I'm not saying that Driscoll doesn't have problems with running at the mouth, but he does not hate women.