In this chapter, all of Haman’s possessions are passed over to Mordecai, and Haman’s decree is reversed.
This chapter continues the general theme of “reversal of fortunes”. As a similar point, we also see Mordecai completely take over Haman’s role and fortune in society.
Throughout the book of Esther, we see numerous parallels between Haman and Mordecai. They are similar in the sense that both Haman and Mordecai are older figures, and they are both advisors to the king; Haman was second in the kingdom, and Mordecai was a man who sat in the gates (generally a position of respect). In fact, I would suggest that their similarity is one of the reasons why Haman takes a particular interest in destroying Mordecai, because Haman may have seen a competitor in Mordecai.
Based on their personalities, Haman and Mordecai are opposites. Haman is a proud and insecure man who is enraged multiple times when he sees that Mordecai doesn’t honor him, but Mordecai is a humble and confident man who is not intimidated by Haman, in spite of Haman’s superior political position. Mordecai trusts that God will protect him against the more powerful man, and Haman is obviously godless. Mordecai has a principle interest in protecting and helping his people, and Haman is almost entirely consumed by the pursuit of his own glory and greatness. Mordecai is basically what you would get if you took Haman and made him a good person. This contrast between Mordecai and Haman is a teaching device, to show us a godly example, which we should emulate, and a godless example, which we should avoid.
In this chapter, we see Mordecai take control of Haman’s house, wealth and the signet ring of authority which the king “had taken away from Haman, and gave it to Mordecai” (v. 2). Given the parallels and contrasts between these two figures, the message is clear: this is another reversal of fortunes, as the wicked Haman is reduced from glory to death, and the humble yet confident Mordecai is raised up into honor and glory.
More generally, these is another, even more important reversal of fortune in this chapter. In verses 11-12, Mordecai writes a letter that takes the exact same day that had been planned for the Jews’ destruction and turns it into a day when the Jews are permitted to destroy their enemies (this day is the 13rd day of the 12th month, see Esther 3:13 and 8:12). This is perhaps the most important reversal in the book of Esther because it takes the day of destruction and turns it into a day of joy and gladness for the Jews. For their enemies, it changes the day from joy and gladness to death and destruction.
As I previously mentioned, Esther follows a large chiastic structure where nearly every aspect of the story has a “before” and “after” component. The chiastic structure places a particular emphasis on the events in “the middle” of the chiasm, which is approximately the moment when Esther fasts and goes in to petition the king for her peoples’ lives. In addition, the parallelism between “before” and “after” parts of the story also emphasize the reversal aspects of the story.
For this particular chapter, there are many parallels with chapter 3. To give a few examples, in verse 2 the king gives his signet ring to Mordecai; in Esther 3:10, the king gave his ring to Haman. In verse 9, the scribes of the king are summoned to write in all the various languages of the 127 provinces. In Esther 3:12, the same thing happened for Haman’s decree to be written to every province and people in their own language. In verse 13, a copy of the edict was issued as law and published to all the peoples, so that the Jews would be ready to defend themselves. In Esther 3:14, a copy of the edict was issued as law and published so that all the people should be ready to carry it out. Finally, in verse 15 the city of Susa rejoices and shouts with gladness, at the salvation of the Jews, while in Esther 3:15, the city of Susa was in confusion over the edict condemning the Jews to death.
The reversals demonstrated are: the exaltation of Mordecai and the downfall of Haman, changing the edict of destruction for the Jews to an edict for their defense and the destruction of their enemies, and the change in Susa from a state of confusion and distress to a state of rejoicing and gladness.
If reversal of fortunes is the central theme of Esther, then I think one of the most instructive perspective we can take is to view reversal of fortunes, particularly as it relates to Haman and Mordecai, as “the answer”. Then once we consider reversal of fortunes as the answer, it is natural to ask, what is the question? While I think it can be studied in several different ways, I want to focus on the following question: “Why do the wicked prosper”?
Taking a step back for a moment, let’s once again consider the political environment that existed during the timeframe of this story. Judah was living as slaves in exile, subjected to the authority and laws of an idolatrous nation. They had been taken out of their homes, away from their inheritance; they had lost everything of value. While there may have been poverty in other parts of the Persian empire, the capital Susa would have undoubtedly been home to the wealthiest men and women in the empire. We can easily imagine that there are many poor, enslaved, yet pious Jews, who could relate to Mordecai. We can also easily imagine that many of these Jews would have known wealthy but arrogant Persians. It’s a bit speculative, but I would suggest that many Jews in the exile would find themselves asking, “why is that arrogant Persian so far from God, and yet successful in life, while I am in poverty in spite of my piety and devotion to God?” Or in short, “why do the wicked prosper”.
This is a topic that is addressed frequently throughout the bible (though many of these references are later that Esther; for instance, Psalm 73, Jeremiah 12, and literally the entire book of Job). The prophetic literature frequently pronounces dooms upon the wicked, stating that while they may prosper for a time, their prosperity would be short-lived. We can also possibly look at Deuteronomy as a mental framework for how many Jews viewed good versus evil. Although Deuteronomy is not directly concerned with non-Israelites, I think the general framework that is established in the law should still give us some sense of what the Jews in Esther’s time would expect. The basic idea is that if the Israelite are faithful to obey God, they will be blessed, and if they turn away from him they will be cursed. In conflict with their enemies, God promises them victory if they are faithful to him (Deut 28:7), otherwise they will be chased away in defeat (Deut 28:25). It is a fairly natural extension for Jews to think, “because these foreign nations do not obey the LORD, they will also be cursed and will fall before us.”
The Jews of Esther’s time observe foreign nations ruling over them, which was also promised in Deuteronomy 28 if they lived in sin and disobedience to God. However, as the pious and devoted Jews rededicate themselves to the LORD (those who would relate to Mordecai), they would expect for God to raise them back up and they would no longer be subjected to their foreign oppressors. Particularly with reference to Haman and Mordecai, I would view it as almost like an inversion of the “natural order”. The “natural order” is that Mordecai should be blessed and Haman should be in disgrace or death. Instead, we see Haman blessed and Mordecai threatened with death.
This results in a natural tension, which Esther seeks to answer. What is the answer? “Reversal of fortunes.” The book of Esther seeks to address the tension between what the Jewish people expect should happen in the world and what they actually observe, and the book’s answer is that God will cause a reversal of fortunes, the wicked will perish and the righteous will prosper. Even though the book begins with everything the opposite of what it should be, by the end of the book everything has been restored to what it “ought” to be, and that’s really the whole point of what reversal of fortunes is all about.
One last point I would like to discuss is the Greek Esther (GE) copy of this chapter. Greek Esther ostensibly contains a copy of the decree issued by Mordecai to all the nations. This decree is heavily biased in favor of the Jews, using language that it’s unlikely a Persian would have written. For instance, it calls the Jews the “chosen people” of God (GE 16:21), and also says that the Jews are “children of the living God” (GE 16:16). Verse 9 specifically says that Mordecai is the one who wrote the decree on behalf of the king, so I wouldn’t say that the pro-Jewish bias is entirely inconsistent, but the decree in Greek Esther also claims that Haman is a Macedonian who was attempting to deceive the king and thereby steal the kingdom for himself. GE 16:13-14 suggests that Haman’s true intent was to destroy Mordecai “our savior and perpetual benefactor” and Esther, “the blameless partner of our kingdom”, so that Haman “would catch us undefended and would transfer the kingdom of the Persians to the Macedonians”.
This reframes Haman’s threat from an attack on the Jews to a subversive attack on the Persian empire itself. I don’t think that is strictly implausible, I don’t see any evidence in the rest of Esther to support that idea. From the rest of the book, it really does seem like Haman is primarily focused on destroying the Jews and I don’t see any evidence that Haman is interested in overthrowing the king. It is possible that this shift in emphasis reflects a later date of composition for the additions to Greek Esther compared to the Hebrew version of the story, since the Macedonians only became a major military force in the later periods of the Persian empire.
In the next chapter, the Jews finally execute vengeance upon their enemies, as per the king’s decree.
Wednesday, May 30, 2018
Wednesday, May 23, 2018
Bible Commentary - Esther 7
In this chapter, Esther finally makes her petition to the king, resulting in Haman’s death.
This is the moment we’ve all been waiting for; Esther finally works up the courage to ask for her people’s lives, and things instantly get bad for Haman when Esther accuses him of constructing the order to kill her people (which is true). The king is so mad that he can’t even deal with it and he runs off to the garden to… swear at the trees or something like that.
One thing that’s kind of funny about the king’s anger is that the king approved the edict. Although it was Haman’s idea, one could reasonably say that the king had more responsibility for it because he was the authority who issued the command. But Esther blames Haman, and the king also blames Haman. Obviously Esther can’t blame the king because the king is the person she is petitioning for help. Still, I would include this as another piece of evidence that the king is easily malleable and controlled by others, because not a single person in this scene thinks that the king is responsible for the edict that he issued against the Jews, because it’s so obviously Haman’s fault that the king couldn’t possibly be responsible here.
Haman sees that he has only one chance left to save his life, and that’s to convince the queen to convince the king to not kill him. Haman “falls on Esther’s couch” (v. 8), which we can imagine him grabbing her leg or arm or something as he pleads for his life. The king is obviously not impressed because touching the queen would be a violation of standard decorum.
Conveniently, at that very moment one of the eunuchs (Harbonah) helpfully points out that Haman had constructed gallows at his house for the purpose of killing Mordecai, “who spoke good on behalf of the king”. I think it’s unlikely that this is the very moment the eunuch learned about the gallows, but Harbonah chooses this moment to point out that a method of execution has already been prepared, you know, just in case the king should decide that some person may need to die.
This moment is the culmination of both Haman’s plots against the Jews: first, his decree to wipe out all the Jews, and second, the gallows he built to murder Mordecai in particular. I personally think it’s clear that Haman was finished from the moment in Esther 5:2 when the king received Esther favorably and more or less promised to give her whatever she asked for.
Even more generally, Haman was in a very dangerous position when he sought to kill the Jews because Esther was secretly a Jew, and Esther could reasonably convince the king that Haman’s actions against her constituted some kind of treason. Haman taking action against Mordecai (who was honored by the king earlier in that same day) helped to assure the outcome, but the situation was clearly working against him.
This is the fifth feast, and it marks the end of nearly all the conflict in the book. The remainder of the book is wrapping up loose ends and the conclusion.
In the next chapter, Mordecai is given permission by the king to revoke the earlier decree and issue a new decree on behalf of the Jews.
This is the moment we’ve all been waiting for; Esther finally works up the courage to ask for her people’s lives, and things instantly get bad for Haman when Esther accuses him of constructing the order to kill her people (which is true). The king is so mad that he can’t even deal with it and he runs off to the garden to… swear at the trees or something like that.
One thing that’s kind of funny about the king’s anger is that the king approved the edict. Although it was Haman’s idea, one could reasonably say that the king had more responsibility for it because he was the authority who issued the command. But Esther blames Haman, and the king also blames Haman. Obviously Esther can’t blame the king because the king is the person she is petitioning for help. Still, I would include this as another piece of evidence that the king is easily malleable and controlled by others, because not a single person in this scene thinks that the king is responsible for the edict that he issued against the Jews, because it’s so obviously Haman’s fault that the king couldn’t possibly be responsible here.
Haman sees that he has only one chance left to save his life, and that’s to convince the queen to convince the king to not kill him. Haman “falls on Esther’s couch” (v. 8), which we can imagine him grabbing her leg or arm or something as he pleads for his life. The king is obviously not impressed because touching the queen would be a violation of standard decorum.
Conveniently, at that very moment one of the eunuchs (Harbonah) helpfully points out that Haman had constructed gallows at his house for the purpose of killing Mordecai, “who spoke good on behalf of the king”. I think it’s unlikely that this is the very moment the eunuch learned about the gallows, but Harbonah chooses this moment to point out that a method of execution has already been prepared, you know, just in case the king should decide that some person may need to die.
This moment is the culmination of both Haman’s plots against the Jews: first, his decree to wipe out all the Jews, and second, the gallows he built to murder Mordecai in particular. I personally think it’s clear that Haman was finished from the moment in Esther 5:2 when the king received Esther favorably and more or less promised to give her whatever she asked for.
Even more generally, Haman was in a very dangerous position when he sought to kill the Jews because Esther was secretly a Jew, and Esther could reasonably convince the king that Haman’s actions against her constituted some kind of treason. Haman taking action against Mordecai (who was honored by the king earlier in that same day) helped to assure the outcome, but the situation was clearly working against him.
This is the fifth feast, and it marks the end of nearly all the conflict in the book. The remainder of the book is wrapping up loose ends and the conclusion.
In the next chapter, Mordecai is given permission by the king to revoke the earlier decree and issue a new decree on behalf of the Jews.
Wednesday, May 16, 2018
Bible Commentary - Esther 6
In this chapter, the king orders that Haman honor Mordecai.
If my readers remember the introduction to Esther I wrote earlier, I said that the central theme of Esther is reversal of fortunes. Basically the way reversal of fortunes is demonstrated in this story is through two parts: the establishment of a particular intent or pattern, and then the reversal of that pattern. In broad terms, the “establishment” is concentrated in the first 4-5 chapters, which lays out the general background and framework of the story. Once we pass through the climax of the story in chapters 4 or 5, the remainder of the book consists of the reversal of fortunes previously established.
To show one example, Esther 3:5 and 5:9 establish a pattern of Mordecai refusing to honor Haman, and Haman being enraged at it. Haman gets his revenge by ordering the destruction of the entire Jewish race, and at the very end of chapter 5 he decides to petition for Mordecai’s death. Verse 1 of this chapter has the closest thing to a deus ex machina that we will find in Esther, because if the king had not suffered insomnia on this one particular night, asking to read the royal chronicles on this one particular night, it is very possible that Haman would have asked for (and received) the death of Mordecai.
But because it does happen, we see (at least) two reversals in the same moment. The first is that Haman went to the king planning to ask for Mordecai’s death, and instead is ordered to honor Mordecai. The second is that Mordecai refused to obey the king’s command to honor Haman, but Haman is forced to honor Mordecai. One could also add that Haman instructed the king with the expectation that he would be honored himself, but instead the honor was given to his enemy. There are many layers of irony in this part of the story.
Going back to verse 1, this is one of the clearest instances of the book of Esther nearly touching the subject of divine intervention. There are other cases where people hint at the possibility of divine intervention (such as the “deliverance arising from another place” of Esther 4:14), but this is the one really clear instance where we see it happen. It is instructive to note the Greek Esther translation of verse 1: “That night the Lord took sleep from the king…”. So while Hebrew Esther leaves the point ambiguous, Greek Esther makes it clear that they viewed this as an instance of divine intervention. I want to touch on a couple points here.
The bible has a lot of crazy stories about food coming from heaven, or people being raised from the dead or leprosy being healed and stuff like that. But for how many miracles are recorded in the bible, most people see very few miracles like that in their day to day lives. This creates a tension, as many people seek to explain the difference between biblical miracles and what they see in their personal lives. The tension is resolved in different ways by different people: some people resolve that God simply doesn’t perform those kinds of miracles anymore, and “no miracles” is the new standard. Other people view this difference as arising from their own deficits or lack of knowledge or training. Perhaps if I was a holier person, or wiser, or more gifted, I could perform miracles of many kinds, but because I am not, I cannot.
I don’t intend to pick sides here, but I do want to point out that Esther presents an alternative view of what divine intervention can look like, that is quite different from the miracles of Exodus or Kings. Instead, what we see in Esther is a relatively subtle intervention. God is tipping the scales in favor of his servants, but what plays a much bigger role in the story is the faithfulness and persistence of humble men and women like Esther and Mordecai. From the structure of the story, I think we have very good reason to believe that Esther indeed came to her position as queen “for such a time as this” (Esther 4:14). How did Esther get her position? It is clear that she received favor from the king’s eunuchs, and ultimately the king himself, but Esther also played a role with her quiet diligence, faithfulness and obedience; in some measure to the king, but also to God.
In this context, Mordecai and Esther were already positioned to bring deliverance to the Jews, in large part because of their own efforts. However, so often we find our own efforts are not enough to make it the whole way, and that is true here too. God breaks in by calling attention to Mordecai’s previous service to the king, and that’s basically all it takes to get things turning around.
On the other hand, if Esther and Mordecai are receiving favor because of their faithfulness and hard work, Haman’s prideful attitude has set him up for a tremendous “fall” (v. 13). There are few things that demonstrate Haman’s character more directly than verse 6; Haman simply doesn’t believe that there is anybody better than himself, and that there is nobody more deserving of honor and praise than himself. Of course, this attitude is why Haman himself declares the many honors that should be bestowed on Mordecai, his enemy, because Haman couldn’t imagine a world where the king would seek to honor Mordecai.
Lastly, this chapter contains a second instance of Haman rushing home to meet his wife and friends. He did this just a little while ago in chapter 5, when he returned home to brag about his personal success in life. This time around, he rushes home in shame and grief, devastated that he was compelled to honor his enemy with the same honors that he desired for himself. Coming from a man who was “enraged” that Mordecai refused to bow before him, I can’t imagine how Haman must have felt when he was compelled to honor Mordecai above himself. This is also another reversal of fortune; previously, Mordecai was grieving and fasting (Esther 4:1-3) and Haman was honored and rejoicing. Now Mordecai is honored, and Haman is grieving.
I would also like to point out that Haman has awful friends. Can you imagine going home in grief and shame, and the advice your friends give you is, “Because Mordecai is Jewish, you will certainly fall before him.” Thank you so much for the help and advice, wife and friends. But why should Haman be concerned that Mordecai is of Jewish origin? Why would that result in Haman’s downfall? The inference our (predominantly Jewish) audience would take from this verse is that Haman is doomed to fall because God is with the Jewish people. Greek Esther makes this point explicitly, modifying the verse to say “If Mordecai is of the Jewish people… you will not be able to defend yourself, because the living God is with him.” It’s another place where the Hebrew text strongly infers the point and the Greek text makes the point explicitly.
In the next chapter, things go from bad to worse for Haman and he is put to death on his own gallows.
If my readers remember the introduction to Esther I wrote earlier, I said that the central theme of Esther is reversal of fortunes. Basically the way reversal of fortunes is demonstrated in this story is through two parts: the establishment of a particular intent or pattern, and then the reversal of that pattern. In broad terms, the “establishment” is concentrated in the first 4-5 chapters, which lays out the general background and framework of the story. Once we pass through the climax of the story in chapters 4 or 5, the remainder of the book consists of the reversal of fortunes previously established.
To show one example, Esther 3:5 and 5:9 establish a pattern of Mordecai refusing to honor Haman, and Haman being enraged at it. Haman gets his revenge by ordering the destruction of the entire Jewish race, and at the very end of chapter 5 he decides to petition for Mordecai’s death. Verse 1 of this chapter has the closest thing to a deus ex machina that we will find in Esther, because if the king had not suffered insomnia on this one particular night, asking to read the royal chronicles on this one particular night, it is very possible that Haman would have asked for (and received) the death of Mordecai.
But because it does happen, we see (at least) two reversals in the same moment. The first is that Haman went to the king planning to ask for Mordecai’s death, and instead is ordered to honor Mordecai. The second is that Mordecai refused to obey the king’s command to honor Haman, but Haman is forced to honor Mordecai. One could also add that Haman instructed the king with the expectation that he would be honored himself, but instead the honor was given to his enemy. There are many layers of irony in this part of the story.
Going back to verse 1, this is one of the clearest instances of the book of Esther nearly touching the subject of divine intervention. There are other cases where people hint at the possibility of divine intervention (such as the “deliverance arising from another place” of Esther 4:14), but this is the one really clear instance where we see it happen. It is instructive to note the Greek Esther translation of verse 1: “That night the Lord took sleep from the king…”. So while Hebrew Esther leaves the point ambiguous, Greek Esther makes it clear that they viewed this as an instance of divine intervention. I want to touch on a couple points here.
The bible has a lot of crazy stories about food coming from heaven, or people being raised from the dead or leprosy being healed and stuff like that. But for how many miracles are recorded in the bible, most people see very few miracles like that in their day to day lives. This creates a tension, as many people seek to explain the difference between biblical miracles and what they see in their personal lives. The tension is resolved in different ways by different people: some people resolve that God simply doesn’t perform those kinds of miracles anymore, and “no miracles” is the new standard. Other people view this difference as arising from their own deficits or lack of knowledge or training. Perhaps if I was a holier person, or wiser, or more gifted, I could perform miracles of many kinds, but because I am not, I cannot.
I don’t intend to pick sides here, but I do want to point out that Esther presents an alternative view of what divine intervention can look like, that is quite different from the miracles of Exodus or Kings. Instead, what we see in Esther is a relatively subtle intervention. God is tipping the scales in favor of his servants, but what plays a much bigger role in the story is the faithfulness and persistence of humble men and women like Esther and Mordecai. From the structure of the story, I think we have very good reason to believe that Esther indeed came to her position as queen “for such a time as this” (Esther 4:14). How did Esther get her position? It is clear that she received favor from the king’s eunuchs, and ultimately the king himself, but Esther also played a role with her quiet diligence, faithfulness and obedience; in some measure to the king, but also to God.
In this context, Mordecai and Esther were already positioned to bring deliverance to the Jews, in large part because of their own efforts. However, so often we find our own efforts are not enough to make it the whole way, and that is true here too. God breaks in by calling attention to Mordecai’s previous service to the king, and that’s basically all it takes to get things turning around.
On the other hand, if Esther and Mordecai are receiving favor because of their faithfulness and hard work, Haman’s prideful attitude has set him up for a tremendous “fall” (v. 13). There are few things that demonstrate Haman’s character more directly than verse 6; Haman simply doesn’t believe that there is anybody better than himself, and that there is nobody more deserving of honor and praise than himself. Of course, this attitude is why Haman himself declares the many honors that should be bestowed on Mordecai, his enemy, because Haman couldn’t imagine a world where the king would seek to honor Mordecai.
Lastly, this chapter contains a second instance of Haman rushing home to meet his wife and friends. He did this just a little while ago in chapter 5, when he returned home to brag about his personal success in life. This time around, he rushes home in shame and grief, devastated that he was compelled to honor his enemy with the same honors that he desired for himself. Coming from a man who was “enraged” that Mordecai refused to bow before him, I can’t imagine how Haman must have felt when he was compelled to honor Mordecai above himself. This is also another reversal of fortune; previously, Mordecai was grieving and fasting (Esther 4:1-3) and Haman was honored and rejoicing. Now Mordecai is honored, and Haman is grieving.
I would also like to point out that Haman has awful friends. Can you imagine going home in grief and shame, and the advice your friends give you is, “Because Mordecai is Jewish, you will certainly fall before him.” Thank you so much for the help and advice, wife and friends. But why should Haman be concerned that Mordecai is of Jewish origin? Why would that result in Haman’s downfall? The inference our (predominantly Jewish) audience would take from this verse is that Haman is doomed to fall because God is with the Jewish people. Greek Esther makes this point explicitly, modifying the verse to say “If Mordecai is of the Jewish people… you will not be able to defend yourself, because the living God is with him.” It’s another place where the Hebrew text strongly infers the point and the Greek text makes the point explicitly.
In the next chapter, things go from bad to worse for Haman and he is put to death on his own gallows.
Wednesday, May 9, 2018
Bible Commentary - Esther 5
In this chapter, Esther, Haman and the king eat a meal together and Haman plots the downfall of Mordecai.
This chapter has one of my favorite parts of the story, at the very beginning in verses 1 and 2. This moment when Esther appears before the king, and she is clothed in her finest royal robes, knowing that she is placing her life in the king’s hands. In this moment, the king may choose if Esther will live or die. From the previous chapter, we can clearly sense Esther’s anxiety and tension about appearing before the king, highlighted in verse 3 when the king asks what is “troubling” Esther. At the same time, in my imagination I picture the king as friendly and relaxed. The language is very muted and neutral so it doesn’t really speak to the king’s emotional state, but his reception of Esther is polite, generous and kind.
After this very first moment though, it seems clear to me that the crisis is over; the king receives Esther favorably and in my mind, it’s all but certain that Esther’s request will be granted. That said, I think Esther handles the situation beautifully. First of all, we see Esther dress in her finest apparel. This is a subtle point, but I think it’s important; we know for a fact that the king loves extravagent displays and he loves the fine things of life. I think Esther is clearly playing to his personality because these kinds of formal affairs are exactly what the king enjoys. Second, Esther invites the king to a banquet. Not only does Esther invite the king to a banquet, but at the conclusion of this banquet she petitions the king to attend a second banquet, the following day. From the very beginning of the book, we know that the king loves feasts and banquets and this is what Esther is using her. I wouldn’t want to call it manipulation exactly, but I think Esther is using her knowledge of the king’s personality to make her request more appealing to him, and I think that she is being very clever and effective at it.
One question that generally comes up in this chapter is why Esther asked the king to go with her to a second banquet. Why not ask for deliverance at the first banquet? I think it’s possible anxiety may have been a factor; she was probably uncomfortable making her request to the king and wanted to put it off. However, we could just as well question why Esther invited the king to the first banquet; why not make her request in the king’s throne room? I think the most likely answer is what I mentioned above: the king loves banquets; the king loves pomp and circumstance. Inviting him to a banquet is likely to make him receive Esther more favorably, and if one banquet is good then certainly two banquets is better. From a story point of view, the two banquets also creates more dramatic tension and we will see in the next chapter or two that it plays out in a very particular way. But I think the best explanation is that Esther is simply accommodating what she knows about the king’s personality.
To go back to the personality studies that we started earlier, we see three actors in this chapter: the king, Esther and Haman. I already mentioned how Esther is working to manipulate the king into saving her people, but what do we see from the king and Haman? In short, both of them are generally consistent with what we saw previously.
The king goes along with Esther’s plots without any objection or apprehension. It looks like he’s simply enjoying himself and agrees to whatever Esther asks for. Haman is much more interesting. In this chapter, we see Haman’s pride shine through above everything else. After attending the banquet (the fourth feast in the book), Haman is “glad and pleased of heart” (v. 9), but when he sees Mordecai refuse to rise or tremble before him, he is enraged. This is the second time that Mordecai has “refused” Haman, though the first time around it was Mordecai refusing to bow; now he is refusing to stand. This symmetry (between chapter 3 and chapter 5) serves to highlight the section between them, particularly chapter 4 and the beginning of 5 when Mordecai asks Esther to approach the king, and her favorable reception. This kind of repetition is a framing technique very similar to chiasm, which emphasizes the part of the text in the middle.
Verse 11 is even more striking, because when Haman gets home the first thing he does is start bragging about how much money he has, how many sons he has, and how many times the king has honored him. Verse 12 is an ironic conclusion because he mentions the feast with queen Esther as one of his “glories”, when in fact Esther is going to use that feast to undermine his position and accuse him before the king. It’s a subtle jab, but Haman’s destruction is already in progress, and yet he thinks it is to his glory. In verse 13, we see Haman’s fundamental insecurity emerge once again, because no matter how much money and glory Haman might possess, he cannot abide even a single man refusing to bow to him.
Finally, in verse 14 Haman builds a gallows to kill Mordecai, showing that even if Esther can reverse the king’s command, the danger is perhaps not yet over; Haman may still succeed in killing Mordecai even if Esther attains mercy for her people.
The last comment I would like to make here is to reference again the additions of Greek Esther (GE). There is a long section at the beginning of chapter 5 that is included in Greek Esther and not the Hebrew version. I highly recommend that everyone read it because it’s a really fantastic text. Anyway, it is Greek Esther chapters 13-15 and it includes a prayer of Mordecai, a prayer of Esther and an expanded scene describing Esther’s first appearance before the king (Esther 5:1-2 in the Hebrew text). I don’t have anything to say about the prayers, but the description of Esther’s appearance before the king is truly astonishing. It describes Esther as being “terrified” before the king, who was “seated on his royal throne, clothed in the full array of his majesty, all covered with gold and precious stones” (GE 15:6). Not only that, it says that the king “looked at her in fierce anger”, at which point the queen “faltered… and collapsed… Then God changed the spirit of the king to gentleness, and in alarm he sprang from his throne and took her in his arms.” (GE 15:7-8). Later she faints a second time after describing the king as “wonderful, my lord, and your countenance is full of grace.” (GE 15:14-15).
It’s honestly kind of ridiculous stuff, a fairly blatant dramatization and while the story is consistent with the Hebrew text, the general tone and writing style is extremely different and distinct. Greek Esther basically turns this part of the story into a romantic drama, which is generally inconsistent with the rest of the biblical text (in terms of tone and literary style). Nevertheless, I think it’s wonderfully entertaining stuff.
As this chapter concludes, the story remains in motion. Haman has declared he will go and ask for Mordecai’s death, and Esther has petitioned the king and Haman to attend a second banquet. In the next chapter, Haman’s request for Mordecai’s death is interrupted in a most surprising fashion.
This chapter has one of my favorite parts of the story, at the very beginning in verses 1 and 2. This moment when Esther appears before the king, and she is clothed in her finest royal robes, knowing that she is placing her life in the king’s hands. In this moment, the king may choose if Esther will live or die. From the previous chapter, we can clearly sense Esther’s anxiety and tension about appearing before the king, highlighted in verse 3 when the king asks what is “troubling” Esther. At the same time, in my imagination I picture the king as friendly and relaxed. The language is very muted and neutral so it doesn’t really speak to the king’s emotional state, but his reception of Esther is polite, generous and kind.
After this very first moment though, it seems clear to me that the crisis is over; the king receives Esther favorably and in my mind, it’s all but certain that Esther’s request will be granted. That said, I think Esther handles the situation beautifully. First of all, we see Esther dress in her finest apparel. This is a subtle point, but I think it’s important; we know for a fact that the king loves extravagent displays and he loves the fine things of life. I think Esther is clearly playing to his personality because these kinds of formal affairs are exactly what the king enjoys. Second, Esther invites the king to a banquet. Not only does Esther invite the king to a banquet, but at the conclusion of this banquet she petitions the king to attend a second banquet, the following day. From the very beginning of the book, we know that the king loves feasts and banquets and this is what Esther is using her. I wouldn’t want to call it manipulation exactly, but I think Esther is using her knowledge of the king’s personality to make her request more appealing to him, and I think that she is being very clever and effective at it.
One question that generally comes up in this chapter is why Esther asked the king to go with her to a second banquet. Why not ask for deliverance at the first banquet? I think it’s possible anxiety may have been a factor; she was probably uncomfortable making her request to the king and wanted to put it off. However, we could just as well question why Esther invited the king to the first banquet; why not make her request in the king’s throne room? I think the most likely answer is what I mentioned above: the king loves banquets; the king loves pomp and circumstance. Inviting him to a banquet is likely to make him receive Esther more favorably, and if one banquet is good then certainly two banquets is better. From a story point of view, the two banquets also creates more dramatic tension and we will see in the next chapter or two that it plays out in a very particular way. But I think the best explanation is that Esther is simply accommodating what she knows about the king’s personality.
To go back to the personality studies that we started earlier, we see three actors in this chapter: the king, Esther and Haman. I already mentioned how Esther is working to manipulate the king into saving her people, but what do we see from the king and Haman? In short, both of them are generally consistent with what we saw previously.
The king goes along with Esther’s plots without any objection or apprehension. It looks like he’s simply enjoying himself and agrees to whatever Esther asks for. Haman is much more interesting. In this chapter, we see Haman’s pride shine through above everything else. After attending the banquet (the fourth feast in the book), Haman is “glad and pleased of heart” (v. 9), but when he sees Mordecai refuse to rise or tremble before him, he is enraged. This is the second time that Mordecai has “refused” Haman, though the first time around it was Mordecai refusing to bow; now he is refusing to stand. This symmetry (between chapter 3 and chapter 5) serves to highlight the section between them, particularly chapter 4 and the beginning of 5 when Mordecai asks Esther to approach the king, and her favorable reception. This kind of repetition is a framing technique very similar to chiasm, which emphasizes the part of the text in the middle.
Verse 11 is even more striking, because when Haman gets home the first thing he does is start bragging about how much money he has, how many sons he has, and how many times the king has honored him. Verse 12 is an ironic conclusion because he mentions the feast with queen Esther as one of his “glories”, when in fact Esther is going to use that feast to undermine his position and accuse him before the king. It’s a subtle jab, but Haman’s destruction is already in progress, and yet he thinks it is to his glory. In verse 13, we see Haman’s fundamental insecurity emerge once again, because no matter how much money and glory Haman might possess, he cannot abide even a single man refusing to bow to him.
Finally, in verse 14 Haman builds a gallows to kill Mordecai, showing that even if Esther can reverse the king’s command, the danger is perhaps not yet over; Haman may still succeed in killing Mordecai even if Esther attains mercy for her people.
The last comment I would like to make here is to reference again the additions of Greek Esther (GE). There is a long section at the beginning of chapter 5 that is included in Greek Esther and not the Hebrew version. I highly recommend that everyone read it because it’s a really fantastic text. Anyway, it is Greek Esther chapters 13-15 and it includes a prayer of Mordecai, a prayer of Esther and an expanded scene describing Esther’s first appearance before the king (Esther 5:1-2 in the Hebrew text). I don’t have anything to say about the prayers, but the description of Esther’s appearance before the king is truly astonishing. It describes Esther as being “terrified” before the king, who was “seated on his royal throne, clothed in the full array of his majesty, all covered with gold and precious stones” (GE 15:6). Not only that, it says that the king “looked at her in fierce anger”, at which point the queen “faltered… and collapsed… Then God changed the spirit of the king to gentleness, and in alarm he sprang from his throne and took her in his arms.” (GE 15:7-8). Later she faints a second time after describing the king as “wonderful, my lord, and your countenance is full of grace.” (GE 15:14-15).
It’s honestly kind of ridiculous stuff, a fairly blatant dramatization and while the story is consistent with the Hebrew text, the general tone and writing style is extremely different and distinct. Greek Esther basically turns this part of the story into a romantic drama, which is generally inconsistent with the rest of the biblical text (in terms of tone and literary style). Nevertheless, I think it’s wonderfully entertaining stuff.
As this chapter concludes, the story remains in motion. Haman has declared he will go and ask for Mordecai’s death, and Esther has petitioned the king and Haman to attend a second banquet. In the next chapter, Haman’s request for Mordecai’s death is interrupted in a most surprising fashion.
Wednesday, May 2, 2018
Bible Commentary - Esther 4
In this chapter, Esther agrees to intercede with the king on behalf of her people, at the risk of her own life.
In the beginning of the chapter we see the king’s command spreading through the whole empire, with great weeping and mourning by the Jews wherever the order came. The only good news is that the command is post-dated so nobody will actually get killed for a couple months. There is still time for some kind of deliverance to come through, but at the same time there can be no doubt this is a great catastrophe for the Jews.
Now, interestingly, in verse 4 Esther finds out not the king’s command, but rather she learns that her uncle Mordecai was mourning, and she “writhed in great anguish” at the news, and it’s only in verse 5 that she sent a eunuch to go talk to Mordecai and find out what was wrong. We can imagine someone going to Esther and saying, “Hey I saw your uncle today, he was crying and wearing sackcloth near the king’s gate”. Esther knows something is wrong but she doesn’t know what.
Here’s the irony: the king’s wife, who is (secretly) a Jew, is the last person to discover that the king ordered for all the Jews to be killed. The king didn’t ask her opinion, didn’t even tell her he was doing it. I’m not sure if it’s because the king considered it a minor affair not worth discussing with her, or because he didn’t consider the queen’s opinion to be worth consulting when he makes decisions. It’s probably a combination of both. I think this also shows that to a certain extent, Esther is disconnected from what’s happening in the rest of the world. This is part of the reality of life as the queen. Basically the way it works is that in 99% of circumstances, the only men permitted to interact with the queen (or any of the concubines) are eunuchs. Any son of the queen is a presumptive heir to the throne, so at least to the king it is very important to ensure that it is his own son and not the bastard child of another man.
I don’t know the exact rules for how it worked, but I think we can infer that the queen spends the vast majority of her life within the confines of the palace. She lives in luxury and is waited upon 24 hours a day by her staff of caretakers, but at least in this story we can see a glimpse of how it isolates her from the community where she grew up.
In any case, verse 8 is when the real action begins: Mordecai orders Esther to go speak to the king and plead for mercy. Verse 11 delivers Esther’s counterpoint: Nobody, not even the queen, is permitted to go to the king without being invited. Anyone who breaks this law is condemned to death, except if the king extends his scepter of mercy and delivers that person from death. Esther has not been invited for over 30 days, and the implication is clear: she does not expect to be summoned anytime soon.
Mordecai’s response in verses 13-14 contains one of the most famous quotes in the bible: who knows whether you have attained your position for such a time as this?
This is the dramatic center of the entire story. This part of the story ties together all of the elements in the previous three chapters. The deposition of Vashti, Esther’s attained position as queen and Haman’s threat to destroy all the Jews are all tied together in this one moment when Mordecai asks Esther to use her position as queen to plead for deliverance from Haman’s threat. This is also a point of unresolved tension because we don’t yet know the outcome. Esther has agreed to risk her own life with no guarantee that she could save the Jews even if she dies. It is possible that Esther could die in the attempt and the Jews still may perish. The only reason we have for confidence at this point is Mordecai’s obscure reference to “deliverance from another place”, which nearly all scholars agree is a veiled reference to the LORD.
In the midst of all this tension, the story presents to us two paradoxes. The first paradox is that in order to save her people from death, Esther must risk her own life. All of the Jews are subjected to the threat of death, by no choice of their own. In turn, Esther must voluntarily choose the risk of death in order to save her people from that same threat. To me this carries undertones of the ritual sacrifices from the Pentateuch. The whole concept of the Passover and the Day of Atonement is that the Israelites could kill an innocent animal in order to save their own lives from the guilt of death. In the same way, Esther is not under the king’s command of death, but she must choose to place herself under another command of death in order to save her people.
I don’t think it’s an accident that this is the one point in the story where we see people fasting. Remember that this is a story largely defined and structured by feasting. All throughout the book we see the king or Esther hosting one feast after another. Here, in the pinnacle of drama, we see Esther, Mordecai and all the Jews of the capital fasting for three days. On one hand, I think this serves as a dramatic counterpoint to all the feasting. On the other hand, I think the fasting here stands as a metaphor of Esther’s embrace of her own death. There are many places in the bible when fasting is a type of intercession, and that is clearly true here. However, it is even more common for fasting to be a kind of mourning; that is also true here. I think the ostensible purpose of the fasting is to intercede for God’s favor for Esther, that the king might spare her life and favorably receive her petition. A secondary purpose is, simply put, to mourn her death (whether she literally dies or not).
The second paradox is that Esther must choose to obey either Mordecai or the king, but she cannot obey both. Now is the moment when Esther is forced to make a decision. Who will she obey? Esther’s instinct is clearly to obey the king, and we see that in Esther’s response in verse 12 (when she initially refuses to obey Mordecai because of the king’s command). It is only after Mordecai insists that she must act when Esther decides to disobey the king’s Law.
To me, this is the most pivotal moment in Esther’s life. In the past we saw Esther diligently obey Mordecai, and then Hegai. Now she is married to the king and we can easily imagine Esther would like to obey the king in the same way. Strange as it may sound, I think this is possibly an even greater risk for Esther than the risk of death. This is the first (and only) time in the entire story we will see Esther disobey anyone. Not without reluctance, and not without a great amount of fear, but she does it. In my opinion, this is a defining moment in Esther’s growth as a person, because in the end she is willing to act contrary to her personality and instinct.
Lastly, I want to reiterate how this mimicks the story of Joseph, with Esther playing the role of Joseph. Especially in light of Mordecai’s line “Who knows whether you have attained your position for such a time as this?” Esther “attained her position” for the same reason that Joseph “attained his position” in Egypt, to deliver the Israelite nation from destruction. The details are quite different from the overall framework of the story is quite similar.
The chapter concludes with Mordecai and the Jews going off to fast on Esther’s behalf, and in the next chapter we will see the outcome of all this drama.
In the beginning of the chapter we see the king’s command spreading through the whole empire, with great weeping and mourning by the Jews wherever the order came. The only good news is that the command is post-dated so nobody will actually get killed for a couple months. There is still time for some kind of deliverance to come through, but at the same time there can be no doubt this is a great catastrophe for the Jews.
Now, interestingly, in verse 4 Esther finds out not the king’s command, but rather she learns that her uncle Mordecai was mourning, and she “writhed in great anguish” at the news, and it’s only in verse 5 that she sent a eunuch to go talk to Mordecai and find out what was wrong. We can imagine someone going to Esther and saying, “Hey I saw your uncle today, he was crying and wearing sackcloth near the king’s gate”. Esther knows something is wrong but she doesn’t know what.
Here’s the irony: the king’s wife, who is (secretly) a Jew, is the last person to discover that the king ordered for all the Jews to be killed. The king didn’t ask her opinion, didn’t even tell her he was doing it. I’m not sure if it’s because the king considered it a minor affair not worth discussing with her, or because he didn’t consider the queen’s opinion to be worth consulting when he makes decisions. It’s probably a combination of both. I think this also shows that to a certain extent, Esther is disconnected from what’s happening in the rest of the world. This is part of the reality of life as the queen. Basically the way it works is that in 99% of circumstances, the only men permitted to interact with the queen (or any of the concubines) are eunuchs. Any son of the queen is a presumptive heir to the throne, so at least to the king it is very important to ensure that it is his own son and not the bastard child of another man.
I don’t know the exact rules for how it worked, but I think we can infer that the queen spends the vast majority of her life within the confines of the palace. She lives in luxury and is waited upon 24 hours a day by her staff of caretakers, but at least in this story we can see a glimpse of how it isolates her from the community where she grew up.
In any case, verse 8 is when the real action begins: Mordecai orders Esther to go speak to the king and plead for mercy. Verse 11 delivers Esther’s counterpoint: Nobody, not even the queen, is permitted to go to the king without being invited. Anyone who breaks this law is condemned to death, except if the king extends his scepter of mercy and delivers that person from death. Esther has not been invited for over 30 days, and the implication is clear: she does not expect to be summoned anytime soon.
Mordecai’s response in verses 13-14 contains one of the most famous quotes in the bible: who knows whether you have attained your position for such a time as this?
This is the dramatic center of the entire story. This part of the story ties together all of the elements in the previous three chapters. The deposition of Vashti, Esther’s attained position as queen and Haman’s threat to destroy all the Jews are all tied together in this one moment when Mordecai asks Esther to use her position as queen to plead for deliverance from Haman’s threat. This is also a point of unresolved tension because we don’t yet know the outcome. Esther has agreed to risk her own life with no guarantee that she could save the Jews even if she dies. It is possible that Esther could die in the attempt and the Jews still may perish. The only reason we have for confidence at this point is Mordecai’s obscure reference to “deliverance from another place”, which nearly all scholars agree is a veiled reference to the LORD.
In the midst of all this tension, the story presents to us two paradoxes. The first paradox is that in order to save her people from death, Esther must risk her own life. All of the Jews are subjected to the threat of death, by no choice of their own. In turn, Esther must voluntarily choose the risk of death in order to save her people from that same threat. To me this carries undertones of the ritual sacrifices from the Pentateuch. The whole concept of the Passover and the Day of Atonement is that the Israelites could kill an innocent animal in order to save their own lives from the guilt of death. In the same way, Esther is not under the king’s command of death, but she must choose to place herself under another command of death in order to save her people.
I don’t think it’s an accident that this is the one point in the story where we see people fasting. Remember that this is a story largely defined and structured by feasting. All throughout the book we see the king or Esther hosting one feast after another. Here, in the pinnacle of drama, we see Esther, Mordecai and all the Jews of the capital fasting for three days. On one hand, I think this serves as a dramatic counterpoint to all the feasting. On the other hand, I think the fasting here stands as a metaphor of Esther’s embrace of her own death. There are many places in the bible when fasting is a type of intercession, and that is clearly true here. However, it is even more common for fasting to be a kind of mourning; that is also true here. I think the ostensible purpose of the fasting is to intercede for God’s favor for Esther, that the king might spare her life and favorably receive her petition. A secondary purpose is, simply put, to mourn her death (whether she literally dies or not).
The second paradox is that Esther must choose to obey either Mordecai or the king, but she cannot obey both. Now is the moment when Esther is forced to make a decision. Who will she obey? Esther’s instinct is clearly to obey the king, and we see that in Esther’s response in verse 12 (when she initially refuses to obey Mordecai because of the king’s command). It is only after Mordecai insists that she must act when Esther decides to disobey the king’s Law.
To me, this is the most pivotal moment in Esther’s life. In the past we saw Esther diligently obey Mordecai, and then Hegai. Now she is married to the king and we can easily imagine Esther would like to obey the king in the same way. Strange as it may sound, I think this is possibly an even greater risk for Esther than the risk of death. This is the first (and only) time in the entire story we will see Esther disobey anyone. Not without reluctance, and not without a great amount of fear, but she does it. In my opinion, this is a defining moment in Esther’s growth as a person, because in the end she is willing to act contrary to her personality and instinct.
Lastly, I want to reiterate how this mimicks the story of Joseph, with Esther playing the role of Joseph. Especially in light of Mordecai’s line “Who knows whether you have attained your position for such a time as this?” Esther “attained her position” for the same reason that Joseph “attained his position” in Egypt, to deliver the Israelite nation from destruction. The details are quite different from the overall framework of the story is quite similar.
The chapter concludes with Mordecai and the Jews going off to fast on Esther’s behalf, and in the next chapter we will see the outcome of all this drama.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)