The Queen’s Gamble

Esther 8

1On that same day King Xerxes gave the estate of Haman, the enemy of the Jews, to Queen Esther. Then Mordecai was brought before the king, for Esther had told the king how they were related. 2The king took off his signet ring—which he had taken back from Haman—and gave it to Mordecai. And Esther appointed Mordecai to be in charge of Haman’s property.

3Now once more Esther came before the king, falling down at his feet and begging him with tears to stop Haman’s evil plot against the Jews. 4Again the king held out the gold scepter to Esther. So she rose and stood before him 5and said, “If Your Majesty is pleased with me and if he thinks it is right, send out a decree reversing Haman’s orders to destroy the Jews throughout all the provinces of the king. 6For how can I endure to see my people and my family slaughtered and destroyed?”

7Then King Xerxes said to Queen Esther and Mordecai the Jew, “I have given Esther the estate of Haman, and he has been hanged on the gallows because he tried to destroy the Jews. 8Now go ahead and send a message to the Jews in the king’s name, telling them whatever you want, and seal it with the king’s signet ring. But remember that whatever is written in the king’s name and sealed with his ring can never be revoked.” (Esther 8:1-8, NLT)


The Daily DAVEotional

Esther is a short book in the Old Testament that takes place during the time when the Jewish people were in exile and subjects to the Persians, who were the dominant super power on the world stage.

Esther is a young Jewish girl, who, through a series of circumstances, finds herself as the Queen to the most powerful man in the world, Xerxes I, also known as Ahasuerus.

The earlier chapters chronicle Esther’s rise to become queen, along with the plot by Haman, who, as Prime Minister, convinced the King to enact a plot to completely eradicate the Jewish people. I wrote about this in a previous blog post, “An Ancient Example of Cancel Culture”.

At great risk to herself, Esther approaches the king without an official summons and ultimately exposes Haman’s wicked plot to the king. It appears that justice has been served.

However, even though Haman’s plot has been exposed and he has been hung on the very gallows he had built to hang Mordecai, there is still the small issue that Haman’s decree ordering the elimination of the Jewish people was still in force.

One would think that the king would simply rescind his original decree but the Persian empire had an interesting law that said any decree made by the king was irrevocable. In other words, the law had to stand and he could not just reverse it. Perhaps there are good reasons for that to be the case but in this instance, it was inconvenient, to put it mildly.

So Esther finds herself in a bit of a quandary. Does she go to the king uninvited yet again?

Now at this point in the story, I think it might be easy to think that there is virtually no risk for Esther in approaching the king. After all, he was very pleased with her early on, which is why he made her queen. And she’s already gone to him uninvited and his response was very favorable. From our vantage point, there is no reason why he wouldn’t be favorable again.

But as is often the case, there’s more to the story that’s not being reported. And in this instance, there’s a religious element at play.

What we don’t see from the text, and wouldn’t know unless we did some extrabiblical research, is that the ancient Persians were highly committed to a religion known as Zoroastrianism, a monotheistic religion that still has adherents today, albeit very few.

What is not shared in the text is that king Xerxes, unlike his predecessors, kings Cyrus and Darius, was not a religious pluralist. That means he was not the kind of king who saw any value in allowing other religions and faith traditions to exist alongside Zoroastrianism within his kingdom.

While it’s true that he acted extremely favorably toward Esther in her initial meeting there was simply no reason to believe he would see it as beneficial to try to undo the previous edict.

This new information about Xerxes’ religious views places Esther’s request of the king in an entirely new light. Instead of being just a low level added encounter, Esther’s request is quite bold and risky. Esther selflessly put herself at risk in order to intervene and advocate for her people. She used her position in order to secure justice for those who could not advocate for themselves – her own people.

Esther is honored not only for her boldness and faith, but for her example of what it looks like to use your position for the well-being and benefit of others.

Reflection

What situations have you been in that are similar to Esther’s – where you had to do something that required risk on your behalf?

What are some typical reasons people might have for not stepping up like Esther did?

In what ways does the additional information regarding Xerxe’s religious views impact your understanding of Esther’s choice?

What steps can you take to increase the level of faith and boldness in your life?

 

Photo by Megan Watson on Unsplash

Was it Genocide or Punishment?

Deuteronomy 18

9“When you arrive in the land the LORD your God is giving you, be very careful not to imitate the detestable customs of the nations living there. 10For example, never sacrifice your son or daughter as a burnt offering. And do not let your people practice fortune-telling or sorcery, or allow them to interpret omens, or engage in witchcraft, 11or cast spells, or function as mediums or psychics, or call forth the spirits of the dead. 12Anyone who does these things is an object of horror and disgust to the LORD. It is because the other nations have done these things that the LORD your God will drive them out ahead of you. 13You must be blameless before the LORD your God. 14The people you are about to displace consult with sorcerers and fortune-tellers, but the LORD your God forbids you to do such things. (Deuteronomy 18:9-14, NLT)


The Daily DAVEotional

I heard a speaker once ask the question, “if you were put on trial for being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict you?”

The idea behind the question is that a lot of people who claim to be Christians don’t live like it.

I think there’s a similar question being asked within our culture about the God of the Old Testament. Is there enough evidence to prove He is God? I think the real question people are asking is, “does the God of the Old Testament measure up to my idea of God?”

For many, the answer is no, mostly because people cannot reconcile their view that God is all-loving with the commands in the Old Testament for the Israelites to wipe out the people dwelling in the land of Canaan.

I wrote about this topic recently in my post “Is the Old Testament God a Bloodthirsty, Genocidal Psychopath?” in which I argue that one of the main reasons people have difficulty with the God of the Old Testament is that they have a faulty or incomplete view of His nature. Sure God is loving. But that is not His only attribute. He’s also holy and righteous and just and infinitely good (to name just a few).

As a result, His command for the Israelites to expel the Canaanites from the land was not genocide, but divine punishment.

This passage in Deuteronomy is one of many that gives just a glimpse into the reprehensible atrocities and “detestable customs” of the Canaanites.

To say the Canaanites were wicked would be an understatement. But of course, that also depends on your definition and understanding of what is “wicked”. And that is part of the problem. Wickedness in our culture is so pervasive that we have a hard time indicting the Canaanites without indicting ourselves too.

The Canaanites not only practiced human sacrifice, with children no less, but they also engaged in sorcery, witchcraft and fortune-telling. Many of these practices have been so mainstreamed within our culture that we look at Canaanite culture as normal and innocent. Hence, we see God as the bad guy.

Sexually, the Canaanites practiced every sort of perversion you can imagine, including incest, bestiality, rape, and of course, homosexuality. But again, in a culture where anything goes sexually, our response is “what’s the big deal?”

This is the point Clay Jones makes in his well-researched article, “We Don’t Hate Sin So We Don’t Understand What Happened to the Canaanites” which can be found at his website: ClayJones.net. Jones utilizes extra-biblical texts from the ancient world to dive deeper into the Canaanites’ pagan practices. What he finds is much more disturbing than even the biblical texts portray.

Scripture is clear. God’s command to the Israelites to drive out the Canaanites from the land was not a whimsical command given to appease some genocidal proclivities. The Canaanites were wicked and their customs so depraved that justice was required. The Israelites were simply God’s tool for meting out that justice.

But make no mistake, God warned the Israelites that they too would be subject to the same just punishment as the Canaanites if they followed their customs.

This passage thus served not as a justification for God’s impending justice but a prophetic warning.

Reflection

What is. your view of God? How would you describe God’s character?

How would you define wickedness? 

In what ways do you see our current culture mirroring or following some of the ancient Canaanite practices which God says were detestable?

How do you explain God’s command for the Israelites to expel the Canaanites to those who question His character? 

 

Photo by KATRIN BOLOVTSOVA: https://www.pexels.com/photo/brown-wooden-gavel-on-brown-wooden-table-6077326/