It is now four years since Esther became queen. As has been noted before, remember there were no chapter and verses in the original text, so chapter 3 flows immediately after the end of chapter 2, there is no division. So Haman's rise is contrasted with what happened to Mordecai. Mordecai had saved the king's life, but we received no immediate reward. Haman is not recorded as having done anything much.
Haman was probably an Amalekite. They were enemies of Israel, which is the reason why Mordecai refused to bow down to him. Haman was enraged at this and decided to take out his anger on all the Jewish people, not just Mordecai. This presents us with a common dilemma. Mordecai's refusal to bow can be fully justified in isolation, but was it worth risking the lives of all Jews in the area? In our society we would probably say no, yet Mordecai is not criticised at all in the Bible, and God did rescue His people. So the lesson could be said to be that even in these situations we should choose to do the right thing, even if doing so seems to endanger many "innocent" people.
Haman then went to the king and incited him against the Jews. He turned what was a personal slight against Haman himself into a more general refusal to obey the king, which it was not. So Haman was given permission to do as he wished against the Jews. See the arbitrariness of all this and the way that kings act. We think our governments are so much more sophisticated and expect them to act is logical and reasonable ways. Often they will not, but this will not stop God's plans.
So an edict was sent out setting a date for the destruction of all the Jews. There is a long history of laws being issued against the Jews.
No comments:
Post a Comment