Where is the ‘Christ’ in the Book of Esther?

 

 

“The character Haman himself is reminiscent of Judas Iscariot.  He was a scheming pretender who plotted against Mordecai, a faithful man of God. His attempts to betray and destroy Mordecai, even receiving payment to accomplish his task, is very much like Judas.

At the conclusion of the narrative, we find him hanging from a gallows just like Judas”.

 Chad Ashby

 

Regarding the Book of Esther, Chad Ashby (2013) asks the question, relevant for a Christian: https://chadashby.com/2013/11/04/wheres-the-christ-in-esther/

“As a good Christ-centered reader of Scripture, your question as well as mine should be, “Where is Christ?”  The total absence of “God”, “the LORD”, and any other mentions of spiritual beings from this play might unnerve you”. 

And he proceeds to identify the Christic element in the book:

 

Esther is one of those books of the Bible you probably don’t read that often.  If that’s true, it’s a shame.  Esther is perhaps the most entertaining, self-contained stories in the entire Bible. It has all the makings of a great play: a cruel villian, an oblivious king, a beautiful country-girl-turned-queen, a wise uncle, a [heroic] underdog, plot twists, comedic irony, and a happy ending. Honestly, the stuff of Esther is as good as any royal intrigue found in Shakespeare’s finest plays.

For most of us, all we know about Esther is that she won King Ahasuerus’ beauty contest to become his new queen, and we might vaguely remember that she saved the Jews. Let me briefly explain the plot…

 

The Drama:

 

Act 1

 

The story opens with King Ahasuerus and his guests at a dinner party. His Queen Vashti stubbornly resists his appeal for her to grace the party with her beauty, and in his drunken stupor he vanquishes Vashti from her royal position. Immediately, like an episode of [Pershia’s] Next Top Model, the king sends recruiters into his vast empire to gather all of the best and most beautiful young women for him to choose his next queen. Esther, a Jew, charms his eye and wins the competition.

Behind the scenes, Esther’s uncle Mordecai faithfully serves the king and guides Esther. He uncovers a plot by two eunuchs to assassinate the king (I know, eunuchs–who woulda thought!). During the story, Haman, the villainous foe, is promoted to the right hand of the king. Haman has it out for Mordecai because he will not bow before him.  In childish fury, he decides that not only Mordecai, but the entire Jewish people will be utterly destroyed for his indiscretion.

 

Act 2

 

Haman hatches a plot to destroy the Jews. He goes to the King, and using very vague language encourages the fatheaded King to decree that all Jews be annihilated because according to Haman, “Their laws are different from those of every other people, and they do not keep the king’s laws, so that it is not to the king’s profit to tolerate them.” The king blindly obeys; he and Haman sit down to a quiet afternoon drink while the rest of the town is thrown into absolute confusion.

Mordecai calls upon Esther with the alarming news, and he encourages her to use her leverage as queen to influence the gullible buffoon she is married to so that the Jews might be saved. Esther agrees. Risking her life, she approaches the king uninvited but finds favor. She invites him and Haman to a banquet, thinking she will broach the issue once the king is in good spirits and well-fed.

 

Act 3

 

Meanwhile, Haman’s rage against Mordecai becomes so palatable that he cannot wait until the designated day to destroy him, but goes home and builds a 75-foot-tall gallows to hang Mordecai. That night, the king asks for a bedtime story, and one of the royal officials reads to him from the chronicles of the kingdom–the best sleep aid available at the time. By chance, the king is reminded of the time when Mordecai blew the whistle on the eunuch conspiracy against him. He asks, “Has this man been rewarded?” To his dismay, Mordecai wasn’t even sent a “thank-you” card.

The next day, as Haman huffs into the castle to ask to hang Mordecai on the gallows, the king invites him quickly in and asks, “What should be done to the man whom the king delights to honor?” Straightening his robe and throwing back his shoulders in smug delight, Haman says, “For me–I mean, the man–whom the king delights to honor, let royal robes be placed on him and a royal crown set on his head, and let him be led on the king’s horse through the public square, and let an official declare his honor to everyone.” 

In response, the king says, “That sounds great, Haman. Everything you just said, go and do for Mordecai.” The humiliation, irony, and comedic twist are so delicious you can taste it!

 

Act 4

 

That evening, Esther’s party is in full swing. On the second day of the festivities, Esther lets the cat out of the bag: someone is trying to kill her! In fact a certain man is seeking to annihilate her entire people. The king, still oblivious as all get out, cries, “Who is it!?” She replies with accusing finger drawn, “A foe and enemy! This wicked Haman!” As the blood drains from Haman’s face, the king turns to him in rage. It’s at this very moment that another one of the king’s mischievous eunuchs reminds the king about the lofty gallows constructed in Haaman’s backyard. “Hang him on that!” the king exclaims.

 

Act 5

 

In the ensuing drama, the Jews are granted the means to defend themselves from the onslaught of the empire, and in surprising fashion, these underdogs slaughtered 75,000 of their foes. The story ends with a victory for the Jews, Esther at the king’s side, and Mordecai elevated to the second highest office in the kingdom!

 

But Where’s the Christ?

 

As a good Christ-centered reader of Scripture, your question as well as mine should be, “Where is Christ?” The total absence of “God”, “the LORD”, and any other mentions of spiritual beings from this play might unnerve you. However, several moments in particular betray that this entire story is actually all about Christ.

First, in chapter 3, there is a pivotal moment in the drama where the king gives Haman the right to destroy the Jews. In verse 11 these are his exact words, “And the king said to Haman, ‘The money is given to you, the people also, to do with them as it seems good to you.’” This passive king betrays Israel into the hands of a wicked, scheming, and vile villain. Haman’s purpose, as revealed earlier in chapter 3, is “to destroy all the Jews.” I cannot help but hear in King Ahasuerus’ words an echo from the passion narrative. Another Gentile ruler, by the name of Pilate, when he had the authority to protect the True Israel, instead passively uttered those fateful words, “I am innocent of this man’s blood; see to it yourselves.” When each man had the power to vindicate Israel, he chose to [defer] to the wicked.

The character Haman himself is reminiscent of Judas Iscariot. He was a scheming pretender who plotted against Mordecai, a faithful man of God. His attempts to betray and destroy Mordecai, even receiving payment to accomplish his task, is very much like Judas. At the conclusion of the narrative, we find him hanging from a gallows just like Judas.

Mordecai’s ride around the town square on the king’s horse just days before the proclaimed execution of all Israel has to remind us at least a little bit of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem riding a lowly donkey. In fact, Mordecai’s refusal to bow before Haman reminds us of Christ’s unwillingness to bow before Satan in the wilderness. 

Though the infuriated Haman sought to destroy him, Mordecai was vindicated, and he rose to the right hand of the king–just as Jesus would do many years later.

The real kicker, however, lies with Mordecai. After hearing the proclamation of the destruction of the Jewish nation, he still has hope. Listen to what he tells Esther in 4:14, “For if you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” Most of us know the second half of this verse, but the first part is the key. Mordecai has faith that God will sustain and deliver the seed of Abraham.

That is what this entire drama is all about. Satan and the Kingdom of Darkness are making another attempt to destroy the seed of Abraham before the Messiah has a chance to appear. That is why Esther is all about Christ. It is all about how God protected and delivered the seed of Abraham from attacks on all sides. It is about how God used a woman like Esther and a man like Mordecai to overcome Satan’s vicious attempts to destroy God’s Plan of salvation. On the cross, we see Satan’s last lunging effort to pierce through and destroy the True Seed of Abraham. Even as he slew the Messiah, the blessing of Abraham finally came pouring forth from His open side. Neither, Haman, Judas, or Satan could make God a liar. His promise to bless all nations through the Messiah came true in Jesus Christ, and Esther is another exciting chapter about how God made it happen. ....

 

 

For further comparisons between Mordecai and Jesus Christ (the ‘New Adam’), and between Queen Esther and the Virgin Mary (the ‘New Eve’), see my book:

 

The Five First Saturdays of Our Lady of Fatima

 

https://www.academia.edu/3731625/The_Five_First_Saturdays_of_Our_Lady_of_Fatima

 

 

Related to this, for Mary as the ‘New Eve’, see my article:

 

'The Marian Dimension'. Part Two: The “New Eve”

 

https://www.academia.edu/27483384/The_Marian_Dimension._Part_Two_The_New_Eve_

 

and:

 

https://www.academia.edu/30654137/The_Marian_Dimension._Part_Two_b_The_New_Eve_continued_

 

For Haman (Aman) identified as a Jewish king, Amon (Aman), see e.g. my article:

 

'Taking aim on' king Amon - such a wicked king of Judah

 

https://www.academia.edu/37575781/Taking_aim_on_king_Amon_-_such_a_wicked_king_of_Judah

Have the Gospels delivered us a fake Jesus?

Herod and Hadrian

Part Three:

Have the Gospels delivered us a fake Jesus?

by

Damien F. Mackey

“Allegorical or supposed "higher truths" exist in a dimension all their own

and a fake historicism confuses the unwary”.

Kenneth Humphreys

At a site claiming and arguing the ‘Jesus Never Existed’:

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/aelia.htm

we read of situations that are seemingly quite unfavourable regarding the reliability of the Gospels, but that actually need to be considered anew in a revised context.

Here are some excerpts to which I shall add my own comments wherever I consider necessary:

For two hundred years, the municipality of Aelia – the erstwhile city of Jerusalem – was demonstrably and triumphantly pagan, enjoying all the refinements of a Roman colonia.

It was also a garrison city for legio X Fretensis – the Roman legion which had destroyed Gamala, Qumran and Masada. In the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD the Tenth had camped on the Mount of Olives, and rained ballisticae onto the city. In the war of 135 it had reduced the fortress of Betar, killing the messianic claimant and the last of his supporters. Post-war, legio decima was heavily involved in reconstruction, its expertise deployed in a vast number of public works.

This pagan past is dimly perceived today, even though the Roman imprint determined the size and layout of the city for more than a thousand years. "Pagan Jerusalem" is regarded by all and sundry as an alien interlude in an essentially Judeo-Christian story. Yet Aelia Capitolina is crucial in the history of Christianity. It was while Jupiter was venerated on "Temple Mount" and Venus honoured in the heart of the city that the fable of Jesus was given form and substance. It was upon, not the city of Herod, but the 2nd century city of Hadrian that the gospellers imposed their fable.

My comment: Indeed, that would all have been a “gospellers fable” if there really had been a “war of 135 [AD]”, but that supposed “war”, or revolt of the Jews, was the Maccabean revolt, but now projected onto a C2nd AD ‘screen’. See e.g. my article:

Sorting out the Jewish Revolts

https://www.academia.edu/36262090/Sorting_out_the_Jewish_Revolts

“Pagan Jerusalem” was the effect of the paganising of the Jews under the influence of the Macedonian Greek king, Antiochus IV “Epiphanes”.

And it was at this very time that Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem, according to my article:

A New Timetable for the Nativity of Jesus Christ

https://www.academia.edu/36672214/A_New_Timetable_for_the_Nativity_of_Jesus_Christ

So, regarding the above statement: “It was upon, not the city of Herod, but the 2nd century city of Hadrian that the gospellers imposed their fable”, this is partly right and partly wrong. For, according to this present series, Herod was Hadrian.

A Roman Colonia

"The whole nation (of the Jews) was prohibited from this time on by a decree, and by the commands of Adrian, from ever going up to the country about Jerusalem. For the emperor gave orders that they should not even see from a distance the land of their fathers. Such is the account of Aristo of Pella. And thus, when the city had been emptied of the Jewish nation and had suffered a total destruction of its ancient inhabitants, it was colonized by a different race, and the Roman city which subsequently arose was called Aelia, in honour of the emperor Aelius Adrian."

– Eusebius, History of the Church, 39.6.3.

If 4th century Christian historian Eusebius is to be believed, the new city that Emperor Hadrian built upon the ruins of Jerusalem was colonized by a "new race of Gentiles". When the gospels took the shape familiar to us today Jerusalem was a memory. In its stead stood the Romano-Hellenic city of Aelia Capitolina, a minor town of the province of Syria Palestina.

My comment: No, the “new race of Gentiles” was comprised of the apostate Jews of the Maccabean era now co-mingling with pagan Greek Gentiles. But Jerusalem was still there.

Coins issued by Hadrian confirm that Colonia Aelia Capitolina was founded about the year 132 AD, before, not after, the second war of the Jews. It was originally intended to be the emperor's gift to the Jewish people ….

My comment: Obviously no coin issued by Hadrian would be marked with “the year 132 AD”.

The Seleucid Greek colony (“Colonia”) was a prelude to the Maccabean revolt now described:

But soon after Hadrian returned to the west resentful religious reactionaries placed themselves at the head of impoverished peasants and urban malcontents and began a well-planned second war against Rome. Evidently, in munitions workshops Jewish craftsmen had deliberately spoiled weapons intended for the Roman army and stored the rejects for future use.

My comment: Enter the revolutionary Maccabees, the most outstanding of whom would be Simon – who would become known as Bar Kochba (or ben Kosiba):

Three years of vicious warfare against rebels led by Simon ben Kosiba left the emperor furious with the Jews. When the revolt was eventually crushed, Hadrian wiped off Judaea from the map [sic]. Privileges which the Jews had enjoyed from the time of Julius Caesar were revoked.

My comment: For my doubts on the historicity of ‘Julius Caesar’ and of some of the textbook Roman Republican history, see my “A New Timetable” article above, and see also:

Horrible Histories. Retracting Romans

https://www.academia.edu/36361697/Horrible_Histories._Retracting_Romans

Except for the ninth of Av, the day of mourning, the Jews faced penalties for even laying eyes on the city. Under the edicts of Hadrian the Roman administration made no distinction between Judeo-Christians and orthodox Jews – all were expelled.

Not to be thwarted, the emperor pressed ahead with his plans for the new city. His architects marked out a colony extending further north than the earlier [sic] Herodian city – its full extent is yet to be established. But Aelia would no longer be a city for the Jews. Under new Roman laws they were forbidden to live in the city or anywhere between Jerusalem and Hebron. Capital punishment faced any Jew who so much as stepped foot in the city. The Aelia which arose would make no concessions to the Jews.

The city itself, no longer the hub of a theocracy, took on the status of a minor provincial town. No major trade route passed its way and rabbinic Judaism established itself elsewhere. Caesarea, the provincial capital, became the city of choice for both the Jewish elite and ambitious artisans, attracted by the thriving port and Hellenistic lifestyle. Aelia, lost in the high country, was on the road to nowhere.

But Aelia was a city with a dimly perceived "past" that would colour a wondrous tale of a saviour god. Who would have anticipated that within a few centuries this minor provincial town would flourish as the "centre of the earth" and enjoy the dubious honour of being the maelstrom of conflict and war for the next two millennia?

Jesus in the city of Hadrian?

"Jerusalem  ... was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited." – Josephus, War VII.1,1.

"And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." – Mark 13.2.

My comment: This prophecy of Jesus was fulfilled to the letter, and there was no subsequent destruction of Jerusalem in 135 AD, in some imaginary, so-called Second Revolt:

"… there shall not be left one stone upon another”. How to explain Jerusalem today?

https://www.academia.edu/35924092/_there_shall_not_be_left_one_stone_upon_another_._How_to_explain_Jerusalem_today

The whole world knows that the gospel pageant is set in the first half of the first century. Rather more pertinent is determining precisely when and by whom the fabulous tale was concocted [sic]. The inspired religious writers of the second century [sic] – who quite possibly had no familiarity with real Jerusalem at all – would have been very aware that the city had changed drastically in a century of turmoil and war. But, in fact, that hiatus helped to establish their salvation drama as a cosmic event. The gospellers' Jerusalem was no mere geography but was the Holy City, a sacred mountain where God had communed with his chosen people.

Aelia's existence on the ruins of Jerusalem – erasing all that had gone before – underscored the transcendent and timeless nature of the gospel message. Divinity had intruded briefly into human affairs and, for the Christian story writers, the comings and goings of Jesus had been a sacred drama, occurring not in simple past and common place but in "sacred time" and "sacred space".

Sacred space is replete with a Holy of Holies, hallowed ground, Paradise, and – inevitably – an Abode of the Damned. Sacred space has place for a "centre", "four corners" and the "ends" of the earth and for a firmament that "divides the waters from the waters" (Genesis 1.6). In sacred space zodiacal coordinates and the position of the stars have meaning ("And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars" – Luke 21.25.)

Sacred time is no less a departure from rationality – and is certainly not linear, chronological and unidirectional. What importance has normal time to eternal truths or eternal beings? – a day is as a year or a millennium. Sacred time has an "In the Beginning", an "End Time", a "time before time", "first and last days" and, by inference, an indeterminate "meantime". The once and future king is always with us, his pithy "wisdom" statements are true now, have always been true, and will remain true for all time. The superhero who utters them does so in times past, present and future. In this quirky universe Joshua can make the sun stand still and a sacrificial redeemer can still live two thousand years after his death, forever dying and resurrecting.

Allegorical or supposed "higher truths" exist in a dimension all their own and a fake historicism confuses the unwary. The problem arises when the theological dreamscape is misinterpreted as literal truth and lesser minds impose the cosmic event onto a real geography and intrude a holy pageant into real history. ….

My comment: In a properly revised context, it will clearly be seen to be, not a mental imposition by “lesser minds, but “a real geography and … real history”.