Let’s continue in our study of Esther by reading the first verse of chapter 5. {I’m using the Peshitta Holy Bible Translated version today.}
1And on the third day Esthir wore the clothing of the kingdom, and she stood in the inner court of the house of the King, next to the house of the King, and the King was sitting on the throne of the Kingdom, next to the door of the house.
This chapter opens with the words “Now it came to pass on the third day”, which begs the question, “on the third day of what?” Some translations add “of the fast”, and it seems obvious that this is what is meant.
Let’s do a little timeline work here. You might want to make yourself a little chart. When Esther and Mordecai were passing notes back and forth, this was Nisan 13, the same day that Haman cast the lots and effected the evil decree in the name of the king. So, most commentators affirm that the Esther fast would have begun on the night that began the 14th. Day two of the fast would have begun the following night, the night that began Nisan 15 (Passover), and day three of the fast would have begun on the evening that began Nisan 16. It was on this day, the third day, that Esther girded herself for spiritual battle. She put on her royal robes.
Do you think that was a significant act on Esther’s part? To dress herself in the clothing that befitted the occasion? Yes, indeed! There are many instances in the Scriptures that speak of being properly clothed for a specific task or occasion. I’ll bet you can name some of them. Here are a few:
***God Himself clothed Adam and Eve, in the skins of animals slain for that purpose
***Isaiah, in chapter 52, exhorted his people to put on their garments of splendor.
***In Leviticus, the priest was instructed to put on the linen garments in preparation for his most holy tasks
***David rejected King Saul’s heavy armor and clothed himself so as to enable himself to freely use his slingshot
***And, one of the more famous instances of “suiting up” for the task ahead is in Ephesians 6, when the follower of Yeshua is instructed to “put on the whole armor of God”.
Did Esther’s wearing royal robes help her case? The sages seem to think it did, although the Scriptures do not explicitly say. However, it IS safe to say tht when the king looked up and beheld her, he beheld a dazzling “vision of loveliness”. Knowing the inclinations of men, it could not have hurt, right?
I love the way the Peshitta puts it: she wore the clothing of the kingdom... I want to explore that a bit more at the end of today’s teaching, if time permits. We’ll see.
Esther was clothed in royal robes, but she was also covered in many fervent prayers, and she was cloaked in humility. Did she go barging in? No, she stood in the inner court, in the line of sight of the king, and waited to be recognized.
Verse 2 - -
2And when the King saw Esthir the Queen standing in the court, she also received favor before him, and the King reached toward Esthir the scepter of gold which was in his hand, and Esthir came near and she held to the top of the scepter of gold.
In our part of the world, the USA, we do not have a political class of people called “royalty”. Therefore, it is rare we see a scepter. But, in the ANE, the ruler’s scepter was a symbol of his rulership and authority. Often, these were very beautiful objects, made of gold, other precious metals, and decorated with many jewels. The scepter and the crown were both quite ostentatious and expensive. Usually, the scepter was in the shape of a rod or a staff. This reminds me of Psalm 23:4, which ends with “your rod and your staff they comfort me”. A shepherd used his staff as a necessary tool in protecting his sheep. Similarly, when King Ahasuerus extended the gold scepter to Esther, and once she extended her hand to touch it, he had symbolically welcomed her into his domain.
Vs. 3 - -
3And the King said to her: “What do you have, Queen Esthir, and what is your request? Unto the half of my kingdom shall be given to you!”
The king may not have been the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he knew the Queen had not come into his presence merely to “hang out”. He, too, was aware of the risk she was taking, to appear before him, unsummoned and unannounced. He assumed that her request was of an urgent and serious nature. This is what led him to promise to give her up to half of his kingdom.
It is here that Esther says and does a most unusual thing.
Vs. 4 - -
4And Esthir said: “If it is good unto the King, let the King and Haman come to the banquet that I have made for him.”
Don’t you find that response odd? The king must have certainly been intrigued by it. “She risked her life to invite me and Haman to a banquet....hmmmm....” What would you have said? Most of us might have just plunged right into our request, figuring we might not get such a chance later on. Some of us might have thrown ourselves to the king’s feet and begged for mercy. After all, it was a dark and desperate hour! But, Esther remains regal, sheds not one tear, and simply issues a lavish invitation, like she was Martha Stewart! (Esther DOES cry later, as we shall see...but not at this point.)
Let’s closely examine what Esther actually said in verse 4. She invited two men to the banquet, but then expressed she had made the banquet for only one of them. Which “him” is the banquet for?! If it’s for the king, well, then why in the world is she inviting Haman. Yes, he IS the second-in-command over all of Persia. But...why? And, if the banquet is for Haman, well, that conjecture is even more horrible in the eyes of the king. Why would she be doing that?
Note that Esther had the banquet already prepared, even when she made the request of the king. Esther was not “flying by the seat of her pants” in any of this endeavor. She had carefully planned.
What was the king’s response? He had promised to grant her request, up to half his kingdom, so what else could he say to this invitation, but “yes”.
Vs. 5 - -
5And the King said: “Quickly, see Haman. He shall do according to what Esthir said!” And the King and Haman came to the banquet.
Understandably, the king was eager to have Haman found and brought onto the scene so that this already-prepared banquet could proceed. In short order, there they were, and things only seem to get worse, from the king’s perspective, when he asks Esther to make her request. Again, he assures her he will grant it, up to half his kingdom. But, again, look at Esther’s puzzling response!
Vs. 6 - -
And the King said to Esthir at the banquet of wine: “What is your request? It shall be given to you, and what is your request? Unto the half of the kingdom it shall be given to you!”
What was this “banquet of wine”? It was the Persian custom to drink only water with the meats and main meal, and to have fruits and wine at the end. You might say that the king showed remarkable restraint by not asking Esther’s petition, and renewing his offer, until “the dessert course”.
Once again, Esther gives a puzzling response.
Vs. 7 and 8 - -
And Esthir answered and she said: “My request and my petition, If I have found affection in your eyes, oh King, and if it is beautiful unto you oh King, that you give me my request and you will perform for me my request, the King and Haman will come to the banquet that I shall make for them tomorrow, according to the answer of the King.”
Now, again, we have a tantalizing pronoun that dropped from Esther’s lips with this invitation. Whereas in the first invitation, she indicated the banquet was for “him”, this time she says she is making the banquet for “them”. She does, then, go on to affirm that at the next banquet she would make her petition, hinting that her petition would be a big one, because it would be in keeping with the king’s offer to give her half his kingdom.
Some commentators have the idea that Esther was deliberately planting into the mind of the king jealousy and suspicion of both her and of Haman. But, why would she want to do that, to play such a dangerous game? Perhaps she thought that if she could bring Haman down, that it did not matter if she went down with him as “collateral damage”.
Perhaps Esther thought to throw Haman off-guard. No doubt he was at the very least curious and most likely a little apprehensive at being invited to the first strange banquet. But, after having a thoroughly enjoyable experience, he left feeling confident and joyful, believing there was no one of his status in all the kingdom.
Vs. 9 and 10 - -
And Haman went out on that first day, and he was merry in his heart, and when Haman saw Murdacai who sat in the gate of the King, and he did not arise, and he was not moved by him, Haman was filled with anger against Murdacai. And Haman was enraged, and he went on to his house, and he sent out, and all his friends came, and Zaresh his wife.
But, Haman’s joy was short-lived. He again saw the unbowing Mordecai at the gate, and his heart was filled with rage. There is no disappointment so great as that which is tied to great joy.
It is one thing to find out you did not get the job. It’s another to learn you were the second choice.
It’s one thing to know you are not the valedictorian, but instead are the salutatorian, and that the person who edged you out did so by less than one percentage point.
You get the drift. Haman went from the heights of joy to the depths of despair, in a split second. Even so, he remembered that he had a plan for Mordecai. So, he restrained himself in that moment and went on home. Once there, he organized a huge “pity party” for himself.
The other day, a good friend called me. She has a new boyfriend, and she just wanted someone to tell about how in love she is. Sometimes, you just need your besties around you, to share the joy and the sorrows of life, as you are called to move through them. So, he gathered to himself his wife and his friends and he then began to unburden his soul to them.
Vs. 11-13
11And Haman related to them the glory of his wealth and the multitude of his children, and that the King had promoted him and had raised him over the Princes and over all the Servants of the King. 12And Haman said: “And Esthir brought no man with the King except me, also tomorrow I am invited by her with the King. 13And all this is not enough for me every time that I see Murdacai the Jew sitting in the gate of the King without moving before me.
This tale of woes takes place as the 16th of Nisan is waning and the 17th is approaching, by the way. What we are witnessing here is a prime example of “never enough”. Haman was one of the most covetous people in Scripture. He plainly states, after a recitation of his many riches and promotions, his wonderful family, and his exclusive access to the king and queen that “this is not enough for me”.
Haman’s maniacal recitation in these verses reveal more than any other his evil character. Have you ever wondered why “Thou Shalt Not Covet” was one of God’s “10 Commandments”? For years, I wondered why that was so important. Yet, we see it here as the last item in the list.
Exodus 20:17 (NASB)
“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male slave, or his female slave, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”
The Peshitta puts the verb as “lust after”. So, what is so wrong about wanting something that someone else has? It’s just an idle fancy after all … isn’t it? Well, no. The Messiah, Yeshua, said, for example, that when a person looked at another person and lusted after him or her, adultery had already been committed in the heart (Matthew 5:28). And, similarly, lusting after another’s possession, coveting what (or whom) someone else has, rarely stops with the fanning the flames of desire. Most often, horrible, grasping actions follow.
In Haman’s case, though, his insane desire for worship from Mordecai, goes beyond wanting what another human possessed, but to wanting what belongs to God alone. His name is Jealous, He says in Exodus 20:5 and 34:14. So, actually, Haman was breaking both the first AND the tenth commandments, with his confession that all the blessings he had been given were simply not enough for him, that nothing short of unanimous worship would do. What a “god complex”!
We will see, as the story unfolds, that Haman will lose every one of the blessings he boasted of in verses 11 and 12. In fact, it was at this time, in the latter hours of Nisan 16 into Nisan 17 that Haman’s “star” began to fall. Up until this time, he had seemed to be on quite the upward trajectory, with the pinnacle being his invitation to Queen Esther’s banquet on the 16th.
The sages say that Zeresh, Haman’s wife, was every bit as evil as he was. She’s about to give him an Advil. Let’s see what she says in verse 14, as we wind up this chapter.
14And Zaresh his wife said to him and all his friends: “Let them make a cross whose height is fifty cubits, and at dawn speak to the King, and they shall hang Murdacai upon it, and enter the banquet with the King as you are rejoicing!” And the matter was very pleasing in his eyes of Haman, and he made the cross.
The commentators have wondered at the choice of death instruments here, for several reasons. One of the prevailing opinions has been down through the centuries that Almighty God had not rescued a Jew from hanging, before, whereas lions’ dens, fiery furnaces seemed to pose little problem to the God of the Jews. Those, and other methods that had failed, were rejected. There is one wild midrashic opinion that Haman was unable to find a 50-cubit high (75-feet tall) beam with which to build the structure and so his son, Parshandasa, who was the governor of the Mt. Ararat area sent him a 75-foot beam that had been part of Noah’s ark! That seems a bit far-fetched....pun intended...
When I decided to use the Peshitta translation for today’s teaching, I did not look ahead down the text. Therefore, when I encountered the English word “cross” where I expected to see “gallows”, I was surprised. I then compared verse 14 across several translations. Here’s what I found:
Stake (sharpened pole) - 2
Pole – 2
Gallows – 22
Cross – 1
Beam – 1
Tree – 2
Why the variety? Dr. Abraham J. Berkovitz studied this anomaly and concluded that the translators allowed themselves to be influenced by their culture’s most prominent forms of capital punishment. I quote:
"Just as early modern translators imagined Haman being killed by a method with which they were familiar, ancient Greek translators also imagined something familiar to them, namely crucifixion, the standard Roman punishment which most resembles impaling.
The LXX (Septuagint) translates Ahasuerus’ command about Haman as “crucify him upon it,” from the Greek word “stauro-” (σταυρόω).[7] Similarly, the Latin Vulgate refers to the pole upon which Haman and then his sons are hung as patibulum, meaning 'cross.' ”
Dr. Berkovitz believes that “stake” is the most likely true depiction of the device, and that Haman was impaled upon it, rather than having a rope cast around his neck, after which he soon swung through the air. It was apparently very common in ancient Persia to humiliate one’s enemies in death by impalement.
That sort of colors how we look at Haman’s death instrument, does it not?
At any rate, Zeresh’s remedy for Haman’s angst was for him to be proactive, to go on the offensive, to plan accordingly and then to seek the king’s permission in the morning, after which he could attend the banquet later in the day, in the best mood possible. Haman thought this was excellent advice. So, he got busy having the structure built. This went on well into the evening. It is unlikely Haman even slept, because we will see at the beginning of chapter six that “in the wee hours” he was in the king’s palace. Zeresh has advised him to approach the king “in the morning”, but she certainly did not mean he should go well before dawn!
Like many of us, when we are not seeking God’s ways about a particular project, we have what is commonly called “tunnel vision”. We either refuse to see or are too blinded by our own desires to see that we are heading toward calamity. We don’t seek the Lord and His will about it, because we don’t want to! We really don’t want to hear what he has to say about the matter. We want what we want and that’s all we want. And, we want it as quickly as possible!
But, you see, in jumping the gun to kill Mordecai, Haman has “outed himself”. He has moved past obsession to becoming mentally unhinged. The Haman of earlier chapters would never have acted in such a manner. Formerly, he had been very conscious of appearances, and the way he presented the annihilation of an entire people group was masterfully thought out and craftily done. The whole idea for exterminating the entire Jewish population was to make it seem that his vendetta against Mordecai was not “personal”. Building a gallows in your backyard, and designating it for one man, however, is quite personal. It’s about as personal as one can get! Appearing petty seems to be the least of Haman’s concerns. He believes he is now untouchable.
It seemed like a great idea, at the time. And, given Haman’s track record with the king, it just might have worked, except for one thing: INSOMNIA.
Let’s now re-visit the concept of “the clothing of the kingdom”. You know, the Bible makes a big deal out of having the right clothes for the occasion, and that they be “suitable” clothes, if again you’ll pardon the pun. I’m just full of them today.
For instance,
***Adam and Eve tried to clothe themselves appropriately, after their sin in Gan Eden, but it was God Himself who covered them with “the right clothes” for that occasion. This was the first shedding of the blood of an animal, to cover sin. A fig leaf just was not gonna get it. The needed the clothing of the kingdom.
***John the Baptist, Yochannon the Immerser, when he was in the desert preparing for his ministry....what did he wear? He wore a scratchy, itchy garment made of camel’s hair, held onto his body by a leather belt. The clothes of the kingdom.
And, as one last example,
***in the parable of the banquet, in Matthew 22 - - there was the matter of the wedding guest coming to the wedding banquet without the proper wedding garment to wear.
So, like many of the examples in Scripture, we need to be sure we are properly clothed to fulfill our role in the kingdom of God, to do the calling our Messiah has put upon our lives. And, although the examples I gave just now involved physical clothes, there is also the “sod’ meaning, the deeper meaning of clothing ourselves in righteousness.
