Esther 2 - - Esther, Mordecai, Haman

In today's post, we will look at some other key players in the Esther story.  Let's start with the heroine.

Esther
Her name is a derivative of a Babylonian word (Ishtahar) which means “beautiful as the moon”. Hebrew is “astir”, meaning “hidden or covering or concealed”.  She is also called Hadassah, which means “Myrtle tree”, a tree which features prominently in the Jewish Feast of Sukkot (Tabernacles).  Myrtle was also used in Jewish marriage ceremonies, where the branches and leaves were worn as a garland crown.  Myrtle trees are plentiful around Jerusalem, and are often believed to represent Jerusalem, in the scriptures.  (See Zechariah 1:8-11.)
Esther comes on the scene in the seventh year of Ahasuerus' reign, about four years after Vashti has been deposed/divorced.  Esther is the ward of her first cousin, Mordecai, a high-ranking official in the Persian Empire.  Both are of the tribe of Benjamin, although both conceal their Jewish heritage through most of the story.
Esther represents the bride of Messiah, believers of all tribes and nations.  Not only that, she represents a surrendered and obedient Bride, one willing to risk her very life to accomplish the will of God.

Mordecai
Mordecai represents the True Messiah, the Second Adam, who has triumphed over His ancient enemy, Satan, and will rule and reign over Heaven and Earth forever and ever.  Mordecai's ancestors were among those who were taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar several decades earlier (Esther 2:6).  While many Jews returned in three waves to Jerusalem after King Cyrus the Great, through his appointed regent, Darius the Mede, gave them permission to go1 - - - the family of Mordecai did not return.  He became a high-ranking official in the Persian government of his day.  This is reflected by the note in Esther 2:19, that he sat at the king's gate.  This is where the high-ranking officials of the realm congregated. (See Nehemiah 11:1.)
Many Jews did not return to Jerusalem, in any of the commonly acknowledged 3 waves of return, over a 110-year period.  Even in Jesus' day, the region of Babylon remained heavily populated by Jews.  Babylon was referred to as "the East", even though the area is more to the northeast of Jerusalem.  Hence, the "wise men" or Magi, who came to bring the infant Jesus gifts, were likely Babylonian Jews, whose ancestors, like Mordecai, never left the region.  (I digress...)

It is important to look at Mordecai's family history.  We are told in Esther 2:5 that he descended from Kish, a Benjamite.
Mordecai was a humble, righteous man, who did his duty to Esther and to the king without seeking recognition or reward.  He was also discerning.  He recognized early on the danger all the Jews of the Persian empire faced if Haman were not stopped; he also recognized Esther's divinely-appointed, pivotal role in preventing their annihilation.

Haman
Although like Mordecai in that both were high-ranking governmental officials, the similarities between these two men ended there.  Introduced in Esther 3, Haman was a deceiver, a vain and arrogant man, always seeking his own promotion, regardless of the harm he caused others.  His desire for advancement was so extreme, it blinded him to the most basic truths and rules of conduct.  He is the villain of the Esther story, providing the conflict to the story's plot.  While he presents himself as a loyal servant to the King, he is merely using the king for his own evil purposes.  Haman represents in this story of God's redemption the False Messiah, the concealed False Messiah.  False Messiah is the Jewish term for the Antichrist.

Let's dig a little deeper into this business of Who's Yo Daddy?, and why it matters to this story.

Take a look with me back at 1 Samuel 9:1-2.  Who was Kish's son?  That's right, Saul, the first king of Israel.  By all appearances, Saul would have made a fine king.  Unfortunately, he turned to disobedience, and his disobedience to God figures into the Esther story.  Now, let's look at 1 Samuel 15:1-11.  Of particular interest is verse 9.

9Saul and his troops spared Agag, along with the best of the sheep and cattle, the fat calvesb and lambs, and the best of everything else. They were unwilling to destroy them ...

Do you see it?  Saul is a picture of Adam, the first man and ruler of Gan Eden (the Garden of Eden).  Adam and Saul failed to uphold righteousness.  God had commanded Saul to destroy utterly all of the Amalekites, including Agag, their king.  When Haman is called an Agagite in Esther 3:1, it means he was a descendant of Agag, who is a picture of Satan.
Once again, history repeats.  In the Esther story, we have an Agagite trying to destroy the Jews.
HAD SAUL DONE AS GOD COMMANDED HIM, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO AGAGITES, meaning, no Haman, no crisis, no pending extermination of the Jewish people, hundreds of years after Saul, in the 5th century B.C.

When we consciously disobey God, thinking we know better than He (or for whatever god-forsaken justification) we rarely can foresee the long-range consequences of our disobedience.  Thankfully, He allowed descendants of Kish to redeem that family name through their submissive obedience, because both Mordecai and Esther surrendered to His leading at this critical point in Jewish history.

As Mordecai pointed out to Esther (Esther 4:13-14), if she had said, "No!", God would have raised up someone else to deliver His chosen people.  Both Mordecai and Esther were devout Jews, who were well aware of the covenants which God had made with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David. They knew He would keep His word, which declared He would not allow His chosen ones to be utterly destroyed.  The question was, "Would Esther and Mordecai fulfill the purpose to which God had called them, in this cosmic battle?"  Would they embrace the task, risking their very lives for Him? Or, would they decline, and miss the blessing God had for them, even if that blessing was in the form of death?

Here is something that Christian martyrs have understood for two milennia, whether you are talking about first century Christian martyrs or those ruthlessly killed by Muslims in Nigeria over the past two years. 2 Yes, this genocide is still going on.  If Christians are living in the center of God's will, fulfilling His purpose for them, then death is not a punishment.  They understand that following hard after Jesus Christ, their Savior, is better than physical life and that, in the end, physical death is ... irrelevant.

Esther knew this truth too.  Not only did she know it, she acted on it.  Ultimately, her acts of submission and obedience caused glad tidings of freedom and salvation to be broadcast far and wide across the Persian Empire (Esther 8:9-14).

Sources:

1  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_to_Zion

2  https://www.christianpost.com/news/fifty-christians-burned-alive-in-pastors-home-in-nigeria-78303/

Esther 1 - - Ahasuerus and Vashti

This is the first in what I’m planning as a series of blog posts on the book of Esther.  Many of my readers are familiar with the story and even know that Jews have a celebration each year, surrounding this book of the Tanakh (Old Testament).  That celebration occurs in the spring, not long before Passover, and is called Purim (Poo-REEM). 

From whence does the name Purim come?  When you see an "im" on the end of a Hebrew word, it indicates the plural.  For example, Elohim is plural for our Triune God, Three-in-One.  Kohanim is a word that means priesthood, a plurality of priests.  The word purim means "lots".  Jewish people of the ancient world would cast lots to discern God's will in a decision, sort of like the modern-day equivalent of rolling dice.  So, you might call the Jewish Feast of Purim the Feast of Lots, or the Feast of Dice.  At various points in the Esther story, it seems that events are spiraling out of control.  They are never, however, out of God's control.  By the end of the story, the will and hand of God cause every "lot" to fall into His perfect will.

Recently, I studied the book of Esther with Dr. Jennifer Scrivner of Beth HaShomer Ministries, Joseph Good of Hatikvah Ministries, and some friends. I learned a lot about its historical connotations and symbolism.  It’s those aspects I hope to add to your understanding of this great book, as we journey through.
I am not going to re-tell the basic story here.  To refresh your memory, it is recommended you re-read Esther before jumping into these blog posts.

One of unique features of the book of Esther is that it never mentions the name of the LORD directly.  It is the only book of the Bible with this distinct feature.  Some scholars of Judaism believe The Name is hidden in various verses as an acrostic in four different verses, a concealment of sorts. Concealment, hiddenness, is a theme of the book.  A couple of examples: Mordecai and Esther concealed their Jewish heritage from the king.  Haman concealed his ulterior, evil motives from the king.
At any rate, the rabbis debated and debated whether or not to even include the book of Esther in the Tanakh, because of the fact that The Name, the Tetragrammaton (YHWH, the name of the LORD too holy to be spoken aloud) is not explicitly mentioned therein.
In the Temple, the ineffable, personal name of the L-RD was only invoked in certain areas - - the inner court (the Azarah) - - for example.  When the priests pronounced the blessing on the people, and heard that Name spoken aloud, they fell prostrate on their faces before Him.  The only other time it was said aloud was when the priest performed the annual Yom Kippur service, and then he said it 8 times in the Holy of Holies.

Along with the theme of concealment, other themes in the book have to do with the (future) False Messiah and his demonic hatred of the Jews, as well as the Messianic Kingdom of the last days. These will be developed more fully later in this study.  The date span, over which the Esther story took place, is given in the book to be between Nisan 13 and 17, roughly the dates of Passion Week, in Jesus’ day.  Again, this will become more relevant later in our study.

Now, let’s look at the key players in this story and what many scholars believe they represent.

The King (Ahasuerus)

{Parenthetical:  at this point my study truly went down a rabbit hole.  For two days, I studied the various Ahasueruses and Dariuses of the Bible. Do not proceed if you want to keep your sanity, as there were 3 different Dariuses listed in the Bible, and also 3 different Ahasueruses, lol!
Here is what I was able to put together from various sources about those rulers.}

There are 3 separate Persian dynasties which flit in and out of scripture.
1. Ahasuerus (Cyaxares I).  He had two sons: Cambyses I and Darius the Mede.  Cambyses was the father of Cyrus the Great, overarching ruler of Persia from 590-530 B.C.  During Cyrus’ reign, he appointed his uncle, Darius the Mede, as prefect/satrap over Babylon; he served in that capacity from 538-536 B.C., right after Babylon fell.) This is the Darius of Daniel 6:1 and 9:1.  Cyrus the Great was succeeded by Cambyses II, also known as Ahasuerus (the second Ahasuerus mentioned in scripture). Some believe this "second Ahasuerus" was the Ahasuerus referred to in Ezra 4.  At first, I did not believe so.  However, after careful study, I believe he actually was.  Cambyses II ruled for only about 8 years, 530-522.  The reason I believe he was the Ahasuerus of Esther and of Ezra is because of the historical dates of each ruler's reign.  This king died, leaving no heirs, a very important point.  Accordingly....
2. The next dynasty to come to power was through the Persian satrap, Hystaspes, because Cambyses II left no heirs.  Hystaspes' son was Darius I (Darius the Great), who reigned from 522-487 (Darius #2 in scripture).  Darius' son was Xerxes I (aka Ahasuerus - - the third Ahasuerus in scripture).  Xerxes I ruled from 487-465 and, as previously mentioned, some scholars believe he is the Ahasuerus of the book of Esther and Ezra 4.  Xerxes I is also sometimes called Artaxerxes, but it was actually his son who was Artaxerxes I and who succeeded him.
3. The third Darius in scripture is mentioned in Nehemiah 12:12.  This “Darius the Persian” is Darius Codomannus (336-331) of history, the last ruler of Persia before the Persian Empire was defeated by Alexander the Great.

So.....
The Persian Empire, at the time of Esther, stretched from Egypt to India (Esther 1:1 and 8:9).
The setting of the story is either 527 B.C. or 483 B.C., depending on "which Ahasuerus" you subscribe to.  After their 70 years of captivity to the Babylonians (608-538), some of the Jews had been allowed to return to Jerusalem and begin rebuilding the Temple (which was finished in 516 BC).  The story of Esther takes place during a lull in the construction of the Temple.  Therefore, if Xerxes I reigned from 486 to 465, and the Temple was completed in 516 B.C., Xerxes I would not be Esther's king.  Jewish tradition holds that Ahasuerus had halted the rebuilding for a short time and that it was during this lull that the story of Esther took place.  The prophet Ezra says this:

4  Then the people of the land set out to discourage the people of Judah and make them afraid to build. 

5  They hired counselors against them to frustrate their plans throughout the reign of Cyrus king of Persia and down to the reign of Darius king of Persia.

 6  At the beginning of the reign of Xerxes, an accusation was lodged against the people of Judah and Jerusalem.

7  And in the days of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his associates wrote a letter to Artaxerxes.

Ezra 4:4-7

A careful reading of these verses shows that the opposition to rebuilding, which had been occurring for decades, off and on since the reign of Cyrus, intensified to an accusation to King Xerxes I and an outright letter of appeal to his son, King Artaxerxes I.  The actually stoppage was ordered by Xerxes I’s son, Artaxerxes.

Here is an interesting tale about Xerxes I (just for the fun of it).  He invaded Greece with an army, it is said, of more than 2,000,000 soldiers, only 5,000 of whom returned with him. Leonidas, with his famous 300, arrested his progress at the Pass of Thermopylae, and then he was defeated disastrously by Themistocles at Salamis. Xerxes I had quite a temper.  It’s reported he was so angry at this naval loss to the Greeks, he commanded that his troops “whip the Mediterranean Sea” (with whips!) for the entire 3-day journey from Athens back to Persia!

Regardless of which Ahasuerus you subscribe to, Cambyses II or Xerxes I, the king represented ultimate authority and supreme worldly power.  Although a corrupted, idolatrous pagan, he is a picture of the authority of the Most High God.

Queen Vashti

In the Oral Torah (the Midrash), Cyrus the Persian (Cyrus the Great) and Darius the Mede were at the infamous banquet on the night King Belshazzar of Babylon died (Daniel 5:2-4). If you recall, it was at this banquet Belshazzar ordered the sacred items from the Jewish Temple brought out of storage and used as common tableware.  At that time, “the writing on the wall” appeared.  The Midrash says that in the pandemonium which took place after Daniel interpreted the writing, a chandelier fell from the ceiling onto Belshazzar, killing him instantly.  9-year old Vashti is identified as the orphaned daughter of Belshazzar. The Midrash goes on to say that King Darius the Mede married her off to Ahasuerus, his son, also known as Cambyses II, years later.  Belshazzar died in 539 B.C., and the banquet of Cambyses II (Ahasuerus) took place in 527 B.C., the third year of his reign.  If Vashti were 9 when Belshazzar died, she would have been around 21 when the banquet described in Esther took place, IF you believe the Ahasuerus of Esther was Cambyses II.
The third year of Xerxes I's reign would have been 484 B.C., which would have made Vashti somewhere in her late-60s when the story of Esther took place.  Not likely.
Regardless....

When the biblical story of Esther begins, Vashti is the Queen.  She is referred to as Queen Vashti until she refuses to answer Ahasuerus’ summons to appear before his guests at a banquet held in the third year of his reign.  After her refusal, her royal title is revoked. The divorce from Queen Vashti occurred after the infamous, royal banquet.  The Oral Torah (Midrash) states that the Esther 1:11 summons for Queen Vashti to appear “in her crown” to be actually “nothing but her crown”, in other words, to be paraded around butt-naked, which would amply explain why she refused.

Some scholars believe Vashti represents those caught up in paganism, including faux-Christian paganism, who reject King Jesus’ summons (Luke 14:16-24) and who will be replaced with the true Bride of Christ (both Gentile and Jewish believers).

We will continue in the next post, with the remaining characters in the story.

Sources:

https://biblehub.com/topical/a/ahasuerus.htm


https://www.gotquestions.org/Darius-in-the-Bible.html

Cahn, J., The Book of Mysteries: "The Cosmic Dice", p. 189, Charisma House Book Group, Lake Mary FL, 2016

https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/vashti-midrash-and-aggadah


https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.12b?lang=bi

Walking Among the Dead

Yesterday, I got to see my mother for the first time in two months by making a visit to her home.  She and I have been very careful with our covid-19 isolation.  So, we decided to take the risk of a visit.  We spent the day going for car rides around the countryside, enjoying the gorgeous North Georgia spring day.

One of mother’s “jobs” is to keep nice-looking, fake floral arrangements on the family grave plot, across the old highway from my family’s home church.  Because the four she had ordered arrived, one of our stops was at the church cemetery.  We put the retiring arrangements in the trunk of her car.  See, there is a “pecking order”, of sorts.  Our immediate family gets the newest “freshest” (an incongruent descriptor....) floral creations, while the more old, tired, faded ones are handed down to the graves of more distant relatives.  Accordingly, we next visited the graveyard where other relatives are buried, appropriating two of the arrangements there.  And finally, we visited a third cemetery, where we graced the graves of mother’s great-great-grandfather and also the graves of family friends with the remaining two.

Part of the adventure was mother remembering (or not...) where so-and-so was buried.  “I think it’s beside that large tree.”  “Well, maybe it’s the next one.”  She did the directing, as I did the searching out and placement.  All looked more “inviting” - - really?! - - than they had before our visits.

When I was a child of 5 years old, my mother worked full-time as a school guidance counselor.  She worked outside the home all my years there.  The kindergarten in those days was a private option, for those who wanted to pay tuition.  Also, it was only half-day.  Mother dropped me off in the empty garage, where the classes were held, on her way to school in the mornings.  The only other child to arrive so early was Tony, who terrorized me on a regular basis.  (That’s another story.)

At the half-day mark, another mother would retrieve me and her children, depositing me at the home of my great-grandparents, who lived right beside their home church and even closer to its cemetery.  In those days, grandparents just fed their young grandchildren and, on sunny days, let them roam.  Where did I roam?  To the cemetery, of course!  Most of the names I did not know, but I sharpened my imagination looking at their tombstones, inventing stories about their lives.  Walking among the dead.

I thought of these memories yesterday as, once again, I roamed where I had a half-century ago.

You may not have spent much time in a graveyard, but we all walk among the dead.  Some of us are “the walking dead.”

The apostle Paul stated quite frankly in Ephesians 2:4 that, before Christians were met by the Holy Spirit and brought to spiritual life, we “were dead in our trespasses and sins”.  Christians who believe so strongly in predestination to the exclusion of free will claim it is impossible for something or someone dead to make a response or to make a choice for or against Christ.  I won’t plunge off that theological precipice here.  The point is, before we meet and accept Jesus Christ as Savior, the Bible rightly claims we are dead and totally incapable of gaining our own eternal life, achieving our own salvation, no matter how “good” we try to be.

This is a deadness so much more pernicious than physical death because, whereas physical death is a one-time happening, spiritual death leads to torment for all of eternity.  A story in the book of Luke (16:23-24) tells of the man who went to Hell and proclaimed “for I am in torment”.  He also begged for a drop of water to assuage his thirst.  Though not stated, an additional dimension of this torment will be for all who enter a one-way ticket to unending separation from God.  Hell is a place God will not be.  The worst experiences endured in this earthly life would not even begin to compare.

Which is it for you?  Are you one of “the walking dead”, or are you spiritually alive, yet walking among the dead as you live here day to day?  Whatever your answer, there is an urgency.  For the non-Christian, obviously, the urgency is to make a decision for Jesus Christ, before it is too late.  For the Christian, the urgency involves seeing those whose souls are perishing.  Both graveyards and the rest of this world are places of concealment.  The physically dead are concealed in tombs.  The spiritually dead appear to the eyes like everyone else, for the most part.  Satan is famous for deception....and complacency.  He works on both groups, to spiritually damn the former and to spiritually incapacitate the latter.

I pray God will open the eyes of those who are dead, blind or sleeping, while we still walk above ground, while (as the Bible describes) “it is still day...  For the night is coming, when no man can work.”  (John 9:4)

The Role of Judaism in a Christian's Bible Study

Leviticus fragment, from https://www.templealiyah.com/Torah_Scroll_Images

In a few days, here in the blog, I am going to embark on a study of the Book of Esther.  But, before we "go there", it will be instructive to first take a look at the role of what we Christians call the Old Testament through the eyes of both ancient and modern-day Jews.  (This study has been a real eye-opener for me, someone who did not previously know a "midrash" from a radish.)

When Christians are asked, "What is the Torah?", answers will generally range from blank stares to "it is some part of the Old Testament" to "the first five books of the Old Testament, the law of Moses".  Jews refer to the 22, 24 or 29 (depending on how they are divided up) books of the Old Testament as the Tanakh (law, prophets, wisdom writings).  TaNaKh is a Hebrew acronym:

Ta = Torah = Law

Na = Nevi’im = Prophets

Kh = Ketuvim = Writings

The first five books of the Tanakh (Old Testament) are referred to as the written Torah.
It is generally accepted the Moses wrote down the first five books (Genesis-Deuteronomy), based on what God revealed to him during the days he was on Mt. Sinai.

There is also something Jews refer to as "the oral Torah".  Back in the days of Jesus, the Sadducees were a Jewish sect that adhered strictly to the written Torah as the authority for Jewish practice.  The Pharisees, by contrast, revered both the written Torah and also the oral Torah.3  Accordingly, by the time of Jesus, there existed a significant body of oral law, which was used to interpret and translate into practice the written law.  When Jews use the term "Torah" today, they are generally referring to both, and they use both in their theological practice.

The question arises: "why would the Jews, who were so obsessive about their scribes copying the holy scriptures with no errors, depend on an oral transmission of their religion?"  One compelling reason this was done was to preserve the transmission of Judaism to only Jews, and to keep holy information from falling into the hands of other people groups for whom it was believed the information was "unauthorized".  A second reason was that the Jews interpret Exodus 24:12 to give permission for an oral tradition to be established.  Here's that verse (King James 2000 version).

And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give you tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that you may teach them.

The "and commandments" referred to in this verse has been interpreted to mean "oral commandments", i.e. the oral Torah.  Another name for this oral Torah is the Talmud.
A third reason is that the ancient synagogues were not only places for the transmission of theology; they were also where civil and legal disputes were settled among the Jewish people of the community.  Much of the civil law for those communities was codified in the Talmud.  And, in ancient times, the Talmud was transmitted orally, from rabbi to student.  A student could make notes of his understandings of these oral transmissions, but there was no codified written "oral law" in those days.

All of this changed with the destruction of the Second Temple.  Remember that the first Temple was built by King Solomon.  It was destroyed by the Babylonians, yet rebuilt within approximately 100 years.  This rebuilt temple was the Second Temple.  It was enhanced a few years before Jesus' birth by one of the Herods, and being called one of the "wonders of the world", was quite magnificent in its heyday, when Jesus lived on earth.  At that time, the Talmud was "alive and well", happily being passed along orally.

However, when the Second Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., two huge problems arose with the oral tradition.  The first problem was that Jews were dispersed, which made passing along a trustworthy oral tradition challenging.  The second problem was that the practice of Judaism, as revealed in Torah, centered in large part around a physical Temple.  Accordingly, the leading rabbis of the second century A.D. published something today called the Mishnah, which is "an edited {written}record of the oral Torah"1, and includes the legal decisions of the Sanhedrin.
Today's Talmud, then, is comprised of the Mishnah and the Gemara, which comments on and interprets the Mishnah.
In dealing with the teachings of the Mishnah, the Gemara has multiple functions. It explains unclear words or phrasing. It also provides precedents or examples to assist in application of the law and offers alternative opinions from sages of the Mishnah and their contemporaries (known as Tannaim). Whereas the Mishnah barely cites biblical verses, the Gemara for nearly every law discussed introduces these connections between the biblical text and the practices and legal opinions of its time. It also extends and restricts applications of various laws, and even adds laws on issues left out of the Mishnah entirely (for example, the key observances of Hanukkah). Multiple opinions of sages are weighed against one another, often without presenting a conclusion. 2
A curious thing about the Mishnah, however, is that it's not what I'd call "uniform", "definitive" or "thou shalt".  This is because it presents differing opinions of rabbis on a variety of issues.  Hence, the old Jewish joke, "two Jews, three opinions", I guess.  But, the Mishnah's dialogues, arguments, persuasions, give us a picture of the context in which Jesus debated the sages at the Temple.

One final term you might run across is "midrash".  A midrash is both a conclusion and a commentary on the Talmud.  A midrash is a rabbinical commentary, sort of analogous to a New Testament Bible commentary.  It attempts to connect the words of the ancient texts to contemporary Jewish life.

Now, most conservative Christians are going to find these religious practices somewhat frightening.  In fact, some of my usual readers won't even finish reading this post.  As Christians there are several things pounded into us from our infancy in the Christian faith.
1.  The Old and New Testaments are divinely inspired and are free from error.   Accordingly, we can take this revealed word of God "to the bank".  "God said it, and I believe it and that settles it."
(I still believe and teach this, by the way.)
2.  "Much of the Old Testament was rendered irrelevant by the teachings of Jesus Christ, and should therefore be ignored."  Well, either the Old Testament is the Word of God, or it isn't.  I deem this position to be heretical, even though it is commonly held by many Christians. At least 33% of the New Testament is from the Old.4  Every book of the Old Testament is either quoted or alluded to in the New, except for the books of Nahum, Obadiah, Esther and Zephaniah.5  Consider Paul's admonition in Romans 15:4

For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, 

that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures

might have hope.

Remember that the Old Testament scriptures, the Tanakh, were "the scriptures" referred to in the New Testament. Keep in mind, and this should go without saying, the New Testament had not yet been written, in Jesus' day!  I believe and teach that the gospel of Jesus Christ is concealed in the Old Testament and that the Old Testament is revealed in the New.

3.  All extraneous, "extra-biblical" ancient texts should be avoided as they were rejected and are therefore heretical.
Hmmm....well, in years past I never questioned this.  However, I began to look at the Old Testament deeply.  And, much of the time, I thought to myself, "Why do Christians avoid this teaching?" "I don't understand this."  Or, "What does this mean?"  The reason these questions arose was because of Jewish idioms and ancient practices, foreign to my current day, and just a general lack of understanding of ancient Jewish culture.  While I don't believe the Talmud, for example, rises to the level of the divinely inspired Word of God, I find that it can provide context and clues to understanding.

So, as we undertake a study of the book of Esther in the coming days, please keep all of this in mind.  I may make references to some of these terms.

Sources:

1    https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/mishnah/
2    https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/gemara-the-essence-of-the-talmud/
3    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-Torah-Tanakh-Talmud-Midrash-Mishnah-and-other-similar-terms
4   http://www.biblecharts.org/newtestaament/percentageoftheoldtestamentfoundinthenewtestament.pdf
5    https://www.blueletterbible.org/study/pnt/pnt08.cfm

Enthroned Between the Cherubim

We are going to begin today's post with a brief look at the Ark of the Covenant.
As a reminder, the Ark (as I'll refer to it in this context) was established when the Israelites were at Mt. Sinai, shortly after God delivered them from Egypt.  On its lid, there were likenesses of two cherubim (Exodus 25:17-22), forming what came to be called the Kapporeth, or "Mercy Seat". 1

The Israelites carried the Ark around with them as they wandered for 40 years, brought it with them across the Jordan and kept it with them until the Philistines captured it in battle, during the judgeship of Samuel and the priestly ministry of Eli (1 Samuel 4).  It is implied in 1 Samuel 4:10-18 that the capture caused Eli to have a heart attack, fall backward out of his chair, break his neck and die.

The Ark brought death and destruction on the Philistines; as a result, they only kept it around 7 months.  They took it to a town called Kiriath-Jearim (or Baale-judah), where it remained for 20 years.   This town, in the area known as Gibeah, was about 9 miles north of Jerusalem.

Once King David moved his governmental seat from Hebron, where he reigned for 7 years, to Jerusalem, he wanted the Ark of the Covenant brought there too.  David says in 1 Chronicles 13:3 that, all during the reign of Saul, no one "inquired of the LORD"; that is, the Ark was not consulted, revered, etc.

This brings us to the central text of today's post: 1 Chronicles 13:5-14 (although the story is also recorded in 2 Samuel 6:1-11.)  Please read one or the other, as I am not going to reproduce the text here.

Saul is an object lesson for Psalm 106:15, which says:

And he gave them their request; but sent leanness into their soul.

(KJV2000)

The people of Israel had coveted their neighbors' kings, and had begged God (during the leadership of Samuel, the last judge) to give them one. Previous to this, they had been led by a succession of judges.  The catalyst to the people's request, a "hitch in the giddyup" you might say, occurred when neither of Samuel's sons was fit to succeed him, as they lacked the moral capacity to do so.
In 1 Samuel 8, God tells Samuel to warn the people that having a king was a very bad idea.  In obedience, Samuel delivered God's message quite strongly.  God told Samuel the people were not rejecting him and his family, or even the concept of leadership-by-judge, but rather that they were rejecting Him, as they had done for years.  Yet, God allowed them their king.

Saul, the first king of Israel, was a spoiled brat.  Tall and handsome, he had probably been excused and indulged, regardless of his bad behavior, his entire life to that point.  It only stands to reason he would continue to operate in a similar way as king.  In 1 Chronicles 10:13, we read that Saul was rejected by the Lord because of his unfaithfulness to him and his disobedience ("because he did not keep the LORD's word".) Instead of inquiring of the Lord, he even consulted a spiritualist, a medium, for guidance.  "Leanness" indeed.

Apostasy has consequences, many times unforeseen. 

At the time King David wanted to retrieve the Ark, it was under the care of Abinadab.  Now, there are at several schools of thought about this character.  (The name "Abinadab" occurs 12 times in the Old Testament.)
1.  Some allege he was a Levite. But, nowhere in the Hebrew Bible is he designated as such.2  Furthermore, David's comments after the Uzzah incident do not make sense if this is true.
2.  Others believe he was King David's older brother. 3  David did have an older brother by the same name, but it is unlikely he was the same person as the man whose house was entrusted with the Ark.
3.  Still others contend this was the same Abinadab as the son of King Saul. 4   However, there is nothing in the scriptures to verify this, as nowhere are sons of this particular Abinadab listed.  He was killed, along with his father Saul, in battle.  He may not have had sons at all.
4.  Finally, some believe this Abinadab was none of the above, but an obscure Gibeonite. 5 The Ark had been kept undisputedly in the area called Gibeah.  Gibeonites were not by-blood Israelites, but had made a crafty deal with Joshua many years earlier, deceiving him into not destroying that people (Joshua 9).  Accordingly, they became the bond-servants of the Israelites, and it was to them the Ark was entrusted when the Philistines rejected it. I believe this to be the most likely explanation.

The Abinadab at the center of this story had a son named Eleazer, the first son consecrated to care for the Ark, when it came to the house of Abinadab, from the Philistines.  However, the Ark was with this family, or "house", for 20 years.  At the time David sought to retrieve it, Eleazar was not mentioned.  He could have died.  Regardless, the two young men mentioned as guiding the cart with the Ark, as it progressed down the hill, were "of the house of Abinadab" and kinsmen of Eleazar.

So, the first problem in this story is that we see men who were not Levitical priests caring for the Ark.  This had gone on for many years.  God had long ago ordained the "sons of Kohath" (Numbers 4:14) to be the custodians and caretakers of this holy article.  But, because apostasy had crept in, it was no longer so.  Saul had scant regard for the Ark, and David had some ignorance about its care, at this point.

Coming down the hill, the cart tipped and, to keep the Ark from falling, Uzzah reached out his hand to steady it.  God immediately struck him dead.  God's action seems rash, until you consider He had been extremely forbearing, because the Ark had not been properly "handled" for many years.  It had been allowed to reside in the house of non-Israelites, first the Philistines and later the Gibeonites. Scripture records Uzzah's death made David angry, but that it also caused him to "fear" (have appropriate awe and reverence for) the Lord. 

In fact, he was so freaked out, he directed the Ark be carried to the house of Obed-edom.  (There is a similar controversy about exactly who this man was also, but I figure you've had enough of that sort of thing.  So, I'm not going to go into it, lol.)  During the brief 3 months the Ark remained with Obed-edom, the Lord blessed him and his house.  After 3 months, David had the Ark brought to Jerusalem - - this time doing it God's way, along with great pomp, circumstance and celebration. 

Lesson learned.

Note 1 Chronicles 15:2 - -

Then David said, “No one but the Levites may carry the ark of God, because the LORD has chosen them to carry the ark of the LORD and to minister before Him forever.”

(BSB)

And again the words of David, in  1 Chronicles 15:13 - - 

It was because you Levites were not with us the first time that the LORD our God burst forth in anger against us. For we did not consult Him about the proper order.”

(BSB)

What are the lessons we can learn from this story?  Why do you think God allowed its inclusion in two different books of the Bible?  Here are some that occur to me.  Feel free to add your own thoughts in the comments of this post.

1.  God is holy and expects His worshippers to respect His ways. Obedience, with reverence and awe.
2.  Satan has been tempting humans to question God's ways since he asked Eve in the Garden of Eden this question: "Did God really say that?"
3.  Our ways, are not God's ways, but our ways can seem oooohhhhh so appealing.
4.  There are always consequences when we ignore or conveniently make excuses to work around God's precepts.  They may not be immediately apparent, but consequences will eventually come.  And, sometimes consequences fall on those who were not the cause of the original apostasy.  David was the prime decision-maker in this story, although Uzzah ended up being the one whose life was taken.

Yes, God is Love (1 John 4:7) and Mercy.  But, he is also Light, and Holiness and Truth.  While His methods of dealing with people have varied over the centuries, His essential character has not changed.  He is changeless, immutable.  Our loving God is "the LORD who is enthroned between the cherubim"  (2 Samuel 6:2)

Sources:

1 http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/The%20Ark%20of%20the%20Covenant.htm
2 https://globalchristiancenter.com/christian-living/lesser-known-bible-people/31309-the-house-of-abinadab-and-the-ark-of-god
3  https://www.bibleabookoftruth.com/KingDavidsFamily.pdf
4  https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/encyclopedia-of-the-bible/Abinadab
5  https://www.biblestudytools.com/encyclopedias/isbe/abinadab.html

From the Birds

4/2/20

House wrens are so called because they love to build their nests in eaves, porch overhangs and in other crevices of homes here in the South.  They are small, rather nondescript brown birds, with a long-ish beak.  Several live on our property.

Our house has a front porch, with a pot of ivy on a plant stand beside the front door.  The plant is very hardy; otherwise, I would have killed it by now.  Each year, a house wren burrows down into the planter to build a nest.  This year, she produced 4 eggs, pictured above.

The poor bird's nesting season has not been free from trouble.  All three of us quarantined "inmates" have enjoyed soaking up the sun on the front porch in the afternoons.  Although we have tried to be generous, we have frustrated mama bird, no doubt.  Yesterday, Hubs came inside saying she had "run him off".  When I asked how she did that, he replied that she "makes her presence known" and won't approach the nest while he is out there.

Remarkably, she has become a bit accustomed to us, allowing me to peer into the nest while she is roosting, as long as I don't get too close.  For days, I would go out and take a peek.  If she was on the nest, I would back away.  But, I got the photo one day while she was out. 
It seemed to take too long for the eggs to hatch.  I was worried we had disrupted the natural course of things so much that they would no longer be viable.  Then, there was the tornado warning the night of Easter Monday... I lamented, as Hubs re-arranged the patio furniture, that high winds might blow the planter off its perch and harm our little avian "family".  Hubs replied if that happened, we'd have much bigger problems than a nest of birds.

Still, I fretted.  Maybe they would hatch on Easter?  No.  The day after?  No.
Finally, on Tuesday after Easter, I peered in and saw four little birdie bodies, newly hatched.  Based on previous experience, in no time they will "fly the coop".

"His Eye is on the Sparrow"....

This well-known gospel song is a favorite of my cousin Robert's, who would often sing it in church when I was a child.  The song was inspired by Jesus' words in Matthew 10:29 and also 6:26.

Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin? And not one of them falls to the ground apart from your Father’s will.

Matthew 10:29 (NKJV)

Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?

Matthew 6:26 (ESV)

I had already planned to blog on this topic today, because it is so relevant to the many anxieties we allow ourselves to stumble into during this Time of the 'Rona.
Then, this morning in my devotional reading, the text was Psalm 84.  Look at verses 3-4.
Isn't God good!

3Even the sparrow has found a home,

and the swallow a nest for herself,

where she places her young near Your altars,

O LORD of Hosts, my King and my God.

4How blessed are those who dwell in Your house;

they are ever praising You.

Psalm 84:3-4 (BSB)

"...she places her young near Your altars..." 
I know this is poetic language, but wow!
She does her best and then trusts God.  Oh, may I do that, concerning my "young"!

Not all birds "make it".  The Berry College Eagles lost both their eggs this season.1
Yet, no matter what, God is in control.  Trust His plan and His timing.
As many of us are "dwelling in our houses" during these 'Rona Days, may we also seek to dwell in His house, and to ever be praising Him!

Source:

1.   berry.edu/eaglecam

The Balaam Balak Backstory

I have resisted writing this post for 3 weeks.
Ever since the covid-19 quarantine began, I've been in a strange sort of paralysis, reverting to "survival mode".  It has been one of the oddest things I've ever walked through.

So, finally, Balaam?
What do you know about him?
The infamous donkey-beating incident, right?
That's the "Bible story" we hear in Sunday School: Balaam was not a nice man because he beat a donkey.  I was amazed at what I found, digging deeper.

The story takes place just before the Israelites had crossed the Jordan River into the Promised Land.  On the "wilderness side" of the Jordan, God had just given them a huge military victory over Kings Og and Sihon, of the Amorites.  Word of these major wins spread to the land all the way to the Mediterranean coastline.  All peoples in the Levant became filled with dread and terror over the Israelites.  King Balak of Moab was one such king thus affected.

During this time period, the following territories east of the Jordan ran north to south, like pearls on a string:

• Amorites (Og and Sihon) - - present-day Syria
• Ammonites - not to be confused with the Amalekites (who were a Canaanite people west of the Jordan)
• Moabites - where Ruth was from
• Edomites - Esau's descendants
• Midianites - - present-day Sinai Peninsula

Balaam was a non-Israelite prophet who lived in the city of Pethor, in Mesopotamia, north and east of these aforementioned territories - - over by the Euphrates River.  (This was the general area the Wise Men of nativity fame were from.)  Balaam apparently had some fame as a prophet, because the king of Moab knew about him.  So, the king of Moab, Balak, sent a delegation with riches to entice Balaam to come to Moab and curse the Israelites.

Now, here's the curious thing:  Balaam knew who Yahweh was, and he HEARD from him!  So, Balaam was not a false prophet, as far as receiving actual, genuine prophecies from God was concerned.  God chose to reveal Himself to him.
But, he was a wicked prophet1 (and not just because he beat the donkey).

To make a long story short(er), Balaam received permission from God to go with Balak's representatives, but it was one of those "I'll give you what you want, but you will regret it" types of scenarios.  To express His displeasure, God sent an angel to block the road Balaam and the ambassadors were traveling on.  The donkey could see the angel and, quite rightly, stopped, refusing to go on.  Balaam could not see the angel, and so beat the donkey in frustration.  Here we see the odd "talking donkey" of the Bible, because God allowed the donkey spoke to Balaam in an effort to save her life.
Well, Balaam went on to Moab and tried three times to please the king by cursing Israel, but God only sent blessings to be pronounced by this wicked prophet.
The highly displeased king sent Balaam home empty-handed (no riches).  Before he left, he graced the Moabite king with four more prophecies about Israel, all of them favorable, and one of them "famous".  Did you know Balaam spoke these words?!  (I didn't.)

I see him, but not now;

I behold him, but not near.

A star will come forth from Jacob,

and a scepter will arise from Israel.

Numbers 24:17

This is a Messianic prophecy, a prophecy about the coming of Jesus Christ.  Wow, God truly can use any human, and He uses whom He wishes to accomplish His purposes and bring Himself glory! (I find it curious that, like the natal "Wise Men of the East", Balaam studied astronomy....hmmmm...)

So, you probably think Balaam went home after blessing Israel 7 times, and that was that, right?  I mean, that's what it says in Numbers 24:25!  When you move ahead into the next chapter, you find the Israelites committing idolatry by marrying Moabite women and polluting their households with the Moabite idols.  This led to the infamous Peor incident, which reached epic proportions of grossness in Numbers 25.

Ahhhh, but between chapters 24 and 25 key information is left out, information explaining how the Israelites got to that point.

Look at Numbers 31:8.  Here it is recorded that the Israelites killed Balaam with the sword.  The logical question is, "Whoa...wait a minute, WHAT?!"  The last time Balaam was mentioned chronologically in Numbers he had passed along prophecies of blessings, seven of them, on Israel.
What happened?!

To get the answer we must look at the Talmud, an ancient rabbinical book of history and theology, as well as two other key verses of Holy Scripture.  Let's start with the Scripture.

This is the Lord Jesus speaking, in the Spirit, via John, to the Church at Pergamum:

But I have a few things against you, because some of you hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to place a stumbling block before the Israelites so they would eat food sacrificed to idols and commit sexual immorality.

Revelation 2:14 (BSB)

They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Beor, who loved the wages of wickedness.

2 Peter 2:15 (BSB)

From these two verses,
it's reasonable to conclude that, perhaps when he was with Balak on Mt. Peor (Numbers 23:28), looking out over the "wasteland" (wilderness of Jeshimon), Balaam hatched an idea to infiltrate the Israelites from within.  Make no mistake, Balaam desired God to deliver through him a curse on the Israelites, because he wanted "the wages of wickedness" from Balak.  When God did not "come through", wicked Balaam at some point advised Balak to entice the Israelites to marry the Moabite women of the area.  Over a course of years, this occurred, leading up to the utterly vile idolatry associated with the false god (ba'al) of Peor.

Here's where the history books like the Talmud become helpful.  In Hebrew, the root of the word Peor is p'r, which means "opening".  It can either allude to the one that speaks words or the one that expels waste.  The Talmud recounts that Ba'al of Peor was a false, demonic god that required public defecation as an act of worship.  It is said that in front of a huge statue of the demon "god" on Mt. Peor was the equivalent of a huge "poop pit", to facilitate this particular form of worship.2
I ... kid you not.  Perhaps Balaam, from Mt. Peor, was looking out over a "wasteland" in more than one sense of the word....

Let's back up and look more closely at those three places Balak took Balaam, to have him curse Israel.  All three were mountain peaks, and all three were sites of pagan worship.  At each site, Balaam ordered an altar be built and sacrifices offered to the One, True God, Yahweh, the God of Israel.  Each time, a sacrifice offered, but surrounded by pagan altars.  God is a jealous God, which means He does not share His glory with false gods, nor does He like syncretism, the toleration/mixture of true and false religion.  (Our home Bible study is currently studying this phenomenon in our study of the book of Hosea, although it is rampant throughout the Bible, actually.)

Now, given what you have learned about Ba'al of Pe'or, does God's wrath toward the Israelites seem misplaced?  Or, does it appear entirely justified?  You decide, but I know what I think.  What a repulsive form of idolatry!  No wonder God's anger burned hot!

And, no wonder the Israelites later killed Balaam when given the chance.

During this coronavirus confinement I've seen our household lose money, lots of it.  And, I've been confronted with my responses to those financial blows.  They were not always godly ones.  Balaam lost everything because he was seduced by "the wages of wickedness".  Money meant more to him than it should have.  That is a sobering lesson to me.

That being said, I pray for those who are not just losing money, but that are losing their entire livelihoods as a result of this national crisis.  Not to mention those who are losing their very lives!  Story after story on the news, on Twitter, on Facebook here locally...  Please join me in praying for them too, because our idols can't get us through this.  There's only one, true God, who can.

Sources:

1  https://www.gotquestions.org/Balaam-in-the-Bible.html
2   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy_of_Peor