In the story of Esther its a whole different set of circumstances. But ultimately its still about life...
Here is some more commentary from "Be Committed."
Not content with merely having a high office and using it, Haman wanted all the public recognition and honor that he could secure. Although the ancient people of the Near East were accustomed to giving public displays of homage, the king had to issue a special edict concerning Haman, or the people would not have bowed down to him. Haman was a small man in a big office; and the other nobles, more worthy than he, would not willingly recognize him. This fact is another hint that Haman got the office not by earning it but by stealing it. If he were a worthy officer, the other leaders would have gladly recognized him.
Pride blinds people to what they really are and makes them insist on having what they really don’t deserve. The British essayist Walter Savage Landor (1775–1864) wrote, “When little men cast long shadows, it is a sign that the sun is setting.” Haman was a little man, indeed, but his vanity compelled him to make himself look and sound bigger than he really was.
“Fools take to themselves the respect that is given to their office,” wrote Aesop in his fable “The Jackass in Office”; and it applies perfectly to Haman. He was recognized, not because of his character or his ability, but because of the office he filled and because of the edict of the king. “Try not to become a man of success,” said Albert Einstein, “but try to become a man of value.” Men and women of value earn the recognition they deserve.
Haman’s promotion may have brought out the worst in Haman, but it brought out the best in Mordecai; for Mordecai refused to pay homage to Haman. It must be remembered, however, that the Jews didn’t violate the Second Commandment (Ex. 20:4–6) when they bowed down before people in authority any more than Christians do today when they show respect to leaders. For instance, Abraham bowed down to the sons of Heth when he negotiated with them for Sarah’s grave (Gen. 23:7). Also Joseph’s brothers bowed down before Joseph, thinking he was an Egyptian official (42:6). David even bowed down to Saul (1 Sam. 24:8), and Jacob and his family bowed before Esau (Gen. 33:3, 6–7). The Jews even bowed to one another. (See 2 Sam. 14:4 and 18:28.)
There were crowds of people at the gate, and some of them would be pleading for Haman to intercede for them. Consequently, Haman didn’t notice that Mordecai was standing up while everybody else was bowing down. The other officials at the gate questioned Mordecai about his behavior, and it was then that Mordecai openly announced that he was a Jew (Es. 3:3–4). For several days, the royal officials discussed the matter with Mordecai, probably trying to change his mind; and then they reported his behavior to Haman. From that time on, Haman watched Mordecai and nursed his anger, not only toward the man at the gate, but also toward all the Jews in the empire.
Why did Mordecai refuse to bow down to Haman? What was there about being a Jew that prohibited him from doing what everybody else was doing? Even if Mordecai couldn’t respect the man, he could at least respect the office and therefore the king who gave Haman the office.
I think the answer is that Haman was an Amalekite, and the Amalekites were the avowed enemies of the Jews. The Lord swore and put in writing that He had declared war on the Amalekites and would fight them from generation to generation (Ex. 17:16). How could Mordecai show homage to the enemy of the Jews and the enemy of the Lord? He didn’t want to be guilty of what Joab said about King David, “You love your enemies and hate your friends” (2 Sam. 19:6, NKJV).
Mordecai’s controversy with Haman was not a personal quarrel with a proud and difficult man. It was Mordecai’s declaration that he was on God’s side in the national struggle between the Jews and the Amalekites. Mordecai didn’t want to make the same mistake his ancestor King Saul had made in being too lenient with God’s enemies (1 Sam. 15). Because Saul compromised with the Amalekites, he lost his crown; but because Mordecai opposed them, he eventually gained a crown (Es. 8:15).
Keep in mind that the extermination of the Jews would mean the end of the messianic promise for the world. The reason God promised to protect His people was that they might become the channel through whom He might give the Word of God and the Son of God to the world. Israel was to bring the blessing of salvation to all nations (Gen. 12:1–3; Gal. 3:7–18). Mordecai wasn’t nurturing a personal grudge against Haman so much as enlisting in the perpetual battle God has with those who work for the devil and try to hinder His will in this world (Gen. 3:15).
Mordecai is not the only person in the Bible who for conscience’ sake practiced “civil disobedience.” The Hebrew midwives disobeyed Pharaoh’s orders and refused to kill the Jewish babies (Ex. 1:15–22). Daniel and his three friends refused to eat the king’s food (Dan. 1), and the three friends also refused to bow down to Nebuchadnezzar’s image (Dan. 3). The apostles refused to stop witnessing in Jerusalem and affirmed, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). That statement can be a wonderful declaration of faith or a cowardly evasion of responsibility, depending on the heart of the person saying it.
But please note that, in each of these instances, the people had a direct word from God that gave them assurance they were doing His will. And further note that, in every instance, the believers were kind and respectful. They didn’t start riots or burn down buildings “for conscience’ sake.” Because civil authority is ordained of God (Rom. 13), it’s a serious thing for Christians to disobey the law; and if we’re going to do it, we must know the difference between personal prejudices and biblical convictions.
Something else is involved: By confessing that he was a Jew, Mordecai was asking for trouble for both himself and the other Jews in the empire. Obedience to conscience and the will of God in defiance of civil law is not a casual thing to be taken lightly. Some of the “conscience protesters” we’ve seen on television, however, have seemed more like clowns going to a party than soldiers going to a battle. They could never stand with people like Martin Luther who challenged prelates and potentates with: “My conscience is captive to the Word of God. Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise!”
Mordecai may have had shortcomings with reference to his religious practices, but we must admire him for his courageous stand. Certainly God had put him and Esther into their official positions so that they might save their people from annihilation. Their neglect of the Jewish law is incidental when you consider their courage in risking their lives.
Like a cancerous tumor, Haman’s hatred for Mordecai soon developed into hatred for the whole Jewish race. Haman could have reported Mordecai’s crime to the king, and the king would have imprisoned Mordecai or perhaps had him executed; but that would not have satisfied Haman’s lust for revenge. No, his hatred had to be nourished by something bigger, like the destruction of a whole nation. As with Judas in the Upper Room, so with Haman in the palace: he became a murderer. Mark Twain called anti-Semitism “the swollen envy of pygmy minds.” And he was right.
4. His subtlety (Es. 3:7–15a)
Follow the steps that wicked Haman took as he executed his plan to destroy the Jewish people.
He selected the day (Es. 3:7). Haman and some of the court astrologers cast lots to determine the day for the Jews’ destruction. This was done privately before Haman approached the king with his plan. Haman wanted to be sure that his gods were with him and that his plan would succeed.
The Eastern peoples in that day took few important steps without consulting the stars and the omens. A century before, when King Nebuchadnezzar and his generals couldn’t agree on a campaign strategy, they paused to consult their gods. “For the king of Babylon stands at the parting of the road, at the fork of the two roads, to use divination: he shakes the arrows, he consults the images, he looks at the liver” (Ezek. 21:21, NKJV).1 The Babylonian word puru means “lot,” and from it the Jews get the name of their feast, Purim (Es. 9:26).
It’s interesting that Haman began this procedure in the month of Nisan, the very month in which the Jews celebrated their deliverance from Egypt. As the astrologers cast lots over the calendar, month by month and day by day, they arrived at the most propitious date: the thirteenth day of the twelfth month (v. 13). This decision was certainly of the Lord, because it gave the Jews a whole year to get ready, and because it would also give Mordecai and Esther time to act. “The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord” (Prov. 16:33, KJV).
Was Haman disappointed with this choice? He may have wanted to act immediately, catch the Jews off guard, and satisfy his hatred much sooner. On the other hand, he would have nearly a year in which to nurse his grudge and anticipate revenge, and that would be enjoyable. He could watch the Jews panic, knowing that he was in control. Even if the Jews took advantage of this delay and moved out of the empire, he would still get rid of them and be able to claim whatever goods and property they would have left behind. The plan seemed a good one.
1 1 “Shaking the arrows” was something like our modern “drawing straws,” with the arrows marked with the possible choices of action. “Consulting images” had to do with seeking help from the images of the gods they carried with them. “Looking at the liver” involved offering an animal sacrifice and getting directions from the shape and marks on the liver.
No comments:
Post a Comment