If Esther had not been that beautiful: dealing with a hidden God in the Book of Esther - Hebrew

Biblical Theology Bulletin, Winter, 2001 by Sabine M.L. Van Den Eynde

Though Haman is favored by Ahasuerus, Mordecai refuses to give him honor. When the servants ask him why, he declares that he is a Jew. This could be interpreted as a sign that Mordecai refuses to bow for anyone else than God. This is, however, not very plausible. Bowing is a particularly prevalent way of greeting an important person (such as the king). It is not very likely that Mordecai, who "was sitting in the King's Gate" adamantly refused to bow, even to the king (cf. Fox: 44). The "obeisance" is also done to kings (1 Sam 24:9), but often this verb indicates weakness, being forced: bending the knees because one is not able to stand any more. Maybe Mordecai decided not to kneel for the enemy of his people. Anyway, as in the case of Vashti, a refusal to pay the honor a mighty person desires is dangerous. Just as Vashti, and indeed all women should be under the thumb of their husbands, so in this case, Haman's reaction goes much further than a reaction against Mordecai alone. The man second in power only to the king is out for revenge. He decrees a day of destruction and accuses the Jews of being a danger to the kingdom: they would follow their own laws and disobey those of the king.

God at Work in the Reversal

When their fate becomes known, the people fast. Though God is--again--not mentioned, this is a religious activity, which can be interpreted as a cry (to God) for help. Mordecai swings into action. He goes to the palace to inform Esther, whose task resembles that of Moses: go to the king to save the people. The dialogue of Esther and Mordecai reminds one of a vocation story. Like Moses, (Ex 3-4), Esther objects to her tasks. She points out that she risks the death penalty by going to the king without invitation. It is not God, however, but Mordecai, who counters her arguments. He is convinced that even without Esther, the people will be saved, though if it be literally without her, she will not survive.

Esther's story seems like a vocation story without God. In Exodus, God informs Moses of his intentions, God sends Moses, God counters Moses' objections, God promises to be with Moses. None of this is found in the book of Esther. Never is it said that God, having heard the cry of his people, comes to the rescue. It is not God, but Mordecai who sends Esther to the king, and she has to go alone, even though it may cost her her life. A vocation story without God. Or not?

At this point, it is interesting to analyse the name "Esther." This non-Jewish name probably refers to a Persian word for "star," or to the goddess of Love Ishtar (Moore: 20). Yet, when read as a Hebrew word, it means "I am hiding" or "I am hidden." In Deuteronomy 31:16b-18, God speaks about a time in which the people will leave God and his laws and God will consequently hide his face (or his presence) from them. The result of this hiding is that the people become an easy prey, and troubles come upon them. According to Beal, a link to Deuteronomy 31 would indicate that God will remain absent, and that the people are the cause of their own troubles. He therefore suggests an interpretation that considers the name Esther as an allusion to God invisibly at work in the story (Beal 1999: xx-xxii). In fact, Beal considers the period of Persian rule precisely as the time of God's hiddenness due to the people's disobedience to his laws. Yet, the story of Esther suggests otherwise. Haman reproaches the Jews for following their own laws rather than those of the king. But the Jews' "own" laws are, precisely, God's laws. I would argue, therefore, that it is not the period of Esther as such that is the period of the judgment, but rather that of the exile.