Why Haman and Why Esther? [open]

[plum]

I posted this in the Women's forum as a reply to a question, but since Purim is coming up in March I thought I'd say it here too!

She had the ten sons of Hamam hanged, and theres a Jewish law that the Jews cannot kill children for the sins of parents and vice versa.

Why is this book in the Bible?

Just a little background on Haman (may his name be blotted out):

It all goes back to King Saul, actually. Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin (the smallest tribe) from the clan of Matri and son of Kish (the smallest clan)
1Sa 10:21 -Then he brought forward the tribe of Benjamin, clan by clan, and Matri's clan was chosen. Finally Saul son of Kish was chosen. But when they looked for him, he was not to be found.God chose a man from the smallest of the small of Israel to become King over Israel.

Then, later on when Saul was King God told him to wipe out the Amalekites. Why? What did the Amalekites do?


8 The Amalekites came and attacked the Israelites at Rephidim. 9 Moses said to Joshua, "Choose some of our men and go out to fight the Amalekites. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of God in my hands." 10 So Joshua fought the Amalekites as Moses had ordered, and Moses, Aaron and Hur went to the top of the hill. 11 As long as Moses held up his hands, the Israelites were winning, but whenever he lowered his hands, the Amalekites were winning. 12 When Moses' hands grew tired, they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it. Aaron and Hur held his hands up--one on one side, one on the other--so that his hands remained steady till sunset. 13 So Joshua overcame the Amalekite army with the sword. 14 Then the Lord said to Moses, "Write this on a scroll as something to be remembered and make sure that Joshua hears it, because I will completely blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven." 15 Moses built an altar and called it The Lord is my Banner. 16 He said, "For hands were lifted up to the throne of the Lord. The Lord will be at war against the Amalekites from generation to generation."
God told Israel again about what the Amalekites did... this verse is particularly telling because it talks about how God feels about people and nations who bully on the weak and kill the poor and the needy:
17 Remember what the Amalekites did to you along the way when you came out of Egypt. 18 When you were weary and worn out, they met you on your journey and cut off all who were lagging behind; they had no fear of God. 19 When the Lord your God gives you rest from all the enemies around you in the land he is giving you to possess as an inheritance, you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget!
God loves the weak and in His economy, the needy and those who lag behind should be taken care of lest they be taken by the enemy!

God promised to destroy the Amalekites for attacking Israel while they were in the Exodus. He wanted them blotted out.

So God chose the smallest of the small of Israel to blot out the huge enemy that was the Amalekites. this was to fulfill God's promise. God chose Saul to help him fulfill that promise.

But what did Saul do?
http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Samuel+15%3A1+-+25&section=0&version=kjv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1sa&NavGo=15&NavCurrentChapter=15
Read the above link (chapter 15 of 1 Samuel) and notice what God asks Saul to do:
15:2Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.15:3Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.He wasn't to let even their cattle or sheep be spared. God wanted amalek GONE!

but Saul, as we read later on, spared Agag king of the Amalekites and his best animals.
15:9But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, F77 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=1+Samuel+15%3A1+-+25&section=0&version=kjv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=1sa&NavGo=15&NavCurrentChapter=15#F77) and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly.15:17And Samuel said, When thou wast little in thine own sight, wast thou not made the head of the tribes of Israel, and the LORD anointed thee king over Israel? 15:18And the LORD sent thee on a journey, and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners the Amalekites, and fight against them until they be consumed. 15:19Wherefore then didst thou not obey the voice of the LORD, but didst fly upon the spoil, and didst evil in the sight of the LORD? and of course, God was angry with Saul because now the Amalekites would survive!

And you know what? they did.

Now we hit Esther! Many years later there is a young girl named Hadassah in exile along with all of Israel in Persia. Her Persian name was Esther.

Esther was from the tribe of Benjamin, the clan of Kish! It says of her uncle Mordecai:
5 Now in Shushan the palace there was a certain Jew, whose name was Mordecai, the son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a Benjamite; Ooh. Now we're seeing it, right? Saul was from Kish of the tribe of Benjamin too. hmmm! The smallest of the small of Israel... and Esther was given the path of being Queen of Persia! God obviously had a purpose for this woman. So what was that purpose?

Es 3:1 - After these events, King Xerxes honored Haman son of Hammedatha, the Agagite, elevating him and giving him a seat of honor higher than that of all the other nobles.Remember Agag, the King of the Amalekites? Haman was a direct descendant! He wasn't even supposed to be alive! But because of Saul's sin against God, he is. And he wants to kill all the Hebrews.

So why did Esther kill Haman? Because he was an Amalekite, of Agag. Because it was what God commanded Saul to do but Saul did not follow God's commands. Esther did. Because He was plotting to kill the weak and the helpless of Israel and we know hoe God feels about that :)
And she obeyed God.

So is Esther going against God's laws? Absolutely not! To the contrary, she's like Saul's redeemer. She took his place. God gave the Tribe of Benjamin and the clan of Kish another chance! And this time, Esther obeyed the Lord. Blessed be He!

So when the holiday of Purim (http://biblicalholidays.com/Purim/purim_links.htm) comes up (March 4-5) when we celebrate the day when the Israelites got to fight back against the armies of Persia and defend themselves against the decree of Haman... remember what God values and how He does achieve His purposes... and he uses the smallest of the small :)

Isn't that awesome?!

[HadassahSukkot]

Awesome stuff! :)

[shalominyeshua]

Thanks for the breakdown! The L-rd is so awesome how he works!

[plum]

I love that HaShem gave them a second chance. :clap:

[Steve Petersen]

accepting Esther as veritable history involves many chronological and historical difficulties. If Mordecai was exiled from Judea with Jehoiachin (589 B.C.E.), as Esther 2:6 suggests, he would have been over 100 years old at the time of Xerxes I. Herodotus reports that Xerxes' queen was neither Esther nor Vashti but a Persian general's daughter named Amestris (Hist. 7:114). Herodotus also says that the Persian king could only choose a queen from among seven Persian noble families (3:84). In addition, the entire plot is full of improbabilities; for example, while Mordecai is well known as a royal Jewish courtier (3:4), his cousin and adopted daughter whom he visits daily (2:11) can successfully conceal her nationality and religion. Finally, the story often seems mockingly serious and suspiciously areligious. Prayers are never addressed to God in the hours of danger and need, and no mention is made of thanksgivings to God after the salvation of the Jews. Indeed, the rabbis of the Talmud had to read references to God into the Scroll of Esther (Meg. 7a). Assuming that Esther is not veritable history there are innumerable possibilities for the book's origin, date of composition, historical context, meaning, and purpose.

[Steve Petersen]

One significant group of scholars considers Esther, much like Daniel, a pseudepigraph, in which the narrative set in Persia is merely a stage setting for the true meaning. Willrich, for example, suggests that Ahasuerus is really Ptolemy Euergetes II (170–164 B.C.E. and 145–117 B.C.E.); Esther, his queen, Cleopatra III, who was friendly to the Jews; and Haman, the anti-Jewish party at the Ptolemaic court. Haupt and Lewy have proposed solutions that understand Esther in relation to the periods of the Maccabees and Herodians, respectively. A detailed examination of one example of these "historical" interpretations of Esther will reveal the difficulties inherent in this approach. R. H. Pfeiffer argues that Esther was written during the Hasmonean era, specifically at the time of John Hyrcanus (135–104 B.C.E.). Haman, Pfeiffer proposes, looks like a caricature of Antiochus Epiphanes. He persecutes the Jews on the grounds that they are different from other peoples (3:8), just as Antiochus ordered that all peculiar national customs be discontinued (I Macc. 1:41). The Jews in Esther have taken matters into their own hands with great success, and, indeed, ultimately force the gentiles to convert to Judaism (8:17), just as they did under the Maccabees. The author of Esther, like that of Maccabees, is militantly nationalistic, more ardent in his patriotism than in his religious zeal. He outwardly conformed to religious practice, but "appears to have made no demands on God and to have expected that God would make none of him." The background of Esther, according to Pfeiffer, is therefore neither the Persian period nor the period of the persecution of Antiochus (168–165 B.C.E.) but rather the reign of John Hyrcanus. Hyrcanus, among his other achievements, forced the conquered Idumeans to accept Judaism by compulsory circumcision. Represented in our book by Mordecai and Esther, Hyrcanus was the author's ideal and hero. These parallels between the events described in Esther and those of the Maccabean period are, however, at best broad and general. Furthermore, the reign of Hyrcanus may not represent the low level of spiritual life essential to Pfeiffer's argument. Finally, if Esther is the product of intense nationalism, why does the author allow his heroine to hide her Jewish origin and enter the harem of a gentile king? Why must the Jews depend on successful intrigues at court and not revolt openly, as Hyrcanus' ancestors had done?
Another school of thought bases its interpretation on the fact that the names of Mordecai and Esther are derived from the names of the Babylonian deities Marduk and Ishtar. This approach sees the story as an account of the conflicts of these gods or of their worshipers. The most extensive formulation of this approach is that of Lewy. Lewy's analysis of Esther begins with the fact that the Septuagint and II Maccabees preserve different features of the story than the Hebrew text. Thus, according to the Septuagint, the Persian king is Artaxerxes rather than Xerxes. Haman is called Bugaean and not the Agagite, and the name of the holiday is Phrouraia or Phourdaia and not Purim. Finally, the holiday is called the "Mardochaic day" in II Maccabees 15:36.
A proper understanding of these divergences, Lewy maintains, can solve the problem of the origin and purpose of Esther and of the feast of the 14th and 15th of Adar which it proclaims. The Phrouraia or Phourdaia suggests the Persian festival of Favardigan which was celebrated from the 11th to the 14th of Adar. The Jews adopted a Babylonianized version of this feast and also accepted the Babylonian legends connected with the festival. The name of the festival in II Maccabees 15:36, the "Mardochaic day," does not mean the day of Mordecai but the day of the Mardukians or worshipers of Marduk. Bugaean suggests a worshiper of Mithra. Combining this information with the clear fact that the name Esther is equivalent to Ishtar, Lewy proposes that it is now possible to reconstruct the Babylonian original behind the last eight chapters of Esther. These chapters recount the threat to the worshipers of Marduk which resulted when Artaxerxes II (404–358) instituted the cult of Mithra, a threat from which they were saved by the goddess Ishtar. Another legend concerning Ishtar is behind the story in the first two chapters of the book. This legend tells of the elevation of Ishtar-Esther over the Elamite goddess Mashti-Vashti.
While Lewy's interpretation explains many features of Esther, it must be considered more as a hypothesis or conjecture rather than as proof. It seems far too complicated to be true, and accounts for the features of Esther only by disregarding the scientific canon of economy.

[Steve Petersen]

Research on the Scroll of Esther, in particular the contributions of E. Bickerman, has elucidated many aspects of this deceptively simple book. Bickerman has solved many of the problems left unsolved by the other commentators we have considered. He has clearly recognized the literary structure of the book and the fact that, while it may be ultimately based on actual events, Esther contains two originally independent plots derived from oriental romance: one plot of harem intrigue of which Esther is the heroine and another of court intrigue of which Mordecai is the hero. Mordecai's story is based on a type of oriental romance. It is the story of the struggle between the vizier and the dashing new courtier who outwits the vizier and replaces him in the king's favor. Mordecai's refusal to bow to Haman (3:2), which puzzled the later Jewish commentators, is thus comprehensible as an attempt by Mordecai to demonstrate his equality with Haman. Haman is angry, consults his friends and prepares the stake. Meanwhile, the episode of the king's sleepless night occurs and at its conclusion Haman must honor Mordecai. Finally, Haman is overthrown and Mordecai replaces him in the king's favor.
The second plot is that of the queen who brings about the downfall of the vizier. In Esther, the conflict between Haman and the queen is accidental, as he does not know that she is Jewish. This cannot have been the motive in the original story or stories. Yet the fact that Esther is not the "original story" explains one puzzling feature of the book—the non-Jewish if not un-Jewish character of the narrative. The heroes of the original story were not Jewish. These two plots were combined quite effectively. Having heard stories of the struggles of a Jewish courtier and of a Jewish queen against an evil vizier, the author combined them. However, traces of the independent stories can still be seen in several places in the book, as in the two separate epistles at the end (9:20–28 and 9:29–32) or in the unexplained presence of two where one would suffice—the delay being necessary for Mordecai's first triumph over Haman on the night of the king's insomnia. The Scroll of Esther presents Purim as a festival commemorating the victory of the Jews, but it is odd in that it occurs on the day following the victory unlike other Jewish festivals celebrated on the anniversary of the event itself. It is therefore clear, Bickerman concludes, that the author of Esther invented his story to explain an already existent festival. Purim, Bickerman suggests, was originally a seasonal festival of mock ritual combat between "our side" and "their side" celebrated for two days in the capital and one day in the countryside followed by a day of pleasure. Similar festivals are well known in the ancient world. On these days, stories such as those which eventually contributed to Esther were told for the pleasure of the celebrants.
This festival, originally a local feast of the Jews of Shushan and Persia (cf. Meg. 7a), received the name Purim after the story of Mordecai and Esther had been elaborated. The name Purim is based on the story of Esther and is properly explained by our author as being derived from the lots (Akk. puru) which Haman cast to determine the date for the annihilation of the Jews (3:7; 9:24).
This analysis of Esther makes it difficult to propose a specific date for its author since most of the motifs occurring in the book are now explained as belonging to the long tradition of oriental romance. Nevertheless, a few facts may be established. The author was definitely a Persian Jew, possibly from Shushan. He certainly wrote before 78/77 B.C.E., the date the Greek translation of Esther (see below) was brought to Egypt, and before the composition of II Maccabees 15:36 which mentions the 14th of Adar as the "Day of Mordecai."

[HadassahSukkot]

Here's what I posted on the other thread, so our men can see it as well. :)


G-d is mentioned, but not in a way that the undiscerning eye would notice (it's in Hebrew, in an acronymn)...

I believe there are reasons that The Name is not used outright, mainly living in a strange land (Babylon) but also the worry that the possiblity of a new king trying to obliterate it.

We find it in an acronyms here:

.... Many "learned" people (Martin Luther was one) have expressed doubt that my story should even be in the Bible because it seems to have such a secular theme. As evidence of this they claim that the Name of God is never mentioned. But as I'll show you His Name appears five times, although each time it's hidden in the Hebrew text. In fact "Something Hidden" is a good sub-title for my story because as it unfolds you'll see that there is much more hidden than just the Name of God. It was all placed here for your learning, as a reward for the diligent student....

...In the Hebrew text describing this event the first hidden appearance of God's name appears. The first letters of the Hebrew words for "all the women will respect" in what is now called verse 20 of chapter 1 form the acrostic acronym YHVH, the initials of God's Name. There are a total of four such appearances. This one is spoken about the queen. The next will be spoken by the queen (5:4) and like it is made up of first letters. In both cases where the acronym consists of first letters the initial facts of an event are being revealed.
The third one will be spoken about Haman, (5:13) and the fourth by Haman (7:7). These two are made up of the last letters of the Hebrew words in the respective passages, and both times the final stages of events are being described. All four of these acronyms consist of the letters YHVH.
The first and third acronyms are spoken by gentiles and read left to right like all languages west of Jerusalem. The second and fourth are spoken by Israelites and read right to left like all languages east of Jerusalem.
There is also a fifth one (7:5) made up of last letters but in reverse order, and in this one the letters used are EHVH, another form of the Name of God, the one He used at the burning bush and that we translate "I am". That makes five concealed appearances of God's name. Five is the number of grace and indeed my story is a beautiful illustration of the Grace of God, concealed in the Old Testament, but revealed in the New.

Source (http://www.gracethrufaith.com/the-bible-thru-the-eyes-of-its-writers/esthers-story-part-1)
I found some of these before I ever found any commentaries affirming these. :)



BTW, the name "Esther" means Hidden of Ad-nai. "Sther" in Hebrew, (samech tet Resh) means to be hidden, to hide. The aleph in the beginning is a sign of Ad-nai. ;)

I find it an interesting "irony" that a girl named Hadassah (one reason I took this name so long ago) was "Hidden of Ad-nai".. such as myself.

[Nessuno]

Though i'm new here, these are some fantastic posts!
I was just curious how close the movie was to what is taught in the jewish culture. The movie was by far the best thing i've seen in quite a long time (just seen it a week ago). I figured, if you want to know a jewish thing, ask the correct ppl. Figure it's a holiday, gotta know a ton about it. Heck, as an adopted child and christian... I got no past. Adopted family, adopted faith and still don't know either the greek or hebrew language :/
So was the movie accurate to what Jewish tradition holds to be true?

Thank you all for posting these, wow. fantastic. Your very lucky to be jewish. (besides the obvious of already knowing hebrew)

[HadassahSukkot]

I have the book, and didn't like it at all. I found it to be a "Christian Davinci code" more or less.

I saw the movie on TBN recently and was even less impressed.

Esther was seen as not so strong and heart/lovesick for her husband constantly. Ahasuerus wasn't exactly shown as he was either, and that's kind of skeery.
Haman... I think they could have done better...

The history was a real mixed bag. Mixing xerxes and artaxerxes and ahasuerus together...

As far as a 10 commandments/David & Bathsheba/the Robe (etc. etc.) type movie (feel good & get the general message); it was good.


Accurate it was not.
I wish there were more messianic produced movies out there, or even if it were produced by the orthodox. Esther deserves a good movie tribute (accurate, animated (verbally) and colorful). :)

[Sephania]

I thought Hadassah meant Myrtle? :)

Anyway, lovely synopsis of the history eirene. :thumbsup: I know I wrote something about this , maybe last year on here. While your history is good, it is not complete. The parts I am referring to are parts many cannot comprehend so for those best not to read past this point. May I fill in the gaps?:)

In my studies of Esther and the history going back from it, the L-RD showed me some truly unbelievable things. Unbelievable because we are taught how to interpret the bible, taught by those that don't want to talk of certain things because they are too frightening, things that spoken in public would get you ridiculed, not because you are crazy but because of the fear of others. This is one of those things.

Eirene gave a nice layout of the history of Esther, Mordechai and Haman ( boo) , but not going all the way back, nor giving some details that are very important.

The story of Esther seems to be one in a moment of time, nice to tell your children, a story with everything, love, hate, romance, fear, villains heroes...........all the right things, but besides HaShem's name being hidden in there I believe this story is the knot that ties the string from the Garden of Eden to the string that stretches to the last day on earth before Yeshua reigns. But strangely, in a cool way this whole Story is about Yeshua.:)

How so?, you say? Let me explain:

Let's start at the beginning, in the Garden of G-d , 3rd chapter:
14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
If you read the underlined bolded part you may say "How can Satan have a seed?"

Let's skip ahead to chapter 6

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
This is another one of those hard things to understand but it seems that angels are all male dispite all the artists throughout history to portray them as female to hid this deception. And they can not produce progeny being all male, but according to G-d ( if you believe that he gave this information to Moshe) they can breed with human females. There is also much secular evidence outside the bible times and even some that predates it.

And we read on:
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Mighty men, Men of renown. Where is proof for this? Right in your bible. Right in the Torah.

The promised land, the land promised to Abrahams descendants...........at the time Abraham was picked and shown the land his son, yet to be born children would inhabit, the sons of G-d 'got busy'. They already knew of the mountain of G-d, this is the same mountain that Abraham brought Isaac to , and they had set up camp in the plain, where Lot, Abraham nephew lived, and practiced abominable things against the L-RD there. But the L-RD told Abraham that his children would not enter in right away, they had to wait, they had to be enslaved first, all part of a two -fold lesson.

Right before the covenant for the land was made, not between G-d and Abraham, but instead between Abba and Yeshua ( Gen 15:17) the L-RD tells Abraham:

15:12 And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him. 13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; 14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance. 15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age. 16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.

The Amorites were in the promised land just like the
Amalekites. ( Gen 14:7)

The finish of the covenant:
( 15:18-)

17 And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace ( HaSHEM), and a burning lamp ( YESHUA) that passed between those pieces. 18 In the same day the L-RD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: 19
The Kenites and the
Kenizzites, and the
Kadmonites, 20 And the
Hittites, and the
Perizzites, and the
Rephaims, 21 And the
Amorites, and the
Canaanites, and the
Girgashites, and the
Jebusites.

As you can see all the land that was the Promised Land, was inhabited by these 'ites' which are tribes, if you will of giants. In the book of Numbers we see how they were encompassed around the promised land. It is time to go in, a year had passed from leaving Egypt, from leaving slavery, and now it was time to enter into the promise. The L-rd tells Moshe to sent in men to spy out the land, ( this is a test they don't even realize) this is a joint thing, the whole nation is represented, there is to be one man from each tribe to go in, the leader of each family.

You can read about the names of each tribe here (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=numbers+13&section=0&version=kjv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ge&NavGo=15&NavCurrentChapter=15)

More to follow

[Sephania]

17 And Moses sent them to spy out the land of Canaan, and said unto them, Get you up this way southward, and go up into the mountain: 18 And see the land, what it is; and the people that dwelleth therein, whether they be strong or weak, few or many; 19 And what the land is that they dwell in, whether it be good or bad; and what cities they be that they dwell in, whether in tents, or in strong holds; 20 And what the land is, whether it be fat or lean, whether there be wood therein, or not. And be ye of good courage, and bring of the fruit of the land. Now the time was the time of the firstripe grapes.

It is the time of the harvest, it is the time to stop their wanderings, it is a time to stop dwelling in temporary shelters and set up a permanent homestead. But it is not to be.


22 And they ascended by the south, and came unto Hebron; where Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, the children of Anak, were.

Fear set in:


25 And they returned from searching of the land after forty days.
26 And they went and came to Moses, and to Aaron, and to all the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the wilderness of Paran, to Kadesh; and brought back word unto them, and unto all the congregation, and shewed them the fruit of the land. 27 And they told him, and said, We came unto the land whither thou sentest us, and surely it floweth with milk and honey; and this is the fruit of it. 28 Nevertheless the people be strong that dwell in the land, and the cities are walled, and very great: and moreover we saw the children of Anak there. 29 The Amalekites dwell in the land of the south: and the Hittites, and the Jebusites, and the Amorites, dwell in the mountains: and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and by the coast of Jordan.

All feared but Caleb and Yehoshua:


30 And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it. 31 But the men that went up with him said, We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we. 32 And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature. 33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

So as you can see, the giants were still around even after the flood. When they do finally go in they are charged with cleansing the land with Joshua leading. And this continues down, through the judges, till Israel demands a King. And Saul is charged with destroying all the Amalakites, but he does not do as he was told, by Samuel the prophet of G-d. And somehow a seed of Agag escapes and after the exile we find Haman in Persia, and Haman of this same stock, this stock that was breed by Satan to thwart G-ds plan of Salvation, is possessed to complete it by the degree to kill all Jews in the kingdom of Persia Media.

This is a huge hard thing to understand, many say they cannot love and worship a G-d who would kill people and children and infants even. But when you understand that everyone that the L-RD ordered the Israelites to kill were not human to start with. That is why he included even infants because they were offspring of the giants. And there one reason of being was to destroy the human race ( this is what was started before the flood and the reason for it) but they came down again and did the same thing, mated with human woman and created more giants, and these are who were in the lnad, the land of G-d, the chosen mountain. I believe this is also where the Garden of G-d is located. But it is hidden from human site today and still guarded by that keruv.

The whole reason that Haman wanted all the Jews dead was not because of his dispute with not getting respect from Mordechai, but he instead ( he being Satan) was trying once again to eliminate the people whom he had figured out by now the one who would crush his head, would come through. You eliminate Israel, you never have to worry about being eliminated yourself. And that is the whole crux of this. Now to today’s time. We know this didn’t happen , and we know that Mordechai told Esther if she didn’t fulfill her role , G-d would sent someone else, help would come, for Mordechai believed that HaShem would never allow his people to cease to exist. WE know that the trying continued up until Herods time even. The ‘slaughter of the innocents” still trying to stop Messiah from coming.

But it goes on today, He didn’t stop Messiah from coming the first time, but he knows there will be a second time, and that second time will only come when the terms are met. Those terms were spoken and recorded , those words were the words of Yeshua:

You will not see me AGAIN, uintil you say, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the L-RD. Baruch Haba B’shem Adonai!

Now, logically it is easy to figure, you stop him from coming again by :

1. Trying again to annihilate all Jews
2. If you can’t annihilate them you assimilate and you use any and all means to keep them from knowing Yeshua is the promised Messiah, thus they can never say: Baruch Haba B’shem Adonai!

So the Story of Esther bridges the story from the Garden of G-d to the Day Yeshua returns! It is a key piece in the bible , and the word would not be complete without it.

:bow: Thank you L-RD for you love and faithfulness to your people Israel! :clap:

[HadassahSukkot]

yes, Hadassah does mean Myrtle. It's "esther" that is a secret hidden name.

I find it fitting considering the history she is coming from, concealing her identity until G-d sees fit for her to reveal it.. etc.. Her name is very interesting in paleo- the picture it paints (imho), btw good to see you in this thread! :hug:

[BoazB]

Thank you, Eirene and others and brilliant to see the way the L-rd uses people to complete the cleaning-up. Every promise of G-D is sure.

Thanks again.

[plum]

Wow, great study there Zayit. Thanks for filling in a lot of that history. I've never thought of it that way before!

[Ivy]

Were you talking about One Night with the King, Hadassah? Frankly, I wasn't very impressed with it either. It was opulent, to be sure, but the acting.....

[HadassahSukkot]

Were you talking about One Night with the King, Hadassah? Frankly, I wasn't very impressed with it either. It was opulent, to be sure, but the acting.....
Yes. I have tenney's book- unabridged audio CD...

I watched almost the whole movie and thought I'd have to get out the duct tape on myself ;)

[Ivy]

I was amazed that one moment she was heading off to Jerusalem with her love David (?), and the next she was frolicking in the harem garden, apparently totally undisturbed that David was about to be made into a eunuch (and that, incidentally, she would never see Jerusalem, either). :doh: A bubblehead like this should be made queen? C'mon!

And I was totally incredulous that there was somehow no litter available to carry her to the king's court--um! she's supposed to be the queen of the richest empire in the world, hello?--so that she had to barge into the court sopping wet from head to toe. *rolling my eyes

[Nessuno]

Were you talking about One Night with the King, Hadassah? Frankly, I wasn't very impressed with it either. It was opulent, to be sure, but the acting.....

Awe, ok, movie wasn't accurate, not biblically, not historically. I still liked it. "Silly Christian, Esther's for Jews." and well, I can't disagree with ya there. And well, i'll admit that when I read Esther, I read it like reading history and hoping for a moral to the story. I think of hollywood movies as entertainment and not a source of biblical accuracy there I enjoyed it, and then I researched it, which led me here :) So for me, it was overall a good experience.Any Zayitt, you not only answered the question that was running thru my mind for a long time, but put it all together wonderfullly. And besides, the moral of the story was still in the movie and that's all that mattered to me (although If I were Jewish, I may not feel the same, who knows)

[Ivy]

Awe, ok, movie wasn't accurate, not biblically, not historically.

Nah, I wasn't griping about the accuracy particularly, just about the shallow acting. However, I did like the thing they did with the star of David necklace. And Haman was truly psycho, he pulled that off :eek: to be sure.

[madmango]

This is a strange thing. This is exactly what hitler thought too. He actually thought all the Jews were not human.
Ya know..if everyone is thinking someone else is not human...we shall just eventually kill each other.
Sounds like genocide on the human race. Hey, we will eventually all die anyway.

[plum]

Ya know..if everyone is thinking someone else is not human...we shall just eventually kill each other. actually, if you're familiar at all with propaganda (especially in wartime), it's a common and popular practice to dehumanize the enemy in cartoons, posters, commercials, in training, etc. Like how Black people have been showed ape-like or clown-faced, more like monkeys than humans. that's de-humanizing them and making it okay to think of them as lower, not worth basic freedoms, etc.

Same with WWII of course. You should see some of the wartime cartoons... unbelievable.


When we take the image of G-d out of the person... we no longer treat them with dignity and love. And yes, people can think it's okay to kill people who are made to seem like animals or experiments. How horrifying humans can be....

[Shimshon]

actually, if you're familiar at all with propaganda (especially in wartime), it's a common and popular practice to dehumanize the enemy in cartoons, posters, commercials, in training, etc. Like how Black people have been showed ape-like or clown-faced, more like monkeys than humans. that's de-humanizing them and making it okay to think of them as lower, not worth basic freedoms, etc.
I was thinking of this very thing. You demonize your enemy so the masses will fall in behind your actions. We did it with Saddam. We put him in charge and demonized the Shaas' then when the dirty work was done in Iran and Saddam ran away with his blessings we did the same thing to him. Just like radical muslims demonize the west.

Point that finger and four more are pointing back at ya.....it's a sad thing.

[Sephania]

I thought this thread was about Esther? Not Saddam, why bring him into it? :confused:

[Shimshon]

Because the serpent seed doctrine was brought up by another poster and postulated the idea that Haman was of this seed. Using the excuse that he was to be put to death by God because he was of the seed of satan.

This led to the discussion of demonizing ones enemies. So i was responding to that portion of the subject. Sorry you took this as off topic. But it was not brought up by me. I'm just commenting on the demonization of the 'sons of God' and the decendants of Anak. As was mentioned earlier in this thread.

[Yovel]

Yes. I have tenney's book- unabridged audio CD...

I watched almost the whole movie and thought I'd have to get out the duct tape on myself ;)

What can you expect from TBN? They show a lot of movies about the Bible but aren't even close to being Biblical.

[Sephania]

Because the serpent seed doctrine was brought up by another poster and postulated the idea that Haman was of this seed. Using the excuse that he was to be put to death by God because he was of the seed of satan.

This led to the discussion of demonizing ones enemies. So i was responding to that portion of the subject. Sorry you took this as off topic. But it was not brought up by me. I'm just commenting on the demonization of the 'sons of God' and the decendants of Anak. As was mentioned earlier in this thread.

Oh, I actually like that post, I gave me a fuller picture of our story of Esther, it's sounds like you are dead set against that, but doesn't it say that the Serpents seed would bite the heel of the Seed of woman?And that seed is our Messiah Yeshua. So who else did it if not Satan?

I think it makes perfect sense, really why else would one man want all Jews killed everywhere for one man's disrspect? That is what doesn't make sense to me, unless you factor in what was said on the first page here .

Oh well, two Jews, unending opinions,eh?

[Shimshon]

Guess so. Your definitly entitled to your opinion. (wish I was) But the serpent seed is postulation. There is no full blown contextual evidence. One has to juggle and massage the text to suppose such a thing. And why? To prove there is a line of sub-humans worthy of destruction? It was a fanciful story, great for the sci-fi channel, but true? Correct, others are allowed to present suppositions. But why not all members?

I presented a study in another post on the matter but it was not allowed to be presented here. Seems my opinions are not welcome. So much for unending opinions no?

Though many did read it and some pm'ed me with appreciation for the content. So not all is swept under the rug as easily as thought around here.

[Sephania]

Swept under the rug? :confused: Sounds like too much politics to me.