Browsed by
Tag: Esther historical

IS MORDECAI IN ESTHER HISTORICALLY ACCURATE?

IS MORDECAI IN ESTHER HISTORICALLY ACCURATE?

Comments 4 comments

“The book is a free composition, not a historical document”—Catholic Commentary

“The only character known to history is Ashasuerus”—Catholic Commentary

“Now there was at the citadel in Susa a Jew whose name was Mordecai, the son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a Benjamite, who had been taken into exile from Jerusalem with captives who had been exiled with Jeconiah king of Judah, when Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had exiled”—Esther 2:5,6 NASB read more

The Book of Esther – History or Fiction?

The Book of Esther – History or Fiction?

Comments 0 Comment

The book of Esther is viewed today by a majority of scholars as non-historical. Yet the story itself is recounted candidly, and there is nothing within it to suggest that it is fictional. Mir­acles or other “impossible” occurrences are totally absent. Critical scholars are bothered, however, by seeming exaggerations, perceived inaccuracies, and certain omissions, such as:

  • The length of the 180-day feast (Esther 1:1-4) seems excessive.
  • The six months of perfuming with oil, and the additional six months of beautifying with spices (Esther 2:12) seem extreme.
  • The book claims that there were 127 Persian provinces (Esther 1:1), while the historian Herodotus speaks of only 20.
  • The notion of a Persian decree being irrevocable (Esther 1:19; Esther 8:8) is regarded as doubtful—but see Daniel 6.
  • Planning for a massacre of Jews almost a year in advance (Esther 3:8-15) strikes critical scholars as unlikely.
  • It seems too coincidental that Haman would turn out to be a descendant of Agag the Amalekite, the enemy of Israel, whom Saul failed to execute in obedience to Yahweh’s direction through Samuel  (Esther 3:1; see 1 Samuel 15).
  • Contrary to the Biblical account, Herodotus identified Xerxes’ queen as Amestris, not Vashti.
  • Although the names Mordecai and that of Haman’s son Parshandatha (Esther 9:7) are attested elsewhere during the Persian period, Xerxes is the only indisputable historical figure in the book.
  • Archaeological data from the Persian period has not specifi­cally confirmed the story’s historicity.
  • It is the only Old Testament book: (1) in which neither “God,” nor his name “Yahweh,” are specifically mentioned; (2) no manuscript copies have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Another factor is that the book is not quoted in the New Testament.
  • Things important to the ancient Jews, such as the Law, sacrifice, and the Temple in Jerusalem are not mentioned.
  • Esther is often read as a satire addressing the needs of Jews outside of the Holy Land. Yet these challenges, though not insignificant, are not, in fact, as overwhelming as they might first appear:

    • read more

    WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com

    Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy