Category Archives: Bible people

MARY

She saw the precious, little child to whom she gave birth, now a man full grown, suspended between heaven and earth, beaten, bloodied, mocked and nailed to a cruel, Roman cross. As she gazed, not just upon the God who condescended to man’s low estate (Phil. 2:5ff), but also upon the man who was her son, surely a sword pierced her to the very soul, just as old Simeon had prophesied thirty-three years earlier (Luke 2:35). What a blessed burden this woman bore throughout her life. It is no wonder that she, above all women, was chosen by the Lord to be the vessel which, after He had left the Glories of Heaven, carried Him to this mundane, mortal sphere.

No less than a personal call from the angel Gabriel would suffice to announce to her the glorious events which unfolded in her life and changed the world (Luke 1:26). She was highly favored by the Lord and blessed among women (1:28). Needless to say, she was “troubled at his saying” that she would bear the Son of God (Luke 1:29, 32, 35). Yet her words, “Behold, the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word” marked her meek acceptance of Gabriel’s shocking announcement and demonstrated her deep faith and humble spirit. This is the same humble attitude the Lord exhibited in the garden when He said, “Not as I will, but as Thou wilt” (Luke 26:39).

Who better to understand and relate to what she was experiencing than Elizabeth? Gabriel had mentioned her cousin, Elizabeth, who was also blessed to “conceive a son in her old age” (1:36). She was already six months with child when Gabriel announced Mary’s conception and when the two met, the babe in her womb leaped for joy (1:44). Mary’s subsequent praise of the Lord demonstrated a great humility and a long and intimate acquaintance with Holy Scripture, especially Hannah’s song of thanksgiving (cf. I Sam. 2:1-10 and Luke 1:46-55). These two women spent the next three months communing with one another likely until just after John was born (Luke 1:56). Now she had to face Joseph.

How does a woman tell her betrothed that she is with child that is not his but that she has not been unfaithful to him? That this child is the promised Messiah and is a supernatural work of God? How would a man accept that? It was difficult enough for Joseph, himself a just and compassionate and holy man, for he thought it best to put her away privily to spare her the shame. Even in what he thought might be her sin, her character spoke for her until the Lord assured him that Mary was innocent. He would thenceforth share in any reproach brought upon the family by those assuming the child had been born out of wedlock (cf. John 8:41).

Mary’s composure throughout all the tumultuous events of her life testify to her faith and grace. Money was scarce for them (cf. Luke 2:22-24; Lev. 12:6-8). Traveling at this time for the census would be difficult (Luke 2:1), giving birth to Jesus in the manger because there was no room in the inn (2:7), dealing with the speculations of those who heard the shepherds’ report of the heavenly host’s announcement (Luke 2:8-20, see esp. v. 18), taking Jesus to the temple to present Him to the Lord forty days later (Luke 2:22; Lev. 12:2,4 – and where she received Simeon and Anna’s prophecies – vv. 25-39), receiving the magi (Matt. 2:10-12), fleeing the country to escape Herod’s cruelty (Matt. 2:13-15), returning to the lightly esteemed Nazareth (Matt. 2:23; John 1:46), running his business and rearing other sons and daughters (Matt. 13:55,56; Mark 6:3) would no doubt challenge this family.

When Jesus was twelve years old, when the family went to Jerusalem for the feast of the Passover and returned back home, Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem unbeknownst to Mary and Joseph, arguing with the doctors of the law (Luke 2:41-45). When they discovered that He was not with them and went back to Jerusalem, Mary reproved Him having treated them thus. However, Mary was gently reproved by the words of the young Jesus when He told her: “How is it that ye sought Me? wist ye not that I must be about My Father’s business?” (2:49). And though she did not yet fully understand all these things, she kept them in her heart (Luke 2:50,51).

After his cousin John’s endorsement of Him (John 1:29-37; Matt. 3:7-15), particularly after the Father in Heaven’s announcement of His divinity (Matt. 3:16,17), and after His temptation in the wilderness (Luke 4:1-13), Jesus publicly announced Himself as Messiah in the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke 4:16-30). He had already gained fame as a teacher in the synagogues in the region (Luke 4:14,15). Though this is where Mary and Joseph had reared Jesus, no mention is made of her presence there or of her other children, when the multitudes attempted to kill Him (Luke 4:28-30). As is usually the case, Mary kept herself in the background.

Mary also bore the burden of a divided family. Her other children, James, Joseph, Simon, Judas and at least two daughters (Matt. 13:55,56; Mark 6:3), did not believe Jesus’ claim that He was the Messiah or that He could perform miracles. They urged Him to go to into Judea, which was unsafe for Him at that time, to show Himself to the disciples (John 7:3-5). While His brethren at first did not believe Him, it seems after some time they were converted (Acts 1:14). James and Judas, at least, became believers for they wrote the New Testament epistles which bear their names. What role Mary played in their conversion, if any, cannot be known.

In Cana of Galilee, Mary appealed to Jesus to remedy a mundane social oversight–there was a lack of wine at the wedding to which Jesus was invited. Perhaps Jesus’ own presence there had caused the problem, because many more people might have come knowing that He would be there. And perhaps this is why Mary wanted Jesus to do something which would prove His claims. And though she is gently rebuked by Jesus for assuming she could control His actions, she, nevertheless, informs the servants to do whatever He tells them. She acts the part of a loving mother who desires to see her child succeed.

It must have been excruciating for Mary to see her son treated as He was by the multitude, doubted, despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. She spent the greater part of His life with Him in Nazareth as He carried on Joseph’s trade until He began to publicly proclaim Himself as Messiah. If the Lord ever appeared to Mary after His resurrection, there is no Record of it. The last we see of Mary is when she continued with one accord with the apostles and disciples, the women that followed and supported Jesus, and her children. None of the New Testament epistles directly mention her again.

She was a sincere, humble and godly woman, devoted to the Lord and His Cause. She was a woman most worthy to be emulated, but not worthy of worship. She was, after all, a woman, a wife and a mother.

Eric L. Padgett

THE HERODS

Mothers and fathers could be heard weeping openly and loudly. There was no comforting these grieving parents and families at the loss of their children, brothers and sisters, nephews and nieces, and grandchildren. These innocents were cruelly and systematically murdered without hesitation, without remorse, all to fulfill the desires and political ambitions of one, evil man. This is not a mass murder scene in some modern metropolis, but the scene in a little, obscure village two thousand years ago.

The perpetrator of this heinous, unforgettable slaughter was king Herod the Great. Herod (meaning “hero” or “son of a hero”) was an Idumean by birth, though it was claimed, apparently falsely, that his family came from one of the more important Jewish families to come out of the Captivity. He is said to have been intelligent and capable but mercilessly conniving and cruel. He aligned himself with whatever political forces in Rome would best serve his fortunes. He would stop at nothing, not even blatant infanticide, to advance his political standing and power and he ruled firmly for the next thirty-three years (37 B.C. – 4 B.C.).

Much has been made by modernists over the fact that in all of contemporary, written history only Matthew records this gruesome event (Matt. 2:16-18). But it is well known that this slaughter was clearly within the moral capabilities of Herod. After Herod took Jerusalem by military force (37 B.C.), he summarily executed forty-five of his political enemies, including all of the Sanhedrin save two. He also had John Hyrcanus, his wife’s grandfather, strangled because he thought he was plotting to take the kingdom from him. Indeed, he “slew also all those of his own family” who believed “that Herod’s government should cease, and his posterity should be deprived of it” (Ant. 17:2:4), including his wife and sons.

It was during the last days of Herod the king that Jesus was born (Matt. 2:1, 19,20). Hearing that influential foreigners were looking for the one born king of the Jews not only troubled Herod but also all Jerusalem. The citizens of Jerusalem were no doubt troubled because they feared what this old despot would do. Their fears were justified for he slaughtered dozens of innocent children to kill just one whom he feared would depose him as king.

The Holy Spirit says that these events fulfilled Jeremiah’s prophecy (Jer. 31:15; Matt. 2:15). Some, including McGarvey, have said that Jeremiah did not intend this as a prophecy of these events but that Matthew merely adopted the wording as a fitting representation of the current situation. But the greater context of the passage in Jeremiah is clearly Messianic and other passages are used in the same way (i.e., Is. 7:14; II Sam. 7:12,13). If the author (in this case, the Holy Spirit) of a passage (Jer. 31:15) says that this is it’s fulfillment (Matt. 2:16-18), what right do we have to tell Him that He is wrong?

Josephus tells us that before Herod died, he realized no one would mourn his death. To make certain that there would be mourning on that occasion, Herod called to Jerusalem “all the principal men of the entire Jewish nation, wheresoever they lived” and locked them in the hippodrome and ordered his sister to have them all killed when he died so that there would be mourning in the land upon his death (Ant. 17:6:5). Fortunately, his sister did not carry out those wishes and set the men free. But so many are the cruel acts of Herod the great that the slaughter of dozens of innocent children is perfectly in keeping with his character.

The son of Herod the Great, Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea (4 B. C. – 39 A. D.), is also involved in the life of Christ and the early church. This Herod, motivated solely by unbridled lust for his illegitimate wife’s daughter, was responsible for the beheading of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:1-12). Antipas is also the Herod mentioned in scripture who laboriously questioned Jesus, hoping to see some miracle (Luke 23:8) and when Jesus would not so much as speak, He, with his men of war, contemptuously mocked the Saviour (Luke 23:11). Interestingly, one of the early leaders in the church at Antioch had been brought up with this Antipas (Acts 13:1).

In Acts twelve we have recorded for us the acts of Herod Agrippa I, King of Judaea (41–44 ce), who “stretched forth his hand to vex certain of the church (12:1) and killed James, the brother of John (12:2) and imprisoned the apostle Peter, intending to kill him, as well. Because of his pride, however, the Lord smote him dead and he was eaten of worms (Acts 12:20-24). Agrippa II is seen in the trial of Paul and is notable because of his admission, “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian” (Acts 25:13-26:32).

It is ironic that these descendants of “Esau tried still to get from Jacob the forfeited blessing (Gen. 27:29, 40), in vain setting up an earthly kingdom on a professed Jewish basis, to rival Messiah’s spiritual kingdom” (Fausset). While the Jews rejoiced over the death of Herod because they were set free from a mad tyrant, the world ever rejoices over the death and resurrection of Jesus because He sets us free the spiritual bondage of sin.

Eric L. Padgett

THE CAESARS

The Pharisees wanted to entangle Jesus in His talk (as He had done so often to them, e.g., Matt. 21:23-27) and what better way to do this than to ask a question about politics and religion (Matt. 22:15)? Their question centered on Caesar: “Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not” (Matthew 22:17)? If Jesus answered “Yes,” then the Jews would turn away from Him but if He answered “No,” then He would draw the ire of the Roman authorities (cf. John 19:12). Caesar was not to be challenged.

Caesar was the title of the Roman Emperor (just as Pharaoh was the title of the Egyptian ruler). Initially, that title was the name of the Roman general who defied the Roman senate and ultimately gained political and military control of Rome. His full name was Gaius Julius Caesar and he effectively managed to guide the Roman Republic to an end and inaugurate the Roman Empire.1 His military conquests not only brought under Rome’s control more territory than ever before but also brought him personal glory. He would claim, or imply, in his public orations, that he was descended from the gods and eventually an imperial cult grew up in which the emperor was worshiped as divine.

So when the Pharisees asked Jesus if it was lawful to give tribute to Caesar, they thought they were really forcing Jesus to either blaspheme Jehovah by implicitly affirming the deity of Caesar and thus break the law of Moses (Ex. 20:1-3) or else bring down the wrath of Rome upon His head for treason. But in Jesus’ answer, “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s,” Jesus not only answered propitiously, but also showed by implication that Caesar was not God!

When Jesus was born (4 B.C.), Caesar Augustus (27 B.C -14 A.D) was emperor of Rome (Luke 2:1). Augustus’ birth name was Gaius Octavius Thurinus. He was Julius Caesar’s grandnephew but was adopted by him and succeeded him as emperor of Rome. It was Augustus’ decree that “all the world should be taxed” that brought into fulfillment the prophecy of Micah (5:2) concerning the location of the birth of Christ (Matt. 2:4-6).

Tiberius Claudius Nero succeeded Augustus as emperor of Rome. Tiberius was adopted by Augustus just as Augustus was adopted by Caesar. Tiberius’ father had been a fleet commander for Julius Caesar and was forced to give up his wife to Augustus. When Tiberius’s father died, he went to live with his mother and the emperor Augustus. He was trained in the ways of the state and distinguished himself in many ways. Though Augustus never really liked him, he was the least offensive choice to succeed Augustus as Emperor.

His reign was mild at first but he is reported to have become cruel and obscene. It was during his fifteenth year that the “word of God came unto John” (Luke 3:1). This is the only place he is mentioned by name in the New Testament but he is the emperor that is under consideration when the Pharisees attempt to ensnare Jesus with the question of paying tribute to Caesar.

The fourth emperor, Caligula, is not mentioned in the New Testament. It was in the days of the fifth emperor, Claudius, that Agabus prophesied of the famine that was to come (Acts 11:28). Suetonius independently records that there was “a scarcity of grain because of long-continued droughts” (Suetonius, The Life of Claudius, 18). In Acts 18:2, Luke records that Claudius had expelled all Jews from Rome. Suetonius also mentions that “since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome” (Suetonius, The Life of Claudius, 25). This “Chrestus” is very likely a reference to Christ.

The sixth emperor was the notorious Nero. He was born Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus but upon his adoption by Claudius he became Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus. He is especially noted for his wickedness. He was accused by contemporary historians of having started the A.D. 64 conflagration which resulted in destroying much of Rome in order to make way for his building projects. However, he quickly blamed the fire on Christians. He was the first emperor to persecute Christians and while his persecution was not as wide spread as Domitians, it was more vicious.

Tacitus recorded Nero’s persecutions of Christians: “Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man’s cruelty, that they were being destroyed” (Tacitus, Annals, 15:44). He was truly the beast of Revelation (Rev. 13:18; 17:9,10).

It was in the days of these Julio-Claudian kings that the God of heaven set up a kingdom that would never be destroyed (Dan. 2:44). The gates of hell would not and will not prevail against it (Matt. 16:18). Christ now reigns, sitting on the throne of that kingdom (Acts 2:29,30), which is an everlasting kingdom (Luke 1:31-33). While we render to Caesar the things that are Caesars, we ought to obey God rather then men (Acts 5:29). We should know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to womsoever He will, and setteth up over it the basest of men” (Dan. 4:17).

 

Eric L. Padgett

 

1. Modern scholars usually begin the list of Roman emperors with Augustus. However, the position here is that Julius was the first emperor for at least these reasons: 1) Josephus, a first century Jewish historian, refers to him as such. He wrote that it was Julius “who first of all changed the popular government, and transferred it to himself” (Antiquities 19:1: 11). Second, Josephus numbers the emperors with Augustus as number two, Tiberius as three, etc. (Antiquities 18:2:2). Josephus lived during this period of time and would know how Julius and Augustus were perceived. 2. Suetonius, a contemporary Roman historian, also begins his enumeration of emperors with “the Divine Julius.” 3. Dio Cassius lists Julius as the first. 4. Moses Stuart observes “At most, only an occasional beginning of the count with Augustus can be shown, in classic authors. The almost universal usage is against it” (p. 277, link).

NEHEMIAH

Herodotus called it “the very honorable office” (III:34), referring to the office of cup-bearer. Nehemiah held such an office for Artaxerxes Longimanus (1:11; 2:1). The word translated “cupbearer” here is also elsewhere translated “butler” (i.e., Gen. 40:1). The person who held this office had to be imminently trustworthy for the life of the king was in his hands. Often the cupbearer would be required to taste the drink before it was served so no one could poison the king. Because he was in this trusted position, he had a close relationship to both the king and queen (2:6).

In 446 B. C., Nehemiah received word from Hanani, one of his brethren, about the horrid condition of those Jews still in Jerusalem (1:2,3). It so disturbed Nehemiah that it visibly saddened his countenance and this change was noticeable to the king, Artaxerxes, who permitted Nehemiah his request to go to Jerusalem and build it up (2:5). Nehemiah also gained a military escort and authority from the king to retrieve timber from the royal forests to use in the rebuilding of the gate and walls of Jerusalem (2:7-9).

Upon his arrival at Jerusalem, after just a full day of rest (2:11), Nehemiah and a few other men, perhaps attendants or guides, went out under cover of night and surveyed the ruins of the walls of Jerusalem. He saw the broken down walls and the gates which had been burned with fire. There he saw the gate of the valley on the south western side of Jerusalem, about fifteen hundred feet before the Dung Gate (3:13). King Uzziah had once built towers there and fortified this gate (II Chron. 26:9). From this gate at that time one could go toward the place later identified in the New Testament as Calvary (Luke 23:33).

At the southern tip, he saw the dung port or the rubbish gate, which led down to the valley of Hinnom, which was the trash dump of the city, right before Tophet, where unfaithful Jews and pagans would burn their children in the fire to false gods (cf., Jer. 7:31,32). Going on further, he saw the gate of the fountain, which was the conduit Hezekiah made which fed the pool of Siloam (II Kings 20:20), where later Jesus gave sight to the man born blind (John 9:6,7). He then, still under cover of the night, finished his survey with the king’s pool or the Pool of Siloam.

Up to this point, Nehemiah had remained silent about his mission. When he finally told the rulers, priests, nobles and people of his purpose, and told them how God had blessed him, he encouraged them, “Come, let us build up the wall of Jerusalem that we be no more a reproach” (2:17). Upon hearing this, they said “Let us rise up and build” and they strengthened their hand for this good work. However, there were forces at work to prevent the walls from being rebuilt.

Sanballat, Tobiah and Geshem formed a triad of opposition against Nehemiah. It grieved them greatly that someone would come to Jerusalem seeking to restore it (2:10). Sanballat was a Moabite from the city of Horonaim. Besides being mentioned here, he is mentioned in extra-biblical literature as the governor of Samaria. He was, however, related by marriage to Eliashib the High Priest (13:28). His name means “Sin gives life.” The Sin mentioned here is an Assyrian moon god. Tobiah was probably Sanballat’s Ammonite slave and perhaps Nehemiah’s chief enemy (cf. 6:14). Eliashib had made room for Tobiah in the temple room that had held temple utensils and offerings. And Geshem was an Arabian, who, probably as a chief of a marauding tribe, had an interest in seeing the Jews and their city kept at bay.

These three intended on stopping the work of Nehemiah through whatever means was available to them. At first, they tried ridicule–“they laughed us to scorn” (2:19), hoping this would discourage the workers. But Nehemiah simply reminded them that God was behind his work and that they had “no portion, nor right, nor memorial, in Jerusalem” (2:19). Even through all their mocking, the work continued “for the people had a mind to work” (4:6). When these enemies plotted to attack, Nehemiah had them ready and “with one of his hands wrought in the work, and with the other hand held a weapon” (4:17). They attempted to kill Nehemiah on he plains of Ono and halt the work by appeals to Artaxerxes, but to no avail.

Nehemiah had completed the monumental task of repairing the wall in a mere fifty-two days (6:15). After this work was completed, Ezra the scribe came forward and read the law unto the people from a pulpit of wood (8:1-8). Nehemiah instituted some other reforms among the people and with the conclusion of his work and the prophecies of Malachi the history of the Old Testament comes to a close.

Eric L. Padgett

EZRA

Ezra was a good servant of the Lord and he was also a brilliant scholar of God’s word. He was described as “a ready [or brilliant or diligent – ELP] scribe in the Law of Moses” (7:5), a “scribe of the law of the God of Heaven” (7:12,21), and “a scribe of the words of the Commandments of the Lord and of his statutes to Israel” (7:11). He was multi-lingual and able to translate Hebrew into  Aramaic so that the people, which had for decades been in captivity and had forgotten much of their native tongue, could clearly understand (Neh. 8:8).  His ability to expound upon the meaning is also suggested.

He traced his lineage back to Aaron, brother of Moses (7:1-5), and was the descendant of Hilkiah the priest which found the book of the law of Moses in the temple ruins during the days of King Josiah (7:1;II Kings 22:4-1). The name Ezra means “help,” though it probably is a shortened form of Azariah, which means “God has helped.” His skills as a scribe were undoubtedly derived from natural abilities he already possessed, and from gifts with which the Lord had blessed him, but they also resulted from the fact that he had “prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord” (7:10).

One hundred and forty-eight years prior to Ezra’s work, in 606 B.C., Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, besieged Jerusalem and put king Jehoikim in chains (Dan. 1:1,2; II Chron. 36:6-8; II Kings 24). Seventy years later, in 536 B.C., Cyrus, king of Persia, allowed the Jews to return to their land to rebuild the temple (II Chron. 36:22,23; Ezra 1:1-4), just as Jeremiah had prophesied (Jer. 25:8-12; 29:10-12). Zerubbabel and Joshua, the high priest, led a group of captives back, laid the foundation of the temple and built the altar and then completed the temple around 515 B.C. (5:2). The prophets Haggai and Zechariah prophesied during this time (Hag. 1:1; Zech. 1:1) and the events of Esther took place (cir. 479 B.C.).

In 458 B.C., Ezra led a smaller group of captives back to Jerusalem. He assembled his contingency by the banks of the river Ahava for three day and fasted and sought of God the right way to proceed (8:21). As Ezra left to return back to Jerusalem, he put his trust in God for his protection. He felt ashamed to ask the king for protection, for he had boasted to him that God would deliver them and would protect them (8:22,23). It took four months for Ezra to make the journey and God did watch over them (7:9).

When Ezra made it back to Jerusalem, he found that the people had not separated themselves from the people of the land and were continuing their ways which led to the captivity in the beginning. He rent his clothes and plucked his hairs because of the sins of the people in marrying into the heathen culture and practicing their evil ways. Ashamed of their sins, he cried out in prayer to God. He observed that God had been merciful to them and that they had been punished less than their sins deserved (9:1-15).

As Ezra was praying and weeping before the house of God, he was pleasantly surprised by a large group of Jews who also come weeping and lamenting their sins (10:1). Then one of them, one Shechaniah, encouraged Ezra and desired the Jews to put away their strange wives and the children born to them. How difficult it must have been for these men to put away their wives, and in some cases their children which they had by these women. But this is what they did because they wanted to serve the Lord and be right with Him.

At this point the account of Ezra goes silent for a little over a decade. It is not until the wall is completed under Nehemaiah that Ezra makes another appearance (Neh. 8). He is called upon by the people to bring the book of the law of Moses and read it before the people (8:1). But because the people had been so long in captivity, they did not understand their own native tongue and as Ezra the scribe read from the law, standing on a pulpit of wood, he had to translate it for the people to understand (Neh. 8:1-8).

The time in which Ezra grew up saw an increased emphasis upon learning and scholarship. Ezra is a case in point. It was during his days that the synagogue was probably formed and, according to Jewish tradition, Ezra was responsible for helping to collect and edit the Old Testament canon as we know it.  Clearly, by the time of the Christ, the canon of the Old Testament was settled (Luke 24:44).

Eric L. Padgett

ESTHER

It was no ordinary beauty contest. Probably hundreds of young, beautiful virgins had been brought from all over the empire out of every province to king Ahasuerus, to the palace at Shushan, in order for him to select a replacement for fair Vashti, whom he had rejected as queen because of her refusal to obey his commands (2:8). A certain beautiful, young, Jewish woman was among those women brought there and her name was Hadassah, a name meaning “myrtle,” a fragrant evergreen shrub or small tree with star shaped flower.

Hadassah was an orphan, “for she had neither father or mother,” and her cousin Mordecai raised her as his own daughter when her parents died (2:7). Mordecai was from the tribe of Benjamin and of the family of Kish, which had been carried away into captivity in 597 B. C., about eight years after Daniel was taken into captivity (Dan. 1:1; II Kings 24:15). He apparently had some role “in Shushan the palace” (2:5) and in this capacity he could keep an eye on his adopted daughter Hadassah, who had been taken from him and given to the custody of one Hegai, keeper of the women (2:8,10).

While Hadassah was Jewish, under the counsel of Mordecai, she had concealed this fact to everyone. Her name had been changed from Hadassah to Esther, a Persian name which meant “star.” The keeper of the women was instantly taken with Esther and he carefully chose seven maidens to attend to her needs and gave her special and preferred treatment. Each of the other virgins which had been taken were allowed to go into the king and were provided with whatever they might need to make them desirable to him. Esther, however, required nothing but what Hegai had already provided (2:15).

All that laid eyes on Esther were immediately smitten with her beauty and character (2:15). Ahasuerus, or Xerxes, was no different. “And the king loved Esther above all the women, and she obtained grace and favour in his sight more than all the virgins; so that he set the royal crown upon her head, and made her queen instead of Vashti” (2:17). And so a Jewess was placed in a strategic position in the palace and she had the king’s ear.

Now Esther was always obedient to her adopted father Mordecai, even after she had been made queen (2:20). When Mordecai uncovered a plot to kill Ahasuerus, he was able to warn the king through Esther and save his life (2:21-23). These events and how they transpired were dutifully recorded in the chronicles of the Persian king (2:23). But while Mordecai was kind to the king, there were those in the kingdom who sought his destruction.

Haman’s particularly intense hatred for, not only Mordecai, who refused to bow down to Haman (3:1-4), but for all of the Jews, manifested itself in an attempt to exterminate the Jewish race (3:8). By moving the king to agree to this extermination, Haman was advancing his own interests, not the King’s. His own pride, however, would let him see neither the forces developing against him nor the God he would be fighting. In his blind arrogance, he also prepared a gallows upon which he intended to hang Mordecai.

The crux of this historical account of this part of Esther’s life is found in Mordecai’s reminder to Esther: You may well have been brought to this position for just this purpose–the salvation of God’s people (4:13,14). Esther takes these words to heart and delicately approaches the king and invites him and Haman to a banquet of her own making the next evening, intending to contravene Haman’s pernicious plot, even at the risk of her own life (4:16).

The night before the banquet, however, the king becomes curiously restless and reads from the royal chronicles, and reads of Mordecai’s actions in saving the king’s life. Ironically, and with justice poetic, just as Haman would speak to the king about hanging Mordecai, the king has Haman bestow upon Mordecai the blessing Haman thought he should receive (6:4-13).

The next evening, at the queen’s banquet, Haman is outed as the perpetrator of great crimes against Mordecai, Esther and the Jewish people. The Jews were given authority to defend themselves and Haman was hanged upon his own gallows (7:10). Through a series of Providential actions, God had used this young lady to save the Jews from extermination. “God works in mysterious ways His wonders to perform.” If God can use Esther (and Mordecai and Joseph and Moses, etc., etc.), then He can use you and me. Who knows if you were brought into the Kingdom for such a time as this? God does. Let Him use you.

Eric L. Padgett

EZEKIEL

Just as our Lord began His public mission at the age of thirty (Luke 3:23; 4:14-21, and consequently, John, as well (Luke 1:24-26)), Ezekiel’s prophetic call was also in his thirtieth year (Ez. 1:1). Born during the reign of the good king Josiah, who attempted with all of his power to reform Israel, Ezekiel was twenty-five years old when king Jehoiachin, himself and ten thousand others were carried away into captivity (II Kings 24:8-15). It was during his fifth year in captivity that the Lord called him with a vision of His glory (1:2,3, 26-28).

Ezekiel was first of all a priest (Ezek. 1:3). Several ages are given in scripture regarding when this service was to begin. In order to do the work of the tabernacle of the congregation, Moses wrote one had to be thirty years old and then continued in service till age fifty (Num. 4:3). So, just as Ezekiel would enter into the full work of the tabernacle, he also began his work as a prophet. Interestingly, like Jesus, he, too, spoke in parables (20:49).

In Numbers 8:25 the age of twenty-five is given as the age at which one began to work in the service of the tabernacle. Some have thought this meant one began in their service in a training capacity and then entered in full service at thirty, others that one could only serve in the priesthood and carry the furniture at thirty, while others think the age was changed when more people were needed. David, apparently, being a prophet, lowered the age to twenty, when the Lord had given them rest and they no longer needed to carry the furniture of the tabernacle (I Chron. 23:25; II Chron. 31:17).

If Ezekiel at first nurtured any intentions of returning to Jerusalem and serving the Lord in the temple, five years into the captivity, it probably soon became apparent to him that he would never return home. Though scripture tells us nothing of the end of Ezekiel’s life, tradition states he was martyred for condemning idolatry. Those same traditions also suggest he was buried near Baghdad.

Ezekiel was married and he must have loved his wife deeply for God says of her that she was “the desire” of his eyes (24:16). In one of the rare instances when he reveals something of a personal nature he records the death of his wife. Even this was to illustrate a point, for the Lord told him not to mourn over the loss of his wife which He would take away in an instant (24:15-17). And when Jerusalem was taken, then they would not mourn out loud for fear of their captors or in astonishment. Therefore, Ezekiel, himself, would be a sign to them (24:24).

Ezekiel’s visions were very visual and his prophesies were in many ways acted out as he often became the sign himself. The marvelous visions of Jehovah’s glory is just but one example of his visions (chaps. 1-3). He was told by God to use his hair to illustrate the future judgment upon them (5:1-4). God would cause him to be unable to speak until the Lord wanted him to prophesy (3:26). He was to remove his things from his house by a hole he created in the wall to teach a lesson of the future carrying away (12). He was to draw upon a tile to illustrate Jerusalem and lay upon his side to illustrate the siege (4).

While his earlier visions and prophesies were of God’s judgement, through his later visions God provided Israel with hope. One of the great visions which illustrate this is the vision of an immense valley full of very dry bones (37). The Lord asked him if these bones could live (37:3). God showed him that they could and as they were graphically reassembled, the Lord used this to illustrate that Israel would be resurrected from the grave of captivity and return back home (37:14). It also foreshadowed the resurrections of the New Covenant (e.g., Luke 8:49-54; I Cor. 15; etc.).

In his final prophecy, Ezekiel sees a magnificent temple (chaps 40-48). This vision finds it’s fulfillment not in any literal temple contemplated in the past nor in some alleged and fanciful future millennial kingdom but in the very real, but spiritual, temple of the church of Christ (I Cor. 3:17), both in its earthly manifestation (Eph. 2:21) and heavenly (Rev. 3:12; 21:22; cf. II Pet. 1:11). In this temple we serve as priests (I Pet. 2:5; Rev. 5:10), just as Ezekiel did in Jerusalem, but our Great High Priest is the One whom Ezekiel saw on the Throne (Heb. 4:14; 1:26-28).

Eric L. Padgett

DANIEL

Daniel was a young man, probably in his early teens, when the Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar (634-562 B.C.), invaded his homeland (Dan. 1:1-4). This young man, possibly of the royal family (Dan. 1:3) was among the first group deported in 606 B.C. from his own home and forcibly taken to a strange and foreign land. He was never to see his own land again. However, because he trusted in the Lord and remained faithful to Him, he would continually experience God’s blessings throughout the remainder of his long, illustrious life.

Far from being just an ordinary citizen of the land of Judah, he was among the very best God’s people had to offer. Nebuchadnezzar was looking for the best so that he could imbue them with the teaching and the tongue of the Chaldeans (Dan. 1:3,4). Not only was Daniel of superior knowledge and learning than most others, he was also an exceptional moral example. Though Ezekiel was a contemporary of Daniel, he places Daniel between Noah and Job and distinguishes him for his righteousness (Ezek. 14:14,20). This was, perhaps, when he was in his forties or fifties, but very early on he had manifested his faith in God and a holiness of life.

Daniel had ample opportunity to demonstrate his righteousness when in Babylon. At the very beginning, when he was chosen to learn the tongue and teaching of the Chaldeans, Daniel and his three Hebrew companions were offered the king’s meat and his wine to be consumed for a period of three years while they learned the Chaldean way (Dan. 1:4,5). At the end of that period they were to be presented to the king (Dan. 1:5)

But the Bible says Daniel “purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself” with the king’s food. There are several reasons why partaking of this food might be considered a defilement, but the real lesson to be gleaned is that Daniel stood his ground on principle. While there were others captives, we are only told of Daniel and his three friends who refused to eat the king’s portion (Dan.1:6,10). Even under these dire circumstances, Daniel kept his integrity and obeyed His God. More of us need to have the heart of Daniel.

Daniel’s long career allowed him to see many changes. About a decade after the previous incident, Belshazzar came to the throne (Dan. 5). It was during his reign when could be seen the “handwriting on the wall (Dan. 5:5)” as the Babylonian Empire came to end when Darius the Mede took over the reigns of power. Darius saw Daniel’s value and placed him over the princes over the kingdom (Dan. 6:1-3).

There were certain men who were envious of Daniel’s success. But his character was so pure that they could find no occasion or fault, neither was there any error found in him (Dan. 6:4). The only way for these men to get at Daniel was through the Lord (Dan. 6:5). These connivers convinced Darius that he should decree an irrevocable decree that whoever asked a petition of any god or man for thirty days should be thrown into the lion’s den (Dan. 6:7). Because they knew the character of Daniel, they knew all they had to do was to wait.

Now Daniel knew the writing was signed by Darius (Dan. 6:10). Possibly, he even knew of the plot against him. Nevertheless, he went to his own house, his windows opened, and did as he always did and prayed (Dan. 6:10,11). And even though he knew his enemies would be lying in wait, he obeyed the Lord. This is character at it’s best. He wasn’t trying to hide but he was not going to stop worshiping the Lord, the one true, living God. Even Darius was saddened that this had hurt Daniel but, even though he tried to find a way to reverse this decree and even though he fasted (Dan. 6:18), he could find no way of altering the law he had made (Dan. 6:14,15). Daniel was thrown into the lions den and it was sealed (Dan. 6:17).

In the morning Darius hastened to the den and removed the stone. He found Daniel alive. The Angel of the Lord had miraculously shut the lion’s mouths because Daniel believed in his God (Dan. 6:23). The passing reference to Daniel in the New Testament is to his faith and this incident in stopping of the mouths of the lions (Heb. 11:33). If we believe in God and trust in Him, the mouth of the roaring lion will be shut (I Pet. 5:8; James 4:7). May we learn to have the heart and the faith of Daniel.

Eric L. Padgett

SHADRACH, MESHACH & ABEDNEGO

Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego are popularly known as the three Hebrew Children, four including Daniel (Dan. 1:17). This word “children” (yeled) covers a number of years, being used of those just born (Ex. 1:17; cf. Ex. 21:22), of those being nursed (Ex. 2:7), and of those who had taken wives (Ruth 1:4,5). In the case of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, they were old enough to be described as having “knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom” (1:17). They were exceptionably intelligent, capable young men.

Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego are the names by which they are best known to most people. These were their Chaldean names, however, given to them in captivity by their captors but their original Hebrew names were Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah. The Hebrew name Hananiah means “the Lord is gracious,” and is a very common name in the Bible. Perhaps thirteen people wear it (e.g., I Chron. 8:24; I Chron. 25:4; Neh. 12:12). Mishael on the other hand is a rare name and means “Who is what God is.” Azariah means “Jehovah is Helper.” It also is a common name is worn by about nineteen Biblical persons (e.g., I Chron. 2:8; I Kings 4:2; I Chron. 6:36).

Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah were chosen by Nebuchadnezzar because they were exceptional. Not only did they excel in knowledge and science (Dan. 1:4), but they were also physically superior, being “children in whom was no blemish” (Dan. 1:4). They were possibly of the royal household (Dan. 1:3). They were chosen because they were going to be taught the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans” (Dan. 1:4). In effect, they were being brainwashed into taking on a new identity and new religion. Possibly, there was hope that these young men would influence other captives to be satisfied with their present condition.

Hananiah, Mishael, Azariah and Daniel were brought as captives to that land when Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem (Dan. 1:1). They would spend seventy years there, unless they happened to die earlier (Dan. 9:2). While they submitted themselves to laws of the land in which they lived, they could not submit to laws that were contrary to God’s will (cf. Acts 5:29). They were singled out because of their unique abilities and qualities which suited the Chaldean’s purposes, but the two qualities which are not specifically ascribed to them, but which come out in the Sacred Text, are their faith and courage.

Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah are a refreshing contrast to the wickedness we find in the previous kings of Israel and Judah who bowed down to idols and images created by men’s hands. When Nebuchadnezzar had built a ninety foot tall, golden image, he required everyone to fall down before it and worship, lest they be cast into a fiery furnace (Dan. 3:6,7). It is likely that King Ahab would have submitted to it. Jereboam would, as well. No doubt, so would have Omri. Very probably so would all the kings of Israel and many of Judah. But Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah were of stronger metal than that and refused to follow suit.

Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah were also the target of certain jealous Chaldeans who railed against the Jews, who found occasion to speak out against them when these three young Hebrew men did not bow to their pressure (Dan. 3:8). Nebuchadnezzar was enraged and furious that anyone would not obey his commands and worship his false gods (Dan. 3:13). Isn’t it amazing how exacting man can be with his false gods but careless with the truth. He offered them one final chance to turn against Jehovah and the penalty for refusing was death by fiery furnace.

Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah responded immediately to this ultimatum. There was no need for further deliberation. There should never be any need for deliberation when the truth is at stake. Their courage and faith in the face of this condemnation is astounding. “Our God is able to deliver us if He desires but if He does not we will still not worship this false god and golden image which you have set up” (Dan. 3:17,18). This further enraged the king and he demanded the furnace be heated seven times hotter than was normal (Dan. 3:19). The flames were so hot, in fact, that the men charged with delivering the three young men into the furnace were themselves consumed by the flames (Dan. 3:22).

Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah found themselves in the fiery furnace, but the laws of physics were not enforced there. The violence of fire was quenched (Heb. 11:34). Not only were they delivered from the flames, but they were joined by the Presence of One who controls the flame (cf. Heb. 1:7; Psalm 104:4; II Kings 2:11; 6:17; Ez. 1:13,14, etc.). God promised His people when they walked through the fire, He would be with them (Is. 43:2). We can rest assured that no matter how hot the flames we may face, that God will be with us if we are with Him (Heb. 13:6). Furthermore, the promise of blessing and glory far outweighs any temporary sufferings we face (Rom. 8:18).

“Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy. If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified (I Peter 4:12-14).

Eric L. Padgett

JOSIAH

Josiah (meaning, “healed by Jehovah”) was born six years before the end of his grandfather’s fifty-five year reign. Manasseh, his grandfather, did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, “after the abominations of the heathen” and even much worse before he later humbled himself (II Kings 21:1, 9). His son, Josiah’s father, Amon, was king in Jerusalem for two years before he was slain by his own servants (II Kings 21:23). He was also an evil king (II Kings 21:20). Given these two major male influences and the corrupt condition of Judah at the time, it is surprising to find that Josiah, very early in his life, turned to the Lord (II Chron. 34:8).

It would be nice to think that the greater influence in his life was his mother, just as Timothy in the New Testament was influenced by his mother and grand mother, the guiding women in his life (II Tim. 1:5; 3:15; Acts 16:1). But there is no way to know this. Perhaps it was the influence of the prophet Zephaniah who initially helped to mold the character of Josiah (Zeph. 1:1). Jeremiah seems a little late, since Josiah began to seek after the Lord in his eighth year and Jeremiah began prophesying in his thirteenth year of his reign, while he was yet young (Jer. 1:1,6). But it is still possible the two were then acquainted. Perhaps Huldah had some influence (II Kings 22:14).

Whoever else may be responsible for Josiah’s faith, Josiah himself must also be given credit. The Lord gives him this credit for He says of Josiah, “Because thine heart was tender, and thou hast humbled thyself before the Lord, when thou heardest what I spake against this place…” (II Kings 22:19). To his great credit, Josiah started seeking after God “while he was yet young” (II Chron. 34:3). What is more, he “declined neither to the right hand, nor to the left” (II Chron. 34:2). He is such a great example of faith that there was no king before him or after him that turned to the Lord with all his heart and soul and might (II Kings 32:25).

Not only did Josiah exhibit great personal fidelity to the Law of Moses and to God, but it was also manifested itself in the way he ruled. Josiah began a purge of the filth of paganism that had been allowed a place in Judah. The sources of paganism among God’s people ranged from Solomon even to his own father and grandfather but Josiah purged them all (II Kings 23:12,13).

The picture given of Judah at this time was ugly. God’s people had descended so far from Him and His Law that Judah more resembled the pagan nations they had displaced than the Covenant God had given them and under which they were bound. Judah was worse than the ten northern, backsliding tribes because Judah saw God’s wrath against sinners and did not repent of her sins (Jer. 3:1-9). Judah was a degenerate plant, playing the harlot under every green tree and upon every high hill (Jer. 2:20,21). There was seemingly a god for every city (Jer. 2:28). Even the sodomites had a place near the temple (II Kings 23:7). Josiah exhibited great courage in carrying out these restorations of the law in such a climate.

During the repairing of the Temple, Hilkiah the high priest found the book of the law of Moses (II Kings 22:8). It is a strange and sad situation that worship had so deteriorated in Judah that the word of God was not even available to the priests who served (though some say this was just the full copy of the law in the side of the ark that had been hidden during the reigns of Ahaz or Manasseh – Deut. 31:26). Some seventy-five years earlier, king Hezekiah had apparently had copies of scripture made and possibly distributed, but now those copies had disappeared (e.g., Prov. 25:1).

We must stand it awe of God’s providential preservation of His word (Psalm 12:7). But how many of God’s people today have no access to the word of God because they are using a bad translation or because they do not seek a “thus saith the Lord” for their actions (I Pet. 4:11)? How many preachers preach something other than His word? But the Lord continues to preserve His word even today (Matt. 24:35). When the law was found and read, Josiah feared and trembled (II Kings 22:11). He caused it to be read to all the people and heeded (II Kings 23:1-3). The people committed to once again following the law, as we should.

Josiah was the greatest of Judah’s kings. He purged Judah of her idols and of its sinners. He restored the Law to it’s rightful place of authority. He reinstituted scriptural worship in the observance of the Passover that had been neglected (II Chron. 35:1). And yet for all of that, God still was to execute His wrath upon His people for their sins. All that Josiah had done, as much as it was, was too little, too late for the sins which they had committed. This should frighten everyone who thinks they are faithful.

Eric L. Padgett