Let’s see how King Ahasuerus handles the queen’s rejection …
he’s not only angry, but his pride has taken a huge hit in front of the men
he’s spent the last 6 months trying to impress!
Queen Vashti, knowing it was the law to do as the King requested, took a stand against him, the head of the largest and greatest power in the known world at that time. One has to wonder what her motivation was! Could it have been that he was asking her to do something that was not only wrong, but degrading as well? Remember he was mostly likely in a drunken state and not thinking clearly. What are your thoughts?
Let’s pick up with verse 13 …
Verse 13:
Then the king said to the wise men who understood the times—for it
was the custom of the king to speak this way before all who knew Persian law
and justice
The king looked to the “wise men who understood the times” also
known as his closest and most important counselors. Could they possibly be wise and closest to
the king because they told him what he wanted to hear?
I did a bit of an overview study on the Persian Law at that time, and this is what I discovered:
Persian Law
It was irrevocable.
It was at the will and whim of the King.
Knowing this is going to help us better understand what
happens next, as well as bring home the power of influence.
The king, in his anger and shock, appears to be at a loss as
to how to handle this situation so he invokes standard court procedure and
makes it into a ‘law’ issue rather than addressing the real problem, which was
his pride?
Verse 14: and were close to him,
namely, Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan, the
seven officials of Persia and Media who had access to the king’s presence and
sat in the first place in the kingdom—
(Sidenote: these men
are not the same as the seven eunuchs mentioned in verse 10 who managed the
King’s harem.)
Notice the phrases, ‘they were close to him’ and ‘they had
access to the king’s presence and sat in the first place in the kingdom’. Our conclusion from verse 13 of these men
telling the king what he wanted to hear in the name of ‘wisdom and counseling’
seems to be confirmed. We also start to
see their influence on the king come into play.
One has to wonder if the king and his ‘wise’ men were still drunk when they
discussed this issue?
Verse 15:
According to law, what is to be done with Queen Vashti, because
she did not obey the command of King Ahasuerus delivered by the eunuchs?
“According to law” … the law that says when the king requests
the presence of someone they must come, without exception.
‘What is to be done …?” King Ahasuerus seems to be more
concerned with his reputation and how others perceive him than he does about
his wife.
Bible Markings and Notes: I underlined ‘according to law’ and in the
margin wrote:
Persian Law
Irrevocable
At the will and whim of the king
Verse 16:
In the presence of the King and the princes, Memucan said, “Queen
Vashti has wronged not only the king but also all the princes and all the
peoples who are in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus
Talk about drama and taking things out of context!
Memucan, the apparent spokesman for the ‘wise men,’ did a good
job of exaggerating the negative effects of Vashti’s actions.
Verse 17:
For the queen’s conduct will become known to all the women causing
them to look with contempt on their husbands by saying, ‘King Ahasuerus
commanded Queen Vashti to be brought into his presence, but she did not come.’
It seems that they have lost all common sense and decorum in
their assumption that Vashti’s disobedience would spark a disrespect of all
women toward their husbands. This seems
like a classic example of overreaction, not to mention a pride and control
issue.
Verse 18:
This day the ladies of Persia and Media who have heard of the
queen’s conduct will speak in the same way to all the king’s princes, and there
will be plenty of contempt and anger.
They are on a roll and are making it personal!
Memucan strongly suggests that all the women in the kingdom
would be doing what Queen Vashti had done if the situation wasn’t dealt with
‘properly.’
We’re going to stop here and leave Memucan firing up all the ‘wise men,
counselors and the king with his exaggerated suggestions and move on to finding
God in today’s lesson.
This was a messy and ludicrous situation, wasn’t it, but isn’t
that sometimes where we find ourselves?
Sometimes, we find ourselves dealing with situations that are so absurd
that if one wasn’t living it, it would be hard to believe!
The frenzy buildup in verses 16 – 18 of establishing cause to
have the Queen removed was necessary albeit ridiculous. After all, she was the queen, and it would
take a great persuasion to dethrone her.
It had to be major or had the where-with-all to be made into something
major, and this, as ridiculous as it was, fit the bill.
It brings me great comfort to see that God sometimes allows
the absurd in order to accomplish what is best for His people. Yes, even in our own personal ‘hard to
believe’ situations, God is working behind the scenes.
What are your thoughts on today’s lesson?
Next week we will finish up chapter 1 with verses 19 – 22.
Don't forget to leave a comment and if you're enjoying this class, please share the link with other ladies who you think might enjoy it as well.
Until the next class ...
patsy @ From This Heart Of Mine
(c) 2023 by Patsy Norwood ~ All Rights Reserved.
It’s interesting to me that the king wasn’t concerned as much about his marriage as he was listening to “the wisemen”.
ReplyDeleteShayla, in the heat of the moment, I'd say his pride was controlling his actions especially if he was drunk with wine.
DeletePatsi, I hope that if I offer a different perspective, it will not be seen as contentious. If you think my comment will in any way cause division, then please don't publish it! That isn't my intention at all (which I think you know or I wouldn't be chiming in ❤).
ReplyDeleteI think the King's anger towards Vashti's public disobedience was justified. If I intentionally disgraced, shamed, or embarrassed Colton in front of his colleagues (or anyone else), I wouldn't blame him for being upset or call it pride. A husband should be able to have confidence and safety in his wife as his loyal companion and support. It grieves me to hear women speak badly about or towards their husbands in front of others. Vashti essentially did the same without words, and on a very big platform.
This is especially bad for those in positions of authority because it sets an example (which is what the wise men were concerned with) and reflects on whatever institution they represent. (Prince Harry's public airing of grievances as a modern study of what not to do 🤦♀️) Vashti's actions showed not only her disloyalty to her husband, but to her King. The response was that she should no longer represent him or his kingdom. The Bible never says that he divorced her, imprisoned her, or had her killed- all things he could have easily done as King. It just says that her royal position would be given to another more worthy than her.
I agree that it was an authority issue, but it is a principle of God for a man to be the head of his household, dating all the way back to the order of creation (in other words, not just for Christians). It says that the wise men "knew the times." Maybe there was a feminist sentiment stirring among the women during that time. Seeing Vashti get away with disrespect towards her husband (the supreme authority of the land, at that) might encourage a "Who do you think you are?" attitude towards their own husbands. I don't think this is too far reaching given Vashti's position. (Who knows what all the women were talking about at her banquet when she got the confidence to challenge authority?) Even in our own modern media, tv shows, movies, etc, we see the promotion of disdain towards parental and male authority. Unfortunately, it does influence people. Vashti acted out publicly and therefore had to be dealt with publicly. The King was establishing through law that "all the wives shall give to their husbands honour" (v20) and "that every man shall bear rule in his own house" (v22). I find that to be a fairly biblical response coming from a pagan King who could've done anything he wanted.
Dear, dear Kelsey, of course it's all right for you to have a different perspective. We learn and grow from researching and considering all sides of the issue. Thank you for being brave enough to present your viewpoint. Love you and your heart!
DeleteThank you so much, Patsi. I love you too and appreciate your kindness. ❤
DeleteHaving read and reread these verses, I came to the opinion that here may be the place where God stepped in. The advisors could have advised to have Vashti removed by putting her to death, or she could have been imprisoned or a host of other punishments. However, God used Memucan to sell his idea to the King and all the rest of the advisors. While what he proposed would happen with other women in the kingdom the idea worked and Vashti's life was spared. Afterall, she was also the mother of the future King as well as being Queen, even if deposed. With Vashti gone, and the King, although probably still in his inebriated state, satisfied with what he viewed as justice for being disobeyed, room was made to introduce Esther and save the Jewish people from Hamen. I also think if the King had not ordered her to appear wearing nothing but the crown on her head so that he could parade her around to a group of equally druken men, she may have obeyed him. I also find it interesting that over these thousands of years there are still entities in the middle east who maintain their supposed right to treat women in a degrading manner defending their actions behind their laws. Just my opinion. Cookie
ReplyDeleteCookie, I came to the same conclusion as you and yes, sadly, there are still areas where the degrading treatment of women are thought to be allowed by law and even biblical. I'm so glad that Jesus elevated women to a higher status.
DeleteOops! Patsi, after having read Cookie's comment, I realize how mine might have sounded...I just want to clarify for anyone reading that I don't believe he was asking her to appear naked, or I wouldn't be so hard on Vashti. Husbands are biblically the heads of their wives, but if they ask us to sin, we must obey God rather than man. I don't want anyone to think I support the degradation or humiliation of women, or blind obedience that leads to sin or harm. I know you don't think I do, I just felt like I needed to clarify my perspective a little so it wasn't mistaken!
ReplyDeleteMy opinion is that he was asking her to appear fully decked out, including (not limited to) the crown, the way Esther would appear before him later on (5:1) in the story when she found grace in the King's eyes (further contrasting Vashti's behavior and punishment). It is likely that most of the people there had never seen the queen, since it says that people "great *and* small" were there, and there was no media or pictures like we have today. He had showed off everything in his kingdom except his queen and the people wanted to see her. If I went to the palace, I'd want to see the queen! But not naked 😂 (As a side note, I was totally disappointed not to see the tiaras at King Charles's coronation. But I was definitely watching for the outfits and the pomp and circumstance 😉)
Anyway, all that to say- I'd be singing a different tune if I thought he was asking her to come out without clothes on. And Cookie, I can definitely see either way how Memucan might have been stepping in for her benefit. She got off much lighter than she could have. Providence all throughout- and that is one reason I love this book so much!
Kelsey, When I was studying these particular verses I read many commentaries , and there were many, as to why Vashti refused to obey the King. One that I read was got questions.com/Vashti. This one as well as several more seemed to be in agreement as to her reasons even knowing what the consequences could be. Not being a biblical scholar but being very curious as to what the scholars do have to say I really enjoy reading their interpretation and then forming my own opinion . Cookie
DeleteCookie, yes I do also believe it is important to study the scriptures with an open heart, including consulting those with wisdom concerning things we don't understand or want to explore further (such as commentaries). I truly didn't mean to sound argumentative if I did and regret if it came across that way. Whatever her reason, I think we can all agree that God took a bad situation and used it for the ultimate good of his people. ❤
Delete