Naturally the great deliverance of the Jews from Haman’s wicked plot was the cause of much celebration and feasting (Esth 9:17-18). But Mordecai and Esther were determined that the story should not be forgotten, so they instituted an annual holiday to commemorate it – the festival of Purim (Esth 9:20-21).

Although Christians do not celebrate Purim, we do have our own annual celebrations of Christmas and Easter, where we remember different parts of the story of the great deliverance we have experienced through the incarnation, sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus. And we have the communion meal, specifically instituted by Jesus himself as a “remembrance” of him (Luke 22:19).

I want to briefly consider a few elements of the way the Jews observed Purim and how they relate to our own times of “remembering”.

First, Purim involved giving. In some ways, Purim is similar to our Christmas, as it was a winter holiday in which they they gave gifts to one another (Esth 9:22). Note however that giving to the poor was explicitly part of it. Sadly Christmas has become a holiday all about giving to those who will give presents back to us.

Second, they told the story. In Esth 9:24-25 we have what some have called a creedal statement, summing up the essence of the story of Esther. We tend to do this well at Christmas, with our nativity plays and carol services rehearsing much of the Biblical account. However, I am not sure we are always so good at this when it comes to communion and Easter. Often we skip past telling the story of the cross and resurrection in favour of teaching the theology of the cross and resurrection. Of course, theology is vitally important, but it is worth considering why each of the four gospel writers devote almost half their books to simply recounting the events of the final days of Jesus earthly life.

Third, it was a celebration. Sometimes our way of remembering can be overly sombre and introspective, such as when we observe a minute of silence held to commemorate the dead. And indeed the Jews did have times of fasting (Esth 9:31), but the overall feel of Purim was a one of joy since their mourning had been turned to joy (Esth 9:22). It is important that when we celebrate the Lord’s supper, it is a genuinely joyful occasion, even if there is an appropriate solemnity to it as we consider the gravity of what Christ endured on our behalf. Like the early church, we should eat with “glad and sincere hearts” (Acts 2:46).

Fourth, it was a community affair – everyone gathered together and celebrated as a community. Though we do have this emphasis on family at Christmas, often the way we do communion is very individualistic, simply due to the logistics of being sat in rows. Maybe we would do well to celebrate communion more often in our homes at meal-times, gathered with small groups of believers, in order that we may remember together.

Esth 8:11 is one of the most troubling verses in the book of Esther for many Christian readers. Not only does Mordecai’s counter-edict effectively authorize a civil war, but its provisions seem unnecessarily barbaric. Although many English translations smooth things over somewhat, many commentators agree that the edict permits the Jews to kill the women and children of their enemies as well as plundering their property. Have Esther and Mordecai become corrupted by power? Have they sunk to the level of their enemies?

There are a few considerations that help us understand why the edict was framed in this particular way.

First, it was a mirror edict. The laws of Persians were irrevocable – to repeal a law would be tantamount to admitting that the king had made a mistake, which was unthinkable (much like modern-day politicians are derided if they make “u-turns”). Therefore, to counteract Haman’s edict, Mordecai’s edict had to be at least as strong, if not stronger. In other words, everything you can do, we can do too. To compare and contrast the edicts look at Esth 3:13 and Esth 8:11, and you will see that the provisions of the counter-edict are equal and opposite to the provisions of the original edict.

Second, because of its strength, the edict served as a deterrent. Anyone thinking that he might be able to target a wealthy and vulnerable Jewish family and take their home from them would now think twice, since his own family and home would come under threat as a result.

Third, it is important to note that the retribution is permitted against attackers only. In other words, Mordecai’s edict didn’t allow the wholesale slaughter of Haman’s people (the Agagites), but only against those who acted on Haman’s edict and attempted to annihilate the Jews.

But fourth, and most significantly, there seems to be a good chance that Esther and Mordecai see this as an occasion to wage holy war. The very concept of holy war is of course not easy for us to stomach. I will first explain why I think it applies here.

When we are first introduced to Haman, we are told that he is an Agagite (Esth 3:1). To most modern Bible readers, this seems like an irrelevant detail, but it is crucial to understanding the story. By identifying Haman as an Agagite, the author of Esther points his readers to the events of 1 Samuel 15.

In 1 Samuel 15, Israel’s first king, Saul, is commanded by God to wage holy war against the Amalekites and destroy them completely, taking no plunder (1 Sam 15:3). Saul does attack and defeat the Amalekites, but spares the best of the cattle and their king, Agag (1 Sam 15:9). The prophet Samuel famously tells Saul that “to obey is better than sacrifice” and that God will remove the kingdom from Saul as a result of his disobedience (1 Sam 15:22-23).

In fact, the hostility between Israel and the Amalekites stretches even further back. They were the first nation to attack the Israelites, while they were still wandering in the desert. In Ex 17:16 we are told that “the LORD will be at war against the Amalekites from generation to generation” and in Deut 25:19 specific instructions are given to the generation that would enter the land that they should wipe out the Amalekites:

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! (Deut 25:19)

In other words, Saul had missed the opportunity to end a long-running conflict between the two nations and now in Esther’s day it had come back to haunt them. That is why she was so determined to finish the job properly this time.

As distasteful as we may find the concept of holy war, the Old Testament does present it as one of God’s means of bringing judgment on the nations. It certainly was not a reward for Israel being righteous as Deut 9:4-6 makes plain.

For us living in the new covenant, the coming of Jesus has changed everything. We now no longer live in an age where holy war is to be practised or tolerated. Karen Jobes sums up this transition in her commentary on Esther:

The death of Jesus Christ, the Messiah of Israel, provides the only basis for the cessation of holy war, and the infilling of the Holy Spirit provides the only power by which one may love one’s enemies as oneself.

We’ll return to holy war in a couple of blog posts time when we consider the distinct lack of mercy found in the story of Esther

Chapter 7 ends with Haman being impaled on the pole he set up for Mordecai (Esth 7:10). If this was a movie, we might expect the credits to start rolling – the arch-villain has been defeated and now things are surely going to be OK. But there is still work to do. Haman’s edict of destruction is still in force, and the laws of the Persians cannot be revoked (Esth 8:8).

Now at this point in the story, Esther and Mordecai were probably personally safe. As queen and prime minister, they were unlikely to be slaughtered. But their people were still in danger and the job remained unfinished. Esther required great courage to make a second daring request to the king. That she recognised that she could not presume on his favour is clear from the very careful and respectful way she makes her second approach (Esth 8:5).

In the Belbin model of teams, one of the roles identified is called the “completer-finisher”. The completer finisher has an eye for detail and for seeing things right through to their completion. Clearly this type of person is a great asset to any team.

However, we cannot assume that completing and finishing things is the domain of a few specialists. God himself is a “completer-finisher” – when he starts a good work, he sees it through to the end (Phil 1:6). Paul considered his life worth nothing if he didn’t “finish the race” and “complete the task” he had been given. And of course the ultimate example is Jesus, whose food was to “finish the work” the Father had given him (John 4:34), and kept going right until he could say “it is finished” (John 19:30).

Admittedly, not everything we start is worth finishing. There is no point stubbornly persisting down a dead-end. But if God has given us a task to do, we need to stick at it until it is finished. This calls for faith, patience, courage, and endurance. Esther didn’t sit back on her initial success, she pressed on until the job was completed. She even went so far as to make a third request to the king (Esth 9:13) to ensure that the threat of annihilation was completely extinguished. She was a “completer-finisher”.

Whilst we have admitted that we don’t know exactly why Esther chose to delay her request until the moment she did, we can certainly say that it was a wise thing to do. She comes across in several places as a shrewd young woman, knowing not just when but how to act. Here she seems to have cunningly got Xerxes in just the right mood and frame of mind to be amenable to her request. Even the way she puts the request to him in Esth 7:3-4 shows how careful she was not to arouse the wrath of the king. Another example of her shrewdness is when she chooses to take Hegai’s advice in Esth 2:15, trusting a man to know what kind of clothes the king would find appealing.

But while “wisdom” is undoubtedly a virtue for Christians to pursue, can the same thing be said of “shrewdness”? One dictionary defines shrewdness as “showing clever resourcefulness in practical matters; artful, tricky or cunning; streetwise”.

In one of his strangest parables, Jesus tells the story of a dishonest manager who nevertheless is commended for his behaviour and used as a positive example:

"The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light. I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings. (Luke 16:8,9)

It raises the question of when shrewdness crosses the line into dishonesty or deviousness. In Matt 10:16, Jesus plainly tells his disciples that they will need to be shrewd – there are people out to get them. Yet he clearly believes that this does necessarily involve moral compromise – you can be shrewd and innocent:

I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. Matt 10:16

I think that the need for shrewdness is especially necessary when living in a culture that is hostile to Christian belief. How can we maintain a Christian lifestyle and witness without unnecessarily getting ourselves into trouble? This is where shrewdness comes into play. It is this kind of “clever resourcefulness” that enables us to fulfil our God-given mission and calling, while staying under the radar of those out to stop us.