Queen Vashti

[amh]

Was she right to disobey the king? Was she a virtuous woman despite her choice to not submit to Ahaseurus?

[Servant's <3]

We have no indication that Vashti was a virtuous woman. She was a Persian. According to Persian culture she should have done what the king commanded of her.

I could be mistaken but "display her beauty" doesn't mean walk around naked...

Was it correct for Ahaseurus to get rid of her? Culturally, of course. Scripturally.... no

Is it wrong if your husband comes by and you comment to some other women how handsome he is? or how much you like how he looks in some piece of clothing you bought him? or what a loving man he is, or how he is good father, etc etc?

Is it wrong if your wife comes by and you comment how beautiful she is to some of your friends? or how she is a wonderful cook, or great mother, etc etc?

[amh]

Originally Posted by Servant's <3

We have no indication that Vashti was a virtuous woman. She was a Persian. According to Persian culture she should have done what the king commanded of her.

I could be mistaken but "display her beauty" doesn't mean walk around naked...

Was it correct for Ahaseurus to get rid of her? Culturally, of course. Scripturally.... no

Is it wrong if your husband comes by and you comment to some other women how handsome he is? or how much you like how he looks in some piece of clothing you bought him? or what a loving man he is, or how he is good father, etc etc?

Is it wrong if your wife comes by and you comment how beautiful she is to some of your friends? or how she is a wonderful cook, or great mother, etc etc?

I don't assume that he wanted her to come in the nude. But I don't think I would want to be the only woman at a party surrounded by men who had been drunk for the past 6 months.

We don't know Ahaseurus, and we don't know his intentions, but they might have been somewhat immoral and confused when he was drunk.

[Servant's <3]

You are assuming the women were all sober? I mean if you choose to read that he wanted or intended her to do something immoral or what not that is your choice but we have no scriptural basis for that assumption.

I'm not saying he did or didn't only that it doesn't say. What it does say is he basically wanted to show off what a beautiful wife he had. Weird... yes... immoral.... probably not.

Although I think it was common for kings to have their wife come out in front of nobles, princes etc and then brag about them... kind of a display of success or power.

Back then having an attractive wife was considered a display of wealth or success. Remember back then women were not considered equal... even if God intended it that way. (them to be equal that is)

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Servant's <3

We have no indication that Vashti was a virtuous woman. She was a Persian. According to Persian culture she should have done what the king commanded of her.

I could be mistaken but "display her beauty" doesn't mean walk around naked...

You are not mistaken, the LXX as Masoretic text agree that she wasn't to come out naked. On the contrary, she was to come out representing her position as queen. Hence she was to walk out before the rulers wearing the mark of her position, she was to wear her crown. Midrashim tradition have two different schools of thought concerning this, but any Rabbinical tradition should be taken with a grain of salt.

Originally Posted by Servant's <3

Was it correct for Ahaseurus to get rid of her? Culturally, of course. Scripturally.... no

Culturally, absolutely yes, scripturally? Of course!

I think people get it a little fuddled, Herod is rebuked by John the Baptist because Herod was SUPPOSED to be the King of Judea. John knew full well, that Herod was a usurper, and that his position was political, that the Herod family were the puppet kings of Rome. That Herodian position was maintained by Rome. John the Baptist clearly mocks Herod for taking the wife of his brother Phillipus. Showing the mockery of these converts to Israelism. Yet, the Persians weren't converts to the God of Judea, they were pagans. Yet, ancient kings did as they felt was right. The Persian king had to release Vashti, because she disobeyed, and for a wife to disobey was disgrace for a common man, but for a king unfathomable. The word of a king was never to be changed, even after the king's death. Like King Cyrus' degree to rebuild the city of Jerusalem, no matter what any king believed afterward, they always had to go back and review documents of kings that proceeded them to inquire what they kings before them decreed. Those degrees had to be maintained by the kings who would follow. Contradicting, the standard of a previous ruler would then set precedence that following kings' laws could be nullified.

When the Persian king calls for Vashti, she refuses, her refusal sets a precedence for not only all other queens who would follow her, but for all women of the kingdom. Hence it is the king's advisory council who demand that Vashti be dethroned and replace as soon as possible.

[Servant's <3]

Unless of course a kings decree goes against God's word... such as the case with Daniel.

I was saying that one does not get to divorce one's wife/husband just because she doesn't do what they say.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Servant's <3

Unless of course a kings decree goes against God's word... such as the case with Daniel.

You mean, unless it goes against God's course of action? In the book of Daniel the Babylonian king gets the revelation that God will set the basest of men over the kingdom Daniel 4:17. While also true that the Lord manipulates rulers to His own benefit Daniel 2:21,Romans 13:1, still not every decree set forth by the king was God's will. 1 Kings 3:9-10 speaks of King Solomon asking for a noble gift to govern the people, but later would stray from God's perfect will in his own life. Men, as well as rulers, have a free will, and that is what gets them in trouble.

Originally Posted by Servant's <3

I was saying that one does not get to divorce one's wife/husband just because she doesn't do what they say.

Yet, that isn't the case in Esther, nor answering what the poster wanted to know. You are dealing with a ancient monarchy, which didn't just have to answer to the people, but had to answer to their own cabinet, and legal system which they adopted from the rulers who came before them.

[mfblume]

Vashti stands as Israel in that true historical story, and Esther is the church. Notice when Jesus came Israel was rejecting him, her King, and having her own little religious activity. So, another took her royal estate. Jesus said the kingdom shall be taken from Israel and given to another.

[mfblume]

Est 1:19 If it please the king, let there go a royal commandment from him, and let it be written among the laws of the Persians and the Medes, that it be not altered, That Vashti come no more before king Ahasuerus; and let the king give her royal estate unto another that is better than she.

Mat 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

Both occurred the day each party refused to honour their respective kings.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Vashti stands as Israel in that true historical story, and Esther is the church. Notice when Jesus came Israel was rejecting him, her King, and having her own little religious activity. So, another took her royal estate. Jesus said the kingdom shall be taken from Israel and given to another.