(1.00) | (Est 4:9) | 1 tn Heb “the words of Mordecai” (so KJV); NIV, NRSV, CEV “what Mordecai had said”; NLT “with Mordecai’s message.” |
(0.87) | (Est 3:4) | 2 tn Heb “Will the matters of Mordecai stand?”; NASB “to see whether Mordecai’s reason would stand.” |
(0.86) | (Est 9:4) | 2 tn Heb “the man Mordecai” (so NASB, NRSV). |
(0.71) | (Est 4:4) | 1 tn The words “about Mordecai’s behavior” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in translation for the sake of clarity. Cf. NIV, NLT “about Mordecai”; TEV, CEV “what Mordecai was doing.” |
(0.57) | (Est 8:10) | 1 tn Heb “He”; the referent (Mordecai) has been specified in the translation for clarity. |
(0.57) | (Est 4:5) | 2 tn Heb “concerning Mordecai, to know what this was, and why this was.” |
(0.57) | (Est 3:4) | 1 sn Mordecai’s position in the service of the king brought him into regular contact with these royal officials. Because of this association the officials would have found ample opportunity to complain of Mordecai’s refusal to honor Haman by bowing down before him. |
(0.51) | (Est 3:1) | 2 sn The promotion of Haman in 3:1 for reasons unexplained contrasts noticeably with 2:19-23, where Mordecai’s contribution to saving the king’s life goes unnoticed. The irony is striking. |
(0.50) | (Est 2:19) | 2 sn That Mordecai was sitting at the king’s gate apparently means that he was a high-ranking government official. It was at the city gate where important business was transacted. Being in this position afforded Mordecai an opportunity to become aware of the plot against the king’s life, although the author does not include the particular details of how this information first came to Mordecai’s attention. |
(0.50) | (Est 2:22) | 1 sn The text of Esther does not disclose exactly how Mordecai learned about the plot against the king’s life. Ancient Jewish traditions state that Mordecai overheard conspiratorial conversation, or that an informant brought this information to him, or that it came to him as a result of divine prompting. These conjectures are all without adequate support from the biblical text. The author simply does not tell the source of Mordecai’s insight into this momentous event. |
(0.49) | (Est 2:5) | 1 sn Mordecai is a pagan name that reflects the name of the Babylonian deity Marduk. Probably many Jews of the period had two names, one for secular use and the other for use especially within the Jewish community. Mordecai’s Jewish name is not recorded in the biblical text. |
(0.43) | (Est 4:13) | 1 tn Heb “Mordecai.” The pronoun (“he”) was used in the translation for stylistic reasons. A repetition of the proper name here is redundant in terms of contemporary English style. |
(0.43) | (Est 4:1) | 1 tn Heb “Mordecai.” The pronoun (“he”) was used in the translation for stylistic reasons. A repetition of the proper name here is redundant in terms of contemporary English style. |
(0.36) | (Est 3:7) | 3 tc The LXX adds the following words: “in order to destroy in one day the race of Mordecai, and the lot fell on the fourteenth day of the month.” The LXX reading is included by NAB. |
(0.35) | (Est 9:30) | 1 tc The present translation is based on the Niphal form וַיִּשָׁלַח (vayyishalakh, “were sent”; so also NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT) rather than the reading of the MT וַיִּשְׁלַח (vayyishlakh, Qal, “and he sent”). The subject of the MT verb would have to be Mordecai (cf. NAB, NIV, NCV), but this is problematic in light of v. 29, where both Esther and Mordecai are responsible for the letters. |
(0.31) | (Est 3:2) | 2 sn Mordecai did not bow. The reason for Mordecai’s refusal to bow before Haman is not clearly stated here. Certainly the Jews did not refuse to bow as a matter of principle, as though such an action somehow violated the second command of the Decalogue. Many biblical texts bear witness to their practice of falling prostrate before people of power and influence (e.g., 1 Sam 24:8; 2 Sam 14:4; 1 Kgs 1:16). Perhaps the issue here was that Haman was a descendant of the Amalekites, a people who had attacked Israel in an earlier age (see Exod 17:8-16; 1 Sam 15:17-20; Deut 25:17-19). |
(0.31) | (Est 10:3) | 5 sn A number of additions to the Book of Esther appear in the apocryphal (or deuterocanonical) writings. These additions supply further information about various scenes described in the canonical book and are interesting in their own right. However, they were never a part of the Hebrew Bible. The placement of this additional material in certain Greek manuscripts of the Book of Esther may be described as follows. At the beginning of Esther there is an account (= chapter 11) of a dream in which Mordecai is warned by God of a coming danger for the Jews. In this account two great dragons, representing Mordecai and Haman, prepare for conflict. But God responds to the prayers of his people, and the crisis is resolved. This account is followed by another one (= chapter 12) in which Mordecai is rewarded for disclosing a plot against the king’s life. After Esth 3:13 there is a copy of a letter from King Artaxerxes authorizing annihilation of the Jews (= chapter 13). After Esth 4:17 the account continues with a prayer of Mordecai (= part of chapter 13), followed by a prayer of Esther (= chapter 14), and an account which provides details about Esther’s appeal to the king in behalf of her people (= chapter 15). After Esth 8:12 there is a copy of a letter from King Artaxerxes in which he denounces Haman and his plot and authorizes his subjects to assist the Jews (= chapter 16). At the end of the book, following Esth 10:3, there is an addition which provides an interpretation to Mordecai’s dream, followed by a brief ascription of genuineness to the entire book (= chapter 11). |
(0.29) | (Est 2:7) | 5 tn Heb “had taken her to him.” The Hebrew verb לָקַח (laqakh, “to take”) describes Mordecai adopting Esther and treating her like his own daughter: “to take as one’s own property” as a daughter (HALOT 534 s.v. I לקח 6). |
(0.14) | (Pro 21:18) | 1 sn The Hebrew word translated “ransom” (כֹּפֶר, kofer) normally refers to a penalty paid in place of some other punishment or the price paid to free a prisoner. But since it seems out of place to suggest that the just face a punishment that they need a ransom for, the proverb remains obscure. Similar wording is reflected in Isa 43:3-4 where God substitutes Egpyt as Judah’s “ransom” and Ethiopia and Seba “in place of” Judah. In that passage Judah is not just, but has been punished and is now being redeemed. Another application reported by R. Murphy is that punishment intended for a group may take the wicked from that group, who then serve metaphorically as a ransom for the righteous (R. Murphy, Proverbs [WBC] 161), but as Murphy points out this is an application rather than the assertion of the proverb. R. N. Whybray (Proverbs [CBC], 121) similarly suggests it may taken to mean that the wicked suffers the evil he has prepared for the righteous, which harmonizes with Proverbs elsewhere (e.g., 11:8). When Haman is taken in place of Mordecai (Esth 7:9-10) would illustrate an application where the righteous escape and the wicked suffer in their place. |