The Pulpit Commentary — Esther — Section 18

friend~, the fea~t of pure a~e~tion. Of this feast of th~ ~ord of nature we mny say t~at, hke that m the text, 1t 1s one of regal bounty ; 1t 1s the constant and lavish kmdnes~ of a King; that, unlike that in the text, there is more of ltindness than ?s!entati?n in ~t-a " hiding of_ power" (Hab. iii: 4~ rather than a display ; nnd that 1t 1s ~ne m wh1c~ those who w1Bely accept the ~1ng s i~vitation may find a continual ond hfe-long enJoyrnent. They who eat and drmk at his table, as he invites them to clo, g? not throu~h an ei:citing in_toxication followe~ by ~ remorseful misery nnd emuii, but find m the gifts of his hand a perenmal sprmg of pure and lasting pleasure. Ill. THE FEAST OF THE PRINCE OF PEACE. Jesus Cl1rist, the" King's Son "has made ~or us a spiritual feast (Ma~. xxii: 1-:14) : "royal wine in !1b~ndance I, (ver. 7) ; bread enough and to sp!1Te at his ~nncely table for all _thirsting and hungering souls (Isa. Iv. 1; John v1. 35). In this gospel feast there 1s (1) no ostentation, but marvellous love ; the marked absence of all stately pomp and material splendour ( Isa. !iii.), but the presence of all generosity and self-sacrificing goodness. (2) Pro- vision, without distinction of rank (contrast vers. 3, 4, 5) or sex (contrast ver. 9) for al,l subjects, in whatever part of his kingdom they dwell (contrast ver. 5) • and (3) provision which lasts not for a.number of days ( contrast vers. 4, 5), but so lo~g as the heart hungers for the bread of life, as the soul thirsts for the waters of salvation.-C. Vers. 3, 4. -The hospital,ity of vainglory. The reign of Ahasuerus, or Xerxes, had now reached its third year. His sway was very wide, and other history lends valuable confirmation of the contents of the former of these verses. Herodotus far enough removed in his general tone from a Scripture historian, fixes this yea; as the year in which Xerxes summoned the rulers of his provinces to Susa, or Shushan, preparatory to his expedition against Greece. Although no mention is made here of this circumstance as the occasion of the feast, or as connected with it, yet the two intimations are not inconsistent with one another, and in fact are well fitted to one another. Each historian keeps the object of his own work in view. The thing which had no significance with Herodotus would be the consideration of primary significance in our present history ; and we get as the result a consent of two widely dul:ering authorities to testify to the fact of special doings in Shushan this year. The passage offers us a typical instance of a feast such as to answer correctly to the motto, " Self first, hospitality second." This is evidently the cha- racter of it. Yet let us take into account what may be said for it. 1. It was confeBBedly an Eastern feast, and as such it would have been considered essen- tially wanting if it had been wanting in the matter of display. 2. It was not a feast given by one of those people who had "received the oracles ; " who had been long time under a course of higher instruction ; who had heard, learned, pondered "the Proverbs of Solomon," or "the words of the Preacher, son of David, king of Jerusalem." Much less was it possible in the nature of thin~s to have been the feast of one, who had had the opportunity of knowing the doctrme of Christ in such a matter. 3. Yet nevertheless it answered in one respect to one of the pre- scriptions of Jesus Christ himself; for it was a feast which could not be returned to its giver-not in lcind, at all events. The feast of a great king, who drew on enormous wealth,-" made to " a whole multitude of princes, subordinate to him, and pro- longed over months,-this could not be returned to him. 4. It was a feast of unstinted plenty-the thought of a nature that had some sort of largeness about it, and the distributing of a hand that dropt more than the uncared-for crumbs of its own table. On the other hand- I. !T lfi INCONTESTABLE THAT THIB FEAST VISITS UPON ITS GIVER THE CONDEMNA• TlON OF VAINGLOB.IOUB DISPLAY AS B.EGAB.DS RIB "KINGDOM," AND BELF·BEEKING DIS- PLAY AS B.EGAB.DB BIS OWN "EXCELLENT MAJESTY." The greater the scale on which it was made, the more profuse its abwidance, the longer its continuance, so much the more impressive and convincing evidence does it furnish of vanity insatiable, of selfishness deep-seated, of the presence of the hand of one who not only sought the praise of men rather than that of God, but who sought to influence even those men by tLe lower kinds of appeal-those of sense a.nd the eye, rather than by any of a higher kind. CH, I, 1-9.] THE BOOK OF ESTHER. 15