Exodus 18:21-22

18:21 But you choose ¹  from the people capable men, ²  God-fearing, ³  men of truth, ⁴  those who hate bribes, ⁵  and put them over the people ⁶  as rulers ⁷  of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. 18:22 They will judge ⁸  the people under normal circumstances, ⁹  and every difficult case ¹⁰  they will bring to you, but every small case ¹¹  they themselves will judge, so that ¹²  you may make it easier for yourself, ¹³  and they will bear the burden ¹⁴  with you.

Esther 1:1

The King Throws a Lavish Party

1:1 ¹⁵ The following events happened ¹⁶  in the days of Ahasuerus. ¹⁷  (I am referring to ¹⁸  that Ahasuerus who used to rule over a hundred and twenty-seven provinces ¹⁹  extending all the way from India to Ethiopia. ²⁰ )

[18:21]  ¹ tn The construction uses the independent pronoun for emphasis, and then the imperfect tense “see” (חָזָה, khazah) – “and you will see from all….” Both in Hebrew and Ugaritic expressions of “seeing” are used in the sense of choosing (Gen 41:33). See U. Cassuto, Exodus, 220.

[18:21]  ² tn The expression is אַנְשֵׁי־חַיִל (’anshe khayil, “capable men”). The attributive genitive is the word used in expressions like “mighty man of valor.” The word describes these men as respected, influential, powerful people, those looked up to by the community as leaders, and those who will have the needs of the community in mind.

[18:21]  ³ tn The description “fearers of God” uses an objective genitive. It describes them as devout, worshipful, obedient servants of God.

[18:21]  ⁴ tn The expression “men of truth” (אַנְשֵׁי אֱמֶת, ’anshe ’emet) indicates that these men must be seekers of truth, who know that the task of a judge is to give true judgment (U. Cassuto, Exodus, 220). The word “truth” includes the ideas of faithfulness or reliability, as well as factuality itself. It could be understood to mean “truthful men,” men whose word is reliable and true.

[18:21]  ⁵ tn Heb “haters of bribes.” Here is another objective genitive, one that refers to unjust gain. To hate unjust gain is to reject and refuse it. Their decisions will not be swayed by greed.

[18:21]  ⁶ tn Heb “over them”; the referent (the people) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[18:21]  ⁷ sn It is not clear how this structure would work in a judicial setting. The language of “captains of thousands,” etc., is used more for military ranks. There must have been more detailed instruction involved here, for each Israelite would have come under four leaders with this arrangement, and perhaps difficult cases would be sent to the next level. But since the task of these men would also involve instruction and guidance, the breakdown would be very useful. Deut 1:9, 13 suggest that the choice of these people was not simply Moses’ alone.

[18:22]  ⁸ tn The form is the perfect tense with the vav (ו) consecutive, making it equivalent to the imperfect of instruction in the preceding verse.

[18:22]  ⁹ tn Heb “in every time,” meaning “in all normal cases” or “under normal circumstances.” The same phrase occurs in v. 26.

[18:22]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “great thing.”

[18:22]  ¹¹ tn Heb “thing.”

[18:22]  ¹² tn The vav here shows the result or the purpose of the instructions given.

[18:22]  ¹³ tn The expression וְהָקֵל מֵעָלֶיךָ (vÿhaqel me’aleykha) means literally “and make it light off yourself.” The word plays against the word for “heavy” used earlier – since it was a heavy or burdensome task, Moses must lighten the load.

[18:22]  ¹⁴ tn Here “the burden” has been supplied.

[1:1]  ¹⁵ sn In the English Bible Esther appears adjacent to Ezra-Nehemiah and with the historical books, but in the Hebrew Bible it is one of five short books (the so-called Megillot) that appear toward the end of the biblical writings. The canonicity of the book was questioned by some in ancient Judaism and early Christianity. It is one of five OT books that were at one time regarded as antilegomena (i.e., books “spoken against”). The problem with Esther was the absence of any direct mention of God. Some questioned whether a book that did not mention God could be considered sacred scripture. Attempts to resolve this by discovering the tetragrammaton (YHWH) encoded in the Hebrew text (e.g., in the initial letters of four consecutive words in the Hebrew text of Esth 5:4) are unconvincing, although they do illustrate how keenly the problem was felt by some. Martin Luther also questioned the canonicity of this book, objecting to certain parts of its content. Although no copy of Esther was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, this does not necessarily mean that the Qumran community did not regard it as canonical. It is possible that the absence of Esther from what has survived at Qumran is merely a coincidence. Although the book does not directly mention God, it would be difficult to read it without sensing the providence of God working in powerful, though at times subtle, ways to rescue his people from danger and possible extermination. The absence of mention of the name of God may be a deliberate part of the literary strategy of the writer.

[1:1]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “it came about”; KJV, ASV “Now it came to pass.”

[1:1]  ¹⁷ tn Where the Hebrew text has “Ahasuerus” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV) in this book the LXX has “Artaxerxes.” The ruler mentioned in the Hebrew text is Xerxes I (ca. 486-465 B.C.), and a number of modern English versions use “Xerxes” (e.g., NIV, NCV, CEV, NLT).

[1:1]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “in the days of Ahasuerus, that Ahasuerus who used to rule…” The phrase “I am referring to” has been supplied to clarify the force of the third person masculine singular pronoun, which is functioning like a demonstrative pronoun.

[1:1]  ¹⁹ sn The geographical extent of the Persian empire was vast. The division of Xerxes’ empire into 127 smaller provinces was apparently done for purposes of administrative efficiency.

[1:1]  ²⁰ tn Heb “Cush” (so NIV, NCV; KJV “Ethiopia”) referring to the region of the upper Nile in Africa. India and Cush (i.e., Ethiopia) are both mentioned in a tablet taken from the foundation of Xerxes’ palace in Persepolis that describes the extent of this empire. See ANET 316-17.