link: http://cojs.org/frequently_asked_questi ... a_scrolls/Which books of the Bible were discovered at Qumran?
All of the books of the Bible were represented in the Qumran library with the exception of the Book of Esther. Scholarly opinion is divided on the reason behind the omission—some believe it is coincidental and others maintain that the book was intentionally excluded.
Then I remembered that a long time ago I read on Reddit that Esther was a "work of fiction" or something like that, then I decided to search about it.
Quote from Wikipedia under the topic Historicity:
link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_EstherThe apparent historical difficulties, the internal inconsistencies, the pronounced symmetry of themes and events, the plenitude of quoted dialogue, and the gross exaggeration in the reporting of numbers (involving time, money, and people) all point to Esther as a work of fiction, its vivid characters (except for Xerxes) being the product of the author's creative imagination. There is no reference to known historical events in the story; a general consensus, though this consensus has been challenged, has maintained that the narrative of Esther was invented in order to provide an aetiology for Purim
But another thing also impressed me, right at the beginning of the article:
Why does that?The books of Esther and Song of Songs are the only books in the Hebrew Bible that do not mention God.
link:Here are some reasons why God’s name may not have been referenced in Esther: first, one emphasis of Esther appears to be how God works behind the scenes. The book of Esther records no miracles and no direct intervention of God at all. In Esther’s story, the Lord redeems His people through the faith and courage of one strategically placed woman and her cousin. All the while, things are happening behind the scenes to bring about the final result.
Also, it is possible God is not mentioned directly in Esther because of the circumstances of its writing. Jewish tradition claims authorship by Mordecai. If Mordecai is the author, he wrote the book in Persia while serving under King Ahasuerus (or Xerxes). Instead of directly crediting God for the victory of the Jewish people, Mordecai may have written the book to better fit the polytheistic context of Susa. This would have kept him protected from harm by the king or other enemies while still communicating the account of God’s work through Queen Esther.
I have to agree with Got Questions that by a side it looks like a beautiful story of faith Esther 4:16. But by the other it also looks like some type of propaganda Esther 6:13.
It's also interesting to note that Esther and Mordecai aren't mentioned (at least by name) in the list of "examples of faith" by the apostle Paul in Hebrews 11, which is very weird for a story whose main theme is faith.
Regarding the authorship, the entire book is written in third person, like someone telling a story.
But let's suppose that it was Mordecai who wrote it. He, who didn't turn his knees to Naman, was able to omit God's name? For me that doesn't fit his personality.
And looks like that not even the Jews believe in the book:
link:The story itself is implausible as history and, as many scholars now agree, it is better viewed as imaginative storytelling, not unlike others that circulated in the Persian and Hellenistic periods among Jews of the Land of Israel and of the Diaspora. (emphasis added)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.myjewi ... sther/amp/
I don't want to offend the brothers who like the book, but I just can't stop to remember from:
2 Peter 1:16 For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
Titus 1:14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.
And then, the quote that literally shocked me:
https://amp.scroll.in/article/831443/tr ... ival-purimSome scholars have contended that given the striking resemblance between the names Esther and Mordecai to the Babylonian deities Marduk and Ishtar, the story was rooted in Babylonian worship practices, which the Jews would have adapted and transformed into the story of Esther. The well-known German Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz (1817-1891) for example, argued that the Book of Esther was written at the time of the Maccabean struggle (167-160 BCE) against Antiochus IV Epiphanes, in order to boost the spirit of the Jews at that critical time, and to show that god does not abandon its people.
Since I leave the Org. I learn from Tadua's (Beroean Pickets/Understand the Word) that most of O.T books have a first century fufilment, usually speaking about the coming of the Messiah, and Esther doesn't like to follow that pattern.
Different from Ruth for example who is even related with Jesus (Matthew 1:5)
Of course I can be wrong, but now everything looks to me that Esther should be apocryphal.