Esther 3 10

Esther 3:10 kjv

And the king took his ring from his hand, and gave it unto Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, the Jews' enemy.

Esther 3:10 nkjv

So the king took his signet ring from his hand and gave it to Haman, the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, the enemy of the Jews.

Esther 3:10 niv

So the king took his signet ring from his finger and gave it to Haman son of Hammedatha, the Agagite, the enemy of the Jews.

Esther 3:10 esv

So the king took his signet ring from his hand and gave it to Haman the Agagite, the son of Hammedatha, the enemy of the Jews.

Esther 3:10 nlt

The king agreed, confirming his decision by removing his signet ring from his finger and giving it to Haman son of Hammedatha the Agagite, the enemy of the Jews.

Esther 3 verses

Esther 3 10 Meaning

King Ahasuerus, with a significant act of trust and delegation, removed his signet ring from his own hand and bestowed it upon Haman, the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, who is explicitly identified as "the enemy of the Jews." This action conferred upon Haman the king's full authority to validate and execute the decree he had proposed—the annihilation of all Jews throughout the Persian Empire. It marked a grave moment where immense royal power was ignorantly placed in the hands of one driven by bitter, ancestral hatred.

Esther 3 10 Context

Esther chapter 3 introduces Haman, a recently promoted official under King Ahasuerus, who demands everyone bow before him. Mordecai, a Jew, refuses, stating his inability to bow to Haman due to his reverence for God and his Jewish identity, implying that Haman's position demanded worship, or that he found bowing to an Agagite intolerable given their historical enmity with Israel. Incensed by Mordecai's defiance, Haman hatches a genocidal plot not just against Mordecai, but against all Jews throughout the vast Persian Empire. Through manipulation and a substantial bribe, Haman secures the king's unhesitating approval to execute his plan. Verse 10 specifically describes the symbolic yet powerful act by which the king transfers his legal authority to Haman, enabling him to enact the destructive decree without further royal scrutiny. This act takes place following Haman's persuasive (though deceptive) argument to the king in Esther 3:8-9, and immediately precedes the writing and promulgation of the decree.

Esther 3 10 Word analysis

• And: This conjunction ties the verse directly to the preceding events, showing a continuation of the narrative flow where Haman's persuasive, albeit false, counsel (v. 8-9) is acted upon.
• the king: Refers to Ahasuerus (Xerxes I), ruler of a vast, global empire. He embodies supreme secular power in the narrative. His actions, though often misguided by pride or negligence, have monumental consequences for his subjects.
• took his ring: The Hebrew word is "tabba'at" (טַבַּעַת), referring to a signet ring. This ring was not merely jewelry but the ultimate symbol of royal authority and the king's personal identity. It was used to seal official documents, making them legally binding decrees with the force of royal command. The act of taking it off his own hand signified a complete divestiture of direct personal authority for the purpose of transferring it.
• from his hand: This emphasizes a deliberate and personal action of delegation by the king. It signifies his trust and authorization given directly to Haman.
• and gave it: This denotes a clear, intentional act of conferral of power and legal authority. Haman was now an extension of the king's own legal persona.
• unto Haman: "Haman" (הָמָן) is a high-ranking official, presented as the antagonist. The king's granting him the ring underscores Haman's high status and the deep trust—however misplaced—the king placed in him.
• the son of Hammedatha: Standard genealogical identifier in ancient texts, specifying Haman's lineage. This was common practice in legal and historical records.
• the Agagite: This specific descriptor is immensely significant. "Agagite" connects Haman directly to Agag, the king of the Amalekites whom Saul was commanded to utterly destroy in 1 Samuel 15. The Amalekites were ancient, relentless enemies of Israel, whose conflict with God's people began shortly after the Exodus (Ex 17:8-16) and was declared a perpetual war by God himself. This designation immediately establishes Haman's hatred of the Jews as an ancestral, almost inherent animosity, setting the stage for a conflict rooted in deeply spiritual and historical opposition to God's chosen people.
• the enemy of the Jews: The Hebrew "tsār ha'yehudim" (צָר הַיְּהוּדִים) clearly identifies Haman as the personal and national adversary, foe, and oppressor of the Jewish people. This direct statement, breaking the typical objective narration, serves to explicitly highlight the antagonist's defining characteristic and primary motivation for his actions against a specific people. This identification elevates the conflict beyond personal revenge to a broader, perhaps even spiritual, level of opposition against a chosen people.
• Words-group: "took his ring... and gave it unto Haman": This phrase encapsulates the crucial transfer of authority. The signet ring, akin to the modern seal or signature, made any document irrevocable. The king, without due diligence, effectively granted Haman carte blanche to carry out his malicious design. It demonstrates the dangerous consequence of a ruler's casual abdication of responsibility.
• Words-group: "Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, the enemy of the Jews": This extensive identification reinforces Haman's character and historical background. His Amalekite lineage positions him not merely as a random foe, but as an inheritor of a deep-seated, generational enmity against Israel. This detail profoundly underscores the biblical context and magnitude of the threat. His self-designation as the Jews' "enemy" confirms his specific, hateful intent.

Esther 3 10 Bonus section

• Symbolism of the Hand: In the ancient Near East, the hand frequently symbolized power, authority, and agency. The king taking the ring from his hand and giving it to Haman's implied that he was symbolically entrusting a portion of his own executive power directly.
• The Unnamed God: While the book of Esther famously omits the direct mention of God's name, His sovereign hand is undeniably active throughout. The very precise and seemingly secular act of granting a signet ring becomes a pivot point in a drama where divine providence will ultimately prevail, showing God working behind the scenes through seemingly ordinary human actions and decisions.
• Contrast and Reversal: This transfer of the signet ring to Haman sets up a powerful thematic contrast with Esther 8:2, where the same ring, now recovered, is given to Mordecai. This reversal of power and authority from the enemy to God's chosen representative is central to the book's message of salvation and justice, powerfully demonstrating God's sovereign control over even the most absolute human rulers and their decrees.

Esther 3 10 Commentary

Esther 3:10 marks a critical juncture in the biblical narrative, illustrating the precipitous speed with which devastating power can be granted without discernment. The king's act of entrusting his signet ring to Haman signifies an unreserved, legally binding delegation of royal authority. This seemingly small gesture bestows absolute power to execute Haman's genocidal decree, exposing Ahasuerus's negligence and naivety. He empowers an individual whose identity is emphatically revealed as "the Agagite," linking him to the perennial adversaries of God's people, the Amalekites. This is not merely a personal dispute; it's a historical and spiritual continuation of ancient enmity against the nation from whom the Messiah would come. This act sets the stage for what seems like unavoidable disaster, yet paradoxically, it also lays the groundwork for God's divine providence to operate, turning human wickedness into an opportunity for His deliverance and the establishment of the Purim festival. It serves as a stark reminder of the danger in bestowing authority upon those consumed by prejudice and lacking wisdom.