Esther 3 3

Esther 3:3 kjv

Then the king's servants, which were in the king's gate, said unto Mordecai, Why transgressest thou the king's commandment?

Esther 3:3 nkjv

Then the king's servants who were within the king's gate said to Mordecai, "Why do you transgress the king's command?"

Esther 3:3 niv

Then the royal officials at the king's gate asked Mordecai, "Why do you disobey the king's command?"

Esther 3:3 esv

Then the king's servants who were at the king's gate said to Mordecai, "Why do you transgress the king's command?"

Esther 3:3 nlt

Then the palace officials at the king's gate asked Mordecai, "Why are you disobeying the king's command?"

Esther 3 verses

Esther 3 3 Meaning

Esther 3:3 describes the confrontation faced by Mordecai after his consistent refusal to bow or pay homage to Haman. The king's servants, stationed at the important king's gate, directly questioned Mordecai, challenging his open defiance of a royal decree by asking, "Why do you transgress the king's command?" This verse marks the moment Mordecai's personal act of dissent becomes public, prompting official scrutiny and setting in motion the conflict that would endanger all the Jewish people in the Persian Empire.

Esther 3 3 Context

Esther chapter 3 introduces Haman, a highly favored official whom King Ahasuerus promotes above all other princes, decreeing that everyone must bow and pay homage to him (Esth 3:1-2). At this point, Mordecai, a Jew and royal servant at the gate, consistently refuses to obey this command. Verse 3 describes the consequence of his repeated disobedience: the other royal servants, having observed his steadfast refusal, openly question his actions. This verse directly follows the establishment of Haman's new position and the specific command issued by the king, placing Mordecai's defiant stand at the heart of the emerging conflict that ultimately threatened the annihilation of the Jewish people. Historically, Persian court protocol demanded prostration before the king and often before high officials. Mordecai's refusal, implicitly tied to his Jewish identity and faith (not explicitly stated in Esther but strongly inferred by biblical scholarship and Jewish tradition, seeing homage to Haman as verging on idolatry or bowing to an Amalekite enemy), marked a severe violation of court etiquette and royal decree.

Esther 3 3 Word analysis

• Then (וַיֹּאמְר֧וּ - vayyom'ru): The Hebrew waw consecutive indicates a direct sequence of events, showing this inquiry immediately followed Mordecai's consistent non-compliance as described in the previous verse.

• the king's servants (עַבְדֵ֤י הַמֶּ֨לֶךְ֙ - ʿavde ha-meleḵ): Refers to officials or loyal employees serving in the royal court, specifically those stationed at the gate. Their role implies familiarity with, and enforcement of, court protocols.

• who were at the king's gate (אֲשֶׁר֙ בְּשַׁ֣עַר הַמֶּ֔לֶךְ - ʾăšer bə-šaʿar ha-meleḵ): The "king's gate" was not just an entrance but a significant public and administrative hub in ancient Near Eastern capitals like Susa. It was a place for official business, judicial proceedings, and public proclamations, making Mordecai's visible defiance impossible to ignore. His actions here were openly challenging royal authority in a very public space.

• said to Mordecai (יֹאמְר֤וּ לְמָרְדֳּכַי֙ - yomru lə-Mordokhai): This indicates a direct, interpersonal challenge, not a private observation. They directly confront him regarding his behavior.

• Why do you transgress (מַדּ֡וּעַ אַתָּה֩ עוֹבֵ֜ר - madduaʿ ʾattah ʿovēr): "Madduaʿ" is a strong interrogative "why," demanding an explanation. "ʿOvēr" from the root ʿabar, meaning "to pass over, beyond, cross," here carries the clear connotation of "to violate, infringe upon, transgress." It implies a breaking of bounds, a crossing of a legal or authoritative line.

• the king's command (מִצְוַ֣ת הַמֶּ֔לֶךְ - miṣwat ha-meleḵ): "Miṣvat" from miṣvah, typically means "commandment" or "injunction." In this context, it refers to the royal decree (Esth 3:2) for all servants to bow to Haman. In the Persian system, a royal decree held absolute authority.

• Words-group analysis:

  • "The king's servants who were at the king's gate said to Mordecai": This phrase emphasizes the official and public nature of the inquiry. It highlights that Mordecai's actions were not merely personal but a public violation witnessed by those responsible for maintaining court order. Their direct question elevates the stakes, turning Mordecai's passive refusal into a potential formal charge.
  • "Why do you transgress the king's command?": This direct question isn't just about curiosity; it's an accusation that demands an account for defiance. It underlines the seriousness of disregarding a royal edict in a culture where the king's word was law. The focus on "transgress" highlights the legal and social implications of Mordecai's unwavering stance, framing it as a serious offense against imperial authority.

Esther 3 3 Bonus section

• Mordecai’s tribe, Benjamin, is significant as the Amalekites (Haman’s likely lineage through Agag) were perennial enemies whom King Saul (also a Benjamite) failed to completely destroy, hinting at a long-standing tribal and religious animosity underlying Mordecai's personal refusal.
• The unwritten reason for Mordecai's action highlights the Book of Esther's theological depth, prompting readers to infer God's guiding presence and the principles of faithfulness despite the absence of explicit divine pronouncements.
• The king's gate served as the "stock exchange" and news hub of the ancient world; thus, Mordecai's consistent stand would quickly become widely known and discussed, elevating its significance beyond a private matter.

Esther 3 3 Commentary

Esther 3:3 captures the crucial pivot point in the narrative where Mordecai’s quiet defiance becomes an open challenge. His persistent refusal to bow to Haman, a command established by royal decree, is now too conspicuous for his peers to ignore. The "king's servants at the gate," seasoned court observers and enforcers of protocol, are the ones who pose the question, indicating that Mordecai's action has gone from an individual decision to a matter of public concern that threatens the strict order of the Persian court. While the text of Esther is notable for not explicitly mentioning God, Mordecai's refusal is consistently interpreted by Jewish tradition and biblical scholarship as a deep-seated religious conviction. To bow to Haman, potentially an Amalekite descendant (an eternal enemy of Israel accordingah to the law), or to give such ultimate homage to a mere mortal, would be seen as a transgression against the one true God, contrasting with the first and second commandments. This single act of faithfulness by Mordecai, though appearing as "transgression" in the eyes of man, ultimately triggers God's providential plan to deliver His people, demonstrating that even subtle acts of spiritual integrity can unleash profound divine consequences.