Being so far away from the days of the Bible, we may well ponder on why men found satisfaction in the worshipping of idols. The futility of the action is obvious to sophisticated gentiles. But the futility of devoted service to the unrighteous mammon is not obvious to the sophisticated gentiles. If one needs pity, so does the other, for the end of both is identical.
Idol worship was more pronounced in the Old Testament than in the New, but, although the gentiles of the days of the apostles were converts from idolatry, conversion was not foolproof.
Paul in the last chapter of his second letter to Timothy says, “Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me”. The sentence does not end there. The desire to see Timothy is not an isolated thought; it is as though Paul wants to talk things over—maybe to unburden himself about the problem of Demas. He goes on to say, “. . . for Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world”.
Technically, we can understand Demas’ defection, but spiritually it is a mystery how anyone can desert the high calling in Christ Jesus. Peter would say, “The dog is turned to his vomit again”. Demas was returning to his “gods” (even though they might be taking a different form). We shall never know what attracted him away from the Truth, but his decision is as empty in its ultimate satisfaction as the reward of the unrighteous mammon worshippers, or of the early idol worshippers. These things, whatever their phase, have a promise of substance but only a shadow results.
The world of Esther seems like our own. We are in the presence of a dictator before whom all men—but not all women tremble is plotting and intrigue and the heads of the mighty tumble. But there is no mention of God at all. There are no open signs of His interest or presence, but somehow He intrudes into the mind with a dominant conviction, exactly as we are convinced in these days.
That veiled hinting of God we call Providence is in the background and the courageous Mordecai brings Him into prominence; and Mordecai appears like a rose in the desert. His reasoning with Esther is so similar to the things we often say. Events take a certain course and in time become propitious for a certain action. Were events coincidental?
“For if thou altogether boldest thy peace at this time, then shall there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place; but thou and thy father’s house shall be destroyed: and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this?”
King Hezekiah, it seems, knew no doubts: his was an urgent exhortation to “come to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem and keep the passover unto the Lord God of Israel”. He would be aware of the constant danger of the influence of other nations’ gods. The great problem was, and always is, how to live by faith and not by sight.
In every heathen temple a man-made carving is there creating an image on the mind of the beholder. The face, the eyes, the very gestures depicted imprint themselves. A confidence is created, even if it fails through disaster or defeat in war, and although the security is false it carries things over for the time being. The blows that human beings suffer are quickly dissipated as time passes and new interests emerge. The heathen returns to his gods confessing his guilt and believing that the gods will be bring victory next time. In the same way the “Demases” return to the world. They meet their defeats and disappointments. In consolation, perhaps circumstances were adverse; or they had committed an error of judgment. There is little difference in either case and in the end there is but one fate.
Hezekiah took charge; commanded his princes and priests; appointed responsibilities in accordance with the Law of Moses. Trial came quickly, but not until the establishment thereof” of the services of the house of the Lord.
The Assyrian argument was a direct challenge to all that Hezekiah had planned. It is evident that the basis of the king’s life was known to the invaders. “As the gods of the nations of other lands have not delivered their people out of mine hand, so shall not the God of Hezekiah deliver his people out of my hand.” Several verses are devoted to this sort of argument. “And they spake against the God of Jerusalem, as against the gods of the people of the earth, which were the work of the hands of man.”
How could the God of one city be successful where gods of all the nations failed? Here was the challenge: trust a God we cannot see or surrender to the arm of flesh whose strength had distinct limitations when the test came?
Sennacherib came too late! In their spiritual education, Hezekiah had spoken “comfortably to them”–The margin says, “He spake to their heart”. “Be strong and courageous, be not afraid nor dismayed for the king of Assyria, nor for all the multitude that is with him: for there be more with us than with him: with him is an arm of flesh: but with us is the Lord our God to help us, and to fight our battles. And the people rested (margin, Heb. leaned) upon the words of Hezekiah king of Judah.”
May we, too, lean on these words—the Hezekiahs have all to gain, the Demases have all to lose!
The Solution