story of esther briefly, with illustration

briefly, what was the story of esther?

king xerxes? after age twenty. see josephus for king name

religion caused people to add a baseless presupposition: any thing in the bible was the word of god "narrated by god" like "transcription" god told whoever which word he wanted them to write... but does that claim have any basis?

bible scholars, several admitted to me that this expectation is false they know more errors than i found or noticed.

for example the book of esther does not even CLAIM "god said to a prophet this is the story in the time of king etc." in contrast to "god said to moses this is the first month" that was claimed from god and similarly book genesis didnot even claim god told the author any story by prophecy nor the author claim i know the story by prophecy.

this false assumption can cause people to try to defend the text even by twisting the meaning away just to defend it from criticism when the need for defense is absent... nobody said this book is from god.

so the next question is the book of esther with its drama a dramatization? or a precise record.

those who claim it is precise rely on a human telling them it is holy but we cannot check.

it is as if nobody claimed it was holy so what remains is a book of drama. so what did it dramatize?

we are familiar with  dramatizations that altered the story for several reasons to hide errors and poor judgement and harm or damages but add emotions and other elements that did not occur to make it interesting.

esther has such elelments matching the idea of dramatization. the fact that the queen did not know until she asked some outsider... as if she is not queen... we only try to defend it if we have a presuppostion instead of evaluating the contents. instead of reading hundreds of words tell me briefly? as the jewish saying "dont tell me the gantz mgilla" meaning the whole scroll. it is an expression when people are too lengthy.

maybe it was pure imaginary fiction that some clever authors compiled. or based on a fact that was boring so it got dramatized.

i can "glean" the boring facts by removing the exagerations and drama.

admittedly it is boring which is the reason the authors exagerated and dramatized.

without the drama: a king decreed [see illustration] kill the jews. the queen convinced the king to cancel the decree... somehow the jews were saved.

the boring story was: queen told the king jew-hating is bad for business and taxes. she suggested making a list of jew haters by allowing them to kill the jews "next year" so people would come and join the "army" to kill while protected by king.

once many people registered the king killed the jew haters probably a couple thousand in the country. you can see this is boring so they needed to dramatize the queen getting replaced and "secret" not knowing which nation until the surprise and the suspense of inviting to a party and another and as critics point out "fillers" which cause the story less boring and filling the time after work... what else would you do without television they needed a long story and since they did not have one they dramatized. for example the "glorious victory jews killed thousadns" these are all teh exagerated dramatizations added to "sweeten" the boring kernel of truth simply by removing the drama... if we search for a basis when the book might be pure fiction.

the point is the king killed the jew haters... probably "wishful thinking" that never happened, but that lacked glory so they added the jews killed the enemy for dramatization not for accurate records.