It is a fairly well-known piece of trivia that Esther (minus the apocryphal chapters) is the only book of the bible that does not directly mention God. Which of the accepted schools of Hermeneutics consider this to be meaningful information for the interpretation of the text?
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
I don't think any "school of Hermeneutics" worth its salt would discount the importance of that characteristic of the book. While I don't believe it changes the interpretation of the book, it certainly underscores one of the central messages of the book: viz., The sovereignty of God is manifest even when it is hidden. Karen Jobes put it extremely well:
Iain Duguid echoes this same thought:
Personally, I take great comfort from the reminder that some of God's most thrilling work is done from "behind the curtain", so to speak. Often, it is when He seems most distant and invisible that I find He is most vitally active in my life and circumstances.