Mordecai: Joseph 2.0

The world of computer programming has provided multiple examples of software “updates” that were inferior to their predecessors. Microsoft followed up the incredible success of Windows XP with two infamous failures: the Windows Vista and Windows 8 operating systems, both hated by users. The significant blow to Microsoft’s reputation serves as a reminder us that “Version 2.0” does not always represent an advance over a predecessor.

The Bible, though, often depicts its characters as “new” versions of earlier heroes, a phenomenon known as typology—an earlier “type” is a foreshadowing of a later “antitype.” The most obvious example is the New Testament’s presentation of Jesus as the perfect “Version 2.0” of Old Testament figures.

Paul calls Jesus “the second man” (1 Cor. 15:47), in contrast to Adam, who was a “type of the one who was to come” (Rom. 5:14). Jesus, the “son of David,” is so superior to his kingly forefather that even David himself had to address him as “Lord” in Psalm 110 (see Matt. 22:41–45). Melchizedek, the priest-king of ancient Jerusalem in Genesis 14, prefigured the work of Jesus, a priest and king superior to all who came before him (Heb. 5:1–10; 6:19–20; 7:1–28).

The New Testament employs typology to instruct the church about God’s redemptive plan and, above all, about the Redeemer. We sometimes fail to realize that the Old Testament also uses typology to present its own heroes as “Version 2.0” of an earlier figure. Let’s consider the book of Esther’s depiction of Mordecai as a kind of “second Joseph.” By doing so, we will see how this Old Testament book speaks about Jesus Christ (Luke 24:44).

How Is Joseph a ‘Type’ of Mordecai?

Mordecai’s life and service to the Persian king Ahasuerus (Xerxes) is remarkably similar to Joseph’s service to Pharaoh. Just as Joseph was taken against his will to live in a foreign land (Gen. 37:12–36), so also Mordecai lived as an exile in the Persian capital of Susa (Est. 2:5–6). While both men eventually rose to second in ruling power (Gen. 41:40; Est. 10:3), both experienced hardship and humiliation along the way (Gen. 39–40; Est. 4:1–17).

The New Testament employs typology to instruct the church about God’s redemptive plan and, above all, about the Redeemer.

When Pharaoh placed Joseph in power “over all the land of Egypt,” he gave him the royal “signet ring” that was on his own hand, just as Ahasuerus gave the “signet ring” he wore on his hand to Mordecai (Gen. 41:41–42; Est. 8:2; cf. 3:10). Pharaoh exalted Joseph by dressing him in fine clothes and making him ride in a royal chariot preceded by a crier (Gen. 41:42–43); similarly, Ahasuerus ordered that Mordecai also be dressed in royal clothes, mounted on the king’s horse, and led in procession to proclamations of the king’s favor (Est. 6:9, 11). Ironically, this exaltation was the idea of the villain Haman.

The striking similarities between these two Old Testament heroes lead us to respond like Bernie Kropp in The Incredibles: “Coincidence? I think not!”

What’s at Stake?

By presenting Mordecai as “Joseph 2.0,” the author of Esther helps the reader to understand what’s at stake in the narrative. Behind the scenes, it was the Lord who had providentially sent Joseph to Egypt to preserve the lives of many, including a “remnant” of the sons of Israel (Gen. 45:5–8).

While the book of Esther has a “secular” appearance on the surface because it never explicitly mentions God, we can see the Lord’s providential hand at work in bringing Mordecai to a position of rule and authority. In the end, the Lord uses Mordecai (as he did Joseph) as an agent of salvation for many people, both Jew and Gentile (Gen. 41:53–57; Est. 8:17; 9:3; 9:27; 10:3).

Just consider for a moment that if Haman were to succeed in exterminating “the people of Mordecai, throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus” (Est. 3:6), it would extinguish the Davidic house and thereby prevent the coming of Jesus, the Son of David (see Rev. 12:1–6).

What Can We Learn?

Joseph’s life and service to the kingdom of God in the book of Genesis serve as a foreshadowing type of Mordecai’s life and service. Yet these two Old Testament heroes point even further ahead to the ultimate antitype: the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Joseph’s life and service to the kingdom of God in the book of Genesis serve as a foreshadowing type of Mordecai’s life and service.

Joseph tells his brothers the most profound lesson he learned from what he endured: “As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today” (Gen. 50:20).

The same lesson proved true for Mordecai: The Lord “reverse[s]” (Est. 9:1) Haman’s evil plot against Mordecai, saves the Old Testament people of God, and thereby preserves the messianic line.

The ultimate instance of God turning the greatest of evils into the highest good, however, is found in the cross of Christ. As the apostle Peter testifies on the Day of Pentecost,

This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it. (Acts 2:23–24)

We have the testimony of three witnesses—Joseph, Mordecai, and Jesus—to assure us that whatever evil may befall us, God can turn it to serve his good and perfect purposes.

It requires great faith in the Lord’s power and grace, but the believer should find incredible comfort knowing that “for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose” (Rom. 8:28). Even when life seems as dark as it can possibly be, the Lord is still “God of our salvation” (Ps. 88:1, 18).