Maccabees and Hanukkah

[LilyM]

Yep, i second that! Happy Hanukkah
God Bless

Interesting that so many of our non-Catholic brothers won’t admit the legitimacy of this particular book of Scripture when the Jews see fit to institute a festival in remembrance of its events

Oh yeah - happy Hanukkah too

 

[SolaFide]

It has its origins in Maccabbees… though

No, it has it’s origins in history. When Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) rules Syria and Palestine (175-164 BC) he forbids and literally outlaws Judaism and any practices related thereto. He enforced a policy of basically “Hellenize” or die. Antiochus actually had sweeps through the country about every 6 months checking the newborn male babies and if they were circumcised he had the whole family killed.

This was just another pogrom in a long history of the enemy, Satan, trying to eradicate the Jewish people. Antiochus tried to destroy all copies of the Torah and required offerings to the Greek god Zeus.

Of course, his worst insult to the Jews was erecting an image to Zeus in the Temple and then sacrificing a pig in the Temple to Zeus.

When Mattathias destroyed a Greek altar that had been erected in his village and killed Antiochus’ emissary, it sparked a revolt. Judas Maccabeus, Mattathias eldest son lead the revolt. Thus this was referred to as the Maccabean Revolt.

Finally, at the end of the struggle and the Maccabeas gained the victory they knew the temple would have to be cleansed from it’s defilement. Following the Levitical pattern to cleanse the Temple the oil in the lamps is never supposed to go out. However, oil was in short supply due to the struggle and other factors, so there was only enough oil for one day. However, the oil burned for 8 days, a miracle of God. Thus the “Festival of Lights” or also known as “Feast of the Dedication” is Chanukkah.

Josephus is a good resource to research the history of the Jews. His works are available free online as they are in the public domain. His “Antiquities” and “Wars of the Jews” are his definitive works.

 

[ralphinal]

No, it has it’s origins in history. When Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) rules Syria and Palestine (175-164 BC) he forbids and literally outlaws Judaism and any practices related thereto. He enforced a policy of basically “Hellenize” or die. Antiochus actually had sweeps through the country about every 6 months checking the newborn male babies and if they were circumcised he had the whole family killed.

This was just another pogrom in a long history of the enemy, Satan, trying to eradicate the Jewish people. Antiochus tried to destroy all copies of the Torah and required offerings to the Greek god Zeus.

Of course, his worst insult to the Jews was erecting an image to Zeus in the Temple and then sacrificing a pig in the Temple to Zeus.

When Mattathias destroyed a Greek altar that had been erected in his village and killed Antiochus’ emissary, it sparked a revolt. Judas Maccabeus, Mattathias eldest son lead the revolt. Thus this was referred to as the Maccabean Revolt.

Finally, at the end of the struggle and the Maccabeas gained the victory they knew the temple would have to be cleansed from it’s defilement. Following the Levitical pattern to cleanse the Temple the oil in the lamps is never supposed to go out. However, oil was in short supply due to the struggle and other factors, so there was only enough oil for one day. However, the oil burned for 8 days, a miracle of God. Thus the “Festival of Lights” or also known as “Feast of the Dedication” is Chanukkah.

Josephus is a good resource to research the history of the Jews. His works are available free online as they are in the public domain. His “Antiquities” and “Wars of the Jews” are his definitive works.

and the Book of Maccabbees also records that story. To me this is one form of proof that the Jewish People used the book in their faith at the time of Christ.

 

[SolaFide]

and the Book of Maccabbees also records that story. To me this is one form of proof that the Jewish People used the book in their faith at the time of Christ.

There are a lot of errors of facts and chronology of events in 1 Macabees. It’s interesting reading but it certainly isn’t in the same category of "inspired’ Scripture. In fact, none of the Apocryphal books claim to be inspired. There are no “thus saith the Lords” in the Apocrypha.

 

[LilyM]

There are a lot of errors of facts and chronology of events in 1 Macabees. It’s interesting reading but it certainly isn’t in the same category of "inspired’ Scripture. In fact, none of the Apocryphal books claim to be inspired. There are no “thus saith the Lords” in the Apocrypha.

Unlike, say, the Song of Songs, which has ‘thus saith the Lord’ every other verse …

 

[Mannyfit75]

There are a lot of errors of facts and chronology of events in 1 Macabees. It’s interesting reading but it certainly isn’t in the same category of "inspired’ Scripture. In fact, none of the Apocryphal books claim to be inspired. There are no “thus saith the Lords” in the Apocrypha.

Oh really. I don’t think so:

This criteria that they are only Scripture if it specifically says “This is the inspired Word of God” would eliminate 26 of the 27 New Testament books, and many of the Protocanonical books. The gospels or the epistles do not call themselves inspired Scripture. 2 Tim. 3:16 does not claim itself to be inspired. It says Scriptures are inspired, but does not call itself Scripture. 2 Pet. 3 says Paul’s writings are inspired, but makes no identification of any books, (Could he have referred to Paul’s letters that we don’t have in 1 Cor. 5:9 or the letter from Laodicea, (Colossians 4:16) which we don’t know) and certainly doesn’t claim itself to be Scripture. The only book in the New Testament that claims to be inspired in and of itself is the book of Revelation. Because of the very different type of book this is, its own canonicity was very much in question until the Church decided that it was Scripture in the late 4th century. Thus, 26 out of 27 books in the New Testament don’t claim themselves to be Scripture, so even if this was true, if you throw out the Deuterocanonicals on that basis, you would only have the Book of Revelation, whose very canonicity was in doubt for centuries.

There are Deuterocanonical books that claim to be inspired. In fact in the book of Sirach we see a claim to be inspired in the same way that Moses is (Sir. 24:22-34). In Sirach 24 we see parallels to Proverbs 8 with teaching on Wisdom. The Creator gives a commandment (Sir. 24:8, thus equivalent to ‘thus saith the Lord’) All who labor for instruction are told to read it in the same manner that one reads Moses (Sir 24:22-34, esp. v. 34). Also, an angel in Tobit tells him to write the book that we have as Tobit, Tob. 6:12-22. We have a divine confirmation of this book that is not confirmed in 26 out of 27 New Testament books. So Mr. Cloud’s theory that no Deuterocanonical books claim to be inspired is not only incorrect, but would eliminate most New Testament books and many Protocanonical books. So thus, the claim of its own inspiration is not determinative of what is Scripture. After all, the Book of Mormon claims to be inspired.

 

[Mannyfit75]

It is agreed that 2 Macc. 12 is a unique Scriptural passage which says to offer sacrifice for the dead. In fact, this passage, though Christianity accepted this as Scripture for 1500 years was pointed out to Luther, who was operating on the newly created Sola Scriptura principle. This passage shows Scripture explicitly teaching purgatory. Luther didn’t like this passage and decided to throw this passage out of the Bible. AC Sundberg, a Lutheran himself documents this in the book, The Old Testament canon of the Early Church, Harvard Divinity School. He thus takes away from Scripture, condemned in Revelation 22:18. However, using that criteria, if we throw out Luke and Matthew we would have no direct explicit indication that there was to be a virgin birth in Scripture. Using Luther and Cloud’s criteria, why can’t I throw out Luke and Matthew and call the virgin birth ‘unbiblical’?
1 Tim. 2:5-6 is totally irrelevant to whether 2 Maccabees is inspired or not. When seen in the light of New Testament revelation, where 2nd Maccabees 12 speaks of making atonement for the dead, it is clear that it does not do away with Jesus as mediator, but is the application of what he did on the cross to the final cleansing from all iniquity. Someone must do something to apply the fruits of Jesus’ death on the cross to one’s soul. After all, 1 John 1:9 says that the blood of Jesus will cleanse us from all iniquity. Cloud’s idea that we are merely ‘covered’ with an imputed righteousness makes folly of 1 John 1:9, and Rev. 21:27. Also, if one must say the salvation prayer (Cloud’s man-made tradition) to appropriate that salvation, and confess with one’s mouth that Jesus is Lord, that is doing something. Even the criteria of ‘faith alone’ says one must have faith in order to appropriate salvation. On what grounds is confessing, and having faith, (which are indeed actions) etc. not do away with Jesus as mediator while the truly cleansing (not merely covering) of one from sin does do that?

The reference to Hebrews 10 to say that one’s salvation is set no matter what one does and the sacrifice needs no further application is a selective look at the passage of Heb. 10:10-14, where the context is speaking of the application of the sacrifice to those who are being sanctified, which is indeed an ongoing process. In fact, in the same chapter, Heb. 10:26 specifically says that if one willfully sins that sacrifice is no longer of any help to that person. This includes a severe punishment (in Hell) for those who have been sanctified by the blood of the covenant (which can only happen to those in God’s grace!!! Thus, just because one is sanctified as spoken of in Heb. 10:10, 14, Mr. Cloud’s guarantee of once saved always saved is directly refuted immediately after the passage he points us to. Thus, one can turn one’s back on that once and for all sacrifice and it will no longer be of avail for that person. Hebrews specifically warns people that one must persevere, to stay within his grace (Heb. 2:1-3; 3:1,5-6, 12-14, 16-19, 4:1-3, 11-14, 6:4-6, 9-12, 10:22-29, 35-38, 12:5-11, 12-17, 25-26). The selective citation of Heb. 10 to make a point which totally contradicts the rest of Hebrews is sort of self-defeating.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Besides that there are other passages in Scripture which speak specifically like things we do to help get sins cleansed. For example, 1 Pet. 4:8 says Above all hold unfailing your love for one another, since love covers a multitude of sins. Apparently love cleanses us from sins. If we walk in the light and confess our sins, we get cleansed from sin via his blood (1 Jn 1:7, 9). Thus, actions that we take get sins forgiven. That is exactly what 2 Macc. 12 does.

The deceased saints in heaven are more alive in Christ in heaven than when they were here on earth. Jesus says this about those who are in Christ, Mark 12:26-27:

26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err. Those who die in Christ are more alive than they were on earth. Mr. Cloud, declares Jesus, errs greatly in saying that the dead in Christ are not alive and aware of what is going on. They are more aware of what is going on and as the Church is only one Body, of course they intercede for those on earth who are in the same body, the Church. We have glimpses of this in Scripture (Rev. 5:8, 6:9-10 8:3-4). They are aware of what is going on in earth (Rev. 18:20). After all, Scripture says that we have come to the assembly of the first-born enrolled in heaven (Heb. 12:24). How can we come to them if they have nothing to do with us? Thus, 2nd Maccabees reflects very much the picture that New Testament Scriptures give us on this matter.

 

[Mannyfit75]

This is pure subjectivism. This is the ‘burning in the bosom’ Mormon criteria. If one just reads it, one just gets the feeling that this is Scripture. Of course, I would love to see this criteria applied to the letter of Philemon. If Mr. Cloud was independently reading the book of Philemon, I would love to see if he really got the chills and say ‘O, this feels like Scripture.’ In fact Mr. Cloud really only knows that Philemon is inspired is because he is told it is so from his Fundamentalist tradition, which borrows from the Protestant tradition which wholesale took from the Catholic Church which declared Philemon to be canonical. When reading the genealogies of Genesis, the dietary laws, statistics and numbers in Numbers and Chronicles, does one just ‘know’ that this is Divine Scripture? When Ecclesiastes tell us that ‘all is vanity’ (Eccl. 1:2, 14, 12:9, etc.) does that inspire us? If Ecclesiastes was a Deuterocanonical book, I can tell you that Mr. Cloud would quote that passage and use this criteria he uses as proof that it is not Scripture. Does 2nd and 3rd John just ‘grab’ Mr. Cloud as obviously divine Scripture? There is tremendous breadth of thought in such books as Wisdom and Sirach. The writings of Sirach are very close to the book of Proverbs. The types of literature found in the Deuterocanonical books have counterparts within the Protocanonical and/or New Testament books. There is a tremendous variety of types of literature both within the Deuterocanonical and Protocanonical books. Some book are just a plain, inspired reporting of facts, and some books are different types of literature meant to convey God’s truth in other ways to mankind, just as in the Protocanonical books.

 

[Mannyfit75]

The fact is that Jesus and the apostles unquestionably use the Deuterocanonicals, even if the authors do not explicitly say, “It is written”. and apply it to the Deuterocanonicals. In fact, on many occasions in Scripture likewise there are allusions to Protocanonical books without the specific phrase ‘It is written’ preceding that. Now a cogent example of a reference to a Deuterocanonical book is that found in Hebrew 11:35:

Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection .
This is as close to a citation as one could get, as it is obvious that Hebrews 11:35, the second part, is speaking of the brothers in the Maccabees who died in the hope to rise again to a better life. See 2nd Maccabees 7. No Protocanonical book has those events, where someone is tortured, and has the hope of the resurrection of life. Also, elsewhere there is a borrowing from Deuterocanonicals in the New Testament, even if there are not formal citations which are preceded by “It is written.” Paul for example, in Romans 1:19-32, clearly borrows from Wisdom 13. Wisdom 2:18-20 is clearly referred to in Matthew 27:43 as well. Also, James 1:19 clearly alludes to Sirach 5:11:
James 1:19 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath.
Sirach 5:11: Be quick to hear, and be deliberate in answering.

There are other references as well. Even if there are not quotations per se, the ideas are intertwined and a borrowing from the Deuterocanonicals is clear. An url that goes into even more allusions and borrowing from the Deuterocanonicals is here (including prophecies): scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html Another url that gives plenty of examples of the deliberate use of the Deuterocanonicals are here (at the bottom of the url) geocities.com/Athens/Forum/3975/deuter.htm Thus, uses to eliminate these books not only do not eliminate these books as he ignores the clear use of these passages by Jesus and the apostles, but would eliminate 12 of the Protocanonical books that he accepts.

 

[Mannyfit75]

So SolaFide’s claims are false. The Maccabbees are inspired they have been used even by the Apostles and Jesus Christ. Second, 2 Tim 3:16 it said, All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, 17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

All Scripture included Deutrocanonical Books. The Jews themselves didn’t close their canon until 90 AD in the Council of Jamnia. So the claim it isn’t inspire, its contradicted by Paul.

 

[homewardbound]

So the claim it isn’t inspire, its contradicted by Paul.

Wow, Manny. Good job!

Happy Hanukkah for all who celebrate it!

 

[ralphinal]

Why does it seem like I spin threads out of control? Besides, if strict historical accuracy is needed for a work to be inspired, there goes a lot of the Bible. It is not ment to be a textbook but a guide book.

Anyway, Happy Hanukkah again

 

[Mannyfit75]

Why does it seem like I spin threads out of control? Besides, if strict historical accuracy is needed for a work to be inspired, there goes a lot of the Bible. It is not ment to be a textbook but a guide book.

Anyway, Happy Hanukkah again

Some Protestant like to discredit the Maccabbees because of its account of Hanukkah. Well, SolaFide always like to attack us. That’s his nature to be Anti-Catholic.

[SIGN]Happy Hanukkah! Shalom![/SIGN]

 

[Lev23]

Nice one Manny, didnt see that one coming. That is using a thread to give Hanukkah greatings as a vehicle to prove Macc1-2 as inspired.

You baited in your “let me quote from scripture” and solafide bit.

Your good man, really smooth!

 

[Mannyfit75]

Nice one Manny, didnt see that one coming. That is using a thread to give Hanukkah greatings as a vehicle to prove Macc1-2 as inspired.

You baited in your “let me quote from scripture” and solafide bit.

Your good man, really smooth!

It was not baited. I merely want to show the history of Hanukkah and the only source of it is found in the the Book of Maccabbees.