Maccabees

  • Thread starter Thread starter HistoryTeacher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HistoryTeacher

Guest
Why isn’t Maccabees considered scripture by Jews? I know Chaunnaka (spelling?) isn’t that important of an event for them, but the fact that it is an event nonetheless and they have a perfectly good ancient document from the time, it seems like it should be part of the Talmud.

Brandon
 
40.png
HistoryTeacher:
Why isn’t Maccabees considered scripture by Jews? I know Chaunnaka (spelling?) isn’t that important of an event for them, but the fact that it is an event nonetheless and they have a perfectly good ancient document from the time, it seems like it should be part of the Talmud.
Brandon
You ask two different questions, Brandon, and each is quite poignant.

“Why isn’t Maccabees considered scripture by Jews?”
We have determined that it was not written with Divine Inspiration, and therefore can not be considered part of the Tanakh, or Jewish Scriptures.

“Why isn’t Maccabees a part of the Talmud?”
Aside from the fact that it was written hundreds of years before the Talmud was compiled by Rabbi Meir, the Book of Maccabees - while viewed as an acceptable and true historical source by the Jews - was not accepted into the main corpus of Jewish texts. The Hasmoneans were looked upon with disfavor by the Jews for having taken the throne and scepter away from the house of King David. That is why there are only eight references to them throught the entire Talmud.

Shalom!

Gil
 
GilKobrin said:
“Why isn’t Maccabees considered scripture by Jews?”
We have determined that it was not written with Divine Inspiration, and therefore can not be considered part of the Tanakh, or Jewish Scriptures.
Gil

How?

We know the process by which the Christian Canon was formed, what was the Jewish process?
 
The book of Maccabees has numerous errors in it, ie historical, geographical.

That is why, it is not considered “Scripture”
 
GilKobran wrote:
We have determined that it was not written with Divine Inspiration, and therefore can not be considered part of the Tanakh, or Jewish Scriptures.
Who determined that it was not written with Divine Inspiration? How? When? Was it ever considered Scripture and used in the synagogue?

(Obviously, I already know the answers to these questions, but I’d like to hear it from you. 🙂 )

JMJ Jay
 
40.png
av1611:
The book of Maccabees has numerous errors in it, ie historical, geographical. That is why, it is not considered “Scripture”
It is not considered Scripture by whom? When was it accepted as Scripture? When was it rejected? Can you point out these “historical, geographical” errors? And do you attest that other “Scriptures” are historically and geographically errorless? Do those qualities determine the inspiration of Scripture? How do you tell an “inspired” writing from one that is “not inspired?” How do you know that Maccabees is “not inspired” but that “Numbers” is? How do you know that Enoch is “not inspired”? Are you sure Maccabees was rejected because of historical and geographical errors? 😃

JMJ Jay
 
  • In 2 Macc 8:10 Nicanor wanted to pay 2,000 talents to the Romans; the Seleucids were not under the Romans. * In 2 Macc 8:20 8K Seleucids plus 4K Macedonians did not destroy 120,000 Galatians in Babylonia.
  • Minor historical discrepancies between 1 & 2 Mac.
The Catholic encylopedia even says they were not inspired:

“Writers of Sirach (prologue) and 2 Mac (2:24-43; 15:38-40) indicate they were not inspired.”
 
40.png
av1611:
The Catholic encylopedia even says they were not inspired:

“.”
Not true This is what the encylopedia states: The title of four books, of which the first and second only are regarded by the Church as canonical; the third and fourth, as Protestants consider all four, are apocryphal.

Note it states the first and second are regarded by the Church as canonical.
As for errors, the article covers that too. newadvent.org/cathen/09495a.htm

Though not included in the Hebrew Bible after the first century A.D., nor accepted by Protestants, the Book of Sirach has always been recognized by the Catholic Church as divinely inspired and canonical. The Foreword, though not inspired, is placed in the Bible because of its antiquity and importance.
 
40.png
HistoryTeacher:
Why isn’t Maccabees considered scripture by Jews? I know Chaunnaka (spelling?) isn’t that important of an event for them, but the fact that it is an event nonetheless and they have a perfectly good ancient document from the time, it seems like it should be part of the Talmud.

Brandon
This is an article that might answer you question

cin.org/users/james/files/deuteros.htm
 
40.png
av1611:
  • In 2 Macc 8:10 Nicanor wanted to pay 2,000 talents to the Romans; the Seleucids were not under the Romans. * In 2 Macc 8:20 8K Seleucids plus 4K Macedonians did not destroy 120,000 Galatians in Babylonia.
    • Minor historical discrepancies between 1 & 2 Mac.
Genesis says the world was created in 7 days, it also says animals were created before humans and humans were created before animals. Do you leave Genesis out of the Bible, too?

Protestants who doubt Maccabees are probably ones who have not read it. It’s a heroic story of Jews laying their lives down for their beliefs. “Inspired” or not, you should read it.
 
Hi all!

Our Sages (at Yavneh/Jamnia, after the destruction of the 2nd Temple in CE 70 :crying: & before the Bar Kochba Revolt in CE 132-135) excluded the so-called Apocryphal books from the Tanakh (what we call what you call the “Old Testament”) for several reasons. Ferinstance, I Maccabees, while considered to be very historically accurate & written by a believing Jew, was not considered to be Divinely inspired. The Prayer of Manasseh, while quite moving & a spiritual gem, was considered to be inauthentic (i.e., not by King Manasseh) as well as uninspired. Other books were considered to be full of nonsense (i.e. ideas that didn’t jibe with the Torah), as well as inauthentic and/or uninspired.

This tinyurl.com/435wl is The Jewish Encyclopedia entry entitled “Biblical Canon”; this tinyurl.com/2jaeu is the entry on “Apocrypha”.

We (orthodox Jews) believe that whereas the Torah (Genesis to Deuteronomy) has existed in its current form since God finished dictating it to Moses our Teacher, the other books of the Tanakh were codified and “canonized” by our Sages (see above). We believe that the authorship of the 39 books of the Tanakh is as follows:

Genesis to Deuteronomy: God dictated, Moses wrote it down.

Joshua wrote his own book.

Judges was written by Samuel.

I & II Samuel were written by Samuel and other prophets & chroniclers such as Gad and Nathan.

I & II Kings are compilations.

Isaiah wrote his own book.

Jeremiah wrote his own book.

Ezekiel wrote his own book.

Hosea wrote his own book.

Joel wrote his own book.

Amos wrote his own book.

Ovadiah wrote his own book.

Jonah wrote his own book.

Micah wrote his own book.

Nahum wrote his own book.

Habakkuk wrote his own book.

Zephaniah wrote his own book.

Haggai wrote his own book.

Zechariah wrote his own book.

There is disagreement about Malachi. The word “malachi” literally means “my messenger.” Some of our Sages say that such a man with such a name wrote the book. Other Sages identify Malachi with Ezra.

Psalms was written by King David, King Solomon, Asaph, Heiman, etc.

Proverbs was written by King Solomon, Agur and Lemuel.

The verdict is still out on Job. Some say it was written by Job himself. Others say that the book is a parable.

Song of Songs was written by King Solomon.

Ruth was written by Samuel.

Lamentations was written by Jeremiah.

Ecclesiastes was written by King Solomon.

Esther was written by Esther and Mordecai.

Daniel wrote his own book.

Ezra wrote his own book.

Nehemiah wrote his own book.

I & II Chronicles were written by Ezra.

The above is the order in which the books appear in a Jewish Tanakh.

The first 5 books are the Torah. The next 21 are the Prophets, or Nevi’im, in Hebrew. The next 13 are the Writings, or Ketuvim, in Hebrew. Hence the acronym Tanakh (which is what we call what you call the “OT”).

Howzat?

Be well!

ssv 👋
 
40.png
av1611:
The book of Maccabees has numerous errors in it, ie historical, geographical.

That is why, it is not considered “Scripture”
scripture isn’t primarily concerned with history or geography. It doesn’t try to be a history book but it does communicate true history. as far as geography and topography, the presence of discrepencies in those areas within the text aren’t primary concerns in determining it’s inspiration.
 
do any of the New Testament books quote/refer to the Maccabees or any other deuterocanonical books?

I read the Apostles used the Septuagint to spread the word. . .which is an argument for the inclusion of the Deuterocanonicals. . .but any direct references or quotes would seem to completely smash the protestant rejection of these books.

Brandon
 
40.png
sweetchuck:
Genesis says the world was created in 7 days, it also says animals were created before humans and humans were created before animals. Do you leave Genesis out of the Bible, too?

Protestants who doubt Maccabees are probably ones who have not read it. It’s a heroic story of Jews laying their lives down for their beliefs. “Inspired” or not, you should read it.
The world was created in 7 days, and animals were created before man. Whats your point?

They were literal days
 
40.png
av1611:
“2 Mac (2:24-43; 15:38-40) indicate they were not inspired.”
2 Mac chaper 2 only has 32 versus. Chaper 15 has 39 none of the versus indicate they were not inspired.
 
People, seized by passions, will rape the Scriptures according to their desires St. Clement of Alexandria
 
40.png
stillsmallvoice:
Hi all!

Our Sages (at Yavneh/Jamnia, after the destruction of the 2nd Temple in CE 70 :crying: & before the Bar Kochba Revolt in CE 132-135) excluded the so-called Apocryphal books from the Tanakh (what we call what you call the “Old Testament”) for several reasons. Ferinstance, I Maccabees, while considered to be very historically accurate & written by a believing Jew, was not considered to be Divinely inspired. The Prayer of Manasseh, while quite moving & a spiritual gem, was considered to be inauthentic (i.e., not by King Manasseh) as well as uninspired. Other books were considered to be full of nonsense (i.e. ideas that didn’t jibe with the Torah), as well as inauthentic and/or uninspired.
Thanks so much stillsmallvoice and thanks for the handy links as well. God spanks you guys kinda hard doesn’t he?
 
40.png
av1611:
The book of Maccabees has numerous errors in it, ie historical, geographical.

That is why, it is not considered “Scripture”
So, can you tell me in what years and bible versions they were in and out of Scripture? Do non-Christians like Jews have the right to edit Christian literature? Does your Scripture have any errors in it?

Ok, I’ll stop with the questions here. I don’t want this to seem like I’m shot-gunning you here with too many questions. I just want to know where you’re opinions are coming from and their sources. I would like to study some of your sources online if I could.

God Bless,

PS, I own a “REAL” King James version too! (i.e. AKJV of 1611) I like it. It too has errors like Mk 6:20, 9:18 and Acts 12:4.😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top