MACCABEES, BOOKS OF (Μακκαβαίων; Lat. Machabaeorum). A series of books relating events centering around Judas Maccabeus and other heroes in the Jewish struggle for religious and political freedom. During the 3rd and 2nd centuries b.c. persecution was unleashed against the Jews by Egyptian and Syrian kings, particularly the infamous Antiochus IV Epiphanes. All but 3 Maccabees concentrate on Antiochus.

1 and 2 Maccabees are included in the Apocrypha, whereas 3 and 4 Maccabees are ranked among the pseudep. The books vary greatly in historical reliability, content and style.

The Maccabees in Perspective

I. 1 Maccabees

A. Title. By the late 2nd cent. a.d. the title τὰ̀ Μακκαβαϊκα (“The Things Maccabean”) was used to refer apparently to 1 and 2 Maccabees. Possibly only 2 Maccabees was intended, since the surname “Maccabeus” applies in its strictest sense only to Judas, who dominates all of 2 Maccabees, but shares the spotlight with his brothers in the longer history of 1 Maccabees. If related to מַּקֶּ֣בֶת, meaning “hammer” in Judges 4:21, etc., “Maccabee” may mean “hammerer.” Others have suggested “extinguisher” or “mallet-headed” also.

Josephus asserts that Mattathias, father of Judas and his four brothers, was descended from Hashmoneus (Jos. Antiq. xii. vi. 1). Since the Talmud refers to this famous family as “Hasmonean,” and “Maccabee” does not occur in Sem. lit. before the Common Era (a.d.), it is likely that the “Book of the House of the Hasmoneans” was the original title of 1 Maccabees. This designation occurs in the Heb. Josippon (a tr. of Josephus’ Jewish War) to indicate a source for the wars of Judas.

Origen called the book σαρβηθ σαβαναιελ (Euseb. Hist. VI. 25. 2), an obvious Sem. term of uncertain meaning. שׁר בית שׁבנה אל, “the prince of the house which God built” is one possible rendering. If it is a badly corrupted title, it might be equivalent to the Aram. “the book of the house of the princes of God.”

Clement of Alexandria (c. a.d. 195) refers to 1 Maccabees as τὸ̀ τῶν Μακκαβαϊκῶν, and Eusebius specifically mentions ἡ πρώτη καλουμένη τῶν Μακκαβάιων βίβλος. Gr. MSS commonly designate 1 and 2 Maccabees as Μακκαβαίων A and Μακκαβαίων B.

B. Unity. In spite of the steady chronological order and sustained style of the book, scholars have occasionally questioned the authenticity of chs. 13:43 to 16:24. The material in these chs. was used sparingly if at all by Josephus in his Jewish Antiquities, so some have concluded that his copy ended prior to this point and that the final chs. were a later addition. A few small contradictions in ch. 14 do lend themselves to this view, but there are discrepancies earlier in the book also. Josephus apparently stopped using 1 Maccabees as a source for the period following Simon’s induction as high priest owing to his earlier Jewish War, in which he had utilized the material of Nicholas of Damascus. Josephus felt free to modify and amplify his sources, so his switch back to a previous work does not prove that the chs. in question are spurious.

C. Sources. From several standpoints it is clear that written sources were used by the author of 1 Maccabees. Of particular importance are several letters, perhaps accessible to the author from the high priest’s archives in the Temple (cf. 14:23 and 16:23f.). Chapter 8 contains a letter from Rome confirming an alliance with the Jews, and in spite of earlier skepticism, scholars today accept its genuineness. Another letter from the Rom. consul Lucius to Ptolemy Euergetes (15:16ff.) explaining the Jewish alliance appears largely authentic.

Several letters from Syrian rulers to the Maccabees are likewise included. Most are directed to Jonathan (10:18ff.; 11:30ff.; 11:57) and Simon (13:36ff.; 15:2ff.) and exhibit authenticity except in various details.

Correspondence between the Spartans and Jews (ch. 12) is open to question, particularly the letter from the Spartans to Onias (12:20f.). A Spartan message to Simon (14:20ff.) does at least reflect an official document.

The existence of a “biography” of Judas Maccabeus is postulated on the large proportion of material relating to him. Half of the book covers only seven years (166-160/59 b.c.) in contrast to the twenty-five year span for the other chapters. In 9:22 one discovers that the rest of the acts of Judas are not written since they were so numerous. This contrasts with the usual summary of a king’s reign found in Scripture (2 Kings 8:23; 10:34, etc.). It may indicate that the author concentrated only on those events concerning Judas which were recorded.

Judas’s biography may not have differed much from the annals which Jonathan and Simon would have kept as high priests. The book ends with a reference to the rest of John Hyrcanus’s activities which were recorded in the chronicles of his high priesthood (16:24). Since John’s accession is noted in 1 Maccabees, but little else, the author wishes to indicate an additional source for information regarding him. Chronicles about the rule of Jonathan and Simon were undoubtedly available in the archives also and were utilized in this historical sketch.

D. Authorship. In a period when party divisions were not clearly defined in Judaism, it is difficult to label the author either a Pharisee or Sadducee. He was a Palestinian who knew the terrain well judging from his precise descriptions of battle locations. Regions outside Pal. are little known to the author. He obviously revered the law and the Temple and vigorously opposed paganism. He is careful to avoid the name of God, referring to deity as “heaven” primarily. Such caution reflects the Pharisee’s practice of substituting for “Yahweh” lest they profane His name.

Perhaps the token summary of John Hyrcanus’s reign indicates that the author disapproved of certain tendencies of the Hasmonean rulers. Toward the end of John’s rule, he openly rebuffed the Pharisees and espoused the Sadducean cause. Dissatisfaction with this policy or the growing worldliness of the king, may be reflected in the failure to discuss John’s rule. The final vv. imply that he had been ruler for some years.

Other factors, however, seem to point toward the Sadducees as the party of the author. He does not refer to the resurrection of the dead, not even when great leaders have fallen (9:9f.). There is likewise no mention of angels or spirits, and strict Pharisaic Sabbath rules appear to be disregarded at times (2:40f.). Certainly there is no attempt to antagonize the Sadducees.

It would be possible to identify the writer with the Hasidim, the “pious ones,” embracing both Pharisees and Essenes. Yet, even the Hasidim are seen in a bad light for accepting Alcimus as chief priest in spite of Judas’s objections.

Contrary to the suggestion of some, the author prob. was not directly related to the Hasmonean family, owing to his criticism of their policies. It is more likely that he respected them highly while not actually belonging to their clan.

E. Date. Since the author does not side decisively with either the Pharisees or Sadducees, some scholars point to a date of about 110 b.c. for the book, before John Hyrcanus’s split with the Pharisees. The reference to the rest of John’s acts in the chronicles of the high priesthood (16:24) suggests that the author was living toward the end of his reign (134-104 b.c.) or shortly after his death. Those who do not accept the trustworthiness of the last few vv. tend to place the book in the early part of John’s rule.

F. Purpose and style. The author aimed at providing a chronological history of the key events surrounding the lives and accomplishments of the Maccabees. He extolled these valiant warriors and the little nation which they led to independence under God. This work may have been an unofficial history geared to rebuke the growing secularization of the Hasmoneans who succeeded the Maccabees.

The structure and purpose of the book parallel Ezra and Nehemiah in certain respects. Just as those canonical books record God’s providence over Israel under Pers. rule, so 1 Maccabees describes God’s care during the Gr. period. Some assert that this book was written as a sequel to Ezra and Nehemiah. The inclusion of decrees and letters does resemble the many items of official correspondence cited in 1 Maccabees.

Unlike the other books of Maccabees, the style is simple, straightforward and factual, with little effort to embellish the narrative or to interpret events. Old Testament references abound, as the Maccabees draw courage from the heroes of old (2:26; 4:30; 7:1-20). Scriptural terms and phrases are sprinkled throughout the text (3:45; 9:21, 22) and predicted events find some fulfillment. Compare the “great tribulation” (9:27) after Judas’s death and the prosperity of the “vine and fig tree” during Simon’s reign (14:4, 12; cf. Mic 4:4).

Occasionally the flow of the narrative is interrupted by one of the many official letters cited (cf. 15:16ff.). These documents, however, are usually well integrated with the writer’s own knowledge and other eyewitness accounts, so that the result is a credible history.

Several poetic sections often dependent on Biblical passages appear in the book. Laments occur most often, mourning Antiochus’s destruction of Jerusalem (1:24-28), the desecration of the Temple (1:36-40), the murder of many Hasidim (7:17) and the tragic death of Judas (9:21). The lament in ch. 7 is an adaptation of Psalm 79:2, 3. An imprecatory prayer directed against Nicanor occurs in 7:37, 38, and eulogies of Judas and Simon are recorded in 3:3-9 and 14:4-15.

G. Contents.

First Maccabees describes the Jewish struggle for independence from the tyranny of Antiochus Epiphanes in 175 b.c. through the reign of Simon Maccabeus in 134 b.c. After a nine v. introduction referring to the exploits of Alexander the Great, the division of his empire, and the rise of the Seleucids, the author outlines Antiochus’s outrages against the Jews, culminating in the “abomination of desolation” (1:10-64). Chapter 2 describes the fervent zeal of Mattathias, a priest who, along with his five sons, launched a bitter revolt in Modein against Antiochus’s soldiers and any Jews who collaborated with the Syrians out of expediency.

The major section of the book records the heroics of Judas Maccabeus, the most illustrious of the five sons. Several victories won after the death of Mattathias enabled Judas to recapture Jerusalem and rededicate the Temple (4:36-61). The Jews purified the Temple on the twenty-fifth of Chislev 164 b.c., a date commemorated in the Jewish feast of Hanukkah.

Judas and his brothers next won victories in Gilead and Galilee (5:17-68). After the death of Antiochus (6:1-17), Judas battled various generals and kings, including Antiochus Eupator, Lysias, and Nicanor. A treaty with Lysias (6:55-63) afforded a brief respite during this time. To pressure the Syrians, Judas concluded a treaty with Rome just prior to his death at Elasa against Bacchides (8:1-9:22).

His brother and successor Jonathan achieved further victories against the Seleucids, who were plagued internally with political intrigue. Using this turmoil to advantage, Jonathan received from them the title of high priest. He also maintained peaceful relations with Rome and the Spartans, only to be murdered by his supposed ally, Trypho (9:23-12:53).

Simon, the surviving brother, ruled from 142-134 b.c. and gained full political independence by capturing the citadel, the hated center of Hellenism in Jerusalem which was manned by a garrison. A special decree set up in the Temple guaranteed to Simon and his successors the offices of ruler and high priest until a faithful prophet would arise in Judea (14:41-44).

Antiochus VII even permitted Simon to coin his own money (15:1-9), although he later denied him this valuable concession (15:10-31). Simon and his sons were victorious over Antiochus, but an army officer named Ptolemy assassinated Simon along with Mattathias and Judas, two of his sons (16:3-16). John Hyrcanus, a third son, escaped and assumed control of the government (16:17-24). With the accession of this king, the book ends rather abruptly.

H. Teaching. The providence of God over Israel is paramount in the book, for the Jewish nation was a righteous center in the midst of an ungodly world. Israel was vitally important for other nations (10:4ff.; 11:3ff.; 14:10ff.), but their attempts to overwhelm her were repulsed by a God who controls history at every turn. Antiochus Epiphanes died because of his wicked acts against Jerusalem (6:1-17).

Numerical superiority means little in battle if the faithful seek God in prayer. Repeatedly, Judas prayed before conflict and encouraged his men to cry to heaven like the faithful of old (4:10, 30; 7:1-20, 36-38, 41f.). Such trust in God should, however, be coupled with sound military strategy.

The Maccabees were instruments of God for the preservation of the faith, and they frequently are compared with OT heroes. Mattathias’s death-dealing zeal for the law paralleled Phinehas’s slaughter of Zimri in Numbers 25:10-15 (2:26). Judas was a savior of Israel (9:21) like former judges and kings, and his death is lamented in terms used for Saul and Jonathan, “How is the mighty fallen!” (9:21; cf. 2 Sam 1:19, 25, 27).

Victory was due ultimately to God (5:62), and the Maccabees are not exalted unduly. The success of the ruling family was secondary to the destiny of the nation as a whole (4:59; 5:16; 7:48f.), and disillusionment with their later policies is implied.

The Messianic hope appears in connection with a faithful prophet who would come to deal with the profaned altar (4:42, 47), and to replace the dynasty of Simon as ruler and high priest (14:41). This “prophet” relates undoubtedly to the prophet like Moses mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:15, 18, vv. prominent at Qumran also.

Some features of the Messianic age are anticipated during Maccabean rule. Simon is praised for bringing peace, so that every man sat under his vine and fig tree (14:12), a probable allusion to the prophecy of Micah 4:4. A newly independent Israel must have rekindled hopes for Messiah’s coming.

Strict observance of the law was mandatory for the righteous man. Those who apostatized and connived to ruin the faithful were harshly condemned (3:15; 6:21f.; 7:10). God is a holy God who demands obedience to the principles of the Torah.

I. Original language. Although it is extant only in tr., there is little doubt that the book was first composed in Heb. Origen’s Sem. designation already has been discussed (see A. 1), and Jerome in his Prologus Galeatus states quite clearly that Heb. was the original language of 1 Maccabees. This Heb. text apparently lasted in some form until the period of Origen and Jerome, but Josephus utilized only the Gr. VS in the 1st cent. a.d.

It is possible that Jerome intended “Hebrew” to be understood as Palestinian Aram., but the nature of the Gr. tr. indicates otherwise. Frequently, this literalistic VS betrays obvious OT idioms, and on occasion, tr. errors are evident due to a faulty understanding of the original. Since the tr. shows an awareness of the LXX, he may have been an Alexandrian Jew, preparing his rendition near the start of the 1st Christian cent. Two trs. based on the Gr. VS were made into Lat. and two into Syr.

It seems strange that the rabbis failed to preserve the Heb. original to such a valuable Jewish work. This may reflect the disapproving attitude of influential Pharisees toward the worldliness so evident in the reign of the Hasmonean successors to the Maccabees.

J. Chronology. The dates in 1 Maccabees are crucial for the history of this period, for they are given with a precision which indicates the author had access to an official Seleucid chronicle. According to Josephus, the chronology is calculated from the year that Seleucus Nicator controlled Syria, a period beginning with the Battle of Gaza in the summer of 312 b.c. (Jos. Antiq. XIII. vi. 7). In 1:10 Antiochus Epiphanes becomes king in the 137th year of the Gr. kingdom, or 175 b.c.

The chronology is complicated, however, by different calendars employed by the Seleucids and the Jews. New Year’s Day occurred in the autumn in the Seleucid calendar, which paralleled the pre-exilic Judean custom for computing kings’ reigns from the first day of the seventh month, the present “Rosh Hashana.”

The postexilic Jews observed a spring New Year, following the Babylonian pattern and the ancient Heb. religious calendar. Dates in 2nd Maccabees often are one less than the corresponding date in 1 Maccabees. Antiochus Epiphanes died in 163 b.c. according to 1 Maccabees 6:16, but 2 Maccabees 9:1 and 11:23 place the same event in 148 b.c. Scholars do not agree concerning how this problem can be unravelled. Apparently 1 Maccabees began the second year of the Seleucid era in the autumn of 312 b.c., counting the remaining weeks of the summer after the Battle of Gaza as the first year. In 2 Maccabees, the Seleucid era may be calculated from the autumn of 311 b.c.

K. Relation to the NT. The Jewish expectation of a Messianic age and a prophet who should come (1 Macc 4:46; 14:41) parallels the attitudes found in the NT. When John the Baptist proclaimed Messiah’s coming, Jewish leaders asked him if he was “that prophet” (John 1:21, 25 KJV). Probably both groups had in mind Moses’ prediction of a great prophet (Deut 18:15, 18).

Instead of using a name of God, the author consistently refers to deity as “Heaven.” The people prayed to “Heaven” with the hope that He would hear (4:10). This substitution of the place for the name is compared by some scholars with the term “kingdom of heaven” (Matt 3:2). This may be virtually equivalent to the closely related “kingdom of God” concept.

While concluding his description of Judas’s life, the author declares that the remaining deeds of this hero were not written because they were so numerous. In similar fashion, John summarizes Jesus’ life by referring to “many other signs....which are not written in this book” (John 20:30). If these “many other signs” were to be recorded, even “the world itself could not contain the books that would be written” (John 21:25). (See I. C. 3 also.)

II. 2 Maccabees

A. Title. As mentioned above (I.A.), the 2nd cent. a.d. title τὰ̀ Μακκαβαϊκα may have referred exclusively to 2 Maccabees inasmuch as Judas, the focal point of this work, was properly “the Maccabee.” The book presents a summary or epitome of a five-volume history by one Jason of Cyrene (2 Macc 2:23ff.). Clement of Alexandria correctly refers to this book as ἡ τῶν Μακκαβαϊκων ἐπιτοψή “The epitome of the things Maccabean.” A more accurate title is given at the end of MS V: “An epitome of the Deeds of Judas Maccabeus.”

B. Unity. Since 2 Maccabees is based on the fivefold history of Jason, it is difficult to decide which material was original with the author himself. Within 3-15:36, which constitute the “epitome” proper, scholars have questioned the inclusion of official documents in ch. 11. Some doubt that either Jason’s history or the original 2 Maccabees contained them, but other authorities attribute the documents to Jason. Inasmuch as the work of Jason is no longer extant, most of the arguments of this nature are subjective and anything but conclusive.

Several contradictions and historical problems have cast doubt on the integrity of 2 Maccabees. Chronological errors abound, such as the placing of Antiochus Epiphanes’ death prior to the cleansing of the Temple by Judas (2 Macc 1:11-18; 9:1-10:9) or the description of episodes concerning Lysias following that same monarch’s decease (11:1-15). In the latter case, the two defeats of Lysias are merged into one badly confused account. Similarly, 8:30-33 relates battles with Timothy and Bacchides which interrupt the account of the victory over Nicanor (8:23-29, 34-36).

With regard to the death of the despicable Antiochus IV, variant accounts are given in chs. 1 and 9. The author must have noticed the discrepancy but preferred to follow his sources; any tradition of that tyrant’s death was worth preserving! Apparently he was bothered little by historical difficulties, avoiding the painstaking care of a thorough historian (2:28). Attempts at rearranging the book to eliminate errors break up whatever continuity remains, for most of the mistakes form an integral part of their present context.

Prefaced to the main body of the text are two introductory letters addressed to the Jews in Egypt (1:1-2:18). While there is some doubt as to their authenticity, these letters may well have been incorporated by the epitomist himself. The prologue (2:19-32) and epilogue (15:37-39) obviously were written by the author.

C. Sources

1. Jason’s history. The bulk of 2 Maccabees comprises an abridgement of a comprehensive history by Jason of Cyrene. This five-volume work has not survived, but many authorities outline the book on the basis of five divisions, which are each concluded with a summary statement (3:40; 7:42; 10:9; 13:26; 15:37). These sections may correspond to the volumes of Jason’s original production. Other scholars contend that the epitomist did not abridge Jason’s entire work, since Jason is said to have written about Judas Maccabeus and his brothers (2:19). Simon, the last of the brothers, died in 134 b.c., whereas the events described in 2 Maccabees stop at about 160 b.c. A five-volume history might be expected to cover more than the fifteen-year period dealt with in the epitome.

Parts of 2 Maccabees clearly reflect the process of condensation owing to their marked brevity (e.g. 13:22-26). Chapter 14 strangely omits any reference to Bacchides’ efforts to appoint Alcimus the high priest, an event which nevertheless seems presupposed (14:3, 4). Yet, other passages, such as those describing the martyrdoms (6:18-7:42), contain abundant detail and may have been amplifications of Jason’s narrative.

It is not likely that the epitomist or Jason made use of 1 Maccabees, even though there are many similarities of detail between the two. Some of the sources utilized by Jason and the author of 1 Maccabees may have been identical, however. The biography of Judas (cf. I. C.) could have been at Jason’s disposal, expanded at points by oral tradition about the Maccabean hero.

Since several of the dates involving Syrian rulers match those in 1 Maccabees, the epitomist prob. had access to a Seleucid chronicle. Numerical notations, such as the number of soldiers involved in battles, do not agree in 1 and 2 Maccabees, so different chronicles may have been followed.

The Temple archives prob. comprised another common source for the two historians. In at least two places (9:19-27; 11:16-38) documents are quoted which demanded access to those key Jerusalem records if they are indeed reliable quotations. Facts about Onias, Jason, and Menelaus may have been derived from priestly annals chronicling events prior to Judas’s triumphs. On the other hand, oral tradition could have been responsible for the circulation of much of this information.

2. Letters. The letters which introduce 2 Maccabees ostensibly were written from Pal. to Egyp. Jews mainly to encourage the remembrance of the purification of the Temple by observing Hanukkah (or Feast of Dedication). Two letters appear to be cited (2 Macc 1:1-9; 1:10-2:18), the first stemming from 124 b.c. and referring to a letter written in 143 b.c. (1:7, 8). The second letter is more suspect, for it includes some legendary material about the altar (1:18b-2:15) and a story of the death of Antiochus that differs substantially from other accounts. If genuine, this second letter was written about 165 b.c.

D. Authorship. The identification of either Jason or the epitomist who summarized the larger history is difficult. There was a nephew of Judas Maccabeus named Jason (1 Macc 8:17) and another Jason served as an envoy to Rome, but neither of these men can be connected positively with Jason of Cyrene. The epitomist himself was evidently an Alexandrian Jew, since the letters opening the book were written to the Jews in Egypt, and the rhetorical Gr. suits the style of Alexandria. Perhaps the emphasis upon the Jerusalem Temple was a pointed rebuke against the Jewish temple at Heliopolis. Others suggest that 2 Maccabees was composed in Antioch, for several of the martyrdoms might have happened there (7:3; cf. 6:8).

The author has been variously designated as a Pharisee or one of the Hasidim. Contrasted with the writer of 1 Maccabees the epitomist stresses such characteristic Pharisaic teachings as predestination, the active intervention of angels on behalf of God’s people, and the resurrection of the body. If the epitomist is identified less specifically with the Hasidim, as is the author of 1 Maccabees, it is hard to account for the vast differences between the two books. The Hasidim disapproved of Simon’s rule (10:18-22; 14:17-19), but the Pharisees doubtless shared this sentiment. Unlike 1 Maccabees 7:12-16, there is no reference in the epitome to the dispute between the Hasidim and Judas.

A case could also be made for an Essene background, for some have noticed several parallels between 2 Maccabees and the Qumran “War of the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness.” Both works frown on fighting during the sabbatical year, and slogans written on the banners of the “sons of Light” resemble those used by Judas (8:23; 12:11; 13:13, 15, 17; 15:7f.). Angels play a large role in the battles, although the War Scroll emphasizes evil angels also. The importance of restoring true Temple worship is another similarity within the two works. On the whole, however, these parallels seem more apparent than real; the Pharisaic identification remains the strongest view.

E. Date. Before examining the date of the extant book, one must investigate Jason’s earlier work. The date of that production depends partially on the identification of Jason and the scope of the epitome. If only a portion of Jason’s five volumes was abridged, a date far later than Judas must be sought (cf. II. C. 1). Even the traditions regarding Judas could have taken a number of years to develop, however, so the date for his history is placed tentatively during John Hyrcanus’s reign (134-104 b.c.), prob. after 130 b.c. Most authorities assume that Jason wrote before 1 Maccabees was composed.

The date of the epitome itself must be later than 124 b.c., since the first letter cited was written then (1:9). In the epilogue (15:37), Jerusalem is said to be controlled by the Jews, a power they relinquished to the Romans in 63 b.c. This date may provide a terminus ad quem for the writing of 2 Maccabees, although Zeitlin argued for a date during the time of Agrippa I (a.d. 41-44). By a.d. 50 one may safely assert that the book was in circulation.

F. Purpose and style. In his zeal to magnify the Temple in Jerusalem, the author aimed his book at those Egyp. Jews who may have been supporting the Jewish temple at Heliopolis. These brothers were exhorted by the introductory letters to observe the Feast of Dedication and thus maintain close unity with the Palestinian Jews. As he carefully depicted the events surrounding the desecration and purification of the Temple, the epitomist sought to foster proper devotion to the Jerusalem sanctuary. He was also intent on proving God’s providential care for His people.

A theological treatise such as 2 Maccabees differed widely from the unadorned, factual approach found in 1 Maccabees. Indeed, so distinct are these two works that one must not label the epitome “the second book of Maccabees,” as if it were a continuation of 1 Maccabees. Rather, it is another book about the Maccabean era. In contrast to the straightforward account of 1 Maccabees, the author of 2 Maccabees embellishes and amplifies his material, mixing historical details with a colorful style in order to delight the taste of the reader (2 Macc 15:39). Thorough historical research was snubbed, while incidents of great interest and emotional appeal were stressed and exaggerated (2:23-32). In general, Jason’s history was abridged, but where facts needed to be dressed up the epitomist waxed eloquent. Second Maccabees was unabashedly written for popular consumption in the florid and fluent Gr. common in Alexandria during this period. The author displays a large vocabulary in his descriptive zeal.

Because of the writer’s religious objective he emphasizes the supernatural, particularly the effective work of angelic horsemen. Frequently he attaches moral teaching to the outcome of battles. Individual heroism also is highly commended, notably that of Judas himself or of the martyrs.

G. Contents.

The book covers a fifteen-year period extending from a time just preceding the accession of Antiochus IV in 175 b.c. down to 160 b.c. Although it has 15 chs. compared with 16 for 1 Maccabees, it is considerably shorter. Two letters (1:1-9; 1:10-2:18) from Jews in Pal. to the Egyp. diaspora are prefaced to the work (see II. C. 2). They contain information about the purification of the Temple and the Feast of Dedication, which they are urging their brothers to keep. Then follows the prologue (2:19-32) acknowledging the author’s dependence on the history of Jason, which he hopes to abridge with sweat and long hours.

In the first ch. of the epitome proper, the author relates the abortive attempt of Heliodorus, an officer of Seleucus IV, to plunder the Temple. A horse with an awesome angelic rider struck Heliodorus dumb and preserved the sanctity of “the place.”

Chapter 4 outlines the struggles of the Tobiads to gain the high priesthood. Jason and then Menelaus, aided by the Tobiad temple officer Simon, wrested this position from Onias III, mainly through bribes given to Antiochus Epiphanes. As a result, Jerusalem was turned into a Gr. city. After miraculous signs in the sky, Jason attacked Jerusalem hoping to regain the high priesthood lost to Menelaus (5:1-10). Assuming that a major revolt was in progress, Antiochus unleashed a murderous attack on Jerusalem, desecrating and plundering the Temple, and forcing Judas to flee to the mountains (5:11-27).

Antiochus dedicated the Temple to Zeus and forced the Jews to honor the god Dionysus (6:1-9). Two women were killed because they circumcised their children, and other Jews were burned to death while keeping the Sabbath (6:10, 11). Included among the many martyrs was one Eleazar, a venerable scribe who refused to eat swine’s flesh to save his life (6:18-31). More famous are the seven brothers who were tortured to death one by one rather than give up their faith. After exhorting her sons not to recant and then observing the merciless atrocities inflicted on them, the godly mother also died a martyr’s death.

The events in chs. 8-15 parallel 1 Maccabees 3-7 in large measure, depicting the accomplishments of Judas. First, victories over Nicanor, Timothy and Bacchides are recounted. Chapter 9 presents an account of the death of Antiochus which differs radically from that of 1 Maccabees 6:1-16. Horrible pains plagued the tyrant, and his chariot somehow ran over him (9:5-8). Then as worms were eating away his rotting body, Antiochus changed his attitude toward the Jews, sending them a friendly letter and resolving to become a Jew himself (9:11-27).

The cleansing of the Temple and the institution of the Feast of Dedication are related in 10:1-9. This is followed by another invasion of Timothy, whose large army was smashed near Jerusalem by Judas, who was aided by five angelic horsemen visible to the enemy (10:24-38). Another horseman dressed in white led the Jewish forces on to victory against Lysias (ch. 11).

A brief peace evaporated as conflicts erupted at Joppa and other cities, and Lysias was again defeated in 163 b.c. (chs. 12; 13). This time three years of peace ensued until Demetrius I sent Nicanor to be the Syrian governor of Judea. Intermittent fighting between the rival armies was climaxed by a final battle in which 35,000 Syrians were killed, including Nicanor. A vision, in which the priest Onias and Jeremiah appeared to Judas, provided important motivation for the army (14-15:36). This triumph was thereafter commemorated a day before the Feast of Purim.

In a short epilogue, the author states that he did his best to combine historical details with a style which was hopefully interesting enough to please his readers (15:37-39).

H. Teaching. The Temple in Jerusalem is regarded as the best and holiest in the world (2:19, 22; 5:15; 14:31) and events concerning the Temple are extremely important. Heliodorus’s unsuccessful attempt to enter and plunder the Temple is related, as well as the high priest’s fear that “the place” would be dishonored (3:18ff.). Antiochus’s desecration of the Temple is viewed by the author as a heinous deed (5:11-6:9), while Judas gains heroic stature for purifying the sanctuary. At the end of the book, Nicanor’s death is attributed to his threat against the Temple.

God’s providential justice is strongly emphasized, particularly by the exact retribution He meted out to the wicked. Hence, Andronicus was killed at the very place where he had put Onias to death (4:38), and the agonies endured by Antiochus IV are compared with the tortures he had devised for others (9:5, 6). Each punishment corresponded precisely to the crime (13:4-8; 15:32-35).

Even the persecution of the Jews was deserved, for the nation had sinned in supporting pagan practices. Their punishment was a loving discipline for God’s people (1:26; 6:12; 14:15) which would bring the ungodly among them to repentance. On the other hand, the sin of heathen nations was allowed to increase to the point where God had to destroy them (6:12-17). When Israel did keep the law, victory over the enemy was forthcoming (8:34-36).

The power and sovereignty of God are evident in His deeds and names. He is the God who sees all things (12:22) and has created heaven and earth out of things that did not exist (7:28 mg.). With a word God can strike dead an invading army of any size (8:18; 15:22). Unlike 1 Maccabees, names for God are used freely. He is the “Almighty Lord” (3:22; 8:18), “the great Sovereign of the world” (12:15, 28), and “the righteous Judge” (12:6, 41).

In almost every battle angelic horsemen appear to terrify the enemy and bring victory to the Maccabean forces. These dazzling warriors physically repelled Heliodorus (3:25) or protected Judas (10:29), and with a heavenly rider to lead them the Jews demolished Lysias (11:6-14). Occasionally angels render assistance without their steeds (3:26, 33). Horsemen were seen fighting high over Jerusalem for almost forty days. This served as a warning of the impending persecution (5:1-4).

Judas Maccabeus stands out as a champion (8:36) who, like David, restored the military fortunes of Israel and revitalized the nation’s worship (cf. 2 Sam 6). His purification of the sanctuary is the focal point of the book, but he also receives praise for his fervent prayers (8:1-5) and his concern for widows and orphans (8:28, 30). To the author, Judas was a blameless man raised up by God at a crucial time.

In a vision seen by Judas before a key battle, the martyred Onias and Jeremiah appeared to encourage the people. Onias prayed for the nation and Jeremiah gave Judas a golden sword to slay the foe (15:11-14). The concern and intercession of the dead for the living has been developed into a doctrine by the Church of Rome. Conversely, Rome has adopted the practice of praying and offering sacrifices for the dead found in 12:43-46. Neither teaching is found in the OT.

The well-known martyr section (6:10-7:42) extols the dedicated faithfulness of the victims and makes their actions worthy of emulation. Patristic writers compared the early martyrs favorably with Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac. Their suffering was even regarded as having an atoning value (7:37; 8:3). The aforementioned sacrifice for the dead was also a sin offering to make atonement for some whose pagan involvements had placed their resurrection and eternal destiny in jeopardy.

In several places this bodily resurrection of the righteous is strongly emphasized. God will raise up the faithful to everlasting life (7:11, 36; 14:26) and a reunion with one’s loved ones (7:6, 14, 19, 29). For the wicked, the future held nothing but punishment and suffering.

I. Original language. There is little doubt that the smooth Gr. of the book, though strained at times, does not represent a tr. from Heb. or Aram. Unlike 1 Maccabees, there are few Hebraisms pointing to such an original, and an Alexandrian provenience is well-established. Only with regard to the introductory letters have serious attempts been made to posit a Sem. original. Since they stem from Pal. and have some evidences of a Hebraic style, it is possible that they are trs. in their present form.

J. Chronology. (see I. J.). Second Maccabees is consistent in following the Seleucid calendar, with the New Year falling in autumn. Where 1 Maccabees 7:1 mentions a Syrian date, 2 Maccabees 14:4 has the same year. When an event concerns the Jews directly, 1 Maccabees employs the Jewish calendar with its spring New Year, but 2 Maccabees retains the Seleucid system (cf. 1 Macc 6:20 and 2 Macc 13:1). Hence, a one-year discrepancy occurs in these instances.

K. Relation to the NT. The impact of the martyr section (6:10-7:42) upon the Early Church was evident during the Rom. persecutions and may be alluded to in Hebrews 11:35-38. Some of the faithful heroes were tortured and killed, or were “wandering over deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth” (Heb 11:38). The terminology closely parallels 2 Maccabees 5:27; 6:11; and 10:6 and may reflect upon the afflictions of the Maccabean era. Since Hebrews 11:4-12:2 is often related to the “honor roll” found in Ecclesiasticus 44-49, it could be argued that the author of Hebrews had another intertestamental book in mind also.

The sequence and meaning of the words δειλανόροῦντες and ἀπιστεῦντες (2 Macc 8:13) resemble δειλοῦς and ἀπίστοις (Rev 21:8). The joining of the epithets “cowardly” and “unbelieving” in these two passages could be more than coincidence, and the context in 2 Maccabees would indicate that ἀπίστοις does not mean only “faithless” (RSV) or “untrustworthy.”

An important NT term, ἐπιφάνεια, G2211, occurs frequently in 2 Maccabees, mainly referring to the “appearances” of angels at strategic times (2:21; 3:24, 33; 12:22). In the NT the “epiphany” of Christ relates to His first coming (2 Tim 1:10) and esp. to His climactic glorious return (2 Thess 2:8; 1 Tim 6:14; Titus 2:13).

Reference is made to the Feast of Dedication (John 10:22). This festival commemorates the cleansing and rededication of the Temple by Judas Maccabeus (2 Macc 10:8; cf. 1 Macc 4:59).

III. 3 Maccabees

A. Title. The earliest MSS and VSS attribute this title to the book although it is, strictly speaking, inaccurate. Events precede the Maccabean era by about fifty years, and none of the Maccabees figures in any of the narratives. In the LXX uncials A and V, 3 Maccabees appears next to 1 and 2 Maccabees and may have received its name from this arrangement.

Some scholars consider the book to be a kind of introduction to the books of Maccabees, and Cotton for one has located it first in his Five Books of Maccabees. Since 3 Maccabees also deals with a foreign power’s attempt to Hellenize the Jews, there is some merit to this suggestion. It is true that “Maccabee” was applied to all of Judas’s brothers (see I. A.) and may have been extended to include other heroes of the faith as well.

B. Sources. In spite of the legendary character of much of the book, there is evidence that the author did have certain historical facts at his command. Several accounts resemble the 2nd cent. b.c. history of Polybius, particularly the description of the Battle of Raphia (Histories V, 80-86). The material in ch. 1 regarding Ptolemy IV apparently represents the facts to a large degree. If it were not for certain discrepancies with the Histories of Polybius, one would label this as a source for 3 Maccabees, though the author may have depended on his faulty memory for information from that work.

A source which may have been used by both Polybius and the author of 3 Maccabees was the biography of Ptolemy IV written by one Ptolemy of Megalopolis, governor of Cyprus during Philopator’s reign. This rather derogatory biography may have furnished the raw material for the embellishments of 3 Maccabees, and it is also known that Polybius lived in Megalopolis. Only a few fragments of this biography are extant, however.

1. Jewish traditions. The fusing of divergent traditions among Egyp. Jewry is particularly evident in the elephant episode (chs. 4-6). Josephus describes a similar event during the reign of Ptolemy VII Physcon (146-117 b.c.) in Contra Apionem II, v. When the Jews supported the cause of Queen Cleopatra against his own, Physcon planned to release a herd of elephants upon them. As in 3 Maccabees, the drunk beasts attacked and killed many of the king’s men. This story must go back to a historical kernel which became associated with more than one Ptolemy in the course of transmission.

Similarly, the dichotomy between the Jews of Alexandria and those from the Egyp. interior indicates two traditions. The existence of a festival at Alexandria as well as one at Ptolemais strengthens this hypothesis (6:36; 7:19).

2. Esther. Several motifs seem to be borrowed from the canonical Book of Esther, which relates the oppression of the Jews by an earlier power. The plot against the king and subsequent rescue through Dositheus (1:2, 3) reminds one of Mordecai’s life-saving contribution in Esther 2:21-23. Like the Jews in Persia, those in Egypt were accused of disloyalty (Esther 3:8; 3 Macc 3:19). In both works the attempt to wipe out the Jews back-fired, as the persecuted gained revenge against the Gentiles (Esther 9) or their apostate brethren (3 Macc 7:10-15). To celebrate the deliverances, both books record the establishment of festivals.

3. 2 Maccabees. Even more striking are the parallels between 2 and 3 Maccabees. Both books revolve around the forced Hellenization of the Jews at the expense of their religious beliefs (2 Macc 4:9; 6:1-9; 3 Macc 2:27-30). The attempt of Philopator to enter the Jerusalem Temple (3 Macc 1:9-2:24) closely resembles the thwarted efforts of Heliodorus (2 Macc 3:7). And the angelic horseman who blocked the path of that Syrian official (3:25) reminds one of the two angels who panicked the elephants and the Egyptians in 3 Maccabees 6:18-21. To preserve the sanctity of the Temple, the Jews prayed fervently in both books (2 Macc 3:15-23; 14:34-36; 3 Macc 2:1-20). In addition, each work solemnizes God’s deliverance with a festival.

C. Authorship. The nature of the Gr. used, the emphasis upon Alexandrian Judaism, and the author’s knowledge of Egyp. affairs lead all scholars to conclude that the author was a Jew living in Alexandria; for his zeal to adhere to the Jewish faith until death links him with the Hasidim. Judging from the parallels of the book with 2 Maccabees, one could identify the author with the Pharisees also. His belief in angels (3 Macc 6:18) points in this direction, but there is no mention of the resurrection of the body or a future life. Perhaps this omission parallels the arrangement in Daniel, where God’s saving providence is emphasized in Dan. 1-6, but the resurrection is outlined only at the end of that book (Dan 12:2).

The failure to refer to Esther might possibly indicate that the author was closer to the Essenes, since that significant little book is not found at Qumran either.

D. Date. Although the occasion for the book need not have been deep distress (see III. E.), several scholars have favored Caligula’s persecution of the Jews in a.d. 38-39 as the historical backdrop. That Rom. monarch, an advocate of emperor worship, tried to defile the Temple and also set up images in synagogues. If this were the actual situation behind the book, one would expect that these heathen practices would have been vigorously condemned and ascribed to Ptolemy.

Several lines of evidence support a 1st cent. b.c. origin. The author was influenced by 2 Maccabees and was aware of the Gr. “Additions to the Book of Daniel,” particularly the language of the “Song of the Three Children” (Song of the Three 26, 27; cf. 3 Macc 6:6). Linguistic affinities with the Epistle of Aristeas strengthens a dating in the last pre-Christian cent. also. Moreover, the use of a personal name like “Philopator” in formal correspondence (3 Macc 3:12; 7:1) did not become the practice of the Ptolemies until about 100 b.c.

While a 1st cent. b.c. date is more probable, others argue that the composition took place in the Christian era. If so, a time prior to the destruction of the Temple in a.d. 70 is demanded, since the Temple services are viewed as continuing (1:8).

E. Purpose and style. The author’s aim is to comfort and strengthen Jews who were undergoing persecution by providing examples of those who remained true to the faith and were delivered. By providing background stories of this kind, he also made available instructional and religious material for use in the special festivals of the Egyp. Jews. These stories would be of value even in times of relative peace and security. The slaughter of the several hundred apostate Jews would also serve as a warning to any about to abandon the religion of their fathers. An equally potent warning is directed against those individuals or nations that may have been embarking on policies of persecution toward the Jews.

With this apologetic approach, the author uses the style of a historical novel or romance. Various traditions and motifs are combined and embellished to achieve the desired effects. Many of the details are fantastic and incredible, reminiscent of the method of the epitomist. Occasionally scriptural allusions are made to God’s intervention in regard to the Flood, Pharaoh and the Exodus, Sennacherib’s army, Daniel and his three friends, and Jonah (2:1-10; 6:3-8).

The book was composed in good idiomatic Gr., so there is no likelihood of a Sem. original. At times the style becomes bombastic and similar to parts of the LXX.

F. Contents.

The book is a historical romance setting forth the growing conflict between Ptolemy IV Philopator and the Jews. In the first story (1:1-2:24) Ptolemy’s great victory over Antiochus III at the Battle of Raphia (217 b.c.) is followed by the Egyptian’s visit to the Jerusalem Temple. His threat to enter the holy place produced bitter grief among the people, who preferred death to the desecration of the Temple (1:29). When the high priest Simon prayed eloquently, God answered by paralyzing Ptolemy.

Returning to Alexandria with his desire unfulfilled, the king retaliated by compelling the Jews of that city to sacrifice to Bacchus (Dionysus) at the royal temples (2:25-33). Those who refused would forfeit their rights as citizens and would be branded with the ivy leaf, the symbol of Bacchus. Most of the Jews resisted this order and used bribery to avoid being enrolled as serfs.

Ptolemy then issued an