Doesn’t the book of Hebrews reference Maccabees?

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
When citing source material it's best to use brackets and a link.
Ancient Jewish Epitaphs PROVE Greek to be the dominant language of the mass majority of Jews during the hellenistic period.

35f62d8ae609c555ca2da3933a3c0d6a.jpg
29b5bf100db44e228f36505ea1ff81c4.jpg
992ab9a46fb2af0a0f4f4644d955cf59.jpg
67eb92a8c8a1593ba556f6777e4c46f1.jpg
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
What is this author's motive?
" Jewish temple of leonopolis"

Huh

What is the author of this thesis name?
 

Lucian Hodoboc

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
1,343
Location
Eastern Europe
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Theist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
No.

Nowhere in the Book of Hebrews is a verse that states, "One of the four books of Maccabees....."

So, no, there is no reference to any book with the word "Maccabees" in its moniker made in the Book of Hebrews.




.
Nowhere in the entire Bible is there a verse mentioning the word "Trinity", so welcome to Unitarian Christianity!
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Nathans silence reminds me of fear in having a daughter .
A right hand of fellowship beyond dreams.

A father knows best
 

NathanH83

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2019
Messages
2,278
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Nathans silence reminds me of fear in having a daughter .
A right hand of fellowship beyond dreams.

A father knows best

What silence? I don’t even understand your question. What’s Solomon got to do with anything? I don’t typically respond to weird questions.
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
What silence? I don’t even understand your question. What’s Solomon got to do with anything? I don’t typically respond to weird questions.
The laver is a quiet storm
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Nowhere in the entire Bible is there a verse mentioning the word "Trinity", so welcome to Unitarian Christianity!


Unrelated.

The issue here is not whether some DOCTRINE in taught in the Bible, but whether a BOOK is referenced. If I claimed that the book "Cat in the Hat" is referenced in the Gospel of Matthew, obviously I'd need to show where "Cat in the Hat" is at least mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew. Now, if I was asked if the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is mentioned there, that's a whole other enchilada.... I'd need to show where Jesus is labeled or described as divine.


If one reads Hebrews, you will not find First, Second, Third and Fourth Maccabees referenced or mentioned. Just reality. Sorry if that offends.




.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Again, you still haven’t answered who the tortured men are. 2 Maccabees still remains the best explanation.


Even if true, that has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with First, Second, Third and/or Fourth Maccabees being referenced in the Book of Hebrews. To be referenced, it at least must be mentioned. Read the Book of Hebrews.... just READ THE WORDS, and you won't find the words "book" "First" "Second" "Third" "Fourth" "Maccabees.:" Sorry. Just reality.



No one denies that there are MILLIONS of books that contain accurate history. I don't challenge that First and/or Second and/or Third and/or Fourth Maccabees might be among them. Does that mean we have over a MILLION books that are the inerrant, normative, inscripturated words of God and books of the Bible? That if any of these MILLION books mentions something also found in another, that it must list all of them in the footnotes because it is referencing such? Come on.....




.




.
 

NathanH83

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2019
Messages
2,278
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Even if true, that has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with First, Second, Third and/or Fourth Maccabees being referenced in the Book of Hebrews. To be referenced, it at least must be mentioned. Read the Book of Hebrews.... just READ THE WORDS, and you won't find the words "book" "First" "Second" "Third" "Fourth" "Maccabees.:" Sorry. Just reality.



No one denies that there are MILLIONS of books that contain accurate history. I don't challenge that First and/or Second and/or Third and/or Fourth Maccabees might be among them. Does that mean we have over a MILLION books that are the inerrant, normative, inscripturated words of God and books of the Bible? That if any of these MILLION books mentions something also found in another, that it must list all of them in the footnotes because it is referencing such? Come on.....




.




.

The context of Hebrews 11 is that it is talking about Biblical history. Didn’t you ever learn what context is? I learned it in grade school.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The context of Hebrews 11 is that it is talking about Biblical history. Didn’t you ever learn what context is? I learned it in grade school.


What I learned in grade school is that if a specific book is referenced, it at least must be named. It's absurd to insist that if I type "Jesus was born" ERGO I'm referencing one specific book, the Gospel of Matthew. Context is not a reference. Didn't you ever learn what a book reference is? Referencing books - The University of Nottingham


It MAY be that Hebrews is speaking of something that perhaps millions of other books also speaks. Sorry, that has absolutely NOTHING whatsoever to do with Hebrews thus REFERENCING those other books. Indeed, while my Ph.D. is not in history, it seems very credible to me that TWO books might mention the SAME historical event (say the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor) and the two authors may be totally unaware of some other book that also mentions that attack. Two books in some way speaking of something historical does NOT mean one book is ergo referencing the other (or even aware that it exists). Come on..... obviously.



.
 

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Even if true, that has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with First, Second, Third and/or Fourth Maccabees being referenced in the Book of Hebrews. To be referenced, it at least must be mentioned. Read the Book of Hebrews.... just READ THE WORDS, and you won't find the words "book" "First" "Second" "Third" "Fourth" "Maccabees.:" Sorry. Just reality.



No one denies that there are MILLIONS of books that contain accurate history. I don't challenge that First and/or Second and/or Third and/or Fourth Maccabees might be among them. Does that mean we have over a MILLION books that are the inerrant, normative, inscripturated words of God and books of the Bible? That if any of these MILLION books mentions something also found in another, that it must list all of them in the footnotes because it is referencing such? Come on.....




.




.
1. Hebrews uses many examples from the Bible in this sermon on FAITH, the last lines in 11:35 is speaking directly of 2 Maccabees 7

2. Unlike secular literature/history, 2 Maccabees is more than just a series of actual past events (The entire Bible is based on actual past events also remember?) but is entirely 100% in pursuit of cleansing GODS house for GODS people. The book is all about re-dedicating the house of GOD!

3. Judah Maccabee was a STRONG believer in the RESURRECTION AND REDEEMER TO COME WHO WILL RAISE THE DEAD, Judah like PAUL found HOPE and COMFORT in the fact that dead believers will be Resurrected into everlasting life!

I.e. (note this is before Christ, the sacrifice had not yet come, keep in mind that this was simply a "pious thought"/wishful thinking/hopes)

2 Maccabees 12:44

"..he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection in mind; for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought."

Concordance to Paul

"But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words"
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18

4. Jews painstakingly transcribed the Maccabean scrolls throughout the synagogues, this is known because after Jamnia, Aquilas replaced them with a new greek Septuagint with the new canon

5. Jesus didnt observe pagan holidays, a Jewish HOLY DAY such as the feast of dedication could not be based on a fictional story, if Judah Maccabee was real then his testament IS real, if the testament is real then God answered the prayers of the Jews and Judah really was called by God to bring his vengeance and wrath upon the pagans and take back His Temple, if it was all in his head well I guess prayers being answered on a grand scale was just coincidence and God really wasn't all that concerned about his Temple being cluttered with pagan idols and Jews being stripped of their religion and forced into pagan idolatry

So whatever call it the Cat in the Hat, im sure Luther felt the same about the book of James
 

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
CAT IN THE HAT

d88f8c05269e9caf7a7e077804300253.jpg
 

NathanH83

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2019
Messages
2,278
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Even if true, that has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with First, Second, Third and/or Fourth Maccabees being referenced in the Book of Hebrews. To be referenced, it at least must be mentioned. Read the Book of Hebrews.... just READ THE WORDS, and you won't find the words "book" "First" "Second" "Third" "Fourth" "Maccabees.:" Sorry. Just reality.



No one denies that there are MILLIONS of books that contain accurate history. I don't challenge that First and/or Second and/or Third and/or Fourth Maccabees might be among them. Does that mean we have over a MILLION books that are the inerrant, normative, inscripturated words of God and books of the Bible? That if any of these MILLION books mentions something also found in another, that it must list all of them in the footnotes because it is referencing such? Come on.....




.




.

It doesn’t have to be mentioned by name in order for it to be referenced.

When Hebrews 11:34 says that there were those who by faith quenched the flames of fire, that’s clearly referencing Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego. It doesn’t mention the book of Daniel, nor does it mention their names. It doesn’t mention Nebuchadnezzar, Babylon, or the Golden statue. None of those specifics are mentioned in this verse. But it’s clear that this is the story it’s referencing.

And Maccabees is not like Cat in the Hat, that’s a ridiculous comparison. Maccabees is not just regular history, like any other history book. This is the history of Israel between the Old and New Testaments. Daniel chapters 8 and 11 prophesy about these events. They were so important to God that he had Daniel prophesy about them. John 10 tells us that Jesus celebrated these events, when he attended the feast of dedication, Hanukah. And then we see Hebrews including it as a part of Biblical history. We also find early church councils in the 300’s declaring it to be divine, canonical scripture.

This is not just a “Cat in the Hat” kind of book. And comparing God’s Word to the fictional stories of Dr. Seuss is a completely disrespectful and inflammatory thing to say.
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
It doesn’t have to be mentioned by name in order for it to be referenced.

When Hebrews 11:34 says that there were those who by faith quenched the flames of fire, that’s clearly referencing Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego. It doesn’t mention the book of Daniel, nor does it mention their names. It doesn’t mention Nebuchadnezzar, Babylon, or the Golden statue. None of those specifics are mentioned in this verse. But it’s clear that this is the story it’s referencing.

And Maccabees is not like Cat in the Hat, that’s a ridiculous comparison. Maccabees is not just regular history, like any other history book. This is the history of Israel between the Old and New Testaments. Daniel chapters 8 and 11 prophesy about these events. They were so important to God that he had Daniel prophesy about them. John 10 tells us that Jesus celebrated these events, when he attended the feast of dedication, Hanukah. And then we see Hebrews including it as a part of Biblical history. We also find early church councils in the 300’s declaring it to be divine, canonical scripture.

This is not just a “Cat in the Hat” kind of book. And comparing God’s Word to the fictional stories of Dr. Seuss is a completely disrespectful and inflammatory thing to say.
The book of maccabees is a theatrical peice and is repugnant to most of the jewish people.

And when you attempt to tie the word "torture" in the scroll hebrews to the maccabees.
By definition that is eisigesis.

And is far from apologetics or christian theology.

Do you understand sir nathan?
 

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The book of maccabees is a theatrical peice and is repugnant to most of the jewish people.

And when you attempt to tie the word "torture" in the scroll hebrews to the maccabees.
By definition that is eisigesis.

And is far from apologetics or christian theology.

Do you understand sir nathan?

Theatrical? IT WAS A REAL HISTORICAL EVENT THAT BECAME A JEWISH HOLIDAY!
btw "Jewish people" find the New Testament repugnant.. so you lose that round buddy

I am seriously starting to believe you are a troll who has no interest in taking this topic seriously, not even Josiah is interacting with you, at least provide us with some form of scholarly critique so we may engage in an actual intelligent conversation instead of you just bouncing all over the place with obscure, spontaneous and fanatical biased statements that you yourself don't even care to explain or elaborate on.. Im sorry but you make it extremely difficult for us to talk to you when you constantly shift the conversations.
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Theatrical? IT WAS A REAL HISTORICAL EVENT THAT BECAME A JEWISH HOLIDAY!
btw "Jewish people" find the New Testament repugnant.. so you lose that round buddy

I am seriously starting to believe you are a troll who has no interest in taking this topic seriously, not even Josiah is interacting with you, at least provide us with some form of scholarly critique so we may engage in an actual intelligent conversation instead of you just bouncing all over the place with obscure, spontaneous and fanatical biased statements that you yourself don't even care to explain or elaborate on.. Im sorry but you make it extremely difficult for us to talk to you when you constantly shift the conversations.
I know it is a difficult thing to defend a friend who lacks faith.

If you prefer to open another thread to discuss the thesis you cited I'll gladly give my criticism.

What you have failed to realize is that sir nathan is making threads with assertions and then denying any rebuttal to such.

Fellowship involves 2 witnesses with prudent manners of conversation if I recall correctly

Have you given in to partiality sir andrew?
 

NathanH83

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2019
Messages
2,278
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Theatrical? IT WAS A REAL HISTORICAL EVENT THAT BECAME A JEWISH HOLIDAY!
btw "Jewish people" find the New Testament repugnant.. so you lose that round buddy

I am seriously starting to believe you are a troll who has no interest in taking this topic seriously, not even Josiah is interacting with you, at least provide us with some form of scholarly critique so we may engage in an actual intelligent conversation instead of you just bouncing all over the place with obscure, spontaneous and fanatical biased statements that you yourself don't even care to explain or elaborate on.. Im sorry but you make it extremely difficult for us to talk to you when you constantly shift the conversations.

Yup.
Maccabees is real history, and fulfills Daniel’s prophecies.
What a tragedy that so many Christians are unfamiliar with it.
And yea, pinacle’s comments are really off-the-wall and unrelated.
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Theatrical? IT WAS A REAL HISTORICAL EVENT THAT BECAME A JEWISH HOLIDAY!
btw "Jewish people" find the New Testament repugnant.. so you lose that round buddy

I am seriously starting to believe you are a troll who has no interest in taking this topic seriously, not even Josiah is interacting with you, at least provide us with some form of scholarly critique so we may engage in an actual intelligent conversation instead of you just bouncing all over the place with obscure, spontaneous and fanatical biased statements that you yourself don't even care to explain or elaborate on.. Im sorry but you make it extremely difficult for us to talk to you when you constantly shift the conversations.
A minor holiday to mourn with dedication to light and the miracle of oil.
And please refrain from accusations sir andrew.

My motives are pure if you are willing to recieve.

Jews do not find the "NT" repugnant.
And you should avoid speaking for a nation in the future.

Blessings Always
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Yup.
Maccabees is real history, and fulfills Daniel’s prophecies.
What a tragedy that so many Christians are unfamiliar with it.
And yea, pinacle’s comments are really off-the-wall and unrelated.
Still cant spell my name correctly I see.

Can you find the word torture in the Tanakh?
 
Top Bottom