1 Maccabees was originally written in Hebrew

NathanH83

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2019
Messages
2,278
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
That's why the early church accepted it as scripture. Even Martin Luther called it scripture.
 

NewCreation435

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
5,045
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
That's why the early church accepted it as scripture. Even Martin Luther called it scripture.

why does that automatically make it scripture?
 

psalms 91

Well-known member
Moderator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
15,282
Age
75
Location
Pa
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Charismatic
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
They are profitable to read
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,649
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I moved this thread out of the Introductions Corner to the World Religion & Speculative Theology Forum.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Pretty sure it was originally written in Polish...
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
It does not matter in which language 1 & 2 Maccabees were first written. What matters is that the Church recognises in them the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the authorship of God. Once any part of the holy scriptures is made "holy" by its alleged pedigree, its alleged "original language", the opinions of scholars, the traditions of Judaism or the assessment of individuals who started a church or movement then the whole of canonical holy scripture becomes a thoroughly human enterprise with no more value than any human enterprise. If the holiness of the holy scriptures is subject to human evaluation rather than Church teaching they become as holy as the Quran or any other work of mankind created by human beings apart from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
It does not matter in which language 1 & 2 Maccabees were first written. What matters is that the Church recognises in them the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the authorship of God. Once any part of the holy scriptures is made "holy" by its alleged pedigree, its alleged "original language", the opinions of scholars, the traditions of Judaism or the assessment of individuals who started a church or movement then the whole of canonical holy scripture becomes a thoroughly human enterprise with no more value than any human enterprise. If the holiness of the holy scriptures is subject to human evaluation rather than Church teaching they become as holy as the Quran or any other work of mankind created by human beings apart from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Nice reply!
Very succinct.
Very clear.
 

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
That's why the early church accepted it as scripture. Even Martin Luther called it scripture.


1. Even if the book was written in Hebrew, I find it absurd to assume that anything written in Hebrew is ERGO the inerrant, fully-canonical, divinely inscripturated words of God. Consider that several books mentioned SPECIFICALLY BY NAME in the Bible itself were very likely written in Hebrew, books such as The Book of the Wars of the Lord, The Acts of Solomon, the Acts of Uziah, the Acts of the Kings of Israel, Annals of King David, the Book of Gad, the Book of Jashar, etc. - ALL books quoted and referenced in the OT itself by Jews). I reject that because it is true they were written in Hebrew, read and used by Jews, and mentioned specifically and by name in the Bible itself, thus they MUST be accepted by all Christians everywhere and in every time as THE inerrant, fully-canonical (for that use), inscripturated words of God. I find your rationale to be silly.


2. This is specifically what Luther wrote concerning the 8 books he INCLUDED in his biblical tome but as Deuterocanonical: "These are books which are not considered equal to the Holy Scriptures, but are useful and good to read." Luther never argued that every useful book is thus the inerrant, fully canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. He never argued that every book used by some Jews and/or some Christians are thus the inerrant, fully canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. They may be USEFUL! But for Luther (unlike you) "useful" does not equal "fully canonical, inerrant, divinely-inscripturated words of God and must legally be required to appear in all tomes sold with the word "BIBLE" on the cover and as equal to every other thing in between the covers thereof."



.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I find it absurd to assume that anything written in Hebrew is ERGO the inerrant, fully-canonical, divinely inscripturated words of God.
Is that implied?
 
Top Bottom