If the prophecies in Daniel 8 cannot be understood without Maccabees, then doesn’t that prove Maccabees belongs in the Bible?

[atpollard]

1. This is the old testament

2. It was a thoughtful and "pious" act but it never suggest that it did any of the men any good.

That is what I look for in my “God breathed” inspired scripture … lots of examples of things that only apply to the OT (having no NT application), are “thoughtful and pious” but don’t do anyone any good, and can be easily misunderstood as being the ”word of God” (thus leading believers into error).

YOU have just summed up exactly why the apocryphal books were removed from the printed Bibles.

 

[atpollard]

Ok, so let me get this straight. You’re saying that a sacrifice in the present was not able to atone for the sins of men who had died in the past?

So you agree with Maccabees that my DEAD brother can still be saved?


(We were discussing the offerings in Deuteronomy because YOU brought them up. Which chapter and verse called for “one incarnate God” and specified “beaten by Gentiles and nailed to a tree” as the prescribed method of offering for the sins of the dead?)

 

[atpollard]

Perhaps God granted them mercy and perhaps not. It's a rather insignificant verse that was totally taken out of context and magnified by the church to push a dogmatic tradition that completely ignores the Atonement through Christ Jesus.
Why take something that was not Jewish tradition but just a wishful thought by a man and turn that into a Christian tradition, superceding Christ all together?

I actually agree. It IS an obscure verse in Maccabees and certainly not even the focal point of the paragraph in which it appears.

One of my personal objections for those that advocate so strongly for Maccabees as inspired scripture is:

“So where are the SIGNIFICANT verses in Maccabees? Where are the verses that really contribute something of ‘gravitas’ to the GOSPEL (good news) of God’s plan of redemption? Where can Jesus say, “When you search Maccabees looking to find God, it points to Me!”​

 

[Andrew]

That is what I look for in my “God breathed” inspired scripture … lots of examples of things that only apply to the OT (having no NT application), are “thoughtful and pious” but don’t do anyone any good, and can be easily misunderstood as being the ”word of God” (thus leading believers into error).

YOU have just summed up exactly why the apocryphal books were removed from the printed Bibles.

lol
It literally states that this was merely an act of commemoration for the fallen men, no where does it imply that God spoke and granted them mercy upon accepting the offering! The passage is more about Judah proclaiming his belief in the promise of the resurrection and his hopes that the unrighteous may have a chance for a better resurrection, Jesus did preach the good news to the unrighteous in hades... Just because some silly popes exploited a passage to fool the ignorant for money doesnt mean the book is thus exposed for holding dark and sinister doctrines.

I could start a church where you are baptized in fire, would that make the books that mention "baptized with fire" apocrypha?

 

[Andrew]

I actually agree. It IS an obscure verse in Maccabees and certainly not even the focal point of the paragraph in which it appears.

One of my personal objections for those that advocate so strongly for Maccabees as inspired scripture is:

“So where are the SIGNIFICANT verses in Maccabees? Where are the verses that really contribute something of ‘gravitas’ to the GOSPEL (good news) of God’s plan of redemption? Where can Jesus say, “When you search Maccabees looking to find God, it points to Me!”​

Running out those who defile the Temple -as Jesus did.

Saving Gods people on the Sabbath -as Jesus did.

Emphases on the Resurrection of the dead -as Jesus did and will do

Expectations of the prophet to raise the dead -Jesus

Refusing to transgress the faith under torture and death -Jesus refuses Satans offer, Satan enters in Judas Iscariot to begin the torture

The Jews come out victorious in the face of dead and genocide and restore the Temple - Jesus defeats death and restores the Temple on his resurrection.

Those are just some on the fly stuff but read 1rst Maccabees, in one verse Judah prays to God about what he must do but only "If you Will it", this God willed it, if he hadn't well there probably wouldnt be any Jews around by 1 BC anyway :/

 

[NathanH83]

So you agree with Maccabees that my DEAD brother can still be saved?


(We were discussing the offerings in Deuteronomy because YOU brought them up. Which chapter and verse called for “one incarnate God” and specified “beaten by Gentiles and nailed to a tree” as the prescribed method of offering for the sins of the dead?)

Hold on a second. We’re in the New Covenant. Maccabees lived in the Old Covenant.

If you have a brother who died today, and he rejected Christ in this lifetime, the New Testament says that there no longer remains any other sacrifice. If he rejected Jesus’ sacrifice, then there is not another sacrifice that can atone for him. It’s too late. You cannot sacrifice an animal to atone for your brother’s sin. Animal sacrifices are over. If he rejected Jesus’ sacrifice then there’s nothing else.

But, in the Old Testament, they had animal sacrifices. And we know that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross atoned for the sins of men who died in the past. So why would it be heretical to say that the Maccabees were able to have the Levite priests sacrifice an animal on behalf of their dead soldiers?

What’s the contradiction?

The real issue is that the Catholic Church was telling people that money atones for sin. But that’s not true. Maccabees is just saying that they sent money to Jerusalem with the intent if having the Levite priests use that money to purchase the animals necessary for the offering.

And it says they did it with the resurrection in mind, not purgatory. The resurrection and purgatory are two different things. Purgatory doesn’t exist.

 

[NathanH83]

So you agree with Maccabees that my DEAD brother can still be saved?


(We were discussing the offerings in Deuteronomy because YOU brought them up. Which chapter and verse called for “one incarnate God” and specified “beaten by Gentiles and nailed to a tree” as the prescribed method of offering for the sins of the dead?)

The Old Testament makes it clear that an animal sacrifice (under the Old Covenant) can atone for the sins of a living person. But you’re saying that an animal sacrifice cannot atone for the sins of a dead person.

However, look at what it says:

“After taking a collection from each man, he sent the sum of two thousand silver drachmen to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. He was acting honorably and appropriately, thinking about the resurrection. If he hadn’t been looking forward to the resurrection of the dead, then it would have been unnecessary and frivolous to pray for them.”
2 Maccabees 12:43-44 - Bible Gateway passage: 2 Maccabees 12:43-44 - Common English Bible


Notice how it says that he was looking forward to the resurrection.

NEWS FLASH: a person who had been resurrected IS A LIVING PERSON!

If a person has been resurrected, then THEY’RE NOT DEAD ANYMORE.

They made atonement for the dead (by means of animal sacrifice) because they had a hope in a resurrection, NOT because they believed in purgatory. Because they believed in a resurrection.

Purgatory is not the same thing as Resurrection.

THE NEW TESTAMENT TALKS ABOUT A RESURRECTION!

Learn your Bible.

 

[NathanH83]

I find it really appalling that I have to spell this out for people:

Resurrected people are not dead people. They’ve been resurrected.

 

[Andrew]

The Old Testament makes it clear that an animal sacrifice (under the Old Covenant) can atone for the sins of a living person. But you’re saying that an animal sacrifice cannot atone for the sins of a dead person.

However, look at what it says:

“After taking a collection from each man, he sent the sum of two thousand silver drachmen to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. He was acting honorably and appropriately, thinking about the resurrection. If he hadn’t been looking forward to the resurrection of the dead, then it would have been unnecessary and frivolous to pray for them.”
2 Maccabees 12:43-44 - Bible Gateway passage: 2 Maccabees 12:43-44 - Common English Bible


Notice how it says that he was looking forward to the resurrection.

NEWS FLASH: a person who had been resurrected IS A LIVING PERSON!

If a person has been resurrected, then THEY’RE NOT DEAD ANYMORE.

They made atonement for the dead (by means of animal sacrifice) because they had a hope in a resurrection, NOT because they believed in purgatory. Because they believed in a resurrection.

Purgatory is not the same thing as Resurrection.

THE NEW TESTAMENT TALKS ABOUT A RESURRECTION!

Learn your Bible.

The atonement was for same one sin of each man, the sin of wearing pagan charms, you're right, in his mind if a sacrificial sin offering atones for the past sin of someone who died in that sin, only to be risen to life later on, would that offering be just as valid upon that persons resurrection and still cover the sin, making for a better resurrection?

 

[NathanH83]

I actually agree. It IS an obscure verse in Maccabees and certainly not even the focal point of the paragraph in which it appears.

One of my personal objections for those that advocate so strongly for Maccabees as inspired scripture is:

“So where are the SIGNIFICANT verses in Maccabees? Where are the verses that really contribute something of ‘gravitas’ to the GOSPEL (good news) of God’s plan of redemption? Where can Jesus say, “When you search Maccabees looking to find God, it points to Me!”​

The book of 2 Maccabees talks all about the resurrection. When Hebrews 11:35 talks about a better resurrection, it references the tortured men in 2 Maccabees chapters 6 and 7. Clearly the author of Hebrews was getting some of his doctrine about the Resurrection from the book of 2 Maccabees.

Have you even read it? They talk about the resurrection all throughout the book. There’s plenty of significant verses.

Especially significant is how the history in Maccabees is prophesied in Daniel 7, 8, and 11.

If God wanted Daniel to prophesy about the events of Hanukkah, then I think God probably wants us to read about it!

Even John 10:22 mentions the Feast of Hanukkah. The whole conversation that Jesus was having with the Pharisees in Solomon’s Porch was during the Feast of Hanukkah - the celebration of the Maccabees.

Where did the believers in Jesus first get called Christians? In Antioch.
Antioch is the historic capitol of the Seleucid empire, named after one of the kings named Antiochus. One of them, Antiochus Epiphanes, was the villain in the Hanukkah story. He’s also the “little horn” prophesied in Daniel 8.

The history of the Maccabees is incredibly integral to the Old and New Testaments.

As a Marvel fan, it would be like someone asking, “Why is Thor Ragnarok necessary for the Marvel story? Let’s throw it out?”

I would be like, “Uh, no. It totally sets up Avengers: Infinity War. This is a necessary piece of the storyline. You cannot just rip that out, or else you’re not going to have the full picture of what’s happening.”

 

[atpollard]

But you’re saying that an animal sacrifice cannot atone for the sins of a dead person.

I am saying that answering this question is tiptoeing along the third rail, one mid step and you can electrocute yourself. I do not “DECIDE” who or how GOD does ANYTHING … certainly not ”How God forgives sin.” I just do not like wild and unsupported speculations being thrown about with the mantra “God said …”.

I am aware of no provision in the LAW for making offerings to atone for the dead. I will not speculate on what God can do … God can and will do WHATEVER HE PLEASES. I will merely challenge purveyors of new claims to support those claims.

If you CLAIM Judas Maccabees sent money to Jerusalem to pay for a sin offering for dead men, I will acknowledge that the Book of Maccabees does claim that happened. If you claim that making sin offerings for the dead is “right” under the OT Law … then I will ask you to make your case from the LAW. I remember reading of no such provision in the Bible.

 

[atpollard]

Especially significant is how the history in Maccabees is prophesied in Daniel 7, 8, and 11.

I find that studying prophecy seldom builds up the Body of Christ … but very often tears it down.

 

[Andrew]

I find that studying prophecy seldom builds up the Body of Christ … but very often tears it down.

Huh? Prophecy and fulfillment is what makes the Bible stand out over all other religious text, when Jesus prophesied the end times he makes it clear why he does so.."these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them"

The Spirit of Prophecy IS Jesus, when God tells us what will happen and then it DOES happen then you KNOW it's divine (for when a false prophet says something that doesnt come to pass he is exposed)

All prophecy builds up the Body of Christ my friend!

 

[NathanH83]

I am saying that answering this question is tiptoeing along the third rail, one mid step and you can electrocute yourself. I do not “DECIDE” who or how GOD does ANYTHING … certainly not ”How God forgives sin.” I just do not like wild and unsupported speculations being thrown about with the mantra “God said …”.

I am aware of no provision in the LAW for making offerings to atone for the dead. I will not speculate on what God can do … God can and will do WHATEVER HE PLEASES. I will merely challenge purveyors of new claims to support those claims.

If you CLAIM Judas Maccabees sent money to Jerusalem to pay for a sin offering for dead men, I will acknowledge that the Book of Maccabees does claim that happened. If you claim that making sin offerings for the dead is “right” under the OT Law … then I will ask you to make your case from the LAW. I remember reading of no such provision in the Bible.

Well then, consider yourself to have rejected the gospel, because Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross atoned for all the dead men who died in history past.

Good grief. Read your New Testament.

Also, a resurrected person is not dead. Judas Maccabees had the resurrection in mind.

 

[NathanH83]

I find that studying prophecy seldom builds up the Body of Christ … but very often tears it down.

Oh, so now you’re against studying prophesy. Wow.

 

[NathanH83]

Huh? Prophecy and fulfillment is what makes the Bible stand out over all other religious text, when Jesus prophesied the end times he makes it clear why he does so.."these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them"

The Spirit of Prophecy IS Jesus, when God tells us what will happen and then it DOES happen then you KNOW it's divine (for when a false prophet says something that doesnt come to pass he is exposed)

All prophecy builds up the Body of Christ my friend!

First they say Maccabees can’t be scripture because it’s not prophecy. Then they say that prophecy tears down the body of Christ. They can’t even get their story straight.

 

[atpollard]

Huh? Prophecy and fulfillment is what makes the Bible stand out over all other religious text, when Jesus prophesied the end times he makes it clear why he does so.."these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them"

The Spirit of Prophecy IS Jesus, when God tells us what will happen and then it DOES happen then you KNOW it's divine (for when a false prophet says something that doesnt come to pass he is exposed)

All prophecy builds up the Body of Christ my friend!

[begin sarcasm] I can tell by how all of these topics ABOUT prophecy build up and unite all of my Christian brothers and sisters. [end sarcasm]

 

[atpollard]

First they say Maccabees can’t be scripture because it’s not prophecy. Then they say that prophecy tears down the body of Christ. They can’t even get their story straight.

You would be more convincing if you paraphrased “them” correctly.
”They” said no such thing.

THEY said that Maccabees was neither written by a prophet (which it was not) nor was it affirmed as scripture by a prophet (which, again, it was not).

I said that discussions about prophecy create more divisions between Christian brothers than bring Christian unity or edification to the BODY OF CHRIST (that would be believers from any denomination).

If you disagree with what I said, talk to me. It seems dishonest to ascribe my opinions to others and to misquote their opinions to mash it all together to build a strawman and claim that “they” (whoever they are) need to “get their story straight”.

This was ME setting YOUR fairytale straight.

 

[Andrew]

[begin sarcasm] I can tell by how all of these topics ABOUT prophecy build up and unite all of my Christian brothers and sisters. [end sarcasm]

That's very sad considering Luther himself fully accepted that 1 Maccabees fulfils the prophecy in Daniel and how 1 Maccabees is "not unworthy" to be placed among sacred scripture.

 

[Josiah]

That's very sad considering Luther himself fully accepted that 1 Maccabees fulfils the prophecy in Daniel and how 1 Maccabees is "not unworthy" to be placed among sacred scripture.

Could you quote Luther saying that a BOOK (pages) fulfill a prophecy? Now, he may be of an opinion that an EVENT recorded in millions of books (including First Maccabees) fulfills a prophecy in Daniel.... but that's entirely unrelated to a BOOK fulfilling a prophecy or that ergo all books that speak of that event THEREFORE was officially declared by The Ruling Body of Judaism and also The Ruling Body of all Christianity to THUS be inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God.

And what is your point? That Luther's personal opinion was much greater than yours concerning that book, how he regarded it as DEUTEROcanonical while you call it APOCRYPHA and insist it's not canonical at all






.