Israel is ‘God’s people’ (136), His ‘portion’ (ἡ μερὶς αὐτοῦ, 14%); their calamities are His loving chastisement for their sins (5'8 6”) ; and from them He will never withdraw His mercy (618). The heathen, on the other hand, are allowed to fill up their cup of iniquity prior to their destruction (61), Foreign kings and their Jewish supporters are the unconscious instruments of the divine punitive righteousness with respect to Israel, but their insolence does not go unpunished (738), and their punishment exactly corresponds to their guilt (4% δ᾽ 138 15°), The view taken of providential rewards and punishments is thus distinctly me- chanical and external. ‘Providence appears no longer as God’s providence, but man’s shaped by his wishes and governed by his caprices.’* God will one day gather the dispersed Israelites into Palestine (218). than this there is no nearer approach to the Messianic hope. The doctrine oF the resurrection, on the other hand, finds the clearest expression (7%), and the offering of prayers for the dead seems to have the sanction of 12%*-,
According to Geiger, 1 and 2 Mac are partisan writings, the work, respectively, of a Sadducee who espoused the cause of the Hasmonzan house, and of a Vharisee who bore it a distinct grudge. As regards 2 Mac at all events, his theory seems to have much in its favour. Of the genealogy of the Maccabees, the death of Judas, the family sepulchre, no account is taken in the narrative. The priestly order, as represented by Jason and Menelaus, appears in the darkest light. Among the martyrs spoken of there is no priest, whereas one of ‘the principal scribes’ (6'"-) was the first to defy imperial cruelty. The Pharisaic bias of the work is seen also from its rigid Sabbatarianism (5% 6" etc.), its partiality for wonders and visions,
* Bissell, p. 555.
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
and its teaching concerning the resu:rection (7). Even the action of Judas himself is ascribed to his mindfulness of the resurrection (1938),
7. Use by Jews and Christians. —Among the Jews 2 Mac was never received as canonical. In the Rabbinical writings, however, some use is made of it, and in Philo’s treatise, Quod omnis probus liber (Mang. ii. 459), the descriptions of tyrannical persecutions of the pious appear to be based upon it. The earliest Christian reference to it is Ἐπρρύπες to be in the Ep. to the Heb. (cf. He 1155. with 2 Mac 6" 38), The first quotation from the book is found in the writings of Clement of Alexandria (Strom. v. 14. 97). Frequent reference is made to it by Origen (Lxhortatio ad martyrium, ὁ. 22-27, de Oratione, ο. 11, contra Celsum, viii. 46, etc.). The history of the Maccabean martyrs was a favourite subject with the early Fathers gener- ally (Cyprian, Test. 111. 17; Jerome, Prol. Galeat. ; Augustine, de Doctr. Christ. ii. 8, de Civitate Det, xvill. 30). That the estimation in which the Books of the Maccabees were held by Augustine exceeded that accorded to them by Jerome, who recognized them as ecclesiastical but not as canonical, appears from the passage last referred to: ‘ Maccabeorum libri, quos non Judzi, sed ecclesia pro canonica habet propter quorundam martyrum passiones.’
8. MSS and Versions.—W hat has been said above on 1 Mae with reference to MSS and versions applign for the most part to 2 Mac also. But (1) 2 Mac is omitted in δὲ ; (2) besides the Old Lat. version which is adopted in the Vulg., and which is not, as in the case of 1 Mac, supplemented in Sabatier by an older text, there is a Cod. Ambrosianus published by Peyron in 1824. The Syriac version 1s very inexact.
δ Il MACCABEES. — 1. Contents.—This book relates how Ptolemy Iv. Philopator, after defeat- ing Antiochus the Great at Raphia (B.C. 217), visited Jerusalem, and ‘conceived the purpose of entering the sanctuary’ (1°). Everything was done to dissuade him from this act of desecration, but in vain. Great excitement consequently arose among the Jews, who were with difficulty pre- veritell from taking to arms (111-39, At the critical moment the calm and reverend figure of Simon the high priest was seen kneeling in front of the temple, and in answer to his earnest prayers God smote the king with paralysis, and he was borne helpless from the sacred precincts (2'). On coming to himself Ptolemy returned to Egypt, but vowing vengeance. This took the form of subjecting the Jews of Alexandria to certain re- ligious disabilities, depriving them of the equal civie rights which they enjoyed with the Mace- donian founders of the city, and branding them with an ivy-leaf as worshippers of Bacchus. Only those who voluntarily embraced the worship of this deity were to retain their privileges (2: 5:30) Enraged at the steadfastness with which the great majority adhered to their ancestral faith, the king commanded the entire Jewish population of the country to be brought in chains to Alexandria (251-31), In spite of attempts made to represent them as disloyal citizens, the Jews had so won the good opinion of all, that some of their Gentile associates interested themselves on their behalf (371°), Notwithstanding the stringent terms of the royal edict,—which caused as much grief to the Jews as it did joy among the heathen,—and the equally harsh manner in which it was carried out, the majority succeeded in evading arrest (34- 4°), As a preliminary to the intended massacre, the names of all were ordered to be taken down. But, at the end of forty days’ continuous work, the clerks reported that, owing to the vast number of Jews to be dealt with, their writing materials were exhausted (4133), Ptolemy next commanded