THE APOCRYPHA

THE APOCRYPHA
Having given an account of the origin and literary characteristics of the accredited and usually accepted books composing the Old and New Testaments, we now proceed to offer a few details relative to those books styled the Apocrypha, a branch of the subject possessed of considerable interest, and which we shall treat in the same measure of impartiality.[7]
[7] The relationship between the canonical and the apocryphal books was correctly defined by the ancient Jewish synagogue, and, after it, by the ancient Greek and the modern Protestant churches, in opposition to the Roman Catholic theory. The Apocrypha serve, 1. As a kind of historical supplement, being a narrative of the kingdom of God during the period intervening between the Old and New Testaments. 2. As a record of popular piety, forming a distinct period between the age of the prophets and that of the New Testament. 3. To exhibit the character of Alexandrian Judaism, though only a part of them is derived from that source. 4. As a background to the canon itself. 5. For private instruction and edification--Dr. Lange's General Introduction to the Scriptures--Ed.
The term apocrypha is Greek, signifying hidden or concealed, and is used to designate a number of books, often placed between the Old and New Testaments, or otherwise bound up with them. Some writers divide the sacred books into three classes, viz., the canonical, the ecclesiastical, and the apocryphal. In the first they place those whose authority has never been questioned in the catholic or universal church; in the second, those which were not received at first, but which were nevertheless read in the public assemblies as books that were useful, though they never placed them upon the same footing of authority as the former; and in the third they placed the books which were of no authority, which could not be made to appear in public, but were kept hidden, and were therefore called apocryphal, that is, concealed, or such as could not be used in public.[8]
[8] Lange. etc., on Matthew., p. 14.
The Apocrypha consists of fourteen books, viz. First and Second Esdras, Tobit, Judith, the rest of the chapters of the Book of Esther, the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the Song of the Three Holy Children, the History of Susanna, the Story of Bel and the Dragon, the Prayer of Manasses, and the First and Second Book of the Maccabees. Every attentive reader must perceive that these books want the majesty of inspired scripture; and that there are in them a variety of things wicked, false, and disagreeing with the oracles of God. None of them were ever found in the proper Hebrew tongue; and they were never received into the canon of scripture by the Jews, to whom the oracles of God were originally committed. They were partly read in private by the ancient Christians as useful, but they did not admit them unto the canon of scripture. None of them are found in the catalogue of the canonical books by Melita, bishop of Sardis, in the second century; nor does Origen in the third, or Epiphanius in the fourth, in the least acknowledge their authenticity. One or two of the writers of them also ask pardon if they have said anything amiss; which clearly shows that they were not inspired, or at least did not consider themselves to be so; and therefore these books can by no means be considered as having a title to form part of the word of God. A very simple analysis of the books themselves will be sufficient to demonstrate this to every attentive mind.
I ESDRAS
I. It is not known at what time the First Book of Esdras was written, neither is it known who was the author of it; but Prideaux considers it certain that he wrote before the time of Josephus. It was originally to be found only in Greek; and in the Alexandrian manuscript it is placed before the canonical Book of Ezra, and is there called the First Book of Ezra, because the events related in it occurred prior to the return from the Babylonish captivity. In some editions of the Septuagint it is called the First Book of the Priest (meaning Ezra), the authentic book of Ezra being called the second book. In the editions of the Latin Vulgate previous to the Council of Trent, this and the following book are styled the Third and Fourth Books of Esdras, those of Ezra and Nehemiah being entitled the first and second books. This book is chiefly historical, giving an account of the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, the building of the temple, and the re-establishment of divine worship. It is, in fact, nothing but a bad extract of the last two chapters of Chronicles, and the Book of Ezra; and in a great many instances it even contradicts these. The author falsely makes Zorobabel a young man in the days of Darius Hystaspes, and Joakim to be his son; whereas he was the son of Joshua, the high-priest. He calls Darius king of Assyria, long after that empire was utterly dissolved; and makes some things to be done under Darius which were done under Cyrus.
II ESDRAS
II. The author of the Second Book of Esdras is likewise unknown. It is supposed to have been originally written in Greek, though the original of it has never been found but in Latin; and there is an Arabic version, differing very materially from it, and having many interpolations. Although the writer personates Ezra, it is manifest from the style and contents of his book, that he lived long after that celebrated Jewish reformer. He pretends to visions and revelations; but they are so fanciful, indigested, ridiculous, and absurd, that it is clear the Holy Spirit could have no concern in the dictating of them. He believed that the day of judgment was at hand, and that the souls of good and wicked men would all be then delivered out of hell. A great many rabbinical fables occur in this book, particularly the account of the six days' creation, and the story of Behemoth (or Enoch, as it is here called) and Leviathan--two monstrous creatures that are designed as a feast for the elect after the day of resurrection, etc. He says that the ten tribes are gone away into a country which he calls Arsareth, and that Ezra restored the whole body of the Scriptures, which had been entirely lost. He also speaks of Jesus Christ and his apostles in so clear a manner, that the gospel itself is scarcely more explicit. On these accounts, and from the numerous traces of the language of the New Testament, and especially of the Revelation of St. John, which are discoverable in this book, several critics have concluded that it was written about the close of the first century, by some converted Jew, who assumed the name of Esdras or Ezra.
TOBIT
III. The Book of Tobit, from the simplicity of the narrative, and the lessons of piety and meekness which it contains, has been always one of the most popular of the apocryphal writings. It was first written in Chaldee by some Babylonian Jew; but there is no authentic information as to his name, or the time when he flourished. It professes to relate the history of Tobit and his family, who were carried into captivity to Nineveh by Shalmanezer, being first begun by Tobit, then continued by his son Tobias, and lastly, finished by some other of the family, and afterward digested by the Chaldee author into that form in which we now have it. The time of this history ends with the destruction of Nineveh, about six hundred and twelve years before Christ; but most commentators and critics agree in thinking that the book itself was not written till about one hundred and fifty or two hundred years before Christ. It has been generally looked upon, both by Jews and Christians, as a genuine and true history; but it contains so many rabbinical fictions, and allusions to the Babylonian demonology, that it is much more rational to suppose the whole book an entire fable. It is not probable that, in the time of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon, the father should live, as is here said, one hundred and fifty-eight years, and the son one hundred and twenty-seven. It is certain no angel of God could falsely call himself “Azarias the son of Ananias,” as this writer affirms. The story of Sarah's seven husbands being successively killed on their marriage-night by an evil spirit, and of that spirit's being driven away by the smell and smoke of the roasted heart and liver of a fish, and bound in the uttermost parts of Egypt, or of the angel Raphael's presenting to God the prayers of the saints, with other matters evidently fabulous, are quite sufficient to justify the rejecting of this book entirely from the sacred canon, upon the score of internal evidence alone.
JUDITH
IV. The Book of Judith professes to relate the defeat of the Assyrians by the, Jews, through the instrumentality of their countrywoman of this name, who craftily cut off the head of Holofernes, the Assyrian general. This book was originally written in Chaldee by some Jew of Babylon, and was thence translated by St. Jerome into the Latin tongue. Dr. Prideaux refers this history to the time of Manasseh, king of Judah; Jahn assigns it to the age of the Maccabees, and thinks it was written to animate the Jews against the Syrians; but so many geographical, historical, and chronological difficulties attend this book, that Luther, Grotius, and other eminent critics, have considered it rather as a drama or parable than a real history. It has been received into the canon of scripture by some as being all true; but, on the other hand, it is the opinion of Grotius that it is entirely a parabolical fiction, written in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, when he came into Judea to raise a persecution against the Jewish church, and that the design of it was to confirm the Jews, under that persecution, in their hope that God would send a deliverer. According to him, by Judith is meant Judea, which, at the time of this persecution, was like a desolate widow: that her sword means the prayers of the saints: that by Bethulia, the name of the town which was attacked, is meant the temple, or the house of the Lord, which is called in Hebrew Bethel. Nabuchodonosor denotes the devil, and the kingdom of Assyria the devil's kingdom, pride. Holofernes, whose name signifies a minister of the serpent, means Antiochus Epiphanes, who was the devil's instrument in that persecution, etc., etc. It is plain that in this way; by means of a little ingenuity, anything may be made of anything; and such conjectures as these, as an able commentator remarks, however ingenious, are better calculated to exhibit the powers of fancy and the abuse of learning, than to investigate truth, or throw light on what is uncertain and obscure. The noted deliverance mentioned in this book is there said to have happened after the Jews had returned from their captivity, and had rebuilt the temple, and yet it is said to have been in the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, which is absurd; and it is said that they had no trouble for eighty years or more after this deliverance, which is equally absurd, as the Jews during any period of their history, or indeed any other nation, never enjoyed a peace of such long continuance. It is quite improbable that a small town, as Bethulia is here represented to be, should stand out against so powerful an army, or that the death of the general should have made all the troops betake themselves to a shameful flight. It is certainly wrong, as is done in the case of Judith, to commend a woman as a devout fearer of the Lord, who was guilty of notorious lying, of acting the part of a bawd, of profane swearing, of murder, and of speaking in praise of that committed by the patriarch Simeon, whom she claims as her ancestor.
ADDITIONS TO ESTHER
V. “The rest of the chapters of the Book of Esther, which are found neither in the Hebrew nor in the Chaldee,” were originally written in Greek, whence they were translated into Latin, and formed part of the Italic or old Latin version in use before the time of Jerome. Being there annexed to the canonical Book of Esther, they passed without censure, but were rejected by Jerome in his version, because he confined himself to the Hebrew Scriptures, and these chapters never were extant in the Hebrew language. They are evidently the production of a Hellenistic Jew, but are considered both by Jerome and Grotius as a work of pure fiction, which was annexed to the canonical book by way of embellishment. From the coincidence between some of these apocryphal chapters and Josephus, it has been supposed that they are a compilation from the Jewish historian; and this conjecture is further confirmed by the mention of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, who lived but a short time before Josephus. These additions to the Book of Esther are often cited by the father of the church; and the Council of Trent has assigned them a place among the canonical books.[9]
[9] Vide Horne's Introduction to the Scripture, vol. iv p. 229.
The author of these apocryphal chapters says many things that are in direct contradiction to the inspired historian; as when he affirms that the attempt made by the eunuchs to take away the life of Ahasuerus was in the second year of his reign; that Mordecai was at the very time rewarded for his discovery; that Haman had been advanced before this event, and was provoked with Mordecai for his discovery of the eunuchs, that Haman was a Macedonian, and intended to transfer the government of Persia to the Macedonians. He very stupidly, also, represents Ahasuerus looking upon Esther, “as a fierce lion,” and yet “with a countenance full of grace!” and as calling the Jews “the children of the most high and most mighty living God;” and as ordering the heathens to keep the feast of Purim.
WISDOM OF SOLOMON
VI. The book of “The Wisdom of Solomon” was never written by that monarch, as its author falsely pretends; for it was never extant in Hebrew, nor received into the Jewish canon of scripture, nor is the style like that of Solomon. It consists of two parts: the first, which is written in the name of Solomon, contains a description or encomium of wisdom, by which comprehensive term the ancient Jews understood prudence and foresight, knowledge and understanding, and especially the duties of religion and morality. This division includes the first ten chapters. The second part, comprising the rest of the book, treats on a variety of topics widely differing from the subject of the first, viz., reflections on the history and conduct of the Israelites during their journeyings in the wilderness, and their subsequent proneness to idolatry. Hence the author takes occasion to inveigh against idolatry, the origin of which he investigates, and concludes with reflections on the history of the people of God. His allegorical interpretations of the Pentateuch, and the precept which he gives to worship God before the rising of the sun, have induced some critics to think that the author was of the Jewish sect called Essenes.
Although the fathers of the church, and particularly Jerome, uniformly considered this book as apocryphal, yet they recommended the perusal of it, in consideration of the excellence of its style. The third Council of Carthage, held in the year 397, pronounced it to be a canonical book, under the name of “the Fourth Book of Solomon,” and the famous Council of Trent confirmed this decision. Jerome informs us that several writers of the first three centuries ascribed the authorship of it to Philo the Jew, a native of Alexandria who flourished in the first century; and this opinion is generally adopted by the moderns, on account of the Platonic notions that are discoverable in it, as well as from its general style, which evidently shows that it was the production of a Hellenistic Jew of Alexandria. Drusius, indeed, attributes it to another Philo, more ancient than the person just mentioned, and who is cited by Josephus; but this hypothesis is untenable, because the author of the Book of Wisdom was confessedly either a Jew or a heretical Christian, whereas the Philo mentioned by Drusius was a heathen.
It is quite evident that this author had read Plato and the Greek poets; and he employs a great many expressions taken from them, such as Ambrosia, the river of forgetfulness; the kingdom of Pluto, etc.; as also several words borrowed from the Grecian games, which were not in use till long after the time of Solomon, whose name he assumes. A great many of his phrases seem to be taken out of the Prophets, and even from the New Testament. There are numerous passages in the book evidently borrowed from the Prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah; particularly in the thirteenth chapter, where there are no less than nine verses plainly copied from the forty-fourth chapter of Isaiah.
This author brings forward many things that are contrary both to the words of inspiration and to common sense. He condemns the marriage-bed as sinful, and also excludes bastards from the hopes of salvation: he talks as if souls were lodged in bodies according to their former merits; makes the murder of Abel the cause of the flood; represents the Egyptians as being plagued entirely by their own idols, that is to say, by the beasts which they worshipped, though it is certain they never worshipped frogs, locusts, or lice. He also calls the divine Logos, or second person of the Trinity, a vapor or steam, with many other things that are evidently absurd.
ECCLESIASTICUS
The seventh book of the Apocrypha, is entitled “The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus,” which, like the preceding, has sometimes been considered as the production of King Solomon; whence the council of Carthage deemed it canonical, under the title of the Fifth Book of Solomon, and their decision was adopted by the council of Trent. It is, however, manifest, that it was not, and could not be written by Solomon, because in it allusion is made to the captivity; although it is not improbable that the author collected some scattered sentiments ascribed to Solomon, which he arranged with the other materials he had selected for his work. Sonntag is of opinion that this book is a collection of fragments, or miscellaneous hints for a large work, planned out and begun, but not completed. From the book itself it appears that it was written by a person of the name of Jesus the Son of Sirach, who had travelled in pursuit of knowledge. By reading the Scriptures, and other good books, he attained a considerable share of wisdom; and by collecting the grave and short sentences of such as went before him, and adding sundry of his own, he endeavored to produce a work of instruction that might be useful to his countrymen.
This book was originally written in Hebrew, or rather the Syro-Chaldaic dialect then in use in Judea about the year 232 before Christ, when the author was probably about seventy years of age. Jesus, his grandson, who is also called The Son of Sirach, translated it into Greek during the reign of Ptolemy Evergetes, king of Egypt, about 140 years before Christ, for the use of the Hellenistical Jews, among whom he had settled in Alexandria. The Hebrew original is now lost; but it was extant in the time of Jerome, for he tells us that he had seen it under the title of The Parables; but he says that the common name of it in Greek was The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach. The Latin version of this book has more in it than the Greek, several particulars being inserted which are not in the other. These seem to have been interpolated by the first author of that version; but now the Hebrew being lost, the Greek, which has been made from it by the grandson of the author, must stand for the original, and from that the English translation has been made. From the supposed resemblance of this book to that of Ecclesiasticus, it has received from the Latin translator the title of Ecclesiasticus, by which name it is most generally known and referred to.
Ecclesiasticus is considered by far the best of all the apocryphal books. The ancients called it Panareton, that is, The Treasury of Virtue, as supposing it to contain maxims leading to every virtue. It has met with general esteem, also, in most of the western churches, and was introduced into the public service of the Church of England by the compilers of its Liturgy. It was frequently cited by the fathers of the church under the titles of “The Wisdom of Jesus,” “Wisdom,” “The Treasures of all the Virtues,” or “Logos, the Discourse:” and in those times it was put into the hands of catechumens, or young Christians under examination, on account of the edifying nature of its instruction.
BARUCH
VIII. The Book of “Baruch” is not extant in Hebrew, and only in Greek and Syriac; but in what language it was originally written it is now impossible to ascertain. Grotius is of opinion that it is an entire fiction, and that it was composed by some Hellenistical Jew, under the name of Baruch. The principal subject of the book is an epistle, pretended to be sent by Jehoiakim and the captive Jews in Babylon, to their brethren in Judah and Jerusalem; and the last chapter contains an epistle which falsely bears the name of Jeremiah. This has never been considered as a canonical book, either by the Jews or the Christians; and, indeed, it is little else than an arrant romance. It absurdly pretends to have been written by Baruch at Babylon, when it is probable he never went thither: that it was read to Jechoniah at the river Sud, which is nowhere else mentioned; nor could Jeconiah hear it there, when he was confined in prison. It mentions a collection to buy sacrifices, gathered by the captives in Babylon, and sent to Joakim the priest, along with the sacred vessels which Zedekiah had made; but how could the captives newly enslaved in Babylon be able to make collections? How could they send it to a high-priest that did not then exist? How could the sacred vessels which Zedekiah made be returned from Babylon, when it does not appear that he made any? Or how could they be returned before they were carried away, along with himself? The author borrows a variety of expressions from Daniel, and must therefore have lived after Baruch was dead. The epistle ascribed to Jeremiah is neither written in his style, nor at all in the style of the Scriptures; and it ridiculously turns the seventy years of the captivity into seven generations.[10]
[10] Brown's Dictionary of the Bible--Art. Apocrypha.
SONG OF THREE CHILDREN
IX. “The Song of the Three Children in the Furnace” is placed in the Greek version of Daniel, and also in the Vulgate Latin version, between the twenty-third and twenty-fourth verses of the third chapter. It is partly a poor imitation of Psalms 148, and partly deprecatory, not at all suited to such a deliverance. It does not appear to have ever been extant in Hebrew; and although it has met with a good deal of approbation for the piety of its sentiments, it was never admitted to be canonical, until it was recognized by the council of Trent. The account of the flame streaming above the furnace “forty-and-nine cubits,” and of the angel's “smiting the flame out of the oven, and making a moist whistling wind in it,” seems entirely fabulous and romantic; nor is it very consistent with the account of the fire's loosening their hands. The fifteenth verse contains a direct falsehood; for it asserts that there was no prophet at that time, when it is well known that Daniel and Ezekiel both exercised the prophetic ministry then in Babylon. This apocryphal fragment is, therefore, most probably the production of some Hellenistic Jew. The hymn resembling Psalms 148, which commences at the 29th verse, was so approved of by the compilers of the Liturgy of the Church of England, that they appointed it to be used instead of the Te Deum during Lent.
SUSANNA
X. “The History of Susanna,” has always been treated with some respect, but has never been considered as canonical, though the council of Trent admitted it into the number of the sacred books. It is evidently, like the rest, the work of some Hellenistic Jew, and in the Vulgate version it forms the thirteenth chapter of the Book of Daniel. In the Septuagint version it is placed at the beginning of that book. Lamy, and some other modern critics after Julius Africanus and Origen, consider it to be both spurious and fabulous. That it was originally written in Greek, is manifest in the punishment pronounced on the elders, from the play which is made upon the Greek names of the mastic and holm trees, under which they said they found Susanna and the young man together. It is evidently absurd to affirm, that in the beginning of the captivity, Joachim, the husband of Susanna, was become exceedingly rich; that there were Jewish judges with the power of life and death in Chaldea; that Daniel, who was bred in the court, had leisure, or being so young, was admitted to be a judge; that Susanna went into her garden to wash at noonday, and did it without searching if anybody was there; or that the elders attempted to force her, when they could not but every moment expect the return of her maids.
BEL AND THE DRAGON
XI. “The History of the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon” is a still more romantic story. It is not extant in either the Hebrew or the Chaldee language, and it was always rejected by the Jewish church. Jerome gives it no better title than that of The Fable of Bel and the Dragon; nor has it obtained more credit with posterity, except with the fathers of the council of Trent, who determined it to be a part of the canonical scriptures. It forms the fourteenth chapter of Daniel in the Latin Vulgate; in the Greek it was called the Prophecy of Habakkuk, the son of Jesus, of the tribe of Levi; but this is evidently false, for that prophet lived before the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and the events pretended to have taken place in this fable are assigned to the time of Cyrus. There are two Greek texts of this fragment, that of the Septuagint, and that found in Theodotian's Greek version of Daniel.
The design of this fiction is to render idolatry ridiculous, and to exalt the true God; but the author has destroyed the illusion of his fiction, by transporting to Babylon the worship of animals, which was never practised in that country. It is also quite improbable that Cyrus, a Persian, would worship a Babylonian idol; nay, an idol that was broken to pieces at the taking of the city! It is absurd to imagine that a man of his sense could believe an image of brass and clay did really eat and drink! How Pitiful, for Daniel to discover the coming of the priests to devour the provisions, by making the king's servants strew ashes on the floor, when the priest might so easily perceive them, or the servants so readily inform concerning them! It is absurd to suppose that the newly-conquered Babylonians should, by menaces, oblige Cyrus to deliver up his beloved Daniel to them, to be cast into the den of lions; or that Habakkuk should be then alive to bring him food; or that Cyrus should be seven days before he went to the den, to see what was become of his favorite minion.
MANASSES
XII. “The Prayer of Manasses,” king of Judah, when he was holden captive to Babylon, never appeared in the Hebrew language; and seems to be the product of some Pharisaical spirit. It was never recognized as canonical, and is rejected as spurious even by the Church of Rome. It can not be traced to a higher source than the Vulgate Latin version; and, therefore, it has no claim to be considered as the original prayer which, in the Book of Chronicles, Manasseh is mentioned to have made, and which it pretends to be. The author speaks of just persons, such as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as being without sin, and not called to repent.
MACCABEES
XIII. The Books of the “Maccabees” are thus denominated, because they relate the patriotic and gallant exploits of Judas Maccabeus and his brethren. The Maccabees arose in defence of their brethren the Jews, during the dreadful persecutions to which they were subjected, on account of their religion, under Antiochus Epiphanes, king of Syria, about 100 years before Christ. The most likely derivation of the title Maccabees, is that which takes it from the motto put by Judas in his standard, being this Hebrew sentence, taken out of Exodus 16:11, Mi Camo-ka Baelim Jehovah, that is, “Who is like unto thee among the gods; O Jehovah?” which being written like the S.P.Q.R., Senatus Populusque Romanus, on the Roman standards, by an abbreviation formed by the initial letter of these words put together, made the artificial word Maccabi; and hence all who fought under that standard were called Maccabees or Maccabeans.
I MACCABEES
The First Book of Maccabees is a very valuable historical monument, written with great accuracy and fidelity, on which even more reliance may be placed than on the writings of Josephus, who has borrowed some of his materials from it, and has frequently mistaken its meaning. It is, indeed, an excellent history, and comes the nearest to the style and manner of the sacred historical writings of any extant. It was written originally in the Chaldee language of the Jerusalem dialect, which was the language spoken in Judea, from the return of the Jews thither from the Babylonish captivity; and it was extant in this Syro-Chaldaic language in the time of Jerome, for he tells us that he had seen it. The title which it then bore was, The Scepter of the Prince of the Sons of God: a title which is certainly suitable to the character of Judas, who was a valiant commander of the persecuted Israelites. It contains the history of the Jews under the government of the priest Matthias and his sons, from the beginning of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes to the death of Simon Maccabeus, a period of about thirty-four years. The author of this book is not certainly known: some conjecture that it was written by John Hyrcanus, the son of Simon, who was prince and high-priest of the Jews for nearly thirty years, and who commenced his government at the time when this history ends: by others it is ascribed to one of the Maccabees, and many are of opinion that it was compiled by the men of the great synagogue. It is, however, most probable that it was composed in the time of John Hyrcanus, when the wars of the Maccabees are terminated, either by Hyrcanus himself; or by some persons employed by him. There is both a Greek and a Latin translation of it, from the Syro-Chaldaic; and our English version is made from the Greek.
There are many things in this book which show that it was not written by inspiration. The writer often observes, that there was no prophet in his times; and, indeed, he has blundered into several mistakes; as, that Alexander the Great parted his kingdom among his honorable servants while he was yet alive; that Antiochus the Great was taken alive by the Romans; that they gave India and Media, parts of his kingdom, to Eumenes, king of Pergamos; that the Roman senate consisted of 320 persons; that Alexander Balas was the son of Antiochus Epiphanes; and several others which are palpably absurd.
II MACCABEES
XIV. The “Second Book of Maccabees” is a history of fifteen years, from the execution of the commission of Heliodorus, who was sent by Seleucus to bring away the treasures of the temple, to the victory obtained by Judas Maccabeus over Nicanor, that is, from the year of the world 3828 to 3843. It commences with two epistles sent from the Jews of Jerusalem to those of Alexandria and throughout Egypt, exhorting them to observe the feast of the dedication of the new altar, erected by Judas Maccabeus on his purifying the temple. The second of these epistles is not only written in the name of Judas Maccabeus, who was slain thirty-six years before, but also contains such fabulous and absurd stuff, as could never have been written by the great council of the Jews assembled at Jerusalem for the whole nation, as this pretends to be. The epistles, which are confessedly spurious, are followed by the author's preface to his history, which is an abridgment of a larger work, compiled by one Jason, a Hellenistic Jew of Cyrene, who wrote in Greek the history of Judas Maccabeus and his brethren, and an account of the wars against Antiochus Epiphanes and his son Eupator, in five books. The entire work of Jason has long since perished; and Dr. Prideaux is of opinion that the author of this second book of Maccabees was a Hellenistic Jew of Alexandria, because he makes a distinction between the temple in Egypt and that at Jerusalem, calling the latter “the Great Temple.”
The compilation of this unknown author is by no means equal in accuracy to the First Book of the Maccabees, which it contradicts in several instances; it is not arranged in chronological order, and sometimes also it is at variance with the inspired writings. The author concludes it, begging excuse if he had said anything unbecoming the story; and, indeed, he had reason to do so, considering what a number of false and wicked things he retails: as, that Judas Maccabeus was alive in the 188th year of the Seleucidae, when he died in the 152nd; that Antiochus Epiphanes was killed at the temple of Nanea, in Persia, whereas he died on the frontiers of Babylon of a terrible disease; that Nehemiah built the second temple and altar, whereas they were built sixty years before he came from Persia; that Jeremiah hid the tabernacle, ark, and altar of incense, in a cave; that Persepolis was in being one hundred years after Alexander had burnt it to ashes; that Judas did well in offering prayers and sacrifices to make reconciliation for the dead; and that Rasis did well in murdering himself to escape the fury of the Syrians.
III MACCABEES
The name of Maccabees was first given to Judas, the son of Matthias, the priest of Modin, and his brethren, for the reason which has been already mentioned; and, therefore, the two books just spoken of, which give us an account of their actions, are called the First and the Second Book of the Maccabees. But because they were sufferers in the cause of their religion, others who were like sufferers in the same cause, and by their sufferings bore witness to the truth, were in after times called also Maccabees by the Jews. For this reason, other two books, giving an account of other persecutions endured by the Jews, are found under the title of the Third and Fourth Books of the Maccabees. The Third Book contains the history of a persecution intended against the Jews in Egypt by Ptolemy Philopator, but which was miraculously prevented. From its style, this book appears to have been written by some Alexandrian Jew; it abounds with absurd fables. With regard to its subject, it ought in strictness to be called the First Book of Maccabees, as the event it professes to relate occurred before the achievements of that heroic family; but as it is of less authority and repute than the other two, it is reckoned after them. It is found in most ancient manuscripts of the Greek Septuagint, particularly in the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts; but it was never inserted in the Latin Vulgate, nor in our English bibles.
IV MACCABEES
Of the Fourth Book of the Maccabees very little is known. It is destitute of every internal mark of credibility, and is supposed to be the same as the book “concerning the government or empire of reason,” ascribed to Josephus by Philostratus, Eusebius, and Jerome. It is extant in some Greek manuscripts, in which it is placed after the three books of Maccabees. Dr. Lardner thinks it is the work of some unknown Christian writer. The history contained in it extends to about 160 years; beginning at Seleucus's attempt to pillage the temple, and ending just before the birth of Jesus Christ.
Upon the whole, in regard to these apocryphal books, it is to be observed, they appear to have been entirely, the work of Hellenistic Jews, and quite destitute of any proper claim to the authority of inspiration. The Jews, after their return from the Babylonish captivity to the time of our Savior, were much given to religious romances: and of this sort the greater part, if not all, of these books are to be accounted. They were never extant in Hebrew, neither are they quoted in the New Testament, or by the Jewish writers, Philo and Josephus; on the contrary, they contain many things which are fabulous, false, and contradictory to the canonical scriptures. They are nevertheless possessed of some value as ancient writings, which throw considerable light upon the phraseology of Scripture, and upon the history and manners of the east.