The Strand Study Bible

LUKE LUKE the close of the Old Testament, the Letter of Jeremiah did not make it into the Jewish canon ( Genesis – Malachi ). It is, however, part of the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox biblical canon. Question is: Why isn’t the Letter of Jeremiah found in any of our modern versions today? The answer is threefold: 1. Jesus didn’t include it in what He called Scripture (Lk 11:51) 2. It was never included in the Hebrew canon 3. Although it is called the Letter of Jeremiah , it is neither a letter, nor is it from Jeremiah The date of the writing of the Letter of Jeremiah places it 300 years after the time of Jeremiah (c. 627-561 BC) About the book: Consisting of 1 chapter (72 verses), much of the material found within the book appears to be dependent on Isaiah 44:9-20. 5. 1 Maccabees (c. 110 BC) Found within the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures), the book of 1 Maccabees did not make it into the Jewish canon ( Genesis – Malachi ). It is, however, part of the Catholic , Eastern Orthodox, and Coptic canons. Question is: Why isn’t 1 Maccabees found in any of our modern versions today? The answer is threefold: 1. Jesus didn’t include it in what He called Scripture (Lk 11:51) 1652

2. It was never included in the Hebrew canon 3. Some of its history is historically inaccurate Neil J. McEleney in The Jerome Biblical Commentary notes:

Several complaints have been lodged against the historical reliability of 1 Mc. Its author’s nationalism and the exaggerated importance he gives Judean events (1:41-43; 3:27-31; 6:5-13) are said to make his objectivity suspect. He is anti-Seleucid (1:9-10), and, moreover, he shows ignorance of the history, geography, and political organization of foreign peoples. His Jewish nationalism leads him to inflate the numbers of the enemy so as to make more striking the divine intervention on behalf of the Hasmoneans. And he has erred in placing the death Antiochus IV after the dedication of the Temple. These and other historical shortcomings are thought to disqualify him as an accurate reporter of the period. 4

About the book: It is generally agreed that 1 Maccabees was originally written in Hebrew, even though no manuscripts or fragments in Hebrew can be found. The author of this work is not mentioned, not once. Whoever he was, he must have composed his text in the last years of John Hyrcanus, for he wrote a kind of unofficial history glorifying the Maccabees. He never speaks of resurrection or of the Messianic hope. The setting for the book of 1Maccabees starts after the conquest of Judea by Alexander the Great. It then tells the story of how the Greek ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes from Syria attempted to suppress the practice of Jewish law by offering a pig upon its altar, and how the Jews revolted under Mattathias and his sons: Judas Maccabeus, Jonathan Apphus, and SimonThassi. Thus, it is a book of Jewish history; and in modern-day Judaism , the book is often of great historical interest as well as biblical interest since it speaks of the future antichrist in the person of Antiochus IV Epiphanes ( Dan 7:8b ), although it has no official religious status. 1 Maccabees , much like the ‘Works of Flavius Josephus’ ( Antiquities of the Jews ), is a book of historical information, not inspiration. 6. 2 Maccabees (c. 80 BC) Found within in the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures), the book of 2Maccabees did not make it into the Jewish canon ( Genesis – Malachi ). It is, however, part of the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox canons. Question is: Why isn’t 2 Maccabees found in any of our modern versions today? The answer is threefold: 1. Jesus didn’t include it in what He called Scripture (Lk 11:51) 2. It was never included in the Hebrew canon 3. It didn’t line up with Scripture The book of 2 Maccabees teaches “praying for the dead” ( 2 Maccabees 12:39-45 ). NOTE – Concerning the doctrine of “praying for the dead,” there are no OT references to it and there is only one NT verse that even appears to refer to a “prayer for the dead” (II Tim 1:18). The only other references to “praying for the dead” are found in the extra-biblical books of the bible ( Tobit and 2 Maccabees ) and religions that believe you have to be good (works) to get to Heaven. The only reason religions believe they can “pray for the dead” is because they aren’t sure that those people who died were good enough to go to Heaven while on earth. The following is a short list of religions that believe in “praying for the dead:” * Judaism –“prayers for the dead” form part of the Jewish services * Hinduism –funeral speeches with “prayers for the dead” are read out of the Mahabharata * Buddhism –Buddhists pray for dead humans as well as dead animals (Namo Ratnasikhin Tathagata prayer) * Taoism –Taoists chant Qinghuahao or Jiukujing for the dead * Islam –Salat al-Janazah is a “prayer for the dead” * Catholicism –each Eucharistic Prayer of the Order of Mass has a “prayer for the dead” * Anglicanism –the 1549 Book of Common Prayer includes a “prayer for the dead” * Episcopal –the 1979 Book of Common Prayer includes a “prayer for the dead” * Mormonism –The LDS Church has a number of sacred ordinances and rituals that are performed for the dead. The chief amongst these are “baptism for the dead” ( I Cor 15:29 ) and the “sealing of the dead” to families. Now we know, according to the Bible, that “praying to the dead” is an abomination unto the Lord (Deut 18:10-12 and I Sam 28:1- 25/I Chro 10:13-14). The question remains: If “praying to the dead” is an abomination unto the Lord, is “praying for