On the Latest Anti-Mormon Attack on the Book of Mormon I

Paul Owen is a fairly nice guy. I know him. He is, nonetheless, an anti-Mormon. He has written books explicitly attacking Mormonism in general and the Book of Mormon in particular. His latest article also attacks the Book of Mormon. He concludes that the Book of Mormon is a "fictional (though ancient) narrative" (Paul Owen, "Theological Apostasy and the Role of Canonical Scripture: A Thematic Analysis of 1 Nephi 13-14," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (?!) 23 [2014]: 100):

What I am suggesting, in essence, is that the Book of Mormon could be taken as a genuinely restored ancient text with a fictional narrative that originated in the Old World

(Owen, "Theological Apostasy and the Role of Canonical Scripture," 99)

Since the Book of Mormon claims to have come from the New World, Owens is arguing that the Book of Mormon is not what it claims to be.

Owen thinks that Joseph Smith took the narrative of the Book of Mormon (or at least 1 Nephi 13-14) from the apocryphal book of 2 Esdras. Owen does not explain that the 2 Esdras he discusses is not the 2 Esdras of the Septuagint but is the book that is also known as 4 Ezra. The earliest known version of it is not in Hebrew or Aramaic or Greek but in Latin.

Owen skirts the issue of whether his proposal that it is authentically ancient and still modern fiction is logically coherent, but setting that concern aside for the moment, let us look at one particular point of his argument.

Owen thinks that Joseph Smith took the idea of brass plates from 2 Esdras/4 Ezra:

The books that are revealed to and dictated by Ezra are first written down on "writing tablets" (2 Esdras 14:24 NRSV; "box trees" KJV). So also the Book of Mormon ( cf. 1 Nephi 13:23; Mosiah 1:3).

(Owen, "Theological Apostasy and the Role of Canonical Scripture," 92.)

Owen argues that "those curious references to Jews writing on "tablets" (2 Esdras 14:24) in obscure characters (2 Esdras 14:42)" are the origin of the idea of the Book of Mormon being written in strange characters on plates of gold or brass (Owen, "Theological Apostasy and the Role of Canonical Scripture," 95). Therefore,

Joseph Smith (or someone in his circle) could have read 2 Esdras in the King James Version of the Apocrypha and perhaps had access to commentary on its meaning through libraries and cultural knowledge.

(Owen, "Theological Apostasy and the Role of Canonical Scripture," 94.)

Consequently, Owen maintains

that the gold plates that were shown to Joseph Smith by the angel Moroni [were] not necessarily historical artifacts from the history of the America

(Owen, "Theological Apostasy and the Role of Canonical Scripture," 97.)

Owen thinks that his speculations 

would allow the Book of Mormon to be taken as simultaneously modern and fictional, on the one hand, and miraculous and inclusive of authentic ancient material on the other. It would thus bring the manner of the production of the Book of Mormon more in line with the restoration of other ancient texts (e.g., the Book of Abraham, the Book of Moses, Doctrine and Covenants 7).

(Owen, "Theological Apostasy and the Role of Canonical Scripture," 98.)

So Owens makes the sweeping claim that like the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, the Book of Moses, and part of the Doctrine and Covenants are fictional as well.

There are a couple of small problems with Owen's thesis. I will deal only with the problems with 2 Esdras/4 Ezra being the origin of the idea of the plates.

1
Owen gets the notion of "writing tablets" from the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible which was first published in 1989. The King James Version of the passage, which would have been available to Joseph Smith reads:

But look thou prepare thee many box trees, and take with thee Sarea, Dabria, Selemia, Ecanus, and Asiel, these five which are ready to write swiftly; (2 Esdras/4 Ezra 14:24, KJV).

Owen does not actually cite the passage because his reader would have found his argument confused by the actual evidence.

So Owen appears to be arguing that Joseph Smith got his basic scenario for the Book of Mormon by reading a translation that was published 155 years after he died like Owen did. This argument is anachronistic.

2
Owen attempts to obfuscate the issue by opining:

there can be no doubt that Joseph Smith's access to 2 Esdras provides a simple, straightforward explanation of the textual evidence-with the exception of one point. The references in the text of 2 Esdras to Jews writing on "tablets" in "obscure characters" are unclear in the King James translation available to Joseph Smith. While a bit mysterious, this could potentially be explained in several ways: (1) Smith (or someone in his circle) could have intuitively surmised (based on the context) the underlying meaning of the King James renderings "box trees" (2 Esdras 14:24) and "which they knew not" (14:42) in a way that happens to correspond to modern English translations. (2) Smith (or someone in his circle) could have had access to annotations on the Apocrypha through various sources (libraries, local ministers, bookstores) that clarified the meaning. (3) These particular parallels between 1 Nephi 13-14 and 2 Esdras 14 could be coincidental, parallels of which Smith and his associates actually had no awareness prior to the publication of the Book of Mormon.

(Owen, "Theological Apostasy and the Role of Canonical Scripture,"96.)

Of course, Owen's argument has major historical problems:

a
Joseph Smith's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, described him as

a boy, eighteen years of age, who had never read the Bible through in his life: he seemed much less inclined to the perusal of books than any of the rest of our children, but far more given to meditation and deep study.

( Lucy Mack Smith, Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet and his Progenitors for Many Generations (Lamoni, IA: The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, 1912, reprinted Independence, Missouri: Herald, 1969), 92 = Lucy Mack Smith, History of Joseph Smith, by His Mother, Lucy Mack Smith (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1901), 82.)

Joseph Smith had not read the Bible and was not inclined to read much anyway.

b
Joseph Smith's close associates, like David Whitmer, agreed with Lucy Mack Smith claiming that when Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon:

Smith was ignorant of the Bible.

(M. J. Hubble interview of David Whitmer, 13 November 1886, in Lyndon W. Cook, ed., David Whitmer Interviews: A Restoration Witness (Orem, Utah: Grandin, 1991), 211.)

c
Multiple accounts of the First Vision indicate that Joseph Smith found James 1:5 simply by flipping through the Bible at random. In an 1843 interview, Joseph Smith said that:

There was a reformation among the different religious denominations in the neighborhood where I lived, and I became serious, and was desirous to know what Church to join. While thinking of this matter, I opened the Testament promiscuously on these words, in James, 'Ask of the Lord who giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not.' I just determined I'd ask him.

("The Praries, Nauvoo, Joe Smith, the Temple, the Mormons, &c." The Pittsburgh Weekly Gazette 58 [September 15, 1843]: 3, reprinted in Dean C. Jessee, The Papers of Joseph Smith [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1989], 1:444.)

Alexander Niebaur records Joseph Smith as telling him:

Joseph tolt us the first call he had a Revival meeting his mother & Br & Sist got Religion, he wanted to get Religion too wanted to feel & sho shout like the Rest but could feel nothing, opened his Bible f the first Passage that struck him was if any man lack wisdom let him ask of God who giveth to all men liberallity & upbraidat not went into the Wood to pray

(Alexander Neibaur Journal, 24 May 1844, in Jessee, The Papers of Joseph Smith, 1:641.)

d
Joseph Smith's own Bible was not purchased until 8 October 1829 when the Book of Mormon was being printed.

e
Joseph Smith seems to have first systematically read the Bible when he was doing his own translation. When he got to the apocrypha (such as 2 Esdras/4 Ezra) he received D&C 91 and consequently seems to have skipped the apocrypha altogether. He thus seems never to have read any of the apocrypha in his life.

So Joseph Smith never read the Bible before he translated the Book of Mormon, did not even own one, and was ignorant of it. He seems never to have read the apocrypha in his life. The idea that he got the idea for the Book of Mormon by reading an apocryphal book seems far-fetched.

3
If Joseph Smith were to get the idea for the plates by reading an apocryphal book, then why 2 Esdras/4 Ezra and not 1 Maccabees? After all, Jews writing on brass plates is explicitly mentioned there:

τοῦτο τὸ ἀντίγραφον τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ἧς ἀντέγραψαν ἐπὶ δέλτοις χαλκαῖς

This is the copy of the letter which they copied on brass plates (1 Maccabees 8:22).

ἔγραψαν πρὸς αὐτὸν δέλτοις χαλκαῖς

And they wrote to him brass plates (1 Maccabees 14:18)

καὶ κατέγραψαν ἐν δέλτοις χαλκαῖς καὶ ἔθεντο ἐν στήλαις ἐν ὄρει σιων

And they wrote down in brass plates and placed them on stele on Mount Zion (1 Maccabees 14:26)

τὴν γραφὴν ταύτην εἶπον θέσθαι ἐν δέλτοις χαλκαῖς

And they said to put this writing on brass plates (1 Maccabees 14:48)

These passages would not necessarily have helped Joseph Smith because this is how they were translated in the King James Version:

And this is the copy of the epistle which the senate wrote back again in tables of brass, and sent to Jerusalem, that there they might have by them a memorial of peace and confederacy: (1 Maccabees 8:22 KJV)

They wrote unto him in tables of brass, to renew the friendship and league which they had made with Judas and Jonathan his brethren: (1 Maccabees 14:18 KJV)

So then they wrote it in tables of brass, which they set upon pillars in mount Sion: and this is the copy of the writing; The eighteenth day of the month Elul, in the hundred threescore and twelfth year, being the third year of Simon the high priest, (1 Maccabees 14:27 KJV)

So they commanded that this writing should be put in tables of brass, and that they should be set up within the compass of the sanctuary in a conspicuous place; (1 Maccabees 14:48 KJV)

While none of these passages match the language of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith probably never saw them in his life, they are much closer than imagining that Joseph Smith somehow got the idea for the Book of Mormon by reading about box trees.

Summation

Paul Owen's argument posits that Joseph Smith got the idea for the Book of Mormon by reading a book which historical sources deny that he read, in a translation published over a century and a half after he died.

There are a number of words one could use to describe Owen's argument, but scholarship is not one of them.

The Normal Run of Things

A passage in 1 Maccabees illustrates how foreign policy was conducted in the ancient world (or at least the Hellenistic world). The Seleucid general has kidnapped the Hasmonean ruler, Jonathan:

And now send a hundred talents of silver and two of his sons as hostages and do not allow rebellion from us and we will release him (1 Maccabees 13:16).

A conquering power would demand tribute and hostages to keep conquered subjects submissive and in line. The idea was that if the subjected revolted them the hostages would be killed. The tribute would be expected on an annual basis. This is the normal way that things worked. One can see the same procedures at work in the El-Amarna letters from a thousand years earlier.

In this case:

Simon knew that he spoke with deception to him (1 Maccabees 13:17).

That too, unfortunately, was not uncommon either.

Secular and Theological Vocabulary

Words are often used in a number of different ways. Many words are just normal words that are used in many different circumstances. Some are technical terms used in special circumstances. There are often special dictionaries to explain technical terms in foreign languages. Theological vocabulary is one set of specialty vocabulary and those who are studying the New Testament have numerous dictionaries to explain the special nuances of vocabulary that is seen as technical theological vocabulary with special significance. Using these dictionaries is normally seen as a way of unpacking the theological significance of a scriptural passage.

One can perhaps go overboard with this tendency. Here is an example of a passage that is filled with technical theological vocabulary where it might be helpful to translate it to bring out the special theological meaning of the passage:

9 καὶ ἀπέστειλεν πρέσβεις πρὸς δημήτριον τὸν βασιλέα λέγων δεῦρο συνθώμεθα πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς διαθήκην καὶ δώσω σοι τὴν θυγατέρα μου ἣν εἶχεν ἀλέξανδρος καὶ βασιλεύσεις τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ πατρός σου
10  μεταμεμέλημαι γὰρ δοὺς αὐτῷ τὴν θυγατέρα μου ἐζήτησεν γὰρ ἀποκτεῖναί με
11  καὶ ἐψόγισεν αὐτὸν χάριν τοῦ ἐπιθυμῆσαι αὐτὸν τῆς βασιλείας αὐτοῦ
12  καὶ ἀφελόμενος αὐτοῦ τὴν θυγατέρα ἔδωκεν αὐτὴν τῷ δημητρίῳ καὶ ἠλλοιώθη τῷ ἀλεξάνδρῳ καὶ ἐφάνη ἡ ἔχθρα αὐτῶν
13  καὶ εἰσῆλθεν πτολεμαῖος εἰς ἀντιόχειαν καὶ περιέθετο τὸ διάδημα τῆς ἀσίας καὶ περιέθετο δύο διαδήματα περὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ τὸ τῆς αἰγύπτου καὶ ἀσίας
14  ἀλέξανδρος δὲ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἦν ἐν κιλικίᾳ κατὰ τοὺς καιροὺς ἐκείνους ὅτι ἀπεστάτουν οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν τόπων ἐκείνων
15  καὶ ἤκουσεν ἀλέξανδρος καὶ ἦλθεν ἐπ' αὐτὸν ἐν πολέμῳ καὶ ἐξήγαγεν πτολεμαῖος καὶ ἀπήντησεν αὐτῷ ἐν χειρὶ ἰσχυρᾷ καὶ ἐτροπώσατο αὐτόν
16  καὶ ἔφυγεν ἀλέξανδρος εἰς τὴν ἀραβίαν τοῦ σκεπασθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐκεῖ ὁ δὲ βασιλεὺς πτολεμαῖος ὑψώθη
17  καὶ ἀφεῖλεν ζαβδιηλ ὁ ἄραψ τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀλεξάνδρου καὶ ἀπέστειλεν τῷ πτολεμαίῳ (1 Maccabees 11:9–17)

9 And he sent out ambassadors as apostles to Demetrius, the king, saying: Come let us make a covenant with each other and I will give you my daughter whom Alexander has married and you shall rule the kingdom of your father.
10 I have repented of giving my daughter to him since he has sought to kill me.
11 And he blamed the same grace of him lusting for his kingdom.
12 And having expiated his daughter, he gave her to Demetrius and alienated Alexander and their enmity was revealed.
13 And Ptolemy entered into Antioch and began to bestow the crown of Asia and began to bestow two crowns around his head, that of Egypt and Asia.
14 Alexander the king was in Cicily in those days since those in that place had apostatized.
15 And Alexander heard and came to war against him and exegeted war and he answered him with a strong hand and furnished him with an oar thong.
16 And Alexander fled into Arabia to be protected there, but King Ptolemy was exalted.
17 And Zabdiel, the Arab, expiated the head of Alexander and sent it as an apostle to Ptolemy.

This is certain to reveal much deeper theological significance than a secular translation would:

9 And he sent ambassadors  to Demetrius, the king, saying: Come let us make a treaty with each other and I will give you my daughter whom Alexander has married and you shall rule the kingdom of your father.
10 I have reconsidered giving my daughter to him since he has sought to kill me.
11 And he blamed him because he desired his kingdom.
12 And having taken back his daughter, he gave her to Demetrius and alienated Alexander and their enmity was open.
13 And Ptolemy entered into Antioch and wore the crown of Asia and began to wear two crowns around his head, that of Egypt and Asia.
14 Alexander the king was in Cicily in those days since those in that place had revolted.
15 And Alexander heard and came to war against him and waged war and he opposed him with a strong arm and set him to flight.
16 And Alexander fled into Arabia for protection there, but King Ptolemy was victorious.
17 And Zabdiel, the Arab, took off the head of Alexander and sent it to Ptolemy.

On second thought, perhaps some passages do not have deep theological meaning even if they are scriptural and even if they are filled with technical theological terms.

Singing Hymns in 1 Maccabees

After a big battle, the Maccabees sang a hymn:

καὶ ἐπιστραφέντες ὕμνουν καὶ εὐλόγουν εἰς οὐρανὸν ὅτι καλόν ὅτι εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τὸ ἔλεος αὐτοῦ

And they returned singing hymns and they praised heaven: "For he is good and his mercy endureth forever" (1 Maccabees 4:24)

The line "For he is good and his mercy endureth forever" is actually the name of the psalm that they sang. It was Psalm 118 which repeats the line a number of times during the course of the psalm. It is also said to have been sung in 2 Chronicles 5:13; 7:3; and Ezra 3:11. It appears to have been one of the more popular of the psalms. It seems to be less popular in modern times.

Accepting the Will of Heaven

At the end of a rousing speech urging the defense of the temple, Judas Maccabees tells the people:

ὡς δ' ἂν ᾖ θέλημα ἐν οὐρανῷ οὕτως ποιήσει

Whatsoever be the will in heaven, so it will be done. (1 Maccabees 3:60)

This, of course, is echoed in the Lord's Prayer:

γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς.

May thy will happen, as in heaven, so also on earth. (Matthew 6:10)

The hope is that the will of heaven will happen on earth, which does not seem likely to be the case most of the time. This life is a time when terrible things happen on earth. Men do terrible things to each other. Sometimes these terrible things are feigned to be the will of heaven. I have a hard time believing that firing a single mother who has done nothing wrong, for example, and leaving her without means of support is really the will of heaven. (James 1:27 argues against such a perverse notion.) What this means is that after two thousand years the Lord's Prayer is still valid.

Salvation as Politics

When Judas the Hammerer went to war against the Persians, he began to have success against them. The account in 1 Maccabees says of his military victories that

εὐοδώθη σωτηρία ἐν χειρὶ αὐτοῦ

salvation prospered in his hand (1 Maccabees 3:6)

So the idea that salvation could be a political or military matter was certainly attested in ancient Judaism. The ancient notion of salvation incorporates political and military success, but includes much more than those notions. It also encompassed ideas of healing, and of eternal life.

Reasons to Revolt

There are only a few good reasons to rebel, and no good reasons if one is rebelling against God. One rationale for rebellion might be supplied in 1 Maccabees.

The Seleucid ruler, Antiochus, wanted a united empire and decided to unite the empire under worship of his gods and thus required all to sacrifice to his gods. Here is the setting for the revolt:

καὶ ἦλθον οἱ παρὰ τοῦ βασιλέως οἱ καταναγκάζοντες τὴν ἀποστασίαν εἰς μωδεϊν τὴν πόλιν ἵνα θυσιάσωσιν

And those who were compelling the apostasy came from the king to the city of Modein so that they might sacrifice. (1 Maccabees 2:15)

Mattathias, the father of the Maccabees, was approached, as a priest and leader in the community to set the example for everyone else and sacrifice like a good citizen.

καὶ ἀπεκρίθησαν οἱ παρὰ τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ εἶπον τῷ ματταθια λέγοντες ἄρχων καὶ ἔνδοξος καὶ μέγας εἶ ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύτῃ καὶ ἐστηρισμένος υἱοῖς καὶ ἀδελφοῖς
νῦν πρόσελθε πρῶτος καὶ ποίησον τὸ πρόσταγμα τοῦ βασιλέως ὡς ἐποίησαν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη καὶ οἱ ἄνδρες ιουδα καὶ οἱ καταλειφθέντες ἐν ιερουσαλημ καὶ ἔσῃ σὺ καὶ οἱ υἱοί σου τῶν φίλων τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ σὺ καὶ οἱ υἱοί σου δοξασθήσεσθε ἀργυρίῳ καὶ χρυσίῳ καὶ ἀποστολαῖς πολλαῖς


And the messengers from the king said to Mattathias answered, saying, You are a leader, and notable, and great in this city and are supported by sons and brothers. Now go first and do the command of the king as all the nations and the men of Judah and those who have left Jerusalem have done, and you and your sons will be friends of the king and you and your sons will be glorified with silver and gold and many gifts.

This would have been a tempting moment for those who wish to go along and get along. What could be so bad about obeying the direct order of the king?

καὶ ἀπεκρίθη ματταθιας καὶ εἶπεν φωνῇ μεγάλῃ εἰ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη τὰ ἐν οἴκῳ τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ βασιλέως ἀκούουσιν αὐτοῦ ἀποστῆναι ἕκαστος ἀπὸ λατρείας πατέρων αὐτοῦ καὶ ᾑρετίσαντο ἐν ταῖς ἐντολαῖς αὐτοῦ
κἀγὼ καὶ οἱ υἱοί μου καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοί μου πορευσόμεθα ἐν διαθήκῃ πατέρων ἡμῶν
ἵλεως ἡμῖν καταλιπεῖν νόμον καὶ δικαιώματα
τῶν λόγων τοῦ βασιλέως οὐκ ἀκουσόμεθα παρελθεῖν τὴν λατρείαν ἡμῶν δεξιὰν ἢ ἀριστεράν

Mattathias answered and said with a loud voice: Even though all the nations which are in the dominion of the king of kings obey him and each apostatizes from the worship of his fathers and delights in his commandments, I and my sons and my brethren will walk in the covenant of our fathers. Far be it from us to abandon the law and ordinances. We will not obey the word of the king to turn aside from our worship to the right or to the left. (1 Maccabees 2:15–22)

Mattathias's answer is that covenant with God trumps the command of the king. Obeying the law is good, but the law of God takes precedence over the law of man.

Maccabees frames the issue of apostasy, which is rebellion, as rebellion against God rather than rebellion against the king.

So Mattathias started a rebellion that eventually succeeded in liberating Judea from the Persians. But the justification for the rebellion was rooted in covenants with God made and kept.

John and Jonathan

There are many people who think that John is a shortened form of Jonathan. If that were the case, one might wonder why Mattathias, the father of the Maccabees, had children named both John and Jonathan (1 Maccabees 2:2-5).

John comes from Hebrew Yohhannan and means "Jehovah is merciful." Jonathan comes from Hebrew Yohnatan and means "Jehovah has given (a son)." They are not the same name and were not interchangeable.

The Abomination of Desolation

The English phrase "abomination of desolation" comes from the King James translation of Matthew 24:15. The Greek phrase is τὸ βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως. As Jesus says, it appears in Daniel 9:27 and Daniel 11: 31. It also appears in 1 Maccabees 1:54.

Daniel 9:27 uses the concept after mentioning that it will occur after the Messiah is cut off (yikkaret; Daniel 9:26).

Daniel 11:31 says that it will come after the sanctuary of the temple is polluted and the daily sacrifice is taken away.

The mention in 1 Maccabees 1:54 is perhaps more interesting because the use of the phrase is not a prophecy but rather in a historical text. The situation described is clearly depicted as a fulfillment of the prophecy in Daniel. (Jesus projects it as still in the future.) Prefaced to this use is a description of the actions of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

Antiochus wanted a unified populous (1 Maccabees 1:41) and wanted his empire to go in a new direction, therefore he commanded "each to abandon his customs" (1 Maccabees 1:42). As a consequence, "many from Israel were happy to serve him and they sacrificed to idols and violated the Sabbath" (1 Maccabees 1:43) and "to follow the customs of the heathen" (1 Maccabees 1:44). They stopped the sacrifices (1 Maccabees 1:45), and "polluted the holy things" (1 Maccabees 1:46). They built altars to idols (1 Maccabees 1:47), "so that they forgot the law and changed all the judgments and whosoever would not do according to the command of the king was put to death" (1 Maccabees 1:49-50). Furthermore, they set up overseers (ἐπισκόπους, "bishops" although "spies" might be a better translation in the context) to insure that everyone followed the new way of thinking. "Everyone who abandoned the law and did evil in the earth" was promoted into positions of responsibility (1 Maccabees 1:52). And then, "on the fifteenth of Chaseleu, in the one hundred and forty-fifth year, an abomination of desolation (βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως) was established at the altar" (1 Maccabees 1:54).


This passage shows the processes that led the authors of 1 Maccabees to decide that the prophecy of Daniel had been fulfilled. Polluting the sanctuary and cutting off the daily sacrifices are both mentioned to draw the reader's attention that the conditions had been met. But following the Gentile customs and doing things their way. Covenants and the law were both abandoned. Spies were put in place to report and insure that everyone behaved the way that the new regime wanted them to. And "they burned the books of the law which they found" (1 Maccabees 1:56). It was, after all, important to rewrite the history and make the previous orthodoxy disappear.

This description from Maccabees supplies an understanding of what Jesus was predicting for the future of Christianity before his death.

Apostasy in 1 Maccabees

Anyone who is at all familiar with the basic story of the revolt of the Maccabees will not be surprised that the book opens up discussing apostasy. The successors of Alexander, according to the author, "filled the earth with evil" (1 Maccabees 1:9):

In those days [the days of Antiochus Epiphanes] wicked sons came from Israel and persuaded many saying: We will go and make a covenant with the nations round about us, since we have abstained from them many evils have come upon us. And the saying was good in their eyes. And some of the people were pleased and went to the king, and he gave them authority to enact the standards of the Gentiles. And they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem according to the custom of the Gentiles. And they made themselves uncircumcised and apostatized from the holy covenant and joined themselves to the heathen and sold themselves to do iniquity. (1 Maccabees 1:11-15)

So the author sets up the opposition, one can make a covenant with God or with the Gentiles, one cannot keep both. Those who wanted to accommodate the world are depicted as apostatizing from their covenants. Unlike some uses of the verb apostatize in Greek, the apostates are depicted as not revolting against the king, but their covenants. The king, who has already been identified as wicked, gives them authority to do what they want. So, for Maccabees, apostasy may be perfectly compatible with possessing authority. They also have standards, but those standards are those of the Gentiles rather than those deriving from the covenant.

Of course, one of the historical ironies of the Maccabees is that while the Maccabees revolted against a corrupt monarch, they became equally corrupt in their turn. Apostasy is a constant problem.

Greco-Roman Hittites

The Hittites, for modern scholars, a nation of people living in Anatlia from about 1800-1200 BC. The spoke the earliest attested Indo-European language, a distant cousin to English. (The Hittite word for water is watar.) The Hittites seem to have been wiped out aroun the time the Israelites entered the promised land.

Most of the Hittites in the Bible (think Uriah the Hittite, you know, the guy David betrayed to his death to cover up his adultery with Uriah's wife, Bathsheba) are the various Neo-Hittite kingdoms in the areas of modern Lebanon, Syria, and Turkey. They too spoke an Indo-European language, Luwian, but also Aramaic, a Semitic language. These kingdoms disappeared in the Assyrian expansion by the end of the eighth century. Conventional wisdom says there were no more Hittites after that time.

Conventional wisdom is wrong.

1 Maccabees opens with the words:

And it came to pass, after the conquest of Alexander, son of Philip of Macedon, who came from the land of the Hittites (Χεττιμ), and he smote Darius, the king of the Persians and the Medes, and he reigned in his stead, and previously over Greece. (1 Maccabees 1:1)

The author of Maccabees identifies those place on the other side of the Mediterranean, not to mention Anatolia, as the land of the Hittites (Χεττιμ). This is also reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls. In the Commentary on Habakkuk, the enemies of Israel (such as the Chaldeans) are identified as Hittites, which seems to indicate the same thing as it does in Maccabees. Modern scholars have often identified the Hittites of the Habakkuk Commentary as the Romans. It seems, in light of the Septuagint, that the term Hittite could either be a geographic or linguistic designation. Geographically it would be the lands northward and across the sea from Israel. Linguistically it would mean Indo-Europeans.

Thus a notion of Hittites continues at least a millennium after the people that modern scholars recognize as Hittites have disappeared from the scene.