On the Maccabees and Bar Kochba

 

 

by

 

Damien F. Mackey

 

 

“… your conclusion: “Judas the Galilean” who “appeared in the days of the census”, according to Gamaliel, may just be that required link between the Maccabees and the census of Luke 2." seems "minimalistic" after many findings here and there.

What are historical implications of your findings?”

 

A Reader

 

This particular correspondent has written in full, commencing with reference to my article:

 

Maccabees need to be greatly lowered on the time scale

 

https://www.academia.edu/36414256/Maccabees_need_to_be_greatly_lowered_on_the_time_scale

 

 

Hi Damien,

I read your article on Maccabees, which does record several interesting literary parallels.

But your conclusion: “Judas the Galilean” who “appeared in the days of the census”, according to Gamaliel, may just be that required link between the Maccabees and the census of Luke 2." seems "minimalistic" after many findings here and there. What are historical implications of your findings?

That Maccabees did not exist as well as Bar-Kochba? That the only historical character was Judah Ha-Galili mentioned in Acts? That all Books of Maccabees are of the 1st century CE?

But Josephus, born in 37 CE and who claimed descent from Maccabees, lived not far from this time - why did he contribute to the confusion?

And why Bar-Kochba (or bar-Koziba as per Talmud) is mentioned at all? Why Sephoris is Modiin? You must prove you know Hebrew when you talk about Jewish history by finding a common etymology of two different words.

Talmud is not just "Jewish legends" as you wrote. It is important collection of historical facts. In my article about Encounter, I show that Talmud is more trustworthy than e.g., Josephus who was prong to "edit" his sources when needed.

The Second Temple of Herod was of marble. The one built by Zerubavel - of wood. Which "unworthy notion" do I create here?

….

PS As for Elijah I have an opinion that he was not an "angel" but was simply murdered by Elisha.

PSS I may agree that Haman is a purely mythological figure and many could be his prototype.

….

 

 

 

 

Damien Mackey replies:

 

….

You are like various people I have encountered over the years who read one or more of my articles and then criticise me for things that I have never actually written or thought. "... a thing which I never ... spoke of, nor did it ever enter my mind," (Jer. 19:5).

Maccabees DID exist, as well as Bar Kochba. (The dating/era just needs to be corrected) - see e.g. my article:

"A New Timetable for the Nativity of Jesus Christ"

https://www.academia.edu/36672214/A_New_Timetable_for_the_Nativity_of_Jesus_Christ

 

Gamaliel's Judas WAS Judas Maccabeus, but Gamaliel gives an appalling description of the great man as if he were a mere flash in the pan. Nor any mention by G. of Judas's mighty brothers after him, Jonathan and Simon (who, incidentally, is marvellously described in Sirach 50:1-21).

Sepphoris as Modein ("declarers") is a highly tentative connection (no name likeness claimed here). Logically, however, if Judas the Galilean were Judas Maccabeus whose ancestral home was Modein, then Modein might well be Sepphoris, the base for Judas the Galilean.

After all, archaeologists cannot find the elaborate Maccabean tomb (I Maccabees 13:27-3) at the presumed 'Modein' near Tel Aviv.

Re Zerubbabel's Temple of Yahweh: "'The glory of this present House will be greater than the glory of the former House',” said the Lord" (Haggai 2:9).

You have turned it into a log cabin.

"Haman ... a purely mythological figure"?

I prefer the legends of the Jews that accord him historical reality, as a Jew. He was a long-lived King of Judah.

Damien.