by Giuseppe Monno
Protestants generally reject the First and Second Books of the Maccabees as divinely inspired, classifying them as apocryphal and arguing that they contain historical and doctrinal errors. A number of objections are commonly raised in support of this view.
THE OBJECTIONS
1. The First Book of Maccabees records the death of Judas Maccabaeus in battle (1 Maccabees 9:17–19). Yet in the Second Book he appears to be still alive, since he is associated with a letter addressed to the Jews in Egypt (2 Maccabees 1:9–10).
2. The Second Book claims that the prophet Jeremiah hid the Ark of the Covenant on Mount Sinai (2 Maccabees 2:1–8), while the Book of Jeremiah suggests that the Ark will no longer be remembered or spoken of (Jeremiah 3:14–16), creating a perceived tension.
3. The death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes is described in different ways: as the result of grief or despair (1 Maccabees 6:8–9), as a violent episode involving an attack (2 Maccabees 1:13–16), and as the consequence of a severe illness (2 Maccabees 9:1–28).
4. The Second Book presents prayer for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:38–45), a practice critics claim is not supported elsewhere in Scripture.
5. It also portrays the intercession of the dead on behalf of the living (2 Maccabees 15:6–16), which some argue is foreign to biblical teaching.
6. The author closes with remarks that seem to qualify his own work (2 Maccabees 15:38), which some interpret as a denial of divine inspiration.
7. The Books of the Maccabees are never explicitly quoted by Jesus or the apostles in the New Testament.
8. They were not included in the later Jewish canon and were received unevenly in the early centuries of Christianity.
9. Finally, some argue that believers do not experience a clear inner witness of the Holy Spirit confirming their inspiration.
RESPONSES
1. THE ALLEGED CONTRADICTION ABOUT JUDAS MACCABAEUS
This objection rests on a mistaken assumption about how the two books relate to each other. Second Maccabees is not a sequel to the First Book. It is a separate work with its own structure, covering events that largely precede Judas’ death.
So the fact that Judas appears alive in 2 Maccabees 1:9–10 does not contradict the account of his death in 1 Maccabees 9. The two books simply approach the same historical period from different angles and with different narrative aims.
2. THE ARK OF THE COVENANT
The supposed contradiction between 2 Maccabees 2:1–8 and Jeremiah 3:16 dissolves on closer reading. Jeremiah is not saying that the Ark will cease to exist or never be mentioned again. Rather, he is saying that it will no longer play a central role in Israel’s worship.
This is a theological point, not a historical one.
In fact, the Ark appears again symbolically in the New Testament:
“Then God’s sanctuary in heaven opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen inside it” (Revelation 11:19).
More broadly, Scripture often presents events with variations in detail without undermining their truth.
For example:
– 1 Kings 22:43–44 says that Jehoshaphat did not remove the high places, while 2 Chronicles 17:6 says that he did.
– Matthew places the Transfiguration “six days later” (Matthew 17:1), while Luke says “about eight days later” (Luke 9:28).
– Mark reports that both criminals mocked Jesus (Mark 15:32), whereas Luke says that only one did (Luke 23:39–41).
These differences do not amount to contradictions. They reflect the fact that Scripture is a collection of distinct witnesses, not a single, flattened narrative.
3. THE DEATH OF ANTIOCHUS IV EPIPHANES
The differing accounts of Antiochus’ death are best understood as complementary rather than contradictory. Each highlights a different aspect of the same reality: the downfall of a king who set himself against God.
As the Second Vatican Council teaches:
“To discover the intention of the sacred writers, attention must be paid, among other things, to literary forms.” (Dei Verbum, 12)
Biblical authors are not always writing modern-style history. They often shape their accounts to bring out moral and theological meaning.
Across the three descriptions, a consistent message emerges:
– In 1 Maccabees, Antiochus is broken by failure and dies in despair.
– In 2 Maccabees 1, he meets a violent end while attempting sacrilege.
– In 2 Maccabees 9, he is struck with a horrific illness as a form of divine judgment.
Taken together, these accounts present:
– a historical reality (his death during a campaign in the East),
– a moral interpretation (punishment for his impiety), and
– a theological message (God’s justice prevails).
Scripture often does this. Consider:
– Judas Iscariot’s death is described as hanging (Matthew 27:5) and as a fatal fall (Acts 1:18).
– The creation narratives in Genesis 1 and 2 present the same truth through different frameworks.
4. PRAYER FOR THE DEAD
The claim that Scripture knows nothing of prayer for the dead is too strong.
In 2 Timothy, Paul writes:
“May the Lord be kind to the family of Onesiphorus… May the Lord grant him to find the Lord’s mercy on that Day” (2 Timothy 1:16–18).
Several details are striking:
– Onesiphorus is consistently referred to in the past tense.
– Only his household is greeted (2 Timothy 4:19).
– Unlike others, his current whereabouts are never mentioned.
Most notably, Paul prays that he may “find mercy on that Day,” a phrase that clearly points to the final judgment.
This wording is unusual if Onesiphorus were still alive, but it makes good sense if he had already died. While not conclusive on its own, the passage strongly suggests a form of prayer for the departed.
5. THE INTERCESSION OF THE SAINTS
Scripture presents the saints in heaven as alive in God and united to him. Their intercession follows naturally from that union.
“The heartfelt prayer of someone upright works very powerfully” (James 5:16).
They are described as “the spirits of the upright made perfect” (Hebrews 12:23).
They are not passive:
– Moses and Elijah appear at the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:3).
– In Luke 16, the rich man and Lazarus are portrayed as conscious after death.
– In Revelation, the saints reign with Christ (Revelation 20:4,6).
All of this is rooted in the unity of the Church:
“He is the head of the body, the Church” (Colossians 1:18).
“You together are Christ’s body” (1 Corinthians 12:27).
From this flows the doctrine of the communion of saints:
– the faithful on earth,
– those being purified,
– and those already in glory.
Their mutual intercession is simply an expression of that unity.
6. DOES THE AUTHOR DENY INSPIRATION?
The closing line of 2 Maccabees reflects modesty, not doubt about inspiration.
Ancient writers often ended their works with a humble acknowledgment of their limits. This says nothing about the truth of what they have written.
Even Paul distinguishes at times between a direct command of the Lord and his own judgment (1 Corinthians 7:12), without calling his authority into question.
Biblical inspiration does not eliminate the human element—it works through it.
7. NO EXPLICIT NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS
The absence of direct quotations proves little. Several Old Testament books accepted by all Christians—such as Esther and the Song of Songs—are not explicitly quoted either.
What matters more is that the New Testament writers frequently draw from the Greek Scriptures (the Septuagint), which included the deuterocanonical books.
8. THE CANON AND EARLY RECEPTION
At the time of Jesus, there was no universally fixed Jewish canon. Greek-speaking Jews widely used the Septuagint, which included the books later called deuterocanonical.
This was also the version most familiar to early Christians.
The later rabbinic canon took shape after the rise of Christianity and does not necessarily reflect the broader scriptural landscape of the first century.
Within the Church, the canon was gradually clarified and formally affirmed:
– in the late fourth century (associated with the Decree of Damasus),
– and definitively at the Council of Trent.
During the Reformation, some communities chose to follow the later Jewish canon instead.
It is worth noting that even Martin Luther expressed reservations about certain New Testament books, showing that the question of the canon was not entirely straightforward.
9. THE WITNESS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
Some argue that the canon is known through the inner witness of the Holy Spirit. While this idea has value, taken on its own it raises difficulties.
Christians who appeal to this principle often disagree on major doctrines—such as the Trinity, baptism, or predestination—while each claiming the Spirit’s guidance.
Yet Scripture says:
“God is a God not of disorder but of peace” (1 Corinthians 14:33).
This suggests that the Spirit’s work is not expressed through conflicting and incompatible conclusions.
The Catholic understanding is that the Spirit guides the Church as a whole, especially through its teaching authority. In this way, the recognition of Scripture is not left to individual judgment alone but is rooted in the life of the believing community across time.
In this light, the witness of the Spirit is not denied—it is understood in an ecclesial sense: as guidance given to the Church in her unity, continuity, and fidelity to the apostolic faith.