Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Canceling God: Hanukkah and Cancel Culture
Perhaps no other story so perfectly epitomizes the fight for freedom of worship than the story of Hanukkah. Though celebrated by the Jewish people for centuries, this story cannot be found in our Bibles. In fact, it occurred in the years between the testaments, but its significance to both Jews and to Christians cannot be underestimated.
The heroic efforts of the Jewish family known to us as the Maccabees literally saved the Temple in Jerusalem and the right of the Jewish people to worship their God. If not for the willingness of these warriors to stand against an evil tyrant, the circumstances would not have existed for a baby to be born in a stable to a devout Jewish family, circumcised on the eighth day as required by Torah law, and raised in a Torah-observant manner that qualified him to be the perfect sinless sacrifice for very sinful people.
The enemies of God, both spiritual and physical, know that God must be canceled and that the best way to accomplish this is to cancel His word, which is ultimate truth, and to cancel a people group dedicated to representing Him on this earth. The story of Hanukkah was not the first time that the enemies of God tried to cancel Him, and it is certainly not the last. We are living in a time when cancel culture has been intensifying exponentially. Make no mistake about it, cancel culture in the United States is not about canceling misogyny, racism, colonialism, homophobia, or even hate. It is about canceling God.
The United States is the only nation in the history of the world that was founded on Judeo-Christian foundations — these foundations include the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They include freedom of speech, freedom to worship in the manner you see fit, freedom to defend yourself, limited government— basically most of what is set forth in our founding documents. Our founders turned to God’s word, both the older and the newer testaments when establishing our nation. We have been a nation that, up until very recently, has defined itself as a Judeo-Christian nation that worshipped the God of Israel. Any attempt to cancel the foundations that our nation was built on is an attempt to cancel God. If we don’t recognize the ancient spiritual nature of our battle, we cannot fight it. I believe that in order to stand against these destructive spiritual forces, we can learn much from the powerful historical account of the story of Hanukkah.
Much of what we know about Hanukkah is recorded in the writings of Flavius Josephus, a first-century Roman-Jewish historian. As a thoughtful exercise in comparisons, I am going to use quotes from Josephus’ writings to identify themes of cancel culture that existed well over 2,000 years ago and still persist to this day. I have identified the quotes of Josephus by underlining them. By no means will I cover all of the points of similarity. I welcome readers’ feedback in identifying other relevant comparisons.
The story of Hanukkah is set in 167 BCE after the death of Alexander the Great who conquered the lands of the kings of Media-Persia. He ruled the world for 12 years and upon his deathbed, he divided his kingdom among four of his generals. These generals and their descendants each ruled a part of the great Greek empire.
A descendant of one of these generals was named Antiochus Epiphanies, the King of Syria. The realm of this particular king included Judea– Israel. Interestingly, Antiochus Epiphanes is not an actual name. It is a title that means “God Manifested.” Keeping this title in mind is critical for understanding the goals and objectives of tyrants like Antiochus.
The goal of King Antiochus was not just military; his goal was also to conquer cultures–to impose the Greek culture upon all nations in his realm. He wanted unity in his kingdom and required that everyone give up their traditions and adopt a Greek way of life. Many conquered nations fell in line with the Greek culture. Even in Judea, there were many Jews who wanted to adopt the Greek culture.
Josephus: Thus, they desired his (The King’s ) permission to build them a Gymnasium at Jerusalem. (A Gymnasium was a place where people exercised naked.) And when he had given them leave, they also hid the circumcision of their genitals, that even when they were naked they might appear to be Greek. “Accordingly, they left off all the customs that belonged to their country and imitated the practices of the other nations. “
Many Jews were more than willing to assimilate into the Greek culture–even to the point of engaging in medical procedures to “hide” their circumcision. That was intense assimilation. There is no more effective way to cancel an entire culture, an entire people group, than through assimilation. It is generally much easier and less messy than physical force, although often when assimilation doesn’t work, physical force is used. The history of the Jewish people is one of either persecution for remaining a separate and set apart people or “relative” peace by assimilating– getting swallowed up by their “host” nation.
But remember, God called Israel to be a separate and holy nation unto Himself. In Hebrew, “holy” means “to be set apart.” Their set-apartness was part of God’s plan to redeem the entire world. They were not to assimilate. If they become just one of the other nations, it would be impossible for them to be a light to these nations.
Similarly, we as God’s people are not to assimilate into the world. We are not to forsake our God-given “culture” in order to fit in with the rest of the world or even for the purpose of avoiding persecution.
Today, we are facing these same pressures to assimilate. Adopting the behaviors of a dominant or coercive culture is not enough to satisfy its leaders. They must insist that everyone think and believe in the same way that they do too. King Antiochus could not afford to allow people to think in ways that threatened his authority and power– that threatened his position as God manifested. Our modern-day gods must also control the thoughts and minds of the people– censoring opposing opinions, or as we now call it — “fact-checking” those thoughts and ideas.
Thought crimes have always been the target of tyrants. Today, it is not enough for us to accept the behavior of those who go against God’s natural design for men and women, we must now champion it. We are deemed racists if we believe that skin color alone does not determine if one is the oppressor or the oppressed. We are not even allowed to believe in natural immunity acquired by those who have had a virus and recovered. And most disturbing, we are called science deniers if we think that boys cannot magically become girls based on their personal desires.
There’s another interesting part of the story as told by Josephus:
When the King and his army first came to Jerusalem, “he took the city without fighting, those of his own party opening the gate to him.” And when he had gotten possession of Jerusalem, he killed many of the opposite party and plundered the city.
Cancel culture cannot exist without its adherents installed in places of power and influence “within the city.” Those of us labeled as conspiracy theorists call this phenomenon in the US the “deep state.” To the dismay of so many of us in America, we have discovered just how many leftist ideological soldiers have “opened the gate” to this cancel culture nonsense in our government, our schools, our medical profession, even in our houses of faith. We have discovered that these deeply entrenched soldiers of the totalitarian faith are the Trojan horse in our midst.
Josephus: Then the King’s army left and came back two years later. This time when the king came up to Jerusalem, he pretended peace and by doing so got possession of the city by treachery.
As Ronald Reagan once so brilliantly surmised: The most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help. The entire Covid response has been one of treachery and deceit with the government and its proxies in the established media claiming the mantle of peace, health, wisdom, and ultimate truth. For those committed to the totalitarian faith, deception serves a higher purpose; therefore, they “will not let a good crisis go to waste.” If it advances their cause to overlook the fact that the Covid “vaccines” do not actually keep people from getting or spreading the disease, this deception is valid and useful and not likely to ever go away.
Josephus: At which time (after entering the city) he spared not so much as those that had admitted him into it.
Eventually, those who engage in treachery will turn on their own. I am amazed at how many white male CEOs have run to a podium to denounce other white males as racists just by their very existence of being white and male. These attempts to appease the woke mob will be supremely self-destructive in the end.
Josephus continues: On account of the riches that lay in the temple, led by his covetous inclinations (for he saw there was in it a great deal of gold and many ornaments that had been dedicated to it of very great value.) In order to plunder its wealth, he broke the league he made (with those of his party).
Ahhhh……. Greed. The root of all evil. Who is making money or gaining power based on the creation or exploitation of a crisis– be it a racial crisis or a health crisis? As our general population suffers, many well-positioned elites remain unscathed by their own policies.
Josephus: So he left the temple bare and took away the golden candlesticks and the golden altar of incense and the table of showbread and the altar of burnt offering and did not abstain from even the veils which were made of fine linen and scarlet. He also emptied it of its secret treasures and left nothing at all remaining …He also burned down the finest buildings…
The goal of cancel culture is always “to leave nothing at all remaining.” No buildings, no businesses, no statues, no traditional institutions.
Josephus: He compelled them to forsake the worship which they paid their own God and to adore those whom he took to be gods
Can anyone think of a self-declared god of science that we are all supposed to adore and obey?
Josephus: He appointed overseers who should compel them to do what he commanded.
Often the government either finds or compels others to do its dirty work. CEOs of major corporations come to mind, particularly media entities.
Josephus: He forbade them to offer their daily sacrifices which they used to offer to according to the law….He made them build temples and idol altars in every city and village and offer swine upon them every day
The daily sacrifices of the Jews were part of their worship practices. Tyrants will quickly close down and prosecute religious worship, as we saw with the forced closing of churches and synagogues. Conveniently, pagan worship is encouraged as we learned that we could still purchase alcohol and marijuana, and we could all engage in the sacrament of abortion throughout the pandemic shutdowns. In the same way, false worship at the altar of CRT has been forced on thousands of employees during training classes at woke corporations.
Josephus: He compelled them not to circumcise their sons and threatened to punish any that should be found to have transgressed his injunction.
In the case of Antiochus, he compelled the Jews not to engage in a physical procedure on their bodies. In the case of governments around the world in 2021, tyranny in the form of an invasive medical procedure is the modern practice of the day.
Josephus: And indeed many Jews there were who complied with the king’s commands, either voluntarily, or out of fear of the penalty that was pronounced
Fear is the source of tyrannical control and the tool of cancel culture both in 167 BCE and in 2021. Fear is cultivated by tyrants and used to control the people. The good news is that tyranny and fear did not win in the Hanukkah story. The courage of just a few faithful and righteous followers of the God of Israel was enough to turn the tide then and it is enough to turn the tide now.
If you want to know the rest of the story and learn how these faithful few successfully defeated one of the greatest efforts in history to cancel God, I encourage you to read the account of Hanukkah in the writings of Josephus, which can be found online. Or you can search “Torah Talk Podcast” on all major podcast apps and listen to Cancelling God: What Hanukkah can teach us about cancel culture.
And I look forward to hearing from you about other ideas that may have been sparked by the words of Josephus.
Published in Religion & Philosophy
I’m not quite sure that either of us even understands the other’s position, but we’re probably getting much closer!
First, the Masoretic text we have now was put together later by Rabbis, and the Dead Sea Scrolls are equally good or better representatives of the Hebrew scriptures Paul read, Jesus preached on, etc.
Second, and more importantly, what do you mean when you say they quote from the Hebrew text? Do you mean they translate it themselves into Greek instead of relying on the preexisting LXX translation? Do you mean the Hebrew they translated means something different from what the LXX means?
And can we maybe work with an example of some sort? What NT verse quotes one but not the other?
The Tanakh is three groups of texts: the Torah, the Writings, and the Prophets. How many quotes from each group?
And how many quotes from that fourth group, the Apocrypha/Deuterocanon?
Given your premises, yes.
But don’t gloss over that one premise. Was the LXX a bundle of the Tanakh and the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha? I don’t know that it was. I know that they were copied and distributed together, but that is not necessarily the same thing.
Yes. That means that the Masoretic text, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the LXX are together the sources of our knowledge of the original Hebrew, with a little help from Jerome’s Latin, etc., etc. It doesn’t mean the LXX is inspired.
Which all means that it is entirely plausible that, in the event that there is a disagreement between the LXX and the Masoretic text and the NT follows the LXX, the NT is still quoting from the Hebrew (using the preexisting Greek translation). It’s just quoting from a different, better Hebrew text than the Masoretic.
It would be helpful in such a situation to see if the Dead Sea Scrolls go one way or the other.
This is what I learned about the Masoretic test, and ultimately why I am convinced it is wrong as a canonical Bible, maybe even heretical, for Christians to base their Old Testament on it.
I found it amazing that the Jewish texts we have today were not the original texts from their original writing in the millennia prior to Christ. I was under the impression their wording stretched back over a millennia before Christ. They are an assimilation of texts that was put together around the ninth century AD. That’s AD! The original Hebrew texts were lost or disfigured and what remained were texts copied over time. This is from a Catholic apologetics page that explains the history:
In other words, the Masoretes had to reconstruct the OT. Again from that website.
I chose that Catholic website because it put the context so succinctly. Now let me turn to a Protestant website for a fuller picture, this from Ryan Nelson, “What Is the Masoretic Text? The Beginner’s Guide.” He describes how the 9th century OT was put together:
To save the Hebrew Bible from dissolving into competing interpretations, a group known as the Masoretes (traditionalists) produced a new copy of the original Hebrew, working from the best available manuscripts, just as countless others had—but with a twist. They used rabbinic tradition to add the most intricate system of punctuation and stress marks anyone had ever seen, obliterating ambiguity once-and-for-all.
The Masoretic Text so rigidly defined the Hebrew Bible’s punctuation and wording that there could only be one way to read and understand it: the same way rabbis had for centuries.
While the Masoretic Text was completed rather late (the oldest copies we have of the Masoretic Text are from ninth century), it was the culmination of several centuries of work.
Continued…
…Continued
Ryan says, “the same way rabbis had for centuries.” Centuries being how long? Nine? Keep in mind, Judaism underwent enormous changes once the Temple was destroyed. Judaism from the nine centuries after Christ was not the same Judaism as before. Ryan goes on to say that the “oral tradition” played a great part in the Masoretic version.
Now the oral tradition may be pretty good, but how accurate is it really when we are referring to words, tens of thousands of words, and not traditions? We’re talking about texts that were composed before 1100 BC and now they are being reconstructed in 900 AD. How good is oral tradition over 2000 years? Ryan even questions the deletion of the deuterocanonical books:
The loss of the deuterocanonical books may be the least important of the discrepancies. Ryan gets to the controversy:
Continued…
Ok. But who does that?
What now? Did something happen to the Dead Sea Scrolls?
No, they had the OT, they did some textual criticism of their own, agreed on the results, and ditched their old manuscripts.
…Continued
Ryan then turns to how this effects the NT:
Since the New Testament writers (especially Paul) primarily refer to the Septuagint when quoting the Old Testament, some view the Masoretic Text (or perhaps the Hebrew manuscripts it was based on) as an attempt to discredit Christianity.
Read Ryan’s entire blog post. He is very generous in his perspective toward the Masoretes and even ends on a positive note. He’s not looking to undermine the Masoretic Bible.
But the Masoretic Text is very questionable. Ryan only provides one example above of the text “muddying” Christian theology, and it is a big one. But you need to see all the quotes which vary with the Septuagint. Once you do, “muddying” is putting it kindly. For that, you need to turn on these series of lessons from a YouTube channel called the Post-Apostolic Church, a channel that provides lessons on early Christianity. They have a series on how the Septuagint came about and its differences with the Masoretic Text. Here is the link to that ongoing series if you wish to watch the entire series. But the two critical parts to watch are Part 3 and Part 4. I’ll embed them here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ottD9bt8t44&list=PLKXGJjRU-bTV8i7pQ700Z4Jkw0WN1djiO&index=3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe4R9ThNA5g&list=PLKXGJjRU-bTV8i7pQ700Z4Jkw0WN1djiO&index=4
Continued…
…Continued
Are those meaningless variations? I would say not. They are an attempt to undermine Christianity.
Now I have pulled information from Catholic and Protestant sources. Finally I will cite an Eastern Orthodox website. After going through similar analysis they come to this conclusion.
I have to say, the websites I found from the Orthodox did not pull any punches. Do a Google search of “Septuagint versus Masoretic Bible Eastern Orthodox” and you will find quite passionate opposition to the Masoretic text. We Catholics have become milquetoast in comparison. There was a time we would have been just as vociferous. And to fully conclude, the Orthodox site references the Holy Spirit as I did earlier.
I agree. The Holy Spirit guided Christ’s apostles and then the Apostolic Churches to the Septuagint. That ultimately is the bottom line for me. All the Apostolic Churches consider it canonical. As a Catholic I am obligated to consider it so, but, after learning all that I did in this exploration, I do so passionately and with my full support. The Septuagint is categorically the Bible of choice.
To nail the coffin of this argument shut for me, I would end that it is erroneous to say that 10% of the New Testament quoting of the Old Testament comes from the Masoretic text. The Masoretic text is not what the New Testament Writers had on hand because it was not created yet. It was created 900 years later. What they quoted was from the ancient texts that were destroyed.
Hey, I’m fine with all this. We get to the original Hebrew text using the Masoretic text, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the LXX, with some other help from things like Patristic quotations, the Vulgate, the Torah texts the Samaritans had, etc.
And I’m totally ok with the idea that the LXX is a better representative of the original Hebrew Bible than the Masoretic text. Not well-informed of the issues and not exactly convinced, but ok with and interested in the idea!
But from that it does not follow that a NT quotation agreeing with the LXX is taken from the LXX. It may just be taken from the original Hebrew, from which the Masoretic text later departed.
Well, yeah.
Whoever said they were quoting from the Masoretic text? I didn’t say that.
St. A, read the entire series first and most important watch the videos in my comment #97. They didn’t embed unfortunately but links should work.
Protestants for sure, but even our current Catholic English translations are base the OT on the Masoretic Text. Heresy!
Read all my comments here. The Dead Sea Scrolls from what I understand agree mostly with the Septuagint.
In other words, Greek quotations of the OT in the NT can be quotations direct from the Hebrew.
So you’ve nailed the coffin shut on your own argument that they’re quoting the LXX as such.
All you know is that they are not quoting from some Hebrew textual tradition that differs much from the LXX.
Well, I kept one link up and hope to look over it.
But I’m crazy-busy. Why should I read and watch first? Did you leave out something crucial that makes a stronger argument?
No. No Protestant does that.
Right on. So when the NT authors quote from the OT and they agree with the Dead Sea Scrolls and the LXX, it’s more likely that they (with Luke being a likely exception) are quoting from the Hebrew, just not from the Masoretic text, and using the preexisting Greek translation.
I agree in that over the tens of thousands of words of the 73 books it does not differ much, but where it does is super critical. Now I can understand you scholars using all the various texts, especially when you understand the differences. But for the average Christian sitting in the pew and going home to read his Bible, he is getting wrong information in critical places. He doesn’t know any of this. To learn of this might even undermine his faith. To the average pious Christian, this is explosive stuff.
But you’re a scholar as I said above. The average Christian (Protestant, Catholic, etc.) isn’t (1) aware of Septuagint, Masoretic, Dead Sea scrolls, and other texts too; (2) doesn’t care, and (3) the jumble could even undermine his faith. Protestants especially, since they put so much faith in scripture alone. How do you think the average church goer who reads his Bible thinking the OT was written 2000 years ago will feel when he learns it wasn’t?
Ok, but I never disagreed, and what about my point that I was making?
This also is missing my point.
But it was written 2.5 thousand years ago (and more), and I think the average pious churchgoer who doesn’t know about textual history would be happy to learn. I know I was.
This point? I thought Protestant OT was based on the Masoretic. I’m pretty sure common translations use the Masoretic for the OT. At least I noticed Catholic Bibles footnote the Septuagint when the difference is critical. But I had no idea of the totality of this context. I’m sure the average Christian doesn’t. We don’t take this up in college.
There is no Protestant OT.
If there were, it would be based on the Masoretic, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the LXX, with extra help from other things like Coptic, Armenian, and Vulgate translations and Patristic quotations.
I did. Everyone should. Textual history is a thing. More important than most of the other stuff we do in college.
But the most important thing about it is that it works. Like translation, it works. It’s always a matter of approximation, but the average Christian is ok to think “Jesus says, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.'” It’s a translation of a reconstructed text from lots of old copies of copies of copies of copies. It’s a simplification to say that.
But it’s also true. (And if it’s not true, it’s close enough!)
[error]
Manny, just a quibble. It appears that you are saying that the line but a body you prepared for me; does not appear on the “Protestant Bible”. But this line appears in both the KJV and the NASV (1977) as according to the Septuagint. These are the two best translations of the Bible into English according to my understanding.
If you are saying that the underscored line doesn’t appear in mainline Protestant Bibles, I think you may be taking bad sources in your research.
Are you saying the NIV, KJV, ESV, EHV, and a whole bunch of others are not Protestant Bibles? And they do not contain the OT?
That’s what Ryan claimed. I didn’t check up on him. I just checked the NIV and it says what Ryan claims. Here’s the KJV and it says what Ryan says. And the NSAV here also follows what Ryan claims. Perhaps your translations used the Septuagint? I don’t know, but it seems to verify Ryan at Biblegate.
I hate to say it, but from the time the NIV which you quoted came out it was well known that it deliberately translated OT verses as divergently as possible from NT verses or principles.
Of course they’re not Protestant Bibles. They’re just translations of the Bible that Protestants often read.
What actually is a Protestant Bible?
And what do you think these texts are based on? They’re based on the Masoretic, Dead Sea Scrolls, and LXX.
(The KJV, of course, predates the Dead Sea Scrolls. It might be all Masoretic for all I know. But I don’t know that its translators ignored the LXX.)
Yes, you’re right. My mistake. The underscored phrase I was looking at comes for these versions from the reference to this verse found in Hebrews.
http://dssenglishbible.com/psalms%2040.htm
Unfortunately, if this is as useful a website as it appears, the Dead Sea Scrolls don’t give us a clue on Psalm 40:6. They only cover one verse. There is this, though, from the Vulgate:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalmi%2039&version=VULGATE
(The Vulgate numbering there follows the LXX numbering: Psalm 39:7 for Psalm 40:6.)
I believe Jerome’s Vulgate translation is based on Hebrew texts predating the Masoretic text Jerome has aures autem perfecisti mihi. Here’s Whitaker’s Words on what that Latin means.
It appears that Jerome’s Hebrew texts led him to believe that “ears” would be the right translation. However, the verb is closer to the LXX verb about preparing than to a Hebrew word about digging.
I think it is likely that the Masoretic text is faithful enough to the original Hebrew–ears, not body. However, the LXX in translating also interprets a bit and draws some nuance out of the text. Something along the lines of a whole body prepared for obedience rather than just ears being dug as a way of helping us hear and obey.
Ears being dug as a way of helping us hear and obey, or as a symbol of permanent obedience to the Master’s authority (Exodus 21, Deuteronomy 15). A whole body prepared for obedience. Those aren’t different things, are they?
The NT confirms that this interpretation is correct. But it’s not disagreeing with the original Hebrew scriptures–it couldn’t, since both are the very Word of G-d. And I doubt it’s even disagreeing with the Masoretic text. And I doubt that the Masoretic text disagrees with the original Hebrew here either.
(I’m writing under a bit of influence of what I skimmed here.)
I think it’s all on the Masoretic text.
KJV? Yeah, maybe. Add that to the list of reasons it shouldn’t be the only Bible anyone reads.
The only one I can really speak to is the ESV; it’s all I’ve properly read in years. You can tell from the footnotes that the priorities are Dead Sea Scrolls, Masoretic Text, and LXX. (Probably in that order, but I’m not sure.)
But those Bibles do not include the deuterocanonical books. Only the Protestant leave them out. So they would have to be considered written for Protestants in mind. I’ll have to check out the ESV. I’ve never really looked at that.