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
LOL. You keep asking.
OK, so this is a point of disagreement. We’ll have to agree to disagree. ;)
Yes, it’s two different women. Of course it’s two different women.
If you insist that the original Hebrew word can only mean “virgin,” then your view entails that the prophecy erred in referring to Mrs. Isaiah.
If you insist that the original Hebrew word cannot mean “virgin,” then your view entails that the prophecy erred in referring to Christ (or did not refer to Christ).
The right answer is simple: The original Hebrew word could have either meaning, and had both.
I keep asking because you keep telling me, and I thought you were telling me because you thought I needed to know. You are very confusing.
Why not look at the arguments?
I believe the exact claim was that when there was a refereence to the OT in the NT, 20% would have matched either the LXX and the Masoretic. 80% they differed. Of the 80%, 90% matched the LXX and only 10% agreed with the Masoeretic. So to be precise it’s 10% of the 80%. So I think that’s a grand total of 8%. That’s a very small amount.
Yes it is possible and probably certain because the Hebrew OT they had was what the Septuagint was translated from. The Septuagint in Greek is the original Hebrew OT.
Alright, I guess we disagree.
Yes, I just don’t trust Liberal scholars.
It does appear they are amazingly accurate. But where the LXX and the Masoretic differ, it sticks in my throat.
I think it’s the texts that came out of Qumran Cave 7. But I’m just getting info off the internet. Who knows how accurate it is.
Ah. My mistake, I reckon. Thank you.
No, the LXX in Greek is not the original Hebrew. Hebrew isn’t Greek.
But did you just agree with me that NT authors are quoting from the Hebrew even when they use the LXX?
Of course, if the LXX is itself inspired (and not just a reliable translation of the inspired Hebrew), then the NT should never once disagree with it. Very small isn’t enough. Only none is enough.
I can’t say I understand this all, but I’ll differ to you. But changing the word from virgin diminishes the prophesy of Christ’s birth. I don’t like that.
Nor do I, but this isn’t a liberal thing. This is liberals, conservatives, Barthians, Protestants, Catholics.
I guess I haven’t personally checked on all of those categories. But I’ve personally heard this stuff from conservatives (and not from liberals).
(I studied this under William E. Bell of DBU, an author and signers of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.)
Ok. And I’m totally ok with preferring the LXX to the Masoretic.
I did. I disagree but I’m getting tired of the subject. I do have other things to do.
No one’s in favor of changing the word. We just don’t agree on what the word was.
If word was beha-whatever instead of alma, then the Bible erred in referring to Isaiah’s wife, didn’t it?
If the word was alma, then the Bible did not err in referring either to Mrs. Isaiah or to Mary. And the LXX translation is still correct.
Not that I could tell.
But ok. And thanks for a lovely conversation. Other than the delusion that I’m some sort of skeptical scholar–wrong on both points!–it was awesome. You’re wrong, and you’re awesome.
I said it’s possible and probable. But I don’t know if it’s definitive. You’re talking to me as if I’m a PhD scholar on this! I thank you for the compliment but I’m basically an amateur on this subject.
Good point, but the Holy Spirit has His motivations! He may have multiple objectives! ;) He may want this ambiguity, just as in God’s ambiguity. You hear atheists ask frequently why doesn’t God just come out and show us He exists in a definitive way? Well that ambiguity is part of His plan. Perhaps the ambiguity with the scriptures is part of His plan too.
It was a great conversation! Maybe the best extended conversation I’ve ever had on Ricochet.
Then why insist that they are quoting from the LXX? And if they are double-quoting–quoting both the Hebrew and the translation they agree with–why would that entail that both things they quote are equally inspired?
I wasn’t trying to. I’m no more than a B.A. scholar myself, and you’re plainly better than many professional scholars. [Grumble, grumble. Scholars these days. Mumble, grumble.]
Yes, but He’ll never have the Bible err.
But it is possible that the LXX is inspired and the NT reads the OT differently without disagreeing with it.
But it’s pretty much certain that that happens one way or another. In my view, the NT uses the LXX reading of the Psalm’s line about ears–the language is a bit different, but an interpretation of the language is made without any disagreement with it.
Works for me!
Although I don’t see any more ambiguity than we would have for any old book–much less, in fact. This is just the facts about how old books happen, plus a lick of common-sense.
Well I enjoyed it.
Thank you Stina. I didn’t know if anyone was still following us. :)
Jesus is following. He’ll probably get back to us later about how terrible we did.
I’m in my third reading of “Jews, God and History” published 1962, by Max I. Dimont. Revised and republished in 1994.
In response to Kathy Mardirosian’s comment to me 6 pages back, I am almost totally deaf, so don’t use social media nor am I able to follow podcasts. My listening and comprehension abilities are about nil. However, I thoroughly enjoyed your post, just need to figure out how to get it to a good friend of 60 years, who can hear, but cannot see. Two old ladies here, one nearly blind and the other one nearly deaf.
@SaintAugustine
I just thought of another reason why the Septuagint should be the authoritative text for Christians. I don’t think I mentioned this. The New Testament writers all wrote in Greek, which I did mention, but the continuity of language implies a continuity of text. Why did the New Testament writers write in Greek? Because I would maintain (with no way to prove it) that they intended to build on the Septuagint with the new texts fulfilling the old texts. I think the intent was one continuous Bible.
I don’t know if that causes you to reevaluate (I doubt it) but it’s something else to consider in your future Biblical endeavors.
Of course it implies a continuity of text. That text is the Old Testament–a text written in Hebrew.
Or by “language” do you just mean Greek as opposed to Hebrew, Latin, Swahili, etc.? In that case, no: The continuity of language only implies that they were writing in the same language. And they wrote in Greek because they wanted people to be able to read it. The intent was one continuous Bible–with the last bits in Greek.
Yes, the Greek language. Because the Septuagint was written in Greek, the New Testament writers felt obligated to continue in Greek. That’s my theory. Apparently there was no compunction to return to the Hebrew. They must have been so steeped in the Septuagint Greek that they felt no obligation to write in Hebrew. Actually as I think on it, by the first century A.D. Hebrew may have already been a dead language. Jews spoke in Aramaic or Greek.
It wasn’t dead. Plenty of Rabbis (at least) knew it, and Aramaic is (so I understand) not exactly a different language.
But anyway . . .
It’s an interesting theory, and I have a better one: Paul and all the Palestinian writers knew the Hebrew OT, and they wrote in Greek so that Gentiles and Greek-speaking Jews could read what they were writing. They had no obligation to write in Hebrew because they had no obligation to write in a language most people could not read. In a different context, they would have used Latin or English.
Yes that’s possible too. Given that most people did not read in any language, I wonder who they were writing for. Paul was writing letters to be read in churches of Greek speakers, so that’s understandable. But who were the Gospel writers writing for? Something to think about.
They were also writing for things being read in churches of Greek-speakers.
Most people didn’t read, but they loved books. They were text-based people. Reading was an out-loud activity, and reading as a communal activity was normal.