1
Maccabees 2:52
1 Maccabees was probably written
shortly before 100 B.C. in Jerusalem. The theme of the book, which was probably
written in Hebrew, is the struggle of the Maccabees to achieve freedom for
their religion and for their people. The Greek translation followed quickly on
the Hebrew original.
The example of Abraham is invoked
at 1 Mc 2:52 in a speech by Mattathias, leader of the Maccabean revolt (2:49-68).
In contrast to 2 Maccabees, the heroes of 1 Maccabees are very much the masters
of their fate, and this is reflected in the vigorous style of Mattathias’
speech. The list of examples of great men in the past is used to encourage
Mattathias’ listeners to observe the Law. Each of the great men does or is
something and is thereupon rewarded in some way. The implication is clear: if
Mattathias’ listeners are true to the Law they will be rewarded which success
in their struggle against the Gentiles (vv. 50-51 and 67-78).
In 1 Maccabees just as in Sirach
Abraham is said to emerge “faithful” (πιστος) from his trial at the Aqedah. But a new element enters in
through the linking of this faithfulness of Abraham on the occasion of the
Aqedah with the statement of his justification found at Gn 15:6 “ . . . he
believed the Lord, and he reckoned it to him as righteousness”. In the original
context in Genesis the statement is associated with Abraham’s belief in God’s
promise of progeny (Gn 15:4-5). Abraham “believes”, i.e., places his trust in God’s
word with regard to a future intervention of God in his designs of salvation.
The “righteousness” refers to Abraham’s acting according to norms appropriate
for the community, i.e., observing the covenant and the commandments. And the
word “reckoned” (λογιζεσθαι)
seems to have cultic overtones. 1 Maccabees takes the phrase and so relates it
to the Aqedah that the declaration of righteousness is made to result from Abraham’s
act of faith in being willing to perform the sacrifice. But the “[being]
faithful (πιστοσ) in 1
Maccabees is not exactly the same as the “[being] faithful” (πιστος) of Sirach: in Sirach it has the
connotation of fidelity to an order and is proposed as an example of obedience;
in 1 Maccabees it has the connotation of confidence in God and his future
intervention and is proposed as an example of trust.
This interpretation of Abraham’s “faithfulness”
in 1 Mc 2:52 is supported by 1 Mc 2:59. There Hananiah, Azariah, and Mishael
are said to have “believed” (πιστευσαντες)
and as a result were “saved” (εσωθησαν)
from the fire. Their belief is an act of trust in God and his future
intervention.
There is another important aspect
of the treatment of the Aqedah in 1 Maccabees: Abraham’s faith at the Aqedah is
considered as being rewarded with the quality of righteousness. The structure
of the entire list indicates this, for each hero and his work of virtue is
granted a rewarded. This use of Gn 15:6 with regard to faith is in contrast
with its meaning with regard to faith in its original context in Genesis. In
its original context in Genesis Gn 15:6 seems to regard faith as simply a
reaction to the initiative of God by which God’s plan for Abraham is accepted.
The pronouncement of justification is a recognition of this acceptance as being
in accordance with a recognized norm. In 1 Maccabees Abraham’s faith is a “work”
to be rewarded, practically in so many words (cf. v. 51: μνησθητε τα εργα των πατερων). (James Swetnam, Jesus
and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the Light of the Aqedah [Analecta
Biblica 94; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981], 36-37)
On the use of the Aqedah in Jas 2:21-23:
The Aqedah is the key element used
by the author to show that “faith apart from works is barren” (v. 20) and is
supported by the example of Rahab who was “justified by works” when she saved
the messengers (v. 25). V. 21 mentions only works in connection with the Aqedah,
but v. 22 indicates that the Aqedah implies faith. In view of the stress on
Abraham’s faith in the Aqedah tradition in Judaism this presupposition is
intelligible. And it is significant that precisely this example was chosen, for
the Aqedah is the greatest trial of Abraham’s faith. V. 22 has faith being
active through works (faith is considered as dominant) and then being completed
by works (works are considered as dominant) to indicate that each has an
essential place in Abraham’s justification (v. 21). In v. 23 the phrase “the
scripture was fulfilled” refers to the words “Abraham believed God, and it was
reckoned to him as righteousness” (Gn 15:6). The Aqedah is thus being regarded
as the natural concomitant of the phrase from Gn 15:6. The author adduces no
proof of why this is so, but simply presupposes its truth, just as at v. 22 he presupposes
that the Aqedah implies faith.
The reason why the Aqedah can be
supposed to be the fulfilment of Gn 15:6 seems to lie in the fact that there
was probably a traditional connection between the two. This connection seems to
be preserved at 1 Mc 2:52 where Abraham’s faith at the Aqedah is linked with Gn
15:6 and is regarded as meaning the reward of righteousness. In Jas 2:23
Abraham’s faith is also linked with the Aqedah and the phrase “it was reckoned
to him as righteousness”: the offering of Isaac is a work of faith meriting a
reward. The final phrase of v. 23 spells out this attribution of righteousness
in terms of another tradition about Abraham: “and he was called the friend of
God”.
The context indicates how the
relation of faith and works is here being understood. V. 18 has a believer who
lives without works defending the possibility of living with either faith or
works but not both. The rejoinder is that works imply faith, i.e., it is
impossible to separate the two if they are properly conceived. The example in
v. 19 of demons believing in the unity of God shows the fallacy of separating
faith from works. And as a clinching argument the Aqedah is introduced in v. 20
as the definitive proof that faith without works is barren: Gn 15:6 is incomplete
without Gn 22. (James Swetnam, Jesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to
the Hebrews in the Light of the Aqedah [Analecta Biblica 94; Rome: Biblical
Institute Press, 1981], 81-82)
On the issue of Rom 4, Swetnam noted the following:
Rom 4 has often been compared
with Jas 2:21-23 and not without reason, for in Rom 4 as in Jas 2:21-23, Gn
15:6 plays a prominent part (it is cited at Rom 4:3.9.22-24) in a context which
suggests the appropriateness of an allusion to the Aqedah. Paul does not
mention the Aqedah explicitly in Rom 4, but not simply because he fails to
honor the traditional relation between Gn 15:6 and the Aqedah which James uses
for his own purpose. Paul deliberately sets up another relation involving Gn
15:6 by the use of gezerah shawah at Rom 4:7-8 (the common element is
the verb λογιζομαι) he links
Gn 15:6 and Ps 32:1-2 to show that man’s blessedness lies outside man’s
control. (The point Paul is making in the chapter is that God’s graciousness is
the cause of man’s justification, not works) The Aqedah clearly had too many
associations as an example of faith demanding a reward, and rather than make
the qualification needed to use it in a sense acceptable for his purpose as
James had done, Paul simply avoids it. For such qualifications would have
weakened the stress Paul was placing on the transcendent role of God’s
graciousness. Thus it seems appropriate to say not that Paul is alluding to the
Aqedah in Rom 4 but that Paul is deliberately not alluding to the Aqedah in Rom
4. (James Swetnam, Jesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in
the Light of the Aqedah [Analecta Biblica 94; Rome: Biblical Institute
Press, 1981], 82-83)
