According to a widespread opinion the purpose of the Second Book of Maccabees is to emphasize the great importance of the temple. This is plausible to a certain extent if the summary of history is read togther with the two introductory letters. But those authors are right who consider the letters to be originally independent of each other and also of the abrigded version. The construction of the summary taken in itself reveals a soteriology which attributes an important part to the witness of faith for the history of salvation, especially when bloodshed is involved. With regard to this point the abrigded version and the first introductory letter harmonize. Both the summary and the work as a whole have therefore a soteriological orientation and stress the witness of faith as relevant for salvation.
An examination of the passages in Ezekiel related to the 'defilement' and 'desecration' of the Temple through the spectrum of the Priestly Sources clearly shows a distinction between the two concepts and reveals Ezekiel’s precise and deliberate usage of these terms. Although they both relate to idolatrous practices, defilement of the Temple in Ezekiel follows the categories of the Priestly Sources, and thus results primarily from corpse impurity and idol worship. With regard to the Temple’s desecration, Ezekiel introduces the aspect of the intense involvement of foreigners, which he viewed as the desecrating agents of his day.
In Chronicles Solomon is represented as one who was born under normal circumstances. He appears in the center of David’s nineteen descendants, and as the youngest of Bathsheba’s four sons, but still gained the kingship. The name «Solomon» was given to the child by God prior to his birth and He elected him as king. The root of the name was interpreted twice, but there is no mention of «Yedidyah». The allusions to or ignorance of the name «Yedidyah» in Psalms, Nehemiah, Chronicles, and Josephus, as well as the question if «Qoheleth» is Solomon’s third name, are also discussed.
Three times within Matt 5,17-20 passage Matthew uses the verb (kata)lu/w, signaling its importance. Consequently, I will focus on two historical events around which these words cluster: the Antiochan persecution and the destruction of the Temple. Since Jewish literature characterizes the Hellenizers of the Maccabean period as law abolishers, labeling a group as such implicated it in endangering the nation. As Josephus’ Jewish War demonstrates, after the Jewish Revolt, law abolishers were blamed for the Temple’s destruction. Thus, Matthew addresses the charge that Jesus abolished the law and, in so doing, brought about the destruction of the Temple.