What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Good and Bad Shepherds

CherubRam said:

Assumption of Moses is a banned book.​

​

Quote: Another 'Assumption of Moses'​

Another fragmentary Assumption of Moses is preserved in the Midrash Bereshit Rabbati of Rabbi Moses ha-Darshan (eleventh century), in a manuscript kept in the library of the Jewish congregation in Prague. The following is a synopsis of its contents:

As the time for Moses' death approached, God permitted him to ascend into heaven,...
Click to expand...

Can you stop trying to teach, please? Lol. I'm very well aware of the matter, and there are several fragments, but the actual Assumption of Moses is lost. We simply know of its existence through quotes from the early fathers, and through them trace it as being the source behind which Jude based the story.

Your assertion that the canonical Book of Jude has has been "corrupted" is a fallacy, as is your assertion that it was "Gnostic." You can post from now till the Lord's return and you'll never provide any support for the claim because no support exists.
 
hawkman said:
Banned by who ?

The Assumption of Moses
Click to expand...

He's trying to ban it himself, and he's also trying to ban the book of Jude. However, having set a course down that path, when someone finds mention of something else in another New Testament book that contradicts his teachings, he would apparently be ok with arguing that those should be removed from the canon and banned as well until things line up with HIS theology.

Very slippery slope, and very spiritually irresponsible, as I have warned him, though he apparently has no intention of doing anything but learning the hard way unfortunately.
 
Hidden In Him said:
You are a witness against yourself, and you will answer for it.

You will fall like the best of the rams, "CherubRam" (Jeremiah 25:34)
Click to expand...
The dispute mentioned between Michael and the Devil does not suit itself to the doctrinal views of the Jewish priesthood since they denied the existence of angels. Acts 23:8 states this clearly.

Only Gnostic's, Pagans, Mystics, and Hellenistic Jews believed in Angels. Origin of the word Angel is from Greek mythology.

Greek goddess called Angel
In Greek mythology, Angelos (Ancient Greek: Ἄγγελος) or Angelia (Ἀγγελία) was a daughter of Zeus and Hera who became known as a chthonic deity. The world of the dead (Hell) is her realm of influence, and was assigned an epithet katachthonia ("she of the underworld").

In Ancient Greek; angels known as ἄγγελος (ángelos). In Latin: angels are called "angelus."
(Greek mythology) The daughter of Zeus and Hera, and goddess of the Underworld.
ANGELIA was the personified spirit (daimona) of messages, tidings and proclamations. The English word "angel" derives the same ancient Greek word.

Angel Angelos Adopted biblical term
The Greek term Angelos did not originate with Judaism or Christianity, but was ordinary Greek, in which it can designate either a human messenger or a heavenly “divine” one. The term was adopted into the 3rd century B.C. Greek Old Testament of the bible as a translation in place of the Hebrew word “malach,” and thereby became part of ancient Jewish and later ancient Christian language also.
Angelos. (Greek mythology) Daughter of Zeus and Hera, and a goddess of the Underworld. Angel was the messenger of Hell.

"Satan" is a word used in parables and is not a real person. Moses ascended to Heaven just like Enoch.
Hebrews 11:5
By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death: “He could not be found, because God had taken him away.” For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God.
 
The Assumption of Moses is known from a single sixth-century incomplete manuscript in Latin that was discovered by Antonio Ceriani in the Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan in the mid-nineteenth century and published by him in 1861.
 
CherubRam said:
The Assumption of Moses is known from a single sixth-century incomplete manuscript in Latin that was discovered by Antonio Ceriani in the Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan in the mid-nineteenth century and published by him in 1861.
Click to expand...

Free

Like talking to a wall, Lol.
 
Hidden In Him said:
Well this much we agree on.


How do you know you're not projecting here? When we were discussing how Jude 1:9 was supposedly a "Gnostic insertion," you gave no proof that the Assumption of Moses was a Gnostic document, and yet you moved on from it like it wasn't important to you whether you could actually support what you were saying or not.

That seems to me like proof that the opposite is going on. You only want to hear your view, and if anything contradicts it you simply ignore it and move on.

You are doing the same thing here.
Click to expand...
In order to be politically correct scholars are now using this term in place of Gnostic: "apocryphal work"

The reason I have not been able to give a better answer, is because my computer keeps going off line when searching for the info. I have a bunch of AI tracking me and causing trouble. It also seems that a lot of Info is missing from the Internet. Perhaps some info has been removed for not being politically correct. Not sure.

Did you know that scholars do not use the name spelling "Alla?"
Alla is the Aramaic spelling for a Pagan god who happens to be the origin of Allah.
 
CherubRam said:
In order to be politically correct scholars are now using this term in place of Gnostic: "apocryphal work"
Click to expand...

Ok, and where is this coming from? :)

Any links to substantiate it? From what I've seen, up until now they haven't seemed all that nervous about using the term, or painting it in the most positive light possible.
 
grace2 said:
They did not have the Bible at that time.

they needed someone to teach them the gospel.

But we all have direct instruction from the Teacher, Jesus, now.
Click to expand...
Still need teachers .
1 Corinthians 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
 
Hidden In Him said:
Ok, and where is this coming from? :)

Any links to substantiate it? From what I've seen, up until now they haven't seemed all that nervous about using the term, or painting it in the most positive light possible.
Click to expand...
You must be the only person in the world who has not heard of political correctness.
 
From: (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian
Subject: Jude 9
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1998 05:02:02 GMT

As promised, some verifiable evidence about the background of Jude
verse 9.

In a large volume titled "The Old testament Psudepigrapha" vol. 1
(DLT, 1983) in an article introducing the text of "The Testament of
Moses (1st Century), J. Priest (pp 919ff) writes that the Testament of
Moses is a virtual rewrite of Deuteronomy 31-34. It is generally held
to have influenced the following NT passages:
Jude 9, 12-13, 2 Peter 2:13, Acts 7:36-43, Matthew 24:19-21.
"Jude 9 refers to a story of the disputes between Michael and Satan
over the body of Jesus, an account that does not appear in our text.
That the episode was contained in the lost ending of the Testament of
Moses, or in a cognate work, possibly called the Assumption of Moses,
is possible, but our present information does not warrand any positive
conclusion.
... The possibility exists that some NT authors were familiar with the
testament of Moses, but it would be better to say that both the
Testament of Moses and certain NT texts show familiarity with common
traditional material."

In the Word Biblical Commentary on Jude, 2 Peter, (Word Books, 1983),
R.J. Bauckham includes an excursus on pp. 65-76 on the sources of Jude
9. This is the most comprehensive text I could find - eleven pages on
tis one verse! It is worth looking up, if you are interested and have
access to a theological library. Bauckham details the relation of Jude
9 to OT and other sources, and writes
"There is widespread agreement that Jude's source in verse 9 was the
lost ending of a work sometimes known as the Assumption of Moses, but
more appropriately known as the Testament of Moses"
"Although the ending of the Testament of Moses is no longer extant, a
number of Christian sources seem to have preserved the substance of
the story it contained"
Sources are listed, including Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Dydimus
the Blind (!), Gelasius, ...
The article concludes that the "Assumption of Moses" is a second-
century edited version of the Testimony of Moses", and that Jude was
aware of, and alluded to, at least the tradition, if not the precise
wording of the Testimony.

Peake's commentary on the Bible, sv "Jude".
"Jude drew on the OT (Septuagint version), Enoch, and the Assumption
of Moses..."

The Epistles of James, .Peter and Jude - Anchor Bible commentary
(Doubleday 1980).
Bo Reicke writes "According to well known authorities of the early
Church like Clement, Origen and others, the reference to Michael's
contention with the Devil comes from an apocryphal intertestamental
book entitled "The Assumption of Moses". (p. 202)

Introducton to the New testament (SCM Press, 1983)
R.F. Collins writes "... the small letter of Jude cites both the
Apocalypse of Moses (Jude 8-9) and 1 Enoch (Jude 14-15) in a
reverential manner..." (page 10)

Jude and the relatives of Jesus in the early Church (T&T Clark 1990)
R Bauckham (I think the same person who wrote the Word commentary)
writes
"According to the Alexandrian Fathers... the story of the dispute over
the body of Moses, to which Jude 9 refers, was contained in an
apocryphal work called the Assumption of Moses.
... some 19th century scholars took the account of Jude to be a
factual one, ...and denied any dependence on the Assumption of Moses,
which [they] argued was a second century Christian work based on Jude"
(p 141)
Bauckham concludes that it is most likely that Jude used the lost
ending of the Testament of Moses, and that "The story in this version
can be reconstituted [from extant sources] with some confidence"
(p.144).


The above shows that the matter of the background of Jude 9 is by no
means an easy or simple matter. I could not find any texts which dealt
with Jude 9 and did not mention the Testament/Assumption/Apocalypse of
Moses, and only Bauckham's incidental reference suggested that there
was any likelihood that Jude wrote without getting his information
from the written or oral Jewish tradition.

What I have collected above is the kind of evidence with which
scholars work. It still leaves many questions and possibilities open,
but points towards a fairly strong consensus that Jude 9 is an
allusion to a Jewish pseudepigraphal work which was well known to both
Jude and his readers.

Cheers

N+

Nigel B. Mitchell

© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium, without applying for permission
(provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright information - and perhaps a reference to this website :)!
 
hawkman said:
Paul wrote the verse .
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Jesus is my Lord, not Pual. If it does not harmonize or Jesus did not mention it, it is moot.
hawkman said:
grace2 did you ever attend any church Sunday school classes ?
Click to expand...
When I was a beginner I did twenty years ago.

It did not take long to find out they are only teaching what they wanted them to know.

They don't go into unpopular teachings of Jesus.

It is so selective.

Trins' problem is that they do not have a personal relationship with God and Jesus by reading them by themselves.

They follow blindly what their leaders teach.

that's how they can continue the tradition of hypocrisy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top