For the Jews, personified spirit beings, good and evil, along with demons, originated during the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE.
This file will be available very temporarily.
I printed it off. Fascinating reading.
Very interesting read!
This is a quote from the 8th chapter of The book called “CRUCIBLE of FAITH” that you posted a link to. It is very telling and matches our research too:
In the Jewish context, the word implies a human figure who would appear to usher in the end of the present world order, to bring in a new era of holiness, justice, and divine rule. Commonly, this person is portrayed as a descendant of David's line, and he might be seen as either royal or priestly."
It also talks about what the book of Enoch says, how the son of man [messiah] was ‘hidden.’ Also he, the son of man would be a descendant of David to fulfill the Davidic Covenant. Which would mean this person would have be a descendant of Adam & Eve too…just like Jews believe. Because Jesus is a son of God NOT a son of MAN.
Again thanks, nice find!
When I first started doubting Jwdom I read the books not included in our current day version of the Bible. One was a book quoted but excluded in the final selection and I never accepted the JW explanation that the book quoted is lost and the one we can read is fake....or some such reasoning. A bit like there were 2 places called Damascus which is why Paul was both coming and going there at the time of his conversion.
AA ,this sounds all too familiar with the WT excusing the two different versions of Jesus coming into Jerusalem or coming out of Jerusalem in the Gospels .
The pretext being their was an old Jerusalem and a new Jerusalem in Jesus day .
Anybody remember this ?
I am not aware of the Watchtower's explanation you are referring to. However, from Galatians (which was genuinely written/dictated by Paul) he gives accounts of his experiences that are completely at odds with accounts in the Book of Acts (written some 30 to 60 years after Paul's death).
For instance, Paul says his visits to the leaders in Jerusalem were very private affairs and that the people only knew him by reputation, not personally. Acts 15, however, creates a general conference in which Paul addresses the whole assembly. Also, Paul was returning to Damascus, not going there.
The Book of Acts is a contrived religious fiction created for a local purpose at the end of the first century. It is evenly balanced between accounts of Peter (first half) and accounts of Paul (second half). One theory is that this was done to counter the positions held by Marcion.
The Gospels attributed to Mark, Matthew, and Luke are known as "synoptic", meaning "same view", or similar. But they are not. Each was created by anonymous writers for its own local community, for its own local purpose.
The earliest, being Mark, was written about 68-70 CE. "Matthew" followed some 15 years later, written for a different purpose (it is artificially structured into 5 parts, now known by the term "Discourses"). "Luke" followed and its current construct was completed about 120 CE, when Marcion was at his dominant height.
While some Gospels suggest Jesus' ministry lasted 6 months, other Gospels, and here I include John's, suggest it could have been longer, maybe a year, maybe three.
Not one Gospel is a literal historical documentary in the sense that we might consider objective journalism.
Not that there would be two Jerusalems, rather there were several different versions of the Jesus (actually Joshua). Not one of the New Testament writers either saw or heard Jesus.
And as a completely unrelated comment, I would like to add that the Watchtower's description of the "New Testament" as "Christian Greek Scriptures" is completely wrong. The documents were Jewish. They were written by Jews for Jews about Jews.