The Assumption of Moses by Robert Henry Charles, first published in 1897, is a rare manuscript, the original residing in one of the great libraries of the world. This book is a reproduction of that original, which has been scanned and cleaned by state-of-the-art publishing tools for better readability and enhanced appreciation. Restoration Editors' mission is to bring long out of print manuscripts back to life. Some smudges, annotations or unclear text may still exist, due to permanent damage to the original work. We believe the literary significance of the text justifies offering this reproduction, allowing a new generation to appreciate it.

The Assumption of Moses by Robert Henry Charles, first published in 1897, is a rare manuscript, the original residing in one of the great libraries of the world. This book is a reproduction of that original, which has been scanned and cleaned by state-of-the-art publishing tools for better readability and enhanced appreciation. Restoration Editors' mission is to bring long out of print manuscripts back to life. Some smudges, annotations or unclear text may still exist, due to permanent damage to the original work. We believe the literary significance of the text justifies offering this reproduction, allowing a new generation to appreciate it.

This first verse-by-verse commentary on the Greek text of the Testament of Abraham places the work within the history of both Jewish and Christian literature. It emphasizes the literary artistry and comedic nature of the Testament, brings to the task of interpretation a mass of comparative material, and establishes that, although the Testament goes back to a Jewish tale of the first or second century CE, the Christian elements are much more extensive than has previously been realized. The commentary further highlights the dependence of the Testament upon both Greco-Roman mythology and the Jewish Bible. This should be the standard commentary for years to come.

It is no longer news that the texts that became the official Bible excluded apocryphal books, in many cases because they didn't serve the worldview of the ruling classes. Early in the 20th century, R.H. Charles translated and edited a series of these texts. In 2003, we published The Book of Enoch, apocrypha describing the hierarchy of angels and demons. Now we are pleased to publish this significant end-times text. Writing at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 ad, Baruch converses directly with God in a series of visions. The fall of Jerusalem is given as part of a larger end-of-the-world scenario. Baruch then receives prophecy: periods of light and darkness shall come, symbolized by rains bright and black, corresponding to alternating times when humanity lives in peace and harmony, then dark periods when evil reigns. Of particular note is the apocalypse when the Messiah appears again on earth. This alternate tale of the apocalypse inspires hope -- evil is punished, condemned to hell and cast off the earth, while those "left behind" are actually the righteous who will enjoy, literally, heaven on earth. Obviously a differing view from the currently in-vogue idea of "rapture." Also included in this edition is "The Assumption of Moses," an apocryphal fragment noted to have influenced other descriptions of the apocalypse included in the Bible. "For at the heights of the world they shall dwell, And they shall be made like unto the angels, And be made equal to the stars, And they shall be changed into every form they desire, From beauty into loveliness, And from that light into the splendour of glory."

The Apocalypse of Moses is the Greek version of the Life of Adam and Eve. The original version is believed to have been written in a Semitic language, as there as terms transliterated into Greek from a Semitic language, however, it is not known positively which language, as the original text is lost, and so far, no fragments have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls that can be firmly linked to it. The closest text discovered to date among the Dead Sea Scrolls would be the Genesis Apocryphon scroll, written in Aramaic and generally dated to between 37 BC to 50 AD. The original language of the Apocalypse of Moses was likely also Aramaic, as demonstrated by the use of the name Iah (Jah), which is found more commonly in Aramaic language books, like Tobit. A number of references circumstantially date the original work to the era when the Greeks ruled Judea, between 330 and 140 BC. The reference to Iah is itself evidence of a pre-Hasmonean origin, as the Hasmoneans’ authorized’ version of the Hebrew texts appear to have redacted Iah (יה) to Yahweh (יהוה) when they converted the Jews from the Canaanite (Samaritan/Paleo-Hebrew) script to the Assyrian (Hebrew) script. The name Iah (Jah) does show up in many ancient names, such as Josiah, and phrases such as Hallelujah, implying it was once widely accepted as the name of (a) God, however, virtually disappeared from the Hebrew scriptures at some point, likely during the Hasmonean redaction and standardization circa 140 BC. The reference to Lord Sabaoth (κυρίῳ σαβαωθ) is another indicator of a pre-Hasmonean origin for the text. Lord Sabaoth was the Major-General of the Lord God’s army that helped Joshua destroy the walls of Jericho in the Septuagint’s Book of Joshua. There are many references to Lord Sabaoth, the ‘Lord of War’ in the Greek era, however, during the early Hasmonean era, he became an epitaph of Iaw (Yahweh) the national God of Hasmonean Judea: Iaw Sabaoth (יהוה צבאות). The Hasmoneans redacted Lord Sabaoth from the Book of Joshua, replacing him with Yahweh (יהוה), meaning that Yahweh was the Major-General of his own army in the Masoretic version of Joshua. According to later-Hasmonean records, Yahweh Sabaoth became the Jewish version of Dionysus or Bacchus, a god of war, wine, and lust, before he was abandoned during the formation of the Pharisee sect, who rejected the pronunciation of any of the names of God.

How did the books of the Bible come to be recognized as Holy Scripture? After nearly nineteen centuries the canon of Scripture remains an issue of debate. Adept in both Old and New Testament studies, F. F. Bruce brings the wisdom of a lifetime of reflection and biblical interpretation to bear in addressing the criteria of canonicity, the canon within the canon, and canonical criticism.