“... Unlike the Two Spirits Treatise, Visions of Amram presents Amram with a choice between the two angelic figures, between light and darkness, righ- teousness and wickedness (Popović forthcoming). They parallel the Prince of Lights and the Angel of Darkness from the Treatise, who have divided their author- ity over two groups of people between them. When asked by Amram how they can have authority over him, they both answer that they rule over all of humanity. The notion of choice is of particular interest here. The two figures ask Amram by whom he seeks to be ruled. This seems contradictory: on the one hand people are said to be ruled by either of these two spirits, while on the other hand it seems there was a choice to seek the rule of either one. Did ancient readers think this choice only applied to Amram or to others as well? In the Two Spirits Treatise the situation seems more or less settled by the text’s deterministic perspective: God has predetermined everyone’s path. At the same time, the text refers to this strug- gle between the two spirits within the heart of man. Whether the end result of that struggle was thought to be predetermined is not entirely clear. The text is not as systematic and explicit in its articulations as we would like it to be. However, the Two Spirits Treatise clearly does not present human beings with a choice, as does Visions of Amram. ...”