EZEKIEL

and YHWH’s

Judgment

for the

Good News

PEOPLE

VOLUME IX

Yisrael

EZEKIEL and YHWH’s

Judgment for the

Good News People

Volume IX--Yisrael

by

an unworthy servant

And you shall know the truth,

and the truth will make you free.

(John 8:32)

Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho. The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States. Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.age-end.com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA.

Contents

Volume IX--Yisrael

CHAPTER PAGE

- Cover Page 1

- Title Page 2

- Contents 3

- Publisher’s Preface 5

Part Z--The Backdrop

121 The Yisrael Dilemma 6

122 Replacement/Displacement Theology 8

Part AA--The Lost House of Yisrael

123 History of Yisrael 20

124 Yisrael Divorced 35

125 Changes in Yisrael 43

126 The Return of Yisrael 49

127 The Return is Future 62

Part BB--Yisrael in Prophecy

128 David’s Throne 71

129 The Stone of Destiny 78

130 Locating the House of Yisrael I 89

131 Locating the House of Yisrael II 99

132 Locating the House of Yisrael III 105

133 Christian Israelites Return 118

Part CC--Aliyah and Zionism

134 Yehudah 132

135 Aliyah and Zionism I 135

136 Aliyah and Zionism II 145

137 Return of the Jews 151

138 Why Were the Jews Omitted? 156

SHEERIT YISRAEL

PO Box 473

Calder, Idaho 83808, USA

Publisher’s Preface

Greetings! The following presentation is volume nine of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.age-end.com web site.

This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world. In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one.

Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material. It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message!

The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1. It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins: left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers).

For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope.

With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers. May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him. Shalom (peace) to you and yours!

an unworthy servant, Sukkot 2005 CE

Chapter 121--The Yisrael Dilemma

The Problem

While the Scriptures are plain and clear enough that a correct understanding of Israel (correctly Yisrael in the Hebrew) is not difficult, the truth is that there is massive confusion and uncertainty in the modern world on who and what constitutes Yisrael. Almost no modern peoples in today’s world have any knowledge or understanding on identifying Yisrael.

This paradox should not even exist. Yet it is the real world out there. Persons at large, and this is even true with the so-called intellectually advanced and enlightened people in the Western Christian civilization, simply are lost in comprehending the reality of the Scriptural description of a people called Yisrael. Some few Orthodox Jews have somewhat of a grasp of the problem. But few persons otherwise.

Among most of the peoples of the world, their dilemma surfaces when they automatically assume, presume and suppose that the modern Jews constitute the Scripturally mentioned Yisrael.

It doesn’t matter whether the issue comes up with people in the pagan world of Black Africa or the primitive world of Eskimos, the very idea of Yisrael automatically opens the door to the theory that Yisrael is found among the Jews or that the modern Jews are Yisrael.

True, the modern persons called Jews, who have founded the current Jewish state in Palestine, have named their state Israel. But that reality does not necessarily mean that the Scriptural Yisrael is synonymous with the modern state of Israel. There are differences which need to be addressed for comprehension of truth.

Commentary to follow in the succeeding chapters should dispel completely the notion of the Jews being Yisrael.

But Yet a Bigger Problem

Contrariwise, in the Christian world, the people have formulated another aberration which is even more stupid and ridiculous. Starting as early as the beginnings of the Roman Catholic Church, the worldly organized Christian Church developed a theory that the Christian Church had mysteriously and supernaturally replaced or displaced the Yisrael of the Scriptures.

Somehow, this mysterious evolution of history occurred, without any explanation or description on how it came about. Once Rome propagated the theory, and regardless of how stupid and irrational it was, the Christian world bought into it. Even the so-called more enlightened Protestants bought the same stupid thinking.

Consequently, over the years, the Christian world has combined the same two incredibly stupid theories into one supposed belief. Yes, most Christians some how suppose that the Yisrael of the Scriptures can be both the Jews as well as the collective Christian Church. How this insanity and stupidity came about will be addressed in the following chapters.

Chapter 122--Replacement/Displacement Theology

Do Christians Steal From Yisrael?

The prophet Yirmeyahu wrote about an interesting concept when he observed that The ELOHIM is against some (false) prophets who steal His words from their neighbors (Jer 23:30). As the “Soncino Books of the Bible” see it, the issue here concerns the theft of “prophecies.”

The context suggests that these false prophets have nothing of truth to declare on their own. So they misappropriate and steal YHWH’s words from true prophets and repeat them as their own to apparently gain some status, recognition and support from the people. Obviously, with a little charisma, they often would achieve their desired ends.

However, these words of Yirmeyahu do raise an interesting question. Would Christians steal YHWH’s words since they really have little or nothing to offer to the people (as a minimum, the professional religionists/preachers would, as allowed in the Prologue)?

Or more precisely, would Christians steal YHWH’s words, as pertaining to Yisrael, and claim that they apply to their respective denominations or the Christian Church in the generic sense?

Mystery Babylon, The Whore and Mother of Harlots

In the Revelation, Yohanan wrote about a vision he had about a symbolic woman named “Mystery Babylon” (Rev 17:1-18).

As will be elaborated upon in succeeding chapters, that word “mystery” (which is a secret symbol or sign) appears (Rev 17:5, 7) to identify this woman (and her daughters) and link her to some very false, pagan worship (which will be identified and commented upon in subsequent chapters herein). This is an important point one about Yohanan’s vision.

Point two--Yohanan was so absolutely astonished and surprised that he marveled at the scene which he was beholding (Rev 17:6). His Messenger then proceeded to offer some clarification on the mystery. Beyond what he wrote, it’s hard to say how much more of an explanation that Yohanan received. Perhaps he learned the whole picture or maybe just some bits and pieces of it.

But the fact that he marveled about this vision would suggest that he did understand at first that this system involved a group of false worshippers who would come on the world scene, carrying the Scriptures of The ELOHIM around, quoting them and pretending to live by them. Perhaps this reality is what surprised Yohanan.

If Satan came as an angel of darkness, maybe a person could understand it. But the Adversary doesn’t come that way. He comes as an angel of light (II Cor 11:14). And in terms of the whore woman and her harlot daughters, they carry their “Bibles” around, quote them, give them some credence and pretend to live by them--all the while that they secretly labor intensely against them.

Yes, Thieves

In short, this false worship system (which is a real system) effectively stole the Words of YHWH from His true people (Yisrael). After all, one must remember that the Scriptures were written by Israelites, about Israelites, for Israelites and to Israelites, as already established.

Not content with just stealing YAH’s Words, this system went on and specifically stole about everything else it could find as applying to the people of YHWH.

This publication at hand has or will describe elsewhere herein how this evil power has stolen (or at least attempted to steal) the promises, the adoption, the election, the blessings, the covenants, the salvation, the rewards, etc of Yisrael, and claim them as its own.

The Bride

For a classic illustration of how far this theft goes, please consider this same point; but with a slightly different twist, in saying that Christendom has theorized that the Scriptural references to Yisrael (the New Jerusalem), the future bride of YESHUA, are, in fact, references to the Christian Church.

As F. Wallace Connon wrote, in an article on "Look Unto the Rock," appearing in the January 1993 "New Beginnings" magazine, this reasoning is impossible.

Connon perceptively noted that The MESSIAH is correctly "the head of the body, the church" (Col 1:18); and therefore, He cannot possibly become the husband of His Own body as would be necessitated if the future bride was, in actuality, "the church." To avoid this impossible paradox, it is Yisrael who will be the bride and not the true Assembly, much less the Christian Church.

To Connon's enlightening comments, this writer would just add that any Scriptural references to the Assembly of the Called Out Ones, as possibly linking to the bride, should be put into the proper context. Such an Assembly or Congregation will be one made up of Israelites. Of course, it is Yisrael who is the bride, as the Word repeatedly maintains.

Incidentally, Piska 22.5 (in “Pesikta De-Rab Kahana,” p. 347) notes that ten times in the Tanakh, Yisrael is described as the bride (SofS 4:8, 9, 10, 11, 12; 5:1; Isa 49:18; 61:10; 62:5; and Jer 33:11).

The same source also indicates that YHWH, as The BRIDEGROOM, appropriately clothes Himself in the proper garments for each occasion, also ten times (Ps 104:1; 93:1; 93:1; Dan 7:9; Isa 59:17; 59:17; 59:17; 59:17; 63:2; 63:1).

As hard as it may seem to most Christians, the truth is that Yisrael is the coming bride and YHWH YESHUA will be The BRIDEGROOM. Nowhere is there any allowance for the Christian Church to be anything at the coming wedding supper of The LAMB.

The Witnesses

Another powerful sample of this theft and the incredible ignorance of hateful, sinful, rebellious Christians, in approving of this illegal seizure and misappropriation of the Scriptural words and messages for Yisrael, arises in the modern Jehovah’s Witnesses denomination.

These foolishly uninformed Jehovah’s Witnesses grab Isaiah 43:10-12 and misapply it to themselves and their own false work.

Of course, in Isaiah 43:10-12, The ELOHIM does say “you are my witnesses.” But sinning Christian Jehovah Witnesses can never comprehend and get it through their thick heads that The HIGHEST YHWH was addressing fleshly Israelites and not confused and misinformed Jehovah’s Witnesses in that text (Isa 43:1, 10-12).

Christian Misunderstandings

Before proceeding on to deduce some other conclusions from this presentation, one more key fact about these Christian thefts needs some reflection and comment. As just noted, it seems that some perceptive Christian scholars have realized the earlier described truth that the Scriptures represent a compilation largely about and absolutely for Yisrael.

Beyond Yisrael, there is little or nothing in the Scriptures for any other peoples in this age to include the whole definition of Christianity. This glaring truth has made some Christians try to find some way around this dilemma.

The result of this Christian attention has been the development and perpetuation of the so-called replacement and/or displacement theology, as mentioned here and in former chapters. This "replacement" theology takes many different forms and shapes.

Although it is fundamentally flawed and ridiculous to even think about, the fact remains that Christendom has successfully taught it as factual truth for years and years with little or no opposition. Ignorant and Scripturally shallow individuals get on this perverted bandwagon and never give the subject a second thought.

In advancing these ideas, Churchianity runs the gauntlet in trying to misappropriate and steal the Words of the Scriptures, as they clearly pertain to Yisrael, and assert that they actually refer to the "church." For example, the Roman Catholic Church has for ages declared that the Israelite throne of David (ultimately due YESHUA) is the Pope's throne where he sits and rules.

Additionally, many misinformed Christians like to seize some or all of the Avrahamic promises and blessings as applying to "Christians," in contrast to what the Word actually declares. A good example of this was discussed earlier in comments made in the article by Anthony Buzzard on "The Christian Hope: Life in the Land of the Promise," as described before herein.

Ernest Martin and His Seven Stages

For another evident example of Christian confusion, misinformation and misunderstanding, the reader might be interested in one of the conclusions of the former Christian writer Dr Ernest L Martin (now decreased) when he outlined his concept of seven stages of spiritual understanding--to include a number six which alleged that “both Jews and Gentiles can now be considered (to be) Israel” through a belief in “Christ” (in the Mar 1994 “ASK Communicator”).

Thus, Martin incorrectly believed that Christian (non-Israelite) Gentiles will “also inherit the promises given to Abraham.”

Now, if any readers of this study wish to persist in accepting these teachings of “Biblical understanding” from supposed scholars, like Buzzard and Martin and the thousands of other so-called Christian scholars, then such readers might well still cling to the “tooth fairy” fables taught by so many foolish parents to receptive and gullible little children.

Of course, these conclusions, as advanced by Christians, seem to be too crazy to be accepted by rational, intelligent, serious and believing students of the Word for the various reasons outlined at length so far in this study.

Yet tragically, the world of rebellious Christendom has historically used these replacement and/or displacement theories for the very foundations of their existence.

R. T. Woodworth

The February 1997 “Pathfinder” had an article by R. T. Woodworth on “Who Are Israelites?” which offered some perception of this man’s uninformed (or rather, misinformed) view on Yisrael. This man Woodworth is reported to be a Christian Identity preacher. But a reader would never know it from the article which he wrote in the “Pathfinder.”

Woodworth opens by saying that three chapters of Romans deal with the history of Israel. He then charges that “Paul is trying to show Christians that they are these Israel people and ought to be aware of their identity and calling” (p. 1 of the Pathfinder article). Woodworth doesn’t seem to understand that there are hundreds of millions of Christians out there who definitely are not and can never be Israelites.

Jumping over to Hosea’s prophecies about Israelites who would not be called The ELOHIM’s people, but would become His beloved in the end time (alluding to Hosea 1:10; 2:23; I Peter 2:10), the Pathfinder writer says that “Christians are God’s covenant people. God’s national promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel are fulfilled in Christian nations today” (p. 2 of the article).

He also charges that “The record is clear. The marks are here. Only Christian peoples have fulfilled all these promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (of OT blessings in Genesis 12:2-3 and 17:1-7). God’s covenants are fulfilled in Christ and Christians, not in Christ-haters and anti-Christians” (p. 2 of the article).

The Pathfinder writer then went on to declare that “Christians have been called, foreknown, and predestined to be conformed to the image of God’s Son, Jesus Christ. Only believers in Christ can be justified and glorified” (p. 3 of the article).

The possibly confused Woodworth goes on to conclude his misinformation campaign by saying “Who are true Israelites? Only those who fit God’s descriptions in God’s Word, who follow God’s Son and obey His commandments and worship the Lord Jesus Christ...” (p. 3 of the article).

Again, one of the most striking features of this confusing literary effort is that Woodworth is reported to be a Christian Identity individual, who supposedly should know “something” (maybe not all, but surely something) about Yisrael.

Even the “Pathfinder” newsletter is alleged to be a Christian Identity publication, which also should know something about Yisrael and that Christianity is not Yisrael, as alleged by Woodworth.

Gene Justice

Christian writer Gene Justice, of the Foundation for Biblical Research (of Pasadena, California), wrote a book in 1984 on “The Israel Identity Syndrome” (p. 2-50) which offered some revolutionary thinking on the role of Christendom in replacing physical or terrestrial Israel.

Of course, Justice is one more person who believes that the modern Jews constitute the whole, twelve tribes of Israel. In later commentary in this study, Justice and his book will be addressed which theorized that the Khazars out of Eastern Europe constituted the ten lost tribes of the House of Israel with the House of Judah being present in the earlier Jewish definitions.

This Pasadena author’s whole thesis was an attack on the modern “Israel Identity” movement (which offers some explanations on what happened to the ten lost tribes of Yisrael on their exit from Canaan land). In order to have some hypothetical basis to support his attack, Justice had to deal with the status of Christianity, in the context of the Scriptures.

For this approach, Justice (ibid, p. 2-5) quite naturally concluded that physical Israel was “cast aside” (as most other Christians believe) based on some of the writings of Shaul the Apostle which he just totally misunderstood and misused.

Taking this thinking one step further, he went on to assert that with the abasement of (fleshly) Israel, there was an exaltation of the (non Israelite) Gentiles (who would become Christians).

Put another way, this Christian writer alleged that “Israel was accursed” while the (non-Israelite) Gentiles are blessed. He then proceeded to claim that while the Scriptures describe blessings and riches for fleshly Israel, The HIGHEST has “offered far more riches directly to the Gentiles than Israel ever conceived of” which he concluded was because of their chance to become “new creations in Christ” (ibid, p. 44-45).

He also went on to charge that all humans have “two pedigrees” --one fleshly and one spiritual (ibid, p. 5). Supposedly, the spiritual pedigree is the “true pedigree” since it matters not who one’s fleshly parents are; but rather, who his or her “spiritual father” is (whether “God or Satan”).

But Justice’s most revolutionary thinking surfaced in his remarks on the status of terrestrial Israel as opposed to something he calls “celestial Israel” (ibid, p. 44-50).

As this seemingly confused Christian saw it, terrestrial Israel consisted of fleshly Israel (as descending from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) while converted Christian (non Israelite) Gentiles constituted celestial Israel.

He justified his ideas on the presence of celestial Israel because the Word mentions the citizenship of the election as being in heaven (Eph 3:14-15; Phil 3:20), and that there is an allusion to a new Jerusalem, as being above (Gal 4:26; Rev 21:2). As Justice concluded, this is proof for the existence of a heavenly or celestial Israel which would be the mother of converted Christians.

More Examples

Writing in “The Last Trump (p. 7),” Dr Ed Moore suggested that “Hence, we can begin to see that being the children of Abraham (today, under the New Covenant) has nothing to do with race.” In truth, Moore missed the point because it is totally linked to race.

Leonard Lee, in his (Seventh-day Adventist Church) book “Clouds over America” (p. 71), said: “Since God rejected the Israelites as a nation, we can look for the fulfillment of His purposes only in (a) spiritual Israel... The (physical) Israelites have now passed off the stage of action.” Again, another writer has completely failed to grasp what the Book says.

A letter to readers (dated Dec 31, 1996) from Walter H Meyer, editor of the “Believer’s Advocate,” noted that Israelites were the “indestructible Jews” who “are the true olive tree, and we as Believers have been grafted in...as a wild olive.” The writer involved seems to be confused and unable to tell the difference between an olive tree and a fig tree.

In an article on “Who Are Israelites?,” appearing in the Oct 1997 “Sacred Name Broadcaster” (p. 3), directing elder and editor Jacob O. Meyer wrote that in the final analysis, the true Israelites are the spiritual people of “Yahweh.”

Mark Cook had an article in the Feb-Mar 1998 “Restitution Herald” (p. 18-20) on “The Church: The Israel of God.” Cook theorizes that Israel was “divided into two” parts or sections. One was the many blinded Jews and the other part was the “remnant” (the church) that accepted The MESSIAH. He says that Gentiles are grafted into this remnant to become a part of Israel by becoming members of the Christian Church.

The Christian Dilemma

Manifestly, many Christians choose to believe that Christianity is the religion of the Scriptures and certainly of the NT, if not the OT.

Therefore, all that the Christian wishes to be able to do is to go to the Word and find the references that pertain to Christianity. And this condition creates the essence of the Christian dilemma because Christianity cannot be found in the Scriptures.

The word “Christian” itself is to be found exactly three times in the NT and nowhere else (Acts 11:26; 26:28; I Pet 4:16). But these three usages do not communicate the meaning which Christendom would wish. Future chapters herein on “Words of the Christian Church” will assess these three NT remarks to demonstrate that they do not mean what most Christians choose to believe.

In any case, the place where one must eventually arrive is that there is absolutely nothing in the entire Scriptures from start to finish which would allow, suggest or imply that the religion of the Book is Christianity.

This interesting reality then brings up a most fascinating question. What if Christianity is not the religion of the Scriptures, OT or NT? Ensuing chapters hereafter will answer that question.

Above all else, there is totally nothing in writing which could ever connect Christendom to Yisrael. It takes absolutely mind boggling misuse of the literal words of the Book to develop that specious theory.

Anyway the subject is cut or dissected, the result is always the same. Christianity is not mentioned or discussed in the Book (although the word Christian does appear three times in the Greek NT, but not in the context that Christians believe, as will be addressed in later chapters herein). So there is no possible way to honestly and intelligently connect Christianity to Yisrael. It simply cannot be done.

Christian Interpretations, Revisited

Yet, the proponents of the replacement and/or displacement theology carry their pretentious arguments beyond the realm of intelligent possibilities into the world of outright stupidity.

These replacement/displacement proponents not only connect Christianity to Yisrael, but they carry their thinking even further by asserting that the word Yisrael means the "Christian Church" in variously desirable situations, as opposed to bad situations.

Consequently, when people read the good things in YHWH's Word connected with Yisrael about coming blessings, happiness, prosperity, abundant living, rewards, security, safety, salvation, heaven, bliss, joy, everlasting life, etc; they are then supposed to understand that all of this "good" is for Christendom and not for fleshly Yisrael at all.

Conversely, when a reader reads from the Book about the evil, sin, rebellion and wickedness of Yisrael and the coming curses, punishments and chastisements upon Yisrael, they then are supposed to recognize that these bad things apply to the ancient Israelites and to the modern Jews and not to the "righteous, holy, just, good" Christian Church (as they perceive it).

The absolutely unbelievable presence of this incredible thinking is enough to tear up one's mind and mental faculties.

Of course, ignorant thinking and speculation like this can only emanate from the halls of Churchianity where the typical Christian knows virtually nothing about YHWH's Word. But surely, anyone with brains above the moron level must understand that this thinking is both stupid and hypocritical.

Actually Christian Hypocrites

Frankly, it is astounding that mentally stable persons can take the Scriptures and read the word "Israel," in one place, and say that it means the man Jacob Israel, and in another place, that it means the Jews, and in still another place, that it means the Christian Church. All of this is, of course, quite arbitrary and absolutely stupid and it matters not how many degrees and credentials the proponents may possess.

Maybe, there was some excuse for the ignorant and gullible masses to not understand and be misinformed on this theology in the "dark ages" when the Roman Catholic Church ruled the so-called civilized world and took stern measures to keep the masses in perpetual ignorance and confusion.

After all, many of the people throughout the world in those trying centuries could not read and write. And how many individuals in the various nations could ever hope to understand the Scriptures and portions of the preaching services available only to them in the foreign Latin language.

Too, there was the famous Catholic Inquisition and murder of millions over the questions of religious conscience and religious freedom.

With the threat of being burned alive at the stake or being put on a rack to be tortured to no end, when the rack began to pull the subject's entire body apart, there was very little incentive on the part of most of the population to care what the Scriptures really said. Most were quite happy to accept whatever the pope and their local parish priests said.

Impose the Kingdom by Force

Therefore, this is precisely the conceptual attitude and mentality of much of Christendom and especially so today in the form of another strange Christian theory called the "Christian Reconstruction Replacement Theology," which not only says that the Christian Church is the true Yisrael, but also that the kingdom is to be imposed by that entity on the world, and by force if necessary.

There is another twist on this Christian speculation about the kingdom. It seems to be embraced in more still modern versions of the so-called “Christian Reconstruction” theology. It envisions the establishment of YESHUA’s kingdom on earth by man, right now, “before” YESHUA returns. Christian fundamentalist Dr Gary North is one of the proponents of this current unscriptural theory.

As a matter of information, the Roman Catholic Church has historically asserted that she had and/or was establishing the kingdom here on earth for the past 1,960 years.

Of course, Rome has been trying to impose this government on the world for ages, by force--with the sword and with the threat of death, punishment, and torture if necessary. It was this thinking which induced and promoted the just mentioned Inquisition of 400 years ago.

In more modern times, Carroll Quigley in “Tragedy and Hope” (p. 146) indicated that the members of Britain’s Round Table groups (1909-1913) were heavily influenced by Christian historian Lionel Curtis who taught that with the proper spirit and organization (federalism), they could establish the “Kingdom of God” on earth (this fascinating book will be addressed in some detail in later chapters).

Surely, individuals with some capacity to think and reason and with intelligence above the moron level should be able to put two and two together and recognize that these various “Christian" speculations are too ridiculous to even be discussed by rational, civilized, Adam men.

Truth Is Available!

But with the 16th century Protestant Revolution and the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 (which formally allowed religious toleration and religious pluralism), the excuses for ignorance, confusion and outright stupidity have largely ended. For some time now, multitudes have had the Word essentially available to them in the vernacular.

Although there have been and are some poor translations of certain texts and portions of the Book, there always remained the availability of the Hebrew and Greek texts, concordances and lexicons to aid any one willing to spend a little time and effort on research and study. Truth was never impossible to discover for the person really seeking it. It is there and always has been there.

This availability of verity is useful to the student of truth for not only Scriptural study, but also for the study of secular history. Although historians have tended to rewrite, slant and twist the historical record over the years, there are secular records now extant which will allow the student of truth to discover some most fascinating facts.

Many contemporary persons may recall how many Americans used to laugh and make fun of how the Russian Communists tended to rewrite their history books whenever there was a change of power in the Kremlin. But what these Americans never realized is that American and other historians have been doing the same thing for ages, as will be proven in later chapters herein.

Rewriting History

Consequently, history is being regularly rewritten to conform to man’s changing ideas about right and wrong (and being done openly in the Christian society, where people are theoretically informed on current events). Almost everyone knowingly seems to accept this deceitful and dishonest practice without a whimper of opposition.

For a classic illustration of this altering of history, the “Universal Jewish Encyclopedia” of 1939 carried a full write-up on Adolf Hitler, which described his true name of Adolf Schicklgruber and his genetic linkage to the Jews, whom he passionately hated. Even “Encyclopedia Britannica” and other older encyclopedias also reflected the true genealogy of Adolf Schicklgruber.

Yet, the 1975 “Encyclopaedia Judaica,” under its article on Hitler, says nothing about his Jewish name and ancestry. Today, a reader of “Encyclopaedia Judaica” on Hitler would suppose that he is reading about an evil German man named Hitler, instead of a very diabolically wicked Jew named Schicklgruber (who religiously was supposed to be a Catholic Christian).

Burton L. Mack

Part of the difficulty associated with the discovery of truth surfaces in Burton L. Mack’s book on “Who Wrote the New Testament? The Making of the Christian Myth,” discussed in previous chapters.

As pointed out before, Mack’s thesis is that not only is Christendom a myth, but he attaches the same conclusions to the Christian “Bible” generally and the Christian NT in particular.

Mack (p. 15) correctly notes that this myth has included the traditional Christian teachings that Christians had replaced or displaced the Jews (this teaching began at a very early time). Mack charges that with the fall of the Second Temple (70 CE), the traditional Jewish model of the Israel epic was in total disarray. In this void, Christian myth-making commenced in the late first century CE.

He argues that Christians merely revised the historic Jewish epic to their favor, claiming that the history of Israel and the Hebrew Scriptures belonged to them in contrast to the Jews. He says that this Christian myth, in the form of the “biblical epic,” granted the Christian Church its charter--effectively making it an heir to the history of Israel (ibid, p. 294).

This process of seizing the Scriptural epic allegedly started with the production of the book of Mark in the 70’s CE. Mack suggests that several attempts were made by the Christians to cast the Christian movement as the legitimate heir of Israel’s promise (ibid, p. 284).

He says that by the time of Marcion in the second century CE (described in a previous chapter), the OT could no longer be read as Jewish history with “Christ” merely tacked on. From then on, the Scriptures were distinctively Christian from start to finish (ibid, p. 285). By the time of Constantine (early 4th century CE), the Jewish Scriptures and the apostolic writings had been transformed into the “Christian Bible” (ibid, p. 287).

The Ante-Nicene Fathers

Mack’s conclusions have merit from the “Ante-Nicene Fathers.” For example, in the mid second century CE, Justin Martyr told a Jew “The Scriptures are not yours, but ours.” In about 177 CE, Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, said that the “Jews are disinherited from the grace of God.” Tertullian (c160-230 CE) charged that “God had rejected the Jews in favor of Christians” (Sep 2000 “Bridges for Peace” newsletter, p. 3).

In the 4th century CE, Christian leader and historian Eusebius said that the Hebrew Scriptures were for Christians and not the Jews, and that the curses were for the Jews.

Eusebius added that the Christian Church was the continuation of the Old Testament and thus superseded Judaism, and that the Christian Church was the true Israel or “Israel according to the Spirit” and heir to the “divine promises while the Jews were Israel according to the flesh” (Sep 2000 “Bridges for Peace,” p. 3).

Truth Can Be Found!

Despite this early Christian effort to transfer the essence of the Scriptures from Yisrael to the Christian Church, the reality of truth can be discovered (certainly, from the Scriptures themselves, as demonstrated in the preceding chapters).

Thanks to the efforts of people like Alexander Hislop (in “The Two Babylons”), C. J. Koster (in “Come Out of Her My People”), Darrell W. Conder (in “Mystery Babylon The Great”) and others, the reality of the church can emerge.

Truth is available. It just requires some work and effort to dig it out. Later chapters will attempt to make several of those truths known (that are not presently understood in organized Churchianity).

The Good News Was For Yisrael

The glaring truth which one must come to is absolutely unavoidable. The truth of this presentation cannot be denied by an honest student of the Word. It is that YESHUA's charge to the disciples never changed (after all, YHWH YESHUA is the same now and forever and changes not).

The objective, from the beginning and thereafter, was always to take the New Testament or New/Renewed Covenant Good News to the physical, lost sheep of the House of Yisrael of whatever religion, nationality or citizenship (Greek, Roman, etc) and wherever located in the Diaspora (the world-kosmos).

And in going to cities containing Israelites, one must allow that, by chance, the Good News message could also be received by ger aliens who could legally respond to it by YHWH's Torah (Ex 12:48-49).

Having brought up, in preceding commentary, the Hebrew terms nokri, nekar, ger, behemah and chaiyah, and the English dog and swine, as associated with certain humans/humanoids (all having some contact/relation to the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael), it has been necessary to define each of these terms, per the Hebrew Scriptures. This was partly done earlier and will be further accomplished in later chapters.

For sure, every so-called human being supposed to receive a call will be faced with that prospect, one day, when the ELOHIM is ready. None of the people to receive a call will be short-changed on this question. We can be sure of it!

The Conclusion

The bottom line here is that Christianity has misappropriated and stolen the election and choice of Yisrael, the great commission to Yisrael, the call of Yisrael, and indeed, even the salvation for Yisrael in this age and lifetime (as will be further proven and established in the chapters to follow). Yes, the Scriptures are for Yisrael and not for the Christian Church.

Chapter 123--History of Yisrael

Shem

Here, while still in the introductory stage, it is crucial that the reader digresses into Old Testament history briefly to consider some historical information which does affect profoundly the topic under discussion. On this, it is interesting to note that some very unique things happened to Yisrael in times past and things which traditional Christianity seems largely ignorant of or at least misinformed on.

Briefly, the story of Yisrael starts with the man Abram (correctly Avram, a descendant of Shem), who obeyed The ELOHIM's laws; and thus, received promises of blessings for his descendants (Gen 26:4-5). Shem was, of course, one of the three sons of Noah who repopulated a portion of the earth after the great flood.

The Semite Problem

Descendants of Shem are correctly called “Shemites.” At once, some confusion arises because the world has been bombarded with reports of certain people being called Semites (and particularly in the context of people who criticize the Jews--thus, anti-Semites).

Though the word and concept of Semite theoretically come from Sem (the Greek form of Shem, “Davis Dictionary of the Bible,” p. 733), an article on “The History of Israel” in the April 1997 “New Beginnings” magazine perceptively notes that “the terms Shemite and Semitic are not, by any means, interchangeable. The former refers to descendants of the progenitor (Shem) who first bore the name, Israelites among them.

“On the other hand, ‘Semite’ is a linguistic term which connotes peoples of various races who spoke one of the so-called ‘Semitic’ languages--including the original Shemites” (p. 3). Thus, Shemite has come to be a racial delineation of the descendants of Shem while Semite is a linguistic definition of people who speak a language of Shem.

The point is well made in this article that it would not be proper and correct to call the Canaanites Shemites (since they were descended from Noah’s son Ham). Yet, it would be proper to label them Semites since they spoke a Semitic language--as was true for a number of non-Shemite people living in the Middle East and speaking Semitic languages.

The Hebrews

This just mentioned man Avram was a descendant of another Old Testament character named Eber, a great grandson of Shem (Gen 11:15-17). Later descendants of this Eber came to be called Hebrews (as resulting from his name).

So, in time, Avram arrived on the scene (Gen 11:27-31). Of course, it was naturally correct that this Avram was to be identified as “a Hebrew” (Gen 14:13). And this seems to be the first important appellative associated with the so-called patriarchs.

In time, Avram had an encounter with The ELOHIM YHWH Who blessed him and changed his name to Avraham, meaning that he was to become the father of many nations (Hebrew goyim--Gen 17:5). Though Avraham eventually had several children, to include his oldest son Ishmael, born of Hagar, the promised blessings were to come upon his second son, Isaac (Yitzhak in the Hebrew), born of Sarah.

Yitzhak, in turn, had twin sons whom he named Esau and Jacob (Jacob, the Hebrew Yakov, was later renamed Yisrael--by YHWH). Although Esau was the first born, technically, he foolishly lost the birthright and most of the blessings to his brother over a bowl of pottage. But while the promises had passed to Yakov, the role of Esau was far from over in history, as will be seen later on in this study.

The Sons of Yisrael

In continuing, Yakov Yisrael had 12 sons (13 with the division of son Yosef into his two sons Ephraim and Manasseh, who were both adopted by Yakov Yisrael as his own sons--Gen 48:5).

These twelve sons were as follows: Reuben (from Leah, Reuven in the Hebrew), Shimon (from Leah), Levi (from Leah), Yehudah (from Leah), Dan (from Bilbah), Naphtali (from Bilbah, Naftali in the Hebrew)), Gad (from Zilpah), Asher (from Zilpah), Issachar (from Leah, Yissakhar in the Hebrew), Zebulun (from Leah, Zevulun in the Hebrew), Yosef (from Rachel), and Benjamin (from Rachel, Binyamin in the Hebrew).

Racial Jews from Yehudah

One of Yisrael’s sons was the just noted Yehudah. Therefore, in Hebrew, Yehudah's bloodline descendants are called Yehudi (Jew in English); and in the plural, Yehudim at II Kings 16:6 (Jews in English). In Greek, they are called Ioudaios.

And except for Yehudah's descendants, it is important to observe here that the progeny of the other sons of Yisrael were not "Jews" from a racial or bloodline perspective at all. This verity may be quite a shock to numbers of professing Christians since so much of Churchianity persists in believing and teaching that all Israelites are Jews, as well as their progenitors.

Assuredly, this supposition is wrong. Respecting this false thinking, it must be pointed out that besides the fact that the Israelites generally were not racial Jews (except for Yehudah's own descendants), there is furthermore no conceivable way that the patriarchs (Avraham, Yitzhak and Yakov) can ever be called Jews or thought of as Jews.

No! The truth is quite absolute that the racial Jews (Yehudim) came about solely through the seed line of Yehudah, one of the sons of Yisrael. Neither Avraham, Yitzhak, Yakov or any of their descendants were racial Jews, except for the line of Yehudah. Therefore, based on genealogy, only Yehudah's seed line can be called Jews. This is an important fact to remember as one considers the 12/13 tribes of Yisrael.

Ephraim and Yehudah

Almost from the beginnings of the tribes of Yisrael, the tribes of Ephraim and Yehudah moved into the more preeminent positions. Of course, it was inevitable that this succession would transpire since Ephraim was to receive the birthright and blessings while the throne over Yisrael would settle in with Yehudah.

By the time that Yakov Yisrael blessed his sons, to the time of Moshe, when he prophesied the future for the tribes, it was manifest that Ephraim and Yehudah would thereafter be Yisrael’s leading tribes.

What was not clear, but what soon began to occur, was that not only would Ephraim and Yehudah be the leading tribes, the tribes of Ephraim and Yehudah themselves would separate and lead Yisrael into division. Though there were periods of reconciliation between Yehudah and Ephraim, this division and the pangs of conflict was to continue to some extent thereafter.

In a way, the tribe of Yosef, the progenitor of the Ephraimites, became estranged from the other tribes when his brothers sold him into slavery. Of course, Yosef was the brother who became a primary leader of Egypt while the other brothers were somewhat subservient to Yosef after they too fled to Egypt.

Ishbosheth and David

The next important resurfacing of this division and perhaps even conflict came about when the tribes, united under King Shaul, faced their first major problem when Shaul’s son Ishbosheth took the throne following the death of his father (II Sam 2:8). Thereupon, the men of Yehudah came to David and anointed him King over the House of Yehudah (II Sam 2:4).

Quickly, war/conflict developed between the House of Shaul (Yisrael) and the House of David (Yehudah, II Sam 3:1). The division of Yisrael into warring camps under David and Ishbosheth continued for the next seven and one-half years. It was eventually resolved for a time when Ishbosheth was killed (II Sam 4:7) and David took over the kingdom which once again reunited (II Sam 5:3).

Shlomo

David then ruled the united kingdom for the next 33 years. Upon his death, his son Solomon (Shlomo in the Hebrew) took over and also ruled the united kingdom--actually for the next 40 years. But trouble was brewing as Shlomo became increasingly more evil--evidently somewhat because of his tendency to marry so many pagan wives (I Kg 11:1).

Before the death of Shlomo, the prophet Ahijah (the Hebrew Achiyah) came to Jeroboam (the Hebrew Yarovam), a leading Ephraimite, who was in rebellion against Shlomo. The prophet Achiyah took a new cloak that he was wearing and tore it into twelve pieces.

He gave ten pieces to Yarovam and told him that The ELOHIM was going to tear the kingdom out of the hand of Shlomo and give ten tribes of Yisrael to him (I Kg 11:28-32). Yarovam fled to Egypt, but he was ever in waiting for the time to come when he could take the kingship over the ten tribes to be split off from Yehudah.

Rechavam

With the death of the Yehudi King Shlomo, his son Rehoboam (the Hebrew Rechavam) became king over all of the combined nation of Yisrael. Very quickly, Rechavam decided to be even more ruthless and evil than his father Shlomo (I Kg 12:10-12). The opportunity for a division then arose when Yarovam returned from Egypt to make his play for rule.

Rechavam assembled the people at Shechem to attend his coronation (I Kg 12:1). When he announced his decision to be even more harsh than his father, the Northern ten tribes of Yisrael split and abandoned Yehudah and Rechavam (I Kg 12:16-17). Yarovam then became king over the Northern ten tribes of Yisrael (all the tribes but Yehudah, Binyamin and some part of Levi).

Houses of Yisrael and Yehudah

Thereafter, following the ascension of Rechavam, the united realm of Yisrael was thus split and divided into two kingdoms--the House of Yehudah in the South (with Jerusalem) and the House of Yisrael in the North (with eventual Samaria).

In connection with this partition, it is useful to note that these terms, the House of Yisrael and the House of Yehudah, were not brand new or original by the time of Rechavam. In fact, from the days of the wilderness wanderings, the unified nation had been known as the House of Yisrael (Ex 16:31; 40:38; Lev 10:6; Num 20:29; Josh 21:45; Ruth 4:11).

With the later ascension of Shaul, the kingdom was still the House of Yisrael (I Sam 7:3). As described above in the preceding commentary, at Shaul's death, the kingdom of Yisrael initially went with Ishbosheth (II Sam 2:10)--except for the tribe of Yehudah, which split off temporarily to align with David and be called the House of Yehudah (II Sam 2:4).

Within eight years, this early breach with Ishbosheth was healed and the kingdom stayed united under David and Shlomo until the days of Rechavam, under discussion.

Essentially, the tribes of Yehudah and Binyamin, plus a portion of Levi, went with the House of Yehudah and Rechavam while the other remaining 10 1/2 tribes or so formed the House of Yisrael under the rulership of Yarovam. With the separation, the people of the North, of course, were properly identified as Israelites and of Yisrael. However, there is never a Scriptural reference to them as Jews.

Categorically, the Northern tribes of Yisrael were not Jews; they were never called Jews; and there is no Scriptural reason to believe that they collectively will ever be referred to as Jews racially. Of course, they had their own tribal identifications and had no linkage to Yehudah whatsoever that would justify them to be called Jews, or put into the category of Jews. In short, they were not Jews!

More on Yarovam

Yarovam had married an Egyptian woman while he was in Egypt. He clearly became introduced to the evils of Egyptian sun worship--either from his wife and/or from his stay in Egypt.

Upon becoming King of the Northern ten tribes of Yisrael (the House of Yisrael), Yarovam quickly introduced blatant sun worship into the Northern tribes and decreased the role of the legitimate Israelite teachers, the Levites, and the people’s attachment to the city of Jerusalem.

As discussed elsewhere herein, Yarovam changed the feast of Sukkot from the seventh month to the eighth month and probably changed the religious distinction of the Seventh day Sabbath to the next day--Sunday.

Movements South and Maybe North

Since the Temple was in the South in Jerusalem and since Yarovam quickly began turning the Northern tribes into outright pagan sun worship, as just noted above, some of the more sincere and religious people in the Northern kingdom began to relocate to the South in order to be near the Temple and to maintain their Hebrew form of worship (I Kg 12:17, 23; I Chron 9:3; II Chron 10:17; 11:3, 13-17; 15:9; 16:1; 30:6, 10-18; 31:1-6; 34:9).

These moving Israelites, from the House of Yisrael, although clearly connected to the persons of the North, because of their bloodlines, effectively became residents and citizens of the House of Yehudah, along with the then present peoples of Yehudah, Binyamin and Levi.

And while one may not have all of the particulars of this relocation, it is possible that the House of Yehudah eventually had "some" representation from all or most all of Yisrael's 12/13 tribes, notwithstanding the fact that the vast majority of the individuals of the Northern kingdom surely stayed there in the North.

Additionally, the student of truth might allow that some dissatisfied persons in the Southern kingdom may have moved North to escape the rule of Rechavam, although details of such seem lacking. And if so, it would mean that the House of Yisrael in the North likewise had some representation from all or most all of Yisrael's 12/13 tribes.

Tribal Identifications

Since the non-Yehudah Israelites moving to the South were not racially Yehudim (Jews), they apparently tried to maintain their own tribal identifications even though they were residents of the Southern House of Yehudah. Here, the same reasoning would apply to any persons of the Southern kindgom of Yehudah moving North.

This fact of tribal recognition surfaces from time to time in the Word in respect to all 12/13 of the tribes. For example, in the beginning of the Yehudah kingship, it was the racial Yehudim, alone, who followed the Yehudi King David long before his grandson Rechavam was even born, as was noted above.

The House of Yehudah

Thus, the tribe of Yehudah was clearly called the House of Yehudah by itself at a very early time, when the people of Binyamin were still allied with the other tribes to the North under the Binyaminite Ishbosheth (II Sam 2:9-11).

Furthermore, in time, when the actual division of the kingdom took place and Binyamin became linked to Yehudah, it is significant that early on, it was only the persons of Yehudah who were called the House of Yehudah.

Even then, Binyamin is separately identified and referred to, despite the political linkage (I Kg 12:21, 23). No wonder that centuries later, the Apostle Shaul would be careful to note that he was racially of the tribe of Binyamin (Acts 13:21; Rom 11:1; Phil 3:5).

Along this same line of thought, there are some good reasons, which will be discussed shortly, and which do suggest that perhaps most of the other early disciples (except Judas Iscariot) were likewise of the tribes of Binyamin or Levi--in difference to Yehudah.

The divided kingdom continued for the next 250 years or so with both the House of Yisrael and the House of Yehudah becoming involved in periodic wars and conflicts between themselves, and a movement by both of them to more and more outright pagan sun worship.

Occasionally, in Yehudah, a good king would arrive on the scene who would clean up some of the pagan worship--like with King Hizkiyahu (Hezekiah in the KJV). But otherwise, the sun worship sin was pervasive and continued.

Punishment for Sin

Finally, YHWH grew disgusted with the Northern House of Yisrael and proceeded to divorce her and allow the Assyrians to enter Canaan land and subdue the Israelites. Thus, their rebellion and iniquity brought forth punishment and chastisement, as was demanded in the Torah for Yisrael (Lev 26; Deut 28).

The House of Yisrael was the first to feel the pinch, evidently some 250 years or so after the division of the kingdom. It happened to them in several motions when the Assyrians came down to defeat, enslave and remove the House of Yisrael far away to the land of Assyria in the Northeast and/or elsewhere.

Conspicuously, the Assyrians, in their deportations, removed not only the House of Yisrael; but also, even much of the House of Yehudah--which certainly included persons of Yehudah and possibly even some people from Binyamin and Levi. These persons of Yehudah by then were clearly connected with or absorbed by the House of Yisrael in the Assyrian captivity (II Kg 18:13).

Status of Binyamin

While some persons of Binyamin probably survived with Yehudah, in the Jerusalem area, in order to leave descendants there who would eventually return to Canaan from Babylon with the Jews (Ezra 1:5; Neh 11:4), the truth is that the tribe of Binyamin, itself, perhaps largely departed from the land, along with the House of Yisrael, during the Assyrian conquest since the Book says that all of Yisrael was removed with only the tribe of Yehudah remaining (II Kg 17:18).

At a first glance, one may speculate that much or at least a sizable portion of the tribe of Binyamin was taken captive and removed by the Assyrians, along with the other deported Northern Israelites. This course seems to gain some credence when one considers that they were surely present in the land just before the Assyrian capture of Samaria.

Though part of Binyamin could have gone into bondage with Yisrael, there also remains the possibility that in some manner the tribe of Binyamin escaped to a place of safety since YHWH seems to allow some deliverance for them (Gen 49:27; Deut 33:12).

Moreover, much of the surviving remnant of Binyamin (and there appears to have been one) may have eventually fled from the land--just before the later Babylonian invasion (Jer 6:1).

However, regardless of what may have happened to Binyamin, the fact remains that many of the Israelite people largely left the land during the Assyrian deportations to leave essentially a portion of the tribe of Yehudah behind to face the subsequent Babylonians and their aggression.

Furthermore, the Assyrian King Sennacherib intended to take all of Yehudah captive, as well, but he met disaster from YHWH when he came against Jerusalem (II Kg 19:34-36). Thus, a remnant of the House of Yehudah survived in the Jerusalem area for the next 140 years or so--all the while that the House of Yisrael had long since been removed from Canaan land.

This remnant remaining in Jerusalem appears to have been largely from Yehudah’s son Shelah and of the royal line of David (I Chron 4:21-23; Num 26:20). Perhaps most (but not necessarily all) of the people from Yehudah’s other sons, Pharez (Peretz in the Hebrew) and Zarah/Zerah (Zerach in the Hebrew) from Tamar (I Chron 2:3), left the land voluntarily or otherwise went into Assyrian captivity.

The Samaritans

Nevertheless, the territory in the North, which had been formerly controlled and governed by Yisrael, was not to remain vacant and uninhabited for long. Perhaps immediately, the Assyrians brought in foreigners and non-Israelites (actually Hamites) and settled them in the area of Samaria, previously occupied by the House of Yisrael (II Kg 17:24). In time, these aliens became known as Samaritans.

While this nominative of Samaritans stuck, it is useful to observe that from the seventh century BCE to the first century CE, these same persons were also known to be essentially Cutheans from Cuthah or Cuth over in the East in the old Persian empire (II Kg 17:24, 30; “Antiquities of the Jews,” book IX, chapter 14, verse 1), plus possibly some Hamitic persons from the other areas indicated in II Kings 17:24.

The distinction between the Cuthean and Samaritan peoples was partially clarified by Josephus. He wrote that the word Cuthean is from the Hebrew while the Greek reference to the same people is Samaritan (“Josephus, The Essential Writings,” p. 175).

In the Tanakh, the II Kings’ remarks are made in the context of the racial or ethnic Cutheans who were brought into Canaan land by the Assyrians. They were settled in a hill area called Samaria (which goes back in time to the House of Yisrael King Omri who built his capitol there--I Kg 16:24).

Hence, the area was called Samaria at an early time in Yisrael’s history. By the time of the Greek conquests and rule, the territory which the Cutheans had held was still called Samaria and its inhabitants then and later were known as Samaritans. In this sense, the term Samaritan came to mean a geographical designation and definition.

“Young’s Analytical Concordance” (p. 833) confirms that the word Samaritans refers to the inhabitants of the geographical province of Samaria which formerly was a part of Yisrael. Besides the Cutheans and some likely Amalekites (to be later addressed), these inhabitants apparently included some apostate Jews in the area in the time of Alexander the Great (“Josephus, The Essential Writings,” p. 200).

The early synagogue teachings, discussed earlier, in “Pesikta De-Rab Kahana,” cover special Sabbath presentations for 500 years. This work has numerous references to the Cutheans in the context of the racial or ethnic people that were moved into the area which came to be called Samaria.

It seems clear that the NT references to Samaria and Samaritans are largely geographical identification remarks and not necessarily racial or ethnic classifications (since the Hebrew word Cutheans correctly refers to many or most of the people brought into the area by the Assyrians). This likely option will be explored and elaborated upon in later chapters.

On the Cuthean relocation to Samaria, it is tragic that so much of Christendom knows so little about the Book that most Christians incorrectly "suppose" that the Samaritans are, in fact, of the House of Yisrael and thus are Israelites. Of course, this is blatant nonsense and vain speculation (and even in the context of the “one” priest of Yisrael, who later joined in with the Samaritans--II Kg 17:28).

In connection with these wild, ridiculous claims emanating from the ivory towers of Christendom, on the premise that the Samaritans are of the lost House of Yisrael, one can go the Scriptures and quickly put to rest for ever such vain imaginations and stark stupidity.

Ezra 4:2

The writer Ezra observed that when the Second Temple was started in his days and following the release edict of Cyrus for the return of the Jews to the land, the Samaritans admitted and confessed that they were descendants of people brought to the Palestine area many years previously by the Assyrians (Ezra 4:2).

They assuredly did not try to lie to the returning Israelites as to their ancestry. Obviously, the returning Jews knew who the Samaritans were and would not have been taken in by any efforts from them in deceit and dishonesty. In short, they could never have gotten away with lying to the Israelite Jews. So evidently, they never bothered to even try it.

Certainly, there is no conceivable way that an honest, fair, reasonable student of the Word can come forward now to charge that the Samaritans (collectively) are of the lost House of Yisrael. They absolutely are not Israelites, as they, themselves, have stated the plain, Scriptural truth on this matter.

In the context that Samaria was a geographical province in Palestine, in Second Temple days, it seems to be true that the NT term and reference to “Samaritans” would have been used on occasion in the vein of a territorial or geographical definition. In fact, Samaria and Samaritans possibly might always be geographical references in the NT.

In that sense, it perhaps was true that some Jewish Israelites did live there by the first century CE (as suggested by Josephus), although many of Samaria’s inhabitants were racial or ethnic Cutheans or Amalekites, as discussed above.

John 4:12

Despite the unmistakable records from the Scriptures, Josephus and other early Jewish writings, some Christians insist on arguing that the Samaritans were the remnant of the lost House of Yisrael with an absolute bypass of unarguable truth. Some quote the statement of the Samaritan woman at the well when she referred to “our father Yakov” in her talk with YESHUA, as proving that she was an Israelite (Jo 4:12).

While this single text could be a little complicated, it certainly doesn’t necessarily prove anything. Maybe, this one woman and her particular family were descendants of the “one” priest of Yisrael who had joined in with the Samaritans some 700 years earlier (II Kg 17:28). Maybe, this tradition had come down to her from her family.

Also, it is possible that in the days of Ezra and Nechemyah, some number of the returning Jews had intermarried with the Samaritans, though they were not named, per se. However, there is some implication of such marriages in the reference to the mixed blooded peoples in certain geographical areas in the land (Neh 13:23).

There was too the situation with a Jewish priest who married the daughter of the Samaritan ruler Sanballat (Neh 13:27-28). Apparently, he would not repent of his wickedness. So Nechemyah chased him away. Allegedly, he moved to Samaria and became high priest of the Samaritans. A later chapter herein will describe this man in more detail (who was supposedly named Menachem).

Could the woman at the well or her family descend from one of these illegal marriages or the apostate Jews who came to the land as allowed by Josephus? Of course, the answer has to be yes.

Moreover, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah were written at least 500 years or so before YESHUA and the Samaritan woman even arrived on the scene. There had been a lot of water going under the bridge during those 500 years.

Is it plausible that some number of persons of Yehudah illegally intermarried over the years with some of the Samaritans (as they did with some Amalekites, to be later discussed) to produce more mixed blooded offspring (beyond the above described priest)? Maybe, the woman’s family involved was a descendant of one of these illegal marriages over the years.

Finally, YESHUA apparently did not dispute her claim or argue with her (or at least, Yohanan did not record such a disagreement, although it could have happened). Again, this fact proves nothing one way or the other. Many people do not go out of their way to create argument and strife with others, when lies and incorrect statements are spoken to them (either innocently, or with foreknowledge and deceitfulness).

YESHUA was not wrong or acting incorrectly by not challenging the woman if she was, in fact, lying to Him. Or perhaps, she was innocent and just misinformed and ignorant about her true ancestry. Maybe, her family taught her a lie on this and she just didn’t know the difference. Maybe, YESHUA let it pass without pressing her on it, as He later did when she lied outrightly about her marital situation.

Beyond the woman, there are a couple of other texts in Yohanan’s presentation which suggests that some other persons besides the woman also believed YESHUA or on Him because He had told the woman “all” that she had done (Jo 4:39). Again, these remarks do not necessarily prove anything in respect to the Samaritans.

Was this belief the same as the concept of faith associated with salvation and the quality present in The MESSIAH’s true followers? No, evidently not at all. Again, it should be noted that in the first century CE, Samaria was a province in Palestine. The term Samaritan can be a geographical identification, as noted earlier.

So it’s hard to say for sure what those so-called Samaritans were racially or ethnically (although many were probably racial Cutheans or Amalekites). A later chapter herein will focus on this meeting between YESHUA and the woman and her friends. While Yohanan’s written record of the incident was true, there is some far reaching symbolism associated with this event which will stagger the mind of the believer.

Samaritan Thinking

As a significant side point here, the earlier Samaritans (apparently racial Cutheans and/or Amalekites, to be later addressed) actually approached Yeshua, Zerubbabel and the Jewish leaders with a proposition that they be allowed to participate and help in the rebuilding of the Second Temple after the return from Babylon (Ezra 4:1-4).

But Zerubbabel, Yeshua and the other leaders emphatically declared "no way" would the Samaritans be allowed in such a righteous undertaking. If they had been true Israelites, it is highly questionable about whether their help would have been rejected.

Thereafter, the racially mixed Samaritans became adversaries to weaken, trouble and terrify the true Israelite workers on the Temple. Actually, this situation, just after the Jewish return from Babylon, seems to have set a precedent of Samaritan reaction to the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.

In “A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ” (p. 289-309, v. ii, division 1), Emil Schurer points out some intriguing history not normally known about the later Samaritans. A Jewish legend has it that in the time of the Roman Emperor Hadrian, the emperor granted permission to the Jews to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem (c 117 CE).

But as happened in earlier times, the Samaritans rushed in to protest and make lies and false representations about the enterprise. Apparently, the pressure was so great from the evil Samaritans that Hadrian backed out on his plan to allow the rebuilding of the Temple.

Perhaps this backdrop (or at least, the desire to rebuild the Temple) had something to do with the development of the Bar Cochba (Kokhba) or Bar Kosiba rebellion which occurred in 132-135 CE. Simon Bar Kokhba became the leader of a Judean Jewish faction which declared its independence from Rome and fought a war with the Romans.

Simon and his forces lost. The Romans killed 580,000 Jews in the campaign and enslaved the rest. Schurer says that the entire area of Judea was turned into a well-nigh desert. Hadrian declared Jerusalem off limits to Jews and built a new Roman city there called Aelia Capitolina. A temple to Jupiter (Zeus) was erected over the Jewish Temple site.

Interestingly, the Hebrew Bar Kokhba means son of the star while Bar Kosiba means son of the lie. In later Rabbinic literature, Bar Kokhba came to be called Bar Kosiba (“Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period,” p. 77). This Rabbinic description about Simon being the son of the lie makes one wonder if he had some connection with the Amalekites (to be later discussed).

Later chapters herein will raise questions over the possibility that some evil Amalekites were attached to or assimilated with the wicked Samaritans/Cutheans over the years in some fashion to allow them to also be oppressors of the Jewish Israelites in the efforts to rebuild the Temple.

Not of Truth

Regardless of the exact racial and ethnic peoples who may have been involved with the Samaritans, the fact of their oppression (especially in Zerubbabel’s time, but later also) does impact on the question of the Samaritan Pentateuch, discussed earlier.

As YESHUA noted, these Samaritan people were not of truth (Jo 4:22). The conclusion has to be that their Pentateuch would have to be a very questionable production and certainly one lacking authority, as concluded in the earlier presentation.

Now, in the context of modern Christianity, is it conceivable that Christendom, collectively, would ever reject the help, money or whatever from people of the racial and ethnic class of the Samaritans? Assuredly not!

Obviously, this revealing little message in the Book should alert all readers that there are fundamental differences between Christians and true believers--just as there are differences between Samaritans and true believers.

Not only were the Samaritans of non-Israelite racial stock, but it is useful to note that they continued to maintain and follow their historic pagan religions even after they came to Canaan land (II Kg 17:29-31)--all the while that they ostensibly "feared YHWH" (II Kg 17:32-34).

Samaritan and Christian Similarities

Thus, the Samaritans have much in common with false Christianity, as will be proven in later chapters. Both peoples have in their possessions all or part of The ELOHIM's Scriptures (the Samaritans have the Samaritan Pentateuch while Christians have the Old and New Testaments).

However, beyond mere possession of portions of YHWH's Word, the religions of the two groups are both far removed from truth in practice, as the writer of Kings observed for the Samaritans (II Kg 17:32-34), and as this study will establish in future remarks for Churchianity.

More on Yehudah

As noted above, this work by the Assyrians left the still independent House of Yehudah in the Jerusalem area; but seriously reduced in population to mainly some part of Yehudah and evidently parts of Binyamin, Levi and some of the other tribes whose people had moved from the Northern House of Yisrael to the Southern House of Yehudah over the years in order to be near the Temple and the true worship of YHWH.

Thus, many and indeed likely most of the people who were formally a part of the House of Yehudah in the South soon became a part of the House of Yisrael which went into Assryian captivity.

Yehudah and Judaism

Despite the clear racial distinctions of the tribes of Yisrael in the South, it is also a clear fact of history that the racial House of Yehudah became the basis for the eventual Jewish religion (Judaism) and particularly so with her later exile to Babylon and return to Palestine.

Therefore, while persons of non-Yehudah ancestry, living in the Southern kingdom, were not Jews, racially, they often identified themselves as such in the religious context (to be considered more carefully in future chapters). Again, the NT man Shaul is an example of this reality (I Cor 9:20; Gal 2:15).

Though it is most often true that the English word Jew (Hebrew Yehudi, Greek Ioudaios) theoretically refers to racial, ethnic or religious definitions, one must not lose sight of the reality that some persons in the geographical area or province of Yehudah (Judea after the exile) were known as Jews (Judeans), simply because of national/residential considerations (per “The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,” v. III, p. 359-377).

Of course, the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE and the deportation of the Jews worldwide largely ended that option, thereby leaving the birth and religious questions.

So, whenever one reads or hears of the word Jew, he must be careful in defining it. Because even today, in the modern Israeli state, there is much confusion and disagreement over exactly who is a Jew. Is the issue here race or is it religion or something else?

Alfred M. Lilienthal

This dilemma over definitions was well illustrated by Dr Alfred M. Lilienthal, a noted American Jewish author, when he wrote that “the words Hebrew, Israelite, Jew, Judaism, and the Jewish people have been used synonymously to suggest a historical continuity. But this is a misuse. These words refer to different groups of people with varying ways of life in different periods of history.

“Hebrew is a term correctly applied to the period from the beginning of Biblical history to the settling of Canaan. Israelite refers correctly to members of the twelve tribes of Israel. The name Yehudi or Jew is used in the Old Testament to designate members of the tribe of Judah, particularly at the time of Jeremiah and under the Persian occupation.

“Centuries later, the same word came to be applied to anyone no matter of what origin, whose religion was Judaism” (“What Price Israel,” p. 216). Lilienthal then notes that the word Judaism was first used by Flavius Josephus after the Jewish Roman wars (late first century CE).

This informed Jewish author (Lilienthal) certainly has some good observations which will be addressed in some detail in further remarks in this study. But the point here is that one must be careful about lumping all of these words into one pile without some discernment. They really are not synonymous at all, despite the reality that many uninformed people believe that they are one and the same.

More Definitions

In addition to this concern of one being of the Jewish religion, generally, there was still further religious or philosophical definitions to assess in Second Temple times because the broader perspectives of Jews and Judaism perhaps involved seven or more major sects or divisions (like the Herodians, Essenes, Hellenists, Zealots, Pharisees, Sadducees and possibly the beginnings of the belief of the later Karaites), in addition to the disciples of YESHUA (the Nazarenes).

Within the confines of the Pharisees, there were still further classifications and delineations. For example, there were two dominating basis of thought--the Schools of Hillel and Shammai, to be described in later chapters herein. Also, in practice, some Pharisees, evidently of the Hillel class, were recognized as being Hasidim or Chasidim, which meant that they were very pious or ultra orthodox.

The just mentioned religious Jew, named Shaul (his actual Hebrew name, anglicized as Saul and later questionably changed to Paulus in the Greek NT), was more precisely a Pharisee (Acts 23:6; Phil 3:4-6), apparently of the School of Hillel since he had been a disciple of the famous Gamaliel, an actual grandson of Hillel and a respected teacher of that theology (Acts 22:3).

The Division

But going back into history, one finds that with the death of Shlomo the united commonwealth of Yisrael did divide into two kingdoms or governments--the Houses of Yehudah and Yisrael.

Albeit, it is certain that the people of the Northern kingdom were Israelites, and while it is also evident that the people of Yehudah were Jews (by certain definitions), it is furthermore verity that most of the peoples of both states were racially Israelites and bloodline descendants of Yakov Yisrael.

The Scriptures plainly assert that all 12/13 tribes were of Yakov Yisrael and were referred to in various circumstances as of Yisrael and Israelites, both before and after the partition of the kingdom and the later Babylonian exile.

So while the people of the House of Yehudah were of Yisrael and were Israelites, they were not a part of the House of Yisrael, per se, though a few of them may have had some close bloodline linkages to the Northern tribes because of having moved to the South after the division of the kingdom.

Please note that in this context, the word House is being used in a national or governmental sense; and from that viewpoint, it was largely dispensed with after the Jewish return to Palestine under Cyrus.

Two Separate Nations

But it is important to remember that the House of Yehudah was not and never will be the divided House of Yisrael. Both governments, nations and entities were entirely separate and distinctly different. Therefore, in the Book, these two realms were never the same, nor were they ever called the same.

In fact, it is interesting and perhaps relevant that in the Scriptures these two kingdoms of Yisrael and Yehudah were frequently at war with each other, despite their common ancestry and relationship. In a word, they were often divided enemies who were totally separated all the time that they were contemporaries in Canaan land.

They were two nations (plural) and there is no other way to view it. Effectively, the main thing that these two states seemed to have in common was their similarly rebellious and sinful conduct in terms of YHWH's laws. Both countries pursued sin and contempt toward YHWH with but few exceptions.

Chapter 124--Yisrael Divorced

The Bill

Another interesting fallout of the Assyrian deportations, described in the previous chapter, was that the House of Yisrael was categorically divorced by The MOST HIGH (II Kg 17:18, 23; Isa 50:1; Jer 3:1-8; Ezek 23:9; Hos 2:2-4).

This act of divorcement by YHWH (for Yisrael's sins of adultery--Ezek 20:39) legally terminated the covenant (marriage) relationship between Himself and the House of Yisrael.

This larger part (the House of Yisrael) of the once greater Yisrael was no longer connected with The ELOHIM. Since this act of divorcement legally terminated the covenant and marriage between YHWH and the House of Yisrael, they were no longer His people (Hos 1:9). They were literally cut off and in a "lost" condition with no observable hope of reconciliation.

Importantly, the remnant of the House of Yehudah, which remained in the Jerusalem area, was not divorced and put away. And in fact, this remnant seemingly was never divorced and put away, despite its adultery and sin.

Effectively, this remnant of the House of Yehudah remained in covenant relationship with The HIGHEST even after they were punished in the Babylonian captivity (although they later played a leading role in killing YESHUA, c30 CE; thus, likely also then ending their covenant relationship with Him).

Provisions of the Divorce

As a part of her divorcement, the House of Yisrael people were no longer to be known and recognized as Israelites, in covenant with YHWH. They had their name changed (Isa 62:2; 65:15; Hos 1:9), lost the Hebrew language and spoke another tongue (Isa 28:11), and became blind as to their racial identity, ancestry and origin (Isa 42:16-19; Hos 1:9-10; 2:6, 17; Rom 11:25).

Without going into any detail on these changes, which came upon Yisrael, it would be well to highlight the fact that in the dispersion the House of Yisrael Israelites lost the Hebrew language and spoke a new tongue or tongues. In other words, they lost or gave up their former Semitic language and spoke something new or different.

In this sense, it probably would be correct to say that these House of Yisrael people were no longer Semites, as they had been while they were speaking Hebrew in Canaan land. But they remained Shemites (descendants of Shem) because of racial factors, as outlined in the previous chapter.

But the Promises Remained

Despite these negative features of the divorce, the fact remains that a number of promises remained of numerous blessings to befall on Yisrael. For example, they were to receive a new home (land) in an appointed place (Isa 24:15; 41:19-20; 49:1; Jer 31;10); to spread abroad North, South, East and West (Gen 28:14; Jer 3:12; 23:8); and to grow in number--like the stars of the heavens (Ex 32:13).

Of great importance to the House of Yisrael and her future after the divorce, she was to live in islands and coastal areas (Isa 41:1-2; 49:1-3; 51:5; 60:9; Jer 31:7-10). Specifically, she was to be known Scripturally as “Yisrael in the isles of the sea” (Isa 24:15)--apparently, after she was emptied from the land of Canaan (Isa 24:3).

Moreover, Yisrael was to become a great nation (Gen 12:2; 18:18) and nations--plural (Gen 17:4, 6, 15, 16; 35:11; 48:19); to multiply and be fruitful (Gen 12:2; 17:6; 22:16-18; 24:60; 26:1-5; 27:26-29; 28:14; Isa 27:6; Hos 1:10); to enjoy wealth, abundance and greatness (Gen 22:16-18; 48:13-20; 49:22-26); to possess the sea gates of enemies (Gen 22:17; 24:60); and to be ruled over by one continuous dynasty of rulers (II Sam 7:12-29; Ps 89:20-37; Jer 33:17, 21, 26).

The interesting thing about the promised blessings for Yisrael is that they were all made unconditionally to Avraham, Yitzhak and Yakov Yisrael and had to come about irrespective of the sins and rebellion of national Yisrael.

Another relevant feature is that these promises never came to physical Yisrael in the land of Canaan, nor have they ever fallen upon the House of Yehudah or the Jews collectively under any circumstances (after all, the birthright and blessings were for Yosef and his line and not for Yehudah--Gen 48:1-22). Consequently, they were future at the time of the fall of the House of Yisrael to the Assyrians.

Since they were certain, they have had to be fulfilled during the last 2,700 years to our time here in the age end of the early 21st century. Therefore, the student of truth interested in pursuing this theme can spend a little time with the history books and get a pretty good idea on what happened to the divorced House of Yisrael upon her departure from Canaan land.

Yisrael Does Exist--Now!

Before continuing, it would be well to recall here a far reaching statement by Yirmeyahu the prophet made long “after” the Assyrian conquests of Yisrael and just before the demise of Yehudah at the hands of the Chaldeans in the 6th century BCE.

He declared that as long as the sun, moon and stars stand to provide light on earth, the posterity of Yisrael shall exist as a nation or people before YHWH--through the ages (Jer 31:35-36), and in the context of the House of Yisrael (Jer 31:33).

The point was just made in this section that the House of Yisrael is out in the world today in 2003. Yirmeyahu’s words prove it conclusively--since the sun, moon and stars are still up in the heavens, providing light to earth. The essence being from Yirmeyahu's statement is that the divorce did not terminate the reality of Yisrael.

Alternatively, Yisrael was to persist; but with a new identification, language and recognition, as cited above. Consequently, Yisrael was then in existence when Yirmeyahu spoke and would continue to be in existence for some time in the future, as both Yirmeyahu and Yechezkel assert.

Of course, the House of Yisrael nations are alive and physically present right now in time somewhere on planet earth. If they had ceased to exist, then it is quite manifest that YHWH’s Word would have been broken. The Book declares that the Scriptures cannot be broken (Jo 10:35). Therefore, it is only a question of finding the lost House of Yisrael. She is out there--somewhere.

“The Jewish Chronicle” of May 2, 1879, put it well by declaring that “The Scriptures speak of a future restoration of Yisrael, which is clearly to include both Yehudah and Ephraim (the Ten Tribes).

“The problem then is reduced to its simplest form. The ten tribes are certainly in existence. All that has to be done is to discover which people represent them” (quoted by Bernard Bateson, in an article on “A Jew Speaks Out” in the Oct 1995 “New Beginnings,” p. 10).

In today’s modern world, there are 12 great Arab nations which are readily identified and known as descending from Ishmael. They know who they are and most scholars have the same perception. Moreover, there are a number of large nations also associated with Esau, as will be described in later chapters. Does it not make perfect sense that Yakov Yisrael would also produce a number of great and powerful nations?

The Lost Name

Moreover, the truth also emerges from the Scriptures that in the divorce the House of Yisrael "lost" an understanding of the pronunciation and meaning of the personal name (the Tetragrammaton YHWH, the Name, called in Hebrew Ha Shem) of her former Husband (Isa 64:6-7; Jer 23:27; Amos 6:7-11).

As early as Genesis 4:26, the KJV has it that men began to call upon the name of YHWH. The “Soncino Chumash” (p. 21) notes that the “righteous began to teach the Name.” In “Christianity Unmasqued” (p. 261), Dan Israel says that this text correctly reads-- “then began men to call themselves by the name of Yahweh.” For sure, true believers became attached to the name of YHWH.

In the “Woman’s Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets” (p. 708), Barbara G. Walker writes that in terms of both magic and religion, the name of anything was considered identical with the thing itself and that early people seldom could distinguish between the reality and the name of an object. Assuredly, a man’s name is extremely important in relation to him.

The Apostle Yohanan also saw the importance of a name when he wrote that YHWH YESHUA gave the status of sons to those who received Him and believed on His name and/or put their trust in His name (Jo 1:12). Actually, Yohanan’s words were not new because the Psalmist wrote centuries earlier that YHWH will set on high those believers who have known His name (Ps 91:14).

In the Translator’s Preface to the “The First Five Books of Moses” (p. xv), Everett Fox wrote that names play a central role in Scriptural stories. Fox adds that in the Word and throughout the ancient world, names were often used to give clues about their bearer’s personality or fate. Hence, the OT frequently gives the meanings of names of the actors on stage. Obviously, these names must have meant something important.

Apparently, in the ancient Hebrew culture, the idea of a name meant everything that a person was (“Jewish New Testament Commentary,” p. 154). No wonder the Scriptures would place such an emphasis on a person’s name. However, a name in the context of trust and belief should not be construed to possess magical qualities to benefit evil people.

The Curse on the House of Yisrael

Amos best put the curse on the House of Yisrael (in the divorce) by declaring that they could no longer make mention of or speak (pronounce) the name (Amos 6:10, per the Bethel and Amplified translations), although the name appears some 7,000 times in the Hebrew OT. Hence, the lost tribes of Yisrael lost the pronunciation and meaning of the most important word in the universe.

Therefore, even today, almost all Israelites of the lost tribes incorrectly believe the name to be the “Lord, God, Jehovah, Yahweh, Yahuweh, Yahoweh, Yahaweh, Yaheweh, Yahowah, Yahuwah, Yahewah, Yahvah, Yahovah, Yahuvah, Yahavah, Yahevah” or something similar.

It is especially true within the Sardis Sacred Name movement (which will be addressed in some detail in subsequent chapters herein) that there is no end to the stupidity and ignorance of Sacred Namers as they devote lifetimes and enormous energy to try to dream up some uncanny and impossible pronunciation for the Tetragrammaton. There seems to be no end to this mass of Sacred Name confusion.

Christians and Sacred Namers seem to have no idea at all on the meaning of the name YHWH though some might try to go to Exodus 3:14, which really does not clarify its meaning.

The Masoretes, Revisited

Years ago, it became obvious to this writer that the word “Jehovah” was not the name (as the Rotherham and other translations explain). To understand this reality, it is necessary to recognize that historically Hebrew writings were written with 22 consonantal letters (as described in a former chapter).

Fearing the loss of pronunciation, the previously mentioned Jewish Masoretes placed vowel points on the Hebrew Tanakh writings when they did their work many centuries ago.

“Jehovah” was apparently an invention of Ashkenazi Masoretes when they took the vowel points for Adonai and attached them to the Tetragrammaton to tell them to pronounce the name as Adonai. Ignorant Christians, lacking understanding of Hebrew, mistook this hybrid word and called it the name of “Jehovah” for years.

It is interesting to note that the Sephardim evidently never altered the Tetragrammaton whatsoever. In fact, their Tanakh Scriptures have the Masoretic vowel points on all words except the Tetragrammaton. This writer has seen Tanakh texts expressed in this fashion.

Still Lost in 2003

This writer once believed that the name was “Yahweh” because of its popular usage in some translations and among the Sardis Sacred Name people. In modern times, almost all of the Christian world has incorrectly come to accept this name “Yahweh” as being Scriptural, despite the fact that it cannot be found in the Hebrew Scriptures.

A Messianic Jewish friend of this writer, living in Jerusalem, told me years ago that Jewish savants invented the name of “Yahweh” as an alternative when they realized that Christian scholars were beginning to understand that “Jehovah” was wrong. They wanted the name to continue to be hid from both Christendom and the world.

This discussion carried a lot of weight because the Messianic Jew involved spoke Hebrew and came from a historic, Sephardic, cohen (priest) family who had been schooled and trained to be a Rav (teacher). He was informed and knew what he was talking about.

In a later examination of an important, ancient, Hebrew, Tanakh scroll, his explanation of the name was verified and proven in a very conclusive fashion. Categorically, the pronunciation and meaning of the name YHWH can be known from the Hebrew Old Testament.

The fact that ignorant and ill-informed Christians and Sacred Namers do not know the name does not alter the fact that it can be known. The problem over the name is reduced to the ignorance and lack of understanding present in Christendom at large--to include its Sacred Name and Christian Identity factions.

It Can Be Known

Once a person comes to a proper understanding of the name (both its pronunciation and meaning, which contain some incredible revelations), it then becomes manifest why informed Jews have hid the name from the world. By the way, the Hebrew Tanakh does contain conclusive information on both its pronunciation and meaning--which should dispel any doubt about it whatsoever.

The point that the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton is not “Lord, Jehovah, Yahweh, Yahvah, Yahuweh, Yahoweh, Yahaweh,” etc goes to validate the statements made above. The ELOHIM’s true people will know His name--both its meaning and pronunciation. Obviously, all of these proponents, advocating a worldly accepted and recognized name, are considerably off base. They don’t know the name.

Perhaps this factor also has some impact upon the question of evil people using or rather attempting to use Ha Shem (the Hebrew, meaning the Name) for improper purposes (as a fetish or for magical purposes). They will likewise be in the dark and in a state of ignorance. They may think that they know His name. But in fact, they do not know it--because it is lost and something in secret only for the eventual election.

YHWH’s Name Went On Yisrael in the Marriage

Although few people may realize or grasp the importance of the loss of The CREATOR's name, the fact remains that it symbolically has had a profound impact of extraordinary magnitude. The premise for such a statement lies, to a large extent, upon the situation in a marriage relationship where the woman takes her husband's name, goes by it, and is recognized by it.

In the case of Israelites, The MOST HIGH placed His personal name on them in the wilderness at the commencement of the covenant and marriage relationship (Num 6:27; Deut 28:10; II Chron 7:14). In giving them His name and His blessings, they, in turn, became His possession (Ezek 16:8) and were under the marriage obligation of obedience of His Torah (Ex 19:5).

Just like Christianity has not done over the centuries, the one thing which Israelites never did do was to obey The HIGHEST. From the beginning, they embarked upon a path of contempt and rebellion toward His Torah--to include outright adultery. Of course, in time, the House of Yisrael was divorced and cut off from The EVERLIVING ONE, as just noted above.

In the divorcement, the House of Yisrael lost an understanding of both the meaning and pronunciation of the personal name of The SOVEREIGN (the Tetragrammaton), as mentioned above. This was to have an enormous impact upon them over the years.

Naturally, with the loss of the pronunciation and meaning of the name of YHWH, the House of Yisrael peoples lost almost everything else of religious importance--to include the weekly and annual Sabbaths, which also serve as marks of identification (Ex 31:13-17; Ezek 20:12, 20).

Lost Yisrael

In short, the House of Yisrael became the "lost tribes of Yisrael" which is correctly understood by many students (both Christians and Jews) of YHWH's Word even today. Encyclopedias generally recognize this reality of the lost tribes of Yisrael and/or lost Yisrael (“The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia,” p. 421).

The Jewish author Dr Alfred Lilienthal, quoted earlier, outlined the position of many educated Jews by saying “No one knows what happened to the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel” (“What Price Israel,” p. 215-216).

Effectively, this divorce of the House of Yisrael by The SOVEREIGN was one much like some of them presently whereby the divorced woman moves out and away from her husband, gives up her marriage name, resumes her maiden name and severs all contact and relationship with her former husband.

By the way, it is relevant to note here that in the age end, the seven assemblies (women) of Revelation 1 to 3 all seem to try to take hold of YHWH YESHUA in order to be called by His name and thus be saved from disgrace (Isa 4:1).

Hence, these seven assemblies (to be present in the age end, just before The MESSIAH returns) will recognize the importance of the name and want it for their own. This theme will be explored in future remarks.

The Divorce’s Impact

In attempting to understand exactly who was to receive the Good News of the New Testament, it is crucially important to appreciate some more issues about the impact of the divorce on the subsequent peoples of the House of Yisrael. True, Yisrael and Israelites generally became “lost,” as to their identity and relationship with YHWH.

However, something far greater was to happen to them which can just about blow one’s mind when reviewing the divorce from a historical perspective. Again, it must be recognized that YHWH was married to the nation of Yisrael, per the Sinai Covenant. He was The HUSBAND and Yisrael was the wife (who was supposed to obey her Husband).

Over the years of the marriage/covenant relationship, Israelite children born in the nation were clearly the children of The MOST HIGH. He was Ha AV (Hebrew words meaning the father) of the Israelite persons being born over the years. But this situation was to change with the divorce.

When Yisrael went off into fornication and adultery, and when YHWH divorced her, the later children born by Yisrael were born from fornication and out of wedlock. They were “not” sons and daughters of The HIGHEST ELOHIM. In a word, they were and are illegitimate offspring from Yisrael’s harlotry.

This reality has a profound impact upon many, many, New Testament words, phrases, thoughts and teachings, such as the grafting in of the wild olives, adoption, blotting out of ordinances against Israelites, etc. These issues were described earlier and will be further commented upon later on in this study.

But please keep this theme in mind as you proceed to read these words.

Chapter 125--Changes in Yisrael

Human Confusion

Previously, in this study, the point was made that The CREATOR does not change. Instead, it is Satan, Babylon, Christendom and limited, little humans who are express instruments of confusion, contradiction, uncertainty, ambiguity and tragic change. In short, the worldly system under man's government is filled with the enigma of excessive confusion resulting from frequent change.

On this reality of confusion in man, this study later on provides a classic case of this very thing in point of occurrence.

In terms of the House of Yisrael, the reader will note that limited, indecisive, confused and changing Christians have dogmatically identified all kinds of people in the world as the lost Israelites--all the way from mixed blooded Samaritans to American Indians to Black Ethiopians to Russian Khazars, etc (as we will shortly see).

Of course, such wild unsubstantiated claims have all come from the hearts and minds of supposedly "intelligent" men (actually entrapped in Babylon) and not from the Word of YHWH. Truly, the capacity of uninformed people to invent absolutely stupid and ridiculous theories is enough to wreck a thinking mind if one is not careful.

The Fall of Yehudah

Otherwise, after the fall of the Northern kingdom to the Assyrians, the remnant of the House of Yehudah survived in the South for the next 140 years or so. But since they too were rebellious and sinful, the promised chastisement and punishment eventually came upon them as well.

It happened to the House of Yehudah in the 6th century BCE, when the Babylonians, under Nebuchadnezzar, laid siege to Jerusalem and conquered it in a most horrible fashion. He killed and slaughtered many of the Judeans and took most of the balance of these people captive to Babylon.

The Babylonians did leave a small remnant of the poor--which included Yirmeyahu and King Zedekiah’s (Tzidkiyahu in the Hebrew) daughters in the land after the fall of Jerusalem (II Kg 25:22-24).

After a short period of time, this remnant left Canaan land and went to Egypt (II Kg 25:25-26) where Yirmeyahu and at least one of the king’s daughter later moved on to another land (as will be discussed more fully in future chapters herein).

This punishment on the House of Yehudah was similar to that which fell on the House of Yisrael in that both national entities were extremely rebellious and sinful. The one thing which neither party ever wanted to do was to obey The MOST HIGH.

However, and as noted earlier, these Yehudah Israelites were never divorced (as was the House of Yisrael); and thus, effectively never lost their identity, tongue and recognized relationship with The SOVEREIGN. It is this factor which promotes and allows the world to suppose that the remnant of the House of Yehudah constitutes the covenant people of The HIGHEST.

At this juncture, it should be acknowledged that the despot Nebuchadnezzar went to great length and effort to try to dramatically change and alter the life style of these people of the House of Yehudah during their enslavement (Dan 1:4).

For example, the Hebrew language they used was partly displaced in the vernacular by Aramaic and the very fabric and backbone of their culture was generally changed from an agricultural orientation to a more mercantile, commercial and business focused society.

Jews Turned To Banking and Commercialism

The exchanging of moneys, lending at usury and other wicked banking practices, forbidden by Moshe (Ex 22:25), gained acceptance by the Jews in Babylon, and were evidently spread by them to other parts of the globe (Neh 5:1-10; Matt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Perhaps it is this backdrop which has motivated the Jews/Jew pretenders to become the leading international bankers in the world for the last several centuries.

Even the former Hebrew religion followed by many of the people came under an immediate assault from the Babylonians and their successors, as they attempted to impose changes on the way the Jewish captives perceived things (Dan 1:4-8; 6:10-16).

Also, indications are that during this exile, the oral Jewish "traditions of the elders" (portions of the Talmud) gained sufficient prominence and legitimacy to eventually displace some of the authority of the written Old Testament within Judaism (Matt 15:2-6; Mk 7:5-13).

Notwithstanding these efforts to change and alter the population of Yehudah in bondage, it is both significant and interesting that portions of this labor did meet with some definite failures. Strangely enough, these non-successes seem to have more often surfaced in religious matters rather than in secular subjects, as one may suppose.

Jews Retained Much Truth

Thus, while the Jews became linked to commercialism, business and banking, they never did give up fully their identity or the Hebrew language and religion. True, Aramaic gained some acceptance. But the Hebrew language remained alive for the next 2,500 years--despite enormous efforts to crush it (even by Catholic Christians).

Alternatively, the Jews preserved the Hebrew Old Testament, as they were commissioned to do so by YHWH (Rom 3:2). And while their religious procedures and beliefs were evidently contaminated somewhat by Talmudic scholars and interpretations, they did preserve and teach much truth from the Word, though they often failed to live by it themselves (Matt 23:2-3).

Of extreme relevance for the Jews, some of their religious leaders did retain the knowledge and understanding of how to pronounce the ineffable name (the Tetragrammaton)--although publicly, they never speak it (Jer 8:14; Lam 2:10).

They never speak it publicly because Yirmeyahu proclaimed that the name would “no longer be pronounced by the mouths of the men of Judah” (Jer 44:26, per Ferrar Fenton and the “Bible in Living English” translations).

“The Book of Legends Sefer Ha-Aggadah” (p. 170) has an ancient Jewish legend from the Talmud of Second Temple days, which seems to explain how it came about that the Jews quit pronouncing and using the Tetragrammaton.

This story says that during the Greek oppression of the second century BCE, the Greeks had issued a decree that the Name of Heaven (YHWH) could no longer be mentioned by the Jews.

Subsequently, the sages became concerned and decreed the discontinuance of mentioning the name. Thus, the Jews came to the place of never pronouncing or speaking the name. In any case, during the restoration under the Maccabees, these legal bonds were abolished (on the third day of Ethanim). But apparently, the Jews continued the practice of never pronouncing the name.

Yeshayahu put it well by saying that true believers could call upon the name only while alone or while under YAH’s dominion (Isa 26:12-19, “Rotherham” and “Ernest Martin” translations--per “The Suppression of the Divine Name”). There is also the question of some very powerful statements in the Torah which limit any misuse of the name (Ex 20:7; Lev 19:12; 22:32; 24:15-16, per the “Bethel” and “Concordant” translations).

Some Sardis Sacred Namers, who do not understand the name (Hebrew Ha Shem) or how to pronounce it, take these Torah references and try to claim that the sin arises because of non-use of the name. This is not true. These references clearly relate to the misuse or abuse of the name and not its non-use.

Christians Are Not Supposed to Know

Obviously, if sinning Christians understood and knew how to pronounce the single, most profound, important and set apart (Hebrew kodesh) word in the entire universe (the great Tetragrammaton), they would do it as they do with the words “Lord, Jesus, Christ and God.” They would paint it on buildings along the highways, on toilet stools, on automobiles and even on the bottoms of their blue jeans.

They would laugh and make fun of it, all the while that they run it through the gutter and sewer of the vulgar society with its propensity for profanity and vulgarity. The name became lost to the people of the lost tribes of Yisrael (including its Christian population) because of their sins and YAH’s judgment on Yisrael because of those sins.

They do not know it (thankfully), and they are not supposed to know it. Can the reader perceive the horrible tragedy that would arise if the personal name of The MOST HIGH was profaned, cussed with and cursed daily with the American Christian culture, society and people, as they do with their “Jesus, Christ, God and Lord?” Sinning Christians will never know the name.

The presiding Jewish Rav at synagogue services pronounces the ineffable name once a year at Yom Kippur, when he whispers it. Even people present in the audience generally cannot understand his pronunciation. Thus, most Jews don’t even know how to pronounce the name. Otherwise, the Jews do their best to hide and suppress usage of the name to prevent its misuse and abuse by false worshippers.

The Sabbath Laws

Additionally, the Jews took to heart The MOST HIGH's Sabbath laws--so much so that they went overboard in the Talmud in trying to put an improper hedge around them. It is important to realize that the Sabbath laws are similar to the name in that they allow people to know The MOST HIGH (Ex 31:13-17; Ezek 20:12, 20).

Undeniably, the Jews’ stay in Babylon never took on the characterization of the House of Yisrael exile to Assyria, where those Israelites literally lost almost everything in terms of identification, language, religion, the Sabbaths and the name.

About all that the Northern tribes of Yisrael from Samaria retained (after their divorce) was perhaps their cultural orientation towards agriculture for subsistence. They never did make good bankers and traders like the Jews. But they did make good farmers. Truly, the House of Yisrael persons have been historically people of the land.

In this Israelite dilemma of not knowing the name and rebelliously be in opposition to the Sabbaths, is there any hope for them?

Yes, The SUPREME is calling out a people from the House of Yisrael nations presently in the age end (called the election, as mentioned earlier and as will be described in detail in future chapters). These elect persons will ultimately learn the name (both its pronunciation and meaning) and be sealed with it (Rev 7:3; 9:4; 14:1; 22:4).

Actually, there are a host of Scriptures which conclusively establish the profound importance of the name. Perhaps Yeshayahu best put it when he wrote that the people of The MOST HIGH will know His name (Isa 52:6). Obviously, that coming time when the election of the House of Yisrael learns the name appears to be still future here in the year 2003.

However, upon learning the most wonderful and far reaching single word in the universe, the elect will also learn to keep silent about it in terms of the vulgar secular society (Amos 5:13, per the “Holy Name Translation”), and use it only in private personal worship (Isa 26:13).

The 70 Years Exile

Yet, the House of Yehudah exile to Babylon was not to continue forever, as YHWH put a cap on it (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10; Dan 9:2, 24). As you may recall, after a 70 years period of punishment in Babylon, a portion of those people did return to Palestine and apparently resumed their covenant relationship with The ELOHIM.

This return of the “remnant” of the House of Yehudah is described in quite some detail in the post exile writings of Ezra and Nechemyah, principally, but also to some extent in the later prophets of Haggai, Zekharyah and Malakhi and the evident editorial remarks in I and II Chronicles (supposedly written or edited by Ezra).

The Scriptures actually went to the trouble to name and identify all of the Jews in the return by their different clans and by their leaders (Ezra 2:1-70; Neh 7:6-73). Both Ezra and Nechemyah number the total people (correctly men) in this return as being 42,360 persons (Ezra 2:64; Neh 7:66).

The Word is quite precise in saying that this return was from the people involved in the Babylonian captivity (Ezra 1:3; 2:1; Neh 7:6). In numerous Scriptural texts, the returnees were identified as being persons of the tribes of Yehudah, Levi and Binyamin.

Yisrael With Returning Yehudah?

In another reference, the Tanakh made mention of the returnees--who settled at Jerusalem, as being persons of the tribes of Yehudah and Binyamin, and also, interestingly, of Ephraim and Manasseh. Obviously, this reference would have had to include Levites and priests from the tribe of Levi as well, though they were not mentioned by name (I Chron 9:3).

There is no question but that these persons from Ephraim and Manasseh were descendants of people who came to Yehudah from the House of Yisrael before the Assyrian deportations, as mentioned earlier herein--since the Book explicitly links these people to the “Babylonian exile” (I Chron 9:1).

Additionally, it is clear that some of these persons who came to Yehudah in Hizkiyahu’s days were probably alluded to in context by Ezra (I Chron 4:41; II Chron 30:1, 10-11).

Finally, in New Testament days, there was a widow woman named Anna of the tribe of Asher who came to see the child YESHUA at the Temple (Lu 2:36).

The Scriptural evidence is quite convincing that this woman probably was a descendant of some of the people of Asher who came to Yehudah in Hizkiyahu’s day (II Chron 30:11).

Chapter 126--The Return of Yisrael

Christian Confusion on the Return

In almost any attempt to go to the various Christian writings and literature (from Christian scholars) on the question of what happened to the House of Yisrael after her departure from Canaan land, only confusion and pandemonium appear to result. No one seems to know much about the ten tribes.

In the old days, before the establishment of the Jewish state of Israel in 1948, confusion and uncertainty were certainly the order of the day whenever the subject of the ten lost tribes of Yisrael would come up in study or conversation. Since 1948, that stance has been altered somewhat (but not much).

John McClintock and James Strong

In their excellent reference work of the “Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature” (v. II, p. 109), first published in twelve volumes from 1867 to 1887, authors John McClintock and James Strong (yes, the James Strong who compiled the famous “Strong’s Concordance”) attacked the problem with some candor and honesty, which is not often done by Christian scholars and church leaders.

These two writers acknowledged some of the Jewish positions on this theme (which will be covered later in this chapter) as well as the then current Christian thinking. Specifically, they noted that “Many attempts have been made to discover the ten tribes existing as a distinct community... The imagination of Christian writers has sought them in the neighborhood of their last recorded habitation.”

This Christian “imagination” included such speculations as finding lost Israel in the Afghan tribes, at the foot of the Himalayas, among the Black Jews of Malabar, with the Tartars, with the Nestorians and even with the Indians of North America (this is the popular Mormon theory, attributable to the confidence man Joseph Smith, discussed earlier).

McClintock and Strong then went on to say that “though history bears no witness of their present distinct existence, it enables us to track the footsteps of the departing race in four directions after the time of their captivity,” which are: (1) some returned and “mixed” with the Jews, (2) some were left in Samaria to mingle with the Samaritans and become bitter enemies of the Jews, (3) some remained in Assyria and mingled with the Jews, and (4) most probably apostatized in Assyria.

To their credit, the team of McClintock and Strong did not seem to go off in wild speculations beyond the listing of the different theories.

However, these Christian theories were to change somewhat over the years and particularly so since the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948. Most modern Christian scholars will now go on record and be very dogmatic respecting their imaginations and suppositions.

Modern Christian Thinking

Merrill C. Tenney, general editor of “The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible” (published in 1975), asserts that some House of Israel peoples remained in the land of Israel to be assimilated with pagan settlers (but the Word says that they were all removed and none remained--II Kg 17:18).

Tenney (v. 3, p. 344) then concludes that the “Samaritans were a mixture of Israelite and foreign elements,” which was one of the above possibilities mentioned by McClintock and Strong. Of course, this Christian view is in sharp conflict with what the authoritative Ezra wrote some 2,500 years ago (Ezra 4:2).

With the more recent significant movements of Khazars out of Russia and the Black Falashas out of Ethiopia to the state of Israel, many Christian scholars have all of a sudden concluded that either the Khazars or the Falashas or both are now persons from the lost tribes of Israel.

Christian writer Dr Ernest Martin, formerly of Portland, Oregon, was convinced in his writings for some years that the Khazars were from the lost tribes of Israel.

More recently, in a May 1997 Letter Forum of his ASK work (p. 2), Martin changed his position when he said that “There is a basic characteristic sign that identifies who is a real Israelite today... The sign is not so much a racial (that is biological and physical) distinction as it is an emotional and religious one.”

Another Christian writer, named Gene Justice of the Foundation for Biblical Research of Pasadena, California (quoted earlier herein), shared the same earlier view of Martin that the Khazars were lost Israel in his book on “The Israel Identity Syndrome” (p. 38-41). This Khazar topic will be studied in a future chapter.

In “Lost Israelite Identity” (p. 63-63, 268-269, 276, 296), Yair Davidy also tries to link the Khazars to certain Israelite people, but offers no proof beyond the fact that the lost tribes of Israel migrated through the Caucasus Mountains in their movements out of the Middle East.

In time, the Khazars moved into these same areas and occupied some of the same places formerly inhabited by true Israelites. The real Israelites of the lost tribes had left some of their names to these geographical places in their migrations and the later Khazar habitation used the old established names.

Furthermore, Davidy seems to confuse some of the migrating and wandering people (evidently Edomites) who passed through the Caucasus (before the Khazars arrived) with being Israelites. Some of these peoples had links to the Khazars, as will be assessed in later chapters herein.

The Most Popular Theory of All

But the most popular theory of all surfaces because many modern Christians are so misinformed and uninformed about the Scriptures that they actually believe that after the 70 years of the Babylonian exile, "all" of the 12/13 tribes of Yisrael returned to Palestine, including the tribes of the House of Yisrael (which had been removed around 210 years or so earlier by the Assyrians).

To support and justify this view, a few ignorant and uninformed Christian scholars have spent some time on this subject and have actually dug out the two references, as described in previous comments (I Chron 9:3; Lu 2:36), and claimed that those two texts alone “prove” that the House of Yisrael returned to Palestine with the Jews after their release from Babylon.

Explanations

Some misinformed Christians would argue the merits of these two Scriptures (I Chron 9:3; Lu 2:36) to no end, despite the clear and precise words of Ezra. Ezra implied, as a minimum, that those people linked to earlier persons who came from the House of Yisrael to the House of Yehudah in Hizkiyahu’s days and later and who went into Babylonian (not Assyrian) captivity (I Chron 4:41; 9:1; II Chron 30:1, 10-11).

Beyond the several clarifications in I and II Chronicles on how some persons in the old House of Yisrael kingdom moved and settled in the House of Yehudah (which allowed them to avoid the Assyrian deportations), another most interesting piece of information surfaces from “The Targum to the Five Megilloth” (p. 10), edited by Barnard Grossfeld, in its presentation on Lamentations 1:3.

This Targum says that the House of Yehudah people went into captivity because they afflicted widows and orphans and because of the great servitude with which they were oppressing their brethren, the children of Yisrael, who had been sold to them, and that they did not proclaim liberty to their male and female slaves who were of the seed of Yisrael.

The reference just cited seems to have some powerful support from the Tanakh. The prophet Yirmeyahu was careful to point out that some of the Judeans had Hebrew slaves which they would not set free in the seventh year, as provided for in the Torah (Ex 21:2; Lev 25:10; Jer 34:8-22). Nechemyah also may have alluded to this situation after the return (Neh 5:11).

The point of this is that beyond all of the individual people who migrated from the House of Yisrael to the House of Yehudah, over the years, the House of Yehudah apparently purchased some House of Yisrael slaves from the conquering Assyrians at the fall of the segments of the Northern kingdom.

Though these House of Yisrael people evidently did not gain their freedom as YHWH’s Torah dictated, they assuredly were assimilated and particularly so during the Babylonian exile.

The point is that there are several explanations on why there were some House of Yisrael people living among the Jews and practicing the Jewish religion.

Since this condition is clearly brought out and described in some detail in the Scriptures and Targums, why is it that Christians want to continue to believe, teach, and swear that the whole House of Yisrael was to be found among the Jews following the Babylonian exile?

The House of Yisrael Never Returned

Thus, such misinformed individuals persist in believing that the House of Yisrael peoples collectively returned along with the Jewish remnant.

This vain speculation by stupid persons is so incredible and so absolutely contrary to Scripture that it boggles one's mind as to how in the world supposedly intelligent people ever could be entrapped and duped into believing such ridiculous claims.

Surely, students of the Word above the moron level should not be taken in by fairy tales and vain imaginations from uninformed fools. Also, as noted earlier, the genealogies of the returning exiles from Babylon were carefully laid out in great detail in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Importantly, these writers pointed out at the beginning or ending of each genealogical presentation that the enumerated returnees were persons or descendants of persons who were largely Jewish, and who had been taken captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar in his 6th century BCE deportations (Ezra 2:2-27; 8:1-20; Neh 7:5-73).

There is absolutely nothing in either Ezra or Nehemiah that would allow for the return of “any” individuals from the House of Yisrael who had been deported to the Northeast by the Assyrians.

Of course, it is true that the returnees (either Jews racially and/or religiously) were sometimes called "Yisrael" (Ezra 2:1-2; etc), which is technically correct since they were a legitimate part of the larger definition of Yisrael.

And it is additionally true that Nechemyah, at least once, even uses the phrase "all Yisrael" (Neh 7:73). Howbeit, he does so in the context of the list of returnees which he had just identified by clan name and in the view of them being persons from the Babylonian captivity of Nebuchadnezzar (Neh 7:6).

It is likewise important to note here that the returnees were never called the House of Yisrael in any of the Old Testament books, nor were they ever lucidly so called or mentioned in any New Testament book. Too, after the exile, the term "House of Yehudah" was no longer used in the Book for the returnees--except in one, isolated instance (Neh 4:16).

Essentially--Yehudah Only

Except for the persons covered in the preceding comments and certain prophetic references, there can be no doubt whatsoever about who did return from the Babylonian exile.

A perusal of the entire post-exile Scriptures categorically reveals that, in the main, the returnees from the Babylonian exile were persons of the tribes of Yehudah, Binyamin and Levi, many of whom were identified as settling in the Jerusalem area (Neh 11:3-36).

Moreover, beyond the various references to the three tribes of Yehudah, Binyamin and Levi, in the context of the return, nothing was furthermore said about any of the other tribes of Yisrael, except in a couple of isolated instances, as described in previous remarks.

Surely, this is verity because both Ezra and Nechemyah make it quite clear (repeatedly, over and over) that "all" of the returnees were linked to the Babylonian deportations which occurred some 140 years after the House of Yisrael had been carried into Assyrian bondage.

None of the returnees from Babylon were ever associated directly or indirectly with the Assyrian deportations of the 7th and 8th centuries BCE (beyond the earlier discussed slaves, who had been reportedly sold to Yehudah).

Heretofore, mention was made of the fact that much of the tribe of Binyamin was captured by the Assyrians or departed the land for some other reason at that time, leaving essentially the tribe of Yehudah behind in the Jerusalem area (II Kg 17:18).

While it appears that the tribe of Binyamin, per se, may not have persisted in the land of Yehudah after Samaria fell and up to the Babylonian exile, some individual Binyaminites certainly did survive (along with some persons from Asher, Manasseh and Ephraim) in order to go into Babylonian bondage and return later with the Jews to Palestine during the time of Ezra and Nechemyah (Ezra 1:5; Neh 11:4).

Despite the fact that some of these individuals of the tribes of Binyamin and the Northern House of Yisrael or their descendants did go into Babylonian exile and return later to Palestine under Cyrus' release, the truth is quite manifest that these persons, surely few in number, did not constitute the whole of their tribes (which assuredly never did return to the land in recorded history).

The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

The fact that the House of Yisrael did not return to Palestine with the return of the Jews under Ezra and Nechemyah is well substantiated in the Jewish Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha literature, some of which was written as early as 300 BCE (per Dr James Tabor, in Vol 1, No 4 of “Jezreel’s Call,” Kislew 5755). Many of these ancient historical records acknowledge this truth quite positively.

In these interesting writings, mention might first be made to “The Testament of Moses” which stated that the “two” tribes (obviously, of the House of Yehudah) will continue in their appointed faith while the “ten” tribes (certainly, of the lost House of Yisrael) will increase among the Gentiles during the time of their captivity (Test. of Moses 2:5; 4:7-9).

Please note that the above quote from “The Testament of Moses” links the lost ten tribes of the House of Yisrael to the word Gentiles (Hebrew goy/goyim). The prophet Yeshayahu (Isa 61:9) seems to have had some perception when he wrote that the seed of Yisrael will be found among the Gentiles (Hebrew goyim).

While Yeshayahu’s words might not be as clear as was those in the Testament of Moses, both do say the same thing. Jewish writer Yair Davidy goes on to note that according to Jewish law (in the Talmud), the lost tribes had become “Gentiles, to all intents and purposes” (Yebamot 17, Talmud, quoted in “Lost Israelite Identity,” p. 52).

This linkage of the ten lost tribes to the Hebrew word goyim (Gentiles) is quite important to recognize and appreciate since Christendom regularly associates the English words gentile and gentiles to non-Israelites. This condition has been and/or will be analyzed in some detail in other chapters herein.

Wherefore, the evidence is quite abundant that in the Jewish psychic and mentality for the last 2,500 years or so (clearly, from the return from Babylon), the lost ten tribes were and are in the same status as of the goy/goyim which the Jews recognize as being the non-Jewish “nations” of the world.

In short, lost Israelites could technically be called Gentiles (that is non-Jews), although that description causes confusion in the typical Christian’s mind.

Yisrael--Nation/Nations?

As a matter of information, some 26 of 37 references to “nation/nations” in the KJV of the New Testament has in the Greek text, the article “the” linked in context to demonstrate that the Jewish writer involved perhaps had in mind the lost ten tribes of Yisrael in writing about these peoples (per Thomas Jones, in his book “The Elect: Who Are They?--A Scriptural View”).

The point Jones is making is that the connected article “the” specifically makes the reference applicable to the lost tribes of the House of Yisrael and not to the broader classification of nations. This study addressed this issue earlier when discussion focused on the Greek ethnos (often translated as “nation” for the Hebrew “goy”).

While many uninformed Christians are acutely aware of the fact that Jews refer to the non-Jewish nations as goy/goyim, few have ever had the perception that the Jews also did refer to the lost tribes of Yisrael as goy/goyim.

Actually, in Christendom’s clouded eyes, the words goy/goyim link to “non-Israelite” nations in the broad, general sense. A non-Israelite can be considerably different than a non-Jew. The two are not necessarily the same at all!

In other Apocrypha literature, like the “Psalms of Solomon” and the “Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,” similar statements can be found alluding to the House of Yisrael as still being in a “lost,” far away profile and as having never returned to Canaan land in Second Temple days.

The Book of Tobit, Revisited

A former chapter herein mentioned the historic book of Tobit, which is found today as a part of the Apocrypha. As the “Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period” (p. 636-637) indicates, the book of Tobit was probably written in the third century BCE. But it must have been based upon a much older tradition in circulation.

In any case, the book of Tobit was a popular Second Temple writing which found much acceptance among the Jewish population (although it never became a part of the OT canon). Certainly, it was popular in the Qumran community in the first centuries BCE and CE since four copies of it were found in Aramaic and one in Hebrew in the Qumran caves.

The importance of Tobit is that it is a narrative (supposedly fictional) about two House of Yisrael families (apparently from the tribe of Naftali in the Galilee area) in captivity in far away Assyria. Though it is extremely complicated, it is a beautiful story and one with possibly much insight, which must have whetted the appetite of the Jews in Second Temple Palestine.

The primary importance of this book is that it is a story about lost Yisrael which was known and kept alive in Palestine by Second Temple Jews.

Assuredly, the whole context of the writing and its preservation is cast in the vein that Yisrael was still absent from Palestine and presumably still in Assyrian bondage when the story first commenced (certainly, by the third century BCE; and perhaps earlier, even in First Temple days).

II Esdras

Another key witness of events in early Palestine was the writer of the apocalyptic II Esdras, who either compiled or at least edited this work essentially by c150 CE (per "Asimov's Guide to the Bible").

Whomever the writer of II Esdras was, he certainly recognized that the ten Northern tribes of Yisrael, carried off by the Assyrians, had never returned to the land and were not a part of then Palestine Jewry, but were still in existence in some far away country (II Esdras 13:40).

While the purpose of this study is not to examine the book of II Esdras, per se, or even to attempt a complete tracing of the ten lost tribes of Yisrael, it still would be useful to note that the II Esdras writer did also point out that the lost Israelites spent some year and a half in leaving the “multitude of the heathen” and in going through the narrow passages of the river (Euphrates) to reach a further country where “never mankind dwelt” (II Esdras 13:39-45).

This conclusion by the II Esdras writer will prove to be quite profound and extraordinary as this study will later establish in a coming chapter. At the moment, the reader can make his/her own interpretation of the importance of these remarks.

Early Rabbinic Thinking

The Nisan 5755/April 1995 issue of the “Jezreel’s Call” paper had an article by Dennis Jones on “Will the Lost Tribes Return?” which contained an analysis of the lost tribes from early Rabbinic literature. While this article was somewhat abbreviated, it did reflect some interesting Rabbinical thinking from over the years.

Quoting R. Akiva and some of his students from around 117-138 CE (from the Mishnah, Sanhedrin 110b), Jones points out that the “question before the Rabbis was only whether they (the ten lost tribes) would ever return and not whether they had ever returned.” Of course, Rabbinical authorities knew full well that the lost tribes had never returned. The issue was if and when would they return in the future.

Contrary to some of his scholarly opponents in those early days, Akiva did not believe that lost Yisrael would ever return from their exile. Others, like R. Eliezer, acknowledged that while lost Yisrael was then in darkness, there would be “light for them” in the future.

The gist of these early Rabbinical writings is that the ten lost tribes were not annihilated, but were only in a state of exile to be returned to Canaan land in a future time period when “light” would be granted to them. Obviously, here in 2003, that time is still future.

Josephus On Yisrael

Even as late as the time of the first century CE, the Jewish priest, scholar and historian Josephus and obviously other informed Jews in Canaan land were cognizant of the fact that the House of Yisrael had been removed and was still far away from Palestine and had not yet returned (“Antiquities of the Jews,” book IX, chapter 14, verses 1-3 and book X, chapter 9, verse 7).

Since Josephus was both a seemingly intelligent man and a first century CE resident of Palestine, his remarks are especially valid and do carry some weight. He was an astute historian who was no slouch in terms of what was going on in Judea in his day. He was informed.

Importantly, he says that there are but two tribes (of Yisrael) in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates "till now" and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers (“Antiquities of the Jews,” book XI, chapter 5, verse 2). Thus, Josephus believed that the House of Yisrael peoples were quite large in numbers in a far away land in his day.

The Talmud and the New Testament

Here also, the student of truth should focus some attention on the Talmud, portions of which may have been placed in writing as early as 200 CE by Talmudic Jewish scholars (to be described later herein). Clearly, these writings date back in whole or in part to traditional oral transmissions, dating perhaps from the Babylonian exile.

In John D Lightfoot’s marvelous “Commentary on the New Testament From The Talmud and Hebraica” (v. 4, p. 291), reference is made to the ten tribes in Lightfoot’s discourse on I Corinthians 14. These findings are especially relevant.

Lightfoot suggests that from the Talmudist’s perspective, the ten lost tribes had been taken to Assyrian lands which bordered those of the Babylonians where the Jews were later exiled. In these far distant lands, the lost House of Yisrael had “remained there in after ages” --only to be reunited with the Jews in a still “future call.”

Additionally, Lightfoot observes that the Talmud reports that these lost ten tribes in those far removed lands had become “people of impure blood” --obviously, from their miscegenation with the heathen nations (while in exile, following the Assyrian conquests).

Thus, from the Talmudic overview, the Jews (with their better blood lines) should not mingle or have social contact with the Israelites of the lost ten tribes and their impure blood lines. Clearly, in the eyes of the early Talmudists, the lost ten tribes of the House of Yisrael had become goy/goyim, as the rest of the nations in the world.

Incidentally, these remarks by the Talmudists on the believed “impure” bloodlines of the House of Yisrael peoples will carry extraordinary weight when one considers how exclusive the Jews were in New Testament days in refusing to have social contact and intercourse with people (actually brethren) of the House of Yisrael, whom they came into contact with. Kefa, of course, typified this viewpoint.

Other New Testament Views

As outlined elsewhere in this production, the various New Testament writings have been addressed in an effort to show that the writers and compilers of the NT books, without exception, were perfectly aware of the fact that the peoples of the “lost” tribes of the House of Yisrael had never returned to Palestine by the age of the Apostolic Assembly in the first century CE.

Actually, there is a vast host of such Scriptural references which leave no doubt over this issue. Since they have or will be later addressed and studied, there is no present need to broach them here in any detail, rather than to acknowledge their existence. But three of these references are so extraordinary and relevant that they need to be briefly mentioned at this time.

The three writers Yakov, Yohanan and Shaul were all cognizant of the entire “twelve” tribes of Yisrael. Yakov directly addressed these peoples in his epistle (Jas 1:1). Yohanan was aware of a future sealing of them (Rev 7:1-8). And Shaul discussed them in the context of his commission with King Herod Agrippa II (Acts 26:6-7).

Commodianus

Professor David Flusser, formerly of Hebrew University, quoted from the work of the Latin Christian poet Commodianus, who wrote in the middle of the third century CE (“Judaism and the Origins of Christianity,” p. 563-564).

Commodianus appears to have quoted some of his material from and/or used data from the earlier apocrypha works of IV and V Esdras in their references to the ten lost tribes of Yisrael. But he went further and added some thinking beyond Esdras IV and V. Unless Commodianus deceptively made up his theory, it is very suggestive that he also used other early sources to compile his writings.

He postulated the movement of the lost ten tribes of Yisrael out of the East to come to the city of Jerusalem in the end of days. He described them as being an ideal people who would break through in a miraculous military campaign to eventually occupy Jerusalem. Does this sound like Allenby’s conquest of Palestine in 1917 or something to come in the future since Allenby came from the West and not from the East?

In Flusser’s comments on this Christian work, he also alluded to V Esdras in its comments on a “coming people,” made up of “Christian Gentiles” (which link to the lost tribes), who would come to and receive Jerusalem where they would dwell together with the three Patriarchs and the prophets of the old dispensation (“Judaism and the Origins of Christianity,” p. 564).

Alfred Edersheim

The famous Jewish Christian writer, Alfred Edersheim (1825-1889), offered a lengthy write up on the issue of the lost tribes of Israel from the modern Jewish perspective--at least, from that perspective in his day in the 19th century (“Life and Times of Jesus The Messiah,” p. 9-11). Edersheim called upon historic Jewish writings--such as the Talmud, Mishnah, Rabbinic sources, 4 Esdras and tradition.

He categorically affirmed that the ten lost tribes of Israel did not return to Palestine with the Jewish return from Babylon. He mentioned the various possibilities of where lost Israel could be in the context of the various references which he cited.

Alfred Edersheim reflected pretty well the thinking of all informed Jews for the last 2,000 years. None of them have ignorantly linked the lost tribes of Israel to the Jewish return from Babylon (as Christians regularly do). And the only authoritative position that informed Jews can take on the subject are the remarks of the several ancient sources--as they all have been generally quoted herein.

Importantly, Edersheim not only discussed the reality of the House of Israel being lost currently, but he focused upon Jewish understanding that the lost tribes would one day be discovered, returned to Palestine and reunited with the Jews--in the context of their conversion under a second Messiah or in the dawn of the new Messianic day (per R. Eleizer). This course will be broached in subsequent chapters.

More Recent Thinking

The July 1999 “Kingdom Digest” magazine (p. 46-51) had an article by F. F. Bosworth on “The Bible Distinction Between ‘The House of Israel’ and ‘The House of Judah’” which offered a number of other relevant Jewish observations on the future of lost Israel. As Bosworth noted, Orthodox Jews even in his day were well aware that the modern Jews do not include the ten-tribes of the lost House of Israel.

For example, on the Day of the Feast of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, Orthodox Jews pray a prayer that Ephraim Yisrael (the ten tribes) may one day be united with them. Bosworth cited a number of authoritative Jewish writings which recognize that lost Yisrael is not a part of modern Jewry.

The article also quoted Dr J. H. Hertz, late Chief Rav of the British Empire, who said that “People known at present as Jews are descendants of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin...we look forward to the gathering of all the tribes at some future date.” The learned Isaac Leiser suggested that the “Israelitish nation was left in banishment after the return of the Jews from Babylon.”

Bosworth additionally quoted Professor Neuhauser who wrote that “The hope of the return of the Ten Tribes has never ceased among the Jews in exile.” Dr V. Herman Adler, another former Chief Rav in London, also was quoted. He asserted that “The Ten Tribes did not return to the Holy Land.”

Although writer Bosworth and his article focused upon Jewish reactions on the status of lost Israel, he also quoted the Christian Jerome, who, in the fourth century, said that “The Ten Tribes inhabit at this day the cities and mountains of the Medes.”

Besides this article, there are other more recent statements. For example, Abba Eban, the well known Israeli diplomat and former Ambassador to the United Nations and the United States, wrote in 1984 that the Assyrian invaders completely obliterated the Kingdom of Israel and that its people, henceforth, to be known as the “ten lost tribes,” were deported and dispersed (“Heritage--Civilization and the Jews,” p. 56).

Historian Paul Johnson wrote in 1987 that “In taking their last, forced journey into Assyria, the ten tribes of the North moved out of history and myth... They lived in later Jewish legend, but in reality they were simply assimilated into the surrounding Aramean population, losing their faith and their language” (“A History of the Jews,” p. 70).

While Paul Johnson’s statement has some things wrong with it, the fact remains that he does present some truth in terms of modern thinking. Certainly, the lost tribes did lose their faith, their language and indeed their identity. However, it is clearly an error (as this study will prove) to charge that they were “assimilated” (in the collective sense) into the Aramean population.

A summation of modern Jewish thinking was offered in the Jul-Sep 2000 “Hebrew Roots” (p. 34), which said that “Orthodox Judaism teaches that they (the ten tribes of Yisrael) are still ‘lost’ and must return (at least, a remnant of them) to the land of Israel before The Messiah comes.

“The rest of Judaism (non-Orthodox) claims that all twelve tribes are to be found among today’s Jewish population.” This non-Orthodox teaching is the primary Christian position found among most Christian denominations.

Perhaps the best statement of all on the lost tribes of Yisrael appears in “The Jewish Encyclopedia” (1909 edition, v. 12, p. 249), in an article on “Tribes, Lost Ten,” viz: “If the Ten Tribes have disappeared, the literal fulfillment of the prophecies would be impossible. If they have not disappeared, obviously, they must exist under a different name.”

YHWH’s Far Reaching Promises

In an earlier chapter, discussing the fall of Yisrael to the Assyrians, the prophet Yirmeyahu (who lived over a hundred years after the Assyrian conquests) was quoted in his fantastic statement that as long as the sun, moon and stars stand to provide light on earth, the posterity of Yisrael shall exist as a nation or people before YHWH through the ages (Jer 31:35-36).

Obviously, the House of Yisrael was in existence somewhere in NT times--just as they are still in existence somewhere today in 2003. Furthermore, The ELOHIM YHWH made some similarly fantastic (unconditional and irrevocable) promises to David which are just as profound and extraordinary today as they were 3,000 years ago when they were first spoken.

Specifically, The HIGHEST declared that David always would have (actually, never want for) a descendant to sit on his physical throne in rulership over Israelites (II Sam 7:12-16; I Kg 2:4; 9:4-5; 11:11-13; II Kg 19:32-36; I Chron 17:11-15; 22:9; 28:4-5; II Chron 7:18; 13:5).

The MOST HIGH YHWH then went on to tell David that as long as the sun, moon and stars are in the heavens above to shine light on this earth, David’s throne will be in existence to rule over Israelites (Ps 89:20-37; Jer 33:17-20).

Although most of the world can never understand it, but the truth is that David’s throne was not terminated or vacated at the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem. This fact will be considered in some detail in future chapters.

Apparent Conclusions

Some obvious conclusions can be deduced from this excursion into history about the ten tribes. Of most importance, they were dispersed by the Assyrians some 140 years or so before the Jewish dispersals. And of profound importance, they historically never returned to Palestine.

They are still out in the world somewhere and thought to be goyim (Gentiles) in the eyes of most informed Jews. Furthermore, the NT remarks by Shaul, Yohanan and Yakov on the “twelve tribes” demonstrate their thinking on this subject.

Clearly, it is manifest that all three of these apostles were familiar with the prophets and knew and recognized that the entire twelve tribes of Yisrael collectively were still in existence somewhere on planet earth--even as they wrote references about them.

And next, it is certain that all three of these apostles knew precisely where the twelve tribes were in existence out in the world. This “where” is made plain by those three men in their various statements in the NT, and in the sense that the twelve tribes of Yisrael then were scattered abroad outside the land of Palestine.

So while the collective Jews in Canaan land in the first century CE might refer to the tribes of Yisrael as being “lost” (just as multitudes of both Christians and Jews have done so for the last two thousand years), the truth is that those twelve tribes actually were not “lost” to The ELOHIM and His chosen Apostolic Assembly apostles.

The place one must come to is that the so-called “lost” ten tribes of Yisrael were never lost (to The ELOHIM YHWH), but were categorically goy/goyim/gentile outsiders in Jewish eyes, likely from the fall of Samaria forward (c700 BCE when they were divorced by The SUPREME), and that they never had returned to Palestine by the time of the Jewish removals in the early years of the first and second centuries CE.

Now, if any misinformed and/or uninformed Christians want to come forward and declare that the House of Yisrael returned to Palestine before 70 CE, then such people are showing their absolute ignorance of history as they would be contradicting Josephus and numerous others (including Yakov, Yohanan and Shaul) who were eye witness observers of events in the land and time of Second Temple Judaism.

Chapter 127--The Return is Future

The Prophesied Return

Despite the fact that the House of Yisrael was removed from old Canaan (now called Palestine), in the 8th-7th centuries BCE, by the Assyrians, the Tanakh prophets were all explicit in predicting that in a future age and time, all of Yisrael would return and be reunited. Categorically, the time of that return is still future, here in 2003. It has never happened in history. But assuredly, it will happen!

Importantly, these predictions of the return have been made in the context that the House of Yisrael is in a state of slavery, captivity and bondage at the time of this return (Lev 26:39; Deut 28:49-68). Essentially, what Yisrael faces is something much like the previous Egyptian bondage of 3,500 years ago when YHWH used Moshe to deliver Yisrael and take them to the promise land of Canaan.

There will be one profound difference between the historic Egyptian slavery and the coming age end captivity of Yisrael. Whereas, the nation of Yisrael was present in Egypt in a collective body or entity of Israelites and moved as a group out of Egypt, the future return will be done by The ELOHIM from all over the world where Israelites will be scattered as individuals or in small entities.

If this sounds like double talk, and in view of the previous comments on Yisrael, an examination of a number of prophecies and their historic fulfillments after Yisrael left the promise land offers clarification and makes the case for this position.

Yechezkel is the Key

To appreciate the modern history of the House of Yisrael, one must study and learn from Ezekiel. This book, above all other writings, has the most detailed and useful information of all on the House of Yisrael.

Yechezkel was a Jew (actually a cohen or priest from the House of Yehudah), who was exiled to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar. He started his writings in Babylon some seven years or so before the fall of Jerusalem to the Chaldeans. He was to record this seven-year block of time in some detail and go on to document the fall of Jerusalem and provide an abundance of data after that.

The student of truth will at once realize that the Babylonian conquests of Yehudah happened some 140 years or so after the Assyrian conquests of the House of Yisrael. Thus, the House of Yisrael was long gone from Palestine by the time that Yechezkel arrived on the scene in Babylon.

But despite the fact that the House of Yisrael seemed to have been lost in history, Yechezkel was commissioned to be a prophet to and watchman for the House of Yisrael (Ezek 3:4-5). Consequently, his message essentially is to, for and about the House of Yisrael. This is most interesting in view of the fact that Yisrael’s supposed fall, conquest and enslavement had happened many years earlier.

And importantly, the book of Ezekiel conclusively proves that Yechezkel knew the difference between the House of Yisrael as opposed to the House of Yehudah. He periodically spoke of both houses and clearly differentiated between the two. Hence, whenever he wrote the “House of Yisrael,” he meant the House of Yisrael (which was not to be confused with the House of Yehudah or the Jews).

As a minimum, all of Yechezkel’s words were still future for the House of Yisrael when he wrote them (starting around 561 BCE). But a complication arises because he often seemed to be writing about Jerusalem. An explanation is needed since he was a watchman for the House of Yisrael. Yet, he was writing about Jerusalem in Canaan--especially, in his early chapters.

The prophet clarifies this dilemma when he early on pointed out that the trouble then coming upon Jerusalem was to be a sign for the House of Yisrael (Ezek 4:3; 14:8). Thus, among other things, Yechezkel was laying out the fall of Jerusalem as an example for the House of Yisrael. In other words, what happened to Jerusalem will happen to the House of Yisrael.

In that sense, any person wanting to know and understand the future of the House of Yisrael (now in the early 21st century) should spend some time to learn and study about the fall of Jerusalem, first to the Babylonians and next to the later Romans, since these falls both have much similarity and significant prophetic relevance.

But Still More

Yechezkel opens his message and witness in a 30th year (the possibilities for dating Yechezkel’s 30th year will be described in a future chapter). While some portions of his work were dual or had historic typical fulfillments, the evidence is that virtually everything Yechezkel wrote about will ultimately take place (starting likely here in the age end).

In that sense, it all seems relevant in the immediate future right now. Chapter 4 quickly introduces a foreign siege on Yisrael (following 390 years of accountable sin) which sees the destruction of her government(s) and the slavery of her people some 390 days later (perhaps sometime during Yechezkel’s 33d year).

It appears that this siege marks the commencement of Yisrael’s final punishment to prepare her for the millennial rule of YESHUA, to include the wedding supper of The LAMB. Manifestly, it will be this punishment (just as a father punishes and chastises a child to teach discipline and righteousness) that will make a change in Yisrael to good for the first time in 3,500 years.

Chapters 4 to 33 describe the seven years of Yakov’s Trouble--which possibly starts in or near Yechezkel’s 30th-31st years and expires some seven years later. Ezekiel 13:1-23 and 34:1-10 focus on the preachers and pastors of Yisrael. YHWH greatly condemns them for their wretchedness and evil, just as He has also done in numerous other Scriptures.

After all, it has been Yisrael’s pastors, preachers, teachers and priests who seem to bear much of the guilt for the sins in Yisrael. Chapter 34 (starting in verse 11) to chapter 37 explicitly focuses on the beginnings of the return or at least the return of some part of the people of the House of Yisrael to Palestine (see Jer 3:14 and Ezek 36:8; 37:1-23).

Isaiah 54:7-8 notes that for a moment (the seven years of Yakov’s Trouble), YHWH has forsaken Yisrael and hidden His face from the Israelites; but in time, He will show the Israelites mercy and (re)gather them (to Palestine). Jeremiah 31:10-11 indicates that YHWH has scattered Yisrael (during Yakov’s Trouble) and will gather, redeem and watch over the Israelites as a shepherd watches over his flock.

Please note that the Israelites in the age end are scattered and YHWH YESHUA must search them out to (re)gather them (Lev 26:44-45; Ezek 11:17; 34:11-16; 36:24; 37:21;39:27; Jer 3:12-17; 23:3; 29:14; 31:8-11; 32:37). It is also important to realize that, in this return, YHWH at last unifies the House of Yehudah and the House of Yisrael for the first time since the division under Rechavam (Jer 3:18; Ezek 37:16).

In order to appreciate that the House of Yisrael seems to have a national existence in twelve or so governmental entities in Ezekiel 4 to precipitate the siege, war and captivity (which ends when YHWH YESHUA returns to gather the scattered Israelites), much history and many other Scriptures must be consulted.

The Background

As commented upon in previous sections, the House of Yisrael largely left or was expelled from Canaan by the conclusion of the Assyrian conquests of about 700 BCE. The truth is that most Israelites were scattered in the Diaspora in groups (some small and some large), evidently for many long centuries thereafter. Most of these groups or bodies of Israelites ended up in various countries of Adam.

From about 700 BCE to 1200 CE, these scattered groups of Israelites began moving West to the Isles of the Sea, the prophesied destination of Yisrael upon leaving Canaan ((Isa 11:11; 20:6; 24:15; 26:15; 41:1-2; 42:4-12; 49:1-3; 51:5; 59:18; 60:9; 66:19; Jer 31:10; Ezek 39:6; Dan 11:18).

As noted elsewhere herein, the throne of David (which was prophesied to perpetually exist) also was removed to these same Isles of the Sea in order to rule over Israelites.

Starting in 1607, some (not all) of these Israelites, accumulated in this express body in the Isles of the Sea, started separating by tribes and commencing a further movement to their eventual individual tribal homelands. This motion to separate by tribes was to continue even into the 20th century.

Beyond this movement from the Isles of the Sea, many of the other Israelites, still scattered throughout the land of Adam in other countries, also began moving to the same new tribal homelands. Thus, there was a “regathering” of scattered Israelites by their tribal identities from all over the civilized lands of Adam.

The prophet Yechezkel, writing in about 561-539 BCE, also prophetically mentioned these subsequent, various regatherings in the Isles of the Sea and later into their particular tribal homelands, which would serve them for long ages (Ezek 20:34-39).

But Yechezkel apparently discussed these regatherings as an ante-type or example of the still future coming regathering to Palestine (a second time, again or once more--Isa 11:11)--which he proceeds to also mention at Ezekiel 20:40-42 (this ultimate regathering is described above in various Scriptures).

In other words, on leaving Canaan land, c700 BCE, Yisrael was temporarily scattered to the winds to be regathered eventually into new tribal homelands where the tribes were to reside and live for the next several centuries to await another second scattering to the winds.

These intermediate homelands were therefore also temporary since the Israelites living there would continue in rebellion, evil and sin and have to be punished again, a second time (just as they were punished by the Assyrians in 700 BCE). This punishment is called Yakov’s Trouble and it is now upon the House of Yisrael in terms of Yechezkel’s 30th-31st years (to be detailed in Appendices D and E).

II Samuel 7:10

There is an interesting prophesy by Shmuel that says in the KJV that YHWH will appoint a place for His people Yisrael where they will move no more and the children of wickedness will afflict them no more (II Sam 7:10). Most Christian Identity people accept the King James translation and are accordingly led astray in interpreting this text.

These Identity believers generally believe that this place is the temporary regathered places of the tribal homelands, outlined above, and that Yisrael will stay in those places to never move again. While the case “might” be made that the temporary places of regathering are involved in Shmuel’s comment, there is also another explanation.

The better view seems to be that this place mentioned by Shmuel is the ultimate promise land in the Middle East in its entirety (which is more vast and covers a far larger territory than anything envisioned historically--to be later commented upon) in the future Kingdom age when truly the children of wickedness no longer can afflict the people of Yisrael.

Obviously, the presence of this stipulation makes it clear that this place is not where the House of Yisrael has dwelled during the past 2,700 years. Manifestly, the Israelites have been subjected to the children of wickedness greatly in the last 2,700 years in their temporary homelands. Even now, in the early 21st century, Israelites are under enormous oppression, as will be established in later chapters herein.

Christian Misunderstanding

This time frame is clearly still future (to actually occur in the millennium). The “Soncino Books of the Bible” (p. 227) gives a better translation of II Samuel 7:10, as being that Yisrael will be planted “and be disquieted no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more.”

Samson Raphael Hirsch gives it as “have implanted them that they may dwell in a place of their own, and have to tremble no longer, and the children of wickedness shall not continue to afflict them as be-fore-time” (The Haphtoroth of “The Pentateuch,” p. 255). In other words, the Hebrew text is not that they move no more; but rather, that they tremble or fear no more from the children of wickedness.

The Christian Identity people, who persist in the incorrect KJV interpretation, as outlined above, go on to try to suppose that there is a New Israel or New Jerusalem in this regathered (intermediate and temporary) territory of the tribal homelands.

Again, they have it wrong. New Jerusalem is a future city that will be quite large, measuring 1,500 miles square--or perhaps even a cube, depending upon how Revelation 21:16 is to be interpreted.

Manifestly, New Jerusalem is not the United States, Washington, DC or London, England. It never has been and never will be. New Jerusalem will be the capitol of the world and it will evidently center on the Mount Moriah site of Old Jerusalem in the land of Palestine during the millennium.