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.