Here is a prime example of how legalism destroys rational thinking. The sheer absurdity of paying more attention to these minuscule rules than allowing one to be set free by grace and triumph shows just how mentally sick those who claim to be such zealots of the law really are. They hate anything that has to do with Jesus, grace, justification, mercy, and compassion, that shattered the yoke of the law and instead have become professional prostitutes to the law.
Explanation of this New Year’s moon sighting
The new moon was seen by only one person and that outside Jerusalem after sunset ending 6 April, however it was calculated to be easily visible and was seen by numerous witnesses east of Jerusalem.
The moon’s illumination at Jerusalem was 1.3% at the moon’s meridian passing 13:35 on 6 Apr, later at nearly 8 pm when it was sighted the illumination was more than 2%. It was easily visible. The term “meridian refers to the moon being directly above the observation site.
The issue in this month’s instance, is that it was well established by calculation that the moon could be very easily seen, and it was seen by multiple witnesses east of the city as well as one witness a few miles outside the city.
Scroll down to the April 6 New Moon sightings list. Note particularly that the new moon was seen directly east of Jerusalem in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
The fact is that sighting by two witnesses at Jerusalem is essential when there is any ambiguity in the calculations; but when the calculations establish the new moon without question, then sightings from east of the city will confirm the calculations.
During the ancient Temple period the Sanhedrin would calculate the first visible light of the new moon at Jerusalem, and then at the appropriate time they would interview witnesses in Jerusalem to confirm their calculations.
Today, even though people go out to search for the new moon in Israel, it is often the case that there are no people searching for the new moon in Jerusalem, or searchers are not reporting in a timely manner due to Rabbinic restrictions.
What if in some months there is no one even looking from Jerusalem: Shall we say that there is no new month when by both calculation and observation outside the city it is obviously the new moon, just because a sighting was not reported at Jerusalem?
We must do the very best we can in our circumstances and if there is no doubt of the visibility by calculation and it is seen east of the city then the new moon should be declared: but if there is any doubt about the calculated potential visibility and the moon is not sighted east of the city then the new moon should NOT be declared.
It is not always possible to have timely reports of observation directly from Jerusalem and at times it is necessary to invoke rule three of the Calendar principles article. This is a difficult issue and I welcome any input which would help, but as of now I am convinced that April 7, 2019 is the new moon day.
I look forward to the day when Christ comes and provides us clear instructions.
James
78 comments:
When I was a kid, and needed to tune my guitar, I had a tuning fork to which I could listen to tune my high E string. Then I’d tune the rest of the strings using the 4th fret on the B sting, and the 5th on the rest. For the past 30 years, I’ve had a meter which “listens” to the notes, and lights a green diode as each string reaches key. I can also verify the intonation by watching the meter as I lightly pinch-mute each string at the 12th fret, checking it harmonically. A green light reading there shows that each note up and down the neck will be in tune. Modern developments in technology have given us a choice between method and accuracy. The same is true of reckoning the moon’s first crescent. The direct observation method is inherently inaccurate due to variable atmospheric conditions. Conjunction can be surgically pinpointed by astronomy, and mathematic calculation.
Insisting that we rely on direct observation to know when the first crescent appears makes about as much sense as insisting that people living in Iceland always wear sandals because that was the footwear of the Bible.
Religious fanatics somehow always seem to lose sense of the word “appropriate”. They suppose that every sentence in the Bible is intended as an eternal paradigm. When teaching about the calendar, James Malm could easily and rightly state that here is the way the ancients had to reckon the new moon. Today, with the advancement of knowledge, we can be much more accurate, although it can be a fun exercise of our observational skills to see if we can get it right. But, no. Clouds notwithstanding, James will insist on correcting the science.
BB
Sighting the new moon in Jerusalem was for when the Temple was built and the system was in place of men whose job it was of looking out for the new moon.
I'm no moon expert but 1% and 2% sightings sounds iffy to me.
It has been nearly 2000 years, and still no clear instructions?
Does anyone here not see anything of significance from this?
What if one person is standing a block away and his/her view of the moon is obscured by a tree or cloud? What if it is cloudy for the entire month? What if the moon observer is sick? What if you are a scientist working in either the North or South Pole in winter?
Do you remember the old TV series "Space: 1999" in which the Moon left Earth orbit?
If the Moon left Earth's orbit, Malm could not practice his religion. Actually, it would probably be worse for Malm the moon shifted its orbit so as to change the length of the lunar month by a day or two.
Either way, Malm's religion relies on the Moon more than it relies on Jesus Christ. Whatever Malm is practicing, it isn't Christianity.
And if that weren't enough, we're told:
Earth is rotating at close to 1,000 miles per hour near the equator.
Earth's orbital speed around the sun is about 67,000 miles per hour.
Moon orbits earth at a speed of 2,288 miles per hour.
And with all of that motion going on we're supposed to determine the exact moment of some "new moon" via eyeballs? What if the eyes blink? Or, sneezes at the "crucial instant in time?"
Well, go figure!
John
Sighting the moon from Jerusalem is one aspect of the vast Temple worship system that doesn't exist formally in this day.
As there is no Temple, the is no official moon sighting lookout experts.
All that motion going on. I have a friend who has fallen for the flat earth crap. They think that 1,000mph rotation is fast and impossible.
I told him if he wants to just see how fast that is to take a basketball and spin it to where it goes a complete 360 degrees in 24 hours, then I asked him, "just how fast is that?"
The hour hand on a clock is going twice the speed of earth at the equator. It spins twice in 24 hours.
Point? It's all relative.
Kevin
Soon there will be orbiting space tourists, from many places around the planet , together on a space station. Perhaps even a permanent living group. How will they calculate when the Sabbath is, or , in the case of a Moon colony, when the sighting of the New Moon is??
I believe in a seventh Sabbath Day, and the principle of rest. Trying to micronize this into minutes of an arc, and longitude, is missing the whole point. I do believe that God is not against "Occams Razor" decisions in such matters, that are practical and pragmatic. The broad principle is, "The Sabbath Was Made For Man, not man for the Sabbath" is lost on the likes of Malm and others.
You fine what he's doing burdensome because you aren't used to doing it. I expect that it isn't very hard for him. Similarly, a physics or chemistry textbook calculation would seem burdensome to me because I am not used to it, but to a physicist or a chemist, it would be a breeze.
This is typical Antisemitism from HWA worshippers - they believe they know the OT better than the Jews - or as Bob put it, the Jews do not even know their own scriptures.
With the Internet, we now have a comprehensive trail of all HWA's failed predictions.
There is a lot of research and discussion about the veracity of the Bible because the physical records do not go back to the stated dates of authorship.
Thanks to modern technology and the Internet, we do have an accurate set of HWA's writings and radio programs.
I have to admit, I did not believe early reports, but now the actual information is online, I had to stop hiding my head in the sand and face reality - I was part of a cult, and a true believer who saw only what I was trained to see.
I had confirmation bias - if I could make it fit, I made it fit. If it did not, I ignored it.
How do people get snared by the worst cults - little by little. As PCG and RCG have added to their "beliefs", they have become ridiculous and insane to those outside of them, but they did not start that way. The people who joined early on, were joining "sane" cults who were going to follow HWA better than the others.
LCG started more as a RCM version of "the work", but was forced to become more HWA worshiping because people were accusing them of not honoring HWA enough.
Regardless of what you think of HWA and his morality, he had 100 times more ability than Flurry, and neither DP or RCM are/were a pale shadow of him.
UCG and COGWA seem little better than retirement vehicles for the ministry.
The others are not worth mentioning.
Dennis has brought out the problems of believing every word in the Bible, and I have definitely lost my feeling of comfort.
I used to know that I knew everything that mattered - now I have come face to face with my deficiencies.
What does this mean for me? I am a soul in transition. I know where I started, I do not know where I will end up, though I have the uncomfortable feeling it may be a lot closer to Dennis. But - I am going where the journey takes me, and making up my own mind.
What does it mean for you? This is truly your decision. Don't let others make it for you.
The was two moon observers in biblical times.
“When Zealotry Rears Its Ugly Head”
You mean: “When Rebellion Rears Its Ugly Head.”
Herbert W. Armstrong taught the use of the calculated Hebrew calendar.
James D. Malm teaches his own form of CALENDAR CONFUSION.
So many people reject what HWA taught, but then come up with much worse nonsense.
TLA on April 14, 2019 at 1:00 PM said...
“How do people get snared by the worst cults - little by little. As PCG and RCG have added to their 'beliefs', they have become ridiculous and insane to those outside of them, but they did not start that way. The people who joined early on, were joining 'sane' cults who were going to follow HWA better than the others.
LCG started more as a RCM version of 'the work', but was forced to become more HWA worshiping because people were accusing them of not honoring HWA enough.
Regardless of what you think of HWA and his morality, he had 100 times more ability than Flurry, and neither DP or RCM are/were a pale shadow of him.
UCG and COGWA seem little better than retirement vehicles for the ministry.
The others are not worth mentioning.”
One idea in the past was that the Laodicea era of the church would see a large and prosperous church seemingly doing very well but somehow being a bit lackadaisical. Now that the Laodicea era is really here, one can actually see every little tiny splinter group saying that it is rich and increased with goods and has need of nothing, even while they all are obviously wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked.
False prophets like GRF and DCP are basically demoniacs who try to utterly destroy people in the cruellest and most perverse ways. Satan sent them to make HWA look bad by having them do all their own outrageous evil in HWA's name.
RCM was always in competition with HWA. RCM even had to pervert the gospel by coming up with a two-fold gospel idea to put his own stamp on the church. RCM had to teach that the falling away is in the world because he cannot admit what a great work the WCG under HWA did until the apostate Tkaches did their great apostasy thing in January 1995 and threw out virtually everything that HWA had taught.
UCG and COGWA have their Winter Family X-mass Weekend stuff because all their changes to what HWA taught just send people back to the world. They like to sit around watching movies, which contain all the bad things of the world.
The trap, TLA, is that we humans all want to take it further. We want what God has to offer, and can teach us. We want to go higher than man. Since God does not speak to us in the sense that He did to Moses, or Jesus, we attempt to learn from people who appear to be close to God. Unfortunately, those people will always disappoint us either through their own imperfections, or by the very fact that they end up being nothing more than filters, although they will always insist that that is not the case. Who told us that preachers of Armstrongism were “God’s ministers”? They did!
The only good alternative is to be on direct connection basis with God, no middlemen, no filters. Do your own due diligence. Armstrongism only appears to work if you practice it by yourself in the privacy of your own home. The very minute someone attempts to set it up and to use it as an organized structure, it corrupts its leaders, and becomes oppressive to those who follow. It is similar to communism in the reaction patterns that it produces.
BB
TLA, you're faced with choosing between the theory that you held from the beginning, which is that God opened your mind and led you to your early beliefs, and the theory that you were deluded. I don't think either can be proven empirically. I recommend that you pay little attention to other people's opinions, and simply revisit first things and your earlier reasons for believing as you did. Maybe you'll find that you had some good reasons.
Gordon - my personal hook was, as a child and teenager, I believed you went to heaven and played a harp all day, which sounded incredibly boring. I used to pray briefly every night that God would let me stay on Earth.
When GTA's broadcast and the follow up booklets revealed the Christian future was to stay on Earth and actually do things, it seemed like the answer to my prayers.
People had different hooks - some were prophecy for example. WCG had all the answers.
I have been revisiting my beliefs and also reading the Bible critically in the sense I am paying attention to what it actually says. DNA science was not available when I was first learning about WCG. I felt they debunked evolution, and I still feel evolution is impossible as the origin of all physical life. However, DNA shows Man has a much longer history than 6,000 years and British Israel is not true.
it was well established by calculation that the moon could be very easily seen....
This from a man who rejects the calculation of the New Moon by astronomers. as being improper.
I agree with him - may Jesus come to settle all this. With no more night, like Revelation 22 mentions.
"I look forward to the day when Christ comes and provides us clear instructions." --- I do too. I suspect He won't be quite so hung up on the moon.
All that moon watching sounds like moon worship to me.
I once saw the moon occulted by the golden arches of McDonald's. It was a beautiful sight.
TLA, I'm just asking you not to judge the Bible on the basis of HWA or WCG. We may have believed in British Israelism, but the Bible writers apparently didn't! Paul said that if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promises. Doesn't matter what your genealogy is once you've been adopted into Israel. I'm smiling now because 50 years ago, a very dear friend, who had started attending WCG services about the same time I did, told me that if Brit-ish means "man of the covenant" then Brit-ain means "not of the covenant".....he saw things more clearly than I.
I agree with you about evolution. The biggest scientific mystery is consciousness. Not only have skilled scientists using perfect artificial laboratory conditions been unable to produce life, but none have even a clue about how consciousness works, much less how it could have evolved.
[M]ay Jesus come to settle all this. With no more night, like Revelation 22 mentions.
So, all of the plants and animals that require a night period between their days will collapse and die?
Try building one. To get that intonation true to every fret, you get the joyous task of measuring pitch, raise/lower the bridge, file away a bit of a fret, file into a nut slot to get better snap off the frets, repeat...
are the genetic facts as cut and dry as some wish?
https://alternativegenhist.blogspot.com/2015/04/jewish-r1b-and-haplogroup-percentages.html
Distribution of R1b haplogroup.
https://binged.it/2v3uEOZ
the human genome project did not disprove britishisraelism. what they did was reveal which paternal haplogroup is most prevalent among jews. that was the haplogroup j, but jews also possess haplogroup r1b, which is now most prevalent in western europe. none of this reveals the original paternal genetic line. no matter how much william hohmann and the exit support people want to push this lie, it hasn't been proven one way or the other. this isnt something that if you keep saying it enough, british israelism has been debunked, doesnt make it true
https://dnaconsultants.com/product/bookstore/when-scotland-was-jewish/
https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-ashkenazi-jews-dna-diseases-20140909-story.html dna evidence links ashkenazi jews to just 330 people who lived 800 years ago but you all think they've proven no link between britain and jews from 2500 to 3000 years ago.
Gordon
The promises that God made to Abraham fits British Israelism to a t. It's true that NT writers didn't mention this, but the danger of murderous envy would have made this unwise. At any rate, God is a prayer answering God. So ask whether its true or not.
We didn’t need the dna. We always did an excellent job of debunking BI before the mapping of the human genome. Dna is just additional information, icing on the cake.
BB
statements like, dna disproves b.i., are just like urban legends, a few people make the claim and then dozens or scores keep repeating it making it seem like fact. dna and the genome project did not debunk b.i. all it did was show that the ashkenazi, sephardi and mizrahi jews are more closely related to other mid easterners than british, that proves nothing. those jews could still have the same father from millenia ago as the british the haplogroups are unable to distinguish that much exactness. is there one real scientist who verifies that the genome project debunked b.i. or is that just an interpretation by the amateur anti b.i. crowd?
My point is that it doesn't matter. Nothing important depends on whether B.I. theory is valid. In short, why care?
"statements like, dna disproves b.i., are just like urban legends, a few people make the claim and then dozens or scores keep repeating it making it seem like fact. dna and the genome project did not debunk b.i. all it did was show that the ashkenazi, sephardi and mizrahi jews are more closely related to other mid easterners than british, that proves nothing. those jews could still have the same father from millenia ago as the british the haplogroups are unable to distinguish that much exactness. is there one real scientist who verifies that the genome project debunked b.i. or is that just an interpretation by the amateur anti b.i. crowd?"
Ignorant words spoken out of the depths of a deeply ignorant heart.
You obviously do not understand even the most basic things that the Y-chromosome has to tell us. And make no mistake, it is the data that speaks, the DNA has its own voice, and it has a story to tell. The scientists are not the ones who speak, they just collect the data, catalog it, and show it to the world. If you choose to reject the data, then that is your problem and nobody else's.
The Y-chromosome is inherited intact, in the same way that mitochondrial DNA is inherited intact from your mother. The only thing that changes these two types of genetic information is mutation. If two men have an identical Y-chromosome, then they share a common male lineage, and by cataloging the accretion of mutations the world over, rather like dendrochronology, you can gauge a chronology, how far back relative to other Y-chromosomes with other mutations, when these mutations occurred, and how they branched off, and how recently, or how distantly those two men share a common patriarch. If two men are not of different haplotypes, then it is then they do not share a common patriarch, not in ancient times, possibly not ever. There is nothing "inexact" about this in the manner in which you seem to suggest. Anyone who thinks that the DNA is somehow "too fuzzy" in this way clearly doesn't know the first thing about DNA, what it is, how it works, or the ways in which it tells its story.
The three most prevalent haplotypes—the strongest signals—among all Jewish people the world over, are E1b1b, J1, and J2. This tells us two things, that the Jewish people themselves do not share a common patriarch. There never was an "Abraham" from which Jews and Arabs were descended. At best, there were three Abrahams! And secondly, that they are a fusion of disparate peoples, at least 3 different peoples, although probably more.
We know from historical sources that the British people are a fusion of Celtic, Germanic, and Nordic peoples, though where any of these people came from prior to Roman times is unclear. However the Y-chromosome can shed some light on more distant histories. Nevertheless, the people of the British Isles have one strong signal: R1b.
If a British man is R1b, then he does not share a common patriarch with a man who has either an E1b1b, J1, or a J2 Y-chromosome, no, not even in ancient times.
Yes, it is possible for an individual who is R1b to be Jewish, but it is not possible for the British people as a whole to be a branch of the Jewish people. The chromosome data rules it out.
We’ve entertained speculation that Flurry will eventually claim to have found the Ark of the Covenant in Ireland. I’m betting that some day soon, one of these unhinged ACOG yahoos will claim to have the Urim and Thummim.
BB
Can you anti bi people please stop saying bi says the british are jewish.
This is the 4th time in a month I read this here and is not what we believe(d).
Nck
Unlike the Israelites, for the most part, up until recent decades, the Jewish oracle keepers have remained largely separate as a group, and therefore, their dna provides a good basis for comparison with other groups suspected as being Israelite. If one of the ethnic groups in the Samaritanized British melting pot had actually been Israelite, they were assimilated as early as the 1100s. The “lost” ten tribes were never lost as an intact remaining group that we can identify today. They were assimilated, many of them into the southern tribes of Judah and Levi. Others were Samaritanized by the Cuthites during the captivity. We also know much from the records of Tilgath-pileser, Sargon, and Sennacherib.
From a dna standpoint, the closest partial match to the Jews today is actually the Lemba tribe in Africa.
Attempting to match prophecy with today’s geopolitical groups seemed to favor the British when they still had an empire. The empire really never recovered from WW-II. For the most part, the remnant dissolved during the ‘50s, which was actually the last time period that HWA’s endtimes hook made any sense. It became long in the tooth for most church members towards the end of the ‘60s.
BB
7:47 does not seem to comprehend basic bi.
and no one here comprehends the basic ideology of bi.
still I do like the haplogro etc information. keep it coming.
I do wonder why with all the recent finds of middle eastern stone age farmers and peoples in Europe why they seldom attach the dna info.
My entire point is that ALL history is ideology driven. That is exactly why all these finds of stone age peoples from the middle east are currently highlighted and documentaries are shown how the northern africans are really (vandals) in line with Hoehean philosophy to show that it is a ok to have all the muslims "return" to their ancestral lands.
All history including the development of bi since the 16th century is politically and ideology driven. The only thing that matters therefore is it is plausible that the bible foresees some kind of kingdom in the future?
And even that is not important. I read a philosopher who stated that the earth currently is in birthpain, all this global warming etc is mother earth in pain producing / birthing humans with a desire to explore other planets to live on. THIS IS THE EXACT ARMSTRONGITE MESSAGE and Philosophy about "dna's awesome destiny." dna is just a code.
nck
7:47 ok youre so smart lets assume there was an abraham and that his haplogroup was r1b, but with the jewish side of his family remaining in the mideast his children mix with those from the mideast with the j haplogroup, which haplogroup would be dominant? now lets say that ten tribes of the r1b children of abraham went to western europe and mostly married within the ten tribes, which haplogroup would be dominant? pure speculation i know but what would the haplogroups look like?
https://binged.it/2Pf6YjL
lets consider the ashkenazi jews with 48% j haplogroup, 12% e1b and 8% r1b and knowing that sons born carry on the fathers haplogroup but daughters, who very well could marry outside the family, who have sons will carry on their fathers haplogroup which isn't the same as the mothers father. after 3,000 years would the original fathers haplogroup be dominant or would the dominant haplogroup of the area be dominant? if there was absolutely no r1b y haplogroups throughout the mideast and the jews then you'd have a case against b.i., your problem is that even among arabs the r1b haplogroup is still fairly strong
https://binged.it/2v9JUtQ
youre reading more into the data than whats there
also considering that if the lost ten tribes concept is true the jewish population should only possess 2/12ths of the original haplogroup compared to the "lost tribes" who would possess 10/12ths of the original haplogroup. amazing that the near and mideast possess about 8 to 10% of the r1b haplogroup but the u.k. possesses about 80%. hmmmmm, go figure
http://hope-of-israel.org/haplo.html
Anon 4:02 said: “Satan sent them to make HWA look bad by having them do all their own outrageous evil in HWA’s name.”
Satan didn’t need to send ANYONE to make HWA look bad. Anyone with one iota of critical thinking could see that he was not what he claimed he was. The misuse (theft) of tithe money and the lavish and ostentatious lifestyle that he led proves that he wasn’t trying to emulate Christ. The MANY failed prophecies prove that God wasn’t speaking through him. The pride that is evident in his speaking and writing show that he wasn’t being led by the spirit. The fruit of his loins is the crazy, abusive ministry of the CoGs, because it was HWA who polluted many of the biblical prove-able doctrines with ministerial idolatry. He spent his whole life as what he was in the beginning, a salesman trying to get rich. In short, Satan didn’t need to send anyone to make HWA look badly, he accomplished that all on his own.
Anon 4:02 said: “Satan sent them to make HWA look bad by having them do all their own outrageous evil in HWA’s name.”
Satan didn’t need to send ANYONE to make HWA look bad. To anyone with one iota of critical thinking he already looked bad. His misuse of tithe money (theft) and his lavish and ostentatious lifestyle proved that he wasn’t truly following Christ. His MANY failed prophecies made it evident that God wasn’t speaking through him. The pride and lack of agape in his speaking and writing showed that he wasn’t being led by the spirit. He always was what he was from the beginning: a salesman’s trying to get rich. The fruit of his loins is the crazy, abusive CoG leadership, because it was HWA that polluted Many of the biblically prove-able doctrines with ministerial idolatry.
So again, Satan didn’t need to send anyone to make HWA look badly, he did that all on his own.
Anon 4:02 said: “Satan sent them to make HWA look bad by having them do all their own outrageous evil in HWA’s name.”
Satan didn’t need to send ANYONE to make HWA look bad. To anyone with one iota of critical thinking he already looked bad. His misuse of tithe money (theft) and his lavish and ostentatious lifestyle proved that he wasn’t truly following Christ. His MANY failed prophecies made it evident that God wasn’t speaking through him. The pride and lack of agape in his speaking and writing showed that he wasn’t being led by the spirit. He always was what he was from the beginning: a salesman’s trying to get rich. The fruit of his loins is the crazy, abusive CoG leadership, because it was HWA that polluted Many of the biblically prove-able doctrines with ministerial idolatry.
So again, Satan didn’t need to send anyone to make HWA look badly, he did that all on his own.
Anon 4:02 said: “Satan sent them to make HWA look bad by having them do all their own outrageous evil in HWA’s name.”
Satan didn’t need to send ANYONE to make HWA look bad. To anyone with one iota of critical thinking he already looked bad. His misuse of tithe money (theft) and his lavish and ostentatious lifestyle proved that he wasn’t truly following Christ. His MANY failed prophecies made it evident that God wasn’t speaking through him. The pride and lack of agape in his speaking and writing showed that he wasn’t being led by the spirit. He always was what he was from the beginning: a salesman’s trying to get rich. The fruit of his loins is the crazy, abusive CoG leadership, because it was HWA that polluted Many of the biblically prove-able doctrines with ministerial idolatry.
So again, Satan didn’t need to send anyone to make HWA look badly, he did that all on his own.
Attempting to match prophecy with today’s geopolitical groups seemed to favor the British when they still had an empire. The empire really never recovered from WW-II.
the problem with rejecting b.i. is that great britain and the u.s. falling is exactly what the bible and hwa said would happen. losing the seagates and strangers taking over and ruling over them. no matter what anyone says the u.s. and british of any in history fit the prophecies.
Doesn’t matter, poster who doesn’t know about caps. That scene got blown in 1972-75, we’re now 44 years after the fact, the US is still a superpower, the Brits are a wealthy and influential island, and white people are intermarrying with exotic ethnicities and disappearing as a race. Why Don Trump even has to embrace the Russkies so there can be more white people in the collective. The HWAcaca ain’t gonna happen no matter how badly you yearn for it. Your life has probably been wasted and filled with anxiety. Nobody is preaching any kind of powerful warning message. HWA’s message faded and became obscure the moment he croaked.
BB
Gordon Feil said...
My point is that it doesn't matter. Nothing important depends on whether B.I. theory is valid. In short, why care?
************************
Agree 100% Gordon!
Kevin McMillen
I did Y testing. Fascinating stuff. Its unfortunate that while autosomal DNA testing is becoming very popular, Y DNA testing is not that common among the hobbyists.
The USA is the only superpower in the world today. Both militarily and economically it is number one. The USA rules the seas, having I think 10 Nimitz class carriers, each of which has more firepower then the combined Naval forces the rest of the world. The cheapest way to ship goods is by water, and the USA has more navigable fresh waterways than the rest of the world combined. Plus American rivers interconnect nicely, unlike Europe's or Asia's. The American economy is best positioned to thrive and survive. Resources and demographics favor it. Try comparing the USA population pyramid with that of Europe or China and Japan, and you may get the point. I could go on, but i detest typing on this phone.
Honestly all this debate between those who accept the theory that descendants of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel exist among those of European ethnicity and those who reject it. Just agree to disagree and move on! Personally I believe the theory. I don't believe it's a salvational issue, however. And I'm sure our knowledge about DNA, ethnicity, etc. is only a drop in the ocean. Like Rumsfeld put it: "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones." So all I'm saying is when Christ returns I can imagine He'll turn everything we thought we knew and were so dogmatic about on its head (and that goes for all Christians not just Armstrongist Christians!)! ;-)
You’re missing the point completely, 12:29. You will probably get as much as 90% agreement, even here, that BI is not a salvation issue.
However, HWA made BI the lynchpin of his endtime prophesy mold, the key to understanding Biblical prophesy as a function of allegedly historic but long-forgotten national identities. As such, arkane “revealed” knowledge was made to impose an endtimes mission upon a small “called out” group, who were expected to give their all in supporting a quasi-Biblical figure, “God’s Apostle” in warning the world.
He, Herbert, made support of him, and loyalty to him, based on this theory and his alleged end-times message a salvation issue! How many times were the lazy, dumb sheep threatened with the Lake of Fire for failing to give enough, or for criticizing Herbert???
Since nothing happened in 1975 or in the 44 years since, and since no successor is getting the Armstrong endtimes gospel out as powerfully as or more powerfully than the Armstrongs, it’s time to admit that the BI-fueled rocket has fizzled. It was a dud, never reality, only a clever “hook”. It’s as I said in another post, we don’t even need dna. The evidence against was already overwhelming.
BB
Byker Bob said...
"He, Herbert, made support of him, and loyalty to him, based on this theory and his alleged end-times message a salvation issue! How many times were the lazy, dumb sheep threatened with the Lake of Fire for failing to give enough, or for criticizing Herbert???"
Yes HWA promoted a version of British-Israelism.
Yes HWA claimed he was ordained of Christ as if he was an apostle or prophet or the fulfillment of Bible prophecies.
Yes HWA used these teachings, along with all of his supposed "restored truths" to fearmonger his followers into financially supporting him.
Yes HWA claimed his followers' spiritual destinies were at stake and dependent on their believing him and his doctrines; and obeying him and supporting his "Work."
But, just because HWA was guilty of all of these reprehensible--and even worse!--actions doesn't automatically render all of his teachings null and void. Moreover, all of his teachings were derived from other Christian groups.
So, basically what I'm saying BB is that HWA might have taught BI and made it a salvation issue for his own selfish purposes, but it's not a salvation issue and aspects of BI might actually be scriptural and historical truth irrespective of how modern genetics interpret human DNA and origins at present.
bb, you've merely proven that the way hwa used the bi theory was wrong, you haven't proven the theory wrong any more than those who consider it possible have proven it right.
mock the so called "end time bi messenger" all you want, but it's pointless to mock something that really can't be proven one way or the other.
Re: your last paragraph: BI is not scriptural or historic truth. As I say, we don’t even need the dna science. Over the years, some of us have done considerable research and have produced papers on BI, which are still available for your edification if you know where to find them. The most definitiive series I have ever seen is archived at the old “Silenced” blog. The series is called “A Foundation of Sand”. Best way to get there is to type “Silenced / A Foundation of Sand” into your browser. There is a 30 page pdf file which you read, or you can print it out so that you have it for your permanent records.
There are also some articles preserved at the Painful Truth website. Go to hwarmstrong.com/articles-2010.htm, and from the list which comes up, select “British Israelism Revisited”. The article presents post-exilic scriptural evidence against British Israelism, pre-exilic scriptural evidence, and scriptural evidence from the actual period of captivity, collectively tracking Ephraimites and Manassites through three separate empires over a period of several hundred years. We also include information from the records of the Assyrian kings of the period. At the time this article was researched and written, the business climate was still bad due to the great recession, and therefore I had considerable disposable time on my hands for research and writing.
There are numerous articles on this topic by other authors at that same site. Check it out!
British Israelism is such a sacred cow, particularly to Armstrongites, that we’ve found that people continue to believe it simply because they want or need to believe it, and not because there is any real factual support for it. In fact, with a few mouse clicks, there is a plethora of evidence against it. HWA read prophecy, and used it to interpret current events. He made some leaps between similarities of the two, further guided by J.H. Allen’s 1902 work “Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright”, a book written during the zenith of the old British Empire. Just about everything HWA ever wrote has been preserved on the internet. From his archives, we realize today that the man was making leaps and wrongly connecting dots during World War II, which he believed at the time was leading to Armageddon, and to demonstrate how ignorant he was, you must realize that Israel had not yet even been reborn as a nation at that time. This is something that most analysts of prophecy believe is a prerequisite for the end-time events. At any rate, Jesus’ Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, and Luke 21 imposes a generational time cap on the end time events, key whether one takes a futurist view or a preterist view of Jesus’ apocalyptic message. Though conveniently revised at several points during the passage of time, the only generation which has not passed since 1948 is the baby boomers, and even we are currently passing at a fairly rapid rate. But, have no fear, Armstrongites. As generation X continues to dominate, your leaders will find some new and creative way of reassuring you that HWA was actually the end times Elijah, and was correct.
Google the materials I’ve referenced, especially the “Silenced” series. Shed your confirmation bias, and preconceptions. You might just come away with an entirely different point of view.
BB
All science confirms what HWA taught................when you aproach the topics from a wide angle and shift the timing somewhat............
I love the teachings of HWA as they shaped my worldview before science confirmed it.........somewhat..........
www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47938188?ns_campaign=bbcnews&ocid=socialflow_facebook&ns_source=facebook&ns_mchannel=social&fbclid=IwAR3BTs32uXlyGIRVa8y-vGLjqsmtw90Q-J-okp4bhEu9oWUxkYW3efviGdM&fbclid=IwAR0klmBra07WfC2XP4OwcuWI--AlHjJskPcWoMOCD--E57u7ilz9ivWljQc
nck
My above posting EXACTLY conforms to what HWA wrote in USBP about the TWO "migration" routes to the isles "NorthWest" from the Levant area. The earlier split off way before the israelite migration. Just read "white" instead of "israel."
All the rest in USBP is way off (timing) but there is SOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH incredible truth in there for the eye of the beholder.
nck
No-caps-man: Obviously, you didn’t go over to the Painful Truth site and read my paper, in which I quoted scriptures which were written before the exile, during the exile, and after the exile.
The lost ten tribes were never lost! They were assimilated. The British nation was never one or two pure ethnicities. It was a melting pot of Picts, Celts, Normans, Anglo-Saxons, and others even prior to the colonization of the new world. The British Royal Family is actually German, and changed their surname during WW-I due to the anti-German sentiments caused by WW-I.
The scriptures I cited in the paper are “inconvenient” scriptures which we were never taught in Armstrongism. There are also passages in the New Testament which identify named characters by their tribe. “Lost” ones were present and accounted for during the time of Jesus and the disciples.
BB
Nck, you must indeed have a genuine HWA “ambassador without portfolio” magic decoder ring that “rectifies” conflicting facts and timelines in such a way as to always make HWA appear to have been correct! Life should be easier than that. Reality should stand on its own and be self-evident.
BB
Thanks BB for the links! I recently read David Baron's "History of the Ten Lost Tribes" but didn't entirely agree with his arguments. I find it interesting to read opposing views so I'll check out your recommendations!
Re your comment to the other anonymous poster (8:29) thus: "The British Royal Family is actually German, and changed their surname during WW-I due to the anti-German sentiments caused by WW-I." I personally don't believe the related BI theory that the British royal family is descended from King David. So I'm in agreement with BI critics like Baron on this point! :-)
3:33
Unlike most people I am able to actually use the "on off button" on my "magic" key. As all people are born with it. (its a mirror function or byproduct of the ego and self consciousness) Ever been to a "star wars" or "game of thrones" convention or took a stroll in the book shop part with "phantasy"?
It also allows one to see the "propaganda" in the article on the esteemed bbc website. As I said current western media is saturated with articles on how people from the middle east contributed to european culture in order to make some point. (as hea did)
Now we can see a backlash. Notre Dame the Paris had Beyonce help them for some minor reparations because of lack of funds for major restauration.
Then a fire strikes at the heart of european culture and a billion dollars is donated within 2 days.
I am awaiting european election results "reading the signs" from my "magic key." The "magic key" has taken me on many interesting voyages and discoveries.
But I do agree! Once in posession of a magic key or in the hands of irresponsible wizzards its powers should be contained.
To some the bbc article opens a world of magic to others a can of worms.
Nck
I would suggest that there is a typological correspondence between the Union of Judah and Israel under the Davidic dynasty and the Union of the Crowns of Scotland and England, which led to the Act of Union in 1707, which created the United Kingdom of Great Britain - the Union of Scotland and England, under the Stewarts.
It is the Stewart bloodline that runs through the succeeding kings and queens of Britain.
“Her Majesty the Queen is bound to Scotland by ties of ancestry, affection and duty. She is descended from the Royal House of Stewart on both sides of her family. Her relationship with Scotland and the Scots began in childhood, and has deepened during her many private as well as official visits during the seven decades of her reign.
“Her parents shared a common ancestor in Robert II, King of Scots. Through her father King George VI she is directly descended from James VI of Scotland [James 1 of Great Britain]. Through her mother’s family, the Bowes-Lyons, Earls of Strathmore, she can trace her ancestry back through generations of Scottish nobility to Sir John Lyon, Thane of Glamis, who married Robert II’s daughter in the fourteenth century” (nrscotland.gov.uk).
1Ki 14:21 And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah... And his mother's name was Naamah an Ammonitess.
A few highlights on the royal houses:
William of Orange was the son of Mary, eldest daughter of the Stewart king Charles 1.
George 1 of the House of Hanover was the son of Sophia, a granddaughter of the Stewart king James the 1.
Queen Victoria was the daughter of Edward, Duke of Kent, the fourth son of King George III.
Eze 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
Eze 37:17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
Eze 37:22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:
Eze 37:21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
Eze 37:24 And David [i.e., the Messiah] my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.
Eze 37:25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.
Eze 37:27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Eze 37:28 And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.
After Jacob’s trouble Judah and Israel will be reunited as one nation under the Messiah. The Gog coalition against Joshua, son of God, parallels the Jabin coalition against Joshua, son of Nun.
Jos 18:1 And the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them.
Jos 18:10 And Joshua cast lots for them in Shiloh before the LORD:
Eze 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever...
Israel before the Lord at Shiloh parallels Israel before the Lord in Jerusalem.
The temple will be some distance from the city depending on whether the ellipses are cubits or rods.
King Edward VII was the eldest son of queen Victoria and Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. He was heir presumptive to the Duchy of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, but renounced his title shortly before his marriage.
King George V, his son, was the first monarch from the House of Windsor, which he had renamed from the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha as a result of public sentiment against the Germans. His cousin was Wilhelm II of Germany. Queen Elizabeth II is King George V’s granddaughter.
BB
I really don't understand BB's incessant denial that the anglo saxons are saxons by constantly proving that the royal family are saxons too.
Am I the stupid one here?
Nck
Nck, you just can’t have the Brits from their melting pot being the good guys, and the Germans being the bad guys (Assyrians), yet have them sharing heretage. You can’t artificially create such a scenario based on a level of purity of ethnicity which never existed.
BB
3:20 BB
So the native tribes turned Oklahomans after the "trail of tears"?
I get it now.
"Germans" is a 19th century concept and the "forbidden songtext " deutschland uber alles" does not at all refer to "superiority over" but refers to the 19th century german nation concept "OVER" the 300 principalities that ruled over a large number of tribes since Roman times when each local chieftain was integrated as a roman officer (as we do at west point and that famous british school training the leaders of the nations under our political and economic dominion)
Only a couple of tribes moved to the isles "on invitation" in exactly the same manner that the US army was legally "invited" by the respective legal governments of Afghanistan and Iraq BEFORE launching their now legal offensive and following (economic) occupation otherwise interpreted as ( rejoining the family of cooperating nations.
The British Monarchs are indeed "saxon" gotha too. But claim many ancestors from each and every kingdom one can imagine. Inclusing pharaos, east roman emperors, marc anthony and why not a davidic king through some princess in exchange for welsh tin export contracts, which was huge 1000 BC.
Nck
So, you are finally admitting that there was not the ethnically pure Manasseh and Ephraim that HWA preached in his version of BI. At AC, we were even taught that God supernaturally sifted Manasseh from Ephraim for the colonization of America. These were tribes in central Europe, alright, but they were Germanic tribes, not the tribes of Israel. And the Germans are a fellow Germanic tribe, not Assyrian.
There are actually some relatively pure Native Americans in Oklahoma. But, many have assimilated theough marriage into the general population, and were raised as the white man. I imagine there were some church members who were part Anglo, and part Native, yet considered themselves to be Israelites.
HWA missed the boat. Christians are the new Israelites. It was never an ethnic thing to start with. You can make the case that America started out as a Christian nation and has progressively lost its values, but you cannot make the case that the USA is ethnically Manasseh.
HWA called France Reuben. Josephus (Antiquities Book I:vi) tells us that the Gauls were spawn of Noah’s grandson Gomer, whose father was Japheth. HWA, possibly because of the similar first letters in Japheth and Japan, taught us that Japheth was the father of the yellow race.
BB
One more concept. What became Samaria during the Assyrian captivity after conquest by Sargon II, had been Ephraim’s land, and the western half of Manasseh. The Cuthites had been brought in to dilute the two tribes, and thereafter, the Samaritans were no longer considered to be Manassites or Ephraimites, but mongrels and pariahs. By this sort of reckoning, the British were already an impure Samaritanized nation by the time of the colonization of America. Picts, Celts, Gauls, Normans, and Angles and Saxons all making up the English melting pot.
BB
BB
Where do you get the "purity" idea. From the "sifting sand" concept?
The moment "Israel" left Egypt the bible mentions that they take a great host of non Israelites with them that should be considered like them.
I also liked the concept of ambassador college where french girls married australian men and dutch canadians swiss and british intermarried irish girls.
Ooooooowah. So far the purity of tribes.
Nck
https://thecompletepilgrim.com/were-there-egyptians-among-the-israelites-of-the-exodus/
Kinda....
Nck
What did Josephus know about the Gauls?
He probably had heard about the greek colonies in Southern France (Provincia)
They were considered japheth by hoehian standards. And definetely mediterranean as compared to the celtic tribes up north. Btw all the names of peoples are attributed by the enemy, the romans for political reasons to divide light from darkness, barbary from civilisation, conquest and citizenship.
The germanic tribes dont care less about what the romans called the fir taxation purposes to maintain a large standing army. Your sources are propaganda by the conquerer. _ Thats why I tslk about hwa as a cia agent. As josephus was too. While ceasar a politician framing his enemies to jeep the money flow coming.
Nck
BB writes:
“HWA missed the boat. Christians are the new Israelites. It was never an ethnic thing to start with.”
Isa 49:6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.
Ac 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
But there is an ethnic component concerning God’s servants of salvation. In the Church Age, Jesus Christ commissioned the Israel of God (Israel the Church) to be His light to the Gentiles - the ‘type’. But the context of Isaiah shows that the implication of this Scripture is that Christ will commission the ‘antitype’ - Israel the Kingdom as His servants of “salvation” in the Kingdom Age.
Ac 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
Ex 19:6a And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation...
Jesus Christ is going to raise up the tribes of Jacob/restore the kingdom to Israel so that they can fulfil their role as a kingdom of priests:
“If revelation is to recommence in the millennial kingdom, converted Israel must head humanity. Jews and Gentiles stand on an equal footing, as both alike needing mercy; but as regards God's instrumentalities for establishing His kingdom on earth, Israel is His chosen people. The Israelite priest-kings on earth are what the transfigured priest-kings are in heaven... A new time of revelation will begin by the outpouring of the Spirit (Zech 12:10). Ezekiel, son of a priest, sets forth Israel's priestly character; Daniel, the statesman, its kingly; Jeremiah ... both its priestly and kingly... The Mosaic ceremonial corresponds to Israel's priestly office; the civil law to its kingly office... in the millennium both Jews and Gentiles united, under the first-born brother, Israel, walk in the light of God, realizing the full life of humanity. The human race is not an aggregate of individuals and nationalities, but an organic whole, laid down once for all (Gen 9:25-27; 10:1,5,18,25,32; Deut 32:8, declares that from the first the division of nations was made with relation to Israel)... The flower of Shem, the representative of spiritual life, is Israel: as the flower of Israel is He in whom all mankind is summed up, the second Adam (Gen 12:1-3), Israel is mediator of Divine revelations for all times... Earthly and heavenly glories shall be united in the twofold election. Elect Israel in the flesh shall stand at the head of the earthly; the elect spiritual church, the Bride, in the heavenly. These elections are not merely for the good of the elect, but for whom they minister. The heavenly Church is elected, not merely to salvation, but to rule in love, and minister blessings over the earth, as king-priests" (Fausset, Revelation, p.722).
Rev 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
Mt 12:26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
"Two thrones are mentioned: (1) His Father's, upon which He has sat since His ascension, after victory over death, sin, world: upon this none can sit save God, and God-man Christ Jesus, for it is the incommunicable prerogative of God; (2) the throne peculiarly His as the one humbled and then glorified Son of man, to be set up over the whole earth (heretofore usurped by Satan) at His coming again: in this the victorious saints shall share (1 Cor 6:2). The transfigured elect shall with Christ judge and reign over the nations in the flesh, and Israel foremost of them" (Fausset, Revelation, p.671).
Christ and the Saints are going to replace Satan and the demons “in the heavenlies” - en tois epouraniois.
My explanation for the scriptures you present is that those Israelites who end up being raised up to rule must come from a point in history when the pure genetics of the tribes were still intact. This conclusion is based on Gen. 6:9, Ezra 10:44, and the history of the Samaritans, and how they were regarded.
Most of us white Europeans today are Heinz 57, of mixed ethnicity. That’s the result of thousands of years of assimilation. Louis Henry Gates would have extreme difficulty finding pure Manassites and Ephraimites today. Even if we use the loose standards practiced in establishing Native American tribal membership, it would be extremely difficult to identify anyone who actually was HWA’s version (the Anglo Saxons) of Israelites.
BB
Josephus knew more than what you give him credit for, nck. He also discusses the Bretons and Germani at length.
When it comes right down to it, HWA treated ethnicity about the same as he treated the Kashrut laws in Torah. Oversimplified. So far as he was concerned, if you were white, you were an Israelite.
BB
Ok. I admit. I read Josephus a long time ago and cant remember much.
I was thinking of Ceasars Bello Gallico, which is a propaganda piece to secure senate funding for a standing army and political ambitions.
He labels and frames peoples and tribes to distinghuish between "good and evil". Not as a scolar unfortunately.
Nck
To clarify:
Jer 30:7 Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.
Eze 20:34 And I will bring you out from the people, and will gather you out of the countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty hand, and with a stretched out arm, and with fury poured out.
Eze 20:35 And I will bring you into the wilderness of the people, and there will I plead with you face to face.
Eze 20:36 Like as I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you, saith the Lord GOD.
Eze 20:37 And I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant:
Eze 20:40 For in mine holy mountain, in the mountain of the height of Israel, saith the Lord GOD, there shall all the house of Israel, all of them in the land, serve me: there will I accept them, and there will I require your offerings, and the firstfruits of your oblations, with all your holy things.
The surviving members of the twelve tribes will be saved out of the great tribulation, undergoing a second exodus.
That is, the descendants of the fathers in the wilderness will comprise the twelve-tribe house of Israel.
The future allocation of the land to the twelve tribes in the Promised land under Joshua, Son of God, has a reverse parallel with the allocation of land to the twelve tribes in the Promised under Joshua, son of Nun.
Jos 18:1 And the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them.
Jos 18:2 And there remained among the children of Israel seven tribes, which had not yet received their inheritance.
In the typical account, five tribes receive their inheritance and then the tabernacle is set up at Shiloh (18:1) and then the other seven tribes are allocated their land.
Eze 48:10 And for them, even for the priests, shall be this holy oblation [“teruma”] ... and the sanctuary of the LORD shall be in the midst thereof.
In the antitypical account seven tribes are allocated their land (Eze 48:1-8). Then comes the description of the ‘teruma’ which contains the Temple. Then follows the allocation for the other five tribes (Eze 48:23-27).
In the allocation of the land, with an exception for Benjamin, the sons of Leah have the prominence. As mentioned in a recent post Levi, Judah, Reuben and Simeon have higher social status than Ephraim and Manasseh in the Millennium.
This higher status, is arguably seen in the allocation of the twelve city gates of Jerusalem. Judah, now a northern tribe, Levi and Reuben have their gates on the north side facing their lands and Simeon, Issachar and Zebulun, the last two now southern tribes, have their gates on the south side facing their lands.
Eze 47:22 And it shall come to pass, that ye shall divide it by lot for an inheritance unto you, and to the strangers [gerim] that sojourn among you, which shall beget children among you: and they shall be unto you as born in the country among the children of Israel; they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel.
Eze 47:23 And it shall come to pass, that in what tribe the stranger sojourneth, there shall ye give him his inheritance, saith the Lord GOD.
When comparing the covenant with Abraham (Genesis) and the covenant with Israel (Exodus) the gerim among them in the New Covenant get the better deal.
Eze 48:35 It was round about eighteen thousand measures: and the name of the city from that day shall be, The LORD is there.
Rev 2:13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.
The presence of the Lord in Eze 48:35 is to be understood in the same sense as Satan dwelling in Pergamos (Rev 2:13).
Ezekiel’s primary audience was the Babylonian exiles. One could make the argument that his prophecies were largely fulfilled through the work of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zerubbabel, although following the exile, there was no King. The Hasmonean kings of the intertestamental period were not of the line of David, nor were they from the tribe of Judah.
In fact, in Ezekiel 21: 24-27, Ezekiel quotes God as outlining the punishments for Israel’s covenant-breaking disobedience. One is that the crown would not be restored until “he to whom it rightfully belings shall come”.
Jacob’s blessing over his sons stated that the sceptre would be vested in Judah. Ezek. 21:2 states that God told Ezekiel to set his face towards Jerusalem. There is no doubt as to which crown is being discussed, because Jereboam’s capital was Shechem at first, and then Penuel. Baasha then moved it to Tirzah, and King Omri moved it to Samaria, where it remained until the captivity. So, clearly, the crown of verse 27 refers to the legitimate crown of Jerusalem. It ended until Jesus Christ would occupy it, Irish myths notwithstanding.
There are some parallels between Ezekiel’s prophecies and Rev. 21-22, but there are also a number of discrepancies, not the least of which is the lack of a temple in the New Jerusalem of Rev. 21:22.
Best answer for the dilemma with which British Israelists must deal is found in Ezek. 37. The real, genetic Israelites are brought back to life, and revitalized. About that, were it to happen in our times, there would be little room for debate over genetics and dna.
BB
1Ki 2:4 That the LORD may continue his word which he spake concerning me [David], saying, If thy children take heed to their way,
1Ki 9:4 And if thou [Solomon] wilt walk before me...
While I believe in BI, I appreciate that there were “if” clauses to the Davidic covenant; and who better to understand this than David and Solomon above
Ge 17:13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
Ge 17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
Human-beings can break everlasting covenants.
Jer 52:31 And it came to pass in the seven and thirtieth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, in the five and twentieth day of the month, that Evil-merodach king of Babylon in the first year of his reign lifted up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah, and brought him forth out of prison...
“The account of Jehoiachin’s release comes like the small cloud of Elijah’s ministry during a time of drought (1 Kings 18:41-46). There is a possibility of change and deliverance to come. The shape of that change is indicated by the person released. He is David’s “son.” Even though the final paragraph likely presupposes the death of Jehoiachin in Babylon, he is the agent of continuity in the Davidic line and thus the family history of the Messiah, which reaches its culmination in the birth of Jesus. A Christological reading of the chapter’s conclusion grows out of the historical concerns of the compilers themselves. They wanted readers to know that all hope was not gone. Jehoiachin and his family were still living. And while the shape of any hope was inchoate, readers are invited to do more than simply acknowledge the judgment of the past. They are invited to be open to a future predicated on God’s promise to the Davidic house” (J. Andrew Dearman, Jeremiah/Lamentations, NIVAC, pp.421-22).
Jer 33:14 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD...
Jer 33:15 In those days, and at that time
Jer 33:17 For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;
This prophecy is for the Millennium. David would want for a man to sit upon the throne of Israel (aka “throne of the Lord,” 1 Chronicles 29:23) from the time of Zedekiah until Jesus Christ’s second coming.
2Ch 9:8 Blessed be the LORD thy God, which delighted in thee to set thee on his throne, to be king for the LORD thy God: because thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do judgment and justice.
Just as Christ appointed Peter to act as shepherd after His return to heaven, at the end of the first half of his prophetic week; so Christ will set up one of his relatives as king to rule for him in His return to heaven at the end of his prophetic week - a descendant of James, the Lord brother?
Eze 37:12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
“The imagery shifts from a scattering of bones on a battlefield to a cemetery with sealed graves” (NIVSB).
BB writes: Best answer for the dilemma with which British Israelists must deal is found in Ezek. 37. The real, genetic Israelites are brought back to life, and revitalized. About that, were it to happen in our times, there would be little room for debate over genetics and dna.
Ro 11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
No dilemma if you don’t take this prophetic vision out of its context (see next post). For me the imagery does not foretell a literal resurrection of the dead to physical life, like Lazarus, of Israel at Christ second coming; looks like we will have to agree to disagree on the interpretation.
“FAMILIARITY LEADS TO misinterpretation. Of all the prophecies of Ezekiel this section is perhaps the most familiar to the average reader. This is not necessarily an advantage, however, because it means the common misconceptions may first have to be cleared away before the constructive work can be done.
“At first sight, for example, Ezekiel seems to be a proof text for the resurrection of the body, as many of the early church fathers (and early rabbinic interpretations) understood it to be. However, what the prophet is depicting is certainly not an expected universal resurrection...
“The fact that this passage has been widely misunderstood by interpreters from such a wide range of backgrounds raises a further point about the nature of visions. Visions, like parables, tend to be open-ended, full of imagery that is capable of diverse interpretations. The precision of logically constructed syllogisms is traded for the effective power of symbols. Some visions are deliberately open-ended, especially those dealing with the future. To avoid such misunderstandings, therefore it is especially important to read visions within their context. If the vision itself is removed from the context of the biblical book in which it stands, as if it were a timeless statement of universal truth, misunderstanding is likely.
“In a similar way a single still photograph taken from a film might be open to many different interpretations, although, seen within the flow of the movie, its meaning may be univocal. In the case of Ezekiel 37, the context is twofold. The narrower context is the interpretation of the vision given by the Lord himself in 37:11-14. The broader context is the place of the vision within the book itself, as part of the message of restoration to a people who have experienced a full outpouring of the wrath of God” (Iain M. Duguid, Ezekiel, NIVAC, pp.428-29).
Dt 30:5 And the LORD thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and he will do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fathers.
Dt 30:6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.
Dt 30:8 And thou shalt return and obey the voice of the LORD, and do all his commandments which I command thee this day.
“... the key to understanding the chapter aright is to see it in its context. Ezekiel had been promising his people a change in their fortunes: new leadership, a restored land, rebuilt cities, and many of the features of the Messianic era. It is not surprising that he was met with scepticism: the fall of Jerusalem had meant the break-up of their faith and it was not going to be restored as easily as that. They looked at the shattered remains of their people in exile and they could only say, ‘Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost. Can these bones live?’ The answer appeared to be unmistakably ‘No’. Ezekiel, however, believed that it could happen. If God’s purpose was to restore Israel, he would do it by however great a miracle. Both the vision and the oracle of the two sticks conveyed this message. In the case of the first (1-14), the nation was shown that God’s Spirit had the power to turn what looked like a host of skeletons into an effective army of men, a picture of Israel restored to life again and filled with the Spirit. In the second (15-28) Ezekiel shows that the old divisions between Israel and Judah will pass away: the new nation will unite the remnants of both peoples in one land under one king, and without their traditional animosity” (John B. Taylor, Ezekiel, TOTC, pp. 227-28).
The dilemma isn’t with Ezek. 37, it’s with the literalism of the British Israelism itself. BI is taught literally, and not spiritual/allegorically.
www.bbc.co.uk./history/ancient/british/_prehistory/peoples_01.shtml gives an overview of the many groups which comprise the British gene pool, and have for hundreds or thousands of years. There is no way that two ethnically pure dominant groups such as the tribe of Manasseh, and the tribe of Ephraim could have existed in the early 1600s. I can’t seem to locate it right now, but about ten years ago I had a quote from the 1100s which stated that by the 1100s the original British ethnic groups had all blended so homogeneously that individuals were no longer able to be distinguished as having come from the original groups.
Admittedly, Wikipedia is not the end all and be all as an authority, but check out the Wiki article on “Genetic History of the British Isles”.
This is why I’ve said for years that we don’t need dna to impeach BI. The evidence against it was overwhelming already. Basically, you had one melting pot nation (along with other nations) participating in the colonization of another nation, usurping the native culture along the way, and producing an even more diverse melting pot. Genetic diversity has accelerated over the past 400 years.
BB
Post a Comment