Let's just say that America is Manasseh
Herbert Armstrong and his Worldwide Church of God taught that Americans with Western European ancestry were the modern descendants of the Israelitish tribe of Manasseh. According to Armstrong, this explained the material wealth and success of the United States of America - that the people of the U.S. were the co-heirs of the promises made to Abraham (the people of Great Britain being the descendants of Ephraim). Unfortunately for America, as far as Mr. Armstrong was concerned, this also meant that most of the ancient prophetic warnings of the Old Testament for the people of Israel were actually applicable to the United States! Indeed, Mr. Armstrong saw it as the mission of him and his church to preach a message of warning to the American people about the terrible punishment which Almighty God was about to unleash upon them because of their national sins. And, in Mr. Armstrong's estimation, things like abortion, homosexuality, and the "breakdown" of the family were among the most important of those sins.
Now, although this teaching about identifying the United States as one of the so-called "lost ten tribes of Israel" has been thoroughly discredited here and elsewhere, very little attention has been paid to the implications which this teaching had on Armstrong's interpretations of all of those prophetic warnings about America's sins. Nevertheless, this was at the heart of the Worldwide Church of God's message to America and the world. Indeed, Herbert Armstrong considered this identification of the United States and Great Britain as Manasseh and Ephraim to be the "KEY" to understanding Biblical prophecy! Moreover, all one has to do is review past issues of the now-defunct Plain Truth magazine to see that he attributed all of America's and Britain's then-current problems to the beginning of the prophesied time of "Jacob's trouble" - the beginning of God's punishment for our national sins. Of course, if the initial identification of America and Britain as Israel is wrong, that means that the related understanding of the applicability of those prophecies to the modern citizens of those nations must also be wrong.
However, for the sake of argument, let's just say that America is Manasseh - and all of those warnings about our national sins do apply to us! Wouldn't it be incumbent upon us to explore what kinds of sins provoked God's wrath? In other words, what do those ancient prophecies reveal about Israel's sins? Were the issues that Mr. Armstrong identified (abortion, homosexuality, disintegration of the nuclear family) synonymous with what those ancient prophets revealed about the nature of Israel's sins? And, if we can clearly demonstrate that Israel's sins were fundamentally different in nature from America's "sins," shouldn't that conclusively demonstrate that the Divine wrath and punishment described in those ancient prophecies CANNOT apply to the United States?
First, from the Torah and through the period of the kingdoms and writings of the prophets, it should be noted that Israel's sins were based ENTIRELY on the premise that the people had violated the terms of God's COVENANT with them. More particularly, Scripture informs us of a widespread problem with idolatry and adopting the religious rituals of both the folks which they had displaced in the Promised Land and the nations which surrounded them. This, of course, was a direct violation of the first two of the Ten Commandments, and God's instruction not to learn and adopt the religious traditions of other peoples. In a similar fashion, Scripture informs us that the Israelites failed to take care of the poor among them and administer justice in a fair and impartial manner (once again, as demanded in the Torah). In addition to these fundamental problems, Scripture also informs us that the Torah laws, rituals, and other observances which they did continue to keep became perfunctory and meaningless to them. In other words, they were just going through the motions of observing the tenets of God's covenant with them. Under the terms of the Old Covenant, Israel was symbolically married to God, and their violation of the terms of that marriage contract also made them guilty of spiritual adultery! As a consequence, we are told that God gave Israel a "certificate of divorce" and allowed them to be conquered and carried into captivity by their enemies.
Now, one could certainly make the case that the United States has made an idol out of their wealth, military might, and their system of governance. It is also apparent that a reasonable person could conclude that America hasn't taken proper care of the poor and disadvantaged in their midst. Likewise, America clearly does not have a spotless record when it comes to the fair and impartial administration of justice. And it is certainly true that the United States has largely ignored the laws, rituals, and other observances outlined in the Torah. However, if the Old Covenant has been abrogated by God, if God truly divorced Israel, it is hard to see by what logic the United States could said to be worthy of receiving the punishments designated for violating that covenant! This notion is made even more absurd by the fact that the New Testament is very clear that Jesus Christ has instituted a New Covenant with better terms and promises than those which were part of the Old Covenant with Israel! Hence, it seems inconsistent and illogical that God would condemn and punish Israel again for violating a covenant which has already been abrogated and superseded! Moreover, the national sins which Armstrong and other Fundamentalist Christians have underscored (homosexuality, abortion, the dissolution of the family) are clearly different from the ones which Scripture ascribed to ancient Israel!
Finally, even if we could somehow make the case that America's sins are the moral equivalent of those of ancient Israel, we would still have to explain why those sins should be regarded in the same universal fashion that Israel's sins were obviously regarded by God. After all, even in San Francisco and New Orleans, the overwhelming majority of the citizens of those cities are heterosexual! Moreover, most Fundamentalist Christians (and the majority of folks in other religious traditions) have NEVER condoned or sought an abortion! Likewise, whatever the reality relative to the "breakdown" of the traditional family, once again, the vast majority of Americans still hold up those notions as the ideal. In other words, if God promised Abraham that he would spare the universally wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah if he found just ten righteous people within them, then how can we justify God destroying the United States for the sins of a minority? Isn't the principle that universal sin brings universal punishment/destruction? In the instance of the flood wasn't the wickedness of humankind said to be so universal in nature that "every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually"? Doesn't Scripture make very plain that ALL of the people of Israel were guilty of spiritual adultery?
Hence, even if we allow that the United States is modern Israel, it is clear that the covenant, sins, and relative culpability of their citizens are NOT comparable to those of the people of ancient Israel! To be clear, this shoe doesn't fit from whatever angle we choose to try to make it fit! In other words, those prophecies of the Old Testament CANNOT and DO NOT apply to the United States of America, and anyone who claims that they do is justly condemned as a FALSE prophet!
Lonnie Hendrix
38 comments:
"Mah great-granma wuz a Manasseh princess!"
There is a Manasseh Street in Oak Grove Missouri according to Google Maps!
Miller:
I especially like your next to the last paragraph - a cogent argument.
I believe the Armstrongist understanding of how people relate to God is formed in Deuteronomy 27 and 28. Their relationship is mostly transactional - if I do X then God will do Y. If I do good, God will bless me. If I do bad, God will curse me.
But included in the OT canon are two books that both sound a counterpoint to the Deuteronomic belief - Job and Jonah. Job did right and got smacked. He complained to God about this and God said he was right. Very non-Deuteronomic. Jonah looked forward to the destruction of the Assyrians. From Nahum we know what God thought of the Assyrians. Jonah thought the record on Assyrian evil was well established and looked forward to their cataclysmic collapse. And they repented and God forgave them and Jonah became exceedingly angry. Very non-Deuteronomic of God.
Jesus said,
"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you..."
I wonder if that NT attitude is not totally cancelled by the zealous and gratuitous pursuit of this OT scripture:
"Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins."
I believe Jesus is to be found in the first scripture and the second scripture had value only in a specific historical context. But the second scripture seems to have found a prominent place in the charters of many apocalyptic Millerite denominations.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Miller
And also. It is utter impossible for the United States and Britain to be nicely divided into two different tribes. There was no neat biological bifurcation process in history to separate them out into two distinct tribes. My family is present in North America, Britain and Australia that I know of. This lack of distinction between the putative Ephraim and Manasseh is one of the stronger proofs that BI is malarkey.
Some will say the the USA is the world's greatest nation and has to be in the Bible and Manasseh is the best possibility. But the USA is just another big Gentile nation that appeared on the scene. They come and go. The USA will one day collapse like all the rest. Maybe China will step up next and inherit the mantle of the fabled Manasseh - if one lives by geopolitics. It is the Gospel that will remain true.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
And, then there was Stephen Stills and Manassas.
As a former adherent and later spectator, I had thought that Armstrongites were unique, in that you could absolutely disprove perhaps their most cherished belief (British Israelism), and I mean literally demolish, obliterate, and destroy all of the arguments in favor of the theory, and they'd just continue to spout it as if not a single objection had been raised. They did this, because it was ingrained in them that disproofs didn't matter! What their demagogue taught on the subject trumped the disproofs.
Strange choice of words there! It was not until 2020 that I realized that this phenomenon was part of the human zealot's condition, as I watched someone else Trump the truth, and observed how his believers reacted. Perhaps Armstrongites really aren't all that strange after all. They fit quite nicely into this band of the human spectrum!
Fortunately, in both cases, I've been able to say "See ya! Wouldn't wanna be ya!"
"I believe the Armstrongist understanding of how people relate to God is formed in Deuteronomy 27 and 28. Their relationship is mostly transactional - if I do X then God will do Y. If I do good, God will bless me. If I do bad, God will curse me."
_____
That also is the standard model and belief in Christianity in general in my experience
No, God's judgement upon the USA is not dependent on we being Israel.
In Jeremiah 5:9,29 and 9:9, God's anger is directed towards what is described as sins committed by "such a nation as this"! Chapter 9:25 shows that this not only includes Israel but all nations that are uncircumcised in heart. You asked, what kind of sins provoke God's wrath? These chapters list several specifics, of which a few are:
-they swear falsely
-covetousness
-no fear of God
-wicked people that lay await and set traps for their fellow man
-they judge not the cause of the fatherless
-speak lies
-deceive their neighbor
-walk after the imagination of their own heart
I would say the shoe DOES FIT, and by calling anyone a false prophet who says these prophecies do apply to the USA (a nation such as this) when God says THEY DO is a false prophet himself!
One of the core doctrines I do believe HWA was right in bringing to the Church was the doctrine of the nature of God, and that He is reproducing Himself within true believers. And using this process as analogous to the physical fetus growing in a womb for nine months is a powerful reason to denounce abortion. And I don't really care if you are denouncing it to Manasseh or Ephraim or Rueben or Gog for that matter. I do think it is the job of God's Church to denounce the practice wherever it is being deployed.
Neo,
I think your exactly right about the transactional perspective of Armstrongites. And, although I think that Dennis is correct in pointing out that the ACOGs are not alone in this, I think that the mainstream Christian approach has always emphasized grace over the dos and don'ts. Even so, I see even more validity to Dennis' point if we leave theology aside and look at how most Christians conduct their lives. Let's face it, there is a widespread expectation out there that "I will be blessed and protected if I do the right thing," or that "God will zap me if I screw up!"
BP8,
Sorry, but no cigar! Jeremiah 5 and 9 are clearly talking about Judah. In other words, God is addressing the sins of HIS people. As for that verse you referenced in Jeremiah 9, the full context is: 25 “A time is coming,” says the Lord, “when I will punish all those who are circumcised in body but not in spirit— 26 the Egyptians, Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, the people who live in the desert in remote places, and yes, even the people of Judah. And like all these pagan nations, the people of Israel also have uncircumcised hearts.” "A time is coming" when? Has God already dealt with the Egyptians, Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, etc.?
Clearly, if we believe in the Bible, we are told that God will someday intervene in the affairs of this world and deal with all of the sins you listed. Why should the United States be regarded as unique in this respect? How are we any different from France, Canada, or Sweden in this respect? And why would God choose to destroy us for our current batch of sins when he didn't choose to destroy us for hoodwinking Native Americans, enslaving our African brethren, or destroying our environment?
Let's be absolutely clear on this point: EVERY nation on the face of the earth is "a nation such as this." ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and God and Jesus Christ have already moved to correct that. You don't need Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, or Amos to demonstrate that - or try to graft their prophecies onto the United States! Yes, for those of us who do not already see it clearly, someday it will be very clear to everyone who was and wasn't a false prophet!
I've always asked so if Britain is Ephraim, then the British descended people came to America and miraculously after crossing the pond (atlantic ocean), then they become Manasseh? How does that work. Impossible
At least the tribal identities stayed in tact when the children of Israel migrated from the Egypt to the promised land.
BI has nothing to do with forgiveness, reconciliation, justification, sanctification, and being glorified (salvation).
Somehow that piece of North America just magically attracted "those of the stock of Manasseh" we're told. Kind of like how a Walmart attracts short, fat people with no teeth.
The truth that Mr. Armstrong taught was MORE that just “British Israelism” — a term that is limited to Ephraim and maybe Manasseh but there were eight other lost tribes. Dissidents live to attack by use of the term “British Israel” because it makes them sound intellectually scholaristic — but they’re just showing off their stupidity and vanity. History books are full of the facts of the migration of all the lost tribes.
Not only does BI have trouble with the identity of the modern day tribes of Israel, so does Christianity in general. The 144,000 in the book of Revelation is comprised of the tribes of Israel - excluding Ephraim and Dan. Yet these tribes do not exist among the modern Jews. Some Jews believe they are Aaronites or Levites. If the book of Revelation is to be credible, the tribes mentioned in Rev 7 have to be spiritual or allegorical categories instead of biological categories.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Oh? Cite the titles of those books.
Yeah. How about an article. And, please, don't forget the footnotes!
Imagine if there had been Armstrongite slaveowners back before the Civil War. They would probably have taught their slaves to say "Yassuh Massah Manasseh!"
I cant help but laugh at that.
Anon 10:54:00 AM PDT
‘History books are full of the facts of the migration of all the lost tribes’.
If you could elaborate on your comment by providing some titles as reference, that would be appreciated.
‘Dissidents live to attack by use of the term British Israel because it makes them sound intellectually scholaristic’.
Well actually no. The flaws of BI are very evident and a little research and detective work readily shows the flaws in this doctrine.
That does not make us intellectually ‘superior’ at all, but perhaps a little closer to those in Berea who diligently who made inquiry with an open and inquiring mind.
As for the ‘Dissident’ label, to lump those who refute BI as ‘showing off their stupidity and vanity’ is intellectually sloppy, especially when you have failed to provide any support to your post.
This website has plentiful well researched material available pointing to the glaring holes in BI theology.
That the Armstrong movement has not openly challenged this material is telling.
The truth that Mr. Armstrong taught was MORE that just “British Israelism”
That's true. For a time, HWA also taught "Pyramid Inches" to explain the who, when, and why of Bible Prophecy. HWA's current fans don't like to talk about that.
Part 1
“That there are 144,000 ... is a symbolic way of stressing that the church is the eschatological people of God who have taken up Israel’s inheritance...” (Alan F. Johnson, Revelation, EBC, Vol.12, pp.479-480).
Zec 2:10 Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the LORD.
Zec 2:11 And many nations shall be joined to the LORD in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee,...
While the church has taken on Israel’s heritance, it has not replaced Israel:
“It is vital that we realize, however, that the fulfilment in Christ does not obliterate the special place of Israel in God purposes, it brings it to perfect realization. Only by bowing the knee to the true seed of Abraham, the one perfect Israelite, can one be saved. There is no Saviour but Israel's Messiah, and no God but Israel's God... Zechariah expresses that same truth in terms of pilgrimage to Zion. There is only one place to which all must come in order to be saved. Only there will God dwell with his people..." (Barry Webb, The Message of Zechariah, BST, p.82-83).
Prophet Like Moses
Dt 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me [Moses]; unto him ye shall hearken;
Jn 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
Mt 5:1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:
Mt 5:2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying
"There is probably a deliberate attempt on the evangelist's part to liken Jesus to Moses, especially insofar as he is about to present the definitive interpretation of Torah, just as Moses, according to the Pharisees, had given the interpretation of Torah on Sinai to be handed on orally. The evangelist, however, does not press the Moses typology. For him, Jesus is far more than a new Moses, and his teaching is not to be construed as a new law" (Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13, WBC, p.86).
"A ... parallelism was suggested by Austin Farrer, namely that Matthew 5-7 was modelled on Exodus 20-24, the eight beatitudes corresponding to the ten commandments, with the rest of the Sermon expounding and applying them as the commandments were also expounded and applied" (John R.W. Stott, The Message of The Sermon on the Mount, BST, p.21).
The Twelve
Mt 10:1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples
Mt 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
"The choice of twelve disciples is full of symbolic meaning since the number corresponds to the twelve tribes of Israel (cf. 19:28) and in itself suggest the fulfillment of the hope of Israel (cf. Acts 28:20); it is also establishing the identity of Jesus' disciples and the Church as the true Israel" (Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13, WBC, p.265).
"Like Moses, who appointed Aaron "to instruct the Israelites" (10:11), the Lord chose his apostles to "go to the lost sheep of the house
Part 2
The Seventy
Lk 10:1 After these things the Lord appointed other seventy ["seventy-two" (NIV)] also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.
"The number appears to be symbolic of the nations of the world, a view based on Genesis 10, where there are seventy names in the Hebrew text and seventy-two in LXX. The gospel is for the world. Some, however, associate the number with that of the elders appointed by Moses (Nu. 11:16ff., 24f.; seventy-two with the two who remained in the camp. They see Jesus as the second Moses..." (Leon Morris, Luke, TNTC, p.198).
"... there is probably symbolic meaning in the number of disciples sent out. Already Jesus had commissioned twelve out of his many disciples to be leaders of the new people of God, and if this number were to correspond to the twelve sons of Jacob, the other one would be significant in a similar way: seventy was the total number both of the members of Jacob's family when he went down into Egypt, and of the representative elders of the Israelites when they eventually journeyed out of Egypt. We might distinguish two symbolic numbers by saying that 12 = the patriarchs of Israel = the apostles; while 70 = the people of Israel = the church in general" (Michael Wilcock, The Message of Luke, BST, p.120).
Twelve Thrones
Mt 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
"... the remarkable feature of this verse is that the Twelve will "sit on twelve thrones," sharing judgment with the Son of Man. The idea that believers will at the consumption have a part in judging is not uncommon in the NT (Luke 22:30; 1 Cor 6:2). What is less clear is whether (1) the twelve apostles exercise judgment over the twelve tribes of Israel physically and racially conceived, or whether (2) the twelve apostles will exercise some kind of judgment over the entire church, symbolized by "Israel" (cf. Rev 21:12-14)..." (D.A. Carson, Matthew, EBC, Vol.8, p.426).
Twelve Tribes
Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Jas 2:1 My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don't show favoritism. (NIV).
1Pe 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ...
"Who are these twelve tribes? To answer we must follow ... the straight line from the Old Testament into the New. Our Lord Jesus chose out twelve apostles (Mk. 3:13-14) and looked forward to the day of his own glory when they would sit on the twelve thrones ruling the tribes of Israel (Mt. 19:28). In doing this he was not creating a 'new' Israel (either alongside or replacing an 'old' Israel); he was leading the Israel of the New Covenant, the apostolic people of our Lord Jesus Christ, those whom Paul calls 'the Israel of God' (Gal.6:16). In a word, 'Israel' is the name of the people of Jesus; it is the inalienable title of his church. Because of this Paul teaches that Christians are children of Abraham (Gal. 3:7) and that Abraham is our father (Rom. 4:11, 16)... He asserts a fact: those who have put their faith in Jesus for salvation are Abraham's children and the Israel of God.
Part 3
“Peter brings us a step even nearer to James. He writes his first letter (1:1) to 'the exiles of the Dispersion' and goes on (1:2) to define them as people who know God ... and who have experienced the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. Old Testament terms again describe New Testament people; they are God's exiles of the Dispersion. No adjustment of meaning is made, no comprise with truth, for they are God's Israel.
"James brings these lines of Bible truth together and so sets the scene for his letter. Better than any other description could, the twelve tribes places the church firmly within the pressures and persecutions of this life. We can think of our ancestral tribes in the storm and stress of Egyptian slavery (Ex. 2:3), redeemed by the blood of the lamb (Ex. 12:3), on pilgrimage with God through 'the great and terrible wilderness' (Dt. 8:15; cf. Ex. 15:22), battling to enter into what the Lord had promised (Jos. 1:2) and struggling even after to live in holiness amid the enticements of pagan culture. These are the experiences through which James would have his readers understand their pilgrim path. They are the Lord's twelve tribes and they are dispersed throughout a menacing and testing world..." (Alec Motyer, The Message of James, BST, pp.24-25).
Sealing of God’s Servant’s
Rev 7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.
Rev 7:5 Of the tribe of Judah were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Reuben were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Gad were sealed twelve thousand...
"... John next gives the number of those sealed - 144,000 - and their identification: "From all the tribes of Israel." There are two principles views regarding the identification of this group: (1) The number and tribal identification are taken literally and refer to 144,000 Jewish Christians... (2) According to another viewpoint, John is understood to use the language of the new Israel and thus refer to the complete church composed of Jew and Gentile...
"In support of the second view, which identifies Israel with the church, is the fact that the NT identifies the followers of Christ as "Abraham's seed" (Gal 3:29), as "the true circumcision" (Phil 3:3) and the "Israel of God" (Gal 3:29...). Furthermore, John himself earlier in Revelation makes a distinction between the true Jew and false (cf. 2:9; 3:9) and that could imply that here in chapter 7 he intends also to designate the true Israel or the church...
"By the middle of the first century, Paul made a distinction between the true, spiritual Jew and the physical descendants of Abraham (Rom 2:28-29; 9:8). Only those Jews who recognized Jesus as Messiah could rightly be called "Israel" in the strictest sense (Rom 9:6), though the term might be used with qualifications to refer to the historical descendants of Jacob ("Israel after the flesh" [1 Cor 10:18 Gr.]). Peter likewise described the church (Jew and Gentile) in terms drawn from the OT ... ("holy priesthood ... chosen people ... royal priesthood ... holy nation ... [1 Peter 2:4, 9])...
"Also, the OT image of the people of Israel as a kingdom and priests of God is used by John of the followers of Jesus (1:6). Similarly, many of the promises to the victors in the churches in Asia (ch. 2-3) are fulfillments of OT promises to the true people of Israel. In Christ's rebuke to the churches, we have the OT imagery of "Balaam" and "Jezebel" describing error that had influenced not the OT Israel but the NT church..." (Alan F. Johnson, Revelation, EBC, Vol.12, pp.479-480).
9:12 writes:
“I've always asked so if Britain is Ephraim, then the British descended people came to America and miraculously after crossing the pond (atlantic ocean), then they become Manasseh? How does that work. Impossible
Just for the record, in BI, Ephraim is England; Britain comprises three countries: England, Wales and Scotland.
Please elaborate on why it is impossible when regarding below:
Nu 35:2 Command the children of Israel, that they give unto the Levites of the inheritance of their possession cities to dwell in;
Jdg 17:7 And there was a young man out of Bethlehem-judah of the family of Judah, who was a Levite, and he sojourned there.
1Sa 1:1 Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah ... an Ephrathite:
1Ch 6:16 The sons of Levi; Gershom, Kohath, and Merari.
1Ch 6:27 Eliab his son, Jeroham his son, Elkanah his son.
Elkanah was a Levite by tribal descent and an Ephraimite by geographical location; or
"Ephraimite" refers to Elkanah's tribal descent, not his tribal ancestry.
2Ch 11:14 For the Levites left their suburbs and their possession, and came to Judah and Jerusalem:
Am 9:9 For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.
* Julie Wheldon, We're all Germans! (and we have been for 1,600 years), dailymail.co.uk, July 19, 2006:
It is a rivalry that has prevailed throughout two World Wars and countless football clashes.
But it seems the English and Germans have more in common than one might have thought.
New research has found that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain from the continent 1,600 years ago was so successful that native characteristics were virtually wiped out.
And as a result experts say this has left England with a population made up largely of Germanic genes and with a language that owes much to our Anglo-Saxon invaders...
This left England culturally and genetically 'Germanised', according to the study published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B” (Julie Wheldon, We're all Germans! (and we have been for 1,600 years), dailymail.co.uk, July 19, 2006).
Why couldn’t Americans have been geographical English when residing in Britain; geographical Germans when residing in Germany; and came both geographical and tribal Manasseh in the USA - but without knowing it.
BTW, one BI enthusiast I know reckons only around 40% of the USA is descended from Jacob; and this figure is from a number of years ago.
Well, come on, out with those book titles. I just finished a book and I'm about to order some more.
Anonymous 5:52 wrote, "And as a result experts say this has left England with a population made up largely of Germanic genes and with a language that owes much to our Anglo-Saxon invaders..."
You will need to cite your "experts" because I believe you have been misled by false statements. The findings of geneticist Bryan Sykes of Oxford University is that the British Isles remains almost entirely Celtic. From a review of his book "Blood of the Isles" in Wikipedia:
"The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period and to a very considerable extent since the Mesolithic period, especially in the female line, i.e. those people, who in time would become identified as British Celts..."
Be aware of the fact that the English do not want to be viewed as Celtic and prefer to be seen as Germanic. The English regard the Celts as lower class. But the British Isles are heavily populated with people bearing haplogroup R1b - both the native Celts and the invaders from the continent. Haplogroup R1b is as densely present in the British Isles as it is absent in ancient Palestine.
I am not sure what you mean by "geographical English." The people who migrated to North America from Britain came from all over the British Isles. They did not come from some kind population redoubt. My own family is an example. There is no tribal cohesion. This is not difficult to prove. Just view a sample of family geneaologies for British derived Americans. It is a dodge to think that this is something esoteric.
Tell your friend, the "BI enthusiast," that the percentage of people of non-Jewish background in the USA that descend from Manasseh is zero. The bottom line is the idea that the USA is Manasseh is absurd and one of the many definitive proofs that BI is unmitigated malarkey.
******* Click on icon for Disclaimer
NEO writes:
“The people who migrated to North America from Britain came from all over the British Isles”.
I am well aware of this fact - I have David Hackett Fischer’s book “Albion Seed - Four British folkways in America”. Chapter titles: “East Anglia to Massachusetts,” “The South of England to Virginia,” “North Midlands to the Delaware,” “Borderlands to the Back Country”.
I haven’t read Bryan Syke, but here are a couple of reviews:
“A hard road of embellished twaddle”
I'm coming to the end of reading Bryan Sykes's "Blood of the Isles*and am throughout disappointed.
In all honesty, this book should have been discontinued some years ago as the genetics discussed in this 2006 book are at this point so incorrect and outdated it makes reading this more or less a waste of time, certainly so for £10.
I recommending having a look over it if you can get a copy for free or cheap, but definitely don't buy it at this price.
Not only is the science outdated, but it is not covered in adequate depth to justify calling this a science book. At least half of the book is Sykes' lackadaisical overview of British history (non genetic) which you can find in countless other books that are better written.
I expected a genetics book to concentrate on genetics, I can read about history elsewhere and save your anecdotes for your memoirs not an information book
(waterstones.com/books/reviews/isbn/9780552154659#review-97541).
* N. R. J. McCaughan, Too much regurgitated history, too little genetics, March 6, 2014:
The bulk of this book is occupied with narrative summaries of the history of the constituent parts of the British Isles. The author seems almost apologetic about the scientific content of what he has to say, so the rather dull and somewhat inaccurate historical accounts get too much exposure, and the science too little. The scientific element that comes off best is the account of blood groups and their distribution throughout different regions. Some of straight historical stuff is debatable, and some clearly misunderstood. In particular it's best to be extremely wary of the stuff about "celts" - it looks as if Sykes is following one of the numerous crackpot writers on this tendentious subject, and ends up confusing himself (amazon.com/Blood-Isles-Professor-Bryan-Sykes/product-reviews).
* ancestry.com/corporate/international/press-releases/DNA-of-the-nation-revealedand-were-not-as-British-as-we-think
“The genetic make-up of the nation has been revealed – with Yorkshire proven to be the most ‘British’ region in the UK, while London is the most ethnically diverse and the East Midlands the most Scandinavian region in the UK...
“The results reveal the genetic ethnic make up of the ‘average’ person in the UK and what countries and/or regions they can trace their ancestry back to over the past 500 years. They found that the average UK resident is 36.94% British (Anglo Saxon), 21.59% Irish (Celtic) and 19.91% Western European (the region covered today by France and Germany)...”
I have Albion’s Seed. Excellent book. Another one that might interest you is this book….
Melungeons: The Last Lost Tribe In America (Melungeon Series) Paperback – November 22, 2004
From the site:
Most of us probably think of America as being settled by British, Protestant colonists who fought the Indians, tamed the wilderness, and brought “democracy”–or at least a representative republic–to North America. To the contrary, Elizabeth Caldwell Hirschman's research indicates the earliest settlers were of Mediterranean extraction, and of a Jewish or Muslim religious persuasion. Sometimes called “Melungeons,” these early settlers were among the earliest nonnative “Americans” to live in the Carolinas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, and West Virginia. For fear of discrimination–since Muslims, Jews, “Indians,” and other “persons of color” were often disenfranchised and abused–the Melungeons were reticent regarding their heritage. In fact, over time, many of the Melungeons themselves “forgot” where they came from. Hence, today, the Melungeons remain the “last lost tribe in America,” even to themselves. Yet, Hirschman, supported by DNA testing, genealogies, and a variety of historical documents, suggests that the Melungeons included such notable early Americans as Daniel Boone, John Sevier, Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, and Andrew Jackson. Once lost, but now, forgotten no more.
Thanks for making me, a non-American, aware of the Melungeons.
The book had a bad review by one reader on Amazon, which wasn’t encouraging.
I read the article on them in Wikipedia; which is enough for me at this time.
My American ancestors come from the same area where the Melungeons live. Several years ago, genetic testing showed I basically had the same genetic make up as a Melungeon. Before I got the testing, research into the family history showed my ggggrandmother maiden name was Arabic, and several of her daughters bore Spanish names. The genetic tests showed Spanish, Portuguese, Maltese, Jewish, Hungarian, American Indian, as well as Scot, Irish, and English DNA. If you wish to learn more about these people, go to redbonenation.com and scroll down to the link to the surname list. Incidentally, my surname is Dalton. The Dalton Gang boys were my great-cousins, and my ggggrandmother Seludy Mustain, who's surname is Arabic, is the sister to the ancestor of Dave Mustain of the heavy metal band Megadeth.
Anonymous 1:15
It is odd that you would scan over a bunch of very positive reviews of this book to find a negative review and present it here. "N. R. J. McCaughan" has no listed credentials and no support for his opinion.
Sykes may have dwelt on history rather than genetics. I think this may have been a matter of audience appeal. Genetics is pretty dry stuff for most people. That seems to be the theme of the criticisms you present. The fact is, Sykes has quantitative data. Any valid critique will have to be at the level of that data. Anything else is qualitative rhetoric.
You quoted, "They found that the average UK resident is 36.94% British (Anglo Saxon), 21.59% Irish (Celtic) and 19.91% Western European (the region covered today by France and Germany)...”
This statement from the Ancestry Corporate site is brief and not very informative. First, the categories are a mix of ethnic identities and geographic regions. A more informative picture of the British Isles based on haplogroup can be found at:
https://www.eupedia.com/genetics/britain_ireland_dna.shtml#germanic_migrations
If you scroll down, there you will find a collection of maps titled "Distribution maps of Y-DNA haplogroups in Britain and Ireland" that support Sykes' view. It is the case that studies subsequent to Sykes original study indicate more diversity in the British Isles that Sykes concluded. But it does not have a revolutionary impact on Syke's conclusion. R1b (which is compatible with Celtic ancestry, either indigenous or mainland) remains the dominant haplogroup. In fact the Anglo-Saxons may have included people of Celtic derivation. From the article "Genetic History of the British Isles" in Wikipedia:
"One common R1b subclade in Britain is R1b-U106, which reaches its highest frequencies in North Sea areas such as southern and eastern England, the Netherlands and Denmark. Due to its distribution, this subclade is often associated with the Anglo-Saxon migrations."
Another issue is that haplogroup I was present in Britain before that Celts arrived. The people who built Stonehenge were Haplogroup I. They were the original Hunter/Gather population of Western Europe. They survive everywhere but mainly in southern Scandinavia and southeastern Europe. So haplogroup I cannot be solely identified with Anglo-Saxons.
This is going to sound cryptic but I am going to say it anyway without explanation. Too little space, too little time. Some people in the BI community will know the issue: It is not possible that Jacob's progeny could be comprised of a bunch of different haplogroups. He did not give rise to R and I and J.
Haplogroups R and I are not found in ancient burials in Palestine. There is no connection between the British-derived people and Ephraim and Manasseh.
********* Click on my icon for Disclaimer
The bloggers on here are obsessed with British Israelisim it's what they've become well known for. Their angle is always on Britain.
Even prior to the mapping of the human genome, there were various attempts at explaining Appalachian people. I recall the Scotch-Irish being invoked, and Hunter S. Thompson used the Linkhorns to explain part of the Hells Angels phenomenon in his first major publication in 1967.
People who make a conscious choice to believe in British Israelism are going to continue to filter out all the valid information which makes mincemeat of their pet theory, and will look to esoterica surrounding little, nondominant groups which they hope will make their case. The information regarding the Melungeons is interesting from an historical perspective, and provides strong evidence that we as a nation really ought to be paying more attention to Critical Race Theory, but it does nothing to prove or even partially validate Anglo Israelism.
Seeing that books and BI have been noted, I will mention that I am presently reading Gary Rendsburg’s “How the Bible is Written,” a book that I have been meaning to buy for some time, but have only done so.
For those interested in the prophecy on Ephraim’s seed Gary Rendsburg had this to say in the chapter entitled “An Introduction to Alliteration, and Alliteration in the Book of Genesis”. (The Hebrew is left out, employing only the transliteration).
Ge 25:23 And YHWH said to her, “Two nations [goyim] are in your womb, and two peoples [le’om] from your innards shall divide: and (one) people will be stronger than the (other) people, and the greater shall serve the younger.”
Ge 25:24 And her days of bearing were fulfilled [ml’]; and behold, twins in her womb.
Ge 48:17 And his father declined, and he said, “I know my son, I know - he also will become a people, and he will grow; however [we-’ulam ], his younger brother will grow greater than he, and his seed will be the fullness of nations [melo’ hag-goyim].”
“Jacob’s word to Joseph concerning Ephraim, the younger son who will supersede his older brother Manasseh, are on par with similar expressions found in similar situations in the book of Genesis (see especially Gen 17:18-21 regarding Isaac and Ishmael, and Genesis 25:23-24 regarding Jacob and Esau... Yet the verse concludes with a most enigmatic locution: melo’ hag-gayim ‘the fulness of nations’. The two-word phrase is encountered only here in the Bible, and while the sense is clear (especially in light of the parallel texts just cited), the expression is puzzling nonetheless.
“By now the reader should have discerned my approach, which I would summarize as follows: “Hark! An unusual word (or phrase)! Look for alliteration nearby!” Once more, our search yields the successful result, for in this verse we are able to identify the relatively rare we-’ulam ‘however’, which appears only 4x in the Torah (and in one of these places, Num 14:21, one notes alliteration with the root m-l-’ ‘fill’ as well...
“There is another reason for the use of melo’ hag-goyim “the fullness of nations’ in Gen 48:19. As intimated above, there is a relationship between the scene in which this verse occurs and the earlier scene in which Rebekah receives the divine word. As we saw in our treatment of Gen 25:23-24, the noun goyim ‘nations’ and the verbal root m-l-’ ‘fill’ appear there, with the latter alliterating with the noun le’om ‘people’. I would suggest that the author of Gen 48:19 intentionally alludes to the earlier scene by utilizing similar language. In fact melo’ and le’om evoke one another through assonance - a literary device that utilizes vowel patterns, in much the same way that alliteration operates with consonants. The technical name for this literary device is allusion or intertextuality...
“In short, there are several motivations that led to the presence of the unusual expression melo’ hag-goyim ‘the fullness of nations’ in Gen 48:19. Not only does the first part of the phrase alliterate with other words in the verse, the entire phrase brings the listener back to the parallel scene in Gen 25:23-24” (Gary A. Rendsburg, How the Bible is Written, pp.90-91).
So, did anyone come up with one of these "history books full of the facts of the migration of all the lost tribes"?
Lost Ten Tribes
Below are three sources who believe that the northern house of Israel disappeared or were lost to history. One is a Christian source (Peter Enns); another is a secular source (Encyclopaedia Britannica); and the third is a Jewish source (Jewish Encyclopedia).
“Assyrians had no problem impaling or flaying their captives. They also conquered and deported most of the ancient Israelites (722 BCE), the northen half, never to be heard from again...” (Peter Enns, The Bible Tells Me So, p.47) - “wiped off the pages of history” (p.112).
"... Following the conquest of the northern kingdom by the Assyrians in 721 BC, the 10 tribes were gradually assimilated by other peoples and thus disappeared from history. Nevertheless, a belief persisted that one day the Ten Lost Tribes would be found" (Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, Encyclopaedia Britannica).
"As a large number of prophecies relate to the return of "Israel" to the Holy Land, believers in the literal inspiration of the Scriptures have always labored under a difficulty in regard to the continued existence of the tribes of Israel, with the exception of those of Judah and Levi (or Benjamin), which returned with Ezra and Nehemiah. If the Ten Tribes have disappeared, the literal fulfilment of the prophecies [see for example Hosea and Ezekiel below] would be impossible; if they have not disappeared, obviously they must exist under a different name. The numerous attempts at identification that have been made constitute some of the most remarkable curiosities of literature" (jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14506-tribes-lost-ten, 1906).
"Assyrian imperial policy deliberately aimed to assimilate them into the population. However, the presence of distinctively Israelite names in documents from their exilic settlements generations after the collapse of Samaria suggests that many retained distinctive ethnic self-consciousness. (Names like Neriyaw and Paltiyau in Assyrian documents have been identified as Israelite...)" (Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel Chapters 25-28, NICOT, p.412).
If the sources above are correct where are these people today?
"In general, it is of the greatest importance to remember in regard to this Eastern dispersion, that only a minority of the Jews, consisting in all of about 50,000, originally returned from Babylon... Nor was their inferiority confined to numbers. The wealthiest and most influential of the Jews remained behind..." (Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, p.5).
Also what happened to the Jews, including members of the royal family, that Sennacherib took to Assyria (cp. Sennacherib Prism, 2Ki 18:13 and Jer 36:1)?
Hos 1:11a Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head...
Eze 37:16 ... 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am going to take the stick of Joseph - which is in Ephraim's hand - and of the Israelite tribes associated with him, and join it to Judah's stick, making them a single stick of wood, and they will become one in my hand.'
Eze 37:21 ... "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will take the Israelites out of the nations where they have gone. I will gather them from all around and bring them back into their own land.
Eze 37:22 I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. There will be one king over all of them and they will never again be two nations or be divided into two kingdoms. (NIV).
"It is sometimes pointed out that this never happened in the post-exilic history of Israel; but the prophet is looking for nothing less than the advent of the Messianic kingdom, when the Tabernacle of God shall be with his people (v.27...). At that time the nations shall recognize the power of Yahweh through His redemption of His people (v.28)" (G. R. Beasley-Murray, Ezekiel, NBC, p.681).
I dont think the exile of either Israel or Judah is in dispute. But where are these magic migrations promised by Anon 10:54?
NEO what do you make of this:
Sean Silver, groups.jewishgen.org/g/main/topic/70310138
(familytreedna.com/groups/jewish-r1b/about/goals)
Besides Vincent Vizachero's and my own work, there are now several projects which have shown a correlation between this Eastern R1b (colloquially called ht35), which is found in high frequencies and broad genetic variance among the Southern Anatolia, the Caucasuses, South Eastern Asia and the Levant. Conversely, this Eastern R1b presents with a very low frequency and genetic variance within Europe, particularly Western Europe. Peter Hrechdakian, the admin of the Armenian and Assyrian DNA Projects, also offers data that further confirms an established R1b presence within the geographic area that was once Assyria. The Jewish clusters do indeed fit within his clusters of Middle Eastern R1b, most of whom are tightly-clustered -- none more than the Jewish clusters, which themselves are tightly clustered and distinct >from the others.
At last year's FTDNA International Conference of Genetic Genealogy, Vince and I had a long discussion with Dr. Michael Hammer, who has since revised his theory of R1b migration to include the presence of this R1b which never migrated into Europe. At last week's conference, I spoke with Dr. Michael Hammer and Dr. Doron Behar about the findings of my project, and both confirmed that it indeed indicated such a presence of Jewish R1b with origins in the Middle East.
Post a Comment