Herbert W. Armstrong built a cornerstone of his Worldwide Church of God on a wild idea: the Lost Tribes of Israel didn’t vanish after the Assyrian conquest—they migrated to Western Europe and became nations like Britain and the United States. This genealogical fantasy, rooted in British-Israelism, claims the British are Ephraim and the Americans Manasseh, backed by shaky interpretations of Genesis 49 and a dash of historical guesswork. But it’s time to pull back the curtain. Armstrong’s theory crumbles under moral scrutiny for promoting exclusivity, biblical analysis for misreading scripture, and historical evidence for lacking support. We’ll show why this myth is a house of cards, spoiler: DNA and archaeological records aren’t buying it.
Twisting Tribal Blessings
Armstrong leaned heavily on Genesis 49, where Jacob blesses his sons, interpreting these as prophecies for modern nations. He linked Ephraim and Manasseh to Britain and America, citing their “multitude of nations” and “great nation” status. But the New Interpreter’s Bible, a respected biblical commentary, clarifies these blessings were symbolic, outlining tribal roles within ancient Israel, not predictions of future migrations. The text aimed to unify Israel’s identity, not map it onto Anglo-Saxon history.
This misreading is biblically flawed. The Cambridge History of Judaism shows the northern tribes were assimilated into Judah after the Babylonian Exile, with no evidence of a separate exodus. Armstrong’s stretch ignores 2 Kings 17, which details their deportation to Mesopotamia, not Europe. His genealogical fantasy twists scripture into a tool for national pride, a moral misstep that divides rather than unites believers.
Armstrong’s narrative hinges on a mass migration from the Near East to Western Europe after 722 BCE, but the Oxford History of the Biblical World and The Bible Unearthed by Finkelstein and Silberman paint a different picture. Archaeological records from Assyria confirm the tribes were resettled in places like Nineveh, with no trace of a westward trek. The Oxford text notes their assimilation into the empire, a common fate for deported peoples, not a grand journey to form new nations.
British-Israelism, the 19th-century pseudohistory Armstrong adopted, relies on fabricated linguistic links—like “Saxon” from “Isaac’s sons”—debunked by scholars in the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. The Cambridge History reinforces this, showing no historical basis for connecting Anglo-Saxon origins to Israel. Armstrong’s migration story is historically baseless, a fantasy built on thin air.
Modern genetics delivers the knockout punch. Behar et al.’s 2010 study in Nature analyzed the genome-wide structure of Jewish populations, finding a clear Middle Eastern ancestry shared by Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi Jews. There’s no significant genetic overlap with British or American populations, contradicting Armstrong’s racial claims. Jewish DNA aligns with other Semitic groups, not Celtic or Anglo-Saxon lineages.
This genetic evidence exposes the moral flaw in Armstrong’s theory: it promotes a false sense of chosenness, excluding most Christians from God’s plan. Historically, it clashes with the assimilation narrative supported by the Oxford History. Armstrong’s genealogical fantasy doesn’t hold up to science or history—it’s a convenient myth for control.
Top 10 Oddest Lost Tribes Claims from Armstrongism
Here’s a rundown of the strangest assertions Armstrong and his followers made, showing the absurdity of their genealogical fantasy:
1. Britain is Ephraim Because of Its CommonwealthThe “multitude of nations” in Genesis 48:19 became the British Empire—never mind the colonial context.2. America is Manasseh Due to Its SizeA “great nation” fits the U.S., ignoring other large nations like China with no tribal claim.3. Saxon Comes from Isaac’s SonsA linguistic leap debunked by historians, yet central to their narrative.4. The Stone of Scone Proves British RoyaltyA coronation stone linked to Jacob’s pillow—pure speculation with no evidence.5. Celtic Traditions Are IsraeliteBagpipes and kilts tied to ancient Israel, a cultural stretch with no archaeological support.6. The U.S. Eagle Matches Manasseh’s SymbolHeraldry twisted to fit a tribal emblem, ignoring its Roman origins.7. British Weather Reflects Israelite BlessingsRainy skies as a sign of God’s favor—apparently drought-prone Israel was a typo.8. Anglo-Saxon Laws Stem from Mosaic LawA legal system traced to Exodus, despite clear Roman and Germanic influences.9. The Throne of David Survived in BritainQueen Victoria as a Davidic heir, with no genealogical record to back it.
10. Prophecies Point to Modern Wealth
Israel’s blessings explained Britain’s and America’s prosperity, ignoring global economic factors.Splinterland, Ditch the Fantasy
Armstrong’s Lost Tribes myth is a moral burden, fostering exclusivity and division among believers. Biblically, it misuses scripture like Genesis 49, as the New Interpreter’s Bible shows, and historically, it collapses under the weight of Cambridge, Oxford, and genetic evidence. The top 10 list reveals the lengths Armstrongism went to prop up this fantasy—lengths that don’t hold up. Its time to let go of this genealogical fiction and embrace a faith grounded in truth, not tribal tall tales.
Twisting Tribal Blessings
Armstrong leaned heavily on Genesis 49, where Jacob blesses his sons, interpreting these as prophecies for modern nations. He linked Ephraim and Manasseh to Britain and America, citing their “multitude of nations” and “great nation” status. But the New Interpreter’s Bible, a respected biblical commentary, clarifies these blessings were symbolic, outlining tribal roles within ancient Israel, not predictions of future migrations. The text aimed to unify Israel’s identity, not map it onto Anglo-Saxon history.
This misreading is biblically flawed. The Cambridge History of Judaism shows the northern tribes were assimilated into Judah after the Babylonian Exile, with no evidence of a separate exodus. Armstrong’s stretch ignores 2 Kings 17, which details their deportation to Mesopotamia, not Europe. His genealogical fantasy twists scripture into a tool for national pride, a moral misstep that divides rather than unites believers.
No Evidence of Migration
Armstrong’s narrative hinges on a mass migration from the Near East to Western Europe after 722 BCE, but the Oxford History of the Biblical World and The Bible Unearthed by Finkelstein and Silberman paint a different picture. Archaeological records from Assyria confirm the tribes were resettled in places like Nineveh, with no trace of a westward trek. The Oxford text notes their assimilation into the empire, a common fate for deported peoples, not a grand journey to form new nations.
British-Israelism, the 19th-century pseudohistory Armstrong adopted, relies on fabricated linguistic links—like “Saxon” from “Isaac’s sons”—debunked by scholars in the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. The Cambridge History reinforces this, showing no historical basis for connecting Anglo-Saxon origins to Israel. Armstrong’s migration story is historically baseless, a fantasy built on thin air.
No Lost Tribes DNA
Modern genetics delivers the knockout punch. Behar et al.’s 2010 study in Nature analyzed the genome-wide structure of Jewish populations, finding a clear Middle Eastern ancestry shared by Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi Jews. There’s no significant genetic overlap with British or American populations, contradicting Armstrong’s racial claims. Jewish DNA aligns with other Semitic groups, not Celtic or Anglo-Saxon lineages.
This genetic evidence exposes the moral flaw in Armstrong’s theory: it promotes a false sense of chosenness, excluding most Christians from God’s plan. Historically, it clashes with the assimilation narrative supported by the Oxford History. Armstrong’s genealogical fantasy doesn’t hold up to science or history—it’s a convenient myth for control.
Top 10 Oddest Lost Tribes Claims from Armstrongism
Here’s a rundown of the strangest assertions Armstrong and his followers made, showing the absurdity of their genealogical fantasy:
- Britain is Ephraim Because of Its CommonwealthThe “multitude of nations” in Genesis 48:19 became the British Empire—never mind the colonial context.
- America is Manasseh Due to Its SizeA “great nation” fits the U.S., ignoring other large nations like China with no tribal claim.
- Saxon Comes from Isaac’s SonsA linguistic leap debunked by historians, yet central to their narrative.
- The Stone of Scone Proves British RoyaltyA coronation stone linked to Jacob’s pillow—pure speculation with no evidence.
- Celtic Traditions Are IsraeliteBagpipes and kilts tied to ancient Israel, a cultural stretch with no archaeological support.
- The U.S. Eagle Matches Manasseh’s SymbolHeraldry twisted to fit a tribal emblem, ignoring its Roman origins.
- British Weather Reflects Israelite BlessingsRainy skies as a sign of God’s favor—apparently drought-prone Israel was a typo.
- Anglo-Saxon Laws Stem from Mosaic LawA legal system traced to Exodus, despite clear Roman and Germanic influences.
- The Throne of David Survived in BritainQueen Victoria as a Davidic heir, with no genealogical record to back it.
- Prophecies Point to Modern WealthIsrael’s blessings explained Britain’s and America’s prosperity, ignoring global economic factors.
Splinterland, Ditch the Fantasy
Armstrong’s Lost Tribes myth is a moral burden, fostering exclusivity and division among believers. Biblically, it misuses scripture like Genesis 49, as the New Interpreter’s Bible shows, and historically, it collapses under the weight of Cambridge, Oxford, and genetic evidence. The top 10 list reveals the lengths Armstrongism went to prop up this fantasy—lengths that don’t hold up. Its time to let go of this genealogical fiction and embrace a faith grounded in truth, not tribal tall tales.
The Myth of the Lost Tribes © 2025 by AiCOG is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0
23 comments:
"Herbert W. Armstrong built a cornerstone of his Worldwide Church of God on a wild idea:"
Herb's "wild idea" came from H.J. Allen's 1902 book "Judah's scepter and Joseph's birthright" which Herb plaguerised. There were BI societies during the Victorian era that put out literature on this topic. Queen Victoria and her advisors also believed in BI.
Btw, I don't need a mental seeing eye dog telling which ideas are wild or not.
"Modern genetics delivers the knockout punch"? Really? Is that true or just wishful thinking?
Science is just as broad as Theology. In both cases it's not the discipline that speaks, but the students of those disciplines, and they are subject to all kinds of influences, bias, distractions, and diversity of thought. A simple internet search reveals some interesting admissions:
" No matter how hard we try, biology will never be an exact science. We simply do not fully understand most of what happens in the cells".
"Genetics can be used in determining ancestry, but it is not an exact science for a variety of reasons. Genetic ancestry testing can provide in sites on genealogical origins of an individuals ancestors. But, the accuracy of testing is limited by the migrations and mixing of populations over time" (Jorde, Banghal, PCM; 6/14/2021).
I'm not implying genetics is useless, but it clearly is not a knockout punch, especially in the annals of Theology, where science verses theology debates rage on many fronts (existence of God, evolution, creation, origins, etc.), without a consensus of opinion.
I think it is also safe to say, and 41,000 denominations prove so, that Theology also is not exact science, especially when it comes to prophetic interpretation. There are too many variables to consider, such as land, people, numbers, identification of nations, and so on.
When God says He's going to do such and such to a nation, is He speaking to the people or the land (see Daniel 11:40-43)? Do prophecies against the house of Israel in the latter days apply to the geographic land of Israel, the ancient peoples, or their modern descendants?
How about Babylon? In the mind of God, who represents Babylon in the end of days? the original land, people, the "system", which could comprise several things? Because of certain parallels and characteristics, many have interpreted the United States as Babylon because many things seem to fit. Who really knows but the Almighty?
In my denomination of one, I see many like examples that make sense to me but probably not to others. Even though I see merit, I not about to hit the road and expouse my speculations from any rooftop.
The post concludes by saying, " it's time to let go of this genealogical fiction and embrace a faith grounded in truth, not tribal tall tales". That's a lofty goal but it will never happen. It's much easier said than done!
If anyone would take the time to read Steven Collins' books or the research of Yair Davidiy about the Tribes of Israel they would not be spouting off heresies. The prophecies contained in Genesis 49 clearly tell the futures of the Tribes of Israel. Yes, HWA did borrow material from J.H. Allen. But that does not negate the facts from the history of the tribes' migrations to all parts of the world which speak for themselves!
The webmaster of this site needs to stop lying to the public and repent of his sins!
.....endless.....ITim 1:4. Sigh........
Yeah I’m like 99% DNA from all over Europe. Ancestor came over on the Mayflower. Guess where I have no DNA from? Anyone remotely Semitic. Not Jewish or Palestinian at all.
Check your genome. Your relation to Jacob through Joseph or Judah is fictional.
1206
Good for you, you know who and what YOU are. But you are just one person out of 330 million in this country, which is hardly enough to speak for everybody.
Gimme a break! Believing in British Israelism has been its own punishment to all the people passing through Armstrongism for decades now.
Knockout punches existed long before the mapping of the human genome or AI! Die hard Armstrongites are so invested in BI that even if Jesus Himself returned and systematically explained why it was totally wrong, Armstrongites would react as did the Pharisees and high priest. They'd actually reject Jesus! They practially already do with their Old Covenant Christianity!
Back on the day I was a dyed in the wool BI advocate and sincerely, like many, believed in the theory. And I believed it was sound and solid and indeed scriptural. Now I know it is not. It was like having blinkers removed when the ‘problems’, of which there are many, were slowly becoming apparent to us in the wwcog. We have no excuse, and the holes in the ‘doctrine’ are now accessible to one and all. I might add that Steve Collins and Yair Davidiys’ books have been taken apart by sound scholarship and they are the last individuals I would look too as reliable sources. The theology is untenable roundly debunked and easily refuted. There is nothing to see here and those who persist in defending the indefensible are barking up the wrong tree. Fortunately those few remaining ‘believers’ in BI are a dwindling remnant of a diminishing group.
Every person has direct access to God via prayer. There's nothing stopping you from asking God whether BI is true or not.
If British Isrealism were true though there would be genetic markers proving it. I’m 99% European ancestry genetically and there’s nothing ..
I don’t speak for 330 million but if I may ask. Where’s your genetic proof for a relationship between immigrants from to America from Europe who are supposedly from Ephraim, Manasseh, or Jacob?
2:45 They sure do reject Christianity. BI has nothing to do with ones discipleship and my belief system . Armstrongism is going to keep it, regardless of its fallacies. They are not going to change.
446 asks, "where's your genetic proof . . .?"
I'm assuming you are speaking to me, but if you will re-read my earlier comment at 759 you will see that I'm just asking questions, not trying to prove BI. I was also pointing out that genetics is not a knockout punch, smoking gun or magic bullet some claim.
We have condemned Armstrong in the past for claiming he had the magical key that unlocked the prophetic word. Yet, some here seem to be suggesting the same thing with genetics. I don't accept that. Genetics might be a limited supportive tool in one's speculation but it only goes so far.
Concerning BI, I have reservations. I can't prove it but can only speculate. Collins book is interesting and informative but in the end it is still speculation! As the late Brian Wilson wrote, "God Only Knows"!
It's christian nationalism or christian tribalism, or christian white nationalism. I am reminded of one of my favorite chapters in the bible by the Apostle Paul:
Philippians 3 Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. For me to write the same things to you is not tedious, but for you it is safe.
2 Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation! 3 For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh, 4 though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: 5 circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; 6 concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. 8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; 10 that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, 11 if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.
Pressing Toward the Goal
12 Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. 13 Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, 14 I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.
15 Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you. 16 Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us be of the same mind.
Our Citizenship in Heaven
17 Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern. 18 For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: 19 whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame—who set their mind on earthly things. 20 For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, 21 who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.
When reading this chapter (and many others) outside the lens of Armstrongism, you can see that Paul's writing is far superior than any of their booklets and is actually a contrast to BI. He was an Israelite from the Benjamin tribe, but all of his fleshly badges he puts aside and boast about knowing Christ and wanting to know Him on a deeper level. And this is addressed to the Gentiles!
BP8 wrote, “I'm not implying genetics is useless, but it clearly is not a knockout punch, especially in the annals of Theology”
Genetics is a hard science that focuses on repeatable results in the laboratory. Theology is not. Although Torrance and others invoke science as the framework for theology this concerned with a methodology for investigation rather than an analysis of objective data. I am not sure how you are trying to connect genetics to theology.
I could not find the reference to Jorde and Banghal. I would like to see this statement in context. What I can say is that genetics may be equivocal at high degrees of resolution when applied to mixed populations. But it is not going to be equivocal about the massive migration of peoples from the Pontic Steppe into Western Europe. No geneticist is going to say that we cannot tell the difference between an Anglo-Saxon and a Jew. Admixture may have a blurring effect on comparisons among small populations. But when it comes to following the broad population migrations of the British ancestral peoples and the Jews, it is a knockout punch.
Scout
Amen, there are so many holes it's not even funny anymore. It's sad.
Genetics offers an extremely persuasive tool where Anglo-Israelism is concerned. Many Americans, like me, have small percentages of Ashkenazi genetics in our autosomal DNA. That means that we have at least one ancestor within the last six generations who was part Ashkenazi. Now, add to this that Ashkenazi Jews have a strong admixture of European DNA. In other words, their Israelite genetic heritage is very diluted. Similarly, Sephardic Jews have a large admixture of Iberian European DNA. Although this is a sensitive subject among Jews, it is generally acknowledged that Mizrahi Jews retain the most Israelite DNA (as in the ancient populations of the Israelite kingdoms), but even this population has experience contributions over the years from other Middle Eastern populations!
Hence, the majority of Americans with European Ancestry have little or no Israelite DNA in their genetic background. This conclusion is solid, irrefutable, genetic fact.
Now, because of the scattering of the Jews (think Diaspora), many nations have strong minority Jewish communities (like the United States). Nevertheless, the United States is certainly NOT unique in this respect. Most European and North African nations have such minorities (despite Hitler's attempts to eradicate them from the face of the earth). Frankly, this kind of hijacking of ethnic identity is one of the most racist and disrespectful kind of claims that one could make about their genetic heritage. Thus, statements like, "we are the real Israelites" or "the Jewish nation in Palestine is NOT Israel" are just plain outrageous - a clear lie that causes pain to the folks who really have a right to claim that heritage (talk about insulting)!
Moreover, genetics is NOT the only evidence available to us to refute Anglo-Israelism. History, linguistics, archaeology, and Biblical scholarship also offer compelling reasons to reject this pernicious heresy! We know the history of the Jews and how they were expelled from their homeland. Likewise, we know a great deal about where the various peoples of Europe originated and have a great deal of archaeological evidence suggesting just how long they've lived there. Needless to say, NONE of this is consistent with the narrative of Anglo-Israelism.
Moreover, the narrative about the British Royal family occupying the throne of David is subject to the same considerations. For instance, the overturn, overturn, overturn prophecy was clearly related to the Kingdom of Judah. Likewise, the promises to Abraham and David about an eternal kingdom, clearly find their fulfillment in Jesus of Nazareth, NOT in the British Royal Family (after all, NO ONE occupied the throne from 1649-1660 when Parlaiment invited Charles II to assume the throne (his father had been driven from his throne and beheaded by Oliver Cromwell). Hence, Anglo-Israelism is only possible if one ignores all of this well-established evidence!
Thank you Scout and Millar Jones.
BI is like a one legged man trying to remain standing. Remove his clutch and he falls. Like BI. Remove this from the Armstrongites and it all falls down.
The DNA is irrefutable, as just one source against this erroneous idea. It, BI, is highly offensive to those of Jewish heritage and quite laughable and many do find it highly amusing. At the end of the day it is the scriptures themselves that speak volumes against it. A quick glance at British Celtic history throws another ‘truth’ at the face of BI advocates. They aren’t Hebrews. Cheers guys.
The throne of David is now ruined, overthrown, cast to the ground -Ps 89:44. "Overturn" is not "transfer" as Herbie thought, but a ruin, overthrow. The throne will be restored when Jesus returns.
Gen 49:8 regarding Judah (Jews aka Israel today), "... thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies" ... and Deut 33:7 "... be thou an help to him from his enemies." This is one strong proof that BI is alive and kicking as God is involved in Israel's battle in the Middle East with the Arabs, Iran and their allies. Further, Manasseh (US) is like a big brother to Israel in modern times, after all they are family. I believe God is laughing at BI naysayers. By the way I am an Asian.
Genetics is literally a knock out punch.
Something is either related or unrelated. If one asserts BI then there should be clear DNA markers and the vast majority of America is unrelated to the people of the Israel.
The Bible Project havebsuperb videos on Babylon and what it is today for followers of The Way.
God told childless, awestruck Abraham his decendants would be so numerous like the grains of sand. God chose that description, perhaps there is much greater meaning in that description, it is overlooked by many from both sides of the argument.
From that I find the arguing over British Israelisim to be foolhardy.
The original 12 men of Israel tribes had four mothers, so of course not all tribes will have Judah's DNA.
Some people have made themselves quite a reputation in the COG world, over the decades, by being well known to hate British Israelisim. Is that all that motivates you ? It's all 'anti this' and 'anti that', 'anti him' and 'anti her'. Isn't it ironic to be only known as 'hating B.I' and against everyone and everything?
It's completely settled for me, and has been for a number of years. Based on the mountains of evidence against, plus the latest in dna science, and the disappointment of 1975, British Israelism is preposterous, absolutely ridiculous, not even remotely possible or credible!. Aside from a few Armstrongites popping in and out of here from time to time, I don't even know why we continue to discuss it, except that we are perhaps overly patient and compassionate with our former brethren. The comments defending BI are like wishfull attempts to find holes in the science which proves that the earth is a sphere! Or, believing each time Dave Pack says that Jesus is coming that it's actually going to happen!
Sooner or later, Armstrongites will need to find a way to continue to believe their religion without B.I. I'm thinking that's going to happen once the boomers are all gone! If it is to survive, Armstrongism will be forced to evolve, just as the Seventh Day Adventists have evolved and have become less cultic. The leaders will need to cultivate, or at least permit intellectual honesty amongst the members. Can we even imagine someone looking to become a member of an ACOG splinter group, and then being told that in order to be a member in good standing, you are expected to believe that the US and BC are Manasseh and Ephraim?
BB
Post a Comment