For Sambee British Israel

http://www.tomorrowsworld.org/cgi-bin/tw/tw-m...

http://www.1335.com/hebrew.html

http://www.ensignmessage.com/archives/ephraim...

http://www.eternalgod.org/booklet/648

Okay ... having run across this kind of stuff from Armstrong and WWCOG, etc., I questioned at the time, what level of authentication had been done. What is the peer review of the 'British Israel' notion? What sociological, archaeological and other findings have validated the ideas? Or is this another idea on the level of the golden tablets and 'Moroni'?

David Koot wrote:

Okay ... having run across this kind of stuff from Armstrong and WWCOG, etc., I questioned at the time, what level of authentication had been done. What is the peer review of the 'British Israel' notion? What sociological, archaeological and other findings have validated the ideas? Or is this another idea on the level of the golden tablets and 'Moroni'?

Again - your lazy summation offers no guide to anyone other than hoping someone else will effect the effort to conduct the critical review.


The sluggard will not plow by reason of the cold;
[therefore] shall he beg in harvest, and [have] nothing.

David Koot wrote:

Okay ... having run across this kind of stuff from Armstrong and WWCOG, etc., I questioned at the time, what level of authentication had been done. What is the peer review of the 'British Israel' notion? What sociological, archaeological and other findings have validated the ideas? Or is this another idea on the level of the golden tablets and 'Moroni'?

What would you know about the subject? Aren't conscious of the fact that there were 12 tribes of Israel and that Judah received the promise of the Messiah and that Ephraim and Manassah which represented Joseph received the Birthright which mean't national greatness and richness as well as the promise that they would control the gates of their enemies? Are you aware of the fact that there were two Kingly lines Perez and Zerah and that there was a breach when they were born? Are you aware of the fact that the line of David were all Kings of the line of Perez and that Zedekiah was the last one on the throne of Judah when the Babylonians invaded Judah. Also how do you explain the fact that God promised that David would never lack a man on the throne. Since Zedekiah was the last King to sit on the throne of Judah did God break his promise and not have any King on the throne from Zedekiah to Jesus? Then you have to take Jeremiah's commission into consideration.

Jeremiah 1:

10] See, I have set you this day over nations and over kingdoms,
to pluck up and to break down,
to destroy and to overthrow,
to build and to plant."

Was Jeremiah the prophet used by God to uproot the Perez line and replant a tender twig one of Zedekiah's daughters by way of marriage to a King of the Zerah line which was already well established in Ireland? This is the mystery that we can now study on the forum.

http://www.asis.com/users/stag/jerrytea.html

The crew of 5 people and a possible trip to Ireland.

Shalom,

It is written: "For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek Yahweh their Mighty One, and David their king; and shall fear Yahweh and His goodness in the latter days" (Hosea 3:4,5).

This is obviously not true of the Anglo-Saxons, whose line of kings is well known, but exactly suits the history of those we indiscriminately call African Americans (who are Israelites), who remain scattered, without a king, temple, sacrifice, or priesthood, as is well known.

Israel's national blessing is all connected with Jerusalem and the Land. It is plainly foretold that their national blessing will be:

By union with Judah. "I will make them one nation in the land" (Ezek. 37:21, et seq., Jer.3:18). Specially consider the figure of the two sticks becoming one in the prophets hand.

By dwelling in the land. "They shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt" (Ezek.37:25).

Their King is to reign on David's throne in Jerusalem (Isa.(:7; Jer. 3:17; Ezek. 48:35).

This will not take place until the fulness of the Gentiles shall be come in (Rom.11:25 and Luke 21:24), and the Times of the Gentiles fulfilled. Our Master's words are: "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."

They will remain a scattered people until then. This was to be their punishment for their disobedience. "Yahweh shall scatter you among the nations" (Deut.4:27; 28:64; 32:26; and many others). Anglo-Saxons do not fit these curses Yahweh placed on Israel.

Their gathering will be accomplished only when Yeshua comes. His feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives, and then they shall look on Him whom they pierced, and a nation shall be born in a day (Zech. 12:9-14; 13:1,2; 14:4-9). Anything less like the history and condition of the British Nation or Empire it is impossible to conceive.

Shalom,

Does the present English monarch, Betty Windsor, sit today on David's throne? The British Israel World Federation tells us so in their literature, and in their pamphlets, and they include (at first glance) impressive geneaologies in their (at first glance) impressive charts. If King Jehoiachin, languishing in Babylon, had no children to carry on the royal line, his pedigree exterminated, then Zedekiah as an indirect collateral branch could (within the realm of possibility) have some substance in the continuation of the Davidic line. Of course, the plain truth of the matter is that Matthew Levi totally ignores Zedekiah in his chronological geneaology of the Messiah. Indeed, if you examine the Matthean text you will discover the following statement: "And Josiah begat Jechoniah [Jehoiachin] and his brothers, about the time that they were carried away to Babylon; and after they were brought to Babylon, Jechoniah [Jehoiachin] begat Salathiel, and Salathiel begat Zerubabel" which royal line terminates in Yeshua the Messiah (Mt 1.11)!

Please note! It terminates with the Messiah. It does not continue with a European bloodline of some holy grail.

Shalom,

It came to pass that with the final fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar's battering-rams and storming machines, that the young Zedekiah was captured, brought before the Babylonian king in Riblah at the upper end of the valley of Lebanon and there, before his eyes, his little sons were slain. It was the last thing the Jewish king ever saw. Then his eyes were burnt out of his head. In contrast the prophet Jeremiah was freed from his prison and rewarded well for his efforts in undermining Jewish national security (Jer 40.2-5).

Ezra, in editing the canon of Jewish Scripture after the days of the Babylonian Exile piously regarded that Zedekiah "did that which was evil in the sight of Yahweh his Mighty One, and humbled not himself before Jeremiah the prophet" (2 Chron 36.12).

Zedekiah was just 32 years of age when his little sons were so cruelly despatched (2 Kgs 24.18) and we have the testimony of Josephus that his children were still under the care of their mothers at the time of the Babylonian invasion and seige of Jerusalem (Josephus, Antiquities, X, VIII, 2). Zedekiah later died in Babylon (ibid, sect.7).

Sambee
It is written: "For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek Yahweh their Mighty One, and David their king; and shall fear Yahweh and His goodness in the latter days" (Hosea 3:4,5).
EC
And that was true when they were taken into captivity by the Assyrians before Judah. The above could have been the situation up until the time that the Zerah line was reestablished in Ireland.
Here is someone else's opinion
http://www.british-israel.us/21.html

Shalom,

For the sake of intellectual honesty and historical accuracy, I must ask our readers to finally desist in believing this Anglo-Israel rubbish. Why? Simply due to the fact that the Irish Chronicles are utterly silent on Jeremiah ever touching Irish soil, with or without "eastern princesses." The Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland by the Four Masters, O'Flaherty's Ogygia, and even Chroniklis of the Scots (by Scottish historian Hector Boece) are silent on any incident involving Jeremiah, under his own name or any other. The entire story is an absolute fabrication from start to finish without any foundation in fact. Indeed,

•Ollam Fodhla (or, depending on the Irish source, Ollamfodla)-- pronounced Ollav Fola -- was the 21st native Milesian king who founded a college, or academy, of education. These institutions were derived from the east (Thomas Moore, The History of Ireland, 1846, 110-113) which is hardly surprising considering the maritime trading contacts of the period. He was the son of king Fiach of Ireland, fathered four sons in Ireland, lived his whole life in Ireland, ruled for 40 years (some sources say 30 years) in Ireland, and died in Ireland. "Ollam" means poet or wise man, while "Fodhla" stands for Ireland. He lived (depending on the source), somewhere between 900-700 years before Jeremiah's time. The Milesians under Heremon invaded Ireland approximately 1000 BCE (Ogygia) or circa 1434 BCE (at the time of the Exodus: The Annals). He appears to be contemporary with king David. He was an indigenous pagan and absolutely NOT Jeremiah.

•"Tea-Tephi" NEVER existed. "Teah" certainly did, but not "Tea-Tephi." In fact, according to Irish history "Teah" was the daughter of a certain "Lugaidh, son of Itha [Ith, uncle of Miledh or Milesius], who [Ghede the] Eremhon married in Spain" (The Annals). She was not the offspring of a Jewish king and was in no way associated with a Hebrew prophet from Eretz Israel or anywhere else. She was contemporary with king David, not Jeremiah. There was an earlier "Tephi" -- a Celtic-Edomite-Spaniard in Spain who was wed to Canthon, a British king, but there is no link to the Irish Royal House.

SamBee wrote:

Shalom,
Does the present English monarch, Betty Windsor, sit today on David's throne? The British Israel World Federation tells us so in their literature, and in their pamphlets, and they include (at first glance) impressive geneaologies in their (at first glance) impressive charts. If King Jehoiachin, languishing in Babylon, had no children to carry on the royal line, his pedigree exterminated, then Zedekiah as an indirect collateral branch could (within the realm of possibility) have some substance in the continuation of the Davidic line. Of course, the plain truth of the matter is that Matthew Levi totally ignores Zedekiah in his chronological geneaology of the Messiah. Indeed, if you examine the Matthean text you will discover the following statement: "And Josiah begat Jechoniah [Jehoiachin] and his brothers, about the time that they were carried away to Babylon; and after they were brought to Babylon, Jechoniah [Jehoiachin] begat Salathiel, and Salathiel begat Zerubabel" which royal line terminates in Yeshua the Messiah (Mt 1.11)!
Please note! It terminates with the Messiah. It does not continue with a European bloodline of some holy grail.

You have a sleight problem. The Messiah did not come through the line of the Northern tribes of Israel the Messiah would be born only through the lineage of Judah.(Houston we have a problem, abort launch.)

The tribes that received the birthright of National greatness but not the Messianic promise were Ephraim and Manassah. So you still have a lot of explaining to do with regard to the Taino Indians etc receiving the birthright of national greatness. This implies that they would have to be more powerful than the Arabs during the latter days around the time that God would free them up to receive the birthright in a land not their own. The U S and Britain received the birthright around the 1800's at the commencement of the industrial revolution. Britain did posses the gates of her enemies and conquered the seas and America went on to become the greatest nation on the face of the earth.

Keep in mind that the promise to Abram was that Israel would be a great nation and a company of nations. The only great nation in the history of this planet which has blessed the world and taken the Gospel to the nations of the world are the British and American peoples. The Bible is an Israelitish book, why would these nations be so preoccupied with a book from Israel?

Shalom,

•Jeremiah's scribe Baruch was not some Simon Brec (Brach, Breas, Berech, Breck, Break or even Breakfast) and certainly Ollam Fodla was never associated with him in The Annals. Rather, there were two Brecks! Firstly, Siomon Breac was a Milesian KING who lived 400 years before Christ (Ogygia). Secondly, a thousand years earlier (and thus prior to the advent of the Milesians) an adventurer bearing the name Simon Breas, or Simeon Breac, a grandson of one Neimheadh, who made a name for himself in piracy and plunder. Hardly could these characters be associated in any degree with Jeremiah's faithful scribe, Baruch.

According to Greg Doudna of the Department of Near Eastern Studies at Cornell University, who has personally studied the historical phenomena we have been spotlighting:

"In 1861, a British-Israel expositor named F.R.A. Glover combined 'Tea' and 'Tephi' into one person, in the first book to promote the 'Tea-Tephi' theory. Glover is the inventor of the story of 'Tea-Tephi' and Jeremiah...Glover's slipshod scholarship was adopted by other British-Israelites, including C.A.L. Totten's first five volumes of Our Race (1890-92), followed by W.M.H. Milner, The Royal House of Britain an Enduring Dynasty (1902),[and] J.H. Allen [Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright](1902)" (G. Doudna, Afterword on British-Israelism.,138, note 22).

Where did Jeremiah take the daughters of Zedekiah? It was quite common (and still is) for royal blood lines to intermarry with the royal families of surrounding nations, and we know from the contents of historical records (including the Bible and secular sources) that Israelites, Egyptians and the (Aryan) Edomites (Phoenician Canaanites) mixed bloodlines. Jeremiah secured the princesses' passage to safety, probably to the continuing Davidic Dynasty (through the Hatshepsut bloodline) in Ethiopia, ultimately returning to Egypt proper (where we lose sight of him), the land of his father's exile, where he died as he had lived, at the murderous hands of his fellow countrymen (Mt 23.29-32,35 cf Ac 7.52).

But, further, British-Israelites also insist that Jeremiah was actually the father of Hamutal, the mother of Zedekiah, continuing the line through one of his daughters (whom they claim was a Tea Tephi or Nephi). We have demolished the "Tea party" story, but has this forceful claim concerning Jeremiah's bloodline any merit? Or is it yet another Anglo-Israel myth?

Listen! There were eight Jeremiah's in the biblical record.

•Jeremiah the prophet.

•Jeremiah, a high ranking priest of the second or third Temple courses (Neh 10.1-8; 12.1,12).

•Jeremiah, head of a house in the transjordanic half-tribe of Manasseh and one of the "mighty men of valor" (1 Chron 5.24).

•Jeremiah, a Benjamite, who came with others to David in Ziglag when he retreated from Saul ( 1 Chron 12.1-4).

•Two Gadite warriors named Jeremiah, also in David's army (1 Chron 12.10,13).

•Jeremiah of the house of the Rechabites (Jer 35.3).

•Jeremiah of Libnah, the father of Hamutal wife of Josiah and who mothered Jehoahaz and Zedekiah (2 Kgs 23.31; 24.18; 52.1).

Jeremiah of Anathoth was the prophet of Yahweh not Jeremiah of Libnah! Indeed, Jeremiah himself plainly states that there was absolutely no connection between himself and Zedekiah. He was decidedly NOT Zedekiah's grandfather (see Jer 1.1)!

Shalom,

Zedekiah was not an heir to the throne of David. Further, he could not convey the throne to any of his descendants, including a mythical "Tea." The powerful prophet Ezekiel denounced him as an appointed stooge of Nebuchadnezzar and as a Davidic would-be king (Eze 21.25-27). The last legitimate king of Israel was Jeconiah, who was also called Coniah and Jehoiachin.

Jeremiah was explicit in his prediction that as far as the throne of David was concerned, he would die childless. "Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? Is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? Wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not? O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of Yahweh. Thus says Yahweh, Write you this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days; for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jer 22.28-30).

In reality he was not rendered childless, for the record says he had sons, but he was rendered childless inasmuch as the throne was concerned! Zedekiah did not occupy the throne of David in Yahweh's consideration. He was the "profane prince" who had a human -- Nebuchadnezzar -- appoint his rule and we have seen that God overturned that appointment.

I must also insist that by inserting Zedekiah into their version of the chronological genealogies of Matthew and Luke (refer to Anglo-Israel charts if you possess any) and jettisoning Jehoiachin and Jehoiakim from the sacred records (in order to give recognition to Zedekiah's daughter to a continuing Jewish throne in the British Isles and thus to ultimately legitimise Betty Windsor's place in sacred history) British Israelites have shown themselves to be blatantly dishonest. British Israel tables grant only thirty-two generations from Luke 3.32-38 and from verse 33 they conveniently jump to Matthew 1.7-10 to the forty-eighth generation. As we have bluntly stated, kings Jehoiachin and Jehoiakim are then omitted and Zedekiah insidiously inserted. Anglo-Israelites seemingly fail to grasp that if Zedekiah is legitimised Yeshua haMashiach is dislodged from His rightful accession to the "Throne of his father David" (Lk 1.32). The entire deal is suspect. Our readers can check for themselves.

Earthcaller wrote:

<quoted text>
You have a sleight problem. The Messiah did not come through the line of the Northern tribes of Israel the Messiah would be born only through the lineage of Judah.(Houston we have a problem, abort launch.)
The tribes that received the birthright of National greatness but not the Messianic promise were Ephraim and Manassah. So you still have a lot of explaining to do with regard to the Taino Indians etc receiving the birthright of national greatness. This implies that they would have to be more powerful than the Arabs during the latter days around the time that God would free them up to receive the birthright in a land not their own. The U S and Britain received the birthright around the 1800's at the commencement of the industrial revolution. Britain did posses the gates of her enemies and conquered the seas and America went on to become the greatest nation on the face of the earth.
Keep in mind that the promise to Abram was that Israel would be a great nation and a company of nations. The only great nation in the history of this planet which has blessed the world and taken the Gospel to the nations of the world are the British and American peoples. The Bible is an Israelitish book, why would these nations be so preoccupied with a book from Israel?

Shalom,

When and how did the ten tribes originate? Read 1 Kings 12 and 13. They originated in the rending of the kingdom and went off in apostasy. Yahweh's throne and kingdom remained in Judah. Yahweh repudiated the kingdom of the ten tribes and sent a prophet out of Judah to denounce their altars. How does it happen now that the apostate ten tribes have the advantage over Judah? Just how and when did the ten tribes fall heir to the throne from Judah?

Earthcaller wrote:

<quoted text>
You have a sleight problem. The Messiah did not come through the line of the Northern tribes of Israel the Messiah would be born only through the lineage of Judah.(Houston we have a problem, abort launch.)
The tribes that received the birthright of National greatness but not the Messianic promise were Ephraim and Manassah. So you still have a lot of explaining to do with regard to the Taino Indians etc receiving the birthright of national greatness. This implies that they would have to be more powerful than the Arabs during the latter days around the time that God would free them up to receive the birthright in a land not their own. The U S and Britain received the birthright around the 1800's at the commencement of the industrial revolution. Britain did posses the gates of her enemies and conquered the seas and America went on to become the greatest nation on the face of the earth.
Keep in mind that the promise to Abram was that Israel would be a great nation and a company of nations. The only great nation in the history of this planet which has blessed the world and taken the Gospel to the nations of the world are the British and American peoples. The Bible is an Israelitish book, why would these nations be so preoccupied with a book from Israel?

Shalom,

I never stated Yeshua did.It seems that your are implying that those of the tribe of Judah are not Israel,am I understanding you correctly? Also the Throne of David is through the tribe of Judah so how can Europeans be on the Throne of David?

Earthcaller wrote:

<quoted text>
You have a sleight problem. The Messiah did not come through the line of the Northern tribes of Israel the Messiah would be born only through the lineage of Judah.(Houston we have a problem, abort launch.)
The tribes that received the birthright of National greatness but not the Messianic promise were Ephraim and Manassah. So you still have a lot of explaining to do with regard to the Taino Indians etc receiving the birthright of national greatness. This implies that they would have to be more powerful than the Arabs during the latter days around the time that God would free them up to receive the birthright in a land not their own. The U S and Britain received the birthright around the 1800's at the commencement of the industrial revolution. Britain did posses the gates of her enemies and conquered the seas and America went on to become the greatest nation on the face of the earth.
Keep in mind that the promise to Abram was that Israel would be a great nation and a company of nations. The only great nation in the history of this planet which has blessed the world and taken the Gospel to the nations of the world are the British and American peoples. The Bible is an Israelitish book, why would these nations be so preoccupied with a book from Israel?

It is you that has the problem a huge one.

EarthCaller,

Your theory teaches that when Yahweh's people returned to Palestine after the captivity, only the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi really returned. The "House of Israel," meaning the ten lost tribes,remained scattered. By Yeshua' day, supposedly only three tribes were represented. According to the theory, the "House of Israel" was missing.

The Apostle Peter was, however, unaware of British-Israelism teaching, since he uttered these words in Acts 2: 36:

"Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that Yahweh hath made that same Yeshua, whom ye have crucified, both (Master/Kng) and Messiah."

In the BI theory, the judgments against Israel naturally become directed towards the United States. We thus find the belief that America will cease to be a nation, and her citizens will be removed, finding themselves in captivity.(Plain Truth, July 1959, p. 16).

The Bible teaches that a prophet is false when his words fail to come to pass.(See Deut.18:20-22). Time has already run out for this prophecy, since it was foretold for 1972 in the publications of Herbert W. Armstrong. The theory of British-Israelism falls with the prophecy, and the prophet.