Genetic evidence links Jews to their ancient tribe

Jerusalem Post (originally) ^ | November 20, 2002 | Judy Siegel

[Just mythoughts]

First off Christ by his own words is letting us know that He and He alone was not sent Himself to only the lost tribes, He, Christ was sent to all who would believe.

Quite different, that his commandment to the apostles to go first, but to the lost sheep.

This woman knew who He was speaking of, why else would she use the words she used. Christ made it clear that no group or people held claim to him by race or religion, but by His Word.

Over and over and over again those children of Israel/Jacob, disobeyed our Heavenly Father and their punishment was to be scatter to the four winds and to loose the rememberance of "who" they were. The children don't know who they are, not that our Heavenly Father or Christ didn't or don't know.

Now if the children were not to remember who they are, who is it that is going to remind them?

[Just mythoughts]

Not to mention the rising and setting of the sun each day, and the law of gravity certain keeps our flesh bodies firmly planted upon earth.

[Sabertooth]

"Again, if you are a Christian the answer is that the old covenant no longer exists"

This is the old lie which caused two thousand years of vicious anti-Semitism and which culminated in the Holocaust.

Destro may correct me if I'm mistaken, but I believe you missed the emphasis of his comment. The old covenant of works no longer exists for Christians, we are under the covenant of grace. Since the Jews haven't accepted Jesus, they are still under the old convenant of works. God made many other covenants with and promises to the Hebrews that are still in effect. "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you" remains a cautionary note to anyone setting their heart against the Jews.

The anti-Semitism that led to the Holocaust is pagan and far older than Christianity, tracing back through Herod, Antiochus Epiphanes; Hayman, the Chaldeans, the Assyrians, and Pharoh.

[Sabertooth]

Try the extensive teaching of Dr. Gene Scott on the subject, a few of which are online at...

I suspect that in the various online archived tapes you will find more than enough linguistic, historical and archeological confirmations to give you a challenge.

Thanks, flag me when you post some linguistic or genetic evidence that European Caucasians are descended from the Ten Lost Tribes.

[Just mythoughts]

I constantly hear this partial scripture being use as foundation for what Christians are required.

Where is this written? "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you".

[ALS]

yer startin' to sound like Baghdad Bob

[RnMomof7]

Mormons believe that the Indians were from Israel..thus my comment

[Sabertooth]

Where is this written? "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you".

You no doubt already know, but I'll answer your question...

Genesis
Chapter 12

1

The LORD said to Abram: "Go forth from the land of your kinsfolk and from your father's house to a land that I will show you.

2

"I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, so that you will be a blessing.

3

I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you. All the communities of the earth shall find blessing in you."
LINK

Now, I'm sure you have a point which I'll be happy to explore, but before you go any further I'd like you to answer the question I posed to you at #40 on this thread. I'll repost it here to save you some time...

---

To: Just mythoughts

The Ten Tribes, (House of Israel) were taken by the Assrian King, North over the Caucasus Mountains, later into Europe.

That is where the word Caucasian came from.

The House of Judah (two tribes) went into captivity to Babylon.

The two Houses have not been rejoined.

There is no proof or basis to claim that the Kurdish Jews are the Ten Tribes.

Where is the evidence, either genetic or linguistic, that European Caucasians are descended from the Ten Lost Tribes?

40 posted on 04/11/2003 10:13 AM PDT by Sabertooth

---

Care to answer my question?

[Just mythoughts]

Thank you for your response.

I apologize that I missed your #40.

Here are a list of some things, however, when and if man's words conflict with what is Written, the Word is correct.

Tracing our Ancestors by Frederick Haberman

Dan The pioneer of Israel. By Colonel J. C. Gawler (His early enterprise, his settlements, and connection with the Scythians.

The Witness of the Stars, E.W. Bullinger

One Man's Destiny, by E.R. Dickey

The Drama of the Lost Disciples, by George F. Jowett

Judah' Sceptre/Josheph's Birthright by J.H. Allen

Sargon the Magnificent by Mrs. Sydney Bristowe

St. Paul in Britain by R.W. Morgan

Abrahamic Covenant by E. Raymond Capt

Traditions of Glastonbury by E. Raymond Capt

Scottish Declaration of Independence by E. Raymond Capt


There are more but this will get you started, remember though that when a conflict arises with what is Written the Word is right.

[DensaMensa]

}Where is the evidence, either genetic or linguistic, that European Caucasians are descended from the Ten Lost Tribes?

Excuse me for interrupting, but if I recall correctly from a much earlier thread you were supplied with copious linguistic evidence of such linkage (perhaps by William Terrell?) and you chose to ignore it. Did not even give it the courtesy of a superficial examination. Just blew it off.

Others have pointed out in other threads which you were part of that genetic "evidence" for ancient heridity is at best very tenuous, and some claim outright fraudulent.

In any case, historic links between peoples are usually based on "evidence" other than these very narrow and weak trails which you choose to nominate as pivotal.

Regards.

[Sabertooth]

Excuse me for interrupting, but if I recall correctly from a much earlier thread you were supplied with copious linguistic evidence of such linkage (perhaps by William Terrell?) and you chose to ignore it. Did not even give it the courtesy of a superficial examination. Just blew it off.

You recall incorrectly. There were threads where linguistics were discussed which consisted of gross misunderstandings of the discipline and a heavy reliance on a single linguist from the 18th Century. His work was noteworthy for the time, but not all of his conclusions are supported modern scholarship.

Others have pointed out in other threads which you were part of that genetic "evidence" for ancient heridity is at best very tenuous, and some claim outright fraudulent.

Shall I take this to mean that genetic evidence for a Lost Tribe origin of the European Caucasians will not be forthcoming?

In any case, historic links between peoples are usually based on "evidence" other than these very narrow and weak trails which you choose to nominate as pivotal.

There are certainly other forms of evidence, but their generally consistent with, not in denial of, linguistic and genetic evidence.

[Sabertooth]

I apologize that I missed your #40.

Oh, you didn't miss it, you replied to it at #52. You just didn't answer my question.

Here are a list of some things...

I own Bullinger's book, and it doesn't contain a discussion of a Lost Tribes origin for European Caucasians. It's a discussion of a theory about antediluvian origins for the constellations of the Northern Hemisphere.

As for the rest of your list, I asked for linguistic or genetic evidence, not a bibliography. Do you have any?

[DensaMensa]

} There were threads where linguistics were discussed which consisted of gross misunderstandings of the discipline

Such "misunderstandings" would appear to be in the eye of the beholder.

} Shall I take this to mean that genetic evidence for a Lost Tribe origin of the European Caucasians will not be forthcoming?

If you like. Like most others I believe, I share an interest in seeing the day when (if ever) solid genetic evidence can truly provide a historic trail of ancient peoples. So far that field has been ripe for charlatans preying on such interest and for practitioners of science fiction. So no, I don't expect "genetic evidence for a Lost Tribe origin of the European Caucasians" or for any other ancient peoples to be forthcoming. One choosing to wait for that train best carry a big lunch. {ggg}.

} There are certainly other forms of evidence, but their generally consistent with, not in denial of, linguistic and genetic evidence.

That's smooth and slippery talk but I don't think you can provide substantial evidence to back it up. The primary types of evidence include the written word in the form of contemperaneous histories, diaries of every type, oral tradition, etc. The Bible is one example, and other scrolls and "documents" like the Behistun Rock, the Rosetta stone, and zillions of clay tablets and archeological artifacts from everywhere.

Relying on psuedo-sciences like linguistics and experimental genetics as primary indicators is very weak. However, I'll give you the last word.

Regards.

[Just mythoughts]

Your question implies that there is such a thing as genetic
information.

In order for their to be such data one must have a base to test genes. You know very well that unless or untill that base coming from Jacob, it will never be possible for flesh man to perform such test. So must question why you would ask the question.

Now if you want to start with Genesis through Revelation where there is original linguistic evidence that man has been allowed to play with then we can start there, which is for me what counts. What was WRITTEN.


The fact that the Word says that as punishment for His stubborn, sottish, disobedient children He would scatter them to the four corners and they would not remember who they are, speaks for itself. Point is the children do not know who they are, our Heavenly Father knows very well who and where they are.

Christ told us to learn the parable of the fig tree, "figs" being mentioned other places is a good place to start. We are also told that it will be our Heavenly Father that restores the Houses and not man.

[Destro]

Oh really? No break from the old testament? How about Peter saying not to keep kosher? Duh!

[Destro]

The Apostles went to the Greeks, not to the Germanic peoples. The New Testament was not translated into the German until some 1,500 years or so later. Germanics=Not Isrealites.

[Sabertooth]

Such "misunderstandings" would appear to be in the eye of the beholder.

Many disciplies have advanced significantly since the 18th Century, linguistics is one of them. Relativistic answers don't really cut it.

For example, "eye of the beholder" misunderstandings of Quantum Theory based on Newtonian Mechanics are more accurately referred to as "errors."

I share an interest in seeing the day when (if ever) solid genetic evidence can truly provide a historic trail of ancient peoples. So far that field has been ripe for charlatans preying on such interest and for practitioners of science fiction. So no, I don't expect "genetic evidence for a Lost Tribe origin of the European Caucasians" or for any other ancient peoples to be forthcoming. One choosing to wait for that train best carry a big lunch. {ggg}.

Dig in...

Joint research conducted by genetics specialists and linguists (Cavalli-Sforza, Greenberg, Ruhlen at Stanford University, for example) have shown that the genetic ties between populations are comparable to the linguistic traits linking different languages. Indeed, significant correlations have been found between the linguistic and biological population distribution in many regions of the world (Africa, Europe, China, etc.)

As a result, in the field of linguistics, new hypotheses concerning language typology and classification are emerging. The patterns elaborated at the end of the 18th and in the early 19th centuries by linguists working on the comparison of Indo-European languages have been completely called into question.
Origins of humankind, language and languages

There are diverse quantitative methods in order to know better the ancestors of the Europeans before the arrival of Indo-Europeans (IE). Among them are genetics of population, dialect linguistics, and quantitative ethnology. We will try here to compare some results of the first two methods....
PRE INDO-EUROPEAN AND CELTIC LEXICON IN THE
« ATLAS LINGUISTIQUE DE FRANCE »,
AND COMPARISON OF BASQUE LEXICAL AND GENETIC GRADIENTS

In support for Greenberg's linguistic model of three separate migrations, evidence from archaeology, dental morphology and genetics are used to display the initial entry into the New World no earlier than 12,000 years ago. Shortly following the archaeological discovery at Folsom and the beginnings of radiocarbon dating, the "Clovis first" model for American aboriginal origins was postulated in the 1950's, and still largely adhered to by many researchers today. According to this view, aboriginal peoples of the Upper Palaeolithic technology type from the Lena river area in northeast Siberia migrated into northwest Alaska-Yukon during the terminal Pleistocene when the Bering Land-bridge was exposed as part of the expansive Beringian ecozone. Once in North America around 12,000 BP, these specialized big-game hunters travelled south through the ice-free corridor along the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains and finally expanding rapidly throughout the continental United States by 11,500 years ago. An alternate to the ice-free corridor hypothesis is that these Siberian groups could have travelled along the Pacific coast refugia areas and still reached the continental States to become the expansive Clovis culture at the same time (Fladmark 1978,1979). The uniformity of Clovis dates implies a very rapid migration and spreading throughout the Americas, likely within a thousand of the initial entry. The Clovis complex is then seen as the as the ancestral culture from which all North and South American aboriginal cultures evolved (Gruhn 1997). The acceptance of the Clovis-first archaeological model lends support to Greenberg's hypothesis for the initial migration of aboriginal Americans from Siberia around 12,000BP. The similarities in distinctive microblade technology of the late Pleistocene Diukhtai people of Siberia and the Proto-Na-Dene group of Alaska are believed to provide an archaeological link for the second migration of aboriginal peoples into the New World at the terminal Pleistocene. For the final migration, the Eskimo-Aleut group in southwest Alaska is believed to be technologically similar to earlier archaeological finds along the Aleutian island chain and coastal Siberia (Greenberg et al 1986).

Biological studies in dental morphology and genetics also support Greenberg's linguistic hypothesis and support three separate population migrations from Siberia to the New World. The analysis of dental morphology in American aboriginal populations by Christy Turner (1986, and Greenberg et al 1986) displays the Sinodont dental pattern which is exclusive to peoples of northern Asian ancestry. In summary Turner notes, the New World dental variation matches the North Asian Sinodont pattern, is greater in the north than in the south, has an original divergence schedule corresponding to Clovis, and forms three clusters which correlate highly with the linguistic and archaeological groupings. The genetic evidence derived from the analysis of Gm allotypes in blood has been used to calculate the amount of genetic "distance" between two populations. In regards to American aboriginal populations, Suarez, Crouse, and O'Rourke (1985) provide genetic evidence suggesting an early migration resulting in a large group of North and South American Indians, followed by two later migrations which brought the present-day Na-Dene and Eskimo-Aleut peoples.
The Role of Linguistics Within a Multidisciplinary Framework
For Studying the Initial Peopling of the Americas

Now, while our understanding of the correlation between linguistics and genetics is only just emerging, it's not true to suggest that it's not there. Further, where you have great migrations of people in the Historical Period, you don't find an absence of both linguistic and genetic evidence.

Therefore, if the Lost Tribes of Israel became the European Caucasians, we should expect to find at least some of the evidence requested.

That's smooth and slippery talk but I don't think you can provide substantial evidence to back it up.

It's always interesting to see requests for "substantial evidence" from those who provide none.

[Sabertooth]

Your question implies that there is such a thing as genetic information.

I'll grant that's a daring position to take this early in the 21st Century.

In order for their to be such data one must have a base to test genes. You know very well that unless or untill that base coming from Jacob, it will never be possible for flesh man to perform such test. So must question why you would ask the question.

This is not at all true. Take your own family tree, and pick a pair of great-great-great-great-grandparents six generations back. Then track down anyone believed, on paper, to be one of their descendents. Through the analyses of mitochondrial and Y-chromosome DNA on can rather accurately reconstruct the genetic relationships of the fourth-cousin descendents of those great-great-great-great-grandparents, even without access to any of their genetic material from six generations back.

That's why I ask the question.

Now if you want to start with Genesis through Revelation where there is original linguistic evidence that man has been allowed to play with then we can start there, which is for me what counts. What was WRITTEN. The fact that the Word says that as punishment for His stubborn, sottish, disobedient children He would scatter them to the four corners and they would not remember who they are, speaks for itself. Point is the children do not know who they are, our Heavenly Father knows very well who and where they are. Christ told us to learn the parable of the fig tree, "figs" being mentioned other places is a good place to start. We are also told that it will be our Heavenly Father that restores the Houses and not man.

None of this, and nothing in the Bible, even makes the claim that the European Caucasians are descended from the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, let alone offers evidence supporting the claim.

I'm more than willing to examine such evidence, if it exists, if you'd simply do the courtesy of providing it.

[Sabertooth]

Didn't Phillip preach to the Ethiopian Caucasians?

[VadeRetro]

Oh, God! They're baa - ack!

Throw out everything we thought we knew about history, archaeology, and linguistics!