British Israelism - an expose

David M. Williams' Theological Essays ^ | David M. Williams

[Destro]

British Israelism - an expose

OVERVIEW

Anglo-Israelism (also known as British Israelism) is the unscriptural theory that Britain and the United States constitutes the 10 lost tribes of Israel who were carried away as captives by the Assyrians in 722 B.C. It is held by the advocates of this view that the Kingdom of Israel (consisting of ten tribes after their separation from the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin in the days of Rehoboam - I Kings 12:21) never returned to Israel after Assyrian captivity as did Judah and Benjamin after their 70 years' captivity in Babylon.

The ten tribes of the Northern Kingdom (Israel) are "lost" after their capture by the Assyrians in 722 B.C. Through intermarriage with other nations, their unique national identity is "lost", Great Britian and the USA are believed to be the Anglo-Saxon ancestors of the tribes Ephraim and Manasseh (predominantly), so it may be inferred by British-Israelism that white, English speaking people are really the chosen people of God.

It is also believed that the Jews who were living in Israel at the time of Christ are now under a curse for rejecting the Messiah. The Israelites (the lost 10 tribes) now become the inheritors of God's promises. Ephraim and Manasseh (the two sons of Joseph) are the major inheritors of the title "Israelites" along with the other eight tribes whose descendants are spread in other parts of the world. Because of this dispersal, it is believed that the Queen of England now sits on the throne of David.

This theory was first put forward around the year 1519.

Some of the main features of this theory are :-

1. The period of "political instability" caused when the Babylonians conquered Assyria around 650 B.C., allowed the 10 tribes to escape to the north and east.

2. They fled past the Black Sea, the Carpathian Mts. into Russia, Scandinavia, Prussia, Germany and then to Great Britain.

3. After the Babylonian captivity, only Judah and Benjamin returned to Israel. This created a "problem" to British Israelism theology in that the royal line had to come from the tribe of Judah (which returned to the south after the Babylonian captivity). Royalty was said to have been brought to the ten tribes by the following sequence of events :

4. "The kingly line of Judah (Genesis 49:10) reached Britain when a daughter of Zedekiah, the last king of Judah before the fall of Jerusalem, arrived with Jeremiah in 569 B.C. This princess, Tea-Tephi, married the king of Ireland, who also happened to be a descendant of Judah through Zarah, Judah's younger son (Genesis 38:30), and so both branches of the kingly line were established as the Royal House of Ireland. This kingdom was transferred to Scotland and then to England with James I (James VI of Scotland) in 1603. Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britian, therefore is a direct descendant of King David and recipient of his throne." (D. Olinger, _British Israelism_, Bob Jones University Press)

5. "Jeremiah also brought with him in 569 B.C. the liafail, or Jacob's pillow-stone (Genesis 28:18) which had been used as the coronation stone of the kings of Judah (II Kings 11:14 - "pillar"). This stone now rests in the royal coronation chair of Great Britain in Westminster Abbey. All kings and queens of Great Britain are crowned while sitting on this chair." (D. Olinger)

6. The transfer of the kingdom from James VI of Scotland/James I England (who was of the house of Tudor) to the present queen (Elizabeth II) who is of the house of Windsor, was achieved through a distant relative, the king of Bohemia, and then back through George I into the house of Windsor. This, British Israelists say, completes the lineage back to King David.

7. The eventual emigration to America was said to have occurred with the pilgrims on the Mayflower.

Because the Northern and Southern tribes are believed to have separated, there is therefore a great emphasis placed on the distinction that British Israelists say exists between the use of the terms "Israel" and "Judah".

Herbert W. Armstrong states :

we want to impress here that Israel and Judah are not two names for the same nation. They were and still are, and shall be until the Second Coming of Christ, two separate nations. The House of Judah always means Jews. This distinction is vital if we are to understand prophecy. Because most so-called Bible students are ignorant of this basic distinction they are unable to rightly understand prophecy! The next place where the term "Jew" is mentioned in the Bible, the House of Israel had been drawn out in captivity, lost from view, and the term only applies to those of the House of Judah. There are no exceptions in the Bible.

Now, once an unscriptural perspective has been taken, the next step is to find a scripture which will support that doctrine. The key verses for British Israelism is II Kings 17:18-23 - "Therefore the Lord was angry with Israel and removed them out of His sight, there was none left but the tribe of Judah only." Here "out of His sight" is interpreted as "disappeared into oblivion". "There was none left but the tribe of Judah only" is interpreted as "the descendants of Judah are the only tribes in existence today."

EVIDENCE FOR THE MIGRATION OF ISRAEL TO THE NORTH AND EAST

Geographical Names.

There are many names of towns in Europe which have names similar in sound to the "lost" tribes, e.g. Danube, Dneister, Don, Dneiper, Denmark, Danzig are claimed to be possible towns through which the tribe of Dan passed.

However, by this piece of evidence, it could be suggested that Dan also went through Vietnam - Danang, DienBien Phu, Don Duong and so forth.

Abraham's Name.

Abraham's name was to be called "Great" (Gensis 12:2). British Israelists believe this is why the name "Great Britain" arose.

The White Cliffs.

In Isaiah 66:19 the word "Tarshish" means "white border". This is taken as referring to the White Cliffs of Dover.

The Dream.

The apocyryphal book of II Esdras describes a dream in chapter 13 in which there is a miraculous parting of the Euphrates river into Armenia where the 10 tribes seemingly remain. However this evidence must be disregarded as Josephus records in Antiquities XI v2 that the ten tribes of the captivity were still in Mesopotamia in the first century AD after Esdras was written, and 750 years after British Israelists claim that they had left for the north and the east.

The Union Jack.

The Union Jack is claimed to be an abbreviation for "union of Jacob". The Oxford English Dictionary states that the Union Jack was so named because of its size - apparantly "jack" was the word used to denote anything small.

Isaac = Saxon and British = Men of the Covenant

By removing the letter "I" from Isaac, Herbert Armstrong derives the word "saac" which combines with the word "son" to form "Saxon", i.e. "British". His logic is that "I" should be removed as the Hebrews omitted the vowels in their writing. This of course, should also require the "a"'s to be removed. The name "Isaac" is in reality anyway a latinsed form of the Hebrew name "Yitschak" (as in the late Yitschak Rabin), which would be significantly more difficult for Armstrong to twist. "Berith" is Hebrew for the word "Covenant" while "Ish" is Hebrew for "man". If you join the two, British Israelists claim you obtain the word "British" which means "men of the Covenant". There is, however, no significant relationship between Hebrew and English.

Herodatus.

A vital piece of information can be seen from the historical records of Herodatus. He claims that a fair-haired, fair-skinned people settled on the shores of the Black Sea (there is, however, no evidence to connect the ten dark-haired, olive-skinned tribes with those recorded by Herodatus). There is absolutely no connection between the ten tribes in Mesopotamia and the tribes around the Black Sea.

EVIDENCE AGAINST THE MIGRATION TO THE NORTH AND EAST

The Stone of Scone.

British Israelists make the claim that the stone under the coronation chair is the stone that the builders rejected. God strictly forbade the use of hewn stones in altars (Exodus 20:25). This stone was probably not the coronation altar of the Old Testament kings.

Secondly, however, Professor A.C. Ramsey of the Geology Department of London University inspected the stone and identified it as red sandstone, probably of Scottish origin. The nearest red sandstone to Bethel, where Jacob found his stone is in Petra, nearly one hundred miles to the south; the stone around Bethel where Jacob slept is white limestone.

Israel = Jews = Hebrews

From Genesis chapters 1 to 11, God is working on a whole world basis. In Genesis 12 God begins to work through a man named Abram (later Abraham). The term "Hebrew" was first applied to Abraham and could also be applied to all of his physical descendants (Genesis 14:13). The term "Israel" was introduced in connection with Abraham's grandson, Jacob (Genesis 32:28).

A third term "Judah" was used in relation to one of Jacob's sons (Genesis 29:35) - Judah was still part of "Israel" - Genesis 49:28 - "All these are the twelve tribes of Israel."

The term "Jew" was derived from the name of Judah and was first used in II Kings 16:6.

A member of the tribe of Judah was called a "Jew", and as a descendant of Jacob he was also called an "Israelite"; and as a descendant of Abraham he was also called a "Hebrew". All of these terms were applied to the apostle Paul (Philippians 3:5; Acts 21:39; 22:3; II Corinthians 11:22).

The division of Solomon's Kingdom made it common to use the name "Israel" in referring to the ten Northern Tribes and to use the name "Judah" in referring to the two Southern tribes.

EVIDENCE AGAINST THE MIGRATION TO BRITAIN

The Assyrians deported the majority of the captured people of the Northern Kingdom and mixed the remainder with five other nations (Babylon, Ava, Hamath, Sepharvain and Cuthah). It was a military tactic for subduing the conquered people. It was this mixture of the nations that made the full-blooded Jews avoid dealings with the Samaritans.

Some authors take the position that since the word "tribe" (shebet) is also translated "sceptre" in several passages (e.g. Genesis 49:10) it may refer to the ruling class, or the leadership, rather than the entire population. This theory may be supported by the fact that Sargon II himself claimed to deport only 27,290 people. Sargon's inscription describing the deportation has been found at Khorsabad in modern-day Iraq (see James B. Pritchard, _Ancient Near Eastern Texts_, 1950 ed., p.284-5).

This means that not all of the ten tribes were taken into captivity by the Assyrians but rather that some remained who were never "lost".

SPECIAL FEATURES ABOURT THE DISPERSAL OF THE JEWS

a) They were scattered among the nations, however they have always managed to keep their unique national identity. Numbers 23:9 (not reckoning itself among the nations) and Hosea 8:4-8 speaks specifically of Israel, the Northern Kingdom.

b) Compared with the populations of other countries, they are relatively few in number (Deuteronomy 4:27). Their population can certainly not be compared with the 4-6 hundred million of the British Isles/USA. There is no more heterogeneous nation in the world than that of the United States. Or did the "Ephraimites" (Englishmen) become "Manassites" merely by crossing the ocean in the Mayflower?

c) Did the dispersal of the "ten lost tribes" disorient them enough to start writing from left to right instead of right to left as was done for centuries?

THE KEY VERSE EXPLAINED

In the Palestinian Covenant there is a very special place for the Hebrews. To be out of His sight, indicates removal from _Palestine_ (Israel), i.e. to be relocated or dispersed. The strict keeping of genealogical records by the Hebrews would also prevent them from being "lost" and tends to indicate that they were a tightly knit community which did not mix with the Gentiles.

DID THEY REALLY ESCAPE?

When Babylon conquered Assyria, the slaves did not escape but rather had a change of masters. This may seem too simplistic a solution but there is much evidence for it in the numbers of the ten tribes that returned to Israel.

SPIRITUAL REFUGEES

The books of Ezra and Nehemiah tell of those who returned to Jerusalem, and the book of Esther tells of those who remained at Babylon. If the tribes have really been lost then all further records of their existance would not be available. It will therefore be necessary to examine what happened prior to the captivity by Assyria and Babylon in order to see who returned from these captivities.

The following scriptures give direct evidence that the Southern Kingdom of Judah was in fact a mixture of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin (about which all agree) and the other ten tribes (which were religious "refugees" from the Northern Kingdom) :

II Chronicles 11:13-17 - spitual refugees from the North

II Chronicles 15:9 - 913-872 B.C. during the reign of Asa

These scriptures show that many from _all Israel_ left the Northern Kingdom a long time before the Assyrian captivity. Therefore the Southern Kingdom now was occupied by all twelve tribes. Members from these twelve tribes returned after the Babylonian captivity to Israel and were never "lost".

Other scriptures include II Chronicles 17:2; 24:5; 30:1-7, 11, 18, 25; 31:1, 2, 6; 34:1-9; II Kings 25:6-12. Which tribes did return from the captivity to build the temple, the walls, and the city itself? Ezra refers to God's regathered people as Israelites 40 times and as Jews 8 times. Nehemiah refers to God's regathered people as Israelites 22 times and as Jews 11 times. Apart from this, the term "all Israel" is used in Ezra 2:70; 6:17; 8:25, 35; 10:5 and in Nehemiah 7:73; 12:47.

It is therefore evident that the terms "Jew" and "Israel" are interchangeable. If Jesus Christ is only "King of the Jews" (the tribe of Judah only) in Matthew 27:37, then He is not the one that is the Messiah.

The Messiah needs to be "King of Israel" (the twelve tribes) - Matthew 27:42.

SPECIFIC SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE OF THE RETURN OF THE TRIBES

The following are just some of the many verses possible :

Ezra 2:5 Arah from the tribe of Asher - I Chronicles 7:39, 40

2:10 Bani from the tribe of Gad - Nehemiah 7:15

2:21 Bethlehem from the tribe of Zebulum - Joshua 19:15-16

2:26 Ramah from the tribe of Nephtala - Joshua 19:32-39

2:29 Nebo from the tribe of Reuben - I Chronicles 5:1-8

Luke 2:36 Asher in the Lord

Acts 26:6-7 The twelve tribes

James 1:1 The twelve tribes

I Peter 1:1 The twelve tribes

Revelation 7:4-8 Jews sealed in the middle of the seven years of great tribulation. Dan is replaced by Levi, but Dan does reappear during the millenial reign of Christ

Romans 11:26 All Israel will be saved, as it is written.

All Israel (not just Judah as British-Israelism contends) is temporarily set aside until the "fullness of the Gentiles come in" according to Romans 11:25-27.

BRITISH ISRAELISM DISTORTS PROPHECY

Adherents of British Israelism appear to have a propensity for date-setting. Lt. Col. W.G. MacKendrick in his book, "The destiny of the British Empire and the USA (1921), dated Armageddon from 1928 to 1936. He further states that the US should seek help from Japan in the battle, since the Japanese, too, are Israelites (as "samurai" sounds like "Samaria") (D. Olinger).

Literally scores of prophecies and promises would have to be ignored or "spiritualised" in order to "make them fit" the British-Israel scheme of things, for example, Deuteronomy 4:27-31; Amos 9:11-15; Hosea 1:10-11; 2:14-23; 3:4-5; Isaiah 2:1-4; 14:1-3; Ezekiel 20:33-44; 34:11-31; 34:40-48; Micah 4:1-7; 7:9-20; Zechariah 2:4-13; 3:1-10; 8:1-23; 8:12-14.

The first 69 "weeks" of Daniel's vision (Daniel 9) applies specifically to the nation of Israel. The seventieth week likewise is specifically for the Israelites. Much of God's dealings with these people will be distorted if one is not even looking at the proper nation to whom the promises apply !

ONE KINGDOM, ONE KING

In Ezekiel 37:15-28 God promises that He will unite all twelve tribes in the last days as part of His Covenant of Peace with them. This prophecy would be difficult to bring to pass if the populations of Great Britain, America, etc. needed to fit in the area from the River Nile to the Euphrates.

CONCLUSION

British Israelism is an erroneous teaching. However, its main danger is the plethora of consequences it has. To hold to British-Israelism means that one not only ignores factual history, but has to interpret significant portions of the Bible in a new "spiritualised" (i.e. allegorical) manner. It leads one to a false understanding of God's purposes for Israel and the Jewish people, and causes one to distort significant prophetical passages in the Bible.

I Timothy 1:4 " ... take no heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in the faith".

davidmwilliams@geocities.com

[Destro]

Following the death of its founder [Herbert W. Armstrong], The Worldwide Church of God dropped British- Israelism and other unorthodox beliefs in 1995. The Church's officialweb page states: "We have worked hard to inform our own members about where we went wrong," and they apologize for having "taught...erroneous doctrines [like British-Israelism]."

[Destro]

bump

[GeronL]

since the Japanese, too, are Israelites (as "samurai" sounds like "Samaria"

If that is their level of reasoning they would be as scary as liberals.

[Destro]

FALSE CLAIMS AND PROPHECIES BY BRITISH-ISRAELITES

Herbert W. Armstong prophesied as follows. A prophecy about Mussolini: "Undoubtedly, then, the "Beast" who will capture half the city of Jerusalem, fighting at Armageddon against Christ at his Second Coming, is MUSSOLINI, with ten European Dictators, and their armies! It is coming in This Generation!" Herbert W. Armstrong, The Plain Truth, January 1939, p. 4

[GeronL]

Hey.. I remember there was a website that had all kinds of stuff about crazy religions... would you remember it??

never mind I guess.

[Destro]

This may cover it?

Cults: from positive to homicidal faith groups

[Destro]

Oops that is like a lefty religous website but still lots of info. Google is hit or miss sometimes.

[GeronL]

religionone.. religionmatrix... I don't know..

I will definitely read more about this...

[Zack Attack]

It is therefore evident that the terms "Jew" and "Israel" are interchangeable. If Jesus Christ is only "King of the Jews" (the tribe of Judah only) in Matthew 27:37, then He is not the one that is the Messiah.

Scripturally, "Jew" and "Israel" are not interchangeable and one must recognize the context the terms are used in. Jew or Y'hudim can be referring to the descendants of Judah, son of Jacob. It can also refer to residents of the land called Judea, or the people of the southern kingdom, irregardless of tribe of birth. Israel can be referring to persons of the northern kingdom of Israel, yet also to the combined houses of Judah and Israel, as in house of Jacob/Israel.

While Judah received the royal lineage, it was Ephraim who received the double portion blessing of the firstborn, and along with that, it was they who maintained the name of their father, Israel.

There were indeed many who were in the northern kingdom or were of the other 10 tribes, who did recognize the errors of Israel and relocated south in Judah. There is not a perfect division of tribes between north and south.

I do disagree with British Israelism and it's aspects of replacement theology, however there is a much deeper truth to all this. The larger part of Israel has never returned. Their numbers now are not as numerous as the sand of the sea. Most Orthodox Jews today are aware that they are awaiting a lost brother to come home. This is what Messiah Yeshua was speaking of when he gave the parable of the prodigal son.

[Cronos]

since the Japanese, too, are Israelites (as "samurai" sounds like "Samaria" If that is their level of reasoning they would be as scary as liberals.

Another silly one is Saxon = Isaac's son. This completely neglects the fact that, being Hebrew, the proper term would have been bin Yitzhak

[fishtank]

Duke McVeigh Armstrong Smith BUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[William Terrell]

One theory against another. Most of this stuff I never heard of.

Many events that happened centuries BC are obscured by time, and so we are left with plausible conjecture. I noticed that there is no more concrete proof in the above than found on the other side.

I'm interested in what became of the northern kingdom. Reasonable extrapolation from Biblical numbers indicates there were millions of them. It is known that they escaped from the Assyrians and there is no evidence that several millions returned to the homeland.

It doesn't ring true to me that they were absorbed by other peoples.

If you're not a believer in God and His word, the Bible, this stuff means nothing beyond a simple anthropological debate. If you believe in God and His word, you have to note Hosea 1:10, 11.

10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

11 Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.

I find no fulfillment of this prophesy in the Bible or otherwise. There are a number of implications in these two verses that are unavoidable in the plain words.

First, there are, or will be, a huge numbers. World Judaism is probably four or five million. Much has to be added to that to fit the prophecy.

The prophecy mentions two distinct groups, according to old grouping of the northern and southern kingdoms. The were apart, then they got together. They will appoint one leader, presumably from Judah, since Judah is the royal house, and their remnants are the Jews we know today, so a Jew will be the chosen leader.

For the combined Israel to be so vast and populous today, they must have been vastly populous in the time between then and today. Vast population isn't grown on trees; look at the remnants of Judah. They kept their identity and are still represent small numbers.

I doubt very seriously that the Brits replaced the Jews in God's eyes as the royal clan. The Jews are the only remnant of the covenant that we are sure of.

However, there have to a lot more existing, today, and that being true, all must be brothers to the existing Jews, not enemies or vying for the "throne".

Why, in your mind, does there have to be one or the other, mutually exclusive? Hell, for all we know from the shards remaining from ancient history, most of the world's population may be Israelite descended. That'd sure burn up all these strawmen, wouldn't it?

When one becomes emotional about a thing, that means that thing is goring someone's ox. What's your ox, that is to say, what's you stake in this debate? I don't buy it's for cold archaeological or anthropolicial theory. You're much too red in the face.

The fact is that all people that accept Christ and His laws in their hearts are part of "God's chosen people", regardless of whither came they. So what's the big deal? You figure that people will think that the Brits are the read sept of Israel and murder all the Jews?

[Destro]

DNA evidence disproves British Israelitic theory. No DNA connection.

Semites and Indo-European peoples besides having a diff language base also have a diff genetic strain.

[William Terrell]

Ok, then where are the vast numbers of Israel that will fulfill Hosea? By the way, I keep hearing of this genetic thing. Do you have the study handy?

[Destro]

Nothandy but I did post genetic distances on here when this discussion came up a while ago. Sabertooth, remember the link?

[Cronos]

Why, in your mind, does there have to be one or the other, mutually exclusive? Hell, for all we know from the shards remaining from ancient history, most of the world's population may be Israelite descended. That'd sure burn up all these strawmen, wouldn't it?

To say that most of the world's population has some Abrahamic blood is plausible but to say that a specific group (like the English -- they're not too bad, really) are the only ones descended from the Israelites seems elitist and incorrect and not in Christ's teachings of the brotherhood of man.  Spiritually, of course, Christians of all hues are God's people as you correctly state. 

[William Terrell]

I'm not saying that Brit's are the remnants of the northern kingdom. I'm saying it's reasonable and evidentuary to theorize that the NK ended up in Europe.

Maybe the Brits have the preponderance of Israelite heritage. I just wouldn't know, see? There have been myths floating around for centuries. Maybe those myths have some basis in fact. Maybe they don't. Nobody knows.

I'm a Christian and I believe in both testaments of the Bible. I believe when God makes a promise, He keeps it, and thus I'm not able to ignore Hosea, nor the prophecy of the sticks, which says the same thing.

But, there is one thing that intrigues me and the reason I decided to explore the issue. IF it is true that the tribes ended up populating Europe and became the dominant heritage there, what are the consequences on the world stage today?

To me, it gives solid foundation for the assistance to and the protection of the Jews in Israel, with a presumption of a reconciliation of both. That would fulfill the prophecies.

I like that notion. Many don't. To each his own. I still don't see what's so objectionable about that.

[William Terrell]

It's somewhere on the web, I assume. Do you remember who do the study?

[topcat54]

since the Japanese, too, are Israelites (as "samurai" sounds like "Samaria"

If that is their level of reasoning they would be as scary as liberals.

Isn't that like the wacky "sounds like" theology of Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye?

The name Moscow comes from the tribal name Meshech, and Tobolsk, the name of the principal state, comes from Tubal. The noun Gog is from the original tribal name, Magog, which gradually became Rosh, then Rus, and today is know as Russia. In the very interesting book The Late Great Planet Earth, my friend Hal Lindsey presents a lengthy discussion of the identity of these nations. I was so impressed by the accuracy of his sources and his readable style that I obtained permission to quote him at length, with numbered footnotes indicating his sources. (Tim LaHaye, quoted in "But Is It In The Bible?" by Gary DeMar)

[Destro]

It's a DNA based calculator using the Jews as fixed base of reference with DNA % differences to those ethnicities you select. What the website was I don't recall. The links and data were posted on here inside the body of an articleof the same topic.