All 12 tribes still exist today and they are all known as Jews.
Which is it? 
Posted on 07/07/2007 7:48:37 PM PDT by tnarg
Mark it down as biblical truth: There is no pre-tribulation rapture.
However, untold thousands believe in the "secret rapture of the church" prior to the tribulation period. This is because untold thousands don't want to have to think of suffering through a tribulation time frame. The late Corrie ten Boom called this pre-trib rapture teaching the "American doctrine." Go figure.
The belief in a secret rapture of believers before the tribulation is also because of a best-seller, "The Late, Great Planet Earth," by Hal Lindsey which was set loose in the l960s. It has been a paperback aggressively pushed by practically every evangelical / fundamentalist engine going.
Theologians, videos, films and preachers bolster up this myth with their earnest preachings and teachings.
Yet this is nothing but a myth, accented as much by certain theologically conservative Protestant segments similar unto the Roman Catholic underlining of the immaculate conception of Mary. Nevertheless, if there is no biblical support for such a Mariology teaching, it is bogus. Likewise, the pre-tribulation rapture teaching is bogus.
The pre-trib rapture concept was manufactured in the 1800s in an 18 year old Plymouth Brethren girl's dream, told to her Pastor, John Darby, and then relayed to C. I. Scofield who bought into the dream as revealed truth. Scofield placed this pre-tribulation rapture notion as a footnote in his popular Bible, hence the spread of the myth.
However, just the opposite is biblical truth. In Matthew 24:29-3l, for instance, the rapture ("gathering together") is placed in the same time frame as the open second coming of Jesus Christ. And all of this is "after the tribulation" (verse 29). That is it in a nutshell!
Yet pre-tribulation rapturists sidestep this clear passage for more oblique passages. The latter are twisted and turned in order to fit into the "American doctrine." Yet such twisting is not sound exegesis. And for biblically-riveted evangelicals and fundamentalists to commit this drastic error is bordering on the horrific.
All other passages in Scripture relating to the "gathering together unto Him" must refer back to the literal time line provided by Jesus in Matthew 24.
One must not use a symbolic passage in the Book of Revelation or any other symbolically-based section of the Bible by which to draw a pre-tribulation rapture doctrine.
Further, one must not take words of the apostle Paul so as to insert them opportunistically into a conjured pre-tribulation string of Scripture references. Yet this has been done ad infinitum.
Instead, Jesus' literalism of Matthew 24 must be used as the benchmark for all other "gathering together" themes of Scripture.
One starts with literalism and moves into symbolism when seeking to understand Scripture; it is not the other way around.
During the 1970s and 1980s there was much written and preached about a pre-tribulation rapture. This has wound down some in the last decade or so. Why?
Today, with the world situation being what it is, there is not that much risk-taking in preaching dogmatically the pre-tribulation rapture. Why?
Is it because there are many who are beginning to question its validity? Is it because the world state is so uncertain that to go out on a limb with a false hope may ricochet?
One wonders, with world events progressively becoming more and more anti-Christian, why the pre-tribulation rapture persons are not celebrating each dawn as the day when Jesus may return to earth.
Such is not the phenomenon on a large scale. Furthermore, it may be because the next generation has not bought into this notion.
In any case, it is a myth, a legend of conservative Protestantism's own conjuring and has no base in the Holy Scriptures.
Yet these very Protestants are the ones who ardently point out the myths of Catholicism while holding to some of their own myths. Both segments of Christendom need to do some serious housecleaning of manufactured legends in order to return to the simple Bible truths; otherwise, the church suffers from severe lack of knowledge.
What is so frightening about holding to a pre-tribulation rapture? It is more than mere academic quibbling. Holding to such a notion is drastically weakening the church worldwide.
The church should be preparing for spiritual battle against the most evil forces arrayed by hell.
Instead, the church is languishing with a false hope. This is all orchestrated by the demonic powers in order to eventuate in a limp army of believers. And to see that through in this age of laxity in religion does not take much on the part of the dark powers. In addition, the apostate segment of religion is doing its fair share of blackening truth.
Does it take much intelligence to realize that there are awesomely wretched days yet ahead for the righteous remnant?
Those who are not strong will drop--fall away, as biblically predicted. They will be too numerous to contemplate. But for those who are truly into carrying the daily cross there will be nothing able to thwart their zeal for Christ.
Already the remnant is being strengthened by the Spirit of light. He is gathering His own together in the power of the resurrection and the might of the revealed Word. There numbers are few; but their ardor before the Father is lovingly honored.
Set your vision upon the difficulties yet to be. They are but the trials permitted by the coming Christ.
At the close of the tribulation period, then there will be the gathering together of the believers from the four corners of the earth. They will greet Jesus in the clouds as He descends through space, having left the right hand of the Father in heaven.
The gathering together ("rapture") and the second advent then will be realized as one and the same event occurring at the end of the tribulation time frame. Jesus' declaration in Matthew 24:29-3l states it clearly.
All 12 tribes still exist today and they are all known as Jews.
Which is it?
Then who were "scattered abroad". Why did Jesus send the disciples to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel"?
. . .as was Anna from the tribe of Asar.
It is well documented that several individuals and families fled the northern kingdom and joined the House of Judah because of the sins therein.
What your theory assumes is that those tribes wandered off somewhere. Any evidence?
Yes, Assyrian tablets from outposts sent back to the Assyrian hierarchy.
The tribes were all represented by individuals who had gone South when the split had occurred and constant travel back and forth before the Assyrians conquered the North. Over the hundred years of the split, both nations were actually ruled by a single King, even though they were never officially united, so travel back and forth would not have been difficult.
And your recorded evidence in proof of this?
The 10 Tribes that went into Assyria disappeared as a national entity, not as individual members of those tribes.
You cannot have it both ways. The people of a nation or kingdom are the nation or kingdom. Each individual retains the memory of that nation or kingdom. If the individuals of the northern kingdom had returned to Palistine, they would have rediscovered and retained their identity.
No, For God's purposes in scattering and allowing their identity to fade, He sent them to other lands.
This is necessary for Hosea and Ezekiel, your scorn and derision notwithstanding.
You appear to be simply afraid of the implications of what I'm saying. It gores your ox somewhere. I, on the other hand, am a Christian, if the Israelite tribes were, as you claim, absorbed into Judah, it would be meaningless to me in terms of my spiritual salvation.
But you are emotional, hurling derision, accusations, scorn and anger in your writing. What part of the Israelite issue affect you in that manner?
1Thess 4:17 Then we which are alive, and remain, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
If we are alive (not spiritually dead) and remain it means we waited for the true Christ, did not fall for the deceit of the fake, and we will be caught in our spirit bodies (in the air), as detailed in 1 Corinthians 15:52:
In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
This happens at the last trump and that is the 7th. That is when the change takes place - not before. To nail that fact down Paul sent a 2nd. letter to the Thessalonians to clarify his first letter:
2 Thess.22:1-3 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto Him,
2.That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter, as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3.Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition,
The word is temple, which you have already admitted...So you are denying what you have already to be a fact as stated in 2Thess.2....What's the matter, no help from Strong's on that one?
#3485 Naos; from a primary naio (to dwell); a fane, shrine, temple - shrine, temple. Comp 2411 - hieron, neut. of 2413; a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerusalem or elsewhere): - temple
So... couldn't that be the Dome of the Rock, a shrine, sacred place that stands where the Temple stood? The place is referred to both as the Holy Place and Temple in different verses on the same subject.
[ Those who follow the Anti-Christ will be awed by the signs and wonders he does and his promise of peace.....That will be the deception, not the view of the rapture.]
We have already established he is coming after Christians, (those that have the testimony of Jesus). Those Christians have been taught about the deception of Satan so that should not deceive them. What else do they have to be deceived about???
Ping - Just remember, there are two tribulations and you must wait for the true Christ:......FTD - There are two tribulations?....One isn't enough?
He tells us there are two. The first is the one Christians should worry about. If they don't fall for the lies then the tribulation of Jesus won't affect us. We are His children - but we will be here for both.
Satan comes when he is cast out of heaven in Rev.12.
Yes, Michael kicks him out and that is at the 6th trump, 6th seal and 6th vial.
Christ comes back for His Church before He returns to set up His Millennial Kingdom in Rev.19.
No FTD, he doesn't. We will all be here.
That 'work' is not done by us,(flesh) it is done by God when we yield to the Holy Spirit (Rom.6)
I agree that it is Him working through us but it is none-the-less "work".
Please explain to me 1 Kings 13. Vs.32, I guess, tells us that the “man of God’s” death made them believe he had spoken the truth. However.....why did the one man in the town lie to him to get the man of God to go with him. What was the purpose? This is a very strange chapter.
The tribes you know as Jews are the remnants of the southern kingdom returned from Babylon. Every Jew I have known knows which tribe they belong to. I've know four well enough to know what tribe they were. Three were Judah and one Levite.
As was discussed there were individuals from northern tribes that joined Judah before the Assyrians. That would mean you would encounter other than Judah, Benjamin and Levi in records.
There are sprinklings, but nothing more than the amount there would be factoring in those who joined Judah before the Assyrians. The House of Judah were captured together and returned together. They keep very good records of their origins.
Don't you know any Jews well enough for them to share their tribes?
You are trying to use the wrong criteria. Judah was contaminated before they were taken by the Babylonians.
Now stop your nonsense! There was no count in the Old Testament at the time of the removal of the 10 tribes that stated any population. What the Old Testament did state was that before Israel was removed, God had began to cut it short, so that it had no army left.
No nonsense. This topic was discussed years ago. A poster had estimated the strength of the northern kingdom and had cited a Biblical count of men in, I think it was Kings, of enough to expand to a population of around 4 or 5 million.
The count was well before the Assyrians, but you would have to agree the tribes would hardly have diminished before the Assyrian invasion.
I looked it up and verified it but don't remember. You're certain free to find it. I'm not going to waste my time because you wouldn't accept the standard expansion anyway. It would destroy your position. Take my word for, or don't.
No army left? Really. Even if there were "no army left" there were still women and children, and males.
Suffice to say, we are talking about 10 tribes as compared to 2. You make your own judgments.
You would 'guess'? They were put under a curse for idol worship (Deut.28, Lev.26). God kept Israel alive as Jews, combing all 12 tribes as one people who returned to the Land, but not as individual tribes.
Why, yes, I would guess. Isn't that what what you're doing? You have no evidence, even logic, that would suggest that the northern kingdom returned to Palestine. the only function of that position is to have something, anything that would explain the lack of whereabouts of Israel. Then Hosea and Ezekiel further nails it.
Show me what make you think that "God kept Israel alive as Jews combining all 12 tribes.? Even the scripture in the New Testament disagrees with you.
Yes, I suppose they did and lost their identity.
Yes, they lost their identity, which is a large argument against combining with Judah. If they had, they would have retained it, as records were always kept.
Go ahead and find you a Jew, and ask him if he knows what tribe he belongs to.
We are not talking about the Southern Kingdom, which ended up in the Babylonian Kingdom for 70 years and returned to the Land as Jews We are talking about the 10 tribes which were taken by the Assyrians into their empire and disappeared from history.
If they disappeared from history, you have no knowledge to base your presumption that they returned to Palestine, whereas there are Assyrian records that show Israelite customary dress, and describe attributes of Hebrews, different names they were called, but close enough to be phonetic version of their real names.
All you have is conjecture to counter a theory you find personally repugnant whether it may be the truth or not. You don't seem to be seeking the truth; you seem to be working to maintain some status quo that you are comfortable with.
Oh stop making up history! There is no record of the 10 tribes 'whipping the Assyrians and making their escape. We know what nations were involved in whipping the Assyrians and they weren't the Israelites. So do you have any actual facts-no, you don't. Maybe UFO's came down and took them to North America and they are really the American Indian?
There is no record of the Israelites in the main assault by Nabopolassar and Medes on Nineveh, either. But Israel was on the northern border with the Medes after they were captured by the Assyrians.
Your history was not and never was oriented toward the House of Israel. So, it means nothing to this discussion. I might be impressed if you gave some history that discusses or mentions them in the Assyrian conflict. However, we know they were there.
None of your history takes into consideration the actual Assyrian tablets and the info thereon, either.
Why don't you go to a British Museum site and see what it says about the tablets, cylinders and other writings that actually came from Assyria and were written by the Assyrians alive at the time?
No one is recorded to have gone North through Turkey.
No, there is no tablet that actually says, "And the Israelite tribes went north to Turkey." There are just indication in records that men in Israelite priestly garb were sighted north of Assyria after the main conflicts.
I don't have absolutely definitive records with the precise reporting you seem to require, but it appears to be more than you have.
My question precisely.
We see the House of Israel back in Israel at the time of Christ and identified as such.
Yes, we see scripture that identifies as they are "scattered abroad", and Jesus sending His disciples to them as "lost sheep of the house of Israel', when the Jews were right there with Him, and He knew the as Jews.
Clearly, they had returned with the Southern tribes after the Babylonian captivity.?
Clearly, by scripture references, even of the Master Himself, they were elsewhere. And, of course, as logic demands, if God wanted them to lose their identity, He certain wouldn't send them to the very place where they could retain it.
Quod Erat Demonstrantum.
Israel to be a great and mighty Nation: [Genesis 12:2] This was God's first promise to Abraham.
Israel to have an uncountable seed: [Genesis 13:16] This was God's second promise to Abraham.
The Jews have never fulfilled these promises as a Nation.
Israel was to spread through out the Earth and be a blessing to everyone: [Genesis 28:14] The Jews have never fulfilled this prophecy.
Israel to have a new home: [2 Samuel 7:10][1 Chronicles 17:9] They will be safe there. The Jews have never been safe anywhere.
When Israel is restored they will be coming from the north west: [Isaiah 49:12][Jeremiah 3:18]
Israel will live in island territories and along the coasts: [Isaiah 41:1;49:1-3;51:5][Jeremiah 31:7-10]
Israel will be a company of nations: [Genesis 17:4-6][Genesis 35:11][Genesis 48:19]
With scriptures like these you don't need definitive records.
Jereboam is attempting to combine the priesthood [I Kings 12:31-33] and the judges which had been made separate by God. This is one of the reasons the Levites came down to be with Judah [II Chronicles 11:13-15] and subsequently became known as Jews.
[13:3-4] Jereboam heard what the Man of God had been saying and put forth his hand and immediately it was dried up...or paralyzed. The alter was also rent [13:5] according to the sign of the Man of God. Jereboam asks that his hand be restored and the hand becomes as it was before [13:6]. You would think that by Jereboam asking for a favor from the Man of God that perhaps he has had a change of heart. No way!
[13:7] The king offers the Man of God a reward...or a payoff... by asking him to come home with him. The Man of God refuses because he had received instructions not to eat any bread nor drink any water nor turn away from your errand [13:8-9]. And when he was done to get home now!
So far....so good! The Man of God (prophet from Judah) is obeying all instructions until......[13:10] he went another way and runs into the sons of an Old Prophet [13:11]. This prophet was a prophet in Israel before Jereboam became bad, appointing his own priests and prophets, and this Old Prophet evidently lost his job.
[13:12] His sons come home and tell him about the Man of God and the Old Prophet asks his sons "Which way did he go?" They knew, so the Old Prophet asks that his ass be saddled so he can go talk with the Man of God [13:13] Well, they catch up with him sitting under a tree [13:14] and ask if it is he who is the Man of God. He replies yes and the Old Prophet invites him home for supper [13:15]. [13:16] The Man of God tells the Old Prophet he cannot do any of this....and why [13:17].
Here's the clincher: [13:18] The Old Prophet lies! A good lesson here....watch what people claim.... and claim to be. Some will explain to you....convincingly error after error...and you will believe! He (the Man of God) fell for it probably because he was hungry and tired and wanted to believe. If God tells you something.... don't let a man tell you different.
[13:19] So, he goes back to the Old Prophet's house and dines and the Word of God [13:20] came to the Old Prophet. This guy knew he had lied and cried out to the Man of God [13:21]"For as much as thou hast disobeyed the mouth of The Lord, and hast not kept the commandment which The Lord commanded thee." The Lord is using the Old Prophet at this point to reveal a message.
You came back, ate....drank and now your carcass will not go to your father's graves[13:22]. The ten tribes had become an abomination to The Lord and here the Man of God sat...in Israel, in complete defiance of God's command with his belly full and his thirst quenched. This same man (Old Prophet) that lied to him is now telling him he ain't gonna make it! Another good lesson here; God expects you to use common sense and do what he commands.
[13:23] The Old Prophet now gives the Man of God a better animal for his short journey, knowing he will not arrive and sure enough, before he had gone too far [13:24] a lion meets him and kills him. This lion is of God because the lion does not eat the mule...it just kills the Man of God and sits there by the road. [13:25] People pass by and take note. [13:26] And when the Old Prophet heard of it he says "It was because the Man of God did not obey the commandment" knowing it was also his lie that convinced the man of God to do what he had done. He says [13:27] let's go and they [13:27] went and they found the carcass....still not eaten by the lion [13:28]....nor the ass! This was because the entire episode was a divine act and God wanted everyone...including the passersby, that this was his doing. [13:29] The Old prophet then hauls away the carcass....to mourn over and bury.
Remember, God had warned the Man of God not to stop and eat or drink and to come right back to Judah. The Old Prophet appears to be somewhat saddened but knows that it was his lie that caused it [13:30]. He probably did some repenting....maybe other folks aware of the situation did also. He requests [13:31] that his sons bury him with the Man of God when his time comes. [13:32] The Old Prophet is now a second witness to what the Prophet of Judah (The Man of God) was doing and what he had stated before the alter of Jeroboam. The Man of God had prophesied that God would bring forth Josiah.....a King that would rid the land of idol worship and bring down these high places.
{13:33] Jereboam continued in his evil ways and [13:34] this thing was known to be a sin unto the house of Jereboam.
The Man of God has a duty to teach the Word of God to all who are of him. To teach it exactly as it is written so all may understand what God expects of them. When you begin anointing certain individuals to carry on this task and they fail in their efforts and manipulate the word to their own ends they are robbing God of his word. This is what the Man of God had done. He had robbed God of his commandment because he was hungry and thirsty....and would believe anything!
The Assyrians came on the scene about a couple of hundred years later and took Israel away. They have never returned! God does not go back on his word or contradict himself and if he says it will happen in a certain order you can believe it. If someone tells you that God is not going to do something...and scripture clearly shows them to be wrong....you can know for sure that person is a liar. There are no short cuts....trust and obey.
why did the one man in the town lie to him to get the man of God to go with him. What was the purpose? This is a very strange chapter.
To show the result of disobedience.
Yes, we see scripture that identifies as they are "scattered abroad", and Jesus sending His disciples to them as "lost sheep of the house of Israel', when the Jews were right there with Him, and He knew the as Jews.
No, Jesus stated that He was sent to the lost of house of Israel, when He was refusing to help the Syrian woman (Mat.15:24).
Both Peter and Stephen are speaking to the house of Israel (Acts, 2:36, 7:42)
So the house of Israel is back in the land and are known as Jews.
[ Clearly, they had returned with the Southern tribes after the Babylonian captivity.? ]
Clearly, by scripture references, even of the Master Himself, they were elsewhere. And, of course, as logic demands, if God wanted them to lose their identity, He certain wouldn't send them to the very place where they could retain it.
Clearly, your logic is flawed assuming what you need to prove.
Eventually all Jews lost their tribal identity didn't they?
Do any of the Jews today know if they are from Judah or Benjamin, no less the other 10 tribes?
Quod Erat Demonstrantum.
It has been demonstrated that you are 'question begging' and 'building straw men'.
No evidence of any migration by the 10 tribes, no evidence of any revolt by the 10 tribes, and no evidence that those tribes are anywhere else.
Quad Erat Demonstrantnum.
And what is worse, you do not know scripture!
The moral of the story...."Take heed, follow no man". I didn't get it, even after I was told he lied, I still assumed because he was an Old Prophet that it would be alright. So.....Even if someone considered "holy" tells you one thing if it does not agree with God's Word - do not follow.
Your explanation has changed a "strange" chapter into one full of warnings: Don't listen to men, Follow God only, even if others make promises and when God says something - it will be done.
Thank you for clearing it up for me. I try to warn others about falling for false teachers, etc. and here I fell, even when being told he was a liar.
The tribes you know as Jews are the remnants of the southern kingdom returned from Babylon. Every Jew I have known knows which tribe they belong to. I've know four well enough to know what tribe they were. Three were Judah and one Levite.
Stop your lying.
Individual Jews do not know if they are from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin or Levi.
Any genealogies to prove what tribe they are from?
No, because there are no more genealogies that trace the tribes as there were in Ezra.
[ As was discussed there were individuals from northern tribes that joined Judah before the Assyrians. That would mean you would encounter other than Judah, Benjamin and Levi in records. ]
There are sprinklings, but nothing more than the amount there would be factoring in those who joined Judah before the Assyrians. The House of Judah were captured together and returned together. They keep very good records of their origins.
And there were those who did not show up in the records that were in the Land as well, such as the tribe of Aser.
And do they have any records today tracing their ancestor ship?
Those records were destroyed when the Temple was destroyed.
Except for DNA testing, no Jew knows what tribe he is originally from.
Don't you know any Jews well enough for them to share their tribes?
Any Jew that claims he is from a particular tribe can only state he thinks he is from that tribe.
He has no proof, no way of tracing his origin back to the the original 12 tribes-and you know it.
Stop blowing smoke.
You are trying to use the wrong criteria. Judah was contaminated before they were taken by the Babylonians.
I don't know what you mean by 'contaminated'.
But all 12 tribes were present in the South, when Judah and Benjamin went into captivity.
[ Now stop your nonsense! There was no count in the Old Testament at the time of the removal of the 10 tribes that stated any population. What the Old Testament did state was that before Israel was removed, God had began to cut it short, so that it had no army left. ]
No nonsense. This topic was discussed years ago. A poster had estimated the strength of the northern kingdom and had cited a Biblical count of men in, I think it was Kings, of enough to expand to a population of around 4 or 5 million.
Well, it isn't in Kings.
So, if you cannot provide the actual verse to show it, it just shows that you do not know what you are talking about.
More hot air.
The count was well before the Assyrians, but you would have to agree the tribes would hardly have diminished before the Assyrian invasion. I looked it up and verified it but don't remember. You're certain free to find it. I'm not going to waste my time because you wouldn't accept the standard expansion anyway. It would destroy your position. Take my word for, or don't.
No word to take.
It is clear from your evasion and lying you do not have any proof.
And know you state that the count was 'well before the Assyrians' which could mean anytime.
Well, the kingdom was under judgment and being smitten by God so the numbers were shrinking rapidly.
So, the fact is you have no legitimate reason to claim you know how many people went into exile.
Yet, another unsubstantiated claim.
No army left? Really. Even if there were "no army left" there were still women and children, and males.
And what were their numbers?
You don't know.
And the size of a nations army is good indication of the relative population.
Now, why don't you find the verse that actually gives the number of peopel that went into exile.
I will accept the number of men that went into exile.
Your theory is built in a foundation of lies.
Suffice to say, we are talking about 10 tribes as compared to 2. You make your own judgments.
Yes, the judgment that one is forced to come to is that you don't know what you are talking about.
The tribe of Benjamin was once down to 600 men, with no women and children left (Ju.21).
[ You would 'guess'? They were put under a curse for idol worship (Deut.28, Lev.26). God kept Israel alive as Jews, combing all 12 tribes as one people who returned to the Land, but not as individual tribes. ]
Why, yes, I would guess. Isn't that what what you're doing? You have no evidence, even logic, that would suggest that the northern kingdom returned to Palestine. the only function of that position is to have something, anything that would explain the lack of whereabouts of Israel. Then Hosea and Ezekiel further nails it.
No, the Bible tells us that the lost house of Israel was back in Israel (Mat.15, Acts,2,7).
Now, since each tribe is among the Jews, we don't need to look any further for them.
So you are making up history to support your own lack of Bible knowledge.
Show me what make you think that "God kept Israel alive as Jews combining all 12 tribes.? Even the scripture in the New Testament disagrees with you.
No, the scripture states clearly that the house of Israel was present during the Lord's day, since Peter accused them of crucifying the Lord (Acts.2:36).
[ Yes, I suppose they did and lost their identity. ]
Yes, they lost their identity, which is a large argument against combining with Judah. If they had, they would have retained it, as records were always kept.
There are no records of the 12 tribes individual identities that go back to the original 12 tribes.
Go ahead and find you a Jew, and ask him if he knows what tribe he belongs to.
What you mean what tribe he thinks he belongs to.
He has no proof of any tribe since he has no records that go back to the original 12.
[ We are not talking about the Southern Kingdom, which ended up in the Babylonian Kingdom for 70 years and returned to the Land as Jews We are talking about the 10 tribes which were taken by the Assyrians into their empire and disappeared from history. ]
If they disappeared from history, you have no knowledge to base your presumption that they returned to Palestine, whereas there are Assyrian records that show Israelite customary dress, and describe attributes of Hebrews, different names they were called, but close enough to be phonetic version of their real names.
Ofcourse, Assyrians would have proof of Hebrews in their Empire, they were there!
What you have to prove is that they actually left.
As for the tribes being present in the land of Israel during Christ's day, that is proven by Scripture (Mt.15, Acts,2,7).
All you have is conjecture to counter a theory you find personally repugnant whether it may be the truth or not. You don't seem to be seeking the truth; you seem to be working to maintain some status quo that you are comfortable with.
No, I am dealing with facts.
You have accepted a theory with no facts to support it.
You have this assumption that in order for Hosea 1:10-11 to be true, there must be millions of pre-existing Israelites before the Millennial Kingdom.
This comes from your poor reading skills.
'Then' doesn't have to mean 'at that time' it can also mean 'in addition'.
Thus, the Millennial reign will begin with the reuniting of the two divisions of the tribes and as a result, the house of Israel will become as the 'sand of the sea'.
[ Oh stop making up history! There is no record of the 10 tribes 'whipping the Assyrians and making their escape. We know what nations were involved in whipping the Assyrians and they weren't the Israelites. So do you have any actual facts-no, you don't. Maybe UFO's came down and took them to North America and they are really the American Indian? ]
There is no record of the Israelites in the main assault by Nabopolassar and Medes on Nineveh, either. But Israel was on the northern border with the Medes after they were captured by the Assyrians.
And if there is no record of them in the assault, then we have no prove that they were involved in it.
Just because they were there, doesn't mean that they were part of the revolt against Assyria.
Once again you are 'question begging'.
They could have been assimilated into the local population by then.
Your history was not and never was oriented toward the House of Israel. So, it means nothing to this discussion. I might be impressed if you gave some history that discusses or mentions them in the Assyrian conflict. However, we know they were there.
And do you have any facts that discuss their involvement?
You are assuming that they were involved, but being in captivity for over a century, they could have adopted Assyrian culture as well.
One of the curses placed on Israel was that they would be dispersed and adopt the Gentile gods.
So, it is you that have to show that the tribes were still existing as tribes.
That they did actually revolt against the Assyrians.
If you cannot, then you have another conjecture to add to your house of cards.
None of your history takes into consideration the actual Assyrian tablets and the info thereon, either. Why don't you go to a British Museum site and see what it says about the tablets, cylinders and other writings that actually came from Assyria and were written by the Assyrians alive at the time?
And do they say anything other then that the 10 tribes were there-which everyone knows!
Does it say that they revolted?
Does it give their number?
Once again , a irrelvant fact that does nothing to advance your theory that the 10 tribes broke free and left the area for lands unknown.
[ No one is recorded to have gone North through Turkey. ]
No, there is no tablet that actually says, "And the Israelite tribes went north to Turkey." There are just indication in records that men in Israelite priestly garb were sighted north of Assyria after the main conflicts.
Not much to base your theory on.
Individual Jews were dispersed throughout the world, so I am not surprised to see them in Asia minor.
I don't have absolutely definitive records with the precise reporting you seem to require, but it appears to be more than you have.
What I have are facts, what you have is myth based on conjecture.
Stop living in a fantasy world.
Now, unless you can supply some facts, like the number of people in the 12 tribes when they were deported, some proof of their revolting, some evidence of their existence of their migration as the 10 tribes (not individuals) you have nothing to sub stain your false theory.
As for the numbers taken, Bullinger notes that in Sargans own inscription he lists-27,900!
And from this you get millions?
LOL!
If I follow your logic, I have no reason to trust you. What if God speaks to us through other men?
But that other man told him something that contradicted God. Isn't the lesson here that when God has spoken, as He did to the Man of God, or as He does to us through His written Word, that we must follow Him, no matter what the other promises or how righteous he appears, or how hungry and tired we are?
But that other man told him something that contradicted God. Isn't the lesson here that when God has spoken, as He did to the Man of God, or as He does to us through His written Word, that we must follow Him, no matter what the other promises or how righteous he appears, or how hungry and tired we are?
I'm not asking you to trust me...but you should trust your own brain and what you read from scripture. Trust The Lord and know that most people you meet on your "Christian Walk" will be wrong....to some degree, but nevertheless, wrong! I'm always reminded of [Matthew 24:4-5] And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
Years ago when I first began to study, this verse stuck out like a sore thumb to me. It told me that most people (when explaining the Word of God) would be wrong.....about most things.....most of the time. Well, right then and there, logic told me to search for the truth in places where the Mainstream Church held different doctrines. That wasn't too difficult because as you read the Word you see contradiction after contradiction in what "They" believe.
We just had a good example a few days ago when we were all discussing the fact that Ruth was not of the Kingdom of Moab. If you propose this idea to Mainstream Theology you'll get strange looks and be shunned. We'll....I showed everyone where the Moab she lived in was the Moab of Moses [Numbers 33:48-50] that he had given to Gad, Rueben and Manasseh [Numbers 32:33] that he had taken from the Amorites who had previously taken it from the Moabites [Numbers 21:23-26]. I received many arguments about this even when it plainly says this in scripture.
I also showed where The Lord God had specifically told the folks to stay away from the Moabites [Deuteronomy 23:34] and where this definitive scripture was repeated in Ezra 900 years later [Ezra 9:1-2] and even showed that the daughters were included also because somebody had said Deuteronomy only applied to the men (Good Grief).
I showed where the word in scripture translated incorrectly as God [Ruth 1:15-16] meant instead, "Judges" because that's who ruled in Israel at the time (verse 1) and the fact that Ruth used the correct name for God in verse 17. But, people were still scratching their heads, thinking I'm a looney. Why? Because they have heard this "touchy feely" story all their lives and it upsets their preconceived notions. Well, that's not good enough for The Lord. He expects you to use your God given intelligence and know that most of what you are being told.....most of the time.....by most of your respected teachers....is garbage!
One final thought. We have been drifting in and out of the Books of The Kings and of course Solomon was one of main characters. Has anyone given any thought as to why The Lord was so displeased with Solomon....and why he decided to split the Kingdom? Well....here is the main reason! [I Kings 11:12] But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites: Of the nations concerning which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.
But....you know...people are still going to call me a crackpot because I think that this prohibition included Boaz marrying a woman of the "Kingdom of Moab" also! That's why Ruth was not of that kingdom....but an Israelite of either the tribe of Gad, Rueben or Mannesah! Why....do I believe this? Because I'm using my God given brain!
Typing too fast: The reference of Deuteronomy 23:34 (fourth paragraph) should be 23:3-4 instead, and the reference to [I Kings 11:12] in the sixth paragraph should be [I Kings 11:1-2].
Another example ....why you should trust no man!
Ruth 4:5-6 Then said Boaz, What day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi, thou must buy it also of Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance. And the kinsman said, I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance: redeem thou my right to thyself; for I cannot redeem it.It seems that the kinsman did not realize that Ruth was part of the deal. If Ruth was an Israelite, then you need to give a reason why the kinsman was prevented from marrying her. It was his duty and his right. If Ruth was a Moabitess, then I need to show why Boaz could redeem her when the kinsman could not.
Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.I don’t like to say that the promise superceded the law, but rather, the law contains the provision for grace.
Matt 19:25-26 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.To be continued
A good example Diego, however, nowhere does it say "Take heed, follow no woman". Does this mean what I tell my husband it means? Females are infallible....Nah, he didn't fall for that either.
It seems somewhat bizarre that you would be a stickler on the Levirate Law (Kinsman Redeemer) [Deuteronomy 25:5-10] and so easily dismiss the commands given to not marry Moabite women: [Deuteronomy 23:3][I Kings 11:1-2][Ezra 9:1-2][Nehemiah 13:1]. You seem to think that Naomi and family would cavalierly disregard the command in Deuteronomy given just a couple of hundred years prior....but then turn around and follow commands to the letter....about the Levirate Law....ten years later....back in Judah.
If you stop and think about it you would realize that the reason the law was carefully being followed by Boaz, Naomi and Ruth was because Ruth was recognized as an Israelite. The Law that they were following expressly forbid marriage with foreign women. All offspring of these marriages were to be treated as outcasts in Israel!
If Mahlon had married a foreign women then there would be no requirement for any relative (Kinsman) to perpetuate the act. Naomi would be able to have her land redeemed but in no way could observance of the Law be made to include procreating with a foreign woman. The kinsman who refused the deal and relinquished his rights would have been the first to say: "Hey, no law exists here....and I don't have to raise up any outcast children!" [Deuteronomy 23:2] But, he doesn't say that...he just says, "You do it"... further proving that Ruth was indeed an Israelite.
The Hebrew word used in the above scripture is : Strong's #4464 mamzer (mam-zare')from an unused root meaning to alienate; a mongrel, i.e. born of a Jewish father and a heathen mother; bastard.
The Levirate Law did not require the first in line to be the Kinsman Redeemer.....only that a brother accept the responsibility. Notice that Boaz says in verse 13 of Chapter 3 that the first Kinsman Redeemer may not want to accept. In other words...he may have accepted a younger, more fertile Naomi....but having to accept the responsibility of the daughter-in-law also.....no way! He told Boaz....Go for it! The first Kinsman was not prevented from taking Ruth...he just opted out.
This is a good example of translators reading something into scripture that is simply not there. They all praise Ruth for being a Heathen Moabitess, a descendant of a people abhorrent to God and proclaim her to be a saintly ancestor of Our Lord. But Ruth could not have been a racial descendant of Moab because the "Levirate Law" would then not apply to her.
Finally....700/800 years later when Ezra brings the folks back from Babylon he tore his hair and his beard, lamenting of the crime committed of intermarriage with Heathens. Read these two chapters of Ezra (9&10) and then ask yourself why the Holy Spirit caused these words to be written if it was O.K. for Boaz to marry a foreign women and set the stage for the Davidic line down through Christ.
Bottom line....there is too much in scripture commanding the Israelites not to marry foreign women to even consider that Ruth, an ancestor of Our Lord, could ever be one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.