Preaching a Pre-Tribulation Rapture Weakens the Church

Mark it down as ~~biblical~~ an interpretation of truth: There is no pre-tribulation rapture.

There. . .fixed it.

There. . .fixed it.

Yes you did!!!

Micah 4:5 For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever.

This is the same problem we noticed earlier in this thread where we were discussing Naomi and Ruth. The word "god" does not mean "Our Lord God" as we know Him or even a pagan god.....it means: 430. 'elohiym (el-o-heem')gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative; angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty. We learned in the Book of Ruth that the "gods" in [Ruth 1:15] were really "judges" as indicated in [Ruth 1:1].

The word "Lord" used later in the verse is: 3068. Yhovah (yeh-ho-vaw')(the) self-Existent or Eternal; Jehovah, Hebrew name of God and this is the same word used in [Ruth 1:17] where Ruth acknowledges The Lord God instead of the judges who were ruling in Israel at that time [Ruth 1:1].

Micah is speaking of the Millennium (last days...verse 1) and is indicating that many disputes will be settled (verse 3) and during the Millennium The Lord will have resurrected Saints (now immortal beings) helping Him to do just this.... and judge the affairs (verse 3) of mankind. During this 1000 year period, where there is no Satanic influence, it will be a great learning experience for mortals yet inhabiting the Earth.....learning to do things God's way.

[The House of Israel is the one who is being addressed and they are told what they had done. That is why they ask, 'what shall we do'. The English is very clear, but you guys have a problem with simple English sentences.]

Are we still on this? The Jews, to whom Peter was talking, was right there in front of him. He refereed to Israel. I can't believe you parse the passage this way. You would have to be so mired in your own prior belief you can't read simple English.

It is you that can't read a simple English sentence.

But ofcourse, that should be expected from someone who would be so stupid as to say that that 'you' in English, is always in the objective case.

You must be kidding!

Yes, he was referring to Israel, and he called them the 'house of Israel'.

So it is you, that are so determined to cling to false theory that you would read a simple English sentence wrong.

But, the real point is, that you try to use this passage as some evidence that Israel has merged with Judah, against Hosea, and that passage clearly and without doubt can be seen legitimately another way. Therefore, it is no evidence at all. Do you understand the meaning of this fact to the support of your belief?

What that passage shows is that both the House of Judah and the House of Israel were present in the Land at the time of Christ, so the House of Israel did not become another people and were in fact, known as Jews, with the House of Judah.

So, the fact that the House of Israel was back in the Land, as made clear by scripture defeats your entire mythological theory.

[ And where does it state that they would forget who they were as part of the curse on them-no where! The curse is that they would cease to be a Kingdom, not a people. The curse is on them as a people and it will continue until the Millennnial reign when all 12 tribes are reinstated and receive their land inheritances as stated very clearly in Ezek.48. ]

You yourself in a prior post, posted a passage from the Old Testament, using forgetfulness as God's judgment on them.

No, I did not-stop your spreading misinformation.

The verses have to do with the dispersal of the 12 tribes among the heathen nations,not them becoming them!

Nowhere in scripture does it ever say that they would forget that they were Hebrews.

That is something you kooks made up to explain how they could become another group of people (British-Americans) and not know they were really Israelites.

If you cease to be identified with a group (kingdom) for 6 centuries, you have forgotten who you were, as God intended. Later God will reunite them, after His purposes have been fulfilled.

No, they did not forget who they were.

They were back in the Land with the tribe of Judah and know that they are of the race of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

What they do not know, with the exception of the Levites, are what particular tribe they belong to.

But that "curse" was not on all 12 tribes. Judah clearly remembers.

The curse as stated in Deut 28:64-65 is for all of the 12 tribes, no exceptions.

And there is no scripture that ever says that anyone would forget who they were and then remember again one day.

Ezekiel has nothing to do with any notion of any "millennium" so named by those who impose their pre concepts on Revelation symbolism. If you think it does, post the specific passage(s) and explain them.

I have the time to teach you the Bible.

Here is a passage from Ezek. which talks about healing water coming from the rebuilt temple.

Ezekiel 47:8 Then said he unto me, These waters issue out toward the east country, and go down into the desert, and go into the sea: which being brought forth into the sea, the waters shall be healed. Ezekiel 47:9 And it shall come to pass, that every thing that liveth, which moveth, whithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live: and there shall be a very great multitude of fish, because these waters shall come thither: for they shall be healed; and every thing shall live whither the river cometh.

Clearly, something that will only happen in the Millennial reign.

Ezekiel 48:29 This is the land which ye shall divide by lot unto the tribes of Israel for inheritance, and these are their portions, saith the Lord GOD.

Jeremiah 3:17 At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart.

Jeremiah 3:18 In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers.

The earlier verses give the inheritance of the tribes of Israel, which has yet to happen, it will in the Millennial reign, in which these verses take place.

[ No, that is not the simplest explanation, nor is it consistent with prophecy and God's promises, since there is no history of it, nor is it in prophecy that those tribes would forget who they were! ]

I have already shown you the history. And I have shown you where you did not understand the the term in the parts of history you posted. For Hosea to reunite the two Houses, under one head they pick, which has not happened yet, and the consensus being that Israel vanished from history, how can you reach any other conclusion, except from a prior accepted belief system seeking to impose itself on the facts?

And I have shown you that you do not know what you are talking about!

No one says that the 10 tribes are 'gone' only that they are now intermingled with the other 2 tribes and are known as Jews.

Hosea hasn't happened yet, and it will during the Millennial reign of Christ.

As for 'appointed' it simply means, 1. To fix; to settle; to establish; to make fast.(Webster 1825), and that is what the Jews will do, they will recognize Christ is their King (Zech.12:10)

You belong to a sacred cow. I seek to make burgers out of it.

In reality, it is you that is making yourself look like a fool with your unsupportable nonsense.

[ Dumbest thing I every heard. ]

Actually, I'd say basing your doctrine on a consensus contrary to evidence and without clear evidence for it is pretty dumb.

No, my doctrine is based on what the Bible actually says and history supports, not on a fantasy that doesn't exist, history has no record of, and doesn't have any Biblical basis.

[ Well, doesn't he say that the blacks have forgotten their heritage as well? ]

Are you seriously saying the two are related?

If you think that an entire people forgot their heritage, yes, you are essentially saying the same idiotic thing as he is.

[ That view that an entire people have forgotten who they are is for kooks and you British Israelite guys fit right in there with them. ]

You doubt the power of God to follow through with His judgments?

You haven't shown anywhere in scripture where God states that the Hebrew people would forget they were Hebrews.

[ That was because they weren't a kingdom in Italy or Palestine at the time of the Roman Empire. They were under the authority of Rome, not a Kingdom. And a Kingdom doesn't have to be a particular size. A kingdom can be quite small. ]

You missed the point. A kingdom is the people. "Kingdom" is just a name describing a group of people. The people and the kingdom are one. You are trying to impute meaning to an abstract term. Throughout the scriptures God cares about people, and about groups like a "kingdom" only that it is a name meaning the people.

No, once again you are very confused.

A kingdom is 1. The territory or country subject to a king; an undivided territory under the dominion of a king or monarch. (Webster 1825).

That is what is going to reestablished at the Millennial reign.

[ Those were the tribes moved by Assyria. There is no record of those tribes moving anywhere else-now is there?. So stop repeating things that has nothing to do with proving your theory. We know that the 10 tribes were dispersed to the Assyrian empire that is in the records. What is not in the records is that those same tribes went anywhere. That is what you have to show to prove your thesis. Not that they were in Northern Assyria. ]

There are numerous plates of inscriptions available that show people dressed in western Semite garb. There are numerous letters to the Assyrian king that mention Israelites being, called "Gamerians", traced back to "Khumri (Omri).

Oh,stop your double-talk.

What you have to show is that those 10 tribes actually moved somewhere as a unit.

So stop talking about something you know is untrue.

There is no historical record of those tribes after they were deported to Assyria and you know it and your appeal to those Assyrian tablets is nothing but a ruse and a fraud.

These letters were assembled by R.F Harper in 1930 and were translated by Leroy Waterman and published by the University of Michigan. There are missives from Assyrian outposts near when the Median and Israelite tribes were placed, those that had not already moved to other places, after being impressed into tilling the land for tribute to the king, showing clear Israelite priestly clothing, being sighted moving north through what is now Turkey.

Oh, cut it out!

So, Israelite Priests as individuals were moving around-so what!

No one doubts that individuals were moving around, what you have to show is the mass exodus that you claimed to happen that established the nations of Western Europe.

You are as phony as a three dollar bill!

There are translated records of Israelite communities having trouble with Assyrian tax collectors, and prevailing because of numbers. Why have you not been exposed to any of this?

And what would that have to do with a mass exodus or rebellion?

So, once again you cite evidence, with no links or references and that evidence doesn't support your central thesis, that a mass exodus of millions of Israelites occurred and they went into Western Europe and became another group of people.

Stop making up stuff!

[ I don't have to prove anything. You have to prove that they did. Since there is no records of any such movement, it is an historical myth. Your logic is as bad as your historical knowledge. History is about showing facts, which you cannot do, not putting forth conjecture and then asking me to prove them wrong. I can't prove that a UFO didn't move them either. ]

I have presented evidence. You seem to forget we are talking about 6 centuries worth of history between the fall of Assyria and Jewish Palestine. The greatest part of the remaining tribes escaped from the Assyrian rule after the fall. Many went north. Many stayed in the land and were called other names.

Any evidence of this 'escape'-no.

Yes, those that stayed were assimilated into the culture.

Or, they went back to Israel and became known as Jews.

What you have asserted, you have no evidence to support, that millions of Israelites left Assyria and went into Western Europe.

You do not have a single record that states such a thing happened and you know it.

But you will attempt to deceive others that you do with your phony appeal to Assyrian records.

Most had probably forgotten all relationship with Judah by then, except through tales. We are talking about a lot time here.

Yes we are, and there is no record of those tribes remaining intact as tribes and going into Western Europe as such.

So, once again, what you have is mere conjecture based on nothing historical.

The notion of the vast number of Israelites merging with Judah appears false on its face, and appears to be the realm of those who haven't' researched further into the matter. All this makes up a prima facie conclusion.

Prima facie, my, what fancy terms you use to appear like you know what you are talking about!

The fact is that the truth is quite the opposite.

You have stated that many of the people from those 10 tribes were left in their lands, and the Bible supports that view.

Thus, every tribe is represented when the Southern tribes are removed to Babylon.

The Bible shows that there was a great deal of intermingling of the tribes after the deportations by Assyria, so those who were deported are not necessary for all 12 tribes to be preserved, as God promised they would.

So, your own concessions have undercut your theory.

In point of fact, you have no real historical facts to support your views and you know it.

The only way to challenge a prima facie conclusion is with greater facts, which you have not provided.

Actually, they have been provided.

You have not provided any real facts.

Nothing substantial to prove that millions of Israelites went anywhere into Europe as tribes who had lost their memory of who they were.

If the Assyrian plates show Israelite Priests, then it is clear that they hadn't forgotten their traditions.

So when did this mass amnesia occur?

[ Yes, that is true. And those of the line of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (known today as Jews) would be the heirs to the Covenant. Are there individuals who do not know they have Jewish blood, yes I am sure there are. But an entire group of 10 tribes didn't stop knowing who they were and become a different race of people. ]

You still are using a preconception of a consensus opinion that all were/are Jews. After all these centuries, the world can reasonably be said to be virtually covered with the seed of Abraham, and you say it is all comprehended in about 5 million or so Jews?

Your opinion is based on nothing factual.

Those millions of Jews that are Jews from every tribe are those that God has preserved despite severe persecution.

It will be enough to accomplish His promises.

It is clear you underestimate the power of God.

As for the 'census' theory, it is the factual theory, not one based on myth and conjecture.

The word "Jew" is a mistranslation of the word "loudaious" and is to mean specifically the remnant of Judah, and would never have been applied to the tribes of Israel except the House of Judah, Judah and Benjamin.

Oh, stop that nonsense!

The word 'Jew' has come to mean anyone who was of the heritage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the King of the Jews, which means He is King of all of the tribes, not just those three.

Again, another unfounded assertion with no basis of fact.

Words change with usage,and the word Jew has come to apply to all of the 12 tribes, not just those 3 you cite.

Anna is considered a Jewess, even though she is from the tribe of Asar.

Even if the tribes merged with Judah, Judah would not have allowed them to be called Jews. Jews have been very proud and territorial of their royal patent.

And you know this how?

Since Judah is the leading tribe,(Gen.49:10) I would think they would be proud if every other tribe was known by their name and not that own tribes name.

So, once again an unsupported assertion.

[ Hosea will be fulfilled after the Millennial reign. There is still a Tribulation ahead in which most of mankind is going to be wiped out, including 3/4 of the seed of Abraham. So, your attempts to deal with the population issue in Hosea are based on your own poor theology which doesn't know that God is going to repopulate Israel with the 12 tribes after most are destroyed, as stated very clearly in Matt.24 and Zech.13 ]

We already discussed this. You have provided no link between Hosea and what you call the Millennium. You don't even know how the millennium will come about applied in real world physical existence, the nature of it applied there to or any connection of ancient peoples and prophecies related to that construct from complete symbolism.

I know that it clearly stated in Scripture and those passages confirm it.

You are simply rejecting clear scripture on the subject.

I'll bet you believe in a "rapture" so God's chullins will be able to avoid pain in their bodies, too. And you call mine "bad theology".

Oh, yes, the Rapture is clearly taught in the scriptures.

And yes, you have a very bad theology, which has no scriptural basis or historical evidence to support it.

1st Thessalonians4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

1st Thessalonians4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

1st Thessalonians4:17 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.

1st 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.

1st Corinthians 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

1st Corinthians 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

[The tribes are reunited under the Millennial reign of Christ and the land inheritances are given out.]

This is the group belief you subscribe to. Nothing is said anywhere that will make that connection.

Ofcourse there is, but you do not want to accept it.

[ That is what Hosea is discussing when he talks about the Northern tribes being the 'sand of the sea', it will be during the Millennial reign and not before. ]

Hosea speaking of Israel being the "sands of the sea" would mean them being very numerous. This specification is fulfilled by the seed of Abraham being spread all over the Earth in vast numbers by centuries of offspring of those whose seed traced back to Abraham, which it certainly should have by this time.

No, it is for a future event.

Ezekiel 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:

Ezekiel 37:17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

Ezekiel 37:18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?

Ezekiel 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

Ezekiel 37:20 And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes.

Ezekiel 37:21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:

Ezekiel 37:22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:

Ezekiel 37:23 Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.

Ezekiel 37:24 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.

Ezekiel 37:25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.

Ezekiel 37:26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.

Ezekiel 37:27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Ezekiel 37:28 And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.

Those events haven't happened yet, but they will, and that is what Hosea referring to, the reestablishment of the two Houses again as one unified Kingdom under their King, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of David (Ps.89).

The Millennial reign need have nothing to do with it. Neither you nor I have any knowledge of what the Millennium is or how it will come in nonsymbolic terms and what it will look like. All interpretation thereof are from pre conditioning into a belief system.

No, the Millennial reign is pretty clearly laid out in scripture in non-symbolic language.

The fact is that there will be no more wars (Isa.2), nature will lose is ferocity (Isa.11), there will be perfect enviroment so that death itself will be rare (Isa.65:20), just to name a few things that are clearly stated in scripture.

As for bad theology, I am sure that you even reject the doctrine of the Trinty.

We know nothing. We theorize much. I think your vulnerability is believing the theory is proved and absolute truth, like evolutioners believe in macroevolution.

No, I base my views on what the Bible actually says, not what I want it to say.

My views are absolute truth since they can be proven by scripture and supported by history.

It is you that takes the Evolutionist view of truth, that you start with the theory and then try to make the facts conform to them.

Your entire theory has no substantial historical evidence and you misread scripture, wresting it to make it fit what you want it to fit.

What do you think of the verse in Rev. 12:17, whom do you think the dragon is making war with? If you look in Rev. 13:7 you will find the answer....At that point in the tribulation, anyone who holds to the testimony of Jesus will be “fair game”(to borrow a phrase)

I'm not sure I understand your point. To me, that shows that we will be here and not raptured. Satan, the dragon, is coming to make war with those that keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. - that is us. We will be here. That is our destiny as a Christian in the end of days.

And if the rapture comes at the end of the tribulation and all who have followed the beast are killed, and all of the people who believed in Jesus for their salvation are changed to become like the angels, where are the people and nations whom Jesus will rule for 1000 years?....If things happen as you believe, there will be no one left on the earth to rule

No one goes anywhere. Jesus comes here. The millennium reign is on earth. All those that "followed the beast" aren't physically killed but are considered spiritually dead. They fell for his lies.

Rev.20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

The dead wouldn't come back to life physically. This is talking about being spiritually dead. Jesus will rule everyone during that time and those that didn't fall for Satan's lies,they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years. (Rev.20:6)

Those that did follow Satan, even unknowingly, have a different fate: Rev.14:9 If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead or in his hand (10)The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

They are those that will be taught during the millennium and will be tested at it's end one last time. Rev. 20:12
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. (15)And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

That scripture is speaking about the spiritually dead who were taught during the millennium. I believe that the torture they are experiencing is that, as Christians that love God, they then understand that they fell for the deceit of Satan.

We'll be here for Satan's tribulation, we have a job to do but we will not be harmed. That is God's promise to us, His children. 1Chronicles 16:22 Saying, "Touch not Mine anointed, And do My prophets no harm."

Luke also tells us: Luke 10:19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

When Christ was telling His disciples what it would be like in the end of days He told us that we would be persecuted but that:

Luke 21:18 But there shall not an hair of your head perish.

The tribulation will not be as you have described it. There are two, Satan's and Christ's. The one we must be concerned about is that of Satan because he is coming after us, Christians. (Rev.12:17 & 13:7) His tribulation is one of peace and love because he will be coming in the guise of Christ. He will kill many but it is a spiritual killing of their souls because they will believe him.

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him Which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Believing in a pre-tribulation rapture motivates me to share the good news of Gods forgivness of our sins and the hope that we are not taking part in the wrath to come.

You are a good soul to share His news of forgiveness. If you believe in a rapture do what Billy Graham's wife did. She said, I'll prepare for the tribulation and be pleasantly surprised if we are raptured. (I'm paraphrasing)

Just be prepared if rapture is some of the false doctrine being spread to deceive His children. Don't be taken........Ping

Micah is speaking of the Millennium (last days...verse 1) and is indicating that many disputes will be settled (verse 3) and during the Millennium The Lord will have resurrected Saints (now immortal beings) helping Him to do just this.... and judge the affairs (verse 3) of mankind.

Thank you Diego, that is what I thought it meant. The person I was speaking to adamantly stated that it meant everyone would then be free to follow their own ways. - freedom of religion. After the entire Bible tells us to "have no other gods before Me".

Thank you again.......Ping

There are 23,000 Assyrian tablets, cylinders and prisms that have been translated. Evey single one of them is in the British museum. They date from 702 BC. They chronicle the 23 years siege and submission of the northern kingdom of Israel, the final "deportation" of Israelites to other communities, including the Medians.

They also chronicle the Israelites left in their land to work the land there for tribute to the Assyrian king. They record the invasion of Nebopolassar and the Medians of Ninevah and the fall of th Assyrian empire.

There are letters to the king describing trouble collecting tribute that mention the Israelites. There are messages from Assyrian military outposts during and after the defeat of Assyria. There are accounting and administration tablets, chronicles of conquered peoples and where they were posted, including the Israelites.

There are lists of peoples and their movements and where they were placed, explanations of policies affecting conquered peoples, including the Israelites, description of tactics used to suborn those peoples.

If you ignore or are ignorant of those writings, you have a serious problem.

Call the British museum. Ask them about the Assyrian records on file and the writings in various forms there.

Don't believe me. Check for yourself, then get back to me.

I hear Irvin's show from time to time on KLNG 1560. I know he will be here in Omaha in Decemeber 2007.

while I may disagree with him on some of his views towards prophecy I think he is a great preacher.

Plus he is the most vocal person I know of who like me is against the RFID chip and the NATIONAL ID card.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs9nRvP-whk

I have another question for you - a very interesting one.

Rev.1:13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.

This is Christ, the Son of Man. Why is the word "paps" used? Why not use breast, as is used of men too?

Paps (Greek) #3149 - mastos. from the base of 3145; a (prop. female) breast (as if kneaded up) - pap.

Paps (Heb) #7699 - shad or shod, shode, prob.from 7736 in it's orig. sense) contr.: the breast of a woman or animal (as bulging) - breast, pap, teat

The word "paps" is used four times in the Bible and it is a female reference until this Rev. 1:13 scripture about the Son of God.

Add that to what we see in Gen. 1:27 -

So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.

That has always been really odd wording to me and sounds as if much more is being said then is shown. And then we have Adam in - Gen.2:21

And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22.And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made He a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23.And Adam said, "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."

Rib, as used there, could simply mean "curved" - I believe it means the Helix Curve, DNA taken from Adam.

Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. What were they before that and what will we be in the next age?

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Mark 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

So...I guess my question would be - what does all that mean? Is the verse about the "Son of God" being "girt about the paps" telling us that we will all be both male and female, one complete entity? Or....am I all wet and it's a mistranslation? .......Ping

So...I guess my question would be - what does all that mean? Is the verse about the "Son of God" being "girt about the paps" telling us that we will all be both male and female, one complete entity?

My short answer is: The word "Stethos" which is translated breast: [Luke 18:13][Luke 23:48][John 13:25][John 21:20] and in [Revelation 15:6] all indicate the scriptures are speaking of the entire upper torso more than the frontal region. On the other hand "Mastos" in [Luke 11:27][Luke 23:29] and [Revelation 1:13] are more indicative of the mammary gland area. I'm not sure that this is a male/female thing and indeed the definition does not indicate that either: 3149. mastos (mas-tos')a (properly, female) breast (as if kneaded up) The word "female" is bracketed (.....), so it is not exclusive. Also.....[Luke 23:48] would indicate that "Stethos" could be used to describe both sexes as well.

My long answer is: To me.....the word "Stethos", from which stethoscope comes, has an internal meaning also.... whereas "Mastos" speaks of only the outer surface area of the mammary. In our scripture [Revelation 1:13] Our Lord is wearing a holy garment indicating an office of priesthood as explained in [Exodus 28:4] and it went around the breast but was girted around the loins. And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. Our Lord is in the midst of seven candlesticks (the seven churches)(verse 4) and instead of being a priest....He is now the judge [John 5:22] and the golden girdle is no longer about the waist....but is now around His shoulders and His paps signifying His new office. The priesthood is over.

I believe your scriptures indicating no genders in eternity are something we all need to wonder about a bit longer. Whatever The Lord has in store for us I'm positive it will be an improvement. I don't think this scripture [Revelation 1:13] is indicative of anything about that or male/female in general. I think John just wrote that verse inspired by the Holy Spirit indicating the garment would be worn differently than that of the Levitical Priesthood. Remember, The Lord's Day, written of by John in verse 10, is not some sleepy Sunday morning on the island of Patmos. It is "The day of The Lord" spoken of in many prophecies [Joel 2:31][Joel 3:14-15][Zechariah 14:4][Isaiah 14:10][Matthew 24][Revelation 6:12-13].....the beginning of the Millennium and Our Lord's 1000 year reign on this Earth before ushering in Eternity!

I'm sorry it took so long to respond. I have had a very busy week....capped off by grandchildrenitis this weekend! I know.....you've been there....done that!

There are 23,000 Assyrian tablets, cylinders and prisms that have been translated. Evey single one of them is in the British museum. They date from 702 BC. They chronicle the 23 years siege and submission of the northern kingdom of Israel, the final "deportation" of Israelites to other communities, including the Medians. They also chronicle the Israelites left in their land to work the land there for tribute to the Assyrian king. They record the invasion of Nebopolassar and the Medians of Ninevah and the fall of th Assyrian empire. There are letters to the king describing trouble collecting tribute that mention the Israelites. There are messages from Assyrian military outposts during and after the defeat of Assyria. There are accounting and administration tablets, chronicles of conquered peoples and where they were posted, including the Israelites. There are lists of peoples and their movements and where they were placed, explanations of policies affecting conquered peoples, including the Israelites, description of tactics used to suborn those peoples. If you ignore or are ignorant of those writings, you have a serious problem. Call the British museum. Ask them about the Assyrian records on file and the writings in various forms there. Don't believe me. Check for yourself, then get back to me.

I don't have to check anything since you have not stated anything that is not already known.

None of those tablets say anything about the Israelites escaping from Assyria or uniting in a massive revolt against Assyria and helping their enemies fight against them.

All those tablets tell is that the Israelites were there (which we knew) and about how the Assyrians administered their empire (which we knew).

So, your appeal to the Assyrian tablets as revealing some great 'unknown truth' is simply smoke and mirrors.

What you have to produce is evidence that the Israelites escaped from Assyria as a united 10 tribe nation and went to Western Europe and then had mass amnesia and forgot their Hebrew heritage and became the founders of the Western nations.

So, once again, if you cannot produce such evidence (not conjecture), your entire theory is built on a foundation of sand.

I have history and the New Testament, as well as the Old Testament prophecies that state that the Jews would be dispersed as part of their judgment. Interest groups?

You have ambiguous passages in the New Testament that can be interpreted exactly the opposite than he way you interpret them. I have offered the alternate interpretations.

You have shown no pivotal history. What history you have shown has been for the purpose of refuting the allegation of vast numbers of Israelites, because vast numbers can't be reconciled with the merging of them with Judah, Judah being 500,000 at the time we are discussing, from about 50,000 that returned from Babylon.

The history you cite misunderstands the practice of Assyrian "deportation", implying that the deportation of a number means that that was all there was and ignores the greater number of Israelites left to work the land for tribute to the Assyrian king. These survived.

The history you cite advances the notion that the Israelites were absorbed into the peoples of other cultures, ignoring that, after of centuries of generations, the progeny carry the seed of Abraham, which was passed under the covenant by blood. Which means the Earth already contains quite a lot of Abraham's seed, possible even covered therewith.

And to your edification and delight, not necessary all European, since this seems to cause you problems. But Europeans, too.

A group that is invested in its belief system based on the principle of "curse and be are cursed, bless and be blessed" is an "interest group" concerned with maintain the status quo.

I personally believe that this was God's protection for the people He charged with bringing the law. The law has been brought. Christ brought the new covenant of faith and belief, as Paul said, Abraham believed and it was imputed to him as righteousness.

No one said that the Israelites were wiped out, only that they reunited with the Southern tribes as individuals and thus, still exist and are known today collectively as Jews.

Any reuniting of Israel with Judah, as you posit, that would not change the demographics drastically, making Judah inundated with other Israelites and cause specific and copious writings describing the event, demands that the Israelites be so few as to make no blip on the cultural radar and not increase the recorded population of Judah significantly.

This would tantamount to "wiped out". The other 10 tribes were millions, and as I have demonstrated by citing Assyrian practices, retained those millions.

Two more assumptions you have made you cannot prove. One, that they forgot who they were, when it is possible they kept their traditions alive and eventually returned to the Land on an individual basis. We see former Assyrian lands mentioned in the 2nd chapter of Acts. Two, that there were alot of them, considering when their capital city of Samaria fell, it only had 27,000 people in it. So, once again, your theory is full of assumptions that you cannot prove.

They did indeed forget who they were, many of them, but not all.

Your point is well taken. But. . .

Isaiah 42:16-19 And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them. They shall be turned back, they shall be greatly ashamed, that trust in graven images, that say to the molten images, Ye are our gods. Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see. Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the LORD's servant?

Romans 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.

There were always, always those that held to the ways of the Israelites, even in cohabitation with the Medians. This has been the way of Judah and the way of the rest of the Israelites.

Their capital city had 27,000 that were deported to other lands, a tactic of th Assyrians to remove dissenters from their native supporters. The rest were kept on the land to till the land to produce tribute to the king.

As has been posted, this policy was was started by Tiglath-pileser III.

I know what deported means by the Assyrian, it means putting them into a land very much the land they left so they could more easily assimilate.

First. Assimilation still carries the bloodline of Abraham even through intermarriage. Second. The majority were not deported, and remained in the land as Israelites to produce for the Assyrian king. those that were deported were a fraction.

I see no serious reduction in numbers here.

First, the fact is that many of the Israelites had returned to Israel as shown by passages in 2Chro. and the fact that Anna of the tribe of Assar was present in Lk 2. Second, the fall of Jerusalem led to those same Jews being dispersed throughout all of the Roman Empire as slaves. Third, there was no need for the entire quote, since the point of the quote was that Paul was going to Jews throughout his missionary journeys that entailed the vast Roman Empire.

As is recorded, there were some of the norhtern kingdom that joined the southern kingdom for various reasons during the assault on the northern kingdom by the Assyrians, which were disgusted with the idolatrous practices that caused God to give them over to the Assyrians in the first place.

Jews being in other places than Palestine had no effect on the Israelites already there, and had been there since 612 BC.

Paul was talking about preferences of Judah for being the seed stock for bringing Christ into the world. The progeny of the Israelites tribes were indigenous people by this time. There are remnants of the Hebrew language in English and Welsh, as well as names of geographical features.

Which is contained in Jesus' charging His disciples to carry the Gospel to the lost children of Israel.

They were indeed lost.

Again, the point is that the Jews/Israelites were scattered throughout Europe.

The Israelites were scattered throughout Europe, including Britianm, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. That they were included in Juda is only what you add to it with no proof.

And, your response had nothing to do with my statement, "Had nothing to do with a journey. If you think so, post the passage and explain it. Remember, the line of Judah was to produce Jesus, so God gave them first pass, obviously."

Well, if anyone should know that it would be you and the rest of those who believe your goofy theory!

This your response to my statement, "You can place the interpretation you do on this passage only if you have a prior belief. Any passage, read in the light of a belief, can be shaded toward that belief."

That hits home to you, hence the response.

Note that I don't believe or disbelieve in what you call my "goofy theory". I was introduced to the notion from reading the posts of a prior poster, years ago, that put out this information (I forget the moniker). I was intrigued by the incredibly nasty responses and ad hominem that greeted his ideas. I reaseached his viewpoint and questioned those responses, helping him out in his arguments.

Through this experience, I was attracted to the unbelievable rage that was directed at this concept, even though the notion, if true, would have validated all assistance and support to the Jews in their fledging nation.

This indicated a mindset that transcended all reason and set itself against the very foundation of evangelicals' near automatic need to help Israel.

Think about it. Brothers in the covenant, aware of it or not, will spiritually be attracted to their brothers in need. Yet, here was a total rejection of the foundation of that impulse to assist those brothers.

This smacks of groupthink, led by agenda, nurtured by consensus, in the favor of those who have much to loose.

You are a proponent of that travesty for the only purpose of survival of your beliefs, right or wrong.

You will, by God in Heaven, give the absolute evidence, that leaves no room for alternate interpretations, of the consensus theory there are no Israelites left in the world except the tiny population of what you call Jews, who have given no indication whatsoever that they intend to fulfill God's promises for the Israelites.

So? Jews were in Italy and they were in all parts of Europe as well, including Britain, which was part of the Roman Empire.

I don't understand what your point is. There were representatives of Judah, I'm sure, in a lot of places in that region. This proves that Jews comprehended the vast number of Israelites that migrated to this are 6 centuries prior, how?

The curse put on them in Deut, long before they were split into two separate kingdoms.

Two separate peoples. They were called kingdoms because that is a group name for peoples that followed a common cause.

You position is that the "curse" was lifted when the tiny remnant, from the vast numbers "wiped out" by the Assyrians returned to Palestine, swelling the population by no significant amount?

Oh, yes, you believe that "kingdom" is considered by God as a unique unit having nothing to do with the human beings with souls that compose "it".

There is no assumption, it is based on fact and Biblical history. The only one with assumptions is you who cannot understand history and the Bible. Those 10 tribes were back in Israel after the deportation as seen by Anna being there and the House of Israel being mentioned by both the Lord and Peter.

You keep repeating this as evidence. It is leakage, which has always gone on among the tribes by preference or by marriage. There were a number of the other tribes that joined southern kingdom during the siege of the northern.

I've explained the references to Israel by Jesus, Peter and James. Your interpretation of the reference by Jesus simply make no sense, as I've posted more than once.

Your other references have equally valid interpreted as proving that the House of Israel existed when historians believe it disappeared into antiquity. You cannot use as evidence that which is ambiguous; evidence by its very nature must be unambiguous. Ask any lawyer.

Your sect of thought is apparently the only one that believes Israel merged with Judah.

No, the problem is that you are ignorant of any numbers (you do not know how many Israelites ended up in Assyria), ignorant of Assyrian records (you did not know of Sargan's record of only 27,000 being deported from the Captial of Samaria) and God's promises which state that the Kingdom will be reunited, and it will be, and they will be of the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, not any other race.

Yes indeedy, just say NO and it all goes away.

Israel was ten tribes and Judah was two. Do the math.

Good grief, friend, can you not read?

27,000 deported from Samaria were rebellious subjects placed in other communities, and were replaced by other rebellious from other areas. This policy was instituted by Tiglath-pileser III. He did this also to compensate for the deportation of the people in captured territories and the depletion of land values.

All this is in his annals, ("Assyrian Discoveries", George Smith, ISBN: 1931956030 page 281) loosely translated, "People the conquest of my hand in the midst of them I place".

He also ordered that the non rebellious subjects (the vast majority of Israelites in Samaria and other regions) continue to till the land and produce tribute to him as king.

His annals were written in 745 BC. He died in 725 BC. His siege of Israel lasted 23-25 years. How many babies were morn in that time?

He did not kill large numbers of Israelites; he needed them to work and occupy the land, and, God had given over the northern kingdom and its people for depravity and sins. Samaria was just one place of the Israelites.

Consider, during wars in history no huge part of any population need be killed, just defeated, as example all the wars that America fought.

The population of the northern kingdom remained intact, whatever it was, and likewise other northern tribes around the Dead Sea.

The ten tribes has always been in the millions. There is no reason to think less than that was moved among the cities of the Medes (II Kings 17:6).

And this was just those placed among the Medes without counting those that, as groups, spread out to other place at that time, including Turkey, then Europe, while all this was going on.

THEN we had just over a century of the Israelites peacefully among the Medians, (how many babies were born in that time?) THEN 6 centuries after the fall of Assyria until our point in history after the birth of Christ. How many babies were born in that time?

Your assumptions are defeated by sheer numbers.

God's promises were made to the seed of Abraham. "Not mixed" with other peoples' genes is not mentioned, just something you add. The blood of Judah was certainly mixed with the Mongol-Turkish Russian Khazars, wasn't it, not to mention the Edomites?

You have zero evidence for your theory. All you know for a fact is the the 10 tribes were deported to Assyria. Now, name a single other fact that you can cite! You do not know how many. You have no prove that those tribes went anywhere as tribes. Your entire theory is simply a figment of someones imagination.

It is not necessary to prove that "tribes" went anywhere as "tribes". People carry the bloodline of Abraham.

I have spent many posts, including this one, citing historical and Biblical facts, and syllogistic proofs, none of which have been refuted by you. Yet you continue to make this statement. Amazing.

You seem to think that making a statement that I am wrong, that's it's all in my, and others' imagination, that I have presented no facts or credible argument is sufficient to vitiate the argument. Maybe it would if you were a recognized authority, proven by works and research, but you aren't.

You have to provide something more.

Ofcourse they do, they show when Hosea prophecies will be fulfilled. The House of Israel cannot be as the sands of the sea, 2/3 of them get destroyed in the Tribulation-you remember the Tribulation-Jacobs trouble (Jer.30:7). Note the word Jacob, referring to all of the 12 tribes, not just the tribe of Judah.

They show when you would like Hosea's prophecies to be fulfilled. You can show no objective linkage outside the presumptions your sect of thought believes.

Your Jeremiah cite is by no means a linkage to the millennial reign of Christ. It is just an assumption your sect makes in its own mind.

Even if 2/3s of the Israelites (code word: Jacob, as you mention) are wiped out during the tribulation, this is no indication that Hosea won't be fulfilled before that. There is no viable linkage in scripture, except a need on your part to justify your beliefs.

The Millennial reign is very clearly depicted in Isaiah. All of Israel had a view of what the Messiah would be like and it was a conquerer to bring in the Millennial reign, not a suffering saviour. That is why they were looking for a King and not a saviour dying for the sins of the world.

Well, evidently, all of Israel was wrong, wasn't it? I used this as an example of how a preconception of how things will work out bears not relation to how they do work out. Same for your assumptions regarding your millennium.

No, history backs up my view as well as the Bible, with both Christ and Peter referring to the House of Israel. It is you who have no support for your assumptions and myths.

You keep making these unsupported statements, as if by just saying so, that makes it so. I wonder, have you read any of my posts?

There is not a single Assyrian record that states that those 10 tribes moved anywhere.

No, there is not any that says, "The Israelite tribes migrated north to Turkey." Nope, sure doesn't. lol.

Now, if you have such a record produce it or stop citing it as a source for something that is false.

I don't have a scanner, or I would post GIFs showing the plates. Sorry. I guess you'll just have to continue to wonder.

I have cited two published historians, one on the history of Assyria which states that those 10 tribes assimilated into the surrounding culture.

None of what you posted indicates this. And, even if they had, the seed of Abraham would certainly have spread all over the world in two and a half millennia. You do your theory no good by resorting to this assertion.

Only individuals from those tribes returned to the Land.

Millions of individuals, when the population of Judah in Palestine at that time was about 500,000 (plus some assorted that were spotted families in other places).

Just so. . .

As for Hosea, the reading of it is for a future event, when the Israelites will be reunited to the to other 2 tribes in the Millennial reign.

Absolutely, Hosea is not yet fulfilled. But during the reign of Christ is your assumption by belief, which is impressed on every cite you've made to me. Remember, any passage can be no proof if it is ambiguous; it can only be a reflection of one's prior accepted belief.

We know this by seeing those tribes listed in the inheritance given in Ezek.48. So, you are just misreading Hosea, as you do the rest of the Bible.

As I said, you keep throwing out these cites that are interpreted according to your belief, not objective, stand alone evidence of anything. For any one of your sect of belief, that are at least two more that would argue with you from their sect of belief.

You have no records of any of the Tribes migrating anywhere-so stop your lying!

Not only are there outpost reports of groups with those in Israelite garb heading north, there are records describing Israelite resisting tax collecting. Large communities, considering they repelled the tribute takers.

There are number of books and pamphlets that discuss the Assyrian translations; I referred to one in this post. As you tell me to, go find them, or you are "lazy".

No, it will be those who are in the lind of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob that will receive the promises. If some individuals have that racial lineage, then and only then can they be considered in the line of the Hebrew Promises. All others are Gentiles.

The leage is not racial. "Israelite" is no a race.

If the Israelites today with mixed lineage can't be considered to be the seed of Abraham, that pretty much leaves out Judah, yes? Since it is historical they have been diluted by the Khazars and Edomites?

Hey- it is to the 12 tribes! What part of the 12 tribes do you not understand?

Certainly two tribes for Judah and ten tribes for Israel. 2+10=12.

There is no indication that James was talking about the two and the ten be dispersed together. Judah was in Palestine and lower parts of Italy and Greece. Israel was in the rest of Europe and any that remained behind in Mesopotamia/Assyria.

Control your breathing.

They were 'lost' in the sense they were -without their sheperd! And that was for all of the 12 tribes of Israel, not just Judah. Once again, your inability to understand simple English is showing.

Well, they had been "lost" a long time in that case, don't you think? Come on, it's obvious in context He wasn't talking about the Jews.

The House of Judah has always been refereed to separately from the House of Israel.

A little trip down memory lane. . .

II Kings 17:21-23 (circa 525 BC) When he tore Israel away from the house of David, they made Jeroboam son of Nebat their king. Jeroboam enticed Israel away from following the LORD and caused them to commit a great sin. The Israelites persisted in all the sins of Jeroboam and did not turn away from them until the LORD removed them from his presence, as he had warned through all his servants the prophets. So the people of Israel were taken from their homeland into exile in Assyria, and they are still there.

Josephus, Antiquities, Book XI, Chapter 5, Paragraph 2, When Esdras had received this epistle, he was very joyful, and began to worship God, and confessed that he had been the cause of the king's great favor to him, and that for the same reason he gave all the thanks to God. So he read the epistle at Babylon to those Jews that were there; but he kept the epistle itself, and sent a copy of it to all those of his own nation that were in Media. And when these Jews had understood what piety the king had towards God, and what kindness he had for Esdras, they were all greatly pleased; nay, many of them took their effects with them, and came to Babylon, as very desirous of going down to Jerusalem; What you have read so far takes place right after 525 B.C. and then jumps to the present time of Josephus (first century A.D.) but then the entire body of the "people of Israel" remained in that country; wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes (Israel) are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers

And once again, James did not write to the 10 tribes, he wrote to the 12 tribes, and thus, he knew where they were, they spread throughout the Roman Empire-as Jews.

And once again, being dispersed does not mean dispersed together. It does proved the the lost sheep of the House of Israel was known to James, and, as Jesus clearly referred to, they were not with the Jews.

"Jews" started off as, and has always been a reference to the House of Judah. The house of Judah has always been used to refer to the Jews. Never has the House of Israel been used to refer to both.

There are no official records. There is DNA testing, but there are no official records.

Oh, please. Of course there are records. With Judah there has always been records. Stop screwing around, ask them and see what they say.

All DNA testing done to date is very iffy. I wouldn't put any faith in it. There has been, for just one thing, a lot of mixing of people with the Jews. Personal DNA testing is accurate enough for identification of fathers and immediate children, but that's about as far as it goes. Identifying mixed genetic populations over centuries is quite another thing altogether.

The reason that no one can tell for sure what tribe he is from is because the records were destroyed in Jerusalem and those that survived, later in Alexandria Egypt. That is why no one can claim any lineage for the Kingship from the tribe of Judah, there are no records to support that claim. No, many Jews from the tribe of Levi did take the name of Cohn, so they would know what lineage they are based on that last name, but not on the basis of any official records.

I'm sure the Jews you make this case to will find it interesting. Let me know what they say. It's interesting that you yourself use as an example that Judah and Israel was merged by using a gal that knew which tribe she was from.

I claim that they know that they are Jews, but do not know their particular tribes (with the exception of the Levi's). Try to grasp the difference.

Ask some Jews. Tell them to grasp the difference.

I have prevented more evidence in one post then you have in all of yours combined. All your posts are based on conjecture, not a fact in them.

You keep saying this. I guess you figure that someone reading it would not go back and read the conversation, so you can get away with it. You seem to playing to the peanut gallery here. I'm probing a belief held by consensus, seeking its foundation, and I have not been impressed.

Well, he said what I said, and it refutes your entire false theory which is based on hot air.

Well, apparently he hadn't researched the translation of Tiglath-pileser's own writings.

And that would support my view, not yours! If most of those tribes were left in the land, then there were not millions deported and thus, it would have been easy for individuals of those tribes to make their way back to the land.

This was the siege of Israel, lasting about 23 years, until the migration. The rebellious were deported, the others were kept to work the land.

You reference was to make a point about the low numbers of the Israelites, presumably destroyed wholesale by the Assyrians, to attempt to block my point about to large of number of Israelites to merge with Judah in Palestine generations later. Your theory of the merging of Judah and Israel fails with large population numbers of the latter.

God intended to give the Israelites over to a cruel people for their sins. They were suborned without massive casualties, probably because they were already deep in sin and lack the connection with God to produce the moral energy in righteousness to prevail, and so, were conquered with out much loss of life.

The Taylor Prism describes much of this fighting. Apparently there was not very much spirit on the part of the Israelites, which would be consistent with God's intentions.

The point here is, there was essentially the original population of the northern kingdom left intact when they were herded, about 25 years later and dispersed among the Median cities.

No, Sargon is referring to the captives he took from the Captial city. So, your intention to get around that number is futile. Whent that city fell it had only 27,000 people left in it.

The Numrud Prism IV, writen by Sargon II, "I surrounded and deported as prisoners 27,290 of its inhabitants together with their chariots, and the gods in whom they trusted. From them I equipped 200 chariots for my army units, while the rest I made to take up their lot within Assyria. I restored the city of Samaria and made it more habitable than before. I brought into it people from the countries conquered by my hands. My official I set over them as governor and reckoned them as people of Assyria itself."

Sargon II continued the policies of Tiglath-pileser III. He was referring as "countries" the other domains of the northern kingdom.

And, again, we are talking about events that happened more than 7 centuries before the coming of Christ to Palestine, 28 standard generations. From the population viewpoint of Israel merging with Judah, how many babies can be born in 28 generations?

You use the merging of Israel with Judah because it is the only thing that anyone could possibly come up with to explain the lack of known Israelite in the modern world.

It doesn't work with projected populations, not to mention prophecy, scripture and historical writing of the Assyrians themselves.

I'm sorry, I know you are invested in it and on it hangs your belief system, but it just doesn't work.

Well, that is nice fantasy history. Any actual prove? The deportation occurred in 1Ki.17 and that is the only recorded instance of the deportation.

But it is true many were left in the land as seen by them going to the South-so your theory is defeated and shown to be nonsense by your own admission.

Assyria under Tiglath-pileser was around 745 BC when the siege of the norther kingdom started. The House of Israel itself was moved in about 721 BC.

We have records on tablets placing these times. Thats about 109 years under the Assyrians, making babies in Median cities under tribute to the Assyrian king.

In 612 BC Assyria fell as an empire, formally releasing the Israelites, which makes 6 baby making centuries until the birth of Christ.

These times are recorded on hard stone and found in books written from the translation of the Assyrian records. You can ignore them as accurate if you like, but I don't recommend it.

But it is true many were left in the Land as seen by them going to the South-so your theory is defeated and shown to be nonsense by your own admission.

Huh?

What the heck are you babbling about? The Israelites who went South increased and became known as Jews. That is how Anna from the tribe of Assar go there. Your reasoning ability is fatally flawed.

The last I "babbled", my friend, was in my crib about 60 years ago.

In order to not dramatically increase the population of Jews during the time of Christ, which was about 500,000, which the ten tribes of Israel in their usual number would have, and attracted definite attention and much writing thereabout (there is no writing about this event), the tribes of the House of Israel, to be consistent with your theory, would have to essentially wiped out.

This is the third time I've explained this.

No, your theory is the one without any historical evidence and Biblical basis. As you said, the Israelites were left in the land. What people the Assyrians did deport did not constitute the majority and thus, the Israelites would have been in the Land when Christ came.

Some of the Israelites were left in the land. They separated and founded their own towns. There are Assyrian records of fights with them even after Assyria fell.

Remember, in 721 BC the Israelites were moved en mass to the Median cities? I don't doubt it took several years to do it. You get a sense of how long a year is, don't you?

You have not come up with a single fact supporting any exodus that left Assryia and went into Europe. You are lying through your teeth about Assyrian records saying they did-and you know it. The prophecies will happen in the future, since the House of Israel, is not yet as the 'sand of the seas' because they are intermingled with the other 2 tribes. So, try actually providing a single fact to show any actual departure from Assyria by those tribes, which you have no admitted did not make up the majority of the members of the tribes. Anyone who would say that the Israelites left for Europe before Moses went out of Egypt has a screw loose!

I have some evidence. As I said, there are Assyrian outpost reports that track movement of people that bear resemblance to Israel moving toward Turkey. Israel was placed on the northern border of Assyria, so a movement to Turkey is most reasonable.

And I have even more evidence that Israel did no merge with Judah in Palestine.

You seem to demand that I produce an ancient tablet that is written cuneiform that states exactly what I say. You are not reasonable, and you are defending a belief that you are invested in.

You have not even investigated the current translation of the Assyrian tablets and the books written about them, have you?

Intermingled with Judah is a a theory you have and you haven't produced any evidence for. We have 7 centuries for the Israel to migrate all over the place, including staying and integrating with the Medians and Assyrians. 7 centuries are enough to populate the earth, given a sufficiently seed population. This is just math and commonsense, not to mention God's word and promises.

I have given you facts about the translation of the Assyrian tablets. Aren't you even diligent enough to verify they exist? There are numerous books written by people who are interested in what the Assyrians had to say about the Israelite tribes. Don't you want to know what they say?

And I have not even touched on the names of European names of geographical features or the common words in Hebrew and European languages.

We are talking about 7 centuries, my friend. Look at the map of where Assyria was and where its northern border is. It's a friggin month's march to Turkey from there. Where in the hell do you think a vast number of people, having been released for Assyrian captivity, and having mostly forgotten their heritage as God ordained, would go?

I'm not even sure your are credible enough to discuss this with. I'm just repelled by consensus conclusion that is seemly devoid of foundation, other than political or motivated by hatred (the comments you make seem to indicative of hatred), to advance a policy that can be used to make decision on the world stage.

You see, the prophecy that House of Israel will be the "sands of the sea" fits the notion that many of the most populous nations of the Earth have a bloodline that traces back to the seed of Abraham is the simplest and most viable explanation of prophecy.

You cannot defend a merge of Israel with Judah on the basis of population, scripture, history or prophecy. You've tried on all these fronts, but just end up repeating that I am wrong and you are right.

I would say that anyone who relies on a consensus opinion unsupported by hard facts, which opinion serves the purposes of those who advance it, has a screw loose.

Well, since you have no facts to support your nonsense, your theory is simply a myth, and does not even rate to be considered a theory.

I have presented you with innumerable facts, and you have not been able to credibly refute them, nor have you been able to come with any facts of your own.

I really believe that fact is that you want to believe in your position, you for some reason have to. It's hard to try to reason with such a person. But I intend to keep it up.

He is an expert in Assyrian history, so he, unlike you, actually know the records.

Your historian must not be too much of an expert. He has missed 23,000 tablets, plus numerous books written about them. How would you explain that? I guess you picked him because he hasn't been exposed to material that would dispute your theories? Yes?

Like I said, look it up.

Ok. Would you be so kind as to tell which post it was, since you wrote it?

I want the location of the record that states that the Israelites left the area.

British museum. Section of records that constitute missives of Assyrian outposts to the king. That's all I can tell you. I cam across the info years ago. I'll try to trace it down for you, without calling you names and disparaging your character. But you don't even believe Assyrian records exist. LOL.

Do you know, going back and reading the comments you throw in with almost every part of every post, they make you sound like a snarling dog? Go ahead, go back and read what your wrote.

I'm tired of responding to 5 or 6 of your posts. Let's stay with this one, Put all you need to here.

I'm sorry it took so long to respond. I have had a very busy week....capped off by grandchildrenitis this weekend! I know.....you've been there....done that!

Grandchildrenitis - You have coined a new word and I'll bet all grandparents know just what you mean. My Mom (86) had one of her great grandchildren spend the night with her last week. The first hour was wonderful as the four year old talked about many things but then she tossed all night and Mom finally gave up and went to sleep on the sofa. Before long, she felt a tapping on her shoulder and heard, "Gigi, you need to come to bed". No rest for the weary....

Thank you for your answer about Rev.1:13. Even with the explanations you've given it just seems to be a very strange wording. Who knows? I think you're right in that "we all need to wonder about it a bit longer" and that whatever it is, "it will be an improvement".

Have a terrific labor day and thank you again......Ping

I'll try to trace it down for you, without calling you names and disparaging your character.

This is what makes it so difficult in carrying on a dialog with some folks. You begin to realize that your arguments are secondary.....and your character and honesty are now the subject of rebuttal.

Excellent post....by the way. I feel your pain!

The Peter passage is clear. It's a frail part of the only arguments you have, so I don't doubt you parse so strangely.

Yes, he was referring to Israel, and he called them the 'house of Israel'.

And the House of Israel has never been used to comprehend the House of Judah, that is why there are two houses so named.

What that passage shows is that both the House of Judah and the House of Israel were present in the Land at the time of Christ, so the House of Israel did not become another people and were in fact, known as Jews, with the House of Judah. So, the fact that the House of Israel was back in the Land, as made clear by scripture defeats your entire mythological theory.

Israel is Israel. comprehending both Judah and Israel. The House of Judah and the House of Israel never refer to one another.

No, I did not-stop your spreading misinformation.

I apologize. You didn't. Mr. Diego did. I reproduced the passages in his post on the immediately prior thread.

The verses have to do with the dispersal of the 12 tribes among the heathen nations,not them becoming them! Nowhere in scripture does it ever say that they would forget that they were Hebrews.

That's your imposition on scripture. Show me some writing that recorded Israel returning from the Assyrians and merging with Judah. An event that would have been, if it had happened, and worthy of recording.

Show it.

That is something you kooks made up to explain how they could become another group of people (British-Americans) and not know they were really Israelites.

Well, they don't' know it do they? Erat quod Demonstrandum.

No, they did not forget who they were. They were back in the Land with the tribe of Judah and know that they are of the race of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. What they do not know, with the exception of the Levites, are what particular tribe they belong to.

You keep repeating this mantra. Yet you are missing any writing at all recording the Israelites returning and merging with Judah in Palestine.

The curse as stated in Deut 28:64-65 is for all of the 12 tribes, no exceptions. And there is no scripture that ever says that anyone would forget who they were and then remember again one day.

Let me say again. Maybe I put the statement in too many words for you. Judah clearly remembers.

Clearly, something that will only happen in the Millennial reign.

Clearly it doesn't. You don't even know with the millennial reign of Christ will be, how it will come to pass and what the nature of it is will be, or events that will surround it. This is all the policy of the sect of thought to which you belong.

The earlier verses give the inheritance of the tribes of Israel, which has yet to happen, it will in the Millennial reign, in which these verses take place.

Again, your theory. You cite only vague and ambiguous indications of it.

And I have shown you that you do not know what you are talking about! No one says that the 10 tribes are 'gone' only that they are now intermingled with the other 2 tribes and are known as Jews. Hosea hasn't happened yet, and it will during the Millennial reign of Christ.

You ve not show me any thing so far, just a repetition of your belief.

If Israel returned to Palestine, there would be mention of it in scriptures or ancient writers, especially since there are two prophets that predict it. Cite it.

No, my doctrine is based on what the Bible actually says and history supports, not on a fantasy that doesn't exist, history has no record of, and doesn't have any Biblical basis.

If you had clear and unambiguous evidence you would have shown it by now. Show me the record of Israel returning to Palestine.

If you think that an entire people forgot their heritage, yes, you are essentially saying the same idiotic thing as he is.

I have already cite two writings for it. You don't seem to realize tath we are talking about 8 centuries, with a prior century and a half of being banished among other peoples.

You haven't shown anywhere in scripture where God states that the Hebrew people would forget they were Hebrews.

Yes, I have.

No, once again you are very confused. A kingdom is 1. The territory or country subject to a king; an undivided territory under the dominion of a king or monarch. (Webster 1825). That is what is going to reestablished at the Millennial reign.

So what? This is only your desperate way of trying to refute Hosea and Ezekiel so that you can say Israel returned to Palestine. Show me some passages or ancient writers recording that event.

Nothing you have cited so far even indicates that Hosea was talking about the millennial reign of Christ. When you were being fed this belief, didn't you ever ask for any evidence for it?

The greater presumption, lacking any evidence against, is that the reunion must occur in order for there to be the return of Christ.

Oh,stop your double-talk. What you have to show is that those 10 tribes actually moved somewhere as a unit. So stop talking about something you know is untrue. There is no historical record of those tribes after they were deported to Assyria and you know it and your appeal to those Assyrian tablets is nothing but a ruse and a fraud.

I have cited authority. There are number of books written by folks tath have studied the Assyrian tablets with an eye to discovering the disposition of Israel; I cited one in a prior post, with ISBN #. Call or email the British museum. If you would like a reference to some of those books ask me.

Do you even bother to read my posts before you reply?

Oh, cut it out! So, Israelite Priests as individuals were moving around-so what! No one doubts that individuals were moving around, what you have to show is the mass exodus that you claimed to happen that established the nations of Western Europe. You are as phony as a three dollar bill!

Noooo, not all priests, that would be silly. Plates of people, among them being spotted robes, and scratched on plates.

You continue to forget that we are talking about 6 centuries between the fall of Assyria and the birth of Christ.

And what would that have to do with a mass exodus or rebellion? So, once again you cite evidence, with no links or references and that evidence doesn't support your central thesis, that a mass exodus of millions of Israelites occurred and they went into Western Europe and became another group of people. Stop making up stuff!

Because plates from same sources that recorded verifiable events also recorded the movement events.

I keep waiting for you to post some writing that records Israel returning to Palestine.

Any evidence of this 'escape'-no. Yes, those that stayed were assimilated into the culture. Or, they went back to Israel and became known as Jews. What you have asserted, you have no evidence to support, that millions of Israelites left Assyria and went into Western Europe. You do not have a single record that states such a thing happened and you know it. But you will attempt to deceive others that you do with your phony appeal to Assyrian records.

Already posted the records. If you want further books on he topic, ask me.

There is no evidence that Israel returned to Palestine. I really believe you didn't know the Assyrian records and the books written about them existed before I told you.

Call or email the museum. Ask.

Yes we are, and there is no record of those tribes remaining intact as tribes and going into Western Europe as such. So, once again, what you have is mere conjecture based on nothing historical.

I have some evidence, plus prophecy, scripture and common sense. I have posted them and you have refuted them, just repeated your beliefs. You still have no sense in what can happen to a bloodline in 8 centuries.

Prima facie, my, what fancy terms you use to appear like you know what you are talking about!

Did you have to look it up?

The fact is that the truth is quite the opposite. You have stated that many of the people from those 10 tribes were left in their lands, and the Bible supports that view. Thus, every tribe is represented when the Southern tribes are removed to Babylon. The Bible shows that there was a great deal of intermingling of the tribes after the deportations by Assyria, so those who were deported are not necessary for all 12 tribes to be preserved, as God promised they would. So, your own concessions have undercut your theory. In point of fact, you have no real historical facts to support your views and you

Well, finally some rational discussion.

Again, you still don't get the effect of the passage of 6 centuries.

You tried to reduce the numbers of the Israelite by saying Assyrian deportations were of all that were left in an area, until I posted historical facts. You just now repudiated that assumption.

The bible is clear that the southern kingdom was captured by Nebuchadnezzar. You tried to use one cite of a mention of a gal from norther tribe in Palestine as evidence that Israel had returned to Palestine. Now, you repute that.

Again, now, you have a numbers problem. Where is the record of all of Israel returning to Palestine?

The southern kingdom clearly had no great number of the northern kingdom among the when they were captured. the Assyrians cut off the southern kingdom from the northern, which is why the Assyrians didn't deal with the southern kingdom also.

there were great numbers of Israel left to serve the Assyrian king. There were deportees to other regions by Assyria. There was a removal of Israel to Media.

Obviously, many Israelites escaped the land to avoid working for tribute. Obviously, many Israelites made a life with the Median. Obviously a great lot of Israelites took their hat after the fall of Assyria, and a lot put up town in the former Assyrian lands.

The ones that left the area, are the subject of Assyrian tablets, made even after the fall of the Assyrian empire.

You have no writing recording any Israelites from the northern kingdom returning to Palestine.

You have no sense of what can happen to bloodlines over 8 centuries. Matter of fact, the Earth can well be covered with the descendants of Abraham, and not just from those who migrated into Europe 6 centuries before the birth of Christ.

Hence, the setup for Hosea.

f the Assyrian plates show Israelite Priests, then it is clear that they hadn't forgotten their traditions.

I'm sure some didn't, always there have been those who remember the old ways, but in a wild land over 6 centuries, things happen. There are remnants of Hebrew artifacts and language all over Europe. Many before the Christian era.

Your opinion is based on nothing factual. Those millions of Jews that are Jews from every tribe are those that God has preserved despite severe persecution. It will be enough to accomplish His promises. It is clear you underestimate the power of God. As for the 'census' theory, it is the factual theory, not one based on myth and conjecture.

You keep saying and not reading my posts.

You have no evidence that any but one of two of other tribes were ever in Palestine.

You showed no records of Israels returning to Palestine.

A consensus theory is one agreed upon by the members of the group that holds it. "Consensus" does not mean"truth". You group is small and many others take issue with your position.

Oh, stop that nonsense! The word 'Jew' has come to mean anyone who was of the heritage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The Lord Jesus Christ is the King of the Jews, which means He is King of all of the tribes, not just those three. Again, another unfounded assertion with no basis of fact. Words change with usage,and the word Jew has come to apply to all of the 12 tribes, not just those 3 you cite. Anna is considered a Jewess, even though she is from the tribe of Asar.

the Lord Jesus Christ is the king of all.

We've already discussed this several times. go back and reread the posts, I don't you read them the first time, such a unthinking partisan of your belief system as you appear to be.

And you know this how? Show me you evidence that Israel hold the royal patent, when Judah clearly did; they gave the lineage of Jesus.

Oh, yes, the Rapture is clearly taught in the scriptures.

No, it's not. there are as many against it as interpreted to be for it. Many are cited on this very thread. Including refutations of those you offer below.

You seem have a raft of weird ideas.

The Peter passage is clear. It's a frail part of the only arguments you have, so I don't doubt you parse so strangely.

Oh, you mean by actually reading what the passage says?

I suppose for you that is considered 'strange'.

[ Yes, he was referring to Israel, and he called them the 'house of Israel'. ]

And the House of Israel has never been used to comprehend the House of Judah, that is why there are two houses so named.

So, now you are backtracking.

Peter addresses the House of Israel because it is there, present at the feast, composing members from all 10 tribes, as well as the house of Judah, which composes the other 2, so members from all 12 tribes are present in the land.

[ What that passage shows is that both the House of Judah and the House of Israel were present in the Land at the time of Christ, so the House of Israel did not become another people and were in fact, known as Jews, with the House of Judah. So, the fact that the House of Israel was back in the Land, as made clear by scripture defeats your entire mythological theory. ]

Israel is Israel. comprehending both Judah and Israel. The House of Judah and the House of Israel never refer to one another.

Well, when it refers to the house of Israel, it always refers to the 10 tribes after the division.

So once again, you show that you do not know what you are talking about.

[ No, I did not-stop your spreading misinformation. ]

I apologize. You didn't. Mr. Diego did. I reproduced the passages in his post on the immediately prior thread.

Well, I will have to look at Diego's post, he is always good for a chuckle.

[ The verses have to do with the dispersal of the 12 tribes among the heathen nations,not them becoming them! Nowhere in scripture does it ever say that they would forget that they were Hebrews. ]

That's your imposition on scripture. Show me some writing that recorded Israel returning from the Assyrians and merging with Judah. An event that would have been, if it had happened, and worthy of recording.

Individuals from every tribe were in Israel as the time of Christ, how they got there, either by returning or having been left there is irrelevant.

2Chron. 34, 9 And when they came to Hilkiah the high priest, they delivered the money that was brought into the house of God, which the Levites that kept the doors had gathered of the hand of Manasseh and Ephraim, and of all the remnant of Israel, and of all Judah and Benjamin; and they returned to Jerusalem.

Something about that verse you do not understand?

Those are tribes from the Northern Kingdom listed after the deportation by the Assyrians.

Show it.

Just did.

See above.

[ That is something you kooks made up to explain how they could become another group of people (British-Americans) and not know they were really Israelites. ]

Well, they don't' know it do they? Erat quod Demonstrandum.

That is because they aren't.

It is up to you to demonstrate that they are indeed the 'real' Israelites and have forgotten.

Talk about 'begging the question'!

[ No, they did not forget who they were. They were back in the Land with the tribe of Judah and know that they are of the race of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. What they do not know, with the exception of the Levites, are what particular tribe they belong to. ]

You keep repeating this mantra. Yet you are missing any writing at all recording the Israelites returning and merging with Judah in Palestine.

And you are missing what the Bible says, that the House of Israel was in Israel when Christ was there.

The House of Israel and the House of Judah were both present in the land at the time of Christ.

And you have no writings stating that Israelites went anywhere as a people, they either went back to the land or assimilated into the surrounding culture.

And you cannot prove anything different.

[ The curse as stated in Deut 28:64-65 is for all of the 12 tribes, no exceptions. And there is no scripture that ever says that anyone would forget who they were and then remember again one day. ]

Let me say again. Maybe I put the statement in too many words for you. Judah clearly remembers.

And let me make this as clear as possible to your befuddled mind, there is no 'Judah' there are only Jews, which are composed of individuals of all 12 tribes, not just the Southern Kingdom.

[ Clearly, something that will only happen in the Millennial reign. ]

Clearly it doesn't. You don't even know with the millennial reign of Christ will be, how it will come to pass and what the nature of it is will be, or events that will surround it. This is all the policy of the sect of thought to which you belong.

Ofcourse I know the nature of it, it is clearly stated in Scripture.

It will happen when the Church is removed and the world goes through the Tribulation, as stated very clearly by the Lord in Matthew 24.

After that there will be 1,000 years of perfect environment in which Christ will rule from Jerusalem and all 12 tribes will be represented and have an inheritance, since Christ is the King of the Jews.

[ The earlier verses give the inheritance of the tribes of Israel, which has yet to happen, it will in the Millennial reign, in which these verses take place. ]

Again, your theory. You cite only vague and ambiguous indications of it.

No, I cited very clear passages in Ezekiel that you just choose to ignore because you are 'wise in your conceits' and 'high and heady minded'

[ And I have shown you that you do not know what you are talking about! No one says that the 10 tribes are 'gone' only that they are now intermingled with the other 2 tribes and are known as Jews. Hosea hasn't happened yet, and it will during the Millennial reign of Christ. ]

You ve not show me any thing so far, just a repetition of your belief. If Israel returned to Palestine, there would be mention of it in scriptures or ancient writers, especially since there are two prophets that predict it. Cite it.

Israel did return to Israel as individuals.

See 2Chronicles above.

Christ and Peter both mention the 'house of Israel' being present and that term is only used for the Northern Kingdom after the split in 1Ki.12.

So, what you want proven is that the 10 tribes returned as tribes, but those tribes were present in the land after the deportation by the Assyrians as shown by 2Chronicles 34.

Now, what you have to show is that those deported tribes went somewhere and you can't, so stop talking like you can.

[ No, my doctrine is based on what the Bible actually says and history supports, not on a fantasy that doesn't exist, history has no record of, and doesn't have any Biblical basis. ]

If you had clear and unambiguous evidence you would have shown it by now. Show me the record of Israel returning to Palestine.

Already shown it by the scriptures, the term House of Israel being used and the tribes mentioned in 2Chronciles by name.

You only reject the evidence because it doesn't fit your warped theory.

[ If you think that an entire people forgot their heritage, yes, you are essentially saying the same idiotic thing as he is. ]

I have already cite two writings for it. You don't seem to realize tath we are talking about 8 centuries, with a prior century and a half of being banished among other peoples.

You have cited nothing that proves your case.

There is nothing in any Assyrian writing that states that those tribes went anywhere as tribes.

We know that Jews were in Turkey and all of the Mideast, Asia Minor and Europe.

That was the curse of their Diaspora, to be scattered throughout the world.

They did not forget they were Hebrews.

[ You haven't shown anywhere in scripture where God states that the Hebrew people would forget they were Hebrews. ]

Yes, I have.

No, you haven't so stop your self-delusion.

[ No, once again you are very confused. A kingdom is 1. The territory or country subject to a king; an undivided territory under the dominion of a king or monarch. (Webster 1825). That is what is going to reestablished at the Millennial reign. ]

So what? This is only your desperate way of trying to refute Hosea and Ezekiel so that you can say Israel returned to Palestine. Show me some passages or ancient writers recording that event.

And you show me some work that states that the 10 tribes went somewhere as 10 tribes.

Those individuals from those tribes were left in the land by Assyria went back into Israel and blended with the other 2 tribes.

They will be reunited as a Kingdom in the Millennial reign of Jesus Christ and not before.

Nothing you have cited so far even indicates that Hosea was talking about the millennial reign of Christ. When you were being fed this belief, didn't you ever ask for any evidence for it?

I have the evidence of it from scripture, that one of the promises made by God that He would multiply the House of Israel during the Millennium.

Ezek. 36, 10 And I will multiply men upon you, all the house of Israel, even all of it: and the cities shall be inhabited, and the wastes shall be builded: 11 And I will multiply upon you man and beast; and they shall increase and bring fruit: and I will settle you after your old estates, and will do better unto you than at your beginnings: and ye shall know that I am the LORD. 12 Yea, I will cause men to walk upon you, even my people Israel; and they shall possess thee, and thou shalt be their inheritance, and thou shalt no more henceforth bereave them of men.

The greater presumption, lacking any evidence against, is that the reunion must occur in order for there to be the return of Christ.

Not according to the Scriptures which states that one of the benefits that God brings to the house of Israel is the ending of the heathen nations 'bereaving the [house of Israel]' of men'(vs.12)

So where does 'your sand of the sea' argument hold up if the heathen are accused of bereaving the house of Israel of men?

It doesn't.

The House of Israel will become as the sand of the sea during the Millennial reign, not before.

[ Oh,stop your double-talk. What you have to show is that those 10 tribes actually moved somewhere as a unit. So stop talking about something you know is untrue. There is no historical record of those tribes after they were deported to Assyria and you know it and your appeal to those Assyrian tablets is nothing but a ruse and a fraud. ]

I have cited authority. There are number of books written by folks tath have studied the Assyrian tablets with an eye to discovering the disposition of Israel; I cited one in a prior post, with ISBN #. Call or email the British museum. If you would like a reference to some of those books ask me.

Stop your nonsense!

Nothing you have cited has proven anything that you contend regarding the moving of the 10 tribes.

You have cited tablets that have stated what is already well known, that the 10 tribes were in the northern part of Assyria.

Not a single shred of evidence that those tribes moved anywhere as tribes-so stop pretending that you did.

You only reveal the fact that you are a fraud.

Do you even bother to read my posts before you reply?

Oh, I read them, and you say nothing in them that is worth any consideration.

There is no a major history on Assyria that would state those 10 tribes left Assyria intact and went into Western Europe.

And you know it,but you keep spreading your myths and fables.

[ Oh, cut it out! So, Israelite Priests as individuals were moving around-so what! No one doubts that individuals were moving around, what you have to show is the mass exodus that you claimed to happen that established the nations of Western Europe. You are as phony as a three dollar bill! ]

Noooo, not all priests, that would be silly. Plates of people, among them being spotted robes, and scratched on plates.

And if they had robes, so what?

Once again, more hot air and nonsense.

You continue to forget that we are talking about 6 centuries between the fall of Assyria and the birth of Christ.

So?

And there were people moving all over the place.

What you have to prove is that those people were the Israelites who then moved into Western Europe and forgot who they were.

Nothing in those plates indicate that.

[ And what would that have to do with a mass exodus or rebellion? So, once again you cite evidence, with no links or references and that evidence doesn't support your central thesis, that a mass exodus of millions of Israelites occurred and they went into Western Europe and became another group of people. Stop making up stuff! ]

Because plates from same sources that recorded verifiable events also recorded the movement events.

Those plates do not prove your theory.

So stop making something of them that doesn't exist.

Your historical 'evidence' is a sham.

The 10 deported tribes either assimilated or moved back into the land on an individual basis.

There is no historical evidence of them moving together out of Assyria and into Europe-and then forgetting that they were Hebrews-and you know it!

[ I keep waiting for you to post some writing that records Israel returning to Palestine. ]

P> First, I have already shown to you by scripture that those tribes were back in the land, as individuals and in Acts 2, the nations they came from are listed, including Medes.

Second, evertime the house of Israel is mentioned after 1Ki.12, it is referring to the 10 tribes and that is what the Lord and Peter is referring to when they are mentioned.

Any evidence of this 'escape'-no.

No need for an 'escape', when Assyria fell, the captives fell under Bablyonian captivity and when they fell to the Medes, they were under their control.

Moreover, when the Jews went back to Israel, they would have taken back members from those tribes as shown in Ezra who could not state their own genealogy due to the loss of their records.

The Southern tribes still had their genealogical records but would lose them in the Fall of Jerusalem.

[ Yes, those that stayed were assimilated into the culture. Or, they went back to Israel and became known as Jews. What you have asserted, you have no evidence to support, that millions of Israelites left Assyria and went into Western Europe. You do not have a single record that states such a thing happened and you know it. But you will attempt to deceive others that you do with your phony appeal to Assyrian records. ]

Already posted the records. If you want further books on he topic, ask me.

Oh, stop your nonsense!

You have not posted a single record showing any mass exodus by the 10 tribes out of Assyria.

And there is not a major history of Assyria that would support your fabrication of the truth.

There is no evidence that Israel returned to Palestine. I really believe you didn't know the Assyrian records and the books written about them existed before I told you.

There is evidence that the house of Israel was present in Israel at the time of Christ.

And your appeal to the Assyrian records is bogus, since no Assyrian record shows that those tribes went anywhere as the 10 tribes.

The entire B.I. theory is built on a lies.

Call or email the museum. Ask.

Stop spreading your misinformation.

There is not a single Assyrian plate that shows any mass exodus by the 10 tribes and you know it.

You are blowing smoke and you know it.

[ Yes we are, and there is no record of those tribes remaining intact as tribes and going into Western Europe as such. So, once again, what you have is mere conjecture based on nothing historical. ]

I have some evidence, plus prophecy, scripture and common sense. I have posted them and you have refuted them, just repeated your beliefs. You still have no sense in what can happen to a bloodline in 8 centuries.

And you have nothing to prove anything for your idiotic theory.

Those tribes did not leave Assyria as unified tribes and there is not a single Assyrian plate that shows that they did-and you know it.

So stop spreading lies.

[ Prima facie, my, what fancy terms you use to appear like you know what you are talking about! ]

Did you have to look it up?

No, since it came from you I knew that you had it wrong.

[ The fact is that the truth is quite the opposite. You have stated that many of the people from those 10 tribes were left in their lands, and the Bible supports that view. Thus, every tribe is represented when the Southern tribes are removed to Babylon. The Bible shows that there was a great deal of intermingling of the tribes after the deportations by Assyria, so those who were deported are not necessary for all 12 tribes to be preserved, as God promised they would. So, your own concessions have undercut your theory. In point of fact, you have no real historical facts to support your views and you ]

Well, finally some rational discussion. Again, you still don't get the effect of the passage of 6 centuries.

The effect of the 6 centuries was the assimilation of those 10 tribes into the surrounding culture, not them moving into Western Europe, a theory that you have yet to prove as a fact.

You tried to reduce the numbers of the Israelite by saying Assyrian deportations were of all that were left in an area, until I posted historical facts. You just now repudiated that assumption.

No, I never said that those low numbers were all that was left.

What I said that it certainly was not millions deported, as you were contending.

Whatever numbers were deported were relatively small and enough people were left to move to repopulate and remain viable as the 'house of Israel' which were in the land in the time of Christ.

So, you have contradicted your own contention that it was necessary for the tribes to remain intact in Assyria or else prophecy couldn't be fulfilled.

Even if those deported did not come back, there were still enough remaining from the 10 tribes in the land to keep those tribes alive, as they are today, and mingled together as Jews.

The bible is clear that the southern kingdom was captured by Nebuchadnezzar. You tried to use one cite of a mention of a gal from norther tribe in Palestine as evidence that Israel had returned to Palestine. Now, you repute that.

No, it is clear you do have a hard time with English.

What I was saying is that those tribes remained in the land, so that even after the deportation, there were members of each tribe in the land.

So, your view that the tribes of the deportation have to be somewhere or else prophecy is overthrown is a false one.

Those people who were deported could have become assimilated with the culture and lost their identify as Hebrews and yet, all of the 12 tribes still existed since the members of the 10 tribes were in the Land.

Could some of the deportees have returned to the land-yes, as individuals, but not as tribes, since they had lost their proof of who they were.

So, your entire 'logical' view that the 10 deported tribes must have remained intact and become some other people in order for prophecy to be fulfilled is overthrown.

Again, now, you have a numbers problem. Where is the record of all of Israel returning to Palestine?

Where is the record of the House of Israel going anywhere else as a body-there is none.

And there is no 'numbers' problem except in your own distorted thinking.

God doesn't need any particular number, all He needs is all of the tribes to remain in existence.

The tribe of Benjamin once got down to only 600 men.

More 'question begging' and 'circular reasoning' on your part.

[ The southern kingdom clearly had no great number of the northern kingdom among the when they were captured. the Assyrians cut off the southern kingdom from the northern, which is why the Assyrians didn't deal with the southern kingdom also. ]

there were great numbers of Israel left to serve the Assyrian king. There were deportees to other regions by Assyria. There was a removal of Israel to Media.

There were no 'great' numbers.

You have yourself stated that only the trouble makers were deported, not everyone!

And those same Medes show up in Acts 2!

Don't you read your own posts!

Obviously, many Israelites escaped the land to avoid working for tribute. Obviously, many Israelites made a life with the Median. Obviously a great lot of Israelites took their hat after the fall of Assyria, and a lot put up town in the former Assyrian lands.

Yes, and obviously, they did not flee as a group to Western Europe.

The ones that left the area, are the subject of Assyrian tablets, made even after the fall of the Assyrian empire.

And those that left, did not go into Western Europe and forget who they were.

Nothing in those tablets suggest that.

All those tablets suggest is that people were uprising and there were movement within the Assyrian Empire, not that the 10 tribes had stayed a united kingdom and fought against Assyria and left to move into Western Europe.

That is simply nonsense.

You have no writing recording any Israelites from the northern kingdom returning to Palestine.

I don't need any!

All I need is people from those tribes in the Land, which they were.

It doesn't matter if none of the deportees ever made it back, since by your own admission, many Israelites were left in the land when the Assryians deported the 'malcontents'.

So, as 2Chroncicles clearly shows, those tribes were in the Land after the Assyrian deportation.

The return of the deportees is not necessary for prophecy to be fulfilled.

God warned those fled from the South, not to go into Egypt because they would not return, and they didn't.

You have no sense of what can happen to bloodlines over 8 centuries. Matter of fact, the Earth can well be covered with the descendants of Abraham, and not just from those who migrated into Europe 6 centuries before the birth of Christ.

And you have no sense of history, prophecy, logic or truth.

The children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (not just Abraham, who had other children), are Jews and are known as such today.

There is no record of them migrating to Europe as the 10 tribes.

They entered Europe as Jews and that is what they were known as.

Hence, the setup for Hosea.

Hence, your misreading of Hosea.

That 'sand of the sea' is for the future, not today.

The Hebrews are dispersed throughout the world as was prophesied to them in Deut.38.

[ f the Assyrian plates show Israelite Priests, then it is clear that they hadn't forgotten their traditions. ]

I'm sure some didn't, always there have been those who remember the old ways, but in a wild land over 6 centuries, things happen. There are remnants of Hebrew artifacts and language all over Europe. Many before the Christian era.

Well, then those plates don't support what you are saying, they state that the Hebrews well remembered who they were.

So once again you are appealing to evidence that doesn't support your thesis.

You are asserting what you need to prove.

And then you just jump to to Europe as if you have proven that those 10 tribes were there-and they weren't.

So your talk about 'bloodlines' is beside the point, since the 10 tribes never moved into Western Europe as the 10 tribes.

They were in Western Europe as Jews, part of the Diaspora.

[ Your opinion is based on nothing factual. Those millions of Jews that are Jews from every tribe are those that God has preserved despite severe persecution. It will be enough to accomplish His promises. It is clear you underestimate the power of God. As for the 'census' theory, it is the factual theory, not one based on myth and conjecture. ]

You keep saying and not reading my posts.

Ofcourse I am reading your posts and you have not provided a shred of real evidence to support the thesis that the Israelites moved into Western Europe.

You have no evidence that any but one of two of other tribes were ever in Palestine.

Well, we know the Levites were there.

We know that Anna from the tribe of Asher was there as well.

We know that the 'house of Israel' was there, since the Lord went to it and Peter stated they had crucified the Lord.

Now, anytime the House of Israel shows up after 1Ki.12, it refers to the Northern Kingdom of 10 tribes.

You showed no records of Israels returning to Palestine.

Hey-according to your own statements, they didn't have to 'return' they had remained in the land after the deportation by Assyria.

There were those who had remained in the land when the Babylonians deported the Southern tribe as well.

So, we do not need to worry about the deportees, we had those who had remained in the Land after the deportation and thus, the tribes were all present when the Lord was born.

A consensus theory is one agreed upon by the members of the group that holds it. "Consensus" does not mean"truth". You group is small and many others take issue with your position.

And a false theory is one that has no facts.

Your theory is false since it is not supported by the Bible, history, or logic.

The facts are that all 12 tribes were in Israel at the birth of Christ and were known collectively as Jews, as they are today.

[ Oh, stop that nonsense! The word 'Jew' has come to mean anyone who was of the heritage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The Lord Jesus Christ is the King of the Jews, which means He is King of all of the tribes, not just those three. Again, another unfounded assertion with no basis of fact. Words change with usage,and the word Jew has come to apply to all of the 12 tribes, not just those 3 you cite. Anna is considered a Jewess, even though she is from the tribe of Asar. ]

the Lord Jesus Christ is the king of all.

And as the Son of David, He is the King over all of the Tribes of Israel-all else prophecy would not be fufilled (Psa.89).

We've already discussed this several times. go back and reread the posts, I don't you read them the first time, such a unthinking partisan of your belief system as you appear to be.

I will take that to mean you have no answer, since you had no answer in the earlier posts either.

In fact, none of your posts have answers, just double-talk, question begging, circular reasoning and conjecture supported by myths.

And you know this how? Show me you evidence that Israel hold the royal patent, when Judah clearly did; they gave the lineage of Jesus.

Judah is the royal line (Gen.49:10)

[ Oh, yes, the Rapture is clearly taught in the scriptures. ]

No, it's not. there are as many against it as interpreted to be for it. Many are cited on this very thread. Including refutations of those you offer below.

And the scripture is very clear, so the 'refutations' have to ignore what the scripture says.

There will be those that are instantly changed and are 'snatched' up to meet Christ in the clouds.

Just like Enoch and Elijah were.

You seem have a raft of weird ideas.

Said the pot to the kettle!

The only difference is that I have scripture, history, and reason to support my ideas.

Yours are constructed of the misreading of scripture, no historical evidence and have are full of logical fallacies, such as begging the question and circular reasoning.

Prima Facie-you are greatly deceived and are deceiving others.

[I'll try to trace it down for you, without calling you names and disparaging your character.]

This is what makes it so difficult in carrying on a dialog with some folks. You begin to realize that your arguments are secondary.....and your character and honesty are now the subject of rebuttal. Excellent post....by the way. I feel your pain!

Well, so along with 'heretic' we can add hypocrite to your name.

It was you who posted that Sargon had in fact attacked a small city when he noted that he deported 27,000 people and my post was 'disingenuous'.

In fact,he had attacked the capital of Samaria, as is made clear by the scripture.

The only ones suffering any 'pain' are those who have to keep an eye open for you and your B.I. buddies who constantly post nothing but misinformation.

[I have history and the New Testament, as well as the Old Testament prophecies that state that the Jews would be dispersed as part of their judgment. Interest groups?]

You have ambiguous passages in the New Testament that can be interpreted exactly the opposite than he way you interpret them. I have offered the alternate interpretations.

You have offered no other interpretations, you have just ignored them.

You have shown no pivotal history. What history you have shown has been for the purpose of refuting the allegation of vast numbers of Israelites, because vast numbers can't be reconciled with the merging of them with Judah, Judah being 500,000 at the time we are discussing, from about 50,000 that returned from Babylon.

And you are begging the question.

You haven't proven that great numbers are needed.

That is an assumption on your part that needsto be proven.

The history you cite misunderstands the practice of Assyrian "deportation", implying that the deportation of a number means that that was all there was and ignores the greater number of Israelites left to work the land for tribute to the Assyrian king. These survived.

So, who doesn't know that?

And those that remained in the land were in the land when the Lord was born, as members of the Northern Tribes.

The history you cite advances the notion that the Israelites were absorbed into the peoples of other cultures, ignoring that, after of centuries of generations, the progeny carry the seed of Abraham, which was passed under the covenant by blood. Which means the Earth already contains quite a lot of Abraham's seed, possible even covered therewith.

Proof?

You have none.

First, it isn't the children of Abraham that is the issue since Abraham had a number of children after Issac as well as Ishmael, who formed the Arab race.

So, what you have to do is actually prove something not just talk about it like it was a fact.

No tribes left Assyria and settled in Western Europe.

Stop making up fables.

And to your edification and delight, not necessary all European, since this seems to cause you problems. But Europeans, too.

No, the Europeans are not from the 10 tribes.

That is what you have to prove not jus assert.

A group that is invested in its belief system based on the principle of "curse and be are cursed, bless and be blessed" is an "interest group" concerned with maintain the status quo.

No, what the scriptures say is that those who are the children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob fall under that protection, which no European race does.

Anyone who claims otherwise is trying to steal something given to the Hebrew by God.

I personally believe that this was God's protection for the people He charged with bringing the law. The law has been brought. Christ brought the new covenant of faith and belief, as Paul said, Abraham believed and it was imputed to him as righteousness.

And in Romans 9 Paul states that the Jew is still beloved for the fathers sake.

And in Romans 11 he warns Gentiles about thinking that they had replaced the Jew.

[ No one said that the Israelites were wiped out, only that they reunited with the Southern tribes as individuals and thus, still exist and are known today collectively as Jews. ]

Any reuniting of Israel with Judah, as you posit, that would not change the demographics drastically, making Judah inundated with other Israelites and cause specific and copious writings describing the event, demands that the Israelites be so few as to make no blip on the cultural radar and not increase the recorded population of Judah significantly.

Once again, 'begging the question'

You are assuming that a particular number of Israelites have to present, but that is only an unfounded assumption on your part.

All that has to be present is representatives from all the tribes.

So once again, you are assuming and asserting what you need to prove.

This would tantamount to "wiped out". The other 10 tribes were millions, and as I have demonstrated by citing Assyrian practices, retained those millions.

You have not proven anything about millions existing in the Northern Kingdom.

What has been proven is that by the time the Assyrians conquered the Northern Kingdom, its capital had suffered three years of famine and were down to 27,000 people who were deported.

So, again, you make up facts as you go along.

There is not a shred of historical evidence that there were millions of people in the Northern Kingdom!

[ Two more assumptions you have made you cannot prove. One, that they forgot who they were, when it is possible they kept their traditions alive and eventually returned to the Land on an individual basis. We see former Assyrian lands mentioned in the 2nd chapter of Acts. Two, that there were alot of them, considering when their capital city of Samaria fell, it only had 27,000 people in it. So, once again, your theory is full of assumptions that you cannot prove. ]

They did indeed forget who they were, many of them, but not all.

You can't prove that any forgot who they were.

Your point is well taken. But. . . Isaiah 42:16-19 And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them. They shall be turned back, they shall be greatly ashamed, that trust in graven images, that say to the molten images, Ye are our gods. Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see. Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the LORD's servant? Romans 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.

And none of those verses speak of any Hebrews forgetting that they were Hebrews.

They speak of the rejection of their Messiah!

There were always, always those that held to the ways of the Israelites, even in cohabitation with the Medians. This has been the way of Judah and the way of the rest of the Israelites.

Meaning that the Hebrews did not forget that they were Hebrews.

The Hebrew Medes were at Pentecost in Acts 2.

Their capital city had 27,000 that were deported to other lands, a tactic of th Assyrians to remove dissenters from their native supporters. The rest were kept on the land to till the land to produce tribute to the king.

Prove?

You have none!

You don't know how many were left in that city after the three year siege, certainly not millions!

As has been posted, this policy was was started by Tiglath-pileser III.

So?

Nowhere does it state that millions were deported.

Once again, that is only an assumption on your part.

[ I know what deported means by the Assyrian, it means putting them into a land very much the land they left so they could more easily assimilate. ]

First. Assimilation still carries the bloodline of Abraham even through intermarriage. Second. The majority were not deported, and remained in the land as Israelites to produce for the Assyrian king. those that were deported were a fraction.

First, assimilation occured in that area of the world, not in Europe.

Second, while the majority were not deported, nowhere are millions listed as living in the Land after the deportations.

I see no serious reduction in numbers here.

You have no numbers-period.

[ First, the fact is that many of the Israelites had returned to Israel as shown by passages in 2Chro. and the fact that Anna of the tribe of Assar was present in Lk 2. Second, the fall of Jerusalem led to those same Jews being dispersed throughout all of the Roman Empire as slaves. Third, there was no need for the entire quote, since the point of the quote was that Paul was going to Jews throughout his missionary journeys that entailed the vast Roman Empire. ]

As is recorded, there were some of the norhtern kingdom that joined the southern kingdom for various reasons during the assault on the northern kingdom by the Assyrians, which were disgusted with the idolatrous practices that caused God to give them over to the Assyrians in the first place.

There is nothing recorded that stated any of the 10 tribes rising up to help overthrow the Assyrian empire.

Stop pretending there is.

Jews being in other places than Palestine had no effect on the Israelites already there, and had been there since 612 BC.

Yes, and nothing about them going anywhere either.

Paul was talking about preferences of Judah for being the seed stock for bringing Christ into the world. The progeny of the Israelites tribes were indigenous people by this time. There are remnants of the Hebrew language in English and Welsh, as well as names of geographical features.

There is no proof of such a nonsensical claim.

As for the words,

The history of England, like the history of Israel, lends no support to the view that the descendants of Abraham invaded the island. Arthur Cross tells us that the Celts, one of the earliest groups that invaded Britain, first arrived 1,000 years before Christ was born and more than 200 years before the Northern Kingdom fell. Not only that, but from the history of the English language itself it is clear that there is no relation between it and Hebrew, or the English people and the Israelites. Roland G. Kent writes, "The English language, despite its present simplicity and grammatical structure, is of an almost unbelievable complexity in its origins, in fact of a complexity quite unrivaled by any of the better known languages of any period." http://www.theology.edu/journal/volume4/BritishIsraelism.htm

Which is contained in Jesus' charging His disciples to carry the Gospel to the lost children of Israel. They were indeed lost.

They were told to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (Mat.15:24)

Again, the point is that the Jews/Israelites were scattered throughout Europe.

A 'point' you have yet to prove.

The Israelites were scattered throughout Europe, including Britianm, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. That they were included in Judea is only what you add to it with no proof.

No, you have no proof that they were in Britain, Wales, Ireland and Scotland.

We have proof that they were in the Land when the Lord was born, since they are addressed as the House of Israel.

And, your response had nothing to do with my statement, "Had nothing to do with a journey. If you think so, post the passage and explain it. Remember, the line of Judah was to produce Jesus, so God gave them first pass, obviously."

And so what?

The Messiah had to come from the line of Judah so they had to be in the land.

But all of the tribes were there as well, since Christ is King of them all.

[ Well, if anyone should know that it would be you and the rest of those who believe your goofy theory! ]

This your response to my statement, "You can place the interpretation you do on this passage only if you have a prior belief. Any passage, read in the light of a belief, can be shaded toward that belief." That hits home to you, hence the response.

No, nothing you say 'hits home' because it is nothing but empty rhetoric.

Any passage I cite is based on a clear reading of the passage and comparing scripture with scripture.

Note that I don't believe or disbelieve in what you call my "goofy theory". I was introduced to the notion from reading the posts of a prior poster, years ago, that put out this information (I forget the moniker). I was intrigued by the incredibly nasty responses and ad hominem that greeted his ideas. I reaseached his viewpoint and questioned those responses, helping him out in his arguments.

And whatever attacks his view got were well deserved, as are the attacks on your posts since they are based on nothing but hot air and myth.

If you spread lies on the Internet expect to get some heat from it.

Through this experience, I was attracted to the unbelievable rage that was directed at this concept, even though the notion, if true, would have validated all assistance and support to the Jews in their fledging nation.

The rage against this theory comes from the fact that is untrue and that it attempts to steal from the Jew what is rightfully his and make the Gentiles something that they aren't-Hebrews.

This indicated a mindset that transcended all reason and set itself against the very foundation of evangelicals' near automatic need to help Israel.

And your mindset is to ignore scripture, history and believe the lie.

Think about it. Brothers in the covenant, aware of it or not, will spiritually be attracted to their brothers in need. Yet, here was a total rejection of the foundation of that impulse to assist those brothers.

We do not need to be racial brothers to the Jew to aid him, we support him because he is still beloved by God for the 'father's sake' and the promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, that God will bless those that bless the Hebrew has never been rescinded.

So we do not need to deal in myths to justify our support for Israel and the Jew.

This smacks of groupthink, led by agenda, nurtured by consensus, in the favor of those who have much to loose.

And your rhetoric sounds like someone who is trying to sound intelligent and well educated but isn't.

You are a proponent of that travesty for the only purpose of survival of your beliefs, right or wrong.

No, I am a proponent of the truth, a foreign concept to you B.I. guys.

You will, by God in Heaven, give the absolute evidence, that leaves no room for alternate interpretations, of the consensus theory there are no Israelites left in the world except the tiny population of what you call Jews, who have given no indication whatsoever that they intend to fulfill God's promises for the Israelites.

The absolute evidence is the fact that whatever numbers of Jews exist are enough for God's purposes.

It is you that has made assertions that millions of Israelites are needed to complete God's Plan, which is untrue, based on a misreading of Hosea 1.

So, since you have no prove of your theory, that no massive numbers of Israelites went anywhere near Western Europe and lost their memory and are now the 'real' Israelites.

[ So? Jews were in Italy and they were in all parts of Europe as well, including Britain, which was part of the Roman Empire. ]

I don't understand what your point is. There were representatives of Judah, I'm sure, in a lot of places in that region. This proves that Jews comprehended the vast number of Israelites that migrated to this are 6 centuries prior, how?

NO, what it proves that there were Jews (all members of the 12 tribes0 scattered throughout Europe and Asia Minor.

They did not forget who they were and become someone else.

[ The curse put on them in Deut, long before they were split into two separate kingdoms. ]

Two separate peoples. They were called kingdoms because that is a group name for peoples that followed a common cause.

Not in Deut they weren't two separate people.

That curse was placed on them as a single people and that was how they were scattered, first the Northern Kingdom and then the Southern, but scattered as a people who were reunited in the land of Israel as a people.

You position is that the "curse" was lifted when the tiny remnant, from the vast numbers "wiped out" by the Assyrians returned to Palestine, swelling the population by no significant amount?

Did I ever say the curse was lifted?

They are not a reunited Kingdom yet.

Oh, yes, you believe that "kingdom" is considered by God as a unique unit having nothing to do with the human beings with souls that compose "it".

And where did you get that myth from.

The Millennial kingdom will definitely have live, flesh and blood people in it.

So once again, your ignorance is showing.

[ There is no assumption, it is based on fact and Biblical history. The only one with assumptions is you who cannot understand history and the Bible. Those 10 tribes were back in Israel after the deportation as seen by Anna being there and the House of Israel being mentioned by both the Lord and Peter. ]

You keep repeating this as evidence. It is leakage, which has always gone on among the tribes by preference or by marriage. There were a number of the other tribes that joined southern kingdom during the siege of the northern.

The point is that the House of Israel was there in the Land.

Stop trying to duck the evidence.

I've explained the references to Israel by Jesus, Peter and James. Your interpretation of the reference by Jesus simply make no sense, as I've posted more than once.

It makes no sense to you because you don't want to understand the truth.

What makes no sense is the spin you try to put on it.

Your other references have equally valid interpreted as proving that the House of Israel existed when historians believe it disappeared into antiquity. You cannot use as evidence that which is ambiguous; evidence by its very nature must be unambiguous. Ask any lawyer.

What historians believe disappeared were the deported ten tribes.

They do not believe that the 12 tribes disappeared, since it is acknowledged the term 'Jew' refers to members of all of the tribes.

You really have a hard time with distinguishing concepts don't you!

Your sect of thought is apparently the only one that believes Israel merged with Judah.

No, Christians believe that Jew means everyone from the 12 tribes.

See the definition given by the ISBE.

Only the B.I. sect think otherwise.

[ No, the problem is that you are ignorant of any numbers (you do not know how many Israelites ended up in Assyria), ignorant of Assyrian records (you did not know of Sargon's record of only 27,000 being deported from the Captial of Samaria) and God's promises which state that the Kingdom will be reunited, and it will be, and they will be of the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, not any other race. ]

Yes indeed, just say NO and it all goes away.

No, provide some contrary proof and it goes away-but since you have none, it stands as a fact.

Israel was ten tribes and Judah was two. Do the math.

What math?

You don't know how many people of the 10 tribes survived the Assyrian invasions.

So stop pretending that you do.

Good grief, friend, can you not read?

Read what-you haven't provided anything that supports your nonsense.

27,000 deported from Samaria were rebellious subjects placed in other communities, and were replaced by other rebellious from other areas. This policy was instituted by Tiglath-pileser III. He did this also to compensate for the deportation of the people in captured territories and the depletion of land values.

And so?

What great revelation is this?

We know that the Assyrians moved people around.

So where is your proof that there were millions of Israelites in Assyria if only a fraction were deported?

Any law court would throw out your evidence as proving anything.

All this is in his annals, ("Assyrian Discoveries", George Smith, ISBN: 1931956030 page 281) loosely translated, "People the conquest of my hand in the midst of them I place". He also ordered that the non rebellious subjects (the vast majority of Israelites in Samaria and other regions) continue to till the land and produce tribute to him as king. His annals were written in 745 BC. He died in 725 BC. His siege of Israel lasted 23-25 years. How many babies were morn in that time?

And how many died?

How many Israelites were there in the first place?

Do you know-no.

He did not kill large numbers of Israelites; he needed them to work and occupy the land, and, God had given over the northern kingdom and its people for depravity and sins. Samaria was just one place of the Israelites.

Samaria was under siege for three years, which means quite a few did die!

Moreover, you do not know how many there were to start with!

In fact, you don't know anything!

Nothing you cited proves anything that you contend and if you tried to put it in a thesis it would be rejected at of hand for conjecture and question begging.

You actually have to have some facts to support a thesis!

So, you do not know how many Israelites were deported total.

How many were left.

What happened to the deportees.

You only have assertions based on conjecture.

Consider, during wars in history no huge part of any population need be killed, just defeated, as example all the wars that America fought.

Not during a three year siege when everyone is starving.

Moveover, you have to at least know how many people the Northern Kingdom had to start with-which you don't.

The population of the northern kingdom remained intact, whatever it was, and likewise other northern tribes around the Dead Sea.

Yes, whatever it was.

The Northern Kingdom was not only assaulted by the Assyrian but thy Syrians as well.

So, God had been cutting that Kingdom down in size trying to get their attention before they were finally finished as a Kingdom in 1Ki.12.

So, you know nothing of the actual numbers of the Israelites and yet you want to make assertions on millions of them in Assyria and moving into Western Europe.

LOL!

The ten tribes has always been in the millions. There is no reason to think less than that was moved among the cities of the Medes (II Kings 17:6).

We do not know that is a fact, that is just another baseless assertion on your part.

More assertions without any factual evidence.

And this was just those placed among the Medes without counting those that, as groups, spread out to other place at that time, including Turkey, then Europe, while all this was going on.

Proof?

Oh, that's right, I forgot, you B.I. guys don't need actual proof, you just assume it so it must be true.

THEN we had just over a century of the Israelites peacefully among the Medians, (how many babies were born in that time?) THEN 6 centuries after the fall of Assyria until our point in history after the birth of Christ. How many babies were born in that time?

Nice little story.

Proof?

None.

You assert what you need to prove, that there were Israelites moving into Europe who forgot their identity.

Your assumptions are defeated by sheer numbers.

read this very slowly-YOU HAVE NO NUMBERS.

God's promises were made to the seed of Abraham. "Not mixed" with other peoples' genes is not mentioned, just something you add. The blood of Judah was certainly mixed with the Mongol-Turkish Russian Khazars, wasn't it, not to mention the Edomites?

The promise was made to the line of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and no other.

When Jews intermarried, they did not form a new race, and forget who they were.

They formed a mixed race, such as the Samartians, who mixed with the Israelites who had not been deported.

[ You have zero evidence for your theory. All you know for a fact is the the 10 tribes were deported to Assyria. Now, name a single other fact that you can cite! You do not know how many. You have no prove that those tribes went anywhere as tribes. Your entire theory is simply a figment of someones imagination. ]

It is not necessary to prove that "tribes" went anywhere as "tribes". People carry the bloodline of Abraham.

Well, the B.I. theory is that the 10 tribes moved as a unit into Europe.

The bloodline to remain Hebrew has to be through Issac and Jacob as well.

That is why Ishmael is not in the promise 'bloodline' even though he is a son of Abraham.

I have spent many posts, including this one, citing historical and Biblical facts, and syllogistic proofs, none of which have been refuted by you. Yet you continue to make this statement. Amazing.

Why you old fraud!

You haven't stated one fact that supports your kook theory.

You have done nothing but assert without any evidence the notion that the Israelites had to be in the millions and then went into Western Europe and forgot they were Hebrews.

You have no evidence regarding the numbers of Israelites who went into Assyria and were left in the land.

Your entire thesis is nothing but question begging and if it were handed to any history teacher he would throw it back at you with an F!

You seem to think that making a statement that I am wrong, that's it's all in my, and others' imagination, that I have presented no facts or credible argument is sufficient to vitiate the argument. Maybe it would if you were a recognized authority, proven by works and research, but you aren't.

I have supplied two major printed works, one in the history of Assyria and one on Israel, both of which reject your claims.

You have not supplied any facts that support your claims of millions of Israelites going into Assyria and leaving it.

You appeal to the Assyrian plates which do nothing more then tell us what the historians already know and have written about.

Nothing is stated about the 10 tribes after their deportation to Assyria.

You have to provide something more.

I don't have to provide anything since you haven't provided anything to support your thesis.

It is you who has to prove that the Europeans are really Israelites.

You have a very weird view on proving a thesis.

[ Ofcourse they do, they show when Hosea prophecies will be fulfilled. The House of Israel cannot be as the sands of the sea, 2/3 of them get destroyed in the Tribulation-you remember the Tribulation-Jacobs trouble (Jer.30:7). Note the word Jacob, referring to all of the 12 tribes, not just the tribe of Judah. ]

They show when you would like Hosea's prophecies to be fulfilled. You can show no objective linkage outside the presumptions your sect of thought believes.

I have already given three citations from Study Bibles and a Commentary regarding Hosea, including Bullinger's note on it.

So, the view that Hosea 1 refers to a future event is seen a number of theologians.

Your Jeremiah cite is by no means a linkage to the millennial reign of Christ. It is just an assumption your sect makes in its own mind.

Jeremiah 30:7 is referring to the Tribulation period.

Jer.31 refers to the Millennial reign.

The scripture is clear on it.

You just don't want to believe it.

Jacob's trouble means trouble for all 12 tribes, not just 2!

Even if 2/3s of the Israelites (code word: Jacob, as you mention) are wiped out during the tribulation, this is no indication that Hosea won't be fulfilled before that. There is no viable linkage in scripture, except a need on your part to justify your beliefs.

Well, if that were the case, then the prophecy in verse 11 wouldn't be fulfilled now would it.

Verses 10 and 11 go together, so the mutipication of Israel coincides with the Millennial reign and peace on earth.

[ The Millennial reign is very clearly depicted in Isaiah. All of Israel had a view of what the Messiah would be like and it was a conquerer to bring in the Millennial reign, not a suffering saviour. That is why they were looking for a King and not a saviour dying for the sins of the world. ]

Well, evidently, all of Israel was wrong, wasn't it? I used this as an example of how a preconception of how things will work out bears not relation to how they do work out. Same for your assumptions regarding your millennium.

Yes, they were wrong, including the Apostles who rebuked Christ when He said He had to be crucified.

They were wrong because they didn't believe what the scriptures said and that is why Christ rebuked those who were walking on the road to Emmaus (Lk.24: 25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:

So when you don't believe what is written, you 'greatly err, not knowing the scriptures'

[ No, history backs up my view as well as the Bible, with both Christ and Peter referring to the House of Israel. It is you who have no support for your assumptions and myths. ]

You keep making these unsupported statements, as if by just saying so, that makes it so. I wonder, have you read any of my posts?

I have read your posts and they are filled with nothing but baseless assertions and devoid of any real facts.

[ There is not a single Assyrian record that states that those 10 tribes moved anywhere. ]

No, there is not any that says, "The Israelite tribes migrated north to Turkey." Nope, sure doesn't. lol.

You have no Assyrian records that state any tribes moved into Turkey.

No, you don't.

LOL!

[ Now, if you have such a record produce it or stop citing it as a source for something that is false. ]

I don't have a scanner, or I would post GIFs showing the plates. Sorry. I guess you'll just have to continue to wonder.

Oh, I don't wonder about it all.

There is no plates that state any such thing about those Israelite deportee's moving anywhere.

So stop lying about it.

[ I have cited two published historians, one on the history of Assyria which states that those 10 tribes assimilated into the surrounding culture. ]

None of what you posted indicates this. And, even if they had, the seed of Abraham would certainly have spread all over the world in two and a half millennia. You do your theory no good by resorting to this assertion.

What a phony you are!

It isn't the seed of Abraham that is the issue, it is the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. <{> And they have not spread out anywhere except as Jews.

[ Only individuals from those tribes returned to the Land. ]

Millions of individuals, when the population of Judah in Palestine at that time was about 500,000 (plus some assorted that were spotted families in other places).

Millions?

Proof?

Oh, that's right, you don't need to have any actually proof, you just say it and it must be so.

Just so. . .

Just so what?

No proof of any millions of people.

[ As for Hosea, the reading of it is for a future event, when the Israelites will be reunited to the to other 2 tribes in the Millennial reign. ]

Absolutely, Hosea is not yet fulfilled. But during the reign of Christ is your assumption by belief, which is impressed on every cite you've made to me. Remember, any passage can be no proof if it is ambiguous; it can only be a reflection of one's prior accepted belief.

And for a theory to be valid it has to have facts to support it, which you don't.

Your view of Hosea is based on an unproven assumption that millions of Israelites existed during the Assyrian captivity and yet, there is no historical record of them and where they went.

Still you will assert that as a fact when you have no evidence of it.

Try bringing that into a law court as evidence.

[ We know this by seeing those tribes listed in the inheritance given in Ezek.48. So, you are just misreading Hosea, as you do the rest of the Bible. ]

As I said, you keep throwing out these cites that are interpreted according to your belief, not objective, stand alone evidence of anything. For any one of your sect of belief, that are at least two more that would argue with you from their sect of belief.

No, the scripture is very clear in those passages.

But there is no scripture that supports your view that the Israelites would forget who they were and would become other nations.

So, you have no scriptural support for your myth.

[ You have no records of any of the Tribes migrating anywhere-so stop your lying! ]

Not only are there outpost reports of groups with those in Israelite garb heading north, there are records describing Israelite resisting tax collecting. Large communities, considering they repelled the tribute takers.

Israelite 'garb' you mean robes, which were worn by everyone in the Mideast?

There is no historical evidence that any tribes went anywhere.

There are number of books and pamphlets that discuss the Assyrian translations; I referred to one in this post. As you tell me to, go find them, or you are "lazy".

I don't have to find them since I know that they do not say anything about those 10 tribes going anywhere.

And you should be ashamed for lying when you know that as well.

[ No, it will be those who are in the lind of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob that will receive the promises. If some individuals have that racial lineage, then and only then can they be considered in the line of the Hebrew Promises. All others are Gentiles. ]

The leage is not racial. "Israelite" is no a race.

Oh, yes it is, it as a race that is in the line of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and follows a very particular blood line.

If the Israelites today with mixed lineage can't be considered to be the seed of Abraham, that pretty much leaves out Judah, yes? Since it is historical they have been diluted by the Khazars and Edomites?

No, because to prove one is a Jew all one has to show is that one is in that racial lineage.

All 12 tribes, no matter what the mixture would still be considered racial Jews.

They don't have to be 'pure' Jew, but they have to have some Jewish blood, which most Gentiles do not have.

[ Hey- it is to the 12 tribes! What part of the 12 tribes do you not understand? ]

Certainly two tribes for Judah and ten tribes for Israel. 2+10=12.

Did James write 10 plus two?

He wrote to the 12 tribes and he knew that they existed in the Roman Empire as Jews.

Talk about rewriting scripture!

There is no indication that James was talking about the two and the ten be dispersed together. Judah was in Palestine and lower parts of Italy and Greece. Israel was in the rest of Europe and any that remained behind in Mesopotamia/Assyria.

And you have some proof of that?

Ofcourse not!

More hot air!

Control your breathing.

Control your hot air.

[ They were 'lost' in the sense they were -without their Shepard! And that was for all of the 12 tribes of Israel, not just Judah. Once again, your inability to understand simple English is showing. ]

Well, they had been "lost" a long time in that case, don't you think? Come on, it's obvious in context He wasn't talking about the Jews.

Ofcourse he was talking about Jews, that is why he called them the 12 tribes.

He could have called them the Israelites and the Jews, but instead he called them the 12 tribes.

The House of Judah has always been refereed to separately from the House of Israel.

Not before 1Ki.12 it wasn't.

A little trip down memory lane. . . II Kings 17:21-23 (circa 525 BC) When he tore Israel away from the house of David, they made Jeroboam son of Nebat their king. Jeroboam enticed Israel away from following the LORD and caused them to commit a great sin. The Israelites persisted in all the sins of Jeroboam and did not turn away from them until the LORD removed them from his presence, as he had warned through all his servants the prophets. So the people of Israel were taken from their homeland into exile in Assyria, and they are still there. Josephus, Antiquities, Book XI, Chapter 5, Paragraph 2, When Esdras had received this epistle, he was very joyful, and began to worship God, and confessed that he had been the cause of the king's great favor to him, and that for the same reason he gave all the thanks to God. So he read the epistle at Babylon to those Jews that were there; but he kept the epistle itself, and sent a copy of it to all those of his own nation that were in Media. And when these Jews had understood what piety the king had towards God, and what kindness he had for Esdras, they were all greatly pleased; nay, many of them took their effects with them, and came to Babylon, as very desirous of going down to Jerusalem; What you have read so far takes place right after 525 B.C. and then jumps to the present time of Josephus (first century A.D.) but then the entire body of the "people of Israel" remained in that country; wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes (Israel) are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers

First, you will note that in Josephus that those in Media are called Jews.

Second, that Josephus knows where the 10 tribes are, they haven't moved anywhere.

{ And once again, James did not write to the 10 tribes, he wrote to the 12 tribes, and thus, he knew where they were, they spread throughout the Roman Empire-as Jews. ]

And once again, being dispersed does not mean dispersed together. It does proved the the lost sheep of the House of Israel was known to James, and, as Jesus clearly referred to, they were not with the Jews.

And as you just quoted in Josephus, they were in fact called Jews.

The house of Israel was not lost in the sense that it was missing, it was lost in that it had no Shepard (Jn.10)

"Jews" started off as, and has always been a reference to the House of Judah. The house of Judah has always been used to refer to the Jews. Never has the House of Israel been used to refer to both.

Never said the House of Israel referred to both, only that Jew did.

The house of Israel when mentioned does refer to the Northern Kingdom and is referred to by the Lord and Peter as being in the Land.

[ There are no official records. There is DNA testing, but there are no official records. ]

Oh, please. Of course there are records. With Judah there has always been records. Stop screwing around, ask them and see what they say.

And you stop lying.

There are no genealogical records of any tribe left.

I don't have to ask anyone, that is an historical fact.

That is why no one can claim to inherit the throne of David, because no one can claim to be in his lineage.

Stop your lying!

All DNA testing done to date is very iffy. I wouldn't put any faith in it. There has been, for just one thing, a lot of mixing of people with the Jews. Personal DNA testing is accurate enough for identification of fathers and immediate children, but that's about as far as it goes. Identifying mixed genetic populations over centuries is quite another thing altogether.

There is clearly some indicator that points out a Jew in the DNA.

There are no genealogical records that date back to the 1st century.

[ The reason that no one can tell for sure what tribe he is from is because the records were destroyed in Jerusalem and those that survived, later in Alexandria Egypt. That is why no one can claim any lineage for the Kingship from the tribe of Judah, there are no records to support that claim. No, many Jews from the tribe of Levi did take the name of Cohn, so they would know what lineage they are based on that last name, but not on the basis of any official records.]

I'm sure the Jews you make this case to will find it interesting. Let me know what they say. It's interesting that you yourself use as an example that Judah and Israel was merged by using a gal that knew which tribe she was from.

The Temple had not been destroyed yet, so there were still records.

You really do have a problem with reading don't you.

[ I claim that they know that they are Jews, but do not know their particular tribes (with the exception of the Levi's). Try to grasp the difference. ]

Ask some Jews. Tell them to grasp the difference.

And could any Jew prove it what tribe he was from without a break in his genealogy?

No, they couldn't.

[ I have prevented more evidence in one post then you have in all of yours combined. All your posts are based on conjecture, not a fact in them. ]

You keep saying this. I guess you figure that someone reading it would not go back and read the conversation, so you can get away with it. You seem to playing to the peanut gallery here. I'm probing a belief held by consensus, seeking its foundation, and I have not been impressed.

I have been impressed by your ability to beg the question.

You state that there were millions of Israelites when the Northern Kingdom fell.

Prove-None.

You state that those same millions of Israelites formed the Western nations-prove.

None.

Your entire theory is based on no one provable fact.

[ Well, he said what I said, and it refutes your entire false theory which is based on hot air. ]

Well, apparently he hadn't researched the translation of Tiglath-pileser's own writings.

Oh, cut it out.

There is nothing in any Assyrian writing that states anything about how many Israelites there you.

You are blowing smoke.

The published work on Assyria by an expert on the subject stated the opposite,that no one knows what happened to those tribes.

[ And that would support my view, not yours! If most of those tribes were left in the land, then there were not millions deported and thus, it would have been easy for individuals of those tribes to make their way back to the land. ]

This was the siege of Israel, lasting about 23 years, until the migration. The rebellious were deported, the others were kept to work the land.

And that would mean that there were not many left now were there.

In fact, Assyria had to import other tribes to make sure the land was inhabited. (2Ki.17).

You reference was to make a point about the low numbers of the Israelites, presumably destroyed wholesale by the Assyrians, to attempt to block my point about to large of number of Israelites to merge with Judah in Palestine generations later. Your theory of the merging of Judah and Israel fails with large population numbers of the latter.

The population was depleted from war and invasion.

And you have no idea how many people were left.

And stop pretending that you do.

You pull numbers out of nowhere.

Israel could have well been down in the thousands, not the millions.

God intended to give the Israelites over to a cruel people for their sins. They were suborned without massive casualties, probably because they were already deep in sin and lack the connection with God to produce the moral energy in righteousness to prevail, and so, were conquered with out much loss of life.

And do you have any actual proof of this as well?

I never saw one individual make up so much history in my life.

You do not know how high the losses were, or even how many people Israel had before the invasions.

Try putting that into a thesis for a history teacher and see how far that would fly.

The Taylor Prism describes much of this fighting. Apparently there was not very much spirit on the part of the Israelites, which would be consistent with God's intentions.

LOL!

Really?

Is that why Samaria was able to hold out for three years against the greatest military of it's day?

You are just one assertion after another without a shred of any actual facts.

Fantasy history at its finest.

The point here is, there was essentially the original population of the northern kingdom left intact when they were herded, about 25 years later and dispersed among the Median cities.

The fact is that you do not know the population that was deported.

And you have stated that deportations only happened to the malcontents, now you are saying they happen to the entire population?

You have not a single shred of evidence of how many people ended up in Media and how many were left in the Land.

So stop pretending you do.

[ No, Sargon is referring to the captives he took from the Captial city. So, your intention to get around that number is futile. Whent that city fell it had only 27,000 people left in it. ]

The Numrud Prism IV, writen by Sargon II, "I surrounded and deported as prisoners 27,290 of its inhabitants together with their chariots, and the gods in whom they trusted. From them I equipped 200 chariots for my army units, while the rest I made to take up their lot within Assyria. I restored the city of Samaria and made it more habitable than before. I brought into it people from the countries conquered by my hands. My official I set over them as governor and reckoned them as people of Assyria itself." Sargon II continued the policies of Tiglath-pileser III. He was referring as "countries" the other domains of the northern kingdom.

Yes, and from the quotes, it appears that the entire population of Sameria was deported and it was only 27,000.

So your quotes prove my thesis not yours.

And once again, we know that the tribes were deported, so you aren't telling us anything we don't already know.

What you need to quote is a passage that tells us that millions of Israelites were deported.

Those passages are well known.

And, again, we are talking about events that happened more than 7 centuries before the coming of Christ to Palestine, 28 standard generations. From the population viewpoint of Israel merging with Judah, how many babies can be born in 28 generations?

The fact is that millions of Israelites were not deported and then moved somewhere else.

Those who were born in those nations they were deported to, either remained there or returned to the Land.

[ Moreover, there is no record of it}

You use the merging of Israel with Judah because it i the only thing that anyone could possibly come up with to explain the lack of known Israelite in the modern world.

I am using the merging of both Israel and Judah because that is what happened and the word Jew refers to all of the tribes of Israel, not just Judah.

It doesn't work with projected populations, not to mention prophecy, scripture and historical writing of the Assyrians themselves.

What doesn't work is making up numbers and history.

There is no record of those tribes leaving Assyria and going anywhere.

So stop pretending there is.

I'm sorry, I know you are invested in it and on it hangs your belief system, but it just doesn't work.

No, what doesn't 'work' are bad historical research and poor reasoning skills.

Which is what your theory consists of.

[ Well, that is nice fantasy history. Any actual prove? The deportation occurred in 1Ki.17 and that is the only recorded instance of the deportation. But it is true many were left in the land as seen by them going to the South-so your theory is defeated and shown to be nonsense by your own admission. ]

Assyria under Tiglath-pileser was around 745 BC when the siege of the norther kingdom started. The House of Israel itself was moved in about 721 BC. We have records on tablets placing these times. Thats about 109 years under the Assyrians, making babies in Median cities under tribute to the Assyrian king. In 612 BC Assyria fell as an empire, formally releasing the Israelites, which makes 6 baby making centuries until the birth of Christ. These times are recorded on hard stone and found in books written from the translation of the Assyrian records. You can ignore them as accurate if you like, but I don't recommend it.

No one denies that Israelites were in Assyria.

What you have to prove is that they went somewhere as a people and became someone else.

So once again you have cited irrelevant facts which do not give any credence to your view that the Israelite went anywhere as a people.

They reproduced and dispersed as Jews, not as Gentiles.

[ You just throw out nonsense as if it is suppose to But it is true many were left in the Land as seen by them going to the South-so your theory is defeated and shown to be nonsense by your own admission. ]

Huh?

[ What the heck are you babbling about? The Israelites who went South increased and became known as Jews. That is how Anna from the tribe of Assar go there. Your reasoning ability is fatally flawed.]

The last I "babbled", my friend, was in my crib about 60 years ago.

No, you done nothing but babble in all of these posts.

Making assertions about numbers and movements without any evidence.

In order to not dramatically increase the population of Jews during the time of Christ, which was about 500,000, which the ten tribes of Israel in their usual number would have, and attracted definite attention and much writing thereabout (there is no writing about this event), the tribes of the House of Israel, to be consistent with your theory, would have to essentially wiped out.

No, they could have remained in the land where they were born, just as many did when the Southern tribes returned from the Babylonian captivity.

Clearly, many were visiting on Pentecost in Acts 2.

Many Jews remain in America today and are not in Israel.

So once again, you make an unfounded assertion.

This is the third time I've explained this.

And it is the third time it is wrong.

[ No, your theory is the one without any historical evidence and Biblical basis. As you said, the Israelites were left in the land. What people the Assyrians did deport did not constitute the majority and thus, the Israelites would have been in the Land when Christ came. ]

Some of the Israelites were left in the land. They separated and founded their own towns. There are Assyrian records of fights with them even after Assyria fell.

And if they were left in the Land, they would have been there when the Lord was born.

So what happened to the 10 tribes in Assyria is irrelevant to the fact that all 12 tribes existed in Israel at the time of Christ's birth.

You don't have to have every member of the tribe there, just enough for the tribes to be represented.

Remember, in 721 BC the Israelites were moved en mass to the Median cities? I don't doubt it took several years to do it. You get a sense of how long a year is, don't you?

And a while back you were saying that only the trouble makers were deported, so now it is everyone?

You do like to change around your views.

And once again, the deportation is well known so you are just repeating the same facts.

What you have to prove is the numbers moved, and that those same tribes remained intact and left Assyria and went into Western Europe.

Which you have no proof of.

[ You have not come up with a single fact supporting any exodus that left Assryia and went into Europe. You are lying through your teeth about Assyrian records saying they did-and you know it. The prophecies will happen in the future, since the House of Israel, is not yet as the 'sand of the seas' because they are intermingled with the other 2 tribes. So, try actually providing a single fact to show any actual departure from Assyria by those tribes, which you have no admitted did not make up the majority of the members of the tribes. Anyone who would say that the Israelites left for Europe before Moses went out of Egypt has a screw loose! ]

I have some evidence. As I said, there are Assyrian outpost reports that track movement of people that bear resemblance to Israel moving toward Turkey. Israel was placed on the northern border of Assyria, so a movement to Turkey is most reasonable.

Movement to Turkey is not the issue, it is the movement into Western Europe.

No one has any problem with Israelites moving around that area of the world, since they are all found there as Jews.

So, your outpost sightings and trackings have nothing to do with the B.I. theory which states that millions of Israelites moved into Western Europe and forgot that they were Hebrews.

You throw out facts that do not prove a single key issue of your theory.

And I have even more evidence that Israel did no merge with Judah in Palestine.

Well, you have admitted that there were those from the Northern Kingdom left in the Land, as there were from the South when they were deported.

So, Israelites were present when the Lord was born and they were then known as Jews, as they are today.

They were stated to be the 'house of Israel', which always refers to those from the Northern tribes.

They were merged as a single people.

You seem to demand that I produce an ancient tablet that is written cuneiform that states exactly what I say. You are not reasonable, and you are defending a belief that you are invested in.

No, what I am demanding are facts from any reputable, published work that supports your theory.

You have no evidence of any mass movement by the 10 tribes.

You have no knowledge of the numbers involved in the deportation.

All you have are assumptions on what might have happened, not on what actually did happen.

You have not even investigated the current translation of the Assyrian tablets and the books written about them, have you?

I have investigated them enough to know that there are none that supports your view.

There is not a reputable published work that will state that the 10 tribes had millions of people at its deportation and that they went into Western Europe.

So stop your phony bluffing and pretending that there is some evidence for your nonsense theory-there isn't.

Intermingled with Judah is a a theory you have and you haven't produced any evidence for. We have 7 centuries for the Israel to migrate all over the place, including staying and integrating with the Medians and Assyrians. 7 centuries are enough to populate the earth, given a sufficiently seed population. This is just math and commonsense, not to mention God's word and promises.

You have not a shred of evidence that those people went anywhere near Western Europe.

Nothing in history supports you.

It is based on nothing more then myth and conjecture and you know it.

The key fact that you have to prove, which you can't is the sufficiently seed population which you have no idea even existed in the numbers necessary.

And then you have to have some record of these millions of people moving out of Assyria into Europe.

You have sightings of small groups, not millions.

I have given you facts about the translation of the Assyrian tablets. Aren't you even diligent enough to verify they exist? There are numerous books written by people who are interested in what the Assyrians had to say about the Israelite tribes. Don't you want to know what they say?

Nothing on those tablets support your view!

No numbers are given to give you a sufficient seed population.

No mass movements recorded of millions of people into Western Europe.

Your appeal to those records is a farce and they do not support anything you are asserting.

And I have not even touched on the names of European names of geographical features or the common words in Hebrew and European languages.

And I have already posted a refutation of that canard.

We are talking about 7 centuries, my friend. Look at the map of where Assyria was and where its northern border is. It's a friggin month's march to Turkey from there. Where in the hell do you think a vast number of people, having been released for Assyrian captivity, and having mostly forgotten their heritage as God ordained, would go?

First, you have not given a single verse of scripture to support you contention that the Hebrews were ever to forget their heritage.

Second, what makes you think that they went anywhere.

Josephus, whom you cited, states they are still in those lands when he wrote.

So, once again, you are simply begging the question, without any evidence to support your idiotic view that the western nations are really the Israelites.

Your tablets do not support the view, since they do no give you any numbers, except the 27,000 which we already know about.

No conclusion you have reached is based on any facts.

I'm not even sure your are credible enough to discuss this with. I'm just repelled by consensus conclusion that is seemly devoid of foundation, other than political or motivated by hatred (the comments you make seem to indicative of hatred), to advance a policy that can be used to make decision on the world stage.

What I hate are liars.

And those who push the B.I. view are just that.

You have not given a single variable fact to support your contention that the Israelites were in Assyria in large numbers (millions) and then left in the millions to Western Europe without any record of that migration.

And outpost sightings of a few people traveling back and forth is not evidence of that migration.

You assert what you need to prove and then think that because you have proven it in your mind, that you do not have to provide actual historical evidence to back up your claims.

Put up a thesis with the facts you have presented and it would be cut to pieces.

You see, the prophecy that House of Israel will be the "sands of the sea" fits the notion that many of the most populous nations of the Earth have a bloodline that traces back to the seed of Abraham is the simplest and most viable explanation of prophecy.

The prophecy that the Houe of Israel will be the 'sands of the sea' fits the promise made in Ezek. 36 when the Lord said He would multipy the house of Isreal.

Your theory that the Gentiles are really the Israelites is simply myth, with not a single solid fact to support it.

You cannot defend a merge of Israel with Judah on the basis of population, scripture, history or prophecy. You've tried on all these fronts, but just end up repeating that I am wrong and you are right.

Actually, the merging of Israel and Judah is made clear in the usage of the word 'Jew' which stands now for all tribes.

The Biblical evidence supports the fact that all the 12 tribes were in the Land when the Lord was born and are addressed as the House of Judah and the House of Israel.

The historical evidence supports me since Josephus refers to the House of Israel still in the former Assyrian lands, they had not gone anywhere.

What facts do you have?

You have the fact that the Israelites were deported-period.

You have no numbers.

You have no record of any mass movements.

That is what you have to prove, not assert, but prove happened to make your theory even possible.

I would say that anyone who relies on a consensus opinion unsupported by hard facts, which opinion serves the purposes of those who advance it, has a screw loose.

And I would say that anyone who relies on a theory with no facts to support it is unconcerned about the truth.

[ Well, since you have no facts to support your nonsense, your theory is simply a myth, and does not even rate to be considered a theory. ]

I have presented you with innumerable facts, and you have not been able to credibly refute them, nor have you been able to come with any facts of your own.

You really do live in your own make believe world don't you?

You have not provided a single credible fact regarding numbers of Israelites deported, numbers born, and any mass movement regarding those numbers.

Now those are the facts you need to make your theory viable, not statements about Assyrian outposts and people wearing robes in Turkey!

I really believe that fact is that you want to believe in your position, you for some reason have to. It's hard to try to reason with such a person. But I intend to keep it up.

Well, you keep it as long as you want.

I have no problem dealing with frauds such as yourself.

He is an expert in Assyrian history, so he, unlike you, actually know the records.

Who is?

Well, let him( whooever it is) tell us what the numbers were in the deportation and the evidence of the mass movements.

Your historian must not be too much of an expert. He has missed 23,000 tablets, plus numerous books written about them. How would you explain that? I guess you picked him because he hasn't been exposed to material that would dispute your theories? Yes?

And any of those 23,000 tablets give you any numbers of the deportation and the evidence of the mass movement you speak of?

My historian could actually read the language and had his work published by a credible publishing firm.

So when you actually get some facts regarding those numbers let me know.

[ Like I said, look it up. ]

Ok. Would you be so kind as to tell which post it was, since you wrote it?

It's in there somewhere.

I want the location of the record that states that the Israelites left the area. British museum. Section of records that constitute missives of Assyrian outposts to the king. That's all I can tell you. I cam across the info years ago. I'll try to trace it down for you, without calling you names and disparaging your character. But you don't even believe Assyrian records exist. LOL.

Oh, I believe the records exist, what doesn't exist is what you are trying to have them say.

There are no Assyrian records of any mass exodus out of the nation by the 10 tribes-and you know it.

Do you know, going back and reading the comments you throw in with almost every part of every post, they make you sound like a snarling dog? Go ahead, go back and read what your wrote.

I have very little patience for frauds and con men.

I'm tired of responding to 5 or 6 of your posts. Let's stay with this one, Put all you need to here.

And so you post me a second one?

You can't even be honest for a single post.

Missing Links Discovered
In Assyrian Tablets

Capt’s crowning achievement!
E. Raymond Capt M.A., A.I.A., F.S.A. Scot
[ERC00706] $12.95

http://hoffmanprinting.ixwebhosting.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/659?osCsid=dafaf539bdc592477e26d1b36abce3fd

Author: E. Raymond Capt
Could you be an Israelite and not know it?
“Here’s a paradox, a most ingenious paradox: an anthropological fact, many Christians may have much more Hebrew-Israelite blood in their veins than most of their Jewish neighbors.” (1)
Alfred M. Lilienthal

Could this possibly be so? If so, it would mean that the majority of Christendom and the rest of society has misidentified the people most prominent in the Bible. If Israel has been misidentified there is no doubt that major errors in doctrinal interpretation and application of biblical prophecy have been made! Take a look at a truly remarkable study of Assyrian tablets that reveal the fate of the Lost Tribes of Israel. This is the book considered by most to be Capt’s finest of all his vast and excellent literary achievements!

An archaeological study of the origin and history of the so-called “Lost Tribes of Israel” and the Assyrian tablets that reveal the fate of these same people chosen by God to be the “light-bearers” to the nations. When clay cuneiform tablets were found in the excavations of the Assyrian Royal Library of Ashurbanipal in ancient Nineveh, their relevance to the nation of Israel was overlooked at the time. This was undoubtedly because they were in complete disorder and among hundreds of miscellaneous text dealing with many matters of State. Contributing to this situation was the fact that the Assyrians called the Israelites by other names during their captivity.

Some of the tablets found were dated around 707 B.C. and reveal the fate of the Israelites as they escaped from the land of their captivity and”disappeared” into the hinterland of Europe. These tablets form the “Missing Links” that enable us to identify the modern-day descendants of the”Lost Tribes of Israel”. In doing so, we increase our knowledge of Bible history and experience a dramatic revision of our preconceived ideas of Bible prophecy.

In this authoritative book, the author has attempted no more than a brief review of the origin and history of the Israelites; a survey of the Assyrian inscriptions and cuneiform tablets that record the deportations of Israel as related to Biblical and secular history; their sojourn in captivity, and a synopsis of their migrations to their new homelands (British Isles, France, Germany, Scandanavia, Canada, America, etc.). “Missing Links” is the book that opened the eyes of thousands of Christians (Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Church of Christ, and more) to their Israelite heritage and how that one single discovery has changed the way they now view all Bible doctrine and prophecy!

256 pages