Why would you call me a liar? Have you ever asked a Jew if he knew what tribe he was from? I have. Try it. Judah has always kept records.
And there were those who did not show up in the records that were in the Land as well, such as the tribe of Aser. And do they have any records today tracing their ancestor ship? Those records were destroyed when the Temple was destroyed. Except for DNA testing, no Jew knows what tribe he is originally from.
I believe that's "Asher". The reason you will not find any, or very few known Jews with no tribal lineage is because the Israelites didn't join Judah.
Jews know what tribes they're from because they keep records. Do you not understand this concept?
Any Jew that claims he is from a particular tribe can only state he thinks he is from that tribe. He has no proof, no way of tracing his origin back to the the original 12 tribes-and you know it. Stop blowing smoke.
Have you ever accused a Jew of not really knowing which tribes he comes from after he has stated it?
The three I mentioned had references to temple records. This info is passed down from mother to son and daughter, and hard records are kept. This information is required, I believe, to become a true native citizen of the land currently called Israel.
I don't know what you mean by 'contaminated'. But all 12 tribes were present in the South, when Judah and Benjamin went into captivity.
"Contaminated" means that the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with their allotment of Levite priests and teachers, received others not of those tribes, but from tribes of the northern kingdom fleeing the sins thereof.
All 12 tribes were present in the southern kingdom before Babylon? Where do you get that idea? The northern kingdom had already been take off by the Assyrians. Did the Assyrians relent and give them back?
Well, it isn't in Kings. So, if you cannot provide the actual verse to show it, it just shows that you do not know what you are talking about. More hot air.
Thanks for looking. All I can say is that I saw it years ago, but have forgotten.
But, then, you have already called me a liar. There is a individual count in 1 Chronicles, which indicate nearly two million (350,000 fighting men, not just men times 5 from family counts), excluding Judah and Benjamin, but that is low and not the one I saw.
t is clear from your evasion and lying you do not have any proof. And know you state that the count was 'well before the Assyrians' which could mean anytime. Well, the kingdom was under judgment and being smitten by God so the numbers were shrinking rapidly.
You're calling me a liar again. I don't do that to you, why do it to me? Have you no decorum?
God used the Assyrians to "smite" the Israelites. They were quite numerous until then. Then they had a couple of hundred years to rebuild their populations from whatever damage the Assyrians caused sitting on light duty on the Assyrian northern border.
And what were their numbers? You don't know. And the size of a nations army is good indication of the relative population. Now, why don't you find the verse that actually gives the number of peopel that went into exile. I will accept the number of men that went into exile. Your theory is built in a foundation of lies.
Again you call me a liar.
I've cited high numbers in scripture. You've cited no numbers at all. The usual multiplier is 4 or 5, probably five since the families of the Israelite would be large. You may even be able to use up to 6 or 7. I gave you a cite above, but it's lower than the one I had seen before.
The tribe of Benjamin was once down to 600 men, with no women and children left (Ju.21).
And this had what to do with the topic? Please, post "Ju.21". I'm not sure what it is.
No, the Bible tells us that the lost house of Israel was back in Israel (Mat.15, Acts,2,7). Now, since each tribe is among the Jews, we don't need to look any further for them. So you are making up history to support your own lack of Bible knowledge.
I have to guess you're talking about:
Matthew 15:23 "But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Uh, so what? Jesus had told His disciples to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. He couldn't been talking about the Jews because He knew them as Jews and they were right there with Him.
Remember this woman wasn't from there, and He acknowledges she wasn't from the other Israelite tribes elsewhere, so this is what He said.
Pretty weak argument, if you ask me.
As for your other cites, "men of Israel" is the only thing I can find to which you're referring. Let me try again. Judah, Benjamin and Levi were tribes of Israel. This means that men thereof can be referred to as men of Israel.
Do you understand?
No, the scripture states clearly that the house of Israel was present during the Lord's day, since Peter accused them of crucifying the Lord (Acts.2:36).
Acts 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
Acts 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Acts 2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Acts 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
It's pretty obvious the house of Israel is the whole of Israel, and with reference to the past, and the Jews, there and then, killed him.
Weak, I think, again. I have much stronger arguments, I might say so.
There are no records of the 12 tribes individual identities that go back to the original 12 tribes.
You are right the northern kingdom lost their identity. However, there are for the southern kingdom.
What you have to prove is that they actually left. As for the tribes being present in the land of Israel during Christ's day, that is proven by Scripture (Mt.15, Acts,2,7).
You are kidding right? They were there, then they're not. Duh?
We already discussed your misreading of those passages.
No, I am dealing with facts. You have accepted a theory with no facts to support it. You have this assumption that in order for Hosea 1:10-11 to be true, there must be millions of pre-existing Israelites before the Millennial Kingdom. This comes from your poor reading skills. 'Then' doesn't have to mean 'at that time' it can also mean 'in addition'. Thus, the Millennial reign will begin with the reuniting of the two divisions of the tribes and as a result, the house of Israel will become as the 'sand of the sea'.
But you haven't cited any facts. I'm the only one here who has presented any evidence of his theory.
In order for there to be member of the Houst of Israel to be uncountable, they must already be vast. Or you have to expect God to raise the very stones up as sons of Abraham. The number of Jews extant are minuscule, diminishing and have enacted not even one promise of God relating to Israel.
Hosea stands, and so does Ezekiel, and you cannot explain them in terms of your theory.
Why do you keep insulting and denigrating me? Do I do this to you. Have you proper raising or skill in interpersonal relationships, or any decorum?
And if there is no record of them in the assault, then we have no prove that they were involved in it. Just because they were there, doesn't mean that they were part of the revolt against Assyria. Once again you are 'question begging'. They could have been assimilated into the local population by then.
I do not have to prove the Israelites were involved in the raz of Assyria beyond that necessary to get free.
However, you need something to support your theory that they went to Palestine and merged with the Jews.
And do you have any facts that discuss their involvement? You are assuming that they were involved, but being in captivity for over a century, they could have adopted Assyrian culture as well. One of the curses placed on Israel was that they would be dispersed and adopt the Gentile gods. So, it is you that have to show that the tribes were still existing as tribes. That they did actually revolt against the Assyrians. If you cannot, then you have another conjecture to add to your house of cards.
Why, yes, I do. We know the northern kingdom was there and then they weren't. And there is no way they could have merged with Judah in Palestine.
They would have adopted Assyrian culture when they were kept away from Assyria proper and kept in sole contact with the Medes?
A curse of God will win out. But that curse would have also kept them from returning to Palestine, and, wherever they went, retained their bloodline.
It is entertaining that after virtually every response to each statement I make, you reiterate I have no proof, while you have given no support of your theory in any form. We have no proof of anything that happened that long ago, but I have much evidence to support my theory. You have no evidence to advance whatsoever, yet you keep repeating this to me.
And do they say anything other then that the 10 tribes were there-which everyone knows! Does it say that they revolted? Does it give their number? Once again , a irrelvant fact that does nothing to advance your theory that the 10 tribes broke free and left the area for lands unknown.
No, but they have graphic scratchings on them that show Israelite religious dress and some of those come from outposts not in the direction of Palestine, during the time we are discussing.
What I have are facts, what you have is myth based on conjecture. Stop living in a fantasy world. Now, unless you can supply some facts, like the number of people
But, but, but, You're shown not one fact supporting your theory. How can you honestly say the above?