London, New York and Palestine Centers of World Intrigue

Present Jewish activities in Palestine and the establishment of the state of the Israelis have led many Christians to assume that Israel is being restored to her land again in fulfillment of the propeches of the Prophets of the Lord. If such a supposition were ture, then all the activities of the antichrist jews would be found to be in conformity with every requirement set fort by the prophets concerning the marks which were to identify modern-day Israel.

Also, they would be following the method by which the prophets predicted the resotration ould be accomplished. Actually, the jews are no in possession of any of the necessary identification marks; nor are they proceeding to possess the land according to Biblical requirements. The mere fact that they established a nation in Palestine is in itslef no evidence that they are True Israel. History abounds with accounts of the activities of peopel who have undertaken to establish themselves in Palestine, but htat did not make them Israel. The activities of the jews have a prophetic significance, they are not fulfilling the prophecies which forecast the return of the House of Israel to the land of their inheritnace. It must not be overlooked that the Israeli state was counded upon a systematic program of violence, deceit and murder and this fact alone should place everyone on guard against assigning to the jews what rightfully belongs to the House of Israel.

�� Abraham and His Seed

In order to arrive at an understanding of the significance of current events as they affect Palestine, let us briefly review the history of Abraham and his posterity and the meaning of the promises made to selected individuals of his race, the White Race. When Yahweh called Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees He promised that his posterity would possess the land of Palestine and that his territory would become the inhkeritance of his seed forever. Isaac, the son of Sarah and Abraham, was the seed of promise, and he had two sons, Esau and Jacob. The birthright, with the covenant promises, went to Jacob and his posterity, not to Esau. Jacob had twelve sons, but instead of selecting one son from among the twelve to receive the whole inheritance, Jacob called all of his sons together and divided his inheritance among them all. To Joseph and his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, he gave THE BIRTHRIGHT. But right of descent Reuben should have received this blessing, for he was the first born son, but the record states:

�Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, (for he was the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father�s bed, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel; and the genealoly is not to be reckoned after the birthright. For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph�s).� (1 Chronicles 5:1-2)

�� The Birthright

It is well to remmeber these instructions concerning the birthright which was given jointly to the sons of Joseph. It carrried with it authority, power and headship over all the other families and tribes. It bestowed all the possessions of the father, which later comprised all the riches of the kigndom and most important of all, the Divine hegemony was vested in the sons of Joseph. The descendants of none of the sons of Jacob apart from the sons of Joseph wilol be found to possess these blessings in their own right. When, through strife and contention, others have come into possession of the inheritance that belongs to the sons of Joseph, their turbulence and trouble which followed soon disposseed them of that which they had acquired by violence.

�� Ephraim and Manasseh

Not long before his death Jacob instructed Joseph to bring his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, to him so that he might bless them. As Joseph�s father prepared to bestow the blessing, Joseph noticed that his hands were crossed so that his right hand was on the head of Ephraim the younger and his left hand on the head of Manasseh the elder. Joseph remonstrated with Jacob, urging him to reverse his hands:

�And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greter than he, and his seed shall become a multitude (fulness) of nations. And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephriam before Manasseh.� (Genesis 48:19-20)

�� Judah�s Blessing

These blessings conferred upon Ephraim and Manasseh, forecasting their future greatness, will be found as marks of identification in the possession of their descendnats only. They cannot be expected to be in evidence as a part of the inheritance of the descendants of any of the other sons of Jacob, including the posterity of Judah. But Judah did receive a special blessing, for of him Jacob said:

�Judah is a lion�s whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, the couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? The septre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.� (Genesis 49:9-10)

�� Selections and Rejections

The kingly line and the right to rule were thus to come through Judah so we will find a royal line among his descendants who will be wielding the sceptre. But this promise of the sceptre, as subsequently shown, was to be exercised by a specially chosen branch of Judah�s posterity. Just as Jacob selected each of his sons to whom he gave certin blessings under the Covenant, so later God selected from the tribe of Judah the particular branch of that tribe the descendants of which were to be the recipients of this special inheritance. It is just as erroneous to expect all the descendnats of Judah to come into possesion of this blessing as it would be to expect all the sons of Jacob to inherit the birthright which was given to Joseph�s two sons alone. It is essential to an understanding of the Scriptures; with out which it would be impossible to properly evaluate current world developments and present activitis in Palestine, to recognize the selections which were continually being made by God who rejected some an dchose others of the posterity of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to eventually receive the specific blesisngs Jacob gage to each of his sons.

�� Samuel Anointed David

When the time came for God to appoint the kingly line to rule over His people, He selected the family of Jesse and chose his youngest son to be anointed King. After all of Jesse�s sons except one had been presented to Samuel and had been rejected, Samuel said to Jesse:

�Are here all thy children? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and behold, he keepeth the sheep. And Samule said unto Jesse, send and fetch him: for we will not sit down till he come hither. And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautifula countenance (with fine eyes and a handsome appearance), and goodly to look to. And the Lord said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he. Then Samuel gook the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethern: and the Spriti of the Lord came upno David from that day forward.� (1 Samuel 16:11-13)

�� David�s House

After Saul�s death David came to the throne, ruling first over Judah and then over all Israel. David�s throne was established at that time in perpetuity. The original covenant God made with David was:

��And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be establihsed for ever.� (2 Samuel 7:16)

�God promised three unconditional things to David:

1). The continuity of David�s House;

2). The endurance of his Kingdom;

3). The perpetuity of his Throne.

�God confirmed the certainty of this covenant which he made with David as set forth in the Psalm:

��I have made a covenant with my chose, I have sworn unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations....I have faoudn David my servant; with my holy oil have I anointed him... My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stnd fast with him. His seed also will I make to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven. If his children forsake my law, and wlk not in my judgments; fi they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and with their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once I have sworn by my holidness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as th esun before me. It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven.� (Psalm 89:3-4, 20, 28-37)

�� Established Forever

During the darkest period on the history of Judah and Jerusalem, as the Throne of David seemed about to be destroyed, god, through Jeremiah the Prophet, confimred this promise of perpetuity of David�s Throne. However, the Throne of David was henceforth to be established to reigh over the House of Israel forever:

�For this saith the Lord: David shall never want (or lack) a man to sit upon th ethrone of the house of Israel.� (Jeremiah 33:17)

�� Use of Terms

It is well here perhaps to clarify distinctions which should always be made in the usee of terms. Judah, as has already been pointed out, was one of the twelve sons of Jacob and, in this use of the tere, it merely designates a man whose name was Judah. Later, the amilies and descendants of each of the twelve sons of Jacob bore the n ame of that son as a tribal distinction so the posterity of Judah beame known as the tribe of Judah; that is, the �families� or �clan� of Judah. David�s father�s house was one of the families of this tribe.

In selecting David to be anointed Kingd, God chose a family out of the tribe of Judah to be separated from the clan of Judah and to beccome a Royal House which was to furnish rulers for His people. The remaining families of the tribe of Judah became known later on as the House of Judah. Thus, we see that the tribe of Judah was divided into two houses: the House of David and the House of Judah. Three houses therefore emerged as the result of the selectinok separation and organization of the descendants of Jacob. The House of Israel, consisted of ten tribes, each named after a son of Jacob. Levi, the priestly tribe, remained separate from all these houses, for men of theis tribe were scattered throughout all Israel officiating in their priestly capacity among all the tribes.

As will be shown later, Benjamin, one tribe of the House of Israel, was loaned to the House of David and, along with the House of Judah, remianed loyal to the Throne of David when the rest of the House of Israel revolted, setting up a government of their own at Samaria. This occurred at the time of the division of the Kingdoms into the northern Kingdom (House of Israel) and the southern Kingdom (House of Judah) in 970 B.C.

The name designating the natin as the Nation of the Jews came into being following the return of a remnant of the House of Judah and the tribe of Benjamin from Babylonian captivity where they had been taken by Nebuchadnezzar. This nation was so desgnated because it became �the nation of the religion of the Jews.� That is, the term Jew, in addition to designating a descendant of the forefather Judah.

The nation of the Jews was composed of people who were not racially relatives of the Israelites. Many of the Galileans who were of the tribe of Benjamin. Howver, because the term jew also designated a religious belief which they held before the coming of Christ, they are often referred to as Jews in error. In the rejection of Christ, it was the Jews racailly of the Natin of the Jews who refused to accept Him, and crucified Him, but the Benjamites, or Galileans, became His followers and disciples.

�� Jews Reject Jesus

Christian men and women are familiar with the Jewish rejection of Christ and the declaration of the Jews and their leaders that they would not �have this man to reign over them.�

It was then that Yahshua told His people to bring the Jews:

�But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.� (Luke 19:27)

Yahshua was of the House of David and God through Jeremiah declared that, folloowing the terms of captivity and punishment of both the House of Israel and House of Judah, no man of the House of David would ever again reign over the House of Judah.

Just as the Jews of our Lord�s day refused to accept the Kingship of Christ, a man of the House of David, so today the Jews of Palestine have refused to accept the rulership of the House of David and they fought against the Crown, finally compelling Great Britain to withdraw from palestine. Had the Jews accept the British mandate over Palestine, and the administration of law under the Crown, the House of David would then have been ruling over them. But they rejecte that rule and, furthermore, they disputed the right of the House of Israel to claim the land of Israel. In doing this the Jews fulfilled Ezekiel�s prophecy:

�Son of man, thy brethren, even thy brethren, the men of thy kindred, and all the house of Israel wholly, are they unto whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, Get you far from the Lord: unto us is this land given in possession.� (Ezekiel 11:15)

�� Political Zionism

Ezekiel was very accurate and used the correct term in describing modern activities in Palestine as he designated the people who were opposing the House of Israel and seeking to wrest their inheritance away from them. Because many of the Zionists who are today in opposition to the House of Israel are not actually descendants of Judah at all; some are not even Jews racially or religiously, he referred prophetically to them as the �inhabitants of Jerusalem.�

A Zionist is anyone, regardless of race, who adheres to the principles of Zionism, particularly the principles of political Zionism. Actually, Zionism is now a term describing a secular political movement the purpose of which was to establish a Jewish nation in Palestine as the national homeland. Not all Jews are political Zionist, nor are all such Zionists Jews. Non-believers, Communists, atheists, and even some so-called Judeo-Christians such as; Binny Hinn; Bill Bright; Billy Graham; Brother Stair; David Lankford; Hal Lindsey (Jew); Jack van Impe; James Robison; James Dobson;� Jerry Falwell; Jim Bakker (Jew); Jimmy Swaggart; John Hagee; Joyce Meyers; Kenneth Copelan; Kenny� Hagin; Marilyn Hickey; Marlin Maddoux; Mike Evans; Oral Roberts; Pat Robertson; Paul Crouch; Robert Schuler; Dr. Wolf (Jew); David Pilinger; Berst Beach; Rod Parsley; Tom Bambley; James Kennedy; J.W. Williams (nigger), Doug Batchler; Jack Graham; Bill Gather; J.K. Halilton (nigger), Allan Lane, Gilbert Graham, all of these could be termed Zionists because they love the enemies of Yahweh more than Him.

Dr. I.M. Rabinowitch, a prominent Jew, in �The Zionist Movement Unmasked,� stated:

�As political Zionists have repeatedly affirmed, a person, born a Jew, may be an atheist and still be a loyal Zionist. Moses Hess, author of the historic and economic basis of Political Zionism, was an anarchist who, both in writing and on the platform propagated the theories of the Proudhon school of anarchy. Theodor Herzl was a renegade Jew, who rather suddenly became conscious of his Jewishness when, during his assignment by his newspaper to witness and report upon the infamous Dreyfus trial, he discovered that, in spite of his so-called �enlightenment,� he was no more immune than the most observant Jew to the anti-Semitism of his day, and in Tel Aviv, Palestine, the only almost completely Jewish city in the world, one may see violated, flagrantly and daily, by political Zionists, most fundamental Jewish laws, in complete disregard of the feelings of their orthodox Jewish neighbors.

�It is not an accident that the majority of the leaders of Political Zionism are Russians (Khazars) or descendants of Russians (Khazars), for this movement, except for sporadic attempts in the early centuries, had its origin in Russia amongst the so-called �enlightened� Jews and is culmination of that which the Haskalah; the so-called Russian-Jewish renaissance, started. Leo Pinsker was a Russian, and Perez Smolenskin, who gave to Political Zionism its philosophy in a nutshell, was a Russian. There are observant Jews amongst the political Zionists; the Mizrahi, but they are in a small group.

�The aim of Political Zionism is a Jewish state. Religious Zionism is, thus motivated by piety, whereas Political Zionism is propelled by a material nationalism, though of different degrees.�

Mr. Benjamin Freedman, also a Jew, explained further:

�Popular ignorance of the real basis of political Zionism is beyond calculation. Vaguely most (Judeo) Christian Americans have the idea that the Jews claim Palestine because it was the �Promised Land� in which they lived for a period of a few centuries that ended 2,000 years ago. And the thought of a people returning to its �homeland� seems emotionally satisfying and good.

�But here are facts most Americans do not know: �Political Zionism is almost exclusively a movement by the Jews of Europe: BUT THE EASTERN EUROPEAN JEWS HAVE NEITHER A RACIAL NOR A HISTORIC CONNECTION WITH PALESTINE. Their ancestors were not inhabitants of the �Promised Land.� THEY ARE THE DIRECT DESCENDANTS OF THE PEOPLE OF THE KHAZAR KINGDOM, WHICH EXISTED UNTIL THE 12^TH CENTURY.

�THE KHAZARS WERE (and are) A NON-SEMITIC, TURKO-FINN, MONGOLIAN TRIBE PEOPLE who, about the 1^st century A.D., created one of the largest kingdoms of their time. At its greatest extent it covered an area of about 800,000 square miles. About the 7^th century A.D., the King of the Khazars adopted Judaism as the state religion, and the majority of inhabitants joined him n the new allegiance.

�Before that date there was no such thing as a Khazar who was a Jew. Neither then nor since was there such a thing as a Khazar whose ancestors had come from the Holy Land. The (non) Semitic people who established Judaism in Palestine many centuries before the Khazars became converts to the Hebrew faith, DID mostly emigrate from Palestine. BUT NONE OF THEM EMIGRATED TO THE KHAZAR KINGDOM FOR TO THE NORTH.

�In view of this fact, what become s of the cry for �reparation� to the �homeland?� these eastern European, Yiddish-speaking Jews have no historic or racial connection with Palestine, or, for that matter, with the other Jews who existed in other countries for thousands of years prior to the Khazar conversion.�

�� Israel�s Withdrawal

Under Jewish pressure the House of Israel has temporarily withdrawn from Palestine. That withdrawal was inevitable since the House of Israel had the way back hedged up, so that they could never return to that land.

�� Prophecy Regarding House of Israel

Through Ezekiel Yahweh declared the House of Israel, not Judah or the Jews:

�Thus saith the Lord God; Although I have cast them far off among the heathen, and although I have scattered them among the countries, yet will I be a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come. Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord God; I will even gather you from the people, and assemble you out of the countries where ye have been scattered, and I wil lgive you the land of Israel. And they shall come thither, and they shall take away all the destestable things thereof and all the abominations therefof from thence. And I wil lgive them one heart, and I wil lput a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh: That they may walk in my statutes, and keep mine ordinances, and do them: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.� (Ezekiel 11:16-20)

This is in accord with the statement in Amos:

�Behold, the eyes of the Lord God are upon the sinful kingdom, and I will destroy it from off the face of the earth; saving that I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob, saith the Lord. For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.� (Amos 9:8-9)

The nation of the Jews was broken up and destroyed but the people of the House of Israel were sifted among the nations as they moved westward, ever westward, following after the east wind.

�Ephraim feedeth on wind, and followeth after the east wind: he daily increaseth lies and desolation; and they do make a covenant with the Assyrians, and oil is carried into Egypt.� (Hosea 12:1)

Then gathered in accordance with God�s plans into the appointed place and none fell by the wayside. Jeremiah gives the terms of the New Covenant of which Ezekiel was speaking and both refer to the removal of the stony heart from Yahweh�s people.

�But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law into their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.� (Jeremiah 31:33)

�� Israel a Nation Always

That this message is addressed to a people who have remained a nation always is evident from the statement:

�Thus saith the Lord, which given the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the wves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease form being a nation before me for ever.� (Jeremiah 31:35-36)

�� A Curse and a Reproach

The sun and the moon are still shining so Israel is a nation before the Lord. This cannot be said of the Jews, for they ceased to exist as a nation when Titus took Jerusalem in 70 A.D., destroying the city and the Temple. They became a nation again when the Khazars of Russia, Eastern Europe and Western Mongolia accepted Judaism as their state religion. Where they ave become a curse, a hiss and a reproach in all lands where they went as predicted by Jeremiah:

�Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Behold, I WILL SEND UPON THEM THE SWORD, THE FAMINE, AND THE PESTILENCE, AND WILL MAKE THEM LIKE VILE FIGS, THAT CANNOT BE EATEN (be assimulated), THEY ARE SO EVIL. And I WILL PERSECUTE THEM WITH THE SWORD, WITH THE FAMINE, AND WITH THE PESTILENCE, AND WILL DELIVER THEM TO BE REMOVED TO AL LTHE KINGDOMS OF THE EARTH, TO BE A CURSE, AND AN ASTONISHMENT, AND AN HISSING, AND A REPROACH, AMONG ALL THE NATIONS WHITHER I HAVE DRIVEN THEM�� : Because they have not hearkened to my words, saith the LORD, which I sent unto them by my servants the prophets, rising up early and sending them; but ye would not hear, saith the LORD.� (Jeremiah 29:17-19)

�� Judgment Upon Zionism

History has demonstrated how accurately these peophecies have been fulfilled in the life of the Jews. Turning agan to Ezekiel, we find that after prophesying of the return of the House of Israel to their land, he declares concerning those who would undertake to dispossess israel of her inheritance as the Zionists are doing today:

�But AS FOR THEM WHOSE HEART WALKETH AFTER THE HEART OF THEIR DETESABLE THINGS AND THEIR ABOMINATIONS, I WILL RECOMPENSE THEIR WAY UPON THEIR OWN HEADS SAITH THE LORD GOD.� (Ezekiel 11:21)

Ferrar Fenton renders this:

��But to those who proceed after their corrupt and depraved hearts, I will bring their own course on their heads,� says the Mighty Lord.�

Moffatt translates this:

�But as for these others, who are devoted to their loathsome practices and destestable impieties, I will make them suffer for their conduct, says the Lord the Eternal.�

The contrast presented between the House of Israel and those who are undertaking to lay claim to the land of Israel, and in doing so dispossess the House of Israel of their inheritance, is very marked. The House of Israel is represented as being a Christian people at that time, while the usurpers of their inheritance are shown to be addicted to corrupt and perverted methods. In their desire to secure to corrupt and pervertedmethods. In their desire to secure control in Palestine, the Jews have committed atrocities and massacred many Arabs. Rev. E.J. Spingett of Toronto, Canada summed up their activies in that land in one terse sentence when he said:

�The State of Israeli was conceived in fraud, borne in deceit, and lives by violence.�

�� Promised Retribution

Through Ezekiel God has declared that he will visit upon them the type of suffering thye have been instrumnental in bringing upon others. Therefore, as the climax of the age approaches, we can expect to see terrible suffering come upon the Jews who have gathered together in Palestine.

Let the fact not be overlooked, however, that many of the Jews who are today laing claim to the Holy Land, and who are known to the world at large as Jews, are not Israelites by descent nor by faith but are atheistic Communists who have set up their control over Palestine. It is no wonder, then, that ghrough His prophet Ezekiel God refers to them as devoted to loathsome practices and are detestable impieties. The Christian world has faied utterly to recognize these Scriptural facts and many sincere but unthinking Christian men and women are undertaking to support the Jews in their unlawful calims to a right to possess Palestine. The land does not belong to them for God has already assigned it to the House of Israel. The present Judeo-Christians who support the false claims of the Zinoists results from a failure to investigate the true nature of what is happening in Palestin as every Christian should since his own spiritual welfare is vitally concerned in this matter at this criticlal time in the world�s history. Actually Christians are assisting in the establishment of the Abomination That Maketh Desolate in their preseen support of Zionism, as we shall reaily recognize in our future stdy of this subject.

�� Israel Revolts

Continuing the history of Gods people from the time of the establishement of the Throne of David, when God selected his family out of the tribe of Judah to exercise kingly prerogatives, we find both the House of Judah and the House of Israel eventually united uder King David. The unity of this administration continued under David�s son Solomon, but when Solomon�s son Rehoboam came to the Throne, following the death of Solomon, he offended the House of Israel.

This precipitated the revolt of the House of Israel from under the rule of the House of David and they set up their own capital at Samaria. From that day forward the House of Israel and the House of Judah remianed separate and, becasue Rehoboam kenw that the blessings of the Kingdom followed the sons of Joseph, who received the brithright, he realized that the Kingdom had been separated from the House of David:

�And when all Israel saw that the king would not hearken unto them, the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David? And we have none inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man to your tents, O Israel: and now, David, see to thine own house. So all Israel went to their tents...And Israel rebelled against the house of David unto this day. And when Rehoboam was come to Jerusalem, he gathered of the house of Judah and Benjamin an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen men, which were warriors, to fight against Israel, that HE MIGHT BRING THE KINGDOM AGAIN TO REHOBOAM.� (2 Chronicles 10:16-19, 11:1)

�� Kingdom Taken From David

The Lord sent word through a prophet to Rehoboam that he was not to make war aganst Israel, for the Lord declared that �this division was from Him.� The King obeyed and from then on only the tribe of Benjamin and the House of Judah remained loyal to the House of David up to the time of the aptivities. Thus was fufilled the prophecy that Ahijah the Prophet made to Jeroboam concerning the Kingdom, which was to be taken from Solomon�s son:

�But I will take the kingdom of his son�s hand and will give it unto thee (Jeroboam), even ten tribes. And unto his son will I give on tribe (Benjamin), that David mty servant may have a light alway before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there.� (1 Kings 11:35-36)

�� Benjamin Remained

Ten tribes were given outrught to Jeroboam but one Kingdom tribe (Benjamin) was to remain at Jerusalem for the time being. Benjamin, in the providence of God, elected to remain with the House of David and was numbered with the House of Judah until the time of the crucifixion of Christ. It was from this tribe, then called Galileans, that our Lord chose His disciples with the exceptin of the one who betrayed Him. With the crucifixion the brotherhood between Israel and Judah was broken as Zechariah had prophesied it would be when our Lord was sold for thirty pieces of silver. (Zechariah 11:12-14()

The Galileans, or Benjamites, accepted the redemptive work of Christ and, having become Christians, carried the light westward to the Isles of the sea (the British Isles). The House of David had already gone before them to the Isles by that time and, when the reunion of all the Kingdom tribes came about, Israel and the House of David in the Isles became acquainted with the work of redemptin by Christ, Israel�s Redeemer.

�� The Captivities

The House of Israel forsook the Lord and went into idolatry and for this reason God allowed them to be taken away into Assyrian captivity (740-720 B.C.)

�� The Second Invasion

The Second invasion is recorded in 2 Kings 15:29. This occurred in the reign of Pekah, and was prosecuted by Tiglath-pileser.

Here is the record:

�In the days of Pekah king of Israel came Tiglath‑pileser king of Assyria, and took Ijon, and Abel‑beth‑ma'achah, and Jonoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria.

30�� And Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and smote him, and slew him, and reigned in his stead ...� (2 Kings 15:29-30)

�� Causes of the Invasion

What were the circumstances that led up to this invasion? Towards the end of his reign Pekah in alliance with Rezin, king of Syria, made an attack upon Judah, 2 Kings 15:37, 16:5 and Isaiah 7:2. Ahaz had succeeded to the throne of Judah on the death of his father Jotham. These allied kings for some reason conceived the idea of conquering Judah, of dethroning the new king Ahaz, and of setting the son of Tabeal on the throne of Judah.

It was at this time that the term �Jews� first appears in the Bible, 2 Kings 16:6. It covered all the people of the kingdom of Judah, composed of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin and all the Levites, and no other tribes. The next mention of the name �Jew� occurs in the reign of Hezekiah (son of Ahaz), when Sennacherib (son of Sargon) invaded Judah (2 Kings 18:26, 28). (And the first time the word is mentioned it is about a people who are at war with Israel)

The prophet Isaiah assured king Ahaz that the project of these allied kings, whom he designated as �these smoking firebrands,� would not succeed. It was on this occasion that he uttered the notable prophecy against Israel, stating the time of her down fall.

�Within three score and five years shall Ephraim be broken that it be not a people.� (Isaiah 7:8)

Ahaz, in spite of the prophet�s assurance that the purpose of the two kings should not stand or come to pass, was thoroughly alarmed, and called in Tiglath-pileser to his assistance (2 Kings 16:7). He humbled himself exceedingly and sent to the Assyrians all the gold and silver on which he could lay hands. Tiglath-pileser thereupon marshaled his forces against Syria and Israel. He conquered Syria and slew Rezin, and then turned upon Israel.

His campaign is clearly outlined in the above account. He invaded the northern region of the land, coming down south to the level of the Sea of Galilee, where he turned eastwards and invaded the eastern portion of Israel, Transjordania, which reached southward nearly to the level of the Dead Sea. This was the extent of the second invasion of Israel. The date of it was about 741 B.C.

It is noteworthy that the tribe of Dan is never mentioned in these accounts whilst the other tribes are named. The northern Danites should have been the first to feel the Assyrian impact. They were not there, and are believed to have migrated by sea to avoid the foreseen Assyrian menace.

�� The Deportation of Captives

Now occurred the first deportation of Israel from the conquered regions. The number of the captives taken is not mentioned. They were removed �to Assyria:� their exact location is not told us in this account, but from the parallel narrative in 1 Chronicles we find that it was to the same regions where the subsequent deportations were settled, namely, Hala, Habor, Hara and the river Gozan. It must have been a great host for the Assyrian king in his Inscriptions says: �All of its people together with their goods I carried off to Assyria.�

�� The Parallel Account of

�� The Second Invasion

Another account of this invasion is found in 1 Chronicles 5:26:

26). And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tiglath‑pilsener king of Assyria, and he carried them away, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and brought them unto Halah, and Habor, and Hara, and to the river Gozan, unto this day.

From this account it might appear that the invasion was by two separate kings; but it adds that �he carried them away,� showing that they were one and the same person. As mentioned above Pul assumed the second name.

This narrative mentions no number of the captives, but their precise location in Assyria is given. It also states that they were there �unto this day,� indicating that at the time of writing the Book of Chronicles, which was long years after this event, these captives had not returned to Judah with the partial return of the Judeans from their captivity in Babylon as some would fain have us believe.

In these first two invasions of Israel were fulfilled Isaiah�s words:

1). Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations. (Isaiah 9:1)

At the end of this invasion, Pekah, king of Israel, was murdered by Hoshea, who seized the throne. Hoshea was recognized as the lawful king by Tiglath-pileser, and was made to pay tribute to the Assyrians.

�� Assyrian Inscriptions Concerning

�� The Second Invasion

In �The ancient Records of Assyria and Babylon,� by D.D. Luckenbill, p. 292, there are two inscriptions given of the invasion:

�The cities of ... Gala�za, Abilkka, which are on the border of Bit-Humria ... the whole land of Naphtali, in its entirety, I brought within the border of Assyria. My official I set over them as governor ...

And again:

�The land of Bit-Humria ... all of its people together with all their goods I carried off to Assyria. Pakaha their kind they deposed, and I placed Ausi as king. Ten talents of gold, ten talents of silver, as their tribute I received from them, and to Assyria I carried them.�

Pakaha was the Assyrian for Pekah, and Ausi for Hoshea. These inscriptions are of value because they completely corroborate the statements of God�s Word.

It is obvious that neither the Jezreel nor the Lo-Ruhamah prophecies of Hosea were fulfilled at this time: nor was Isaiah�s Three Score and Five Years prophecy fulfilled now, in fact it had only just been uttered.

�� The Third Invasion

The Third Invasion of Israel was by the Emperor Shalmaneser, whose commander-in-chief was Sargon. It took place in the sixth year of Hoshea.

There are some who suggest that Shalmaneser made two invasions. The first of these mentioned in 2 Kings 17:3, where it says:

3). Against him came up Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, and Hoshea became his servant, and gave him presents.

The second in verse 5 of the same chapter:

5). Then the king of Assyria came up throughout all the land, and went up to Samaria and besieged it three years.

Whatever the truth may be concerning this point, it is the so-called second one that is of supreme importance, and the first is ignored by all, and both are generally regarded as only one.

This third Invasion was most disastrous, for it terminated the kingdom of Israel in Palestine. Here is the whole account of it:

2 Kings 17:3‑5:

3). Against him came up Shalmaneser king of Assyria; and Hoshea became his servant, and gave him presents.

4). And the king of Assyria found conspiracy in Hoshea: for he had sent messengers to So king of Egypt, and brought no present to the king of Assyria, as he had done year by year: therefore the king of Assyria shut him up, and bound him in prison.

5). Then the king of Assyria came up throughout all the land, and went up to Samaria, and besieged it three years.

This campaign began about 723 B.C., and ended in 721.

The refusal of Hoshea to continue to pay to Shalmaneser the annual tribute exacted by Assyria was the cause of this invasion; and to this was added the fact that Hoshea had appealed to Egypt for assistance; a very serious matter for Assyrian ambitions and foreign policy. Shalmaneser somehow made Hoshea a prisoner, and began hostilities. He overran the land and laid siege to the capital. It is strange to realize that during this campaign the king of Israel was a prisoner in the hands of the enemy.

Whether other cities were taken, and captives carried away is not recorded in the Bible; such events would not be known to the State Recorder shut up in the beleaguered capital. There are no monumental records of the campaign by Shalmaneser extant. It is said that all such, if any, were destroyed by Sargon: but this os not relevant to our subject.

Sayce in his book, �Assyria, its Princes, Priests and People,� p. 48, shows that Shalmaneser died, or was murdered, a year before Samaria fell, and that it was Sargon who actually completed its reduction. This fact is not recorded in the Bible for the simple reason that the State Recorder of Israel, shut up in Samaria, would not have been aware of such events, and would have no opportunity of writing them after the fall of the city, because he, with all the officials and inhabitants, was carried away captive to Assyria. For the same reason he could not have recorded the actual fall of the city, or state the number of the captives carried away into Assyria, or their location in that land. All such information must come from other sources.

�� The Deportation, The Orthodox View

From reading 2 Kings 17 it has been universally understood (1) that the Israelites were all deported after the fall of Samaria to Assyria:

(2) that the entire nation was then removed out of God�s sight because it states that only Judah was left behind in the land:

(3) that Shalmaneser was the Assyrian king who performed this wholesale deportation:

(4) that it was Shalmaneser who brought in all the various Gentile (non-Israelite) tribes mentioned in verse 24 to repopulate the land thus denuded of Israelites.

�� Objections to the Orthodox View

These points need careful examination. Against these commonly held views there are several adverse considerations.

A). If Israel was indeed entirely removed from the land upon the fall of Samaria, �the Three Score and Five Years� prophecy by Isaiah entirely failed and was not true. In 721 B.C., when Samaria fell, only twenty of the sixty-five years had elapsed, there were yet another forty-five to run before �Ephraim shall be broken that it be not a people.� Hence it is evident that Israel at this time was not entirely cast out of Palestine.

B). Shalmaneser could not have been the Assyrian king who effected the wholesale deportation of Israel. He, as we have seen, died n the third year of the siege, he did not live to see the end of the invasion or to return to Assyria. It seems impossible that he carried away any captives at all.

C). Much less could he have brought in those Gentile (non�Israelite) hordes into the land of Israel. The Bible does not tell who �the king of Assyria� was who did this filling of the land with these aliens. It has been presumed that it was the king whose name is last mentioned in the chapter, namely Shalmaneser, but this is a gratuitous assumption without foundation.

In all fairness it should here be mentioned that Josephus states that it was Shalmaneser who did all this. In his �Antiquities� Book 9 and Chapter 13, he writes:

�This conquest proved wholly destructive of the kingdom of Israel, Hosea being made a prisoner, and his subjects being transplanted to Media in Persia, and replaced by people whom Shalmaneser caused to be removed from the border of Chuthah, a river in Persia for setting in the land of Samaria.�

Shalmaneser, had he not died, could not have moved Israel into Media, because Media at that time did not belong to the Assyrian empire: it was only conquered and taken by Assyria some years later, whereupon many of the Israel captives were removed thither as attested by the inscriptions of Sargon.

Josephus takes the prevalent view and puts a name to the unnamed �king of Assyria.�

�� Deportation by Sargon

It has been argued that, if it were not Shalmaneser who effected these changes, it was Sargon his successor, who did so and that he was the unnamed �king of Assyria� of verse 24. It was Sargon who captured Samaria; whether he destroyed the city is not stated, he probably did not; but the city does not seem to be mentioned again after that date.

Sargon, however, was not the king who removed the entire nation of Israel from Palestine. He himself witnesses to this. He states that he removed THE INHABITANTS of Samaria to Assyria, which is a very different matter; he gives the number of his captives as 27,280 persons, a goodly number considering the fighting and the length of the siege. His Inscription states:

�In the beginning of my reign the city of Samaria I besieged, I captured...27,280 of its inhabitants I carried away.�

It is therefore certain that Sargon did not remove the entire nation. He was not the king of Assyria who removed Israel out of God�s sight, and he was not the one who brought in the mass of the Gentiles (non-Israelites) mentioned in verse 24.

Did Sargon bring in any aliens at all? The Bible gives no answer to this question, but such was the invariable practice of the Assyrian conquerors. One of his inscriptions tells that he did bring in foreigners, and reads:

�The conqueror of the Thamudites, the Ibadidites, the Marsiminites and the Khapaijans, the remainder of whom was carried away, and whom he transported to the midst of the land of Beth-Omri.�

This shows that he did so. How great this importation was does not transpire. Were they only enough to re-people the city of Samaria or more?

On comparing the peoples mentioned with those enumerated in 2 Kings 17:24, they do not appear to be the same peoples, which goes to confirm the conviction that it was not Sargon who imported the tribes mentioned in verse 24, for these came from Babylon, Cuthah, Ava, Hamath and Sepharvaim. These the king of Assyria �placed in the cities of Samaria, and they possessed Samaria and dwelt in the cities thereof.� Note that �Samaria� here refers to the land and not to the city of Samaria.

At the time of the capture of Samaria the Jezreel prophecy of Hosea �I will cause to cease the kingdom of the house of Israel� was fulfilled. But his Lo-Ruhamah prophecy, �I will utterly take them away,� was not yet fulfilled. Nor was Isaiah�s Three Score and Five Years prophecy fulfilled: the fulfillment was due forty-five years from this date.

�� The Last Entry in the Israel State Records

The Official Records of the kingdom of Israel ceased with the fall of the kingdom. What was the last entry in the Records? It was 2 Kings 17:5:

5). Then the king of Assyria came up throughout all the land, and went up to Samaria, and besieged it three years.

For reasons already given, all that follows was by another hand at a later date.

The statement in the Bible concerning the taking of the city is given in the next verse, and reads:

6). In the ninth year of Hoshea the king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes.

The words �and in the cities of the Medes� are important as indicating the time when these words were written. They prove that this verse was not written at the time of the fall of Samaria in 721, but at earliest several years afterwards. The captives were not at once put into the cities of the Medes, for the simple reason that Media in 721 did not belong to the Assyrians, but they were moved thither after Sargon had invaded and conquered Media. These words were probably written long years afterwards by Ezra.

�� Additional Information

The verses subsequent to this vers 6 do not continue a narrative: they do not tell the story following the fall of Samaria: they are not a history of that period: they proceed to give a review or summary of the whole history of the kingdom, telling of the sad declension of Israel from the Worship and Laws of Yahweh. They do not read like a record made at the time of the fall of Samaria, but like those of a commentator of a much later period. They review, from a religious standpoint, the Kingdom and the end of the kingdomless People.

This Review ends in the following words:

18). Therefore the LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only.

19). Also Judah kept not the commandments of the LORD their God, but walked in the statutes of Israel which they made.

20). And the LORD rejected all the seed of Israel, and afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of spoilers, until he had cast them out of his sight.

21). For he rent Israel from the house of David; and they made Jeroboam the son of Nebat king: and Jeroboam drave Israel from following the LORD, and made them sin a great sin.

22). For the children of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam which he did; they departed not from them;

23). Until the LORD removed Israel out of his sight, as he had said by all his servants the prophets. So was Israel carried away out of their own land to Assyria unto this day.

This is a most important statement. Four points at least call for special notice.

(1). The expression removed �out of His sight� is considered, in the case of God�s chosen people, to mean being cast out of the Holy Land on which the eyes of the Almighty ever rested. For we are told in Deuteronomy 11:12:

12). A land which the Lord thy God careth for: the eyes of the Lord thy God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year.�

This same expression concerning Israel is used by Jeremiah as a warning to the house of Judah. For we find in Jeremiah 7:12‑15:

12). But go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh, where I set my name at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel...

14). Therefore will I do unto this house, which is called by my name, wherein ye trust, and unto the place which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I have done to Shiloh.

15). And I will cast you out of my sight, as I have cast out all your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim.

(2) It is quite clear that these words were NOT written upon the fall of Samaria because of what is said about Judah, that �Judah kept not the commandments of the Lord their God.�

This we recognize was no true description of Judah at the period under consideration. Hezekiah was king of Judah at the time, and in no reign did Judah so steadfastly keep the commandments of God. Nor was it true in the days of Josiah, but it was a very true description of Judah after the death of Josiah. Hence this statement was made long years after 721. The whole statement points to its being the word of Ezra.

(3) The words, �So was Israel carried away out of their own land to Assyria UNTO THIS DAY,� also makes it certain that this account was not written upon the fall of Samaria, for the simple reason that Israel was not all carried away in 721, for we read of a remnant in the land as late as the time of Josiah. Therefore it could only have been true after the days of that king. This again points to the period of Ezra.

(4) From this passage it is evident that between the reign of Josiah and the time of this statement the entire Israel population had been cast out of their own land. The words admit of no alternative.

�The Lord ... removed them out of His sight�...

�Until He had cast them out of His sight�...

�Until the Lord removed Israel out of His sight�...

And to leave no doubting as to the meaning:

�THERE WAS NONE LEFT BUT THE TRIBE OF JUDAH ONLY.�

surely this is conclusive and final.

Who should know the situation better than Ezra? In the face of this emphatic pronouncement any present day opinions are valueless.

�� Reference to Israel

�� In The Judah Records

Our knowledge of the Israelites in the land after the fall of their kingdom is at best but scanty. With the extinction of the kingdom there was an end of all State records; the government and rule had passed into Assyrian hands, and there was no one in Israel to write the history of the tributary people. It can only be gained either from the records of the kingdom of Judah, or from secular history of the epoch.

The kingdom of Judah continued to exist for a hundred and thirty-three years after the downfall of the kingdom of Israel. During those long years Judah�s State Records were carefully kept, until this kingdom in turn was destroyed in 587 B.C. It is in these records that we may expect to find, as we actually do, occasional allusions to Israel still in the land of Samaria, which it must be remembered had then become a portion of the Assyrian empire. Such allusions are only made in so far as they concerned the Judah kingdom, they are scanty enough and in no way purport to be a history of Israel.

There are at least three such references in the Bible:

(1) The first is one concerning the siege and fall of Samaria, mentioned in 2 Kings 18:9-12, where we are informed that the siege began in the fourth year of Hezekiah�s reign, and that the city was captured in his sixth year: and further that the captives were transported to Assyria.

(2) A second reference is cited by Dr. Dimont from 2 Chronicles 30 and 31 as evidence that after the fall of Samaria there were many Israelites left in their land after the deportation by Sargon. These chapters give an account of the great Passover held in Jerusalem by Hezekiah, to which he invited the Israelites, most of whom rejected the invitation with scorn, while very many accepted and attended the Feast.

This so-called �evidence� is examined further on.

(3) A third allusion is made to the remnant of Israel still found in the land of Samaria in the reign of Josiah, recorded in 2 Chronicles 34. This tells of the religious revival brought about by this godly young king of Judah, and of a Passover he subsequently held, to which he invited the remnant of Israel, who responded and attended the feast. This is proof that there were some Israelites in their own land in the time of Josiah.

This king not only purged Judah of her heathen altars, groves, high places and molten and carved images, but he did the same work in the land of Samaria, territory under Assyrian rule. It seems amazing that a king of Judah was permitted to do so. The Assyrian governor probably cared little what was done in religious matters so long as it did not affect his government and tribute.

It is clear from the Scriptures that there were Israelites in their own land long after the fall of their kingdom, all of which is in strict accord with the prophecies.

This concludes our study of the Invasions and Deportations as recorded in the Scriptures. There is yet another invasion and deportation to be considered which is not fully told in the Bible.

�� The Fourth Invasion

This Fourth Invasion is not given in the Second Book of Kings. It is briefly told in the Second Book of Chronicles, which, as already stated, deals only with the history of Judah. The Bible does not definitely tell us of the effect it had upon Israel. The Israelites naturally could give no account of it themselves.

�� Esar-Haddon�s Invasion of Palestine

The invading king was Esar-Haddon. Though his name is not given in the Scripture narrative we know from Assyrian inscriptions that he was the emperor who made the invasion, which can be read in the Encyclopedia Brattanica.

This invasion of Palestine was but a part in the great campaign. It took place about 676 B.C., a time when the Israel nation had no king of their own, in fact, it was forty-five years after the fall of Samaria when the kingdom ceased. During these years Israel had been ruled by an Assyrian governor.

It may hardly be correct to speak of it as an invasion of Israel. It was really an invasion of Judah, who had hitherto withstood the efforts of Assyria to subdue here.

�� A Previous Invasion of Judah

It will be remembered that Sennacherib, some seven years after the fall of Samaria, had made a great effort to conquer the Judah kingdom, but Judah at the last moment was saved by the direct interposition of Yahweh. For though Sennacherib devastated Judea, took fenced cities and carried away a great host of captives, yet he was not able to capture Jerusalem. He was compelled to retire to Assyria with a depleted army that had well night been annihilated by a devastating plague, thus was Judah delivered out of the hand of Assyria, and her territory remained intact.

The Sennacherib inscriptions assert that he took forty-six fenced cities and removed some 200,150 captives, whom he placed in the same regions whither the captives of Israel had all been transported by previous emperors. Thus to the captives of Israel were added a great number from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and of the Levites.

Esar-Haddon, however, now succeeded in doing what his father had failed to do. He conquered Judea, and took Manasseh and its king captive and sent him away a prisoner in chains to Babylon. The brief narrative is in 2 Chronicles 33:11:

11). Wherefore the LORD brought upon them the captains of the host of the king of Assyria, which took Manasseh among the thorns, and bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon.

Here again we have another verse that speaks of a �King of Assyria� without the mention of his name. But from secular history we know that it was Esar-Haddon.

In his captivity Manasseh repented of his evil ways and turned to the God of ISRAEL, and later he was released and reinstated once more as king of Judah, and the kingdom continued till its destruction in 587 B.C., by Nebuchadnezzar.

There is no explanation why Judah was not annexed by Esar-Haddon. Further it would appear that no Israelite captives were deported.

�� Non-Israelites Settled

�� In The Land of Samaria

It was after this campaign that Esar-Haddon brought in foreigners into the land of Samaria, which hitherto had been occupied by Israel. In accord with the accepted policy of the Assyrian kings Esar-Haddon removed the Israelites, and into their emptied land made a wholesale importation of non-Israelites.

These various alien tribes were in time blended into one people in the land, and were therefore called Samaritans. They themselves, as we shall see later on, made no claim whatever to be Israelites; they openly confessed that they were foreigners, who had been forcibly settled in that land, and this by Esar-Haddon. Some years later there were still other non-Israelites brought in by Asnapper (Ezra 4:10). This last king is identified with Assurbani-pul, the son of Esar-Haddon.

The great influx of non-Israelites was after this Fourth invasion and recorded in 2 Kings 17:24:

24). And the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children of Israel: and they possessed Samaria, and dwelt in the cities thereof.

We have already seen that this unnamed �king of Assyria� could not have been Shalmaneser or Sargon, and that he must have been Esar-Haddon. The statement that they were placed in the cities of Samaria �instead of Israel� implies a great deportation of Israelites, and that Israel was no longer �a People� in Palestine.

�� Fulfillment of Two Prophecies

Two prophecies ran out at this time:

(1) Isaiah�s prophecy of The Three Score and Five Years; �shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.�

(2) Hosea�s Lo-Ruhamah prophecy: �I will utterly take them away.�

And yet, even after this wholesale removal of the Israel population, there were still some Israelites left behind, because we read of some being present there in the reign of Josiah, who reigned in Judah some years after Esar-Haddon�s invasion.

But Jeremiah who wrote at a later time stated that in his day Israel had been removed out of God�s sight, �even the whole seed of Ephraim.� (Jeremiah 7:15)

�� Josiah�s Reform

�� In The Land of Samaria

Bearing in mind this removal of the nation and its replacement by imported non-Israelites, attention must be drawn to the reforms undertaken there by Josiah. It has already been noted that this godly young king of Judah not only purged Judea of idolatry, but that he carried this work into the land of Samaria, the old home of the Israelites, which was then Assyrian territory. People usually think of Josiah doing this task amongst the Israelites. But was this really so?

Was it not also amongst the new comers into the land, amongst the mass of the new population of the heathens? These new Samaritans all worshiped their various racial gods and at the same time sacrificed to �The God of the land,� the God of ISRAEL. At the beginning of their dwelling there they feared not the Lord; but when they were plagued by lions, they requested the king of Assyria, who had placed them there, to send them a priest from among the captives of Israel to teach them �the manner of the God of the land.� (2 Kings 17:25) so they worshiped their own gods and sacrificed to the God of ISRAEL. This was the very plea that they urged upon Ezra in later years. (Ezra 4:2) It was amongst this people that Josiah carried out the work of breaking down their images, altars and shrines, and also of course the heathen altars that Israel had previously set up.

�� Examination of Contrary Views

We are now in a position to examine the arguments of those who deny that the Bible gives any countance to the idea that the nation of Israel was wholly removed out of Palestine.

The final statement of the Scriptures on this point is related in 2 Kings 17:18, 23:

18). Therefore the LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only...

23). Until the LORD removed Israel out of his sight, as he had said by all his servants the prophets. So was Israel carried away out of their own land to Assyria unto this day.

Dr. H.L. Goudge, Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Oxford, in his booklet entitled, �The British Israel Theory� on page 88 writes, �First, there is not a particle of evidence that there were ever any lost tribes in the British Israel sense.�

This is an amazing statement; it is not documented and no proof either from Scripture or Assyrian inscriptions is given in support of the assertion, which precludes detailed examination. Suffice it to say that the term �lost� in reference to Israel is found in the marginal reading of Isaiah 17:13, in the Revised Version.

Dr. C.T. Dimont, Principal of Salisbury Theological College and Chancellor of the Diocese, says that there were no lot tribes; that all the Israelites were not carried away into Assyria; that only some twenty thousand old in all were removed, a negligible number of the population of Israel. Here are his exact words: In his pamphlet �the Legend of British Israel,� on page 5 he writes:

�The British cannot be the descendants of the Lost Ten Tribes because no such body of lost tribes exists or ever existed. The assertion that all the Ten Northern Tribes were carried away to Assyria is contrary to Scripture and to the testimony of the monuments. Sargon, the king of Assyria, says that he carried away from Israel 27,290 captives�

He states here that the complete deportation of the nation is contrary (1) to the Scriptures, and (2) to the Monuments

He then proceeds to give his evidence, which needs or careful examination.

�� The Testimony of the Monuments

Dr. Dimont adduces two passages of Scripture to prove that the whole nation was never carried away. He, however, wholly ignores at least one important one that refutes his contention, a proceeding which renders void his conclusions; the most important evidence from Scripture is not produced.

With regard to the subject of Scripture Evidence, it ought not to be necessary to point out that statements of fact apply, unless otherwise clearly stated, only to the time in which they were uttered or written, and that they do not necessarily describe the position of affairs of a much later date.

Few will hold that all the Ten Tribes were carried away at the time of Sargon, because, as Dr. Dimont points out, the wholesale transportation of Israel in 721 B.C., is contrary to Scripture, because there were Israelites still in their land in the reigns of Hezekiah and of Josiah. But he ignores statements in later Scriptures describing later conditions. There can be no real contradiction in these various statements; they were made at different times, and each was absolutely true at the time it was made.

Dr. Dimont contents himself with these two statements made concerning Israel, and no other. but surely the whole of the evidence should be considered before pronouncing a verdict.

The whole crux of the question turns upon the fixing of dates.

(1) Samaria fell in 721 B.C., and there WERE Israelites left in the land at that time. There is no doubt that Sargon�s testimony that he only removed 27,280 was perfectly true.

(2) There were Israelites still in the land in the reign of Hezekiah king of Judah, who reigned from 726 to 697 B.C.

(3) Some Israelites were still found there at a later period, in the time of Josiah, who began to reign in 677 B.C. This is the last information given about Israel in the Judah records.

(4) What was the date of the statement that tells of Israel�s being utterly carried away into Assyria out of God�s sight, and that only Judah remained behind?

�So was Israel carried away out of their own land unto this day.� What date was �this day?� The date of its writing was the time of Ezra. The earliest possible date 561 B.C., the latest being 536 B.C., the time of Judah�s captivity in Babylon.

It should be remembered that there was a considerable lapse of time between the fall of Samaria and the days of Ezra, about two hundred years. A good many things could have happened, and certainly one event of great importance did happen, in that period, though there was no historian in Israel to record the happenings.

Dr. Dimont cannot be ignorant that the invasion of Israel by Shalmaneser and Sargon was not the last invasion of the Holy Land by Assyria. He cannot have forgotten that there was a great invasion of Palestine by the emperor Esar-Haddon, about 676 B.C., as testified by the Monuments. Anybody can read about it in the Encyclopedia Britannica. Yet he entirely ignores this testimony as if it had no bearing on the question under consideration, and his readers are sorely misled. Surely all the relevant evidence should be adduced to arrive at a right conclusion.

Events had occurred which made the state of affairs very different from what they were in the bygone days of Sargon and his inscription; and different from what obtained in the days of Hezekiah.

The bible gives no direct account of Esar-Haddon�s invasion as far as Israel is concerned, but the history of Judah tells of it, because the campaign sorely affected the kingdom of Judah. (2 Chronicles 33:11)

The bible also at a much later date refers back to this invasion, and shows how it affected Israel. (Ezra 4:2)

It is strange that anyone should think that the state of affairs which existed in 721 B.C., and which then was correctly described, must remain unaltered by the changes during the stirring times of the ensuing century. Was no change possible or probable? Changes did take place which made the statement �so was Israel carried away out of their land to Assyria unto this day� absolutely true.

Esar-Haddon effected a radical change in population of the land of Israel, he removed Israel and replaced them by non-Israelites. Thus filling the land with foreigners and is referred to in Ezra 4:1-2:

1). Now when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the children of the captivity builded the temple unto the LORD God of Israel;

2). Then they came to Zerubbabel, and to the chief of the fathers, and said unto them, Let us build with you: for we seek your God, as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto him since the days of Esar-Haddon king of Assur, which brought us up hither.

Two points need consideration here:

1). These Samaritans did not claim that they were Israelites.

2). They definitely stated that they were foreigners, the peoples whom the Assyrians had brought into the lands in the reign of Esar-Haddon. They tell us emphatically who they were and by whom they were imported thither. They do not mention Shalmaneser or Sargon as having done so. It is clear therefore that the wholesale importation of Samaritans was AT THE TIME OF and BY Esar-Haddon. There were no Israelites there at that time, but only these imported non-Israelites, whom the Jews always regarded as such, and with whom they would nave no dealing. The Jews would have rejected these advances with much more contempt had they been made by Israelites.

It was the invariable practice and policy of the Assyrian monarchs to remove conquered peoples wholesale from their conquered lands and settle them in the distant parts of the empire, and to repopulate the evacuated lands with people from other districts. A policy which led eventually to the undoing of that empire.

The non-Israelite tribes imported into Samaria were those who are mentioned in 2 Kings 17:24. But even at this period Esar-Haddon had not removed the last vestige of Israel, for some were still found in the land in the reign of Josiah, who was king of Judah some years after this invasion.

The statement made by Jeremiah, which has already been quoted above, has a bearing on the deportation of Israel from Palestine. It was written after the days of Josiah, before the final destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. How did he regard the position of Israel at that time? Speaking to Judah, he gave God�s message as:

15). And I will cast you out of My sight as I have cast out ALL your brethren, even the WHOLE seed of Ephraim. (Jeremiah 7:15)

The words �I have cast out all your brethren� points to a complete removal of Israel from their land; and this is emphasized by the added words, �even the whole seed of Ephraim.� Hence even before the Babylonian captivity there were no Israelites left, the whole nation had been carried away.

Here it may be objected, how could this remnant of Israel living in their own land in the days of Josiah have been removed into Assyria so as to make Jeremiah�s statement a true word. Who could have effected it and when? The Bible gives no direct answer: but it does tell us that Asnapper, king of Assyria (identified with Assurbani-pul, son of Esar-Haddon) who reigned after the time of Josiah, did bring into Israel�s land several non-Israelite tribes as recorded in Ezra 4:9-10. If he followed the traditional Assyrian policy, he must have located them in places from which he evacuated the Israel remnant. Here at least was a fitting opportunity for the complete removal of any remnant of Israel.

Thus there are three recorded Importations of non-Israelites with corresponding Deportations of Israel into and from the land of Israel.

1). By Sargon in 721 to replenish the Israelites whom he removed from Samaria.

2). The mass importation by Esar-Haddon in 676.

3). By Asnapper after Josiah�s time.

�� Review of the Evidence

To summarize:

(1) Sargon�s statement was quite truthful, and is exactly what happened at that time. It in no way contradicts the truth of the later bible statement made concerning a subsequent time.

(2) The fact that there were many Israelites in their land in the reign of Hezekiah is correct. It in no way contradicts the truth of the Bible statement made at a later date concerning a much later period, and it accords with prophecies on the subject.

(3) The fact that there were some Israelites in the land in the days of Josiah is perfectly true, but it does not necessarily contradict the truth of a later bible statement concerning a later date.

(4) The statement of Jeremiah only confirms the FINAL pronouncement of the Bible on the subject.

(5) The statement of the Samaritans to the returned captives of Judah also entirely corroborates the FINAL word of the bible as to the complete removal of the whole nation from Palestine.

Thus the evidence put forward by Dr. Dimont from the Monuments and from the Scriptures, when examined, I found to be no evidence at all against the fact that Israel was wholly removed from their land, but is rather in complete accord with the Bible statement.

One point more about the Scripture evidence given by Dr. Dimont. He says that the presence of the great number of Israelites at the great Passover held by King Hezekiah in Jerusalem is proof that Israel was never entirely carried away to Assyria upon the fall of Samaria.

Surely, Dr. Dimont must know that this incident has no bearing on the point. He must know that this Passover took place BEFORE the invasion of Israel by Shalmaneser, and still more years before the capture of Samaria by Sargon, and not after it.

The ordinary reader may be pardoned for thinking that this Passover was held after the downfall of the kingdom of Israel, because the reign of Hezekiah in the Bible is given after the reign of Hoshea. The observations made previously on the difficulties of editing two separate histories into one is here exemplified. The universal mistake of thus misdating the Passover is explainable. As a matter of fact, the early events of Hezekiah�s reign took place in the reign of Hoshea. These tow kings for several years were reigning at the same time, one in Judah and the other in Israel. The celebration of the Passover took place in the first year of Hezekiah, at which time Hoshea was reigning in Israel, and it was five years before the conquest of Israel. The presence of many Israelites at the feast therefore has nothing whatever to do with the situation of affairs after the fall of Samaria, and is no proof that the whole nation was not carried away.

That there were many Israelites in the land is a fact, but not on the evidence adduced by Dr. Dimont.

�� The Imported Non-Israelites

There are three distinct records of the importation of foreigners into the emptied land of Israel. Two of these are found in the Bible, while the other is recorded in the Assyrian inscription of Sargon.

That there were more such importations is not denied, because of what we know of the policy of the Assyrian conquests, but they are not recorded as far as can be discovered at this time. For instance, no one doubts that, after Tiglath-pileser carried away the Israelites from the extreme north and from Transjordania, he filled up the depopulated territory with peoples from distant regions as was the custom of Assyria: but this is not recorded.

The records of the three importations of aliens give a list of the nations or tribes thus brought in and settled in the land of Israel.

In passing, it may be stated here that, in the case of the deportations of the Israelites later by the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar, the depopulated land of Judea was never colonized by aliens, but remained empty till the return of some of the Israelites after seventy years captivity in Babylon.

The First and earliest of the three Groups is that which Sargon brought in after his capture of Samaria and the downfall of the kingdom of Israel in 721. As said above this lis is not recorded in the Bible.

The Second Group, which was by far the largest, was made by Esar-Haddon in 676, and the list of those nations so imported is that recorded in 2 Kings 17:24.

The Third Group was brought in later by Asnapper, the son of Esar-Haddon, and the list of these newcomers is given in Ezra 4:9.

The three Groups are quite distinct from one another: each represents groups of different nations. There was an interval of about forty-five years between Groups I and II, and several years between Groups II and III.

None of these Groups consisted wholly of one single nation. Each consisted of mixed peoples gathered from different regions. They were not a homogeneous crowd.

Further a Group did not consist of peoples of one religion; they did not all worship the same god, but gods many and lords many. This may be gathered from 2 Kings 17:30-31, where each nation had its own special object of worship.

Under such conditions they were powerless to combine or rebel against the suzereign power. Herein appears the astuteness of the Assyrian policy.

On the other hand all accounts of the deported Israelites tell of their settlement (at first at least) in one single large region, Hala, Harbor, Hara and the river Gozan; a fact which may be considered rather strange.

It was here that Tiglath-pileser placed the first captives of Israel in 741 B.C. It was here that Sargon brought the inhabitants of captured Samaria. But be it noted that, true to Assyrian policy, a few years later he broke up the unity of these captives by removing very many of them into the �cities of the Medes,� whom he had then conquered. Esau-Haddon moved Israel �into Assyria,� presumably to the same regions as the previous captives, though the exact locality is not mentioned.

We do not know what Asnapper did. All we know was that there were some Israelites in their land after Esar-Haddon�s time, and that his son brought Group III into the land; further that at a still later date, before the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, Jeremiah tells us that Israel, even the whole house of Ephraim, had been cast out of the land. The natural conclusion is that Asnapper had removed this remnant before he imported the non-Israelites of Group III. Ezra is clear that none of the chosen race was left in Palestine save Judah.

The House of Israel never returned to Palestine from the land of their captors but moved north and west from the land of Assyria in their trek toward the appointed place. Esdras speaks of this migration as follows:

�And whereas thou sawest that he gathered another peaceful multitude unto him; Those are the ten tribes, which were carried away prisoners out of their own land in the time of Osea the king, whom Salmanasar the king of Assyria led away captive, and he carried them ovre the waters, and so came they into another land. But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth ino a further country, where never mankind dwelt. That they mnight there keep their statutes, which the never kept in their own land. And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passags of the river. For the most High then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over. For through that country there was a great way to go, namely, of a yar and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth: Then dwelt they there until the later time.� (2 Esdras 13:39-46)

�� The Westward Trek

The latter days refer to the time following the birth and ministry of our Lord and, during the early period of the Christian era. Israel, then in central and Southern Europe, took up their westward trek again. Under different names we find the peoples moving ever westward toward the appointed place. Their king had proceeded them when the Royal line of David came to the Isles, Jeremiah being the agency, fulfilling his mission �to build and to plant.� Thus, the following prophecy by Micah was fulfilled:

�I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I wil put them together as the sheep of Bozrah, as the flock in the midst of their fold; they shall make great noise by reason of the multitude of men. The breaker is come up before them: they have borken up, and hav epassed through the gated, and aregone out by it: and their king shall pass before them, and the Lord on the head of them.� (Micah 2:12-13)

�� The Appointed Place

Nathan the Prophet informed David of the Appointed Place for the throne when the Lord declared through him:

�Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in A PLACE OF THEIR OWN, AND MOVE NO MORE; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime.� (2 Samuel 7:10)

We have this same promise and prophecy told with just a little difference in wording in:

�Also I WILL ORDAIN A PLACE FOR MY PEOPLE ISRAEL, AND WILL PLANT THEM, AND THEY SHALL DWELL IN THEIR PLACE, and shall be moved no more; neither shall the children of wickedness waste them any more, as at the beginning.� (1 Chronicles 17:9)

Isaiah prophesied:

�For the Lord will have mercy on Jacob, and WILL YET CHOOSE ISRAEL, AND ST THEM IN THEIR OWN LAND: and the strangers shall be joined with them and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob.� (Isaiah 14:1)

Again Isaiah stated:

�O Lord our God, other lords beside thee have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name. They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, and they shall not rise: therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish. Thou has increased the nation, O Lord, thou has increased the nation: thou art florified: THOU HADST REMOVED IT FAR UNTO ALL THE ENDS OF THE EARTH.� (Isaiah 26:13-15)

Jeremiah relates:

�And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I have driven them, and WILL BRING THEM AGAIN TO THEIR FOLDS; and they shall be fruitful and increase. And I will set up shephards over theim which shall feed them: and THEY SHALL FEAR NO MORE, nor be dismayed, neither shall they be lacking, saith the Lord. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a Kingshall reign and prosper, and shall eexecute judgment and justice ijn the earth.� (Jeremiah 23:3-8)

Ezekiel also related:

�And I WILL BRING THEM OUT FROM THE PEOPLE, AND GATHER THEM FROM THE COUNTRIES, AND WILL BRING THEM TO THEIR OWN LAND, and feed them upon the mountains (nations) of Israel by the rivers, and in al lthe inhabited places of the country.� (Ezekiel 34:13)

Again Ezekiel says:

�And say unto them, thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I WILL TAKE THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL FROM AMONG THE HEATHEN, WITHER THEY BE GONE, AND WILL GATHER THEM ON EVERY SIDE, AND BRING THEM INTO THEIR OWN LAND: And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains (nations) 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 37:21-22)

Again Ezekiel relates:

�So the house of Israel shall know that I am the LORD their God from that day and forward. And the heathen shall know that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity: because they trespassed against me, therefore hid I my face from them, and gave them into the hand of their enemies: so fell they all by the sword. According to their uncleanness and according to their transgressions have I done unto them, and hid my face from them. Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Now will I bring again the captivity of Jacob, and have mercy upon the whole house of Israel, and will be jealous for my holy name; After that they have borne their shame, and all their trespasses whereby they have trespassed against me, when they dwelt safely in their land, and none made them afraid. When I have brought them again from the people, and gathered them out of their enemies' lands, and am sanctified in them in the sight of many nations; Then shall they know that I am the LORD their God, which cause them to be led into captivity among the heathen: but I HAVE GATHERED THEM UNTO THEIR OWN LAND, AND HAVE LEFT NONE OF THEM ANY MORE THERE.

Neither will I hide my face any more from them: for I have poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord GOD.� (Ezekiel 39:22-29)

During the long centuries which were consumed by the Israel peoples in their westward trek, as they moved from Asia into Europe and through southern and central Europe toward the Isles of the sea, the prophecy uttered by Hosea was also being fulfilled:

�For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod,and without teraphim: Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God and David their king; and shall fear the Lord and his gooness in the latter days.� (Hosea 3:4-5)

�� The Latter Days

When we remember that the latter days refer to the time designated in our claendar as A.D., i.e., in theyear of our Lord, and that it was not until then that His disciples were able to bring the knowledge of redemption to the Isles, it is significant that Israel should resume their trek toward this apointed place during the early days of the Christian era. This would bring them to the Isles in time to hear the early proclamation of the message of salvaton and redemption and there also they found the king of the House of David awaiting their coming. The House of Israel accepted christianity and thus fulfilled the intentions of God and prophesied by Jeremiah:

�And ye shall be my people, and I will be your God. Behold, the whirlwind of the LORD goeth forth with fury, a continuing whirlwind: it shall fall with pain upon the head of the wicked. The fierce anger of the LORD shall not return, until he have done it, and until he have performed the intents of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it. At the same time, saith the LORD, will I be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be my people. Thus saith the LORD, The people which were left of the sword FOUND GRACE IN THE WILDERNESS; EVEN ISRAEL, when I went to cause him to rest.� (Jeremiah 30:22-31:2)

Watchman Willie Martin Archive