13781963 the Mystery of the Gentiles Who Are They and Where Are They Now

8/13/2019 13781963 the Mystery of the Gentiles Who Are They and Where Are They Now

1/87

The Mystery of the GentilesWho are they and where are they now?

By Ted R. Weiland

Chapter 1

Setting the Stage

Nearly everyone enjoys a good mystery. Most of us can recall a book or movie thatcaptivated us from the opening sentence through the very last scene. This accounts for thepopularity of mysteries by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Agatha Christie and others. !et none of theseauthors" #orks compare to the mysteries presented in the book inspired by the greatest of allauthors. Scottish novelist and poet Sir $alter Scott claimed that the greatest mystery of all iscontained #ithin the %oly Scriptures&

$ithin that a#ful volume lies the mystery of mysteries'(

The greatest suspense novels pale in comparison #ith the mysteries found in the #ordsinspired by !ah#eh"s %oly Spirit) *)+!ah#eh, is the personal %ebre# name of the -od of theible./0&

1or my thoughts are not your thoughts neither are your #ays my #ays saith !ah#eh.))*))$here the Tetragrammaton !%$%2 the four %ebre# characters that represent thepersonal name of -od 2 has been incorrectly rendered the LORD or GODin Scripture 3have taken the liberty to correct this error by inserting Yahweh#here appropriate./0 1oras the heavens are higher than the earth so are my #ays higher than your #ays and mythoughts than your thoughts. 4 3saiah 55&678))) *)))All Scripture is 9uoted from the:ing ;ames ord?@ 4 omans ((&BB7B)))) *))))ortions of Scripture have been omitted forbrevity"s sake. 3f there are 9uestions regarding any passage please open your ibles andstudy the teEt to ensure that it has been properly used.0

!ah#eh embodies mysteries and distinctive #onders along #ith infinite concepts andprinciples that are beyond the finite capabilities of man to fully understand. 1or instance!ahshua"s virgin conception and %is dual divine and human nature are incomprehensible to thehuman mind and therefore can only be received by faith. ))))) *)))))Yahshua is the Fnglishtransliteration of our Savior"s %ebre# name./0

Moses declared that !ah#eh purposely concealed certain things but those %e does reveal

belong to us that #e might better serve %im&

The secret things belong unto !ah#eh our -od& but those things #hich are revealedbelong unto us and to our children for ever that #e may do all the #ords of this la#. 4Deuteronomy /8&/8

;ob B/&6 informs us that +the inspiration of the Almighty giveth ? understanding., !ah#ehhas given %is Spirit to Christians that they might kno# #hat is other#ise incomprehensible to


2/87

carnal man *( Corinthians /&G7(0. No man kno#s !ah#eh in %is fullness but that #hich can bekno#n of %im is revealed in %is $ord through %is Spirit.

There are enigmas in the ible that our finite minds are unable to comprehend fully. utthere are also mysteries #ithin that incredible book that !ah#eh has given us to solve 4 if #e are#illing to search for the clues&

3t is the glory of -od to conceal a thing& but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.4 roverbs /5&/

This book is devoted to one of the ible"s greatest mysteries 2 that of the oft7mentionedgentiles.) *)The #ord +gentiles, derived from the non7specific %ebre# +goyim, and -reek+ethne, should not be capitaliHed. Therefore the #ord +gentile, has been capitaliHed only #hen9uoting scripture or another source.0 These people #ho are ineEtricably bound #ith !ahshua theChrist are mentioned by the Apostle aul in conjunction #ith the mystery of Christ and inrelation to the mystery of 3srael"s blindness *Fphesians B&(7I Colossians (&/57/G ( Timothy B&(Iand omans ((&/57/I0. $ho are these gentiles and #hat is their relationship #ith !ahshua@

The Making of a Good Mystery

Jnder the heading +Mystery Story, The World Book Encyclopediastates in part&

Mystery stories about crime are also kno#n as detective stories?. Characteristicallythey are carefully plotted schemes of crime and detection clues and suspense andsometimes pursuit and violence.B

Although it is unnecessary to develop each of these elements the mystery of the gentilescontains most of them making it #orthy of its title.

The majority of people secular and Christian alike do not recogniHe the gentiles" identity asa mystery.)) *))Not everyone claiming to be a Christian has been properly instructed in thebiblical plan of salvation. Therefore in many instances the designation +Christian, is used in ageneric sense only. Mark (I&(57(I Acts /&BI7( //&(7(I omans I&B7 -alatians B&/I7/G and

( eter B&/( should be studied in order to understand #hat is re9uired for salvation in !ahshua theChrist.0 1rom the onset this real7life mystery involves more intrigue than other mysteriesbecause its protagonists are misidentified and therefore do not even realiHe that they share a partin the intrigue. $hile most mysteries begin by identifying the main characters the mystery of thegentiles is all about discovering their identity.

This biblical saga is even no# playing itself out and the majority of the people reading thisbook are a part of the cast.3n other #ords this mystery is most likely about you in #ays you havepossibly never imagined.

*icture of Sherlock %olmes K No caption0

1or anyone #illing to do the detective #ork of a Sherlock %olmes the ible contains the

clues that #ill aid them in unmasking the characters in this real7life drama. egrettably ho#evernot everyone is interested in putting forth the effort re9uired in discovering the clues much lessusing them to unravel this mystery. Content to let the characters remain disguised they absolvethemselves #ith eEcuses such as +So #hat@ $hat difference does it make@, 5Conse9uently they#ill never eEperience the thrill of solving the riddle. =n the other hand to those #ho seek they#ill findL to those #ho knock the door #ill be openedL and to those #ho ask it #ill be given tothem *Matthe# G&G0.

/


3/87

Chapter 2

The Cast of Characters

Bilical !ews

$ho are the gentiles #ritten about in the ible and #here are they today@ e prepared to

consider that at least some of the gentiles in the ible may not be #ho you think they are. Thisbook #ill demonstrate biblically archaeologically and historically that many people today #hoconsider themselves gentiles are in fact 3sraelites and that many people #ho considerthemselves ;e#s are in fact gentiles.Sound confusing@ emember truth is often stranger thanfiction and error often flies on the #ings of truth.

3f these statements are true one can only imagine the profound effect they #ill have uponthe eschatology of many Christians and in turn #ill probably change their perspective on life ingeneral.

3n order to identify the gentiles in the ible it is first necessary to correctly identify the ;e#sand the 3sraelites. The fact that ;e#s and 3sraelites are often separate and distinct peoples is animportant detail overlooked by many Christians.

3n the ible racial ;e#s *better rendered ;udahites)0 *)1rom the perspective of the %ebre#

language !ahudi *singular0 and !ahudim *plural0 are better renditions than ;udahite and;udahites. Nevertheless ;udahite*s0 has been used throughout this book to reduce compleEity andfor the purpose of reader association.0 are 3sraelites but 3sraelites are not al#ays ;udahites. Thisfact is overlooked in 1oy $allace"s book Gods Prophetic Word. $allace concluded that because+the terms ;e#s" and 3srael" are used interchangeably, in the ible +they are identical.,IThiserror might be compared #ith the statement +ecause 1rench poodles are dogs all dogs are1rench poodles., Designating all 3sraelites as ;udahites #ould be the same as labeling allAmericans Nebraskans. Most Nebraskans are Americans but not all Americans are Nebraskans.The same is true of the term +;e#s, as used in the ible. This distinction is ackno#ledged in TheNew n!ers Bi"le Dictionary&

;F$.? A ;ehudite i.e. descendant of !"dah? a name formed from that of the

patriarch ;udah andapplied first to the trie or co"ntry of !"dah or toa s"#ect of thekingdo$ of !"dah*/ :ings /5&/5L ;er. B/&(/L B6&(8L &((L (&BL 5/&/60 in distinctionfro$ the seceding ten triesthe %sraelites.G))*))old emphases have been added bythe author of this book. =ther emphases are by the author of the 9uoted material.0

Three other ible dictionaries confirm this distinction&

;F$?. &riginally a $e$er of the state of !"dah*/ :i. (I&IL Ne. (&/L ;e. B/&(/0 andso used by foreigners from the 6th century Con#ards?.6

;F$? This #ord does not occur in =T literature earlier than the period of ;eremiah. %tthen $eant a citi'en or s"#ect of the kingdo$ of !"dah*33 : /5&/5L ;er B/&(/ B&8etc0.8

;e#?. This na$e was properly applied to a $e$er of the kingdo$ of !"dah afterthe separation of the ten tries Oof the kingdom or house of 3sraelP. The term firstmakes its appearance just before the OAssyrianP captivity of the ten tribes. / :ings (I&I.(

The first chapter of the (86 edition of The #ewish $l%anac titled +3dentity Crisis, begins#ith the follo#ing statement&

Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient 3sraelite a +;e#,?.((

B


4/87

The foregoing declarations stand in contrast to the unsupported assumptions of manyChristians. Consider for eEample the follo#ing statements by ;ames :ennedy at obertsonand Tim >a%aye&

Throughout the history of the !ews they were in ondage to the (gyptians the

Assyrians the abylonians the hilistines and the Canaanites.(/

Correction& All t#elve tribes of 3srael not just the ;udahites #ere in bondage to theFgyptians.

The la# of the -od of ;acob #as preserved by the !ewish people who were thedescendants of !aco"s twel)e sons as the true rule of order for all the nations.(B

Correction& The descendants of ;acob"s t#elve sons #ere 3sraelites not ;udahites. ;udahites#ere descendants of ;acob"s fourth son ;udah.

!ews& the descendants of *raha$ thro"gh %saac. They started out as %ebre#s

eca$e the twel)e tries of %srael?.

(

Correction& The ;udahites #ere descendants of Abraham through ;udah and they initiallymade up only one tribe of 3srael.

The claim that the tribe of ;udah became the t#elve tribes of 3srael is as erroneous as #ouldbe the claim that the tribe of euben or the tribe of -ad or any other tribe became the t#elvetribes of 3srael. 3f >a%aye"s statement #ere true it #ould mean that 3saac"s son ;acob #as a;udahite and that his t#in brother Fsau and his descendants #ere also ;udahites. =bviously this isincorrect.

3n his book What Price &srael ;e#ish author Alfred M. >ilienthal testified that the term+;e#, is not automatically synonymous #ith the term +3sraelite., %is statements leave no doubtthat there is a general misunderstanding and misapplication of the #ord +;e#*s0,&

The ;e#ish racial myth flo#s from the fact that the #ords %ebre# 3sraelite ;e#;udaism and the ;e#ish people have been used synonymously to suggest a historiccontinuity. ut this is a misuse. These #ords refer to different periods in history. %ebre#is a term correctly applied to the period from the beginning of iblical history to thesettling in Canaan. 3sraelite refers correctly to the members of the t#elve tribes of 3srael.)*)The term +3sraelites, also refers to the ten7tribed house of 3srael after the unitedkingdom of 3srael composed of all t#elve tribes #as divided into t#o houses.0 The!ehudi or ;e# is used in the =ld Testament to designate members of the tribe of ;udahdescendants of the fourth son of ;acob as #ell as to denote citiHens of the :ingdom of;udah particularly at the time of ;eremiah and under the ersian occupation. Centurieslater the same #ord came to be applied to anyone no matter of #hat origin #hosereligion #as ;udaism.(5

3n The 'istory o( $ncient &srael Michael -rant echoes >ilienthal by pointing out that theterms +;e#, +%ebre#, and +3sraelite, are not al#ays interchangeable&

!ew" +erew" %sraelite" are so$eti$es regarded as interchangeale "t that isnot always strictly the case. The word!ew" *originally defining the descendants of!aco"s son !"dah0 carries a #ide range of implications 4 religious cultural ethnicbiological 4 #hich mean that the ter$ can hardly e e$ployed witho"t $isleadingeffect efore the fall of the kingdo$s of %srael and !"dah or e)en some #ould sayefore the ret"rn of the e,iles Ofrom abylonP?. The designations 3sraelites" or


5/87

people of 3srael" are available for the earlier periods?. ut once #e have reached theepoch #hen the country has become divided bet#een the kingdoms of 3srael and ;udah3sraelites" and people of 3srael" #ill evidently have to be abandoned as a generic term.(I

The ible does not use the term +;e#s, #hen referring collectively to ;acob"s t#elve sons orto their descendants #ho became the t#elve tribes of 3srael for the simple reason that not all

3sraelites #ere descended from the tribe or kingdom of ;udah. This error has led to manymistakes in biblical interpretation and eschatology.

The earliest date that the term +;udahite, could be legitimately assigned to anyone #ouldhave been at the birth of ;udah"s children. Therefore it is improper to identify Abraham 3saac;acob or any of ;acob"s other eleven sons as ;udahites or ;e#s.To label Abraham as a ;udahite#ould mean that allof his descendants including his first born son 3shmael the progenitor oftoday"s Arabs #ould be ;udahites. 3n short if Abraham #as a ;udahite then today"s Arabs #ouldbe ;udahites.

Moreover it is improper to call Abraham an 3sraelite. The first 3sraelites #ere the children ofhis grandson ;acob #hose name #as changed to 3srael. Abraham is properly identified in -enesis(&(B as a %ebre#.

The ible clearly identifies the people kno#n as ;e#s or ;udahites. At the time of Solomon"s

son :ing ehoboam the nation of 3srael consisted of t#elve tribes that divided into t#o houses 4the house of ;udah and the house of 3srael. ( :ings (/ details this division.

*3nsert Map of Division K No Caption 4 See +The Story of Celto7SaEon 3srael ennett p.50

=nly the people of the house of ;udah became kno#n as ;e#s as rendered in our Fnglishversions of the ible. The first appearance of the #ord +;e#, in the ible is found in / :ings(I&I and it occurs a(terthe t#o houses separated. 1rom this point for#ard the ible uses the#ord +;e#s, eEclusively for descendants of the tribe of ;udah or the citiHens of the southernkingdom or house of ;udah. The only eEceptions are found in Fsther 6&(G evelation /&8 and B&8#here non73sraelites assumed the name andKor religion of the house of ;udah and became kno#nas ;udahites.

3n$ Partisan 'istory o( #udais% abbi Flmer erger testified that only those people from

the tribe or house of ;udah #ere designated as ;e#s in the Scriptures&

3t is interesting ? to kno# that these tribes O3sraelites from all t#elve tribes enteringCanaanP and their subse9uent confederacies #ere not yet really ;e#sL that there #as no+;e#ish, nation. 3t #as not for many years after these earliest origins of these people that#e find the #ord +;e#s, in the iblical teEts. robably the earliest such reference is inthe Second ook of :ings chapter (6 verse /I in #hich the language of the people ofthe southern kingdom of ;udah is called +the ;e#s" language., This passage is inconnection #ith an incident close to the period of the abylonian FEile and the peoplethemselves and their religion are not spoken of by the ible as ;e#s until after theFEile.(G

$ith the eEception of non73sraelite proselytes #ho adopted the name or religion of ;udaism

the people identified as ;e#s throughout the ible #ere the physical descendants of the house of;udah #hich consisted of the tribes of ;udah enjamin and >evi. The term +;e#s, #as neveremployed in the ible to designate all t#elve tribes of 3srael.

The reno#ned first7century ;udahite historian 1lavius ;osephus bore #itness to the fact thatthe designation +;e#s, #as derived from the tribe of ;udah and #as used for the descendants ofthe house of ;udah #ho came out of the abylonian captivity&

*3nsert picture of ;osephus #ith Caption0

5


6/87

So the !ewsprepared for the #ork& that is the na$e they are called y fro$ the daythat they ca$e "p fro$ Baylonwhich is taken fro$ the trie of !"dah #hich camefirst to these places O;erusalem and the land of ;udahP and thence both they and thecountry gained that appellation.(6

Many Christians incorrectly maintain that the term +;e#s, became synonymous #ith all

t#elve tribes #hen a remnant from the t#o7tribed house of ;udah returned from the abyloniancaptivity to rebuild ;erusalem under FHra and Nehemiah. 1or eEample 1oy $allace asks thefollo#ing baseless 9uestion regarding the ;udahites&

After the return to ;erusalem FHra commanded a sin offering for every tribe of 3sraeland he referred to them as all 3srael." ?$hy offer for all 3srael" if it #as only the ;e#s#ho returned from abylon and not 3srael?@(8

A fair ans#er #ould be 2 #hy shouldn"t FHra have done so@ Nothing can be proven by thefact that FHra made a sacrifice for all t#elve tribes #hen dedicating the house of -od. 3n theapocryphal book of / Maccabees #ritten in the second century C a priest named ;onathanmade a similar offering at #hich time he prayed for 3srael in her entirety although only a portionof the house of ;udah #as present at the time&

Therefore #hereas #e are no# purposed to keep ? the feast of the tabernacles and ofthe fire #hich #as given us #hen Neemias ONehemiahP offered sacrifice after that hehad builded the temple and the altar?. And the priests made a prayer #hilst the sacrifice#as consuming ? ;onathan beginning ? as Neemias did. And the prayer #as after thismannerL = >ord >ord -od Creator of all things ? Recei)e the sacrifice for thy wholepeople %srael and preserve thine o#n portion and sanctify it. -ather those togetherthat are scattered fro$ "s deliver them that ser)e a$ong the heathen look uponthem that are despised and abhorred and let the heathen kno# that thou art our -od. 4 /Maccabees (&(67/G

3n ( :ings (6&B7B/ #e are informed that +Flijah took t#elve stones according to the

number of the tribes of the sons of ;acob, and +#ith the stones he built an altar in the name of!ah#eh, on Mount Carmel at a time and place #hen only ten tribes #ere present. The rophetDaniel also petitioned !ah#eh for forgiveness not only for his fello# ;udahites in the abyloniancaptivity but for all 3srael near and far&

3 Daniel ? prayed unto !ah#eh my -od and made my confession and said ? #e havesinned?. = >ord righteousness belongeth unto thee but unto us confusion of faces as atthis dayL the $en of Othe house ofP!"dah and to the inhaitants of !er"sale$ and"nto %srael that are near and that are far off thro"gh all the co"ntries whithertho" hast dri)en the$ because of their trespass that they have trespassed againstthee?. !ea) all Othe nation ofP3srael have transgressed thy la#?. 4 Daniel 8&(7((

3t #as a common practice for the priests or prophets to sacrifice or pray on behalf of all

t#elve tribes even #hen some of the tribes #ere not present at the time. The book of FHra revealsthat FHra #as doing the same thing. %e made an offering for all 3srael 2 the remnant of the t#otribes #ho had returned to ;erusalem and the remaining ten tribes #ho #ere scattered amongother nations.

The &nternational *tandard Bi"le Encyclopaediaidentifies those #ho returned to ;erusalemfrom the abylonian captivity as ;e#s and specifies them as being from the tribes of ;udahenjamin and >evi&

I


7/87

3n the very first year of his O:ing Cyrus"P reign over abylon he issued an edict */ ChronBI // ffL FHra ( ( ff0 that permitted the !ewsto return home #ith the command that theyshould again erect their temple?. At the head of those to be returned stood SheshbaHHar#ho is probably identical #ith Qerubbabel ? and also the high priest ;oshua?. They#ere accompanied by only a small part of those in eEile that is by -2/0 $en andwo$en and children $ale and fe$ale ser)ants esp. fro$ the tries of !"dahBen#a$in and e)i but of the last7mentioned tribes more priests than other >evites./

;amieson 1ausset and ro#n"s comments on FHra /&( agree #ith The &nternational*tandard Bi"le Encyclopaedia&

?those #hich had been carried a#ay 2 i.e. the descendants including childrengrandchildren and great7grandchildren of those #hom NebuchadneHHar had carried a#ayunto abylon. Those who are $entioned in the following catalog"e then were notthe ten trieswho were dispersed into )ario"s and scattered districts of *ssyria"tthe !ewish e,iles resident in or aro"nd Baylon. Qerubbabel the prince of ;udahhimself resided thereL and thither flocked around his standard those ;e#s #ho formed thefirst caravan co$prising chiefly or e,cl"si)ely those of the tries of !"dah andBen#a$in#ho took the initiative in the journey to the land of their fathers both from

their location in abylon and from their greater interest in the #ork of rebuilding;erusalem and the temple./(

The house of ;udah #as composed of the three tribes of ;udah enjamin and >evi&?;udah and enjamin ? and the priests and the >evites that #ere in all 3srael resorted tohim Oehoboam king of the house of ;udahP out of all their coasts. 1or the >evites lefttheir suburbs and their possession and came to ;udah and ;erusalem. 2 / Chronicles((&(/7(

A small contingency from some of the other ten tribes associated themselves #ith the;udahites on certain occasions according to ( Chronicles 8&(7B / Chronicles ((&(B7(G and (5&678.$hile this is true there remained a definite distinction bet#een the t#o houses. ( :ings (/&/B7/ and other passages too numerous to cite demonstrate this division bet#een the t#o houses of

3srael.eople #ho are determined to make the term +;e#s, synonymous #ith all t#elve tribes of

3srael from the time of FHra and Nehemiah on#ard attempt to use the passages from ( and /Chronicles to support their claims. Adam Clarke thought other#ise&

The kingdom of ;udah #as composed of the tribes of ;udah and enjamin #ith the>evitesL all the rest Othe ten tribesP #ent off in the schism #ith ;eroboam and formed thekingdom of 3srael. Tho"gh so$e o"t of those tries did re#oin the$sel)es to !"dahyet no whole trie e)er ret"rned to that kingdo$.//

A close eEamination of the previous passages and an honest evaluation of the prophets refuteany interpretation that unites the house of ;udah #ith the house of 3srael prior to the Ne#

Covenant dispensation. Demographics and common sense concur.


8/87

after the ;udahites returned to ;erusalem. This graphically illustrates the absurdity of the claimthat the ;udahites represented all t#elve tribes of 3srael. Fach star in the diagram represents53sraelitesL the entire chart represents the conservative figure of 53sraelites.

*Chart from Gods +o,enant Peoplepg. BB( K No Caption0

The numbers alone dispel the notion that the houses of ;udah and 3srael #ere reunited #henthe 5;udahites returned to ;erusalem from their abylonian captivity.

;amieson 1ausset and ro#n"s commentary ackno#ledges that the ;udahites #ho returnedto ;erusalem from abylon did not represent the reunion of the house of 3srael #ith the house of;udah foretold by the prophets&

?the ten tribes did notreturn at the restoration from abylon but is and shall continuedistinct from ;udah until the coming union #ith that tribe at the restoration ? a futurecomplete fulfillment must therefore be looked for./B

*icture of the house of ;udah rebuilding the temple of !ah#eh K Caption 2 The house of;udah returns to rebuild the Temple of !ah#eh0

3n the first century AD approEimately 5years a(terFHra and Nehemiah 1lavius ;osephusplaced the dispersed ten tribes beyond the Fuphrates iver&

?the ten tribes are beyond the Fuphrates till no# and are an immense multitude and notto be estimated by numbers./

Fven contemporary ;e#s teach that only ;udah enjamin and >evi returned to ;erusalemfollo#ing their captivity in abylon. 3n an article titled +$here are the Ten Tribes@, in the#ewish-uarterly Re,iew Adolf Neubauer distinguished bet#een the ten tribes and the t#o tribes thatreturned from abylon&

The captives of 3srael eEiled beyond the Fuphrates did not return as a #hole to alestinealong #ith their brethren the captives of ;udah?. FHra and Nehemiah give theenumeration only of +the children of the province of ;udah that #ent up out of thecaptivity of those #hich had been carried a#ay unto abylon and came again to;erusalem and ;udah everyone unto his city.,/5

3nDiscourses) $r!u%entati,e and De,otional on the *u".ect o( the #ewish Reli!ion abbi3saac >eeser #rote that the t#o houses #ere not reunited follo#ing the abylonian captivity&

ut seventy years soon elapsed and at their ending a small number of ;e#s no# nolonger the "nited %sraelites returned to repossess their land and again they d#elttherein?./I

Neubauer added that according to the prophets the ten tribes of the house of 3srael #ere notto be reunited #ith the t#o tribes of the house of ;udah until the advent of the Messiah. %epointed out that the ;udahites at the time of FHra and Nehemiah did not look at this reconciliationas having occurred in their day but as something to be fulfilled in the future&

?the return of the ten tribes #as one of the great promises of the rophets and theadvent of the Messiah is therefore necessarily identified #ith the epoch of theirredemption. ?the hope of the return of the Ten Tribes #ith the Messiah did not ceaseamongst the ;e#s during the time of the second Temple?./G

6


9/87

Abraham !agel a siEteenth7century 3talian ;e# pointed out that the ten7tribed house of3srael did not return at the time of the rebuilding of the second temple but that they #ere to returnat the Messiah"s 1irst Advent. !agel did not recogniHe !ahshua as the Messiah therefore heerroneously anticipated the return of the ten tribes at some future date&

?it is clear to anyone #ho has his right senses that the OTenP Tribes still eEist and thatthey #ill return at the time #hen the edeemer shall come to Sion./6

Alone these sources prove nothing. The ible must be our authority and a person has onlyto readthe books of FHra and Nehemiah toconfirm that the houses of ;udah and 3srael #ere notreunited at that point in history&

Then rose up the chief of the fathers of !"dah and Ben#a$inand the priestsand thee)ites #ith all them #hose spirit -od had raised to go up to build the house of !ah#eh#hich is in ;erusalem ... the$ of the capti)ity that were ro"ght "p fro$ Baylon"nto !er"sale$. 2 FHra (&57((

?the adversaries of !"dah and Ben#a$inheard that the children of the OabylonianPcapti)itybuilded the temple unto !ah#eh -od of 3srael. 4 FHra &(

?they made a proclamation throughout ;udah and ;erusalem to all the e,iles that theyshould assemble at ;erusalem and that #hoever #ould not come #ithin three days ? allhis possessions should be forfeited and he himself eEcluded from the assembly of theeEiles. So all the $en of !"dah and Ben#a$inassembled at ;erusalem #ithin the threedays?. 4 FHra (&G78

And my -od put into mine heart to gather together the nobles and the rulers and thepeople that they might be reckoned by genealogy. And 3 found a register of thegenealogy of them #hich came up at the first and found #ritten therein these are thepeople of the province #ho came up from the captivity of the e,iles who$e"chadne''ar the king of Baylon had carried away and who ret"rned to!er"sale$ and !"dah each to his city?. 4 Nehemiah G&57G

:ing NebuchadneHHar took only the house of ;udah captive into abylon therefore onlythose carried captive into abylon returned from abylon. FHra stipulated ;udah and enjamin asrepresenting +all the eEiles, thereby conclusively demonstrating that only the house of ;udahreturned from the abylonian captivity.

There is no biblical justification for claiming that the house of 3srael returned to ;erusalem#ith the house of ;udah. Therefore in the books of FHra and Nehemiah only 3sraelites from thehouse of ;udah #ere called ;udahites.

FHra and Nehemiah used the terms +;udahites, and +3sraelites, interchangeably becausedescendants of the house of ;udah could be called by either name. They #ere ;udahites in thenarro# sense and 3sraelites in the broad sense.'url"uts *tory o( the Bi"lealso delineated the

house of ;udah"s dual designation&

1rom this time Othe ;udahites" captivity in abylonP these people #ere called ;e#s aname #hich means +people of ;udah., ?And because they had once belonged to thet#elve tribes of 3srael ? they #ere also spoken of as 3sraelites./8

This statement cannot be made about theten tribes of 3srael. ecause theydid not meet thecriteria for being called ;udahites they #ere therefore only kno#n as 3sraelites.

8


10/87

3n Amos B&G !ah#eh declared that %e +#ill do nothing but he revealeth his secret unto hisservants the prophets., !ah#eh never revealed to any of %is prophets that %e #ould bring both;udahites and 3sraelitesback to ;erusalem immediately follo#ing the abylonian captivity.3nstead %e revealed through %is prophet ;eremiah that only ;udahites #ould return to ;erusalemat that time&

No# these are the #ords of the letter that ;eremiah the prophet sent from ;erusalem untothe resid"e of the elders which were carried away capti)esand to the priestsand tothe prophetsand to all the people who$ e"chadne''ar had carried away capti)efro$ !er"sale$ to Baylon?. Thus saith !ah#eh of hosts the -od of 3srael unto allthat are carried a#ay captives #hom 3 have caused to be carried a#ay from ;erusalemunto abylon?. 1or thus saith !ah#eh That after seventy years be accomplished atabylon 3 #ill visit you and perform my good #ord to#ard you in ca"sing yo" toret"rn to this place. 4 ;eremiah /8&(7(

obert !oung"s $nalytical +oncordance to the Bi"lesummariHes the truth regarding thebiblical term +;e#,&

Strictly speaking the name is appropriate only to the subjects of the kingdom of the t#o

tribes after the separation of the ten tribes .C. 8G5.B

This first clue establishes that the term +;e#s, designates only the house of ;udah. This onebiblical fact alone should begin to change the #ay contemporary Christians vie# the history andthe prophecies of the ible.

Chapter


Today3s !ews

Most people believe that today"s ;e#s are 3sraelite descendants of Abraham 3saac and ;acob

and that they represent all t#elve tribes of the nation of 3srael. As has been demonstrated thesecond half of this claim is inaccurate because the ible ne,er identifies the ;udahites #ith allt#elve tribes of 3srael.

According to many ;e#ish authorities the first half of this same claim 4 that the majority oftoday"s ;e#s represent all or any 3sraelites 4 is also untrue. The #ewish $l%anacsuccinctly statesanother fact that #ill surprise most people&

Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient 3sraelite a +;e#, or to call aconte$porary !ew an +%sraelite,or a ++erew.,B(

3n the (8Is Nathan M. ollock #as professor of Medieval ;e#ish %istory at Tel AvivJniversity. 3n the *an Die!o nion August /6 (8II >eo %eiman remarked about rofessor

ollock"s research supporting The #ewish $l%anacsstartling admission&

%e has devoted of his I years to trying to prove that siE out of ( 3sraelis and nine of( ;e#s in the $estern %emisphere are not real ;e#s" ;e#s Ogenetic ;udahitesP butdescendants of fierce :hoHar tribes #hich roamed the steppes of southern ussia manycenturies ago. 1or obvious reasons the 3sraeli authorities are not at all eager to give theofficial stamp of approval to ollock"s theories. +1or all #e kno# he may be ( per centright, said a senior government official. +3n fact he is not the first one to discover theconnection bet#een ;e#s and :hoHars. Many famous scholars ;e#s and non7;e#sstressed these links in their historical research #orks.,B/

(


11/87

Notice that the connection bet#een the ;e#s and the :hoHars #as ackno#ledged by a senior3sraeli government official. This same official emphasiHed that +many famous scholars ;e#s andnon7;e#s stressed these links in their historical research #orks., Those famous scholars includeernard >aHare obert Ruillan ;ames !affe aul Meyer the authors of The #ewishEncyclopedia The ni,ersal #ewish Encyclopedia The Encyclopedia #udaica The New

*tandard #ewish Encyclopedia The New Encyclopaedia Britannica and many other scholars andreference #orks.BB

The follo#ing map from The #ewish Encyclopediaidentifies the ;e#s as ChaHars *alternatespelling for :hoHars0.

*3nsert Map of :haHars from ;e#ish Fncyclopedia See -C p. I( K No Caption01ollo#ing are portions of a letter #ritten by ;e#ish author enjamin %. 1reedman to the

Ne# !ork National Fconomic Council 3nc. and published in their Council >etter No. (GG=ctober (5 (8G. Although 1reedman #as specifically addressing the eEploitations of Qionism)*)Qionism is a national and political movement that maintains the ;e#ish people are entitled to anational homeland. 1ormerly founded in (68G Qionism eventually selected alestine in (8(G astheir home. Since (86 Qionism"s main aim has been the development support and defense ofthe modern State of 3srael. The term +Qionism, #as coined in (68 by Nathan irnbaum.0 he also

eEpounded upon the fact that most of today"s ;e#s are not descendants of ;acob 3srael&

opular ignorance of ? political Qionism is beyond calculation. and, in #hich they lived for a period of a fe# centuries that ended /years ago. Andthe thought of a people returning to its +homeland, seems emotionally satisfying andgood. ut here are facts most Americans do not kno#& olitical Qionism is almosteEclusively a movement by the ;e#s of Furope. ut these Fastern Furopean ;e#s haveneither a racial nor a historic connection #ith alestine. Their ancestors #ere notinhabitants of the +romised >and., They are the direct descendants of the people of the:haHar Oalternate spelling for :hoHarP :ingdom #hich eEisted until the (/th century.The :haHars #ere a non7Semitic ? Mongolian tribal people?. About the Gth centuryA.D. the :ing of the :haHars adopted ;udaism as the state religion and the majority of

inhabitants joined him in the ne# allegiance. efore that date there #as no such thing asa :haHar #ho #as a ;e# O;udahiteP. Neither then nor since #as there such a thing as a:haHar #hose ancestors had come from the %oly >and?.

?these Fastern Furopean !iddish7speaking ;e#s #ho form the Qionist group practicallyin toto have neither a geographic historic nor ethnic connection #ith either the ;e#s ofthe =ld Testament or the land kno#n today as alestine.B

%.-. $ells in his Outline o( 'istory reached the same conclusion regarding today"s ;e#s&

The main part of ;e#ry never #as in ;udea and had never come out of ;udea.B5

3n The Master ible"s +Archaeological Supplement, -eorge obinson 9uoted the late%enry Morgenthau"s autobiography$ll in a Li(e Ti%e #hich +Qionism is the most stupendousfallacy in ;e#ish history., obinson declared that the Qionists are not ;udahites&

The Qionists are not ;e#s according to race. ather they are the descendants of a hoardof pagans #ho pressed into ussia in the first century of our era and in due time becameproselytes to ;udaism. 3n I8/A.D. they formed the :haHar kingdom. 3n 855 A.D. ussiacon9uered them. They are neither ;e#s by race nor are they genuinely ;e#ish in religion.They pass as ;e#s and pretend that they are the descendants of 3srael and therefore have

((


12/87

a right to alestine as their national homeland but they are false in their claims andirreligious in their living.BI

The previous 9uotations are documented as historically accurate in the remarkable book TheThirteenth Tri"e#ritten by the #ell7kno#n ;e#ish author Arthur :oestler. This book is summedup in the follo#ing statement&

3n this last chapter 3 have tried to sho# that the evidence from Anthropology concurs #ithhistory in refuting the popular belief in a OmodernP ;e#ish race descended from a biblicalO3sraeliteP tribe.BG

3n his book What &s $ #ew/ abbi Morris :ertHer testified that many ancient ;e#ish abbis#ere non73sraelite gentiles&

Several of the ancient rabbis in fact including some of those #ho created the Talmudtraced their ancestry to -entiles #ho had been converted to ;udaism.B6

Conse9uently the descendants of those ancient rabbis #ould also be non73sraelite gentiles.To serious students of the ible none of this should come as a surprise. !ahshua #arned ofimposters #ho falsely claim to be 3sraelites&

3 kno# thy #orks and tribulation and poverty *but thou art rich0 and 3 kno# theblasphemy of them #hich say they are ;udahites) *)The #ord +;e#*s0, does notaccurately convey the biblical intent of the original %ebre# and -reek #ords+


13/87

indicate ? that during the Middle Ages that the majority of those #ho professed the;udaic faith #ere :haHars.B

Today"s descendants of yesterday"s :haHars cannot be 3sraelites. A point even more pertinentis that the :haHarshave the biblical and spiritual marks of Fsau Fdom"s descendants. Somehistorians maintain that the Turkish tribes from #hom the :haHars are descended can be traced

to Teman the grandson of Fsau. The #ewish Encyclopedia recounts a :haHar tradition thatoriginally places some of their progenitors near the land of Fdom&

%asdai ibn Shaprut #ho #as foreign minister to Abd al7ahjan Sultan of Cordova in hisletter to :ing ;oseph of the ChaHars *about 8I OADP0 ? speaks of the tradition accordingto #hich the ChaHars once d#elt near the Seir *Serer0 Mountains.5

Mount Seir and the surrounding area #as the Fdomites" homeland&

And ;acob sent messengers before him to Fsau his brother unto the land of Seir thecountry of Fdom. 4 -enesis B/&B

*icture of Mt. Seir K Caption 2 The Mountains of Seir0

Thus d#elt Fsau in mount Seir& Fsau is Fdom. 4 -enesis BI&6

At the time of Fsther approEimately G5C it is certain that relatives of %aman and otherFdomites #ho #ere a part of the ersian population became kno#n as ;udahites by convertingto their religion&

And in every province and in every city #hithersoever the king"s commandment and hisdecree came the ;udahites had joy and gladness a feast and a good day. And $any ofthe Onon7;udahiteP people of the land eca$e !"dahitesL for the fear of the ;udahitesfell upon them. 4 Fsther 6&(G

According to three ;e#ish encyclopedias and 1lavius ;osephus the entire Fdomite nation#as forced into converting to ;udaism and became kno#n as ;udahites at the time of the highpriest ;ohn %yrcanus *Maccabaeus0&

?in the days of ;ohn %yrcanus *end of the second century .C.F.0 ? the Fdomitesbecame a section of the ;e#ish people.I

They #ere then incorporated #ith the ;e#ish nation?.G

?from then on they constituted a part of the ;e#ish people %erod O:ing of ;udeaP beingone of their descendants.6

?they submitted to the use of circumcision and the rest of the ;e#ish #ays of livingL at

#hich time ? they #ere hereafter no other than ;e#s.8

y their o#n testimony the vast majority of today"s ;e#s are not racial 3sraelites or even;udahites. %istory reveals that most of today"s ;e#s are :haHars and Fdomites because of forcedconversion in the seventh and second centuries C and voluntary conversion in the seventhcentury AD. The Fdomite connection #ith today"s ;e#s is an important piece of the puHHle that#ill be addressed in more detail in Chapter (.

(B


14/87

Chapter -


Bilical %sraelites

1ollo#ing the division of the t#elve tribes of 3srael during the reign of :ing ehoboam

in approEimately 8BG C the ten northern tribesbecame kno#n as the house of 3srael.These tribes #ere ne,erkno#n as ;udahites.

3n a section titled +The %ebre# eoples, relating to the time follo#ing the division of thet#o houses'ar%sworth 'istory o( the Worldaffirms that the ten tribes #ere not ;udahites&

Since the severance the -od of 3srael had ceased to be the centre of a national #orshipand any traces of such #orship #hich had been retained in the north from the time ofDavid #ere 9uite insignificant?. %n reality the Ten Tries ? were not therefore+!ews.,5

1urthermore there #as a period of time #hen the ten tribes #ere not even kno#n by thename +3sraelites., Jnderstanding the 3sraelites" marital relationship #ith !ah#eh and %is

subse9uent divorce of the house of 3srael is essential to understanding this loss of identity. The=ld Testament Scriptures reveal that !ah#eh #ed the t#elve tribes of the nation of 3srael&

And !ah#eh said ? 3srael ? 3 am married unto you?. 4 ;eremiah B&((7(

Moses recorded in the book of FEodus #hat has been described as !ah#eh"s marriageproposal to all t#elve tribes of the nation of 3srael&

!e have seen ? ho# 3 bare you on eagles" #ings and brought you unto myself. No#therefore if ye #ill obey my voice indeed and keep my covenant then ye shall be apeculiar treasure unto me above all people?. And ye shall e "nto $e a kingdo$ofpriests and an holy nation. 4 FEodus (8&7I

This is the first time that the #ord +kingdom, used in reference to !ah#eh"s kingdomappears in the ible. !ah#eh established a kingdom relationship bet#een %imself and the nationof 3srael #hen %e married her at Mount Sinai. 3n FHekiel (I !ah#eh provided a second #itnessto the affinity bet#een %is kingdom and %is marriage to 3srael&

No# #hen 3 passed by thee and looked upon thee behold thy time #as the time of loveLand 3 spread my skirt over thee and covered thy nakedness& yea % sware "nto theeandentered into a co)enant with thee saith the ord 4ahweh and tho" eca$est$ine?. Thus #ast thou decked #ith gold and silverL and thy raiment #as of fine linenand silk and broidered #orkL thou didst eat fine flour and honey and oil& and thou #asteEceeding beautiful and tho" didst prosper into a kingdo$. 4 FHekiel (I&67(B

:ing David commented on this kingdom relationship&

?let them kno# that God r"leth in !acounto the ends of the earth. 4 salm 58&(B

*icture of ;acob #restling #ith Angel of !ah#eh KNo Caption0

$hile #restling #ith an angel ;acob #as given the name +3srael, because this name meanspo#er or ruling #ith Fl&

(


15/87

And he O!ah#ehP said Thy name shall be called no more ;acob but 3srael& for as a princehast thou po#er #ith -od?. 4 -enesis B/&/6

;ames Strong"s definition for the name +3srael, is even more eEplicit&

!israel *yis7ra#7ale0L from =T&6/6 and =T&(L he will r"le as God?.5(

+-od, is translated from the %ebre# #ord 2Elohiy%)3Elbeing its shortened form. !ah#ehFlohiym married the t#elve tribes of 3srael thereby making her %is helpmeet. As both %is #ifeand %is 9ueen she ruled with Elin %is kingdom and #as thus named&sra El.

>ater ho#ever because the ten7tribed house of 3srael #orshiped other gods an act #hich!ah#eh identified as adultery %e divorced and put her a#ay&

And 3 sa# #hen for all the causes #hereby backsliding 3srael committed adultery 3 hadput her a#ay and given her a bill of divorceL yet her treacherous sister ;udah fearednot?. 4 ;eremiah B&6

/ :ings (G describes the divorce and dispersion of the house of 3srael at the hands of their

Assyrian spoilers&

Therefore !ah#eh #as very angry #ith 3srael and removed them out of his sight& there#as none left but the tribe of ;udah only?. And !ah#eh rejected all the seed of 3sraeland afflicted them and delivered them into the hand of spoilers until he had cast themout of his sight. 4 / :ings (G&(67/

!ah#eh declared to %osea that as a result of %is divorcing the house of 3srael she #ould nolonger be %is people thereby stripping that house of her name&

And !ah#eh said unto him ? % will? ca"se to cease the kingdo$ of the ho"se of%srael?. Then said God? ye are not $y people and 3 #ill not be your -od. 4 %osea(&78

$hen the ten tribes committed adultery and %e divorced them they #ere no longer a part of!ah#eh Flohiym"s people. Therefore the ten northern tribes no longer had either the right orprivilege of being called&sra El.

%istorian $alter %utchinson described the conse9uence of the house of 3srael"s disobedienceunder :ing ;eroboam and her subse9uent divorce in terms of a loss of identity&

3n conse9uence of ;eroboam"s ambition aided by the #eakness of Solomon"s successorehoboam Oking of the house of ;udahP at about the year 8BG.C. there #ere formed therival and often hostile kingdoms of ;udah and %srael the latter of#hichlost its identityby the capture of Samaria in G//.C?.5/

1ollo#ing !ah#eh"s divorce of the ten7tribed house of 3srael %e dispersed them among non73sraelite nations&

?#hen the house of 3srael d#elt in their o#n land they defiled it by their o#n #ay andby their doings?. And 3 scattered them among the heathen and they #ere dispersedthrough the countries& according to their #ay and according to their doings 3 judged them.4 FHekiel BI&(G7(8

3srael is s#allo#ed up& no# shall they be among the -entiles as a vessel #herein is nopleasure. 4 %osea 6&6

(5


16/87

ehold the eyes of the >ord !ah#eh are upon the sinful kingdom and 3 #ill destroy itfrom off the face of the earthL saving that 3 #ill not utterly destroy the house of ;acobsaith !ah#eh. 1or lo 3 #ill command and 3 #ill sift the house of 3srael among allnations like as corn is sifted in a sieve yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth. 4Amos 8&678

The :ingdom represented the seat of government and !ah#eh"s covenantal marriagerelationship #ith 3srael. 3t #as this seat of government that !ah#eh destroyed #hen %e divorcedher not the people of the house of 3srael.

And yet for all that #hen they be in the land of their enemies 3 #ill not cast them a#ayneither #ill 3 abhor them to destroy them utterly and to break my covenant #ith them&for 3 am !ah#eh their -od. ut 3 #ill for their sakes remember the covenant of theirancestors #hom 3 brought forth out of the land of Fgypt in the sight of the heathen that 3might be their -od& 3 am !ah#eh. 2 >eviticus /I&75

!ah#eh dispersed the house of 3srael throughout the nations and eventually their identity#as forgotten by the other nations&

3 O!ah#ehP said 3 #ould scatter them into corners 3 #ould make the remembrance ofthem to cease from among men. 4 Deuteronomy B/&/I

Although the house of 3srael"s identity #as lost to other nations and even to herself !ah#ehnever lost sight of #ho she #as&

?= ;acob my servantL and 3srael #hom 3 have chosen ? thou art my servant& 3 haveformed thee.? = 3srael thou shalt not be forgotten of me. 4 3saiah &(7/(

ecause of being dispersed throughout the then kno#n #orld the descendants of the houseof 3srael became identified as simply +!oyi%, the %ebre# #ord most often translated gentiles in

the =ld Testament. This change from a specific to a non7specific identity is confirmed in the Ne#Testament. aul identified himself and the Corinthian Christians as descendants of the =ldTestament 3sraelitesand later he identified them as ethne the -reek e9uivalent of!oyi%&

Moreover rethren 3 #ould not that ye should be ignorant ho# that all o"r fatherswere "nder the clo"dand all passed thro"gh the seaLand were all apti'ed "ntoMoses in the clo"d and in the seaLand did all eat the sa$e spirit"al $eatLand did alldrink the sa$e spirit"al drink& for they drank of that spiritual ock that follo#ed them&and that ock #as Christ. ut #ith many of them -od #as not #ell pleased& for theywere o)erthrown in the wilderness. 4 ( Corinthians (&(75

!e kno# that yewere Gentiles OethneP carried a#ay unto these dumb idols even as ye#ere led. 4 ( Corinthians (/&/

!ah#eh had divorced the ten7tribed house of 3srael for her idolatry and scattered her amongnon73sraelite !oyi%or peoples. Fventually they assumed the names of the nations and peoplesamong #hom they lived or those nations gave them other names. This change of names isindicated in The #ewish Encyclopediaunder the heading +Tribes >ost Ten,&

3f the Ten Tribes have disappeared the literal fulfillment of the prophecies #ould beimpossibleL if they have not disappeared obviously they must eEist under a differentname.5B

(I


17/87

/ :ings (G&(7/B records that the Assyrians #ere responsible for taking the ten7tribed houseof 3srael into captivity and dispersing them among non73sraelite peoples. 3n recent years somefourteen hundred Assyrian cuneiform tablets have been unearthed and deciphered. These tabletsprovide some of the names the house of 3srael had been given or that they assumed during theirdispersion.

*icture of =ne of the Assyrian Tablets -C p. BBI K As in -C00issin! Links Disco,ered in $ssyrian Ta"lets by biblical archaeologist and historian F.

aymond Capt documents the ne# names of the house of 3srael during and follo#ing theirAssyrian captivity.5The identity of the dispersed 3sraelites today is a 9uestion that #ill beans#ered in Chapter 8.

3t is important to understand that the terms +;e#s, and +3sraelites, are synonymous only#hen referring to the descendants of the t#o7tribed house of ;udah. 3t is e9ually important tounderstand that it is inaccurate to refer to the 3sraelites descended from the ten7tribed house of3srael as ;e#s or ;udahites. They #ere not descended from ;udahL hence there is no scripturaljustification for calling them ;udahites. The 3sraelites that Assyria dispersed eventually becamekno#n as the nations or gentiles having lost their identity through the centuries.

Chapter 5The Cast of Characters

Bilical Gentiles

3t #ould not be much of a mystery if the gentiles in the ible #ere simply non73sraelites to#hom !ahshua granted salvation through %is propitiating sacrifice. ut it wouldbe intriguing ifsome of these gentiles fulfilled ible prophecies that #ere intended for 3sraelites. $hat if thesegentiles #ere someho# racially related to the 3sraelites of biblical anti9uity and the redemptionand remarriage that !ah#eh promised to the divorced and dispersed 3sraelites actually applied tocertain gentiles in the Ne# Testament@ Could some of the gentiles actually be other than #homthey are commonly considered to be@ These possibilities present a much more perpleEing puHHle

than simply that salvation #as granted to non73sraelites.To correctly ans#er the foregoing 9uestions a person must become familiar #ith t#o #ords

one %ebre# and one -reek. 3n the =ld Testament the Fnglish #ord +gentiles, is translated fromthe %ebre# #ords +yogl, *!oy2 singular0 and +


18/87

The %eb.!oyi%signified the nations the surrounding nations foreigners as opposed to3srael.5I

%eb. -oi +the nations, *or +heathen, derived from the -r. ethne0 as opposed to 3srael*Neh. v. 60.5G

-entiles& all the peoples of the #orld #ho are non7;e#s. 3n the Ne# Testament a -entiledesignates any lost member of the human race #ho is not a ;e#.56

The #ord translated as +-FNT3>FS, is often translated as +NAT3=NS., 3t is the #ord+FT%N=S, from #hich #e derive +FT%N3C., All people #ho are not ;F$S are-FNT3>FSregardless of their ethnic origin.58

3n the Ne# Testament the #ord for +-entiles, *-reek ethnos0 is also translated +nations,and +heathen., The corresponding %ebre# #ord in the =ld Testament is goi. That is allnations outside -od"s covenant people of 3srael #ere called +-entiles, or +heathen, orsimply the +nations.,I

The term +-entiles, in the Ne# Testament al#ays refers to people and nations outside of

and apart from all the t#elve tribes of 3srael?. 3t can be said positively that 3N N= CASF3N T%F 3>F either in the =ld Testament or in the Ne# D=FS T%F $=D +-FNT3>F,F1F = A>! T= AN! AT =1 3SAF>.I(

The #ords +gentiles, +!oy, and +ethnos, are notthe eEclusionary terms that these authorshave attempted to make them.1or eEample try replacing the #ord +nations, translated from!oyi% #ith the #ord +non73sraelites, in -enesis /5&/B #here ebekah #as informed about hert#in boys ;acob and Fsau&

And !ah#eh said unto her T#o non7%sraelites are in thy #omb and t#o manner ofpeople shall be separated from thy bo#elsL and the one people shall be stronger than theother peopleL and the elder shall serve the younger.

Try the same in -enesis 6&(8 #here ;acob blesses ;oseph"s second son Fphraim&

?he also shall become a people and he also shall be great& but truly his younger brothershall be greater than he and his seed shall become a multitude of non7%sraelites.

Try replacing the #ord +nation, #ith +non73sraelite, in ;eremiah B(&B57BI #here !ah#ehpromised both houses of 3srael that %e #ould never forsake them as long as the sun rules by dayand the moon by night&

Thus saith !ah#eh #hich giveth the sun for a light by day and the ordinances of themoon and of the stars for a light by night #hich divideth the sea #hen the #aves thereofroarL !ah#eh of hosts is his name& 3f those ordinances depart from before me saith

!ah#eh then the seed of 3srael also shall cease from being a non7%sraelitebefore me forever.

The three preceding eEamples demonstrate that the definition and application of the %ebre##ord +!oyi%, is not as narro# as some people #ould make it.

The same is true for its -reek counterpart +ethne., 3f modern Christianity"s definition forethnosis correct ;ohn (6&B5 #ould have to be translated as follo#s&

(6


19/87

ilate ans#ered Am 3 a ;udahite@ Thine o#n non7%sraelitesand the chief priests havedelivered thee unto me& #hat hast thou done@

Ethnos and ethne have a much broader use in the Ne# Testament than is commonlyunderstood. Consider the follo#ing four eEamples.

The first employs the #ord +gentiles, *ethne0 in reference to non73sraelites specificallyCanaanites&

=ur O3sraeliteP fathers had the tabernacle of #itness in the #ilderness as he hadappointed speaking unto Moses that he should make it according to the fashion that hehad seen. $hich also our fathers that came after brought in #ith ;esus Othe =ld Testament;oshuaP into the possession of the Gentiles #hom -od drave out before the face of ourfathers?. 4 Acts G&75

The second eEample uses the #ord +nations, *ethne0 in reference to a multi7ethnic multitudeof people non73sraelite and 3sraelite alike&

And hath made of one blood all nationsof $enfor to d#ell on all the face of the earthand hath determined the times before appointed and the bounds of their habitation. 4Acts (G&/I

The third eEample employs the #ord +nation, *ethnos0 in reference to ;udahites descendantsof the house of ;udah the t#o southern tribes of 3srael&

And they said Cornelius the centurion a just man and one that feareth -od and of goodreport among all the nation of the !"dahites?. 4 Acts (&//

The fourth eEampleuses the #ord +gentiles, *ethne0 in reference to 3sraelites thedescendants of the house of 3srael the ten northern tribes of 3srael&

And that he O!ah#ehP might make kno#n the vessels of mercy #hich he had aforeprepared unto glory even us #hom he hath called not of the ;udahites only but also ofthe Gentiles@ 4 omans 8&/B7/

$e #ill return to this last passage in Chapter I because some people may 9uestion thisinterpretation and also because it provides important clues for solving the mystery.

Fven #ithout accepting the application for ethnein omans 8&/B7/ it should be apparentfrom the other three passages as #ell as many others that there is a much broader use of the-reek #ords 2ethnos3and 2ethne3than #hat is usually taught. >eEicographers also provide thebroader application. Consider the follo#ing definitions for the -reek #ord 2ethnos3&

?(. a $"ltit"de*#hether of men or of beasts0 associated or living togetherL a co$panytroop swar$?. /. a $"ltit"de of indi)id"als of the sa$e nat"re or gen"s ? Acts(G&/I?. B. Race nation& Mt /(&BL Acts (&B5 etc. ? of the !ewish people >k //&/5L"sed *in the sing.0 of the !ewish people >k. G&5L /B&/?. . ? in the =.T. foreignnations not worshipping the tr"e God pagans Gentiles? Mt. &(5 ? and veryoftenL in plain contradistinction to the !ews& o B&/8?. 5. aul uses ? ta\ >e&qnheven ofGentile Christians& o. ((&(BL (5&/G?.I/

There are I passages in the NT #here #e have e&qno$ or e&qnh #ithout anyspecial sense or characteristics?. *o"t /0 refer to a people or peoples in the generalsense and of these the following ha)e in )iew the !ewishpeople& >k. G&5L /B&/L ;n.

(8


20/87

((&6 5 5( 5/L (6&B5L Ac. (&//L /&/ ( (GL /I&L /6&(8L ( t. /&8. That the ;e#ishpeople is meant in the same sense as others #ith no particular distinction may be seenfrom the various conteEts?. That the e,pressione&qnhrefers to all nations $ay eseen fro$ the addition ofpa/nta OallP in Mt. /&8 (L /5&B/L /6&(8L Mk. ((&(GL(B&(L >k. /(&/L /&GL . (5&((L -l. B&6.IB

3n the foregoing 9uotation from the Theolo!ical Dictionary o( the New Testa%ent some ofthe passages that are applied to +the ;e#ish people, are inclusive of all t#elve tribes indicatingthat the #ord 2ethnos3sometimes describes both ;udahites and 3sraelites.

3t is no different in the =ld Testament. 2Goy)3the %ebre# e9uivalent of the -reek #ord2ethnos)3is used in identical fashion. Consider the follo#ing definition for !oy from The NewBrown4Dri,er4Bri!!s4Gesenius 'e"rew4En!lish Le1icon&

?(. Nation people ? a. specif. of descendants of *raha$? -n (/&/ ? (G&I ?definitely of%srael FE (8&I ? BB&(B ? Dt &I ? of %srael and !"dah as two nationsFH B5&(?. c. usually of non7%eb. peoples FE 8&/ B&( ? esp. of these peoples asheathen& idolatrous >v (6&/ /6?.I

The =ld Testament does not use !oy eEclusively for non7%ebre# peoples. 3n fact this

leEicon begins by correctly defining the #ord generically as any nation or people. 3t then includesthree definitions that many Christians completely ignore&!oycan refer +specif. of descendants ofAbraham, +definitely of 3srael, and +of 3srael and ;udah as t#o nations.,

recisely opposite of popular teaching the ible provides eEamples of non73sraelite nationsidentifying 3sraelites as!oyand!oyi%&

ehold 3 have taught you Othe nation of 3sraelP statutes and judgments?. :eep thereforeand do themL for this is your #isdom and your understanding in the sight of theOnon73sraeliteP nations O!oyi%P which shall hear all these stat"tes and say S"rely thisgreatO3sraeliteP nation O!oyP is a wise and "nderstanding people. 1or #hat nation isthere so great #ho hath -od so nigh unto them as !ah#eh our -od is in all things that#e call upon him for. 4 Deuteronomy &57G

?tho" OMount Seir representing the FdomitesP hast said These two nations Ot#ogoyim the houses of 3srael and ;udahP ? shall e $ineand we will possess it?.FHekiel B5&(

The &nternational *tandard Bi"le Encyclopaedia and The 5onder,an Pictorial Bi"leDictionarycorrectly define!oy&

?-oy *or -oi0 is rendered +-entiles, in the A


21/87

admit that in the ible!oysimply meant nation6s7)and that it#as used for both non73sraelitesand 3sraelites alike&

The +erew wordgoy*plural!oyi%0 $eans +nation., %n Bilical "sage it is appliedalso to %srael& +!e shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation, *!oykadoshL FE. (8&I0.I6

%n the +erew of the Bile+goi, and its pl"ral+goyyi$, originally $eant+nation,and were applied oth to %sraelites and to non7%sraelites*-en. Eii. / Evii. /L FE. Eiii.B EEEii. (L Deut. iv. GL viii. 8 (L Num. Eiv. (/L 3sa. i. iE. //L ;er. vii. /60.I8

The #ewish Encyclopediaadmits that the %ebre# #ord +!oyi%), and its Fnglish e9uivalent+gentiles, changed over time and took on +the sense of non7;e#.",GNevertheless in the ible!oy means any nation be it non73sraelite 3sraelite or ;udahite.

The %ebre# #ord +!oy, like the -reek #ord +ethnos, is simply a generic #ord meaningnation*s0 or people*s0. The most cogent definition for both #ords is +a multitude of individualsfrom the same nature or genus.,G(Nations is the best translation of +!oy, and +ethnos., oth#ords should have been translated in this manner throughout the =ld and Ne# Testaments

permitting the conteEt of each passage to determine #hich nation*s0 #ere being referred to. %adthey been consistently translated nation*s0 much of today"s confusion concerning the gentiles#ould have never occurred. The translators" inconsistency in their renditions of +!oy, and+ethnos, has contributed to fla#ed theology concerning these #ords and their biblicaleschatological and contemporary applications.

eople are often heard speaking of an individual as being a gentile. This is another improperuse of the term. ecause both +!oy3and +ethnos, are collective nouns neither#ord can be usedto identify an individual. The ible al#ays uses these terms to identify numerous nations or anation composed of many individuals.

$ith this information so readily available from both the ible and the leEicons #hy is it thatmany preachers and theologians continue to teach other#ise@ At best they have not taken theinitiative to investigate this subject. At #orst they are similar to the leaders described in FHekiel//&/5& +There is a conspiracy of her Othe land"sP prophets ? they have taken the treasure and theprecious things, giving them a#ay to people to #hom they do not belong.

Jnderstanding that!oyand ethnosrefer to both non73sraelite and 3sraelite nations #ill placeyou #ell on your #ay to#ard solving the mystery of the gentiles.

Chapter /

The 6rophets Bear Witness

Amos B&G declares +Surely the >ord !ah#eh #ill do nothing but he revealeth his secretunto his servants the prophets., This is precisely #here the customary interpretation of thegentiles falls #oefully short. The generally accepted application of the #ord +gentiles, not onlymisuses -od"s $ord it also misapplies or leaves unfulfilled many prophecies. Consider the

follo#ing three =ld Testament #itnesses&

*icture of the rophets K Caption for icture on >eft +Micah %aggai Malachi Qechariah, KCaption for icture on ight +Qephaniah ;oel =badiah %osea0

Witness "$er &neAnd 3srael stretched out his right hand and laid it upon Fphraim"s head?. And heblessed ;oseph and said ? hisOFphraim"sP seed shall eco$e a $"ltit"de of nations. 4-enesis 6&(7(8

/(


22/87

Fphraim #as the representative tribe of the ten7tribed house of 3srael. The prophets usedFphraim and sometimes ;oseph Fphraim"s father to represent the house of 3srael.8aussets Bi"leDictionaryattests to this use of Fphraim&

This kingdom #as sometimes also designated Fphraim" from its leading tribe *3sa. Evii.

B %os. iv. (G0 as the southern kingdom ;udah" #as so designated from the prominenttribe.G/

;acob"s blessing upon Fphraim and his descendants #as essentially an eEtension of!ah#eh"s promise to Abraham&

?!ah#eh appeared to Abram and said unto him ... 3 #ill make my covenant bet#een meand thee and #ill multiply thee eEceedingly. ?and tho" shalt e a father of $anynations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram but thy name shall beAbrahamL for a father of $any nations ha)e % $ade thee. And 3 #ill make theeeEceeding fruitful and % will $ake nations of thee?. And % will estalish $y co)enantetween $e and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an e)erlastingco)enant to be a -od unto thee and to thy seed after thee. 4 -enesis (G&(7G

As a conse9uence of misidentifying some of the gentiles in the ible much of contemporaryChristendom teaches a replacement theology kno#n as +Spiritual 3srael., This doctrineerroneously maintains that under the Ne# Covenant !ah#eh has replaced national 3srael #ith aspiritual 3srael made up of a multiracial multitude of people #ho have embraced !ahshua as theirSaviour. %o#ever #hen !ah#eh blessed Abraham %e prophesied that $"raha%s descendants#ould become a multitude of nations. >ike#ise #hen ;acob blessed Fphraim he prophesied thatEphrai%s descendants #ould become a multitude of nations. Neither !ah#eh nor ;acobprophesied that a multitude of non73sraelite nations #ould become spiritual 3sraelites.) *)Thisdoctrine is more thoroughly addressed in AppendiE ( 2 Spiritual 3srael& =ut of All Nations or =utof the Nation of 3srael@0

The phrase +a multitude of nations, can also be rendered +a fullness of gentiles, a

translation that #ill be addressed in Chapter G.

Witness "$er TwoMoreover thou son of man take thee one stick and #rite upon it 7orOthe tribe ofP!"dahand for the children of %sraelOof the house of ;udahP his companions& then takeanother stick and #rite upon it 7orOthe tribe ofP !osephthe stick of (phrai$andfor all the ho"se of %sraelhis companions& And #oin the$ one to another into onestickL and they shall become one in thine hand. ?ehold 3 #ill take the children of3srael from among the heathen #hither they be gone and #ill gather them on every sideand bring them into their o#n land& And % will $ake the$Othe house of ;udah and thehouse of 3sraelP one nationin the land upon the mountains of 3sraelL and one king shallbe king to them all& and they shall e no $ore two nationsneither shall they edi)ided into two kingdo$s any $ore at all. 4 FHekiel BG&(I7//

!ah#eh declared through FHekiel and other =ld Testament prophets that the ten tribes of thehouse of 3srael #hom !ah#eh had divorced and scattered among other nations #ere not to bebanished forever. They #ere to be called out from among the non73sraelite nations #here they#ere dispersed and eventually reunited #ith the house of ;udah.

Many people assume that the ;udahites represent all t#elve tribes of 3srael. Conse9uently#hen some Christians are called upon to interpret prophecies relating to both houses of 3sraelthey are unable to do so. ecause these Christians are mistaken about the heritage and ancestry of

//


23/87

today"s ;e#s and because they have absolutely no idea #ho represents the house of 3srael theyoften ignore FHekiel"s and other corresponding =ld Testament prophecies. They are unable to seethat this prophecy and others like it actually find fulfillment in the Ne# Testament and in today"sdescendants of the house of ;udah and the house of 3srael.

FHekiel"s prophecy is sometimes erroneously circumvented by those #ho teach that it #asfulfilled at the time of FHra and Nehemiah) *)A careful reading of FHra and Nehemiah reveals

that only 3sraelites from the tribes of ;udah enjamin and >evi returned from abylon to;erusalem. The follo#ing 9uotations should also prove interesting& +?believers in the literalinspiration of the Scriptures have al#ays labored under a difficulty in regard to the continuedeEistence of the tribes of 3srael #ith the eEception of those of ;udah and >evi *or enjamin0#hich returned Ofrom abylonP #ith FHra and Nehemiah., +Tribes >ost Ten, The ;e#ishFncyclopedia *Ne# !ork and >ondon& 1unk and $agnalls Company (850 ord shall set his hand again the second time torecover the remnant of his people?. And he shall set up an ensign for the nations andshall assemble the outcasts of 3srael and gather together the dispersed of ;udah from thefour corners of the earth. 4 3saiah ((&(7(/

/B


24/87

The fact that 3saiah #as referring to the 1irst and not the Second Advent of !ahshua is madeapparent by the Apostle aul in omans (5&(/. aul applied the phrase +the root of ;esse, to!ahshua and this prophecy to %is 1irst Advent.

Nelsons New &llustrated Bi"le Dictionaryapplies the reference to David in the prophecy ofthe t#o sticks in FHekiel BG to !ahshua"s 1irst Advent as #ell&

Although -od"s people #ere suffering at the hands of a pagan nation #hen FHekielprophesied better days #ere assured. -od #ould establish %is universal rule among %ispeople through a descendant of David *BG&/7/50. This is a clear reference to theMFSS3A% a prophecy fulfilled #hen ;esus #as born in ethlehem more than 5yearslater.GB

These prophecies reveal that the t#o houses #ere not reunited #hen the house of ;udahreturned to ;erusalem from their abylonian captivity. 3nstead !ah#eh promised to call the houseof 3srael back from among the non73sraelite nations #here she had been dispersed and reunite her#ith the house of ;udah beginning at the 1irst Advent of !ahshua.

Witness "$er ThreeThen said -od ? ye are not my people and 3 #ill not be your -od. !et the number ofthe children of 3srael shall be as the sand of the sea #hich cannot be measured nornumberedL and it shall come to pass that in the place where it was said "nto the$ Othehouse of 3sraelP 4e are not $y people there it shall e said "nto the$ 4e are thesons of the li)ing God. Then shall the children of ;udah and the children of 3srael begathered together?. 4 %osea (&87(

%osea #as speaking to 3sraelites of the divorced house of 3srael #hom!ah#eh #ould callfrom their banishment and christen +sons of the living -od., !ahshua"s ministry #as initially to%is brethren of the house of ;udah and %e granted them the po#er to become sons of -od first&

%e came unto his o#n and his o#n received him not. ut as many as received him to

them gave he po#er to become the sons of -od even to them that believe on his name&$hich #ere born not of blood nor of the #ill of the flesh nor of the #ill of man but of-od. 4 ;ohn (&((7(B

Another name for sons of -od is Christians. According to %osea there #ould also be3sraelites from the house of 3srael #ho #ould become Christians. Many people understand that!ah#eh"s Ne# Covenant people #ere to be given the name +Christians, as prophesied in 3saiahI5&(5 and fulfilled in Acts ((&/I. ut those same people often fail to discern that 3saiah"sprophecy #as made to and about 3sraelites.) *)This is not to say that non73sraelites are unable toshare in some of the Ne# Covenant benefits available through !ahshua and %is blood7atoningsacrifice much the same as non73sraelites did under the =ld Covenant. See AppendiE / 4!ah#eh"s lan for elieving Non73sraelites.0

So far #e have gleaned the follo#ing clues from the =ld Testament&

Non73sraelites and 3sraelites alike can be gentiles.

!ah#eh divorced the ten7tribed house of 3srael and scattered them among non73sraelite gentiles or nations.

These same 3sraelite people #ere to become a multitude of nations or fullness ofgentiles.

/


25/87

These 3sraelites lost their identity and became collectively referred to as gentiles orby the names of the gentile nations among #hom they #ere dispersed or by thenames given to them by these non73sraelites nations.

A remnant of these 3sraelite people #ere to be reunited #ith a remnant from thehouse of ;udah beginning at the first advent of !ahshua.

These reunited 3sraelites #ould be christened sons of the living -od and #ould becalled Christians.

*dditional WitnessesArmed #ith these clues let us consider some additional =ld Testament prophecies 9uoted in

the Ne# Testament&

And that he O!ah#ehP might make kno#n the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy#hich he had afore prepared unto glory even us #hom he hath called not of the;udahites only but also of the -entiles. *s he saith also in &see O+oseaP% will callthe$ $y peoplewhich were not $y people?. 4 omans 8&/B7/5

Christians #ho assume that the ;udahites in omans 8 represent all t#elve tribes of 3srael

conclude that the gentiles must be non73sraelites. Therein lies the heart of the mystery. ecausethe term +;e#s, is never used in either the =ld or Ne# Testament to describe all t#elve tribes of3srael there is no reason to immediately conclude that the gentiles in this and other passagesrepresent non73sraelites. The gentiles in omans 8 simply represent non7;udahites 4 either3sraelites or non73sraelites or both. The =ld Testament prophets narro# do#n these three optionshelping us to determine #hich nations aul #as referring to.

3n verse /B the Apostle aul describes these people as +vessels of mercy., The prophets3saiah FHekiel and Qechariah inform us #hich nations #ere to specifically receive !ah#eh"smercy&

1or thyOthe house of 3srael"sP Maker is thine h"sandL 4ahwehof hosts is his nameLand thy Redee$er the +oly &ne of %srael?. 1or !ah#eh hath called thee as a #oman

forsaken and grieved in spirit and a #ife of youth #hen thou #ast refused saith thy-od. 1or a small moment have 3 forsaken theeL but with great $ercies will % gatherthee. 3n a little #rath 3 hid my face from thee for a momentL but with e)erlastingkindness will % ha)e $ercy on thee?. 1or the mountains shall depart and the hills beremovedL but my kindness shall not depart from thee neither shall the co)enant of $ypeace e re$o)ed saith 4ahweh that hath $ercy on thee. 4 3saiah 5&57(

So the house of 3srael shall kno# that 3 am !ah#eh their -od from that day and for#ard.And the heathen shall kno# that the house of 3srael #ent into captivity for their ini9uity&because they trespassed against me therefore hid 3 my face from them and gave theminto the hand of their enemies& so fell they all by the s#ord. According to theiruncleanness and according to their transgressions have 3 done unto them and hid my facefrom them. Therefore thus saith the >ord !ah#ehL No# #ill % ring again OreversePthe

capti)ity of !aco and ha)e $ercy "pon the whole ho"se of %srael and #ill bejealous for my holy name. 4 FHekiel B8&//7/5

And % will strengthen the ho"se of !"dah and % will sa)e the ho"se of !oseph and 3#ill bring them again to place themL for % ha)e $ercy "pon the$& and they shall be asthough 3 had not cast them off& for 3 am !ah#eh their -od and #ill hear them. 4Qechariah (&I

/5


26/87

3n %osea (&I !ah#eh initially declared that %e #ould +no more have mercy upon the houseof 3srael., >ater %e announced that it #as to these very people that %e #ould indeed eventuallysho# %is mercy&

And 3 #ill betroth thee unto me for everL yea % will etroth thee "nto $e inrighteousness and in judgment and in lovingkindness and in $ercies?. And 3 #ill so#

her unto me in the earthL and % will ha)e $ercy "pon her that had not otained$ercy?. 4 %osea /&(87/B

Throughout the =ld Testament prophets #e find !ah#eh bringing judgment upon thebacksliding houses of ;udah and 3srael yet %e al#ays follo#ed that judgment #ith promises of%is future mercy. Although at times !ah#eh #as also merciful to non73sraelites the propheticpassages of the =ld Testament specifically identify 3sraelite nations as the recipients of %ismercy. Therefore there is no reason to assume that omans 8&/B7/ applies to non73sraelitegentiles especially in light of the remaining teEtual evidence.

The Ne# American Standard ible translators described the nations in 9uestion in omans8&/B as having been +prepared beforehand for glory., 3n verses B and of this same chapter aulproclaims to #hom the glory belongs&

?my brethren my kinsmen according to the flesh& $ho are 3sraelitesL to #hompertaineth the adoption and the glory?. 4 omans 8&B7

3saiah prophesied that the glory of !ah#eh #as reserved for 3srael&

3n that day shall !ah#eh of hosts be for a cro#n of glory and for a diadem of beautyunto the residue of his people. 4 3saiah /6&5

?the house of ;acob?. Then shall thy light break forth as the morning and thine healthshall spring forth speedily& and thy righteousness shall go before theeL the glory of!ah#eh shall be thy rere#ard. 4 3saiah 56&(76

These prophesies reveal that !ah#eh"s glory #as +prepared beforehand, or predestined forthe people of 3srael. aul also spoke of predestination in omans 6&

?all things #ork together for good to them that love -od to the$ who are the calledaccording to his p"rpose.7or who$ he did foreknowhe also did predestinate to econfor$ed to the i$age of his Son that he $ight e the firstorn a$ong $anyrethren. Moreover #hom he did predestinate them he also called& and #hom he calledthem he also justified& and #hom he justified them he also glorified. 4 omans 6&/67B

Note especially the phrase +#hom %e did forekno#., The -reek phrase +ou^$proe/gnw, *ho9s pro:!noo0 from #hich this Fnglish phrase is translated is also found inomans (( #here aul used it to identify 3sraelite nations&

3 say then %ath -od cast a#ay his people@ -od forbid. 1or 3 also am an %sraelite of theseed of *raha$ of the tribe of enjamin. -od hath not cast a#ayhis people which heforeknew Oo^n proe/gnw]?. 4 omans ((&(7/

The rophet Amos declared that it #as only3sraelites #hom !ah#eh forekne#&

%ear this #ord that !ah#eh hath spoken ? = children of 3srael ? saying !ou only have3 kno#n of all the families of the earth?. 4 Amos B&(7/

/I


27/87

aul identified those +#hom he did forekno#, as !ahshua"s brethren in omans 6&/8 and as3sraelites in omans ((&(7/. aul continued in omans 6&B by saying 2 +?#hom he didpredestinate them he also called., 3n other #ords those #hom !ah#eh forekne# 4 identified as3sraelite +kinsman according to the flesh, 4 #ere also those people #hom %e called. This callingleads us right back to omans 8&

And that he might make kno#n the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy #hich hehad afore prepared unto glory even us who$ he hath called not of the ;udahites onlybut also of the -entiles. 4 omans 8&/B7/

3saiah identified those #hom !ah#eh called as 3sraelites&

%earken unto me = !aco and %srael$y calledL 3 am heL 3 am the first 3 also am thelast?. 3 even 3 have spokenL yea % ha)e called hi$. 4 3saiah 6&(/7(5

According to aul those #hom !ah#eh called #ere of the house of ;udah and also +of the-entiles., The Ne# American Standard ible translates this same phrase +from among the-entiles, #hich points again to the house of 3srael scattered among the non73sraelite nations. 3n

FHekiel"s prophecy regarding the t#o sticks representing the house of ;udah and the house of3srael #e find essentially the same phrase&

?say unto them Thus saith the >ord !ah#ehL ehold 3 #ill take the children of %sraelOof the house of 3sraelP fro$ a$ong the heathen O!oyP #hither they be gone and #illgather them on every side and bring them into their o#n land& And 3 #ill make them Othehouse of ;udah and the house of 3sraelP one nation in the land upon the mountains of3sraelL and one king shall be king to them all& and they shall be no more t#o nationsneither shall they be divided into t#o kingdoms any more at all. 4 FHekiel BG&(I7//

All of the teEtual evidence points to the fact that the gentiles referred to by aul in omans8&/ are the divorced and +gentiliHed, nations from the house of 3srael. 3n these verses bothparties have been identified 2 the ;e#s represent the house of ;udah and the gentiles represent the

house of 3srael. omans 8&/B7/ is not describing a union bet#een 3sraelites and non73sraelites#hich #as never prophesied in the =ld Testament. 3t is describing the beginning of the fulfillmentof FHekiel"s prophesied reunion of the house of ;udah and the house of 3srael.

$hile the foregoing provides sufficient evidence to conclude that the gentiles in omans8&/ are the nations of the house of 3srael the conteEt provides further definitive confirmation forthis conclusion&

Fven us #hom he hath called not of the ;udahites only but also of the -entiles@ *s hesaith also in &seeO%oseaP 3 #ill call them my people #hich #ere not my peopleL andher beloved #hich #as not beloved. And it shall come to pass that in the place #here it#as said unto them !e are not my peopleL there shall they be called the children of theliving -od. 4 omans 8&/7/I

3n omans 8&/57/I the Apostle aul 9uoted from chapters ( and / of the rophet %osea.Fverything in these t#o chapters pertains to 3sraelites and only 3sraelites. These chapters describe!ah#eh"s divorce of the house of 3srael and prophesy %is remarriage to those same people andtheir reunion #ith the house of ;udah. 3n omans 8&/7/I aul 9uoted and applied %osea (&(and /&/B to the scattered 3sraelites simply kno#n then as ethne. omans 8&/ is the beginning ofthe fulfillment of both FHekiel BG&/( and %osea"s corresponding prophecies concerning thereunion of the house of 3srael #ith the house of ;udah. The %osea prophecies #ere made aboutthe nations ofthe house of 3srael and can be applied to only the nations of the house of 3srael.

/G


28/87

-od is not a man that he should lie ? hath he said and shall he not do it@ =r hath hespoken and shall he not make it good@ Numbers /B&(8

The authors of The Pulpit +o%%entarymisidentified the ;udahites in omans 8&/ as beingall t#elve tribes of 3srael and the gentiles as being non73sraelites. Nevertheless in attempting to

eEplain ho# these prophecies from %osea could someho# be applied to non73sraelites gentilesthey admitted that these prophecies pertained to the ten7tribed house of 3srael&

3t might seem that these 9uotations are not apposite OapplicableP since they referredoriginally not to the -entiles but to the ten tribes of 3srael.G

The Pulpit +o%%entarys use of the #ord +originally, implies that at some point in time!ah#eh changed %is mind. ut nothing in the =ld Testament indicates that someone else #asever substituted for the 3sraelites. There is no biblical justification for applying these propheciesto anyone other than to #hom they #ere originally directed. These prophecies refer to the tentribes of 3srael and no one has the authority to apply them to non73sraelites. %ad ethnosbeentranslated nations in omans 8&/ and had the connection bet#een the ten tribes or nations of

3srael and the!oyi%and the ethnebeen made most of the confusion over this passage #ouldhave never eEisted.3mmediately follo#ing his 9uotations from %osea about the house of 3srael aul 9uoted the

rophet 3saiah in verse /G. %e introduced the 9uotation by declaring that +Fsaias also criethconcerning 3srael., The conteEt of 3saiah (&// from #hich aul 9uoted is about the gentiliHed3sraelites from the nations of the house of 3srael. y 9uoting from %osea ( and / and 3saiah (aul confirmed that the nations to #hom he #as referring #ere 3sraelites rather than non73sraelites. Therefore in omans 8 and other Ne# Testament passages the ethneare the same3sraelite !oyi% found in the =ld Testament #ho #ere divorced by !ah#eh and #ho #ereprophesied to be reunited #ith the house of ;udah beginning at the 1irst Advent of the Messiah.

3n spite of the prophetic and teEtual evidence demonstrating that in omans 8&/ the ;e#sare ;udahites and the gentiles are 3sraelites verses B7B( raises a 9uestion that begs an ans#er&

$hat shall #e say then@ That the Gentiles #hich follo#ed not after righteousness haveattained to righteousness even the righteousness #hich is of faith. ut %srael #hichfollo#ed after the la# of righteousness hath not attained to the la# of righteousness. 4omans 8&B7B(

3n these t#o verses aul contrasts the gentiles #ith 3sraelL therefore ho# can those gentilesbe 3sraelites@ emember !ah#eh initially chose to conceal the identity of the house of 3srael bydivorcing and scattering her among the nations of the #orld. According to %osea (&7I they lostthe right to be called by the name +3srael., Although undeserved the house of ;udah remained ina marriage relationship #ith !ah#eh right up to the Ne# Covenant dispensation presumably sothat !ah#eh"s Son #ould not be born out of #edlock&

And !ah#eh said unto ? O%oseaP ?3 #ill ? cause to cease the kingdom of the house of3srael?. 3 #ill no more have mercy upon the house of 3srael?. ut % will ha)e $ercy"pon the ho"se of !"dah?. 4 %osea (&7G

Therefore the house of ;udah continued in her kingdom relationship #ith !ah#eh andretained the right to be called by the marital name &sra El.Although representing only the t#osouthern tribes and principally kno#n as ;udahites they #ere nonetheless 3sraelites andoccasionally called 3srael because they still reigned #ith Fl in %is kingdom&

/6


29/87

%ear ye this & ho"se of !acowhich are called y the na$e of %sraeland are co$eforth o"t of the waters of!"dah?. 4 3saiah 6&(

Fphraim compasseth me about #ith lies and the house of 3srael #ith deceit& but !"dahyet r"leth with God OFlohiymP?. 4 %osea ((&(/

Jnder the subheading +ebellion of the Northern Tribes, Nelsons New &llustrated Bi"leDictionarydeclares that the reason #hy the term +3srael, in the ible is sometimes confusing isbecause it is occasionally used for both the northern tribes of the house of 3srael and for thecovenant people of the house of ;udah&

The northern tribes declared independence and formed a separate kingdom #ith;eroboam as head. They named their kingdom +3srael, *this sometimes causes confusionbecause the name is also used for the remnant of the Covenant eople at a later time0.G5

The New n!ers Bi"le Dictionaryalso comments concerning the use of the name +3srael, asa designation for the descendants of the hou

Documents

13781963 the Mystery of the Gentiles Who Are They and Where Are They Now