Your Heritage

By Bertrand L. Comparet

INTRODUCTION
Much is heard in this day of the word ANTI-SEMITIC The word is a
creation of the modern Pharisees who are anti-Christian. The purpose
of the creation was to "smear" or blacken the name or reputation of
Christians seeking to protect and defend their faith from the
onslaughts of those who would destroy it.

The word "Semitic" is derived from the patriarch Shem, and is

correctly applied to people descended from him. All true Israelites
(NOT Jews, as this booklet shows) are therefore Semites; and today
these are the great White Christian nations of the Western World.
The Jews (as the second half of this booklet shows) are not Semitic at
all, as their Canaanite and Khazar ancestors were not descendants of
Shem. Their smear accusation "anti-Semitic" against all who oppose
Jewish seizure of Palestine is, therefore, false. (Indeed, the Arabs -
who are half Semitic - can truthfully accuse the Jews of anti-
Semitism!)

That fact is quite obvious. It has been said that Communism seeks to
make black white and white black. The word anti-Semitic is just one
example of such mis-use and intended opposite meaning, in an effort
to attach an ill-sounding term which should be self-applied, to him or
them who are actually quite the opposite in viewpoint.

It is one purpose of this booklet to bring to the reader accurate

Biblical and historic proof of the error applied in the use of the term
anti-Semitic.

It is hoped that much confusion, purposely created as camouflage, will

be clarified in the minds of Christians by the careful reading and
study of the material so excellently presented by the author.

ISRAEL' S FINGERPRINTS
The Bible is written about, and addressed to, God's people, "Israel."
It is the history of their past, the prophecy of their future, the law of
their relation to their God, and the promise of God's eternal care of
them, The common misconception, that "the Jews are Israel, or all
that remains of them," has made the Bible meaningless, and most of it
apparently false, to those who hold this mistaken belief. It is just as
though you took a good history of the United States, but wherever the
name "United States" appeared therein, you erased it and wrote
"China" in its place. As a history of China, it would be obviously
false; but if you applied it to me right nation, it would be clearly true.

The Bible's history of Israel's past is known to be accurate; and its

prophecies of Israel's future have been fulfilled in every detail, down
to the present day. When the police have the fingerprints of a wanted
man, they know that the man whose fingerprints match those they
have is the man they seek. Likewise, when we find the people to whom
God has fulfilled all of His promises and prophecies to Israel, we have
found Israel! Today, the Anglo-Saxon-Scandinavian and Germanic
nations have Israel's finger-prints in every detail.

When we realize that WE ARE ISRAEL, the Bible becomes full of

meaning for us: it is our history, it contains God's promises to us. It
gives us courage to face the. terrible upheaval into which all the world
is being drawn. If you will only read the Bible with an open mind,
taking no man's word for it, but proving for yourself what the Bible
says, then comparing that with what you know of present-day history,
you will see that WE are God's People Israel, and that, however
terrible the trial ahead, we will be brought safely through it when we
turn to God.

FIRST - Let us briefly review the ancient history of Israel God first
made His promises of wonderful blessings to Abram, changing his
name to "Abraham," meaning "Father of Nations." Note that this is
in the plural - nations. God repeated His promises to Abraham's son,
Isaac; and again to Isaac's son Jacob, whose name God changed to
''Israel,'' which means ''He will rule with God.''

Israel had twelve sons. The descendants of each son became in time a
Tribe, under its ancestor's name: thus, all the descendants of Dan
became the Tribe of Dan, all the descendants of Benjamin became the
Tribe of Benjamin, etc. For many centuries, all members of all the
twelve tribes collectively were known as the "children" - that is,
descendants of Israel. However, do not confuse this with the later
"House," or Kingdom, of Israel, about which I will have more to say
later.
Israel and his twelve sons, with their families, went into Egypt, as you
will remember; and after about 2 1/2 centuries, their descendants left
Egypt in the Exodus, under the leadership of Moses. For several
generations they were ruled by "Judges" appointed by God. Later,
they unwisely copied the customs of the surrounding nations and
demanded a King; so Saul became their first king, ruling the twelve
tribes as a single nation. This unified nation of twelve tribes (like the
United States of fifty states) continued until the death of Solomon, in
975 BC., when it broke into two nations, Israel and Judah

1st Kings 11-12 tell us how Solomon finally fell into idolatry, mis-
governed the people and burdened them with excessive taxes. (Yes,
they babbled about "New Deals" and "Great Societies" in those days,
too!) When his son Rehoboam succeeded Solomon as King, in 975 BC.
the weary people petitioned him to ease their burdens; but being vain
and arrogant, and surrounded by a lot of "bright" young Jewish
advisors (even as today!), he threatened to make their load heavier.
The exasperated people of the ten Northern tribes revolted, and set up
their own. independent kingdom under Jeroboam, the son of Nebat,
which is told in detail in 1st Kings, Chapters 11 and 12 and 2nd
Chronicles 10 and 11 Rehoboam, the son of Solomon had left in his
Kingdom only the two Southern tribes, Judah and Benjamin, with
some of the Levites, who were the priests: and this Southern Kingdom
was never thereafter known as "Israel," but only as the House (or
Kingdom) of Judah. The Northern, ten-tribed kingdom was thereafter
called the House (or Kingdom) of Israel. Just as the Southern
kingdom Judah, took its name from the Tribe of Judah. which WiL5
the ruling Tribe, so also the Northern Kingdom of Israel was
sometimes called "Ephraim" in the prophecies, be-cause the Tribe of
Ephraim was the most powerful tribe in it. The histories and destinies
of the two kingdoms were thereafter separate: they engaged
separately in foreign wars and treaties, and were sometimes at war
with each other, as the Book of Kings and Chronicles record.

From the time of this separation, 975 BC., the Bible very carefully
distinguished between the Southern, two tribed nation of Judah and
the Northern, ten-tribed nation of Israel. This distinction is kept clear,
both in the historical record of what is past and the prophetic record
of what is to come. It would take another volume to cover them all;
but for a few examples, see the following: the distinction is made
historically in 2nd Samuel 19:40-43; 1st Kings 14:19-21; 15:1-33; 16:b;
2nd Kings 3:1-9; 2nd Chronicles 16:1; 25:5-10; and many others. The
distinction is kept clear in prophecies in Isaiah 7:1-9; 11:12-13;
Jeremiah :3:6-18; 5:11; 11:10-17; 13:11; 18:l-6; 19:1-13; Ezekiel
37:16-22; Daniel 9:7; Hosea 1:11; 4:15; 5:9-15; Amos 1:1; Micah 1:5;
Zechariah 8:13; 10:6-8; and many others.
Just as we must carefully distinguish between the two nations of Israel
and Judah, so also we must carefully distinguish between the nation of
Judah and the Jews.

Both Israel and Judah were carried into captivity - but separately,
and at different times, by different conquerors, and taken to different
places. Israel was conquered by Assyria between 740 and 721 BC.,
and by 715 BC. all of its people had been deported and resettled in
what we now know as Armenia, northwestern Iran, and the region
near Baku, around the southern end of the Caspian Sea. The
Assyrians brought in other people and settled them in Samaria, the
southern halt of Israel's old Palestinian land, to which the people of
Israel never returned. See 2nd Kings 17. From this time onward, the
historical parts of the "authorized" or King James version of the
Bible do not record the further history of Israel; but in the
Apochrypha, 2nd Esdras 13:39-46 records their further journey to "Ar
Sereth" (the valley of the River Sereth, a northern tributary of the
Danube River, in modern Romania, which still bears the name
Sereth.") At the conclusion of this deportation of Israel from its
Palestinian home, the Assyrian king Sennacherib also invaded the
southern kingdom of Judah and captured all the smaller Cities in it,
everything except Jerusalem. The people of these smaller cities were
deported, along with the people of the northern Kingdom of Israel.
Sennacherib's own record of this invasion says that he deported
200,150 people from the southern Kingdom of Judah. 2nd Kings 18:13
and Isaiah 36:1 mention his capture of these cities. Thus the Assyrian
deportation of Israel included the entire population of the northern
Kingdom of Israel and a considerable representative share of the
southern Kingdom of Judah. From this time on, these people became
the so-called "Lost Ten Tribes of Israel." (As we shall see, God took
good care of them, as lie had promised, and you who are reading this
are among their descendants.)

The Kingdom of Judah on the other hand, did not go into captivity
until 606 to 585 BC., and was conquered by Babylon, not Assyria.
They were deported to the City of Babylon and settled nearby, a little
south of Bagdad, in what is now southern Iraq. Not quite all of them
were deported, a few of the poor being left behind to cultivate the
land, and no other people were brought in to settle the land. (See 2nd
Kings 24-25.) This Babylonian captivity of Judah lasted 70 years, as
had been prophesied by Jeremiah 20:4-5; 25:11-12; 29:10. After the
fall of Babylon, King Cyrus allowed all who wished to return to
Palestine, beginning in 536 BC. (See 2nd Chronicles 36:20-23.) Ezra1-2
records that only 42,360 returned, and their descendants (who have
never been called "Jews" until their Babylonian conquerors gave
them that name) lived in Palestine until the destruction of Jerusalem
by the Romans under Titus in AD. 70. This reconstructed nation,
sometimes called "Jewish" was the "70 weeks" nation with the evil
destiny "to finish the transgression," prophesied in Daniel 9:24. In
AD. 70, those who had survived the terrible wars ceased to be a nation
at all, and became scattered wanderers in all lands.

There is not one word in either the Bible or secular history to suggest
that Israel either was destroyed or that they went (town to Babylon
and joined Judah in the Babylonian captivity; and the Jews
themselves testify that the genealogy of those who returned from
Babylon shows no one from any tribe but Judah, Benjamin, and Levi,
the members of the Kingdom of Judah. To the contrary, it was well
known at the beginning of the Christian era that Israel THEN
EXISTED IN GREAT NUMBERS: Josephus' great history,
"Antiquities of the jews" Book 11, Chapter 5, speaks of them as "an
immense multitude, beyond the Euphrates River." The prophetic
parts of the Bible still continue to prophecy the great future of Israel
several generations after they had vanished into the Assyrian
captivity: Isaiah prophesied until 698 BC., Jeremiah until 588 BC.
Ezekiel to 574 BC., and Daniel to 534 BC. Jesus Christ was well aware
of the existence of Israel, separate and apart from Judah and the
Jews; see Matthew 10:5-6. Again, compare John 7:35; 11:49-52, which
cannot refer to Judah or the Jews, as the Jews were not yet
"dispersed" or "scattered abroad" and would not be for another 40
years; only Israel was "dispersed" out of its own land.

The complete and permanent destruction of the Jewish nation by the

Romans under Titus, and their subsequent troubles as outcasts in
every land, are not a failure of the prophecies and promises to Israel,
but an accurate fulfillment of the prophecies about the Jews. With the
history of these nations in mind, let us examine God's promises and
prophecies about Israel in the Bible.

God's promises to Abraham were unconditional. God must fulfill

them or break His word. Consider what God said, in Genesis 12:2;
13:16; 15:5; 17:3-7, 19; and 22:16-18: "And I will make of thee a great
nation, and I will bless thee and make thy name great: and thou shalt
be a blessing: And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth; so
that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed
also be numbered. As for Me, behold, My covenant is with thee, and
thou shalt be a father of MANY nations. And I will establish MY
covenant between Me and thee, and thy seed after thee in their
generations, for an EVER-LASTING COVENANT. Look now toward
heaven, and count the stars, if thou be able to number them; and He
said unto him, so shall thy seed be. BY MYSELF HAVE I SWORN,
saith the Lord . . . that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying
I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven and as the sand
which is upon the seashore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his
enemies."

God did not say that He would do this "IF" or "PERHAPS" - these
were all UNCONDITIONAL promises. Those promises which were
made at Mt. Sinai on condition that men should obey Cod's laws, were
the promises made through Moses, relating to health, prosperity,
peace, etc. The promises to Abraham were UNCONDITIONAL and
absolute; and in the New Testament, Paul tells us that these "the law,
which was 430 years after, cannot disannul, that It should make the
promises of none effect." (Galatians 3:17.) If the Bible is true, if God's
word is good, then these promises must be good.

God repeated these promises UNCONDITIONALLY to Isaac, in

Genesis 26:3-5: "Sojourn in this land and I will be with thee, and will
bless thee; for unto thee and thy seed I will give all these countries;
and I WILL PERFORM THE OATH WHICH I SWORE UNTO
ABRAHAM, THY FATHER. And I will make thy seed to multiply as
the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all of these countries;
and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed."

Again, in the 28th, and 35th chapters of Genesis, GOD REPEATED

HIS PROMISES, UNCONDITIONALLY, to Jacob, Israel our
ancestor; "I am the Lord God of Abraham, thy father, and the God of
Isaac, the land wheren thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed;
and thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth; and thou shalt spread
abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south;
and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be
blessed. And Behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places
whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land, FOR I
WILL NOT LEAVE THEE UNTIL I HAVE DONE THAT WHICH I
HAVE SPOKEN TO THEE OF. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation
and A COMPANY OF NATIONS shall be of thee, and kings shall
come out of thy loins."

There can't be any evasion of these promises; and God has always
honored them. Even when the children of Israel worshiped the Golden
Calf while Moses was on Mt. Sinai, receiving the ten commandments,
God did not destroy them, for the sake of these promises. (See Exodus
32:7-14.) In many places, the New Testament recognized these
promises as being still in full effect; for example, in Hebrews 6:13,17,
"For when Cod made promise to Abraham, because He could swear
by no greater, He swore by Himself . . . Wherein God, being willing
more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability
of His counsel, confirmed it with an oath." Again in Romans 11:1-2;
9:4-5; and 15:8 Paul tells us "I say then, Hath God cast away his
people? God forbid! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of
Abraham, of the Tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away His
people which he foreknew... Who are Israelites, to whom pertaineth
the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the
law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the Fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ . . . Now I say that Jesus
Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to
confirm the promises made unto the fathers.

SO THESE ARE THE PROMISES OF GOD: IF THEY ARE

FALSE, THEN THE BIBLE IS FALSE: BUT IF THEY HAVE BEEN
FULFILLED, THEN THE PEOPLE TO WHOM THEY WERE
FULFILLED ARE THEREBY IDENTIFIED AS ISRAEL. But the
separate, and very different prophecies relating to the Jews show that
the promises and prophecies to Israel had no reference to the Jews.
Let's look at a few of them.

ISRAEL WAS TO HAVE A CHANGE OF NAME, WHILE THE

JEWS' NAME WAS LEFT TO THEM AS A CURSE. In Isaiah
65:13-15, God tells the Jews: "And ye shall leave YOUR name FOR A
CURSE TO MY CHOSEN: FOR THE LORD GOD SHALL SLAY
THEE, and CALL HIS SERVANTS BY ANOTHER NAME." Who
are God's servants? In many places God repeats this: "But thou,
ISRAEL, are MY servant . . . Thou art My servant: I have chosen
thee, and not cast thee away." For example, see Isaiah 41:8-10; 43:1,
and 10; 44:1-2, 21-22; etc. This has been fulfilled, ISRAEL is no
longer called by its old name; but the Jews have retained their name
for "a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse," as Jeremiah 24:9
says.

AGAIN, THE JEWS WERE TO BE KNOWN BY THEIR FACES.

Isaiah 3:9 says: "THE SHOW OF THEIR COUNTENANCE DOTH
WITNESS AGAINST THEM, and they declare their sin as Sodom,
they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! For they have rewarded evil
unto themselves." To this day, the Jew is known by his face, and even
getting his nose bobbed can't always hide it: IT IS A WITNESS
AGAINST HIM - While Israelis not so marked.

ISRAEL WAS TO BECOME A GREAT NATION AND ALSO A

COMPANY OF NATIONS, AND TO BE A NATION FOREVER,
AND TO HAVE A KING FOREVER. See Genesis 35:11; Jeremiah
31:35-37; 33:17; Psalm 89:3-4; Isaiah 9:7; Luke 1:32-33; etc., which
say, "A nation and a company of nations shall be of thee . . . Thus
saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the
ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night . . . If
those ordinances depart from before Me, saith the Lord, then the seed
of Israel shall cease from being a nation before Me forever . . . For
thus saith the Lord; David shall never lack a man to sit upon the
throne of the House of Israel." Since the sun, moon and stars still
shine, these promises must be still in effect; and they cannot possibly
apply to the Jews, who never were "a company of nations" and who
ceased to be a nation at all in AD. 70. On the other hand, Israel has
fulfilled all of this, as we shall see.

GOD SAID THAT THE JEWS WERE TO BE DESTROYED AS A

NATION, AND TO BECOME SCATTERED OUTCASTS IN ALL
LANDS. In the 18th Chapter of Jeremiah, God used the parable of the
potter making a clay bottle on the potter's wheel; and on the first
trial, the bottle was spoiled; so the potter mashed it back into a lump
and tried again, and on the second trial he made a perfect bottle. God
said that He would re-make Israel into the kind of nation he wanted,
just as the potter had done with the soft clay. But in the next chapter,
Jeremiah 19, God told the prophet to get an earthen bottle which had
been burned hard, and to assemble the elders and important men of
Jerusalem. Then God said; "Then shalt thou break the bottle in the
sight of the men that go with thee, and shall say to them, Thus saith
the Lord of hosts: Even so will I break this people and this city, as one
breaketh a potter's vessel that cannot be made whole again." Again in
Jeremiah 15:4 and 24:29, God said of the Jews. "And I will cause
them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth, because of
Manasseh, the son of Hezekiah, the King of Judah, for that which he
did in Jerusalem. And I will deliver them to be removed into all the
kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb,
a taunt and a curse, in all the places whither I shall drive them:" In
fulfillment of this, after the 70 weeks (or 490 years) of Daniel 9:24
were completed, Titus the Roman General destroyed Jerusalem in
AD. 70; The Jews were broken as a nation, and have had no king of
their own. In John 19:15 they spoke truly. "we have no king but
Caesar."

Israel was to become a very numerous people: besides the many

statements of this in Genesis chapters 13, 15, 22, 26, and 28, it is
repeated in Hosea 1:10: "yet the children of Israel shall be as the sand
of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. The Jews on the
other hand, were to be reduced to a remnant. In Ezekiel 5:11-12 God
said: "Wherefore, as I live, said the Lord God, Surely because thou
hast defiled My sanctuary with all thy detestable things, and with all
thine abominations, therefore will I also diminish thee: neither shall
Mine eyes spare, neither will I have pity. A third part of thee shall die
with the pestilence, and with famine shall they be consumed in the
midst of thee; and a third shall fall by the sword round about thee:
and I will scatter a third part into all the winds, and I will draw out a
sword after them." See also Jeremiah 15:4-9, etc. The total Jewish
population of the world is estimated to be about 16 million people,
today - almost exactly what it was estimated to be just before Hitler's
completely mythical massacre of six million Jews who were not killed
at all. They are not so prolific that in 20 years they could increase
their numbers by 60%, as would have to be the case if the alleged
massacre was true. To conceal this fact, the Jews now seek to falsify
the records: you will remember that in our 1960 census, it was not
permitted to ask anyone his religion, so you couldn't find out that
5,000,000 of the supposedly dead 6,000,000 had been illegally admitted
to the United States. But this 16 million is certainly NOT "as the stars
of tile heaven or as the sand which is upon the seashore" for numbers.

For another thing, ISRAEL WAS TO BECOME BLIND TO ITS

IDENTITY. In Romans 11:25, paul comments that "blindness in part
is happened to Israel." This is fulfillment of Isaiah 42:19-20, "Who is
blind, but my servant? Or deaf, as My messenger that I sent? . .
Seeing many things, but thou observeth not: opening the ears, but he
heareth not." You remember that God's servant is Israel. The Jews,
on the other hand, are not blind to their identity: they know their
origin and their history - although they try to fool you into thinking
that they are Israel - and they generally have succeeded in this
deception.

AGAIN, Israel WAS TO RECEIVE THE NEW COVENANT -

CHRISTIANITY: Jeremiah 31:33 prophecied it, and in Hebrews 8:10
Paul quotes it in proof of this: "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 in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and
I will be their God and they shall be My people." Have the Jews
received the new covenant? Of course not?. As the beloved Apostle
John said, in I John 2:23, "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath
not the Father." And in John 15:23, Jesus Christ Himself said, "He
that hateth ME hateth My Father also."

The Jews DO NOT FULFILL ANY OF THE PRINCIPAL

PROPHECIES CONCERNING ISRAEL. THEREFORE, THE
JEWS ARE NOT ISRAEL.

DOES ISRAEL EXIST TODAY? OR HAS GOD VIOLATED ALL

OF HIS PROMISES?

YES, ISRAEL EXISTS TODAY: FOR THE ANGLO SAXON,

SCANDINAVIAN AND GERMANIC PEOPLES HAVE RECEIVED
THE FULFILLMENT OF GOD'S PROMISES AND PROPHECIES.
FIRST: THEY ARE A GREAT NATION AND A COMPANY OF
NATIONS, ALL OF THE SAME RACE. The United States is the
largest civilized nation in the world; its population is exceeded only by
China, India, and Russia; it is the richest, the most advanced, the
most benevolent in its policies, and has the greatest degree of liberty
of any large nation. Between the two world wars, the former British
Empire was officially reorganized into the "British Commonwealth of
Nations;" Canada and Australia are independent nations. The
Scandinavian and Germanic nations arc of the same blood, have
largely the same customs, and can be identified historically as the
peoples who furnished most of the population of the British Isles and
its colonies and the United States.

SECOND: THEY ARE VERY NUMEROUS, as the prophecies said

Israel would be. In the last two centuries, the population of the United
States has increased from a mere handful to over 200,000,000 of
whom about 150,000,000 are WHITE CHRISTIANS of Anglo-Saxon-
Scandinavian Germanic stock. In the last three centuries, the
population of the British Isles and their colonies of Canada and
Australia increased from about 5, 000,000 to over 70,000, 000 Anglo-
Saxons. The nations of Germany, Austria, Holland, Denmark,
Norway, Sweden, and Finland add about 96,000,000 more. So the total
number of the Anglo-Saxon-Scandinavian-Germanic peoples is well
over 300 million.

THIRD: THEY ARE A MARITIME PEOPLE, Of the descendants of

Israel, Numbers 24:7 prophecies: "His seed shall be in many waters:"
and Psalm 89:25 says: "I will set his hand also in the sea, and his right
hand in the rivers." The world's greatest navies are those of the
United States and Britain: the greatest merchant marine fleets are
those of Britain, and Norway (and until recently, the United States.)

FOURTH: THEY ARE THE GREATEST MILITARY POWERS.

Jeremiah 51:20 gives God's word: "Thou art my battleaxe and
weapons of war: for WITH THEE will I break in pieces the nations,
and WITH THEE will I destroy kingdoms." Throughout history this
has been true. A century after being taken captive by Assyria, the
peoples of Israel (then generally known as Scythians) had bled
Assyria white by their constant warfare against it, so that Assyria was
an easy push-over victory for the Medes and Persians, just before they
turned their attention to Babylon. It was the Israel tribes on their
march to Europe, as the Visigoths, Ostrogoths, and Vandals who
crushed the Roman Empire. In 713, at Tours, Anglo-Saxon Israel
destroyed the invading hordes of Muslins, Jews and Moors. In the 13th
Century they defeated the Tartar, Mongol, "Jewish" Khazar hordes
under Genghis Khan. Later they conquered Turkey and Japan. Not
without heavy cost - for the promises of EASY Victory were made
through Moses and were conditional upon keeping the law. But the
promise of FINAL Victory to shatter the enemy (even with heavy cost)
is unconditional. This has been fulfilled consistently to only one
people, those whom we identify as Anglo-Saxon Israel.

FIFTH: "THEY POSSESS THE GATES OF THEIR ENEMIES."

You will remember that this was one of God's promises we found in
Genesis 22:17. Obviously, this doesn't mean a wooden gate in some
person's front yard, but the "gateways" of hostile nations the great
water-ways of the world. Consider the fact that the Anglo-Saxon
nations, and THEY ALONE, have power to close EVERY important
water "gate" in the world. American and British fleets based at
Scotland, the Orkney Islands, Gibralter, Malta, Aden, Capetown,
Australia, Singapore, the Philippines, Hawaii, San Francisco and
Puget Sound, Panama, the Falkiand Islands, Hampton Roads, and
Iceland - these dominate and can close the Skagerrak and Baltic Sea,
the North Sea, the English Channel, the Straits of Gibralter, the
Mediterranean, the Suez Canal, the Indian Ocean, the waters around
Southeast Asia and the East Coast of Asia, the coasts of Africa and
around the Cape of Good Hope, the coasts of North and South
America, the Straits of Magellan and around Cape Horn, and all
trade routes acrbss the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans. They
have proved this by actually doing it in two world wars.

SIXTH: THEY "POSSESS THE DESOLATE HERITAGES" OF

THE EARTH. In Isaiah 49:8 God says: "Thus saith the Lord: In an
acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I
helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of
the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate
heritages." No one else has so successfully developed the colonies
which were desolate when they first occupied them. Compare what
the United States has done in its Southwestern States with Mexico,
similar land, with fully as great undeveloped riches, separated from us
by only an imaginary line. Compare British Africa with the African
colonies of all other nations -and especially compare it with the dismal
savagery of the Negroes! Compare the development of Palestine and
Iraq while under British rule, with Turkey, Arabia, Iran, etc.

SEVENTH: THEY HAVE EXPANDED IN COLONIES IN ALL

DIRECTIONS. Deuteronomy 32:8 says: "When the Most High
divided to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of
Adam, He set the bounds of the people according to the number of the
children of Israel." Genesis 28:14 says, "Thou shalt spread abroad to
the west, and to the cast, and to the north, and to the south: and in
thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed."
Isaiah 54:2-3 tells us, "Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them
stretch forth the curtains of habitation; spare not, lengthen thy cords
and strengthen thy stakes: for thou shalt break forth on the right
hand and on the left; and thy seed shall inherit the nations, and make
the desolate cities to be inhabited:" Their colonies were established in
every sea, in Europe, North and South America, Africa, Australia-
New Zealand, and Asia. Who else has ever had such colonies? All the
ancient empires were insignificant compared to this. Since we have
allowed the Jews to teach us to turn our backs on God, we have
unwisely abandoned our colonies; and the chaos in the world today is
largely a result of our failure to obey God's commands to occupy and
rule the uncivilized peoples. However, even this was also prophetic
(though that is another subject.)

EIGHTH: THEY HAVE MAINTAINED THE CONTINUITY OF

THE THRONE OF DAVID. David's descendants continued on the
throne in Jerusalem until King Zedekiah was taken prisoner to
Babylon, at which time all his sons were slain. But the prophet
Jeremiah took the king's daughters, first to Egypt (as we read in
Jeremiah 43:6) and from there, by way of Spain to Ireland, where
Zedekiah's daughter, Tea Tephi, was married to Eochaidh, the
Heremon (or Chief King) of Ireland. Eochaidh was a descendant of
Zarah, one of the twin sons of Judah, while David was a descendant of
Pharez, the other twin. Killing all of Zedekiah's sons did not end the
dynasty, as it was established law in Israel ever since they first entered
Palestine, that when a man died leaving no sons, his daughters
received the entire inheritance. The two king lines of the Tribe of
Judah were united in this marriage; and the lineage is clearly traced
in the histories of Ireland, Scotland, and England, unbroken down to
the present British Queen Elizabeth. Thus the prophecy that David's
descendants should always be on the throne over an Israelite nation
has been fulfilled - and by the Anglo-Saxon nations ONLY.

---------------------

This has covered but a tiny fraction of Biblical proof that the Anglo-
Saxon-Scandinavian, and Germanic people are the Israel of the Bible.
Scholars have found nearly 100 prophecies concerning Israel which
have been fulfilled by this one group of, people. When you consider
that the United Nations now recognizes over 100 member nations, the
odds against any one nation fulfilling the first of these prophecies is
obviously 100 to 1. The odds against that same nation fulfilling both
the first and second prophecies again multiplies this by 100, making
ten thousand to one; and the odds against the same nation fulfilling
the first, second, and third prophecies becomes. one million to one.
Well, you figure it out; keep on multiplying by 100 - oh, even 50 more
times. But even that isn't all; a group of nations all the same blood
have done this. Not a random assortment, like China and Spain, or
Egypt and Brazil; but all of the same racial group. So this again
multiplies the odds. Do you think that this could have happened by
mere accident?

And if you do think that this was pure accident, then WHAT HAS
BECOME OF GOD'S PROPHECIES AND PROMISES? Was he too
ignorant to know that he couldn't make good on His word, that all the
things He had promised to Israel never got there but were all taken by
other people? No, I don't think that God made any failures or any
mistakes. He promised and Prophesied many things about Israel.
They have all come to pass; and they have all been made good to the
same racial group of nations.

---------------------

THIS PEOPLE HAS ISRAEL'S

FINGERPRINTS
There is also the other line of proof of the identity of these people, by
tracing historically their migration into Europe, and from there Into
their colonies. But that is another subject, much longer than the one
just covered.

WHO ARE THE JEWS?

The identification of the Anglo-Saxon-Scandinavian Germanic
peoples as the surviving members of the peoples of Israel, leaves us
with two other questions to answer:

1. WHO ARE THE JEWS?

2. WAS JESUS CHRIST A JEW?

To answer these questions, we must first define what we mean by

"Jew." The muddled thinking of most people on this subject is due to
the fact that they never know just what they do mean by "Jew" -
sometimes they mean a Jew by religion, regardless of his race (for
Negroes, Chinese and Japanese have all been converted to Judaism);
or sometimes they mean a Jew by race, regardless' of his religion (for
example, Premier Ben Gurion of the Jewish nation in Palestine is a
Buddist by religion, though a Jew by race) - and usually people don't
know which of these they do mean.

Since it can be answered quickest, let us first take the question - was
Jesus Christ a Jew by RELIGION? The answer is clearly "NO." Jesus
had the true religion of the Old Testament, found in the Law and the
prophets: and He constantly rebuked the Jews for having abandoned
this for Judaism under the Babylonian Talmud (which in His day was
called "The Tradition of the Elders.") In Matthew 5:17-18, he said:
"Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the prophets; I am
not come to destroy, but to fulfill; for verily I say unto you, till heaven
and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law
till all be fulfilled.

Jesus constantly rebuked the Jews for their apostasy, for setting aside
the Laws of God in favor of the Tradition of the Elders. This
Talmudic Judaism was very different from the religion which we find
in the Old Testament. The late Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Chief Rabbi of
the United States, expressed it so clearly that I cannot improve on his
words. He said: "THE RETURN FROM BABYLON, AND THE
ADOPTION OF THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD, MARKS THE
END OF HEBREWISM, AND THE BEGINNING OF JUDAISM."

Since the true religion of the Old Testament was the religion of the
real Hebrews (NOT JEWS), the learned Rabbi was quite right in
calling it "Hebrewism" and noting that it came to its end when the
Talmud (then called the Tradition of the Elders) was adopted; and
that this WAS THE BEGINNING OF A NEW RELIGION -
"JUDAISM," (or BABYLONIANISM.)

So we read in Matthew 15:1-9: "Then came to Jesus Scribes and

Pharisees which were of Jerusalem, saying, 1Why do Thy disciples
transgress the Tradition of the Elders? For they wash not their hands
when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them Why do ye
also transgress the commandment of God by your Tradition? Ye
hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophecy of you, saying this people
draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and honoreth Me with their
lips; but their heart is far from Me. But in vain do they worship Me,
teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."' (The same
incident is found also in Mark 7:5-13.) In John 5:37-46, Jesus told the
Jews: "The Father Himself, which hath sent Me, hath borne witness
of . . . Search the Scriptures: for in them ye think ye have eternal life;
and it is they which testify of Me . . . For had ye believed Moses, ye
would have believed Me: for he write of Me." Again, in John 8:54-55,
lie said: "It is My Father that honoreth Me: of whom ye say that He is
your God: yet ye have not known Him." In John 15:23, Jesus said:
"He that hateth Me hateth My Father also." In the 21st Chapter of
Matthew, Jesus summed up their position by saying that even the Tax
Collectors and the harlots could enter the Kingdom of God before the
Jews. Surely, Jesus Christ's entire ministry was a complete
demonstration that He was not a Jew by RELIGION.

Was Jesus a Jew by RACE? To answer this, we must trace the racial
ancestry of both Jesus and the Jews. Jesus Christ was a pure-blooded
member of the Tribe of Judah-and no true Judahite was a Jew by
race, as we shall see. Jesus ancestry is given in both Matthew 1 and
Luke 3. Both of them show that He was a descendant of the Patriarch
Judah, through one of his twin son Pharez; by His mother Mary, He
came through the line of David, and Nathan, the brother of Solomon,
as traced in the 3rd. Chapter of Luke. Jesus Christ was therefore a
pureblooded Israelite, of the Tribe of Judah as Paul says in Romans
9:4-5.

Now, let us trace the racial descent of the Jews. First, let us note that
the Jews were not - and are NOT - Israelites. Yes, I know that you
have been taught that "Jew" and "Israel" as we shall see. Let us get
the first proof of this from Jesus Christ himself. He stated plainly, in
Matthew 15:24: 'I am not sent but unto the Lost Sheep of the House of
Israel. "Therefore, He was sent to those who were of Israel - but not to
others. Accordingly, when he sent his 12 disciples out to preach His
gospel, Matthew 10:5-6 records that He told them this: "Go not into
the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye
not; but go rather to the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel." And He
added, "Ye shall NOT have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of
man be come. (Matthew 10:23.) They could have gone over all the
cities of Judea in a month; so it was obvious that the cities of Israel, to
which he referred were the cities of the so-called Lost Tribes who had
already entered Europe in their long migration. But take careful note
of Jesus Christ's own words: "I am not sent but unto the Lost Sheep
of the House of Israel." If the Jews were any part of Israel then they
would have been some of His sheep; but He says that they are not.

In the 10th chapter of John, Jesus says: "I am the good shepherd, and
KNOW MY SHEEP, AND AM KNOWN OF MINE." But he tells the
Jews - and it says "Jews" - "But ye believe not, BECAUSE YE ARE
NOT OF MY SHEEP, as I said unto you. MY SHEEP HEAR MY
VOICE, AND I KNOW THEM, AND THEY FOLLOW ME." Note
carefully those words: He does NOT say that the reason that the Jews
are not His sheep is that they don't believe, and that they could
become His sheep just by changing their minds: to the contrary, He
says that the reason they don't believe is that THEY ARE NOT OF
HIS SHEEP: He knows His sheep, and knows that the Jews are not of
His sheep.

Since the Jews are not any part of any Tribe of Israel, then WHO
ARE THE JEWS? Let's trace their ancestry. We find that the true
line of His people must be kept free from mongrelization with the
neighboring Canaanite Accordingly, Genesis 24:3-4 records that
Abraham took great pains to see that his son Isaac, should marry of
only a woman of his own people likewise Genesis 27:46 -28:1 records
that Isaac also required that his son, Jacob (the father of the
Israelites) should also marry only within his own race line. This law
had been obeyed for several centuries, to keep the race line pure. But
one of the sons of Israel, the patriarch Judah, father of the tribe of
Judah, violated it by marrying a Canaanite woman, who bore him 3
sons, of whom only one, Shelah, survived and left descendants. (See
Genesis 38:1-5.) This half-breed, mongrel line must be distinguished
from Judah's pure-blooded descendants by his twin sons Pharez and
Zarah. Judah fathered Pharez and Zarah by his daughter-in-law
Tamar; although born out of wedlock, they were of pure, Israel stock
on both sides; and from one of them, Pharez, Jesus Christ was
descended. The descendants of these twins are the real tribe of Judah.

The half-breed son, Shelah, accompanied Judah into Egypt, and in the
following centuries left many descend-ants. They were in the Exodus,
and accompanied the armies of Israel into the promised land. (See
Genesis 46:12 and Numbers 26:20.) However, they bred true to type:
they were half-breed Canaanites, lacking the spiritual insight which
God gave to his own people, so they remained idolaters, Baal-
worshipers, In 1st Chronicles 4:21, you will find them referred to as
"the House of Ashbea." "Ashbea" is a corruption of "Ishbaal" -
"man of Baal" and shows that they were still idolaters, unable to
perceive the God of Israel. So these Shelanites, half-breeds, formed
one of the peoples of the land, who made up the Jews in the time of
Jesus Christ.

Another alien racial group who became part of the Jews were the
"mixed multitude" which Exodus 12:38 says left Egypt along with the
children of Israel The Hebrew word here translated "mixed" is the
word "EREB," meaning half-breed or mongrel. During the two
centuries in Egypt, many had violated the divine law against race-
mixing, and these were the result. On the Exodus, when the going
became hard in the wilderness, the Bible records that this "mixed
multitude" made a lot of trouble, and led some of the Israelites into
rebellion. (See Numbers 11:4-6.) This mongrelized group was still in
the land after the return from the Babylonian captivity; for we find
them listed in Nehemiah 13:3 as still in the land, and still a source of
trouble. They also were among the Jews in Christ's time.

Then there were the various Canaanite peoples who were still in the
land, chief of whom were the Jebusites, the Hittites, the Hivites, the
Perizzites, and the Amorites When the Israelites were about to enter
the Promised Land, God gave them specific instructions to completely
drive out or exterminate all of these Canaanites, saying: "When the
Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to
possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites,
and the Gergashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the
Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater
and mightier than thou; and when the Lord thy God shall deliver
them before thee: THOU SHALT SMITE THEM AND UTTERLY
DESTROY THEM; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show
any mercy unto them . . . But of the cities of these people which the
Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive
nothing that breatheth: but thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely,
the Hitties, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the
Hivites, and the Jebusites: as the Lord thy God hath commanded
thee." (See Numbers 33:50-56; Deuteronomy 7:1-6; 20:16-18.)

I know that it is fashionable among the "liberal" church members of

today to look down their noses at God, and say, "I just can't believe in
that cruel God of the Old Testament." However, I think He will
manage very well with-out their belief. He always was a good reason
for what He does or tells us to do. The Bible never argues with you
about the reasons for its rules, it just states the rule: but there is
always a good reason, if you will look for it, For about 2,000 years, the
Canaanites had worshiped Baal and Ishtar - the most immoral
religion in the world, with the possible exception of some Hindu
religions even today. Part of the worship of Baal and Ishtar consisted
of the compulsory prostitution of all the women. On certain festival
days of the year, all the women of the village had to sit in the field
outside the village gate: and any wandering camel-driver who came
along could select the woman of his choice, hand her the coin which
she must pay over to the temple, then take her aside and leave with
her his syphilis or gonorrhea, as the case might be. This funneled into
Palestine the venereal diseases of all western Asia, Any Doctor can tell
you that one infection of syphilis, not cured, can produce degenerative
changes in the children for as many as four generations. But the
Canaanites had been replenishing the disease with new infections
every generation for 2,000 years; they were not physically, mentally,
morally, or spiritually fit to marry or even associate with our people.
Therefore, God warned the Israelites to exterminate them; if you do
not, He warned them, you will have "integration;" your children will
grow up with theirs as playmates, they will intermarry, until you
become as badly polluted as they are, and I will have to destroy you as
I am commanding you to destroy them.

But the Israelites are often soft-hearted and soft-headed. While they
did exterminate the people of Jericho and a couple of other cities, the
Bible records that they left most of the others alive, merely making
them pay a heavy tribute tax. For example, the city of Jerusalem was
inhabited by the Jebusites at the time the Israelites came in. The Bible
records that the Jebusites were neither killed nor driven out, but
continued to live among the people of the Tribes of Judah and
Benjamin. (See Joshua 15:63; Judges 1:21,27-35; and 19:10-12; and
2nd Chronicles 8:7-8.) Even after the people of the southern Kingdom
of Judah returned from the 70 years captivity in Babylon, the
Jebusites were still in the land, and some of the people were
intermarrying among them. (See Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29.)
And the Bible records the same thing as to the other Canaanite
peoples, Further proof of this is found in various places, such as
Ezekiel 16:1-3: "Again the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
'Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations, and say thus
saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem; Thy birth and thy Nativity is of
the land of Canaan; thy father was an Amorite. and thy mother an
Hittite." God could not have said this truth-fully to any real Israelites:
BUT He was NOT saying it to Israelites: He said it to the city of
Jerusalem and her people. 'They were in large part Canaanite Jews:
and they had gained power in the manner by which Jews usually gain
it: hence Jerusalem was becoming more and more corrupt, as most of
the prophets record. They surrounded, and because the influential
advisors of, the Kings of Judah: just as today they surround and are
the principal advisors of our President, We find clear proof of this in
Isaiah 3:8-9, where he says: "For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is
fallen: because their tongues and their doings are against the Lord, to
provoke the eyes of His glory. THE SHOW OF THEIR
COUNTENANCE DOTH WITNESS AGAINST THEM; and they
declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul I For
they have rewarded evil unto themselves."

Now in China, where their rulers were Chinese you couldn't say that
"the show of their countenance doth witness against them" - their
faces would be just like those of the rest of the Chinese; and in
Sweden, where their ruling class were Swedes, you couldn't say that
their faces were witness against them, for they had the same kind of
Swedish faces as the rest of the people had. But in Jerusalem, the faces
of the Canaanite-Jebusite Jews identified them, "were a witness
against them." The true Israelites were not hook-nosed. The ancient
kings of Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, and Persia were very vain about
their military conquests, and left carved stone monuments telling how
they captured this city and that one, killed so many people and
enslaved the others, etc.; and on these monuments they usually had
carved in the stone pictures of the captive people. Whenever they
showed Israelites, the faces had straight noses and were generally of
Anglo-Saxon type; but when they showed Canaanites, the faces were
those of typical hook-nosed Jews. Therefore, the faces of the
Canaanite-Jebusite Jews who had gained controlling power as
merchants, bankers, advisors of the King, the wealthy ruling class,
identified them as separate from the real Israelites - "the show of their
countenance doth witness against them." They had brought ruin upon
the Kingdom of Judah. Now go back and read the many places where
Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel condemn the wickedness which was
found in Jerusalem; don't you find the same conditions existing in
New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington DC., where large
numbers of the same people have gained power through their wealth?

So we find that there were still large numbers of Canaanites in the

land, "integrated" with the real Israelites and Judahites, and bringing
the lowering of standards which integration always brings: look at the
City of Washington, DC. for example. Besides the Jebusites in
Jerusalem, the Bible records that the other Canaanite peoples - the
Hittites, the Hivites, the Perizzites, and the Amorites -were not
exterminated or driven out, but merely conquered and made to pay a
tribute tax, and left in the land to be integrated with the people and
corrupt them. So these Canaanites were another element of the Jews
in the time of Jesus Christ.

You will remember that when the people of Israel left Egypt, they
were accompanied by a "mixed" - mongrel multitude. The same is
true of the return of the remnant of the people of the Kingdom of
Judah from their captivity in Babylon. The books of Ezra and
Nehemiah record the return. They show that the total number who
returned was 42,360; but they also show that among these were many
who were not Israelites of any tribe; they were Babylonians who had
come with them, in order to "get in on the ground floor" as the saying
is; and they had even infiltrated into the priesthood. But it says that
"these sought their register among those that were reckoned by
genealogy, but they were not found:" When you add up the total of all
these other elements listed in Ezra and Nehemiah, they equal 8,381 of
these alien Babylonians - about 1/5 of all the people who returned
from Babylon to Palestine. So they also formed another element of the
Jews in the land of Jesus Christ's time.

One more, and we complete the list; that is the Edomites. You will
remember that Esau and Jacob were twin brothers; but Esau was a
man of such low character that we have God's own testimony, in
Malachi 1:2-3: "Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the Lord: Yet I
loved Jacob, and I hated Esau." Jacob kept the race-line pure, and
God changed his name to Israel and made him the father of God's
own chosen people, Israel. But Esau married two Canaanite wives and
one Ishmaelite wife, and left only half-breed, mongrel children. (See
Genesis 26:34-35; 27:46; and 36:2.) As his mongrel descendants could
not marry into the true Semitic line, he moved out from among them,
and went down to Mount Seir, the rugged range of mountains south-
east of the Dead Sea, and this land was called "Edom" (or
occasionally by the Grecianized form of the word, "Idumea");
thereafter, his descendants were called "Edomites." (See Genesis
33:16 and Genesis 36:1-9.) There they had a long and troublesome
history. Esau's grandson was Amalek, father of the Tribe of Amalek,
who were such an evil lot that, in Exodus 17:14-16, God said that He
would have perpetual war with Amalek until they were all destroyed.
The Edomites constantly harassed tile southern portion of Israel until
King Saul beat them off, about 1087 BC. But Saul disobeyed God's
command to EXTERMINATE them, and for this disobedience, God
deposed him as king, in favor of David. See 1st Samuel 15:1-26. But
even David didn't exterminate them, and there was a long history of
wars between Edom and Israel (later with Judah.) (You will find It in
2nd Kings, Chapters 8 and 14, and 2nd Chronicles, Chapters 20 and
25.) The whole book of Obadiah is devoted to God's condemnation of
Edom's treacherous at-tack upon the Kingdom of Judah when Judah
was being conquered by Babylon.

During the Babylonian captivity of Judah, the land lay practically

empty; and during this period, the people of Edom, partly from
opportunity and partly from pressure against them from the east,
moved into the vacant southern half of the old Kingdom of Judah.
(See article "Edom,"in Funk & Wagnall's New Standard Bible
Dictionary, pages 198-199, and Scribner's Dictionary of the Bible, Vol.
I, pages 644-646. From this new area, they continued to harass the
little nation which returned from Babylon. By about 142 BC. the
returned exiles of Judah won complete independence under the
Maccabean line of Kings; and about 120 BC. John Hyrcanus, one of
the Maccabean kings, conquered the Edomites. He, too, instead of
exterminating them, took them into his kingdom, offering them full
citizenship if they would give up their paganism and adopt the
religion of Judaism. This they did, and from 120 BC. they were full
citizens of the kingdom. (See Josephus, "Antiquities of the Jews,"
Book 13, Chapter 9, and see also The Jewish Encyclopedia, article
"Edom," Vol. V, page 41.)
By 69 BC. incompetent leadership and intrigue within the Maccabean
monarchy, together with the rising power of Rome in western Asia,
gave opportunity to Antipater (also called Antipas), an Edomite
chieftain, founder of the Herodian family, to rise to power. By
bribery, boldness, and military skill, he gained the favor of Rome, and
the Romans made him Procurator (Governor) of Judea. His -son,
Herod I, beginning as Governor of Galilee, used the same methods to
secure appointment as King of Judea in 40 BC.; and by 37 BC. he had
gained complete control of Judea. He maintained himself in power by
extreme ruthlessness and by bribery, for which he taxed the people
very heavily. (The New Deal, Raw Deal and Great Society are not so
new, after all!) This is the same Herod who had all the little male
children in Bethlehem murdered, trying to murder Jesus Christ.

His son Herod Archelaus, held the Governorship (the Romans didn't
trust him with the crown) for ten years of astonishingly evil misrule,
from 4 BC. to 6 AD.; after which the Romans convicted him of crimes
and removed him: and thereafter Judea was governed by Roman
Procurators (of whom Pontius Pilate was No. 6.) Nevertheless, the
Romans left practically complete power of local government in the
hands of the Herodian Edomites, who had complete control of the
Temple and power to enforce all their local laws. (Remember how
Pontius Pilate tried to get out of condemning Jesus Christ, telling the
Jews: "Take YE Him, and judge Him according to YOUR law."
(John 18:31.)

These Edomite Jews could say that Abraham was an ancestor of

theirs, through Esau, as they did in John 8:33; but this Hebrew blood
through Esau had been diluted to the vanishing point by 1700 years of
marrying only people of Canaanite racial stocks. Therefore, Jesus
Christ rebuked them for falsely claiming to be still of Abrahamic (and
therefore inferentially of Israelite) lineage, for He told them, in John
8:44: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye
will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the
truth because there is no truth in him." You should very carefully
observe the 8th chapter of John, verses 31-47. These were Jews to
whom Jesus was speaking, and the Bible identifies them as Jews. In
the Jewish Encyclopedia, the article on Edom concludes with the
words "The Edomites today are found in modern Jewry."

WAS JESUS CHRIST A JEW?

Now, let us review for a moment what we have covered. We have seen
that Jesus Christ was NOT a Jew by religion, for the Jews based their
religion on the Babylonian Talmud, which was at that time called
"The Tradition of the Elders," and Jesus Christ's whole ministry was
one constant battle against the evils of Judaism. We have seen that
Jesus Christ was a TRUE ISRAELITE, of the Tribe of Judah, BY
RACE. And we have seen that the Jews of His time included the
mongrel descendants of Shelah, the mongrel "mixed multitude"
which followed the Israelites out of Egypt, the various Cananite
peoples in Palestine, including the Jebusites, the Hittites, the Hivites,
the Perizzites and the Amorites, NOW do you understand why Jesus
Christ, who said that He was sent only to "the lost sheep of the House
of Israel" told the Jews that "I know My sheep, and they know Me.
BUT YE (the Jews) BELIEVE NOT BE-CAUSE YE ARE NOT OF
MY SHEEP, AS I SAID UNTO YOU. MY SHEEP HEAR MY
VOICE, AND I KNOW THEM, AND THEY FOLLOW ME" in the
10th chapter of John?

The tiny remnant of Judah and Benjamin which came back to

Palestine from the Babylonian Captivity did leave some descendants
in Palestine; but THESE were Jesus Christ's sheep, and He himself
said He knew them, they knew Him, and they followed Him. All those
in Palestine who became Christians were true members of the Tribe
of Judah or the Tribe of Benjamin, but they were NOT Jews. And the
Jews were not members of Judah, Benjamin, or any other Israelite
tribe, for Jesus Christ Himself said they were NOT of his sheep.

Now we know who it was who constituted the Jews in Jesus Christ's
time. If you want to bring it down to date, and find out who are the
Jews in our own day, we must add one more racial element. Of course,
the descendants of the Jews of Jesus Christ's day are among them: but
there is also another element: the KHAZARS. These make up the
Slavic Jews of today.

Meanwhile, we must return to the Jews of Palestine for a few words.

As you know, by AD. 68, the Romans had found the rascality of the
Palestinian Jews so intolerable that they began the campaign which
resulted in the fall of Jerusalem in AD. 70. The Jews were then
expelled from Palestine, and most of them migrated in large numbers
to what was then called Byzantium, later called Constantinople, and
today is known as Istanbul, facing the Bosphorus, outlet of the Black
Sea. Here, they again demonstrated the truth of the Bible's lesson,
that CONDUCT IS THE PRODUCT OF CHARACTER: or in Jesus
Christ's own words, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of
your father ye will do." By about the year 300 AD. their rascality had
again become so intolerable that they were again expelled; and they
moved northeast, into the Khazar kingdom.

About the year 150 AD. the Khazars, an Asiatic people related to the
Turks, migrated westward from Central Asia, and established a great
empire which covered what is today southwestern Russia, north of the
Aral Sea, the Caspian Sea, and the Black Sea, including the Don and
Dnieper Valleys and the Crimea. About 740 AD. Bulan, the Kagan or
King of the Khazars, was converted to the religion of Judaism,
together with some 4,000 of the most powerful nobility of the
kingdom. In those days, it was not healthful for a subject to be in a
religion in conflict with that of the king or with the baron on whose
land he lived; so in due course, most of the Khazars became Jews by
religion. In fact, it became part of the kingdom's constitution that no
one but a Jew by religion could be king. The principal languages
spoken were the Khazar (called "Yiddish" today) and Turkish.
During the great invasion by the Mongols under Genghis Khan, many
of the Judaized Khazars were dispersed into what is now Poland and
Lithuania. These Khazars, Jews by religion, constitute the Slavic Jews
of today, those with names such as Minsky and Baranov and
Moscowitz; (the latter often shortened to "Mosk") also, since much of
the western part of this area has been at one time or another ruled by
Austrian or Germanic peoples who brought in their own language,
these Khazars also took Germanic names, such as Gold or Goldberg,
Rosenberg, Eisler, and so forth. if you are wondering how they can be
so much like the other Jews, historical documents written at the time
the Khazar empire was at its greatest height refer to their tradition
that their ancestors originally came from the region of Mt. Seir, which
is Edom, the home of the Edomite Jews.

If you wish to look up further details, you will find brief articles on
the Khazars in various encyclopedias such as the Britannica, the
Jewish Encyclopedia has 6 pages on it In some it is spelled "Khazar"
and in other Chazar and even other variations. It is also discussed in
"A History of the Jews", by Solomon Grayzel, and "A History of the
Jews," by Prof. H. Graetz, both works being published by the Jewish
Publication Society of America. The most thorough discussion of the
whole problem is found in that magnificent bit of historical research,
"The Iron Curtain Over America," by Col. John Beatty. Col Beatty is
an Historian and Professor of History, whose works are used as text
books in more than 700 colleges and universities. "Iron Curtain Over
America" is one of the most thoroughly documented and accurate
works ever put in print. It should be in the library of every patriotic
American and good Christian.
Perhaps you are wondering, "Why does my Bible some-times speak
well of the Jews? Such as Paul saying in Romans that "the gospel of
Christ . . . is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that
believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek:" and in Acts, Paul
saying that he was "a Jew of Tarsus.'' If you will look up these few
instances in a good concordance, such as Strong's you will find that in
each instance the translators have written the word "Jew" in English,
where it was not used in the original Greek from which they MIS-
translated it. In such in-stances, in the original Greek, the word used
was "Ioudaios' which does not mean "Jew," but simply a "Judean," a
person whose home is in the land of Judea, or southern Palestine. It
has no religious connotation, and it has no racial connotation either; it
is purely a geographic term, like "Californian." A "Californian"
could be white, black, brown or yellow by race; and he could be
Christian, Jew, Buddist or atheist. So also a "Ioudaios" was merely a
person who lived in Judea, where, as we saw, there were some few
Israelites of the tribe of Judah and Benjamin; but there were far more
Canaanite Jews, and also a general mixture of Romans, Greeks,
Syrians, Egyptians, etc. It is true that Christian salvation was first
offered in the land of Judea, hence to those who were living there, the
Ioudaios; and later, as the Apostles traveled from city to city; it was
soon offered to the Greeks. But it was never offered to the Jews as a
preferred class, for you will remember that Jesus Christ taught only
in hard-to-under-stand parables when there were Jews around, and
explained them privately to His Disciples, explaining that He spoke
among the Jews ONLY in parables "Lest at any time they should be
converted, and their sins should be forgiven them." Both Matthew
13:10-15 and Mark 4:10-12 record this. Jesus was taking great pains
to see that the Jews could not understand Christianity and be
converted. He was preaching only "to the lost sheep of the House of
Israel" the members of the Tribes of Judah and Ben3amin, which He
said were his sheep, who knew His voice, and followed Him. The Jews
He rejected as the children of "their father, the devil."

Now to sum it up; the Jews are not, and never were any part of any
tribe of Israel; they include various mixtures of Egyptians,
Babylonians and Canaanites, the Edomites, and - later - the Khazars.
Christ was a pure-blooded Israelite of the Tribe of Judah, without any
Jewish ancestry; and He was NOT a Jew by religion.

Now think this over carefully; the group of nations which we loosely
group under the term "Anglo Saxon," (including the people of the
British Isles, the Scandinavian nations, nearly all of Germany,
Holland and some few of the people of France and Belgium, with the
closely-related people found in Austria, some of the Swiss, Czechs,
some of the Hungarians, North Italians, and Spanish, and their
descendants now living in the United States, Canada, Australia, and
South Africa) are the living descendants of the Israel of the Bible,
blood brothers of our Saviour, Jesus Christ!

If you are descended from these, the true "people of the Book," - "the
Lost Sheep of the House of Israel" - accept gladly the Salvation and
Leadership of your Risen Saviour and King, the Lord Jesus Christ.
You are called as Israelite Christians to stand up for righteousness
and decency in the home, the church, the community, the nation, and
the world, as Jesus directed, ". . . teaching them to observe all things
whatsoever I have commanded you . . ." Don't you appreciate your
Ancestry, your Salvation, and your Calling? That truly is YOUR
HERITAGE.

WHO ARE THE GENTILES?

It is unfortunate that most people have so many mistaken ideas about
their religion, due largely to the many mistranslations of words in the
commonly-used King James' Version of the Bible. One of these
mistaken ideas is that most of the people of the United States and
Western Europe - in fact, nearly all the Christians in the world - are
"Gentiles". You hear many of them - even clergymen, who should
know better - say, "I'm just a Gentile, saved by grace." I think it is
high time that we learned something about one of the most mis-used
words, "Gentile."

First, you might be surprised to know that there is no such word in

the Bible, in its original languages. Oh yes, I know that you are now
riffling the pages of your King James' Version, looking for some of the
many places you will find "Gentile" in it. But I said that there is no
such word in the Bible IN ITS ORIGINAL LANGUAGES. The word
was put into it by translators, who changed the wording of the Bible
centuries after the last book in the Bible was written. If you are a good
Christian, you will surely agree with me that what the prophets
originally wrote in the books which make up our Bible was inspired
by God. It was correct as the prophets wrote it. But not one of them
wrote in English, remember, because no such language as English
existed until many centuries after the prophets lived. It was written in
Hebrew, as to the Old Testament; and the New Testament was
originally written in the language which Jesus Christ spoke, Aramic, a
Semitic dialect somewhat similar to, but not the same as, Hebrew. But
Aramaic was not generally understood outside of Western Asia; so
when Christianity began to spread into southern and southeastern
Europe, the New Testament had to be translated into a language
which was widely used in Europe. Greek served this purpose nicely,
for it was understood by well-educated men over nearly all of Europe.
Therefore, the New Testament was first translated into Greek.
Protestant English-language translations of the Bible, today, are
nearly all translated from Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament
and Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. So, let's start at the
beginning, with the Old Testament.

The word "Gentile" is not even once used in any Hebrew manuscript
of the Old Testament, for the good reason that there is no such word
in Hebrew, nor any word which corresponds to it. Everywhere you
find the word "Gentile" used in the Old Testament, it is a
mistranslation of the Hebrew word "Goi," which means "NATION".
The plural form of it is "GOYIM". Since it means "nation," why
didn't they translate it correctly? Sometimes they did; but for the
most part, they translated it to fit the official doctrines of the church
of their day, no matter what violence that did to the true meaning of
the word. The church hierarchy had long since determined what its
doctrines should be: and if the Bible didn't agree with them, so much
the worse for the Bible. Men were still being burned at the stake for
heresy, in those days: and "heresy" meant any religious idea which
differed from the official doctrines proclaimed by the Bishops. So the
translators did the best the Church would allow them to. Let's take
some examples.

In Genesis 12:2, God said to Abram, "I will make of thee a great
nation". In Hebrew, God said "I will make of thee a great GOI." It
would have been too silly to translate this "I will make a Gentile of
you," so they correctly translated it "nation". Again Genesis 25:23.
Rebekah was pregnant with the twins, Esau and Jacob; and while still
in her womb, the unborn children were struggling against each other;
so she wondered at this, and asked of God what was the meaning of
this? God said to her, "Two GOYIM are in thy womb." Certainly
God was not telling her, "You are an adulteress, pregnant with two
Gentile children, when your husband is not a Gentile." God said
"Two NATIONS are in thy womb," and that is the way it was
translated: but it is that same word, "GOYIM", which elsewhere they
generally translate as "Gentiles."

Now let's take some examples from the New Testament. Here the
word mistranslated "Gentile" is nearly always the Greek word,
"ETHNOS" which means just exactly "NATION", the same as the
Hebrew word "GOY". Luke 7 begins with the incident of a Roman
Centurion who appealed to Jesus Christ to heal his servant who was
sick unto death. The Elders of the Jews praised him to Jesus, saying
"He loveth our ETHNOS, and hath built us a synagogue". These Jews
would never praise anyone for loving the Gentiles; and the Centurion
would not have built a synagogue for Gentiles. So, to avoid complete
absurdity, the translators were forced to translate "ETHNOS"
correctly, as "NATION". Again, in John 11:50, we find that the
Jewish High Priest, Caiaphas, was plotting with the chief priests and
Pharisees, to murder Jesus Christ; and Caiaphas told them, "it is
expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and that the
whole ETHNOS perish not." Nothing could have pleased this evil Jew
more than for all the Gentiles to perish - using the word "Gentile" as
we do today. Therefore, the translators had to translate "ETHNOS"
correctly, as "nation." Yet in many other places they mistranslate it
"Gentile".

The Greek word "ETHNOS"means simply "nation", nothing more or

less. It has no pagan, or non-Israel, or even non-Greek connotation.
The Greeks distinguished between Greeks and all non-Greek peoples,
whom they called "Barbarians". All educated men of that day knew
this, and the Apostle Paul was a very well-educated man, who was
quite familiar with the Greek language and its idioms. He recognized
this distinction in Romans 1:14, where he said, "I am debtor both to
the Greeks and to the Barbarians". Paul, therefore, never wrote the
word "Gentile" in any of his Epistles.

What does this word "Gentile" mean, and from what is it derived? It
is derived from the Latin word "GENTILIS", which means "ONE
WHO IS NOT A ROMAN CITIZEN." If you use the word correctly,
then you would have to say that Jesus Christ and his twelve disciples
were all Gentiles, because none of them was a Roman Citizen. Only
Paul could say that he was not a "Gentile," because in the 22nd
chapter of Acts, Paul says that he was a Roman citizen by birth.

How, then, is it used at present when The speaker means to say that
someone is non-Jewish? About the fourth century AD., its use was
loosely extended to cover more than its original meaning. It was
applied especially to those who were heathen, pagan; it became a term
for those who were neither Christian nor Jewish, for Christians and
Jews were generally called just that, (Christian; or Jew). But this was
centuries after the last book in the New Testament had been written.

The word "Gentile" was never used by the writer of any book of the
Old Testament, because none of them bad ever heard it, as they had
never come in contact with Rome. It was not used by the writer of any
book of the New Testament, for there is no such word in the Hebrew,
Aramaic or Greek languages. They did not borrow the word from the
Latin, for if you will look up every place it is used in your King James'
Version, you will see that it is never used in the correct sense, to say
that someone is not a Roman citizen; and that is the only meaning it
had, the only way anybody used it, in those days. It was put in by the
translators in an effort to make the Bible say what the Translators
thought it should have said. Therefore, it has no authority at all.

In short, wherever you see the word "Gentile" in the Bible, remember
that the correct word is "nation," "race," or "people". Sometimes it is
used when speaking of ISRAEL nations or the ISRAELITE race, as
we have seen in the examples I have given you in other instances, the
context will show that it is being used of a nation which is non-
Israelite. Only the context in which it is used will show you which
meaning to give it. When used of non-Israelite race perhaps "Gentile
is as good a word as any, for we seam to have no other in general use.
But never be deceived by reading the word "Gentile" in your Bible,
for its only correct meaning is "nation" or "race."

SUPPOSE WE ARE ISRAEL,

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?
What would you say to me, or of me, if you knew I had discovered
that I was the heir to vast estates, great wealth, power and
responsibility, and that, instead of rejoicing in the great privilege and
turning to the work with all its great issues, I simply said "Well, and
what if I am the heir; what difference does it make?" I know what
you'd think, even if you didn't say it.

Yet, when we show from the Bible, and from history and archaeology
that the Anglo-Saxon and kindred peoples are the modern
descendants of the House of Israel, to whom God has pledged with His
oath so many great privileges and blessings, many say indifferently
"what difference does it make?"

They want only personal salvation. Now the man who has the blessing
of personal salvation is the recipient of a marvelous gift of God in
Jesus Christ. But that doesn't warrant his despising and rejecting the
other God given birthright - the birthright of race.

The Bible, as given by God, is a complete whole. It stands or falls in

one piece. It declares the whole counsel of God and it required
nothing short of the whole book to declare it. Otherwise, much of it
would not have been written. It is not for man to go through the Book
sorting and picking, deciding what he wishes to accept and then say
about the rest, "what difference does it make?" To do so is the height
of presumption.

God, in His wisdom, chose Israel to be used by Him in His great plan
for the transformation of a lost world. He wrote a large portion of the
Bible to tell us about Israel's part in that plan. Allowing ample space
in the Bible for the presentation of the Gospel to the individual, God
wrote about five-sevenths of the Book as his message to the nations.
And related to almost every phase of this revelation, is the great
nation Israel, promised by God to Abraham.

Infidel critics are busy all the time knifing the Scriptures, cutting out
a bit here and a bit there - but the "what difference does it make"
folks throw away five sevenths of the Bible in one lump. Five-sevenths
is a lot of Bible to scrap!

Actually the Israel Truth is the key which opens up the Bible from the
first promise made at the Fall, until Jesus delivers up the finished
Kingdom to the Father. It may be likened to a spiritual thread which
runs through almost every chapter of Bible history, every doctrine,
symbol, promise and covenant. The thread which, when found, makes
possible the unraveling of most of the mysteries of the Word. This is
why the people who see this truth have declared the Bible to be a
"new book;" consistent, harmonious and satisfying to mind and soul.

Centuries ago God made an unconditional, irrevocable, covenant with

Abraham to increase and preserve his posterity throughout all
generations. And now, here we are, the many nations of Israel, right
here on the planet after almost 4,000 years - doing the work he said
Israel would do. Psalm 105:8 says: "He remembers his covenant
forever, the word he has commanded, to a thousand generations: The
covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath to Isaac. For he
confirmed it to Jacob as a statute, To Israel as an eternal covenant."

The writers of the four Gospels constantly call attention to God's

faithfulness to Abraham. The Apostles, every one of them, gloried in
it: but you say "what difference does it make?"

It made quite a difference to Esau who despised his birthright of race.

Afterwards he found no place for repentance, though he sought it with
tears. The birthright of race made quite a difference to Ishmael, the
son of the bond woman, Hagar. The birthright of race also make quite
a difference to the sons of Keturah.

"Suppose we are Israel", then we are the descendants of Abraham

through Sarah, Isaac and Jacob. There is a world of difference in the
blessings of race, country, enlightenment and opportunity bestowed
upon the descendants of these than that which was bestowed upon the
others. Does the fact that a man is saved eternally, preclude the
possibility of his appreciating the civil blessings which he enjoys
under the Abrahamic covenant in these Israel countries? A short stay
in the lands of the dictators would show the difference and be quite
convincing.

In Isaiah 51:2, God says "Hearken unto me, ye that follow after
righteousness, ye that seek the Lord: look unto the rock whence ye are
hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. Look unto
Abraham your father, and unto Sarah, that bare you: for I called him
alone, and blessed him, and increased him." "Ye that follow after
righteousness", are certainly tbe Christians and we see that God
wants them to see that they are Abraham's seed.

In Genesis 17:7, God says, "I will establish my covenant between me

and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." Can it be
possible that it means nothing to the believer to be chosen of God as
an heir of that covenant, which in all of its ramifications, God unfolds
through the remainder of the Scriptures?

"Suppose we are Israel", then we are members of the Kingdom of

God on earth. He established that Kingdom at Sinai. Constituting that
Kingdom was twelve tribed Israel. Matthew 21:43 tells us plainly that
He took the Kingdom from the Jews and turned it over to a "nation."
The Greek word is "ethnos". Don't tell me it was given to a church -
for the Greek word for church is "ekklesia". That nation was to bring
forth the fruits of the Kingdom. Those fruits are both political and
religious.

True to Christ's assignment, the Israel nations lead the world in

evangelistic work, missionary work, Bible translation, publication and
distribution. The United States and the British Commonwealth holds
the record for 90% of this work.

It is not good Bible Christianity to hug the covenant of grace so close

to our heart and that we have no room for God's covenant of race.
That spurns the honors conferred by God. It does not require much
research to find many texts in which God reveals the exalted position
given to his chosen race. A few of them are:

"But now thus saith the Lord that created thee, O

Jacob, and He that formed thee, O Israel, for I have
redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name, thou art
 mine . . . Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast
been honorable and I have loved thee." Isaiah 43:1,4

"Thou didst separate them from among all the people of

the earth, to be thine inheritance." I Kings 8:53

"For the Lord hath chosen Jacob unto himself, and

Israel for a peculiar treasure." Psalm 135:4

"For thou art a holy people (meaning set apart), the

Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people
unto himself above all the nations that are upon the
earth." Deuteronomy 7:6

Note the honors conferred: He chose them, redeemed them, claimed

them for his own, separated them, calls them precious, his peculiar
treasure, his special people, his inheritance above all the peoples on
the earth. Think of any believer reading all of that and then turning
upon his heel and saying "suppose we are Israel: what difference does
it make?"

It rejects God's comfort for the last days. God was anxious that His
Israel people should have a clear vision of all that was to come to pass
in these trying times, and consequently, sent prophet after prophet,
telling of world conditions which we would experience in our day. But
right along with the cataclysmic upheavals foretold, there is always a
word of cheer, consolation and encouragement to his people Israel. He
wanted us to have the benefit of knowing what He is doing in the
world, what the world events actually mean, how He is going to make
it all work out to the good of His people Israel, and through all that is
happening bring in the Kingdom of God on earth. The Kingdom of
God on earth is the one theme of the Bible. It is the theme Jesus
preached. In Romans 15:8 Paul tells us that Jesus Christ came to
confirm the promises made unto the fathers.

What is the worth of our identity with Israel? It proves God to be

unchangeably faithful. It proves the Bible to be literally and
historically true. It proves that God is working today, as the prophets
have all foretold he would, in and through and for his people Israel -
who are the Anglo Saxon, Scandinavian and Germanic peoples.
Lastly, but by no means least, it proves that Jesus Christ did what he
came to do, confirm the promises made to the fathers.
 HISTORIC PROOF OF ISRAEL'S
MIGRATIONS
In my lecture called "ISRAEL'S FINGERPRINTS", I have sketched
briefly for you some of the Bible's evidence that the Anglo-Saxon,
Scandinavian and Germanic people of today are the living decendants
of the ISRAEL of the Bible. This evidence was in the form of many
Bible prophecies of Israel's future which have been accurately
fulfilled by these nations, and by no others. If the people who have
actually done all the things which God said Israel would do, and who
have received the exact blessings which God said He would give to
Israel - if they are not Israel, how could God be so greatly mistaken?
No, God was not mistaken: He knew what He would do, and for
whom He would do it; and by making good all His prophecies and
promises, He has identified these nations as Israel.

But there are some people who won't believe God, and will not accept
His identification of these nations. In fact, one clergyman with whom I
discussed this, minister of a church in this county, wrote to me
demanding to know "what other historians of the time, inwhat books,
chapters and verses, record theirmigrationintoNorthem and Western
Europe and the British Isles?" He is but one of many skeptics who ask
this; and to these skeptics, the answer is, "Yes, various historians of
those centuries have traced various steps of this migration." What I
propose to do for you now is to race this migration historically.
Remember that, within the time limits which must necessarily be fixed
on such a talk as this, I can only "hit the high spots" - you know how
large a library can be filled with history books, so I can't quote them
all verbatim. But I will have time enough to show you that the
historians have traced this migration from Israel's old Palestinian
home intotheir European homes as the Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian
and Germanic peoples. Not under their old names, of course but that,
also is the fulfillment of God's prophecy that He would "call His
servants by another name," and surely you now know that the Bible
identifies Israel - and only Israel - as God's servants.

The migration of the Israelites covered about 12 centuries, during

which time they were mentioned by various historians, writing in
different languages, during different centuries - and therefore
mentioned under different names. Even today, if you were to read a
London newspaper1 a Paris newspaper, and a Berlin newspaper, all
dated about the end of 1940, you would find that the British
newspaper said that in that year France was invaded by "the
Germans, ' the French newspaper said that the invasion was by "les
Allemans;" and the German newspaper said that the invasion was by
'der Deutsch" - yet all three were talking about the same people and
the same invasion. Likewise, we must not be surprised to find that the
Israelites were given different names in the Assyrian, Greek and Latin
languages. Likewise, even in the same language, names change from
century to century, just as today we never speak of "Bohemia", as it
was called only a century ago, but only of "Czechoslovakia."

You remember that the original 12 - tribed nation of Israel broke up

into two nations upon the death of king Solomon, about 975 BC. The
northern 2/3 of the land, containing ten Tribes, kept the name
"Israel," while the southern 1/3, containing the Tribes of Benjamin
and Judah, with many of the Levites, took the name of "Judah" after
the royal Tribe. From that time on, they kept their separate existence
until they were finally merged into a vast migration, as we will see.

Most of the kings of the 10 tribed northern kingdom of Israel were

distinguished more for their wickedness than for any ability.
However, OMRI, who reigned from 885 to 874 BC., was a vigorous
and able king - although as wicked as the others - and his reign was
regarded among the other nations of western Asia as the foundation
upon which the national identity thereafter rested. The languages of
that day spoke of a family, a Tribe, or even a whole nation as a
"house" or household. If you have read your Bible much, you must
surely remember God's many references to the "House of Israel" or
"House of Judah" - meaning, in each case, the Kingdom of Israel or
the Kingdom of Judah. But the phrase was also used in those days to
refer to a nation as the "House" of a great king who ruled it. The
Assyrians, among others, began calling the 10 tribed Kingdom of
Israel "the House of Omri". In Hebrew, "house" was "bahyith" or
"bayth" - in English usually spelled BETH and pronounced "BETH".
In the related Semitic language of Assyrian, this was "BIT". The
Hebrew "OMRI" was in Assyrian sometimes written "HUMRI",
sometimes "KUMRI."

With this preface in mind, let's start tracing the Israelites from their
Palestinian homeland, in the Assyrian conquest and deportation. In II
Kings 15:29 we read, "In the days of Pekah, king of Israel, came
Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria, and took Ijon and Bel-beth-maachah
and Janoa and Kedesh and Razor and Gilead and Galilee, all the land
of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria." In 1st Chronicles
5:26 it says, "And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul, king of
Assyria, and the spirit of Tiglath-Pileser, 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."
Confirmation of this is found in inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser which
archaeologists have dug up and are in our museums today. One of
these says: "The cities of Gala'za (probably Assyrian for Galilee),
Abilkka (probably Assyrian for Abel-beth maacha), which are on the
border of Bit-Humna ** the whole land of Naphtali in its entirety, I
brought within the border of Assyria. My official I set over them as
governor. ** The land of Bit Humna ** all of its people, together with
all their goods, I carried off to Assyria. Pahaka their king they
deposed, and I placed Ausi as king." In confirmation of this change of
kings, we read in II Kings 15:30, "And Hoshea the son of Elah made a
conspiracy against PEKAR son of Remaliah and smote him and slew
him, and reigned in his stead."

The conquest thus begun in the northeastern and northern parts of

the kingdom about 740 BC. worked southward, down to the heavily-
fortified capital city of Samaria, which was captured about 721 BC.
Another king of Assyria reigned, by that time. 2nd Kings 18:9-11
records it as follows: "And it came to pass in the 4th year of King
Hezekiah (of Judah), which was the 7th year of Hoshea, son of Elah,
King of Israel, that Shalmanezer, King of Assyria, came up against
Samaria and besieged it. And at the end of 3 years they took it, even in
the 6th year of Hezekiah, that is the 9th year of Hoshea, King of Israel,
Samaria was taken. And the King of Assyria did carry away Israel
unto Assyria, and put them in Halah and in Habor by the River of
Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes." We know that king
Shalmanezer died toward the latter part of this siege, and the final
conquest and deportation were carried on by his successor, King
Sargon II. In confirmation of this, an inscription of Sargon II says,
"In the beginning of my reign, the City of Samaria I besieged, I
captured. **27,280 of its inhabitants I carried away."

The deportation of a whole nation naturally took a considerable

period of time. The journey had to be organized, with adequate
supplies for each convoy on each stage of the journey, and proper
organization of the places selected to receive them. We know that
Sargon II did not hold "the cities of the Medes" east of the Zagros
mountains until a few years after 721 BC., so about 715 to 712 BC. is
the correct date for the deportation to Media. The places to which
Israel was deported by the Assyrians can be summed up in brief as
constituting an arc or semi-circle around the southern end of the
Caspian Sea.

This deportation took in the entire population of the ten northern

Tribes constituting the nation of Israel. From this point on, the
separation into Tribes is apparently most, and it is as a nation that the
Kingdom of Israel moved into its Assyrian captivity.
This left the other 2 tribes still living in the southern Kingdom of
Judah. Assyria and Egypt were the two giant empires of that day,
each seeking domination over all the smaller and weaker nations.
Assyria had driven Egyptian influence out of western Asia, back to
the continent of Arica, and had made all the smaller nations
surrounding Judah into vassal states paying heavy tribute to Assyria.
The brutal arid rapacious character of the Assyrians made them no
friends, and their vassal states were always hopefully looking for any
means of escape from Assyrian power. Egypt kept the hope of revolt
alive by offers of military assistance to those who would rebel against
Assyria. The death of a king seemed the most opportune time for
revolt, since his successor would need time to get his power organized,
and might even face some competition at home for his throne,
Therefore, when king Sargon II of Assyria died, about 705 BC.,
revolts began in western Asia, the Kingdom of Judah under king
Hezekiah taking part in it, in the hope of military aid from Egypt
(although the prophet Isaiah warned that the revolt would fail).

The new king of Assyria, Sennacherib, set about recovering his

empire; one rebellious city after another was reconquered, with the
hideous cruelty characteristic of Assyria; and in 701 BC.,
Sennachenib's huge army invaded the kingdom of Judah; midway
through it, they paused briefly to defeat the Egyptian army, then
moved on to besiege Jerusalem. None of the smaller cities of Judah
were able to resist. 2nd Kings 18:13 and Isaiah 36:1 say that "In the
14th year of King Hezekiah, Sennacherib came up against all the
fortified cities of Judah, and captured them." Then followed the siege
of Jerusalem, which was ended when the angel of the Lord killed
185,000 Assyrian soldiers in on~ night, and Sennacherib gave up the
siege and fled back to his own land. In confirmation of this,
Sennacherib's own record of this says, "I then besieged Hezekiah of
Judah, who had not submitted to my yoke, and I captured 46 of his
strong cities and fortresses, and innumerable small cities which were
round about them. with the battering of rams and the assault of
engines, and the attack of foot-soldiers, and by mines and breaches
made in the walls. I brought out therefrom 200,150 people, both small
and great. **Hezekiah himself, like a caged bird, I shut up within
Jerusalem his royal city." Ancient kings were boastful of their
victories,but never of their defeats: so king Sennacherib tactfully fails
to state how the siege of Jerusalem ended. But he does confirm the
capture of all the other cities of Judah, and the deportation therefrom
of 200,150 people.

Remember that all the people of the 10 northern tribes were already
settled around the south end of the Caspian Sea, in the Assyrian
deportation of Israel; now to them was added a large portion of the 2
southern Tribes of Benjamin and Judah; so that the Assyrian
deportation included all of the ten Tribes and a substantial
representation from the other 2. These were the people who became
your ancestors and mine, whenthev moved into Europe.

Over the years, the increasing numbers of the Israelite tribes

expanded northward along both sides of the Caspian Sea. They were
not basically city-builders but farmers and herdsmen. Probably in the
earlierpart of their stay here,the Assyrians sternly discouraged the
building of cities, which would naturally be fortified centers of
resistance. As they were moved into this area, herded along as
prisoners, robbed of all their belongings, they had to make themselves
brush shelters or booths where they stopped for any length of time,
Here in the southwest our Indians call such a brush shelter a
"wickiup''; the Hebrews called it a "soocaw'' - applying the name also
to a tent. It was the only house a nomad owned. The plural of
"soocaw" was "succoth". Gradually this was slurred over into
"Scuth", used of a ten-dweller or nomad, and finally became
"Scythian."

The great carving on the Behistun Rock made about 516 BC. carried
inscriptions showing the many different nations who were tributary to
King Tarius I of Persia. These inscriptions were written in Old
Persian. in Median, and in Assyrian. Thev showed that among these
were a Scythian nation called in Assyrian and Babytonian "Gimiri",
which means "The Tribes From "Gimiri" was derived the name of
the "Cimmerians", who settled somewhat to the north and into the
Ukraine. But the Behistun Inscriptions also stated that these people
were called "Sakka" in Persian and Median. Already the later names
are beginning to evolve.

The great Greek historian HERODOTUS, who lived from 484 to 425
BC., and who is generally called "The Father of History", speaking of
these people, says, "The Sacae, or Scyths, were clad in trousers, and
had on their heads tall, stiff caps, rising to a point. They bore the bow
of their country and the dagger; besides which they carried the battle-
axe or sagaris. They were in truth Amyrgian Scythians, but the
Persians called them Sacae, since that is the name which they give to
all Scythians." Incidentally, some of the magnificent carved walls of
the ancient ruins of the Persian palace at Persepolis show illustrations
of those Sacae, in their trousers and pointed caps, bringing tribute to
the Persian king.

We are now getting further clues to these people. Herodotus says that
the Scythians or Sacae first appeared in that land in the seventh
century BC., which is the same period in which the Tribes of Israel
were settled there by their Assyrian conquerors. Their use of the
battle-axe as aweaponisacarry-over from their history as Israel. In
Jeremiah 51:20 God says of Israel, "Thou art My battleaxe and
weapons of war, for with thee will I break in pieces the nations, and
with thee will I destroy kingdoms". We will see later that the name
evolved from SAKKE to SAXON; and it is noteworthy that the battle-
axe was the great weapon of the Saxons.

These Scythians or Sacae lived up to God's description of Israel as His

battleaxe and weapons of war. They became a military people of great
power, who did much to break up ancient nations. The Greek
geographer and historian, STRABO, who lived between 63 BC. and
about 21 AD.,says: "Mostof the Scythians, beginning from the
Caspian Sea, are called 'Dahae Scythae' and those situated more
towards the east, 'Massagatae' and 'Sacae'; the rest have the common
name of 'Scythians', but each tribe has its own peculiar name. The
Sacae had made incursions similar to those of the Cimmenans and
Treres, some near their own country, others at a greater distance.
They occupied Bactriana, and got possession of the most fertile tract
in Armenia, which was called after their own name, Sacasene. They
advanced even as far as the Cappadocians, those particularly situated
near the Euxine Sea (Today called the Black Sea), who are now called
'Pontici.'"

This was but the early part of their expansion, however. when a
century had elapsed since their deportation to this land of Scythia,
they had grown strong enough to begin the long series of harassing
wars against their conquerors, the Assyrians. They lacked the
strength to capture the powerfully fortified group of cities about the
Assyrian capitol; and in turn, their nomadic habits made it easy for
them to retreat before a too-powerful Assyrian army. But generations
of this constant warfare wore down the Assyrians, "bled them white",
so that when the Medes finally overran Assyria and captured Nineveh
in 612 BC., their victory was a fairly easy one against the exhausted
Assyrians.

From this point on, I could refer you to just one historical work which
fully traces the Scythians on to their settlement in England as the
Anglo-Saxons. "A History of the Anglo- Saxons", by Sharon Turner
does a magnificent job of this. As most of you know, I am a lawyer by
profession: and a lawyer soon learns to distinguish between the man
who actually knows the facts and the man who is merely repeating
hearsay - that is, gossip and rumor he has heard from others - and
how do we know whether these others actually know what they are
talking about? Unless a man has seen the occurrence with his own
eyes, his ideas on the subject are no better than the accuracy of the
information he has received. Now no historian living in our times can
have any personal knowledge of what happened 2,000 years ago, so
his writings can be no better than the source material he has obtained
from people who lived and wrote at a time when accurate information
could still be had. Most modern history books are based on rather
scanty documentation from any sources, as it is so much easier for one
historian to copy from another. But Sharon Turner's "History of The
Anglo-Saxons" is one of the most thoroughly documented historical
studies ever produced, and its reliability is beyond question. He traces
the Anglo-Saxons cf Britain back to the Scythians; unfortunately, he
doesn't go the one step further and trace the Scythians back to Israel;
but we can do that from other sources.

But let us go back to the Scythians, as the people of Israel became

known in the land to which they were deported. Diodorus Siculus, a
Greek historian who lived in the times of Julius and Augustus Caesar,
says this: "The Scythians anciently enjoyed but a small tract of
ground, but (through their valor) growing stronger by degrees, they
enlarged their dominion far and near, and attained at last to a vast
and glorious empire, At the first, a very few of them, and those very
despicable for their mean origin, seated themselves near to the River
Araxes. Afterwards, one of their ancient kings, who was a warlike
prince and skillful in arms, gained to their country all the
mountainous parts as far as to Mount Caucasus. **Sometime
afterwards, their posterity, becoming famous and eminent for valor
and martial affairs, subdued many territories. **Then turn mg their
arms the other way, they led their forces as far as to the River Nile, in
Egypt."

Other historians record that BLOND SCYTHIANS made an

expedition against Palestine and Egypt about 626 BC. The town of
Scythopolis, in the Jordan valley, is named for a settlement made on
this raid. But to continue with Diodorus Siculus, he says, "This nation
prospered more and more, and had kings that were very famous;
from whom the SACANS and the Massagetae and the Arimaspians,
and many others called by other names derive their origin. Amongst
others, there were two remarkable colonies that were drawn out of the
conquered nations by those kings the one they brought out of Assyria
and settled in the country lying between Paphlagonia and Pontus; the
other out of Media, which they placed near the River Tanais which
people are called Sauromatians."

Note how God's destiny for these people worked. They would not
leave behind any pockets of their people in the lands where their
conquerors had settled them; but when they had gained great power,
they came back and picked up any who remained, taking them into
the migrating mass. Likewise, history records that they raided
Babylon, after its overthrow by the Medes and Persians, carrying off
with them such of the people of Judah and Benjamin as were not
going back to Jerusalem.

Even in early times, before the final mass movement into Europe, the
Scythians had begun their march to their new homelands, where some
of them had already arrived before the beginning of the Christian
Era. Pliny the Elder, a Roman historian who lived from 23 to 79 AD.,
says this: "The name 'Scythian' has extended in every direction, even
to the Sarmatae and the GERMANS; but this ancient name is now
only given to those who dwell beyond those nations, and live unknown
to nearly all the rest of the world. **Beyond (the Danube) are the
peoples of Scythia. The Persians have called them by the general name
of Sacae, which properly belongs only to the nearest nation of them.
The more ancient writers give them the name of Aramii (Arameans).
The multitude of these Scythians is quite innumerable; in their life
and their habits they much resemble the people of Parthia (Persia).
The Tribes among them that are better known are the Sacae, the
Massagetae, the Dahae, **" etc.

Others have noted this early migration into Germany. For example,
Herodotus mentions a migration and settlement of a people he calls
the Sigynnoe, who them selves claimed to be colonists from Media,
and who migrated as far as the River Rhine. (Remember that among
the places the Israelites were resettled were "the cities of the
Medes"?)

Also note that Pliny the Elder said that "The more ancient writers
give them the name of Aramii" - that is, "Aramean", in modern
language called "Syrian." In Deuteronomy 26:5, every Israelite was
commanded to confess and sojourned there with a few, and became a
nation, great, mighty and populous." Hence, such ancient writers
could correctly identify the Israelite Scythians as "Arameans", for
they had come from a land which was part of Syria.

Among the Tribes of the Scythians, the Massagetac attracted the

notice of all the ancient historians, by their numbers and warlike
ability. Those who described them in more detail divided them into
the Massagetac and Thyssagetae; and the "getae" part of the name
soon evolved into "Goth"; the Massagetae were the Greater Goths
and the Thyssagetae were the Lesser Goths. Thus we already find
among the Scythians names we can identify as the people who later
conducted the great migrations into Europe. The Goths, as we know,
were later called "Ostrogoths," meaning "East Goths," and
"Visigoths," meaning "West Goths."
But to go back a few centuries, the Sacae were allies of the Medes and
Persians in the attack upon Babylon, in 536 BC. Remember that God
had said that Israel was "My Battleaxe and weapons of war; for with
thee will I break in pieces the nations, and with thee will I destroy
kingdoms." So God had used Scythian Israel to maintain constant
war against Assyria for nearly a century, until Assyria was too
weakened to resist the Medes and Persians; then God used Scythian
Israel, the Sacae, to help in the conquest of Babylon, when its time
had come. Later, King Cyrus of Persia was foolish enough to try to
conquer his former allies, the Sacac; but he was killed in the battle.
King Darius also tried to conquer them, but they being a nomadic
people, retreated before his massive armies until he gave up and
retired.

Professor George Rawlinson says that the original development of the

Indo-European language took place in Armenia - which, you will
remember, was at that time occupied by "Scythian" Israel. Certainly
from these people we can trace the introduction of this language into
Europe.

This powerful and increasingly numerous people thereafter spread

further north, both east and west of the Caspian Sea. To the west of it,
they penetrated into the Volga and Don River Valleys as the
Sauromatians and the Royal Scyths, nomadic peoples. To reach these
lands, they had come up through the Caucasus Mountains by a great
pass which is today occupied by the Georgian Military Road. Perhaps
the Communists have changed the name of this pass in recent years,
but from ancient times until without our own lifetimes this pass was
known as "The Pass of Israel." The white Race of Europe is often
called "Caucasian" because the ancestors of many of them did thus
come out of the Caucasus Mountains.

When Alexander the Great began his great marauding expedition

across western Asia and as far as India, he had to skirt the edge of the
lands held by the Scythians. In his limitless vanity and ambition, he
wanted also to conquer them; but it is recorded that their
ambassadors said that they would never surrender to him; that they
were nomadic peoples who, if they could not resist, could retreat
indefimtely before his armies; and they had no wealthy cities for him
to occupy and loot. Alexander invaded their lands long enough to
fight one severe battle with them, defeating the Scythians forces he
met; but this was evidently just as a lesson to them not to attack the
flanks of his forces, for he led his forces out of their territory and
never returned to the attack.
Remember that Israel is "God's battleaxe and weapons of war." They
had already weakened Assyria, and as allies of the Medes and
Persians had helped overthrow Assyria and Babylon. They had
beaten off attempts of the Persians to conquer them. In the article
"Scythians", Chambers Encyclopedia (1927) records that "The
Scythians, after about 128 B.C. overran Persia, routed several Persian
armies, and levied tribute from the Persian kings. During the first
century before and the first century after Christ, hordes of Scythians,
having overthrown the Bactrian and Indo-Greek dynasties of
Afghanistan and India, invaded northern India: and there they
maintained themselves with varying fortune for five centuries longer.
**The Jats of India and the Rajputs have both been assigned the
Scythian ancestry." Madison Grant writes that "Ancient Bactria
maintained its Nordic and Aryan aspect long after Alexander's time,
and did not become Mongolized and receive the sinister name of
Turkestan until the seventh century (AD.). ** The Saka were the
blond peoples who carried the Aryan language to India."

A land so vast, and not the original home of the Israelite Scythians,
but already having some inhabitants when they were settled there,
must of course show varying types of people. The Nordic or Aryan
Israelite Scythians conquered these other races. while some speak of a
Mongoloid type found in some parts of Scythia, ancient writers pretty
well agree that the dominant Sakka or Massagetae Scythians were a
Nordic people. Dr. Hans Gunther, professor at Berlin University, in
his "Racial Elements of European History," published in the 1920s,
says: "The investigations into the traces left behind them by that
wide-spread Nordic people, the Sacae (Scythians), with its many
tribes, are well worthy of attention. It had been living on the steppes
of southeastern Europe, and spread as far as Turkestan and
Mghanistan, and even to the Indus. The ancient writers, such as
Polemon of Ilium,Galienos, Clement of Alexandria, and Adamantios,
state that the Sacae were like the Kelts and Germans, and describe
them as ruddy-fair. The Scythian tribe of the Alans are also described
as having a Nordic appearance. Ammianus (About A.D. 330-400) calls
them, 'almost all tall and handsome, with hair almost yellow, and a
fierce look.'"

We have seen that the names of the Massagetae and the Thyssagetae
evolved into Goths, the Ostrogoths (or East Goths) and Visigoths (or
West Goths). The historian Ptolemy, who died about 150 AD.,
mentions a Scythian people, descended from the Sakae, by the name
of SAXONS, who had come from Media. Albinus, who lived in the
first century BC., also says, "The SAXONS were descended from the
ancient Sacae in Asia, and in process of time they came to be called
SAXONS." Prideaux reports that the Cimbrians came from between
the Black and Caspian Seas, and that with them came the ANGLI.

We are now well into established European history. By the beginning

of the 4th century AD., many of the Goths were already Christians. In
the 4th century there were several collisions between Visigoths and
Rome, and in 410 the Visigoths became the masters of Italy and
captured Rome. Later, they moved on into Southern France and
northern Spain where they settled permanently. The Ostrogoths
settled in what is modern Hungary about 455 AD.; under Theodoric
the Great, they conquered Italy about 493, and set up an Ostrogoth
kingdom in Italy, which, however, was short-lived. Their descendants
are the fair-skinned and blond Italians of northern Italy. But the
Goths had ended the Roman Empire: "God's battleaxe" again
destroying the kingdoms of the Babylonian order of empires.

The Angli and the Saxons moved up the Danube Valley and settled in
Germany and along the Baltic shores, as is well known; and from
there, the Jutes, Angles and Saxons colonized England after the
Roman legions were withdrawn in AD. 408.

Actually, the earliest waves of migration penetrated to the farthest

edges of the European continent - partly because they could move
through nearly empty lands, without meeting any peoples strong
enough to effectively resist them, partly because they were pushed
farther by the later waves of Israelite migration coming behind them.
Hence, we find the settlement of the Scandinavian Peninsula pretty
well completed before the arrival of the Jutes, Angles and Saxons
along the southern shore of the Baltic Sea.

The Tribes which settled along the shores of the Baltic were a great
maritime people - as some of the Israelites had been1 even when still in
Palestine, and as God had prophesied. The Jutes, Angles and Saxons
came from within the Baltic Sea, but their ocean-borne raids on
England were heavy and continuous; later, by invitation of the
British, they settled along the eastern shores, in East Anglia, Mercia,
Northumbria, Sussex, Wessex, Essex, and Kent.

William the Conqueror invaded England in 1056, with the Normans;

they were actually Norse Vikings who had settled on the coast of
France in the province of Normandy: "Norman" being really derived
from "Norseman."

So we see that the migrations of Israel, first into Scythia, expanding

there, then gaining the names of Goths, Angli and Saxons, and under
those names moving into their present European homelands, is a well
established historical fact. There is also the fascinating story of the
early migrations by sea, but that is another subject in itself.

The End