Ephraim is England and Her Commonwealth
by Peter Salemi
The tribe of Ephraim was the leader tribe in Israel, with the smallest allotment of land. This tribe as leaders of Israel continued to be the head tribe throughout history, until our day today.
The book of Genesis
The Covenant God made with Abraham of being a father of "many nations," was passed on to Isaac. Rebekah, Isaac's wife, her seed also was to posses the "Gates" of their enemies. This got passed on to Jacob. Jacob was prophesied to become a "nation and a company of Nations" (Gen 35:11). Then when Jacob was about to die, he passed the birthright on to Joseph's two sons Ephraim and Manasseh. As 1 Chronicles says, "For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph's:)" (5:2).
Genesis 48, Jacob crossed his hands to his two grandsons, and said, "The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth...and he [Ephraim] also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations" (vv.16, 19). Ephraim was to become a "multitude of nations" The Company of nations prophesied in Genesis 35:11. This was never fulfilled in the promised land. This prophecy was for the "latter days." (Argument answered: Read our article Ephraim a "Multitude" or the "Fulness of the Nations [Gentiles] here).
In Genesis 48, Jacob was so happy to see not only Joseph, but his two grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh. Jacob being so thankful, he said, "And now thy two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, which were born unto thee in the land of Egypt before I came unto thee into Egypt, are mine; as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine" (v.5). He elevated Joseph's two sons to the level of them being his sons, and not grandsons. The Cyclopedia of Bible, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, says, "That blessing was an adoptive act, whereby Ephraim and his brother Manasseh were counted as sons of Jacob, in the place of their father; the object being to give to Joseph, through his sons, a double portion in the brilliant prospects of his house. Thus the descendants of Joseph formed two of the tribes of Israel, whereas every other of Jacob's sons counted but as one. There were thus, in fact, thirteen tribes of Israel; but the number twelve is usually preserved, either by excluding that of Levi (which had no territory) when Ephraim and Manasseh are separately named, or by counting these two together as the tribe of Joseph when Levi is included in the account" (under article "Ephraim" emphasis added). Once adopted and counted on the same level as the others, the birthright blessing was given to them, and the name of Israel, "The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth." (v.16). These two tribes bore the name "Israel." These two tribes were made the leader tribes of all twelve.
In Genesis chapter 49, Jacob prophesied one by one what each tribe would receive in the "latter days" (v.1). When he got to Joseph he said, "Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose branches run over the wall:
"The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him:
"But his bow abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob; (from thence is the shepherd, the stone of Israel:)
"Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the Almighty, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb:
"The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate [margin "chief"] from his brethren." (vv.22-26). The meaning of the word "Ephraim" is "Fruitfulness" (Strong's# 669, Dual of a masculine form of H672; double fruit; From H6509; fruitfulness; Ephrath,).
In this prophecy, Joseph [Ephraim and Manasseh], they were to be fruitful bough ,planted by a well, whence it draws forth necessary moisture. Those are the most fruitful that are near a well or fountain of water, as such trees are which are planted by rivers of water, see Psalms1:3. Joseph was prophesied to be the most fruitful tribe because they were the closest to God. Jesus said, "But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." (John 4:14). God said he would pour his spirit on the seed of Israel (Isaiah 44:3). The reason why, in the latter days Joseph is chief among his brethren is, they are closest to God, and because of the holy spirit, God revealed many truths to them. Opened up their minds to the bible, and they ran their nations, and empire by the biblical laws as revealed in scripture. This is why they are fruitful! As a result, his "branches run over the wall," meaning that Ephraim would become so fruitful that it would "transcend all the usual boundaries of a well-enclosed garden." (Barnes), and "sending forth its young twigs or offshoots over the supporting walls" (Pulpit Commentary). Joseph would "send forth" his branches over its boundaries, and produce fruit in other places. Ephraim, after it would receive its inheritance of a "company of nations" would send forth its system of Government, religion, economy, civilization to others so they can be fruitful as well.
The enemies of Joseph of course will resist, but God said Joseph' "bow abode in strength" because God was with him. God would bless him with all types of resources, with temperate climates, good weather, natural raw materials and resources "blessings of the deep that lie under"), and good health on a national scale ("breasts of the womb"). Out of all the tribes Ephraim and Manasseh would be the "chief" the head of them all. Was this fulfilled in the latter days? Did the English people fulfill these prophecies?
One more prophecy is made by Moses. This was similar to Jacob's prophecy. Moses said, "And of Joseph he said, Blessed of the LORD be his land, for the precious things of heaven, for the dew, and for the deep that coucheth beneath,
"And for the precious fruits brought forth by the sun, and for the precious things put forth by the moon,
"And for the chief things of the ancient mountains, and for the precious things of the lasting hills,
"And for the precious things of the earth and fulness thereof, and for the good will of him that dwelt in the bush: let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the top of the head of him that was separated from his brethren.
"His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh." (Deut 33:13-17). Verses 13-16 are basically the same as Jacob's prophecy. The last verse however, is added by Moses. He says, "His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns" This means, "The oxen are Joseph's sons, all of whom were strong, but the firstborn excelled the rest, and was endowed with majesty" (Pulpit Commentary). "The ox is a common emblem of power and strength." (Barnes). Clarke's Commentary says, "it is well known that in Scriptural language horns are the emblem of strength, glory, and sovereignty; Psa_75:5, Psa_75:10; Psa_89:17, Psa_89:24; Psa_112:9; Dan_8:3, etc.; Luk_1:69; Rev_17:3, etc." So "By his strong power, Ephraim should thrust down nations, even the most distant." (Pulpit Commentary). However it is, "Ephraim was the most powerful of them all. He was endowed with majesty; his horns, the strong weapon of oxen, in which all their strength is concentrated, were not the horns of common oxen, but horns of the wild buffalo (reem, Num_23:22), that strong indomitable beast (cf. Job_39:9.; Psa_22:22). With them he would thrust down nations, the ends of the earth, i.e., the most distant nations (vid., Psa_2:8; Psa_7:9; Psa_22:28). 'Together,' i.e., all at once, belongs rhythmically to 'the ends of the earth.' Such are the myriads of Ephraim, i.e., in such might will the myriads of Ephraim arise." (K&D Commentary, emphasis added). All of Joseph's people are strong as the ox, but Ephraim was positioned as the "firstborn," and the first born has the most strength (Gen 49:3). This is why they "are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh." Ephraim's empire would be ten times the size of Manasseh's empire.
With this strength Moses said, "he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth:" The word "push" should read "govern." They would rule over many nations "all at once" even to the ends of the earth. They were to govern the world! As we see today, the English people have fulfilled these prophecies to the letter. But can we trace the English people back to Ephraim?
Clues from our National Heraldry
In Numbers 2:2-34, God commanded the tribes of ancient Israel on their way to the Promised Land to divide into four brigades of three tribes each when they set up camp—with each brigade arranged on one side of the square camp. Each brigade would assemble behind the "standard" of the leading tribe on its side. The four leading tribes were Judah, Reuben, Ephraim and Dan. The Jewish Encyclopaedia ("Flag") and many other sources attest that the ancient heraldic symbol on the standard of Ephraim was a bull or ox. Dan's, as we saw in chapter two, was an eagle. Reuben's was a man. And the symbol of Judah was a lion.
The origin of these symbols can be traced to the prophecies God gave regarding particular tribes (Gen. 49; Deut. 33). Remember what God had said of Ephraim and Manasseh: "His glory is like a firstborn BULL, and his horns [weapons] are like the horns of a wild OX ["UNICORNS" KJV]" (Deut. 33:17). Notice that the New King James replaced the King James word "unicorns" with "a wild ox." This is certainly correct since the medieval unicorn idea is thought to have originated from the bovine oryx of the Sinai Peninsula and not from any horse-related animals!
In Genesis 49:9, God said, “Judah is a lion's whelp." The lion became the national symbol of Judah—and was later tied to the House of David. Jesus Christ, the Messiah who sprang from that line, is called "the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David" (Rev. 5:5). But we have also seen the lion used as a symbol of Joseph's military power (Mic. 5:8-9) along with the bull and wild ox (or unicorn).
Recall that, in later years, Jeroboam, the first king of northern Israel, would erect two golden BULLS—one each in the cities of Dan and Bethel—for the Israelites to worship (1 Kings 11:28-33). As Jeroboam was "an Ephraimite" (11:26) of the "house of Joseph" (v. 28), he may have used the fact that the bull was his own tribal symbol to introduce it into Israel's new pagan worship. Centuries before Christ, the ancient Britons worshipped a bull or heifer. Is it any wonder that a well-known nickname for the British is "John Bull"?
Of course, we see these symbols elsewhere in Scripture too. For instance, Israel became associated with THE LION AND THE UNICORN (or wild ox) in Numbers 24:8-9 (KJV)—representing the scepter and birthright tribes of Judah and Joseph respectively. Incredibly, both these symbols appear on the British Coat of Arms, their Great Seal. Between the Lion and the Unicorn are the Old French words, Honi soit qui mal y pense, meaning "Evil to him who thinks evil"—of Britain, that is. This is very similar to the birthright promise: "Cursed be everyone who curses you" (Gen. 27:29; cf. Num. 24:9). At the bottom are words, Dieu et mon droit, meaning "God and my [birth]right." How remarkable! Ephraim was the leading tribe of the family of Joseph who long ago used the BULL as its tribal symbol. The Ephraimites have been the chief possessor of God's birthright blessings (1 Chron. 5:2; Gen. 48:19). As God declares, 'Ephraim is My firstborn" (Jer. 31:9). Isn't it naturally fitting that those BIRTHRIGHT people should today have as one of their mottoes, "God and my [birth]right?”
The Exodus & the Promised Land
In the days of Joshua when the land was being allotted to each tribe, Joseph said to Joshua, "Why hast thou given me but one lot and one portion to inherit, seeing I am a great people, forasmuch as the LORD hath blessed me hitherto?" The tribe of Joseph were the strength of Israel. In the wilderness during the census, we see that Ephraim and Manasseh, "The sons of Joseph after their families were Manasseh and Ephraim." (Num 26:28), were the second most populous tribe next to Judah. Numbers the first chapter reveals them combined as 72,700 of able men twenty year old and upward. The second census in Numbers 26 shows them to be the most populous tribe combined as 85,200 with a dramatic increase of Manasseh, by 20,500, but a decrease in Ephraim by 8,000. By the time they got to the promised land, Joseph was a "great people."
The Tabernacle of God when settled in the promised land was planted in Shiloh., "And the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them." (Joshua 18:1). "The place they assembled at, Shiloh, was in the tribe of Ephraim, of which tribe Joshua was, and whose lot and inheritance was now fixed, and it was not far from Jerusalem, about two leagues." (Gill's Commentary). Ephraim was the leader tribe of Israel, therefore the Tabernacle of God resorted there for its protection, and a place where all of Israel would gather to worship the Lord God. "Then they said, Behold, there is a feast of the LORD in Shiloh yearly in a place which is on the north side of Beth-el, on the east side of the highway that goeth up from Beth-el to Shechem, and on the south of Lebonah" (Judges 21:19). It is the place where Samuel stayed and the Lord revealed himself to him and ordained him as a prophet to Israel (1 Samuel 1-4). Afterwards in the days of King David, the place of the Tabernacle was changed to Jerusalem, "So that he forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent which he placed among men...Moreover he refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim: But chose the tribe of Judah, the mount Zion which he loved...And he built his sanctuary like high palaces, like the earth which he hath established for ever. "(Psalms 78:60, 67-69).
Mount Ephraim was a very important place. This was the place where Joshua was buried, "And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the LORD, died, being an hundred and ten years old...And they buried him in the border of his inheritance in Timnath-heres, in the mount of Ephraim, on the north side of the hill Gaash." (Judges 2:8-9). Most of Ephraim settled there, "Of this district the northern half was occupied by the great tribe we are now considering. This was the Haar- Ephraim, or 'Mount Ephraim,' a district which seems to extend as far south as Ramah and Bethel (1Sa_1:1; 1Sa_7:17; 2Ch_13:4; 2Ch_13:19, compared with 15:8), places but a few miles north of Jerusalem, and within the limits of Benjamin. In structure it is limestone — rounded hills separated by valleys of denudation, but much less regular and monotonous than the part more to the south, about and below Jerusalem; with "wide plains in the heart of the mountains, streams of running water, and continuous tracts of vegetation" (Stanley, Palest. p. 225). All travelers bear testimony to the 'general growing richness' and beauty of the country in going northwards from Jerusalem, the 'innumerable fountains' and streamlets, the villages more thickly scattered than anywhere in the south, the continuous corn-fields and orchards, the moist, vapory atmosphere (Martineau, pages 516, 521; Van de Velde, 1:386-8)" (The Cyclopedia of Bible, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, under "Ephraim"). Most of Ephraim settled there, and eventually spread out through the centre of Palestine. But Ephraim was in the centre of all Israel, so all communication between all the tribes were done through Ephraim. "The central situation of Ephraim in the highway of all communications from one part of the country to another. From north to south, from Jordan to the Sea — from Galilee, or still more distant Damascus, to Philistia and Egypt — these roads all lay more or less through Ephraim, and the constant traffic along them must have always tended to keep the district from sinking into stagnation." (ibid).
Settlement of tribes in the Promised land.
Ephraim had the smallest part of the land, but was in the centre of all Israel. I was a gathering place for worship and the tabernacle of God. Manasseh had two allotments of land, east and west. Their populations were a lot greater than Ephraim's.
In the days of Deborah, all of Israel met with her on Mount Ephraim for judgment (Judges 4:5). In 2 Chronicles 13:4 Abijah appealed to all of Israel about the civil war that was about to start. 1 Chronicles 6:67, "Shechem in mount Ephraim" was at one point the capital of Ephraim, "Here, at this same place, the ten tribes renounced the house of David and transferred their allegiance to Jeroboam (1Ki 12:16), under whom Shechem became for a time the capital of his kingdom" (ibid). Mount Ephraim was always a place of a gathering of Israel. A place of patriotism, of a renewal of the Covenant God made with them etc... In Prophecy it will be a place of the second exodus where God's watchman will tell the Israelites to God to Jerusalem and meet with the King, Jesus Christ, "For there shall be a day, that the watchmen upon the mount Ephraim shall cry, Arise ye, and let us go up to Zion unto the LORD our God." (Jer 31:6). It was also be repopulated by the Ephraimites once again (Jer 50:19).
Eventually, the capital got changed to Samaria. This was the capital of the kingdom of Israel, and Ephraim was the leader tribe, "And the head of Ephraim is Samaria," (Isaiah 7:9). The Ephraimites in the bible reveals them to be ones who are in positions of power, of government, and are PRO-MONARCHISTS! "Their acceptance of and loyalty to Saul, the first king chosen over Israel, may be explained by his belonging to a Rachel tribe, and by the close and tender relations existing between Joseph and Benjamin" (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, under "Ephraim"). When all the tribes of Israel came to David to anoint him King of Israel 2 Sam 5:1, surely, Ephraim being the leader tribe among them showed loyalty to the King. Then "Solomon's lack of wisdom and the crass folly of Rehoboam in the management of the northern tribes fanned the smoldering discontent into a fierce flame. This made easy the work of the rebel Jeroboam; and from the day of the disruption till the fall of the Northern Kingdom there was none to dispute the supremacy of Ephraim, the names Ephraim and Israel being synonymous. The most distinguished of Ephraim's sons were Joshua, Samuel and Jeroboam I." (ibid).
Exile in Assyria
God began "to cut Israel short" (2 Kings 10:32). Israel's blessings were beginning to be stripped from them. God told his prophet years before, "For the LORD shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water, and he shall root up Israel out of this good land, which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the [Euphrates] river, because they have made their groves, provoking the LORD to anger." (1 Kings 14:15). Israel was in a state of sin on a national level. God used the Assyrians to carry them away, and "I have cast out all your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim" (Jer 7:15). All of Ephraim got taken away. Due mainly because of the Ephraimite, Jeroboam's sin, of setting up the calf's in Dan and Beersheba, and setting up his own priesthood, (see 1 Kings 12). "And he shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, who did sin, and who made Israel to sin." (1 Kings 14:16). "Thy calf, O Samaria, hath cast thee off; mine anger is kindled against them:" (Hosea 8:5).
So the Assyrians came in, in many waves of invasions. The first wave in 734 B.C., they took the Galilean tribes of, Asher, Naphtali, Issachar and Zebulon, see 2 Kings 15:29. In the Parallel account in 1 Chronicles 5:26, Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh were taken as well, the reason why Naphtali was not mentioned, is, the whole chapter was dedicated to the genealogies of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh, so the writer parenthetically wrote in what happened to those three tribes.
In the Assyrian inscriptions we read of this invasion: "The cities of ...Gala'za, Abikka, which are on the border of Bit-Humria [house of Omri]...the whole land of Naphtali, in its entirety brought within the border of Assyria. My official I set over them as governor..."
And again: "The land of Bit-Humeria [Israel was named after this king to the Assyrians, explained later]...all of its people together with their goods I carried off to Assyria...Pakaha [Pekah], their king they disposed, and I places Ausi as King...and to Assyria I carried them" (Thomas, pp.17-18). These statements absolutely corroborate the Bible. He gave no number, but its obvious he took all of the Galilean tribes captive. The words like "all of its people," and the "whole land of Naphtali," indicates he took them all away. As God said he would, "...And God said unto him, Call her name Loruhamah: for I will no more have mercy upon the house of Israel; but I will utterly take them away." (Hosea 1:6)
The second invasion is in 2 Kings 17:5-6. In these two verses, two separate Kings of Assyria are described. In verse 5 Shalmaneser King of Assyria besieged "all the land" and the the "city of Samaria." "Against him came up Shalmaneser king of Assyria...Then the king of Assyria came up throughout all the land, and went up to Samaria, and besieged it three years." (vv.3, 5). During this siege of Samaria Shalmaneser died and Sargon took over, (see Sayce, Assyria, It's Princes, Priests and People, p.48). The state recorder of the book of Kings could not have known that, that's why its not recorded in the Bible. The state recorder was being attacked at the time by the Assyrians.
When we look at the records of Sargon, he himself says, "In the beginning of my reign the city of Samaria I besieged I captured...27, 280 of its inhabitants I carried away" (The Assyrian Invasions and the Deportations of Israel, by Thomas p.23) This is not an entire nation. Israel was much more than 27, 280 people. And as Sargon himself states, he just besieged a CITY NOT A NATION! So verse 6, "In the ninth year of Hoshea the king of Assyria [Sargon] took Samaria..." This was the time when God said, "will cause to cease the kingdom of the house of Israel." (Hosea 1:4). Now he "carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes." Was this Sargon or Shalmaneser? No! There was another invasion by Esarhaddon in 669 B.C. Evidence?
In 2 Kings 17:24, it shows that the King of Assyria imported gentile people in Samaria: "And the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children of Israel: and they possessed Samaria, and dwelt in the cities thereof." There's a problem. These people are NOT the same people that Sargon imported from other nations. The Assyrian Chronicles read: "The conqueror of the Thamudites, the Ibadidites, the Marsiminites and the Khapaijans the remainder of whom was carried away, and whom he transported to the midst of the land of Beth-Omri [Israel]...One comparing the peoples here mentioned with those enumerated in 2 Kings 17:24, they do not appear to be the same peoples, which goes to confirm the conviction that it was not Sargon who imported the tribes mentioned in verse 24..."(Thomas pp.23-24, emphasis added). This shows that there had to be a fourth Invasion of the Land of Israel!
Mr. Thomas makes an interesting point about Chapter 17. He shows that the great editor of the Bible Ezra, added a few words here and there to show what happened at the siege of Samaria.: "The official state records of the Kingdom of Israel ceased with the fall of the kingdom. What was the last entry of the records? It was verse 5 of chapter 17...(ibid., p.24, emphasis added). For reasons already stated, he could not write down what was happening anymore, Samaria was under attack. But in verse 6 we see an interesting statement about the deportation, this phrase, "and the cities of the Medes." These words are important to us, for it shows us the time frame for when these words were written. This proves that this verse was not written during the siege of Samaria, but the earliest several years afterwards...for a simple reason Media in 721 did not belong to the Assyrians...These words were written long years after, by Ezra" (ibid., p.25, emphasis added).
Other phrases for Ezra being the one who wrote the later verses of chapter 17 is the phrase that God "removed out of his sight," Israel, in verse 23. This is talking about the land of Israel, see Deuteronomy 11:12. The same expression is found in Jeremiah 7:15: "And I will cast you [Judah] out of my sight, as I have cast out all your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim." Sargon only took 27,280 people away, not the "whole seed of Ephraim." So it points to a latter date.
Another interesting phrase that points to Ezra is the phrase "So was Israel carried away out of their own land to Assyria unto this day" (2 Kings 17:23). This again shows that this did not happen in 721 to 718 B.C. For the Bible shows that there was still Israelites in the land after the invasion of Samaria: "And Hezekiah sent to all Israel and Judah, and wrote letters also to Ephraim and Manasseh, that they should come to the house of YHWH at Jerusalem, to keep the Passover unto YHWH God of Israel...So they established a decree to make proclamation throughout all Israel, from Beersheba even to Dan, that they should come to keep the Passover unto YHWH God of Israel at Jerusalem: for they had not done it of a long time in such sort as it was written...So the posts went with the letters from the king and his princes throughout all Israel and Judah, and according to the commandment of the king, saying, Ye children of Israel, turn again unto YHWH God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, and he will return to the remnant of you, that are escaped out of the hand of the kings of Assyria...So the posts passed from city to city through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh even unto Zebulun: but they laughed them to scorn, and mocked them... Nevertheless divers of Asher and Manasseh and of Zebulun humbled themselves, and came to Jerusalem" (2 Chronicles 30:1, 5, 6, 10-11, see also verses 18, 25; 2 Chronicles 31:1, 6). This is just after the fall of Samaria, and there are still Israelites in the land that escaped the invasions. Now we come to the next invasion of Israel.
Esar-haddon son of Sennacherib was the invading king of Israel that Ezra knew
about, that the state recorder could not have known. Though his name is not
mentioned in the book of kings, we can see
from the Assyrian inscriptions and the Encyclopedia Britannica that he was the King that invaded and deported Israel.
In 2 Chronicles 33:11 we see the invasion take place: "Wherefore YHWH brought
upon them the captains of the host of the king of Assyria [Esar-Haddon] , which
took Manasseh among the thorns,
and bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon." Thomas says: "There is no explanation why Judah was not annexed by Esar-Haddon. Further it would appear that no Jewish captives were deported" (ibid., p.31). After this campaign he brought foreigners into the land of Samaria, "In accord with the accepted policy of the Assyrian kings, Esar-Haddon removed the Israelites, and into their emptied land made a wholesale importation of gentiles [now called Samaritans]" (ibid., p.31). We also find in Ezra 4:2, that the Samaritans themselves stated that they were brought in by EsarHaddon: "...Esarhaddon king of Assur, which brought us up hither." But why wasn't the northern ten tribes of the house of Israel mentioned in the book of Chronicles in this invasion? The book of Chronicles is a history about the HOUSE OF JUDAH, NOT ISRAEL, as Halley's Bible Handbook explains: "[The book of] Kings gives a parallel account of the northern and the southern kingdoms, while Chronicles confines itself to the southern kingdom. Chronicles seems to be concerned primarily with the kingdom of David and bringing his line down to date" (p.214, emphasis added). But we find in other books of the Bible and authentic history that the northern kingdom was taken by EsarHaddon. Also notice that king Manasseh was taken captive to "Babylon." In 2 Kings 17:24, it mentions the people of Babylon being transported to the northern kingdom by the king of Assyria, so now we have the right time frame. The "King of Assyria" in 2 Kings 17:24 is Esar-Haddon!
This campaign took place in 672 B.C.: "This event [the invasion of Israel] may possibly be dated to the year 672 B.C. at the time when Esar-Haddon introduced a series of vassal treaties at the ceremony of the induction of the crown prince Asshurbanipal. Representatives of all countries which owed allegiance to Assyria were brought together at the royal palace at Nineveh and they were bound with particularly fearful oaths to support the crown prince after the death of his father" (International Bible Commentary, p.483, emphasis added). Here you have the motive for the invasion of Israel. They did not want to pledge allegiance to Asshurbanipal.
Now Esar-Haddon died in 669 B.C.. The Campaign started in 672 B.C. and the invasion finished when he died in 669 B.C. "A very interesting explanation of this passage [Ezra 4:2], has been recently obtained from the Assyrian sculptures on a large cylinder...there is inscribed a long perfect copy of the annals of Esar-Haddon, in which the details are given of a large deportation of Israelites from Palestine, and a consequent settlement of Babylonian colonists in their place [see 2 Kings 17:24]. It is a striking confirmation of the statement made in this passage...Esar-Haddon removed Babylonians to Samaria...The complete overthrow of the Israelitish Kingdom DID NOT take place TILL ESAR-HADDON Made the invasion of Judea and carried Manasseh prisoner to Babylon and made a conquest of the WHOLE NORTHERN PORTION OF JUDEA [Northern Israel] by those military followers of Babylon, Cutah etc...When returning to Assyria, he left behind to colonize the cities of SAMARIA formerly occupied by the Children of Israel" (JFB Critical, Experimental and Practical Commentary, p.589, emphasis added). Esar-Haddon fulfilled Hosea's prophecy that Israel would no longer be a people in Palestine as Thomas explains: "This statement that they were placed [the gentiles] in the cities of Samaria' instead of Israel' implies a great deportation of Israel, and that Israel was no longer 'a people' in Palestine" (Deportation of Israel, p.32). 734-669 B.C. is 65 years. Isaiah prophesied that Israel would be taken away in a 65 year span of time, ": "...within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people" (Isaiah 7:8).
The Land of Exile
Now we get to the land where the Israelites were taken, in "Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes." The Assyrian record says, ": "...the border of BIT-HUMRIA...the whole land of Napthali...The land of BIT-HUMRIA...all its people together...I carried off to Assyria..."(Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylon, D.D. Lucenbill, p.292, emphasis added). The land of Israel was called "Bit-Humria." This was named after king Omri of Israel. The Assyrians did not call them Israelites as a whole, but the "Humri."
The Britannica admits:"...the land [of Israel] continued to be known to the Assyrians down to the time of Sargon as the house of Omri..." (11th edition, vol.20, p.105, emphasis added).
There is a lot of evidence supporting the fact that the Assyrians called Israel by other names: "...letters covering the sweep of the Empire in the seventh century [time of Israel's captivity] contain references to captive Israelites...However owing to the relevant texts being mixed up in complete disorder among so many others, the early translators failed to recognize references to the Israelites in about a dozen tablets. Contributing to the fact that WE NOW KNOW that the Assyrians called the ISRAELITES BY OTHER NAMES" (RF. Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian Letters, and Waterman, The Royal Correspondence of the Assyrian Empire, p.101, emphasis added). Israel became the "Humri" in the land of the Assyrians before and after they got taken away.
In any number of languages, the h is silent. However, in other languages the h has a hard sound, pronounced by forcing the sharp sound against the hard palate, as in the English word "how." In some languages, such as German, the h can be pronounced quite similarly to the English k. Thus "Bit Humri" was pronounced by some "Kumri" and by the Greeks "Kimri," "Cimri" or "Gymri." Raymond Capt in his book Missing Links in Assyrian Tablets, demonstrates this fact pertaining to the Assyrians: "Above the scene is written in Assyrian cuneiform script: 'The tribute to Jehu (Iaua) son of Khumri (Omri)...' The Hebrew name 'Omri' is represented in Assyrian transliteration as 'Gh' or 'Kh.' The Israelites would naturally pronounce 'Omri' 'Ghomri' which became 'Khumri' in Assyrian...The Assyrian name 'Khumri,' used to denote the Israelites is also found in the annals (records) of King Tiglath-Pileser III concerning his invasion of Israel...Sargon II (722-705 B.C.) also makes mention of the 'Khumri' in his record of the capture of Samaria. He refers to himself as the conqueror of 'Bit-Khumri'...Letter 112...reveals the names of the inhabitants of Gamir as 'Gamera' and further identified them as 'CIMMERIANS.' The texts of the preceding tablets reveal the Israelites, originally known to the Assyrians, as 'Khumri,'...In captivity the Israelites were renamed 'Gamira,' 'Gamera' and FINALLY CIMMERIANS''' (pp.99, 115, emphasis added).
Also, in the Old Testament, the people of
Israel were generally called the "House of Israel" (Heb. beit Yisrael) and,
quite frequently, the "House of Jacob" (Heb. beit Ya'akov). However, they were
referred to as the "House of Isaac" (Heb. beit Yitzak, Amos 7:16). About 751 B.C. (30 years before the Assyrian deportation of the northern tribes to Media) the Prophet Amos said, "The high places [idolatrous shrines] of Isaac shall be desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel [at Dan and Bethel] shall be laid waste" (v. 9). In that scripture, "Isaac" and "Israel" both refer to the same people--the people of Israel. Amos also stated, "And the LORD said to me, 'Go, prophesy to My people [the Northern Kingdom of] Israel'" (v. 15). Amos then told Amaziah, king of Judah, "Now therefore, hear the word of the LORD: You [Amaziah] say 'Do not prophesy against Israel, and do not spout against the HOUSE OF ISAAC'" (v. 16). Notice that the people of the Kingdom of Israel were being called the "House of Isaac" a few decades before the Northern Kingdom was destroyed and its people taken captive. Those Israelites would have told their captors that they were the people of "Beit Yitzak." Since the Assyrian language was a Semitic tongue akin to the Hebrew language, the Assyrians may well have referred to the captives of the House of Israel by not only the name "House of Omri," but also the "House of Isaac"!
Notice what the Assyrians (whose court language was Semitic) did with the word Israel (Heb. Yisra'el). Notice how they referred to King Ahab of Israel in ancient documents: "A-ha-ab-bu Sir-'i-la-a-a" (cf. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, pp. 277-281). They clearly dropped the Yi from Yisra'el (or the "I" from Israel)! Wouldn't the same be true of Yitzak? Based on all we've seen, more than likely! The Yi would be dropped, leaving Tzak (or the "I" dropped, leaving Saac or the plural Saccae). Ptolemy's maps of the area of the Exile reveal the Israelite names of the towns and cities. One region is called "Sacarum Regio" "Kingdom of the Sacae." "SACCAE was the contemporary Middle Eastern term for Scyth and the name is believed to be a DERIVATIVE OF 'ISAAC'" (The Tribes, Davidy, p. 128, emphasis added). Herodotus writes, "The Sacae, who are Scythians... These were Amyrgian Scythians, but were called Sacae; that is the Persian name for all Scythians." (bk.7 chpt.64.v2). What two tribes had the name of Isaac primarily on them? Ephraim and Manasseh (Gen 48:16). These were the two leader tribes especially Ephraim. So the time of their captivity, the two names of the Cimmerians and the Scythians appear. These were the exiled Israelites!
"cities of the Medes"-"According to these clear words of the text, the places to which the ten tribes were banished are not to be sought for in Mesopotamia, but in provinces of Assyria and Media....on the eastern side of the Tigris near Adiabene, to the north of Nineveh on the border of Armenia. חָבֹור is not the כְּבָר in Upper Mesopotamia ...Here in northern Assyria we also find both a mountain called Χαβώρας, according to Ptol. vi. 1, on the boundary of Assyria and Media, and the river Chabor, called by Yakut in the Moshtarik l-hsnîh (Khabur Chasaniae), to distinguish it from the Mesopotamian Chaboras or Chebar...The river Gozan or of Gozan is therefore distinct from חָבֹור (Khabur), and to be sought for in the district in which Gauzani'a, the city of Media mentioned by Ptol. (vi. 2), was situated. In all probability it is the river which is called Kisil (the red) Ozan at the present day, the Mardos of the Greeks, which takes its rise to the south-east of the Lake Urumiah and flows into the Caspian Sea, and which is supposed to have formed the northern boundary of Media.
Halah- "The name appears in Chalcitis (Ptolemy, 5:18), and Gla, a mound on the upper Khabour (2Ki_17:6). A Median district and city." (Faucette Bible Dictionary)
Habor-" Habor is the mount Chobaras of the same; from which mountain, as you go to the Caspian sea, about midway, is the city Gauzania, the same with Gozan, which might give name to this river (b). The Jews say (c), this is the river Sambation,..;Vid. Witsium de 10 Trib. Israel. c. 4. sect. 2. (c) Rambam apud Eliam in Tishbi, p. 134."(Gill's Commentary).
Gozan-Ptolemy, in his description of Medias, mentions a town called Gauzania (Geogr. 6:2, 10), situated between the Zagros mountains and the Caspian Sea. Bochart (Opp. 1:194) and others (so Rosenmüller, Bibl. Geogr. I, 2:102).
The Encyclopedia Americana records the Scythians arrived in the region of South Russia “about 700 B.C.” (Vol. 24 p.471) An historian of the Scythians, Tamara Talbot Rice, wrote the following: “The Scythians did not become a recognizable national entity… before the eighth century B.C…by the seventh century B.C. they had established themselves firmly in southern Russia…Assyrian documents place their appearance…on the shores of Lake Urmia [just south of Armenia] in the time of King Sargon (722-705 B.C.) a date which closely corresponds with that of the first establishment of the first group of Scythians in southern Russia.” (The Scythians pp.19-20, 44).
The Behistun Rock that links two Peoples
In Iran there is an inscription called the Behistun Rock that was made during the time of Darius the Mede. The inscription is written in 3 different languages, Babylonian, Elamite and Persian
|The Behistun Rock helps us to understand our Celtic (Cimmerian) and
Anglo-Saxon (Scythian) Heritage. They list 23 different provinces which
then constituted the Persian Empire (520 B.C.) According to the
translation by LW King and RC Thomson, the 19th province listed, in the
Persian Language, that province is called "Scythia" (phonetic: Sakka)
and Susian (Median). But in the Babylonian language, that Same
province is called "the land of the Cimmerians" (phonetic: Gimiri). This
shows that the Cimmerians and the Scythians were one and the same
Notice the following extract from The History of Herodotus:
"The ethnic name of Gimiri first occurs in the cuneiform records of the
time of Darius Hystapses [Darius I], as the Semitic equivalent of the
Arian name Saka [Sacae = Scythians = Saxons].... The nation spoken of
contained at this time two divisions, the eastern branch, named Humurga...
and the [western branch] Tigrakkuda or 'archers,' who [shared a common
border]... with the Assyrians" (translated by G. Rawlinson, H. Rawlinson
feature of the Behistun Rock inscriptions is King Darius, in royal
attire and surrounded by captives. Around the captives are five main
panels, twenty in all. The first panel contains 19 paragraphs and 96
lines. Each paragraph commences with the words: “I am Darius, the king
of kings, the king of Persia.” The second panel has 16 paragraphs and 96
lines; over each figure is a brief history of the man and the tribe he
represents. The tenth panel is most interesting to a Bible student
because it speaks of “Sarocus,” the Sacan, who has the HEBREW FORM OF A
“Most noteworthy is King Darius majestically standing before nine persons united by a rope around their necks and their hands fastened behind their backs ( as seen in Photograph above). A tenth man is prostrate on his back; the right foot of the king is upon his body. Now two of the prisoners are dressed alike. Some of them have short tunics, others have long flowing robes. They are evidently the HEAD CHIEFS OF THE TEN TRIBES OF ISRAEL. The word “Kana” occurs 28 times in the inscription and the word “Armenia” also occurs frequently. This is the area from which the prisoners were taken - the very area where the ten tribes of Israel had been placed by the Assyrians” (Missing Links in Assyrian Tablets, by Ray Capt, p.139, emphasis added).
In the Book Missing Links in Assyrian Tablets, Capt says that the Rock shows the Scythians are a "branch of the Gimiri" (p.140).
Davidy says, "A group of Amyrgian Scythians in the time of Darius, king of Persia, were reported as then dwelling on the Tigris [River] banks. They were led by a chief Saku'ka and revolted against the Persian rulers. In a bilingual inscription these Amyrgians are called Saka Humuvashka in Persian and Gimirri Umurgah in Babylonian. Gimirri [in the Babylonian version] means either 'Tribes' or Cimmerians or perhaps both since the Scyths and Cimmerians were originally ONE ENTITY" (The Tribes, Davidy, p. 360, emphasis added).
Sir Henry Rawlinson was also of this opinion: "The identification of the Persian Sacae or Scythians with the people named by the Greeks Kimmerioi [Cimbri = Celts]... would seem highly probable" (Proceedings of the Royal Asiatic Society, May 12, 1849, p. xxi). How about that! Incredibly, history reveals that the Celts (Cimmerians) were merely the western branch of the wide-ranging Scythians!
Madison Grant concurred with this conclusion, writing that the Cimmerians, the Sacae (Saxons) and the Massagetae all sprang from the Scythians (p. 194). So these great peoples, seemingly originating in northern Mesopotamia and in Persia, were basically the same. The Cimmerians (to the west) and the Scythians (to the east--yet always advancing westward upon the Cimmerians) were actually branches of the same great family!
Ptolemy's Map of Scythia
Davidy in his work the "Tribes" identifies many of these names with the Israelites sub-tribes of each clan. (pp.179-194).
Eran, Dahae, Bactriana are the Epraimite clans, Number 26:35.
Sammartae, Samakand "in honor of Samaria"
Massagetae is Manasseh
The Scythians and the Parthians
The tribes of the Scythians make it very easy to see who these people actually are. Many people do not realize that the names of the sub tribes we read of in the Bible of the tribes of Israel, make it easy for one to trace the Israelites.
The Tribes of Ephraim are, "These are the sons of Ephraim after their families: of Shuthelah, the family of the Shuthalhites: of Becher, the family of the Bachrites: of Tahan, the family of the Tahanites.
"And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran, the family of the Eranites.
"These are the families of the sons of Ephraim according to those that were numbered of them, thirty and two thousand and five hundred. These are the sons of Joseph after their families." (Num 26:35-37).
The Tribes of Manasseh, "Of the sons of Manasseh: of Machir, the family of the Machirites: and Machir begat Gilead: of Gilead come the family of the Gileadites.
"These are the sons of Gilead: of Jeezer, the family of the Jeezerites: of Helek, the family of the Helekites:
"And of Asriel, the family of the Asrielites: and of Shechem, the family of the Shechemites:
"And of Shemida, the family of the Shemidaites: and of Hepher, the family of the Hepherites.
"And Zelophehad the son of Hepher had no sons, but daughters: and the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, and Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah." (Num 26:29-33).
The Tribes of the Sacae, Isaac, or Scythians are the , "Bactriana, Tocharians, Dahea, Massagetea, Saka " (Strabo, Geography 11.8.1) There is also the " Sarmatians (Latin: Sarmatæ or Sauromatæ)" (Ptolemey). Herodotus speaks of the "Amyrgian Scyths" (book 7, chap. 64, v.2), and that the Massagetea "In their dress and mode of living resembled the Scythians" (book.1 chapter 215, v.1).
It does not take an expert to see that the names of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are seen in the names of the Scythian-Sacae Tribes.
Ephraim & Manasseh
|Scythian & Parthian|
|East Manasseh||Massa [Manasseh] getea [Jats, Jutes]|
|Shuthelah||Scoloti Scythians (Heodotus)|
|Eran||Modern name of Iran|
|Aeglah nickname for Ephraim (Hosea 10:11; Jer 31:18)||Aegli in north Bactria (Herodotus 3:92)|
|The daughters of Zelophehad|
|Milcah||Milicertii & Royal Scyths|
|Tirzah||Thyrsa-getae (Pliny N.H. 4:12)|
"The prophecy of Jacob promised that the name of Isaac would remain on the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, therefore, the "fact that the Scythians bore the name of Isaac (Saka or Sacae) confirms that many of the Scythians were from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh" (LTTF, Collins, p.182).
The Parthian and Scythian Empires
In Scythia, the Ephraimites and the Manassites were beginning to break from their Persian masters. Then when Alexander the Great came to power in Persia, the Parthians revolted against the Greek rule as well. The major branches of the Parthians were, "the Scythians clan of the Dahanites [who] had a major role on the origins of Parthia's independence...The Bactrites, the Eranites, and the Tahanites, and their mutual co-operation would have been the backbone of Parthia's strength. The subsequent stability of Parthia argues that its component clans were closely related and had much in common" (ibid, p.211, emphasis added). The Parthians empire was composed of these three clans of Ephraimites. The "Massagetae were one of the foremost tribes of their Scythian kinsmen...history records a very close relationship between the Scythians and the Parthians" (ibid, p.212). It is reasonable to believe that the Scythians were Manasseh and the Parthians were Ephraim.
National Characteristics-The Scythians according to Herodotus abhorred swine and swine's flesh, "... these Scythians make no offerings of swine; nor are they willing for the most part to rear them in their country." (Histories, bk.4 chpt.63). The Scythians claim they are "the youngest of all nations" (ibid, book 4, chpt.5). Israel was born in 1500 B.C. "to the crossing of Darius" was 500B.C.. They like to ride on "horseback" as the "extent of Scythia is very great" (ibid, book 4, chpt.7). They love the open land, and ride on horseback much like the cowboys of the old west in the United States. They live as nomads, "The nomadic Scythians inhabiting Asia" (ibid, book.4, chpt.11). These nomads dwelled mainly in tents or wagons. They raised some crops, but their main talent was in tending livestock: cattle, sheep, goats and especially horses! Sounds a lot like the cowboys of the old west in America
The Scythians were acknowledged to have been the best horsemen of their day, and no cavalrymen could match their skill in fighting. In about 512 B.C., Darius the Great tried to subdue them north of the Danube River and the Black Sea, but he failed. On numerous occasions the Scythians defeated the powerful armies of their enemies—the Assyrians, Persians and Romans. In fact, it was some of the hard-riding, violence-loving Scythian tribes which later laid in the dust the might and glory of Rome!
Archaeological evidence and historical records reveal that the Scythians were fair skinned peoples closely akin to, if not identical to, today’s northwestern Europeans! In fact, archaeologists have discovered burial mounds containing the frozen bodies of Scythian chieftains and their retainers. “The chieftains were exceptionally tall and strong and... racially the Altai [a Scythian tribe] were predominantly [of] European type.... At least one man had black wavy hair and one woman a luxuriant soft pile of dark chestnut tresses. A silver and gilt amphora [vase] discovered in 1862 in a grave at a site called Chertomlyk, also on the Dnieper, bears in relief on its gleaming surface a group of Scythians who could be American wranglers: one is roping a shaggy-maned steed, another is removing hobbles from a saddled horse.... The Budini [another Scythian tribe, were] a powerful people with bright red hair and deep blue eyes....Sometimes the Scythians prepared a sort of haggis [a Scottish dish] by boiling the flesh of a cow in its own skin.
“They were in all respects a passionate people—bearded men with dark, deep-set eyes, weather-cured faces and long wind snarled hair. They drank from the skulls of slain enemies and flaunted the scalps of their foes as trophies. In a time when nations had not yet developed skilled cavalrymen and relied almost entirely on foot soldiers and chariots, the Scythians came riding at the gallop, shooting fusillades of singing arrows from their bows. 'Herodotus also reported that the Scythians liked to get high from marijuana!' ‘In order to cleanse their bodies, the men make a booth by fixing in the ground three sticks inclined toward one another, and stretching around them woolen felts; inside the booth a dish is placed on the ground, into which they put a number of red hot stones, and then add some hemp seed. Immediately it gives out such a vapor as no Greek vapor bath can exceed’” (Frank Trippet, The First Horsemen, Time-Life Books, New York, 1974, pp. 9, 18, 105-106, 112, 122). So the ancient Scythians not only looked like most of the America peoples today, they even appear to have passed on some of their terrible habits to our modern peoples—their descendants.
What of the Parthians? First why were they called Parthians? In his book Phoenician Origins of Britons and Scots, L.A. Waddell points out that the "Phoenicians" interchanged the B's and the P's in various forms of the word B-R-T. He lists many ancient forms in which the root word B-R-T was expressed. Words such as 'Barat,' 'Prat,' 'Britannia,' and 'Piritum' are just a few samples of the words based on the Hebrew for 'Covenant.' The Ancient British Chronicles record that the first king of Briton was named Brutus [ancestor of the kings of Troy], whose name was also formed by the B-R-T consonants of the Hebrew word for 'Covenant.' Waddell notes that the Phoenicians interchanged B's and P's in the Mediterranean world, and adds that the Phoenicians of Cilicia called the city of Tarsus 'Parenthia.' The Greeks also interchanged P's and B's, as the Greek explorer Pytheas referred to the British Isles by the term 'Pretanic' (using P) while Aristotle refers to them by the word 'Britannic' (using B). Since the Greeks interchanged P's and B's and they wrote of the Parthians, the word "Parthia" could just as easily been written "Barthia" or "Brithia." In these forms the Hebrew word for "covenant" BRT or BRTH is clearly evident. The identity of the Parthians is clearly evident that they are the Covenant People of Israel, especially Ephraim !
The Parthians spoke the Pahlavi language which has its roots in the Semitic tongue, "The name [Pahlavi] which means Parthian, can be traced back for many centuries...The great peculiarity of the language is that though its Iranian, it is full of Semitic words" (Britannica vol,17, p.30). Zenaide Ragozin states: "Pehlevi...does not seem Persian at all, but rather Semitic. That is, an enormous amount of words-nouns, pronouns, verbs, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions-are Semitic, while the grammar and construction...are Eranian..." (Media, pp.20-22). The Israelites when exile learn the Persian tongues, and eventually mixed with the Hebrew/Phoenician language that they already had, therefore became Pahlevi.
The Parthians wore "coat[s] of mail looking like the scales of a fish, and trousers; for arms they carried light wicker shields, quivers slung below them, short spears, powerful bows with cane arrows, and short swords swinging from belts beside the right thigh" (Herodotus book.7, chpt. 61). Although he calls them "Persians" others call them Parthians. Its understandable since the Parthians dwelt in Persia. Their army looked a lot like the Medieval English armies. Rawlinson describes the heavy Calvary of the Parthians, "The strong horses selected for this service were clad almost wholly in mail. Their head, neck, chest, even their sides and flanks, were protected by scale amour of brass and Iron...Their riders had cuirasses and cuisses [Breastplates and leg armour] of the same materials, and helmets of burnished iron" (The Sixth Oriental Monarchy, p.161, emphasis added). The Britannica calls the heavy Parthian Calvary "Knights" ("Persia" vol.17, p.581). There is evidence of this among the Israelite army as well. In 2 Chronicles 26:14 Uzziah equipped his army with, "And Uzziah prepared for them, even for all the host, shields, and spears, and helmets, and coats of mail, and bows, and stones for slinging" (ASV).
The Parthians also governed in the same way the Medieval English lords did, in fact, the English way of governing just comes from the Old Feudal system of Parthia! "In their governmental structure, the Parthians manifested the beginnings of a 'Parliament,' and foreshadowed the Magna Carta of Medieval England which enabled the nobility to check the power of English kings" (LTTF, pp.232-233, emphasis added). The Parthian kings ruled over all of Parthia, but also had provincial and municipal vassal kings or rulers. Like in England, Canada, Australia, there is the Parliament systems, provincial, and municipal governments, and a governor General that represents the Queen. The same system was in place in Parthia (see Rawlinson's The Sixth Oriental Monarchy, pp.87-88).
Scythian and Parthian Migrations After Their Fall
We can trace the migrations of these two great peoples into England through the records of ancient history.
|Herodotus writes, "It
is that the wandering Scythians [Amyrgian Scyths] once dwelt in Asia, and there warred
with the Massagetae,
[East Manasseh] but with ill success; they therefore quitted their
homes, crossed the Araxes,
and entered the land of Cimmeria."
(book.4, chpt.11). Already during the time of Herodotus, the Scythians
[West Manasseh] were moving towards Europe. By the first century, the
Scythians were in Southern Russia and eastern Europe. When Parthia fell
in the third century A.D. they fled into Scythian territory. Now there
are many familiar names associated with these migrating peoples.
The Romans had a custom of naming leaders after the enemies they fought. One was called "Germanicus" because he fought the Germans. One Romans General who fought the Parthians called himself "Decidius SAXA" (Rawlinson's The Sixth Oriental Monarchy, pp.187-189). The Parthians called themselves the SACAE, in the Latin form its was "SAXA."
Ptolemy mentions a Scythian people, sprung from the Sakai, by the name of Saxones (J.H Allen, Joseph's Sceptre chapter 5). There was a people called Saxoi, on the Euxine, according to Stephanus (Stephanus de Urb. et. I'op. p. 657).
Albinus also says the Saxons were descended from the Ancient Sacae of Asia, and that eventually they were called Saxons. (J.H Allen, Joseph's Sceptre chapter 5)
"Prideaux finds that the Cimbrians came from between the Black and Euxine (Caspian) seas, and that with them came the Angli" (J.H Allen, Joseph's Sceptre chapter 5).
Scythia, Sarmatia, Bactria and the Parthian Empire in ca.100-50 BC
The Augali-The Ephraimites as a whole were called, "Aeglah" Hosea writes, "And Ephraim is as an heifer [eglâh Strong's #5697]" (10:11). Jeremiah writes of Ephraim, "I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus; Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised, as a bullock [Strong's #5695 "êgel ay'-ghel] unaccustomed to the yoke: turn thou me, and I shall be turned; for thou art the LORD my God." (31:18). Joseph was likened to a bull (Gen 33:17), and so this nickname stuck to this tribe. They were the "Ayghel" tribe. Davidy writes, "...the tribe of Ephraim had been nicknamed ;bull calf'...Ephraim an 'Aegel' meaning 'young bull' in Hebrew. Herodotus (3:92) puts the Aegles on the edge of Bactria and apparently there were the Augali whom Ptolemy much later positioned a bit further north in Sogdiana on the banks of the Jaxartes River" (The Tribes, p.379, emphasis added). Notice that the Augali, Aegles dwell in the lands of Parthia in the province of Bactria, one of the major tribes of Ephraim, and the backbone of the Parthian Empire. Since all of Ephraim were called the Aegels, these were most likely one of the names used to describe the whole Empire. Like in the Bible, tribal, and sub-tribal names were used, why should it be any different in the place of exile? So the Parthians were known as the Aeglah Saxe, eventually to be known as the Anglo-Saxons.
The Word "Saxon"-"The word Saxon is usually derived from the word saks, or sax. "Dr. W. Holt Yates says: 'The word Saxon comes from 'Sons of Isaac.' By dropping the prefix 'I,' and adding the affix 'ons,' he gives us 'Saac, Saach, Saax, Saach sen.' He shows that in most of the Eastern languages 'Sons of' is written 'Sun-nia;' as in Scotch 'Mac' means 'son of;' thus 'Macdonald, son of Donald;' and in English 'Fitz, son of,' 'Fitz-William, son of William;' so in the east 'Saic Sunnia,' means 'sons of Isaac.' I consider Dr. Yates's derivation of the word the most reasonable put forward... The derivation of the word from Saxe or Sach, [to] the short sword which they are said to have used does not seem worthy of accepting, because both long and short swords were used before there were any Saxons known as such. The etymology which traces it to Isaac seems very satisfactory. If the initial letter is dropped (as is often done in the East, it being a formative letter merely) we have 'saac,' which only requires the addition of sen or son to make 'saac-sen' or 'saacson,' which last is phonetically equal to Saxon. (See 'Lights and Shadows.' )...How were they to be called in Isaac? Let us drop the prefix ''" as shown above, and we have 'Saac;' the letter c is often changed to k, and as often to x. Then we may find 'Saax;' now add the termination 'ons' derived from sunnia, sons of, we have "Saxons." (Cheshire Notes and Queries, Volumes 3-5,, Origin of the British People, pp.20-21, emphasis added). thus: Sons of Isaac, Sons of Saac, SaacSunnia, Saac-Suna, Saac-Sena, Saac-pena, Esakska, Sacae-Amyrqui, Beth-Sakal (House of Isaac), Sunnia Sakai-Suna, Saca-Suna, Sacae-Sunnae, Sackisina, Sacka-Sacia, Saca-Cine, Saka-Suna, Sacas-Sani, Sakas-Saeni, Saxi-Suna, Sach-Suni, Sachi, Sacha, Sa-kah, Saa-chus, Saa-cus, Sa-cho, Saxo, Saxoi, Saxonia, Sax-ones, Saxae, Sach-sen, Sack-sen, Saxe-sen, Saxone, Saxony, Saxon' "("Our Race, "Judah's Scepter and Joseph's Birthright, page 294). "for in Isaac shall thy seed be called." (Gen 21:12).
Talbot Rice notes that the Scythians "all traces" of them largely disappeared by the Second century from Asia and South Russia (The Scythians, p.25). The Eastern Romans continued to speak conventionally of "Scythians" to designate Germanic tribes and confederations (see Zosimus, Historia Nova, 1.23 & 1.28, also Zonaras,Epitome historiarum, book 12. Also the title "Scythika" of the lost work of the 3rd-century Greek historian Dexippus who narrated the Germanic invasions of his age). The Scythians migrated into Germany. But, Pliny wrote that the "name of the Scythians has altogether been transferred to the Sarmatae and the Germans" (Dilke, Greek and Roman Maps, p.46). Now the Sarmatae as the Greek writes like Herodotus regard them as Scythians (see Britannica, Vol.19, p.1001). As noted above it was one of the Israelite names of the old city of Samaria. But as Pliny says, the Romans lumped all these people together and called them Germans, which they are not! And we will prove this below. But the main "movement [was] from Asia into Europe...[was] that of the Scythians" (Britannica, vol.12 "Indo-Europeans; subhead "Migrations", p.263).
English have descended from these early “Germanic” invaders of Britain. But exactly who were these people?
The Teutons or “Germans” migrated to England as Angles, Saxons and Jutes in the decades immediately following the departure of the Roman legionnaires from Britain around 410 A.D. In The Story of English, a 1986 companion book to the PBS television series of the same name, authors McCrum, Cran and MacNeil say, “The tribes which now threatened the Celtic chiefs of Britain were essentially Germanic.... There are, Tacitus [famed Roman historian, c. 55- 120 A.D.] writes, seven tribes.... One of these seven barbarous tribes was the Angli, known to history as the Angles, who probably inhabited the area that is now known as Schleswig-Holstein [immediately south of Denmark on the Jutland Peninsula].... The speech of the Angli belonged to the Germanic family of languages” (pp. 56-58).
According to Encyclopedia Britannica, the Angli (Angles) definitely had a close affinity with the Saxons (“Saxons,” 11th ed., vol. 24). The Story of English continues, “To this day the [cultural] gap between the English on the one hand and the Welsh, the Scots and the Irish on the other, is often huge.... To the Celts, their German conquerors (Angles, Jutes and Saxons) were all Saxons” (p. 61).
Who were the “Germanic” Saxons? Sharon Turner says, “The Saxons were a... Scythian tribe;" (History of the Anglo-Saxons, p.87). Clearly, the invaders of Britain were the Scythians, the Angles, Jutes and Saxons, and not the Germanic peoples of Germany today!
Most true Germans are characterized by “Alpine” round skulls. Yet ethnologist Madison Grant writes, “In the study of European populations the great and fundamental fact about the British Isles is the almost total absence there today of true Alpine round skulls” (p. 137).
Ripley, in The Races of Europe, says, “The most remarkable trait of the population of the British Isles is its head form; and especially the uniformity in this respect which is everywhere manifested. The prevailing type is that of the long and narrow cranium, accompanied by an oval rather than broad or round face” (p. 303). Remember that this is the same as the northern Celtic type. It is also the same as the Teutonic, Scandinavian type—the Scythian type!
In a 1915 article—“Are We Cousins to the Germans?”—Sir Arthur Keith wrote that “the Briton and German represent contrasted and opposite types of humanity” (The Graphic, Dec. 4, p. 720). He explained, “The radical difference in the two forms leaps to the eye. In the majority of the Briton—English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish—the hinder part of the head, the occiput, projects prominently backwards behind the line of the neck; the British head is long in comparison with its width” (p. 720).
Keith then pointed out that “in the vast majority of Germans,” the back of the head is “flattened”—indicating “a profound racial difference. Even in the sixteenth century, Vesalius, who is universally recognized as the ‘father of Anatomy,’ regarded the flat occiput as a German characteristic....He came, rather unwillingly, to the conclusion that the vast majority of modern German people differed from the British, Dutch, Dane and Scandinavian in head form.
“The explanation,” according to Keith, “is easy. With the exodus of the Franks to France and the Anglo-Saxons to Britain in the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth centuries of our era, Germany was almost denuded of her long-headed elements in her population.” So the land of Germany seems to have been operating as a massive SIEVE—while the round-headed population elements were retained, the long-headed elements passed through. This is rather astounding! Could something like this have happened by chance alone? Surely there was something more at work here! God was , "I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth." (Amos 9:9).
Did any more of the Scandinavian long-headed type leave? Yes—to America! Look at the entry on “Germany” in the Britannica: “There have been great oscillations in the actual emigration by sea. It first exceeded 100,000 soon after the Franco-German War (1872, 126,000), and this occurred again in the years 1880 to 1892. Germany lost during these thirteen years more than 1,700,000 inhabitants by emigration. The total number of those who sailed for the United States from 1820 to 1900 may be estimated at more than 4,500,000....
“The greater number of the more recent emigrants [to the U.S.] was from the agricultural provinces of northern Germany—West Prussia, Posen, Pomerania, Mecklenburg, Schleswig- Holstein and Hanover, and sometimes the emigration reached 1% of the total population of these provinces. In subsequent years the emigration of native Germans greatly decreased” (11th ed., vol. 11).
What is so special about northern Germany? Notice this reference from Ripley’s Races of Europe: “Northwestern Germany—Hanover, Schleswig-Holstein, Westphalia—is distinctly allied to the physical type of the Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes. All the remainder of the Empire—no, not even excluding Prussia, east of the Elbe— is less Teutonic in type; until finally in the essentially Alpine broadheaded populations of Baden, Wurttemburg, and Bavaria in the south, the Teutonic race passes from view” (p. 214).
It is generally known that the northern “Low Germans” differ from the southern “High Germans.” But there were differences even among the Low Germans.
Another source comments, “A separate study, in the case of Germany at least would seem to indicate that those [immigrants] who went to the U.S.A. in the 1800s were somehow different from those who stayed behind and German officials themselves remarked on such a difference. The claim for such a distinction is based on consideration of physical types, areas-of-origin within Germany, religious orientation and social outlook” (Yair Davidy, The Tribes, p. 430, emphasis added). In fact, Herbert Hannay's book, European and Other Race Origins p.244 says, "in conclusion then, not only do i deny that the Germans and the english are enthnically identical, but i should be very sorry to believe that any blood relation whatsoever existed between them as races." But these particular Germans can be traced to Manasseh as we prove in our article on the United States is Manasseh!
The Angles, Jutes and Saxons settle in Britain
First, who are the Jutes? Tarim Mummies, James P. Mallory and Victor H. Mair write, " "Da (Greater) Yuezhi or in the earlier pronunciation d'ad-ngiwat-tieg, has been seen to equate with the Massagetae...The original pronunciation has been reconstructed as gwat-ti or got-ti or gut-si, which opens up distant lexical similarities with the Goths (the German tribes of northern and eastern Europe), the Getae (the Dacian, i.e., Balkan, tribes northwest of the Black Sea), the Guti (a people on the borderlands of Mesopotamia), the Kusha (our Kushans), the Gushi (a people mentioned in Han texts and regarded as brigands along with the peoples of Kroran), or a combination of some but not all of the above (Mallory and Mair 2000, 98-99). So the Massagetae retained the name Getae. These were a "a nation of nomads who knew themselves as Gets, Gats, Guts, or Yuts?...[and] the similarity between the Goths, Getae, and the Yuezhi. " (article The Getes by Sundeep S. Jhutti, emphasis added)
In his Tableaux Historiques De L'Asia, Julius Von Klaproth (1783-1835) wrote: The name of Yueti or Yut recalls that of Yuts or Goths, which came to Europe: it would be very possible that the Yutes who arrived in Scandinavia with Odin, are the same people who three centuries before our era, still inhabited the area ... northwest of the Chinese Kansu province. This would suppose the emigration of the Goths of Central Asia after that of the other Germanic peoples." According to the Venerable Bede, the Jutes settled in Kent, the Isle of Wight, and parts of Hampshire.
The Angles are Ephraim, they settled in the north and east of the Island, as well as the other Ephraimite clans, Bercher: "...was also recalled in the Boroctuari who participated in the Anglo-Saxon invasions according to Bede...Shutelah produced the Skiodings from Scandinavia [to Britain]...; Eran-the Arri...Tahan...whom the Angles absorbed in Europe before the Invasion" (The Tribes, Davidy p.383, 392, emphasis added). These all settle in Northumberland, East, South, and Middle Angla.
The Saxons that settled in the middle and the south are the Amyrgian Scyths (Sacae) mentioned by Herodotus. Notice, Strabo (zi.7.2.) said that, "Most Scythians from the Caspian Sea are called [Ephraim "Angles] Dahai, those more to the east Massagetae [Jats, Jits or Jutes] and Sacae, [Saxons] the rest have the common appellation of Scythians but each tribe has its peculiar name." Davidy says, "The Sacae referred to by Strabo mean (in this case) the Amyrgian Scyths who had been centred around Maracanda and nearby Maruka in Sogdiana." (ibid, p.72). He goes on to say, "The names Maracanda, Marycae, Maruca, and Margiana were connected to that of the Sacae Amyrgio who intermittently dominated this region. These appellations (Amyrgio, Maruca) are similar to permutations (Aimerico, Maghario, Aymeri) known in Europe for the name Machir...The Mercian Saxons and Myrings in Europe were also referred to as 'SKATI MARUKA', meaning Scyths from Maruka (Amyrgian Scyths)" (ibid, p.73, emphasis his and mine). In his footnote he refers to , "Fritz Mezger, p.12" who "brings sources indicating that the Myringas in Europe had been called Skati Maruka (i.e. Scyths from Maruka, Amyrgioi), from the Myringas evolved into the Mercian Saxons" (Footnote, 89; source "Angelssachsische Volker-und- Landernamen, emphasis mine). These became know as the kingdoms of Mercia, Essex, Wessex and Sussex. Added to that, "The son of Machir was Gilead (pronounced Gileath) from whom emerged the Galadon of Northern Wales and the Galadi Galatians of Gaul, and the Caledonians of Scotland...The Frissians (say Procopius) were important participators in the Anglo-Saxon invasions, and they apparently descend from Peresh son of Machir (1 Chron 7:15-16). Also from Peresh came the Parissi...[which] may also have given a derivation of his name Surrey, which was the southern portion of Saxon Mercia England" (ibid., p.361, emphasis added). There they settled till the time of the Reformation, and then God began to perform what he promised he would do to those peoples.
|7 Times Punishment
The Lord forewarned His Chosen People if they continued to be lacking in faithfulness He would inflict a punishment upon them, of very long but nevertheless definite duration, termed "Seven Times". This punishment took the form mainly of conquests by and subjection to other nations. It was stated to the entire Israel nation—the whole twelve tribes (Lev. 26,18,21,24, 28). It came into operation upon the Northern Kingdom of Israel (the Ten Tribes) when they came under the Assyrian yoke and were taken captive to Assyria, and it began on the Southern Kingdom of the Two Tribes, Judah and Benjamin, when they were subjugated by the Babylonians.
That great term of punishment, as stated, is "Seven Times"—a cryptic expression which the Bible itself reveals the meaning of. In Revelation 12:14 a certain prophetic period is spoken of as lasting "a time and times and half a time". In verse 6 of the same chapter that same period is stated to be "a thousand two hundred and three score days" (1,260 "days"). In the third verse of the previous chapter (Revelation 11:3) "a thousand two hundred and three score days" is also mentioned, but in the verse that precedes (v.2) it is referred to as "forty and two months" (42 months) as also in Revelation 13:5. It is obvious, therefore, that 42 months, 1,260 days and "a time, times, and half a time" are synonymous terms, and that "a time, times and half a time" is 3½ prophetic years (1 +2 + =31/2). A "Time" is therefore a prophetic year and has 12 months of 30 days each, i.e., 360 days. This is confirmed by the fact that 42 months equal 1,260 days, and hence 1 month equals 30 days. Since 31/2 Times are 1,260 days, then twice Three and a Half Times, that is, Seven Times must be twice 1,260 days, i.e., 2,520 days. Be it noted, though, that these are not literal days
but prophetic days. How long is a prophetic day? "God is His own interpreter," for in the time-prophecy of days given in the Book of Ezekiel, chapter 4, He informs us that the prophetic scale is a day for a year. He instructs us:" I have appointed thee each day for a year" (Ezek. 4:5,6). Therefore, Seven Times, or 2,520 days, prophetic time, equal 2,520 years, ordinary time. ( In Old Testament times a month was 30 days. There were twelve months in the year, which therefore had 360 days (12 x 30.---360), the odd 5 1/4 days making up the solar year being accumulated over a period of years and intercalated periodically). Using the day-for-a-year principle, each DAY here represents a YEAR of national punishment-a DELAY in the promised blessings (as in Numbers14:34; Ezekiel 4:6). This gives us 2,520 YEARS that the birthright blessings would be WITHHELD!
The time of the Reformation was a time unparallel in history. The time when the Bible opened up to the Israelites under the yoke of Catholicism. God had to produce this miracle before he gave them the lands he promised to them during the time the promises were fulfilled. It was during this time the colonization began, and the Mercians, and the Saxons began to colonize North America. The Anglo-Saxons began enterprise overseas. Now Israel ceased to be a kingdom in 718 B.C.. From that time on they wandered into Europe and the British -Isles. Now subtract 2520 from 718 B.C. and this leaves you with the number 1802 A.D. Problem is, when you came from 1 B.C. to 1 A.D. you lost a year. So you have to add one year in your chronological reckoning, and you come up with 1803 A.D.!
Its interesting that in 1803, that happens to be the year of the Louisiana Purchase. Before 1800, the United Kingdom, and the United States were small insignificant Nations. Britain consisted of the British Isles, India and a few Islands. The United States consisted of the original 13 colonies, and three added states. Neither possessed any great wealth or power. Then in 1803 A.D., the Louisiana Purchase brought the United States National wealth and Power, by purchasing hundreds and hundreds of acres of land, and ever since that time, it became the GREATEST SUPERPOWER! The U.S. acquired more than 500 million acres of the riches, most fertile farmland on this earth-the "Bread basket of the world." And, by this awesome purchase, the United States grew about 140 per cent!
In 1800, exactly 2,520 years after Israel's capital city of Samaria fell to the Assyrians, the U.S. capital was moved from Philadelphia to Washington, D.C.! Every major sea gate of the world (such as Gibralter, Panama Canal, Suez Canel, Hong Kong) were under the possession and control of Great Britain and the United States
The Industrial Revolution began exclusively in Britain in the 1750s, and by the turn of the century London was the financial and trading capital of the world. In 1803, Henry Maudslay devised the first industrial assembly line at Portsmouth, England, to manufacture rigging for the Royal Navy. The British sprouted into the greatest Empire the world has ever seen. They became a great Company of many nations. The Nations of the Commonwealth were given Dominion status-made free and independent of England-A Company a Commonwealth of Nations, joined together, not by legal government, but solely by the head of state of all the Commonwealth, THE THRONE OF DAVID! This happened exactly "SEVEN TIMES" AFTER THE KINGDOM OF ISRAEL CEASED IN 718 B.C.!
God promised that the seed of Israel would become as the "sand of the seashore." Historians reveal that various factors (war, famine, disease) kept the population of Britain from increasing very rapidly until the Industrial Revolution (1750-1850). Then, suddenly, a population explosion occurred. British historian, Colin Cross, observes that "one of the unexplained mysteries of social history is the explosion in the size of the population of Great Britain between 1750 and 1850. For generations the British population had been static, or rising only slightly. Then in the space of a century it almost tripled from 7.7 million in 1750 to 20.7 million in 1850. Why it happened is unknown.... It must just be recorded that human reproduction and vitality follows unpredictable patterns.... Britain was a dynamic country and one of the marks of its dynamism was the population explosion" (Fall of the British Empire, p. 155, emphasis added).
Ephraim (Anglos) became a "company of nations." Isaiah said, ""The children which thou shalt have, after thou hast lost the other, shall say again in thine ears, The place is too strait for me: give place to me that I may dwell" (Isa 49:19-20). When did they say this before? In the book of Joshua, the TRIBE OF JOSEPH PRIMARILY said, "And the children of Joseph spake unto Joshua, saying, Why hast thou given me but one lot and one portion to inherit, seeing I am a great people, forasmuch as the LORD hath blessed me hitherto?" (Joshua 17:14). “Britain ‘LOST’ the territory which had the greatest military and economic potential and which would-much later-become a world superpower. The defection of the American colonies in 1776...” (The British Empire in Color, by Stewart Binns, p.15, emphasis added). Amazing how Britain refers to the U.S.A. as the “lost” colony the way the Bible does!
Ephraim "lost" America in the Revolution, but they did not let the loss bring them down. Instead, after losing her American Colonies, her work of colonizing non-populated areas of the world, that the colonizers called the "...virgin portions of North America" (Rise and Fall of British Empire, p.12), kept right on going, colonizing Provinces, and then calling it, The Dominion of Canada. Then Britain added six States of Australia, and then came New Zealand, Tasmania, British India, the Fiji Islands, the Caribbean, parts of Africa, Egypt, and China. Ephraim became a "Company or multitude of Nations" as God promised!
Another promised God told Abraham: "Your seed shall possess the gate ["Gates" plural Ferrar Fenton Translation] of their enemies" (Gen 22:17)."And they blessed Rebekah [Isaac's wife], and said unto her, Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate [“gates” Ferrar] of those which hate them" (Genesis 24:60).
This is a major reason for British and American supremacy over the high seas. First, one would see the British Isles, lying like a dominating lion offshore Europe; secure behind the famous English channel, yet guarding the gateways to Europe; the Kattegat and Skagerrak; the ports of Holland and France. The position of the British Isles has been absolutely decisive in the course of history—has influenced dramatically the outcome of many, many wars, including the first and second World Wars! During the last of the nineteenth century and much of the twentieth, Britain controlled Palestine, Trans-Jordan, Gibraltar, Malta, Crete, the Suez Canal, The Khyber Pass, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Ceylon, Rhodesia, Kenya, and Tanganyika; Singapore and the Straits of Malacca; Hong Kong, Brunei, the Gilberts and Solomons, New Georgia and New Guinea; Santa Cruz. In the Atlantic, Britain controlled the Hebrides, the Falklands, Bermuda, Bahamas, Barbuda, Antigua, St. Vincent, St. Lucia, Barbados, the Cayman Islands, and British Honduras, as well as British Guiana, Gibraltar and Suez, thereby bottling up the Mediterranean, and with Malta, Crete and Cyprus available as naval bases, not to mention Alexandria, in Egypt, as well as the Bosporus Dardanelles between European Turkey and the Anatolian Peninsula, bottling up the Black Sea.
Britain stood astride the most vital sea lanes in the world. Add to this the huge naval base at Singapore and the Straits of Malacca, Hong Kong on the Chinese littoral, together with Brunei, and one gets a picture of how and why Britain was able, together with the Dutch (who are the descendants of Zebulon, another of the so-called "lost ten tribes") who possessed the East Indies, to maintain a powerful naval and military presence in the Far East.
Colonization in the Bible- When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee...I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King....Thus saith the LORD, which maketh a way in the sea, and a path in the mighty waters;...Behold, I will do a new thing; now it shall spring forth; shall ye not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert....The beast of the field shall honour me, the dragons and the owls: because I give waters in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert, to give drink to my people, my chosen." (Isaiah 43:1-2, 15-16, 19-20)
All the prophecies and promises spoken of by God about his people Israel has been fulfilled completely. Joseph receive the richest and most fertile places in all the earth (Gen 49). They would have good health, and international responsibility of power to govern all over the world (Deut 33:17). There are prophecies that speak of the rise of the British. But there are also ones that speak of its fall.
The Fall of the British Empire
The British today have forsaken their Christian heritage. Since this dramatic turn from God into materialism, secularism and the like, Britain has been steadily on the decline. Many of its overseas protectorates, sea and land gates, and colonies have gone independent. God says, "Woe to the crown of pride, to the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is a fading flower...The crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim, shall be trodden under feet:
"And the glorious beauty, which is on the head of the fat valley, shall be a fading flower, and as the hasty fruit before the summer; which when he that looketh upon it seeth, while it is yet in his hand he eateth it up" (Isa 28:1, 3-4). "As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception." (Hosea 9:11). All the lands the British received from God are fading away. We are losing them all!
Ephraim was fruitful, that is his name. But now, because of our sins, Ephraim is becoming unfruitful, and Britain and her colonies struggle with debts, low birthrates, their economies etc... God says, "Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb." (Hosea 9:16). Even when we do produce something, God will take it away from us because of our sins. God continues, "My God will cast them away, because they did not hearken unto him: and they shall be wanderers among the nations" (v.17). Here is the future of Britain and her colonies unless we repent. God says, "woe also to them when I depart from them!" (v.12). But, that is exactly what we want! We want God out of our business! We've taken him out of the schools, the courts, government, every part of public life. We think its a good thing, God says "woe" to us when he departs. What replaces Good? Evil!
Our sins, the internal problems, social problems is what is causing our downfall and weakness. The break up of the family, our redefinition of marriage, high divorce, alcohol, drug problems, sexual habits and preferences, crime, robbery, rape, abortion, murder etc... Rome's downfall occurred because of its problems from within, that gnawed away its empire. God says, "...therefore shall Israel and Ephraim fall in their iniquity; Judah also shall fall with them...Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment...Therefore will I be unto Ephraim as a moth, and to the house of Judah as rottenness. (Hosea 5:5, 11,12).
Multiculturalism is another scourge on our peoples. Instead of promoting British culture, or American culture, we promote multiculturalism in the British and American countries. Immigration is so high, that the culture is changing. Eventually Canada will not be Canada any more. Britain will not be Britain anymore etc...And the British people promote it! They say we are a nation of Immigrants. Nonsense!
As Peter Brimelow points out ALL NATIONS ARE NATIONS OF IMMIGRANTS. STOP CALLING AMERICA “A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS!” "Do people imagine the British simply emerged from the mud as proper, common law-respecting, tea-drinking Englishmen?"
As Milton Friedman has said: "You can’t have open borders and a welfare state. For roughly the first three centuries of America’s existence, anyone could come here – and good luck to them! If they couldn’t make it, they went home. About 30 percent did. We skimmed the cream of the world! By the time of the American Revolution, this had created something distinctive about Americans, as described absolutely beautifully by Alexis de Tocqueville’s “Democracy in America.” "Even after the Democrats ginned up the welfare machinery, the country maintained the same national character and stayed largely the same demographically because our immigration policy imposed quotas to replicate the nationalities of the people already here." All nations are form by migrations of peoples, Britain, her colonies and America are no different! I read many plaques around the country, and its speaks of a person who was a "Scottish Immigrant" back in 1886. He wasn't an immigrant, but a British citizen moving from one end of the Empire to another, like someone from Idaho, moving to California. But the government wants people to think we are a nation of immigrants, to promote Multiculturalism. God says, "Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned [meaning worthless]....Strangers have devoured his strength, and he knoweth it not: yea, gray hairs are here and there upon him, yet he knoweth not" (Hosea 7:8-9). The Bible says Ephraim "hath mixed." They are doing it to themselves! With the welfare and refugee programs that immigrants rely on, the strength of Britain, Canada etc...is being sucked away, and the government continues this nonsense! Reminds me of a proverb in the Bible, "The horseleach hath two daughters, crying, Give, give" (Proverbs 30:15) Just sucking the strength out of the horse!
Look what the British have done to their own religion. Hardly anyone in Britain today believes in the Christian God anymore. The one place where it was the seat of the missionary movement, is now a place where missionaries are sent! Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution changed the attitudes of the western world. Atheism is on the rise, Christianity is looked upon as politically incorrect, and something of the past. Seminaries, and the Jesus Seminary, and so-called scholars tells blatant lies about the Bible. People Like Bart Ehrmen, Dominic Crossen other people continually teach the same old arguments about the Bible that have been disproven, by Archaeology, or manuscript evidence, yet they continue to tell lies about the Bible. The same can be said about scientists, and philosophers. God says, "Woe unto them! for they have fled from me: destruction unto them! because they have transgressed against me: though I have redeemed them, yet they have spoken lies against me...I have written to him the great things of my law, but they were counted as a strange thing. " (Hosea 7:13; 8:12).
The Watchmen of Ephraim
In the last days God promised before he acts, "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." (Amos 3:7). The prophets of God in turn "Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins." (Isa 58:1). God has watchmen in Israel (Ezekiel 33:7). He always leaves a warning to his people. God in Hosea says, "Blow ye the cornet in Gibeah, and the trumpet in Ramah: cry aloud at Beth-aven, after thee, O Benjamin....Ephraim shall be desolate in the day of rebuke: among the tribes of Israel have I made known that which shall surely be...When they shall go, I will spread my net upon them; I will bring them down as the fowls of the heaven; I will chastise them, as their congregation hath heard." (Hosea 5:8-9; 7:12). No one will shake their fist at God and say, "But you never told me!" God has watchmen to do his work, this is the work of the church of God!
At the moment Israel as a whole is not listening to its watchmen, God says, "Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.
"Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken.
"Therefore hear, ye nations, and know, O congregation, what is among them.
"Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it." (Jer 6:16-19). They have rejected the message of the watchmen of Israel. Therefore the time of "Jacob's trouble" (Jer 30:7) is approaching. But the time will come, when they will listen to the watchman once again. This will be the time when we repent and return to Almighty God, "For there shall be a day, that the watchmen upon the mount Ephraim shall cry, Arise ye, and let us go up to Zion unto the LORD our God" (Jer 31:6). It's amazing how God has to take it to the point of warfare, slavery and captivity for us to repent, when we can do it right now.
The Second Exodus
At the second coming of Jesus, He will save Israel, and bring them back to the promised land. "And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.
"And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
"The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim." (Isaiah 11:10-13). Notice Judah and Ephraim, two separate peoples and nations being brought back to the promise land from the places that they were scattered. And there will be no more animosity between them anymore.
Ezekiel writes, "The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,
"Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:
"And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
"And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?
"Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.
"And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes.
"And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
"And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:
"Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.
"And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.
"And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.
"Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
"My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
"And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore." (37:15-28 ). This is revealing. First its shows that Judah and Israel are separate nations right up till the time of the second coming. Second, as revealed in Isaiah, they will be one nation in Palestine once again. And Third, David will be resurrected and be the king over them all. He will serve under Christ. Jesus will be their God, and his tabernacle shall dwell with them.
Obadiah reveals the taking of the promised land by the Israelites from Edom, who are the Palestinians in the West Bank today. "But upon mount Zion shall be deliverance [see Rev 14:1], and there shall be holiness; and the house of Jacob shall possess their possessions.
"And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD hath spoken it.
"And they of the south shall possess the mount of Esau; and they of the plain the Philistines: and they shall possess the fields of Ephraim, and the fields of Samaria: and Benjamin shall possess Gilead.
"And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel shall possess that of the Canaanites, even unto Zarephath; and the captivity of Jerusalem, which is in Sepharad, shall possess the cities of the south.
"And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the LORD'S." (vv.17-21). One of the "saviors" will be the resurrected king David, and he will judge the people of Israel, being their king!
Ephraim has terrible times ahead of itself unless they repent. But the good news is, Jesus will save his people, and Israel once again will be the great people that they once were!
*See other Article Ephraim-A "Multitude" or "Fullness" of the Nations [Gentiles]? Click here
If you wish to donate to the BICOG Please click here