Transcriber's note:
Text enclosed by equal signs is in bold face (=bold=).
THE HISTORY OF THE TEN "LOST" TRIBES:
Anglo-Israelism Examined
by
DAVID BARON
Author of
"Visions and Prophecies of Zechariah," etc.
FOURTH EDITION
Morgan & Scott Ltd.
12, Paternoster Buildings, London, E.C. 4
* * * * * *
Two Shillings Net
The History
of the
Ten "Lost" Tribes:
ANGLO-ISRAELISM EXAMINED
by
DAVID BARON
Author of
"The Ancient Scriptures and the Modern Jew"
"The Shepherd of Israel," etc.
Fourth Edition--Revised and Enlarged
Morgan & Scott Ld.
(Office of "The Christian")
12, Paternoster Buildings
London, E.C.
PREFACE
A few words of explanation are needed by way of preface to this little
book. More than twenty years ago, being often appealed to by friends for
my judgment on Anglo-Israelism, or to answer questions which were
addressed to me on this subject, I finally, after making myself
acquainted with the positions and arguments by which the theory is
supported, drew up a statement in the form of "A Letter to an Inquirer."
This "Letter," somewhat amplified, was printed in the form of an
appendix in my book, "The Ancient Scriptures and the Modern Jew," whence
by special request it was subsequently reprinted in pamphlet form under
the title, "Anglo-Israelism, and the True History of the Ten Lost
Tribes"--a separate edition of it having also been published in America.
This pamphlet is now out of print, and, being appealed to by prominent
Christian friends to bring out a new edition, I felt constrained before
doing so to re-examine the whole question anew, and more thoroughly than
before. To this end I have read through, with much inward pain I must
confess, a number of the more recent Anglo-(or "British")-Israel
publications, which for the most part are mere repetitions of one
another. The result is the treatise now in the reader's hands, which
will be found to consist of three Parts.
In Part I. I have dealt with Anglo-Israel assertions and claims, and the
arguments by which they are supported; in Part II., which is
constructive in its character, and in which the greater part of my
original "Letter to an Inquirer" will be found embodied, I have tried
briefly to trace the true history of the supposed Lost Tribes; and in
Part III., which is altogether new, I have further analysed some of the
scriptural "proofs" of a separate fate and destiny of the Ten Tribes
from that of "Judah," and have added notes and explanations on some of
the more plausible points brought up by all Anglo-Israelite writers.
The epistolary form, which is retained in Parts I. and II., is accounted
for by the relation of this new booklet to the original "Letter to an
Inquirer," which is embodied in it.
Let me ask the reader's Christian forbearance for any expressions in
this little work which may be regarded as too severe. I would only say
that if the unbiassed reader had had to wade through the amount of
Anglo-Israel literature, with all its fearful perversions of Scripture
and history, which the writer has had to do in the course of the
preparation of this little work, he would most probably have felt as he
did--the difficulty of putting a restraint upon his spirit so as not to
use much stronger language. Toward the persons of the propagandists of
this theory I have, I trust, no other feelings than those of Christian
charity; but the theory itself I cannot help regarding, after a close
study of its principles, as subversive of the truth, and as one of the
dangerous delusions of these latter days.
After this little book was finished, an honoured friend in Brighton sent
me the article by the late Dr. Horatius Bonar, which appeared in _The
Sunday at Home_ in 1880. I add it, with the permission of the
proprietors of that magazine, as an appendix in the assurance that the
testimony on the subject of so honoured and eminent a servant of God
will be welcomed and carry weight with many.
David Baron.
CONTENTS
PART I.
PAGE
I. Anglo-Israel Assertions and Claims 7
II. The Way Anglo-Israel Writers Interpret
Scripture 11
III. Fictitious Histories of the Tribes 15
PART II.
I. Are the Tribes Lost? 22
II. The Condition of Things at the Time of
Christ 33
III. The Testimony of the New Testament that
the "Jews" Are Representative of
"All Israel" 39
IV. Early Misconceptions and Confusion on the
Question of the Ten Tribes 44
V. The Testimony of Prophecy in the Light of
History 48
VI. A Solemn Warning 51
PART III.
NOTES AND EXPLANATIONS.
I. Anglo-Israel "Proofs" of a Separate Fate
and Destiny of "Israel" and "Judah" 54
II. The Promises to the Fathers of a Multitudinous
Seed 65
III. The Perpetuity of the Davidic Throne 72
IV. The So-called Historic Proofs of Anglo-Israelism 76
V. "The Gate of his Enemies" 80
APPENDIX.
Are We the Ten Tribes? By the late Horatius
Bonar, D.D. 82
PART I.
ANGLO-ISRAELISM EXAMINED.
ANGLO-ISRAEL ASSERTIONS AND CLAIMS.
DEAR FRIEND,--I shall endeavour to comply with your request, and to give
you in this Letter a few reasons for my rejection of the Anglo-Israelite
theory. I can sincerely say that I am not a man delighting in
controversy, and I only consent to your wish because I believe that you,
like many other simple-minded Christians, are perplexed and imposed upon
by the plausibilities of the supposed "Identifications," and are not
able to detect the fallacies and perversions of Scripture and history
upon which they are based.
The theory is that the English, or British, are the descendants of the
"lost" Israelites, who were carried captives by the Assyrians, under
Sargon, who, it is presumed, are identical with the Saxae or Scythians,
who appear as a conquering host there about the same time. Or, to quote
a succinct summary of Anglo-Israel assertions from a standard work:--
"The supposed historical connection of the ancestors of the English
with the Lost Ten Tribes is deduced as follows: The Ten Tribes were
transferred to Assyria about 720 B.C.; and simultaneously,
according to Herodotus, the Scythians, including the tribe of the
Saccae (or Saxae), appeared in the same district. The progenitors
of the Saxons afterward passed over into Denmark--the 'mark' or
country of the tribe of Dan--and thence to England. Another branch
of the tribe of Dan, which remained 'in ships' (Judges v. 17), made
its appearance in Ireland under the title of 'Tuatha-da-Danan.'
Tephi, a descendant of the royal house of David, arrived in
Ireland, according to the native legends, in 580 B.C. From her was
descended Feargus More, King of Argyll, an ancestor of Queen
Victoria, who thus fulfilled the prophecy that 'the line of David
shall rule for ever and ever' (2 Chron. xiii. 5, xxi. 7). The Irish
branch of the Danites brought with them Jacob's stone, which has
always been used as the Coronation-stone of the kings of Scotland
and England, and is now preserved in Westminster Abbey. Somewhat
inconsistently, the prophecy that the Canaanites should trouble
Israel (Numbers xxxiii. 55; Josh. xxiii. 13) is applied to the
Irish. 'The land of Arzareth,' to which the Israelites were
transplanted (2 Esd. xiii. 45), is identified with Ireland by
dividing the former name into two parts--the former of which is
_erez_, or 'land'; the later, _Ar_, or 'Ire.'"[1]
As to the Jews, quite a different history and destiny is marked out for
them. They, as the descendants of Judah, are still under the curse. In
fact, the Anglo-Israelite, by another and more mischievous method, is
doing exactly what the allegorising, or so-called spiritualising, school
of interpreters did. The method was to apply all the _promises_ in the
Bible to the "spiritual" Israel, or the Church, and all the curses to
the literal Israel, or the Jews; but by this new system, while the
curses are still left to the Jew, all the blessings are applied not even
to those "in Christ," but indiscriminately to a nation, which, _as a
nation_, is like the other nations of Christendom in a greater or lesser
degree in a state of apostasy from God, though I thankfully recognise
the fact that there are in proportion more of God's true people in it
than in any other professing Christian land.
I shall endeavour later on to show you the baselessness of the
distinction which Anglo-Israelism makes between the ultimate fates of
Israel and Judah, but let me first say that the supposed historical and
philological "proofs" by which the theory is supported, most of which
have no more basis in fact than fairy tales, are utterly discredited by
competent authorities.
"Philology of a somewhat primitive kind," writes a prominent and
learned Jew, "is also brought in to support the theory; the many
Biblical and quasi-Jewish names borne by Englishmen are held to
prove their Israelitish origin. An attempt has been made to derive
the English language itself from Hebrew. Thus, 'bairn' is derived
from _bar_ ('son'); 'berry' from _peri_ ('fruit'); 'garden' from
_gedar_; 'kid' from _gedi_; 'scale' from _shekel_; and 'kitten'
from _quiton_ (_katon_ = 'little'). The termination 'ish' is
identified with the Hebrew _ish_ ('man'); 'Spanish' means
'Spain-man'; while 'British' is identified with _Berit-ish_ ('man
of the covenant'). Perhaps the most curious of these philological
identifications is that of 'jig' with chag (_hag_ = 'festival').
"Altogether, by the application of wild guess-work about historical
origins and philological analogies, and by a slavishly literal
interpretation (or misapplication) of selected phrases of prophecy,
a case is made out for the identification of the British race with
the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel sufficient to satisfy uncritical
persons desirous of finding their pride of race confirmed by Holy
Scripture. The whole theory rests upon an identification of the
word 'isles' in the English version of the Bible unjustified by
modern philology, which identifies the original word with 'coasts'
or 'distant lands,' without any implication of their being
surrounded by the sea. Modern ethnography does not confirm in any
way the identification of the Irish with a Semitic people; while
the English can be traced back to the Scandinavians, of whom there
is no trace in Mesopotamia at any period of history. The whole
movement is chiefly interesting as a _reductio ad absurdum_ of too
literal an interpretation (or misapplication) of the
prophecies."[2]
To this let me add the verdict of a prominent Christian scholar.
Commenting on Edward Hine's "Identifications of the British Nation with
Lost Israel," Professor Rawlinson wrote that: "The pamphlet is not
calculated to produce the slightest effect on the opinion of those
competent to form one. Such effect as it may have can only be on the
ignorant and unlearned--on those who are unaware of the absolute and
entire diversity in language, physical type, religious opinions, and
manners and customs, between the Israelites and the various races from
whom the English nation can be shown historically to be descended."
The fact of the matter is that the so-called historical proofs, by which
the theory is supported, are derived from heathen myths and fables,[3]
and the philology which traces "British" to "Berith-ish," and "Saxon" to
"Isaac's-son," etc., deserves no other characterisation than
_child-ish_.
It is in a misunderstanding of Scripture, and especially of prophetic
Scripture, to which the origin of Anglo-Israelism can be traced. Coming
across some of the great and precious promises in the Bible in reference
to Israel, for instance, such as that they should be a great and mighty
nation, and rule over those who previously had been their enemies and
oppressors, and overlooking the fact that these prophecies and promises
_refer to a future time_, when Israel as a nation shall be restored and
converted, and under the personal rule of their Messiah become great and
mighty for God on the earth, evidence of their fulfilment has been
sought _in the present_. Now certainly these prophecies of might and
prosperity are not now being fulfilled in the "Jews"--on the other hand,
see how great and influential the British nation is in the
world--_ergo_, the British must be the "lost" Israel of the "Ten
Tribes"! The "history" and philology is, so to say, an after-thought of
Anglo-Israelism, by which an effort is made to support the false
postulate with which it starts. The Scriptural "Identifications" with
which Anglo-Israel literature abound turn out on examination to be
perversions and misapplications of isolated texts taken from the English
versions of the Bible without any regard for true principles of
exegesis.
THE WAY ANGLO-ISRAEL WRITERS INTERPRET SCRIPTURE.
Some of their interpretations can only be characterised as bordering on
blasphemy. Let me quote a few examples:--
=I. The glorious Messianic prophecy of the stone cut without hands which
smote the image of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel ii.) is applied to the British
people; and the British Empire, which is one of the Gentile
world-kingdoms, is made to be identical with the Kingdom of God.=
"We will see what is to be the future of the British Empire, or, in
other words, the stone that smote the image. It is to become a great
mountain and fill the whole earth. Our Colonial Empire, then, will
continue to grow till it covers the whole world. We have tried to avoid
extending our Empire many and many a time, and yet God has caused it to
grow larger and larger, and I believe will still do so. We are already
by far the greatest Empire there is, or ever has been, and we shall yet
be far greater.
"The British Empire, again, can never be conquered. Daniel says, 'The
God of Heaven shall set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed: it
shall stand for ever.' Consequently, we shall never be conquered; we
must continue till the end of time--so that we are to continue to exist
as the last kingdom or empire this world is to see."[4]
=II. Messiah's Throne of Righteousness and Peace is made out to be
identical with the throne of England, and the English people are "the
saints of the Most High," to whom all the kingdoms of the world shall be
given.=
"If the Saxons be the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel ... then the English
throne is a continuation of David's throne, and the seed on it must be
the seed of David,[5] and the inference is clear--namely, that all the
blessings attaching by holy promise to David's throne must belong to
England.... To this end God is overturning, and will overturn, until the
whole world shall be federated around one throne, and that David's
throne (which, according to the writer, is identical with the throne of
England)--the only throne God ever directly established, and the only
one He has promised perpetuity to.... This kingdom is the fifth kingdom
to be set up in the latter days of those kings, says Daniel. The kingdom
was never to be left to other people.... To her (that is, to England)
was promised the isles of the sea, the coasts of the earth, the waste
and desolate places--the heathen and the uttermost parts of the earth as
a possession. Already, out of the 51,000,000 square miles which compose
the earth, England, including the United States (Manasseh), now owns
about 14,000,000, say, one-fourth. She bears rule over one-third of the
people of the earth; she adds a colony every four years, on an average.
At the present rate it will not be long before the kingdoms of this
world will be given to the saints of the Most High [that is, according
to the writer, the English people]. It is no marvel in the light of and
instruction of prophecy that this throne and people should be so stable
and prosperous."[6]
=III. The smoke which ascends from the "blazing furnaces and steam
engines" of London is identified with the Shechinah Glory, the visible
symbol of God's presence with His people.=
"During their wanderings in the desert His presence was manifested by
the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night; and during
the captivity of the Two Tribes of Judah in Babylon He was with them,
until, at the expiration of the seventy years, He stirred up Cyrus to
release them. The same Lord still watches over the Ten Lost Tribes of
Israel in England, and continues to bless them. The same miracles that
were wrought in Egypt were intended to foreshadow the realisation of
God's future dealings with the Israelites; and if a gigantic panoramic
view of England could be taken from an elevation above the centre of the
island at midnight, a temporal pillar of fire would be as remarkable
from the blazing furnaces, the gas, the steam-engines, as the pillar of
cloud and smoke arising from the same sources in the daytime, marking
the chief position and prosperity of Israel."[7]
=IV. Edward Hine, author of the forty-seven "Identifications," is the
promised Deliverer who should come out of Zion.[8]=
The following is taken from an article on Romans xi. 25-27, which
appeared in "Life from the Dead," which was edited by Edward Hine
himself:--
"Are the British people identical with the lost Ten Tribes of Israel?
And is the nation, by the identity, being led to glory? If these things
are so, then where is the Deliverer? He must have already come out of
Zion. He must be doing His great work; He must be amongst us. It is our
impression that, by the glory of the work of the identity, we have come
to the time of Israel's national salvation by the Deliverer out of Zion,
and that Edward Hine and that Deliverer are identical."
I have said above that Anglo-Israelism applies the promises given to
converted Israel indiscriminately to the English nation. It does not
stop even here, as the above extracts show, but goes on to rob Christ
Himself of His glory by applying to the British people prophecies which
belong, not even to Israel, but to Israel's Saviour.
Thus, the address of the Father to the Son in Psalm ii.:
"Ask of Me, and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and
the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession," will be found
again and again in Anglo-Israel literature applied to the British
nation. It also substitutes the British Empire for the Church. A
favourite Scripture on which almost every Anglo-Israel writer fastens is
Matt. xxi. 43: "Therefore I say unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be
taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof,"
taking it for granted that England is that "nation"--which, as a nation,
is bringing forth the fruits of God's kingdom.
Now I need not explain to you that this is an utterly unspiritual and
baseless assumption, for it is the Church--God's elect and converted
people out of all nations--which is that "nation," which during the
period of Israel's national unbelief bears fruit unto God; as is clear
from 1 Peter ii. 9, where believers in Christ are addressed as "a chosen
generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation (εθνος), that ye should
show forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into
His marvellous light."
FICTITIOUS HISTORIES OF THE TRIBES.
Let me give you one or two more samples of Anglo-Israel perversion of
Scripture and history:--
"The tribe of Benjamin has a singular special place in the history
of Israel and Judah. Neither Old or New Testament can be well
understood unless one understands the place of this tribe in
Providence. They were always counted one of the Ten Tribes, and
reckoned with them in the prophetic visions. They were only loaned
to Judah about 800 years (read 1 Kings xi.). They were to be a
light for David in Jerusalem. God, foreseeing that the Jews would
reject Christ, kept back this one Tribe to be in readiness to
receive Him; and so they did. At the destruction of Jerusalem they
escaped, and after centuries of wanderings turn up as the proud and
haughty Normans. Finally, they unite with the other Tribes under
William the Conqueror. A proper insight into the work and mission
of Benjamin will greatly aid one in interpreting the New Testament.
He was set apart as a missionary Tribe, and at once set to work to
spread the Gospel of Jesus. Most of the disciples were
Benjaminites. Then, after 800 years of fellowship with Judah, they
were cut loose and sent after their brethren of the House of
Israel. It was needful that the Lion and the Unicorn should unite."
Again:--
"God said to Abraham, 'In thee shall all the families of the earth
be blessed'; and more, 'and in thy seed shall all the nations of
the earth be blessed.' Israel, being scattered and cast off, became
a blessing to the world. They gave to the surrounding nations the
only true idea of God, for in their lowest condition and idolatry
they preserved the name and knowledge of Jehovah, and Christ sent
His disciples after them through one of their own tribe--namely,
Benjamin--telling them not to go into the way of the Gentiles, nor
into the cities of the Samaritans, 'but go rather to the lost sheep
of the house of Israel.' To these sheep Christ declares He was
sent. Where were these sheep? They were scattered about in Central
Asia--in Scriptural language, in Cappadocia, Galatia, Pamphylia,
Lydia, Bithynia, and round about Illyricum. From these very regions
came the Saxons; from here they spread abroad North and West, being
the most Christian of any people on the face of the earth then, as
now."[9]
It is difficult to characterise statements like these given out by
Anglo-Israel writers in _ex cathedra_ style for the consumption of the
ignorant and credulous. But--
I. This "history" of the tribe of Benjamin (which may be taken also as a
fair sample of their "histories" of Dan, Manasseh, etc.) is entirely the
product of the perverted fancy of the writers, and is without a vestige
of historic basis for its support. The only reference given in the first
extract is 1 Kings xi. Now that chapter gives the account of God's
warning to Solomon, and of the announcement that in the reign of his
immediate successor the kingdom would be rent from the house of David.
"_Howbeit_," we read, "_I will not rend away all the kingdom, but will
give one tribe to thy son (i.e., Rehoboam) for David My servant's sake,
and for Jerusalem's sake, ... that David My servant may have a lamp
alway before Me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen to put My
Name there_."[10]
The "one tribe" which during the time of the schism would be left to the
house of David is, of course, not Benjamin, as the writer of the above
extract supposes, but _Judah_, "with which Benjamin was indissolubly
united by the very position of the capital on its frontier." This is
seen from verses 31, 32 of the same chapter, where the Ten Tribes "are
given to Jeroboam," and the remaining two of the twelve are called "one
tribe."
It is, of course, a pure invention also, of the fairy tale type, that
Benjamin as a tribe received Christ while the Jews rejected Him, or that
Benjamin became "the missionary tribe," or that "most of the disciples
were Benjamites." Not one single tribe as a tribe, or even one local
community as a community, received Christ; but the "as many" of His own
"as received Him" were "Jews," which, as we shall see farther on, were
the representatives of the Israel of the whole "Twelve Tribes scattered
abroad," and the Twelve Apostles (though Paul, indeed, was a Benjamite)
were in a way representative of all the _Twelve_ Tribes of Israel.
II. Then note the absurdities and contradictions of Anglo-Israel
assertions. "Israel," you are told--by which is meant the Ten
Tribes--while themselves idolaters and sunk so low as not only to forget
their origin, but, as another exponent of the theory has it, lapsed
"into a state of semi-barbarism like the first pioneer settlers in North
America"; and, being without records, in a brief period lost all memory
of their former name and condition[11]--became, while in such a
condition, "a blessing to the world, and gave to the surrounding nations
the only true idea of God"!
And what shall be said of the terrible perversion of such a plain and
beautiful Scripture as Matt. x. 5, 6? In the introduction to that
chapter (Matt. ix. 36-38) we read how our Lord Jesus, beholding the
multitudes which were pressing around Him, was moved with compassion for
them because they fainted (or rather, according to the now accepted
reading, "were harassed," "plagued"), "and were scattered abroad as
sheep having no shepherd." Then, after saying to His disciples that the
harvest truly is plenteous but the labourers are few, and commanding
them to pray the Lord of the harvest that He may send, or thrust forth,
labourers into His harvest, He calls the twelve individual Jewish
disciples, and commissions and empowers them to go forth on the definite
mission of mercy to their countrymen, warning them not to go beyond the
bounds of the land "into the way of the Gentiles," nor even within the
bounds of Palestine to visit "the cities of the Samaritans," but to
confine themselves exclusively "to the lost sheep of the House of
Israel"--that is, to their own Jewish people, who (as we shall see) are
throughout the New Testament called alternately "Jews" and "Israel."
This is all plain and obvious; and we know, as a matter of fact and
history, that the ministry of John the Baptist, and of our Lord Jesus,
and of the Twelve Apostles, until after His ascension, was confined to
the "Jews" in Palestine. Anglo-Israelism, however, is able by some
fiction to transform the Twelve Disciples into the tribe of Benjamin,
and "the lost sheep of the House of Israel" into a medley of Gentile
nations located "in Central Asia," and other specified regions, who,
though unknown to themselves to be Israelites in origin, and mistaken by
the Apostles in their subsequent missionary journeys for "Gentiles,"
were really the "lost Ten Tribes," alias "the Saxons," and progenitors
of the English! And these are only a few typical samples of the
so-called "historical proofs" and Bible interpretations on which the
whole theory rests. I must now pass on to another part of the subject,
but let me, before doing so, earnestly commend to you whenever you come
across Anglo-Israel literature to keep in mind the good advice of a
well-known Bishop to his clergy--"_Always verify your references_"--and
I would add, "study the context"--and you will find that the Scriptures
quoted in them are either misapplications or perversions of the true
meaning of the text. In fact, there is not a Scripture, however sublime
and glorious its import, and however plain and obvious its meaning,
which does not become distorted and perverted in Anglo-Israel hands.[12]
Here are one or two samples. Anglo-Israelism is based for the most part
on the false supposition of a separate calling and destiny of the Ten
Tribes from that of Judah:--
"The natural seed of Abraham," we are told, "is divided in the
Bible, the word Israel standing generally for the Ten Tribes, and
Judah for Two Tribes. These divisions have separate paths appointed
them to walk in through the centuries. 'All the House of Israel
wholly,' 'the whole House of Israel,' 'all the House of Israel,'
have a special work. The Ten Tribes are especially called in the
Scriptures the seed of Abraham. Sometimes 'My chosen'; again, 'Mine
inheritance,' and 'My servant.' God, in referring to them in their
scattered state, and of His gathering them together, says (Isaiah
xli. 8): 'But thou, Israel, art My servant, Jacob whom I have
chosen; the seed of Abraham My friend--thou whom I have taken from
the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof,
and said unto thee, Thou art My servant; I have chosen thee, and
not cast thee away.'"[13]
I shall show later on that it is not true to say that the word Israel
stands "generally" for the Ten Tribes, and Judah for the Two Tribes.
"Generally," the name Israel stands for all the descendants of Jacob,
whose name was changed by God Himself to "Israel," though in the
historical books, especially in 1 and 2 Kings, and 2 Chronicles, and in
a few passages in the Prophets, it is used to describe the northern
kingdom of the Ten Tribes in contradistinction to the southern kingdom
of Judah. But its use in the more limited and temporary sense as applied
to the Ten Tribes can always be clearly discerned from the context. But
in order to support the assertion that "these two divisions have
separate paths appointed them to walk through the centuries," it is
affirmed that the designations "All the House of Israel wholly," "the
whole House of Israel," "My chosen," "Mine inheritance," and "My
servant," are especially applied in the Scriptures to the "Ten Tribes"
in contradistinction to Judah. Now this is utterly baseless, as any
intelligent Bible-reader will find if he takes the trouble to look up
all the passages where these expressions are used.[14]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: From the article "Anglo-Israelism" in the _Jewish
Encyclopedia_.]
[Footnote 2: Joseph Jacobs, B.A., in the _Jewish Encyclopedia_.]
[Footnote 3: See Note iv. in Part III.]
[Footnote 4: "Nebuchadnezzar's Dream" in "The British Empire of
Ephraim." A whole collection of similar perversions of Scripture may be
found in an excellent pamphlet by the late Pastor Frank H. White, called
"Anglo-Israelism Examined"--unfortunately now out of print.]
[Footnote 5: A beautiful specimen, this, of Anglo-Israel logic.]
[Footnote 6: "The Lost Ten Tribes," by Rev. Joseph Wild, D.D. A book
containing twenty discourses which abounds in statements and
"interpretations" as wild and unscriptural as this sample quoted from
Discourse XVIII.]
[Footnote 7: From an article in _The Banner of Israel_.]
[Footnote 8: When preparing to re-write this little book I was told by a
friend that I need not take much notice of the works of Edward Hine, as
Anglo-Israelites themselves no longer attach importance to them. On
inquiry, however, I found that this was not the case. His writings are
still largely advertised and circulated, and many of the more modern
Anglo-Israelite writers profess to draw instruction and inspiration from
them. Beside which, even his most extravagant statements are more than
paralleled in some of their most recent publications.]
[Footnote 9: Both these extracts are taken from "The Lost Ten
Tribes"--the book referred to in a previous note--by Joseph Wild.]
[Footnote 10: 1 Kings xi. 13-36.]
[Footnote 11: "Israel in Britain," by Colonel Garnier, page 6.]
[Footnote 12: See samples in Note i. of Part III.]
[Footnote 13: "The Ten Lost Tribes," page 12.]
[Footnote 14: "All the House of Israel wholly" is found in Ezek. xi.
27, and is used of those of the southern kingdom who were already in
captivity, as contrasted with those who were still with Zedekiah in
Jerusalem and Palestine. The parallel to Ezek. xi. is Jeremiah xxiv.,
where the two parts of the nation--those already in captivity and those
still in the land--are also contrasted under the symbol of the two
baskets of figs, one of which was "very good" and the other "very evil."
When Peter, for instance, said, "_Let all the House of Israel_ know
assuredly that God hath made this same Jesus both Lord and Christ," he
addressed the "Jews" in Palestine, as every one knows. "My chosen," or
"Whom I have chosen," apart from its use as applied to the priests and
Levites, is used sixteen times of Zion and Jerusalem, and _just as many
times of the whole nation_. Deut. vii. 6; xiv. 2; Psalm xxxiii. 12;
Isaiah xli. 8, 9--may be turned up as examples. "My servant" is used
seventeen or eighteen times in the second half of Isaiah, and when not
directly applied to the Messiah, as in xlii. 1; xlix. 3-7; lii. 13; and
liii. 11--is a designation of the whole people; and it must be
remembered that Isaiah prophesied primarily "concerning Judah and
Jerusalem." The term as a designation of the people is also used five
times by Jeremiah in the same inclusive sense, _i.e._, of the whole
nation.]