''And when these things begin to come to pass, the look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.'' (Luke 21:28)
How Many Tribes do the Jews of Today Represent?
by
Jeff Booth
Editor's note - Click here if you wish to read and print an updated version of this article on Microsoft Word document
“Preaching the kingdom of God, AND teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ” Acts 28:31.
Some Christians are of the opinion that the Jews of today represent all 12 tribes of Israel. Others believe that they only represent two.
Years ago I was talking to a Jewish believer on this very subject. I was explaining to him that Jews represent only two tribes and not 12 and he asked me a question: "What do Jewish scholars have to say about this?" I thought that was a fantastic question and told him I'd check it out. I spent a few months visiting synagogues with libraries, several public and county libraries making photocopies of pages from books written by Jewish rabbis, scholars, historians and theologians. I was only interested in Jewish thought on the issue. Not one of them maintained the position that the Jews of today represent all 12 tribes. They hold the position that the Jews represent only 2 tribes: Judah & Benjamin. In their opinion the 10 tribes are still "lost." I even made phone calls to rabbis and asked them this question. "They're lost, we don't know where they are," they all told me.
There are two schools of thought on the 10 tribes in Jewish circles:
(1) They’re lost and will some day be reunited with Judah (The minority point-of-view)
"The people known as Jews are the descendants of the Tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with a certain number of the Tribe of Levi. So far as is known, there is not any further admixture of other tribes. The Ten Tribes have been absorbed among the nations of the world. The Jews look forward to the gathering of all the tribes at some future date." ---Dr. Hertz - Chief Rabbi of the British Empire. 1918
"While not a link is missing of the historical chain so far as the romance of the House of Judah is concerned, the Israelites who were subjected by the Assyrian power disappear from the page of history as suddenly and completely as though the land of their captivity had swallowed them up... the Ten Tribes are certainly in existence, all that has to be done is to discover which people represent them." ---The Jewish Chronicles, May 22, 1879.
“The captives of Israel exiled beyond the Euphrates did not return as a whole to Palestine along with their brethren the captives of Judah; at least there is no mention made of this event in the documents at our disposal… In fact, the return of the ten tribes was one of the great promises of the Prophets, and the advent of the Messiah is therefore necessarily identified with the epoch of their redemption.” ---Jewish Quarterly Review, Vol. I -1888, pages 15, 17
(2) They’re lost, intermarried and were absorbed into surrounding nations and races. They’ll never return (The majority point-of-view)
“The people were transported eastward, and a new population was brought in westward. The transported Israelites became the “ten lost tribes”; in reality these were absorbed by the people of the lands to which they were transported and they disappeared.” ---The Hebrew Scriptures by Samuel Sandmel, p. 20.
“Thus were the people led away into distant provinces of the [Assyrian] empire and became colonized with strangers, and the Kingdom of Israel became a tale that is told.” ---ISRAEL: A History of the Jewish People by Rufus Learsi, p. 79.
“…but in general it can be said that they disappeared from the stage of history.”
---Encyclopedia Judaica, vol. 15, p. 1004.
“These are the Ten Lost Tribes; lost not as a jewel is lost on the road, perhaps to be found again, but as a drop of wine is lost in an ocean of water, dissolved, gone.” ---Eternal Faith, Eternal People, by Leo Trepp, p. 14.
"The Ten Tribes of Israel were not even permitted like the sister kingdom of Judah, to bequeath to later ages... the memory of rich and varied destinies. They were irretrievably LOST." --- C. and A. D. Rothschild, History and Literature of the Israelites, Vol. 1, page 489:
"The Jews do not claim to represent the Twelve Tribes for the Ten Tribes never returned from captivity and are LOST to history" ---Rabbi Aaron Werner, when asked by Dr. Schiffner, “Do the Jews represent all 12 tribes.”
There are many more quotes I could give but I think the point has been made. These statements represent what the Jews themselves have to say on the subject.
So why all the confusion and debate over the 10 tribes amongst certain Christian groups? My guess is that some have preconceived interpretations of scripture, especially in the area of eschatology, and will hold onto those beliefs no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented. At the same time there’s absolutely no confusion in Jewish academia. They all agree the 10 tribes are still lost. This belief that the Jews represent all 12 tribes is an erroneous Christian doctrine. It's unbiblical and false. Have you ever noticed that Christian groups that hold this position never quote Jewish sources to prove their point? The reason is there aren’t any.
The biblical and historical facts concerning the tribal makeup of modern-day Judaism will create problems for those who have written books dealing with end-times events because it adds a whole new chapter into the eschatological mix. However, it's time to put this issue to rest. It's time to get our facts straight. It's time to investigate this issue with an unbiased point-of-view. It's called "rightly dividing the word of truth..." 2 Tim. 2:15.
It was never in God's plan for all the tribes to remain in Israel nor was it in God’s plan for Israel and Judah to remain together. This will remain the case until the Millennium. Now that I have everyone’s attention let me try to explain. First, concerning Israel’s expansion:
“And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” Gen. 28:14.
Right from the start we get a picture of a migrating, colonizing people. The land of Canaan was the port-of-departure for Israel.
“Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well: whose branches run over the wall.” Gen. 49:22.
A wall is a boundary line. Ephraim & Manasseh would extend beyond the boundaries of Israel.
Another prophecy came when David was king and Israel was enjoying its greatest geographical expanse:
“Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel and will plant them, that they may have a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime.” 2 Sam. 7:10.
"The children you will have, after you have lost the others, will say again in your ears, 'The place is too small for me; give me a place where I may dwell.'" Isa.49:20.
Isaiah 54 sheds more light on this subject:
“Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate [Israel] than the children of the married wife, [Judah] saith the LORD.”2 Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations: spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes; 3 For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited.''
Despite the fact that Israel exited Canaan via the Assyrian invasion, God would still keep His promises. Israel would expand geographically and in population while in exile. These promises were based on the unconditional Abrahamic Covenant
not the conditional Mosaic Covenant.
These verses (and others we’ll examine) make it clear that Canaan was not the only land God reserved for His people. There was an "Appointed Place" waiting for them. "And move no more" means that they will still posses it during the Millennium. Judah currently abides in the land of Canaan; Israel currently abides in the Appointed Place. This fact, as we’ll see, plays an important role during the Great Tribulation.
This may come as a surprise to some, but, there may be only one “Holy Land” however there are several “Promised Lands.” The land of Canaan was not the only territory promised to Israel. The Appointed Place is every much a land promised to Israel as Canaan. And it’s theirs to keep forever.
“For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph's.” (1 Chron. 5:2) The sons of Joseph would become like the stars of heaven, etc., not Judah.
The Abrahamic covenant was divided in Genesis chapters 48 & 49. “Judah was his sanctuary, and Israel his dominion.” Psa. 114:2.
Let me give a classic example about what I’m trying to get across:
“Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of the sea; and he shall be for an haven of ships; and his border shall be unto Zidon.” Gen. 49:13.
Moses said Of Zebulun: “…for they shall suck of the abundance of the seas, and of treasures hid in the sand”. Deut 33:19.
According to these verses Zebulun would become noted for its maritime activity. However, if you look at a tribal map showing the boundaries of each tribe you’ll see that Zebulun was totally landlocked with no access to the sea whatsoever. Zebulun was the proverbial “Kansas” of the promised land and his birthright could not be fulfilled until relocated in the Appointed Place. The Elders of Israel in Joshua’s day were not ignorant of Zebulun’s birthright promise so why did they place Zebulun in the center of Israel with no access to the sea? Did they know something that most of us miss today? I think the answer is obvious.
(Map Courtesy Jewish Virtual Library)
“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”. Isa. 11:11.
Isaiah 11 speaks of a “second time” recovery which begs the question: when and where did the “first time” recovery take place? The first gathering took place after the Assyrian captivity. God led the 10 tribes from Assyria into the “wilderness” (Hos. 2:14) where they would “renew their strength” (Isa. 41:1) a place where “never mankind dwelt” (II Esdras 13: 39-45) There they would find “grace in the wilderness” and “rest.” (Jer. 31:1-2) A place where Israel will “sing” and “praise” the Lord. (Isa. 42:10-12). There God would plead with them “face to face” and be brought into “…the bond of the covenant.” (Ezek. 20:33-37) The “covenant” spoken of here is the “new covenant” (Jer. 31:31) Israel would receive the new covenant while in the wilderness. Here, the population of Israel would grow, “…be thou the mother of thousands of millions”. Gen. 24:69.
The “Wilderness” and the “Appointed Place” are one and the same. There the birthrights would find there fulfillment---an impossible task while in the land of Canaan.
The birthright described in the Abrahamic Covenant states: “That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;” The state of Israel, roughly the size of New Jersey, simply cannot handle those kinds of numbers even with the boundaries expanded during the Millennium.
During the Millennium only a percentage of Israelites actually return to Canaan. “…and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion.” (Jer. 3:14). The majority of Israelites will remain in the Appointed Place during the Millennium and go year-to-year to pay homage to their Messiah as mentioned in Zech. 14:16.
Where is Israel today and when they return at the beginning of the Millennium, what direction will they come from?
"Go and proclaim these words toward the north, and say: 'Return, backsliding Israel,' says the LORD." Jer. 3:12.
"In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given as an inheritance to your fathers." Jer. 3:18.
"Behold, I will bring them from the north country." Jer. 31:8.
"They shall walk after the Lord. He will roar like a lion. When He roars, then His sons shall come trembling from the west." Hos. 11:10.
"Surely these shall come from afar; look! Those from the north and the west. . . ." Isa. 49:12
Josephus wrote during the 1st. century: “The Ten Tribes did not return to Palestine; only two Tribes served the Romans after Palestine became a Roman Province. …. the Ten Tribes are beyond the Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude not to be estimated in numbers.” If they were an immense multitude 2000 years ago what are their numbers today?
This is how the birthrights mentioned in Genesis' 48 & 49 would be fulfilled: Each tribe would become a nation in its own right. There was only one tribe needed to remain in Israel for the birth of Jesus and again for the return of Jesus: Judah.
When would the birthrights find their fulfillment? “And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the LAST DAYS.” Gen. 49:1.
Everyone says we’re living in the last days, so who fulfilled these birthrights and where? Where’s the “Appointed Place”? And it must be remembered that the “last days” ends when the Millennium begins. When you read the promises in Gen. 48 & 49 and Deut. 33 they must be fulfilled before the Jesus returns. There’re not Millennial promises and they’re unconditional.
Where was Israel during the first century? Josephus gave us a clue, but there’s more.
Hosea and Peter also give us a clue: God is about to divorce the 10 tribes of the northern kingdom. He tells Hosea to take a wife---she has three children and the Lord tells Hosea what names to give them:
1) Jezreel: "God Scatters/sows"
2) Lo-ru-hama: "No More Mercy".
3) Lo-am-mi: "Not My People".
These are the new names given to northern kingdom for turning from God to idolatry. Judah was excluded from this prophecy---it does not apply to them---they cannot fulfill any part of it, nor can anyone else.
"The Lord was very angry with Israel and removed them out of His sight; there was none left but the Tribe of Judah only." 2 Kings 17:18.
“For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people.” Isa. 7:8.
In the first chapter of 1 Peter the Apostle opens with greetings to the "sojourners of the dispersion" or "exiles of the dispersion" depending on which translation you have. He's addressing a group of people that are in a state of exile. They’re in a state of “Jezreel”. They're located in Asia Minor but who are they?
Peter 2:9 sheds more light on this. “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people...” all OT references to Israel.
Peter goes on to say, (v. 10) "Which in time past were "not a people" [Lo-Ammi], but are now the "people of God" [Ammi]. Which had "not obtained mercy" [Lo-ru-hama] but now have "obtained mercy" [Ru-hama]
"And I will sow [Jezreel] her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy [Ru-hama] upon her that had not obtained mercy;[Lo-ru-hama] and I will say to them which were not my people, [Lo-ammi] Thou art my people; [Ammi] and they shall say, Thou art my God." Hos 2:23.
This is the fulfillment of Hosea prophecies. No other race of people, not even the Jews, can fulfill this prophecy except the 10 tribes. In Romans chapters 9, 10 & 11 Paul talks "about" Israel: third person. Peter is talking "to" Israel: second person. Paul quoted the same verses as Peter telling the Romans that they must be fulfill. Peter is saying that these prophecies have been fulfilled. They were fulfilled by the Galatians accepting Christianity.
There are a few references to Judah in the book of Hosea, but by-and-large, he was a prophet to the northern kingdom and his book dealt exclusively with that kingdom. He mentions Judah a few times only to show the spiritual condition, the contrast, that existed between Judah and Israel at that time. Israel had their prophets and Judah had their prophets. Daniel deals primarily with Judah. Elijah, Elisha and Hosea were exclusively northern kingdom prophets. Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Zachariah and Isaiah dealt with both kingdoms.
“And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee, (2) And shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul; (3) That then the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee.” Deut.30:1-3.
These verses cite three stages: First: Exile. Second: A spiritual return to God while in exile. Third: A return to the land of Israel after exile. This is exactly what Hosea said would happen. The only prophecy that remains to be fulfilled is the return from exile at the onset of the Millennium. Ezekiel 37 and Hosea 1 cite the same stages.
Now allow me to go on record and say that I find Roman’s chapter’s 9, 10 & 11 somewhat confusing for this reason: It seems that Paul is talking about the Jews in these chapters. However, Paul quotes two prophets that were prophets to the northern kingdom. Elijah dealt exclusively with the northern kingdom while having no dealings whatsoever with Judah (with the exception of a letter he wrote to Jehoram the king of Judah delivering one of the most gruesome prophecies imaginable, II Chron. 21:12-15) This was the one and only contact Elijah had with Judah.
In Romans 11:15, Paul wrote: “For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead.” (Ezek. 11:16, Hos. 8:8, 9:17.)
Who was “cast away” at the time Paul wrote to the Romans? Who was Paul referring to? He was referring to Israel because Judah was still abiding in Canaan. Judah wasn’t “cast away” in 55 AD when the letter was written. Judah never received a bill-of-divorce from God. They ceased to be a nation after the Jewish-Roman War of 70 AD, but they still remained God’s people. Israel on the other hand ceased being God’s people, became nations while in exile, and once again became God’s people via the Cross. As Isaiah 50:1 says concerning Israel: “Thus saith the Lord, Where is the bill of your mother’s divorcement, whom I have put away…?”
Where Paul wrote, “…but life from the dead” he’s referencing Ezekiel’s “Valley of Dry Bones,” “Then he said unto me, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost, we are cut off for our parts.” (Ezek. 37:11) When you read this chapter you’ll see that the “dry bones” are resurrected “and I’ll put my spirit in you” before the two sticks are joined together. This corresponds with Hos. 1:10-11.
Paul went on to write, “And if some of the branches be broken off…” The northern kingdom was broken off at the time, not Judah. If you read the 11th Chapter of Romans, Paul could only be talking about northern kingdom. The branches that were broken off happened some 700 years prior. Paul wasn’t talking about Judah; he was referring to Israel in exile. If Paul were referencing Judah in these chapters, why not quote from Isaiah 53? Why not quote from the book of Zechariah and other books that addressed Judah? Why would Paul quote two prophets that never prophesized to Judah? I think these are honest questions and should be examined. John’s statement: “He came unto his own and his own received him not” (Jn. 1:11) was written about Judah. For Israel, the exact opposite was true. According to Hos. 1:10, they received Him. Judah rejected the Messiah, Israel accepted the Messiah.
Some Christians may try to spiritualize Hosea and Peter by saying that it applies to anyone who accepts Christ as Savior or the Church in general. If that’s the case, why did Paul address the Romans as “a wild olive branch grafted in” thereby excluding them? If Replacement Theology be true why didn’t Paul address the Romans as a “chosen generation,” a “royal priesthood,” etc.? Why didn’t Paul tell the church at Rome that they fulfilled the prophecies recorded in Hosea when they became Christians? Fact is they didn’t fulfill any part of Hosea’s prophecy whereas the Galatians fulfilled all of them. Why? Because the Galatians were Israelites. Paul again drives home the point when he says, “For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee”. (Rom. 11:21).
Paul again makes a distinction between the Romans and Israel (and all non-Israelites) when he wrote:
"They are Israelites, and to them belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen." Rom. 9:4-5.
“For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?” (Rom. 11:24) The “natural branches” Paul is speaking of is the divorced house of Israel.
“As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people,[Ammi] which were not my people;[Lo ammi] and her beloved, which was not beloved.
And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; [Lo ammi] there shall they be called the children of the living God.[Ammi]. Rom. 9:25-26. Now, who is Paul addressing in Romans chapters 9, 10 & 11? If you say Paul was addressing Judah in these verses from the OT then why did Peter quote the same verses while addressing the Galatians who were not Jews?
Paul also quotes Isaiah 9:27 & 29, both verses address the house of Israel.
The book of Isaiah, starting at chapter 40 to the end, deals primarily with the northern kingdom. Chapter 53, one of the great chapters in the OT dealing with the Messiah---what follows in chapter 54: “Sing O barren…” speaks of the northern kingdom. Isaiah 53 starts off asking “Who hath believed our report…” Answer: According to Hosea 1 the house of Israel. Who rejected the report? Answer: According to John 1:11, Judah. Israel (in exile) rejoices over the message recorded in Isaiah 53 and at the same time Judah rejects it.
The entire 54th. chapter of Isaiah deals with the northern kingdom’s response to the Gospel. When Paul delivered the Gospel to the Galatians, he wrote, “And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.
Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.” (Gal. 4:14-15.) The Galatians were ecstatic when Paul showed up with the Gospel---they responded pretty much the way Isa. 54 said Israel would.
Chapter 55 opens up with “…everyone that thirsteth.” The Gospel goes first to Israel, then the rest of the world just as Jesus commanded His disciples. “But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Matt. 10:6.
To further illustrate whom Peter and Paul were addressing we can turn to the book of Galatians. Paul was addressing the same racial group as Peter. Are there any statements in the book of Galatians that would indicate that Paul was addressing Israelites?
Gal. 3:23: "But before faith came, WE were kept under the law...." If the Galatians were true Gentiles, they were never under the law. I read somewhere that Martin Luther admitted he was confused and couldn't understand why Paul was addressing the Galatians as if they were once under the law. The fact is Paul was addressing them in this manner. The Galatians were once under the Law of Moses.
Gal. 3:24: "Wherefore the law was OUR schoolmaster to bring US unto Christ, that WE might be justified by faith." (25) But after that faith is come, WE are no longer under a schoolmaster”.
Gal. 4:3: ''Even so WE, when WE were children, were in bondage...(5) To redeem them that were under the law, that WE might receive the adoption of sons."
(9) "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how ye turn AGAIN to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire AGAIN to be in bondage"? There’s a lot of “us” and “we” in Galatians and “you” and “us” in Romans.
If the Galatians were true Gentiles, how can they "return" to the Law of Moses "again?" Remember what was happening to the Galatians and what prompted Paul to write his letter. Judaizers from Jerusalem traveled to Asia Minor and told the Galatians that they had to keep the Law. Why the Galatians and no one else? Why did the Galatians so readily accept portions of the Mosaic Law as a means of salvation while other Gentile churches were ignored? Why did the Judaizers specifically target the Galatians for legalism? Why not Rome, it was closer and easier to get to?
There must be a reason, an explanation, and I believe the answer is that the Galatians were (a part of) the northern kingdom of Israel. They were Israelites in exile. Peter said that by accepting the Gospel and becoming Christians, they fulfilled the prophecies of Hosea 1. This chapter makes it explicitly clear that the house of Israel, while in exile, would be Christianized and then be joined with the house of Judah and return to the land of Israel at the onset of the Millennium.
Hos. 1:10 “Yet the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. (11) THEN shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together…”
If Israel linked up with Judah in Babylon and returned together with Ezra, this prophecy could in no way be fulfilled. Some Christians, however, make this very claim.
When the Disciples asked Jesus, saying, “Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6). In other words, “…wilt thou at this time restore the 10 tribes to the land Israel.” Fact is, the exact opposite was about to take place. In Matthew 21:43, Jesus, speaking to the Jews, said: “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation [not the Church] bringing forth the fruits thereof”. The nation He was speaking of was Israel, the northern tribes. “The kingdom” Jesus was referring to was the tribe of Benjamin, who were the Galileans in the north and were a part of the kingdom of Israel but were kept with Judah for David’s sake. Now they would be removed and given back to the northern kingdom and Judah would be alone. All of the disciples of Jesus, save Judas Iscariot, were Benjamites, (Matt. 28:16-Acts 1:11) they took the Gospel to the 10 tribes and the world. Benjamin bore fruit, Judah did not. For the most part Jesus was well received in Galilee not so in Judea.
God made an oath to David that he would never want for a man to sit on his throne ruling over the house of Israel. (Jer. 33:17) However, after the death of Solomon, the northern kingdom broke away from Judah and God’s promise to David was in jeopardy of being broken so the tribe of Benjamin was annexed to Judah. (1 Kings 11:34) Benjamin was Judah’s “Israel” and represented the kingdom. After the throne of David was removed back in Jeremiah’s day via Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion, Benjamin was no longer needed. Their purpose had been served.
1 Kings 11:11 “Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant.
13 Howbeit I will not rend away all the kingdom; but will give one tribe [Benjamin] to thy son for David my servant's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake which I have chosen.”
These verses make it clear that when Jesus said that the kingdom would be taken away from Judah He was referring to the tribe of Benjamin. This was the last tribe Judah had contact with. And yet there’re Christians who still claim that the Jews represent all 12 tribes! A complete contradiction of what Jesus said. If the kingdom of God is represented by the 10 tribes, now 11 with the return of Benjamin, and Jesus told the Jews that the kingdom would be taken from them how can the Jews represent all 12 tribes? Answer: It’s impossible! Judah today is alone.
Where it says, “…and for Jerusalem’s sake…” Jerusalem fell within Benjamin’s territory. If Benjamin hadn’t been annexed to Judah they would have lost both the kingdom and Jerusalem.
Moses, looking down through the centuries of time, knew the plight of Judah at the end times and their need to be reunited with the other tribes and protection from their enemies:
“And this is the blessing of Judah: and he said, Hear, LORD, the voice of Judah, and bring him unto his people: let his hands be sufficient for him; and be thou an help to him from his enemies.” Deut. 33:7.
Points to Consider
Of the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7 only three tribes can be rightfully called "Jews." Judah, Benjamin and Levi. After the northern kingdom fell into idolatry under the leadership of Jeroboam, the Levite's became unemployed. They trekked southward and joined themselves with Judah.
Of the 144,000 how many are Jew’s? 36,000. The remaining 108,000 are from the northern kingdom. If you do a Google search on the subject of the 144,000 you’ll see time and again the term “The 144,000 Jews”. Wrong! Only 25% will be Jews. And the tribe of Benjamin should be excluded because they were given back to the northern kingdom bringing the number down to 24,000.
The sealing of the 144,000 will not take place in one geographical location, it’ll be world-wide, where ever all the tribes of Israel are currently residing.
* * * * *
This raises questions concerning the return of Elijah, “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.” (Mal. 4:5). Elijah was from the tribe of Manasseh, the northern kingdom. Where will his ministry begin? “Behold, I will send “you”…” Who’s the “you” in this verse? All the tribes, needless to say, but will Mal. 4:5 find most of its fulfillment in the Appointed Place? Only time will tell. Will Elijah and/or the Two Witnesses be Jews? Highly unlikely. If Elijah was from the tribe of Manasseh during his first ministry he’ll be from the tribe of Manasseh the second time around. Many Christians naturally assume that Elijah (or Elijah-type individual) and the Two Witnesses will be Jewish and deal exclusively with the Jews. That will not be the case. And when these prophets appear on the world stage and don’t meet the expectations of many Christians how will they be received?
No doubt Malachi 4 ties in with Revelation 11 concerning the Two Witnesses. What tribe, or tribes, are they from? (Note: When two prophets are together one takes a leadership role, such was the case with Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha. I believe that Mal. 4:5 will occur first and, at a later date, the other Witness will join him).
* * * * *
Jeremiah 31:31 states: “Behold, I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah…” In verse 33, however, something happens: “But this shall be the covenant I will make with the house of Israel…” there is no mention of the house of Judah in this verse. The new covenant spoken of in verse 31 would take root in Israel but not Judah.
* * * * *
Dispensationalists claim that God has suspended His dealings with Israel and that we’re living in a “gap” or “parenthesis” period. The reason for this is because they’re focused on the house of Judah and lost sight of Israel. Gen. 17:7 states: “And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee”.
There is no gap or parentheses “in their generations” and “everlasting”. This means that God’s covenant would be passed on from generation to generation in Abraham’s seed without interruption. Remember, Jesus came to “…confirm the promises made unto the fathers…” (Rom. 15:8) not postpone them. And it should be noted that Christianity is Israel’s national religion and any non-Israelite (“wild olive branch”) that accepts Christianity is being grafted in to that religion along with Israel, not instead of.
Dispensationalists use what I call “Star Trek Theology”. When faced with a difficult prophecy, like one addressed to Israel and never meant to be fulfilled by the Jews, they just take it to the transporter room, give it to Scotty, and he beams it into the Millennium. “There---we took care of that pesky little prophecy.” The Millennium is the Dispensationalist’s best friend.
One “pesky little prophecy” for the Dispensationalists, as incredulous as it may sound, is the New Covenant mentioned Jer. 31:31. Because Judah rejected it this prophecy has been moved (thank God for Scotty) to the Millennium:
“This covenant will be realized in the millennial age.” J. Dwight Pentecost, Things To Come, page 121.
“…the [dispensationalist] premillennial position is that the new covenant is with Israel and the fulfillment in the millennial kingdom after the second coming of Christ.” Dr. John F. Walvoord. The Millennial Kingdom, Page 209.
“…it can be shown that the period of the new covenant is millennial.” Dr. Charles C. Ryrie. The Basis of the Premillennial Faith. Page 111.
But there’re no “pesky little prophecies” in Scripture. The problem lies in the fact that there are two kingdoms, two parts of Israel today. “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: Ezek. 37:22.
Hosea 1, Isaiah 54, Ezek. 36 and Jeremiah 31 indicate that Christianity would take root in Israel and become their national religion. “And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people.” Rom. 15:10.
Once Dispensationalists realize that Israel is represented by two nations today their theology collapses---along with the teachings of Replacement Theology. What is it about “two nations” that some people fail to grasp? What is it about what God told Abraham, that he would be the father of “many nations,” (Gen. 17:6) and that Sarah would become the “mother of nations” (Gen. 17:16) that some fail to grasp?
Judah---the Jews, represents only one part of the kingdom but what about the other part? And remember, Ezekiel’s “Two Sticks” prophecy speaks of a post-Armageddon, post-Gog Magog War period of time. Unless I missed something, I don’t believe Armageddon has taken place yet. Therefore, Israel today is still two nations, two kingdoms, and still divided. How, in the name of common sense, can God make a new covenant with Israel and then postpone it for 2000 years and give it to everyone else but Israel? There is no logic to this type of thinking. The problem lies in the fact that Dispensationalists view the Jews as “all Israel.” If Judah represents all Israel today they have a good argument---but that’s not the fact. Dispensationalists fail to realize that Israel is represented by two factions, two nations. Some claim that Ezekiel’s “Two Sticks” prophecy took place in Babylon, but in this same chapter it also says, “And David my servant shall be king over them…” (Ezek. 37:24-25). Unless I missed something---again!---I don’t think King David is around today.
The sad fact of the matter is there’s no need for this. God is big enough to perform His word---even if we can’t see or comprehend it. In my opinion the “gap” theory is one of the great errors of Dispensationalism. There’re legitimate gaps in certain prophecies but Dispensationalists have taken this principal to staggering levels.
I believe there is a gap between Daniel’s 69th. and 70th. week prophecy---but not in the same manner as Dispensationalists. They view this gap as a suspension of God’s dealing with national Israel, when in fact, the opposite is true.
* * * * *
Concerning the woman spoken of in Revelation 12 which speaks of Judah. When the great tribulation begins and the beast tries to destroy her she flees “…into the wilderness…” the same wilderness that Israel was lead to many centuries before. Israel found “grace” in the wilderness. (Jer. 31:2, Hos. 2:14) and so will Judah. Revelation 12:6 says that “…she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there.” “They?” Who’s “they” mentioned in this verse? Who’s going to “feed” and take care of Judah in the “wilderness” for 3 ½ years? It will be the house of Israel. Many Judeans will flee to Israel as the situation worsens not unlike the Jews who fled Germany in the early 1930’s. They will take refuge in “The Wilderness,” with Israel. The Wilderness, Appointed Place and the Prepared Place, are all one and the same. There, Judah recognizes Jesus as their Messiah.
What reunites the house of Israel and the house of Judah is the Great Tribulation when Judah flees to Israel for protection. They’ll remain there with Israel for the full 1260 days and then both return to Canaan to meet their Messiah. Ezekiel’s “two sticks” prophecy (37:16) is fulfilled while Judah is with Israel during the Great Tribulation. They exit the wilderness after Armageddon reunited as Jeremiah foretold:
“In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers”. Jer. 3:18. (Isa. 11:12)
If you have a Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible you’ll see where it says “with” it should read “to.” “…Judah shall walk to the house of Israel…” as the Great Tribulation unfolds.
The brotherhood between Judah and Israel, once broken, (Zech. 11:14) has now been mended.
The Second Exodus: “Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that it shall no more be said, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; But, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither he had driven them: and I will bring them again into their land that I gave unto their fathers”. (Jer. 16:14-15.) The Second Exodus, or Millennial Exodus, will surpass the exodus from Egypt in greatness.
In Rev. 12:14, it says, “And to the women were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, where she is nourished…” The “two great wings” here may be a description of Boeing 747’s.
* * * * *
It should be remembered that the name “Israel” was given to Ephraim and Manasseh by Jacob before he died in Egypt. It’s their inheritance and where ever the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are today---that’s where the house of Israel is located. There’s a land named Israel and there’re two tribes named 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.” (Gen. 48:16.) Judah is not a multitude in the midst of the earth today, they did not fulfill this prophecy and never will. And it was not fulfilled in the land of Israel. The two tribes that carry the name of Israel---Ephraim and Manasseh---became a multitude in the midst of the earth.
* * * * *
Concerning the “sands of the sea---stars of heaven” promise to Israel. Last time I checked the current Jewish population, world-wide, it stood at 13.3 million. The growth rate for Jews is near zero: From 2000 to 2001 it rose 0.3%.
The current Arab population, the descendants of Ishmael, stands at about 320 million. Granted, not all Arabs are direct descendants of Ishmael but a good portion of them are. If the Jews represent “all Israel” and we’re living in the “end times” shouldn’t the Jewish population be greater than Ishmael’s? Or should we save this one for the Millennium as well?
* * * * *
Why didn’t the 10 tribes return with Judah? They were given a bill of divorce. (Jer. 3:8) This was a little more serious than some understand. In other words the northern kingdom had been “Gentilised.”
“When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance”. Deut. 24:1-4.
As long as the Mosaic Law was in effect God could not take the kingdom of Israel back---not without violating His own standard of righteousness. The bill of divorce was done away with at the Cross: “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” (Col.2:14.) Israel’s bill of divorce was nailed to the Cross rendering it null and void. After Calvary the door was open for the remarriage to take place.
This is why Israel did not return with Judah out of Babylon. And those who claim that they did never explain their way around Deut. 24.
There are three great events recorded in the New Testament: Salvation through the Cross, Baptism of the Holy Spirit, and the remarriage of the house of Israel back to God. Truth be told, I’ve been a Christian for 40 years and I’ve never heard a sermon preached on the remarriage part of the Gospel. Not a word from the pulpit---dead silence---despite the fact that the Bible speaks of it many times.
* * * * *
One of the most oft-quoted verses to prove that all 12 tribes were in Israel when Jesus was born is Luke 2:36: “And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity…”
Anna was from the tribe of Aser, this is “proof-positive” for some that all the tribes returned with Judah out of Babylon. The following verse explains her presence:
“Yet gleaning grapes shall be left in it, as the shaking of an olive tree, two or three berries in the top of the uppermost bough, four or five in the outmost fruitful branches thereof, saith the LORD God of Israel.” Isa. 17:6.
Virtually all commentaries concur that this verse speaks of the post-Assyrian invasion of the northern kingdom. There would be a smattering of Israelites left behind and would join themselves with Judah in the south. This explains Anna’s presence . Anna does not represent the kingdom of Israel nor the tribe of Aser.
Her family were refugees of the Assyrian invasion.
* * * * *
Acts 9:15 states that Paul would “…bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.” Somewhere in Paul’s journeys he brought the Gospel to Israel. Who and where the 10 tribes were was common knowledge in the first century. There was no debate or discussion on the issue back then. Today, things are a little different, we don’t have their perspective.
* * * * *
Steven M. Collins wrote a very interesting article titled: The Missing Simeonites. It tells the story of a possible revolt during the Exodus which may have lead to a “Mini-Exodus” from the “Main Exodus” headed by the tribe of Simeon. Collins wrote: “In Numbers 25, we learn that Phineas, a Levite, executed "a prince of a chief house among the Simeonites" (verses 7-14). Phineas leaped to execute this Simeonite prince for his audacity in rebelling against God by taking a Midianite woman into his tent at a time when God was punishing Israel for such deeds. Indeed, God sent a plague among the Israelites which killed 24,000 people, and that plague was stayed by the action of Phineas.”
A large number of Simeonites, it seems, were not particularly happy with the execution of one of their prince’ and may have departed in a huff and set out on their own. The article also pointed out that there’s evidence that portions of four other tribes may have left with them. The tribes of Ephraim, Reuben, Naphtali, Gad ended their 40 years in the wilderness with less numbers than when they started out from Egypt while other tribes showed an increase.
Collins pointed out that when the first census was taken (1450 BC) the tribe of Simeon was the 3rd. largest in Israel with 59,300 men of military age: “Those that were numbered of them, even of the tribe of Simeon, were fifty and nine thousand and three hundred.” (Num. 1:23) When the second census was taken (1410 BC) Simeon ranked the lowest with 22,200 “These are the families of the Simeonites, twenty and two thousand and two hundred.” (Num. 26:14) There was a significant drop (37,300 in 40 years) in Simeon’s numbers in the second census when it should have risen exponentially. Perhaps half to two thirds of this tribe parted company from their brethren in the Wilderness. If this is the case, where did they go? And remember, that 37,300 figure represents only men of military age, not their wives, children, parents, grand-parents and other family members.
We know through the Apocrypha and the writings of Josephus that the Spartans in Greece claimed a “kinship” with the Jews in Jerusalem and of being of the stock of Abraham---and the Jews acknowledged this claim. Letters were exchanged between Onias I, high priest of the Jews, and Arius I, King of Sparta. Collins presents the hypotheses that the Simonenites may have settled the city-state of Sparta.
Collins wrote: “Notice the Spartans called the Jews "our kinsmen." The Spartans did not proclaim themselves to be Jews, but rather that they were "kinsmen" to the Jews (i.e. members of one of the other tribes of Israel). That the Spartans acknowledged a common ancestry with the Jews of the tribe of Judah gives powerful weight to the assertion that they were Israelites who migrated to Greece instead of the Promised Land. The Spartan culture is most likely that of the tribe of Simeon, most of which apparently left the Israelite encampment in the Wilderness after a Simeon prince was executed by a Levite.”
It’s a known fact that not only were the Spartan’s of Hebrew stock but other Greek city-states were settled by Hebrews as well. Look at the way Paul spoke to the Corinthians:
“Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.” I Cor. 10:1-4.
Another point to consider is this; Judah had five sons; Er, Onan, Shelah, Pharez and Zarah. Er and Onan died in Canaan. The last time Zarah was mentioned in the Bible is in Gen. 46:12. They left Egypt long before Moses and the Exodus which means one third of Judah’s descendants never entered Canaan with Joshua. Where did they go and where are they today---and who are they today?
Steve Collins’ article is sited below and worth reading.
http://www.stevenmcollins.com/html/simeon.html
* * * * *
In Romans 11:25 Paul wrote: “For I would not, brethern, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.” Here, Paul is quoting Ephraim’s birthright verbatim. Gen. 48:19 says: “…and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.” Multitude of nations and multitude of Gentiles are one and the same. The word “Goyum” in Hebrew is sometimes translated “Gentiles” sometimes “Nations” depending on the translator’s discretion. What Paul is saying is that blindness in part has happened to Judah until Ephraim comes into the covenant. That’s the only way “all Israel” can be saved. Rom. 11:26.
"Both Dr. Delitzsch's translation of the New Testament into Hebrew, and Ginzburg-Salkinson's Hebrew New Testament, have absolutely the same Hebrew words in Rom. 11:25, that we find in Gen. 48:19 in the Hebrew Old Testament, and in these two verses only in the whole Bible. …When the 'fullness of the Gentiles' had to be rendered into Hebrew, the most eminent scholars naturally employed the phrase used in the promised birthright blessing given to Ephraim-Israel in Gen. 49!" Dr. Henry Aldersmith, Fullness of the Nations, p. 72-73.
* * * * *
"And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, "AND" teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him." Acts 28:30-31.
The key word here is “and”. The Gospel was a two fold message back in the early Church. The "Kingdom of God" or “Gospel of the Kingdom” speaks of the Temporal/Racial aspects of the Abrahamic Covenant---which is what this article is about.
The things "which concern the Lord Jesus Christ" deal with the message of salvation, the Cross. They are not one and the same message. Closely related, but not the same. The Gospel of "The Kingdom of God" is almost a lost message today. Very few churches teach on it. Or perhaps I should say seldom taught correctly. It’s usually from a Judah representing all 12 tribes’ perspective.
There is RACE and there is GRACE in scripture. The Kingdom of God aspect of the Gospel deals with a RACE of people. GRACE deals with “whosoever will, let him come”. The Gospel is open to anyone who believes, the Kingdom of God is restricted to a specific group people. H. G. Wells thought the Bible should be rewritten to include all races of people not just Israelites. If Mr. Wells had his way he would have turned the Bible into another science fiction novel.
* * * * *
What’s the purpose of this article? As a young Christian back in the 1970’s I remember reading the OT and many times saying to myself, “I wonder why God never kept that promise to Israel.” At that time, in my way of thinking, the Jews represented Israel and Israel was represented by the Jews. I know now that’s not the case.
I believe that a proper distinction between the two kingdoms and they role they play in eschatology will make the study of the end-times much clearer.
The notion that the Jews of today represent all 12 tribes has become one of the central pillars of certain orthodox Christian denominations. But it’s based on a miss understanding of scripture and history. Jewish scholarship universally rejects this belief and has done so for the past 2000-plus years.
I think it’s time to stop limiting the Holy One of Israel through a limited view of God’s plan for His people and who His people are. Many opinions concerning eschatology and the role the Jews play in end time events have become so entrenched, so solidly fixed, in Church doctrine that any other point of view is dismissed out-of-hand without consideration. We may be making void the word of God through our fixed traditions and interpretations. If the Jews made void the word of God through their traditions don’t for a minute think that Christians cannot do likewise. The notion that the Jews of today represent all 12 tribes has become one of the central pillars of various Christian denominations. But this pillar rests on a foundation of error.
No one will argue against the fact that the Jews play and important role in eschatology, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that for the past 2000 years God has been doing something with the other half of His kingdom. Fulfilling all His promises and prophecies to His people while some Christians claim that they’ve been postponed until the Millennium or transferred to the Church. I believe that God kept His promises to His people, both Judah and Israel.
If one cannot make an accurate distinction between the house of Israel and the house of Judah in prophecy, things can get a little confusing. Some Christians become spiritual contortionists in their attempts to make the Jews fulfill prophecies that were never addressed to them. If you can’t make these distinctions---you really should stay out of the arena of eschatology and leave it to someone else.
Send your comments to Jeff at JBINVT912@aol.com
