Lost Tribes Blog
Some interesting information with brief comments from a recent visit to the venerable British Library in London:
Several Reasons Why We Need To Be Concerned With History!
Humorist Mark Twain very wisely commented, “History may not repeat itself, but it certainly does rhyme.” The Bible gives us evidence of a cyclical view of history. Will we learn from it or make the same mistakes over and over again?
Professor Carol Newsom in “Rhyme and Reason” says, “One of the functions of history writing is to show how the present emerges out of the past…A crisis exists in historical understanding itself.” (p.225) Very true! There is a reason why someone said, “History is bunk.” Help us set it straight!
Historian R.G. Collingwood, in “The Idea Of History” (NY: Oxford, 1946, p.247), stated, “Every present has a past of its own, and any imaginative reconstruction of the past aims at reconstructing the past of this present.” It stands to reason (although seldom considered) that our view of history is important to how we view the present. Historical research is important, for unless we know and understand who we are, we remain but ‘lost tribes’ without a history to live up to.
Professor Marc Zvi Brettler, in "The Book Of Judges" (Routledge, London, 2002), gives "three explanations for why ancient historians sometimes do not tell the truth: error, dishonesty, or misconception of history's true function." Many people probably simply go with whatever the status quo is, unwilling to buck the trend or risk losing their position in the world. However, there is indeed a great misconception of God's plan and purposes for the Houses of Israel and Judah throughout history. Here is an example of the misconception of Israel's true function in the world (in my humble opinion): "The Kingdom of Israel became the Ten Lost Tribes, not that they were lost in the sense of being misplaced and forgotten; they merged into the life of other races and lost their identity. They dissolved like salt in water." (From "The History Of The Hebrew Commonwealth," by Albert Edward Bailey and Charles Foster Kent; Chas. Scribner's Sons, 1920) If the House of Israel dissolved "like salt in water" then the prophecies in Genesis chapters 48 and 49, as well as Deuteronomy 33, could not be fulfilled, nor the unconditional Abrahamic Covenant promises that they would become a multitude of nations. Shall we believe man or God?
The Two (Separate) Houses of Israel:
Well known Israeli scholar, Nadav Na’aman commented on the separation between the two houses of Israel, Ephraim-Israel and Judah, in Biblical times: “But it is very doubtful if a work…correlating events that took place in the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, was in fact composed in one of these kingdoms. On the contrary—the Book of Kings refers to the Chronicles of the kings of Israel / kings of Judah as two separate works.” (“The Temple Library of Jerusalem and the Composition of the Book of Kings,” p. 135)
Referring to the research of Hebrew scholars W. Schniedewind and D. Sivan, Nadav Na’aman says, “…they maintain that the spoken language was markedly different in the two kingdoms” of Ephraim-Israel and Judah.
Professor Ernst Axel Knauf, in “Kinneret and Naphtali” (p.223, n.15) says, “Tribal consciousness within Israel and Judah outlived the respective states, if 1 Chronicles [chapters] i-xi is of any significance.” This accords with Scripture, because the tribal divisions were to remain separate and distinguishable, with individualized prophecies for each, until at least the “latter days.” (Gen. 49:1)
Prof. Knauf also points out the interesting observation (p.223, n.16) that, “It is unlikely that the Assyrians, who sometimes tried hard to eradicate the ethnic identity of their newly acquired subjects, paid much respect to their tribal identity.” This provides a reason why Assyrian records do not speak of individual tribes of Israel, instead referring to them by the corporate name of Khumri, or “House of [King] Omri.” Professor Thos. L. Thompson of Copenhagen says, “Assyrian records refer to this Iron II state of Israel by the dynastic name, Bit Humri [or Khumri].” (“Problems of Genre and Historicity With Palestine’s Inscriptions”). The Babylonian form of this word was Gimirri or Gimmiri (variously spelled), from which the term, Cimmerian, was derived.
Dr. Graeme Auld of Edinburgh states, “The house of David had an uneasy relationship with the majority in Israel…” (“The Deuteronomists Between History and Theology” p.364) The majority spoken of here is the ten-tribe House of Ephraim-Israel.
Regarding “the latter days” when Genesis 49:1 says the tribal prophecies were to be fulfilled, Dr. Raymond DeHoop says, “These words are considered by some scholars as a designation for the far future, the ‘end of days’, as in the case of Dan. 10:14.” (“Genesis 49,” p.86) It is clear therefore, that the tribal prophecies were not fulfilled during Old Testament times, but are prophecies for we who are living at the end of the age!
The Assyrian Captivity of Judah?
Zeev Herzog also asserted that in the pre-exilic cities of Beersheba and Lachish, “all the settlements were destroyed during [Assyrian king] Sennacherib’s campaign in Judah in 701 BCE.” Historians usually forget that the Assyrians exiled not only the House of Israel, but a large portion of the House of Judah as well, leaving only the city of Jerusalem spared.
Professor W. Boyd Barrick (“The King and the Cemeteries” p.38, n.39), notes that the 46 Judahite fortified cities taken by Sennacherib in 701 B.C. “is a very large number for Judah alone” and may include Benjamin. Therefore, a significant number of both tribes which constituted the house of Judah were taken into Assyrian captivity long before the Babylonian exile of 604-587 B.C. This corrects the false notion that there were no exiles and therefore no lost tribes. Prof. Barrick affirmed that “Benjamin would have been lost under Hezekiah (along with his holdings) after 701…” (p.38, n.39) Who says that there were no lost tribes? Scholars disagree!
A third scholarly witness is Professor Sarah C. Melville of Clarkson University. In “A New Look At the End of the Assyrian Empire,” p.188, she says, “Less promising regions such as Ephraim [i.e. the ten tribes] and the Judean Shephelah [the tribe of Judah] they [Assyrians] simply destroyed and turned into more or less empty buffer zones by deporting the indigenous population wholesale to more profitable areas.” Again we see that large numbers of both houses of Israel were taken into Assyrian exile between 722 B.C. and the fall of Nineveh in 612 B.C. There was no return to Canaan from this Assyrian exile, which is why these Israelites were afterward known as "the lost tribes of Israel."
The above should be read in conjunction with the often-stated remark that some individuals from the northern House of Israel moved south and resettled in Judah, supposedly thereby evading exile at the time of the fall of Samaria in 722 B.C. As an example of this thinking, Eric Maroney in "The Other Zion" (Rowman & Littlefield Pub., 2010) says, "Many of the citizens of the Northern Kingdom of Israel fled to the south...during the 8th century BCE..." (p.22) But these would have been exiled later by the Assyrians under Sennacherib during their invasion of Judah in 701 B.C., (and other even later Assyrian invasions which have been documented--see paragraph below), and therefore they would not have evaded exile after all. The above remarks by Assyrian scholars still stand true to history.
Ministers today seem to be totally oblivious to "...the fact that, after the destruction of Israel, three other Assyrian kings--Sennacherib (reigned 705-681), Esarhaddon (r. 681-669), and Ashurbanipal (r. 669-627)--also deported people from Palestine." (Zvi Ben-Dor Benite, "The Ten Lost Tribes", Oxford Univ. Press, 2009) There were therefore a series of Assyrian exiles, not just the often-mentioned conquest by Sargon in 722 B.C. In fact, at least six Assyrian kings exiled Israelites, beginning with Tiglath-pileser III in 732 B.C. (see 2 Kings 15:29). This exile was followed by subsequent invasions and exilings by Shalmaneser V, Sargon II, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, and Ashurbanipal.
Judah was indeed scattered in exile, like the House of Israel, and not just taken to Babylon: "I will cause them to be removed into all kingdoms of the earth..." (Jeremiah 15:4) The famous theologian, Charles C. Torrey of Yale University, speaking of the Babylonian captivity of Judah said, "The exile, into all lands, and among all nations, was as irrevocably decreed as was the destruction of the city [Jerusalem]." (Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 56, p.206) There is evidence that a portion of the House of Judah migrated to Europe in early times.
Why the Davidic-Solomonic State Broke Apart
Baruch Halpern, in “The Gate of Megiddo and the Debate on the Tenth Century,” says, “…a northern [i.e. Ephraim-Israel] coup might be attempted, in reaction against the sectional preference for Judah that led to the sale of Asher…” (p.108) Twenty out of Twenty-two cities in Asher were sold to King Hiram of Phoenicia in return for gold for Solomon’s treasure. When these towns were turned over to the Phoenician-Canaanites, were the Hebrew residents ordered out at spear-point? If so, where did all of these residents of the tribe of Asher go? Since Asher was on the sea-coast as a seafaring tribe which Scripture said had “continued on the sea shore, and abode in his breaches,” (Judges 5:17) did they sail away across the Mediterranean to find new homelands?
Was the House of Israel Not Exiled?
The Prophet Ezekiel (11:16) proclaimed, "Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Although I have cast them far off among the heathen, and although I have scattered them among the countries, yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come." These words by the prophet of the exile, written at the time the events occurred, should be considered authoritative proof that the exile of Israel did take place. Ezekiel was speaking of the exile of the House of Judah, and please note that after being taken from Canaan, they ended up being scattered to many countries in many lands. (Also see Jer. 15:4)
Well known Israeli scholar, Nadav Na’aman, says that an archaeological survey of Lower Galilee showed a sharp decline of population during the 7th and 6th centuries B.C.E., and concludes that the Assyrians did not resettle the Galilee but left it “in a state of partial abandonment and devastations.” (“Population Changes in Palestine Following Assyrian Deportation,” Tel Aviv 20 [1993], pp. 105-6)
Carol and Eric Meyers, in “The Prophecy Of Second Zechariah,” speak of "...the survival of some -- a woefully small number in comparison to the preexilic kingdom -- is apparent." (p.276) They also state, "This assessment of the size of postexilic Yehud [i.e. Judah] reveals a rather tiny province in the central hill country of Palestine: an area of about 1700 sq. km, which is less than one-half the area of Rhode Island..." (pp.279-280) The combined evidence of both Scripture and archaeology should correct the misconception of those who assume that there was no exile of Israel, or that they all returned. See the articles on our main page for a more complete explanation of the fact that most of the Israelites were exiled out of Canaan, and few of those who were exiled ever returned again.
Did the Twelve Tribes Develop Into Nations?
Biblical prophecy states that Israel was to become “many nations” and “a company of nations” (Gen. 17:5; 35:11). Can we trust the Bible? Professor Knauf states, “autarchy [independent statehood] is what tribes usually strive for.” (ibid. p.222, n.55) Why should the twelve tribes of Israel, who remained separate during Old Testament times, be any different?
If so, why did the exiled Israelites not retain knowledge of their identity over succeeding centuries? Dr. Adele Berlin of the University of Maryland explains, “Dispersion of the population dissolves its political identity, and idol worship dissolves its religious identity.” (“Did the Jews Worship Idols in Babylonia?” p.323) For these reasons both the political and religious identity of exiled, lost Israel, took place over time.
The tribe of Dan was prophesied to remain a separate tribe in the world, according to Dr. Raymond DeHoop: “The root is comparable to the Akkadian dananu, ‘to be strong’. The meaning of the verse [Gen. 49:16] would be…Dan is a tribe to be reckoned with, and will maintain its position as a full tribe in Israel.” (ibid. p.166)
Where Was Israel’s Restoration To Take Place?
Mainstream writers assume that the exiles of Israel and Judah all returned to Canaan, but Professor Brad Kelle’s book, “Hosea 2: Metaphor and Rhetoric in Historical Perspective,” (Brill, 2005) gives evidence that disagrees with the popular assessment. He says, “The restoration of Israel as God’s people will occur in a particular ‘place’. The scholarly discussion of the unnamed ‘place’ in which this reversal is set has varied greatly…Garrett and Andersen and Freedman suggest that the unnamed place may be the wilderness mentioned as the place of reconciliation in [Hosea] 2:14.” (p.214) Neither Palestine nor Assyria was a wilderness, but northern Europe at the time of the exile was undeveloped and unpopulated, so that it is probable that "the wilderness" was a Hebraistic expression for Europe.
"Israel as a kingdom was never restored from Assyria, as Judah was from Babylon after 70 years." (Jameson, Faucett & Brown Commentary, p.650)
Israel Is Both A Physical and Spiritual Entity:
"...in Romans 9 to 11, the apostle understands the ethnic dimension of God's promise to Abraham as bearing enduring validity. Its fulfillment comes, however, through a fresh act of God, the Creator and Redeemer of ethnic Israel (11:25-27)." ("Commentary On The New Testament Use Of The Old Testament", G.K. Beale & D.A. Carson, eds., Baker Academic, GRapids, 2007)
Who Is A Hebrew? Are You Sure?
Professor Zeev Herzog, in “Beersheba Valley Architecture” says, “Ethnic identity is a flexible and manipulated phenomenon…” (p.87) How true that is! Jews who convert to Christianity are no longer considered Israelites by the mainstream Christian and Jewish leaderships. Yet how could a person’s Hebrew physical descent be changed just by changing their religion?
Scripture states, “Therefore the LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only.” (2Ki 17:18)
For informative books on this subject, visit the Bible Blessings Christian Resources booksite at www.bibleblessings.net
To be continued! Thanks for reading. -J.S. Brooks