British-Israel has always been problematic ...

Sixty Anglo-Israel Difficulties Answered

Chiefly from the Correspondence of the late
John Wilson
compiled by his daughter.

London: S. W. Partridge and Co., 9, Paternoster Row. 1877

John Wilson, 1877. Sixty Anglo-Israel Difficulties Answered

[Originally published, with editor's comments, on the Internet by: ABCOG.ORG article - it is not available on that site at this time.]



Every new phase of genuine Truth has to struggle with the opposition of those who have been built up in contrary opinions; or, it may be, in no opinion, and dislike having their peace disturbed, or the perfection of their wisdom called in question. But controversy may be overruled for good. Even a Jew could ,say, "Doth, our law judge any man before it hear him, and know what he doeth?" and from the darkness and diversity of views prevailing upon the subject of LOST ISRAEL, it is evident that some fresh light was wanting. Those who have fully investigated the views contained in the following pages have found them increasingly satisfying to their own minds, as well as best adapted to meet the difficulties of those opposed to the truth of Divine Revelation.

Great mischief arises from not recognizing our own place in prophecy. The time has passed for trifling with the Word of God. It has been in our hands for hundreds of years. We have had ample time to think about its contents. The most learned and able men that well-endowed universities can produce are maintained at great expense to teach its meaning. Many of us they have had under instruction from early infancy to latest age. And one day in seven, as if in the performance of a solemn duty, without contradiction many of us listen quietly to whatever they have to say about the Sacred Scriptures, and the subjects of which they treat.

In such circumstances it might well be expected that our people should at least know something about the first book in the Bible, and the Covenant made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, concerning which, God has been so earnest as to speak upon oath, which He wrote in the very names of the great Receivers of the Promises, reiterated again and again; and at length pronounced by Jacob upon the head of EPHRAIM, who was given the BIRTHRIGHT and the privileges belonging to the Firstborn (Gen. 48:16-21).

The children of Ephraim were not "Jews," although they were their brethren. At one time these were rivals, but they separated thousands of years ago; and the children of Ephraim have long been lost among the Gentiles.

Yet upon this "lost" people were to come the accumulated blessings promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The blessings were to "come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the crown of the head of him that was separate [the Nazirite] from his brethren." Here, then, appears to be a wonderful blank! Where are the children of promise, the offspring of Ephraim and Manasseh? Manasseh was to be "great;" but truly his younger brother Ephraim was to be "greater than he, and his seed" was to "become a multitude of nations."

We are told (Heb. 11:21), "By faith Jacob blessed both the sons of Joseph," giving them, through the Cross, the blessing of which he was the divinely appointed heir, and for which he suffered so much from the folly of his parents, and the hatred of his brother. But where is this "multitude of nations"? Where is this "Fullness of the Gentiles"? Where are Ephraim and Manasseh, who were to be patterns of blessing for all the tribes of Israel?

We all know that the people called ANGLO-SAXONS have possession of those things which constitute the Birthright [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: written in 1877]. They have the means of ministering blessing to all nations. In their National Liturgy they claim to be the Lord's "people" - "the sheep of His pasture" - "the remnant of the true Israelites, among whom is Salvation." Being made disciples of Christ as "being born [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: begotten] again of the incorruptible seed of the Word," they are made "sons of the living God" and in the right of "the Man that is a Jew" (Zech. 8:23) they are children of Abraham by faith. If the Birthright had been given to Judah, and nothing had been said about the Sons of JOSEPH being constituted heirs of the promises, there would seem to be something in this...

But the fact remains that the fulfillment of the Promises to the Jews, whether natural or spiritual, can never answer to the conditions indicated in Gen. 48, 49. The lost children of Joseph must themselves inherit the blessing.

Observe, also, that the children of JOSEPH were brethren of the Jews, and thus were descendants of SHEM; while the English are said to be descended from Japheth. If this be so, we must look elsewhere for the children of promise.

Yet supposing the Aborigines of the British Isles to be, like the Lapps, descendants of Japheth, or, like some of the Irish Phoenicians (Fenians), the offspring of Canaan, this would not prove the present inhabitants of the British Isles to be descendants of either Japheth or Ham; because shortly before the Christian era the north of Europe received a new population of Semitic origin, and repeatedly thereafter.

We are not a beardless race like the descendants of Japheth. Like the Jews, we are of Caucasian, that is of Semitic origin. Japheth was to dwell in "the tents of Shem," but Shem was to be master of the tents. The Birthright also belonged to Shem (Gen. 9:26), and as "the Lord God of Shem" the Most High bestowed the Blessing. But our teachers have comparatively nothing to say upon the Birthright, the culminating point of Patriarchal Revelation. They pass it by altogether, and do not seem to understand the emphatic manner in which reference is made to the Cross as the Ensign under which the Blessing was to come upon the children of Joseph.

So blind have we been that we have even confounded Judah with Joseph, and have regarded "All Israel" as Jews, notwithstanding the marked distinction made by God between even the two sons of Joseph, and much more between them and Judah (Gen. 48:19).

So ignorant of Scripture have our poor people been left, that multitudes have become the prey of even Mormon imposture, which one would think is sufficiently palpable when pretending to reply to the questions, "Where are the children of Ephraim"? " Where are the people who were to inherit the promises"? These Mormons say, "Look to the North American Indians. There is the promised multitude of nations. True, they are not at present under blessing but under curse, indicated by their dark skins. [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: Do Mormons still teach this?] But these are to become white when they embrace the creed of Joseph Smith." That is, when the white-faced followers of Joseph Smith come to inherit their lands, and take the place of the pretended multitude of nations, which is fast perishing from off the earth.

And yet the Book of Mormon does not at all pretend what the apostles of Mormonism took for granted - that the Indians are descended from Ephraim. It says they are of a family of Manasseh, who more than a hundred years after the two half-tribes of Manasseh were lost, came out of "the land of Jerusalem," and having travelled away to America, became the progenitors of the Indian tribes.

Our guilt is doubtless as great as our folly in refusing to acknowledge the truthfulness of God in fulfilling to us the Promises made to our Fathers; and it is high time to throw away the absurd fallacy of our being descended from Japheth, as if we were the aborigines of these European countries any more than our kindred in America are descended from those of America.

About 1,328 years ago (549 A.D.) the Angles obtained their final settlement in this "place appointed" for them from the days of old (2 Sam. 7:10). Previously they came from where Israel were lost. And let it never be forgotten that WHERE THE PEOPLE WERE LOST TO WHOM THE PROMISES WERE MADE, THENCE THE PEOPLE HAVE COME TO WHOM THE PROMISES ARE BEING FULFILLED.

God calls upon us to consider prophecy and its fulfillment, and to say whether or not it be truth. But if we give no heed to the Faithful Promiser, how can we expect to escape without damage in the great changes which are taking place in the earth?

Most of the objections, difficulties, and hindrances to understanding the truth with regard to our Israelitish origin arise from the very widespread ignorance of even the broad facts of Scripture, English, and Jewish history, to say nothing of language. Many mistakes might easily be corrected by a judicious reference to the historical parts of the Bible, and to such well-known works on our own early national existence as Dr. Henry's " History of Great Britain," and Sharon Turner's "History of the Anglo-Saxons;" while Josephus and Prideaux should not be entirely overlooked when considering matters RELATING to the Jews.

It is repeatedly asserted by the prophet Isaiah that the Lord hath not merely "created" Israel as He hath done all men, but also that He hath "formed" them to show forth His praise; hath, as it were, with laborious carefulness fashioned them for the manifestation of His glory in the latter time. The wisdom of the Great Teacher of Israel in their training, as recorded in Scripture, even after they were led into captivity and seemingly abandoned, is manifest; for this happened to them only that they might be taken up by the Lord in another way, so that He should be able to say, as in Isa. 41:9, "I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away." The great work of "forming" a people for Himself was still to be going forward according to promise, "for the gifts and calling of God are without repentance" (Rom. 11:29).

Now, it is remarkable that in all researches after the Lost Tribes this important truth has been overlooked, that the Infinitely wise God in all their wanderings would continue to be the Instructor of Israel; so in place of looking for the Promised Seed where we ought, we, in the pride of our Gentileism, have been looking for them among the most degraded, uneducated, and savage races on the face of the earth, altogether by nature incapacitated for taking the part appointed prophetically to Israel. But "shall the work say of Him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of Him that framed it, He had no understanding?" No, the "work" will justify the wisdom of the Worker. "The thing framed" will witness to the wonder-working power of Him that framed it. The "dry bones" are here - nay, "flesh and sinews" have come upon them, and "skin" begins to cover them above. Let but "the breath" of the Lord breathe upon them; let the Word of God pass freely over them, declaring His purposes regarding themselves, and they will stand up "on their feet an exceeding great army" prepared to follow the Captain of their salvation in triumph over all the powers of darkness.

These views have been adopted cautiously, after many years' study of the Holy Scriptures and Providence. Although we have carefully discussed many controverted points, we have, happily been kept out of mere disputation, and have felt ourselves free to follow Truth. If we seem to fail in this on any important point, it is rather perhaps because sometimes our readers may be disposed to tell our meaning before we utter it.

For, notwithstanding, all that is said about ISRAEL and EPHRAIM, it is quite possible that some of our friends, as well as others who are directly opposed, may still think of our work as especially relating to "the Jews;" whereas the prime object is to show that God has been keeping His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to whom He was known by the name of "God Almighty." He was also known to them by His name JEHOVAH "(He who causes to be or bringeth to pass)," and by oath He confirmed to them His Covenant. (WATCHMEN of EPHRAIM, Vol. 1)

The promises to the fathers were made sure to Ephraim, the younger son of Joseph, who was constituted the Heir in Christ, from whom chiefly was to descend that "great nation" pointed forward to in the name of Abram, the first great receiver of the promises, and also that "multitude of nations" referred to when his name was enlarged to ABRAHAM.

On the disruption of the tribes at the death of Solomon, Judah, Benjamin, and fragments of other tribes, with many of the priests and Levites, adhered to the throne of David, and were called "the house of Judah;" but Ephraim and the other tribes to the north, and east, and west of the Jordan, under the name of ISRAEL, or ALL ISRAEL, remained a distinct kingdom until the captivity of Israel, which began about B.C. 740, and was completed thirty years after - B.C. 710.

Israel had been called near to the Lord, had been led about, instructed, and given abundant evidence of the justice and mercy of God, and of His determination to accomplish all He had promised. EPHRAIM had been a ringleader in rebellion, to such a degree as that the Lord had said, B.C. 742 , "Within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken that he be not a people." This curse was to take effect B.C. 677. Before that time Ephraim was to be "lost among the Gentiles," and so it came to pass.

There was one hopeful feature in Ephraim's case. The last view we have of him in Scripture previous to his expatriation was as bringing forth "the fruit of the Kingdom." The army of Israel had made war upon the Jews, and brought immense spoil and many prisoners to Samaria. Against the host thus returning from the war a prophet of the Lord went forth, and the Word of the Lord spoken by him was taken up by "the men of Ephraim expressed by name" who, acknowledging their own sins against the Lord, protested against adding to their guilt by being the wilful instruments of punishing their brethren of the house of Judah. The soldiery seem to have bowed to the Word of the Lord as well as the civilians, so that they left both the prisoners and the spoils in the hands of "the men of Ephraim," who clothed those who were naked among them, arrayed them, gave them to eat and to drink, anointed them, carried all the feeble among them upon asses, and having brought them "to Jericho, the city of palm trees," they returned to Samaria (2 Chron. 28). The Lord must have seen something of this when He said, about the same time, or just after, "How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?" (Hos. 11:8). And although the decree had gone forth, and Ephraim must be cut off as a people, we may be quite sure that in thus bringing forth the "fruits" called for, in the judgment of the nations, preparatory to being given to inherit the Kingdom (Matt. 25), this practical exhibition of repentance towards God, and kindness to the poor and needy of that people whom the Lord condescended to make His brethren according to the flesh, was not overlooked by the Great Messenger of the Covenant when sending forth the Word of His Grace; and may well believe it was directly pointed to when He said to the Jews, after speaking of the very different kind of treatment which they had given to the Lord's messengers, " Therefore say I unto you, the Kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits of it." This saying of our Lord is like that in Jer. 3: "The backsliding Israel hath justified herself more than treacherous Judah. Go and proclaim these words towards the north, and say, "Return, thou backsliding Israel, I will not cause Mine anger to fall upon you, saith the Lord." The Apostle [Paul] witnesses that upon the Jews of his generation wrath" was "come to the uttermost" (I Thess. 2:16). But this was not to be the case with Ephraim: "I will surely have MERCY upon him, saith the Lord" (Jer. 31:20).

The Word of the Lord, to which Ephraim had at length shown a disposition to give ear while yet in the Land, was sent after him into the North Country, after the nation to which he belonged had been "given a bill of divorce and sent away" (Jer. 3:8). We are, therefore, not to look for Israel as still under the law, like the Jews; nor even as bearing their own name of Ephraim or Israel. They were cast out among the Gentiles, and were to become "a multitude of nations," or as the phrase is rendered by the Apostle Paul, "THE FULLNESS OF THE GENTILES " (Rom. 11:25).

Let us then proceed in the direction in which the Word of the Lord went forth from Jerusalem. Following the course of that great Apostle of the Gentiles, we find that every successive journey was more and more towards these "isles afar off" where we find a people dwelling "alone," who are also "without number among the nations." Upon the "multitude of nations" to whom they have given birth in all "the ends of the earth" has fallen the pleasant lot of ministering to the wants of all the nations of the earth. God has done for them, and enabled them to do "great things" for themselves and for others. But in nothing have they been more signally favored than in this, that to them has been committed that which was taken from the Jews, "the keeping of the Oracles of God," the ministration of the Bread of Life to all people, the causing to be proclaimed in all languages the wonderful works of God.

The people upon whom this privilege has fallen came from the borders of the Caspian Sea, whither the Assyrians carried the people upon whom it was promised the blessing should come. The destiny promised to the Firstborn was special, and it is specially that of the English. All things agree to confirm the word that God "hath remembered His mercy and His truth toward the House of Israel." "We are indeed His People and the sheep of His pasture." May this be proved, not only by the Lord's kindness to us, but by our making a right use of our privileges; by our truly fulfilling our destiny in being for blessing unto all the nations of the earth.

Saxo Grammaticus, who wrote about the middle of the twelfth century, asserts that a certain man named DAN was the founder of the Danish monarchy, and that his brother was called "ANGUL." And at the Royal Academy in 1877 a most graphic picture by Keeley Halswelle (No. 1,394) was exhibited representing the oft-told, though sometimes discredited tale of Gregory the Great looking with tender compassion on some beautiful children "every one like the son of a king" exposed for sale in Rome. Inquiring of his companions who they were, he was told they were ANGLI, and is thought by many to have perpetrated but a poor pun when he exclaimed, "Non Angli, sed Angeli."

Now the fact is, in those early days (A.D. 588) Roman Churchmen were far better scholars than they were after "the Dark Ages" of ignorance and superstition had set in; and it is likely that the Hebrew word (Engel) was familiar enough to him as the name for a CALF, YOUNG BULL, or BULLOCK; but the Roman power having by previous heathen conquest acquired the Four Standards of Israel (the Man, the Lion, the Eagle, and the Bull, called "living creatures" in Ezek. 1, and "beasts" in Rev. 4), the Church thought the symbols of too great value to be left unused, appropriated them to the Four Evangelists, and called them by the same name angeloi (Gk.), angeli (Latin.), angels (or messengers), possibly from their " feet," which are said to be those of "a calf" (Engel), the word still used in Germany for "an angel."

There is much more in this than at first meets the eye, causing one's thoughts to flash backwards and forwards along the lines of Prophecy and Providence in relation to that people, after whom the south part of this island is called ENGLAND, the world's carriers and messengers, and whose voice is popularly but in this case correctly, translated by that of JOHN BULL, possibly the rough wit of some Meso-Goth on hearing the word Euangelion (Gk.) for the first time, the first syllable of which would sound like the contraction (in hebrew) of John (and means the same), and Engel as pronounced in Germany. For those among them who "feared the Lord, and spake often one to another (Hebrew, a man to his runi, the Icelandic for one who knows the secret), a Book of Remembrance," the Gospels, the Good Message, the New Testament or Covenant was written "before Him" (Mal. 3:16; John 14:26).

Yes, let us be thankful that the English name, even as "Engli," is inscribed in Mal. 4:2, and that the last message of the Old Testament has come to us from the Lord, saying, "But unto you fear My name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in His wings; AND YE SHALL GO FORTH AND GROW UP AS CALVES (Ka-Engli), OF THE STALL" - strong for the Lord's work. "Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb, for All-Israel, the statutes and judgments. Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord."

A great change was indeed necessary. "The ox (the standard of Ephraim) knoweth his owner, and the ass (that of Issachar) his master's crib); but Israel doth not know; My people doth not consider" (Isa. 1:3). "Ephraim is a heifer that is taught... I will make Ephraim brake the ground." (Engle) (Hos. 10:11, B.C. 740). "Worshippers of golden calves" (Englim, chap. 13:2). "Thy calf, O Samaria," &c. Engli-ka. chap. 8:5). But a great and gradual change is recognized by the Prophets. Thus JEREMIAH 31:18, B.C. 606, -

"I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus:
Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised,
Like a bullock (Ka-Engel) unaccustomed to the yoke.
Turn thou me (convert me), and I shall be turned,
For thou art the Lord my God."

ZECHARIAH also, B.C. 518 (chap. 9:12), -

"Turn you to the stronghold, ye prisoners of hope:
Even to-day do I declare that I will render double unto thee
When I have bent Judah for me,
Filled the bow (Kasheth) with Ephraim,
And raised up thy sons, 0 Zion, over thy sons, O Javan (or Ivan),
And made thee as the sword of a mighty man."

And many hundreds of years before that, JACOB with the eye of faith had foreseen the ultimate result, along with the CAUSE of Joseph's power, when he prophesied, -

"His bow (Kashto) abode in strength,
And the arms of his hands were made strong
By the hands of the mighty God of Jacob,
Gen. 49:24.

It is worthy of observation that, of the nations from the north of Europe which came into Britain, the ANGLES alone, who came last, and ultimately gave their name to this country, left no known portion of their people on the Continent. They seem to have merely passed through the country of the Jutes and Saxons, and to have almost entirely transported themselves into this island, after whom the whole southern portion of it came ultimately to be termed ENGLAND. It would, however, be an error to suppose that they only occupied Yorkshire. Partly by direct emigration, and partly by the scattering occasioned by the incursions of the Danes and Norman conquest, the same race which peopled at first the central parts of the island, called in the times of the Heptarchy EAST ANGLIA, Mercia (from the Gothic "Merc," a boundary), and Deira (or Northumberland), spread southward to the Saxon quarters, and even. westward Into Wales, as well as northward into Scotland... In their quarters are found the principal and most ancient seats of learning, such as Oxford and Cambridge; also the chief manufacturing districts, whether of clothes, metals, earthenware, or chemical preparations; as well as the greatest marts, with the exception of London, for the import of the 'fullness of the earth' by sea, and for sending forth to all quarters of the globe the productions of English ingenuity and industry... Nor is it to be overlooked that from these same quarters London itself is supplied with some main portions of its population which have carried literature, science, and art to such perfection, as well as mercantile and missionary enterprise to the bounds of the habitable globe." - Wilson's "Lectures on our Israelitish Origin," 5th edition.

It is interesting to note the various kinds of evidence which connect the SAXONS with India. The BEHISTUN ROCK at Kermanshah, in Persia, said to be erected by Darius Hystaspes (of Ezra 4.) the year before his ratification of the decree of Cyrus for rebuilding the Temple at Jerusalem (B.C. 521), contains the figures of nine men tied together, and another in a high cap, under whom is written in three languages - the key discovered in 1837, whereby the Nineveh inscriptions have been read, - 'THIS is SAKUKA, THE SACAM OR SAXON.'" - Vaux Persia, and "Christian Observer," 1876.

"The White Island, SACAM or SAXAM, as pronounced by our Saxon ancestors, as well as by certain adjacent parts of the Continent - such as Saxony - is stated in the Puránás (or very old writings) named "Varaha and Matsya," to be in possession of the Saks, who conquered it at a very early period." Asiatic Researches, 11.

"From a Druidical record we know that a people using Hebraic language visited Britain when Druidism was the dominant religion, proving alike by their language and their religion their connection with the Sakai and the Buddhists of the East. At the time of Caesar's invasion (B.C. 56) we find a people bearing a name precisely similar to that adopted by the Buddhists in the most ancient period of record, as at Kanari - the CASSI or KASHI (i.e., bowmen)." - Dr. Moore's "Saxons of the East and West". From the same author's "Ancient Pillar-Stones of Scotland," we learn of the death of Aittie, a Buddhist missionary, the Runic or Pali inscriptions round whose tombstone at Logie-Elphinstoe, Aberdeenshire, reads thus: 'When Baal ruled Jutland and the coast before thee, Iatti was smitten;" and on the other side, -

"In the tomb with the dead is Aitti,
The light of the darkness of a perverted people.
Who shall be consecrated pure priest to God?
Like The vessel of prayer my glory covered me."

The "Ynglengla Saga" tells that in Suithiod (Sweden) Odin established the same laws which had been observed by the Asae; and that in memory of distinguished men, sepulchral mounds, now called by the people kin-barrows (atte hogar) were to be erected; and memorial stones (bauta stenar) besides to every man who had shown himself valiant.

Many are the hindrances existing in the minds of men, from whom, in an ordinary way, it might be expected that they would give this subject at least an honest hearing, There are the whisperings of infidelity where one least expects; there are the mental warpings acquired while groping through the fogs of ignorance unaided by such assistance as a liberal familiarity with the various stores of knowledge, in a measure necessary to the right apprehension of the question in its various ramifications, would supply. There are the consistencies and inconsistencies of the various schools of prophetic interpretation bringing in their claims; there are vested interests to be considered; to say nothing of the lazy selfishness of human nature, which querulously asks, "Cui bono?" [Who benefits?] Let us take a few of these, and briefly reply to the more general.

From Sixty Anglo-Israel Difficulties Answered.
Chiefly from the Correspondence of the late John Wilson, compiled by his daughter.
London: S. W. Partridge and Co., 9, Paternoster Row. 1877

FIRST. - Twenty years ago a writer the "RECORD" remarked: -
"A strong bias has lately been given to many spiritually-minded people to alienate from the Gentiles the exceeding great and precious promises of the Old Testament Scriptures."

REPLY. - There can be little doubt of the extent of the evil, likewise that it is most dangerous to exalt any fleshly relationship above that which our Saviour reckoned paramount, and possessed by "those which hear the word of God and do it" (Luke 8:21). The most effectual way of meeting the difficulty seems to be this, - allow your friend his desired ground of "literal interpretation." What then? Are the Gentiles excluded on that ground? Certainly not. The promise was not that Israel should be exclusively blessed, but that in Abraham's seed "all the nations of the earth" should be blessed (Gen. 22:15-18). This was also contemplated when the land and the wide-spreading of his descendants was promised to Jacob (Gen. 28:13, 14), "In thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed."

The same spiritual blessings enjoyed by Israel are promised to "the stranger" who lays hold upon the Lord's covenant. (Isa. 56:3-7). Even in the land the same inheritance is appointed to "the stranger sojourning in any of the tribes of Israel." (Ezek. 47:22, 23). Exaltation, except as placing in a position for higher and greater service, is not more contemplated in the Old Testament for Israel than it is for Christians in the New (Luke 22:25, 26).

The Birthright or heirship to the Promises made to the Fathers was given to the GENTILES in a way in which it was never bestowed upon the people called Jews. Jacob had the birthright which his brother despised; and when he alienated it from Reuben, his own firstborn, he transferred it to the sons of Joseph (1 Chron. 5:1, 2), especially to Ephraim, the younger (Gen. 48:13-20), whose posterity he contemplated as "Gentiles" when blessing him through the cross, saying "His seed shall become a multitude of nations, - or as the same passage is translated in Rom. 11:26, "Fullness of the Gentiles." As distinguished even from his own brother Manasseh, and therefore much more from the Jews, Ephraim was to become "a multitude of nations," or Gentiles, who were to inherit the promises, and obtain and minister the blessing to their brethren. "The multitude of nations," or Gentiles who were to come of Ephraim, having been brought into the promised blessing, "so all ISRAEL - the tribes of Israel his companions - " shall be saved." (Ezek. 37:16-19; Rom. 11:25; Gen. 48:19, 20.)

Even after Ephraim was carried away by the Assyrians and lost, or so broken as to be "not a people" (Isa. 7:8), he was still considered by the Lord as His Firstborn (Jer. 31:8). If the promises to Ephraim's descendants are to be fulfilled to those with regard to whom they were made, then we need not look for their fulfillment in a people called "Jews," for they never had that name. They were separated from Judah at the death of Solomon, politically, religiously, and locally (I Kings 12.), and even "the whole seed of Ephraim" was carried away, dispersed, and lost among the Gentiles more than a hundred years before "the Jews" were carried to Babylon (Jer. 7:15, 2 Kings 17:24, 25).

The Heirs of the Promises made unto the Fathers are, therefore, doubtless to be looked for among the GENTILES. To their condition and name Ephraim was reduced when "backsliding Israel," as distinct from " treacherous Judah," was given a "bill of divorce" and sent away (Jer. 3:8). Ephraim was stripped of all wherein he might glory, and taken back to the land whence Abraham had been called. Thence our ancestors commenced their wanderings in the northern wilderness. The "Firstborn" of Israel was left nothing to trust in but the free grace of God, according to which, through the Cross, Ephraim had been given the Birthright (Gen. 48:13, 14). By the same free grace the people who were put away under the old covenant were to be espoused to the Lord in a "new and everlasting covenant" (Hos. 2:6-3; Isa. 59.).

Not among the people generally called "Israelites," then, need we expect to find those who were emphatically appointed heirs of the promises. "The Jews" have their own place in prophecy, but not that of the "Firstborn," which belongs to the descendants of Ephraim, whose very name was given in the spirit of prophecy, and means "I will bring forth fruits," the people contemplated by our Lord when He said to the Jews, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof (Matt. 21: 43).

If we can ascertain to whom has been given that which was the chief advantage of the Jews, "the keeping of the oracles of God," the ministration of the bread of life among the nations; if we inquire whence came the multitude of Gentiles inhabiting these islands, who have hence spread out to all "the ends of the earth," and have been dealt with in providence as the Lord promised to deal with the children of Joseph (Gen 49:22-26); and if we pursue the subject far enough and carefully enough, we shall be in a fair way to see that God can be rich in His grace to the Gentiles, and most literally true to the promises made unto Abraham and his seed for ever.

SECOND. - "If this view is generally accepted, by turning away the public attention from the Jews, the interests of the Societies for their conversion may be seriously affected."

Reply. - Is it not wonderful that Christians should allow worldly considerations of expediency to influence them in the reception or rejection of Scripture truth? If this be the truth respecting Israel, it ought to be received, however it may affect the Jews' Societies; and if it be not truth, it should be dealt with, not as being calculated either to increase or lessen the income of any Society, but rather as not having Scriptural warrant. Those who suggest such motives for the regulation of our investigation of prophetic truth, do much to induce a suspicion of their own insecure standing.

"Our Israelitish Origin" may undermine the erroneous views of some respecting "the Jews," for it shows the prior duty and importance of seeking the conversion of our own people. But in doing this we are not the farther from promoting the conversion of "the Jews;" rather we are removing one of the greatest stumbling-blocks out of the way of both Gentile and Jew, and we are increasing the instrumentality whereby God has declared His intention of operating for the good of all.

Our view facilitates the conversion of the Jews, because it enables us to approach them upon greater terms of equality, and not as magnifying them in the flesh, which must always be a hindrance to their embracing Christianity, whereby they lose that very caste on account of which they are valued. It is surely better to invite "the Jew" to join the commonwealth of Israel - to partake of the privileges of Ephraim, "My Firstborn" - of being set among "the children" of Joseph, whose is "the Birthright." (Compare 1 Chron. 5:2; Jer. 3:18, 19; 31:9.)

And it is not the case that those who are most interested in "the Jews" have found their zeal lessened by this view, of which we could give many notable instances where the spiritual footing has been made more secure, because the ground had been cleared of some loose insecure rubbish.

THIRD. - "Are you quite sure that the so-called Scriptures are not a mere Jewish fabrication?"

REPLY. - 1. The Lord threatened the people Of ISRAEL with four sore judgments on their land, in case of their denial of His power, rejection of His authority, and oppression of the poor (Isa. 1:17). And just as when, by obedience to His law, they sought to obtain His blessing, the showers descended in their seasons, the land brought forth abundantly, and they were protected by His mighty power from the inroads of the enemy; so, in consequence of their disobedience, have all those threatened judgments, "the sword, the famine, the pestilence, and the beasts of the earth," come upon them according to His word (Lev. 26.).

2. And at length, as had been threatened, the enemy was allowed to prevail, not only to punish them in the land, but also to carry them away so entirely from it, that to all human appearance they were "lost" (2 Kings 17). More especially was this the case with regard to " EPHRAIM and the Tribes of Israel, his companions," who constituted the Kingdom of ISRAEL (Hos. 1:7).

3. As had been predicted, the Jews were allowed to remain in the land, until, "their iniquity being full," they were removed to Babylon for the space of seventy years (Jer. 29:10; Dan. 9:2); after which they were permitted to return, upon condition of defending the poor and needy, and of being ready to receive and willing to obey the Messiah when He should appear (Isa. 1; Mic. 5:2).

4. Messiah did appear in the time and place predicted, as a Poor Man demanding simple justice, and an honest hearing for the Truth; but the Jews would not hear. They hid as it were their faces from Him (Isa. 53:3). They knew not the day of their visitation (Luke 19:24). And so the same generation which had perpetrated the gross injustice of putting that Poor Man to the accursed death of the cross, saw their temple and city destroyed as foretold; while from that time to this the Jews have been as all their own prophets had forewarned Deut. 4, 28, &c., &c.).

5. And it is not because the land of Israel has been so crowded with inhabitants that there has been no room for them; for it has been "lying desolate without them" (Jer. 26:43).

"The Lord hath removed men far away, and there hath been a great forsaking in the midst of the land" (Isa. 6:12). The cities have been deserted, and the most fertile fields untilled, ready to become the possession of whoever would cultivate them. True, the curse has been upon the Land, as well as upon the People. "Therefore the showers have been withholden, and there hath been no latter rain" (Jer. 3:3), until now, that we are come to the time which the Prophets thousands of years ago foretold, when the mountains were to shoot forth their branches, and. bear their fruit for the people of Israel, who are at hand to come (Ezek. 36:8).

Now if the Old Testament Scriptures were, as you say, "a mere Jewish fabrication," is it at all likely that they would have appointed to the Jews such a destiny as that people have exactly fulfilled? In that case the Jews would have been much more likely to constitute themselves heirs to the promises made to the Fathers.

Not so these Old Testament Scriptures, any more than those of the New, which both plainly declare that the blessing in all its fullness, temporal and spiritual, was to "come upon the head of Joseph;" from whom the Jews of course are not descended (Gen. 49:22-26). We are told, 1 Chron. 5:, that "Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the Chief Ruler; but the Birthright was Joseph's." On moral considerations the Birthright had been taken from Reuben, and given to Ephraim and Manasseh, the sons of Joseph; but more emphatically to Ephraim, the younger son (Gen. 48:15-20). And thus, when speaking of the restoration of Israel, by the prophet JEREMIAH, the Lord says, "I am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn" (31:9).

The Word of God-for the authenticity and truth of which we are pleading - marks clearly the distinction between the respective destinies of Judah and ISRAEL; the latter, under the name of Ephraim, being cast out among the Gentiles and lost, as much as Joseph was when he was carried down into Egypt. Our forefathers came from the borders of the Caspian Sea; from the very neighborhood where these children of Ephraim were lost when they were carried away from their land by the Assyrians between two and three thousand years ago.

And manifestly to us have been fulfilled the promises which we read in the Bible were made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Ephraim; which spoke of our growing into " A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS," of possessing "THE GATES" of our enemies, and of being the means Of BLESSING TO ALL THE NATIONS OF THE EARTH (Gen. 22:16-18; 48:15-20).

FOURTH. What evidence have we that the Scriptures are a Revelation from the Eternal?

REPLY. - 1. EGYPT, which enslaved the nation of Israel in its infancy, and compelled that people to cast their children into the river Nile, had that same river turned into blood, and its king and all his host drowned in the Red Sea (Exod, 1:22; 8:19-25; 14:28). And, as was threatened, Egypt has been left to become "the basest of kingdoms" (Ezek. 29:15); so that no one could be a ruler there except as having been previously sold for a slave. Such was the dominion of the Mamelukes, which existed till our own day. [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: Even modern Egypt is ruled by ethnic Arabs, not ethnic Egyptians].

2. Of NINEVEH, the capital of ASSYRIA (by whose power the Ten Tribes of Israel were carried captive, and as it were put in "graves," - Ezek. 37.), it was said thousands of years ago, "I will make thy grave, for thou art vile" (Nah. 1:14); and there it lay from soon after the time that Israel were carried thither by the Assyrians until our own day, when it has been disentombed by Englishmen!

3. We might thus not only take the beginning and the end of Israel, EGYPT on the south and ASSYRiA to the north of their land, but also the various countries circling around them, to see how remarkably retributive have been the dealings of God; which, although as regular as what are called the physical laws, are evidently higher than these, and require us to think of a Moral Intelligence as speaking from the beginning, and working throughout all ages in the succession of empires from BABYLON to ROME, and from TYRE to these "ISLES OF TARSHISH," the traffic of which TYRE attempted to monopolize to itself. And now these same BRITISH ISLES are as "the ends of the earth" were promised to be; while TYRE, as was threatened, is now "like the top of a rock - " (Ezek. 26:4-11; Deut. 33:17). [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: the story of Tyre is complex, as is its geography.]

FIFTH. If your view be true, surely it would have been found out before?

REPLY. - In that case the judgment written against Israel would not have been so remarkably fulfilled (Lev. 26:18, 21, 24, 28). They were to be punished "seven times" for their sins by being cast out of the Lord's land, lost, dead, and put into graves (Ezek. 37.). Seven times 360 make 2,520 years, according to the symbolic language Of prophecy of a day for a year [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: the ideal year has 360 days]. And it is now more than that time since Ephraim was "lost" among the Gentiles. We have, therefore, come to the time when Israel should be known, and Ephraim the Prodigal Son should come to himself. (See "Lectures on our Israelitish Origin," 5th edition.)

SIXTH. "The Lost Tribes are where God says: in Assyria."

REPLY. - True, God says (Isa. 27:13), "They shall come which were ready to perish in the land of Assyria," which may hereafter be fulfilled in the Nestorians; but these people do not come up to the predictions respecting EPHRAIM, to which they do not even pretend to belong, but rather to the tribe of Naphtali. The people of whom it can be said, "The nations shall see and be confounded at all their might" (Mic. 7:16), must be in a far different position from that of the Nestorians or any people like them.

The great restoration of Israel is to be from other quarters than Assyria (Isa. 48:5), "I will bring thy seed from the EAST and gather thee from the WEST," where we ourselves are. They are not spoken of ... as a people called by the name of the Lord, and created for His glory. Compare therewith 1 Pet. 4:14.

Ephraim was to be so "broken" as to be "not a people" (Isa. 7:8). When cast out among the Gentiles, of course they could not be known as the people of promise. But they were to be known by that which is better than a name; by the blessing to extend to "the utmost bound of the everlasting hills." Notwithstanding all the obstacles presented by either Pagan or Papal Rome - the seven-hilled city which has been called Eternal - the blessing was to "come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren" (Gen. 49:25, 26; Deut. 33:16).

SEVENTH. Drs. Grant and Buchanan, Sir G. Rose, Messrs. Samuel, Finn, Layard, and others, have written on the Israelitish origin of different portions of the human race; therefore "our Israelitish origin" was not required to account for the lost tribes of Israel.

REPLY. - We are not aware that any have attempted to find the "multitude of nations" promised to come of Ephraim; except those who hold with the Mormons about the North American Indians; but these, so far from increasing and filling the face of the world with fruit (Isa. 27:6), are comparatively few in number, are neither blessed, nor show a capacity for ministering blessing to others, and are being rapidly supplanted by the race we identify with Ephraim. [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: rather Manasseh].

EIGHTH. "There is not a single text which points to any of the tribes so mixing with Gentiles as to beget a new legitimate nation."

REPLY. - Most certain it is, that within sixty-five years from the giving forth of the prophecy in Isa. 7:8, Ephraim was to be so "broken that he should not be a people;" and that of him it is said in Hos. 7:8, "Ephraim he hath mixed himself among the peoples." If Ephraim was soon to be broken so as not to be a people, and was at the same time to be MIXED among the peoples; then even the Firstborn of Israel must of course have been mixed among the Gentiles; and most probably "the tribes of Israel his companions" were mixed in the same way.

But although Ephraim was to be thus mixed up among the Gentiles, and was to be "so broken as not to be a people," was he therefore also to lose his birthright?

No; for long after these words were spoken, the position of the firstborn is recognized as being reserved for Ephraim (Jer. 31:9). In the yet future restoration, the Lord will be able to say, "I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn." Notwithstanding, his being "mixed" among the Gentiles, Ephraim is still the heir to the promises, and may most reasonably be expected to prove himself the nation to whom has come "the Kingdom" which, according to our Lord's prediction, was taken from the Jews (Matt. 21:43). What nation can this be but that of Ephraim, whose very name means "I will bring forth fruits", and that to which the blessing was promised (Gen. 48:16-20).

This nation is clearly to be distinguished from "the Jews," the people from whom the Kingdom was to be taken. Now of what great advantage had the Jews been deprived? Unto them had been committed the Oracles of God (Rom. 3:1, 2). The ministration of the Word - the bringing forth "the fruits of the Kingdom" - was to pass away from them; and unto what we call the Anglo-Saxon race has been committed the stewardship of "the Oracles of God" - the distribution of the bread of life to the whole human family: - to the people we identify with Ephraim.

In the future restoration to the land, those with whom Sion is to be adorned as with a bridal dress are to be a comparatively new and unlooked-for people, whose connection with the Fathers had been lost sight of (Isa. 49:18-21). The people who were lost as having been made "NOT MY PEOPLE" - Lo-ammi - are to be found "sons of the living God" (Hos. 1:6-10; Isa. 7:8).

Judah and Ephraim are clearly distinguished from each other, both under the Mosaic dispensation, and since the coming of Christ. The Lord had not mercy upon Israel while they were under the [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: penalty of breaking the] law; but He had mercy upon the house of Judah. Their cases were different after the rejection of Messiah by the Jews. "The Kingdom" was taken from "treacherous Judah," and the Word was sent away into the north country after "backsliding Israel " (Jer. 3:11-17).

NINTH - Though the Saxons came out of Assyria, where Israel were lost, this is no proof that the Saxons have sprung from Israel; any more than it would prove a family to be of negro descent, to show that it came from, the West Indies, to which negro slaves had been deported.

REPLY. - True, our Israelitish origin cannot be proved from the simple fact that our Saxon forefathers came from where Israel were lost. But this fact shows the possibility of our being descended from Israel. It amounts to still more when we consider that from Israel were to come a seed to be sown over the earth; while of Nineveh (Assyria) it is said (Nah. 1:14), "The Lord hath given commandment concerning thee, that no more of thy name be sown; I will make thy-grave; for thou art vile." Therefore, when after this we find a people coming out of Assyria to be most extensively "sown" over the earth, appointed to fill the waste places thereof with fruit, of whom God has been pleased to make up the great body of His most faithful witnesses to Jew and Gentile, and has given them multiplicity, supplanting power, and the ministration of blessing such as He only promised to give to Ephraim, we may well suppose them to have sprung from those Israelites who were carried captive into Assyria, whom the Lord was to "sow to Himself in the earth," and who were to "fill the face of the world with fruit" (Isa. 27:6).

In dealing with historic facts we must be regardful of the providential laws revealed in the Scriptures. Thus we find God saying to Israel (Jer. 30:11), "Though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee; but I will correct thee in measure, and will not leave thee altogether unpunished." As God is true, no nations among whom Israel has been cast can entirely supplant them; but, on the contrary, Israel are themselves to supplant others.

Even when "corrected in measure" and cut off as to name, and to appearance lost among the nations, Israel were to continue throughout all changes (Deut. 33:17; Jer. 33:20-26).


REPLY. - The following considerations lead to the conviction that Ephraim, who had been carried into Assyria, did not return with the Jews from Babylon.

1st. Comparatively few of even the Jews returned; and the Scriptures make no mention of others being among them, save descendants of those who had been carried captive to Babylon as belonging to the house, although not all to the tribe of JUDAH.

2nd. At the time of that restoration, EPHRAIM's return from Babylon would have been inconsistent with the Lord's purpose regarding him and his companions (Jer. 3.). They were "put away" under the law of Moses, that they might become the Lord's people according to the gospel (Isa. 54; Hos. 1:2). Having been lost as "children of Israel" they were to be found "sons of the living God" (Hos. 1:6, 7, 10).

3rd. The Prophets speak of the restoration Of ISRAEL as something very different from the return of the Jews from Babylon (Isa. 49; Jer. 30.).

4th. In the promised restoration Judah is to return with Israel, and Ephraim is recognized as the firstborn (Jer. 3:18; 31:9), whereas upon that from Babylon, Judah and Benjamin are spoken of as constituting, the body of the people returning from the captivity (Ezra 10:9). Ephraim is not once mentioned either as restoring his brethren or as being himself restored.

5th. After the restoration from Babylon had taken place, Zechariah prophesied (chap. 10:6-12) the return of Ephraim as still future, after they bad been sown among the people.

6th. As regards the animals being presented as a sin offering for all Israel at the restoration from Babylon, what proof have we that the number of sacrifices was changed at the separation of the two houses under Rehoboam, or after the captivity Of ISRAEL to Assyria? Were no people remembered in sacrifice but those in the land? See for example the case of the Spartans (1 Macc. 12).

7th. Even after EPHRAIM was lost, he is spoken of as the firstborn, to whom the Promises made to the Fathers primarily belonged (Jer. 31:9). If Ephraim's case had been an unnoticed accompaniment to that of Judah: if he had been made a subject people along with the Jews, he could scarcely have grown into the promised multitude of nations distinguished, for the privileges bestowed upon them, as (through grace) inheriting the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

8th. The JEWS, who know they can never return to blessing, except as in connection with the Heir, make no claim to having been joined by Ephraim at their return from Babylon.

9th. After their return, Samaria, the capital city of Ephraim and of the house of Israel, remained in possession of the mixed people placed there by the king of Assyria (2 Kings 17:26, 27) And even the more northern parts of the land of Israel came into the possession of the Jews.

All the circumstances of the case are evidence that Israel, and especially EPHRAIM, did not return with the Jews from Babylon. THE RESTORATION OF ISRAEL TO THE LAND HAS THEREFORE NOT YET TAKEN PLACE. (See also "Standard of Israel," Vol. 1.)

ELEVENTH. What good can result front knowing about our Israelitish origin?

REPLY. - If we can show that "the Fullness of the Gentiles" or "multitude of nations" to come of Ephraim has been brought into the blessing promised - that of keeping "the Oracles of God," and their distribution among all nations, - then it is evident that we are much nearer the full establishment of Christ's Kingdom than those prophetic interpreters have supposed, who have thought that all the prophecies respecting Israel out of the Land, the reign of Antichrist, and the mission of Elijah, have hitherto failed of accomplishment; and therefore remain to be hurried forward in some mere fragment of time after the rapture of the saints, and previously to our Lord's actual descent to the earth. They have supposed that Antichrist's making war upon the saints and killing them is to be after the saints have been given glorified bodies and caught up to heaven. They have thus again been obliged to look out for some other kind of saints than those who are usually so called.

By admitting our view all these difficulties are removed. It is seen that the Christian Dispensation is no mere parenthesis, but that God's great work of Providence is one, and is according to His Prophetic Word: that "He hath remembered His covenant," and hath been a God to Jacob's posterity "in their generations;" and that throughout all generations He hath been going forward to the accomplishment of His promises; so that He may truly say unto us as His Israel, "Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love; therefore with loving kindness have I drawn thee."

TWELFTH. The reconciliation of the Jews must precede universality of blessing to the Gentile world (Rom. 11:12, 15-26).

REPLY. - The words in ver. 12, "How much more their fullness?" cannot refer to the Jews, of whom "the fullness" was not promised to come. "The fullness" was to come of EPHRAIM (Gen. 48:19; see margin).

Now EPHRAIM, of whom this "fullness" was to come, was separated from Judah, cast out, and to appearance lost among the Gentiles (Isa. 7:8; Jer. 7:15). We must not expect from the Jews the blessing which was to come through "the fullness of the Gentiles." "THE FULLNESS" by whom the blessing was to be universally ministered to the Gentiles MUST BE LOOKED FOR AMONG THE GENTILES, out among whom Ephraim was cast (Hos. 8:8).

"What shall the receiving of them be but life from the dead?" is illustrated by a reference to Ezek. 37., where is described the resurrection of ALL ISRAEL, as distinct from "Judah and the children of Israel his companions": compare ver. 11 and 16. ALL ISRAEL were put in graves, and gave themselves up for lost. The Jews have never said, like Israel, "Our hope is lost, we are cut off for our parts." It is the recovery Of ISRAEL which is to be "like life from the dead, and will follow the finding of the lost son EPHRAIM."

The "branches" of Joseph are alluded to in ver. 17. The king of Assyria was employed as an "axe" or "saw" in cutting them down (Isa. 10:15). The Jews were not so cut off. The outcast branches of ISRAEL were to obtain mercy through the mercy manifested to the Romans (ver. 31). The doctrine of justification by faith taught in the Epistle to the Romans was doubtless powerfully instrumental in conveying mercy to the Churches of the Reformation which were of Israel. When the Church of Rome cut itself off by refusing to continue in the Lord's goodness, and identified itself with doctrine directly subversive of the truth, we, "the natural branches" were grafted into our own "olive tree" again.

The Jews were not the only, principal, or most numerous "branches" of the Tree. "The branches of Joseph" are the most emphatically spoken of in Gen. 49:22. EPHRAIM, designed to be the most fruitful branch, was broken that it should not be a people (Isa. 7:8); and, as a distinct people, was lost, not among the Jews, but among the Gentiles (Jer. 7:5; Ezek. 11:16). Of EPHRAIM was, to come "the fullness of the Gentiles": compare Gen. 48:19 with Rom. 11:25, 26.

"The Kingdom" taken from the Jews was to be given to the heir through adoption and grace (Matt. 21:43). EPHRAIM, whose very name means "I will bring forth fruits," was described by our Saviour as "a nation bringing forth the fruits of the Kingdom." They were to be "grafted into their own olive tree again;" to "take root downward, and bear fruit upward, and fill the face of the world with fruit." By this fruitfulness, and not by their ancestral roll, was Ephraim to be known. EPHRAIM, as "the fullness of the Gentiles," having been brought in, "so all Israel shall be saved;" for he will endeavor to make "all the tribes of Israel his companions" partakers of all the good which God hath given to himself.

ISRAEL'S case, while out of the land, and "filling the face of the world with fruit," is described, Isa. 28:6-8. In contrast the state of the land is described, ver. 10, 11; the breaking off of EPHRAIM is contemplated, 27:1-4; the Lord's loathing of JUDAH from whom better things were to be expected, ver. 5-8; and his turning from them to the children which had been cut off from their natural nourishment - "the children weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts" ver. 9. The same mercy to the "fatherless" is contemplated at the close of that most remarkable prophecy respecting EPHRAIM as distinct from Judah, Hos. 14:3. EPHRAIM was to be cut off (13:12-16); but after this he was to be found in fruitfulness as being united to the Lord (14:4-8).

The spiritual portion of the house of Judah has of course continued in the Christian Church; and the merely natural parts have more particularly inherited the name of "JEWS." In both cases we have a visible continuation of the Jewish part of Israel; so that it can scarcely be affirmed of them that they were "broken off;" although that can be said, and truly, of "the branches of Joseph," whose visible connection with the stock of Israel was altogether lost till they were found in Christ in the countries where they have come (Ezek. 11:16). In Him were they to find the "fruit" with which they were to "fill the face of the world" (Hos. 14:8).


REPLY. - Connect this expression of Paul with that ancient prophecy which appears to be here referred to - the blessing of Joseph's sons by Jacob when "blindness in part" had happened to him (Gen. 48). In "mystery," or by sign, such as that of crossing his arms, he foretold that EPHRAIM should come into the enjoyment of all the blessings of the firstborn, even in preference to his own brother Manasseh, as well as of all the rest of the children of Israel. After the pattern of blessing exhibited in the two sons of Joseph, Jacob predicted that Israel should bless, saying, "God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh." Ephraim was to come into the enjoyment of the birthright; "and so," or in like manner, "all Israel shall be saved." On that remarkable occasion Jacob crossed his arms, and laying his right hand upon Ephraim's head, bestowed upon him the Birthright promises. Joseph would have corrected his father, supposing that he ought to have preferred Manasseh; but Jacob refused, saying, "I know, my son, I know: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great : but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations;" or, as the words might as literally be rendered, and as they are here quoted by Paul, "the fullness of the Gentiles." The word here translated is mello (Heb.), and not hamon (Heb.) used in Gen. 17:4. The word rendered ha-goim (Heb.) is translated variously in different parts of Scripture; sometimes "Heathen," but generally "Nations," or "Gentiles." The "MULTITUDE OF NATIONS" promised to come of Ephraim is doubtless "THE FULLNESS OF THE GENTILES" referred to by the Apostle. Ephraim having come into the possession of the Birthright, all Israel are with him to be made partakers of blessing.

Are we not, then, by this phrase to understand that of Ephraim those were to come who should fill up a void among all nations - a people intended to supplement the nations in the promotion of all good for themselves, and incite them to a preparation for the return of their King: in short, to fill up the place left vacant for a people to exercise the right of the Firstborn in regard to all nations; providing them with the King's instructions, and, as "priests of the Lord, ministers of our God," teachers, missionaries, and exemplars of various kinds conducting them, so far as human agency may do, through the transition period.

Is it not that these children of promise, being diffused among all people, are designed to stir up every portion of the human family to the enjoyment and production of whatever belongs to it; so that all may issue in the general good and the glory of God? This would be conduct indeed worthy of the Firstborn: the natural result of thus benefiting his brethren would be, "And so all Israel shall be saved."

Let us consider what provision God, in His good providence, has made towards this glorious result: the various blessings we possess - physical, mental, spiritual, artistic, mechanical, commercial, political, and literary; our remarkable position in regard to other races all round the globe; our responsibilities as rulers and missionaries; as civil, naval, and military servants in various capacities; as merchants, or as men and women occupying independent positions at home or abroad. As a people we have been given wonderful wealth, and marvelous means of doing good. Let us fill up our destiny of being for Blessing to all nations. God has been true to His promise. The outward means have been put into our hands. Soon may Ephraim indeed possess and exercise the spirit of the Firstborn!

It might also be suggested, "Was a number of nations to come of Ephraim, such as the Heptarchy, or Seven Saxon Kingdoms, from which the English are supposed to be mainly descended?" Do these words point to what the English were to become, as having hence spread out to all "the ends of the earth," and become a multitude of states in America, Australia, India, and South Africa, as well as that they are descended from "a multitude of nations" in this their own island home? Or are we thereby to understand the filling up of the Gentile Dispensation? Was Ephraim to complete the period when Israel was to be lost among the Gentiles, and at the close of which ALL ISRAEL was to be saved, after the example given in Ephraim; when the blessings possessed by the English would be communicated to many nations, and the prophecy be fulfilled, "And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and be My People, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of Hosts hath sent Me unto thee" (Zech. 2:11). Romans 11:25 alludes to the partial blindness which happened to Jacob, when "the mystery" of blessing EPHRAIM and Manasseh took place, as recorded Gen. 48:10. "By faith he blessed both the sons of Joseph " through the cross, giving the blessing of the firstborn to EPHRAIM by adoption through grace; declaring that of him "the fullness of the Gentiles" was to come. The Romans were not to be "wise in their own conceits," supposing that to give them the supremacy Christ was preached in this direction. The Gospel was sent north-westward through Rome to bless the children of promise.

FOURTEENTH. The happiness of finding our nation to be of the chosen seed, and inheritors of the special promises, must render us the more careful to avoid self-deception and self-flattery in the matter; for it would be very awful to find we were presumptuously arrogating what is not ours, and thus to be righteously destroyed as usurpers at our Lord's coming.

REPLY. - The truth of our being in the place of the Firstborn, favored above all nations, and given the ministration of blessing to the whole human race, is not a mere speculative opinion, but a plain matter of fact. There can be no "presumption" in accepting our position, and in seeking to rise up to the duties of our high calling. Otherwise we do not recognize the mercy of God to us, and His faithfulness in bestowing it according to ancient promise; and so are apt to use for our own pleasure the means which we suppose have been acquired by our own wisdom and strength; leaving others to do in the future that which we should do in the present.

The people most visibly under the curse during the Christian dispensation we speak of as "the ancient people of God," and as special objects of blessing; as if the God of Providence had parted company with Old Testament Revelation; and as if we had come into being as an afterthought of God, altogether apart from His purposes as revealed unto the fathers.

But it is not so. When we look into the Inspired Record, we find that the blessing which has come upon us was not promised to the Jewish people, but to the sons of Joseph who were lost among the Gentiles, and who were to be found among the Gentiles "sons of the living God." We should manifest our origin by our conformity to the Son of God. There can be no "presumption" in this. But there is great danger in leaving the truth of God unacknowledged. We are His "Witnesses," and it is not fitting, that out of a false humility we should go before either Jew or Gentile, practically denying that God has been true to His covenant mercy promised to the Fathers.

Unbelief is a sin which doth most easily beset us, and that against which we ought to be particularly on our guard. Look at the case of Israel, and also at that of the Jews, our taking such a false position in regard to whom is doubtless as great a stumbling-block to them as to the heathen.

There can be no possible good in perpetrating such a universal falsehood before the world in regard to the whole procedure of God, as to say that the people who have been and are the special objects of New Testament mercy, are not the people chosen of God to inherit that mercy. And it is doubtless a great practical error to maintain that we are to look for another people to do the work to which God hath called us, and for which He hath furnished us.

Nor should we ever forget the truthfulness of the Great Prophet, in regard to the judgments which have come upon the people called "Jews," while remaining apart from their believing brethren, who were called "Christians" after the Name of their Lord (Acts 11:26). Their only safety, as it is ours, is the being found in Christ (Deut. 18:15-19).

Trust in the flesh, or in what man can do for us, is presumption; but trust in Jesus is salvation. This salvation, and the power of manifesting it to all nations, was promised to EPHRAIM (Gen. 48:14-16 Matt. 21:43), and by this possession and manifestation of blessing were the seed of EPHRAIM "the sons of the living God" to be known.

Though our descent from Abraham and Isaac were as clear as was that of Esau or Herod, this would give us no claim to the blessing. It is in Christ that "all the promises of God are yea, and in Him Amen;" and it is only through faith that we can obtain the blessing. "If ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3:29). No other claim avails, but this does for all found in time, place, and circumstance according to the prophecy; and who having received blessing for themselves are employed in its diffusion to all around them, and are willing with what they have to do their part of the work appointed to Ephraim - that of bringing forth "the fruits of the Kingdom." Whatever may be their origin, those who do "the works of the flesh shall not inherit the Kingdom of God." But let us, as a people, bring forth "the fruits of the Spirit, love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance," and doubtless God will acknowledge us to be of His Elect Nation.

We should never forget that "it is accepted according to that which a man hath, not according to that which he hath not." But in regard to the actual possession of privilege, God hath not dealt so with any nation as He hath with the inhabitants of these isles and their offshoots all over the earth. It is not presumption, but positive duty, to endeavor to realize our position, and act up to it, under the blessing of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

FIFTEENTH. I believe that Rom. 11:25, 26, "Blindness in part hath happened to Israel, &c.," includes the whole JEWISH nation, with the exception of the remnant according to the election of grace. I believe also that the "blindness" has only reference to their not acknowledging the Lord, who came in humiliation as the Christ which therefore, to my mind, quite upsets your theory.

REPLY. - When about to speak on the subject the Apostle says, "I would not have you to be ignorant of this mystery," therefore we need not be altogether surprised at some mistake being made. In speaking on any matter, especially of this kind, it is needful that there be a clear understanding of terms. "A mystery" is generally understood to imply something obscurely revealed, or rather something made known by symbol - some great truth, represented by an action which derives its chief importance from being viewed in relation to that which it represents.

By some it is taken for granted that "blindness in part" means blindness of a part or portion of the people of Israel; but when the Greek text is compared - as with Rom. 15:15-24, 2 Cor. 1:14, &c. - it will be found to mean what the words in our translation also express, "blindness in part," or partial blindness, to Israel as a whole. Nor need we be surprised at the imputation of partial blindness to the Christian portion of Jewish Israel, of whom the Lord chose Apostles to the Twelve Tribes, and Messengers to the nations generally. Does not the Lord Himself say (Isa. 42:19-21), "Who is blind but My servant? or deaf as My messenger that I sent? Who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the Lord's servant? Seeing many things, but thou observest not; opening the ears, but he heareth not. The Lord is wellpleased for His righteousness' sake?" Compare Isa. 43:8-14, identifying the blind people, not with the Lord, as some have strangely supposed, but with the people who are His witnesses.

Those employed in declaring the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus, in whom His people are found complete, were still in the case described by the apostle (1 Cor. 13:12), "For now we see through a glass darkly; now I know in part," &c. It is certainly more consistent to suppose that the Church is, and has been, in partial blindness, than to say that all those who have been stumbling against each other, as in the dark, and whom we must in charity suppose to be true Christians, have been in the full enjoyment of the light, and that "blindness in part" hath not happened to them.

But "a mystery" is one thing represented by another. Thus the union between Christ and His Church is represented by the marriage relation; the seven churches by the seven golden candlesticks, &c. Now to what does the apostle refer as shadowing forth "the mystery" of which he is about to speak? It is to some well-known Old Testament prophecy connected with "the mystery" when He says, "Blindness in part is happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in." Where in the Old Testament does this peculiar expression, "fullness of the, Gentiles," occur?

Words exactly corresponding to the Greek of this passage occur in the Hebrew of Gen. 48:19, where they are translated (as observed elsewhere) "multitude of nations;" but the word mello, translated "multitude," is literally "fullness" (see KJV margin), and answers exactly to pleroma of the Greek; and the Hebrew goyim is the same word that is applied by the Jews to designate others than themselves. It is indifferently translated "Nations, Heathen, and Gentiles" in other parts of the Old Testament.

In this passage Jacob, or "Israel," as he is here called, with regard to Joseph's younger son Ephraim predicts that he was the chosen of God to inherit the Birthright, and that upon his head, or the head of his posterity under the name of GENTILES, the blessing of Abraham was to fall in its amplitude. We are therefore, not to look for the people upon whom most emphatically the blessing was to come as bearing the name of "Jews," but that of "Gentiles" - "A MULTITUDE OR FULLNESS OF GENTILES."

The circumstances in which these words were spoken illustrate the reference of the apostle, "Blindness in part," or partial blindness, being one of the first things noticed with regard to Israel in the narrative of that mysterious transaction given in Gen. 48. In ver. 10 it is said, "Now the eyes of Israel were dim for age, that he could not see." That this blindness, however, was only partial is evident from ver. 8, where it is said, "Israel beheld Joseph's sons, and said, Who are these?" Israel knew that there were persons before him, but required to be told who they were. And "by faith, he blessed both the sons of Joseph," crossing his arms "wittingly," showing by symbol, or in mystery, how through faith, or by the showing forth of the Cross, the blessing of Abraham was to come upon the "GENTILES."

The ministers of the blessing were divinely directed, but still knew only in part. Not by mere outward circumstances was Paul "hindered" from turning to either the right band or the left when he first passed over into Europe in the ministration of the Gospel, but "by the Spirit." In partial blindness as to God's purpose in the matter, he was made to proceed north-westward to Troas (Troy), and thence over into Europe, to commence at Philippi "that good work which God was to perform until the day of Jesus Christ." (Phil. 1:6) Onward in this direction, so remarkably indicated by the Spirit of God, has actually been the ministration of the Gospel, and indeed of all other blessing until it has come upon people whom we have identified as the head of the "fullness of the Gentiles" or multitude of nations to come of Ephraim, and who have carried it out into "all the ends of the earth."

If it were allowable to put "blindness of a part" in place of "blindness in part," we might plead that as it was only to a part of Israel that blindness is said to belong, the great body of the people may very reasonably be looked for as in the enjoyment of light [of Jesus Christ], and neither as Jews, nor as mere heathen. But knowing that the passage means partial blindness rather than the blindness of a part, we refuse to take advantage of this concession in favor of our view that lost Israel must be looked for in light, in contrast to the nominally Jewish part of Israel which has so long been suffering, as is supposed, the curse of judicial blindness.

We should never forget that "the Kingdom" was to be taken from the Jews, and that as surely as this has happened was it to be given to "a nation" appointed to "bring forth the fruits thereof" (Matt. 21:43). In this there is evidently an allusion to Ephraim, in reference to whom so much in prophecy is said respecting "fruitfulness." True, he hath often tried to bring forth fruit of himself and to himself, but at length he is to listen to the Lord's kind intimation, "FROM ME IS THY FRUIT FOUND."

Already, when only known as "a multitude of Gentiles," have they covered the face of the world with the leaves of "the tree of life." Let us hope and pray and labor also that the fruit may follow.

No other fact than that of Jacob's blessing the sons of Joseph can be pointed out as that referred to by the Apostle under the name of a "mystery."

No other prophecy than that of Jacob with regard to Ephraim contains so exactly the words quoted by the Apostle as if from a well-known prophecy.

No other people than the Anglo-Saxon race - and we have shown that they must not be sought for as Jews, but amongst the Gentiles - so exactly correspond to all the terms in which are described the people towards whom such mercy was to be shown.

And when Ephraim has fully come into the blessing, doubtless "ALL ISRAEL" - "all the tribes of Israel his companions" shall be gathered into the blessing with him; "and so" or in like manner, "all Israel shall be saved;" or as Jacob expresses it, "In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and Manasseh." If Ephraim and Manasseh have no known existence, where are the types of blessing?

But if they be found occupying the most distinguished position in both hemispheres; if, either among themselves or by their missionary establishments, they comprehend almost all the true people of God on the whole earth; if God by His providence has actually constituted them the stewards of His bounty to all others, whether Jews or Gentiles; then have we something correspondent to "THE BIRTHRIGHT" which, not according to natural right, but according to election through grace, was to be bestowed upon the sons of Joseph, and more especially on the younger son Ephraim, born to Joseph when lost to Israel.

[SIXTEENTH -- Not available in the text supplied.]

SEVENTEENTH. "The blessing bestowed upon Ephraim refers to spiritual blessings hereafter to be enjoyed, AFTER the people are discovered to whom the blessing belongs."

REPLY. - Jacob blesses the sons of Joseph in every way. He blesses them in the name of his ancestors, Abraham and Isaac, which at least implies that as a race they were to be highly favored; in the name of the God of Providence, "the God which fed me all my life long," and in the name of the Redeemer of Israel, "the Angel which redeemed me from all evil." Words like these can only be fulfilled in a people for whom the Lord hath continued to care. In proof that the blessings pronounced on Joseph and his posterity were of an earthly and temporal, as well as those of a heavenly and spiritual character, see what is predicted concerning them in Gen. 49:22-27; and Deut. 33:13-18.

That All Israel, or the Ten Tribes, were swallowed up, not among the Jews, but among the Gentiles, will, I suppose, be granted. That ISRAEL, as cast out among the Gentiles, had no temptation to retain their pride of race seems evident from what is said near the time of their casting out : "Now shall they be among the Gentiles as a vessel wherein is no pleasure" (Hos. 8:8). As Israel they were disliked by the other nations. Why provoke this dislike for the sake of a name, when they had already abandoned the more important distinctions which God had given to separate them from the nations generally?

Does not the Lord recognize them as saying, "We are cut off for our parts"? (Ezek. 37:11). But although they were "cut off" as Israel, were they, therefore, to cease from being "a nation" before the Lord (Jer. 31:35, 36). Rather were they not to grow into "a multitude of Nations and Gentiles"? And it is as such, and not as Jews, that we must look for the people unto whom the Birthright was promised, and on whom the Blessing was bestowed by the ancient ministering servants of God in partial blindness. Without the knowledge of "this mystery," in which were shown forth the wonders of Redemption and Providence, men are very apt to be "wise in their own conceits."

EIGHTEENTH. "I find also that the term or title Of "ISRAEL" is not confined to the Ten Tribes."

REPLY. - The author of "Our Israelitish Origin " never asserted that the term "Israel" belonged exclusively to the Ten Tribes. On the contrary he maintained that, although the Ten Tribes are never to his knowledge called "Jews," yet the Jews are Israelites - in the same way as a man of Kent is an Englishman, although all Englishmen are not men of Kent.

Different writers have different ways of distinguishing the two houses. JEREMIAH, for example, calls the one "treacherous Judah," and the other "backsliding Israel" (chap. 3.); whereas EZEKIEL almost invariably calls the Jews "Israel" or "children of Israel," and the people usually denominated Israel he styles "all Israel" or "the whole house of Israel."

In the latter term he does not include the Jews; see Ezek. 11:15, where "all the house of Israel" wholly are distinguished from the Jews, "the inhabitants of Jerusalem;" and in ver. 16, that "whole house of Israel," which had been cast far off among the heathen, the Lord promises to bring in to Himself, in the countries into which they should come. The Jews had rejoiced in the expulsion of their brethren of the house of ALL ISRAEL, saying, "Get you far from the Lord; unto us (the Jews) is this land given in possession." But to the people whom the Jews thought cast away as unclean, the Lord avows His purpose to draw near in their outcast condition. Not only will He permit them to approach His courts, but even to come into His house - yea, into Himself, their "Little Sanctuary."

In Ezek. 37 also we find the same distinction. Here is described the resurrection of Israel, whom the prophet does not recognize while lying in the valley of dry bones. He has to be told who the archeological specimens are, even after they have been made by the word of prophecy to stand upon their feet, "an exceeding great army." Ver. 11 : "SON OF MAN, THESE BONES ARE THE WHOLE HOUSE OF ISRAEL." It might be supposed that "the whole house of Israel" here includes the Jews; but if we look at ver. 16 we have reason to see this is not the case. There "Judah and the children of Israel his companions" are distinguished from "EPHRAIM AND ALL THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL HIS COMPANIONS," at a period supposed to be still future, when the two are about to be made one upon the mountains of Israel. The difference between the two houses is thus marked in their being cast out, and in their being gathered.

The cases of the two were also distinct under the law. Upon Israel he "had not mercy, and utterly took them away," but upon Judah He "had mercy" (Hos. 1:6). When New Testament times are contemplated, the Lord has mercy upon Israel (Hos. 2.). He even sends away from "treacherous Judah" His word after her "into the north country" (Jer. 3.). The Lord had promised to bring the outcast house of Israel in to Himself while they were in foreign countries; and here the same is implied in what is said with regard to them at the time of their restoration. They have already been raised up by the Word and Spirit of God; they have been already made to know the Lord, they already have His Spirit within them, before they are placed in their own land, and have their remaining blindness removed, implied in these words, "Then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken, and performed, saith the Lord."

NINETEENTH. "Reasoning by analogy is very dangerous, and would naturally lead a lively imagination astray; such as saying that because the Apostles' line of evangelizing was north-westward, so it was probable that Israel travelled north-westward."

REPLY. - There seems to be some mistake here. The intention was not to take only one fact, and reason therefrom by analogy; but by an inductive process to take possession of all the facts bearing on the point, so as to show that the laws of Providence exist as really and are as uniform as those whereby God governs the material world. One of these laws is indicated in Jer. 3:12: "Go and proclaim these words towards the North, and say, Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the Lord."

It has been shown that the people here referred to are "backsliding Israel," as distinguished from "treacherous Judah;" that the Word was to be sent away from the latter after the former, and that its first going forth was to be towards the NORTH; that as the Word was thus to be sent away from the Jews to Israel cast out among the Gentiles, so we must follow the subsequent course of that Word, see in what quarter of the north it terminates, and observe whence it results in the evangelization of the world in all directions.

In that point where the lines running northward end, and those going out to "all the ends of the earth" begin, it is not only probable, but also certain, that we shall find Israel. God, who sent forth His Word in a certain direction, after a certain people, cannot have been mistaken; and it has been shown that He has given us no occasion for our mistaking the course of His Word after proceeding northward to Antioch. The remaining portion of the great prophetic line of Empires, through which the Word was to pass, lay towards the north-west. Here at the "feet" of the Great Image, like the "mire" of the streets, lay the people who were to be gathered unto the Stone and constitute its increase, supplanting the Great Image, and filling the whole earth (Dan. 2.), they being made, with all His saints, "the fullness of Him that filleth all in all." (Ephes. 1:23).

After Israel in whom He was to be glorified, He directly sent His Word through the nations which spoiled Jerusalem; and when the Word is made effectual to the purpose for which it was sent, "MANY NATIONS shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be MY PEOPLE" (Zech. 2:8, 11; Hos. 2:23). In this direction, accordingly, came every successive journey of the messengers sent to bear the Word of the Kingdom. Along this line the Epistles were also sent. In this direction our Great High Priest is seen proceeding, as described Rev. 1. Arising from the East is seen the Angel with the seal of the Living God, sent forth to seal the election out of all the Tribes of Israel (Rev. 7). And in this direction have actually come, the successive great interferences of the God of Israel for the confirmation of His truth, the reviving of His cause, and the spreading of His light throughout the dark ages.

Here, in the north-west, God's Word, which was sent after "backsliding Israel" has found a people with unprecedented means of acting in the stewardship appointed to Israel. Surely it will not be denied that we have been more highly favored than any other nation; that the multiplicity, supplanting power, and ministration of blessing promised to Abraham's posterity in the line of Ephraim, have actually been bestowed upon our people, since they took the Cross for their ensign, and acted in any measure consistently with this profession. We have nothing to boast of. It is all of grace. Still we must own that God has dealt with us as He promised He would deal with Israel, and as He did not say He would deal with any other nation.

We are precisely in that state of privilege, responsibility, partial blindness, and failure through our own faults, in which Israel were to be found, when in the latter days they were to begin to consider the Word and Working of God with regard to themselves. They are remonstrated with, and called to repentance, and to the richer enjoyment of His grace, "a very little time before Lebanon shall be turned into a fruitful field" (Isa. 29.). At the time referred to they were to have become again His people, which can only be in Christ; and therefore they are defended in the land out of which they were formerly cast.

In the great restoration Ephraim are more particularly to come from the West; and in the West our people are chiefly to be found. Here is their proper abode, but they have also spread out unto all "the ends of the earth;" whence, also, they are represented as coming. The people thus gathered are neither heathen, Muslims, nor Jews, but Christians; a people who have the Lord's Name put upon them and of whom He can say, -

"This people have I formed for Myself;

They shall show forth My praise" (Isa. 43:5-9, 21).

True, the word "north-westward" does not occur in Scripture, but neither does the word "Trinity," and yet the doctrine of the Trinity lies at the very foundation of Scripture teaching [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: an unfortunate choice of parallel, in view of the strong scriptural evidence contradicting the "Trinity" hypothesis.] It is not necessary that the word "north-westward" should be found in Scripture, but only that this shall be the word which expresses most briefly what the Scriptures reveal more at large. Undeniably the Word points northward and also westward; first northward to Antioch [modern Syria], and then westward to Illyricum [modern Yugoslavia]. And it is only as proceeding westward that, in the north, we come upon "a multitude of nations" in the circumstances recognized in prophecy as being those in which lost Israel were to be found.

Here in these "isles afar off," in their own proper home, we find this people dwelling alone, besides being without number among the nations. They came from where Israel were lost, and possess abundant evidence of being the people who were lost, as the natural Israel, to be found in Christ "sons of the living God." An isolated fact has not been taken possession of and bent in any particular direction; but it has been shown in "Our Israelitish Origin" that a purpose was avowed, and that the whole Providence of God has been carrying it out. We show UNITY OF DECLARED DESIGN IN ALL THE PROCEEDINGS OF GOD WITH REGARD TO ISRAEL.

There is danger in imputing to the Word of God what it does not contain, but there can scarcely be any in reasoning inductively from all the facts of the case; in the same manner as that by which, since the time of Lord Bacon, such immense advances have been made in the knowledge of the laws according to which the government of the material universe proceeds. Bishop Butler says in his "Analogy," chap. 3., "And as it is owned the whole scheme of Scripture is not yet understood; so, if it ever comes to be understood before the restitution of all things (Acts 3:21), and without miraculous interpositions, it must be in the same way as natural knowledge is come at - by the continuance and progress of learning and liberty; and by particular persons attending to, comparing, and pursuing intimations scattered up and down it, which, are overlooked and disregarded by the generality of the world. For this is the way in which all improvements are made - by thoughtful men tracing out obscure hints, as it were, dropped us by nature accidentally, or which seem to come into our minds by chance."

"Nor is it at all incredible that a book which, has been so long in the possession of mankind should contain many truths as yet undiscovered. For all the same phenomena and the same faculties of investigation, from which such great discoveries in Natural knowledge have been made in the present and last age, were in the possession of mankind several thousand years before. And possibly it might be intended that events, as they come to pass, open up and ascertain the meaning of several parts of Scripture."

TWENTIETH. "But is not ours a heavenly calling, and superior to that of Israel?"

REPLY. - It is a mere delusion to suppose that if you should be found Israelites, you must necessarily be under the Jewish covenant, lose your heavenly calling, have your portion with Israel upon the land promised to their fathers, and be deprived of the heavenly inheritance. Do you not know that you can only be blessed with faithful Abraham, and among the natural branches? Do you look to have a higher or a lower calling than that of Abraham, who was "heir of the world," and yet looked for "that city whose Builder and Maker is God," and which God bath provided for His faithful of all ages, who shall also have dominion over the earth? Do you not know that the double portion, the birthright blessing, was promised to the sons of Joseph; who were to enjoy it by adoption through grace and not by the deeds of the Law? You certainly have no good authority for separating earth from heaven, giving the one to the natural seed; and in the pride of your Gentile-ism appropriating the other to yourselves. No: "he that overcometh shall inherit all things," whether he be Jew or Gentile, circumcision or uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bond, or free.

The knowledge of "our Israelitish origin," by apprising us of the great obligations under which we are brought by the God of our fathers to devote unto Him our whole being, all that we are, and all wherewith He hath so richly favored us as bestowing upon us the means of spreading His life-giving truth over all the earth, is indeed well calculated to humble us because of our past misimprovement of His wonderful kindness, and our neglect of much important duty. But it also lifts up from grovelling in the dust, and greatly invigorates for the service to which we are called; as convincing so abundantly of the truth and faithfulness of God, and of His almighty power in accomplishing what He so wisely purposed from the beginning. It is much to feel that we are the very people of promise spoken of to Abraham; and promised to come not of a people under the Law, but of the outcast house of Israel, divorced of old from the Law, in order to be married to her "Ishi" (Hos. 2:16) according to the terms of the everlasting covenant by Which believers are now united unto Christ.

TWENTY-FIRST. "The Epistle to the Galatians recognizes them as not in any sense Israelites; but, on the contrary, the whole argument rests on this, that they, being Gentiles by origin, were returning to the weak and beggarly elements of Judaism [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: actually to their pagan weak and beggarly elements]. Paul, being himself a Jew, could circumcise Timothy, and be blameless; but he writes to the Galatians, that if they were circumcised [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: if they should put their trust in circumcision, then], Christ should profit them nothing. Now these Galatians were our kindred, our very cousins german, as all history testifies. See Rollin (ed. 1826, vol. 2, p. 312). Luther recognizes the supposed affinity between the Germans and Galatians in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians. 'Some think,' says he on chap. 1:6, 'that the Germans are descended of the Galatians. Neither is this divination perhaps untrue, for the Germans are not unlike them in nature,'" &c.

REPLY. - The writer seems to go upon the supposition that we plead for a conformity to the ceremonial law as the great privilege to be derived from the knowledge of "Our Israelitish Origin." Wherever be got such an idea, it certainly is not to be found in the book known by that name, and which it would be well for him to read if he intends to say any more on the subject. Moreover it does not follow, because the country was called Galatia, and the inhabitants of it were called "Galatians," that therefore the Christians addressed were descendants of the Gauls. Many countries - as, for example, a great portion of the United States of America - are called after tribes which do not now inhabit those countries. The Epistle of Peter recognizes those in Galatia whom he addresses as being "strangers" therein; and yet not of the house of Judah, but of that house upon whom the Lord had not mercy - of the outcast house of Israel, but who now, through grace, had been made "the people of God" (1 Pet. 2:10), They had said when cast away "Our hope is lost; we are cut off for our parts," but they were now begotten again unto a lively hope by the Gospel.

History also states that the race with which we identify Ephraim was very different from that of the Gauls. Hear Prideaux, part ii., book vi., "The country from whence these Cymbrians came was the Cymbrica Chersonesus, the same which now contains Jutland, Sleswick, and Holstein. On their deserting this country, the Asae, coming from between the Euxine [Black] and Caspian Seas, took possession of it, and from these came those Angli who, with the Saxons, after having expelled the Britons, possessed themselves of that part of Great Britain which is now called England."

It is to be recollected that it was to the borders of the Caspian Sea that outcast Israel bad been carried by the Assyrians. The Angli (Heb. Engli), of whom came the English, for whom "the Book of Remembrance," or Gospels, was written, Mal. 4:2, are thus not only in history distinguished from the Gauls, but even from the Cymri who subsequently made a descent upon Italy, correspondent to that which the Gauls had made upon Greece and Asia Minor nearly 200 years before.

Now if the Gauls had come from the extremities of the ocean, and from the same countries as those out of which the Angli came into Britain, then it appears that the Cymri had come in to fill up the interval between the desertion of the extreme north by the Gauls, and the coming thereinto of the Anglo-Saxon race; in the same manner that we find one tribe after another of the North American Indians has been pushed westward by the natural spreading of the English over the American continent. The tribe nearest to the whites, and more leavened by the force of European civilization, takes the place of the one less civilized, which is forced farther backward. Thus it was in Europe. Common sense may show the absurdity of reckoning the North American Indians of the same family of nations with the people of the United States. Although they have proceeded from the same countries as those in which the whites have now settled, they certainly are not of the same people. So were the Angli of a different race from the Gauls, with whom, however, they became intermixed; and still more so with their relations the Cymri. But there is presumptive evidence that both the Galatians and Cymri were of previous deportations of Israel; the former being most likely from the Hebrew Ger "a stranger " (l and r being interchangeable), and the latter from Kymri, or "according to Omri;" i.e., Baal worshippers from Samaria, the city of Omri.

Remnants of other nations having been blended with the Jewish race, have not taken away the origin of the Jewish people generally. Neither can a partial admixture with other races destroy the Israelitish origin of that house of Israel which was made uncircumcised, and which is now found in the places, and in all the circumstances predicted, at the end of the Seven Times during which it was to be cast out among the Gentiles.

TWENTY-SECOND. "I strongly deprecate the idea that science and much human learning of any kind are needful to the right understanding and exposition of the Word of God; for how, then, would the great mass of God's own children, among whom (as His Word tells us) not many mighty, not many wise of this world are to be found, ever be able to understand the greater portion of that Word, which consists of prophecy?"

REPLY. - The Scriptures have many beauties, which those who know Hebrew and Greek are better able to appreciate than others who know them only from a translation, however good. There are many allusions to Ancient History and Eastern manners which persons who have travelled, and are deeply read in such matters, should be prepared to understand better than can the unreading poor who know nothing but about their own immediate neighborhood. There are many references to metals and precious stones, trees, plants, beasts, fowls, and fishes, and to the characteristics of different nations; much is said respecting particular mountains, rivers, seas, and countries; fine and useful arts, city productions, agricultural employments, modes of warfare, forms of government, and sacrificial rites, implying an immensity of knowledge, all of which is very rarely possessed by one individual. It would be flattery, therefore, to tell the ignorant man that he is equally prepared to expound Dan. 11 with another who had studied the history of Syria and Egypt, and the relation of these countries to Palestine at the periods referred to in the prophecy.

It is true that the man who knows not much about former times, nor about foreign countries, may know something about the temptations and trials common to human nature, and may feel strongly the adaptation of Scripture promise and precept, and especially of the glorious Gospel of the grace of God to meet his own case. But even here it may be a disadvantage to him that his knowledge is so limited. His own idiosyncrasy he may be in danger of imputing to human nature generally. That which is only the result of local circumstances he may reckon to be radically innate. It might be of importance that he should be given an understanding of the different powers of the human mind as possessed by all, and of their various combinations, to see still more intelligently the beautiful adaptation of the Word of God to the moral and intellectual wants of humanity; and that in the new creation in Christ Jesus fitting occupation is provided for every particular faculty. God can sanctify all knowledge of His working in Creation and Providence to the better understanding of His Word. The knowledge of what He has done in the formation of body, soul, and spirit is not to be despised. The Word of God makes nice distinctions, which one unacquainted with the study of mind is apt to overlook. It is "sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart" (Heb. 4:12). Whatever God hath made or done, and recognized in Scripture, is surely worthy of our regard; but especially the human mind which has to come into contact with that Word.

Our Saviour "reasoned" with the doctors whilst as yet He was only a child; Paul could use both Natural Science and Greek Literature in disputing with those who thought themselves wise, and neither the rabble nor the Areopagites were able to come up to the full comprehensiveness of his disputations; but this did not prevent the one or the other from speaking for the benefit of those who either required such teaching or were capable of being benefited thereby. It would have been no small mistake respecting his own importance for any ignorant man, however poor, or however rich, to have objected to their teaching on account of its not being suited to his capacity. Would it not be rather the duty such to pray for a capacity, and at the same time labor to obtain it?

Now we know as a fact that there are matters in the Bible all of which few, if any, do understand. A child may understand the way of salvation. One who knows not much of history may know the great fact that Jesus Christ died for our redemption. But in how many different ways is this truth taught in Scripture, and much connected with it, which we know is not all possessed by every individual of God's children! Indeed, very few profess to have made out a clear idea of any considerable portion of the prophetic Scriptures, or of the purpose of God in giving a great part of that which is historical. But because such knowledge is not attained by Christians generally, are we to say that, it ought to be neglected by those who have the means of obtaining it?

If one should say, "I have arrived at a knowledge of the truth of such a portion of the Word of God, the true meaning of which was previously unknown, and was therefore overlooked or misapplied. Now I find it full of light, and throwing its light not only on other portions of Scripture, previously obscure, but also upon God's working in Creation and Providence. And that this is not a false light, let those who know God's Works and Word most extensively look at them in this light, and see whether it be not God's own view on the subject;" if any one should speak thus, those who were conscious of being partially blind, and did not arrogate to themselves the right to prescribe to God the channel through which He might be pleased to convey light to their minds, would of course attend and examine.

We invite all to do so, with regard to "Our Israelitish Origin," according to their capacity and power. If they know nothing of ethnology or ancient history, perhaps they know something of their own time and people. They may know, for instance, whether God has favored our nation according to the plain meaning of the promises made with regard to Abraham's posterity in the line of Ephraim. If not, they can examine the Scriptures, look immediately around them, and see the Word of God fulfilled in their own case. Another may be able to look farther, and take in the case of other nations; or farther still, to look before and behind, and see the relation of the present to the past and the future.

But others, again, should not reject the Truth because its ramifications are wider than "children in understanding " can comprehend. Let them rather endeavor to comply with the apostolic precept, "IN UNDERSTANDING BE MEN." There is nothing necessary to the knowledge, or even the discovery of "our Israelitish origin" to which a poor man may not actually attain. Knowledge is now more generally diffused and more extensively possessed than some are inclined to think; and if Christians do not avail themselves of that circumstance to promote deeper and more general understanding of Scripture among the masses, Satan will turn it to their disadvantage, while they may be needlessly placing stumblingblocks in the way of the blind. We should not "strongly deprecate" science and learning without some warrant from the Word of God; which, so far as I know, we have not. Rather we are exhorted to "get wisdom and get understanding." Is it not said, "The works of the Lord are great, SOUGHT OUT of all them that have pleasure therein?" "He hath shewed His people the power of His works, that He may give them the heritage of the heathen" (Psa. 111:26). And as regards learning, I should be strongly disposed to think that if a man had the opportunity of acquiring a knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, and refused to improve this kindness of Providence, to say the least, it is not likely that God would reward his negligence by giving him the ability rightly and fully to expound His Word.

TWENTY-THIRD. "If the promises were sure as to their certain literal fulfillment, the evidence for our Israelitish origin, and of our being the people appointed to minister blessing to all Nations, would he strong indeed; but the CONDITIONALITY of the promises is such that we cannot tell whether they have been or will be fulfilled."

REPLY. - We cannot argue that God will break an unconditional promise, from the fact that He told the children of Israel when He was about to break a conditional one, the terms of which they had failed to fulfil; nor from the fact of His Making, known to them His "breach of promise" (Numb. 14:34) are we to argue that He may break His promise without making known to those concerned whether He will keep His word or no. His truthfulness should be taken for granted and when "by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie," He makes oath, we may be assured He will bring to pass what He hath promised, and should indeed truly trust in God, and act upon His word as upon an accomplished fact. God has been giving forth His word, and accomplishing it both by judgment and mercy throughout all generations, to induce men to exercise faith in His word of promise. And is all this confirmation of His word to be made void by His being faithful to His word of warning against want of confidence in His word of promise?

It is to be observed that when the punishment of Israel in the land, and as being cast out among the Gentiles was foretold, there was a reservation promised of "the covenant made with their ancestors" (Lev. 26:45). This was to be sure to them, even when cast out into other lands. All the evils of which we have been guilty, and the punishments we would consequently have to endure, were foreknown and foretold; and, yet the promised mercy was to be sure in the end. See the last words of both Jacob and Moses (Gen. 49; Dent. 32, 33).

The promises of God are not so conditional as to render their fulfillment uncertain. Prophecy is not to be regarded as a mere may-be, but can certainly be adduced as evidence of that which is most surely to be expected in the cases of the people spoken of, in the time, place, and circumstances predicted. We may be sure that if, on account of man's disobedience, God were to recall His word, He would not leave it in doubt whether or not He would do what He had said.

Although, because of unbelief, the generation who came up out of Egypt were not allowed to enter the land yet their children were. And although the complete fulfillment of the promises to Abraham has been in abeyance for many generations, yet even now it can be seen that after all God has not so cast away Israel, as that He has not for their fathers' sakes remembered "the covenant of their ancestors."

These promises were not made under the law of Moses, and therefore could not be made void by their disobedience to it (Gal. 3:16-19). After Israel had so sinned as to be cast out of the Lord's land and lost among the Gentiles, still there is a recognition of the promised mercy to them (Jer. 30:11, &c.). When the forerunner of Christ was born there was a prophetic recognition of the promises made to the fathers, and their inviolability declared Luke 1:68; and He came as "a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to CONFIRM the promises unto the fathers" (Rom. 15:8).

If facts were not exactly ad foretold, there would be less excuse for doubting, the truthfulness of God; but there is none, for we are actually in possession of the means and opportunities of accomplishing that which was promised. God indicates His will by giving the power of performing it; and "it is accepted according to that which a man hath, and not according to that which he hath not."

The case of Ephraim was to be peculiar: the peculiarities promised to Israel in the line of Ephraim have all been found in the case of the English, who, therefore, are undoubtedly the people contemplated in the promises.

The promises are certainly ours, although we may fail in faithfully laying hold upon them, and so come short of the blessing intended for us. God is faithful, and His promise sure. Not in our own wisdom, power, or goodness let us have confidence, but in the Faithful Promiser. [Emphasis ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: we have failed and come short!]

TWENTY-FOURTH. Do you not think in the present dispensation the middle wall of partition is broken down between Jew and Gentile - "all one in Christ:" -so that whatever view we form of the scattered tribes, their privileges are all for a Future Dispensation?

REPLY. - "There is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus;" both may be alike partakers of His saving grace. Still, both male and female do actually exist, and they have each their several parts to act in society. So with Israel among the Gentiles. We have not now to make a difference between one and another portion of the human race. That is already made, and exists in nature. Scripture clearly recognizes this difference when it speaks of "the wild olive branch, contrary to nature" being grafted into the good olive tree, and of the "natural branches" being much more likely as engrafted again "into their own olive tree" (Zech. 4.; Rom. 11.). The whole world is witness to the relative positions of the Anglo-Saxon and other branches of the human family. When "the wild olive," or Roman "branch" at the Council of Trent cut itself off from "the good olive tree," by forbidding the circulation of the Scriptures, then our nation came into full connection with the Word of God, and showed such an adaptation for the reception and transmission of the Gospel as quite distinguished them from other races.

True, we have not acted up to our privileges. Still they have been continued to us from age to age. Our concentrated energy at home, wide extension over the whole earth, and the power bestowed upon us, not only of handing out an open Bible to all other nations, but also of interference in behalf of the oppressed portions of the human race, and of humbling the most haughty, were all promised to Israel when cast out among the Gentiles; and, notwithstanding our evil deserts, they have been singularly bestowed upon us. Are we wrong in ascribing all this to the free electing grace of God who chose us in our fathers; not that we should be selfishly privileged or presumptuously confident, but that, like Joseph in Egypt, when not known as Israel, we should fulfil the prophecies in being privileged with the ministration of blessing to many? God hath not dealt so with any other people. Soon may we recognize, in His providential working with regard to us, His early purpose, as declared by the Patriarchs, opened up by the Prophets, and confirmed by Him, who came certainly not to abrogate the promises made by the Fathers.

The privileges which have come to us have certainly not been given as an afterthought of God, but according to His original purpose and design: "The Covenant which He commanded to a thousand generations," and the Lord's Covenant with His people, had a special reference to their being entrusted, as undeservedly as our race has been, with the keeping and communication of the Divine Oracles (Isa. 59:21).

We do not plead for self-indulgent privileges, but for the consideration of undeserved mercies, and for a sense of responsibility correspondent to the stewardship with which we have been actually entrusted. We welcome all to a participation of the same blessings we ourselves enjoy. Even in a future dispensation, those of other nations who happen to be among Israel in the land, and who conform to the same rule as the people of God, are to partake of the same privileges as Israel (Isa. 56:3, 6, 7; Ezek. 47:22, 23).

The matter stands thus:- Israel were to be punished by being stripped of what was thought to distinguish them from other nations. They were banished from the Lord's land, and divorced from the Mosaic covenant (Jer. 3.). The very name of "Israel" was to be taken from them (Isa. 63:16). They were to be made Lo-ammi, i.e., not my people, or "Gentiles." (Hos. 1.)

But this outward appearance of things did not alter the reality of their descent from Israel, any more than a child being made a foundling, and brought up as bearing a different surname from that of its father, would be a denial of its parentage when, from sufficient evidence, that was undeniably proved. Having lost the name of "Israel," we were to be found bearing the Name of CHRIST, being called "SONS OF THE LIVING GOD" (Hos. 1:10; Isa. 43:7). In Him the fatherless will find mercy (Hos. 14:3). Hence was to spring our blessing (ver. 5). "FROM ME IS THY FRUIT FOUND" (ver. 8).

TWENTY-FIFTH. Do you imagine that all the English are of "Israelitish" origin? Who then are the Gentiles? And if the Israelites are mixed among the nations, what is your idea of their genealogy?

REPLY. - We are not merely in the place of, but are really descended from "ancient Israel." Yet it is not therefore necessary that every individual in these countries should be undoubtedly descended from ancient Israel. Those of the Gentiles who joined themselves to the people of God were made one people with them. So it was, and so it is to be again (Isa. 56:6-8; Ezek. 47:22, 23). Other nations might be lost in Israel, but Israel were not to be lost in other nations (Jer. 30:11). The case of the individual as being allowed to rejoice with the gladness of God's people, and glory with His Inheritance, does not depend upon his natural descent from the Fathers, but on being remembered with the favor God bears unto His people and visited with His salvation. It is a wonderful confirmation of our faith to see the faithfulness of God in fulfilling, His covenant mercy to the people He foresaw, and with whom He has been dealing from the days of old, in order that we should be a people to show forth His praise. But the ground of our confidence individually and collectively is Christ alone. All other ground of boasting is taken away from either Jews or Gentiles, or the Church of God. [emphasis ABCOG.ORG EDITOR]

The Jews, we certainly know, were most extensively mixed with Canaanites, Edomites, and peoples of the countries in which they were scattered both before and subsequent to the coming of Christ; and they were and are reckoned Jews. What is your idea of the very purest Jew, whose mother appears to have been a CANAANITESS; Or of Joseph's posterity, whose mother was the daughter of an EGYPTIAN priest? They soon began to mix with the people of the land, so that even in our Saviour's genealogy we find both Rahab the CANAANITESS and Ruth the MOABITESS! Moreover one of those who was most employed in furnishing the Temple was the son of a man of Tyre, whose mother was of the daughters of Naphtali (1 Kings 7:13, 14); the Nethinims, who were devoted to the service of the temple, were CANAANITES (Josh. 10:22); and the other inhabitants of Jerusalem down to the time of David were JEBUSITES, or at least Jebusites dwelling "with the children of Benjamin" (Judg. 1:21; 2 Sam. 5-24.).

And it might be well asked, if the Gentiles were thus mixed among the Jews in the Capital, the Temple, and the Royal Race, what do you think of their supposed genealogical purity? We do not certainly know that to any great extent admixture with the Gentiles has been the habit of the outcast house of Israel, but if we may take the case of the Jews for an example, we shall see that Ephraim may have much "mingled himself among the people" without the integrity of the race being lost.

TWENTY-SIXTH. What then is the meaning of "God shall ENLARGE Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem"?

REPLY. - It ought to be considered that the popular interpretation of this passage depends upon giving the meaning of "multiply" to a Hebrew verb which is never elsewhere so interpreted. The true meaning, "persuade," is found in the margin: "God shall persuade Japheth;" that is, He shall invite him to come in; He shall entice him to unite himself to the family of Shem: "and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem." Shem is at the head of the family. He is master of the tents in which Japheth has been induced to become an inmate - a sort of indoor servant - while Canaan is his servant, and thus becomes "the servant of servants unto his brethren," being the servant of Japheth, who is the servant of Shem.

That is to say, the principal people, intellectually and morally, in Europe and our settlements generally all over the world, are descendants of Shem, to whom belong the "tents" and management of affairs generally. And along with them are the descendants of Japheth, whose ancestors had previously come into these countries, but did not truly possess them or develop their resources, and have actually given way to the more modern race who are the ancient people of God brought into the position appointed from the beginning, of "inheriting the Gentiles," so that they should minister good to the whole family, educating and emancipating even the down-trodden children of Ham.

We have too easily taken for granted that this passage refers to the multiplication of the European race as being the descendants of Japheth; and it is, indeed, wonderful how people have stopped here, and refused to go on to the many and undoubted promises of multiplicity to Abraham, Isaac, and the house of Israel, and especially to the descendants of Joseph.

Even in their outcast condition, as Scythians (sukkoth, Lev. 23:43; Zech. 14.16), dwelling in "tents" among the Gentiles, God hath been making them the head of the heathen, and multiplying them as He had said (Isa. 54; Jer. 3:8).

TWENTY-SEVENTH. We are told that the Anglo-Saxons are descended from the Sacae, and that these lived near where "the Jews" must have wandered. But if "the Jews" formed a nation as suggested, the race would have stood out in strong contrast to neighboring races. I am not aware that the Anglo-Saxons very materially differed in their social or religious habits and customs from Scatina Gentium, the north of Asia, and Europe.

REPLY. - The Saxons are indeed supposed to be descended from the Sacae; and as the House of Israel - not "the Jews" - had begun to call themselves by the name of "Isaac" (Amos 7:9, 16), shortly before their removal by the Assyrians to the same neighborhood as that out of which the Saxons, by our best historians, are judged to have come, and as the promise to Abraham was "IN ISAAC SHALL THY SEED BE CALLED" (Gen. 21:12; Rom. 9:7), and as that destiny has not been fulfilled in any other people, we of course judge them to be what they are named and appear to be; especially as they are now found in the place and at the time the people lost as "children of Israel" were to be found, "sons of the living God" (Hos. 1:10).

That the Sakai especially were a vigorous, enterprising, practical, self-governing race, and eminently possessed of a progressive character, was proved by their proceedings previous to their embrace of Christianity. But, of course, it is since these "outcast branches" were engrafted by the apostolic ministry "into their own olive tree again," that they have really begun to bring forth the fruit of all the culture they had received from the days of Abraham onwards. It was, however, as ENGLISH (or Engli - Heb.- rendered "calves of the stall" in Mal. 4:2), that they were to "go forth and grow up," and for those among them who feared the Lord's Name "would the Sun of Righteousness arise with healing in His wings." Since the great awakening by the marvelous extension of missionary enterprise at the close of last [18th] century, our people have been in many lands truly what Israel was to be in the latter day - "as a dew from the Lord" (Mic. 5:7). But we have not only been employed in the ministry of mercy, frequently have we occupied ourselves in the execution of judgment, and this also was predicted of us (ver. 8).

We must look steadily at God's great purposes with regard to Israel as avowed in Old Testament promise and prophecy from the beginning, and compare with these the great past and present historical facts of our race, and see if we can better account for them in any other way than by saying that THE FRUIT WHICH APPEARS IS ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE MADE RESPECTING THE SEED THAT WAS SOWN.

TWENTY-EIGHTH. We have not the same language as the Jews; we do not speak Hebrew.

REPLY. - Shall we say that the Jews were not "Jews" because they spoke Chaldee [Aramaic] when they were in Babylon, and seem to have brought it into the south of Germany, and after their restoration spoke Syriac? Shall we say that the Normans were not Northmen equally with the Danes, because that previously to their coming into this country they had been awhile in France, where they had acquired the French language, which they sought to impose upon the English?

Neither is the language called French the language of the Franks, from whom are descended the people called "French," or at least that portion of them who are the lineal heirs of those after whom that country bears its present name. And yet all the north-western tongues contain much Hebrew; which in the south are frequently rendered by their Chaldee equivalents. The Jews themselves do not ordinarily use pure Hebrew [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: until their return to Palestine]; but when they have a language of their own, it is a mixture of the languages of the peoples with whom they have intercourse; although they have always had the Hebrew in their hands as a Written language. So far as We know, the Anglo-Saxons had not the latter advantage; but making allowance for the circumstances, they had as large a proportion of words of Hebrew origin in their ordinary speech as the Jews have in theirs. There are 600 Hebrew roots, and there are over 600 Hebrew words in the English language; and it is a curious fact that we still retain the very characteristic which distinguished the Ephraimites so early as the days of the Judges (Chap. 12:5, 6.) The hissing sound of the English speech has been remarked by foreigners: when the Jews say Moshes, we say Moses; and when we say "Monies," the Jews say "Monish." Thus even in the pronunciation of our language, we bear evidence of our Ephraimitish descent.

The English language is so like the Hebrew that it can more easily be made to express the contents of the Hebrew Scriptures than any other; and as regards words, any one who has studied and compared the two languages carefully will be able to say that an immense proportion of especially the vulgar [common] part of our language has a very close affinity with the Hebrew in sense and sound, - making allowance, of course, for the Ephraimitish pronunciation.

TWENTY-NINTH, "Great mistake appears to be made in the use of the name Ephraim," &c.

REPLY. - The supposed misuse of this name, Ephraim, in later prophecy cannot affect the stability of the promise of the birthright to the sons of Joseph, nor frustrate their realization by the children of Ephraim, which name may at least be supposed to include the literal descendants of Joseph's younger son. Great misconception and confusion arises from jumbling together not only the cases of Jews and Gentiles, but also those of Israel and Judah; and from applying to the Jews the predictions respecting Ephraim, and to Ephraim those belonging to the Jews.

THIRTIETH. "There is a great deal in our history contrary to the supposition, of our Hebrew origin, or at least not in favor of it; such as the darkness of our pagan history before the invasion of Julius Caesar, the fact of the Saxons not being our sole originators, but Danes, Scots, Normans, &c. and the whole aboriginal Britons. Besides, the Saxons were fierce pagans, without a trace of Jewish ritualism about them."

REPLY. - Like some of the other objections, this is not very clearly stated. The coming of Julius Camar had little or nothing to do with our Saxon ancestors, who did not arrive till centuries after his invasion, when the Romans had withdrawn their forces from Britain. It is nothing against our Israelitish origin to say that we have sprung from Jutes, Saxons, Angles, Danes, and Normans, or from the Cymri or Welsh; for the "seed" of Israel were to be "in many waters" (Numb. 24:7.) Israel were not only to be cast far off among the nations, but also scattered throughout the countries (Ezek. 11:16;) therefore they might well come from various quarters, and under different names into the place prepared for them, and where the Lord was to be to them what He has been to us, "a little sanctuary" in the countries into which they were to come after being carried into Assyria.

But there is not such a variety in our parentage as has been supposed. The Jutes, Angles, Saxons, and Danes were brethren; and the Normans were Northmen originally the same with the Danes, who having settled in France, came thence into Britain with the language and much else belonging, to that country which from them has been called Normandy. The Cymri or Welsh also are said to have come from the neighborhood of the Black Sea by the same route which the Saxons and Goths used at a later period in coming into Western Europe.

THIRTY-FIRST. "The Welsh certainly are a most remarkable people, and the Cymri [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: Cymry is western Wales] were evidently Baal-worshippers."

REPLY. - And you might have added that in this way they be identified with Israel, who were likewise noted for similar idolatry.

In the ruins of Nineveh a marble slab has been found, which bears on this point of the discussion, and has been translated as follows:- "SARGON MARCHED AGAINST THE CITY OF SAMARIA, AND AGAINST THE TRIBE OF THE BETH KUMRI, OF WHICH HE TOOK AWAY 27,280 FAMILIES INTO ASSYRIA." And in the British Museum is to be seen a black basalt obelisk five feet high, on which this has been deciphered: "The tribute of Yahua ab-il Khumry;" i.e., of Jehu the son of Omri:- "silver, gold, vessels, goblets, pitchers, and other things, all of gold, have I received." And one of the baked clay hexagonal prisms also tells that in the reign of Esarhaddon the Kimmerians were under the leadership of one TUISPA.

Now the Israelites of Samaria were often called "Kumri," because of their idolatrous priests called "Chemarim." The Kimbri, Cimbri, Cumry, or Cymri, are always mentioned by Tacitus as making part of the great Germanic race. As "Scythians," they have occupied Denmark, a small part of the north of Germany, and Great Britain, where the Cambrian Scythians and Cymri are called "Welsh;" from Goer (Heb.), "a stranger," which next became "Goel," and then "Woel."

Herodotus says (Book 4., s. xi.), that the Cimmerians came from the region called Kimmerion (the country of the Khumri Israelites).

Pliny says that the Saccasani gave to their country the name of Saccasena (Saxonia). Sunna signifies "son" (and also the Hebrew Shanah, a repetition). Now the Sacae were the most celebrated of the Scythians (wandering tribes or dwellers in booths.)

NOTE. - The Hebrew word "Chemarim" occurs only three times in the Old Testament: 2 Kings 23:5, where it is translated "idolatrous priests;" Hos. 10:5, where it is simply "priests;" and Zeph. 1:4, where the word is given untranslated. In the German Bible the word "Camarim" is retained in all three passages. The letter m, at the end, being merely part of the masculine plural termination, the real word stands KMRY.

For further information, consult Layard's "Nineveh," Rawlinson's "Herodotus," "Western Asiatic Inscriptions," and "Parkhurst's Hebrew Lexicon."

THIRTY-SECOND. "If they had been Jews, must have brought their rites with them; but they did not bring one."

REPLY. - What rites? The Ten Tribes were not "Jews" as we now understand the term. They had forsaken the Law of Moses after the death of Solomon; and God granted them their choice, gave them a bill of divorce, and sent them away; while He retained Judah under the old marriage covenant (Jer. 3; Hos. 1., &c.).

ISRAEL never belonged to the synagogue worship adopted by the Jews after their return from Babylon. They had been given over to worship "the host of heaven, the sun and moon, and new gods," such as were worshipped by the Kymri and Saxons, the remembrance of which we retain in the days of our week. But it is not correct to say that in their corrupted form of religion our forefathers were without evidence of their having sprung from ancient Israel. As noticed in the work on "Our Israelitish Origin," in their places, times, and manner of worship, as well as in their forms of government, arts of peace and war, physical, moral, and intellectual constitution, and in their language, which is a gathering up of all the languages spoken between this and Egypt, along the routes by which they have come into Western Europe; by all these - but especially as fulfilling the destiny of Israel when out of the Land - may we know these people to be "The outcasts of Israel," to whom the Lord hath been showing the mercy promised unto our forefathers; and, as in the case of Abraham, simply through faith.

For thus it was to be, "That the promise might be sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the Law" (Rom. 4:16) under which the Jews were, while ISRAEL was divorced and sent away (Jer. 3:11-17). The Promises were not only to the Jewish portion of Israel, but to "that also which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all." Israel were to be cut off, cast away, and to appearance lost. But the people nominally lost as "children of Israel," were in truth to be found "sons of the living God" (Hos. 1, 2).

It is nothing against this to maintain that our history is dark, and that previous to our submission to the rightful Heir of David's throne, many of our ancestors were fierce pagans. It is far more to the prejudice of our argument that we now act so little like "sons of the living God," and are so feebly employed in conveying blessing to the nations. Yet so it is, that if the Lord have a people upon the earth, they are to be found among the English; and if there be a ministration of blessing at all to the nations, it is through their instrumentality. Soon may we fully awake to the duties of our high calling in Christ Jesus, and as truly realize our oneness in Him in the outpouring of His Spirit, as we have in the past fulfilled the other predictions respecting Israel! Soon may the Tribes of Israel unite in calling for the Return of their King! It is meet that our preparation should precede HIS coming.

THIRTY-THIRD. "We are not Jews. We have not their peculiar manners, customs, or physiognomy."

REPLY. - ISRAEL never were Jews. Also the Jews have acquired their religious peculiarities since Ephraim separated from them; and more particularly since the Babylonian captivity. Joseph was mistaken, after only a few years' separation, for "a man of the country," by his own brother. And if Judah did not know Joseph, much less is it to be expected that the Jews should recognize us after the families have been separated for thousands of years. And yet many of us bear the peculiar features of the Abrahamic race, even more prominently than the Jews - beauty, activity, integrity, invention, and progress. Our political arrangements and social manners also bear the impress of the institutions of Moses; while our loss of circumcision and seeming change of language may be accounted for by the analogous case of the Jews (Nehemiah 13:24). - "Watchmen of Ephraim," 1:202, 381, &c.

When the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans took place, Israel had been 800 years divorced from that old Covenant, of which Circumcision was regarded as the outward sign. Comp. Jer. 3:8 with 1 Kings 18., Hos. 1. Why, then, should they be looked for as retaining it in their longer wanderings in the Northern Wilderness, when all the time of their sojourn in the Wilderness of Sinai, under the leadership of Moses, they left it altogether unobserved? (Josh. 5:7.) Then they expected soon to enter the Land of Promise; but now they had been given a "bill of divorce," and sent away, bereft even of the name and other outward tokens of being the Lord's people. Besides, was it not clearly foretold that ISRAEL, as distinct from Judah, should be "utterly taken away," and that they should be made "Not His People"? (Hos. 2, 3, &c.)

THIRTY-FOURTH. In no particular can I see any feature which resembles the peculiarities of the Jews; but very many that are common to the heathen races of Europe and Asia.

REPLY. - To do justice to our argument we should not look for the peculiarities of the people called "Jews;" but for those characteristics which the God of our fathers declared it was His purpose to impress upon the people He intended to make use of for conveying His truth and manifesting His goodness to all nations. Let the English especially be judged of in this light - not, indeed, according to the rule of absolute perfection, but as being compared with others, in regard to physical, moral, and intellectual qualities, and whatever may be needful to a race designed for universal stewardship. There is a genial vigor in the Anglo-Saxons, which, of course, best develops under the influence of Protestantism; but it was manifested in its own way before they were nominally acquainted with Christianity; and when converted by Roman missionaries they became the most active and successful belonging to that church. Other races had high civilization, and received the Gospel pure from the teaching of the Apostles; but if they have not retrograded, they have for many centuries made comparatively little advance; whereas the Anglo-Saxons received it when it was being overlaid with superstition, and thus have been privileged to bring it forth in truth for the blessing of all nations. They are partially mixed with the Romanized portions of European population; but where this is least, integrity of character and practical goodness are the most conspicuous; and such as we do not find even among other Christian nations, whether civilized or barbarous, previous to their conversion.

The writer of "Our Israelitish Origin" was not singular in recognizing Israelitish customs in those of Britain. One of the most intelligent writers upon the Land of Israel says, "The land was held, like that in our own country, in the times of our Davids and Williams, by military tenure or service. Every Israelite of age was liable, by his feudality, to be called out to bear arms in defence of his country. Each tribe had its own 'elder,' who administered the laws, and led the forces to battle. His subordinate officers were the heads of families, as the emirs and sheiks are among the Arab population of the present day."Hundred Days in the East," by the late Rev. A. P. Black.

THIRTY-FIFTH. "The Anglo-Saxons had a plurality of deities; and I am under the impression, at least, that human sacrifices were not infrequently offered up to their deities."

REPLY. - It is true that the Israelites ought not to have become idolaters; but there would not then have been the necessity for their expatriation. One of the principal reasons for Moses teaching the children of Israel the words of his remarkable song is thus stated (Deut. 31:29) "For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you, and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the Lord, to provoke Him to anger, through the work of your hands." He also predicted that in "the latter days" it would be said of them (chap. 32:16, 17),-

"They provoked Him to jealousy with strange gods,

With abominations provoked they Him to anger.

They sacrificed to devils, not to God

To gods whom they knew not,

To new gods that came newly up,

Whom your fathers feared not."

The Druids, it is said, offered up human sacrifices; but this order of men did not belong to the Anglo-Saxons. Some people are as apt to confound the ancient Britons with the Anglo-Saxons as they are to call the house of ALL ISRAEL "Jews." Only confusion of idea can be expected from such confounding of terms. But even supposing the Anglo-Saxons were guilty of offering up their children in sacrifice, those who expect to find Ephraim by Jewish marks should not object, seeing that "the Jews" were accustomed to cast their children to Moloch, even in the neighborhood of their national Temple at Jerusalem, where Josiah had also to put down "the idolatrous priests" of Baal.

THIRTY-SIXTH. "But we have not been dealt with in Judgment, according to the threatenings against Israel"

REPLY. - Our forefathers were so dealt with, that, as Israel under the [penalty of the] Law, they were "destroyed" (Hos. 13:9). Then fell they back into "the Everlasting Arms," to be dealt with according to the free promises made to the Fathers, and which Paul identifies with the Gospel (Rom. 15:8). The term of Israel being forsaken by the Lord was to be comparatively "for a small moment" (Isa. 54:7). She was to be followed into the wilderness, and there spoken to "comfortably" by the Lord (Hos. 2:14). When the working of God in Providence is considered in the light of His Word, it will be found that He has been the God of all the families of Israel in their generations (Jer. 30:24; 31:1). And at the time of Israel's restoration Ephraim, the Lord's "Firstborn," is to be discovered AMONG THE GENTILES as "a seed the Lord hath blessed" (Isa. 61:9), as having been corrected in measure, and not left altogether unpunished (Jer. 30:11). God covenanted with Abraham to be the God of his posterity "in their generations" (Gen. 17:7; 28:13-15). The New Covenant, or Testament, was promised to the same people with whom the former Covenant was made (Jer. 31.); and finally, the Bride inhabiting the Heavenly City is found to be more especially of the twelve tribes of Israel (Rev. 21:12).

PREVIOUS TO THEIR RESTORATION Israel are recognized as possessing great political power and abundant means of temporal and spiritual blessing (Isa. 58.). The promises made to the Fathers, their opening up by the Prophets, and the indications of the New Testament, all require that Israel should be found A PEOPLE CALLED BY THE NAME OF THE LORD - a Christian people, - AND AMONG THE CHIEF MEN OF THE EARTH (Isa. 41:9).

THIRTY-SEVENTH. - "The Hebrew nation is positively to dwell alone, and is not to be numbered with other nations. A plain distinction is to be, kept up; not a vague, uncertain, or casual separation. The Jew is to be a Jew, without ambiguity or question."

REPLY. - The Hebrew verb Ghah-shev (Numb. 23:9) is found in this place only in the reflexive form, and the passage should be read "And shall not reckon itself among the nations." So long as Israel were permitted to continue in the Land of Promise, they exulted in their separation from other nations. It was not with their own will that this distinctiveness ceased to exist. It was God's act, consequent upon their disobedience. Yet it may be said the prophecy of Balaam here alluded to regards the number of the people of Israel rather than the distinction of race (ver. 10.) "Who can count the dust of Jacob, and the number of the fourth part of Israel?" If Israel were to be altogether distinct, as some have supposed the Jews to be, of course they could be reckoned up.

The words are not so applicable to the Jews, who during nearly the whole Christian dispensation have been without a country of their own, as to ISRAEL; who, besides dwelling here in the British Isles in "a place of their own," are infinitely spread out among the nations of the earth. WE cannot be reckoned up. "The dust of Jacob" cannot be counted.

It is not correct to say that no actual admixture with other nations has taken place with regard to the Jews. Facts are opposed to such a theory. They are a very mixed people. They mingled with the people of the Land as soon as they entered it. Even Salmon, prince of Judah, married Rahab, a Canaanitess. In the same line we find Ruth the Moabitess. But such actual admixture of races did not vitiate our Saviour's genealogy. He was the promised "Seed of Abraham."

In the time of the Maccabees the Jews subdued the Edomites and forced them to become Jews (Josephus, B. XIII., c. ix. §. i.; Prideaux Conn. Vol. iii., 413,) so that when our Saviour was born, the king of the Jews [Herod] was an Edomite. Herod mingled his blood with that of the highest priestly family of the nation, which by some has been supposed to be altogether apart from other nations. If they were to be apart from any particular people, surely it should be from that against which the Lord said He would have "indignation for ever" (Mal. 1:4.) Yet these Edomites were merged with the Jewish people.... [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: Wilson's speculation about Edom omitted].

Not only have other peoples been mixed with the Jews. The germs of the first churches were Jewish, and left their descendants not among the people known as Jews, but among the Christians who have been reckoned Gentiles. Are not "all the promises of God yea and amen in Christ Jesus?" Or are those promises respecting Israel's glorious future sure to only the descendants of the Jews who rejected Christ - that Blessed One through whom alone the blessing can come?

THIRTY-EIGHTH. "That no actual admixture of races is sufficient to constitute a claim to Jewish privileges is evident from the case of the Samaritans, who as a mongrel race were classed by our Lord with Gentiles, not to be visited by His disciples. Israel was to be a peculiar people, and will be so to the end of time."

REPLY. - It has been already shown that even in our Saviour's genealogy an actual admixture of races did take place. It may be questioned whether it was merely "mongrel" descent that prevented the Samaritans from being regarded with favor by the Jews, who received proselytes from among the Gentiles, and even compelled many to become Jews. The mere fact of doubtful descent, or even of undoubted Gentile descent, would not have kept the Samaritans apart from the Jews. It was because they said, "Our fathers worshipped in this mountain" (Gerizim), while the Jews maintained that "Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship;" it was because they had a different center of unity, and were acting in disobedience to the command that Israel should have one altar; it was because they did not conform to the law, and not on account of their being a mongrel race, that they were in separation from the Jews.

Had the Samaritans conformed to the Jewish system, they might as well have been merged into the Jewish nation as the Edomites, or such portion of the Canaanites as the Gibeonites, who were brought almost as near to God in the Temple worship, as the Levites. The Jebusites also appear to have remained in Jerusalem, and to have been built up in the capital of the Jews. On the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite, the avenging angel stayed his hand when the people of Israel were being hewn down by pestilence. This afterwards became the site of the Temple - the center of unity for all Israel.

There is some mistake with regard to the claim of Jewish privileges being made on behalf of the English. We only show that the blessings we have enjoyed have not come by chance, but are according to God's appointment, as indicated in the mystery of Jacob's blessing the sons of Joseph. We only claim to use the blessings which God promised to a people distinct from "the Jews," and which have actually come to us, not by right of natural descent, but by adoption and grace. God has been marvelously dealing out the blessings of the Firstborn to us who have eyes but see not, and ears but hear not; who have been employed in opening the ears of others to the great things of God, but have not been hearing what He has been saying respecting our own peculiar case - the most remarkable in the, Providence of God, both as regards His cause and the destinies of mankind.

In the future Israel is not to be unmixed any more than in the past. The stranger is not to say, "The Lord hath utterly separated me from His People" (Isaiah 56:3, 6-9; Ezekiel 47:22, 23). He is to be received into God's house, and to have inheritance equally with Israel.

THIRTY-NINTH. In what sense can "the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel," be from Joseph, as stated by parenthesis in Jacob's prophecy, Gen. 49:24? Is not Christ the Good Shepherd of Israel (Ezek. 34:11; John 10:11, 12); "the Tried Stone" (Isa. 28:16; Matt. 21:44)?

REPLY. - In all cases of disputed interpretation of Scripture we should endeavor to ascertain the primary meaning of the Hebrew or Greek words used; and when we do so here, we find that the whole controversy has arisen out of the supposed divine inspiration of the artificial vowel points introduced by the Jewish commentators, called MASORETES, who ranged from about A.D. 200 to 950, which are a continual gloss upon the meaning of the Law and the Prophets, and whose one great aim seems to have been to baffle the New Testament (as in this case) and to hinder the Christian conversion of the Jews by false construction of several parts of the Old Testament which are referred to or translated in the New.

The greatest of uninspired teachers have always appealed to the common sense, or human powers of comparison and judgment, of their hearers. But in a matter of this kind, where so much depends upon a competent knowledge of an unfamiliar language, educated conscience also requires to be in active exercise, carefully to ascertain the meaning by personal scholarship, or by a true appreciation of the force of competent testimony. Self-sufficient, idle carelessness is easily satisfied.

What then is the true meaning of these three letters, M-SH-M, translated "from thence" in Gen. 49:24?

M which is here rendered "from," in the immediately preceding clause is translated "by," and might just as well or better have been in this case; and SH-M, Shem, "name," as of a person, which either out of carelessness, or for the reason previously stated, has been here given the vowel of Sham, signifying "there," or a place. The primary cause of the two significations of the same word may have been that SHEM had his dwelling at Damascus, which to this day is called by the Arabs EL SHAM, or "the place of Shem." Shem, as applied to the Name of the Lord, is used throughout the Old Testament, as in Mal. 1:11, 14; 4:2. Hence this passage should rather be translated "The arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the Mighty God of Jacob " (Psa. 144:4), BY THE NAME OF THE SHEPHERD (Familiar Friend) OF ISRAEL (Psa. 23:1; Prov. 18:10).

FORTIETH. Were the Anglo-Saxons one and the same with the Teutonic peoples?

REPLY. - No; the Sakai and KADUSI were distinct, though allied peoples in the time of Cyrus. They went up with him to the siege of Babylon, predicted 170 years previously by Isaiah (13:3). (See Xenophon's " Cyropaedeia," B.v., 2, 25.) The latter was one of the inspired designations of the people of God, as in Exod. 19:6, where it is promised that if they would obey the Voice of God they should be to Him Goyi Kadosh = "a Holy Nation." From its first and second syllables come the words GOD (Saxon), Deus (Latin), and Theos (Greek); as also the Chaldaic forms of the same, as applied to the peoples = GOTH and TEUT. The other nearly synonymous designations, Germani, "the numbered strangers" (Gen. 15:13), mentioned by Herodotus as among the Persians, and Allemani, "all the numbered," are likewise Hebrew, as well as the Sakai (or bowmen, Kashi) of Joseph, and the Angli or Engli (bullocks), of Ephraim (Mal. 4:2; Jer. 31:18).

FORTY-FIRST. "The Scriptures were composed by the Jews; to whom we are indebted for those sublime compositions which have delighted and instructed the world in all succeeding ages, and to which, we ourselves owe our superior civilization."

REPLY. - True, several of those employed in penning the inspired volume were Jews. Others doubtless were Israelites; but whether the one or the other, neither can be allowed that honor which belongs alone to the Divine Spirit - the production of the Word of God.

If the Bible be the Word of God, it cannot be regarded as proceeding from "Jewish genius," which nearly overlaid it by vain traditions (Mark 7:10-12), and was not infrequently exercised for the destruction of those whom God employed in the utterance of Divine Revelation for their reproof, correction, or instruction. If the Bible had been of the Jews' own making most probably there would have been more self-laudation in it, and less of the truth with regard to both themselves and others (Jer. 38:3, 4).

Did the Jews appreciate the Scriptures, or discern their true import even after they were produced? They did not. Even till this day they "do err, not knowing the Scriptures" (Matt. 22:29). The very first of the sacred writers [Moses] is not understood by them with regard to the most important subject of which be wrote. Even after fulfilling the Prophecy for eighteen hundred years, they do not discern the humbling cause of their being so long trodden under foot; although they had been so pointedly forewarned of the danger of not hearing "THAT PROPHET" which should be raised up unto them (Deut. 18:15). See also Stephen's testimony (Acts 7:51-53).

FORTY-SECOND. "We are under obligations to the Jews, because we have received the Gospel from them. The Apostles were Jews."

REPLY. - We did not receive the Gospel from the people who are now called Jews. And as to their ancestors, did they not forbid the Gospel to be preached to the Gentiles? (1 Thess. 2:16.) Were they not "filled with madness" when they heard that a message of mercy had been sent to us which, were "afar of"? (Acts 22:21, 22). The apostles and all employed in a work so distasteful to the Jews had become CHRISTIANS, and their posterity were not left among the people now called Jews, but among the followers of Christ. If we wish to express thankfulness for the labors of the apostles, it should be in striving to do good to their descendants, whom it is useless to seek among those who would have hindered their work, but may be found among those who endeavor to follow in the footsteps of the Lamb of God. This consideration will not hinder us from doing good to the Jews; but we should act from right principle, - out of gratitude to our Lord Jesus Christ...

FORTY-THIRD. "The Jews are to be in such repute that ten men out of all languages of the nations even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew."

REPLY. - This passage (Zech. 8:23), when examined with its context, shows that the prophet speaks of coming before the Lord in prayer. [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: This also applies physically after the return of Christ, see Zech. 12.] Now there is One who sprang of the tribe of Judah, under the covert of whose robe of righteousness we can draw near to God with acceptance. It is as laying hold of the skirt of "the Man" (Heb. Ish), the Companion Husband that is a Jew, that "ten men out of all the languages of the nations," among whom Ten-tribed Israel were cast out and scattered abroad, are able to approach the Father. Around the skirts of the High Priest's garment were golden bells, which represented the utterance of the Word of God in all languages of the nations. The Word of God is laid hold upon, so as to draw men together in the worship of God. It is only as being clothed with Christ's "robe of Righteousness" that we can come before God, and say to those who have been speaking by the power of the Spirit, "We will go with you; for we have heard," we have listened to the voice of "God with you."

The JEW spoken of is certainly the Lord Jesus Christ, the Companion Husband of Israel whom the Jews rejected, and to whom Israel were to be united according to New Covenant mercy revealed by Him who speaketh from heaven by His Holy Spirit of promise. It is as being united with Jesus and His followers that we come into blessing. Apart from Christ there is no Immanuel "God with us."

FORTY-FOURTH. "But are not the JEWS the Kings of the East,' to prepare the way for whose return the waters of the river Euphrates are being dried up"? (Rev. 16:12).

REPLY. - Certainly the Jews are NOT "the Kings of the East," and if they are to obtain this advancement, it must be at the expense of the English who are in actual possession of sovereign power in the East. [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: This happened in 1947 with the founding of the state of Israel!] Our own abode being in the West, it is important that we should have the power of traversing the intervening countries between the coast of Syria and the Persian Gulf.

On the banks of the Euphrates arose those "waters great and many" (Isa. 7:8), that swept Israel forth of their land. There also the Turks rose into the power which they have since used for desolating the Land, [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: the Turkish Ottoman Empire ruled Palestine until 1917] and for preventing free communication between the East and the West; while our own people have risen to the dominion of the East, on whom also will ere long be forced an occupation of the great highway between the East and West.

Let us look unto Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. The blessing was to come through faith upon the children of promise. Not as Jews was the blessing to come upon them, but as "Gentiles," or "Nations." Let us be thankful to God for the privileges we enjoy, and endeavor to make a right use of them; that disappointment may not result from our promise of fruitfulness, as in the case of the Jews, of whom it was said, "They will reverence My Son." This was no more than might have been reasonably expected. But they said, "This is the Heir: come, let us kill Him."

So surely as the Inheritance was taken from the Jews, will it be given to us, if we be found bringing forth the FRUITS thereof (Matt. 21:43). The fruit expected from us is the doing good unto all as we have opportunity, seeking in all things to glorify Jesus by obedience to His great law of love. Let us contemplate our privileges for humiliation, considering the misuse we have made of the many favors bestowed upon us - natural, spiritual, and providential, - and the power of influencing the happiness of all nations in all parts of the earth. Correspondently great is our responsibility, not to leave the duties of the firstborn to be attended to by another people, to whom "the birthright" was not promised, and has not been given (I Chron. 5:3; Jer. 31:9); for in so doing we are quite as blind and perverse in our own way as the Jews have been in continuing to reject the Messiah.

FORTY-FIFTH. "But was it not said respecting the Jews, 'Blessed is he that blesseth thee; and cursed is he that curseth thee'?"

REPLY. - These words in the prophecy of Balaam (Numb. 24:9), and others of the same import, spoken by the Lord to Abram (Gen. 12:3), have been understood by many as having reference to the merely natural seed of Abraham, without any regard to their spiritual condition... [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: Wilson's argument at this point becomes irrelevant to the topic of Israelitish Origin.]

FORTY-SIXTH. "Who, then, ARE the Jews?"

REPLY. - Genealogically, a Jew is a descendant of Judah, the fourth son of Jacob. When. the Ten Tribes revolted from under Rehoboam the son of Solomon, and chose Jeroboam the son of Nebat to be their king, the tribe of Benjamin, descended from the youngest son of Jacob, remained with the house of David and these two tribes, with individual families from the others, constituted the kingdom of Judah, as distinct from that of "All Israel." This latter title remained with the great body of the people, who dwelt along the whole eastern and western frontiers, and also possessed the main portion of the land north of Jerusalem (1 Kings 11:12).

TIRZAH appears to have been chiefly the royal residence among the revolted tribes till the time of Omri, who built Samaria (1 Kings 16:23, 24), which was their capital till the time of their deportation by the Assyrians (2 Kings 17.).

The greater number also of the priests and Levites, as well as individual godly families "out of all the tribes of Israel," cast in their lot with the kingdom of Judah, of whose royal family it had been predicted that Christ, the Shiloh, the Prince of Peace, was to come; unto whom was to be the gathering of "the people of the God of Abraham" (2 Chron. 11:13-17; Gen. 49:10 Psa. 47:9).

Jerusalem, which had been the capital of All Israel for seventy-three years, during the reigns of David and Solomon, and in which was the Temple of the Lord, the place of sacrifice for All Israel, lay on the confines of Judah and Benjamin, and continued to be the capital of those who adhered to the house of David (1 Kings 2:11; 11:42; 2 Chron. 7:11-16). Thither they still went up to worship; although the other house -that of Israel - had abandoned the worship of God, according to the Mosaic ritual, from the very time of the revolt.

In the Books of Kings we are given the parallel histories of the kings of Israel and Judah. In the Books of Chronicles is given the history of Judah mainly, and that of Israel only incidentally, down until the captivities: first Of ISRAEL, near the end of the eighth century B.C. (2 Kings 17); and that Of JUDAH at the very end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries B.C. (2 Kings 24, 25.).

The JEWS were restored from BABYLON after seventy years' captivity, many of whom appear to have settled in the north part of the land, previously inhabited by their brethren of the house of ISRAEL, and which subsequently was called Galilee. During their captivity in Babylon, much of their own district of country to the south of Jerusalem had been seized by the Edomites. About B.C. 129, these [Edomites] were conquered by John Hyrcanus, who gave them their choice of either becoming Jews, or of leaving the country (Josephus, B. X111., c. ix., § 1). They preferred to become Jews; and the result was, that Herod, an Edomite, had intermarried with the family of even the high priest, and was king of Judea when our Saviour was born (Matt. 2:1).

Portions of other neighboring nations were from time to time incorporated with Judah and Benjamin; and from all these together are descended the people we call Jews. The name "Jew" is in itself a glorious title. Literally it means praise or confession, and appears to have been given with a reference to Him unto whom "every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess" (Phil. 2:10; Gen. 49:8). At the birth of Judah his mother had said, "Now will I praise the, Lord" (Gen. 21:35); and Jacob seems to have recognized both the humanity and divinity of our Lord when he said, "Judah, thou art He whom thy brethren shall praise." David, who so directed the praises of Israel to the coming Saviour, was a JEW in the right [accurate] sense of the word.

In the very beginning of the epistolary writings of the New Testament this title is claimed for the true worshippers of God (Rom. 2:28, 29): "For he is not a Jew which is one outwardly; but he is a JEW which is one inwardly, whose PRAISE is not of men, but of God."

So, also, near the beginning of the Apocalypse [Book of Revelation] a caution is repeatedly given against looking only on the outward appearance (Rev. 2:9): "I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan." "Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie. Behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee" (Rev. 3:9).

It should not be forgotten that in the, apostolic age the Jewish people were parted into two great portions; that of those who believed, and took the name of Him in whom they believed, the Expectation of Israel from the beginning. THESE held to the faith, did the works of Abraham, and were called CHRISTIANS after Christ, the object of their praise.

But the others, who remained under the curse of their broken law [i.e, having broken the law], and were verily guilty in rejecting and speaking against the Holy One of God - "that Prophet," - have in common parlance been called Jews; although they have no true claim to the blessing of either Judah or Israel, until found in that "One Seed" unto whom the promises were made (Gal. 3:16-29; John 8:24). It is only in Christ that all the promises are "Yea" and "Amen" (2 Cor. 1:20). From the time of that generation which rejected the Saviour, the Jews have been left "wanderers among the nations," witnesses to all men of the impotency of mere natural descent to procure the blessing. And in proportion as our people [the natural House of All Israel] have been gathered unto Shiloh, and have submitted themselves to Him, hath "the blessing of Abraham" come upon them, although bearing the name of Gentiles.

FORTY-SEVENTH. "What do the Jews say about this theory of the Israelitish origin of the English? Are they willing to allow the place of the Firstborn to another people than themselves?"

REPLY. - A Jewish writer once undertook, in "The Scattered Nation," to reply to the query, "WHERE ARE THE TEN TRIBES?" But the real question was ignored - that of the Birthright, the heirship to "the promises made unto the fathers," which were to be fulfilled to a people in Christ whom our Lord distinguished from the Jews, saying, "The kingdom shall be taken from you, and given to a Nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" (Matt. 21:43).

Many are the prophetic Scriptures which make a similar distinction between Israel and Judah; recognizing the fact that the people lost as Israel were to be found in Christ (Isa. 54:5); that the people made "Lo-ammi" [Not a people] were to be made "the people of God," "being born [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: begotten] again of the incorruptible seed of the word" (1 Pet. 1:23; Hose 1:10); and that they would ultimately be made the means of evangelizing the world, and of converting the Jews (Jer. 31:7). When "the dispersed of Judah" are gathered together, it will be as being added to "the outcasts of Israel," who Will have been previously "assembled" (Mic. 5:3; Hos. 1:11).

When "Jacob, by faith, blessed both the sons of Joseph" (Heb. 11:21), under Divine guidance, he spoke words which the God of truth intended to fulfil, by actually bestowing upon them the inheritance of blessing promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Gen. 15:5; 48:16-19). The people appointed to inherit this Birthright therefore are not to be looked for among the people called Jews, but among those who are uncircumcised [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: Circumcision is irrelevant - 1 Cor. 7:19] as Abraham himself was when God entered into covenant with him, as recorded in Gen. 15. Indeed, when "Jacob, by faith, blessed both the sons of Joseph" with the fullness of the blessing promised to him and to his ancestors, he recognized those who should especially heir these promises as being, "a multitude of GENTILES " (Or Goyim).

The blessing of Abraham was to come upon the GENTILES, through faith (Gal. 3:14), who were to be literally descended from Jacob through his long-lost son Joseph. They might not be known to the Jews any more than Joseph was known by Judah when he came down to buy corn in Egypt, and found his brother in the very circumstances predicted by those dreams, on account of which, and his truth-telling tendency, Joseph was hated by his brethren, and sold by them into the hands of the Ishmaelites. Joseph was certainly not known as a Jew, or even as an Israelite, when his brothers met him in Egypt. He was regarded by them as a mere Gentile; and it is clear that his descendants, who were especially to inherit the Birthright, were to be "a multitude or fullness of GENTILES" (Gen. 48:19).

Such being the case, where are we to look for these heirs of blessing? Of course not among those who are known not to be "Goyim," who have always distinguished themselves from the Gentiles, ... The people of promise were to "be known among the Gentiles" (Isa. 61:9), not by the curse [of Deut. 28], but by the blessing; not by the reputation of Israelitish descent, but by their being "born [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: begotten] again of the incorruptible seed of the Word" (1 Pet. 1:4); by their being found "sons of the living God" (Hos. 1:10). Not as common Gentiles, worshipping idols dumb that cannot save, they were to be found a living, life-diffusing race. "All that see them shall acknowledge them that they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed." Those who have not found blessing in Jesus and all who do not wish to be a blessing "in the midst of the nations," and to "the ends of the earth," we do not claim as worthy of an Israelitish origin.

FORTY-EIGHTH. "A pretentious volume [Wilson's Our Israelitish Origin] has been written to demonstrate that the Anglo-Saxon race, are alone entitled to this honor, although the Irish and Welsh have been found to dispute their claim."

REPLY. - The author of the magazine article, "WHERE ARE THE TEN TRIBES?" like the rest of our opponents, seems to have been too wise in his own conceit to prepare himself for rightly reporting on the subject. So far from claiming, an Israelitish origin for "the Anglo-Saxons alone," the book recognizes "THE ISRAELITISH ORIGIN OF THE MODERN NATIONS OF EUROPE." We never even thought of all the tribes as being comprehended in the Anglo-Saxons, nor of setting up their claim as opposed to that of the Welsh, or to those of our people in Ireland, America, Australia, New Zealand, the Cape of Good Hope, or other "ends of the earth," whither they have been spread out. The claim of the English was not made to the exclusion of either the Nestorians or any other Christianized portion of ancient Israel on the Continent.

Neither was a claim put up for the Anglo-Saxons as being descended from the lost tribes generally, but only from that tribe from which "a multitude of Gentiles" were to proceed, who, for Christ's sake, were to be found in the position occupied by the English, from whom light and salvation were to go forth to the nations generally, and who were to be so manifestly favored of God, that when men asked blessing for other tribes, they would ask it after the pattern of blessing given in this people, saying;, "God make thee so-and-so. God give you the privileges of British citizens. God give you an open Bible, liberty of worship, a free press, free trade, constitutional government, an asylum at home for the oppressed of all nations, and free development by colonization to all the ends of the earth" (Gen. 48:20).

We perfectly agree with the writer alluded to that "blindness in part has happened to Israel." And so it was to be "until the fullness of the Gentiles" promised to Ephraim should have "come in; and so all Israel" shall be blessed along with him. Why? Because the more Ephraim comes to the knowledge of his true position as the Firstborn will he imbibe the spirit of the Great Redeemer in yearning for the Recovery of the Lost.

Jacob made a clear enough distinction between the children of Joseph and the other tribes of Israel. But this author conglomerates them into one confused mass under the curse [of Deut. 28]. Does he doubt that God will prove true to His promise? (Lev. 26:40-45). He recognizes the wondrous accuracy of prophecy in regard to the Jew, and quotes Deut. 28:37: "Thou shall become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword among all nations whither the Lord shall lead thee." The echoes of these denunciations are caught up after the lapse of centuries, and in 1 Kings 9:7 we find it written, "Israel shall be a proverb and a byword among all people."

FORTY-NINTH & FIFTIETH: [These address aspects of Jewish history irrelevant to "Our Israelitish Origin"]

FIFTY-FIRST. "Did not the Lord say (Ezek. 20:32) that Israel should not be as the heathen to serve wood and stone? How then can the Saxons be of Israel, since all their branches were heathen when they came into the west?"

REPLY. - In "The Watchmen of Ephraim" ii, 344-352, is a full exposition of Ezek. 20, where it is shown that those to whom the Lord speaks in ver. 32 are the people generally called Jews, but whom Ezekiel denominates "Israel," as distinguished from "ALL ISRAEL," or "the WHOLE HOUSE OF ISRAEL," spoken of in the same chapter. See also 11:15; 37:16.

The Jews have been in the case predicted. They have neither had the Voice of Prophecy among them, neither have they been, like the heathen, serving idols of wood and stone. They have not been, as they will be hereafter, seeking the Lord their God [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: in the way God requires]; but neither have they been "for another man." Hosea 3 describes the case of the children of Israel known as Jews, with whom the name of Israel was left when it was taken from the other house, who are spoken of throughout chap. 2., but are not once named as ISRAEL; they having been utterly taken away, and made "LO-AMMI." [Not a people]

Their cases are contrasted by Hosea 1:6, 7, &c. From the further predictions of this prophet (4:17; 8:11) it is evident that Ephraim was for a long time to be left to idolatry and variety of sinful worship. In conclusion, however, Hosea most distinctly shows that EPHRAIM was to become Protestant [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: !? - "turn to God"]. Like the Prodigal Son, he was at length to come to himself, and say, "What have I to do any more with idols?" He was to submit himself to Divine grace, saying, "I am like a green fir tree," [(Hos. 14:8)] fair to appearance, but unworthy of his name "Ephraim" ("I will bring forth fruits"); to which the Divine response is, "From Me is thy FRUIT found." Not only was Ephraim to protest against idolatry, but he was also to have true life-giving communion with the God of Israel.

FIFTY-SECOND. "And after all, what warranty does the Scripture give for considering the Ten Tribes as lost? The Apostle JAMES write to the Ten Tribes scattered abroad."

REPLY. - In Deut. 28. we have described principally the case of ISRAEL, reaching to ver. 48; and thereafter we are told of the cruel siege and long Tribulation consequent upon the dispersion of JUDAH under the Roman Eagle. Now with regard to ISRAEL it is said (ver. 36), "The Lord shall bring thee unto a nation, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known; and there shalt thou serve other gods, wood and stone." All must agree that this does not particularly apply to the Jews. The end of the Ten Tribes was to be their being lost as Israel, described in ver. 48. "Therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies which the Lord shall send against thee, in hunger, and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things: and he shall pot a yoke of iron upon thy neck UNTIL HE HAVE DESTROYED THEE." This surely declares that they should be lost as bearing the name Of ISRAEL. The destruction of the Jews was not to be so absolute; but they were to be left long under it, and "few in number" (ver. 45-62).

A people cast "out of sight" of the Lord may surely be called "lost;" and this is said to be the case of the whole seed of Ephraim (Jer. 7:15). A people dead and buried, and their "bones scattered in the open valley, very many and very dry," so that God only could know whether they could ever again come to life; and so as that the prophet required to be told who they were, and what was to become of them, were surely "lost." Now thus lost, as distinct from Judah, were "the whole house of Israel," as described in Ezek. 37. True, they were not to remain "lost." They were to be raised up by the Word and Spirit of God, and made to "stand upon their feet, an exceeding great army."

Was it not unto the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" that the Good Shepherd sent His twelve apostles? Did He not come to seek and to save that which was lost? Ezek. 34. Did He not give up His life "that He might gather in one the 'children of God' that were scattered abroad" (John 11:52), the people who had become Lo-ammi, but who as children of the living God were to be gathered into one? (Hos. 1, 2; John 17:20). Are we to look for the descendants of the Twelve Tribes, "scattered abroad," to whom the Apostle JAMES writes, recognizing them as "having the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ," among the unbelieving Jews? Have we any record of their conversion to Judaism? If the descendants of these Primitive Christians are to be found anywhere, they are, of course, to be looked for among the Christian nations, not among the Jews. If they were of "outcast Israel," they had been divorced in reference to the old covenant, and must not therefore be looked for as under it (Jer. 3.).

It is rather out-of-the-way reasoning to say that because the twelve tribes were Christians in the Apostolic age, therefore they are to be looked for as having wandered away to Judaism and become an unnoticed fragment of the Jewish remnant, remaining under the curse of a broken law [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: of having broken the law, Deut. 28], from which thousands of years ago the greater part were divorced and sent away. True, the Jews were retained under the old covenant; but some distinction should certainly be made between "JUDAH and the children of Israel his companions," and "EPHRAIM and the tribes of Israel his fellows" (Ezek. 37:16-19).

FIFTY-THIRD. How can Hos. 3:4 apply to the English? [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: "The children of Israel shall abide many days without a king.."]

REPLY. - The case there predicted is not that of Israel when seeking the Lord; therefore it cannot apply to the English when they have become a Christian people, and are professedly subject to Christ. It is not said that after they become seekers of the Lord they will be left in the condition described of being left for "many days" without a king, and without a prince. It is not that appointed to her who had been made desolate, and to whom the Lord was to be able to say, as in Isa. 54:7, 8, -

"For a small moment have I forsaken thee;

But with great mercies will I gather thee.

In a little wrath I hid My face from thee for a moment:

But with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee,

Saith the Lord thy Redeemer."

In Hos. 1-3, as in Isa. 54. and Jer. 3., two women are spoken of and are contrasted with each other. These two represent ISRAEL and JUDAH. From the former even the very name was to be taken; and they were to be lost among the Gentiles. This is the people represented by Gomer and her children in Hos. 1.; it is also the nameless people whose case is more particularly described in chap. 2. While this woman was yet in the wilderness, the Lord was to espouse her to Himself, according to the New and Everlasting Covenant after which she was to "sing as in the days her youth." [(Hos. 2:15)]

In [Hos.] chap. 3., quite another woman is spoken of. Upon Ephraim and his companions God "had not mercy, but utterly took them away." They were entirely "lost" as Israel until found in Christ. But that portion of the children of Israel generally called Jews, and with whom the name of "Israel" was left when taken from the people to whom it more especially belonged, were to be left in long and lingering suspense, in contrast with the other house, whose alienation was to be more complete for the time, but of far shorter continuance, "for a small moment," after which she was to be made to forget the shame of her youth, and to remember the reproach of her widowhood no more (Isa. 54:4; Jer. 3:12-16).

FIFTY-FOURTH. "Israel will he converted at the second coming of Christ, after they have been gathered again in wicked unbelief into their own land and city."

REPLY. - [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: Wilson does not address the substance of the question, but, after discussing side-issues, concludes:] The passage evidently refers to both another people and another time, rather than to ALL ISRAEL in the future.

FIFTY-FIFTH. "Before the Second Advent of our Lord, Israel will receive and worship a false Messiah, whom Christ will consume with the brightness of His coming" (Zech. 11:16, 17; Ezek. 21:25, 27).

REPLY. - These verses do not appear to point to anything more remarkable than to a well beneficed clergy, who have accepted office for the sake of emolument; such, for example, as the high priests of the Jews previous to the destruction of Jerusalem.

So also with Ezek. 21:25-27. We have to remember that Ezekiel calls Judah "Israel," and the house of Israel, or the Ten Tribes, "ALL ISRAEL." This passage refers to the king of Judah. The time had come when the sum of the iniquity of Judah's kings was complete; so that the Lord would bear no more with them, until He should come whose right it is to reign. Him the Father hath acknowledged, and He shall actually be King of Israel.

Rev. 13. is also referred to, where indeed Antichrist is described. The Beast and the False Prophet are both here; but we have no evidence that the Jews will worship either of them after their Restoration. These seem rather to be usurpers who intrude upon Israel while they are out of the land, and who also seek to infest and molest them upon their return.

FIFTY-SIXTH. "Antichrist is yet to be sent as a scourge from God to Israel, as foretold, Isa. 10:5, 6."

REPLY. - But from ver. 5 we may clearly see that the prophecy concerns the Assyrian's commission against Israel at the time of their deportation from the land, and also against Judah for their chastisement. ISRAEL were given up to him, but he was withheld from doing what be would with the Jews; and his proud boasting was to end in his own confusion, when the work was done for which he had been raised up. His boasting as recorded in ver. 8-10, refers to what the Assyrian had already done, not to what Antichrist is yet to accomplish. He had taken Samaria, the capital of Israel, and expected to do the same with Jerusalem (ver. 11). But the Lord had determined otherwise (ver. 24-26). It was because Messiah was to come of Judah, and because of the Anointing that the Assyrian was prevented from destroying Judah (ver. 27).

FIFTY-SEVENTH. " It is after the Second Advent of Christ that the spared of Israel will be made a blessing to the nations" (Mic. 5:7).

REPLY. - It may be true that "Israel after the flesh" is so to be used after the Second Advent; but certainly this passage does not prove it. The context shows that describes the case of Israel when the Land is lying desolate (ver, 10-15), not as it shall be during Messiah's peaceful reign, when the cities will have been rebuilt and the land restored to fruitfulness and beauty. It describes the case of Israel when cast out among the Gentiles, and not yet in possession of their own land. They were to be used for both mercy and judgment while it was "lying desolate without them" (ver. 7, 8). Of them were to be the messengers of the Gospel, and also the people successful in war. While yet among the Gentiles, like our people, they were to have the power of ministering the blessings of peace to the nations; but equally also of inflicting the horrors of siege and of the battle-field.

Notwithstanding all this power among the Gentiles, as here described, their own peculiar inheritance was to be lying waste.

Isa. 66:19, is also referred to in proof of this; but how can it be said, "I will set a SIGN among them," when the Lord Himself is personally present? Is He to be so much in a corner that "a sign" is all that can be said to have been given? Are there still to be "Isles afar off, which have not heard His fame, neither have seen His glory," to whom "couriers " are to be sent after He has come "with the voice of the archangel and the trump of God," [(1 Thess. 4:16)] as the "lightning shining under the whole heaven"? [(Luke 17:24)].

What places are specified? Tarshish is the first; and Javan, or Greece, which is the last, supplied the language in which the New Testament was written, in which the glory of God in His redeeming love is declared to all the world from "the isles of Tarshish." Can those who have for generations possessed the Septuagint or Greek translation of the Old Testament be said never to have heard the fame of Jehovah? As to Tarshish, was not the great apostle of the Gentiles a citizen of one ["Tarsus"], and in design the apostle of another? ["Greeks"] And if we take in also "the isles of Tarshish" - "the isles afar off" - we come to our own part of the world. Spain was Tarshish, and the British Isles were "the isles of Tarshish," the very quarter to which Saul of Tarsus intended to proceed in preaching the Gospel. If anywhere, certainly in these "isles afar off" the fame of Jehovah has been heard, and the glorious Gospel of the grace of God has been made manifest.

As certainly as the message came forth in this direction at the beginning will that Restoration also take place which is referred to in ver. 20: "And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering unto the LORD out of all nations upon mules, and upon swift (conveyances) to My holy mountain Jerusalem, saith the LORD, as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the LORD." Those who thus assist in restoring the Jews will at length be recognized as their brethren. Of that people which the Jews supposed had been cast off as unclean, the Lord says, ver. 21, "I will also take of them for Priests and for Levites." The first messengers of the Gospel were of those who escaped from that evil generation which perished in the destruction of Jerusalem. The last and great preaching of the Gospel is to be by their brethren of the outcast house of Israel.

Most undoubtedly Isa. 43:5-7, refers to "a gathering of Israel." But when? Whence? In what condition? Let us look at the passage:

"Fear not:

For I am with thee:

I will bring thy seed from the East,

And gather thee from the West;

I will say to the North, Give up;

And to the South, Keep not back:

Bring my sons from far,

And my daughters from the ends of the earth;

Every one that is called by My Name."

There is no evidence that this gathering together is in preparation for our Lord's Second Coming. "Fear not: for I am with thee," implies that danger from the enemy is threatened. But at the Second Advent, Satan is to be bound, and to have no power to threaten danger.

The people addressed are in the same positions as are occupied by ourselves. Our seed is in the East; and we are in the West. In the North many of our race are enthralled; and in the South there are hindrances to a centralization in the Land of our fathers. Our sons have gone afar; and our colonies are to be found in all "the ends of the earth."

Then as to the character and condition of the people referred to. They are a people "called by My name" - the Lord's - Christians. They are a converted people - "new created in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:10).

That there may be no mistake about the matter, this is repeated once and again most expressively:-

"I have created him for My glory,

I have formed him,

Yea, I have made him."

All this cannot be said except of a Believing People who have espoused the Lord to be their God according to the Gospel.

There is no evidence whatever to prove that at the Lord's Second Advent ISRAEL are to be found as a people who have not put on the profession of Christianity. [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: But will Jesus find faith on the Earth?] Unto them the Gospel has been more especially sent (Ezek. 34.; Matt. 15:24), and by them it has been universally proclaimed. It is in their case that the Lord will magnify His grace and truth in the land, and most conspicuously the outcasts of Israel will be the heirs of His glory (Rev. 21.).

FIFTY-EIGHTH. "Since the [first] coming of Christ the promises to Israel are in abeyance, but are to be fulfilled hereafter in the conversion of the Jews, and their restoration to their own land."

REPLY. - It is a gratuitous assumption to say that "Christ came" not "to confirm the promises made unto the fathers" (Rom. 15:8), but to postpone their fulfillment for 1800 years; that He came to interrupt the fulfillment of God's Covenant mercy during nearly the whole of the New Testament dispensation, to the people unto whom it was promised in their successive "generations." Did not God appoint that [out] of Abraham should proceed a multitudinous seed, through whom all the nations of the earth were to be blessed in Christ, the One Seed? How can this be if the people through whom God is now blessing the nations by His grace, and who are hereafter to constitute the main body of the royal priesthood in glory, are almost exclusively Gentiles, and not descended from the fathers unto whose children this honor was appointed, and which, be it remembered, came of the free grace of God, according to the everlasting covenant with Abraham?

FIFTY-NINTH. "But the Christian Church is non-Israelitish.

You make it chiefly to consist of 'the twelve tribes scattered abroad.'"

REPLY. - The "Gentiles" were to inherit the blessing of Abraham through faith. The firstborn of Israel were to be known by all nations of the earth being blessed through their instrumentality.

EPHRAIM, the firstborn of Israel, was cast out and lost among the Gentiles, in the quarter whence our Anglo-Saxon forefathers came. Since the knowledge of Christ was brought unto us, and since we professed to place our confidence in Him alone, eschewing idolatry, and since we took the New Testament as our guide, we have been given the blessing of Abraham, and the power of ministering blessing to all nations.

The promises were to be sure to "that [portion of the seed] also which is of the faith of Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised" (Rom. 4:16). And this, as distinct from the case of Judah, was to be what should happen to "outcast Israel," who were given a bill of divorce in regard to the old covenant, and sent away (Jer. 3:8).

We English have been favored as outcast Israel was to be when divorced from the ceremonial law [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: so we are no longer under the penalties we have accrued from breaking the "Old Covenant"], and when we had nothing to trust in but "the Lord our Righteousness." [ABCOG.ORG EDITOR: so that we can enter into the "new Covenant"] We are to ascribe our privileges to the free grace of God according to the Gospel, and not to our own wisdom or strength; and to Him from whom we have received we are to devote all that we have and are in the accomplishment of the work which He hath given us to do.

God has been teaching us faithfulness by His own most truthful fulfillment of ancient promise. He has been going forward from "the days of old" to recover us from our lost estate; accumulating His gifts and storing up His wealth for us in all "the ends of the earth," to bestow it upon us when we were in any measure prepared to make use of it for the purpose designed, - that of inviting all men into the enjoyment of His goodness and a meetness for His glory - that of showing forth His mercy unto all, as He hath showered it upon us.

Even as to temporal things, "He hath not dealt so with any nation." As for "His judgments" in comparison they "have not known them" (Psa. 89:30; 147:20). But this knowledge He is freely presenting unto us, and hath given us the glorious privilege of opening up the wonderful works of God in all languages, unto all the families of mankind in all parts of the earth.

Possession of the blessing was to be known by its being communicated to others. Christ was to be known as glorified, and His disciples as being blessed in Him by His sending through them "rivers of living water" (Isa. 58:11); and by this blessing being upon them the children of promise were to be recognized. Unlike the Jews, they were to be lost as to name and legal rites when cast out among the Gentiles. But at length, by the Blessing, their seed were to be "known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which, the Lord hath blessed" (Isa. 61:9).

SIXTIETH. "What Profit shall this Birthright do to me?"

REPLY. - Esau asked the same question, and sold his Birthright because he "despised" it.

1. It is good to feel that we are what we are, not by the appointment of man, but by the grace of God. That we did not come into the world and fill the place we now occupy by chance; but that the infinitely wise and Almighty God foresaw and provided for our existence, that He prevented [went before] us with the blessings of His goodness, and prepared for us the marvelous means we possess of opening up the treasures of knowledge which have been hid from ages and generations.

2. It is a great thing to feel that God knoweth us altogether; that He hath made use of His omniscience to provide for us so many and such great means both of receiving and communicating good, and this not for the enjoyment of merely transient pleasure, but as a preparation for never-ending happiness in higher states of being.

3. It is a great thing to feel that God is our God from everlasting to everlasting; not from yesterday merely, but from eternity, and throughout all the changes of time. He foresaw what was to be, foretold it, and it came, to pass as at this day; and we are witnesses that God is true, both in the execution of threatened judgment and in the bestowment of promised mercy. We feel that there is no safety but as being in the safe keeping of the Almighty God, and that there is no wisdom but as being wise to do good.

4. God opens to us His bosom of love, and invites us to enter into His gracious and glorious designs, that we may "be made partakers of the divine nature, and escape the corruption which is in the world through lust;" that we may no longer succumb to mere secular influences which enslave and debase the soul, but "seek for glory, and honor, and immortality," and obtain eternal life. What has he to fear, who knows that he is in the eternal purpose of God where he is, that he may make the best of his circumstances, and even draw freely upon the infinite resources of the Godhead for power to uphold in the right, manfully to oppose the wrong?

5. By the Word of Promise revealing the purpose of God and our portion therein, light is thrown upon the proceedings of God in creation, providence, and redemption; and we are given God's working in the past as full security for our enjoyment of the glorious future.

6. God, in the most kindly manner, by His promises teaches us also prudence and moderation. We learn to use things present in the light of things to come. The evils of penury and depression are lessened by looking forward to and preparing for the time of enlargement. We learn to prize present restraint as an opportunity for concentrating our attention more exclusively upon the lessons most necessary for us to learn, that we may hereafter exercise ourselves as we ought in the duties of our high calling.

How great the longsuffering of God! How patient has He been with us! Even when we were yet a great way off, how ready to receive us! (Luke 15.) Over what rebelliousness and back-sliding He hath passed! What long desolation and great Tribulation have been passed through! He gave His Word, and He hath performed it. He hath ever been teaching us, that we may confidently look forward to the full accomplishment of what He hath said, and by the example of our Great Teacher may be taught patience and perseverance in dealing with others, that we may do them good in their latter end. How God has borne with our ignorance and perversity! Let us at length learn to be perfect in this, even as our Father who is in heaven is perfect.

7. It is a great thing to feel that all is of God, and that unto Him all thanksgiving is due. Such engagements lead to solemnity of thought and unity of purpose.

8. He who is accustomed to view everything in relation to the Word and Working of God is likely to rise superior to the motives of ordinary men, and at the same time into some assimilation to Him whose "tender mercy is over all His works." [(James 5:11?]]

9. It is a great thing to feel that we are brethren, and that by our love one to another we may manifest to all that we are the disciples of Jesus. Let us learn to love each other after the example of Him who hath loved us unto the death. It will not lessen our bond of brotherhood to know that we are of those "children of God who were scattered abroad " and lost among the Gentiles, that we might be found in Him "who came to seek and to save that which was lost," and so the better fulfil our destiny in being for blessing to the lost of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation. We know that whatever otherwise may be our origin, we are of the family of God and are fellow heirs with Christ Jesus, and are appointed to enjoy with Him the same eternal blessedness in the home of our heavenly Father.

10. It is a glorious privilege to know that we are appointed of God to be for "blessing," unto all men; to fill up the purpose of God with regard to Abraham His friend:- That his posterity should be for blessing, to all the nations of the earth. And doubtless THE RIGHT USE OF THE WORD OF PROMISE, so wondrously confirmed age after age by the workings of Providence, is OUR BEING HARMONIZED INTO ONE GRAND INSTRUMENT, UNDER THE EYE OF OMNISCIENCE AND IN THE HAND OF THE ALMIGHTY, FOR BLESSING UNTO ALL AROUND US.

Here ends our present consideration of "Anglo-Israel Difficulties." It will interest some to know that the last answer was written with pencil, in the dead of night, on what seemed to be the death-bed of the lamented author, the calm repose and full satisfaction of which have comforted many others in similar circumstances. Five and twenty years before he had written, "We are sowing in tears, but also in joy. There is joy in the actual sowing of the seed, and there is great joy to find how all opposition, however cunningly or confidently put forward, when brought face to face with the Truth and investigated, serves only to confirm it. It is astonishing on what feeble grounds it has been kept at a distance."

To that shiftiest of all subterfuges, "HAVE ANY GREAT MEN EMBRACED THIS VIEW OF YOURS?" his invariable reply was "That would be no substitute for your individual, careful and impartial examination of it, for it must stand by its self-evidence and abundance of proof of all kinds when these are honestly and thoroughly investigated."


Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional

Valid CSS!