Language Proofs Of Descent From Ancient Israel
A QUESTION OF ORIGIN
Note: the following study presents exciting new research identifying
the descendants of the ancient lost house of Israel. It has tremendous
bearing on Bible prophecy, the fulfillment of the covenants, and the
duties and obligations of God's chosen people in the world today.
I. LINKS TO ANCIENT ISRAEL
What happened to the Biblical house of Israel, the people of God who
were carried away into Assyrian captivity eight centuries before Christ
and never heard from again? This age-old mystery can finally be solved
through the knowledge which archaeology provides concerning ancient
languages. The evidence following supports the theory that the ancient
ten tribes of the northern kingdom of Israel, after their conquest by
Assyria in the late 8th century, B.C., became the Scythian-Cimmerian-Celtic
peoples who colonized Europe in the early Christian centuries. This
view, which has long been known as the "Anglo-Israel theory,"
has been analyzed in an interesting article by author and historian
Geoffrey Ashe. (1)
Ashe states that Anglo-Israel (sometimes called British-Israel)
believers "do not claim that the British people are the lost tribes
because of the legends and alleged linguistic coincidences which are
cited in support of that view. Their starting-point is the Bible, read
in a fundamentalist spirit." As we will see, the linguistic proofs
presented are not alleged at all, but based upon well-attested testimony
of scholars in the field.
The author continues, "The prophets foretell various things
about Israel which have not been fulfilled in the Jews: that God's
people will be powerful, that they will be 'a nation and a company of
nations,' and so forth. Also, a few passages (notably Ezekiel 36:15-25)
certainly seem to keep up the distinction between Israel and Judah after
the exile of both, and to foreshadow a final return and reunion... The
British-Israelite, or any other theorist who thinks on these lines,
feels no obligation to produce scholarly proofs that the lost tribes
exist. He already knows that they do because, on biblical grounds, they
must. Their reality is an axiom, not a conclusion. His non-Biblical
arguments are offered mainly as indications confirming the belief he
already holds." These are key points: The lost tribes of Israel
must continue to be in existence as a separate people somewhere, even
though they have not yet been identified; there will be a final reunion
with Judah at the end of the age. Further, the Jewish people have not
fulfilled all of the prophecies given to Israel, so we must look
elsewhere to find these prophecies fulfilled. But in which people?
Having answered this from Bible prophecy in a separate tract, we are now
addressing it through linguistics, the study of languages.
Having said this, however, Mr. Ashe closes with a caveat: "But
while a case could be made out for the Empire being Israel in some
symbolic sense, the case for literal ethnic links with the lost tribes
could not be sustained. It was altogether too complicated... [it]
reduces the lost tribes to a theme of speculation only." This
statement is best answered by analogy. If a robbery or murder occurred,
would we accept a police explanation that, 'there is a solution here,
but we won't try to solve it because it is altogether too complicated'?
Of course not! Where lives are at stake, a solution is necessary. In a
Spiritual sense, lives are indeed at stake, who can be transformed by a
knowledge that the Bible is true and the prophecies fulfilled. A mystery
is a subject for "speculation" only until the solution is
found, and we believe that the identity of the lost tribes of Israel is
now proven, as we shall show.
Since Mr. Ashe believes that a solution is "altogether too
complicated," we will simplify our answer to two basic principles
of linguistics, the science of languages.
II. LINGUISTIC PRINCIPLES
CAN ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES OF LANGUAGE BE USED to identify the
ancient mysterious tribes who appear prominently in the Bible and
ancient history? Names of tribal units change when carried over into
other languages, making it a challenge to connect them without definite
guidelines to determining language affinities. There are two
well-established principles in particular that enter into this
discussion regarding ancient languages, both European and
Middle-Eastern. One concerns consonants, and the other concerns vowels.
They are:
· "Guttural" consonants "Kh", hard
"G", and hard "C" are interchangeable.
· Vowels are very frequently interchanged, added, or substituted.
CONSONANTS
We will examine what recognized language scholars have written
concerning these principles, and then make a practical application of
them. First, concerning consonants, the learned seventeenth-century
linguistic scholar, Dr. O'Brien, compiler of the first Irish-Keltic
language dictionary, had this to say: "It hath been observed in the
remarks on the letter C, that it is naturally commutable with G, both
letters being of the same organ and nearly of the same power; and hence,
in our old parchments, they are written indifferently for each other....
The same indifference, or interchangeable use of letters G and C in the
Latin tongue, and the latter being generally substituted in the place of
the former, appears from ancient Roman inscriptions, and most
particularly from that of the Columna Rostrata, erected in honour of
Duillins, the Consul, whereupon were engraved the words macistratos,
leciones, pucnando, Carthaciniensis, for magistratos, legiones, pugnando,
Carthaginiensis, etc... Which gave occasion to Diomedes to call G a new
consonant."(2)
This interchangeability of hard consonants was also true in ancient
Mesopotamia. In the Assyrian Cuneiform Alphabet, the same character
stands for both the hard "G" and "Kh," (as can be
seen in the encyclopedia chart reproduced in the written form of this
tract).(3) A moments' reflection will indicate to you that the same part
of the mouth and throat is used to sound out all three hard consonants:
Kh, hard G, and hard C, and that a change of spelling is easily and
logically made from one to another, because virtually no change in
pronunciation is involved. This is verified by modern Hebrew language
and literature scholar, Dr. Isaac Elchanan Mozeson, who teaches language
studies at Yeshiva University in Jerusalem. He states, "The Hebrew
G, the Gimel, is often a K in Greek and other Western tongues. [The
Hebrew letter G] resembles a backwards K."(4) As an example,
Mozeson gives the word, "colossus," which originated as "Golios,"
the Hebrew word for the Biblical giant, Goliath. He states, "The
Greek pronunciation would sound like "kol-ios" - just as the
[Hebrew word for camel], Gamal, was rendered "kamelos." (5)
Note again the interchanges between the K, G, and C.
Another key point is that it is the consonants which carry the value.
Language expert, Siegfried H. Muller says, "In most languages,
consonants are the main carriers of thought." Further, "The
outstanding structural feature of the Hamito-Semitic family is
triliterality of word roots. They consist mostly of three consonants,
and the insertion or omission of vowels -- often not written and to be
supplied by the reader...vocalization of consonants serves to create a
set of verb and noun forms whose meanings are related to that of the
root." In other words, from a word root of three consonants,
various related words would be created by insertion of vowels, but all
of them would carry the same basic meaning as the root. You would not be
able to take a root word applied to a particular tribe of people, add
differing vowels and identify a different tribe. If the cononental root
word is the same, the two tribes would be the same people. For example,
Muller says, "Correspondingly, from Hebrew KTV are derived KoTaV,
"written," KTiVah, "writing," KTiV,
"spelling," KToVet, "inscription," KTaV,
"script," KaTaV, "correspondent." In all of these,
although various vowels be added, the words all correspond to the same
root topic. We will be applying this interesting principle shortly in
connecting several seemingly unrelated ancient tribes.
VOWELS
Nineteenth-century scholar, Sir William Betham (1779-1853), was
knighted by the King of England for his research into ancient history,
language, and archaeology. He had this to say concerning vowels in
ancient languages: "Vowels are often substituted for each other:
the same words are written promiscuously with an a, o, and u, an e or an
i." (6) As an example, he discussed the ancient inhabitants of
western Britain, "the Welsh, who have ever called themselves by the
name of Cymri, Cimbri, or Cumbri." (7) As can be easily seen, the
name of this ancient tribe has been variously spelled with differing
vowels: Y (often called a "pseudo-vowel"), I, and U. Such
variations are a good example of the common vowel shifts which are found
in the name of this historic people, who we will learn more of shortly.
Another scholar of renown was Dr. Richard Cumberland (1632-1718),
Anglican Bishop of England in the early 17th century. He authored
several celebrated books, and was well-regarded in his day for his
expertise in ancient history and languages. He wrote, "The learned
will not wonder at change of vowels in a name, especially when its made
by authors of different countries and times, because they know this is a
thing very usual; yet for the service of readers that are not much used
to such changes, I will give proof thereof."
"Wherefore, I have observed, that in Jeremiah 48:23, our
translation calls a place in Moab, Beth Meon, which signifies the house
or temple of Meon, agreeably to the Hebrew text and to the Chaldee
paraphrase. But the Septuagint calls it the house of Maon; and so doth
the vulgar Latin. The Moabites agreed with the Egyptians in their
idolatry, who worshipped their first king and planter as a god, under
the name of Osiris. But when they speak of him as a man who first
reigned among them, they call him Meon or Menes, with a Greek
termination: Which word, Bochart well observes, signifies habitations or
places to dwell in, which he brought them to and settled them in."
Samuel Bochart (1599-1667) was a well-known Huguenot scholar.
"Now, by the same reason that Meon is changed into Maon, Menes must
become Manes, as he is called in Herodotus and Dionysius
Halicarnassensis, or Manis, as this god and powerful potentate is called
by Plutarch de Iside. (8)
On the subject of vowels, Professor Cyrus H. Gordon, who is perhaps
the leading American archaeologist of the twentieth century, stated
concerning a Hebrew Old Testament name, "The ancient Hebrew text...
has only the consonants...which were later supplied with vowels to make
a verbal noun of it." (10) In the 6th century, A.D., Hebrew
scholars added vowel marks to the text of the Hebrew Bible in an attempt
to restore the original pronumciation of words. But in some cases, with
words not commonly used, they had to guess what the original vowel signs
should have been. One example of this is the word, Gomer, which was used
in the text of Genesis, Hoseh, and Ezekiel between 1200 and 600 B.C.,
well over a millennium before post-New-Testament-era scholars added
vowel marks. Scholars now know that the letter-sound "O" was
not in use in Semitic languages in ancient times. Linguist C.B.F. Walker
says that the ancient Semitic languages used the four vowel sounds a, e,
i, and u. (Reading the Past, p. 26)
Dr. Isaac Mozeson adds, "The Bible has no vowel marks in the
original, handwritten parchment form...Vowels are certainly
interchangeable, and ought to be largely ignored when comparing words
from different languages." (9) We will therefore remove the vowels
in comparing the names of the following four mysterious peoples in
ancient times.
It is true that some Semitic languages, such as Hebrew, originally
contained no written vowels at all, but only consonants, with the vowels
supplied by the reader. The drawback to this is obvious: Different
speakers might use different vowels, creating a slightly different
pronunciation of the same words. As an example, the name of God in
Hebrew consisted of the four consonantal characters, YHVH, and is
therefore called the tetragramation, meaning "four letters."
Centuries later, a scholarly argument is raging concerning whether the
name of God was originally pronounced Yahweh, Yahvee, Yahvah, or
something similar. The solution may perhaps never be known, because of
the absence of vowels in ancient written Hebrew. Indeed, it is possible
that more than one pronunciation was in use in ancient times, due to the
absence of stated vowels to guide the speaker.
III. FOUR TRIBAL NAMES
These two principles, concerning consonants and vowels
in ancient languages, will help us in identifying several ancient tribal
names which are prominent in the Bible and ancient history. These are
the:
· KHUMRI
· GIMIRRAI
· CIMMERIANS
· GOMER
These names at first notice appear to be entirely different peoples - or
are they? Modern scholars now admit that at least three of them are only
different forms of the same tribal name. To see that this is the case,
let us first examine the above names using our language principle
concerning consonants. Since the guttural consonants KH, G, and C are
all interchangeable, we can rewrite these names as follows: (Note that
in the third name, we can drop the "ANS" which is simply a
Greek suffix indicating proper names. This gives us:
· GUMRI
· GIMIRRAI
· GIMMERI (ANS)
· GOMER
This helps to make the picture clearer, but we need to also realize that
vowel shifts, or changes in the vowels used in a name, were frequent
occurrences. In addition, some ancient languages did not include vowels
in their writing at all. Therefore, the identity of these four can be
most easily seen if we write them using the consonants only:
· GMR
· GMRR
· GMMR
· GMR
Repetition of consonants, as seen in the second and third names above,
was also a common occurrence. Therefore, by the grammatical rules
governing language, all four tribes must be one and the same people. Who
were they? Let's examine them one at a time.
IV. MANY NAMES, ONE PEOPLE
THE "KHUMRI" OR "GOMRI"
When the conquering armies of the nation of Assyria came against the
ten-tribe kingdom of the house of Israel late in the eighth century,
B.C., they did not refer to God's People as "Israel" or
"Jews." Instead, the Assyrian word for them was, "Khumri."
This has been established through the deciphering of Assyrian
"cuneiform" clay tablets. Ancient historian, Alan Ralph
Millard, in his recent book, "Treasures from Bible Times,"
says, "In 1846 men working for Henry Layard on the site of the
ancient Assyrian city of Calah (Nimrud) uncovered a block of polished
black stone, carved and inscribed. The 'Black Obelisk' records the
triumphs of the Assyrian king, Shalmaneser... The first panel in the
second line of pictures proved exciting. The text above the kneeling
figure lists tribute brought to the king from 'Yaua son of [Khumri]'
that is, Jehu, who took the throne from a descendant of Omri, king of
Israel." (11) Millard reproduces the Assyrian words mentioning
Israel, along with a literal translation.
Famed 19th century archaeologist, Sir Henry Layard, rediscovered the
ancient Assyrian cities, and remarked, "An identification connected
with this word KHUMRI or Omri is one of the most interesting instances
of corroborative evidence that can be adduced of the accuracy of the
interpretations of the cuneiform character...Sargon is called on the
monuments of Khorsabad, 'the conqueror of Samaria and of the circuit of
Beth KHUMRI'...Samaria having been built by Omri, nothing is more
probable than that - in accordance with a common Eastern custom - it
should have been called, after its founder, Beth KHUMRI, or the house of
Omri." (12) Samaria was the capital of the Ten-Tribe Israel nation.
The Assyrians named the Israelites after their King Omri, which they
pronounced "Khumri" or "Gomri." This is not
surprising, because the Israelites, as well, often gutturalized the
pronunciation of the Hebrew "O" by prefixing to it the sound
of a "G" or a "Kh." Hebrew scholar Mozeson gives, as
examples, "The correct guttural pronunciation of 'olum' (world,
eternity) is really 'kholum'," (13) and the city-name, "Amora,"
is pronounced in Hebrew, "Gomorrah." (14)
So the first mysterious tribe of our ancient list, the
Khumri or Gomri, are definitely identified by ancient inscriptions as
Israelites of the so-called, "lost ten tribes," who
disappeared from history in the Caspian Sea region of Medo-Persia during
the late 8th century and early 7th century, B.C.
THE "GIMIRRAI, GOMER, CIMBRI, CELTS, TEUTONS"
The Encyclopedia Britannica says, "Certain it is that in the middle
of the 7th century, B.C., Asia Minor was ravaged by northern nomads
(Herodotus iv. 12), one body of whom is called in Assyrian sources
Gimirrai and is represented as coming through the Caucasus. They were
probably Iranian speakers, to judge by the few proper names preserved.
The name has also been identified with the biblical Gomer, son of
Japheth (Gen. x. 2,3). Later writers identified them with the Cimbri of
Jutland, who were probably Teutonized Celts..." (15)
It is fascinating that the Gimirrai suddenly appeared out of seeming
nowhere in the same century as the lost tribes of Israel disappeared,
yet no scholar ventures to investigate a link between them. The
additional mention of "Iranian" (i.e., Medo-Persian) words in
the Gimirrai vocabulary indicates some physical contact between the
Gimirrai and Medo-Persians, such as the captive Israelites might have
been expected to have had. Historian Sharon Turner, in fact, stated that
he identified 262 Medo-Persian loan-words in the Anglo-Saxon-Cimmerian
vocabulary. (16) Who were these mysterious people? According to
scholars, the Gimirrai, Gomer, Cimbri, Teutons, and Celts are all linked
together as the same people. By applying the rules of language, we
realize that the "Gimirrai" were also the same people as the
"Khumri," who have been positively identified as Israelites of
the lost ten tribes. It is therefore no coincidence that the lost tribes
of Israel disappeared in Medo-Persia-Iran (II Kings 17:6), the
birthplace of the Gimirrai.
The same Encyclopedia Britannica article has this to say about the
people known today as Cimmerians: "An ancient people of the far
north or west of Europe, first spoken of by Homer (Odyssey, xi. 12-19),
who describes them as living in perpetual darkness. Herodotus (iv.
11-13), in his account of Scythia, regards them as the early inhabitants
of South Russia (after whom the Bosporus Cimmerius and other places were
named.)" (17) The same encyclopedia reference also traces the
European "Cymry" and "Celts" to this same people.
There seems to be no question in historian's minds, that whoever these
Cimmerians were, they were the ancestors of a significant branch of the
modern people of Europe. (See box below) Again, by applying the two
basic linguistic rules mentioned previously, it may be seen that the
Cimmerians were none other than the Khumri or Gomri, the lost ten
tribes.
BIBLE "GOMER" MIGRATED TO EUROPE
"Gomer...a people known in Assyrian inscriptions as Gamir or
Gimirrai. They are the Cimmerians of ancient Greek
literature...According to the Greek author Homer, the Cimmerians...
appeared in the northern provinces of the Assyrian Empire at the time of
Sargon II, during the 8th century, B.C....Poets of the time spoke of the
"Cimmerian Bosporos," and the Armenians still call part of
their country Gamir. It is thought that the Crimea bears their name to
the present day." -Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 1, p. 269
"...In Yoma 10a and Yer. Meg.i.9...stands either for "Cimmerii"
or for "Germany". -The Jewish Encyclopedia, vi:40
"Gomer: ...Most of the interpreters take him to be the ancestor of
the Celtae, and more especially of the Cimmerii." -Popular &
Critical Bible Encyclopedia, ii:726
"Gomer...became identified with the German Cimbri and the Celtic
Cymry." "The old sound of their name is still retained in the
mouth of the inhabitants of Wales, who call themselves Cumri or Cymry,
and their land Cymru." -Franz Delitzsch, quoted in Commentary on
the Holy Scriptures, by John Peter Lange, xiii:362
"The Cimbri, as well as the Cumry or Cymry in Wales, and in
Bretagne [Britain], are to be regarded as in relation with the
Cimmerians." -Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, by John Peter
Lange, i:348
V. WHO WAS GOMER?
The eminent Christian historian and archaeologist, Dr. Henry Sayce,
stated, "Gomer is the Gimirra of the Assyrian inscriptions, the
Kimmerians of the Greek writers." (18) Many reference works
associate the names Gimirrai and Cimmerians with Gomer, connecting all
three together (see references above) using the very same established
linguistic rules we have presented. In fact, because the ancient Hebrew
language did not contain vowels, the present rendering of "Gomer"
is a later construction. Since it is now known that the original
Assyrian word for Israel was pronounced "Khumri," and the
Babylonian was "Gamir" or "Gimirrai," it is probable
that the original vowel-less Hebrew word was pronounced similar to these
actual forms, as well. This information is known through the reading of
ancient source documents which give us an accurate view of the 7th
century, B.C. world that was not possible until recent years.
The first scholarly reference above tells us that the Gimirrai
suddenly appeared in history during the reign of Sargon II, 722-705 B.C.
He was the Assyrian king who conquered Samaria and deported the
Israelites to the Assyrian-controlled province of Medo-Persia. It is
amazing that historians never notice the tremendous
"coincidence" of this: The first historical notice of the
existence of the Gimirrai was during the same 17 years that the
Israelite-Gomri-Khumri were deported and lost to history in that same
province!
GOMER IN GENESIS
But the connection of "Gomer" or "Gimirrai" with
ancient Israel has been clouded by confusion over reference to them in
the tenth chapter of Genesis, the so-called "register of
nations." In Genesis 10:2-3, we read, "The sons of Japheth;
Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and
Tiras. And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah."
A literal, racial interpretation of these verses would make Gomer (or
Gimir) a son of Japheth, and not of Shem as the Israelites were. But
there are at least two important reasons why this is not so. First,
Japheth lived at the time of the Noahic flood, which has been dated by
Christian scholars to about 3400 B.C., more than 2,500 years before King
Omri, who reigned about 882 to 871 B.C. As shown previously, the
Israelites were called "Khumri" or "Gimirri" after
King Omri; clearly, the "Gomer" in Genesis chapter ten is ages
before his time!
Secondly, the tenth chapter of Genesis is a geographic representation
of nations, rather than racial, and is allegorical rather than literal.
We believe in taking the Bible literally whenever possible, interpreting
allegorically only when a literal explanation cannot apply, such as the
case here. It has been shown by scholars that the national relationships
found in Genesis Ten do not fit a literal, racial interpretation. For
example, Dr. Sayce says, "The tenth chapter of Genesis is
ethnographical rather than ethnological. It does not profess to give an
account of the different races of the world and to separate them one
from another according to their various characteristics. It is
descriptive merely, and such races of men as fell within the horizon of
the writer are described from the point of view of the geographer and
not of the ethnologist. The Greeks and Medes, for example, are grouped
along with the Tibarenian and Moschian tribes because they all alike
lived in the north; the Egyptian and the Canaanite are similarly classed
together, while the Semitic Assyrian and the non-Semitic Elamite are
both the children of Shem. We shall never understand the chapter rightly
unless we bear in mind that its main purpose is geographical. In Hebrew,
as in other Semitic languages, the relation between a mother-state to
its colony, or of a town or country to its inhabitants, was expressed in
a genealogical form. The inhabitants of Jerusalem were regarded as 'the
daughter of Jerusalem,' the people of the east were 'the children' of
the district to which they belonged." (19)
Dr. Sayce points out that this is the reason the South Arabian tribe
of Sheba is listed twice in Genesis Ten, once under the designation of
Ham in verse seven, and again listed under Shem in verse twenty-eight.
The tribe of Sheba originated in the south, later spreading a colony far
to the north to clash with Assyria in the days of Tiglath-Pilesar and
Shalmanesar. (20) Sayce further remarks, "When, therefore, we are
told that 'Canaan begat Zidon his first-born, and Heth,' all that is
meant is that the city of Sidon, and the Hittites to whom reference is
made, were alike to be found in the country called Canaan. It does not
follow that there was any ethnological kinship between the Phoenician
builders of Sidon and the prognathous [i.e., 'protruding-jaw'] Hittites
from the north. Indeed, we know from modern research that there was
none." (21) Sayce, in fact, reproduces Egyptian drawings of both
Phoenicians and Hittites, (shown in the printed form of this tract)
showing graphically that there was a dramatic difference in racial
features (and therefore origins) between these two peoples. Similarly,
Assyria, Elam, and Babylonia (Arphaxad) were called brethren, "not
because the natives of them claimed descent from a common father, but
because they occupied the same quarter of the world." (22) Ancient
races portrayed on Egyptian monuments are shown in the printed version
of this tract, reproduced from Sayce's book. Included are a king of the
Hittites (with pigtail), Hittite soldiers, an Israelite, and a chief of
Ganata or Gath, showing Phoenician-Canaanite features. (23)
PROPHETIC NAMES FOR ISRAEL
GOMER: Assyrian, Khumri or Gomri; Babylonian, Gimirrai or Gamir,
Greek, Cimmerian; English/Welsh, Cymry, Cimbri, Cumbri, or Celt
JEZREEL: "Scattered" into Assyrian dispersion 762-676
B.C.
LO-RUHAMAH: "Not pitied" by God because their sins received a
just recompense.
LO-AMMI: "Not God's People," because they were divorced
by Him and sent away to a far land.. Scholars have traced their
migration through the Caucasus Mountain region and into Europe in the
early pre-Christian centuries.
SONS OF THE LIVING GOD: "Christians" -Israel's ultimate
restoration would later come when they accepted Christ as Savior,
becoming His Bride at the marriage supper of the lamb.
GOMER IN HOSEH
The name, Gomer, appears again in an interesting passage in Hoseh 1:3.
The Encyclopedia Britannica comments on that prophetic book by saying,:
"The most interesting and important problem of the book relates to
the marriage of Hosea, which is closely related to the form and content
of his message. According to the first chapter, Hosea is commanded to
take a harlot for his wife and children of harlotry; he therefore
marries Gomer bath Diblaim, who subsequently has three children, to whom
the prophet gives symbolic names that he may make them the texts of
prophetic messages concerning Israel." (24) In prophetic symbolism,
the prophet Hoseh marries an Israelite harlot named "Gomer,"
(probably originally pronounced "Gomri" or "Gimir")
symbolizing the Ten Tribes of Israel, who true to the prophecy became
known as Gimirrai or Cimmerians. In God's eyes, Israel indeed was a
harlot adulterating herself with false worship, and the fact she is
purposely called "Gomer" shows that people to be ethnic
Israelites. The symbolism continues with their children's names: Jezreel,
(meaning "scattered"), Lo-Ruhamah ("not pitied"),
and Lo-Ammi ("not my people"). As these prophetic names show,
Israel was punished by being conquered, scattered in the Assyrian
dispersion, and divorced by God. Hoseh's words therefore make no logical
prophetic sense unless "Gomer" and her offspring were lost and
dispersed Israel and their descendants. Hoseh 1:10 is appropriate here:
"In the place where it was said unto them, 'You are not my people,'
(i.e., no longer recognized as Israel and perhaps blind to their true
identity), there shall they be called, 'sons of the living God.' (i.e.,
"Christ-sons" or Christians, an indication that a Spiritual
transformation in them would later occur). History recorded the
fulfillment of that prophecy when the "Celtic-Cimmerian"
peoples migrated into Europe, accepted Christianity, and became known as
Christendom, or "Christ's Kingdom."
"Hoseh's words make no logical prophetic sense unless Gomer and
her offspring were lost and dispersed Israel."
GOMER IN EZEKIEL
One last important reference to Gomer needs to be mentioned, which
appears in Ezekiel chapter 38. Gomer is listed as joining a confederacy
led by "Gog, chief prince of Meschech and Tubal." Gomer
apparently does not lead this confederacy, nor are the other listed
confederate nations Israelites. In addition, one should not assume that
all of the lost tribes, Gomer/Gamir, are allied with Gog, but only one
portion. So it is primarily a non-Israel invading force, which also
includes some number of Israelites. Therefore, dispensationalists who
identify Gomer as Europe may be at least partially right in that
identification, because the Celtic-Cymry race did spread throughout
Europe, before colonizing North America, Australia, South Africa, and
other lands. But because Gog's army invades the "mountains of
Israel," they assume that Gomer itself must not be Israelite. That
assumption has little basis. Israelites have warred among themselves
since the kingdom was divided into Israel and Judah after the time of
Solomon, about 975 B.C. Whether the battle typified in Ezekiel is
literal or allegory is impossible to predict beforehand, but that it
represents to some degree yet another fratricidal war between Israelites
seems obvious.
One possible fulfillment was addressed in the old nineteenth-century
prophecy, "GEORGE WASHINGTON'S VISION," a prophetic vision
received by America's first President during the Revolutionary War. It
speaks of a confederacy comprised of "Europe, Asia, and
Africa" coming in battle against America: "Then my eyes beheld
a fearful scene: From each of these countries arose thick, black clouds
that were soon joined into one." The late Professor C.A.L. Totten
of Yale University wrote in the year 1898: "The third and last
peril clearly indicates a future invasion of our country by the Old
World. The drift of events and Bible prophecy indicate that a great
combination of powers will be the actor." (25) In the prophecy,
help against this peril comes in the form of divine assistance,
apparently the Second Advent.
"GOMER WAS AN ISRAELITE..."
-Dr. Thomas Scott's Bible Commentary,
Vol. IV, p. 704, Hoseh 1:2 (1864)
VI. SUMMARY: TWO CERTAINTIES
The Encyclopedia Britannica article we quoted states that it is
"certain" that the tribe of Gomer is identified with the
Celts, Teutons, and related peoples of Europe. We have found through
linguistics (the study of languages), as well as through Bible prophecy
in Hoseh, that the people called Gomer or Gimir are in fact Israelites.
Linguistically, Israel's name, Khumri, is the phonetic equivalent of the
European, Cymri; and Gomri/Khumri is also the consonantal equivalent to
Gomer, Gimir, and Cimmiri. Therefore, if it is indeed a certainty that
Gomer is found in the Europeans of today, then it is an equal certainty
that those same Europeans are Israelites.
We have quoted sources that find these Cymry-Celtic people in England,
Wales, and Germany. The Encyclopedia Britannica further traces them to
Scandinavia, Scotland, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Spain, Italy, and
Russia; in fact, they spread themselves throughout the continent of
Europe. The Britannica also reveals that the New Testament Epistle to
the Galatians was written to them,26 in which the Apostle Paul refers to
them as "the sons of Abraham." (Galatians 3:7)
It is odd that scholars so easily admit to certainty concerning the
relationship between the names Gomer, Gimirrai, and Cimmeri, yet are
silent concerning the name Khumri. It is never mentioned or
investigated. Author and historian Geoffrey Ashe, mentioned earlier,
states that it is "altogether too complicated" and "a
theme for speculation only." That argument is rather specious,
since it never appears "too complicated" for them to
positively link the other three names Gomer, Gimirrai, and Cimmeri,
using the same rules!
Mr. Ashe also speaks of "alleged linguistic coincidences"
which support the Anglo-Israel view. But there is nothing either alleged
or coincidental about it. The information we have presented is based
upon standard, accepted grammatical rules, and the known fact that
Israel was the Khumri of the ancient inscriptions. Since the name Gomri/Khumri
is the consonantal equivalent of Gomer, Gimir, and Cymri, it would
indeed be a strange "coincidence" if they were not identical
peoples! Scholars don't consider the identity of the latter three as
coincidence, but as fact!
What does this mean to you and I who trace our roots to this same
Biblical people? It is a tremendous heritage and responsibility that we
realize. Israel was to be God's servant nation, and a light to the
world. Israel, too, would receive many promises, including Jacob's
blessing as outlined in Genesis chapter 49. The knowledge of your
identity should inspire and invigorate you with evangelical fervor, to
make a positive difference in your world and to serve God more
faithfully each day. The Anglo-Israel identity is now a proven fact!
What you do with this knowledge is up to you. See to it that you make
your calling and election sure! (2Peter 1:10)
FOOTNOTES:
Geoffrey Ashe, article: "Lost Tribes Of Israel," in "The
Encyclopedia of Myth and Magic," pp. 1645-1646.
Dr. O'Brien, quoted in Betham, "Etruria-Celtica," 1842, vol.
1, p. 59
McClintock & Strong's Encyclopedia, vol. 2, p. 603
Dr. Isaac Elchanan Mozeson, "The Word," 1989, p. 39
ibid., p. 49
Sir William Betham, "Etruria-Celtica," 1842, vol. 1, p. 58
ibid., p. 14
Dr. Richard Cumberland, "Origines Gentium Antiquissimae; or,
Attempts For Discovering the Times Of the First Planting of
Nations," London, 1724, p. 331
Dr. Cyrus H. Gordon, "The Common Background Of Greek And Hebrew
Civilizations," W.W. Norton & Co., 1965, p. 138
Mozeson, p. 10
Alan Ralph Millard, "Treasures From Bible Times," 1985, p. 31
Sir Austen Henry Layard, "Discoveries Among The Ruins Of Assyria
And Babylon," G.P. Putnam & Sons, 1853, chapter 26, pp. 492-494
abridged edition; pp. 612-614 unabridged edition
Mozeson, p. 48
ibid., p. 80
Encyclopedia Britannica, 1957, vol. v, p. 707-8
Sharon Turner, "History of the Anglo-Saxons," 1836, p. 100
Encyclopedia Britannica, ibid., p. 707
Dr. A. H. Sayce, "Races of the Old Testament," 1925, p. 71
ibid., p. 65-66
ibid., p. 67
ibid., p. 66
ibid., p. 66-67
ibid., frontispiece
Encyclopedia Britannica, 1957, vol. xi, p.783
National Forecast Magazine, vol. xix, Oct., 1959
Encyclopedia Britannica, 1910, vol. v, p. 611-614
|