ORDO AB CHAO

When I was a boy, the United States of America was composed of the lower 48 states. Its population was about 88% white. The majority of that white population was Germanic in racial origin. The second highest percentage was of Keltic origin. As I believe that the Germanic people descended from the Northern Kingdom of Israel, which is a well-supported assertion, I also believe that the Abrahamic Promises and Inheritance fell upon them as an inheritance. Since, at his death-bed in Egypt, Jacob-Israel placed his hands upon the sons of Joseph, passing over his first-born, to bestow his blessings, the Abrahamic Promises and Inheritance fell upon them particularly.

Parenthetically, a British anthropologist named Parker discovered that the skulls of the people living in the lands at the time of the Israelites were Nordic. Hence, it would be expected that, if the Israelites migrated from the Assyrian Captivity into Europe, their presence would be signaled by Nordic skulls, which was the case.
 

During the period prior to and during the Assyrian Captivity which saw the vast population of the Northern Kingdom taken into bondage, the Israelites were known to their enemies by such names as “Sachs,” “Sacs,” and the like, which would be natural for the sons of Isaac, as the vowel would not be written. Further, Scripture states that by Isaacs name would the People of God be known, so the Most High has provided a legal witness to the matter.
 

Further, Omri, one of the kings of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, was referenced by Israel’s enemies by terms for the Israelites of “Khumry,” “Chumri,” “Qumri,” and the like. The Cimmerians were certain to be a variation of these terms, as in “Chummeri,” “Qummeri” and the like. Among the terms used to indicate an Israelite was a variation of “Schythi,” which became better known as Scythian.
 

Further, the heart of the Parthian Empire was another group of Israelites. Not surprisingly, they generally worked closely with the Scythians. The Parthian Empire was fully the equal to the Roman Empire. The Romans never conquered Parthia and were defeated by the Parthians in battle as often as savoring a victory over them. Interestingly, the Israelite people were typically in a hostile posture to the Romans, as revealed by the Germanic Wars with the Roman Empire, as well as lesser strife in the remnant land of the Southern Kingdom of Judah. Indeed, in a sense the Protestant-Catholic wars were a continuation of this seemingly ancient enmity between Israel and Rome.
 

It might be well to mention that during the various Assyrian intrusions into the land of the Israelites, the Assyrians did not limit enslavement of Israelites of the Northern Kingdom, but, also, they took into bondage two-hundred thousand Judahites from the outlying regions of the Southern Kingdom. This was proclaimed by one of the Assyrian kings on an obelisk, which served him (and them) as a sort of historical “show & tell” of his glorious reign. Hence, it can be inferred from all this that the great bulk of existing Israelites were spread north, northeast and northwest of the Assyrians and were intended to be a buffer stratum geopolitically.
 

The Bible does not address this matter directly, making only prophetic comments that would be pointless if the objective situation did not exist. Although the Gospels barely hint at this situation, the Epistles more clearly reveal the great truth that “Israel Lives!”
 

Further still, two sons of Judah, the son of Jacob-Israel, appear to have gone to Iberia and Hibernia with their entourage. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that Ireland not only became a colony of Hebrews but of the lawful seed of Judah as well. Since the calamity that befell the Southern Kingdom of Judah resulted in the migration of Jeremiah and the two royal daughters eventually to Iberia and Hibernia (according to scant references and legend). One of the daughters married an Irish descendant from the son of Judah referenced earlier. This royal seed of Judah eventually made its way to Scotland and then to England.
 

During the 18^th & 19^th Centuries famous linguists such as General Charles Vallancey, Lord Rosse and Sir William Bentham noted the close affinity of Hebrew and Celtic words and phrases. George Rawlinson concluded that “readily explicable, if Hebrew be assumed as the key to them, but not otherwise.” [Phoenicia, p. 327] For example, in Druidism Revised Dr. Beauford stated, “It is remarkable that all the ancient altars found in Ireland, and now distinguished by the name of Cromlechs or sloping stones, were originally called Bothal, or the House of God, and they seem to be of the same species as those mentioned in the Book of Genesis, called by the Hebrews, Bethel, which has the same signification as the Irish Bothal.” As may be recalled, the coronation of Hebrew kings took place on or adjacent to such stones. Indeed, Jacob’s Pillar was thought to be the very same Stone of Scone, brought by Jeremiah at the time of the royal flight from Jerusalem, and used during Scottish and English coronations.
 

A caveat: Be especially cautious when considering information by a “scholar” who uses the words Hebrew, Israel and Jew as synonyms, as they are not. Indeed, the first mention of the word Jews in Holy Scriptures (Kings) suggested that they lived below the borders of the Kingdom of Judah [in Eilat], which would be the expectation regarding Judah’s sons by his Canaanite wife, Sura. As half Canaanite, they would exist outside the congregation of Israel, according to law.
 

Interestingly, the Hebrew translation of Eilat is behind. That is where it geographically appeared relative to the Southern Kingdom. It was next to Edom [“Edom is red” (Bible)], the home of Esau. Since Esau had married Canaanite women [causing his mother Rebecca to weep], it seemed especially congenial for the sons of Judah and Sura to take up residence there.
 

Also, since Amalek, seed of Edom, was famed for attacking the rear of the Israelites, who were being led by Moses, his style of attack has a curious affinity with the Jews of Eilat, meaning “behind.” Factor in the notorious Canaanite cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and one finds still more “food for thought.”
 

Be that as it may, from this linguistic and cultural relationship cited above, one can perceive support for the idea that Ireland was a Hebrew colony, as well as the “safe harbor” of the royal remnant of the Southern Kingdom. Eventually, the Germanic tribes would also invade Keltic Britain and inadvertently create a new Israelite “Land of Milk and Honey.” Usually, the Angles and Saxons [“Sacs-sons”] have been cited in general histories of England as the invading Germanic tribes, but the Normans were as well. At any rate, Western Europe settled into a more or less homogenous religio-cultural union.
 

Yet, the Biblically correct new “Promised Land” was America. It was here that Ephraim and Manasseh migrated – first in a trickle and then in a flood. All the Tribes of Israel made their way in part to this Promised Land [Samuel II] to be re-planted. These were Israel Christian. Paul the Epistlist had opined that being fleshly descendants of Abraham was not enough; he stated that they must also have Yshua. They came as Christians, as many were unaware of their descent – less they be vain in their imaginings.
 

When the Israelites came out of Egypt, they were accompanied by a “mixed multitude” who were “nettles” and “thorns” to the Israelites. Many centuries later, when Israel Christian came out of other lands into the Promised Land of their re-planting, they found hostile peoples here and there. As time went by, these Israelite Christians would sin brazenly. They were punished by a new mixed multitude rising up in their midst. These would become “thorns” and “nettles” to the Israelite Christians.
 

The leaders of the Israelite Christians welcomed into the new Promised Land the sons of Edom, Amalek and Eilat, and before long, their children followed after strange gods. The new Promised Land no longer seemed as promising. It was always at war, always becoming more indebted, and had become the “booty” of any pirate people nearby. Oh, yes. The Israelite Christians were blamed for the blemishes of the mixed multitude. Even so, repenting, they could count on a Friend in High Places. Not a bad deal, when you think about it.