Hubbry Logo
British IsraelismBritish IsraelismMain
Open search
British Israelism
Community hub
British Israelism
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
British Israelism
British Israelism
British Israelism
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Israel in Britain, an 1890 book advocating British Israelism. According to the doctrine, the Ten Lost tribes of Israel found their way to Western Europe and Britain, becoming the ancestors of the British, the English, and related peoples.

British Israelism (also called Anglo-Israelism) is a pseudohistorical[1] belief that the people of Great Britain are "genetically, racially, and linguistically the direct descendants" of the Ten Lost Tribes of ancient Israel.[2] With roots in the 16th century, British Israelism was inspired by several 19th century English writings such as John Wilson's 1840 Our Israelitish Origin. From the 1870s onward, numerous independent British Israelite organizations were set up throughout the British Empire as well as in the United States; as of the early 21st century, a number of these organizations are still active. In the United States, the idea gave rise to the Christian Identity movement.

The central tenets of British Israelism have been regarded as pseudoscientific and refutable by archaeological,[3] ethnological,[4] genetic,[5] and linguistic research[6][7] by mainstream sources.

History

[edit]

Earliest recorded expressions

[edit]

According to Brackney (2012) and Fine (2015), the French Huguenot magistrate M. le Loyer's The Ten Lost Tribes, published in 1590, provided one of the earliest expressions of the belief that the Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Scandinavian, Germanic, and associated peoples are the direct descendants of the Old Testament Israelites.[8] Anglo-Israelism has also been attributed to King James VI and I (1566–1625),[9] who is reported to have believed he was the King of Israel.[2] Adriaan van Schrieck (1560–1621), who influenced Henry Spelman (1562–1641) and John Sadler (1615–74), wrote in the early 17th century about his ideas on the origins of the Celtic and Saxon peoples. In 1649, Sadler published Rights of the Kingdom, "which argues for an 'Israelite genealogy for the British people'".[9]

Aspects of British Israelism and its influences have also been traced to Richard Brothers, who published A Revealed Knowledge of the Prophecies and Times in 1794,[10] John Wilson's Our Israelitish Origin (1844),[11] and John Pym Yeatman's The Shemetic Origin of the Nations of Western Europe (1879).[12]

Foundation

[edit]

British Israelism arose in England, and then spread to the United States.[13] Its adherents cite various supposedly-medieval manuscripts to claim an older origin, but British Israelism appeared as a distinct movement in the early 1880s:

Although scattered British Israel societies are known to have existed as early as 1872, there was at first no real move to develop an organization beyond the small groups of believers which had arisen spontaneously. The beginnings of the movement as an identifiable religious force can, therefore, be more accurately placed in the 1880s, when the circumstances of the time were particularly propitious for the appearance of a movement so imperialistically-orientated.[14]

Peak of adherence to British Israelism – late 19th and early 20th centuries

[edit]
William Pascoe Goard

The extent to which the British clergy became aware of the existence of the movement may be gauged by the comment which Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801–1890) made when he was asked why he had left the Church of England in 1845 in order to join the Roman Catholic Church. He said that there was a very real danger that the movement "would take over the Church of England."[15]: 86 

In the late 19th century, Edward Hine, Edward Wheler Bird, and Herbert Aldersmith developed the British Israelite movement. Hine and Bird achieved a degree of "doctrinal coherence" by eliminating competing forms of the ideology: in 1878, the Anglo-Ephraim Association of London, which followed Wilson by accepting the broader community of western European Germanic peoples as fellow Israelites who were also favoured by God, was absorbed into Bird's Metropolitan Anglo-Israel Association, which espoused the Anglo-exclusive view promoted by Hine.[16]

By 1886, the "Anglo-Israel Association" had 27 affiliated groups throughout Britain.[17] Hine later departed for the United States, where he promoted the movement.[18]

The 1906 edition of the Jewish Encyclopedia stated that British Israelism's adherents "are said to number 2,000,000 in England and the United States",[19] an unreliable figure if association membership and journal subscription numbers are any guide; the number of passive Protestant sympathisers is almost impossible to determine.[16]

Between 1899 and 1902, members of the British-Israel Association of London dug up parts of the Hill of Tara in the belief that the Ark of the Covenant was buried there, doing much damage to one of Ireland's most ancient royal and archaeological sites.[20] At the same time, British Israelism became associated with various pseudo-archaeological pyramidology theories, such as the notion that the Pyramid of Khufu contained a prophetic numerology of the British peoples.[21]

In 1914, the thirty-fourth year of its publication, the Anglo-Israel Almanack listed the details of a large number of Kingdom Identity Groups which were operating independently throughout the British Isles as well as in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Canada, and the United States of America.[citation needed]

In 1919, the British-Israel-World Federation (BIWF) was founded in London, and Covenant Publishing was founded in 1922. William Pascoe Goard was the first director of the publishing house. During this time, several prominent figures patronized the BIWF organization and its publisher; Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone was its Patron-in-chief prior to World War II. One of its highest-profile members was William Massey, then Prime Minister of New Zealand. Due to the expansive nature of the British Empire, believers in British Israelism spread worldwide and the BIWF expanded its organization to the British Commonwealth. Howard Rand promoted the teaching, and he became the National Commissioner of the Anglo-Saxon Federation of America in 1928. He published The Bulletin, later renamed The Messenger of the Covenant. More recently, it was renamed Destiny.[22]

A prolific author on British Israelism during the later 1930s and 40s was Alexander James Ferris.[23]

Contemporary movement

[edit]

The BIWF continues to exist, with its main headquarters in Bishop Auckland, County Durham.[24] It also has chapters in Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and South Africa.[25]

In 1968, one source estimated that there were between 3,000 and 5,000 British Israelists in Britain.[26] There, a few small Pentecostal churches have taught British Israelism.

The post-Imperial era brought about a change in orientation for British Israelists, reflected in a corresponding change in the social class to which their membership predominantly belonged. During the years of its initial growth, it could depend on the spread of Christian fundamentalism within the country, the emotional appeal of imperialism, and a belief in the unrivaled power of the British economy to expand a middle-class membership that viewed it as the divine duty of the nation, as God's chosen people, to rule and civilize the world. By the mid-20th century, the dissipation of these factors changed the focus of the movement to one troubled by social and moral decline, including the degradation of class distinctions and of monarchical absolutism. Societal changes were viewed as portents of a coming apocalypse and as indications that the nation was in need of redemption. A fantasized society which practiced Victorian moral rectitude and imperialism, lacked socialism, bureaucrats, intellectuals, and income tax, would now come to be viewed by the movement which drew its support from the well-to-do as the ideal that modern British society should emulate.[26]

Tenets

[edit]

Most Israelites are not Jews

[edit]

Adherents believe that the Twelve Tribes of Israel are the twelve sons of the patriarch Jacob (who was later named Israel). Jacob elevated the descendants of Ephraim and Manasseh (the two sons of Joseph) to the status of full tribes in their own right, replacing the Tribe of Joseph.

A division occurred among the twelve tribes in the days of Jeroboam and Rehoboam, with the three tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and, in part, Levi, forming the Kingdom of Judah, and the remaining ten tribes forming the Kingdom of Israel (Samaria).[27] Thus, they argue, "the great bulk of Israelites are not the Jews".[28] W. E. Filmer, writing in 1964, suggested that the fact that some Jews continue to search for the Ten Lost Tribes implies that their representatives are not found among modern-day multi-ethnic Jews.[29] A number of British Israelites quote Josephus in order to support their claim that the lost tribes of Israel are not Jews: "the entire body of the people of Israel remained in that country; wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond the Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude."[30][31][32][33]

The British are the descendants of the Lost Tribes

[edit]
Jehu kneeling at the feet of Shalmaneser III on the Black Obelisk

The key component of British Israelism is its representation of the migrations of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. Adherents suggested that the Scythians, Cimmerians, and Goths were representatives of these lost tribes, and the progenitors of the later invaders of Britain.[34][35] John Wilson would argue for the inclusion of all Western European Gothic peoples among the descendants of the Israelites, but under the later influence of Edward Hine, the movement would come to view only the peoples of the British Isles as having this ancestry.[16]

Herodotus reported that the ancient Persians called all of the Scythians Sacae, but they called themselves Scoloti. However, a modern comparison of the forms which are given in other ancient languages suggests that Skuda was their name.[36] Ancient writers, such as Josephus and Jerome would associate the Scythians with the peoples of Gog and Magog,[37] but British Israelist etymologists would see in Sacae a name derived from the biblical "Isaac",[38] claiming that the appearance of the Scythians where they claimed the Lost Tribes were last documented also supported a connection.[19] Further, British Israelists find support in the superficial resemblance between King Jehu's pointed headdress and that of the captive Saka king seen to the far right on the Behistun Rock.[39] They continued the chain of etymological identification leading from Isaac to the Sacae to the Saxons (interpreted as "Sac's sons" – the sons of Isaac),[38][40][41]: 121  who are portrayed as invading England from Denmark, the 'land of the Tribe of Dan'.[19] They saw the same tribal name, left by the wanderers, in the Dardanelles, the Danube, Macedonia, Dunkirk, Dunglow in Ireland, Dundee in Scotland, Sweden, and London,[2][42][43][44] and ascribed to this lost tribe the mythical Irish Tuatha Dé Danann.[19] In the name of the British they see berithish, referring to the Hebrew covenant with God.[2]

The 'Tyninghame' copy of the Declaration of Arbroath from 1320 AD

Bede (died 735) had linked the Picts to the Scythians, but British Israelists suggested that he had confused the two tribes of Scotland, and that it was the Scotti (Scots) who were one with the Scoloti (Scyths) of Herodotus.[45] They drew particular support from the derivation of the Scots from the Scythians found in the 1320 Declaration of Arbroath,[46] reflecting a tradition related in the 9th-century Historia Brittonum that the Scots descended from the union of a Scythian exile with Scota, daughter of a Pharaoh, a tale found in some form in several other early-14th-century historical and poetic sources.[47] The Declaration begins:

"Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today."[48]

British-Israel Associations cite the Declaration as evidence for the link between the Scots and the Scythians, and hence the Lost Tribes,[49] as had been proposed by the early British Israelist etymologists.[50]

Other Celtic invaders would be given an analogous descent. In the Welsh (Cymry) the British Israelists would see a direct connection through the Cimbri to the Cimmerians, the Gimirri of Assyrian annals,[51]: 57  a name sometimes also given by the ancient Babylonians to the Scythians and Saka.[52] Perceived similarity between this and the name by which the Assyrian annals referred to Israel, Bit Khumri, would lead the British Israelists to claim that the Welsh too were members of the Lost Tribes.[51]: 57 

According to the Anglo-Israelists, these claimed connections would make the British the literal descendants of the Lost Tribes, and thus inheritors of the promises made to the Israelites in the Old Testament.[53]

The British throne is a continuation of the Davidic throne

[edit]

Some adherents further claim that the British royal family is of lineal descent from the house of King David via a daughter of Zedekiah, the last king of Judah. According to this legend, the prophet Jeremiah, and his scribe, Baruch, escaped with "the king's daughters" (Jer. 41:10; 43:6) to Egypt. They later travelled to Ireland, where one of the surviving Judahite princesses, Tea Tephi, married a local High King of Ireland. From this fabled union the Davidic throne was supposedly preserved, having been transferred to Ireland, then Scotland, and later England, whence the British monarchs are alleged to have descended.[54] The Stone of Scone, which has been used in the coronations of Scottish, English, and British monarchs for centuries, is traditionally claimed to be the pillow stone on which the biblical patriarch, Jacob, slept, and the stone used in David's coronation.[2]

Britain and the United States are the inheritors of Jacob's birthright

[edit]

A commonly held British-Israel doctrine is the belief that the Tribe of Ephraim and the Tribe of Manasseh can be identified as modern day Britain and the United States of America.[55][56]

Part of the foundation of the British-Israel doctrine is the theological claim that particular blessings were bestowed upon three of the tribes of Israel,[57][58][59] in that the Tribe of Judah was to be the 'chief ruler' e.g. King David, and Ephraim was to receive the birthright (See Jacob and Esau). Adherents believe that these blessings have continued down through the ages to modern times, with the British Monarchy being identified as the continued blessing upon Judah, and both Britain (Ephraim) and the USA (Manasseh) as recipients of the national birthright blessing. They cite passages such as 1 Chron 5:1–2 and Gen 48:19–20 in order to support their claim.[citation needed]

Claims and criticism

[edit]

British Israelism has been criticized for its poor research and scholarship. In the 1910 edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica, an article which summarizes the theology of British Israelism contains the statement that: "The theory [of British-Israelism] rests on premises which are deemed by scholars—both theological and anthropological—to be utterly unsound".[60] Current scholarship is not consistent with the claims of British Israelism, with scholars drawing attention to its "historical and linguistic inaccuracies" in addition to its links to antisemitism.[61] Hale (2015) refers to "the overwhelming cultural, historical, and genetic evidence against it."[5]

Research standards

[edit]

Critics of British Israelism note that the arguments which are presented by promoters of the teaching are based on unsubstantiated and highly speculative, amateur research. Tudor Parfitt, author of The Lost Tribes: The History of a Myth, states that the proof cited by adherents of British Israelism is "of a feeble composition even by the low standards of the genre."[62]

Historical linguistics

[edit]

Some proponents of British Israelism have claimed that numerous links exist between historical linguistics, Ancient Hebrew, and various European place names and languages.[63] This can be traced to the works of John Wilson in the 19th century. The self-trained Wilson looked for similarities in the sounds of words and argued that many Scottish, British, and Irish words stemmed from ancient Hebrew words. Wilson's publications inspired the development of British Israel language associations in Europe.[64]

Modern scholarly linguistic analysis conclusively shows that the languages of the British Isles (English, Welsh, and Gaelic) belong in the Indo-European language family, while Hebrew belongs in the Semitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic language family.[65] In 1906, T. R. Lounsbury stated that "no trace of the slightest real connection can be discovered" between English and ancient Hebrew,[66] while in 1993 Michael Friedman refuted claims that Hebrew was closely related to Celtic and Anglo-Saxon when he wrote that "the actual evidence could hardly be any weaker".[64]

Others have addressed the specific word relationships proposed. Russell Spittler (1973) says of the "disputable" etymological claims made by the British Israelists that they "have no ample basis in linguistic scholarship and are based on coincidences only."[43] William Ingram (1995) would present arguments made by British Israelism as examples of "tortured etymology".[41]: 121 

Scriptural interpretation

[edit]

Adherents of British Israelism cite various scriptures in support of the argument that the "lost" Northern Israelite Tribes migrated through Europe to end up in Britain.[67] Dimont (1933) argues that British Israelists misunderstand and misinterpret the meaning of these scriptures.[68]: 5–7 

One such case is the distinction that British Israelists make between the "Jews" of the Southern Kingdom and the "Israelites" of the Northern Kingdom. They believe that the Bible consistently distinguishes the two groups.[citation needed] Dimont says that many of these scriptures are misinterpreted because after the captivities, the distinction between "Jews" and "Israelites" was lost over time.[citation needed]

British Israelists believe that the Northern Tribes of Israel lost their identity after the captivity in Assyria and that this is reflected in the Bible.[citation needed] Dimont disagrees with this assertion and argues that only higher-ranking Israelites were deported from Israel and many Israelites remained.[68]: 5  He cites examples after the Assyrian captivity, such as Josiah, King of Judah, who received money from the tribes of "Manasseh, and Ephraim, and all the remnant of Israel" (2 Chronicles 34:9), and Hezekiah, who sent invitations not only to Judah, but also to northern Israel for the attendance of a Passover in Jerusalem. (2 Chronicles 30);[68]: 6  British Israelites interpret 2 Chronicles 34:9 as referring to "Scythians".[citation needed]

Dimont is also critical of the interpretations of biblical prophecy embraced by the movement, saying, "Texts are torn from their context, and misapplied without the slightest regard to their original meaning."[68]: 18 

Historical speculation

[edit]

British Israelism rests on linking different ancient populations. This includes linking the "lost" tribes of Israel with the Scythians, Cimmerians, Celts, and modern Western Europeans such as the British. To support these links, some adherents believe that similarities exist between various cultural aspects of these population groups, and they argue that these links demonstrate the migration of the "lost" Israelites in a westerly direction. Examples given include burial customs, metalwork, clothing, dietary customs, and more.[69] Dimont argues that the customs of the Scythians and the Cimmerians are in contrast to those of the Ancient Israelites,[68]: 7–10  and he further dismisses the connection between these populations and the Saxons and Celts, particularly criticizing the then-current formulations of British Israelism that would interject Semites between the closely related English and Germans.[68]: 10–11 

The Scythian origin of the Scots has been referred to as mythical.[70][71] Algernon Herbert, writing in 1848, characterized the linguistic derivation of Scots from Scoloti as "strictly impossible",[70] and Merrill (2005) referred to it as false etymology.[45]

Addressing their view on the fate of the exiled tribes, Frank Boys said of their voluminous output, "All the effort to write these volumes might well have been saved on the premise that 'they were never lost,' which we believe to be the correct one."[43]

Ideology

[edit]

Parfitt suggests that the creation of British Israelism was inspired by numerous ideological factors, which included: a desire of its adherents, many of whom were from ordinary backgrounds, to prove that they had a glorious ancient past; emerging pride in Western imperialism and colonialism, and a belief in the "racial superiority of white Anglo-Saxon Protestants".[63] Colin Kidd points out that British Israelism gave the spiritual component of rationalizing Anglo-Saxon superiority.[72] He further considers that its theology represents a "quasi-heresy", which serves to "blunt the universalist message apparent in the New Testament."[72] Its role in fostering antisemitism in conservative Protestant Christianity has been noted by historians,[51]: 57  along with its role in fostering a feeling of "racial chauvinism" which is "not always covert".[41]: 121–122 

Separately, the mythology of British Israelism has been characterized as fostering "nationalistic bellicosity" by historians.[73] To some adherents, British Israelism served as a justification for British imperialism and American settler colonialism (manifest destiny), along with the displacement of indigenous peoples which subsequently followed them.[74]

Influences on other movements

[edit]

Mormonism

[edit]
See also: Mormon teachings on skin color

British Israelism was rapidly growing in England when the United States-based Latter Day Saint movement sent its first missionaries to England. British Israelist ideas clearly influenced Mormon thought by the 1850s, and by the 1870s, Mormon periodicals published in Britain were citing British Israelist proponents to promote the belief that most Mormons were of Anglo-Saxon and Israelite descent, concepts that would subsequently be synthesized into general Mormon discourse.[75][76]: 18, 35–36 [77]

Pentecostalism

[edit]

Several individuals who were influential in the founding of Pentecostalism embraced the tenets of British Israelism. The British-Israel-inspired self-identification of Anglo-Saxon peoples with the Jewish nation and the promises which were made to them by their god would significantly contribute to the belief that they would play a central role in the end times, a belief which was adhered to by several prominent proto- and early-pentecostals. Notable among them was John Alexander Dowie, who spoke about Anglo-Saxon Christians' plans to take control of Jerusalem in order to prepare for the Second Coming. This legacy was continued by Charles Fox Parham, but he believed that the Lost Tribes would join their Jewish brethren in order to reestablish the nation of Israel. His view of the Lost Tribes was more expansive than Dowie's view (see Nordic Israelism), in addition to encompassing Anglo-Saxons, it also encompassed Scandinavians, Danes, High Germans, and even Hindus and Japanese (see Japanese-Jewish common ancestry theory), who, according to Parham, had acquired the blood of Abraham through intermarriage and were hence eligible to take part in his end-time drama. British-Israelist beliefs would soon be marginalized in the movement, but their influences could still be seen in the teachings of several key leaders in the mid-20th-century.[78]

Noted Christian Identity minister Wesley A. Swift was first introduced to British Israelism via Pentecostalism in the early 1930s. Swift was a student at L.I.F.E. Bible College at the Angelus Temple, Aimee Semple McPherson's Pentecostal Foursquare Church, during the 1930s. Swift later served as a minister at the Angelus Temple during the 1930s and 1940s. This teaching was brought by Gerald Burton Winrod, an evangelist from Kansas, who was a speaker at Angelus Temple. Swift was a student of Rev. Philip Monson's Kingdom Bible School during the 1930s; Monson taught British Israelism and some of the racial teachings which Swift would later reformulate into Christian Identity theology. Swift was also exposed to Charles Parham's British Israel teachings at the Angelus Temple.

In Britain, the espousal of British Israelism by George Jeffreys, founder of the Elim Pentecostal Church, led to a schism which precipitated his resignation in 1939 and led to the formation of the Bible-Pattern Church Fellowship,[79] which continues to teach the doctrine.[80]

Armstrongism

[edit]
Main article: Armstrongism

Beginning in the 1960s, Herbert W. Armstrong, founder and Pastor General of the Worldwide Church of God, vigorously promoted the teaching of British Israelism.[81] Armstrong believed that the teaching was a key to understanding biblical prophecy: "One might ask, were not biblical prophecies closed and sealed? Indeed they were—until now! And even now they can be understood only by those who possess the master key to unlock them."[82] Armstrong believed that God commanded him to proclaim the prophecies to the Lost Tribes of Israel before the "end-times".[83][unreliable source?]

Armstrong founded his own church, first named the "Radio Church of God" and later renamed the "Worldwide Church of God".[83] He described British Israelism as a "central plank" of his theology.[84]

After Armstrong's death, his former church abandoned its belief in British Israelism and in 2009, it changed its name to Grace Communion International (GCI). It offers an explanation for the doctrine's origin as well as an explanation for the church's renunciation of the doctrine on its official website.[83] Church members who refused to accept these doctrinal changes left the Worldwide Church of God/GCI and founded their own offshoot churches. Many of these organizations still teach British Israelism, among them are the Philadelphia Church of God, the Living Church of God, and the United Church of God. Armstrong promoted other genealogical history theories, such as the belief that modern-day Germany represents ancient Assyria (see Assyria and Germany in Anglo-Israelism), writing, "The Assyrians settled in central Europe, and the Germans, undoubtedly, are, in part, the descendants of the ancient Assyrians.".[85]

Christian Identity

[edit]
Main article: Christian Identity

While early British Israelites such as Edward Hine and John Wilson were generally philosemites,[86] an antisemitic strain also existed within the movement, such as the scientific racialism that led Wilson to deny the "racial purity" of modern-day Jews, leading some within the movement to adopt the belief that modern-day Jews were "un-Semitic impostors".[87] Some American adherents of British Israelism would later adopt a racialized, strongly antisemitic theology that became known as Christian Identity,[88] which has at its core the belief that non-Caucasian people have no souls and therefore, they cannot be saved.[89] Since its emergence in the 1920s, Christian Identity has taught the belief that Jews are not descended from the Tribe of Judah. Instead, some Christian Identity adherents believe that Jews are descended from Satan and Lilith (see Serpent seed) while others believe that Jews are descended from Edomites or Khazars (see Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry). Their adoption of the British Israelist belief that the Israelite-derived Anglo-Saxons had been favoured by God over the 'impure' modern Jews meant that a reluctantly antisemitic Klansman "could now maintain his anti-Semitism and at the same time revere a Bible cleansed of its Jewish taint."[90]

The arrival of British Israelism in the United States contributed to the transmission of antisemitic notions into the Christian Identity movement. One of the leading proponents of the movement after World War II was Wesley A. Swift, who founded the Anglo-Saxon Christian Congregation, later renamed the Church of Jesus Christ–Christian in about 1948, which became Christian Identity's main mouthpiece.[91] British Israelism and Christian Identity have both been branded as intrinsically "racial chauvinist" doctrines, but while the Jews are protagonists of the apocalypse in British-Israelism, they are antagonists of the apocalypse in Christian Identity eschatology.[92] Christian Identity adherents believed that the Jews used British Israelism as a platform to "facilitate a Jewish monopoly on global power", based on this belief, Christian Identity adherents accused British Israelites of being manipulated by Jews. Conversely, in January 2007, in its BIFW Newsletter, the British-Israel-World Federation lamented the rise of antisemitic groups within British-Israelist circles in the US.[93]

Notable adherents

[edit]
Poole, WH, Anglo-Israel

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

British Israelism

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

British Israelism, also known as Anglo-Israelism, is a pseudohistorical religious doctrine maintaining that the peoples of the and related Anglo-Saxon nations are the direct biological descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of , exiled by the Assyrians in the BCE and distinct from modern , who are said to descend primarily from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. The theory interprets biblical promises to ancient —such as national greatness, control of key lands, and a role in end-times —as applying to Britain and its empire, with positioned as the fulfillment of Israelite religion under the . Emerging in its modern form in the 1830s through the writings of John Wilson, it was popularized by Edward Hine in the mid-19th century via claims of linguistic parallels (e.g., "Saxons" from "Isaac's sons"), heraldic symbols, and historical migrations, gaining traction amid Victorian as a justification for British dominance. Proponents established organizations like the British Israel World Federation in 1919, which at its peak claimed hundreds of thousands of adherents, including figures such as Princess Alice of Athlone. Despite such influence within certain Protestant circles, the doctrine has faced substantial criticism for relying on selective biblical and speculative etymologies rather than ; archaeological records show no mass Israelite migration to , while genetic studies reveal British ancestry rooted in prehistoric Indo-European and later Germanic influxes, with predominant Y-chromosome haplogroups like R1b incompatible with ancient Levantine Semitic profiles. Controversies include its evolution into more racialized forms, such as American , which inverted its original philo-Semitism into , though mainstream British variants emphasized covenantal destiny over supremacy.

Historical Origins and Development

Early Expressions and Precursors

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, scattered speculations among British Protestant writers began exploring the fate of the biblical of Israel following their around 722 BCE, with some positing migrations into Europe and Asia. These ideas, though not yet systematized into a of British descent, reflected broader Reformation-era interests in biblical and prophetic fulfillment amid England's emerging . A notable early contribution came from and Giles Fletcher the Elder, who around 1610 composed The Tartars, or Ten Tribes, arguing that the Tartars—nomadic descendants of ancient —constituted the lost tribes transplanted by Assyrian conquerors. Fletcher drew on historical accounts of customs, language remnants, and geographic traces from the region to support this identification, viewing the Tartars' martial ferocity and vast dominions as echoes of Israelite heritage preserved through exile. His treatise, circulated in manuscript and later published in 1677 as part of Israel Redux, exemplified efforts to trace Israelite continuity beyond , influencing subsequent debates on tribal survivals in Eurasian steppes that bordered European peoples. Parallel to such ethnological inquiries, Puritan during the (1642–1651) fostered typological views of Britain as a covenant nation akin to ancient , anticipating apocalyptic restoration under godly rule. Writers like Thomas Brightman and Joseph Mede interpreted prophecies as portending England's role in the millennium, with parliamentary forces cast as overthrowing monarchical "Pharaohs." This eschatological framework, prevalent among radicals in the , emphasized Britain's providential election without explicit ancestral claims but primed audiences for literal interpretations of Israelite succession in . These precursors remained fragmentary, often entangled with anti-papal or imperial ambitions, yet they seeded notions of non-Jewish Israelite lineages persisting among gentile nations, distinct from contemporary .

Nineteenth-Century Foundations

In 1840, John Wilson published Our Israelitish Origin, a collection of lectures that systematically compiled earlier speculative theories positing the migration of the biblical Lost Tribes of Israel from through to Britain, framing the British as descendants inheriting ancient Israelite identity. Wilson's work marked a pivotal consolidation of dispersed ideas into a cohesive narrative, emphasizing linguistic, customary, and historical parallels between ancient and , though reliant on selective etymologies and unverified chronicles rather than empirical or . A parallel doctrine, Nordic Israelism, emerged in the mid-19th century among some proponents, asserting that Scandinavian peoples descended from the Lost Tribes of Israel, paralleling the British focus through similar migration narratives involving northern European routes. The 1870s saw Edward Hine emerge as a key popularizer, disseminating the theory through inexpensive pamphlets and lectures that reached wider audiences beyond scholarly circles, including claims of British fulfillment of Genesis 48-49 prophecies on tribal blessings. Hine founded the British-Israel Identity Corporation around 1880 to propagate these views organizationally, shifting the movement from individual advocacy to structured dissemination amid growing public interest in biblical prophecy. Concurrently, the Anglo-Israel Association was established in 1879 by George Moore, author of The Lost Tribes, or of the East and West, fostering evangelical networks drawn to literalist interpretations of Scripture that aligned British identity with divine election. This formation reflected broader Victorian-era enthusiasm for and biblical historicity, untainted by Darwinian skepticism in conservative Protestant circles. The theory's appeal intensified within the context of Britain's imperial zenith, where proponents interpreted the empire's expanse—spanning a quarter of the globe by 1870—as empirical validation of Israelite covenant promises in Deuteronomy 28, portraying global dominance as providential rather than mere geopolitical happenstance. Such alignments bolstered advocacy among elites and , though unsubstantiated by contemporary or .

Peak Expansion in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries

British Israelism reached its zenith of organizational growth and cultural influence during the late Victorian and Edwardian periods, coinciding with the British Empire's territorial apex. Key societies emerged to propagate the doctrine, including the Metropolitan Anglo-Israel Association founded in 1879 by Edward Wheeler Bird, which coordinated lectures and publications linking Anglo-Saxon heritage to the lost tribes of Israel. Similarly, the Anglo-Israel Association, established the same year by George Moore with support from Viscount Folkestone MP, expanded to 27 affiliated groups by 1886, fostering discussions on biblical prophecies as validated by imperial expansion. These prefigured the British-Israel-World Federation, formalized in 1919 but rooted in late-nineteenth-century networks that enrolled hundreds of members across affiliated bodies. The ideology resonated among Britain's upper echelons, including , , military officers, and politicians, who viewed it as affirming divine sanction for . Adherents such as First Sea Lord Admiral integrated its tenets into interpretations of national destiny, while parliamentary figures like endorsed organizational efforts. Estimates of formal membership remained modest—around 300 subscribers for major associations like the Metropolitan branch—but informal sympathy extended widely amid Edwardian optimism, with proponents citing the empire's dominion over a quarter of the world's population as empirical proof of covenantal birthrights. Lectures and pamphlets routinely invoked Genesis 48–49, portraying Britain as (a "multitude of nations") and its successes—from the 1899–1902 Boer War victories to global trade dominance—as prophetic fulfillment rather than mere geopolitical fortune. Proponents tied the movement to by emphasizing Britain's role as inheritor of Israel's scepter and stone, with publications arguing that Edwardian prosperity reflected Joseph's blessings rather than industrial innovation alone. This era saw international dissemination, as Anglo-Israelite ideas migrated via emigration and missionary networks to the —where Edward Hine proselytized post-1880s—and Commonwealth dominions like , , and , adapting the narrative to local "Saxon" identities. By , the doctrine permeated Protestant circles, bolstering prewar confidence in Britain's without yet facing the ideological fractures of global conflict.

Decline and Persistence Post-World War II

The two world wars profoundly undermined the ideological foundations of British Israelism, as the erosion of the British Empire's global dominance contradicted the movement's claims of divine favor and imperial birthright derived from biblical covenants. The loss of key colonies, exemplified by Indian independence in and the of 1956, exposed the speculative nature of assertions linking British expansion to Israelite destiny, leading to reduced public interest and organizational vitality. Wartime disruptions further accelerated this, with general declines in activity noted during and immediately after the conflict, despite temporary spikes in prophetic interest amid global upheaval. The establishment of the State of in 1948 posed a theological challenge to British Israelism's core distinction between the "lost tribes" (identified with Britain) and the (as Judah), as the regathering of to appeared to fulfill prophecies of national restoration without corresponding validation for Anglo-Saxon claims, prompting internal reevaluation and membership attrition. This event, coupled with Britain's withdrawal from the Mandate, repudiated expectations of sustained imperial stewardship over holy lands, contributing to schisms such as the late-1940s formation of the Society for the Proclamation that Britain is from British-Israel-World Federation (BIWF) chapters. Despite these setbacks, British Israelism persisted in niche organizations and regional strongholds. The BIWF, founded in 1919, endured through post-war reorganizations and maintained operations into the 2020s, hosting annual conferences such as the National British-Israel Conference in 2025. In , the movement found renewed vigor among Loyalist communities from the 1970s onward, influencing figures like MP Robert Bradford (1974–1981) and DUP MLA Nelson McCausland (until 2014), with ties to the Loyal Orange Lodge ensuring cultural embedding. Attendance waned in by the 1970s–1980s, shifting focus northward, but scattered evangelical and online remnants sustained doctrinal dissemination amid broader Christian secularization.

Core Tenets and Theological Framework

Distinction Between Israelites and Jews

British Israelism asserts a categorical separation between the biblical of the northern kingdom—comprising ten tribes under Ephraim's leadership—and the , who are regarded as descendants principally from the southern , along with remnants of and . This distinction underpins the doctrine's claim that "all are not ," with the former exiled en masse by in 721 BCE and never returning as a cohesive entity, while the latter underwent circa 586 BCE and partially repatriated. The Assyrian deportation, detailed in 2 Kings 17:5–6, 18, and 23, is interpreted as total for the northern tribes, who were resettled in regions like Halah, Habor, and the cities of the , leaving "none left but the only" in the land; proponents emphasize that this scattering was irreversible, preventing any tribal reformation or integration into the post-exilic Jewish polity. In 1:4–9, directed against the northern kingdom, the naming of children "Lo-ruhamah" (unpitied) and "Lo-ammi" (not my people) is cited as prophetic confirmation of their covenantal rejection and identity dissolution, distinct from Judah's preserved lineage. Post-exilic records in and document returns limited to those identifying with Judah, Benjamin, and priestly Levites, numbering around 42,360 in the first wave under circa 538 BCE, without mention of northern tribal representatives; thus, modern are seen as embodying Judah's "" (rulership and legal ordinances) but excluded from the "" endowments of prolific nationhood and material dominance originally vouchsafed to ’s house in the northern tribes. This bifurcation allows British Israelism to allocate unfulfilled prophecies of restoration—such as becoming "a multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19)—to the dispersed rather than the Jewish remnant. Proponents of British Israelism maintain that the ten northern tribes of Israel, deported by the Assyrian king in 722 BCE, did not assimilate into Mesopotamian populations but instead undertook a prolonged migration northward from Assyrian territories in southeastern and Media (northwest ). These exiles are claimed to have traversed Asia Minor westward by approximately 680 BCE, with groups identified as (Gimri) crossing into and the , while others, labeled (Sakka), moved via the around 600 BCE to settle north and west of the , including areas in southern , , and . From these steppe regions, further westward movements into are posited, culminating in settlements among Celtic, Germanic, and Scandinavian groups, with Britain designated as the primary homeland for the . Specific tribal identifications form the core of these genealogical assertions, linking modern peoples to ancient Israelite clans based on purported historical movements and territorial affinities rather than genetic or archaeological verification. The British and related Celtic peoples, including the Welsh, Scots, and Irish, are equated with , Joseph's younger son, whose biblical blessing in Genesis 48:19 promised a "multitude of nations," interpreted as reflecting the British Empire's global reach encompassing , , and other dominions. Conversely, Manasseh, Joseph's elder son, is associated with the , fulfilling the prophecy of becoming a "great people" through colonial expansion and industrial dominance, with American settlers viewed as branching from the same Josephite stock that reached Britain earlier. Scandinavian groups receive targeted identifications, such as the deriving from the , evidenced by place names like (Dan's mark) and historical seafaring traits aligning with Dan's biblical role as a "serpent by the way" (Genesis 49:17). Anglo-Saxon invaders of Britain post-Roman era are similarly traced to 's descendants ( as "sons of "), reinforcing the Israelite continuum among northern European stocks, while excluding southern Europeans from these northern tribal lineages. These mappings extend the birthright inheritance of —land blessings and numerical growth—to Britain and its offshoots, positioning them as fulfillment of 1:10's promise of multiplied seed "as the sand of the sea."

Continuity of the Davidic Monarchy in Britain

British-Israelist proponents maintain that the Davidic monarchy, promised an eternal throne in 2 Samuel 7:12-16, survived the Babylonian conquest of Judah in 586 BCE through the transplantation of King Zedekiah's surviving daughter, Tea Tephi (also called Tamar Tephi), to under the guidance of the prophet . According to this narrative, detailed in early 20th-century British-Israelist works, , following the siege of recorded in 2 Kings 25, accompanied Tea Tephi westward via , , and , arriving in circa 585 BCE. There, Tea Tephi married the Milesian king Eochaidh (or Heremon), merging the Davidic bloodline with the existing Celtic monarchy at Tara, thereby preserving the royal succession promised to . This purported continuity traces through Irish high kings to the Dal Riada Scots, who migrated to in the 5th century CE, and subsequently to the English following I's conquest of in 1296 CE. Proponents argue that the British sovereigns, from onward, embody the unbroken , with coronations symbolizing divine endorsement of this heritage. They interpret the endurance of the throne—spanning over 3,000 years from (circa 1000 BCE) to the present—as empirical fulfillment of the Nathan oracle in 2 Samuel 7, where vows, "Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me; your throne shall be established forever." Central to this tenet is the Coronation Stone, known as the in Irish lore and the in Scottish tradition, asserted by British Israelists to be the biblical "pillar" that used as a pillow at Bethel (Genesis 28:18), later serving as a portable throne for Israelite kings. Legends claim conveyed this sandstone relic—measuring approximately 27 by 16 by 10 inches and weighing 336 pounds—with Tea Tephi to Tara, where it was used for inaugurating kings until its relocation to and eventual placement under the in by Edward I in 1296 CE. British-Israelist authors posit that its consistent use in anointings, from Irish and Scottish rulers to English monarchs like (coronated 1838), validates the throne's Davidic authenticity, as the stone's "voice" under legitimate heirs allegedly roared in affirmation per ancient . During Victoria's reign (1837–1901), which oversaw the British Empire's peak with dominion over roughly one-quarter of the world's population—including , where she was proclaimed Empress in —proponents saw corroboration of the Davidic promise to rule "many nations" (implicit in 2 7's eternal scope). This era's imperial expanse, encompassing 412 million subjects by 1901, is cited as prophetic realization, with the monarchy's stability amid dynastic shifts (e.g., from Hanoverians to Windsors in 1917) underscoring an allegedly providential lineage immune to interruption.

Inheritance of Biblical Covenants and Birthrights by Britain and Allied Nations

British Israelism posits that the birthright covenants originally granted to Abraham and subsequently inherited by the house of through and Manasseh represent material and national blessings realized in the ascendancy of Britain and its allied nations, particularly the . In Genesis 48:19, blesses to become a "multitude of nations," which proponents such as J.H. Allen interpret as fulfilled through Britain's development of a far-flung empire and that by encompassed over 50 territories and dominions, including , , and , forming a collective of sovereign entities under the British Crown. This structure is seen as embodying the promised expansive fruitfulness, distinct from a singular , with 's dominance over Manasseh's line reflected in Britain's earlier imperial reach preceding America's independent rise. Conversely, Manasseh receives the prophecy of becoming a "great people" in the same verse, aligned by British Israelists with the ' emergence as a singular , evidenced by its control of vast natural resources—such as leading the world in oil production by 1900 and surpassing Britain's economy by 1870—and military preeminence, including the largest navy by tonnage after in 1919. Adherents argue this fulfills Joseph's birthright as delineated in 1 Chronicles 5:1-2, where the preeminence passes to the firstborn son, manifesting in America's unparalleled industrial output, which accounted for nearly half of global manufacturing by 1945. The intertwined destinies of these brother nations are emphasized, with Ephraim's multiplicity enabling global dissemination of resources and influence that bolster Manasseh's concentrated power. Proponents further connect these developments to the conditional blessings of Deuteronomy 28, portraying Britain and allied nations as recipients of prosperity for covenant adherence, including agricultural abundance—"the precious fruits of the earth"—mirroring Britain's control over fertile colonies yielding commodities like , , and rubber, and the promise of being "the head, and not the tail" through naval supremacy that dominated sea lanes and trade by the 19th century's . This is extended to a divine mandate for these powers to lend to many nations without borrowing, as Britain financed global wars and infrastructure while maintaining creditor status until the mid-20th century, and to possess the "gates of thine enemies," interpreted as strategic control over key maritime chokepoints like and . The broader Abrahamic promise in Genesis 12:2-3 of becoming a great nation blessing all families of the earth is viewed as enacted through these nations' role in disseminating , with British and American missionaries establishing churches across continents and translating the into hundreds of languages by the early , thereby extending spiritual and civilizational influence.

Proponents' Arguments and Supporting Claims

Biblical Interpretations and Prophetic Fulfillments

Proponents of British Israelism maintain that biblical prophecies of Israel's tribal regathering, particularly Isaiah 11:11–12, describe the lost tribes' relocation to the "islands of the sea," interpreted as the British Isles and northwestern Europe following their Assyrian captivity. This second recovery of remnants from dispersion is seen as distinct from the initial return of Judah under Cyrus, with the tribal migrations forming the basis for Anglo-Saxon nations' rise. Ezekiel 37's vision of dry bones reviving and two sticks joining—one inscribed "for Judah" and the other "for , the stick of "—is applied by proponents to the restoration of the northern tribes ( of ) in Britain as 's descendants, separate from the southern of Judah (). The unification of sticks symbolizes a future prophetic reunion, where these houses acknowledge shared covenant heritage, with 's multiplication (Genesis 48:19) fulfilled in Britain's imperial expansion. Symbolic elements in reinforce these claims, such as Balaam's in Numbers 23:22 likening Israel's strength to a "," which proponents link to the unicorn in British heraldry as emblematic of Ephraim's (Joseph's) enduring power and purity. The from Judah's (Genesis 49:9) appears alongside in the royal arms, signifying intertwined tribal legacies despite the houses' distinction. In eschatological interpretations, these fulfillments position Britain and allied nations—identified as Ephraim-Manasseh—as pivotal in end-times events, facilitating Judah's ingathering to per :21–22 and , prior to millennial restoration under a Davidic . Proponents argue this aligns with prophecies of Israel's dominance aiding Judah's return, culminating in national repentance and covenant renewal.

Historical and Archaeological Speculations

Proponents of British Israelism reference Assyrian inscriptions documenting the of the northern kingdom of Israel's population, estimated at around 27,290 individuals from in 722–721 BCE under , to regions including the cities of Media. These records, preserved in annals, describe the resettlement policy aimed at preventing rebellion by dispersing conquered peoples. Advocates speculate that these exiles, identified in later Assyrian intelligence as "Gimira" or , migrated westward from Media and through Asia Minor around the late 8th to 7th centuries BCE, eventually reaching as precursors to Celtic and Germanic tribes. Medieval European chronicles provide further narrative support in the view of proponents. The Declaration of , a 1320 Scottish petition to signed by 39 nobles, asserts that the Scots originated from Greater Scythia, journeyed through the Mediterranean including , and displaced ancient inhabitants of before settling in . This Scythian origin myth, echoed in attributing royal lineages to eastern migrations and figures like the Tuatha Dé Danann, is interpreted by British Israelists as veiled references to Israelite exiles blending with or becoming Scythian nomads post-Assyrian captivity. Linguistic and toponymic evidence from the features prominently in these speculations. Biblical accounts portray as seafaring and migratory (Judges 5:17), leading proponents to identify "Dan" markers along purported migration routes: the and rivers, the strait, (etymologized as "Dan's mark" or Danes), and Irish "Tuatha de Danaan" as "." In Britain, recurring "Dunn" elements in place names—such as , , and Dunnottar—are claimed as vestiges of Danite settlement, signifying "fort" or "hill" in Gaelic but linked speculatively to Hebrew "Dan" meaning "." These artifacts and records form a chain of historical inferences tracing Israelite dispersal to , though reliant on interpretive alignments rather than direct attestation.

Linguistic and Cultural Parallels

Proponents of British Israelism frequently invoke folk etymologies linking Hebrew words to Anglo-Saxon nomenclature as purported evidence of Israelite ancestry among the British peoples. One prominent claim posits that "British" derives from the Hebrew berit (covenant) combined with ish (man), rendering it "covenant man" or "man of the covenant," aligning with the biblical covenant promises to Israel in Genesis 17:4-7. This interpretation, advanced in 19th-century works like John Wilson's Our Israelitish Origin (1840), suggests the name encapsulates the enduring divine pact transferred to the lost tribes. Another key linguistic parallel drawn by advocates concerns the term "Saxon," etymologized as "sac-son" or "sons of ," tracing back through intermediaries (Sacae) to the patriarch , fulfilling Genesis 21:12's declaration that "in shall thy seed be called." Proponents such as J.H. Allen in Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright (1902) extend this chain, arguing it connects ancient Israelite migrations to Germanic tribes invading Britain around the 5th century CE. These derivations, while phonetically suggestive to supporters, rely on selective sound correspondences rather than established philological methodology. Cultural customs are also adduced for parallels, with British traditions purportedly echoing Hebrew patriarchal practices. For example, ancient Celtic and Druidic veneration of sacred stones and pillars is likened to anointing of the Bethel stone in Genesis 28:18-22, symbolizing covenant continuity and divine presence. Proponents further highlight purported affinities in sacrificial rites, white-robed priesthoods, and oak-grove rituals among Druids, drawing comparisons to Levitical customs described in Leviticus 1-7 and Exodus 28, as explored in Edward Hine's The British Israelites (1870s lectures). Such resemblances, claimed to persist in , are interpreted as vestiges of Israelite traditions preserved amid pagan overlays. British heraldry and provide additional layers of alleged veiled Israelite . The rampant in the royal arms is tied to the tribal emblem of Judah (Genesis 49:9), while Arthurian legends—particularly tales of a messianic king restoring a united realm—are seen by some advocates as encoded narratives of Davidic restoration among the lost tribes in the . Works like those of 20th-century British-Israel groups assert these motifs, including , subtly reference the or , refracted through Celtic myth to obscure Hebrew origins during . These interpretations, however, depend on symbolic conjecture over direct historical attestation.

Stone of Destiny and Symbolic Artifacts

Proponents of British Israelism assert that the Stone of Destiny, also known as the , originates from the biblical "pillar" erected by in Genesis 28:18, where he used a stone as a pillow during his dream of , subsequently it as a sacred . This identification draws on ancient Scottish and Irish traditions linking the relic to stone, positing it as a portable emblem of divine covenant carried by the during migrations. According to British Israelist lore, the stone was transported from to around 585 BCE by the prophet , accompanied by the daughters of King Zedekiah of Judah—specifically Tea Tephi (or Tamar Tephi), who purportedly married the Milesian king Eochaidh and established the in the Isles. , fleeing the Babylonian destruction of as described in 2 Kings 24–25, is claimed to have safeguarded both the stone and royal bloodline, ensuring continuity of the throne promised to in 2 Samuel 7:16. From , the stone allegedly moved to in the 5th century CE under , founder of the Scottish kingdom of , where it became integral to coronations at starting around 843 CE under . British Israelists view the stone's placement under the in —following its seizure by I in 1296—as evidence of the Davidic monarchy's transplantation to Britain, with every English and British since 1308 crowned upon it, symbolizing the fulfillment of prophecies like 21:27 regarding a perpetual throne. The relic's composition, lacking inscriptions but bearing a purported Hebrew under-rung resembling "Ni" (possibly for "Ni Ni"—a cry of ), is cited as corroborating its ancient Near Eastern provenance. The 1950 removal of the stone from by Scottish nationalists, who transported it to and returned fragments before its recovery, has been interpreted by some adherents as a prophetic "regathering" echoing biblical themes of tribal restoration in Isaiah 11:11–12, though this event preceded its official repatriation to in 1996 under the Stone of Destiny Act.

Criticisms and Empirical Refutations

Genetic and Anthropological Evidence Against Israelite Descent

Genetic analyses of Y-chromosome and in populations reveal predominant haplogroups such as R1b-M269, which originated in during the and spread via from the , rather than Semitic lineages typical of ancient Near Eastern groups like J1 or J2 associated with Levantine populations. Studies indicate that up to 90% of paternal lineages in regions like and trace to these pre-Israelite around 2500–2000 BCE, with minimal input from post- sources. Autosomal DNA research, including the 2015 analysis of over 2,000 individuals, demonstrates fine-scale genetic clustering that correlates strongly with geographic regions within the and aligns with historical migrations from , such as Anglo-Saxon influxes contributing 25–40% northern European ancestry in eastern , but shows no significant Levantine or Semitic admixture signatures expected from a hypothetical mass Israelite dispersal after the Assyrian conquest in 722 BCE. from Bronze and Britain further confirms continuity with Early European Farmer and steppe pastoralist components, lacking the elevated Anatolian Neolithic or Levantine markers prevalent in ancient Israelite samples from sites like Megiddo. Anthropological examinations of skeletal remains and across post-8th century BCE yield no evidence of a large-scale Semitic migration pattern, such as distinct burial practices, dietary isotopes indicating Near Eastern grains, or artifact styles matching Israelite material from the ; instead, European assemblages reflect local Celtic and Germanic developments without disruption from eastern refugee groups. Consensus among archaeologists attributes British to layered prehistoric and early historic intra-European movements, precluding the demographic scale required for "lost tribes" to form the core of peoples.

Linguistic and Historical Inaccuracies

Assyrian royal annals and inscriptions, such as those of , document the conquest of the Northern Kingdom of Israel in 722 BCE and the of approximately 27,290 inhabitants—primarily elites, artisans, and —to regions in and Media, where they were resettled among foreign populations to induce assimilation. This policy of selective and cultural integration, evidenced by cuneiform records and archaeological continuity in Israelite post-exile, contradicts claims of a mass westward migration preserving tribal identity toward or Britain, as no contemporary Assyrian or biblical texts reference such movements. Instead, extrabiblical sources indicate dispersed groups intermingled locally, with remnants in blending into populations by the Persian period. Linguistic parallels posited by British Israelism proponents, such as deriving "Britain" from Hebrew berit ("covenant") or linking Anglo-Saxon terms to Semitic roots, rely on unsubstantiated folk etymologies dismissed by philologists as coincidental resemblances lacking phonetic, morphological, or historical support. The name "Britain" originates from the Greco-Roman Pritani or Pretani, a Celtic term (likely from Proto-Celtic pritt-, denoting "painted" or "tattooed" peoples) recorded by of around 325 BCE and Latinized as by in 55 BCE, reflecting indigenous nomenclature rather than Hebrew influence. Similarly, Anglo-Saxon language derives from Germanic Indo-European roots, with no verifiable Semitic substrate, as confirms independent evolution from continental tribes without Israelite intermediary. The legend of Jeremiah escorting Zedekiah's daughter Tea Tephi to Ireland around 585 BCE, foundational to dynastic continuity claims, lacks any contemporary corroboration in Irish annals, Hebrew texts, or archaeological records from the period, emerging instead in medieval Irish pseudohistories like the Lebor Gabála Érenn (11th century CE) and amplified by 19th-century British Israelist writers such as J. H. Allen. These accounts conflate disparate myths, including Egyptian princess Scota, with no epigraphic or documentary evidence predating the Common Era, rendering the narrative a post hoc fabrication unsupported by verifiable historiography.

Scriptural and Theological Counterarguments

Critics of British Israelism argue that teachings redefine Israel's covenants through Christ, forming a that transcends ethnic boundaries rather than transferring national promises to Anglo-Saxon peoples. In Galatians 3:28-29, Paul states there is "neither nor Greek... for you are all one in Christ . And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise," indicating believers, regardless of descent, inherit the promises spiritually, not as a literal ethnic continuation in Britain. Similarly, Romans 11 employs the olive tree metaphor where unbelieving ethnic ("natural branches") are broken off, and believing Gentiles ("wild olive shoots") are grafted in, but the root remains tied to Israel's historic faith, with no indication of separate tribal identities like or Manasseh reemerging in ; Paul identifies himself and contemporary as , affirming ethnic as the continuity of biblical . British Israelism's emphasis on distinct tribal restorations overlooks the biblical record of the northern kingdom's assimilation following Assyrian captivity in 722 BC, as described in 2 Kings 17:6, where the Israelites were deported to Assyria's cities and intermingled with foreign populations resettled in Samaria, leading to a loss of distinct tribal identity rather than preservation for later migration to Britain. This assimilation policy, typical of Assyrian conquests, implies no perpetual ethnic separation or promised regathering as intact tribes, contradicting claims of ongoing distinction; subsequent prophecies of restoration, such as in Hosea 1:10-11, envision a unified Israel under one head (the Messiah), not fragmented tribal nations in distant lands. Interpretations of prophecies like 's valley of dry bones as a literal regathering of lost tribes to Britain fail textual scrutiny, as the vision explicitly addresses "the whole house of " in the context of Babylonian exile ( 37:11), fulfilled initially in Judah's post-exilic return around 538-445 BC under leaders like and , or symbolically in spiritual revival through the , not a separate northern tribal migration. The prophecy's emphasis on reuniting "two sticks" (Judah and /) into one nation under Davidic rule (:15-22) aligns with messianic fulfillment in the church or eschatological Jewish restoration, without warrant for applying it to British imperial , as no validation extends such ethnic specificity post-Christ. This approach privileges a supersessionist reading where the church embodies true , rendering British Israelism's literalist tribal claims theologically extraneous to covenant realization in Christ.

Ideological Motivations and Pseudoscientific Methods

British Israelism aligned closely with 19th-century and , framing the empire's territorial expanse and economic supremacy as direct inheritance of ancient Israelite birthrights, thereby supplying a scriptural justification for colonial dominance as divinely ordained rather than contingent on geopolitical or economic factors. This perspective gained traction among elites during the , when Britain's control over one-quarter of the world's land and population by 1900 was interpreted as prophetic fulfillment of promises to Abraham's descendants, circumventing the need for verifiable migration records or genetic continuity in favor of providential exceptionalism. Proponents employed pseudoscientific techniques, notably , which posited the as an encoded Israelite prophecy through manipulated chronologies—such as equating one "pyramid inch" to one year or month to predict events like the 1914 onset of —while disregarding the structure's Egyptian context and lack of Hebrew inscriptions. These methods depended on , cherry-picking superficial linguistic or symbolic parallels (e.g., deriving "British" from Hebrew "berit-ish" for "covenant man") and folklore-driven excavations, like those at Ireland's seeking the , without yielding artifacts or stratigraphic evidence of Semitic incursion. Archaeological consensus confirms no Israelite , including , seals, or , in Bronze or Britain, a datum routinely sidelined in favor of non-falsifiable allegorical readings of texts like the Song of Deborah. The doctrine's non-empirical core manifested in selective sourcing, amplifying anecdotal resemblances in customs or heraldry while omitting contradictory data from Assyriology (e.g., cuneiform records of deported tribes remaining in Mesopotamia) or anthropology, which traces British ethnogenesis to Celtic and Germanic migrations absent Semitic intermediaries. This approach eschewed causal testing—such as modeling hypothetical mass exoduses against known Iron Age demographics—for ideological affirmation of cultural superiority, often appealing to audiences predisposed to view imperial setbacks, like the 1914-1918 war losses, as temporary divine chastisement rather than disconfirmation. Originally philo-Semitic in affirming Anglo-Jewish kinship under Mosaic law, British Israelism's offshoots revealed ideological drift by the mid-20th century, incorporating anti-Semitic fabrications like the Khazar hypothesis to relegate to non-Israelite status, prioritizing racial purity narratives over or that affirm Ashkenazi Levantine origins. This mutation, evident in American variants by , subordinated evidence to supremacist ends, as seen in "two-seedline" pseudotheology alleging Satanic Jewish ancestry, transforming a nationalist reverie into vectors for exclusionary unchecked by primary sources.

Influences on Religious and Cultural Movements

Impact on Restorationist and Adventist Groups

Restorationist movements in 19th-century America, emphasizing the restoration of primitive and often intertwined with , incorporated concepts akin to British Israelism's lost tribes migration narratives to underpin their eschatological visions. These groups viewed the scattering and regathering of as literal events involving modern peoples, paralleling British Israelism's identification of Anglo-Europeans with Israelite descendants, though without direct dependence on its formalized tenets. In the , founded by in 1830, the depicts Israelite tribes—explicitly including descendants of Manasseh via Lehi's family—migrating to the circa 600 BCE, establishing societies that preserved Hebrew origins amid later . This echoes British Israelism's Ephraimite themes, as LDS doctrine assigns to (often linked to Anglo-American converts) the covenant role of gathering scattered , with patriarchal blessings from 1833 onward declaring thousands as Ephraimites tasked with restoring gospel ordinances. Such declarations, peaking in the , reinforced a sense of direct tribal continuity among European-descended adherents, facilitating missionary expansion and temple work as fulfillments of prophecies like Hosea 8:8 and 113. While Mormon claims uniquely include Native Americans as Lamanite (Manassehite) remnants, the Ephraim focus provided a theological bridge to broader lost tribes , independent yet resonant with contemporaneous Anglo-Israelite speculations. Early Adventist pioneers, emerging from the Millerite movement after the 1844 , debated the literal application of Israelite prophecies, with some non-Sabbatarian Adventists from 1844–1850 exploring lost tribes' role in end-time sealing and gathering. Figures like , a prominent Second Adventist, adopted by the , arguing as tribal heirs preserved elements, influencing views on 7's 144,000 from Israel's tribes. Joseph Bates, a Sabbatarian Adventist co-founder, linked seventh-day observance to Israel's perpetual covenant (Exodus 31:16–17), positing in 1846 writings that scattered tribes retained knowledge, implicitly aligning Anglo-Saxon customs with Ephraimite birthright promises in Genesis 48–49. These interpretations bolstered Adventist identity as modern Israel fulfillers amid apocalyptic expectations, though later Seventh-day Adventist orthodoxy spiritualized such claims, rejecting literal tribal descent.

Connections to Pentecostalism and Charismatic Traditions

Some early British Pentecostal leaders, emerging from the fervor of the 1904-05 Welsh Revival—a movement characterized by widespread repentance, spontaneous worship, and over 100,000 reported conversions—later integrated British Israelism into their prophetic frameworks, interpreting these national spiritual outpourings as divine fulfillments of covenant promises to the lost tribes of Israel residing among the Anglo-Saxon peoples. This perspective underscored a shared emphasis on biblical and , positing that Britain's revivals evidenced God's ongoing favor toward His ancient covenant nation, distinct from or other regions. Such views reinforced millennial expectations of restoration, where British dominion and spiritual awakening aligned with end-times restoration motifs from scriptures like 3:5 and Ezekiel 37. Despite these overlaps, divergences marked the traditions: Pentecostalism prioritized experiential markers of the Holy Spirit's baptism, including glossolalia as initial evidence—a doctrine formalized post-Azusa Street in 1906—which British Israelism neither required nor emphasized, focusing instead on ethnic-historical identity for prophetic application. Eschatologically, while both anticipated Israel's regathering and kingdom advent, Pentecostals frequently upheld a distinct role for ethnic Jews in prophecy per dispensational lines, contrasting British Israelism's substitution of British peoples as the primary heirs, leading to interpretive tensions over Romans 11 and Zechariah 12. A substantial minority of early Pentecostals nonetheless incorporated British Israelist elements, blending them with revivalist zeal until mainstream shifts emphasized spiritual over racial identification with Israel. In Charismatic extensions, such as the post-World War II Latter Rain movement, residual prophetic ties persisted through interpretations of latter-day outpourings as tied to Israel's restoration, influenced by British Israelism's exceptionalist lens, though often spiritualized to prioritize manifestations over . These connections highlighted indirect synergies in anticipating global revival and dominion but waned as Charismatic emphases on personal and ecumenical unity diverged from British Israelism's nationalistic .

Herbert W. Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God

Herbert W. Armstrong incorporated British Israelism into his teachings during the early , identifying the Anglo-Saxon peoples, particularly the and Britain, as descendants of the lost tribes of Israel, specifically and Manasseh, who inherited the unconditional birthright promises of national greatness outlined in Genesis 48 and 49. He founded the Radio Church of God in August 1933 in , initially broadcasting "The World Tomorrow" program to propagate these views alongside observance and other doctrines derived from his interpretations of Scripture. Armstrong argued that the modern superpower status of these nations fulfilled biblical prophecies of material blessings but warned of impending decline and captivity due to covenant violations, such as , -breaking, and moral decay, drawing from curses in Deuteronomy 28. Armstrong's exposition of Anglo-Israelism became central to unlocking end-times prophecies, positing that the identity of these nations as Israel clarified symbols like the "beasts" in Revelation and Daniel, with Britain's "lion" emblem and America's role in global events tying into blessings. He formalized these ideas in his 1954 booklet The and Britain in Prophecy, which expanded into a major work emphasizing how failure to repent would lead to national punishment before the return of Christ. Through radio broadcasts starting in the 1930s and television expansion in the 1950s–1970s, alongside The Plain Truth magazine, the organization grew from a small congregation to an estimated 150,000 members and affiliates by the late , including families and unbaptized adherents, with media outreach reaching millions annually. Following Armstrong's death on January 16, 1986, his successor Joseph Tkach initiated doctrinal reforms, including abandonment of as a core tenet, which triggered mass exodus and the formation of over 100 splinter groups by the mid-1990s, many retaining the Anglo-Israel framework to interpret and church identity. These offshoots, such as the and , continued emphasizing U.S. and British descent from as essential for understanding warnings of national decline amid global upheavals. The original Worldwide Church of God, renamed , repudiated these teachings, viewing them as unsubstantiated and pivotal to the prior system's prophetic errors.

Evolution into Christian Identity and Fringe Ideologies

In the United States following , certain branches of British Israelism diverged by incorporating explicit anti-Semitism, portraying not as the but as racial impostors or descendants of ancient enemies like Edomites, a shift influenced by rising domestic racial tensions and apocalyptic interpretations amid the Holocaust's aftermath. This evolution, accelerated in the and , transformed philo-Semitic Anglo-Israelite teachings—which had viewed as the "lost tribes" of alongside as Judah—into the ideology, emphasizing white racial purity and rejecting Jewish claims to biblical heritage. Christian Identity further departed from core British Israelism through doctrines like the "dual-seedline" theory, positing that Eve's seduction by the serpent produced Cain's lineage as the progenitor of , framing modern as satanic rather than Israelite, a cosmological absent in original British Israelist texts that avoided such mythic racial origins. Unlike British Israelism's providential view of British exceptionalism as divine favor without inherent supremacy over other races, explicitly endorsed superiority, linking to groups and justifying violence against non-whites and as biblical mandate. These fringe variants overlapped with organizations like the , where Identity adherents propagated anti-Semitic propaganda in the 1950s-1970s South, blending Israelite identity claims with nativist . This radicalization contrasted sharply with British Israelism's foundational philo-Semitism, which affirmed Jews as authentic Judahites and, in some 19th-early British circles, supported Zionist efforts like the 1917 as prophetic restoration of Judah to alongside Israel's "northern" tribes in Britain. U.S. distortions, however, prioritized conspiratorial , eroding the original doctrine's compatibility with Jewish national aspirations and repurposing it for exclusionary ideologies that mainstream British Israelists had eschewed.

Notable Adherents and Contemporary Status

Historical Figures and Institutional Promoters

John Wilson (1799–1870) emerged as an early advocate of British Israelism, publishing Our Israelitish Origin in 1840, which argued for the identification of the with the lost tribes of based on historical and biblical interpretations. Edward Hine (1825–1891), influenced by Wilson's lectures as a youth, became a leading popularizer in the 1870s and 1880s, authoring Forty-Seven Identifications of the British Nation with the Lost in 1871 and conducting extensive lecture tours that drew thousands. In the late 19th century, organizational efforts gained momentum under figures like Edward Wheler Bird (1823–1903), a retired who established the Metropolitan Anglo-Israel Association in 1879, which published The Banner of Israel and coordinated activities among adherents. George Moore (1803–1880), a physician and author of The Lost Tribes, or Saxons of the East and West, co-founded the Anglo-Israel Association around 1874–1879, attracting members from political and intellectual circles. The British-Israel-World Federation, formed in 1919, consolidated earlier groups with over 80 affiliated associations, promoting the ideology through publications and lectures led by military and clerical figures such as Major-General C.A. Hadfield and Colonel J. Garnier. In the United States, J.H. Allen (1847–1930), a minister, advanced the movement's reach via his 1902 book Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright, emphasizing Anglo-Saxon evangelistic destiny and influencing American branches. William Pascoe Goard (1863–1937), a Methodist minister and prolific of over 20 books on the topic, served as editor of The National Message and organized associations in , further institutionalizing the teachings.

Modern Proponents and Organizational Remnants

The British-Israel-World Federation (BIWF), established in , persists as a key organizational remnant promoting British Israelism into the , functioning as an educational society that interprets biblical covenants as applying to Britain and related nations while addressing current geopolitical issues through this framework. The group maintains an active online presence, including newsletters and articles linking modern events like immigration policies to prophetic warnings of national decline for the "Israelitish" peoples. It holds periodic conferences, such as the 2022 Australian national gathering featuring speakers on covenant themes. Smaller-scale continuity appears in niche online communities and publications post-2020, where proponents discuss revivals of the theory amid debates over Western cultural identity and globalization's erosion of national sovereignty, often citing it as validation of end-times prophecies against the "lost tribes." However, these efforts remain marginal, with no evidence of widespread institutional revival or significant membership growth beyond dedicated circles. Occasional echoes surface in political discourse, with reports indicating lingering sympathy among select British parliamentarians—primarily Conservatives—in contexts of national heritage and identity preservation, though without forming organized advocacy. Overall, British Israelism's modern footprint is confined to fringe religious and interpretive outlets, lacking broader cultural or electoral traction despite periodic online resurgence.

References

  1. https://www.cdamm.org/articles/british-israelism
  2. https://www.theology.edu/journal/volume4/BritishIsraelism.htm
  3. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/renaissance-quarterly/article/most-vile-and-barbarous-nation-of-all-the-world-giles-fletcher-the-elders-the-tartars-or-ten-tribes-ca-1610/5306DECC46911C5FA1A5C8C1F07E5DFF
  4. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1353/ren.2008.0809
  5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0048721X87900601
  6. https://www.cdamm.org/articles/seventeenth-century-english-millennialism
  7. https://www.cdamm.org/assets/articlePDFs/29847-british-israelism.pdf
  8. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/323272223.pdf
  9. https://www.ucg.org/learn/bible-study-tools/bible-study-aids/united-states-and-britain-bible-prophecy/advocates-british-israelism
  10. https://www.originofnations.org/books%2C%2520papers/MA_dissertation_BI.pdf
  11. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1968.tb01291.x
  12. https://www.cbcg.org/booklets/america-britain/appendix-1-problems-associated-with-british-israelism.html
  13. https://2024.sci-hub.box/8334/da0c591f75dffb0def18f77780922805/10.1111%401467-9809.12685.pdf
  14. https://www.britishisrael.co.uk/
  15. https://britishisrael.org.au/conference/
  16. https://www.originofnations.org/old_bi_literature/some_historical_background.htm
  17. https://www.thetorah.com/article/assyrian-deportation-and-resettlement-the-story-of-samaria
  18. https://www.cbcg.org/booklets/america-britain/chapter-eight-israel-migrates-to-the-north-and-west.html
  19. https://www.stempublishing.com/authors/pollock/The_British-Israel_Theory.html
  20. https://hebrewnations.com/articles/tribes/dan/denmark.html
  21. https://www.cbcg.org/booklets/america-britain/appendix-5-jacob-s-pillow-stone-the-prophetic-stone-of-destiny.html
  22. https://www.ucg.org/learn/bible-study-tools/bible-commentary/beyond-today-bible-commentary-2-samuel/2-samuel-7-and-related
  23. https://www.associationcovenantpeople.org/the-prophet-nathans-prophecy-of-britain/
  24. https://www.ucg.org.au/learn/read/bible-insights-weekly/biw-archive/the-biblical-identity-of-britains-royal-family-2
  25. https://www.tomorrowsworld.org/magazines/2022/december/the-stone-of-destiny
  26. https://www.ucg.org/learn/bible-study-tools/bible-study-aids/united-states-and-britain-bible-prophecy/britain-and-united-states-inherit-josephs-birthright
  27. https://stevenmcollins.com/who-is-ephraim-and-manasseh/
  28. https://lifehopeandtruth.com/prophecy/america-in-prophecy/united-states-and-britain-in-prophecy/
  29. https://www.cbcg.org/booklets/america-britain/chapter-thirteen-modern-israel-s-astonishing-rise-to-greatness.html
  30. https://hebrewnations.com/articles/biblical-proof/geo/geoisles.html
  31. https://www.bible.ca/pre-british-israelism-foy-wallace.htm
  32. https://ensignmessage.com/articles/heraldrythe-clues-to-history-ephraim-the-unicorn/
  33. https://www.britam.org/unicorn.html
  34. http://www.britishisrael.co.uk/study/5steps3.php
  35. https://armstronginstitute.org/1137-assyrian-deportation-policy-at-tel-hadid
  36. https://www.bethelcog.org/the-captivity-and-deportation-of-israel/
  37. https://www.historyofisrael.com/archeological-proof-of-the-lost-10-tribes-of-israel.html
  38. http://www.revneal.org/Writings/Writings/british.htm
  39. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/medieval/arbroath_1320.asp
  40. https://arbroathfestival.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/NRS_DoA_English_booklet_700_Spreads_WEB.pdf
  41. https://www.tomorrowsworld.org/magazines/2008/november-december/finding-the-lost-tribes-of-israel
  42. https://www.cbcg.org/booklets/america-britain/chapter-nine-the-tribe-of-dan-trailblazing-pioneer-of-israel.html
  43. https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/38630/pg38630-images.html
  44. https://ensignmessage.com/articles/whats-in-a-name/
  45. https://cbcg.org/franklin/Judah%27s_Sceptre_Joseph%27s_Birthright.pdf
  46. https://armstronginstitute.org/250-were-the-celtic-druids-pagan-israelite-priests
  47. https://www.amazon.com/British-Israelites-Evidences-Genealogy-Philology/dp/1167200837
  48. https://www.friendsofsabbath.org/Further_Research/Lost_Tribes_British-Israel/British-Israel2/The-Twelve-Tribes-of-Israel-Today.pdf
  49. https://www.nytimes.com/1924/08/24/archives/the-stone-of-scone-is-it-really-jacobs-pillow-that-a-scot-wishes.html
  50. https://www.britishisrael.ca/blog/story-of-a-stone
  51. https://www.christianheritageedinburgh.org.uk/2021/05/07/the-stone-of-destiny/
  52. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14230
  53. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982203003737
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8889665/
  55. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05247-2
  56. https://cojs.org/israelites-in-exile-k-lawson-younger/
  57. https://www.thetorah.com/article/the-ten-lost-tribes-a-myth-to-delegitimize-the-samarians
  58. https://claudemariottini.com/2018/11/20/the-deportation-of-the-northern-kingdom/
  59. https://archive.gci.org/articles/anglo-israelism-and-the-united-states-britain-in-prophecy/
  60. https://www.academia.edu/126467748/The_root_of_the_name_Britannia
  61. https://www.balashon.com/2019/11/britain.html
  62. https://explorersweb.com/exploration-mysteries-tea-tephi/
  63. https://bereanbiblesociety.org/a-scriptural-examination-of-anglo-israelism/
  64. https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/2-kings-17/
  65. https://bibleissues.atspace.com/prophecy/british.htm
  66. https://ecommons.luc.edu/context/luc_diss/article/4692/viewcontent/998529493402506_1997_Ds_reisenauerE_britishIsrael.pdf
  67. https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781000172300_A39784067/preview-9781000172300_A39784067.pdf
  68. http://www.badarchaeology.com/religious-delusions/the-british-israelites/
  69. https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/christian-identity-movement
  70. https://www.bibleodyssey.org/articles/mormon-scripture-and-the-lost-tribes-of-israel/
  71. https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/the-ten-lost-tribes-a-world-history
  72. https://adventistbiblicalresearch.org/articles/the-gathering-of-israel-a-historical-study-of-early-writings-pp-74-76
  73. https://faithsaves.net/welsh-revival/
  74. https://healingandrevival.com/BioGJeffreys.htm
  75. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/religion-and-american-culture/article/pentecostals-israel-and-the-prophetic-politics-of-dominion/229DC7F19167D33778822793A7BF7063
  76. https://william-branham.org/site/blog/20231127_c._a._l._totten_british_israel_influence_on_modern_pentecostalism
  77. https://archive.gci.org/articles/the-central-plank-cracks/
  78. https://archive.gci.org/articles/the-enigma-of-herbert-w-armstrong/
  79. https://www.hwalibrary.com/cgi-bin/get/hwa.cgi?action=getmagazine&InfoID=1342781511&InfoType=PT&SearchWhat=KeyWord&SearchFor=This%2520is%2520Petra%21%2520Part%25201&NoShow=&page=32&return=search
  80. https://www.bible.ca/pre-british-israelism-herbert-armstrong.htm
  81. https://www.unityinchrist.com/wwcofg/wwcofgod.html
  82. https://www.hwalibrary.com/cgi-bin/get/hwa.cgi?action=getbklet&InfoID=1412024145
  83. https://mrm.org/worldwide-church
  84. https://www.religionwatch.com/worldwide-church-of-god-dissolves-leaving-replica-splinter-groups-in-its-wake/
  85. https://vridar.org/2017/05/17/how-philo-semitic-british-israelism-morphed-into-anti-semitic-white-supremacism-christian-identity/
  86. https://www.splcenter.org/resources/reports/how-christian-identity-movement-began/
  87. https://gale.com/academic/essays/product/k-r/joseph-baker-brianna-mcmillan-christian-identity-religions-of-america
  88. https://goodfaithmedia.org/understanding-israel-and-palestine-british-israelism-and-the-roots-of-christian-zionism/
  89. https://www.britishisrael.co.uk/history.php
  90. https://www.associationcovenantpeople.org/mr-british-israel-william-pascoe-goard/
  91. https://www.britishisrael.co.uk/articles.php
  92. https://www.basscoast.vic.gov.au/the-british-israel-national-conference-2022-2
  93. https://www.britishisrael.co.uk/newsletter/1.pdf
  94. https://listverse.com/2024/08/05/10-bizarre-claims-of-british-israelism/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.