The Israelite Identity movement originally arose in Britain — and it closely coincided with Oliver Cromwell’s advocating for the readmission of the Jews to England after they had been exiled for 350 years after their expulsion by Edward I in 1290 — in return for Jewish financing of the Civil War.
Cromwell was heavily influenced by his relationship with the Amsterdam-based Jew, Menasseh Ben Israel, who provided him with the rationalization that the readmission of the Jews to England, and their subsequent conversion to Christianity would hasten the return of Christ.
It appears that Menasseh convinced Cromwell that since the British could be counted among the ten lost northern tribes of Israel, the readmission of the Jews to England would fulfill the prophecy of the regathering of the tribes of Israel, which would signal the second coming.
One of the founding documents of British Israelitism was The Rights of the Kingdom written in 1649 by John Sadler, a philosemite who also just so happened to be a friend of Menasseh Ben Israel — and it was Sadler’s work that apparently convinced Cromwell that Menasseh’s theories were legitimate.
But Menasseh wasn’t the first to point out that the Anglo-Saxons could trace their ancestry back to the “lost” ten northern tribes of Israel — the French Huguenot, Pierre Le Loyer published his book, The Ten Lost Tribes, in France in 1590 — copies of which cannot be found anywhere on the internet.
So it appears that Menasseh observed that the European people had already begun to awaken to the fact that they were descendants of the ten northern tribes of Israel, so he saw an opportunity to steer this awakening to the advantage of Jews — by affirming that, yes, the Europeans were counted among “lost” Israel, but more importantly that the Jews were Judah — which they were decidedly not.
But it would take historians and researchers another couple hundred years to figure out that Europe’s “Jews” were not, in fact, legitimate descendants of Judah — mainly the work of Israelite Identity Christians in America who had sloughed off the pernicious influence of the judaized British-Israelite advocates.
So here we will take a look at a chapter from the 1896 book Anglo-Israel: The Jewish Problem by British-Israel writer, Thomas Rosling Howlett.
Like all Christians in the British-Israel movement, Howlett appears to be aware of some difficult problems around the notion that the “Jews” are actually Judah — he accepts the idea at face value, which puts him in a position to come up with some implausible explanations to account for certain contradictions.
In Chapter III entitled “The Hebrew Nations — Changed Physiognomy — Cause of the Same” (p. 23-26) Howlett attempts to come up with a “reasonable” explanation to account for why the Europeans who descended from the ten lost tribes physically look the same, but the Jews who are allegedly also Israelites look entirely different.
In fact, Howlett points out how early on many Christians rejected the whole idea of the British-Israel thesis because the British people looked nothing like Jews — and since Jews were “Israelites”, the British people could not possibly be Israelites.
Howlett even compares differences of Jews to Englishmen in the same way he compares Englishmen to the Welsh — but this comparison falls flat on its face because the English and the Welsh look the same, whereas Jews and the English do not.
So in order to account for this difference, Howlett utilizes the concept of Lamarckian Inheritance — a theory still popular in the late 19th century but now dismissed by geneticists as scientifically untenable — which claimed that organisms — even humans — an can pass on to their offspring physical characteristics that the parent organism acquired through use or disuse during its lifetime.
Howlett claims that the reason Jews have such a twisted and distorted physical look to them is because of the “persecution” that they experienced over the centuries at the hands of Christians — and he goes on to claim that once Jews spend enough time in England without further persecution, they will eventually begin to look indistinguishable from English Israelites.
Of course, over time Jews in England and elsewhere have started to look more like the native Europeans but not because they are no longer “persecuted” but rather because they have often inter-bred with real European Israelites — and in England, especially, often with the elite or aristocracy.
Ironically, despite Larmarkian Inheritance being discredited, Jews still publish “studies” that use this spurious theory — claiming that Holocaust trauma literally shrunk the brains of Jews, an affliction that can be passed down from generation to generation.
Another Jewish “study” claimed that the “barbarous” treatment that Jews experienced at the hands of the “Nazis” has caused Jews to have such a high incidence of schizophrenia — rather than the obvious — multi-generational close inter-marriage — or endogamy.
But Howlett was writing at the time when modern genetics were unknown — differences in phenotype or outward physical traits are caused by differences in genotypes or underlying genetics.
Even so, Howlett ignores the obvious explanation — that Jews had race mixed in the preceding two thousand years, which made them look discernibly different from White European Israelites who remained relatively genetically pure and homogeneous.
The fact that Jews inherit their “Jewish” identity through the mothers rather than their fathers should have set off alarm bells for Howlett, as he must have known that Israelites always traced their Israelite identity through the father — and that race mixing was strictly forbidden.
To this very day, the British-Israel movement is still controlled by Jews — most notably the website Britam.org — run by the Jew, Yair Davidiy — along with the related site, Hebrewnations.com — both of which insist that the Jews are Judah.
That said, we now present Howllet’s brief chapter on this issue — to see how easily duped the British-Israel movement was — and how that influence has greatly misguided many sincere Christians who have looked into the truth of the fate of the “lost” ten tribes of northern Israel:
“Ethnic traits and peculiarities are conceded to be evidence of racial affinity. These sometimes appear in the physiognomy — oftener in manners, customs, beliefs, and the general racial trend. In the Jews the countenance is often conclusive.
Unlikeness to this people in facial appearance is cited as evidence against the Saxons being a kindred race. But why should there be a facsimile resemblance?
The Israelites of the Ten Lost Tribes never were Jews. To suppose so is one of the errors of our times. There are many diligent readers of the Bible who fail utterly to distinguish between the two families, or nations, into which the Hebrews were divided — the “House of Israel,” and the “House of Judah.”
One of the most celebrated and popular lecturers upon the Prophets of Israel was asked if Jeremiah used the words “Israel” and “Judah” as synonymous, and he was not able to say. He “had not noticed.” He seemed surprised when told that this prophet used the word “Judah” 180 times and “Israel” 90 times, but never once as synonymous. Another, a professor in a Theological Seminary, said he “had no confidence in the Anglo-Israel theory because it would make us out to be “Jews.”
Another, a diligent Bible student and an extensive writer of Sunday school literature, asked the author how he distinguished between Israelites and Jews, supposing them to be synonymous.
The Jews get their name from their own tribe and house. The Anglo-Saxons descend from the “House of Israel,” consisting of the ten tribes. The “House of Israel,” the “House of Jacob,” the “House of Issac,” the “House of Ephraim,” the “House of Joseph,” are used synonymously.
But the “House of Judah” denotes another and a separate nation of the Hebrews. Only in the latest period of the Old Testament history, long after the disappearance of the ten tribes from the Holy Land, is Judah used as synonymous with Israel. Even in New Testament times, it was only in common parlance that other Israelites than those springing from the “Jewish nation” were called Jews. All Israelites are no more Jews than all Britons are Welshmen.
Into this common error of confounding Israel with Judah Tom Paine fell, and declared that he was led into infidelity, because he saw that the Jews could never verify the promises given to Israel.
The more acute observer, William E. Gladstone, in his “Impregnable Rock of Holy Scripture,” writes, “Now the name of Israel is the name under which, in the Psalms, the chosen people are described. We have this name repeated twenty-six times. The name Judah occurs ten times, and never with this paramount significance. It is mentioned either together with Israel, or in conjunction with other tribes, as with Ephraim and Manasseh, or with Zion, but always locally or tribally.”
Much confusion would have been prevented if all readers of the Scriptures had been thus observing. Jehovah is constantly called the “God of Israel,” but not once is he called the “God of Judah.”
“Israel” is the named employed to denote “the chosen people” consisting of the twelve tribes; but these twelve tribes were divided into two nations. Christ recognized this when he said to the Jews, “The kingdom of god shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” Consistently with all Old Testament promises and predictions, He must have meant another Hebrew “nation,” in other words the ten tribed nation, the “House of Israel.”
Since these things are so, why should the descendants of the ten tribes be expected to resemble the Jews in physiognomy?
Besides it is not certain that the facial appearance of the Jew was always the same as it is now. There are reasons for believing that it has been changed since their dispersion, that it is the result, in part, of the social and physical degradation into which they were thrown after the destruction of Jerusalem, and in which they have continued in may lands until the present day.
The change in physiognomy has been in the two tribes, not in the ten from which the Anglo-Saxons sprang. The open, frank, bold, fearless countenance so marked in our race may have once belonged to the sons of Judah also.
The shy, timid, fearful look that often marks them now belonged not to them originally. Under the tyranny and persecutions of the ages, they have been made to tremble at the shaking of a leaf.
Is it unusual for inward fears and passions to be mirrored in the face? Even black men turn pale from excessive fright. It is but recently — and that only in the British Empire and the United States — that the Jews have been wholly emancipated, and lifted from racial degradation.
This surely is an important consideration. A few generations among the Anglo-Saxons may smooth from the brow and face of Judah the furrows of care, fear, and sorrow, which centuries of persecution have made, and restore to his very physiognomy the symmetry and beauty of his youth.
“A merry heart cheereth up the countenance; but when the heart qeeleth pain, the spirit is depressed.” (Proverbs 15:13)
Howlett’s Note: Young’s Concordance thus defines Jew as “A descendant of Judah; in later times also an Israelite. In 2 Kings 16:6, this appellation is applied to the two tribes. Strictly speaking, the name is appropriate only to the subjects of the kingdom of the two tribes after the separation of the ten tribes. B.C. 975.”
The first time this historic name occurs in Scripture history is during the reign of Pekah, on of the last of the kings of the House of Israel. He joined Rezin, the king of Syria, in war against Abaz, king of Judah. “At that time Rezin, king of Syria, recovered Elath to Syria and rove the ‘Jews’ from Elath.” (2 Kings 16:6. B.C. 742).”
Joh 10:14 “I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me,
Joh 10:15 even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.
Joh 10:16 “I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.
In Jesus’ own words , He brought all His people into one flock ! The reunification of the House of Judah and Israel ! Just as prophesized by Jeremiah 31:31-33, Hosea 1:11 2:23 etc etc
Hos 1:11 And the sons of Judah and the sons of Israel will be gathered together, And they will appoint for themselves one leader, And they will go up from the land, For great will be the day of Jezreel.
Jer 31:31 “Behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,
Jer 31:32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD.
Jer 31:33 “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
Same as Ezekiel 37:15-28 , reinforced by Paul in Ephesians 2 amongst other passages !
What is it these British-Israel folks do NOT comprehend ? I have read alot of their books , i shake my head often ! Its infiltration and subversion is what Happened !
Little Boats in England – Thank God we defeated Hitler?
https://twitter.com/LittleBoats2020/status/1662706418690957313
https://twitter.com/LittleBoats2020
Christopher Hitchens was JEWISH.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/6QuhzxSWlDyh/
or
https://worldtruthvideos.website/watch/christopher-hitchens-was-jewish_Dv7zFcQR3l9mnv9.html
Many will say in that day ‘Lord, we did many works in thy Name’ and He says ‘away from me I never knew you…’ judeo-Christian (((pastors))) have always struggled to interpret this Scripture because they are Universalists and they reject the racial element of the Bible.
However, to me ( as much as jew gayo-cuckstians cringe and say ‘Not my (universalist) Jesus!’) , Jesus is clearly telling the non-Adamic hitites that they are NOT going to be in the Kingdom.
It is the same situation with the Parable of the Net and Fishes of every variety. The judeo-cuckstians teach that the ‘Unsaved’ are tossed out but the Saved are kept. Imo , the fishes kept are the Race of Adam, but all the other fishes that are thrown out are the non-Adamic races.
Again, this sternness of Jesus in regard to the Racial aspect is something very few would be even willing to consider.
I saw a video recently of African ‘pastors’ ‘delivering’ black women from “vagina demons.” This would be a good example of ‘works’ done in His Name that are rejected imo.
In Biblical Hebrew the word Save is translated as ‘to return.’
How can the non-Adamics who are not created in the image of the Father ‘return’ to something they never knew ?
I highly recommend Arnold Kennedy’s essay, “BRITISH ISRAEL DOCTRINE PROBLEMS”
https://christiansfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/British-Israel-Doctrine-Problems.pdf
Kennedy does a thorough job of showing how the British-Israel crowd were lead astray by their traditional Christian universalism.
What’s the point of understanding that you are from the bloodline of Israel if you also believe that “gentiles” or non-Israelites will also inherit the same promises from God?
And how many Jews ended up converting to Christianity after they were allowed back into England?
Zero.
And yet Christians still believe, and many still pray for, the “conversion of the Jews” so that Christ will return.
Never going to happen. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
never ever going to happen, because modern jewry aren’t even from Judah , not by bood nor geography ! Back in Jesus’ day they were mixed Edomite-Canaanite-Babylonian with barely a smidgin of Judahite but thats was it , they were impostors then and even moreso now.
Zechariah 14:21, Judges 1:21, Judges 3:5, and Ezekiel 16:3 all show that Judah and Benjamin had problems with Canaanite infiltrators. Judges 3:6 says that some of them had intermarried the Perizzites, and they can’t even be traced back to a Genesis 10 nation. That’s not even getting into the Edomite tribes that joined Judea later. Anyone claiming to be a legitimate Judahite or Benjaminite from the post-Babylon period is on shaky grounds.
most were gone by the release of Babylonian captivity , only 42,000 returned while the rest made their way north . Whoever returned most likely did race mix …… too hard to say really, all records are destroyed
Always the Band on the Run.
Cain’s curse.
IMO, there isn’t a leader of British-Israelite factions (they aren’t really unified or anything), but that hasn’t stopped the fake jews from trying to get ahead of it, same as usual. They do that with everything. I suspect they wanted to present it as a faction to begin with, rather than a tribal ethnic group. They’ll make up a faction if there isn’t one, so they can “get ahead of it”.
The irony is God won’t let them destroy His people. He still has work for them to do. The “jews” have failed, mainly because they can’t help but attack actual Israelites while oppressing them. They keep trying to steal their ethnic identity.
IMO the two major “jew” factions are Ashkenazi Magog “mongols” from the Turkish family tree and Edomitic mixed-race Shepardi [Along with the usual black faction LARPing with someone else’s history to cover their egos].
The massive global satanic cult linked to the cartels and sex trafficking is Magog’s deal since it’s a silk road thing; it’s about money for them, and I suspect their ancestors may have run the great Asian cultures in the distant past. You know, before they screwed them up with godlessness and they collapsed. Ashkenaz has that goat characteristic of wanting to dominate at all costs.
We all know how Magog and Edom end. Ironic that Joseph’s tribes are running the world’s largest military and created the nuke these parasites took with them. We know Damascus has yet to be uninhabited – and Edom dies in fire from Joseph. Magog is dragged out and wiped out when they attempt an invasion.
Part of my semi-skepticism about nukes comes from the story being that the jews invented them. Einstein, the most famous jew scientist, was a plagiarist and probable fraud, but somehow Oppenheimer and his gang of yid scientists on the Manhattan Project were on the up-and-up?
On genetics, In the article here about all yids having 5% nog genetics, it was mentioned that the Ashkenazi were found to be only distantly related to the Sephardi, and that they’d added this distance by (paraphrasing) shapeshifting with shiksas.
https://christiansfortruth.com/genetic-study-shows-jews-have-up-to-5-black-sub-saharan-african-dna-admixture/
While there could be enough difference between Sephardi and Ashkenazi to equate to Edom and Magog, it sticks in my craw is that the Khazars converted en masse to talmudic judaism seemingly overnight circa 800 AD, have clung to it for over 1,200 years, and are the only example of a population doing so, at least that I recall.
Menasseh Ben Israel in his book “The Hope of Israel” claimed that the native Indians in the Americas were the lost tribes of Israel.
If he also claimed that White Europeans were the lost tribes, then how could that be?
How did the native Indians look so drastically different in such a short amount of time?
I wonder if Howlett read “The Hope of Israel”, and if he did, did he believe that the native Indians were also counted among the lost tribes of Israel? Did Howlett agree with Ben Israel on all his theories? Hard to believe.
Would he have some explanation about why the Indians looked so different from Europeans?
If Howlett could think for himself, he would have rejected Ben Israel’s book as a crock.
No way native Indians could be lost tribes of Israel, and if they aren’t, then Howlett would also have to question the Jews being Israel also, just by the fact that they looked nothing like Europeans, more like Turks or Arabs.
There was no concept of racial science back then. Now we know that “Native Americans” are nothing more than primitive Asians.
Primitive Asians that were once ruled over by Adamics in an apartheid-type society that collapsed to race mixing (as happened to ancient Kush & India)?
It would explain the Colonists finding Injuns with European traits, and the accounts of the Injuns/Aztec of having their civilizations built by a long-gone people, akin to how St Louis, Detroit, and Baltimore are now run by blacks who, despite Frederick Douglass’ claims that negroes built the USA, never built anything of note in the US.
Recently, I came across an article on the Aztecs. The court historians were making the case that the Aztecs had Advanced Civilization rivaling Rome. Highlighting their engineering prowess — the harnessing of water for power, sanitation via aqueducts, etc., etc.
I was thinking exactly as you comment —“… It would explain the Colonists finding Injuns with European traits, and the accounts of the Injuns/Aztec of having their civilizations built by a long-gone people…”
Can someone help me out with the logic of Cromwell:
Ollie Cromwell was told that it was his Christian duty to force the kikes back into England, as this would bring about the Second Coming.
Why then didn’t the Second Coming happen when the kikes were previously in England, before “our guy” Ed Longshanks kicked the kikes out?
I’m sure the Jews would claim some nonsense that only a small number of Jews were in England under Longshanks. And they didn’t convert, which is the important part of the second coming, supposedly.
They were trying to find a home supposedly for all the Jews in Europe, especially for those Jews in eastern Europe where there were many pogroms, kicking them out for usury, etc. And they thought that England should take them in. Supposedly.
Cry me a river. The Jew never tells you why they are being persecuted.
Someone pointed out how before they approached Cromwell, the Jews had petitioned Queen Christina in Sweden to take in the Jews, but the Queen smartly rejected such an idea. She couldn’t be bought off, but the crook Cromwell was corrupt enough to take their money.
It all looks like the Jews were looking for somewhere to set up shop where they could all congregate with impunity.
But at this time the Jews in Poland had virtual autonomy, a state with the state, which they called “the New Jerusalem”, the largest population of Jews in Europe. So why did they also need a headquarters in England? Why? They wanted it all.
The fall of the West started when Christians believed Jews that they were “God’s chosen people” and they were from the tribe of Judah, just like Christ. What a boondoggle that keeps on paying.
For me not only do they look wicked but also sound evil when they speak. It wasn’t ‘persecution’ that made them hideous, it is the evil they live, think and act on that make them despicable. Just as Jason mentioned they are all spawn of Satan. They have corrupted the spoken Word and ALL of their works are perverted, corrupted and polluted…a total death to the Living Word.
So it is no wonder we are witnessing the death throws of the whole planet. Lies can not make life. Look at their community filled with fully gay, trans, mental and all illness… everything they touch causes death. Is it any wonder why the whole of their lives they are plotting because lies piled up to heaven produces paranoia? Is it any wonder why they control every single avenue of manipulation to put lipstick on a pig?
There is absolutely no redemption for this …the worst being blood sacrifice, imo. I hate them and boldly say so. Jesus has cast down fear so their darkness unveils them to all that have eyes to see and ears to hear. Most of all their love of money, power and riches ends at the lake of fire…and their paranoia which produces FEAR can’t and won’t be healed.
That’s why they want to take down true Israel…the Christian Nation that they have infiltrated, persecuted, deceived and MURDERED by the tens-hundreds of millions.
Who is the Welshman vs the Jew:
https://youtu.be/ra7x5t6oD4o
“Lion of the Tribe of Judah” is another thing that I get hung up on. I always took it to mean, in conjunction with Kings and Chronicles, that Judah consisted of the good guys.
Mind you, somebody rejected the chief cornerstone, and it wasn’t the Romans.
I’d enjoy commentary on this, but at the same time it’s probably unnecessary. This site does a great job filling in the blanks the more I read.
Well, I do have one question: the thesis is that the 10 Tribes emigrated to Europe before the time of Christ?
Jimmy2 …………
“…. the thesis is that the 10 Tribes emigrated to Europe before the time of Christ? ……”
That’s the million dollar question. Some may even have made it to the Four Corners of the Earth as well.
I think, but I can’t prove, that Matthew 21:43 is in reference to pure Adamites from the Genesis 10 Nations.
I figure when Abraham was chosen, there had to be a million + Adamites on the Earth. What happened to them???
Surely they would not have all been absorbed into the Tribes of Israel.
I can’t prove that. But it seems logical to me.
I would think that the Wild Olive Tree would be Unmixed Adamites, welcomed into the Israel Family. Just as the “Strangers” were, if they kept the commandments of Israel. But that’s just my opinion.
Could Matthew 21:43 just mean that the Pharisees were being disowned?
Offhand, does Jeremiah 31:31 mean that Mat. 21:43 has to be referring to the Israelites?
I’m not sure if all the non-Israelite Adamics get absorbed into Israel, some seem to have just been wiped out by war and race mixing, which I believe Isaiah 43:3 tells us of Egypt and Kush.
Though that’s confusing on its own as the old “Curse of Ham” idea has been shot down here but if various Adamics were race-mixed out of existence then isn’t that the same concept?
RB said “Could Matthew 21:43 just mean that the Pharisees were being disowned?”
“Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” (Matthew 21:43)
The Pharisees weren’t a nation unto themselves but part of a nation, so I don’t understand why Jesus would say the kingdom was being given to another nation here just because some “Jews” rejected Him.
Jesus didn’t take the kingdom from all “Jews” just because the Pharisees rejected Him, because John 1:12 tells us that just as many “Jews” accepted Him as rejected Him.
“…taken from you and given to a nation…”
It seems to me that the “you” Christ used doesn’t mean a nation, Mat. 21:45 reads:
“And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.”
Which to me reads like Christ told the Pharisees that he was taking the Kingdom of God from the Pharisees specifically and giving it to another nation. Does that logic jibe? I admit I’m trusting the translation of “you”.
As I understand it, shortly after the time of Christ the Pharisees were tossed from power and Christendom never adopted a similar concept (bloodline exclusively born to the priesthood in a theocracy).
There’s plenty of evidence that the lost northern tribes of Israel began their migration north west into Europe not long after their captivity in 700BC, and continued over the centuries, all the way through Christ’s time.
in the fourth grade in Memphis, Tennessee back in the early seventies at a private
“White Supremacist” and Anti-Semitic… “non-Jewish” Schul it was taught as part
of the Old Testament that one Tribe {Ephriam} had a problem with the letter “H”.
https://biblehub.com/topical/s/shibboleth.htm
Still no Dallas Cowboys at the Alamo.
Everyone trying to be “chosen” and ordained by bloodlines is a clown and a joke. Like the Satanic “Jew,” they’re just too lazy to work and want the world handed to them on a silver platter.
Jesus seemed to have similar thoughts of entitlement interspersed with truth and wisdom, until he realized he was going to be crucified by the Synagogue of Satan, which brought home the stark reality of what these corrupt “Jews” really amounted to, and affirmed that he was being punished for what Moses rightfully did to the entitled, Synagogue of Satan golden calfers — the Ponzi scheming scum so beloved by the Anglo-Zionists.
No one is “ordained” by bloodlines. But Christ himself made it clear: “I come only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” That’s a bloodline. Period.
However, just because you may be of the Israelite bloodline, doesn’t mean you’re going to be saved, and both Christ and the apostles made that clear. Christ told the Pharisees that their bloodline won’t save them without faith in Him. Paul said the same. That’s what He had to say on the matter.
You wrote: ‘No one is “ordained” by bloodlines. But Christ himself made it clear: “I come only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” That’s a bloodline.’
I believe Christ’s life and then the Christendom that was the consequence of Christ’s life are two distinct episodes. In his life he seemed to be fallible, uncertain, contradictory, partially perfected, but pointing us in the right direction and towards destiny. Even at one point he seemed exasperated and in disbelief: “Father, why hast thou forsaken me?”
For me, that calls into question bloodline lineage as a concept of chosen-ness, as do Moses Ten Commandments and his summary execution of a sect of the Hebrew bloodline with barely a second thought.
But Christendom, the actualization of Christ, had no such doubts, became by far the greatest civilization in history, but failed to reach its potential because it was hijacked and co-opted by evil Zionists and their stooges.
It’s got to get its mojo back. Destroying its evil enemies may be the only way, as it was the only way for Moses to deliver the Ten Commandments. (I hope not but He was the one crucified by them so He’ll decide what their punishment should be. It’s in His hands, but their belligerence seems to dictate His response, hence if they are destroyed, it will be their own doing — just as the Golden Calfers destroyed themselves through their murderous grifter essence.)
Chris Moore ……………….
I wasn’t sure at first, but obviously you are a new reader to CFT.
It’s also clear you have a “point” to make — you have your own blog etc.
Maybe you could introduce yourself, if you don’t mind, all the while staying as anonymous as you are comfortable.
I find your comments interesting and provocative, but I really don’t know what “perspective” you are coming from.
Are you a “Christian” first and foremost? Are you White?
It doesn’t not seem you are familiar with the Central Premise here at CFT that the White Peoples of the Earth are the Adamites and Israelites of the Scripture.
We do not believe that the non-white races of the world — yellow, black and red — have blood relations with Adam and Eve. Most here believe they were created pre-Adam — Genesis 1:25.
https://christiansfortruth.com/does-acts-1726-prove-that-all-races-are-of-one-blood-in-christ/
The second most important point of CFT would be “who” are the jews.
Must read Article — https://christiansfortruth.com/who-are-jews/
If the idea of “Whites being the Israelites of Scripture” is a new concept for you — the easiest way to get up to speed would be the “100 Proofs” series of videos — https://www.youtube.com/@TruthVids
I personally like — Europeans Are The “Lost” Tribes Of Israel – A Rare Documentary
— https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbbSVjVWX-4
Another must read for you would be — https://christiansfortruth.com/racial-exclusivity-in-the-bible-in-both-old-and-new-testaments/
I hope you stick and around and study some of the resources provided and then we can learn more about what you are really trying to say.
Hope you do. Sincerely.
Hey West! I’m so glad you wrote this comment. I’m new to this channel today and I’ve written one or two replies not knowing some of the basics for the site. Thank you for the info and links! It does make a difference to know the premise from which people are writing. Now that I know, I expect to receive a similar message if anyone responds to something I wrote. 🙂
B.S.T.
Thank you. However, we do now know more about Chris Moore. I wish I could “revise” my comment. But yea, you are right, most of the comment is a good introduction for New Readers. Beware of Chris Moore.
I think Jews look different than everyone else because they’ve been mating with devils using their sorcery. They mate with the Shechinah in their davening, which is a devil, for example. Hence, their father is literally the Devil.
Slyness, insidiousness, cunningness, conspiratorial, camouflage, mimicry, parasitic is their devilish ways. Just rules of a MAFIA . All opposition of trusting innocence .
I’ve never seen Israel Identity put in this kind of historical context, very informative.
Seems like the Jews knew that the cat was out of the bag as far as the lost tribes go, so they did everything they could to spin it to include themselves in the movement.
Reminds me just how much the U.K. has been judaized, and how the Jews are now the de facto rulers of the realm.
Nesta Webster 1938 Germany and England
“Is the boasted Christianity of England then all a sham if those who have been brought up outside it, or even to hate and despise it, are judged to be the right companions for Christian children? The sentimentalist will answer that Christian influences may win them over. Alas! evil is more contagious than good. Should our children be made the objects of so dangerous an experiment?”
https://ia600902.us.archive.org/8/items/01WorldRevolutionNestaWebster/Webster%20Nesta%20Helen%20-%20Germany%20and%20England.pdf
Yes, this was Hitlers error – he did not know the amount of which England already was judaized, and Queen Wictoria as I believe was also already jewish. England in those times was already more judaized than Germany.