MYSTERY OF THE GENTILES:
Who Are They and Where Are They Now?
The Cast of Characters: Biblical Jews
Available for a suggested donation of $10.00.
Who are the gentiles written about in the Bible, and where are they today? Be prepared to consider that at least some of the gentiles in the Bible may not be who you think they are. This book will demonstrate biblically, archaeologically and historically that many people today who consider themselves gentiles are, in fact, Israelites, and that many people who consider themselves Jews are, in fact, gentiles. Sound confusing? Remember truth is often stranger than fiction and error often flies on the wings of truth.
If these statements are true, one can only imagine the profound effect they will have upon the eschatology of many Christians and, in turn, will probably change their perspective on life in general.
In order to identify the gentiles in the Bible, it is first necessary to correctly identify the Jews and the Israelites. The fact that Jews and Israelites are often separate and distinct peoples is an important detail overlooked by many Christians.
In the Bible, racial Jews (better rendered Judahites*) are Israelites, but Israelites are not always Judahites. This fact is overlooked in Foy Wallace’s book God’s Prophetic Word. Wallace concluded that because “the terms ‘Jews’ and ‘Israel’ are used interchangeably” in the Bible “they are identical.”6 This error might be compared with the statement, “Because French poodles are dogs, all dogs are French poodles.” Designating all Israelites as Judahites would be the same as labeling all Americans Nebraskans. Most Nebraskans are Americans, but not all Americans are Nebraskans. The same is true of the term “Jews” as used in the Bible. This distinction is acknowledged in The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary:
JEW.… A Jehudite, i.e., descendant of Judah … a name formed from that of the patriarch Judah and applied first to the tribe or country of Judah or to a subject of the kingdom of Judah (2 Kings 25:25; Jer. 32:12; 38:19; 40:11; 41:3; 52:28) in distinction from the seceding ten tribes, the Israelites.7**
*From the perspective of the Hebrew language, Yahudi (singular) and Yahudim (plural) are better renditions than Judahite and Judahites. Nevertheless, Judahite(s) has been used throughout this book to reduce complexity and for the purpose of reader association.
**Bold emphases have been added by the author of this book. Other emphases are by the author of the quoted material.
Three other Bible dictionaries confirm this distinction:
JEW…. Originally a member of the state of Judah (2 Ki. 16:6; Ne. 1:2; Je. 32:12) and so used by foreigners from the 8th century BC onwards….8
JEW … This word does not occur in OT literature earlier than the period of Jeremiah. It then meant a citizen, or subject, of the kingdom of Judah (II K 25:25; Jer 32:12, 34:9, etc).9
Jew…. This name was properly applied to a member of the kingdom of Judah after the separation of the ten tribes [of the kingdom or house of Israel]. The term first makes its appearance just before the [Assyrian] captivity of the ten tribes. 2 Kings 16:6.10
The first chapter of the 1980 edition of The Jewish Almanac, titled “Identity Crisis,” begins with the following statement:
Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a “Jew”….11
The foregoing declarations stand in contrast to the unsupported assumptions of many Christians. Consider, for example, the following statements by James Kennedy, Pat Robertson and Tim LaHaye:
Throughout the history of the Jews, they were in bondage to the Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Philistines, and the Canaanites.12
Correction: All twelve tribes of Israel, not just the Judahites, were in bondage to the Egyptians.
The law of the God of Jacob was preserved by the Jewish people, who were the descendants of Jacob’s twelve sons, as the true rule of order for all the nations.13
Correction: The descendants of Jacob’s twelve sons were Israelites, not Judahites. Judahites were descendants of Jacob’s fourth son, Judah.
Jews: the descendants of Abraham through Isaac. They started out as Hebrews, became the twelve tribes of Israel….14
Correction: The Judahites were descendants of Abraham through Judah, and they initially made up only one tribe of Israel.
The claim that the tribe of Judah became the twelve tribes of Israel is as erroneous as would be the claim that the tribe of Reuben or the tribe of Gad or any other tribe became the twelve tribes of Israel. If LaHaye’s statement were true, it would mean that Isaac’s son Jacob was a Judahite and that his twin brother Esau and his descendants were also Judahites. Obviously, this is incorrect.
In his book What Price Israel, Jewish author Alfred M. Lilienthal testified that the term “Jew” is not automatically synonymous with the term “Israelite.” His statements leave no doubt that there is a general misunderstanding and misapplication of the word “Jew(s)”:
The Jewish racial myth flows from the fact that the words Hebrew, Israelite, Jew, Judaism, and the Jewish people have been used synonymously to suggest a historic continuity. But this is a misuse. These words refer to different periods in history. Hebrew is a term correctly applied to the period from the beginning of Biblical history to the settling in Canaan. Israelite refers correctly to the members of the twelve tribes of Israel.* The Yehudi or Jew is used in the Old Testament to designate members of the tribe of Judah, descendants of the fourth son of Jacob, as well as to denote citizens of the Kingdom of Judah, particularly at the time of Jeremiah and under the Persian occupation. Centuries later, the same word came to be applied to anyone, no matter of what origin, whose religion was Judaism.15
*The term “Israelites” also refers to the ten-tribed house of Israel after the united kingdom of Israel, composed of all twelve tribes, was divided into two houses.
In The History of Ancient Israel, Michael Grant echoes Lilienthal by pointing out that the terms “Jew,” “Hebrew” and “Israelite” are not always interchangeable:
‘Jew,’ ‘Hebrew,’ ‘Israelite’ are sometimes regarded as interchangeable, but that is not always strictly the case. The word ‘Jew’ (originally defining the descendants of Jacob’s son Judah) carries a wide range of implications - religious, cultural, ethnic, biological - which mean that the term can hardly be employed without misleading effect before the fall of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, or even, some would say, before the return of the exiles [from Babylon]…. The designations ‘Israelites’ or ‘people of Israel’ are available for the earlier periods…. But once we have reached the epoch when the country has become divided between the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, ‘Israelites’ and ‘people of Israel’ will evidently have to be abandoned as a generic term.16
The Bible does not use the term “Jews” when referring collectively to Jacob’s twelve sons or to their descendants who became the twelve tribes of Israel for the simple reason that not all Israelites were descended from the tribe, or kingdom, of Judah. This error has led to many mistakes in biblical interpretation and eschatology.
The earliest date that the term “Judahite” could be legitimately assigned to anyone would have been at the birth of Judah’s children. Therefore, it is improper to identify Abraham, Isaac, Jacob or any of Jacob’s other eleven sons as Judahites or Jews. To label Abraham as a Judahite would mean that all of his descendants, including his first born son Ishmael, the progenitor of today’s Arabs, would be Judahites. In short, if Abraham was a Judahite, then today’s Arabs would be Judahites.
Moreover, it is improper to call Abraham an Israelite. The first Israelites were the children of his grandson Jacob whose name was changed to Israel. Abraham is properly identified in Genesis 14:13 as a Hebrew.
The Bible clearly identifies the people known as Jews or Judahites. At the time of Solomon’s son King Rehoboam, the nation of Israel consisted of twelve tribes that divided into two houses - the house of Judah and the house of Israel. 1 Kings 12 details this division.
Only the people of the house of Judah became known as Jews, as rendered in our English versions of the Bible. The first appearance of the word “Jew” in the Bible is found in 2 Kings 16:6, and it occurs after the two houses separated. From this point forward, the Bible uses the word “Jews” exclusively for descendants of the tribe of Judah or the citizens of the southern kingdom or house of Judah. The only exceptions are found in Esther 8:17, Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 where non-Israelites assumed the name and/or religion of the house of Judah and became known as Judahites.
In A Partisan History of Judaism, Rabbi Elmer Berger testified that only those people from the tribe or house of Judah were designated as Jews in the Scriptures:
It is interesting … to know that these tribes [Israelites from all twelve tribes entering Canaan] and their subsequent confederacies were not yet really Jews; that there was no “Jewish” nation. It was not for many years after these earliest origins of these people that we find the word “Jews” in the Biblical texts. Probably the earliest such reference is in the Second Book of Kings, chapter 18, verse 26, in which the language of the people of the southern kingdom of Judah is called “the Jews’ language.” This passage is in connection with an incident close to the period of the Babylonian Exile, and the people themselves and their religion are not spoken of, by the Bible, as Jews until after the Exile.17
With the exception of non-Israelite proselytes who adopted the name or religion of Judaism, the people identified as Jews throughout the Bible were the physical descendants of the house of Judah, which consisted of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi. The term “Jews” was never employed in the Bible to designate all twelve tribes of Israel.
The renowned first-century Judahite historian Flavius Josephus bore witness to the fact that the designation “Jews” was derived from the tribe of Judah and was used for the descendants of the house of Judah who came out of the Babylonian captivity:
So the Jews prepared for the work: that is the name they are called by from the day that they came up from Babylon, which is taken from the tribe of Judah, which came first to these places [Jerusalem and the land of Judah], and thence both they and the country gained that appellation.18
Many Christians incorrectly maintain that the term “Jews” became synonymous with all twelve tribes when a remnant from the two-tribed house of Judah returned from the Babylonian captivity to rebuild Jerusalem under Ezra and Nehemiah. For example, Foy Wallace asks the following baseless question regarding the Judahites:
After the return to Jerusalem, Ezra commanded a sin offering for every tribe of Israel, and he referred to them as ‘all Israel.’ …Why offer for ‘all Israel’ if it was only the Jews who returned from Babylon, and not Israel…?19
A fair answer would be – why shouldn’t Ezra have done so? Nothing can be proven by the fact that Ezra made a sacrifice for all twelve tribes when dedicating the house of God. In the apocryphal book of 2 Maccabees, written in the second century BC, a priest named Jonathan made a similar offering at which time he prayed for Israel in her entirety, although only a portion of the house of Judah was present at the time:
Therefore whereas we are now purposed to keep … the feast of the tabernacles, and of the fire, which was given us when Neemias [Nehemiah] offered sacrifice, after that he had builded the temple and the altar…. And the priests made a prayer whilst the sacrifice was consuming … Jonathan beginning … as Neemias did. And the prayer was after this manner; O Lord, Lord God, Creator of all things … Receive the sacrifice for thy whole people Israel, and preserve thine own portion, and sanctify it. Gather those together that are scattered from us, deliver them that serve among the heathen, look upon them that are despised and abhorred, and let the heathen know that thou art our God. - 2 Maccabees 1:18-27
In 1 Kings 18:30-32, we are informed that “Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob” and “with the stones he built an altar in the name of Yahweh” on Mount Carmel at a time and place when only ten tribes were present. The Prophet Daniel also petitioned Yahweh for forgiveness not only for his fellow Judahites in the Babylonian captivity, but for all Israel near and far:
I Daniel … prayed unto Yahweh my God, and made my confession, and said, … we have sinned…. O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; the men of [the house of] Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto Israel, that are near, and that are far off, , because of their trespass that they have trespassed against thee…. Yea, all [the nation of] Israel have transgressed thy law…. - Daniel 9:1-11
It was a common practice for the priests or prophets to sacrifice or pray on behalf of all twelve tribes even when some of the tribes were not present at the time. The book of Ezra reveals that Ezra was doing the same thing. He made an offering for all Israel – the remnant of the two tribes who had returned to Jerusalem and the remaining ten tribes who were scattered among other nations.
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia identifies those who returned to Jerusalem from the Babylonian captivity as Jews and specifies them as being from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi:
In the very first year of his [King Cyrus’] reign over Babylon he issued an edict (2 Chron 36 22 ff; Ezra 1 1 ff) that permitted the Jews to return home, with the command that they should again erect their temple…. At the head of those to be returned stood Sheshbazzar, who is probably identical with Zerubbabel … and also the high priest, Joshua…. They were accompanied by only a small part of those in exile, that is by 42,360 men and women and children, male and female servants, esp. from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, but of the last-mentioned tribes more priests than other Levites.20
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s comments on Ezra 2:1 agree with The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia:
…those which had been carried away – i.e., the descendants, including children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren of those whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away unto Babylon. Those who are mentioned in the following catalogue, then, were not the ten tribes, who were dispersed into various and scattered districts of Assyria, but the Jewish exiles resident in or around Babylon. Zerubbabel, the prince of Judah, himself resided there; and thither flocked around his standard those Jews who formed the first caravan, comprising chiefly or exclusively those of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin who took the initiative in the journey to the land of their fathers, both from their location in Babylon, and from their greater interest in the work of rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple.21
The house of Judah was composed of the three tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi:
…Judah and Benjamin … and the priests and the Levites that were in all Israel resorted to him [Rehoboam, king of the house of Judah] out of all their coasts. For the Levites left their suburbs and their possession, and came to Judah and Jerusalem. – 2 Chronicles 11:12-14
A small contingency from some of the other ten tribes associated themselves with the Judahites on certain occasions according to 1 Chronicles 9:1-3, 2 Chronicles 11:13-17 and 15:8-9. While this is true, there remained a definite distinction between the two houses. 1 Kings 12:23-24, and other passages too numerous to cite, demonstrate this division between the two houses of Israel.
People who are determined to make the term “Jews” synonymous with all twelve tribes of Israel from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah onward attempt to use the passages from 1 and 2 Chronicles to support their claims. Adam Clarke thought otherwise:
The kingdom of Judah was composed of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with the Levites; all the rest [the ten tribes] went off in the schism with Jeroboam, and formed the kingdom of Israel. Though some out of those tribes did rejoin themselves to Judah, yet no whole tribe ever returned to that kingdom.22
A close examination of the previous passages and an honest evaluation of the prophets refute any interpretation that unites the house of Judah with the house of Israel prior to the New Covenant dispensation. Demographics and common sense concur.
Various studies have estimated the collective population of the houses of Israel and Judah at the time of their respective captivities to be anywhere from five to thirty million. Ezra 2:64-65 declares that 49,697 Judahites returned to Jerusalem from the Babylonian captivity. Using the most conservative figure of 5,000,000 Judahites from all twelve tribes in existence at the time, and subtracting the approximate 50,000 Israelites who returned to Jerusalem, we are left with 4,950,000 Israelites from both houses who did not return to Jerusalem.
The following diagram demonstrates the enormity of the number of Israelites that would be unaccounted for by those who attempt to reunite both houses at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah after the Judahites returned to Jerusalem. This graphically illustrates the absurdity of the claim that the Judahites represented all twelve tribes of Israel. Each star in the diagram represents 50,000 Israelites; the entire chart represents the conservative figure of 5,000,000 Israelites.
The numbers alone dispel the notion that the houses of Judah and Israel were reunited when the 50,000 Judahites returned to Jerusalem from their Babylonian captivity.
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s commentary acknowledges that the Judahites who returned to Jerusalem from Babylon did not represent the reunion of the house of Israel with the house of Judah foretold by the prophets:
…the ten tribes did not return at the restoration from Babylon, but is and shall continue distinct from Judah until the coming union with that tribe at the restoration … a future complete fulfillment must therefore be looked for.23
In the first century AD, approximately 500 years after Ezra and Nehemiah, Flavius Josephus placed the dispersed ten tribes beyond the Euphrates River:
…the ten tribes are beyond the Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers.24
Even contemporary Jews teach that only Judah, Benjamin and Levi returned to Jerusalem following their captivity in Babylon. In an article titled “Where are the Ten Tribes?” in the Jewish Quarterly Review, Adolf Neubauer distinguished between the ten tribes and the two tribes that returned from Babylon:
The captives of Israel exiled beyond the Euphrates did not return as a whole to Palestine along with their brethren the captives of Judah…. Ezra and Nehemiah give the enumeration only of “the children of the province of Judah, that went up out of the captivity, of those which had been carried away unto Babylon, and came again to Jerusalem and Judah, everyone unto his city.”25
In Discourses, Argumentative and Devotional on the Subject of the Jewish Religion, Rabbi Isaac Leeser wrote that the two houses were not reunited following the Babylonian captivity:
But seventy years soon elapsed, and at their ending a small number of Jews, now no longer the united Israelites, returned to repossess their land, and again they dwelt therein….26
Neubauer added that according to the prophets, the ten tribes of the house of Israel were not to be reunited with the two tribes of the house of Judah until the advent of the Messiah. He pointed out that the Judahites at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah did not look at this reconciliation as having occurred in their day, but as something to be fulfilled in the future:
…the return of the ten tribes was one of the great promises of the Prophets, and the advent of the Messiah is therefore necessarily identified with the epoch of their redemption. …the hope of the return of the Ten Tribes with the Messiah did not cease amongst the Jews during the time of the second Temple….27
Abraham Yagel, a sixteenth-century Italian Jew, pointed out that the ten-tribed house of Israel did not return at the time of the rebuilding of the second temple, but that they were to return at the Messiah’s First Advent. Yagel did not recognize Yeshua (Jesus’ given Hebrew name) as the Messiah, therefore he erroneously anticipated the return of the ten tribes at some future date:
…it is clear to anyone who has his right senses, that the [Ten] Tribes still exist, and that they will return at the time when the Redeemer shall come to Sion.28
Alone, these sources prove nothing. The Bible must be our authority, and a person has only to read the books of Ezra and Nehemiah to confirm that the houses of Judah and Israel were not reunited at that point in history:
Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and the Levites, with all them whose spirit God had raised, to go up to build the house of Yahweh which is in Jerusalem ... them of the captivity that were brought up from Babylon unto Jerusalem. – Ezra 1:5-11
…the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the children of the [Babylonian] captivity builded the temple unto Yahweh God of Israel. - Ezra 4:1
…they made a proclamation throughout Judah and Jerusalem to all the exiles, that they should assemble at Jerusalem, and that whoever would not come within three days … all his possessions should be forfeited and he himself excluded from the assembly of the exiles. So all the men of Judah and Benjamin assembled at Jerusalem within the three days…. - Ezra 10:7-9
And my God put into mine heart to gather together the nobles, and the rulers, and the people, that they might be reckoned by genealogy. And I found a register of the genealogy of them which came up at the first, and found written therein, these are the people of the province who came up from the captivity of the exiles whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away, and who returned to Jerusalem and Judah, each to his city…. - Nehemiah 7:5-7
King Nebuchadnezzar took only the house of Judah captive into Babylon, therefore only those carried captive into Babylon returned from Babylon. Ezra stipulated Judah and Benjamin as representing “all the exiles,” thereby conclusively demonstrating that only the house of Judah returned from the Babylonian captivity.
There is no biblical justification for claiming that the house of Israel returned to Jerusalem with the house of Judah. Therefore in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah only Israelites from the house of Judah were called Judahites.
Ezra and Nehemiah used the terms “Judahites” and “Israelites” interchangeably because descendants of the house of Judah could be called by either name. They were Judahites in the narrow sense and Israelites in the broad sense. Hurlbut’s Story of the Bible also delineated the house of Judah’s dual designation:
From this time [the Judahites’ captivity in Babylon] these people were called Jews, a name which means “people of Judah.” …And because they had once belonged to the twelve tribes of Israel … they were also spoken of as Israelites.29
This statement cannot be made about the ten tribes of Israel. Because they did not meet the criteria for being called Judahites, they were, therefore, only known as Israelites.
In Amos 3:7, Yahweh declared that He “will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” Yahweh never revealed to any of His prophets that He would bring both Judahites and Israelites back to Jerusalem immediately following the Babylonian captivity. Instead, He revealed through His prophet Jeremiah that only Judahites would return to Jerusalem at that time:
Now these are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the prophet sent from Jerusalem unto the residue of the elders which were carried away captives, and to the priests, and to the prophets, and to all the people whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away captive from Jerusalem to Babylon…. Thus saith Yahweh of hosts, the God of Israel, unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon…. For thus saith Yahweh, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. - Jeremiah 29:1-10
Robert Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible summarizes the truth regarding the biblical term “Jew”:
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. 975.30
This first clue establishes that the term “Jews” designates only the house of Judah. This one biblical fact alone should begin to change the way contemporary Christians view the history and the prophecies of the Bible.
Chapter 1 Table of Contents Chapter 3
6. Foy Wallace, Jr., God’s Prophetic Word (Ft. Worth, TX: E. Wallace Publications, 1946) p. 402.
7. “Jew,” The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1985) p. 688.
8. “Jew,” New Bible Dictionary (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1982) p. 593.
9. “Jew,” A New Standard Bible Dictionary (New York, NY: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1936) pp. 453-454.
10. “Jew,” Peloubet’s Bible Dictionary (New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1947) p. 316.
11. “Identity Crisis,” The Jewish Almanac, compiled and edited by Richard Siegel and Carl Rheins (New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1980) p. 3.
12. James Kennedy, Character & Destiny: A Nation in Search of Its Soul (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994) p. 165.
13. Pat Robertson, The New World Order: It Will Change the Way You Live, (Dallas, TX: Word Publishing, 1991) p. 250.
14. Tim LaHaye, Rapture under Attack: Will You Escape the Tribulation? (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Publishers, 1998) p. 233.
15. Alfred M. Lilienthal, What Price Israel (Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery Company, 1953) p. 216.
16. Michael Grant, “Appendix 11, The Names of the Country and the People,” The History of Ancient Israel (New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1984) pp. 283-284.
17. Rabbi Elmer Berger, A Partisan History of Judaism (New York, NY: The Devin-Adair Company, 1951) p. 32.
18. Flavius Josephus, Josephus, “The Antiquities of the Jews” (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1960) Book XI, Chapter V, Verse 7, p. 236.
19. Foy Wallace, Jr., God’s Prophetic Word (Ft. Worth, TX: E. Wallace Publications, 1946) p. 401.
20. James Orr, “Israel, History of,” The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Co. 1939) Volume III, p. 1526.
21. Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset and David Brown, A Commentary Critical, Experimental and Practical on the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Co. 1967) Volume II, pp. 583-584.
22. Adam Clarke, Clarke’s Commentary (New York, NY: Lane & Scott, 1850) Volume IV, p. 526.
23. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Volume IV, p. 346.
24. Flavius Josephus, Josephus, “Antiquities of the Jews” (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1960) Book XI, Chapter V, Verse 2, p. 234.
25. Adolf Neubauer, “Where are the Ten Tribes?,” The Jewish Quarterly Review (New York, NY: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1889) Volume I, pp. 15-16.
26. Rabbi Isaac Leeser, Discourses, Argumentative and Devotional on the Subject of the Jewish Religion (Philadelphia, PA: Haswell and Fleu, 1836) Volume II, p. 25.
27. Neubauer, pp. 17-18.
28. Abraham Yagel, Beth hal-Lebanon, quoted by Adolf Neubauer, “Where are the Ten Tribes?,” The Jewish Quarterly Review (New York, NY: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1889) Volume IV, p. 412.
29. Jesse Lyman Hurlbut, Hurlbut’s Story of the Bible (Philadelphia, PA: The International Press, 1932) p. 419.
30. Robert Young, “Jew,” Analytical Concordance to the Bible (New York, NY: Funk and Wagnall’s Company, Twentieth American Edition) p. 544.
Click Here to Read Chapter 3
Most Recent Article
An Open Response to Martin Selbrede and Archie Jones’ ‘Book Review’ of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective
Most Recent Message
To Seek or Not Seek 'Tis Not the Question, Pt. 1