Response to “Israel and the Church”

A Response to:

Israel and the Church: the Differences

(Zola Levitt Ministry)

Original (black and red print) by Thomas S. McCall, Th.D.;

Response (in blue type) by James Wilson

Dr. Thomas McCall, the Senior Theologian of our ministry, has written many articles for the Levitt Letter. He holds a Th.M. in Old Testament studies and a Th.D. in Semitic languages and Old Testament. He has served as Zola’s co-author, mentor, pastor, and friend for nearly 30 years.

Introduction

One of the great theological battlegrounds of orthodox Christianity throughout the centuries has been the nature and character of the Church, especially in relation to its biblical predecessor, Israel. The two major views are that:

1. The Church is a continuation of Israel

2. The Church is completely different from Israel

3. The Minority View, which I (James) hold, is that the Church’s core is and always was Israel.

First View: The Church is Israel

The predominant view has been that the Church is the “new” Israel, a continuation of the concept of Israel which began in the Old Testament. In this view, the Church is the refinement and higher development of the concept of Israel. All of the promises made to Israel in the Scriptures find their fulfillment in the Church. Thus, the prophecies relating to the blessing and restoration of Israel to the Promised Land are “spiritualized” into promises of blessing to the Church. The prophecies of condemnation and judgment, though, are retained literally by the Jewish nation of Israel.

This view is sometimes called Replacement Theology, because the Church is seen to replace Israel in God’s economy. One of the problems with the view, among others, is the continuing existence of the Jewish people, especially with regard to the revival of the new modern state of Israel. If Israel has been condemned to extinction, and there is no divinely ordained future for the Jewish nation, how does one account for the supernatural survival of the Jewish people since the establishment of the Church, for almost 2,000 years against all odds? Furthermore, how does one account for Israel’s resurgence among the family of nations as an independent nation, victorious in several wars and flourishing economically?

Second View: Israel and the Church are Different

The other view, we believe, is clearly taught in the New Testament, but it has been suppressed throughout most of Church history. This view is that the Church is completely different and distinct from Israel, and the two should not be confused. In fact, the (NT) Church is an entirely new creation that came into being on the Day of Pentecost after Christ’s resurrection from the dead, and will continue until it is taken to Heaven at the Rapture return of the Lord (Eph. 1:9-11). None of the curses or blessings pronounced upon Israel refer directly to the Church. The Church enters into the Abrahamic and New Covenants, for instance, only by divine application, not by original interpretation (Matt 26:28).

This view has several major errors. First, the Church can never be extracted from Israel; Acts points this out:

Acts 7:38 This is he who was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers, who received the lively oracles to give unto us.

The very core of the Church is Israel; remove that core, and there is no Church.

The Church never came into being at Pentecost; nothing came into being at Pentecost. That event was an example of a future event: a minature of it, as the text itself explains with reference to the prophet Joel.

The Rapture isn’t of ‘the Church,’ and no text states that it is. The Rapture will take all Saints living at that time. The very core of the Church will continue.

No part of the Church enters into the Abrahamic and New Covenants by any divine application; that is spiritualization, and it is Replacement Theology. The Covenants are literal, and directed toward those as the Scriptures describe.

This leaves all the covenants, promises, and warnings to Israel intact. Israel, the natural Jewish nation, is still Israel. To be sure, Israel has been side-lined during these past 1,900 years of the Diaspora. The Church has taken center stage in the Lord’s affairs as the Gospel has spread throughout the world. Nevertheless, God has carefully preserved the Jewish people, even in unbelief, through every kind of distress and persecution. Some- times, the professing Church itself (I speak to our shame) has been a cause of these persecutions to the Jews.

Israel has never been side-lined. ‘The Church’ that has taken center stage has been nearly all made of unbelievers, and has no part in the permanent plan of God, while the Biblical Church, with Israel at its core, and all who truly are born of God are added to this group—not as a replacement for Israel, but as participants in the congregation (church) of Saints. Israel remains distinct, and must necessarily always remain distinct as the Covenant itself declares: Israel is an ‘Am Segulah,’ a segregated people. Even Daniel’s prophecy keeps Israel distinct:

Daniel 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

There are three entities: the people, the saints, and the most High. The people speaks of Israel; the Saints refer to all Saints, and especially non-Jewish Saints in this text, and the most High’s identity is obvious.

The group that has taken center stage for the past 1900 years of the Diaspora is described in a parable of a grain of mustard seed that grows into a tree—a monstrosity in which the birds (demons) can make their nests in its branches. That tree will be demolished.

What has been spread throughout the world isn’t the Gospel—that is, isn’t the Biblical Gospel; it is American Pagan Christianity in which sin is acceptable and the mere acknowledgement of faith, or doing particular denominational actions, brings one into the supposed Body of Christ.

The ‘professing Church’ consists of non-Saints who think they are Saints.

Not only has God preserved the Jewish nation, but He has also kept His promise to save a remnant of Israel in every generation. The remnant of (true) Israel in this age are the Jewish believers in Christ who have joined the Gentile believers, and form the Church, the Body of Christ (Rom. 11:5). In this respect, then, a part of Israel (the believing remnant) intersects with the Church during the Church Age. But this does not make Israel the Church, or vice versa.

It is a thoroughly Replacement Theological concept to state that “The remnant of (true) Israel in this age are the Jewish believers in Christ who have joined the Gentile believers, and form the Church, the Body of Christ.” If the writer had known proper theology, he might have stated something more like this: “The remnant of (true) Israel in this age are the Jewish Believers in Messiah who have been permanently joined to all Believers by the New Birth, and are a permanent part of the Church, the Body of Christ, whose very center is Israel (including Israel not in faith).”

There is no such thing as ‘the Church Age.’ It is the Age of the Gentiles in which pagan Gentiles have predominance over Jerusalem; this contrasts to the Day of Yehovah when Yehovah will permanently take Jerusalem to Himself.

In the future, both God’s warnings and promises to Israel will come to pass. After the Lord is finished with the Church Age, and has taken the Church to Heaven in the Rapture (1 Thess. 4:16-18), God will restore Israel to center stage on the world’s divine theater. First comes the devastating “Time of Jacob’s Trouble” (Jer. 30:7) also known as the Great Tribulation. This is a dreadful period of seven years, which begins relatively lightly during the first half, but intensifies into full focus during the latter half. During this time the world is judged for rejecting Christ, but, more specifically, Israel is judged, purged and prepared through the fiery trials of the Great Tribulation for the Second Coming of the Messiah. This is the bad news.

God never takes the Church to Heaven in the Rapture. He takes the Saints. The Church still remains, since all the plans of God have everything to do with the Church (with Israel at its core).

The concept that the Tribulation “begins relatively lightly during the first half, but intensifies into full focus during the latter half” is based on a reading error. It begins terribly heavy on Israel, and then it gets even heavier on the races trying to destroy Israel and be rid of Yehovah and His Messiah. When Yehovah begins the Tribulation, He will terribly slaughter among the Israelis.

The world is never judged “for rejecting Christ.” The world is judged for its attempts against Israel, Yehovah and His Messiah. Some of the greatest heroes and heroines of that time won’t even know who Yehovah and His Messiah are.

The good news is that, when Christ does return to the earth at the end of the Tribulation, Israel will be ready, willing, and eager to receive Him, and proclaim, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matt. 23:39). As the stumbling of Israel brought blessing to the world at Christ’s First Coming, the reception of Israel to Christ at His Second Advent will be like “life from the dead” (Rom. 11:15). The remnant of Israel which survives the Tribulation (some one-third of the Jewish people who enter the Tribulation), will be saved, and the Lord will establish His kingdom on the same earth and the same capital city, Jerusalem, that rejected Him centuries before. Israel will be the head of the nations, and no longer the tail, and all nations will send representatives to Jerusalem to honor and worship the King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Isa. 2:2-3; Micah 4:1). The Church will return with Christ, and will rule with Him for a thousand years (Rev. 20:1-5). He Himself told His disciples that they would rule over the 12 tribes of Israel in the restoration (Matt. 19:28). Thus, Israel has not been forgotten in God’s plan. While the Jewish nation still has a dark period facing it, there is a glorious finale to Israel’s long history.

The Professor McCall has events in the wrong order. He has Christ returning, and then Israel proclaiming, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matt. 23:39). What will occur will be the opposite (as the text itself declares). Yeshua will not even be seen until the inhabitants of Jerusalem will say, “Blessed is He Who comes with the Name Yehovah!”

His proportions are also incorrect. Far fewer than 1/3 of Israel will survive the Tribulation.

The Church won’t return with Christ; Saints will come with Him, and the Church will continue on Earth. There is no concept of The Church off planet Earth. There never has been. There are members of the Church, but the Church itself is always a congregation on Earth.

He stated, “all nations will send representatives to Jerusalem to honor and worship the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.” He didn’t mention the Zechariah 14:16 text that describes this in detail, including their mandatory participation in Succot (‘Tabernacles,’ ‘Booths’).

The Saints (not the Church) will rule with Messiah for a thousand years.

How Did the Church Decide the Demise of Israel?

The New Testament Church was very much involved with the vicissitudes (changes) of Israel. Jesus is an Israeli, as were all the apostles, and the concerns of Israel, spiritually and politically, were very much a part of their lives. The greatest struggles the early Church had were over the relationship between Israel and the Church, law and grace, and the fellowship between Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ (Galatians). Many of the Jewish believers were not comfortable with the Gentile believers at first; and as time went on and Gentiles began to predominate numerically, the attitudes were reversed. Galatians shows how the Jewish party tried to impose the Mosaic Law on Gentile Christians, and Romans shows how the Gentile party began to “boast against the branches” (Rom. 11:18), resenting the place of Israel in history and theology.

Professor McCall stated, “The greatest struggles the early Church had were over the relationship between Israel and the Church, law and grace, and the fellowship between Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ (Galatians).” This is totally false. I will word it correctly: “The greatest struggles the early pagans who thought they were the true Church had were over the relationship between Israel and the Church, law and grace, and the fellowship between Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ (Galatians). Even Peter was confused on this point for a while, but was soon corrected.”

He continued, “Many of the Jewish believers were not comfortable with the Gentile believers at first.” This was due to their being unclean, and to their not submitting to becoming physically clean as if they were becoming part of the People of Israel. They knew very well that a person could be a non-Jewish Saint, but they didn’t know how to deal with these folks because of the current teachings on becoming unclean by contact with the races.

Professor McCall wrote, “As time went on and Gentiles began to predominate numerically, the attitudes were reversed.” He was right: as Gentiles (not Saints) began to predominate; they claimed faith, but were not in faith.

Professor McCall incorrectly used the phrase, “Gentile Christians.” There is no such thing in the Bible. Once a person who used to be a Gentile is born of God, that person is a son or daughter of Avraham by faith—not an Israeli, but a son or daughter of Avraham. Now, should the person also join to Israel, the person then becomes an Israeli, but that is totally not necessary for the person to become a son or daughter of Avraham.

That Gentile party of which the professor spoke who “began to ‘boast against the branches’ (Rom. 11:18), resenting the place of Israel in history and theology, never consisted of folks who were born of God.

It took some time, perhaps a couple of centuries, but eventually the vast Gentile majority in the Church began to view Israel as a vestigial organ that had outlived its usefulness. In fact, the predominant Christian view was that the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Romans in 70 AD signaled the official and divinely-ordained end of the Jewish nation, never more to be re-instituted as a national entity. The fact that Jerusalem lay in ruins and the Jewish people were scattered over the world was seen as conclusive evidence that God was forever finished with national Israel. If there were any purpose for the existence of the Jewish people, it was to remind the world of the severe judgment of God upon a disobedient people.

The professor wrote of “the predominant Christian view” in this paragraph. Why didn’t he realize that this was the predominant anti-Semitic view of the uncircumcised?

If this harsh view of Israel were true, though, what of the promises of God to Israel in the Old Testament? For those who claimed to believe in the entire Bible as the Word of God, this was a great problem. How could a faithful God not keep His promises to His ancient people? To deal with this took extraordinary theological dexterity and alchemy. The theologians had to propose that Israel in the Scriptures did not really mean Israel, especially when it came to the promises of eternal blessing. Instead, Israel meant something else, something that came to be known in the New Testament as the Church. The Church became the new Israel, and through this remarkable transformation, wherever blessing is promised to Israel in the Old Testament, it was interpreted to mean the Church. This is Replacement Theology, in which the Church has become Israel.

The professor is right; only, he doesn’t know that he, himself, clings to Replacement Theology. This is a great problem at the present time. Many who have a real and determined interest in the Bible and in the God of the Bible, and who feel themselves thoroughly grounded in Truth and in Faith, having everlasting Salvation, hold to Replacement Theology, and therefore are in unbelief. The reason for this is because they fail to take the Scriptures literally, as does this professor. Not taking it literally is direct unbelief.

Replacement Theology was already around before the end of the First Century, but did not become the official position of professing Christian leadership until Augustine popularized the concept, primarily in THE CITY OF GOD, in the latter part of the Fourth Century. Augustine actually states that he was previously a Chiliast, meaning that he was a believer in the thousand-year reign of Christ on the earth after His return. This is the same as our current description of Premillennialism. However, he had come to the conclusion that this view was “carnal,” and had adopted the view that the reign of Christ would be something more “spiritual,” and would actually occur during the Church Age. Such a view necessitated the extinction of Israel, and the cancellation of all promises God made to the Jewish nation. These promises of blessing would now be fulfilled within the framework of the Church.

I agree with the professor in this paragraph; Augustine was a non-spiritual swine.

This view, which had been latent in Christendom, now flourished throughout the Byzantine world. From this point on, the theological legs were cut out from under Israel, and the predominant Christian theology was that there was no future for Israel. Replacement Theology has been the rule that has survived the Middle Ages, the Crusades and the Reformation in Church History. Only during the last Century or so has the Premillennial concept of the future of Israel come to the forefront in evangelical Christianity. Even so, it is a minority view.

The professor is incorrect in his assessment: “Only during the last Century or so has the Premillennial concept of the future of Israel come to the forefront in evangelical Christianity.” He is apparently unaware of groups, like the Puritans, who were confused about these things, but who didn’t dismiss the restoration of Israel and the reign of Messiah on Earth.

Does Israel’s Future Demean the Church’s Glory?

Some suggest that if Israel has not ceased to exist in its covenant relationship to God, and if Israel still has a future in the divine plan, this somehow diminishes the position of the Church. Is such a concern valid? It is almost as though the Church has been jealous of Israel, and afraid that if it recognized Israel’s future promises, it would somehow demean Christ and the Church. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Jealousy over Israel is the norm.

It is when the Church recognizes Israel that the true distinctiveness and glory of the Body of Christ becomes evident. This called-out body, composed of believing Jews and Gentiles during the Church Age, is the highest entity the Lord has created, superior to the universe, all the Angels, the nations, and Israel. Our Head, our Husband, our Friend is the Son of God Himself. We shall reign with Him when He rules the earth, and our 12 Founding Apostles will rule over the 12 tribes of Israel. The Angels themselves will study us forever as the greatest exhibit of God’s grace, and we will actually judge the Angels. This is our destiny, and this writer, for one, would not trade his position in the Body of Christ with any creature in the universe! Why, then, be disturbed over what God has promised the Jewish people? Why be jealous over the future destiny of Israel? How short sighted of us! Indeed, the Church’s finest and most distinctive hour will be when Israel is restored nationally and spiritually to the Lord at the Second Coming of Christ. We will return from Heaven with Him as His glorious Bride to rule Israel and the world. What more could we ask?

I thoroughly disagree with the statement, “This called-out body, composed of believing Jews and Gentiles during the Church Age, is the highest entity the Lord has created, superior to the universe, all the Angels, the nations, and Israel.” That is about as blatantly Replacement Theologically oriented a statement as one can make.

The professor then delves deeper into Replacement Theology: “Our Head, our Husband, our Friend is the Son of God Himself.” Jerusalem is the Bride and wife of the Lamb, as Revelation 21:9 and following show:

Revelation 21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues. And he talked with me, saying, “Come hither! I will shew thee the Bride, the Lamb’s wife!” 10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain! And he shewed me that great city: the holy Jerusalem, descending out of the heavens from God, 11 having the glory of God!

The professor then continues, “Indeed, the Church’s finest and most distinctive hour will be when Israel is restored nationally and spiritually to the Lord at the Second Coming of Christ.” Israel will be restored nationally and spiritually, and physically, before this Coming of Christ! That is a prerequisite to His coming!

Professor McCall then exclaims, “We will return from Heaven with Him as His glorious Bride to rule Israel and the world. What more could we ask?” I will tell you what more you could ask: You could ask this professor to believe the Bible, and not theological replacement. So, the Bride will rule Israel? Fat chance, unless Yehovah is a liar.

So, if we are not to suffer from spiritual myopia, we must recognize what the Lord is doing with Israel, not shrinking from it as though our own interests will be overshadowed. Rather, we rejoice in these developments, with full assurance that our own redemption draws ever closer.

March 9, 2009August 22, 2016

A Short Response to Arthur Koestler’s Book “The Thirteenth Tribe”

A Short Response to Arthur Koestler’s Book, “The Thirteenth Tribe”

Published by Random House, 1976

Arthur Koestler’s historical research and coverage on this topic is very well done. His conclusion is a matter for separate analysis.

The Bible as a Legend

Mr. Koestler comes from the viewpoint that the ‘Chosen Race’ status of the Jews (and Israel) is a legend (final paragraph, page 289). This view dismisses the Bible’s teachings (which Mr. Koester uses to his advantage when the Bible suits his purposes):

Psalms 33:12 Blessed is the nation whose God is Yehovah and the people whom He hath chosen for his own inheritance.

Psalms 106:4 Remember me, Yehovah, with the favour of Thy people. Visit me with Thy salvation that I may see the good of Thy chosen, that I may rejoice in the gladness of Thy nation, that I may glory with Thine inheritance.

He states,

In the first place, I am aware of the danger that it may be maliciously interpreted as a denial of the State of Israel’s right to exist. But that right is not based on the hypothetical origins of the Jewish people, nor on the mythological covenant of Abraham with God. [Page 285]

If the Covenant of Abraham with God is a myth, of course the Chosen Race status of the Jews is a myth, and the existence of Israel is a myth, for that matter. History then returns the Jews back to obscure origins, and relegates them to the status of inventors or propagators of the ‘One God’ myth. There is no Biblical God, in this case; He is an invention.

My Observation

As I read Mr. Koestler’s work, I waited and watched with great interest to see his evidence or proof that the Khazarian peoples and the Jews became so joined and interspersed that the Jews disappeared. I was very interested to see what he had to prove that Khazarians, not Jews, made up the genetic main part of the Eastern ‘Jews’. Perhaps I am dense, or very slanted in my views, but I somehow totally missed his proofs or evidences. I understood what he said, and I found much of it very informative. He answered very important questions I had about history and peoples. I am indebted to him for these things. Yet I failed to find strong or even weak evidence that the Jews are actually Khazarians.

Everything Mr. Koestler said about the migration after the cessation of the Khazarian empire was supposed to support his claim that the so-called Polish Jews were actually Khazarians, but another interpretation was apparent to me. When the Khazarian kingdom was overrun by other groups, the Jews who lived in the area began a migration as they had done in former centuries. Jews had always maintained a separate identity. If folks joined them and became part of Israel, this did not obscure Jewish identity.

Intermarriage and Dilution

The Bible records several groups that joined themselves to Israel:

Joshua 9:3 And when the inhabitants of Gibeon heard what Joshua had done unto Jericho and to Ai, ⁴They did work wilily, and went and made as if they had been ambassadors, and took old sacks upon their asses, and wine bottles, old, and rent, and bound up; ⁵And old shoes and clouted upon their feet, and old garments upon them; and all the bread of their provision was dry and mouldy. ⁶And they went to Joshua unto the camp at Gilgal, and said unto him, and to the men of Israel, We be come from a far country: now therefore make ye a league with us. ⁷And the men of Israel said unto the Hivites, Peradventure ye dwell among us; and how shall we make a league with you? ⁸And they said unto Joshua, We are thy servants. And Joshua said unto them, Who are ye? and from whence come ye? ⁹And they said unto him, From a very far country thy servants are come because of the name of the LORD thy God: for we have heard the fame of him, and all that he did in Egypt, ¹⁰And all that he did to the two kings of the Amorites, that were beyond Jordan, to Sihon king of Heshbon, and to Og king of Bashan, which was at Ashtaroth. ¹¹Wherefore our elders and all the inhabitants of our country spake to us, saying, Take victuals with you for the journey, and go to meet them, and say unto them, We are your servants: therefore now make ye a league with us. ¹²This our bread we took hot for our provision out of our houses on the day we came forth to go unto you; but now, behold, it is dry, and it is mouldy: ¹³And these bottles of wine, which we filled, were new; and, behold, they be rent: and these our garments and our shoes are become old by reason of the very long journey. ¹⁴And the men took of their victuals, and asked not counsel at the mouth of the LORD. ¹⁵And Joshua made peace with them, and made a league with them, to let them live: and the princes of the congregation sware unto them. ¹⁶And it came to pass at the end of three days after they had made a league with them, that they heard that they were their neighbours, and that they dwelt among them.

Genesis 34:1 And Dinah the daughter of Leah, which she bare unto Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. ²And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her, and lay with her, and defiled her. ³And his soul clave unto Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the damsel, and spake kindly unto the damsel. ⁴And Shechem spake unto his father Hamor, saying, Get me this damsel to wife. ⁵And Jacob heard that he had defiled Dinah his daughter: now his sons were with his cattle in the field: and Jacob held his peace until they were come. ⁶And Hamor the father of Shechem went out unto Jacob to commune with him. ⁷And the sons of Jacob came out of the field when they heard it: and the men were grieved, and they were very wroth, because he had wrought folly in Israel in lying with Jacob’s daughter; which thing ought not to be done. ⁸And Hamor communed with them, saying, The soul of my son Shechem longeth for your daughter: I pray you give her him to wife. ⁹And make ye marriages with us, and give your daughters unto us, and take our daughters unto you. ¹⁰And ye shall dwell with us: and the land shall be before you; dwell and trade ye therein, and get you possessions therein. ¹¹And Shechem said unto her father and unto her brethren, Let me find grace in your eyes, and what ye shall say unto me I will give. ¹²Ask me never so much dowry and gift, and I will give according as ye shall say unto me: but give me the damsel to wife. ¹³And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father deceitfully, and said, because he had defiled Dinah their sister: ¹⁴And they said unto them, We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one that is uncircumcised; for that were a reproach unto us: ¹⁵But in this will we consent unto you: If ye will be as we be, that every male of you be circumcised; ¹⁶Then will we give our daughters unto you, and we will take your daughters to us, and we will dwell with you, and we will become one people. ¹⁷But if ye will not hearken unto us, to be circumcised; then will we take our daughter, and we will be gone. ¹⁸And their words pleased Hamor, and Shechem Hamor’s son. ¹⁹And the young man deferred not to do the thing, because he had delight in Jacob’s daughter: and he was more honourable than all the house of his father. ²⁰And Hamor and Shechem his son came unto the gate of their city, and communed with the men of their city, saying, ²¹These men are peaceable with us; therefore let them dwell in the land, and trade therein; for the land, behold, it is large enough for them; let us take their daughters to us for wives, and let us give them our daughters. ²²Only herein will the men consent unto us for to dwell with us, to be one people, if every male among us be circumcised, as they are circumcised. ²³Shall not their cattle and their substance and every beast of theirs be ours? only let us consent unto them, and they will dwell with us. ²⁴And unto Hamor and unto Shechem his son hearkened all that went out of the gate of his city; and every male was circumcised, all that went out of the gate of his city. ²⁵And it came to pass on the third day, when they were sore, that two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brethren, took each man his sword, and came upon the city boldly, and slew all the males. ²⁶And they slew Hamor and Shechem his son with the edge of the sword, and took Dinah out of Shechem’s house, and went out. ²⁷The sons of Jacob came upon the slain, and spoiled the city, because they had defiled their sister. ²⁸They took their sheep, and their oxen, and their asses, and that which was in the city, and that which was in the field, ²⁹And all their wealth, and all their little ones, and their wives took they captive, and spoiled even all that was in the house.

No problem exists because of this. Israel’s status as a people is not diminished or diluted, and the ‘Chosen Race’ (Jacob’s race) is not changed. Even Mr. Koestler points out that marrying women from other races captured in a war is permitted in the Torah [and I add, as long as the women are not Canaanite].

Hitler and the Turks

If, as Mr. Koestler claims, Eastern European Jews are actually Kazars, why did Hitler determine to exterminate this ‘Turkish’ group? Why didn’t the Turkish folks protest this?

Short Memories

Why didn’t the Eastern European Khazarian Jews remember that they were Khazarian? When did their knowledge of their Khazarian ancestry disappear? Since when does a large people forget its ancestry when it changes religion? Jewish folks have always had an inclination toward their ancestry, a desire to know where they originated. Some Jewish groups have attempted to forget they were Jews because of persecutions, but they do not succeed for long. The evidence comes out, just as certain Hispanic groups in New Mexico discovered they were offspring of Spanish Jews who fled persecution.

Claiming Jewishness During Annihilation

Since when does a largely non-Jewish group claim to be Jews when this leads to greatly intensified persecution and attempts at its annihilation? Mr. Koestler did very well in showing historical patterns, but on this issue he shows the greatest ignorance.

Mass Conversion and Assimilation

Traveling Jews tend to know and recognize Jews (including converts to Judaism). When a large group becomes Jewish for political reasons (as Mr. Koestler pointed out in the case of the Khazarians), most remain nominally Jewish as long as it suits their purposes. They later revert back to their former religions when it is no longer necessary to claim the adopted religion. At least some Jewish travelers know the difference between real compatriots in the Jewish faith and folks who have adopted it for commercial and/or political reasons. The Khazarian Jews were not isolated from Jewish travelers. Mr. Koestler seems to be assuming that the entire Khazarian empire became committed converted Jews, then cast their fate with the rest of the Jews no matter what occurred, erasing their past. There is no historical precedent for this. Even the race that joined itself to Israel claiming moldy bread (cited above) was distinct in Israel years later, as King David found:

2 Samuel 21:1 Then there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David enquired of the LORD. And the LORD answered, It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites. ²And the king called the Gibeonites, and said unto them; (now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites; and the children of Israel had sworn unto them: and Saul sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah.) ³Wherefore David said unto the Gibeonites, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of the LORD? ⁴And the Gibeonites said unto him, We will have no silver nor gold of Saul, nor of his house; neither for us shalt thou kill any man in Israel. And he said, What ye shall say, that will I do for you. ⁵And they answered the king, The man that consumed us, and that devised against us that we should be destroyed from remaining in any of the coasts of Israel, ⁶Let seven men of his sons be delivered unto us, and we will hang them up unto the LORD in Gibeah of Saul, whom the LORD did choose. And the king said, I will give them. ⁷But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan the son of Saul, because of the LORD’S oath that was between them, between David and Jonathan the son of Saul. ⁸But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite: ⁹And he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the LORD: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest, in the first days, in the beginning of barley harvest. ¹⁰And Rizpah the daughter of Aiah took sackcloth, and spread it for her upon the rock, from the beginning of harvest until water dropped upon them out of heaven, and suffered neither the birds of the air to rest on them by day, nor the beasts of the field by night. ¹¹And it was told David what Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, the concubine of Saul, had done. ¹²And David went and took the bones of Saul and the bones of Jonathan his son from the men of Jabeshgilead, which had stolen them from the street of Bethshan, where the Philistines had hanged them, when the Philistines had slain Saul in Gilboa: ¹³And he brought up from thence the bones of Saul and the bones of Jonathan his son; and they gathered the bones of them that were hanged. ¹⁴And the bones of Saul and Jonathan his son buried they in the country of Benjamin in Zelah, in the sepulchre of Kish his father: and they performed all that the king commanded. And after that God was intreated for the land.

Mr. Koestler’s view that a group of races making up the Khazarian kingdom would altogether forget their Turkish lineage and would claim to be from Israel’s stock is not realistic. He was realistic in other areas. Inconsistency is not a good trait in a historian.

More on Dilution

I have no doubt that some Khazarians went with the Jews to Poland and other places, and that intermarriage took place. The Jews have intermarried with nearly all groups in which they have found shelter. If the Jewish race is diluted out, the Bible will become a book of lies. If this is your proposal, it is not part of my faith. The Book of Revelation speaks of 11 of the twelve tribes (chapter 7) who are still in existence in the End Times, which, according to Biblical promises, will be here for a thousand generations:

Deuteronomy 7:9 Know therefore that Yehovah thy God, He is God, the faithful God Who keepeth Covenant and grace with them who love Him and keep His commandments to a thousand generations.

1 Chronicles 16:15 Be ye mindful always of His Covenant; the word that He commanded to a thousand generations.

Psalms 105:8 He hath remembered His Covenant forever, the word that He commanded to a thousand generations.

Each of the above texts refers back to Abraham’s Covenant. If a generation is twenty years or forty, that still leaves many centuries. If Yehovah commanded it to a thousand generations, that implies that a thousand generations will exist. Yehovah is preserving Israel and Israel’s identity. The Jewish People is the People of Israel; attempts to make a distinction in order to annihilate part of Israel is an attempt to annihilate part of the Biblical promise. Mr. Koestler has no reason to believe the Bible. He is satisfied with his own religion. If you are convinced that Mr. Koestler is right about the Jews, you hold a faith similar to his.

Yehovah’s Preservation

If one takes a Biblical perspective, the Khazarian Jewish experience shows something very different: that Yehovah has preserved the Jewish People no matter where they have been driven. He has made sure they have safe havens to dwell while persecutions are occurring elsewhere. Many host countries have taken in the Jews for a time; all have eventually driven them out when they have become jealous. Yehovah has made sure that their identity has remained segregated, no matter how many have joined themselves to them. The expression ‘peculiar people’ actually means ‘segregated people’, and Yehovah is the segregator. The Israelis are segregated, yet are the benefactors of the world even if the world turns to hate them.

Caucasian Jews?

Mr. Koestler stated,

The evidence quoted in previous chapters adds up to a strong case in favour of those modern historians—whether Austrian, Israeli or Polish—who, independently from each other, have argued that the bulk of modern Jewry is not of Palestinian, but of Caucasian origin. The mainstream of Jewish migrations did not flow from the Mediterranean across France and Germany to the east and then back again. The stream moved in a consistently westerly direction, from the Caucasus through the Ukraine into Poland and thence into Central Europe.

It is no wonder that folks read such statements, and confuse Israel with Britain. Saying the Jews are from Caucasian origin is most confusing. Saying the Jews came from the Caucasus, as he does in the next statement, is very different. The Jews are not Caucasian in any sense except for some skin coloration and the location of where they lived for a time.

Directions of Jewish Migration

Jewish migration has always been in more than one direction, then turns to another, then another, then another according to where the persecutions were less and the opportunities to make a living more. I agree that some Jewish groups inhabited Khazaria, but not all. I agree that many went west, but not all. Jewish migrations have never been in one direction alone, except under the hand of Moses and Joshua. Oversimplification is not a proper way to view historical movements.

Asheknazi and Sephardi State of Israel

The State of Israel has both Sephardi and Ashkenazi Jews. They each have Chief Rabbis, and they exist together. The Ashkenazi remain Ashkenazi, and the Sephardi Sephardi. If the Ashkenazi Jews are really Turks who became the Khazars, and who turned to Judaism, why haven’t they likewise adopted Sephardi forms? And what happened to the Jews who went to Khazaria? Did they just disappear, becoming assimilated, losing their identity after many centuries of preserving it through all the traumas of history? This makes no sense. One group becomes another, and the group it becomes disappears. What kind of logic is this? Why haven’t these transforming Turks become Sephardi? Yet this whole reasoning makes no sense, since Sephardi Jews have lived among the Turks for centuries, and have remained Sephardi while the Turks have remained Turkish in its various cultures. Mr. Koestler tells us that one leader converted to Judaism, and his whole realm turned to Judaism, staying that way to this day. Why don’t these Turks in the State of Israel have good linkage and relationships with their brothers in Turkey? Jews have relationships with Jews all over the world. The Turks who inhabit Israel (according to Mr. Koestler) have good relationships with Jews (which he would claim to be of mainly Turkish derivation) all over the world; why not with the Turks themselves?

Defying Historical Patterns

I find it telling how one can use factual and convincing evidences to draw what appears to be a logical conclusion, while ignoring other obvious facts. A historian who ignores a people’s historical behaviour while studying that people is not showing much sense. Mr. Koestler writes as if the Jews were a people segregated into several groups (eastern and western) since the time of their becoming a people, then in a short time of Khazarian rule were totally assimilated into the Khazars, and at the same time the Khazars became the western Jews. Please tell Mr. Koestler that this makes no sense.

Conclusion and Thanks

Thank you for lending me this very informative book. I learned much from him, and I am only sorry that he didn’t think his conclusions through using his vast knowledge of history to come to a convincing instruction. Though I am not a historian or a scholar, I can use his knowledge of history to see what truly took place, and to be very grateful that the Khazarian kingdom was a refuge for Yehovah’s Chosen People for that period of time. It is my hope that the United States will continue to be a refuge for the Jewish People for a while longer. I know Yehovah will prove refuges for this People that is at the core of the Hope of all fearers of the Biblical God, since only they can call the Messiah to return, and will do so at the right time. I am also glad that the Jews have acquired genetic stock from many other races, since this may provide them with the means to avoid genetic detection when their enemies again attempt to annihilate them. None of these issues would be important if Gentiles were not jealous of the position of the Jews in the Bible. As Paul stated,

Romans 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? Or what profit is there of circumcision? ²Much every way!—chiefly because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.