Merits & Shortcomings of British-Israel, Part # 8

This is the 8th critical review of the principal beliefs known as British-Israel, and as with the first seven, we will address statements which W.H. Poole made in his book entitled Anglo-Israel Or, The British Nation: The Lost Tribes Of Israel (hereinafter A-I/BN). The purpose of this series is to confirm such a belief system where it is correct and to give constructive criticism where it is in error. With this paper, I will start quoting Poole on page 28:

“IRELAND NOT MISSIONED FROM ROME.

“Gildas says, ‘The sun of the gospel first illumined the Island before the defeat of Boadicea.’

“Many of our modern writers give far too much credit to Rome when they say that she missioned England and Ireland. Those Islands had the pure worship of God before the Romans sent their agents. The Irish Church was the last to submit to the claims of the Roman Pontiff. She held firm by the Asiatic customs.

“Dr. Adam Clarke says on that point, ‘Ireland received the Christian religion not from the West or the Roman Church but from the East. The Irish were, from time immemorial, accustomed to Eastern rites, and celebrated their Easter after the Asiatic manner. I have myself noticed among this people a number of customs both sacred and civil, that are of mere Asiatic origin; and not a few exact counterparts of some among the patriarchs and ancient Jews [sic Judaeans], as mentioned in the sacred writings, and were historians and chronologers to look more towards the East, than towards the West, not only for the origin of the religion of Ireland, in its early days, but for the origin of the nation itself, they would probably get nearer the source.’

“Some authors say, that ‘Bran, the father of Caractacus, brought the gospel into Ireland, at the very time it was being taken from the Jews.’ ‘The Church in those Islands,’ says the Rev J. M. Hodge, M.A., ‘Was known to have been zealously opposed to Roman usurpation, and the English as a Church and nation, today seem most nearly to answer to the nation spoken of by our Lord in Matthew xxi, 43.”

This has been an excellent excerpt from W.H. Poole’s book! Also citing Matt. 21:43 is an excellent choice of Scrip- ture to quote here which states: “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” This prophecy by Yahshua Christ was fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. The small remnant nation of Judaea had become for the most part populated by a mixture of Canaanites and Edomites although a few racially pure Judahites and Benjamites still resided there. Once this “kingdom” was transferred to Britain, it would never again return to Judaea. but would eventually spread to all of Britain’s White colonies, including the United States and Canada.

Since W.H. Poole has brought up the subject of Easter [Passover] in Ireland, I will quote from the book The Celts by Jean Markale, pages 147-148 under the chapter heading “The Celtic Christian Church” for greater detail on the issue:

“Another cause of controversy was the celebration of Easter. The date of Easter Day had always been fixed by scholarly computations, which meant that in the early days each Christian Church had its own date. In 314 it was decided at the council of Arles that Easter should be celebrated uno die et uno tempore per omnem orbem, but there was so much opposition to this decision that it was never put into practice.

“In 325 the council of Nicaea ruled that Easter should never be celebrated on the same day as the Jewish Passover and never after the spring equinox. Until the end of the 3rd century, the Romans observed the 16-year cycle of Saint Hippolytus which put Easter between the 16th and 22nd day of the lunar month. The 84-year cycle of Augustalis was then adopted, and this set Easter between the 14th and 20th day of the lunar month, that is between 25 March and 21 April. It was this 84-year cycle that the Celts followed and that they continued to use even after Rome had abandoned it in 457 for the cycle of Victorius of Aquitaine. Victorius’ system involved a 532-year cycle, based on multiplying the 28-year solar cycle by the 19-year lunar cycle used at Alexandria and this 532-year calculation continued to be used in Gaul until the end of the 8th century. In Rome, however, the Alexandrian 19-year cycle of Dionysius Exiguus was used from the beginning of the 6th century. With the equinox being fixed at 21 March, Easter would then fall between the 15th and the 21st day of the lunar month, i.e. between 22 March and 25 April.

“When Saint Augustine of Canterbury was sent to Britain by Gregory the Great to convert the Saxons and remove them from the influence of the British, it was the Alexandrian cycle he took with him. The Saxons accepted it, of course, but the British Christians who used the 84-year cycle were very slow to adopt the Roman way.

“In 602 or 603, Augustine invited the British abbots and bishops to a celebrated meeting at Saint Augustine’s Oak somewhere south of the Severn, in an attempt to settle the differences between the old church and the new. But instead of adopting a conciliatory tone, Augustine immediately delivered an ultimatum, urging the Britons to join with him in bringing Christianity to the Saxons and to renounce their erroneous customs and their incorrect Easter cycle.

“The Britons asked for a delay before replying and went, together with the learned men of the monastery at Bangor (another former druidic college in Wales) to seek the advice of a saintly hermit. He encouraged them to stand firm but to agree to talk. So discussions were opened with delegates from Augustine and when it appeared that there might be some area of agreement the Britons returned to meet Augustine in 605. However, he would not even stand to receive them; and deeply insulted and justifiably convinced that Augustine wanted nothing so much as their total submission, the Britons refused to make any concessions and left. A century later in 731 according to the Venerable Bede the two sides were still equally divided in Britain and a letter from Augustine’s successor Laurenctius to the bishops and abbots of Ireland indicates that there, too, the Celtic Church had stuck to its beliefs.

“When Columban settled on the continent he encountered similar difficulties but refused to abandon his Easter cycle. In 631 there was a whole month between the celebration of Easter in Rome and Easter Day in Ireland. Honorious I, Pope from 625 to 638, urged the Scottish church to follow the Roman rule. In 632, an Irish monk named Cummian wrote a work justifying the Celtic Easter cycle and declaring that only the Scots and the Britons were correct.

“In 628 Easter was celebrated on March 27 in both Rome and Ireland. The Pope used this coincidence to make further entreaties to the Celts to give way. Finally during the second quarter of the 7th century, Southern Ireland agreed to accept the Roman cycle, but the North still obstinately refused. In 661 Colman, bishop of Lindisfarne, reopened the Easter controversy. In 664 a conference took place at the monastery of Whitby between Colman and Wilfrid, the Saxon king of Northumbria who supported Rome. The majority of the clergy attending the synod sided with Wilfrid and Colman left with his supporters to found the monastery of Galway.

“Gradually the Roman cycle came to be adopted by the Irish communities, though Iona did not give way until 716. Finally, at the end of the 8th century, the Britons and the Bretons also yielded.”

To all of this I would say, I am very suspicious of any sacred day that the romish church would adopt. They falsely date Christ’s birthday at Christmas which is nothing more than a substitute for a pagan holiday; and then because John the Baptist was six months older than Christ, they arbitrarily place the Nativity of St. John on the 24th of June. If they can’t get these right, why would they place Passover at the correct time? Not only that, but the Sunday weekly sabbath is a romish catholic fixture, and the only yearly sacred day that falls on Sunday is Pentecost once a year! Other than that the yearly High Sabbath and first and last days of Tabernacles would occasionally fall on Sunday. So the romish church can’t get the sacred days in the correct month or the proper day of the week! The truth of the matter is, the romish catholic church was never the true church; not even for a nanosecond! For those of us who attempt to keep the Israelite sacred days, we have to remember that the world is geared to the pagan holidays, and we have to adjust our schedule accordingly. Since we are only responsible for those things within our own “gate”, we find that we must violate our own conscious in cases where we are obligated to work or shop on someone else’s gate. So we do the best that we can!

Where W.H. Poole wrote about “Ireland Not Missioned From Rome”, he did quite well, but on the next topic on pages 28-29 he really goofed. I know it was unintentional, but that doesn’t make it any more the full truth. First, I will reproduce it as he wrote it, and then comment on his misunderstanding of the passages of Scripture he will quote here:

ISRAEL AND JUDAH DISTINCT.

“But we must return to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. We have no warrant for saying that the Jews of our Lord’s day were of the ten tribes. ‘Many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God,’ was spoken of the future. ‘He hath holpen his servant Israel,’ could not apply to the Jews because they refused his help. To his Israelitish, Benjamitish followers, he said, Matthew xiii, 11, Unto you (Israel) ... ‘it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God, but to them (Jews) it is not given, and Jesus quotes and applies, Isaiah vi, 9, 10. See Matthew xiii, 14, 15, 16.

“‘By hearing ye (Jews) shall hear and shall not understand; and seeing ye (Jews) shall see and shall not perceive. For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes (Israel who became Christians) for you see, and your ears (Benjamites) for they hear.’

“Israel was his scattered flock and He went to seek them out as he promised. He draws a very broad line of distinction between them and the Jews, and He tells them so. To the Jews, He said, ‘Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep,’ John x, 26, 27. And then, bringing out the distinction very clearly, He said, ‘My sheep hear my voice, and I know them and they follow me.’ Then, having drawn the distinction so clearly, and told the Jews so plainly of the true relation, ‘They took up stones again to stone him’.”

It is regrettable that most Bibles do not differentiate between the true pureblooded members of the tribe of Judah and those of Judah who had race-mixed with the Canaanites and Edomites. So when your Bible speaks of “Jews” it is imperative to determine which of these two groups it is speaking of! It is glaringly apparent that W.H. Poole was unable to determine the difference when reading this last excerpt of his.

For instance, here is an example of how Poole should have amplified part of the above:

“Unto you (Israel) ... ‘it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God, but to them (Canaanite-jews) it is not given, and Jesus quotes and applies, Isaiah vi, 9, 10. See Matthew xiii, 14, 15, 16.

“‘By hearing ye (Canaanite-jews) shall hear and shall not understand; and seeing ye (Canaanite-jews) shall see and shall not perceive’ ...”.

When Poole cited: “To the Jews, He said, ‘Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep,’ John x, 26, 27”, Christ couldn’t have been speaking of the pureblooded members of the tribe of Judah and those of true Judah are His Sheep, whereas the Canaanite-jews are wolves in sheep’s clothing! And wolves love to kill sheep! I hope the reader is beginning to see through what I’m explaining here!

Picking up again where W.H. Poole left off: “They took up stones again to stone him.” At this point Poole starts another topic trying to explain to others what he doesn’t fully understand himself stating on pages 29-30:

“TWO CLASSES.

“One Professor fails to see any distinction here; Jesus saw it, and the Jews saw it, hence the stones. It was Christ’s grand mission to redeem Israel, to save them, and employ them and commission them to reform and save the world. If His mission was to the Jews, it was a signal failure, for after 1,800 years have passed they still hold to the law of Moses, and the picture he then drew of them holds good to this day, Matthew xv, 8.

“‘This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me. teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.’

“Jesus had well instructed his followers in the loss the Jews would sustain, and in the honour and blessing Israel would receive, and they came to him and asked him, ‘Lord wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel.’

“Peter, too, saw the distinction, and his address at the Pentecost shows it. He had both Jews and Israelites in that audience, Acts ii, 14, ‘Ye men of Judea, be this known unto you,’ and then ver. 22, ‘Ye men of Israel, hear these words, Jesus of Nazareth .... ye (Jews) have taken and by wicked hands, &c.’ These were the unbelieving Jews, mocking, and calling hard names, and the men of Israel, Benjamites, who were given, we are told, ‘to be a light always in Jerusalem, 1 Kings, xi, 34, upon whom the promised spirit had come.’ They all listened to him (Peter) until he came to the grand appeal to the Israelites, representative men, Parthians and Medes, &c., and to them he said, ‘Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye (Jews) have crucified, both Lord and Christ.’ Who can avoid seeing the two houses, Judah and Israel, represented here, the people that mocked, and used ugly words, were not the same as those ‘who speak with new tongues.’

“The Medes were represented at this Pentecost, and it was all important that they should carry home the wondrous tidings of a world’s redeemer. This important message was sent to Israel by one who well knew where they were.’ Let all the house of Israel know.’

“As to Israel returning with the Jews after the decree by Cyrus, no greater wrong can be done to numerous portions of the Scriptures, than such an assumption, Isaiah xi, 11:

“‘And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathroa, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the Islands of the sea.’

“Here a second return is spoken of. There was one return from Egypt, when the whole twelve tribes were brought into the promised land. The second return is yet in the future; when that time comes they are to come from the East and from the West, and from the Isles of the West. There is not one word said of a third return, Isaiah xlix, 12:

“‘Behold these shall come from far: and, lo, these from the north and from the west: and these from the land of Sinim.’

“We must do violence to our common sense, if we take these promises as referring to the return of the Jews from Babylon.

“When the time comes for the second return the Lord says, Amos. ix, 14, 15:

“‘And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. 15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy God’.”

Here Poole stated: “One Professor fails to see any distinction here; Jesus saw it, and the Jews saw it, hence the stones.” It is important here to resolve that it was the Canaanite-jews who provoked the crowd to take up stones to stone Christ. It is typical of Canaanite-jews to get a riot started and then go away leaving others to do their dirty work! Poole is blind to the fact that the two parties here are (1) Israelite citizens of Judaea of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah, and (2) Canaanite-jews.

Also, Poole’s faulty premise is that when Christ, Peter, or the other apostles or leaders such as Stephen addressed the Benjamites, they were addressing Israelites, but when addressing Judah, they were not addressing Israelites. In the days of Christ and the apostles, they were using the terms “Israelite” and “Judahite” interchangeably! It is regrettable, but they were even addressing the Canaanite-Edomites who had been proselyted to Israel’s tenets of belief as “Judaeans”, or citizens of Judaea. Thus Poole was in error when he stated:

“Jesus had well instructed his followers in the loss the Jews would sustain, and in the honour and blessing Israel would receive ... Peter, too, saw the distinction, and his address at the Pentecost shows it. He had both Jews and Israelites in that audience ...”

Here Poole falsely surmises that somehow the true pureblooded Judahites are not Israelites! Yes, there is a “distinction” between the house of Israel and the house of Judah, but both houses are from Jacob-Israel, and both houses have the right to the claim of being Israelites, whereas the Canaanite-Edomite proselytes have no right to either the term Israelite or Judah! The only claim these proselytes would have is that they were citizens of the land of Judea! It’s a genetic claim vs. a citizenship claim! While both the pureblooded Judahites and the Canaanite-Edomite-jews could claim citizenship to the land of Judea, only the pureblooded Judahites could claim to be racially pure genetic Israelites of the tribe of Judah!

W.H. Poole is not alone in all of this lack of distinguishing the difference between citizenship and genetic. Even today there are those in Israel Identity who point to Stephen’s statement at Acts 7:52 and claim that it was Judahites of the tribe of Judah that was responsible for the crucifixion of Christ: “Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers.”

Yet it was prophesied by David at Psalm 22:16, 20 that Christ would be crucified by “... the power of the dog ...”, and the Canaanites were always considered dogs! Therefore, it was the Canaanite-Edomite proselytes who were responsible, not the Judahites!

Clifton A. Emahiser’s Teaching Ministries